Discussions With A Jnani

Susan: This Vedic culture is amazing. Even more ‘hats off’ for Ramji and you, for sharing Vedanta without this Vedic/spiritual infrastructure!    

I see teachers of Vedanta charging money for teaching, also those who have been trained by Pujya Swamiji. I am still pondering over this topic. Most arguments are known to me, I think, but what stands out is how can one commercialize oneself? How can You be a profession? It has a funny element to it, don’t you think? Anyway, as I said, still pondering, no conclusions.   

Sundari: Vedanta teachers charging for the teaching is not the traditional way. Vedanta does not belong to anyone, and it ‘belongs’ to everyone. Who has the right to charge for them? Yes, everyone has to live, but if you truly know the value of the scriptures, and are doing the ‘work’ of unfolding them for Isvara, all your needs will be taken care of.  So in my view, anyone who claims to be a qualified teacher, yet charges for their service, must believe they are the teacher, not Isvara. Therefore, there is still ignorance, fear and desire. I don’t think there is any other way to see this. It is pretty cut and dried. 

Susan: Thank you for your very clear words on the topic of charging for teaching, because this mind can be naive. The mind says for example, “O, but they are not bad people” etc. What you wrote validates what I understand. Thank you. I am also grateful for a very discriminating friend who put this topic in front of me to see. Now the topic (and the people acting out this idea) can be dropped. How wonderful. Nothing like clarity. 

Sundari: So true – there is nothing like nondual vision and the complete clarity if gives you – on absolutely everything.  It is like a laser and cuts straight to the truth.  In mithya, nothing is certain – in fact, if you are certain about anything, you are probably wrong.  But if you look at mithya through the eyes of satya, there is only certainty.  That is why someone who is ignorant of the Self will think nonduality is arrogant. But it is far from it. It’s not black and white, it just stands on its own and cannot be argued with.  If the mind finds an argument, that’s Maya and avidya talking again. Simple! Of course the ego does not like it, but what a relief it is when you know. Just leave it all up to Isvara and the scripture.  No need to carry anything.

I am happy for you that you are dispassionate about your Sanskrit studies.  I think it’s really great to have the time to study such a beautiful and important language, but also to be aware of it becoming a goal.  Maya finds many subtle ways to bind the mind.

Susan: Yes, life is very simple. Or one can say, it becomes very simple ‘growing into’ consciousness. And yes the mind can trick one, once again. ‘No struggle’ is an easy auto-suggestion that works, so struggle is a red flag . Sometimes it feels a bit like a balance act between keeping the intellect sharp and not falling into the trap of intellect-gratification, which is a habit, as you know. 

Sundari: There is nothing wrong with intellect gratification – the intellect is a tool that needs to be used, and giving it noble work is very good for it.  The only issue is when we identify with and ‘own’ our cleverness, or think we are becoming smarter or better than others, i.e., spiritual pride. If you know that it is Isvara that makes the intellect sharp or dull, where’s the problem?  It feels great to have a brain and to use it, and why not seeing as a gift from Isvara? To not use it would be an insult – kind of like someone giving you a Ferrari and you just keep it parked in the garage…ha-ha!

Susan: Yes.  I also see that people take the attitude of intellectual-gratification to Vedanta, and then it becomes conceptual Vedanta. Or people making Vedanta into a product like we talked about. Seems to be more common than not.   No, there is never any problem  when you know it’s all Isvara.  Well, I just like polishing…….!! (that is a joke)

Sundari: There is nothing wrong with doing some polishing of the intellect! It is true that there is a tendency among some people to commodify Vedanta and add it as a badge of superiority, or accomplishment. If not that, it becomes theory in practice.  You cannot study Vedanta because firstly there is a ‘studier’ and secondly, it is who you are. The main objective is to negate the doer, and that is tricky because you do need to ‘do’ inquiry, but not as a doer.  It’s a fine line everyone must navigate in the quest for freedom from and for the ego. 

Susan: Yes, it is tricky when not realising that it’s just happening and the knowledge is doing the job (if one believes anything is going on.

Sundari: Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom, as Chinmayananda liked to say.

Susan: I Just followed a lecture where the whole concept of vyvaharika was dismissed, it is supposed to be a post-Shankara concept and not what Shankara ever wrote. I did read about this before and the lecture made total sense. So yet another Vedanta-concept that can be dropped. Great.

Sundari: It is always good to drop concepts when they have served their purpose.  Speaking as the Self, from the paramarthika perspective, we can negate vyavaharika. All the same vyavaharika may be a teaching principle or mithya designation, but it denotes that which does have an apparent existence, even though it’s not real. Speaking purely from the mithya perspective, of course. Like we can all agree on the existence of our body, a table or a chair, for instance, though we may all experience the object according to our subjective reality, pratibasika. Ultimately we can negate it all as ‘not me’. 

What is so great about the methodology of Vedanta is that it provisionally accepts duality because it has to in order to negate it – cause and effect teaching. Only then does it take you to the non-origination teaching where mithya ‘becomes’ satya because that’s the only option if you want to collapse the subject/object split. Otherwise, you are stuck like the Neo’s claiming that you don’t exist, nothing exists. There’s only the Self.  Fine and true. But how does that help you to free the mind from Maya if you pretend it doesn’t exist ? It does exist, because you experience it.  It does not work to impose satya onto mithya.

Nonduality is very subtle, and seems like a both/and, but it isn’t. The Self ‘sees’ only itself, and with nondual vision, ‘not me’ transforms to only me – no separation. Except I am prior to and exist independently of all things. At that stage, when Self-knowledge is firm, we can throw out all classifications as they are no longer necessary. But not before.

Teaching Vedanta and assimilating it requires all stages and terms of inquiry to be fully unfolded and understood. However, the last stage of inquiry, which is throwing out the teacher and the teaching remnants, is very subtle, but must take place if Self-actualization is to obtain. Sadly, there is a lot of confusion on that score. That is why there are so few genuine and qualified Vedanta teachers, and so many inquirers who get stuck.  We are very lucky to have been taught by James. I count my blessings on this score every day.

It’s great talking to you – I will post this as it will be helpful to others.

Much love

Sundari