As was shown in the previous chapter, the theory that the Maharshi taught was intended only to serve as a basis for practice. However, the demand for practice brought in another branch of theory, that of free will or predestination, since many people asked why they should make any effort if everything is predestined, or if all men return to their Source in any case.
‘A visitor from Bengal said: “Shankara says that we are all free, not bound, and that we shall all return to God from whom we came, like sparks from a fire. If that is so, why should we not commit all sorts of sins?”’
Bhagavan's reply showed him that that cannot be the point of view of the ego.
B: It is true that we are not bound. That is to say, the real Self has no bondage. And it is true that you will eventually return to your Source. But meanwhile, if you commit sins, as you call them, you have to face the consequences. You cannot escape them. If a man beats you, can you say: ‘I am free, I am not affected by the beating and feel no pain. Let him continue beating’? If you can really feel that, then you can do what you like, but what is the use of just saying in words that you are free?1
Bhagavan did sometimes make pronouncements that seemed superficially like affirmations of complete predestination. When he left home in his youth, already established in Self-realization, his mother sought and at last found him. He was maintaining silence at that time; therefore, on her request to return home with her, he wrote out his reply instead of replying verbally:
‘The Ordainer controls the fate of souls in accordance with their prarabdhakarma (destiny to be worked out in this life, resulting from the balance sheet of actions in past lives). Whatever is destined not to happen will not happen, try as you may. Whatever is destined to happen will happen, do what you may to prevent it. This is certain. The best course, therefore, is to remain silent.’2
He sometimes also made such statements to devotees.
‘All the activities that the body is to go through are determined when it first comes into existence. It does not rest with you to accept or reject them. The only freedom you have is to turn your mind inward and renounce activities there.’3
‘With reference to Bhagavan's reply to Mrs. Desai on the evening of January 3rd, I asked him: “Are only the important events in a man's life, such as his main occupation or profession, predetermined, or are trifling acts also, such as taking a cup of water or moving from one part of the room to another?”’
B.: Everything is predetermined.
I: Then what responsibility, what free will has man?
B.: Why does the body come into existence? It is designed for the various things that are marked out for it in this life . . . As for freedom, a man is always free not to identify himself with the body and not to be affected by the pleasures and pains consequent on its activities.4
Actually, however, the question of free will or predestination does not arise at all from the point of view of non-duality. It is as though a group of people who had never heard of radio were to stand round a wireless set arguing whether the man in the box has to sing what the transmitting station tells him to or whether he can change parts of the songs. The answer is that there is no man in the box and therefore the question does not arise. Similarly, the answer to the question whether the ego has free will or not is that there is no ego and therefore the question does not arise. Therefore Bhagavan's usual response to the question would be to bid the questioner find out who it is that has free will or predestination.
D.: Has man any free will or is everything in his life predetermined?'
The same question as above, but the answer differs according to the needs of the questioner. In fact, if one does not bear in mind what has just been said about the unreality of the ego, it seems to be quite contradictory.
B.: Free will exists together with the individuality. As long as the individuality lasts, so long is there free will. All the scriptures are based on this fact and advise directing the free will in the right channel.
Is this really a contradiction of the reply given earlier? No, because, according to Bhagavan's teaching, the individuality has only an illusory existence. So long as one imagines that one has a separate individuality, so long does one also imagine its free will. The two exist together inevitably. The problem of predestination and free will has always plagued philosophers and theologians and will always continue to do so, because it is insoluble on the plane of duality, that is on the supposition of one being who is the Creator and a lot of other, separate beings who are created. If they have free will, then he is not omnipotent and omniscient—he does not know what will happen, because it depends on what they decide; and he cannot control all happenings because they have the power to change them. On the other hand, if he is omniscient and omnipotent he has fore-knowledge of all that will happen and controls everything, and therefore they can have no power of decision, that is to say no free will. But on the level of advaita or non-duality the problem fades out and ceases to exist. In truth the ego has no free will, because there is no ego; but on the level of apparent reality the ego consists of free will—it is the illusion of free will that creates the illusion of the ego. That is what Bhagavan meant by saying that ‘as long as the individuality lasts, so long is there free will’. The next sentence in his answer turns the questioner away from theory to practice.
‘Find out who it is who has free will or predestination and abide in that state. Then both are transcended. That is the only purpose in discussing these questions. To whom do such questions present themselves? Discover that and be at peace.’5
‘The only path of karma (action), bhakti (devotion), yoga and jnana (knowledge) is to enquire who it is who has the karma, vibhakti (lack of devotion), viyoga (separation) and ajnana (ignorance). Through this investigation, the ego disappears and the state of abidance in the Self in which none of these negative qualities ever existed, remains as the Truth.’6
‘As long as a man is the doer he also reaps the fruits of his deeds, but as soon as he realizes the Self through enquiry as to who is the doer, his sense of being the doer falls away and the triple karma (destiny) is ended. This is the state of eternal liberation.’7
Bhagavan said: ‘We are all really Sat-chit-ananda (Being-Knowledge-Bliss) but we imagine that we are bound (by destiny) and have all this suffering.’
I asked him why we imagine this, why this state of ignorance (ajnana) comes over us.
Bhagavan said: ‘Ask yourself to whom this ignorance has come and you will discover that it never came to you and that you always have been Sat-chit-ananda. One goes through all sorts of austerities to become what one already is. All effort is simply to get rid of the mistaken impression that one is limited and bound by the woes of samsara (this life).’8
D.: Is there predestination? And if what is destined to happen will happen, is there any use in prayer or effort or should we just remain idle?
This is a concise form of the question that Bhagavan was so often asked, and the reply is typical in that it does not expound theory but prescribes what to do.
B.: There are only two ways in which to conquer destiny or be independent of it. One is to enquire who undergoes this destiny and discover that only the ego is bound by it and not the Self, and that the ego is non-existent. The other way is to kill the ego by completely surrendering to the Lord, by realizing one's helplessness and saying all the time: ‘Not I, but Thou, O my Lord’, and giving up all sense of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ and leaving it to the Lord to do what he likes with you. Surrender can never be regarded as complete so long as the devotee wants this or that from the Lord. True surrender is love of God for the sake of love and for nothing else, not even for the sake of salvation. In other words, complete effacement of the ego is necessary to conquer destiny, whether you achieve this effacement through Self-enquiry or through bhakti marga.9
This mode of reply is common to spiritual teachers. I remember once reading the life of a Sufi saint, Abu Said, by Professor Nicholson, in which the learned author concluded that he seems to have taught predestination in theory but free will in practice. Puzzling as it may be for the philosopher, this is the attitude of all spiritual teachers, just as Christ affirmed that not even a sparrow can fall without the will of God, and that the very hairs on one's head are numbered, just as the Quran affirms that all knowledge and power are with God and that He leads aright whom He will and leads astray whom He will; and yet both Christ and the Quran exhort men to right effort and condemn sin. Bhagavan was quite categorical that effort is necessary. In actual life everyone realizes this, whatever theoretical view he may hold. A man makes the physical effort of putting the food in his mouth and eating; he does not say: ‘What is the use of eating if I am predestined to die of starvation?’ He makes the mental effort of earning the money to buy food to eat. Why should he, then, apply a different logic when it comes to spiritual effort?
‘A young man from Colombo, Ceylon, said to Bhagavan: “J. Krishnamurthi teaches the method of effortless and choiceless awareness as distinct from that of deliberate concentration. Would Sri Bhagavan be pleased to explain how best to practise meditation and what form the object of meditation shall take?”’
B.: Effortless and choiceless awareness is our real nature. If we can attain that state and abide in it, that is all right. But one cannot reach it without effort, the effort of deliberate meditation. All the age-old vasanas (inherent tendencies) turn the mind outwards to external objects. All such thoughts have to be given up and the mind turned inwards and that, for most people, requires effort. Of course, every teacher and every book tells the aspirant to keep quiet, but it is not easy to do so. That is why all this effort is necessary. Even if we find somebody who has achieved this supreme state of stillness, you may take it that the necessary effort had already been made in a previous life. So, effortless and choiceless awareness is attained only after deliberate meditation. That meditation can take whatever form most appeals to you. See what helps you to keep out all other thoughts and adopt that for your meditation.
‘In this connection Bhagavan quoted some verses from the great Tamil poet and saint Thayumanavar, the gist of which is as follows. Bliss will ensue if you keep still, but however much you tell your mind this truth, it will not keep still. It is the mind that tells the mind to be still and it will attain bliss, but it will not do it. Though all the scriptures have said it and though we hear it daily from the great ones and even from our Guru, we are never quiet but stray into the world of Maya (illusion) and sense objects. That is why conscious, deliberate effort is needed to attain that effortless state of stillness.’10
Indeed, until the supreme, effortless state is attained, it is impossible for a man not to make effort. His own nature compels him to, just as Sri Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita told Arjuna that his own nature would compel him to fight.
D.: I want to be further enlightened. Should I try to make no effort at all?
B.: Now it is impossible for you to be without effort. When you go deeper, it is impossible for you to make effort.11
D.: What is the difference between meditation and samadhi or absorption in the Self?
B.: Meditation is initiated and sustained by a conscious effort of the mind. When such effort entirely subsides, it is called samadhi.12
B.: If you can keep still without engaging in any other pursuits, well and good. But if that cannot be done, what is the use of remaining inactive only with regard to realization? So long as you are obliged to be active, do not give up the attempt to realize the Self.13
‘Meditation is a fight. As soon as you begin meditation, other thoughts will crowd together, gather force and try to overwhelm the single thought to which you try to hold. This thought must gradually gain strength by repeated practice. When it has grown strong, the other thoughts will be put to flight. This is the battle always going on in meditation.’14
‘So long as the ego lasts, effort is necessary. When the ego ceases to exist, actions become spontaneous.’15
‘No one succeeds without effort. Mind control is not your birthright. The few who succeed owe their success to their perseverance.’16
Sometimes glimpses of Realization are attained before it becomes permanent, and in such cases effort still continues to be necessary.
‘Effort is necessary up to the state of Realization. Even then, the Self should spontaneously become evident; otherwise happiness will not be complete. Up to that state of spontaneity there must be effort in some form or another.’17
Sometimes right effort is referred to as a duty.
D.: Why should I try to get Realization? I shall emerge from this state of illusion just as I wake up from a dream. We do not make any effort to get out of a dream when we are asleep.
B.: In a dream you have no inkling that it is a dream and therefore no obligation to make an effort to get out of it. But in this life you have some intuition based on your experience of sleep and on what you hear and read, that it is a sort of dream, and this intuition imposes on you the duty of making an effort to get out of it. However, who wants to realize the Self if you don't want to? If you prefer to be in this dream, stay as you are.18
Sometimes, however, as in the following very similar conversation, the seeker was reminded that even the effort is a part of the illusion of individual being.
D.: It is said that our waking life is also a dream, similar to our dream during sleep. But in our dreams we make no conscious effort to get rid of the dream and to wake up; the dream itself comes to an end without any effort on our part and we become awake. Similarly, why shouldn't the waking state, which in reality is only another sort of dream, come to an end of its own accord, without any effort on our part, and land us in Realization or real awakening?
B.: Your thinking that you have to make an effort to get rid of this dream of a waking state and your making efforts to attain Realization or real awakening are all parts of the dream. When you attain Realization you will see there was neither the dream during sleep nor the waking state, but only yourself and your real state.19
Sometimes the question took the form of apparent conflict not between effort and destiny but between effort and grace, for there were those who asked what use effort was if Realization was dependent on the grace of God or Guru. In one form or another this doubt tends to arise in any religion, as in the Christian dispute whether salvation is due to grace or good works. Really, as the following quotations show, there is no conflict between the two.
V.: It is said that only those who are chosen for Self-realization obtain it. That is rather discouraging.
B.: That only means that we cannot attain realization of the Self by our own mind, unaided by God's grace.
‘I interposed: Bhagavan also says that even that grace does not come arbitrarily but because one has deserved it by one's own efforts either in this life or in previous ones.’
V.: But human effort is said to be useless; so what incentive has a man to improve himself?
‘I asked where it was said that you should make no effort or that effort was useless; and the visitor pointed to the passage in “Who am I?” where it says that, since the indefinable power of the Lord ordains, sustains and controls everything, we need not worry what we shall do.20 I pointed out that what is deprecated there is not human effort but the feeling “I am the doer”. I asked Bhagavan whether my explanation was not right and he approved of it.’21
D.: Grace is necessary for the removal of ignorance.
B.: Certainly. But Grace is there all along. Grace is the Self. It is not something to be acquired. All that is necessary is to know its existence. In the same way, the sun is pure brightness; it does not know darkness, although others speak of darkness fleeing away on its approach. Like darkness, ignorance is a phantom, not real. Because of its unreality, it is said to be removed when its unreality is discovered.
‘The sun is there and shines and you are surrounded by sunlight; still, if you would know the sun you must turn your eyes in its direction and look at it. Similarly, Grace is only to be found by effort, although it is here and now.’
D.: By the desire to surrender, increasing grace is experienced, I hope?
B.: Surrender once and for all and be done with the desire. So long as the sense of being the doer remains desire does also. Therefore the ego remains. But once this goes the Self shines forth in its purity. The sense of being the doer is the bondage, not the actions themselves. ‘Be still and know that I am God.’ Here stillness is total surrender without a vestige of individuality. Stillness will prevail and there will be no agitation of the mind. Agitation of mind is the cause of desire, of the sense of being the doer, of personality. If that is stopped, there is quiet. In this sense, ‘knowing’ means ‘being’. It is not relative knowledge involving the triad of knower, knowledge and known.22
D.: But one may not be quite sure of God's grace?
B.: If the unripe mind does not feel God's grace, it does not mean that this is absent, for that would imply that God is at times not gracious, that is to say ceases to be God.
D.: Is that the same as the saying of Christ: ‘According to thy faith be it done unto thee’?
B.: Quite so.
D.: The Upanishads say, I am told, that he alone knows the Atman whom the Atman chooses. Why should the Atman choose at all? If it chooses, why some particular person?
B.: When the sun rises some buds blossom, not all. Do you blame the sun for that? Nor can the bud blossom of itself, it requires the sunlight to enable it to do so.
D.: May we not say that the help of the Atman is needed because it is the Atman that drew over itself the veil of Maya?
B.: You may say so.
D.: If the Atman has drawn the veil over itself, should it not itself remove the veil?
B.: It will. But who complains of being veiled? Ask yourself that.
D.: Why should I? Let the Atman itself remove the veil.
B.: If the Atman complains about the veil, then the Atman will remove it.23
D.: If the Supreme Being is omnipresent, as He is said to be, His realization ought to be an easy thing. The scriptures, however, declare that without His grace the Lord cannot even be worshipped, much less realized. So then, how can the individual by his own effort realize the Self, or the Supreme Being, except through His grace?
B.: There was never a time when the Supreme Being was unknown or unrealized, because He is one and identical with the Self. His grace or Anugraha is the same as the conscious immediacy of His Divine Presence, Prasannata, in other words, Enlightenment or Revelation. One's ignorance of this self-revealing immediacy of Divine Grace is no proof to the contrary. If the owl does not see the sun that illumines the whole world, is that the fault of the sun? Is it not due to the defectiveness of the bird's sight? Similarly, if the ignorant man is unaware of the ever-luminous Atman or Self, can that be attributed to the nature of the Atman itself? Is it not the result of his own ignorance? The Supreme Lord is eternal grace. Therefore, there is really no such individual act as bestowing Grace; and, being ever present, the manifestation of Grace is not confined to any particular period or occasion.24
Turning to God and desiring His grace is itself grace.
D.: Doubts keep arising. That is why I ask how it is to be done.
B.: A doubt arises and it is cleared. Another arises and that is cleared, only to make way for another, and so it goes on. So there is no possibility of clearing away all doubts. Find out instead to whom the doubts come. Go to their source and stay there. Then they cease to arise. That is how doubts are to be cleared away.
D.: Only grace can help me do it.
B.: Grace is not something outside you. In fact your very desire for grace is due to grace that is already working in you.25
Grace is represented alike as the grace of God or Guru.
D.: Isn't success dependent on the grace of the Guru?
B.: Yes, but isn't your practice itself due to such grace? Its fruits spring from it automatically. There is a stanza in Kaivalya which runs: ‘O Guru, you have always been with me, watching over me, one incarnation after another, and have shaped my course until I was Liberated.’ The Self manifests externally as the Guru when occasion demands; otherwise he always remains within, doing what is required.26
V.: In actual practice, I find I cannot succeed in my efforts unless Bhagavan's grace descends on me.
B.: The Guru's Grace is always there. You imagine it to be something somewhere high up in the sky that has to descend, but really it is inside you, in your heart, and the moment you effect the subsidence or merging of the mind into its Source, by whatever method, the Grace rushes forth, spouting as from a spring within you.27