|
There are some
states of consciousness that come onto this dimension
because their duty, let's say, is that of teaching and
therefore, in eastern terms we could say that they are
gurus. My position is a bit different. I have not come here
to have disciples, as such. If a person comes along and he
has to be guided by me, no problem, I will do it. But this
is not the main goal of this particular incarnation of this
state of consciousness. Raphael's Dharma is that of allowing
people like Shankara, Gaudapada, Plato, Plotinus, Parmenides
to speak out again. And, it is in their name that this
particular state of consciousness has come down to this
dimension. So, the image of Raphael is put aside so that
these people, these other states of consciousness that we
mentioned, can speak out. There are some gurus who come onto
this plane, their goal is that of teaching, they might even
create an ashram - and then they disappear. It all ends
there. Instead, my role is not that of creating an ashram in
his own name, let's say, but rather of perpetuating this
knowledge that in the West, especially, is something that is
lacking. As far as my physical body is concerned, even when
I was extremely young, when I was about 20, I already knew
exactly what I had to do. So, in this particular incarnation
the person who incarnates Raphael had no problems of
sadhana, of understanding certain teachings, of ascension
and of realisation because all of this had been done
previously.
Q : What you call a state of consciousness is what we would
refer to as a person ?
R : Everything in this world is consciousness, and a state
of consciousness is a way of unveiling the possibilities
that exist within this consciousness. So in fact, Raphael is
a state of consciousness, but you too are a state of
consciousness that has to be unveiled.
Q : Everything being consciousness, but in this one
Consciousness there are different movements, is that a good
explanation ?
R : We could say that there is a single or one Consciousness
which is expressed through the gunas, that is, the qualities
and qualifications, and according to the perfection of the
gunas, consciousness has a greater or a lesser possibility
of expressing itself. In a tree or in an animal,
consciousness has much less of a possibility of expressing
itself. What limits these states of consciousness, or
awareness, is form. Realisation is the possibility of
breaking all these limitations, these circumferences that
limit consciousness so as to allow it to be unveiled in all
of its majesty. Consciousness exists everywhere, even in the
mineral kingdom. In the human being, of course, it has a
greater capacity of expression. In a Deva, that is in a
higher level being, it is unveiled through Ananda-maya and
therefore it has much greater possibilities. According to
Vedanta we have five vehicles or instruments that allow
contact with the rest of the world. And these go from the
gross physical level to the most subtle, which is the one of
Ananda or bliss. This is exactly what was thought in Ancient
Greece and in Ancient Egypt. Nothing changes. Only a
different name is given to these states, but the basic
knowledge is exactly the same.
Q : Have you ever been to India ?
R : No, I have never been to India. The ambassador of India
to Rome, Apa Pant, often invited me to go to India. Each
time I said "I'll go there sooner or later. Sometime I'll go
there." One of our brothers is presently in India and has
gone to Shankara's Maths. He'll be back at the end of the
month. There are five or six people who have gone to India
for me, and they will have quite a bit of material to bring
back here. On the other hand, knowledge is beyond space, we
are all the children of the same dimension. Because
knowledge is not something that is located either here or
there and that you can only find either here or there.
Knowledge is like the sun, it's up there and it's for
everybody. Quite a few Swamis have invited me to go to India
to visit their ashrams, even Shankara's Maths have invited
me - and I say, " I'll go".
Q : Seeing that in this life there has been no searching,
would you say that you were born realised ?
R : This particular state of consciousness has no ego that
can say "I am realised". It is the others who can define me
as realised or non-realised. When I was very young my
brothers and sisters on the path kept on saying that I was
born old. Instead, I thought that I was very normal, I was
like everybody else, according to me. Other people said,
"You are a philosopher" and I would reply, " I don't think
so, I'm just saying the things I feel like saying."
Everything is so beautiful !
Q : When and why were Ashram Vidya and Academia Ordo Rael
started? What is their function?
R : First of all, we have to make a distinction. There was
an Ashram Vidya which was founded in Rome and is now the
headquarters of the publishing house. This particular place
is the Academy (Academia).
We have to make a distinction, because you might be aware of
the fact that in Tradition, there are four different stages
of life. The two first stages, that is the disciple/student,
the one who is learning something on a pathway, and the
so-called head of the family or the person who has any kind
of responsibility : these two stages of life have to be
carried out within the world and for the world. We cannot
run away from the world, the world has to be integrated.
This is to avoid any escapism, psychological fugues and so
on. The other two stages are that of the hermit and of the
samnyasin or the renouncer.
The first two stages of life were the ones that we followed
in Rome, at the Ashram. The latter two stages are the ones
that we carry out here, because to be a hermit or a
renouncer is more difficult to obtain in the city and
usually they are in the country or in the mountains and in
silence. As far as the last two stages of life are
concerned, the hermit stage represents a return within
oneself, in Sanskrit, Uparati. This gives rise to silence,
to inner concentration and to contemplation. Samnyasin is
total renunciation, even to one's own physical body. If the
body were to go, there would be no problem. This
renunciation, though, is due to the fact that one's state of
consciousness raised to such levels that there is no
connection to the world of names and forms. In addition,
this particular Academia was not founded because there was
some kind of specific desire on the part of myself, but
rather because we could receive the possibility of anchoring
certain principles onto this level. That is, an influx of a
metaphysical level and it would be of the Greater Mysteries
or Paravidya. What Shankara tried to do with the four Maths,
what Plotinus tried to do with the City of the Philosophers,
with great modesty, we are trying to do here now.
(Showing a book) These are the four main Maths of
Shankara's, there are some others as well. This is to give
the Tradition a possibility of being perpetuated and to go
on. And, after 1200 years, this Tradition is still alive.
There is the greatest importance in the fact of perpetuating
a Tradition. Because if the Tradition should no longer
exits, all of humanity would be left an orphan. If now we
are able to follow these teachings, it was because Shankara
wrote all of the so-called sacred texts, and this gives us a
possibility of not having any illusions and to go on with
our self-realisation. And, these holy scriptures, or holy
texts have to be cared for by someone, so that they can go
on in time, that they can be perpetuated. It is very
interesting for Indian gurus to come to the West and talk
about Advaita Vedanta - but equally important it is to have
the holy scriptures with which to confront what is being
said. It is very important to understand these two lines of
action which, as a matter of fact, are a single line of
action: there has to be the teacher but there has to be the
scriptures as well. If we were to lose all of that exists in
the holy books, such as the Vedas and the Upanishads, the
Darshana, and so on, we would be in total ignorance. This is
something very important. I do think you have understood
it.
Q : The people who are living here, are they dedicating
their life to the study of the traditional texts and their
application?
R : And, of course, to Self-realisation. We have here some
permanent residents, and a part from that there are very
many people who come from Italy and abroad to meet with me -
to have a kind of experience here. There is another very
special experience that people can go through here, because,
as you can see, you have both men and women close to one
another. Many gurus from India would disapprove of this. But
because we are looking at the Greater Mysteries, at the
Paravidya, we presume that the people who come here and,
even more so, the people who reside here have a 'suitable'
state of consciousness. In fact, nothing special has ever
happened here! Quite a few of the people that are residing
here, when they came they were very young. Now even if you
look at them, they would take no notice and create no
problems, of course.
There are quite a few groups here in Italy, who follow my
teaching and who have founded themselves into groups. Some
of them are here and you can meet some of them who come from
Sicily, from Calabria, from the central part of Italy
(Marque) and the north, Piedmont. These groups periodically
come over to have their experiences, and they can also
receive teachings. The relationship that I have with these
people or with these groups is not that of a guru with his
disciples, but it is a relationship like that of the Acharya
- that is a relationship based on a dialogue so that there
can be a total comprehension, a total understanding between
the two beings and there is an unveiling of what one really
is. So, I will never tell the people who come here, "You
must do this", or "Don't do that, for this reason and for
that reason". No, this is not the kind of relationship that
I have with my children or with the beings that come here.
Because I have integrated within myself all of the different
branches of Tradition, therefore, according to the person
who is in front of me, I can offer that particular kind of
teaching - the one which is most suited for the person. So,
I will express, or will present a general vision of what
life should be like and then I allow total freedom to the
person to manifest it or to make this vision his own. If
there are special conditions that create obstacles to the
realisation of this vision, the only thing to do is to talk
about it and see why there are these obstacles and what to
do about them. The fact that I have a gift of languages, as
far as the traditions are concerned, is something that
leaves people a bit aghast, very surprised. Because the
majority of disciples, when they seek a Master they expect
that the Master is That and nothing else : so he's either
Buddhist, or a Kabbalahist or something specific and nothing
else. Sometimes they ask me, "What current do you belong to
? Are you a Hindu? Are you Advaita Vedanta?" And I have to
answer, "No, I am not even that !" "Are you a Kabbalahist,
you've written books on the Kabbalah" And this totally
disorients them! (laughing) And so, I usually try to ask the
person, "What are you looking for? What is the direction in
life ?" - "At which point I can come towards you and we can
help each other". So, I find it very difficult when somebody
talks about me and says that I am a Vedanta expert. I feel
like laughing, because that is not what I think I am.
There must be a state of consciousness that integrates all
of the different possibilities and opportunities, even if
you are outside of these currents because this state of
consciousness does not identify with any of the different
paths. That is the great difficulty that I have in answering
specific questions. If somebody asks me, "Have you followed
this particular path?". My only answer could be, "Yes, I've
followed all of them".
Top
of the page
Q : What takes
place here?
R : Here, we have a temple, but it is wrong to call this
building a temple, because the whole compound is a temple.
The people who reside here meditate in this room next door.
There are special conditions whereby not everybody is
advised to meditate three times a day (and on Wednesdays
much more) because they might not withstand this kind of
meditation, so it is a good idea for the non-residents to
meditate in their own cells - which are also temples -
according to their own choice. You for example, very
probably have your own guru who has given you special
techniques or special meditation, ways to meditate and so
on. So it is a good idea not to disturb your way of
meditating. I do not expect people to follow our techniques
or our way of meditating and so on. So it is a good idea for
you to meditate according to what you know and to how you
have been instructed, and you can do that in your cell. So,
it is not a question of being exclusive, but rather of
giving everybody an opportunity and giving everybody
freedom.
Q : We both feel a very strong silence and respect for
silence here. Why is it important to be in silence?
R : We have already said that the third stage of life is the
one that starts with a returning into oneself. At the Ashram
in Rome, there were quite a few dialogues, there were
conferences and everybody could express their own point of
view. Here instead, we suppose at least that these
experiences have been integrated at that level let's say,
the understanding has been integrated. During the first two
stages of life it was more than fair for people to say
everything, to express their point of view, to have a
dialogue and somebody to listen to them and so on.
My work is to try and let people understand that even in the
West there is a metaphysical path concerning the Greater
Mysteries. Yesterday we were talking about the Oneness of
the Truth. One of my duties is that of bringing again
something to the light - there's nothing new of course, all
of this has already been said, - to have the reappearance of
Western traditional philosophy as well, which is part of the
Greater Mysteries. There are some westerners who believe
that Truth only belongs to the East. And this is not true
because even in the West we have a Tradition. All we have to
do is allow it to be manifested. Plotinus, for example, was
a great realised being, was a mystic and a philosopher and
he wanted to give a possibility to the Tradition to be, to
reappear, to re-emerge, and he wanted to create this City or
Citadel of the Philosophers, but in traditional terms. At
the time of emperor Gallienus, Plotinus was one of the
teachers of the emperor's children and unfortunately,
because of court problems, he was not allowed to go on with
this idea of the creating a Citadel of the Philosophers,
south of Naples. Plato, for example, wanted to set up in
Sicily (which was Magna Grecia at that time) the 'Politeia',
which is the Republic. Often, he travelled from Greece to
Sicily to bring about this vision of a State which is based
on justice and order. By order he means commensurate with
the higher planes, with the universal planes. Pythagoras had
this kind of School as well, and it lasted for a long time
in Calabria. And he also set up quite a few groups.
So, the Tradition followed by Plato, by Plotinus and by
Pythagoras exists here in Italy and in the West, of course.
This is to allow you to understand that unfortunately in the
West the Tradition has been more of the kshatriya nature, of
the warrior, rather than being contemplative and of course,
with Christianity, all of this was completely erased.
Plotinus used to say that he was ashamed of being in a
physical body. I would say the same (laughing). Plotinus did
not like people to draw pictures of him. He hid all the
time. So, one of his disciples, Amelius, asked one artist to
come over from Greece and the only image we have is this one
here (Raphael shows the cover of the book) that was
something that this man learnt by heart and painted in
secret from memory. The image is of him together with his
disciple, Porphyry. This image is due to a painter's memory
!
Q : It seems that many westerners are more attracted to
India and Advaita Vedanta. They seem to give it more value,
in fact. Why is it that it attracts them like this ?
R : There have been two main events. The first was
Christianity, which willingly tried to obscure Western
philosophy. Christianity only has the smaller, the lesser
Mysteries, and not the Greater Mysteries. Islam has Sufism,
which is already of a greater order and it contains the
Greater Mysteries. The Torah, the Old Testament, has
an Esoteric part, which is Kabbalah. Christianity
does not have this metaphysical level and it does not have
this vision of the Greater Mysteries. The other reason is
that the West is mainly positivistic and materialistic, and
therefore it sees everything in terms of materialness and so
on, and it has interpreted philosophy in a materialistic,
positivistic way. These two events, gradually, little by
little, have obscured the Greater Mysteries and the greater
part of western philosophy. Although Plato, Plotinus and
Parmenides have spoken very very clearly, today,
philosophers do not accept that Plato was a great realised
being. These people are only considered as great discursive
philosophers.
In Sicily, there is a group which was set up under my aid
which is mainly a group centred around Plato. You have met
the co-ordinator of this group. He is the co-ordinator of
this specific Platonic group and all of the different groups
that we have in Sicily. There is also a group that has to do
with politics and is inspired by the 'Politeia', that is the
"Republic and the Laws", written by Plato. A couple of years
ago we had a girl who became the Mayor of a small town in
Sicily and who tried to follow the rulings of Plato in this
small town of hers.
Q : In the traditional Greek texts, do you feel that they
talk about the same things as in Advaita Vedanta ?
R : When we talk about Advaita Vedanta, we talk about three
states of being plus a fourth, which is the Absolute Nirguna
and it is beyond manifestation. Plato says exactly the same
thing. Plato talks about the world of Being, which is
exactly as the state of being of Ishwara, in Advaita
Vedanta. Plato also speaks of "One One", which is beyond
Being and that corresponds to Nirguna in Advaita Vedanta.
The Sephirotic tree (Kabbalah) has three different
levels, exactly as the other two traditions, plus one which
is called Ain-Soph, which is beyond manifestation. I have
tried to make people understand that all the different
branches of Tradition lead to exactly the same conclusion,
that there is something which is beyond manifestation and
that there is only Oneness. Even Parmenides says exactly the
same thing. The teaching of Parmenides is a very synthetic
one because we do not have many things that remain from him.
But what we have that remains of his teaching says exactly
the same things as Gaudapada or Shankara. Parmenides says,
"The Being is and does not become, and therefore it is an
absolute Reality". "Manifestation is nothing else but an
appearance. It appears at the horizon and disappears". This
is exactly the same concept as that of Maya, in Vedanta.
Q : When you think of yourself, or when you say 'I', what
concept do you have of yourself? What does this 'I' refer
to?
R : We were saying before that Raphael is a state of
consciousness. A state of consciousness cannot say, "I am
this", "I am not that", "I am realised", "I am not
realised". A state of consciousness is totally impersonal.
We have an ego or an "I" whenever there is an identification
through the reflection of consciousness in a physical body
which says, "I am this". This 'I' will say, "I am the body",
"I am feeling", "I am emotion", "I am thought". In France,
you have Descartes with this very famous axiom, "I think,
therefore I am", "I doubt, therefore I am". The Tradition
goes totally to the contrary of this point of view, it turns
it over: "I am, therefore I think", and not "I think,
therefore I am". Descartes is taking the cause for the
effect, he is mistaking the cause for the effect. And this
created quite a few divisions in the West, even though
Descartes believed in God, as well. If you identify with a
vehicle, you lose your total identity. This is the myth of
Narcissus. Narcissus was the one who in reflecting himself
in the water, saw his image, fell in love with his image,
fell into the water and therefore died. Even in the West we
have these very significant symbols, which are very
important from the realisation point of view. Even the tale
of the prodigal son - who moves away from the father,
therefore from unity, goes into the world, has many
experiences, very many negative experiences as well, and
then goes back to the father and therefore to unity - has a
deep traditional meaning.
In the Viveka-cuda-mani of Shankara, which is a very
interesting book on the relationship between the teacher and
the disciple, the disciple seeks from his Master the
ultimate realisation, that is, realisation of Brahman. The
teacher starts by saying, "You are not the physical body,
you are not the emotional nor the mental body, you are not
the super-conscious body which is the body of buddhi and you
are not even the causal body." The disciple then gets a
little scared because if "I am not this, I am not that and I
am not the other, where is the end of this?" The Master then
allows the disciple to understand that there is one single
ultimate Truth and it has nothing to do with the vehicles
because all of the vehicles have just the time to appear and
they're already gone, they're already dead. But, of course,
it is very difficult to be detached from the vehicles or to
lose the identity with the vehicles. Vedanta says, "You are
not this, you are That", "Tat tvam asi, That thou art". It
seems very simple but unfortunately it is quite difficult to
realise. And this is also due to the fact that there is a
collective unconscious that sucks us back to the level of
forms.
If you look at it from the point of view of the "One without
a second", all of this that is taking place is in its proper
place. According to the movement of the gunas, and the
identification of the ego with this or that, it can only
give rise to what is happening now. A path that has to do
with the Greater Mysteries, leads to the pacification of
one's own heart. We often say here that "whoever has
understood all of this, lives in all-pervading silence and
in donating love". Gaudapada, in the Asparsa-yoga, says that
"this yoga is the yoga of non-opposition". But this is not a
question of emotion or feeling, this is the result of
knowledge and understanding that everything, in a given time
and space, is in its proper place. I have met people who
have really suffered a lot. I tried to point these people to
the path that leads to bliss, but they did not want to
follow that path. We can say that humanity is
masochistic.
Q : It seems to be a very strong aspect of the ego, is to
keep itself in place, despite anything else coming along to
try and break it up.
R : Yes, this is the power of ego, although ego is not an
absolute Reality. Someone may say, "In this moment I am
happy", and then some kind of sad, negative news comes along
and then he says, "I am unhappy". So I says to him, "I
really don't understand what's going on? You just said you
were happy, and now you're not. How many egos do you have?"
But even in psychology, now we know that there is a social
ego, or an 'I', that is only used in the office or among
friends, an 'I' that is used in the family for husband or
wife and so on; so we can say that the ego is a chameleon.
But notwithstanding all of this, the majority of people
attach themselves to this ego and allow its perpetuation in
time. The ego is a cause of conflict because it creates
duality: ego and non-ego.
Top
of the page
Q : So, why do
people do this? Why does it come about?
R : It is a possibility of life, a mode of life. Because,
you see, you have different possibilities which are granted
to the human being. A human being can think with
identification, but he can think without being identified.
It is not something that is forbidden, this can be done. And
the person might not even think at all, he is allowed that,
too. This is the freedom of the Being because we are the
children of the Being, and therefore we partake of that
freedom. Amongst all of the opportunities of choice granted
to the human being, he can choose the one that he most
likes, that he desires. Of course, it is obvious that
according to his choice, and to the directions that the ego
takes, there are different effects. Identification takes
place gradually.
Q : You talk about awakening as "stopping the movement of
the jiva" . What does jiva refer to and what exactly does
this statement mean?
R : We can talk in eastern or western terms, but even
Christianity talks about the body, the soul and the spirit.
Plato talks about soma, psyche and pneuma. Vedanta speaks
about a physical dense body or gross body, the jiva, which
is a reflectiion of Atman, and the Atman, which corresponds
to pure spirit. According to Vedanta, the Atman is a
reflection of absolute Reality, of the metaphysical plane.
So jiva is the intermediate phase between the gross physical
level, which includes mind, feelings and so on, and pure
spirit. The soul, according to Plato, but also according to
Vedanta, can be directed towards the body or towards the
pure spirit. If it identifies with the sensible world, to
use Plato's words, inevitably it has certain effects. If
instead, it turns towards its Divine counterpart, that is
the metaphysical level, it will have different effects. So,
it is important to stop this movement downwards and direct
it towards transcendence. This third stage of life that we
live here as hermits is the one that has to do with avoiding
the movement of the soul towards the outside world and the
identification with that world; the hermit tries to identify
with something that has nothing to do with emotions and
sensations and so on, but with one's own transcendence. In
other words, it is a returning into oneself. In Sanskrit
terms, this is Uparati . This is a turning inwards, and a
detachment from the vehicles and from whatever surrounds us.
Plato talks about periagoge, which is a detachment from all
the things of the world, but of course this is not because
of an escapism, but because of integration. So you see, we
say exactly the same things, and Tradition is one and one
only. All of the different branches of Tradition belong to
that one.
Q : In your book The Pathway to Non-Duality, you say,
"The One can be known only by an act of Identity". What does
this mean?
R : According to Plato and Greek Philosophy, there are
different degrees of knowledge. This goes for Vedanta as
well, there are different degrees of knowledge. The first
level of knowledge is thanks to our sensations and feelings;
for example, animals through their sensations know and
understand and therefore we have a knowledge through
sensation. Even human beings, at the instinctual level, work
according to their sensations. And then we have the
so-called empirical knowledge, the one which is transmitted
to the mind by the senses. This is a dual kind of knowledge,
because we have subject and object. So, we have manas in
Sanskrit terms and dianoia in Greek, but it is exactly the
same thing. Science, for example, relies a lot on manas
because it has to discover all of the different rules that
have to do with phenomena, the phenomenal world. And this is
all right, because to know the different phenomena we need
to use the manas, the mind, which has its importance. Here
too we have this knowledge which has to do with
subject-object. It is a subject who knows an object. If we
go deeper inside, we realise that this dualistic kind of
knowledge has no longer its "raison d'être" because as
we go up higher all of multiplicity becomes unity or
Oneness; we discover that there is nothing to be known which
is outside oneself. At this point, in human terms, we can
talk about a "knowledge by identity" because "I am that I
am", without a second, as the subject and the object have
been integrated in that One which is, and does not become.
When a disciple discovers that it is the mind that creates
this duality between the subject and the object, he can
close himself to this kind of knowledge and realise that
there is a single being beyond all of this kind of movement.
This is why it is impossible to have a realisation at the
manas level, because manas projects a God or a Divinity
outside of itself. Saint Augustinus says, "God is within
ourselves", and Jesus Christ says, "The kingdom of Heaven is
within yourselves". It is the priests who say that all of
this is outside of you. And at this point, one becomes
knowledge and the subject and object disappear.
In Sanskrit terms, we talk about Sat, Chit and Ananda which
are unity, a Oneness. Chit is both knowledge and
consciousness and the two are one. In the West, we have
created a distinction between knowledge and consciousness
and we have made two different things out of one. Instead,
both in eastern and western terms, we have Chit or Gnosis,
which means a non-dual knowledge. We in the West have more
of an empirical mind and we would like to understand the
Absolute level through the empirical mind, which is a
relative mind. There is a brother of ours who has a very
strong, a very powerful manas and he would like to
understand the Absolute through his mind. It is not that one
has to do away with the mind, no. The mind is a vehicle, a
tool like all of the others. It is important to understand
its right value. But in order to know something that is
beyond oneself we have to surrender.
Q : There are two things here: one wants liberation and
wants to understand and maybe wants to surrender, but at the
same time part of this process has to come about by itself,
you cannot really bring it about, even though you know
this.
R : We have understanding, and little by little, through
teachings and so on we manage to grasp this Reality. I often
give the example of somebody putting one's finger in a
flame. So, we have this desire of experiencing what it is
like to put our finger in the flame because of tamas,
because of the collective unconscious and so on. Suppose a
person come to me and I explains all of the reasons why if
you put your finger in the flame you get burnt. This person
might realise that at once and so he would not go through
the experience. Or, he may still want to put his finger in
the flame, and so he gets burnt. Then, afterwards he comes
to me and says "I got burnt, what have I got to do to avoid
getting burnt? I will say, "Well, maybe you have not
understood? If you want, I will explain all of this once
more". The world of ego creates this kind of duality. It
creates pain and joy, and creates conflict and pain and so
on. I might indicate the road that leads to the solution of
this kind of conflict. If this person goes away and again
puts his finger in the fire, into the world of duality, of
conflict and pain and so on, of course he will again get
burnt. Now, if he wants, I can explain all of the reasons
why he has been forced to do it again. If the dialogue does
not take place between two minds, but rather between a
Master, or a state of consciousness that has gone beyond all
of this, and a disciple, through this dialogue there is a
possibility for this state of consciousness to penetrate the
disciple's or the other person consciousness and chances are
that true understanding will surface in this person without
effort. The relationship between a Master and a disciple is
something really extraordinary and beautiful because it is a
relationship between somebody who concedes himself, who
gives himself, who donates himself and somebody who is there
to open himself up, to receive what has been given, up to a
point that there is no distinction between the two and the
two become one. But sometimes it is difficult to come to
this level because there is a certain resistance on the part
of the disciple. We have identification with certain
psychological contents, with manas and with other
experiences and so on. The state of consciousness of a
realised being is nothing but the possibility to touch
another state of consciousness which is not yet awake. But,
at the potential state, we all are That.
Rather than talking about a "realised being", I prefer to
talk about an "elder brother". There is only one Master, and
that is Shiva. So this "elder brother" must touch the state
of consciousness of the other person, and not this person's
gunas.
Q : This joins up with the following question, which is
about realised beings. In your book Tat Tvam Asi,
there is a description of a realised being, and we wondered
if you have some advice to give people, to help them to
discriminate between a truly realised being and someone who
has simply cultivated certain powers?
R : It is not difficult to see the difference but, of
course, it is inevitable that the person who is wondering if
the being which is in front of him is realised or not, has
to be at a certain level of understanding. It is said that a
realised being can only be understood by another realised
being (laughing). But, you see, when we talked about the
written Tradition, this is very important because we can
compare the person we are listening to and looking at with
the traditional texts.
Let's give a very simple example that we all know : the
Gospel. Somebody might come up to me and say, "I have
realised this state that is explained in the Gospel".
And one might say, "Very well, but let me go and see what
Jesus Christ actually said in the Gospel".
For example, the Christian West has produced many a war and
has proposed and actually favoured national separation, and
so on. So, if I am adequately intelligent, I go to the
Gospel and try to understand if Christ said that this
is the way to bring his teaching into the world. Christ, in
the Gospel, says, "Love one another as I have loved you".
And then He says, "Pray unto God so that the Sun might shine
on the just and on the unjust . What do you gain if you only
love the people who love you? I tell you : love the people
who hate you". So, I look around and I may be asking myself
whether the priests have followed all of this, if they have
really realised all of this. There have been wars of
religion. In Europe, we have had more wars of religion than
political wars (laughing), and Jesus says, "Give your other
cheek". So this is the role of Tradition : the Gospel
is my mirror. By studying the Gospel, I can say,
"Yes, this person really follows the Gospel. He has
realised it because he offers his other cheek and he even
loves his enemy".
For Advaita Vedanta, we can say the same thing. Someone
might come up to me and say, "I have realised the state of
One-without-a-second". And we say, "Let 's go and see". If
we then realise that this person is a pantheist or a
nihilist, I go and check what Shankara said and I can easily
see that the two things don't coincide . This is the great
importance of Tradition. Only in this way can we understand
if that person is a realised being or not. We have to be
very careful because we are living in the Kali Yuga and
quite a lot of people have the knowledge; it is not
difficult to learn things in books, but to live by them and
to realise them is a completely different matter. The only
ways and means left to a disciple to see if a person is
realised or not is to go and compare his behaviour with what
is in the books of Plotinus, Gaudapada, Shankara and so
on.
But there is another aspect: very often disciples are very
passive and it is very difficult for them to go in depth
into these spiritual teachings. I very often tell the
brothers to go ahead with their experiences, to go to India
and visit many gurus, but then at the end they have to draw
their own synthesis and compare the different texts so that
you really know what you are doing. I have written quite a
few books which make a comparison of the different paths.
Unfortunately, they are not yet translated into French or
English. There is a book that I wrote which is called The
Philosophy of Being that says, "There are false Masters
because there are false disciples" (laughing). If we talk
about Advaita Vedanta, it is Shankara and Gaudapada who have
brought it into manifestation. If someone says to me, "I am
a scholar of Plato" - because even today we have schools of
Platonism and neo-Platonism - the right thing to do is to go
directly to his texts, so that I know exactly what Plato
said. This is the only means left to a disciple nowadays. In
the past in India, where you had a traditional society, it
was much easier, but today you don't have these
opportunities and means; this is the world of avidya. Jesus
says, "You will recognise them by the fruit they bear", but
a disciple has to be intelligent and he has to be able to
understand.
I will also have to make a distinction between a real
realisation of a state of consciousness and siddhis, which
are powers. Siddhis belong to prakriti, to the gunas and
therefore siddhis create duality, while realisation is
beyond the siddhis and there is no higher siddhi than
realisation. Of course, people at large would prefer
siddhis. It is not that we are against siddhis or powers.
Powers have their reason to be, but we have to know that
they belong to a particular plane and confine them in their
proper place.
Q : Just before we came to see you, a friend of ours was
going through a crisis. Intellectually, she knew she should
surrender and let things be, but her emotions were going in
another direction and prevented her from letting go. So, the
question is : how to reconciliate reason and emotions,
feelings?
R : In this case we have an identification with the
emotional body and this identification is so strong that it
does not allow her to let go, to surrender. It would be a
question of re-educating both the emotions, that are so
strong, and reason, which does not have the capacity of
tearing itself away from them. Her position should be such
as to be able to understand even with the manas, with the
mind, that she can go beyond this state, beyond emotion and
reason. Of course, the ideal condition would be to come out
of all this situation and put herself in a state of silence.
In this case, she would solve all of her problems. But she
has feelings and emotions which hold her back,
unfortunately. So she could be right in the middle of a
battle between the rational consciousness and emotions which
are fighting with each other. So, her consciousness is right
in the middle of this conflict.
Q : And so, the best thing for her would be to be above
both, wouldn't it?
R : That would be a total solution, yes. That is already a
realisation. It all depends on the emotion, if she is strong
enough to drop it. If she had a vision, some kind of
traditional knowledge and so on, she could be helped in
creating identity not with her emotions but with this
vision.
Q : What is meditation? Is it a technique to accomplish
something and if so, what?
R : At the beginning, meditation is extremely important. We
have meditation with a seed (an object) or without a seed.
For a beginner, the best thing to do is to start with some
kind of concrete seed, like for example, a book, so that the
person's mind may reach a certain concentration and
attention on that particular seed, because one's mind has a
tendency to wander around. It is very difficult to block it
in one position. So this meditation with a seed promotes
concentration.
In the Yoga-darshana, which is the Raja-yoga by
Patanjali, the last three means are dharana, dhyana, and
samadhi. So, we have attention, concentration and meditation
on a seed, so that the mind might concentrate on something.
The mind usually wastes quite a lot of its energy. A mind
that disperses its energy cannot create something positive,
something good. Whoever has achieved something of a certain
importance, even in the outside world, has in any case to
have a very strong concentration. A scientist or a
mathematician has to have this kind of concentration to
discover certain laws. Of course, when one's consciousness
rests on itself and it lives for itself and within itself,
meditation is no longer necessary. So, meditation is a very
powerful means, an extremely powerful means to put all of
the vehicles in a state of attention, of concentration. Of
course, there are different techniques of meditation but I
don't think we have the time to go into them right now.
Q : Yesterday I told you that I had glimpses of the Oneness
vision, but that it wasn't something I was constantly
living. You answered that it was enough to go back to that
vision. My question is: isn't that just a memory, something
unreal?
R : Of course, we don't talk about a psychological memory
that you have to go back to. But we can promote this vision,
this state we were in. I think all of us have realised one
minute of Oneness in life, that life is One. All we have to
do is to stabilise this experience we've had. A solution is
offered by Vedanta, that suggests not to look at everything
surrounding us as "name and form" but try to look for what
is beyond the form. So right now, looking at you, I see
threads of consciousness. These threads are exactly the same
although they are covered by different forms. So, we could
say that the difference between the way I look at things and
the way you look at things is that I see this Oneness of
consciousness. We sort of stop ourselves short at the form
and fail to see beyond the name and form.
Q : Do you feel that you are everywhere?
Top
of the page
R : Yes. There is
no differentiation and there is no opposition. The bhakta,
just to use Hindu terms, need to place Ishwara outside of
us, to consider Ishwara as a 'second'. In reality, Ishwara
is a state of consciousness that has to be realised.
Ishwara, or God, is a state of being. At that point you have
the possibility of looking either with the eyes of
consciousness or with physical eyes. Plato talks about,
"Oneness in diversity". This means that unity is the
substrate of 'otherness', of diversity. This is very
beautiful and it is very important. If you look with the eye
of Oneness, you can not oppose anything or anyone. You could
say: but people behave in a way that has nothing to do with
this vision of Oneness. I am aware of this behaviour, but I
am also aware that these people who are behaving in this
different way are expressions of Oneness.
We have situations which are farcical sometimes. We may have
brothers or sisters who come up to me and say, "I am this, I
am that, I am a man, I am a woman, I am a doctor, I am a
lawyer". I look at this person and say, "But you're not all
these things that you're talking about". Very probably, all
of these people who come up to me have got it into their
mind to consider themselves as men, women, doctors, lawyers
and so on. Let's accept them as they believe themselves to
be. Plotinus says that, "The world is an immense stage where
everybody is reciting his own role", and that's what we all
are doing (laughing). I realise all of this but it seems
that so many others fail to understand it. That's why it is
difficult when people come up to me and say, "You are a
Master. You are a teacher". A teacher is already a role. And
so people say "Well, if you're not a Master, I might as well
go away from here. "
Q : So, by looking at things as "name and form", is it
something mental, a mental process that you have to remind
yourself to work at?
R : Of course you cannot force yourself to do that but you
have to favour this kind of attitude to see things not as
"names and forms", but as the consciousness aspect that is
beyond "names and forms". There is a very good example given
by Shankara which is very pertinent to this case: we have
ether, which is all-pervasive and it is Oneness. A part of
this air, or ether, is included within a vase, and there are
different vases of all sort of shapes and sizes. The vase,
of course, can be taken to mean a human being, a tree, or an
animal. But the ether which is closed within the vases is of
the same nature as the free ether outside the vases. So, we
should have the vision whereby we are all vases, and we have
this body which is our vase, but within all of the different
vases there is this Oneness. The difference is that there is
a state of consciousness that sees only the ether within and
without the vases. Others instead only see with the eyes of
the vase, in which case, one vase is different from another
and this gives rise to conflict. And it also gives rise to
vanity, because in all respects "my vase is better than
yours" (laughing).
So, if you have had this experience, this is something which
is very useful for you. Go back to this moment when you have
seen unity, and look at everything with the eye of that
unity and you can see that the unity has taken up different
forms: a tree, an animal or a person, and so on. But it
would be wise to recapture the vision of Oneness. It is very
important, though, for the manas, the mind, not to interfere
with this and start conceptualising.
Q : At the moment I had this vision, there were no concepts.
But to go back to that moment, for me, it becomes a concept
because it is not something which is happening now.
R : But now you are totally aware of the fact that this
state exists, because it was a direct experience. Now you
can no longer conceptualise. When somebody tells you, "Look
at the world of name and forms", you can no longer
conceptualise because you know what is beyond it.
Q : Yes, I know that this is the Reality. Most of the day I
have to deal with concepts and I still get caught up with
them, but underneath I know that this is not the
Reality.
R : In any case, you have had this experience of a state of
consciousness that has no concepts and therefore you know
that Reality is beyond concepts. So, what you can do now is
to take a walk around here and just look at the trees, look
at everything you come across and observe, but do not
conceptualise. When we walk around, automatically our mind
starts conceptualising. It doesn't just look at the tree,
but it says, "This tree is tall, or low, I like it, I don't
like it, and this, that and the other". What you have to do
then, is to contemplate without conceptualising. And little
by little, this can be brought into your working life as
well, because it is your consciousness that is directing you
and no longer concepts. To be more specific, we can call it
'intuition', just to give you an idea what happens. Some
people might say, "But how can I possibly go on living and
working in this way ? I need to use my mind, I need to do
this." You can do it very well. It seems impossible, but it
is quite easy. As a matter of fact it is extremely easy. I
have done all of this. I can do so many things: I drive a
tractor, I chop wood, I can cook. In this room, I look after
the cleaning of the floor. I clean my own clothes. And all
this with joy in my heart because everything is so
beautiful.
It is very important for you to cultivate this vision of
Oneness in life because it is very important what you have
gone through. In Vedanta terms, this would be Savikalpa
Samadhi. And this is the possibility of seeing the unity of
life through your eyes, through the eyes of
consciousness.
Q : Could you explain what the role of yoga and its various
disciplines are? Is it necessary to follow a particular
yoga?
R : There are different kinds of yoga. You have read the
book I wrote entitled Essence and Purpose of Yoga
which ranges from Hatha-yoga to Asparsha-yoga, which is the
Advaita yoga, the metaphysical path. In the ancient times,
these were just different steps or different passages to go
into a more expanded path. So, in the old times there was
just a single yoga with different possibilities and
different dimensions. But all of these different kinds of
yoga led to transcendence, even Hatha-yoga. Today,
Hatha-yoga in the West is just a series of exercises which
promise good health, and that's all. But we do not have a
yoga which is better than another yoga because there is only
one yoga. Of course, in the East, Tradition is still living
and therefore it can allow the different people who come
across it to be taken at their own level of preparation and
gunas and so on. In the West, and in some countries, for the
past two thousand years we have had nothing else but
Christianity, so there is no choice and there is no
possibility of giving the right solution to every single
person, because every single being is a world within
himself. Instead, the East has this range of opportunities,
which is much greater and fill the needs of each person
according to his gunas or qualities.
Even Vedanta can be defined as yoga, the yoga of knowledge.
In the books that I have written, I have tried not to use
this word 'yoga' because it has been degraded.
Unfortunately, this is what happens. But this kind of
degradation is unavoidable because we are in the Kali Yuga.
In fact, if we were to say to people, "We do Vedanta yoga"
they would say, "so you do gymnastics? What are the
positions? Where is the gymnasium?" (laughing).
Q : Can anyone decide to awaken or does it happen
spontaneously, without any preparation?
R : Awakening, of course, cannot be something that you just
will to happen. It happens by itself. But we have to be
prepared for when awakening takes place, so there has to be
some preparation to the moment of awakening. Even in our own
life, when we go to school for example, we study so much,
and then all of the things that we study have no use for our
professions. But this kind of training has prepared our mind
for some kind of intuition, for a better way of grasping
things and so on, and therefore the preparation in our
studies is very useful. So, the preparation will lead us to
accept the kind of event that happens spontaneously, by
itself. There can be no forcing, to use violence on
ourselves is completely useless.
Q : In India, several times we have seen people come to see
a Master and say, "I'm here in India for only a few weeks,
so please enlighten me now because I want to travel around
and also go and see the Taj Mahal before I return home".
R : (Laughing) This is lovely! This also happens in the
West. There is so much innocence in the world.
Q : What advice would you give someone seeking the
Truth?
R : This question is not very easy (laughing). To give
advise to someone is very difficult. Of course, if the
person is really seeking the Truth, the thing can be looked
at. That's why we talk about a certain degree of maturity of
a person, when there is a better control of the gunas, and
so on. At this point, of course, advice could be given. The
problem arises when somebody lives in a state of suffering
and in a state of duality and they do want to solve their
problems but they also want to remain in that state of
duality. At this point there can be no understanding because
all they want to do is to change an event or a situation
within that level. But this is the level of ego, of duality.
So, it is very difficult to advise somebody who is
identified with this state of duality. On the other hand,
from a philosophical point of view we can say that there is
nothing beyond or outside of the Being and sooner or later
we cannot but return to the Being.
An advaitin is pacified, let's say, he has found his peace;
he is not urged by the wish to change this or that and this
is the reason why he does not look for disciples or for
followers. Duality is a state of existence that has been
integrated and so there is no desire to change it at all
costs. Of course, Advaita is offered to everybody in the
world but not everybody wants to reach this dimension. But
sooner or later they will reach it, because each single
person in the world is That. They might think of themselves
as something different but they are That. We are all
alienated because we believe that we are what we are
not.
Just to end up on a happy note: after Napoleon, there were
quite a few people that in their alienation believed to be
Napoleon. They were convinced that they were Napoleon, and
wore hats on their heads, but they were not Napoleon. All we
can do about this situation is to try to awaken them to the
reality that they are not Napoleon. The traditional
knowledge tells us that we are all alienated. We are
identified with the different vases and each vase is
different from the other vase. An advaitin notices all the
suffering of the world but at the same time he sees that it
is all very funny (laughing) because he can see that these
people have just forgotten what they are. Someone might say,
"I am suffering", and the answer could be, "No, you're not
suffering". "Yes, I'm suffering!" Somebody else might say,
"I am now dying", and the answer is, "But you cannot die,
you are immortal". If this person is convinced that he is
going to die, what can we do? All we have to do is wait for
him to realise that he is immortal, that he cannot possibly
die.
When we leave our physical dense body, the majority of us
will go to the lower part of taijasa, the luminous state. In
western terms, this is the astral plane. Some materialists,
when they reach this plane, find it difficult to realise
that they're not dead. Some disciples consecrate themselves
to work on this level trying to re-educate them to believe
that they are not dead. Because they are so convinced, they
say "How can I not be dead? I died. I have to be dead." This
person will not surrender to the evidence that he exists,
that he is talking and therefore he is living in this other
dimension. I always say that this life that we go through,
at this human level is "a tragicomedy with a happy
ending".
Q : What are the main obstructions to living the Truth? And
how does one overcome them?
R : This question we have already answered by saying that we
have this identification with the gunas. When you go for
your a walk and you try to go back to your vision, you will
have to check within yourself, "What is the obstacle that
blocks me from being That? What vehicle comes in between me
and that Reality? Is it the mind or some psychological
content that I have? Could it be the world of feelings or
emotions? Could it be also an idealism, a thought?" So, all
of these could create obstacles, but as soon as these are
solved, because these problems solve themselves, That
emerges by itself.
In the East, there is a very significant example: we have a
room full of objects. There are so many objects that you can
hardly move. Identification with the different objects does
not allow us to see the room in its reality. Today I might
identify myself with the table, tomorrow with the heating
system, the third day with something else. If I take all of
these objects and throw them out, (by throwing them out, of
course, I mean integrating all of these objects), I will
find myself in an empty room, and therefore with free space.
I am this free space, and this means that the ether within
the vase is of the same nature as the ether outside of the
vase. These examples or these analogies may be of great
import in understanding the Reality which is underlying.
Q : About four years ago, one evening I started repeating
the phrase "I am That" in my mind and it hit me all of a
sudden that the 'I' which I took myself to be had nothing to
do with That. Before this realisation, I used to think that
the 'I', that is, all these concepts which I took myself to
be, was going to be the That through realisation. At that
moment, I saw that That had nothing to do with these
concepts. It was very important for me to see this.
R : Yes, of course, it has nothing to do with the ego, the
'I'. 'I' is a non-Reality. But this is a mistake that
everybody makes.
Q : If we live in a state of complete spontaneity, do we
have any control over what happens in our lives?
R : It has to be the spontaneity of the ether, that kind of
spontaneity. Only in that case can you have control because,
in this case, it is the ether that is using the vase and not
the vase using the ether. And the ether is innocence, is
spontaneity. This is lila, the divine game, the game of a
child. So, we should make a clear distinction between
spontaneity as instinctual spontaneity and the spontaneity
of the ether, which is a completely different matter. It is
very important to make this distinction because some people
are very instinctual, emotional and therefore spontaneous,
but they could cause great damage. From the position of
That, this could never happen. The innocence we are talking
about is altogether a different thing.
Q : Can you describe your own nature?
R : It is your very same nature.
Everyone of us is all-pervading ether, just to give you this
idea which can be quite enlightening. There is no difference
between myself and any one of us. There might be just this
difference: a person might be identified with one of its
vehicles or one of the experiences that he has gone through,
while I have closed all of the books of experiences.
|
