|
|
Paul Brunton and Ramana Maharshi
(Part 2) ©2005 d) Ramana’s Silent Healing Vibrations (continued) It is therefore unclear to me whether or not Ramana, prior to Brunton’s visit, believed that his silence would teach and help disciples by a kind of telepathic radiation. As we have seen, many of Ramana’s statements present a traditional monistic view of advaita, where the world is unreal, and there would be no one to help in this way. Osborne reports that Ramana held to both opinions: that we are to help others, but that there are no others:
Ramana therefore gave a twofold response: there are no others and the sage does more by meditating than any action. But it is clear that after Brunton wrote A Search in Secret India, Ramana promoted this view of his powers of silence. Here are some quotations from Ramana after the date of Brunton’s visit:
And Chadwick reports that Ramana’s “conversation” with the novelist Somerset Maugham was a half hour of silence. Ramana said, “Silence is best. Silence is itself conversation” (Chadwick, 38). And Ramana says that “the realized ones send out waves of spiritual influence which draw many people towards them, even though they may be sitting silently in a cave” (Conscious Immortality, 134). What is interesting is that Ramana justified his belief in the teaching power of silence by appealing to Brunton’s books! We shall see this when we look at the book The Secret Path. But we should not conclude that Ramana was always silent. His devotees have written many memoirs where they describe a very different Ramana who would recite and enact stories with great emotion, and who would participate in many daily events. These stories are reported in The Maharshi. Ramana read books and engaged in debate. Although he often communicated only by silence, he would also sometimes give very sharp replies. See for example the report by U.G. Krishnamurti of his visit with Ramana:
Although he felt Ramana’s responses were arrogant, he nevertheless resolved to try to attain Ramana’s state of being. I cite his remarks only to show that Ramana did sometimes teach by speech and not by silence. e) Ramana’s Method of Self-Enquiry Although Brunton appears to have embellished and changed the report of his first visit, he did not invent all the facts that he reports. Even the independent report says that the next day Ramana responded to many of his questions. The dialogue among Ramana, Brunton (Hurst) and the monk was as follows:
Brunton seems to have correctly summarized Ramana's method of Self-Enquiry, the “Who am I?” method:
But I suggest that Brunton understood as corresponding to what Thurston had said about the Higher Self, or what the theosophists said about the Overself. For one thing, it seems clear that Brunton understood this in terms of mentalism, and the importance of the ideas of the mind. Brunton’s book Conscious Immortality has a whole section on “The doctrine of mentalism.” The introductory paragraph to this section says,
The book does not just represent this as Brunton’s idea, for it goes on to report Ramana as saying:
Surprisingly, Brunton interprets Ramana’s method of self-enquiry as a “rational” process of self-questioning (Search, 302). By this self-questioning one can “ …stand aside and watch the very action of the brain (p 304). And yet Brunton also recognizes that the process leads beyond mind. He reports “what the Maharishee has confidently affirmed, that the mind takes its rise in a transcendental source” (p. 304). This was already Ramana’s view in 1913, as reported by Humphreys. Humphreys says that realization is the experience is where you “argue your mind out of existence.” Humphreys only thing that remains is Being, and not explainable in words or ideas. But a Master can use mind, body and intellect without falling back into the delusion of having a separate consciousness (Glimpses, 21). Although Brunton understood self-realization as going beyond mind, he seems to have understood this in terms of a higher transcendental mind observing a lower process of thought. f) Brunton’s story of Ramana's Enlightenment It is clear that Brunton relied on previous biographies of Ramana, especially for the account of Ramana’s enlightenment at the age of 16. (1) Like Narasimha, Brunton emphasizes that Ramana had a propensity for deep sleep as a child. He finds in Ramana’s abnormal sleep and depth of attention an indication of his mystical nature (schoolmates took him from bedroom into the playground, beat his body and box his ears and then lead him back to bed; he had no remembrance of these things in the morning) (Search, 282). (2) And Brunton characterizes Ramana’s experience at the age of 16 as a trance, “a profound conscious trance wherein he became merged into the very source of selfhood” (Search, 283). Narasimha had said that Ramana hardly knew the difference between sleep and the samadhi state into which he had sunk on his way to Tiruvannamalai at the age of 16 (Narasimha, 36). And for Narasimha, the intensity of Ramana’s trance showed his spiritual state:
(3) And like Narasimha, Brunton emphasizes that Ramana had had no previous experience of enlightenment. And Brunton says that Ramana’s next six months involved mystical trances and spiritual ecstasies (Search, 285). The second and third points are questionable, even though they have become firmly established in the traditional hagiographic accounts of Ramana. As I have shown in Jivanmukta, Ramana did have some previous knowledge of meditation prior to his experience as a 16 year old, and he derived his teaching of Self-Enquiry from books that he read before he wrote any of his own. Even more importantly, Ramana did not himself have the certainty at the age of 16 that his experience was permanent. And he later disputed the necessity of a state of trance for enlightenment. Based on Ramana’s own teaching, the significance of his experience of enlightenment at the age of 16 must be reevaluated. And as we shall see, it is the issue of whether trance is necessary that forms one of the primary bases for Brunton’s later criticism of Ramana. In any event, Brunton seems to have incorporated this view of Ramana’s independence of any written teachings to his own life experience:
This last statement is almost exactly what Ramana claimed for himself–that his experience was direct, and that the later books that he read were only "analysing and naming what I had felt intuitively without analysis or name." (Osborne, 24 and Teachings, 11). g) Occult powers or siddhis We know that Brunton was interested in special powers or siddhis, such
as telepathy or the power to read thoughts.
But Humphreys says,
Humphreys says that Ramana noticed his “bent of mind” [towards the siddhis] and was afraid Humphreys would yield to the charms of thaumaturgy (siddhis) (Glimpses, 112). But Humphreys says on the same page that he “felt the magnetic attraction of Maharshi.” Narasimha reports this statement of magnetic attraction (Narasimha, 112). Osborne says that Humphreys was probably wrong about Ramana’s clairvoyance. He says that although Sri Bhagavan saw through people in order to help and guide them, he did not use any such powers on the human plane (Osborne, 101). It is Osborne’s view that Narasimhayya, [Humphreys’ Telegu tutor, who brought Humphreys to see Ramana] had previously told Ramana Humphreys’ life story. Osborne says that Ramana no more used subtle powers than those of the physical world (Osborne, 97). And yet there are stories about Ramana’s siddhis. Narasimha relates story of Ganapati Sastri, who in 1908 went to a temple at Tiruvottiuyr near Madras, and had a vision of Ramana coming in and sitting up next to him. Sastri tried to sit up but in his vision, Ramana held him down. It gave him something like an electric shock. He regarded this as the grace of the guru. Sastri later asked Ramana about it. On Oct 17/29 [21 years later!], Ramana told him:
Narasimha himself had a vision of Ramana, but Ramana told him that the visions may be from his study of the Bhagavad Gita. But he also told him that Ganapati Sastri had had a similar experience, so Narasimha should go ask him. (Narasimha, 107) \Ramana himself discounted the importance of these powers. Ramana said that for the formless self to have a body, to eat food and drink water–that these are siddhas enough (Letters, 76, Aug. 10, 1946). One of the reasons that Ramana discounted powers was that they implied the existence of others to whom to display them:
and
Ramana said, “Why recall the past incarnations? It is a waste of time.” (Conscious Immortality, 117). Ramana was asked whether yogis can show us the dead. He answered that they may be able to, but not to ask him because he could not do it. Ramana says that some jñanis may develop siddhis such as invisibility. But no powers can equal Self-realization. “Jñana is everything, and a jñani will not waste any thought on the occult powers.” (Conscious Immortality, 39). “The occult powers are only of the mind, they are not natural to the Self.” They are not worth trying for (p. 40). So although there are accounts of Ramana having powers of telepathy and telekinesis, he is also clear that such siddhis must never be sought for themselves. The search for powers distracts one from self-enquiry. In his discussion with Evans-Wentz, Ramana says that siddhis are not natural, and not worth striving for, and the would-be occultist seeks to acquire them so that others may appreciate him. These powers do not bring happiness. Ramana even discounted the importance given to black magic or evil powers: Another visitor referred to Brunton's statement that he had actually feared a woman for her association with black magic. Ramana said that black magic is condemned in Devikalottaram. By such practices a person ruins oneself. But Ramana goes on to say that avidya or ignorance is itself bad, and why should we add a separate category of black magic? (Talks, 499-500, par. 517; also confirmed in Conscious Immortality). Nor did Ramana give much importance to dreams:
On the same page, it is reported that Ramana seemed to give more value to the conscious mind:
And Ramana did not believe in the importance of miracles. K.K. Nambiar asked Ramana about the miracles that Christ performed. Ramana asked whether such Saints know and act as though they were performing those miracles. In other words, they do it unconsciously [58]. This is the same answer that Humphreys had reported. Nambiar says that Ramana is averse to the use and exhibition of any mystical powers. Ramana has warned disciples that indulging in such powers will sidetrack them from Self-realization. But Nambiar himself reports several powers. e.g. a dream that Ramana had where Nambiar needed some ink (Nambiar, 41). Ramana’s dismissive attitude towards miracles is also reported elsewhere:
Although Ramana is clear in discounting the importance of siddhis, Brunton emphasizes the telepathic powers of Ramana that he felt on his first visit:
Ramana told Brunton that he should find the master within himself (Search, 278). In other words, he should not be traveling about looking for someone else with powers. And yet Brunton did not stay, but left to search for more holy men in India. h) Theosophy and astral planes Ramana was specifically asked about theosophy. It appears that the following questions were asked by Brunton:
Ramana says that occultism and theosophy are circuitous routes to the Self (Conscious Immortality, 44). His response regarding speculation about astral planes was equally dismissive:
Theosophy speaks of evolving selves. But Ramana asked,
Ramana says that reincarnation, astral planes are true, but only from a lower standpoint:
Brunton says that there are "degrees of reality," but Ramana corrects him and says there is always only one reality and that is the Self (Talks, 127, par. 144). Ramana told Humphreys that religion, whether Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Theosophy can only take us to the point where all religions meet (Narasimha, 118). [59] And when Ramana was asked what happens after death, he merely said, engage yourself in the present. i) Meditation and trance As already mentioned, Brunton, like Narasimha, emphasizes Ramana’s condition of trance. On his first visit, he said that Ramana was “certainly in a trance condition” (Search, 141). When Brunton left Ramana the first time, he reports that Ramana had re-entered the trance-like condition (p. 161). Brunton says that the hall then becomes pervaded with a “subtle, intangible and indefinable power which affects me deeply” (p 161). And on his second visit he remarks on Ramana’s “trance-like abstraction wherein he locks his senses against the world outside” (Search, 292). Brunton says that on this second visit, he himself was in a trance for over two hours, and that Ramana watched him (Search, 310). j) The Overself The term ‘Overself’ does not appear in the Search. But there are references to a higher or deeper self:
On the same page, Brunton refers to the “mystery of the divine within-ness.” There is a deeper being: Self still exists, but it is a changed, radiant self. For something that is far superior to the unimportant personality which was I, some deeper, diviner being rises into consciousness and becomes me. […] I, the new I (p. 305). Now that we are familiar with Thurston’s writings, we can see similarities in Brunton’s reports of Ramana. Brunton says, “There is That in man which belongs to an imperishable race” (Search, 306). And on the same page, he refers to : “the voice of a hidden, recondite and mysterious being who inhabits his centre, who is his own ancient self.” Thurston had spoken of "the Higher Self," which he said was created from the best of man’s aspirations during his descent and evolution through matter:
Brunton asked Ramana about the “true self.” Ramana responded,
In this conversation, Ramana tells Brunton (to his evident shock) that the sense of the personal ‘I’ must totally disappear into the true self.
Brunton then refers to Jesus’ words, “Whoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it…” But Ramana himself sometimes refers to the Higher Self, and he does this in reference to Brunton’s books! And then Ramana speaks of two meanings of ‘I’ or Self. In response to a question by a certain Mr. Knowles, who had read Brunton’s two books, Ramana refers to the “true Self” (Conscious Immortality, 11). A similar reference by Ramana to Brunton is found in Talks:
Ramana also refers to the "Real Self” (Talks, 121, par. 136; Jan. 15, 1936). This was said while Brunton was visiting the ashram. And when Ramana was asked how one could get in touch with the Higher Self, he answered, “The Higher Self is always so, whether you follow the path to it or not” (Conscious Immortality, 161). This is a fascinating interplay between Brunton, who admits that he was interpreting Ramana through his own ideas, and Ramana who then adopts Brunton’s ideas to describe his own teachings! This is even more apparent in disciples of Ramana, who adopt the term ‘Overself’ in their translations of some of Ramana’s works. For example, let us look at the works of Sri Muruganar (1893-1973), one of Ramana’s most prominent disciples. David Godman says this about him:
Muruganar personally attended on Ramana since his meeting with him in 1926 [61]. Muruganar wrote down Ramana’s teachings in Tamil. One of these books is the Guru-Ramana-Vachana-Mala. That book was a collection of verses from Muruganar’s larger work Guru Vachakakkovai [62]. The word ‘Overself’ is used in the English translation of Guru-Ramana-Vachana-Mala [63].
and
From this it can be seen that not only did Brunton interpret Ramana through his previous theosophical ideas, but that he in turn influenced Ramana and his disciples to interpret the experience in the same way. 3. The Secret Path (1935) In 1935, Brunton wrote The Secret Path. This is the first book in which he mentions the Overself. A whole chapter is entitled “The Awakening to the Overself.” Brunton says that the Overself consciousness is equivalent to deep dreamless sleep (Secret Path, 87). And Brunton’s mentalism is also evident, since he regards the Overself as Universal Mind:
Brunton compares his view of Indian Absolutists to Bishop Berkeley’s idealism (Secret Path, 25). Brunton also refers to Emerson (Secret Path, 13, 98) It is worth looking at this book in some detail. The Foreword to this book is by Alice A. Bailey (1880-1949), a well-known occult teacher at the time. She was the author of 24 books, which she said she authored with the help of a Tibetan teacher or master, a spirit that she contacted through channeling. These books covered topics like white magic, telepathy, occult meditation, and the reappearance of the Christ. For a time she was a member of the Theosophical Society. She said that Madame Blavatsky's teaching of the occult masters had led her to identify her own spirit guide from the age of 15. She left the Theosophical Society. With her husband, another theosophist, she founded and founded The Arcane School, a movement that continues to this day. In the first paragraph of her Foreword, Alice Bailey mentions the “growing sensitivity to the that “mysterious Overself mentioned by our author [Brunton]" (Secret Path, 9). Now why did Brunton ask for a Foreword by this theosophist and occult teacher? Had he not already obtained enlightenment with Ramana? The answer can only be that Brunton had not achieved the enlightenment he sought, and that he was still searching. This is confirmed in Secret Path. After he had written A Search in Secret India, Brunton proposed “an exploration right across Asia, an exploration that would continue my old quest of the last surviving exponents of genuine Oriental wisdom and magic” (Secret Path, 13). His meeting with Ramana had therefore not diverted him from his real interest in seeing and possessing magical powers. He also speaks of seeking "wonder-working lamas of Nepal and the Tibetan border." And he speaks of the “Himalayan attitude” of the Overself (Secret Path, 128). Later in 1936, Brunton himself traveled to the Himalayas, with the intention of reaching Mount Kailas in Tibet. One place he would have received the idea to do this would have been from Alice Bailey, and her purported revelations from her Tibetan Master. Secret Path does not mention Ramana by name, although it does set out the "Who am I?" method. “This inquiry into the true self is the simplest system of meditation I know…” (Secret Path, 51). There is a whole chapter entitled “A Technique of Self-Analysis.” And there is a clear reference to Ramana in a few pages in Chapter 1. Brunton refers to Ramana as "a wise man of the east." He says that he met the man "unexpectedly." That is hardly true, since Brunton had had to make a special train journey to see Ramana. Even the newspapers had been announcing that Brunton would be visiting [64]. Brunton emphasizes that at that first meeting, Ramana had telepathic insight into his life:
So again we see Brunton’s continued interest in special siddhis or powers. He says, “The spiritual radiations which emanated form him were all-penetrating.” (Secret Path, 12). Thus, Brunton is still emphasizing special occult powers or siddhis. His reference to "gnomes" is probably a reference to the ideas of Le Comte de Gabalis, which speaks of salamanders, sylphs, undines and gnomes. Another reference to powers is at page 106, where Brunton says,
Brunton refers to some Christian ideas. With respect to the lack of argument in the book, he refers to Christ’s saying “Except ye become as little children ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Secret Path, 18). And he refers to Jesus’ words “Seek ye first the kingdom of heaven…” (Secret Path, 51). But he also makes some strange statements, such as “Christ descended on earth from a superior planet, which was His real home…”(Secret Path, 102). In Secret Path, Brunton says that he is putting forward what seems to be an astounding proposition:
He says that if intellect is only this train of thoughts, then we could
cease to think but still remain conscious (Secret Path, 66).
Ramana’s book Upadesa saram [Spiritual Instruction], which is quoted here, was written at the request of Muruganar. Ramana wrote it before Brunton wrote Secret Path. The idea that “the mind is nothing but a bundle of thoughts” already appears in Ramana’s work “Who Am I?” [65] And in Upadesa Saram, Ramana says,
Ramana says that the first thought that arises is the “I-thought.” And the state of true Being is where there is not the slightest trace of even this first thought. Ramana emphasizes that this state does not include any telepathy of clairvoyance or other psychic powers of the mind. As for Brunton’s idea that we can retain “consciousness without thought,” this is already in Ramana’s translation of the Vivekacudamani [67]. And in a dialogue in 1937, Ramana continues this line of reasoning. He recommends concentrating on “the interval between thoughts” as an explanation of the realized state.
But although this idea of the mind as a collection of thoughts was not original to Brunton, it is important to note that Ramana read Brunton’s book Secret Path. Already in 1935, a certain Mr. Knowles refers to reading Brunton’s two books (Talks, 56; June 15, 1935). And Swarnagiri shows that Ramana approved of some of Brunton’s ideas:
The incident is also reported in Conscious Immortality:
So again we note this amazing interplay between Brunton’s ideas and those of Ramana himself. And yet Ramana did not approve of everything Brunton wrote, or at least did not interpret them in the way that Brunton wrote them. Brunton wrote that he had a vision of “the Wise One of the East” [Ramana]. In the vision, Ramana said,
Ramana was asked about Brunton’s vision referred to in this passage. He was asked whether Paul Brunton saw him in London. Ramana answered that Brunton had a vision. “Nevertheless he saw me in his own mind.” (Conscious Immortality, 41). 4. A Search in Secret Egypt (1935) In 1935, the same year that he published Secret Path, Brunton also published A Search in Secret Egypt [68]. The book refers to Brunton’s experience of spending a night alone in the Great Pyramid. The book is evidence that, despite his stay with Ramana, Brunton was still interested in esoteric and occult mysteries [69]. We should recall that F.W. Thurstan (who may or may not be Thurston) also wrote about the mysteries of Egypt. The book Egypt refers to many strange powers. He refers to being with others who were in a hypnotic state or hypnotic trance (pp. 99, 101). Chapter 5 is entitled “With a Magician of Cairo. Chapter 6 is entitled “Wonder-working by hypnotism.” Chapter 7 is “An Interview with Egypt’s Most Famed Fakir.” Chapter 12 is “The Ancient Mysteries.” Chapter 16 is “With Egypt’s most famed Snake-charmer.” Chapter 18 is “I Meet an Adept.” In reference to the last chapter, Brunton says that he believed that the adept that he met possessed “some unusual power (p. 275). He says that adepts are those “who had entered into the councils of the gods and knew the deepest spiritual secrets man could never learn” Adepts work in silence and secrecy. They can exchange thoughts with fellow Adepts at a distance, that they can temporarily use the body of another person by projecting his soul into that person’s body” Brunton calls this power to use another body the power of “overshadowing”(p. 276). The idea of overshadowing is another idea that Brunton took over from Madame Blavatsky’s theosophy. Brunton says that the adept speaks with him about “magical powers of injuring other people.” The powers were originally used for self-defence were later used for “injuring enemies from a distance or removing those who stood in the path of the magician’s (or his patron’s ) ambition (p. 281) Brunton says that “In ancient times, Egypt was the chief centre of magical knowledge and practice excelling even India.” Brunton says that some Adepts from ancient Egypt were still alive. Their bodies lie in a comatose state in certain Egyptian tombs not yet discovered. “Trance” most nearly describes that state. They are like the Indian fakirs, but the knowledge of these Adepts is far more profound. Hindu fakirs become unconscious, but these Adepts remain fully conscious. While they are in coma, their spirits are free and working. Their hearts were never cut out. Some have been there 10,000 years (pp. 282-284). We see here Brunton’s continued fascination with occult powers. This does not seem to correspond to any enlightening experience with Ramana! Chadwick is of the opinion that in later years, Brunton wrote a lot of rubbish (Chadwick 16). And yet we know that Ramana read Brunton’s book Egypt. He says [to Brunton on Brunton’s return in 1936]:
5. A Message from Arunachala (1936) Brunton returned to India, via Egypt, and again spent some time with Ramana. He reached Ramana's ashram before the end of 1935 (Essential, 13). At that time he wrote the book A Message from Arunachala, which was published in 1936 [71]. The book does not name Ramana, but refers to ‘the Maharshee of South India.’ After Ramana’s death, Brunton dedicated a new printing of this book to “The Maharshee of South India.” In the dedication, he says that after the Maharishee’s death, the mountain of Arunåchala lost much of its sacred atmosphere. “…it is a man and his mind which give holiness to a place, not the place which gives holiness to man.” Brunton compares this book to the Mosaic tablets written on the mountain. In this case, the mountain is Arunåchala. Brunton compares Arunåchala to the Egyptian pyramids. He says that that Ramana told him that the lost continent of Lemuria had once stretched from Egypt to South India. I find that doubtful. The idea of Lemuria is related to Thurston’s ideas. Thurston refers to Lemuria, although not in an approving way. Thurston said that the worst type of atom is from Lemurian period; bodies were of an animal nature and were constantly engaged in war. They sacrificed their victims and ate their flesh (Dayspring, 49). Brunton later said that A Message from Arunachala was a book of “pointed criticism,” “an indictment of the materialistic foundations of our modern civilization and therefore necessarily destructive in tone” [72]. He said that its bitterness was too extreme and that he would now tone down its language. In Message, Brunton refers to Emerson (p. 24). Emerson wrote that he did not have one disciple, because what he wrote was not to bring men to him, but to themselves. Message makes several references to the Overself. Brunton characterizes his first meeting with Ramana in terms of the Overself. He says that his first period with the Maharshee was when the “Overself stretched forth its hand to touch me” (p. 12). And, “to know the Overself is to know the deep, unmoved rest which is at the centre of our being” (p. 100). “The Overself speaks to man in the only language that his deafened mind cares to understand–suffering” (p. 116). The Overself is “inexplicable.” “It is the self-created ray of light out of the Absolute Darkness. It is the nearest that any human being can get to God.” (p. 138). In January 1936, Brunton asked Ramana about Siddhas. The glossary at the back of Talks defines a siddha as "one who has acquired supernatural powers and is capable of working miracles; also a state of accomplishment. In other words, it is one who has siddhis, supernatural powers. Ramana tells him that there are reputed to be special beings with powers, siddhas, within the holy mountain Arunachala. Brunton’s conversation with Ramana was as follows”
This remarkable exchange shows that as of this date, Brunton is still very much concerned with those who possess powers. This is likely the main reason that Brunton left Ramana in order to visit the Himalayas later that year. Ramana's exchange with Brunton is remarkable for another reason: it shows that Ramana had read A Search in Secret Egypt, and was now using its teaching to describe the power of Arunåchala. It is also evident that at this time in 1936 that Brunton was visiting Ramana, he was also visiting other teachers. Chadwick writes about the American Bierce Spaulding, who came to the Ramana’s ashram in 1936 with a group of Americans. The reference appears to be to Baird Thomas Spaulding, who wrote about his trip to India in 1894 [74]. In 1935, when Spalding was 78 years old, he organized another trip to India with 18 fellow-travelers and seekers. Chadwick reports that they had bought one way tickets to India. They had been told that once with the Masters, every care would be taken of them and that they would not want to return to America. They arrived in Calcutta, where Spalding left them in a hotel while he tried to communicate with the Masters as to how to proceed. Spalding told they group that he had met Brunton, who invited them to Ramana’s ashram. Spalding took the group to Pondicherry for a darshan of Aurobindo. Brunton was present at the same darshan and stayed at the same hotel. Brunton told Chadwick that members of the group accused Spalding of having swindled them. When they arrived at Ramana’s ashram, there were 12 members left of the group. Others had left in exasperation. One of the group, a Mrs. Taylor, asked Ramana for Self-realization “right away.” Chadwick thought that Spalding was an interesting person, who “obviously suffered from delusions” and was “slightly mad” (Chadwick, 48-51). 7. A Hermit in the Himalayas (1937) In early 1936, Brunton was still at Ramana's ashram. While still with Ramana, Brunton planned to go to Tibet with Yogi Pranavananda on a pilgrimage to Mount Kailas. Pranavananda's teacher was Swami Jnanananda, in Andhra, then the northeast part of Madras Presidency. So even while he was with Ramana, Brunton was still looking for other teachers. Brunton seems to have believed that there are Masters who possess spiritual powers in the Himalayas. Others had told him about the Himalayas, including his former Buddhist mentor Allan Bennett, the Buddhist monk Frederic Fletcher, who had actually been to the Himalayas before visiting Ramana with Brunton in 1931. And Alice Bailey, who wrote the Foreword to Secret Path had told Brunton about Tibet. And we must not forget Sir Francis Younghusband, who had led a military expedition to Tibet. Younghusband had been sent by Lord Curzon to Tibet in 1904, where Younghusband forced a treaty on the Dalai Lama, after firing on Tibetan soldiers. Younghusband wrote the Foreword to A Search in Secret India. Brunton had discussions with Ramana about his desire to see the holy Mount Kailas in the Himalayas. Ramana told him his real search was within:
Ramana also told Brunton the story of Appar, a Tamil saint, who wanted to go to Kailas, but found Kailas in a temple tank in Tiruvayyar, near Tanjore, where an old man told him to take a dip. Tanjore is in South India. Ramana said,” Where is Kailash then? Is it within the mind or outside it?” and “Everything is within, there is nothing without” (Conscious Immortality, 111). But Brunton left Ramana. In the summer of 1936, Brunton went to the Himalayas, where he stayed as the guest of a Nepalese prince, a nephew of Maharajah of Nepal. In 1937, Brunton published A Hermit in the Himalayas: The Journey of a Lonely Exile [76]. The Prince wrote the Introduction to Himalayas. He refers to certain criticism that had been directed against Brunton:
The title of the book refers to ‘exile.’ That probably means the renunciation of the world, or a retreat from it. But in a Preface that he added twelve years later to the first British edition of the book in 1949, Brunton warns against any permanent retreat from the world:
In his Preface, Brunton says that Westerners need to learn how to be; we have already learned how to do. He says that the mystical quest links us with “an infinite power, an infinite wisdom, and infinite goodness.” Usually only brief glimpses of “the soul’s flower-like beauty” usually only for a few minutes, but the “adept” can return at will to “the serene beatitude of this high consciousness.” The book is a collection of various ideas. Brunton’s publishers called it “a literary cocktail.” It is noteworthy that it begins with a poem by Emerson, “Good-bye, proud world.” Brunton writes that he receives letters from readers of his books. Some letters he replies to. But he says that he sends telepathic messages to others:
Brunton does not describe observing any special powers in the Himalayas. That must have disappointed him. He does refer to a Buddhist monk with memories of previous existences (Himalayas, 42). And he reports what his companion Pranavananda’s said about his guru, Swami Jnanananda. The Swami was said to have lived for a time in Gangotri in the Himalayas, stark naked in the ice and snow that was 7 feet deep. Talking to Pranavananda, Brunton “sees” the sublime presence of the Swami. Brunton says he does this by “overshadowing” Pranavananda. Brunton also makes some comparisons between Hinduism and Buddhism. He says that Mount Kailas is the most sacred spot in Asia to Buddhist and Hindus (Himalayas, 24) He finds the Hindu Krishna is more adorable and lovable than Buddha; Krishna preaches no harsh asceticism. Brunton says that Buddha took existence too seriously (Himalayas, 149-150). Brunton also refers to the Bible, “Be still and know that I am God.” That is also the concluding line of the book. Ramana himself frequently used that verse in order to sum up his own method of Self-Enquiry [77]. But Brunton does not mention Ramana at all in the book. Brunton says that Jesus spoke out of the deep region of the Overself (Himalayas, 84). Ramana was aware of the book Himalayas. In October 1936, Ramana was read an extract from it that had been printed in the Sunday Times. This shows that Ramana continued to follow Brunton's work. In the article, Brunton mentioned Buddhist methods of gaining the faculty of recovering past incarnations. Again, this shows Brunton's fascination with powers. Ramana said, "The attempt to recall the past is mere waste of time" (Talks, 215; para. 260). 8. The Quest of the Overself (1937) a) The Maharajah Brunton spent the winter of 1936 and the spring of 1937 with the Maharajah of Mysore, who had read his books and invited him there (Cahn Fung I, 39). The Maharaja had perhaps learned of Brunton from Ramana, whom he had visited for 15 minutes [78]. When the Maharajah left, Ramana said that he was a highly advanced soul, a Janaka (Conscious Immortality, 154). Janaka is mentioned in the Hindu Scriptures as a king who was also a realized person. Brunton writes with great enthusiasm about some books that the Maharajah gave him to read. These were the Ashtavakra Gita, the Mandukya Upanishad, Gaudapada’s Karika, and Shankara’s Commentary on King Janaka.[79] The Ashtavakra Gita [80] is a record of Ashtavakra's teaching to King Janaka. Its later chapters emphasize the fact that the true sage does not flee to caves or sit idly in ashrams but is constantly engaged in work for the welfare of others. It points out that he will outwardly pretend to be just like ordinary people in order not to be put on a pedestal by them.” The Ashtavakra Gita was translated into English by Swami Nityaswarupananda of the Ramakrishna Order. It included a transliteration in the Kannada language. The book was published by the Maharaja of Mysore. Its later chapters emphasize the fact that the true sage does not flee to caves or sit idly in ashrams but is constantly engaged in work for the welfare of others. It points out that he will outwardly pretend to be just like ordinary people in order not to be put on a pedestal by them. Brunton does not seem to know that the Ashtavakra Gita was presented to Ramana Maharshi in 1932. Ramana then meticulously wrote with his own hand all the Sanskrit verses above each Kannada verse. Brunton also does not seem to know that these same books were also discussed by Ramana. b) T. Subrahmanya Iyer In Mysore, Brunton met T. Subrahmanya Iyer, who was the Maharajah's reader in philosophy. Iyer would to become Brunton’s new guru. Cahn Fung has shown from Brunton’s letters to Iyer that their relationship was more than just academic, but that Brunton regarded Iyer as his spiritual teacher (Cahn Fung II, 128). Cahn Fung also points out that Iyer was in his own words “a keen theosophist.” Cahn Fung writes, “Earlier in his life he had been a regular reader of Blavatsky’s books, and was “several years in the clutches of Annie Besant.” (Cahn Fung I, 19). What were Iyer's teachings that so attracted Brunton? Iyer's main difference from Ramana was that his neo-Hinduism was more pronounced. He emphasized practical ethics. Iyer was a follower of Vivekananda (1863-1902). Vivekananda was an Indian philosopher who was a disciple of the Indian holy man Ramakrishna (1836-1886). But Vivekananda was also influenced by western thought. Vivekananda wrote the book Practical Vedanta, in which he argued that Vedanta had ethical implications [81]. Ramakrishna's disciples set up the Ramakrishna Missions, which emulated Christian missions in India with their emphasis on service to humanity and social involvement. And we have already seen how Jung was familiar with Ramakrishna, and makes reference to his ideas of involvement with the world. Following Vivekananda, Iyer stressed the basis of ethics in our interdependence with others. He related this in Hindu terminology, and in particular to the Upanishadic identity of atman and Brahman. This is the tat tvam asi [“that art thou”] basis of ethics. According to this view of ethics, we do good to others not out of altruism, but because in some sense we and others share a common identity, so we are serving our true Self. Iyer interpreted Shankara from a Neo-Vedantic point of view. He found in the great advaitin philosopher a validation of his own ethic of social service (inspired by Western influence), universalism (i.e. Neo-Hindu inclusivism), as well as ideas of Indian nationalism. Iyer also presented Shankara as a rationalist philosopher, in contrast to the more traditional image of him as a theologian:
Cahn Fung summarizes Iyer’s teaching:
It is unclear whether Brunton realized that in following Iyer, he was accepting a more western outlook on life. But it is interesting that Brunton found Iyer's emphasis on ethics to be too one-sided. Iyer rejected mystical experience and mystical feeling. For him, intellect alone was important. c) The Quest for the Overself In the summer of 1937, the Maharajah let Brunton stay at a hill station, where he wrote his next book, The Quest of the Overself [83]. He refers to the Cave of Baba Budan that he visited, where the mystic Dattatreya
Brunton dedicated Quest to his patron, the Maharajah of Mysore. In this dedication, he refers to
He says that he regards the Maharajah as a philosopher king. Both the Maharajah and Iyer encouraged Brunton in this task of building a bridge between east and west. Iyer told Brunton what the Maharajah had said before he died in 1940:
and Iyer told Brunton
The book Quest is described as a “more comprehensive and advanced
work” than Secret Path. Brunton says that he wants lead
reader into “realms of knowledge, forms of experience and phases
of consciousness that surpass what is usual” (Quest,
9). He says that there has been “considerable expansion in personal
realisation” since writing Secret Path (Quest,
32). I n response to his critics, Brunton briefly discusses some of his previous books. He says that if there are contradictions in his writings, this is because of the grade of development in the mind of his readers (Quest, 33). This is the same justification that was frequently given for apparent contradictions in Ramana’s teachings [84]. He says that the title Secret Path was criticized. He says he meant a path of spiritual attainment mostly lost to the modern world. He also says that he took the title from Tirumoolar, from the Tamil Sacred Scriptures, as well as from Ramana, whom he quotes as saying “This method of realizing the Absolute is known as the Secret Path of the Heart” (Quest, 12). He says that Ramana is the “highest embodiment” of mysticism (Quest, 15). But he also boasts that it was left to him, “an infidel foreigner, to make the Maharishee famous in his own country” (Quest, 17). Brunton says that the book A Message from Arunachala gave him the least pleasure to write (Quest, 29). Brunton refers to A Search in Secret Egypt. He says that he found actual wonders in Egypt. What was revealed to him during the night spent at the Sphinx’s feet was confirmed by a later archaeological discovery (Quest, 19). He says that whereas India has mothered the deepest thought of man; Egypt was the father of his “most marvellous magic” (Quest, 43). The fundamental lesson of Secret Egypt is that of man’s survival after death:
But Brunton goes on to say that this view of psychic survival perpetuates the personal ego, whereas spiritual immortality dissolves it. It is important to surrender our ego to the Overself (Quest, 28, 33). But Quest also shows Brunton’s continued interest in special powers. He says he has observed fakirs suspending their breath for hours or days in an airless coffin or below ground. He discusses trance, hypnotism and psychic research. Profound trance is when persons forget their bodies and witness far-off scenes. There is also real trance of the third degree. Brunton sees trance as evidence of separation of mind and body (Quest, 56-60). Thus, Quest teaches a dualistic view of the self, as opposed to advaita’s nondualism. There is “an immaterial Overself, to which the physical body is subordinate” (Quest, 63). Brunton quotes Emerson: “souls are not saved in bundles” (Quest, 48,130) Brunton also refers to discoveries of modern science, which he tries to relate to his own ideas. He refers to the work of Sir James Jeans. Cahn Fung has pointed out that Jeans’ The Mysterious Universe was assigned reading in the philosophy courses that Subrahmanya Iyer taught to the monks of Mysore’s Ramakrishna Ashram. Thus, Quest seems to incorporate ideas that Brunton learned from Iyer. He says that the mind’s incessant movement creates the time sense
(Quest, 96). We must overcome this time sense by being still.
He again quotes the Bible, “Be still and know that I am God.”
The ‘I’ of man is the God-element within him, eternal (Quest,
101). By being inwardly still, one avoids this movement. The goal is
to seek a kind of semi-trance, in which one must endeavor to remain
perfectly awake, perfectly alert, and yet indulge in no mental, emotional
or physical movement whatsoever (Quest, 172). This idea seems
similar to Ramana’s idea of seeking the state where one is conscious
without thinking, seeking the space between the thoughts. Brunton speaks of The Path of Self-Enquiry, but he does not credit Ramana with the source of this idea (Quest, 143). The Overself is a “region.” It is impersonal, and exceeds our intellect. It can be communicated only by not-words and by profound telepathic silence (Quest, 181, 193). Brunton’s diagram of the refraction of the ray of the Overself on p. 196 of Quest is very similar to the diagram in the Collected Teachings of Ramana Maharshi [85]. Again, Brunton does not credit Ramana. It is also surprising that he says that the Overself is impersonal, when he had previously criticized Ramana for this apparently nontheistic viewpoint [86]. After all his evident interest in occult powers, Brunton then warns that these occult powers should not be sought for their own sake. This is not to say that they do not exist, for “…the supreme power which supports all occult powers is the Overself’s own power. All lesser forces take their rise therein.” Yet Brunton says that studies of the psychic and occult are not without worth. These studies may “break the back of crude materialism.” He then quotes Jesus that all these things will be added unto us if we seek the kingdom of heaven first. Unexpected miracles and wonders then happen. But they then come unsought (Quest, 223, 224). We see here that Brunton continues to be fascinated by occult powers, and that he believes that upon self-realization, these powers will be there. That seems to me to be a very different attitude from Ramana, who said that the powers do not count for the realized person, since powers are only for the phenomenal level of reality. Go to Part 3 of this article. Endnotes [53] Arthur Osborne: Ramana Maharshi and the Path of Self-Knowledge (York Beach, Maine: Samuel Weiser, 1997, first published 1970), 107 [‘Osborne’]. [54] Ramana Maharshi: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi, ed. Arthur Osborne (New York: Samuel Weiser, 1978, first published 1962), 186 [‘Teachings’]. [55] Ramana Maharshi: Maharshi’s Gospel (Tiruvannamalai: Sri Ramanasramam, 1969), 33. [56] U.G. Krishnamurti: The Mystique of Enlightenment: The unrational ideas of a man called U.G. Online at [http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/moe/moe_1.htm]. [57] Both statements cited in a review of T.V. Kapali Sastri’s The Way of Light, in The Mountain Path 1 (January, 1964), 55, online at [www.ramana-maharshi.org/downloads/m_p_january_1964.pdf]. [58] K.K. Nambiar: The Guiding Presence of Sri Ramana (Tiruvannamalai, 1984) [‘Nambiar’]. [59] This is a neo-Hindu view of religion. [60] David Godman: The Power of the Presence (Tiruvnannamalai: Sri Ramanasrmam, 2000); Online at [http://www.realization.org/page/doc1/doc102a.htm] [‘Presence’]. [61] As an aside, there is a troubling report that at his first visit to Ramana, Muruganar was administered a hallucinogenic. Muruganar reported the following to Narasimha in 1930:
[62] Sri Muruganar: Guru Vachaka Kovai (The Garland of the Guru’s Sayings). New translation by Michael James and Sadhu Om online at [http://davidgodman.org/rteach/gvk_intro.shtml]. This translation makes no reference to ‘Overself.’ It does refer to “True Self” (e.g. verse 16). [63] Guru-Ramana-Vachana-Mala, tr. by “Who” (Tiruvnammalai, Sri Ramanasramam, 1960), 5 verse 11. The translator, “Who” was the pen name of Lakshmana Sarma, who also wrote the book Maha Yoga or The Upanishadic Lore in the Light of the Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana (Tiruvannamali: Sri Ramanasramam, 1961, first published 1937). [64] "From the Early Days," The Maharshi 7, No. 5 (Sept./Oct. 1997). [65] Ramana Maharshi, “Who am I?” in The Collected Works of Ramana Maharshi, ed. Arthur Osborne (York Beach, Maine: Samuel Weiser, 1997, first published 1972), 41. The statement does not appear in the revised edition of The Collected Works of Ramana Maharshi,Tiruvannamalai: Sri Ramanasramam, 2001), although it does have the statement, “Apart from thoughts, there is no such thing as mind.” (p. 38). Osborne had translated that as “”So then, thoughts themselves constitute the mind.” [66] Collected Works (Osborne translation), 85. [68] Paul Brunton: A Search in Secret Egypt (London: Rider & Co., 1935) [‘Egypt’]. [69] Cahn Fung says that in the 1940’s, Brunton “publicly repudiated certain passages of A Search in Secret Egypt in which the search for Truth was sacrificed to a love of mystery and the sensational.” (Cahn Fung I, 19-20). Even if that is so, the book is important in showing that Brunton was still attracted to these ideas after his meetings with Ramana. [70] ‘Overshadowing’ is a term used by Blavatsky. See her The Key to Theosophy, online at [http://www.theosophical.ca/keytheos.htm]
[71] Paul Brunton: A Message from Arunachala (London: Rider & Co., 1936) [‘Message’]. [72] Paul Brunton: The Quest of the Overself (London: Rider & Co., 1937), 29 [‘Quest’].
[74] Baird Thomas Spalding: Life and Teaching of the Masters of the Far East, 6 volumes (DeVorss & Co., 1996, first published 1924). [75] Paul Brunton: A Hermit in the Himalayas: The Journey of a Lonely Exile (London: Rider & Co., 1937), 26. [77] S.S. Cohen: Reflections on Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi (Tiruvannamalai: Sri Ramanasramam, 1990, first published 1959), 168: “the whole Vedanta is contained in the two Biblical statements: ‘I AM THAT I AM’, and ‘BE STILL AND KNOW THAT I AM GOD’. See also See Talks, 187, 285, 307, 322-23, 333, 345, 458, 487, 563. Conscious Immortality, 49 “Be still, do not think, and know that I AM.” See also Erase the Ego (Mumbai: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1996), 24. And Maharshi’s Gospel (Tiruvannamalai: Sri Ramanasramam, 1969), 33. See my work Jivanmukta for many more Biblical references made by Ramana. [78] Apparently this was in order to present to Ramana a copy of the Ashtavakra Gita (see below). [79] Paul Brunton: The Hidden Teaching Beyond Yoga (London: Rider & Co., 1969, first published 1941), 36-37 [‘Hidden Teaching’]. [80] Still available from Ramana’s ashram. [81] Swami Vivekananda: Practical Vedanta (Calcutta: Ananda Press, 1978, first published 1896). [82] V. Subrahmanya Iyer: “Shankara and Our Own Times,” reprinted in his book, The Philosophy of Truth (Salem :Sudharma ,1955). See also Iyer's book, The Meaning of Life (self-published from 'Mysore Lodge', Madanapalli, A. P.). In the latter book, Iyer argues that the art of living consists in being in tune with nature and in tune with the law of life. It starts with self-enquiry: "Who am I? Whither do I come? What is the purpose and meaning of life?" It is based on self-knowledge, the principles of dharma and the law of karma. [83] Paul Brunton: The Quest of the Overself (London: Rider & Co., 1937). [84] Chadwick says there are contradictions in Ramana’s teachings because he had to speak from two points of view [self and phenomenal world] (Chadwick, 45). [85] Ramana’s Collected Works (Osborne translation),18, 23. Go to Part 3 of this article.
|
|||