BOOK II
V
THE PLACE OF THE HEART
D: But I have heard it said by a Saint that his spiritual experience is felt at the place between the eyebrows.M: As I said previously, that is the ultimate and perfect
Realization which transcends subject-object relation. When that is achieved, it does not matter where the spiritual experience is felt.
D: But the question is, which is the correct view of the two, namely, (1) that the centre of spiritual experience is the place between the eyebrows, (2) that it is the heart.
M: For purposes of practice you may concentrate
between the eyebrows, it would then be bhavana [?] or imaginative contemplation of the mind; whereas the supreme state of anubhava [?] or Realization, with which you become wholly identified and in which your individuality is completely dissolved, transcends the mind. Then, there can be no objectified centre to be experienced by you as a subject distinct and separate from it.
D: I would like to put my question in slightly different words. Can the place between the eyebrows be said to be the seat of the Self?
Page 79
M: You accept that the Self is the ultimate source of
consciousness and that it subsists equally during all the three states of the mind. But see what happens when a person in meditation is overcome by sleep. As the first symptom of sleep his head begins to nod, which however cannot happen if the Self were situate between the eyebrows or at any other place in the head.
If during sleep the experience of the Self is not felt between the eyebrows, that centre cannot be called its seat without implying that the Self often forsakes its own place, which is absurd.
The fact is the sadhaka [?] may have his experience at any centre or chakra [?] on which he concentrates his mind. But, for that reason that particular place of his experience does not become ipso facto the seat of the Self.
There is an interesting story about Kamal, the son of Saint Kabir, which serves as an illustration to show that the head (and a fortiori the place between the eyebrows) cannot be considered the seat of the Self.
Kabir was intensely devoted to Sri Rama, and he never failed to feed those who sang the praise of the Lord of his devotion. On one occasion, however, it so happened that he had not the wherewithal to provide food for such a gathering of devotees. For him, however, there could be no alternative except
that he must somehow make every necessary arrangement before next morning. So, he and his son set out at night to secure the required provisions.
Page 80
The story goes that after the father and son had removed the provisions from a merchant's house through a hole they made in the wall, the son went in again just to wake up the household and tell them, as a matter of principle, that their house had been burgled. When, having roused the household, the boy tried to make good his escape through the hole and join his father on the other side, his body stuck up in the aperture. To avoid being identified by the pursuing household (because, if detected, there would be no feeding at all of the devotees the next day), he called out to his father and told him to sever his head and take it away with him. That done, Kabir made good his escape with the stolen provisions and the son's head which on reaching home, was hidden away from possible detection. The next day Kabir gave a feast to the bhaktas, quite unmindful of what had happened the previous night. "If it is Rama's will" said Kabir to himself, "that my son should die, may it prevail!" In the evening Kabir with the party set out as usual in procession into the town with bhajana [?] etc.
Meanwhile, the burgled householder made report to the king, producing the truncated body of Kamal, which gave them no clue. In order to secure its
identification, the king had the body tied up prominently on the highway so that whoever claimed or took it away (for, no dead body is forsaken without the last rites being given to it by the kith and kin) might be interrogated or arrested by the police who were posted secretly for the purpose.
Page 81
Kabir and his party with the bhajana in full swing came by the highway, when, to the astonishment of all, Kamal's truncated body (which was considered dead as a door-nail) began to clap its hands marking time to the tune sung by the bhajana party.
This story disproves the suggestion that the head or the place between the eyebrows is the seat of the Self. It may also be noted that when in the battlefield the head of a soldier in action is severed from the body by a sudden and powerful stroke of the sword, the body continues to run or move its limbs as in a mock fight, just for a while, before it finally falls down dead.
D: But Kamal's body was dead hours before?
M: What you call death is really no extraordinary
experience for Kamal. Here is the story of what had happened when he was younger still.
As a boy Kamal had a friend of equal age with whom he used to play games of marbles etc. A general rule they observed between themselves was that if one of
them owed the other a game or two, the same should be redeemed the next day. One evening they parted with a game to the credit of Kamal. Next day, in order to claim `the return of the game', Kamal went to the boy's house, where he saw the boy laid on the verandah, while his relatives were weeping beside him.
Page 82
"What is the matter"? Kamal asked them, "he played with me last evening and also owes me a game". The relatives wept all the more saying that the boy was dead. "No", said Kamal, "he is not dead but merely pretends to be so, just to evade redeeming the game he owes me". The relatives protested, asking Kamal to see for himself that the boy was really dead, that the body was cold and stiff. "But all this is a mere pretension of the boy, I know; what if the body be stiff and cold? I too can become like that". So saying Kamal laid himself down, and in the twinkling of an eye was dead.
The poor relatives, who were weeping till then for the death of their own boy, were distressed and dismayed, and now began to weep for Kamal's death also. But up rose Kamal on his back, declaring "Do you see it now? I was as you would say dead, but I am up again, alive and kicking. This is how he wants to deceive me, but he cannot elude me like this with his pretensions".
In the end, the story goes, Kamal's inherent saintliness gave life to the dead boy, and Kamal got
back the game that was due to him. The moral is that the death of the body is not the extinction of the Self. Its relation to the body is not limited by birth and death, and its place in the physical body is not circumscribed by one's experience felt at a particular place, as for instance between the eyebrows, due to practice of dhyana [?] made on that centre. The supreme state of Self-awareness is never absent; it transcends the three states of the mind as well as life and death.
Page 83
D: Since Sri Bhagavan says that the Self may function at any of the centres or chakras while its seat is in the heart, is it not possible that by the practice of intense concentration or dhyana between the eyebrows this centre may itself become the seat of the Self?
M: As long as it is merely the stage of practice of
concentration by fixing a place of controlling your attention, any consideration about the seat of the Self would merely be a theorisation. You consider yourself as the subject, the seer, and the place whereon you fix your attention becomes the object seen. This is merely bhavana. When, on the contrary, you see the Seer himself, you merge in the Self, you become one with it; that is the heart.
D: Then, is the practice of concentration between the eyebrows advisable?
M: The final result of the practice of any kind of dhyana
is that the object, on which the sadhaka fixes his
mind, ceases to exist as distinct and separate from the subject. They (the subject and object) become the one Self, and that is the heart.
Page 84
The practice of concentration on the centre between the eyebrows is one of the methods of sadhana [?], and thereby thoughts are effectively controlled for the time being. The reason is this. All thought is an extroverted activity of the mind; and thought, in the first instance, follows `sight', physical or mental.
It should however be noted, that this sadhana of fixing one's attention between the eyebrows must be accompanied by japa [?]. Because next in importance to the physical eye is the physical ear, either for controlling or distracting the mind. Next in importance to the eye of the mind (that is, mental visualisation of the object) is the ear of the mind (that is, mental articulation of speech), either to control and thereby strengthen the mind, or to distract and thereby dissipate it.
Therefore, while fixing the mind's eye on a centre, as for instance between the eyebrows, you should also practise the mental articulation of a nama [?] (name) or mantra [?] (sacred syllable or syllables). Otherwise you will soon lose your hold on the object of concentration.
Sadhana as described above leads to identification of the
Name, Word or Self — whatever you may call it — with the centre selected for purposes of dhyana. Pure
Page 85
Consciousness, the Self or the heart is the final Realization.
D: Why does not Sri Bhagavan direct us to practise concentration on some particular centre of chakra?
M: Yoga sastras say that the sahasrara [?] or the brain is the
seat of the Self. Purushasukta declares that the heart is its seat. To enable the sadhaka to steer clear of possible doubt, I tell him to take up the `thread' or the clue of `I'-ness or `I-am'-ness and follow it up its source. Because, firstly it is impossible for anybody to entertain any doubt about his `I'-notion; secondly whatever be the sadhana adopted, the final goal is the realization of the source of `I-am'-ness which is the primary datum of your experience.
If you, therefore, practise atma vichara you will reach the heart which is the Self.