A Shocking Memory

When the Mandala Yoga Ashrama in Wales was being established, in the early/mid 1980's, I was training in Kung Fu with a very interesting guy called Chris Baldwin. Chris's wife at the time, Anne, was a yoga teacher, and her teacher training tutor was Swami Paramatmananda Saraswati. Swami Paramatma was also Poornamurti's teacher training tutor, although I wasn't to meet Poorrnamurti for another 20 years.
Through Anne, Chris new Paramatma, and Paramatma was heavily involved in the ashrama at that time. So Chris organised a couple of visits to the ashrama. During my time with Chris, one of these visits came up.
Now, I'd been training very heavily at around this time. I was 18 or 19 years old, practiced yoga asanas daily, ran everywhere instead of taking public transport, was unemployed and spent every hour of the day training with my good friend Gilly (Paul Gilmore). In fact, We used to go round to Chris' house on a Friday night, and train with him all weekend at Kung Fu and meditation.
So, the ashrama visit was arranged, but a few days before we were due to go, I became ill with a very heavy chest and throat infection.
All of this was lost in my memory until a few weeks ago, when it all came back to me. Especially something Gilly said.
You see, whilst the Kung Fu group had been at the ashrama, so had Swami Niranjanananda!
At the time, he must have been about 24 years old, maybe less, and his visit there was very low key compared to his travels in more recent years. He had basically hung out with the kung fu crowd!
I can remember now everyone talking about how beautiful he was, and what an amazing person he was.
But most of all, I remember Gilly saying that Swamiji had suggested to him that he go back Swami Satyanandas ashram in India with him!

I think about the mess that I am now, compared to who I was then, and I wonder if Swamaji would have offered me the same opportunity. I can remember being amazed that Gilly had not taken up the offer, and saying that I'd go at the drop of a hat.

But I hadn't been there. So I have to assume that I wasn't meant to be there.

The Yoga I Don't Do and the Yoga I Do Do

Of course, I should do it all, but let's be honest: I don't do much.

Well that is, I don't do much of what people think of as yoga.

I'm 45, fat, and am becoming seriously inflexible in body. I never, ok, rarely, practice asana or pranayama.

But I consider myself a practicing yogi. I have, after all, been blessed with Karma Sannyasa Diksha by my Beloved Guru.

So what do I do?

Well, every day - every day - I think about my Guru. Every day he is on my mind. Every day I remember touching his feet, and every day I thank him from the bottom of my heart for accepting me as his worst disciple.

I have a piece of paper blue-tacked to my computer monitor at work. It has written on it the Yamas and the Niyamas. I look at it many times every day. It helps me to bring what I consider to be the real spirit of yoga into my working day. I try hard to deal with every person and every situation in light of those ten simple principles.

I approach my daily work as service. When someone at work asks me to help them, or to do something, it is my Beloved Guru who is asking through them. It doesn't matter that they are asking me to provide evidence for internal audit, or to find the root cause of a bug in the program code. What I am being asked to do is irrelevant. The fact is, I am where I am, and this is what I am to do. I could not be where I am if my Beloved Guru did not put me here. So, I do as He asks, and I do it for Him.

I try to take 20 minutes each mid-day to chant some malas of the mantra my Beloved Guru gave to me. My Beloved Guru has provided a multi-faith room at work so I can do this. Sometimes I am too busy, but that's ok, because if I am busy, then I am busy with my Beloved Guru's work.

So I would love to be thin and bendy, and to be able again to practice ustrasana and siddhasana, matsyasana and my other old favourites. But that won't happen. It's not my path, and I'm not yet ready to step up to the third rung of the eight-step ladder. The first two rungs are enough, and are more than I believe I will achieve in this incarnation. If I try, and if I persist in my trying, then perhaps I can achieve enough that in my next incarnation, I am ready to take another step.

I hope and pray that in my next incarnation, I am able to be born on the same landmass, or even the same country, as my Beloved Guru. If my Yoga practice can achieve so much, the reward will have far outreached the effort.

Vedanta

In another context, someone just asked me the meaning of advaita.

This is what I answered:

As I'm sure you are ware, much of Yoga philosophy is based upon the Upanishads. The Upanishads are a loose collection of writings from the Indian subcontinent. They date from around 1000 years old, to just a couple of hundred years old. There is no official collection, as such, and there are some Upanishads that are not always included in collections.

There are a few 'classics', though, such as Brihadaranyak, Mandukya, Chandogya, and Isa.

Upanishad means 'to sit near', and the implication is that it is the student sitting near to the teacher. Many Upanisads are written as a student asking questions of a teacher, and the teacher answering. The questions are profound, such as: What is the true nature of reality; What is the real significance of OM; etc.

As these books are old, they have been read by many people, and some of those people were remarkably bright. Some of these people commented on the Upanishads, and over time, 'schools of thought' grew up around these commentaries.

There are three main schools of thought:

Dvaita (dualistic): The true nature of reality is that there is a divine spirit which is separate from human consciousness. We can strive to approach the divine spirit, and find its grace and favour, but we can never become one with the divine spirit.

Advaita (non-dualistic): The true nature of reality is non-dual. We and the divine spirit are identical. What you are right now is the divine. What you see right now is the divine. Everything that is, is the divine, right here, right now, in its pure, perfect undiluted form. All we need to do is realise our present true nature, and we are one with the divine.

Vishist-advaita (qualified non-dualism): The true nature of reality is one divine spirit, but presently we are separate from that spirit. We can become one with the divine, but we have to strive to achieve this. It's not just a case of modifying our understanding (as in pure advaita), but of modifying our nature.

It's worth pointing out that, although in the past there have been fierce discussion (I mean, hundreds of years ago), most people now accept that each of these is really just a different way of approaching the same thing. Some people feel more comfortable thinking about things one way or the other. In the end, it matters little, as the Upanishads always say the same, whatever spectacles you look at them through!

The Theory of Emergence

Continuing with my theme of pointing out where great scientists with PhD's coming out of their ears are going wrong...

One of the most accepted theories of consciousness in science at the moment is that it is simply an 'emergent feature'.

The idea is that the brain is simply so complex, that the illusion of consciousness simply emerges from the complexity. Again, a bit like the idea of a whirlpool emerging from a flowing river. The whirlpool isn't real in a great sense, it just 'emerges' from the complexity of the forces of the flowing water.

So this idea of emergent consciousness says that there really is no 'I'. There is no self at all, and the fact that we think we exist is just a complex activity of the brain that simply springs forth from its inherent nature. Consciousness, even beingness, is simply an illusion brought forth by the nature of the way matter behaves.

Well, yet again, they have it nearly right.

In fact, the brain is an emergent feature of consciousness.

The universe is an emergent feature of consciousness.

Radiohead - A Theory of of Mind/Body

Conventional science believes that the brain is the seat of consciousness.

Well, I can go along with that, to an extent.

One of ways that scientists come to that conclusion is by prodding around in brains. Or by examining the behaviour of beings (human beings or other-species beings) with damaged brains. They come to the conclusion that, as behaviour is altered when the brain i altered, this proves that consciousness is a property of the brain.

In other words, there is no need for any theory of consciousness as separate from the brain, and certainly no need to postulate a soul or spirit that inhabits the brain/body.

Scientists can prove that the brain 'generates' consciousness, because they can manipulate different parts of the brain, and show predictable results. If we mess around with one part of the brain, then the sense of social conscience is lost. If we mes around with another part of the brain, the ability to recognise faces is lost, etc.

This is taken to mean that these parts of the brain 'are responsible for' these aspects of our conscious being. The whole thing is wrapped up, and no further thought need be given to it. The so called consciousness is just a illusion created by the way thee varous parts of the brain interact. Its just electrical impulses, nothing more.

Well.

I have a box on desk that talks to me.

There is a voice coming from the box, so, it makes sense that the voice comes from within the box.

I open the box up to see, and there are a complex system of wiring and weird shaped things.

I finda few bits that move. When I move them, the voice changes. When I move one thing, the voice gets louder or quieter. When I move another, the voice changes to music, or to a different voice. Maybe to a strange voice talking about 'Dogger, Backing South 5 to 7'!

If I mess around with some of the other parts, I sometimes et screeching and howling. If I mess about to much, it dies.

It's quite obvious that this voice originates from the complicated machinery in the box.

Of course, it doesn't. And we all know I'm describing a radio. Funny thing is, someone from a couple of hundred years ago might reach these conclusions, and a modern scientist might scoff at them or not understanding radio waves.

Of course, the way a radio works is that there is a field permeating the space all around us, and tis field is called 'electromagnetic radiation', or radio waves. The radio is just receiving equipment. It 'tunes in' to the electromagnetic field, and as a consequence, manifests sounds.

Different radios can be tuned to different channels, and even radios tuned to the same channel sound different. Some are louder, some quieter, some are hi-fidelity, some are 'cheap trannies', these days, some are digital!

The same thing is happening in the brain.

Space is infused with another field, called 'consciousness', or 'Brahman', or 'God'. Same difference.

Brains are receiving equipment for consciousness. This is so obvious to anyone but a scientist!

Some receptors are very good. Some receptors give a perfectly clear reception of the true nature of the consciousness field. Our Guru is one such.

Some receptors are less good. Some add their own 'colouration' to the field. The nature of the equipment influences how the field is manifest. Like a radio that has too much bass, or is too 'tinny'.

Some receptors give a great deal of distortion. Such as criminals and those who are so called 'evil'.

Some give quite a clear sound, but somehow lose all the subtlety and nuance. You can tell the equipment is receiving, but you can't make out quite what is being received. Such are animals and Liverpudlians (JOKE! :-).

Some objects are permeated by the field, but barely pick it up at all. Such are trees and mountains, planets and stars.

Remaining Verses

A few thoughts on BG 3.32 - 35.

32. But those who, out of envy, disregard these teachings and misunderstand everything, become lost and are the cause of their own suffering.
33. All beings act according to their own nature, even the wise. Why try to force anything to be otherwise?
34. It is natural for the sense o be attracted to that which is pleasant and to reject the unpleasant, but you must not come under the power of these two forces, because they are your enemies.
35. It is better to perform your own duty imperfectly, than someone else's perfectly. In fact, it is better to die in ones own duty, because following someone else's path is dangerous.

Taking these one at a time...

32. But those who, out of envy, disregard these teachings and misunderstand everything, become lost and are the cause of their own suffering.

This pretty much speaks for itself, but is perhaps worth adding some emphasis.
Become the cause of their own suffering.
Noone else. Nothing else, is the cause of our suffering, but ourselves.
We are each, individually, the cause of our own personal individual suffering.
And the cause of this suffering is that we forget, or are ignorant of, this teaching of the Gita: that everything that is in the manifest world is just the interaction of forces with other forces, again interacting with other forces...
Our suffering come because, not realising that we have no impact on the world, and the world has no impact on us, we imagine that the leaf swept along by the currents of the river, swirled by turbulence and bashed on the rocks, is who we are. We forget that we are actually the serene bird in the tree, simply observing the leaf with dispassionate compassion.

33. All beings act according to their own nature, even the wise. Why try to force anything to be otherwise?

Why try to force anything to be otherwise? Notice the 'try', ad the 'force'. We make heavy work for ourselves when we fight against what the world gives us. We can try all we want, we will not change a thing.
If we see change, and we believe it is as a consequence of our actions, that is also a delusion. Whatever happened was going to happen anyway.
If we choose not to act, so meaning it doesn't happen, then that is what was going to happen anyway.

34. It is natural for the sense to be attracted to that which is pleasant and to reject the unpleasant, but you must not come under the power of these two forces, because they are your enemies.

It seems the most thing in the world. Indeed in it's essence, it is the very basis of the survival instinct. Reject what is bad, accept what is good.
Te important thing here is 'you must not come under the power'.
It does not say 'you must ignore your instinct'. If something is bad, move away from it. Don't be affected by it. Don't feel fear or revulsion. Observe the bad situation, take it for what it is: forces of nature acting on other forces of nature, in such a way that you don't wish to be around them. See them, and move away.
If you can't move away, then its because you are an essential part of that particular pattern, working itself out. Bear with it. See it still as forces of nature acting other forces of nature. Recognise yourself not as the leaf in the wind, but as the observer of the leaf. See what comes, and, as the saying goes, roll with it.
It's at this point that most people say 'that's easier said than done'!
Of course it is.
Nobody said it would be easy.
But what do you want?
Do you want to get embroiled in the turbulence, forget your true nature as the unperturbed devine spirit, and just go with it being a horrible situation, and cause yourself more strife y struggling against forces so much ore vast than the puny leaf on the mighty river?
Or do you want to at least try to let go?
Do you want to at least make an effort to step back, take a breath and identify yourself with that still small voice?
The longer you use 'easier said than done' as an excuse for not doing, the longer it will be before you, personally, stop saying an start doing!
But that's okay too, because that also is already decided.

35. It is better to perform your own duty imperfectly, than someone else's perfectly. In fact, it is better to die in ones own duty, because following someone else's path is dangerous.

Hmmm.
Might save this one for tomorrow...

Bhagavad Gita 3.29 - 31

Continuing my look at the verses selected for the next Mrityunjaya meeting, lets move on to verse 29:

29. Those who are deluded by the qualities of material nature become attached to material activities.

The cause of attachment to material activities is delusion brought on by misunderstanding of the qualities of material nature.

The nature of the misunderstanding was mentioned previously: the idea that we carry out actions, and that we have a a conscious free-will.

It is this delusion of our activity in the world that gives rise to us believing we have some kind of investment in what goes on. We believe, mistakenly, that we are making decisions, and we are carrying out actions, and therefore we feel a sense of responsibility and ownership for the results of those actions. We also believe that just as we make our decisions and our own choices, so do other people. So when someone else does something that contradicts our expectations and desires, we get all hot under the collar about that, too.

It is our delusional belief that we are acting and being acted up by others that leads us to this feeling of interacting with the world, when in fact our true nature is as observer of the world.

30. Dedicating all actions to Me, meditating on the Supreme Spirit, becoming free from the wising and selfishness fever, you must fight!

We all know that 'fight' is figurative, and part of the story structure of the Gita, and that what it really means that we must do our duty. We must carry out our lives by following our Dharma and our samskaras.

And we can best achieve this by dedicating al actions to Krishna (or however you choose to name your conception of the Devine). So we perform our actions, to the best of our abilities, but we do them not for ourselves, but for God. Keeping God in mind at all times, we perform our duties with no selfishness, and no formulation of wishes for the results or outcome of our actions, as our actions are not ours, they belong entirely to God.

31. Whoever constantly practices tis teaching of Mine, with pure faith and without complaint, is released from karma.

Released from karma.

I can think of two ways of interpreting this: The way for mere mortals, and the real deeper meaning that applies only to those really elevated beings we hear about on occasion.

The interpretation for mere mortals, such as myself:

Released from Karma does not really mean 'released from karma'. Karma is a natural law and applies to everyone and everything. What this means is, because you are no longer attached, you are no longer impacted emotionally, intellectually or otherwise by the events that occur to you. Stuff still happens, but you understand that it's not really you it is happening to. Stuff is happening, and it's just forces of nature acting on other forces of nature. You are not involved in it anywhere. You just observe, perform your duty with dedication to God.

But what it really mean is:
Karma is a natural law. That's like saying 'released from the laws of physics'. Hmmm.

Well, some people are that released. Some people so seriously 'grok' that they are not in this world, that they are just the observer, that they are genuinely no longer bound by it's laws.

Maharaji swallowed enough LSD give an elephant the trip of it's lifetime, but it had no effect on him at all. Because, tripping is the consequence that follows if one is subject to the laws of nature, and Maharaji was not so subjected. Te laws of physics state that you can only be in one place at one time. Maharaji was frequently seen in multiple places at the same time. He would be at a festival in Brindavan, with hundreds of devotees, and on the same day he would be in his Kainchi ashram with hundreds of others. The laws of physics say this is impossible. But Maharaji was not subject o the laws of physics.

Karma is just another such law, and in the final stage, freedom from karma ia accompanied by freedom from all limits.

This type of miracle is very rarely mentioned in the Satyananda tradition. It's not a tradition with a big focus on the sensational, but when we were in Rikhia in October, I was taling to one of the Swamis, and they mentioned something. They mentioned that at one of the big events where many people are fed at the ashram, the feast was underway, and the person managing the kitchen came to realise that people were taking much more of the sweets than had been anticipated, and there would be a considerable shortage, and not everyone would be served.

So the kitchen wallah ran to Paramahamsa-ji and said 'Paramahamsa-ji, we are running out of sweets, and there will not be enough for everyone!'

Before Paramahamsa-ji could answer, another swami ran in and said 'Paramahamsa-ji, the sweet seller from Deoghar has just arrived with two carloads of sweets. He decided to close shop today, and give them all to you!'

Paramahamsa-ji turned to the first fellow and said, 'Why are you bothering me about having too few sweets! You can see we have plenty!'

February Verses - 3.28

I said I had some thoughts on this verse. And I do.
Hopefully I'll be able to express them.

Here's the verse:

28. But those who know the truth, O Arjuna, understand the relationship between the gunas and action, and are not attached.

Or from Mascaro:

28. But the man who knows the relation between the forces of Nature and actions, sees how some forces of Nature work upon other forces of Nature, and becomes not their slave.

We'll have to excuse the 'man' references. Genderless pronouns are not very comfortable in the English language.

So, 'the man who knows the relation beween the gunas and action'.

This is quite strong stuff. In these two verses (this and verse 27) is the denial of free will, and the statement that it is the belief in free will that causes suffering (attachment).

"the man lost in selfish delusion thinks that he himself is the actor"

So says verse 27. So, to believe oneself the actor is delusional. But, if I am not the actor, then what is the actor?

in fact all actions are carried out by the [...] qualities of nature.

All actions are carried out by the qualities of nature. Not by me.

...some forces of Nature work upon other forces of Nature...

So, action, or change, is just forces of nature acting upon each other. No mention of conscious decision. Because, from the perspective of the Gita, so called conscious decision is just another action. And so it comes about by the acting of forces of Nature upon one another.

In other words, there is no conscious decision. A 'decision' is just a consequence of the interacting forces of Nature. The idea that we can decide anything, is delusional. The idea that we act.

So all of existence, including our own actions, and the delusion that we ourselves take those actions, is merely the ebb and flow of cause and effect. It is the eddying of the flow of karma.

And it is by not realising this that we become involved in the world. We believe we are making our own decisions, and we believe we are making our actions, and when things turn out other than we expect, we get unhappy. And when things go as we wish, we get happy. We either become attached to what is, or we become attached to what is not.

If, on the other hand, we see material existence as simply the interplay of the forces of nature, and we understand that we (or what we perceive as 'we') are just a leaf floating on the eddies of karma, then we can avoid attachment. We can float through life without being battered against the rocks.

So we don't change anything by our actions. Because our actions are not our actions. Whatever we do, no matter how much we agonise over it, that's what was always going to happen, and he only thing we achieved by agonising over the decision was the creation of agony. Or rather, the illusion of agony, in our illusory minds.

The Bhagavad Gita needs a word. Unfortunately, the word was not invented until about 1960. That word is 'grock'. Grock is a martian word.

The Gita says:

28. But those who know the truth, O Arjuna, understand the relationship between the gunas and action, and are not attached.

Well, I know that truth. But I'm not liberated. But that's because the Gita meant to say 'those who grock the truth'.

Robert Heinlein invented the work grock. It means to know. Not just to know, but to REALLY know. To have something so fundamentally in your knowingness that it goes beyond mere knowing, and is fundamental to your truth.

For example, I am Phil Lewis. I grock that completely. There is nothing anyone can say or do to convince me I am actually someone else. I breathed in just now. I don't just know that: I grock it. It's so fundamentally true to me, that the knowing that I just inhaled goes beyond mere knowing.

And that's how we get free. Not by merely knowing that we are leaves on the wind of karma, but by grocking it.

Baba Neeb Karori grocked it. He grocked it in public.

So, one day in the morning, he told the people at the house where he was staying to prepare dinner for an extra 18 people.

In the afternoon, Ram Dass and his party were driving along, and they had to decide. Should they go straight to Maharaji (who nobody had told they were coming), or should they divert to Khumb Mela. In the late afternoon, they made their decision. They went straight to Baba. They were all astounded (as were the hosts) when the amount of food prepared was perfect, and the 18 people in the bus arrived just as it was being served.

But it's very simple to explain. Nobody decided to skip visiting Khumb Mela. Nobody decided to go straight to Maharaji. They always were going to Maharaji, and there was no decision to be made.

February Verses - Some thoughts on 3.27

These are some of my thoughts on the verses from the Gita chosen for the February meeting.

Firstly, the overall 'gist' of the passage is duty, why it is important to perform ones duty, and how one should approach that duty.

Verse 27 tells us that

"He whose mind is confused by egoism imagines 'I am the doer', whereas in fact all actions are carried out by the three qualities of nature."

So the concept of 'I am the doer' is an imagination of the ego. The ego is the little self, the 'I' who I mean when I think 'I am typing this blog'. So whenever that I thinks 'I am doing...' anything, then that is an imagining of the 'I' itself. Really, 'I' am not doing anything, and 'I' never can. Events are occurring, events are unfolding, and the sense that 'I' am responsible for any of those events is an egotistical illusion. In truth 'I' is not capable of 'doing' anything (for confirmation of this, just ask my wife!).

So, 'in fact, all actions are carried out by the three qualities of nature'. Hmmm. I'm not sure that's a good translation. I think the translator has imposed a Sankhya interpretation where it is not appropriate. The Verse in the Gita says:

"prakriteh kriyamaanaani
gunaih karmaani sarvasaha
ahankaara vimoohaatmaa
kartaaham iti manyate"

Word for literal, this is:

"ordinary-state honourable-operation
quality engaged-in all-enduring
ego free-self
I-doer so believe"

The important point here is that the word gunaih does not carry any connotation of 'three'. Often in yoga, we think of Sattvas Rajas and Tamas whenever the gunas are mentioned. In fact, this interpretation of the Gunas is quite specifically belonging to the Sankhya philosophy. Whilst Sankhya is mentioned in and treated by the Gita, it is not the overriding philosophy of the Gita, which is Yogic and Puranic.

In Yogic and Puranic philosphy, the term Gunas more classically applies to the five gunas as represented by the tattwas: akasha, vayu, tejas, apas, prithivi (spirit, air, fire, water, earth). In other passages where the Sankhya gunas are the intended meaning, they are described explicitly as tribhirguna: 'three sided gunas', or 'triple aspect gunas'.

I personally find it easier to understand this verse as saying that all actions are carried out by these elemental gunas, rather than being carried out by the abstract sankhya gunas. But maybe I am wrong?

The next verse states that if you understand the relationship between these gunas and action, then you are freed from attachment. I have a take on that, and hope to get a chance to blog about it in the next couple of days...

Guru and Disciple

Some Western people are suspicious of Gurus. Some gurus are suspect.
We'll gloss over that for now, and address it another time.

...

We're all in a room. It's a very big room, and very high. We spend our lives wandering around, and most of us never even realise we are in a room. It's so vast, we think everything is ok, be cause we never meet the limits imposed on us by the walls. Most people simply don't see the walls.

Some of us do.

Some of us encounter a part of the wall that contains us. Some of those bump off the wall, and choose to pretend to not notice. They wander back into the room, and maybe don't encounter the wall again for a long time.

Some others spend some time frowning at the wall, scratching their heads, then kind of carry on wandering, but keep the wall in view, off in the distance. They get the feeling it's important, but just not right now.

Some others meet the wall and wonder what lies beyond.

These people often spend more and more of their time approaching the wall, probing, examining. Sometimes they may find a small, dirty window, and through the window, they may see tantalising glimpses of a bright beyond. Some become intrigued by the wall. The wall becomes a big part of their lives, and examining and exploring the wall becomes a regular occurrence. For some it becomes their primary purpose.

Sometimes, someone finds steps.

The steps are treated the same as the wall. Some ignore them, some start to climb. But climbing is hard, and many give up.

Some though, are driven, and think this must be the way over the wall!

So they climb. And the climbing becomes harder. The stairs steepen, the steps narrow, and eventually, its almost like trying to climb the wall itself. It's slippery, and difficult. But to some it's also rewarding, and these press on.

Sometimes, on very, very rare occasions, someone on these steps encounters a fine golden thread, hanging down the inside of the wall. Many people ignore the thread, thinking it is just another vine, another creeper growing on the wall.

But some people look up. And those that choose to look up see that the wall is terribly high. The sides are smooth, like glass. It's virtually mpossible to climb. But there, in the farthest distance, there is a light. A beautiful, glowing light at the end of the fine thread hanging down the wall.

And as the eyes become clear and accustomed to the glare, what we see is our Guru waiting patiently, holding out the thread of gold, simply waiting for us to take hold.


You can read a greaqt deal of wisdom concerning the Guru in Satsangi's wonder full book Light on the Guru and Disciple Relationship

An Into the Body Experience

I was driving home tonight, and suddenly, the windscreen of the car became my eye.
I was looking out through the windscreen, just as I look out through my eyes. The car was my body.
I realised that I had climbed into the car, just as I climbed into my body of flesh.
It was just another layer.
I was existing in Toyotamaya Kosha!
I put on the body of steel and rubber, oil and petrol, and I wore it and controlled it for as long as it was useful. It got me home, and then I climbed out of it.
I dropped my Toyotamaya kosha.
I didn't mind.
If I need to travel some more, I can put it back on. Or another one.
Some people become very attached to their Toyotamaya kosha, and if it gets damaged, it upsets them. They might even wince or cry.
But really, they know it's just a shell. Just a tool for getting around. But as long as they have their Toyota (or Ford, or BMW) maya kosha, they feel a great deal of attachment to it.
When it comes time to part with this vehicle for the last time, and send it to the scrap heap, there may be a little tear, a feeling of fond memories. But we move onto our next car, and the old one is soon forgotten.
It's so easy to drop your Toyotamaya kosha.
And it's just as easy to drop your Annamaya kosha.