Dear Sundari, I have a doubt about two parts of the teachings, both arose out of a satsang James gave recently, where he used the candle light metaphor to explain the difference and the sameness of love and knowledge. I found it powerful but also confusing because it is quite a dualistic concept. I thought the metaphor fell short in several ways. Firstly, there is the containment of the room, and then because I heard both of you say on many occasions that love and knowledge in the true meaning of those words, are the same thing.
Sundari: Good to hear from you again, Gary. The recent satsang James gave on the candle light metaphor is a very powerful one, but all metaphors have their limitations. I see why you found it confusing because the analogy employed does seem to be dualistic. Bear in mind though that James did explain this, and emphasized that Vedanta provisionally accepts duality in order to negate it. Where else can one start to unfold nonduality? Because nonduality is so subtle, and it is not an object of knowledge, the teachings start where everyone believes themselves to be – in duality. The scripture then ‘walks’ us through the impeccable logic of the nondual teachings, and if the inquirer is qualified, he/she is gradually and flawlessly lead out of duality.
In the metaphor in question, James uses a candle lit in a large dark room. The heat of the flame symbolizes what Self-knowledge, the eternal flame of love existing in all hearts, feels like for the jiva. And the light the candle emits represents Self-knowledge. He separates the heat/love and the light/knowledge and uses the containment of the room, its darkness minus the light, to represent ignorance. Though Vedanta unfolds that love is the true nature of reality, therefore it is knowledge, and there is nowhere the Self is not, it cannot be contained, so the metaphor is purely for teaching purposes.
It teaches that though feelings and thoughts are objects known to the Self, our true identity, we do experience them. And knowing you are the Self when the flame of Self-knowledge is burning, feels blissful for the jiva. Though Self-knowledge is not dependent on a feeling or a thought, to assimilate the nondual teachings, we need an open heart and a clear, sattvic intellect. Clear thinking is involved as is a feeling component to everything. James used the word ‘palpable’, which describes it very well. So though it does not serve us to identify with most of our thoughts and feelings and to apply dispassion to them, the feeling of deepest satisfaction and love that Self-knowledge brings is one feeling that is very good to identify with. As is the thought ‘I am the Self’. When you know you are the Self, there is no dependence on the feeling and no separation in the thought because neither comes or goes. It is a permanent state of satisfaction, regardless of whether or not the feeling of bliss or the thought of knowledge is present.
Before Self-knowledge obtains, both love as our true nature and Self-knowledge are hidden in the dark of ignorance, and not accessible to the heart or the mind. Though this metaphor seems to imply that lighting the candle brings something that was not there before to light, what it is actually saying is that something is required to illuminate the dark so that what has always been there can be seen and known. And that ‘something’ means the scripture, the nondual teachings of Vedanta. Without a valid means of knowledge for the nondual Self, it is almost impossible to lift the veil of Maya, the darkness, from the mind.
The metaphor appears to separate love and knowledge, but in fact, it proves that they are inseparable. Love is not a feeling, it is Self-knowledge, it is the light, and it is the true nature of the mind. It does not reside in the mind or in the heart as it has no specific location. Love/Self-knowledge pervades everything. It is not contained by anything. But if ignorance of our true nature stands in the way of the appreciation of this fact, we think that love and Self-knowledge are quite different and quite separate, and we need to do something to attain either of them.
As humans we experience what we call “love” as an indwelling and compelling feeling that resides apparently dormant in our hearts and awaked from time to time by the appearance of an external object of beauty, desire or compassion. The heart opens, love is ignited and rises up, overwhelming the lover with its powerful force. This kind of love comes unbidden, gloriously and then disappears like the melting snow, no matter how hard we try to hang on to it. We then believe that we suffer love’s absence, and again we seek to re- ignite it, to ‘find it’ so that we can experience that wonderful bliss again.
A human life is spent in search of this feeling, one way or another, at the mercy of its grace. But we are looking for love in all the wrong places. Mostly we seek it in the form of another person, that elusive soul mate whose very presence opens the floodgates of bliss. Perhaps when the search for the soul mate has not been successful or has resulted in painful loss, we turn to God or religion and try to experience love through religious or spiritual experience. Or through art, music, nature or any other promising object. These fleeting experiences, although joyful, do not produce lasting happiness but rather are like carrots on a stick before a hungry donkey, tempting us to keep going, keep searching, keep believing. Not to become cynical.
If we are very blessed, we stop seeking love and come upon the truth of our own nature – I am the love that I seek. Love is me. Love is all there is. There is nothing else. The person we thought we were dissolves into the truth of love itself, our very being, the only reality, which we call non duality. Why do we call it non duality? Because we realize that there is only me. Only one thing exists and for want of a better word we call it love because love is the only experience that comes close to what we now know to be the truth of Existence. Other words could be goodness, wholeness, fullness, light – but these words all have an opposite, and love does not. We can experience love, but in truth, love is not an experience. It is the only reality. This truth is that love as my nature, Self-knowledge, cannot be lost.
Once the heart has opened and is filled by Self-knowledge, love does not come and go as feelings do, because I do not come and go. I am not a feeling – I am Existence and Existence is love, shining eternally in my own light. This is the flame that lights the darkness, the eternal warmth of the love that is me. And it feels amazing for the mind, and anyone who comes into contact with such a mind. This is because the Self always recognises itself. With this understanding, all suffering ceases. Pain may arise, or loss, or the cruel dark expressions of human ignorance but none of these can recreate suffering because they are known to be mithya, not me. For the samsari love is blind but for the jnani, love sees only itself.
What is the effect of Self-knowledge upon life as a jiva? Of course I still have love feelings for my husband, my children, my morning cup of coffee – those feelings do not disappear but are experienced within the context of their apparent reality, namely mithya. Love itself is known to be satya, shining as every name and form, as every manifestation of Existence, meaning, me. So the love I feel for my husband/friends/children is the love of the universal wife/friend/mother of all children. At once personal and yet inseparable from love itself. I am not conflicted in loving this but not that. It does not make me sentimental or unfeeling but secure, peaceful, devoted, and happy in the knowledge that for all eternity and beyond, manifest or un-manifest, I am love.
The candle light metaphor can fall short if one takes it too literally in that Self-knowledge cannot switched on and off like a candle can. The bliss of the Self is always present whether or not this knowledge is available to the mind. It may be hidden by ignorance of my true nature, but it is nonetheless always present. It is satya, Awareness, that which knows ignorance and knowledge. This flame has no beginning or end.
Gary: Secondly, my second doubt is where James talks about becoming a slave to Isvara. I have heard both you and Ramji teach how important it is that the inquirer becomes the devotee of the teacher and the scripture. You are no longer the boss if you are truly committed to self-inquiry. That the whole quest for freedom is to surrender the ‘I” identified with its ego, individuality and its ‘story’ to Isvara, however you perceive that creative force behind the world. But I have trouble with the idea of being a slave. Please help me to understand this as I get this is a big obstacle in my quest for freedom from limitation.
Sundari: Good point, and one that all serious inquirers will have to come to terms with if freedom from the jiva (the idea of individuality) is ever to take place. The ego hates the idea of subservience. Most egos hang on to the belief that we have free will and that submitting to anyone is weakness. But if we cannot do this, and we confuse the teacher or the people with whom we have transactions as being ‘people’ or ‘other’, we will not surrender to them. But as everything we experience in our lives is in fact, Isvara, surrender is the only sane option. Resistance is futile. Everything belongs to and is borrowed from Isvara, except me, the Self.
Speaking for myself as a jiva, I know how hard this is. I had to grow up and take care of myself in a hostile world, so I developed a fierce independence and suspicion of people’s motives, often with good reason. Everyone has an agenda in the world of duality. I put great store in trust and honesty, and often felt betrayed by those who did not demonstrate these qualities. Who has not experienced this? Until I realized that this only matters if you are identified with the egoic self. Life in the apparent reality is inherently untrustworthy; nothing is as it seems. And yet, paradoxically, freedom from this means I must fully surrender to Isvara.
There is no way around this one. All the hard parts of the jiva identity have to go – especially those. If there is still the slightest vestige of individuality left, freedom will not obtain. I think this is true for most inquirers, even those whose Self-knowledge is firm. Of course it sounds contradictory because freedom and submission seem like oxymorons. But the kind of freedom we are really after requires freedom from who we think we are, the limited small egoic self in bondage to objects. The one that is so invested in having agency and free will.
Becoming a slave to Isvara therefore means you have surrendered to the fact that Isvara in the form of your life and all in it, is your teacher. Is you. So hanging onto the stupid idea of independence only serves to bind you more deeply to that which you are seeking freedom from. This only sounds contradictory and counter-intuitive if we are not qualified for self-inquiry. But even if we are, the ego does not give up or give in easily. The stamp of individuality in the blueprint of the jiva program is extremely hard to root out. Therein lies all the teaching of Vedanta!
Much love
Sundari
