4-5. To those who are fitted (by all) their sins having been burnt off by austerities (practised) in several past births, their minds made pure, their intellects discriminating the real from the unreal, themselves indifferent to the pleasures of either this or the other world, their minds and senses under control, passions held down, actions given up as a worthless burden, faith firm and minds tranquil, eagerly seeking release from bondage, this work — SRI ADVAITA BODHA DEEPIKA — is presented in twelve short chapters.
7. Greatly afflicted by the three kinds of distress (tapa-traya), intensely seeking release from bondage so as to be free from this painful existence, a disciple distinguished by long practice of the four fold sadhana, approaches a worthy master and prays:
8-12. Lord, master, ocean of mercy, I surrender to you! Pray save me!
Master: Save you from what?
Disciple: From the fear of recurring births and deaths.
Master: Leave the samsara and fear not.
Disciple: Unable to cross this vast ocean of samsara, I fear
recurring births and deaths. So I have surrendered to you. It is
for you to save me!
Master: What can I do for you?
68. D.: What is the “effect” of this sravana?
M.: It destroys that veiling part of ignorance which hitherto made one think “Where is this non-dual Self? Nowhere”.
To destroy this ignorant conclusion of the non-existence of the non-dual Self is its “effect”.
69-70. D.: How long should one continue sravana?
M.: Until the doubt of the non-existence of the non-dual Being does not rear its head again.
The non-recurrence of this doubt is said to be the “limit” of the process of sravana
D.: What is the “fruit” of sravana?
M.: When once for all the
non-belief in the non-duality of Being is destroyed,
no sacred text or tricky argument can make the seeker deviate from his faith.
All obstructions to his faith thus removed,
he remains steady in his indirect knowledge of non-dual Being.
This is the “fruit” of sravana.
71. D.: What is this indirect knowledge?
M.: To know the true nature of the inmost Self, not by direct experience but by a study of the shastras, is called indirect Knowledge.
Although one does not see Vishnu face to face yet through the evidence of the shastras one believes in His existence; this forms only common (samanya) knowledge.
Similarly a common knowledge of non-duality of Brahman gained through the advaita shastras is indirect knowledge
72-76. D.: Why should the knowledge arising from sravana be said to be indirect? Can it not be direct?
M.: No. So long as the Inner Self cannot shine forth owing to the other veiling aspect of Ignorance (abhanavarana) mere knowledge of Its existence cannot be called direct.
Manana
6. D.: Why should not the Desire for Liberation be the ‘cause’ of reflection?
M.: A mere desire to be Liberated cannot make a man fit for enquiry into the Self.
Without sravana one cannot have even an indirect knowledge.
How can one succeed in one’s enquiry?
............................................... ..........................
CHAPTER V MANANA
Only after knowing the nature of the Self, should one proceed to seek it.
Ignorant of Its true nature, how can one investigate the Self?
Simple desire to be liberated will not suffice.
7. D.: Should not this desire lead to enquiry? With the rise of this desire the man will begin to hear about the nature of the Self and gain indirect knowledge which must enable him to undertake the enquiry.
M.: This amounts to saying that the seeker possesses discernment.
He is not only desirous of Liberation but also discerning in intellect.
With sravana comes this faculty of intellectual discernment of the real from the unreal, or the Self from the non-self.
This is called indirect knowledge.
The shastras say that only he who possesses indirect knowledge can discern the real or the Self from the unreal or the non-self, and is fit for enquiry into the Self.
Therefore discernment is the sine qua non for enquiry.
8-12. D.: Even if the desire for Liberation be not the particular (visesha) cause of Reflection, could not either desirelessness or tranquillity be the cause of it?
M.: All these are only general aids for reflection but not its particular causes. A desireless and tranquil man need not necessarily have the indirect knowledge of the Self and is therefore unfit for enquiry into the Self. There are men of austerities who are desireless and tranquil but not anxious for Liberation. Having no desire for Liberation they have not heard at all about the Self.
Not having done sravana, though endowed with desirelessness and tranquillity, they are incapable of discerning the real from the unreal and therefore unfit for enquiry into the Self.
Desirelessness etc. can only be aids to this enquiry but not its chief causes. Discernment of the real from the unreal is the only chief cause.
13-14. D.: Can the Self not be realised by austerities accompanied by desirelessness and tranquillity, without enquiry?
M.: No.
By non-enquiry the Self has been lost sight of;
to regain It enquiry is needed.
In its absence how can even crores of austerities restore the sight?
Always to enquire into the Self is the only remedy for the blindness of the ignorant whose mental eye has been bedimmed by the darkness of non-enquiry spreading its veil.
Unless by the eye of knowledge gained through enquiry, the Self cannot be realised
Truly the Self is all-permeating. Still Its knowledge is obscured by the covering of the five sheaths. The Self which lies hidden in them must be looked for only there and not elsewhere. A thing is sought in the place where it was lost. Something lost at home is not looked for in a forest. In the same manner the Self hidden in five sheaths and remaining unrecognised by wrong identification with them must be found only by sifting the unwanted elements, here the five sheaths.
D.: How can an investigation into unreal things lead to the recognition of the Reality?
M.: The unreal coverings must be removed to disclose the Reality hidden in them.
They are superimposed on the Real Self.
They must be examined and ascertained to be unreal so that their substratum which is the sole Reality can be known.
Unless the external trappings that are superimposed are looked into, their substratum, that is the Reality, cannot be found.
Has any one in the world been able to find the rope without looking and enquiring into the nature of the seeming snake, though this is superimposed on it and unreal?
Or can there be any one, who having enquired into the superimposed snake, did not discover its substratum to be the rope?
No one.
In the same manner an indirect knowledge should be gained by sravana that the five sheaths are superimposed and unreal;
but by a keen intellect the seeker must probe deep into this superficial knowledge and experience the truth of it;
just as the directly experienced gross body is clearly known to be built up by food and recognised to be only the food-sheath covering the Self,
so also the other four subtler sheaths remaining unknown to the common people but taught by the scriptures and the master must be known by their characteristics; they must be enquired into and directly experienced;
at the same time they must be recognised to be only sheaths and successively dismissed in order to seek their witness, Consciousness-Being or the subtle Self.
20. D.: If the Self is enquired into, after investigation and dismissing these sheaths, how can It be realised?
M.: This enquiry is but reflecting on the Self i.e., manana, its effect is to destroy the veil of Ignorance.
A constant reflection on the Self lying behind the sheaths must burn away that aspect of veiling which makes one say ‘It does not shine forth’.
D.: How can this be?
M.: Just as an enquiry into the rope-snake that obstructs the rope from view, destroys the ignorance of the rope, so also a keen quest of the Self that remains as the witness of the five sheaths, destroys the ignorance which supposes that the Self is not seen and that It does not shine forth.
On the clouds being scattered away as the sun shines forth in its full glory, so also the darkness of veiling being destroyed the witnessing Self will shine forth in all Its splendour.
Therefore enquiry is necessary
21. D.: How long should one continue to enquire into the Self?
M.: Non-recrudescence of the darkness of Ignorance is said to be the “limit” of reflection.
Therefore one should continue the practice until this darkness of Ignorance does not recur
M.: Transcending all, the Self has nothing in common with worldly things or activities;
It transcends the void also; hence the experience is unique and unearthly.
A fear may then arise “Can this be the Self? It cannot be — Should this be the Self, how can I be such a void?”
Even after realising the impartite Self, there is no confidence in one’s own experience;
it is regarded as impossible and a great doubt arises. The sense of impossibility gives rise to doubt. But repeated reflection removes
this sense of impossibility. So it is said by Vyasa in the Brahma Sutras:
On account of the repeated instruction (by the scriptures), (it is) necessary repeatedly (to hear of, reflect and meditate on the Self).
25. D.: What is the “fruit” of such reflection?
M.: By continued practice, the veiling is destroyed;
with its destruction, the sense of impossibility of the Self shining forth all alone disappears;
with its disappearance all obstacles are at an end
and then direct experience results
as clearly and surely as an apple in the palm of your hand.
This is the “fruit
26. D.: What is this direct experience?
M.: Just as one can clearly distinguish the sun from the cloud hiding it, so also when one can distinguish the Self from the ego, it is direct experience.
This is the ‘fruit’ of reflection.
27. My son! wise boy! Reflection has now been taught in detail.
It is for you to enquire into the five sheaths, dismiss them as unreal, then with keen intellect turn inwards to find the very subtle Self and recognise it distinctively.
28. D.: O Master! even on a keen enquiry I am unable to say “These are the five sheaths; this is the inmost Self as distinguished from them”. I cannot directly realise the Self. Why is it so?
M.: This is owing to beginningless Ignorance.
D.: How did this Ignorance arise?
M.: From the aforesaid veiling.
D.: How?
M.: Although by nature the Self and the ego are quite different from each other, the aforesaid veiling presents them as if they were identical.
D.: Please explain this.
M.: See, how though rope and a snake are quite different from each other, yet ignorance of the rope makes it appear a snake,
so also the Self being hidden by the darkness of veiling
does not shine forth and in its place only the functions of the ego, doership etc., are seen.
29-31. Therefore enquire into the nature of the five sheaths, find them, realise them, and then reject them as non-self.
There must be the unchanging witness of changes, originating and destroying these phenomena.
Find and realise Him as the Self.
The direct meaning of That is the world factors, i.e. names and forms; the intended meaning is Brahman — the composite of Being-shining-pleasing.
Just as the beginningless Ignorance veils the self-evident difference between the sheaths and their witness, so also it veils the similar difference between the Beingshining-pleasing and the ‘name and form’ factors.
Again as enquiry scatters away the veiling power,
the Being-KnowledgeBliss can be seen distinct from the ‘name and form’ aspect.
D.: What is the ‘fruit’ of this knowledge?
M.: To reject the five sheaths and names and forms of objects as something inexpressible,
only superimposed on the Reality,
illusory to practise that the substratum,
i.e., Brahman of Being-Knowledge-Bliss is the Self and to realise It as ‘I am Brahman’ with the resulting Supreme Bliss of being the Brahman, is the ‘fruit’ of this knowledge.
Here ends the chapter on Reflection.
57. The wise student who carefully reads and practises it can realise himself as Brahman i.e., Being-Knowledge-Bliss.
.... chp 6 vasana kshaya.........
1. This chapter succeeds the five earlier ones on superimposition, its withdrawal, the requisites of the seeker, hearing, and reflection.
To the disciple who after reflecting on the Self has gained direct knowledge, the master further says as follows.
2. Wise son, the shastras have nothing more to teach you; you have finished them. Henceforth you must meditate on the Self.
The scriptures say: ‘Dear! the Self must be heard of, reflected and meditated upon’.
Having finished reflection, you must proceed with meditation.
Now give up the shastras.
3-6. D.: Is it proper to give them up?
M.: Yes, it is proper. Now that by enquiry you have known what need be known, you can unhesitatingly give them up.
D.: But the shastras say that to the last moment of death, one should not give them up.
M.: Their purpose is to teach the truth.
After it is gained, of what further use can they be?
A further study will be so much waste of time and labour.
Therefore leave them aside.
Take to unbroken meditation.
D.: Is this statement supported by scriptures?
M.: Yes.
D.: How?
M.: They say: After repeatedly hearing from the master about the Self, reflecting on It and directly knowing It, the seeker should give up the shastras even as the pole used to stir up the corpse in the burning ground is finally consigned to the burning fire of the corpse.
From a study of the shastras let the seeker of Liberation gather an indirect knowledge of the Self
and put it into practice by reflecting on
It until by experiencing It a direct knowledge is gained;
later like a gatherer of grains who takes the grain and rejects the chaff, let him leave the shastras aside.
The man desirous of liberation should make use of shastras only to gain knowledge of the Self and then proceed to reflect on It;
he should not be simply talking vedanta,
nor even be thinking of it.
For talk results only in so much strain on speech, similarly thinking on the mind, no useful purpose can be served by either.
Therefore only know just what need be known and give up tiresome study.
Controlling his speech and mind a sensible seeker should always engage in meditation.
This is the teaching of the shastras.
It is the inclination of the mind always to study vedantic literature, to understand the meaning of the texts, to commit them to memory and constantly be thinking of them.
Since this inclination obstructs meditation, a wise man must overcome it with every effort.
Next the latencies connected with the world (lokavasana) must be eliminated
8. D.: What are these latencies?
M.: To think, this is my country, this is my family pedigree and this is the tradition. Should any one praise or censure any of these, the reactions of the mind denote the latencies connected with the world. Give them up. Later on, give up the latencies connected with the body also (dehavasana).
9-13. D.: What are they?
M.: To think oneself to be of such and such age, young or old and desire the full span of life with health, strength and good looks. Generally thoughts pertaining to the body indicate these latencies.
Ambition in the world and love for body distract the mind and prevent meditation on Brahman.
Since all objects are ephemeral, they must be eschewed.
Then the latencies connected with enjoyments (bhogavasana) must be given up
D.: What are these?
M.: These are made up of thoughts like: this is good and I must have it; this is not so and let it leave me; now I have gained so much and let me gain more, and so on.
D.: How can this be overcome?
M.: By looking with disgust upon all enjoyments as on vomit or excreta and developing dispassion for them, this can be overcome. Dispassion is the only remedy for this mad craving. After this, the mind must be cleared of the six passions, namely, lust, anger, greed, delusion, pride and jealousy
D.: How can this be done?
M.: By (maitri, karuna, mudita and upeksha) friendship with the holy, compassion for the afflicted, rejoicing in the joy of the virtuous and being indifferent to the shortcomings of the sinful.
Next must be effaced the latencies connected with the objects of the senses (vishayavasana) such as sound etc.
These latencies are the running of the senses such as hearing etc., after their objects.
D.: How can these latencies be effaced?
M.: By a practice of the six-fold discipline consisting of sama, dama, uparati, titiksha, samadhana and sraddha, withdrawing the mind from going outwards, controlling the senses, not thinking of the objects of the senses, forbearance, fixing the mind on the Reality and faith.
Next all latencies connected with mutual attachments must be overcome
14-15. D.: What are they?
M.: Though the senses are restrained, yet the mind always thinks of objects: ‘there is that; there is this; it is such and such; it
is this-wise or otherwise’ and so on. Because of brooding over objects, the mind gets attached to them, this constant brooding is called the latency connected with mental attachment.
D.: How can this be checked?
M.: By practising uparati which means desisting from all thoughts after concluding by proper reasoning that they are only fruitless daydreams.
16. When in the right manner, all this has been accomplished, the greatest evil-doer, namely the latency connected with wrong identity must be put an end to, even with great effort.
17. D.: What is this latency connected with wrong identity? (viparita vasana)
M.: Owing to beginningless Ignorance the non-Self is mistaken for the Self as ‘I am the body’ from time immemorial,
this Ignorance is hardy and can be ended only by the practice of Brahman.
18-20. D.: What is this practice?
.: It consists in discarding the body, senses etc., as being non-Self and always remembering that ‘I am Brahman’, remaining as consciousness witnessing the insentient sheaths.
Meditating on Brahman in solitude,
speaking of or teaching only Brahman in the company of others,
not to speak or think of anything but It,
but always one-pointedly to think of Brahman, is the practice.
So say the wise. By this transcend the ego and then proceed to eliminate the idea of ‘mine’.
21-22. D.: What is the nature of this idea?
M.: It consists in the single concept of ‘mine’ in relation to the body or whatever pertains to it, such as name, form, clothing, caste, conduct or professions of life.
D.: How does this go away?
M.: By a steadfast meditation on the Reality.
D.: How?
M.: Always to be aware that the body etc., its interests and effects, enjoyments, activities etc., are only figments of ignorance on pure knowledge i.e., the Self,
that like the appearance of silver on nacre, ornaments in gold, water in mirage, blueness in the sky or waves in water, all but the Self are only false presentations or illusory modes of the Self. In reality there is nothing but our ‘Self’.
Next the sense of differentiation (bheda vasana) must go.
23-25. D.: What is this sense of differentiation?
M.: It consists in ideas like: “I am the witness of this; all that is seen is only insentient and illusory; here is the world; these are the individuals; this one is the disciple and the other, the master; this is Isvara, and so on.”
This must go by a practice of non-duality.
This practice is to remain non-dual,
solid BeingKnowledge-Bliss,
untainted and free from thoughts of reality or unreality,
ignorance or its illusory effects,
and internal or external differentiation.
This is accomplished by a constant practice of modeless (nirvikalpa) samadhi.
Here remains the experience of Brahman only. After leaving the sense of differentiation far behind, the attachment to non-duality must later be given up.
26-27. D.: How is this to be done?
M.: Even this state must finally pass into untellable and unthinkable Reality absolutely free from modes and even non-duality.
The Bliss of Liberation is only this and nothing more. When the mind is cleared of all latent impurities, it
remains untainted, crystal-clear so that it cannot be said to exist or not to exist and it becomes one with Reality, transcending speech and thought.
This unmoded, untainted fixity of the mind is known as Realisation or Liberation while alive.
28. Though direct knowledge of the Self has been gained,
yet until this Realisation ensues,
to be liberated while alive one should always meditate on Brahman
with proper control of mind and senses.
Thus ends this chapter.
............................ chp 7 .. Sakshatkara .................................
1. In the foregoing chapter it was said that direct knowledge must first be gained
and then the latent tendencies of the mind wiped out
so that Brahman may be realised.
Now Realisation is dealt with
The master says: Wise son, now that you have gained direct knowledge by enquiry into the Self,
you should proceed with meditation
2. D.: Master, now that I have gained direct knowledge by enquiry and my task is finished why should I meditate further and to what end?
3-4. M.: Though by reflection, direct knowledge of the Self has been gained, Brahman cannot be realised without meditation.
In order to experience ‘I am Brahman’ you must practise meditation.
5-6.: D.: You ask me to pursue meditation for realising Brahman. I have already gained direct knowledge by enquiry into the sacred text. Why should I now practise meditation?
M.: If you mean to say that enquiry into the sacred text results in realising Brahman, who can deny it? No one. Truly this enquiry must end in the realisation of Brahman.
Let us now enquire into the meaning of the text.
Whose identity with whom is implied in it?
It must be of the consciousness witnessing the five sheaths of the individual,
the implied meaning of ‘thou’ with Brahman, the implied meaning of ‘That’; it cannot be of the Jiva, i.e., the personal soul with Brahman.
By enquiry the identity of the witnessing
consciousness with Brahman has certainly been found.
Of what use can this identity of the witness with Brahman be to you?
7. D.: On enquiry into the meaning of the sacred text, when one has realised that the witness is Brahman and vice versa, how can you raise the question ‘Of what use can it be to the person?’ Its use is evident. Formerly the seeker was ignorant of the identity and now by enquiry he is aware of it.
M.: By enquiry you have certainly known that the witness is Brahman and that the unbroken, all-perfect Brahman is the witness.
Still this knowledge is not the end and cannot serve your purpose.
Suppose a poor beggar who was ignorant of the fact that a king residing in a fort was the emperor of the world, later knew it. How does this newly acquired knowledge improve his position? It cannot serve any useful purpose for him.
8. D Before enquiry, ignorance prevails. After enquiry, knowledge
is gained that the witness is Brahman. Now knowledge has taken the place of ignorance. This is the use.
M.: How does this affect the fact? Whether you have known it or not, the witness ever remains Brahman. Your knowledge of the fact has not made Brahman, the witness. Whether the poor beggar knew it or not, the king in the fort was the emperor. His knowledge did not make an emperor of the king in the fort. Now that you have known the witness to be Brahman, what has happened to you? Tell me. There can be no change in you.
9. D.: Why not? There is a difference. The sacred text teaches ‘That thou art’. On enquiring into its significance I have found that the witness of the five sheaths in me is the same as Brahman. From this I have known that I am Brahman, which forms another sacred text. To me who was ignorant of the witness being the same as Brahman, this knowledge has dawned, with the result that I have realised Brahman.
M.: How can you claim to have realised Brahman? If by the text ‘I am Brahman’ you understand yourself to be Brahman,
who is this ‘I’ but the Jiva, the individual soul or the ego? How can the ego be Brahman? Just as even with his knowledge of the king, the beggar cannot himself be the king, so also the changeful ego can never be identical with the changeless Brahman
10-14. D.: Certainly so. But on enquiring ‘Who am I?’ it becomes plain that by non-enquiry the unchanging witness had mistaken the changing ego for himself. Now he knows ‘I am not the changing ego but remain its unchanging conscious witness’. Now it is but right that the witness should say, ‘I am Brahman’. What can be discordant in this?
M.: How can you hold that the witness says ‘I am Brahman?’
Does the unchanging witness or the changing ego say so?
If you say that it is the witness, you are wrong.
For the witness remains unchanging as the witness of the ‘false-I’. He is not the conceit itself. Otherwise he cannot have the quality of being the witness for he will himself be changing. Being unchanging the witness is free from the least trace of any notion such as ‘I’ or Brahman and cannot therefore know ‘I am Brahman’. There is no ground for your contention that the witness says so.
D.: Then who knows ‘I am Brahman’?
M.: From what has been said before, it must follow that the individual soul, the jiva, or the ‘false-I’ must have this knowledge.
D.: How does this follow?
M.: In order to be free from the repeated cycle of births and deaths, the ignorant man is obliged to practise the knowledge ‘I am Brahman’.
There is no ignorance for the witness.
When there is no ignorance, there can be no knowledge either.
Only the ignorant must seek knowledge. Who but the ‘false-I’ can be the subject of ignorance or of knowledge?
It is self-evident that the witnessing Self being the substratum on which knowledge or ignorance appears, must itself be free from them.
On the contrary the ‘false-I’ is known to possess knowledge or ignorance.
If you ask him ‘Do you know the Self witnessing you?’ And he will answer ‘Who is that witness? I do not know him’. Here the ignorance of the ‘false-I’ is obvious. On hearing the vedanta that there is an inner witness to him, indirectly he knows that the Self is his witness. Then enquiring into the Self, the veil of Ignorance that It does not shine forth, is drawn off and directly he knows the witnessing Self. Here again the knowledge of the ‘false-I’ is also clear.
It is only the jiva and not the witness who has the knowledge or ignorance that there is, or is not, the inner witness. You must now admit that the jiva has the knowledge that ‘I am Brahman’. Now for the reason that the changing Jiva has become aware of the unchanging witness, he cannot be the same as the witness. Because he had seen him, the poor beggar cannot be the king. So also the changing Jiva cannot be the witness. Without being the witnessing Self, the changing entity cannot be Brahman. So this experience ‘I am Brahman’ is impossible.
15. D.: How can you say that merely seeing the witness, I cannot know that I am the witness? Ignorant of his true being as the substratum or the witnessing consciousness, the Jiva moves about as the ‘false-I’. However on a careful enquiry into his true nature he knows the witness and identifies himself as the witness who is well-known to be the unbroken, all perfect Brahman. Thus the experience, ‘I am Brahman’, is real.
M.: What you say is true provided that the jiva can identify himself as the witness. The witness is undoubtedly Brahman.
But how can the mere sight of the witness help the jiva merge himself into the witness?
Unless the jiva remains the witness, he cannot know himself as the witness.
Merely by seeing the king, a poor beggar cannot know himself to be the king.
But when he becomes the king, he can know himself as the king.
Similarly the jiva, remaining changeful and without becoming the unchanging witness, cannot know himself as the witness.
If he cannot be the witness, how can he be the unbroken, all-perfect Brahman?
He cannot be.
Just as at the sight of the king in a fort, a poor beggar cannot become king and much less sovereign of the universe, so also only at the sight of the witness who is much finer than ether and free from traffic with triads, such as the knower, knowledge and the known, eternal, pure, aware, free, real, supreme and blissful, the jiva cannot become the witness, much less the unbroken, all-perfect Brahman, and cannot know ‘I am Brahman’
M.: ‘I am Brahman’ means that, after discarding the ‘false-I’, only the residual being or the pure consciousness that is left over can be Brahman
— It is absurd to say that, without discarding but retaining the individuality, the jiva, on seeing Brahman but not becoming Brahman, can know himself as Brahman.
A poor beggar must first cease to be beggar and rule over a state in order to know himself as king; a man desirous of god-hood first drowns himself in the Ganges and leaving this body, becomes himself a celestial being;
by his extraordinary one-pointed devotion a devotee leaves off his body and merges into god,
before he can know himself to be god.
In all these cases when the beggar knows himself to be king, or the man to be celestial being, or the devotee to be god, they cannot retain their former individualities and also identify themselves as the superior beings.
In the same way, the seeker of Liberation must first cease to be an individual before he can rightly say ‘I am Brahman’.
This is the significance of the sacred text.
Without completely losing one’s individuality one cannot be Brahman.
Therefore to realise Brahman, the loss of the individuality is a sine qua non.
D.: The changeful individual soul cannot be Brahman. Even though he rids himself of the individuality, how can he become Brahman?
19. M.: Just as a maggot losing its nature, becomes a wasp. A maggot is brought by a wasp and kept in its hive. From time to time the wasp visits the hive and stings the maggot so that it always remains in dread of its tormentor. The constant thought of the wasp transforms the maggot into a wasp.
Similarly, constantly meditating on Brahman, the seeker loses his original nature and becomes himself Brahman.
This is the realisation of Brahman
M.: Undoubtedly individuality lasts as long as the mind exists.
Just as the reflected image disappears with the removal of the mirror in front, so also individuality can be effaced by stilling the mind by meditation.
M.: Successively appearing in the ignorance-created mind and disappearing in deep sleep, swoon etc.,
this empirical self is inferred to be only a phantom.
Simultaneously with the disappearance of the medium or the limiting adjunct (upadhi), the mind, the jiva becomes the substratum, the True Being or Brahman.
Destroying the mind, the jiva can know himself as Brahman
24. D.: With the destruction of the limiting adjunct, the jiva being lost, how can he say ‘I am Brahman’?
M.: When the limiting ignorance of dream vanishes, the dreamer is not lost, but emerges as the waking experiencer. So also when the mind is lost, the jiva emerges as his true Being — Brahman.
Therefore as soon as the mind is annihilated leaving no trace behind, the jiva will surely realise ‘I am the BeingKnowledge-Bliss, non-dual Brahman; Brahman is I, the Self’.
M.: Just as at the end of a dream, the dreamer rising up as the waking experiencer says ‘All along I was dreaming that I wandered in strange places, etc., but I am only lying down on the bed,’ or a madman cured of his madness remains pleased with himself, or a patient cured of his illness wonders at his past sufferings, or a poor man on becoming a king, forgets or laughs at his past penurious state, or a man on becoming a celestial being enjoys the new bliss, or a devotee on uniting with the Lord of his devotion remains blissful,
so also the jiva on emerging as Brahman wonders how all along being only Brahman he was moving about as a helpless being imagining a world, god and individuals,
asks himself what became of all those fancies and how he now remaining all alone as Being-Knowledge-Bliss free from any differentiation, internal or external, certainly experiences the Supreme Bliss of Brahman.
Thus realisation is possible for the jiva only on the complete destruction of the mind and not otherwise.
M.: The latent impressions (vasanas) manifesting as modes (vrittis) constitute the form-aspect of the mind. Their effacement is the destruction of this aspect of mind. On the other hand, on the latencies perishing, the supervening state of samadhi in which there is no stupor of sleep,
no vision of the world,
but only the Being-Knowledge-Bliss is the formless aspect of mind.
The loss of this amounts to the loss of the formless aspect of mind.
Should this also be lost, there can be no experience — not even of the realisation of Supreme Bliss
D.: When does this destruction take place?
M.: In the disembodiment of the liberated being. It cannot happen so long as he is alive in the body.
The mind is lost in its form-aspect but not in its formless one of Brahman.
Hence the experience of Bliss for the sage, liberated while alive.
26-27. D.: In brief what is Realisation?
M.: To destroy the mind in its form-aspect functioning as the limiting adjunct to the individual,
to recover the pure mind in its formless aspect whose nature is only Being-KnowledgeBliss
and to experience ‘I am Brahman’
is Realisation.
D.: Is this view supported by others as well?
M.: Yes. Sri Sankaracharya has said:
‘Just as in the ignorant state, unmindful of the identity of the Self with Brahman, one truly believes oneself to be the body,
so also after knowing to be free from the illusion of the body being the Self,
and becoming unaware of the body, undoubtingly and unmistakably always to experience the Self as the Being-Knowledge-Bliss identical with Brahman is called Realisation’.
‘To be fixed as the Real Self is Realisation’, say the sages.
30-31. Therefore without effacing the form-aspect of the mind and remaining fixed as the true Self, how can anyone realise ‘I am Brahman’?
It cannot be.
Briefly put, one should still the mind to destroy one’s individuality and thus remain fixed as the Real Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss,
so that in accordance with the text ‘I am Brahman’ one can realise Brahman.
On the other hand, on the strength of the direct knowledge of Brahman to say ‘I am Brahman’ is as silly as a poor beggar on seeing the king declaring himself to be the king.
Not to claim by words but to be fixed as the Real Self and know ‘I am Brahman’ is Realisation of Brahman.
32. D.: How will the sage be, who has undoubtingly, unmistakably and steadily realised Brahman?
M.: Always remaining as the Being-Knowledge-Bliss, nondual, all-perfect, all-alone, unitary Brahman, he will be unshaken even while experiencing the results of the past karma now in fruition. (prarabdha).
33-35. D.: Being only Brahman, how can he be subject to the experiences and activities resulting from past karma?
M.: For the sage undoubtingly and unmistakably fixed as the real Self, there can remain no past karma.
In its absence there can be no fruition, consequently no experience nor any activity.
Being only without mode Brahman, there can be no experiencer, no experiences and no objects of experience.
Therefore no past karma can be said to remain for him.
D.: Why should we not say that his past karma is now working itself out?
M.: Who is the questioner? He must be a deluded being and not a sage
D.: Why?
M.: Experience implies delusion; without the one, the other cannot be.
Unless there is an object, no experience is possible.
All objective knowledge is delusion.
There is no duality in Brahman.
Certainly all names and forms are by ignorance superimposed on Brahman.
Therefore the experiencer must be ignorant only and not a sage.
Having already enquired into the nature of things and known them to be illusory names and forms born of ignorance, the sage remains fixed as Brahman and knows all to be only Brahman.
Who is to enjoy what?
No one and nothing.
Therefore there is no past karma left nor present enjoyments nor any activity for the wise one.
M.: In Viveka Chudamani, Sri Acharya has said
‘Simultaneous with the dawn of knowledge, ignorance with all its effects flees away from the sage and so he cannot be an enjoyer.
However, the ignorant wonder how the sage continues to live in the body and act like others.
From the ignorant point of view, the scriptures have admitted the momentum of past karma, but not from the point of view of the sage himself’.
40. D.: If truly he is no enjoyer, why should he appear to others to be so?
M.: Owing to their ignorance, the others regard him as an enjoyer.
41-43. D.: Can this be so?
M.: Yes. To the ignorant only the non-dual, pure Ether of Absolute Knowledge manifests Itself as various beings, the world, God, different names and forms, I, you, he, it, this and that. Like the illusion of a man on a post, silver on nacre, snake on rope, utensils in clay, or ornaments in gold, different names and forms on the Ether of Knowledge delude the ignorant.
not bewitched by the senses,
but by strong dispassion grown indifferent to external objects,
there cannot be the least difficulty in giving up the mind.
D.: How is it so easy?
M.: The question of difficulty arises only if there is a mind to leave off.
Truly speaking, there is no mind.
When told ‘There is a ghost here’ an ignorant child is deluded into believing the existence of the non-existent ghost, and is subject to fear, misery and troubles,
similarly in the untainted Brahman by fancying things that are not, as this and that, a false entity known as the mind arises seemingly real,
functioning as this and that,
and proving uncontrollable and mighty to the unwary,
whereas to the self-possessed, discerning seeker who knows its nature, it is easy to relinquish.
Only a fool ignorant of its nature says it is most difficult.
5-10. D.: What is the nature of mind?
M.: To think this and that. In the absence of thought, there can be no mind.
On the thoughts being extinguished the mind will remain only in name like the horn of a hare; it will vanish as a non-entity like a barren woman’s son, or a hare’s horn, or a flower in the sky. This is also mentioned in the Yoga Vasishta.
D.: How?
M.: Vasishta says: ‘Listen, O Rama, there is nothing to speak of as mind. Just as the ether exists without form, so also the mind exists as the blank insentience. It remains only in name; it has no form. It is not outside, nor is it in the heart. Yet like the ether, the mind though formless fills all’.
D.: How can this be?
M.: Wherever thought arises as this and that, there is the mind.
D.: If there be mind wherever there is thought, are thought and mind different?
M.: Thought is the index of the mind. When a thought arises mind is inferred. In the absence of thought, there can be no mind. Therefore mind is nothing but thought. Thought is itself mind.
D.: What is ‘thought’?
M.: ‘Thought’ is imagination. The thought-free state is Bliss Supreme (Sivasvarupa). Thoughts are of two kinds; the recalling of things experienced and unexperienced
Real or unreal, experienced or not, however it may be, whatever is not thought of, is not apprehended.
It is obvious that without attention, even the objects of direct cognition cannot be recognised.
maya, avidya diff names.
D.: Be it so, what has this got to do with the extinction of the mind?
M.: Listen. You must understand that the knowledge signified by all these terms is only the mind.
M.: Vasishta has said to Rama: ‘Whatever objective knowledge manifests as this and that, or not this and not that, or in any other manner, it is only the mind.
The mind is nothing but this manifest knowledge’.
34. D.: Let it be so. How can the mind be extinguished?
M.: To forget everything is the ultimate means. But for thought, the world does not arise. Do not think and it will not arise.
When nothing arises in the mind, the mind itself is lost.
Therefore do not think of anything, forget all.
This is the best way to kill the mind.
35-37. D.: Has anyone else said so before?
M.: Vasishta said so to Rama thus: ‘Efface thoughts of all kinds, of things enjoyed, not enjoyed, or otherwise.
Like wood or stone, remain free from thoughts.
Rama: Should I altogether forget everything?
Vasishta: Exactly; altogether forget everything and remain like wood or stone.
Rama: The result will be dullness like that of stones or wood.
Vasishta: Not so. All this is only illusion. Forgetting the illusion, you are freed from it. Though seeming dull, you will be the Bliss Itself. Your intellect will be altogether clear and sharp. Without getting entangled in worldly life, but appearing active to others remain as the very Bliss of Brahman and be happy. Unlike the blue colour of the sky, let not the illusion of the world revive in the pure Ether of Consciousness-Self. To forget this illusion is the sole means to kill the mind and remain as Bliss.
Though Shiva, Vishnu, or Brahman Himself should instruct you, realisation is not possible without this one means.
Without forgetting everything, fixity as the Self is impossible.
Therefore altogether forget everything.’
38-39. D.: Is it not very difficult to do so?
M.: Though for the ignorant it is difficult, for the discerning few it is very easy.
Never think of anything but the unbroken unique Brahman.
By a long practice of this, you will easily forget the non-self.
It cannot be difficult to remain still without thinking anything.
Let not thoughts arise in the mind; always think of Brahman.
In this way all worldly thoughts will vanish and thought of Brahman alone will remain.
When this becomes steady, forget even this, and without thinking ‘I am Brahman’, be the very Brahman.
This cannot be difficult to practise.
40. Now my wise son, follow this advice; cease thinking of anything but Brahman.
By this practice your mind will be extinct;
41. He who studies this chapter and follows the instructions contained therein, will soon be Brahman Itself!
table 4 pages
aham bramhasmi = deho aham
..................................................end.....................................
Disciple: Save me. I have no other refuge. Just as water is
the only thing to put out the flames when the hair of one’s head
is on fire, so also a sage such as you are, is the sole refuge of
people like me who are on fire from the three kinds of distress.
You are free from the illusion of samsara, calm in mind and
sunk deep in the incomparable Bliss of Brahman which is
beginningless and endless. Certainly you can save this poor
creature. Pray do!
Master: What is it to me if you suffer?
Disciple: Saints like you cannot bear to see others suffer, as
a father his child. Motiveless is your love for all beings. You are
the Guru common to all, the only boat to carry us across this
ocean of samsara.
Master: Now, what makes you suffer? Disciple: Bitten by the cruel serpent of painful samsara, I am dazed and I suffer. Master, pray save me from this burning hell and kindly tell me how I can be free.
13-17. M.: Well said, my Son! You are intelligent and well disciplined. There is no need to prove your competence to be a disciple. Your words clearly show that you are fit. Now look here, my child!
In the Supreme Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss who can be the transmigrating being? How can this samsara be? What could have given rise to it? And how and whence can it arise itself? Being the non-dual Reality, how can you be deluded? With nothing separate in deep sleep, not having changed in any manner, and having slept soundly and peacefully, a fool on waking shouts out “Alas, I am lost!” How can you, the changeless, formless, Supreme, Blissful Self shout forth “I transmigrate — I am miserable!” and so on? Truly there is neither birth nor death; no one to be born or to die; nothing of the kind!
...avrana + vikshepa..sansara arises from it........
Ignorance has two aspects: Veiling and Projection (Avarana—Vikshepa). From these arises the samsara. Veiling functions in two ways. In the one we say “It is not” and in the other “It does not shine forth.”
... 1st aspect of veiling.......
27-28
although the sage teaches that there is only the non-dual Reality the ignorant man thinks “What can be non-dual Reality? No. It cannot be.” As a result of beginningless veiling, though taught, the teaching is disregarded and the old ideas persist. Such indifference is the first aspect of veiling.
Next, with the help of sacred books and gracious masters he unaccountably but sincerely believes in the non dual Real, yet he cannot probe deep but remains superficial and says “The Reality does not shine forth.”
...2nd aspect of veiling..
Here is knowledge knowing that It does not shine forth yet the illusion of ignorance persists. This illusion that It does not shine forth, is the second aspect of veiling.
...Self as body = superimposition...............
Though he is the unchanging, formless, Supreme, Blissful, non-dual Self, the man thinks of himself as the body with hands and legs, the doer and experiencer; objectively sees this man and that man, this thing and that thing, and is deluded. This delusion of perceiving the external universe on the non-dual Reality enveloped by it, is Projection. This is Superimposition.
: Though the Self is Brahman, there is not the knowledge of the Self (being Brahman). That which obstructs this knowledge of the Self is Ignorance
There is only the basic Existence, not fictitious, nondual, undifferentiated, ab extra and ab intra (Sajatiya, vijatiya, and svagata bheda), Being-Knowledge-Bliss, the unchanging Reality.
“In dissolution the whole universe is withdrawn leaving only the Single Reality which stays motionless, beyond speech and thought, neither darkness nor light, yet perfect, namely, untellable, but not void,” says Yoga Vasishta
This maya which is dependent on the unrelated Knowledge-Bliss-Reality, has the two aspects of veiling and projection (avarna and vikshepa); by the former it hides its own substratum from view, and by the latter the unmanifest maya is made manifest as mind. This then sports with its latencies which amounts to projecting this universe with all the names and forms
To recollect ideas or latencies is its nature. It has latencies as its content and appears in the witnessing consciousness in two modes — “I” and “This”
106/...3 states
Nevertheless they are merely appearances of the deluded mind and not real. He seems to be born and to die.
experiences heaven,hell
Nevertheless they are merely appearances of the deluded mind and not real. He seems to be born and to die.
elestial city
Names and forms make it up and it is nothing more.
nurse chiild story...14 gates etc
The child believed the tale and was pleased. So it is with the fool who takes this world to be real.
Now Isvara, the king who is the son of the barren mother Maya, having built the houses of the bodies, enters into them at will as the Jivas, sports in the company of the phantom egos and moves about aimlessly
The anklets are heaven and hell; the four strings of glass lustre are the four stages of Mukti — Salokya, Samipya, Sarupya and Sayujya, meaning equality in rank, condition or power and final identity.
tudent suffer in the world, desirous of making him realise the truth, but knowing his love for the world and dislike of the non-dual Reality — which is subtle and hard to understand, gently coax him with the sweet pleasures of heaven, etc., before laying bare the non-dual Reality.
By repeated practices in several rebirths his mind becomes pure and turns away from sense enjoyments to receive the highest teaching of the nondual Reality
Their aim is to make the student purify his mind by his own efforts such as good actions, austerities and devotion. To coax him, these are said to yield him pleasures. Being themselves insentient, these cannot of their own accord yield fruits. So an all-powerful Isvara is said to dispense the fruits of actions. That is how an Isvara appears on the scene. Later the scriptures say that the jiva, Isvara and the jagrat (world) are all equally false.
Ignorance of the Self is the root cause of all the three illusions — jiva, jagat and Isvara.
Maya is self- evident, beginningless and spontaneous, yet it subsists in the absence of enquiry into the nature of the Self, manifests the universe etc., and grows more massive.
How can Maya be compared to a mother burnt down to ashes by her daughter?
In the process of enquiry, Maya becomes more and more transparent and turns into Knowledge. Knowledge is thus born of Maya, and is therefore said to be the daughter of Maya.
Maya so long flourishing on non-enquiry comes to its last days on enquiry.
Just as a crab brings forth its young only to die itself, so also in the last days of enquiry Maya brings forth Knowledge for its own undoing. Immediately the daughter, Knowledge, burns her down to ashes.
..ya ma that which doesnt exist = maya....................
In a bamboo forest, the bamboos move in the wind, rub against one another and produce fire which burns down the parent trees. So also Knowledge born of Maya burns Maya to ashes.
Maya remains only in name like a hare’s horn.
Therefore the sages declare it non existent.
Moreover, the very name implies its unreality.
The names are Avidya and Maya. Of these the former means ‘Ignorance or that which is not’ (ya n iv±t sa Aiv±a e ); again, ‘Maya is that which is not’ (ya ma sa maya).
Therefore it is simple negation. Thus that it fruitlessly vanishes into nothing is its ‘fruit’.
The fire from the friction of the trees burns them down and then dies out; the clearing nut carries down the impurities of water and itself settles down with them. Similarly this Knowledge destroys Ignorance and itself perishes. Since it is also finally resolved, the ‘fruit’ of Maya can be only unreal.
: Samsara, the effect of Ignorance, is unreal like Knowledge. One unreality can be undone by another unreality.
When non enquiry gives place to enquiry, right knowledge results and puts an end to Ignorance.
Mind being the samsara, must be investigated.
Associated with mind which according to its modes assumes the shapes of objects, the man seems to undergo the same changes.
This eternal secret is disclosed in the Maitryiniya Upanishad.
With complete stillness of mind, samsara will disappear root and branch. Otherwise there will be no end to samsara, even in millions of aeons (Kalpakotikala
Absolutely by no other means; neither the Vedas, nor the shastras nor austerities, nor karma, nor vows, nor gifts, nor recital of scriptures of mystic formulae (mantras), nor worship, nor anything else, can undo the samsara.
Only stillness of mind can accomplish the end and nothing else.
19. D.: The scriptures declare that only Knowledge can do it. How then do you say that stillness of the mind puts an end to samsara?
M.: What is variously described as Knowledge, Liberation, etc., in the scriptures, is but stillness of mind.
D.: Has any one said so before? 20-27.
M.: Sri Vasishta had said: When by practice the mind stands still, all illusions of samsara disappear, root and branch. Just as when the ocean of milk was churned for its nectar, it was all rough, but became still and clear after the churn (viz., mount Mandara) was taken out, so also the mind becoming still, the samsara falls to eternal rest.
D.: How can the mind be brought to stillness?
M.: By dispassion, abandoning all that is dear to oneself, one can by one’s efforts accomplish the task with ease.
Without this peace of mind, Liberation is impossible.
Only when the whole objective world is wiped out clean by a mind disillusioned as a consequence of discerning knowledge that all that is not Brahman is objective and unreal, the Supreme Bliss will result.
Otherwise in the absence of peace of mind, however much an ignorant man may struggle and creep on in the deep abyss of the shastras, he cannot gain Liberation.
Only that mind which by practice of yoga, having lost all its latencies, has become pure and still like a lamp in a dome well protected from breeze, is said to be dead.
This death of mind is the highest fulfilment.
The final conclusion of all the Vedas is that Liberation is nothing but mind stilled.
For Liberation nothing can avail, not wealth, relatives, friends, karma consisting of movements of the limbs, pilgrimage to sacred places, baths in sacred waters, life in celestial regions, austerities however severe,
or anything but a still mind.
In similar strain many sacred books teach that Liberation consists in doing away with the mind.
In several passages in the Yoga Vasishta, the same idea is repeated, that the Bliss of Liberation can be reached only by wiping out the mind, which is the root cause of samsara, and thus of all misery.
imp-
28. In this way to kill the mind by a knowledge of the sacred teaching, reasoning and one’s own experience, is to undo the samsara.
How else can the miserable round of births and deaths be brought to a standstill?
And how can freedom result from it?
Never.
Unless the dreamer awakes, the dream does not come to an end nor the fright of being face to face with a tiger in the dream.
Similarly unless the mind is disillusioned, the agony of samsara will not cease.
Only the mind must be made still. This is the fulfilment of life
29-30. D.: How can the mind be made still?
M.: Only by Sankhya.
Sankhya is the process of enquiry coupled with knowledge.
The realised sages declare that the mind has its root in non-enquiry and perishes by an informed enquiry
D.: Please explain this process.
M.: This consists of sravana, manana, nididhyasana and samadhi, i.e., hearing, reasoning, meditation and Blissful Peace, as mentioned in the scriptures. Only this can make the mind still.
31-32. There is also an alternative. It is said to be yoga.
D.: What is yoga?
M.: Meditation on Pure Being free from qualities.
D.: Where is this alternative mentioned and how?
M.: In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Sri Bhagavan Krishna has said: What is gained by Sankhya can also be gained by yoga. Only he who knows that the result of the two processes is the same, can be called a realised sage
33-34. D.: How can the two results be identical?
M.: The final limit is the same for both because both of them end in stillness of mind. This is samadhi or Blissful Peace. The fruit of samadhi is Supreme Knowledge; this remains the same by whichever process gained
D.: If the fruit is the same for both, the final purpose can be served by only one of them. Why should two processes be mentioned instead of only one?
M.: In the world, seekers of truth are of different grades of development.
Out of consideration for them, Sri Bhagavan has mentioned these two in order to offer a choice
35. D.: Who is fit for the path of enquiry (Sankhya)?
M.: Only a fully qualified seeker is fit, for he can succeed in it and not others.
4 pre requisites for discrimination/enquiry
36-37. D.: What are the sadhanas or requisites for this process?
M.: The knowers say that the sadhanas consist of
an ability to discern the real from the unreal,
no desire for pleasures here or hereafter,
cessation of activities (karma) and
a keen desire to be liberated.
Not qualified with all these four qualities, however hard one may try, one cannot succeed in enquiry. Therefore this fourfold sadhana is the sine qua non for enquiry.
38. To begin with, a knowledge of the distinctive characteristics of these sadhanas is necessary. As already pointed out, these distinctive characteristics are of the categories (hetu, Sv-av, kay, Avi0, fl R ) cause, nature, effect, limit and fruit. These are now described.
39-44. Discernment (viveka) can arise only in a purified mind.
Its ‘nature’ is the conviction gained by the help of sacred teachings that only Brahman is real and all else false.
Always to remember this truth is its ‘effect’.
Its end (avadhi) is to be settled unwavering in the truth that only Brahman is and all else is unreal.
Desirelessness (vairagya) is the result of the outlook that the world is essentially faulty.
Its ‘nature’ is to renounce the world and have no desire for anything in it.
Its ‘effect’ is to turn away in disgust from all enjoyments as from vomit.
It ends (avadhi) in treatment with contempt of all pleasures, earthly or heavenly, as if they were vomit or burning fire or hell.
Cessation of activities (uparati) can be the outcome of the eight fold yoga (astangayoga), namely, yama, niyama, asana, pranayama, pratyahara, dharana, dhyana and samadhi, i.e., self restraint, discipline, steady posture, control of breath, control of senses, mind collected to truth, meditation and peace.
Its ‘nature’ consists in restraining the mind.
Its ‘effect’ is to cease from worldly activities.
It ends (avadhi) in forgetfulness of the world as if in sleep, owing to the ending of activities.
...mumukhatava..
Desire to be liberated (mumukshutva) begins with the association with
realised sages.
Its ‘nature’ is the yearning for liberation.
Its ‘effect’ is to stay with one’s master.
It ends (avadhi) in giving up all study of shastras and performance of religious rites.
When these have reached their limits as mentioned above, the sadhanas are said to be perfect.
45-47. Should only one or more of these sadhanas be perfect but not all of them, the person will after Death gain celestial regions.
If all of them are perfect, they together quickly make the person thoroughly capable of enquiry into the Self.
Only when all the sadhanas are perfect is enquiry possible; otherwise, not.
Even if one of them remains undeveloped, it obstructs enquiry. With this we shall deal presently.
48-49. Dispassion, etc., remaining undeveloped, discernment, though perfect, cannot by itself remove the obstacles, to enquiry into the Self.
You see how many are well read in Vedanta Shastra.
They must all possess this virtue, but they have not cultivated the others, dispassion etc.
Therefore they cannot undertake the enquiry into the Self.
This fact makes it plain that discernment unattended by dispassion etc., cannot avail.
50-51. D.: How is it that even scholars in Vedanta have not succeeded in the pursuit of enquiry?
M.: Though they always study Vedanta and give lessons to others yet in the absence of desirelessness they do not practise what they have learnt.
D.: And what do they do otherwise?
M.: Like a parrot they reproduce the Vedantic jargon but do not put the teachings into practice.
D.: What does Vedanta teach?
M.: The Vedanta teaches a man to know that all but the non-dual Brahman is laden with misery, therefore to leave off all desires for enjoyment, to be free from love or hate, thoroughly to cut the knot of the ego appearing as ‘I’, you,
he, this, that, mine and yours, to rid himself of the notion of ‘I’ and ‘mine’,
to live unconcerned with the pairs of opposites as heat and cold, pain and pleasure, etc.,
to remain fixed in the perfect knowledge of the equality of all and making no distinction of any kind,
never to be aware of anything but Brahman,
and always to be experiencing the Bliss of the nondual Self.
Though Vedanta is read and well understood, if dispassion is not practised, the desire for pleasures will not fade away.
There is no dislike for pleasing things and the desire for them cannot leave the person.
Because desire is not checked, love, anger, etc., the ego or the ‘false-I’ in the obnoxious body, the sense of possession represented by ‘I’ or ‘mine’ of things agreeable to the body, the pairs of opposites like pleasure and pain, and false values, will not disappear.
However well read one may be, unless the teachings are put into practice, one is not really learned. Only like a parrot the man will be repeating that Brahman alone is real and all else is false.
D.: Why should he be so?
M.: The knowers say that like a dog delighting in offal, this man also delights in external pleasures.
Though always busy with Vedanta, reading and teaching it, he is no better than a mean dog.
52. Having read all the shastras and well grounded in them, they grow conceited that they are all knowing, accomplished and worthy of respect; filled with love and hate they presume themselves respectable; they are only packasses esteemed for carrying heavy loads over long distances in difficult and tortuous ways. They need not be considered as regards non-dual Truth. In the same strain Vasishta has spoken much more to Rama.
53. D.: Have there been those who being well read in the shastras have not practised their teachings?
M.: Oh, many. We have also read of them in the puranas. Once there was a Brahmin, Brahma Sarma by name. He was well versed in the Vedas and the Vedanta and otherwise an accomplished man too. He would not practise what he had learnt but would give lessons in it to others. Filled with love and hate, transgressing the code of conduct by acting according to greed, and otherwise enjoying himself according to his own sweet will, after death he passed to hell. For the same reason, so many more also went the same way.
In the world we see so many learned pandits consumed by pride and malice. No doubt a study of Vedanta makes one discerning. But if this is not accompanied by dispassion etc., it is useless and does not lead to enquiry.
54-56. D.: Will discernment together with dispassion meet the end?
M.: No. In the absence of cessation of activities, these two are not enough for a successful pursuit of enquiry. In its absence there will be no desire to enquire into the Self. How can we speak of success in it?
D.: What will a man with dispassion do if he does not take to enquiry into the Self?
M.: Activities not ceasing, there is no tranquillity; being desireless he dislikes all enjoyments and cannot find pleasure in home, wealth, arts, etc.; so he renounces them, retires into solitary forests and engages in severe but fruitless austerities. The case of King Sikhidhvaja is an example of this
57-59. D.: Then will discernment together with desirelessness and cessation of activities achieve the end?
M.: Not without the desire to be liberated.
If this desire is wanting, there will be no incentive to enquire into the Self
D.: What will the man be doing then? M.: Being desireless and peaceful, he will not make any effort but remain indifferent.
D.: Have there been men with these three qualities who did not take to enquiry into the Self?
M.: Yes. Dispassion is implied in all austerities; the mind too remains one pointed for tapasvis; yet they cannot enquire into the Self.
D.: What do they do then?
M.: Averse to external pursuits, with their minds concentrated, they will always remain austere in animated suspense like that of deep sleep, but not enquire into the Self. As an instance in point, the Ramayana says of Sarabhanga rishi that after all his tapasya he went to heaven.
D.: Does not heaven form part of the fruits of enquiry?
M.: No. Enquiry must end in Liberation, and this is freedom from repeated births and deaths which does not admit of transit from one region to another. Sarabhanga’s case indicates that he could not and did not enquire into the Self.
Therefore all the four qualifications are essential for enquiry
60-61. A simple desire to be liberated unaccompanied by the other three qualities will not be enough.
By an intense desire for liberation a man may take to enquiry but if otherwise unqualified, he must fail in his attempt.
His case will be like that of a lame man wistfully yearning for honey in a honey comb high up on a tree; he cannot reach it and must remain unhappy.
Or, the seeker may approach a master, surrender to him and profit by his guidance
D.: What authority is there for saying that a man not otherwise qualified but intensely desirous of liberation remains ever unhappy?
62. M.: In the Suta Samhita it is said that those desirous of enjoyments and yet yearning for liberation are surely bitten by the deadly serpent of samsara and therefore dazed by its poison. This is the authority.
In the view that all the four qualities must be together and in full, there is complete agreement between the srutis, reason and experience. Otherwise even if one of them is wanting, enquiry cannot be pursued to success, but after death regions of merit will be gained. When all the four qualities are perfect and together present, enquiry is fruitful.
63-69. D.: In conclusion who are fit for enquiry into the Self?
M.: Only those who have all the four requisite qualities in full, are fit, and not others, whether versed in Vedas and shastras or otherwise highly accomplished, nor practisers of severe austerities, nor those strictly observing the religious rites or vows or reciting mantras, nor worshippers of any kind, nor those giving away large gifts, nor wandering pilgrims etc.
Just as the Vedic rites are not for the non-regenerate so also,
enquiry is not for the unqualified.
D.: Can want of requisite qualities disqualify even a very learned scholar?
M.: Be he learned in all the sacred lore or ignorant of all of it, only the four fold requisites can qualify a man for enquiry.
The sruti says: “The one whose mind is in equipoise, senses controlled, whose activities have ceased and who possesses fortitude” is fit for this. From this it follows that others are not competent but only those who are possessing the four fold virtues.
70. D.: Is any distinction made amongst seekers who are competent?
M.: For enquiry into the Self there is absolutely no distinction bearing on caste, stage of life or other similar matters. Be the seeker the foremost scholar, pandit, illiterate man, child, youth, old man, bachelor, householder, tapasvi, sanyasi, brahmin, kshatriya, vaisya, sudra, a chandala or a woman, only these four qualifications make up the seeker. This is the undisputed view of the vedas and shastras.
71. D.: This cannot be. How can illiterate men, women and chandalas be qualified to the exclusion of a pandit learned in the shastras? He must certainly be more qualified than others. You say that a knowledge of the shastras is no qualification but practice of their teachings is. No one can practise what he has not known. How can an illiterate person qualify himself in the requisite manner?
M.: In reply I ask you and you tell me — how does the learned man qualify himself?
D.: Because he has known the teachings of the shastras that he should not do karma for selfish ends but dedicate it to God, he will do so; his mind will be purified; gradually he will acquire the dispassion etc., needed for enquiry. Now tell me how an illiterate man can qualify himself.
M.: He also can. Though not learned now, he might have learnt the teachings in preceding births, done actions dedicated to God; his mind being already pure enough, he can now readily acquire the qualities needed for enquiry into the Self.
72. D.: In the illiterate man, should the sadhanas acquired in preceding births and later lying as latencies, now manifest themselves, why should not his learning acquired in those births similarly manifest itself now?
M.: Some of his past karma may obstruct only the learning from re-manifesting itself.
D.: If the learning is obstructed, how is not the sadhana also obstructed from manifestation?
M.: Though the learning is obstructed, the fruits of his valuable labour cannot be lost; he cannot lose his competence for enquiry
73. D.: What would happen if his four fold sadhanas were obstructed as well as his learning?
M.: The result would be that for want of the requisite qualities neither the scholar nor the other would be fit for enquiry. Both would be equal.
74-76. D.: No. This cannot be. Though not already qualified, the scholar having known the teachings can put them into practice and gradually qualify himself, whereas the other with all his studies had not already succeeded in his preceding births, and what hope can there be now that he has forgotten what he had learnt and his sadhanas are obstructed? Obviously he cannot be successful in enquiry. M.: Not so. Though illiterate a man anxious for liberation will approach a master, learn from him the essence of the scriptures, earnestly practise the teachings and succeed in the end. Just as a worldly man ignorant of scriptures yet desirous of heaven, seeks guidance from a master and by observance, worship and discipline, gains his end, so also by a master’s teachings even an illiterate man can certainly benefit as much as the scholar with his knowledge.
77-78. D.: Religious rites bear fruits only according to the earnestness of the man. Only if the seeker of Truth is earnest can a master’s guidance act in the same manner. Otherwise how can it be?
M.: Just as earnestness is the essential factor for reaping fruits from karma, so it is with the practice of sadhanas by the learned scholar or the master’s disciple. Karma or sadhana cannot succeed if interest is wanting in them. A scholar or an illiterate man reaps the fruits of karma according to the interest he takes in its performance. One who is not earnest need not be considered in any matter concerning the Vedas or a master.
79. A scholar or an illiterate man, if he has not already qualified himself as aforesaid, but is now desirous of liberation, should in right earnest practise the sadhanas so that he may qualify himself now at least. He will later be fit for enquiry. So no distinction can be made between a scholar and an illiterate man.
80. D.: If so, regarding fitness for enquiry into the Self, how does a scholar differ from an illiterate man?
M.: The difference lies only in the learning and not in the practice of sadhana or enquiry.
81-82. D.: No. This cannot be. Though learning does not make any difference in sadhana, it must certainly weigh in favour of the scholar in the pursuit of enquiry.
M.: Not so. Shastra is not the means for enquiry. The means consist of desirelessness etc. Only these can qualify a man for enquiry and a learning of the shastras does not make any difference. Therefore a scholar has no advantage over an illiterate man in the field of enquiry
83-85. D.: Granted that dispassion etc. form the means for success in enquiry, even with the necessary sadhanas the enquiry into the Self must be pursued only in the light of the shastras. Therefore the study of the shastras should be indispensable for the successful pursuit of enquiry
M.: Nonsense!
No Shastra is required to know the Self.
Does any one look into the Shastra for the Self? Surely not.
D.: Only if the Self is already known, Shastra will not be required for enquiry into the Self. But the seeker being deluded has not known his true nature. How can an illiterate man realise the Self without studying the shastras which deal with the nature of the Self? He cannot. Therefore the shastras must be learnt as a preliminary to realisation.
M.: In that case the knowledge of the Self got from the shastras will be like that of heaven mentioned in the Vedas, i.e., indirect and not directly experienced. This knowledge corresponds to hearsay and cannot be direct perception. Just as the knowledge of the form of Vishnu always remains indirect and there is no direct perception of the four armed being or again the knowledge of heaven can only be indirect in this world, so also the knowledge of the Self contained in the shastras can only be indirect. This leaves the man where he was, just as ignorant as before.
Only the knowledge of direct experience can be true and useful;
the Self is to be realised and not to be talked about
86-88. D.: Has any one said so before?
M.: Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said in Dhyana Deepika: The Knowledge of the figure of Vishnu gained from shastras that He has four arms, holding a disc, a conch, etc., is only indirect and cannot be direct.
The description is intended to serve as a mental picture for worship and no one can see it face to face.
Similarly to know from the shastras that the Self is Being-Knowledge-Bliss amounts to indirect knowledge and cannot be the same as experience.
For the Self is the inmost being of the individual or the consciousness witnessing the five sheaths; it is Brahman.
This not being realised, a superficial knowledge is all that is gained by reading the shastras.
It is only indirect knowledge.
D.: Vishnu or heaven being different from the Self can only be objective whereas the Self is subjective and its knowledge, however gained, must be only direct and cannot be indirect.
M.: Although spontaneously and directly the Vedanta teaches the Supreme Truth, “That thou art” meaning that the inmost being of the individual is Brahman,
yet enquiry is the only sure means of Self realisation.
Sastric knowledge is not enough, for it can only be indirect.
Only the experience resulting from the enquiry of the Self can be direct knowledge.
89-90. Vasishta also has said to the same effect.
Shastra, Guru and upadesa are all traditional and do not straightway make the seeker directly realise the Self.
The purity of the seeker’s mind is the sole means for realisation and not shastra nor the guru.
The self can be realised by one’s own acute discernment and by no other means. All shastras agree on this point.
91. From this it is clear that except by enquiry the Self can never be realised, not even by learning Vedanta.
92. D.: The Self must be realised only by a critical study of the shastras. Otherwise what can be the enquiry into the Self but a critical and analytical study of the shastras?
93. M.: In the body, senses etc., the concept “I” persists. With a one pointed mind turned inwards to look out for this “I” or the Self, which is the inmost Being within the five sheaths, is the enquiry into the Self.
To seek elsewhere outside the body by an oral recital of Vedanta Shastra or a critical study of its words, cannot be called enquiry into the Self which can only be a thorough investigation into the true nature of the Self by a keen mind.
94-96. D.: Can the Self not be known by reading and understanding the shastras?
M.: No. For the Self is Being-Knowledge-Bliss, different from the gross, subtle and causal bodies, witnessing the three states of waking, dream and deep sleep.
Always to exercise the vocal organs in reading the shastras, or with a thorough knowledge of grammar, logic and diction to critically examine the scripture and make out its meaning, cannot reveal the Self which is within
D.: How can it be realised?
M.: By the mind to examine the nature of the five sheaths, by experience to determine them, then to discard each of them step by step “this is not the Self — this is not the Self”, and by mind thus grown subtle to look for the Self and realise It as the witnessing Consciousness lying beyond the five sheaths — forms the whole process.
The Self cannot be seen without.
It is overspread by and lies hidden in the five sheaths.
In order to find It, the intellect must be made to turn inwards and search within,
not to look for It in the shastras.
Will any man in his senses search in a forest for a thing lost in his home?
The search must be in the place where the thing lies hidden.
In the same way the Self covered over by the five sheaths must be looked for within them and not among the shastras. The shastras are not the place for It.
97. D.: True, the Self cannot be found in the shastras. From them a scholar can learn the nature of the five sheaths, intellectually examine, experience and discard them, in order to find and realise the Self. How can the other man ignorant of the nature of the Self or of the five sheaths pursue the enquiry?
M.: Just as the scholar learns from books, so the other learns from the master. Later, enquiry remains the same for both.
98-99. D.: Does it follow that a master is necessary for an illiterate man and not for a scholar?
M.: Scholar or illiterate, no one can succeed without a master.
From the beginning of time, unable to realise the Self without a master, the seekers even learned in all the shastras always sought a master to enlighten them. Narada went to Sanatkumara; Indra to Brahma; Suka to king Janaka. Unless the master is gracious to him, no man can ever be liberated.
100-101. D.: Has any one illiterate been liberated by Guru’s Grace only?
M.: Yes. Yagnavalkya helped his wife Maitreyi to be liberated. Many other women ignorant of the shastras e.g., Leela and Chudala were also liberated while alive. Therefore even those ignorant of the shastras are qualified for enquiry into the Self.
102-108. It must now be obvious that the make up of the best qualified seeker consists in dispassion, resulting from discernment of the real from the unreal, so that he discards all enjoyments here and hereafter as if they were poison or vomit or blazing fire, retires from all activities to remain quiet like a man in deep sleep,
but finding himself unable to remain so owing to unbearable pains, physical and mental, as if the hair of his head had caught fire and was burning, he cannot feel happy nor bear the agony even a minute longer and burns in anguish feeling “When shall I be free? How and by what means can I be liberated?”
For the best seeker all the qualifications must be full up to the above said category “limit” (avadhi). For the next in scale, the good seeker, the qualifications are developed only to the “effect” stage; for the middling, only to the “nature” stage; and for the lowest, only to their “cause” stage. These stages determine the success of the seeker’s efforts.
109. Immediate success attends the efforts of the best qualified; some time elapses before the next in grade succeeds; a longer time is required for the middling; and only a prolonged and steady practice can enable the low-grade seeker to succeed.
110-112. Their perplexity of minds does not allow the last two grades of seekers to take to enquiry.
Their minds are more readily composed by yoga, which is more suited to them than enquiry.
The first two grades of seekers readily profit by enquiry which is more suited to them than yoga.
113-114. In Dhyana Deepika, Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said:
“The path of enquiry cannot lead to success to the seekers whose minds are confused.
To bring down the false notion of their minds, yoga is necessary.
The minds of those who are fully qualified, are not confused but remain one pointed; only the veiling power of Ignorance still hides the Self from them; they await only awakening.
Enquiry is the process of awakening; therefore it best suits them.”
115-118. Yoga can be successful only after a long, steady, earnest, diligent and cautious practice without needless strain.
D.: Why should one be so heedful about it?
M.: When the attempt is made to fix the mind in the Self, it gets restive and drags the man through the senses to the objects.
However resolute and learned the man may be, his mind remains wayward, strong, mulish, and hard to restrain.
Wanton by nature, it cannot remain steady for a moment; it must run here, there and everywhere; now it dwells in the nether regions and in a trice it flies up in the sky; it moves in all the directions of the compass; and it is capricious like a monkey. It is hard to fix it. To do so, one must be heedful
119-121. In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna asked Sri Bhagavan:
‘O Krishna! Is not the mind always capricious, disturbing to the man and too strong to be checked? It is easier to hold the air in the fist than to control the mind.’
In the Yoga Vasishta, Sri Rama asked Vasishta: ‘O master! Is it not impossible to control the mind? One may sooner drink up the oceans or lift up Mt. Meru or swallow flaming fire than control the mind.’
From the words of Rama and Arjuna, and our own experience, there can be no doubt that it is exceedingly difficult to control the mind however able and heroic one may be.
122-124. D.: Control of mind being so difficult, how can yoga be practised at all?
M.: By dint of practice and dispassion, the mind can be brought under control.
The same has been said by Sri Bhagavan to Arjuna and by Vasishta to Sri Rama.
Sri Krishna said : “O Son of Kunti! There is no doubt that the mind is wayward and difficult to control. Nevertheless by dint of practice and dispassion it can be controlled.”
Vasishta said: “O Rama, though the mind is hard to control yet it must be subdued by dispassion and effort even at the cost of wringing your hands, clenching your teeth and holding down the senses and limbs; it must be accomplished by will power.” Therefore intense effort is necessary for the purpose.
125-127. The honey bee of the mind ever living in the lotus of the heart turns away from the sweet honey of unequalled Bliss of the Heart lotus, and desirous of honey bitter with misery, collected outside as sound, touch, form, taste and smell, always flies out through the senses.
Though by dispassion the senses are forcibly closed and the mind shut in, yet remaining within, it will be thinking of the present or recollecting the past or building castles in the air.
D.: How can even its subtle activities be checked and itself completely subdued?
M.: Checking its external activities and confining it within, this bee of the mind must be made to be drunk with the honey of the Heart lotus, i.e., the Bliss of the Self.
128. D.: Please explain this yoga.
M.: With an intense desire for Liberation, reaching a Guru, hearing from him the non-dual Brahman shining forth as BeingKnowledge-Bliss of the Self, understanding It though indirectly yet as clearly as one understands Vishnu etc., turning the mind one pointedly to this Brahman, without taking to enquiry by reflection (manana) always meditating on the non-dual Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss, attributeless and undifferentiated, is called yoga.
By its practice the mind becomes tranquil and can gradually go to samadhi.
In samadhi it will experience the Supreme Bliss.
129-130. D.: Has any other said so before?
M.: Yes. Sri Bhagavan has said: The yogi who, controlling the mind, always turns it upon the Self, becomes perfectly calm, and ultimately gains Me i.e., the Bliss of Liberation.
The mind of the yogi who always practises yoga, will be steady like a flame protected from the breeze and without movement will pass into samadhi.
131-133. Similarly by enquiry, the mind readily gains peace and samadhi.
D.: What is this enquiry?
M.: After hearing from the Guru about the nature of the Self which in the shastras is spoken of as Brahman or BeingKnowledge-Bliss,
to gain a clear indirect knowledge,
then according to upadesa and by intelligent reasoning to enquire and find out the Self
which is Pure Knowledge,
and the nonself which is objective and insentient like the ego,
to discern and sift them,
then directly to experience them as different from each other,
later on by meditation to extinguish all that is objective,
and to absorb into the Self the residual mind left over as non-dual,
ends in the direct experience of Supreme Bliss.
Here it has been described in brief, but the shastras deal with it elaborately
134. This chapter on Sadhana has dealt with these two means, Enquiry and Yoga, for making the mind still. According to his merits an intelligent seeker should practise either of them.
135. This Chapter is meant for the earnest student in order that he may study carefully and analyse his qualifications to ascertain what he already has and what more are wanted. After properly equipping himself he can find out which of these two methods suits him and then practise it till success.
.... ,, .............................. .............................. ..........
chp 4 shravana
1. In the foregoing chapter we had seen that yoga is suited to the lower grade of seekers and enquiry to the higher.
In this chapter we shall consider the path of enquiry which effortlessly leads to Knowledge of Brahman
2-4. D.: What is this path of enquiry?
M.: From the shastras it is well known to consist of sravana, manana, nidhidhyasana and samadhi i.e., hearing the Truth, reflection, meditation and Blissful Peace.
The Vedas themselves declare it to be so. “My dear, the Self must be heard from the master, reflected and meditated upon.” In another place it is said that
in Blissful Peace the Self must be realised.
The same idea has been repeated by Sri Sankaracharya in his Vakyavrtti, namely that
until the meaning of the sacred text “I am Brahman” is realised in all its true significance, one must be practising sravana etc.
5-7. In Chitra Deepika, Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said that
enquiry is the means of knowledge and it consists in hearing the Truth, reflection and meditation;
only the state of blissful Peace of awareness in which Brahman alone exists and nothing else,
is the true “nature” of Knowledge;
the non-revival of the knot of the ego parading as “I” which has been lost once for all, is its “effect”;
always to remain fixed as ‘I am the Supreme Self’
just as strongly, unequivocally and unerringly as the heretofore ignorant identification “I am the body” is its end;
liberation is its fruit.
From this it follows that only hearing etc. is the enquiry into the Self
8-10. To hear the Supreme Truth, reflect and meditate on it, and to remain in Samadhi form together the enquiry into the Self.
They have for their cause (Hetu) the aforesaid four sadhanas, namely, discernment, desirelessness, tranquillity and desire to be liberated.
Which of these is essential for which part of enquiry will be mentioned in its appropriate place. Here we shall deal with sravana.
M.: Sravana consists in ascertaining, by means of the six proofs considered together, that the Vedas aim at the non-dual Brahman only
11-12. To analyse sravana under the five categories:-
Intense desire to be liberated gives rise to it;
always to be hearing of the non-dual Brahman is its nature;
the complete removal of that aspect of the veiling power of Ignorance which says, “It (Brahman) does not exist” is its effect;
non recurrence of this veiling power is its limit;
a firm indirect knowledge is its fruit
M.: In the sruti it is said: “In the state of dissolution before creation there was only the non-dual Reality.” This Reality is the same as the Self.
Only he who is eager to be liberated will seek the knowledge of the Self and take to hearing it. No other is interested in It.
Therefore eagerness to be liberated is the essential requisite for this part of enquiry, viz. sravana.
14. D.: Just now you said that always to be hearing of the non-dual Self is the nature of sravana. Who is this non-dual Self?
M.: He is famous in the srutis as the Consciousness beyond the gross, subtle and causal bodies, apart from the five sheaths and witness of the waking, dream and sleep states.
15-17. D.: What can be beyond the gross, subtle and causal bodies?
M.: Of these the gross body is composed of skin, blood, muscles, fat, bones, nerve stuff and lymph; it is secreting and excreting; it is born and it dies; like a wall it is insentient; like a pot it is an object of the senses. The subtle body is the internal organ (antahkarana) wellknown as the mind, which functions as the ‘I’ mode and ‘this’ mode; together with the five vital airs, the five senses and the five organs and limbs, it transmigrates to other bodies or worlds; always remaining within a gross body it experiences pleasures and pains. The beginningless, neither real nor unreal, and indescribable Ignorance manifests these subtle and gross bodies and is therefore said to be the causal body.
18. These three bodies are contrary to the nature of the Self. D.: How?
M.: The gross body is insentient; the subtle is pain ridden; the causal is unreal.
These are the opposites of the BeingKnowledge-Bliss nature of the Self.
Therefore the Self must be different from these.
It remains unconcerned as the witness of the three states and of their experiencer who remains conceited with the ideas “I woke up — I dreamt — I slept.”
Therefore none of the three states is of the Self.
54. D.: Do these three — Being, Knowledge and Bliss form the qualities or the nature of the Self?
M.: These are not qualities but the very Self. Just as heat, light, and redness form the nature of fire and are not its qualities, so also Being, Knowledge and Bliss are the nature of the Self
Therefore all this universe is really false. Now it is but right to say that being the witness, the Self is the sole cause of all this universe which is but an illusory appearance on the Self. The illusory effect cannot be separate from the basis.
Just as the foam, bubbles and waves are not different from their origin, the sea, so also the phenomena of the Universe are but the Self falsely presented.
Therefore the Self is ‘non-dual’ and there can be no duality.
67. In the presence of the master always attentively to study the Vedanta shastra which treats of the non-dual Being and retain its meaning forms the “nature” of sravana or hearing. This must always be attended to.
Master: Now, what makes you suffer? Disciple: Bitten by the cruel serpent of painful samsara, I am dazed and I suffer. Master, pray save me from this burning hell and kindly tell me how I can be free.
13-17. M.: Well said, my Son! You are intelligent and well disciplined. There is no need to prove your competence to be a disciple. Your words clearly show that you are fit. Now look here, my child!
In the Supreme Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss who can be the transmigrating being? How can this samsara be? What could have given rise to it? And how and whence can it arise itself? Being the non-dual Reality, how can you be deluded? With nothing separate in deep sleep, not having changed in any manner, and having slept soundly and peacefully, a fool on waking shouts out “Alas, I am lost!” How can you, the changeless, formless, Supreme, Blissful Self shout forth “I transmigrate — I am miserable!” and so on? Truly there is neither birth nor death; no one to be born or to die; nothing of the kind!
...avrana + vikshepa..sansara arises from it........
Ignorance has two aspects: Veiling and Projection (Avarana—Vikshepa). From these arises the samsara. Veiling functions in two ways. In the one we say “It is not” and in the other “It does not shine forth.”
... 1st aspect of veiling.......
27-28
although the sage teaches that there is only the non-dual Reality the ignorant man thinks “What can be non-dual Reality? No. It cannot be.” As a result of beginningless veiling, though taught, the teaching is disregarded and the old ideas persist. Such indifference is the first aspect of veiling.
Next, with the help of sacred books and gracious masters he unaccountably but sincerely believes in the non dual Real, yet he cannot probe deep but remains superficial and says “The Reality does not shine forth.”
...2nd aspect of veiling..
Here is knowledge knowing that It does not shine forth yet the illusion of ignorance persists. This illusion that It does not shine forth, is the second aspect of veiling.
...Self as body = superimposition...............
Though he is the unchanging, formless, Supreme, Blissful, non-dual Self, the man thinks of himself as the body with hands and legs, the doer and experiencer; objectively sees this man and that man, this thing and that thing, and is deluded. This delusion of perceiving the external universe on the non-dual Reality enveloped by it, is Projection. This is Superimposition.
: Though the Self is Brahman, there is not the knowledge of the Self (being Brahman). That which obstructs this knowledge of the Self is Ignorance
There is only the basic Existence, not fictitious, nondual, undifferentiated, ab extra and ab intra (Sajatiya, vijatiya, and svagata bheda), Being-Knowledge-Bliss, the unchanging Reality.
“In dissolution the whole universe is withdrawn leaving only the Single Reality which stays motionless, beyond speech and thought, neither darkness nor light, yet perfect, namely, untellable, but not void,” says Yoga Vasishta
This maya which is dependent on the unrelated Knowledge-Bliss-Reality, has the two aspects of veiling and projection (avarna and vikshepa); by the former it hides its own substratum from view, and by the latter the unmanifest maya is made manifest as mind. This then sports with its latencies which amounts to projecting this universe with all the names and forms
To recollect ideas or latencies is its nature. It has latencies as its content and appears in the witnessing consciousness in two modes — “I” and “This”
106/...3 states
Nevertheless they are merely appearances of the deluded mind and not real. He seems to be born and to die.
experiences heaven,hell
Nevertheless they are merely appearances of the deluded mind and not real. He seems to be born and to die.
elestial city
Names and forms make it up and it is nothing more.
nurse chiild story...14 gates etc
The child believed the tale and was pleased. So it is with the fool who takes this world to be real.
Now Isvara, the king who is the son of the barren mother Maya, having built the houses of the bodies, enters into them at will as the Jivas, sports in the company of the phantom egos and moves about aimlessly
The anklets are heaven and hell; the four strings of glass lustre are the four stages of Mukti — Salokya, Samipya, Sarupya and Sayujya, meaning equality in rank, condition or power and final identity.
tudent suffer in the world, desirous of making him realise the truth, but knowing his love for the world and dislike of the non-dual Reality — which is subtle and hard to understand, gently coax him with the sweet pleasures of heaven, etc., before laying bare the non-dual Reality.
By repeated practices in several rebirths his mind becomes pure and turns away from sense enjoyments to receive the highest teaching of the nondual Reality
Their aim is to make the student purify his mind by his own efforts such as good actions, austerities and devotion. To coax him, these are said to yield him pleasures. Being themselves insentient, these cannot of their own accord yield fruits. So an all-powerful Isvara is said to dispense the fruits of actions. That is how an Isvara appears on the scene. Later the scriptures say that the jiva, Isvara and the jagrat (world) are all equally false.
Ignorance of the Self is the root cause of all the three illusions — jiva, jagat and Isvara.
Maya is self- evident, beginningless and spontaneous, yet it subsists in the absence of enquiry into the nature of the Self, manifests the universe etc., and grows more massive.
How can Maya be compared to a mother burnt down to ashes by her daughter?
In the process of enquiry, Maya becomes more and more transparent and turns into Knowledge. Knowledge is thus born of Maya, and is therefore said to be the daughter of Maya.
Maya so long flourishing on non-enquiry comes to its last days on enquiry.
Just as a crab brings forth its young only to die itself, so also in the last days of enquiry Maya brings forth Knowledge for its own undoing. Immediately the daughter, Knowledge, burns her down to ashes.
..ya ma that which doesnt exist = maya....................
In a bamboo forest, the bamboos move in the wind, rub against one another and produce fire which burns down the parent trees. So also Knowledge born of Maya burns Maya to ashes.
Maya remains only in name like a hare’s horn.
Therefore the sages declare it non existent.
Moreover, the very name implies its unreality.
The names are Avidya and Maya. Of these the former means ‘Ignorance or that which is not’ (ya n iv±t sa Aiv±a e ); again, ‘Maya is that which is not’ (ya ma sa maya).
Therefore it is simple negation. Thus that it fruitlessly vanishes into nothing is its ‘fruit’.
The fire from the friction of the trees burns them down and then dies out; the clearing nut carries down the impurities of water and itself settles down with them. Similarly this Knowledge destroys Ignorance and itself perishes. Since it is also finally resolved, the ‘fruit’ of Maya can be only unreal.
: Samsara, the effect of Ignorance, is unreal like Knowledge. One unreality can be undone by another unreality.
When non enquiry gives place to enquiry, right knowledge results and puts an end to Ignorance.
Mind being the samsara, must be investigated.
Associated with mind which according to its modes assumes the shapes of objects, the man seems to undergo the same changes.
This eternal secret is disclosed in the Maitryiniya Upanishad.
With complete stillness of mind, samsara will disappear root and branch. Otherwise there will be no end to samsara, even in millions of aeons (Kalpakotikala
Absolutely by no other means; neither the Vedas, nor the shastras nor austerities, nor karma, nor vows, nor gifts, nor recital of scriptures of mystic formulae (mantras), nor worship, nor anything else, can undo the samsara.
Only stillness of mind can accomplish the end and nothing else.
19. D.: The scriptures declare that only Knowledge can do it. How then do you say that stillness of the mind puts an end to samsara?
M.: What is variously described as Knowledge, Liberation, etc., in the scriptures, is but stillness of mind.
D.: Has any one said so before? 20-27.
M.: Sri Vasishta had said: When by practice the mind stands still, all illusions of samsara disappear, root and branch. Just as when the ocean of milk was churned for its nectar, it was all rough, but became still and clear after the churn (viz., mount Mandara) was taken out, so also the mind becoming still, the samsara falls to eternal rest.
D.: How can the mind be brought to stillness?
M.: By dispassion, abandoning all that is dear to oneself, one can by one’s efforts accomplish the task with ease.
Without this peace of mind, Liberation is impossible.
Only when the whole objective world is wiped out clean by a mind disillusioned as a consequence of discerning knowledge that all that is not Brahman is objective and unreal, the Supreme Bliss will result.
Otherwise in the absence of peace of mind, however much an ignorant man may struggle and creep on in the deep abyss of the shastras, he cannot gain Liberation.
Only that mind which by practice of yoga, having lost all its latencies, has become pure and still like a lamp in a dome well protected from breeze, is said to be dead.
This death of mind is the highest fulfilment.
The final conclusion of all the Vedas is that Liberation is nothing but mind stilled.
For Liberation nothing can avail, not wealth, relatives, friends, karma consisting of movements of the limbs, pilgrimage to sacred places, baths in sacred waters, life in celestial regions, austerities however severe,
or anything but a still mind.
In similar strain many sacred books teach that Liberation consists in doing away with the mind.
In several passages in the Yoga Vasishta, the same idea is repeated, that the Bliss of Liberation can be reached only by wiping out the mind, which is the root cause of samsara, and thus of all misery.
imp-
28. In this way to kill the mind by a knowledge of the sacred teaching, reasoning and one’s own experience, is to undo the samsara.
How else can the miserable round of births and deaths be brought to a standstill?
And how can freedom result from it?
Never.
Unless the dreamer awakes, the dream does not come to an end nor the fright of being face to face with a tiger in the dream.
Similarly unless the mind is disillusioned, the agony of samsara will not cease.
Only the mind must be made still. This is the fulfilment of life
29-30. D.: How can the mind be made still?
M.: Only by Sankhya.
Sankhya is the process of enquiry coupled with knowledge.
The realised sages declare that the mind has its root in non-enquiry and perishes by an informed enquiry
D.: Please explain this process.
M.: This consists of sravana, manana, nididhyasana and samadhi, i.e., hearing, reasoning, meditation and Blissful Peace, as mentioned in the scriptures. Only this can make the mind still.
31-32. There is also an alternative. It is said to be yoga.
D.: What is yoga?
M.: Meditation on Pure Being free from qualities.
D.: Where is this alternative mentioned and how?
M.: In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Sri Bhagavan Krishna has said: What is gained by Sankhya can also be gained by yoga. Only he who knows that the result of the two processes is the same, can be called a realised sage
33-34. D.: How can the two results be identical?
M.: The final limit is the same for both because both of them end in stillness of mind. This is samadhi or Blissful Peace. The fruit of samadhi is Supreme Knowledge; this remains the same by whichever process gained
D.: If the fruit is the same for both, the final purpose can be served by only one of them. Why should two processes be mentioned instead of only one?
M.: In the world, seekers of truth are of different grades of development.
Out of consideration for them, Sri Bhagavan has mentioned these two in order to offer a choice
35. D.: Who is fit for the path of enquiry (Sankhya)?
M.: Only a fully qualified seeker is fit, for he can succeed in it and not others.
4 pre requisites for discrimination/enquiry
36-37. D.: What are the sadhanas or requisites for this process?
M.: The knowers say that the sadhanas consist of
an ability to discern the real from the unreal,
no desire for pleasures here or hereafter,
cessation of activities (karma) and
a keen desire to be liberated.
Not qualified with all these four qualities, however hard one may try, one cannot succeed in enquiry. Therefore this fourfold sadhana is the sine qua non for enquiry.
38. To begin with, a knowledge of the distinctive characteristics of these sadhanas is necessary. As already pointed out, these distinctive characteristics are of the categories (hetu, Sv-av, kay, Avi0, fl R ) cause, nature, effect, limit and fruit. These are now described.
39-44. Discernment (viveka) can arise only in a purified mind.
Its ‘nature’ is the conviction gained by the help of sacred teachings that only Brahman is real and all else false.
Always to remember this truth is its ‘effect’.
Its end (avadhi) is to be settled unwavering in the truth that only Brahman is and all else is unreal.
Desirelessness (vairagya) is the result of the outlook that the world is essentially faulty.
Its ‘nature’ is to renounce the world and have no desire for anything in it.
Its ‘effect’ is to turn away in disgust from all enjoyments as from vomit.
It ends (avadhi) in treatment with contempt of all pleasures, earthly or heavenly, as if they were vomit or burning fire or hell.
Cessation of activities (uparati) can be the outcome of the eight fold yoga (astangayoga), namely, yama, niyama, asana, pranayama, pratyahara, dharana, dhyana and samadhi, i.e., self restraint, discipline, steady posture, control of breath, control of senses, mind collected to truth, meditation and peace.
Its ‘nature’ consists in restraining the mind.
Its ‘effect’ is to cease from worldly activities.
It ends (avadhi) in forgetfulness of the world as if in sleep, owing to the ending of activities.
...mumukhatava..
Desire to be liberated (mumukshutva) begins with the association with
realised sages.
Its ‘nature’ is the yearning for liberation.
Its ‘effect’ is to stay with one’s master.
It ends (avadhi) in giving up all study of shastras and performance of religious rites.
When these have reached their limits as mentioned above, the sadhanas are said to be perfect.
45-47. Should only one or more of these sadhanas be perfect but not all of them, the person will after Death gain celestial regions.
If all of them are perfect, they together quickly make the person thoroughly capable of enquiry into the Self.
Only when all the sadhanas are perfect is enquiry possible; otherwise, not.
Even if one of them remains undeveloped, it obstructs enquiry. With this we shall deal presently.
48-49. Dispassion, etc., remaining undeveloped, discernment, though perfect, cannot by itself remove the obstacles, to enquiry into the Self.
You see how many are well read in Vedanta Shastra.
They must all possess this virtue, but they have not cultivated the others, dispassion etc.
Therefore they cannot undertake the enquiry into the Self.
This fact makes it plain that discernment unattended by dispassion etc., cannot avail.
50-51. D.: How is it that even scholars in Vedanta have not succeeded in the pursuit of enquiry?
M.: Though they always study Vedanta and give lessons to others yet in the absence of desirelessness they do not practise what they have learnt.
D.: And what do they do otherwise?
M.: Like a parrot they reproduce the Vedantic jargon but do not put the teachings into practice.
D.: What does Vedanta teach?
M.: The Vedanta teaches a man to know that all but the non-dual Brahman is laden with misery, therefore to leave off all desires for enjoyment, to be free from love or hate, thoroughly to cut the knot of the ego appearing as ‘I’, you,
he, this, that, mine and yours, to rid himself of the notion of ‘I’ and ‘mine’,
to live unconcerned with the pairs of opposites as heat and cold, pain and pleasure, etc.,
to remain fixed in the perfect knowledge of the equality of all and making no distinction of any kind,
never to be aware of anything but Brahman,
and always to be experiencing the Bliss of the nondual Self.
Though Vedanta is read and well understood, if dispassion is not practised, the desire for pleasures will not fade away.
There is no dislike for pleasing things and the desire for them cannot leave the person.
Because desire is not checked, love, anger, etc., the ego or the ‘false-I’ in the obnoxious body, the sense of possession represented by ‘I’ or ‘mine’ of things agreeable to the body, the pairs of opposites like pleasure and pain, and false values, will not disappear.
However well read one may be, unless the teachings are put into practice, one is not really learned. Only like a parrot the man will be repeating that Brahman alone is real and all else is false.
D.: Why should he be so?
M.: The knowers say that like a dog delighting in offal, this man also delights in external pleasures.
Though always busy with Vedanta, reading and teaching it, he is no better than a mean dog.
52. Having read all the shastras and well grounded in them, they grow conceited that they are all knowing, accomplished and worthy of respect; filled with love and hate they presume themselves respectable; they are only packasses esteemed for carrying heavy loads over long distances in difficult and tortuous ways. They need not be considered as regards non-dual Truth. In the same strain Vasishta has spoken much more to Rama.
53. D.: Have there been those who being well read in the shastras have not practised their teachings?
M.: Oh, many. We have also read of them in the puranas. Once there was a Brahmin, Brahma Sarma by name. He was well versed in the Vedas and the Vedanta and otherwise an accomplished man too. He would not practise what he had learnt but would give lessons in it to others. Filled with love and hate, transgressing the code of conduct by acting according to greed, and otherwise enjoying himself according to his own sweet will, after death he passed to hell. For the same reason, so many more also went the same way.
In the world we see so many learned pandits consumed by pride and malice. No doubt a study of Vedanta makes one discerning. But if this is not accompanied by dispassion etc., it is useless and does not lead to enquiry.
54-56. D.: Will discernment together with dispassion meet the end?
M.: No. In the absence of cessation of activities, these two are not enough for a successful pursuit of enquiry. In its absence there will be no desire to enquire into the Self. How can we speak of success in it?
D.: What will a man with dispassion do if he does not take to enquiry into the Self?
M.: Activities not ceasing, there is no tranquillity; being desireless he dislikes all enjoyments and cannot find pleasure in home, wealth, arts, etc.; so he renounces them, retires into solitary forests and engages in severe but fruitless austerities. The case of King Sikhidhvaja is an example of this
57-59. D.: Then will discernment together with desirelessness and cessation of activities achieve the end?
M.: Not without the desire to be liberated.
If this desire is wanting, there will be no incentive to enquire into the Self
D.: What will the man be doing then? M.: Being desireless and peaceful, he will not make any effort but remain indifferent.
D.: Have there been men with these three qualities who did not take to enquiry into the Self?
M.: Yes. Dispassion is implied in all austerities; the mind too remains one pointed for tapasvis; yet they cannot enquire into the Self.
D.: What do they do then?
M.: Averse to external pursuits, with their minds concentrated, they will always remain austere in animated suspense like that of deep sleep, but not enquire into the Self. As an instance in point, the Ramayana says of Sarabhanga rishi that after all his tapasya he went to heaven.
D.: Does not heaven form part of the fruits of enquiry?
M.: No. Enquiry must end in Liberation, and this is freedom from repeated births and deaths which does not admit of transit from one region to another. Sarabhanga’s case indicates that he could not and did not enquire into the Self.
Therefore all the four qualifications are essential for enquiry
60-61. A simple desire to be liberated unaccompanied by the other three qualities will not be enough.
By an intense desire for liberation a man may take to enquiry but if otherwise unqualified, he must fail in his attempt.
His case will be like that of a lame man wistfully yearning for honey in a honey comb high up on a tree; he cannot reach it and must remain unhappy.
Or, the seeker may approach a master, surrender to him and profit by his guidance
D.: What authority is there for saying that a man not otherwise qualified but intensely desirous of liberation remains ever unhappy?
62. M.: In the Suta Samhita it is said that those desirous of enjoyments and yet yearning for liberation are surely bitten by the deadly serpent of samsara and therefore dazed by its poison. This is the authority.
In the view that all the four qualities must be together and in full, there is complete agreement between the srutis, reason and experience. Otherwise even if one of them is wanting, enquiry cannot be pursued to success, but after death regions of merit will be gained. When all the four qualities are perfect and together present, enquiry is fruitful.
63-69. D.: In conclusion who are fit for enquiry into the Self?
M.: Only those who have all the four requisite qualities in full, are fit, and not others, whether versed in Vedas and shastras or otherwise highly accomplished, nor practisers of severe austerities, nor those strictly observing the religious rites or vows or reciting mantras, nor worshippers of any kind, nor those giving away large gifts, nor wandering pilgrims etc.
Just as the Vedic rites are not for the non-regenerate so also,
enquiry is not for the unqualified.
D.: Can want of requisite qualities disqualify even a very learned scholar?
M.: Be he learned in all the sacred lore or ignorant of all of it, only the four fold requisites can qualify a man for enquiry.
The sruti says: “The one whose mind is in equipoise, senses controlled, whose activities have ceased and who possesses fortitude” is fit for this. From this it follows that others are not competent but only those who are possessing the four fold virtues.
70. D.: Is any distinction made amongst seekers who are competent?
M.: For enquiry into the Self there is absolutely no distinction bearing on caste, stage of life or other similar matters. Be the seeker the foremost scholar, pandit, illiterate man, child, youth, old man, bachelor, householder, tapasvi, sanyasi, brahmin, kshatriya, vaisya, sudra, a chandala or a woman, only these four qualifications make up the seeker. This is the undisputed view of the vedas and shastras.
71. D.: This cannot be. How can illiterate men, women and chandalas be qualified to the exclusion of a pandit learned in the shastras? He must certainly be more qualified than others. You say that a knowledge of the shastras is no qualification but practice of their teachings is. No one can practise what he has not known. How can an illiterate person qualify himself in the requisite manner?
M.: In reply I ask you and you tell me — how does the learned man qualify himself?
D.: Because he has known the teachings of the shastras that he should not do karma for selfish ends but dedicate it to God, he will do so; his mind will be purified; gradually he will acquire the dispassion etc., needed for enquiry. Now tell me how an illiterate man can qualify himself.
M.: He also can. Though not learned now, he might have learnt the teachings in preceding births, done actions dedicated to God; his mind being already pure enough, he can now readily acquire the qualities needed for enquiry into the Self.
72. D.: In the illiterate man, should the sadhanas acquired in preceding births and later lying as latencies, now manifest themselves, why should not his learning acquired in those births similarly manifest itself now?
M.: Some of his past karma may obstruct only the learning from re-manifesting itself.
D.: If the learning is obstructed, how is not the sadhana also obstructed from manifestation?
M.: Though the learning is obstructed, the fruits of his valuable labour cannot be lost; he cannot lose his competence for enquiry
73. D.: What would happen if his four fold sadhanas were obstructed as well as his learning?
M.: The result would be that for want of the requisite qualities neither the scholar nor the other would be fit for enquiry. Both would be equal.
74-76. D.: No. This cannot be. Though not already qualified, the scholar having known the teachings can put them into practice and gradually qualify himself, whereas the other with all his studies had not already succeeded in his preceding births, and what hope can there be now that he has forgotten what he had learnt and his sadhanas are obstructed? Obviously he cannot be successful in enquiry. M.: Not so. Though illiterate a man anxious for liberation will approach a master, learn from him the essence of the scriptures, earnestly practise the teachings and succeed in the end. Just as a worldly man ignorant of scriptures yet desirous of heaven, seeks guidance from a master and by observance, worship and discipline, gains his end, so also by a master’s teachings even an illiterate man can certainly benefit as much as the scholar with his knowledge.
77-78. D.: Religious rites bear fruits only according to the earnestness of the man. Only if the seeker of Truth is earnest can a master’s guidance act in the same manner. Otherwise how can it be?
M.: Just as earnestness is the essential factor for reaping fruits from karma, so it is with the practice of sadhanas by the learned scholar or the master’s disciple. Karma or sadhana cannot succeed if interest is wanting in them. A scholar or an illiterate man reaps the fruits of karma according to the interest he takes in its performance. One who is not earnest need not be considered in any matter concerning the Vedas or a master.
79. A scholar or an illiterate man, if he has not already qualified himself as aforesaid, but is now desirous of liberation, should in right earnest practise the sadhanas so that he may qualify himself now at least. He will later be fit for enquiry. So no distinction can be made between a scholar and an illiterate man.
80. D.: If so, regarding fitness for enquiry into the Self, how does a scholar differ from an illiterate man?
M.: The difference lies only in the learning and not in the practice of sadhana or enquiry.
81-82. D.: No. This cannot be. Though learning does not make any difference in sadhana, it must certainly weigh in favour of the scholar in the pursuit of enquiry.
M.: Not so. Shastra is not the means for enquiry. The means consist of desirelessness etc. Only these can qualify a man for enquiry and a learning of the shastras does not make any difference. Therefore a scholar has no advantage over an illiterate man in the field of enquiry
83-85. D.: Granted that dispassion etc. form the means for success in enquiry, even with the necessary sadhanas the enquiry into the Self must be pursued only in the light of the shastras. Therefore the study of the shastras should be indispensable for the successful pursuit of enquiry
M.: Nonsense!
No Shastra is required to know the Self.
Does any one look into the Shastra for the Self? Surely not.
D.: Only if the Self is already known, Shastra will not be required for enquiry into the Self. But the seeker being deluded has not known his true nature. How can an illiterate man realise the Self without studying the shastras which deal with the nature of the Self? He cannot. Therefore the shastras must be learnt as a preliminary to realisation.
M.: In that case the knowledge of the Self got from the shastras will be like that of heaven mentioned in the Vedas, i.e., indirect and not directly experienced. This knowledge corresponds to hearsay and cannot be direct perception. Just as the knowledge of the form of Vishnu always remains indirect and there is no direct perception of the four armed being or again the knowledge of heaven can only be indirect in this world, so also the knowledge of the Self contained in the shastras can only be indirect. This leaves the man where he was, just as ignorant as before.
Only the knowledge of direct experience can be true and useful;
the Self is to be realised and not to be talked about
86-88. D.: Has any one said so before?
M.: Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said in Dhyana Deepika: The Knowledge of the figure of Vishnu gained from shastras that He has four arms, holding a disc, a conch, etc., is only indirect and cannot be direct.
The description is intended to serve as a mental picture for worship and no one can see it face to face.
Similarly to know from the shastras that the Self is Being-Knowledge-Bliss amounts to indirect knowledge and cannot be the same as experience.
For the Self is the inmost being of the individual or the consciousness witnessing the five sheaths; it is Brahman.
This not being realised, a superficial knowledge is all that is gained by reading the shastras.
It is only indirect knowledge.
D.: Vishnu or heaven being different from the Self can only be objective whereas the Self is subjective and its knowledge, however gained, must be only direct and cannot be indirect.
M.: Although spontaneously and directly the Vedanta teaches the Supreme Truth, “That thou art” meaning that the inmost being of the individual is Brahman,
yet enquiry is the only sure means of Self realisation.
Sastric knowledge is not enough, for it can only be indirect.
Only the experience resulting from the enquiry of the Self can be direct knowledge.
89-90. Vasishta also has said to the same effect.
Shastra, Guru and upadesa are all traditional and do not straightway make the seeker directly realise the Self.
The purity of the seeker’s mind is the sole means for realisation and not shastra nor the guru.
The self can be realised by one’s own acute discernment and by no other means. All shastras agree on this point.
91. From this it is clear that except by enquiry the Self can never be realised, not even by learning Vedanta.
92. D.: The Self must be realised only by a critical study of the shastras. Otherwise what can be the enquiry into the Self but a critical and analytical study of the shastras?
93. M.: In the body, senses etc., the concept “I” persists. With a one pointed mind turned inwards to look out for this “I” or the Self, which is the inmost Being within the five sheaths, is the enquiry into the Self.
To seek elsewhere outside the body by an oral recital of Vedanta Shastra or a critical study of its words, cannot be called enquiry into the Self which can only be a thorough investigation into the true nature of the Self by a keen mind.
94-96. D.: Can the Self not be known by reading and understanding the shastras?
M.: No. For the Self is Being-Knowledge-Bliss, different from the gross, subtle and causal bodies, witnessing the three states of waking, dream and deep sleep.
Always to exercise the vocal organs in reading the shastras, or with a thorough knowledge of grammar, logic and diction to critically examine the scripture and make out its meaning, cannot reveal the Self which is within
D.: How can it be realised?
M.: By the mind to examine the nature of the five sheaths, by experience to determine them, then to discard each of them step by step “this is not the Self — this is not the Self”, and by mind thus grown subtle to look for the Self and realise It as the witnessing Consciousness lying beyond the five sheaths — forms the whole process.
The Self cannot be seen without.
It is overspread by and lies hidden in the five sheaths.
In order to find It, the intellect must be made to turn inwards and search within,
not to look for It in the shastras.
Will any man in his senses search in a forest for a thing lost in his home?
The search must be in the place where the thing lies hidden.
In the same way the Self covered over by the five sheaths must be looked for within them and not among the shastras. The shastras are not the place for It.
97. D.: True, the Self cannot be found in the shastras. From them a scholar can learn the nature of the five sheaths, intellectually examine, experience and discard them, in order to find and realise the Self. How can the other man ignorant of the nature of the Self or of the five sheaths pursue the enquiry?
M.: Just as the scholar learns from books, so the other learns from the master. Later, enquiry remains the same for both.
98-99. D.: Does it follow that a master is necessary for an illiterate man and not for a scholar?
M.: Scholar or illiterate, no one can succeed without a master.
From the beginning of time, unable to realise the Self without a master, the seekers even learned in all the shastras always sought a master to enlighten them. Narada went to Sanatkumara; Indra to Brahma; Suka to king Janaka. Unless the master is gracious to him, no man can ever be liberated.
100-101. D.: Has any one illiterate been liberated by Guru’s Grace only?
M.: Yes. Yagnavalkya helped his wife Maitreyi to be liberated. Many other women ignorant of the shastras e.g., Leela and Chudala were also liberated while alive. Therefore even those ignorant of the shastras are qualified for enquiry into the Self.
102-108. It must now be obvious that the make up of the best qualified seeker consists in dispassion, resulting from discernment of the real from the unreal, so that he discards all enjoyments here and hereafter as if they were poison or vomit or blazing fire, retires from all activities to remain quiet like a man in deep sleep,
but finding himself unable to remain so owing to unbearable pains, physical and mental, as if the hair of his head had caught fire and was burning, he cannot feel happy nor bear the agony even a minute longer and burns in anguish feeling “When shall I be free? How and by what means can I be liberated?”
For the best seeker all the qualifications must be full up to the above said category “limit” (avadhi). For the next in scale, the good seeker, the qualifications are developed only to the “effect” stage; for the middling, only to the “nature” stage; and for the lowest, only to their “cause” stage. These stages determine the success of the seeker’s efforts.
109. Immediate success attends the efforts of the best qualified; some time elapses before the next in grade succeeds; a longer time is required for the middling; and only a prolonged and steady practice can enable the low-grade seeker to succeed.
110-112. Their perplexity of minds does not allow the last two grades of seekers to take to enquiry.
Their minds are more readily composed by yoga, which is more suited to them than enquiry.
The first two grades of seekers readily profit by enquiry which is more suited to them than yoga.
113-114. In Dhyana Deepika, Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said:
“The path of enquiry cannot lead to success to the seekers whose minds are confused.
To bring down the false notion of their minds, yoga is necessary.
The minds of those who are fully qualified, are not confused but remain one pointed; only the veiling power of Ignorance still hides the Self from them; they await only awakening.
Enquiry is the process of awakening; therefore it best suits them.”
115-118. Yoga can be successful only after a long, steady, earnest, diligent and cautious practice without needless strain.
D.: Why should one be so heedful about it?
M.: When the attempt is made to fix the mind in the Self, it gets restive and drags the man through the senses to the objects.
However resolute and learned the man may be, his mind remains wayward, strong, mulish, and hard to restrain.
Wanton by nature, it cannot remain steady for a moment; it must run here, there and everywhere; now it dwells in the nether regions and in a trice it flies up in the sky; it moves in all the directions of the compass; and it is capricious like a monkey. It is hard to fix it. To do so, one must be heedful
119-121. In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna asked Sri Bhagavan:
‘O Krishna! Is not the mind always capricious, disturbing to the man and too strong to be checked? It is easier to hold the air in the fist than to control the mind.’
In the Yoga Vasishta, Sri Rama asked Vasishta: ‘O master! Is it not impossible to control the mind? One may sooner drink up the oceans or lift up Mt. Meru or swallow flaming fire than control the mind.’
From the words of Rama and Arjuna, and our own experience, there can be no doubt that it is exceedingly difficult to control the mind however able and heroic one may be.
122-124. D.: Control of mind being so difficult, how can yoga be practised at all?
M.: By dint of practice and dispassion, the mind can be brought under control.
The same has been said by Sri Bhagavan to Arjuna and by Vasishta to Sri Rama.
Sri Krishna said : “O Son of Kunti! There is no doubt that the mind is wayward and difficult to control. Nevertheless by dint of practice and dispassion it can be controlled.”
Vasishta said: “O Rama, though the mind is hard to control yet it must be subdued by dispassion and effort even at the cost of wringing your hands, clenching your teeth and holding down the senses and limbs; it must be accomplished by will power.” Therefore intense effort is necessary for the purpose.
125-127. The honey bee of the mind ever living in the lotus of the heart turns away from the sweet honey of unequalled Bliss of the Heart lotus, and desirous of honey bitter with misery, collected outside as sound, touch, form, taste and smell, always flies out through the senses.
Though by dispassion the senses are forcibly closed and the mind shut in, yet remaining within, it will be thinking of the present or recollecting the past or building castles in the air.
D.: How can even its subtle activities be checked and itself completely subdued?
M.: Checking its external activities and confining it within, this bee of the mind must be made to be drunk with the honey of the Heart lotus, i.e., the Bliss of the Self.
128. D.: Please explain this yoga.
M.: With an intense desire for Liberation, reaching a Guru, hearing from him the non-dual Brahman shining forth as BeingKnowledge-Bliss of the Self, understanding It though indirectly yet as clearly as one understands Vishnu etc., turning the mind one pointedly to this Brahman, without taking to enquiry by reflection (manana) always meditating on the non-dual Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss, attributeless and undifferentiated, is called yoga.
By its practice the mind becomes tranquil and can gradually go to samadhi.
In samadhi it will experience the Supreme Bliss.
129-130. D.: Has any other said so before?
M.: Yes. Sri Bhagavan has said: The yogi who, controlling the mind, always turns it upon the Self, becomes perfectly calm, and ultimately gains Me i.e., the Bliss of Liberation.
The mind of the yogi who always practises yoga, will be steady like a flame protected from the breeze and without movement will pass into samadhi.
131-133. Similarly by enquiry, the mind readily gains peace and samadhi.
D.: What is this enquiry?
M.: After hearing from the Guru about the nature of the Self which in the shastras is spoken of as Brahman or BeingKnowledge-Bliss,
to gain a clear indirect knowledge,
then according to upadesa and by intelligent reasoning to enquire and find out the Self
which is Pure Knowledge,
and the nonself which is objective and insentient like the ego,
to discern and sift them,
then directly to experience them as different from each other,
later on by meditation to extinguish all that is objective,
and to absorb into the Self the residual mind left over as non-dual,
ends in the direct experience of Supreme Bliss.
Here it has been described in brief, but the shastras deal with it elaborately
134. This chapter on Sadhana has dealt with these two means, Enquiry and Yoga, for making the mind still. According to his merits an intelligent seeker should practise either of them.
135. This Chapter is meant for the earnest student in order that he may study carefully and analyse his qualifications to ascertain what he already has and what more are wanted. After properly equipping himself he can find out which of these two methods suits him and then practise it till success.
.... ,, .............................. .............................. ..........
chp 4 shravana
1. In the foregoing chapter we had seen that yoga is suited to the lower grade of seekers and enquiry to the higher.
In this chapter we shall consider the path of enquiry which effortlessly leads to Knowledge of Brahman
2-4. D.: What is this path of enquiry?
M.: From the shastras it is well known to consist of sravana, manana, nidhidhyasana and samadhi i.e., hearing the Truth, reflection, meditation and Blissful Peace.
The Vedas themselves declare it to be so. “My dear, the Self must be heard from the master, reflected and meditated upon.” In another place it is said that
in Blissful Peace the Self must be realised.
The same idea has been repeated by Sri Sankaracharya in his Vakyavrtti, namely that
until the meaning of the sacred text “I am Brahman” is realised in all its true significance, one must be practising sravana etc.
5-7. In Chitra Deepika, Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said that
enquiry is the means of knowledge and it consists in hearing the Truth, reflection and meditation;
only the state of blissful Peace of awareness in which Brahman alone exists and nothing else,
is the true “nature” of Knowledge;
the non-revival of the knot of the ego parading as “I” which has been lost once for all, is its “effect”;
always to remain fixed as ‘I am the Supreme Self’
just as strongly, unequivocally and unerringly as the heretofore ignorant identification “I am the body” is its end;
liberation is its fruit.
From this it follows that only hearing etc. is the enquiry into the Self
8-10. To hear the Supreme Truth, reflect and meditate on it, and to remain in Samadhi form together the enquiry into the Self.
They have for their cause (Hetu) the aforesaid four sadhanas, namely, discernment, desirelessness, tranquillity and desire to be liberated.
Which of these is essential for which part of enquiry will be mentioned in its appropriate place. Here we shall deal with sravana.
M.: Sravana consists in ascertaining, by means of the six proofs considered together, that the Vedas aim at the non-dual Brahman only
11-12. To analyse sravana under the five categories:-
Intense desire to be liberated gives rise to it;
always to be hearing of the non-dual Brahman is its nature;
the complete removal of that aspect of the veiling power of Ignorance which says, “It (Brahman) does not exist” is its effect;
non recurrence of this veiling power is its limit;
a firm indirect knowledge is its fruit
M.: In the sruti it is said: “In the state of dissolution before creation there was only the non-dual Reality.” This Reality is the same as the Self.
Only he who is eager to be liberated will seek the knowledge of the Self and take to hearing it. No other is interested in It.
Therefore eagerness to be liberated is the essential requisite for this part of enquiry, viz. sravana.
14. D.: Just now you said that always to be hearing of the non-dual Self is the nature of sravana. Who is this non-dual Self?
M.: He is famous in the srutis as the Consciousness beyond the gross, subtle and causal bodies, apart from the five sheaths and witness of the waking, dream and sleep states.
15-17. D.: What can be beyond the gross, subtle and causal bodies?
M.: Of these the gross body is composed of skin, blood, muscles, fat, bones, nerve stuff and lymph; it is secreting and excreting; it is born and it dies; like a wall it is insentient; like a pot it is an object of the senses. The subtle body is the internal organ (antahkarana) wellknown as the mind, which functions as the ‘I’ mode and ‘this’ mode; together with the five vital airs, the five senses and the five organs and limbs, it transmigrates to other bodies or worlds; always remaining within a gross body it experiences pleasures and pains. The beginningless, neither real nor unreal, and indescribable Ignorance manifests these subtle and gross bodies and is therefore said to be the causal body.
18. These three bodies are contrary to the nature of the Self. D.: How?
M.: The gross body is insentient; the subtle is pain ridden; the causal is unreal.
These are the opposites of the BeingKnowledge-Bliss nature of the Self.
Therefore the Self must be different from these.
It remains unconcerned as the witness of the three states and of their experiencer who remains conceited with the ideas “I woke up — I dreamt — I slept.”
Therefore none of the three states is of the Self.
54. D.: Do these three — Being, Knowledge and Bliss form the qualities or the nature of the Self?
M.: These are not qualities but the very Self. Just as heat, light, and redness form the nature of fire and are not its qualities, so also Being, Knowledge and Bliss are the nature of the Self
Therefore all this universe is really false. Now it is but right to say that being the witness, the Self is the sole cause of all this universe which is but an illusory appearance on the Self. The illusory effect cannot be separate from the basis.
Just as the foam, bubbles and waves are not different from their origin, the sea, so also the phenomena of the Universe are but the Self falsely presented.
Therefore the Self is ‘non-dual’ and there can be no duality.
67. In the presence of the master always attentively to study the Vedanta shastra which treats of the non-dual Being and retain its meaning forms the “nature” of sravana or hearing. This must always be attended to.
68. D.: What is the “effect” of this sravana?
M.: It destroys that veiling part of ignorance which hitherto made one think “Where is this non-dual Self? Nowhere”.
To destroy this ignorant conclusion of the non-existence of the non-dual Self is its “effect”.
69-70. D.: How long should one continue sravana?
M.: Until the doubt of the non-existence of the non-dual Being does not rear its head again.
The non-recurrence of this doubt is said to be the “limit” of the process of sravana
D.: What is the “fruit” of sravana?
M.: When once for all the
non-belief in the non-duality of Being is destroyed,
no sacred text or tricky argument can make the seeker deviate from his faith.
All obstructions to his faith thus removed,
he remains steady in his indirect knowledge of non-dual Being.
This is the “fruit” of sravana.
71. D.: What is this indirect knowledge?
M.: To know the true nature of the inmost Self, not by direct experience but by a study of the shastras, is called indirect Knowledge.
Although one does not see Vishnu face to face yet through the evidence of the shastras one believes in His existence; this forms only common (samanya) knowledge.
Similarly a common knowledge of non-duality of Brahman gained through the advaita shastras is indirect knowledge
72-76. D.: Why should the knowledge arising from sravana be said to be indirect? Can it not be direct?
M.: No. So long as the Inner Self cannot shine forth owing to the other veiling aspect of Ignorance (abhanavarana) mere knowledge of Its existence cannot be called direct.
Manana
6. D.: Why should not the Desire for Liberation be the ‘cause’ of reflection?
M.: A mere desire to be Liberated cannot make a man fit for enquiry into the Self.
Without sravana one cannot have even an indirect knowledge.
How can one succeed in one’s enquiry?
............................................... ..........................
CHAPTER V MANANA
Only after knowing the nature of the Self, should one proceed to seek it.
Ignorant of Its true nature, how can one investigate the Self?
Simple desire to be liberated will not suffice.
7. D.: Should not this desire lead to enquiry? With the rise of this desire the man will begin to hear about the nature of the Self and gain indirect knowledge which must enable him to undertake the enquiry.
M.: This amounts to saying that the seeker possesses discernment.
He is not only desirous of Liberation but also discerning in intellect.
With sravana comes this faculty of intellectual discernment of the real from the unreal, or the Self from the non-self.
This is called indirect knowledge.
The shastras say that only he who possesses indirect knowledge can discern the real or the Self from the unreal or the non-self, and is fit for enquiry into the Self.
Therefore discernment is the sine qua non for enquiry.
8-12. D.: Even if the desire for Liberation be not the particular (visesha) cause of Reflection, could not either desirelessness or tranquillity be the cause of it?
M.: All these are only general aids for reflection but not its particular causes. A desireless and tranquil man need not necessarily have the indirect knowledge of the Self and is therefore unfit for enquiry into the Self. There are men of austerities who are desireless and tranquil but not anxious for Liberation. Having no desire for Liberation they have not heard at all about the Self.
Not having done sravana, though endowed with desirelessness and tranquillity, they are incapable of discerning the real from the unreal and therefore unfit for enquiry into the Self.
Desirelessness etc. can only be aids to this enquiry but not its chief causes. Discernment of the real from the unreal is the only chief cause.
13-14. D.: Can the Self not be realised by austerities accompanied by desirelessness and tranquillity, without enquiry?
M.: No.
By non-enquiry the Self has been lost sight of;
to regain It enquiry is needed.
In its absence how can even crores of austerities restore the sight?
Always to enquire into the Self is the only remedy for the blindness of the ignorant whose mental eye has been bedimmed by the darkness of non-enquiry spreading its veil.
Unless by the eye of knowledge gained through enquiry, the Self cannot be realised
Truly the Self is all-permeating. Still Its knowledge is obscured by the covering of the five sheaths. The Self which lies hidden in them must be looked for only there and not elsewhere. A thing is sought in the place where it was lost. Something lost at home is not looked for in a forest. In the same manner the Self hidden in five sheaths and remaining unrecognised by wrong identification with them must be found only by sifting the unwanted elements, here the five sheaths.
D.: How can an investigation into unreal things lead to the recognition of the Reality?
M.: The unreal coverings must be removed to disclose the Reality hidden in them.
They are superimposed on the Real Self.
They must be examined and ascertained to be unreal so that their substratum which is the sole Reality can be known.
Unless the external trappings that are superimposed are looked into, their substratum, that is the Reality, cannot be found.
Has any one in the world been able to find the rope without looking and enquiring into the nature of the seeming snake, though this is superimposed on it and unreal?
Or can there be any one, who having enquired into the superimposed snake, did not discover its substratum to be the rope?
No one.
In the same manner an indirect knowledge should be gained by sravana that the five sheaths are superimposed and unreal;
but by a keen intellect the seeker must probe deep into this superficial knowledge and experience the truth of it;
just as the directly experienced gross body is clearly known to be built up by food and recognised to be only the food-sheath covering the Self,
so also the other four subtler sheaths remaining unknown to the common people but taught by the scriptures and the master must be known by their characteristics; they must be enquired into and directly experienced;
at the same time they must be recognised to be only sheaths and successively dismissed in order to seek their witness, Consciousness-Being or the subtle Self.
20. D.: If the Self is enquired into, after investigation and dismissing these sheaths, how can It be realised?
M.: This enquiry is but reflecting on the Self i.e., manana, its effect is to destroy the veil of Ignorance.
A constant reflection on the Self lying behind the sheaths must burn away that aspect of veiling which makes one say ‘It does not shine forth’.
D.: How can this be?
M.: Just as an enquiry into the rope-snake that obstructs the rope from view, destroys the ignorance of the rope, so also a keen quest of the Self that remains as the witness of the five sheaths, destroys the ignorance which supposes that the Self is not seen and that It does not shine forth.
On the clouds being scattered away as the sun shines forth in its full glory, so also the darkness of veiling being destroyed the witnessing Self will shine forth in all Its splendour.
Therefore enquiry is necessary
21. D.: How long should one continue to enquire into the Self?
M.: Non-recrudescence of the darkness of Ignorance is said to be the “limit” of reflection.
Therefore one should continue the practice until this darkness of Ignorance does not recur
M.: Transcending all, the Self has nothing in common with worldly things or activities;
It transcends the void also; hence the experience is unique and unearthly.
A fear may then arise “Can this be the Self? It cannot be — Should this be the Self, how can I be such a void?”
Even after realising the impartite Self, there is no confidence in one’s own experience;
it is regarded as impossible and a great doubt arises. The sense of impossibility gives rise to doubt. But repeated reflection removes
this sense of impossibility. So it is said by Vyasa in the Brahma Sutras:
On account of the repeated instruction (by the scriptures), (it is) necessary repeatedly (to hear of, reflect and meditate on the Self).
25. D.: What is the “fruit” of such reflection?
M.: By continued practice, the veiling is destroyed;
with its destruction, the sense of impossibility of the Self shining forth all alone disappears;
with its disappearance all obstacles are at an end
and then direct experience results
as clearly and surely as an apple in the palm of your hand.
This is the “fruit
26. D.: What is this direct experience?
M.: Just as one can clearly distinguish the sun from the cloud hiding it, so also when one can distinguish the Self from the ego, it is direct experience.
This is the ‘fruit’ of reflection.
27. My son! wise boy! Reflection has now been taught in detail.
It is for you to enquire into the five sheaths, dismiss them as unreal, then with keen intellect turn inwards to find the very subtle Self and recognise it distinctively.
28. D.: O Master! even on a keen enquiry I am unable to say “These are the five sheaths; this is the inmost Self as distinguished from them”. I cannot directly realise the Self. Why is it so?
M.: This is owing to beginningless Ignorance.
D.: How did this Ignorance arise?
M.: From the aforesaid veiling.
D.: How?
M.: Although by nature the Self and the ego are quite different from each other, the aforesaid veiling presents them as if they were identical.
D.: Please explain this.
M.: See, how though rope and a snake are quite different from each other, yet ignorance of the rope makes it appear a snake,
so also the Self being hidden by the darkness of veiling
does not shine forth and in its place only the functions of the ego, doership etc., are seen.
29-31. Therefore enquire into the nature of the five sheaths, find them, realise them, and then reject them as non-self.
There must be the unchanging witness of changes, originating and destroying these phenomena.
Find and realise Him as the Self.
The direct meaning of That is the world factors, i.e. names and forms; the intended meaning is Brahman — the composite of Being-shining-pleasing.
Just as the beginningless Ignorance veils the self-evident difference between the sheaths and their witness, so also it veils the similar difference between the Beingshining-pleasing and the ‘name and form’ factors.
Again as enquiry scatters away the veiling power,
the Being-KnowledgeBliss can be seen distinct from the ‘name and form’ aspect.
D.: What is the ‘fruit’ of this knowledge?
M.: To reject the five sheaths and names and forms of objects as something inexpressible,
only superimposed on the Reality,
illusory to practise that the substratum,
i.e., Brahman of Being-Knowledge-Bliss is the Self and to realise It as ‘I am Brahman’ with the resulting Supreme Bliss of being the Brahman, is the ‘fruit’ of this knowledge.
Here ends the chapter on Reflection.
57. The wise student who carefully reads and practises it can realise himself as Brahman i.e., Being-Knowledge-Bliss.
.... chp 6 vasana kshaya.........
1. This chapter succeeds the five earlier ones on superimposition, its withdrawal, the requisites of the seeker, hearing, and reflection.
To the disciple who after reflecting on the Self has gained direct knowledge, the master further says as follows.
2. Wise son, the shastras have nothing more to teach you; you have finished them. Henceforth you must meditate on the Self.
The scriptures say: ‘Dear! the Self must be heard of, reflected and meditated upon’.
Having finished reflection, you must proceed with meditation.
Now give up the shastras.
3-6. D.: Is it proper to give them up?
M.: Yes, it is proper. Now that by enquiry you have known what need be known, you can unhesitatingly give them up.
D.: But the shastras say that to the last moment of death, one should not give them up.
M.: Their purpose is to teach the truth.
After it is gained, of what further use can they be?
A further study will be so much waste of time and labour.
Therefore leave them aside.
Take to unbroken meditation.
D.: Is this statement supported by scriptures?
M.: Yes.
D.: How?
M.: They say: After repeatedly hearing from the master about the Self, reflecting on It and directly knowing It, the seeker should give up the shastras even as the pole used to stir up the corpse in the burning ground is finally consigned to the burning fire of the corpse.
From a study of the shastras let the seeker of Liberation gather an indirect knowledge of the Self
and put it into practice by reflecting on
It until by experiencing It a direct knowledge is gained;
later like a gatherer of grains who takes the grain and rejects the chaff, let him leave the shastras aside.
The man desirous of liberation should make use of shastras only to gain knowledge of the Self and then proceed to reflect on It;
he should not be simply talking vedanta,
nor even be thinking of it.
For talk results only in so much strain on speech, similarly thinking on the mind, no useful purpose can be served by either.
Therefore only know just what need be known and give up tiresome study.
Controlling his speech and mind a sensible seeker should always engage in meditation.
This is the teaching of the shastras.
It is the inclination of the mind always to study vedantic literature, to understand the meaning of the texts, to commit them to memory and constantly be thinking of them.
Since this inclination obstructs meditation, a wise man must overcome it with every effort.
Next the latencies connected with the world (lokavasana) must be eliminated
8. D.: What are these latencies?
M.: To think, this is my country, this is my family pedigree and this is the tradition. Should any one praise or censure any of these, the reactions of the mind denote the latencies connected with the world. Give them up. Later on, give up the latencies connected with the body also (dehavasana).
9-13. D.: What are they?
M.: To think oneself to be of such and such age, young or old and desire the full span of life with health, strength and good looks. Generally thoughts pertaining to the body indicate these latencies.
Ambition in the world and love for body distract the mind and prevent meditation on Brahman.
Since all objects are ephemeral, they must be eschewed.
Then the latencies connected with enjoyments (bhogavasana) must be given up
D.: What are these?
M.: These are made up of thoughts like: this is good and I must have it; this is not so and let it leave me; now I have gained so much and let me gain more, and so on.
D.: How can this be overcome?
M.: By looking with disgust upon all enjoyments as on vomit or excreta and developing dispassion for them, this can be overcome. Dispassion is the only remedy for this mad craving. After this, the mind must be cleared of the six passions, namely, lust, anger, greed, delusion, pride and jealousy
D.: How can this be done?
M.: By (maitri, karuna, mudita and upeksha) friendship with the holy, compassion for the afflicted, rejoicing in the joy of the virtuous and being indifferent to the shortcomings of the sinful.
Next must be effaced the latencies connected with the objects of the senses (vishayavasana) such as sound etc.
These latencies are the running of the senses such as hearing etc., after their objects.
D.: How can these latencies be effaced?
M.: By a practice of the six-fold discipline consisting of sama, dama, uparati, titiksha, samadhana and sraddha, withdrawing the mind from going outwards, controlling the senses, not thinking of the objects of the senses, forbearance, fixing the mind on the Reality and faith.
Next all latencies connected with mutual attachments must be overcome
14-15. D.: What are they?
M.: Though the senses are restrained, yet the mind always thinks of objects: ‘there is that; there is this; it is such and such; it
is this-wise or otherwise’ and so on. Because of brooding over objects, the mind gets attached to them, this constant brooding is called the latency connected with mental attachment.
D.: How can this be checked?
M.: By practising uparati which means desisting from all thoughts after concluding by proper reasoning that they are only fruitless daydreams.
16. When in the right manner, all this has been accomplished, the greatest evil-doer, namely the latency connected with wrong identity must be put an end to, even with great effort.
17. D.: What is this latency connected with wrong identity? (viparita vasana)
M.: Owing to beginningless Ignorance the non-Self is mistaken for the Self as ‘I am the body’ from time immemorial,
this Ignorance is hardy and can be ended only by the practice of Brahman.
18-20. D.: What is this practice?
.: It consists in discarding the body, senses etc., as being non-Self and always remembering that ‘I am Brahman’, remaining as consciousness witnessing the insentient sheaths.
Meditating on Brahman in solitude,
speaking of or teaching only Brahman in the company of others,
not to speak or think of anything but It,
but always one-pointedly to think of Brahman, is the practice.
So say the wise. By this transcend the ego and then proceed to eliminate the idea of ‘mine’.
21-22. D.: What is the nature of this idea?
M.: It consists in the single concept of ‘mine’ in relation to the body or whatever pertains to it, such as name, form, clothing, caste, conduct or professions of life.
D.: How does this go away?
M.: By a steadfast meditation on the Reality.
D.: How?
M.: Always to be aware that the body etc., its interests and effects, enjoyments, activities etc., are only figments of ignorance on pure knowledge i.e., the Self,
that like the appearance of silver on nacre, ornaments in gold, water in mirage, blueness in the sky or waves in water, all but the Self are only false presentations or illusory modes of the Self. In reality there is nothing but our ‘Self’.
Next the sense of differentiation (bheda vasana) must go.
23-25. D.: What is this sense of differentiation?
M.: It consists in ideas like: “I am the witness of this; all that is seen is only insentient and illusory; here is the world; these are the individuals; this one is the disciple and the other, the master; this is Isvara, and so on.”
This must go by a practice of non-duality.
This practice is to remain non-dual,
solid BeingKnowledge-Bliss,
untainted and free from thoughts of reality or unreality,
ignorance or its illusory effects,
and internal or external differentiation.
This is accomplished by a constant practice of modeless (nirvikalpa) samadhi.
Here remains the experience of Brahman only. After leaving the sense of differentiation far behind, the attachment to non-duality must later be given up.
26-27. D.: How is this to be done?
M.: Even this state must finally pass into untellable and unthinkable Reality absolutely free from modes and even non-duality.
The Bliss of Liberation is only this and nothing more. When the mind is cleared of all latent impurities, it
remains untainted, crystal-clear so that it cannot be said to exist or not to exist and it becomes one with Reality, transcending speech and thought.
This unmoded, untainted fixity of the mind is known as Realisation or Liberation while alive.
28. Though direct knowledge of the Self has been gained,
yet until this Realisation ensues,
to be liberated while alive one should always meditate on Brahman
with proper control of mind and senses.
Thus ends this chapter.
............................ chp 7 .. Sakshatkara .................................
1. In the foregoing chapter it was said that direct knowledge must first be gained
and then the latent tendencies of the mind wiped out
so that Brahman may be realised.
Now Realisation is dealt with
The master says: Wise son, now that you have gained direct knowledge by enquiry into the Self,
you should proceed with meditation
2. D.: Master, now that I have gained direct knowledge by enquiry and my task is finished why should I meditate further and to what end?
3-4. M.: Though by reflection, direct knowledge of the Self has been gained, Brahman cannot be realised without meditation.
In order to experience ‘I am Brahman’ you must practise meditation.
5-6.: D.: You ask me to pursue meditation for realising Brahman. I have already gained direct knowledge by enquiry into the sacred text. Why should I now practise meditation?
M.: If you mean to say that enquiry into the sacred text results in realising Brahman, who can deny it? No one. Truly this enquiry must end in the realisation of Brahman.
Let us now enquire into the meaning of the text.
Whose identity with whom is implied in it?
It must be of the consciousness witnessing the five sheaths of the individual,
the implied meaning of ‘thou’ with Brahman, the implied meaning of ‘That’; it cannot be of the Jiva, i.e., the personal soul with Brahman.
By enquiry the identity of the witnessing
consciousness with Brahman has certainly been found.
Of what use can this identity of the witness with Brahman be to you?
7. D.: On enquiry into the meaning of the sacred text, when one has realised that the witness is Brahman and vice versa, how can you raise the question ‘Of what use can it be to the person?’ Its use is evident. Formerly the seeker was ignorant of the identity and now by enquiry he is aware of it.
M.: By enquiry you have certainly known that the witness is Brahman and that the unbroken, all-perfect Brahman is the witness.
Still this knowledge is not the end and cannot serve your purpose.
Suppose a poor beggar who was ignorant of the fact that a king residing in a fort was the emperor of the world, later knew it. How does this newly acquired knowledge improve his position? It cannot serve any useful purpose for him.
8. D Before enquiry, ignorance prevails. After enquiry, knowledge
is gained that the witness is Brahman. Now knowledge has taken the place of ignorance. This is the use.
M.: How does this affect the fact? Whether you have known it or not, the witness ever remains Brahman. Your knowledge of the fact has not made Brahman, the witness. Whether the poor beggar knew it or not, the king in the fort was the emperor. His knowledge did not make an emperor of the king in the fort. Now that you have known the witness to be Brahman, what has happened to you? Tell me. There can be no change in you.
9. D.: Why not? There is a difference. The sacred text teaches ‘That thou art’. On enquiring into its significance I have found that the witness of the five sheaths in me is the same as Brahman. From this I have known that I am Brahman, which forms another sacred text. To me who was ignorant of the witness being the same as Brahman, this knowledge has dawned, with the result that I have realised Brahman.
M.: How can you claim to have realised Brahman? If by the text ‘I am Brahman’ you understand yourself to be Brahman,
who is this ‘I’ but the Jiva, the individual soul or the ego? How can the ego be Brahman? Just as even with his knowledge of the king, the beggar cannot himself be the king, so also the changeful ego can never be identical with the changeless Brahman
10-14. D.: Certainly so. But on enquiring ‘Who am I?’ it becomes plain that by non-enquiry the unchanging witness had mistaken the changing ego for himself. Now he knows ‘I am not the changing ego but remain its unchanging conscious witness’. Now it is but right that the witness should say, ‘I am Brahman’. What can be discordant in this?
M.: How can you hold that the witness says ‘I am Brahman?’
Does the unchanging witness or the changing ego say so?
If you say that it is the witness, you are wrong.
For the witness remains unchanging as the witness of the ‘false-I’. He is not the conceit itself. Otherwise he cannot have the quality of being the witness for he will himself be changing. Being unchanging the witness is free from the least trace of any notion such as ‘I’ or Brahman and cannot therefore know ‘I am Brahman’. There is no ground for your contention that the witness says so.
D.: Then who knows ‘I am Brahman’?
M.: From what has been said before, it must follow that the individual soul, the jiva, or the ‘false-I’ must have this knowledge.
D.: How does this follow?
M.: In order to be free from the repeated cycle of births and deaths, the ignorant man is obliged to practise the knowledge ‘I am Brahman’.
There is no ignorance for the witness.
When there is no ignorance, there can be no knowledge either.
Only the ignorant must seek knowledge. Who but the ‘false-I’ can be the subject of ignorance or of knowledge?
It is self-evident that the witnessing Self being the substratum on which knowledge or ignorance appears, must itself be free from them.
On the contrary the ‘false-I’ is known to possess knowledge or ignorance.
If you ask him ‘Do you know the Self witnessing you?’ And he will answer ‘Who is that witness? I do not know him’. Here the ignorance of the ‘false-I’ is obvious. On hearing the vedanta that there is an inner witness to him, indirectly he knows that the Self is his witness. Then enquiring into the Self, the veil of Ignorance that It does not shine forth, is drawn off and directly he knows the witnessing Self. Here again the knowledge of the ‘false-I’ is also clear.
It is only the jiva and not the witness who has the knowledge or ignorance that there is, or is not, the inner witness. You must now admit that the jiva has the knowledge that ‘I am Brahman’. Now for the reason that the changing Jiva has become aware of the unchanging witness, he cannot be the same as the witness. Because he had seen him, the poor beggar cannot be the king. So also the changing Jiva cannot be the witness. Without being the witnessing Self, the changing entity cannot be Brahman. So this experience ‘I am Brahman’ is impossible.
15. D.: How can you say that merely seeing the witness, I cannot know that I am the witness? Ignorant of his true being as the substratum or the witnessing consciousness, the Jiva moves about as the ‘false-I’. However on a careful enquiry into his true nature he knows the witness and identifies himself as the witness who is well-known to be the unbroken, all perfect Brahman. Thus the experience, ‘I am Brahman’, is real.
M.: What you say is true provided that the jiva can identify himself as the witness. The witness is undoubtedly Brahman.
But how can the mere sight of the witness help the jiva merge himself into the witness?
Unless the jiva remains the witness, he cannot know himself as the witness.
Merely by seeing the king, a poor beggar cannot know himself to be the king.
But when he becomes the king, he can know himself as the king.
Similarly the jiva, remaining changeful and without becoming the unchanging witness, cannot know himself as the witness.
If he cannot be the witness, how can he be the unbroken, all-perfect Brahman?
He cannot be.
Just as at the sight of the king in a fort, a poor beggar cannot become king and much less sovereign of the universe, so also only at the sight of the witness who is much finer than ether and free from traffic with triads, such as the knower, knowledge and the known, eternal, pure, aware, free, real, supreme and blissful, the jiva cannot become the witness, much less the unbroken, all-perfect Brahman, and cannot know ‘I am Brahman’
M.: ‘I am Brahman’ means that, after discarding the ‘false-I’, only the residual being or the pure consciousness that is left over can be Brahman
— It is absurd to say that, without discarding but retaining the individuality, the jiva, on seeing Brahman but not becoming Brahman, can know himself as Brahman.
A poor beggar must first cease to be beggar and rule over a state in order to know himself as king; a man desirous of god-hood first drowns himself in the Ganges and leaving this body, becomes himself a celestial being;
by his extraordinary one-pointed devotion a devotee leaves off his body and merges into god,
before he can know himself to be god.
In all these cases when the beggar knows himself to be king, or the man to be celestial being, or the devotee to be god, they cannot retain their former individualities and also identify themselves as the superior beings.
In the same way, the seeker of Liberation must first cease to be an individual before he can rightly say ‘I am Brahman’.
This is the significance of the sacred text.
Without completely losing one’s individuality one cannot be Brahman.
Therefore to realise Brahman, the loss of the individuality is a sine qua non.
D.: The changeful individual soul cannot be Brahman. Even though he rids himself of the individuality, how can he become Brahman?
19. M.: Just as a maggot losing its nature, becomes a wasp. A maggot is brought by a wasp and kept in its hive. From time to time the wasp visits the hive and stings the maggot so that it always remains in dread of its tormentor. The constant thought of the wasp transforms the maggot into a wasp.
Similarly, constantly meditating on Brahman, the seeker loses his original nature and becomes himself Brahman.
This is the realisation of Brahman
M.: Undoubtedly individuality lasts as long as the mind exists.
Just as the reflected image disappears with the removal of the mirror in front, so also individuality can be effaced by stilling the mind by meditation.
M.: Successively appearing in the ignorance-created mind and disappearing in deep sleep, swoon etc.,
this empirical self is inferred to be only a phantom.
Simultaneously with the disappearance of the medium or the limiting adjunct (upadhi), the mind, the jiva becomes the substratum, the True Being or Brahman.
Destroying the mind, the jiva can know himself as Brahman
24. D.: With the destruction of the limiting adjunct, the jiva being lost, how can he say ‘I am Brahman’?
M.: When the limiting ignorance of dream vanishes, the dreamer is not lost, but emerges as the waking experiencer. So also when the mind is lost, the jiva emerges as his true Being — Brahman.
Therefore as soon as the mind is annihilated leaving no trace behind, the jiva will surely realise ‘I am the BeingKnowledge-Bliss, non-dual Brahman; Brahman is I, the Self’.
M.: Just as at the end of a dream, the dreamer rising up as the waking experiencer says ‘All along I was dreaming that I wandered in strange places, etc., but I am only lying down on the bed,’ or a madman cured of his madness remains pleased with himself, or a patient cured of his illness wonders at his past sufferings, or a poor man on becoming a king, forgets or laughs at his past penurious state, or a man on becoming a celestial being enjoys the new bliss, or a devotee on uniting with the Lord of his devotion remains blissful,
so also the jiva on emerging as Brahman wonders how all along being only Brahman he was moving about as a helpless being imagining a world, god and individuals,
asks himself what became of all those fancies and how he now remaining all alone as Being-Knowledge-Bliss free from any differentiation, internal or external, certainly experiences the Supreme Bliss of Brahman.
Thus realisation is possible for the jiva only on the complete destruction of the mind and not otherwise.
M.: The latent impressions (vasanas) manifesting as modes (vrittis) constitute the form-aspect of the mind. Their effacement is the destruction of this aspect of mind. On the other hand, on the latencies perishing, the supervening state of samadhi in which there is no stupor of sleep,
no vision of the world,
but only the Being-Knowledge-Bliss is the formless aspect of mind.
The loss of this amounts to the loss of the formless aspect of mind.
Should this also be lost, there can be no experience — not even of the realisation of Supreme Bliss
D.: When does this destruction take place?
M.: In the disembodiment of the liberated being. It cannot happen so long as he is alive in the body.
The mind is lost in its form-aspect but not in its formless one of Brahman.
Hence the experience of Bliss for the sage, liberated while alive.
26-27. D.: In brief what is Realisation?
M.: To destroy the mind in its form-aspect functioning as the limiting adjunct to the individual,
to recover the pure mind in its formless aspect whose nature is only Being-KnowledgeBliss
and to experience ‘I am Brahman’
is Realisation.
D.: Is this view supported by others as well?
M.: Yes. Sri Sankaracharya has said:
‘Just as in the ignorant state, unmindful of the identity of the Self with Brahman, one truly believes oneself to be the body,
so also after knowing to be free from the illusion of the body being the Self,
and becoming unaware of the body, undoubtingly and unmistakably always to experience the Self as the Being-Knowledge-Bliss identical with Brahman is called Realisation’.
‘To be fixed as the Real Self is Realisation’, say the sages.
30-31. Therefore without effacing the form-aspect of the mind and remaining fixed as the true Self, how can anyone realise ‘I am Brahman’?
It cannot be.
Briefly put, one should still the mind to destroy one’s individuality and thus remain fixed as the Real Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss,
so that in accordance with the text ‘I am Brahman’ one can realise Brahman.
On the other hand, on the strength of the direct knowledge of Brahman to say ‘I am Brahman’ is as silly as a poor beggar on seeing the king declaring himself to be the king.
Not to claim by words but to be fixed as the Real Self and know ‘I am Brahman’ is Realisation of Brahman.
32. D.: How will the sage be, who has undoubtingly, unmistakably and steadily realised Brahman?
M.: Always remaining as the Being-Knowledge-Bliss, nondual, all-perfect, all-alone, unitary Brahman, he will be unshaken even while experiencing the results of the past karma now in fruition. (prarabdha).
33-35. D.: Being only Brahman, how can he be subject to the experiences and activities resulting from past karma?
M.: For the sage undoubtingly and unmistakably fixed as the real Self, there can remain no past karma.
In its absence there can be no fruition, consequently no experience nor any activity.
Being only without mode Brahman, there can be no experiencer, no experiences and no objects of experience.
Therefore no past karma can be said to remain for him.
D.: Why should we not say that his past karma is now working itself out?
M.: Who is the questioner? He must be a deluded being and not a sage
D.: Why?
M.: Experience implies delusion; without the one, the other cannot be.
Unless there is an object, no experience is possible.
All objective knowledge is delusion.
There is no duality in Brahman.
Certainly all names and forms are by ignorance superimposed on Brahman.
Therefore the experiencer must be ignorant only and not a sage.
Having already enquired into the nature of things and known them to be illusory names and forms born of ignorance, the sage remains fixed as Brahman and knows all to be only Brahman.
Who is to enjoy what?
No one and nothing.
Therefore there is no past karma left nor present enjoyments nor any activity for the wise one.
M.: In Viveka Chudamani, Sri Acharya has said
‘Simultaneous with the dawn of knowledge, ignorance with all its effects flees away from the sage and so he cannot be an enjoyer.
However, the ignorant wonder how the sage continues to live in the body and act like others.
From the ignorant point of view, the scriptures have admitted the momentum of past karma, but not from the point of view of the sage himself’.
40. D.: If truly he is no enjoyer, why should he appear to others to be so?
M.: Owing to their ignorance, the others regard him as an enjoyer.
41-43. D.: Can this be so?
M.: Yes. To the ignorant only the non-dual, pure Ether of Absolute Knowledge manifests Itself as various beings, the world, God, different names and forms, I, you, he, it, this and that. Like the illusion of a man on a post, silver on nacre, snake on rope, utensils in clay, or ornaments in gold, different names and forms on the Ether of Knowledge delude the ignorant.
The sage who, by practice of knowledge, has destroyed
ignorance and gained true knowledge, will always remain only
as the Ether of Absolute Knowledge, unaware of enjoyments of
fruits of actions or of worldly activities. Being That, he can be
aware as the Ether of Knowledge only. Nevertheless, owing to
their ignorance others see him otherwise, i.e., as an embodied
being acting like themselves. But he remains only pure,
untainted ether, without any activity.
47-48. D.: Not that there are no experiences whatever for the realised sage, but they are only illusory. For Knowledge can destroy the karma already stored and the future karma (sanchita and agamya) but not the karma which having already begun to bear fruit (prarabdha) must exhaust itself. As long as it is there, even from his own point of view, activities will persist, though illusory.
M.: This cannot be. In which state do these three kinds of karma exist — knowledge or ignorance? Owing to delusion; it must be said ‘they are operative only in ignorance.’ But in knowledge there being no delusion, there is no prarabdha. Always remaining undeluded as the transcendental Self, how can the delusion of the fruition of karma occur to one?
Can the delusion of dream-experience return to him who has awakened from it?
To the disillusioned sage there can be no experience of karma.
Always he remains unaware of the world but aware of the Self as the non-dual, unbroken, unitary, solid, without any mode Ether of Absolute Knowledge, and of nothing besides.
49. D.: The Upanishad admits past karma in the Text ‘As long as his past karma is not exhausted the sage cannot be disembodied, and there will be illusory activities for him’.
M.: You are not right. The activities and experiences of the fruits of action and the world seem illusory to the practiser of Knowledge and they completely vanish to the accomplished sage. The practiser practises as follows: ‘I am the witness; the objects and activities are seen by and known to me. I remain conscious and these are insentient. Only Brahman is real; all else is unreal.’ The practice ends with the realisation that all these are insentient consisting of names and forms and cannot exist in the past, present or future, therefore they vanish.
There being nothing to witness, witnessing ends by merging into Brahman.
Only the Self is now left over as Brahman.
For the sage aware of the Self only, there can remain only Brahman and no thought of karma, or worldly activities.
D.: Why then does the sruti mention past karma in this connection?
M.: It does not refer to the accomplished sage.
D.: Whom does it refer to?
M.: Only to the ignorant.
D.: Why?
M.: Although from his own point of view, the sage has no enjoyment of the fruits of actions, yet the ignorant are deluded on seeing his activities. Even if told there is no enjoyment for him, the ignorant will not accept it but continue to doubt how the sage remains active. To remove such doubt, the sruti says to the ignorant that prarabdha still remains for the sage. But it does not say to the sage ‘You have prarabdha’. Therefore the sruti which speaks of residual prarabdha, for the sage, really does not speak of it from his point of view.
50-51. D.: Realisation can result only after complete annihilation of individuality. But who will agree to sacrifice his individuality?
M.: Being eager to cross over the ocean of the misery of repeated births and deaths and realise the pure, eternal Brahman, one will readily sacrifice one’s individuality.
Just as the man desirous of becoming a celestial being, willingly consigns himself to the fire or the Ganges in order to end this human life and emerge as a god, so also the seeker of Liberation will by practice of sravana, manana, and nidhidhyasana, (i.e., hearing, reflection and meditation) sacrifice his individuality to become the Supreme Brahman.
52. Here ends the Chapter on Realisation.
Diligently studying and understanding this, the seeker will kill the mind which is the limiting adjunct that causes individuality to manifest and ever live as Brahman only
... manonasha chp 8.............................
1. In the previous chapter, having taught the realisation of the non-dual Brahman,
the master now treats of
the extinction of the mind as the sole means of realising Brahman
M.: Wise son, leave off the mind which is the limiting adjunct giving rise to individuality, thus causing the great malady of repeated births and deaths, and realise Brahman.
2. D.: Master, how can the mind be extinguished? Is it not very hard to do so? Is not the mind very powerful, restive and ever vacillating? How can one relinquish the mind?
3-4. M.: To give up the mind is very easy, as easy as crushing a delicate flower,
or removing a hair from butter or winking your eyes.
Doubt it not.
For a self-possessed resolute seeker
47-48. D.: Not that there are no experiences whatever for the realised sage, but they are only illusory. For Knowledge can destroy the karma already stored and the future karma (sanchita and agamya) but not the karma which having already begun to bear fruit (prarabdha) must exhaust itself. As long as it is there, even from his own point of view, activities will persist, though illusory.
M.: This cannot be. In which state do these three kinds of karma exist — knowledge or ignorance? Owing to delusion; it must be said ‘they are operative only in ignorance.’ But in knowledge there being no delusion, there is no prarabdha. Always remaining undeluded as the transcendental Self, how can the delusion of the fruition of karma occur to one?
Can the delusion of dream-experience return to him who has awakened from it?
To the disillusioned sage there can be no experience of karma.
Always he remains unaware of the world but aware of the Self as the non-dual, unbroken, unitary, solid, without any mode Ether of Absolute Knowledge, and of nothing besides.
49. D.: The Upanishad admits past karma in the Text ‘As long as his past karma is not exhausted the sage cannot be disembodied, and there will be illusory activities for him’.
M.: You are not right. The activities and experiences of the fruits of action and the world seem illusory to the practiser of Knowledge and they completely vanish to the accomplished sage. The practiser practises as follows: ‘I am the witness; the objects and activities are seen by and known to me. I remain conscious and these are insentient. Only Brahman is real; all else is unreal.’ The practice ends with the realisation that all these are insentient consisting of names and forms and cannot exist in the past, present or future, therefore they vanish.
There being nothing to witness, witnessing ends by merging into Brahman.
Only the Self is now left over as Brahman.
For the sage aware of the Self only, there can remain only Brahman and no thought of karma, or worldly activities.
D.: Why then does the sruti mention past karma in this connection?
M.: It does not refer to the accomplished sage.
D.: Whom does it refer to?
M.: Only to the ignorant.
D.: Why?
M.: Although from his own point of view, the sage has no enjoyment of the fruits of actions, yet the ignorant are deluded on seeing his activities. Even if told there is no enjoyment for him, the ignorant will not accept it but continue to doubt how the sage remains active. To remove such doubt, the sruti says to the ignorant that prarabdha still remains for the sage. But it does not say to the sage ‘You have prarabdha’. Therefore the sruti which speaks of residual prarabdha, for the sage, really does not speak of it from his point of view.
50-51. D.: Realisation can result only after complete annihilation of individuality. But who will agree to sacrifice his individuality?
M.: Being eager to cross over the ocean of the misery of repeated births and deaths and realise the pure, eternal Brahman, one will readily sacrifice one’s individuality.
Just as the man desirous of becoming a celestial being, willingly consigns himself to the fire or the Ganges in order to end this human life and emerge as a god, so also the seeker of Liberation will by practice of sravana, manana, and nidhidhyasana, (i.e., hearing, reflection and meditation) sacrifice his individuality to become the Supreme Brahman.
52. Here ends the Chapter on Realisation.
Diligently studying and understanding this, the seeker will kill the mind which is the limiting adjunct that causes individuality to manifest and ever live as Brahman only
... manonasha chp 8.............................
1. In the previous chapter, having taught the realisation of the non-dual Brahman,
the master now treats of
the extinction of the mind as the sole means of realising Brahman
M.: Wise son, leave off the mind which is the limiting adjunct giving rise to individuality, thus causing the great malady of repeated births and deaths, and realise Brahman.
2. D.: Master, how can the mind be extinguished? Is it not very hard to do so? Is not the mind very powerful, restive and ever vacillating? How can one relinquish the mind?
3-4. M.: To give up the mind is very easy, as easy as crushing a delicate flower,
or removing a hair from butter or winking your eyes.
Doubt it not.
For a self-possessed resolute seeker
not bewitched by the senses,
but by strong dispassion grown indifferent to external objects,
there cannot be the least difficulty in giving up the mind.
D.: How is it so easy?
M.: The question of difficulty arises only if there is a mind to leave off.
Truly speaking, there is no mind.
When told ‘There is a ghost here’ an ignorant child is deluded into believing the existence of the non-existent ghost, and is subject to fear, misery and troubles,
similarly in the untainted Brahman by fancying things that are not, as this and that, a false entity known as the mind arises seemingly real,
functioning as this and that,
and proving uncontrollable and mighty to the unwary,
whereas to the self-possessed, discerning seeker who knows its nature, it is easy to relinquish.
Only a fool ignorant of its nature says it is most difficult.
5-10. D.: What is the nature of mind?
M.: To think this and that. In the absence of thought, there can be no mind.
On the thoughts being extinguished the mind will remain only in name like the horn of a hare; it will vanish as a non-entity like a barren woman’s son, or a hare’s horn, or a flower in the sky. This is also mentioned in the Yoga Vasishta.
D.: How?
M.: Vasishta says: ‘Listen, O Rama, there is nothing to speak of as mind. Just as the ether exists without form, so also the mind exists as the blank insentience. It remains only in name; it has no form. It is not outside, nor is it in the heart. Yet like the ether, the mind though formless fills all’.
D.: How can this be?
M.: Wherever thought arises as this and that, there is the mind.
D.: If there be mind wherever there is thought, are thought and mind different?
M.: Thought is the index of the mind. When a thought arises mind is inferred. In the absence of thought, there can be no mind. Therefore mind is nothing but thought. Thought is itself mind.
D.: What is ‘thought’?
M.: ‘Thought’ is imagination. The thought-free state is Bliss Supreme (Sivasvarupa). Thoughts are of two kinds; the recalling of things experienced and unexperienced
Real or unreal, experienced or not, however it may be, whatever is not thought of, is not apprehended.
It is obvious that without attention, even the objects of direct cognition cannot be recognised.
maya, avidya diff names.
D.: Be it so, what has this got to do with the extinction of the mind?
M.: Listen. You must understand that the knowledge signified by all these terms is only the mind.
M.: Vasishta has said to Rama: ‘Whatever objective knowledge manifests as this and that, or not this and not that, or in any other manner, it is only the mind.
The mind is nothing but this manifest knowledge’.
34. D.: Let it be so. How can the mind be extinguished?
M.: To forget everything is the ultimate means. But for thought, the world does not arise. Do not think and it will not arise.
When nothing arises in the mind, the mind itself is lost.
Therefore do not think of anything, forget all.
This is the best way to kill the mind.
35-37. D.: Has anyone else said so before?
M.: Vasishta said so to Rama thus: ‘Efface thoughts of all kinds, of things enjoyed, not enjoyed, or otherwise.
Like wood or stone, remain free from thoughts.
Rama: Should I altogether forget everything?
Vasishta: Exactly; altogether forget everything and remain like wood or stone.
Rama: The result will be dullness like that of stones or wood.
Vasishta: Not so. All this is only illusion. Forgetting the illusion, you are freed from it. Though seeming dull, you will be the Bliss Itself. Your intellect will be altogether clear and sharp. Without getting entangled in worldly life, but appearing active to others remain as the very Bliss of Brahman and be happy. Unlike the blue colour of the sky, let not the illusion of the world revive in the pure Ether of Consciousness-Self. To forget this illusion is the sole means to kill the mind and remain as Bliss.
Though Shiva, Vishnu, or Brahman Himself should instruct you, realisation is not possible without this one means.
Without forgetting everything, fixity as the Self is impossible.
Therefore altogether forget everything.’
38-39. D.: Is it not very difficult to do so?
M.: Though for the ignorant it is difficult, for the discerning few it is very easy.
Never think of anything but the unbroken unique Brahman.
By a long practice of this, you will easily forget the non-self.
It cannot be difficult to remain still without thinking anything.
Let not thoughts arise in the mind; always think of Brahman.
In this way all worldly thoughts will vanish and thought of Brahman alone will remain.
When this becomes steady, forget even this, and without thinking ‘I am Brahman’, be the very Brahman.
This cannot be difficult to practise.
40. Now my wise son, follow this advice; cease thinking of anything but Brahman.
By this practice your mind will be extinct;
you will forget all and remain as pure Brahman.
41. He who studies this chapter and follows the instructions contained therein, will soon be Brahman Itself!
table 4 pages
aham bramhasmi = deho aham
..................................................end.....................................
No comments:
Post a Comment