Human beings
seem particularly vulnerable to the need for
validation. Nowhere is this need more evident
than in the modern spiritual world’s
obsession with status. Forty years ago the word ‘avatar’ was
barely known in West. A few rare souls knew it
through the Bhagavad Gita but it was definitely
not a household word. These days the old words
that served to indicate an exalted spiritual
condition…guru, yogi, lama, sage enlightened
being, etc….have been eclipsed by the
word avatar, God in human form but God miraculously
free of all human foibles. One seems not to be
worth one’s salt spiritually these days
unless one is an avatar.
Another word that reveals a need for spiritual
validation is ‘lineage.’ A lineage
is meant to confer status by suggesting gravitas.
And the modern spiritual world…in so far
as it comes out of modern life which certainly
lacks gravitas…seems of late to be particularly
prone to inventing lineages. Any Tom, Dick or
Harry who 'sat' with a brown-skinned Indian...preferably
in India...for twenty minutes suddenly becomes
part of a great lineage. With a lineage to back
you up your spiritual resume is enhanced and
your words take on added meaning, particularly
if they are short on truth.
One of the most noticeable modern ‘lineages’ is
the Ramana-Papaji lineage. Papaji is the father
of the modern ‘Neo-Advaita’ movement
which has spawned a plethora of self proclaimed ‘enlightened’ beings
who are responsible for the satsang culture that
has attracted tens of thousands of seekers in
the last fifteen years.
Papaji, who was virtually unknown in India during
his life, came to the attention of the Western
spiritual world shortly after Bhagavan Rajneesh,
the notorious ninety-three Rolls Royce guru died.
Rajneesh, the ‘horse’s mouth’ concerning
the topic of enlightenment for Westerners for
many years, was a particularly clever man who
created a very large following of Westerners
by wedding two largely incompatible concepts,
sense enjoyment and enlightenment. His ‘Zorba
the Budda’ idea gave a whole generation
of rebellious disaffected community-seeking Westerners
a good excuse to party hearty on their way to
God. When Rajneesh…who rechristened himself
Osho to avoid the bad karma his notoriety produced…died,
his devotees, ever on the lookout for the next
master, ‘discovered’ Papaji, by this
time an old man languishing in Lucknow, a hot,
dirty noisy city on the banks of the Ganges.
Papaji, like Rajneesh, was a clever man with
an outsized personality, a shaktipat guru. A
shaktipat guru is someone with a superabundance
of ‘spiritual’ energy. By ‘hanging
out’ with such people one often ‘experiences
enlightenment.’ It seemed lost on Papaji…and
his followers certainly didn’t know the
difference considering their provenance…that
reality is non-dual ‘light’ or Awareness
and therefore all experiences are the experiences
of enlightenment. In any case many people got ‘high’ on ‘his’ energy
and imagined themselves to be enlightened, a
condition known in yogic culture as manolaya,
a temporary cessation of thought…or if
you prefer an English term, an epiphany. A new
horse’s mouth had appeared…by the
grace of God.
It so happens that the Osho people, in spite
of the fact that most of them spent long periods
in India, had virtually no knowledge of Vedic
spiritual culture even though they paraded around
in red clothing...much to the consternation of
the locals...and called themselves 'neo-sanyassis'
which translates as ‘new renunciates.’ Renunciation
is a tried and true Vedic spiritual idea but
in this case it is not clear what was actually
being renounced. It is not surprising that they
knew virtually nothing about Vedic culture because
Rajneesh was not a Hindu and seemed to have had
a certain contempt for the great spiritual tradition
that surrounded him. His role models, who he
was not above criticizing, were Christ and the
Buddha. Papaji, on the other hand, was a died
in the wool Hindu from a family of Krishna devotees.
His contribution to the spiritual education of
this group was two-fold. He introduced them to
Ramana Maharshi who he claimed was his guru…thus
giving himself a golden, nay platimum, credential.
And he introduced them to the word ‘advaita’ which
means non-duality. Hence, the ‘advaita’ movement.
Although Ramana was Papaji’s guru their
idea of spiritual practice, self inquiry, was
quite different. Ramana’s involved persistent
and intense effort moment to moment basis to
dispel the mind/ego's idea of duality while Papaji’s
involved only the question ‘Who am I?’ and
then ‘keeping quiet’ until the answer
appeared. Papaji was no fool and understood quite
well that he was not talking to yogis, serious
practicioners, but bhogis, enjoyers. Most took
Osho seriously when he told them that spiritual
life was a big celebration and encouraged them
to get on with it. And, to be fair, most thought
they were doing spiritual work…although
therapy would be a more accurate term. Sadhana,
spiritual work, presupposes a healthy mature
individual with a clear, discriminating, dispassionate
mind and a burning desire to be free of the quest
for satisfaction in this world. Whether Papaji
was enlightened is open to question…many
unenlightened yogis can give shaktipat more or
less at will and speak eloquently about the truth…but
whether he was or wasn’t isn’t important,
only that he gave shaktipat and reserved his ‘final
teachings’ for qualified aspirants, who
were by his own admission non-existent.
In an extraordinary interview in a book about
his life entitled ‘Nothing Ever Happened’ by
David Godman he talks about his teaching and
the people who received it…or not.
David: “You used to give experiences to
a lot of people. Why did you do it if you knew
that the effect would not be permanent?”
Papaji: “I did it to get rid of the leeches
who were sticking to me, never allowing me to
rest or be by myself. It was a very good way
of getting rid of all these leeches in a polite
way. I knew that in doing this I was giving lollipops
to the ignorant and innocent, but this is what
these people wanted. When I tried to give $100
bills to them, they rejected them. They thought
that they were just pieces of paper. So I gave
them lollipops instead.
David: Many of the people you gave lollipops
to left Lucknow thinking that they were enlightened.
Does the fact that they accepted the lollipop
and left indicate that they were not worthy to
receive the $100 bills?
Papaji: “If one is not a holy person,
one is not worthy to receive the real teaching.
Many people think that they have attained the
final state of full and complete liberation.
They have fooled themselves, and they have fooled
many other people but they have not fooled me.
A person in this state is like a fake coin. It
may look like the real thing. It can be passed
around and used by ignorant people who use it
to buy things with. People who have it in their
pocket can boast of having a genuine coin, but
it is not real. But it has no value. When it
is finally discovered to be a fake, the person
who is circulating it, claiming that it is real,
is subject to the penalties of the law. In the
spiritual world, the law of karma catches up
and deals with all people who are trafficking
in fake experiences. I have never passed on the
truth to those whom I could see were fake coins.
These people may look like gold and they may
glitter like gold, but they have no real value.
There are many people who can put on a show and
fool other people into believing they are enlightened.” “Why
does hearing the truth only work in a small percentage
of cases? The simple answer to that is that only
a small percentage of people are interested in
the truth.”
David: “Many people have heard you say, ‘I
have not given my final teachings to anyone’.
What are these final teachings, and why are you
not giving them out?”
Papaji: “Nobody is worthy to receive them.
Because it has been my experience that everybody
has proved to be arrogant and egotistic… I
don’t think anyone is worthy to receive
them.”
Here we have the horse’s mouth, the father
of the satsang movement, saying that those teaching
in his name are not enlightened. Traditional
Vedanta, the source of the idea of non-duality
would agree in so far…as stated above…reality
is non-dual Awareness and therefore the search
for a discrete permanent experience that one
might call ‘enlightenment’ is gratuitous.
This is not to say that the occasional intense
experiences of non-duality...the lollipops…that
power the searches of many are in any way unhelpful,
although they may become a source of frustration
and disappointment if not properly understood.
Shaktipat is indeed a wonderful experience but
it is simply another experience and will not
set you free…although it can give you
an idea of what you are seeking…in so
far as freedom is the nature of the Self. This
freedom cannot be produced by anything, particularly
an experience, because it is limitless. What
is limitless i.e. the Self can, as Ramana conclusively
says…and traditional Vedanta agrees…be
only gained by knowledge since you have it already.
The purpose of Self inquiry is to gain Self knowledge
and remove ignorance about your nature…not
to get a discrete permanent experience of the
Self. In any case an epiphany is not enlightenment
and it is certainly not the proper basis for
a ‘teaching.’
Papaji’s insistence that a seeker of enlightenment
be qualified is in harmony with the teachings
of traditional Vedanta. Why should one be qualified?
Because enlightenment…the knowledge that
one is whole and complete actionless Awareness
and not this body mind…will only arise
in a pure mind, one free of the limited perspective
and the consequent suffering it produces. And
secondly this knowledge will only stick in a
pure mind. A pure mind can be produced by action,
unlike the Self. And finally, action in a spiritual
context is Self inquiry, the consistent application
of Self knowledge…the idea that I am limitless
Awareness…until the mind accepts it completely.
It is clear that while Ramana gained that knowledge
when he was very young he spent many years applying
it to his mind, hence his teaching of self-inquiry.
If he didn’t do sadhana, as many believe,
where did he get the authority to teach Self
inquiry? The belief that he didn’t do Self
inquiry stems from the unfortunate idea that
Self inquiry is simply asking the ‘Who
am I?’ question when it is in fact a willingness
to examine all one’s thinking in light
of the truth of one’s being. It is, as
traditional Vedanta states, ‘the practice
of Self knowledge.’ What else are you going
to do once you wake up? You see the Self and
you see the mind and you see that there is some
disconnect between them and you either let the
mind be knowing that it isn’t you…which
is not Self inquiry but is a perfectly legitimate
path…or you make an effort to get the
mind in alignment with the Self. Self inquiry
is a continuous discipline until the mind no
longer throws up limiting concepts about the
nature of the ‘I’ at which point
one could be said to be ‘fully’ enlightened.
Evidently Papaji neglected to inform his followers
that they needed to prepare themselves for the ‘final
teachings’ and that self inquiry was a
lot more than getting high from ‘getting
it’ and then running off to ‘teach’ enlightenment.
Consequently they had no idea how to prepare
themselves apart from developing therapies on
their own to clear up psychological problems.
If they were informed the message somehow got
lost in translation because this teaching is
conspicuous by its absence in the Neo-Advaita
world. Instead, in Papaji's inquiry lite method,
you were meant to ask who you are and then sit
still, presumably waiting for the answer, as
if there was somebody other than you in you that
knew the answer. The obvious problem with this
approach is the fact that who you are is not
a secret. Even if it is to you and you are lucky
enough to get an answer from within as you sit
in ‘silence’ how will you evaluate
its meaning? What does it mean to say I am limitless
non-dual actionless Consciousness? What does
it mean to say I am the Self? How should this
knowledge impact on my life? Do I get up and
shout for joy and get on with my doings because
nothing ever happened? Do I shut up and keep
silent the rest of my life? Do I hang out a shingle
and make a business of enlightening others? Knowing
that I am not a doer do I quit eating, die and
merge with the Absolute?
The purpose of scripture…teachings…is
to remove one’s ignorance. It is meant
to guide Self inquiry. Ramana read and wrote
scripture dedicating at least one work to Shankara…indicating
the importance of getting the overview and not
just relying on one’s own interpretation
of the revelations that come when the mind is
quiet either as a result of conscious Self inquiry
or from an outside event like shaktipat…or
an intense pleasure or tragedy.
Yes, you are temporarily enlightened...assuming
wrongly that you aren't enlightened all the time...when
you have your non-dual epiphanies but when your
old patterns return you will invariably re-identify
with them and return to endarkenment. Unless
a seeker understands the value of purifying the
mind along scriptural lines, he or she will not
remain enlightened…in so far as ‘permanent
enlightenment’ depends on the nature of
the mind. Enlightenment is only for a Self ignorant
mind. The Self is enlightened by default.
Another point that Papaji makes concerning the
search for enlightenment is also in harmony with
the teachings of traditional Vedanta: very few
people are actually interested in enlightenment,
not only because they don’t know what it
is but because their presence in the spiritual
world is due to other factors. Take away the
unrestrained sex, the discos and the touchy feely
sense of ‘community’ from the Osho
experience and you would not have had a mass
quasi spiritual movement. Add some straight talking
purified teachings devoid of a guru’s beliefs
and opinions harkening back to the Upanishads…like
those of Shankaracharya…and you will be
left with a small handful of dedicated people.
I have interviewed hundreds of people in the
forty years I’ve been in the spiritual
world concerning their motivations and well over
ninety-five percent…after paying lip service
to the idea of enlightenment…will admit
that that they are really looking for a sense
of ‘community.’ They want to associate
with people who think and feel like they do about
the spiritual nature of life. There is nothing
wrong with it but it is an emotional need, not
the desire for freedom that is the hallmark of
a true spiritual seeker. The only question remaining
concerning Papaji is that if he really believed
what he said why did he open up his life to a
crowd of parasitic people…and then complain
vociferously about their presence? Presumably
enlightened people are free to say 'no.' Many
truth seekers survived both the Osho and the
Papaji experience and have continued to grow
spiritually but it is impossible not to notice
the downside of this so-called ‘lineage’:
the many aging middle-aged Zorba the Buddhas
still trolling the spiritual world in search
of the next big ‘celebration of life’ and
the raft of modern Neo-Advaita teachers desperately
trying to cobble together a ‘teaching’ from
their own limited experience. Enlightenment does
not a teaching make.
What Papaji meant by enlightenment is anybody’s
guess but it obviously wasn’t experiential…the
experiences were only ‘lollipops.’ Somehow,
it involved his ‘final teachings’ which
presumably involved some kind of knowledge…although
what that knowledge was is not clear. You will
notice that in this interview he does not answer
the question ‘What are your final teachings?” And
it need not be clear because the idea of a ‘final
teaching’ is absurd in so far as you can
crack any Upanishad or any of the hundreds of
great Vedantic texts…or listen to any
traditional Vedanta master…and discover
that the final teaching is that you are non-dual
Awareness and not the body mind entity you think
you are. The Upanishad’s roar, “You
are That!” meaning limitless non-dual Awareness.
This teaching is not secret or ‘final’ in
any way. It is simply a fact to be appreciated,
assuming you are mature i.e. qualified. And the
permanent appreciation of this fact depends on
the nature of the mind…how free it is
of beliefs and opinions to the contrary. What’s
apparently secret and a 'final' bit of unwanted
knowledge is the idea that you need to roll up
your sleeves and get to work on your mind…if
you are going to actualize this teaching.
One suspects…and there is no way of knowing
in so far as Papaji is no longer with us and
would probably not be inclined to ‘share’ with
us if he was…that the ‘final teaching’ myth
was one of the tricks Papaji picked up in guru
school…keep them dependent on you by shrouding
yourself in mystery. Why would a truly enlightened
teacher perpetuate this myth? He or she wouldn’t
because the whole purpose of enlightenment teaching
is to give you the tools that will set you free,
including freedom from gurus. When you take into
account the contemptuous and cynical attitude
that Papaji expresses in this interview toward
his ‘disciples’ and the fact that
he knew that the people coming to him were not
qualified for enlightenment…and neglected
to tell them and also neglected to provide teachings
and techniques that would prepare them for it…one
is tempted to conclude that less noble motivations
were at work.
In another portion of the interview Papaji says
that he did not authorize people to teach in
his name, only to send them to Lucknow to get
the ‘final teachings.’ One wonders
why people who were obviously not enlightened
and not qualified for it would be successful
in attracting those who would be prepared for
the ‘final teachings’ which, as far
as I know, Papaji never declared. But he couldn't
really declare them because it would make him
seem foolish in so far as they are an open secret.
Does this mean that there is no value to the
teachings of Neo-Avaita? Not at all, only that
the truth stands on its own and does not need
validation by any guru or any lineage…although
it certainly becomes more desirable when purified
gurus with proper teachings…like Ramana…teach
it.
A lineage is much more than a couple of gurus.
In fact the guru is only one small link in a
vast teaching tradition...the Sanskrit word is
sampradaya...that stretches back to the first
enlightened being, the Creator, and even beyond
to the non-dual unborn Consciousness that makes
the apparent creation possible. These teachings
and the understanding that contexualizes them
have survived repeated attempts to corrupt them
with the personal views of Johnny-come-lately
gurus who think they need to 'moderinize' them
to make them palatable for modern audiences or
hide them for want of qualified aspirants. As
the poet says, contrary to the opinion of most
modern seekers, there is nothing new under the
sun, including advaita, non-duality and sannyass,
renunciation. Human beings are human beings and
will always be human beings. We suffer the same
fundamental problem today that the first human
being suffered, a crippling sense of limitation.
And from the very beginning the knowledge that
removes this problem has been with us. That it
is still unsullied today...in spite of repeated
attempts to modify it...is a tribute to a lineage
that outshines all the individuals in it.
Why is Neo-Advaita not a skillful means of Self
knowledge? Because it is a victim of level confusion,
the belief that you can simply negate yourself
by saying that you don’t exist or shouldn’t
exist. Yes, it is true that from the Self’s
point of view ‘you’ don’t exist
as a separate entity but this teaching only creates
spiritual frustration if you are not ready to
receive it…which most aren’t. Ignorance…the
belief that one is separate from everything…is
hard wired. It does not go away because you deny
it. The logical conclusion is that you need to
get rid of this belief. But this is precisely
the point at which the teachings of no doer,
no work, no guru, etc. float off into fantasy
land because getting rid of it is very hard work.
Denial is much easier; you just tell yourself
that you are ‘awakened’ or ‘cooked’ and
you avoid noticing that you are still the same
old fool. Or you explain your foolishness away
with some clever non-dual tidbit like “I’m
not chasing things in this world, I’m playing
in Consciousness.” Or ‘nothing ever
happened’ or ‘I’m not really
here’ or ‘what I’m teaching
is crazy wisdom.’ Or “Ramana got
it without doing anything so that means I don’t
have to do anything.’ Or, “How can
I do sadhana, I’m not a doer.”
Yes, it would be wonderful if life was that
easy. But it isn’t. We do not choose to
be here…New Agey theories to the contrary
not withstanding. We appear here, the result
of vast complex of factors that nobody understands.
Life somehow wants us here…it needs us.
And one of life’s nasty inconvenient little
truths is that there are no free lunches. You
have to pay all the way. It provides a lovely
world and a beautiful body and mind with which
to enjoy it. But it also requires you to play
your part. If you don’t, you suffer. Why?
Because along with the good stuff it infects
you with a completely debilitating disease, the
beginningless disease of ignorance. This disease
will not go away because you want it to. You
have to take your medicine. You have to admit
that you are a human being and do the work. Neo-Advaita
fails because it is basically dishonest. It wants
the fantasy, not the truth, because the truth
is a hard sell.
A successful teaching is not content to merely
preach non-duality from its ivory tower. It comes
down into the dream of duality and shows the
way out…from within the dream. This is
why traditional Vedanta has survived for thousands
of years and Neo-Advaita will rate little more
than a footnote in modern spiritual history.
It humbly accepts you where you are at, shows
you the goal and supplies the tools you need
to succeed: the karma yoga attitude, discrimination,
the hugely effective three guna model, devotion
and many others. It is sophisticated enough to
understand the human tendency toward self delusion,
its desire to cut corners and take the easy way
out. So it supplies the logic that cuts through
age old spiritual myths.
To its credit Neo-Advaita has awakened many
to the idea of non-duality and pointed out a
fact little known to extroverted people looking
for relief from their suffering…that you
are not your mind/ego. And through the satsang
vehicle it has given many seekers experiential
validations of this truth along with rudimentary
bits and pieces of Self knowledge…which
unfortunately only serve to confuse without the
big picture. It disappoints, however, in so far
as it does not provide a detailed road map to
enlightenment because it is…like Osho’s
teachings before it…isolated from the
great teaching tradition of Vedanta…which
provides just such a map: time tested profound
and brilliant teachings about the nature of the
Self, the nature of the mind and the nature of
the cosmos in addition to a huge database of
techniques…the scriptures of yoga…that
help the sincere seeker to prepare the mind for
this noblest of human pursuits.
Return to list of essays on Traditional vs neo-vedanta.
See the list sorted by Topic.
See the list sorted by Author. |