BOOK I
III
MIND CONTROL
D: How can I control the mind?M: There is no mind to control if the Self is realised.
The Self shines forth when the mind vanishes. In the realised man the mind may be active or inactive, the Self alone exists. For, the mind, body and world are not separate from the Self; and they cannot remain apart from the Self. Can they be other than the Self? When aware of the Self why should one worry about these shadows? How do they affect the Self?
D: If the mind is merely a shadow how then is one to know the Self?
M: The Self is the heart, self-luminous. Illumination
arises from the heart and reaches the brain, which is the seat of the mind. The world is seen with the mind; so you see the world by the reflected light of the Self. The world is perceived by an act of the mind. When the mind is illumined it is aware of the world; when it is not so illumined, it is not aware of the world.
If the mind is turned in, towards the source of illumination, objective knowledge ceases, and the Self alone shines as the heart.
Page 17
The moon shines by reflecting the light of the sun. When the sun has set, the moon is useful for displaying objects. When the sun has risen no one needs the moon, though its disc is visible in the sky. So it is with the mind and the heart. The mind is made useful by its reflected light. It is used for seeing objects. When turned inwards, it merges into the source of illumination which shines by Itself and the mind is then like the moon in the daytime.
When it is dark, a lamp is necessary to give light. But when the sun has arisen, there is no need for the lamp; the objects are visible. And to see the sun no lamp is necessary; it is enough if you turn your eyes towards the self-luminous sun. Similarly with the mind; to see the objects the light reflected from the mind is necessary. To see the heart it is enough that the mind is turned towards it. Then the mind does not count and the heart is self-effulgent.
D: After leaving this Ashram in October, I was aware of the Presence that prevails in Sri Bhagavan's presence enfolding me for about ten days. All the time, while busy in my work, there was an undercurrent of that peace in unity; it was almost like the dual consciousness which one experiences while half-asleep in a dull lecture. Then, it faded out entirely, and the old stupidities came in instead. Work leaves no time for separate meditation. Is it enough constantly reminding oneself `I AM', while at work?
Page 18
M: (After a short pause). If you strengthen the mind,
that peace will continue for all time. Its duration is proportional to the strength of mind acquired by repeated practice. And such a mind is able to hold on to the current. In that case, engagement or no engagement in work, the current remains unaffected and uninterrupted. It is not the work that hinders but the idea that it is you who are doing it.
D: Is a set meditation necessary for strengthening the mind?
M: Not if you keep the idea always before you that it is
not your work. At first, effort is needed to remind yourself of it, but later on it becomes natural and continuous. The work will go on of its own accord, and your peace will remain undisturbed.
Meditation is your true nature. You call it meditation now, because there are other thoughts distracting you. When these thoughts are dispelled, you remain alone — that is, in the state of meditation free from thoughts; and that is your real nature, which you are now trying to gain by keeping away other thoughts. Such keeping away of other thoughts is now called meditation. But when the practice becomes firm, the real nature shows itself as true meditation.
D: Other thoughts arise more forcibly when one attempts meditation!
Page 19
M: Yes, all kinds of thought arise in meditation. That is
only right; for what lies hidden in you is brought out. Unless it rises up, how can it be destroyed? Thoughts rise up spontaneously, as it were, but only to be extinguished in due course, thus strengthening the mind.
D: There are times when persons and things take a vague, almost a transparent form, as in a dream. One ceases to observe them as outside, but is passively conscious of their existence, while not actively conscious of any kind of selfhood. There is a deep quietness in the mind. Is it at such times that one is ready to dive into the Self? Or is this condition unhealthy, the result of self-hypnotism? Should it be encouraged as yielding temporary peace?
M: There is Consciousness along with quietness in the
mind; this is exactly the state to be aimed at. The fact that the question has been framed on this point, without realizing that it is the Self, shows that the state is not steady but casual.
The word `diving' is appropriate when there are outgoing tendencies, and when, therefore, the mind has to be directed and turned within, there is a dip below the surface of externalities. But when quietness prevails without obstructing the Consciousness, where is the need to dive? If that state has not been realised as the Self, the effort to do so may be called `diving'. In this sense the state may be said to be
suitable for realization or diving. Thus, the last two questions you have put do not arise.
Page 20
D: The mind continues to feel partial towards children possibly because the form of a child is often used to personify the Ideal. How can this preference be outgrown?
M: Hold on to the Self. Why think of children and of
your reactions towards them?
D: This third visit to Tiruvannamalai seems to have intensified the sense of egoism in me and made meditation less easy. Is this an unimportant passing phase or a sign that I should avoid such places hereafter?
M: It is imaginary. This place or another is within you.
Such imaginations must end; for places as such have nothing to do with the activities of the mind. Also your surroundings are not merely a matter of your individual choice; they are there, as a matter of course; and you should rise above them and not get yourself entangled in them.
(A boy of eight and a half years sat in the hall at about five in the evening, when Sri Bhagavan went up the Hill. During His absence, the boy spoke on yoga [?] and Vedanta [?] in pure, simple and literary Tamil, quoting freely from the sayings of saints and the sacred scriptures. When Sri Bhagavan entered the hall, after nearly three-quarters of an hour, only
silence prevailed. For the twenty minutes the boy sat in Sri Bhagavan's presence, he spoke not a word but was merely gazing at Him. Then tears flowed from his eyes. He wiped them with his left hand and soon after left the place saying that he still awaits Self-realization).
Page 21
D: How should we explain the extraordinary characteristics of the boy?
M: The characteristics of his last birth are strong in him.
But however strong they may be, they do not manifest themselves save in a calm, still mind. It is within the experience of all, that attempts to revive memory sometimes fail, while something flashes into the mind when it is calm and quiet.
D: How can the rebellious mind be made calm and tranquil?
M: Either see its source so that it may disappear, or
surrender yourself so that it may be struck down. Self-surrender is the same as Self-knowledge, and either of them necessarily implies self-control. The ego submits only when it recognises the Higher Power.
D: How can I escape from samsara [?] which seems to be the real cause for making the mind restless? Is not renunciation an effective means to realise tranquillity of mind?
Page 22
M: Samsara is only in your mind. The world does not
speak out saying, `Here I am, the world'. If it did so, it would be ever there, making its presence felt by you even in your sleep. Since, however, it is not there in sleep, it is impermanent. Being impermanent, it lacks substance. Having no reality apart from the Self it is easily subdued by the Self. The Self alone is permanent. Renunciation is the non-identification of the Self with the not-Self. When the ignorance which identifies the Self with not-Self is removed, not-Self ceases to exist, and that is true renunciation.
D: Can we not perform actions without attachment even in the absence of such renunciation?
M: An atma jnani alone can be a good karma yogi [?].
D: Does Bhagavan condemn dvaita [?] Philosophy?
M: Dvaita can subsist only when you identify the Self
with the not-Self. Advaita [?] is non-identification.