The Atma Jyoti Blog

The poet Browning wrote of “the end of life for which the first was made.” That is a lovely expression, but very few really believe it and therefore rarely think of their life’s end. Those of us who seek liberation must from the very beginning be looking toward the end we desire. In the next to the last verse at the close of the Isha Upanishad we are given the perspective we should be living with every moment of our life if we would truly “come to a good end.”

Now

“Let my life now merge in the all-pervading life. Ashes are my body’s end. OM….O mind, remember Brahman. O mind, remember thy past deeds. Remember Brahman. Remember thy past deeds.”
–Isha Upanishad 17

Emily Dickenson wrote: “While others hope to go to heaven at last, I am going all along!” This is the only way for those who would succeed in spiritual life. Nothing should be delayed for the future–it is all now or not at all. “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (II Corinthians 6:2)

There are many partially awakened people who know that God is the only real goal. Yet they delay their endeavor. “After I get this,” they say, “then I will really dig in and seek God.” But they never do, for as soon as one little short-term goal is reached another arises that seems even more demanding.

I know a woman that claimed she would intensely seek God the day after her only child graduated from high school. But then it became after his graduating from college. Then after he was married and “really settled down.” Death found her anticipating still another “after which,” but it was all over. And by her foolishness she had created in her mind the habit of postponing spiritual life, a habit that will surely carry over into the next life and perhaps into others.

How often do we think that the vision of God will somehow interfere with our life–when in reality we have no life outside that vision. Silly children, we dawdle and dally until the night falls, that “night in which no man can work” (John 9:4) which Jesus warned us about. “Now or never” happens to be the simple truth.

Merging in Life

Many people want to “embrace life” so they can egocentrically possess it and exploit it to the full. But they have no idea what life is. Just the opposite, for what they think is life is really death. “The all-pervading life” is the only life, for that is God. And the necessity is not to find or see God as an object (again, to possess), but to merge with God in complete unity-identity. That is, our consciousness must be completely merged in the infinite Consciousness, and irrevocably so.

Just as a cup of water poured into the ocean cannot be drawn back out of the ocean, so we need to attain that state of unity which can never be reversed. Many yogis paddle their feet or go for a quick dip in the ocean of Satchidananda, but the goal is to unite with that ocean, to merge in it and become totally one with it. Consequently at ever moment of our life we must be holding in mind and living out the sankalpa: “Let my life now merge in the all-pervading life.”

Those who are unfit for union with God become all anxious and even fearful when they hear about merging with the Divine. “O! will I go out of existence?” they quaver. “What will happen to me?” Over and over again they plunge headlong into the sea of rebirth, never raising such questions about relative existence, but “going for it” heedlessly. Only when confronted with God do they develop prudence and caution. Jesus has assured us, though: “Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.” (Luke 17:33) This is because we are truly negative–that is, we are absolutely backwards one hundred and eighty degrees. Consequently what we think will annihilate us will immortalize us, whereas what we think will make us live will destroy us.

Like the great master, Yogananda, we must pray: “Let me drown in Thine ocean and live!”

Read more commentaries on the Upanishads.

Keep up to date with the latest posts. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

Great Masters are fearless, and so must those be who would benefit from their teachings. For Masters and (true) disciples see things exactly opposite to the world and the worldlings. Certainly greed and desire for control over others bring about the inner destruction of religion, but an equally pernicious factor is the insistence that the principles of religion be made to accommodate, please, and motive the crowd, and not the chosen few–the only ones to whom the Masters really speak.

That is why Jesus prayed, saying: “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.…I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” (John 17:9, 14) On one occasion when Jesus had given a particularly thorny discourse: “Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?…From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” (John 6:60, 66) Now we are ready to look at one of Buddha’s “hard sayings.”

“If a man does not seek children, wealth or power either for himself or for someone else, if he does not seek his own advantage by unprincipled means, he is a virtuous man, a wise man and a righteous man.” Dhammapada 84

Narada Thera’s translation: “Neither for the sake of oneself nor for the sake of another: he should not desire son, wealth, or kingdom. By unjust means he should not seek his own success. Then such a one is indeed virtuous, wise and righteous.” The translation of the Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu says that such a one “is righteous, rich in virtue, [and] discernment.”

Applied to everyone

Although it is so common to hear someone say regarding an unpalatable discipline: “Oh, that is just for you monks,” in this case it has to be pointed out that Buddha’s teaching is not just for non-monastics. For sad to say a lot of monastics are greedy and scheming supposedly for the sake of others–family, friends, church, monastic order, etc. Under the guise of personal poverty, Christian monks for centuries have amassed fantastic amounts of money and land holdings, often owning slaves and bond servants–even peasants in Russia. One famous monk in Thailand actually raised enough money to pay off the national debt, then realized that everyone in the government were such crooks that they would grab it and not pay off the debt. So the money sits idle to no purpose. Monks are often matchmakers. I knew a Greek Orthodox nun that travelled around raising thousands of dollars for her nieces’ dowries.

Even more absurd, consider the number of monks (especially in India) who are credited with the miraculous power to ensure pregnancy, gain wealth for devotees, and get employment and university degrees for others. Some activity for world-renouncing teachers of dispassion and non-materialism! Buddha never did such things. He is a perfect example for all humanity. In the case of this eighty-fourth verse, one size truly does fit all.

Children, Wealth, and Power

In themselves these three items have no defect. After all, if we had not been children we would not be here at all. And if we had no money, what kind of existence would we have? It is the same with some power or influence–it would be impossible to live a worthwhile human life without it. What, then, is the problem? As always: the ego. The trouble is with the rascal that says: My children, My money, My influence. Or an ego so twisted that it thinks getting those things for others–which will all be labeled Mine in some way–is acceptable. Ego is at the bottom, the middle, and the top.

Buddha is warning us away from actively seeking those things in an ego-involved way. Actually, he is warning us about seeking anything “on our own” rather than to approach life as a worthy karma yogi–do our best and leave the rest to the cosmic laws. It is true, as the Gita points out to us, that there is a positive form of indifference to these things that renders them safe for us. Buddha does not want us to hate or despise them, for then we would be thinking and obsessing about them. The idea is that we should live life with the central purpose of spiritual evolution and let these other factors be–or not be–as they are. We are to seek the Paramartha, the Supreme Attainment, of enlightenment.

Let us not forget that Buddha gave up all these three. And because of his renunciation billions have understood the truth about this life and have attained higher consciousness. Just think: one man has done all this through his renunciation!

Unprincipled means

The end does not justify the means. Rather, the end can invalidate or corrupt the means. Buddha is aware of the slippery nature of the ego. It may seem to agree to not seek for vain things, but it will certainly consider that it can adopt any strategy it wants for the accomplishment or gain of something that is seen as necessary or beneficial. The ego loves to Do Good in a Not Good manner, thinking it is justified to do so. This type of hypocrisy is common on all levels of life. Sometimes the religious people are the worst. In the 1960’s an acquaintance of mine discovered that officials of the Russian Orthodox Church in New York City were paying someone who lived right there in New York City to write accounts of fictitious “new martyrs” in Russia (as if the Communists were not continually “making” enough real ones!). These fabrications were then presented as “accounts recently smuggled out of the Soviet Union.” When the priest (later a bishop) in charge of the fraud was challenged by her regarding this, he responded with polished cynicism: “It accomplishes what we want.” And the conversation was at an end.

But the good and true person will never cut corners or compromise integrity or moral principles to gain something that of itself may seem desirable. As an Eastern Christian writer has said: “If you have to employ an unjust means, then the end is unjust, as well.”

Virtuous, wise, and righteous

Diogenes may have searched for a good and wise man with a lantern, but only two things will enable us to find such a one: a) by that person really being good and wise; and b) by ourselves being good and wise so we can recognize them. It is true: it takes one to know one.

Those who live according to the principles so clearly presented by Buddha will be all those things: virtuous, wise, and righteous. It is easy for the real person, but impossible for the ego.

Related: How to Misuse Your Power of Thought

Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog and get frequent spiritual sustenance with valuable writings on practical spiritual life.

This is Part 15 of A Catechism of Enlightenment–a serialized commentary on “A Method Of Enlightening A Disciple” from Shankara’s Upadeshasahasri–A Thousand Teachings

45) “Through the mind alone is Brahman to be realized. He goes from death to death who sees in It [Brahman], as it were, diversity.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:4:19)

Through the mind alone is Brahman to be realized. Although external conditions can be favorable to spiritual practice, Brahman is realized through the mind alone–by no other faculty. Therefore the yogi works intently with the mind that lies within, knowing that just as churned milk yields up the butter, so the mind “churned” by meditation will reveal Brahman. Of course, “mind” here refers to the highest faculty of the mind, the chidakasha, which is “churned” by the japa and meditation of Om.

There is in It no diversity. He goes from death to death who sees in It, as it were, diversity. How aptly does the upanishad call death what we foolishly call “life.” For we have the habit of saying that we go from life to life, when really we are going from death to death–the death that is ignorance of the Self. Dual consciousness is the producer of that death from which we can escape only through knowing the Self.

46) “That which is the subtle essence–in it all that exists has its Self. That is the True. That is the Self. That thou art.” (Chandogya Upanishad 6:13:3)

This is the essence of everything that has been said or will be said in this “catechism.” Realizing its truth is the purpose of our being here.

47) “Just as someone might lead a person, with his eyes covered, away from the country of the Gandharas and leave him in a place where there were no human beings; and just as that person would turn toward the east, or the north, or the south, or the west, shouting: ‘I have been brought here with my eyes covered, I have been left here with my eyes covered!’ And as thereupon someone might loosen the covering and say to him: ‘Gandhara is in that direction; go that way;’ and as thereupon, having been informed and being capable of judgement, he would, by asking his way from one village to another, arrive at last at Gandhara–in exactly the same manner does a man who has found a teacher to instruct him obtain the true knowledge. For him there is delay only so long as he is not liberated from the body; then he reaches perfection.” (Chandogya Upanishad 6:14:1, 2)

A person in ignorance is not really blind, but has had the covering of Maya bound over his mind-eyes and been “kidnapped” to an alien place where nobody really belongs. Once he has the good sense to call out for help, help will come in the form of knowing how to journey back to his home. In the same way, those that yearn to know the way out of inner desolation will be given instruction in that way–whether through another person who knows the way or through the written teachings of those that have found the way. Actually, the parable indicates that as he travels along he will be given directions by various people. His getting back home is assured, the only delay being in the time it takes him to return. In the same way the liberation of the questing yogi is assured, and upon his being freed from the body he will enter the state of perfect freedom, having already enjoyed it inwardly even before the dropping of the body.

48) “One who has known the Real [Brahman] is not born again.” (Chandogya Upanishad 6:16:3)

This is because the very purpose of birth in relative existence has been fulfilled and there is no need for further birth.

49) “This is the eternal glory of Brahman: It neither increases nor decreases through action. Therefore one should know the nature of That alone. Knowing It one is not touched by evil action.

“Therefore he who knows It as such becomes self-controlled, calm, withdrawn into himself, patient and collected; he sees the Self in his own Self [body]; he sees all as the Self. Evil does not overcome him, but he overcomes all evil. Evil does not afflict him, but he consumes all evil. He becomes sinless, taintless, free from doubts and a true Brahmana [knower of Brahman]. This is the World of Brahman.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:4:23)

This is the eternal glory of Brahman: It neither increases nor decreases through action. I do not think it is any surprise that God cannot be made larger or smaller by anything he might do! But what is implied is that no action can increase or decrease our divine Selfhood which we draw from Brahman. Nor can action make us more or less divine. What we are and what God is, is immutable. So no one is less or more divine than another. Difference between sentient beings is a matter of realization, not of essence. And those that know Brahman can never say: “I am more than you are.” Nor do they have a false humility that would make them say: “I am less than you are.”

Therefore one should know the nature of That alone. Since Brahman alone exists in the absolute sense, we should at all times realize that we are always experiencing Brahman–nothing else. This also means that we should have enough sense to center our entire life on Brahmajnana, aware that since all else is a mirage there is really nothing else we can know. Knowing Brahman should be our life’s purpose.

Knowing It one is not touched by evil action. This does not mean that a knower of Brahman can do evil and not be touched, for a knower of Brahman has become incapable of evil acts. The upanishad is talking about negative karma from the past. Knowing Brahman puts us beyond karmic reaction. Finally, it means that no one can harm or act evilly against a Brahmajnani. That is, he cannot be harmed by anyone, though attempts might be made.

Therefore he who knows It as such becomes self-controlled, calm, withdrawn into himself, patient and collected; he sees the Self in his own Self; he sees all as the Self.

He sees the Supreme Self within the core of his own individual, finite Self.

Evil does not overcome him, but he overcomes all evil. Evil does not afflict him, but he consumes all evil. He becomes sinless, taintless, free from doubts and a true Brahmana [knower of Brahman]. This is a result of the transmutation brought about by prolonged yoga practice.

This is the World of Brahman. The world of Brahman is not a place, not a “world” or a level of existence. Rather, it is the eternal state of Brahman, of perfect liberation.

50) “In this state a father is no more a father, a mother is no more a mother, the worlds are no more the worlds, the gods are no more the gods, the Vedas are no more the Vedas. In this state a thief is no more a thief, the killer of a noble brahmin is no more a killer, a chandala is no more a chandala, a paulkasa is no more a paulkasa, a monk is no more a monk, an ascetic is no more an ascetic.

“This form of his is untouched by good deeds and untouched by evil deeds, for he is then beyond all the woes of his heart.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:3:22)

This needs no comment, just a determined seeking-after.

51) “Three he designed for himself”–that is to say, the mind, the organ of speech and the vital breath; these he designed for himself. They say: ‘My mind was elsewhere, I did not see it; my mind was elsewhere, I did not hear it.’ It is clear that a man sees with his mind and hears with his mind. Desire, determination, doubt, faith, lack of faith, steadfastness, lack of steadfastness, shame, intelligence and fear–all this is truly the mind. Even if one is touched from behind, one knows it through the mind; therefore the mind exists.

“Whatever sound there is, it is just the organ of speech; for it serves to determine a thing, but it cannot itself be revealed.

“The prana, apana, vyana, udana, samana and ana–all these are but the vital breath [prana]. This atma consists of these–the organ of speech, the mind and the vital breath.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1:5:3)

Since the previous verse spoke of the liberated person’s “form,” Shankara has put this next. For just as Prakriti is one with Purusha, so our personal energy systems are always with us–even in liberation. Consequently they can be spoken of as our “Self,” though they are not the atman. This is why the expressions “higher self” and “lower self” have come into common usage. This verse is speaking of the lower self which is the “form” still possessed by the liberated.

This lower self consists of three things: manas (mind–which includes the buddhi), vakya (the faculty of speech, which includes hearing), and prana (life force and breath.) These three remain with us forever, though transmuted into the subtlest possible forms. Therefore to say the mind, the faculty of speech, and the prana are not the Self is incorrect. For they are the Self in the sense of permanent adjuncts of the Self.

Because this is so, authentic yoga makes use of these three. Within the mind the faculty of speech is exercised in the repetition (japa) of Om in conjunction with the flow of the breath. (See Om Yoga: Its Theory and Practice.)

• Read more installments of A Catechism of Enlightenment.

Keep up to date with the latest posts. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

A continuation of Choosing Between the Good and the Pleasant

One of the problems with prevailing religion of all kinds is its incredible small-sightedness. Like the pleasant-oriented and pleasant-obsessed ego which it supports and feeds, it is concerned with only the moment at hand or with goals that are utterly irrelevant to the real nature of the human being. When we understand who/what we really are, then alone can we comprehend what is the sole purpose of our existence: conscious union with the Absolute. In light of this the upanishad concludes: “Blessed are they that choose the good; they that choose the pleasant miss the goal.” So the discrimination between the good and the pleasant is no light matter.

A genuine test of character

In the twenty-fifth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew we find a parable about foolish and wise souls. Most of us do not really care if we are foolish, just as long as no one labels us so. But we should care, and so the upanishad continues its teaching, saying:

“Both the good and the pleasant present themselves to men. The wise, having examined both, distinguish the one from the other. The wise prefer the good to the pleasant; the foolish, driven by fleshly desires, prefer the pleasant to the good.” (Katha Upanishad 1:2:2)

There is a lot of truth in these few lines, some of it embarrassing, but nevertheless beneficial for us. (The good is not the pleasant, even in philosophy.)

• “Both the good and the pleasant present themselves to men.”

Whatever may be the excuses we may make for ourselves, even portraying ourselves as weak or victims, no one, NO ONE, forces anything upon us in life, however much it may seem otherwise. Rather, the good and the pleasant simply “present themselves” to us. We are totally responsible for our response to them, although, like Adam and Eve back in Genesis, [“And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.…And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.” (Genesis 3:12,13)] we try to put the blame on someone else, on some external factor.

It is really essential to us as we move through life (hopefully forward) that although our deluded experience seems just the opposite, in reality all “things” are completely neutral–it is our response to them that really gives them any character such as good, bad, destructive, positive, etc. A little thought will show this. The deadliest poison is harmless if we do not make contact with it. Conversely, the best medicine is worthless if we do not consume it. Or think of this: garbage seems heavenly food to a starving person, but not to someone who is well fed; a child’s toy means nothing to a mature adult. Nothing has an innate ability to draw or force us–all the drawing and forcing is in our own mind as it responds to the object. We can blame no one at any time. It is all in us. If there are no grass seeds in the soil no grass will grow. The seeds have to be in us to sprout and grow and bear fruit as thinking, willing, and acting.

• “The wise, having examined both, distinguish the one from the other.”

Viveka, the ability to distinguish between the real and the unreal, between the true and the false, between the transient and the permanent, is indispensable for the serious spiritual aspirant. The wise possess and exercise this faculty, the eye of wisdom, by deeply examining whatever is presented to them and discerning whether it is the good or the merely pleasant they are being confronted with. Intelligence comes into the foreground, feeling and emotion being banished from the mental field altogether. Human beings operate either rationally or instinctually-emotionally. The wise are rational at all times. At all times. For example, real love is clearsighted–never blind–whereas infatuation masquerading as love is both blinding and blindness.

Preferring and driven

If two people are walking, one toward the north and the other toward the south, the difference between them is very little–just the direction they are facing. But in the matter of the wise and the foolish the differences are profound, for they are rooted in their very being, especially the mind and intellect. Even as a child I always thought that the statement of Abraham to Lazarus that “between us and you there is a great gulf fixed,” (Luke 16:26) was spiritually symbolic, that a great gulf did indeed lie between the Godwards and the earthwards. The upanishad is outlining this nature of this gulf for us by describing its effects on both.

The wise prefer the good–they are not enticed, coerced, or “somehow drawn” to the good. They intelligently–yes, intellectually–prefer it because they know its nature and its effects. This is true of everything in their life, mundane, mental, and spiritual. This is markedly true in the matter of religion. The religious expression of the wise is always, peaceful, clear, intelligent, informed, and practical–it works.

The foolish, however are not so. They truly are a “troubled sea” (Isaiah 57:20) “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind” (Ephesians 4:14) as Isaiah and Saint Paul observed. “Driven by fleshly desires,” it only follows that they prefer the pleasant to the good, for the “flesh” cannot even perceive the good to any appreciable degree; but they create a lot of illusions about it–all negative and self-assuring. Their religion is subhuman, of course, catering to their emotions and their demands for the indulgence of their whims and vices. However educated they may be, or how boring and dry their church services, still animality reigns and all manner of subhuman behavior is sanctioned and even elevated and “spiritualized.”

Wallowing in the sty of their comforting and indulgent religion, they cast many a contemptuous (and secretly guilty) glance at those who are not so, and create many a bon mot about their “unnatural denial and repressions” hinting of sinister implications for those who “run away from life” and “refuse to face themselves,” and “expect too much from themselves and others.” But they are still only talking pigs. Even though they like to say they are “only human” and that God understands they are.

Driven by pleasure/pain, their humanity becomes submerged in the animality impressed in their subconscious by millions of incarnations in subhuman forms. Merely possessing a human body is no guarantee of humanity. The redoubtable Dr. Bronner in a conversation with one of the monks of our ashram referred to some people as “not yet HUMAN!” He was right. A house does not make a home and a human body does not make a human. Humanity only dawns when intelligence dominates and wisdom is gained. We need not be intellectual in the academic sense, but we must be intelligent. Then if we use our intelligence there is a chance we may become wise and thereby cross the great gulf.

Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog and get frequent spiritual sustenance with valuable writings on practical spiritual life.

“The good is one thing; the pleasant is another. These two, differing in their ends, both prompt to action. Blessed are they that choose the good; they that choose the pleasant miss the goal.”
–Katha Upanishad 1:2:1

“The good is one thing; the pleasant is another.” This does not have to be the situation–the problem is in us. Since the good dissolves the ego and frees us from its seemingly eternal domination and bondage, it is only natural that those who are inured, even addicted, to its rule will find the good bitter in the extreme. In the closing chapter of the Bhagavad Gita Krishna speaks of the one who chooses the good: “Deep his delight after strict self-schooling: sour toil at first but at last what sweetness, the end of sorrow.” (Bhagavad Gita 18:37)

Who would not choose this? Just about everybody. Why? Because it requires “strict self-schooling.” We have to educate and deliver ourselves. Neither God nor any holy being can do it for us. Therefore those who cling to their ego-addiction avidly “take refuge” in and “surrender” to and “place all my trust” in God, gods, gurus, saints, teachers, a religion, and whatever, knowing at least subconsciously that it will not work, for they alone can do the needful. The Holy Ones have already done all they could do for them. They have given the message and pointed out the way. Now it is their turn to get to work. Otherwise nothing will happen. And in their perversity this satisfies them completely, though they cover it up with religiosity and “devotion.” Those who do wish to achieve the good must shake off their self-hypnosis and begin the labor. They will be surprised at how pleasant it really is, and in time will come to realize that they were enjoying pain and avoiding the real pleasure that is found only in spiritual life.

The poison of pleasure

Krishna describes the pleasant as essentially “sweet at first but at last how bitter: that pleasure is poison.” (Bhagavad Gita 18:38) It is not just harmful–it is deadly. Saint Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of Saint John the Evangelist, wrote of those who, drinking a sweet drink that contains poison, “sweetly drink in their death.” (Epistle to the Trallians) “Aren’t we having fun?” “Come on–live!” “What are you afraid of?” “Why don’t you find out what it is all about?” “What do you know about life?” These are the desperate appeals of those whose consciousness is awakened enough for them to be tormented by the example of those who have more fully awakened and who “touch not the cup–it is death to the soul.”

The wise know that the good and the pleasant utterly differ in their ends. The pleasant leads to ever more addiction, a craving for ever-increasing intoxication, and finally complete collapse and destruction.

“When senses touch objects, the pleasures therefrom are like wombs that bear sorrow.They begin, they are ended. They bring no delight to the wise.” (Bhagavad Gita 5:22)

On the other hand:

“Self-controlled, cut free from desire, curbing the heart, and knowing the Atman, man finds Nirvana that is in Brahman, here and hereafter.” (Bhagavad Gita 5:26)

“For when a man’s heart has reached fulfillment through knowledge and personal experience of the truth of Brahman, he is never again moved by the things of the senses. Earth, stone and gold seem all alike to one who has mastered his senses. Such a yogi is said to have achieved union with Brahman. Then he knows that infinite happiness which can be realized by the purified heart but is beyond the grasp of the senses. He stands firm in this realization. Because of it, he can never again wander from the inmost truth of his being.” (Bhagavad Gita 6:8, 21)

The good also leads to complete collapse and destruction–the collapse and disintegration of the ego and its attendants, ignorance and desire. Then:

He knows bliss in the Atman, and wants nothing else. Cravings torment the heart: he renounces cravings. I call him illumined. (Bhagavad Gita 2:55)

The man of faith, whose heart is devoted, whose senses are mastered: he finds Brahman. Enlightened, he passes at once to the highest, the peace beyond passion. (Bhagavad Gita 4:39)

His mind is dead to the touch of the external: it is alive to the bliss of the Atman. Because his heart knows Brahman his happiness is for ever. (Bhagavad Gita 5:21)

Already, here on earth, before his departure, let man be the master of every impulse
Lust-begotten or fathered by anger: thus he finds Brahman, thus he is happy. (Bhagavad Gita 5:23)

Motivating forces

“These two, differing in their ends, both prompt to action.” Both the good and the pleasant impel us to actions, but they do so in completely different ways.

The good points us to the way of benefit in a completely intelligent and non-emotional way. For example, the good never motivates us by selfish means such as promising reward or threatening punishment–this is the way of evil, including much of religion. The good motivates us toward itself simply by revealing its inherent value.

The pleasant is altogether different. It only shows us its external appearance. It does not reason with us, but entices or even compels us to seize it. The pleasant only shows us its immediate or short-term effect, but completely hides from us its long-term effects and blinds us to its inherent defects. The archetypal example of this is found in the Bible. There we are told that “when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat.” (Genesis 3:6) Here we see all the problems with the pleasant: only the external is considered, emotion and instinct come to dominate and eclipse reason, and the ultimate effect is completely unapparent.

In sum, the good reveals but the pleasant conceals. It is necessary that we see the good as truly good and the pleasant as harmful and even evil. This is not easy.

Next: Are We Wise or Foolish?

Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog to read the latest posts as they are published.

A Continuation of “Worship and Discipline and the Gunas”

Tamas (dullness, inertia, and ignorance)

“When the givers of the sacrifice are inspired by tamas, they disregard the scriptural instructions: there is no food-offering, no prayer of dedication, no gift to the chief priest, and no faith at all.”
–Bhagavad Gita 17:13

Sometimes we have to pay attention to ignorance to figure out the ways of wisdom. And that is the case here regarding tamasic religion. This is a very full picture of deluded and confused “spirituality.” and we need to look at it so we can avoid it.

• Disregard of scriptural instructions

The word used here is very interesting: vidhihinam–which means both “lacking scriptures” and “discarding scriptures.” Krishna is implying here that scriptures are necessary for real spiritual life. However, in the East any book that contains wisdom is considered a scripture, even if it was written this morning. So Krishna is speaking of the wisdom of enlightened teachers that have been put into words and set down for our help in pursuing spiritual life. He is also referring to a spiritual tradition–not narrow and sectarian, but a tradition, nonetheless. In the West we tend wisely to shy away from “tradition” because of the deadly ignorance of those who boast of being “traditional.” But in the East tradition is always subject to intelligent scrutiny and is never a matter of “the book says it, so I believe it.”

Most important, authentic spiritual tradition is understood to be verifiable by each seeker for himself. In the West many are satisfied with intellectual jugglerly and argumentation, but in the East it is practical experience that is sought. Whenever I quote a scripture in my writings I certainly think of it as lending authority to what I have to say, but I usually use quotations simply because the scriptures say it much better than I can.

So tamasic religion is that which has no authentic scripture(s), no viable tradition(s). It may either be the shallow and flimsy “make up my own” whimsical kind, or a religion burdened with fantasy and lies claiming to be God’s latest revelation to the world. Either way, its characteristic is the darkness, confusion, and delusion of tamas.

On the other hand, some tamasic religion may have a great deal of scriptures in which true wisdom is to be found, but the leaders and adherents prefer to ignore the wisdom and subvert the teaching to suit their own fancy. So, while adulating the scriptures they really cast them aside. Consider the way every religion manages to condone spiritually poisonous behavior and thought, wresting the scriptures to not only approve, but often to advocate them. No religion is free from this, as anyone with open-eyed experience and observation will know. Often the divine light of holy wisdom is completely covered by the evil and untruth of a religion’s popular form.

Finally, vidhihinam can also simply mean “without knowledge (vidya)” or “discarding (ignoring) knowledge.” In other words, ignorant and ineffectual religion that boasts of its “faith” since it has no substance or reality. Today we find many religious currents in the world that were born in ignorance, and went on from there to greater ignorance. There are also religions that started out with authentic spiritual knowledge, with true spiritual revelation, but turned away from it in order to gain power and wealth. This is especially the case with state religions, or those that used to be state religions. Having remodeled their spiritual structure to suit their patrons, they lost their original value, and often the patronage, as well. Christianity is the latest and most blatant example of this.

• No food-offering

Asrishtannam means food that is either not offered, or is not shared out after the offering. This is an important part in Eastern religion of whatever kind. There is always offering of food which is then distributed to those present–usually in the form of an abundant feast. But the selfish refuse to do so, and their religion becomes one of taking but not giving. This is the mark of any cult–old or new.

No prayer of dedication. I think that Swami Prabhavananda had in mind the mantra known as the sankalpa which is recited at the beginning of any ritual, stating its purpose and dedication. Its absence would indicate religion that is vague, even purposeless, performed in a rote way simply for the doing of it, or religion whose real purpose is not at all grasped, and is therefore meaningless. But mantrahinam is like vidhihinam; it has the dual meaning of “without mantra” or “disregarding mantra.” This indicates religion that is without order or legitimacy, and especially religion that is without power, for power (effectiveness) is the fundamental characteristic of mantra. So we are looking at a religion that never had any spiritual power, or has come to discard–and even deny–that power. It can also be applied to the adherents of a religion that does have power and knowledge, but regarding which they are either ignorant or indifferent.

• No gift to the chief priest

Adakshinam simply means “without fee” or voluntary offering. This means a religion in which the members engage in take-but-no-give policy–the obverse side of the type where the religion only demands and takes. Such religion is proud of the fact that it expects nothing of its adherents, and they are proud of that, too. “Our religion is democratic ,” they boast. “You don’t need to do anything you don’t want to.” They confuse democracy with anarchy. It is certainly true that in worthy religion the members are not coerced or cajoled in any way. But people that want to avoid all involvment, commitment, or investment of time and thought are unworthy of such a religion and will never benefit from it until they change their outlook.

Such religion often denies the fact of priesthood or hierachial realities, refusing to recognize that some people may be more spiritually skilled or knowledgous than others. Such religion revels in a kind of egalitarianism that suppresses anything but lock-step standardization and mediocrity. “The priesthood of all believers” sounds nice, but it often masks ineffectiveness and repression.

Adakshinam also indicates a kind of selfish materialism that hates expenditure of time, effort, or even money on religion. My great-aunt Lou Maxey not only never put anything in the collection plate, she would grimly shake her head No whenever it came by her! But she was one of the first to head to the back of the church to get a free copy of the weekly church magazine. Deadbeat religion is nothing new.

At the opposite pole are the saints–that is why they are saints. As Mirabai, the great poet/musician saint of India wrote: “I have sold everything in the marketplace of this world and bought my Khanaia (Krishna). Some laugh at me and say the price was too great, and some say that the price was too small. But Mira only knows that it was everything she had.”

• No faith at all

The last quality of tamasic religion listed is shraddhavirahitam–devoid of faith or having abandoned faith. To really understand this, we must remember that shraddha is not mere intellectual belief, but an interior, intuitive conviction that arises as an enlivening of the inner intelligence of an individual. In other words, a religion of shraddha is a religion that is spiritually alive, and therefore inwardly perceptive. In the sixth chapter of the Gita we have this description of one who has this divine shraddha: “The mind of the yogi knows that Brahman:…the way is easy, Brahman has touched him.…He never loses sight of me, nor I of him.” (Bhagavad Gita 6:27, 28, 30) This is the religion we should seek, realizing that it can be hinted at outwardly, but can only be achieved inwardly. As Jesus said (Luke 17:21): “The kingdom of God is within you”–actually is you.

Tamasic religion really has no genuine perception at all–it is only obscurity and confusion. However, there are degrees of tamas (as with the other gunas, as well), and we can encounter people who have no faith in their religion because they dimly intuit that it is nonsense. But, being tamasic–one quality of which is inertia–they stay with it and go through the motions knowing it means nothing. Here, too, we find religions that once had a mystical aspect but jettisoned it for material gain or from spiritual blindness resulting from impurity and dulness of heart. There are individuals that are the same. For whatever reason they blind themselves to the insights they once had and become wanderers in the fog along with so many others. I have seen people do this for various reasons, but result was always the same: inner death. And I have never seen one regain what they willfully cast aside. Rebirth alone will restore it to them, and after how long a struggle?

The whole subject of tamasic religion is certainly gloomy, but spiritual adults know they have to acknowledge a lot of facts that are not pretty or pleasant, just as in material life unpleasant realities much be faced. The up side of the whole thing is that having given careful consideration to the matter we can avoid slipping into its ways and ourselves losing our inner vision.

The wise traveller knows both the right and the wrong roads.

Related post: How to Misuse Your Power of Thought

Keep up to date with the latest posts. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.