Hi Ram,

Following your recommendation a couple of months ago, I spent the last weekend at a retreat in the UK with Swami Dayananda. Inspired (as well as confused) by this, I had a few questions I wanted to ask you regarding Advaita Vedanta:

1)  If, as I believe was being claimed by Swami Dayananda, hearing the teaching methods of advaita vedanta skillfully delivered by a self-realised teacher, then assimilating and meditating upon those teachings; is the ONLY path to Self-realisation, then how can you explain all the other Guru's, saints and philosophies that ALSO claim to be a path to self-realisation? If I understand correctly, it seems advaita claims to be the exclusive method by which self-knowledge can be uncovered. Such exclusive claims ring alarm bells in my head intuitively.

What about gurus such as Ramana Maharishi, Anandamayi ma....who received NO formal teaching in Advaita. Surely, these people were great saints nonetheless. What about the paths of Buddhism and Jainism - is it impossible to achieve self-realization through these paths? What about Guru's such as Parhamansa Nithyananda & Yogananda who seem to emphasize the more basic Yoga aspects of teachings -are these for 'lower level' seekers?

Ram:  Traditional Vedanta is not the only way but it is undoubtedly the most efficient, fastest, and easiest path…assuming that you are qualified for it.   Irrespective of his or her path anyone with an inquiring mind who is completely dedicated to Self realization will eventually come to the conclusion that reality is non-dual, that the ‘I’ is not separate from reality and is therefore always free.  It is impossible to ignore the evidence that the realization of people like Ramana, Bhagavan Nityananada and Anadamayi provides.  These are the famous saints and we all would like to be like them but this does not mean that they way it happened for them is going to happen to us. 

This focus on the famous saints has a downside, it tends to obscure the fact that there are many unknown enlightened beings that realized through the traditional method. Traditional Vedanta is a method of teaching that is suitable for almost any qualified person.  And it evolved not to address the exceptions, like Ramana, but to provide a rational experience based path any reasonable person can walk to free his or herself.  Spiritual types are not only often egoic, they tend to be romantic and rebellious.  They often believe that they are very special and that Self realization is a ‘heart’ thing and that Vedanta is ‘only intellectual.’  Many often think the intellect is the enemy, not realizing that the way the intellect thinks is the problem.  And when they hear that they must subject themselves to a certain intellectual discipline to get their thinking back in line with reality, they reject it.  It seems like too much boring work.   And they have been seduced by mysticism, preferring to believe that everything will be solved by some kind of transcendental or mystical experience, not realizing that the thinking patterns that produce their suffering survive their epiphanies.   Vedanta understands the primacy of the intellect in the inner hierarchy and knows that unless you address the way you think about yourself and the world, you will not get freedom.  Most of us are not exceptional or particularly lucky.  So Vedanta is a means of knowledge that works effectively for normal but qualified people.  It has worked for thousands of years because it is rational, sensible, and businesslike.  I’m nothing special but it set me free after two years of intense sadhana.     

It’s a shame but quite understandable that most people assume that what works for them will work for everyone.  Every time you get a cold each of your friends will swear by his or her favorite remedy and have a reason why another remedy doesn’t work.  It is human nature.  Spiritual teachers are no exception.  Muktananda said that you can’t get enlightened until you have the ‘blue pearl’ experience because he had a blue pearl experience before he woke up.  I have the greatest respect for Swami Dayananda…there are very few teachers out there that are as effective as he is…and there is no doubt that traditional Vedanta works beautifully and that is has worked for centuries so you can’t go wrong with it…but his claim that it is the ‘only’ path is unfortunate.   The Self is in everyone and it will guide someone who sincerely wants freedom to the realization that he or she is, was and ever will be free.  Vedanta as taught in the traditional way by Swami Dayananda has set many people free.  On this topic which is not a Vedanta teaching but an opinion, he's a victim of his considerable success, in enlightening people, I believe.

Most people come to Vedanta at the end of a long sadhana, not at the beginning.  Usually they start with Yoga, meditation.  Meditation often gives them some kind of experience of the Self but the experiences end and this makes them start to ask questions.  Why doesn’t this good feeling, this sense of wholeness and oneness, last?  Vedanta has no problem with Yoga at all, in fact it encourages meditation, etc.   Inquiry is absolutely necessary but it should be guided by scripture because the seeker’s beliefs and opinions lead the mind astray.   And one’s beliefs and opinions can also distort the meaning of scripture too.  So a teacher is required.  But not any teacher will do.  The teacher needs to be free and have a command of scripture so the inquirer can understand the teachings as they are and not interpret them according to his or her likes and dislikes. 

There are exceptions like Ramana but they are extremely rare.  And when you consider Ramana, for example, you will find his teachings are in harmony with scripture.  In fact the Vedanta world has granted his work, Upadesa Saram, the status of an Upanishad.   So even if you don’t come to the realization that you are the Self, i.e. free you can’t argue with the teachings of Vedanta. 

 
There is no path called advaita Vedanta.  This is an invention of intellectuals.  There is a difference between advaita and Vedanta.  Vedanta is a path that leads you to the realization that reality is non-dual.   It is a temporary means of knowledge operating in Maya.   You can throw it away once you realize advaita, your own nature. You can’t discard yourself.   Advaita is simply the knowledge of non-duality provided by Vedanta…which can come about in various ways.

With Swami Dayananda you have to consider that he was born into the Vedanta world from a very early age.  He is a Brahmin from a village.  He was naturally lead to it because for educated Brahmins with a spiritual vasana they gravitated to it more or less without hindrance.  The Vedanta world in India is a big world.   It sits at the top of all the spiritual paths.  And you can get a lot more from Vedanta than self realization; you get knowledge of yoga which allows you to develop and control the mind...plus you get a refined appreciation of dharma which has tremendous implications in terms of happiness.  Even before the Swami realized who he must have realized how effective it was.  He spend many years with Swami Chinmayananda who was Mr. Vedanta before he set out on his own and became Mr. Vedanta himself.  You would be amazed at how many thousands of Vedanta enlightened people there are in India.  Maybe he had no experience of any other path.

This statement is quite typical of him.  I remember at one time a long time ago he said that you could only get enlightened if you knew Sanskrit.  He eventually retracted that statement, although Sanskrit knowledge is certainly very useful if you are doing Vedanta sadhana…because the scriptures were originally written in Sanskrit. One has to remember that being enlightened does not make the instrument, the body/mind, perfect.  So we have to cut the Swami a bit of slack on this issue.  At one time he was contemptuous of psychotherapy but did an about face some years later.  This is in no way a criticism of Swami Dayananda for whom I have the highest respect. In fact it is a tribute to his character that he is able to reevaluate his views.

Now to the issue of ‘other paths’ to enlightenment.  If this is a non-dual reality then enlightenment is only going to be attained through Self knowledge, since we are already enlightened.  Any path that sells experiential enlightenment is selling temporary enlightenment.  So if there are other paths they would have to have a means of Self knowledge.   And any statements that teach that this is a non-dual reality is Vedanta.  Vedanta is a compound word.  ‘Veda’ and ‘anta’ and it means ‘the knowledge (veda) that ends (anta) the search for (self) knowledge.   The essence of Vedanta is the contained in the statement ‘Tat tvam asi.’  It means, ‘You are That’ meaning non-dual actionless awareness.  This knowledge is Vedanta. Anyone who gives you this knowledge is a Vedanta teacher whether or not he or she went through the traditional gurukula system.  And anyone who realizes it through inquiry or an epiphany got enlightened through Vedanta.  So in this sense it is the only way. 

2)  I’m pretty sure I have read in a Vedic scripture that to attain realization you must have, amongst other things, a male body. Therefore women cannot be self-realsied? I ask, because there is Swamini who is a direct disciple of Swami Dayananda in the UK .

Ram:  That idea is just a remnant of the Brahminical caste system which was pretty sexist.  It is completely untrue, although a masculine temperament is one of the qualifications for enlightenment. A masculine temperament can be found in both males and females.   Dayananda is the guru to quite a few enlightened women.  A masculine temperament is a no-nonsense, take no prisoners state of mind.   It is considered a qualification because so many seekers are romantic and sentimental, prone to emotional tendencies which make the susceptible to the many irrational beliefs floating around in the spiritual world.  Vedanta is not ‘spiritual.’  Vedanta is a professional means of knowledge.  It is both simple and sophisticated.  It requires discrimination and dispassion, something that the ‘feminine’ mentality is not always noted for.  Remember this is not a gender thing.  Gender is just a symbol used to address two states of mind.  There are many men…particularly nowadays…with romantic and sentimental minds who are prone to emotion and are completely unsuited for Vedanta sadhana.   

3)  Is self-realization a discrete occurrence in time? i.e. after hearing about, contemplating and meditating on the self; one day it will just suddenly click that 'I am Self'. For example, did you, one day just wake up and realize you are the self (obviously after long sadhana).

Or is the removal of self ignorance a gradual process over time? Whereby, you gradually realise the self (although this is a bit non-sensical).

Ram: It can be either or both.  Usually one realizes who one is, falls again under the sway of ignorance, applies the knowledge again, realizes again and so on.  It goes on over and over until one day there is absolutely no doubt and the process of enlightenment/endarkenment stops for sure. Ignorance is persistent and aggressive and one needs to practice the knowledge until the last vestige is rooted out.   I have a friend, a self realized person, who said, “I realized the Self five hundred times before my seeking stopped” to illustrate that point. 

4)  Does the ignorance of the self reside in the MIND (intellect)? i.e. self realization is actually only occurring in the mind, since the self is eternally free, right?  So it’s just the mind realizing that IT is NOT 'I'. Therefore Vedanta uses the mind-intellect to teach the mind-intellect itself?

Ram:  Got it in one!  Good on you, as the Aussies say.   

Arun: As ever, thanks for your clarity Ram. If you ever get the chance, it would be great for you to visit the UK - i would be very interested in meeting you Ram. Unfortunately, your Germany retreat is during my degree studies which means I don’t think I can make it, although I would really like to come and meet you. Let’s see, maybe the Self will provede me with an opportunity to meet somehow.

Best Wishes,
Arun
My pleasure, Arun.  Take care of yourself.