by Peter Holleran
PART FOUR - PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE
Samadhi versus Satori: two fundamentally distinct experiences often misunderstood
CHAPTER TWO
The concept of Perfect Masters, or perfection Itself for that matter; No perfection exists; A specific definition for a perfect Master in Sant Mat; If it fulfills its purpose it is perfect enough; “God allows defects to remain in the dearest of His saints so that He can preserve the saint from corruption and “hide him in the secret of His presence”; Imperfection only is intolerant of imperfection
CHAPTER THREE
Is the Saint or Master omniscient?; Knowing and not-knowing; Sarvagnana or ‘knowing Reality’ is the meaning of ‘All-Knowing’; “Nobody can boast that he knows everything. Even if we know the everything - all creation - what is it? It is one ray of thought, is it not? Man cannot know everything”; “He does not claim to be a walking encyclopedia nor ask for a halo of infallibility. There are many questions to which he does not know the true answer. He is neither pontifically infallible nor deifically omniscient”; “Proclaiming oneself to be an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipotent deity is a clear sign of ignorance”; Views of Brunton, Nisargadatta, Atmananda, Ramana Maharshi; “At the higher noetic spheres you do not learn about things outside of yourself. You become those things”
CHAPTER FOUR
“The inner Master is more strict than me”; a gentle warning to pay attention to the prompting of the deeper self
CHAPTER FIVE
Cognitive dissonance #2; A recent example of “You cannot handle the truth!”; The madness of crowds; Scamming; Getting real: when the eyes glaze over even in the face of a 1 in 469,001,600 chance of something being the truth, you know there is a problem!
CHAPTER SIX
The power of a lineage; Having your back; The making of a Master; A Master is unique and not a robot! (and neither are you); Finishing school
CHAPTER SEVEN
Are Masters “above the stars”? Yes and no; What you can tell from a natal chart
CHAPTER EIGHT
What does Self-realization and God-realization mean in Sant Mat? Comparisons with Ramana, Nisargadatta, Brunton; Does the self expand, or the ego contract? "In contacting the Overself he does not really sense a bigger "I." he senses SOMETHING which is”; Saguna and Nirguna Brahman; Gradual and final liberation; It can be confusing: non-duality can be realized on any plane, but there are voids or zero-points within and between each plane as well
CHAPTER NINE
If God Is the controlling power keeping you in the body, why meditate to get out of the body; It seems one can’t have it both ways: either the Master Power keeps us here, or our sinful fallen nature is doing it and we have to struggle to reach the Master Power; drishti-shristi-vada and shristi-dristhti-vada; Mentalism; A strange case of two souls in one body
CHAPTER TEN
Leaving the body doesn't automatically tell you what the body is: The logic and need of incarnation seems to be this: one has to experience being in or as a body to know what it is like to be without a body. One cannot know what one is or what the body is in Truth solely from a dis-incarnate state. A contrast is needed. This is one reason why the waking state of earth-life has been valued in the spiritual traditions. Paradoxically, one also cannot know the unlimited nature of the Universal or Cosmic Self or Mind without being confined to the limitations of a body; The issue of attachment’; Franklin Merrell-Wolff on the use of the mind; The saints have a short-cut; The desire for samadhi is a “vicious yogic samskara”.
CHAPTER ELEVEN
The need for basic trust; Self-love and self-abandonment are both required; Embrace the shadow; Hanging on the gallows; You have a right to be here
CHAPTER TWELVE
A review of various topics: Degrees of mastership; Brief remarks on karmas; Where are the Inner realms; There is no technical way to be saved; Die to who you think you are before who you think you are dies, or surrender into the Mystery; The Master always resides in the disciple's innermost heart center.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
‘Seeing’ in Sach Khand; "May I see you face to face with the eyes of my soul, because you are their light" (St. John of the Cross); The real shabd is not a sound but your self; Seeing and hearing essentially; ‘Eternal’ forms; Ramana, Dogen, Ramakrishna, Plotinus, Nisargadatta
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
A debate on “merging” - Adyashanti versus Darshan Singh; What merges with what; Commentary on Anami, Amrita Nadi, Soul, and Self; The importance of language
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
Kal - psychological, allegorical, philosophical perspectives; Is Kal the Demiurge or not? What is it and what does it represent? “Sophia's Passion: Sant Mat and the Gnostic Myth of Creation”; Kabbalah; Rajinder Singh on Kal; Increasing non-judgmental presence liberates karma and transcends ‘Kal’
CHAPTER SIXTEEN
Shiv Brat Lal on Kal; An allegorical story
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN
Kal and fear; And now for real goofiness
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN
Kal and the Sant Mat conception of avatars; Inner planetary and cosmic hierarchy, or ‘Trans-Himalayan lineage’; Contrasting views on avatars within esotericism; Christ, Buddha, Blavatsky, Bailey
CHAPTER NINETEEN
The Hindu conception of avatars and reincarnation; Brunton’s view; Avatars and reincarnation dissected; No one knows what an avatar is!; Meher Baba; Tenth Guru of the Sikhs; Lineage ego
CHAPTER TWENTY
Kal, karmas, and non-dualism: Three approaches from the Dzogchen perspective
CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE
Kal - additional theological considerations: Satan, demons, the ‘Fall’
CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO
RESIST YE NOT EVIL: A look into complementary opposites; Archtypal forces of good and evil; A counter-syllogism to prove that not to resist evil on the basis that it is God’s will is a cop-out; The error of Lucifer was pride, the error of Satan cruelty; Humility and understanding the remedy
CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
Kal and spiritual experiences: St.John of the Cross on inner spiritual warfare
CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR
Two metaphors for the path to truth: the ‘ladder’ of ascent, or ‘the bottom falling out of the bucket’; A note on short and long path practices, or ‘insight’ and ‘purification/concentration’
CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE
Passing from objectivity to subjectivity; A major transition; The awakening of the witness; Devotional and advaitic approaches; “The Path begins in Sach Khand” - what did Soamiji and Ishwar mean?
CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX
Do we meet past Masters inside?; Do Buddhists only go to the third plane?
CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN
Non-dual debate among initiates: which is better, just dropping the personal self or pursuing the inner planes as an object of attention?
CHAPTER TWENTY-EIGHT
Sleep: objective and subjective perspectives; Sant Mat and Vedanta; Why do Masters sleep instead of spending the whole night in samadhi? Awareness persists in sleep but not necessarily consciousness; “I knew you in your mother’s womb”
CHAPTER TWENTY-NINE
The sacrifice of the sage or master
CHAPTER THIRTY
MASTERS DIE MANY TIMES
CHAPTER THIRTY-ONE
More depth on the importance of human birth and the waking state; Ramana, Brunton, Siddharameshwar, Daskalos, Kirpal, deCaussade; Scorching of the vasanas; The anchor of the body that allows full understanding of all the states
CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO
KARMA AND GRACE - A lengthy exploration of two complementary divine laws: Karma - (Sanskrit) - “action or deed”, and Karam - (Persian) - “grace, mercy, kindness, compassion” - just switch two letters and all is explained; The views of many Teachers
CHAPTER THIRTY-THREE
Jnana chaksu and divya chaksu: two different “third-eyes”; ‘The Eye of the Heart,’ ‘the Eye of the Mind,’ ‘the Eye of Wisdom,’ 'the Eye of Intuition’; The ajna center and the Heart; The Ultimate transcends attention; The heart-lotus is not a place; Faith and trust open it; Four lives to Sach Khand? That was a misinterpretation, there are four stage, to be done in One life; Intuition, the listening attitude, is the Ear of the Mind; A western path: Light is Knowledge and Sound is Love’s Essence
CHAPTER THIRTY-FOUR
Yoga and Vedanta: two distinct metaphysical perspectives; wakefulness versus the three states; “Causal” has a different meaning in each school; Bodies: adventitious vehicles versus upadhis; The mind as a function of the Self and not a ‘thing’
CHAPTER THIRTY-FIVE
Siddhis: what they are, how they are done, and how they relate to spiritual realization;
Unique Christian miracles; Jesus is Just All Right with Me, or he's not and the deal with Kal is the gospel truth; Levitation, a strange gift; Materialization and dematerialization in Buddhism; the Rainbow Body; Death, ‘the last enemy,' even for saints?
CHAPTER THIRTY-SIX
A proposed model for comparing/classifying different teachings and schools; A summary of non-dualism as the heart of any authentic spiritual teaching; Re-cap: Sant Mat visualized as a non-dual path
CHAPTER THIRTY-SEVEN
Marked souls and the ‘Fall’; Evolutionary enigmas; If souls started out in the Nether world how did they get to Sach Khand only to fall from there?; Three theories of evolution; Why did we leave Sach Khand only to return there; The Biblical Fall: the beginning of reincarnation?; The Cat Lady: on the karma of mice-killing; Summary: creationism or evolution; ET’s; Our human mind can hardly punch its way out of a paper bag!
CHAPTER THIRTY-EIGHT
The “Mauj”; God’s will; more on the ‘moharchap’; The chosen ones; We must choose God again and again;
CHAPTER THIRTY-NINE
The Map of Consciousness (0-1000); Ramaji, Nisargadatta, David Hawkins, Zen, Sant Mat; The Conference of the Birds; Many modern aspirants do not pass through archetypal stages of the spiritual process in the same way as those on traditional devotional paths have; Self-inquiry, radical faith, self-surrender; the Absolute
CHAPTER FORTY
Wrapping it up: Sri Ramana, Sri Nisargadatta, and the Sants contrasted
CHAPTER FORTY-ONE
The concept of a center: ‘Life without a center’ versus the ‘return to our center within’; Bernadette Roberts, Paul Brunton; The I Am has nothing to do with the chakras; “The ridge-pole is split, all thy rafters are broken now” versus “Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it”; Being in the Overself and the body at the same time; Transcendental stages compared: Plotinus, Ibn ‘Arabi, Chuang Tzu, Sant Mat, Brunton; Dragon’s Play; Home
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
Is there only One Soul? Reflections on a remark by Ishwar Puri; Soul is one-and-many, not only one; If soul is the creator then what is God?; The non-dual union of the oneness of the perceiver and the perceived is the basis for a deeper realization; A final dive into Plotinus for some answers on soul and Oversoul; Ishwar Puri: “only the Totality goes to Anami”; What ‘Totality’? - that of the unified Soul. Is there more than one ‘Totality’? Let’s be reasonable!; Metaphor of the ocean and the drop: The ocean of consciousness is to be ‘recognized’, not ‘reached’; "This is your last illusion," said Atmananda, "that you are a gnani." All is forgotten, and one re-enters the marketplace
Concluding thoughts
“The things that are the most important are the things that are the least difficult”- Jeanne Guyon; “The task seems hopeless, until suddenly all becomes clear and simple and so wonderfully easy” - Sri Nisargadatta; “When you unfold the wings of love, you need not ascend by means of the steps” - Kabir; “Having received the protection of a God-realized man, do you think he would ever forget you? The Master always holds his disciples in the innermost heart center.” - Kirpal Singh
“The Master was greatly pleased with Narendra’s inquiring mind. Sri Ramakrishna also tested Narendra in an unusual way. Without explanation, whenever Naren visited Sri Ramakrishna, the Master would not speak to him, although he spoke with other devotees. Every time Naren came to visit Sri Ramakrishna, the Master ignored him. When he arrived, Sri Ramakrishna did not even greet him; similarly when he left, Sri Ramakrishna was silent. This continued for nearly a month. At last Sri Ramakrishna said, ‘Why do you still come here when I do not speak to you?’ Narendra replied, ‘Do you think I come to listen to you? I love you, and that is why I come.’ At his response the Master said, ‘I was testing you. Only a great person such as you could endure such treatment. Any other person would have gone away.’ Narendra’s attitude was: I love you and so I come to you, But this does not mean that I will accept all of your words.” (1)
"Such is the strange paradox of the quest that on the one hand he must foster determined self-reliance but on the other yield to a feeling of utter dependence on the higher powers.” - Paul Brunton (2)
CHAPTER ONE
Samadhi versus Satori: two fundamentally distinct experiences often misunderstood
One point of clarification of an obscure quote an astute older student of this path may have picked up on. My dear Sant Kirpal Singh is said to have once criticized devotee Russell Perkins for editing out a reference in his book NAAM, where a Buddhist monk said the sound of a bell caused his awakening into satori (which was described as a samadhi, although it was clearly a satori). Russell edited it to read that the person heard an INNER sound, but Kirpal Singh said to leave the quote alone, because that’s the way the sutra read, but also said that the person was mistaken, and that he only THOUGHT it was an outer sound, for how could an outer sound ‘DRAG one into samadhi?” In this case, the monk went on to describe this satori as apparently initiating a series of deeper mystical experiences for him. Now, satori and samadhi are very distinct experiences. As D.T. Suzuki explains:
"When a man's mind is matured for satori it tumbles over one everywhere. An inarticulate sound, an unintelligent remark, a blooming flower, or a trivial incident such as stumbling is the condition or occasion that will open his mind to satori. Apparently, an insignificant event produces an effect which in importance is altogether out of proportion...When the mind is ready for some reasons or others, a bird flies, or a bell rings, and you at once return to your original home; that is, you discover your now real self." (3)
Zen has long considered samadhi as a temporary mental absorption in a object, or even a void, whereas satori, particularly a great satori, is an awakening to the real Person, the true Subjectivity. It has nothing to do with absorption or mystical transport.
An example of a satori awakening was that of a nun Chiyono who studied Zen under Bukko of Engaku. For a long time she was unable to succeed in her meditation. At last one moonlit night while carrying water in an old pail bound with bamboo, the bamboo broke and the bottom fell out of the pail. At that moment Chiyono was set free, moving her to write this poem:
“In this way and that I tried to save the old pail
Since the bamboo strip was weakening and about to break
Until at last the bottom felt out.
No more water in the pail!
No more moon in the water!”
Similarly, Daniel Odier states:
"No one has ever attained awakening while meditating, but always when face to face with the real. Even the Buddha experienced awakening at the end of his meditation when he saw the morning star." (4)
The Buddhist monk who awakened to the sound of a distant bell was the great Hakuin, rejuvenator of the Rinzai school, who later said that so intense was the experience he was convinced that no one in the past three hundred years had penetrated to such a glorious attainment. Nevertheless, he later wrote that he spent the next several weeks strutting around the temple “puffed up with a soaring pride, bursting with arrogance...and swallowing whole everyone he encountered, regarding them contemptuously as so many lumps of dirt." (5)
Although he had a fundamental breakthrough into a realization of non-duality, his condition was not steady or complete nor was he yet purified in virtue. He later had dozens more satoris. Years later, at the age of forty-one, after much training and schooling with other masters, he had a great Satori, from which there was no back-sliding, this time catalyzed by the reading of the Lotus Sutra, and, by some accounts, hearing the sound of a cricket. He spoke of tears falling from his eyes like beans from a ruptured sack, and he realized that he had been mistaken about his earlier experiences. This was satori, however, not trance samadhi. Even after this he required further training, to stabilize his realization in everyday life - what he called “the training after satori.” A version of this is found in other traditions, and it might certainly be said to also be the case in Sant Mat.
In any case, in the above instance, either: one, Kirpal Singh apparently did not recognize the way countless Zen practitioners achieved satori through their ripe minds being awakened to reality in a moment through an outer sight or sound, and strictly adhered to the Indian belief that only inner (trance) experience was spiritual, and didn’t understand other schools or experiences which contradict that and was using this monk's account only to support the philosophy of Surat Shabd Yoga (all of which is possible, but I am inclined to doubt, for a number of reasons: Kirpal was a scholar of the traditions, had read 300 biographies of different saints and sages and great men as a young man, and was friends with numerous Buddhist teachers, and last but not least, seemed to catalyze such an experience in me in his company); or, two, he said what he did because he didn’t want to confuse his meditating followers with more sophisticated, non-dual teachings, and, as was the case with his dealings with Faqir Chand, he didn’t consider it ‘expedient’ to do so. Ramakrishna was the same way when he was with Vivekananda in contrast to most of his followers. He put the advaita books such as the Ashtavakra Gita away when Master Mahasaya (“M”) was around because he knew the latter was keeping a diary and didn’t want him to confuse many of his disciples who were not ripe enough to understand such things. Only Vivekananda was taught non-duality, the rest of the disciples were taught yoga. My experience with Kirpal suggests this was the case with him as well.
On the other hand, Kirpal was not wrong in pointing the initiate towards the stage of merger with the personal God within. Or some might call it the Soul. In many Soto schools of Zen [where satori is not emphasized; for example, the well-known Suzuki Roshi never had a satori], after attaining the 'absolute samadhi', or 'great death (corresponding to stage eight of the ten famous ox-herding pictures), in which one attains to the self-essence or void in meditation, with body and mind stripped away, upon coming out of this state, he is then open to the spontaneous arising of a final awakening, sometimes called the 'positive samadhi', where by he sees reality as-it-is with 'open eyes'. This would be knowing Atman and Brahman as being one, that is to say, recognizing the reality behind the universe and the reality behind the individual to be the same essential Mind. And I believe the same can occur on the path of Sant Mat for one who has first achieved 'Sach Khand' or higher and then reawakens to the outer world in full consciousness. And such may in fact be a deeper realization within Sant Mat, although it seems not to have been made explicit in the literature, nor, as explained in Part Three, is it necessarily automatic but takes time and wisdom both to realize and to stabilize in that realization. This is just my opinion. It also has long felt reasonable to me that, just as this plane may be experienced from an enlightened and unenlightened point of view, so, too, may the inner planes be experienced that way. So sooner or later an aspect of understanding seems inevitable to complete even the simplest of devotional paths.
It is sometimes taught in Sant Mat that one who achieves full absorption in the Sound Current 'within' and then comes 'out' or 'down' will experience an amrit or nectar of bliss saturating every pore of his body. My experience with Kirpal suggests to me that he was in such a condition, a fruit of this noble 'ancient, eternal, and authentic' path. He appeared to be stabilized in that condition. But all who soar high inside may not yet be so matured.
Whether through satoris or samadhis, a form of devotion is present on any real path, as it seems to be built into human nature and the way. Kirpal was therefore doing his duty in teaching the all-important first stage of devotion to the majority of his disciples. Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gita said, however (according to V.S. Iyer), ”To those whose minds are united with Me and worship Me with love, I grant that understanding [i.e., ‘Buddhi Yoga’] through which they may attain Me." It is something like that, I feel, in all true paths. 'Die', and then be 're-born', usually in stages, unto the true Self, beyond mind, matter, and illusion, and even, so to speak, while present within them. But to simply see two great schools, such as the highest forms of Gyan and Yoga, or Zen and Sant Mat, as in some kind of opposition, seems highly unwarranted and a position that increases ignorance and ego - which in fact thrives on opposition. When Kirpal hosted Zen Master Fuji to Sawan Ashram, the latter had a smile so wide it seems his face would crack, and he and Kirpal were playfully laughing much of the time. Neither was trying to teach the other about "the one true path." My friend Judith said that Master Fuji's smile came all the way from Sach Khand. I thought to myself, "What do you mean? Master Fuji doesn't do Shabd Yoga!"
One final quote to ponder, then, before we close this section:
“Psychologically the void trance is deeper than the world-knowing insight, but metaphysically it is not. For in both cases one and the same Reality is seen.” - Brunton (6)
This is basically saying what Buddhism always asserts, that in ignorance this world is samsara, but upon awakening this world is the Pure Land, the Buddha World. And isn’t that what we are called to see, when all is said and done, in Sant Mat? Whether the planes have all been experienced yet or not?
CHAPTER TWO
The concept of Perfect Masters, or perfection Itself for that matter; No perfection exists; A specific definition for a perfect Master in Sant Mat; If it fulfills its purpose it is perfect enough; “God allows defects to remain in the dearest of His saints so that He can preserve the saint from corruption and “hide him in the secret of His presence”; Imperfection only is intolerant of imperfection
“Everything is already perfect, but it can be more perfect.” - Suzuki Roshi
”This is the true perfection of them that are born anew, to confess that they are imperfect.” (Romans 7:25, paraphrased)
The idea that a "perfect Master" never makes a mistake, or that every word he utters is absolute truth, is often a stumbling block for many initiates on the path. It must also be understood to generally be an erroneous conception of enlightenment. For instance, Brunton states:
"The first and last illusion to go is that any perfect men exist anywhere. Not only is there no absolute perfection to be found, but not even does a moderate perfection exist among the most spiritual of human beings." (7)
He distinguishes between a master having a perfect consciousness of the inner divinity, but not be perfect in terms of his human conduct. He will certainly be a morally superior specimen of a human being, but not 'perfect' in every degree as we imagine that to be. Now, what are you going to do - look for a Master's every imperfection?! No, that would be as wrong and inappropriate as to go looking for everyone else's imperfections. It does mean, however, that one will not necessarily be shocked or disheartened by such observations. But how often do the disciples reflect the following attitudes and traits?
“None of these biographies written by overzealous disciples ever shows up the master’s faults or even suggests that he had a single one...These disciples assume so much, such as that the guru knows everything about them, what they should do in their particular and private situations - everything about everything...They glamourize their guru, provide him with qualities and powers he does not possess and perhaps does not even claim.” (8)
The assertion here is that masters, no matter how highly evolved, are not, from the human point of view, omniscient or perfect. A review of their many spiritual teachings reveals that the many opinions and doctrines are in fact very different. It is hubris for any human being, however advanced, to believe he can pick out from among them the one, true teaching for all time, for everyone, or even have unerring intuitive guidance in every instance. He may go a long way in that direction, however, and be more than adequate to guide and assist us.
There is a specific definition of perfection in Sant Mat, however, which has nothing to do with whether or not he can make ordinary mistakes or not. A master on this path is considered a "perfect Sant" if he can go, or transfer his consciousness, at will to the fifth plane Sach Khand (the 'office of the Master') and lead others there, and a "Param Sant" if he has further been absorbed into the eighth and final 'region-less region', Anami, by the Sat Purush. He is also said to be "perfect" in the sense that his astral, mental, and causal bodies are clear of worldly or egoic taint. He is also a conduit for what appear to be God-like powers, when so directed by the Divine Will. It doesn't mean that while in his human body he never make what looks like a mistake, or necessarily have absolute relative knowledge or wisdom regarding all doctrines, including those he has never studied, for instance and especially the path of jnana. He might "drop his fork" or spill food. He may make mistakes of fact from time to time when he speaks, in spite of seemingly having total knowledge of his disciple's needs and circumstances the rest of the time as it is required. He may even make ‘teaching mistakes’. This is, of course, our working opinion, and is only mentioned because some seekers have held the naive view that such should not happen if a Master is perfect. Brunton writes:
“The indispensable prerequisite to mystical illumination is self-surrender. No man can receive it without paying this price. Any man in any degree of development may pay it - he has to turn around, change his attitude, and accept the Christ, the higher self, as his sovereign. But once this happens and the Grace of illumination descends, it can affect the self only as it finds the self. An unbalanced ego will not suddenly become balanced. An unintellectual one will not suddenly become learned. His imperfections remain though the light shines through them.” (9)
An important fact to keep in mind is that a Master may certainly evolve and deepen his realization over time. That is to say, he will become 'more and more perfect' in his human incarnation, even after his inner realization(s). He may even be made into a Master over time by the grace of his own Master. In which case, one could say that, for the devotee, his Master may not be perfect, but he will always be perfect enough!
A further word needs to be said about cultural influences. As mentioned above, these can color one's articulation of realization. Or even his approach to truth. Kirpal Singh, in one of his childhood notebooks, once crossed out a discussion of various paths to truth, and scribbled "No Way Out!" I venture the possibility, because of his Sikh background, that he was inclined to consider the need to mystically leave the body and the 'wilderness' of the physical world as paramount in pursuit of truth. Whereas in vedanta, on the other hand, the 'wilderness' is chiefly one of ignorance, not exclusively an actual place, and meditation is considered a helpful means or preparation in the pursuit of truth, but not its direct, final means. And I suspect that Kirpal came to this perspective later in life. This is my opinion.
The Masters, it should be mentioned, would probably be the first to say they are not perfect, even while maintaining the view that their own Masters were perfect. This is out of respect and humility. "Don't call me perfect," said Christ, "only God is perfect." It is a human concept, after all. Let us leave it at that. None of these aforementioned examples of so-called imperfection, where present, or by themselves, are evidence that a path or teacher is false or not genuine. Osho - who wasn't perfect - still said worthwhile things, including:
"The experience of enlightenment is such that you can still commit mistakes. This is something to be understood. People ordinarily think that the man of enlightenment cannot commit mistakes. That is their expectation, but it is not reality."
"The East has been very concerned for ten thousand years with the phenomenon of enlightenment. It certainly brings you great light, great clarity, great ecstasy and the feeling of immortality. But even though it brings so much, existence is so vast that your enlightenment is just a dewdrop in the ocean of existence. However transparent and clear your understanding may be, there is always a possibility to commit mistakes. And this has been recognized in the East. Even Gautama Buddha is reported to have said that existence is so vast, so infinite in all dimensions, that even an enlightened man may commit mistakes. This is true religiousness and humbleness. The idea of infallability is just ugly ego."
"In fact the enlightened man becomes so humble that if you point out his mistakes he will accept them. He is so detached from his own personality, it does not matter...He is not hurt. And he accepts that there are possibilities where he may become too one-sided, may lean into this multidimensional existence more towards certain dimensions, may become averse to the dimensions which are against his own experiences and feelings. Existence contains all contradictions, and even at the highest point of enlightenment it is very difficult to contain contradictions."
"Man, after all, is man, asleep or awake. It is very difficult to conceive contradictions existing not as contradictions but as complementaries. The easier thing seems to be to choose one side and go against the other. But that does not mean that the enlightenment is not complete; it simply means even an enlightened man can have a partiality. And it is because of the vastness of the universe." (10)
Sant Kirpal Singh once said, "I don't appreciate art." Disciples no doubt took that to mean that they shouldn't appreciate art, but is that right, or was it simply a confession of a preference or partiality of his? Are we to assume that if you are 'perfect' you will not appreciate art? Now, if he was referring to much of what passes as 'modern art', I agree with him (!), but the reference in this instance is to a strictly personal preference.
An illumined master may appear ignorant as the case may be when dealing with his disciples, saying one thing and then seemingly changing his mind a minute later, or speaking words to one disciple that are meant for another, all part of his need and nature to be unpredictable in order to break the student's fixation with the dualistic mind and its expectations and egoic tendencies.
Yet, one cannot help but wonder if the notion of 'perfect master' is outdated and due for substitution by a better concept, or a better articulation of the truth. Even the 10th guru of the Sikhs famously declared, "those who consider me to be God will go straight to hell!" Jesus said, "don't call me good; don't call any man good; there is none good but God." If these illustrious personalities felt this way, maybe we should take note. Or at least publically tone down the hyperbole.
“Perfect is the enemy of the good.” (attributed to Voltaire, listed in his Dictionaire Philosophique, 1770, quoting an Italian proverb: “il miglio e l’inimico del bene.”)
For this also leads to the notion that a perfect master can automatically produce a perfect 'successor' to his teaching. Can he? In Sant Mat it is taught, in some lineages, that the power of initiation (its particular form of shaktipat, connecting - or consciously connecting - the soul to the Naam Power) is handed down from master to successor through the eyes. This may be so, but does it necessarily mean the successor or acclaimed successor has reached the attainment of his master - be he in his direct family or not? The annals of spiritual history are filled with stories of the progeny of the masters that are not even interested in the path, what to speak of enlightenment itself. Of course, as stated, a new Master may grow into his given role. That appears evident. But perhaps all may not to the same degree. Brunton writes:
"The belief that a fully enlightened master or religious prophet can be succeeded generation after generation by a chain of equally illumined leaders following the same tradition, is delusive. He cannot bequeath the fulness of his attainment to anyone, he can only give others an impetus toward it. He himself is irreplaceable." (11)
Does this then mean that it is completely the luck of the draw if a particular master has a genuine successor? Not necessarily, as we are told by various sources - the Sufi tradition, for one - that there are many ready candidates, so to speak, in the spiritual 'queue' awaiting promotion. This is certainly in the play of the divine, however, and not by virtue of any magic a master may personally employ. If he were capable of just conferring enlightenment on anyone he chose, would he in his great compassion not do it? Would not Christ or Buddha or Ramakrishna or Ramana have done it if they could? So in this matter the quester is inevitably forced to fall back on his own faith, as well as judgement and discrimination.
As for the notion, existent in the Sufi tradition, and apparently in Sant Mat as well, that there are a number of “candidates“ under surveillance for the job of Master, the following is interesting. A Darshan Singh initiate - a friend of a friend - was informed that “there is a school on the inner planes that is a training school for masters. Before they can initiate they must learn how to guide their initiates through spiritual crises and difficulties and obstacles on the onward journey as well has how to help them outwardly. Some don’t pass this training he says.” All I can say is, “more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, Horatio.”
Brunton writes:
“Many Yogis are made but some are also born. Destiny transcends all training and often it needs but a mere touch of an illuminated finger to release pent-up stores of secret power within a soul.” (12)
So in such a case we can see the Higher Power using a Master as a channel or medium to ‘re-awaken’ a ripe soul destined for service. It is not a capricious action. But perfect? We must define the term adequately for our spiritual purposes. Dogen uttered this mysterious statement: "A Zen master's life is one continuous mistake."
Bhai Sahib cuts to the chase by saying:
"If it fulfills its purpose, it's perfect...This chair is perfect because it fulfills its purpose...The Master is perfect because he can make others perfect." (13)
And then we have these quotes from PB; it may not be Sant Mat gospel, but for me, it puts a feeling in the heart:
"There is one master to whom the seeker is predestined to come and before whom he is predestined to bow above all others...He may not be a perfect master, he may commit previous errors of judgement and display regrettable deficiencies of personality, yet still he will be your master. No one can take his place, no one else can arouse the feelings of affinity and generate the harmony that he does. If because of his defects or lacks you reject him for another man, you will be sorry for it again and again until you return." (14)
And even:
“It sometimes happens - although uncommonly - that the feeling of inner affinity with a certain illuminate exists deeply and strongly in striking opposition to the attitude taken up intellectually towards him. The desire for personal independence of thought, movement, and self-expression may prevent external submission. The attitude of self-reliance may be so ingrained that one is reluctant to become dependent on another. There may be marked difference of doctrinal view. The physical actions or arrangements of the illuminate may be disapproved. Yet the subtle inexplicable mystical attraction may be overwhelming. His wisest course is to recognize that this is his divinely ordained spiritual godfather, and to accept the relationship rather than to resist or reject it. No label need be affixed to it, mysterious though it be, and certainly not the conventional master-pupil one. He will be outwardly free but inwardly tied.” (15))
“Nothing can change between them if God has appointed the adept to a spiritual relation with him. It is above earth, time, and space. It will be fulfilled only in the kingdom of heaven.” (1)
So, in regards to perfection, might be said that at the very least we can retain some common sense while still retaining awe for the Guru function in human form?
Madame Guyon, in Experiencing the Depths of Jesus Christ (a book supposedly never out-of-print in over three hundred years and for which she was imprisoned in the Bastille), wrote about the divine fire that purifies the spiritual gold and perfects the soul. This excerpt is interesting for the insight it gives on the distinction between inner and outer perfection:
“God wishes to make your soul pure. He purifies it by His Wisdom just as a refiner purifies metal in the furnace. Fire is the only thing which can purify gold. The fire seems to know that the earthly mixture cannot be changed into gold. The fire must melt and dissolve this dross by force so that it can rid the gold of every alien particle. Over and over again, the gold must be cast into the furnace until it has lost every trace of pollution. Oh, how many times the gold is plunged back into the fire - far, far more times than seem necessary. Yet you can be sure the Forger sees impurities no one else can see. The gold must return to the fire again and again until positive proof has been established that it can be no further purified.
“There comes a time, at last, when the goldsmith can find no more mixture that adulterates the gold. When the fire has perfected purity - or should I say simplicity - the fire no longer touches it. If the gold remained in the furnace for an eon, its spotlessness would not be improved upon nor its substance diminished!
“Now the gold is fit for the most exquisite workmanship. In the future, if the gold should get dirty and seem to lose its beauty, it is nothing more than an accidental impurity which touches only the surface. This dirt is no hindrance to the use of the gold vessel. This foreign particle which attaches itself to the surface is a far cry from having corruption deep within the hidden nature of the gold.”
“Rare would be the man who would reject a pure, golden vessel because it had some external dirt on it, preferring some cheap metal joy because its surface had been polished.”
“God allows defects to remain in the dearest of His saints so that He can preserve the saint from corruption and “hide him in the secret of His presence.” (Psalm 31:20)” (17)
Bhai Sahib says much of the same:
“Something will always remain; I told you this before. Even in Great People something always remains; so that people will say: ‘Look here, how many faults are there!’ While we are in the physical bodies, something must remain.” (18)
Michael Molinos wrote:
“It is a rather dangerous thing to be perfect. There is vice in being without frailty; there is vice in virtue. Because we make a wound of our medicine He makes a medicine of our wound, so that we who are injured by virtue may be cured by vice. The Lord, by means of our small failures, lets us know that it is His majesty which frees us from great faults. These are the ways He keeps us humble and vigilant.” (19)
Fenelon likewise had this to say on the notions of visible faults and perfection. I am sure we can all attest to this in ourselves and others we know:
“Don’t be surprised at the defects in good people. God leaves weaknesses in all of us. In those who are advanced, the weakness is out of proportion to their otherwise mature life. In a field, a workman may leave a pillar of earth to measure the amount of material removed. God leaves similar pillars within those He is perfecting. A person with visible shortcomings can be more spiritually advanced than someone who is free from such defects. “Perfect” people often want to find fault with others for not being perfect. God’s way is entirely different. He sometimes allows people to remain deeply flawed in order to keep them from being too satisfied with themselves. It would be easier for them to be corrected for their failings than to feel conquered by their weakness.”
“Imperfection only is intolerant of imperfection. You know from experience the bitterness of the work of correction; strive then to find means to make it less bitter to others.”
“People must learn to bear with their own weaknesses as well as the weaknesses of others. Why are you so upset by your neighbors’ faults when your own are still uncorrected? Your motives are not entirely pure in wanting to see people perfected for God’s glory: People’s faults bother you because you are too fussy and hard to please. You can often help others more by correcting your own faults than theirs. Remember - and you should, because of your own experience - that allowing God to correct your faults is not easy. Be patient with people - wait for God to work with them as He will do.”
And finally:
“Nothing has been more common in ancient, as well as in modern times, than to meet souls who were perfect and holy, theoretically. (Matt. 7:6) “Ye shall know them by their fruits,” says the Saviour. And that is the only rule that never deceives, when it is properly understood; it is that by which we must judge ourselves.” (20)
Much to think about here. Perhaps agreement may also be found, then, with this statement by Bhai Sahib:
“God is perfect in every respect.
Guru is perfect in many respects.”
A Disciple is perfect in one or two respects.” (21)
I think in this quote we may assume that by “Disciple” is meant a pure disciple, even a self-realized soul. Such a status does not automatically make one a guru, which requires many more qualities to effectively guide disciples of all kinds. A similar distinction was made by Shri Atmananda between a self-realized person and a sage or acharya, the latter needing a special abundance of qualities in addition to simple realization, to be able to guide aspirants on different paths. This would be quite rare, as most gurus only guide followers along the path they themselves have traveled. One might also make a distinction between a Sant and a Sant-SatGuru.. The gist is that the more relative wisdom a realizer of Absolute Wisdom has, the better or more effective a Guru he will be.
But, having said all this,
“The lover sees no fault in the beloved and considers him to be worthy of his highest regard for him. This is giving away one’s heart....If you want to know how the heart goes out of your hands, ask one who has lost his heart...Unless one’s self is completely surrendered, nothing can be achieved on the Path of Love. There is no half way.” - Sawan SIngh (22)
Another question is: how many Perfect Masters are there? We will leave this unanswered, and the reader perhaps unsatisfied, save for this enigmatic additional quote:
“Due to their limited knowledge, the majority of the people do not believe that there could be a living Master in the world today. But love says, “You should remove the bandage of ignorance and selfishness from your eyes. Then only will you see not one but many perfect Masters.” (23)
CHAPTER THREE
Is the Saint or Master omniscient?; Knowing and not-knowing; Sarvagnana or ‘knowing Reality’ is the meaning of ‘All-Knowing’; “Nobody can boast that he knows everything. Even if we know the everything - all creation - what is it? It is one ray of thought, is it not? Man cannot know everything”; “He does not claim to be a walking encyclopedia nor ask for a halo of infallibility. There are many questions to which he does not know the true answer. He is neither pontifically infallible nor deifically omniscient”; “Proclaiming oneself to be an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipotent deity is a clear sign of ignorance”; Views of Brunton, Nisargadatta, Atmananda, Ramana Maharshi; “At the higher noetic spheres you do not learn about things outside of yourself. You become those things”
This question is related to the previous one about 'perfection', and is also a stumbling block and conundrum for many seekers. As with most things, there is a childish, immature, or incomplete view, and a more straightforward truth, offered to three grades of students. In the school of advaita vedanta, and the view of many sages, "omniscience" does not mean knowledge of everything the mind can think of, but rather “understanding the real nature of existence,” or the permanent and continuous knowing or recognition of Reality or Brahman, period. This is especially significant in that the highest form of knowing has so frequently been described as a kind of "unknowing" or "divine ignorance." A little story will illustrate this. In 1991 I met Sant Rajinder Singh for the first time when my friend William Combi pushed me up to the dias to meet the saint. I was writing a book of biographies of spiritual teachers at the time, which William was quick to point out. I was a little embarrassed, and simply said, "I really don't know what I am doing," to which Sant Rajinder's instant response, faster than anyone else could notice, was, "Join the club!" Rather than causing doubt to arise, for me it was an instiller of confidence in him and my own guru. To me this meant his knowledge arose spontaneously or intuitively as needed from deep within, if even that. Later, I have heard Master Rajinder say, "God-Power does everything, I don't do anything." Many saints and sages have confessed to this, that while many wonderful things happen all around them, apparently related to their presence, yet they generally take no credit for it, having become the still point at the center of the wheel. Swami Saradananda, a direct disciple of Sri Ramakrishna writes:
"The Vedas and other scriptures say that a knower of Brahman becomes all-knowing. This saying of the scriptures is proved to be wholly true when we notice the present behavior of the Master firmly established in the knowledge of Brahman. For not only did he now become directly acquainted with both the Absolute and its relative aspect, with Brahman and its power Maya and rising far above all doubts and impurities was abiding in a state of everlasting bliss [unknowing?], but, ever feeling his oneness with the universal Mother in Bhavamukha, he could undertake any hidden mystery of the realm of Maya any moment he wished to know...All the ideas arising in the universal mind appear clearly before one who has crossed the limit of his little I-ness and has become identified with the universal I. The Master could know the events of all the previous births of his devotees before they had come to him, only because he had reached that state. He could know the particular Lila of the universal Mind for the manifestation of which he had assumed his present body. He also knew that some very high class Sadhakas were born by the will of God to participate in that sport...[However] from what the Master told us on one occasion...it is clear that all truths do not always remain revealed even to the minds of incarnations of God. But whatever truth of the spiritual world they want to know and understand, comes very easily within the range of their mind and intellect." (24)
But while this is available to some saints and sages, it is secondary to their abidance in that which is beyond both ignorance and knowledge. In Sant Mat, this would be the Wordless or Stateless State (Parabrahman), also called Absolute God, or the ‘Beyond God’ state. Omniscience might be spoken of in relation to God or Brahman, but not Parabrahman. Therefore the highest or best class of saints or sages are always a mystery and a paradox from our point of view.
Shri Atmananda spoke of truth, being beyond the opposites, as characterized by “knowledge knowing everything and knowledge not knowing anything, at the same time.” (25)
How’s that for paradox and mystery! This is in fact close to what Meher Baba told Kirpal SIngh when they met each other. Thus, something like this may be true: a high degree of relative knowledge may be available to a realized Master, but generally on a 'need to know basis' for his work. But he may not see it as knowledge as we do, although his spontaneous action may give that impression. His all-knowingness lies primarily in his realization. The word for that is sarvajnana, or “knowing all about the path and its fruition.” Along with that often do come spontaneous siddhis or powers that bring him access to 'detailed files', so to speak, that appears like omniscience. But we cannot expect a Master to know everything there is about nuclear physics, for example, if he has not trained in that field, absent a miracle. And saints usually eschew miracles or the use of siddhis unless moved by the Power within to be used to do so, and even then generally deny doing so. Such then is a limit on his relative knowledge. More important is his ability to read one's spiritual condition and offer highly individual guidance.
This also brings up the issue that when one is 'born', or when spiritually 'born again', onto the quest or into its final goal, one is not born as an adult! He is born as a babe, so to speak. Therefore, a new master must grow into adulthood. He is not automatically equipped with all power and knowledge. This is quite evident upon observation. It doesn't mean he is not perfect according to the aforementioned criteria. But it certainly means he still grows in understanding and capability. Much may be recapitulated rapidly from past lifetimes, and much may be downloaded, so to speak, from his own Master, to help him grow into the role.
It must be admitted, however, that there is a paradox here as well. For the true master, as portrayed in Sant Mat in any case, is not the physical form, but the Master-Power or God-Power or Oversoul behind the 'breakwater' of the physical Master. And that Power is infinite, and can, for example, manifest the Master's Radiant or subtle form (and even physical form) to millions of people simultaneously, even beyond or over the head of the human Master's awareness, which is the more common occurrence. It is also always capable of giving one the advice he needs in any situation, according to the Divine will - even if the physical Master does not know it - and even if he Himself is not yet capable of acting in such a capacity. This is, granted, hard to understand. But in a sense this may be considered an attribute of omnipresence and omniscience, if one likes. What it amounts to is that the infinite Self knows everything because it is everything, but has a special focus in the Master, using him as necessary.
The concept that a human Master is omniscient and omnipotent, while useful perhaps at a particular stage of development of a disciple, is simply too often misconstrued. It need not be a stumbling block for anyone. If it is an aid for ones devotion, so be it, but it must be understood rightly. A fifth-plane master is said to be fully 'Overself' conscious at all times, if that term is permitted to be used here, and able to look into the deepest heart of the disciple. The scriptures of every tradition are full of stories about having full faith in the words and actions of the Master, especially when directed at the individual. He is, so-called, in tune and one with the Sat Purush, the universal Soul, and thus is His mouthpiece. Yet it doesn't lessen the grandeur of a Master and his scope of influence to see him in his humanness, but, rather, should seemingly be a guide to strengthen ones faith. If one is in internal conflict because of a discord between his faith and his reason, that is not too useful. Doubts must be cleared before one can move on. Sant Darshan Singh once replied to a disciple's question of whether a saint always knows of the existence of all of the other other saints alive in the world or on higher planes at the same time. Master Darshan replied, "Of course, saints are all-knowing." Now, to this writer's limited understanding, for a true saint to know that there are other saints alive at the same time does not necessarily imply being "all-knowing" - nor would he automatically have to know of the presence of ALL of the saints or liberated masters so existing in order to be worthy of the name 'Master', but, then again, perhaps he could do so if he 'researched' (on inner and outer planes) this matter. But would he also be able to distinguish between a saint and a sage? For there is a difference between the two, in most understandings. A sage has been traditionally been described as "trackless, like a fish in water, invisible even to the gods," and knowing reality, that everything is Brahman (God), at all times, as well as abiding as Parabrahman or the Absolute. This basically means that his essence, with which he is constantly aware, is noumenal, not phenomenal. It cannot be 'seen.' PB wrote, “Others may see him as standing in the great Light, but he himself has no particular self-importance.” And such beings are often rather hidden, therefore how could one know them unless they wanted to be known, or were among those sharing in the 'same line of work'?
But in contrast to Darshan Singh, Kirpal did not claim to be all-knowing, and according to one satsangi, Maharaj Charan Singh when asked at one point did not even know who Ramana Maharshi was. And we know that Ramana never claimed to be omniscient or Ben right all the time. So someone must be wrong here. To my way of thinking, it is certainly odd that Charan Singh, an educated man, would say he did not know who perhaps the greatest and most widely known Indian sage of the twentieth-century was, but that in itself does not mean that he was not great or a competent Master, if it is conceded that omniscience is not a requirement for the job. That he was unaccountably ignorant is all we can say with a degree of certainty.
It is also a little know fact, it has been said, that there is often a 'veil' of sorts between Masters working in higher dimensions such that one Master may NOT know what another is doing unless it is part of his own work and experience. This does not necessarily contradict Ishwar Puri’s enthusiastic statement that a Master is simultaneously conscious in all planes at once. It is difficult to explain, but it has something to do with the fact that one can be conscious on a plane, but not yet be able to function fully on that plane, and further, one may function on a plane, but not fully understand on that plane, or be able to translate perfectly in language or to the brain what he actually knew while on that plane. It is somewhat like if a master in the tenth century had a vision of the future. Again, would he be able to explain the intricacies of nuclear physics to his audience? Not likely. It takes time, then, to fully acclimate in those dimensions. Furthermore, as for a Master's articulation of the teaching and his own experience, there is this to consider, again from PB:
"The inspiration may be pure Spirit but because it must come into a particular man, he receives it in a particular way, interprets, expresses and communicates it in a personal way, so that the purity is at least a little adulterated, the integrity a little lost. His character may be as selfless as he can make it, but the coloring of his mind can only fade out to a particular extent because his body is still there, his entire past history is there graven in the subconscious, and body is interfused with mind. All this will vanish with death." (26)
As Master Darshan's statement about omniscience is different from Master Rajinder's enigmatic comment to me above, I would like to explore this idea a bit further. The gist of the common understanding is that the ignorant soul 'knows nothing', but the 'Lord knows everything'. But this is the 'understanding' within the dream of a dreamer. So, of course, to the extent that it is true at all, it is of necessity paradoxical. Sri Nisargadatta went so far as to say that “God doesn’t even know you exist.” What can we make of that, as we have the contrary statement in the Bible, wherein it is stated “I knew you in your mothers womb” ? The answer is that Maharaj was speaking of the Absolute, or what the Sants refer to as Absolute God, ‘beyond’ God as Creator, and which is ‘beyond’ ignorance or knowledge and any concepts whatsoever. God as All-knowing means, in most traditional scriptural references, knowledge of “the All,” not knowledge of every possible particular ‘thing.’ “The All” means Reality. The word used is sarvagnana or sarvajna: i.e., "knowing the true nature of existence - no more and no less. So in that sense Master Darshan would be quite right, but disciples do not understand, and misconceptions are fed, and all too often by omissions on the part of a teacher.
Kirpal said:
“Nobody can boast that he knows everything. Even if we know the everything - all creation - what is it? It is one ray of thought, is it not? Man cannot know everything. At least that which is that ray manifest somewhere, that can give you contact with that ray within you, that’s all.” (27)
Here “that’s all” is surely an understatement!
One dear initiate lady who was very close to Kirpal Singh said confidentially to a group of us many years after his death that he made a lot of mistakes. This is not a problem for me, because I am aware of the tendency of disciples to conflate or confuse levels and misunderstand the fundamental condition of the adept. Even so, considerable goofiness makes its way into the teachings of this path! Beas at different times said Jesus was only third plane, but then he was fifth plane. Buddha only went to third plane, but then again he taught light and sound in the Surangama Sutra so he's definitely with us! It begins to appear that Jesus and Buddha are only quoted when it serves the interests of a lineage. And then there is occult mumbo-jumbo about Soamiji or Kabir being avatars, unverifiable and unfruitful speculations that go very far in helping anyone's Self-realization!
With no disrespect intended, are we to think that Sant Darshan Singh, who said saints were all-knowing, could tell us the "status" and "level" of a Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche? What could he say? That he only went to the third plane, like other Buddhists? Dilgo himself would probably admit he didn’t go there! Darshan had to apologize for yelling at a lady for initiating someone without permission! Why didn't he know the group leader had told her to do it? There are hundreds of such examples. Certainly we must discriminate and try to separate the wheat from the chaff, but the plain fact is that the Masters are not perfect at this level! One can either be continually disillusioned by this, or simply re-frame his understanding of the path and still honor the teachers for what they represent in Truth.
Ramana Maharshi once remarked somewhat sarcastically after certain guests left, "people think if I can not answer every question that I am not great, etc." The great Zen Master Dogen; as mentioned, once said, "the life of a Zen Master is one continuous mistake." When further asked if he as enlightened, he replied, "I do not know." When questioned if he did not mean that literally, he said, "No, I really don't know!" Sri Nisargadatta said "I know even less than you do!" Now that one can really make one think if he takes it too literally. One simply can't get one's mind around such a comment. Held in contrast with that of the "perfect master" and it can't help reduce one to an absolute state of ignorance, which is a great achievement! Paul Cash, further, in an article he wrote about his time with Paul Brunton (PB) wrote thusly:
"Once PB asked Paul what his idea of what it is like being a sage. Paul answered that he thought one thing would be that one loves everybody. PB answered, "I'm not that advanced; I don't love everybody." Another time the question of omniscience came up:
One afternoon I asked him, "What exactly is it about a sage's mind that makes that mind so different from the rest of us?" It was one of many questions I asked that he didn't originally seem to intend to answer. But I persisted and finally he asked me, "Well what do you think it is?"
I said that I had never been able to believe that it could be omniscience in the sense of knowing everything at once; but I didn't think it unreasonable to conceive that when a sage wants or needs to know, he could turn his mind toward it in a certain way and that knowledge would just arise. PB laughed heartily and answered, "It's not even that good!"
"Well, how good is it?"
"It has really nothing to do with knowledge, or continuity of intuition, or frequency of intuitions. It's that the mind has been made over into the Peace in an irreversible way. No form that the mind takes can alter the Peace."
"You could say it's a kind of knowledge," he continued, "in this sense. If the mind takes the form of truth, the sage knows its truth. If it doesn't , then he knows that it's not. He's never in doubt about whether the mind has knowledge or not. But whether it does or not, his Peace is not disturbed."
I asked if that meant that someone could go to a sage for help and the sage would be unable to help them. He replied that sometimes the intuition comes, sometimes it doesn't; he explained that when it doesn't come, the sage knows he has nothing to do for that person. The continuity of frequency of the intuitions has to do with the sage's mission, not with what makes a sage a sage.
"You must understand," he said, "that there is no condition in which the Overself is at your beck and call. But there is a condition in which you are continuously at the Overself's beck and call. That's the condition to strive for."
As he spoke these words, he was the humblest man I had ever seen before or since. For all the extraordinary things about him, all the glamorous inner and outer experiences, all the remarkable effects his writings and example have had on others, that humility is what seems to be the most important fact about him."
In general, this was PB's view on the result of self-realization:
"There is some confusion on this point in the minds of many students. On attaining enlightenment a man does not attain omniscience. At most he may receive a revelation of the inner operations of life and nature, of the higher laws governing life and man...But the actuality in a majority of cases is that he attains enlightenment only..." (28)
Which is no mean achievement! Speaking similarly on Ramana Maharshi, Sri Aurobindo once remarked:
"Because he is a great man, does it follow that everything he thinks or says is right? Or because he lives in the light, does it follow that his light is absolute and complete? Living in the true consciousness is living in a consciousness in which one is spiritually in union with the divine in one way or another. But it does not follow that by so living one will have complete, exact and infallible truth about all ideas, all things and all persons. [Maharshi] realizes the divine in a certain aspect and he has knowledge of what is necessary for his path. It does not follow that he will have knowledge that is beyond what he has reached or is outside it." (29)
To which David Godman noted,
"I should point out..that although Sri Maharishi often gave forthright answers to questions, at no time did he insist that he alone was right, or that all people should follow his teachings." (30)
Mark offers this explanation:
"A great learning the 'world sangha' is experiencing in these times is the gradual recognition that there is a significant difference between Self-Realization and the development of relative wisdom. In this understanding, being a 'true master' or SatGuru will not mean relative omniscience, especially in the physical consciousness, which is more veiled than the higher bodies. So even though the physical consciousness of a jivanmukti or liberated one, might be more permeable to the influence of higher planes, it is likely, one might say, still more veiled than the same master while in their vijnanamayakosha alone. So the full liberation of an adept, the 'true' nature of their 'mastery', is true in the sense that they have been reborn fully into the light of a non-dual realization that eclipses their tendency to act out of self-interest based on dualistic perceptions and, therefore, separative needs. This is different from their 'knowing everything.' But even this living realization may be mildly tainted by the veils of the lower bodies, but usually, with a more complete master, not very much. But again, as far as their relative wisdom goes, that is very subject to conditioning from the state of the world at large, human culture at large, the gene pool they incarnated into, their personal karmic history and education, the lineage they may be a part of, and the type of training and practices they received. The relative aspect of an initiate's nature and understanding is a combined product of all these factors interacting with their inner realization. So they are only 'perfect' in their liberation, not in their relative wisdom. Recognizing or accepting this can be a challenge for spiritual seekers, who have for a long time wanted to believe that masters are perfect in all ways. It is a kind of long romance, and the fantasy is fading, and practical truth is emerging. Masters and disciples, it seems, may both need to adjust themselves to this wiser and more mature understanding of the true nature of the situation. Masters are profound in their core realization - which to us is of most importance - and still in varying degrees human in their relative wisdom. It will most likely take time for the great lineages in the world to adjust to these truths."
And further, on another occasion, in responding to a personal reaction of despair, in my particular condition, after reading one passage sent to me: “By sitting in silence and focusing on the spiritual vistas within, we return to God. That is the measure of success in our spiritual work, which is our true mission in life,” my friend responded;
“Yes, I just ignore quotes like that! I make a distinction that is very important to me in understanding spiritual masters and teachings - which is that there is a difference between relative wisdom and absolute wisdom. The latter concerns direct experience of 'God', ‘non-dualism', the 'Tao', 'Brahman', etc. These terms I put in quotes because they are names for a reality (more or less the same with differences of interpretation and so on), that are about the underlying, deepest or most 'absolute' reality. The relative can be very deep and soulful too, but is more about truths like the value of equanimity, or the nature of karma, or the differences between different practices, or the nature of Grace. These are very important and profound truths too, but are more 'relative'."
"To me, one important reason to understand the difference between these two truths is that liberation, mastership or nirvana is essentially based on absolute wisdom. When one has adequately realized the 'absolute', then one feels such a depth of wholeness that separation ends, and one feel contentment, peace and liberation from personal suffering."
"But the methods of arriving there, and the details of all the relative levels of truth, are much more complex and there are many points of view about all that. So what I find in various examples of 'true masters', those that have realized liberation, is that they have all deeply realized some version of absolute truth, and this has given them liberation. And in that sense they are 'perfect' or 'sat gurus'. But always, their relative wisdom is imperfect. They will have areas of great and profound relative understanding about some topic like grace and karma, but be very unaware of another area, or even have partial or false views in that area. So a sobering truth about masters is that, although their absolute wisdom (direct intuitive realization of a profound sense of transcendent truth) is very deep, their relative wisdom is always flawed - in some areas profound, in others middlish, and in other not so great. Their absolute realization makes it more likely that they will have better relative wisdom than the average person - and I would argue that, overall, they always do. But point by point, they will definitely always have flaws - even the Buddha, Lao Tse, Krishna, Jesus - all had flawed relative wisdom. I love the Sant Mat masters, and feel deeply their mastery, and even value some of their relative wisdom. But I have disagreements with them in other areas as well. As I do with Ramana, Daskalos, Buddha, Dogen, Jesus, etc.."
"I feel we are in a time when students have a new challenging task of growing up some and discovering this truth that masters can be 'perfect' in their liberating/absolute wisdom, and imperfect in their relative wisdom. The old archetype is of the perfect master who is omniscient and can't be questioned. Those days are over, imo. People are too educated now and exposed to too many teachings, which is exposing the flaws in the teachings in specific individuals and traditions more and more. So I still deeply respect the inner liberated presence of a master while being discriminating about what they say. Agree sometimes, not other times."
"For me, that quote is standard Sant Mat with its primary emphasis on inversion meditation. It is not that the entire quote is wrong, per se, only, imo, incomplete. In particular, I don't agree with the statement at all about “the measure of our success.” I know many people who are 'on fire' through grace, past karma/practice, etc. so that the Fire of purification burns without the need of practice at this time. In fact, in some cases any meditation will make it too intense and out of balance. For many just learning to accept the process, surrender to the fire and the suffering and let it do its work, is the path. And then, as a kind of karma yogi, just trying to maintain ordinary life activity and hang in there. For some this is the path. Even things like therapy can be part of the path. So, I love many of these Masters, but their publicly expressed understanding of the path, when meant for everyone, at all stages, and in every situation, is a little simplistic and outdated for me.”<
This particularly pertains to what we have already written about “progress” in Sant Mat Three. There are many ways saints and mystics of all ages have expressed progress towards the ultimate goal besides their degree of success in meditative inversion. Even Kirpal Singh said that in the greater picture progress is not about the inner experiences one has. And one finds that in private even these masters sometimes say and recommend different things to different people - as it has always been with great masters with insight into what people need. [Note: this is not a recommendation for anyone not to do a certain practice or meditation, just to give a ray of hope by way of understanding that progress proceeds in different ways and by different routes for different people].
The same friend who counsels me at times sent me this reassuring message. This was for me, not you, so absorb whatever, if anything, feels right or helpful to you. Otherwise, stay true to yourself and your Master.
“I've met quite a few who are the same - inversion, for one reason or another, isn't the path for them. It's not really my path either, although I had periods when I meditated that way. Not now. I love the masters of Sant Mat, but don't follow that practice. Nor has that caused me to experience any sense of separation with the Inner Being of the masters of that lineage like Kirpal or Darshan, They understand and are supportive. And that is my experience of how Kirpal feels towards you too. Just compassion and support and grace.”
Love,
Kirpal wrote:
"It is not the inner experience which determines the spiritual progress, but the basic personal attitude of serene living of the child disciple, which proves his or her worth."
Similarly, Brunton wrote:
"Let us value these encounters with the divine and be glad and truly grateful when they happen. They are significant and important. But they are special events. The quest does not run through them alone. It runs just as much through ordinary daily life in which our experiences are shared in common with so many people." (31)
Kirpal continues:
“When a disciple entrusts his all to the Master, he becomes carefree and the Master has of necessity to take over the entire responsibility, just as a mother does for her child who does not know what is good for him. Surrender..comes only when a disciple has complete faith and confidence in the competency of the Master.”
“Self-surrender is not an easy task. To accomplish it, one has to recede back to the position of an innocent child. It means an entire involution, a complete metamorphosis, supplanting one’s own individuality. It is the path of self-abnegation, which not everyone can take."
"On the other hand, the path of spiritual discipline is comparatively easy. Self-effort can be tried by anyone in order to achieve spiritual advancement."
"It is, no doubt, a long and tortuous path, as compared with the way of self-surrender, but one can, with confidence in the Master, tread of firmly step by step. If, however, a person is fortunate enough to take to self-surrender, he can have all the blessings of the Master quickly, for he goes directly into his lap and has nothing to do by himself for himself.” (32)
Please send a few kind thoughts this way, dear reader, it was not easy to write this material, risking breaking taboos, facing judgement, ridicule, or damnation. My solace lies on the understanding that the times demand a reckoning and reconciliation of the different paths, and alleviation of unnecessary suffering due to misunderstanding. It is in this interest only that these exercises were undertaken. There is no self-interest to be gained, no money to be made. Prayers are sent constantly to the Masters that no one be mislead by anything we have explored and written about. So far, feedback has mostly been positive, and for that I am most grateful.
One final note on omniscience. Lest we be misunderstood, there is no doubt that a great Master can have access to knowledge from a perspective unavailable to the more ordinary man. Ishwar Puri said a perfect Master is conscious on all planes at once. We do not know about that, or exactly what he means, but would be comfortable saying that one might be, or could be, sometimes. Or he may be conscious in some respects at some times, and broadly in contact subconsciously at others. As far as I know there has not been an adequate and comprehensive explanation of this so far. Even so, Daskalos' disciple Kostas seems to agree in principle:
"The advanced mystic can enter inside the psychic worlds any time he so wishes through superconscious self-awareness without closing the door of perception to experiences that are taking place in the gross material world. Additionally, the mystic, by entering the Real [Sat], moves beyond time and space and therefore is capable of acquiring impressions and experiences simultaneously from all the dimensions of life - from the gross material, the psychic, the noetic, and beyond." (33)
"There is only one world," he says, "with the same deep center but expressed in variable ways."
Daskalos himself says:
"At the higher noetic spheres you do not learn about things outside of yourself. You become those things. This is what is meant by at-onement. At the higher noetic spheres you do not shape mind as thought forms in order to understand reality outside yourself. You become the reality outside yourself. And when one reaches the higher noetic worlds you can consciously acquire any form you like and still be you."
"In an instant you can know things about an object which for a scientist may take years and years of study. If you penetrate the higher noetic worlds then you can become the rose bush and you can know in an instant everything about that rose bush...You go beyond time and space and become yourself the essence of things. You enter into the world of ideas and not of the concrete forms in the march of evolution. When I spread my consciousness in this state of at-onement what is outside becomes inside. Through at-onement I become one with creation and become aware of the role the archangels play and the Christ-Logos, the giver of life. What do you gain? You enter inside the first principles, inside everything. You may ask 'When you reach such a stage do you undervalue things that are not at this level?' No. Because in reality there is no higher and lower." (34)
So perhaps we should not place too many restrictions on a sage. Continuing with the themes of omniscience and also the courage to question, we repeat Swami Vivekananda’s attitude towards his revered Sri Ramakrishna:
“The Master was greatly pleased with Narendra’s inquiring mind. Sri Ramakrishna also tested Narendra in an unusual way. Without explanation, whenever Naren visited Sri Ramakrishna, the Master would not speak to him, although he spoke with other devotees. Every time Naren came to visit Sri Ramakrishna, the Master ignored him. When he arrived, Sri Ramakrishna did not even greet him; similarly when he left, Sri Ramakrishna was silent. This continued for nearly a month. At last Sri Ramakrishna said, ‘Why do you still come here when I do not speak to you?’ Narendra replied, ‘Do you think I come to listen to you? I love you, and that is why I come.’ At his response the Master said, ‘I was testing you. Only a great person such as you could endure such treatment. Any other person would have gone away.’ Narendra’s attitude was: I love you and so I come to you. But this does not mean that I will accept all of your words.”
This expresses a thoroughly modern attitude. Would we be amiss in feeling the same way? Is there anything but fear and tradition that prevents it? Would any true master, moreover, think we were less of a devotee because of it? Or less spiritual?
PB writes this about the sage:
"He does not claim to be a walking encyclopedia nor ask for a halo of infallibility. There are many questions to which he does not know the true answer. He is neither pontifically infallible nor deifically omniscient."
“His reliability and competence, his trustworthiness and holiness as a guide, are not diminished if his limitations and faults as a human being are acknowledged...I distrust the legends which are told about most gurus by the disciples. They all exaggerate. Why? Because they have stopped seeking truth...When a man turns belief in the superior knowledge of the guide into belief in the virtual omniscience of the guide, it is dangerous.” (35)
Having said that, PB presents us with the mystery of devotion:
“Do not stray into waters that are too deep for you. Do not try to grasp the mystery of your master. You cannot do it and you will never do it, for if ever you came to the very edge of succeeding in doing it both you and he would vanish from your ken...The last lesson of these words is: trust him where you cannot understand, believe in him where you cannot follow, and no regret on this point need ever be yours.” (36)
Finally, for the Jnani, once again, there is simply a different notion of omniscience altogether than that claimed by some great mystics. ”All-knowing" for the jnani means "knowing at all times that "consciousness is All" - not knowing every conceivable possibility in an infinite universe of ever-increasing relative knowledge.
Shri Atmananda says: “Ignorance of everything is the same as knowledge of everything, which is pure knowledge.” (37)
Sri Nisargadatta points out:
“There are no distinctive marks of gnana. Only ignorance can be recognized, not gnana. Nor does a gnani claim to be something special. All those who proclaim their own greatness and uniqueness are not gnanis. They are mistaking some unusual development for realization. [The latter is often the disciple’s mistake as well]. The gnani shows no tendency to proclaim himself to be a gnani. He considers himself to be perfectly normal, true to his real nature. Proclaiming oneself to be an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipotent deity is a clear sign of ignorance.”
"Gnana is not a thing to be bound by causes and results [i.e., efforts, meditations]. It is beyond causation altogether. It is abidance in the Self. The Yogi comes to know many wonders, but of the self he remains ignorant. The gnani may look and feel quite ordinary, but the self he knows well." (38)
"To me nothing ever happens. There is something changeless, motionless, immovable, rock-like, unassailable; a solid mass of pure being-consciousness-bliss. I am never out of it." (39)
My hope is that these examples will provide food for thought and help clarify the matter of perfection of a saint or sage for the aspirant. Again, perfection as such is a concept of the human mind. It has limited usefulness. I can say this with confidence - that is, to my own satisfaction - simply because even sages have disagreed on what it means. Yet, having said that, I will also say that a perfect saint can 'read' your soul better than you can, and is therefore able to give better advice - i.e., what it is that you need to hear - when it is karmically or divinely appropriate - than anything that we can say here. But then, the receptivity to that advice, guidance and help is one's own responsibility.
But even giving unerring guidance, for which we should be forever grateful, does not imply omniscience in the strict philosophic sense, and we should not be constrained to tortuously stretch the truth to uphold our allegiance to any group, teaching, or teacher, for how does that help us or anyone else? One Sant Mat sceptic has strict criteria for omnipotence, for instance. One of them is that a Perfect Master should be able to go through a wood-chipper and come out whole again! We may laugh, but this is just an example of how absurd our lack of understanding of a widely used concept can become. But come, let us reason together a bit more.
The respected sage Shri Atmananda, essentially an advaitin, once again offers further clarification on this issue of omnipotence:
“The saint [note: not necessarily to be equated with the highest Sant in the Sant Mat tradition, but included here for the purposes of understanding] is one who follows the path of devotion to a personal god and develops an intense love (though personal) towards him. This love, in course of time, purifies the devotee’s heart immensely and makes it sattvic, though he still cannot transcend the limits of his own personality. His concept of God also develops, until it reaches omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience. Here he is stranded, and has sometimes to wait for years to get help from a Karana-guru to take him beyond (as Sri Caitanya did). If he is fortunate enough to keep his reason alive, and if he succeeds in keeping himself away from the mire of fanaticism, he will be able to obtain a Karana-guru and will be liberated.” (40)
“God is conceived with the attributes of omnipresence, omnipotence, omniscience etc.; and therefore he has to possess a cosmic mind, and there must be a cosmic world also for the mind to function in. But the real ‘I’- principle [the fundamental Reality] in man goes beyond mind and therefore beyond everything objective. In the sphere of the real ‘I’- principle, there is absolutely nothing else existing beside it. It is therefore attributeless. Brahman is also supposed to be attributeless. Therefore for God to become Brahman, he has to give up all the attributes attached to him.” (41)
Kirpal once told me “God is nothing!” The gist seems to be that at first we visualize ourselves as small and God as big. But that concept of ‘bigness’ eventually has to go in order to come to the Truth. Isvara may be visualized as big, but the Absolute is not big but beyond all categories.
Atmananda goes on to say that there is a class of mystics who follow the path of raja-yoga (or one might add, shabd yoga) mixed with a course of jnana practices, chalked out by a Karana-guru, who will certainly reach the ultimate Truth. One might take this as saying that enquiry added to one’s yoga practice is inevitable at some point, if ultimate Truth be the goal. This is rarely found explicitly in Sant Mat literature but is actually fairly uncontroversial in many high paths.
My interpretation of this, in light of Sant Mat philosophy, is, one, that there are Masters and there are great Masters, and, two, that a realized Master in this system may function in two modes: one, from the position of what they refer to as the Wordless, Absolute God, where, as Kirpal Singh said, “God is Nothing!”, and in which their omniscience is jnanic in knowing the eternal Reality alone - whether in Anami Lok or in this present world - and, two, stepping down to the level of the Satpurusha, i.e., “God,” where the attributes of omniscience, etc., come into play (although, the Master being Soul, shares them somewhat lesser in scope than God per se, Whose mind is said to know everything past, present, and future in all the universe(s) all at once). So confusion comes from not recognizing that there are two kinds of omniscience, as well as two (or more) notions of perfection as well: relative and Absolute.
Perhaps apropo of this, there was a meeting of Kirpal with Meher Baba. At one point Meher said, "I know everything and at the same time I know nothing." Kirpal replied, "Baba, that is a very high state."
This exchange between a disciple with Ramana Maharishi may also shed some light on this issue:
"Question: Is there a separate being Iswara [personal God] who is the rewarder of virtue and punisher of sins? Is there a God?
Bhagavan: Yes.
Questio: What is he like?
Bhagavan: Iswara has individuality in mind and body, which are perishable, but at the same time he has also the transcendental consciousness and liberation inwardly. Iswara, the personal God, the supreme creator of the universe, really does exist. But this is true only from the relative standpoint of those who have not realized the truth, those people who believe in the reality of individual souls [we prefer to say, ‘who have only realized as far as the soul’, to avoid the implication that this is only a matter of thoughts, concepts, or beliefs, or, also, for the purposes of our discussion, that advaita is the only truth]. From the absolute standpoint the sage cannot accept any other existence than the impersonal Self, one and formless. Iswara has a body, a form and a name, but it is not so gross as this material body. It can be seen in visions in the form created by the devotee. [and also manifests itself to the devotee as well] The forms and names of God are many and various and differ with each religion. His essence is the same as ours, the real Self being only one and without form. Hence forms he assumes are only creations or appearances. Iswara is immanent in every person and every object throughout the universe. The totality of all things and beings constitutes God. There is a power out of which a small fraction has become all this universe, and the remainder is in reserve. Both this reserve power plus the manifested power as [all the worlds] together constitute Iswara.” (42)
This is the World-Mind of PB and the ultimate Deity of religion and mysticism. It itself knows Brahman, the Absolute, or what PB terms Mind. To get this far may be considered the next to last stage on the jnana path of Vedanta, but a lofty realization it is. When is this realized in Sant Mat - Sach Khand, or Anami lok? We understand that many Sant Mat writings assign Isvara to a lower position, but the meaning behind the word is what is important - it is a word after all - and it appears Ramana gives it a higher significance than Sant Mat writings do. And it is a stage below that reached by the Self-realized sage. Still, God and Godhead, World-Mind and Mind, Saguna and Nirguna Brahman are basically one, not two, although they are separated for good pedagogical reasons.
In any case, this example from Ramana suggests the notion that a sage or sant may function, albeit to a limited degree, at times in God’s role as endowed with the great attributes like omniscience, etc., and then again function like absolute God or Godhead who has no such attributes, where the sage is “beyond the light, as the feeblest of creatures, with no sense of being a conscious co-creator in God’s Plan”, as PB once wrote.
Sri Nisargadatta summed up the essence of "knowing" in a simple, non-mystifying, and practical way:
"There is nothing in the world that you cannot know, when you know yourself. Thinking yourself to be the body you know the world as a collection of things. When you know yourself as a centre of consciousness, the world appears as the ocean of the mind. When you know yourself as you are in reality, you know the world as yourself.” (43)
And:
"I do not claim to know what you do not. In fact, I know much less than you do." (44)
"To lose entirely all interest in knowledge results in omniscience. It is but the gift of knowing what needs be known, at the right moment, for error-free action." (4)
So these are some various ways of looking at this issue. Something to ponder as well as to observe when in the company of a saint or a sage.
A brief note on PB’s views here. One might be pardoned, based on the frequent use of his quotations in these articles, for thinking that Brunton solely advocated following an independent path and took a somewhat dim view of masters. This is not the case, but he did declare that, one, it was difficult to find the genuine article, and two, that there were various misunderstandings about them among seekers. The following quotes - especially the first one which I find rather unique for PB - should disavow the reader of any misconception in this regard:
“Only when a sage is permanently and consistently established in the higher self may these occult powers be safely acquired and these relations with disciples be safely entered into. Only when other planes of existence are accessible to him and higher beings from those planes are instructing him can he really know how properly to live down here and be able to competently instruct others to do so.” (46)
“One great advantage of the path of personal discipleship is that it requires no intellectual capacity, no special gifts of any kind, to get its profit and make progress along its course. What could be simpler than remembering the master’s name and face? What could be easier than mentally turning to him everyday in faith, reverence, humility and devotion?” (47)
“The advantage of having a living master is immense...Should anyone have the good fortune to be taken under the wing of a sage, his progress will go forward at a far greater rate than would otherwise be possible.” (48)
“There is no tie so strong, no attraction so deep as that between Master and pupil. Consequently it persists through incarnation after incarnation.” (49)
CHAPTER FOUR
“The inner Master is more strict than me”; a gentle warning to pay attention to the prompting of the deeper self
One brief diversion by way of a story on this concept of omniscience and the inner and outer Master. Jesus said that "I and my Father are one." Yet he also said "The Father is greater than I." In the summer of 1973 Judith Lamb-Lion was at Sawan Ashram. She had a spectacular initiation experience as mentioned in several places in this book. At the time she was still a stewardess for an airline, and revealed to a friend that she was instructed from within to go on a fast. He relates: She kept it up for 18 days, and expressed to Kirpal that she was getting sick and was confused as to what to do, saying "what do you want from me?" He responded sharply, "We do not fast on this path, who told you to fast!" She said, "You!" He then said, "The inner Master is more strict than me, also with me. But you can now eat something." We left for the langar and she only ate one bite...and then went back to fasting!
Remembering this anecdote reminded me of a quote from Sri Nisargadatta. He said:
"The innermost light, shining peacefully and timelessly in the heart, is the real Guru. All others merely show the way...The outer Guru gives the instructions, the inner sends the strength; the alert application is the disciple's. Without will, intelligence and energy on the part of the disciple the outer Guru is helpless. The inner Guru bids his chance. Obtuseness and wrong pursuits bring about a crisis and the disciple wakes up to his own plight. Wise is he who does not wait for a shock, which can be quite rude...The inner Guru is not committed to non-violence. He can be quite violent at times, to the point of destroying the obtuse or perverted personality. Suffering and death, as life and happiness, are his tools of work. It is only in duality that non-violence becomes the unifying law."
Questioner: "Has one to be afraid of his own self?"
Nisargadatta: "Not afraid, for the self means well.. But it must be taken seriously. It calls for attention and obedience; when it is not listened to, it turns from persuasion to compulsion, for while it can wait, it shall not be denied. The difficulty lies not with the Guru, inner or outer. The Guru is always available. It is the ripe disciple that is lacking. When a person is not ready, what can be done?" (50))
And, without wanting to unduly frighten a reader, David Hawkins writes:
"Divine entreaty may or may not result in a desired outcome because, to the Self adversity, or even physical death, may be the only way to defeat the ego. To the Self, surrender of the personal world or the physical body may be the requisite for the transformation of the soul...The ego's basic illusion is that it is God and that without it, death will occur...It is often in the very pits of Hell and absolute despair that the ego can be surrendered, even right up to the point of imminent physical death. In extreme, timeless agony, the soul may entreat,"If there is a God, I ask him for help," and a great transformation occurs. This confirms the truth of the Zen teaching, "Heaven and hell are only one-tenth of an inch apart." (51)
Jeanne Guyon said "The Lord is very jealous over any saint who is utterly abandoned to Him. He does not let that believer have any pleasure at all outside of Himself." And finally, Brunton wrote:
"It often happens that aspirants put off the sacrifice of time which prayer and meditation call for because, they complain, they are too busy with this or that. Thus they never make any start at all and the years slip uselessly by. In most cases this involves no penalty other than the spiritual stagnation to which it leads, but in some cases where a higher destiny has been reserved for the individual or where a mission has to be accomplished, the result is far different. Everything and everyone that such a person uses as an excuse for keeping away from the practice of meditation, the exercise of devotion, and the communion of prayer may be removed from his external life by the higher self. Thus, through loss and suffering, he will be forced to obey the inward call...No man can afford to fail to heed the summons to the Quest. If he does, it is at his own peril and he will then fail in everything else, for this is an imperative call coming from the highest part of his being."
But then:
"Human beings are given more than one chance to redeem themselves. Such is the mercy of the higher power." (52)
CHAPTER FIVE
Cognitive dissonance #2; A recent example of “You cannot handle the truth!”; The madness of crowds; Scamming; Getting real: when the eyes glaze over even in the face of a 1 in 469,001,600 chance of something being the truth, you know there is a problem!
I hesitated to bring this up, after having tried to be nice, as well as balanced and measured in my writing on this topic. I fully realize the risk of upsetting some satsangis with the following comments, but then, I remember my Master, Kirpal Singh, often quoting Socrates who, upon being asked if he loved Plato, answered, "yes, but I love Truth more than Plato." And that is how it must be, as perhaps our only safeguard from going astray, to which we must adhere, however much it hurts. In my opinion, the following should put the nail on the coffin of any lingering doubts as to whether or not any Master is "omniscient" or not on a human level:
Regardless of ones basic views and political leanings, we now have irrefutable evidence, based on government and pharmaceutical company data, documents, and testimony (including court proceedings and disclosures to parliamentary bodies), that the vaccines promoted during the recent pandemic were never tested for safety or efficacy; that they were never proved to prevent infection or transmission; that masks are ineffective; that there were massive numbers of serious adverse affects registered with VAERS, the government's vaccine reporting system (with numerous studies showing that only 1-10% of the actual number of such events get reported); that the death counts were inflated possibly by 97% due to faulty PCR testing at too high of a cycle count to accurately assess Covid infection, with the result that such deaths were reassigned by the CDC two years after the fact as having died of multiple co-morbidities with Covid, but not from Covid; that hospitals were highly financially incentivized to count a death as Covid (up to $300,000 per patient if put on a ventilator); and that safe, effective and inexpensive remedies such as Vitamin D, hydroxychloroquin, and ivermectin were heavily suppressed by the media, big pharma and hospitals. One major province in India saved hundreds of thousands of people with ivermectin, for example, but that was quietly reported and then dropped from public awareness. Instead, hospitals were pressured to use what amounted to a death protocol of ventilators, Remdesvir (which destroys the kidneys) and sedatives, with Do Not Resuscitate orders on Covid patients. Just recently, a bombshell study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has confirmed that the risk of autoimmune heart disease is 13,200% higher in people who are vaccinated for Covid. The study found that the risk of myocarditis following mRNA Covid vaccination is around 133x greater than the background risk in the population. The study was conducted by the CDC, FDA, and researchers from several top U.S. universities and hospitals. All of this is not conspiracy theory but a matter of public record.
The point here is that NEITHER of the gurus of at least the two main Sant Mat lineages KNEW or spoke out about any of this during the pandemic. If they were omniscient shouldn't, and wouldn't, they have done so? I suppose one could make the case that "well, they knew, but might not have wanted to risk getting singled out by public authorities and thereby do damage to their mission." Perhaps, but this is a critical time for standing up for truth. It makes me uneasy that the gurus either had relationships with family members in the medical profession, or hundreds of millions of dollars invested in hospitals - major conflicts of interest for objectivity. Certainly enough to put doubt on possession of anything like omniscience. For instance, the guru with the family hospital empire said bluntly when asked by someone if they should get vaccinated or not, "just take the shot if you don't want to die!" And that turned out to be spectacularly untrue. And when asked in Germany, after much negative information about the mRNA shots became exposed publicly, why he had said that and why getting the shot was until recently still required to visit his ashram, “he conveniently evaded the question - like he often does,” said one devotee. This is not a sign inspiring trust. And without trust there is no path of discipleship. The other (who I have met several times and respect), somewhat uncommittedly said, "you have to decide for yourself, but these companies are working very hard on these vaccines." Sure they were - long before there was a pandemic they were working on the mRNA technology, and even had patents on the virus. The drug companies lied about their test results; the head of Pfizer publicly later admitted when subpoenaed that they lied (with the unbelievable excuse that “since the government was lying, too, it was okay.”); there was no legitimate placebo group, and the list of errors and deceptions in the clinical trials and subsequent recommendations goes on and on. So where in all of this is there any evidence of "omniscience" on the part of any spiritual teacher?” The answer is “nowhere,” and as they say, “extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.” The irony, however, is that even when the gurus deny such a possession many followers insist on claiming it for them, almost as if they would fall into an abyss or lose their faith if they stopped believing it.
“How can he who is hesitant to say that false things are false, speak the truth? Seeing this clearly, everything becomes clear.” - Samartha Ramdas (53)
We have no doubt these teachers are graced with many noble and enlightened qualities and help many people. There are doubters who may not feel that way but we are not among them. Not being omniscient does not mean that they are not exceptional beings. We hope to have made this clear in the preceding section. They are being singled out here only because in other schools of practice, where even some teachers of, say, Buddhism, non-duality, or contemporary forms of embodied awakening, often seem to have the same share of blind spots, cognitive dissonance, and prejudices as the general population, they never claim to be all-knowing, or "God in human form," anymore than everyone else is. The tenth guru of the Sikhs said "anyone who sees me as the Supreme Lord will go straight to hell." Of course this can be confusing when one is told to worship the Guru as God. Some allow this, while some don't. In many cases this may depend on the caliber of devotees one has. In any case reverence is always an appropriate attitude to have. But this is what it boils down to:
"The man who understands his own limitations and the Absolute's lack of them will never claim equality with it. Such a man will never ask others to show him the reverence which they ought to give to God. Whereas nearly all popular religions set up as an intermediary between It and us "The Divinely Incarnate Prophet" or else "The Son of God," philosophy depersonalizes it and sets up instead the true self, the divine soul in man. For even the prophets and avatars whom the divine Godhead sends down to mankind are sent not only to teach them that the Absolute exists but also to direct them towards the realization of their own true inner self. The true self will then reflect as much of the divine as it is able to, but it can never exhaust it."
"Even the sage, who has attained a harmony with his Overself, has found only the godlike within himself. Yes, it is certainly the Light, but it is so for him, for the human being. He still stands as much outside the Divine Mystery as everyone else does. The difference is that whereas they stand in darkness, he stands in this Light." - Brunton (54)
Ishwar Puri said that the fact that a true Master is one with our higher self or soul is how we actually recognize that he is our Master. In some sense this may be so, but, of course, it is a matter of the Heart. And that he will not alienate us from own true self is a necessary criterium in this matter. Our reasoning abilities must not be compromised by dependence on any group or provincial belief system. It is we who are getting realized, after all. How can one recognize someone is their master? There are so many things one can look for (outer behavior, inner experiences), but these are both objective things and subject to error. Perhaps Nisargadatta summarizes it as good as any:
"The only way you can judge is by the change in yourself when you are in his company. If you feel more at peace and happy, if you understand your self with more than usual clarity and depth, it means you have met the right master." (55))
And the same could be said for satsang, as mentioned earlier. Enoblement of character and augmentation of intelligence are the lasting elements to be retained, moments of enthusiasm and bliss, as well as their expectation, are not. Are these things happening? If so, well and good. If not, some self-questioning is certainly in order as well as inevitable.
Continuing, it is perhaps unfortunate that one of the few groups on the whole, in my opinion, who seem on principle to have some in their midst with an eye out for mass deception today are Christians. Unfortunate not only because they are often singled out and persecuted for their conservatism, but also because some of their rather fundamentalist theological tenets have driven many into various Eastern and alternative forms of spirituality in the first place. "In a time of universal deceit," said George Orwell, "telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Sadly, maintaining integrity on this point in the face of cult dynamics can make one feel he has no spiritual home, no “sangha,” without feeling a need to hide a large part of himself. Yet the gurus may get another chance to stand firm, as blasphemous as some may feel about such a comment. The fact is that everyone on this planet is on a learning curve, including Masters. Already at the time of this writing (5-20-24) there are signs and trial balloons of other pandemics to come, and even worse forms of global manipulation: cultural, scientific, medical, political, and financial, and if they blindly encourage their followers to go along with all that, I would be disappointed, and then perhaps "Kal" in one aspect - as an accomplice of satanic forces - may have won the day. Let us pray it not be so. [Eph. 6:12 ”For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” - i.e., demons and fallen angels and their earthly servants]. Remembering from the Kal discussion in Part Two (with more to come in this Part) that evil thrives when the power of thinking is unused or suppressed out of fear, Gary Barnett writes on the current situation:
“Madness indicates psychotic behavior, but what is going on today, while most assuredly psychotic, is also intentional, completely planned, and being implemented with full consciousness by evil forces. To make matters worse, the pathetic masses are taking sides, fomenting hate, supporting their chosen masters, and tearing apart all that is right; thus allowing this insanity to continue…The all-consuming evil in this world is in full view, but blindness on a grand scale has infected this collective horde of soulless masses [not actually soulless, but subjected to mass hypnosis with their reasoning powers more or less dormant] to such an extent, as to render them unsuitable in any pursuit of moral relevance.” (57)
The sage is said to represent the flower of human intelligence throughout time. One must ask, where are such signs in all of this? Being silent is often better than promoting untruth, even unknowingly, but at pivotal times a stand must be taken. A friend recently sent me this:
“Judith Lamb-Lion has recently given a series of Satsangs that clarify the principal human illusion to be "scamming", which begins in the mind of each of us. We are scammed (accepting untruth for truth) by our minds by means of cognitive dissonance and thereby become vulnerable to scamming by others. The entire world runs on scamming...Stillness in love (Love is ultimate stillness in the Creator) has always been the Teaching of all Sants and Seerers. Beyond mind via openheartedness.”
He also mentioned that Rajinder Singh spoke of the situation in Gaza, saying there were deep roots to the conflict, while admitting it was a land grab, concluding that there would be no peace until both sides realized their oneness. All of that is hard to argue with. My reply was:
“Yes, this is all good as far as it goes. “Scamming” is a hip contemporary word for “rationalization,” a primary mode of operation of the mind. Much of the ego itself could be characterized as largely self-rationalization, a lack of honesty or truthfulness. The antidote for that is clear thinking, not just stillness, for one can be in stillness and still have cognitive dissonance for the rest of the day. And of course they both must go together: the ability to think deeply and the ability to go into or abide as stillness."
A big problem today is, as Judith says, massive cognitive dissonance. This is not merely an individual problem, however, if that is her position - I don’t know is if it is - but more and more largely an induced one - which prevents clear thinking or even investigating the news and views presented to us all of the time. How can it be otherwise when 95% of the media is controlled by a few elite-run corporations with an agenda? A hive mind has been induced with controlled opposition on all sides. The gurus as well as most people sometimes seem to dance around this fact. Currently Gaza is in focus, and most of the “left”, and some of the “right,” are mostly correct on that issue, but then, mostly wrong on Ukraine. People are resistant to examining parts of their world view out of fear it will all fall apart - their minds so compartmentalized and their time so limited - which is the basis for cognitive dissonance. And the same goes with almost every issue, as if we are now witnessing the “deceiving even the elect” as the Bible forewarned."
In general we as people by tendency think we know things and that our knowledge is valid, yet are averse to examining the roots of our knowledge. There are various reasons for this: tribal and group loyalties, emotional attachments, and basic mental laziness. One example of this, for instance, is with the issue of climate change, whose proponents, right or wrong, have taken on the characteristics almost of a new religion, specially among the young. Yet when I ask how many books and articles by expert critics of the theory they have read, to balance what sound bites they hear on tv, or selected opinions from the internet, the answer is usually “none.” Thus, it is the primary epistemological question “how do you know?”, and the even deeper, “how do you know what you know?”, unanswered, that are at the root of both our worldly as well as spiritual ignorance. And it is basically an emotional problem based on a cognitive dissonance underlying it - or, one could say, a lack of courage and curiosity based on fear - that is at cause. As Socrates said, it is bad enough that we are ignorant, but to be ignorant of our ignorance is fatal.
Here is an example of something that might cure even the diehard victim of cognitive dissonance. One would hope that with our modern scientific and mathematical backgrounds one might - in spite of any lingering belief that those owning most of the news outlets and who create the news and arguably a lot of the perceived problems are really interested in fixing those problems - be able to see the impossibility of something being just a chance or freak thing when faced with the obvious facts. One can hope.
So this is a test. For one example of the devious symbolic signaling of the snakes among us in human form, call them demonic or merely deluded agents of ‘kal’ if you like, back a couple of years ago when “delta” and “omicron” were big Covid news, the fact is when you place those twelve letters on a scrabble board when rearranged they spell out “media control”. If you don't have a scrabble board just print out the letters D E L T A O M I CRON on one side of a piece of paper and one by one cross each letter off as you transfer it to the other side and spell M E D I A C O N T R O L. Try it.
The chance of that being a random happening is, depending on which calculation you use, 1 in quintillion (or 10 to the 28th power); or more conservatively, simply based on the number of combinations in 12 letters, 1 in 469,001,600!
This should make the hair stand on end, or at least bring one to attention. Cognitive dissonance, however, has the eyes glazing over and a direct challenge to a belief system quickly forgotten. Everything is connected, and, in our view, this flaw in our reasoning abilities carries over into the spiritual life as well. This is why the original title of this book was Sant Mat Through the Heart’s Gaze and the Mind’s Intelligence. Very often in spiritual circles a judgement is made that the mind is the enemy and one should not think. But what faculty was used to arrive at that conclusion? Buddhi, or the power of discrimination - another name for reason. So there is no way around the fact that we are obliged to become intelligent. People, even serious spiritual seekers, tend to have compartmentalized minds and can only handle so much truth. But if truth does not enter every aspect of our lives, there is little chance at awakening to it. Passing the buck to 'kal' by spiritual bypassing - another name for only being concerned with one's personal salvation - will never lead to the realization of Oneness with All.
Another result of a lack of critical thinking is the creation and acceptance of various 'urban legends'. For instance, Paul Twitchell was an initiate of Kirpal Singh who left him and started his own movement called Eckankar. As far as I am concerned, so far "no praise, no blame," although at the time this type of branching off on your own was considered heretical within Sant Mat. He then wrote a book called Tiger's Fang, changing the names of the gurus in it to those of fictional Tibetans, not mentioning Kirpal, and sent it to Kirpal for endorsement. Kirpal declined and sent the book back. A story was told by initiates that when the book arrived at Twitchell's desk he dropped dead of a heart attack, and that Kirpal, when informed of Twitchell's fate, said, "You don't hit your head on a rock." This sounds horrible, especially the implied condemnation by a Guru, but is any of it really true? Now, fifty years later I am told by an initiate that, "Things are changed, and they have taken him back," i.e., meaning the Masters are so gracious that Twitchell was forgiven and is now in Sach Khand. My, what gullible satsangis won't believe!
Another example. Beloved Ishwar Puri died on December 23, 2020. The cause of death was said to be Covid. A story began circulating that because he died this way no initiate would ever have to die of Covid, that essentially he had sacrificed himself for us. Is this true? Who can ever prove it or not? Ishwar was 94 years old, but at this time of the pandemic the hospital 'death protocols' of ventilators, Remdesvir, and sedatives and 'do not resuscitate' orders were in full effect. Could not that have had something to do with it? Sawan was almost poisoned to death by a zealous initiate giving him the wrong blood for transfusion. The Buddha is said to have died from being given bad food. Why must people think only of the mysterious and fantastic? The answer can only be magical thinking in place of reasoning and a mature understanding of what the spiritual path is really about.
CHAPTER SIX
The power of a lineage; Having your back; The making of a Master; A Master is unique and not a robot! (and neither are you); Finishing school
Shifting gears, there is something to be said about the power of a lineage of Great Masters - where such exists - whose grace flows from one to the next in an unbroken stream, with each humbly deferring to his teacher as the source of grace, and himself being backed up - and his 'imperfect' aspects 'backed-up' - by those who came before him, and whom he is at one with in the Divine reality. For from the point of view of truth, all Masters are said to be One. An example of this sustaining power is given in the Mahayana text, the Lankavatara Sutra, where it says:
"What is this twofold power that sustains the Bodhisattvas? The one is the power by which they are sustained to go through the Samadhis and Samapattis, while the other is the power whereby the Buddhas manifest themselves in person before the Bodhisattvas and baptise them with their own hands...This is in order to make them avoid the evil ones, karma, and passions, to keep them away from the Dhyana and stage of Sravakahood, to have them realise the stage of Tathagatahood, and to make them grow in the truth and experience already attained. For this reason, Mahamati, the fully Enlightened Ones sustain with their power the Bodhisattva-Mahasattvas...Thus it is said: The sustaining power is purified by the Buddhas' vows; in the baptism, Samadhis, etc., from the first to the tenth stage, the Bodhisattvas are in the embrace of the Buddhas." (58)
Something to think about. The mystery behind all of this is profound.
This also relates to the reality that an apparently faulty but “best candidate” for mastership can be ‘completed’ by his own Master over time, even instantly in some cases and some respects. Shri Atmananda speaks to this, and also to the historical fact that more than a few masters who have successfully reached the ultimate goal solely through either bhakti or jnana have proven quite capable of schooling their disciples in paths other than that which they personally followed - or even studied! This may be well to keep in mind when assuming that such a path like Sant Mat is necessarily a cookie-cutter or one-size-fits-all path:
“When you reach the Ultimate by following the path of pure jnyana, you experience deep Peace and Happiness expressing itself sometimes in the form of gushing tears and choking voice. This is not an experience of the head, but of the heart in you. On the other hand, there are many instances of Sages like Padmapada and Vatishvarattamma who have reached the Ultimate through the heart, and heart alone, directed to their Guru - the Absolute - with deep devotion. They have subsequently guided aspirants to the Truth, even on the Jnyana path, most successfully. Thus it is clear that what one experiences through either path is the same Reality, the one through the head and the other through the heart.”
“The disciple who takes the Guru to be the formless Ultimate, is taken to the right Absolute. [i.e., the Truth] However, the disciple whose sense of discrimination is less developed, but who has a deep devotion to the person of the Guru, may well take the Guru to be the form. His love and devotion compensate abundantly for the lack of discrimination, and he is easily taken through the form to the formless, and thence to the Absolute even without knowing it. [An amazing and wonderfully uplifting quote!] Revered Vativishvarattamma - an illiterate woman devoted near Cape Commorin, who became a reknown sage by her sincere and earnest devotion to her Guru (Amma-svami, who was a great yogin Sage) - is a standing testimony to this class of Sages. Though the disciple directs his love to the person of Guru, the reciprocation comes from the impersonal which is the abode of love. When your limited love is directed to the Guru, who is love unlimited, the limitation of your love vanishes immediately.”
“Every Sage cannot be [a Karana-Guru], an Acarya. It needs certain special qualifications to equip oneself to be an Acarya. He must have the experience of all the different paths, particularly of those of devotion and yoga, so that he can guide the aspirants that come to him (sometimes with perverted experiences) without cutting the ground off their feet. These qualifications he can acquire by dint of exercises in the earlier stages of his spiritual life. In the light of ultimate Truth, later on, he would be able to see the correct significance of such experiences.” (59)
St. John of the Cross cautions - speaking of spiritual directors and not masters - but the point is worth considering:
“Not everyone capable of hewing the wood knows how to carve the statue, nor does everyone able to carve know how to perfect and polish the work, nor do all who know how to polish it know how to paint it, nor do all who can paint it know how to put the finishing touches on it and bring the work to completion. One can do with the statue only what one knows how to do, and when craftsmen try to do more than they know how to do, the statue is ruined…Is it possible that all these functions are yours and that you are so perfect the soul will never need any other from you?…God leads each one along different paths so that hardly one spirit will be found like another in even half its method of procedure.” (60)
Atmananda adds, however:
"There are Sages who, though they had no previous training, cannot help taking the role of Guru; because they have been explicitly ordered by their own Gurus to do so. In such cases, all the necessary qualifications of the Guru come to them, as and when required. Whatever they are lacking will be supplied instantly by the word of their Guru.” (61)
An initiate writes:
"My understanding is that channeling the Master Power is a tricky business, with pitfalls that are only avoided with years of experience in abandoning the self. In other words, Masters evolve into perfection and are not suddenly, simply transformed from into a PLM. But, during the process, special care is exercised to endure purity during the most critical events, e.g., Satsang, say compared to eating dinner or whatever else a Master is called on by the Master Power to do. The lives and writings of others testify to this maturation process. We have experienced this with Darshan himself, who matured from a shy, shaky teacher in 1977 to a full fledged, well-centered mystic over his 15 year tenure. Kirpal arrived in our lives after many years of training with and before Hazur's personal guidance. He, from our perspective, was pretty nearly fully cooked when we met him at the end of his mission."
Masters, it appears, in terms of their realization and function start as “Baby Buddhas, and then grow into it the role. Meanwhile someone has their back. This makes total sense and is pretty obvious from observation. It has been pointed out that there is a difference between having an experience (however high) and understanding it, just as there is a difference between going to a plane and being able to function there. Sant Darshan Singh "confessed" that the only time a Master is perfect is when he was on the dais! He also said there was a school on the inner planes for Masters.
A Master Is unique and not a robot! (and neither are you)
One would think that this should be obvious but apparently it is not. In Sant Mat an analogy of transmission is often given that one bulb is fused and then another and another as if each Master is but a divine automaton. This has little value for ones realization, as it can also encourage a slavish dependency and overly self-deprecatory attitude on the part of the aspirant. Whereas each one who realizes the Atman is unique and not a copy. Brunton writes:
"He is sufficient, himself and not anyone else, an original and not a copy, music and not an echo - in short, a true individual." (62)
This of course applies equally to both Master and disciple. It is so important one should write it in bold and post it beside ones bed at night.
Ishwar Puri told an interesting story. He says that there is a dispute over successorship when nearly every Master dies. In the time of Great Master Sawan Singh's death, a will was produced that made Jagat SIngh the guru. However, as Puri states it, Kirpal Singh thought there was some sort of game that Sawan was playing, because he was sure he had entrusted the job of initiation to him. Mention was also made that Sawan had said that no guru (in Sant Mat) ever appoints a family member to succeed him. A short period of time later, Jagat appointed Charan Singh, Sawan's grandson. Meanwhile, Ishwar was a friend of both families, and informally took on the role of go-between and got both sides to accept the dual situation amicably, for which he got the name of 'peacemaker'. Of course the Beas and Delhi satsangs remained polarized over this for years, each arguing over who was the rightful successor. And the same thing happened again when Kirpal Singh died, with three or more claimants on the successorship. Interestingly, Charan appointed his nephew Gurinder Singh to succeed him, and Darshan, Kirpal's son was made guru, while in turn Darshan appointed his son Rajinder! So much for Sawan's theory about not appointing family members. When Ishwar asked Darshan Singh about this, he said Darshan replied, "Masters are free beings, and can do anything they want." In essence, they make or break the rules. As for the notion that a Master must win his realization afresh, and can not just be given it as a family inheritance, it has been said that when Masters come the "bring their staff with them" when they choose to incarnate, and those beings often have "background." The main point is that becoming a Guru following in the footsteps of a great Master is not a mechanical assembly-line process, but a living one laden with mystery and even apparent interruptions.. And the legitimacy of not to be proven by the degree of inner experience one has with them either. How many disciples of those who are later exposed as fallen gurus have had greater experiences under them than many following more respected Gurus? One may then ask, well, is it just the disciple that matters? No, we cannot say that either!
A relatively more minor issue but still needing to be addressed is that, in general, Sant Mat schools sometimes have said that it is a fixed divine design that the Master is always a man. The reason given is usually because, esoterically considered, all souls are female, and the divine is male. This is not universally held to be true, however, even within Sant Mat. I believe that Sant Darshan Singh said that this was the case, but I have heard Sant Kirpal Singh mention that there have been women saints (such as Mirabai and Rabia Basra, for instance). They may have been saints, of that there is little doubt; however, were they gurus or Masters? For that is another question. There was Anandamayi Ma, universally recognized as a great saint and spiritual master. There are other traditions, such as that of Tibetan Buddhism, where woman saints and siddhas have been held in great regard and many disciples of great male masters were sent to them for 'finishing school'. See the book, Women of Wisdom by Tsultrim Allione for the amazing story of one Ayu Khandro, a famous woman adept. Some may say, well, it is the divine will on the path of the Shabd that requires a male to be a master, but it has been suggested that the custom may be more traditional and cultural than divinely ordained. Women in traditional India were taught to revere their husbands almost as a guru, but it may not be nearly the case when the roles are reversed. In the West, it may be even more difficult. Within meaning any irreverence, in the movie City Slickers one of Billy Crystal’s memorable lines was, “A woman needs a reason to have sex, a guy just needs a place.” So maybe a man’s internal wiring, all things considered, makes him better off with a male guru, Just a thought, perhaps chauvanistic, maybe politically incorrect. In far earlier ages when there was a matriarchal society no doubt the roles may have been reversed. And, even now, in some traditions the divine is considered female, the Great Mother, and not male. So, while this may seem a minor point compared to the deep philosophy we have been covering, it nevertheless had to be mentioned to make our discussion complete.
CHAPTER SEVEN
Are Masters “above the stars? Yes and no; What you can tell from a natal chart
This is another related topic concerning astrology and its influence on the Masters. Let us consider. A natal chart basically represents the ego at the time of birth for the present incarnation and shows the characteristic modes of functioning of that ego. The planets at the time of birth occupy the twelve houses of a circle of 360 degrees. Some of the houses appear empty, however. Does that mean we are not able to function or are not called to function in the areas of life represented by those “empty” houses? No, of course not - but the ego by tendency might prefer not to. Now visualize the entire circle of 360 degrees as representing the witness self, which, spiritually, we are meant to grow into. The ordinary person is fairly predictable because the ego as represented in his chart is fairly predictable. But the more one grows beyond that set of born tendencies and gets closer to realizing and living as the witness self, the less predictable one will be and the more capable he will be of responding to what is required by any given set of circumstances of life - whether or not he has any planets in those houses in his natal chart. The sage is permanently identified with the witness self or soul, not the ego, and, therefore, he is much less predictable than his natal chart would represent. He may function in his ego or he may not. This is one meaning to Kirpal Singh’s saying that the masters are beyond the stars. They are not limited to the predictability of the ego. It doesn’t mean they don’t have a characteristic personality denoted by the natal chart, although they are not limited to it, and while in it may function from far beyond it as well. For example, Kirpal was an Aquarian and very much interested and involved in humanitarian causes. On the other hand, he was entirely unpredictability when dealing with disciples, and one could never know what might happen next. His own shift from health to sickness to health from one moment to the next was another example of this.
Further, a sage’s influence on his disciples will change their destiny, and even alter some of their prarabdha karmas. This would be the influence of grace. And inasmuch as a disciple by his own efforts, progresses out of his natal tendencies, growing more into identification with the witness position and less that of the ego, his prarabdha karmas may also change, to the degree that his reaction to them changes, thus foregoing further reactions, and so forth. Thus, for both of these reasons, the disciples of the masters are to varying degrees “above the stars” also. “Predictions may not come true. While there is no way to quantify it, one might speculate that their degree of free will may expand beyond the general 25% estimated by the Sants. Shri Atmananda sums all of this up this way:
“It is a process of calculation and application of mathematics, in establishing the relationship of cause and effect, reduced to the terms of their source: ‘time’. In these calculations, many other things have also to be taken into consideration. If all these are given due consideration, the predictions will be mostly correct. Still, facts relating to the body alone can be predicted successfully - facts relating to the ‘sharira-yatra (the ‘journey of the body’) as they technically call it. Even here, sometimes it goes wrong, whenever Consciousness from beyond the realm of the mind brings to bear its influence upon the activities of the body, either directly or indirectly. For example, when a Sage’s thoughts in any way intervene from beyond the limitations of time, the predictions fail. Therefore, with regard to the life of yogins or sadhakas progressing under a Sage, good astrologers usually refuse to predict anything. Here, something other than the body element, from beyond the body level, comes into operation...This means: If your free will becomes predominant in your activities, you gradually transcend your prarabdha-karmas [conditioning from the past].” (63)
According to some sages, such as Sri Ramakrishna, for a Master to function on this earth, something like 3% of ego will remain. This is in general the position of videha mukti, where complete liberation is not attained until after death and the final leaving of the body. As mentioned, this has been discussed for thousands of years and there are pros and cons to the issue. But assuming it is true, this accounts for Masters making so-called mistakes, and also of the fact that they have dharmic and other disagreements with other saints and sages. The 3% means there will never be 100% completely pure transmission from the higher self into the human vehicle. But as a teacher of mine, Anthony Damiani, once said, if you get rid of 70% of your ego that will be fulfillment enough!
A few relevant quotes from Paul Brunton on astrology:
“The planets do not control your individual destiny, but their movements determine the time when the latent karma which you have earned shall become active and operative.” (64)
“The horoscope is a map not only of the present reincarnation but also of the relation existing between the ego and the soul. It indicates what particular lessons have to be learned” (65)
“Astrology rests on the ground of karma in tendencies and deeds. Freedom of decision rests on the evolutionary need to let man express the creativeness he gets from the Overself. He must put both factors together to find truth.” (66)
“Whatever happens to a man is in some way the consequences of what he did in the past, including the far-gone past of former births. But it may also be in part the imposition of the World-Idea’s pattern upon his own karmic pattern. If it comes, such imposition is irresistible for then the planetary rhythms are involved.” (67)
So we find the idea of a Universal Mind’s activity inside of or super-imposed on an individual mind’s efforts; grace influencing or altering karma; Fate-Destiny-Karma, interconnected with Divine Providence; an evolutionary impulse or Guiding hand, modifying or shaping or releasing aspects of a person’s karma. In short, two basic complementary laws influencing events. This will be discussed in detail in the section "KARMA AND GRACE".
CHAPTER EIGHT
What does Self-realization and God-realization mean in Sant Mat? Comparisons with Ramana, Nisargadatta, Brunton; Does the self expand, or the ego contract? "In contacting the Overself he does not really sense a bigger "I." he senses SOMETHING which is”; Saguna and Nirguna Brahman; Gradual and final liberation; It can be confusing: non-duality can be realized on any plane, but there are voids or zero-points within and between each plane as well
This is an important source of much confusion when comparing systems. To clear up a question of the different concept of Self-Realization in Sant Mat and some other schools, in Sant Mat when the soul is said to ‘leave the mind behind' in Trikuti, the realm of the universal mind or Brahma and the home of the 'individual mind', the soul arrives in Par Brahmand, the super-causal regions, and can be said to know itself. How does it know itself? It knows itself as free of the three bodies and of the same essence as God. It metaphorically utters the famous Mahavakya, aham Brahm asmi, or "Oh Lord, I am of the same essence as thou art," or "I am That", and, according to the Sants, is actually at the level from where the Vedic rishis derived that Mahavakya. However, says Sri Siddharameshwar, this ‘I Am’ or ‘Pure Knowledge’ is still, as it were, a ‘parasite’ upon the pure radiance of the Self, although it is also said to be the absence of the ego or sense of a separate self. The soul, free of the mind or mental vehicle, says Sant Mat, now is said to glow 'with the light of sixteen suns'. This is the 'Self-Realization' in the terminology of the Sants, which the reader can see appears quite different from the vedantic Self-realization, for instance as given by the sage Ramana Maharshi, who poked fun at those who wanted to see the light of a million suns, what to speak of only sixteen! Ramana would likely place Sant Mat in the Visishtadvaitin category:
"D: The Visishtadvaitins say that Atma Sakshatkara (Self-realization) is preliminary to Paramatma Sakshatkara (God-Realization).
M: What is Atma Satshatkara? Are there two Atmas that one realizes the other? There are not two selves. First get Atma Sakshatkara and then judge what follows." (68)
Truthfully, though, it is difficult to compare the two systems. One is attained in a disembodied ascended ‘vertical’ position, while the other is based in a ‘horizontal’ heart-root realization. I tried to question Kirpal Singh about this very point, but the reader will find in Appendix One of this book that while he correctly addressed Me and my primary issues (!), this issue of comparative dharmas was not actually tackled. In classic Vedanta, Self-Realization is realization of the Self of All, as opposed to the realization of merely the inner Atman, or subjective Logos such as in heart-samadhi at the root of ‘I.’ In classical Advaita Vedanta, the notion of merger in God by many individual souls is dismissed in favor of the realization of the one Absolute Self, or the "not-two." In Sant Mat the progression is a little more complex, yet, may the end result be the same? Honestly, I do not know.
Is Self-Realization of the Sants attained on reaching the super causal region, then, or Sach Khand? If the former, then Sach Khand would be God-Realization, or at least the beginning of it, but if the latter, then is Anami, in their system, God-Realization? It is not clear. Sawan Singh wrote:
“On reaching Par-Brahm, all the material, astral, and causative coverings of mind and matter that envelope the soul are removed. Then the soul is pure spirit. [Pure spirit, but not yet Sach Khand] This is self-realization. Here there is no form, no cover, no shape, no youth nor old age - only the soul, shining in its pure radiance - a drop of existence, knowledge, and bliss, capable of comprehending the Great Ocean, its Creator. Now the drop tries to reach and mingle with the Ocean.” (69)
Kirpal said:
"When you rise above the causal body you will completely understand who you are." (70)
Completely? Is there not a higher witness to this realization? The traditions say there is, and Kirpal definitely appears to imply that there is, and even told one blessed soul who had gone beyond this stage to enquire, "who am I?" So, of course, this is not yet vedantic Self-Realization. Rather, it could be said to be the realization of a pure "I", or maybe the pure 'I am', but still not Atman or the vedantic Self. The following quote is broader in scope:
"Self-knowledge precedes God-Realization, or, Self-Knowledge is God-knowledge. The more the Self expands, the more it expands into Him: one loses oneself...To know one's self is the first thing, and the foremost thing. Unless you know yourself you are not in a position to know the Overself. Even then you do not know - you are simply absorbed. It cannot be expressed in words." (71)
Is Self-Realization of the Sants attained on reaching the super causal region, then, or Sach Khand? If the former, then Sach Khand would be God-Realization, or at least the beginning of it, but if the latter, then is Anami, in their system, God-Realization? It can get more than a little confusing! If there is truly an absorption, what gets absorbed into what? Are there really two selves: self and Overself? Does the self (or Self) expand, or is approaching a 'zero point' closer to what actually happens? Surely, the self may be said to expand, to embrace the cosmos (the macrocosmic dimension of the three bodies), but at the same time the ego shrinks, and that may be felt as the primary experience! "God is nothing" and "I am Mr. Zero" said Kirpal Singh, and there seems no way of getting around that part of the equation. We would all like to pop out of a White Hole, but no one looks forward to going through a Black Hole on the way there. Of course it is all illusory, but to say it and to know it are two different things.
Sri Nisargadatta said, "When you realize yourself as less than a point in space and time, something too small to be cut and two short-lived to be killed, then and then only, all fear goes. When you are smaller than the point of the needle, then the needle cannot pierce you - you pierce the needle!" (72)
In summary he also said:
"Even faith in God is only a stage on the way. Ultimately you abandon all for you come to something so simple that there are no words to describe it...Reality is neither subjective nor objective, neither mind nor matter, neither time nor space. These divisions need somebody to whom to happen, a conscious separate center. But reality is all and nothing, the totality and the exclusion, the fullness and the emptiness, fully consistent, absolutely paradoxical. You cannot speak about it. You can only lose yourself in it." (73)
Both sages speak of being absorbed or losing oneself in something. The difference is that Nisargadatta is firm on the ultimate realization being one's true nature and not something 'other':
"All scriptures say that before the world was, the Creator was. Who knows the Creator? He alone who was before the Creator, your own real being, the source of all the worlds with their creators. Even the idea of God as the Creator is false. Do I owe my being to any other being? Because I am, all is." (74)
Further, he summarizes the paradox and enigma perhaps as best as one can do:
"One has to understand that the search for reality, or God, or Guru and the search for the self are the same; when one is found, all are found.When 'I am' and 'God is' become in your mind indistinguishable, then something will happen and you will know without a trace of doubt that God is because you are, you are because God is. The two are one." (75)
Kirpal and other Sants often said that "both God and the soul are within the body, it is a pity they do not know each other," and this tentative position has been posed as a primal duality with God as a "Controlling Power." Yet if God and the soul are within the body, what about the body? Is that not part of God, too? So what is the ultimate relationship and status of both body and soul? Do they both arise in consciousness, or is the soul consciousness? Faqir Chand said that soul is the light, and Surat, or our Surat, is consciousness. That helps a little, and is kind of how Ramana Maharshi might have put it, but what does it mean to say the soul is the light? Visible light? Or the "clear light of the void", which is not visible and usually means consciousness? In any case, beyond such Self-and-God Realization lies "Absolute God" (i.e.,Godhead), which Kirpal mentioned almost in passing, but which has correlates in many teachings. This Absolute is said to make everything possible, but doesn't cause anything. It is beyond causality, hence the misnomer "causeless cause" used by many traditional philosophers and theologians. Even consciousness is said to rest on this, and from consciousness arise the world(s), self, and God. Hence the strange and often perplexing utterances of sages who do not identify with their personhood as we do.
Speaking mystically, a time comes, said PB, where at the edge of the Void, or the Absolute, "God and the soul meet for the last time." It is a joyful reunion. But no one stays in the further contemplative state while still alive, he says, they return and remain soul in which to live in these lower worlds, yet eternally poised, as it were, between world and Void, aware of the ground of their Being. Thus even the soul, its realization and expression, is a paradoxical thing. And also a fundamental simplicity belying the apparent complexity of all of these teachings!
Inasmuch as Kirpal used the term Overself a number of times to describe alternately both the true Self, and God, let us look at how Brunton, who more than perhaps anyone else, popularized this term, characterized this realization:
"In contacting the Overself he does not really sense a bigger "I." he senses SOMETHING which is. This is first achieved by forgetting the ego, the personality, the "I." But at a later stage, there is nothing to forget for then he finds that the ego, the personality, and the "I" are of the same stuff as this SOMETHING." (76)
"Is this benign state a past from which we have lapsed or a future to which we are coming? The true answer is that it is neither. This state has always been existent within us, is so now, and always will be. It is forever within us simply because it is what we really are." (77)
"The Overself is not a goal to be attained but a realization of what already IS. It is the inalienable possession of all conscious beings and not of a mere few. No effort is needed to get hold of the Overself, but every effort is needed to get rid of the many impediments to its recognition. We cannot take hold of it; it takes hold of us. Therefore the last stage of this quest is an effortless one. We are led, as children by the hand, into the resplendent presence [a presence which he also says is our 'ink to the Supreme Being]. Our weary strivings come to an abrupt end. Our lips are made shut and wordless." (78)
Ramana, and sages going back as far as Vashista, spoke similarly about this realization not being an 'attainment':
"There is no one who even for a trice fails to experience the Self. For no one admits that he ever stands apart from the Self. He is the Self. The Self is the Heart." (79)
"You are always in the Heart. You are never away from it in order that should reach it." (80)
"There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no efforts, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his eternal inherent state." (81)
"Generally, people want to find out about illusion and do not examine to whom it occurs. This is foolish." (82)
Thus, it becomes apparent when one goes deeply into these teachings, that the last stage is somewhat different than what went before. It is not more of the same, a higher bliss, or greater devotional communion, all of which are more or less dependent on the presence of an ego-I, however subtle. It is not achieved by effort, hence all the sages refer to it as not an attainment. Any superstructure of devotional spirituality built up is somehow sacrificed or let go, and who can do that, especially if there was no understanding that such would be one's eventual trajectory?
Yet it was always like that, but perhaps not considered 'expedient' to be so instructed until enough impediments were out of the way for a crack to be made allowing truth to come in unhindered. This important discussion will be continued in the section "The Map of Consciousness.”
Let's go over some of this again. Sant Mat teachings say that the soul beyond the three bodies is said to be free from the need to incarnate in the lower worlds; however, dualistic impressions of karma still are impressed upon the soul, and the soul has yet to know its place or dimension of origin. Three regions remain between the soul and the home of the Father, Sach Khand, the first eternal spiritual region within Sat Lok and considered the first stage of the God-realizing stages.
The super-causal regions begin after Daswan Dwar (which sometimes is divided into several stages), where the karmic impressions are wiped clean, then Maha Sunn, or a great Void of vast and impenetrable darkness (at the threshold of which the soul is said to be instructed in the knowledge of its four hidden regions - although this is radically interpreted by Faqir Chand), for which the soul is said to need the superior light of a master who has gone further in order to cross, followed by Bhanwar Gupta, or the "whirling cave" separating the soul from Sach Khand. The Sants claim that the highest region that mystics of the religions have gone to is Trikuti, and which they have mistaken for the highest. Once the soul is reborn in Sach Khand, which is the first wholly non-dual plane (from the point of view of ignorance), there is progressive absorption by the Sat Purush or the Father into the Nameless and Formless Absolute God. The sound current of God, the Soul, and the Father are all one in essence. After this level of realization things are turned in side out, in the sense that, as all planes ultimately interpenetrate, no longer is God only to be found within, as such terms as 'within' and 'without' cease to have real meaning. Not only has the drop merged into the ocean, but the ocean has merged into the drop. The later, said Kabir, is 'para-bhakti'. It is an altogether higher order of experience. As the Zen Master Tozan remarked:
"Everywhere I am able to meet Him;
He is me now;
I am not Him.
When we understand this
We are instantaneously with the Truth." (83)
I was privy thirty years ago to the confession of one satsangi, Ed Wallace, with an ecstatic demeanor, and blood-red, tear-filled eyes, who said that after literally having to "drag himself to satsang" for five years he finally achieved by the grace of the Master entry into the first of the inner planes, the experience of which at first scared him, but which appeared to have had the result in him of a marked change of character. When asked, "Is it a place or a state," he answered me, "it's both; it's so perfect - you die, and are born again! And once you are through, you are through forever." [The latter point seems not to be true; Ed confessed to me forty years later that he went through a time when even he could not meditate; this in fact is the more usual experience]. Ed also confessed to witnessing Kirpal Singh coming on the inner planes to take charge of numerous souls at the time of death, a testimony to the faithful discharge of the promise of a Master on this path. Now, once again, while such a positive result may have been true for him, but for others whose inner journey was a more gratuitous passage, a temporary gift, they often come out with the vividness of the experience fast receding, and all that is left is a dream-like memory, as the ego re-identifies with the body and consolidates its hold over the being again. That is certainly true for nighttime transports. But for others, such as the gentleman mentioned above, his confession for me at the time was an inspiration. Judith Lamb-Lion's tale of going to Sach Khand, a much higher state, at her initiation, however, was communicated to me, at the time, in a much more calm and balanced way. Based on these two honest accounts of death-in-life on this path of ascent, however, it should not be dismissed by the beginner or seasoned advaitist or non-dualist student that the possibility exists of a progressive death and absorption of the ego-soul at succeeding inner plane after inner plane leading to a progressively more integrated form of non-dual realization that is valid in its own right. For that, in effect, is what the Sants and the greatest of the historical mystics are saying. But then, I could be wrong, and how many can do it in any case? Let us not forget the "good news" of the great Teacher who said "my yoke is easy, and my burden light," and rest easy in our present humble circumstance.
An interesting take on this form of graduated mystic path is given by Swami Satprakashananda:
”Knowers of Saguna Brahman [God with form or attributes], according to Sankara, do not have full knowledge (jnana) and their souls depart from their bodies at the time of death, although they do not have to be reborn. The jnanis (knowers of Nirguna Brahman - God without attributes), however, merge in Brahman, and their subtle bodies (souls) dissolve at the time of death....Knowers of Saguna Brahman realize Nirguna Brahman and attain final liberation at the cosmic dissolution, along with Hiranyagarbha, the presiding deity of Brahmaloka. This is called “Gradual Liberation” (krama-mukti), as distinct from “Immediate Liberation” (sadya mukti), achieved by those who realize Nirguna Brahman in this very life.” (84)
This gradual liberation has also been discussed clearly by Swami Krishnananda, disciple of the renown Swami Sivananda, whom Kirpal Singh met and respected. He argues that one can reach Brahmaloka or union with Puroshottama and, thus purified, gain a relative liberation, and then attain final, unconditional mukti from the after-death realms. (85). Paramhansa Yogananda was of the view that most souls achieve final liberation this way.
Since a chief claim of Sant Mat is that Sat Lok itself is beyond both Brahmaloka and the “three worlds”, as well as cosmic dissolution and grand dissolution, and is eternal, it would most likely agree that the above statement only implies a relative liberation in Brahmaloka, although it would not disagree on the general concept of gradual liberation or the non-necessity of rebirth for as yet un-liberated souls, which it and even some schools of Buddhism are also in agreement with. It is just that it will likely take longer on the inside than here on the physical plane. A lot more.
Part of the confusion between Sant Mat and advaitic/Buddhist philosophies may be that some of the latter may not realize that there is, in a sense, a void or zero-point not only between each successive plane of being, but also various void-like regions along the way that may be mistaken for 'emptiness' or ultimate realization. And part of the confusion in Sant Mat is that many do not realize that one may realize the truth of non-duality on any plane, without profound inversion, as is the case in schools such as Zen, Advaita, or Dzogchen. However, this is not an inherent limitation, as traditionally one first detaches from the world, realizing what is not oneself and what is the inner reality, and then one goes back into the world to realize that from which one separated oneself as also the same reality, or inseparable from it. So there is an ordered logic to the approach which is the same in all systems.
On the path of Surat Shabd Yoga meditation, one must first enter the silence, in order to contact the Sound of Brahman, which is the sound of the Greater Silence and to which it leads. The advaitists think they have a short-cut, while the Sants hold that one must pass through all of the hierarchical and archtypal phases of creation and the mind, before the great non-dual truth with all its great paradoxes may actually be realized. At least, many of them feel this way. We will return to this point later on. Important to note is that the soul, upon merging, retains its capacity to unmerge and become soul. it merges, yet is still in some sense separate. Charan Singh said, while this is so, nevertheless one is not ‘conscious of one’s consciousness, individuality, or even conscious itself, that all is the love and bliss of the Supreme Being’. However, when one re-emanates, he continues to know this is so, but experiences it in a somewhat lesser way.
For vedantic pundits such as V. S. Iyer, a strict vedantic analysis would hold that liberation is truly not release from the cycle of births and deaths, but knowledge or gyan alone, that is, freedom from even the concept of birth and death. [Ironically, the mystic Paltu Sahib said that one 'listens to the sound while in gyan samadhi', thus implying that this practice and realization is a much higher one]. In any case, the point is that the sage, if he so chooses or is commissioned to do so, will perpetually return just like everyone else for the sake of others. His freedom lies in that he knows all is Brahman, and his sympathies and identification are with the benefit of all. That is why he will come back. He is no longer motivated by the hope of a personal salvation, bliss, or peace. Incidentally, the term Brahman for the Sants signifies a lower level of realization than what the term connotes for the Vedantists, furthering one's possible confusion. But we will not go into that now.
CHAPTER NINE
If God Is the controlling power keeping you in the body, why meditate to get out of the body; It seems one can’t have it both ways: either the Master Power keeps us here, or our sinful fallen nature is doing it and we have to struggle to reach the Master Power; drishti-shristi-vada and shristi-dristhti-vada; Mentalism; A strange case of two souls in one body
This is another of those apparently dumb questions upon which the whole superstructure of Sant Mat metaphysics may rest. A friend wrote:
"As Kirpal confessed, creation is being created and cared for by the Master Power, WHICH IS KEEPING US IN THE BODY! So, does this mean we are in a contest with the Master Power by sitting in meditation in order to rise above body consciousness!?"
That has puzzled me, too. Is it a full and correct explanation?It seems one can’t have it both ways. Either the Master Power keeps us here, or our sinful fallen nature is doing it and we have to struggle to reach the Master Power. Strange. Kirpal writes:
"God is the Controlling Power within you. Our body works as long as we are in the body, and we are controlled in there body...As soon as that Controlling Power is withdrawn, we have to leave the body. That very Power controls all the u Universe. When that Power withdraws from the Universe, the result will be dissolution and grand-dissolution...God resides in every heart. He is the Controlling Power that keeps the soul in the body...When you rise above body-consciousness, you can know the Controlling Power within you." (86).
So how is one supposed to get out of the body to find the Power that is keeping us in the body? Seems impossible. And so it would be if there were not some kind of misunderstanding in the way these teachings are articulated. And there is. At one time the soul is deemed to have the power of creation, and giving life to the body, and another time this power is assigned to God. Kirpal said:
"We see that the machine goes on when we direct our attention. In other words, when you are in control, there's no world. We create the world....You sit in meditation - all right. The world is not there. When you come out the world is there. It is you who makes the world. Yes?" (87)
This is very similar to the drishti-shristi vada theory of Vedanta, i.e., "the world is there because you see it." Which is in contrast with shristi-drishti vada, or "you see the world because it is there." In other words, Kirpal is stating the position of subjective idealism. With a few twists this is what Brunton taught as mentalism, or the notion that all one can know is what is present to consciousness, that is, with out the observer the world is never experienced. Only, the soul, while cosmic and infinite and of the nature of voidness, is not the ultimate Creator. A master image is projected by the soul's parent, call it Absolute Soul or World-Mind, through the soul and manifest as the so-called external world. The soul thus co-creates its own world based on this master-image, projects it out and then experiences it sensibly. This is complex doctrine, do not struggle to get it right now. But if you can get a glimpse, great. In any case, the soul and God are in intimate relationship all the time. Now, Kirpal says you are here because a Power is keeping you here. Other teachings have said that no one is here who does not want to be here. And in the sections on the importance of the waking state the value of this experience will be discussed in some depth. But how can one leave the body if some power is keeping you there? The answer may not be found in Sant Mat. But it may be described this way, which is how Brunton and originally Plotinus did so. The Divine Soul is rooted in God. The Soul has the power of projecting an emanate of itself (which eventually becomes the human ego)into the manifest worlds, and also has (or can develop or recover) the power of retracting or concentrating itself back into its original Unity. Thus, the soul or consciousness can invert into itself - but it can not stay there. God as Nature will compel its return. One reason is that the soul itself is not our ultimate identity. That must include the world, or the "World-Idea" - the divine Intelligence (the God-into-Expression Power?) - from which the manifest worlds come from. Call this more complete identity God or Overself or the Self, the subjective logos, Nirvikalpa Samadhi, or the utmost inner Subjectivity is not the All. If you get even a little intuition out of this you are doing great!
Another reason one cannot forever remain in the divine trance is because the pralabd karmas will compel ones return from that inner sanctuary. And this is perhaps another way of saying that God as Nature compels it.
So what is the purpose of it all? Maybe, to become conscious of the Soul and/or Overself, not just to fly into the heavens, but to go straight into the Heart of God, here and hereafter.
A perhaps minor additional problem confronts us in the following situation which came to my attention today. Not insolvable, but enigmatic nevertheless. It made me reflect on the Christian doctrine on the Resurrection of the body, but it may apply to the topic at hand as well. There is a rare condition where two twins are born conjoined. Most of them that cannot be separated medically do not survive more than a day or two, but a few have lived many decades. One in the news lately has been a case where two girls were born 26 years ago with: two heads, two brains, two esophagi, two stomachs, two spinal columns, three kidneys, two hearts, two pairs of lungs, two arms, one pelvis, one liver, one circulatory system and a semi-shared nervous system. Everything below the waist - intestines, sex organs, two legs - are shared. Each girl or woman controls and feels one side of the body. They can potentially bear children, and in fact, one man has married them. they can swim and ride a bike, with much coordination required. Their sleep patterns, as well as personalities are different. One can be sick while the other is well. They teach school but only get one paycheck!
What interests me is what happens when they die. There are clearly two souls there, not just one soul with two brains, right? Obviously, the life current cannot withdraw for one soul and have the remaining soul alive in half a body. So is there some form of shared karma at play here? With individual brains and spinal columns, one can even imagine a yogic exit possible, but would both have to be withdrawn at once, or the one left behind suffering a terrible fate? What would spiritual practice be like in this situation? Were it even possible to activate, what would kundalini do when it reached the navel center? Interesting problems for sure. Or are we simply imagining the process of birth and death in a wrong way?
CHAPTER TEN
Leaving the body doesn't automatically tell you what the body is: The logic and need of incarnation seems to be this: one has to experience being in or as a body to know what it is like to be without a body. One cannot know what one is or what the body is in Truth solely from a dis-incarnate state. A contrast is needed. This is one reason why the waking state of earth-life has been valued in the spiritual traditions. Paradoxically, one also cannot know the unlimited nature of the Universal or Cosmic Self or Mind without being confined to the limitations of a body; The issue of attachment’; Franklin Merrell-Wolff on the use of the mind; The saints have a short-cut; The desire for samadhi is a “vicious yogic samskara”.
The logic and need of incarnation seems to be this: one has to experience being in or as a body to know what it is like to be without a body. One cannot know what one is or what the body is in Truth solely from a dis-incarnate state. A contrast is needed. This is one reason why the waking state of earth-life has been valued in the spiritual traditions. Paradoxically, one also cannot know the unlimited nature of the Universal or Cosmic Self or Mind without being confined to the limitations of a body.
A point to be noted is that one may become certain by an inner psychic or mystical experience that he is NOT (at least exclusively) the body, but he doesn’t necessarily also know what that body is, or what the ego is, or what the world or God is, nor can he necessarily make sense out of the world when he comes out of meditation, without some other sadhana of purification and metaphysical understanding or enquiry. That is because the mystic believes that what he perceives or feels is real, and is apt to dismiss the discriminative use of the mind prematurely. But without recognizing that the body and world are in fact the manifestation of, and inseparable from, God and/or one’s inner consciousness - and never in fact known or experienced otherwise as things made of “matter”, but only imagined to be so - upon returning from his meditation the lesser mystic is confronted by a world he does not understand, and he feels a need to return to his samadhi to maintain his peace. He is already convinced that to feel the body is wrong, bad, and a fall from, or degradation of, his spiritual nature, and he recoils from that. Thus, by being erroneously programmed to believe that the only way to know or see the body is to transcend it by leaving it behind and viewing it from “on high,” he in effect bars himself from actually experiencing it as it is, from fully feeling it from the awakened heart’s perspective, as well as absorbing its inherent wisdom. That is to say, we start by assuming that we know what the body is - a thing - and therefore give reality to the proposition that it is necessary to get out of that thing to find another thing called “consciousness.” This is absurd, however, because it is only by the light of consciousness that we are able to know anything in the first place. Nor can we experience that awareness as such because we are that awareness.
In short, by virtue of such dualistic thinking, in the name of spirituality one remains at war with himself and Nature, and can not proceed to realize the further stage that “this very world is the Lotus land of purity.” By virtue also of the nature of the inviolable ability of the soul to invert upon itself, as well as project itself, one may do meditative exercises and, without full understanding of their results, become addicted to samadhi. Few, admittedly, have this problem, but many are addicted to the exclusive pursuit of going within out of fear of the world, rather than love of the Divine. This is an ancient error, yet one that is encouraged in most mystical schools in general, where it is also assumed that meditation alone is the only and sufficient means necessary to realize Truth. That has always been strongly denied in Advaita and some schools of Buddhism, however, and other branches of philosophy, with strong warnings not to be misled by the ecstasy and even absorptive oneness of trance states but to go beyond them, using the fruits of concentration gained to enquire into the Universal Truth, instead of stopping with the knowledge of the inner self or subject logos within. However, even then there is often a dissociation from the forbidden domain of the body and feeling, with its attendant shame and fear of bondage to limitation, and many traditional teachings also reinforce that view. Westerners particularly are uncomfortable with the practical application of those teachings. A new vision seems required to meet the needs of contemporary humanity
How many satsangis after even fifty years are still suffering from life-negative teachings of Kal and the ‘five dacoits’ stalking them around every bend, what to speak of how to deal with the realm of human sexuality?
How very different was the viewpoint and approach of Sri Atmananda Krishnamenon, who, when asked how to transcend the body, answered, “By being aware of it.” Who can understand this - the words of a great sage - who is living in a place of fear - of the flesh - of the descended life itself? So it is proposed, as part of the courage required in Sant Mat “2.0+”, that the way to transcend the body, to know what it truly is, not what one thinks it is, or fears it is, is paradoxically to get more into it - not out of it. Like a newborn gets acquainted with it, feeling it fully, before he got shutdown and learned to reside in the head instead of the heart. And as a result perpetuates the ancient strategy of seeking to return to a starry heaven - based on a recoil from earthly life - forgetting all the while that his true home is not so far away. And thus invalidating not only this life but also, perhaps, the life to come?
One way of looking at Sant Mat from the Heart’s Gaze is that, rather than believing and acting as if one is a gross being seeking to get to the subtle, the causal, and beyond to consciousness, instead one sacrifices the subtle, or inner psyche, to the heart, and then, in a sense, the wholeness of the integrated bodily being to consciousness or the Self. [Self-enquiry is one traditional practice that in essence does this, eliminating the ego-I before considering exploration of any worlds beyond; in Sant Mat the difference would be more one of attitude and disposition of the heart]. The former - the “1.0” - approach makes the body the standard of reality, while the latter starts with the intuited ground of the Self. The one starts with fear, while the other - “2.0+” - starts with trust. The essence is that trying to leave the body because one feels he has to in order to be free [an attitude which is not required in order to meditate, by the way] not only gives the ego and body a reality they do not have [as ‘things’ separate from God], but it gives one only a negative freedom - a freedom “from” - as well as the loss of finding out th reality that the body has when known in truth and experienced directly without buffers as well as preconceived notions of “detachment,” which in the end are at best only of provisional value. For “why” is one “detached”? “Who” is detached? “What” is one detached from? What’s so great about a stark detachment, as a principle? An “affectionate indifference” will more likely characterize what will arise upon realization than a strategic detachment. Can one in fact actually love fully and freely without the opposite: “attachment”? Sure, one’s desire nature will go through a process, at times perhaps fierce, of purification and refinement, but assuming that is understood, what’s wrong with desire, or even “TOTAL” attachment? For that matter, what’s wrong with the ego? Yes, getting rid of or even killing the ego is a sine qua-non in many Yoga paths as well as the Vedanta. And for perhaps many it is a safer path, especially under the personal tutelage of a competent master, with the least chance of making fatal detours catering to the impulses and ignorance of the lower self. But it is also not without its misconceptions, and sooner or later one will come to see that, as Brunton wrote,
“The ego to which he is so attached turns out on enquiry to be none other than the presence of the World-Mind [i.e., God] within his own heart. If identification is then shifted from one to the other he has achieved the purpose of life.” (88) Or as Kirpal said, "one day you will look at your hand and see the Master there."
The truth of non-dualism makes it so. Therefore, nothing is wrong. This is all something to deeply ponder before dismissing outright as being contrary to the path. It is at the core (couer = heart) of the 2.0+ view.
Jagat Singh, as mentioned, said “90% of spiritual life is clear thinking.” Ramana Maharshi said, “Deliverance is just the clarification of the mind, the understanding: 'I am ever in my own real nature; all other experiences are illusory.' It is not something that has newly come about." (89) Sant Mat generally, however, teaches that vivek or discrimination will take place automatically by the progressive absorption that occurs from plane to plane on the way to the final goal of Anami. But is that really so, or the only way? Perhaps it is, for some, but certainly not, for many others. A true understanding is said by sages to be won by absorbing it into one's being while incarnated here on earth, and then taken with one wherever he goes.This is because here one can compare and contrast states in a way that is not possible after death. As pointed out before by Aadi, there is a difference between the mere experience of a state and the full understanding of it. This is important if one aspires to be a well-rounded sage and not just a simple mystic. Brunton writes:
"Seeing a man or an object is one thing, recognizing it for what it is, is a further and extended operation." (90)
This is easily enough comprehended in regard to lower visionary experiences, but at much higher levels it takes a supremely rational consciousness to overcome the comparative effulgence of the mystic states, and press on until a deep serenity and clear gnosis or understanding is gained.
Another misunderstanding among mystic paths often arises over their definition or use of the term "mind". First off, it is to be understood in Buddhism, especially Zen or Ch’an, as well as Advaita, that ‘Mind’, especially when capitalized, means Consciousness, not manas as it usually is in the yoga paths. And manas and everything else reduces to Mind or Consciousness. It is common in yoga paths to refer to mind as "the slayer of the real", and as something that must be destroyed or eliminated. Yet this is sometimes denied on paths of jnana or advaita vedanta, where the intellectual sheath itself is a primary means of realization of the Atman in the waking state. "It [the Self] is always shining in the intellectual sheath," said Ramana. In yoga, however, the goal is often conceived as kaivalya, or radical separation of consciousness from all limiting adjuncts, but in advaita, for instance, it is not. The Truth to be realized necessitates self-cognition, not mere destruction of the mind, as if that were even possible. There is both Being and Knowing. Franklin Merrell-Wolff writes:
"It is often stated in mystical literature that the activity of the mind is in a peculiar sense a barrier to the Realization of the Higher Consciousness…”
“In general, the mystical and occult use of the word "mind" does not carry the same connation that western philosophy or the most authoritative usage gives the term. If for "mind" we substitute the word "manas," at once the mystic's statement becomes more correct. "Manas" is commonly translated as "mind" since there is no other single English word that approximates its meaning. The word "mind" today comprehends much more than the Indian philosophers and mystics mean when they say "manas." Unless this distinction is born in mind, confusion is almost inevitable. For my own part, this confusion caused me some years of needless misunderstanding. What I read violated what I felt intuitively and subsequently demonstrated to be the case. It was not the competent mystics and philosophers who were in error, but the translators and the western students of mysticism and occultism.”
“I have entered into this point at some length, partly for the reason that in my earlier studies the mis-translation of "lower manas" seemed to require of me a crushing of faculties of the soul that are vitally important for even the Realization itself, for I was quite familiar with what the word "mind" meant in western usage. Others may be facing the same difficulty. Literally, to crush or suppress "mind," giving to that word the meaning it has in western thought, is to crush or suppress the soul. No true mystic means that, whatever he may seem to say as a result of not being familiar with the English term.”
“Actually, with the mass of men, cognition is bound to egoism, but a divorce of these two is possible. Cognitive activity of a higher type is most emphatically not a barrier to Recognition, and if my experience is any criterion, may well prove to be one of the most powerful subsidiary aids for those who can make use of it. In any case, I must conclude that if by "mind," cognitive activity is meant, then it is not true that the mind must be stilled in order to attain Recognition. But it is true that the cognitive action must be within a matrix of a high order of dispassion.”
“The higher affections, such as love, compassion and faith are also most emphatically an aid. But upon this point I do not need to dwell, for here agreement among the mystics seems to be practically universal. Further, this phase of the subject has been much clearly presented and better understood. This is the Road through Bliss, the Way most widely appreciated and most commonly followed by Those who have attained God-Realization.”
“By means of pure cognition, it is possible to enter through Intelligence (Chit). Or, again, one may Enter through various combinations of the higher affections and pure cognition. Such a course is naturally the most perfect. The individual may be more developed on the one side or the other at the time of the Entering. But once he is grounded in Higher Consciousness, there is a tendency for the nature to unfold toward balance, so that finally a Man is symbolized by the "Great Bird" which has two wings equally developed. And these two are Compassion and Intelligence." (91)
James Schwarz (Ram) argues that one must think or use discernment before during, and after enlightenment:
"There is a strange notion that when one permanently experiences the Self the intellect is switched off for good and you just remain forever as the Self in some kind of no thought state. The fact is that the intellect keeps right on thinking from womb to tomb. God gave it to us for a good reason. Clear logical practical thinking is absolutely necessary if you are going to crack the identity code. It is called inquiry. You want to think before realization, during realization and after realization. Realization is nothing more than a hard and fast conclusion that you come to about your identity based on direct experience of the Self. Only understanding will solve the riddle...No experience will eradicate vasanas born in ignorance and reinforced with many years of negative behavior.”
"Question: Is self-realization a discrete occurrence in time...or is the removal of self ignorance a gradual process over time?"
"Ram: It can be either or both. Usually one realizes who one is, falls again under the sway of ignorance, applies the knowledge again, realizes again and so on. It goes on over and over until one day there is absolutely no doubt and the process of enlightenment/ endarkenment stops for sure. Ignorance is persistent and aggressive and one needs to practice the knowledge until the last vestige is rooted out. I have a friend, a self realized person, who said, “I realized the Self five hundred times before my seeking stopped” to illustrate that point." (92)
Obviously, during a process of dhyan type of meditation one tries to stop thinking. That is where the mystic schools derive the admonition for one to still the mind. This generally refers to manas, the discursive mind, and intellect. However, outside of such a particular exercise philosophic schools argue that one needs the complementary practice of contemplation on the nature of the self and reality for realization to occur. This requires a faculty of cognition. Judith Lamb-Lion, who had gone to Sach Khand at her initiation, still asked, "Master, who am I?", to which Sant Kirpal replied, " 'Who' is asking?" This was akin to Ramana's inquiry, but traditionally for the ripe soul only. And his response to the question, "do you still meditate?", being "once you get your PhD, do you have to go back and learn the ABC's?", suggested that he, the Master, enjoyed going inside for refreshment, but it was not necessary anymore for his realization. He admitted as such, that "I, too, like to go inside and enjoy." Maharaj Charan Singh confirms, much like the earlier reference to Sawan Singh' going to Sach Khand in the blink of an eye', that for a realized saint, it is not necessary for him to pass through the inner stages to be one with the Lord - and what is this but a confirmation of the actualization of non-duality through this emanationist path?
"[The saints] have short cut in the sense that they have immediate access to the Father. After having reached sainthood they do not have to pass through all those stages on their way to the Father. Christ also indicated that he could leave the body when he wanted to and he could take it up again when he wanted to, so he was always with the Father and he and the Father were one. ["Does this mean that he sees him through the physical eyes or does he mean that he sees him at the eye center?'] This is spiritual seeing. He is one with the Father. He is at his level. When he sees him within, he sees him everywhere in every part of creation. The Father is not a man. He is a power, a state of consciousness. So Christ says he is always at that level, at that state of consciousness where the Father is. Therefore he sees him everywhere and in every part of creation, within him and outside of himself. Not with his physical eyes. That is a different eye. This involves a different understanding of the whole situation." (93)
Kirpal Singh (credited to Sawan Singh) in The Philosophy of the Masters, wrote:
“Love is the most powerful and effective of all practices to meet the Lord. It is the only method by which one can attain communion with Him in an instant. Shamas Tabriz says:
“If the road is lengthy, you should fly on the wings of love. When you unfold the wings of love, you need not ascend by means of the steps.”
“A person who is intoxicated with the wine of love will reach the goal by means of a single sigh, as compared to thousands of years spent in other methods.”
“True union and one-pointed attention comes only with love. The spiritual progress achieved by means of meditation over a number of years can be had in a moment through love, because the union of inner sight takes the lover immediately to the goal. This is the real love and this is the true yoga. In fact, this is the be-all and end-all.” (94)
“The difference between knowledge and love is that knowledge continually tries to banish duality but love retains it as a precious treasure and itself remains without duality.” (96)
This is not so different from gyani Sri Nisargadatta who said:
“Change the current of your desire from taking to giving. The passion for giving, for sharing, will naturally wash the idea of the external world out of your mind, and giving as well. Only the pure radiance of love will remain, beyond giving and receiving….In love there is not the one even, how can there be two? Love is the refusal to separate, to make distinctions.” (96while )
So love as well as knowledge are found in the body first if they are truly to be taken with you when the body is no more. PB writes:
“Sahaja Samadhi is not broken into intervals, is permanent, and involves no special effort. Its arisal is instantaneous and without progressive stages. It can accompany daily activity without interfering with it. It is a settled calm and complete inner quiet...There are not distinguishing marks that an outside observer can use to identify a Sahaja-conscious man because Sahaja represents consciousness itself rather than its transitory states....Those at the state of achieved Sahaja are under no compulsion to continue to meditate any more or to practise yoga. They often do--either because of inclinations produced by past habits or as a means of helping other persons. In either case it is experienced as a pleasure. Because this consciousness is permanent, the experiencer does not need to go into meditation. This is despite the outward appearance of a person who places himself in the posture of meditation in order to achieve something....When you are engaged in outward activity it is not the same as when you are in a trance. This is true for both the beginner and the adept. The adept, however, does not lose the Sahaja awareness which he has achieved and can withdraw into the depths of consciousness which the ordinary cannot do.'' (97)...It would be a poor thing for the sage if he had to sit down and squat in meditation in order to lift himself into peace. This is why he may or may not make a practice of meditation. For whether he meditates or not he always enjoys his inner peace.'' (98)
Shri Atmananda was sometimes uncompromising: he referred to the desire for samadhi, or the feeling that one needed to enter samadhi for realization, as a “vicious yogic samskara.” He said:
"The samadhi experience is that ‘I was happy.’ But when you understand, from a Karana-guru, that Happiness is your real nature, you come to realize that you are yourself the goal of samadhi. With this understanding, all hankering after samadhi disappears; though samadhi might still come upon you sometimes merely as a matter of course or samskara. But you will never again be attracted by the enjoyment of happiness in samadhi." (99)
PB gives a hint of the stage of sacrifice of the sage:
“The escape into Nirvana for him is only the escape into the inner realization of the truth whilst alive: it is not to escape from the external cycle of rebirths and deaths. It is a change of attitude. But that bait had to be held out to him at an earlier stage until his will and nerve were strong enough to endure this revelation. There is no escape except inwards. For the sage is too compassionate to withdraw into proud indifferentism and too understanding to rest completely satisfied with his own wonderful attainment. The sounds of sufferings of men, the ignorance that is the root of these sufferings, beat ceaselessly on the tympana of his ears. What can he do but answer, and answer with his very life, which he gives in perpetual reincarnation upon the cross of flesh, as a vicarious sacrifice for others. It is thus alone that he achieves immortality, not by fleeing forever--as he could if he willed--into the Great Unconsciousness, but by suffering forever the pains and pangs of perpetual rebirth that he may help or guide his own.'' (100)
Kirpal Singh, again, when asked if he meditated anymore, once answered, "If a man has his PhD, does he have to go back and learn the ABC's?" This terse remark, in my opinion, points towards the realization of sahaj samadhi, wherein the adept can meditate if he wants to, for refreshment, to perform special service, or sheerly out of prior habit - but not for the sake of realization itself. Brunton explains:
"Those at the stage of achieved sahaja are under no compulsion to continue to meditate anymore or to practice yoga. They often do - either because of inclinations produced by past habits or as a means of helping other persons. In either case it is experienced as a pleasure. Because this consciousness is permanent, the experiencer does not need to go into meditation. This is despite the outward appearance of a person who places himself in the posture of meditation in order to achieve something. When you are engaged in outward activity it is not the same as when you are in a trance. This is true for both the beginner and the adept. The adept, however, does not lose the sahaja consciousness which he has achieved and can withdraw into the depths of consciousness which the ordinary man can't do." (101)
CHAPTER ELEVEN
The need for basic trust; Self-love and self-abandonment are both required; Embrace the shadow; Hanging on the gallows; You have a right to be here
We have offered an assortment of traditional views regarding the need to integrate the descended life with any so-called higher realization, but are we any closer to answering the question implied in the heading to this section, "leaving the body does not necessarily tell you what the body is" ? Much of what we have suggested may still sound idealistic and something requiring much effort, which more and more people are finding elusive and disheartening, somehow always beyond reach, and counter to their heart's intuition and perhaps even emerging evolutionary needs. Is there not another way for embracing ones heart's desire than struggling mightily against the descended life in order to reach the empyrean above? While it is not yet explicitly acknowledged within the Sant Mat tradition, however, a paradoxical, mysterious, at times perplexing yet simultaneously delightful process of descent is divinely occurring in many souls on the ancient paths wearing of spending seemingly endless time in a state of tension between opposites. We touched upon this is Part One in the sub-section "Do We Really Know What the Body Is?", and in Part Three in the sub-section "Down and In' Before 'In and Up." What has been suggested is that something new is happening in the fields of spirituality, and that we are being asked, gently coaxed, to plow new furrows, follow new leads of being and not be waylaid in old ruts. This book has taken on an immense and perhaps impossible task: to appeal to many types and levels of seekers and trajectories of awakening. Therefore what is being pointed to here is not for everyone at this time, nor should it further discourage those who have not felt the stirrings of such a trajectory of new life within themselves, or those who may feel this is a reversal of all that Sant Mat teaches. We have tried to show with quotes and examples here and there in this book that this is in fact not really the case, although it may still feel strange and foreign to the experience and understanding of the reader. Please have patience, perhaps repeated ponderings with the sunshine of ones love and attention will at a later time bear fruit. Of course, nothing mentioned herein is a required experience, except that they happen, and so we point them out.
Trust is needed in all traditions. In Sant Mat it is trust in the promises of the Guru. In Christianity it is trust in the Cross. In Zen, it is trust in the teachings of awakening. In Advaita, it is trust in being. A person said to Sri Nisargadatta: “I need samadhis for self-realization.” He answered, “You have all the self-realization you need, but you do not trust it. Have courage, trust yourself, go, talk, act; give it a chance to prove itself. With some realization comes imperceptibly, but somehow they need convincing. They have changed, but they do not notice it. Such non-spectacular cases are often the most reliable.” (102)
There may also be an ordeal of transformation, discussed at length in Part Three. Fenelon writes:
"I have no doubt but that God constantly treats you as one of His friends, that is, with crosses, sufferings, and humiliations. The ways and means of God to draw souls to Himself, accomplish his design much more rapidly and effectually than all the efforts of the creature; for they destroy self-love at its very root, where, with all our pains, we would scarcely discover it. God knows all its windings, and attacks it in its strongest holds. If we had strength and faith enough to trust ourselves entirely to God, and follow Him simply wherever He should lead us, we should have no need of any greta effort of mind to reach perfection. But as we are so weak in faith, as to require to know all the way without trusting in God, our road is lengthened and our spiritual affairs get behind. Abandon yourself as absolutely as possible to God, and continue to do so to your last breath, and he will never desert you." (103)
Fenelon spoke truth, but in somewhat dated language. I have enjoyed his words for years, but it is time for new expressions of the same truth suited for our time. Here is something challenging from contemporary western teacher, Saniel Bonder, that resonates within our own experience and part of what we have been trying to say here:
"I believe in the course of the 21st century the leading spiritual edge of humanity will conclude once and for all that the quest for spiritual ascent as an escape from our darkness has become an evolutionary dead end...I believe more and more masters and teachers of spiritual life will reach these conclusions helplessly, by falling out of their perches in brightness and surrendering into their messy, shadowy illogic and woundedness. They will discover that the promised transcendence of all of that too-human suffering never really and fully took place during their flight or their ways of buffering themselves from the shadow, holding it at bay, hovering above it."
"In any case, whatever happens with others, those who would embrace deep tantric trust in self, trust in other, and trust in Being allow themselves to fall into their own dark and chaotic life. They don’t view that descent as an unfortunate indicator of their weakness or a regrettable inconvenience in their march toward light or consciousness...Practitioners of the Tantra of Trust view their material bodies as the gateway to previously impossible, epochal revelations. They revere the Earth as the mysterious cosmic chakra of the most unprecedented transformation possible to us. And they regard their own shadow limitations and patterns as blessed repositories of the most evolutionary, liberating energetics in all of Nature."
"Do you get what I am saying? In the Tantra of Trust, the whole direction of spiritual life reverses. This is a world-changing shift. The entire value system of spirituality gets upended – perhaps we should say ‘downended.' And the new, divine humanity establishes priorities that, in the ancient and recent, hypermasculine worlds, would have been heretical, if not downright unthinkable."
"I’m trying my best to send up a signal flare that a sea change is already underway. I’m not the only one doing so, by any means. Spirituality is evolving - we might say, most positively devolving. It’s coming down from the skies of mind, light, and consciousness. Human beings will find it less and less possible to carve reality into distinct realms of Spirit and Matter, light and darkness...The Earth, the body, and the shadow are suddenly the Cinderellas at the royal ball of Being. And no body is in a position to know the future of her or his marriage to the crown prince of Heaven, consciousness, and the light - but 'happily ever after,' understood without romantic silliness, is a fair bet. From my perspective, ‘auspicious' does not even begin to describe this sacred marriage."
"All of this, I hope, provides a context for a different kind of descent into your own darkness, and that of humanity and the world, than you may ever have even contemplated before, never mind actually made. In this event you wind up turning around and viewing your own worst ‘stuff' as the icons, the sacred shrines, the living deities of what Being can reveal to you next.” (104)
This is a bold vision, and if one can glean even a little from it one will have received a great deal, and may find insight to smooth over whatever course he has chosen in this life. Jeanne Guyon four centuries ago somewhat similarly forewarned the seeker of a journey of "unknowables, unanswered questions, enigmas, incomprehensibles, and most of all, things unfair":
"The beginning of your spiritual journey is [sometimes] glorious, beautiful and rich. Do not confuse the beginning with the end or the middle. They so often have little in common and bear no similarity to one another. There are parts of the journey that are spiritual, but they can also be so difficult and so dry that the word "spiritual" seems to not even apply." (105)
The fundamental problem for Guyon was one of self-love:
"Self-love is a deeply rooted thing in all of us. The Lord's gifts only serve to increase self-love. They perhaps will take us from the love of the world and the love of other things, and even to a love of God, but they do not affect, in any way, our love and charm for ourselves." (106)
PB wrote that "the ego will welcome a large attrition of its scope" in order to prevent its own death. The maturing seeker in the traditional mode will recognize the signs of ego inflation as sometimes the flip-side of a tactic of ego diminuation, as well as spiritual bypassing.
This remains an often harsh truth, but what Saniel is suggesting, in my opinion, is that it is often not merely too much love for self that is a problem, but too little. And the way to love and know self is to embrace the dark and painful parts, the "hidden crevices of self-hatred that surreptitiously undermine all attempts to find love and awakening," as one student of his put it, and that out of shame and erroneous teachings we run from in a one-dimensional pursuit of the light, but which, undisclosed, prevent our present awakening and happiness. The traditional way is one of self-abnegation to get to the light, to consciousness, while the more contemporary way is to integrally embrace and be kinder even to that little self and allow consciousness to emerge organically and without an overly muscular struggle with our human limitations - which Saniel categorized as the "hypermasculine" approach that has been the dominant spiritual model for centuries. Paradoxically, without self-love the road to abiding as consciousness can be a long and tortuous one. Both Sri Nisargadatta as well as Ishwar Puri said one must love oneself. Trust in our self, our being, then, is at least as important as trust in a Teacher, and, as that self is the only one guaranteed to be there in the end, it is good to know this self well!
Yet, it can be scary to stand on one's own. Faqir Chand called it "hanging on the gallows". Emerson spoke of it as "Self-Reliance". Therefore, we propose exploring the question introduced in Part Three, "what are you afraid of doing, but would choose to do in the best and sacred interests for the welfare of your body and mind, if you knew that God was not keeping score or being the judge?" Is there trust in your own being, and trust that there is love that will meet your willing participation? The vision is that you have a right to be here, and were not just sent here because of a mistake or wrong-doing. Fear of taking a few risks can be a major stumbling block to self-realization, or basic happiness.
CHAPTER TWELVE
A review of various topics: Degrees of mastership; Brief remarks on karmas; Where are the Inner realms; There is no technical way to be saved; Die to who you think you are before who you think you are dies, or surrender into the Mystery; The Master always resides in the disciple's innermost heart center.
Instruction in a meditative technique is one thing. The gift of a brief experience of subtle light and sound is another. Establishment of the soul of a disciple in a position to fruitfully engage such subtle meditation via the master's siddhi or power is yet another, and even greater gift. As far as the matter of realization goes, however, Asvaghosa clearly states: “The more you wish to attain Enlightenment, the clearer you see the need for your Guru to be a Buddha.” (107)
And as far as dhyan meditation is concerned, if it is one's own divine Soul which paradoxically and mysteriously gives him the inner image of his Master as well as grace (even if mediated through a Master), and at the ultimate level the true Master is one with one's own Soul and Absolute Soul (both transcendental and of the nature of voidness - and thus beyond what is commonly understood as soul in occult or mystic circles), then certainly contemplation of a form which comes of itself in meditation, that is, not through the discursive imagination, is an authentic practice and imbedded so to speak in the divine structure of the worlds, and has been pronounced as such. Even Ramana Maharshi did not disparage it. The lotus feet of the guru, or the “dust of the guru’s feet”, the radiant Gurudev, appearing in the disciple’s heart is supposed to be a great vision, boon, and aid, during life and at even the time of death and beyond. It is a cornerstone of Sant Mat. Even Kabir, in his devotional ecstasy, proclaimed, “now I see nothing but the radiant form of the master!” Did he mean this literally? Or in a broad sense, otherwise he might have run into trees and so on.
The important thing is for the sun to rise in one's Heart. Then one is all right. The search is over. And perhaps gurus who can activate this are more rare than those who can induce visions. It is not easy to say.
On a purely technical point, however, the Sant Mat lineages divide on whether one should continue contemplating only on one’s initiating guru after that guru’s death, and/or whether it is necessary to take his successor as one's guru. This controversy began after the death of Shiv Dayal Singh. All recommend seeking the company of a true successor, but differ on what to do with one's contemplative practice. Sant Darshan Singh also said that matters pertaining to the disciple's pralabd karma (current destiny) could only be handled by the successor, because that would required a physical body. Many initiates of Rajinder Singh have seen the forms of the preceeding three masters before him coming to them unbidden during their meditations.
This is an important point that raises a number of issues. First of all, in Sant Mat, at least in the lineage after Sawan Singh and Kirpal Singh, the dispensation has been offered or promised that once a disciple is initiated it will take a maximum of four lives for him to reach Sach Khand or be so liberated. The Master is said to take it upon himself to erase the pool of sanchit karmas from time immemorial that the disciple would otherwise have to bear. This is significant, for, as taught in, for instance, Tibetan Buddhism, it is these very tendencies, karmas, or habits of uncountable lifetimes that prevent our abiding in the Ground Luminosity of Clear Light which dawns after death, if ever so briefly for the average person. A question arises, however. If responsibility for exhausting the sanchit storehouse of karmas is taken over by the Master at the time of initiation, what would prevent an initiate from only needing one lifetime to realize the truth? The answer must be, only his creating more destiny or kriyaman (agami in Hinduism) karma by not living up to the teachings in this life. Even so, Sant Mat says that the decision of a further birth into this earth realm lies in the hands of the Guru. Aadi says that it also depends upon if the soul has reached completion of its inborn destiny during this life whether or not he need return. Kirpal said that if one has no remaining desires towards this life one needn’t return, depending on the grace of the Master. Of course, as we have explored in this book, what's inherently wrong with coming back, assuming one has been self-realized? Ramana Maharshi said the question itself implies imperfection.
Once out of the body (and from an absolute point of view, even while in the body), don't ideas of high or low, inside and out, essentially lose their ultimate meaning, as they are only concepts or ideas in the mind? We have already discussed this in part, saying that the subtler bodies being still within subtle space and time (Kal) have their relative dimensions, although ultimately there is no such thing. Sant Rajinder Singh succinctly explains that this is indeed the case:
Q: Where are the inner realms?
Sant Rajinder Singh: “When we withdraw our attention to the single eye, we become absorbed in the inner Light and Sound. Then, after we meet the radiant form of the Master and rise above body-consciousness, we find inner realms. These inner dimensions or realms exist concurrently with our physical universe. For lack of better terminology we speak of inner and outer, or higher and lower regions. These realms are not exactly descriptive because we are talking about states of consciousness. They do not exist in time and space, but we have the illusion that our physical world is in time and space. The physical region with the earth, sun, planets, and galaxies exists simultaneously with spiritual regions. We measure time and space in this physical universe because that is the only frame of reference that we know. But all these regions, from the physical to the spiritual, exist as states of consciousness. When we talk about traveling to inner or higher regions, we are not actually traveling anywhere or going up or in. We are actually refocusing our attention to a different state of consciousness or awareness.”(108)
< Of course, this leads to the question many will ask: “why then go into another state or plane of consciousness? Is not truth realizable here and now?” Good questions, and of course one answer to them is : because you can, and in order to know things in a deeper way. But all the same, every world has the same deep center, which some have said to be "I AM."
This depiction aligns nicely with these words of Kusan Sunim, Korean Zen Master (1901-1983):
"Your own mind alone is the creator. There is no one else who created it for you; therefore, this universe is your own universe. This is true whether you are awakened or not. The universe can be affirmed or negated only because we are here now. If we were not present, there would be no one to make such affirmations or denials. Since we create the universe, how can one then say that we came from anywhere or will depart to somewhere else? In reality, there can never be any such coming or going. Hence, it is meaningless to talk of "going" to a Pure Land. For how can a Pure Land exist elsewhere when in fact it is latent within one's own mind?"
"Originally, you have never come from anywhere. Therefore, there can be no place to which you go. Hence, in itself, the true nature is always thus. And this is the path to the Nirvana of the Buddhas.This is the place where the bodies and the minds of all you gathered here are at peace. Thus you can go as you wish to the celestial realms or to the Buddha worlds. You can freely wander everywhere. How joyful! Indeed how joyful!" (109)
Daskalos as well explains that the planes as such are not merely layered in a "pancaked" fashion as a mind bound a priori by the categories of time and space might envision them:
"You must realize that the planes and subplanes of the psychic and noetic [i.e.,astral and causal] worlds occupy the same space. And this space is the center of the Earth, everywhere on the planet, the periphery of the planet and the space around the planet. Do not imagine that these psychonoetic planes and subplanes are juxtaposed one on top of the other. At this very moment inside the head of a pin, in this space and everywhere there exist all the planes and subplanes of the psychonoetic worlds. It is a state of being, of vibrations and a methods of tuning into them." (110)
From the point of view of Advaita even the body is essentially nothing more than an idea or collection of sensations, perceptions, and beliefs arising in consciousness. Therefore, from the point of view of truth, does it even matter, as some of the Tibetans maintain, how one ‘leaves’ the body? What if an initiate is murdered or killed in a horrible accident and is suddenly jerked out of the body, as has happened? I have already spoken of one such case. We are told that no matter how we die we will be instantly with the Master within. "The Master always resides in the disciple's innermost heart center," said Kirpal Singh.
Saints and yogis have said that one can leave the body through different centers: the navel, the heart, or the head, etc. They generally feel that a conscious exit via the head is most fruitful, and some have gone so far as to say that if one exits the body or dies via a chakra lower than there ajna such as the anahata, or through the "grey matter" of the brain and not the "white matter", for instance, one may be lost in lower planes or even lower reflections of the true higher planes. This, however, is really foolish and fear-inspired. There is no technical way to be "saved". The key is to die to who you think you are before who you think you are dies, or simply surrender into the Mystery. In Sant Mat all initiates are promised to be directly in the presence of their Master within. This is essentially the promise in Christianity as well, to go straight into the heart of God.The ego really has no place in the matter and can do nothing and less than nothing; therefore, any and all concern is useless. You are simply going home, to one degree or another, and all is taken care of. If you come back, what comes back is not 'you', so again there is nothing to worry about.
Sants argue for the superiority of the head or third eye (sixth chakra or divya chaksu') over the heart as the main portal to the beyond, but generally do not address the the spiritual heart spoken of by sages such as Maharshi, which is not a chakra. They simply say that the heart-lotus of the saints is between the eyebrows. That is their portal into the Beyond. Whereas Ramana suggest that the entire inner journey through the subtle, psychic realms via the divya chaksu may be avoided by absorption of attention or mind via the jnana chaksu in the heart, the subjective source of the separate self or ego. Traditionally, such as in the Upanishads, the heart is considered to be the seat of the soul in the body. Presumably this may account for the apparent exception-to-the-rule in the case of Lakhshmi the cow, whom Ramana said attained mukti upon her death. Of course, maybe he was wrong about Lakhshmi, but If the soul is in the deep heart, and so realized, the lack of a man-body or human form, chakra system, and lack of a third eye as located in the sixth chakra, might not be an impediment to liberation. An objection might be raised that in the case of Ramana, who by his own admission had little experience of the overhead planes, cannot speak for the realizations of the Sants. That seems a reasonable assumption, but comparisons between the two positions are difficult. Sri Aurobindo made a similar comment about Maharshi when a disciple asked him questions concerning differences between their philosophies. Maharshi in turn criticized Aurobindo's experiences of the Supermind, Overmind, etc., in effect saying they were all within the Self only...When such sages disagree, we should feel little doubt over seeking answers to our own questions. More on these two ‘chaksus’ later.
Sant Mat sometimes describes Sach Khand as the realm of atman, in the same terms of “the light of a million suns” that Maharshi mentioned as the experience of atman reflected through mahatattva (cosmic consciousness); even more, according to Sar Bachan at least, there are scenes and sounds there, with gushing fountains of light. But could this be atman? Atman is usually described as the light which makes seeing anything possible. The disciple of Sant Mat eventually attains to a realm of no sound and no light (Anami), which it sometimes calls Absolute God, so could this then be atman? Sages like Paul Brunton, Ramana, Nisargadatta would possibly say yes, it is the atman in itself, the unmanifest inner self, but disagree with the idea that even that is the end of the path. Sahaja samadhi, the integration of the inner and outer - still awaits the mature soul.
It should be noted that Hazur Baba Sawan Singh was attracted to advaita, but after study of Anurag Sagar decided the path of shabd yoga was higher. In Sant Mat, the state of sahaj is supposed to happen more or less automatically, through the infused power of the shabda-brahman. We cannot say, but that may or may not happen in every case. Nanak in his Jap Ji spoke of the “Primal, Pure, Eternal of all ages - the Unmanifest-Manifest.” Nisargadatta interestingly made a similar comment: ”Beyond consciousness altogether lies the unmanifest. And beyond all, and pervading all, is the heart of being which beats steadily — manifested-unmanifest (saguna, nirguna).” (111). This could certainly be characteristic of sahaj samadhi, the natural state.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
‘Seeing’ in Sach Khand; "May I see you face to face with the eyes of my soul, because you are their light" (St. John of the Cross); The real shabd is not a sound but your self; Seeing and hearing essentially; ‘Eternal’ forms; Ramana, Dogen, Ramakrishna, Plotinus, Nisargadatta
"May I see you face to face with the eyes of my soul, because you are their light." - St. John of the Cross (112)
Ishwar Puri seems to feel that in Sach Khand one has reached "Sar" Shabd, which, being beyond the mind, is also beyond time and space and unmanifest, and therefore beyond sensible light and sound; rather, it is the essence of light and sound. Any references in Sar Bachan to "turrets," "Islands," "lights," and "millions of suns" would seemingly be purely allegorical if this is a true interpretation of his words. He states:
"THE REAL SHABD IS NOT A SOUND BUT YOUR SELF. When you go beyond the causal to the spiritual region there is no sound as such because there is no space-time at all. It's a totally different indescribable state. So the sound becomes Sar Shabd, which means the Real Shabd, which means your Self. There you discover the Sound was your Self, not emanating from the Self. You find it WAS the Self. Great experience. That comes only with the help of the love of a Perfect Living Master” (113)
So it is both mysterious and kind of confusing. Again, is "Sar shabd" the same as "Sat shabd", or does Sar shabd merely progressively become Sat shabd in the higher stages, with finally Nij shabd in the end? This rings true, but also seems to affirm the traditional vedantic view that all the audible sounds are only in the subtle regions of the being (taijasa); there would, for instance, be no bagpipes beckoning one into Sach Khand. And there would be no ‘Naam-Bhakti’ after Daswan Dwar. Is there no more object of concentration? Is one totally dependent on the transcendent Master from there on up? Help is needed here, for comprehension - what to speak of realization. Faqir Chand said that the Master's form is no longer an aid for concentration after this point, but the Naam is. However Dr Sharma, Faqir's disciple, said that you will know your who your real Master is in Sach Khand, and Kirpal at least once that I recall said that although the inner Guru Dev or radiant form may change from plane to plane in the ascending planes but becomes a man again in Sach Khand.
In any case, some gurus like Faqir Chand say that the attention only goes as far as Sach Khand, where it dissolves. Remember, for Ramana, however, attention dissolves here and now in the heart through self-enquiry. He does not talk of the intermediate overhead planes as far as realization goes, although he does not deny their relative or apparent existence. There is no apparent dissolution of attention, i.e., passage beyond objectivity, in Sant Mat, however, until Sat Lok. What occurs afterwards can only be described as a further deepening or absorption, in our opinion.
Sach Khand then could either be "formless yet manifest" - infinite light, the 'full effulgence of the Nameless One' (literally “fountains of gushing light” as Sant Kirpal Singh once described (114), or it may be such visible light only metaphorically, as variously described according to some of these teachers. Is it the subjective Self, source of the ‘I’-thought, all vision, and root of the mind, as Ramana Maharshi taught? Or is that only realized, in Sant Mat, in Anami? I don’t know the answer, please let me know when you get there! Anami, however, would also be formless, yet manifest, if described as an infinite ocean of light [or an "infinite ocean with no shores" (Darshan Singh)], but usually is defined as "formless and Unmanifest". But one thing we may expect with some certainty, is that according to most accounts Sach Khand or Sat Lok entire generally is described as a wholly positive experience, and not a mere void. It is reality in its primal mode of expression, and therefore could be equally described as pure subjectivity as well as the most truly objective of all objective knowledge and experience. It is beyond the triad of knower, knowing, and known, but a state in which consciousness manifests, sees and knows its own projections within and as itself. Or one could also say, it sees only Itself. Ramana said the experience is unmistakeable when it is pure. Seems to me - something like that is true. “Seeing” is therefore not an inappropriate word to use, so long as one understands its uniqueness. The Buddhist sage Nagasena testified:
“O king, Nirvana exists...And it is perceptible to the mind...that disciple who has fully attained can see Nirvana.” (115)
Kusan Sunim tries to express this in a similar way:
“Do you know what constitutes the brightness of the mind? [i.e., of consciousness] Have you ever witnessed the radiance that emerges from it? An enlightened person is able to see this radiance of the mind. But even if you are unable to actually see it, you are nevertheless using it right here and now. This brightness that radiates from the mind is precisely that which is able to see forms and hear sounds. If it were absent we would be unable to either see or hear.” (116)
Ramana said of this ‘unperceived perceiver,’ or consciousness, that “while we can say that it is not darkness, can we not say that it is ‘light’?” The sage can be said to ‘see’ it. They also call it the ‘clear light.’ Can one imagine that? I don't think so. While not entirely correct, it would be closer to say it is seen with the intuition than the senses. A parallel example from the life of Kirpal Singh was when he was writing the Gurmat Siddhant, or Philosophy of the Masters series. Someone saw him and asked how he was writing so fast. He replied, "Sawan is dictating to me from within." He was then asked, "do you mean you see him and he is talking to you?" He replied, "By intuition, the same."
But for seeing in Sach Khand, the term 'direct insight' would be closer yet. A "seeing through," a seeing with the prajna or wisdom-eye, or a seeing that includes both subject and object within itself - otherwise we still have a dualistic seeing where the ego sees something.
In any case Sach Khand, to repeat, is said to be a positive, awakened experience, not a negative void or a nothing as the mind might conceive it. Buddha first taught emptiness to counter the disease of the worldly existence. But the teaching of emptiness was also a disease that needed to be gone beyond once it had done its work. This is sometimes forgotten. The Buddha did not teach nihilism. Sach Khand and Sat Lok are eminently real, but cannot be imagined, or barely even conceived.
Ishwar elsewhere states:
"The stage at which the Ego merges with its Totality is in the second region of the Universal Mind [Trikuti, lower Brahmand]. There one is alone and "indifferent"! Most Yogis, Yogeshwars and other practitioners of various types of Meditation have thought that to be the Highest level of Consciousness! Only Perfect Living Masters have taken us beyond that stage to pure Spiritual realms where the Bliss and Happiness is incredible!" (117)
This characterization might be said to be similar to "the ‘night’ of indifference before the positive event of satori" spoken of in Zen.
Ramana, it must be noted, was of the view that all types of experience are unnecessary - even while many of his disciples had all sorts of classic yogic and mystical experiences in his company. He also made gentle fun of those of his disciples who wanted to see “the light of a million suns.” Brunton called that "the penultimate experience." A rare yogic text called it , great as it was, "maya". Interesting, isn't it, that Maharshi made fun of what most Sant Mat disciples would die for, and what, in fact, sound a lot like descriptions of Sach Khand! Ramana also said that one could not really say it was not light, however, that the metaphor was appropriate, but it was the (ordinarily) unperceived light that lights up the understanding.
The highest mystical experience is generally considered in the standard yogic literature to be nirvikalpa samadhi (samadhi without form, the source of subjectivity), with anything perceptible still in the realm of the psychic or subtle. Thus Sach Khand is described as fountains of light or an ocean of light would not be “spiritual” in this traditional understanding. It is described in Sant Mat as the "full effulgence of the light of the Creator." Yet it is not Atman as traditionally defined, which is without visible attributes. Sach Khand and maybe even Anami has at least one attribute, that of infinite light. Kirpal Singh once did mention, however, that the description of Sach Khand as being that of millions of suns, etc., was in fact an allegorical description, but the question remains, is it realization of Atman, and, if not, what is it?
The Theosophical schema, in addition to various subplanes in the astral world, outlines seven sub-planes in devachan, the lower four constituting the mental plane, and the higher three the causal plane. In Sant Mat, the soul is free of birth and death when it reaches the super-causal plane, where only a thin layer of the anandamaya kosha is said to cover the soul. After that is Sach Khand, or Sat Lok. As mentioned, Dr. I.C. Sharma called Sach Khand “the office of the Master”, and Param Sants are said to go higher, to Alak, Agam, and Anami. There is no doubt that these planes are intoxicating compared to ordinary life in this sublunar earthly sphere. However, while Sach Khand may possibly be beyond a so-called cosmic dissolution and grand dissolution of the lower created worlds, as these masters teach, it, once again, seems at least paradoxical to call it spiritual, in a philosophical sense, inasmuch as there is said to be light and sound and visible beings there, living on their “dweeps” (islands) and enjoying nectar, as the Sar Bachan of Soamiji says. We cannot ignore what Anthony Damiani emphasized, that “no amount of superlatives” will take away from [the] fact that if there is a perceiver and a perceived there, it is not the Reality." No matter how intense and high the bliss and ecstasy, these must be gone beyond before the Soul as consciousness in itself is realized. This at first glance seems not to be the case in Sach Khand, but perhaps not. If one considers Sach Khand to be a profound re-birth into non-dual realization, where one is 'beyond' the so-called three bodies, mind and maya, and if this 'perception' of infinite light is similar to what is described in Buddhism, i.e., a pure spontaneous 'Sambhogakaya manifestation of the Dharmakaya', with non-separate souls dwelling in unity, then the word spiritual could be used. The words "spiritual planes" is then valuable within the sense it is used in Sant Ma, so long as it is held in perspective. In Buddhism there is, in fact, mention of glorious Dharmakaya realms, where only buddhas and bodhisattvas of the highest realization may dwell.
Yet, once again, the highest mystical experience is supposedly beyond all objectivity, as the realization of ultimate subjectivity, and can then, it seems, only be found in the Sant Mat experience in the Anami state or region - ? - if that is understood and experienced as beyond subject/object distinctions as nameless and formless would seem to imply. Some in Sant Mat, in fact, feel that not only is the Radhasoami state higher than Anami, but that it itself is just the beginning. Anami and even Radhasoami are described, however, in terms such as "the wonder region," into which, according to Baba Jaimal Singh, Sawan Singh's Guru, the gurumukh disciple will "get merged", which, however, is supposedly beyond subject and object. This is a contradiction only if we are talking about a separate ego that merges into God. But we must remember that here we are talking of a process of the Soul, which is eternally in unity with the divine One, and not that of an 'ego-soul wanting to 'save' itself. There is also a ‘death’ as the emanant of the Soul quits each inner plane. Even the mind is transformed until it is said to merge, or appear to merge, in the universal mind in Trikuti. This is a radical insight and requiring a radical shift in one’s view of the world and sense of identity. Ramana, however, called an approach of assuming the reality of an ego-soul that gets purified to finally enjoy or even get merged with an Oversoul or Paramatma a "deceitful stratagem," but, Sant Mat would then ask, was he talking about the true soul? Here is what he said:
"...devotion is nothing more than knowing oneself. The doctrine of Qualified Monism [i.e., Ramanuja] also admits it...Their traditional doctrine says..that the individual soul should be made pure and then surrendered to the Supreme; then the ego is lost and one goes to the regions of Vishnu after one's death; then, finally, there is the enjoyment of the Supreme (or the Infinite)! To say that one is apart from the primal Source is itself a pretension; to add that one divested of the ego becomes pure and yet retains individuality only to enjoy or serve the Supreme, is a deceitful stratagem. What duplicity is this - first to appropriate what is really His, and then pretend to experience or serve Him! is not all this already known to Him?"......"all lokas, even Brahma loka, do not release one from rebirth. The Bhagavad Gita says: 'Reaching Me, there is no rebirth...All others are in bondage'...so long as you think that there is gati (movement) - as implied in the word gatva (having gone to) - there is punaravritti (return), also. Again, gati implies your Purvagamanam (birth) What is birth? It is birth of the ego. Once born you reach something; if you reach it, you return, also. Therefore, leave off all this verbiage! Be as you are. See who you are and remain as the Self, free from birth, going, coming, and returning"....."People would not understand the simple and bare truth - the truth of their everyday, ever-present and eternal experience. That Truth is that of the Self. Is there anyone not aware of the Self? They would not even like to hear it (the Self), whereas they are eager to know what lies beyond - heaven, hell, reincarnation. because they love mystery and not the bare truth, religions pamper them - only to bring them around to the self. Wandering hither and thither, you must return to the Self only. Then, why not abide in the Self right here and now?" (118)
Still, the soul remains unsatisfied with this analysis of Sach Khand. Nirvikalpa samadhi, as previously noted in Part One, can seemingly be had on any plane, and would not be equivalent to either reaching Sach Khand or Anami. Faqir equated it with maha sunn, but that does not seem to cover its highest expression, such as in the realizations of Sri Ramakrishna and other great Hindu saints. Moreover, we have the unique quote of Sri Atmananda about the devotee, “even in the nirvikalpa samadhi of the jnani, being blessed with the Form of his Master, and sending him even beyond SatChitAnanda.” A special Form in “formless” Nirvikalpa Samadhi! That is a wonderful confession, and leads one to ponder a great mystery. A similar gem mentioned in Part One when discussing the Master's Form was Sri Ramakrishna speaking of 'eternal forms'. We repeat his statement here:
“God has form and He is formless, too. Further, He is beyond both form and formless. No one can limit Him…Through the cooling influence of bhakti, one sees forms of God in the ocean of the Absolute. These forms are meant for the bhaktas, the lovers of God. But when the sun of Knowledge rises, the ice melts; it becomes the same water it was before…But you may say that for certain devotees God assumes eternal forms. These are places where the ice doesn’t melt at all. It becomes like quartz.” (119)
“Eternal forms” - sounds much like Plotinus’ depiction of the Intelligible Realm, given earlier. Logically it doesn’t make sense, but to the Heart it resonates. So may it be that our thinking about these things may be too rigid and linear? If, as Ishwar Puri stated , we eventually come to realize that everything that has ever happened has happened in Sach Khand, and if the true perceiver in any realm is not the senses or mind, but the soul, then in some divine way the soul, divested of all vehicles, adjuncts, or ‘coverings’, could ‘see’ ‘things’ in Sach Khand. Such as a “tree” in its real being, and so on. The soul in its essence could see essentially. Or “hear” essentially. “Sar Shabd” thus makes sense. It is no doubt a wondrous realm.
The very way Sach Khand is described is paradoxical, and our language is a poor gauge of reality, in the final analysis. Sach Khand, as a divine realm where souls see by their own light and recognize other souls and their Creator, is very much like the following description given by the great Sufi, Ibn Al ‘Arabi:
”A final spiritual intuition will show you our forms manifest in Him, so that some of us are manifest to others in the reality, know each other, and distinguish each other in Him. There are those of us who have spiritual knowledge of this mutual recognition in the reality, while others have not experienced the plane on which this occurs. I seek refuge in God lest I be of the ignorant.” (120)
And also by Plotinus, on the realization of the Nous or Intellectual Principle, the image of which is the Soul:
“in the Intellectual World everything is transparent, and all the essences see one another and interpenetrate one another in the most intimate depths of their nature.”
"A blissful life is theirs. They have the Truth for Mother, Nurse and Nutriment; they see all things: not the things that are born and die, but those which have Real Being and they see themselves in others. For them all things are transparent and there is nothing dark or impenetrable, but everyone is manifest to everyone interiorly and all things are manifest to the most intimate depth of their nature. Light is everywhere manifest to light. There, everyone has all things in himself and sees all things in others, so that all things are everywhere and all is all and each is all, and the glory is infinite." (121).
Zen Master Dogen said, "Unwise people think that in the world of essence there should be no bloom of flowers and fall of rain."
So maybe there is a paradoxical dualistic/non-dualistic form of seeing there after all?! Damiani, in Living Wisdom, argues, using Neo-Platonic terminology, that in the dimension of Divine Intellection“ (celestial reasoning”, or the “archtypal world”) while there is in fact a content there is no subject-object relationship. Here one knows by being. In terms of inversion this comes after the various levels of mentation, after the witness self, but before Nirvikalpa. This suggests something like the way Sach Khand is portrayed: no subject-object but still having a content.
Another way of looking at the notion of seeing in a so-called “spiritual region” is as follows. Again we refer to Ramakrishna. He is famous for saying “I see God as clearly as I see you.” This could be taken in two ways. One, the lesser, is seeing the objectified vision of ones Ishta inside or outside, which becomes animated and talks to oneself. This is not likely what Ramakrishna meant, but it refers to what is commonly called the “Interior Word” in mysticism. For most, this phenomenon does not go on forever, but only for a time in his inward development. However, in Sant Mat it is said one may have contact with ones inner Master like this more or less perpetually at some stage. This has correspondence with the Divya Chakshu. Ramakrishna said, ”When the disciple has the vision of the Ishta, through the Guru’s grace, he finds the guru merging with Him.” (Ibid, p. 1014). Of course, that is a wonderful experience. A question is, however, is the ‘merger’ real? Or only apparent? What merges with what? More on that below.
The second meaning, and according to some the greater, would be “seeing” with the eyes of faith or the deeper intuition. This is correlated with the Jnana Chakshu, or the “eyes of the Heart.” Ramakrishna said:
“Faith is the one essential thing. God exists. He is very near us. Through faith alone one sees Him. (122)
This is central to Christian mysticism. Through faith alone one sees Him. Seeing on the highest planes is then not seeing with the senses, even with the inner senses, in an objective manner, but rather, subjectively, intuitively in the highest sense - something like seeing by identity or by being. [With the exception noted above about “Eternal Forms”!]
The psychologist C.G. Jung went to see Ramana once. He made a comment about how with Bhagavan we have a perfect example of the progression from the mysticism of Ramakrishna (“seeing God”) to the jnana of Ramana (finding out “who” sees?). Ramana put him in his place and forcefully told him not to say that, for “what was there that Ramakrishna did not know?!”
I know some will say, “well, Ramakrishna was just a Yogeshwar and he didn’t go beyond Brahmanda, etc. etc., so what did he know?” - all I can say is “jeeeesh!” In my opinion that is just an example of “giving something a name and immediately dismissing it from your mind,” as someone [Herbert Spencer?] characterized worldly knowledge or ignorance. In other words, it isn’t an explanation based on real investigation or deep thought - in my opinion, of course. Ramakrishna was a great soul who inspired millions and still does today.
Finally, as mentioned the idea of pure subjectivity (antardrishti) is an advance over seeing objectively as in visions (whether inner or outer), but is still a pointer to truth. The truth is beyond both objectivity and subjectivity. “The true seeing,” says Sri Siddharameshwar, “is to ‘see’ oneself as God.” (123)
His disciple Sri Nisargadatta simply stated:
“There is no such state as seeing the real. Who is to see what? You can only be the real - which you are anyhow.” (124)
While we are on the subject of Sach Khand, Sat Lok, or Sat Desh, a note may be in order here on the cosmological of Sant Mat. That is an area of difficulty in comparing it w with other systems, inasmuch as Sat Desh is said to be both an eternal realm, yet also a created one. This seems impossible, and it is, certainly to the mind. How then can it be? And the companion question arises, when was it created, since eternity is prior to time? And then also, when did souls fall from Sach Khand? And the answer can only be: never, or, Sat Desh is eternally created within the Absolute, and the so-called fall of souls is an eternal perpetual process that never happened in time. Now, does that help? Thank you!
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
A debate on “merging” - Adyashanti versus Darshan Singh; What merges with what; Commentary on Anami, Amrita Nadi, Soul, and Self; The importance of language
Adyashanti argues similarly to Ramana:
"The taste of no separate self is totally liberating. "No separate self" does not mean there is a spiritual experience that goes something like, "I have extended myself infinitely everywhere, and have merged with everything." That's a beautiful, wonderful experience for a separate self to have, but that's not what Oneness is. Oneness is not merging. Merging happens between two and since there is only one, then any experience of merging is one illusion merging with another, as beautiful and wonderful as that experience may be. Even when I experience having merged with the absolute, with the infinite, with God, it simply means that my fictitious self has merged with another fiction. Mystical experiences aren't enlightenment." (125)
"The merging experience is very pleasant and very beautiful, and you may or may not ever have it. If you have a particular type of body-mind, you might experience having it every five minutes. If you are another type of body-mind, you might have it every five lifetimes. It means nothing whether or not this happens or how often... I have met many people who can merge at the drop of a hat, and they are about as free as a dog chasing its tail in a cage. Merging has nothing to do with being free or actually having any idea what Oneness really is...Oneness simply means that everything is the One. Everything is That, and everything always was That. When there is a very deep knowing that everything is One, then the movement of the me trying to find a past experience ceases. Movement is cut off. Seeking is cut off. The seeker is cut off. Realization cuts everything off all at once...Every experience that you will ever have is the One, whether that experience is merging or having to go to the bathroom. Even when it's beating a stick on the floor and saying, "This is it. This is the Buddha. This is enlightened mind. It doesn't get more enlightened than this!" It is all God.” (126)
Sant Darshan Singh, by contrast, described his ultimate experiences in the following manner:
"He has taken me above body consciousness...to the higher planes, leaving the stars, the moon and the sun behind, making me one with him in his radiant effulgent form. He has taken me into moments of eternity; beyond the limitations of time and space, and then, giving me a glance of love, a boost...he has taken me...into the highest realms of spirituality. On the way he has introduced me to the various Masters who have blessed this earth since time immemorial, and arranged for our conversation. We have conversed in a language which has no tongue...no words...no alphabet...in a language which is eternal. We have conversed in the language which was in the beginning..which was made Word, in the language which [divine] lovers even now speak. This is the language which will continue to the end of all time...And after taking me to our Eternal Home, Sach Khand, he has taken me to higher realms known as Agam and Agochar, those regions which are fathomless...beyond human imagination. And after that we reached Anami, the ultimate vast region which has no shores...no limitation...no name..." (127)
"We cannot possibly reach our goal of union with God without the help and constant guidance of an Adept. The distractions and pitfalls that line the way are unsurmountable, and one would be lost a thousand times even before one crossed the first inner plane. But the Guru's task does not end even after the soul has realized its own essential divinity. He takes us to the region known as Sach Khand, or the True Home. Here the soul comes face to face with its Creator and is finally in the realm of the Absolute, the Unchanging Permanence. From now on the spiritual journey is the story of progressive merger, to a state where the creature cannot be said to behold the Creator for they have at last become one. Such indeed is the inner journey which the spiritual Adept makes possible and which he enables us to traverse successfully." (128)
And from Sant Kirpal Singh:
"The soul has been imprisoned for ages and it is only through the kindness of the Master that it can be released. There is no other way." (129)
On the other hand, Sant Darshan said:
"Properly understood, our surrender to and ultimate merger in God is not a denial, rejection, or annihilation of the individual self. Rather, it is an affirmation that the macrocosm is in the microcosm, and that however limited we may believe ourselves to be, we are, in reality, infinite and eternal." (130)
So perhaps this metaphysical divide is not insurmountable, but the two experiences do seem quite distinct.
Perhaps Anami is the same as the Self of Ramana, or the Absolute of Nisargadatta? Anadi said that when Ramana realized the Self he actually realized the Soul. For him the Soul and Self are two sides of the same coin, the Self being the ground in which the Soul exists. Adyashanti once said that the Self for Ramana was really the no-self. But we have seen that for Siddharameshwar the realization of the ‘I Am’ is itself the realization of ‘no-self’, or ‘no separate self’, and that that is not yet the True Self of Self-Realization. He even characterizes it as a "parasite on the Pure Nature of the Self." (131). This was the state of the Buddha for many lives before his Enlightenment. In classical Vedanta this is sometimes referred to as MoolaMaya, or the Primal Illusion. Not ordinary illusion, no, that is forgotten and left behind (perhaps, in Sant Mat, after the stage of Maha Sunn). It could be then that Maha Sunn is the macrocosmic equivalent of the 'black hole' of causal unknowing/darkness prior to the super-causal clarity of the "I am Truth' identity. But a further, ’forgetting of the ‘forgetting’ is still required. All of one's hard-won spirituality must be let go. But who will do it? The I Am is indeed a liberation from ignorance, but not yet the Self or Absolute. Another step is needed. Perhaps this is a stroke only God can make, or, perhaps, someone with an extreme rational consciousness that can see beyond the bliss of the mystic states. One does not become bigger; if anything one becomes smaller, even nothing, and beyond. A hard sell, 'tis true, but the final trajectory of a soul willing to “give up God for God’s sake,” as Meister Eckhart put it.
For what it is worth, and not to be accused of unjustly singling out Sant Mat, Sri Siddhadameshwar also loosely used the term “merging” for the final step. As did his disciple, Sri Nisargadatta. Although the latter qualified this by saying that technically speaking there is no merger or re-uniting of a person with the self, because there is no person. The person is only a reflection in the mind of the I Am, a mental picture given reality by conviction, and has no being of its own. It is really only by dispensing with and ‘voiding’ this imagined inner self that one realizes the Truth. The question then is if there is a real journey with a real merger or only an apparent one? In the final analysis it may not matter, perhaps, but in preliminary stages it will affect how the path is conceptualized.
If we wish to say that at some stage the soul merges with all souls, or merges with God, then we need to be able to define our terms. For instance, Faqir Chand said he was a bubble of consciousness. A bubble, as discussed in Part One, has spatial dimensions, which consciousness, by definition, has not. So this metaphor is meaningless. If we wish to say that we merge into something, we had better know who and what we are first. Further, just because we feel we are mystically merging into something does not mean that that is what is actually happening. Maybe the situation is more like this: what you thought was yourself was not true, and you really experienced the merger with or recognition of your true self, or soul, not necessarily God or all other souls. There may be a paradoxical recognition of oneness, as well as further deepenings, but not 'things' to be merged into each other.
These penultimate and ‘ultimate’ stages are spoken of in many traditions. Here is a Zen equivalent, perhaps, I wonder, of the ‘throne’ in Sach Khand experience, for example, as well as a ‘final’ step:
“You experience great liberation, and without producing a single thought, you immediately attain true awakening. Having passed through the gate into the inner truth, you ascend to the site of the universal light. Then you sit in the impeccably pure supreme seat of the emptiness of all things...You cause all beings, whether ordinary or sage, whether sentient or insentient, to look up to the awesome light and receive its protection.
“But this is not yet the stage of effortless achievement. You must go further beyond, to where the thousand sages cannot trap you, the myriad conscious beings have no way to look up to you, the gods have no way to offer you flowers, and the demons and outsiders cannot spy upon you. You must cast off knowledge and views, discard mysteries and marvels, and abandon all contrived actions. You simply eat when hungry and drink when thirsty, and that’s all.” (132)
That’s all, except maybe, a life dedicated to service.
But see the problem? It is so important when discussing these matters to have a clear understanding of the terms involved, for at least that way one has a fighting chance, and that, unfortunately, is not the case much of the time. Hopefully other minds, other lights, will clarify and augment our feeble attempts to advance this conversation.
And as for the Amrita Nadi associated with the intuited causal heart-center on the right, spoken of by Ramana Maharshi, perhaps it is not necessary for all to experience it. Some teachers, such as Sri Nisargadatta - and even Ramana - have said so. But it sometimes manifests when one successfully tracks the ‘I’ to its source, felt as a terminal bend of the sushumna back from the body and the entire chakra system into the deep Heart. Is it the only way to Truth? Some advaitins think so, at least regarding the ‘I’ part. They may say, “nobody in Sant Mat wakes up,” while the satsangis of Sant Mat feel, “those advaitins are stuck in the mind and do not go deep enough" - even though proper self-enquiry has nothing to do with thinking, and some do go deep. Perhaps penetrating the 'heart-lotus of the Sants', the agya/ajna chakra or eye center, can, with a Sant’s grace, lead to the same realization, albeit in a different way or by a different route? The section, ”Kundalini: Up, Down, or ?”, found in Part One explored this in much more detail. For now, this excerpt from Ramana Periya Puranam should help allay some worry one might have over whether he is lacking in the correct and necessary experiences on the path:
"1942, a Tamil scholar had a lengthy and detailed discussion with Bhagavan on the amrita nadi, believed to be the nerve associated with Self realization. Bhagavan showed interest in the discussion and answered all the pundit’s questions, giving a detailed description of the functions of the amrita nadi. Nagamma felt out of place as she did not know anything of the subject matter. After the pundit left, she approached Bhagavan and began to ask him about what was discussed. Before she could complete her sentence, Bhagavan asked, “Why do you worry about all this?” Nagamma replied, “Bhagavan, you have been discussing this for four days; so I thought I should also learn something about it from you.” Bhagavan answered, “The pundit was asking me what is written in the scriptures and I was giving him suitable replies. Why do you bother about all that? It is enough if you look into yourself as to who you are.” Saying this, Bhagavan smiled compassionately at her. After another two days or so, there was once again another dialogue on the same subject. This time Bhagavan said that it was only a notion, a mere concept. Nagamma intervened to ask whether all matters relating to the amrita nadi were also only concepts. Bhagavan replied emphatically, “Yes, what else is it? Is it not a mere notion? If the body itself is a notion, will that not be a notion as well?” Bhagavan then looked at Nagamma with great kindness. That very moment, all her doubts were laid to rest. In narrating this incident, Nagamma wanted to make known how important it is to go back to the source when spiritual doubts arise." (133)
Aadi offers what may seem to be a solution that will satisfy the bhaktis and the gyanis, or advocates of both the 'Soul' and the 'Self'. He states:
"In transcendence the soul merges with the universal self - individuality dissolves into the ocean of universal being. To realize the state of oneness is to transcend self while remaining an indivisible part of that realization. Though dissolved, the soul continues to exist, but now in a new, transcendental way; the beloved allows her to return to a state of conscious unity with the undivided whole so that she may continue her everlasting evolution as an angle of perception within that unity. Oneness is not an inert entity, but the eternally recurring reunion of the soul and her creator within the space of totality, an everlasting journey of love and individual expansion into the divine reality...The soul in transcendence no longer owns her individuality - it is owned by her creator....the soul no longer knows herself by her presence but by her absence." (134)
The methodology given at the outset in Sant Mat appears dissociative, as if it teaches only inversion as the goal. However, this may only be temporarily so as it is also the case in other oriental paths, where reunion with the subjective essence by separating from the gross plane is the initial attainment desired. Then one is supposed to integrate what he previously detached from into a higher synthesis with the ultimate transcendental or universal I Am, the infinite Subjectivity of the One. Aadi recognizes this progression:
"The outer world is not outside the universal I Am, but contained within its boundless space of pure being. Since creation dwells within the universal subjectivity of the self, there is no way to experience oneness with the external reality unless one becomes unified with the inner realm and the soul."
He says that, therefore, in initially creating and stabilizing a state of presence or conscious awareness, or depth of being, one may feel more dissociated than when he started. Thus he teaches in somewhat of a traditional manner. There are other paths that do not each this way, claiming to be able to realize the ultimate reality without such a depth of meditation. Aadi and Sant Mat, and sometimes but generally PB, do not feel this is possible. In any case, the 'natural state' is boundless, with no 'in' or 'out':
"Because the natural state is not external to the one who knows it, there is no movement of energy and no direction of absorption. Natural absorption is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. It is not within or without, up or down, here or there. In natural absorption, no one is absorbed into nowhere. the natural state just is. This stateless state is neither the soul nor the beyond, but their undifferentiated unity." (135)
Some teachers of Sant Mat say that this discrimination comes automatically as one progresses on the path. Yet this does not appear to be universally the case. If we keep in mind, however, as Paramhansa Yogananda pointed out, that 'within' the Holy Sound, so to speak, lies the 'Christ Consciousness', or the consciousness of the Soul, then this may in fact be so. If we recognize this, we will not get lost in the mystical states as being objective to our essence. This is an important point, and holds the difference from 'relatively enlightened' mystical experiences and 'unenlightened' ones. Aadi further says:
"It is the evolutionary level of intelligence that inhabits the inner state that determines whether its experience is translated as personal or impersonal. A seeker in touch with the light of pure subjectivity will recognize the sense of I Am inherent in the inner state, while one unawakened to the soul will experience the state beyond the mind as an external, objectified space of abidance. Without the consciousness of I Am to illuminate it, the inner state is no more than an empty shell." (136)
This would account for the trouble with the correspondence between the two initiates mentioned earlier over their inner experiences. Both were clearly not in touch with the I Am principle, which is consciousness of the soul and not just the inner experience.
In other words, as Ramana pointed out, listening to the sound is good - and we add that the shabda-brahman can be considered a liberating presence within relativity - but listening is better with vichara or inquiry, as that keeps one conscious along the way. This does not mean the traditional shabd yoga practitioner must or should do mental inquiry along with his concentration practice, for that may hinder his absorption. It is only suggested that at intervals in such a process, and especially during the day, contemplation/inquiry in all its aspects is a useful accompaniment to meditation in order to both develop discrimination and the ability to stay in touch with the I Am, the true soul principle, thus avoiding the pitfalls of ordinary mysticism which objectifies its inner experiences and also finds a great divide between the world and the spirit. This is not always a problem in Sant Mat; it is, finally, a matter of the evolution of the practitioner. For in the final analysis it is not the experience one has, but the one having the experience and the understanding of the experience that are of primary importance.
And, for our pondering, Sri Nisargadatta said when asked “what is the final understanding?” “The final understanding is that there is no final understanding!
The branches among Sant Mat, as mentioned, have sometimes been divided on whether Anami is the highest realm, or whether there is something beyond, called “Radhasoami”, “Dayal Desh”, etc., which may or may not be a region, per se. This is where there is a lack of preciseness or limitation in the language used. Some of this may be unavoidable, yet if Radhasoami is not a region, but a more universal, transcendental realization, similar to that described by sages like Ramana Maharshi or the Buddha, beyond even a formless state represented by Anami, then it should be made explicit. It may not matter much to beginners but overall it is important. And perhaps not all Sant Mat masters have attained the highest philosophic realization, but only the highest mystic one, which is not the same. Even in cases where they have, because so much theologic tradition has been built up around Sant Mat, it might not be easy for the gurus to teach differently, even if they have the radical insight, without challenging the faith of thousands, if not millions of disciples. And perhaps they help more people by simply teaching the way they do. Perhaps it is more practically effective to teach an initial dualistic search, with more advanced instruction demonstrating higher stages of the path being given by those of their gurus with the specific capability. But, as Kirpal Singh was fond of quoting from Socrates, “I love Truth more than Plato.” At some point, Truth is better.
In one passage Sant Darshan does speaks more radically about the true condition of the soul:
"If we think that the Master is in one physical location, that is the most erroneous way of looking at things. The Master is always with us. He is nearer to us than our throat; he is within us. He is within our eyes; he is within our forehead; he is within every pore of our body...The Master is with us all the time. We are caught in the tresses of the beloved and we cannot wiggle out of them. We cannot even move our finger we are so tied up in our Beloved's tresses. Only if we look inside ourself will we find our Beloved master with us. Our Master can even be with us physically all the twenty-four hours. He is not gone. He has not left the earthly plane. He is here - now! [words similar to those of the dying Ramana Maharshi: "where could I go? I am here."]... We should call him from the core of our heart. He has not gone anywhere. He is with us; he is within us; he is without us; he is in every pore of our body. He enlivens us in our voice; he is in our breath; he is in our looks; we only fail to perceive him...Be one with him and he will be with us all the time. There is no magic in this room. It is only the oneness of our attention." (137)
And, interestingly, Sant Rajinder Singh recently has also appeared to modify the language of Sant Mat to move one step closer to the advaita or non-dual position, as well as that of modern science. While touring Budapest in 2007 one woman expressed that when she sat for meditation she sometimes felt afraid. The Master responded by saying that we often feel fear because of the language used such as “rising above body-consciousness.” The words, he said, do not clearly define what is happening. The spiritual regions are going on concurrently with this physical region. We are not rising “out” of the body, he explained, but are "tuning into different frequencies." This is a radical departure from the explicit message in all of Sant Mat to date, whose appeal to suffering seekers is exactly that the soul does rise out of the body, 'exactly as at the time of death', with the ability to return guaranteed because the 'silver cord' mentioned in the Bible remains intact, etc.. But if we are just tuning into different frequencies, then what if, in any moment, we choose not to tune in to them, or just to stay tuned to this one, are we not then still who we are? So the question then becomes, "what is the problem?"
Ishwar Puri teaches that we should understand that Sant Mat uses stories that are not to be taken too literally in order to speak on things that really can't be described. Thus, he says, it is not that there is really a 'journey', or a 'one' who is making that journey, but in the beginning we cannot understand things except in a human manner, and the saints indulge our ignorance. At some point, however, we find that all of the drama of creation and the soul's experiences have taken place within Sach Khand, and when we 'reach' Sach Khand we actually find we are only awakening from a dream. In this he sounds very much like advaita andthe current non-dual teachers. Brunton would say that there is an eternal aspect ofSoul, which he termed the Overself, which never incarnates, but which puts forth an eminent of itself that goes through all the realms of experience, and upon enlightenment it is this eminent re-unites with its eternal parent, the Soul. This Soul, being beyond the mind, or time and space, can never actually go or journey anywhere, such things being only apparent. So one can see such language is a concession to our limited understanding or point of view.
One can then see a difficulty faced by a traditional sort of Sant Mat teacher. If he, in this instance, is trying to tell someone that 'we' are really not a 'something' that goes anywhere, but that 'we' only deepen in the experience of more and more dimensions within our self, then the traditional teaching as given might lose its comparative uniqueness. And for some people that is very threatening. Moreover, saying that we are really not leaving the body but 'tuning into different frequencies', still leaves unanswered the more basic question, " 'who' is doing the tuning in?", as well as "then what's wrong with this dimension?" Without resolving that question, say the gyanis or sages, self-understanding has not yet occurred and the potential for fear will remain, as well as the possibility of misunderstanding one's experiences. If this is answered according to advaita, it will be argued that in fact there is no 'separate one', no fixed entity, to tune into anything (and also no fixed entity that is born or dies), in which case the motivation to meditate in this specific manner itself is called into question and needs further consideration: what is the goal one exactly is trying to achieve? This is now not so clear. Is this ascent a necessary and direct means to enlightenment, or, as traditions such as advaita would argue, are the practice and samadhis only preparatory, in some cases, to prepare, clarify, and sharpen the mind for direct inquiry into the Self?
If there is no leaving, or no one who leaves, the body in meditation, then is there any one who leaves the body at the time of death - and does this also need to be understood in a radically different way? Thankfully this matter is eventually taken out of our hands. Non-dualist or not, a power takes the soul out of the body at death. The teachings of the advaitists purporting to speak from the position of absolute truth, however, often even deny incarnation itself, and speak radically differently about death and the state of consciousness of an "I" after death - or in life, for that matter - some denying it any intermediate reality at all. There may be limitations in their point of view, which they will admit is not for beginners, but what they say must be considered. If the Masters say that the body is just a thought, or perception arising in consciousness, however, which even the language, "we are not really rising out of it", suggests - or at least is compatible with - then the concept of "leaving" the body would also need to be re-explained, and the books possibly re-written, a difficult and perhaps thankless task for those charged with upholding a tradition with countless followers at many levels of understanding. This issue of leaving the body has been discussed in detail in Part One when comparing the nature of the centers or chakras in the body and brain with the planes of creation and the terms used in Sant Mat as compared with other yoga paths. And also extensively in Part Two when discussing the planes of creation and what happens after death.
Sant Mat is a bhakti path, and few may be interested in questions like these. Just sit in the silence, receive the love, and don’t worry. I pray for a cool breeze from the Masters to soothe an overheated brain, and I, too, wish above all for pure love...But such questions have been around in some form for hundreds of years and will not go away. They are not mere mental hair-splitting but inquiries that affect the very means, intention, and understanding of one's sadhana and the guru-disciple relationship. If the soul or power of the soul called the attention does not really rise up and leave the body during meditation, but only appears to do so, then what is the meaning of a heart-felt statement like the following from Kirpal Singh, quite representative of traditional Sant Mat, "You cannot imagine with what longing the Master Power awaits you at the eye focus ready to receive you with open arms" ?
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
Kal - psychological, allegorical, philosophical perspectives; Is Kal the Demiurge or not? What is it and what does it represent? “Sophia's Passion: Sant Mat and the Gnostic Myth of Creation”; Kabbalah; Rajinder Singh on Kal; Increasing non-judgmental presence liberates karma and transcends ‘Kal’
Sardar Jagat Singh said:
"Even the devil [Kal] can do nothing to a man so long as he can laugh."
We might very well stop right here, with laughter being one of the highest spiritual practices one can have, but as Kal is a central figure in Sant Mat theology, with much confusion - if not outright craziness, or, perhaps, goofiness - that this will be a major discussion in our book.
In the article “Sophia's Passion: Sant Mat and the Gnostic Myth of Creation” (138), my friend Neil Tessler, within the framework of Sant Mat, attempts to explain their teachings within classic creation stories wherein the realms of creation allotted to “Kal”, the negative power (himself an eternal emanation of the Sat Purush or creator God, actually said to be “created out of the finest hair of the Sat Purush”), are lower than the highest, uncreated Heaven of Sach Khand. While Kabir's Anurag Sagar (139) is very interesting, lyrical and enigmatic, it is debatable whether it should necessarily be a taken as a metaphysical and literal description of conditional and absolute reality. It should be mentioned, however, that the renown saint, Sawan Singh, considered Anurag Sagar as essential for understanding the difference between Sant Mat and other paths, so its reading should not be lightly dismissed - at least not yet.
Tessler writes:
“The several creation myths developed by the Masters serve to describe the relationship between the Absolute in its non-attributive formless essence, known in modern Sant Mat as Anami or Radhasoami, and its manifested attributes. As Kirpal Singh has written, "In one there is always the delusion of many, and the totality does signify the existence therein of so many parts. The ideas of a part and of the whole go cheek by jowl, and both the part as well as the whole are characterized by the similarity of the essential nature in them.”
“The essence of a thing has its own attributive nature and the two cannot be separated from each other. Just as the essence is both one and many, so is the case with its attributive nature." [Kirpal Singh, The Crown of Life; A Study in Yoga]
“These attributes first appear in their purest and most realized form as the primordial "creation", known in the East as Sach Khand or in Gnosticism as the Pleroma or Fullness, (terms which will both be used synonymously throughout this paper). Creation is, however, a misnomer, for Sach Khand is not created as such, but rather it is the expansion into distinct being of the eternally perfect and fully elaborated attributes of the Absolute. [Good, this is in alignment with the Neo-Platonism we introduced in Part One] These cosmic attributes are known as the Sons of Sat Purush in the East and the Aeons in Gnosticism. Sat Purush or the Only-Begotten is the Aeon that is the Being, the mind, as it were, of the Absolute; pure consciousness and consciousness on all planes, thus also the bridge to creation proper. As Hans Jonas has written,
"The Only-Begotten Mind alone, having issued from him directly, can know the Fore-Father: to all the other Aeons he remains invisible and incomprehensible. 'It was a great marvel that they were in the Father without knowing Him.' (Gospel of Truth 22.27)”
“The number of these eternal emanations of the divine varies according to reference. The gnostic version described by Hans Jonas gives four Aeons with their consorts to make eight, "the original Ogdoad", who then further elaborate to make another seven pairs for a total of thirty. The Kabiran version gives sixteen with Sat Purush being the first emanation.
The myths now run in two distinct directions, at least in the gnostic forms. The Kabiran version and one gnostic version tells us that there was an Aeon that cherished a desire for its own creation as an inherent part of its nature. We could say that the potential for separation from God is in itself an Aeon. This leads ultimately to a creation existing in negative polarity with eternal Sach Khand, spinning the attributive universes that exist in Time. This separative Aeon, known as Mind or Time (Kal), is Sat Purusha's first expansion in the gnostic version and fifth in the Kabiran version. Kabir's Anurag Sagar states that "He is created from the most glorious part of the body of Sat Purush". Thus Sat Purush is cosmically linked to the "lower" creation, which eventually develops through Kal's activity. In this we are warned away from value judgements, and reminded that this entire process is under Divine Will (Hukam).”
This last statement is important, because how many nevertheless do think of Kal in value judgements? But how can this be the true perspective when one has realized Oneness? One answer: It is the paradoxical nature of reality. As Rabia of Basra said, however,
“In love with God, I have no time left to hate the devil; My love to God has so possessed me that nothing remains but Him.”
Here is an illustration where the editors or assistants working on Kirpal Singh's book, Godman may possibly have stretched a bit to maintain the traditional dualistic negative power/positive power dichotomy. One must keep in mind that Kirpal Singh wrote this book, as a devotional gesture to his guru, Sawan Singh, when he was still a disciple, twenty or more years before he was a Master, although it was not published until 1967. Speaking in glowing terms of the oneness of the Master and God or God-Power and how such a state is possible, Kirpal states:
In discourse 7 of the Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna thus sets to rest this question:
"Not knowing my transcendent, imperishable supreme character, the
undiscerning think me who am unmanifest to have become manifest.
Veiled by the delusive mystery created by my unique power,
I am not manifest to all; this bewildered world does not recognize me,
birthless and changeless."
Then he writes:
"Blessed indeed is the man who is ready for immediate transformation into God, for to such an individual he at once reveals his Godhood; as Krishna revealed his oneness with Kal to Arjuna..." (140)
Krishna, previously implied to be one with God, is here relegated to the lesser avataric status or "oneness with Kal" the negative power as considered within the Sant tradition. All very confusing. Explainable, no doubt, but still confusing - certainly for a Hindu who would consider Buddha or perhaps Christ or even Ramakrishna to have been avatars. I am certain that Kirpal or his editors had sound esoteric reasons for using this phraseology, but in any vision of Oneness, whether it be the ‘oneness’ of the soul, or the ‘oneness of the ultimate, "Kal” must be taken back into one's being and no longer projected outside. It must, however, be kept in mind that Kal is not really claimed to be a person or being, i.e., Satan, but a principle, yet which can apparently manifest in form. Kirpal once said in Heart to Heart Talks that Kal was just a name for the “outgoing power.” As such it would be the manifesting or projecting power of God, and as such how could they be characterized as bad? It would have to be morally neutral. Exclusive identification with that aspect might be considered negative, but that is another matter.
Ishwar Puri in shorthand fashion basically agrees with Tessler's account by saying that Kal is not an individual entity or personality like us, and does not have a soul, but Kal as "time" is a creation of God (Sat Purush) to make the experience of the three lower worlds possible. This is a story, too, with inherent problems like all stories, such as God creating a 'thing' called time, how and why, but at least it seems on the right track rather than personifying it as evil. As we will see in the section "Karma and Grace," in reality most teachers take as their final stand that there is only One Power, not two. Moreover, actions of cause and effect (Karma), and Divine Mercy or Grace (Karam) are intimately connected and made as one by the mere reversal of two letters.
Judith Lamb-Lion, initiate of Kirpal Singh, described a mystic encounter where she met a personification of Kal, who "was black and had feathers. She removed a feather and saw light and God behind him and no longer was afraid." This is also essentially what the Tibetan Book of the Dead tells one to do: recognize everything as a projection of one's own mind. This non-reactivity and acceptance must be habitually practiced every day, however, to be effective at the time of death. What this all suggests is that the dualistic vision of the cosmos, described metaphorically in many spiritual and religious teachings, is ultimately to be transcended. Yet within relativity, up to at least the causal plane, it is said that respect must be given to the polarity of positive and negative powers. Yet for the initiate of a Saint there is no reason to fear. The key is, however, as Zen Master Dogen wrote, to strive to always be in the non-dual state:
"Birth and death continue and both are within samadhi. There is endless sight and sound...All are part of the constant movement of the Sea of Truth..If someone does not know that everything is in samadhi, he cannot understand the fundamental Truth. Therefore the power of the devil was destroyed." (141)
The more positive aspect of the Kabirian myth is where the aeon Kal is not inherently evil or sinful. This is in contrast to many of the early and very dualistic Gnostic renditions in which the Demiurge (in Judaism and Christianity sometimes equated with the creator god Jehovah in the Old Testament) which created the lower worlds is indeed an angry, even evil god, and from whose power and evil minions one must escape into the realms of light or original Pleroma. The nature of the Demiurge and man's "Fall" into a world of matter is explained differently in various traditions, but in the end none of the stories are totally satisfying or complete, with many unexplainables remaining. One version has Sophia, often described as an emanation of eternal light, an "immaculate mirror of God's activity," and as "the spouse of the Lord," being cast out of the Heaven as a result of her desiring to "know" the Father, with her very desiring giving birth to the god who created the material world. Although she was restored to the Pleroma, parts of her divinity were left behind in that world, which required a Savior to restore them to the native state of light beyond ignorance. Thus, for the gnostics, salvation was not primarily from sin, but from the ignorance that was the cause of sin. And the source of this ignorance was the evil creator god created by Sophia's desire to know the supreme transcendent God. Thus the desire for knowledge becomes the source of ignorance! One may well ask, is this believable? How can a mortal human verify any of this? And how to choose between alternative views?
Nevertheless, for Kabir and Sant Mat, while Kal is not an evil creator god, power is granted to him as a concession for his penances by the Sat Purush [one so silly as having stood on one leg for many aeons] so that the cosmic play will go on for some time and souls will not immediately return to the Father as soon as they are incarnated for the first time, but be trapped in the lower worlds until rescued by the manifestation of the Positive Power, the Sant Satguru. How and why this play or process must happen at all is not made clear, and it might be said to be the weak link in the superstructure of the faith, as are all creation stories which presuppose someone being there antecedent to the creation in order to verify it. Why shouldn't souls return to the Father as soon as they incarnated for the first time? [Actually, in some accounts they did, but then something changed [a "Fall", as contrasted with a mere first exploratory"descent" without consequences] and then they didn't so return, after which a deal was made with Kal and Satguru regarding their fate. This "Fall" will be discussed much more in a later section].
One can see gnosticism in its varied forms is almost identical with Sant Mat "1.0." It is implied in Darshan Singh's going from "the earth-earthy to the "heaven-heavenly." It is valid, as no teaching that has been around for thousands of years does not have an aspect or perspective on truth. But is it complete and the entirety of truth for all times, and, for our purposes here, is it even the fullest expression of Sant Mat?
In non-theistic teachings such as Advaita (in sources like the Mandukya Upanishad) such cosmological theories of creation are not accepted at all, except as a temporary expedient for the ignorant. But it can be argued that they have their own version of Kal, being that of perceiving duality due to the arisal of a separative 'I'-sense. And the way out of this predicament can only be non-duality.
deCaussade writes:
"Who is Lucifer? He is a pure spirit, and was the most enlightened of all pure spirits, but is now at war with God and with His rule. The mystery of sin is merely the result of this conflict, which manifests itself in every possible way. Lucifer, as much as in him lies, will leave no stone upturned to destroy what God has made and ordered.”
But also:
"The soul in the state of abandonment knows how to see God in the proud who oppose His action. All creatures, good or evil, reveal Him to it."
"Of what use are the most sublime illuminations, the most divine revelations, if one has no love for the will of God? It was because of this that Lucifer fell. The ruling of the divine action revealed to him by God, in showing him the mystery of the Incarnation, produced in him nothing but envy. On the other hand a simple soul, enlightened only by faith, can never tire of admiring, praising, and loving the order of God; of finding it not only in holy creatures, but even in the most irregular confusion and disorder. One grain of faith will give more light to a simple soul than Lucifer received in his highest intelligence." (142)
Having said this, and before proceeding deeper into the mysteries of Kal, one may note that even St. John of the Cross appears to have presented a depiction similar to the Sant Mat version of the ‘deal’ cut by Sat Purush with the Negative Power about its function:
“God ordinarily permits the adversary to recognize favors granted through the good angels so this adversary may do what he can, in accordance with the measure of justice, to hinder them. Thus the devil cannot protest his rights, claiming that he is not given the opportunity to conquer the soul, as was his complaint in the story of Job [Jb. 1:9-11; 2:4-5]. He could do this if God did not allow a certain parity between the two warriors (the good angel and the bad) in their struggle for the soul.” (143)
He goes on to speak of warfare in various stages of inner contemplation, but ends by saying that when God communicates himself directly to that part of the soul in which he dwells substantially (beyond the senses, beyond visions, etc.), the devil has no power over the soul because he cannot discern what is going on at that level.
Another example of God’s justice mediated through a negative power is given by the spiritual director Guillore:
“The seed men sow in autumn needs winter’s frost and snow to prosper its growth, and in like manner the sharp biting chill of spiritual desolation is sometimes needed to preserve the precious seed of that Christian life which St. Paul says “is hid with Christ in God.” (Col. iii. 3). The special grace of this life is often concealed under darkness and dryness, which preserve him who possesses it from undue exaltation. St.Paul was himself an instance of this, for although caught up into the third heaven, and given to hear unspeakable words, he was “buffeted by a messenger of Satan, lest he should be exalted above measure.” (144)
One could read this to imply ‘Kal’ was trying to keep a soul down, but Guillore’s meaning seems rather that he was working along with God for the greater good of the soul. Because, “After all, that power was given by whom?” said Kirpal Singh.
The basic Kal story in the Kabirian version, adopted by some of the contemporary Masters, including Sant Rajinder Singh, is as follows:
”When Kal at some point desired a kingdom of its own, up to that point there were but two regions in existence: Sach Khand, made of pure spirit and Par Brahm or the supracausal plane, made of spirit with a thin veil of illusion as previously described. Both of these are beyond dissolution (pralaya) and grand dissolution (mahapralaya).* [Actually Mahapralaya because Pralaya refers to the lower worlds which were not created yet]. When Kal, the Negative Power (function or principality), as a result of great penances and pleasing Sat Purush desired his own realm, the three lower regions came into being. The purpose of Kal is to keep souls entrapped in these regions. To this extent, God granted Kal three boons: one, that when souls died they would not go immediately back to God - otherwise Kal's domain would soon be depopulated; two, souls would forget all their previous lifetimes; and three, that God would not do miracles to in order to make souls go back to God, but only by allowing His agents, the saints, agents of the Positive Power, through the process of satsang (discourses, fellowship, and spiritual transmission), reconnecting them with the eternal Light and Sound of God of which they had become unaware of. “ (145)
Nowhere does this say that Kal was the gnostic demiurge or evil god who actually created the lower worlds. Such a concept was, for instance, debated for a hundred years and renounced as heretical by the Church Fathers. Jesus Christ came to redeem rather than escape bodily existence, as the gnostics had taught, said Irenaeus.
Kal as characterized in Sant Mat, however, is not the Demiurge as defined in Neo-Platonism, the Kaballah, as well as Kashmir Shaivism. For Plotinus, to review, there are three transcendental or Primal Hypostases: One, Intellectual Principle, and Soul. There are many types of Soul, all rooted in the One and nested within the other. The Absolute Soul is the source of Life within the Being of the Intellectual Principle. Its emanation is Universal Soul presiding over the manifestation of universe(s), as well as individual or unit souls. As Universal Soul it is the Demiurge or Zeus (Jupiter) ("Guru" in Vedic astrology), also known as Providence, containing the divine archtypal pattern of the universe which it 'thinks' into existence. "Ordering all, governor, guardian, and disposer, possessor for ever of 'the kingly soul' and the 'kingly intellect', bringing all into being by his providence." (Enneads, iv.4.9) "When under the name of Zeus we are considering the Demiurge we must leave out all notions of stage and progress and recognize one unchanging and timeless life." (ii.4.10)
"Demiurge is Universal Soul, Soul of the Universe. Soul here is the principle of manifestation, and it is two-fold. On the one hand, it eternally contemplates the ideas or the wisdom of God, a timeless and abiding wisdom. On the other hand it organizes the samskaras or past traces of universal manifestation...into a basic or primitive plan of the universe to be. Plotinus refers to this vast and cosmic sweep of its intellectual fabrication as the "tentative illumining of matter" (vi.7.7), or the ground-plan of the universe to be." (146)
How could such a universal principle be bad? Even to simply call it "the outgoing power" seems to do us a disservice, inasmuch as the world is the primordial scripture, embodying the wisdom of the Principles beyond it, and whose existence is our hope of coming to self-knowing.
As mentioned in Part One, in Kashmir Shaivism the Demiurge is the Shabda-Brahman, the primal point or Bindu from which arise the manifest levels of the Word (vak). Does that mean that those who meditate on the five sounds and the five names are aligned with Kal, while followers of Kamal Dayal and Faqir Chand (and occasionally Soamiji and Sawan Singh and Ishwar Puri), who teach meditation on Saarshabd or the unmanifest Current of consciousness, the only ones aligned with truth?
Finally, in Kabbalah, the three Primal Principles of Plotinus can be correlated with Ein (the One), Ein Sof ('World Without End'), Ein Sof Aur ('World of Limitless Light'). From the last (the inner dimension of the Universal Soul) emerges a point of no dimension called the First Crown, the Demiurge, which manifests a series of levels of creation: celestial, empyrean, aerial, aquatic, and terrestrial according to Platonists, or the archetypal World of Emanations (Azilut, the fullest completion which is known as Adam Kadmon - the Primeval and Universal Man), the World of Creation (Beriah), the World of Formation (Yezirah), and the World of Effects (Asiyyah) in Kaballah. (S. Halevi, Adam and the Kabbalistic Tree (New York: Samuel Weiser, 1974) These would roughly correlate to the five planes in Sant Mat. Again, how could such a universal principle be a bad guy? Whether through thinking, imagining, or manifesting, the universe is a direct reflex of the Demiurge's inner vision of the Intellectual Principle or Nous. It is essentially through the Demiurge that the Void-Mind comes into form, and as all is rooted in the One from top to bottom, if we cannot yet appreciate the divine wisdom we can at least avoid value judgements?
What Rajinder says above is only that “three lower regions came into being” as a result of “great penances”, or what might be thought of as a mysterious deal between the Supreme and his own Kal. The teaching comes from the Anurag Sagar as well as Sar Bachan, is still basically gnostic, but Kal in this version does not create. But even If he did, he as well as what he would use to create with both come from a higher, Supreme Power, the ultimate "Creator" (One, not two), which only thickens the mystery of the story.
Kal, therefore, is one of those topics that on investigation has many layers. Kal is said to take many forms, but certainly can and does manifest as a personification. In the Middle Eastern religions Satan also has no fixed form. The name Kal in the Sant Mat tradition (and names and images of him will be related to cultures and traditions) means 'time' and is probably based on the experience that Kal has power over a person to the extent that they have karma (cause and effect is a time-based notion), unless they are free enough from karma that through an act of will/aspiration and/or grace, they are freed to move beyond the realm of Kal, which, of course, Kal does not have. Kal is said to have no power beyond the causal plane (or sometimes spoken of as MahaKal up to the supercausal plane) because this is where a level of dualism ends, an aspect of which is the distinction between good and evil, right and wrong. This concept is transformed in such a way in planes beyond that it no longer reflects a separation into such crude categories, which are not relatively wrong at the level in which they operate, by can be transcended if the consciousness is advanced enough. At this point, and with enough freedom from Karma, the individual can pass beyond Kal's dominion.
This can be experienced in various ways, including by the sheer power of a realization that transcends Kal (as long as one has also balanced enough of one's karma as well). Kal is said to be a stickler for not releasing anyone from his classroom unless they have paid their dues. Some even say he is still a bit resentful. One person described an experience in which he was was seeking to pass beyond him. He said he was rising up, but waves and waves of judgmentalness came down upon him, pushing him back. Then he realized he did not have to give into these beliefs, that he was unworthy, not ready, etc. As this soul force arose within him he ascended back and Kal then personified and confronted him face to face, much as described by Judith Lamb-Lion previously. He was very testy and demanded to know what he felt gave him the right to pass beyond him, as he was limited to this realm and had longed to be free of it for a very long time. This person said nothing but held his ground, his state of presence, and he dissolved and let him pass. In the next plane above there is not judgmentalness, within oneself, collectively or as a personified figure. Kal at this level is more like the notion of a wrathful deity, not one serving the dissolution of ego as in Kali. More like some of the Old Testament Deities. In this sense, Kal is fulfilling a natural function, embodying an aspect of the personification of karmic law. We say personification because some experience that there are other beings gradually taking over Kal's work on our planet. Enlightened beings who bring more compassion and wisdom to the dispensing of karma. Kal seems more like a kind of bureaucrat who plays it strictly by the book, does not care about the individual, does not care about the enlightenment of the individual or the world, but simply does his job. And it seems that he is rather impersonal in doing so, unless you try to get free from his realism, and then he can get jealous. At least that seems to be the experience of some.
Fenelon pointedly writes:
“Hear these things and believe them. This pure truth shall be bitter in your mouth and belly, but it shall feed your heart upon that death which is the only true life. Give faith to this, and listen not to self; it is the great seducer, more powerful than the serpent that deceived our mother.” (147)
“Self” more powerful than “Kal” ? Is that what he is implying? Something to keep in mind, perhaps, when we try to pass the buck for our problems. The ego is more dangerous than Kal. The mind, once bifurcated, dualistic, is no longer in ‘Heaven.’ It is the ultimate liar. Brunton writes, “It lies to itself, lies to the man who identifies with it, and lies to other men.” (148)
From my co-writer:
"One of the key aspects of passing beyond Kal, besides the Grace of the Master, which is the chief factor, is settling enough karma, which arise from judgments/desires/aversion, so that one's nature is beginning to be free enough from judgment so that one can rise above the Lord of Judgment. But also one's state of consciousness in that moment must transcend judgment to actually pass beyond. This can, of course, happen in two ways according to which style of practice one is doing (this is assuming that the main power of a moment of transcending Kal is not grace, which also can liberate a person at least temporarily, as in peak moment, but also permanently). But if at least part of the power of a path is the individual's own effort, then this must take the form of having the ability to enter a state of presence beyond judgment. This is one of the ways intuition is defined, as the next basic level of consciousness beyond the judgmental mind. This does not mean that intuition cannot 'evaluate' things. But this is done more holistically, with a great dose of understanding, acceptance and compassion. Anytime someone is expressing these qualities, they are passing to some extend beyond Kal, inner and outer Kal. In an inversion path, one uses method to move beyond judgment such as the sound current, inquiry, grace, etc. And one will experience this process as a liberation from a basic level of dualism, judgmentalness, and separation. If one is doing a practice like vipassana, even if ones eyes are open and one is just sitting on the couch, or driving a car, waking down the street, the context does not matter. If one can be very present (not distracted, day dreaming, anticipating), if concentration is strong but relaxed, and one is basically or fundamentally accepting of one's experience moment to moment, not wishing one was not experiencing what is there, a situation, a feeling, a memory, and so, then one is integrating a state of mind beyond Kal in one's ordinary state. It is really not that hard to do this for short periods of time, or especially when the contents of our experience are not too challenging - ones we are inclined to judge, such as pain, loss, mistakes, blame from others, and so on. Then our freedom from Kal is tested!"
"Also, even without these challenges, which varying in strength from person to person and moment to moment, to sustain this level of presence for increasing periods of time (not just a minute or two here and there) will cause all the karma that is unresolved in our subconscious and conscious mind to be stirred up to be released. Because all of that stuff was more or less created by judgmental consciousness/intentions and are incompatible to this state of presence. Also, we separate ourselves unconsciously from this karma by repressing it, which is also a form of judgment! So if we enter into a non-judgmental state of mind, even to a partial degree, our repressions will begin to be lifted to that extent, and the karma will begin to flow to the surface. If we enter into a fully trans-judgmental state of mind, our subconscious will become profoundly open, and we will be flooded with all our unfinished business. Most people have a decent amount of karma yet to resolve, so it would be overwhelming to release it all so strongly. So, they must not try to sustain such a profound state of presence to too great a degree or for too long periods of time if they do not wish to get swamped in painful karma."
"Developing increasingly non-judgmental presence liberated karma not only by de-repressing the subconscious/storehouse karma, but also by a mechanism whereby, as karma arises as elementals of desire, aversion, thoughts, emotions, judgments, attachments (they are all judgmental!), then these elementals get their life, their ongoing vitality to be active or become active again through the judgmental/desire energy that we charged them with in the first place, whether we created them consciously or unconsciously (which is most common). They will resurface periodically if they are active in this life to get recharged. If we experience them (as sensations in our bodies, emotions, desires or thoughts) and we remain aware and equanimous toward them, then they will fail to be re-energized, their vitality will be discharged and they will be neutralized. Even if our equanimity is not profound, they will be somewhat de-energized, and their vibrations upgraded according to the state of mind we had in that moment. Awareness and equanimity are key qualities, but these qualities are inherent in others as well such as forgiveness, compassion, love, surrender, openness. But often it is not possible for many of us to hold these qualities, but at least we can shoot for trying to be present, enduring our karma, and being as accepting as we can. Then we resolve our karma (and our relationship to Kal, if we wish to think of it that way) and by freeing our karma and cultivation non-judgment (however we approach that), then we move beyond Kal, whether we remain in this realm or not."
"When an individual is initiated, the masters said to be able to replace Kal's function as far as becoming responsible for the working out of one's karma. But that does not mean we are 'free to go'. The master must still basically abide by the rules of the game, as these rules are ultimately there not as reward and punishment, but to serve an educational process. Those who have more consciously signed on to a spiritual path and will share in the process or working out their karma can be 'transferred' to another system where the lineage of enlightened souls can take over from Kal's role, but with greater personalized skill, wisdom, compassion and grace. And, as our planet becomes more evolved, some say, this system will spread to effect more and more people, that a new order in this regard is being 'negotiated' in our times, and is one of the implications of a new level of planetary consciousness that is claimed to be emerging gradually at this time, if such is true at all. Kal will not get on board with that plan! Nor would anyone who really understands the beauty of the system. But it is natural for it to move from stage to stage, system to system."
"Now that we have discussed Kal from a more or less psychological and philosophical perspective, let us examine him/it from a theological/spiritual one. Many advanced systems of non-dual teachings like various forms of Hindu tantric lineages (Kashmir Shaivism, for instance, or Swami Rama's lineage), many forms of Mahayana and Vajrayana, Taoist schools, Shankara, and Blavatsky-Theosophy etc. embrace cosmologies that include various personifications of Cosmic Intelligences, including benefic and malefic beings. As a general classification, many traditions that would even be considered advaitists in particular and non-dual traditions in general embrace, on a relative plane, the undeniable presence of a 'negative power', although theories of what they are and their origin may differ. Namkhai Norbu, for instance, describes doing practices designed to ward off and neutralize 'Dark Forces', Yogananda told Kriyananda at one point that the Forces of Darkness were 'thinning the herd' (their sangha), which would leave a healthier, stronger group when finished. One can glibly say it is all one, there is not good or bad, but is that just incomplete non-dual philosophizing? Having said that, the drama between this type of polarity of light and dark, good and evil, does not extend beyond the causal plane. But below that it is a ‘relatively real' one and can't be ignored."
A letter (date unknown) attributed to Sant Kirpal Singh reads:
“Whenever Sat Purush (the Supreme Being) comes into the world in the garb of a Satguru to save the souls in their misery and trouble by giving them the secret of the True Home, Kal follows suit in different forms to mislead, so as to prevent an easy escape of the souls in his domain. His agents set up schools resembling those of Sant Mat, use similar language, and adopt similar terminology to ensnare the naive and unwary aspirants. Hence the need for great caution.”
So, are we to believe that Sri Yukteswar or Yogananda were agents of Kal? Or that Ramakrishna was only a ‘Yogeshwar’ reaching the causal plane, or an agent of Kal because in his youth he served in the Dakshineswar temple where goats were sacrificed? As if his later sadhana and realizations, his universal outlook and the inspiration of thousands, counted for nothing? I love the Masters of Sant Mat, but such talk among satsangis makes my heart weep. More than that, it feels torn in two. All this talk of Kal - these are my feelings only - seems to give the poor ego much too much credit in discerning the true from the false. Therefore, I pray to God, save us all, both saint and sinner alike!
Still, the issue is not settled.
“The truth is that on the basis of our labor alone we could not even find the living spiritual Master. It is his grace which brings us to him,” said Darshan Singh. In a similar vein Fenelon wrote, “We may be sure, then, that it is the love of God only that can make us come out of self. If you see his powerful hand did not sustain us, we should not know how to take the first step in that direction.”(149)
Some think that the more one gives weight to the thought of Kal, the more real he becomes. But if Kal in some way or another represents something that is relatively real, then ignoring it may sometimes be like seeing a truck coming down the street and thinking that if I don't feed the idea, it will go away. On the other hand, undo dwelling on these things, not to mention paranoia about them, or delusions of heroic participation in battles with them, are feeding or relating to the issue in problematic ways. The initiate has only to place his attention and heart with the Master, or on the Self, and then, for the most part, his days cavorting with Kal are over.
When one advances from what Brunton called the Long Path to the Short Path, which is at least similar to what Kirpal Singh juxtaposed as the path of self-effort versus that of self-surrender to the Master, one’s attitude and practice emphasis change. He is no longer based in duality, on the bifurcating tendency of the mind, but rather the force of his contemplation is on the One Reality. In his faith he is now no longer so concerned with lapses from the virtues, but rather focused more on the ever-presence of the divine. In this radical change his concept of “Kal” also necessarily undergoes a change. As PB writes:
“On the Short Path he does away with the duality of thought which sets up two ruling powers - god and evil, God and Adverse Force - and recognizes God as the real existence.” (150)
Thus, henceforth one only recognizes One Power and One Real World. In that world even what is called evil is only the servant of the good and therefore necessary. Sant Mat generally does acknowledge this and in so doing is consistent with other high teachings. The difficulty arises in personifying issues in a way that does not serve one, such as in claiming that “Kal” made a deal with the higher Power and became tasked with the role of keeping souls bound to the lower three planes, rather than emphasizing universal principles.
CHAPTER SIXTEEN
Shiv Brat Lal on Kal; An allegorical story
Shiv Brat Lal was one of the more philosophical among Sant Mat Masters, and leaning more towards non-dualism as well, although he was fond of telling allegorical stories albeit not without a sense of irony. In Light on Anand-Yog he wrote:
"So I give below, a story, which is an attempt in allegorizing the Truth in its closest form. Read it and turn it to your advantage. But read it rather carefully, without losing the sense that underlies it...They say in the beginning. Darkness and Light lived in conjunction, in unison, in coupling condition, undifferentiated. A natural agitation arose in the womb of this Unity and Darkness that enveloped Light, got separated. A Vapoury Substance evolved itself first, in the form of smoke and was followed by Light that came after it. You might have seen that when a wick soaked in oil is ignited with a match, smoke rises at first, and finds place in a dark and black globular form, in the ceiling of your house, when the smoke has risen up and got settled or seated above, the flash of Light rises in its turn, and gets attracted towards it, at the same time diffusing itself all around, why ? Because, no Light can live without Darkness. Their natural affinity hates separation. Now, the spirits that are embodied with gross Matter or Smoky substance, are called Demons, while the Spirits, embodied and in-cased with Light, are called Celestial Beings or Gods. The aggregate or collection of these smoky individuals is ‘KAL; SATAN, or IBLIS, or whatever name you may like only, do not lose sight of the sense. The aggregate or the collective individual- gods embodied in Life, is called God, the Supreme Deity of the so many so called religions. Both these elementalized entities are at war with each other, fighting for supremacy and quarreling for ascendancy. The Universe below is the field of these two natural Wrestlers, god and the Satan, and God, or rather the Spirit and Matter; and they know no rest till one conquers the other. The spectacles of the Universe are apparent proof of this eminent struggle. Go wherever you will, you will find this in born tendency of these striving, contending contesting and competing Rivals. At every step, when the Smoky Element is victorious, all is cloudy; and when the Luminous Element gains ascendancy, it is sun shine. Ignore it as much as you can, but ignoring it is only ignorance. When the stern realities of the Creation come face to face, the discrimination is gone and the result is pain. This state of affairs goes on from cycle to cycle. The Universal assailants never fail in asserting their rights in this Universal contest."
"Is this the Kingdom of the Real God? A sensible man is apt to put this questions to himself and to others. The answer to this question is always negative. Is it not enough that this should fill an enquirer’s mind with disgust? Either there is no God, or if there is one, He is believed or supposed to be always bent on enmity with Satan appears to be of revengeful nature and vindictive habits visiting the offending culprits with his ire from generations to generations. It is He that heap curses, scatters devastation, and creates havoc all around Still, the ignorant folks are prone to pay homage to Him, forgetting the lordly prayer of the Lord:
Our Father, Which art in Heaven, Hallowed be Thy Name, Thy Kingdom come on Earth, As it is in Heaven.” etc., etc".
"It shows that this God-aggregate of gods below, or the collective reservoir of creatures must be different from the One who is Father in the Heaven. He ought to be different either from this godly God or the demonic Iblies. Both seem to be mighty in this plane of existence. Have any one of you realized this and come to any satisfactory conclusion ? I doubt it. Now for the story.'
The embodied individual - spirit experience the painful perception of this warfare in the gross external world. He seeks rest in the world that is within i.e. the mental world inside. There also, He finds this pair of opposite combating side by side. For, the mental- world is nothing but the subtle form of the gross one as dream is of wakefulness. Then he repairs to the causal world to find momentary rest as has been represented by the state of dreamless sleep. He is compelled to descend again below, to meet with those painful experiences again and again, everyday, as we are habituated to do. The causal the subtle, and the gross are of the same spirit for, within an embodied soul, there is no rescue and nothing comes to its assistance. It is lost and doomed to perdition. That the same thing takes place within and without, is a fact which no amount of denial can prove untrue."
"Here comes the teaching of the Anand-Yog, to render him the helping hand in solving the mystery and advising him to seek the Real Kingdom of God-head elsewhere, different within and without, with different cause and its Effects...The contending gods thought within themselves: Let us sing the Udgith (the celestial song) or ‘Pranava the melodious tune sung by ‘Pran’ only). They repaired to the external and internal organs with the request of singing the song for them."
"The Tongue sang it. But it is prone to sing its own praise, depreciating and denouncing others. So did Eyes, Ears, Mind, Intellect, etc, etc, None of these are unselfish and so the Demons overpowered the gods thought this weakness of theirs; and the gods had to suffer utter defeat from them. Darkness overpowered Light, Ignorance prevailed and the victory was denied to them. Where there is selfishness there is no real godliness. The ears are in the habit of listing to their selfish ends, decrying other interests: the eyes are habituated to behold good for themselves and evil for others: the mind is accustomed to think of good for itself and evil for others: and so, one and all of them were routed and signally vanquished Retreat after retreat fell to their lot; till , in the end, they had recourse to ‘Pran’(the Vital- principle) and asked it to sing the celestial song for them. And when the Demons approached to crush it, they were dashed to pieces instead as clods struck against a rock crumbing and falling to the Earth. The Demons were frustrated and gods at last won the victory. For in ‘Pran’ there is no selfishness. It is not conscious of I, though, she, it , etc. For instance if a thief enters one's household the Tongue finds voice to proclaim his presence ; the Ear listens to the uproar caused by him the Mind thinks of catching him; and so on. But no such thing could be expected of the ‘Prans’. A thief may come or go. They manifest no consciousness of the thief 's presence or absence. It is why Light prevailed and Darkness had to bend its knees to it."
"Thus the story finishes. And it is left to you to think about the allegory. [Note: This story finds room in the old Hindi Scriptures Chandog-Upanishad, Vrihadaranyak-Upanishad etc. in indifferent wordings and different ways.]" (151)
"Good and evil, in reality, have no existence what ever beyond the plane of relativity and when relativity is gone both disappear at once. Man, from time immemorial has acquired the relative notion of good and evil; and it is not easy for him to wipe them out at once. Hence the ethical teaching emphasise the importance of good and evil and so we do here. God and Satan too, are ‘relative ’ terms. God is the affirmation of Reality and Satan is the denial of it. Affirmation is always accompanied by denial and hence the idea of Godhead in the ordinary religion is ever allied with the idea of Satanhood because they can never be severed…The object of ’Anand Yog’ is to translate or rather to transplant the kingdom of God on Earth, or bring it down on to the lower plane and make a man's life spiritual rather than mental or physical." (152)
Thus he is in agreement with the preceding quote from Brunton on there being in truth only One Real Power, while also acknowledging the need to nevertheless do good on the relative plane until one has gone beyond it. And "going beyond" results not in Nirvanic isolation, but in bringing the kingdom of heaven down to earth. He went far in his day in bridging the old to the new. A disciple of traditionalist Rai Salig Ram, he nevertheless enthusiastically supported iconoclastic Faqir Chand, and even wrote a book containing the latter's own sayings, entitled Faqir Shabdawali. Shiv Brat Lal said, "The happiest life is to be lived on earth and not in heaven. One who lives a happy life gains paradise on earth." (153)
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN
Kal and fear
“Hell is empty and the devils are all here.” - William Shakespeare, “The Tempest”, 1623
Here is one way of looking at the problem. Kal feeds on fear, and fear is probably the most fundamental or primitive emotion in the psycho-physical ego-entity’s history. And whether one pursues advaitic self-inquiry, or Sant Mat yoga/devotion, at some point he will have to choose whether to see Everything that comes his way positively or negatively. That is to say, ultimately, when surrender begins to mature, the sadhaka or devotee will acknowledge only One Supreme Power or Reality, at least as far as his own liberation is concerned. This is the fruition of faith. He won’t be always living in fear of tainting his personal spiritual progress. The Masters certainly don’t live like that. Indeed, how can one come to the universal view of seeing all as oneself if he is always concerned about saving himself from perdition or sullying his purity by, for instance, “looking into the eyes of others?” Others who may need to be recognized and loved. Few will deny this is a necessary for kids, but everyone needs it, is it not so? Yet many older, perhaps more fundamentalist and paranoid satsangis, not in bad faith but more from a deficiency in some of the teachings, turn the path into something bordering on schizophrenia. I know, and plead guilty of this in my younger years. But really, and for this I take full responsibility, and like Ramanuja without the fear of going to hell, it is almost insane. Moreover, how can one come to view the world from the position of the all-embracing heart if he is always concerned about avoiding the world and concentrating wither at the eye-focuser elsewhere? How can he face his fears, or surrender his fears, if he is hyper-vigilant about avoiding all to concentrate on the ‘spirit’?
I dare to say, and this is my feeling alone, that old Kirpal sometimes slung a lot at us to see what would stick, to see what we would buy, but hopefully in the end for us to see the futility of our own efforts not only to save ourselves, but of not recognizing that God is everywhere. While he did say “don’t look into the eyes of others,” he also said, “what you see is you.” These two statements are incompatible: if you don’t fully look at others how can one ever see them as themselves, or the One Self in All? How can one ever come to the point of seeing the world as ‘friendly,’ and of oneself as being in the lap of God, or as if in one's mother’s arms, instead of a stranger in a strange land where Kal lurks around every corner?! At some point, usually after many struggles, one gets tired and finds he must choose one or the other way of living.
The ego is an illusion fighting to survive - yes, even in its highest spiritual pursuits. It thrives on opposition, resistance, and its own points of view. If one can align with his Master without ‘hating’ or ‘fearing’ ‘Kal,’ then it will be easy to feel the Presence, the Self, but if not, then it becomes more difficult.
When one has reached the point of throwing in the towel of his search, what previously may have been seen as a trial provoked by Kal, for instance, is now viewed only through the lens of the mercy and justice of God. Satan, Kal, Mara, etc., are known as only real within relativity, and not of the Absolute. Which is why
“It has been said that awakening from ignorance resembles awakening from a fearful dream of a beast. It is just like that.” (154).
In practice, this means facing and letting go all of one's fears. Fear of Kal, fear of being lost, fear of not progressing, fear of going to hell, fear of not making it through a dissolution or grand dissolution, fear of coming back for another birth - the latter which even Ramana said was a sign of imperfection. Fear and the heart are incompatible. “Fear is the tool of a man-made devil,” said Napoleon Hill. He thrives on negative energy and lives in the hearts of people who fear him. To a great extent the degree one is motivated by fear is the degree he is ruled by Kal. With duality there is fear, and with duality perhaps Kal is inevitable. Therefore, seek Oneness and non-duality. We need to find this for ourselves. Gradually, and by degrees, as trust grows, we get there.
And now for real goofiness
We have gone within Sant Mat from an allegorical (Anurag Sagar) to a philosophical version (Shiv Brat Lal) version of the Kal story. Now here is one plum crazy. This is a perfect example of how cults feed on, and human minds gravitate towards, stories based on fear. Ishwar Puri says we should not take the stories told by the saints too literally. That they were only being kind. The problem is that these stories have promoted undue fear, cultism, and lack of discrimination. And, unfortunately they still do.
An extreme example is found in the Kabir Panth of Garibdas of the 18th century with current leader (and convicted on a murder charge) Guru Rampal Ji. This group has an even more divisive cosmology and creation story than Kabir’s Anurag Sagar. They believe, as many do, that their Guru and group are the only ones today in possession of the Truth. (A sect in Dayalbagh, mentioned in Part 1, has a similar claim to exclusivity, in their case being the only true successors in the line from Soamiji and Salig Ram, the latter as earlier discussed having proclaimed Soamiji an avatar and incarnation of the Supreme Lord himself). The Kabir Panth of Rampal maintain that Kabir is not just a saint but the Supreme Creator God, and, incredibly, “find” references to this in all the world’s scriptures.
At least Anurag Sagar merely claims Kabir incarnated in all four ages: the (most recent of the) Golden-Silver-Bronze-Iron ages; it doesn’t say every yuga since the dawn of this creation, or that Kabir was the Absolute Lord, the Creator himself. Anurag Sagar was published by the Sant Ajaib Singh group.
Sometimes strange and dark elements creep into a teaching when asserting and promoting impossible to verify, difficult to believe, and relatively crack-pot stories as the literal Truth. This Kabir group and its leader claim that Kal or "Kaal" is the actual being worshipped by the other Sant Mat groups as indicated by the first word in their Simran mantra “Jyot Niranjan”, which this sect says means "the light of the Devil" and the name of Satan or Kaal, and who are falsely leading their followers to Satan’s home, which is none other than Sach Khand! They even claim that Jesus was an agent of Kaal, as well as Muhammad. Kaal was also the serpent in the garden of Eden, as well as Mara the temptress for Buddha, and so on. They teach that the only mantra to use is "OM-TAT-SAT," not the five names in Sant Mat.
Jesus was alternatively considered at Beas during Sawan's tenure to be either a third or fifth plane adept. On this logic one might ask whether or not it was decided if he worked for Kaal or the Sat Purush.
In this goofy Kal story, however, whether in the original Anurag Sagar or the Kabir Sagar of the rogue Kabir Panth group, the ultimate sin of Kaal ends up being related to sex. It seems like nothing ever changes. Karl Marx, in fact, once said that if you want to destroy an institution, first saturate it with sex. Isn't that what we see so much of in our culture today? By the way, Marx admired Darwin, who called his own theories "the devil's doctrine." Nice bunch of guys.
To briefly summarize, Kaal, in Sar Bachan - which seems to borrow from the earlier story in Anurag Sagar - Kaal was “created from the finest hair of the Sat Purush.” Like Satan or Lucifer in Christianity, he was uncomfortable with his lot, and stood on one foot for many yugas as penance, and Sat Purush (or, in the Rampal version, the Akshar Purush or "Kavir Dev", the Highest God in Sat Lok) rewarded him with a boon of 21 Brahmands or regions (as yet still within Sat Lok). This was not enough for him and he did more penances for yugas and was again granted a boon. Kaal said he wanted souls to inhabit his 21 Brahmands. So the Lord asked souls in Sat Lok if they would like to accompany Kaal into these new creations. Some of them agreed. The Lord gave Kaal a young girl, Durga, in which he inserted the souls, to follow Kaal. But Kaal became, through his imagination, sexually attracted to her, created sexual organs for her and then planned to rape her, and because of this sin both Kaal and his 21 Brahmands “fell” and were sent down becoming the lower worlds and where he was cursed to eat 1.5 lakhs of beings each day, while creating 1.25 lakhs. Durga, who had shrunk herself and hid in Kaal’s stomach to avoid being raped, was rescued by Sat Purush, escaping Kaal’s fate of banishment. But the souls remained. This is a little like the Bible story of the Fall of both Adam and Eve as well as the entire creation, without the gruesome details of a Kaal eating 1.5 lakhs of being a day. A minor detail....
The details of this story vary, but this was said to lay the groundwork for the further deal between God and Kaal in which Kaal was allowed dominion over his own kingdoms, and souls were only allowed to escape his control through attending the satsangs of the saints.
Sar Bachan says that Kal was created because otherwise the Sat Purush would not be truly appreciated.
All of this allegory and amazing fairy tale of creation could be interpreted philosophically and metaphysically, such as Faqir Chand and Shiv Brat Lal did, and admitted to be a story, but then, where would be the fun of that?
The following account of Kal as Demiurge or negative creator god of the lower worlds is an example of to what lengths these stories can be stretched to satisfy the childish and fearful mind. Further, in my tentative opinion (for it is best to hold many of our views lightly), these tales seem to be rampant on paths that encourage exploration of the subtle, imaginative dimensions of the mind. They tend to keep the believing flocks in line. Of course, this is totally inappropriate any more.
“THE PLANS OF THE CREATOR GOD
"According to Gnostics, the creator god has many plans, which together make up his “grand plan”. This was the reason why he created the universe and man. To achieve his objectives he is going ahead with an evolutionary experiment in which the body, soul and the Spirit of man are taking part. He goes on practicing, trying things out, and if he succeeds he will extend the results to his entire created universe. If he fails, he will have to do away with this project and start again from scratch, as he has done so many times, to try something else again and again. The fact is that he will never be able to make a perfect copy of what he imagined is the unknowable world, which he tries to imitate in vain."
"Without a doubt, in this last experiment he achieved success which, although imperfect, has some value. After millions of years of fruitless practicing, he has within a few thousand years made a notable step in the evolution of his greatest work: man. After millions of years of evolutionary suspension in which the hominid man lived like just another animal, he has advanced more in the last 30,000 years than throughout all of history. Gnostics associate this mutation or “creation”, this great evolutionary jump, with the use of Spirits of the greatest purity coming from the uncreated world. The creator god modelled a body from the dust of the earth and, with his breath, gave it an animic element, the soul. To this soul, this breath of the creator, he affixed a Spirit, which was trapped through trickery and imprisoned against Its will in this satanic monstrosity of dust and breath: the body and soul of man. It is the divine energy of the imprisoned Spirit which impelled and continues to impel the evolution of the man-animal! And why does the creator want this being to evolve? So that it will transform itself gradually into him. That is why he made his precepts and commands. He wants man to transform into himself, the creator, to become the same as him. The body and soul would be very happy if this happened because they are part of the creator god. But the Spirit is not part of him; It has another origin and another destiny."
"As long as the Spirit is chained up, everything goes well, It impels evolution. But if even one Spirit frees Itself It disturbs the whole plan. That is why it is so important that the tyranny of the demiurge is absolute, and that all knowledge which could wake man up and make him remember who he really is, remains forbidden because it would be dangerous knowledge, so dangerous that it would be able to destabilise the plan of the creator god. According to Gnosis, only one Spirit which can free Itself would be able to weaken the whole creation and also weaken the creator god, preventing him from continuing with his plans. This Spirit would be a saviour, a saviour of the world and the other Spirits. It would favour the liberation not only of other men but of the entire universe, of the innumerable divine sparks coming from the uncreated and eternal world which find themselves imprisoned here, in this great blind machine, in order to make it work and evolve."
"This system, created by the demiurge, cannot function unless it possesses these particles of the Spiritual world enslaved, imprisoned here. Gnostics say that of all these Spiritual particles, those imprisoned in human beings are the most important in Spiritual hierarchy and purity. The demiurge created and assembled all this and encourages it to evolve. So that it evolves towards him, with the human being ahead. If the experiment with man fails, he will lay his hands on another of his creatures and try again."
"We have said that the demiurge wants man to evolve until he turns into him and becomes the same as him, so that every soul, or in other words his own breath, and everyone made of dust can return to him, transforming themselves into him. This is the final objective that the demiurge has for man...Because of all this, it is fundamental to the demiurge to keep the Spirit imprisoned so that he can use Its energy. This is why the demiurge needs man to remain half-asleep and confused so that man keeps on blindly approaching him, the creator, who lures him with tricks and punishment. For this whole system to work, man has to keep on believing that the creator is the only god that exists and that he is a good god."
"Gnostics maintain that if man evolves to the point where he merges with his creator, at that moment his Spirit will lose all possibility of freeing itself while this universe lasts.” (from the files of Jim Sutherland, source forgotten)
There is something in here for everyone. In Rampal Ji’s account even space aliens are agents of Kaal and working for this evil creator god. [In theosophy they even had a hand in making the man body in its final form, but this was not considered evil].
It hardly needs to be said that the above Gnostic account is a very negative view of humankind and the flesh, but characteristic of ancient cosmologies and creation stories where “spiritual” only pertains to the upper regions and the world is fallen and evil. But it is hardly the end of the bewildering messages in some of these teachings. It is easy to throw stones at such a Kabir Panth sect, but in a publication of the Beas group, With the Three Masters, the following stories were included for our amusement. As related by an initiate:
"The book covers the last years [1944-1948] of Sawan Singh's tenure as RSSB (Radha Soami Satsang Beas) guru. Sawan was well into his 80's and suffering from various health conditions. One has to admire his fortitude in continuing to travel about India giving satsang. On the other hand, there are Sawan's comments to consider. From them, I judge that he was either one of the most advanced mystics in India's history or suffering from dementia...We have Sawan declaring that a recently deceased Satsangi is in Trikuti and "doing well." Another Satsangi of note was, according to Sawan, fed 4 eggs by his relatives and, despite the aegis of the satguru, must take human birth again. And then, on hearing that a Satsangi committed suicide, Sawan observes that a suicide's soul is "upside down."
"We learn from the author that when a Satsangi is in his last moments, it is vital that all non-initiate relatives be banned from the sickroom, or else the ailing Satsangi risks taking a new birth in unfortunate circumstances. Rai Sahib Munshi Ram also tells us that it is important to remember that when we die, our soul has a choice of turning left or right, and voices that pretend to be divine will urge us in the wrong direction, with the disaster of chaurasi [i.e., "the wheel of eighty-four" or Hindu cycle of 84 lakhs (8,400,000) species of transmigration] the consequence. I thought the guru would come at the last moment and expedite the course, but apparently not" [It is possible that Munshi Ram misinterpeted the teachings, but on the other hand, this book was published by RSSB]."
"We get a touching story of how when a satguru chews the leaf of a tree, the soul in that leaf will assume human birth through guru's grace. Hence, that was why one of Huzur's Satsangis had a child who was born mentally disabled -- his soul was still in the wood stage. I'm not making this up, it's in the book."
The initiate concludes:
"I've long felt that Sawan was not all there in his last years. It's funny though that in the guru politics wars, no camp was willing to consider that even a possibility. I can understand why: if the guru is non-compos mentis, his authority to designate a successor is rather qualified. One, because his decision-making ability is suspect, and two, because when a leader is senile, his decisions generally come through his underlings."
Well, his is a sensitive topic! Many spiritual teachers have succumbed late in life to forms of dementia or Alzheimer's and other mental disorders. This does not necessarily deflect from their enlightenment, only their ability to perform various human functions, both physical and intellectual. The machine has broken down, that is all. Once freed from the burden of the physical body, their spiritual status may remain unaltered. And even in this case there can be lucid intervals and moments of competency. One of these was on his deathbed when Sawan gave Kirpal Singh a major spiritual infusion as reported by the latter. Yet in the days before that in the days before Sawan was agitated and in distress, saying only when someone competent in bhajan and simran stood by him would he be at ease. Are we to imagine him like Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane? Compare this with Ramana Maharshi, who when dying of the ravages of cancer was quite unperturbed. One imagines a sage will be like that, but perhaps it is not always so. There was also a famous photograph of Sawan a few years earlier standing with his thumb in his right ear. He mentioned that he did not have enough time for meditation. Was this all a show for his disciples, or something else?
Here there was also a matter of a legal will which supposedly gave Jagat Singh a clear title to being the successor. Kirpal SIngh claimed he had been given the spiritual transmission through the eyes and left to start his own group, Ruhani Satsang. The two sangats have been at odds over each other's legitimacy ever since. Interestingly, someone said or started a rumor that when Jagat Singh was dying Kirpal told him that Sawan would not come for him at the time of death, contrary to the promise in the Sant Mat teachings. I am inclined not to believe this story, and suspect it was a rumor by a partisan initiate with an axe to grind. It would have been a heartless thing to say, and Kirpal was not heartless. Second, what purpose would it have served? And third, even it were true, if Jagat Singh was not just a guru in name only, but actually an enlightened soul, why would he or any saint need someone to come for him to escort him past the clutches of Dharam Raj, the angel of death? When asked what happens to a sage or gyani when he dies, Nisargadatta said, “He is already dead, do you want him to die again?” For us, then, seems axiomatic that if we are still concerned with our fate when passing through the portcullis of death that we haven’t died the fundamental death yet that sages talk about, despite any mystic experiences we may have had.
One way or another, however, Munshi Ram's comments about being concerned with going left or right at the time of death seem confused, if the power of a Master on this path has any meaning at all.
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN
Kal and the Sant Mat conception of avatars; Inner planetary and cosmic hierarchy, or ‘Trans-Himalayan lineage’; Contrasting views on avatars within esotericism; Christ, Buddha, Blavatsky, Bailey
As the reader may or may not already know, in Sant Mat an 'avatar' is a manifestation of the 'negative' power, their sole job being to keep the lower realms of creation in balance and order. It is the Sants, the manifestation of the 'positive' power, whose job it is to attract and liberate souls. And because of this conceptualization, spiritual figures such as Ramakrishna are often relegated to a lower plane than that of a Sant. Or, as mentioned above, Krishna is considered to be an agent of Kal, and not the Supreme Lord as worshipped in Hinduism. But on inspection there are some questions with this Sant Mat distinction. Perhaps if one admits 'degrees' of avatars then the problem will dissolve. But for now consider. According to Pandit Arya (and others), there are two types of Avatars in Hinduism: direct incarnations of cosmic enlightened Beings, or reincarnating jivan muktas who, having attained union with God and are also now simply direct manifestations of God when they reincarnate, with no other purpose or will than God's. Ironically, that does not sound much different from the Sant Mat definition of a Sant or Param Sant! So the avatar business appears as possibly a straw man deal, where it is defined in a lineage's own way (not in line with the Hindu perspective) and then relegated to a lower status.
By the way, while many Christian theologians argue that Jesus Christ was not just some kind of “Hindu avatar," in my opinion they then go on to describe his descent and nature in terms nearly exactly like that of an avatar: that is to say, as the direct incarnation of the Deity itself, the Logos or second Person of the Trinity, without going through the normal processes of ensoulment and natural human birth like most masters do.
Continuing, the 'inner planetary and cosmic hierarchy', or 'Trans-Himalayan lineage' (i.e., Babaji, Koot Hoomi, Hilarion, Serapis, Neem Karoli Baba, Buddha, Christ, Sanat Kumara, etc.) also appear to define liberating self-realization as attaining the 'fifth plane' (depending on how one counts the planes), beyond the bodies, beyond time and space. Certainly then also beyond karma and Kal. So once again it appears inconceivable and absurd to believe the Sant Mat masters of the highest order do not understand and realize this. Furthermore, this was all talked about long ago in books like The Voice of the Silence in the context of using nada yoga to realize liberation as the 'atman', and so on.
But - not so fast! On closer inspection one finds this extreme dualistic conception of the cosmos in Sant Mat to be perhaps a provisional teaching. For instance, as mentioned above, Kirpal Singh did mention that Krishna was acting as an agent of Kal in his role as an avatar. Elsewhere, however, Kirpal said:
"When He [God] expressed Himself, from one He became many, and from the grand Sun in the Maha Brahmand came the Sound. This teaching was given by Ingris Rishi to the son of Devki, known as Krishna [as told in the Ramayana of Tulsidas, chapter called "Bal Khand"]...From the life of Lord Krishna we learn how he once jumped into the River Jamuna, where lived a thousand-headed poisonous snake. Lord Krishna won over the monster with the music in his flute, that is, the Music of the Spheres. It again indicates that to control the serpent-mind there is no other means than the Sound-Principle. The Lord is Soundless, but when He expressed Himself, this song came out of Him, and that Song will never cease." (156).
So here we find the implication that Krishna was a Master of the Sound Current. Is this a contradiction to the teaching that contrasts Sants and Avatars, or Positive and Negative Powers? Not necessarily. Sants and Avatars have different roles, but both roles are played by advanced, enlightened souls. Kirpal explains, "The Avatars themselves have a deep respect for the Saints, for they also followed a Guru, they also traveled the one path...Saints and Avatars respect each other, for both carry out the Lord's work in different ways. The Negative and Positive are both created by the one Lord...Both are necessary for the furtherance of the world's purpose..." (156) And, one may add, sometimes even by the same being! As Kirpal also tells us:
"The Tenth Guru [of the Sikhs - Guru Gobind Singh] played the role of a Saint and an Avatar." (157)
This concept is entirely in line with the esoteric teachings of an 'inner Planetary Hierarchy', in which advanced fifth-stage and beyond Masters, and beings such as Christ and Buddha, are said to hold prominent positions.
As mentioned in Part One, some branches of Sant Mat, specifically the Agra lineage descending from Rai Saligram (whom according to some sources Sawan Singh tolerated but basically disagreed with) assume superiority in asserting that, in fact, the modern founder of the Radhasoami religion, Soami Shiv Dayal Singh, was an avatar or direct incarnation of the Supreme Being, whom he called “Radhasoami”, and having no human guru. Whereas, in contrast to Saligram, Kirpal Singh sought to find the links of a continuing lineage, guru parampara or succession, from the Sikh gurus on to the present. Kirpal admitted he did not succeed in this, but the groups are still apparently divided on this point, although it seems a minor issue compared to the potentially greater error of asserting that God is a “Supreme Being” rather than the Principle of Being itself. This is not only unverifiable but carries a potential trainload of philosophical errors in its wake.
And, as mentioned in Part Two, in Sant Mat, Kabir is also considered to be an avatar, who incarnated in all four Hindu ages, based on the lesser known book of Kabir, Anurag Sagar. Yet Kabir is said to have only taught the Shabd Yoga in this (Kali) yuga, which would appear to possibly contradict the Sant Mat claim that "the Satguru is an incarnation eternally present on the earth" (unless, of course, the Satgurus taught something else in the other three yugas). Ironically, a minority Kabir sect believes that the Sant Mat gurus - even the ones who revere Kabir as a Perfect Master - are all agents of Kal!
In any case, there are a couple of different ways to look at the notion of an avataric incarnation. It need not imply a direct descent of the Godhead or of a Supreme Being itself as is commonly asserted in Hinduism (and Christianity). My co-writer addresses this issue. It gets quite esoteric:
“Christ lived before Jesus,” said Sant Kirpal Singh. It may be right that Jesus was an incarnation of the Christ-Logos, and, in contrast with the teaching system of traditional or exoteric Christianity, that there have and will continue to be other such beings, i.e., that Jesus was not for all times the only one. And moreover that also just because his was an already completed descent from above does not also mean his incarnate individuality was not also a reincarnating human being (a traditional distinction in occultism between Christ and Buddha). It has also been mentioned as a possibility that some jivanmuktas or bodhisattvas are given larger roles that are empowered by a co-incarnational process where a larger Being is also inspiring or empowering or even co-incarnating in the same body. In this type of 'avatar' (the other kind being direct single incarnations of greater Logoi - the level of realization is not necessarily more advanced than other bodhisattvas (or Masters) who simply reincarnate to serve. So, for instance, we cannot necessarily say that Jesus, or Christ-Jesus, descending from a higher plane and, as theosophy maintains, also from a more evolved planet, was therefore necessarily greater in absolute realization of truth than the Buddha. But his function and spiritual evolution were different. The level of development and type of soul chosen seems to relates more to the specific archetype that is being energized in human consciousness. By some accounts from advanced mystics, Jesus himself has now passed a ‘seventh initiation’ and become a planetary Logos himself. Frankly, I do not think this is an area that even fairly advanced masters seem to have much clarity.”
Certainly a handful, yet before dismissing it outright the reader may recall from Part 1 that there were historical links between Theosophical and Radhasoami gurus. Here is some additional interesting history of these early theosophical pioneers. Use your judgement and due diligence:
"Madame Blavatsky had the advantage of physically knowing many very advanced 'inner' and outer masters, mostly from central Asia [hence her work on "Esoteric Buddhism"; see also "The People of the Tradition"(http://www.mountainrunnerdoc.com/people_of_the_tradition.html], but also from Egypt and even North America, while Alice Bailey only met her teacher Kuthumi once, in the flesh. He came to her when she was fifteen. She was visiting her aunt in around 1895 in Scotland. As an evangelical Christian, it was unlike her not to go with her family to church that Sunday, but she decided to stay home. As she sat in the 'drawing room', the door suddenly opened and a very tall man appeared (Kuthumi - he took his name from an ancient Vedic sage, who he probably was), wearing a European suit, but darker skin and a Sikh turban on his head (he had been born into a Kashmiri Sikh family in about 1830). Kuthumi was said to have been Pythagoras, Nagarjuna and the fourth Sikh Guru Ram Das. He walked over to her (she was mortified), sat down and gave her a talk about the life work in service to humanity she was planned to do if she could get a handle on her personality, develop some character, etc. Then she could be of some use to 'the masters'. He then got up, said he would be in touch with her in the future inwardly, periodically, until it was time, and then gave her a powerful look before leaving. Of course, she hoped it was Jesus, but it wasn't until she was age thirty-five and had joined the Theosophical Society that she saw a portrait of him and realized it was the same man."
"A few years later she was sitting outside, and she heard a strong tone sound in her head, and then a voice, crystal clear, began speaking to her. He said he was assigned to work with her dictating some books, if she would agree. She refused! She told him she was a single mom with two daughters, and had to work, and could not afford to loose her psychological grounding and balance by becoming involved with such a thing. He said 'wise people don't make snap decisions - think it over and in two weeks I will check in again'. She forgot about it, but two weeks later he contacted her again. She refused once more. He said, 'why don't you talk it over with Kuthumi', who she was now in inner contact with at that point in her life. She took it up with Kuthumi, who explained to her that the person contacting her was his senior student and a master in his own right, and that she had been trained for this work in recent lives, so it would be much appreciated if she would at least give it a try. She consented to test it out - and found that the material was very good, so she kept going. She ended up writing eighteen books with 'the Tibetan' (as he was nicknamed), over twelve thousand pages, and another six books of her own. Another nickname the masters had for 'the Tibetan' was 'the disinherited', as they were goofing on him for having been disinherited by his father when he became a renunciate. He was also a lama in the Gelugpa sect, and his 'outer' work was being the abbot of a monetary, while also working for the higher masters behind the scenes. he worked mainly behind the scenes, but as known to thousands of Tibetans. The 'Tibetan' was Kuthumi's senior disciple, who he was training for what they called the fifth initiation, or Self-Realization during the 1880s (which is when he became a master - Kuthumi having been one for a very long time - perhaps over 1000 years). Jivanmukti in the Buddha's system was at the fourth or arhat stage. The Tibetan became a fifth stager in the mid-1880s. Kuthumi in that life was at the sixth stage, and had been for centuries. The Buddha is believed to have been at the eighth stage. Bailey was very clairvoyant, and the Tibetan would show her charts to her inner vision, which she would copy down. In her later years she was sometimes too tired to see these detailed charts clearly, and friends of her's testified that at these times they would see books materialize on her desk, then she would copy from them, and then they would disappear. Blavatsky had similar experiences which help dictate her writings."
"Blavatsky spent over two years in Tibet, living and studying with her master Morya, Kuthumi, the Tibetan, and the Mahachohan, who lived inconspicuously at Tashl Lungpo Monastery at Shigatse. The Mahachohan was a seventh level master who was the incarnate head of this sub-lineage (the Trans-Himalayan) of masters, which was a behind-the-scenes group of liberated bodhisattvas or jivanmuktis (fifth to seventh level adepts), the Tibetan being one of their newest members during that time period. The thirteenth Dalai Lama was aware of them, but only indirectly, as the Dalai Lamas tend to function more in an outer capacity. It is the Panchen Lama at Shigatse who was the esoteric head of the Gelugpa order, and he was a disciple of these higher masters, as was the Tibetan. The Tibetan was also known to others, especially folks like Cooper-Oakley and Leadbeater. In the early days of the Theosophical Society he used to materialize physically on the roof at Adyar (a flat roof with deck) to give teachings. Nicholas Roerich went to search for these masters in the 1920s and 1930s, but was told by lamas that he met there that though the presence of these mysterious higher masters, beyond the high lamas of Tibetan Buddhism, was well known to ordinary lamas, that they were no longer to be found as easily there, and that many of their retreats were now vacated."
"Alice Bailey suggested a composite theory among several conflicting theories (Anthroposophy, Rosicrucian, Theosophy) about the incarnation of the Christ, in which Jesus was both a reincarnating soul who had already achieved Self-realization and was being used by the Logos as an avatar to initiate Christianity. Some have said they have had confirmation of this view from a number of highly advanced inner masters that Jesus was both a jivanmukti soul who won liberation through reincarnation and also an avatar, co-incarnating the Logos. Daskalos believed he was a pure incarnation of the Logos without any human/reincarnating soul aspect. Rudolph Steiner held the view that Christ, a higher being, the solar logos, entered the surrendered body of the high initiate Jesus at the time of his baptism by John the Baptist, and also borrowing the "soul-sheath" (subtle body) of Krishna (!), in order to purify the karmas of the Earth which were hindering its further evolution. Bailey believed that a third presence was involved, that Jesus was also a co-incarnation with the Bodhisattva Maitreya, who formed a kind of intermediary/step down from the Logos to the earthly masters. Some disagree with Bailey on the point of Maitreya, saying he was not involved directly. What all agree upon is that something profound for this planet happened through the incarnation of the Christ."
"This early wave of transmission of eastern teachings was most powerfully stimulated by Blavatsky. She brought a taste of a highly esoteric version of eastern spirituality that was still very inclusive of the many traditions in which she was in contact with. Then later people like Bailey, Annie Besant, Steiner and others took up the work. In most cases, they shifted the vision to a Christo-centric one, partially due to that being easier for many Westerners in the early-20th century to relate to, but also because many of these souls, although having trained extensively in the East in previous lives, also typically had lives in the West as well, in which they were often esoteric Christians like the Rosicrucians. They had built up pretty powerful thought forms in their subconscious so that when they incarnated in the West this time to do this work, ended up giving a spin to what was often an inner, more Eastern inspiration coming from their inner teachers. So this first wave was not only tainted with that (which was not fatal, but limited the transmittal of the non-dual aspect of the secret teachings - which Blavatsky in fact admitted that she had not revealed, the time not being right), but also came during a time when little had even been translated yet from the East, and there were not many eastern teachers coming to the West, or westerners going there either. So the context of these early transmissions was much less informed, and less good training than that available today. The context is different now, so a better, more profound, transmission is possible, blending the best of the 'outer teachings', such as Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Sufi, Christian, with deeper, esoteric, emergent idea and teachings."
Dare anyone claim, without reasoned explanation, that "Buddhists only go to the third plane", or that all these high lamas and Masters merely worked for Kal, and only "we" or our group have the Supreme Truth?
CHAPTER NINETEEN
The Hindu conception of avatars and reincarnation; Brunton’s view; Avatars and reincarnation dissected; No one knows what an avatar is!; Meher Baba; Tenth Guru of the Sikhs; Lineage ego
The traditional view of a avatar is that of a direct emanation or appearance of the infinite DIvine (or part of a Trinity, be it Hindu or Christian) without there being any reincarnating human being. We have already seen, however, that many recognized avataric manifestations are not of this sort. But are there ever any? Paul Brunton strongly doubted that possibility:
"There is metaphysically no such thing as a human appearance of God, as the Infinite Mind brought down into finite flesh. This error is taught as a sacred truth by the Bahais in their Manifestation doctrine, by the Christians in the Incarnation doctrine, and by the Hindus in their Avatar doctrine. God cannot be born in the flesh, cannot take a human incarnation. If He could so confine Himself, He would cease to be God. For how could the Perfect, the Incomprehensible, and the Inconceivable become the imperfect, the comprehensible, and the conceivable?
Yet there is some fire behind this smoke. From time to time, someone is born predestined to give a spiritual impulse to a particular people, area, or age. He is charged with a special mission of teaching and redemption and is imbued with special power from the universal intelligence to enable him to carry it out. He must plant seeds which grow slowly into trees to carry fruit that will feed millions of unborn people. In this sense he is different from and, if you like, superior to anyone else who is also inspired by the Overself. But this difference or superiority does not alter his human status, does not make him more than a man still, however divinely used and power-charged he may be."
”Philosophy displaces the belief in Divine Incarnations by belief in divinely inspired men. Although it refuses to deify any man into being fully representative of the Infinite Consciousness, it affirms that any man may approach nearer to and be uplifted by that Consciousness."
"The popular Hindu belief that God reincarnates himself periodically as an Avatar is a Puranic one, which means that taken literally it is sheer superstition. If it is to be correctly understood, it must be taken as really being an oversimplification of psychological truth for the benefit of simple minds. Hence it is inevitably misleading if its surface interpretation is taken to exhaust its entire significance."
"If the Divine Essence could really subject itself to the limitations of human existence, this could only be achieved at the cost of impairing its own infinitude and absoluteness. But even to comprehend the hint of a hint about it, which is all that we may hope to do, is enough to show how utterly impossible such subjection would be. The notion that the infinitude of Deity can be compressed and contained within a special human organism is unphilosophical. Whether such an avatar be Krishna in India, Horus in Egypt, or Jesus in Palestine, there has never been any ground for raising one above the others, for the simple reason that there have never been any avatars at all. And if the doctrine of divine incarnations is irrational, the sister doctrine of predicted and messianic second advent is partly a wish-fulfilment and partly a miscomprehension. If a divinely inspired being first appears visibly in the flesh of his own body, his second appearance is invisibly in the heart of his own worshippers."
"The downfall of every faith began when the worship of God as Spirit was displaced by the worship of Man as God. No visible prophet, saint, or saviour has the right to demand that which should be offered to the Unseen alone. It is not true reverence but ignorant blasphemy which could believe that the unattainable Absolute has put itself into mortal human form however beneficent the purpose may be. The idea that God can enter the flesh as a man was originally given to most religions as a chief feature for the benefit of the populace. It was very helpful both in their mental and in their practical life. But it was true only on the religious level, which after all is the elementary one. It was not quite true on the philosophical level. Those few who were initiated into the advanced teaching were able to interpret this notion in a mystical or metaphysical way which, whilst remote from popular comprehension, was closer to divine actuality. They will never degrade the Godhead in their thought of it by accepting the popular belief in personification, incarnation, or avatarhood. It is a sign of primitive ignorance when the humanity of these inspired men is unrecognized or even denied, when they are put on a pedestal of special deification. The teaching that Godhead can voluntarily descend into man's body is a misunderstanding of truth. The irony is that those who try to displace the gross misunderstanding by the pure truth itself are called blasphemous. The real blasphemy is to lower the infinite Godhead to being directly an active agent in the finite world."
"Nothing can contain the divine essence although everything can be and is permeated by it. No one can personify it, although every man bears its ray within him. To place a limitation upon it is to utter a blasphemy against it. The infinite Mind cannot be localized to take birth in any particular land. The absolute existence cannot be personified in a human form. The eternal Godhead cannot be identified with a special fleshly body. The inscrutable Reality has no name and address. It cannot be turned into an historical person, however exalted, with a body of bones nerves muscle and skin. To think otherwise is to think materialistically. The notion which would place the Deity as a human colossus amongst millions of human midgets and billions of lesser creatures shows little true reverence and less critical intelligence.” (158)
Again, this clarification need not exclude unique forms of "Logoic" incarnation - although it might - but, only their exclusivity, absoluteness, or supernatural nature. Yet, how may we philosophically distinguish any purported form of avataric descent from the usual human process of incarnation? This, too, will be theoretical, but, still, we will try to form a reply. Compared to the multiple emanation material in Part Two this will be fairly simple! Keep in mind, however, that here we are taking a deep dive into relativity so take all this with a grain of salt.
The human being can be defined as having three dimensions. There is the "gross personality", built up during one lifetime, composed of the physical body, its life energies (pranas), and the lower intentional mind. This is the "John Doe" which does not reincarnate. "It dies and dies for good," as Sri Nisargadatta has said. Prior to this gross personality can be said to be the "deeper personality", consisting of the subtle and causal aspects of the being, and which may manifest in life as emotional and mental tendencies and traits that may even bear little resemblance to the parental lineage. This constitutes the character of an individual, which is the net result of many lifetimes and stored in what is largely the subconscious and unconscious of a person. In yoga terminology the deeper personality consists of the higher aspect of manomaya kosha as well as the vijnanamaya kosha ("buddhi" and the "I"-thought). As Ramana once said, "same ego, different body." But this doesn't mean one will be in touch with this level consciously. This is the antahkarana ("inner organ"), what might be said to be the true reincarnating entity (except it is not an entity, per se), but is really a changing or (hopefully) evolving matrix of tendencies and potentialities that seem to have a life of its own. This is also known as the karana sarira or causal body, the repository of the samskaras or tendencies or impressions from past lifetimes without number and from which a new person is formed in each lifetime in conjunction with the emanant of the Soul. In Sant Mat, it is said that when one reaches the causal plane, one can know their past lives, but, of course, when one has reached such an impersonal level these "lives" will not seem to be yours. Daskalos might have called this the "permanent personality," although it is not truly permanent, but linked with the downward or "demi-divine" aspect of the Soul it might be viewed that way, until one realizes Atman.
Prior to even the deeper personality, then, is the Atman, the Conscious Self, the higher aspect of the Soul, which never incarnates at all but is said to witness or oversee on a sutra-atma ("string of beads") a host of lifetimes. The enlightened being is said to have transcended exclusive identification with both the gross and deeper personalities: the physical body, the "psychic being", as well as the primal root of "I"-ness or egoity itself. If he incarnates again he is said to have to will it, but he maintains a connection to a deeper personality, and therefore we see Masters speaking of their past lives, and then, speaking from a higher point of view, denying any such thing! Ramana said:
"Reincarnation exists only so long as there is ignorance. There is really no reincarnation al all, either now or before. Nor will there be any hereafter. This is the Truth." (159)
To summarize, the Atman or Soul never incarnates, the person doesn't reincarnate, and what does reincarnate is not you. Understand? Of course not!
Sri Nisargadatta attempts to explain it this way:
"I do not say the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for a new person. The real takes no part in it, but makes it possible by giving it the light.” (160)
Is he right? Can we phrase it another way that might be compatible with emanationistic teachings of intermediate levels or planes, even 'plane-specific' karmas, and life on other planes? Even if such are not the Absolute? Possibly. He might be said to be taking his stand on the part of the Soul that never changes or incarnates, what Plotinus would call the Soul-in-the-Nous. It makes incarnation possible by giving it its “light“ while it remains forever unchanged, or, as Maharaj might say, remains as awareness even with the appearance of the 'I Am' of consciousness.
An avatar, in any case, defined in the extreme way would seem to have no deeper personality to connect with, having had no previous lives. Which again is likely why some postulate an avatar's need to "borrow" vehicles from others (with or without 'permission', according to various accounts).
It is entirely a separate issue whether someone who has had no Master (i.e., Shiv Dayal Singh, or Kabir) is an avatar. He may be one, or he or she may not. Moreover, one can be an avatar (however one defines it) and have had a Master. There seems no fixed rule. Let us summarize.
No One Understands What An Avatar Is!
In Hinduism avatar generally means a direct descent of God, apparently bypassing the need for a human soul. As we have seen through the eyes of Brunton, there are philosophical difficulties with that concept. In addition, various teachings strain our credulity when they argue that any one particular being, human or divine, was born fully enlightened. This does not seem to have been the case even with Jesus or Meher Baba, so why say it was so for Soamji? Anthony Damiani states:
"Anyone who is born into a physical body has to go through the search of finding himself all over again. Remember, the first link in the nidana chain is avidya [ignorance]. He has got to go into a physical body, he's got to to get acquainted with the brain, he has to go through the whole mess like everyone else. He may be perfectly aware of who he is and what he is until that moment when he is in the body. As far as I know, there is no awareness in the sense of an unbroken thread of continuity of Soul awareness. It's broken when you are born. Then you have to institute the search for self-discovery. In the case of a sage, of course, it's more immediate, and the prevalence is something that is obvious to those that are spiritually oriented. But everyone has to go through that. I might make the exception of the avatar, but I don't understand anything about avatars." (161)
Meher Baba said the difference was that an avatar was God-become-man in contrast with a PerfectMaster who was man-become-God. This is the standard distinction. But then it is idiosyncratically maintained:
“The Avatar, according to Baba, is a special Perfect Master, the first soul to achieve God-realization. This soul, the original Perfect Master, or Ancient One, never ceases to incarnate. Baba indicated that this particular soul personifies the state of God called Vishnu in Hinduism and Parvardigar in Sufism, i.e. the sustainer or preserver state of God. The Avatar, in Baba's testimony, appears on Earth every seven to fourteen hundred years and is "brought down" into human form by the five Perfect Masters of the time to aid in the process of moving creation in its never-ending journey toward Godhood. Baba claimed that in other ages this role had been fulfilled by Zoroaster, Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, and Muhammad.”
“The universal work of the Avatar has several levels of priority. Number one is to prepare his circle of 122 people for Realization, and then to give the Realization of God to these 122 people, and also to his very closest lovers. Number two is to give Liberation (Mukti) to many people, and free them forever from the rounds of births and deaths. Number three is to give a push to those in the inner subtle and mental planes, and they are of a fixed number. Number four is to take many people to the path of Truth, who thereby enter the planes. Number five is to awaken the whole of humanity toward the Truth of God's Existence. Number six is to give a universal push to all states of evolution in their progress toward higher evolutionary consciousness. Number seven is to allow new souls to enter the creation. In order to achieve all of this work, the Avatar has to remove binding impressions (sanskaras) from each individual, and therefore, he takes upon himself those divine free impressions (yoga samskaras) which remove the bindings from others.” (162)
Given that Meher’s view is that the Avatar was the first perfect master to attain God-Realization, it would not be confusing to find his definition of an avatar as one functioning both in the role as the restorer of righteousness as well as that of a perfect master such as in the Sant Mat tradition. But, even so, Meher Baba himself was not born enlightened and needed the help of Perfect Masters to (re) awaken, which in his adulthood he said took him seven years.
In contrast, as we have seen, Agra believed Soamiji incarnated with infinite knowledge and also "even from birth never went below the third eye.” This also implies Soamiji as an avatar not only bypassed the need for a human soul, and was not subject to the first link of the nidana chain - ignorance - needing recapitulation of his prior enlightenment. But is there any real evidence for this, or is it just unverifiable hagiography? If Soamiji, moreover, never descended below the third eye how did he get an education or later hold a job?
The concept of avatar, then, traditionally implies a fresh, direct manifestation of either God (i.e., Vishnu, Shiva, or, in the case of Christ, the Logos), or the Godhead (the Supreme, Absolute or One), meaning in both cases a being that had no prior human lives or incarnations. In some Hindu classifications even the Buddha is sometimes considered an avatar, but he spoke of his many many previous incarnations when even then he was “free of the conceit of a separate self”, but not yet fully enlightened. So here the use of the word avatar loses its more traditional Hindu-Puranic meaning. As we have seen, however, this may not be that important spiritually; for our purposes “a descent of something great” may be quite enough. Why then make it more - or less - than it is?
Sant Mat, then, generally can be said to speak of an avatar as a matter of function, and not of nature. That is to say, they say the avatar comes to restore order and righteousness, while the Sants come to free souls, but, again, one can be both at the same time (which Baba also said).
So it is all confusing, least of all in that there are several definitions and usages given to the term. And, on top of this, one might ask, where on the Avatar/Perfect Master spectrum are we to place the Tibetan teachings of multiple simultaneous emanations/incarnation of one self-identical being? Perhaps the process and teachings of enlightenment may, one dares to say, be evolving along with the cosmos and require new understandings and definitions of divinity and avatar to serve us in the modern era. Or perhaps "Everyman" is the new avatar with unique avataric work to do, each of us standing forth as consciousness with our own unique gifts to share. John Wheeler writes:
" 'Enlightened beings' are fine as far as they go, but they are still appearances that come and go in the only real light there is - your own awareness. People search for enlightened ones, not realizing that they could not even appear without one's own being. So being is the source." (163)
Here he seems to echo Sri Nisargadatta who said:
"Your own self is your ultimate teacher (Sadguru). The outer teacher (Guru) is merely a milestone. It is only your inner Teacher that will walk with you to the goal, because he is the goal." (164)
This is not to lessen the great teachers, but only to point one to the ultimate Friend that should not be forgotten. Sri Nisargadatta said there are many amazing beings who know many things, yet the gyani knows only one thing, but he knows it very well: the Self. In our search for the Avatar or Great One let us remember that without which they could never be known. It is not far away. Brunton adds:
"For practical purposes he is an emissary of the Deity, even though in theoretical truth no one is sent out because everyone has his or her roots in the Deity already." (165)
Therefore, the words of the tenth Guru of the Sikhs, who Kirpal Singh said was both an avatar and a sant, should be listened carefully to:
"Those who call me the Supreme Lord will go to hell!"
This appears to imply he would not have looked kindly to the theology in modern Sant Mat of "GIHF", or "God in human form" - as descriptive of a Master. It can be argued that Salig Ram created this notion when he made Soamiji an avatar in the classic sense of a direct divine incarnation. Whereas Guru Gobind Singh may have been more content to share Brunton's language on this point, and thus avoid superstition, exaggeration, and sentimentality among their followers:
"Such a one is not God incarnate. He is a man still, but a man with unusual awakening to his higher consciousness, unusual intimacy with the Source...To worship him as a god, to put him beyond all possible criticism, will only confuse our thought about him and obstruct our understanding of him....The sage is only a man, not a God. He is limited in power, being, knowledge. But behind him, even in him - but not of him - there is unlimited power, being knowledge. Therefore we revere and worship not the man himself, but what he represents." (166)
Lineage ego
While the languaging of some of the Masters is gradually changing with the times, to move away from the more theological and less philosophic of their traditional teachings, many followers of Sant Mat still seem to view their's as the only true path. Therefore this seems like an appropriate juncture to insert this continuation of the above note from my co-writer for consideration:
“There is something that may be called 'lineage ego', or a collective tendency within a lineage to believe various things like: our practices are the highest, our teachings are the highest, our founder is the only or best avatar of the world, or our masters are the best. That is something that has to go. It is really almost a kind of virus or bad gene that is passed down from one generation to the next, a kind of group bias and limitation. And they all seem to have it. So if there is a planetary Logos, for instance, we probably will not have consensus about who it is for a long time, in my guess, until lineage ego and strong sectarian biases have been largely transcended. In the context of the idea of the planetary logos, the traditions assume that some seminal figure in their tradition is the jagatguru or world teacher or planetary logos. But who is it: Sanat Kumara, Krishna, Shankara, the current Sant Mat Satguru, the Buddha, or Jesus? It gets politically dangerous to suggest one of these is the highest! When I commune inwardly with Sant Mat gurus, for instance, I find them no less enlightened than great masters of other traditions. But some of the stuff they seem to say or buy into on the physical plane frankly still surprises me - avatars being limited to the causal plane, their masters being the only ones who can lead people to Sach Khand. I am sorry, but these just simply aren't tenable ideas to me. And yes, when I connect with them inwardly, I do not find that their inner selves on higher planes hold these views. It is something that they seemed to inherit (in part due to the heavy 'guru is infallible' belief in such lineages) from previous generations, so that it is hard for them to throw it all off. Most masters have baggage like this, especially in big traditions like Tibetan Buddhism or the Sikhs. But it will all gradually be outgrown."
Sounds reasonable. In any case, the function of an avatar guiding and controlling the affairs of the universe, as expressed in Sant Mat teachings, does not appear upon close inspection as merely a negative one, i.e., of 'holding back souls', but rather, it can also be seen as a great sacrifice made on the part of cosmic beings for maintaining the environments necessary for universal evolution and the realization of the embryonic souls. Souls which are alternately said to: (1) have 'fallen from heaven out of disobedience to God' (truly or likely a beginner-level teaching when used in Sant Mat, and borrowed from or matched whole-cloth by other theistic religions), or (2) be souls/monads evolving their consciousness for the very first time, after a long passage through the kingdoms of Nature. We confess, it is likely that neither of these explanations is completely accurate, due to the limitations of our dualistic language and fundamental ignorance, but the latter explanation is at least more in keeping with the maturing intellect of modern man. But as one teacher of mine once said, “when you finally realize what is what you will come and shoot me - for lying!”
CHAPTER TWENTY
Kal, karmas, and non-dualism
Mark continues:
"Kal does make sense even in a non-dual context. One way to look at the idea of dealing with Kal, karmas, vasanas, or samskaras is through the notion that basic spiritual cosmologies or sensibilities can be categorized into three general types. The most basic is the type that distinguishes human experience, especially human traits, into good and bad, the foundation of morality and right choice on the path. Understandings of what these values are, why we should believe in them, and how to practice them vary widely from one tradition and individual to another. But they are all based on a simple distinction of good and bad (or unwholesome, sin, evil). A basic sign of the maturity of a version of this level of spiritual understanding is how much this quality of discriminating wisdom is balanced with other qualities like acceptance, understanding, compassion, mercy and forgiveness. And how true is its understanding of the actual karmic significance of a given action or motivation. This is a vast subject, just understanding the ins and outs of this aspect."
The next level can be called transformation, and is more 'esoteric', and in India and is most commonly associated with tantric teachings, including Tibetan Buddhism. In this view, the key thing that is different is that although the practitioner must have a clear foundation in the first level of distinguishing virtue from vice, ignorance from enlightenment (this cannot be over-emphasized), the distinction here lies in how that aspect is viewed that is considered 'evil', bad, unwholesome, problematic, a hindrance, obstruction, ego, or fetter. In the first stage view, these energies are seen as needing to be renounced, neutralized, detached from, let go of, and so on (less mature versions harshly judge, condemn, or damn these energies or those deemed to have too much of them). In the tantric view, however, these negative attributes are seen as not needing to be rejected or let go of, but rather can be transformed, which process alchemically release the soul within them, their hidden qualities, which subsequently enrich the practitioner. It's a bit like recycling or composting - no need to discard, lets get something out of it. Only with the tantric vision, we get wisdom and virtue out of it, not just recycled unwholesomeness."
"As a person matures on the path, they may transition to a more tantric vision (and sometimes corresponding practices) if either this naturally emerges, or they are taught this point of view. And it becomes not just a theory or philosophy, but something that is intuitively experienced. But there must be maturity. Chogyam Trungpa warned that tantra was a dangerous practice to teach, particularly the popularized version of sexual tantra (which traditionally required proficiency in kundalini yoga), especially in the West."
"In the third stage, which comparatively few people reach in a given lifetime, one can gain access to the non-dual view, at least in meditation, in which nothing is being perceived as needing to be changed, rejected, fixed, transformed, healed, or confronted (such as positive and negative powers). Not that these were wrong views, but just that when the time is ripe, one can transition to allowing the last stages of realization to happen through resting in the non-dual view, which not only liberates one from further karmically unwholesome actions, but also transforms karma/elementals that remain as they arise in one's consciousness, as the power of non-dual realization illuminates the arising phenomena in each moment. As they say in Dzogchen, each vasana or samskara is 'self-liberated' as it arises in awareness. But the practitioner themselves does not focus on the need for this to happen, since, being in the non-dual view, they are already 'there' and feel no need to liberate karma. But on a relative level that can be said to be what is naturally happening anyway."
"In mature practitioners in the non-dual traditions that understand this type of process, one will continue to appear to function in the world as one who on a relative level is still mindful of the discriminative moral and tantric levels of experience (typically, except for the historical 'crazy' adepts), as a deep non-dual realizer is in a state that is not against these relative levels of one's nature. Just as they do not reject the body, but allow it to play out its nature, so they do not reject the personality of the practitioner, continuing to be mindful of morality, relative good and evil, dark forces, spiritual practices, the drama of gurus and students, everything. Nothing need be rejected of other stages and aspects of the path once non-dualism has been realized. There is no need to reject 'the path' (as folks like Krishnamurti claimed to), or 'teachers', or practices, or effort, and so on. Non-dual realization rejects nothing. It seamlessly integrates with and illuminates all of that. So inwardly the non-dual stage of the path is one of not identifying with all of that, while a mature actualization of it (rather than a personality that is not yet fully illuminated by non-dualism, and so has various reactions of misunderstandings about it) allows the outer expression of spirituality to go on as before. This also insures that you don't get realizers who think they have transcended everything falling back since there are still tendencies or vasanas that are not yet liberated that could pull them back."
"Namkhai Norbu made a succinct observation when he say that "the highest practice is not the deepest one that one can conceive of or has heard of, but rather the practice that is most suited to one's stage." That is to say, the highest view for each individual is not necessarily the non-dual, but rather the one that is most organically emerging for them, and can therefore most powerfully be integrated in their experience and practice. One of the most basic problems with the western non-dual scene is that many of the people running after that vision do not understand it well, are misapplying it in counterproductive ways, and really would be more skillfully practicing if they focused on one or both of the other two views as the primary vision, and cultivated non-dualism as a philosophical context and goal, rather than a current focus. Many are attempting to practice over their heads. Anyway, that's how I at times tend to see it. But, who is to say? Maybe I am just arguing for my own limitations..."
CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE
Kal - additional theological considerations: Satan, Demons, the 'Fall'
As to how this all started, the Masters in all traditions generally steer disciples away from such questions, considering them as 'not conducive to edification,' 'first get out of the house before it burns down,' but let's be daring here.
In the teachings of the. Cypriote Christian mystic Daskalos (Stylianos Atteshlis, 1912-1995), after passing through the archtypal “Idea of Man” (167), the Soul/Permanent Personality sends forth a reflection of itself, passing through ’the dome of many-colored glass that stains the white radiance of eternity,’ and gets cloaked or veiled in three bodies, physical or material, psychic or astral, and noetic or mental (higher and lower), thus beginning its incarnational cycle as a ‘present or temporary personality’, or what might simply be called, the personality. This happens in stages, beginning in the psycho-noetic planes. At a certain stage in our planet's development, the so-called 'Fall' from the Garden of Eden spoken of in scripture occured, which, strictly speaking, was no fall, but the continuation of the Soul's innate desire to experience the material world and full separation, all as part of its spiritual growth.
There are many versions of this creation story/mythos, similar but with variations. One other such story is found in Milton's Paradise Lost, in which the archangel Lucifer is thinking about his closeness to God, and that 'one step higher will make me highest', and just at that moment God decided to emanate a divine son to create the universe of matter. In some stories Lucifer out of anger and greed decided to become lord of those lower worlds, in others (Sant Mat) he is offered the job, and in either version a certain portion of souls decided to follow him down. At heart of these stories, however, lies the mysteries of matter and incarnation. This more or less Abrahamic yet Christian version includes a fall and a redemption, a divine incarnation and an at-the-end-of-time parousia (2Pe.3:12). This might be said to be an essentially planet-based religion, with the Sun considered the central source, the one God. To make it relevant for our time we might expand our perspective to include billions of star-systems, solar systems and galaxies. And moreover, hold all of this - lightly - within a vision of eternity, without a beginning or end, if such were possible. What we can say with plausibility is that one meaning of Lucifer was altered by later Hebrews to equate it with Satan (fallen angels, etc), and that the alteration was picked up by Christianity. An early meaning of Lucifer related it to Venus (the Morning Star), and meant the bringer of light. Hence the term Lucifer was part of an ancient tradition of honoring the birth of mind and individual identity in Humans not as a fall, but as a spiritual gift (Prometheus), giving self-awareness which would become a boon for spiritual progress, which the Archangels did not have. One can see how this might upset some people, as it can be misunderstood to mean that Lucifer empowers egoism, which as 'Kal' it does so in some of the Sant Mat versions. Rather, Lucifer, on this alternate view, is the underlying intelligence behind the Human Idea, which is a Divine Archetype, and a 'Bringer of Light'. But trying to liberate the term Lucifer from over 2000 years of tradition was too big a step for some modern teachers, so theosophist Alice Bailey tried to 'back off' by changing the name for her publishing house from the Lucifer Trust to the Lucis Trust, while Madame Blavatsky never did, and that contributed to why she was hated by many Christians.
Or there may have been other reasons. For Theosophy - and Satanism - and Freemasonry - Lucifer sacrificed himself for humanity, while Christ was a false prophet. For Theosophy, Lucifer and his angels came down, they were not thrown down. For Theosophy, there is evolution, even a version of Darwinian evolution, while for mainstream Christianity there is not. For the Lucis Trust, now aligned with the U.N., before the Avatar and the New World leader can come to usher in a New Age, one-third of the "saints" - humanity - must be sacrificed as having outlived their usefulness for the purposes of the Logos. Whereas for Christians Christ is the Logos who came to earth to save humanity from a perpetual captivity in hell and the lower worlds. For Theosophy, the fallen angels came down not only to the earth but are residing on various planets and star systems, such as Orion and the Pleiades, awaiting the need of their divine intervention or the "Externalization of the Hierarchy," as Alice Bailey wrote. For Christians, the hierarchy that will be externalizing itself is not that great, but demonic. Then again, both good and evil may be showing themselves more openly.
So we must also confront head-on the scriptural passages in which an equation of Kal and Satan may be made to try for a more complete picture. What, however, if “Kal” as the Negative Power is, at its highest level, a basic metaphysical principle, as well as a Lord of karma, while Satan as biblically portrayed (the same Kal created from the finest hair of the Sat Purush in Sant Mat), is a fallen Angel wreaking havoc in the lower worlds? Is not that a possibility? In a paradoxical both/and universe this can certainly be the case. If so, then the contrasting stories in the Sant Mat accounts may have to be understood as speaking from different levels of meaning and understanding. From the highest level both God and Kal are within us, and our primary focus is on minding our own business and not projecting too much outside. The relevant Bible verses, however, read as follows:
Luke 10:18 Jesus says, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.”
Isaiah 14:12 “How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!”
Revelation 12:9 “The great dragon was hurled down - that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.”
Ephesians 6:12 “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world [alt. “of this age “], against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
No doubt there are demonic spirits and maybe even a “king” of all demons, which priests and occultists have been confronting and battling for centuries. Exorcism is real. Demonic influence and possession are real. There are child slavery and alleged sacrifices at high levels among numerous cults and perhaps one worldwide Master Cult who in essence worship Satan or the god of this world while posing behind philanthropies and making everyone else think their occult rituals and ubiquitous symbolisms are a joke. Those spiritual people who believe a neutral version of the Kal story must not, while maintaining their composure, be blind to the presence of evil in our midst.
But does that necessarily negate all truth behind the story of Prometheus or Lucifer as “light-giver”? Perhaps not. Nor does the fact that the teachings and spiritual schools which align with this version may have been borrowed from or co-opted in part by evil forces such as various trans-humanism supra-governmental organizations that have negated or inverted the more benign mythological narratives. As in all things, we are inevitably faced with the imperative of discrimination. Nobody said getting at the truth was easy.
In Judaism, Satan is seen as an agent subservient to God, typically regarded as a metaphor for the yetzer hara, or "evil inclination". In Christianity and Islam, he is usually seen as a fallen angel or jinnwho has rebelled against God, who nevertheless allows him temporary power over the fallen world and a host of demons. In the Quran, Shaitan, also known as Iblis, is an entity made of fire who was cast out of Heaven because he refused to bow before the newly created Adam and incites humans to sin by infecting their minds with waswasas ("evil suggestions"). There is little here for everybody.
Different stories, to repeat, are created in different traditions to account for both the apparent creation and man’s predicament within it. The traditional biblical version posits an initial manifestation of the upper heavens, including an empyrean or heaven above the heavens, followed by a war in heaven in which Lucifer, the “fairest of the archangels,” “a brilliant intelligence,” “the bearer of the light,” was driven out of heaven by the archangel Michael. His ‘crime’ was desiring to rule over a world of his own, and not be ruled by God. Thus, he became the god of this world, and many souls followed him down. Thus, pride on the part of Lucifer, and “audacious self-will” (according to Plotinus - whose Neoplatonic philosophy was a potent influence on early Christianity) on the part of the souls, were the reasons given for the fall of man.
In the teachings of Sant Mat, to refresh, a similar story is given but with a few twists. The Anurag Sagar of Kabir tells us that Kal, “created from the finest hair of the Sat Purush,” (the True Lord, the first expression of the One absolute, and resident Deity of the Empyrean, Sat Look, the true home of the soul), had a desire to rule a world of his own. Perhaps the Sat Purush gave him this desire, because in one version of this story he was given the role of Demiurge, or the creator of the lower worlds, as a book; while in another version he was made to do it. In either case there now existed a positive and negative power and corresponding positive and negative pole of creation. Kal wished to keep souls trapped below, while the Sants worked to free them to return to their home above.
In one version of the story, the souls in Sach Khand were given a glimpse Kal’s creation, and 1/10 of them decided to go down to experience it, while the other 9/10s chose to remain. The 1/10 of the souls who chose to leave their primal home to go down would become the prodigal sons upon their eventual return. In another variant of this story the souls were not given a choice but were forced to come down by the will of the Sat Purush. In neither version of this story, therefore, was there a moral failure behind the descent of the souls, or of Kal. This was because no karma was possible prior to experience in the lower worlds. Thus this story is somewhat more positive and more in line with evolutionary theories of the soul than the biblical accounts. Which is not to mean that it is right. Likely no story is 'right'.
It needs to be remembered that “Kal” literally means “time,” and thus metaphysically one can see how the fall is sometimes explained as related to the bifurcation of consciousness from unity to duality and separation, from eternity into time and space. Thus the stories of an event that happened long ago are necessarily allegory concealing deep esoteric truths. “In the beginning” is an illegitimate expression according to advaita and other high philosophies as it presupposes time which hadn’t existed yet, with scholastic concepts such as a “Cause-less Cause” merely passing the buck in search of an answer. Thus, all so-called creation stories need to be held very lightly, using the feeling and imaginative faculties more than the intellect to relate to them.
There are thus two gnostic views, one positive and one negative. [And also two Garden of Eden views, with aGarden of Eden story found throughout the world. Only in Judaism and Biblical Christianity, very interestingly, is eating of the tree of knowledge considered negative. Perhaps that is why there is so much guilt in that tradition and people. Everywhere else it is considered to be a good thing. In gnosticism, which would include Kabir's Anurag Sagar [and there is even debate as to whether he actually wrote it - the Beas lineage has always made a big deal of its truth, in fact Sawan recommended that all satsangis read it], there are two views. One, we did something wrong and 'fell' down to this world as punishment, and, two, there was 'no fall,' the whole affair was one of getting knowledge and realization. Sant Mat, publicly at least, tends to hold to the view that we disobeyed God and fell from a certain inner plane - after which the Sat Purush cut a deal with Kal (who was made from him and works under his authority) to keep souls from immediately returning home; that deal was: the guru could not do miracles, but only hold satsang and set an example, to win over souls to the path of truth, which ultimately is the triumph of non-dualism over dualism - but which from the highest point of view might be viewed as still a relative teaching.
Charan Singh, interestingly, answered someone by saying that when we first 'came down' here, we had no karma, that God sent us here. Why, he couldn't say. The answer of Charan Singh may be slightly different than the punishment theory of Sawan Singh, although it is not certain. Kirpal Singh also said that we were sent down here, that we did nothing wrong. Further, he describes Kal as follows:
“That very power is no personality…Just the power that is going out is called the negative power. What is going in…[is] the Christ Power, God Power, Master Power…That power sometimes takes on a form that looks like a person on the inner planes, ”but realize it has no special form.” (168)
This last statement is similar to the concept of Satan in the Judeo-Christian tradition; he has no fixed form. But the ‘in’ and ‘out’ part is what is interesting from a non-dual point of view. First, because in various traditions one is said to reach a point of realization where the notions of inside and outside, both products of time and space, are transcended. Where would that then leave “Kal” as far as an individual and his perception is concerned? And second, the word “Radha” in “Radhasoami” is said to be composed of two parts , “Ra” and “Dha” signifying the two directions of the Spirit-Current, inward and outward, or ascending and descending - so where in that is there also room for ‘Kal’ as the outgoing power? It would appear to vindicate the notion that God is responsible for a soul’s coming down as well as going up. When the Life-Current withdraws, the soul is said to leave the body at death. Would the Current descending then bring the soul into the body at birth? This seems to follow from the metaphysics of Sant Mat, in which it then seems that the soul has no choice in these two fundamental matters. But is that the true characterization of Soul - carried helplessly on the Current? Some teachings say no one is here who doesn’t want to be here. And if the Sound is eventually realized to be oneself, as Puri said, then what determines who comes or goes? It truly seems that the only “way out” is to dissolve oneself into the Mystery and realize non-duality. All other “answers” to these questions appear to lead to a blind alley.
In another variant, the initial ‘being sent down’ of the souls was only as far as Dev Lok, which In his book, The Mystery of Death, Kirpal Singh quoting theosophist Annie Besant describes as a sort of sanctuary of the “shining ones” on the mental plane - and the Biblical Garden of Eden - whence he then seemingly tongue-in-cheek says, “where - as the story goes - Adam and Eve were further cast down for their first disobedience to God’s commandments.” Again, the ‘original sin’ is not explained. As mentioned elsewhere, the mystic Daskalos says “they donned animal skins” which meant that they then descended and took on physical bodies.
The type of view, nevertheless, that Kal or even Sat Purush is the Creator of maya or relativity itself is actually dangerously close to falling into dualistic scenarios that try to give meaning to relativity. This is inconsistent with radical non-dualism, although many who have aligned themselves with non-dualism fall into this trap. Ken Wilber for instance has suggested that the non-dual is transcendentally lonely and so projected relativity so that it would have something to love/relate to. This is not non-dualism, at least not according to the Dzogchen school. In Dzogchen they use a metaphor of a mirror. The essence of the mirror is emptiness, its nature is to continuously reflect, and its energy is the reflections that constantly appear and disappear in the mirror. The reflections are spontaneous manifestations that are inseparable from that which reflects them and from that which is the basis for reflection itself. There is no creation as is commonly (dualistically) understood. There are dozens of these concepts in various cosmologies, many of them embraced by those who in other ways consider themselves non-dualist. They just don't seem to realize that such creation or emanation or projection scenarios are not really compatible with their non-dualism. At first people beginning to see this will often feel a loss, another thing to let go of. But if one completes the process of surrendering these attempts to make positive sense of the whole thing and just settle more deeply into transcendent Being, one may find that this state is even more sublime, empowering, liberating and loving than the other scenarios. This is the opinion of some, and a difficult point, perhaps the most difficult point in philosophy and religion, one which the reader must deeply ponder for him or her self.
A 'problem' with the view of Kal as the Creator of maya and relativity is, basically, that it is based on a Creationist view (!), which does not make sense from a pure non-dual perspective, but the above one is even more odd than others. It seems to take the view that all the universe came from a transcendent Reality in two manifestations, Sat Purush, the Positive Power, and Kal, the Negative Power. In this view, Sat Purush's nature is to liberate beings, draw them back to God, and Kal's function is to create the world of maya, and then try to keep beings trapped there. What is not clear in this philosophy is the notion that Kal is under Sat Purush's power, both of which are 'created' by the Transcendent Reality beyond. So what is their view of why all this would happen? The answer given is the usual one of 'lila', or divine play. And that may be as good as any for now. But why would the Negative Power be under the control of the Positive Power? Would that not mean that basically they are one? One gets the sense that, as Sant Mat arose in India in the context of India's Advaita traditions, yet is a bhakti movement that traditionally favors more dualistic or qualified Advaita views, that there is a mixing together in Sant Mat of elements of each in a not always very coherent or integrated fashion.
If this being is the 'creator of maya' or the lower worlds as some schools of Sant Mat seems to believe (whereas others just say he was given dominion over the lower worlds, with Sat Purush being the real 'Creator'), therefore, it may not be considered to make sense to a non-dual-oriented intuition. That does not mean that this being does not exist, but, viewing things in a non-dual light, things may inevitably be more complex than some of the Sant Mat philosophy suggests.
Kal, by most Sant Mat explanations, seems to be not strictly the creator of maya, but possibly something like the 'regent' in charge of it. Therefore, if by 'Creator' with a capital 'C' they mean (and they do) the Primal Reality from which and within which all of the play of emanated levels of being and worlds takes place, that is, a Prime Reality which in its aspect of Supreme Power 'creates' out of itself both consciousness and phenomena - and, in a 'delegated', emanated fashion, souls, archangels, gods, beings of all types, higher and lower worlds, etc. - then there is room in this teaching to portray a most inclusive form of non-dualism, and the word 'Creator', stripped of its Middle eastern associations of a tribal God creating something out of nothing, is acceptable.
All of this Kal talk may be relevant to other discussions, such as free will versus determinism, for instance. Eastern Orthodoxy explains our predicament as follows: God knows everything that ever was, is or will be. Therefore he knows, in fact, that a certain individual, for instance, may commit murder when he is thirty years old. But God does not force him to do so, i.e., we have a modicum of free will to choose good over evil. Elder Porphyrios says of this paradox that, in brief "...these things are very delicate matters and require divine illumination for a person to understand them. They are mysteries. What is good in nature is a mystery."
So there is probably not much more that can be said. Elder Sophrony does add this, however, for those who take up the inner struggle to ponder:
"The ontological unity of humanity is such that every separate individual overcoming evil in himself inflicts such a defeat on cosmic evil that its consequences have a beneficial effect on the destinies of the whole world." (169)
And perhaps we might again listen to these words of Fenelon:
“Listen not to self; it is the grand seducer, more powerful than the serpent that deceived our mother. Happy the soul that hearkens in all simplicity to the voice that forbids its hearing or compassionating self!” (170)
“Suffer Him, then, to despoil self-love of every adornment, even to the inmost covering under which it lurks, that you may not receive the robe whitened by the blood of the Lamb, and having no other purity than his...Then He will love thee without measure, because it will be Himself that He loves in thee." (171)
Thus, humility being the adornment of the saints, the vanquishing of self conquers Kal as well. In the terminology of Madame Guyon, the entry of ‘self’ into the soul is the central problem. Alternatively, this might also be viewed metaphysically as a beginningless (but really moment to moment) bifurcation of the mind into subject and object, space, causality, as well as “time” - the latter of course which is the etymological meaning of “Kal.”
This has endless repercussions for all mythological and allegorical, religious and mystical stories of creation. Are there really two powers, or only one? The reality seems to depend, at least to a degree, on ones point of departure or spiritual status within relativity. Plenty left to ponder here. What are the Sants to do when talking amongst people with vastly different levels of evolution, background, and understanding?
Having said all this, however, it is to be acknowledged that a Master, as a son of Man, has undertaken a holy struggle. History tells us that the Buddha confronted Mara the temptress before his enlightenment, and Jesus similarly faced Satan in the desert. These must have been archetypal-level tests, a victory over cosmic evil, perhaps, for these were advanced and not ordinary beings. We therefore offer this sobering quote from PB:
”Life is an arduous struggle for most people, but much more so for such a one who is always a hated target for the unseen powers of darkness. Do not hesitate to send him your silent humble blessing, therefore, and remember that Nature will not waste it. The enemies you are now struggling against within yourself he has already conquered, but the enemies he is now struggling against are beyond your present experience. He has won the right to sit by a hearth of peace. If he has made the greatest renunciation and does not do so, it is for your sake and for the sake of those others like you.” (172)
T. Craig Isaacs explains what this might mean for an aspirant on a traditional western mystical path delineated by Purgative, Illuminative, and Unitive stages:
"As we enter the Illuminative Way, the degree of the spiritual life where we love God for God's sake and seek to grow even more like God, the devil attacks more overtly, in order to dissuade us from going further...The more one progresses, the more one is attacked...Up until this point in the process, the objective devil (in contrast to the subjective devil, the imago diabolus - untransformed aspects of the inner self - a perversion of its opposite, the imago dei) has not had much overt work to perform. The temptations of the sensual life and the tendencies of the darker aspects of the psyche were powerful enough to keep the person from moving toward her or his destiny. However, seeing that these inner forces were no longer so powerful, it is as if one now encounters a direct experience of the objective demonic." (173)
This phenomenon of a person on the path being at the same time in heaven and yet subject to the devil's rage is illustrated in the life of Padre Pio:
"Hardly do I apply myself to pray than all at once I feel as if my heart were possessed by a flame of living love...unlike any flame of this poor world. It...consumes, but gives no pain. It is so sweet and delicious that the spirit finds great pleasure in it, and remains satiated in it in such a way that it does not lose its desire. Oh God! this is a thing of supreme wonder to me. Perhaps I will never come to understand it until I reach the heavenly country!"
This was followed by the following confrontation:
"[Padre Pio] says that he "saw nothing at first," but heard a diabolic noise," after which a number of demons appeared "in themost abominable forms." When Pio refused to do their bidding, he reports: "They hurled themselves upon me, threw me, threw me on the floor, struck me violently and threw pillows, books, and chairs through the air and cursed me with exceedingly filthy words...It is obvious that Padre Pio is not using a metaphor for an inward temptation or a state of mind. He saw and heard and apparently felt specific phenomena - phenomena which, despite the vacancy of the adjoining apartments, were heard by neighbors several doors away. A few days later, on February 13, 1913 (26 years old, but already a monk for 11 years), he wrote Padre Agostino: "My body is all bruised because of the many blows that our enemies have rained upon me...These evil creature would have thrown themselves all over me if the sweet Jesus hadn't helped me." (174)
In the Sant Mat scheme any active attacks or attempts by Kal to halt the further progress of a soul are said to cease at the causal level after which he is said to exclaim, "my man is gone!" Whether this was so with Buddha or Jesus in their temptations by Mara or Satan may be different in each case. Buddha was at the terminal stages of his sadhana, whereas Jesus, the Logos was at the beginning of his sacrificial ministry. There is cosmic resistance to the work of the adepts. And then again, there is also "Maha Kal" - primal ignorance, perhaps - yet to be transcended or seen through. This appears to be one of those subjects that is nearly inexhaustible.
A related aspect of Kal is that of being the "Archangel of testing". This may not be as relevant to those under the care of a Master, where Sant Mat teaches that all karmic accounts as such are transferred from the Negative to the Positive Power at the time of initiation, or perhaps for those on a path of self-enquiry versus one of yoga, where the ego may be under more direct scrutiny, but it still is worth mentioning. If even great souls like Jesus and Buddha were tempted, then the initiate is surely to face his own trials and tests. Inner demons may yield to the repetition of Simran, but outer as well as more subtle tests will try the aspirant's discrimination, which is an important part of his development. Brunton writes
"it is a curious fact and at first an incredible one that whenever an aspirant makes some effort and gets a little gain in consequence, and certainly when he makes a great effort and seems near a great gain, something happens in his outer life to defeat his purpose and deprive him of his gains unless he displays much discriminative prudence and more impersonal strength. In this way the evil forces and adverse destinies are permitted to test him."
"The aspirant may expect all kinds of test and trials on his path, no less than temptations at unpredictable times, but invariably when he is successful enough so as to near the gate of illumination he will be subject to severe attacks by the adverse elements in nature which seek to prevent his attainment. In the old Indian books it is said that divine knowledge-consciousness is very difficult to attain because even when one has got near to it, adverse spirits make it their work to prevent one's entry into that state." (175)
However, the bulk of these obstacles are in the mind, as also are repressed subconscious tendencies that arise for purification in response to both one's determined efforts and a Master's influence, so it is a difficult matter trying to assign blame to Kal. In any case, he would only be doing his job. One final note about the seeker:
"He is sometimes taken at his word and made to undergo what Light on the Path refers to as the keenest anguish, which is brought to bear upon the disciples in order to lift him or her finally above the oscillations of experience.The path is no joke. it is as terrible as it is beautiful at times." (176)
CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO
RESIST YE NOT EVIL - A look into complementary opposites; Archtypal forces of good and evil; A counter-syllogism to prove that not to resist evil on the basis that it is God’s will is a cop-out; The error of Lucifer was pride, the error of Satan cruelty, humility and understanding the remedy
A friend wrote me the following:
"On this trip to Babaji in India, I got that we should stay focussed on what we are here to attempt while we have bodies, and why make two fools under one roof by " resisting evil "? In other words don't let's get sidetracked by fighting injustices...better to continue on our spiritual focus rather than righting wrongs...after all Kal and Maya work hard to arrange these lessons for humanity, with the valuable sufferings. This world is a reform school, why carpet it? This world is a motel we are passing thru, why stop to fix the plumbing? Where can I learn more about the meanings of "resist not evil "?
Dear bro:
I hesitate to get into this, out of fear that it really needs a book-length treatment! It is a very important question, however. "Where can I go to find out more about the meanings of resist not evil?" Well, it is doubtful there is one book or teacher, but it is really strewn throughout many teachings. There are, of course, a number of levels of considering this. I will venture a few humble comments and broad considerations.
"What is evil?" seems the first line of business to explain. What is it to you might be the real question. Yet perhaps we can say without too much trouble that "good" is anything that promotes the realization/evolution of consciousness," and that "evil" is anything that goes against the realization/evolution of consciousness." For us lowly beings, however, this is not always easy to tell. But this is better than explaining good and evil only in moralistic relativistic terms. If we accept that God is all, then evil is part of God's plan. If that is so, we then ask, "why?" A few things come to mind: it provides resistance with which to foster the development of consciousness. As Ramakrishna said,"it thickens the plot." Second, evil tests our relative progress in understanding. In this respect "Kal" has been viewed as the "archangel of testing." And three, evil provides a bit of "chaos", which also forces us to develop consciousness.
"Good and evil," says Brunton, "are not so much opposites but complementaries...This is the universe's final fact, life's twin secret. The pairs of opposites really secretly combine, cooperate and assist each other, despite their outward appearance of antagonism." (177)
A problem comes in the process of judgement, or ourselves and others and circumstances. What is bad may sometime really be good, and vice versa, right? We all have seen how this plays out. Even the development of the atom bomb was at tremendous goad towards a globalization of consciousness for humanity. If one studies the way the Manhattan Project, etc., came about, all the amazing coincidences that happened, he will marvel at the wisdom of the divine mind behind it all.
From a personal perspective, imo, 'resist not evil' is something we choose in one manner or another whenever we face the automatic tendencies of our lower self: physical, emotional, mental. Do we fight these (maybe sometimes we might, to establish new patterns, eventually making the old ones obsolete from non-use), or do we simply bring non-judgemental awareness and acceptance (which is not necessarily approval) to them - or to others who act them out? It seems the latter is largely what Jesus had in mind. If we look at the Buddha under the Bo tree, when he confronted Mara the temptress, or Milarepa facing the demons, or, again, Jesus facing Satan - did they fight against them? According to the scriptures, no, they met them with awareness, with neither attachment or aversion, and thereby vanquished them.
So to me that is the central theme here.
If you are concerned about whether to take up a social cause, well, I don't see an inherent conflict there, as long as one maintains equanimity throughout, has a desire for such activity, time to do it, and non-judgementalness while doing it. My Master once said that some initiates might have to get into politics. If one really believes in the truth of non-duality this is an entirely valid consideration. The only problem is the time and circumstance one may have for it. And how deep one wants to go down the rabbit hole! Certainly, however, we can at least share information via the internet and email! That much we can do, to try to help steer this ship of mother earth in the direction of further good, to make it a better vehicle for the evolution of consciousness. The earth itself is also a living being and is evolving, too, according to esoteric doctrine. I am not an escapist and do not see our salvation only in getting out of here. Thus, I try to take a more non-dualistic, less traditional, view of Sant Mat and other mystical teachings. But each person also has to pick and choose his battles with the time, energy, talent, and desire he has available.
Christ did say, "resist ye NOT evil'. It appears to my way of thinking that he meant this in psychological terms of non-resistance and non-reactivity more than anything else, and neither for us to be a doormat nor an ostrich in practical affairs. For he also said “overcome evil with good.” We can not avoid standing for righteousness when it is called for. But we can also do this without holding onto fixed views and opinions - including the view of having no views or opinions! Likewise, we are not called to judge, but we are not to judge ourselves for judging, either! It is a mental attitude, a state of mind, most of all."
It might be said that there are basically three ways of perceiving this issue, as well as the entire notion of spiritual work. They may be considered to be distinct, but also progressive stages. We generally are not in a position to just begin the path by choosing one or the other. However, they are not water-tight compartments either. At any one time in our process we may emphasize one or the other attitude, depending on our maturity and the fluctuations of our ability to handle experience. Thus at one stage improving oneself may be the most important thing one can do, while at another forgetting oneself will take center stage. The next three paragraphs review and expand on the Dzogchen perspective introduced earlier.
The first is the traditional dualistic approach given in most spiritual teachings, where we use the faculty of discrimination, dualistically, to separate good from evil, wholesome from unwholesome, right from wrong, virtuous from unvirtuous, hindrances from helping factors, spiritual from material or worldly, etc.. This is the basic spiritual approach as given to beginners, who are strongly attached to the world of dualistic perception, reasoning, and understanding. He tries not to feed those, and cultivate the opposites where required. It involves discernment, self-introspection, and necessarily judgment, but ultimately what might be called the highest or "sattvic" form of judgement, i.e., that which serves liberation from dualistic suffering, which will eventually be transcended as he develops (without being entirely discarded).
A second-level of approach is what could be called a more 'tantric' approach. Not tantric in terms of working exotically as the Tibetan Buddhist yogis or Hindu siddhas do with the chakras (and certainly not anything in terms of gross sexual manipulation of energies!), but tantric in the sense of seeing the spiritual qualities that are latent within the hindrances, 'failures', 'dacoits', lower tendencies, moral judgements, and transmuting them into those higher qualities. A simple example of this is taking your lust, and, without judgement, paying friendly attention to it without acting upon it (or even if one feels compelled to act, not yet being perfect); still, not labelling it as bad; it may in fact be necessary in a case where, for instance, one has been a repressed anchorite in a former lifetime, or just earlier in life, and needs to express desire in this area this time to come to balance; the notion of desire as bad is a key area needing transformation; one may have key desires that need to be fulfilled in order for the soul to move on; we realize that this is contrary to traditional forms of Buddhism regarding the role of desire, for instance, but it appears to be so); so one trusts and allows himself to feel it - i.e., the 'burn', frustration, tapas or heat, if he is not acting on his impulses, or the human side of it if he does, and eventually feeling the deep human and then spiritual need underneath it (with such a distinction made less and less as time goes by), which will turn that feeling into longing for something more primal or basic instead of just physical desire, which is often emotionally based and not purely a physical appetite). Paramahansa Yogananda replied to a disciple who wanted him to do away with his feelings of lust, "If I did so you would feel like you were losing your best friend." Similarly, Sri Ramakrishna told a devotee that if he did likewise "he would find his life insipid." To merely kill out desire is to kill out all passion, the energy that fuels life and creativity. In the tantric sensitivity, this energy is to be transformed and transmuted, not suppressed or merely sublimated. The same attitude may be taken with anger, or any other 'negative' quality. The principle of tantra is "by what one falls, one rises." (the Vimilakirti Sutra). In this stage one doesn't try to be perfect, but to realize and extract the perfection within the apparent imperfection. There is a great deal of tolerance, patience, and acceptance here. It is a step higher than dualism, a bridge between that path and the next stage, that of non-dualism.
The third and highest traditional approach or understanding, then, is the non-dual one, as in Dzogchen, for instance, where the various hindrances are 'spontaneously liberated' as they appear, as long as one keeps to the non-dual view 'introduced' to one by his guru. This is obviously not easy to do, and impossible for a beginner. Many in fact want to jump to it when they haven't grown into the previous two stages, with partial or disastrous results. One doesn't just choose this way, it must present itself as inevitable at some point. Here good and evil are seen as two sides of the same coin, and not different from one another. It does not mean that in practical terms one does not choose one or the other, but he does not see any difference in their essence, and is beyond ordinary likes and dislikes, or aversion or attraction. It is a higher stage of practice/realization, but glimmers and moments of it may be had at any level of practice, and it can be assumed as an inner attitude at any time, even when acting dualistically choosing right from wrong.
So one can take these three views when considering the question of 'resisting evil' or 'resisting not evil'. Neither is right or wrong, but appropriate and natural at any given stage of maturity. To tell an undeveloped person not to try to be a better person might be poison, while at another time it would be useful instruction.
Now, we would be amiss if we did not address the liabilities in each of these stages, and a fourth way not directly addressed by these three stages. In the first approach we remain bound to some degree, despite our best efforts, to the conventional ego self that most of us live in every day, although through a subtle alchemy and the power of grace of the higher self or a Guide some change or progress will nevertheless be made. In the second there is the danger that we may try this prematurely and only act out or exacerbate our weaknesses. In the third, while there is no liability when truly actualized, if understood only in a conceptual way, as perhaps in a meditative ideal of quietness or an exclusive identification with a timeless, changeless 'absolute' Self, then the personal contribution and a sense of true aliveness can be missed. A 'fourth' way, then, perhaps with its closest affinity to the second or tantric stage, reveals itself as an evolutionary self that is the creative force of the universe alive within us, as the human face of the very impulse of evolution itself.
This is hard to classify as either personal or impersonal, but not so hard to actually live and embody, when all the factors are in place. And it appears to be the way that human 'spiritual' evolution is heading, if one concedes that there is in fact such a thing.
There is one final thought to make about Kal before we move on. It has been succinctly expressed by Hannah Arendt :
"Evil comes from a failure to think. It defies thought for as soon as thought tries to engage itself with evil and examines the premises and principles from which it originates, it is frustrated because it finds nothing there. That is the banality of evil." (178)
The dictionary defines "banality" as trite, boring, and lacking in originality. Isn't that what Kal viewed as an opponent is when faced with a lack of fear and the capacity to think? Our spontaneous Presence is the Truth, Whole and Original; let us not surrender our spiritual independence and gifts to a bogeyman of the mind's invention. Forgetting about metaphysics for the moment, isn't this what it all boils down to? Furthermore, if our very own Existence is our True Glory and Reality, and we are the essence of Time (Kal) and created Time, then how can Kal cross our path?
Still, there is evil in this world. And is said that even the gods are powerless against stupidity. if we do not think sufficiently, then, a balance in the psyche and the cosmos is not maintained. An example of right thinking, i.e., reasoning, is as follows. The way to counter the proposition, that since all is determined by a divine will and therefore we can do nothing, is simply by the counter syllogism that since our own resistance to evil is also part of everything, it is just as much determined by that divine will, and therefore we must act when it is called for. Brunton wrote:
"If we were static beings fixed and chained by Nature, nothing would be worth the effort of trying. But we are not. We are dynamic centers of intelligence." (179)
This was Aadi's view also, that as moderns we are not comfortable with the notion that we are only a bunch of 'empty skhandas' as conceptualized in ancient Buddhism.
Krishna explained the truth to Arjuna and then told him to go and fight. Christ must have had a spiritual meaning to his words, therefore, akin to what we discussed earlier, as he also did cast out the money changers, and thus did not always advocate turning the other cheek.
Without getting too far into this, it must be said that just as there are archetypal forces of good in this universe, so there are archetypal manifestations of evil, call them the Forces of Mara, the Black Lodge, demons, Shamael, Satan (a corruption by the evil brotherhoods of 'Sanat Kumara', said to be ruler of the inner Planetary Government), the Illuminati (http://www.greatgenius.com/revelations-from-an-illuminati-insider-point-of-view), and so on. This is actually a very complex subject, as we have seen. "Kal", however, the so-called 'Negative Power' in Sant Mat, as created 'from the finest hair of the Sat Purush', the 'Positive Power', would not entirely be in this category, but more a personification of the 'Lords of Karma', the regents within time, which in some teachings are also referred to as 'Angels of the Presence', Devarajas of the Seven Planes', 'Lipika Lords', or 'Guardians of the Four Directions' - a special class of 'Four Archangels of the Elements' - which can hardly be said to be evil. Kal, then, interpreted dualistically as 'a collective force of cosmic evil' would just be a reflection of the same confused attitude of humans feeling victimized by the universe around them. The Laws of Karma are very intricate, as is their administering by several hierarchies of evolved beings. The Lords of Karma make use of and direct so-called 'forces of darkness' on the lower planes to act upon those who transgress the Laws of Life. Thus the working of karmic law is one of the reasons for the allowance of the continued existence of 'evil'. This is not to say, however, that this is the totality that can be said about forces of evil. We are only speaking in general terms. This concept is similar to that in the apocryphal Book of Jubilees, where Yahweh [possibly Kal as the demiurge] grants the Satan authority over a group of fallen angels, or their offspring, to tempt humans to sin and punish them.
Psychologically speaking, we could say that the error of "Lucifer" or Kal was pride, based on a distortion of truth, which then creates guilt, and which in turn gets projected onto others. Then comes the error of "Satan", which is cruelty. One error leads to another, the remedy being humility and understanding.
Interestingly, and revealing, is the fact that 'evil' spelled backwards is 'live'. Break the Laws of Life, and evil will show up as a learning experience to direct one back to the right course. There is no fear of evil for those who adhere to the Laws of Life. As part of humanity, however, one may have a share in collective karmas, which must be met with acceptance as being one's due. To deny or run away is to delay the repayment and eradication of the karma. One of the best ways to avoid creating new karmas and evoking grace for the elimination of old karma is through a life of service of others. And to adopt the attitude internally that there is only One Power, not two. To see all from the point of view of the Holy Spirit working within them - a work that is “in progress.” As J. Allen Boone, in the magnificent Kinship With All Life, wrote:
“If you would learn the secret of right relations, look only for the god, that is the divine, in people and things, and leave all the rest to God.”(180)
Best not to judge, and thus add one's own negative thoughts to pollution of the subtle planes. The fact is we can not know all the causes of events and their effect upon us until the very high level of personal development - of causal consciousness, according to Sants. Until then we need to grow and use our intuition to guide us in knowing when to stand up for ourselves, or for others ('resist'), and when to step down and simply observe fate in action ('not resist').
CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
Kal and spiritual experiences: St.John of the Cross on inner spiritual warfare
For devotees with an understanding of spiritual progress as examined in Part Three - as essentially being the lessening of ego and increase in virtue - then the influence of Kal on inner experiences is not much of a concern. When one knows that any vision in itself is not truth, or necessarily proof of progress, or even necessarily an indication of the deepening of concentration (while it usually is a sign of such, some for one reason or another have access to inner manifestations who have not developed great powers of concentration), and also that it is unique to the person and not of universal meaning, then he or she will not be carried away when any inner display happens. On paths which do not cultivate such things, moreover, such as advaita, where one is told to hold the subject, the one having the experience, the problem of Kal interfering and masquerading as a positive power as such generally does not arise. But on the path that Sant Mat has chosen as its trajectory towards God, via the exploitation of the visionary (jana) center, it can be an issue. Various possibilities of such interference have been detailed by St. John of the Cross, and which we will now explore. Some may object to his dualistic language, but then, that is where we are when talking of Kal and the Positive power, is it not? So read on with discrimination. Much of the following may not be directly relevant to the stage of practice most people are now experiencing, but since these things are written about we account for them.
In Part Three we spoke of two types of spiritual experiences, one of visions with a subject-object duality, and another more purely subjective, intuitive, without form, reaching "the man himself and not his vehicles." The latter St. John refers to as hidden from both the senses and the devil - Kal - and sometimes even from the soul itself. Here God works in the substance of the soul and where the matter of enemy infiltration is rendered moot. The former is where the negative power may copy the manifestations of the positive power, and for which in Sant Mat the repetition of SImran or the charged words of the Master are advised. Only those forms standing before Simran are to be trusted or concentrated on. The efficacy of this depends, it seems reasonable to assume, partly on the strength of one's concentration. If one has not become stable in such domains of experiential penetration, that is, if one's concentration is wavering or weak, then the repetition may be less effective, akin to dream experience. In most cases one will simply return to normal body-consciousness. In any case, St. John deals with several possibilities, depending on how much the spiritual communication, as he terms it, affects the spirit or the senses (both external and internal). He uses the word "concealment" to indicate those experiences pertaining primarily to the spirit:
"The reason the darkness of this contemplation frees and hides the soul from the wiles of the devil is that the contemplation experienced here is infused passively and secretly without the use of the exterior and interior faculties of the sensory part of the soul. The soul's journey, consequently, is not only hidden and freed from the obstacle these faculties in their natural weakness can occasion, but also from the devil, who without these faculties of the sensory part cannot reach the soul or know what is happening within it. Accordingly, the more spiritual and interior the communication and the more removed it is from the sense, the less the devil understands it." (181)
So far, so good. However,
"It is quite true that even though the devil is ignorant of the nature of these very interior and secret spiritual communications, he frequently perceives that one is receiving them because of the great quietude and silence some of them cause jn the depths of the soul. And since he is aware that he cannot impede them in the depths of the soul, he does everything possible to excite and disturb the sensory part, which he can affect with sufferings, horrors, and fears. He intends by this agitation to disquiet the superior and spiritual part of the soul in its reception and enjoyment of that good." (182)
Sometimes, however, the soul has been carried so deep within itself the devil cannot reach it:
"Yet when the communication of such contemplation shines in the soul alone and produces strength in it, the devil's diligence in disturbing the soul is often of no avail. It receives instead new benefits and a deeper, more secure peace. For what a wonderful thing it is! In experiencing the troublesome presence of the enemy, the soul enters more deeply into its inner depths without knowing how and without any efforts of its own." (183)
But,
"At other times, when the spiritual communication is not bestowed exclusively on the spirit but on the sense too, the devil more easily disturbs and agitates the spirit with these horrors by means of the senses. The torment and pain he then causes is immense, and sometimes it is ineffable." (184)
One hopes that with the help of a living Master this sort of thing is avoided. But if we interpret this in terms of a blessing often being followed by a test, or inner light being followed by the revelation or uprooting of some inner darkness (or "shadow material"), what St. John is saying still works. He then speaks of divine justice being served by allowing the devil to copy the manifestations of what he calls the "good angel." Here the good angel might be seen as the Master:
"At other times, when the communications are accorded by means of the good angels, the devil detects some of the favors God desires to grant the soul. God ordinarily permits the adversary to recognize favors granted through the good angels so this adversary may do what he can, in accord with the measure of justice, to hinder them. Thus the devil cannot protest his rights, claiming that he is not given the opportunity to conquer the soul, as was his complaint in the story of Job [Jb. 1:9-11; 2:4-5]. He could do this if God did not grant a certain parity between the two warriors (the good angel and the bad) in their struggle for the soul. Hence the victory of either one will be more estimable, and the soul, victorious and faithful in temptation, will receive a more abundant reward." (185)
Thus we see here a similarity with the Sant Mat teaching that the negative power has an arrangement with God to try and keep souls confined to the lower worlds up to the causal plane. . The deeper "substantial" touches of the Lord in "concealment", however, are in essence from far beyond that realm, even when received in a non-inverted everyday condition. This of course is entirely possible since the essence of the soul is not limited by time or space:
"The reason for this concealment is that since His Majesty dwells substantially in that part of the soul to which neither the angel nor the devil can gain access and thereby see what is happening, the enemy cannot learn of the intimate and secret communications there between the soul and God...In one of these touches, since this is the highest degree of prayer, the soul receives greater good than in all else." (186)
The following is probably not the experience of any initiate in the modern world, and also unlikely for all but the full-time contemplative, but we include it because St. John mentions its harrowing possibility:
"At other times the devil prevails, and disturbance and horror seize upon it. This terror is a greater suffering than any other torment in life. Since this horrendous communication proceeds from spirit to spirit manifestly and somewhat incorporeally, it surpasses all sensory pain. This spiritual suffering does not last long, for if it did the soul would depart from the body on account of this violent communication. Afterward the soul can recall this diabolic communication; doing so is enough to cause great suffering." (187)
"All we have mentioned here takes place passively without one's doing or undoing anything. Yet it should be understood that when the good angel allows the devil the advantage of reaching the soul with this spiritual horror, he does so that it may be purified and prepared, through this spiritual vigil, for some great feast and spiritual favor that God, who never mortifies but to give life or humbles but to exalt [1 Sam. 2:6-7], desires to give. This favor will be granted a short time afterward, and the soul, in accord with the dark and horrible purgation it suffered, will enjoy a wondrous and delightful spiritual communication, at times ineffably sublime. The preceding horror of the evil spirit greatly refines the soul so it can receive this good." (188)
St. John speaks in Ascent of Mount Carmel of seven mansions or stages on the path - as well as seven heads of the beast to be surmounted, using the analogy from the Book of Revelation - and he warns of the soul who has advanced as far as the fourth stage of purity of spirit yet still being diverted by Satan and slipping down to the first stage (where the sensual things of the world are struggled with), finding himself even worse off than before:
"But what is most to be lamented is that some, having destroyed not only the first and the second but even the third, which is that of the interior senses, pass out of the state of meditation, and travel still farther onward, and are overcome by this spiritual beast at the moment of their entering into purity of spirit, for he rises up against them once more, and even his first head comes to life again, and the last state of those souls is worse than the first, since, when they fall back, the beast brings with him seven other spirits worse than himself." (189)
This "fall" is basically the result of the human nature not being sufficiently transformed, and a path not sufficiently integral being followed, to permit mystic light from circulating without over-stimulating, or being hindered, by the ego. In other words, the "scrubbing" spoken of in Part Three, as well as "closing the gap" between this world and the other world - that is to say, the 2.0+ attitude - has not been sufficiently achieved. Never mind the Devil for now. St. John also warns against being attached to any and all visions, because by doing so one will stray from the life of faith and the invisible things of the spirit and also lose humility:
"So it has happened to many incautious and ignorant souls, who rely on these things to such an extent that many of them have found it hard to return to God in purity of faith, so securely has the devil rooted himself in them; for which reason it is well to resist and reject them all. For, by the rejection of evil visions, the errors of the devil are avoided, and by the rejection of good visions no hindrance is offered to faith and the spirit harvests the fruit of them...Even though some of them be of God, He is not offended by their rejection, nor is the effect and fruit which he desires to produce in the soul by means of them any the less surely received because the soul rejects them and desires them not." (190)
This is a delicate subject, touched upon in many places throughout this book. St. John is not saying that concentration is wrong, or that all experiences of light and sound are bad, but only that this must all be undertaken and understood in a right way, or error, disappointment, and deception are inevitable. It must always be kept in mind that God is ever-present both within and without, whether in meditation or not, and in this way one will be all right.
Why do Teachers on 'direct' paths such as advaita, like Ramana Maharshi or Sri Atmananda, never talk about Kal and such things? A good question to ask them! One takeaway from all this is that a traditional body-dissociative mystical path without sufficient moral preparation and grounding is highly risky, especially without the protection of a realized Master wherein the duality of two apparently dueling powers is contained. The saints say as much. Most of this 'warfare', however, will likely play out within the battlefield of the psyche and ordinary worldly conditions of the aspirant. Many practitioners of different forms of meditation including non-inversion varieties report similar oscillations of experience in their life and practice. Most will never experience demons.
CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR
Two metaphors for the path to truth: the ‘ladder’ of ascent, or ‘the bottom falling out of the bucket’; A note on short and long path practices, or ‘insight’ and ‘purification/concentration’
The word "metaphor" is used here because Truth is Eternal, and there are a myriad of ways to it. There is no fixed formulaic way to attain what already is. But historically two images of attainment have been used. The most ancient metaphor given is the emanationist one of the "ladder" or "ascent" to the highest or deepest realm of consciousness. The non-dual metaphor currently in vogue is that of the "bottom falling out of the bucket" or "the bubble of ego bursting" wherever one finds himself. Both of these in actuality are true, and represent different stages and aspects of the path, of which many aspirants and teachers ignore. Does the "Radhasoami" realization in Sant Mat produce a non-dual enlightenment? It seems that in some cases it may, in some case maybe not, as they seem to some extent, some of the time, to derive from different antecedent causes. The Gyan samadhis so criticized as only as "the highest human realizations" by the Sant Mat masters may not automatically become the experience of these Masters just because they fulfilled the complete course of inner inversion, and, therefore, only the rare Master in that lineage may have the means to make an accurate comparison, in my humble and hesitantly introduced opinion. On the other hand, Paltu Sahib, as mentioned earlier, spoke of listening to the sound while 'poised in Gyan Samadhi'. This is similar to Ramana’s comment that “listening to the sound is good, but better with vichara.” And, of course, one is entitled to ask whether the 'non-dual' enlightenment in popular Buddhism, Zen or Advaita lasts any longer than the body, unless the deep course outlined by Masters of Sant Mat or Tibetan Buddhism is fulfilled.
Realization certainly doesn't seem to remain unbroken in its continuity, in either case, except perhaps for the most exceptional being, as even the masters and sages who choose to return to help others are subject to what the Buddhists call the chain of dependent origination, and temporarily sacrifice their enlightenment when they assume a new body, and then must spend some time regaining it (Kirpal Singh called it a "refresher course"), although in their case the regaining is relatively rapid and assured. Anthony Damiani shared this opinion, that:
“Anyone who is born into a physical body has to go through the search of finding himself all over again. Remember, the first link in the nidana chain is avidya [ignorance]. He has got to go into a physical body, he’s got to get acquainted with the brain, he has to go through the whole mess like everybody else. He may be perfectly aware of who he is and what he is until that moment when he is in the body. As far as I know, there is no awareness in there sense of an unbroken thread of continuity of Soul awareness. It’s broken when you are born. Then you have to institute the search for self discovery. In the case of a sage, of course, it’s more immediate, and the prevalence is something that is obvious to those that are spiritually oriented. But everyone has to go through that. I might make the exception of the avatar, but I don’t understand anything about avatars.” (191)
And neither do we! However, the point is, even such a one as Jesus needed to “grow in wisdom and stature.” And this is a reason why such a descent is a sacrifice.
A note on short and Long path practices
Generally, in Sant Mat there is little public recognition or proposal of what Brunton called "Short Path" practices to cultivate insight, as complementary to “Long Path” concentration practice, and to supplement the often long and dreary years of attempts at purifying the ego-soul so it can go "within" - such attempts which can in spite of themselves - without love for the guru - often reinforce the identification with the ego itself - prior to actual experience of the higher realms themselves, which through the power of the Word will progressively annihilate the earth-bound soul's fetters until it shines in its primal glory. This is less likely for those who make themselves accessible to the company of a true master and are able to develop love for him. Sometimes in Sant Mat this is difficult, due to the great number of disciples. This is one reason many are turning to non-dual teachers for what they feel is to be more direct, accessible, and practical guidance, even while feeling a loyalty to their Sant Mat guru. The Upanishads themselves were the product of a few students sitting at the feet of the master until all doubts were resolved. This turning away from the path could be unfortunate, however, throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Again, however, Brunton explains that the mystical schools above all are the most likely to offer one method for all, whether that is suitable for an aspirant or not. There are several reasons for this:
"The average teacher takes from his own personal experience what helped him most or what his own teacher led him to, and passes it on to the student as being "the Path," the only way to God, the sole method of arriving at truth - whether this particular way or method suits the individual type or his degree of development or not. He almost forces it on the student, even if it is contrary to the latter's entire temperament or need. The poor student finds himself locked up in his teacher's personal opinions and practices, as if nothing good existed outside them."
"It is the mark of a well-qualified teacher that he adapts his advice to fit each disciple individually. If everyone is recommended to practice the same method irrespective of competence, his personal history and temperament, his grade of development or capacity, his character-traits and tendencies, in a number of cases it will be largely ineffectual." (192)
Some of the difficulty between reconciling practice of "Long Paths" such as the progressive stages of mysticism with "Short Paths" such as Advaita or Zen, lies in: one, the fact that some form of "long" path of moral and concentrative development is a requirement for successful pursuit of a "short" path of inquiry and insight, and, two, the type of the master or teacher one requires on either path. Some teachers or gurus with big lineages have the difficulty of dealing with those on both of these paths, and being stretched thin may not be able to adequately serve one and all under their charge. This again is why many these days are seeking out other teachers to broaden and fill out their understanding as well as why in earlier days the masters themselves would send students and even family members out to do likewise. [All of this and much more is discussed towards the end of the biographical material in Appendix 1, as well as in Appendix 2, "The Long and Short of It."] Brunton writes:
"The Short Path [which it must be warned nevertheless requires its own forms of discipline and preparation] can succeed only if certain essential conditions are available. First a teaching master must be found. It will not be enough to find an illumined man. We will find peace and uplift in his presence, but these will fade away after leaving his presence. Such a man will be a phenomenon to admire and an inspiration to remember, not a guide to instruct, to warn, and to lead from step to step. Second, we must be able to live continuously [or for a sufficient period] with the teaching master until we have finished the course and reached the goal." (194)
Again, an antidote is to go in all humility to the Master-Soul and tell him your problems; if he is a true master the help will be there. And if one reads closely, it will be found that in many cases an individual disciple may be put on a 'different path' by their master at the appropriate time. For instance, the paths of 'self-effort' and grace, and that of 'self-surrender' were plainly spoken of Kirpal Singh, and individually tailored paths were sometimes given out. It is also little known, but explained by Roy Eugene Davis and others, that Paramhansa Yogananda did not just teach Kriya Yoga, but also jnana yoga and others, depending on what was needed by a person. One advanced woman disciple of his was never initiated into the Kriya path, which he said was unnecessary as she had attained realization through jnana alone. Read the biography of Kirpal Singh on this website and the author's own story for examples of this sort of thing.
But it may not be easy to find a master, or, as many confess, a master who has the time to instruct you personally. The inner sadguru is always there, however, your own higher self, call it what you will, who can lead you to good teachers - they needn’t be masters - who can set you straight and shed light on your way. One need not be shy to “grasp the means of your own liberation.”
Life is short after all. At some point one may feel an inner need to adapt or change his practices, having gone beyond a beginner's orientation and recognizing that they do not serve him anymore or to the same degree. This is as it should be, and a true Guru will have your back. There may, however, be a struggle with one's inner programming as well as outer support system. Brunton summarizes the situation:
"What were hitherto his virtues now become his vices...If he is really done with worrying about the state of the ego, he will not visit it every day to keep a finger on its pulse...The transition from the Long to the Short Path is really a normal experience, even though to each person it seems like a major discovery...He must be willing to discard the familiar attitudes developed on the Long Path. There will be an inner struggle...It is not easy to start a daring revolt against so much that we held for truth for so many years. To desert the Long Path even when dissatisfied with it calls for courage...The Short Path of recognizing the divine existence here and now, whether or not the ego feels it, is the best path at a certain stage...The sinful conscience, the feeling of guilt, belongs entirely to the Long Path. It vanishes with a few steps on the Short Path...You cannot think two thoughts simultaneously. You cannot practise Advaitic identity with the Overself and with ego together. You must choose one or the other." (194)
How many initiates find themselves at such a crossroads? The line demarking the choice is real but not so easily chalked out, and most likely to be a gradual thing.There is a certain amount of aloneness to be adjusted to.
CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE
Passing from objectivity to subjectivity; A major transition; The awakening of the witness; Devotional and advaitic approaches; “The path begins in Sach Khand” - what did Soamiji and Ishwar mean?
So at some point sages say that one must move from the practice of pursuing concentration on a projected ultimate object (i.e., God), with attention extended outside of the heart, and inquire or find the subject, and then the ultimate Subject. Supposedly this happens automatically through Naam bhakti. Zen Master Bassui (1338-1500), however, echoed Ramana:
"What is this mind? Who is hearing these sounds? Do not mistake any state for Self-realization, but continue To ask yourself even more Intensely, What is it that hears?" (195)
There are hints here and there that even some of the Sant Mat masters recognized this. As mentioned previously, a disciple I knew, Judith Lamb-Lion, who confessed in Kirpal Singh’s company and was acknowledged by him to have gone to Sach Khand at her initiation, still asked him in private, “WHO am I?” to which Kirpal replied “WHO wants to KNOW?" It should be mentioned that Kirpal did not suggest this inquiry or practice to just anyone. This was a ripe soul who had also been taken to Sach Khand, and for whom the question still arose. Therefore we are talking of very high spiritual states. This would make sense of Ramana's comment:
"It is said in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad that the first name of God is 'I'. 'Aham nama abhavat' ['I becomes the name']. Om came later." (196)
'Om' here refers to the creative vibration or life-current, similar to Naam or Shabd in the Sikh or Sant tradition - except that, in the teachings of the Sants, the scope of "Om" is sometimes attributed to that of the lower three worlds only, which are the purview of the Vedas and vedantic sages. Sar Shabd and Sat Shabd (sometimes spoken of only as Far Shabd) are said to take one much higher and lead to liberation. On the other hand, the True Name is said to have come from the Nameless One as movement, which became vibration, out of which came Light, the Sun of Maha Brahmand and out of that came Sound, which could give weight to teachings whereby the Sound actually emanates from the supercausal region, or lower, and not non-dual Sach Khand, per se. Sar shabd by definition is not the subtle audible sounds, so must be more in the nature of an intuition or intuited aspect of the life current (sometimes called the ‘I’-current) which attracts the soul. If the soul and the current are one this makes sense, although this is not clearly explained in Sant Mat teachings. Ramana was quite adamant that eventually the quest into the truth of the Self is alone the direct path to the right awareness of the Self or realization. He affirmed that meditation is a preliminary aid to this quest for breaking up the idea of the body as the self, but that in all yogas, or stages of yoga, other than that of enquiry, it is assumed that there is an entity called 'the soul' pursuing that quest, which he says is a false assumption. In summary, for Ramana all yoga and meditation is just preliminary to the ultimate path of vichara or enquiry, wherein the source of the apparent ego-soul is realized as the Self. In self-enquiry, an intuition arises in the silence which is to be followed into the Heart. Something like may be the case with “Sar” Shabd, one would think. However, as shown in Part One, Ramana also did concede that meditation on the sound was good, was “one of the accepted methods, although he felt it was better if combined with vichara (enquiry), i.e., keeping hold of the experiencer or subject.
Ishwar Puri said that as one ascended higher inside, the initial sense of meditating objectively was naturally transformed into an increased sense of the reality of the subjective self. And at this level one realizes that shabd is not heard in the usual perceiver-perceived sense, rather, as Sar Shabd it has been described as "saturating one with consciousness". If so this would go part way in solving the problem of advaita versus Sant Mat. My feeling is that it would depend on the individual’s background and understanding how one experiences the inner dimension, in the same way that ones experience of the physical world will vary from unenlightened to enlightened. But the reader will notice how this ultimate Subjectivity is usually capitalized. That seems because after Great Causal Body in the terminology of the Nisargadatta -Siddharameshwar-Samartha Ramdas lineage the "I Am', or Self-Knowledge, the true subject), or the Supra Causal body in Sant Mat (the stage of the individualized soul), the next stage is beyond subjectivity or objectivity, and hence has been called either the ultimate Subjectivity, (the True, Absolute, or Universal "I"), or the ultimate Objectivity. The latter was a characterization of the Absolute given by Aadi. We usually associate objectivity with what is real as opposed to subjective fancy or imagination. Here, however, the term means the ultimate Real-ness, That which IS. And it has been described as a "Diamond Mountain (Zen), a "mass of consciousness" (Vedanta), the "true objective awareness" (Brunton), or "a hard, rock-like, changeless, beginningless, endless, a solid block of Reality" (Nisargadatta). Sometimes the Sants speak of a "Super Conscious" state. Kirpal SIngh called that "the ultimate goal." (197). Nisargadatta simply says, "Some call it super-consciousness, or pure consciousness, or Supreme consciousness. It is pure awareness free from the subject-object nexus." (198)
Thus there is a paradox here, of course, because no words apply to describe Reality
The sadhana of advaita (such as Nisargadatta or Ramana), is to first 'hold' onto the subject sense of 'I' or 'I am' at all times, to counter the habitual focus of attention on objects (both external and internal). But the subjectivity contemplated and thus realized is still the witness state (sakshin), not the finality. In Sant Mat, in contrast, the sadhana is to hold onto the inner form or light and sound to break the hold of the external on the attention; apparently then only God, Guru, or, let us say, the transcendental heart of the Word can then break ones hard-won internal attachments. The inward Atman, however, is not the ultimate goal. But generally it must be gone through because few can realize the Truth in one shot. The Reality is thus called the ultimately "Objective" or "Subjective" in name only as it is beyond the opposites.
Here is an example of how Ramana would direct his listener from a relative to an absolute viewpoint:
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Individual human souls are not the only beings known."
Question: "And the sacred regions Kailasa or Vaikuntha, are they real?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "As real as you are in this body."
Question: "Do they possess a phenomenal existence, like my body? Or are they fictions like the horn of a hare?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "They do exist."
Question: "If so, they must be somewhere. Where are they?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Persons who have seen them say that they exist somewhere. So we must accept their statement."
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "In you."
[Didn't Baba Sawan Singh say much the same thing?
"Everything, including the Creator, is within you."]
Question: "Then it is only an idea, which I can create and control?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Everything is like that."
Question: "But I can create pure fictions, for example, a hare's horn, or only part truths, for example a mirage, while there are also facts irrespective of my imagination. Do the Gods Iswara or Vishnu exist like that?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Yes."
Question: "Is God subject to Pralaya (cosmic dissolution) ?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Why? Man becoming aware of the Self transcends cosmic dissolution and becomes liberated. Why not Iswara who is infinitely wiser and abler?" [In Sant Mat, Iswara is situated lower in the scheme of creation than the Sat Purush]
Question: "Do devas (angels) and pisachas (devils) exist similarly?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Yes."
Question: "These deities, what is their status relative to the Self?"
Sri Ramana Maharshi: "Siva, Ganapati and other deities like Brahma, exist from a human standpoint; that is to say, if you consider your personal self as real, then they also exist. Just as government has its high executive officers to carry on the government, so has the creator. But from the standpoint of the Self all these gods are illusory and must themselves merge into the one reality..." (199)
"Truly there is no cause for you to be miserable and unhappy. You yourself impose limitations on your true nature of infinite being, and then weep that you are but a finite creature. Then you take up this or that spiritual practice to transcend the non-existent limitations. But if your spiritual practice itself assumes the existence of the limitations, how can it help you to transcend them?" (200)
Sant Darshan Singh said in one of his books that one doesn't get the first glimpse of true happiness until after transcending the fourth plane. In the highest and most true sense this may be so. At the fourth inner plane the soul is said to stand with only the anandamayakosha veiling it. No doubt there is great bliss as one ascends to such a heavenly realm, and as the ray of the soul returns to its origin it partakes more directly of the nature of that source. Still, one may find it difficult to accept or simply agree with that comment, no matter how pure and illumined Sant Darshan Singh was, which as far as I can tell few have walked the earth with as much sanctity as he. It is simply that other sages have disagreed with it. Therefore the question arises. True, it is certainly harder to be happy here, and it appears that there is a limit to human happiness, due to its transiency, but it also seems that the communication of such a view could reinforce suffering, in so far as, for one thing, the more one believes or thinks he must get out of the body, the more fixed the belief in the reality of the body will become. Japanese Buddhist Master Fuji, who sat with Kirpal Singh a number of times, was in obvious ecstasy, with a smile as wide as the room, while in this very plane. Kirpal was often that way, too. There is also the example of the emotion-filled exclamation Kirpal made to His master, "Huzur, the peace and security found while sitting at your feet can not be had in higher planes!" Unless this was just a devotional gesture one must question the nature of happiness itself. Does it shine forth while being without ego in the moment, or is it only attained in some far-off inner plane, in the psychological depths of consciousness? If one believes strongly in the reality of the body and world as real, which the very drive to get out of the body must reinforce (not that one should never pursue it), then necessarily one will project his ideal of happiness in that direction only and not recognize it any other way. According to some, that very disposition is a big stumbling block to liberation. Again, we refer to Brunton who wrote:
"The notion that the truth will be gained, that happiness will be achieved, that the Overself will be realized at the end of a long attempt must be seen as an illusory one. Truth, happiness, and the Overself must be seen in the Present, not the future, at the very beginning of this quest, not the end, here and now...It is an error, although a reasonable one, to believe that attainment comes only when the whole distance of this path has been travelled. This is to make it depend on measurement, calculation - that is, on the ego's own effort, management, and control. On the contrary, attainment depends on relinquishment of the ego, and hence of the idea of progress which accompanies it. it is then that a man can be still; then that he can, as the bible promises, "know that I am God." (201)
Ramana also declared:
"What is meant by liberation? Do the heavenly worlds and heavenly bliss exist somewhere else in the sky? Are they to be experienced in some other world and some other body after leaving this world and the body? The heart alone is the supreme world. Tranquility, in the form of supreme silence, is alone the supreme bliss or the happiness of liberation...The cessation of all worries is the attainment of the supreme truth. By the state of inner consciousness the great life of supreme bliss can be attained at all times in this very world and in this very body." (202)
Even Master Darshan spoke enigmatically about this, in apparent contradiction to his words mentioned above:
"Eternal rapture is within reach in this ephemeral world:
Devote your life to serving in the tavern." (203)
Perhaps we can understand Kirpal's statement above regarding "the ultimate goal" as implying that a Master who has fully integrated his higher plane realization while in the physical body is by that attainment greater than those who have not yet done that, and for which he had reverence and respect for.
It is possible that some of the Sant Mat gurus, then, might be generally and honorably classified according to the Lankavatara Sutra as "Transformation Buddhas", but not necessarily "Dharmata Buddhas" (such as perhaps Buddha, or Hui-neng), that is, those who do not publicly teach the ultimate truth of the One Mind, but methods to help the most people they can from the level at which they find them (or simply in the capacity of initiating them into the practice of Naam, and guiding them to Sach Khand). Many of the greatest sages in history have mixed mysticism with philosophy, trying to help as many people as they could, such is their great compassion and universal vision. As vedantist V.S. Iyer wrote:
"In Brahma Sutras Sankara says that Brahman is the cause of the world, whereas in Mandukya Upanishad he denies it. This is because he says that at the lower stage of understanding, the former teaching must be given, for people will be frightened as they cannot understand how the world can be without a cause, but to those in a higher stage, the truth of non-causality can be revealed." (204)
In fact, in Master of Self-Realization, Shri Siddharameshwar Maharaj, in discussing the methodology of Vedanta teachers taking their students to progressively higher standpoints, mentions the concept of Bhava Roga, which means “the disease that created the idea that the world has been created.” In Sant Mat Two we proffered the consideration of the Shabd as a “Liberating Presence within Relativity” rather than as Creator. The end result may be the same in practice but the understanding somewhat different. This is an interesting and complex topic.
As Hung-Jen (eighth century) said:
“Throughout the canon, the Tathagata preaches extensively about all types of transgression and good fortune, causes and conditions, and rewards and retributions. He also draws upon all the various things of this world, mountains, rivers, the earth, plants, trees, etc. to make innumerable metaphors. He also manifests innumerable supernormal powers and various kinds of transformations. All these are just the Buddha’s way of teaching foolish sentient beings. Since they have various kinds of desires and a myriad of psychological differences, the Tathagata draws them into permanent bliss according to their mental tendencies. Understand clearly that the Buddha Nature embodied within sentient beings is inherently pure, like a sun underlaid by clouds. By just distinctly maintaining awareness of the True Mind, the clouds of false thoughts will go away, and the sun of wisdom will appear." (205)
Before leaving this section we will offer a summary of what might be termed a "360 degree shift" in passing from objectivity to subjectivity. It is a profound turnabout in perspective. Kirpal Singh spoke of a time when "you will look at your hand and see the Master there, not you." Sri Nisargadatta put it this way:
"Your expectation of something unique and dramatic, of some wonderful explosion, is merely hindering and delaying your self-realization...There is only one mistake you are making: you take the inner for the outer and the outer for the inner. What is in you, you take to be outside you, and what is outside, you take to be in you. The mind and feelings are external, but you take them to be intimate. You believe the world to be objective, but it is entirely a projection of your psyche. That is the basic confusion and no new explosion will set it right. You have to think yourself out of it. There is no other way."
"You see yourself in the world, while I see the world in myself. To you, you get born and die, while to me, the world appears and disappears." (206)
Actually, Brunton said that he did get this "mentalistic" perspective (that all is consciousness and manifestations of consciousness) initially by a mystical experience, and only later confirmed it by knowledge. So it could happen that way. But it doesn't hurt to cultivate a little basic understanding to shorten the process.
Yet there seems to be a subtle difference between the articulation of things by Ramana and Brunton, and that by Nisargadatta. The former view all as manifestations of consciousness, and therefore see no "matter" but only "ideas." Nisargadatta held that matter and consciousness are both aspects of awareness or the Supreme. He saw consciousness as the subtle counterpart of matter and "in a way a very subtle energy." Like the "seventh element" mentioned in Part One in the section on "Sacred Numbers". One might say there is no real difference except in language, or from the point of view of the Absolute, but then he says something like this:
"Whenever matter organizes itself into a stable organism, consciousness appears spontaneously. WIth the destruction of the organism consciousness disappears." (207)
Brunton might have asked, "How does matter organize itself into a stable organism? Does it not need a guiding intelligence?" Using this language with matter, along with he difficult statement mentioned earlier - "Awareness is the reflection of the light on the waters of existence" - inclines me to see Nisargadatta's teachings almost like a modified Sam'khya than a straight Vedanta "all-is-consciousness" teaching. He does gets a little confusing, sometimes saying awareness is the Supreme Reality and other times saying it comes from the Supreme, but takes us out of this by saying:
"As long as you deal in terms of real-unreal, awareness is the only reality that can be. But the Supreme is beyond all distinctions and the term 'real' does not apply, for in it all is real and, therefore, need not be labelled as such." (208)
Further, while it is true that the dualities are surpassed and included in the Supreme, but then, from the Sant Mat perspective, what about soul? The Sants would say a pre-existing soul enters a body, Nisargadatta says consciousness just appears from awareness spontaneously when a body is ready for it. Are they saying the same thing? In each case one could argue that there is a new person, but yet, the understanding seems different. This is admittedly difficult material.
Just for the sake of sketching out a metaphysics to ponder, Brunton wrote:
"The Mind's first expression is the Void. The second and succeeding is the Light, that is, the World-Mind/Soul. This is followed by a third, the World-Idea. Finally comes the fourth, manifestation of the [sensible] world itself." (209)
This is not to be understood in a temporal sense, but ontologically. The great mystic Ibn 'Arabi spoke of an Absolute in-its-absoluteness, followed by an Absolute in its first determination, and then God as a second determination, followed then by the processes of creation. Could we posit in Sant Mat a Stateless State, then Wordless State, then God/Word/Sat Purush, and so on down the line of emanation? If we keep in mind that all these transcendental stages are applicable atemporally and cannot be separated in reality, perhaps we can. But then again, we needn't lose too much sleep over it.
The main point to ponder is that the concepts of inner and outer only apply in relationship to a body, and are thus distinctions the mind makes in relativity, while awareness comes, ascends, or descends as if from another dimension. Most spiritual sadhanas start from the position of “attachment” to body and world and attempt to make one “detached,” imagining freedom is in that direction. And it is, but only tentatively. Both attachment and detachment are ultimately seen as relative polarities, each giving reality to the other. That is to say, one would not strive to be unattached if he did not believe in the independent reality of that which he thought himself attached to. But that view is untrue, and leads to much unnecessary warfare, seen through when attachment and detachment yield to transcendence, meant not in the sense of avoidance or escape, but as reality, or truth. The three modes of experiencing (attachment, detachment, transcendence; or the person, the witness, the reality; or this world, the other worlds, and God) are, in fact - from the Heart’s perspective - finally seen as a unity and not as a progression leading to that unity. Little by little the search and the struggle are let go, dismissed, ignored, or left behind. The mechanism of the mind winds down, its pursuit of an escape route also seen as useless, and what is left is simply the THAT which is.
Somehow, someway, on either a devotional/dhyana type of path, or a gyan/advaita path, something or someone must light the torch in the disciple to awaken him or her from exclusive identification with a conventional life. They all say it is really ones own self that does it, but however you look at it one must pass from being strictly the empirical ego to the witness. The empirical ego or person is the object, the witness is the subject. Beyond the witness is the "infinite intensity of Emptiness and Silence," says Sri Nisargadatta, or simply, reality as pointed to in so many ways. Many on mystical paths assume, consciously or unconsciously, that they will pass from the person or empirical ego into the reality, call it the Self, Sat Lok, or whatever, without going through the witness, having no idea or conception of the need for this transitional stage, wherein one changes from thinking one is passing through worlds instead of becoming or absorbing them, or, in other words, thinking of them as realities 'out there' rather than 'within oneself'. Which is one reason so many even even moderately successful mystics are thrown back prior to the void.
In Sant Mat, it has not been clear at what stage one 'awakens' to subjectivity from the ordinary objective orientation, whereas in the path of, say, Ramana Maharshi, this is dealt with through self-enquiry from the beginning. This is not a judgement on how many 'graduates' are produced by each school; that is another matter on its own.
Ishwar Puri, as well as Kirpal Singh, as mentioned, , basically have said that the sense of subjectivity, and/or ones intuition, grows stronger naturally as one ascends or deepens contemplatively, both inside and outside. Hopefully the relationship with a Master will help see to that. So what will now be introduced is not to be considered as necessary mental or intellectual exercise if one is fine with simple surrender, growth in compassion, and lessening of self-seeking characteristic of a devotee. That is where we are all at most of the time anyway, especially at the end of a long day. But if using the mind to go beyond the mind does interest you, even a little, read on. This pertains to the gyan way the witness comes to the forefront, and its role in spiritual practice. Sri Nisargadatta says:
"M: Unless the witnessing consciousness begins to play on the person and it becomes the object of observation rather than the subject, realization is not feasible. It is the witness that makes realization desirable and attainable..The person by itself will not become the witness. It is like expecting a cold candle to start burning in the course of time. The person can stay in the darkness of ignorance forever, unless the flame of awareness touches it.
Q: Who lights the candle?
M: The Guru. His words, his presence. InIndia it is very often the mantra. Once the candle is lighted, the flame will consume the candle.
Q: Why is the mantra so effective?
M: Constant repetition of the mantra is something the person does not do for one's own sake. The beneficiary is not the person. Just like the candle which does not increase by burning."
We will pause for a moment and examine this last interesting sentence. It is counter-intuitive: the mantra is not repeated for one's own sake, but for the sake of the witness working on the person. In other words, it is true, as Masters say, that every repetition of the mantra counts and is valuable, but how many practice with it in expectation and hopes for personal results? Results in terms of awareness will come as if outside of the person. It may be that mantra japa is not the practice for you at the moment, that is something else, but to abandon it prematurely because of a lack of 'personal results' is a result of wrong understanding of what is really happening.
"Before the spark is lit there is no witness to perceive the difference. The person may be conscious, but is not aware of being conscious. It is completely identified with what it thinks and feels and experiences. The darkness itself is of its own creation. When the darkness is questioned, it dissolves. The desire to question is planted by the Guru...It may be a stray word, or a page in a book. The Guru's grace works mysteriously...Use the mind to investigate the manifested. Be like the chick that pecks at the shell. Speculating about life outside the shell would have been of little use to it, but pecking at the shell breaks the shell from within and liberates the chick. Similarly, break the mind from within by investigation and exposure of its contradictories and absurdities."
For some, the practice of meditation can be perceived as a way of trying to get deeper into the egg, rather than breaking the shell (of the person). We understand this is counter-intuitive to the way meditation is presented in the teachings, but really two different processes are at work here. Finally,
"It is not the person that is doing the sadhana. The person is in unrest and resistance to the very end."
This is why there are so many ups and downs, rises and falls, despite increased proficiencies in meditation: the clarifying and balancing understanding is often lacking.
"It is the witness that works on the person, on the totality of its illusions, past, present and future...The effect need not be an experience. It can be a change in character, in motivation, in relationship to people and one's self. Trances and visions...are temporary and inconclusive. The truth of what is said here is immovable and everlasting. And the proof of it is in the listener, in the deep and permanent changes in his entire being. It is not something he can doubt, unless he doubts his own existence, which is unthinkable." (210)
Kirpal SIngh also made the same point on the essentials of 'progress'. We hope this section added some additional perspective on the awakening aspects of it.
"The Path begins in Sach Khand"
This will expand on the topic brought up in the section "More divergence among the lineages: Faqir Chand versus the ‘spirit baptizers’" in Part One. There it was brought up that some schools teach in a traditional way where one begins the path in Pinda and uses surat as attention to latch on to the sound current and follow it to the realm of all-consciousness, Sach Khand, whereas others teach with an emphasis on surat as consciousness itself, much like the gyanis, and make that their focus as they undergo an apparent penetration of the various strata of manifestation while abiding as the ocean of consciousness from the beginning, instead of as being defined as a drop making its way to the ocean.
Ishwar Puri leaned this way and quoted Sawan and Soamiji as saying that their path begins in Sach Khand. What did they mean by this? People respond in different ways. Some no doubt feel it is both irresponsible and disheartening for them to have said this, leaving them without adequate means or understanding to somehow jump into Sach Khand to begin the path!
Cezary, Ishwar successor, has said that Sach Khand is not a place as such but consciousness, or the Self, and that the next step down is the individual soul in the supercausal level. He says this is the first illusion, and that the real path begins in Sach Khand. This needs some clarification. Sri Siddharameshwar, as we have seen, calls this stage the Great Causal Body, the Witness, Knowledge, or Liberation, but also Moolamaya or the Primal Illusion; in other words, it is not gross illusion, but a high state, beyond the three worlds, but still he refers to it in metaphor as a ‘parasite’ on the Absolute. It seems Cezary is also trying to tell us something like this. But a subtlety of understanding may be missed, and in the process create a new cult, be it the Soamiji-Sawan-Ishwar cult?! Why? The practice for beginning the path in Sach Khand is unclear. We mean no disrespect. A teacher sweeping his hand over the head while referring to Sach Khand can be a bit distracting, if only because it may give some people the impression they should concentrate at the top of the head, which Ramana Maharshi, for one, felt was foolish. The diagram from Shiv Brat Lal in Part One also shows Sat Lok located at the top of the head. But to concentrate there is to do what we are told not to do, I.e., give spatial dimensions to Sach Khand or Sat Lok or the Self! Similarly pointing to the center of the forehead (where Shiv diagrammed the subtle regions) as indicating we should get involved therein is understandable, but it is still all imaginary.
Sri Nisargadatta, in my opinion, has a more balanced perspective on the Witness, or the Great Causal Body. “[The witness] is the last remnant of illusion, the first touch of the real.” In the downward direction, one could say, like Cezary and Ishwar, it is “the first touch of illusion,” yes, but it is also “the last touch of the real.” It partakes of both and is an important transitional state.
It can be referred to as ‘detachment’, where the self has let go of attachment to gross illusion. However detachment as such is part of a ‘trinity’, which could be called attachment-detachment-transcendence, or likewise, body/mind-self-Spirit. Through investigation and enquiry, or love and devotion, the trinity becomes known as a unity, and one is ‘beyond’ time and space, beyond levels, even while present within them. There is really nothing to give up when it is realized that nothing is one’s own. Thus, Sach Khand is here and now, acknowledging the limitations of using such concepts! (i.e., there is really no such thing as here and now).
Maybe we can try to shed some more light on this. A traditional explanation from Sufism is that there are two paths: the path to God, and then the path in God. This is relatively easy to understand. Everything up to Sach Khand is the path to God, and from there the path in God begins. This is not necessarily meant to be taken in a spatial or exclusively mystical sense, but essentially, this is Sant Mat 1.0.
But I don't think this is what Ishwar or Sawan or Soamiji meant. What they are asking for, and what advaita also teaches, in my tentative and humble opinion, is the cutting through of all stages of seeking and prodigality, and basing oneself in the intuitive assumption of reality now, even from the beginning, and proceeding from there. This is the meaning of "beginning the Path in Sach Khand." It is primarily an intuitive regard and understanding - and yes, even a choice - from the heart. It does not imply the need for some kind of meditative or imaginative trick to settle oneself snugly in either the eye-focus or the sahasrar and begin meditation from there, which is just another difficult and burdensome thing for seekers to try to do! That is not the 'good news' and the 'easy yoke' that Jesus and great saints and masters have kindly offered us.
CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX
Do we meet past Masters inside?
Once when Kirpal Singh was sitting on a rock at Sant Bani Ashram (later named "Master's Rock"), he said he had been talking to Guru Nanak. His assistant Madame Hardevi ("Tai Ji") also claimed to have done so. Some initiates claim to have talked to Jesus or Buddha. One said of the Buddha, "he was unique." Moreover, sometimes a Master will say that when you go inside along the way your Master will introduce you to all of the great Masters of the past. Is this true? The answer is not a simple yes or no. This sort of thing was partially discussed in Part One in the sections on the nature of visions and a Master's Form, and again in Part Two in the section on "Multiple Emanations", but here it will be approached from another angle.
The obvious question that comes up is, if a saint or sage has reincarnated a number of times since he was alive on earth , can one really still expect to see and talk with him? Whether East or West, the issue is the same. If one has a vision of Catherine of Siena, or Buddha, is it really that being? It was noted in Part One that Shiv Brat Lal claimed himself to have been Buddha and Faqir Chand his disciple Ananda. Assuming that is true, can anyone now meet Gautama Buddha on the inner planes? The answer is a tentative no, but with qualifications.
Esoteric Christian mystic Daskalos teaches:
"Whatever has been imprinted on the Universal Mind [chidakash] will always exist. Suppose, for example, I wish to contact a master who lived four thousand years ago, let us say he lived in Egypt as Rasadat. Since that time the entity that manifested as Rasadat has incarnated over twenty-five times. Is Rasadat at this moment alive or is he a dead entity? Both Rasadat, as well as all his other incarnations, are alive within the Universal Memory. Subconsciously we are linked to all our incarnations and whatever consciousness we bring to consciousness is a living entity. Rasadat is alive because the entity that emanated him is alive. Socrates may have incarnated many times. Perhaps he is alive today in another body, in a different culture, with a different name. It is possible, however, to bring up Socrates from the pool of Universal memory, and even semi-materialize him in front of us and converse with him irrespective of the fact that today the entity that incarnated as Socrates maybe in another body...You must bear in mind that Socrates within the Universal Memory is a living elemental and not a human being. The self-consciousness that was Socrates is no longer there. iIf I bring Socrates and converse with him, he will have the intelligence and knowledge of the Socrates of that period. He will not be able to offer more than Socrates knew during his life." (211)
To refresh the memory, this is related to the discussion in Part One of the "astral duplicate theory" and its similarity to Daskalos' teaching of the conscious creation of living elementals on the part of an adept which, remaining in the Universal Mind, can report back to him on the condition of anyone he is connected with, as well as help those individuals. Unanswered is whether or not the claim in Sant Mat, beginning with Sawan Singh, that the astral duplicates a Master creates are truly self-conscious "multiple emanations" of himself that have "all the power of the human Master" in addition to merely reporting back to him, are something greater than what Daskalos was talking about. Inasmuch as some Masters in the Sant Mat tradition deny this happens at all, using the principle of Occam's razor, the answer to this question is likely to be, "no."
A last question is, however, does it matter if one talks with a still living elemental of a great master inside and not that original historic master himself? For the purpose of bolstering our faith, inspiring us, or even boosting us spiritually in some way, perhaps not. For in a way, and in the Divine Economy, and with our own Divine Soul as intermediary, as also discussed in Part One, whatever we need is always available to help us. For requesting information applicable to our modern world situation, however, it may matter. If Daskalos is correct, that living elemental can only give out whatever knowledge it had in the era in which it was created. It would not likely know anything, for instance, about nuclear physics or gender ideology, or even about integral approaches to spirituality. But then, this is also to varying degrees true of living Masters as well.
Alas, many of these topics are virtually inexhaustible, with many questions remaining unanswerable at the level of our feeble brains, and as the Bard said, "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, Horatio." But hopefully this will help a little in clarifying one area of our research. A related question is as follows:
Do Buddhists only go to the third plane?
Since writing this section a friend told me that Sant Darshan SIngh may not have actually said "Buddhists only go to the third plane," but rather only told some people leaving to visit the Dalai Lama that His Holiness went to the third plane. I’m not going to change this section, however, because its purpose does not totally hinge on whether Darshan said that or not. I think I read in one of his books him saying more or less the same, however. The motive for his saying this would be baffling to me. Another time, however, he told a friend that the Buddha went to the Supreme level. That is good to know! The reader may refer back to the comparative chart of planes presented in Part One for further confirmation on this point. Kirpal likewise recognized the greatness of Sri Sankara in his book The Crown of Life: A Study in Yoga, but Agam Prasad Mathur wrote that Sankara was of Kal and the fourth plane! It has been said in Sant Mat that “anyone who tries to distinguish one saint from another goes to Hell.” But they do it anyway, don’t they? We do it, too. So let us proceed with this investigation, the primary consideration being the teachings and not the individual teachers.
The remark about the Dalai Lama is of interest for a couple of reasons. I don’t know the timing of events, but him saying such a thing - if true - sounds like a rather delicate thing to say, if only for the fact that there was also a poor guy at Darshan's ashram who had a nightmare vision of the Dalai Lama telling him that Darshan was Kal! I am pretty sure the Dalai Lama doesn’t care and is not specifically trying to get to the third or any region or plane nor would an illustrious and beloved Buddhist such as Dzogchen master, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche. Nor would the Dalai Lama be interfering with a disciple of Darshan Singh by personally appearing in his visions! This is one reason not to trust many such stories, which get distorted and embellished over time. The Dalai Lama is not a satguru as such, but a spiritual leader, yet I am aware of a number of spectacular healings and spiritual help attributed to his influence. And of course this sort of thing is well-documented especially in the Christian saint tradition, as we shall see, and even in internet accounts of devout people with no masters at all.This certainly doesn’t sound like the work of Kal to me.
In any case, the comment by Darshan Singh, that “Buddhists only go to the third plane,” (briefly discussed in Part One) I have always found perplexing. To me, simply as stated, it has no meaning. This is not an insult or value judgement, but a statement of semantics. That is, I do not know what it means, and it therefore requires further clarification. As far as I know he died without being asked to give a broader explanation. And this is a common problem: too often we are either too ignorant or afraid or intimidated to ask the Gurus truly intelligent questions! In respect to this one statement, the obvious first question should have been, “Why?”
So we must play catch-up and see if we can sort out possible reasons. With all due respect, therefore, one might then ask, “which Buddhists?” “Every Buddhist?” “Does anyone know all Buddhists?” Or, “Is there something specific about the Buddhist teaching and practice that limits one to reaching the third plane?” There are, after all, different Buddhist schools with different cosmologies and metaphysics. In Ati Yoga and Dzogchen - traditionally considered pinnacle practices in Buddhism - there is no intention or desire or even particular value placed in going to inner planes at all. Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche states:
“One should realize that one does not meditate to go deeply into oneself and withdraw from the world. In Buddhist yoga, even when meditating on chakras there is no introspection concentration; complete openness of mind is the essential point.” (“Pith Instructions”, internet post)
How can one then even compare these teachings?! The average Sant Mat beginner or fundamentalist or apologist, without adequate understanding, may consider this instruction trivial or “not very deep,” while the Buddhist, on the other hand, may view the Sant Mat path as being largely an unnecessary “TV journey” as far as the ego is concerned! On a higher level we believe there can be agreement, but such a level is not often mutually found.
Continuing our questioning, “How would one even recognize the Buddha on the third plane, or any other plane - because he tells us so, or by his robes?” No historical evidence of his appearance has ever been found. Historically, his image has never been recorded. So how to find him up there? The same goes for Jesus - the movies say he looked something like Jeffrey Hunter, while Scripture says he was “short and dark.” And, as pointed out in the previous section, even if one sees a recognizable saint or sage, is it really the same conscious entity who lived hundreds of years ago, or a living animated elemental in the Universal Memory that, remarkably, one can actually talk to? We don't know the full answer to these questions, but are just posing them. There can be different ways of looking at the issue. If a Master can be said to merge with the "Totality" at the soul level, and/or even manifest multiple emanations of himself, then certainly he would be able to find a way to communicate throughout time from his Real Identity, shouldn't he? One problem is that some sages say, "no, he cannot." Another problem is that we just do not understand the mystery of who a Master really is, to a great extent because we do not know who we really are.
To say that the Buddha, however, considered in some schools to be a planetary bodhisattva of the highest order, only had access to the level of what the Sants call the causal plane, seems unwarranted by any preliminary evidence.
The Sant at teachings can not have it both ways, having at times made reference to the Surangama Sutra, where the Buddha tells of his realized disciples and how they attained the "golden samadhi" through the process of 'intrinsic hearing', as evidence for the Buddha teaching about the Sound Current, and then downgrading him to the third plane. The Buddha, in addition, went to great lengths discussing the realms of form, the formless realms, and the realizations 'beyond' these, including Nirvana. It is highly unlikely that he would be fooled by a visionary experience on an intermediate plane such as the causal - as defined by the Sants (which would be ' the mental ' or higher mental' according to some schemas such as in theosophy), or even an experiential and hence ‘objective’ void like Maha Sunn. Or is this opinion based on emptiness teachings, prominent In Buddhism, and assuming those practitioners would not be able to transcend the great void of darkness? Even the great Nagarjuna, originator of the emptiness teachings, however, criticized those “believers in emptiness who are incurable and get stuck in a self-condemned void.” So there is little doubt that the Buddhist doctrines have more than adequate answers to any charge that their teachings are limited to the third plan. But then I came upon this, from another mystical school, which may or may not shed some light on this question.
Kostas, a disciple in the esoteric Christian school of the Cypriote mystic Daskalos, in commenting on the prophecy of the Buddha that five hundred years after his death a greater being than he would incarnate to restore the teachings, says this:
"The Buddha prophesied that within about five hundred years the Logos Itself would descend and incarnate within a human body. In other words, Buddha recognized that the average state of consciousness on our planet had reached such a level at that point it made possible and inevitable the logoic expression. The Buddha had reached the heights of the 'Third Heaven,' the point where he was beginning to transcend his human form.”
What Kostas says next is very interesting:
“Buddha was not an incidental self-consciousness. After entering that state he was able to foresee what was about to happen and instructed his disciples on the matter. It was that prophecy that alerted the three Magi from the East to travel to Bethlehem in order to pay homage to the newborn Godman." (212)
The term, Logos, does not appear in early Buddhist sutras. But assuming he is correct, we proceed by repeating that in Sant Mat there are five main planes with the fifth considered the soul’s true home, Sach Khand, and three more transcendental planes or deepening levels within Sat Lok. The fourth plane is sometimes considered to be the first of the spiritual planes. Sant Kirpal Singh, as mentioned, said that a soul must be “ushered into those higher planes.” And Christ is frequently referred to in Sant Mat as the Word or Logos made flesh, with the authority to take souls back to the Father. Could this be why it is claimed that Buddhists, broadly considered, do not go past the third plane? Interesting, but it is unlikely Darshan Singh knew of this teaching, nor do I think this is the definitive answer, and, as mentioned, Sant Darshan did on one occasion tell someone that Buddha went to the highest.
Perhaps most likely in clarifying the central teaching point is something like the following from Shri Atmananda, who, while approaching the problem from a jnanic perspective, explained things regarding a realm of nothingness this way:
“It will never be possible to transcend duality [by contemplating that everything is yourself, i.e., cosmic consciousness]...On the contrary, it will lead you to a state of nothingness where you will find yourself helplessly stranded and deprived of all power of initiative to go on.” (213) [Sounds similar Sant Mat where they speak of great souls stuck in Maha Sunn; the mind as a vehicle is gone, and the soul does not yet know itself nor can it exercise its discriminative power]
“Whenever the concept of nothingness confronts you, take the thought that nothingness is also your own object, and that you are its perceiver, the ultimate subject, whose nature is Consciousness itself. Immediately, the shroud of nothingness disappears in the light of Consciousness, and it becomes one with the ‘I’-principle.” [i.e., Atma] (214)
It should be noted that Shri Atmananda is describing things from a direct path point of view, and not in an inner cosmological way as in Sant Mat, but nevertheless let us try to grasp the principles involved. The subtle realms are not his concern, but only the ultimate state where concepts or notions such as within and without do not apply. He further explains:
“Q: Would the process of eliminating from me all that I am not, take me to my real nature and establish me there?
A: Certainly it will do both, provided you have heard the ultimate Truth about your real nature from the lips of a Karana-guru. Otherwise you will get stranded in nothingness, mistaking it for the Ultimate; because the most experience of nothingness also gives you a reflected and limited peace or happiness.” (215)
Brunton seems to agree with the Sant Mat position, although speaking from a different, philosophical perspective:
“All other thoughts are banished by the single thought of the Void but this in turn cannot be got rid of by his own effort. The descent of grace is necessary for that.” (216)
“Nothingness” is one of the four higher Buddhist jhanas: infinite space, boundless consciousness, nothingness, beyond perception and non-perception - followed by nirvana. So it’s not like they never talked about it. Shri Atmananda continues:
“[In the traditional method] one slowly ascends from the world always attributing reality to the objective. Proceeding this way they knock against a blank wall of ignorance, because they find no way to transcend duality.” (217)
Again, there is said to be a need for a Master and/or Naam in Sant Mat at this stage, to get one past duality. It must be remembered that when one transcends the mental plane the idea of “inside” is also transcended just as the notion of outside” was transcended lower down. And in the void the ego is not there, or rather, is in hiding, so how can one go beyond without grace? Atmananda adds:
“This void is the last link in the chain which binds you to the objective world. Its appearance in your spiritual sadhana is encouraging, since it forebodes the death-knell of the world of objects, of course in the light of knowledge.” (218)
In Sant Mat this passage lands you in short order in Sach Khand, which could be said to be the first of the entirely non-objective realms, where attention is no longer projected outside of itself on an apparently objective inner panorama. The difference is that on the path of Sant Mat, due to the nature of the prior sadhana of dhyana, and where there appears to be a perceived gap in the sound current in Maha Sunn, a plane of silence, it now requires the enveloping aid of the Master to get the soul through this void. Whereas on the steep but direct path expounded by such sages like Atmananda it is vidya vritti or what he calls higher reason (‘higher’ even than buddhi - variously interpreted), and employed even from the beginning of one's sadhana, that accomplishes this task, and not in a disembodied mystical fashion.
Shri Atmananda also says:
“Shri Buddha first analyzed the eternal objective world in the right yogic fashion, utilizing mind and intellect as instruments, and at the end reached what may from the phenomenal level be called void or nothingness. A negative can never subsist by itself. Much less can it be the source of positive things. That which was called void or nothingness has to be understood as Atma itself. Buddha must have gone beyond and reached the atmic principle himself. But Shri Buddha’s followers seem to have stopped short and interpreted the Ultimate to be that void or nothingness.” (219,)
So it appears reasonable to assume that many among Buddhist and other practitioners, due to historical and philosophical constraints and preconceived notions may not “go beyond” the third plane. In this sense, then, we can be in agreement with Darshan Singh. But it also is more than reasonable to say that we should definitively not conclude that about the Buddha himself or assume the higher Buddhist teachings do not go beyond that stage.
Has there, moreover, been no progress of Buddhism since the days of Gautama? So this is surely an intriguing question for further “research.” And so, Mark wrote as follows in response to my request for further clarification on this question:
“This belief of the Buddha/Buddhists only going to the third plane could result from a few possible sources. But, be that as it may, it is likely a good example of the dangers of when one tradition tries to assess the nature of another tradition based on their own approach, which often leads to misunderstandings."
"Yes, as you mentioned, for instance, the Buddha spoke of many 'planes' - the lower four being 'material' and the higher four being 'immaterial' or formless. Beyond all these he described a state called nirodha, which means cessation, where all awareness of samsara/maya/relativity - form and formless - is transcended in nirvana (same as nirodha). Though nirodha is considered something more akin to nirvikalpa samadhi, which is a high trance-state realization, but the Buddha even taught that that was not the highest, since even a non-returner or third level vipassana realizer (one step below the arhat - the four stages being stream-enterer once-returner, non-returner, and arhat) could learn to access nirodha. Important to remember, too, that the Buddha taught that, with a practice like mindfulness or vipassana, it was not necessary to master inversion to reach liberation or nirvana."
"Especially interesting is that the Buddha also said that, as a non-returner, one was still not fully liberated from attachment to, and obscuration from, the formless states. But he did say that this deeper liberation was, indeed, accomplished by achieving arhatship - who had achieved a state in which nirodha/nirvana had been realized in the midst of daily life (jivanmukti - enlightened while embodied). So it is hard to imagine that, if this is true, that an arhat was limited to the third plane if they had been liberated from all the planes, even the formless!"
"Luckily, grace and other paths do not require all these fancy practices."
"I suspect that the Sikhs, having taken some but rejected other beliefs from both Hinduism and Buddhism, may be a source of this idea of Buddhist and the third plane. Because one belief that the Sikhs embraced was about avatars, but they rejected that they were realized masters. Instead they said that they were an expression of Kal, the ruler of the lower planes, and maintainer of lower spirituality in the world (Krishna saying 'when righteousness in the world declines, I return'). So since karma, right and wrong, and such are of Kal and the causal plane, then the Sikhs taught that all the great avatars, in which they include Krishna, Christ and the Buddha, were products of Kal and limited to the third plane! Buddhists, incidentally, generally dismiss the Hindu claim that the Buddha was an avatar, even though I don't personally believe avatars are limited to the third plane anyway."
"Also, a common misunderstanding of the terms emptiness (sunyata), void, etc. from Buddhism is that they refer to either some version of the formless planes, such as mahasunn, or the Buddhist third formless state ('nothingness'), and so on. But the Buddha was very clear that one should be careful not to confuse emptiness or nirvana with any of these planes. It was 'beyond' not only the physical and subtle, material planes, but also all four formless planes. In fact, in many schools of Buddhism, emptiness or sunyata is the very nature of all planes. Not a particular plane in itself. This is why it is not necessary to practice inversion in Buddhism to realize emptiness or buddha-nature.”
In the days preceding his final enlightenment, Buddha met and practiced with two teachers. One, Arada Kamala, taught him to achieve four levels of samadhi called dhyanas, ending in utter calmness and equanimity, but upon returning to ordinary consciousness he was dissatisfied and felt there must be something higher. Then he went to another master, Udraka Ramaputra, who taught him to attain four levels of concentration called samapattis, otherwise known in Buddhist texts as the four higher jhanas: “limitless space”, “infinite consciousness” (the integration of these two constituting what is known in the West as cosmic consciousness), “nothingness”, and “neither perception nor non-perception”. Again, on returning to the ordinary state the Buddha realized that even these were karmically limited and impermanent attainments. Indeed, it is said that a yogi could die while in one of these states and remain in peace and bliss for thousands of years, mistaking them for liberation, only to be reborn in a state of existence or plane corresponding to that state of meditation when its karmic causes were exhausted. Only after abandoning all of these states, and passing beyond the Desire World, the Form World, and the Formless World, did the Buddha finally realize Nirvana.(220)
This gist is that realizing a void is not enlightenment, and however serene and peaceful, unlimited and seemingly devoid of ego, it is in essence a negative attainment. Enlightenment is a wholly positive one, full, and full of divine love. So, inasmuch as Buddhism has been misunderstood in the past - and rightly criticized by its greatest sages for mistaking emptiness for enlightenment - Master Darshan, would technically be correct in his comment, if that is how he understood and meant it. However, we simply do not know.
Finally, as argument for the position that in Buddhism higher states than the causal plane and Maha Sunn are accounted for, there is the following quote from a Mahayana Buddhist text:
“There are four successive stages of piercing in reality, identical in sleep and dying. The first, ‘Revelation,’ is experienced in the earliest period of sleep, and appears as a moonlit cloudless sky. The drowsiness deepens and ‘Augmentation’ is reached. It appears as brilliant clear sunlight. Few can go beyond this into the third stage, ‘Immediate Attainment.’ Here is total darkness. It vanishes when sleep gets deeper still, then the Void is penetrated, called ‘Innate Light,’ the first clear radiance. The student thus passes into Reality and Enlightenment, whether in the nightly death of sleep or the end of human life.” (221)
Few pass into sleep or die as consciously as the potential implied here portrays, but the parallel with the successive stages of Sant Mat are evident: ‘moonlight,’ ‘sunlight’, thick darkness, then the clear light of Sach Khand - the first entry into the true Void. The stages thus appear archetypal in nature and are found in different religions.
There are also numerous interesting passages in the Holy Bible that appear to refer to this darkness and void that precede Self/God-Realization. St. John of the Cross mentions many of them:
“David also said that clouds and darkness are near God and surround him [Ps. 18:11], not because this is true in itself, but because it appears thus to our weak intellects, which in being unable to attain so bright a light are blinded and darkened. Hence he next declared that clouds passed before the great splendor of his presence [Ps. 18:12], that is between God and our intellect.”
“Drawing nearer to him, so has she greater experience within herself of the void of God, of very heavy darkness, and of spiritual fire that dries us and purges her so that this purified she may be United with him. Inasmuch as God does not communicate some supernatural ray of light from himself, he is intolerable darkness to her when he is spiritually near her, but the excess of supernatural light darkens the natural light. David indicated all this when he said: Clouds and darkness are round about him; fire goes before him [Ps. 97:2-3]. And in another psalm he asserts: He made darkness his covert and hiding place, and his tent round about him is dark water in the clouds of the air; because of his great splendor there are in his presence clouds, hail, and coals of fire [Ps. 18:12-13], that is, for the soul drawing near him. As the soul comes closer to him, and until God introduces her into his divine splendors through transformation of love, she experiences within herself all that David described. In the meanwhile, like Job, she exclaims over and over: Who will grant me to know him and find him and come into his throne? [Job 23:3]" (222)
In reference to this latter statement, Sant Kirpal Singh said that to enter the higher spiritual planes “one must be ushered into them.” Although many great souls find the peace of Maha Sunn attractive and get stranded there, for others the depth of their yearning finds them bonded with the saving grace of their Godman to ferry them across this, albeit illusory, barrier to their True Home. This, in light of all of the above, for me, seems easy to explain but still difficult to understand.
St. John also tells us:
“Faith is the proximate and proportionate means to the intellect for the attainment of the divine union of love...For the likeness of faith and God is so close that no other difference exists than that between believing in God and seeing him...The greater one’s faith the closer is one’s union with God...The darkness under God’s feet and of his hiding place and the dark water of his dwelling [Ps. 18:10-11] denote the obscurity of faith in which he is enclosed...Above these is his being, which no one can reach through human effort.” (223)
Fenelon also says:
“It is the mystery of mysteries, where all is so hidden, so obscure, so incomprehensible, that the more spiritual and enlightened one is, the more faith is required to believe it...In that passive state of pure faith all that God communicates partakes of the nature of that inaccessible darkness that surrounds his throne." (224)
Thus we see that from whatever outlook or tradition, be it Sant Mat, Christian, or Advaitic; whether viewed mystically or otherwise; there is a dark void or nothingness the soul confronts before transcending duality, through either deep faith or deep understanding.
Without pursuing it further - chiefly because it is even more beyond my capacity than all of the preceding - one thing may be noted. In his book, The Mystery of Death, in describing the path through the inner realms Sant Kirpal Singh, referring to theosophist Annie Besant, says there are formless heavens even in the highest reaches of Anda, the subtle planes, specifically the mental plane. On the highest of these “they enjoy their self-consciousness to the highest point but are not yet endowed with cosmic-consciousness” (225) - or “Super-Cosmic-consciousness", which supposedly comes after the void of Maha Sunn. So there appear to be a number of formless dimensions and/or voids to contend with. But all of them have been accounted for in Buddhist teachings. So we are saying here that while Darshan's statement may have been relevant to how certain of the Buddhist teachings have been interpreted (and misinterpreted), for the sake of accuracy it must be narrowed in scope for clear comprehension. It is a pity no one asked him what he meant. This is an ongoing problem, where people lack the discrimination or curiosity - and often the courage - to ask necessary questions, and then go on for years repeating cliches, slogans, and blanket statements without real inquiry as to their meaning.
CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN
Non-dual debate among initiates: which is better, just dropping the personal self or pursuing the inner planes as an object of attention?
Some recent email exchanges illustrate issues concerning satsangis who take to or incorporate other paths into their practice:
“I think Teacher XYZ explained the pitfalls and dangers of Shabd yoga practice in a detailed and very clear way. He said people do not make spiritual progress with the practice as it is taught. This is also my concern and xxxxx moved on to non-dual practice which gave him results. Good to hear from someone who left Sant Mat for Advaita based on his own experiences and need for something that would work better, at least for him. He wrote back:
"One can argue that there are chemical process involved in body sensations from meditation, like bliss, but those chemicals may be the tail wagging, as result of the divine experience, not just a chemical cause only. Sure, inner experiences are over-rated when it comes to visions and inner realms, as they do not give you a quick trip to a vast state of consciousness that is freed by dropping the personal self. However, inner experiences are useful cause they uplift you, open your energy and consciousness. Even an imperfect dualistically oriented in focus but sincere and good guru like Darshan will uplift those that are open to it. Inner experiences are good. Vast undifferentiated states with no sense of personal "I" are better. OK, maybe that can be argued, but in practical terms a vast consciousness without a doer is better than a doer who keeps after inner planes as his object."
I replied:
Yes this I in part agree with. But I also think much of the confusion in Sant Mat comes from old language. It is not supposed to just be a continuous process where it seems like the same "you" goes from plane to plane, objectively. Ishwar, Faqir, Shiv Brat Lal, even Kirpal, if we read between the lines, tell of a process where, as the Christian's might say, the Holy Spirit transforms the apparently ascending jiva. Especially after passing through the Maha Sunn stage, the equivalent to the Great Death stage in Zen, it is much more impersonal. I think the jnanis tell us it doesn't have to happen that exact way, but a similar transformation does happen, but unfortunately the Sant Mat teachers don't always do a great job articulating it.
“YYY said that Raji in a recent visit said you are not taken up out of the body. Consciousness and realization is right here where you are in this very moment.”
He's been saying something like that for a number of years. That's why I've said they are slowly changing the traditional languaging. Nisargadatta said when the body dies you are not disembodied, you just are. But then, even though you may not leave the body, when the body is no more, the inner realms still are, too, aren't they? So "out of the body" is something to be understood. What is the body? Are we in it? If we are not in it, true, how can we go out of it? Shiv Brat Lal says all realms up to Anami are in the body. But what is the body ? A thought in Mind? And what is Mind - a box to put things in?! So who goes where is a good question to ponder deeply. One can certainly have the experience of being withdrawn in, or up. The question is where are you then? Certainly the Self is witnessing all this, however, right?
Sant Rajinder Singh said that in meditation we do not actually go anywhere, but we only change frequencies. This suggests there is really no such thing as "matter" but only one Reality or Mind with various strata within it. This has been stated by saints and sages for centuries. The planes are not really "pan-caked" upon each other, which, while more sophisticated than a purely gross standpoint, is still a form of objective or materialistic view. Daskalos taught essentially the same thing:
"When we leave our bodies...we actually enter within ourselves...You must realize that the planes and subplanes of the psychic and noetic worlds [astral and causal or mental] occupy the same space. And this space is the center of the Earth, everywhere on the planet. Do not imagine that these psychonoetic planes and subplanes are juxtaposed one on top of the other. At this very moment inside the head of a pin, in this space and everywhere there exist all the planes and subplanes of the psychonoetic worlds. It is all a state of being, of vibrations, and a method of tuning into them." (226)
As for comparing Sant Mat versus XYZ or Ramana, my feeling for a long time is this. One can experience this plane from an awakened or unawakened point of view, so then, why couldn't one experience an inner plane from either of those perspectives also? This means, to me, that just because one person can go to an inner plane does not make him or her 'higher' or more advanced. Two people on an inner plane can be at vastly different levels of understanding or maturity. This applies to teachers as well. Enlightenment does not come just from experiencing other levels but from what is grasped therein. This also explains to me that a figure like St John of the Cross had depths of maturity far beyond those who merely technically by a trick of the attention can access so-called ascending or "fifth stage" phenomena. And that, imo, is where XYZ was much too reductionistic, and his analysis missed much of the beauty in the traditions he criticized.
CHAPTER TWENTY-EIGHT
Sleep: objective and subjective perspectives; Sant Mat and Vedanta; Why do Masters sleep instead of spending the whole night in samadhi? Awareness persists in sleep but not necessarily consciousness; “I knew you in your mother’s womb”
We will expand on a related topic here, briefly explored earlier, which is the apparently profound difference in attitude towards the state of deep sleep between Sant Mat and Vedanta. Only briefly, because any more, once again, is beyond our capacity, and moreover the two perspectives appear so different. In Sant Mat it is said, speaking objectively - that is, from the perspective of the waking state - that during dream the attention goes down to the throat center and during deep sleep it descends further to the gullet or navel. It is considered from a spiritual perspective an undesirable state of unconsciousness. Kirpal Singh in a letter wrote to me:
"The eye-focus is the seat of the soul. Some call it the heart-centre because the heart is the central organ in the body, maintaining and sustaining the entire system. The heart-lotus of the Saints is the Aggya-chakra above the white sepulcher of the body. Do you not realize that when a person wakes up after sleep, eyes are the first to awaken and become conscious of the surroundings and gradually the consciousness travels below bringing into activity the lower sense organs?"
Ramana Maharshi stated things quite differently, beginning the first moment after sleep but still prior to the awakening to body-consciousness, saying that first there is a moment of awakeness (reality), then the birth of the 'I'-thought, then the I-thought and the light of the Self travels upwards to the brain from the Heart (not to be confused with the heart chakra), before manifesting as, or spreading downwards giving rise to the thought "I-am-the body.
Ramaji clarifies this process even further in his book 1000. He says that it takes approximately one-third of a second for the "I"-thought to rise from the Heart to the crown (sahasrar) - the speed of which is why most people miss it and do not account for this in their philosophy - and then two-thirds of a second for it to alter brain chemistry and then spread throughout the body as the I-am-the-body-thought. And concomitant with that thought is of course the world-thought. This entire process takes about one second.
A question thus arises pertaining to the difference between the approach of Sant Mat and Vedanta. By ignoring the quick movement of the I-thought from the heart to the Sahasrar, the Sants perspective on the birth and trajectory of the jiva (I-thought) is very different. For the Vedantin the Sants may be confining their 'investigation' to the waking or wakeful state and not the complete avastatreya or analysis of the three states. Thus on one path there is a grand tour proposed with the roots of the 'heart-lotus' planted far above, while on the other the Heart is the center, and the roots of the lotus reach down from the sahasrar to the Heart. The big question is whether the Sants come around to the realization of the Self in the end, and, conversely, do the advaitins achieve full God-realization as the Sants claim to do, or something less than that?
The Sants, to repeat, say that the soul resides at the eye-center in the waking state, in the throat during dreams, and in the navel during deep sleep. The Vedantins view this as looking 'objectively', from a starting point of of ignorance, and not 'subjectively' from direct experience. They say that since the end-goal is pure subjectivity, the other approach is wrongly conceived. No one during sleep experiences that his soul is in the navel area. The experience is one of bliss and peace, and the unmanifest infinite. However, due to the total lack of imagery this is 'forgotten' upon awakening. In the usual man it is not a state of conscious awareness or useful for the purposes of realization. On this both schools agree. But a Vedantin, such as Sri Atmananda, says one can court sleep as an aid by 'sleeping knowingly.' This can usually only be done, however, by first achieving a state of 'waking sleep' (turiya) during ones normal waking hours. And the process for this is a long drawn-out one of self-enquiry, dispassion and non-attachment throughout the day, i.e., jnana. Sri Nisargadatta expressed the process this way:
"M: Examine carefully your waking state and you will discover that it is full of gaps when the mind blanks out. Notice how little you remember even when fully awake. You cannot say that you were not cconscious during sleep. You just don't remember. A gap in memory is not necessarily a gap in consciousness.
&nsp Q: Can I make myself remember my state of deep sleep?
M: Of course. By eliminating the intervals of inadvertence during your waking hours you will gradually eliminate the long interval of absent-mindedness which you call sleep. You will be aware that you sleep." (227)
For most practitioners, apparently, this is only a reality at a fairly advanced stage. The point is that some saints and yogis often want to avoid sleep, and even fear it as if it were primal doom or at least a waste of time. But from the point of view of sages this is assigning too much importance to the waking state. It is sometimes implied that they would rather not sleep but 'go up' at night and remain in a super-conscious, but still essentially 'waking', state - or jagrat, the state of the gods. Paramhansa Yogananda, for instance, once confessed to experiencing dismay at returning from a prolonged period of states of samadhi to entering the normal sleep cycle, adding, "but then, I get used to it."
But is this true about the Sants? Charan Singh said that Kirpal died in his sleep. I don’t know how he was supposed to know this, and eye-witness reports have him replying to the question, “how are you?”, with “bot acha,” meaning “very good,” and shortly after passing away. But this brings up an interesting question, namely, what happens to a Master who dies in his sleep? We have an idea of how sages look at it. Regarding his experience of sleep, Sri Nisargadatta said,
"I am aware of being unconscious...In each state you forget the other two, while to me there is but one state of being, including and transcending the three mental states of waking, dreaming, and sleeping." (228)
For Nisargadatta the primordial reality of the natural state is "awareness." It is "homogenous, unchanging, solid, dense, rock-like, uncaused, beginningless, endless, without parts, unsupported, not a new state but the original basic existence." Within awareness arises consciousness. Awareness is the "eternal potential", while consciousness is the "eternal actual." The latter includes all levels from unconsciousness to the highest superconsciousness. For the saint, sage, as well as the ordinary man, sleep is a state of unconsciousness. Only for the sage, and, hopefully, some of the saints, is there an unbroken state of awareness in sleep. If awareness is their realized, bedrock condition, whether conscious or not, then for a sage the answer to the question, “what happens if you die in sleep?”, is likely “nothing.” Nothing real changes. For a saint, with organized subtle bodies due to the result of a different prior sadhana, might it be a bit different when he dies in sleep? Might it be that his abiding as awareness does not change, but his consciousness does change, and rather immediately, from one of unconscious to super consciousness, i.e., Sat Lok, perhaps - however that is to be understood - ? Saints certainly would not lose their realization just because they died in in sleep, so it seems that would not matter. "If you've had a change of identity, even if the experiential qualities of awakening disappear, that change will always be with you," says Adyashanti. There are levels of abidance in this; vasanas may rise up and still have power, but in the case of a saint this must certainly be minimal.
Faqir Chand said, in Secret of Secrets, “I wish the modern Gurus should present their true self to their followers, so that the ignorant may not be computed.” He then made a case that because both he and his guru Shiv Brat Lal slept and experienced dreams of their dead relatives, “the mind of a man who undertakes the practice of surat shabd yoga (union of the attention with the inner sound) does not become impregnable to the old samskaras...which bud forth in their subconscious mind.”
Okay, what is the significance of this? It shows, for one thing, that Masters like all living things experience sleep and dreams. Faqir then said after the dream he awoke and attuned himself with the Naam. If we, however, accept the claim that a Master is identified with the sound current, is one with the Word or Naam, then this would seem only be so in his waking state, at least as far as the human Master is concerned. Now, a hallmark of a gyani is said to be that he is aware in all three states, even in sleep while unconscious. So we either must change our understanding of what a Master is, or consider that the great sages may have a different and perhaps more fundamental realization than the saints - unless a saint can also attest to being aware while unconscious in sleep, although not conscious of the Naam at that time. If he was conscious of the Naam - or, considered one with the Naam, conscious of himself - then he would not be asleep. So our Master then can only be God, using the human being as a medium, while awake or wakeful in samadhi, but not in sleep. Are the Masters conscious as their shabd form while in dreams and sleep? If not, is there a hiatus in any personal connection between them and their disciples until they are again awake, conscious and super-conscious? Or in some mysterious transcendental way is the shabd form fully functional even while the human Master is sleeping and unconscious? Oh, it is very baffling, isn't it ? How little we really know!
There is another interesting question, however: what is the value of sleep? Darshan Singh supposedly barely slept, and Kirpal said, "sometimes I sleep, maybe an hour or two, what’s the harm?” Sleep, of course, is different from going to higher planes. We are sometimes taught by the Masters that those experiences are much better than sleep, and even more rejuvenating, and if so then why would a saint sleep? But they do, and have said so. Are those higher states really more rejuvenating than true deep dreamless sleep, or only so for the average person in contrast with their usual fitful sleep? Do saints gain something from sleep, or are they not able to stay in higher planes all night long? I'd love to hear an answer on this. It might settle an enigma or two. Again, if going up provides more rest than sleep, why do Masters sleep? It must either (1) provide a benefit they don’t get in higher planes, or (2), be because, like all forms of life, they can’t help it and pass through the three states like everyone else. Does sleep rest their brain more than samadhi rests the body below the eyes?
In Vedanta, there is agreement with the Sants on valuelessness of sleep for spiritual attainment in the usual man, but Shri Atmananda said when approached rightly it can be turned into an advantage:
“if correctly understood, deep sleep is evidently your real nature. It is, strictly speaking, no state at all, and is way beyond any samadhi.” (229)
Further:
"Q: Why does not the experience of deep sleep help one spiritually? - Because the ordinary man looks upon deep sleep objectively. If deep sleep loses its sense of objectivity and becomes subjective, you are free.” (230)
Brunton writes:
“Sleep is a condition which nature imposes on man. No one, not even the sage, can alter its general course and therefore even the sage has to accept this condition as an inevitable part of his human lot. But if he is to attain full self-realization, this must eventually pertain to his sleeping state as much as to his waking state, else it will not be what its name suggests.”
“Although the sage withdraws with the onset of sleep from wakeful awareness, he does not withdraw from all awareness. A pleasurable and peaceful sense of impersonal being is left over. In this he rests throughout the night.”
“When we remember that all living creatures from ant to man are plunged into intermittent sleep for substantial portions of their whole lives, how can we grasp the meaning of their existence and the meaning of the universe of which they are parts, without examining the full meaning and proper value of sleep states? Whatever we learn from a single state alone may always be liable to contradiction by the facts of another state. Therefore unless we coordinate and evaluate the truth of the waking state with the truth of the sleep state we cannot hope to arrive at ultimate truth in its fullness. But when we venture to make such a coordination we shall discover that in sleep there lies the master-key of life and death!” (231)
The position in Vedanta, once again, can be therefore be said to be from the ‘subjective’ point of view of the sage; not, it might be argued, from the ‘objective’ view of a saint in the overhead planes, as usually understood. No doubt many such advanced souls spend little time in sleep, but are we to assume that they spend no time there, but only enjoy the inner ascended states - as they often seem to do in their waking hours? As we have seen, no. Again, Kirpal said he slept, “an hour or two.” At another time when someone told him that Darshan Singh, who later earned the appellation “the sleepless Saint”, he replied “fifteen minutes should be enough!” There were also many Christian saints who barely slept. But sleep and samadhi are not the same, and further, Shri Atmananda said that to sleep knowingly is way beyond any samadhi. That is a very deep statement and not easily dismissed and passed over.
A sage is not automatically a saint, nor is a saint automatically a sage. So how to compare the two camps? It seems very difficult, as they employ different sadhanas, and so we will leave it at that, for now, risking the ire of the reader. But it seems too important just to ignore. Maybe someone can complete these cursory introductory notes on this issue. Sri Nisargadatta and Sri Atmananda spoke little or nothing about a sahasrar-heart axis, but also appeared to ignore consideration of the overhead planes as necessary for self-realization. That is, they seemed content to directly solve the mystery of the microcosm and its so-called adventitious vehicles or bodies (gross, subtle, causal, and greater-causal), and were not concerned, prior to self-realization, with penetrating beyond the veil of the incarnation into the so-called macrocosmic 'bodies' of Virat, Hiranyagharba, Avyakrat, and Moolamaya (or their 'ascended correlates', for ascension per se is apparently only one way of viewing the macrocosm, and dependent on conceiving of the body and chakra system as more or less real and not fundamentally imaginary in nature).
A key for some kind of resolution may be with the issue of deep and fundamental intuitively based purification of the so-called incarnate self and its attendant egoisms: physical, emotional, mental, willful, and moral. Without that neither path is likely to be either complete or enduring in results.
"I knew you In your mother's womb"
"Nobody is born or dies at any time; it is the mind that conceives its birth and death and its migration to other bodies and other worlds." - Yoga Vasishta
This is what advaita vedanta says. Still, there is the biblical phrase, "I knew you in your mother's womb" to contrast with this more impersonal message. Somehow, paradoxically and mysteriously, there is an identity recognizable, perhaps only at the Soul level, by the deeply awakened. Kirpal greeted some as “Purana yar” meaning “old friend”. Our friend Ishwar Puri told this story :
“I knew Great Master [Sawan Singh] for many years. He knew me even earlier. He knew me before I was born. I knew him 29 days after birth in this physical form. My mother was pregnant in the fifth month, and she had a dream. It is a personal event that I am sharing with you today. I normally don’t do that. My mother was pregnant in the fifth month when she had the quickening and saw the baby moving inside her. She had a dream that night. In the dream she saw a plastic doll. In those days they used to have pink colored plastic dolls that they used to sell in India. She saw a plastic doll on the mantelpiece of the fireplace. In the dream she said, “I never placed that doll there. How did it come there? As she looked at the doll, the doll began to shake and became a small human baby. That baby raised its hand like this and began to give a discourse to her. She was surprised at that strange dream, so she went to Great Master, and she narrated her dream to him.
And he said, “Yes, this is a sign of the child who is coming, who is being born to you. He has been lecturing a lot in the past. He will keep on lecturing in the next life after his birth.” I had no idea I’d be doing this. She did not tell me the dream until much later. So, he knew me before I was born.” (232)
It may be difficult and seem strange and even ungodly to conceive of "God" as the Fourth Body or "Brahman", characterized by Sat-Cit-Ananda, Omnipresence, Omnipotence, and Omniscience, as SIddharameshwar and his lineage classify it, or Nisargadatta's "God is not running the world," and reconcile it with the warm and fuzzy Biblical verse "I knew you even in your mother's womb," but we submit that that is our limitation, not philosophy's. Infinite awareness/ consciousness is all these things, and if a Sage or Sant has realized and resides as that, well, then, why couldn't he in some way also "know us in our mother's womb"? All power belongs to the Absolute.The problem for our understanding basically comes down to the fact that due to ignorance we take everything too personally. This clouds our perception.
In brief, it might humorously be said that the average mystic wants to go 'up and out', the average man is content with going 'down and out', while the modern embodied sages advise going 'down and in' - before going 'up and out'! This may save many, many years of ascended distraction before getting down to tackling the ego in real earnest, unless one has a Master who graciously begins to pull on the long rope he has given you and cuts short the nonsense.
CHAPTER TWENTY-NINE
The sacrifice of the sage or master
Moving on, the following quote may hurt. This concept was briefly touched on earlier. PB states:
"The sage has conquered separativeness in his mind and realized the ALL as himself. The logical consequence is tremendous. It follows that there is no liberation from the round of births and rebirths for the sage; he has to go through it like the others. Of course, he does this with full understanding whereas they are plunged in darkness. But if he identifies himself with the All, then he can't desert but must go on to the end, working for the liberation of others in turn. This is his crucifixion, that being able to save others he is unable to save himself. "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, `And he was numbered with the transgressors.' Why? Because compassion rules him, not the ego. Nobody is likely to want such a goal (until, indeed he is almost ready for it) so it is usually kept secret or symbolized. Again: "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (233)
Shri Atmananda expressed things this way:
“I have never told you that you will never be reborn. I have only said that you will be rid of the illusion that you were ever born or will die.” (234)
Ramana Maharshi and others, even Darshan Singh, have also said that they would come back again and again to help apparent other souls.
As Kirpal said, "one bulb is replaced with another." Sant Mat believes the Satguru is an incarnation eternally present on the earth, "giving food for the hungry and water for the thirsty," as Christ said.
As previously mentioned, there is merit to the concept of a lineage, where each master watches each other’s back, so to speak, thus maintaining the purity of the transmission, even when a particular master is not yet fully developed. A teacher or Master may in fact still be a true and effective agent of Grace without the ability to advise one in all areas of life or practice; in such cases, one will inevitably be moved out of inner necessity to exercise and develop his intelligence in many matters and seek guidance, with all due love and respect to the primary master of his heart, from other sources as required, and without fear or paranoia about "Kal" or anything else. In traditional devotional paths this independence and self-reliance has usually been considered taboo, but in the age we are living in that is increasingly becoming a no longer viable or believable point of view. The Divine Mind seems to be leading us on a path of evolution and to develop all of ones faculties is part of that evolution. And there is a higher purpose behind this.
To teach outside the religious and cultural expectations of tradition when needed requires skill, knowledge, and courage. Sant Kirpal did so, with some. Sant Darshan Singh, to his credit, seemed to be moving in that direction, but once admitted, bless his soul, that he “was old-fashioned”. Perhaps he was referring to personal moral codes and such, perhaps not. I was not his personal disciple so I cannot say. He did write that when all is said and done, one must come to the point of surrender. With that there can be no argument. But there is no question that the public message of Sant Mat in general continues to be simply “go in and up”. For some this works, but for many, apparently not so well. There are many, many souls who have meditated faithfully for years and been disheartened with the results. This may not all be attributed to a lack of patience and perseverance or the difficulty of the ordeal, although that can’t be ruled out. In Sant Mat a big emphasis is placed on the stage of man-making and the working-off of karma. It is sometimes said that ninety-five per cent of the grace is withheld until the time of one’s death, and that is when one will see the full glory of one’s Master. Still, some ‘cash in hand’ is usually promised even from the beginning, but that is often a bait, a lure, and a sweet to establish a connection with the Master so that he can henceforth work in the ground of the soul with one’s full trust.
In the July 2007 issue of Sat Sandesh magazine Sant Rajinder spoke about how we should meditate because we will see the glorious inner realms and have bliss and peace, and that another benefit is that we will see our relatives and realize that they, too, are in a better place of peace and joy. However, more recently he said one should not be too attached to this idea, as we in fact have had many fathers and mothers in our soul’s long history. You see, as said before, “eventually Masters say everything”; it is not a flaw or shortcoming but rather the nature of the beast and the many people they have to deal with, that provisional or partial teachings are sometimes given that eventually are superceded by truer ones.
Kirpal Singh's book, Mystery of Death, does not promise that everyone [non-initiates specifically] just by dying are in a better place, and certainly not forever. You have some vivid but dream-like experiences for a while (with those not under the protection of the master, and not very 'conscious' during life, passing in and out of the astral dream); perhaps, as taught in certain schools, do some past-life processing and even current karmic integration; but then eventually pass into a pleasant sleep, and then are reborn until they get it right or wake up. One isn't in the clear, so to speak, just by dying! But the promise of the masters for devoted disciples at least is protection of your dear ones for up to seven generations both past and future - a promise difficult to get one’s mind around. One may chose to disbelieve this. It may remain a matter of the heart’s assurance. For us seven generations is a bit hard to visualize. But with God, what is impossible? The reader may remember all the references to the sacred number seven in Part One.
I am reminded of a story about Ramana Maharshi. A man came to him distraught about a son who had passed away. He wanted Ramana to tell him if he would see his son again when he died. Ramana didn't answer him, and the man relentlessly implored him to promise him that he would again see his son when he died. Finally after a long time Ramana said, "yes." When the man left, Ramana turned to one of his advanced devotees and said, "what could I say? If I had said "no" the man's faith would have been shaken to its roots."
Sri Nisargadatta, in the midst of speaking about the point of view of the jnani, also confessed to using such consoling words when dealing with souls of less understanding:
"Q: Imagine you are ill -- high fever, aches, shivers. The doctor tells you the condition is serious, there are only a few days to live. What would be your first reaction?
M: No reaction. As it is natural for the incense stick to burn out, so it is natural for the body to die. Really, it is a matter of very little importance. What matters is that I am neither the body nor the mind. I am.
Q: Your family will be desperate, of course. What would you tell them?
M: The usual stuff: fear not, life goes on, God will protect you, we shall be soon together again and so on. But to me the entire commotion is meaningless, for I am not the entity that imagines itself alive or dead. I am neither born nor can I die. I have nothing to remember or to forget...
Q: How does the jnani fare after death?
M: The jnani is dead already. Do you expect him to die again?
Q: Surely, the dissolution of the body is an important event even to a jnani.
M: There are no important events for a jnani, except when somebody reaches the highest goal. Then only his heart rejoices. All else is of no concern. The entire universe is his body, all life is his life. As in a city of lights, when one bulb burns out, it does not affect the network, so the death of a body does not affect the whole." (235)
The saints, after all, promise help and protection for family members of initiates, not their permanent residence in an after-death plane. They have their own path to go through in due course. Still, stories like this are found in the Sant Mat literature; a man whose father died wrote of his master Kirpal Singh:
“As I looked at Him, His head was one mass of bright Light. I could not distinguish His face. Two or three days later I asked Him about my father: not being an initiate, I was worried what would become of him. “But you are his son, and you are an initiate. He will be looked after. Why do you worry?” Maharaj Ji inquired. “Will he again get human birth?” I asked. “And what if he does not need to come back at all?” (236)
Let us not enter waters that are too deep for us and judge Masters or disciples unduly, for messages and experiences are given to many, many people of different background, understanding, and readiness. Experiences come and then they go. No one has them continually, nor is that the goal. Nor is an eternal post-mortem heaven for the ego! The important questions to ask of our time with a master are: what is the understanding gained? And the stable peace? For these, once gained, will not be lost. The following from Brunton may sting a little:
“This goal must not be mistaken, however, for the orthodox Hindu or Buddhist goal of liberation from the cycle of rebirths. The philosophic aspirant seeks liberation only from mental and emotional bondage to the experiences of these rebirths. He does not hate earthly life nor desire to disappear utterly in the universal life. Unlike the ordinary Oriental ascetic or mystic he is content to come back to earth again and again, provided he can come back with wisdom, understanding and compassion, and participate effectively and selflessly in human affairs. For he knows that death and birth, earth and heaven, are but changes in idea, and that in reality there is one unchanging existence which is birthless and deathless and everlasting. The world is for ever changing, but the flow of changes is itself permanent. Therefore we can find the Eternal here in this world as well as in the supra-mundane realm...”
“Ultimately we may continue to exist no longer as finite beings, only as the Absolute itself. The person is absorbed into its impersonal source. This deprives immortality of all human meaning. The instinct of self preservation holds us all in so powerful a thrall that we demand its satisfaction even after we have renounced the transient mortal life. For then there is no impress on the universal life, nothing to show in the vast void of the Absolute that the individual has even existed at all. But we as egos shall not pass into nothingness when we finish this pilgrimage from outward existence to inward Essence. We shall pass inwardly into a state where we shall not be involved in time space change as humanly known, a state where they become meaningless terms. This state is as undeniable to a being in it as it is impenetrable by those who stand outside it. But it exists. It is not annihilation, it is the fullness of being.”
“From this final standpoint there can exist no such process as the cyclic whirl of reincarnation. All births on earth are then seen to be appearances of one and the same thing. The thing is known to be the reality, and its appearances are known to be its shadows. But before this high level is reached man thinks in his ignorance that he has a wholly separate existence from all other men, that he is a finite individual who must be born again and again on earth until he attains the being of the Overself, and that the Overself and he are two things, separate and apart.” (237)
Rajinder Singh in more positive terms has said that merger in God is not the annihilation of one's identity, but rather immersion in all the love, joy, and wisdom of God.
They are likely speaking of the same thing, but I sense that Sant Rajinder was speaking to someone or some particular group of people for which such a consoling message was a help. Sort of like "Mr. Rogers". Watching Mr. Rogers (God rest his soul) was a humbling experience. A cynical person like myself could never pull off what he did. He was incredible. So, too, the Masters have their amazing play and often there is little to say about why they do what they do. Sooner or later they say almost everything, to one person or another. In this instance, however, was the earlier statement of Sant Rajinder's in Sat Sandesh magazine about seeing one's loved ones the literal "truth" ? The answer is, for the Sant Mat initiate, it has been said that their close relations and loved ones are also given help. We may see them for a while after death, but it must be remembered that they have their own destiny and will in turn move on.
They will always be in our hearts, however, where they always were to begin with. We may not realize that they are within us, however, until they are outwardly gone, a wise person once told me. It seems to be the bittersweet way it works. It is the same way when the master leaves his disciples. "It is expedient for you that I go away, for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you. When he, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you unto all truth." Therefore discipleship is not prolonged unduly. Excessive reliance on a guide can make us more and more incapable of independent thought and judgement. The agony of coming to a right judgement, for instance, is part of the educative process in developing right intuitions. Brunton writes:
"It is as necessary to his disciples that he leave them deprived of his guidance as well as of the consolation of his presence as it was earlier necessary for them to have them while he was still on earth. After all, it is their own Overself that they are seeking. They must begin to seek it just where it is - within themselves and not in someone else. The time has then come when, if they are to grow at all, they must cease drawing on his light and strength and begin drawing on their own. The very hour of his departure from them is appointed in their destiny by the infinite intelligence, which has sufficient reasons for making it then, and not earlier or later. If they must henceforth strive for direct touch with the Infinite and no longer lean on the encouragement of an intermediary, this is because they are at the stage to make better progress that way, whatever their personal emotions may argue to the contrary." (238)
What happens after that for the sincere and earnest questers who wonder if they have progressed enough, or are not awakened yet? This is one possibility: my intuition tells me that once vasanas are sufficiently cleared, or faith is made firm, when you die and the body is dropped and personhood is no more, it is all love and there is no fear, no stages, discrimination (buddhi or vivek) fully awakens, and one goes straight into the lap or heart of God. And, if you do happen to come back, "so what?" "So what?," the best mantra according to Ishwar.
CHAPTER THIRTY
MASTERS DIE MANY TIMES
“When we comprehend what it is that must go into the making of a sage, how many and how diverse the experiences through which he has passed in formed incarnations, we realize that such a man’s wisdom is part of his bloodstream.” - Brunton (239)
“People who do not understand diamonds, or who do not examine them closely, may take false stones to be real. But all the same there are such things as real diamonds, and it is possible to distinguish them.” - Fenelon
I forget the context now, but, at Sawan Ashram in 1973 I remember saying something to my friend Judith to the effect that I now saw the Master as more than a mystic; that He was truly a sacrificial being, that He, in fact, had already died, and she said, "Yes, He has died many times." That penetrated my being in a new way, in that I felt it meant more than just that he had died daily in meditation, painlessly, as was often repeated on the path; I recalled Kirpal himself saying to us one time, "What more do you want, I have given you my life's breath." The phrase from Light on the Path comes to mind about the feet being bathed "in the blood of the heart," and also quotes of Brunton such as a similar one in which he says that for the sage, spirituality is literally in his blood, and another, paraphrasing Huang Yang-Ming, that “on the way to becoming a sage one will die a hundred deaths and suffer a thousand sufferings.” Pere La Combe, spiritual director of Madame Guyon, wrote: “The soul that is destined to have no other support but God himself, must pass through the strangest trials. How much agony and how many deaths must it suffer before losing the life of self.” I thought again of seeing Kirpal groaning in pain on his bed, then becoming radiant and glowing only a moment later. The image of Him as a rag doll in the hands of God, squeezed dry as if from taking on the pain and suffering of the world, only to burn it up within and then turn gracefully to emanate light and love. He often had said, "I know my own worth. I am a mere pipe. If my Master doesn't send His grace, I am nothing...You people think I am lying. I tell you what I see. God is doing everything. I do nothing. It is all God's grace and compassion."
True saints and sages suffer so much unknown to to their followers. I was reminded that Sant Darshan Singh suffered nightly such whole bodily pain in his fifties and sixties that people had to hold his body. Might this not likely be due to his absorbing karmas of his disciples?
Bhai Sahib confirmed this truth:
“Unbelievable suffering of the mind and body are necessary in order to become a Wali [Saint]. Absolute Truth is difficult to attain…One should not compare Great People, for they have died before the physical death. Such people are made to die, not once, but many times. That’s why they are beyond comparison…They go on dying…Dying all the time…The Master is the keeper of the Grace of God on earth. Only he can give it. There are exceptions. But they are very rare. Only very, very few can reach The Reality without the Master.” (240)
In the past few years of his life, Sant Kirpal Singh had much suffering, but one of his doctors confessed, “Sir, one minute you are at death’s door, and the next completely normal. I can therefore no longer treat you!” (paraphrased). Once a devotee asked him a question, "Master, is it true that Jesus died for the sins of the world?,' to which Kirpal replied, "all Masters have died for the sake of the world." The implication is that to be an active agent of grace necessitates a depth of trial more severe than that required of more ordinary souls. Another disciple, seeing the Master in severe pain, asked if He would please let him share it by taking some of it on himself. Kirpal, whose body in that moment was said to be burning-hot to the touch, said, "Look here, I appreciate your sentiments, but if you have a child would you give him poison?" One gets an appreciation for the sublime sacrifice involved.
The following beautiful account of the death of the Gyalwang Karmapa also illustrates the phenomenon of the vicarious suffering of a sage or Master-soul:
"By the time that I saw him, His Holiness had already had many operations, some parts of his body removed, things put inside him, his blood transfused, and so on. Every day the doctors discovered the symptoms of some new disease, only to find them gone the next day and replaced by another illness, as if all the diseases in the world were finding room in his flesh. For two months he had taken no solid food, and finally his doctors thought the life-supporting systems should be disconnected. But the Karmapa said, "No, I'm going to live. Leave them in place." And he did live, astonishing the doctors, and remaining seemingly at ease in his situation - humorous, playful, smiling, as if he were rejoicing at everything his body suffered. Then I thought, with the clearest possible conviction, that the Karmapa had submitted himself to the cutting, to the manifestation of all those diseases in his body, to the lack of food, in a quite intentional and voluntary way: He was deliberately suffering all of these diseases to help minimize the coming pains of war, disease, and famine, and in this way he was deliberately working to avert the terrible suffering of this dark age." (241)
The peerless sacrifice of the sage or "completed one" is dramatically depicted in a story called "In Praise of the Blessings of the Monk," from the Buddhist text Sutra of the Wise and Foolish, or The Ocean of Narratives, a series of Jatakas or rebirth stories. A householder called Majestic Being who was one hundred years old desired to become a monk, but was turned down by Sariputra, the wisest and most senior monk of the Sangha, as well as by Mahakasyapa and others, who believed he was too old to study, meditate and engage in discipline. The man wept and cried out in despair, asking what sins did he commit that he be denied becoming a monk, whereupon the Enlightened One appeared to him in all radiance and asked the reason for his sorrow. Upon hearing Majestic Being's story He spoke thus:
"Do not let your mind be troubled, householder. I myself shall ordain you. Sariputra has not, during countless aeons, exerted himself in the austerities. Nor has he, for hundreds of aeons, brought forth virtues. Sariputra has not, in previous births, allowed his head, eyes, bones, marrow, flesh, blood, skin, feet, hands, ears, and nose to be cut away and offered them freely. Sariputra has never given his body to a tiger, has not been burnt in a pit of fire, has not had his holy body pierced by a thousand iron pins, has not had his body burnt by a thousand torches. Sariputra has not given away his lands, his cities, his wives, sons, men and women slaves, elephants, chariots, or his seven precious jewels.
Sariputra has not, during the first countless kalpas, honored a hundred-thousand kotis of Buddhas. Nor did he, during the intermediary countless kalpas, honor ninety-nine thousand Buddhas. Nor, during the final countless kalpas, has he honored a hundred-thousand Buddhas [these guys sure like big numbers!], become a monk in their presence and become perfect in the Precepts and the Paramitas. Sariputra is not one who zealously teaches the Dharma. How can he say that this one may become a monk and that one may not? I alone have authority to endow one with the Dharma and to extol the Six Perfections. I alone have put on the armor of patience. I alone sit on the Vajrasana at the tree of Enlightenment. I alone have overcome the hosts of Mara and attained the bliss of a perfect Buddha. There is no one like me. Therefore, follow me and I shall ordain you." (242).
One may well wonder, might these great men have exaggerated at times?! But still, again we read:
“People in ancient times gave up their whole bodies for the sake of this matter. They stood out in the snow, worked as rice pounders, sold off their hearts and livers, burned their arms, threw themselves into roaring fires, got dismembered and cut to pieces, fed themselves to tigers and birds of prey, gave away their heads and eyes, endured a thousand kinds of pain and suffering. In sum, if you do not suffer hardship, you will not arrive at deep realization. Those with the will for the Path must certainly consider the ancients as their comrades and aspire to equal their standard.” - Yuanwu, 1063-1134 (243))
How profound the words, then, "the Master has died many times," seem to become. The sage has been said to be the summit, the crown of human evolution, the agent of the Lord in this world. For despite the simplicity suggested by some teachers of non-duality, the Idea of Man - the Perfect Man - calls for its fulfillment. The peerless Al Ghazali wrote:
"Know, 0 beloved, that man was not created in jest or at random, but marvelously made and for some great end."
Wherefore, as Brunton wrote:
“Ask for your share of the divine nectar and it shall not be withheld from you. Indeed, those who have turned from the peaceful hearth that is their due, to move through the gloomy houses of men to dispense it, have done so because of the dark flood of secret tears that break daily through the banks of human life.”
"Life is an arduous struggle for most people, but much more so for such a one who is always the hated target for the unseen powers of darkness. Do not hesitate to send him your silent humble blessing, therefore, and remember that Nature will not waste it. The enemies you are now struggling against within yourself he has already conquered, but the enemies he is now struggling against are beyond your present experience. He has won the right to sit by a hearth of peace. If he has made the greatest renunciation and does not do so it is for your sake and for the sake of others like you."
“The escape into Nirvana for him is only the escape into the inner realization of the truth whilst alive: it is not to escape from the external cycle of rebirths and deaths. It is a change of attitude. But that bait had to be held out to him at an earlier stage until his will and nerve were strong enough to endure this revelation. There is no escape except inwards. For the sage is too compassionate to withdraw into proud indifferentism and too understanding to rest completely satisfied with his own wonderful attainment. The sounds of sufferings of men, the ignorance that is the root of these sufferings, beat ceaselessly on the tympana of his ears. What can he do but answer, and answer with his very life, which he gives in perpetual reincarnation upon the cross of flesh, as a vicarious sacrifice for others. It is thus alone that he achieves immortality, not by fleeing forever--as he could if he willed--into the Great Unconsciousness, but by suffering forever the pains and pangs of perpetual rebirth that he may help or guide his own.'' (244)
Indeed, the Gospel tells us:
“They said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand in thy glory. But Jesus said unto them, ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and be baptized with the baptism that I shall be baptized with?” (Mark 10:37-38)
This is why the true Master is respected and revered in all traditions.
“The follower does not dream what the Master is doing for him, but the Master does not show anything...He fills his followers with His own thought, with His own Life. So when the child remembers Him, well, it is the Master who first loves us, remembers us. When we remember Him, He remembers us, with all His heart and soul. He is always looking after the good of His followers. He is not the body. He is the Word personified, the Word made flesh...He will never leave you, mind that! Christ said, “I shall never leave there nor forsake thee till the end of the world. The Master never leaves the disciple. He is the God in him, how can He?” - Kirpal Singh (245)
And finally:
“A disciple need never bother himself about what the Guru is doing for him. A disciple can never conceive or understand it, in its real significance. You need only know that the Guru takes you from the phenomenal to the Absolute.”
"If one feels that he is not able to love his master as he desires, it really means that he still loves his master deeply, but that he is not yet satisfied with the love he gives him. That is all. This dissatisfaction with the depth of one's love for his master is the nature of true love; and it will never disappear."
“Every sage leaves a rich legacy behind, to help us reach the Truth. It is as a result of that legacy that we have been able to meet here today. We are ungrateful wretches if we do not recognize it.” - Shri Atmananda (246)
CHAPTER THIRTY-ONE
More depth on the importance of human birth and the waking state; Ramana, Brunton, Siddharameshwar, Daskalos, Kirpal, deCaussade; Scorching of the vasanas; The anchor of the body that allows full understanding of all the states
This is a major topic which deserves a book all its own. Already discussed in Part One, it can be examined from many aspects and levels. Moreover, different traditions have their own reasons for declaring birth in a man-body a precious boon, and the only form in which one can achieve self and/or god-realization.
There are really two issues: (1) what is unique about a human birth, and (2) what is unique about attaining awakening while alive in the waking state.
Ramana gives the basic vedantic understanding:
"[The Self] must be first realized in the waking state, for it is our true nature underlying all the three states. Effort must be made only in the jagrat (waking) state and the Self realized here and now. It will afterwards be understood and realized to be continuous Self, uninterrupted by jagrat, svapna, and sushupti." (247)
Brunton writes:
“Both Hindu and Buddhist teachers concur in regarding the human creature as being the most fortunate of all living creatures, because he alone has the potential and opportunity to become spiritually “aware.”
“Every life in the fleshly body represents an opportunity to obtain spiritual realization because man can only discover his divinity to the fullest extent while in the waking state.” (248)
“Here, in this wakeful state, on this physical plane, we may move towards the fulfillment of life’s higher purpose. But in ever-changing dream or ever-still sleep there is no such opportunity. Hence the New Testament suggests that we will work “whilst it is day, for the night comedy when no man can work.” - John 9:4.
“Waking world is the crux. Realization must be won here and now.” (249)
“We must look for eternity in the present moment now, and not in some far off afterlife. We must seek for infinity here, in this place, and not in a psychic world beyond the physical body.” (250)
The latter quote may appear to be a bitter pill in that it seems to flat out contradict the Sant Mat position, but does it actually do so? Much pondering is required. For instance, how can a saint be said to “go to Sach Khand in the blink of an eye, as Sawan Singh said, if he is not in some sense already there?
Kabir said:
O friend! hope for Him whilst you live, know whilst you live,
understand whilst you live: for in life deliverance abides.
If your bonds be not broken whilst living, what hope of
deliverance in death?
It is but an empty dream, that the soul shall have union with Him
because it has passed from the body:
If He is found now, He is found then...
If you have union now, you shall have it hereafter." - trans. Rabindranath Tagore
Samartha Ram Das in Dasbodh agrees with Kabir:
"The concept that realization will be in the future or in the next life, like some obligation to be paid by God in the future, is totally without substance. The power of discrimination between the Eternal and the ephemeral, where one's gain is immediate, is not like that. With right thought, the benefit is immediate. The living being is freed from worldly life and all the doubts about birth and death are wiped away...One becomes "without a body" (videha) even though within the body, and even though one is doing, he is not doing anything." (251)
Sri Nisargadatta’s guru, Siddharameshwar Maharaj, similarly said:
“Some say that you will attain Brahman only after death. However, when you do not attain it while living, how can you attain it after death? What is the proof of experience that that is the case? Who can give that proof? One fool says, “How can we be free now at this moment? When the world comes to an end, then liberation is there automatically.” These fools do not realize that when one world ends, another is bound to come into being. It is stupid to say that attaining Brahman will be there as a matter of course when the illusion vanishes, or when the body dies. Only one who is beyond the body while actually in it, and who does not perceive the illusion, has achieved “the happiness of the state of Brahman.” This must be attained while we are living in the body. When one really understands he enjoys the body as well as the world.” (252)
However, it may not be as black and white as all that. We have the assurance of Siddharameshwar that ”Those whom the Saints bless become Brahman. If your bow down to a Saint only once with full faith, he will make you like himself.” Sant Mat gives the same assurance, with the pledge that for the sincere initiate there can be continued progress after death and an unbroken connection with his Master. Bhai Sahib said much the same, emphasizing that in his [Sufi] system the expectation is liberation in one life, and if there is some delay it is done at the time of death, and third place, there are other lokas where one can reach liberation after death. Ramana, as mentioned earlier, in fact also gave out these options! And Kabir in the passages above was speaking mainly to those under the influence of priests with empty promises and and teachers not involved in a liberating spiritual process. He didn't mean you were doomed if you were not fully enlightened before the time of your death. In any case, with full faith one may pass over with the prayer on your lips,
“Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.” -Psalms 23:6
There has been a debate going on for two thousand years about liberation in life (Jivan Mukti) versus liberation after death (Videha Mukti) - also discussed in Part One - and there are pros and cons for each position. All are agreed that more progress can be made much faster while here. The Sants, Sufis, and some Buddhists do posit the possibility of achieving liberation from various other lokas, however. It likely depends on how much purification and understanding have been realized while living on earth. The reason given in Vedanta is that only in the waking state can one experience and compare all of the states and realize their underlying essence.
Does all of this contradict some of what was said in the section on sleep? No, it highlights that the complete non-dual sahaja state is achieved in waking life alone wherein the different states are understood and are no longer in opposition to each other. This would be similar, we venture to say, that in Sant Mat the furthest realization comes after one has reached the innermost state, Anami, or what could be said to be the Subjective Logos within, and then realizes in the fully projected waking state that the world is of the same nature as that Anami, absorbs it into Himself, and comes into one's True Eternal Identity as the Universal Self and not the individual soul. And this is said to be a practice until stabilization in that condition is achieved. In Zen - not to exactly equate two different schools - they speak of the “practice after satori, or the “downward practice.” Most saints and sages and high spiritual traditions mention this stage where the inner with the outer are reconciled. Guru Nanak in the Jap Ji hailed the “One Unmanifest-Manifest, the Primal, Pure, Eternal of All Ages.” Brunton writes:
“Only for the sage is the truth always present, no matter whether he is with others, whether he is working, or whether he is in trance, and this truth is continuous awareness of one Reality alone and one Self alone.” (253)
Whether the adept continues to enjoy or go into samadhis because of a prior habit, or because of the unique scope of his work, the essential factor is his awareness of and abidance in Reality at all times. When someone, for instance, once asked Sant Kirpal Singh if he still meditated, he replied, “Look here, if someone has got his PhD does he have to go back and learn the ABC’s?”
Brunton also offers an interesting quote that may shed some additional light on this consideration:
“The term “waking state” suggests the actual moments of passing from one state to the other, the transition itself, and is therefore inaccurate to describe as a static condition. Hence I try to use the term “wakefulness” or the “wakeful” state instead.” (254)
The reason this may be of interest is because the Sants describe penetrating to the higher planes in “full wakefulness,” as contrasted with the relative vagueness of the dream or usual after-life experience. That is to say, in deep meditation, or before birth, we are essentially “not here.” So why did we come here, and why is it essential, as nearly all saints and sages agree, if being “there” were the goal? The Sants also stress the biblical passage quoted above, i.e., “work while it is day,” - that is, while “here,” but often seem to imply inner experience as the be-all and end-all. One reason that is given is that here one has the anchor of the body, in which to compare and contrast both dimensions, while on the inside everything, at least at the lower levels, is fluid and therefore difficult to discern. Another reason is that in Vedanta the gods are said to be always in jagrat or the state of waking, higher than the ordinary individual who might be said to be dreaming through the inner planes, but still not turiya or turiyatita. That seems to require integration of all states. It appears that the inner experiences to be truly understood must be repeatedly held up or seen in contrast to the ordinary waking condition, and that something fundamental is gained thereby. It is not enough merely to go “there” and bask in the relative superlative effulgence of the inner states. This is hard for the usual mystic to understand. This is not to put down such a lofty achievement. It is a necessary stage on many paths. We were already “there,” however, exactly why did we need to come here? To pay off karma, build character, and to understand For all of these, but the latter, specifically, sages say the human waking state is necessary. But it may be said that only a supremely rational consciousness, or one with the utmost balanced development and complete surrender, is capable of seeing beyond the ecstatic states. In Buddhism, for instance, the inward progression is: calmness, ecstasy, peace, insight, and then Nirvana. And it is significant that the Buddha experienced his passage into Nirvana at daybreak as he came out of his meditation. This, the waking state was a key to his final realization. It was not achieved while in trance, as necessary as that may be in a preliminary sense. Is the same thing not the case on the path of Sant Mat? That everything is to be experienced as reality in full wakefulness? There is much to be pondered here.
Returning to the first of these ideas, the human birth, numerous traditions argue that only humans have the capacity to reflect and learn to discriminate about their experiences and also then yearn to transcend them. This is often exemplified by the parable of the prodigal son. Sant Mat has a couple of variations on this theme regarding how souls were caused to “fall” from their original true home in Sach Khand. Sufism has a version, and esoteric Christianity has an elaborate version. For example, Stylianos Atteshlis, aka Daskalos, 20th century Christian mystic and esotericist, writes, using his own terminology:
“Prior to passing through the Human Idea, humanity is an Archangel within the Archangelic Orders. Before their expression, Human Beings and Archangels, as Holy Monads (Spirits), differ little from each other. Later, however, when they (humans) return to be within Absolute Beingness, the difference is great. Archangels cannot obtain Super Self-consciousness in any of their expressions. This is because they have their Being within the Eternal Now and are exposed to various experiences without being able to make comparisons. Conversely, Human Beings as Prodigal Children are fully exposed to the worlds of duality, and are therefore able to develop a keen sense of individuated Self-consciousness. Such considerations inspired Paramahansa Yogananda to say, ‘The human form is higher than the angel form. Man is the highest being in Creation because he aspires to freedom’."
"It is the Soul which distinguishes humans from other Beings, for Archangels have no need of a Soul as they each belong to a communal Order. It is the Soul that harbors the Divine Individuation of each human Spirit-Soul-Ego when we return to our Father. The Soul is the womb of Super Self-consciousness.” (255)
The Sant Mat versions of this prodigality of the soul are discussed in the section “Marked Souls and the Fall."
Sant Mat, Hindu, and, to some extent Buddhism, speak of this world as the field in which to pay karmic debts so one can ascend higher. That is another benefit of a human birth. The formation of karma requires conscious volition, which is largely a human characteristic. As deviously mentioned, in Sant Mat while one’s vasanas are certainly purified in the waking state, the sanchit storehouse of karmas or samskaras from time immemorial determining rebirths are said to be fully eradicated when the purified soul passes through the pool of manasarovar in Daswan Dwar on their inward ascent, through the grace of the Master Power.
Advaitic sages like Ramana Maharshi, on the other hand, speak differently about the issue of karmas and samskaras: they say it is an (often long and drawn out) affair that must occur in the waking state, whereby the vasanas (tendencies or complexes) of egoity are scorched not exclusively by mystical inversion but rather by checking them in consciousness as they arise and returning consciousness to its source. That is, a process of recognizing that one's desire are fundamentally ideas, then, understanding that ideas arise from mind, and therein gradually overcoming attachment, objectification, and compulsive extroversion. Or perhaps more simpler put, abiding as awareness and letting all arise without the reactivity of attraction or repulsion, for as long as that goes on. This process needs to go on even after the attainment of mystical experiences. That is to say, the consciousness, and oneness, must become stabilized or known under any and all conditions, and, most essentially, in the fully embodied waking state. It is easy to feel 'detached' when enjoying mystical states, but not so easy when in the body and not having access to such 'sweets.' The Sants often give the argument that the very reason for having a contact within, or mystical experiences, is to detach one from the 'outer enjoyments'. However, the world must then also be known (to be not separate from the Self), and not just avoided. This argument is essential to advaita. So mere introversion, they say, is not a permanent solution. According to vedanta the purpose of yoga: to purify the mind and render it fit for inquiry into the Self, not for the various changing states one may attain thereby.
One can see how, in a way, the exclusive pursuit of inner experiences does not automatically purify the habitual tendencies, but may in fact be a bypass of a necessary transformation of the lower nature. It depends entirely on an individual's particular needs how far that process has to go, but it seems likely, once again, that the important fixed habitual tendencies (vasanas) must be scorched or purified while here in the body - even while the entire sanchit storehouse may be eradicated, as the Sants say, when the soul passes through Daswan Dwar on its upward assent, or by the grace of the Sant at the time of initiation. The point is that something is missing in our understanding if we think that there will be an automatic purification of all karmas simply by mystic meditation.
The world is not separate from Atman, Self, or God, and it must be realized as such. How can one realize that it is not separate from oneself if he is always tending towards dissociation from it? This is the problem. Not only does the desire nature need to be transformed, but the cognitive tendencies or mental habits of objectification must be undone. That is to say, in blank trance there is nothing to know; only in the full waking state can one learn to see everything like a dream, as the mind's own creations, and then fundamentally as not other than oneself, i.e., that there is 'no second thing', or, as Kirpal said, "what you see is you." One other way this might be expressed, somewhat paradoxically, is to say that "if you know the body is not real while in the body, then you really know it." Or, "if you know that you are not really in the body while you are in the waking state, apparently while in the body, then you really know it." If you only know it when in trance, then the knowledge is not firm or clear knowledge. Might this all be one reason Sants like me Kirpal Singh say it takes hundreds of years inside to accomplish what can take much less time on earth? The reason why is that it is harder to see everything as a dream on the inside - as in fact when there everything almost can seem more real! Without realization it is really dreamlike. But as experiences on earth are etched in stone, as it were - with lessons hard-won - if one comes to see the world as dreamlike, it is easier to see the inner - at least the lower planes - in the same light, as equally unreal. Here there seems a divergence: mysticism often portrays the subtle realms as more real than the physical, while vedanta often argues they are equally unreal. The question of Sach Khand or the Atman are a different story, for there you are touching reality, even though it is not the final state.
The point may be raised, “to what extent are you really in the waking state when you are in deep meditation?” They may call it superconsciousness, but the Vedantin will argue that, even so, it is really dreamlike or sleep-like. Remember, the Buddha had his enlightenment upon coming out of his trance and first seeing the morning star. There appears to be something about having the anchor of the body that allows full understanding of all the states.
Everyone may face this differently, we do not say one way or the other is exclusively true or the only way. I only acknowledge that in my own case, the freedom from desire experienced early on in my 'mystic' career pales in comparison from what has been growing from a lifetime of direct encounter, feeling, transformation, and understanding while really in the body, courtesy of my guru (for more, see "Death of a Dream" in Appendix A). On the nature of desire, vedantist V.S. Iyer states:
"The reason of hunger or desire lies in the memory of the past satisfaction of the hunger or desire. This is repeated continuously. This is the process of the vasanas. There is no new creation really. The vasanas cause you to repeat the desires. Repeated imagination makes you a slave of the desire which has been re-echoed from the past; the desire is only imagination deeply rooted. This karma is created. When a man realizes at last that his desires are only ideas he is able to get rid of them. Until then they will go on repeating themselves." (256)
One can easily see that this is a somewhat different view on eradicating vasanas, a process in consciousness and not just a gratuitous or automatic mystical experience. However, maybe not completely different if one considers the Naam or Word itself to be of the nature of consciousness, and also experienceable both inside and outside of the body. It can certainly help assist the process. The 'living flame of love' the mystics have spoken of can be said to drive out and package the impurities so that what was once an impenetrable mass of resistance comes out more and more in manageable, discrete chunks. Moreover, this purification process itself is only carried to fruition by the God/Master - and the entire cosmos - it is not something that the disciple or sadhaka can do by himself; but the latter needs to learn to cooperate with it. it is largely a matter of endurance. It is a humble and humbling process, as well as an art that takes time to get the hang of.
Kirpal Singh said, "I know what I am making for myself after this life." Darshan Singh said, "I derive satisfaction from the cold-blooded murder of my desires." Of course, this can be interpreted in an old-school way. Without desire one would be dead. Astrologically it is symbolized by the function of Mars, and is not wrong or evil. But the entire psyche is misaligned, and generally a 're-wiring' or purification will take place sooner or later whether one's path be enquiry or devotion or a combination. The vasanas are burned not solely by a mystical trick, through developing concentration, nor solely by a cognitive recognition through awareness. The blood of the heart comes into play as well. We can know joy and pain here that cannot be experienced in higher planes, and we can purify tendencies here in a short period that, the Masters say, would take many years up there - if it were even possible. This point was emphasized repeatedly in Part Three. Therefore in times of trial, we should learn, as deCaussade writes, to:
"...thank God for having been so good as to put His own hand to the work, and to operate in your soul in a few months, what with the help of ordinary grace would have taken you, perhaps, twenty years to accomplish, namely, to get rid of a hidden self-love, and of a pride all the more dangerous in being more subtle and/or imperceptible...God has given you a great grace in giving you light to recognize this, for never would you have been able to discover it yourself...The heavenly Physician has therefore treated you with the greatest kindness in applying an energetic remedy to your malady, and in opening your eyes to the festering sores which were gradually consuming you, in order that the sight of the matter which ran from them would inspire you with horror. No defect caused by self-love or pride could survive a sight so afflicting and humiliating. I conclude from my knowledge of this merciful design that you ought neither to desire nor to hope for the cessation of the treatment to which you are being subjected until a complete cure has been effected...Look forward to the happy moment in which the full knowledge of this abyss of misery completes within you the destruction of all self-confidence and foolish self-satisfaction. Then will it be that, flying from the... putrefaction of this tomb you will enter with joyful transport the bosom of God...This is the new life in Jesus Christ, this is the life of the new man after which the old has been destroyed." (257)
The "tomb" here is not just meant as the body, but rather the root of self-love or egoism, and the "bosom of God" is not meant as an ascended place elsewhere, but rather the reality of the one great Heart, realized here and now. Every compulsive tendency awakened and purified here makes the afterlife more awake as well. The transformation of the psychic and noetic - or astral and mental/causal - bodies is carried over when the physical body drops. This is true whether one has succeeded in piercing the 'veil of incarnation', i.e., been a yogic success in one's meditation or not. Nothing real is lost.
Iyer the vedantin, somewhat in the manner of Faqir Chand, also gives a philosophic interpretation of the bath in Manasarovar (Sanskrit: "manas-sarovar", or "lake of mind”), which for the Sants is a mystical bath in Daswan Dwar. For Iyer, the world in front of us, including the body, is the lake of mind that one must be immersed in until he has firmly established that all is an idea, or a mental appearance. The epistemological argument goes: the reality of matter is basically a guess; we can only know what appears in consciousness; therefore, everything we can know is an idea. This understanding, he says, when adhered to moment by moment effectively dissolves the world into Mind, and one realizes in his understanding that he is Atman. This, he says, is equivalent of the religious pilgrimage to Lake Manasarovar where one takes his ritualistic bath before going on to Kailas. For Iyer, Kailas signifies Atman.
To 'return to samsara', for him, means 'to take this world as real.' Simply by dissociating from it or negating it may tell you something about the 'I’ (the inner soul), but does not eliminate this assumption of substantiality when you return, nor will it tell you what the world is or in what it arises; only seeing, facing, and understanding it will accomplish that, according to vedanta.
This interpretation of the importance of the waking state goes hand in hand with the meaning given by vedanta for the value of the human birth itself: only in such a birth is higher reason (vidya vritti or buddhi) fully active, i.e., the faculty that discriminates truth from falsehood, the ultimately real from the unreal. And it is this reality which, imo, made the sage Shri Atmananda say that, given this grace of human birth, if we did not take advantage of what the past sages have left us “we were nothing but ungrateful wretches.”
Sant Mat recognizes this, too, of course, but with a different method, approach and understanding.
Iyer makes no mention of the mystic interpretation of vasana-eradication as given in Sant Mat. Of course, because he was not a mystic, nor had mystic access to those transcendental realms, one might say that, as great a pundit as he was, perhaps his view was rather one-dimensional. We do not know the answer to this, neither having achieved permanent gyan nor having gone to Daswan Dwar. To truly 'eradicate' karmas is a great task, no doubt; even the path of true gyan can be quite steep with real requirements asked of its aspirants. Nor are they dogmatically opposed to the concept of Grace, as some Buddhists might be. Which leads to our next major topic: a detailed examination of the relationship between karma and grace.
But before we move on, it may be said that much of the previous discussion paints a rather negative assessment of our fall and redemption, overall predicament, and accompanying remedy: solely one of merely eliminating karmas and overcoming something “wrong.” For a more positive view we refer the reader to “Outline of the System of Plotinus" from The Shrine of Wisdom, on the Wisdom’s Goldenrod Center for Philosophic Studies website, wherein it is summarized:
"But in order to realize that eternal life and become a conscious and active participant in It, it is requisite for the Immortal Soul to be associated first with that which is mortal, finite and transient ere it can learn to recognize Eternity, the Infinite and the Spirit which will unite it to the Supreme."
Thus, manifestation and our association with it is inherently meaningful, full of divine purpose, and not merely a trap or an illusion as many mystical schools portray it. And so, Brunton writes:
"It is only the beginner who needs to think of the quest as separate from the common life, something special, aloof, apart. The more proficient knows that it must become the very channel for that life." (258)
CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO
KARMA AND GRACE - A lengthy exploration of two complementary divine laws: Karma - (Sanskrit) - “action or deed”, and Karam - (Persian) - “grace, mercy, kindness, compassion” - just switch two letters and all is explained; The views of many Teachers
This is a brief introduction to this section. Once more, the issue of purification of karmas, and/or vasanas or egoic tendencies comes up. The general Sant Mat answer to this is rather unique. In the lineages it is sometimes said that the sanchit karmas, that is, the vasanas and karmas, from time immemorial are eradicated forever by the Master at the time of initiation. However, upon a closer look it is clear that this is a not quite correct interpretation. What they promise is that at the time of initiation the sanchit storehouse of karmas is transferred from the control of 'Dharam Raj', the Lord of Death, or the 'Lords of Karma', to the Master-Power for future dispensation, and the promise given is that the timeline of any future births an initiate will require is shortened, sometimes said to be no more than four. This in itself is a stupendous boon, as even the Buddha said that the "stream-enterer" would usually have up to seven more births before reaching nirvana - if in fact reaching nirvana and Sach Khand are the same. Because the sanchit karmas are in the hands of the Master-Power, portions of "good" karma can be released for faster progress, and likewise portions of "bad"karma can be released - for faster progress! (because of accelerated purification). Because more progress can be achieved on this earth-plane in a far shorter time than on higher planes (where the equivalent takes “ten times as long,” or “years instead of months”), Sant Darshan Singh and other Masters have said that this is in fact one of the main reasons a Master may chose another earth-life for a soul:
“Masters take the entire picture into account and give the maximum possible benefit to the soul. They usually place the souls on the inner planes. The soul remains there and meditates, and in due course the Master takes the soul to higher and higher stages, according to the soul’s progress, until it reaches its Eternal Home. Finally, after passing through the higher stages, the soul attains ultimate communion with God. This is how the Master takes care of a disciple.” (259)
The Master’s grace is said to be all in all, however, and can alter many seeming necessities.
The pralabd karmas, those making up this lifetime, are left alone, otherwise one would die at the time of initiation. The kriyaman (in Hinduism called agami) karmas are those one accumulates in this life from day to day by unrighteous living, and are supposedly kept to a minimum by meditation, moral actions, selfless service, and eating a vegetarian diet. It is said that if one does this adequately with full faith, then either during life or after death when the soul passes through Manasrovar sheds its causal body, all one's past karma (already in the process of being scorched by communing with the Naam) are then said to be definitively wiped out. Otherwise, in some cases if this has not been reached, the accumulated kriyaman karma may require another birth to be purified.
This will, no doubt, raise the hair on the neck of some confirmed advaitins, who may not even believe in the concept of karma. So be it. To them it might be said, "see you next life." Just kidding. Vedanta, however, usually does recognize karma. Additionally, however, on the path of Sant Mat it is also said that if one has no overwhelming desires left and is devoted to the Master, he may decide that you need not take another human birth, but can continue progressing from the higher planes. However again, it is also said that one can progress more rapidly on earth than up above (another analogy given is hundreds of years up there compared to a few years down here), and that is one of the reasons the Master may choose another more congenial-to-spiritual-progress human birth for the disciple:
"The Guru may give happiness or misery, for he has to make a beautiful form from a rough piece of stone and therefor has to wind up the karmas; but a true follower will never complain, no matter what condition he has to face in life - no matter what hardships the Guru allows...The Guru does allow a long rope, in order to test the disciple's depth in the water, but he never leaves him." (260)
It can be said that just as Kal and Master from a non-dual view appear as two aspects or powers of One God, so also do karma and grace intertwine. Karma can be viewed as an attribute of God: the aspect of Justice. Guillore writes:
“God wills that those who turn heartily to Him shall be purified from all the stains of their past life, and in proportion to His designs for the soul’s perfection, so will often be the sharpness of this purification. And in all the purificative way, nothing is more cleansing than the inward suffering caused by past sin, which is as a fire by which God burns away the rust and dross of the soul. Be it your part as director to let this purification be accomplished to the full. If you take the metal from out the furnace before the melting process is completed, that dross may never be purged.”
“Our Lord has said, “Thou shall not come out thence until thou hast paid the uttermost farthing,” and a good director will not hinder the fulfillment of this due justice. But if we consider the subject calmly, how few among us really adore the Justice of God. Of all His Attributes, this it is to which we pay least homage, because such homage consists of crosses, temptations, inward trials; and we all would fain be quit of these. Everyone evokes God’s Goodness and Mercy, but none His Divine Justice.” (261)
As discussed in the sections on Kal, Kirpal Singh said, “After all, this power has been given by whom?” In other words, Divine Justice is ultimately from God, not Kal. But as for calling them two distinct Powers, well, he adds, “that is a way of expression.” This is a delicate topic, and one's perspective on it will inevitably change as time goes by and he makes his way through life.
Two essential and complementary universal laws present themselves: Karma and Grace, Self-Effort and Grace, or Karma and Forgiveness
Karma - (Sanskrit) - “action or deed”
Karam - (Persian) - “grace, mercy, kindness, compassion”
How closely related they are in etymology! Karma and grace, not easy to separate:
“You must believe in the fineness of Divine mercy even when that mercy humbles, afflicts and tries you. It is a certainty that the soul never really loves and believes more than at those times when it is afflicted. Whether you believe it or not (and whether you consent to it or not), those doubtings and fears and tribulations that beset you are nothing else but the refinements of His love.” - Michael Molinos (262)
Plotinus writes: " Even a sage may not always be able to distinguish between Providence (Grace, Divine Mercy) and Necessity (Karma)." “Divine Providence determines the Reason-Principle (or Logos) of the Cosmos to be a principle of Good, and not of Evil.” Plotinus says that Evil is caused not by Providence, but by Necessity. Evil can only exist as a lack of Good. Human beings are free to choose their own actions, and are not forced to be evil.
Some of the philosophers distinguish between Grace and Providence. In this case Providence is Divine guidance or care, of a person or the universe itself, in general. Grace refers to help given directly to man by the Divine, advancing him spiritually and/or eradicating otherwise inevitable Karmas or Necessity.
Sometimes Providence is equated with Fate or Destiny, as in a “predetermined course of events,” or the “fixed natural order of the universe.” Or it is referred to as “a power or agency that cares for or guides” either of these. Finally, “Divine Providence” is sometimes used as a name of God.
The Turkish word “Kismet” [Persian “Qismat,” Arabic “qisma”, meaning division, portion, fate, destiny, the Will of Allah] is of similar meaning and has been contrasted with karma by one Theravadin practitioner as follows:
“Kismet” means fate, destiny, pre determination by God or some inexplicable forces. Which means there is nothing you can do to change it as everything is pre-decided for you. 'Karma in Sanskrit or 'Kamma' in Pali means volitional or intentional action in Buddhism. 'Vipaka' is the result of the volitional action or Kamma. Hence Kamma Vipaka means volitional action and its result or effect popularly translated as cause and effect. Good begets good and evil begets evil as it is known. Our past Kamma can give effect to us in our present life, in our immediate subsequent life or future lifes. So in a way and certain extent, our present life is predetermined by our past Kamma. Our present Kamma will determine our future either in this lifetime or future lifetimes. So in this respect, we can say that Kamma determines our fate or destiny or Kismet in certain circumstances. The difference being Kismet is predetermined by an external God or inexplicable forces but Kamma is created by our own self using our thinking mind. Of course, the workings of Kamma is not as straightforward as one plus one equals two. According to the Buddha, the workings of Kamma Vipaka is very complex and cannot be understood by ordinary worldlings. Not all that happens to us is due to our Kamma but I would say Kamma plays a big part. We can alter or influence our destiny or fate by our intention of creating good kamma through our body, speech and mind but its not possible in the case of Kismet.” (263)
So perhaps we are back to where we started. It can be seen that a “predetermined course of events” could be easily interpreted as either karma or providence. Either way faith and acceptance are called for. Such acceptance, however, does not rule out responding to alter or try to change situations for the better. Thus corollaries to karma and grace then are the issue of self-effort and grace, as well as free-will and determinism. The Sants generally say that man has 25% free will, with 75% determined by God. But as far as that 25% goes towards our spiritual progress, Paramhansa Yogananda says that it represents 100% of our efforts! Ishwar Puri said the 25%/75% Sant Mat rule is an illusion, that it is 100% determined. But you won't know that until you have tried. Brunton explains:
“This blind abject apathy of many fatalistic Orientals is based, not on real spirituality, but on fallacious thinking. “Because the whole universe is an expression of God’s will, and because every event happens within the universe, therefore every calamity must be accepted as expressing God’s will.” So runs the logic. The best way to expose the fallacy lurking in it is to place it by the side of a counter-syllogism. Because the whole universe is an expression of God’s will, and because every individual resistance of calamity happens within the universe, therefore such resistance is the expression of God’s will!” (264)
And:
“No man need resign himself to utter helplessness in the face of fate. Let him try to change what seems inevitable, and his very trying may be also fated! In other words, what is destined to happen, paradoxically comes to pass through the exercise of free will.” 265)
The reader will recall how closely this mirrors the words of Roshi Yasutani, “For the truly enlightened man subjection to the law of cause and effect and freedom from it are one Truth.” The reader will also remember that it was after Lord Krishna gave Arjuna the cosmic vision, that he told him his dharma was to go out and fight against his enemies. Was this situation, and his subsequent actions, destiny or karma? No doubt opinions will vary, but the lack of personal volition or choice on his part argues against a simple designation of karma.
Are we reborn only because of karma? That is another mystery. PB writes, suggesting further distinctions for us to ponder:
“None of us is thrown into this world against his will. All of us are here because we want to be here. We reincarnate in part through the pressure of accumulated karma and in part through the presence of habitual tendencies. Some are eager to descend into a body again, but others are half-dragged down...All things contribute to the making of man - the history of his past and the climate of his land, the people among whom he is born, and his own particular tendencies. The most important is his karma.” (266)
But then he seems to argue against anything like group karma. Gurinder Singh said likewise: that all karma is individual. PB states:
“It is true that the whole of what man experiences is not wholly of his own direct making and that only part of it is so. It is true that his nation’s life affects and is responsible for some of the color which his own takes on. But why was he born in that particular nation during that particular period? The answer must again be that he is getting the recompense of his own past making. For his nation may be defeated and wounded, or it may stride triumphant and prosperous.” (267)
No doubt the Buddhists would consider all of these things part of one's karma. Without assigning blame or ultimate cause, Sri Nisargadatta said:
" [Q; Your people speak of karma and retribution]. M: It is a gross approximation: in reality we are all creators and creations of each other, causing and bearing each other's burdens." (268)
However, he also said that "all accounts are squared in the end." But, in any case, the law of Nature that breaks up one's karma into repeated embodiments is, arguably, not karma, but the divine mercy. PB writes:
“When he looks back upon the long series of earth lives which belong to his past, he is struck afresh by the supreme wisdom of Nature and by the supreme necessity of this principle of recurring embodiment. If there had been only one continuous earth life, his progress would have been brought to an end, he would have been cluttered up by his own past, and he could not have advanced in new directions. This past would have surrendered him like a circular wall. How unerring the wisdom and how infinite the mercy which, by breaking this circle of necessity, gives him the chance of a fresh start again and again, sets him free to make new beginnings!...The law which pushes us into, or out of, physical bodies, is a cosmic law. There is no blind chance about it.” (269)
While a maturing aspirant may intuit the meaning of seemingly predetermined events, the answer may perhaps be definitively known only by access to what the ancients referred to as the “three sisters of the spinning wheel,” or what the mystics of Sant Mat identify as the uppermost dimension of the plane or level of consciousness beyond the trigunatmic domain of the physical, astral, and causal bodies - wherein the seed karmas are weaved into destiny - but not yet the region of pure Spirit which alone is free, and the source of grace. This may refer to the level of what the theosophists referred to as the “seed-atom” of the body and its experiences. PB explains:
“All his experiences during the ages upon ages of his existence as a finite center of life and consciousness have left their record in the mysterious and measureless seed-atom of his body.” (270)
Might this be akin to where the sanchit or reserve storehouse of karmas are stored - above Trikuti as Sawan Singh wrote? In any case, a grand mystery is karma indeed, as both Krishna and the Buddha have proclaimed. But then, the Master is a grand mystery as well:
“On the day of reckoning thou shalt know for certain, in the land of darveshes there is no count of deeds.” - Hafiz
Brunton writes that one
“resigns himself to God’s will...because he realizes that it will bring him only what is best for him or only what is needed by him or only what has been earned by him.” (271)
Thus Providence and Necessity, grace and karma are two complementary laws behind what is otherwise referred to as fate or destiny. The divine Overself or Master can, if so moved, even release a portion of favorable karma to smooth or accelerate ones spiritual path. Swami Rama of The Himalayan Institute called that, “putting a comma” in ones karmas. This could also be called an act of grace.
PB offers another distinguish feature of Providence and destiny:
“Fate [i.e., Providence] is something which descends on us from outside ourselves and to which we have made no visible contribution - as in the death of a beloved one. Destiny [i.e., Karma] is something which arises out of our own causation.” (272)
Of course here Fate would include the karma of others with whom we interact, in addition to divine intervention or grace. PB strongly believed in a guiding hand which he called the World-Idea [the expressed intelligence of the World-Mind, i.e., God) and not just a blindly mechanical intermeshing of karmas:
“Throw out the idea of coincidence. Remember there is a World-Idea. There is meaning in life, in its events, happenings, karmas, meetings, and opportunities...If he works faithfully on the quest, every experience which is essential to his inner growth will gravitate to him, every thing or person needful to his development will be drawn to him, subject to some synchronization with his personal karma.” (273)
Kirpal Singh succinctly put it this way, “Whatever comes, either it is a reaction of our past or it comes from above.” (274)). It is most often difficult to distinguish the two, but in each case it is for our ultimate educational benefit and should be accepted as such.
Even so, life remains mysterious. Sri Nisargadatta said:
“Calling it destiny explains little. When it happens, you cannot say why it happens and you merely cover up your ignorance by calling it karma or Grace, or the Will of God.” (275)
And there may be a third factor, perhaps best expressed in the Gospel story of Christ and the man blind from birth. When asked by his disciples the reason for the man’s blindness, Jesus replied:
“Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.” (John 9.3)
Then Jesus - the second “Adam”- moistened some dirt making clay and rubbed it in the man’s eyes and restored his sight, which, according to Irenaeus, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Cyril, was to show how the hand of God had made the first Adam from the dust of the earth.
We suggest it may be best to keep an open mind on certain matters. There is no doubt that the views of Orthodox Christianity are quite different from those of India, be they Vedanta or the path of the Sants. For instance, for the Holy Elders, Christ as the Word, Logos, or Third Person of the Trinity, is a beginningless begetting or producing out of God’s Essence, while the creation is a work of God’s Will (Fiat!) out of nothing (ex nihilo). This is hardly acceptable to the higher philosophies for India, where, for instance, it is an axiom that nothing can ever be said to come out of nothing. For Brunton, the soul of man is “rooted” in God, while for the Orthodox the soul is created by God, and is divine by participation in God, but is not a part of God or in any way of the same essence as that of God. Which of course is also at odds with the Maha Vakya “ahambrahmasmi” of the Sants. When studying a different system, however, it is often wise to try to understand it on its own terms first. There may be something we can learn from it, and there is so little we really know after all.
Sri Ramakrishna once told this story:
“Once a king went hunting in a forest with his minister. The king’s finger was accidentally cut and he asked the minister, ‘Why did I get this cut?’ The minister replied, ‘O kind, there must be a deep meaning behind this accident.’ The king was not satisfied with this answer, so he pushed the minister into a deep well. Fortunately there was not much water in the well. Then the king asked the minister, ‘Is there any hidden cause behind my cruel action?’ ‘Of course,’ replied the minister."
"In the meantime some robbers were passing through the forest, and they came upon the king alone and decided to chop off his head in front of their deity, Mother Kali. After performing a ritual they took the king to the sacrificial place, and then noticed the cut on his finger. Now according to their custom, a defective body cannot be offered to the deity, so they verbally abused see the king and set him free. The king thanked God, and remembering the wisdom of his minister, rushed back to the well and rescued him. Then the king narrated what had happened and apologized to the minister for his rude behavior. The latter said, ‘O king, what God does is good for us. If we had both been caught by those robbers, I would have been beheaded. You saved my life by pushing me into the well.” (276)
“Unfathomable is the way of Karma.” says Lord Krishna (Bhagavad-Gita 4.17)
And,
“Steady faith is stronger than destiny. Destiny is the result of causes, mostly accidental, and is therefore loosely woven. Confidence and hope will overcome it easily.” - Sri Nisargadatta (277)
“There is much that we must let stand as inexplicable, must accept as a mystery, and thus avoid falling into the trap of smooth intellectual theories.” - Paul Brunton (278)
In poetic language the mystic Hafiz appears to suggest that karma and grace are one:
“To the tavern of ruin, by my own wish.
Everything that has happened to me
Took place through some agreement
Made in pre-eternity.” (279)
Fenelon writes:
“With the exception of sin, nothing happens, in this world, out of the will of God. It is He that is the author, ruler, and bestowed of all. He has numbered the hairs of our head, the leaves of every tree, the sand upon the sea-shore, and the drops of the ocean. When He made the universe, his wisdom weighed and measured every atom. It is he that breathes into us the breath of life, and renews it every moment. He it is that knows the number of our days, and that holds in his all-powerful hand, the keys of the tomb to open or to shut.” (280)
But still, with all these varying views by way of introduction, let us see if some further clarification can be given on this important matter. A young J. Krishnamurti once wrote:
“You must bear your karma cheerfully, whatever it may be, taking it as an honor that suffering comes to you, because it shows that the Lords of Karma think you worth helping. However hard it is, be thankful it is no worse. Remember you are of but little use to the Master until your evil karma is worked out, and you are free. By offering yourself to Him, you have asked that your karma may be hurried, and so now in one or two lives you work through what otherwise might have been spread over a hundred. But in order to make the best out of it, you must bear it cheerfully, gladly.” (281)
Paul Brunton, The Notebooks of Paul Brunton, all quotes from Vol.12, Part 2, chapters 4, 5, excerpt where noted. This is a fairly long selection of quotes:
"The eternal laws of karma will not cease operating merely for the asking and cannot violate their own integrity. They are impersonal and cannot be cajoled into granting special privileges or arbitrary favors to anyone. There is no cheap and easy escape from them. If a man wants to avoid hurtful consequences of his own sins, he must use those very laws to help him do so, and not attempt to insult them. He must set going a series of new causes which shall produce new and pleasanter consequences that may act as an antidote to the older ones."
"Those who say that the idea of Grace violates the concept of universal law do not look into it deeply enough. For then they would see that, on the contrary, it fulfills the law of the individual mind's effort, which they believe in, by complementing it with the law of the Universal Mind's activity inside the individual, which they ought also to believe in. God cannot be separated from man. The latter does not live in a vacuum.”
“Would forgiveness be an impossible nullification of the law of karma? If there is no way out of one Karmic consequence leading to and creating a further one in an endless and hopeless series? I believe an answer to the first question has been given by Jesus, and to the second by Aeschylus. Matt.12:31: “Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men,” was Jesus’ clear statement. As for the difficult problem propounded by the second question, consider the solution suggested by Aeschylus: “Only in the thought of Zeus, whatever Zeus may be.” Karma must operate automatically, but the Power behind karma knows all things, controls even karma itself, knows and understands when forgiveness is desirable.” No human mind can fathom that Power; hence Aeschylus adds the qualifying phrase, “whatever Zeus may be.” Forgiveness does not destroy the law of karma; it complements the work of that law. “All of us mortals need forgiveness. We live not as we would but as we can,” Menander wrote nearly four hundred years before Jesus’ time.” (282)
The idea that there is a power behind karma merits discussion. Buddhists generally believe in karma, but not grace or its ability to alter or eradicate karmas. They generally also do not believe in God or a power governing and controlling the universe. PB attempts, at least partially, to reconcile these views:
“I know that many dispute the existence of Grace, especially those who are Buddhistically minded, strictly rational, and they have much ground for their stand. My own knowledge may be illusory, but my experience is not; from both knowledge and experience I must assert that through one channel or another Grace may come: dutiful, compassionate, and magnanimous.” (283)
“There comes a time when out of the silence within himself there comes the spiritual guidance which he needs for his further course. It comes sometimes as a delicate feeling, sometimes as a strong one, sometimes as a clear formulated message, and sometimes out of the circumstances and happenings themselves. Not only does it tell him and teach him, but sometimes it does the same for others. Such is the effect of the Divine Life now working increasingly within him.” (284)
Brunton quotes on karma, continued:
“When we can fully accept the truth that God is the governor and manager of the universe, that the World-Mind [i.e., God] is behind and controlling the World-Idea [i.e., the Intelligence behind the World-Mind's expression] , then we begin to accept the parallel truths that all things and creatures are being taken due care of and that all events are happening under the divine will. This leads in time to the understanding that the ego is not the actual doer, although it has the illusion of doing, working, and acting. The practical application of this metaphysical understanding is to put down our burdens of personal living on the floor and let Providence carry them for us: this is to surrender the ego to the divine.”
“The deeper mind is so close to the source of our karma that we may at times get its right guidance not only intuitively from within but also circumstantially from without.” (285)
“Because we have with us residues of former reincarnations in the form of karma, it is impossible for most persons to distinguish whether any happening is a result of karma or of Grace, but sometimes they can, for instance, if they wake up in the morning or even in the middle of the night remembering some difficulty, some situation or problem, but along with it feeling a Higher Presence and then with this feeling beginning to see light upon the difficulty of problem and especially beginning to lose whatever distress, inquietude, fear, or uncertainty may have been caused by it. If they feel the negative reactions vanish and a certain peace of mind replaces them, and especially if the way to act rightly in the situation becomes clear, then they are experiencing a Grace.”
“There are three types of Grace: firstly, that which has the appearance of Grace but which actually descends out of past good karma and is entirely self-earned; second, that which a Master gives to disciples or aspirants when the proper external and internal circumstances exist - this is in the nature of a temporary glimpse only but is useful because it gives a glimpse of the goal, a sense of right direction, and inspiring encouragement that continue on the Quest[Note: on the path of Sant Mat much more is explicitly promised, namely, ongoing spiritual protection and help, and the elimination of the sanchit storehouse of karmas perpetuating rebirth] ; thirdly, when a man attains the fullest degree of realization, he is enabled in some cases to modify overhanging negative karma or in others to negate it because he has mastered the particular lessons that needed to be learned. This is particularly evident when the Hand of God removes obstructions in the path of his work. The philosophic conception of Grace shows it to be just and reasonable. It is indeed quite different from the orthodox religious belief about it, a belief which regards it as an arbitrary intervention by the Higher Power for the benefit of its human favorites.”
“If at times it seems to intervene specially on his behalf, that is an appearance due to the immense wisdom in timing the release of a particular good karma."
“To make any spiritual venture explicitly efficacious and to bring it to complete success, certain conditions must first be fulfilled. Most of them can be provided by the venturer himself but a few of them must come from outside themselves. These are grace and favorable destiny.”
“Grace can be a ripening of karma, or a response to a direct appeal to a higher power, or can come through a saint’s appeals. Faith in the Power is rewarded by grace. If the appeal fails, adverse karma must be too strong.” [Note: Patient endurance then being a noble virtue].
“The failure to appreciate the role of grace because of faith in the law of karma is as deplorable as the tendency to exaggerate it because of faith in a personal deity.”
“The law of recompense [karma] is not negated by forgiveness but its own working is modified by the parallel working of a higher law.”
“The Overself acts through inexorable law, yes, but love is part of the law. Grace violates no principle but rather fulfills the highest principle.”
“It is not generally known that a master not only can give illumination but also can remove the obstacles to it, that he may be used by the disciple’s higher self for both these purposes...Nevertheless, no master is free to exercise this power with arbitrariness or with favoritism but only in obedience to the laws governing it.” (286)
“Many Yogis are made but some are also born. Destiny transcends all training and often it needs but a mere touch of an illuminate’s finger to release the pent-up stores of secret power within a soul.” (287)
“We must exert our own will and strength to prepare the way for, and make us receptive to, the divine grace. This the one complements the other; both are necessary parts of the World-Idea.”
"The Grace works from his centre outward, transforming him from within, and therefore its earliest operation is unknown to his everyday mind."
“Whoever invoked the Overself’s Grace ought to be informed that he is also invoking a long period of self-improving foil and self-purifying affliction necessary to fit him to receive that Grace.”
“The fact is that the higher power dispenses grace to all, but not all are able, willing, or ready to receive it, nor can all recognize it and so many pass it by.”
“If he cannot compel or command grace, he can at least ask, work, and prepare for it. For if he is not prepared properly by understanding he may not be willing to submit when it does come, if the form it takes is not to his liking.”
“The ultimate secret of Grace has never been solved by those who do not know that previous incarnations contribute to it. Some men receive it only after years of burning aspiration and toil but others, like Francis of Assisi, receive it while unprepared and unaspiring.”
"The psychological laws governing the inner development of spiritual seekers often seem to operate in most mysterious ways. The very power whose presence he may think has been denied him - Grace - is taking care of him even when he is not conscious of this fact. The more the anguish, at such a time, the more the Higher Self is squeezing the ego. The more he seems to be alone and forsaken, the closer the Higher Self may be drawing him to Itself."
"When, therefore, the really earnest disciple who has asked for a quickened advance on the Quest finds that all kinds of experiences begin to follow each other for a period, he should recognize that this is part of the answer to his call. He will be made to feel loss as well as gain, bliss as well as pain, success as well as failure, temptation as well as tribulation at different times and in different degrees. He needs both kinds of experience if his development is to be a balanced one. But because he is still human, he will learn more from his sufferings than from his pleasures. And because their memory will last longer, he will not pass through this period of quickened experiences and extreme vicissitudes without much complaint."
"He must be forewarned that, at certain stages, he will be examined by his higher self and tested by the beneficent forces or tempted by the adverse ones. From this epoch-making date, the major episodes of an aspirant's life are purposely sent into it. Both good and evil powers pay special attention, within his personal karma, to his affairs. Once he has committed himself to this quest, he will find that events so arrange themselves as to indicate his sincerity, examine his motives, display his weaknesses, and find out his virtues. His loyalty to the goal will be tested."
"The Overself's grace will be secretly active within and without him long before it shows itself openly to him."
"The grace may be barely felt, may come on slowly for many months, so that when he does become aware of its activity, the final stage is all he sees and knows."
"It is not within the power of man to finish either the purificatory work or its illumination-sequel: his Overself, by its action within his psyche, must bring that about. This activating power is Grace.”
"Although personal effort and the will toward self-mastery do much to advance him on this quest, it is grace, and Grace alone, which can advance him to the goal in the last stages or assist him out of an impasse in the earlier ones."
"The ego, the personal limited self, cannot lift itself into the Higher Self, and if the student has felt dismally powerless to make progress by self-effort, he will have learned the priceless lesson of the need of Grace."
“The man’s effort must be met by the Overself’s Grace. What he does attracts what the Overself gives. This he can understand. But what he seldom knows, and finds hard to understand, is that in certain cases the aspiration which impels such effort is itself impelled by Grace.”
“With the coming of Grace, his development takes on life of its own and is no longer to be measured in direct ratio to his effort.”
“When a sensitive man loses faith in his own goodness, and even his own capacities, to the point of despairing hopelessness, he is really ready to pray properly and practice utter dependence upon the Higher Power’s grace...When he abandons further trust in his own nature and clings to no more personal hopes, he really lets go of the ego. This gives him the possibility of being open to grace.”
"Since the very "I" which seeks the truth and practices the meditation is itself so illusory, it cannot attain what it seeks or even practice with success, unless it also receives help from a higher source. Only two sources are possible. The first and best is the Overself's direct grace. This must be asked for, begged for, and wept for. The next best is the grace of master who has himself entered into truth-consciousness."
"He cannot bring this enlightenment into being - much less into permanent being - by his own willpower. It can only come to him. But although striving for it may probably end in failure, the masses' indifference to it is worse. For whereas he will at least be open to recognize and accept it when it does happen to come, their doors of perception will be shut to it, or, bewildered and frightened, they will run away from it."
"He who told us to note the lilies of the field also told us the parable of the talents. Whatever the divine Grace brings us, it brings it through our personal efforts."
“We may strive and weep but unless Grace falls on us we cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. How and when it should come depends partly upon our karma, partly upon our yearning, and partly upon the channel which God uses...Constant self-effort can thin down the egoism but not eliminate it. That final act is impossible because the ego will not willingly slay itself. What self-effort does is to prepare the way for the further force which can slay it and then make the operation timely and its success possible. What it further does is to improve the intelligence and intuition and to ameliorate the character, which also prepares the individual and attracts those forces. They are nothing else than the pardoning, healing, and, especially, the transforming powers of Grace.”
“He resigns himself to God’s will...because he realizes that it will only bring him what is best for him or only what is needed by him or only what has been earned by him. He believes that God’s will is a just will...If he intelligently accepts the suffering that the Overself, under the law of recompense, brings him, the evil will be transmuted into good. If he blindly clings to a completely egoistic attitude, he fails to show his discipleship.”
"In the end, and after we have tried sufficiently long and hard, we find that the knot of self cannot be untied. It is then that we have to call on grace and let it work on us, doing nothing more than to give our consent and to accept its methods."
"The time may suddenly arise when Grace will take a hand in the matter, and the student's outward life will begin to conform to the mental ideal which he has so long - and, seemingly so vainly - held for it.”
“Your karma is being speeded up; everything is being accelerated to a certain extent. This is necessary for a period to bring quicker progress through forcing different parts of mind and character into activity."
"If his evolutionary need should require it, he will be harassed by troubles to make him less attached to the world, or by sickness to make him less attached to the body. It is then not so much a matter of receiving self-earned destiny [i.e., karma] as of satisfying that need. Both coincide usually but not necessarily. Nor does this happen with the ordinary man so much as it does with the questing man, for the latter has asked or prayed for speedier development."
“The Law is relentless but it is flexible: it adjusts punishment to a man’s evolutionary grade. The sinner who knows more and who sins with more awareness of what he is doing, has to suffer more.”
"There is however an unpredictable element in the pattern of human life, which increases rather than decreases as the quality of that life rises above the average. We see it markedly in the case of a maturing aspirant who has to undergo tests and endure ordeals which have no karmic origin but which are put across his path by his own higher self for the purpose of a swifter forward-movement. [“The soul that is destined to have no other support but God himself, must pass through the strangest trials. How much agony and how many deaths must it suffer before losing the life of self.” - Pere La Combe]They are intended to promote and not delay his growth, to accelerate and not impede his development. But they will achieve this purpose only he recognizes their true aim...Thus human life is not wholly confined within the rigid bounds of karmic law. The Overself, which is after all its real essence, is free. He who has entered his name in this high enterprise of the quest, must be prepared to trust his whole existence into its sacred hands...He has entered a stage where he is being assayed from within and without, where his yearnings and attachments, his virtues and vices, will be forced to show their real strength." (288)
“The Overself does not always play the part of a witness however. Still and unmoving though it be, nevertheless its presence paradoxically makes possible all man's activities and movements. In a broad sense it is not only the hidden observer but also, by virtue of its being a function of the World-Mind, the inner ruler of the person. Thus it arranges the karma of the coming incarnation before birth, for it contains all his karmic possibilities out of the past, and it is the secret actualizing agent which passes them down into time and space for his ultimate progress. At critical moments in the personal life it may suddenly and dramatically interfere by engineering unexpected events or by imparting a powerful urge toward a sudden decision. This also is an act of grace. In the result the man is super-rationally guided or miraculously guarded...More precisely, grace is a mystical energy, an active principle pertaining to the Overself which can produce results in the fields of human thought, feeling and flesh alike on the one hand, or in human karma, circumstances and relations on the other hand. It is the cosmic will, not merely a pious wish or kindly thought, and can perform authentic miracles under its own known laws. Such is its dynamic potency that it can confer insight into ultimate reality as easily as it can lift a dying person back to life again or instantaneously restore the use of limbs to a crippled one." (289)
"With the descent of Grace, all the anguish and ugly memories of the seeker's past and the frustrations of the present are miraculously sponged out by the Overself's unseen and healing hand. He knows that a new element has entered into his field of consciousness, and he will unmistakably feel from that moment a blessed quickening of inner life. When his personal effort subsides, a further effort begins to do for him what he could not do for himself, and under its beneficent operation he will find his higher will strengthening, his moral attitude improving, and his spiritual aspirations increasing." (290)
Further,
“The horoscope indicates the future only for ordinary people and can never be a fixed certainty for the spiritually awakened. For whenever an individual has come under Divine Grace, he directly or indirectly through a teacher can be rendered independent of his past karma at any moment that the Divine wills it to be so. The will is free because Man is Divine and the Divine Self is free.” (291)
[The scope of astrology was discussed in the earlier section, "Are Masters above the stars?"]
Fate and destiny, as used by the Romans and Greeks, are sometimes used interchangeably with the term karma of the Hindus. “Character is fate” is a well-known expression. Brunton at times, however, distinguishes karma and fate, as follows:
“Karma, being made by human will, is subject to human modification. Fate, being decreed by the higher power, is not. The general fact of death is an example of fate, and in this sense the poet James Shirley’s line: “There is no armour against Fate,” is true. But the particular fact of death, its time and manner, may be alterable.” (292)
Confused? He then says:
“Events happening to us are not necessarily karmic in the sense that we earned them. They can also have a non-karmic source. No physical doing on our part brought them on, but they are what we need at that point for character or capacity, development or correction. Both kinds are fated. In that sense they are God’s will.” (293)
“The victory of the spiritual nature in man is foreordained and unavoidable, but the hour of that victory no man knoweth.” (294)
This means that to some extent the speed of our development is in our hands, as the Masters also say. And finally:
“It would be an error to separate karma from the universal power and to treat it as an independent power. This error accounts for the difficulty in understanding its role in bringing the cosmos into manifestation. Treat karma rather as an aspect of God and as inseparable from God, or as one of the ways in which God’s presence manifests itself.” (295)
Sri Nisargadatta speaks of the paradox of freedom:
“Why should a liberated man follow conventions? The moment he becomes predictable, he cannot be free. His freedom lies in his being free to fulfill the need of the moment, to obey the necessity of the situation. Freedom to do what one likes is really bondage, while being free to do what one must, what is right, is real freedom.” (296)
And further, we are all in this together:
"Must one suffer only for one's own sins? Are we really separate? In this vast ocean of life we suffer for the sins of others, and make others suffer for our sins. Of course, the law of balance rules supreme and accounts are squared in the end. But while it lasts, we affect each other deeply. (297)
Q: Your people speak of karma and retribution.
M: It is merely a rough approximation. In reality we are all creators and creatures of each other, causing and bearing each other's burdens." (298)
Brunton concludes:
"And because the Overself is the source of [his] karmic adjustment, it may be said that each man is truly his own judge. For it must never be forgotten that fundamentally the Overself is his own central self; it is not something alien to or remote from him. The real nature of karma is not grasped if it is believed to be a power external to the self, ruthlessly dictating its decrees for our helpless submission. On the contrary, by virtue of the fact that the whole world is mental it is a power working in everything and everyone. This yields the clear implication that what happens to him happens by the secret will of his own innermost being. From this standpoint the sufferings he may have to endure are not evils in the ultimate but only in the immediate sense and what appears as a blind external and ruthless force is really a conscious internal and purifying one." (299)
Anthony Damiani
"If you're under the guidance of a sage, the sage can release you from a certain destiny which is indicated in your chart...The Master can assign you to a certain work or God can assign you to a certain work. A Master can release you from certain compulsions that you feel your destiny allotted to you...We're speaking about the quintessence of Divinity as far as humanity is concerned...about someone who is in touch with the Lord of the Universe...The sage is guided by the Logos in the other person's soul as to how to relate to that person...If you talk to a sage, the sage doesn't tell you what you want to hear, the sage tells you what you need to hear." (300)
"There are even times when the World-Mind [i.e., God] will bring in experiences that are not even destined for you in terms of your karma, but are just brought in ad hoc! Just out of curiosity, you know: "Let's see what you're going to do with this one!...Ultimately you'll see that the World-Mind is teaching you...You get the greatest education that can be conceived of, and you're not even grateful for it." (301)
D.T. Suzuki, from Shin Buddhism
"...Jiriki is self-power. Tariki is other-power. The Pure Land school is known as the other-power school because it teaches that tariki is most important in attaining rebirth in the Pure Land or regeneration or enlightenment or salvation. Whatever name we may give to the end of our religious efforts, that end comes from the other-power, not from self-power. This is the contention of Shin followers…"
"This doctrine, other-power... is based on the idea that we humans are relative-minded, and as long as we are so constituted there is nothing in us, no power which will enable us to cross the stream of birth and death. Amida must come from the other side and carry us on the boat of all efficient vows - that is, by means of his hongan, his friendly Dharma."
"There is a deep and impassable chasm between Amida and ourselves, and we are so heavy-laden with Karma hindrance that we cannot shake it off by our own power. Amida must come and help us, extend his arms of help from the farther end. This is what generally is taught by the Shin school. But from another point of view, however ignorant and impotent and helpless we may be, we will never grasp Amida' s arms unless we exhaust everything we have in our efforts to reach the other end."
"It is all right to say other-power does everything by itself. We just let it accomplish its work, but we must nevertheless become conscious of the other-power's doing its work in us. Unless we are conscious of Amida's doing his work, we shall never be saved. We can never be conscious or sure of the fact that we are born in the Pure Land and have attained our Enlightenment. To acquire this consciousness, we must exhaust all our efforts. Amida may be standing and beckoning us to come to the other shore where he is standing, but we cannot see Amida until we have done all we can do. Self-power is not what is needed, really, to cross the stream. Amida will extend his arms of help only when we realize that our self-power is of no account".
"Since we cannot achieve the end we try to accomplish, Amida' s help must be recognized. We must become conscious of it. In fact, recognition comes only after we have strained all our efforts to cross the stream by ourselves. We only realize the inefficacy of self-power when we try to make use of that power, when we become conscious of how worthless self-power is. The other-power is all-important, but this all-importantness is known only to those who have striven, by means of self-power, to attempt the impossible."
This realization of the worthlessness of self-power may also be Amida's work. In fact it is, but until we achieve recognition we do not realize that Amida has been doing all this for us and in us. Therefore, striving is a prerequisite of realization. Spiritually or metaphysically speaking, everything is finally from Amida, but we must remember that we are relative beings. As such, we cannot survey things unless we first try to do our best on this plane of relativity. Crossing from the relative plane to the transcendental or absolute plane - the plane of the other power - may be impossible, logically speaking, but it appears an impossibility only before we have tried everything on this side..." (302)
Richard Rose, from After the Absolute
"That's one side of the equation - persistence. The one you have control over. The other side is grace. A person on the path has help. Once a person makes a commitment to the Truth - I mean truly demonstrates a sincere desire to find his Real Self at all cost - then this commitment will attract assistance and protection. Opportunities arise. Blocks are removed. Decisions may even be made for you.”
Q: My thoughts were incoherent and confused but I couldn’t stop asking questions. "But who...? What makes these decisions? I mean, where does this help come from?
"I won't presume to name it. All I’m saying is that there are levels of intelligence that help other levels of intelligence. There is an interpenetration of dimensions. But you can't count on this help or get too secure in the knowledge that it's there. Just when you think you need it most, it will desert you and leave you to suffer the ‘dark night of the soul,’ as John of the Cross calls it. Because despair is necessary. Despair is part of the final formula for cracking the head. You have to maintain a state of between-ness the whole time. Because no matter how hard you push, in actuality, you can't change your being. You're being is changed for you.” (303)
Fenelon, from The Complete Fenelon
"It is hard to convince us of the goodness of God in loading those whom he loves with crosses. "Why," we say, "should he take pleasure in causing us to suffer? Could he not make us good without making us miserable?" Yes, doubtless he could, for all things are possible with God. In his all-powerful hands he holds our hearts, and he turns them as he will, as the skill of the workman can give directions to the stream at the summit of a hill. But able as he may be to save us without crosses, he has not chosen to do so, just as he has not seen fit to create people at once in the full vigor of adulthood, but has allowed them to grow up by degrees amid all the dangers and weaknesses of childhood and youth. In this he is the Master: we have only to adore in silence the depths of his wisdom without understanding it...In this process of detaching us from our self-life and in destroying our self-love, it would take a powerful miracle to keep the work of grace from being painful. Neither in his gracious nor in his providential dealings does God work a miracle lightly. It would be as great a wonder to see a person full of self become in an instant dead to all self-interest and all sensitiveness, as it would be to see a slumbering infant wake up in the morning a fully developed adult. God works in mysterious ways in grace as well as in nature, concealing his operations under an unseen succession of events. In this way he keeps us in the darkness of faith. Not only does he accomplish his designs gradually, but also he does so by means that appear the simplest and best designed to accomplish the end in view, in order that human wisdom may ascribe the success to the process, and in this way make his own working be less evident! Otherwise every act of God would seem to be a miracle, and the state of faith, in which it is God's will that we should live, would come to an end."
"God renders the working of grace slow and obscure, then, so that he may keep us in the darkness of faith. He makes use of the inconstancy and ingratitude of the creature, and he makes use of the disappointments, the surpluses, and the excesses that accompany prosperity, in order to detach us from them both. He frees us from self by revealing our weaknesses and corruptions in a multitude of back sliding. All this dealing appears perfectly natural, and it is by this succession of natural means that we are burned as by a slow fire. We would like to be consumed at once by the flames of pure love, but such an end would scarcely cost us anything. It is only an excessive self-love that desires to become perfect in a moment and at so cheap a rate.” (304)
Jean-Pierre deCaussade, from Spiritual Counsels
“If the violence of this trial prevents her seeing clearly the value and use of it, let her rely on her faith, and let her glorify God by patience and an unreserved submission... “But,” she will answer, “this comfort would be just if my state were a trial only, but I have every reason to believe that it is a punishment inflicted by God.” I acknowledge this, but in this life no punishment is inflicted by divine justice without a loving intention of divine mercy. This is particular the case with those souls whom God most loves. God often permits their faults in order to be enabled to derive glory from them, and to make them serve for the salvation of these souls. The chastisements He inflicts sanctify while humiliating them, and dispose them to unite themselves more closely to God, at the same time as they become more detached from self. Therefore they are chastisement as well as trials; chastisements inasmuch as they atone for the past evil and satisfy divine justice; and trials because divine mercy makes use of them to prevent future danger, and for the exercise of many meritorious virtues.”
“All our crosses come certainly from Him when they are the necessary, natural, and inevitable consequences of the state in which divine Providence permits us to be settled. These are the heaviest crosses, but also the most sanctifying because they come from God. Crosses from our heavenly Father, crosses from divine Providence, how much easier to bear they are than those we fashion for ourselves, and embrace voluntarily. Then love yours, my dear Sister, since they have been prepared for you by God alone for each day. Let Him do this; He alone knows what is suitable for each one of us. If we remain firm in this, submissive and humbled under all the crosses sent by God, we shall find in them, at last, rest for our souls.”
“Be convinced that all the trials that God sends us in this life are sent in mercy more than in justice; this is why the prophet says that God remembers His mercy even when He is angry with us.”
“There is no intelligence nor power in the world capable of wresting from the hand of God a soul He has seized in the rigour of His mercy to purify it by suffering.” (305)
Sant Kirpal Singh, from Life and Death
“A Jagat-Guru can annihilate karmas by his look and Word. In his presence karmas fly like autumn leaves before a wind.”
“Karmas have been classified by Saints into three distinct categories:
(i) Sanchit or the gathered and stored Karmas, going far back into the unknown past.
(ii) Pralabdha: Luck, fate or destiny, or that portion out of the Sanchit (store-house) which constitutes a person's living present, which none can escape however one may wish and try.
(iii) Kriyaman: The Karmas which one is free to perform as a free agent in his present earthly span of existence, and thereby make or mar his future. [Note: this is called Agami karma in other traditions]. Ordinarily, some of the Kriyaman Karmas bear fruit in this very life; while others - the unfructified ones - are transferred to the General Account of the Sanchit Karmas, which go on accumulating from age to age.
"The moment He [the Master] accepts an individual as His Own, He takes in His own Hand the process of liquidating the endless process of Karma coming down from the unknown past. He calls a halt to the mad and reckless career in which one is engaged. "So far and no further" is His command. He does not usually interfere with the Pralabd or destiny, for it has of necessity to be worked off as well as possible, so as to complete the allotted span of life and to reap the fruit; while the Sanchit or the vast storehouse, He, by being a conscious co-worker with the Divine Plan, singes by contacting the spirit with the spark of Naam. Contact with Naam or the Holy Word at once reduces to ashes the storehouse of Sanchit Karmas as well as the unfructified Kriyaman Karmas done hitherto, just as a spark of fire reduces to ashes the entire forest or the heap of fuel that may be lying on the ground.”
This is important because as he says of the Sanchit Karmas:
“These are latencies lying in the store-house to one’s account from endless ages, ever since the world began. No one escapes from them unless the same are worked off (without making any more addition thereto, which of course in the nature of things, is an interesting impossibility) in innumerable lives that lie ahead. It is not possible to exhaust this tremendous credit balance in one’s account. Is there no way to cross over the great chasm that lies between the conscious and the sub-conscious and again the gulf that separates the sub-conscious from the unconscious?...The Sanchit Karmas can be seared and scorched with the fire of Naam or Word and rendered harmless for the future, for then one becomes a conscious co-worker with the Divine Plan...”
A looming question is whether or to what degree the paths of knowledge or contemporary non-duality accomplish (or even acknowledge) the crossing of the aforementioned chasms, and if the agency of the Holy Spirit or Naam is needed. As Kabir wrote, “for who can part with the seed-mind within?”
Let's explore this a bit. While differing on the method used and view on what is required, advaitins like Shri Atmananda seem to agree that the eradication of samskaras - subconscious imprints - essentially the same as or related to what the Sants refer to as sanchit karmas - is crucial for complete liberation:
“Death is liberation if it is ultimate death, that is the death of everything objective including even samskaras. But ordinary death is only partial, being the death of the gross body alone. It is no more than a change and does not deserve the name of death.” (306)
While the Sants say the samskaras get “scorched” by internal practice of the Sound-Current, the advaitins revert to Guadapada in the Mandukya Karika who affirms that “exercise of discrimination and higher reason (vidya vritti) alone can destroy your samskaras (innate tendencies) and lead one to the ultimate Truth.” (307)
Ramana Maharishi seemed to be of this position also:
"Q: Why is it sometimes I find concentration on the Self so easy and at other times hopelessly difficult?
Bhagavan: Because of vasanas. But really it is easy since we are the Self. All we have to do is to remember that. We keep on forgetting it and thus think we are this body or this ego. If the will and desire to remember the Self are strong enough, they will eventually overcome vasanas. There must be a great battle going on inwardly all the time until the Self is realized. This battle is symbolically spoken of in scriptural writings as the fight between God and Satan. In our Sruti, it is the Mahabharata, where the asuras represent our bad thoughts and the devas our elevating ones. All such thoughts as ‘attainment is hard’ or 'Self-realization is far from me', or ‘I have many difficulties to overcome to know Reality’, should be given up, as they are the main obstacles, created by the false self, the ego. They are untrue.” (308)
Samskaras and vasanas are related. Vasanas have been referred to as chains of samskaras that through volition have formed and exist as latent tendencies.
It must be asked, that depending on how one visualizes “ultimate Truth” and “complete Liberation”, might not, at various stages, these two methods be not either/or but complementary? Especially when one is engaging a “downward” practice, that is, when he returns to the world after scaling the heights - or depths - of consciousness, and must now make sense of, reconcile himself with, and understand what he left behind. Shri Atmananda states:
“Certain shastras hold that everything from intellect down to the gross body is dead, inert matter, as it is. They ask you to get away from all that matter and get to Atma in its pure form, in a state called the nirvikalpa state (samadhi). In that state, there is no sense of bondage, it is true. But, coming out of that state, you find the same world. To find a solution to this, you have to examine the world again, in the light of the experience you had in samadhi. Then you find that the same Reality that was discovered in samadhi is found expressed in the objects also as name and form. And that name and form, which the shastras also call maya, are nothing but the Reality itself. Thus you find yourself to be one with the world, and all doubts cease.” (309)
Kirpal Singh quotes on karma, continued
“The Master-Saints come into the world with a mission. They are commissioned from above to liberate man from karmic bondage. When one is fortunate to find such a Holy Man and surrenders himself to His will, the latter takes charge of the spirit...All the troubles of the devoted disciples are greatly mitigated and softened. Sometimes the intensity of bodily and mental troubles is increased a little to shorten the duration of suffering involved, while at others the intensity is greatly reduced and the duration is prolonged as may be considered appropriate...He may even take over by the law of sympathy the burden of the Karmas of His devoted disciples on His own shoulders to bear Himself, for the Law of Nature has got to be compensated in one form or another. This happens in very rare cases as the Master may think fit...A disciple must learn to really pray to his Master sincerely and if he does so, all feasible help is sure to come to relieve him or to soften the situation and to minimize the resultant suffering...The Master is the Lord of Compassion. In His kingdom which is boundless, there is no account of deeds.The atmospheric range of a Master-Saint is a vast immensity which man can hardly imagine...The Saint is present everywhere and His sway extends to realms undreamed of. He never leaves nor forsakes His disciples to the ends of the world.”
"I have my dealings with the Saints and my only concern is with them,
The angel-of-death cannot now touch a single hair of my head,
When the entire record of my deeds has been consigned to the flames." (Nanak)
"The moment [a competent spiritual Master] accepts an individual as His own, He takes in His own Hand the process of liquidating the endless process of Karma coming down from the untold past...All Karmic debts are to be paid and their accounts squared here and now, and the speedier it is done, the better, instead of keeping any outstanding balances to be paid hereafter. In the time of Hazrat Mian Mir, a great Muslim devout and mystic, it is said that one of his disciples Abdullah, when down with an ailment, withdrew his sensory currents to the eye-focus and closed himself safely in the citadel of peace. His Master Mian Mir when He visited him, pulled Abdullah down to the body consciousness and ordered him to pay what was due from him for he could not indefinitely evade the payment by such tactics.”
[One can find the free e-book Life and Death and others at ruhanisatsangusa.org or kirpalsingh-teaching.org ]
This quote about Mian Mir has a special fondness for me. In 1973 I lay prostrate with fever at Sawan Ashram and could not meditate, being also in a very “descended” condition. I mentioned this story to someone who relayed it to Kirpal Singh, and I was told that when he heard what I had said he laughed. My feeling was that, one, that was partly out of delight that someone would recall a rather obscure passage from one of his books, and, two, partly because it precisely reflected my actual condition, which he must have known!
“Every initiate has a lot of karma to be worked off during physical existence. The terminology of good or bad karma cannot be adequately justified as both entail some debts requiring fair liquidation. Suffice it to note that the decrees of heaven are subject to no error and the divine dispensation is invariably flavored with mercy. The inner rare bliss from regular and devoted meditations changes the entire outlook of the initiate when he/she finds the gracious Hand of the Master protecting him/her at every step. You should know it for certain that every thing whatever comes to your counting is definitely for your spiritual progress, and you should gladly withstand the trials and tribulations of this life, by reposing your hopes and aspirations in the gracious Master Power overhead.”
“The span of life can neither be extended nor shortened. Even by one single breath. Fate cannot be altered. Health and disease are connected with past karma, and come and go as determined by the cycle of karma. Medicine does not cure the disease. Karma is at the root. When the karma has been gone through; the disease has run its course; and the medicine is effective. No medicine is effective as long as the disease has not run its course. But it is good to take medicine in disease as advised by doctors. Medicine keeps the patient consoled. Friends do not unnecessarily trouble and press the patient, while others get no chance at all to call the patient a miser or a stupid person. Again, it is an opportunity for the paying up of old debts through the doctor’s fees and apothecaries bills.” (310)
No doubt there is a significant point here, although parts of this will surely be controversial!
"The Guru may give happiness or misery, for he has to make a beautiful form from a rough piece of stone and therefore has to wind up all the karmas; but a true follower will never complain, no matter what condition he has to face in life - no matter what hardships the Guru allows." (311)
“The sowing then is of prime importance for quality of the harvest depends on the quality of the seeds sown. Next comes the proper tending, the humanizing process which usually takes quite a long time covering a few incarnations depending on the past make-up of each individual. But with the right type of steadfast devotion and the grace of the Master-power, one can easily traverse the otherwise hard and tortuous path. “A perfect Master, conversant with the turns and twists of the road,” says Kabir, can, however, take the disciple through in no time.” The pilgrim-soul with a competently Guide and honest endeavor, can easily swim over the Ocean of the world even in the midst of worldly life.” (312)
“Whatever comes, either it is a reaction of our past [karma]
“For I know the plans I have for you,” says the LORD. “They are plans for good and not for disaster, to give you a future and a hope.” Jeremiah 29:11.
Here again we have the mystery spoken of at the outset by Plotinus, that even the sage may not always be able to distinguish between karma (or Necessity) and grace (Providence). Karma may be said to be the universal law of God in terms of actions and reactions, while Providence is the intelligence or guidance represented by the divine grace, bringing us what we need or is best, and coming “from above.” Both are considered complementary aspects of God’s will.
Rumi
“Even if an arrow has been shot from God’s bow,
The Murshid [Godman] has the power
To turn it from the half-way mark
Back to the quiver whence it came.” (314)
Compare this to story of Krishna where an ‘arrow’ once in flight can NOT be turned back. Krishna, in Sant Mat terminology, had the role of an avatar; but not that of a Perfect Master, whose domain is said to be higher and power greater.
Bhai Sahib, from Daughter of Fire
"There is only one Teacher; only one Spiritual Guide in the whole world for us. For only he alone is allowed to subject a free human being to sufferings and conditions; only he, and nobody else...Ancient karmas form part and parcel of the blood (unconscious memories are stored in the blood-stream: C.G. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections). It was in you. It would have dragged you back again and again into the womb, but from now on it will burn itself out. From time to time this fire will burn in your body. This is purifying fire, this suffering, and you will need a lot more. When you meet your Spiritual Guide, this is supposed to be your last Karma-bound life. After that, one is supposed to be free to go where the Teacher directs you. There are many planes, besides the earth plane, where Service can be rendered.” (315)
Regarding karmas forming “part and parcel of the blood”, see Kirpal Singh: ”Karmas are the most contagious form of invisible diseases to which a man is ever exposed. They are even more...destructive than the deadliest and most poisonous germs transmitted into the innermost cells of the human system, and worm their way most surreptitiously into the bloodstream.” (316)
"But..Bhai Sahib...I am afraid of new sufferings you may give me; it seems I have had enough of them by now." "Sufferings?" he asked. "You have not begun yet! It has still to come. On our line such suffering is given that there are no words for it....[But] if you knew what I have in mind for your future, you would never cry, never be upset."
"I remember L. telling me that the disciple is subjected to such states of loneliness and longing that it could be almost suicidal. A great Master is needed to get the disciple through this state of separation.”
“He replied: I was in this state many times with my Rev. Guru Maharaj. He never spoke to me in a kindly way...Many, many times...Now I can laugh, but then...it was not a laughing matter."
Bhai Sahib said that many karmas of an initiate are worked out in dreams:
“When you are on the Path earnestly and seriously, your Karmas are taken away from you. Either you have to suffer them..in your physical life, or they will come to you in dream. One second of dream-suffering is like three years of real suffering in life. When you are on the Path, you are speeded up, and you pay for them in your dreams. If you stay away from the Path, once decided, all the Karmas you will pay in full in your daily life. But once on the Path, the Grace of God reaches you, catches up with you, and the mental Karmas will go away in dreams. Emotional sufferings are cleared up by the suffering Love causes, but the Physical Karmas one has to suffer in the physical body. We are not supposed to have another one, if we are with the Teacher. So, clearly, all has to be cleared in the present one. There is a place where Karmas cannot reach if it so pleases God. His Grace is infinite, and Karmas fall away from you.” (317)
Kirpal Singh also mentioned the clearing of karma in dreams. He emphasized, however, that it is the Master who does this, not the disciple. So the latter need not be concerned with it, although over time he may get intuitive feelings as to when it may be happening:
“I tell you, the Master is to wind up all reactions the best He can. The initiate prays, “Oh God, I pray I should go to Your Home forever, that I should not return.” So He’s working to wind up all actions and reactions. Most of them are paid off in dreams, and like that their severity is polished down to the minimum possible. Whatever reactions cannot be set aside you’ve got to pass through, but with a little help on the side. Generally in the life of an initiate he’ll find many changes in his life…Many things are omitted, sometimes things are delayed, some things are minimized.” (318)
“Sometimes it happens that a man has to be born into another life but in special cases the Master can pass of that life in dreams. You feel and see everything. It happens rarely. [Q: And we can work off that other life in dreams?] The Master makes it work off, not you.” (319)
Bhai Sahib also makes some interesting comments about destiny after death for the sincere devotee of a Master, which is also echoed in Sant Mat and certain Buddhist schools. The advaitin may cringe, but “there may be “more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy,” said the great bard:
“He began to speak of xxxx who died seven years ago of a brain tumor, and who, he said, was the best of all the European disciples he had until now.
“Where is he now?” I asked.
“In heaven,” he said. I retorted that it is not a very high state - Swarga Loka. He shook his head.
“He will not come back. He will go to other Lokas where there is no death and where one goes from Loka to Loka without birth or death. Without coming into the womb,” he said with emphasis:
When we are in the Mirt Loka [the physical plane], if we are attached to the Spiritual Guide, or Master, and if the Master is powerful from the spiritual point of view, he will leave no desire with the disciple at the time of death; the desire would lead to another incarnation. The Master serves as a focus of attention for the mind, for the mind needs something to hold on to.
The Love for the Master is also Vasana (subtle desires arising from samskaras, seeds of karma, which are impressions of actions in Chitta, universal mind), but it is this Vasana which will lead one beyond the Lokas of change. It will carry one right through. There are four other Lokas in which there is neither birth nor death. According to desire or necessity, one goes from one to another in a glorious body made of light.” (321)
Ramakrishna
“You know, if you weep before the Lord, your tears wipe out the mind’s impurities of many births, and his grace immediately descends upon you. It is good to weep before the Lord.”
Baba Jaimal Singh, letters to Baba Sawan Singh
“Whatever pleasure or pain comes, accept it cheerfully. Always realize that “The Sat Guru is everything. “I” am nothing. “I” am not. Thou art. Thou alone art... Please do not worry now. Hazur Din Dayal [Swami Ji] will forgive you by His Grace. All the karmas of the past lives have to be gone through now. The disciples of the Saints do not have to be born again. You should therefore bear this affliction with courage. Both pleasure and pain pass away in course of time...A Satsangi is made to finish off in days only, the painful karmas which would otherwise last for years. You should not, therefore, feel anxious or worried about anything.”
Baba Sawan Singh, from Spiritual Gems
“The Supreme Creator and the individual spirit in the creation are connected together through the Sound Current. But Kal, also the creation of the Supreme Being, separates the individual from the current by coming in between as mind and forms."
"Hence the individual feels disconnected; but not so the Creator. There are three minds, and corresponding to these three minds are three kinds of forms. In Trikuti the Nijman (innermost mind) or Brahm (universal mind) covers the spirit. The forms here are made up of very pure Maya (mind), so much so that a majority of the seekers have failed to see here the spirit apart from the Maya or mind and therefore considered Brahm as all-pervading [Note: keep this in mind when reading Reynold’s Buddhist account of creation below]. Lower down in Sahansdal Kanwal the forms of Trikuti get another covering of mind and form, both coarser than the above; the astral form here being governed by the Andi man (astral mind)."
"In this zone there are the hells and heavens and numerous other lokas (regions). The tendencies of the mind are directed inward and are elevating. This mind behaves like a wise enemy (seeking to keep us here). Further down in Pind, the astral form gets another covering of coarse material with which we are all familiar."
"The mind that governs this form is called the Pindi man (physical mind). Its tendencies are outward and diffusive, and it is most difficult to control. Now, a body actuated by mind and spirit cannot help performing Karma, and the Karmic Law - "As you sow, so shall you also reap" - continues to work, and the account is complicated with time. The more one works the greater the entanglement, like a bird struggling in the meshes of a net."
"So cunningly has Kal arranged the snare of forms and minds that it is well nigh impossible to escape from their working in these minds and bodies. No matter how good and godly we may be, it will not take us out from these regions. Says Lord Krishna: "Good actions are as binding as bad actions; good actions may be likened to fetters of gold and bad actions to those of iron, and both equally keep us tied." The escape is through the Sound Current which is the substratum at the bottom of these minds."
"Only when the attention catches and follows the Current does the mind become dormant and gets out of action. At all other times, when the attention is off the Current, the mind gets the upper hand. Through the long and indefinite time since the spirit separated from its ocean and associated itself with the minds and bodies, not only has the upward passage been blocked, but the spirit has been so bewildered, entangled and enfeebled that it has lost all memory of its home, and is contented to live a wretched life in this wretched material world."
"Now, there are two ways of looking at this creation: from the Creator's point of view and from our point of view - or in other words, from the top end and from the bottom end. From the top it looks as though the Creator is all in all. He is the only doer and the individual seems like a puppet tossed right and left by the wire puller. There seems no free will in the individual, and therefore no responsibility on his head."
"It is His play. There is no why or wherefore. All the Saints, when they look from the top, describe the creation as His manifestation. They see Him working everywhere. Now, looking at the thing from below, or the individual viewpoint, we come across variety as opposed to oneness."
"Everybody appears working with a will, and is influenced by and is influencing others with whom he comes in contact. The individual is the doer, and is therefore responsible for his actions and their consequences. All the actions are recorded in his mind and memory, and cause likes and dislikes which keep him pinned down to the material, astral or mental spheres, according to his actions in an earlier move in the cycle of transmigration."
"The individual in these regions cannot help doing actions and having done them cannot escape their influences. Individual is the doer, and therefore bears the consequences of his actions."
"As stated above, the observations differ on account of the difference in the angle of vision. Both are right. The individual clothed in coarse material form sees only the external material forms. His sight does not go deeper than that. If he were to rise up, the same individual from Sahansdal Kanwal will see the mind actuating all forms. The form will be secondary only; mind will be the mover in all. The same individual from Daswan Dwar will see the Spirit Current working everywhere and will see how the mind gets power from the spirit."
"From Sach Khand the whole creation looks like bubbles forming and disappearing in a spiritual ocean. An individual is endowed with intelligence and does every action knowingly. It is therefore incumbent upon him to find a way of escape from this entanglement. To raise his spirit he must struggle against the mind; for he lives by struggle. And where there is a will, there is a way."
"He cannot say this is no part of his duty."
"Now, the Karmas are divided into three groups: Kriyaman or new actions; Prarabdha or fate; and Sanchit or reserve. Take the case of a farmer: he prepares his land for seed; he has the option to sow whatever he likes. Suppose he decides on wheat and sows it. The crop matures and he gathers it. Some of it he keeps for his consumption during the coming year, and the surplus he puts in store. For the next year he will have to live on wheat, for he has nothing else by him."
"If he now wants something else - say, corn - he can sow that next season. Suppose he now sows corn and gathers the crop at the end of the year. Like his wheat crop, he keeps some for his consumption and keeps the surplus in his store. Year after year he is living on the previous year's gathering and increasing his reserve in store to be utilized in time of scarcity or need."
"You will see that he is living and hopes to live on what he himself sows and gathers. Similarly, whatever we do in this life becomes fate for our next life; and some of this is kept in reserve by Kal to be given to us if by any chance (of course, the chance is practically nil) we run short of Karma. Without Karma Kal cannot keep down a spirit in a body, and without a body no Karma can be performed."
"It is open to Kal to add from reserve to Fate, or deduct from Fate for reserve. [The Master who has taken charge of the soul from kal is supposed to be able to do this, too]. Like the farmer who is preparing his land for the coming season, and is living on the gatherings from the last season, with a confidence based on his reserve, we are doing our fate, in which we have no choice. But we have the choice to work anew as we please for our future good. And we have a surplus which is our reserve from past lives, of which we have now no knowledge."
"We are therefore at present doing a dual function: (a) in regard to fate, we are helpless; but (b) in new actions we have a free hand to sow for the future. To distinguish between these two types by intelligence alone is not easy for the individual; but a rough rule may be laid down: that what comes in spite of our efforts and spontaneously is due to fate. But those whose attention is concentrated and who have access within can read their fate easily. It is an open book to them."
"Now, in the physical body actions are done from the heart center. As long as the mind is centered here (in ordinary individuals, heart is the center of mind action) it will be influenced by mind actions. The sensations of joy and sorrow will be felt as the body is worked by mind from this center. When the mind has been elevated to the eye focus by concentration, or in other words, when the mind has changed its seat or center from the heart to the eyes, then the feelings caused by outward influences working on the physical body will be felt imperceptibly."
Joys of the world will not elevate and its sorrows will not depress him. The fate actions are stored in the eight-petaled lotus in Anda above the eyes. Their influence is felt forcibly as long as that center has not been crossed. When that center is crossed and the Master's astral form is seen (for that form resides there) the influence of the fate actions will be perceived nominally. The mind has then become strong and it has the power to bear them without eflort.
"But fate cannot be effaced or altered; it will have to be undergone. An arrow after leaving the bow must find its mark. The reserve actions are stored at the top of Trikuti; and only when a spirit has crossed the third mind or Trikuti, is it said to be free from all Karma. Below this the spirit suffers from the ills of Karma."
"All actions are performed with a motive and the motive is binding. It is not easy to conceive of an action which is performed without a motive. The mind is consciously or subconsciously active, and it is ridiculous to talk of Karma without a counter-Karma. There is no escape from counter-Karma. By doing actions, however good, there is no escape. Charity, offerings, or pilgrimages must bring their reward, and the soul doing these things must receive the reward in one body or another."
"Men are reborn and reincarnate with a span of life pre-fixed on the Karmic reactions of our past lives - "no more, no less." Christ said, "Thy days are numbered." The length of life depends on the breaths we take. Proper use and misuse thereof can prolong or shorten our lives on this earth. Normally a man breathes fourteen or fifteen times in a minute, but in passionate moments of life one breathes 24 to 26 times in a minute. Thus the allotted breaths are exhausted in a shorter period. If, however, you are of temperate habits and are devoting time to spiritual practices the number of breaths goes down to four to six per minute. In this way life is prolonged. Yogis control the breath in kumbhak for months and sometimes years, prolonging their lives for hundreds of years."
"The escape from Karma lies in the protection afforded by Saints. They are themselves Karmaless. Their actions are not binding on them, for their spirit works from Daswan Dwar, a center above the three spheres of mind and forms, as stated above. They show us the way out."
[Note: this is interesting - usually it is said that the Sant works from Sach Khand, or that Sach Khand is the 'office of the Master', not Daswan Dwar. One may wonder what Sawan Singh meant here. Daswan Dwar seems to be considered an intermediate position between the lower and higher worlds, a sort of resting place for a Master to work above or below. In any case the Sants are said to work from a plane beyond karma].
"They say, let new actions be performed in the name of the Master, the individual working in the capacity of an agent only. The new actions, DONE IN THIS SPIRIT, will not be binding. The fate actions will have been undergone by the time the life comes to an end; the reserve actions Saints partly take upon themselves, and partly are undergone by the devotee as the Saints think proper."
"They put the individual spirit in touch with the Sound Current, the substratum; and as the spirit catches it and rises up and throws off the influences of mind and matter it gets stronger and stronger. The more the individual works on these lines, the easier the Path for him. Otherwise the course becomes lengthy; but the Saints are pledged to see him through, after they have initiated him. The practice of the Sound Current cuts the root of Karma."
"The Current acts like a magnet on the spirit. It attracts the spirit to itself, and if the spirit were not covered by the rust of mind and matter it would go up like a shot. The rust of attachments and impressions is removed by repetition. The repetition of thoughts of the journey within replaces our common day thoughts; and the mind instead of wandering outside begins to take rest and peace within; and when it comes in, the spirit comes in with it; and when the spirit is in, the Current in its turn pulls it up, and when the Trikuti has been crossed (which will only be when all Karmic accounts are settled) the soul never goes back in transmigration. It will go up to merge in its ocean.” (321)
There is obviously plenty of food for thought here. Sawan is giving us the "long path" view, not 2.0+. We must first balance this with two obviously very high perspectives:
“For the truly enlightened man subjection to the law of cause and effect and freedom from it are one Truth. - Yasutani Roshi
“Karma is nothing but the Ultimate Reality itself, and as such can never bind you...Your liberation is not an escape from bondage, but an expression of real Freedom behind that apparent bondage, knowing that bondage also is but an expression of Freedom.” - Shri Atmananda (322)
And secondly, a view shared by many sages:
"All life forms, excluding humans, do not have karmas, because there is no sense of doership in their actions. They are simply awareness expressing itself in conjunction with the macroscopic vasanas." - James Swarz (323)
And:
“Man, by contrast with the animal, is an individualized creature. He is aware of his own separate identity and special personality. The animal is not individually responsible for its actions, being entirely responsive to its surroundings and herd instincts. If man feels the same responsiveness, he modifies it by his own particular characteristics.” - Brunton (324)
We have discussed this issue of animals and karma in Part Two ("If There's a Hell Below, We're All Gonna Go"), but a few additional comments can be made here. Please pardon us for any repetition.
These quotes bring in much more of great Mystery: do animals ever pass upwards into the human kingdom, or are they on a parallel track of evolution, if any? The philosphers and sages appear divided on this issue. If they do so, how is it possible if they can not accrue the positive karma to merit such a transition? Many Sufis, one being Bhai Sahib, adamantly deny that animals can become human, while others refer to Rumi’s famous poem, “I died as a mineral and became a plant, etc.” as evidence for an opposite claim. The former point to separate lines of development for animals and humans, while the latter acknowledge only one. Seemingly in this camp, Sri Siddharameshwar wrote, "[The human body] can be acquired only after rendering service to human beings while passing through the different inferior species." (325) This could be taken as implying that animals are rewarded for their service to humans, which suggests they are subject to karma and spiritual evolution. What a mystery this all is! And once again, what do we really know?
Brunton appears to offer a partial solution to the problem by including both evolution and karma as guiding Divine Ideas within the World-Mind and its expression, the World-Idea. He posted that units of mind - emanants of a Divine Soul, not the Soul itself - do incarnate and evolve through the diverse kingdoms of nature, guided by the “Idea of Man,” which he terms a “Master Idea,” to eventually reunite with their divine parent, but with an individuality and self-consciousness gained in the process. And for Brunton, included in this evolutionary design is the human agent of grace:
“And somewhere, sometime, for every man who sincerely seeks there must come a Guide, merely because this personal opening of the gate is part of Nature’s program...The purpose of human evolution requires the presence at all times through human history of some spiritually fulfilled individuals to act as guides or teachers. At no period has the race been left entirely without them, no matter how bleak, how savage, or how materialistic the period has been.” (326)
Kirpal Singh seems to side with the second class of Sufis mentioned above, when he wrote: “The spirits on coming out of the nether world of Pluto, gradually work their way up from the mineral to the vegetable kingdom and then to the world of insects and reptiles and on to the feathery fraternity and next to the quadrupeds and finally to human beings.” (327). Theosophy complicates things further in positing an evolution of animal forms up to the human, into which pre-existing Human Monads then incarnate. The possibilities and contrasting arguments are immensely complex.
But for instance, Reynolds, cited in Part Two (“A Buddhist Creation Story”), argues that it is willing intention that makes an act karmically binding. Thus he basically agrees with Swartz on this point. Reynolds also goes to great length to deny the evolutionary theories of theosophy as in total opposition to the Buddhist position regarding karma as the fundamental law of existence. He denies any guiding intelligence such as a Divine Mind, World-Idea or Logos having anything to do with an evolutionary process. He particularly takes objection to the Theosophical view that once one becomes a man he will not go back in the evolutionary scale to a lower form. He feels this contradicts the inviolable law of karma. Some yogis such as Paramhansa Yogananda felt this was possible, but only for one incarnation as a form of punishment. Ramana Maharshi claimed that a cow named Lakshmi attained liberation in his company. Exceptions to the rule abound in the traditions. We might speculate that a reversion is possible, but not likely for most people, and certainly not practitioners.
One will recall from the story by Reynolds, after having evolved to a relatively advanced state in one solar system, then being reborn in one of the higher planes of Form, where they resided in bliss for aeons, a good number among a group of poor souls transferred to another world-system, suffered being reborn as animals, seemingly starting from the bottom rung of the ladder once again! A rather heartless cyclical rather than spiral view of things. All of this eaving us with many unanswered questions, primarily, how did the animals without volitional intentionality accrue the necessary meritorious karma to advance to humanhood? How comes it that kundalini lies coiled at the base of the spine? How does karma account for the chakras? The human form? How is the breathe of life (prana) breathed into us from moment to moment, including during sleep - an unconscious but intelligent process? How is that just mechanical karmic factors at work? And a host of other mysteries. Must one stay in the higher realms of Form, or anywhere else, until ones karma there “runs out?” There are in fact many Buddhist accounts of great Masters leading groups of souls out of hells and other Bardos. What is this if not grace? Ramana Maharishi said that at the age of sixteen “a great Power took him over.” What was this if not grace, even if one argues that it was due to his past karmas? Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism, Sufism, the Masters, all extoll grace. Adyashanti wrote a book on grace! Only among Buddhists and Jains do there seem to be sceptics of a higher power.
Even Reynolds said that as the Buddhist dharma evolved to the Mahayana it was recognized that those who reached “non-returner” status could progress to Buddhahood from higher celestial realms. In later Mahayana sutras, the Surangama and Lankavarara as but two examples, references to the grace of the Buddhas are abundant. it was affirmed in the latter that those in higher realms become “sustained in their samadhis by the transforming power of the Buddhas.” What is this but grace moving them beyond any lingering conditionality? This concept is almost a given in the path of Sant Mat, where the soul initiated and looked after by a Param Sant Satguru, has his destiny karmas swiftly wiped out, and is helped both before and after death. The grace of such a Master has been said to be boundless. There is a story in The Ocean of Divine Grace wherein a disciple of Kirpal Singh asked if his uninitiated father would at least come back into a good family where he could have favorable conditions for spiritual practice. Kirpal replied, “And what if he need not return at all?”
Another story of the power of grace is told by Ishwar Puri:
“When my father died, I was curious to know where he was because one of my uncles used to say, “He could have reached halfway to the universal mind,” which we call Trikuti or the causal plane. I said, “Maybe he’s gone further, but I don’t know. I’ll check with my Master.” I was driving down to Delhi where I had a meeting, and on the way I checked up through meditation. My master said, “You can’t see him.” I said, “Why not?” He said, “Because the moment he passed from his physical body, he merged completely with me and he is in the same place where I am, where totality is.” That was a great experience. I said, “Did he meditate so much?” He said, “No. It’s not meditation that takes you beyond a certain point [the causal plane and the dark void or “nothingness” beyond that which the Sants call Maha Sunn], it’s love and devotion.” (328)
In my opinion, the type of creation story told by the Buddha as recounted above, is both illustrative of the law of karma and also a form of “scare story” to motivate followers to serious practice. It was not a complete exegesis of the teaching, which the Buddha said was vast and that he had only given out the smallest portion, comparing a handful of leaves to all the leaves in a forest. Further, the teachings as such were carried on by oral tradition, and not written down for hundreds of years after his death: must one then accept it all uncritically as the be-all and end-all?
But Reynolds insists that the Buddhist view is that karma is the creator:
“The Buddhist view may be described as non-theistic. It does not assert that God, here called Brahma, thinks or otherwise brings the universe into existence as its Creator, or that his thinking sustains its existence, or that, if he ceases to think (or dream or breathe, as the case may be), the universe ceases to exist. On the contrary, according to the Buddhist teachings found in both the Sutras and the Tantras, our universe is the aggregate result of the actions in their past lives of all the sentient beings who inhabit our universe. When the world appears in the same way to a group of sentient beings, such as the human race, for example, it is because all the members of that group share a common karmic vision (las snang), that is to say, a particular way of perceiving things determined by a karmic cause. To the first question found in the catechism, “Who made the world?,” the Buddhist teachings unhesitatingly reply, “It is karma that made the world.” (329)
The Islamists throw a twist in the whole affair, countering this Buddhist view by declaring both man and the universe’s very existence as being due to the “divine Mercy.” How high a view indeed! The existence of an intelligence, a Mind, a Providence guiding in some fashion, under its own laws, the entire cosmic process, seems a reasonable assumption. While the realms of Desire, Form, and the Formless, including even the Pure Abodes of the Gods, may be impermanent and conditioned, as Buddhism maintains, does the collective karma of their entities entirely account for their manifestation itself? Moreover, according to Buddhism, Akinistha is known as the highest plane in existence, while beyond that lies Mahakanistha, which is the plane of existence at which the Sambhogakaya aspect of the Buddha manifests itself. Might that not be the Sach Khand of the Masters, or the Empyrean of the Sufis and Christians?
Another point about karmic management, barring perhaps advaita and early buddhism, is that it is recognized in numerous traditions that in the lower realms of relativity where karma holds the most sway, there are beings tasked as “lords of karma” or “karmic judges” to moderate and arrange things in best accord with divine law. We touched on this in Part Three in the section "Scrubbing" when mentioning the story of Fanny and her NDE. The mystic Daskalos refers to this while discussing the “second death” mentioned in Christianity:
“Some people hear about a second death and they are horrified. They imagine something analogous to earthly death. The second death is the dissolving of the psychic body in Kamaloka. You don't even recognize it because it is a very gradual process. It is not something that happens suddenly, it is unlike the death of the gross material body which, after it dies - or rather, after you drop it - you can see lying there. The second death is the gradual cleansing of the psychic [or astral] body from its negative vibrations whereby the surrounding environment becomes increasingly numinous. It is something analogous to the illumination over landscape as the sun rises...The second death is a process toward higher levels of awareness and illumination...All human beings have the potential of having this experience. They will have it, assuming they have come to their senses and assimilated the lessons of life just lived. Otherwise the masters of karma will put the ego to sleep. That is, the psychic body will dissolve instantly, will pass momentarily through the noetic dimension and descend down to the gross material level in a new incarnation. In such a case the individual will not experience or have consciousness of the noetic body. It is a very complicated process..It is an individual matter of how long you stay within the psychic dimensions and not a fixed mathematical formula which is the same for everyone." (330).
Summary and comments on Karma and Grace
David Hawkins gives a 'scientific' explanation of the interaction of karma and grace. Invoking the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, where we live in a non-linear dimension wherein all is not set in stone, he writes:
"Potentiality is converted to actuality by the introduction of consciousness and intention. Karma is not fixed...The love of God by worship, devotion, commitment, declaration, or selfless service is the catalyst and the formal invitation for the intercession of Divinity via the power of the nonlinear field of consciousness itself, which is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. By surrender of all resistance, this powerful nonlinear field becomes progressively dominant and eventually an all-encompassing Presence." (331)
This process is the case whether or not one has a Master or not. It presents a progressively advancing shift from a linear to a nonlinear 'quantum' point of view - rather than one of fixed cause and effect - the more one engages or dissolves oneself into it. It is self-verifying, with no need for idle speculate about whether there is free will or not.
Now, for some further perspective. These are my own very limited observations and opinions. The following view may be superceded later, say various jnanis, but the general teachings of the Sants is that there is a power controlling the human being; in one respect it is the soul that gives power to the intellect, mind, pranas, and physical body. In the body is the attention of the soul, or the emanant of the soul, which is consciousness, and which gives power to the human being. However, the Power of the All-Soul or Oversoul is within and controlling and sustaining all creation, including the individualsouls. The Oversoul manifests all of its creation through the soul. So within the body are said to be both the soul and ‘God’ or the Oversoul. [This is from a 'bottom-up' perspective; from the top-down', it is all One]. The Oversoul is All-consciousness, and its expressive Power is the Light and Sound, or Word, which is not just Light and Sound but a current of Life and Love as well. This Power, then, along with the souls, are emanations of the All-Soul or Oversoul, i.e., the Sat Purush, which proceeds from the nameless One.
The sage Plotinus described this arrangement as the The Divine Mind or Intellectual Principle (God), itself the eternal outpouring of the One (Godhead), emanating eternal Souls as well as the Divine Idea of all creation. Paul Brunton re-interpreted this philosophically as a World-Mind emanating individual Overselves, as well as a ‘World-Idea’ which is simultaneously projected through each Overself, manifesting a sensible world and body. The divine Soul then projects an emanant of itself into that 'World-Idea' in order by experience to come to self-consciousness through a process of evolution. This puts a positive spin on what in gnostic teachings is often a negative ‘fall’ of man or the soul. Thus, we have the paradox that the Soul is in the world and the body, and from a higher point of view the latter are also within the Soul:
"But soul is not contained in the universe, on the contrary the universe is in the soul. Soul is contained in the Intellectual Principle [Nous, Absolute Soul, or God] and is the container of body. (332).
The Soul, while in truth omnipresent, is said to have its true Home in Sach Khand, the first plane that came into being by His Will. To say the ‘first’ is unavoidably misleading due to our dualistic language, because this is happening atemporily, prior to the mind. It is a ‘realm’ of All-consciousness, beyond the physical, astral, mental or causal, and super-causal bodies and planes (or Pind (physical), Anda (Sahansdal Kanwal), Brahmand (Trikuti), Par Brahmand (Daswan Dwar/Bhanwar Gupta). At every plane until full realization there is an apparent dualism of the Soul and the Current or Naam, both being of the nature of consciousness and ‘magnetically’ attracted to each other, and both coming from the same Source. Thus, the ultimate truth of non-dualism is not violated. Moreover, the notions of both 'controller' and 'controlled' are ultimately transcended in mystery.
While in theory non-duality is always realizable, Sach Khand might be said to be the first of the 'inward-bound' non-dual stages, as previously explained.
The path of Sant Mat has generally as its first task for a person to merge his attention in the light and sound current and transcend all bodies to know itself as pristine soul in Sach Khand, where the All-Soul merges it by stages (Alak, Agam) into Anami or the Nameless One. This is ‘seeing no longer in a glass darkly, but face to face.’ When returning to the physical plane, one has of necessity to take on again the coverings of the soul and function as a normal human being once again, but now with perfect knowledge of who and what one is and what God in its expressive aspect is. One retains the realization of the higher planes, but still, experiences things at somewhat of a lesser intensity or directness, inasmuch as the lower planes are reflections of the higher. This is probably why the Buddha spoke of his nirvana, and then paranirvana: at death or in the higher planes the reality is more directly and fully known. But a great value is gained by the ascent. As written by Rene Daumal,:
“You cannot stay on the summit forever, you have to come down again. So why bother in the first place? Just this: What is above knows what is below, but what is below does not know what is above. One climbs, one sees. There is an art of conducting oneself in the lower regions by the memory of what one saw higher up. When one can no longer see, one can at least still know.” (333)
A higher task remains, some argue, which is to integrate the awareness of Sach Khand or the true Home with every plane quit by the soul on its upward journey. This leads to a complete non-dual realization. All may not fulfill this to the same degree, and that may depend on various reasons, including one’s destiny for service. In any case, residual karma is played out until the bodily term is over, and one then can return home forever. It is perhaps somewhat misleading to say, “From Sach Khand the whole creation looks like bubbles forming and disappearing in a spiritual ocean” - from the perspective of this non-dual integration - because of course on earth the liberated soul will see things as others do, but also with depth of knowledge and penetrating vision.
While the Master on this path puts a direct hand to the work of eradicating ones karmas, this process must also be seen in terms of our everyday life, and not just in meditation or by His grace. This implies experiencing what is known as tapas, or ‘heat’ in the traditions - the burning up of one’s karmas in the lower three bodies, which interpenetrate, and also exist in worlds of their own. This happens 'at our own expense', as the Christian mystics might say, through the resistance that comes up in our attempts at right living. Coming from another school, the sage Papaji writes along these lines:
“I feel such strong heat. Strong burning fire. What is it? All the store that you have accumulated and collected with great care and much interest—you have put a match to it and burned it. Now enjoy. This is a fire that burns all karmas so you won't have to appear again in this suffering. You have seen your own cremation. All the karmas are finished. This burning is the fire of knowledge. The ego, mind, senses, and pleasures are all burned and over. Everything is over. This is called fire. It is a very lucky person who will see his own cremation while alive. And he is putting fuel into the fire, until the corpse is completely burned. And then he will dance! This is called Shiva's dance. He has won. Everything is finished. No more notions or thoughts or desires. All ended in the fire. And then happiness will come and you will dance the eternal dance.” (334)
“He that is near to me is near to the fire.” - Origen (Jeremiam Homiliae, XX3)
The early life of Sri Ramakrishna went through alternations of anguish and ecstasy as his divine moods increased. The transformation of his body-mind was marked by numerous physical symptoms: a burning sensation, oozing of blood through his pores, loosening of the joints, and a shutdown of physiological functions. Such changes sometimes occur when the human vehicle is penetrated or infused with divine force. A tangible glow or golden radiance may also be apparent on the body of a yogi passing through the fires of ecstasy. Romain Rolland wrote:
“The yogis of India constantly note the effect of the great ecstasy caused by an efflux of blood. Ramakrishna could tell as soon as he saw the breast of a religious man, whom he was visiting, whether or not he had passed through the fire of God.” (335)
Obviously this is not the experience of every sadhaka, and may not be a requirement, especially for those not on the paths of yoga. But then, something equivalent to it very well may not be unexpected. Once again, Darshan Singh said:
"We are people of little faith and fail to recognize and appreciate the hand which guides and which sustains. Hazur (Baba Sawan Singh Ji) used to say that once a saint has taken a soul under his wing, he is keen to compress the progress of twenty births into a single one. And if we desire to pack the accomplishments of twenty lives into a single one, we must pay for it."
And also, for those on his path:
“The Master's job is to see that our karmas are wound up in this life, that we are cleansed and purified so that he can take us to our Eternal Home.”
Bhai Sahib:
“My disciples, if they live as I expect them to live, and they follow me in everything, they realize God IN THIS LIFE. Absolutely. And if they are old, or the progress is too slow, I make them realize on the deathbed. God MUST be realized in one life, in this life.” (336)
Kirpal Singh also spoke of the 'scrubbing' one undergoes once he is initiated, in which process his back karmas are gradually wound up:
"It is during this probationary period that the soul will feel some discomfort. It has become so besmeared with the dirt of the senses that it has lost its original purity of heart and is not fit to be raised out of the prison house is of the body."
"Even though the door has been opened, it is so attached to the things of the outside world that it does not wish to be free. It is only when the soul begins to regain its original purity of heart and mind that it can at last want to be free of the desires of the flesh and outward attachments. The loving Master tries to avoid all possible discomforts to the child disciple by explaining what are the vices to be avoided and the virtues to be developed in order to regain this purity."
"Unfortunately, more often than not the words of the Master do not sink in and little or no action is taken by the disciple to amend his ways. Therefore, the Master Power must take firmer measures to bring home to the disciple the importance of the truths that have been explained in words. Hence the discomfort that is sometimes felt by the dear ones in their day-to-day living...If a child gets itself so dirty that the only way the mother can wash it clean is by using a scrubbing brush, can it be said that the child will feel comfortable during the scrubbing process? It will only feel comfortable after the scrubbing has ceased and it is shining clean and pure."
"Help and protection is always extended by the Master to his followers. He looks after their comforts in every way, both outer and inner. Even the effects of the reactions of the past - from the gallows to an ordinary pin prick - so much concession is given. As the mother sacrifices everything for the sake of the child, even so does the Master sacrifice everything for the sake of his children. The follower does not dream of what the Master does for him. He fills his followers with his own thought, with his own life impulses. When we remember him, he remembers us with all his heart and soul." (337)
Shri Atmananda remarked, similarly to Kirpal Singh saying “the follower does not dream of what the Master does for him,”
“A disciple need never bother himself about what the Guru is doing for him. A disciple can never conceive or understand it, in its real significance. You need only know that the Guru takes you from the phenomenal to the Absolute.” (338)
The general consensus is that an enlightened Master does not perform miracles or absolve karmas by his personal will-power alone, and that he even has no personal will as such. Ramana Maharshi described it in this way in the case of a jnani:
“...a person’s bad karma will be considerably reduced while he is in the presence of a jnani. A jnani has no sankalpas [will or intentions] but his sannidhi [presence] is the most powerful force. He need not have sankalpa, but his presiding presence, the most powerful force, can do wonders: save souls, give peace of mind, even give liberation for ripe souls. Your prayers are not answered by him but absorbed by his presence. His presence saves you, wards off the karma and gives you the boons as the case may be, [but] involuntarily. The jnani does save the devotees, but not by sankalpa, which is non-existent in him, only through his presence.” (339)
Being paradoxical and mysterious, however, this may not exactly portray the entirety of the process, but likely may serve to counter dualistic conceptions about it.
One of the ways on this path - although it is often taught as the only way - that the disciple comes to know himself and the Oversoul is by rising above body-consciousness during meditation. He then sees - if his understanding has been well-schooled and his ego held in check by an integral philosophic discipline - 'what is what' in greater and greater degrees. Yet there is also a lesser known method or process by which one comes to know of this Controlling Power. This is when it - while still controlling, for it cannot do otherwise - apparently lessens its 'sustaining' power for a time, leaving one 'high and dry'. Here one 'knows without seeing', and is sustained by faith. It can be a short or very long process. Brunton writes:
"It is not only by the experience of feeling at times the presence of God that an aspirant may develop inwardly: it may also happen by the equivalent non-experience, by feeling quite deserted by God, quite left alone! This - the "dark night of the soul" - is just as essential." (340)
"If the Overself did not lead him into and through the final dark night, where he becomes as helpless as an infant, as bereft of interior personal possessions as a destitute pauper, how else would he learn that it is not by his own powers and capacities that he can rise at last into enduring illumination?" (341)
It need not happen this way, but it happens enough that it is worth mentioning, as the reader will recall from Part Three.
“Forgiveness is the only sweet water that will wash away all dirt. Justice won’t do it, mind that. If you want justice, then that will react. Forgiveness only washes away all dirt. Forgive and forget, this is the way to Spirituality.” - Kirpal Singh (342)
“The Guru will be waiting for the disciple to get mature. When the disciple matures, the Guru will give him one glance. At that time all others, other than the disciple, will disappear as if burnt by fire." - Ramana Maharishi (343)
“There are little graces, such as those which produce the glimpse; but there is only one great Grace: this produces a lasting transformation, a deep radical healing and permanent enlightenment. .” - Brunton (344)
“A few minutes of the Master’s grace...and then?” - Kirpal Singh
[For additional perspective on the nature of karma on the path of Sant Mat, please see this series of letters and quotes by Sawan Singh, Kirpal Singh, and others: (http://www.mountainrunnerdoc.citymaker.com/on-karma.html)].
Needless to say, there remains much more that could be said on this topic. In fact, it is well-nigh inexhaustible! Only in physical life, however, are experiences so vivid and, as mentioned, etched into ones inner being. One can experience things here that one cannot on higher planes. Only here, moreover, can one meditate and then compare the inner experiences with the outer and understand reality in its fullness as transcending all the states. Whereas until realization inner experience alone is rather dreamlike. One can experience joys here as well as pain here that one cannot on inner planes. Through so many ways the soul grows. All this, then, must be why Masters say spiritual progress here is faster than when in a disembodied condition alone. But it is hard. We all desire, and most mystics consider it a success, to be in a state of stabilized ecstasy. But that is not the highest state, or the fundamental essence of the spiritual path, and something few if any achieve. “First calm, then ecstasy, then peace, then insight, then Nirvana,” said the Buddha. This is not achieved solely by dissociation from the world. There is a matter of purification and understanding also. This world is considered “the footstool of the gods,” and “the womb of the Buddhas.” We should think on this. Anthony Damiani spoke on this aspect of the waking state:
“Even after life, in death, a certain amount of learning goes on. And, usually, for many years, you are preoccupied with assimilating the experiences that you had here…[But] experiences in the body are so intense, in comparison to experiences outside the body, that you learn much faster what in the spiritual worlds may take you many, many years to learn. And I am speaking about hundreds and hundreds of years. Experiences in the body are so intense that sometimes one experience is all you need to learn. This body provides the means whereby our experiences are intensified to the nth degree. You can experience pain here that you can’t experience elsewhere, you can experience joys here that you can’t experience elsewhere, because of the very intensity of the mechanism by which the soul is operating in the world.> (344)
St. John of the Cross said of the soul's purification that "It gains more in one hour here on earth...than it would in many there.”
Brunton echods many saints and sages when he wrote:
“It is a paradox of the strangest irony that the place where we can best find the Overself is not in another world but in this one, that the chance to grow enduringly out of darkness into light is better here.” (345)
Finally, St. Padre Pio offers a view from his Christian perspective on the value of earth-life:
“By suffering we are able to give something to God. The gift of pain, of suffering, is a big thing and cannot be accomplished in Paradise." (346)
Contemplating things like indeterminate eons of suffering, the wheel of eighty-four, Lord Yama, or an immensely long evolution, however, it is nice to have Vedanta to fall back on once in a while and find some rest. Sri Siddharameshwar states:
"The world is not even one moment, but it appears as if it is millions of years old. All of it is false. Think about the fifteen minutes of dream. There you can experience births and deaths by the hundreds...Brahman is said to be "all-pervading," but when the "All" is not real, how can Brahman be pervading it?...The Kingdom of Yama the God of Death, is this world appearance. If one enters the empire of Self-Knowledge, the kingdom of Yama is no more...If one becomes one with the world through the understanding that the entire world is himself, he becomes Parabrahman...What is Parabrahman? That natural, spontaneous (stateless) state, which remains after the inspiration "I Am" is cast off, is called Parabrahman...Your spontaneous and natural self, devoid of all concepts of Knowledge and Liberation." (347)
CHAPTER THIRTY-THREE BR>
Jnana chaksu and divya chaksu: two different “third-eyes”; ‘The Eye of the Heart,’ ‘the Eye of the Mind,’ ‘the Eye of Wisdom,’ 'the Eye of Intuition’; The ajna center and the Heart; The Ultimate transcends attention; The heart-lotus is not a place; Faith and trust open it; Four lives to Sach Khand? That was a misinterpetation, there are four stage, to be done in One life; Intuition, the listening attitude, is the Ear of the Mind; A western path: Light is Knowledge and Sound is Love’s Essence
”It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.” - Saint-Exupery
When I sat before Kirpal Singh, one disciple expressed intense frustration that she couldn't still her mind. On this path of dhyana (concentration) is a sinequa non. Kirpal replied,”that’s all of our problem!” Some would take that merely as a matter-of-fact reply, which it may have well been, the point being that achieving stilling of the mind was difficult for everyone. Yet perhaps there was an additional meaning to Sant Kirpal’s remark. At the time my 'dhyan’ was being demolished! Later, I remembered this incident when I read the following words of the Chinese master Hung-Jen:
“The triple realm is an empty apparition that is solely the creation of the individual mind. Do not worry if you cannot achieve concentration and do not experience the various psychological states. Just constantly maintain clear awareness of the True Mind in all your actions.” (348)
In the Dzogchen tradition the same approach is taken. Not internalconcentration, but letting the mind be open and vast as the sky, neither rejecting or accepting thoughts. In this case the concentration is there, but manifested through ones earnestness and perseverance rather than by yogic effort. The only problem is that if one relaxes the mind prematurely, he may go into the subconscious mind and stagnate. That is why in most traditions the development of mindfulness or concentration, among other practices, such as the cultivation of the virtues, service, character building, are preliminary exercises or practice, and Sant Mat and even Dzogchen are no exceptions. Pure Dzogchen is traditionally a pinnacle practice for one who is already established in a steady state of contemplation; therefore, it is really quite advanced. But these days no one wants the preliminaries and so the teachers oblige, and a new tradition has been formed.
My experience with Sant Kirpal Singh was unique, to my understanding, and led me to feel that he himself may in a sense have transcended the conventional teaching of his lineage and realized Sat and Sahaj, for instance, independent of exclusive inversion. He once asked me if I wanted anything, if I wanted to leave my body, and when I replied (unknowingly, without much intelligence at the time, as I was a young man), “no, nothing,” he immediately got excited and said, “You're an emperor, I’ll kiss your feet, God is nothing!” A couple of days later I had an awakening type of experience at his ashram, which he seemed to recognize and acknowledge, even though I didn’t yet know what had happened at the time. It was not mystical or psychic, or even an experience, but an instant of realization of the ego or person's unreality, even while in the body. Nothing had changed, and everything negative in me remained to be purified, but yet, everything was different. It was one of those infamous "non-events" the non-dualists are so fond of talking about. I knew this was something that never arose in any of my inner meditations before that moment, and could not have arisen as long as my attention was only riveted on inner phenomena or their expectation. Kirpal, as stated, after giving a long and detailed description of the path to the final goal, once said, "you already are there, you just don't know it." To me this confirms he had a more complete realization than that conventionally elaborated in Sant Mat, and that Kirpal, like Rumi and Kabir, was among the higher gurus in that lineage.
Ramana spoke of a tiny orifice or ‘bud’ in the heart which is normally closed, but when opened led to realization of the Self and happiness, here and now. It was also from this tiny orifice that the whole universe sprouted forth. This causal ‘knot’ (granthi) is not automatically opened by the path of ascent, it seems, but rather the knot at the ajna doorway is opened. That is, the ‘divya chakshu’ is opened, but not necessarily the ‘jnana chakshu’ that Ramana talked about. That, too, is referred to as the ‘Third Eye.’ In Zen it is the Eye of the Way. Ot has variously been spoken of as ‘the faultless Eye of Truth,’ ‘the Eye of the Heart,’ ‘the Eye of the Mind,’ ‘the Eye of Wisdom,’ 'the Eye of Intuition,' and ‘the Eye of Understanding.’ It is not an organ of perception like divya chakshu, and in truth, does not have an exclusive physical location in space, although the word heart is used. It is fundamentally a realization of subjectivity, free of subject-object distinctions, rather than the inner dimensions of visionary objectivity. That may or may not open on the mystic path, depending on ones background, prior understanding, and so forth. Otherwise, the ego on the path of ascent "takes a bath" and is purified of gross attachment, but still remains intact as an ego-soul for some time, dying step by step until the Soul shines in its pristine glory in Sat Lok. Further, on return to the world ignorance to a degree may reassert itself, perhaps not in all, but in many cases. In Sant Mat, it is indeterminate, in my understanding, when the knot at the causal heart opens. It is likely that the greatest of these Masters, such as Kabir, Nanak, Kirpal, and others knew the Truth, but this major distinction between the teachings regarding the heart versus the third eye (ajna center) is simply not given much recognition. Rather, the path of the sages is just dismissed as a lesser path, and left at that. This leaves many experiences unexplainable. Ishwar Puri felt that the ‘subjectivity’ automatically increases as the soul ascends. This makes sense for the mystic on this path, who is not as it were all alone experiencing dualistic visions, but actually communing with the Holy Spirit within and ultimately realized as himself.
On the other hand, it is likely possible for the jnana chakshu to open, on the path of knowledge, without the divya chakshu, or even the heart chakra, opening to any significant degree. In the latter case one is known as a “dry” meditator. The heart may open later in life, although an intention is needed for that to happen. Some prefer to remain in their transcendence. Perhaps for both to open would be best. At the farthest reaches of both paths, moreover, words like subjective and objective lose any relative meaning; or, alternatively, it has been said that one realizes that which is the One ‘Objective’ Truth. However one phrases it, along with that is an understanding that the universe, whatever it be, as J. Allen Boone wrote is “faultless in its conception, faultless in its purpose, and faultless in its operation.”
It is perhaps best, moreover, not to get too technical regarding the ‘place’ of the jnana chakshu. After all, the specific ‘heart on the right’ mentioned by Ramana Maharshi was not considered essential by Sri Nisargadatta (who never experienced it), or Ramaji (who did experience it) - or even Ramana himself (who essentially originated this teaching) ! What is realized as the Heart is essentially infinite and non-local. This has been discussed to some degree in Part One. By way of further explanation, Papaji did not agree with Ramana about the location of the spiritual Heart:
"On my first visit to the Maharshi, when my Heart opened and flowered, I knew that it was neither inside nor outside the body. And when the experience of my Self became permanent during my second visit, I knew that it was not possible to say that the heart could be limited to or located in the body...The Maharshi gave me an answer which fully satisfied me. Turning to me, he explained that he only spoke in this way to people who still identified themselves with their bodies. 'When I speak of the "I" rising from the right side of the body, from a location on the right side of the chest, the information is for those people who still think they are the body. To these people I say that the Heart is located there. But it is really not quite correct to say that the "I" rises from and merges in the Heart on the right side of the chest. The Heart is another name for the Reality and it is neither inside nor outside of the body; there can be no in or out for it, since it alone is. I do not mean by "Heart" any physiological organ or any plexus or anything like that, but so long as one identifies oneself with the body and thinks that one is the body, one is advised to see where in the body the "I"-thought rises and merges again. It must be the Heart at the right side of the chest since every man, of whatever race and religion, and in whatever language he may be saying "I", points to the right side of the chest to indicate himself. This is so all over the world, so this must be the place. And by keenly watching the daily emergence of the "I"-thought on waking, and its subsiding in sleep, one can see that it is in this Heart on the right side.'" (349)
Ishwar Puri denigrated this place as 'a minor bodily center', but it must be noted that even Ramana did not tell everybody to meditate there, or do self-enquiry, or, on some occasions, to be concerned with the Amrita Nadi, the Heart on the right, Nirvikalpa or Sahaja samadhi, or any of this! Yet many have made elaborate philosophy about the bodily heart on the right as well as the amrita nadi as the terminal gateway to realization and also as the true center of the so-called causal body. For example, Adi Da wrote:
"The term "causal (or "causal body") is generally used (or misused) by...Yogis and Saints to indicate the "manomayakosha", or the second (and mental) dimension of the subtle realm (or subtle body), beyond which is the "super causal" (or "supracausal") realm (or body), also called the "vijnanamayakosha" (the third, final, and highest sector of the subtle realm, or body). However, the true (and classically defined) causal body is the ultimate "body" (or the terminal of Ultimate Realization), called "anandamayakosha", on the primary region of the right side of the heart, and it is the bodily (or psycho-physical) seat directly associated with (or specifically transcended in) the Ultimate Realization That Is Consciousness Itself." (350)
He goes on to say that Ultimate Realization transcends ascent, descent, and even attention itself. One will remember that Faqir Chand also spoke of the transcendence of attention in the ‘Stateless State.’
However, if the Heart itself is beyond time and space and non-localized, infinite and all-pervading, then through whatever locus it was initially experienced or realized may not be as important as whether or not it has been realized.
Kirpal Singh said that "the heart-lotus of the Saints is the agya chakra." Ramana, however, said this of the so-called heart-lotus:
"God is said to reside in the Hritpandarika (the heart-lotus). The heart-lotus is not a place. Some name is mentioned as the place of God because we think we are in the body. This kind of instruction is meant for those who can appreciate only relative knowledge...The Supreme Being is that from which the body is born, in which it lives, and into which it resolves. However, we think we are in the body. Hence such instruction is given. The instruction means: "Look within."" (351))
From Maharshi's point of view, the "agya center heart-lotus" would not really an actual place either, and the notion of leaving the body is only an apparent one. It appears real at the start of an indirect path of yoga, but the final reality is that the Self does not go anywhere:
"It is wrong to imagine that there is the world, that there is a body in it, and that you dwell in the body. If the Truth is known, the universe and what is beyond it will be found to be only in the Self." (352
At first glance, there does not seem to be any further distance between Advaita and Sant Mat, but we have hoped to paint a picture, perhaps in broad strokes, of a common vision. But this present point is a major one, and we need to look at it a bit more. Ramana adds:
"One may seem to go out of the body, but the body itself is not more than our thought. There can be no body in the absence of thought; no outgoing or incoming in the absence of body. However, owing to habit, the feeling of going out arises...The thoughts are the enemy. They amount to the creation of the Universe. In their absence, there is neither world nor God the Creator. The Bliss of the Self is the single Being only...The body is a projection of the mind...It is the mind [consciousness] which creates the body, the brain in it, and also ascertains that the brain is its seat." (353)
Nisargadatta similarly said:
"As long as there is a body you appear to be embodied. Without the body you are not disembodied - you just are." (354)
Remember, even Sant Rajinder Singh said that "the soul doesn't go anywhere."
Perhaps here is the crux. The time of awakening from sleep gets a different description from the Sants as if does from a sage like Ramana. As the reader will see in a letter written to me from Kirpal Singh presented in Appendix 1, he taught that at the moment of waking the first thing one notices ones self as awareness at the eye-focus, followed by the descent of awareness to include the body below and the world. For Ramana, however, this skips a crucial step. He taught that at the first moment between sleep and awakening there is first an awareness of the "I" in its pure form. In a split second this "I"-thought travels from the Heart to the sahasrar or brain, before then spreading over the whole body. In advaita, this gap between sleep and awakening, and other gaps between two thoughts, or thought-moments as Buddha called them, are potential opportunities to recognize the pure "I" or "I Am," which when held, leads to the goal of the Self, or the substratum of Consciousness underlying all three states, also referred to as Prajnaghana, or full knowledge in all states.
But see the difference here. If the body is only a projection of thought, and the pure "I" arising from the Heart is prior to the ego-I and body-thought, and itself the royal road to the Heart, then starting ones sadhana from the eye-focus in the already wakened state is missing not only the transitional transcendental stage, but basing ones sadhana on the conventions of ordinary living which Ramana already refuted above ("It is wrong to imagine that there is the world, that there is a body in it, and that you dwell in the body").
Let's try another angle. Bhagavan says:
"The Self is pure consciousness in sleep, it evolves as aham ["I"] without idam ["this"] in the transition stage [between sleep and waking]; and manifests as aham ["I"] and idam ["this"] in the waking state. If the transitional "I" is realized, the substratum is found and leads to the goal." (355)
This utilization of the transition stage is an advanced practice, but it is realized through enquiry also. The point is, if the body [and brain] are a projection of the mind, which arises from the Heart, isn't it a roundabout way of realizing the Heart to exploit the mechanisms of the body-mind only to return to the Heart in the end? Such would be the argument of these advaitic sages.
But this raises interesting questions. Is the interval between the moment the "I"-thought rises from the Heart to the sahasrar so fast that even some ofthe saints miss it?! And second - and this is pure speculation - may the Surat concentrating deeper and deeper into the brain, passing through an inverted tunnel [baanknal], end up actually going down into the heart, perhaps without knowing it fully? And, what happens when the eyes roll up in samadhi: do you keep 'going up'? Is there any 'going up' or even 'going down' except in relation with a body? If not, is a sadhana, based on acknowledging the existence of the body independently of the mind or consciousness, not unduly prolonged? Finally, is the same heart realized in Sant Mat at Anami, or Dayal Desh, or the so-called Stateless State?
Whatever the answer to these questions, the eye-focus as the seat of the soul - or Self - in the body, it appears, can only be so in the waking state, not in dream or sleep. Yet Ramana said that the seat of the real "I" must be constant in all states. The head bends when sleep overtakes it, while the Self still exists. Therefore he maintains that the Heart is senior to body, the head, the world and all chakras. Despite appearances, this may not be entirely inconsistent with what some of the saints say when one goes deeply into their actual teachings.
And in any such discussion it needs to be kept in mind that the heart on the right is said to be more of an intuited 'structure' than an actual physical one. In other words, the experience upon realization is not so much one of proceeding from objectivity to subjectivity, but understanding that the objectivity was never real as such. This would seem to be applicable to 'realization-in-place' as sages teach, or realization via an inner journey through various emanated planes and coming around to the Self or Absolute in the end as the saints teach. Even so, this is a very challenging topic.
This may have already been mentioned, but there was an encounter of psychologist C.G. Jung with Ramana, where Jung argued that from Ramakrishna to Ramana was a perfect example of the progression from bhakti to jnana. Ramana rebuked him saying, "What was there that Ramakrishna did not know!" Many take Ramakrishna's reply when asked if he saw God, "Yes, I see Him as clearly as I see you," as implying that he had not gone beyond objective vision to non-duality. But is that so? In his last years he said:
"You see nowadays it is not necessary for me to meditate much. All at once I become aware of the Indivisible Brahman. Nowadays the vision of the Absolute is continuous in me." (356)
He was not speaking of a vision of light seen with the divya chakshu, rather the absolute vision of the jnana chakshu, where seeing and being are one.
Another way of looking at the jnana chakshu, or the “eyes of the Heart’, is simply as realization through the doorway of faith, or trust. Faith does not depend on visions or inner experiences, or feeling good, or the absence of trials and tribulations. In way, it is made good in their absence. It is much deeper than all that. It is more active than intuition, and far more than mere belief. The Christians mystics as well as the Masters have, in fact, always stressed that it is a or the primary way to God. We will let Guillore speak to us on this:
“Nothing leads the soul so directly to perfection as the spirit of faith, nothing renders it so capable of union with God…Faith walks not by sight; and therefore it may be at its strongest when the soul is most barren of consolation, light, or conscious feeling. He who depends on these is liable to be dispirited and sluggish if they fail; but he who acts under the influence of a spirit of faith will not vary and fluctuate with any such tides; his spiritual life is founded on a rock which cannot be moved…There is no mental attitude so free from earthliness, so capable of looking straight at God in His holiness - consequently, so near union with Him - as this spirit of faith - which, as one of the Fathers says, rises beyond all limits of human reason, of nature, and of experience. Let these strive to fetter the soul as they may, the eagle’s wings faith will pierce that darkness, and its clear penetrating ray will reach straight to the Bosom of God. Bitterness may whisper to the afflicted soul that God is no longer the Loving, Tender Lord it once rested on; but faith overstretches all experience, and teaches that He is the Same to all Eternity, though out of love He may hide His Face awhile. Temptation may suggest that the soul is forsaken and left a prey to the enemy, but faith boldly proclaims that God was never nearer, never more tenderly watchful over His child, than amid that conflict the very fierceness of which is a sacred chain binding him to his Lord. Thoughts of despair may assault the trembling conscience; but faith with uplifted hand points to the endless abyss of God’s Mercies, deeper than the abyss of man’s sins…It is this path that God has ever led His chosen saints…It is the “path of perfect peace.” There is no real peace which admits of a misgiving lest the soul lose its treasure; but the grace which springs from true faith is so substantial, so firm, it fills the mind with such unhesitating strength that where it is, the fear of loss cannot penetrate. That was the faith in which Job said, “Though He slay me, yet will I trust in Him”: in which St. Peter said, “Lord, Thou knows all things, Thou knows that I love Thee.” (357)
“Faith is the proximate and proportionate means to the intellect for the attainment of the divine union of love...For the likeness of faith and God is so close that no other difference exists than that between believing in God and seeing him...The greater ones faith the closer is ones union with God...The darkness under God’s feet and of his hiding place and the dark water of his dwelling [Ps. 18:10-11] denote the obscurity of faith in which he is enclosed...Above these is his being, which no one can reach through human effort.” - St. John of the Cross (358)
"Into my own head have I taken thy worry; so do not thou worry but cherish thou love. Leaving all doubts, thy love do thou make firm, and have staunch faith. This practice I'll get done by thee myself; and into the Durbar (court) of the highest Absolute Lord shall I take thee." - Soamiji Maharaj (359)
Four lives to Sach Khand?
In light of Soamji's quote above we feel it is useful to revisit the teaching about "four lifetimes" often given out in Sant Mat. Kirpal when asked said that he himself never said that four lives were required to attain the goal, only that there were four stages. These have been depicted in various ways in different traditions: Bhakti, Naam-bhakti, Self-realization, God-realization; Guru-bhakti, Naam initiation, Turiya (causal plane), Sach Khand; Stream Enterer, Once-Returner, Non-Returner, Arhat, etc.. The essential thing, however, is that once one comes to a true Guru the goal is supposed to be reached in this one present life. Bhai Sahib in his Sufi lineage said the same thing: one life, and if for some reason not in life then at the time of death, or at least one will be liberated from a higher Loka. You are there already, you just don't know it, trust it, act like it, or believe it. And, as Brunton declares, the Overself is not a wit less close to one even in a life filled with disappointment and despair. That is an astounding declaration! So one should always carry the faith that home really IS where the heart is. We make too much sometimes of technicalities, yogas, and understanding. As Kabir said, "Nobody gets it - it's too simple!"
Ishwar Puri said that when Sawan Singh was pressed on the issue of four lives he affirmed the one-life promise as well. In his charming off-hand manner Ishwar said that basically the deal was sealed when one comes to a perfect Master, and as long as you try your best in this life, you go home. With some humor he then said if you don't try very much, a second life is possible, if you leave the Master, a third is possible, and only if you go so far as to kill the Master (!) may a fourth life become necessary. That’s a way better deal than in Buddhism where the latter is one of the unforgivable sins! Ishwar further went on to say that Sawan had said that these apparent rules were set down in different yugas when the conditions of life were different. So we should not put too much stock in them. Remember, Soamiji promised to do the whole meditation for the disciple as long as he had faith, and Sawan assured one disciple that all he really needed to do was meditate once after initiation, and the rest was done!
Very few are not trying their best (according to Hafiz, NO ONE is), and many of those who so-called leave their Master are not doing it in their heart of hearts but merely following what they feel as guidance to go to another teacher or teaching to round out and further their development. Ishwar said that in a sense we are not in a position to know who is our Master, and further, it is an error to assume one has made a mistake by following a less than perfect Master. We go from experience to experience, with our heart leading the way.
The point is, metaphysically speaking, that what is to happen has already happened when the mysterious occasion of a true meeting with a Master occurs. It need only be for a short time, even just a moment. It is not really a meeting in time and space, nor are its primary results to be found there. Only a little pralabd karma to endure. Sri Nisargadatta said that he did essentially zero sadhana, but merely trusted his Guru's words that he was the Truth, and simply watched his life effortlessly change, attaining realization in only three years. It can be as simple as that.
And yes, truth is paradoxical. Many may be saying, "what are you talking about, after several hundred pages of explaining how difficult, albeit mysterious, of an ordeal the path is?! Perhaps we are merely carrying on a rear-guard. Yes, we do not want to encourage seekers to be naive, but at the same time wish to offer balm for troubled hearts approaching the end of their rope of seeking, struggling, and effort, and ready to accept the ever-present grace true Masters offer with open hands, simply, and (hopefully) in a bit more sober and intelligent way.
“The Master holds the disciple through thick and thin. It is the Divine Way. Never let faith and love in Him falter. There will of course be moments of doubt and questioning, but if you can pass through them with love and faith unscathed you will find the spiritual road within steadily unfolding itself before you and all things being added unto you. Such moments are only tests to make our self-surrender more complete and more secure.”
“When a disciple entrusts his all to the Master, he becomes carefree and the Master has of necessity to take over the entire responsibility, just as a mother does for her child who does not know what is good for him. Surrender..comes only when a disciple has complete faith and confidence in the competency of the Master.”- Kirpal Singh (360)
"Faith is the resolve to live as if certain things were true, in the confident assurance that they are true, and that we shall one day find out for ourselves that they are true." - W.R. Inge
[For more on faith or shraddha, see https://www.mountainrunnerdoc.com/shraddha.html.]
So just as the heart on the right was given as a concession by Ramana for those identified with body-consciousness, and not essential for realization of the true Heart which is formless, infinite and bodiless, so might also the ajna chakra or third-eye spoken off as "the heart-lotus of the saints" also be such a provisional aid, bypassable once the Heart Itself is realized? It will be recalled that Kirpal once also put his hand on his heart and said, "the Master resides here," as well as saying "He is an immense presence...is everywhere," and also Darshan Singh saying that the Master "nearer than your jugular vein" and resides "in every cell in your body." Or as Empedocles said (sometimes mistakenly attributed to St. Augustine), "God is a circle whose center is everywhere and circumference is nowhere." This may simply be part of the necessary paradox involved in giving expression to the incomprehensible and ineffable.
Now that everything is fully understood (!), another concept found in the literature besides the Eye of the Mind is the "Ear of the Mind." Korean Zen Master Song-Chol (1912-1993) explains:
"When you open the Eye of the Mind, you are also opening the Ear of the Mind. And you will be able to hear the inexhaustible Dharma explanations of the boulder which seems to be just sitting there. In Buddhism this is called inanimate Dharma." (361)
This clearly refers to the higher, intuitive faculty, not inner subtle sounds. In Part One we quoted Shiv Brat Lal saying that "Radhasoami Dham is intuitional only." He also said that "the happiest life is to be lived on earth and not in heaven." Likewise, Song-Chol further writes:
"The big issue is not whether you're going to heaven or paradise. That's nonsense. The issue is to open the Eye of the Mind and to resolve everything here and now...All that is visible is Avalokitesvara, all that is audible is the mystical sound. No other truth than seeing and hearing. Do you understand?" (Ibid)
Sri Ramana spoke of following a subtle intuition that arises and leads one to its source in the heart. Some call it the "I"-current, aham sphurana, or the life-current. While not entirely unrelated to the audible sound current, it is not the same either. Theoretically one could experience both, and in this respect Ramana said that the practice of listening to sound is better combined with vichara or self-enquiry. Brunton nevertheless also speaks of following this intuition in terms of 'listening':
"Once you have caught the inner note in your experience of your self-existence, try to adhere firmly to the listening attitude which catches it...He does not, cannot, fabricate this inner silence, but he provides the correct condition of relaxed, concentrated listening which allows it to be discovered as a presence within himself. (362)
A western path: Light is Knowledge and Sound is Love’s Essence
Being wakeful and waiting upon the Lord is another way of looking at it. Being wakeful relates to understanding, light, and "seeing," while waiting upon the Lord relates to "hearing" or the intuitional-listening attitude. It need not imply any passage through ascended realms per se. And in fact a number of teachers seem to be leaning in this direction. One initiate of the Masters who spent time with Ishwar Puri and others had this to say:
"My wife and I feel more connected to the Western teachings of Light and Sound which say that Light is Knowledge and Sound is Love's Essence, and it has nothing if anything at all to do with soul travel or seeing inner phenomena. Ishwar would say often in private classes, if you see inner lights or hear inner sounds, ignore them - they are only side effects of a greater awakening beyond the causal mind. Ishwar and Gary Olsen were very much alike in this respect."
This may be confusing to students, and rightly so, because the teachers say contrary things. Sawan said be attached to the sound, Shoonyo (a temporary successor of Faqir Chand) said if you do get attached to sound you will need another birth. Faqir said all is phantasmagoria up to Bhanwar Gupha, but also said to use the sound to get to the soundless. Gary Olsen, who went from Eckankar to open acknowledgement of the Radhasoami teachings (at one time being accused by Beas of plagiarism for using them without permission), teaches that the traditional ways of Sant Mat meditation are too slow for the western seeker, that it is contemplation on the love of God, experienced through reading-contemplation, which keeps the mind active as ones attention ascends in consciousness. That is his opinion, I am not saying he is right or that I am in total agreement with him. Nor am I saying he is wrong either. For some what he has offered might be just what the doctor ordered. One really must find your own way, as Sri Nisargadatta said, or it will take you nowhere.
We will be speaking more on some teachings of Gary Olsen in CHAPTER FORTY-ONE in the section "The I Am has nothing to do with the chakras". One may well ask for clarification, however, on what he meant by ascension here, which is the big question we posed at the beginning of Part One. The idea that comes to mind is that one transcends, so to speak, in place, without going anywhere. This is not so strange when other initiates come back from satsang and say things like:
"Rajinder in a recent visit said you are not taken up out of the body. Consciousness and realization is right here where you are in this very moment.”
He, as we mentioned, has been saying something like that for a number of years, yet at other times the traditional search gets presented:
"For whatever reason, God sent the souls into realms of creation; it has been the souls who have delayed their own return."
That is why it has been said that the teachers are slowly changing the traditional language of the path. Is this not a message that we really must find out for ourself what is true and what works? If we are not going anywhere why do we repeat five names and gaze into the mental space? So the concept of being "out of the body" is something to be understood. What is the body? Are we in it? If we are not in it how can we go out of it? Shiv Brat Lal says all realms up to Anami are in the body. But what is the body? Advaita says it is a thought in Mind? And what is Mind - a box to put things in?! No, it is timeless, spaceless, immaterial, and infinite. So who goes where is a good question. But one can have the experience of being drawn in, or up, so a natural question is, where are you then? Certainly, the self is witnessing all this.Therefore you must be where the self is! And once this is grasped, what more is there to say or do?
As for comparing Sant Mat with advaita teachers like Ramana, my feeling for a long time is this. One can experience this plane from an awakened or unawakened point of view, right? So then, why couldn't one experience an inner plane from either of those perspectives also? Certainly, one can. This implies that just because one person can go to an inner plane does not necessarily make him or her 'higher' than anyone who doesn't.That is an illusion. Moreover, two people on the same inner plane can be at vastly different levels of understanding or maturity. Enlightenment does not come just from experiencing other levels but also from understanding or recognizing the nature of what it is that is there. And from this perspective, the free-flowing "reading-contemplation" practice that Gary Olsen recommends is not easily dismissed as "just intellectual." It is actually a big part of many spiritual traditions, like Advaita and Buddhism. I'm not making any judgement of Olsen, whom I have never met. I am only saying that some folks who have spent time with Ishwar and other perhaps more widely known and respected contemporary Sant Mat teachers have also found a personal resonance and value in his company. And in the end, isn't that what it's all about?
.There is a concept in Buddhism of being a "baby Buddha." Once enlightened you still have to grow into it. Similarly, just because you have gone to a plane or even can go there at will does not mean you yet have the full ability to function there or fully understand it. And it follows also one may not have the ability to lead others there. To me it is an open question whether you have to be "authorized" to do it. Perhaps authorization simply means it is acknowledged that you know what you are doing. I'm not pretending to answer all these questions, only trying to raise them. And perhaps it would be a good thing if others did so, too. Already many are thinking them, is it not better to get it all out in the open?
CHAPTER THIRTY-FOUR
Yoga and Vedanta: two distinct metaphysical perspectives; wakefulness versus the three states; “Causal” has a different meaning in each school; Bodies: adventitious vehicles versus upadhis; The mind as a function of the Self and not a ‘thing’
This is difficult material to formulate. While it may appear that the two teachings are very different, that may only be true at the relative level, not the Absolute, and different teachers tend to emphasize one over the other. Everything is only the One, in truth, One Mind, Nirguna Brahman, and no Saguna Brahman, Isvara or soul. But for sake of pedagogy let us bifurcate that One and presume there is a Universal Mind, or Soul, and an individual mind, or soul. For Brunton, Ramana, and some other "mentalistic"sages (those who see there is no matter as such but only consciousness, or images non-separate from consciousness or awareness), the process of our experience is as follows: the Universal Mind sends its master image(s) of the world or cosmos into the individual soul via the atomic heart-center on the right side. From there these impressions, images, or karmic seeds travel up to the brain where our individual mind 'creates' the image of the world for us. Thus, we 'create' the world for ourselves, based on the material supplied by the Universal Mind through us. We create the world, as Kirpal Singh and others mentioned in Part Two have said, but it is a co-creation. Our world is in common with others because, unlike dream, there is a shared master-image. Nevertheless, we do not experience a world created "out there" in time by a separate Creator. It is still a mentalistic creation, that is to say, a manifestation of consciousness. It may in a sense be considered to be outside of the body, but it is not outside of Mind. Now if we believe some accounts, Ramana as a contemplative spent a good part of his time in a state where these seed-images hadn't fully exploded into the dense physical condition we are familiar with, and which some say was a state of far earlier races of mankind (i.e., ancient Lemurians).
Now Sant Mat, on the other hand, can be interpreted differently, but also in two ways, lower and higher.
The lower way is to posit a world created by the Word or Naam that is made of matter and is truly 'out there', apart from us, and with us abiding 'inside' of the body. The so-called matter is acknowledged to be a stepped-down emanation of spirit, but it is a real evolution or devolution or transformation of spirit that has occurred. This could be considered a form of the parinamavada theory of Vedanta. [Even more primitive would be to imagine that this creation took place at some time in the past instead of instantaneously moment to moment]. The soul is visualized as a ray of the Sat Purush that enters the head at the Brahmarandhra and then spreads itself out in the body. When this is assumed to be real, then the task is proposed primarily if not solely as one of gathering these dispersed soul-currents into one at the ajna center and proceeding back through the emanated strata towards God. This is quite a different vision than the "mentalistic" one outlined above.
The higher way is to acknowledge there has been only an apparent emanation or manifestation, rather than a real or actual transformation or evolution of God into the world (or "matter"). This would be akin to the more traditional vivartavada theory of Vedanta. In this view we can also follow Plotinus and hypothesize a divine world-image projected from the Nous through the soul [whose deeper or higher dimension forever abides in the divine], which then projects an emanation or emanant of itself into that world-image so it can experience the world sensibly and, by doing so, come to self-recognition. In this view, one does not have to accept the sense of prodigality as evidence for the need of radical inversion, but in every instance of self-recognition the Soul itself is realized, without total retraction of its emanant. Thus, in this view the manifestation has great value, and the world becomes "the womb of the buddhas," the "footstool of the gods," and is not merely a trap for the fallen soul, as it has negatively been portrayed for centuries in many traditional teachings.
Ultimately, the the initial bifurcation of Mind reduces to a radical simplicity within either perspective.
If you feel even a tentative understand any all this at all, please give yourself a hand at least for a difficult, sustained exercise in concentration!
Here are a series of quotes outlining Ramana's position in more complexity. There may be some repetition from earlier material presented, which is all right because it fits in here and also because it is difficult and can bear hearing again:
"The brain acts by consciousness derived from the Heart, and the body is thus protected...The Heart is the most important center from which vitality and light radiate to the brain, thus enabling it to function. The vasanas are enclosed in the Heart in their subtlest form, later flowing to the brain which reflects them highly magnified, corresponding to a cinema show at every stage....Were the vasanas in the brain instead of the Heart, they would be extinguished if the head is cut off so that reincarnation would come to an end. But it is not so. The Self obviously safeguards the vasanas in its closest proximity, i.e., within itself in the Heart, just as a miser keeps his most valued possessions (treasure) with himself and never out of reach. Hence the place where the vasanas are is the Self, i.e., the Heart, and not the brain (which is only the theater for the play of the vasanas from the greenroom of the Heart." (363)
"The body is in the mind, which has the brain for its seat, which again functions by light borrowed from another source, as admitted by the yogis themselves in their fontanel theory. The jnani further argues: if the light is borrowed, it must come from its native source. Go to the source directly and do not depend on borrowed resources...The center of the ego andits core are called the Heart, the same as the Self...We are never away from the Heart-Center. Before reaching anahata or after passing it, one is only in the center. Whether one understands it or not, one is not away from the center. Practice of yoga or vichara is done, always remaining in the center only." (364)
This is complex material and we do not presume to definitively answer certain questions. For instance, we have shown in Part One that Shiv Brat Lal and other Sant Mat masters have localized the causal region (at least while embodied) in the area between the mid-brain and the anterior fontanel. And supposedly here is where a mystic purification of karmic vasanas or samskaras gets purified (i.e., in Daswan Dwar). Yet Theosophy teaches that these traces are stored in a mysterious seed-atom in the heart that is transferred after death and is the impetus and material for a new incarnation. Whether there is also an organized subtle or causal body after death is subject to some debate among sages. The consensus is that for the average man there isn't, but for the practitioner there may be. The issue of seed-atoms gets very complicated and we can go no farther with this topic at present. Some posit a trinity of seed atoms from spleen, heart and brain that gets attached to the silver cord and so on and so forth. For Brunton and by supposition for Ramana there is basically only one.
A key difference in the two main views discussed in this section might be more easily summarized in these words of Sri Nisargadatta, without regard for either the ajna or heart centers:
"You see yourself in the world, while I see the world in myself. To you, you get born and die, while to me, the world appears and disappears."
And the ultimate 'place' of all these centers?
"What you see is nothing but yourself...Through the film of destiny your own light depicts pictures on the screen. You are the viewer, the light, the picture, and the screen." (365)
Ishwar taught this also, that we are ultimately the cause of the whole show. Shiv Brat Lal, when asked where one should fix ones attention, seeming to answer more in the spirit of Ramana than Sant Mat, said:
"It is on the changeless "I" that attention is to be fixed." (366)
This is definitely not speaking about third-eye concentration, and bound to be provocative for many Sant Mat practitioners. One may question the language used here, for is such a thing even possible, inasmuch as the changeless "I" is not an object on which attention can be fixed? Nevertheless, Faqir Chand - and even Adi Da, for that matter - argued that realization of truth is a matter of the transcendence of attention, and not the product of an act of attention. For Faqir the Absolute or natural state or changeless "I" was "No Naam, No Sat Lok, no Anami, no God, No Guru." So how could one "fix" his attention on what is beyond attention? One could only do that, moreover, if he knew what the changeless "I" is. And that is to be determined. Therefore this is more of a confession of realization, and not a "how to" instruction. Actually, Ramana did not say to fix the attention on the changeless "I". He said to hold the "I' you do know, hold the thinker, and let grace pull you into the changeless "I" or what he referred to as the "I-I". Sri Atmananda called the latter the "I"-principle. And if you could not do that, however, simply surrender to God. So perhaps Shiv Brat Lal's statement could be expressed differently, such as "do not settle for placing your attention on anything less than the changeless "I." Brood over it, ponder it, make this your meditation.
Finally, Kirpal Singh said, "The Master always holds the disciple in the innermost heart-center." What did he mean? Certainly much food for contemplation here.
Some other differences
It has been said by some that in the yoga schools as well as Samkhaya [one of the six systems of Hindu philosophy] thought is only given to the experiences of the waking state, whereas in Vedanta thought is given to all the three states [waking, dream, and sleep]. Thus, in Sant Mat, for instance, attention is given to the eye-focus, ‘the center of wakefulness’ the body, whereas in the teachings of Ramana Maharshi, for instance, the ‘I’-feeling or ‘I’-thought, individuality or ego is to be traced to its source in the heart, where it is said to arise, rather than let it be re-born or escape to higher worlds via the ajna-center. In the process one attains to a condition of ‘wakeful-sleep’, which is said to be sahaj samadhi, self-realization or liberation. And in this realization it is suggested that the entire ‘inner subtle tour’ of the Sants may be bypassed, all of the inner planes as such being various states of wakefulness.
The example is given of the death of a disciple of Ramana named Palaniswami (first introduced in Part One in "Dying in the Master's Company"):
“Palaniswami was in the throws of death, gasping for breath. Bhagavan sat near him with his right hand on his chest. Palaniswami’s breast became soft and Bhagavan took off his hand when he felt a quivering within Palaniswami’s chest. This, Bhagavan has said, is the sign of life becoming extinct in the body. But when Bhagavan took off his hand, at that very moment, Palaniswami’s eyes opened. ”I thought he would subside at the heart, but he escaped,” Bhagavan remarked, adding, “That is said to be the sign of one going to higher states of spiritual experience, though not immediate merger at the Heart.”’
“Bhagavan later declared that Palaniswami had taken birth in one of the higher deva worlds…Having learned from this experience, Bhagavan successfully brought about the liberation of his mother in 1922 by using the same technique. Bhagavan described what happened when he put his right hand on his mother’s chest and his left hand on her head:
‘It was a struggle between mother and myself. Her accumulated tendencies of the past (vasanas) rose up again and again, and then and there got destroyed. Thus the process was over and peace reigned supreme. I feel the last quiver of the heart, but did not take my hand off until it completely stopped. This time I was careful, thanks to my experience with Palaniswami, and saw that mother’s prana (life) got completely merged at the Heart."' (367))
Some questions arise from this:
The quote says that the mother’s prana was completely merged at the Heart - what of the consciousness (attention), which the Sants say is distinct from the pranas?
(2) What about all the souls that Ramana didn’t serve in this capacity, including those who had realized the Heart - were all their vasanas eradicated? So here, as in Sant Mat, the grace of a Master is certainly required.
(3) In Sant Mat, the departed soul is not alone "in a deva world" after death, but accompanied/linked with the sound current and the Master.
(4) The process in Sant Mat is one of death-by-stages: physical ego to astral ego to causal and so on. There is a death "at each stage quit by the soul," with the "sun setting here and rising ther." The usual ego does not simply ‘escape’ to higher worlds as it is presently constituted.
Still, this example and Maharshi's overall teaching does imply Heart-realization can bypass the inner journey through subtle planes.
But, is the final reality that much different? Kirpal Singh said some initiates would go ‘direct to Sach Khand,’ not stopping along the way, and also, that "once one had implicit faith in the Master, He was commissioned to at once take that soul to Sach Khand." Is not Sach Khand or Sat Lok actually the Reality beyond the waking, dream (taigas), and sleep (prajna) stages? Or is it not?
For Vedanta, Atman and/or Brahman or the Self is the substratum of all three states. It exists through all the three states, is their basis, and in fact is them also upon realization, and also remains when these states are no more. Whatever is, always is. Therefore, in deep sleep when there is no individuality, the Self still is, and therefore, individuality as we know itis not real. This means the ego-soul (jivatman) that we imagine venturing into other worlds is also in a sense not real now, not only after it reaches a God-World after a long course of ascended meditation.
This appears to vindicate the idea that realization can be had here and now, without leaving the body.
Sant Mat teaches that in sleep the attention or soul as it were, goes down to the gullet and one is in an unconscious state. However, Vedanta would say this spatial reference is so only with reference to the experience in the waking state, and not in sleep per se. In sleep one does not say or know that he is in the gullet or anywhere else. Vedanta says the waking state cannot be used as a proof of the sleep state, and therefore, the logic of the yogis on this point is lacking as it does not take into account the three states, also known in Vedanta as the Avastatreya analysis.
This is very important point but it is also very very subtle to grasp.
In sleep there is no individual, no world, and no God; so it is with the Self or Brahman. And Brahman, being always the case, can be realized anywhere and anytime, with the appropriate sadhana, and not only after a long passage through various stages of experience.
Vedantins, such as Shri Atmananda, say to "sleep knowingly," thus seeing even sleep as Brahman, and further, to remain in a state "like sleep" while wide awake. Obviously, this is easier said than done. Some say that sleep, despite its remaining as ignorance for the ordinary man, is really the Nirguna state. And so we find the following seemingly rather curious statements from Atmananda. But, when a sage of his caliber says these things, we might take notice rather than dismissing them outright:
"Tamas [passivity] and rajas [activity] are two distinct and separate qualities or attributes - each with a good proportion of the other mixed with it. But sattva [peace] is not a positive quality like the other two. Let us take an example. If a man walks and walks, without wanting to stop at all, that amounts to sattva, though on the surface it may appear to be rajas. Similarly, if a sleeping man, when he wakes up, is inclined to return to that sleep again rather than take to the activities of life in spite of all kinds of temptations for active life, that is also sattva, though it might appear on the surface as tamas itself. So there is tamas in rajas and rajas in tamas - sattva balancing the two. If the ego does not come in to interfere, indolence is the Reality itself. It may also be said that there is only sattva. When it is divided into two, it appears as rajas and tamas. Sattva is the ultimate Reality itself (shudda-sattva)." (368)
Confusing? No doubt..."If the ego does not come in to interfere" appears to be the crux.
We are not saying one system is better or higher or more complete than the other, only that some - perhaps much - explanation is necessary to correlate them. Vedanta will not easily be dismissed, in our opinion, by stating that in sleep attention goes down into the body somewhere - the question is the nature of the experience in all three states, and what that tells us about reality.
For Vedanta the waking and dreams states are both considered 'waking' states - as are all the higher plane experiences, at least until the so-called ‘causal’ level. But here is another apparent problem: it is quite clear that ‘causal’ in Vedanta and ‘causal’ in Sant Mat are not equivalent. For Vedanta (and traditional Yoga), ‘causal’ is equivalent to the void of sleep, whereas in Sant Mat ‘causal’ is described in terms that imply it is a higher subtle plane. And after that there is the ‘super or supra-causal plane, and a void. Perhaps the meaning or significance of the void of Maha Sunn in Sant Mat is the same as the causal void of the other systems. If so then in the transition to Sat Lok a last act of discrimination or vivek turns this apparent void of non-being into the Self. This is a different way of looking at things than the idea of a soul reaching a higher world that is distinct from its own being. In other worlds, for Sant Mat it seems as if the emanated worlds are taken to be real, whereas for Vedanta all emanation is an appearance of the Self, and non-existent as such when the Self is realized. All so-called bodies including the mind are not adventitious vehicles, but rather upadhis or adjuncts of the Self, not real, and even non-existent (for the realizer) upon realization. The same logic goes for the mind. It is not other than thoughts, the root of which is the ‘I’-thought, and when enquired into, taught Ramana, it is seen as non-existent or unreal. In Vedanta, therefore, the mind is only a function of the Self, it is not a real thing. For Sant Mat, the mind is real, as it is said to be ‘left behind’ in Par Brahm, the mind’s ‘true home.’ This doesn’t seem to be a trivial distinction, for the sadhanas differ significantly. One pursues the Self here and now, the other apparently comes around to it after a long inner journey.
Further, to repeat, one cannot help but ask, “what is the mind - a ‘thing’?” and “what is Par Brahm - a ‘box’ to put such ‘things’ in?” Clearly that can not be. Furthermore, even to call Par Brahm the mind’s true home implies that the mind is a living entity that will contentedly dwell there once it is left behind by the soul! But this is patently absurd, and hopelessly dualistic. Without the soul the so-called mind does not have a life of its own. So there is a real problem in languaging what may nevertheless be a valid mystical experience.
CHAPTER THIRTY-FIVE
Siddhis: what they are, how they are done, and how they relate to spiritual realization; Unique Christian miracles; Jesus is Just All Right with Me, or he's not and the deal with Kal is the gospel truth; Levitation, a strange gift; Materialization and dematerialization in Buddhism; the Rainbow Body; Death, ‘the last enemy,' even for saints?
I had a lot of help from Mark on portions of this section.
A helpful point to remember at the outset is that the possession or miraculous powers does not mean one is divinely enlightened, or even a sanctified person. That is to say, even evil people have been known to do miraculous things! And Christ warned us of this:
"For there will arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall do great signs and wonders, inasmuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect." (Matt. 24:24)
Lucifer or Satan (Kal), moreover, can "masquerade as an angel of light." So much more important than the ability to do miracles is the quality of character, the Faith, Hope, and Charity, i.e., the noble virtues, that one manifests. This is always a key in discerning the true from the false. "Concentration is a passport to inner attainment," said PB, "but it needs the visa of humility to become an impeccable document." Further, miracles, whether achieved through siddhi (in the East) or the power of prayer (in the West), are primarily a grace for the spiritual benefit of others, to strengthen their faith and bring them closer to God. All true saints usually acknowledge that all such glory goes to God. A saint's powers, as such, are limited by the Will of God or the Supreme, even when they are aware that they are the focus for it - which they will usually but not always deny or seek to disguise.
It is common knowledge in many traditions that powers will arise spontaneously as the result of spiritual practice. In addition, one can engage in specific practices (again which many major traditions teach, but not all) to develop siddhis. Jack Kornfield says in Living Dharma (Living Buddhist Masters) that of the dozen or so teachers he studied with in Asia, virtually all of them were also reputed to have not only mastered all the jhanas, but also the various siddhis as well, most teachers and bodhisattvas finding that siddhis, when used without ego, enhance ones ability to serve. Of course, great debate rages about the appropriate place of siddhis on the path, but most traditions embrace a willingness to cultivate them when motivation and wisdom are mature enough.
Although the development of siddhis or supernormal powers are warned against in all traditions of authentic spirituality as something not to be cultivated by yogic means for their own sake, there is also a belief that on certain paths that the siddhis are not only possible from 'ordinary' practice, but that also by a certain stage they will all be fully available spontaneously. Sant Mat would be an example of this. Sri Nisargadatta's way would not, as he acknowledged that such powers 'require further training' - although, even in his case, as in many holy persons, seemingly miraculous things happened around him. Sri Yukteswar, Paramahansa Yogananda's guru, asserted this view of the automatic development of the siddhis in his book the Holy Science, but many others schools and teachers have also said something equivalent. In particular, the more 'tantric' orientations that embrace the notion that the deepest realizations are those that will come from fully integrating realization into the lower bodies, transforming them profoundly so that gradually various phenomena will arise like: glowing, changes in need of food or sleep, slowing or stopping aging, unfoldment of siddhas, and the Body of Light. Not everyone will get all of these at advanced stages. Many people have also intentionally rejected their development. You may have heard that when Ramakrishna began to glow significantly, he asked Kali to make it go away, for he wanted people to seek beyond the surface. The Buddha is reputed to have rejected the development of many signs of deep transformation as he did not want to be deified. The Sants are said to be bound by the Sat Purush not to win over souls through the display of miracles, although it still manages to happen from time to time! Ramalingar allowed these phenomena to arise, but became disappointed when his followers become focused on him and his 'divinity', telling them that they should not, that he was just one of them, and to not get distracted from their own awakening. He then locked himself inside of a room and disappeared! Tamil siddhas Manikavachakar and Nandanar, as well as Tukaram, Jnaneshwar and possibly Chaitanya left their bodies in a blaze of light, having dissolved the physical elements into their subtle constituents. Ramana himself when sitting for a long time on numerous occasions manifested the "pranava" body wherein the body dissolves into its constituent atoms which in turn merge in the five elements, before reappearing as smoke and then mist and finally the normal body. This was not a siddhi but presumably an effect of his intense contemplation on the essence of the Self, thus absorbing the gross into the subtle into the unmanifest. Something like this is involved in the "Rainbow Body" in Tibetan Buddhism. Jack Kornfield said that nearly all of the Forest Masters he met in Southeast Aisa had such Siddhis, although if attained they were generally eschewed as impediments to realization. Buddha said that he could have created a Nirmanakaya (physical) body until the end of the kalpa is he so desired, but that he chose not to so his devotees would not deify him.
All these powers, including flying, invisibility, bilocation, and even raising the dead are among the classic siddhis listed by Patanjali, acquirable either by yogic effort or as an accompaniment of divine realization. In the latter case it is paradoxical and one might say that it is the Holy Spirit that does the work, inasmuch as many of these masters are not always aware of what is happening around them, and even when they are it is often clear to them that they - as the son of man - are not doing it. Clearly we cannot use either the presence or absence of these powers as an indication of of Self-realization, for many without them are very realized. Ramana admitted, when pressed for answers, that God had given him neither clairvoyance nor omniscience. He also felt that a being like Christ could not have been personally aware of doing miracles. [This point is debatable; the Gospels give the clear impression that sometimes he was - such as in the raising of Lazarus, and sometimes he wasn't, viz., the woman who touched his garment and was healed due to her faith].
Brunton addresses the question of why one Master or another did not heal themselves of a disease such as cancer:
"Why did Ramana Maharshi and Ramakrishna refuse to heal themselves? One possible explanation is that healing powers are like intellectual powers. One may be a realized person and yet not possess much intellect. Similarly, one may not possess healing power. Realization does not endow one with encyclopedic knowledge or with all the talents." (369)
Another reason is that they do not see themselves as having any power at all, attributing all such power to God. Ramana said he had not the will or sankalpa to do such a thing; nevertheless, sometimes they apparently happened as a result of his company. Brunton expresses this in two ways:
"He learns...that every movement which takes him out of the Void stillness into a personal mental activity is a return to an inferior state and a descent to a lower plane. He sees that among such movements there must necessarily be classed even the answering of such thoughts as "I am a Master. He is my disciple," or "I am being used to heal the disease of this man"...He knows well enough that he has no power to exalt a man spiritually or to change him morally. When that seems to happen, it is really the Overself which is the effective agent and which has been using his destiny to prepare the man for the event long ahead of its actual and visible occurrence...In his mind he is neither a teacher or healer. If other men choose to consider him as such and gain help toward sinlessness or get cured of sickness, he takes no credit to himself for the result but looks at it as if the 'miracle' was done by a stranger." (370)
On the other hand he writes:
"Indeed the law is that the deeper a man penetrates into the void and the longer he sustains this penetration, the greater will be the power with which he will emerge from it...When these powers come into his possession, there also comes a deep sense of responsibility for their right use." (371)
So there is, as always, a depth to this issue which belies smooth facile answers. Summarizing our consideration so far, Patanjali himself warned against attachment to even the highest of such things. Alice Bailey, in her exposition of the yoga sutras, Book 3, Verse 37, said,
"These powers are obstacles to the highest spiritual realization, but seen as magical in the objective realms."
On the other hand, I.K. Taimni points out that
"it is almost impossible to distinguish the terminal stages of self-realization and the powers that adhere in those stages, for the siddhis that come out of that realization are hardly occult powers as such." (372)
Sri Nisargadatta had this to say about siddhis and higher states. This was in response to a couple who said they had come from a radhasoami teacher!
"The person who, after much effort and penance, have fulfilled their ambition and secured higher levels of experience and action, are usually acutely conscious of their status, they grade people into hierarchies ranging from the lowest non-achiever to the highest achiever. To me all are equal...When this sense of equality is lacking it means that reality had not been touched."
"A fully realized man conscious of his divinity is hard to find. The saints and yogis, by immense efforts and sacrifices, acquire many miraculous powers and can do much good in the way of helping people and inspiring faith, yet it does not make them perfect. It is not a way to reality, but merely an enrichment of the false. All effort leads to more effort, whatever was acquired must be protected against decay and loss. Whatever can be lost is not really one's own, and what is not your own of what use can it be to you?" (373)
He also said that in his state he realized all beings were within him, but things such as bringing down into one brain the contents of another brain requires special training, and that further the gyani knows one thing, the self, but he knows it very very well. The question then is, while some saints may have powers that sages might not have, do they, in any particular case, know reality - the Absolute - as well?
Shri Atmananda generally considered siddhis a major impediment and distraction from realization itself. But he also referred this to siddhis acquired willfully through specific yogic exercises, which he said were limited in time, generally lasting no more than twelve years, and being limited to the waking stage alone:
”Siddhis, acquired by dint of exercise, do not last for more than a limited number of years (usually twelve years). Even when one professes to possess them, one does so only in the waking state, which is only one-third of ones whole life. One does not possess any of the siddhis in ones dream and deep sleep states. Therefore, siddhis are impermanent, and depend upon the body and mind for their very existence - even during the limited time they seem to exist. It is the exhibition of such siddhis (called miracles) that are often cited to prove the spiritual greatness of even founders of religions. Such and much greater and deeper siddhis are possessed and sometimes exhibited, even by the commonplace yogins of India. But such yogins and their siddhis are shunned and detested by all Sages and all real aspirants to Truth. All men of real experience and all higher as astray, directing attention to the ultimate Truth, have declared unequivocally that siddhis or powers are the greatest obstacle to realization of Truth. Therefore avoid siddhis at all cost, if you aspire to the Truth.”
[Note: the reference to twelve years is interesting, and is also mentioned in some yogic texts as the period of celibacy needed to attain divine siddhi or realization. Whatever the truth of that, twelve years is simply the length of a full transit of Jupiter, known in traditional western astrology as the "Great Benefic", or in Vedic astrolgy as Guru].
“Sages also possess infinite siddhis even without their knowing it; not as a result of exercise, but as a result of the knowledge of the ultimate Truth. But they use these powers with the greatest restraint; nor do their powers ever fade away from them like the yogin’s siddhis, by lapse of time or by constant use (even if they do so).” (374)
This certainly seems to be in alignment with the Sant Mat position, wherein siddhis are officially to be eschewed, and in which the Master-Power is ultimately credited with any and all so-called miracles that occur and that the individual Master may or may not be aware of his role in any of them.
But the allure of power can be very subtle, whether in followers wanting their guru to have it, or in gurus claiming it. "But Thakar or (fill-in-the-blanks) had power." And? So what? To do what? What is the truth? "I of myself can do nothing," said Jesus. Atmananda admonishes:
"The yogin takes to Consciousness as power and thus the way to Consciousness of Truth is blocked. Power is objective and you become enamored of that power, never wanting to get beyond...The method of direct approach to the Truth (vicara-marga or the path of discrimination) is found only very rarely, even in the higher Indian scriptures; and that again as mere assumptions only, and seldom elaborated upon. Hence, it has always its virgin novelty.” (375)
Kirpal Singh once castigated an initiate who indulged in siddhis by sending him a letter, with subtle sarcasm, congratulating him on his ‘promotion’ from college to the primary class.
Ramana Maharshi:
“A magician deludes others by his tricks, but he himself is never deluded. A siddha who manifests his siddhis is inferior to the magician as he is deceiving others as much as himself.”
Upon being asked to revive a dead child, after having the child removed to a nearby cottage for one night, to no effect, Ramana later replied:
“Even an incarnate God cannot raise all the dead. He has no individual will so he cannot decide to perform a miracle. If miracles happened in his ambience, he witnessed them, that was all.” (376)
This is consistent with what Kirpal Singh might say in similar situations. But still, there were more than a few incidents such as this:
“A gentleman told us the story of his brother who had three sons and one daughter. The daughter died and the grief-stricken parents begged Master Kirpal Singh to come immediately".
"Please," pleaded the bereaved father when Master arrived, "please, Maharaj Ji, take the life of any one of my sons, but give me back my daughter."
"Master, however, did not do it, and got in His car for the trip to Delhi. Halfway down the road Master ordered His driver to take Him back to the saddened family. On His return, Maharaj Ji put His fingers on the forehead of the dead girl, pressed both of her eyes, and lo and behold, she was alive once again. And Master did not take the life of any of the three sons either. The Sikh gentleman had ended his story. Master holds the power over life and death in His hands, we observed. And securely in His hands is our fate and salvation.” (377)
One other anecdote that has recently come to my attention is as follows. As told by a friend, Samson Kumah from Ghana, an initiate of Kirpal and devout follower of Sant Rajinder, was pronounced dead in a hospital:
"He always gets miracles of Master. He is my close Satsangi friend. He died for thirteen hours and was placed in the dead body room. When the man came in the room to put the dead bodies in the freezer Samson said hello. The man ran out thinking him a ghost. Then all the doctors came and Samson was sitting on the bed. The doctors asked him if he had come back to life. Samson said yes. Then he started walking out of the room. The doctors proceeded to get hold of him. Samson told that nobody should touch him, so he came out by himself. He was surrounded by the inner vibration of the Master."
With Ramana Maharshi his influence was subtle, and the standard answer given was that whenever something was brought to his attention, “automatic divine activity” started, for which he denied any personal responsibility. In one situation a mother brought her son, dead from snakebite, to Bhagavan and begged him to restore him to life. He repeatedly ignored her and after a few hours she was asked to leave. Upon leaving she met a snake charmer who said he would cure him, and he did something to the boy’s hand which brought him back to life. As usual Maharshi denied having anything to do with any of this. David Godman writes:
“The devotees in the ashram attributed the miraculous cure to the Maharshi, saying, ‘When a problem is brought to the attention of a jnani, some ‘automatic divine activity” brings about a solution’. According to this theory, the Maharshi did nothing consciously to help the boy, but at a deeper, unconscious level, his awareness had caused the right man to appear at the right place.” (378)
So arguments such as those Faqir Chand put forth about a master’s not knowing about anything seem to fall short of the mystery inherent in the likely fact that without the realizer’s very existence itself such miracles would not have happened, whether he personally knew how or when they happened or not. But it has some truth to it in that many if not most genuine masters do not admit or even see themselves - as a person - having any causative role to play in miraculous things. Nisargadatta sums this point up:
"Man's fivefold body (physical, etc.) has potential powers beyond our wildest dreams. Not only is the entire universe reflected in man, but also the power to control the universe is waiting to be used by him. The wise man is not anxious to use such powers, except when the situation calls for them. He finds the abilities and skills of the human personality quite adequate for the business of daily living. Some of the powers can be developed by special training, but the man who flaunts such powers is still in bondage. The wise man counts nothing as his own. When at some time and place some miracle is attributed to some person, he will not establish any causal link between events and people, nor will he allow any conclusions to be drawn. All happened as it happened because it had to happen, everything happens as it does, because the universe is at it is."
"In the light of calm and steady self-awareness, inner energies wake up and work miracles without any effort on your part." (379)
Sai Baba of Shirdi (c. 1838-1918) was the focus for many miracles, but would usually say things like, “God will do this,” or “God will put it right,” or “The Fakir will not let me do this,” or “I can only do what the Fakir will let me do.” Sometimes he would say that to prolong someone’s life would only prolong their suffering, or he might promise to bring a person back in a new life. On one occasion he told someone who asked him to bring a dear one that the person had already taken on a new body in which he could do good work he could not do here, and that to bring him back would require his new body to die for this one to live. “I might do it for your sake, but have you considered the consequences? Have you any idea of the responsibility and are you prepared to assume it?” (380)
Sant Darshan Singh once told a follower that the Dalai Lama only went to the third plane. That may or may not be so. But in any case, how do we explain this: The wife of Anthony Damiani, teacher at Wisdom's Goldenrod Center for Philosophic Studies in upstate New York, had met the Dalai Lama when he came to visit the center in the 1979 before making nearby Ithaca his North American headquarters. He blessed the studies there and dedicated the library.
Anthony Damiani and the Dalai Lama Ella May Damiani His Holiness and Ella May
Ella May was raised Catholic and before meeting Anthony had thought of being a nun, having an attraction to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Instead she got married, in her words, to ta 'bohemian', and had six sons. During the Dalai Lama's short visit she was mostly busy cooking while her husband talked philosophy with His Holiness and the students at the center. Twenty-five years later she developed a widespread cancer and had a massive heart attack. A student sent a wire to India telling the Dalai Lama about her condition, while also placing a photo of him in her hospital room. He immediately sent back word that he would pray for her. She then had a massive heart attack, and the doctors said there was little hope for her to make it through the night. Yet she survived. Two weeks passed, and the doctors did tests and scans and found her heart healed and the cancer was almost gone.
“We’ve come to the conclusion,” the chief doctor said, pointing at the large photo of the Dalai Lama near her bed, “that you’ve had help from outside sources.” Ella May nodded. She knew. Even through the heart attack she’d felt held by a white light that entered through the crown of her head. She could feel it falling into her, healing every organ and cell of her body." (Christi Cox, "Ella May, A Mother and Mystic", wisdomsgoldenrod.info)
Now, what happened? Did the Dalai Lama heal her - himself only going to the third plane?! Or were his prayers backed up by his Lineage, or were they answered because he called on a Higher Power? Was it God or Jesus, or Ella May's faith? Or was it all of the above, including the prayers of her many friends? How little we know, and how petty our judgements and placements of teachers into nice little categories!
Swami Nirmalananda Giri (George Burke), a teacher claiming to be in the line from Yogananda and one of the Shankaracharyas, gave this explanation for siddhi, while proposing a novel rationale for the power of the sacrament of Holy Communion in the Christian Church:
“Everything that exists in the relative universe is energy moving to specific patterns that cause the energy to be formed into the various substances and elements. All material objects consist of molecules formed of atoms which are formed of atomic particles–electrons, protons, and neutrons–which are basically three modes of energy behavior. The only difference between a wooden table leg and a piece of gold is the pattern of basic energies. And those energies, if reduced to their final constituent, are found to be consciousness, which is spirit. It is, then, no exaggeration, but rather the simple truth, to say that matter is manifested consciousness or spirit."
"When we realize this, we can understand to a degree how Jesus turned water into wine: he simply altered the energy pattern of the water. By being one with the Infinite Consciousness, Whose thoughts are manifesting as creation, he needed only to “see” or “think” of the water as wine–and it was so! In the realm of God, thought is act, as is shown in Genesis: “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). With God, the willing is the doing."
"Material forms being the manifestation of states of consciousness, it is not amiss to say that the body of Christ is also the Consciousness, the essential being, of Christ. If that Consciousness is implanted in us by our receiving his body and blood - or, more correctly, the Consciousness-Energy that was his body and blood now recast into the mold of bread and wine - that Consciousness will begin to pervade our bodies and our blood, awakening our own consciousness and transmuting us into Christ - which is exactly what being a Christian is all about."
"Understanding this, we realize that Christ did not resurrect his body for dramatic effect nor only as a demonstration of immortality. Rather, he retained his perfectly deified body so it could be made the seed of immortality in those who were united to him through Communion. Saint Paul tells us that the Lord Jesus “is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” (Hebrews 8:1). Obviously his body is not material flesh and blood as upon earth, but as Saint Paul also says, “a spiritual body” (I Corinthians 15:44) made of the Light that is God (“God is light” I John 1:5.) And since that Light has become all things, it can take on the form of bread and wine in an instant in the Mass.” (381)
This is Burke's attempt to form a hybrid between orthodox Christianity and yoga, but it is not likely shared by Yogananda, or the Sants, who: generally dismiss the bodily resurrection and ascension of Jesus in favor of a purely spiritual one; don't touch the end-times doctrine of a new Creation with a Resurrected Body for all of the faithful; and teach that rites and rituals are only for remembrance and merely stepping stones to spirituality, and do not respect or seem to understand the mystery of the Eucharist. Burke's explanations, valid or not, make for a more multi-dimensional perspective on the Sacraments of the Church than we have been given. Jesus was considered a high priest of the order of Melchizedek, which goes back to the time of Pythagoras and used bread and wine in their mystery school temples. Again one must ask, “What do we really know?”
In general, it may be said that many and perhaps any genuine path can lead to the development of siddhi, but it may be that some are more likely than others. Paths including a tantric or transformational and descending/integrating approach, as well as an interest in service, tend to be ones more likely to. One of the reasons for this is that the siddhis are powers latent in human nature, and are generally part of our body (including subtle ones) nature, as opposed to our consciousness aspect. They are Shakti rather than Shiva manifestations. Those paths having a strong leaning towards Shiva or realization, consciousness, wisdom paths, are among those less likely to as easily generate siddhis spontaneously. But paths that include or emphasize the Shakti aspect such as Hindu tantric/kundalini paths, Tibetan Buddhism, Taoism, Qi gong (which has spiritual levels), Daskalos (a western Greek master with extensive knowledge and teachings about the inner realms), and such, work more directly with bodily energies on various levels, and are therefore more likely to awaken their latent powers. Coming back to Sant Mat, not only would Sant Mat masters be likely to have siddhis (even if they chose not to display them openly) because not only do they achieve the levels of realization where they would come spontaneously, but they also approach the path by a method that has elements in common with classic tantric paths. This is a vast topic, and a risk of misunderstanding is taken by treating it so cursorily here, but the inner light and sound, in some of the more esoteric tantric traditions, are considered Shakti expressions. So those that meditate on them will be attuning to the Shakti or emanation aspect of the Absolute.
An interesting story related by Ramana Maharshi illustrates that there are degrees of mastership in regards to siddhis:
"Prabhulinga, while traveling North, came across Gorakhnath. The latter displayed his yogic power, e.g., when his arm was cut by a sword and the sword was blunted without inflicting injury on him. This is making the body proof against injury (kayasiddhi). Prabhulinga offered himself to be cut. When the sword was thrust, it passed right through his body as if it were air and there was no injury on the body. Goraknath was astonished and offered himself as the disciple of Prabhulinga." (382)
One may be reminded of Moses' serpent swallowing the serpents of pharoah's magicians. Ramana also related the following:
"There were rishis like Vishvamitra who could duplicate the universe if they wished [i.e., the power of Isvara]. They lived during the lifetime of Ravana who caused great agony even to Sita and Rama, among others. Could not Vishmamitra have destroyed Ravana by occult powers? Though capable, he kept still. Why? The occurrences are known to the sages, but pass away without leaving an impression on their minds. Even a deluge will appear a trifle to them, they do not care for anything." (383)
A similar situation occured in the Sikh tradition. When the great Sikh guru Arjan Dev was being tortured to death on hot plates, his close friend Mian Mir offered to "raze the entire Mogul empire to the ground!' with his esoteric powers. The great Guru replied, "Don't you know that I also could do it? But the path of the saints is the path of sweet surrender. Ours is the path of 'sweet is thy will.' "
Unique Christian Miracles
Perhaps more so than in other traditions in Christianity all power is attributed to Christ, the Logos or Second Person of the Trinity. He is the Master of the "lineage." There is acknowledgement of thousands of miracles associated with many many saints, but they themselves make it clear that they do not possess the power to make them happen. All power resides with the Holy Spirit which acts through the saints and other sanctified individuals in the Church. Jesus did not teach yogic techniques for acquiring siddhi, but merely "blew" on the Apostles in the Upper Room giving them authority to act in His name, with the power of the Holy Spirit. In Acts 3:12-13,16, we read:
"Why wonder you at this? Or why look upon us as if by our own strength or power we had made this man to walk?"
Jesus said to the Apostles, "he that believeth in me, the works that I do he also shall do, and greater than these shall he do" (John 14:12). They would do much greater things than he had done, but again, in His Name." His miracles were great, but He had only to convert a few Jews, while for the Apostles and later Christians who were to convert millions, the number and degree of miracles were proportionately greater. Two books came to my acquaintance that changed the impression I had about the history of the Church in this regard: Saints Who Raised the Dead, a compilation of four hundred examples of this one miracle alone, and Mysteries, Marvels and Miracles: The Lives of the Saints, 500 pages from A to Z covering bi-location, levitation, invisibility, healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, passing through walls and locked doors, miraculous transports, multiplication of food, and so on. All largely without siddhi or sadhana, in most cases, but 'only' the power of prayer and the grace of the Spirit acting through Christ and his saints. While arguable, this seems unique to the Christian tradition in both quantity and the spectacular nature of confirmed miracles. St. Patrick (c.389-c.461), who is said to have nearly single-handedly converted all of Ireland to Christianity in a thirty year period [according to The Life and Acts of St. Patrick by Jocelin, 12th century, he consecrated 350 bishops, ordained 5000 priests, and erected 700 churches, while doing countless miracles and raising 39 people from the dead - many already buried and in varying states of decomposition], yet had this to say in his Letters:
"The Lord hath given to me, though humble, the power of working miracles among a barbarous people, such as are not recorded to have been worked by the great Apostles; inasmuch as, in the Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, I have raised from the dead bodies that have been buried many years; but I beseech you, let no one believe that for these or the like works I am to be at all equalled with the Apostles, or with any perfect man, since I am humble, and a sinner, and worthy only to be despised."
The Ecclesiastical History of the Venerable Bede, whose reputation is impeccable, recounts many examples of these events. Two other great saints, St. Francis of Xavier (1506-1552) and St. Vincent Ferrer (1350-1419), the former in ten short years baptizing 100,000 people, and the latter, converting 200,000, both raised many souls from the dead. What is interesting is that in their cases they authorized "helpers', including children, to do it for them when they were otherwise indisposed! Particularly stunning are examples in the history of people dead and even buried, for days or weeks and even years, or partially devoured by beasts, being instantly raised up whole and healthy. The latter, obviously, are not ordinary miracles, and so far I am not aware of anything as spectacular in any other tradition. I am not sure they would be covered under the eight siddhis noted by Patanjali! One such example, somewhat gruesome, from the life of St. Vincent Ferrer, one of the greatest of the Dominicans, and who is attributed with a minimum of 873 miracles including resurrecting more than thirty people (as recorded in the Acta Sanctorum) is as follows:
"The father of a certain child had given Vincent lodging while he was on a missionary journey. His wife, a virtuous woman, suffered from bad attacks of nerves, and at times was close to madness. Upon his return from hearing one of Vincent's sermons, the father came upon a terrible tragedy. His wife had gone mad, cut their boy's throat, then chopped up the boy's body and roasted a portion of it, which she then attempted to serve her husband. When he realized what had happened, the man fled in horror and disgust to St. Vincent Ferrer. Vincent told him that...the tragedy would be for the glory of God. St. Vincent went with the father back to the home and prayed as he gathered the bloody pieces together. he said to the father, "if you have faith, God, who created this little soul from nothing, can bring him back to life. Vincent knelt and prayed. He made the Sign of the Cross over the reassembled body. The pieces became united together, the body came to life again, and Vincent handed over to the father a living child. This event is depicted in a painting by Francesco del Cossa in the New Picture Gallery in the Vatican." (384)
Other equally hard to believe miracles [perhaps food for thought with respect to the dietary issues discussed in Part Three] by St. Francis of Paola (1416-1507), well-documented as a miracle worker, founder of the Hermits of St. Francis of Assisi, and as equally sympathetic to all life as his namesake, are these:
"One day Antonella [St. Francis' pet trout] was swimming about the pool, like a good fish should. A visiting priest helping with a religious service saw it, took it home and began to fry it. St. Francis missed the trout, and either realizing naturally or else having superior knowledge of what had happened, he sent one of his religious to get it back. When the priest heard this request from the hermit sent by Francis, he was annoyed. He threw the cooked trout on the ground, the impact shattering it into several pieces. When the hermit returned to St. Francis with the broken pieces, St. Francis placed them in the pool and prayed: "Antonella, in the Name of Charity, return to life!" The trout at once became while again and happily began to swim about the pool. Friars and workers witnessed the miracle...On another occasion, from nothing but bones and fleece left and thrown into an oven, St Francis of Paola called back to life his pet lamb Martinello, which had been recently roasted and eaten by some nearby workmen." (385)
All the saints were not as wedded to ahimsa as the Franciscans; the great St. Teresa of Avila ate roast duck on occasion.
Miracles are not limited to the lifetime of the saints, but also after their death, through their shrines, burial places, relics, and remembrance. In the case of St. Therese of Lisieux it is written: "Mother Agnes of Jesus asked Therese one day, "You will look down on us from Heaven, won't you?" The Saint replied, "No, I will come down." (386) Being a Christian, she was not talking about reincarnation.
One may ask here, however, why is there such a preponderance of miracles in the Christian tradition? I can think of several, but Scripture provides some answers. Jesus said, "The works themselves, which I do, give testimony of me, that the Father hath sent me...Believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." (John 5:36, 10:37-38). "I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth beneath." (Acts 2:19)
St. Irenaeus (130-220) in his work Against the Heresies, emphatically wrote:
"Nor can we sum up the miraculous works which the Church, by the gift of God, performs every day over the whole world in the Name of Jesus Christ...So far are they [such as wonder-worker Simon Magus and his disciples] from raising the dead, as our Lord raised them, and as the Apostles did by prayer, and as in the brotherhood oftentimes is done, when the whole church of the place hath begged it with much fasting and prayer, and the spirit of the dead man hath returned and the man hath been given back to the prayers of the saints."
The Vatican Council I (1870) states that
"...in order that the obedience of our faith might be in harmony with reason, God willed that to the interior help of the Holy Spirit there should be joined exterior proofs of His revelation, to wit, divine facts, and especially miracles and prophesies...If anyone shall say that divine revelation cannot be made credible by outward signs, and therefore that men ought to be moved to faith solely by the internal experience of each, or by private inspiration, let him be anathema."
Reasons, then, for these saints doing miracles have been: (1) in the case of founders of the great Orders, to convert multitudes to the faith (2) for the glory of God, and not themselves (3) purely out of compassion - without regard for karma and sometimes at their own cost - as Sants are also drawn into doing, and (4) unique in this tradition, sometimes people (even children) were raised from the dead only long enough to confess one hidden sin, or make a final confession, or receive a Sacrament, and then died again, in peace!
Jesus is Just All Right with Me, or he's not and the deal with Kal is the gospel truth
It seems to me more than silly for anyone to suggest that, because in Sant Mat the story is that the Positive Power made a deal with Kal so that Sants could not convince the people of the greatness of the path through miracles, but only through discourses and satsang (which, in actual practice, has not been strictly adhered to, quite a number have come to the path through miraculous visitations, etc.), that Christ and his great saints were agents of Kal for doing exactly that very thing. One pretty much has to believe Christ (and his God) were of Kal and only "third-plane" if one accepts this story. Some Sant Mat traditionalists have in fact made such petty claims, even while attempting to promote a unity among all religions. With that attitude, we must ask, how could such an endeavor ever hope to produce much fruit?
Sai Baba of Shirdi famously stated, "I give my devotees what they want so that they will begin to want what I want to give them." All Masters do not do these things, but they happen, so why make it too black and white of an issue? A reasonable but absurd question to ask might be, "when was this "deal" made?" Was it in the time of Kabir (1398-1518), who supposedly was the first to introduce the teaching of shabd yoga in the present age or yuga, and if so, does that then let Jesus with his miracles and saints off the hook for what he had started fifteen hundred years before?! Or was the deal cut at the dawn of creation, and is so, why did Kabir or God wait so long? Does anyone really know what time it is, or how crazy this all sounds to ninty-nine percent of spiritual seekers?
Perhaps we should say a word on the process of canonization in the Catholic Church. First of all, again, miracles as such in the Christian tradition are accorded solely to the glory of God and their Master, Jesus Christ, not the deification of any particular saint. This is a foundational principle in Christianity. Many of the saints did not claim or even want such abilities. Yet large numbers of saints have arisen and been the agents of countless miracles in this tradition over many centuries. Canonization became more systematized over time, but a first principle has always been that heroic virtue must be established before mystical phenomena and miracles are presumed to be of divine origin. And even when determined to be authentic, mystical phenomena were to have no influence on a candidate's sanctity. When someone has been proposed as a saint, many witnesses including priests, bishops, and eye-witnesses have engaged in a process of extensive discussion and scrutiny. In the 14th century, for instance, canonical trials were begun with a Promoter of the Faith challenged by a Devil's Advocate. In the trial for a Benedictine hermit, St. Nicholas of Tolentino, in 1325, there were 371 witnesses testifying of his influence in their lives. Later, in the 18th century, Pope Benedict XIV wrote four hundred pages of instructions in "On the Beatification and Canonization of the Servants of God." Obviously, these proceedings did not try to determine what level or inner plane each saint went to, but the point is that it was not a haphazard process but was taken very seriously.
Perhaps an echo of this is behind the procedure in the sangat at Tarn Taran where they select their own gurus? This democratization will no do doubt appear risky if not sacrilegious to the fundamentalist believer in an unbroken line of a perfect living master (PLM), for whom the idea of disciples choosing their Guru seem like putting the cart before the horse, but it has its appeal in place of taking one man’s word for his authenticity or sanctity, so long as some of the cautionary tenets mentioned above are adhered to. For even as I write (September 2024) another potentially ugly succession dispute has arisen, this time at the dera of Baba Somanath (a successor to Sawan Singh for southern India), complete with murder and land grab charges and calls for a central intelligence investigation. In the face of these not infrequent kinds of transitions many may see a decentralized 'canonization' process as having its advantages. Its success, however, may depend on what the role of a Sant or Guru is considered to be. If it is to be only a role for delivering a Sunday sermon, one may question "why have such a guru at all?" But even if he be considered the be-all-and-end-all vehicle for salvation, it is still questionable whether getting repeated hits or 'boosts' of grace, naam or shakti are absolutely necessary. All groups in Sant Mat do not in fact teach the necessity of that, the Faqir lineage being one example. And, while not a Sant Mat master, Brunton said that in the case of a true sage, only one meeting is necessary to establish a connection, after which it is the duty of the student to find his master mentally, that is to say, inside of himself, with his own divine Overself ultimately being his true guide and Master. "Blessed are those who do not see and yet believe," said Jesus. How many thousands believed and martyred themselves solely on the testimony and example of the Apostles? Few spent a great deal of quality time or even any time with their actual Master. Fellowship is always good, when not reduced to cultism, and with a solid teaching as a primary resource. Perhaps that is somewhat rare. Personally, in the dawn of my life - my early years - I met a Guru. The time was brief and fruitful, and the connection made. While I have benefitted from many teachers since then, all attempts to find a master in another man have come up empty. Many find themselves in similar situations and it is all right. One need not feel bound by tradition. "The old road is rapidly aging," sang a poet of our times. "Know Thyself" is the primary order of the day.
How do these extra-spectacular miracles, such as recounted above, happen? To repeat, there seems to be nothing like it in volume and scope in any other spiritual tradition. For instance, Dominican missionaries St. Hyacinth, St. Vincent Ferrer, and St. Louis Bertrand alone were credited with over one hundred raised from the dead and thousands of miracles. Similar prodigious accounts are recorded for renown saints Bernard of Clairvaux, St. Francis Xavier, and St. Anthony of Padua. They all were aware of what was happening, even if the results were all attributed to their prayers to God and not any power of themselves. Faqir Chand did not have an adequate answer for this, nor do any other Sants that I am aware of. If one believes Faqir that no one, saint or otherwise, can do or knows how to do these things, and that they are just the work of God, that is fine, but it is just not true to say that no saint is aware of it, or even sillier, that it is Kal's work. So we are left having to dismiss two thousand years of Christian history with its many illustrious saints in favor of the view of just Kabir, Soamiji, or Faqir. In my humble opinion, that is unreasonable, and the result of a lack of in-depth investigation !
Levitation, a strange gift
There is one particular miraculous phenomenon that does seem to be unique to Christianity, which is levitation. Not "bunny-hopping" as some TM meditators have done (for a price), and not through siddhi like some Buddhists learn to do, even though their teachers usually frown on it, or at most make it a short-lived period of their training (such as the monk Munindra did with Dipa Ma, who very quickly learned to fly, as well as dive into the earth and come up wet - through concentration techniques on transmuting the elements - and who then was told to forget all that and very quickly passed through the first few stages of insight in the Theravada enlightenment system). We are not talking about the occasional levitating saint in Hinduism such as mentioned in Autobiography of a Yogi. Nor are we talking about the phenomenon of miraculous transport (crossing an unfordable river, or suddenly finding oneself hundreds of miles away), passing through walls, or bilocation - all of which have been reported fairly commonly in the Sant Mat tradition as well. No, what seems to be unique in Christian mysticism is the phenomenon of saints levitating while in a state of ecstasy, either six inches or many feet above the ground. This is not planned, or even desired, in some cases, but has happened many times throughout history. St. Francis of Assisi sometimes went so high he disappeared from sight. St. Joseph of Cupertino would hover near the ceiling of the chapel and he "flew" in the air so often he is now the patron saint of those who fly. St. Philip Neri had to rush when giving Mass to avoid levitating. St. Teresa had to beg her fellow nuns to hold her down so she would not be embarrassed before the others. Her close friend St. John of the Cross would bite the chalice during Mass, and also twist the bars of an iron grill in a convent to resist being drawn upwards. In John's Apocalypse, by T. Craig Isaacs, an interesting story of these two saints is told:
"St. Teresa of Avila and St.John of the Cross are good examples of people with vast experience of ecstasies and visions, who found these more distracting than helpful. One story of these two is that they were praying together one day when a young sister looking for her mother superior walked in on them, only to find them holding onto their chairs which were levitating off the ground. Both were struggling to get the chairs back on the ground because it was disturbing their prayer time. Teresa is known to have said that as she reached the state close to the transforming union that she would look back at the days of frequent ecstasies and remark how quaint they were, but she would never sacrifice the experience of her union with Jesus to experience them again." (387)
So the question that arises is, "how and why does this form of levitation occur?" It appears to serve no obvious purpose, other than as inspiration to an onlooker. And the answer is, "no one really knows." However, it is speculated that it may have something to do with these saints being given and demonstrating a sort of preview of the life in the promised resurrection Body when the New Creation comes when the old world passes away.
This is a difficult doctrine for students of Eastern mysticism to come to terms with. Even the early Church Fathers had their struggles with it, and, as St. Augustine said centuries ago, "No doctrine of the Christian Faith is so vehemently opposed as the doctrine of the resurrection of the flesh." (388).
For Christianity this new body is not to be thought of as a form of enhanced "vijnanamaya kosha"; in the New Jerusalem the planes and bodies that exist now will be no more, something entirely new will take their place, and all will be at least as blessed as Adam and Eve in the garden before the Fall and all flesh became corrupted. This is not just one among an infinite number of cyclical pralayas or dissolutions and re-creations. I can say no more. It is entirely different than the general Hindu and Buddhist view. [Some thoughts on Christian views of creation will be further discussed in the section, "Evolutionary Enigmas"].
Materialization and dematerialization in Buddhism; the Rainbow Body
Yet there is more from the Hindu and Buddhist traditions that may (or may not!) shed some light on the overall topic of materialization and dematerialization of bodies. Some claim that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu translated at directly into light, body and all, in 1533. (389) This phenomenon, exemplified in some form by Elijah, Jesus, Jnaneshwar, Tukaram, and Ramalingar (390), is known in the yoga sutras as agni yoga dharana, or a yogic process of radiating inner fire to reduce the body to a subtle form or to consciousness itself without actually burning it. It is a possible but not necessary accompaniment of the ultimate stages of certain yogic processes - definitely not a common or necessary event! [Christians may object, as in their teaching Elijah and Jesus are said to have ascended with their Resurrection bodies to the new Creation/Heaven for which the rest of us must wait until the general Resurrection, and did not just ascend into the light or as a light-body as these other Hindu saints did - but, as mentioned, this is a very difficult topic to understand, although it has been Christian doctrine for two thousand years.
Important to note is that the apparently similar phenomenon known as the 'Great Transfer/Rainbow Body' in Dzogchen (also found in some Taoist and Hindu teachings), where genuine, is not a siddhi like the dematerialization/bi-location capacity so often demonstrated by various saints and masters. The latter is a power that derives from the ability to manipulate the elements - not just the physical elements per se, but to be able to translate matter/energy in and out of the various planes. For instance, if one visualizes an orange clearly in one's mind, and then with adequate concentration, infuses this elemental that one has formed of an orange with the earth element, it will precipitate in the physical world. This is one basic method of materialization. Conversely, if one take any physical object, or one's own body, and through mind-power concentrates on removing the earth element from it, then it will dematerialize, though it will now continue to exist in the astral plane, all objects and beings always having an astral counterpart to their physical form. This is a siddhi that is based on will-power, however subtle and sublime, and profound knowledge of the elements. It has been done by great adepts in the Theravadin, Tibetan, Hindu, Sant, and other traditions. A more spectacular example is Milarepa, 'banging' on space and making the sound of a drum, and thus transmuting air into earth, or in modern days Dipa Ma, 'diving' into the earth and coming up drenched, thus transmuting earth into water. Or perhaps a saint accomplished in bi-location, manifesting and demanifesting, or translating into light, body and all, at the time of death. But the Great Transfer of Dzogchen is not such siddhi. It is considered, where genuine, to be the expression of so fully integrating non-dual realization into the human form that it is transformed at a more fundamental level directly into soul or one's essence. The adepts in the tradition who achieve such 'Total Realization', at the time of death, usually retire for seven days (sometimes more), when their body shrinks [indeed, photos of this exist] and disappears into its subtle elemental light essences, leaving only the hair and nails behind, these being considered its impurities and used as relics by the common people.
Why they would do this is a good question! Most Masters certainly do not do this, but we'll give it a shot and say that it could mean that one has not only attained sahaja samadhi, or stabilized non-dual realization in the ordinary state, but also so illuminated the lower bodies with this realization that all karma is 'spontaneously liberated', and the body itself (which is a product also of Nature) is also, in a sense, liberated. It essentially means, using other terms, that the Primordial Shakti-Holy Spirit-Wisdom/Energy inherent in the body is profoundly assimilated into the Self-Realized Soul of the practitioner. [Note: Dzogchen and Buddhism in general do not use this terminology of Soul; however, we use it in these writings liberally, in a context where its traditional limiting connotations are understood.
Adriano Clemente, translator of a text by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, writes:
"The rainbow body ['ja' lus] is the transmutation of the physical constituents of the body into the essence of the five elements of which it is composed: the five lights. Thus an immaterial body, invisible to the physical eye, continues to exist, actively working for the benefit of all sentient beings....Higher than this accomplishment is the "great transference into the rainbow body" ('ja lkus 'pho ba chen mo), in which the yogin achieves the rainbow body while still alive, without undergoing the process of death." (391)
It is not easy to understand how this is different than an 'immortalized' subtle body of a great saint performing the same function, and to our knowledge has not been explained adequately so far in any tradition. In our opinion, the importance of the rainbow body is two-fold: one, the depth of non-dual realization itself, which can be considered a 'death-in-life' regardless of any special 'light body ' created thereby; and, two, the 'enrichment' of the soul or spirit of the practitioner that such a process as actual reabsorption of the body may produce. This aspect of the process has not been adequately recognized in any tradition either.
Those who are not fully 'transferred' or psycho-physically integrated during life may yet be able to shrink their bodies down and disappear at death; this must be understood as implying a profound but somewhat lesser degree of realization. It is still not 'siddhi', i.e. as accomplished by a willful effort, but rather an allowance of the full extent of realization that the death process affords, but was not completely accomplished while alive.
This discussion of Dzogchen is only to make clear that we do not know under which category the light bodies of these great masters from the various traditions fall. In any case it may or may not be necessary or inevitable, or even 'better' than that of those saints and siddhas who do not exit that way. Buddha said he was capable of so doing, in fact he said that he could even maintain a "Nirmanakaya' or 'physical' body until the end of the kalpa" if he so desired, but he chose not to so that his disciples would not make him into a god.
Even Ramana Maharshi seems to have admitted such a possibility as the rainbow body when he said that, inasmuch as the body is a condensed form of mind, when the mind resolved into the Self, the body might itself do likewise. Indeed, a similar phenomenon occured to Ramana:
"On several occasions Sri Bhagavan had had an unusual experience in which his body would disappear in a flash and disperse into its component atoms. A little later a smoke-like form would appear and the atoms would come together in a form that resembled particles of mist. Finally, the body would reappear in its normal form. Sri Bhagavan used to have this experience whenever he remained in the same position for a long time or when his body got emaciated because he was not taking enough food. This state, in which the body disintegrates into atoms and merges with the five elements, is known as 'pranava body'." (392)
While this is a rare form of siddhi some how or other associated with advanced yogic development, or in Ramana's case even sagehood, it is not to be equated with the equally rare and unexplainable phenomenon of spontaneous combustion, whereby ordinary persons literally burn up without apparent cause:
"The shower was cold but she complained of being hot. After that, smoke started pouring out of her ears and mouth. Then she caught fire and started screaming...The young woman burned intensely for about ten minutes. When the flames subsided, all that remained was ash...There was no source of heat or fire visible to her teachers and classmates. She obviously started to burn spontaneously from the inside out.” (393)
This is good to know, in case you were wondering.
Death, "the last enemy," even for saints?
A few concluding thoughts for this section. David Lane, in "The Suffering Saint," published an interview he had with Faqir Chand shortly before the latter's death. Faqir was suffering from various ailments and the conclusion was that even a saint can not cure or save himself, which seemed to be consistent with much of Faqir's message about the power of saints. It is true, many saints have suffered greatly at the time leading up to their deaths. When questioned about it, the answers have varied greatly. But the general concept of saints or masters being a medium through which to intercede on behalf of others, and yet unable to help himself, is consistent with the principle of their being surrendered to the higher self or God, and resigned to the divine will. "And he was numbered with the transgressors," (Mark 15:28) was written about Jesus. Some will interpret this to mean masters who suffer are taking on the karmas of their disciples, and that is always a possibility. The 16th Karmapa seemed to pass through and recover from one disease condition to another to the bafflement of his doctors when he was dying. But there are other considerations. Ramana Maharshi was asked when he had a terminal cancer why he did not cure himself, and his answer was that he lacked the will or sankalpa to do anything about it. Kirpal Singh when asked the same question replied, "If someone you love gives you a gift, would you not accept it gladly?" Devotees considered him all-powerful, yet he sat with a thermometer in his hand. Sawan Singh was restless and shaking nearing his death, and said that only if someone proficient in simran and bhajan sat by him would he be calmed. Not long before there was a photo of him standing with his finger in his right ear, and making the comment that he did not even find enough time for meditation. What was that about? I wondered if it was just for the sake of his disciples, or something else? Compared to Ramana, whom seemed to be in perpetual contemplation, and for whom nothing seemed to alter his serene state, this all appears odd. Isn't a master supposed to be always in a state of halcyon equipoise?
Maybe we should not count Ramana, as he was practically a full-time contemplative, and not in charge of managing hundreds or thousands of people, like some of the saints were, both in their professional life as well as in their mission. He said that "even if a jnani was screaming on the floor in pain nothing would change - he is the jnani." Yet even for him, who had experienced the world almost in a dreamlike quality for most of his life, was pulled down to the body by his cancer near the end and would groan at night. In Faqir's case, his kidney poisoning made it so painful he complained that he could no longer meditate or go within - which you think would be an easy thing for a master on this path to manage. But apparently not necessarily. There seems to be something about actual physical death that even for many great saints poses a final challenge or ordeal. It seems the physical body - and brain - even of saints has its limits. Else why should there have been a bottle of fish oil on Kirpal's nightstand, or valium in Charan Singh's bedroom in Sawan Singh’s house where he was living? It is somewhat ironic that some disciples are seemingly spared the sting of death, while some of the Masters are not.
Saints vary in their degree of spiritual capacity. We are not now comparing one to the other. It is only that, as St. Teresa of Avila said, speaking of one in a state of spiritual marriage [in her system, the stage after infused contemplation, the prayer of quiet, and the prayer of union, and the last degree before that of the 'Beatific Vision'], "it must not be thought that the faculties and senses and passions are always in this state of peace, though the soul itself is." (394)
Not only the cross of physical decay and death, but the experience of Job - i.e., the manifestation of the archtype of death, where life seems futile and meaningless - often confronts people, and apparently even some saints, towards the time of their dying. The latter seems to have been the case for Faqir Chand as he lay dying in the hospital, at least for a time, as evidenced by his confession presented in Part One. The life of Padre Pio is also most illustrative of this. Although throughout his life he experienced almost constant communion with Jesus and Mary, his guardian angel, and other saints, had the gifts of bi-location, healing, raising the dead, reading the hearts of others (many thousands on a regular basis), needing little food or sleep, as well as life-long stigmata, in his last few years "had to be assisted in dressing, bathing, and even, much to his great humiliation, in the most intimate necessities of life. "May the Lord call me now because I am no longer permitted to be of any use to my brethren." (395) Amazingly, he still felt unworthy and unsure of his salvation, although he was glad at the approach of death.
One could take the easy way out and say that some of these examples are not of the best saints, the true masters, who can slip out of the body via the third eye center, effortlessly and painlessly, whenever they wish, but I think it would be short-sighted to do so. There is a mystery of the body which is barely touched in many traditions, which is well worth pondering.
For David Hawkins, as well as advaitic sages, the only real death is the death of the ego. He writes of his experience:
"All has been surrendered to God, and then the very last remnant of the self remains as the seeming source of life - the core of ego itself, with the conviction that it is the author and primordial source of one's very life and existence. As this arises, so also does a knowingness that 'even this, too' must be surrendered to God. This last barrier is signaled by a sudden burst of the last remaining fear which is very strong and intense - the very basic fear of death. The arises a knowingness, which has been nascent in the spiritual aura, that 'all fear is an illusion' and 'death is not a possibility.' Then, as a consequences of faith and devotion, the last illusion is surrendered. Next emerges the literal, actual, feared sensation of dying - a brief but very intense agony because, unlike physical death, it has never been faced before. That is the only and final 'death' possible. As the agony dies away, there is an emergence into the Revelation of the Infinite Glory of Divinity. The stunning perfection and beauty of the Allness of Creation as Divinity radiates forth, and all is still, beyond all time. Gloria in Excelsis Deo is the State Itself." (396)
The important point here is "unlike physical death, it has never been faced before." This root fear, discussed in Part One in the sections on Maha Sunn and the Void, has, throughout the ages-long history of the ego, never been isolated and confronted. It is said that people can die hundreds of times and never really experience the roots of fear. Most pass into a merciful swoon of unconsciousness when passing over or even in meditation.
But even here, for one established in the so-called Absolute, prior to consciousness, the diminished capacity of the physical vehicle is no reflection on the user. Nor are expressions of agony. Or an inability to “remember God” or anything at all, for instance, due to dementia or clouding of the brain. The sage himself is beyond remembering or forgetting, birth or death, which pertain only to the body and mind. He has nothing to remember or forget. The only concerns are those of the devotees left behind. So the concerns expressed by Faqir in the hospital remain puzzling, if one assumes such one as he was established in the Absolute. This is not a judgement of him, no doubt he was a great man, but only a question for philosophical investigation.
CHAPTER THIRTY-SIX
A proposed model for comparing/classifying different teachings and schools
Since first writing this section, it has become evident that it is incomplete without including a Christian perspective. For this omission we apologize. But as one can see, this would be difficult without turning Christian doctrine into just another form of Eastern mysticism, which Christianity on the whole disavows, placing it at odds with the interpretations of the yogis. Maybe at a later date we will give it another try, but for now, so be it.
Imagine a triangle with the Unnameable, Inexpressible Absolute, the Tao, the Dharmakaya, Anami on the top, then Shiva and Shakti on the bottom left and right. These are the 'relative' principles of Consciousness and Energy, Purusha and Prakriti, that for now we may consider as 'emanating' or manifesting from the Absolute. Some paths lean one way, some the other, and some are more balanced. Shiva paths emphasize wisdom, discrimination, realization, mind, knowledge, consciousness, awareness, awakening, and enlightenment. These, in what might be considered a 'watered-down' form, are currently very popular in the Western world among many of the newer teachers of non-duality. Shakti paths (first introduced in a major way the West in the 1960's-1970's) emphasize energy, body, feeling, passion, phenomena, love, and so on. Most advanced tantric inclusive paths like Tibetan Buddhism or Swami Rama's lineage, marry these two aspects in a more integral approach. If the emphasis is on things like realization, wisdom and inquiry, then siddhis are slower to develop because that aspect of our nature is being detached from, or 'seen through'. But with Sant Mat, not only is the leaning towards devotion/love/surrender, but the form of the practice is to attune to the essence of the nature side or Shakti. In the difference between mind and body (shiva and shakti), mind has insight, realizes, while body feels and does. In our feeling aspect, in our senses, we emphasize three major senses to experience nature, whether physical or subtle - we touch, or see or hear. So there are two types of Shakti practice - active, such as pranayama or tai chi, and receptive, which would be sensory. We know that Sant Mat does not prefer to emphasize the active, motor currents, so the emphasis in on the sensory currents. These are reflected in the three meditations of that tradition - gazing, bhajan and shabd (the one active method is simran).
The finest manifestation of shakti is inner light and sound - where meditation on these will lead to unity with the Positive Power, or the Shakti aspect of God. Then the Sat Purush or Positive Power will take one beyond into the Realization/Shiva aspect within, with the Eternal then spontaneously revealing itself as It is, and also, if allowed, re-integrating itself deeper and deeper into all of the bodies and planes as it descends. It is as if the light and sound are the outer form of Saguna Brahman, with its pure Realization (Nirguna) aspect being 'behind' that, just as our minds and souls are within our bodies. This leads to the pure, complete non-dual realization. So, tantric traditions also use the light and sound, but rather than having a bhakti emphasis and so focusing primarily on these expressions of Deity, they also include seeing them as kundalini and may work with them in other contexts as well. For instance, Swami Veda Bharati, a successor of Swami Rama, taught that in the Himalayan Advaita/Tantric lineage that he and Swami Rama were part of, the first stage of initiation was raja yoga practices like yama, niyama, asanas, and pranayama, along with mantra initiation. The second initiation, after adequate purification, would begin work with kundalini. He said that in their tradition 'the kundalini is a force of divine light and superconscious sound', and that beyond that stage, meditations would focus on 'light, sound, and chakras'. The third initiation would be their equivalent of direct transmission of non-dual realization as in Dzogchen, leading to advanced meditation. He described this stage as beginning with direct transmission - “the tremendous explosion of consciousness on a cosmic scale that takes place in such initiations has to be experienced to be believed, and the power to confer such Light resides only in a few hands. The initiation my be given by the touch of the hand, with a glance, or with a burst of mental energy. The degree of the height and intensity of initiation depends on the disciple's ability to withstand, contain and later slowly assimilate into his nervous energy the shock of the divine energy.” During this stage meditation on inner light and sound transitions to being beyond the body, and continues into higher worlds. There is also a four stage of initiation as well, which they don't talk about openly. The goal in this tradition is sahaja samadhi, and comes from a blending of Advaita/realization and shakti/kundalini approaches. Again, in a path like this the siddhis are more likely to arise at an earlier stage, especially since they are latent in the body/feeling/shakti level, and they are using practices that attune to these in various ways including chakras and subtle light and sound.
Sant Mat may not explicitly embrace the tantric philosophy, and many of the elements that are associated with the various and many more tantric styles (chi gong, Taoism, Vajrayana, hindu forms) such as breathing practices, chakras, and so on. But they do meditate on what these traditions (at least many of them) would consider to be a manifestation of Shakti or kundalini (which does extend into the subtle world all they way up to its emanating source, whether we call it MahaShakti, the Holy Spirit, Sat Purush, or Shabd Brahman. So, in the context of this perspective, an advanced practitioner of Sant Mat would be expected to inevitably also develop all the siddhis because not only do they get them from adequate God-consciousness in general, but also that they are absorbing themselves in the Positive Power that is Shakti that is the source of all the power of nature, normal or paranormal, physical or subtle.
How a master manifests their realization, however, will in considerable part be dependent on the type of path that they are practicing/embodying for that incarnation. Each path has its strengths as well as areas that are less developed. So it becomes very tricky to compare masters of different paths. And just because a path does not explicitly focus on some element like non-dual wisdom does not mean its adepts will not come into that realization in a round-about sort of way. It may not be the most efficient way to be directly initiated into that aspect of spirituality, or to cultivate it. But it is not necessarily going to be totally lacking, though it might be given a different spin depending on their philosophy and approach.
To fully compare paths requires working from a comprehensive understanding of spirituality as a context, one that will allow us to put each path in perspective. In doing so there are many, many components that have to be evaluated in order to look at each path and how it is a unique combination of various components. Then in that context we can also have a better understanding of what 'type' of masters are the product of that path. This is further complicated by the fact that people will bring to a given path components that are built into their own nature, which are not strong or explicit on that path, and so give their own unique spin to that path. For instance, clearly Sant Mat is not particularly a jnani path, yet some within it (both masters and students) have that inclination in their nature. So they bring that to their involvement with Sant Mat, which some people feel enriched by, and others confused or threatened by. So there is the basic soul or nature of a given path, and then there are those who bring a different spin to it, so they that break the mold. They may be reformers, or outcasts! Or both.
Some of the components that one might use to evaluate and compare paths would include: primary philosophy (like Dvaita, Advaita, Vishishtadvaita); and Shiva leaning, Shakti leaning, or balanced; jnani, bhakti, tantric, karma, etc. Also whether emphasizing inversion, integration or both. Outstanding virtues emphasized like wisdom, discipline, technical skill, love/compassion, devotion, surrender, creativity/expression, equanimity/detachment, and so on. At another level there are more comprehensive archetypes that underly a spiritual path, which bring together some of these different characteristics.
Although Sant Mat includes elements from the Shakti aspect, it is not as rich in that area as Dzogchen or other rich tantric paths, so the emergence of siddhis may not be as efficient (also less dangerous therefore), and generation of the Body of Light is unlikely, and so on. But, another component of a path is the depth to which they appreciate the central component of grace, and it significance on the path. Tibetan Buddhism/Dzogchen does deeply appreciate this, but there are many facets to it, to this wonderful attribute of the divine. Shabd yoga is a profound and unique contribution to the appreciation of this aspect. But the tradition of the realized guru's grace is a very ancient and universal one.
None of the existing traditions have it all, and they all need to be matured further, part of which comes from blending with other truths. There is a profound place, for instance, for 'inversion' practices in a larger, planetary spirituality. And the Buddhist versions are a good contribution to these, but perhaps not their greatest strength. Sant Mat may understand certain truths about this much better than Buddhism.
The central strength of especially Mahayana Buddhism is its penetrating insight into non-dualism, its appreciation of the power and greater enlightenment embodied in balancing love and wisdom, and its middle path and integrated presence (rather than trance) approach to spiritual development. On the other hand, the significance of the inner light and sound is profound. It is one of the great under-appreciated truths in our times. Sant Mat is carrying a relatively clean, simple but profound version of that truth in the context of the world's spiritual traditions. That is its world Dharma. There are other pieces that are not as well expressed or expressed at all in Sant Mat. But that does not diminish the beauty of what it does express. In the centuries ahead there will likely be an increasing blending of these truths into a greater world spirituality.
A summary of non-dualism as the Heart of any path
What characterizes a profound 'integrated' non-dual realization? In our opinion, it is an experience of the relative dimension of matter and mind (even very formless mind), and its gross and subtle forms of dualism (distinctions of planes, elements, mind and matter, soul and bodies, etc) from a profoundly integrated non-dual state in such a way that a type of 'realization' arise that 'rebirths' one's interpretation of all that in the light of non-dualism. Put simply and 'mystically', it would be to say 'all is one', or 'it is all God' or 'Buddha-nature'. Put in a way that naturally cannot really be put into words, it also can include a way of realizing all of that in an integral wholeness where it is all comprehended in a new way but without dualistic categories. There is no longer an experience that mind and matter are distinct - yet one sees a continuum of continuity of a reality that is both mind and matter, so there is a simultaneous realization of its oneness (a single substance neither mind or matter) and a spectrum of manifestations. In such a state one does not need to 'go out of one's body' to be deeply present to all 'planes', and can still appreciate the 'levels', but in a radically different way. Separative dualism is liberated into a new state of realization. Some have tried to talk about this by picking one side of a polarity and saying that is the only reality, and the other side is unreal. Ad example of this is the 'Mind-Only' school. But that is just a limited attempt to put in human concepts and terms something that transcends all that. But it does help get the idea across that there is a state where it is integrated. The 'Matter-Only' school is a bit like saying 'it is all empty' - which is to say, that even mind and individuality is like matter, a bunch of 'heaps', stuff with no real 'mind/soul', etc. One says matter is really just a form of mind, the other says mind is just a kind of matter. But the radical non-dual truth is that you cannot reduce one to the other, and they are both dualistic ways of looking at something that, when viewed non—dually, retains the essence of both yet translates them to a level at which those essences are fully integrated into a total reality. Perhaps the closest one can come is to say it is a 'unity-in-diversity' realization while simultaneously realizing the non-dual foundation of both unity and diversity - a 'three-in-one' realization. Then 'planes' (which is a view that tends to lean towards 'matter') are not places to go to, but also 'states of mind' and can be accessed from anywhere, and all at once or 'separately', though in the later case, their non-dual nature will still be foremost, so a given plane will still be experienced as interdependent with all the other planes, and inseparable from the primordial Reality.
Re-cap: Sant Mat visualized as a non-dual path
This subject has been discussed in some depth in Part Two, but there is a bit more to be said. The current impression among newer teachings is that paths such as Sant Mat are indirect, dualistic and other-worldly, and therefore not truly non-dual. That they assume a separate self, and its meditation only reinforces that assumption, and also proposes a superhuman task that few are capable of. There are several reasons why this conception is invalid. Briefly, the notion that bhakti and devotion are ultimately illusion, as there is only the One, ignores that from the plane of relativity they are not illusion, but a natural means for most people to transcend self and connect with Truth. Even the venerable late Shankaracharya of Kanci frequently admonished students of his not to shake the faith of simple bhaktas by asking too technical of a nature of questions in their presence. This staunch Vedantin recognized the power of faith and devotion. Kirpal Singh used to say, when referring to the many poor villager Satsangis in India, "I love them, and they love me: no technology required." This delicate quandary regarding faith is, in fact, is a dilemma for me in writing this entire, long dissertation - it is my appointed task, but then this is not for the simple, perhaps, but for those with many questions whose need draws them to find this website, as all questions must be fulfilled eventually once they arise. They are not wrong or just a distraction. They are part of the divine plan, too. The divine wants to be known and loved. All true desires and questions must be fulfilled in due course. In the meanwhile, bhakti is somewhat out of vogue in the West to a large degree, due to the current rise of non-dual jnana-style teachings, but its human naturalness and efficacy is all too often simplistically overlooked.
Second, all great traditional masters, including Swami Sivananda, Sankara, Ramakrishna, Ramana, Milarepa, Gampopa, Huang Po, Anandamayi Ma, and Sant Kirpal Singh, to name a few, have proposed basically a two-stage process of inward concentration and aspiration towards an ideal, achieving dis-identification with the world and merging with a higher principle - the divine soul - to be naturally followed by realization of a wider, omnipresent reality - Oversoul - wherein one reintegrates and includes all that has been dis-identified with. The first stage is establishment of a higher center than the dispersed condition that has become habitual, but which is not the final stage, and is moved beyond once attained. This stage or its equivalent on different paths can not generally be bypassed, as many seem to think these days. Otherwise one is often left with a 'husk without the kernel', and disparagement of the realization of the soul or inner essence as some of those of the 'talking schools' often are, glibly dismissing soul as if it were synonymous with the 'ego'. And third, the 'Divine Intermediary Liberating Presence within Relativity' - the Shabda-Brahman, whose nature is fundamentally Consciousness, and whose embodiment is the Master, is on this path the great means that makes this possible and relatively easy for the apparently 'separate' aspirant. In truth all that is required is faith in its beneficent grace and all-accomplishing power.
Moreover, in Sant Mat there is a great, almost hidden paradox involved that is worth recognizing. While it is taught as a path of inversion and ascent to other planes, the mystery is that as one aspires to simple devotion, and higher, ascended realities, in actuality the divine grace descends, more and more. Even if one has not actually and literally 'ascended', the divine grace really descends and assumes, overtakes, or infuses the very body-mind of the devotee. In the process inner and outer, higher and lower become one and inseparable, as one blissful intensity. The Master Power, given a fair chance, by simple co-operation and faith on our part, quite naturally creates, evokes, and establishes divine knowledge and understanding in the disciple, in stages. And if one in fact has gone inside to any degree, he returns with an amrit saturating the whole body, not entirely unlike the 'amrita nadi' spoken of by Ramana Maharshi (where there is felt to be present an eternal and infinite spire of Light and Sound rising from the Heart to the sahasrar). Thus, this is a non-dual path when understanding or devotion is fully established. The fundamental tasks appear many, but at heart there is only the surrender in trust to that Power and Being which in turn transforms the disciple and from which he is inseparable. Once again, as Soamiji promised:
"Into my own head have I taken thy worry; so do not thou worry but cherish thou love. Leaving all doubts, thy love do thou make firm, and have staunch faith. This practice [of shabd] I'll get done myself, and into the Durbar [court] of the highest Absolute Lord shall I take thee. This I do as and when it is my Mauj [Will]."
The mystery is that this 'Durbar' has been said to be both a realm and an ever-present reality. In other words, a ‘realm’ where non-duality prevails and the underlying essence of all planes. Which leads to a question.
When one successfully has penetrated, ascended, or otherwise accessed the highest plane in meditation, does that automatically persist as and/or become an integrated ever-present realization when one returns to normal consciousness? Or does a divine nostalgia remain fueling a desire to return to samadhi to avoid contamination with this world pinda? Some teachers have said perfect discrimination and understanding does occur automatically, while the experiences of others suggests that it does not. Case in point: a satsangi man of high inner experience was seen acting unseemly on numerous occasions. Kirpal Singh was asked how this could be. His reply was, “you see, the ego can go all the way up. Thus humility is the precious adornment of the saints.” One may well ask, “why would the Master open the door and allow such a person to access inner planes before the requisite purity and humility were developed? For in most cases that is what happens. And the answer is, He sometimes lets the other happen as well [perhaps more often in India!], may be to see what a person will do with the divine grace. But most often, the ego must be thinned down first. Or should. And sometimes, a dark night of the soul may be needed to produce that result. St. John of the Cross gives one reason, that before such purification:
“…the soul’s faculties and appetites are impure, lowly, and very natural. And even were God to give these faculties the delight of supernatural, divine things, they would be unable to receive them except in their own way, very basely and natural. As the Philosopher says, Whatever is received is received according to the mode of the receiver.” (397)
Further, Brunton writes:
“The banishment of thoughts reveals the inner self whereas the reinstatement of thoughts without losing the newly gained consciousness reveals the All-inclusive universal self. The second feat is the harder.” (39)
He calls this an “ultra-mystic” exercise. “Thoughts” of course includes the body-thought and the world-thought, not merely thoughts swirling in the head-space, and in fact any manifestation other than the pure consciousness itself. Therefore this is a practice and not by any means an automatic result from gaining the innermost states. Few mystics go on to realize this.
My guess then is that non-dual integration of the inner and the outer on this path or any such path will depend on ones metaphysical understanding, as well as how well one knows and has been with himself - that is to say, how well one recognizes the ego and its ways, as well as how much fundamental trust and confidence in ones own ‘being’ a person has matured into. Only then will one be free from fascination with and inflation by experience on subtle planes. Need it go without saying that this will also require a great deal of purification. Accessing inner samadhi is not, in itself, such purification, as discussed in Part Three of this book. The annals of mysticism are replete with examples of the bypassing of that.
The understanding is something along the lines expressed by sages quoted earlier, as well in two quotes of Brunton (paraphrased from memory):
“The world is not a trap or a degradation of the divine essence,” and “we are not among those who claim that the immortal soul has become encased/entrapped in a physical body.”
This appears in stark contrast with the usual viewpoint of Sant Mat, but is grounded in another and widely extant perspective held by, not only Brunton, but others sages as diverse as Plotinus and Meister Eckhart. On this view only a portion of the Soul has incarnated, while an immortal part ever remains in union with the Divine and never (even apparently) enters into the flesh. There is still a dualism here, but it is more subtle and benign than in the view which has the soul fall as a discrete entity and actually separate from God. Eckhart wrote:
“An uncreated aspect of the soul abides in perfect oneness with God at all times.” (399)
On this view a part of the soul, a projected emanant that eventually becomes the complex human ego, incarnates and goes through all of the travail in the lower worlds, while the other, diviner part never leaves that Essence, never leaves the Nous, never leaves Sach Khand (as Ishwar Puri characterized the realization upon actually entering that domain). One intuits this deeper and deeper and is not then swayed by the teaching of any swamiji or babaji, but freely lives his incarnation without fear of being cast into the pit. Further, he comes to know that his real nature is happiness, and does not need to go into samadhi to realize it again and again, although he may do so for refreshment, or to render greater service in such a way if that be his destiny. This perspective is what is slowly permeating across the traditional understandings and also coming into embodiment within them. The signs are already appearing, albeit gradually.
We dare say that the ‘silly’ parts of the Kal story will fade away as humanity or its spiritual remnant enters into a more mature stage.
To some extent it is all in the perception. “What you see is you,” as said Kirpal Singh. Many satsangis - perhaps the more paranoid among us - will resist for a time this view of things and cling to fearful traditional explanations of two separate powers vying for the soul, whereas as one matures he naturally gravitates to recognizing only One Supreme Power and ceases to live in fear, choosing to regard all of his experience in positive terms - at least insofar as his salvation or realization is concerned. It is not, however, that one becomes an ostrich with his head in the sand.
CHAPTER THIRTY-SEVEN
Marked souls and the ‘Fall’; Evolutionary enigmas; If souls started out in the Nether world how did they get to Sach Khand only to fall from there?; Three theories of evolution; Why did we leave Sach Khand only to return there; The Biblical Fall: the beginning of reincarnation?; The Cat Lady: on the karma of mice-killing; Summary: creationism or evolution; ET’s; Our human mind can hardly punch its way out of a paper bag!
The history of the Radhasoami movement, unfortunately, since the time of Soamiji has often been one of being encouraged not to ask difficult questions. My Master, Sant Kirpal Singh, however, said, “Go to him in whatever attitude you like. If you are really after truth, he won’t be annoyed. Even if you ask a hundred and one!Bring me your worst question!" Yet too often the advice is, "we shouldn't ask such things," "we can't know such things," or even, “submit your questions in writing and maybe it will be chosen to be answered.”
One question in need of a simple answer is the teaching in Sant Mat of there being "marked souls," those with a moharchap on their foreheads, indicating they are to be chosen for initiation and eventual return to Sach Khand. There is even at least one mention in the New Testament of such a stamp on the forehead of the elect (Rev. 9:4). Is this meant literally? I don’t think so. Even if true, some may well ask that it be explained and understood in a more comprehensive way. I think it only means a Master may recognize “his own”, not that one is wearing an invisible badge. This was basically the view of Ishwar Puri. Brunton wrote:
"The Master knows, automatically and by his own intuition, whether a candidate for discipleship is in affinity with him or not, and hence whether to accept or reject the man or not." (400)
So once again the word intuition is used - the essential quality, said Shiv Brat Lal, of Sach Khand and above. Not a visible badge. Shri Atmananda adds to our understanding:
"[There] is a statement in the Upanishads...'He who is chosen by the Atma itself is alone eligible for realization of the Truth.' It is ordinarily said that a thing attracts one. It is not on account of anything done by that particular thing that it is said to attract, but one gets attracted to it of himself. It is in his way that Atma's choosing has to be understood. It means that he who is earnest about getting to Atma - the ultimate Truth - gets attracted to it without anything being done by Atma itself. That is the 'choosing'." (401)
Ramakrishna recognized some of his followers as “marked,” but in his case he meant the ones that were to become monks. My feeling is, if one thinks he has found an authentic stream of grace and truth, be thankful to be so blessed, and then forget any of this kind of divisive us-and-them thinking. Live life simply with dignity and gratitude. Kirpal Singh often said, "the man in whom the question of the mystery of life has arisen is fit, I tell you." That is the essential requirement. And even if one is so marked, as the path unfolds one will find that there are still parts of the psyche that are still 'unmarked', and in need of transformation! This may even sometimes only be made obvious after becoming a guru. For as Brunton also says:
"His consciousness of the Overself may be perfect, but his conduct as a human being may not. Is there anywhere a faultless man? He may be wise but he may not be wise all the time. For history shows lapses of judgement, impulsive actions, and other regrettable happenings due to karmic personas even where least expected." (402)
So to be marked per se is only a beginning. Unfortunately, almost every religion and cult has a teaching where some are considered special souls, the chosen ones, or God's elect.The following is an example of a statement on this point made by an angry Beas follower, with references, about this topic and its consequences. One will see its essentially drastic message:
"MISSION STATEMENT OF THE RADASWAMI MASTER AND THE INTENT OF HIS GOD."
"In this argument we want to look at the "Mission" that the Masters claim to be given by God and also look at certain defining characteristics of that God which we can infer from statements by the Masters. We will use two quotes from Radhasoami (RS) books as the source documents: The first is from the book "The Master Answers" by Charan Singh from 1984. The second is data attributed to Sawan Singh from the book "With the Three Masters - Vol. II" (1967) Pages 68 and 176. Q. 310. The first question referred to the Supreme Lord as sending us down here: Now sometimes in the Radha Soami literature, may be in some of the discussions, I forgot which, we have referred to as being prodigal Sons, which indicates that we came down here by our own choice, rather than being sent down by the Supreme Lord. Will you comment on that? A. How could we have a choice, when we were with the Lord? Choice comes through the mind, and there is no mind there. We have been sent. We have been given mind, to be pulled to and function in this world. But we had no mind there. The question of our choice did not arise there. If the universe had to be created, some souls had to be sent, whether they liked it or not. It is not advisable to discuss many things. For example, you may have heard or you may have read but I do not want to give much importance to it that some souls were quite willing to come, and others were quite reluctant to come. Generally, it is said that saints come for those souls who were reluctant to come into this world, and that is considered to be one-tenth of the number of souls sent here. So, only one-tenth will make their way (p.310 THE MASTER ANSWERS (1964 Charan Singh) back to the Lord and nine-tenths will stay back here to carry on the universe. That is why everybody will not be attracted towards the Lord. Some souls are required for the universe to go on, unless the Lord wants to finish this whole play. Otherwise, if all the souls were to go back to Him, there would be an end to this universe. So the Saints come for those marked souls. The one-tenth are the marked souls for which the Masters come, to take them back to the Lord. They are known as the marked souls. I did not want to discuss this question. (below dated June, 1945 and attributed to Sawan Singh)"
"Last night Huzur said, The real secret is that when this creation was created for the first time it was most beautiful and fascinating. It was shown to all the souls and they were asked whether they would like to live in Satlok or go down to this new creation. Eight-ninths of the souls said they wanted to go down to the lower creation, and only one-ninth of the souls said they wanted to stay at the feet of the Lord. This the all-merciful Supreme Father asked the souls who did not want to go down, to do so, and to enjoy the new creation. He added, however, that He would call them back later on. So it is this group comprising one-ninth of all the souls that is now going back to Satlok. Since the creation is infinite, this one-ninth part is also infinite, and some of these souls will always be in this world to be taken back. The rest of the eight parts will always remain here as a part of this creation."
"On June, 1945, someone asked why this universe was created. Huzur replied, This can be understood only after reaching Sat Lok, but the perfect Saints possess this secret, which is not to be found in any books, that this entire universe was shown to all the souls on the day it was created. Eight-ninths of the souls said that they would like to live forever in the material world; but the remaining one-ninth said that they did not want anything else except God. At this the Supreme Lord said, "All of you go down to the material world. Those who have asked for me only, I shall come to take them back in the form of perfect Saints." I said that it was really surprising that these souls liked this material world in exchange for the bliss of Sat Lok. Huzur replied, "These souls were then not in Sat Lok, but were in a passive or dormant state. They liked this material world because they had not seen any other universe." The Masters claim that their "mission" is to find "marked souls" and bring them back to God. It is further claimed that each Master has been assigned a specific number of these "marked souls" to locate and return. This is their stated mission throughout the many RS books. Many RS books contain glossaries, but the term "marked soul" is not defined in any of them. So, just what is a "marked soul". From the above quotes we can see that a "marked soul" is a soul which came from Sach Khand. It is a statement of fact or citizenship - marked souls are citizens of Sach Khand and so have the right to return there. You cannot earn the right to be a "marked soul". You either are or are not. Either way you cannot change it. The concept of karmas or good or bad works has nothing at all to do with being a marked soul. The Masters then state the number of marked souls at about 10% of all souls. So, what if you are not a "marked soul"? Well, if you are a member of the 90% of non-marked souls, according to the Masters, there is no hope for you regardless of how good you are. In the model for the Universe as given in the above quotes, non-marked souls never reach God. When they are not being "used" to animate life forms in the creation, they are "stored" in a "dormant state" until needed. I do not believe that I can find, in the language that we use here to communicate with one another, the words to adequately express the gravity of what is being stated in the above quotes. Please read them carefully."
"We begin at a point where the material creation had not yet been conceived. Souls lived in the Spiritual realms. Now it is time to create the lower or material worlds. It is desired that these worlds be populated by animate creatures which necessitates that these creatures have souls. The souls used for this purpose are not souls from the spiritual planes. They are souls from "a dormant state" - souls who "had never been in Sat Lok". These souls are destined to "always remain here as part of this creation". They will have lifetime after lifetime - hopes and dreams - good and bad times, but the most they can hope for (although they do not know this) is to be put back into "a dormant state". They will never reach God - they will never see God. Saints will not help them. Only the special 10% who came from an active existence in the Spiritual planes have the right (divine right ?) to return to those high planes. They have the passport - "the mark" by definition or divine right or whatever. It is irrelevant what they have done or do now or will do in the future. None of this has any effect on the fact that they are "marked souls" and therefore have the right to access the Spiritual worlds. Similarly, those 90% who are "not marked" have no right and no hope of gaining any right regardless of anything they may do. Now, this is a simply horrible model for the Universe and for God's intentions. If true, we might as well all hang it up because we are dealing with a God which is vastly different from what is generally believed. This is a model for a totally non evolving Universe - a stagnant place where souls spin around but accomplish nothing ruled by a God who creates souls for "utility" and not out of Love that they might develop and grow and achieve fulfillment. It also suggests an elitist or "master race" type attitude on the part of the Masters. The Masters and their students, of course, are members of the "marked soul class" and the "masses" or the general population is the "non-marked soul class" which is doomed and does not count. To accept this RS model, then, is to worship a God who does NOT have "unconditional love" but who instead has very conditional love for specific souls and no regard for others. The most likely possibility here is that the god of RS is not the ultimate God but rather one of the many "gods" which are worshipped by the various sects in India. In fairness, I wrote to Gurinder Singh and asked him to explain or clarify the quotes used above. As usual, he refused to give any meaningful answer and simply stated that "our limited minds cannot understand these things". He also added some advice saying, "I would advise you not to activate the mind unnecessarily". It is good advice, of course. If you are a mindless zombie you will have no trouble accepting anything. However, my "limited mind" has no trouble seeing what is being said in the above quotes- and I do not agree with it and I do not feel that the "god" being described here is the ultimate and "for real" god." (End of internet post)
Evolutionary enigmas
We can hardly expect to unpack all of the difficulties and contradictions within the above quote. How did souls get to or originate in Sach Khand before the moment of creation? Where did they come from? Where did dormant souls come from? On the one hand, they were the 8/9ths, or 9/10ths, or 1/10th (I can't keep track) of the souls who wanted to go down to the new creation, but in another passage they are said to be those souls that never knew Sach Khand but were created dormant and would always be dormant. Were they from a previous grand dissolution? Did these unfortunate dormant souls get sent down to begin as amoeba, and slowly go through a long evolutionary chain, or did they instantaneously inhabit all of the millions of life-forms created by the fiat of a creator? And for what purpose? For the use of man alone, as the Bible teaches? The Yog Vasistha said there is a mind behind every particle of dust. Do these other life forms have no soul or consciousness of any kind? Where did the body of man come from? Was that created by divine fiat or was it the product of an evolution of lower life forms? Or a special creative manipulation with the help of Venusian spirits of the most advanced primates available after a long evolution (as theosophy teaches) ? All such views have been proposed. As physical evolution has never been proven and no examples have ever been found of one species evolving into another, or any process of evolution even at the molecular level, despite what is still taught in the school books, was the process then not primarily physical but one of a mental or etheric evolution and gradual condensation or emanation of the planes as also taught in theosophy, thus at least in part accounting for gaps in the geological record, a lack of fossils and evidence for supposed early races of man such as the Lemurian or Hyperboreans? If so, once again, where is the "fall" in all this? Is it not more about the development of consciousness and intelligence that did not exist in the original souls before leaving the divine plane?
Did the souls in Sach Khand enter that human form when it was ready, as theosophy has taught, or was it spontaneously created for the souls when they were sent down? Or is Christianity right, that we were never actually sent down, but created body and soul down here at the same time?
Infinity has no parts nor is it partible, say high philosophies, so it is absurd to speak of 1/9th of the souls, even more so of that 1/9 as infinite! But there may be some fire with this smoke, so we might rightly ask a number of questions: Was this a one-time Fall, or is it a continual process with no end? If so, are souls falling continually? Why? Is there no 'feedback loop' between going and returning souls to alter the process? And, what 'Beginning' are we talking about? Have there been infinite beginnings, and is the story the same in each of them? Are new souls in this or a next new creation after a cosmic dissolution also destined to repeat the same fall and return as the so-called 'original' souls', or was the 'fall' a one time event for this planet, or for this age? Is it the same in other universes or higher planets? (assuming such exist).
If this is a process eternally generated, and not a one-time thing, then can there can be a 'fall' or blame assigned? Or fear that a creator-god might change its mind ('maul') in the future and send us down again?! There can be no capriciousness involved in such a grand process, but it often creeps in when there are beliefs in such tenets as a 'beginning' and a 'creator'. Philosophy says that once we speak of an absolute 'beginning' we are already off the track, inasmuch as a beginning implies time, space, and causation which, being a priori categories of the mind, did not even exist yet. So then even all talk of evolution is only in the realm of relativity. But human beings captured in the mind by nature love stories, and the saints and mystics oblige us - with some stories being more satisfying than others.
If the 1/9 or 1/10 or whatever constitutes the chosen ones are destined to return to Sach Khand, how can they fall all the way back down to the bottom rung of a so-called evolution, an evolution or predicament that is supposedly only the province of the dormant souls created for no other purpose? Are not the stories such as Guru Nanak's of a man returning to be a worm only a form of scare story?
Kirpal Singh wrote, in Wheel of Life, of "the spirits coming out of the nether world of Pluto" to begin their long climb up the ladder. If man at the top of the ladder started in Sach Khand, how did he get into the nether world of Pluto? Who would want to "visit the beautiful new creation below" if they knew they were to begin as an amoeba?! But the story doesn't say that, as we will see below. The souls at first immediately went back to the Father when they died, and the nether world never entered the picture.
And where is the nether world, for that matter? We have already seen, moreover, in the prior section “IF THERE'S A HELL BELOW, WE'RE ALL GONNA GO," the difficulties in even defining it. Siddharameshwar said the nether world means the causal realm of ignorance. The sage Narada, however, said it was more beautiful than Swarga. Where is the nether world? Is it below the earth? Can one get any lower or denser than the earth, the physical plane and annamaya kosha? Is there any truth to the claim that is sometimes made that listening to the sounds coming from the left side in meditation will take one towards the nether regions? Are those regions accessed through the lower chakras? Is this famous verse telling us something of the truth: “She’ll go where the witches go, below, below , below, below …ding ding the witch is dead" ?
Guru Nanak was said to once dip his finger in the fires of hell thus cooling it down and rescuing one of his disciples who had strayed in that direction. Is hell a nether world, then, or is it an astral region? Are the nether regions where the 'units of consciousness' in the mineral and plant kingdom begin their journey through time and space? For their consciousness has been compared by some seers to a state of the deepest trance and of deep sleep, respectively. Or is it the birthplace of sylphs or undines and fairies? How many saints other than Narada, in fact, have actually visited there to tell us what it is like?
I am just raising questions, not proposing to answer them! The basic problem is that the various stories we are given conflict with each other. So it seems we are left with no alternative but to take them very, very lightly, as Ishwar Puri advised us from time to time.
If the spirits started in Sach Khand and “wanted to see the new lower creation," then they would hardly have begun as amoebas, even if they were tricked into doing so! Or, if only the dormant 'worker-drone' kind of souls did so, then how can we chosen ones ever do so?
And what happens to the animal ‘spirits’? Do they have no soul or consciousness and are destined for eternal dormancy?
If there was no fall can we say we are trying to get back to somewhere we started from? Or somewhere or something we never knew before?
Sri Nisargadatta said: "It is not that you knew what you are and then you have forgotten." Bernadette Roberts, coming from another tradition said, "We came here in ignorance and we go back in light." So either way, there is some question that we did something wrong to end up where we are now!
For PB, man pre-existed elsewhere and incarnated when a form was ready for it (like theosophy, Origin, and certain schools of Roman Catholicism). For Sufism, Christianity, and Sant Mat (usually) man was always man, wherever or however he began (if you can even speak of a beginning). Daskalos held that man was a spirit passing through the "Human Idea" (unlike the Archangels) becoming a human soul and whose destiny was then to be man. Animals were formed in a different way. [The explanation is complex, see "The Idea of Man" at https://www.mountainrunnerdoc.citymaker.com/the_idea_of_man.html for more detail]. He also pictured God not as creating, or dreaming, but rather meditating the universe through its own inherent power of Thought:
"Once an irradiation of a Holy Monad [myriads of which abide in or as the "Absolute Be-Ness"] passes through the Human Idea then the entity will embark on an evolutionary trajectory specifically appropriate and unique for that archtypal form. Therefore, no human being as such ever evolved out of an animal and no human being will ever regress to an animal state." (403)
For Daskalos, this is an eternal and continuous process, and also, not limited to this earth. To account for the question often raised about population increase and reincarnation, he explained that:
"...there is continued communication between the noetic, psychic, and material level. Humans who are born now may come from other dimensions of existence. Those who die move to these other universes. We should not consider this a problem...since we know how a first incarnation takes place." (404)
But who/how was it determined which Spirit-Monads get passed through the Human Idea? This remains as unexplainable Astorias whether we were sent down or we chose to come down from Sach Khand! And once again, , if spirits passed through the Human Idea to become human souls, then how did they end up in the the nether world?
Knotty problems indeed! Fortunately, it is not necessary to know any of this to be happy, and it is unlikely, based on all the teachings out there, that anyone really knows or agrees on any of it either!
Still, let us see if we can sort out some of the given possibilities. For acceptance of one or the other can determine much of how we conceive our spiritual trajectory, path, and practice.
There are basically three types of evolution that have been proposed, as well as no evolution, and two types of "Fall". The first type of evolution is the Darwinian model. This has problems in that there has never been shown any change from one species into another, no evidence of in-between species, and neo-Darwinists have failed to show any evolution even at the molecular level. There are gaps in the fossil records, inconsistencies in the stratification levels of the earth, that are more consistent with a catastrophic or creationist model than one of gradual evolution over millions of years. In addition, the theory of "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" (in which the embryonic development mirrors all the stages of evolution up to that of man) has been shown to be false. The theory of evolution, moreover, has been left behind by much of scientific research. Dr. Marc Kirschner of the Harvard Medical School’s Department of Systems Biology, wrote: “...in fact, over the last hundred years, almost all biology has proceeded independent of evolution except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.” (405). Further, the theory of evolution, although widely accepted even among spiritual practitioners of Sant Mat and other paths, is difficult to reconcile with the story of souls falling or being sent down from Sach Khand. How did they get to Sach Khand in the first place, if they started out as lowly amoeba? A second view is supplied by theosophy, and sometimes by Brunton and perhaps Daskalos, in which the fall into animal bodies suggests a prior evolution for all life-forms except man. Essentially, man as soul entered a body when such a body was ready for it. This type of pre-existence of the soul was suggested by Origin, but it was rejected by most of the Church Fathers in place of the view of Genesis in which the body and soul of the first man was created simultaneously by God in a special Creation. This is also the view of Islam and Judaism, which implicitly rejects the eons long cyclical evolution proposed in Hinduism, as well the transmigration of souls from species to species, as well as, for most Christians except for a few outlying esotericists, reincarnation.
Some of this was discussed in Part Three in the section on Dietary Considerations. The general Semitic view of a one -time instantaneous special creation is rejected by philosophy and by inference eastern schools like Sant Mat, which speak of multiple cyclic creations and dissolutions. Brunton writes:
“There is no once-for-all creation at a certain moment in time by a First Cause, but only the appearance of it. There is a series of appearances, as beginningless and endless as the unseen Mind Itself. The word “creation” is inadmissible here for it signifies producing something out of nothing. No one, not even God himself, can produce something out of nothing. Therefore, the orthodox Christian view of a mysterious creation is completely untenable.” (406)
Again, this gets somewhat confusing when Sant Mat holds to this position but then tells a story of 9/10’s of the souls “in the beginning” falling from Sach Khand. One may ask, “which beginning?” But let us continue.
One type of "Fall" is the Christian story in which the sin of Adam and Eve resulted not only in their expulsion from the Garden of Eden [which the Orthodox Fathers consider an actual although quasi-physical place on earth], but a total change in the nature of the created cosmos [Romans 14] such that now men were subject to physical death, and there was a degeneration of the relationship between man and animal as well as animals with each other. This change was gradual over hundreds and thousands - but not millions - of years. According to the Orthodox Fathers, we do not bear the guilt or participate in the sin of our first ancestors, but because of them have been born into a corruptible world with a corruptible nature that inclines towards sin. After the Fall, man was subject to death, but still lived a very long time (up to nine hundred years), and animals were at first obedient to him. The soul was now separable from the body by death, and until the coming of Christ and his descent into hell and Resurrection redeeming mankind from the sin of Adam, all souls went to Hades after death - except for a few virtuous Patriarchs who went to a lower heaven termed the Bosom of Abraham. Hades is not generally considered the worst place one can go, and is not equivalent to hell as we imagine it from accounts in various Scriptures. But it is not an especially nice place either! Nevertheless, the sacrifice of Christ as the Logos was a special cosmic event that changed the structure of the worlds and opened the door for humanity to ascend higher and not be trapped in hell or Sheol or Gehenna after death. As we shall see, this has a possible parallel in Sant Mat with souls being trapped in a cycle of reincarnation in the lower worlds.
While in the Garden of Eden before his expulsion, man needed no food, the conditions outside of the Garden of Eden were such where the Genesis 1 plant diet prevailed among the animals, and for man, too, after the Fall. Man toiled by the sweat of their brow, amidst thorns and thistles, and no longer was there a constant and benign climate making life easy. After the Fall sexual reproduction began, and women experienced pain in childbirth. Eventually, things got so bad on earth with man's degeneration into savagery, largely through the lineage of Cain, that the Lord cause a universal Flood which wiped out all but the family of Noah and the animals he had brought into the Ark. Things weren't peachy after the Flood, predators resumed being predators, while animal husbandry began with man tilling the earth for the first time under Noah. A new dietary dispensation was given to man that allowed "all foods to be permissible." This diet continued until the time of Jesus, although apochryphal texts like The Essene Gospel of Peace - not recognized by the Orthodox - have basically claimed that Jesus in his ministry recommended a return to the Genesis 1 diet, along with permitted dairy products. This is the Sant Mat diet. One can see it is a yogic precept to help one return to the "Garden", but is not in the same camp as present day Christianity, which is not exclusively vegetarian.
Kirpal Singh reflects some of this when he wrote:
"The ancients [presumably post-Flood man] knew well that man, bird, and animal were all bound up with the same Karmic bond. Man with the thought of common brotherhood worked hard both for himself and for his pets. He tilled the land, grew fruits, and produced food both for himself, his bird friends, and his kine and oxen. But in course of time he first preyed upon the animals' milk and then upon their flesh as well...The milking of dairy cattle was permissible only after the cows were bred and treated with extra care, and sufficient milk was left in their udders for feeding their own off-spring, the calf. This residue of milk was allowed to man under special circumstance. This special rule was intended to prevent degeneration of the early civilization." (407)
While he was speaking of Indian civilization, the interesting phrase here is: "Man worked hard both for himself and for his pets." Cows and cattle were considered as pets on this view. And presumably they were only raised initially to help man with his work in the fields, and only later for their milk and later still for meat. The implication is somewhat different from the Biblical view where man had dominion over the domestic animals and didn't consider them as pets.
Kirpal then rightly condemns what in his purview were the rudimentary forms of factory farming:
“The only consideration of man, today, is to obtain as much milk as possible even at the cost of the calves themselves. In some places, he throws them in boiling water immediately after they are born, and applies milking machines to the udders to draw out the last drop of milk to keep pace with trade competition and profit-making.” (408)
He then concludes:
“Our budding reformers of today thrust such trade and practices on man instead of improving agriculture and rearing and developing livestock, both of which are harmless pursuits and could relieve the pressure of want so much talked about today.” (409)
But it must be asked, even in an improved form, are these really “harmless pursuits”? Even in a small family dairy farm, the majority of male calves must be gotten rid of, as they serve no economic purpose to the farmer. Even a poor Hindu peasant with only one milk cow is still implicit in killing by buying it from another farmer or rancher who does sacrifice the males, whether calf or full-grown. There is no need for 500 make cows to make 500 female cows pregnant, a few would do. And it must be remembered that a cow must be perpetually made pregnant to produce milk. So unless you are an independently wealthy gentleman farmer who has space for all cows born to live out their lives contentedly grazing on green pastures, there is no way to avoid some necessary sacrifice of life. And just as was discussed about the fate of chickens in Part Three, the only way to avoid killing, except perhaps for a few cows kept in zoos or on a sanctuary, seems to be to breed all cows out of existence. Are we then doing them a favor, advancing them to another, higher species of life? Or are we better just trying to do the least unnecessary harm, by supporting human animal husbandry, recognizing that no one gets out of here alive and some killing is unavoidable? To me this is not hair-splitting about a proscribed diet, but a real ethical problem needing to be grappled with. With all this in mind, then, is the following written by my beloved Master not a little too extreme of a statement - regarding diet - for sincere seekers going forward at this time in human history?
“Whither is man moving headlong? Is he not standing on the brink of a terrific precipice with an extremely sharp declivity, ready to topple down at any moment? He has, by his conduct, exposed himself recklessly to chance winds of Nature’s vengeance. Hourly he stands in danger of being swept to the deepest depths of physical and moral annihilation.” (410)
No doubt this is an indictment of humanity and its materialistic strife and warring ways as a whole, but one may ask,"all this for for eating an egg?"
I trust the reader will not feel I am singling out Kirpal Singh here; in our opinion this is but one more example of 'scare tactics' that Masters in times past have employed to motivate their disciples and general readers as a whole. The question is whether this is still useful or necessary for sincere seekers today. Not only do we have much more knowledge of nutrition than we did in times past, especially in pre-internet days, but being on the cusp of the Aquarian age the emphasis is moving towards self-knowledge more than belief, and the individual needs to experiment and find out what is true within his or her own body-mind as well as the soul.
Keeping all of this in mind, a second view of the Fall, then, is that of the Sants. Briefly touched on above, there was a 'Beginning', and a certain percentage of the souls in Sach Khand either were sent down or were given a choice to be sent down to see the new creation below. In some versions of this story Kal, "created from the finest hair of the Sat Purush," also came down and either became the creator of the lower realm (the demiurge) or its regent in charge. In either case he became the negative power, hindering souls return to Sach Khand. But not at first. At first, souls returned to Sach Khand as soon as they physically died. But a decision was made by Someone not to allow this to continue in the interest in serving divine justice or the divine plan or something or other! So Kal was granted a boon, that this automatic return would not continue, he could remain in charge, and only Sants by virtue of satsang and initiation, and without any show of miracles, could free the souls. Here one might say a kind of "Fall" occurred, not by man's sin but by divine fiat, as henceforth man was subject to the usual round of death and rebirth again and again, in a physical realm subject, as Buddha taught, to suffering, illness, decay, and death. But what the Buddha was describing, from a Christian perspective, were the conditions of life after the Fall and not part of God's "very good" original creation, which had been corrupted. It is not clear from Sant Mat literature if this was the world the souls from Sach Khand entered into, or whether it was original pure and became corrupted - which possibly might itself have been a reason for God's deal with Kal to keep souls entrapped here, at least for awhile - ?
A twist on this story has been suggested by Kirpal Singh that a second "fall" occurred lower down, in Devachan or Dev Lok on the mental plane, and men "donned coats of skins" (i.e., astral and physical bodies) but no moral lapse is necessarily implied with this descent either. But it is suggested by one quote where Kirpal said that, "technically speaking, even breathing is a sin," as mentioned in the section on diet in Part Three. By essentially advocating initiates eat a Genesis 1 diet to avoid accruing unnecessary karmas, Sant Mat is admitting some kind of "Fall", even though it is both similar and different from the Biblical version on at least two accounts. One, like earlier Catholic views, and that of Origin, Sant Mat holds that man as soul pre-existed the body. The Orthodox Fathers rebuke the Catholic school that proposed a deus ex machina position wherein God breathed or infused a spirit into an already existing animal form thus creating the human being Adam. They argue that this is wrong on two counts: one, Scripture says that body and soul were first created together; and, two, that saying otherwise is both legitimizing a process of natural evolution prior to the creation of Adam, which is unscriptural, and also denying the Biblical teaching that the Fall resulted in corruption and death not just for Adam and his progeny but for all of nature. The animals prior to man's Fall ate the green things and not each other, and they did not die nor did man. But nowadays Christian evolutionists want to have their cake and eat it, too. As does, it seems, Sant Mat. If the souls were sent down from Sach Khand, there was no sin and therefore no "Fall." And where did the bodies they entered into on earth come from? Were they spontaneously generated as needed as souls entered pinda, the earth plane, or were they a product of animal evolution? Most modernists, steeped in Darwinian evolutionary theory (the "devil's gospel," in Darwin's own words in a letter to his disciple Thomas Huxley) automatically assume the latter. And this would seem to be required, for the gurus to scare disciples with the prospect of falling all the way back down again the scale of creation (i.e., evolution). But most evolutionary teachings say that sin, evil, and death are all "natural" products of a self-generated and random, coincidental process over millions of years, and not the results of some kind of transgression of God's law. For what then would there be to be saved from?And so it is no wonder why Darwinian theory is imbedded in Marxism, modern 'woke' scientism as well trans-humanistic ideology.
Why did we leave Sach Khand only to return there?
Sant Mat, it might be argued, cannot believe in both physical evolution and a conscious descent of soul - without at least proposing a special creation of the human form. And this is a third view, that of the soul of man pre-existing on a higher plane and descending into a human body when that was ready for it, with a twist, provided by theosophy and in his younger days, Brunton and a few others. The theory is that the divine Overself of man, basically his divine soul, oversaw the entire evolution of forms up to the most advanced primates available at the time, and through the help of 'Venusian spirits', in one version, or a divine spark, in another, modified the glandular centers and brain of this organism making it suitable for a self-conscious human to inhabit it. All along the way a parallel evolution of forms and organisms had been going on for millennia, guided by divine intelligence and archtypes from higher planes or dimensions. Thus it is not primarily a blind physical process alone, but essentially one of intelligence and consciousness. But the human archtype or Idea was a special one above all others. When this 'ignition' in consciousness occurred, the first humans obviously were not in a fully developed state, and had their animal traits in full. This was thus a "Fall" from the spiritual realm, but, from a perspective of an evolution in consciousness, it was really an advance. Something is to be gained through a long travail in the lower worlds, and we do not return the same as when we left. Brunton writes"
"Our source is in the Overself, our growth is but a return to it, made fully conscious as we were not before. The immediate purpose of human incarnation and evolution is to develop a true and full self-consciousness at all levels from the lowest to the highest." (411)
This is the prodigal son story, but, of course, in its modified evolutionary form his view is adamantly objected to by the Orthodox Fathers, Sufis and other Middle eastern faiths, who hold to the Scriptural formula: "He spoke, and they came to be. He commanded, and they were created." (Psalm 148:5). They also object that theosophy still errs in presuming that the world was never created incorruptible, but was always corrupt and subject to decay and death from the beginning out of a primordial slime, as it were, even if guided by a divine Intelligence with a special creation of Man later. But this could be acceptable to the mystics of Sant Mat, inasmuch as it accounts for both a descent and then a spiritual evolution. And it would likely be acceptable to Hindus philosopher-sages such as Swami Vivekananda, in "Darwin, Evolution, and the Perfect Man" (412) and Sri Aurobindo in The Life Divine who articulated the position of evolution and its compatibility with Advaita Vedanta.
The Biblical Fall - The beginning of reincarnation?
Here is where possible common ground may be found, however, between the two prior views, as well as cohesion between spiritual evolution, creationism, and reincarnation. Sat Desh is supposed to be a created yet eternal realm, a contradiction in logic but perhaps not in truth. Is this equivalent to the meaning behind the incorruptible first Creation and Garden of Eden? Yet Sat Desh still exists one may say. But so is the Garden according to Orthodox Fathers, and visible to the great mystic seers among them.
After the Fall, in either scenario, man gradually devolved into an uncivilized if not savage state. Whether man had preexisted, or been a special creation, after entering the earth plane of existence and after the deal was made with Kal, reincarnation began. And a process of spiritual "evolution" also began. Not from the amoeba to man, but from degenerate man to more spiritually evolved man. From the Christian view of a special Creation and a Fall, I do not see why this cannot be a possibility, although they do not accept this. That is to say, as a hybrid position with the West rejecting transmigration of souls through different species, but with the East accepting reincarnation.There being only one life as Christianity proposes does not seem fair when considering the fate of someone born deformed or crippled or mentally deficient. Having reincarnation not being part of an original Design but a new development along the way seems as reasonable as anything else. As far as a story goes, for me it is more satisfying than the others, as a kind of both/and situation! Both in gnostic Christianity and teachers like Yogananda stories are put forth explaining that at a certain point in time souls became subject to reincarnation in the lower worlds as a punishment for sin or as a result of ignorance. But while seemingly reasonable, do we know whether either of these is true? And>how do we know?
This, in fact, is the problem with any of such theories: that they are reasonable! And the mind, by nature limited to the constraints of time, space, and causation, will never grasp what lies outside of those inherent limits. Nor will even mystic perception alone, perhaps, as evidenced by the contrasting views even of saints and sages.
And so while we may entertain answers to certain questions, much remains unanswered and may never be answered for the mind: "Is there a continual fall of new souls from Sach Khand?" "Is there a continuous creation of new souls as Christianity holds after the Fall now happens at the time of conception?" And, "if not, how does the world's population keep increasing?" And also, "what is the fate and destiny of the animals?" "Are they on a different evolutionary track?" And, as previously questioned in "If There's a Hell Below, We're All Gonna Go," "If getting a man-body is a precious boon, how do animals accrue the good karma to advance to being human?" For that matter, "if there is no Darwinian evolution, and certainly if there is, how do animal spirits even advance to the next higher species?" Brunton posits a guiding hand in terms of a divine 'World-Idea', basically his term for the manifested Intelligence of a 'World-Mind' or God. But what need for that, one may ask, if there was a special Creation of all species at once, as the Middle Eastern religions propose in their Scriptures? See how many unanswered mysteries there are!
This latter view of Brunton demands an extended separate treatment. It is a difficult one to lay out in detail, and we will rely mostly on a series of quotes from Vol. 16, Part 2 of Brunton's Notebooks. His own views sometimes seem contradictory and in both camps simultaneously. On the one hand, he says that a 'unit of life' separates from the Cosmic Life and enters a long upward evolution. On the other hand, he says that all during its long passage through the kingdoms of Nature the entity of man was pre-existent from above and destined to be man from the beginning. This implies that animals have a somewhat different evolutionary path. He says they reincarnate like man, but cannot end that process as is possible for man eventually to do until they reach the stage of self-consciousness and are possessed of an "I" thought. . Within this overview, I see it possible whether instantly or gradually, - for the forms of all species to be non-physically 'created' as the Bible asserts, or 'manifested' as philosophy maintains [insofar as 'matter' is not a real separate substance but rather a manifestation of Mind], and thus by a non-Darwinian Divine Intelligence. The animal spirits inhabiting these forms advance from one to another by both the development of the creative intelligence of their own consciousness and experience as well as the guiding hand of the World-Mind or God's intelligence which Brunton calls the 'World-Idea'. The same is true of the human mental and spiritual evolution with the added component of moral advancement and involutionary potential. But in neither case is there a true passing of one form into another.
PB says:
"At the center of each man, each animal, each plant, each cell and each atom, there is a complete stillness, yet it contains the divine energies and the divine Idea for that thing." (Vol. 16, Part 2, 1.213)
Likewise, in Yog Vashista it says, "There is a mind behind every particle of dust."
These two quotes imply an individual mind or soul, as part of a greater mind or soul. Yes even an individual mind behind each atom, for if there was only one mind for all atoms then all atoms would be the same, which they are not. It also gives weight to the idea, as common sentiment demands, that, yes, animals do have a soul, or rather, are a soul, but not yet a self-conscious soul. But unanswered by all is where do they go when they die? How can we account for the multiplication of souls, the increase in both human and animal populations, if a new souls are not created at the moment of conception? Do they come from or pass to other life-waves, planets or star systems? This was discussed in the end of Part Three, where we were left with a conundrum about how to deal with the dual problem of human cruelty to animals versus whether or not the only humane thing to do is to breed certain species (i.e., cows and chickens) almost out of existence, since there is nowhere for them to go now. If we do the latter, however, where do they go? Perhaps we can only do the best we can, and leave the big questions to God, the divine intelligence behind every particle of dust.
&nbs[p Does an animal, then, ever 'become' a human? The traditions diverge on this, and it is, again, a very difficult area of research on which even sages disagree. Can non-human animals become liberated? Ramana Maharshi said his pet cow Lakshmi had done so. Who are we to say? Let us try a few quotes to give a feel for the mystery presented to us. We are not saying we agree with all of it or know whether it is true or not.
"The human entity paradoxically contains within itself all lower forms of life from the very beginning, although they are quite different from the one it manifests when fully developed. The living, intelligent human entity preexists elsewhere, and takes up its physical residency on earth only when that is ready for it. From the moment this specific unit of life separated from the cosmic Life, through all the different experiences whereby it developed, and through all the different Kingdoms of Nature, its spiritual identity as Man was predetermined. (413)
"We may call it evolution if we wish but the actuality is not quite the same. The universe is being guided to follow the World-Idea. This is the essence of what is happening." (414)
"Because mind is the basal reality, all this majestic progression is nothing else than an evolution from lower to higher forms of intelligence and consciousness." (415)
"Animal life climbs ever higher in the scale of evolution, reappears in forms of a more developed type. That is one compensation for the manner of its death, which is so often to be devoured by other forms." (417)
"The race of apes came from a conjunction of of primitive man and female beast. It was a degeneration, not an evolution. It is true that we got our bodies, as Darwin says, from the best type of animals on earth through a utilization of them at the time of conception. The progeny was animal plus human." (418)
The latter of course is pure theosophy. They claim there was a spark of mind inserted into this body that made him a man and not an animal. And, a big question here is, 'who' utilized these animals at the time of conception? If it was ‘Venusian spirits,’ as Madame Blavatsky claimed based on her clairvoyance, then who created them? God? Then what was He doing during the long night of evolution - sleeping? Or just biding His time? Did He need to wait for evolution to prepare a body for man, but not need to wait to create a soul for it? Is there any real evidence for any such claims? These are questions the Orthodox Patristic tradition would ask of all those who propose any such version of ‘teleological’ evolution, be it Paul Brunton, H.P. Blavatsky, Alice Bailey, Rudolph Steiner, Henri Bergson, Teilhard de Chardin, Jean Gebser, or Ken Wilber.
Actually, not only theosophists but even some evolutionists have suggested this sort of view. In “Descent of Man - or Ascent of Ape,” John Gribbin and Jeremy Cherfas suggest that “the chimp is descended from man, that the common ancestor of both chimp and man being more man-like than chimp-like.” (419) Blavatsky said there was a fateful mating she termed “the sin of the mindless” (before the intervention of the Venusian spirits) that produces this result. But here again there is the problem of proving either a backward or forward ‘evolution’, and no such evidence in the form of missing links has ever been found. And Sant Mat must certainly reject such a view if it argues for a conscious descent of souls from Sach Khand, and not an unconscious descent into a dumb animal form needing the help of extraterrestrials to spark into humanhood! It would also have to admit that it was greatly at odds with a fundamental tenet of Christianity regarding creation.
An interesting question in regards to the theory of five elements presents itself. If only man has the ether element, responsible for self-consciousness, how could an animal ever advance through evolution to become man? Where would the ether element come from? Obviously, a theory of evolution will not work here. The basic gist is that if we wish to speak of where we are going we had better be sure of where we began. Here is another tenet of such occult evolutionary views:
"The waves of life have moved across other planets before arriving on this earth, and when this has outserved its usefulness, will move on again. The inhabitants of each planet belong to different stages of evolution, some higher and some lower. This applies not only to the human inhabitants but also to the animal and even the plant inhabitants. They pass is great waves from one planet to another at certain stages of their evolution, going where they can find the most appropriate conditions either for expression of their present stage or for the stimulation of their next immediate stage...There may exist on other planets creatures infinitely more intelligent and more amiable than human beings. We may not be the only pebbles on the beach of life." (420)
Again, sounds reasonable for those raised on Darwinism and Star Trek, but is there any evidence for this view? And how does it affect our practice? These are questions we are entitled to ask. The following quotes are easier and have an intuitive ring to them.
"Human beings are not only what their past births have made them, but also, in the most popular and least accurate language, what God has made them." (421)
"If left to their own capacities, many would fall back and fail to grow. But life or Nature does not leave them unassisted like that. For there is the World-Idea, the vital spark, the germ born of the World-Mind, the mental picture held by the higher power, which pushes each living cell to fulfill itself." (422)
"What we need to grasp is that although our apprehension of the real is gradual, the real is nonetheless with us at every moment in all its radiant Totality. Modern science has filled our heads with the false notion that reality is in a state of evolution, whereas it is only our mental concept of reality which is in a state of evolution." (423)
"For all of us, the witless and for the wise, there are unanswerable questions in life and we must learn to live with them. None of us is a full and finalized encyclopedia, for however far we may penetrate into the meaning of things we are always confronted in the end by the Unknowable Mystery. We do not know why the whole process of involution and evolution ever started at all: because we find that there is in the deepest metaphysical sense no becoming and process at all, there is only the Real. At the ultimate level there is neither purpose nor plan because there is no creation." (424)
That final quote should put the quietus to our thoughts...but there is always more! How's that - "the ant is closer to man than the panther"! Definitely a stimulating thought, or thought's end. Perhaps that was its purpose, and is not literally true. But if true, is there less karma in eating a big cat than eating an ant, despite what the theory of the five elements (four elements in the cat, and only two in the ant) implies? Are purported alien Insectoid races real? This might be important to determine if certain people have their way in having us eat bugs for protein. What do we really know?!
All these are imaginative speculations, I doubt if anyone really knows the answers, or if very many care. Perhaps to try to find them is a bunch of foolishness! However, once again it is asked, "if we did nothing wrong in being sent down here, why do spiritual teachings keep making us somehow 'wrong' or 'fallen?' Where was the sin? How can breathing be a sin? Or eating plants be a sin, if only the 'least' sin?! And what is the mad rush to "get out of the burning house"? How does one even know the answer to the question "what is truth?" will come that way? This is the sort of question, for instance, that a vedantin might ask the mystics.
It appears that many have been pondering this stuff for millenia. To summarize a few points discussed above, here is a letter from friend and fellow Sant Mat researcher Lars from Sweden with my replies:
"The Bible says that only man is created in the "image of God," while animals and plants are not created in the image and likeness of God. Therefore, Abrahamic religions such as Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe that humans and animals are different even at the level of the soul and have different paths. On the other hand, according to Hinduism, the soul of animals is identical to that of humans (but only at a different level of development of their consciousness). Many of the Western esoteric spiritual belief systems seem to be a mixture of both the Eastern belief in incarnation and the Western belief system of separation of man from animal even at the level of the soul (inspired by the Bible's statement that only man is the image of God)."
"By the way, the Sufi Bhai Sahib, who was Irena Tweedie's guru [frequently referred to in this book], was actually not a Muslim but a Hindu by birth. His father Raghuwar Dayal and his uncle Lalaji were the first appointed Sufi Masters of the Naqshbandi Sufi Order who came from a Hindu family and they never converted to Islam. It is documented that Lalaji was even influenced by Sat Mat and particularly liked the writings of Shiv Brat Lal (a disciple of Rai Saligram). Lalaji even taught the method of Surat Shabd Yoga to some of his disciples. They had disciples from both Hindu and Muslim backgrounds. So, I think that Bhai Sahib had to accept the belief of reincarnation found in the Hinduism along with the concept that man did not evolve from animals based on the statement in the Bible, in order to fit into both the Hindu and Islamic belief systems. Islam is influenced by the creation story found in the Bible, which separates man from animals."[Daskalos the Greek mystic also seemed to have had a similar hybrid view on this matter, accepting creationism as well as reincarnation].
"So yes, you're right that there are many different beliefs about how the soul has to go through different incarnations in the cycle of transmigration, and I don't know which one is the right one." [Me, too]. For example, Hindus believe that in the endless cycles of transmigration one can go both upward into higher forms of life (human form or into gods or goddesses) and downward into lower forms of life (into the animal kingdom). In the Srimad Bhagavatam, it is written that India's great monarch, King Bharata, because of his extreme attachment to a dear, had to incarnate and spend one life in a dear’s body before he again attained a human form. Whereas in the most Western esoteric spiritual belief systems, as for example Martinus [Danish mystic, 1890-1981] described, there is a logical, coherent world view that shows that all living beings are part of a living universe and take part in a continuous evolution towards higher forms of life."
"Even though we can go up and down in different forms of life, the general opinion is probably that we have to start in the lower forms. For example, even though Lord Krishna was an avatar, he had to be born as a fish, a turtle, and a boar before he could come as a human being and as Krishna."
This is now speaking pure mythology, which truth (if any) is lost in the mists of time, and assumes the Hindu theory on avatars is the last word on the subject. It is ironic, moreover, that doctrinal Christianity which dismisses comparisons of Christ with Hindu avatars, speaks of Christ in the very same manner - as a direct manifestation of divinity as an incarnation of the second person of theTrinity.
"While the Sant Mat tradition seems to claim that in the beginning, when the creation was created, the souls were free to come and go in the creation, they chose to take the human form. So it indicates that when the souls come to this creation they took the form of man first. The Sant Mat tradition says that the soul can only create karma while we are in the human form (because only humans have free will). For example, Ishwar Puri said in open Satsang that we create karma only in the human form, and this was probably the belief of Baba Sawan Singh and all his successors." [We also quoted vedantist James Schwartz and Brunton to this effect in the section “Karma and Grace”]
"According to this statement of Ishwar (which is probably the belief of most other Sant Mat gurus, too) the soul can only create karma while in the human from (since only man has a free will), while the animal has no free will, but act only on instincts (out of their control) and therefore do not create any karma. Our incarnations as animals are just the reaction of our karma created in our human from. Ishwar made the following three statements in the same Satsang: (1) Only a human being can create karma (2) Animals do not create karma, as they are only living to pay off their karma. (3) We can only live in this world due to our karma (and without karma we cannot live in this world). However, these three statements do not make sense if one believes in a development from a lower life from into a higher life form. Because you can only come to this world if you have karma."
Here Ishwar seems to be making the exception into the rule - that the ONLY way animals get here is if they fall from the human state, which is hardly believable, or reasonable. Yogananda, for instance, said it was an exception, and only for one lifetime as a punishment. Did Ishwar just say that out of his devotion to Sawan and because Sawan at one time said so? Moreover, what karma did we have when we left Sach Khand - assuming we left Sach Khand and started out there? None. So we go round and round.
"If an animals live in this world, it means that it already has received karma from a past lifetime, but since animals cannot create karma, how did they receive their karma?"
Yes, in this quote Ishwar implies animals were only humans that went bad. I wonder if there was more said in that satsang, because this seems to be a slip-up into another unworkable story. And just as we said in “If There’s a Hell Below We’re All Gonna Go,” how would an animal then get the good karma to advance to human? Answer: they don’t, it doesn’t happen that way. Puri seems to imply they just work it off and go back. But opinions vary so much on this one has to conclude no one knows exactly how or what happens.
"The only logical explanation to the above three statements is that all animals have been human in earlier life to receive their karma (as only human can create karma). It means that the first manifestation was man and only later came the animals, but this is not according to the evolutionary theory of modern scientists, which indicates that life began with lower life forms leading to higher life forms. It is also contrary to scientific evidence that argues that life began with lower life forms and that man appeared in history much later."
This may not be a serious objection, as per our discussion on various theories of evolution and problems within the mainstream accounts. Moreover, Genesis teaches that animals were created before man, and then man named them, so any school of Sant Mat that chooses to go against this teaching is making an (equally) extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. And if, as Kirpal Singh admitted in the book Heart-to-Heart Talks, that even in Sach Khand we will not find out the reason we came down here, is there any reason that by any extraordinary mystical means we will know the true story of evolution or creation either? Still some Sant Mat Saints claim that man came first, and that in the beginning when the creation was created the souls were free to come and go into the creation, and they chose to take the human form. Perhaps we did not have a physical body at that time, but a subtle body. Who knowns? PB and theosophy claim the "Idea of Man" predated his incarnation, even if there was an evolution or involution of different forms. All existing theories are quite complicated and each have problems. Lars concludes:
"So it is uncertain how the cycle of transmigration really functions and how it started. It is a subject of controversy." [Right!]
To conclude this section, a brief recap of some questions on what has been presented so far will be given. Another friend writes:
“Charan Singh said creation began with humans who devolved into lower species due to freedom to act. They acted in ways that made them devolve. Makes more sense spiritually than traditional evolution theory.”
Personally, I don’t see Charan’s theory - which is the same as Sawan's and Ishwar's - as stated making sense at all. If creation began with man who then devolved into lower species, did he mean to account for the rest of creation by saying 'man' kept on devolving all the way to single/cell organisms?! Obviously not. Or did Sawan only mean by animals the apes and quadrupeds? So where did everything besides man come from? Yes, theosophy does maintain that the great ape came after man and was a degeneration due to the mating of primitive man with female beast, but this is theory and also has not been shown to have happened with any other species. Even if true, once again, it is an exception. So if that was what Charan meant, all right. But he implies otherwise. No scripture says man devolved into all of the animals, or that they can only go back to being man when they have worked off the bad karma as an animal that they previously accrued as a human! How would they ever 'work it off'? This is rather a dismal view. Maybe it is true that animals do not have free will and as such cannot therefore create karma, but much more reasonable to then conclude either that (1) they are on a different spiritual evolutionary line of development than man, or (2) their evolution is guided by a World-Idea - or divine intelligence - which could account for their transitions in the scale of evolution without resort to volitional karma.
But still, how and where did man get created? The Bible says animals came first, and then man was created. So the above account from Sant Mat would be going against Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, based solely on the opinions of a master or two from the twentieth century. Hinduism, meanwhile, basically accepts some form of evolution. It all falls apart, however, when one starts talking about how “in the beginning” souls fell from Sach Khand. Which beginning? Kirpal said the spirits come out of the nether world. But if so, how then did they get to Sach Khand to be able to fall back into the lower worlds ? These stories basically dn’t work at all.
If we fell or were sent down after being created, what (bodies) did we fall into and how did they get there? From this point - the form side - one must then choose either gradual evolution or instantaneous creation, and there are pros and cons for each position. Or one could choose the biblical view that body and soul of man were created all at once [the idea that the soul was created before or after the body being the two ancient heresies according to Christian doctrine] - exactly one day after all other creatures (without self-conscious souls) were created all at once. All of this, however, is difficult to reconcile with our human sensibilities (animals have no soul?) and a supposed beginning for man in Sach Khand.
The most reasonable and reconciling view perhaps is from Brunton. It is still a story, but a good one. with it we can bridge the view of a fall from Sach Khand and also spirits coming out of the nether world. The answer is an impersonal one, however. Brunton says the transcendent Overself, rooted in the One, call it Mind if you like, projects 'units of life' from itself that go through all the kingdoms of nature, predestined to become man when they reach the reasoning phase and can consciously pursue enlightenment. There was no conscious decision by pre-existing self-conscious souls to 'check out' the lower creation; thus, there was no 'fall' as such, and kal had nothing to do with it. The divine purpose is the evolvement of the individual entities and not their meaningless return to the universal soup of oneness from which they came. They thus start their ascent as amoebas in the 'nether' world, and work their way back to conscious union with that Overself, but this is something they did not know before. So there is a gain for all the travail, but it can only be properly viewed as happening within the One and as part of its mysterious self-expression.
Ultimately, it is only imagined that the soul put itself or was put into association with the system of nature. The world is a manifestation of one's own nature, not an imposition by an alien source. In this respect then, the whole Sant Mat story is wrong. It is not like that at all. Rather, it is only at an early stage of one's journey is it felt necessary to detach the soul from the realms of manifestation. Later it is realized that these are but the expression of the Nous - the gnostic or knowing principle - within the soul, and one comes to non-duality and wholeness.
Oddly, R.K. Gupta, mentioned Part One, was partly right when he claimed that one could not go back to Sach Khand without taking on a body. Paradoxically, a body is needed for one to enter consciously into the unlimited nature of the Nous or Divine Mind already within the soul. It is part of the divine plan. Gupta was unnecessarily obscure when he posited a need for a body to be able to return to Sach Khand, solely to one who theoretically had descended to the supercausal plane. This is spiritual mumbo-jumbo reducing reality to a personal trap and personal drama because of an unverifiable something gone wrong. We may not know all the answers, but his story is just not satisfying. We will revisit this topic later.
The cat lady: on the karma of mice killing
"Kitty" - always alert
Supposing Ishwar Charan, and Sawan were correct that animals only came into being as a degeneration from human. Kirpal Singh went to a Christian school and taught us to “respect our younger brothers and sisters in the family of God.” He hadn't ever said, as far as I know, that man was created first, and animals only began as punished humans. At Sawan Ashram there were a few cats that wandered around and a German lady took to feeding them cat food with meat in it. Ramaji the Master’s helper saw this and, in his broken English, said, “Meat? No meat!" and started to take it away. The lady stridently said, “No! They don’t need to evolve so fast!” Ramaji may or may not have understood what she said, but he humbly apologized as was the nature of so many who served around the Master. and let her be. Kirpal reportedly was upset with her and told her to “mind her own business” and stop feeding the cats. Apparently he wanted them to be of use in capturing mice instead. The lady left soon afterwards. Disregarding thought of any inner play we aren't aware of that may have been unfolding between her and the Master in this situation, a perhaps odd question comes to mind: would the cats at Sawan Ashram have paid off their 'bad karma' faster by eating that lady’s cat food, and leaving the mice be, or by killing mice which is what Kirpal wanted? Interesting problem for a Sant Mat fundamentalist (lol)!
This relates to issues discussed earlier about the human and divine natures of a Master. An initiate writes:
"Gets us back to the basic (scary?) questions: Who and what is a Perfect Living Master? Can he/she ever make a mistake? Can he/she ever speak untruth or misunderstand disciples' true needs or real questions? Few initiates are willing to look onto this box for fear of excommunication by the Organizational Powers or perhaps by God Itself! I had the privilege of hanging out with several old Kirpal initiates who worked long and hard in his mission over decades who each obviously had rich inner experiences, sweetly reflected in their humility and unswerving devotion to him (instead of themselves and to personal specialness/importance). Each confided in me after years of working together with the following tickler questions: " Do you think the Master can be wrong or can make mistakes? Do you think that the Master is always a Master? Do you expect that everything the Master says is always perfectly from God?", ending up with "I can prove to you that he can and does make mistakes and even gets things wrong!” Personally I didn't care at the time and actually still do not care because I have learned and am still learning to not believe anything a Master says or does without personal experience confirmation in my life. This lesson is from Kirpal and was also reflected throughout his own life both before and after meeting Hazur! It is a 'scary strategy' that can open deeper truth within ones heart and soul, where blind belief can often lead to narrow mindedness and arrogance!”
It is clear to me, as discussed in Part Two, that 'up there' a Master may be perfect, but 'down here' they are not. That is to say, 'up there' we are brothers in Christ, but 'down here' we can (hopefully lovingly) cross swords'. And that reality should be totally okay with a disciple and not be expected to dogmatically and cultically believe it to be otherwise. To do so is to forget that a Master does not have to be ‘perfect' in our human imagination in order to be more than ‘perfect enough' to serve the purpose he appeared in our midstfor.
“Again, the promised touchstone from the Masters I have met has always been 'further confirmation' via personal experience, which may be overlooked by overzealous students.”
Overzealous - or naive - or dumbed-down? Or a little of each? Ramana Maharshi, for instance, never claimed that he knew everything or that every thing he said was right. Kirpal himself said that no one can know everything. Someone told me that Charan Singh told him that when you awaken you know everything. I cannot speak for Charan Singh and do not know what may have been the full meaning behind his words, but taken on its own in my view it is a misunderstanding of both what really happens as well as what is the nature of the domain of relativity. And because a master can sometimes point out things about yourself that no one could have known, and that are uniquely and personally helpful, disciples forget their own part in any follow-up discrimination and confirmation of what is really true for them. A PLM in Sant Mat means a Master can go to the fifth plane or above, not that he can go through a wood-chipper and come out whole, or that he knows everything. His very human brain limits the unadulterated transmission of what he may knows up there. It can’t be helped. Some are more transparent than others. It seems reasonable to say that there are degrees of mastery and integration. Yet is ridiculous if not sad that when someone new is appointed as the next master, they are immediately lauded as a PLM with a world-wide following, etc.. Perhaps it is time to retire that term? Cannot truth very well speak for itself?
Back to evolution. To me the most that can be concluded from all of this is that no one really knows the complete picture of how creation or evolution or neither came to be. Further, because of difficulties in both stories (i.e., we don’t know if there was evolution or if everything was created all at once) some have postulated, as far back as Pythagoras, that our true origin is somewhere far away in the galaxy, such as from Orion, or that, for instance, cetaceans (whales and dolphins)came from the Pleiades. All this is possible, if theosophy is right about planetary life waves moving on and so forth. But we still remain in the dark. One might ask, but couldn’t masters just find the answers in the Akashic records? No, if 'creation' initially began higher up, and in any case that is not the way Masters do things.
ET's
The question of the role of aliens and alien hybrids comes up. Sant Mat Guru scholar Agam Prasad Mathur told a friend of mine that compassionate aliens are watching us and will intervene by the end of this decade to help us. The problem is, Masters have been saying things like this since the 1960’s, with both positive and negative perspectives. Aliens are coming to harm us, or aliens are coming to help us. Mathur was therefore likely offering false hope, in my opinion. Watch the movie “They Live” with Roddy Piper for another perspective!
Yes there are many theories about aliens. H.P. Blavatsky in The Secret Doctrine said it was Venusian spirits that had a part to play in the creation of the man body, through some kind of work and/or meditation on the glandular centers of higher primates ("at the time of conception" as mentioned by PB from his theosophical days). Some “ET” literature even claims that the modern pink piggy was a DNA hybrid by ancient aliens between man and wild boar. They claim that’s why pigs were used for heart valves, so there is no tissue rejection. Therefore, if you eat a ham sandwich you are, in essence, practicing cannibalism. Sounds reasonable to me. Lol! The earlier theosophical theory was seemingly confirmed by the show “Ancient Aliens” on the History Channel which argued that a DNA gap with improbable evolution seems to indicate a mating of extraterrestrial with prehistoric homo-sapiens.
But then, there are many improbable DNA gaps in the fossil records which cast doubt on the materialistic theory of evolution itself. "Creationist" scientists have run rings around many of these evolutionists who have been afraid to debate them, so weak is the present theory. The views of writers like Zecharia Sitchin about the intervention of aliens as told in his Earth Chronicle series are captivating, but also have yet to overturn the basic scriptural accounts.
For any comprehensive view on creation and evolution, beings in other galaxies (if any) would need to be taken into consideration. Major questions arise, however. Do they have the same internal cosmology as we do in regards to Sat Lok and the inner planes? Who/what created them? Moreover, if they did have a role in our human evolution, how does that impact the existing creation theories that the various scriptures and Masters have told us? Was there a fall from Sach Khand only in our planet or universe? Was evolution preceded - or followed - by involution? Are these secrets really to be found in the Akashic records on the causal plane?
It seems that it doesn’t take much investigation to conclude that no one knows much about this at all, and that our human mind can hardly punch its way out of a paper bag! The least we might say to is that any explanation beginning from a strictly linear materialistic standpoint will certainly take us down a blind alley, and only a view of a nonlinear ‘mentalistic’ universe, that is to say, a theory starting from the standpoint of awareness, has any chance to all of even relative satisfaction. But even what that would be is difficult to say. Therefore, perhaps the only way out of this quagmire is the advaitic way, that is, to step outside of the mind. All of these questions: “when was the beginning, when will it end, when did I first get the ‘I-am-the-body-idea’ - for example, at birth, this morning, or many lives ago?,” can have only one useful answer: NOW. Objections such as, “but I remember having the I-am-the-body-idea yesterday,” are answered, “the memory of yesterday is happening NOW.” It is meaningless, moreover, to talk of a ‘beginning’ before the arisal of mind or consciousness because that implies time which didn’t exist yet, and consciousness is arising NOW, and so on. What about fossils? The idea of fossils is happening NOW. In essence, the point is that a false question cannot be answered but can only be seen as false. After that, it is up to us to step out of time and space and plunge into the unknown, obliterating the conventions of ordinary living and the concept of a limited person.
The problem for the mind here is similar to the mind’s fear, discussed earlier, of not getting beyond the reach of pralaya or maha-paralaya, or cosmic dissolution (even if that dissolution is billions of years away), because one fears death and destruction if he doesn’t get there before death. Such a fear is absurd, however, because to get to that place and realize the natural state of Awareness, in or out of meditation, itself requires the death of the very one - the imaginary inner being - who fears death! So it is kind of funny because in the ‘sales pitch’ for beginners the Sants play on that fear, with the result, however, that one is forced to engage in some form of self-enquiry sooner or later!
No disrespect is intended here.
CHAPTER THIRTY-EIGHT
The "Mauj"
In Sant Mat, while there is Absolute God, there is its expression, a personal God, the Sat Purush, of whom it has been said from time to time that the "mauj" or divine will has been 'changed'. Soamiji mentioned this theological concept on at least one occasion. Things have seemed to be loosening up in recent years - perhaps out of necessity, it is hard to tell - but see this provocative explanation of Sant Mat 2.0 which sent many Beas devotees into confusion. (http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2011/05/how-sant-mat-is-moving-from-duality-to-oneness.html)
The following statement, made to a friend of mine by Sant Darshan Singh, is a much more universal proclamation which is in line with that of other saints these days:
"I was with Master Darshan in his living room at the ashram in 1988 when he said ecstatically to maybe forty of us, “In fact all the souls in the universe are destined to go back to God!” I do not know if the “mauj”” has changed since Master Sawan Singh made the statements above, but I think that may be the case, since the living master can ask for these things and the inner circle of past masters will listen to the living master."
This is what Paramhansa Yogananda also had proclaimed, that "eventually all souls will go back to God - because there is nowhere else to go!”
For more mystery regarding possible changes in Sant Mat doctrine, Sant Darshan Singh was asked by the man who claimed to be his last initiate whether Jesus is a real person. According to him Darshan answered: “Of course. If you believe in him, he can wait for you on the other side.” In his last year Kirpal said: ”I tell you all are Satsangis.” Hhmm...What does this all mean? Darshan Singh telling a disciple that if you believe in Jesus he will come for you at death - is this a version of what Ishwar meant when he said that even if you in good faith believe in an imperfect master he will lead you to a perfect one? Or Ramana, who said that disciple is more important than the Master. So then does it matter who you believe in? [Note: we are not saying Jesus is not perfect, or no longer has a living role, although the latter would be the Sant Mat position].
Other questions arise: why did Ishwar Puri, a Sawan initiate, tell Leon Ponce - bless his soul - a Kirpal initiate, that "Sawan will be waiting for you on the other side" ? Sawan had taught that a successor would only bring you closer to your own Master. But as Ishwar was a Sawan 'successor', not a Kirpal one, perhaps he wasn't technically breaking that rule. Was it then because Ishwar didn't believe in Kirpal, or that Leon no longer did? Why did Ishwar rarely speak of Kirpal, and why didn't he tell Leon that Kirpal would be waiting for him? Is succession a convenient illusion with no necessary importance than to focus the faith of the followers who may not be ready to follow the Logos in their own heart - the light, said Christ, “that lighteth every man who comes into the world”?, i.e., the light of consciousness? I ask this seriously. Faqir Chand, for instance, was, it could be argued, not chiefly a successor of Shiv Brat Lal, taking on all his disciples, but merely tasked by him in a friendly way to update the teachings of Sant Mat, which he certainly did, for better or worse, to the point of not offering the traditional Naam initiation or promising to guide or take one to Sach Khand. Some see this as a negative, while others see it as a positive. The death of Kirpal led to many claiming to be his successor, with Darshan Singh getting the most followers. I ask the hypothetical question, even if Darshan wasn't the chosen successor, if he was enlightened in his own right would it not be acceptable for him to announce that and start his own sangat? Does that make all the other contenders illegitimate? Does an imprimatur have to come from above in the sense of an inner government of Masters, and is not at least some democratization of the process of enlightenment beginning to manifest in recent years? Are all seekers hapless and helpless if they find no perfect Master? Finally, from the Heart's perspective, does it really matter, if in the end one must have trust in his own inner being and not only in that of another man, or woman? These are questions some no doubt are asking, when confronted with obvious contradictions and controversies among different groups and paths. We have seen how strange it can get in Part Two with, successorship issues aside, Dr. Harbhajan seemingly stretching the teachings to their outer limits with bizarre new revelations spanning the scope of the entire iron Age in the name of his Master. Down on the ground raw truth - "getting real" - is becoming the pressing need of the day, and not ever-more expanding adventure and supposition from the imaginative realms of the being.
God's Will
The issue was raised as to whether there is a God whose "mauj" can change at whim. For example, just before his death Soamiji raised his surat and came back down saying that "the mauj had changed" and that he was not to die right away. Perhaps Soamiji didn’t mean this literally, and it was only another example of “a manner of speaking.” Does God's Will change? What would that even mean? Further, does a Master have to be perfect or free from karma to know God's Will? Or can they know or do God's Will - at least some of the time - without being perfect or free from karma? If a Master plans a tour and then dies and it is cancelled, is it fair to ask if they were omniscient or knew God's Will? What actually is God's Will? Can it be argued by some that this declaration of Soamiji was the start of some of the weirdness that creeps into these teachings - the notion that there is a Will of "a" Supreme Being that changes, and only Masters can go inside and know it? A Master's plans can change, but God's WIll? This idea can excuse a lot of merely personal changes of plan, or simple lack of omniscience, the recognition of neither in themselves which should derail a devotee's faith, yet unfortunately sometimes does. For a philosophic view, Brunton writes:
"It is impossible for a rational mind to believe that the Infinite and Eternal Deity is subject to momentary changes of mind or suffers occasional lapses from continuance of the cosmic laws."
"The Greek conception of the world being directed by Intelligence is surely higher than the Hebrew belief in a capricious, jealous, and angry despot of a personal God." (425)
Sri Nisargadatta sides with Brunton:
"What we call the will of God is not a capricious whim of a playful deity, but the expression of an absolute necessity to grow in love and wisdom and power, to actualize the infinite potentials of life and consciousness." (426)
Brunton also has an intriguing quote that may allow us a broader vision, depersonalized version of what "mauj" may imply. And this is in line with what might be called a "quantum" vision of the cosmos:
"It is a paradox of the World-Idea [Divine intelligence of the World-Mind, i.e., God] that it is at once a rigid pattern and within that pattern, a latent source of indeterminate possibilities. This seems impossible to human minds, but it would not be the soul of a divine order if it were merely mechanical." (427)
Thus, perhaps the Divine Will does not change, but a Divine Plan within that Will is subject to varying degrees of reception, as well as alterations of expression. This is not an excuse for cultism, but gives us latitude in trying to get a feel for the concept.
Returning to the "Fall" story, in one version souls were given the choice to leave Sach Khand to explore the lower worlds. In another version they had no choice. As far as the notion that souls initially fell from Sach Khand out of choice, is that philosophical? What kind of free will could exist for souls or consciousnesses prior to manifestation of vehicles of mind and matter, i.e., entitiveness, or ego? Is such a “fall” a divine matter of an actual evolution of consciousness or simply one of a sinful 'fall' and return to Paradise? Teacher Aadi seems to argue for the former:
"Why would a Soul decide to leave his original condition of pure oneness with the Divine, to experience forgetfulness and separation? This decision was not made in a conscious way and there was no one, in the first place, to decide. This decision comes from the impersonal wisdom of the Source itself - it is not made on the personal level." (428)
Bernadette Roberts also seems to agree: “We leave the divine unknowingly and return knowingly and in light.” (429)
According to teachers like these, something new is added upon realization: a recognition that was not there before, something the Soul never knew before. Thus it is not simply a realization of what was already known to be the case and forgotten. As mentioned, for PB it is an emanant of the Soul that entered into a process of creation, not the soul entire, and this emanant is what has an enlightenment that was not there before. Yet even this explanation is, in the end, another story - albeit more sophisticated and satisfying than one portraying us as originally self-conscious souls "in the lap of God" having 'fallen' from Heaven because of some sin or error. The mind simply can not get itself around the fact of its own ignorance. Sri Nisargadatta said:
"It is not that you know what you are and then you have forgotten. Once you know, you cannot forget. Ignorance has no beginning, but can have an end." (430)
So this remains mystery and paradox.
If there was any so-called Fall it took place at a much lower level than Sach Khand. Kirpal Singh in quoting theosophist Annie Besant implied that the so-called Garden of Eden, Svarga, Sukhavati, or Paradise of the various religions is ‘a sanctuary of special interest’’ in the mental realm referred to as Dev Lok." (431)
Note: in Buddhism, particularly Pure Land Buddhism, Sukhavati [Devachan in Tibetan] is a Pure Land, a kind of sanctuary manifested as it were ‘outside’ the ordinary universe, by the Buddha Amitabha (‘Infinite Light’ - or perhaps Amit ‘Abba’, ‘Father’ of Light) from which blessed souls may work towards Buddhahood. A primary disciple of Amitabha is Avalokitesvara, his regent, the Bodhisattva of Compassion, prophesied to attain enlightenment there, who saves from unbearable suffering as well as from the torments of hell all beings who call upon his name. The parallels with Christianity are obvious, and interestingly the renown Lotus Sutra in which this is mentioned was written between 50-150 CE, around the time the Gospels were formulated and also Buddhist councils were codifying the Mahayana doctrine - for which some speculate on a possible Christian influence. Other possible Pure Land sanctuaries are Padmasambhava's Copper Mountain.
Continuing, from this level of Dev Lok the souls fell into the physical realm, being “clothed in animal skins”, as scripture tells us, or bodies of flesh. This was Daskalos’ teaching also, except for him as well as theosophy there was no fall out of disobedience, but rather, a necessary descent for the purpose of the soul's evolution. But even so, this is still a story. Whether it was a sinful act of disobedience or not is one of the Mysteries we are apparently left to fathom. On the general subject of how or why souls left Sach Khand, however, when pressed Kirpal opined:
“Why He made the world, who can reply? Why He sent us here was His will. There is action, and therefore reaction. The first action was God’s which reacted in the shape of sending us down. We did nothing wrong. We were sent down. That was no reaction. In the world we sow something and reap, isn’t it so? What seed have we sown? We have remained in Him. It is His will. These are not my words. These are words of the Masters. Now we are reaping what we sow. But what did we do before coming down to the world? [Q: But do You hold out the hope that at least we’ll get an answer at perhaps the top of the mental realm or the causal? Is the answer there?] Past that. Not there either. There you will come to know only the reaction of your own past births. [In Sach Khand the answer is available?] Sach Khand, no. On the causal plane you can have the reason you’ve been born, reborn, here, there, what these things are. But this very question of why we were sent down into the world cannot be substantiated. It is for God alone to reply. He sent us. Why did He send us when we did not do anything wrong. Did you do anything wrong? What sin did we commit before being sent down here?…But how did the creation come into being? Did the seed precede the fruit or did the fruit precede the seed? Did the egg precede the hen or did the hen precede the egg?…No reply, you see. It is all delusion. It is all maya.” (432)
This is a fascinating disclosure. First, imagine reaching causal consciousness. In our deluded normal state we imagine, “oh, that is where I will know my past lives.” But upon reaching that level, the one - the ‘I’ - who thought like that is seen as just one more such life, so we are talking about a very impersonal type of consciousness. Here free will and destiny are seen as one. The current ego never reincarnated as such, one is basically a new person. That which can see its past lives, that awareness, is very deep down. And then, rising higher, he says that even in Sach Khand there is no answer to the question of why a soul was sent down. He says one must go and ask God, but, of course, at such a level the questioner as such disappears and the question, too, is essentially unanswerable. Where in all this is there room for anything like 'omniscience' - as we imagine it? The realized soul has been said to be of the nature of 'Pure Knowledge', which is sometimes considered as omniscience, but Parabrahman beyond that is characterized as 'No Knowledge'.
So there is mystery, for which stories have been created. In whatever case, however, the help of a master, or one who has realized, is not negated. It is still, when auspiciously actualized, of great importance in seeing ones process through to completion. Grace is still needed. But the human intellect and spirit have gone through an immense growth over the past few centuries, and the dharmas are struggling to adapt themselves to that. Old stories have to a great extent outlived their purpose, and now more often than not obfuscate what is actually happening in individual souls. In the West, we are taught there was a great Fall for which we are still playing the price from original sin. In the East, the problem has generally been expressed as the making of a simple error in recognizing reality. Sant Mat has presented the “problem” as a curious mixture of both of these. But in all cases the end result - our current predicament - has often been making us “wrong,” rather than simply living out a particular stage in human evolution. This puts unnecessary binds on the human heart.
My friend Saniel Bonder has termed this “the Great Conflation,” by which he means “the marked tendency in spiritual traditions to criticize and stigmatize human suffering and ignorance as an existential error or failure - for instance, with concepts like original sin, samsara, and karma - rather than [at least holding simultaneously a viewpoint of] seeing them as evidence of a nearly species-wide developmental un-ripeness for which no one can possibly be to blame.” It is impossible, for various reasons as previously discussed, to prove or verify that “9/10’s” of the souls came down or not, or how it may have happened, nor is it possible to prove or verify there was a Fall from a primordial Garden of Eden, whether super-physical or astral-mental, for which we are now guilty. This is no call for a moral relativism divorced from the heart, or a denial of the need for basic cultivation of virtue. It is simply this. Conflation in the dictionary means: “the merging of two or more sets of information, texts, ideas or opinions into one, often in error. It is defined as fusing or blending, but is often misunderstood as 'being equal to' - treating two similar but disparate concepts as the same.” This is going on in spiritual circles and/or schools all the time. “I feel bad and therefore I am bad and this or that path has the answer, formula, or remedy for that.” But what when that doesn’t work? Rather than freely exploring the matter further apologists of one stripe or another step in and try to justify methods that may have outlived their value or not be efficient anymore or in a particular case. This is true not only here in Sant Mat but can even be seen in some schools of non-duality as well.
It is time to raise the bar in the articulation of spiritual truths. This is one globe, one universe. The explanations of long ago - often tentative ones even back then - no longer serve us so well. Much in the traditional teachings remains of great value, but much needs upgrading. Provincialism and fear are no longer valid bases for a spiritual path, nor excuses for the promulgation of half-truths. Sant Rajinder remarked after attending an interfaith council a decade ago, “meetings like this show us how little our differences really are.” Yes, what he expressed was noble and right, but how much does much of Sant Mat really teach this? How much is universality championed, and how much are archaic idiosyncrasies presented as absolute Truth? Let’s be honest. The suffering is too real, the need for understanding and tolerance too great.
More on the Moharchap and the chosen ones
Regarding marked souls, teacher Ishwar Puri said that the concept of being marked specifically means that one is destined to be under the care of a particular master, not that he is one of the only ones 'chosen' by almighty God Himself. Although, to the devotee the difference may be immaterial, and such destiny in either case is certainly not to be undervalued or dismissed as trivial. David Hawkins, author of the excellent Devotional Non-Duality and many other books, basically agrees with Ishwar:
"It is important to know that it is extremely rare for a human to be committed to spiritual truth to the degree of seriously seeking Enlightenment, and those who do make the commitment do so because they are actually destined for Enlightenment." (433)
But, as mentioned, it has been claimed that there is a so-called stamp or “moharchap” on the forehead of chosen souls that is visible to a Master. Is that literal or only a metaphor for something intuitively grasped by the unerring inner vision of a Master? I have yet to hear a satisfactory full explanation. In Sufism, such a concept has been admitted. Bhai Sahib said:
“People who are intended to realize God in this life have a sign on them.” (434)
So it seems there may be something to it, although I am inclined to feel that Ishwar and Hawkins' explanations are closer to the truth.
Kirpal Singh once said, "I tell you, the man in whom the need to solve the mystery of life has arisen is fit," and "When a true Master accepts a disciple, that person’s status changes. We were lost wanderers whom not one befriended; accepted by the Satguru, we were then recognized. He becomes an “accepted” soul, under the care of the Master." (435)
We do not claim to know more than the Masters, but suggest that the articulation of this concept may be raised to a higher level, such as whoever is interested in their spiritual nature can be said to be 'marked', and destined for more rapid transformation, especially if they request it.
We maybe chosen, but we must choose God again and again
Then again, the Holy Bible says, “many are called, few are chosen,” and “you didn’t choose me, I chose you.” (verses in Matthew and elsewhere). Sant Rajinder Singh said, “the Master’s love for you began long before you ever met him.” And Sant Kirpal Singh said, “Master doesn’t take everybody.” So there is somewhat of a mystery here. Each Master is said to have those he is to take under his wing and work with. And everybody apparently is not ready to chose, or be chosen, at any given time. Furthermore, everyone even long after choosing or being chosen, can forget his “conversion”, his “saved” status, and resist the Master’s grace if it takes a form not to one’s liking! So the path is a very delicate matter. One must choose God again and again, although the Master never leaves him.
From within the Christian tradition, Guilllore affirms this aspect of being chosen:
“Origen says that God is not content to leave His chosen ones in the ordinary easy paths of holiness; the bulk of his flock may be left to follow a straight road, without any special hindrances, but those destined to great things are called apart, and led by strange rude ways, that they may learn how entirely they are children of adoption…Do not imagine, St. Bernard says, addressing some such, that you will be allowed to rest in a common-place holiness. God’s grace calls you to something higher, and you must meet it halfway, or He will smite you. If you will not be lifted up, He will cast you down. The nearer you are to God, the more He requires of you.”
But he softens his message by saying:
“He who would meet such cases with tender compassion and help, must remember that human weakness exceeds all we can express, and that those who are pre-eminent in goodness are not exempt from such weakness; that the holiest may fall to the lowest depths, and that none are kept from falling save by the wholly undeserved Grace of God…If he be a man of experience and tenderness, the director will go yet further in comforting those who fall. He will reflect that perhaps in the hour of temptation the sinning soul was left in a manner to itself, because God, Who never really withdraws His Grace, sometimes leaves the soul seemingly to itself, in order to cure it of all tendency to self-satisfaction, and to teach it what are the sad results of its own weakness…Again, God sometimes allows those who are destined to govern others to fall grievously, as St. Teresa observes, in order that they may learn by experience to be tender and pitiful towards their brethren’s faults.” (436)
CHAPTER THIRTY-NINE
The Map of Consciousness (0-1000); Ramaji, Nisargadatta, David Hawkins, Zen, Sant Mat; The Conference of the Birds; Many modern aspirants do not pass through archetypal stages of the spiritual process in the same way as those on traditional devotional paths have; Self-inquiry, radical faith, self-surrender; the Absolute
We have spoken lot about maps and planes and stages, both in Sant Mat and popular teachings such as non-duality, Ramana Maharshi, Sri Siddharameshwar, Sri Nisargadatta, and more. It is one thing to say a person will or should have certain experiences, and in a particular order, but the fact is that the path is not so linear. Faqir Chand said that there is a unique unfoldment for each individual, and most enlightened teachers agree. As has often been said, “The Map is not the territory.” There seem to be basic stages that are universal, but it may be best, at least tentatively, for satsangis to regard experience of various inner planes and such not so much as places where we will go, but stations of inner development, transformation, and understanding. At least that way we may be able compare and contrast them with those of other systems. All roads lead us home, but sometimes on ones chosen path unexpected experiences and influences outside of the given map arise, and lead to confusion in the aspirant. The feeling that somehow he has either gone astray or is doing something wrong may arise, while it may simply be that he is being led to a deeper self-understanding. That is a main reason for the writing of this book, to give some assurance that one is not lost or betraying his Master by seeking help or understanding in other places when needed. After all, in ancient times many Gurus sent their disciples elsewhere for further training. This was especially so with their children - as with King Janaka - because of the liability of intimate association affecting their objectivity. And with the internet and global understanding increasing, this seems more and more inevitable. Moreover, there is certainly truth in the statement of Kamal Dayal (current successor from Baba Faqir Chand), that “only the Doctor is good who is available to monitor the treatment of his patient. And if the treatment is not good, given a fair trial, then the good Doctor will change the medicine.” To satisfy these needs is a real problem in very large lineage where personal contact and correspondence is at a minimum. Hence the need to broaden the perception of who ones Master is and also include good supplementary teachers to help one along the path. They need not be gurus, but good teachers. It seems reasonable to conclude that any view contrary to this may be a cultic one.
One such map of spiritual progression, quite simple, was given by Sri Nisargadatta. His path goes from the awakening to the Presence and what he calls, “I Am I" or "I Am Myself,” (rather than simply "I am the empirical ego" - which itself can be considered a stage of individualization beyond the herd-consciousness of non-human animals); followed by the embrace of “I Am All” (or “I am the world,” or “the world is in me” which might be called cosmic or universal consciousness/identity); followed by the dropping off of that cosmic identity and passing through the “forgetting” or “ignorance” of the causal body to abide as the “Pure I Am,” (the state of Self-Knowledge), then followed by the "forgetting of this forgetting" and realization of the Absolute, which is only the natural state. Similarly in Sufism there is fana, or dissolution (of the ego), followed by fana-el-fana, or the "dissolution of the dissolution."
This follows closely the model of Nisargadaptta's Guru, Sri Siddharameshwar, who in Amrut Laya: The Stateless State spoke of the going beyond the three bodies: physical, subtle, and causal, to reach the Great Causal Body. The causal body refers to the state of forgetfulness and ignorance of all prior knowledge, both ordinary and ‘cosmic.’ The Great Causal Body is the state of Self-Knowledge, Consciousness, Satchitananda, the first ‘step’ of the Absolute out of itself. While the source of all the other bodies, it, too, in turn must look up towards its own Source. This is attained by a “forgetting of the forgetting,” which means a state where bondage and liberation are both forgotten. This is not just an intellectual procedure but a process of profound vichara or investigation.
The Great Causal Body, where one may feel “I am Brahman,” or “aham brahm asmi,’ is in fact the absence of ego or a sense of separate self. It is the imposition of a subtle sense of “I Am” on the Absolute or Self. Thus many non-dual realizers who genuinely awaken to “no-self”, are still actually but unconsciously identified with a subtle sense of self, or what might be called a “no-self” self. They have a sense of freedom but the ego itself is still in hiding. There actually can be a number of levels or stages of no-self or ego-death up to the final No-Self/Universal-Self. Only with further maturity and purification does this become clear in many cases. According to Siddharameshwar the Greater Causal Body must be “polished” or “scrubbed” to make it pure and stable before the Absolute can be realized. Until then one may vacillate between causal ignorance and Self-Knowledge. Ramana would say this will continue until the vasanas are eradicated. This was discussed earlier in Part One.
Ramaji in his book 1000 expands on and clarifies this model with a Map of Consciousness with LOCs (Levels of Consciousness) on a scale of 0-1000, similar to a model of David Hawkins but focussing more on non-dual stages (although devotional paths can be included in this model also), simplified as follows: LOC 500’s - basic spiritual seeking; 600’s - the first breakthrough into non-duality, or the realization that the empirical ego is not running the show; realization of “no-self” or local spontaneity; 700’s - expansion into universal self, and a stage of great purification based on understanding the necessity and implications of that expansion, and to a degree incapable before an awakening to non-duality; 800’s - here a great void passage leads to the “Pure I Am” (i.e., a forgetting and causal-ignorance, followed by “divine unknowing”, with divine love enjoyed; no more separate me, you, and world, but a state of non-dual devotion or devotional non-duality where there is only Self and God, characteristic of great saints); 1000 - the Absolute (no world, no self, no other, no-mind; either the mind or ‘I’-thought is dead or it has become harmless, and all arising is known only in and as God or the Self; in practice, this is Fullness and Duality Divinely "Resurrected"). Note: “no-mind” does not mean there are no more thoughts; they may still arise but do so spontaneously with no sense of a mind or “I”-thought generating them. Sawan Singh said "the Master's mind is motionless." He did not likely mean that no thoughts ever arose. But if he did, that is a lesser yogic goal, and not that of the jnani. It is acknowledged that usually there is a progression in practice from mind-stilling, to mind-isolation, to no-mind (whether thoughts continue to arise or not). Ultimately the mind or thoughts are recognized to be not other than consciousness. The teaching of Sant Mat that they are different is an expedient given at a lesser stage of practice.
Papaji also mentions similar stages, and also clarifies no-mind. First, he gives a 'creation' story:
"...consciousness sometimes wants to look at Itself to see what it is. A wave will arise in consciousness. It will ask Itself, 'Who am I?' This wave that arises in consciousness imagines Itself to separate from the ocean. This wave becomes 'I', the individual self. Once it has become separate, this 'I' degenerates further and starts to create. First there will be space, the vast, frontierless emptiness of infinite space. And along with space, time will be created, because wherever there is space ,there must be time. This time becomes past, present and future, and from these attachments arise. All creation rises within the past, the present and the future. This is called samsara."
"...At some point an intense desire for freedom will arise. This desire will arise from consciousness Itself. Originally there was a descent [speaking metaphorically] from consciousness - from the 'I' to space to time to samsara. Now there will be an ascent. As you ascend, attachment to physical objects will go, then vital, then mental, then intellectual. Finally you return to 'I' alone. This 'I' is still mind...This 'I' has rejected everything. It exists alone with no attachments. It cannot go back tp the world of attachments, to samsara. It has a desire for freedom. It wants to go back to its original place. This 'I' which rose from consciousness is now returning to consciousness. It takes the decision, 'Become no-mind now,' and with that decision the 'I' is gone, mind is gone. The 'I', which is the mind, has been rejected, but there is still something there which is between the 'I' and consciousness. This in-between thing is called no-mind. This in-between entity will merge into consciousness, and then it will become consciousness Itself...Gradually, slowly, this no-mind will merge back into the beyond. But how it happens, I do not know." (437)
The acute reader may recall from the section "Charan Singh versus Ramana" in Part One, that Charan said at the fourth plane there is no-mind, but it was still a place where one can get stuck and not advance to Sach Khand. He argued that Ramana was in fact at that level. Papaji would certainly argue that Ramana was not stuck there, while admitting the distinction in levels:
"Though everything has gone when you reach this state, it is not the final state. 'No-mind', which is related to mind, is still alive...If you can reach the state of no-mind, you have done very well. When you reach this stage your work is over, because from then on, it is the task of the beyond. It will take hold of you and work on you in a very beautiful way. It will show you a different beauty, a different love and a different form that are so entrancing, you will always be engaged with It. It will be engaged with It. Even if the body leaves, you cannot get rid of It. This can be described as the Ultimate, as 'Ultimateness'." (438)
Going beyond no-mind as Papaji describes it seems the equivalent to the 'forgetting of the forgetting' of Siddharameshwar, the passage from the realization of the Great Causal Body (The "I Am', self-luminous, 'consciousness of consciousness') to the Absolute (Parabrahman).
Sant Mat with some modification can also fit into these models. The only wild card is that on this path so much purification goes on under the surface that one may not always be able to feel, enjoy, or barely notice any of the above ‘non-dual’ awakenings, particularly those at lower levels, that may occur along the way to the goal. He may have them, but spend so much time in the purification of karmas that he will envy those teachers of advaita who seem to have an easy time and promote a quick realization. He need not worry, many of them will likely play catch up later. A specialty of Sant Mat is said to be eradication of karmas. One also remembers the teaching sometimes given that 95% of the Master’s grace is left for the time of ones death. The latter is probably not entirely true; re-worded it may be more precise to say that 95% or much of the grace may not be fully noticed until then. Nevertheless, Sant Mat classified under the above map of Ramaji might be viewed as follows: 600’s - awakening to the inner Master’s presence; 700’s - cosmic or universal consciousness, astral and causal bodies transcended; 800’s - Maha Sunn (cosmic consciousness forgotten, super ignorance with a void passage followed by transcendental unknowing, no-mind, and Divine abiding (Supercausal to Sat Lok); 1000 - Anami or ‘Beyond Anami’ (Stateless State, or the Absolute No-Self).
Simplifying the model even further, in Zen, first (levels below 600) “rivers are rivers and mountains are mountains.” Then (600-800), “rivers are not rivers and mountains are not mountains.” Finally (1000), once again, “rivers are rivers and mountains are mountains.” The last stage is not the same as the first, but the product of a great ordeal. The ordeal is not a positive one, but rather the negative one of removing blocks and hindrances preventing realization of simple being. This then leads to the “return to the marketplace” stage, or the “Truth is above all but higher still is true living” of Guru Nanak. It is not so much the lifestyle one will now live but an understanding based on fundamental realization: both bondage and liberation are forgotten.
Is one then always in the Absolute State? It seems to be a point of some difference among sages. Some say yes, others have a more nuanced view. Samartha Ramdas writes in Dasbodh:
“Understand that the absence of the attitudes of mind is “no-mind” wherever the awareness of myself as an entity is dissolved. That is called “Spiritual Knowledge (Vidynana). [Here the “I AM’ is the absence of a sense of separate self, but is yet a ‘parasite’ on the pure nature of the Absolute]. Where Ignorance (Avidya) has disappeared, and Knowledge (Vidya) does not remain, and even the higher Spiritual Knowledge (Vidynana) dissolves, this is ParaBrahman, the Absolute Reality.” (439).
This is the understanding of the Absolute given above. But he also says, appearing to retreat from a strict identification with the Absolute:
“Beyond this “Identification with the Self” there is only the eternal Absolute Reality. This is the understanding that the Self always has of itself.” (440)
The latter comment is similar to that found in the views of Plotinus. There, the realized Soul as Soul knows that its prior, the Intellectual Principle or Nous (i.e., God), and higher, the One, exist. It knows that God IS. The ego can’t know that, only the Soul can. It doesn’t become that Principle, but by virtue of its inviolable being it knows it as its Source. Thus, while one can abide as that in contemplation, in order to function in the “lower” worlds he must return and be Soul.
It can be confusing, as our modern conception of Soul is not that of the ancients. Plotinus states: "The gradation of the One, the One-Many [Nous], and the One and Many [Soul] is eternally fixed, and is an expression of reality.” (441) These are the three Primal Hypostases, distinct but inseparable. This is quite different from Advaita, but not so dissimilar from Sant Mat. There, one is liberated in Sat Lok, and can be absorbed by stages in Anami or Beyond, but returns to be Soul in ordinary life, although realizing the essence of the Absolute in himself and paradoxically as himself and as Saarshabd permeating throughout all creation. It is perhaps most critical to understand that this realization in its fullness is not to be known (and perhaps cannot be known) in the meditative trance state alone, but in the midst of ordinary active life.
The Conference of the Birds
It may be difficult, but perhaps not as complicated as it sounds. The gist is wonderfully depicted in the classic, Conference of the Birds, by the Sufi poet and mystic Attar. This is an allegorical description of the spiritual journey and the paradoxical nature of the final stage. A group of birds are told about their majestic King named Simurgh and wish to find and see Him. A bird named Hoopee agrees to help him in their quest. Along the way the birds must pass through five valleys and two deserts [the ordering of the stages is different, but could it be five planes and Sunn and Maha-Sunn?]. The five valleys are Quest, Love, Knowledge, Detachment, and Unity. The two deserts are Bewilderment and Annihilation. Along the way many birds get disillusioned or weary and fall away from the quest, but some persevere on the encouragement they receive from Hoopee. In the desert of Bewilderment they forget everything they knew about existence. In the desert of Annihilation nothing remains of the self. Finally they arrive, purified, and are ushered into the King’s chamber by one of His personal servants. Once inside, however, the birds find no King, only themselves, thirty birds (the actual meaning of the word Simurgh). The meaning of the story is that in looking into themselves they found the King, and in finding the King they found themselves.
Remember, Kirpal Singh said one first attains Self-Knowledge, and then comes to realize that Self-Knowledge is God-Knowledge. Plutarch said the ancient mystery schools placed "Know Thyself" above the door of their temples because it was a Divine Precept. A mystery and paradox, but could it be otherwise?
Looking back at it now, in 1973 while with Kirpal Singh I had a non-dual awakening, but luckily had the example and ideal of completion in Kirpal (1000) to keep me from being too complacent. It was an understatement that I had much purification and human growing to do. There were a few mystical experiences before and after initiation, but they didn’t change me at the core. This time, however, “I” was awakened permanently from what I was before - to what I as yet wasn’t sure - but still, found myself still hurting plenty inside and was full of unconscious arrogance, pride, lust, fear, and all the rest. This is not uncharacteristic of what have come to be known as ‘no-self’ awakenings. One has still not embraced the ‘other’ fully and opened the heart. One still has a self - perhaps, as suggested, a ‘no-self self' (!) - and, moreover, still believes in that self, others, and the world. This is not great enlightenment or liberation. It is possible to have a non-dual awakening with the heart barely opening at all. Often that comes much later, and gradually. Despite a degree of freedom, the ego is still lurking around or in hiding. This is often not understood in non-dual circles, and the languaging of such awakenings vary a great deal and can make enlightenment seem to be a simple and easy thing. Nevertheless, a Guru, once given permission by his disciple (one way of another, knowingly or unknowingly), can be quite ruthless in his efforts to mercifully liberate him from a posture of devotion and surrender when that is no longer called for, in order to serve a higher purpose. This can be a disconcerting time, but may be necessary if a further advance is to be made. Of course real devotion is not gone, although it may seem so, but is sublimated to a deeper, more serene and less emotional level. This can be misunderstood by both yogis and advaitins alike.
Satsangis, in any case, are mistaken in viewing all such awakenings as bogus, but the other groups often belittle the heart and guts of the path - even as plainly written about in their great traditions.
Also, due to the influence and developments in science and human development, many do not pass through the archetypal stages of the spiritual process in the same way that those on devotional paths often do. Specifically, devotees on such a path as Sant Mat with a religio-theological bent who pass through stages - even essentially non-dual stages albeit with a “quintessential” dualistic relationship with Deity (800’s in Ramaji’s map) - will view those who do not do so with scepticism, even though the stage in a different form is in fact passed through. For instance, after passing through the universal-self stage (whether cosmic consciousness, or seeing others as oneself), one may realize the pure “I Am” as Consciousness (which in effect become the object of their devotion), while the more religious devotee sees nothing but themselves and their God/Guru and likewise basks in the warmth of the oneness of this ‘primal dyad.’ Both seekers are essentially at the same stage, one speaking about Consciousness or True Nature and the other about God. But the final stage is the same for all. And that is one where the self, other, world, God, Guru, and all concepts are lost leaving “nothing” behind, which of course, is not nothing as one imagines but Reality as it IS.
Bernadette Roberts in her books such as The Path to No-Self and What is Self? argues that the stage of ego-death or no-ego is not the same as the stage of no-self. For her, no-ego is the unitive state of the great Christian mystics and a similar state in other traditions (but which traditions she admits she has not followed in great depth), with no-self being the falling away of even that unity. No-ego results in the experience of our 'true self', according to her, but this is not yet no-self or sunyata, for instance. She admits people have experienced no-self before but says that in her opinion it is nowhere made explicit in the traditions. Her writing is excellent but difficult. In her view, the divine experienced in the state of no-ego is still dependent on a sense of self, thus it is not yet the realization of no-self which begins the true realization of the divine, in her case couched in the language of Christ and the Trinity. For her, one must live that unitive state of no-ego 'in the marketplace' of ordinary life for years before the final falling away of a sense of self. This much is good and consonant with many traditions. The ego in her perspective is a state of reflective consciousness, but the falling away of that, profound as it is, does not eliminate a deep unconscious reflexive consciousness which is the sense of self. She prefers the Buddhist no-Atman as closer to no-self than the Hindu Atman, which she feels is just the 'self' of the unitive state. But are they really so different? Here is where, in my opinion, she seems to resort more to a popular understanding of terms used in these traditions than the actual most esoteric scriptural meaning.
Ramaji simplifies and cuts through some of this confusion with his map of consciousness. For him there is simply a sliding scale of transcendence of the ego and/or self, as well as of no-self. Roberts insists she is not talking semantics, that ego and self are radically different, but much depends on how they are defined. Ramaji delineates stages of non-dual realization - stages of no-self - with more or less ego still present until the very end of the realization process. Thus, at level 600 the reflexive consciousness, in Robert's terms, is seriously nicked, yet reflective consciousness is not totally eliminated. At level 700 more of the same happens, only deeper. At level 800 - Roberts' unitive state - the 'I Am' is realized, but a subtle form of ego [the 'I'-thought, which is not a conventional thought but more like a deep repression] is still present, but in hiding. Roberts says that this unitive state does not eliminate the sense of self or the phenomenal self. Ramaji agrees. Only at 1000 does ego, others, and world disappear. But they are all then resurrected. It is not that the sage no longer sees the world, he does, not the world as world but as Truth. This is as far as language can take us in depicting what is essentially beyond the mind. Roberts' experiential accounts are accurate and well-articulated, but if they are taken as incompatible with or beyond the confession of other sages such as Ramana or Nisargadatta or even Sant Mat, that seems unwarranted, as well as unnecessarily complicating. Still, I recommend her books for the excellent spiritual biography, of which there is too little these days, and as a stimulus for understanding and inquiry. As she writes:
"We cannot believe experiences we have not had or are unable to conceive or imagine, much less can we believe any experience we cannot find verified and described in our traditional literature." (442)
A problem with the notion of quick enlightenment is that it seems that only a mature ego is capable of the sacrifice involved in allowing the deep void passage where the surrendering of all that hard-won cosmic spirituality and knowledge is lost in exchange for the comparative ‘nothing’ of blissful divine unknowing. This is the so-called 'Great Death' mentioned in the Zen tradition. And to then let go of even that God-communion or, alternatively, sweet “I Am”- abiding, is inconceivable to those in earlier stages on the path, but it is where the so-called Absolute awaits the disciple. Calling it the ‘Absolute’ makes it seem really big, but it is actually the Natural State, compared to which every thing else, no matter how grand or holy, is considered to some degree as a veil over Truth.
The 'marketplace' stage - the 'learning swimming in water' phase - is important not only to make realization real, lasting and complete, but to make the penultimate stages of contemplation possible. As one teacher told me, " the problem is we are not ready - and even when you're ready you're not ready!" The point is that the ego or self will not efface itself, grace is the necessary final arbiter in the matter. But unless we have done the work day to day, dying a little at a time, the matter of a so-called 'Great Death is not feasible, for one will intuitively run from it.
The advantage in the non-dual paths is that one may be trained to look for, notice, and enjoy glimpses of that Reality even from the beginning; a disadvantage is that one may lack the grace and example which the Master represents of what the ordeal and sacrifice involved in getting there and actually living as that entails. In either case, since the path and reality are non-linear, and major shifts may happen unexpectedly, it is important to know something about the terminal stages even from the beginning, so that one will be better prepared both to discern truth from falsehood and to overcome unconscious resistance to the fear - primal yet illusory - that may arise when the ego is seen for what it is.
Comparing jnana and/or non-dual experience with Sant Mat experience is not always easy. Darshan Singh, when asked about the differences said, “Jnana samadhis are high states of human evolution and are to be revered, but won’t take you to the highest.” Such a response brings up a number of issues. What did he mean? Before accepting what he says or understanding it we would have to define what is a ‘jnana samadhi’? Usually jnanis do not speak much about samadhis, specifically trance samadhis. Often it has been the case that they may have experienced them frequently in their earlier life, in a yogic phase, but later moved beyond them. Ramana went so far was to classify ordinary life as samadhi or trance, in other words, the natural state of sahaja:
"Trance is only temporary in its effects. There is happiness so long as it lasts. After arising from it, the old vasanas return. Unless the vasanas are destroyed in sahaj samadhi (effortless samadhi) there is no benefit from trance. Trance is the natural state. Although there are activities and phenomena, yet they do not affect the trance. If they are realized to be not apart from the Self, the Self is realized. What is the use of trance unless it brings about enduring peace of mind? Know that even now you are in trance whatever happens. That is all." (443(
Likewise, Sri Nisargadatta said:
M: “If you are in the right state, whatever you see will put you into samadhi. After all, samadhi is nothing unusual. When the mind is intensely interested, it becomes one with the object of interest…”
Q: “I need samadhis for self-realization.”
M: “You have all the self-realization you need, but you do not trust it. Have courage, trust yourself, go, talk, act, give it a chance to prove itself. With some realization comes imperceptibly, but somehow they need convincing. They have changed, but they do not notice it. Such non-spectacular cases are often the most reliable.” (444)
One could say this is the same as Kirpal Singh saying, “You are already there, you just don’t know it.”
Ancient sages like Ashtavaktra said the same, with also radical statements like “this is your bondage, that you practice meditation.” Jnana is definitely not a samadhi, and in Sant Mat samadhi usually implies a trance state. So there is almost a built in prejudice towards interpreting spiritual realization in terms of samadhi that can hinder an open dialogue.
If we cannot accept the radical assertions of great sages that we are not other than the ultimate reality, right now - and few can, primarily believing it too good to be true - at least we can observe how often we deny it by habitually asserting the opposite - which is almost continually! And this discipline becomes a practice that powerfully and day by day complements whatever form of meditation one may use, helping to close the gap between inner and outer, absolute and relative.
What then was Darshan Singh referring to? If he - along the lines of his comment about ‘Buddhists not going beyond the third plane’ - meant Buddhist jhanas, for instance [which are similar but not exactly dhyana-style meditative samadhis] - then he may have been right, but not only he but even the Buddha himself affirmed that they were not the highest realization. As for specifics unfortunately he is no longer available to explain his statement in the detail it warrants. So once again we face the situation pointed out in the beginning of Part One, that there were not people present to ask the proper questions. It is then left for all of us to try to fill in the blanks. All right, then, here is one example. Ramana Maharshi said “the practice of listening to the sound is good, it is one of the accepted methods; but combining it with vichara (inquiry) is better.” Why would he say that? Brunton said something similar. He wrote:
”The mystic attains [his ultimate state] through religious devotion and concentration practice alone. But when the latter is accompanied by philosophical discrimination and knowledge, the consciousness is carried almost twice as far into still subtler states and values.” (445)
This statement is very provocative. Might this have something to do with shortening the process from objectivity to subjectivity, as well as quicker through the consolations for the ego by allowing a process of awakening to accompany the expansion of experience in meditation? It must also be remembered that whatever is experienced inside must be integrated with that on the outside. Brunton explains further in a series of quotes:
“The deepest state of meditation and one where he is deprived of all possessions, including his own personal self, has a parallel state in the ordinary active non-meditative condition, which can best be called detachment…After all, even the Void [not Maha Sunn, but Jnana-Nirvikalpa or perhaps its Anami equivalent] grand and awesome as it is, is nothing but a temporary experience, a period of meditation…The awareness of what is Real must be found not only in deep meditation, in its trance, but when fully awake…The moment the questing attitude is taken, with the Overself as its sought after goal. in that moment the ego and Overself are put apart as two separate things and cannot be brought together again. But by letting such thoughts go, and all thoughts subside, mind may enter the Stillness and know itself again as Mind. Yet even this is useless if the understanding that the seeker is really the sought is lacking.” (446)
The latter is rarely considered until the very end in the path of Sant Mat, but is where the discipline of self-inquiry in the popular non-dual teachings can possibly come in to save us from years of potential frustration. There may still be frustration, but it becomes ‘packaged’ and passed through in a comparatively shorter time. And of course, there is a Sant Mat alternative: self-surrender. Kirpal Singh wrote:
“Self-surrender is not an easy task. To accomplish it, one has to recede back to the position of an innocent child. It means an entire metamorphosis, supplanting one's own individuality. It is the path of self- abnegation, which not everyone can take. On the other hand, the path of spiritual discipline is comparatively easy. Self-effort can be tried by anyone in order to achieve spiritual advancement. It is, no doubt, a long and tortuous path, as compared with the way of self- surrender, but one can, with confidence in the Master, tread it firmly step by step. If, however, a person is fortunate enough to take to self-surrender, he can have all the blessings of the Master quickly; for he goes directly into his lap and has nothing to do by himself for himself.” (447)
As always, for most there is a paradox involved. Brunton wrote of the need to practice a determined self-reliance, and at the same time an utter dependence on the higher powers. There is no magical way out of personal difficulties. Yet without avoiding necessary responsibilities, at some point the personal self is led by grace to throw in the towel. Then the path of self-surrender becomes possible, being the only alternative left. Until then many look at this option really as the path of self-effort ‘light’. That is to say, it is still imagined as something one can do. But can one really sacrifice and surrender all cares for the survival of his ego, all concern for his progress, his mystical life, his meditation - his most precious possession - and be nothing, if that is what God or the Self or his Master calls for? We all know how few the numbers are of such disciples. There is also a matter of different levels of practice. In self-effort, for instance, especially in the beginning stages, one is told to watch all ones thoughts scrupulously and note failures and so on. But at a later stage, or in the path of self-surrender, one is more or less told to forget all of that, and to pay no attention at all to on’s thoughts, to turn ones back on them and to leave it all up to God. It is as hard for some to do that - to give up a path they spent so much effort and time on - as it is for them to understand or accept those who have graduated or been graced to move on from that, not because they have gone astray but because it no longer serves them. This is where a comprehensive teaching is necessary.
One can notice and enjoy non-dual glimpses in ones own being or consciousness (as contrasted with manifestations to consciousness, such as visions, which may or may not be transformative) even in Sant Mat, except for an attitude that is inclined to look only for the spectacular, or phenomena at the ajna center alone (which unfortunately the traditional teachings on this path often reinforce) and then miss those which descend or arise from within oneself as gently as the dew. Such expectations based on misunderstanding of our true position and what is actually happening veil the direct intuition of spiritual truth. One way to notice more these welcome but “unexpected intrusions of the divine” is through the presumption and practice of radical faith and trust, grounded in the heart, that the Master and you are rooted in the Truth right now - regardless of thoughts, feelings or circumstances - rather than nursing the rigid assumption that Truth is something you are lacking and somewhere else that you have to get to. This was the basic piece of advice that Sri Nisargadatta’s Guru gave him before he died, and he then fully awakened in just three years. Kirpal Singh said that as soon as one has full faith in the Guru he is entitled to take him at once to Sach Khand. This is a key practice that helps to ‘close the gap’ between the inner and outer, the relative and the absolute, and it is useful in every stage of either devotion or enquiry.
Another key piece, and which can actually be considered a form of self-enquiry, is honest recognition of our basic ignorance. “Do I know what anything (including myself, my sense of me), actually is?” This means to abide in a disposition of unknowing - now. We needn’t wait until reaching the causal or supercausal plane to do so. In truth, isn’t it really the case now? And in fact, if we don’t see that now, we might not be comfortable with that revelation then, and may prolong our cycling in and out of the rotating cave of Bhanwar Gupha longer than necessary! In the meantime - the bulk of our time - we will be more at ease and free of obsessive cultism and self-importance. This is not to be irresponsible or never use our intellect, it is much more basic than that. It is to retain and cultivate a sense of wonder, thus gradually easing the mind into the heart.
A brief note on self-enquiry may help a little here. Most seekers these days are familiar with it to some extent, even if they are not drawn to it. Self-enquiry is not the search for the Self or Absolute. That is already the case. The practice is essentially one of 'turning the light around', and focussing on the unknowingness associated with our sense of self or I. What Sri Nisargadatta was told to do by his Guru was basically the equivalent of the 'Who am I?' practice of Ramana Maharshi. However, this practice is frequently misunderstood. When stated in its alternative form, given by Ramana, as "what is this me?", it becomes clear that the enquiry is into the ego, not the Self. Ramana taught one to "hold the ego," the seeker, or the experiencer. "The ego must be held in order to get rid of it. Hold it first and the rest will be easy." We think we are already doing that, but this is not the case. Most of the time we are lost in revery or activity and not self-aware. 'Holding' onto the sense of me is really a new activity for most people. And the primary result is "I don't know." When I returned from India after being with Kirpal I wrote that there was an enigmatic 'hole in my head.' It had nothing to do with any mystical experience. It was characterized by a fundamental 'doubt' or not-knowing who I was, as a 'me.' I didn’t realize this as a result of a practice of self-enquiry, but through the Guru’s skillful means. Forget the Self, the me had an unshakeable enigmatic doubt of what it was. This form of doubt is what is actually cultivated in the Zen tradition. Korean Zen Master Kusan Sunim referred to it as “the root of questioning," which, when firmly established and becomes stable, “everything will dissolve and vanish, and the world you previously imagined to exist, in fact does not.” Over time the Great Doubt as the Zen calls it gets intensified and eventually explodes or implodes in satori, “the bowl of lacquer overturned,” as discussed in the beginning section of this Part. Or one could say the 'I' is resorbed into its source, revealing the Truth, here and now. The Yoga Vasistha described enquiry as the “gaining of direct knowledge of the supreme causeless cause by the examination of the intelligence within.” And further, “Direct enquiry into all the movements of thought in one’s own consciousness is the supreme guru or preceptor, and no one else.”
Ramana, of course, always qualified his recommendation:
"Meditation differs according to the degree of advancement of the seekers. If one is fit for it one might directly hold the thinker and the thinker will automatically sink into his source, namely Pure Consciousness. If one cannot directly hold the thinker, one must meditate on God; and, in due course, the same individual will have become sufficiently pure to hold the thinker and sink into absolute Being." (448)
In Sant Mat this might entail contemplation on the Naam and the Master until one was prepared or disposed for the ultimate question, "Who am I?" This enquiry is not easily found explicitly on devotional paths (except perhaps with teachers like Samartha RamDas), but I am convinced if one is sincere and the Guru is great, something similar may happen eventually. For it is not enough to experience subtle phenomena, nor even to perceive the clarity of the luminous nature of Consciousness, nor even to attain to the deep inner Stillness, nor even to realize that the Stillness is oneself - these are not, truly speaking, final awakening. What is yet lacking, says Brunton and others, is the direct knowledge that the seeker is the sought. And here the concept of God as the Creator is, in a sense, moved beyond. This is, of course, very different from orthodox Christian theology, but in Vedanta one owes his being to no one. But too often the ego claims this realization for itself, which of course, is way off the mark.
The problem is, one thinks he knows who he is (i.e., a somebody in a world and a body who wants and needs to get out of it, for instance), but, actually, this is entirely wrong!! Or it might said, this may or may not be true, but one does not this, and therefore should not assume it. Meditation is fine, but a little open-minded and open-hearted natural enquiry may make it better. After all, we are supposed to know ourselves, and it always starts now - not just in spiritual planes. Sri Nisargadatta said:
"Even to say that you are not the body is not quite true. In a way you are all the bodies, hearts and minds, and much more...Ultimately even the observer you are not. You are the ultimate potentiality of which the all-embracing consciousness is the manifestation and expression." (449)
Self-enquiry is not just "who am I?" In a broad sense it encompasses many forms of self-reflection, all serving to direct attention away from who or what you think. Some random examples of such questioning could include: "What am I?" "What is the world?" "Am I in a body?" "How do I know (anything) ?" "Is this thought true?" "How do I know it is true?" "What would I be without this thought?" "Who says?" "So what?" "What am I always doing?" "What is the worst that can happen?" "Was I born?" "How do I know I was born?" "Do I have parents?" "How do I know?" "What am I afraid of doing/saying?" "Who is afraid?" You see the point? We really do not know very much and are quite ignorant! That in itself is fine. But from a spiritual point of view to be ignorant and not know that one is ignorant, according to Socrates, is much worse.
Whether in a path of mystical-devotion or of self-inquiry, one is essentially being drawn from within, from the Real. Not from within the body, just 'within' - better to leave it that way to avoid getting hung-up with spatial references. And there is a basic beginner's misunderstanding on either path that eventually is revealed. David Hawkins expresses it well:
"In the beginning, a seeker assumes there is a personal self that is seeking the real self. Actually, it is the real self that is drawing the seeker to it." (450)
So in the end the two paths are one. How could it be otherwise? Therefore everything reduces to a simplicity - but hopefully reading this long book has had its value! It is said that the mind, after all, must be exhausted, with its basic questions satisfied.
The point here then is not to promote self-enquiry as a sole practice, but only to illustrate a parallel intuitive process in consciousness that one would be amiss in not paying attention to if it arises or grabs ones interest. For here one is led from objectivity to subjectivity, the “I” as the root or source of the mind in fact being “the origin of the assertion of objectivity.” (451). It is possible to meditate for fifty years without this happening, if ones mind is closed to the unexpected, or one has preconceived expectations of how the path is to unfold. In fact, it has been said that the ego is expectation: always looking around, always expecting. Sri Siddharameshwar likewise wrote:
“To be without any expectation whatsoever is the highest state…The meaning of the centrally important part of the Upanishads is, “Have no expectation." (452)
This is related to the statement of Ramana mentioned earlier that ”The cessation of all worries is the attainment of the supreme truth,” for what is worry but expectation? So naturally it is a key focus of self-enquiry. Eliminating hurry and worry, expectations, desires and doubts, dreams and imaginations is in effect a way to ‘dissolve’ the subtle body without inversion. That can go on, but why not work on two fronts? When this becomes stable, the causal ignorance gets exposed, and is easily forgotten, then revealing the ‘supercausal body’ of Self-Knowledge. The rest will take care of itself if ones heart is in the right place and one makes the decision to embrace the All as oneself. Yes, Siddharameshwar actually says that Full Liberation is a decision (moment by moment) not to settle for any state however high, and to go beyond them by seeing All as oneself and practicing Oneness with All. Adyashanti refers to this last stage not as a realization, per se, but as a final release of all control, simply because it is the only thing left to do. This step is relatively rare.
The bondage to the ‘objective’, even in certain styles of meditation, is one reason many these days are attracted to non-dual teachers of one variety or another. It is in fact getting somewhat harder to be a traditional devotee, as we no longer live in a traditional culture, and also desire self-understanding first and foremost. The point of this book, however, is to show it is not a matter of one path or the other. The great sage Sri Atmananda stated:
“When you reach the Ultimate by following the path of pure jnana, you experience deep Peace and Happiness expressing itself sometimes in the form of gushing tears and choking voice. This is not an experience of the head, but of the heart in you. On the other hand, there are many instances of Sages like Padmapada and Vatishvarattamma who have reached the Ultimate through the heart, and heart alone, directed to their Guru - the Absolute - with deep devotion. They have subsequently guided aspirants to the Truth, even on the Jnyana path, most successfully. Thus it is clear that what one experiences through either path is the same Reality, the one through the head and the other through the heart.”
“The disciple who takes the Guru to be the formless Ultimate, is taken to the right Absolute. However, the disciple whose sense of discrimination is less developed, but who has a deep devotion to the person of the Guru, may well take the Guru to be the form. His love and devotion compensate abundantly for the lack of discrimination, and he is easily taken through the form to the formless, and thence to the Absolute even without knowing it. Revered Vativishvarattamma - an illiterate woman devotee near Cape Commorin, who became a reknowned sage by her sincere and earnest devotion to her Guru (Amma-svami, who was a great yogin Sage) - is a standing testimony to this class of Sages. Though the disciple directs his love to the person of Guru, the reciprocation comes from the impersonal which is the abode of love. When your limited love is directed to the Guru, who is love unlimited, the limitation of your love vanishes immediately.” (453)
What a wonderful confession! So there is no need for worry. True faith is a complete path. Even so, practitioners of Sant Mat are often amazed at the notion that there can be stages of advancement or transformation in consciousness in ordinary daily life outside of their particular form of inner meditation. Some become curious and investigate what some of these other teachers and teachings have been saying, while others, content where they are are, either wish then well, or simply dismiss them and their claims outright as false, even while sometimes being secretly envious of a perceived freedom from laborious meditation. This is understandable, but fear and the burdensome complications of modern life are usually the motivators, not the desire for truth.
In all authentic traditional paths, there may be said to be subtler forms of ego-death at each stage. This is true for advaita or Zen as well as Sant Mat. Gross ego, subtle ego, cosmic ego, and finally divine ego - all are left behind. On both types of paths pride may stand in the way. “For who can part with the seed-mind within?” said Rumi. Or one could simplify the path and say one goes from mistaking ignorance for knowledge (i.e., the first three planes or bodies), to Knowledge (the fourth), to “No-Knowledge” (the fifth and above). Or from objectivity, to subjectivity, to beyond subject or object.
Yet it is so easy to stop where one feels comfortable, thinking one is finished. And easy to find confirmation for it from somewhere or other.
The ‘end’, however, the final stage, for lack of a better word, is gyan or vijnana: beyond ignorance (avidya) and knowledge (jnana), in a way even beyond love and devotion - not in reality, but to a conceived ‘other’, as it is not less than love or knowledge, rather its fulfillment. Pure Love. If ones Jnana or Self-Knowledge is under-developed or ‘unpolished’ one remains, as Sri Siddharameshwar puts it, “like a man awakened in a dream, and thinks he is awake, yet, he is still snoring!” (Ibid, p. 81). A rather crude way of criticizing a penultimate stage of realization, but one cannot enjoy the bliss of liberation completely without also realizing a universality, the feeling of 'Oneness with All', and knowing oneself as the ‘Self of All’. This does not come from self-isolation in bliss or peace, which is not yet the True Peace or “peace that passeth all understanding.” And the simple way to achieve this, he says - after all these technicalities - is, the Self being All, to try and make everyone happy, for then the Self is pleased.
There is a certainty and a mystery here that is not apparent in the lesser stages. Various sages have attempted to give us some clues. Brunton writes:
"When you awaken to truth as it really is, you will have no occult vision, you will have no "astral" experience, no ravishing ecstasy. You will awaken to it in a state of utter stillness, and you will realize that truth was always within you and that reality was always there around you. Truth is not something which has grown and developed through your efforts. It is not something which has been achieved or attained by laboriously adding up those efforts. It is not something which has to be made more and more perfect each year. And once your mental eyes are opened to truth they can never be closed again."
"No one really knows how this enlightenment first dawns on him. One moment it was not there, the next moment he was somehow in it.....No announcements tell the world that he has come into enlightenment. No heralds blow the trumpets proclaiming man's greatest victory - over himself. This is in fact the quietist moment of his whole life....He who has attained the consciousness of the Overself puts in no claim to the attainment. He accepts it in so utterly natural and completely humble a manner that most people are deceived into regarding him as ordinary....He has not attained who is conscious that he has attained, for the very consciousness cunningly hides the ego and delivers him into its power. That alone is attainment which is natural, spontaneous, unforced, unaware, and unadvertised, whether to the man himself or to others."
"The pure spiritual experience comes without excitement, is reported without exaggeration, and needs no external authority to authenticate it." (454)
Faqir Chand, once again, said this stage means: "No Naam, No Sat Lok, no Anami, no God, No Guru." Further stressing the naturalness of this realization, Ramakant Maharaj, successor to Sri Nisargadatta, said
“Except for your no-knowing selfless-self, there is no God, no Brahman, no Atman, no Paramatman, no Master. Forget the words “Ultimate” or “not Ultimate.” Remove these words from your vocabulary. Your spontaneous Presence is Ultimate. Your spontaneous and invisible Presence is Ultimate, and beyond that.“ (455)
And Sri Nisargadatta himself, when asked if this was a high state, replied by saying,
"Oh no. It is the normal state. You call it high because you are afraid of it. First be free from fear. See that there is nothing to be afraid of. Fearlessness is the door to the Supreme." (456)
Yoga Vasistha wrote, “This self can be attained by a hundred ways and means; yet, when it is attained, nothing has been attained! It is the supreme self, yet it is nothing.” Ishwar Puri said in Sach Khand it is as if one awakens from a dream and realizes that everything always and only happened in Sach Khand. The logical consequence of this is that the Self as well as Sach Khand are also here and now, which also must mean there is ultimately no separate creator or complex process of creation apart from our real Being as conceptually imagined and laboriously detailed in arcane spiritual books meant largely to satisfy the mind, whether they be Taoist, Sufi, Christian or Sant Mat. Only the Absolute, Reality, the Truth. How could it be otherwise than this if a man is to come into his own Atman, and not remain in a subordinate position forever, hiding somewhere in the backwaters of being and not becoming fully alive with a Lion’s roar to help all others?! One will not leave the path and God, but it may be that the path and God leave him, and that may be the way God wants it. Yet it can be so hard to leave behind all that one held dear for so long. See, we are talking about final stages here. What is spoken of in Vedanta is also spoken of in Sant Mat. Even the concept of Ishwar Puri that in Sach Khand it is just like awakening from a dream will in turn be forgotten, for while no doubt a stage of divinity, it is not yet the final Truth. It is liberation from ignorance that must also be forgotten. This happens in a quite natural way. Brunton says,
"At this state there is no struggle for further growth; it comes as softly and as naturally as a flower's." (457)
To the religious ego all this beyond God talk may sound like a negative, but it is really the ultimate Positive affirmation - even of a return to a sacred Duality in a Kingdom of Heaven while on Earth. And just so, great sages are said to remain great Devotees, and practice the “Devotion after Self-Realization.” For what else is left to do?
CHAPTER FORTY
Wrapping it up: Sri Ramana, Sri Nisargadatta, and the Sants contrasted
In numerous ways we have spoken of two apparently different paths: that of advaitins and that of the Sants, with one (Sri Ramana) teaching enquiry into the source of “I” in the spiritual heart and the possible (but generally acknowledged as unnecessary) preliminary awakening of the amrita nadi or spire of light from the heart to the Sahasrar, and the other advocating meditation on the third eye and ascension to the Sahasrar (and/or above, depending on the teaching of each particular Sant Mat school, as we saw in Part One). Ramaji in 1000 uniquely described the Sahasrar as a thousand-petalled lotus above the head, with, however, a stalk extending into the throat (allowing ‘nectar’ to be tasted as yogis often report), and roots that curve around the back of the head and along the throat and ending at the right side of the heart. Thus the lotus doesn’t merely hang suspended as if from its inverted roots far above as the Sants portray it. Rather, the lotus has its roots grounded in the heart, which serves as a locus of realization in the human form. The one path envisions a grand tour, while the other a more direct path. The two views seemingly paint very different pictures of reality, which the student will have to ponder with imaginative vision and intuitive feeling.
"That which is said to be beyond the beyond and which is inside of the inside and shines within the Heart, the Real Self is verily Sri Ramana, do adore Him." - Muruganar (458)
The Yoga Vasistha had this to say:
“When the impurities of the mind have ceased to be, there arises in the heart all the auspicious qualities, and there is equal vision everywhere. Even as darkness is dispelled by the rising sun, the world-illusion is dispelled when the sun of the infinite consciousness arises in the heart. Such wisdom as is capable of gladdening the hearts of all beings in the universe, manifests and expands.” (459)
One point about this quote. I sent it to my friend Saniel Bonder who responded this way:
“We agree, except for the “world-illusion” idea. It springs from a “Spirit/Matter split” that sees matter as an illusory manifestation of that infinite consciousness. When that Sun-rise in the Heart is permitted to shine to a fuller degree, the actual illusion is discovered to be that split itself, and the privileging of transcendental consciousness as the greater or only reality. Then the universe itself is discovered to be none other than that consciousness, and every bit as real, divine, and blessed, the ever-changing and ephemeral aspects of its nature notwithstanding.”
Vasishta may in fact have meant “world-illusion” in the old-school vedantic way. We take it to signify, however, “illusory” only as a separate thing-in-itself. It is a real manifestation of consciousness (and essentially, our consciousness, our own being, and thus, "our own world"), not an illusory one. A close reading of some of Ramana Maharshi’s words shows that even he was leaning away from the extreme ancient position regarding illusion, albeit somewhat reluctantly. I jokingly replied that if he truly embraced it he might have worn some proper clothes!
We earlier mentioned differences between standard Vedanta and Neo-Platonism, and by extension, Sant Mat. The former is known for asserting that only Brahman is real, while the latter assert the reality of distinct essences and emanated stadia within Brahman or the One. Yet it must be remembered that the complete Vedantic formula as stated by Ramana Maharshi is "The world is illusory, only Brahman is real, the world is Brahman." Moreover, the matter of stages and their reality depends on which form of Vedanta one espouses: ajata, vivartavada, or parinamavada, which roughly correlate with no emanation, apparent emanation, and real emanation. Or one could hold to all three of these depending on perspective. Shri Atmananda, advaitin, for instance, succinctly stated: "The God-given universe is God itself, and can be nothing else." (460) He then speaks of stages:
"The natural state of the 'I'-principle in man is unmanifested. This becomes manifest, in the case of human activities, in three distinct stages: 1. The unmanifest state of luminosity itself. 2. Becoming manifest as 'I know I am' or self-luminosity. 3. Becoming manifest as objects...From the first stage to the second is only a subjective change to 'I am', without losing its identity. This is called 'sphurana'. It has no object, but it has become self-luminous. That is all. When the 'I'-principle comes to the third stage of perception, it becomes manifested as a jiva...In other words, the unmanifested 'I'-principle first prepares itself to manifest by adopting the subjective and changeless 'I know I am', then takes on the attribute and becomes clearly manifested...In all three aspects [luminosity, self-luminosity, and illumining the object] you do not change from your centre." (461)
This last sentence holds to the inviolable, unique nature of the One throughout all levels and stages. He then reveals the higher perspective.
"When the mind is proved to be Consciousness itself, samskaras die out, and the mind no longer continues as mind [i.e., it is not a 'thing' dropped off in the fourth plane, but known as a modification of consciousness]...In the early stages of sadhana when the aspirant is relying upon the lower reason alone, the world of objects appear as an obstacle to his progress. Gradually, when he begins to awaken his higher reason and begins to rely upon vidya-vritti, everything that appeared as an obstacle before gets transformed into help to lead him on to the Ultimate. When he takes his stand in the Truth itself, prakriti also changes its characteristics and appears as Truth." (462)
This can be realized cognitively, or through feeling:
"Any particular feeling, pursued to its very source, suddenly disappears, and you will be thrown unawares into your real nature of Peace." (463)
I cannot speak for others, but whenever I am fortunate enough to shed tears, no matter what the reason or cause, this is the result.
The important point in the Yog-Vasistha is that the sage says “The sun of infinite consciousness arising in the heart”, not a golden sun appearing in the forehead. These are obviously two distinct spiritual events. Traditionally, the former is considered senior to the latter. But can there not be both? Certainly, why not? Just as there can be Self-Realization as well as an accompanying mystical development. Yet it must be said that more and more people these days are having what might be said to be a descending or embodiment type of experience, with the “sun in their heart rising,” and less pull towards the mystic realms. This is happening even in Sant Mat, with some experiencing confusion in part due to a traditional teaching not comprehensive enough to embrace what is actually happening. People may struggle with a spiritual trajectory which seems contrary to the way they are taught the Holy Spirit in their tradition is supposed to work. But it is all in vain, because the Spirit must have its way, and something unique appears to be happening in human experience. This book is one attempt to begin to outline what that is. If such is the case with you, rest assured, nothing is wrong, and certainly, you are not wrong. The Heart is big enough to embrace ascent as well as descent. Remember, the world is not a trap, nor is the body a cage. That is Sant Mat 1.0. The divine is present here and now, whether one knows it yet or not. That is the working premise of Sant Mat 2.0+, as we have portrayed it.
Again, some trust is required. To the ignorant, the mind is “the slayer of the real.” (i.e., Kal). To the wise, says Vasistha, “the mind is an obedient servant, good counselor, able commander of the senses, pleasing wife, protecting father and trustworthy friend. It impels him in good actions.” (464) Similarly, “When one is ignorant, one entertains the wrong notion that the body is the self; his own senses prove to be his worst enemies. On the other hand, he who is endowed with self-knowledge and knows the truth enjoys the friendship of his senses, which are pleased and contented; they do not destroy him.” (465)
The essential difference here is between subjective and objective, intuitive recognition affecting 'the man himself' rather than his vehicles or bodies, between existential versus experiential, at-the-core versus the periphery, consciousness versus its energies, faith versus visions, "secret" versus only apparent, perceiver versus perceived, infused contemplation versus meditation, getting the "OK" or "green-light" to one’s being versus only viewing the scenery, satori versus samadhi, and so on - the one subtler but of a higher voltage than the other. And such delicate intrusions of the divine are often missed - or even dismissed - in Sant Mat teachings, not so much in reality, but when the expectations are centered solely on the forehead, or where the teaching itself may not accommodate them.
Having said all this, it may be better not to have too rigid a concept about these things: Planes, Levels, Soul and Oversoul, Mind and No-Mind, Self and Consciousness. As per Consciousness,‘intelligence’ or ‘sentience’ may be a better term, since we all have a sense of what that means; even in denying it we affirm it. Or better still, Heart, for with that we likely will not be very far off the mark as to the central matter. As my friend Saniel also wrote, "The Heart-Sun is forever rising, lightening and brightening, deepening and subliming all our relations in all dimensions of space-time." (466)
Vasistha says:
“When incorrect perception has come to an end and when the sun of self-knowledge arises in the heart, know that the mind is reduced to naught. It is not seen again, even as burnt dry leaves are not seen. The state of mind of the liberated ones who are still living and who see both the supreme truth and the relative appearance, is known as satva (transparency). It is improper to call it the mind: it is really satva. These knowers of truth are mindless and are in a state of perfect equilibrium; they live their life here playfully. They behold the inner light all the time, even though they seem to be engaged in diverse activities. Concepts of duality, unity or such others do not arise in them, for there are no tendencies in their hearts.” (467)
Here, there is no explicit need for self-abnegation anymore. The so-called little self is after all an aspect or mode of the so-called big self. All is ok, and praiseworthy. And praise, it has been said, is a cure for the loveless heart - both for the one giving and the one receiving it. Shri Atmananda was once asked, "Why do we love flattery?" His answer: "Because it is the Self or Atman that is flattered, and it really deserves all that and even more. But let not the ego claim it. That is all." (468)
Bhai Sahib told Irena Tweedie:
"You don't need anything, no Sadhana, no discipline. My father and my uncle [both Gurus] emphazied love, and love only. Just love, whatever happens, and in a few years you will be..." -- he made a gesture of a bird soaring into the sky. (469)
So, the message is: do not pretend to be what you are not, but do not be afraid to be what you are. Brunton wonderfully describes a central aspect of this heart-centered awakening:
“..the Overself is with him here and now. It has never left him at any time. It sits everlastingly in the heart. It is indeed his innermost being, his truest self. Were it something different and apart from him, were it a thing to be gained and added to what he already is or has, he would stand the risk of losing it again. For whatever may be added to him may also be subtracted from him. Therefore, the real task of this quest is less to seek anxiously to possess it than to become aware that it already and always possesses him.” (470)
"The Overself is not a goal to be attained but a realization of what already is. It is the inalienable possession of all conscious beings and not of a mere few. No effort is needed to get hold of the Overself, but every effort is needed to get rid of the many impediments to its recognition. We cannot take hold of it; it takes hold of us. Therefore the last stageof this quest is an effortless one. We are led, as children by the hand, into the resplendent presence. Our weary strivings come to an abrupt end. Our lips are made shut and wordless." (471)
"It must be remembered that it does not actually happen in time, but out of it, in the great Stillness. The man does not know the absolute final truth a second before - and then it is all there...The difference between the intermediate and the final states is the difference between feeling the Overself to be a distinct and separate entity and feeling it to be the very essence of oneself." (472)
The tenth century mystic, Gunaid, said "Truth comes after states and ecstasies and then takes its place." This confirms the idea that the higher mystical stages (i.e., Sat Lok) in a path like Sant Mat are not merely greater, but of a different nature than what comes before, and are therefore also not incompatible with the radical and direct message of the jnanis.
These points are abstruse, and not the everyday concern of most aspirants, but it is good to have some understanding for when they do become important.
The full task is to eventually combine the inner and outer in one integral intuitive realization of sahaja. A high state of Void, such as Nirvikalpa Samadhi [Anami?], is not Absolute Truth, because it comes and goes. No one can stay in it for long, they are impelled to come back. Therefore it is not the steady state of the Absolute, from which there is no coming otr going. Shri Atmananda went so far as to classify Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the goal of many yoga systems, 'phenomenal' rather than 'noumenal', because it is dependent on time, space, and causality. It is time-bound because it comes and goes; it is dependent on space because it needs a body to meditate with; and it is cause-dependent because it is a product of effort, e.g., meditation. Why do we come back from Nirvikalpa, and why is it not the goal? He explains:
"What is the taint of the Nirvikalpa State? Something inevitably draws you out of that state. That must evidently be the feeling that you went into it by your own effort. Therefore it is transient. Moreover, when you come out of it, you again see a world unexplained; because, something of the world remains in you still." (473)
So one must go on to see the world as ones own self. That is the permanent way to transcend it. Although the soul by nature can isolate itself, the higher realization is that the world is actually part of our deepest Self.
Having said that, there is no reason mystical experiences of the inner dimensions of the body-mind can not be had on the basis of a deeper recognition in consciousness. There can, in fact, be no loss and perhaps a gain. Sant Rajinder Singh has said that the soul does not do anything, nor does it go anywhere, and that by meditation one simply changes frequencies. The question might then arise, "Why then change frequencies, what's wrong with this one?" And one could well answer, "There's nothing wrong with this one, and, while perhaps unnecessary, also nothing wrong with the Self wanting to know something about itself and its inner working or parts." Not that the Self has parts.
On paper and in practice, though, it may seem that the two approaches, and even the realizations, could not be more different. Ramana says:
"Destroy the ego by seeking its identity. Because the ego has no real existence, it will automatically vanish, and the reality will shine forth in all its glory. This is the direct method...All other methods retain the ego. In those paths so many doubts arise, and the eternal question remains to be tackled. But in this method the final question is the only one and is raised from the very beginning." (474)
Sri Nisargadatta, similarly, taught one to pay attention to the sense of 'I am' until it took one to essentially to the same place, and was then finally effaced resulting in the underlying Absolute revealing itself. On both paths duality is transcended - in place - and any lingering sense of prodigality is erased. This means that a creator God, the world, and and the soul are seen non-conceptually as aspects of the One Mind apparently bifurcating itself into subject and object. But even this is saying too much, for the Mind - the Absolute - the One - the Stateless State - remains forever what it is. In truth, we do not come out of it or merge back into it. Nisargadatta says:
"Q: How does the personal emerge from the impersonal?
M: The two are but aspects of one Reality. It is not correct to talk of one preceding the other. All these ideas belong to the waking state."
"The particular and the universal are inseparable. They are the two aspects of the nameless, seen from without and from within."
"The real does not begin; it only reveals itself as beginningless and endless, all-pervading, all-powerful, immovable prime mover, timelessly changeless."
"It is the self that believes there is a person and is conscious of being it. Beyond the self (vyakta) lies the Unmanifest (avyakta), the causeless cause of everything. ["Causeless cause" is misleading language; usually he refers to this as "that which makes everything possible," rather than a cause of anything. The next two quotes makes this plain]. Even to talk of re-uniting the person with the self is not right, because there is no person, only a mental picture given a false reality by conviction. Nothing was divided and there is nothing to unite."
"Reality is beyond the subjective and objective, beyond all levels, beyond every distinction. Most definitely it is not their origin, source or root. These come from ignorance of reality, not from reality itself which is indescribable, beyond being and non-being."
"You must realize first of all that you are the proof of everything, including yourself. None can prove your existence, because his existence must be confirmed by you first. Your being and knowing you owe nobody. Remember, you are entirely on your own. You do not come from somewhere, you do not go anywhere. You are timeless being and awareness." (475)
The last quote is powerful. In Sant Mat it is usually taught we came from somewhere and are going somewhere. And certainly it can feel so. The words of the advaitins are uncompromising, and often hard to accept for those schooled for a long time in yoga, and burdened with contrary concepts. But as Nisargadatta exhorted: "You must not be compelled to think the same thoughts again and again. Move on!" (476) Keeping that in mind, let us see if even so we can find some common ground.
In Sant Mat the ego in essence can go all the way up, as Kirpal Singh cautioned, and apparently not be effaced completely until the end of the inner path. Which is why without a strong Guru there can be and have been so many mystical exaggerations among devotees. In the path of the Advaitins, there is not so much of a concern about this as one is not attempting to go up at all! In the path of the Sants the quality of "awakeness" is maintained starting at the third eye or ajna center, while in the path of Sri Ramana, for instance, one essentially brings the state of deep sleep into the waking state by the return of the ego or I-sense into the timeless, spaceless, spiritual heart. For the Sants, the chakras are [taught as] real, yet for Ramana they are basically imaginary. And there have been sages who reported even the sahasarar as being severed or dissolved. With the path of the Sants, for many disciples, the various strata or planes of creation are assumed to be real, while for Ramana there is no such "objective reality." Rather, the objective worlds have no reality apart from our own Being, with the seen being inseparable from the seer.
To be fair and balanced, Kirpal Singh did say, "what you see is you." But we largely misunderstood his words. Even this realization of the non-duality between the perceiver and the perceived, however, is not the end. That must yield or be known as arising in the pristine simplicity of Awareness. Or, one might say, when "what you see is you" stabilizes and becomes ones baseline or 'default' position, then even this luminous self lapses, and the Supreme Reality manifests itself. This was the position of Siddharameshwar, and also Bernadette Roberts, who felt that the ego-self must first be displaced by the true or 'divine' self, and then become stabilized 'in the marketplace', before a shift to an absolute 'No-Self' was possible. This discussion to be continued in the next section.
CHAPTER FORTY-ONE
The concept of a center: ‘Life without a center’ versus the ‘return to our center within’; Bernadette Roberts, Paul Brunton; “The ridge-pole is split, all thy rafters are broken now” versus “Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it”; Being in the Overself and the body at the same time; Transcendental stages compared: Plotinus, Ibn ‘Arabi, Chuang Tzu, Sant Mat, Brunton; Dragon’s Play; Home
We are getting to it little by little, I think. Can we reconcile those teachings of "life without a center" with those that teach a "return to ones center within"? At some point, yes. That 'point' may vary from person to person. Some may realize all of the 'inbound' stages before coming to the 'life without a center' stage, while others may not. The traditional paths have commonly taught a two-staged process: realize the subjective heart (or Soul) within, and then realize that as non-different from what is without, and thus come to the realization of the Heart with no boundaries, no-center, or a center that is 'everywhere and nowhere.' Roberts writes:
"Few people realize that without the experience of a center there is also no experience of interiority or within-ness. Without a center nothing can arise within ourselves: no feelings, no energies, no divine presence - nothing. This means we can no longer experience or see the divine within ourselves and, consequently, within anything else that exists. And when there is no divine within (immanent), there is also no divine without (beyond or transcendent). Thus beyond union the divine is not the center of anything; it is not immanent or IN anything and also not BEYOND or transcendent to anything."
"So beyond self or consciousness there is nothing for the divine to BE IN, and nothing for it to transcend, Self or consciousness has been the vessel experiencing the divine as without or within. Without a vessel or container, however, there is nothing the divine can pour itself into, nothing for it to be either within or without, and nothing to which it can reveal itself."
"This is not only the falling away of the divine in the "cave of the heart," but the falling away of the cave itself." (477)
Thus, no vessel, no cave, no soul, no (experienced) God, and therefore no "soul and God dwelling in a body made by God in the womb of the mother," as Sant Mat sometimes teaches. God still exists, but any and all human concepts or experiences of this all fall away as one leaves the beginning stages behind. There is no 'self' left to become or be an 'Absolute'. This should actually be a relief to those burdened by the thought of a seemingly impossible goal to be reached. True, it is an advanced teaching, but can be pondered from the beginning from time to time with no harm.
Brunton confirms this insight:
"It is an amazing paradox that the Overself completely transcends the body yet completely permeates it. Both these desriptions are simultaneously true...Whenever I have used the term "the centre of his being," I have referred to a state of meditation, to an experience which is felt at a certain stage. The very art of meditation is a drawing inwards and the finer, the more delicate, the subtler this indrawing becomes, the closer it is to this central point of consciousness. But from the point of view of philosophy, meditation and its experiences are not the ultimate goal - although they may help in preparing one for that goal. In that goal there is no kind of centre to be felt nor any circumference either - one is without being localized anywhere with reference to the body, one is both in the body and in the Overself. There is then no contradiction between the two." (478)
This would be like paradoxically and simultaneously experiencing the part of the soul that never incarnates and is eternally the same, and also the part that does incarnate, which may be called the re-embodying soul. I would tend to equate the latter realization at its deepest center with Sach Khand, and the former centerless realization with Anami. This would, in Plotinian philosophy, be the Nous beyond the individual or unit soul.
It gets a little confusing, and more so because the I Am is used differently in different schools. For Nisargadatta and Siddharameshwar, the I Am would be the realization of the Witness or individual soul or the Great Causal Body. It is the deepest center within. PB calls this 'awareness of awareness'. However, others use the I Am to denote that which is deeper than the Witness, and which has no center. This would be the immortal Soul, and could be referred to as simply 'awareness', or 'pure consciousness'. It can be difficult when in the Witness to distinguish it as other than pure consciousness, but it is not.
The 'I Am' has nothing to do with the chakras
Before proceeding with our discussion of Bernadette Roberts, a bit more needs to be said about a difference between most yoga teachings and those of jnana. The former sometimes, such as in Sant Mat, one way or another emphasize the reality of the chakras, while the latter usually does not. Sant Mat teaches the importance of going within at the ajna chakra and ascending through various intermediary centers to the top of the head and beyond to achieve realization. As we have seen, Sant Mat teachings seem to be split on this regard between those which say the first region Sahansdal Kanwal is actually experienced in the center of the head behind the eyes (with other centers, such as Trikuti, Daswan Dwar, and Bhanwar Gupha, deeper and higher up within the head, and only Sat Lok at and above the crown), and those who say Sahansdal Kanwal is exactly the same as the yogic Sahasrar, and therefore all the subtle regions are out of the body entirely. This has been extensively discussed in Part One. The former adherents include Maharaj Saheb, Ram Chandra (Lalaji), Shiv Brat Lal, probably Faqir Chand, and apparently, sometimes Soamiji, while the latter group would be the more traditional Sant Mat teachers.
Sri Gary Olsen, who branched off and started what he terms The Master Path Teachings, basically teaches this traditional model, with a few modifications suited for westerners. One of these which we are in hearty agreement with is the need to integrate the higher with the lower and to achieve balance. What is of interest for our immediate discussion, however, is his view that when the Surat reaches the crown, it becomes or merges with or “transitions into the higher identity of the I Am."
“When the surat escapes the human consciousness and enters the third eye in the astral plane, there rendezvousing with the Radiant Form, the stage of bhakti, or discipleship, has been entered. At this point, the surat has transitioned into the higher identity of the I Am…When the I Am has transcended the astral plane and enters Trikuti, it comes into the realm of all spiritual knowledge, (GNOSIS) or para vidya, which is the earmark of the gyani stage.”
This obviously require a detailed explanation, but on first impression it seems somewhat like what Swami Sivananda in Part One said that when kundalini reaches the Sahasrar one can become a "full-blown jnani." Our answer to that was that most jnanis do not talk that way, it does not necessarily follow that one gets jnana upon reaching the crown, nor is it required for kundalini (or attention) to reach the Sahasrar to attain jnana. That was certainly Ramana Maharshi's and Shri Atmananda's position. It could happen, but it depends on a number of factors and is not an automatic yogic result.
Similarly, what Sri Gary is saying could be experienced in the way he describes, that there is a definite shift in consciousness (indeed, Kirpal Singh said that “one is said to have died at every plane quit by the soul”), but in our view such enhanced insight is not an automatic result of leaving the lower six chakras, and, furthermore, for understanding, the terms used must be fully defined. What is Surat, and what is the I Am? If Surat is attention, and the I Am is the divine Soul or Overself (self-contained, infinite consciousness, with no center), then what means is to be used, or what need is there, for further Naam or Guru-Bhakti through the succeeding stages of Trikuti, etc., on the way to Sat Lok, once the I Am is realized? To attend to a Radiant Form or higher sounds requires surat or attention, does it not? On the other hand, if capital 'S' Surat means the original consciousness (as some Agra gurus have stated), and small 's' surat is its projection as attention, at some stage when the attention is retracted into itself enough one will realize the part of the Divine Soul that never entered into incarnation - the I Am. Fundamentally, however, the I Am, when realized in a glimpse or flash of awakening - whether in a trance state or not - is far beyond form, colors, sounds, i.e., far beyond the psyche and the subtle worlds - and has nothing to do with chakras. It is not a place one gets to via the chakras. The I Am is realized discriminatively in deep silence; it is beyond the psyche, which is the living form of the organism, whether one is embodied of disembodied, and not the soul or emptiness, which is the I Am, or Overself. Further, the physical, subtle and causal bodies are all in the Overself, so it is not quite the correct way of looking at things to say one must shed these or rise through them en route to that Overself.
So this is a difficult concept to deal with. In fairness to Sri Gary, whose teachings I have not studied in depth, if one has transformed the lower six chakras and what they represent psychologically or psycho-physically, in an integral, living way, along with cultivating understanding, a new level of insight can arise at each subsequent major transition, but, in our view, in this case this prior preparation has as much to do with the new insight as any yogic experience or state itself. This is similar to Brunton's teaching that the ego gets the ground cut out from under it by the development and balancing of the faculties of right feeling, thinking, and willing, or the heart, the head, and the hand, eventually fusing into a faculty of insight, which could be equated with the realization of the I Am, and which can be then deepened. But in fact, after speaking with a practitioner of this path, jnana rather than traditional yoga may in fact be closer to what Gary means by his use of terms. For instance, this person says, "Gary redefines things like the bell sound, to mean only a call to love, and the Radiant form of the master meaning illumination, insight, or revelation, and not just some image of a Guru in the mind's eye. He does not place any importance on hearing sounds and seeing forms or inner kingdoms. He is only interested in the experience of Nirvikalpa Sahaja Samadhi, and the Bhakti of love...and not so much the bells and whistles."
So we are back with the conundrum introduced in Part One about divergent teachings among the lineages. Not only is Olsen, considered a maverick teacher by Sant Mat fundamentalists, but also Ishwar Puri and Faqir Chand are among those who do not attach importance to inner light and sound, the latter saying "it is all phantasmagoria up to Bhanwar Gupha" (beyond which there is no perceivable light and sound). Ishwar said:
"Power does not exist in seeing the light. Power does not exist in listening to the Sound. Power exists in who is looking at the light. Power exists in who is listening to the Sound." (from a talk, 9-14-18)
Isn't this just what Ramana spoke about all the time, Ramana, who also said sound practice was good, but better with vichara, or keeping the knower in focus?! Yes, it is exactly that. So if Ishwar said this, and if his Master Sawan basically said this, placing little importance on inner experiences, then Charan Singh, a successor to Sawan, saying Ramana only went to the fourth plane (discussed in depth in Part One), seems further unjustified. Charan also told Greg Leveille that putting attention on light and sound was not the highest practice of Sant Mat. Rajinder Singh has said that you do not leave the body, and you do not actually go anywhere. So what is Naam-Dan if it is not an attunement to light and sound? An intuitive activation of one's soul. Yet, if we strip out meditation on inner light and sound, and traveling to inner planes, what then is left of Sant Mat as a distinct and unique path? The answer seems to be, "nothing," or "not much." This is very "inexpedient" for many to hear, those stallion Sant Mat 1.0. Yet, as we have tried to argue throughout our book, all need not be lost, for the essence of the teaching, rightly understood, the love and insight generated in the seeker, while not making it distinct and unique, still makes it valid and authentic. The heart demands that both of these be true.
Returning to the quote from Gary Olsen, perhaps it would be more accurate to say the surat becomes accompanied by, or known alongside, the I Am from which it is projected, rather than that it becomes the I Am. It does not disappear, it being a power of the soul, and with which we can navigate in the so-called lower worlds. We are multidimensional beings and not just formless consciousness.
Satsangis in general are not comfortable with paradox and want linear answers. They don’t get that to actually realize their individual immortal soul they will go through states of no-self along the way as well. That’s why, imo, so few realize it, and those few who do manage to go part way inside don’t understand what is really happening. And even when going to, say, Trikuti, can remain a goofy ego! Kirpal and Ishwar said as much and I know a few people - ‘star’ satsangis - like that who by luck or grace can easily tap inside but are not transformed very much at all. The same few that had experiences fifty years ago are among the same few having them now. Not “rainy day people “ as Gordon Lightfoot sang, that you’d want at your side in a crisis. I’m sure you know what I mean. So I don’t at all see most people among the few that do go to Trikuti having any idea what the I Am is, or having gnosis anything like that of a real jnani. Most likely what the result will be depends upon the prior preparation and understanding. Even Kirpal said the ego goes all the way up - he mentioned that while explaining why a prominent satsangi went high up inside but when outside was acting like a jerk. So the ego is certainly there in Trikuti , and that is nothing like the ‘gyan’ realized by Ramana Maharshi, whose ego was gone. By the way, more commonly Sant Mat criticizes jnanis as only going to the fourth plane, so the assertion here of gyan being established at the third plane is somewhat confusing.
My sense is that that just as one can be awakened here or not, the same situation can apply inside. Just going to a plane is not a guarantee of awakening and maturely functioning there. Remember that St. John of the Cross wrote that “many who have no inner visions are infinitely more advanced than those to whom many have been given.” So personally I don’t see a great divide between great jnanis and the great mystics. Trikuti can only denote gyan and the I Am if these terms are given an unconventional meaning. This all right if one understands this is what is the case. I believe Sant Mat often does this, however, and then makes unfair comparisons with other schools to the degree of even setting up straw men and knocking them down instead of grappling with tough questions and getting down to the real meaning of words used to make clear what is what.
Sahaja
Even this divine Soul or I Am, however, must also be realized seamlessly in active life to produce the sahaja state, which would be the philosophic realization of the complete Overself, the universal nature of which includes the Soul and the gnostic element - the Intellectual Principle or Nous - which manifests the world or realms of nature through the Soul, and into which world the Soul then projects an emanant of itself to in order to paradoxically gain experience of that higher Principle within it and know itself discriminatively! Another way of saying this is that the whole of the Divine Mind, Universal Mind (not the same as Sant Mat's use of this term), God, or the Intellectual Principle is within you, within your mind and functioning through your mind. And then at a lower level your individual mind translates what is in the Intellectual Principle and manifests it, and then our mind experiences what it manifests. In this way Ishwar Puri is correct in saying that we are a creator.
In short, the above long-winded sentences are leading to is that it is not enough to realize the Soul within. That alone does not give you the knowledge of what the world is, which is also required for full enlightenment. Theoretically one could have Nirvikalpa samadhi or its Sant Mat equivalent and not gain knowledge of what the world is, or, most importantly, of one's role within it. Ramakrishna castigated Vivekanda for wanting to be in such a state for days on end, saying, "You fool! There is a state much higher than this." Traditionally it is seen as a necessary first step, giving illumination, but it is not full enlightenment. The world must be seen as one's inner self, and as a manifestation of consciousness, and not an alien superimposition on the soul. This grants complete serenity with no sense of prodigality. One realizes he has a dharma to perform and is not content to merely bask in divinity within. The universality of your being includes the world emanating from it, and realizing this can be considered as a stage beyond mysticism. "The world is myself." Most mystics, of course, shy away from this out of fear and an incomplete understanding. It requires a different form of sadhana than only seeking one's center within.
To Faqir Chand's "No Naam, No Sat Lok, no Anami, no God, No Guru," we may then add Roberts' "No true-self, no divine-self, no unitive-self, no center, no interiority, no unconscious, no conscious, no psyche."
PB said that until that point "The real you has yet to come forward." Interestingly, Sri Nisargadatta said that after that point he was "all front and no back." We will not attempt to explain further but simply let then remain as enigmatic words to ponder as one's own process unfolds.
But Roberts is getting into deep waters here, and gets even deeper as her book proceeds. What she is pointing to is that there is a stage where the sense of within and without falls away. This is actually completely consistent with the conclusions of the Ashtavakra and Ribhu Gitas (high Hindu non-dual texts from a tradition that Roberts feels falls short in respect to the no-self realization), although their implications for the knowing and feeling self are not often drawn as articulately as she has done. This stage can be incomprehensible, if not disconcerting, to the meditator resistant to letting go of what he has gained through so much labor. But it is really an advance, and will come in due course. Saying that within and without are only concepts as some advaitins have said may be helpful, but may also belie the difficulty involved in coming to this point. One can see the difficulty in understanding this stage of realizing there is no vessel in light of comments such as Kirpal Singh made in response to a devotee begging for inner experience, "but are you (the vessel) ready to receive?" Such a difficulty is made somewhat easier to understand by realizing that the initial preparation is more or less the same - although the intermediate steps may vary - whether the end result, for instance, be samadhi or satori.
What is one of the consequences of living without a center? Besides feeling a centripetal in meditation, there can also be a sense of “boundless extroversion,” there being only so far one can go “within.” This is only possible of acceptance for one grounded in the Heart. For all others, those with something to protect or hold on to, it is too scary. Life without a center, or a center that is everywhere and nowhere, is impossible, obviously, if one is trying not to look into the eyes of others, etc., in order to hold on to a center, to a separate life.
Bernadette Roberts wrote before Sri Nisargadatta was well-known or the current crop of non-dual teachers had arrived. Her understanding of Eastern teachings was good but not exhaustive. And, as a Christian, I am not sure what her views on reincarnation were, other than she just didn’t believe in it. They certainly would not be any animistic version where a ‘person’ gets reborn. Nor is her view of “the resurrection of the body” a materialistic or even mystical one, but rather something that occurs after the state of no-self is realized and one learns what the body is in truth. From here God [or the “experience” of God] has also ‘died’, and the journey from here is one from God to Godhead, which, in her view, are poles apart. She writes:
"To help understand the falling away of the self it is helpful to make a distinction between God and Godhead, where God is the Absolute known to and experienced by consciousness, and Godhead is the Absolute as it lies beyond all self or consciousness and can never be experienced by it. The difference between God and Godhead is very great, and consciousness cannot bridge this difference; in truth, the span between the two is a great void. What it takes to bridge this void and come to the dimension of the Godhead necessitates the death of God - the death of consciousness or self and all its divine experiences. We do well to remember that the whole message of Christ was that we must go through God to get to the Godhead." (479)
One now realizes, says Roberts, that the material is spiritual, and the spiritual (soul, consciousness) is material. On first glance, while the former is consistent with advaita and some other high teachings, the latter (that consciousness is material) sounds absurd, but her position is that of a realization ‘beyond consciousness’. In Buddhism, more phenomenological in contrast with Hinduism, 'consciousness' is sometimes considered one of seven elements [earth, water, fire, air, ether, space, and consciousness].
At this stage, the opposites no longer apply. The mind may balk at her assertion that here the “eternal form” is realized. As she writes: "Christ is the Eternal Form or substance of which the Father is the "Formless Unmanifest" or the divine state or dimension in which Eternal Form exists." (480) Actually, however, some other sages (PB, Aadi, Ramaji, Taoists and Sufis) have used similar language. This is not a beginners perspective or understanding. Therefore, do not let your heart be troubled! From this Eternal Form or "substance" comes everything else. We do not come directly from the Formless Unmanifest, but from the one divine Manifest, substance, or Christ [which from our perspective, however, is transcendent].
One problem is that we cannot recognize or understand something we have not experienced or that is not written about in the traditional literature we have affiliated with. This must be kept in mind in judging a deep teaching. Nisargadatta, for instance, said some people may have awakened but they do not know or recognize it, and it needs to be pointed out to them. He interestingly says “and such cases are often the most reliable.” He then adds that you recognize it by comparing it with how you once were with how you are now. Roberts would agree, but makes no bones about emphasizing the long ripening process leading up to it. Until then one can at best have flashes or brief glimpses, and which are often overlooked due to preconceptions of what is supposed to happen.
Take this with a grain of salt, then, and do read her books if you wish to dive in further. This is advanced material, and what might be called “Sant Mat 5.0” - knowing full well that some might think it is a complete rejection of Sant Mat. She, for instance, says the notion that there is a thing called an eternal soul that leaves the body at the time of death is completely wrong. Any assertion this bold needs to be taken seriously and investigated before outright rejection. She would likely agree with Nisargadatta, Atmananda, and the Zennists, who taught that there is only one death worth the name - the death of self and consciousness - and merely becoming disembodied is not it. But her view is consistent with those discussed in this book as per the ultimate realization and nature of what consciousness, the soul, and the body are.
We do not necessarily agree with all of what she says. The soul is not the Absolute, or our truest identity, but may survive as a mode of the Absolute in a seamless multi-dimensional Universe with no inherent problem. Why not? One does “rotate into an entirely new dimension,” as Nisargadatta said, but then all is 'resurrected' in that Reality. But then, exactly what soul is, Roberts would say, can only be known after going beyond it - after it falls away, in her language. At last, “mountains are mountains, and rivers are rivers” again, but the last condition bears little resemblance to the first.
Roberts provocatively writes:
"What remains when there is no self and no divine?" [for with the falling away of the self the 'experiential' divine - not the actual Divine - falls away as well]. Discovering "what remains" is virtually the journey from death to resurrection, or the journey from God to Godhead in Christian terms. Right off, it is obvious that the body and senses remain - which seems easy enough to account for - yet knowing the true nature of the body and senses is another matter entirely. The revelation of the true nature of the body is the revelation of the resurrection and the true nature of Christ's mystical body. This revelation (true nature of the physical body), however, can never be accounted for in any terms available to consciousness (and the intellect), because its true nature is beyond consciousness...While the ultimate truth of the body is beyond all our usual notions and experiences of it, the resurrection reveals that the eternal body outlasts all the experiences we call "soul" or "spirit." Consciousness has been responsible for these experiences, and without consciousness there is no existence of "within-ness," or of any soul or spirit dwelling "within" the body. The notion of a soul or spirit independent of the body, which leaves the body at death, is not true." (481)
And:
"...consciousness generally regards the body as a temporary shell that houses an inner, immaterial spirit, a spirit that pops out when the body dies. But this whole scenario is consciousness' view of things based on its own limited experiences and way of knowing; ultimately there is no truth in it. The resurrection reveals that there is no distinction, as we had thought, between matter and spirit, body and soul, and so on. Obviously what consciousness had regarded as matter and spirit turns out to be of a different nature altogether. Thus we must not mix our present notions of matter and spirit with their reality or Truth. As said before, beyond self or consciousness there lies a dimension that cannot be articulated." (482)
Hang in there, dear one, only a mature aspirant can endure the shock that such a message may confront one with! It seems to contradict everything Sant Mat stands for. Neither Roberts or Nisargadatta, however, are saying that consciousness or awareness is merely a byproduct or epiphenomenon of a 'thing' called matter. They are not scientific materialists. But neither are they idealists. It is not that something like a soul leaving a body does not appear or feel like it happens, but rather, in my understanding, from her point of view it is not the final truth of what is actually happening. Similarly, in reincarnation it is not true that the person John Smith returns as John Smith. Roberts and other sages talk like that to partly avoid giving a person false hopes that something like what they are conscious of as themselves is in fact eternal. Her personal recoil from an idea she was told in her youth by a Buddhist teacher that she might have thousands of lives to go filled her with horror and led her to accept the Christian doctrine of only one life [which of course can be considered as having its own inherent problems]. Read on:
"Beyond consciousness, the ultimate Truth of the divine is that it is neither immanent (within anything) nor transcendent (beyond anything), but IS everything that eternally exists. What the divine is NOT, however, is the structure, function, or energy of anything. The energy that is consciousness or self is but one of many functions of matter, which function is not divine. [Sri Nisargadatta said similarly that "the I Am is the product of the food body." This seems radically different from the way the Sants portray things with the soul pre-existing the body. Yet the I Am is not the truth, although it points to the truth. The question then is, what is matter?]...What I call the true nature of matter is "eternal form," eternal form that cannot be grasped by the senses, intellect or consciousness. Another way to articulate eternal form is to say that what consciousness regarded as matter turns out to be spirit, and what consciousness regarded as spirit turns out to be matter. Surely in terms of consciousness this means that the mystery of matter IS spirit, and the mystery of spirit IS matter. Consciousness was responsible for this dichotomy of distinction, but beyond consciousness no such distinctions exists." (483)
The “Eternal Form” of no-form is the realization of the Absolute. Nisargadatta depicts it as a “solid block of reality.” Terms like consciousness, implying a self, do not apply here. Aadi called this the true Objectivity, compared to which the worldly things (objects) are but a dream within another dream of subjectivity. Siddharameshwar compared the realization of the "I Am', consciousness alone, “like that a man who is awake in a dream, but is still snoring.” This is the ‘natural self’ - Roberts’ ‘true self’ - but it is not the Natural State, or the ultimate No-Self, which is…Beyond.
For Kirpal, this could be “Absolute God,” or Godhead. Self and consciousness have dropped away as ones identity. It is important to note that the so-called objects are not separate from the divine, and the way to the divine is not to separate from them, but still, they are not the true Divine. For Roberts, all divine 'experiences' before this point are really the experience of our true self. Or, as is said in Vedanta, “the things are the Self, but the Self is not the things.” Nor is the Self just consciousness. [Some writers distinguish consciousness from awareness to avoid confusion. Awareness is really a pointer to what is beyond consciousness, for the mind can't imagine what that could be. Some use the term "unperceived perceiver" for awareness. Or they distinguish awareness of awareness (the witness or sakshin) from pure awareness.The difficulty remains]
A teaching of Advaita that considers the soul or consciousness as ultimate Reality, for example, can fall short of the truth, according to Roberts and Nisargadatta. And this is a Nisargadatta who said that he agreed with Ramana Maharshi on everything except "the heart on the right business." Similarly, feeling the “presence” is experiencing ones deepest inner reality, but it is not the Final Reality. Just so, the stillness, says Brunton, is not Brahman, but “Brahman coming into the soul’s field of awareness.” What Brunton sometimes affirms is a form of “agnostic mysticism,” where man, even in his divinest state, while rooted in the Divine is yet not the Divine Itself. This is consistent with most Christian and Sufi positions, but not so much in Advaita.
Where Roberts may lose some people is invoking the Trinity in her ontology. That is to say, for her there is one God the Father, or Absolute Unmanifest. There is only One eternal Manifest of that Godhead, which is the Christ. We as consciousness, as well as the world of objects, are not the manifestation of the Unmanifest and can never know it directly. We are manifestations of the Christ or the Logos. Our knowing of the true Divine beyond consciousness is knowing Christ. The point is there is a mediating principle. Unlike Advaita where there is the Unmanifest and its manifestation, here there a Trinity. Between the Unmanifest and the creation there is the only-begotten Son or Christ (and Holy Spirit). Brunton speaks of Mind and World-Mind, and Nanak of one Unmanifest-Manifest with the same meaning. The “Manifest“ here is the “substantive“ creative power, not the things.
My feeling, if I am correctly describing Roberts' position, is that we can get lost if we follow her conclusion that no-self negates all sense of self, even when the “Eternal Form” is realized. Even Nisargadatta retained an ‘I Am’ until the final days of his life. He also said, “in the Absolute every I Am is preserved and glorified.” This correlates with Plotinus’ position that Soul is an eternal verity, even while it is not the One. Just as Sat Desh for the Sants is paradoxically eternal yet created. But of course, one must assume a lofty conception of Soul here, and not the usual notion of the moderns.
So how can we reconcile Sant Mat with Roberts’ teaching that it is entirely wrong to speak of a soul leaving the body at death - or any other time? And also how do we account for reincarnation after no-self is realized as well? One answer may be something like this. First, for the sages, like Ramana and Nisargadatta, their experience must be that body, senses, mind, consciousness, and whatever appears to leave the body, is not them [in their deepest identity]. At death the flame goes out, and they are just as they already are: THAT, beyond consciousness. The eyes needn’t roll up, with Ramana there was just a final breath and he was gone. Or, for the adept Sant, likewise what leaves the body is not them, but only the play of the Absolute in its mode of Soul. They are not individually going anywhere anymore. That illusion is gone. At death, the movement of the gunas continues, and they as divine Overself are the witness of the spirit in its awakened condition, while also being beyond the witness. Grounded in the Absolute, the I Am is preserved, along with the memory traces [samskaras, vasanas] held in the universal mind (chit). If they are to reincarnate, they must will it before their death. This was PB’s view. The sage is not just sitting up there and deciding if he will come down. At the proper time, the preserved I Am, rooted in the Absolute, picks up the memory traces and assumes/creates a new body and new person. He must then get familiarized to that new body and brain and reawaken, which is inevitable in his case. It is a sacrifice, nonetheless.
Despite the difficulty and complexity of understanding the stages and transitions in Roberts' teaching, heart-reassuring and far less austere words of hers are these:
1. Be true to your own path, don’t compare it with the path of others. Honor the stage you are on.
She does acknowledge the need to recognize that “the map is not the territory":
"Since the Christian path is the only one I know experientially, the pages that follow represent what I have learned on this path, especially as it pertains to the ultimate revelation of Christ...While my account and what I have to say may not be typical of someone else's Christian journey, it nevertheless testifies to the variety of experiences within a single path, a variety due to different psyches, mentalities, and, above all, the divine's unique design for each of us. No single account or its findings can speak for everyone in a tradition; all it can do is speak for the possibilities within a tradition. It seems that even within a single tradition, variety is the spice of divine life...It is important that we do not settle for anyone else's journey or account; we have to have our own. The great Revealer will take care of this; It alone knows us and maps our way, a way that will be unique and like no other." (484)
For instance, viewing things from her tradition, she visualized a unitive stage, the equivalent to the pure "I Am" or what Ramaji calls “800”. But, as previously mentioned, Ramaji points out that in recent times, many aspirants on non-dual paths may spend little time in that stage, not being inclined to a Theo-centric disposition and background like the older mystics. Roberts herself argues that all so-called "divine experiences" are not the Divine itself, which is non-experiential, but the human experience of the divine. So this stage - realization of the pure I Am - or a unitive state with "God" as the center - may not be necessary for everyone to linger in that long.
In addition, while there are archetypal stages, some will awaken to degrees of no-self, or non-duality, first, [that is, prior to much of the classical preparation] and then face forms of purgation, or, in more modern terms, encounter with shadow material, or what Saniel Bonder terms 'primal insanity' and 'broken zones'. [see "Non-Dual Awakening does not bypass purification but makes it possible" in Part Three].
Another way of looking at this is to say that distinguishing between states of no-ego and no-self as Roberts does may be difficult as they may run concurrently or in a non-linear way. Thus, her estimate of twenty years “in the market place” between the no-ego and no-self stages may not always apply as it did in her case. This is not to minimize mature spiritual states (as per the saying in Zen, “Chao-chao was enlightened, but needed thirty more years to graduate”), but only to recognize that many are living and practicing in very trying circumstances in an increasingly complex modern life and world - of stunning, vibrant paradoxes, and challenges we could never have foreseen - which, as teacher Richard Rose put it, “will provide one with all the koans he needs.” It also appears that evolvement, as well as awakening, are being stimulated and quickened by support from both exoteric and esoteric levels. And Roberts actually foresaw this happening.Two blog posters give their perspective:
"It's a journey to the inside and then a journey with an inside and then a journey without an inside. No aspects of it are any more or less important than any of the other aspects."
"I've come to see the times when there's re-identification with ego and suffering, and feeling conflicted by thoughts, as expressions of the Absolute, and not problems that are keeping me from expressing "That" which lies beyond self. I've all but stopped comparing any experience on my journey with the journey of others and comparing myself to some sliding scale of awakening."
Nisargadatta taught, "You must find your own way or it will take you nowhere." Ramana said, "Don’t hate the tamas, but make the most of the sattva.” The idea in both cases being to "close the gap” between absolute and relative reality.
2. God/Christ works imperceptibly..
"It can be said that our whole journey is Christ's human consciousness [that is, the humanity within the Trinitarian Logos itself] taking over (transforming) our own. This transformation takes place on a level of existence we do not know because Christ exists on a level we do not know. For most of the journey what we know and experience of Christ is akin to our deepest unknown self, yet Christ exists for us even beyond this personal, experiential self-dimension - closer than close, that is."
That is to say, much of the transformative and transmutative action of divine grace works largely below our conscious self, which leads to.
3. The "good news" is that the main and best practice to the unitive stage and beyond is naked faith, not experiences.
This, of course, has been a prominent theme in this book.
4. The only way from the unitive state and no-self to the Godhead is not the path of consciousness and its experiences but for Christ to dissolve your consciousness.
The end is not another plane of consciousness but an entirely new dimension, which, nevertheless, is that in which all are rooted in from the beginning, and exists even now, from the perspective of one great Heart.
For Roberts, after the falling away of the ego, the falling away of self, and the realization of no-self, comes several further refinements, which she depicts in terms from her traditional background. These are (1) Resurrection: which for her is the revelation of the true nature of the body - the “Eternal Form”, which is Christ, the only true “substance” or Manifest of the Unmanifest Father. [following the ancients, that which we call matter is not substance, nor is our conscious subjectivity substance; rather, that which is beyond these is true substance] (2) Ascension: the revelation that Christ as Trinitarian Logos dwells in the heavenly Unmanifest Father; (3) Incarnation: the "GOD-AWFUL" living after realizing this condition, which she calls the "Eucharistic State." I must confess she loses me here. I can only think of this stage as a sage living as a perpetual sacrifice.
But can we compare all of this with Sant Mat? Yes, I think so. Simply substitute Sat Purush/SatGuru for Christ, Sat or Sat Lok for Substance, Anami for Ascension, and the Stateless State for Incarnation. And realize and trust that all this is being actualized in a timeless dimension right NOW. Templates or maps of stages are found in all traditions and bear a striking resemblance to each other. The Sat Purush absorbing the soul into Anami sounds like Christ dissolving our consciousness to reveal its eternal abidance in the Unmanifest Father. PB said that the "The Overself is not a goal to be attained but a realization of what already is...We cannot take hold of it; it takes hold of us...The Overself lovingly swallows us."
A word on Roberts' experience of what she calls Ascension, however, for this seems to me to hold a key to how she articulates the ultimate stages. And it may also relate to how we do the same. She felt it was a divine revelation that made this world almost intolerable. That does not seem consistent with how the Masters speak. She writes about an experience she had after several years living as no-self:
"After communion one morning the body seemingly began to inhale (although it did not come from the outside) what I can only describe as a type of odorless anesthetic (reminiscent of ether) that instantly spread from the lungs to the entire body. It was as if every cell of the body had given way or was disclosed as a kind of elemental gas or "divine air"...It was as if every cell or element of which the body was composed WAS this "divine air," and that every element of the body dwelled in this indescribably divine and glorious state of existence. It was as if the body had dissolved into this divine air"...I wish to make it clear that this particular experience is not a dissolving or disappearance of the body; it is not an out-of-the-body experience of a soul leaving the body. It was not an experience of bodilessness or the discovery of some other body and so on. Rather, it is the clear disclosure that the unknown substance of the physical body (Eternal Form or Christ's mystical body) dwells in a divine (heavenly or glorious) condition, which condition IS the unmanifest or Formless Father." (485)
This 'experience' - which, being beyond consciousness, she maintains is not an experience [but then, 'who' or 'what' knew it?] - may have been similar to the “pranava” body experience of Ramana described in the section “Kundalini” in Part One. Or various Rainbow Body experiences of various Tibetan adepts or dematerializations of the Siddhas. She felt that death would result if such an experience continued, which is probably true, and also then felt it impossible to bear her normal no-self state, while retaining the senses, afterwards. Here she seems to have made an unwarranted conclusion. Yogananda spoke of coming down from on high and not liking it, but said he "got used to it." Ramana didn’t make a big deal about the pranava body. For him there was no essential difference in his condition. He was not “serious” about it. Sages do not find the divine incompatible with human existence. How could the divine be uncomfortable with its own creation? As PB said, “This world is rooted in the divine substance and is consequently not an empty illusion but an indirect manifestation of divine reality...The world is neither a trap nor an illusion, neither a degradation of the divine essence nor an indication of the divine absence.” She did say that the only way to endure it was to convert it into the Eucharistic State, however, which does, in a manner of speaking, seem to be the way of the great Masters.
So, I could be wrong, but I am inclined to agree with Ramaji that Roberts did not speak of the stage of “1000”, and was not clear on what some of the great sages and saints outside of her tradition have spoken of. For instance she quite clearly had no familiarity with the Naam principle or the tradition of living Masters, and apparently had little acquaintance with classic non-dual texts. This is not to say she was not a great example by her life and teaching of what it can take to reach the high stage of the “800s” (and which many neo-advaitins often overlook), but yet which, at these penultimate stages, as Ramaji pointed out, “a miss of an inch can be as good as a mile.”
[While beyond the scope of this book, for further discussion of potential ambiguity in non-dual teachings, including hers please see "Languaging Non-Duality" at https://www.mountainrunnerdoc.citymaker.com/languaging-non-duality.html]
I recommend her books for what they do offer, and which is quite rare. There is nothing wrong with appreciating value where you find it even if it may not encompass truth in its completeness (if there is such a thing). Many of the teachers quoted in this book were chosen with that aim in mind. I mention Roberts’ story and teaching for three main reasons: (1) her articulate writing on the no-self experience as being a state without a center, which has relevance for our own discussions on comparative mysticism (2) her biographical honesty and pull-no-punches approach on the ordeal involved (3) her positing of a mediating principle between man and the Absolute. In her tradition that would be the Christ as Logos, which as we have shown has parallels with many traditions (Allah, Sat Purush, Heavenly Emperor, World-Mind/Overself). Here the reality of the soul and the no-self realizations can come together, in my opinion. How? The following discussion builds upon that begun in the sections on Sat Purush as a divine intermediary, and transcendental stages compared in Part One. First, consider this explanation from Damiani speaking on the Enneads of Plotinus. We have introduced this material several times in this book so far so it should be getting easier to understand a little bit:
"Even if we view the three primal Hypostases - the One, the Intellectual Principle [Nous] and Soul - as forming an integral whole (which is often referred to as the Absolute when considered from the side of manifestation), the distinctions cannot be dissolved in such a way that the Nous and Soul, so carefully defined become illusory principles. In our understanding of the metaphysical Infinite, we retain the view of the One as the pure and only perfect reality, as well as the view of real and distinct emanations from it. We do not violate the One's sovereignty by granting to each of the other levels of reality their proper status; they do not become null and void in the face of the One which they eternally contemplate." (486)
"When Plotinus considers Soul as inseparable from the One and the Intellectual Principle, he does so in order to emphasize its transcendance and inconceivability - a mysterious Void. But looked at as a distinct essence, Soul is living intelligence, the outgoing activity of the Supreme, and our inner divinity." (487)
Where Roberts and Advaita would seem to want to abolish these distinctions, Plotinus and Sant Mat retain them. Other suchlike examples are found in Islam and Taoism.
For Ibn 'Arabi, there is 'first' an 'absolute-Absolute' (the 'Essence') that is itself in its absoluteness; it has no attributes. Then, by a 'most holy emanation' (or 'the Breathe of the Merciful') this Absolute in its absoluteness becomes something different; it is still Absolute, but with multiplicity in potentia within it. This is the stage of Divinity, or Allah. Also, the 'permanent archtypes' of all things are there potentially within this Divine Consciousness. Then, a second 'holy emanation' actualizes the Divine Names and Attributes (archtypes), but first as-a-whole; this is the stage of Unity; from here down we get the stage of Images and Similitudes, and, finally, the sensible world (all seven planes or so, depending on tradition). What is interesting is that Ibn 'Arabi says that there is a 'pressure' or 'compression' that builds up in the Absolute with the Divine Names that necessitates its actualization of those archtypes which finally overflows - he uses the word 'determination' - and the chain continues on down producing all the things. It goes on perpetually, moment to moment; there are no temporal gaps, it is all a drama within the Absolute, but still, with ontological stages that must be respected.
Chuang Tzu says that after the Tao or Way, the Mystery of Mysteries, the ultimate Unity [Arabi’s absolute-Absolute], there is the Nameless (Non-Being). Of this Nameless he says, ‘In this darkness, there seems to be an image, I sense there is something there, I don't know whose 'son' it is, I think maybe it is 'antecedent to the Heavenly Emperor' (i.e., God). God is called the One. Then it 'eructates', Heaven (Yang) and Earth (Yin) are produced, and the Divine Wind blows over and through “the holes and hollows” [i.e., every potential thing] creating the “ten thousand things.” (488)
In Sant Mat, Anami or the Nameless would likely come after the Absolute, and before God (Sat Purush). So we have the progression Absolute - Anami - Sat Purush. Brunton similarly labels these emanations Mind - Void - World Mind. Islam has Absolute (as Absolute) - Absolute (as Allah) - Absolute (as Lord). Taoism has Hsuan - Non Being - Being - Creator.
It must once again be kept in mind that all this is atemporal and within the eternal present, including the perpetual creation processes, even while it is depicted as a sequential process beginning in time. That of course is impossible, and also of course, completely boggles the mind. Here are a few suggestive examples of transcendental triplicities. In Sant Mat, 'Absolute' is suggested for 'Beyond Anami'.
Islam - Ibn 'Arabi Taoism - Chuang Tzu Brunton Vedanta Plotinus Sant Mat
Absolute as 'absolute' Hsuan (Tao) Mind Parabrahman One Absolute
(the 'Essence')
Absolute as Allah Nameless Void Nirguna Brahman Nous Anami
(Divinity) (Non-Being)
Absolute as Lord Heavenly Emperor World-Mind/ Saguna Brahman Soul Sat
(Unity) (God/Being) Soul
A modern Taoist teacher, Charles Belyea, in the interesting book, Dragon's Play, paints another map and describes the Way in terms of twelve stages. Numbers one to five are approaches to the Way. Six generates an inner fire that brings an end to all seeking and the realization that any more efforts are useless for realization. Seven (considered the end of many paths) constitutes non-dual realization, with no distinction or difference felt between emptiness and form, although he calls seven 'yin-nondualism', with the focus more on the emptiness aspect. Some non-dual teachers are stuck in this stage. Eight is the realization of the Greater Patterning of Nature, or 'yang-nondualism', and nine and ten are greater participation in that Patterning and further actualization and deepening of the non-dual realization, through the natural activation and interaction of inner and cosmic energy channels. This would appear at first glance to be what happens in some schools of Vajrayana Buddhism, but not exactly. For there is no motivated exploitation of these things, but a free exploration and co-operation with them on the basis of the already realized transcendental Heart. Eleven is the Heavenly Immortal, through which the Tao effortlessly operates, while twelve is the fulfillment of the Tao, the truly human stage, but even it is not really 'the end' in the normal sense. As he points out:
"There really is no Beginning, nor a cosmic or personal fall from grace. The path of returning to the Source is not a matter of going back to the womb or transcending the diverse universe of manifestation [as some of the early examples of Taoism indicate with the yogic terms such as 'closing the gates of the body and mind', and entering the void', etc.]. The Source is the context for everything. It's quite simply where we all are, and returning to it means to give more attention to it as the basis for a full exploration of life...Twelve is not the top of the mountain and is not a "peak experience" - that rather limited view exhausts itself long before twelve." (489)
He says, then, that in step six "efforts cease and we are confronted with the reality that cultivating the Way produces nothing." We could translate that as saying that willful efforts to achieve something by a separate self do end, but a much deeper integration with Nature or the Divine lies ahead. Ones human character must penetrate much deeper into both its own depths and into the energies and dimensions of the cosmos. Thus what began in stages six and even before continues in the stages after seven, at a deeper level, and without personal effort, although not without its cooperation. But it would not have been able to do so until it had reached the end of its personal rope in six and been taken to the mat in a fundamental way. Roberts might call this the stage of no-ego. Then at seven, "attaining the Way is the merger of our self-nature and Nature Itself, without death or transformation...We can no longer make a meaningful distinction between phenomena and..open Space." This is a description of Self-realization. Characterizations of such a stage are 'the totally unexpected,' 'the obviousness', 'just so', and 'the undeniable but still unbelievable'. Here he says the metaphorical (not mystical) 'third eye' opens.
At eight and nine, the exploration of Nature expands, and the 'fourth eye' opens. Stages ten and eleven are a further deepening of the interpenetration of consciousness and energy, the One and the Many, the Many and the One, the individual and the universal, 'Earthly' Hsien and 'Heavenly' Hsien, quite advanced, with twelve representing the return to our true nature, which is nothing other than our full humanness, with a 'fifth eye' of the dragon' opened.
A third-eye, fourth-eye, and fifth-eye! Putting all these views together we can simplify (!) and say there is before us a picture of definite shifts, as well as seamless integration. The soul can be looked at as a distinct eternal existent even while is inseparable from the One. It is characterized as no-self, and as void, yet even so is not the Absolute in its Ultimate Voidness. Much confusion arises over failing to make this distinction. Yet, some argue it is a distinction that should not be made. Perhaps the bottom line in our search for authentic understanding of truth, then, is best left in simple terms: “Gold is gold," a favorite expression of Kirpal Singh.The realization of Soul is gold, the Divine Intellectual or Archtypal Cosmos above the Soul is gold, every I Am preserved and glorified in the Absolute is gold. The Absolute itself is gold. Every glistening tear from the bleeding heart is gold. Gold. Gold. Gold. Not counterfeit.
What is most needed by us, obviously, are further researchers! By this I don’t mean philosophers like me, but sants, sages, and adepts with the ability to explore and articulate these ultimate stages so far only scantily addressed in the books. But, alas, such personages are few and far between. Until then, be not overwhelmed, but “take what you can use and leave the rest,” as Martinus was fond of saying.
It can be said that the devotional paths in general focus on transforming the effective and volitional natures, but do not pursue the self-inquiry and cognitive sadhana that augment the former with direct awakenings, or the opening of the ‘mental eyes’, leading to questions people have as to the nature and place of ‘no-self’ realizations or even whether they ever happen in gradual paths like Sant Mat. We hope this book may in some small measure have helped to bridge that apparent gap. Fortunately, in the end faith says there is no conflict and all awakenings and realizations resolve themselves peaceably in Divine truth.
The two paths may be contrasted in another way. Roberts quotes the following lines reportedly from the Buddha to indicate the state of no-self:
"House builder! I behold thee now,
Again a house thou shall not build;
The ridge-pole is split
All thy rafters are broken now,
My mind, its elements dissolved,
The end of cravings has attained."
For her the "ridgepole" is the self, that is to say, the divine center in the unitive state, or the Atman in Hinduism, which, when it is broken and the elements fall away [which she equates with the five skandhas or components of self in Buddhism], there is no more 'house' of the self. In Zen they would refer to this as "the barrel of lacquer being overturned." This could, however, be contrasted with the oft-quoted verse of biblical scripture:
"Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it." (Psalm 127:1)
One must ask, is there a difference in essential meaning and practical result here? Having a self-made house fall away, or having the Lord build the house? Is the difference merely between the perspectives of a jnana or a bhakti path? Is there, in other words, no commonality between (1) the disassembly of the skandhas, and realizations of ‘no-self’ or ‘anatta’ (of which there may be varying degrees, according to Ramaji and Sri Nisargadatta), through self-enquiry and/or grace, and (2) a divinely reconstructed new self, in which the old one is progressively outshined by divine pressure from within, almost without knowing it or seemingly doing anything, through a simple bhakti of faith and love?
The good news must be, “Yes.”
The Buddha himself did not deny the existence of soul, although he also spoke of anatta (no-self or no-atmanl). Can this paradox also be reconciled somehow? I think so. Among the Buddhists one doesn't find them speaking of the soul, but call it Mind. They deny the soul (anatta) doctrinally, but what soul really represents they refer to as Mind. Bernadette Roberts argued that Buddhism clearly denied any self or consciousness with their anatta doctrine, the implication also being a denial of an individual soul. But the Buddha while refuting both the nihilists and the eternalists, said he never denied the existence of the soul but only said it was indefinable. I don’t see why Soul in the system of Plotinus or Sant Mat could not be of the nature of anatta, or no-self as Roberts describes it. Even Adyashanti has at times used the term soul for true nature.
Few get this deep in meditation, but fortunately for the average seeker, they can awaken to what has been called “the waking paradox of the Nous” - that is, the non-dual glimpse of the soul’s ‘prior principles’, or one could say, direct insight into the part of the divine soul that never incarnates, even now, especially when even in simple faith they are supported from the esoteric dimension.
In the end, Roberts does affirm that our true self, in her system realized as one with God, is in fact God's mechanism for going beyond self. Thus, she does in fact honor self:
"We do not go beyond the self because it is worthless, self-centered, and of no value. On the contrary, the self is God-given, and, for a time, as part of our humanity, it serves a great purpose. Yet self as an interior energy and self-conscious way of knowing stands in the way of pure vision, and therefore must ultimately be relinquished." (490)
For her, the original state of Adam and Eve was the unitive state, but it was not their final destiny. This is consistent with the view of the Orthodox Fathers. We are not just to return to where we once were. For Roberts, then, after re-uniting our soul with the divine, that is, establishing a sense of self with the divine as its center, the many years actively lived in that unitive state are a time when the deepest roots of self slowly dies out, and the transition to the ultimate state of No-Self then becomes effortless and ordinary.
For Roberts, the "mystical marriage" is not an achievement of union, but the realization of an already existing union. It is ordinary, in that it doesn't imply that one will necessarily become a charismatic being out to set the world on fire. The unitive state is living our lives as God originally intended, in oneness and partnership with Him. There is a stage beyond this unitive state, however, leading to a final loss of self, or which she speaks of as Christ's death and resurrection within our own being, revealing the Trinity within the Godhead. The important point is that she maintains that the unitive state is the means to realize no-self. Yet there may be some confusion because not many modern seekers pursue the religious path and achieve the unitive state, but often experience degrees of no-self through self-enquiry first. Ramaji in his book 1000 handles this complex issue well. Brunton, using a more comprehensive conception of ego than Roberts, expresses this differently by saying that only a mature ego is capable of the sacrifice involved in realizing the Overself.
I do not see her views opposed to those of Sant Mat, Nisargadatta, Siddharameshwar, Ramana, and other great teachers and teachings, only perhaps expressed differently (i.e., inserting a Trinity) and emphasizing different stages. The experiential difference here is sometimes between a view that says "I exist because God exists," versus the more or less Hindu "I am God." Yet then comes along a sage like Nisargadatta who says, "I owe my being to no one." So one can take what one can intuitively grasp and leave the rest for now. We do the same!
But perhaps the view of Roberts as well as Sant Mat are not so much different than that of Sri Nisargadatta and Sri Siddharameshar. For Roberts there is a true self, and then no-self. For Sri Siddharameshwar there is a natural 'state' which is pure consciousness, also called Moolamaya (by Shankaracharya), the Primal Illusion, I Am, Atman, Self, Jnana, Knowledge, Turiya, the 'I Am', and even 'God'. At the same time that it is called Moolamaya or Primal Illusion, however, it is also referred to as 'Sat' and eternal.
Paramatman or Parabrahman, on the other hand, is the Natural 'Self', Absolute Reality, Vijnana, Supreme Knowledge, prior to consciousness and all of the above. In all four states, of wakefulness, dream, deep-sleep, and Turiya or pure consciousness, it is present as the 'Eternal Truth'. And it is present even if the others are not present. Another name for Parabrahman, he says, is 'the embodiment of Knowledge'. This I think is key, and implies that it is not another state, but rather a 'stateless state', and something to be realized here and now.
"In the Absolute every 'I Am' is preserved and glorified," said Sri Nisargadatta. That seems to mean that the Self or 'I Am' is eternal, like Sat Desh, but not the 'Final Reality.' For Siddharameshwar, "In Vijnana (Supreme Knowledge) both bondage and liberation are merely a childish game."
There is no hope in or need to effortfully try to reach a state of 'no-self' or the 'stateless state' of Paramatman. That is to say, being a devotee is perfectly okay, and a right path for most. Even after 'liberation'. There are so many aspects of the divine grace. A lot of complex models have been presented here for comparison, but the main thing, it has been said, is to die a little more each day to who you think you are, before who you think you are dies. Then there will be so much less to do on the last. That’s what they are all talking about. And contemplate the great truths regularly to allay any fears that you won’t get there, haven’t got there yet, or that there is anywhere else to go. There is no failure or getting lost.
Just a few more considerations before we leave this section. For advaita vedanta, all of the manifest planes where there is anything visionary are the equivalent to taijasa or the dream state, including the so-called causal plane of the Sants. For vedanta, the true causal dimension of prajna, the equivalent to sushupti or deep sleep, is associated with the Heart. When the ego 'falls down abashed' the universal recognition or realization is described as being asleep while awake, or waking sleep. All thought of going anywhere or of up or down is seen as only imagination and like a dream. All desire for samadhi is gone as the true source of happiness is found. What comes after this there can only be spoken of as a deepening, as the dream is over. In Sant Mat this is depicted as a movement to Alakh, Agam, and Anami. But there is no more sense of being a prodigal son going home. PB says of this stage, and beyond, that there is :
"...no aspiration, no longing, [only] a calm movement into the silent Universal Mind without personal aims." (491)
[Note: Here he implies by Universal Mind not what Sant Mat usually means by the term, but rather, “God” - an endless deepening into God].
David Hawkins puts it this way:
"Transcendence" is really a style of languaging, for in the nonlinear domain, there are progressive dimensions rather than actual levels...Each advance expands the paradigm of awareness that, transitionally, has a certain sense of 'home'...Subjectively, transition is more like an emergence or an unfolding, which is the province of awareness itself, about which there is no mentalization because these are states of 'no mind' (paradoxically labeled as 'Mind')." (492)
For Ramana and the advaitins, forgetfulness of our true nature as the Self gives rise to the I-sense, and only then do we speculate about God as a Supreme Being and a Creator. Yet God or the Absolute or the One is not "a" Supreme Being, but rather Being or the Supreme Itself, as Meister Eckhart also maintained one thousand years ago. This is likely true in Sant Mat also, but a theology of a Supreme Being known as Radhasoami has arisen. If Radhasoami is simply meant as "the Supreme", however, that is fine. The question then of course also arises, "who are we?"
The experiences seem so distinct: dying to who you think you are, the heart opening, the dissolution of attention and the abandonment of the search, versus achieving via concentration of the attention various higher plane states, that discussion fails to capture it all. We have tried, as a proper synthesis has not been done before, but of ourselves can advance no further. The reader will have to ponder deeply for his or her self the apparent contrasts depicted.
Ramana said: ”The ‘I’ transcends ‘I’ yet remains ‘I’. This is the paradox of realization. The wise see no contradiction in it.” Kirpal said: ”It is He who is working in me, not I.” St. Paul said: ”It is I, not now I, it is Christ lives in me.”
Is there so much difference here?
The reader will note that while Sri Ramana did not follow a cosmological path like that of the Sants, his spiritual process, however, did follow basic archetypal stages, and was not one of vedantic self-enquiry alone from start to finish. Quoting from “The Lost Years of Ramana Maharshi” :
“What, then, was Ramana’s process? First, with no prior spiritual practice or understanding, he was suddenly “taken over by a great Power,” which pulled him within, breaking his gross body-identification. Second, his “spirit longed for a fresh hold,” and he petitioned the sixty-three saints whose images he had worshiped in the temple as a boy, asking for their grace to establish him in the same degree of devotion that they had. This could be suggested as devotion between him and Isvara, the “Father” he left home for Arunachala in search of. Third, he contemplated on the Self in the heart - which held a “powerful fascination” for him - in the caves on Arunachala for many years, before becoming identified with it. Fourth, he experienced a second death experience at age thirty-two which seems to have furthered the establishing of him in sahaj, with the integration of body and world with the inner Self. Thus, his Self-Realization was in no way a “one-shot” affair at the age of sixteen as is often popularly portrayed. It required grace in the beginning, the middle, and the end. He also confessed that this grace “comes only to those who have already, in this or previous lives, gone through all the struggles and sadhanas preparatory to the extinction of the mind and killing of the ego." (493)
Fortunately, then, the ultimate goal of these different paths is the same: “Home”. And as has been seen there are many different experiential scenarios in which that may play out. It has been said, for instance, that some have attained a stable, liberating opening of the sahasrar or crown chakra without having conscious experience of the amrita nadi or the heart on the right, and, as Ramaji interestingly suggests, if they are in schools that do not pay attention to yogic experiences, or think that they are unnecessary, they may not even be aware of the crown chakra opening and possibly enabling a realization of, say, no-mind. (494). And this is also not to say that having that chakra open is the only way to realize a state of no-mind, or the I Am, nor that experiencing the amrita nadi is necessary for Self-Realization! Remember, Sri Nisargadatta, for instance, said he never had the latter experience, but that he was in near total agreement with Ramana Maharshi's teachings. Further, the functioning of the “aham sphurana” or the lighting up and pulsating of the amrita nadi, while a happy augery, fades away like other yogic and mystical phenomenon, as “its function is to be a bridge for the recognition of that which is supreme beyond all.” (495) Similarly, all of the planes of ascent only lead one back to where one always and already is anyway. In summary, any and all of these phenomenal things are not required, but they can happen, and so they are mentioned. The great Sants who go another route than the vedantins hopefully get to the same place, and vice versa, but perhaps, not always or in every case. But all the phenomena talked about in the books need not happen for or in the same way to everyone, as previously suggested, so no one should feel left out.
Ramakrishna went frequently into ascended Nirvikalpa samadhis, and even said to a young Vivekananda who ardently desired the same, that “there is a state much higher than that”, but himself reported no ‘heart-on-the right’ experiences. Yet Ramana forcefully told Jung there was nothing that Ramakrishna did not know. Nor did Ramakrishna say that the “I”-thought became dead, but that it was rendered harmless. Papaji said that through self-enquiry it is not so much that you destroy the mind but rather that you realize that the mind doesn't exist. Don't these views, however, amount to the same thing in the end? Ramana did it his way, Ramakrishna did it his way, the Sants do it their way, but the non-exclusive infinite consciousness [what Sri Atmananda curiously termed the true "I" Principle], must remain, because what else is there? My sense is that he used that phrase to emphasize that one never gets away from a unique individuality to be lost in a purely impersonal something, albeit these are still concepts that fail to convey the nature of what is realized, while they do help say what it is not.
Even body and mind, however, are considered by scripture to be nothing but THAT, so is it really true as many teachings also profess, that the much-maligned ego must commit “egocide” or will simply disappear? Exclusive forms of egoism will diminish, sure, but not even all of that, as the ego has a role to play in this world, and the sage can function in the ego and out of it, as needed. What is wrong with taking care of ones needs? After all, that is part of the totality, too. It is all OK.
Even the realized ones have a sense of “I”, it does not go away, although they are not identified with it, take no "refuge in it' as we do, and it is also said that it does tend to get universalized. ”The “I” transcends “I” yet remains “I”, the wise see no contradiction in it,” said Ramana. Without a sense of self, of “I”, one might not be able to function here, would likely mistake other people’s thoughts for ones own, would possibly become psychotic, and would not even be able to begin a spiritual search. Further, Ramana says:
"You now think you are an individual, there is the universe and that God is beyond the cosmos. So there is the idea of separateness. This idea must go. For God is not separate from you or the cosmos...God is not only in the heart of all, He is the prop of all, He is the source of all, their abiding place and their end. All proceed from Him, have their stay in Him, and finally resolve into Him. Therefore, he is not separate." (496)
From the Heart’s Gaze, there is no so-called spirit/matter distinction, in fact no independent spirit and no matter. That is but a temporary position or expedient, a kindness of the Masters for teaching purposes, but it is not true, for there is only a seamless web of reality. There is no “non-self”, no such thing as “non-being”, no “nothing” from which a “something” came from, and, therefore, fundamentally nothing to be afraid of.
The “Absolute”, moreover, being only that which IS, is not something to worry about. Stages unfold naturally, meaning first you live them, then you outgrow or move beyond them. How can one, for instance, be in a rush to transcend Divinity? Likely one may spend a long time there, particularly on a devotional path. But as long as there is an adored “other,” even a Divine one, standing as a transcendental, or ultimate pure "object," there must also be a “subject," or "self,” as a thin veil on the Absolute, says Sri Siddharameshwar and others, and therefore a final step to go, a final “seeing” to take place. That tricky devil, the I-thought, always lurking in the background, must be exposed, held down, recognized and/or in some sense be resorbed into the Source whence it arises. The Divine as other, and the self that supports it, both die - an illusory death - and are forgotten, and then, even that forgetting is forgotten. Liberation as such is forgotten. Ramaji says "that is God's gift to you. In the final stage, God gives you to you as itself." (497) God, self, and world - as concepts - all vanish, only the Absolute remains - only Yourself - beyond divinity and love, as such, but not the annihilation of these, rather, one naturally stands prior to them, Alone. And these are not just irrational and impractical words resounding in the tympanum of those seekers weary of the quest, for it is said there is also a rock-like strength in these later stages, wherein is allowed the highest expression of Divinity and Love, and the Real World as it IS. Papaji said:
"As far as my experience goes, it's not even love, not even love. It is something else - a fullness as when there are no waves in the middle of the ocean. The word 'love' is misused. There is love when there is no lover and no beloved. No subject, no object. This is true love." (498)
Perhaps. This is the advaita view or perspective. It is certainly not wrong. But might it also sometimes be seen as tainted with a lingering disposition to invulnerability? Might what we are after he better articulated as a simultaneous divine duality within non-duality, a vulnerability within the invulnerable or unassailable peace? We are human beings after all.
Brunton said something else about this stage. To quote from memory, "Others may think that he stands in the great Light, but he himself has no particular self-importance." Ramaji put it this way:
"You thought you had reached the Source before. But what you had achieved before was what you thought to be the Source, meaning God, Buddha, Jesus, Krishna, Rama [or Sat Purush]...But when you finally arrive in heaven, you find it is not what you expected. You are ushered into a very quiet room, There you are introduced to what is behind the mind, behind even the big, magical mysterious divine mind. No matter what your concept of Source was up until then, it was wrong. You had arrived at the perfect concept [i.e., God] It was still wrong...God was always a concept pointing to you, yet you had to die to find that out. Both you and God had to die and be forgotten." (499)
This could be the "Wordless State," or certainly "Stateless State," or perhaps Kirpal’s “Beyond the Beyond State,” which is not my state or your state, but "The State".
Again, please don't fret all these big words. It is only your Self, when all is said and done. So say those much wiser than I. Shall we not trust them that it is not far away? The saints say we are like fish swimming in water and not realizing where the water is! Kirpal said "you are already there, you just don't know it." Darshan said "He is nearer than your jugular vein." Are we not to believe their plain words and shorten the path, or will we interpret them to mean we must meditate forever to 'reach' that which is nearer than our own breath, that is, to reach that which we truly are? Not only is "He" closer than breath, but so is the Self. Papaji, like Brunton and other sages mentioned in this book, forthrightly proclaims:
"There is no depth. It is immaculate emptiness. No inside, no outside, no surface, no depth. No place to go. Everywhere you go is 'here'...It is like searching for your glasses while wearing them. What you have been searching for is nearer than your own breath. You are always in the Source. Whatever you are doing, you are doing it in the Source." (500)
Sri Nisargadatta also points us not to miss the pristine simplicity by holding on to an expectation of the spectacular:
“Even faith in God is only a stage along the way. Ultimately you abandon all, for you come to something so simple that there are no words to express…On realization you feel complete, fulfilled, free from the pleasure-pain complex and not able to explain what happened, why and how. You can put it only in negative terms: ‘Nothing is wrong with me any longer.’ It is only by comparison with the past that you know that you are out of it. Otherwise - you are just yourself. Don’t try to convey it to others. If you can, it is not the real thing.” (501)
And further:
“You must realize first of all that you are the proof of everything, including yourself. None can prove your existence, because his existence must be confirmed by you first. Your being and knowing you owe nobody. Remember, you are entirely on your own. You do not come from somewhere, you do not go anywhere. You are timeless being and awareness.” (502)
This is in stark contrast to the message of the sants presented in Part One on how the soul came from Sach Khand to enter the body and reside at the eye-focus! It may only be now at the end of this long book that such a message is more palatable to us, or at least, seen as providing much food to ponder on what our true eternal status is - right now.
Can one but see it, or accept it, or believe it, at least now and then?
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
Is there only One Soul? Reflections on a remark by Ishwar Puri; Soul is one-and-many, not only one; If soul is the creator then what is God?; The non-dual union of the oneness of the perceiver and the perceived is the basis for a deeper realization; A final dive into Plotinus for some answers on soul and Oversoul; Ishwar Puri: “only the Totality goes to Anami”; What ‘Totality’? - that of the unified Soul. Is there more than one ‘Totality’? Let’s be reasonable!; Metaphor of the ocean and the drop: The ocean of consciousness is to be ‘recognized’, not ‘reached’; "This is your last illusion," said Atmananda, "that you are a gnani." All is forgotten, and one re-enters the marketplace
In a talk (The Soul Wants Freedom from the Mind; Part 2 of 6, Dec. 14, 2018, Grayslake Illinois; youtu.be) Ishwar Puri said there is really only one soul, and that soul creates everything. We must ask a few questions for clarification: Is he right, and how does he know that? Moreover, what does it mean? Is that ‘One Soul’ the Absolute? As we have seen, Plotinus does not hold that the soul, even Universal Soul, is the One. Sri Siddharameshwar and Samartha RamDas taught that even the non-dual union of the oneness of the perceiver and the perceived is but the basis for a deeper realization, ’beyond consciousness’. Zen, of course, certainly does not say the soul, however, cosmic, is the absolute Mind. Moreover, one who realizes this does not usually advertise it. It is ‘secret’ and ‘really Beyond’. As Bodhidharma said:
“The nature of the Mind when understood,
No human speech can compass or disclose.
Enlightenment is naught to be attained,
And he that gains it does not say he knows.”
I believe Ishwar was trying to say something profound, but as it stands his statement is likely to be confusing for people. His talk caused me to re-insert some difficult material I had previously omitted in the interests of simplifying matters! And, having left things on a simpler note, the reader may justifiably be upset with me for now demanding even more of their no doubt already strained intellect. One could perhaps without great loss skip to the next section, but I feel questions raised by Ishwar’s claim deserve answers.
If we say that there is only one soul, which creates all, then is that soul God, the supreme Creator? Is the soul of each of us that one Universal Soul, is it part of that Soul, or does it dwell within that Soul? Is there no distinction to be made between soul (or principle of Soul) and God? To merely say “no, there is not” may leave many things unexplained and the different words interchangeable and therefore meaningless. This may be satisfy advaita, but it is certainly not what Sant Mat or Plotinus had in mind.
From the point of view of non-duality it is better to say there is only one soul than to say there are many souls, but then, ‘one’ is still a concept and not that to which it points to. “If I say He is one, the question of two arises,” said Kabir. Advaita means ‘not-two' - not ‘one’. Saying there is only one suggests a monolithic block, which is perhaps the highest conception the mind can grasp, but it does not categorize the reality beyond the mind, which is uncategorizable and mathematically denoted by the naught, not one. Therefore, in a manner of speaking, ‘one’ is only a rough approximation!
It may be said that when the concept of space is transcended, then the concepts of whole and part are no longer valid. This should be the paradoxical reality characteristic of a soul in Sat Lok or its equivalent in everyday life. The part is the whole, and the whole is the part. 'I Am' is the Absolute, except it is "not now I, but Christ liveth in me." The soul is there, but no longer herself.
Where then, however, does the soul get its being from - itself? If that is so then the soul is the Absolute and there is no question of it ever losing itself in illusion or ignorance, and ipso facto, no path either. But that does not seem to be the case.
In the Enneads of Plotinus, once again, Soul is one of three Primal (eternal, transcendental) Principles or Hypostases: Soul, Intellectual Principle (Nous), and the One. Soul is not ego, nor an astral or subtle body that migrates, and itself does not incarnate or reincarnate, although an apparent emanant of it does so or appears to do so. Soul can be known in its lower and higher aspects. The Orthodox Fathers considered the Nous to be the higher aspect of soul. Plotinus considered Nous to be the soul's immediate prior Principle, and the source of its self-knowing. In reality these cannot be separated. Certainly realization of Soul beyond all lower bodies or conditional vehicles is transcendental from our perspective. And it can be realized even while the bodies exist, that is, even when not in meditation. There is only one Absolute Mind, but individual Soul can be said to be the offspring of the ‘Absolute-Soul-in-the-Intellectual-Principle’. This could be considered as God, contrasted with the Godhead or One.
Plotinus speaks of the Principle of Soul as a one-and-many. Not one, not many, both both simultaneously. It in turn gets its being from the Nous, or Intellectual Principle, its prior, which he calls a one-in-many, and which itself eternally overflows from the One.
The image of the world comes from the Nous, or the Absolute-Soul-in-the-Intellectual-Principle or Nous, projected through the individual soul. So the individual soul can be said to co-create the world. As Sri Nisargadatta said, “The Absolute makes manifestation possible, the self makes it actual.” The soul as such is god-like, but it is not God. Many if not most mystics, when they attain union with their soul, think they have attained union with God. This is understandable, since the soul itself is infinite and eternal and of the nature of voidness, but this is a fallacy. Experiencing the ‘soul as absolute’ is not the same as realizing the Absolute. Damiani explains:
"The whole issue is a little confusing. First of all, because the very nature of the Absolute Soul is Void, the individual soul as absolute is also void. PB points out that when the experience of the union with the soul takes place, one recognizes that his soul or his mind is of a void nature. That nature is similar but not identical with the Intellectual principle or the World-Mind. When one is in that position, that union with the soul [which in itself is a realization of non-duality], then he can receive the aura which is emanating from the World-Mind. And he knows - that is his soul knows - that that principle is.”
"If we say that the experience of the Intellectual Principle can't exist, then the most that we could know is the existence of our soul as the absolute individual, and we would never know what Plotinus refers to as the three primal Hypostases, or even what PB refers to as the World-Mind. You couldn't know it. But because the very nature of the soul is similar to the Intellectual principle, it can receive the aura which is emanating from the Intellectual principle. And in that emanation the soul receives the fact or the revelation that God is, the existence of God...That individual soul, that sage, can even be directed by the Intellectual Principle...The reception of the Void, that Intellectual Principle coming into your soul, is utter silence. It's so silent it is deafening.”
And this may account for differences among sages, such as Ramana Maharshi, or perhaps adepts in the Sant Mat tradition who have merged in Anami Lok and not only Sach Khand: they are directed by the divine, and act as directed by a divine Power. Even as they have no distinct sense of holiness or self-importance. Beyond this presumably is the Stateless State.
"They speak of the direct transmission of No-Mind, and things like that. When Hui-neng, for instance, speaks about "from the first not a thing is,' he's speaking about the principle of his absolute mind, his individual mind [remember that for Plotinus, while infinite the soul is a 'one-and-many'; it can be both one and many; therefore, the term 'unit soul' or 'unit mind' is used; there is no contradiction of logic here]. That's where he is coming from. He's not coming from the Intellectual Principle, the Principle of Emptiness. [He’s coming from] the position that all you could know is your own mind and that if you could experience it in its profoundest level it would be void.”
This would be the highest form of solipsism, even though one is touching reality - the reality of his subjective logos within - so it wouldn’t really be a solipsism. But the error that one is the supreme creator itself may come with this view. The individual soul is not that creator, although one can say it is co-creator inasmuch as it translates and makes manifest the image projected by the Nous, its prior Principle, within it. Paradoxically the soul is in the Nous and the Nous is in the soul. Even more paradoxical is that there is the same Absolute Mind throughout.
"Your individual consciousness, even if distinguished from your ego, cannot directly go into the Intellectual Principle, cannot be receptive of the Intellectual Principle. It must do so through the unity of the soul, though the unity of your own mind."
"PB points out that each and every one of us has an Overself, and then there is the universal principle of Overself. Let's say there is a universal Self, and from it come all these individual Overselves. Each one of these individual Overselves is made of the very stuff of awareness, of which this is the universal principle. In other words, there's the mother Overself, the universal consciousness, the principle of awareness, and then each individual Overself is a unit of awareness, an absolute individual. And each one of these units of awareness he refers to as an Overself. Now if that's so, wouldn't it make sense to you that in order to make contact with the Universal Overself, the principle itself, you would have to do so through the intermediary of your Overself?”
"This would be the same as when Plotinus says that the Absolute Soul is the Soul Essence undivided and integral to the Intellectual Principle, and from it emanate individual souls. He calls them units of life. Now wouldn't it stand to reason that each one of these souls that emanates - or each one of these minds that emanates - has to be of the very essence, of the very nature of that Absolute Soul, that Universal Overself?...And the nature of her Overself, my Overself, your Overself is similar to the nature of that Universal Overself, pure awareness. Now in order for me to become receptive of that Universal Overself, I first have to become the Overself itself, my individual Overself."
"The individual Overself is similar but not identical in essence with the Universal Overself. PB makes that point quite often: there is a difference between every individual Overself and the source from which it comes...The important thing is this, that the only way you can receive or perceive the Void is to become that pure awareness that your Overself is, because it's that pure awareness of what your Overself is which is receptive to the Universal Overself. There can't be any admixture in that awareness because it would interfere with the reception of the Void. So there can't be any kind of individual consciousness that receives the emanation from the Void. It's a cosmic consciousness, your absolute mind, that receives that."
"They don't have texts available on these things. When PB speaks of about what a philosopher sage is, he points out that the philosopher sage is a person who has achieved permanent union with his soul. He doesn't say that the philosopher sage is one who has achieved permanent union with the Intellectual Principle or with the Absolute Soul [or God], but one who has achieved permanent identity with his soul. The soul that he speaks about, this is what he refers to as made in the image of God - in other words, the image of the Intellectual Principle. And that is what the philosopher or the jnani is, he's that soul. He knows his essence comes from the Intellectual Principle. He knows it, not intellectually, he knows it because his soul is a direct emanation from that, and the soul's self-cognition automatically includes the recognition of its principle - where it comes from."
"So it's true that the glimpse into your soul is of the nature of the Void. It's true. But it's also true that the essence of your soul, even though it is void, and the essence of the Intellectual Principle, which is also void, are distinct. Now what is the distinction between these two? When the philosopher sage says to you, "God is," he's not saying that my soul, even though it is cosmic and infinite, is God. He's speaking about the Intellectual Principle, and that's the experience that comes to the philosopher sage..." (503)
Now, there are people who say that their master showed them God, or showed them that they were Everything. The meaning of words is crucial. What this usually means is that the ego dropped out or was temporarily overshadowed or held in abeyance, revealing a unity of the perceived and the perceived. Because the soul as consciousness is itself infinite, one can see the whole manifest universe as within oneself, or non-distinct from oneself. This in itself is profound illumination and if maintained could be condiered Self-Realization.
What Damiani is suggesting is that there is no glimpse of the Absolute, however, until one is united with or stabilized in his soul in this way. Until then one can only have glimpses of the soul, and easily mistake them for something greater. Sri Nisargadatta says there can be gradual progress in eliminating the false, ridding oneself of hindrances, but enlightenment comes suddenly and irrevocably, and you ‘rotate into a new dimension’. His guru Sri Siddharameshwar said one polishes or scrubs the Great Causal body [the Soul in the state of liberation from ignorance], i.e., makes it steady for some time, before effortlessly shifting to the Absolute, ‘from which there is no return.’ In other words, the Absolute cannot be lost, and it is not a state entered into or gone out of.
The ‘totality’ of ones soul must be realized before the higher or deeper glimpse is possible. Both are of the nature of void, the individual soul and the mother soul. So in a way Ishwar is right about only a totality going from Sach Khand to Anami, but it is misleading to imply it is the totality of ‘everything’. It is the totality of the eternal soul and its retracted emanant of consciousness that goes there, but in truth, nothing is going anywhere, so this realization is possible anytime and anywhere, although not likely, says Ramana, until binding vasanas are eradicated.
So, is there only one soul?
Metaphor of the ocean and the drop
The path is often conceived of an ascending journey where a “drop” merges in the “ocean.” Ramana quoted Kabir as seemingly reversing this sequence and saying that the “ocean merges in the drop,” which he called “para-bhakti.” Ishwar Puri also felt that the notion of a drop merging in an ocean was misleading and for him the concept of a drop or river traveling from here to there was repulsive and that awakening was more of a process where the drop expands in a non-linear fashion into the entire infinite ocean, even as every sand kernel contains an infinite desert. For advaita, of course, there is no drop and no expansion into anything! But in our experience, accepting basic progression of non-dual awakening stages as, for instance, Ramaji outlines, there is an apparent expansion going from the 600’s to the 700’s, or cosmic consciousness stage, followed by an exalted ‘implosion’ (or as in Zen the 'lacquer barrel overturning and and bubble bursting and equalizing with all space) in levels 800-1000. This may be said to happen in Sant Mat as well, with the first three planes experienced as a cosmic expansion, which is then sacrificed for one to become a ‘nothing’ as the foundation for the more advanced stages. Just at this point is where one in a sense has the most to lose (i.e., the 'death of god-consciousness'), and also why many dwell in these places for long periods of time.
So, yes, there are different ways of talking about these things. The soul reaching an ocean is ridiculous when you think of it, but thinking is something many mystics shy away from. The ocean of consciousness is not ‘reached’, rather, it is recognized’. It is already the case. But on a cosmological path it may seem like there is a journey, for a while, and that is all right as long as one moves beyond that perspective.
Anthony Damiani confessed to us once in class that these were all metaphors, and when we got enlightened we would come back and shoot him - for lying!
One initiate gives us a Sant Mat version of the second metaphor metaphor depicted above:
"The promises at initiation include that one's karmic account is taken over and the experiences in life after initiation are those precisely necessary for your awakening to your true nature and essence. Judith Lamb-Lion said it was like sword fighting with the Master, where he keeps backing you up a steep hill. In the end you discover that you have reached the peak fighting a losing battle and moving in reverse! Perhaps we thought 'surrender' was something we somehow had to decide on and do. In reality, surrender to me is what happens when one is completely defeated, exhausted, out of tricks and next moves, unable to move anything at all. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for they shall see God...not those still standing, but those groveling on the floor of life completely out of tricks of will power!"
From this perspective, as Kirpal said, "All are satsangis, I tell you." Life in truth is not something apart from the path. Brunton writes:
"Let no one make the mistake of separating out the quest from everyday life. It is Life itself! Questers are not a special group, a labelled species, which one does or does not join, but are all humanity." (504)
"This is your last illusion," said Atmananda, "that you are a gnani." All is forgotten, and one re-enters the marketplace, with no notion of being better or even different from other men.
Concluding Thoughts
"While the higher mystic experiences are mostly the same universally, the personal beliefs and teachings of the mystics differ, and usually take some or all of the form of the religious tradition into which they were born." - Brunton (505)
Therefore we must discriminate and be tolerant. For too long almost every group feels that their group and their teaching is the best. But, of course, no true master, saint, sage, or teacher will ever speak like that. Everyone has different needs and is in a different situation or stage of life.
For the young, for instance, the urgency, or the resignation, of the old may not be there, and life may call to them from within and without for a variety of expressions. The following words of Aadi spoke to this. Some may consider them not spiritual, but, although they could perhaps be articulated more precisely, feel if they resonate with you. Looking back through the years, they do for me. The value of course will depend on how they are interpreted, what is meant by enlightenment in this context, etc., but the gist is that we must own and honor where we are.
“It is not necessary to be completely enlightened. Complete Enlightenment is the destiny of very few Souls. What an average person, an average seeker, needs to awaken is a certain relatively permanent experience of the I Am, and the ability to come back to this experience at any time - to have this inner home. Such a person does not need to reach the Absolute State. Enlightenment is not the only purpose of life. You want to live life, you want to be happy, you wish to reach a certain essential amount of emotional fulfillment, you want to adventure in life, to express your creativity. If the purpose of life was only Enlightenment, this universe would not be created.”
“Yes…there are many elements. You are multidimensional and you need to have in your perspective the vision of your blueprint, your destiny, and your completion. You are heading towards that point in your experience of the inner and outer where you simply feel complete and done with this dimension…Enlightenment doesn’t necessarily make you a better person. It gives you a foundation of inner peace, a continuity of awareness, and a depth of Being. But if the Heart is not awakened, the ego may still be arrogant. Apart from awakening, the Soul needs to still evolve emotionally, mentally and in many different areas.” (506)
We humbly say, with our limited understanding and countless faults, that it is getting time for secrecy and old language to be abandoned, and truth to be made plain. There are inevitable mysteries and paradoxes on the path to be sure, words as such being but pointers towards wordless truth, but also many 'unnecessary mysteries' due to philosophical provincialism and doctrinal obscurity. Even under genuine teachers, many initiates have suffered from a lack of clarity and understanding. To help remedy this has been a central theme in this book. To wit, it must be kept in mind that :
"Whether you feel the Reality in an overwhelming mystic experience or not, what matters is that you should carry the unfaltering faith that it is always there, always present with you and within you." (507)
"Is this benign state a past from which we have lapsed or a future to which we are coming? The true answer is that it is neither. This state has always been existent within us, is so now and always will be. It is forever with us simply because it is what we really are." (508)
"The real Truth is so wonderful that it is what it is because 'it is too good to be true' in the little mind's expectations." (509)
Jeanne Guyon likewise spoke to our hearts:
"God demands nothing extraordinary. On the contrary He is very pleased by a simple, childlike conduct...The highest spiritual attainments are really the ones that are the most easily reached. The things that are the most important are the things that are the least difficult." (510)
"The task seems hopeless," said Sri Nisargadatta, "until suddenly all becomes clear and simple and so wonderfully easy."
All this being said, Kirpal Singh often said that if one wished to be convinced of the greatness of the path, he should go see an initiate dying. Many have attested to the form of a Master or a Radiant Presence manifesting at the time of their passing welcoming them into the Heart and ease their passing over to the next world of being. Blessed assurance, is granted the faithful soul at the time of this event if not before. Brunton called it a divinely ordained part of the process of dying. For those on the path of knowledge, likewise, the realization that one is always Home certainly will not be less so at the time of death. The sage Robert Adams was asked when he was dying if Ramana had come, and he replied, "Everyone has come!" If one has read this far he knows that with surrender into the Mystery he will be okay. Being lost is not an option. There are many beings and presences that assist each and every soul.The promise given by true Sants is that for the sincere disciple there is not only such assurance but also much help. Kirpal Singh said:
"Satguru is the fountainhead of grace. Strange are the ways in which he works his grace. With just a single kindly look he may bless a jiva forever." (511)
"Having received the protection of a God-realized man, do you think he would ever forget you? The Master always holds his disciples in the innermost heart center." (512)
“A loving faith in the inherent goodness of God and complete self-surrender to the Divine will lead one on the high road to spirituality without any great continuing effort on the part of an aspirant.” (513)
“Love is the most powerful and effective of all practices to meet the Lord. It is the only method by which one can attain communion with Him in an instant. Shamas Tabriz says: If the road is lengthy, you should fly on the wings of love. When you unfold the wings of love, you need not ascend by means of the steps...A person who is intoxicated with the wine of love will reach the goal by means of a single sigh, as compared to thousands of years spent in other methods.”
“True union and one-pointed attention comes only with love. The spiritual progress achieved by means of meditation over a number of years can be had in a moment through love, because the union of inner sight takes the lover immediately to the goal. This is the real love and this is the true yoga. In fact, this is the be-all and end-all.” (514)
The Apostle Paul declared, “No eye has ever seen, nor ear heard, nor has the human heart or thought ever grasped what God has prepared for those who love him." (Is. 64:4, 1 Cor. 2:9)
We have talked a lot about stages and what not. My experience is that 99% of the path can take place beneath the surface until the time is ripe for a mere touch of the illuminate’s hand, so to speak, to catapult you (a you that doesn’t care anymore if he goes anywhere - that's seems to be the requirement as well as the essence of much of the 'preparation') straight into the Heart of God. In fact, I’m wondering if that is more the norm than the slow passing through stages. Soamiji and Sawan both said this. They weren't copping out for failure to deliver the goods. We just didn't understand what they meant or what is really happening.
The sort of faith called for can be reached through love, although most of us come to it through a combinational of love and intelligence. A true teaching, therefore, like true art should not only be Good, and True, but also Beautiful. The pondering of its words should of themselves help guide the thoughts of the recipient into the mood in which the work was created, as well as help in evoking feeling, intuition, and awakening, and not merely give one more things to do or think based on concepts or dogma. That was the goal of the ancient sages, and we hope in some small way we have been similarly successful here. Being largely a synthetic work, we are eternally in debt to the great ones mentioned herein, whose pen far surpasses that of our own.
Thank you for reading Sant Mat Through the Heart’s Gaze and the Light of Awareness! May you be truly blessed.
1. Swami Lokeswarananda, The Way to God As Taught by Sri Ramakrishna (Calcutta, India: The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture, 1992), p. 384
2. Brunton, op. cit., reference misplaced
3. D.T. Suzuki, from The Gospel According to Zen, 1970, p. 39
4. Odier, op. cit.
5. Norman Waddell, trans., Great Ivy, The Spiritual Autobiography of Zen Master Hakuin (Shambhala, 1999), p. xxi
6. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part Two, 7.5
7. Ibid, Vol. 2, p. 267
8. Ibid, Brunton, Vol. 11, Chapter 6: 41, 45, 46
9. Ibid, Vol. 12, Part 2, 4.70
10. Osho, Bodhidharma: The Greatest Zen Master (Pune, India: Osho Media International, 1979/2011), p. 162-164
11. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, 4.115
12. Ibid, Vol. 14, 5.88
13. Tweedie,op. cit., p. 539-540
14. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 5.12, 5.130 15. Ibid, 5.131
16. Ibid, 5.135
17. Guyon, Experiencing the Depths of Jesus Christ, op. cit., p. 128-129
18. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 608
19. Molinos, op. cit.
20. Fenelon, The Seeking Heart, op. cit., p. 101-102
21. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 546
22. Sawan SIngh, op. cit., p. 109
23. Ibid, p. 183
24. Swami Saradananda, Sri Ramakrishna the Great Master (Mylapore, India: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 6th edition, 2008), p. 1014, 813
25. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #1134
26. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 14, 2.88
27. Kirpal SIngh, Heart-to-Heart Talks, op. cit., p. 43-44
28. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 2.108
29. Godman, The Power of the Presence, Part One, op. cit., p. 248
30. Ibid, p. 245
31. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 14, 8.68
32. Kirpal Singh, Godman, op.cit., p. 179-181
33. Markides, Fire in the Heart, op.cit., p. 100
34. Ibid, p. 216-217
35. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, 6.263-265
36. Ibid, 6.871
37. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., # misplaced
38. Frydman, op. cit., p. 193-194
39. Ibid
40. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #1181
41. Ibid, #807
42. David Godwin, ed., Be As You Are (Penguin Arkana, 1985), p. 204
43. Frydman, op. cit., p. 380
44. Ibid, p. 4
45. Ibid, p. 457
46. Brunton, op.cit., Vol. 2, 6.389
47. Ibid, 6.550
48. Ibid, 6.551
49. Ibid, 6.560
50. Frydman, op. cit., p. 372-374
51. Hawkins, Transcending the Levels of Consciousness, op. cit., p. 37-46
52. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, 2.426, 430, 435
53. Saint Shri Samartha Ramdas, Dasbodh, Mrs. Shilpa Jopshi and Dr. Shrikrishna Karve, trans., (Sadguru Publishing, 2010)
54. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 4, 2.91, 2.95
55. Frydman, op. cit., p. 273
57. internet post
58. D. T. Suzuki, trans., The Lankavatara Sutra (Boulder, CO: Prajna Press, 1978), p. 89-90
59. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #’s 583, 690, 944
60. Kavanough/Rodriguez, op. cit., The Living Flame of Love, stanzas 3.57-58
61. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., # 944
62. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 3.236
63. Shri Atmananda, #209
64. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 6, Part Two, 3.429
65. Ibid, 3.431
66. Ibid, 3.436
67. Ibid, 3.439
68. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 114
69. Sawan SIngh, Spiritual Gems, op. cit.
70. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit. p. 61
71. Kirpal Singh, Heart-to-Heart Talks, op.cit., p. 208-209
72. Frydman, op. cit., p. 464
73. Ibid, p. 470, 207-208
74. Ibid, reference misplaced
75. Ibid, p. 223-224
76. Brunton, op. cit., Ibid, p. 223-224
77. Ibid, Vol. 14, 3.23
78. Ibid, 3.35
79. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 71
80. Ibid, p. 73
81. Ibid
82. bid, p. 8
83. Jiyu Kennett, Selling Water by the River (New York: Vintage Books, 1972), p. 172
84. Swami Satprakashananda, The Goal and the Way (St Louis: The Vedanta Society of St. Louis, 1977), p. 179
85. http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/realis/realis_6.html
86. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 74, 171, 89
87. Kirpal Singh, Heart-to-Heart Talks, op. cit.
88. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 6, Part 1, 1.127
89. Godman, The Power of the Presence, Part Three, op. cit., p.193
90. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 14, 8.99
91. Franklin Merrell-Wolff, Experience and Philosophy: A Personal Record of Transformation and a Discussion of Transcendental Consciousness, Chapter 77, "The Higher Consciousness and the Mind”
92. http://www.shiningworld.com
93. Maharaj Charan Singh, Spiritual Perspectives, Vol. 1 (Beas: Radha Soami Satsang Beas, 2010), p. 446-447
94. Sawan Singh, The Philosophy of the Masters, Series Two, op. cit., p. 159, 172
95. Ibid, p. 188
96. Frydman, op. cit., p. 352
97. Vol. 16, Part 1, 2.138; Perspectives, p. 350
98. Brunton, unpublished
99. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., reference misplaced
100. Brunton, Vol. 16, Part 1, 4.17
101. Ibid, Vol. 14, 3.61
102. Frydman, op. cit., p. 290-291
103. Spiritual Progress, op. cit., Spiritual Letters, p. 122
104. Saniel Bonder, The Tantra of Trust, p. 54-55
105. Guyon, Spiritual Torrents, op. cit., p. 92
106. Ibid, p. 47
107. Asvaghosa, op. cit.
108. Rajinder Singh, Spiritual Thirst (SK Publicatons, 2004)
109. Kusan Sunim, op.cit., p.106, 143-144)
110. Markides, The Magus of Strovolos, op. cit., p. 94
111. Frydman, op. cit., p. 450
112. Kavanough/Rodriguez, op. cit., Spiritual Canticle, Stanza 10:7
113. Ishwar Puri, The Ultimate Secret, talk on Sep 2017, Rice Lake, WI, Part 3 of 5
114. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 66-67
115. cited in: Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 13, Part 1, 5.2
116. Kusan Sunim, op. cit., p. 174
117. source misplaced
118. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 141, 118, 99
119. Nikhilinanda, op. cit., p. 192, 191
120. Ibn Al ‘Arabi, The Bezels of Wisdom, trans. by R.W.J. Austin (Mahwah, New Jersey: The Paulist Press, 1980), p. 93
121. MacKenna, op.cit., V. 8, 4
122. Nikhilinanda, op. cit., p. 499
123. Sri Siddharameshwar, Master of Self-Realization, op.cit., p. 345
124. Frydman, op. cit., p. 359
125. Adyashanti, Emptiness Dancing (Los Gatos, California: Open Gate Publishing, 2004), p. 199-200
126. Adyashanti, “Consciousness - Everything is That”
127. Stephens, op. cit., p. 249-250
128. Darshan Singh, Streams of Nectar, op. cit., p. 263
129. Kirpal Singh, Spiritual Elixir, op. cit., Chapter 20
130. Darshan Singh, op. cit., p. 174
131. Sri Siddharameshwar, Amrut Laya, op. cit., p. 50
132. J.C. Cleary and Thomas Cleary, :Boston, Shambhala Publications, 1994), p. 30-31
133. Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri Muruganar, Ramana Periya Puranam, reference misplaced
134. anadi (Aadi), book of enlightenment, op. cit., p. 293-294
135. Ibid, p. 145, 245
136. Ibid, p. 158
137. Darshan Singh, op. cit., , p. 106-107
138. http://www.scribd.com/doc/113534414/Sophias-Passion-Sant-Mat-and-the-Gnostic-Myth-of-Creation
139. http://www.scribd.com/doc/34413796/Anurag-Sagar-by-Kabir-–-Ocean-of-Love
140. Kirpal Singh, Godman, op. cit., p. 148, 153
141. Kennett, op. cit. p. 206
142. Ramiere, op. cit.
143. Kavanough/Rodriguez, op. cit., Dark Night of the Soul, Book Two, chapter 23, verses 6-10
144. Carter, op. cit., p. 166
145. Rajinder Singh, Spiritual Thirst, op. cit., p. 134-135
146. Damiani, Astronoesis, op. cit., p. 176
147. Spiritual Progress, op. cit., p. 129
148. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 6, Part 1, 3.83
149. Spiritual Progress, p. 45
150. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part 1, 1.34
151. Shiv Brat Lal, Light on Anand-Yog, op. cit., p. 71-75
152. Ibid, p. 147-148
153. bid, p. 113
154. Ramana Maharshi, Talks with Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 483
155. Rai Sahib Munshi Ram, With the Three Masters, Vol. 2 (Radha Soami Satsang Beas, 1974)
156. Kirpal Singh, Sat Sandesh, Nov. 1970
157. Kirpal Singh, Sat Sandesh, Dec. 1974
158. Brunton, op.cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 1.176-1.184
159. Maharshi's Gospel (T.N. Venkataraman, 1987), p. 40
160. Frydman, op. cit., p. 381
161. Anthony Damiani, Standing in Your Own Way, op. cit., p. 139
162. Bhau Kalchuri, THE WORK OF THE AVATAR : 7 LEVELS OF PRIORITY, avatarmeherbaba.org
163. John Wheeler, You Were Never Born (Salisbury, United Kingdom: Non-Duality Press, 2007, p. 222
164. Frydman, op. cit., p. 51
165. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 3.16
166. Ibid, 1.186, 3.7, 3.15
167. “The Idea of Man” (https://www.mountainrunnerdoc.com/the_idea_of_man.html)
168. Kirpal Singh, Heart to Heart Talks, op. cit., p. 56
169. Elder Sophrony of Essex, St. Silouan the Athonite (St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2021), p. 222
170. Spiritual Progress, op. cit., p. 129
171. Ibid
172. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part One, 3.552
173. Isaacs, op.cit., p. 70-71
174. Bernard Ruffin, Padre Pio: The True Story (Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, 1982), p. 96, 93-94
175. Brunton, op. cit., Vol.3, Part 1, 3.113, 153
176. Ibid, 3.161
177. Brunton, op.cit., Vol. 16, Part 3, 3.58
178. Internet post
179. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 3, Part One, 6.45
180. J. Allen Boone, Kinship With All Life (Harper and Row, 1954/1976), p. 143
181. Kavanough/Rodriguez, op. cit., The Dark Night of the Soul, p. 450
182. Ibid, p. 451
183. Ibid
184. Ibid
185. Ibid, p. 452
186. Ibid, p. 453
187. Ibid
188. Ibid
189. Peers, Ascent of Mount Carmel, op. cit., p. 212
190. Ibid, p. 210, 207
191. Damiani, Standing in Your Own Way, op. cit., p. 139)
192. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, 6.513, 524
193. Ibid, Vol. 15, Part 1, 5.112
194. Ibid, 4.62, 65, 55, 57, 84, 86-87
195. Reference misplaced
196. Godman, The Power of the Presence, Part One, op. cit., p. 233
197. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 61
198. Frydman, op. cit., p. 310
199. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., reference misplaced
200. Ibid
201. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part 1, 5.216, 5.233
202. Godman, op. cit., p. 133
203. Darshan Singh, Love's Last Madness, op. cit., p. 75
204. Iyer, op. cit., p. 197
205. John R. McRae, The Northern School and the Formation of Early Ch’an Buddhism, 1986)
206. Frydman, op. cit., p. 239-240, 264
207. Ibid, p. 265
208. Ibid, p. 303
209. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 4, 1.53
210. Frydman, op. cit., p. 356-359
211. Markides, The Magus of Strovolos, op. cit., p. 109
212. Markides, Fire in the Heart, op.cit., p. 142-145
213. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #1226
214. Ibid, #187
215. Ibid
216. Vol. 15, Part 1, 8.112
217. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #936
218. Ibid, reference misplaced
219. Ibid, #187
220. Reynolds, op. cit., p. 100-102
221. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 14, 4.181
222. Kavanough/Rodriguez, op. cit., The Dark Night of the Soul, Bk 2, chapter 6.3
223. Ibid, The Ascent of Mount Carmel, Bk. 2, chapter 9
224. SpiritualProgress, op. cit., Letters of Counsel
225. Kirpal Singh, The Mystery of Death, op.cit., p. 108
226. Markides, op. cit., p. 93-94
227. Frydman, op. cit., p. 21-22
228. Ibid, p. 28-29
229. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #1034
230. Ibid, #946
231. Brunton, op. cit., Vol.13, Part 1, 3.139, 3.129, 3.19
232. Ibid, Vol. 16, Part One, 4.42
233. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #735
234. Frydman, op. cit., reference misplaced
235. Kirpal Singh, The Ocean of Divine Grace, "A Servant in His Household,”
236. Brunton, op. cit., Brunton, unpublished essay
237. Ibid, Vol. 2, 6.855
238. Akash Maharaj, internet post
MASTERS DIE MANY TIMES
239. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, 3.16
240. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 671, 539
241. Sogyal Rinpoche, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying (New York, N.Y>: HarperCollins Publishers, 2001), p. 224-225
242. Stanley Frye, trans., Sutra of the Wise and Foolish or Ocean of Narratives (Library of Tibetan Archives, 1981), p. 73
243. J.C. and Thomas Cleary, trans.,Zen Letters: The Teachings of Yuanwu (Shambhala, 1994), p. 55
244. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 12, 5.42; Vol. 16, Part 1, 3.552, 4.17
245. Kirpal SIngh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 23-24, 215
246. Shri Atmananda, op.cit., #251, #1194, #
247. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 221
248. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, 1.127-1.128
249. Ibid, Vol. 13, Part 1, 3.29-30
250. Ibid, 4.216
251. Saint Shri Samartha Ramdas, op. cit., p. 146-147
252. Sri Siddharameshwar, Master of Self-Realization, op. cit., p. 352
253. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 13, Part 1, 3.40
254. Ibid, Vol. 13, Part 1, 3.31
255. Stylianos Atteshlis, Esoteric Practice, p. 32-33
256. Iyer, op. cit.
257. Ramiere, op. cit.,p. 264-266
258. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, 1.75
259. Darshan Singh, reference misplaced
260. Kirpal Singh, Sat Sandesh, February 1972
KARMA AND GRACE
261. Guillore, op. cit., Ibid, p. 164-165
262. Molinos, op. cit., p. 35
263. Internet post, source misplaced
264. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 12, Part 2, 4.55
265. Ibid, Vol. 6, Part 1, 3.126-127
266. Ibid, Vol.6, Part Two, 2.14-16, 21
267. Ibid, 2.49
268. Frydman, op. cit., p. 415
269. Brunton, op. cit., 2.161-162
270. Ibid, 2.97
271. Ibid, Vol. 12, Part 1, 4.78
272. Ibid, Vol. 9, Part 1, 1.29
273. Ibid, 1.30, 1.42
274. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 234
275. Frydman, op. cit., p. 304
276. Swami Chetanananda, ed. and trans., Ramakrishna As We Saw Him, Vedanta Society of St. Louis, 1990, p. 106
277. Frydman, op. cit.
278. Brunton, op. cit., reference misplaced
279. Barks, et. al., op. cit., p. 4
280. Spiritual Progress, op. cit., p. 73
281. “Alcyone”, At the Feet of the Master (Wheaton, Illinois: Theosophical Publishing House), p. 24
282. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 12, Part 2, 5.76
283. Ibid, Vol. 12, Part 2, 5.32
284. Ibid, Vol. 15, Part 2, 4.146
285. Ibid, Vol. 14, 1.100
286. Ibid, Vol. 15, Part 1, 3.48
287. Ibid, Vol. 14, 5.88
288. Brunton, Essays on the Quest, op. cit., p. 197
289. Brunton, The Wisdom of the Overself, op. cit., p. 240, 236
290. Brunton, The Notebooks of Paul Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 9, reference misplaced
291. Ibid, Vol. 6, 9:3.459
292. Ibid, 3.31)
293. Ibid, 3.20
294. Ibid, 3.23
295. Ibid, 3.30
296. Frydman, op. cit., p. 114
297. Ibid, p. 383
298. Ibid, p. 418
299. Brunton, op. cit., p. 231
300. Damiani, Living Wisdom, op. cit., p. 235-236
301. Ibid, p. 50
302. D.T. Suzuki, Shin Buddhism (Harper & Row, 1970)
303. David Gold, After the Absolute (iUniverse, 2002)
304. Edmunson/Helms, op. cit.
305. Ramiere, op. cit.
306. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #820)
307. Ibid, #1120
308. Ramana Maharshi, Conscious Immortality (Sri Ramanasramam, 2013)
309. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., Ibid, #35
310. Kirpal Singh, Spiritual Elixer, op. cit.
311. Kirpal Singh, Sat Sandesh, Feb. 1972, "Joyfully I Surrender”
312. Kirpal Singh, The Wheel of Life, p.49
313. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 126-127
314. reference misplaced
315. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 173
316. Kirpal Singh, The Wheel of Life, op. cit., p. 38
317. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 65-66
318. Kirpal Singh, Heart-to-Heart Talks, Part One, op. cit., p. 54-55
319. Ibid, p. 90
320. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 155-156
321. Sawan Singh, as quoted in Sat Sandesh, April, 1975
322. Shri Atmananda, op. cit.
323. Swartz, James, How To Attain Enlightenment (Boulder, CO: Sentient Publications, 2009), p. 119
324. Brunton, op. cit., reference misplaced
325. Sri Siddharameshwar, op. cit., p. 278
326. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 2, Part 2, 6.134, 6.27
327. Kirpal Singh, The Wheel of Life, p. 26
328. Ishwar Puri, internet post, source misplaced
329. Reynolds, op. cit., p. 88-89
330. Markides, op. cit., p. 207-209
331. Hawkins, op. cit., p. 300
332. MacKenna, op. cit., v.5.9
333. Rene Daumal, Mount Analogue (Vincent Stuart Ltd, 1959)
334. Papaji, internet post, source misplaced
335. Romain Rolland, The Life of Ramakrishna (Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 1979), p. 50
336. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 267
337. Kirpal Singh, Sat Sandesh, September 1976, ”The Cage of the Soul", p. 25-26
338. Sri Atmananda, op. cit., #251
339. Ramana Maharshi, The Mountain Path, 1968, p. 236
340. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part 1, 3.71
341. Ibid, 3.54
342. Kirpal Singh, Morning Talks, op. cit., p. 18
343. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 12, Part 2, 5.13
344. Damiani, Looking Into Mind, op. cit., p. 17,105
345. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 9, Part 1, 2.180
346. Ruffin, op. cit.
347. Sri Siddharameshwar, op. cit., p. 338, 366, 164-165, 273-274
348. John R. McRae, The Northern School and the Formation of Early Ch’an Buddhism (University of Hawaii Press, 1987)
349.Godman, Papaji, op. cit., p. 51-52
350. Da Free John, The Basket of Tolerance (Free Daist Communion, 1988)
351. Ramana Maharshi, Talks with Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 186
352. Ibid, p. 77
353. Ibid, p. 245, 244, 248
354. Frydman, op. cit., p. 224
355. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 230
356. Nikhilinanda, op. cit., p. 718
357. Guillore, op. cit., p. 306-309
358. Kavanough/Rodriguez, op. cit., The Ascent of Mount Carmel, Bk. 2, Chapter 9
359. Soamiji, op. cit., 220:20
360. Kirpal Singh, Godman, op. cit., p. 177
361. Ven. Song-chol Echoes from Mt. Kaya: Selections on Korean Buddhism (Loutus Lantern International Buddhist Center, 1988)
362. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part 1, 6.228; Part 2, 4.77
363. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 308
364. Ibid, p. 299-300
365. Frydman, op. cit., p. 264, 480
366. Shiv Brat Lal, Light on Anand-Yog, Faqir Library Charitable Trust, p. 133
367. Godman, The Power of the Presence, op. cit., Part One, p. 77-78; also The Mountain Path, 1975, p. 206
368. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #937
369. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 3.98
370. ibid, Vol. 15, Part 1, 8.71, Vol. 16, Part 1, 5.196
371. Ibid, Vol. 15, Part 1, 8.175-176
372. I.K. Taimni ,The Science of Yoga (Wheaton, Illinois: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1981), p. 312
373. Frydman, op. cit., p. 301
374. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #1146
375. Ibid, #943, #147
376. Narain, op. cit., p. 257
377. Sat Sandesh, December 1971, p. 17-20
378. Godman, op.cit., p. 53
379. Frydman, op. cit., p. 270, 311
380. Arthur Osborne, The Incredible Sai Baba (New Delhi: Orient Longman, 1970), p. 40-41
381. Swami Nirmalananda Giri (George Burke), “The Yoga of the Sacraments” (https://ocoy.org/original-christianity/the-yoga-of-the-sacraments/)
382. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 250
383. Ibid, p. 318
384. Hebert, op. cit., p. 170-171
385. Ibid, p. 115-116
386. John Clarke, trans., St. Therese of Lisieux, Her Last Conversations (Washington, DC: ICS Publications, 1977), p. 256
387. Isaacs, op. cit., p. 79
388. St.Augustine, Ps. 88, sermo 2, n. 5
389. Prabat Mukherje, History of the Chaitanya Faith in Orissa (South Asia Books)
390. Ramalingar (1823-1873), a contemporary of Sri Ramakrishna, demonstrated many signs of bodily transfiguration by spiritual illumination while alive. At the age of fifty-three, dismayed that he could not find any serious disciples, but only those fascinated with miracles, Ramalingar "closed up shop": He entered his room, locked the door, sealed all of the windows and disappeared, never to be seen again. He completed the last of his literary works, a poem presaging this awesome event, one hour before. Ramalingar predicted the formation of the Theosophical Society, saying that a Russian (Madame Blavatsky) and an American (Henry Steel Olcott) would come to India and start a movement for universal brotherhood. The Society was formed in New York in 1875 and permanent headquarters were established in India in 1882.
391. Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, Rainbow Body: The Life and Realization of a Tibetan Yogin, Togden Ugyen Tendzin, trans, ed., and annotated by Adriano Clemente (Berkeley, California: North Atlantic Books, 2012), p. ix, 84
392. Godman, David, The Power of the Presence, Part Two (Boulder, CO: Avadhuta Foundation) p. 115
393. Weekly World News, Jan. 17, 1989: "Girl Bursts Into Flames - In Shower”
394. Dennis Billy, The Interior Castle (Notre Dame: Ave Maria, 2007), p. 274-275
395. Ruffin, op. cit., p. 300
396. Hawkins, op.cit., p. 307-308
397. Kavanough/Rodriguez,op. cit., p. 431
398. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 6.88
399. Timothy Conway, “Meister Eckhart (1260-1328) - Non-dual Christian Mystic Sage," http://www:enlightened-spirituality.org/Meister_Eckhart.html
400. Brunton, op.cit., Vol. 2, 6.205
401. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #90
402. Ibid, 6.287
403. Markides, Fire on the Heart, op. cit., p. 88
404. Markides, The Magus of Strovolos, op. cit., p. 104-105
405. Peter Dizikes, “Missing Links,” The Boston Globe, Oct. 23, 2005; as quoted in Fr. Seraphim Rose, Genesis, Creation, and Early Man, St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 2011, 2nd ed.
406. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 2, 1.167
407. Kirpal Singh, "The Wheel of Life" in Life and Death, p. 64,66
408. Ibid, p. 66-67
409. Ibid, p. 67
410. Ibid
411. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 2, 4.265-266
412. What Is Enlightenment? Spring/Summer 2002, p. 58-63, 150-151
413. Vol. 16, Part 2, 4.45
414. Ibid, 4.175
415. Ibid, 4.176
416. Ibid, 4.186
417. Ibid, 4.187
418. Ibid, 4.16
419. John Gribbin and Jeremy Cherfas, “Descent of Man - or Ascent of Ape,” New Science, Vol. 92, Sept. 3, 1981, p. 582
420. Brunton, op. cit., 4.235-237
421. Ibid, 4. 229
422. Ibid, 4.213
423. Ibid, 2.110
424. Ibid, Part 4, 1.63-64
425. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 3, 1.22, 1.23
426. Frydman, op. cit., p. 85
427. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 2, 1.112
428. Aziz Kristof [Aadi], Transmission of Awakening, op. cit., p. 71
429. Bernadette Roberts, What Is Self?, op. cit., p. 59
430. Frydman, op. cit., p. 194
431. Kirpal Singh, Mystery of Death, op. cit., p. 104
432. Kirpal Singh, Heart-to-Heart Talks, op. cit., p. 66-67
433. Hawkins, Transcending the Levels fo Consciousness, op. cit., p. 305
434. Tweedie, op. cit., p. 794
435. Kirpal Singh, Sat Sandesh, July, 1971, “The Destiny of a Gurmukh”, p. 2
436. Guillore, op. cit., Ibid, p. 175-177
437. Godman, ed., Papaji - Interviews, op. cit., p. 265
438. Ibid, p. 263
439. Mrs. Shilpa Joshi and Dr. Shrikrishna Karve, trams., Saint Shri Samartha Ramdas, Dasbodh, (Sadguru Publishing, 2010), p. 163
440. Ibid, p. 131
441. MacKenna, op. cit.
442. Bernadette Roberts, op.cit., p. xi What Is Self?, op. cit., p. xi
443. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 234)
444. Frydman, op. cit., p. 290-291
445. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part 1, 8:183
446. Ibid, 1.20
447. Kirpal Singh, Godman, op. cit., p. 180-181
448. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 352-353
449. Frydman, op. cit., p.2, 6
450. Hawkins, Devotional Non-Duality, op. cit., p. 21
451. Sri Siddharameshwar Maharaj, op. cit., p. 65
452. Ibid, p. 169
453. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #’s 593, 690
454. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 2.77, 82-85; Vol. 14, 7.199
455. Ramakant Maharaj, Internet post
456. Frydman, op. cit., p. 353
457. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 16, Part 1, 2.86
458. Muruganar, source misplaced
459. Swami Venkatesananda, op. cit., p. 115
460. Shri Atmananda, op.cit., #419
461. Ibid, #410
462. Ibid, #260, 407
463. Ibid, #261
464. Swami Venkatesananda, op. cit., p. 117
465. Ibid, p. 225
466. The Human Sun Institute, newsletter
467. Swami Venkatesananda, op. cit., p. 223
468. Shri Atmananda, op.cit., #326
469. Tweedie,op.cit., p. 239
470. Brunton, The Wisdom of the Overself, op. cit., p.441
471. Brunton, The Notebooks of Paul Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 14, 3.9
472. Ibid, Vol.16, Part 1, 2.33, 2.42
473. Shri Atmananda, op. cit., #312
474. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., reference misplaced
475. Frydman, op. cit., p. 124, 136-137, 142, 143, 145, 160
476. Ibid, p. 161
477. Bernadette Roberts, op. cit., p. 145-146,114
478. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 14, 3.336; Vol. 13, Part 2, 4.136
479. Bernadette Roberts, op. cit., p. 52
480. Ibid, p. 161
481. Ibid, p. 50
482. Ibid, p. 165
483. Ibid, p. 50-51
484. Ibid, p.129
485. Ibid, p. 193-194
486. MacKenna, op. cit., p. 716
487. Ibid, p. 726
488. Toshihiko Izutsu, Sufism and Taoism (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1983
489. Charles Belyea and Steven Tainer, Dragon's Play (Berkeley: Great Circle Lifeworks, 1991), p. 6, 21, 23
490. Bernadette Roberts, The Path to No-Self, op. cit., p. 213
491. Brunton, op. cit., reference misplaced
492. Hawkins, Transcending the Levels of Consciousness, op. cit., p. 292-293
493. “The Lost Years of Ramana Maharshi” https://www.mountainrunnerdoc.citymaker.com/page/page/5213285.htm
494. Ramaji, op. cit., p. 478
495. Ibid
496. Ramana Maharshi, op. cit., p. 500
497. Ramaji, op. cit., p. 216
498. Godman, Papaji - Interviews, op. cit., p. 78
499. Ramaji, op. cit., p. 216-218
500. Godman, op. cit., p. 73
501. Frydman, op. cit., p. 469, 332
502. Brunton, op. cit., reference misplaced
503. Damiani, op. cit., p. 201-207
504. Brunton, op. cit., reference misplaced
505. Ibid, Vol. 15, Part 1, 7.116
506. Aziz Kristof [Aadi] , The Human Buddha (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 2000), p. 488
507. Brunton, op. cit., Vol. 15, Part 1, 7.151
508. Ibid, Vol. 14, 3.23
509. Ibid, Vol. 13, Part 2, 5.222
510. Guyon, op. cit., p. 64
511. Kirpal Singh, Godman, op. cit., p. 175
512. Kirpal Singh, Portrait of Perfection: A Pictorial Biography of Sant Kirpal Singh, op. cit., p. 189
513. Kirpal Singh, reference misplaced
514. Sawan Singh, The Philosophy of the Masters, Series Two, op. cit., p. 159, 172
