Removal of Sanskaras -1
The Cessation, the Wearing Out and the Unwinding of Sanskaras
Question::
Why Self-illumination is necessary for humans?
(or)
How are ‘drop-soul (atma/Individual)’ and ‘Oversoul (Paramatma)’ related? How can the drop-soul become the Oversoul?
(or)
Even though we are related with Paramatma, we are not CONSCIOUS of this relationship. Why so?
(or)
Why ‘release from the grip of sanskaras’ is so very important task in order to attain Realization?
(or)
Can ‘Renunciation’ annihilate sanskaras?
(or)
How does ‘renunciation’ help attain ‘spiritual freedom’?
(or)
Can ‘circumstances’ really tempt us?
(or)
How come Renunciation demands strength of character?
(or)
Can ‘wealth’ and ‘power’ influence one’s character? What is the advantage of having a strong character?
(or)
How come ‘solitude’ and ‘fasting come under “renunciation”?
(or)
What should be the aim of ‘external fasting’, in order for it to have some spiritual value?
(or)
When can ‘solitude’ and ‘fasting’ have spiritual value, and when not? What is ‘physical’ and ‘mental’ fasting?
(or)
What is ‘penance’ and repentance? What sort of spiritual benefit does ‘Penance’ and ‘Repentance’ provide? What sort of ‘penance’ is discouraged by spiritual masters?
(or)
How does “emotional awareness” help annihilate sanskaras?
(or)
What is true/sincere penance and what is not? What is the danger that lies in ‘penance’? What is the TRUE PURPOSE of “penance”?
(or)
What happens when ‘desires’ are fulfilled and what happens when they are not? What kind of spiritual benefit does “denying desires” provide?
(or)
People differ based on their ‘desire-denying-capabilities’. How so? Why should one ‘deny/control desires’, in the first place? When can ‘denying desires’ become valueless, spiritually?
(or)
How to deny desires? What happens when desires are denied? What sort of outlook is necessary while denying desires?
(or)
How come ‘wanting’ is a binding? What are the external and internal stimuli that goad the mind to want, always? What is the advantage of non-wanting?
(or)
What is ‘equipoise’? Why is it necessary for every individual? How can it be achieved?
(or)
How can one remain unmoved by the joys and sorrows of the world?
(or)
What does the Vedic-concept of ‘neti’, ‘neti’ imply? How does this concept help detachment of mind from its stimuli?
(or)
What is ‘healthy asceticism’? What is not? What are the different ways/methods of implementing asceticism?
(or)
When is ‘spontaneous life of asceticism’ possible? When can one develop the ‘knowledge of relative values’?
(or)
What are ‘gross’ and ‘subtle’ attachments? What is True Detachment? What is not?
(or)
What sort of caveat one has to keep in mind while attempting to achieve detachment from the world of objects?
(or)
What is ‘subtle-egotism’? How does it develop in the process of getting detached from the world-of-objects?
(or)
When can “aloofness” becomes a sign of subtle-ego?
(or)
What is healthy-detachment/true-detachment that aids spiritual progress, and what is not?
(or)
When can detachment become INTEGRAL and WHOLE-HEARTED?
(or)
How far is this “neti, neti” formula, applicable? When/where to renounce it?
(or)
What does “going beyond the mind” mean?
(or)
What is blissful detachment?
(or)
What does it mean to look OBJECTIVELY upon the ‘body’ or ‘mind’?
(or)
What are the ‘self-imposed illusions’ of the soul?
(or)
What is enlightened stage?
Answer::
(Extracted from Meher Baba’s literature, which is a copyright of Avatar Meher Baba Perpetual Public Charitable Trust (©AMBPPCT), Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, Bharat/India)
Human beings do not have Self-illumination because– their consciousness is shrouded in ‘sanskaras’ or the accumulated imprints of past experience.
In the human form, the ‘will-to-be-conscious’ with which evolution started, has succeeded in creating ‘consciousness’.
However, ‘unconsciousness’ does not arrive at the ‘knowledge of the Oversoul’ because, the ‘individual soul’ is impelled to use it for experiencing sanskaras instead of utilizing it for experiencing the soul’s own true nature, as the Oversoul.
The experiencing of sanskaras keeps it confined to the illusion of being a finite body trying to adjust itself in the world of things and persons.
‘Individual souls’ are like drops in the ocean. Just as each drop in the ocean is fundamentally identical with the ocean, the soul– which is individualized due to bhas or illusion– is still the Oversoul, and does not really become separate from the Oversoul. Yet, the envelope of sanskaras by which consciousness is covered, prevents the drop-soul from having Self-illumination and keeps it within the domain-of-duality.
In order for the soul to consciously realize its identity with the Oversoul, it is necessary that ‘consciousness’ should be retained and that ‘sanskaras’ should be entirely removed.
The sanskaras which are contributory to the evolution-of-consciousness, themselves become impediments to its efficacy in illuminating the nature-of-the-Oversoul. Henceforth the problem with which the will-to-be-conscious is confronted is not that of evolving consciousness but that of releasing it from ‘sanskaras’.
The release from sanskaras takes place in the following five ways :
- The cessation of creating new sanskaras::
This consists in putting an end to the ever renewing activity of creating fresh-sanskaras. If the formation of sanskaras is compared to the winding of a string around a stick, this step amounts to the cessation of the further winding of the string. - The wearing out of old sanskaras::
If ‘sanskaras’ are WITHHELD from expressing themselves in action and experience, they are gradually worn-out. In the analogy of the string, this process is comparable to the wearing out of the string at the place where it is. - The unwinding of past sanskaras::
This process consists in annulling past sanskaras by mentally reversing the process that leads to their formation. Continuing our analogy, it is like unwinding the string. - The dispersion and exhaustion of some sanskaras::
If the mental-energy that is locked-up in sanskaras is sublimated, and diverted into other channels, they are dispersed and exhausted and tend to disappear. - The wiping out of sanskaras::
This consists in completely annihilating the sanskaras. In the analogy of the string, this is comparable to cutting the string with a pair of scissors. The final wiping out of sanskaras can be effected only by the grace of a Perfect Master.
It should be carefully noted that, many of the concrete methods of ‘undoing sanskaras’ are found to be effective in more than one way, and the five ways mentioned above are not meant to classify these methods into sharply distinguished types. They represent rather the different principles characterizing the ‘spiritual processes’ that take place while ‘sanskaras’ are being removed.
If the mind is to be freed from the bondage of ever-accumulating-sanskaras, it is necessary that there should be an end to the creation of new sanskaras. Fresh multiplication of sanskaras can be stopped through ‘renunciation’. Renunciation may be external or internal.
- External, or physical, renunciation consists in giving up everything to which the mind is attached– home, parents, marriage, children, friends, wealth, comforts and gross enjoyments.
- Internal, or mental renunciation consists in giving up all cravings, particularly the craving for sensual objects.
Though external renunciation in itself is not necessarily accompanied by internal renunciation, it often paves a way for internal renunciation. Spiritual freedom consists in ‘internal renunciation’ and not in ‘external renunciation,’ but external renunciation is a great aid in achieving internal renunciation.
The person who renounces his possessions disconnects himself from everything that he had or has. This means that the things he renounces are no longer a source of fresh sanskaras. He thus takes an important step toward emancipating himself from his sanskaras by putting an end to the process of forming new sanskaras.
This is not all that is achieved through external renunciation. With the renouncing of everything, he also renounces his past bindings. The old sanskaras connected with his possessions get detached from his mind; and since they are withheld from expressing themselves, they get worn-out.
For most persons, external renunciation creates a favourable atmosphere for the wearing out of sanskaras. An individual who possesses ‘wealth’ and ‘power’ is exposed to a life of indulgence and extravagance. His circumstances are more favourable for temptations.
Man is mostly what he becomes by being chopped, chiseled and shaped by the sculptor of environment. Whether or not he can surmount his surroundings depends upon his strength of character. If he is strong, he remains free in thought and action, even in the midst of action and reaction with his environment. If he is weak, he succumbs to its influence.
Even if he is strong, he is likely to be swept off his feet by a powerful wave of the collective mode of life and thought. It is difficult to withstand the onslaughts of a current of ideas and avoid falling prey to circumstances. If he resists the circumstances, he is likely to be carried away by some wild wave of collective passion, and get caught up in modes of thought that he is unable to renounce.
Though, it is difficult to resist and overcome these influences and surroundings, it is easier to escape from them. Many persons would live a chaste and straightforward life if they were not surrounded by luxuries and temptations. The renunciation of all superfluous things helps the wearing out of sanskaras and is therefore contributory to the life of freedom.
The two important forms of external renunciation that have special spiritual value are ‘solitude’ and ‘fasting.’
Withdrawal of oneself from the storm and stress of the multifarious worldly activities and occasional retirement into solitude are valuable for wearing out the sanskaras connected with gregarious instinct. But this is not to be looked upon as a goal in itself.
Like solitude,’ fasting’ also has great spiritual value. Eating is satisfaction; fasting is denial.
Fasting is physical, when food is not taken, in spite of the craving for the enjoyment of eating; it is mental, when food is taken not for its delights and attachments, but merely for the survival of the body.
External fasting consists in avoiding direct contact with food in order to achieve mental fasting.
Food is a direct necessity of life, and its continued-denial is disastrous to health. Therefore, external fasting should be periodical and only for a short-time. It has to be continued till there is complete victory over the craving for food. By bringing into action the vital forces to withstand the craving for food, it is possible to free the mind from attachment to food.
External fasting has no spiritual value when it is undertaken with the motive of securing the health of the body or for the sake of self-demonstration. It should not be used as an instrument for self-assertion. In the same way, it should not be carried to the extreme until the body is reduced to its limits.
Self-mortification through prolonged fasting does not necessarily promote freedom from the craving for food. On the contrary, it is likely to invite a subsequent reaction toward a life of extravagant indulgence in food. If, however, external fasting is undertaken in moderation and for spiritual purposes, it facilitates the achievement of internal fasting. When external and internal fasting are whole-hearted and faithful, they bring about the unwinding of the sanskaras connected with the craving for food.
The unwinding of many other sanskaras can be brought about through penance. This consists in augmenting and expressing the feeling of remorse an individual feels after realizing that he has done some wrongful act.
Repentance consists in mentally reviving the wrongs with severe self-condemnation”. It is facilitated by availing oneself of the different circumstances and situations that stir up penance or by remaining vulnerable during periods of emotional outbursts, or by deliberate efforts to recall the past incidents with a remorseful heart and acute disapproval. Such penance unwinds the sanskaras that are responsible for the action.
Self-condemnation accompanied by deep-feeling can negate the sanskaras of anger, greed and lust.
Suppose a person has done irreparable wrong to someone through uncontrolled greed, anger or lust. Sometime or the other he is bound to have the reaction of self-killing remorse and experience the pricks of conscience. If at this time he vividly realizes his evil for which he was responsible, the intensity of EMOTIONAL AWARENESS by which it is accompanied– consumes the ‘tendencies’ for which he stands self-condemned.
Self-condemnation sometimes expresses itself through different forms of self-mortification. Some aspirants even inflict wounds on their body when they are in a mood of penitence, but such drastic expression of remorse must be discouraged as a general usage. Some Hindu aspirants try to cultivate humility by making it a rule to fall at the feet of everyone whom they meet.
To those of strong will and stable character, ‘penance’ can bring the desired good effect through self-humiliation, which unwinds and eradicates the different sanskaras connected with good and bad actions. Others who might be feeble in their ‘willpower’ also derive benefit from penance if they are under sympathetic and loving direction.
When penance is carefully nourished and practiced, it inevitably results in the mental revocation of undesirable modes of thought and conduct, and makes one amenable to a life of purity and service.
It should, however, be carefully noted that there is always the danger in penance that the mind might dwell too long upon the wrongs done and thus develop the morbid habit of wailing and weeping over petty things. Such sentimental extravagance is often an indiscriminate waste of energy and is in no way helpful in the wearing out or the unwinding of sanskaras.
Penance should not be like the everyday repentance that follows everyday weaknesses. It should not become a tedious and sterile habit of immoderate and gloomy pondering over one’s own failings.
Sincere Penance does not consist in perpetuating grief for the wrongs but in resolving- to avoid in the future- those deeds that call forth remorse. If it leads to lack of self-respect or self-confidence, it has not served its true-purpose, which is merely to render impossible the repetition of certain types of action.
The wearing out and the unwinding of sanskaras can also be effected by denying to desires their expression and fulfillment. People differ in their capacity and aptitude for rejecting desires!
Those in whom ‘desires’ arise with great impulsive velocity are unable to curb them at their source, but they can refrain from seeking their fulfillment through action. Even if someone has no control over the surging of desires, he can prevent them translated into ‘action’. Rejection of desires by controlling actions avoids the possibility of sowing seeds of future desires.
On the other hand, if a person translates his desires into action, he may spend up and exhaust some impressions. But he is creating fresh impressions during the very process of fulfilling the desires and is thus sowing seeds for future desires, which in turn are bound to demand their own satisfaction.
The process of spending up or exhausting impressions through their expression and fulfilment does not in itself contribute toward securing release from sanskaras.
When ‘desires’ arise and their release into ‘action’ is barred, there is plenty of opportunity for spontaneous cogitation about these desires. This cogitation results in the wearing out of the corresponding sanskaras.
It should be noted, however that, such spontaneous cogitation does not bring about the desired result if it takes the form of mental indulgence in the desires.
When there is a deliberate and wanton attempt to welcome and harbor the desires in the mind, such cogitation will not only have no spiritual value but may itself be responsible for creating subtle sanskaras.
‘Cogitation’ should not be accompanied by any conscious sanction for the desires that arise in consciousness, and there should not be any effort to perpetuate the memory of these desires.
When the desires are denied their expression and fulfillment in action and are allowed to pass through the intensity of the fire of a cogitative consciousness that does not sanction them– the seeds of these desires are consumed. The rejection of desires and the inhibition of physical response effect, in time, an automatic and natural negation of the past sanskaras.
Rejection of desires is a preparation for desirelessness or the state of non-wanting, which alone can bring about true freedom. Wanting is necessarily binding, whether it is fulfilled or not.
- When it is fulfilled, it leads to further wanting and thus perpetuates the bondage of the spirit.
- When it is unfulfilled, it leads to disappointment and suffering which– through their sanskaras– fetter the freedom of the spirit in their own way.
There is no end to wanting because the external and internal stimuli of the mind are constantly alluring it into a state of wanting or disliking (which is another form of wanting) something.
- The external stimuli are the sensations of sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch.
- The internal stimuli are those that arise in the mind of man from the memories of the ‘present life’ and the totality of sanskaras gathered by ‘consciousness’ during the ‘evolutionary period’ and during ‘human lives’.
When the mind is trained to remain unmoved and balanced in the presence of all external and internal stimuli, it arrives at the state of non-wanting. And by not wanting anything, (except the absolute Reality, which is beyond the opposite of stimuli), it is possible to unwind the sanskaras of wanting.
Wanting’ is a state of disturbed equilibrium of mind and ‘non-wanting’ is a state of stable poise.
The poise of non-wanting can only be maintained by an unceasing disentanglement from all stimuli, whether pleasant or painful, agreeable or disagreeable. In order to remain unmoved by ‘joys’ and ‘sorrows’ of this world, the ‘mind’ must be completely detached from the external and internal stimuli.
Though the mind is constantly fortifying itself through its own constructive suggestions, there is always the chance of these outposts of defense being washed away by some sudden and unexpected wave arising in the ocean of the natural and mental environment. When this happens, you may, for a time, feel completely lost; but the attitude of non-attachment can keep you safe.
This attitude consists in the application of the principle of neti neti (not this, not this). It implies constant effort to maintain a watchful detachment in relation to the alluring opposites of limited experience.
It is not possible to deny only the disagreeable stimuli and remain inwardly attached to the agreeable stimuli. If the mind is to remain unmoved by the onslaughts of opposites, it cannot continue to be attached to the expressions of agreeable stimuli and be influenced by them. The ‘equipoise’ consists in meeting both alternatives with complete detachment.
The “yes, yes” meaning of the positive sanskaras can only be annulled through the negative assertion of “no, no”. This negative element is necessarily present in all aspects of asceticism, as expressed through–
- renunciation,
- solitude,
- fasting,
- penance,
- withholding desires from fulfillment, and
- non-wanting.
The happy blending of all these methods and attitudes creates a healthy form of asceticism in which there is no toil or exertion. But to ensure all this, the negative element in them must come naturally without giving rise to any perversions or further limitations.
Trying to coerce the mind to a life of asceticism is of no use. Any forcible adjustment of life on ascetic lines is likely to stunt the growth of some good qualities.
When the healthy qualities of human nature are allowed to develop naturally and slowly, they unfold the “knowledge of relative values” and thereby pave the way for spontaneous life of asceticism. Whereas, any attempt to force or hasten the mind toward an ascetic life is likely to invite reaction.
The process of being freed from some attachments is often accompanied by the process of forming some other new attachments.
The grossest form of attachment is that which is directed toward the world of objects; but when the mind is being detached from the world of objects, it has a tendency to arrive at some finer attachments of a SUBJECTIVE kind.
After the mind has succeeded in cultivating a certain degree of detachment, it might easily develop that subtle form of egotism which expresses itself through ‘aloofness’ and a ‘superior air.
Detachment should not be allowed to form any nucleus upon which the ego could fasten itself; and at the same time, it should not be an expression of one’s inability to cope with the storm and stress of worldly life.
The things that limit pure and infinite being should be given up through an attitude of immense strength, which is born of purity and enlightenment, and not from a sense of helplessness in the face of strife and struggle.
Further, true detachment does not consist in clinging to the mere formula of neti neti, which sometimes becomes an obsession of the mind without any deep felt longing for enlightenment. Such interest in a mere formula of negation often exists side by side with an inward dwelling on the temptations. Detachment can be integral and whole-hearted only when it becomes an inseparable part of one’s nature.
The negative assertion of “no, no” is the only way of unwinding the positive sanskaras gathered through ‘evolution’ and ‘human lives’. Although this process does destroy the positive sanskaras, it results in the formation of negative sanskaras, which in their own way condition the mind and create a new problem.
The assertion of “no, no” has to be sufficiently powerful to effect the eradication of all the physical, subtle, and mental sanskaras; but after it has served its purpose, it has to be ultimately abandoned.
The finality of spiritual experience does not consist of bare negation. To bring it under a negative formula is to limit it by means of an intellectual concept. The negative formula has to be used by the mind to decondition itself, but it must be renounced before the ultimate goal of life can be attained.
‘Thought’ has to be made use of in order to overcome the limitations set up by its own movement; but when this is done it has itself to be given up. This amounts to the process of going beyond the mind or its desires.
To look objectively upon the body as well as all thoughts and lower impulses is- to get established in blissful detachment and to negate all sanskaras.
This means freeing the soul from its self-imposed illusions– like “I am the body”, “I am the mind”, or “I am desire” and gaining ground toward the enlightened stage of “I am God” (Anal Haqq, or Aham Brahmasmi ).
– Meher Baba
Source ::
Discourses, Pg:: 40-48
© AMBPPCT, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India/Bharat
