21. RETURN TO THE STATE BEFORE BIRTH


MAHARAJ: I once felt a sense of individuality, but I do not now have that individuality. The sense of individuality has transformed itself into the universal manifest state. 

Visitor: Did it happen just like that? 

M: The moment the name of the disease emerged, the feeling of being an individual arose. Now the sense of individuality is gone and only the feeling of universal consciousness remains. 

The individuality is gone, together with the identity of body form. The body is not my design, nor am I male or female. Everything happens spontaneously. Who sees that the day has dawned and the sun shines? Could the knowledge of the day be the individual’s? The moment one wakes up, the “I-am-ness” arises, which means the sense of being only; later also the sense of body is there. This sense of beingness is all-pervading, and it has no name and no form—it is existence itself. 

V: When the body suffers, what actually happens? What is the relationship between the Unmanifest and the body, or between the actual and the illusory appearances in the world?  

M: They are intimately related. The culture and sentiment of every atom is different, so also every individual is different in this world. 

There are varieties of expressions in atoms and sub- atoms. 

V: Is the truth manifest or unmanifest? If the truth manifests through the body, then all the diseases of the body are in the Unmanifest. 

M: When the Unmanifest manifests, it is called saguna-brahman. This brahman principle is ample, plenty and manifest and comprises the five elements, three gunas and prakriti-purush; it is this that recognizes the sun and the space and is more pervasive and subtler than space even. 

V: What is all this play about? In this manifest universe, which is the outcome of the Unmanifest, a body suffers from sickness—the body of Maharaj. As a result, we also suffer, after witnessing the sickness. Why all this nuisance? 

M: If your “I-am-ness” is not, who would observe the rising of the sun? 

V: Although you have explained it thousands of times, I still have not understood. 

M: “Who” and “what,” as such at the highest level, are Noth- ing; whatever is, is very clear and obvious. But such a simple fact has turned into a riddle, because that principle has identified itself wrongly with a form, and then takes pride in that identification. It has accepted body as its identity. 

V: But why should this happen to you through whose body the Unmanifest manifests itself? 

M: In order to have a reply to this question, you will have to retreat into yourself. 

Out of this atomic touch, this speck of consciousness, all this magnificent universe has materialized. How and what would you reply to this question: Did it create itself or did it arrange for the creation? Your replies will be mere conjecture and guesswork. What evidence have you that you have births and deaths? What proof have you about rebirth? 

V: You mean to say that we should remain at the point of emergence of consciousness? Shall we then understand this? 

M: Yes, I have been telling people exactly that. 

V: Then you mean to say that unless I stop at the rising of consciousness, I shall not understand this play of the Unmanifest, manifest, body suffering etc., and that all my talking is actually only blabbering and therefore a mere nuisance. 

M: Yes, it is just entertainment to pass the time. 

V: That means when we visit and sit near you, in fact it bothers you. 

M: I am not bothered even by the five elements, which are my creations. So how can you be a nuisance to me? If I identify myself with the body, then I will necessarily have to undergo all the botherations and sufferings that go with it. 

V: May I ask you another question? You have consciousness which has reached a certain high level. Could it have a beneficial effect on us by your mere presence without any talk? 

M: Not only you, but even germs, ants, worms and so on, are the beneficiaries. 

V: That means your influence is continuously working on us, including on the smallest? 

M: For the sake of talking it is all right, but in actuality no one affects anyone. At the moment of its sprouting, did my birth principle have any intelligence? This birth principle, which is the child principle, grows spontaneously, develops mind and intellect and may in due course become a Mahatma—a great sage even—but the root of that sage is the sprouting of the child principle only. Is it not so? Now you are collecting a lot of knowledge in the name of spirituality, but that is only entertainment. 

V: How can a child principle attain the status of a jnani or sage? 

M: To understand this, stay there at the point of sprouting (ankura), you be the ankura (omkara). [Om is the beginning of words and Mabaraj directs the visitor to be in a state prior to the formation of words in bis mind.] 

V: That is all right and I decide to remain in that omkara state. Then what about the violence which goes on outside— in Iran, America, the USSR etc.? Is there no connection or have I to sit passively in the omkara state? 

M: Both are intimately connected. 

V: But to escape from violence, suffering, exploitation . . . 

M: All your talk is in defence of your individuality. As a mat- ter of fact, you are to be accused of responsibility for all that is happening. Except you, who could be the accused? To say all that, who is there but you, your sense of “I-am-ness”? To state “anything is,” someone must be there in the first place. In your beingness, millions of sins are committed and now you want to elude responsibility by clinging to, and hid- ing within, an individuality. All these happenings are your creations only. 

V: But you are also all that, in your beingness. 

M: Totally everything is in my beingness, including yourself. But no authority whatsoever is given either to me or to you to set things right. 

V: To set matters right, can the omkara be of any use? 

M: Omkara is useful for everything; and all is omkara, including suffering. How else could there be pleasure and pain without the realm of omkara? Whatever sprouted is termed as birth, and with birth beingness wrongly identifies itself as a personality—resulting in pleasure and pain. 

V: With omkara, how can the ankura (sprouting) be stopped? 

M: In the same way that it sprouted. 

V: Can the omkara arrest the sprouting (ankura) or is the ankura a play of the omkara? 

M: Omkara and ankura are both experiential states. Could they be separate? What can there be without omkara? 

V: I want to know if there is a process which can arrest ankura—sprouting? Say, by reciting the sacred mantra omkara; or should we passively watch all the happenings? 

M: Every mantra has a purpose; there cannot be any mantra without a purpose. 

V: Then by reciting a mantra everything will be re-created? 

M: Yes. 

V: Then why should we recite a mantra at all? 

M: But this mantra is without any language, without any words. Go to the root, see the actuality before you die, abide in your true nature. But instead, you are busy pampering your body which you consider as your identity. People are devotional to God only in order to acquire things worldly. 

V: That means our devotion to God is equal to going into the marketplace for a purchase. 

M: This is the way that human life goes on. The normal motive force is gain for all one’s actions. 

V: So long as one worships God with the aim of gain, the worship will not be effective; isn’t that so? 

M: The primary motive is the “love-to-be,” to keep oneself alive. 

V: When the “love-to-be” is lost, what happens? 

M: Who is there to reply? When the “love-to-be” has subsided, who is there to say that it has subsided? Is it possible to experience shakti (energy potential), ananda (bliss) and sat-chid-ananda (being-consciousness-bliss)? Or is there nothing of the sort? 

V: We have been told about sat-chit and ananda all along. If they are real, should we not proceed towards them? And if they do not exist as such, why should we strive at all for them? 

M: Our source, the root, is our sense of beingness, or the child principle. Did it engage in any activity consciously? Did it have any intelligence at all, at that stage? What else is there, except this primary child principle? 

V: Let someone ask questions now. 

M: How can they ask real questions? They will pose ques- tions after holding on to some identity, and such identities are built up after reading or listening to somebody. All this is informational knowledge collected externally, and it is not the spontaneous knowledge, the true knowledge. Who has the knowledge that “one is” and what is that “one is”? What is this principle of Shiva? In Marathi, shiv means “a touch.” Show me the touch of beingness. Thoroughly observe and investigate: How did this principle, the touch of beingness, happen to be? The entire cosmic expression is the proliferation of the touch of beingness. This principle comprises the five elements, three gunas and prakriti-purush. 

V: All this magnificent creation is out of omkara, the touch of beingness. Is it an energy, a power, or merely a notion? 

M: Whatever words, titles, or ideas occur to you, are all right for the purpose. 

V: To this principle, titles such as Jagadamba—mother of the universe—Mahishasura Mardini—destroyer of the demon 

Mahisha etc. are given. 

M: What do you mean by Jagadamba? The principle which rec- ognizes the daybreak, the waking state, is that Jagadamba? 

V: But is this principle an energy or only a concept, or an illusion? 

M: Has it intelligence? 

V: Is it a sort of intelligence? M: You may presume it to be so. 

V: What I want to know is this: This manifestation which has come out of me, am I a part of it or am I apart from it? 

M: You are not apart from it. It is your light only. 

V: Time and again is has been proclaimed through various religions, tantras, puranas etc. that it is an energy potential, it is ananda, it is shakti, it is charged with love etc. These are our deep-rooted impressions, and once we give them up, once we surrender them, what are we to do? 

M: Where is the need to surrender them? 

V: You have given me two levels: at one level I see this relationship between my manifestation and Me, and the other level is the sprouting or rising of the sense of “I-am-ness.” What am I to do? 

M: If you are interested in levels, there are millions of them and you may start counting. But that principle cannot be objectified as a sample for the purpose of counting. What are you? What do you feel you are, what is your specimen? 

What is the point in your running about here and there for social work etc. ... 

In this objective world is there anything permanent? You are trying to do so many things, such as social services, to make people happy. 

You shave today, and tomorrow again you have to shave as your beard grows, and so on. Similarly, you make people happy today, and tomorrow they are unhappy, and again you proceed to make them happy, and so the cycle goes on, and you are caught in it. Initially, when I wanted to pursue spirituality, I gave up prapancha, the worldly life. Later I understood the meaning of spirituality and came to the conclusion that it is as discardable as used dishwater. Therefore, at present, I am in no way concerned with spirituality, since I have transcended it. I cannot discuss the topic in this manner before the general public. They would throw stones at me. What are you? What is your identity? Have you seen yourself correctly? Can you take photographs of your true identity bereft of body-mind? With this type of talk, will you care to see me again? 

V: Maharaj, after such visits when I had the great privilege of associating with you, this personage known as Nisargadatta Maharaj, I have a feeling of having been given a certain push in my spiritual pursuit. Maybe this feeling, which persists for three, four months after such visits, is a sort of bewildering state of exultation. It gives an assurance that one can stop at the point of ankura—the “sprouting of I-am-ness.” This feeling itself is an indication of wisdom and intuitive apperception. 

In the past three or four years when I visited you, I went back with these impressions and I used to get some peace—a sort of quietude. 

M: Yes, but that is the mere subsidence of your mental turbulence. Beyond this, it is nothing. 

V: But Maharaj, is it bad? We get the feeling of quietude and well-being after the visits. Why do you denounce it? 

M: It is only a temporary state; after some time it will disappear. With birth, three states—deep sleep, waking and knowingness—function. What you experienced is in the domain of knowingness, a time-bound state. Prior to birth, is there any need for anything? 


November 20th 1980 

Share: