8 Spirituality Studies 10-1 Spring 2024 Leaving external phenomena, the mind knowing its own form of light is alone real awareness. [3] What he means here by “leaving external phenomena” (Ta. “veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu”) is ceasing to be aware of anything other than ourself, and what he means by “the mind knowing its own form of light” (Ta. “maṉam taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdal”) is the mind knowing its own “form” or real nature (Sa. svarūpa), which is the light of pure awareness that shines eternally as our very being, “I am”. Moreover, the verbal noun ōrdal means not only “knowing” but also “investigating”, so in this context it implies knowing our “form of light” (Ta. oḷiuru) by investigating it, and we can investigate it only by being keenly self-attentive, carefully observing this light of awareness, which shines as “I am”, to see what it actually is. Knowing ourself thus as the light of pure awareness without knowing anything else is alone “real awareness” (Ta. uṇmai uṇarcci). In order to be aware of ourself as we actually are, namely as the light of pure awareness, we need to be keenly self-attentive. When we fall asleep, we thereby cease to be aware of anything other than ourself, but we fall asleep due to tiredness, not due to being keenly self-attentive, so ego is not thereby eradicated. Only when we attend to ourself so keenly that we thereby cease to be aware of anything else will ego be eradicated, because only by being so keenly self-attentive will we as ego be aware of ourself as pure awareness, namely awareness that is aware of nothing other than itself, and as soon as we are aware of ourself as such, we will thereby cease to be ego and remain eternally as pure awareness, which is what we always actually are. Dissolution of mind, which entails dissolution of ego, since ego is the root and essence of the mind, is of two kinds, namely manōlaya and manōnāśa, and the difference between these two kinds of dissolution is that manōlaya is temporary whereas manōnāśa (Sa. “annihilation of mind”) is permanent, as Bhagavan points out in verse 13 of Upadēśa Undiyār: Dissolution is two: laya and nāśa. What is dissolved in laya will rise. If its form dies, it will not rise. [4] What exists and shines in sleep or in any other state of manōlaya (Sa. “temporary dissolution of mind”) is only ourself as pure awareness, but ego is not thereby eradicated, because it is only after the dissolution of ego in manōlaya that pure awareness alone remains. That is, since ego has ceased to exist in manōlaya, albeit only temporarily, it cannot be annihilated by the pure awareness that then remains alone. In order to be annihilated, ego must itself experience itself as pure awareness, so it can be annihilated only in waking and dream and not in sleep or any other state of manōlaya. Whereas in the case of manōlaya ego is first dissolved and then as a result of its dissolution pure awareness alone remains, in the case of manōnāśa ego is dissolved as a result of its being aware of itself as pure awareness. That is, since ego is the adjunct-conflated and therefore impure awareness that always knows itself as “I am this body” and consequently knows the appearance of other things, and since (just as the sole reality underlying the false appearance of what seems to be a snake is just a rope) the sole reality underlying the false appearance of ego is just the adjunct-free and therefore pure awareness that always knows itself as just “I am” and consequently never knows anything other than itself, as soon as ego is aware of itself as pure awareness, it will thereby cease to be ego and remain eternally as pure awareness. Therefore what is called the “eradication of ego” or “annihilation of mind” (Sa. manōnāśa) is just the clear recognition that no such thing as ego or mind has ever actually existed, because what seemed to be ego or mind was actually just pure awareness, just as what seemed to be a snake was actually just a rope, as Bhagavan points out in verse 17 of Upadēśa Undiyār: When one investigates the form of the mind without forgetting, there is not anything called ‘mind’. This is the direct path for everyone whomsoever. [5] Since the snake that a rope is mistaken to be does not actually exist, in the sense that it is not actually a snake but only a rope, it cannot be “killed” or “annihilated” by any means other than looking at it carefully enough to see that it is not a snake but just a rope. Likewise, since ego does not actually exist, in the sense that what seems to be ego or mind is actually only pure “being-awareness” (Sa. sat-cit), it cannot be “killed” or “annihilated” by any means other than its attending to itself keenly enough to see that it is not any such thing as “ego” or “mind” but just pure awareness of being, “I am”. Therefore, after distinguishing manōlaya from manōnāśa in verse 13 of Upadēśa Undiyār, in verse 14 he points out that though manōlaya can be achieved by the yōga practice of “breath-restraint” (Sa. prāṇāyāma), manōnāśa can be achieved only by “self-investigation” (Sa. ātma-vicāra):
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjkyNzgx