Behind My Hand

चित्तमणीयो   वित्तं   य   इदं   मूल्ये   प्रपञ्चतोऽप्यधिकम्   । हृदयगुहायां   निहितं   जानीते   स   विजहाति   बहिराशाः   ॥   ४ . २१॥ “Whoever has found that pure mind, encamped within the Cave of the Heart, worth more than the conceptual universe, gives up all desires.” ( Kavyakanta Ganapati Muni,   trans. MWright) Ramana’s explanation of the above verse as found in Nayana’s Biography by Dr G. Krishna (1978; p. 194): “Ramana explained slowly - Nayana has extolled the very precious nature of Chitta in the first sloka and then explained his own experience gained by spiritual practice. Though the radiance passing from Heart to head gets entangled in external influences due to its association with sense organs, it will be experienced in its pristine purity by those who arrest the flow of the current in between in the Amritanadi. This radiance is not anything different form the Pure Awareness of the Heart. Chitta is the subtlest essence of the mind and intellect. What proceed

yas tu sarvāṇi bhūtani ātmany evānupaśyati | sarvabhūteṣu catmānaṁ tato na vijugupsate ||6|| One who sees all beings in the Self alone, and the Self in all beings, thence feels no disdain . (Sri Isopani śad, 6)

...regulation of breath is prescribed for making the mind quiescent. Quiescence lasts only so long as the breath is controlled. So it is transient. The goal is clearly not pranayama. It extends on to pratyahara, dharana, dhyana and samadhi. Those stages deal with the control of mind. Such control becomes easier for the man who had earlier practised pranayama. Pranayama leads him to the higher stages involving control of mind. Therefore control of mind is the aim of yoga also. A more advanced man will naturally go direct to control of mind without wasting his time in practising control of breath. A simple development of pranayama alone may confer siddhis which so many hanker for. ( Ramana Maharshi in Talk 154, 5 February 1936 )

The Master said: The Brahma akara vritti helps to turn the mind away from other thoughts. Either some such practice is necessary or association with sadhus should be made. The sadhu has already overcome the mind and remains in Peace. His proximity helps to bring about such condition in others. Otherwise there is no meaning in seeking a sadhu’s company. Deho aham (I am the body) is limitation and is the root of all mean and selfish actions and desires. Brahma aham (I am Brahman) is passing beyond limitation and signifies sympathy, charity, love etc., which are divine and virtuous. [ note: Brahma akara vrtti - thoughts of Brahman ] ———— Ramana Maharshi in Talk 54, 16 June 1935 ———————————- Remember that both “ deha aham ” and “ brahma aham ” are in the realm of thought. This needs to be resolved hence Sri Ramana says:  “I am Brahman” is only a thought. Who says it? Brahman itself does not say so. What need is there for it to say it? Nor can the real ‘I’ say so. For ‘I’

M.: If the eyes are closed, it is nirvikalpa; if open, it is (though differentiated, still in absolute repose) savikalpa. The ever-present state is the natural state sahaja. Ramana Maharshi in Talk 17, 24 January 1935

M.: (a) Existence without beginning or end - eternal. (b) Existence everywhere, endless, infinite. (c) Existence underlying all forms, all changes, all forces, all matter and all spirit. The many change and pass away (phenomena), whereas the One always endures (noumenon). (d) The one displacing the triads, i.e., the knower, the knowledge and the known. The triads are only appearances in time and space, whereas the Reality lies beyond and behind them. They are like a mirage over the Reality. They are the result of delusion. (from Talk 28, Ramana Maharshi) ————- The man awake says that he did not know anything in the state of sleep. Now he sees the objects and knows that he is there; whereas in deep sleep there were no objects, no spectator, etc. The same one who is now speaking was in deep sleep also. What is the difference between these two states? There are objects and play of senses now which were not in sleep. A new entity, the ego, has risen up in the meantime, it pla

19th January, 1936, Talk 139. Mr. Ellappa Chettiar, a Member of the Legislative Council, from Salem, asked: “Is it enough to introvert the mind or should we meditate on ‘I am Brahman’?” M.: To introvert the mind is the prime thing. The Buddhists consider the flow of ‘I’ thought to be Liberation; whereas we say that such flow proceeds from its underlying substratum - the only - Reality. Why should one be meditating ‘I am Brahman’? Only the annihilation of ‘I’ is Liberation. But it can be gained only by keeping the ‘I-I’ always in view . So the need for the investigation of the ‘I’ thought. If the ‘I’ is not let go, no blank can result to the seeker . Otherwise meditation will end in sleep. There is only one ‘I’ all along, but what arises up from time to time is the mistaken ‘I-thought’; whereas the intuitive ‘I’ always remains Self-shining, i.e., even before it becomes manifest. (Emphasis by the poster)