Neuronal Correlates of a Jivanmukta

8/11/2019 Neuronal Correlates of a Jivanmukta

1/106

Neuronal Correlates of a Jivanmuktas Mind Identification of Markers in the Brain

By Dr. emuri !amesam !evised "# $%r "&''

$(stract) This paper explicates the essence of Gaudapadas ajativada (nothing is ever born) school of Non-duality and gives a neuroscientific rationale to develop identifiable Mar ers! in the brain of a "ivan#u ta$ i%e% one&ho has reali'ed that nothing is ever born%! The sense of an individuating self has collapsed right in the

present life for a "ivan#u ta% a#adhi or e*uivalent #editation states and epiphany etc% (on &hich publishedresearch infor#ation is available) is considered in +dvaita to be still a state (i%e% ti#e dependent) unli e"ivan#u ti &here the sense of separation ends for good (i%e% irreversibly)% Though a "ivan#u ta is dissolved intoan inexpressible ,neness$ this change happens within and to an individual % ertain broad traits andcharacteristics of a "ivan#u ta can be gleaned fro# scriptural literature and ta ing advantage of the latestresearch on brain$ these traits can be expected to sho& their distinct signatures in the brain che#istry andneuronal activity of a "ivan#u ta% Ten such Mar ers! are identified in the present study% + road #ap of future

research can be thought about only after these Mar ers! are fir#ed up and their para#eter ranges areestablished *uantitatively% These studies #ay also be able to help to thro& light in the future on the explanatorygap proble# (ho& #atter can arise fro# onsciousness in general or ho& a &orld is seen by a "ivan#u ta inspecific)$ though this issue is not the focus of the current paper%

Introduction)

Brahmavidya (Knowledge of the Self) is considered.aravidya (beyond the world) in contrast to the worldlyknowledge (aparavidya ) basically because Brahman is eternal, ineffable and inexpressible in terms of the worldlylanguages and symbols. orldly knowledge is limited to the sensory and mental realms and transient. ButBrahman is inaccessible to either the senses or the mind.

But mind is the only tool we have through which we can understand Brahman and experientially !be" Brahman. #human mind that gives up its habitual worldly proclivities of likes and dislikes (and other such pairs of opposites)and is immersed in an unbroken continuous stream of $Brahman thought% is itself Brahman. &his transformationof the mind takes place through re'orientating its reactive udgmental attitude. &he re'orientated mind movesfrom assessing the external stimuli in terms of opportunities and threats for the protection and perpetuation of the!self within" to a reali ation that the !self within" is an imaginary non'existent entity and what truly exists is!whatever" that *S (indescribable unitary experience of thoughts, sensations and perceptions).

&he thoughts, sensations and perceptions are called $ob ects% + sensory and mental percepts which have noinherent meaning within themselves but attain a significance only when and if a meaning is attributed to them.( ven the word -onsciousness or Brahman are ust words in this sense and no salient sanctity exists in thosewords). &his reali ation within the mind changes it to !let" all things happen as they arise effortlessly ust likevarious picture elements appearing on a screen. Such a mind also reali es eventually that the arisings(thoughts, sensations and perceptions) are no different from itself ust like no picture element is any different from

the screen on which it appears. ach picture element happens to be only a transient !superimposition" on thescreen at that moment. &hat is to say that the screen temporarily appears in the form of that specific pictureelement at that moment. *n other words, the screen, the document on the screen or any pixel is non'differentfrom one another. &his is a good modern analogy for the neness of the Brahman, world and the individual(/iva).

# room thermometer cannot have any memory of the temperature measured even a nanosecond before nor canit see in the present !now" the temperature that is going to be after a nanosecond. *t functions (senses thetemperature) always in the $0ow.% &hus !time" is a non'existent dimension to a thermometer. &he !reali ed" mind


2/106

too functions ever in an eternal $0ow% transcending time. Because all there is, is only itself and no other entitiesseparated from it ever exist, there is no scope for space (the in'between dimension separating two ob ects) toarise. -onse1uently such a mind transcends space too. #n absence of experiencing of time and space may alsobe obtained in a Samadhi state. But as 2audapada in his Karika and Sankarar"s commentary thereon urges,one has to surpass such Samadhi states in order to attain /ivanmukti ( Turiya ).

# human being in whom this transformation of mind has happened is called a $/ivanmukta%+ liberated right in thislife. 0ow the 1uestion is whether the present day scientific developments can help us to describe $ob ectively%the transformed !mind" of a /ivanmukta.

ften there is an entrenched !belief" in many of the traditional philosophers that science deals exclusively withphysical $ob ects% and Brahmavidya which is beyond ob ects is inaccessible to science. &hey believe thatscience deals with materials and philosophy of mind with mind. &his is the unfortunate legacy of -artesiandichotomy. -racks began to appear in this imaginary wall of separation about a century ago with the arrival of3uantum 4echanics. 4odern day neuroscientific developments and technologies speeded up the crumbling ofthis separation wall. &oday scientists do courageously foray into those domains of mind and consciousness,which used to be solely the preserves of philosophy of mind.

5urther, $ob ective% assessment in science does 0 & mean dealing with !ob ects" or their measurable properties.$ b ectivity% in science refers to an unbiased open'minded in1uiry without pre udgments and establishing thetruth with the operative principles being falsifiability and verifiability, ever mindful of experimental andobservational errors as well as interpretational ha ards (biases) and limitations. &he true spirit of science is to!in1uire in wonder". &his is no different from 6edantic Self'in1uiry into $who am *% or $what is this world around%apavada (sublation) techni1ue + negating each stage of an understanding reached by the seeker as neti neti untilno further negation is possible.

hereas in the good old ancient days not much was perhaps known about the brain beyond trepanning (thoughthe ancients might have had their own argon to explain things of the mind), we are now in a better position tohave a look at the !goings on" in the brain of a /ivanmukta. 7ndoubtedly, neuroscience has to travel a long wayto understand the brain and is only scratching the surface at the present. e may not be able to establish rightaway 1uantitative parameters to define the characteristics of a /ivanmukta"s brain. But we can try to identifyspecific 1ualitative $4arkers% that distinguish the brain of a /ivanmukta ob ectively.

#n attempt is made here to present the rationale of the approach and to identify a few $4arkers% that areamenable for investigation in a lab.

*ho is a Jivanmukta)

# /ivanmukta"s state8 is described in laudatory and eulogi ing terms in all our scriptures.

98 :Special Note on the word State: /e nor#ally use this &ord to describe a phase or a transitory condition%0t i#plicitly indicates that there are other states in &hich an entity could exist% 1ut this is not the sense &e use the&ord here% /hat &e try to convey is the disposition$ natural isness of "ivan#u ta after one achieves

reali'ation%

o the state of "ivan#u ta is not so#ething that co#es and goes% +s per +dvaita 2edanta$ this state is al&aysthere3 other states$ conditions #ay superi#pose on that veiling it$ #a ing it invisible% 4or lac of a better &ord$&e shall continue to use state to denote the position of a "ivan#u ta in order to differentiate fro# the conditionor disposition of an ordinary see er &ho has not yet reached that state% ;

# /ivanmukta is a Knower of Brahman.


3/106

happy unmindful of and unaffected by the goings on in the world. eali ation is synonymous to ending the mind. /. Krishnamurti calls it !emptying the mind". #

ero'thought position describes the state of a /ivanmukta. amayana fame), but considered tobe of a later period by some, explicates and clearly explains many of these intricacies of #dvaita philosophy.

@ogavasishta clearly states that the world does not end as long as mind exists (See >ef: A). >egarding the mindof a /ivanmukta, the story of Sage 6itahavya was narrated to show how 6itahavya annihilated his mind throughKnowledge. Sage 6asishta, observed that as a result, 6itahavya obtained noble 1ualities like universal affection(#aitri ). &he dialog between Sage 6asishta (the &eacher) and >ama (the upil) went on the following lines at thispoint:

!ama) $/ust a second SirC n one hand you say that the mind was annihilated. n the other hand you say thatnoble 1ualities like universal affection have arisen. hen mind itself was gone, where could these noble 1ualitiesreside?%

asishta) $#nnihilation of mind is of two types. ne is !#nnulment of mind ith >etention of 5orm 9in memory;".&he other is #nnulment of mind ithout >etention of 5orm". &he annihilation of mind of the /ivanmuktas is of thefirst type. 6idehamuktas achieve the other type of annihilation. 9/ivanmukta is one who is liberated and is still


4/106

living in his body and 6idehamukta is one who is liberated without the body 9deadC; ;. 6itahavya obtainedannihilation of mind with retention of form at that time.


5/106

techni*ues% o for all practical purposes &e #ay regard the &ord #ind as an o#nibus ter# for all the fouractivities identified in the east%

Note ") ,ne can$ of course$ argue &hether brain causes these four functions or that the brain is only an organinfluenced by so#e forces beyond itself in functioning in a certain &ay% This is a controversial issue thatde#ands a separate essay by itself% 6et us disregard for the present &hat forces cause these functions in thebrain and go &ith &hat neuroscientists are able to identify &ithin the brain% ;

Brain scans using the latest imaging techni1ues record the activity of the cells (neurons, interneurons, glia). &heactivity pattern is relatable to the thoughts or other functions that happen in the brain. So brain is clearly the seatof mind. hatever was attributed to physically invisible !mindstuff" 9mind; by the ancients can be seen in the brainusing techni1ues like magnetic resonance imaging (4>*), functional magnetic resonance imaging (f4>*),=iffusion'weighted 4>*, single photon emission computed tomography (S -&), positron emission tomography( &), diffusion tensor imaging (=&*), arterial spin labelling magnetic resonance imaging (#SE 4>*),magnetoencephalography, etc. in addition to the more simple electroencephalography ( 2). &hese are sensingsystems beyond the immediate capability of our physical sensory organs.

&he $5orm% of mind is still said to be retained in a /ivanmukta, thoughvasanas (except in trace residual1uantities) and mind are annihilated. &herefore, if we can identify such traits which can be observed in the brainof a /ivanmukta, we will have certain $characteristic markers% to differentiate a /ivanmukta from an ordinary man,though the physical body may not show any external difference detectable by the human senses.

Stripping out the hyperbole, mysticism, esoteric and !other worldly" attributes and complex descriptors, let us seewhat 0on'=ualism says.

n the attainment of Eiberation $*% and $ orld% become ne.

$*% loses its (individuating) status as a sub ect perceiving a separate ob ect $ orld% out there.

hen a distinct perceiver $*% is no more present, it logically follows that a distant perceived $ orld% also cannot

be present (because there is no one to see it).9Note) 0n other &ords$ an object cannot and does not exist by itself &ithout a subject seeing it% .utting itdifferently$ as +dvaita 2edanta holds$ true 7xistence! (transcending ti#e periods of past$ present and future) isintrinsic to ubject! only% +n object #ay exist for a period of ti#e (ho&ever long #ay be the period)$ but it isconsidered as lac ing True 7xistence if it is born at a ti#e and ends at another ti#e% ;

hat will then remain is only $#m'ness% or $Being'ness% or simply $ xistence% of whatever &hat *s. *f this soundsas too much mumbo' umbo, let us translate this into simple nglish.

Sentence A:

$I /ee the *orld .% + (i.e. !*" am here and the !world" is out there).

Sentence G:

$I $m the *orld % or $,he *orld Is Me % '' (i.e. 0o distinctions through !names and forms" are seen).

Sentence J:


6/106

$*hatever that $ll Is0 sim%ly I/ % '' (i.e. /ust Seeingness or *s'ness is the remnant once the triad of observer'observing'observed differentiation ends, thus establishing 7nity 1.%

&he transformation of Sentence A to J in an individual is Eiberation.

Sentence A is a phenomenon of normal perception. *t involves the sense organs and sensory cortex in the brain. #s it transforms to Sentence J., via Sentence G., there is no apparent reason to say there are no attendantcognitive changes (invoking ccam"s >a or). 5urther, the change is ha%%enin2 ithin and to a s%ecificindividual . So this change in cognition has to show up in that specific liberated *ndividual"s(rain areas andtheir activities . ( e cannot, though, rule out related changes in other body parts e.g. endocrine system).

3ossi(le 4(5ections and $ns ers to the %ro%osed Neuronal Correlates)

4(5ection ')

# ma or ob ection of the traditional advaitin trained in the 2uru'disciple system in looking for possible neuronalcorrelates that can work as !markers" for a /ivanmukta runs as follows:

1. # /ivanmukta is a $Knower of Brahman (1rah#avit )%. #1rah#avit is Brahman eali ation of &ruth by /ivanmukta.

G. &herefore, there is no extant empirical world for a /ivanmukta. *t is we only who are in the empirical worldthat see the body of a /ivanmuktaI but he is not aware of his own body.

3. &he human body including the neurons exists in the empirical (vyavahari a ) world.


7/106

waves of his dreaming brain (and dream world).

5. &herefore, the pratibhasi a truth (dream) of that man is recordable in our transactional (vyavahari a )world.

.


8/106

years of evolution are stored and transmitted to the offspring through !information replicators".

2enes are the replicators for an organism. #s each organism learns newer and newer survival tactics, the robustand sturdy tactics get passed on to the offspring through the genes. &hus the survival information (genes) isinhered from a succession of ancestral creatures which were born and later dead in the past. &hese perhaps

constitute what are called as vasana 's (impressions from past births). *f we consider the !birth and death" of eachof our ancestors (human and pre'human animal ancestors going right up to the beginnings of life (prokaryotes 'single living cells)) from whom the accumulated genetic information gets transmitted, we can think of all thosecreatures to be our !past lives"C

ne of the significant survival tools is the sense of !* am an individual", giving a distinct identity to each organism.&his sense of $an individual entity% separate from the rest is more developed in man compared to other animals.*t got solidly concreti ed as the concept of !self" in us. -ulture helped in reinforcing the concept of !self". &hereplicators for cultural information are !memes", a term coined by rof. >. =awkins in ANL . =r. Sue Blackmorerecently introduced the word !temes" to refer to a replicator of technological information. 4emes and temesfacilitated faster communication and spread of the ac1uired characteristics in self'protection and self'perpetuation.

*n other words, it is our sheer habit conditioned by survival information transmitted by genes, memes and temesthat makes us view the world in fragments, divide the world into parts that can be handled and then assigndistinct names and forms to the parts for identification and referral. &he fragmentation of one whole experiencethat truly *S into pieces and subse1uent identification of an individual through the claim $as mine% some of thosepieces engenders the sense of a separate individual organism. &his process of individuation results in !conflict of interest" and !competition for resources" ending up mostly in misery and sorrow.

*n order to redeem this sorrow, #dvaita points us back to the basic ! neness" of everything, the unfragmentedwholeness.

0ow that we understand the biological reason for our conditioned view of fragmentation, it is only a short step tosay that the distinction we make between the !permanent screen" over which a !movie" occurs and the moviecharacter is also artificial, non'existing. r taking the example of turbulence and the river, the turbulence andriver are not two separate things. &he distinction is artificial and non'existing. So turbulence is the river and theriver is the turbulence.

&he oft 1uoted metaphor in #dvaita is the non'difference between the ocean water, the wave, the foam, thespume and the water droplet. # boy at the beach sees them all to be distinct, each with its own name and form,but an adult looks at them all as water.


9/106

therefore be never observable, because by definition the sub ect will then become an ob ect. Brahman(-onsciousness) is ever the Sub ect. Brahman cannot be an ob ect.


10/106

iii) &he thought itself is cogni ed by us because we have Rconsciousness.R r as philosophers put it,consciousness illuminates (shows up) the thoughts.

iv) # !me"'thought acts as the !seer" of the map in our head. &his is the ego providing continuity in time,

coherence to experience and ownership to knowledge. *t gets generated based on memory'basedautobiographical information.

v) 0euroscience is as yet unable to understand how R-onsciousnessR is engendered in us.

vi) /ivanmuktas find a shift in their perception. *nstead of seeing the QmapQ of the world in their brain withthe ego at the center, they identify themselves with the illuminating -onsciousness. #nd this shifthappens within and to an individual.

vii) -an we evolve 0euronal -orrelates as $4arkers% to detect this shift?

8ni9ue characteristics of a Jivanmuktas mind)

e shall next list what could possibly be the uni1ue characteristics of a /ivanmukta"s mind which still retains its!5orm" in the brain of his physical body and each traitQs corresponding neuronal correlates which can beexpected in his brain in a 1ualitative way to begin with. 4uch research and data are needed before we can inchtowards the development of 1uantitative value ranges for each of these markers and set standards as it is donefor health parameters.

e should also note that some of the traits may arise in a /ivanmukta in the last stages only of the Seven StepKnowledge ath. &he Knowledge ath begins with the first step of an intense desire for liberation, study andanalysis of !self" and the world, arriving at an understanding that the $*% and the world are the same, internali ingthis understanding unbrokenly and unswervingly, then non'perception of a world and finally a reali ation that all isBrahman (See >ef: F). #s what we are discussing presently is a preliminary coarse level attempt, it may not bewise to try to demarcate the characteristic markers specifically identifiable at each stage of the Sevenfold ath.

&he neuronal correlates of some of the characteristics can be in the brain chemistry reflected through hormonalchanges detectable in blood. Some other traits can be seen only from the relative activity level of a specific lobeof the cortex (outer most layer) or a deeper part of the brain detectable through a suitable imaging technology.Eeaving out the details for the present, * shall tabulate below (&able A) the characteristics that can serve aspossible $4arkers% for a /ivanmukta"s mind. # few additional !markers" like the absence of a sense of!embodiment", an $active body'inactive mind% may also be identified later on.

* suggest the $ob ective% approach of $4arkers% proposed here is better than a standardi ed psychological1uestionnaire approach because any 1uestion framed automatically implies the existence of a $separate entity%on the part of the administrator of the 1uestions. *n fact eter = iuban pointed out this limitation in the study of/effery 4artin (See >ef. ). &he study done by Toran /osipovic on the neural networks appears not to be strictlyrelated to #dvaita because meditational practices do not involve permanent collapse of individuating !self" aswould happen in the case of a /ivanmukta (See -omments section in >ef: ).

,a(le ') 3ossi(le Markers of a Jivanmuktas Mind)

: ,rait Indicator Detecta(lein

A. 7niversal$Eove% (Maitri )


11/106

G. 1uipoise


12/106

*t may also be pointed out here that 0on'=ualism is inarguably a uni1ue achievement of our ancient seers andsages within the means of in1uiry and investigation available to them millennia of years ago. 0on'=ualism andits derivatives helped in the redemption of sorrow. But the important point is that #dvaita ends thesufferer andnot sufferin2 per se . xistence of !suffering", inviolability and inexorability of 0atural Eaws (Niyati ) are

accepted as +naadi (without a beginning) and hence taken as un1uestionable in 6edanta.Causal !elations)

# 1uestion may come up whether the $4arkers% would be mandatory or necessary conditions in a /ivanmuktaand whether externally inducing the electricalPchemicalPstructural changes will result in /ivanmukti (Eiberation).

3uestions like these can become relevant far into the future. >ight now, one has to establish first that certainindicators as !signatures" of the /ivanmukti can be detected in the brain. 5urther, even if we do find the $4arkers%,we should remember that one'to'one causal relationships cannot immediately be postulated in biological systemsunlike in deterministic physical systems. &hat is to say, if we find that 9#; indicates 9B;, we cannot say in naturalsystems that given 9B;, 9B; automatically implies 9#;. *n other words, correlation may not imply causation.

!e9uired ;uture 3lan of $ction)

&he suggested markers are indicative only. 3uantitative base level information for each of the markers has to beestablished for a normal person from a review of the available published research documents or actual studies.

hen once the bench mark levels are agreed to, we may measure the same parameters in any of thevolunteering individuals who are known to be those in whom the separate sense of !self" has already collapsed(i.e. /ivanmuktas). 9/effery 4artin claims to have a database of over JMM 0on'dual awakenings (See >ef. );.

# road map for a possible extension of the research can then be drawn if we are successful in une1uivocallyidentifying $4arkers% in a /ivanmukta.

Acknowledgements:

* am grateful to =r. &. S. >amakrishna, 5ounder resident of S #>#, at whose behest the preliminary thoughtson the topic were laid in early GMMN through an opportunity he provided for a talk at the 5orum S #>#. * amgreatly obliged to /ohn ( ditor, 0=4), aula (#uthor of $&he &eachers of ne%) for their encouraging commentson the draft version. -harles (#uthor of $-ircuits in the Brain$) was kind to suggest one correction. * am indebtedto >am (6ision >esearch *nstitute, #cton, 4#, 7S#) who suggested incorporation of explanatorynotesPamplifications in order to improve the understandability of the terminology of the paper for readersunfamiliar with the #dvaita argot.

0euroscientist Toran (#d unct rofessor, 0ew @ork 7niversity) says that the neural correlates of /ivanmukta ornonduality, is perhaps the most important topic but stresses the need for rigorous definitions of 6edantic termsand points to the difficulties because of the complexity and variability in neuronal phenomena.


13/106

!eferences)

A. @ogavaasishta, art *6, &he -alm =own, by K.6. Krishna 4urthy, ( nglish &ranslation by =r. 6emuri>amesam), #vadhoota =atta eetham, 4ysore, *ndia, pp: ANF, GMMU.

G. olitical rientations -orrelated with Brain Structure (>. Kanai et al, GMAA):

http:PPwww.sciencedirect.comPscience?WobO#rticle7>EVWudiOB 6>&' G/6Gesearch on 0on'=ualism: Blog ost at:

http:PPbeyond'advaita.blogspot.comPGMAMPMNPresearch'on'non'dualism'self'and.html

. #wareness of decision making: -hun Siong Soon et al., $7nconscious =eterminants of 5ree =ecisions in the


14/106

>#4 S#4 6 47>*Intervie ith non


15/106

or being bound by cause'effect and expectations.


16/106

>amesam 6emuri: 4ay * first make explicit the assumptions behind some of the terms in the 1uestion?

$#cting out%: @ou have put very aptly $acting out% in 1uotation marks. 5or a !me" ' positioning myself as an aloofobserver, a separate distinct individual ' a /ivanmukta may !appear" to act. But a /ivanmukta does not act. #ctions

ust happen by their own force. &here is no sense of doership, a motive for action or expectation of an outcome onhis part. &he supernova explodes, the sun shines, the earth rotates, the ocean waves. # /ivanmukta acts. &hings ust happen.

0egative: -lassification of positivePnegative or desirablePundesirable or sinPmerit and so on re1uires ana prioristandard in relation to which we can compare and udge the things. ho and what for does one set thesestandards? #re the standards not highly contextual, local, artificial and sub ective? =oes 1ualifying anything 'vasanas or actions + based on such purely udgmental aspects have any holiness? # society"s imposition of rulesand regulations, howsoever high may be the value and whatsoever may be the morality and nobility, does not have

#bsoluteness. &hey may have a societal sanction but lack intrinsic Sanctity. ho to say right or wrong or good orbad? &hings ust exist. 0othing is positive or negative until a !thought" interferes.

sama is as much a part of the world as bama isC erhaps * should even omit $a part of% because neness doesnot have parts in it. *t is simply indivisible. 0on'duality is not exclusive. *t does not sieve out, winnow or filter. *t isall inclusive.

* shall now try to answer the 1uestion in the light of the above disclaimers.

erchance * should answer at three levels: from that of a /ivanmuktaI from the position of his bodyI and from theviewpoint of the rest of the world.

5rom the position of /ivanmukta: /ivanmukta is Brahman.


17/106

drop down.

5rom the view of the rest of the world: &hough it is all ne world including me, you or any observer for the/ivanmukta, we do see him !acting." *t is so because we view the world with the filter of our mind. ur mind firstconceives us to be distinct entities separate from the body of /ivanmukta. 0ext it imagines motives for his actionsand udges the motives with reference to our anticipations. So it is we who see those actions on the part of/ivanmukta.

NDM: !hen you say: !ho and what $or does one set these standards# Are the standards not highlyconte"tual) local) arti$icial and sub(ective# Does ,uali$ying anything % vAsanA%s or actions - based onsuch purely (udgmental aspects have any holiness# A society&s imposition o$ rules and regulations)howsoever high may be the value and whatsoever may be the morality and nobility) does not have

Absoluteness. /hey may have a societal sanction but lack intrinsic Sanctity. !ho to say right or wrong orgood or bad# /hings (ust e"ist. Nothing is positive or negative until a 0thought& inter$eres.

1ut what about dharma# /he natural laws o$ the universe or 2od as some would call it. Some vAsanA%sviolate dharma) others do not. Such as a vAsanA $or smoking cigarettes like Nisargadatta had) is anunhealthy vAsanA but it&s only going to in(ure his lungs at most. Someone like the American guru Adi Dahad e"treme vAsanA%s such as having se"ual relationships with his students) physically and

psychologically e"ploiting and abusing them. 3ow does dharma play into this e,uation ?

>amesam 6emuri: !=harma" to me in the context of #dvaita is synonymous to Brahman, undefinable, ungraspable.&he Sanskrit word for the $0atural Eaws of the 7niverse or 2od% is !niyati ." &hus these two words are not the samefor me.

=harma being whatever $*s%, and there being no second, there is no 1uestion of some other !thing" violating *t. &henatural laws being inexorable and inviolable there is no 1uestion of violating them either. (&hese Eaws are said tobe embedded in the very first thought that kicks off (imagines) !creation" of an $*% and a visible world.)

&endency for addictions (smoking etc.) and promiscuity do appear to have some genetic basis as biology tells us.

&hese therefore may 1ualify to be termed as vasanas in the light of the analogy discussed earlier.0ow the 1uestion is what relation does =harma have with the vasanas?

2enes, world and all ob ects (perceivables) are a creation of *'consciousness. *'consciousness originates whenBrahman (abidance in or being Brahman) is ignored. *n other words !ignore'ance", as eter puts it so beautifully,engenders $*%. Subse1uent thoughts of claiming some perceivables as $me or mine% and some others as not $me or mine% consolidates the entity $*% and cocreates an $other% which is the world. So the relation of =harma andvasanas is that of Brahman and the world.

NDM: 3ow does one measure these vAsanA%s or draw the line#

>amesam 6emuri: #ny $measure% whether of vasanas or any other thing has only a relative value. ne can sitdown and evolve measures like we have traffic rules to move about on roads. * do not need them in my house,however.

NDM: !ould they all not get burned out# !hy would some remain over others#

>amesam 6emuri: &his is a very interesting 1uestion. * would like to cite the famous illustration from 6edanta. &herope seemingly appears to be a snake because we forgot that it was a rope. &he reali ation that !it is actually a ropeand not a snake" does not happen in steps + first the tail, then the wiggly body and finally the hood. &he whole


18/106

snake disappears at one go.

So also on the reali ation of Brahman, the 0on'dual neness dawns at one go. But scriptural evidence andexperience of many individuals suggest that firm unwavering abidance in Brahman is obtained only after some backand forth swings. *f one falters here, he may continue to retain a $memory% of seeing the rope at one time (i.e.reali ation) and exhibit an intellectual understanding of it. But he may have practically slipped back again into thephantasm of the mind"s creation (world) and indulge himself in the worldly temptations. Scriptures warn a seeker toobserve utmost care and vigilance to avoid such a fall when once reali ation dawns.

hy should such a time gap be there between the first reali ation and complete abidance in Brahman? atch herethe tricky mind playing once again its cunning roleC *t is looking for a cause outside itself. So in order to provide anexplanation to the mind, a reason is invented using the artifacts of vasanas. e say some vasanas are hard toburn, they take time, long habits die hard and so on. /ust a bunch of explanations. #ctually what is happening is,the mind keeps popping back even after the first reali ation.

&he Sevenfold ath to >eali ation described by some Sages says that the first reali ation happens at the fourthstep. (&he first step is *ntense yearning for nlightenment). &hey spell out the characteristics and tendencies of aseeker at each stage. &he seekers at different stages are even christened as $Knower of BrahmanI Better knowerof BrahmanI 4aster Knower of BrahmanI and xcellent Knower of Brahman.%

#n important caveat, though. &hese gradations and stages are not for ornamentation as titles. &hey are purelymeant to help the seeker in one"s own self'assessment and self'guidance and not for udgment. &he Sevenfold

ath too thus indicates the existence of time delay between the first reali ation and the final stage.

hen we discuss a /ivanmukta, we usually talk with reference to the one at the Sixth or Seventh stage.

Some of the /ivanmutas may sometimes let a few habits of their body to linger. &hey ignore those habits totallyunable to draw themselves from $being Brahman% towards their body to rid it of its residual habit. 4ahara "s smokingcould be of this type.

NDM: !hen you say: /he most basic point to remember is that in order to talk in terms o$ vAsanA%s andso on) one has to $irst believe in the 0reality& o$ the e"istence o$ a cause) an e$$ect and a relationshipbetween them. 4ooked at $rom the position o$ a ivanmukta) there are no di$$erent entities) one as a causeand another as an e$$ect and a $ormula e"pressing a relationship between them. /he entire thing is *ne.

And that is the only /ruth. Not so many di$$erent things and their inter%relationships which are allimaginary.

So are you saying that the ivanmutkta no longer acknowledges that there is an empirical relationship o$cause and e$$ect on this relative level. 5samvriti%satya or vy6vah6rika%satya7

/hat they only recogni8e or acknowledge the absolute perspective# 5p6ram6rthika%satya7. /hat they in $actdeny that a relative level even e"ists like some o$ the neo advaitins do.

>amesam 6emuri: &he terminology of #bsolute &ruth, transactional reality and dream'like reality and storiesaround them are inventions for appeasing a seeking mind. &hey have as much value, meaning and significance asthe conversations and technologies of a dream experience have in the wakeful world. @ou may dip into a river andnext thing suddenly be flying over a mountain peak in a dream. @ou could do so in the dream because youpossessed that technology in your dream. But what relevance has it in the wakeful world? Similalry, theterminologies and classifications and theories used in the wakeful world carry no meaning or relevance to a/ivanmukta.

# /ivanmukta does not have to even acknowledge the absolute perspective or deny relative levels.


19/106

#ll Y ne. hat and whom does he have to perceive when there is no other?

0evertheless, we should also be aware of another important aspect. #s >upert would put it, it is disingenuous toclaim that there is no one to seek or search as long as there is a sense of lack, a feel of void. &hat lack itself is theseeker.

NDM. As $ar as the brain changes a$ter enlightenment) are you $amiliar with the work o$ /odd Murphy. 3esays that there are changes in the amygdala) also the anterior commisure) the two%way communicationbetween the two amygdala5s7. As well as changes in the hippocampus and so on.

.shaktitechnolo2y.com>enli2htenment.htm

>amesam 6emuri: &hanks, /ohn for the link. * am aware of the studies by =r. ersinger whose work &odd heavilydraws upon. #s you know =r. ersinger" s research was a bit controversial (Swedish scientists could not replicatehis resultsI also /ohn amesam 6emuri: 7nfortunately, we do not have any clear cut indicators for identifying a /ivanmukta by anexternal agent. Several scriptures do however leave large hints for self'assessment and self'improvement. #tabular statement comparing the traits of a /ivanmukta and an ordinary individual is available at

.advaita.or2.uk>discourses>teachers>advaita?ramesam.htm at the very end of the article.

* hope modern scientific technology can help us in identifying a few parameters as $markers% for a /ivanmukta. ehave to establish the validity and range of such parameters and build a database. #s you pointed out already,ma[tri, absence of !doership" etc. could be such markers. (also vide:

htt%)>>(eyond"&&@?&A?&'?archive.html

&he possibility of detecting a fake /ivanmukta was discussed in @ogavaasishta. Sage 6asishta declares, not inexasperation but in encouragement, that it is good even if somebody pretends and playacts as a /ivanmukta.


20/106

enlightenment.

Do you think it&s even possible to be enlightened and be a 'schmuck'. 5A Schmuck is most o$ten used in American ;nglish as a pe(orative or insult) meaning an obno"ious) contemptible person> one who is stupid)$oolish) or detestable7

>amesam 6emuri: &his can be true in view of the wide range of people and personalities and the stage they arein. e have in a way discussed such a possibility under 3 .

NDM: !hat is the di$$erence with simply being enlightenment in the advatin sense) knowing one is1rahman) in$inite) eternal non%dual awareness and so on and being a ivanmukta#

>amesam 6emuri: &he first and foremost thing is the knowing of information $* am Brahman.% &his has to beunderstood by the mind intellectually. *t is the Shravana (Eistening) phase. 0ext is to assimilate it and internali e itto the extent that no doubt remains in one"s mind about the &ruth of that statement. &his is the 4anana (>eflection)phase. #fter being firmly convinced and free of doubts, one needs to continuously stay with it as Brahman (notbecome Brahman but be Brahman). &his is the 0idhidhyasa (-ontemplation and 4editation) phase. /ivanmukta isone who unwaveringly and unbrokenly abides as Brahman.

NDM: !hy would one person become enlightened and get the added bene$its o$ bliss) no aversions) $ears)desires and being a ivanmukta) while another may not# 9s this grace) karma) or because o$ one&s practiceor some other $actors involved#

>amesam 6emuri: *f one continues to mistake the rope as snake or understands only superficially, theunderstanding is obviously incomplete.

erfect understanding is not a !phala" (fruit or result) of an action. So looking for reasons of one obtaining it andanother failing to do so is of no help. e may supply some theories and lame explanations using the words karma,lack of grace etc. but they are all ust that + unfalsifiable fiction. So what has one to do? Scriptures advise to goback, start with shravana, manana and nidhidhyasa.

NDM: Do all ivanmuktas e"ist in a $ourth state o$ turiya or the $i$th state) turiyatita#

>amesam 6emuri: *f * may point out, * am sure you are already aware, &uriya is not a state. *t does not come andgo as the word state would imply. &he other three + awake, dream and deep sleep states + may come and go.&uriya is ever there. &he other three states exist in &uriya. &uriya is Brahman.

*f &uriya is Brahman, what can be there as the fifth state or turiyatita? Strictly 6edanta does not admit the wordturiyatita. &uriyatita ac1uired common parlance even in some important ancient texts for the purpose of emphasisonly to prime the seeker to look beyond the three states and be ever established in &uriya.

Some people e1uate &uriya to Brahman and turiyatita to arabrahman (Supreme Brahman). But Brahman isarabrahman. *t is ust a poetic expression.

&uriya is /ivanmukta.

NDM: Can you please take a look at the $irst ? minutes o$ this video on !ayne 4i,uorman talking about thedi$$erence between a sage and a saint#

www.youtube.com@watch#v dmBpN+w 9oE$eature channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmYpNFw_QIo&feature=channelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmYpNFw_QIo&feature=channel


21/106

!hat do you see is the di$$erence with a sage and a saint#

>amesam 6emuri: ayne defines a Saint as the embodied person of a set of high values believed in by a group.&he Saint becomes the role model for virtuous behavior for that group and may not gel with another group. # Sageis defined by him as one in whom the individuating $*% has collapsed.

4aybe my knowledge is limited. * am familiar that the Sanskrit word Sanyasi (an absolute renunciate whorenounced even thoughts and counter thoughts) is usually translated as Saint. &he word >ishi (a reali ed man) istranslated as Sage. 4aharishi is now accepted into nglish ( xford =ictionary). Sanskrit scriptures use >sihi,4aharishi, /nani, /ivanmukta, Sthitapra na, =rik, 4uni etc., a whole variety of such names interchangeably.

But one thing is clear. hen one is a /ivanmukta, he is already a complete renunciate + has no desires,preferences, likes and dislikes, wants and fears. &here is a natural nobility and a spontaneous morality in a/ivanmukta + not any showy or artificial morality sanctioned by an authority. #c1uiring many embellishing 1ualitiesbut retaining a


22/106

processes keep running parallel, not strictly one after other. !0on'perception of ob ects" is the sixth stage in theSevenfold Knowledge ath to Self'reali ation. &he seeker has hardly to do anything from this stage as this stage,by itself, will lead him to the final &uriya.

&he above is a very 1uick run of the things. 2raphic descriptions of individual experiencesPstruggles in 0idhidhyasaphase are available in literature. &hey vary considerably and we need not be concerned with the details.

NDM: !hat about an energetic shi$t# Does this also take place#

>amesam 6emuri: # particular individual may call his experience as !energetic shift" and only he can tell what thoseterms signify. 4ost people may figuratively express $reali ation% as a change in perspective, a sort of re'orientating,rather than anything extra'ordinary or dramatic.

NDM: So i$ the understanding isnFt crystal clear) are you saying this is the reason why one may not becomea ivanmukta#

>amesam 6emuri: &hat is true. #bsolute clarity without even a speck of confusion or doubt on the teaching (shall

we call the $theory%?) of advaita is a must and is the primary step. Eack of clarity or misunderstanding can lead oneastray into pursuit of false mental states, fancy expectations and may even result in unhealthy minds or dead ends.

NDM: !ill crystal clear knowledge wipe out all vAsanA%s#

>amesam 6emuri: -rystal clear Knowledge will once for all establish without any scope for a doubt that !vasanas"is ust a conceptual term and like all concepts, it is purely imaginary, fallacious and unreal.

lease notice that * capitali ed Knowledge. &his is to show a distinction from the type of knowledge we ac1uire andaccumulate in brain like hysics or carpentry. Knowledge with capital K is Self'Knowledge, not accumulative. *t isnot something hoarded. *t is never of the past. *t is always in the present, alive and afresh. *t is prior to theconcepts of space and time. *t is the experiential Knowledge that what all exists (including the seeker) is newhole undivided -onsciousness or Brahman.

=escription of 0irvana as e1uivalent to total annihilation of vasanas appears to be a model more popular in post'7panishad period. 6asanas is a concept developed to explain the accumulated and stored knowledge, thebehavioral pattern of responses based on habituation. &he stored knowledge with lower case k is a function of timeand training.

Knowledge of Self gets inputted, undoubtedly, through knowledge (using language, words, symbols). henKnowledge takes root, *t does not go piling up like worldly knowledge or expertise. *t destroys knowledge anddestroys itself too in the end. hat then remains as residual is Brahman. 6edanta gives several metaphors toexplain the process.

&he paste of ground ater'purifying 5ruit (Knowledge) added to turbid water, precipitates the turbidity (knowledge). #long with turbidity, the added paste too is sedimented. *t does not remain and add on to the turbidity. &he secondexample is fire (Knowledge) and firewood (knowledge). 5ire initially burns the logs. hen the logs are fully burnt,fire also gets extinguished. *t does not remain and continue as !fire." # third is the washing dirt off a cloth. #detergent is added to the dirt. But the detergent too is washed away along with the dirt.

NDM: !hat e"ercises can one do to wipe out their vAsanA%s# Do mantras) (apa) meditation help at all#!hat would you suggest#

>amesam 6emuri: 4antras, apa, meditation, etc. are all actions that help in the reduction of vacillations in a mindand are conducive towards the development of a focused mind. ilgrimages, holy dips, rituals, donations, service


23/106

etc. may help in the development of detachment and also free one from too narrow an outlook and loosen the vicegrip of a belief system.

5or a reasonably analytical, intelligent and disciplined mind with an above average *.3., cultivation of any of suchexercises is superficial, irrelevant and of no concern for attainment of 0irvana, *4< . # balanced diet and limitedexercise that can contribute to a healthy body'mind are more necessary so that Self'in1uiry may proceedunimpeded by health problems

-oming to the 1uestion of 6asanas: hat * am presently !conscious" in the now is an undesirable trait. (Eet us notfor the present 1uestion the legitimacy in branding the observed trait as !undesirable." e discussed this aspectunder 3uestion F). * am not !conscious" of the vasana which is an imagined cause for the undesirable observedtrait.

6asanas are ust fictitious !culprits." 5urther, we place them not only outside us but also so far away from us in time(in an unknown past). hy is it so?

*f something (a good or bad trait) arises in my -onsciousness in the !now", it is -onsciousness which has taken theshape of that trait !now." *s it then correct to link it to a past? =oes this not imply that -onsciousness has a pastand a history?

Eet us take a detector of temperature. e call it thermometer. -an a thermometer ever detect a temperature ofyesterday or even the temperature a minute ago? *t can only and always function in the !now."

So also -onsciousness (which for the present analysis may be viewed as a multi'sense, multi'parameter detector)can function always and only in the !now." hat it detects is always new, fresh, alive, never dead or in the past.-onsciousness has no memory, no history. ven if a thought or image about a past event occurs, that thought itself is detected (i.e. we are aware) in the !now." &hat thought is a new, live arising.

So the trait, desirable or undesirable, appearing !now" has no past history. &he imagined causal vasana is a conceptthat has arisen !now." # concept is ust another thought. ach thought is highly ephemeral, has no true existence. #

thought comes and as easily disappears in a flash. hy should we make any effort to wipe it?*n fact any effort to cleanse a thought, or offer resistance to it, is surprisingly counterproductiveC ur resistancegives strength to it. So best thing is ust to observe the trait arise and let it go ust by ignoring it.

Eooked at from another way, my search for a culprit and effort to kill it is avoidance of taking responsibility. #t themoment the trait arises, it is !me" who is conscious of it. !4e" is my -onsciousness. &he observed trait is the shape-onsciousness has taken as an arising. So !me" is the trait at that moment. &here is no separate !me" herepossessing an unwanted !trait." 4e is the trait and the trait is me. *s it at all possible for me to wipe out myselfnaming !me" as an undesirable trait?

(* hope the logic is not too confusing. *f * need to elaborate, * shall do so).

NDM: !hat would you say are the odds o$ someone being 'enlightened' also becoming a ivanmukta#

>amesam 6emuri: #dvaita holds that everyone is already a /ivanmukta. Some scriptures une1uivocally declarethat the mind is most important. *f it knows clearly that it is unbound, it is free. *f it thinks it is bound, it is inbondageC

#nd incidentally, the #dvaita teaching does not say one $becomes% a /ivanmukta. &he teaching is that $@ou are


24/106


25/106

# situation or problem may appear to present itself, maybe it even seems to be recurring.

&he only ne who is conscious is Self *tself, 0 *tself. &he RapparentR situation really has no prior status, nofoothold of existing whatsoever, no 1ualities of being lingering or tenacious, 0 4#&& > < *& 4#@ S 4. &othis 0 '#wareness, there having been nothing besides *tself, there can be nothing besides *tself that 0 isinterested in, or that Rgets *ts attention.R

Bodies are left entirely out of consideration. *t is #EE about 0 only, for *& is the only ne being conscious''notRus.R &here are no situations that 0 has to Rwork overR or Rbe worried aboutR because there have been no priorsituations. 0 has to be, in fact *S, Rsolely interestedR in *ts Rnever'before'#live resenceR because there simplyis nothing else present.

&hen the thought may come, R@es, but the problem still appears to linger.R &his is where one must Rput oneQsspiritual foot downR and Rstand oneQs groundR as 0ever'before'ness, because only this is RhonestR and consistentwith the way6ife actually N,/ is present . &he claim of lingering'ness or tenacity isnQt true''for that, too, only wouldbe a current thought trying to arise. &here has been no long past in which something could have lingered. herewe get unclear is in accepting the seeming (and sometimes see#ingly very persistentC) suggestion that there hasbeen a prior time in which all this began. #nd then, if accepted, this notion will add feelings of guilt, inade1uacy,etc. etc. because thereQs a feeling that R*R havenQt been spiritually clear enough to have thisapparent situationdissolve. &hatQs why R eterR is left entirely out of consideration. &he responsibility of being 0 is entirely up to0 ''there is no middleman called a eter'awareness that has to be as good at being 0 as 0 *tself is.

(*talics were by him only).

>#4 S#4 6 47>*Intervie ith non


26/106

NDM: !hy e"actly do you $eel hesitant to $ollow any organi8ed system that demands obse,uiousobeisance e"actly#

>amesam 6emuri:: # hilippine friend of mine used to 1uote a proverb. *f you want the bird in your hand to flyhigh, you have to loosen the grip of your fist. &here cannot be free in1uiry when you are already told to fall in linewith a system P a method. #n open wondering mind is a pre're1uisite for any new discovery, particularly so in thecase of the unknown.

Eet me 1uote from Scientific #merican, /uly GMAM, about a research paper regarding a 1uestioning mind:( .scientificamerican.com>article.cfm+id the< ill%o er


27/106

>amesam 6emuri:: 0on'duality is not the ungle. 0on'duality is clarity. *nformation on it, about it and around it isthe ungleC

ne of the derivative meanings for the Sanskrit word 2uru is, as you know: the dispeller of darkness. *n the ancienttimes when knowledge is transmitted through oral tradition, a human 2uru (dispeller of darkness or ignorance) wasnecessarily re1uired because the 2uru was the only information source. ach 2uru developed, used and expandedcertain terminology to explain the &ruth as reali ed by that 4aster to a lineage of his disciples.

5ast forward to the present day. e have now multimedia storage devices as information resources and satellitecommunication technologies for its dissemination. &hese do dilute the mandatory re1uirement of a human 2uru(dispeller of ignorance).

&he more important 1uestion is how do we manage with the information !overload" and distinguish the grain fromthe chaff.

0o acid tests are available. 0o guarantees provided. 0o Bureau of Standards certifications.

* do not know how it happens, but normally some or the other appropriate information source becomes accessiblewhen a seeker is sei ed with an intense yearning. (4aybe because information is existent everywhere or whateverthe reason). @ou resonate with the information that opens up before you and keep moving with your in1uiry withoutgiving up 1uestioning as we discussed (in the beginning of art ' **).

NDM. 3ow does one know i$ one is deluding onesel$ without some outside source) authority) validating the persons understanding and knowledge and e"periences#

>amesam 6emuri: &ests, validations and approvals by an external agency can certify an ac1uired andaccumulated knowledge and expertise.

&rue Knowledge is not accumulative nor does it get stored. *t"s ever fresh, always in the $0ow.%

@es, it is 1uite possible a person may be wallowing in hisPher deluded understanding. #dvaita does not have aBritish harmacopeia or an #merican =S4 to prescribe a standard line of therapy for such situations. (*n thestrictest sense of #dvaita, ultimately everything is okay !as *s"I nothing needs to be changedC So no need for anyprior manuals of remedies). # thumb rule is: Keep on 1uestioning (as we already discussed). hen the 1uestionsget exhausted, 1uestion whoPwhere is the 1uestioner.

*f a particular individual is unclear, gets a doubt at one time or other, it is (s)he who has to define his problem andprobe deeper into it. 0o one else can hold a brief on his behalf or pose the 1uestion and look for an answer. 0oproxy will work to ask and seek solution. ach individual seeker has to himself pose his 1uestion as it arises to (in)him and find the solution. (&he surprise is that the $1uestioner% isthe %ro(lem I not the form or content of the1uestionC &he answer does not lie in a solution but in the dissolution (of the $1uestioner%)).

NDM : Do you see we are living at a time o$ the end o$ the traditional guru# *r the days o$ the cyber guru)giving email satsangs) or the universal guru that speaks one language only. ;nglish.

2reg 2oode says: No longer can people believe that liberation speaks only /ibetan) or that the world wascreated $rom holy Sanskrit syllables.


28/106

.heartofno .com>files>other. ritin2s.html

>amesam 6emuri: #ny stored information will always be something of the $past.% *t can never be in the present likea live teacher is. 5urther, human communication is predominantly non'verbal. *n contrast a storage deviceconveys what is merely stored. # live teacher may be able to convey more than that in an interactive mode andalso through an appropriate interpretation of the info in a more contemporary manner.

5or example, ocean and waves were an ancient metaphor for Brahman and the world. *n the mid GMth centurycinema and film pro ection was the oft'cited example. resent day teachers talk about computer screen and themultiple documents on itC

#t any given point of time, the #dvaitic search is for the $7nknown% and not for what is known. very newgeneration may come with new 1uestions in the light of their own backgrounds and experiences. # static deadinformation device cannot meet such growing demands.

&hus a live teacher may not get totally replaced. # seeker in the cyber age may be able to pursue his in1uiry ingreater physical comfort under a distant human 2uru providing an occasional interface.

NDM: Also what about this sensitive money issue that seems to hit a raw nerve whenever it&s raised.

9s there anything right or wrong with doing this# 9s there any thing right or wrong with making a $ew )rupeeFs on this ancient non dual teaching# !hat is your take on this controversial and almost taboo,uestion#

>amesam 6emuri: 5irst of all no 1uestion need be a taboo. *f a particular doubt posits itself as a stumbling block,well, it should be attended to.

&he ancient *ndian system advises a student to redeem his indebtedness to the teacher by rendering service, bypayment in kind or cash or in the absence of any other means of repayment, by passing on the wisdom obtained byhim to others after obtaining 2uru"s permission. &his obviously shows the necessity of some accepted socialstructural norm to preserve and propagate the knowledge to others. *t is also important that a seeker had to beeligible (ready) to receive the wisdom, the most important criterion being his single minded unswerving devotion forliberation in exclusion of any other desire (including food, clothing, wealth, status etc. beyond the barest minimumre1uired for sustenance).

#nother point * may mention is that the ancient sages foresaw a danger in throwing open the knowledge for oneand all because it can be detrimental to the very health of the individual and the society, if it is misunderstoodandPor incompletely understood or perverted in interpretation.

5or example, if everything is Brahman, is it okay to feed dog shit to a hungry beggar? r because all is ne andthere is nothing like right or wrong, is it okay to go on chopping off the heads like the 3ueen in #lice"s wonderland?*s not one accountable for a crime as per #dvaita?

&he point is one has to stick to the full course of Self'in1uiry, right up to the very end + the end being he, hisseparate individuating ego with all its desires, plans, wishes, needs etc. etc. is completely dissolved. hen thathappens a spontaneous morality will shine in him, not the ac1uired or assumed or imposed type of social orderPrules and regulations.

#s declared in the 7panishads and repeated in Bhagavad'2ita, a Self'reali ed man is feared by none nor is heafraid of anyone.


29/106

their guidance and advice (by visiting their forest dwellings if necessary) in the governance of the country.

&he social fabric too was designed in the ancient times to facilitate the development of the individual through fourstages of life + learner, householder, forest dweller and renunciate. # supportive economic rubric was built aroundthis structure as if the entire nation state is one smoothly functioning organism, not composed of disparateindividuals.

7nder such circumstances, what for are the green backs or red francs re1uired by a /ivanmukta?

0ow the cyber'guru has thrown open free access to the knowledge without the necessary social support structurefor his own maintenance. n the top of it, promises (misleadingly in some cases at least) of permanent happinessare made by some teachers even in the absence of some ground preparation by the seeker.


30/106

animism) or guide.

*thers like ames 3illman call this psyche. /hese are the various ethereal bodies that some believecontain samskaras) or sin and so on# Do you believe that such an ethereal essence or a thing e"ists#

!hat are all these various traditions talking about or pointing to e"actly#

>amesam 6emuri: hen we discussed !samskaras and vasanas" in art + *, we have seen how we invented thoseexplanatory fictions. Karma is no different. &ransmigration and re'birth are further stories to back up the fiction ofkarma. (please see: .advaita.or2.uk>discourses>teachers>karma?ramesam.htm )

&he three bodies you are referring to + gross, subtle and causal + correspond to the three states of awake, dreamand deep sleep. &hey are said to be made up of finer and finer substances. *t is said that the grossest part of thefood you eat is excreted. &he grosser part goes to make the physical body. 5iner material goes to make the subtlebody and the finest the causal body. @ou can draw your own conclusion on what all this would mean.

*n the olden days dreams were a complete mystery. &hey believed that dreams belonged to the mental body

(subtle or #ano#aya osa ) made up of mind'stuff of the mental world. &he mental world was said to be accessibleto yogis and gods. *t was believed to have its own life even after the death of the physical body. &hanks to themodern research, we have much better picture now about dreams. f course, the last word is not yet said inscience. But we are able to pierce through some of the mystery. e may even get a handle in future to control ourdreams (see: .scientificamerican.com>article.cfm+id ho


31/106

that he is dead because he feels that he does not possess a bodyC Such people even take up some actions thatcould endanger their body or prove fatal under the false impression of having no body. bviously it is apathological case.

#t the same time, it is true that our ancient scriptures also say that sometimes it is hard to distinguish a mad capfrom a highly reali ed individual. &hat is why any assessment by an external onlooker is said to be impossibleabout the reali ation status of an individual.

hile neuroscientists do have some knowledge of the pathological state of the brain of sick individuals having avariety of symptoms as listed by you, we have absolutely no known record of the brain scans of a reali ed man. *tis high time we should build up this information base and examine what sort of signature Self'reali ation leaves inthe brain, if *t does so at all.

NDM: H.D. 4aing said '/rue sanity entails in one way or another the dissolution o$ the normal ego) that$alse sel$ competently ad(usted to our alienated social reality... and through this death a rebirth and theeventual re%establishment o$ a new kind o$ ego%$unctioning) the ego now being the servant o$ the divine) nolonger its betrayer.' 9n the west) when this happens it is re$erred to as when an ego collapses) $ragments) or disintegrates andwhen the shadow and archetypal contents $lood in $rom the personal and collective unconscious causing

psychosis) or a psychotic break $rom reality.

9n the east) its considered Sel$%reali8ation or 2od%reali8ation) seeing the $ace o$ 2od) Shiva and so on#

3ow do you make the distinction between a psychotic break like this here and a satori or awakeninge"perience#

>amesam 6emuri: #ny of the psychological phenomena, hallucinations, lack of control, inability to filter diverse anddissonant signals coming to the brain (e.g. schi ophrenia) are all related to the activity of the mind. So also thevisions etc. &hese leave a clear foot'print in the brain. rgasmic or epiphany states are

also clearly seen in the activity of different cortical regions (see: leasure of Sex vs. Bliss of Self in Brain Scans,>amesam, 6. in >eligion =emystified , GMMU, p: U 'UU.( .=en%u(lications.com>forms>frm?2?(ook?catlo2ue.as% +ltr ).

*n contrast, #dvaita is about when the activity of the mind is nulled. #s per the metaphor provided by the sages, stillwind is Brahman. 4oving wind is the world. 4ovement implies that work is done. *t is energy expensive. *n otherwords, Stillness is -onsciousness, movement is mind. But again, Still mind is -onsciousness. hen mindbecomes still, the cogni er, what is cogni ed and the process of cognition become one. &here is no sub ect, aseparate distant ob ect and the process of acting. *t will be 1uite interesting to see the scan of such a brain. &hishas got to be different from epiphany.

NDM. Do you think it is wise $or someone to make sel$ evaluations) sel$ assessments) sel$ enlightenmentclaims and assertions) with it being thoroughly ,uestioned) tested) investigated by someone who knows

the ropes) has been there and done that so to speak#

>amesam 6emuri: self'evaluation and self'assessment is advised in #dvaita. &he very fact that he is conscious of a !self" within him to do an evaluation barely conceals the final answer to be expected.

But #dvaita does not and cannot support declartions and assertions of self'enlightenmentC # claim to do so is anoxymoron. &he very loss of !self" is enlightenment. ho or what is there to make a claim then and addressed towhom?
http://www.zenpublications.com/forms/frm_g_book_catlogue.aspx?ltrhttp://www.zenpublications.com/forms/frm_g_book_catlogue.aspx?ltr


32/106

#n external agent, as we have already discussed, can at the best provide some pointers as and when a 1uestion israised by a specific individual. *t is up to the individual tosee the $moon% in the direction of the finger. #notherperson cannot see it for himC

NDM> 9s entrusting someoneFs eternal soul (ust as important as entrusting someoneFs mind or physical

body to a doctor $or an operation# 9 ask this since there are many snake oil salesman out there)mas,uerading as gurus#

>amesam 6emuri: *s there an $eternal soul% thatyou really are in %ossession of ? #nd does that $eternal soul%, ifany, need a fixing?

r are all such beliefs the marketing tricks of the snake oil salesmen?

NDM 3ow should someone make a decision like this#

>amesam 6emuri: *f you are going by the metaphor of handing over your body'mind to some doctor: # $@ou% sittinghere do not surrender to other $some one or something% there in 0on'dualism. *f you and the other are two distinct

entities to be related by !surrendering", it is dualism. /ivanmukti does not exist in dualistic philosophies.NDM: 3ow do you know i$ a guru is legitimate or not i$ they do not belong to some kind o$ tradition andhave been thoroughly tested by their own teacher# +or e"ample) 9 could even say 9 was a guru) anyonecan make this claim#

>amesam 6emuri: &his is an age'old 1uestion, discussed even in the *ndian scriptures too. &here are innumerableschools of thoughts and e1ually highly competent individuals in all lines of teachings. &he advice we find in thescriptures is that a seeker should explore what appeals best for him, find a knowledgeable man in that school ofthought and discuss with him all the issues in detail. &he seeker then may adopt an approach that resonates bestto his heart. *f, by chance, he finds later on that that particular teacher was a fake, he should leave that teacher andfind another. &here need not be any feelings of regret or guilt, for what he needed at that time perhaps was ustthat + whatever he gotC

Some sages suggest that the 2uru need not be a fully reali ed person to communicate the teaching. *n factSankara says that some of the /ivanmuktas may not even teach because they do not find an !other" to impartknowledge to.

NDM: Do you think some sort o$ guru test could be devised) to measure the gurus knowledge aboutenlightenment) as well as teaching it#

>amesam 6emuri: &he sort of industrial mass scale manufacturing model of assembly line production, 1ualitytests, setting standards with tolerance ranges, franchising the technology for replication may be inapplicable to

#dvaita, its core message being there is only ne, no other.


33/106


34/106

the people in the 5ar ast are trained to be more aware of the totality of the scene and the inter'relationships of theelements within. &he #merican culture believed in creating an opportunity for the growth of the $*ndividual% whereasthe social and family structure was more hierarchical in *ndia (at least from what * have seen). kay, we are awareof these differences. But why should they come in my way of true understanding of the basic message of #dviata?

#s we have already discussed earlier, the moral values ( la shana ) will automatically come with the $7nderstanding%

(la shya ). =Intervie ith non duality ma2a=ine

-hris


35/106

*n fact, * would have placed non'duality in thetrash bin along with many other seeminglynew age hi' inx like power crystals, petpsychics and 75 s.

But, as >obert #dams once said, R#ll is well and unfolding exactly as it should.R &he -hris story is a brilliant example of ignorance in itQs glory: one attempt after another to complete myself throughob ects of all sorts: career, politics, philosophy, beliefs, drugs, alcohol, woman, family, travel, luxury....the classicsymptoms of greed, lust and vanity, the bell weather of lack.*n a word, my prescription was simply, R4oreCR.

nce thing was certain, this profound and deep sense of lack could be satisfied through obtaining some ob ect thatwas always ust out of reach.

xtroverted, entrepreneurial, even slightly sociopathic, this certainty began a slow motion train wreck, culminating inGMM . * was experiencing a crisis in all areas of my life. * was in litigation with everyone from ex'business associates to the7.S. government. * lost a very successful business that * had run for over AM years. * lived in economic fear as one

problem seemed to build on top of another. 4y entire economic estate was ruined by costly litigation and unfruitfulbusiness plans.

4y wife had divorced me, leaving with our one year old child. 4y mother, father, 7ncle and 2randmother had alldied''all within one year. &wo of my pets died unexpectedly.

# routine surgery for an impacted wisdom tooth went badly resulting in my aw being broken, being wired shut for months, re1uiring surgeries and causing the permanent loss of feeling in part of my face.

* was facing a huge tax liability and was in danger of losing my home.

* could not sleep. * had been taking sleeping medications for many years and they no longer seemed to work. *would take the medication and it would force me to sleep for a short period of time'' only to wake up a few hourslater, full of dread, fear and anger. * was at war with the world, which * felt was treating me unfairly.

ne sleepless night, * experienced what * can only call a complete breakdown.

=uring an extreme Rdark night of the soulR experience, * had a massive, catastrophic collapse which left me spentand speechless, praying fervently to a 2od * did not believe in, the only honest prayer there is: R lease help meCR

&his collapse was sudden, left me completely empty, with not even one ounce of resistance left in me, with no moreanswers of any sort, in a sort of cathartic and limp state.

ulling myself up from the floor, where * had been curled in fetal position, still sobbing, * poured what was left of meinto a wing back chair,

hile * sat in this darkened, private library in the middle of the night, mentally and spiritually exhausted, in finaldespair, with absolutely no clue on what to do with my next breath, much less the rest of my life, a most peculiarphenomena occurred: sitting in absolute silence, * noticed my thoughts arising to me.

4ind you: these were no longer Rmy thoughtsR.

5or some peculiar reason, in this stillness, it was spectacularly clear to me, that these thoughts, which were arisingin the stillness of QmeQ, were not me at all, or, more specifically, that what * was had to be something 1uite separate


36/106

from these thoughts. 5or, it was clear that, if * observed these thoughts arising, then, who was observing them, ifnot me? #nd, if it was what * call QmeQ that was observing these thoughts, then, what exactly was this QmeQ which sclearly did not include these thoughts?

&his was a profoundly unsettling awarenessI in fact, it completely shattered my world. verything that * had takenfor granted up to this point, came roaring back into 1uestion: my career, my marriage, every decision supporting theentire direction of QmyQ life. &he only thing * was certain about was that * was uncertain about everything.

*n this space of not knowing, of complete uncertainty about everything, * began to reach out for help. =esperately, *searched for any clue as to what * was experiencing. 5or better than a year, * locked myself in an apartment,meditating, ournaling reading everything * could locate, leaving my residence only when * uncovered authenticteachers who might offer me direction.

&his initial experience, completed shattered and redirected my life. * can not imagine how * could ever reconstruct it.

5rom there, * have merely followed the perfume. *t has been a spectacular ourney that has honored me withmeeting many gifted teachers who patiently and gently tolerated my fumbling , feeding my deep curiosity withinsights and gem like experiments designed to challenge deeply held beliefs that colored what remained of myconfusion.

&his sadhana left nothing but scorched earth as lightning struck many more times.* suspect revelation never ends. So, this is how my interest in advaita was born.

* hope this answers your 1uestion.

Bring it on, /ohnC

NDM: *k) thanks Chris. !hen you $irst noticed that these thoughts were arising and that they were not'you'. Did you clearly understand what this meant at the time#

*r did this take some e"tra outside help $rom a teacher#

-hris


37/106


38/106

&he difference is that you have reali ed that you no longer live in the nowI instead, you are the now.

erhaps, this is the Renergetic shiftR you refer to, although this RshiftR is actually nothing other than the clearunveiled recognition of your forgotten nature. >elatively, this grounding stabili es over time.

ven saying this is too much.

NDM> !hen you say that Enlightenment is "Presence" recognizing itself. By presence do youmean:

1. /he $act or condition o$ being present#

J : /he part o$ space within oneFs immediate vicinity#

?. Divine presence#

Such as

2odFs presence in nature 2odFs presence among all human beings 2odFs presence in each human being or something along these lines.

Also when you say R!hat never leaves is the 'spaceless space' in which even this appears' 9s this issomething you see with your eyes#

*r inside your minds eye#

-hris


39/106

that actually reads these words on this page, right here, right now?R is our direct experience....right here, right now.

*n actuality, we never experience anything but the present. 0otice * did not say Rthe present momentR, as this wouldimply that something existed before and after it. But, do we ever directly experience something existing beforeRnowR or after it? &hat which is experienced as RbeforeR, also referred to as the RpastR is nothing more thanmemories RarisingR in the present. 4emories are simply a kind of thought arising now. &he only RplaceR thoughts can

occur is RinR the now. hat we refer to as the future is also a concept, as it is never present, it is a pro ection ofsome RthingR that never arrives.

*t is not difficult to identify the ob ects we experience as the body presently. Broadly, we could categori e them asthoughts, sensations and perceptions. e experience the RmindR as thoughts, the RbodyR as sensations, and theRworldR as sensory perceptions. So, what is this thing we call Rthe bodyR? *s it not a collection of bodilysensations...perceptions received as sight, sound, taste, smell, and touch? *n reality, donQt each of these sensationsappear to that which we are?

e actually never experience a RbodyR, we merely experience perceptions we refer to as a body. hat we call thebody, ultimately, consists only those perceptions identified as RoursR, while Rthe worldR is a pro ection of perceptionidentified as Rnot oursR.

5or this mind, it was important to explore perception very deeplyI what resulted was a series of =6=s that walkedwith the viewer step by step thru the process some refer to as 0eti 0eti but in a directly experiential way. * havereceived correspondence from all over the world from seekers for whom this work has been very beneficial, evenpivotal to a much deeper understanding of the ever present reality of our nature.

&his investigation never gets us any closer to that which perceives. *t only dances around with the ob ects ofperception, constantly ignoring the ma estic reality that never changes...that which perceives. &he deeper weexplore, looking for this RperceiverR, the more obvious it becomes that Rwhat we areR is not phenomenal at all.

R hat we areR in actuality is RbeingnessR itself. ur RbeingnessR only ever exists in what we call Rthe nowR, so, whbetter word to describe it than resence? *s resence divine? @ou betC

&he great discovery is that there is no RpartR to this thing we are calling resenceI it has no borders at all. &heexamination of perceptions reveals the sub ective reality of the witness. 5urther exploration proves that thisRwitnessR has no borders and boundaries. &he boundaries we perceive between us and the world are, in fact,simply more artificial, conceptual creations of the mind. Some refer to this process of naming and fracturing ourseamless reality by the ancient *ndian term, 0ama >upa. 0o place can ever be found where R what we areR, thispresent awareness, ends and ob ects begin. &his, then, is what * mean when * refer to RbeingnessR as RspacelessspaceR, the RglueR of the ob ective RmirageR.

Seeing this reality is a life shattering experience. 0o words can effectively describe it.

#bout my self, one thing is certain, and it is that * exist. &his one fact may seem so obvious that we continuallyoverlook it, but, when inspected closely, we discover that this is the single fact known to us without any ob ectivereference. &hink about this: *t is the one certainty based upon a source of information not sub ect to any ob ectiveconfirmation.

hen we consider this, it makes sense. -learly, for something to change, there must be a changeless element. #llob ects, be they thoughts, feelings, images, bodily sensations or perceptions begin and end.


40/106

seeing. >emember, this discovery is simply the sudden re'discovery of that which always has been and will be. *twas never Rnot present.R *t is all that ever is.

&here is simply no witness at all. Eike two sides of a coin, eternal emptiness and fullness co'exist simultaneously,one a reflection of the other. erception is creation.

3$!, ,*4

Continued.

NDM: Can you please tell me how you $ound your teacher and what this did $or you#

-hris


41/106

* had no clue who he was. 5inding a phone number in the manuscript , * decided to call.

&he person on the other end of the phone, a close associate of 5rancis Eucille, greeted me with great affection,and suggested * might like to fly in, attend a dialogue, have dinner and watch a movie with friends. Stunned by theinformality of the invitation, * immediately went. *n one fell swoop, my imagined sense of hierarchy between teacher and student was destroyed. *t was discovered that the only price of admission here was a deep and sincereinterest in self discovery, nothing more.

* flew to &emecula. &he resence was palpable, the experience of which continues to this day, and for which * haveno explanation.

=uring these first encounters, there was a total experience of dissolution, unexplainable, outside of what we allQtime and spaceQ, in which only pure awareness remained.

ithout any ob ective orientation present, it was an experience of pure freedom of unimaginable depth. #s allexperiences do, it came and passed over time, but, it left me absolutely certain of the reality of the RdestinationR.

&he rest is history. &hese first visits reset the course of my life. >eturning home to =allas, having no plans beyondthat moment, it suddenly occurred to me to sell my home and relocate as close to my teacher as possible. * did soand have never regretted it, even for one moment. *t was a tremendous gift of grace.


42/106

>amana 4aharshi, recogni ed and discussed this. *t is no surprise that there is little written about this here, as it is difficult toreport about that which is not in our direct experience.

#t some point in Self *n1uiry, it is true that the mind is no longer useful. *t can not and will never come to any successfulconceptual understanding of awareness. hat occurs is a dissolution of ignorance as the mind reali es its own folly. 7ltimately,the vastness reveals itself. *n this RseeingR, the mind becomes subservient to resence rather than the other way around. nceRthe mindR sees the &ruth regarding awareness, itQs struggle ends.

So, what does one do at this delicate point?

&he answer is simply, that Stillness actually speaks. #s * have 1uietly shared for years, the greatest and humblestpiece of advice * offer others deeply interested in Self *n1uiry, the deepest secret * know, is the ineffable benefit ofbeing in the presence of the teacher. *t is resence itself that teaches.

*f you have been in the presence of a great teacher, you may have experienced this phenomena. -all it shakti,Rspaceless spaceR, R resenceR, -onsciousness or 2od. &his is where the real teaching happens.

#s 5rancis Eucille once shared, R ords are what we do to keep the mind busy while the transmission happens inthe silence.R

* call it R2odQs silent kissR.f course, some will say this is ust so much pro ected fiction of a desperate ego. *t is not.

# truly under' heralded #merican mystic, monk and master, 5ranklin 4errell' olff, shared this insight , which he called &he*nduction. &his is a monster revelation in print by a former


43/106

spirituality becomes our Q6ihita guruQ (the noble one). nce anestheti ed by dispassion to the ups and downs of life, we areready to be led by the QKarana guruQ, the one who removes the disease of QQSamsaraQQ by curing the very cause (karana) of itC Swami &e omayanda -hairman -hinmaya 4ission

5rancis Eucille: R nlightenment is the sudden recognition that non'duality is, has always been, and will always be the reality ofour experience. =uality is an illusion. -onsciousness is not private and personal, but impersonal, universal, and eternal. &hereis no limited personal entity, no conscious ego. &he ego is a perceived ob ect, not the all perceiving awareness. Self reali ation

is the subse1uent stabili ation in the peace, happiness and freedom of our natural state. &he world, seen in the light ofimpersonal awareness, reveals itself as a permanent miracle, a divine display that celebrates its invisible source.R

NDM: !hat are your thoughts on some people that make enlightenment) sel$ evaluations# +or e"ample)they have a $ew glimpses) read a story online) buy a couple o$ books and read about someone elseFse"periences) or shi$t and come to the conclusion that they then must also be enlightened#

Do you think there is away to test this# /o know i$ some one is '3al$ way up the mountain') as MariannaCaplan re$ers to it in her book. *r has enlightenment sickness as ames Swart8 would say. 9n Ken theycall it the stink o$ enlightenment#

-hris


44/106

*t is a great irony that, in an effort to unravel the delusions of identification and thus reveal our inherent beauty, wecan fall prey to yet another identity''this time a Rspiritual identity.R &his sense of separation can become very subtleand hidden from view.

*f you follow this, you might en oy our interview with /eff 5oster entitled #we and onder: =arkest before the=awn. *t covers these issues in depth.


45/106

&here are other teachers we are excited to be interviewing in the near future. 4ore will be announced asagreements are reached.

/ohn, thank you for the opportunity to participate in your new website. * wish you great success with it.

What You Really Feel

Arthur Schopenhauer is my favorite 19th century German philosopher. Not that this is enormous praise given my attitude to the others !ut any"ay here#s one of his pearls of "isdom $ source %&'f you "ant to find out your real opinion of anyone o!serve the impression made upon you !y the firstsight of a letter from him.
http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.in/2010/07/what-you-really-feel.htmlhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schopenhauer/http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schopenhauer/http://infomotions.com/etexts/gutenberg/dirs/1/0/8/3/10833/10833.htmhttp://4.bp.blogspot.com/_zE8CzamN1Y0/TEQ3clPzebI/AAAAAAAABNs/kPgfxnRUYV4/s1600/schoep+warhol.JPGhttp://neuroskeptic.blogspot.in/2010/07/what-you-really-feel.htmlhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schopenhauer/http://infomotions.com/etexts/gutenberg/dirs/1/0/8/3/10833/10833.htm


46/106

(oes your heart leap does it sin) do you get !utterflies in your stomach in the moment "hen you firstsee a message from that person? *hat#s ho" you really feel and if you didn#t think you felt that "ay youthought "rong.

Schopenhauer#s tric) relies on the fact that emotion is faster than thought. A letter ta)es you !y surprise&

even if you#re e+pecting to hear from someone you don#t )no" e+actly "hen it "ill arrive. 't arrives& inthat first second your emotions have a chance to sho" through !efore your thoughts have got into gear. 't"or)s "ith emails and phone calls as "ell of course !ut not "ith any encounter "hich is planned out inadvance.

*he point is that you do not en,oy direct and perfect )no"ledge of your o"n feelings. -ou can !e "ronga!out them ,ust li)e you could mis,udge anyone else#s feelings. ay!e you thin) that you li)e someone"hen you really find them annoying. -ou !elieve that you li)e someone as a friend !ut you really feelmore than that.

'n fact it#s not clear that "e have any special insight into our o"n emotions !eyond that "hich is

availa!le to others. /e tend to assume that "e do. 0or one thing "e say they#re our emotions& "e o"nthem. '#m the one "ho feels my emotions and emotions are ,ust feelings so ' must !e the e+pert on themright?

-es !ut feeling an emotion and understanding it are entirely separate. As ' "rote previously "e allinterpret our feelings in various "ays and li)e any act of interpretation "e can !e either right or "rong.Suppose ' love you and ' thin) ' love you . 'n that case '#m right. ut ' could love you

Documents

Neuronal Correlates of a Jivanmukta