| Listen to Prabhaata-rashmih Audio |
Harih Om Tat Sat. Jai Guru. Jai Guru.
My dear children, you know that India’s culture, philosophy, religion, dharma and spirituality, all of them are revolving ultimately around one truth or concept that the entire world we see is an illusion. The entire world we see is an illusion. It is an illusion, to whom? It is an illusion to oneself. That means the illusion producer is oneself.
When we look at the world, it is infinite in every way. When we look into oneself, we find we are finite in every way. Nonetheless our tradition and our culture have implicitly believed in the proposition that the entire infinite variety outside is an illusory production of one’s own inner mind. You will find this truth mentioned and also sought refuge under by the simple housewife, by the enlightened scholar, by the most experiential or experienced seer. For the seer, it may be a personal experience and realization. For the housewife, it may be hearsay and for the scholar it may be a scholastic indulgence. But all of them implicitly say this.
When I stepped into the threshold of spirituality years back, maybe about more than sixty years back when I was in Calcutta, I was not ready to accept the proposition that the world is non-existent. But I also have grown with the belief and the tradition that everything is an illusion. So, the illusory nature of the world remains something not accepted and digested by me. Nevertheless I became a spiritual seeker particularly a vedantic sadhaka and I went to my Gurudev, got deeksha from him. Ever since I got deeksha, no question, no doubt, nothing was obstructing me, and I implicitly felt that the deekshita-sadhana is the only one that I have to pursue and perfect.
So, doubtlessly this pursuit was going on and in the non-sadhana hours, the secular activities and involvements together with the wisdom pursuit like reading the scriptures, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, the various Prakarana Granthas etc. they were moving in a parallel manner. But I always had a problem in accepting that the world is an illusion. It remained there. Very strangely and providentially I left everything and became an ascetic, started wandering and the people made me a speaker.
My wandering life suddenly underwent a shift. Instead of wandering alone in the wilderness of the world, I was being called from one place after the other to address them on the subject of spirituality. But still the wandering continues, I am still a wanderer. Eight months of the year we are wandering.
But I would like to tell you that I wanted to make a meaning, a purpose and an experiential confirmation, if at all, of the statement that the world is an illusion. Take Bhagavad Gita for instance, our Upanishads themselves and Srimad Bhagavatam which is a unique devotional text which generally tends to describe the world as a play of God.
When I started reading the Srimad Bhagavatam, in more than one place it clearly says ‘avidyamānō'pyavabhātih’ (11.2.38). This world is non-existent. Yet, yet, yet it shines. It shines because of ‘dhyāturdhiyā’ (11.2.38). It shines because of the intelligence of the perceiver.
So, the world is an extension of intelligence and besides the intelligence, apart from it, it has no ground or existence. I cannot doubt or question the statement of Srimad Bhagavatam.
The play of the sattva, rajas and tamas is nothing but illusory. So that the world is an illusion is very, very clear.
So, my mind started probing like a scientist. How is this illusion? How is this illusion? This is what I want to tell you today. I have already mentioned it yesterday. You open your eyes and then look at the surroundings here. Then the surroundings with the eyes open are reflected within you, in the mind. Do not call it the mind. It is consciousness. We call it mind. Mind is only a functional note of consciousness. Now close your eyes. When you close your eyes, the visual connection is gone. But nevertheless you will find a state of vibrant buoyance whereby you feel the surroundings in the same manner. The visual connection is not there. But the feeling and awareness of the surroundings is there.
I close my eyes and listen to the music and the chanting here. Nutan Swamiji is on my left. A little further is Mā, and the others who chant are far away. When I close my eyes, I clearly understand that Nutan Swamiji is nearer, further is Mā, and still further are the others. How do I feel it?
Any time when you close your eyes, don’t you think the expanse and the variety are being experienced? If the expanse and variety are being experienced even with closed eyes, what is the difference when they are experienced with eyes open? The experiential sphere is the same, the experiencing factor is the same, experiences are always inner. I experience the world. So, the world experience is mine and it is rooted to me, it is anchored to me, it is subsisting on me. And this experience, inner experience is always within the body, within the body, within the body, within the body.
Our body is limited. If the body is limited, how is it that I have a dimension or an area greater than the perimeter of the body? So the existence and prevalence of the body does not in any way constrict my inner presence and its potential and dimensions. What I am trying to say is that I am not questioning the existence of objects. But in saying there are objects, the objects are not the fulcrum or anchor. I say there are objects. So the objects are an object of experience by me, in me, of me, for me.
So I had formed a very good sentence long back. Though objects are incidental to our experiences, experience by itself is inner and subjective. Though objects are incidental to our experiences, experience by itself is subjective, personal and inner. This point, can you question? So, whether the objects exist or not is immaterial here. What is material is the existence of the objects, becomes a fact when you who experience them, you are first there. I can never refer to an object which is not my experience. An object becomes an object only with reference to the subject. The subject can be without the object as in sleep. You sleep not depending upon anything, even your own body.
So the subject can exist, does exist, is being felt without the object. But an object never comes into existence or being felt without the subject. So between the two, which is independent? The subject. So naturally the object has to be dependent upon the subject. So my dear children, with a lot of fondness I am telling you that this illusory nature of the objects was always a problem for me to accept. The same person tells you now that this illusoriness alone is the truth and reality even when you are living in this world and interacting with the world and the objects.
At no point of time any experience whatsoever is disconnected from you. Every experience subsists on you. A boy falls in love with a girl. He is very much happy to see her, hankering after her association. He comes to know that the girl already has a fondness for another. Immediately his attitude changes. She is no more an object of joy either to see or to remember or to feel. So, any object becomes dear only when your mind makes it dear. When the dearness is lost then the object is no more dear. So you tell me, what makes an object delightful?
So functionally as well as in front of enquiry, logic and reason, the objects world is always illusory. It is an extension, an expression, a wonderful expression of the perceiver, the perceiving intelligence. In this way, I am able to relate properly and also confirm and explain what our sastras say on the basis of my own experience. This is what I discussed yesterday, this evening I will talk about it more and more, until at last all of you agree individually and collectively that the proposition is right.
Harih Om Tat Sat. Jai Guru. Jai Guru.