My spiritual journey started when I was 12 years old. It went from taking a deep dive into Christianity, emerging from it when I was 19, then a 2 year spell of interest in Womens Lib and socialist ideas before, at the age of 24, turning to Eastern teaching. Twenty-two years later I turned to Western Advaita, which actually revealed to me what I had set out to realize. It was only 5 years from then that I seriously started to study Advaita Vedanta.

 This brought about a big change, not so much in what I realized to be true, but in the way my intellect was challenged. For more than thirty years it kept learning that it could not possibly contribute anything worthwhile to my life, at least not in any spiritual respect. And as my life did almost entirely consist in what I considered to be spiritual at that time, the intellect became almost redundant in the course of those years between 24 and 54.

 The invitation to inquire into Vedanta was handed out to me through Dennis Waite’s book “Back to the Truth – 5000 years of Advaita”. This book in itself demanded all my - at that time quite underused - abilities to concentrate, memorize and process data. Luckily, my intuitive expertise was fairly evolved and I had been in India long enough to intuit that Advaita Vedanta was THE key for the Western seeker. Of course it is a key for all seekers, East, West, North and South alike but at that time I was on the look-out for something that would really make a difference for the many Western seekers I had come to know, travel and work with during all those years.

 With the help of the online classes of Swami Paramarthananda and the books of Swami Dayananda and Swami Chinmayananda, as well as reading the posts from the Advaitin list every day and sometimes participating actively in the discussions, I slowly made my way into the teaching. Unfortunately in Germany there was/is no possibility of taking part in classes or exchange with like-minded people. But luckily I seem to be a born autodidact so I delved into it anyway and continue delving deeper and deeper every day.

 The background of my personal story may explain why I am so very interested in bridging the gap between Western and traditional Advaitins. I know the value of both and experience how valuable many of the keys of Advaita Vedanta are to sort out the confused minds of Western people I work with. As I am not a Vedanta teacher the little I have learned so far is all I can offer to people but even that does work wonders.

 It is unfortunate that up until now very few Western teachers have explored Advaita Vedanta. Without the backing of a proper teaching methodology the clues that Western Advaita hands out can only work for already advanced seekers. Those who are not advanced are likely to remain mystified about who they are in Truth. Still they come back again and again because what they hear rings deeply true to them: that every one’s true nature is existence-consciousness-limitlessness.[1]

 For anyone with a background of traditional Advaita Vedanta, however, listening to Western Advaita teachers proves to be unsatisfactory because their message often seems confused (and confusing).

  As pointed out in other blogs, use of language differs in East and West. For someone with a traditional viewpoint it is often as difficult to discern the Truth of a statement in Western language as it is for a Westerner to filter out Truth from a Sanskrit scriptural statement (even if correctly translated). What would need to happen to overcome these difficulties?

 Westerners would need to study Advaita Vedanta for some years (or more) to get to a proper understanding of such texts. This being quite an arduous undertaking, so far only few have engaged in it.

 Traditional Advaitins would not have to invest that much time and effort; but they would need to change their way of listening (when listening to a Western teacher). Usually they are not prepared to go step by step into a Western style exploration with a teacher. More often than not they are convinced that this cannot be worth their while because they miss the authority of the scriptures, they miss the possibility of systematic study and they miss God. By looking out for a certain way of expression and certain essential components they find the statements to be shallow.

 What they need to take into account is that even a Western teacher who IS a knower of Truth usually does not have the terminology to convey it. Thus Western teaching can seem to make unfounded claims, contradictory and illogical statements and use many vague terms without providing any definition.

 By contrast Advaita Vedanta delivers precise definitions and terminology; it calls for strictly logical thinking - based on the teachings of the Upanishads but even those have to be understood (not believed in). Though the definitions are precise they nevertheless have to be interpreted in context. A teacher cannot just make a vague statement and hope that things will be apprehended somehow. An argument for or against something has to be consistently carried out, no questions should remain unaddressed and it has to be followed through. Moreover in a teaching every statement needs to be verifiable by the scriptures.

 As opposed to some Traditionalists I do not think that enlightenment is possible only for those who walk the path designed by Sampradaya teaching. Although I consider it to be the peak of Advaita teaching, I hold that there are Jnanis who discovered the Truth a different way – in India as well as in other parts of the world. All of them will use their own words and many of their expressions will fall short compared to the superb terminology of Advaita Vedanta; but this does not mean that they do not know the Truth.

Admittedly this stance makes it more difficult to judge the quality of a teacher even within one’s own culture, let alone another one. It is much easier to look out for the math someone is associated with and trust that such a teacher is a good one. From the traditional perspective the quality of a teacher is not determined alone by him being a knower of truth. He also needs to have extensively studied the scriptures and should be able to apply the proven teaching methodology of Advaita Vedanta handed down through centuries by the maths of Shankaracharya.

  Enlightened Western Advaita teachers can talk only from their own authority and use their own communication skills, psychological expertise and intuitive faculties to help people. Still, some of them are searched out by thousands of seekers so one may suspect that they have something useful to deliver. At least, to my mind, this should be reason enough to investigate into their secret(s).

 Western Advaita teaching provides clues on an individualized basis – as far as I can see this is it’s strength and this is it’s weakness; it is this individualized approach (plus the fact that no onerous study of foreign scriptures and language is involved) that makes it so attractive in the Western world. If the teacher is very good she/he may be able to offer exactly the clue that someone needs at a given moment to make him realize his/her true nature.

But this kind of realization is all too likely to remain a mere experience.

 Why? The reason (that it is likely) is twofold:

Time-wise - There is no further guidance[2] except for the visit of another Satsang of that teacher in a few weeks or months. As there is no study and often no practice of any kind, for most people this is far too long a gap; they are likely to loose whatever they have gained long before the next pointer to truth may come their way.

Method-wise - Because there is no methodology, even if there is some guidance it is more or less random.[3]

 The consistent teaching of Advaita Vedanta by a competent enlightened teacher using the teaching methodology of the tradition, however, provides a reliable framework for beginners as well as advanced students.

 Now, unless a Western seeker is utterly frustrated he is unlikely to abandon his favorite teacher to start his search from scratch within a traditional framework. My vision for Western teaching would be that the teachers are more open to appreciating the value of the traditional methodology and the study of the scriptures more. Thus from getting a deeper understanding of Advaita Vedanta themselves they would be able to prevent a lot of confusions that their not so advanced listeners fall victim to.

 My vision for Traditional teaching would be that advanced seekers and/or teachers would open up their minds to different ways of expression and – just as an experiment - let themselves explore their own understanding with a teacher in the individualized way that many Western teachers offer.

[1] There is no difference between Western teaching and Vedanta in that respect, except for some teachers who lean more towards Buddhism calling one’s true nature “emptiness” and some others who say that fullness and emptiness are essentially the same.

[2] The only exception known to me is Dolanos „Intensive Satsang“.

[3] Again Dolano is a kind of exception, as she does apply a methodology, even though it does not compare to the traditional methodology of Advaita Vedanta

“Rajas is in the form of a coloring (of the mind), causing longing and well-entrenched attachment. It totally binds the indweller of the body by connection with action.” BG 14, 7

“Greed, physical restlessness, undertaking of activities, mental restlessness, longing – these are born when rajas has increased.” BG 14,12

 
Claire is a hard-working woman. Companies, administrative bodies, professional associations and the like book her to conduct workshops all over Europe. 90% of her nights are spent in hotel rooms, hardly any weekend she spends in her own home which means there is hardly any private time. She is never not working.

The motives for this kind of life style changed several times in the last years but the life style itself has remained. Recently she asked me what to do about some of her habits, which she herself found undesirable: 1. the habit of drinking a glass of wine (not more than two) after work to calm herself down, 2. the tendency to slip into bouts of shopping addiction spending lots of money on clothes (which means she needs to work even harder in order to settle her account).

Here one can easily start to focus on the symptoms and forget about the cause. Drinking alcohol is tamasic. The shopping addiction is partly rajasic – greed – and partly tamasic – indulgence. Someone with a rajasic lifestyle as obvious as her’s, is not someone who one can diagnose as basically tamasic. So a lot of her tamasic behavior can be considered as an effect of her rajasic pattern.[1] Even though her tamasic reactions need to be kept in check – and in fact she does keep them in check – I do not think that they need her main attention. Her psychological system tries to balance her obsessive busy-ness the way it knows, i.e. with tamasic countermotions; but in this respect the real problem is the excessive busy-ness, not the reaction to it. In fact in BG 18,8 Krishna points out that such reactions need not even be called anything else but rajasic.

Claire needs to learn a different way to live so that the need for any kind of compensation becomes obsolete. By dis-identifying from her rajasic habits she will develop a more sattvic lifestyle. What does this mean in practical terms?

 
Advaita Vedanta prescribes a simple method to reduce fixation on rajas, called karma yoga. It signifies a certain attitude to one’s own actions as well as to their results.

To go into any kind of action we need to have a desire. To get up in the morning may be prompted by my desire to earn a living, by my desire to go to the bathroom, by my desire to enjoy the sunshine outside or whatever. The initial spark that gets me going on whatever is desire.

Now there are desires and desires. Some are almost arbitrary, carrying very little energy. They are rather preferences or intentions than desires. Others are highly charged and carry a lot of energy. Why do some carry lots of energy and others almost none? The key word is identification or attachment[2].

What is identification? When identifying with something I take this something almost as my own self – ‘me or mine’. One can be identified with people, situations, ideas and convictions, behavior patterns and of course with one’s desires.

So my desire prompts me to act because I want a certain result. Not every desire is as easily fulfilled as getting up in the morning. Lets say I want to spend a beautiful day with my loved one/s. If it is a preference, i.e. I am not identified with the desire, I will propose it and when meeting with a positive response I will go ahead and prepare for the trip. If preparations go well we will set off. The day may be as beautiful as I had wished for and we happily return home in the night.

Then again, I might face opposition on the proposal or I may not be able to prepare according to my intentions – I wanted a picnic but there is nothing suitable in the fridge, I wanted to wear that blue pair of shorts but it is still waiting to be washed, I wanted my beloved(s) to give me a hand but they decide to make endless phone calls instead. Even if all went well before we set off, the day itself may not meet my preferences. Maybe the car breaks down or one of us sprains his ankle and we spend the day in a walk-in clinic instead of in the county side or we cannot stop ourselves getting again into this old argument about moving house or not.

 If there really had not been any identification with the desire for a beautiful day with my loved one/s it would be utterly immaterial whether things went this way or that. This however may be a little too angelic to expect of oneself. Reduced identification will do; one can feel a little sad or dispirited or annoyed but for someone not identified with his/her original intentions these reactions will pass swiftly.

If there was a lot of identification, it means that I cherish my own desire for a beautiful day with my loved one/s and all the desires that go with it as much as my own self; this implies that if anything goes against these desires it goes against myself and I will have a strong reaction against the obstacle.

The rajasic attitude is: In my actions I have to assert myself, meaning I have to make sure they are implemented forcefully so I attain the goal I have set. If things do not turn out as desired I feel intensely frustrated and react with the attempt to assert myself more. If nothing works I will move onto another desired project that looks as if I could be more successful and proceed in the same way.

“That action which is done by one who has a (pronounced) desire for the result or again with arrogance (and) a lot of exertion is called rajasa.” BG 18, 24

Rajas is very much identified with the desire prompting the action and the action itself as well as with the desired result. Swami Paramathananda points out that raga (identification or attachment) brings about shoka (grief) and shoka brings about moha (confusion about right and wrong). Turned around this means whenever there is grief it is worth investigating what kind of identification/attachment is behind that grief.

Too much rajas certainly brings about a lot of grief in the form of feeling bothered, upset, unnerved, frustrated, annoyed, irritated, agitated, cross, outraged, angry, furious (in this order). If what is behind the grief has been clearly recognized for what it is, raga (identification/attachment), we can nip the unfortunate process in the bud. If not, our minds will fall victim to grief, which will bring about delusion.

 
In the case of Claire who did not realize that the way she lives and works displays an identification (raga) with rajas, a lot of agitation and frustration (shoka) has come about, which needs to be tempered; in her case by drinking the odd glass of wine in order to calm down and by treating herself to nice new clothes in shopping bouts.

These reactions can be classified as moha because in the course of doing them she is convinced that her actions are absolutely appropriate, something that afterwards she recognizes as erroneous.

So the first step in order for Claire to leave her behavior pattern behind is in acknowledging it as rajasic. The second step is acquiring an understanding of the guna that would allow her to rise above her pattern. This is sattvaguna.

“That action, which is enjoined and which is done without attachment, without being impelled by likes and dislikes, by a person without a (binding) desire for the result, is called sattvika.” BG 18,23

 
Someone who is predominantly sattvic will act with
little or no attachment to/identification with
neither the desire prompting the action
nor the action itself
nor the result.

 
The desire is dispassionate, more a preference or intention.

The attitude to the action is ‘I am not the doer’.

The attitude to the results of actions is ‘while the attempt to reach a certain result is natural, once I have acted, I let go of this attempt’.

 
How can such an attitude be achieved?

For such an attitude it is helpful to introduce Ishvara. Ishvara, as mentioned in other blogs, is the totality of natural laws and orders and their seamless interlocking. No human being will seriously claim that he/she is above or beyond natural law and order: throwing dry wood into fire will make it burn and turn into ashes. Being born as a human, I cannot suddenly choose to become a duck. Screaming at someone will trigger a physiological and psychological reaction in him and myself. No-one can escape such laws.

Yet there are innumerable laws we do not know or do not understand. Admitting to both – that we are not above them and that we often do not even know of them – humbles us. This attitude means we bow to Ishvara in wonder, reverence and gratitude. Why gratitude? Because isn’t it a miracle that we, knowing so little, are still alive and even happy a lot of the time?

Grateful or not, the acknowledgement of Ishvara allows me to let go of my rajasic identification. How?

 As to the results of my actions – taking into account the innumerable unknown factors that concur to form the result of what I have set in motion – I cannot possibly claim the authorship for the same. Yes, I am the author of an action but never of the result. The result is Ishvaras ‘doing’, the result is the product of the natural laws and orders and their seamless interlocking. This attitude in itself will propel me a fair way towards sattvaguna.

The next step is more advanced and not possible for many but it is worth to reflect about it:

As to the action – who or what is this “me” that acts? Is it apart from the natural laws and orders? Is it not rather the expression of these very same laws and orders? Looking from this perspective: as much as I can say “I act” I can say “these natural laws and orders act” and surrender my identification with my own ego to them, i.e. to Ishvara.

As to the desire prompting the action –

Lets consider a really rajasic want, a burning desire, a passionate craving (to act in a certain way). Such cravings usually are deeply ingrained habits. More often than not one cannot change them in a trice. One has to grow beyond them. How? First of all they can be worked on directly by constantly keeping them in check. This being not always very successful, we can ask for help. Who? Ishvara. Our very asking for help expresses our intention to go beyond the habit and will in time effect a change. Swamini Atmaprakashananda calls prayer “will-involved auto-suggestion“, her Guru Swami Dayananda calls it “free will”. We can choose to express our free will in mindlessly following in old ruts, or we can decide to express it in prayer for the ability to change.

The rajasic impatience, however, will tend to pray once or twice and then complain that it does not help. A possible remedy: make the desire to change as urgent as the desire that you want to leave behind, pray intensely, again and again, for the ability to be able to leave the old habit behind. Don’t give up, it will work.

 
My attempt in this blog was not to try and diagnose and solve a psychological problem with vedantic means – although as has been shown this is possible to a degree. But in Advaita Vedanta we aim for much more than mere freedom of psychological disturbances. We aim for moksha, which is the freedom from ignorance.

In my last blog (please see there) I talked about how sattvaguna helps us to overcome ignorance because “Knowledge is the key to sattva and vice versa: the more sattva shines through us the more capable our intellect will become. By deepening and refining the mind's capacity to understand, knowledge will grow.”