When we apply the definition of the word ‘illusion’ to the mind we realize that it too is an illusion. An illusion cannot exist without a substratum. The experience of the mind is only due to the non-apprehension of its real substratum.
Knowledge of the substratum would remove the illusion called the mind. For such knowledge to take place, Ramana Maharshi further analyzes the mind as we presently experience it.
vrttayas-tvaham-vrttimasritah, vrttayo mano viddhyaham manah.
vrttayas – thoughts; to -now; aham-vrttimasritah – depend upon the ‘I’ – thought; vrttayo mano – thoughts in the mind; viddhi – may you know; aham manah – ‘I’ -thought is the mind
Now, thoughts make the mind. All thoughts depend on the ‘I’ thought. Therefore, know the ‘I’-thought’ to be the mind.
The mind is the continuous flow of thoughts. The thoughts are of innumerable objects. These objects may be perceivable gross objects or emotions like desire and anger or ideas and concepts. Each thought must necessarily have an object. In the thought, “This is a pot”, the pot is the object of the thought. Moreover, the thought, ‘This is the pot’ cannot arise without a knower of the thought, the subject of the thought. Therefore, the complete thought is – ‘I know this is a pot’. Here ‘I’ is the subject and the ‘pot’ is the object. Innumerable thoughts of such objects, in a perpetual flow, is called the mind. Usually, we seek to gain peace by trying to quieten and control this flow. We are not very successful in our efforts because the flow is wild, swift, and forceful.
On further inquiry, we understand that innumerable thoughts are in fact made up of only two thoughts. They are the ‘this’-thought and the ‘I’-thought. In the thought ‘I know this pot’, ‘I am’ is the ‘I-thought’ (aham vrtti) and ‘pot is’, is the ‘this-thought’ (idam vrtti). The ‘this’-thought keeps changing in each thought, but not the ‘I’ thought. That means that the objects of the thought keep changing but the subject remains the same. From innumerable thoughts, we now come to the analysis of two thoughts.
Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi leads us a step further. Each of the ‘this’-thought depends on the ‘I’-thought and therefore, the mind is made up of not two thoughts, but only of ‘I’ – thought. Only after the thought, ‘I am’ has arisen, we are capable of knowing any object. This is made clear when we analyze the deep sleep state. In deep sleep, the ‘I am’ – thought is not known and hence no objects are known. On waking up we first realize ‘I am’ and then alone the world of objects and beings around us like the table and the chair are known.
By the above analysis, we understand that the thought ‘I am’ or ‘I’ -thought alone is the mind. If we wish to solve the problem of the mind, it becomes necessary to understand the ‘I’ thought. Identifying with the body-mind-intellect, we say ‘I am fat’, ‘I am sad’, or ‘I am bad’. This false identification is the cause of our delusion and grief. This is because we do not really know the pure Self.
All spiritual paths lead to the same unique goal – abidance in the Self. The earlier sixteen verses described the path of action, path of devotion, and Ashtanga Yoga. Henceforth is expounded the path of inquiry – Jnana Yoga. This path has a special fascination and attraction for an intellect-dominated individual. The path of inquiry is unique. We shall now see what distinguishes it from the other paths.
When we are faced with a problem, we seek to solve it. We consider the problem as real and start thinking about its solution. In other words, we take the existence of the problem for granted. That being the case, we do not spend time thinking about whether the problem is real or not, but on its solution. A problem once solved, either due to our solution or some other reason, may arise again. It could be the same problem arising in a different form or a different problem altogether. We again try to solve it and free ourselves from the troublesome problem. We shall illustrate this through an example.
The majority of mankind is in search of peace. We are faced with the problem of mental agitation and disturbance. Here we have taken for granted that there is such a thing as ‘mind’ which is agitated. We then try to reduce mental agitation and attain peace by various methods like pranayama or japa, as described earlier. By these practices, the mind becomes relatively and temporarily peaceful. But when we go back to the din and crowd of the marketplace, this hard-found peace is shattered. When problems arise in another form, we again become agitated. In some cases, we find that the very practices are seen to cause a greater disturbance.
Therefore, it becomes necessary, first to understand what our problem is. On understanding the nature of the problem, we shall try and find a more permanent solution and not seek hasty temporary solutions. The path of inquiry teaches us how to inquire into the problem with a quiet unperturbed mind. If such inquiry is conducted, not only in the quest of the Truth but also in our day-to-day living, we shall discover that the majority of our problems are merely mind-created, purely imaginary. They have no real existence other than in our mind. When a problem itself is proved to be imaginary, where is the need to find a solution to it? To strike at the very root of the problem by inquiry into the nature of the problem and not its solution is the uniqueness of the Path of Knowledge.
What is Mind?
Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi describes this path of inquiry in an extremely beautiful and simple manner. He starts with the question, ‘What is the mind?’
manasam tu kim margane krte, naiva manasam marga arjavat.
manasam – the mind; tu – but (now); kim – what is; marganekrte – after having inquired; naivamanasam – there is no mind; margaarjavat – in this path due to its directness;
Now, on enquiry as to ‘what is the mind’, (we realize that) there is nothing (real) called the mind. There is a directness in this path.
The word ‘tu’ (but or now) denotes the change of topic. After explaining Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, and Ashtanga Yoga, now Jnana Yoga is being taken up for discussion. Its unique way of tackling the problem is through inquiry into the nature of the problem. The question asked is not ‘how’ the mind can be quietened or ‘how’ it can abide in the Self but ‘what’ is the mind that causes man so many problems. If such an inquiry is conducted properly and thoroughly, the mind itself disappears. Its very existence is nullified. Generally, the path of inquiry is considered very difficult, but Bhagavan thinks it to be the simplest and the most direct path. When the mind itself disappears, where is the need to quieten it? When the problem itself is dissolved, where is the effort required to solve it? A man walking at night imagines a snake on a rope lying on the ground and gets frightened. He runs in search of a stick to hit the snake. When he realizes that there is no such thing as a snake, but there is only an innocent rope, his fear disappears. Since the snake vision itself is falsified, his problem is dissolved and the search for the stick also ends. This path is indeed simple and straightforward!
Now we shall enquire, ‘What is the mind?’ The question implies: ‘Is the mind that we experience real or unreal?’ – since an experience of a thing can be either real or imaginary. The next question that arises is, ‘What is real and unreal? How can one define them?’ The common meaning of these words as we use in our life is decided according to each situation. This relative truth and untruth is the subject of Dharma sastra. But in Spiritual science (Adhyatma sastra), the inquiry is conducted from the absolute standpoint. Hence, we have to ascertain whether the mind is real or not from an absolute standpoint.
The Absolute Reality or the Truth is defined in Vedanta as that which remains the same in all three periods of time – past, present, and future. (kalatraye’pi tisthati iti sat – Tattvabodha). Unreal is that which does not exist in any of the three periods of time. That is, it is totally non-existent like the horns of a rabbit. According to the above definition of the Absolute Reality, the mind cannot be called real, since it is experienced only sometimes and not at all times. Also, it is experienced as a constantly changing entity. It is made up of thought modifications like anger, desire, likes, dislikes and volition. If it is not real, then can it be called unreal? No. If it were non-existent it would not be experienced by us and so would not have been the cause of the problem or an object of inquiry. A thing that cannot be described either as real or unreal is known as mithya or illusion, in Vedanta.
It should be noted that an illusion is that which is not real as it is experienced, but it is not totally non-existent either. If a man mistakes a rope for a snake in the darkness, then would the snake vision be real? No, when it is illumined, only the rope is seen and hence the snake vision is negated. The snake cannot be called non-existent since it is experienced and cannot be real since it is negated. The snake being neither real nor unreal is an illusion. Also, we realize that in and through the snake vision, we experience the rope alone. It is only the ignorance of the rope that causes the illusion of the snake. The illusory snake has no existence apart from the rope. In fact, other than the rope nothing else exists.
