Inquirer: I am 67 years old, male, Hindu. I started my spiritual journey 3 or 4 years before as a curiosity to know what these scriptures are about. Then, as a therapy for my hypertension, started meditation by reading meditation books here and there. Started with 5 minutes once or twice a day. Now I do it for 30 mins comfortably and satisfactorily. In meditation, I try to be just aware of myself. I have found a remarkable improvement in my emotional state, good concentration, and a noticeable reduction in my BP.
Then I started to read books on Buddhism, Gurdjieff, and Ouspensky, followed by Johannas Bronkhorst. Later a friend of mine introduced me to books on the teachings of Nisargadatta and Ramana Maharishi. I used to read all these books on and off as per my prevailing mood. Honestly, I did not complete reading any of these from start to end.
Initially, I was interested in Buddhism, as I read in one of the books by Johannes Bronkhorst that the Gita, etc were in response to curtail the growth of Buddhism in India. Brahmins who were the custodians of Vedas and Hinduism which conferred on them the highest position in the social hierarchy, so for selfish reasons to protect their position wrote these books.
Subsequently, I do not know what happened. I decided to follow Advaita. I read books by some Indian authors, then Paul Brunton, James Swarts, Ramdass, etc. Now and then some teachings by Eckhart Tolle, Adyashanthi, Tej Anand, etc. Frankly, I thought these neo teachers must be great otherwise there would not be so many “likes” on YouTube and a huge purchase and many positive customer reviews in the online bookstores.
Honestly, Self-inquiry is too much of an abstract. Only a few can understand and pursue it till the end, requiring complete dedication. And for this reason, cannot be popular. But I realize that there is no shortcut to it. Traditional teaching is the best. I have started to re-read “The Essence of Enlightenment” literally word by word, one page taking more than an hour to complete. Also, I am going to resume listening to James talks given at Tiruvannamalai.
I do my meditation regularly and spend time reading books and contemplating what I read. This is all that I am doing presently. I do not know whether these could be termed a sadhana. With this background of mine, I humbly request your guidance. Our correspondences are shared with my small group of like-minded persons here. Can I do this?
Sundari: Thank you for responding, I appreciate you giving me such an accurate account of your spiritual path and a little of your background. It really helps me to know how to help you. You are most welcome to share our exchanges, as you are to share anything we offer on Shiningworld. I need to point out that you have James Swartz included in the list of Neo-Advaita teachers, and he is definitely not one. James is a traditional Vedanta teacher, but he is not a traditionalist, and he is my teacher. Though his teachings stick strictly to traditional scripture, he has developed a more accessible methodology for the teachings. As you rightly point out, nondual teachings are extremely subtle. How do you teach something for which there are essentially no words to describe? You do so by using very specific language, the language of identity, not of experience. Sanskrit is the perfect vehicle for this, but as it is so little known in the West, James needed to use English words in keeping with the tradition, which we are extremely careful about doing because the wrong words can so easily confuse.
It is important that you understand these are not our teachings or anyone’s teachings. They are the words of the Self, called apauruseya jnanam, revealed to man, not from man. They are not in time and have no beginning. They are passed onto and delivered through qualified teachers who are simply mouthpieces for the timeless Tradition of the Eternal Truth, the sampradaya. As a Hindu, you would have a natural connection to the scripture as they are part of your culture and originate from the Vedas. Vedanta is the last part of the fourth Veda, and literally translated “anta’ means the end. It is the end of the search for knowledge.
Another important thing to grasp from the start is that the teachings are progressive, there is a definite unfoldment that takes place as the teachings work deeply on the mind to remove ignorance, the hypnosis of duality. Additionally, the inquirer must be qualified, motivated, and properly taught by a qualified teacher or they will interpret the teachings according to their filters, or vasanas (ignorance). You cannot read your way to moksa, which is why so few are interested in self-inquiry; it is not for the lazy or unqualified, or the majority of spiritual types who are looking for a good experience.
Without the requisite qualifications, Self-knowledge will not work to remove ignorance, and the meaning of the teachings simply will not assimilate. There is no shortcut to this. Neo-Advaita, while promoting the truth that you are the Self and all that exists, is an attempt at a shortcut to moksa. It does not work unless you are highly qualified, like Ramana was. And we all know how rare that is. You cannot ignore the apparent reality, it may not be real, but you cannot deny it. As I said in my last email to you, real is defined as that which is always present and never changes, which can only be applied to Consciousness, satya, the only ever-present factor. The apparent reality is the dream, mithya, that which is not always present and always changing, but it exists because you can experience it. The question is, what is it? If you try to jump over mithya straight to satya you will never be free of mithya.
Freedom from the apparent reality only comes through understanding what it is, the forces that govern it, and why and how they condition the mind. Thus, through the teachings which explain so powerfully the logic of existence, we can negate the apparent reality and take what remains, the Self, to be who we are. Some people try to mix Vedanta with other teachings, but this does not work either. The Neo ‘teachings’, contain parts of the truth, they just tell you that you are the Self and to ‘get it’. But without proper inquiry into the one who wants to ‘get it’ you will very quickly “unget it”. Other teachings too have the most important parts missing, Buddhism included.
With Buddhism, it is all about striving to perfect the person to attain ‘nirvana’. But we tell you upfront that you cannot improve the person because they are not real. The only problem with the person is their identification with the body/mind thanks to the deluding power of Maya, the hypnosis of duality. The teachings of Vedanta remove the veil of ignorance that covers the mind freeing you of limitation and suffering. It does not give you anything but simply reveals your true limitless nature as the Self. Furthermore, there is nothing a person or ego can ‘do’ to attain moksa because the doer is a limited entity trapped in the dream.
Moksa, the Self, is not in the dream, it is the knower of the dream. It is not something you can gain because it is and always has been who you are, this is why the teachings are so subtle. The Self is not an object but the subject. The subject is much subtler than the object, so the object, the jiva, needs a valid means of knowledge to escape the dream of duality and take a stand in Awareness AS Awareness. The jiva doesn’t disappear, it is just known to be an object and not who you are. An object is anything other than you, Awareness/the Self. Moksa is thus the ability to discriminate the subject, the Self, from the objects that appear in you, 24/7. Simple, but far from easy.
Neo-Advaita, Buddhism, and most other paths do not address this issue because they do not have a valid and independent means of knowledge capable of removing ignorance of the Self. How does it help you to know you are the Self if you are still suffering as a jiva? They don’t teach the difference between satya and mithya, between knowledge and experience. They teach ignorance along with knowledge or worse, ignorance AS knowledge. So people chase an experience of the Self, which is just another object, not the real thing. The real thing is that you are what you seek. All experiences take place in time and end, but Self-knowledge never ends because it is who you are. You cannot gain what you already have.
As we often point out, the Neos and other teachings are not wrong, and you are not wrong to be interested in them. They have their place, even if only as leading errors, which is something that takes you to the right place through the ‘wrong’ path. They led you to Vedanta, did they not? But as qualified teachers of Vedanta, we need to point out where the Neo’s are lacking because it is important that inquirers understand what is missing, assuming they are truly interested in moksa.
So, taking all this into account, you are quite correct, Self-inquiry is not very popular. It requires hard work, and the moment-to-moment application of the teachings to your life, if you want the fruit of Self-knowledge, which is freedom from and for the jiva, from existential suffering. If you are not qualified, the hard work will not appeal, you will not have faith in the scripture and quit. Vedanta does not require blind faith but faith pending the outcome of your investigation; it is a provocative teaching designed to trigger doubts that make you uncomfortable. To progress you must drop everything you think you know if it does not fit the teachings, you don’t get to pick and choose what works for you. You cannot fit Vedanta into what you think you know. If what you know does not fit with Vedanta, it must go, end of the story. With Vedanta, you are not the boss, if freedom from suffering is more important to you than your own ideas.
It seems to me that Isvara has guided your spiritual path, which is a sadhana. You are becoming established in proper self-inquiry. If Vedanta comes to you, you must be ready to end being a seeker and become a finder. And you have the good grace to have found such a qualified Vedanta teacher as James, and grace is earned. He was a disciple of Chinmayananda, as you probably know, and Chinmaya groomed James to take Vedanta to the West. Dayananda was a guru brother, present in Chinmaya’s ashram at the same time as James was, and continued to influence his growth as a teacher, as has Swami Parmarthananda, for whom we have the greatest respect. Swami P is one you should definitely look up, he teaches in Chennai, has a very active website and a Youtube channel, if I am not mistaken.
I have attached several satsangs for you to read, contemplate and share. Take your time, do not rush. The first one, The Steps to Self-inquiry outline the methodology involved and the requirements for each step. The second gives a short background to the difference between Buddhism, Yoga, and the Neos. The third is an explanation of why Ramana and Nisargadatta followers often get confused.
Please feel free to write when you have a doubt, we are both very happy to help you and anyone who is dedicated to self-inquiry.
Stay safe, may the teachings protect you and bring continued grace to your life.
Om and prem
Sundari
