Mithyatvam defined in Gita

शर्ीगुरुभ्यो नमः
‘mithyA’ defined in the Bhagavadgita
In Advaita Vedanta the world is held to be ‘mithyA’. This term is variously rendered in English as ‘unreal’, ‘dependently real’, ‘seemingly real’, ‘relatively real’, etc. The most popular definition of mithyAtvam, ‘unreality’, as given in the Advaitasiddhi is: ‘That which appears in a locus where it does not belong in the three periods of time’. Thus, in the rope-snake analogy, the snake appears in the rope where it does not belong in the three periods of time. The rope is not the locus for the snake to exist. Yet it is apprehended there due to ignorance of the locus, rope. When the true knowledge of the rope arises, the snake is known to have not been there. Similarly, the world (and samsara) is imagined to be present in the substratum, locus, Brahman. When by the help of the Scripture and the Preceptor the knowledge of Brahman arises, the world will be known to have not been there. In the sequel a study of the application of the above definition of ‘mithyA’ is taken up with the Bhagavadgita as the source for the definition.
In the ninth Chapter of the Gita the Lord says:
मया ततिमदं सवर्ं जगद􁳞क्तमूितना ।
मत्स्थािन सवर्भूतािन न चाहं तेष्वविस्थतः ॥ (9.4)
By Me, the Unmanifest, all this world is pervaded. All beings dwell in Me; and I do not dwell in them.
न च मत्स्थािन भूतािन पश्य मे योगमै􁳡रम् ।
भूतभृ􁳖 च भूतस्थो ममात्मा भूतभावनः ॥ (9.5)
Nor do these beings dwell in Me; behold My Divine Yoga! Sustaining all the beings, but not dwelling in them, is My Self, the cause of beings.
In the first quoted verse, the Lord states the relative situation: the world rests in Him, Brahman. However, He clarifies that Brahman does not inhere in the world. This is the first part of the definition of mithyAtvam: the appearance of the world in the locus, Brahman.
In the next verse the Lord hastens to add: Nor does the world rest in Brahman. This is the absolute position that translates the second part of the definition of mithyAtvam: ….where it does not belong in the three periods of time.
Thus, the Lord, by first stating the ‘presence’ of the world in Brahman and immediately denying the presence of the world in Brahman, has stated in so many words that the world is just an appearance in Brahman.
Quite interestingly, He has supplied some more dimensions of the definition of mithyAtvam: the substratum does not exist in the superimposed object. This He says in the first as well as the second verse. Yet, the substratum can be spoken of being a support, only contextually, to/of the superimposed object in as much as the object ‘exists’ only with the borrowed reality of the substratum. One is able to talk about the apparent snake only because the rope is there really existing. If there had been no rope at all, there would not be a superimposition of snake possible.
The world has thus a dependent reality while Brahman’s is Independent Reality. Without the Reality of Brahman the world would be simply naught. Thus, perforce, one has to admit that it is Brahman that appears as the world. In a way, we can say that the world has Brahman for its ‘source’, origin, just as it is possible to say that the superimposed snake has the rope for its source. It is indeed the rope that constitutes the source material for the one who sees it erroneously as a snake. What he has
contributed is his imagination born of unclear knowledge of the rope lying there. Even so, owing to the ignorance of the true nature of Brahman, the world involving a body-mind apparatus, the subject and all the objective variety is imagined. Thus the duality of subject-object is churned out of this ignorance of the Non-dual Brahman.
It would be interesting and illuminating to note the Upanishadic basis for the above Gita verses. In the Mandukya Upanishad (M), the Absolute Reality, Brahman, is presented as ‘constituted’ of four quarters or limbs or components. The waking, dreaming and sleeping states are the first three and the state transcending these is taught as the Turiya, the Atman. We shall list the Mandukya-Gita connection as follows:
•
The third quarter of the M corresponds to the first verse of the Gita quoted above. There, the Ishwara-pAda of M says: //mantra VI. He is the Lord of all. He is the knower of all. He is the inner controller. He is the source of all; for from him all beings originate and in him they finally disappear.// The Gita verse says: All beings dwell in Me.
•
The Fourth quarter, pAda, of M corresponds to the second verse of the Gita quoted above. There, the Turiya-pAda of M says: //mantra 7 ….It is the cessation of all phenomena; ‘prapanchopashamam’. It is all peace, all bliss and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized. // The Gita verse says: ‘Nor do these beings dwell in Me.’ The world, prapancha, is not present in Brahman, says the Lord thereby translating the term ‘prapanchopashamam’ of M into the Gita language.
•
M says that the Ishwara-pAda is the source and sustainer of the world. Gita says that Brahman is the support of the world.
•
M, by saying that the Turiya, Brahman/Atman is ‘indescribable’ conveys that the Ishwara-pAda of the third quarter is only relatively placed just as the Lord says in the Gita that ‘He does not dwell in the world’.
•
While the first three pAda-s of M constitute the ‘adhyAropa’ or deliberate superimposition by the Upanishad, the Gita first verse is an adhyAropa.
•
While the Fourth pAda is the negation, ‘apavAda’, of what was stated in the earlier three quarters, the Gita second verse is a negation of what the Lord said in the first verse.
•
While the Lord says explicitly that ‘It is My Divine Yoga’ which is Maya that is at the root of the appearance of the world and its non-existence in Brahman, the M Upanishad only implicitly states this by negating the entire world-phenomenon of the three states in the Fourth.
•
Shankaracharya brings out the ‘asanga’ or unattached nature of Brahman: // I do not dwell in those beings, because of the absence of contact with others, unlike corporeal things.// (9.4). The rope, even though ‘supports’ the snake, does not inhere in the snake as it has no contact with the illusory snake. Clay is the support of clay-products. Can we really say that clay inheres/dwells in the clay-products? When we realize that clay-products are only clay in truth (based on the ‘vAchArambhaNa shruti’ of the Chandogya Upanishad VI Chapter), there would be no meaning in asserting that clay inheres the clay-products. Nor would be there any meaning, at that stage, in asserting that the clay ‘supports’ the clay-products. Similar is the situation with regard to Brahman and the world.
•
The M Upanishad says: //mantra 2: All this is, indeed, Brahman. This Atman is Brahman. This same Atman has four quarters.// This shows that Brahman pervades the ‘four (three) quarters’. The Lord says in the Gita: // By Me, the Unmanifest, all this world is pervaded.// The rope is said to ‘pervade’ the illusory snake in the sense that the snake has no existence independent of that of the rope. Terms like ‘support’, ‘pervaded’ only indicate that the one supported and pervaded is saturated by the one
that supports and pervades it. For example, space supports and pervades all objects situated in it. Brahman is in and through the world that It supports and pervades. That this ‘supporting’ and ‘pervading’ by Brahman is only relative is known by the Upanishad and the Gita negating the very world that is first admitted to be supported and pervaded.
Having seen these parallels between the Upanishad and the Gita, let us see what is the sadhana that helps us to get at this truth:
The world is mithyA. The M Upanishad, as quoted above, explicitly says: All this is Brahman. The Gita only states this implicitly by negating the world in Brahman. Since the world is only dependently real, when it is negated altogether, having no reality whatsoever, it is known to be mithyA. This knowledge born of logic, mananam, has to be internalized, through nididhyasanam, focused contemplation on the Truth. Since the Upanishad also said: This Atman is Brahman, the sadhana has to be on the lines of contemplating: I, the Pure Consciousness, Atman am the Non-dual Truth, Independent of everything. This objective world which depends on me for its existence does not exist in me the Consciousness. I am neither the support of this world nor do I inhere in the world. My pervading the world is also only relative to the world having an existence. In other words, the All-pervading nature of Brahman is also only relative to the existence of ‘all’. When the ‘all’ itself is negated, there is no question of Brahman pervading anything. This is because, the pervading-pervaded relationship is possible only in the wake of two real entities. That such is not the case is being clarified by the Lord. I, the Non-dual Consciousness alone am the Truth. There is no such thing called the world. I have no samsara. I have no birth nor will I die. I am the Eternal unchanging
Consciousness, Brahman. This is the kind of sadhana that will result in freedom from bondage.
[The above sadhana is wholly based on the teachings of the M Upanishad and the Gita.]
शर्ीसद्गुरुचरणारिवन्दापर्णमस्तु

Jivan Mukti Viveka By Swami Vidyaranya

Jivanmuktiviveka
of
Swami Vidyaranya

A summary

Chapter 1

Scriptural authority on Jivanmukti

This work consists of five chapters, known as Prakaranas. The first chapter deals with the scriptural authority for the postulation of Jivanmukti or liberation while still living. The chapter opens with a salutation to Sri Vidyatirtha, the author's Guru, who is identified with the Supreme Lord.

Sannyasa is of two kinds, known as Vividisha Sannyasa and Vidvat Sannyasa, or, renunciation of the seeker and renunciation of the knower. (These terms will become clear as we proceed further). The first is the cause of liberation after death (Videhamukti) and the second of liberation while still living in the body (Jivanmukti). The essential pre-requisite for both these kinds of Sannyasa is detachment.

Detachment is of three kinds-- weak, strong and stronger. The detachment that arises on the occurrence of some calamity such as the death of a dear one, or loss of possessions, is not lasting and is categorized as weak. Such a temporary feeling of detachment is of no use and does not make a person eligible for Sannyasa. The determination not to marry, beget children and live the life of a householder is categorized as 'strong' detachment. There are four varieties of Vividisha Sannyasa. These are-- Kutichaka, Bahoodaka, Hamsa and Paramahamsa. The detachment described as 'strong' makes the person eligible only for the varieties of Sannyasa called Kutichaka and Bahoodaka. Both of them are 'Tridandins' i.e. they carry three long thin sticks knotted together, emblematic of the triple renunciation of everything connected with body, mind and speech. The Kutichaka resides in a secluded hermitage. The Bahoodaka keeps moving from one holy place to another. The choice as to which of these two varieties a person with the kind of detachment described as 'strong' should take depends on whether he is physically fit to move about from place to place or not.

When a person is free from desire not only for the pleasures of this world, but even for those of higher worlds such as heaven, because of the knowledge that they are transient and will result only in repeated births and deaths, he is said to have 'stronger' detachment. This kind of detachment entitles the person to take the Hamsa and Paramahamsa varieties of Sannyasa. A Hamsa Sannaysi goes to Brahmaloka, realizes the absolute truth there and becomes liberated. This is known as Kramamukti or liberation by stages. The Paramahamsa is the ascetic of the highest order, who has achieved complete control over his senses. He attains liberation even while living in the body. This is called Jivanmukti.

Paramahamsas are of two kinds: the seeker after liberation and the knower of the Self. The seeker is one who has renounced all desires and wants nothing but the realization of the Self. He does not desire any of the three worlds or spheres of enjoyment, namely, the world of men, the world of the manes and the world of the gods. The means to the attainment of these three worlds are, respectively, the begetting of a son, the performance of the prescribed Vedic rituals and meditation (Br.Up.1.5.26). The seeker renounces all these means. He is intent only on attaining the world of the Self, which means liberation. To attain this he has to achieve total control over the mind, body and senses.

Vividisha Sannyasa (Renunciation of the seeker) 

The desire for Self-realization arises to a person as a result of the study of the Vedas and the performance of the rites enjoined by the Vedas in this life or in previous lives. The renunciation consequent on such desire is known as Vividisha Sannyasa or 'the renunciation of the seeker'. (Vividisha means 'the desire to know'). This Sannyasa is the means to the knowledge of Brahman. This is of two kinds: one, giving up the performance of only Kamyakarma, or actions motivated by desire for the fruit, and two, entering the Sannyasa Ashrama by muttering the Praisha formula and accepting the staff, etc. It is said here that ladies also are entitled to this Sannyasa before marriage and after the death of the husband, but it appears that they can become only 'tridandins', that is, only the Kutichaka and Bahoodaka varieties. Those who are not able to take the Sannyasa Ashrama for some reason can renounce mentally, while continuing to perform the duties of their own Ashrama.

Vidvat Sannyasa (Renunciation of the Knower) 

The entry into the Sannyasa order by those who have already attained Self-realization through hearing, reflection and meditation is known as Vidvat Sannyasa. Sage Yajnavalkya is an example of this. Having already realized the highest truth he declared his intention to renounce the world to his wife Maitreyi. He then became a Sannyasin. (See Br.Up. 4.5.2 and 4.5.15). This kind of Sannyasa is also mentioned in the Kahola Brahmana in Br.Up. 3.5.1.

While the Vividisha Sannyasin should devote himself to the study of the scriptures, reflection thereon and meditation for the realization of the Self, the Vidvat Sannyasin should strive for the destruction of the mind and the elimination of Vasanas in order to attain Jivanmukti. This matter will be dealt with in detail later on.

In the Jabala upanishad, when Atri objects that giving up of the sacred thread by a Brahmana is not permissible, Yajnavalkya replies that Self-knowledge is the real sacred thread for the Paramahamsa Sannyasin (Jabala.Up.5). So the absence of the external sacred thread is the sign that the Sannyasin belongs to the Paramahamsa category. It is further said in this Upanishad that Vidvat Sannyasins are without the external signs of Ashrama, bound by no forms of conduct and behaving like mad men, though not mad.

The procedure for a Tridandin to become a Vividisha Sannyasin who carries only one stick is the following. The three sticks, water-pot, begging bowl with the suspension-strainer, tuft and sacred thread should be offered to the Bhurloka, i.e. the earth, reciting the mantra: "Bhuh Svaha", meaning, "oblation to Bhuh" and thrown into water. He should then seek the Self.

The Paramahamsa who is a Vidvat Sannyasin is described as one who is like a new-born baby, whose mind is free from the effects of the pairs of opposites, devoid of all possessions, who is firmly established in the path to Brahman, whose mind is free from desires, who, just to maintain life without being under obligation to any one, goes about begging at the prescribed time, using his belly as the begging bowl, and is unperturbed whether he gets it or not, without a fixed dwelling, lives in places such as a derelict house, a temple, a hay-stack, under a tree, in a pottery, in a house where sacrificial fire is kept, on the riverside, in a mountain cave, in the hollow of a tree, or a place for the performance of sacrifices built near a spring. He is free from all striving, devoid of the feeling of "I and mine", ever meditates on the pure Self, is established in the supreme Self, gives up all actions and ultimately gives up his body with total detachment.

Both Vividisha Sannyasa and Vidvat Sannyasa fall under the category of Paramahamsa, but their characteristics are different and, in some respects, even contradictory. In Arunika Upanishad it is said that Vividisha Sannyasa is marked by the giving up of the tuft, the sacred thread, the study of the (Karmakanda of the) Vedas, the repetition of the Gayatri, etc, and enjoins the acceptance of a staff, bathing three times a day, meditation on the Self and study of the Upanishads. Though the same are prescribed for Vidvat Sannyasa also, it is said in the Paramahamsa Upanishad that these are not the essentials. A Vidvat Sannyasin is free from all rules regarding external symbols, social norms and conventions. He ever remains established in the realization that he is Brahman.

In the Smritis also, the distinction between these two types of Sannyasa is clear. With regard to Vividisha Sannyasa, Brihaspati Smriti says that those who find worldly life to be devoid of substance enter the order of Sannyasins even before marriage. The Mahabharata says that the wise, who aim at the attainment of Self-knowledge, renounce the world (14.43.39).

Regarding Vidvat Sannyasa, it is said-"When the eternal, supreme Brahman, becomes known (in a general way), then taking only one staff, the person must give up the sacred thread and the tuft; he should renounce everything and take Sannyasa, after having directly realized the supreme Brahman".

Desire for knowledge out of mere curiosity is no ground for renunciation. Vividisha implies desire for knowledge alone, excluding everything else. It can be compared to the desire for food of a person who is so hungry that he cannot tolerate even a moment's delay and will not accept anything else, however valuable. (In his Bhashya on Gita, 4.11 Sri Sankara says that it is impossible for a person to be a seeker of liberation and also a seeker of the fruits of action at the same time. This means that Vividisha, the desire to know the Self, can be said to be there only when there is total detachment towards everything else).

The culmination of knowledge is when the identification with the Self totally replaces the identification with the body (See Upadesa Sahasri, 4.5). On the attainment of this culmination, the knot of the heart is cut off, all doubts are destroyed and all latent impressions are annihilated (Mund. Up. 2.2.8).

The highest state attainable through karma is that of Hiranyagarbha. Even this pales into insignificance compared to the Supreme Brahman. The 'knot of the heart' means the wrong identity of the Self with the intellect, caused by beginningless ignorance; it is so called because it is as tight as a knot. The doubts referred to are-- Is the Self a mere witness or the doer of actions? If it is only a witness, is it Brahman or not? If it is Brahman, can it be known by the intellect or not? Does liberation consist merely in this knowledge? The 'latent impressions' are those that lead to future births. These three, being the results of Avidya, disappear on the realization of the Self. (See also Gita, 18.17).

A doubt now arises. Since Vividisha Sannyasa itself leads to the attainment of knowledge of the Self, which itself prevents future birth, and the remaining portion of this life has to be lived because of Prarabdha karma, what is the need for Vidvat Sannyasa? The answer is-- Vidvat Sannyasa is necessary for the attainment of Jivanmukti or liberation in life. Vividisha Sannyasa leads only to the attainment of Knowledge.

The nature of Jivanmukti

Bondage is the experience of pleasure and pain resulting from man looking upon himself as the performer of actions and the enjoyer of the fruits thereof. Because of this bondage one is not able to experience the Bliss which is natural to him. The cessation of this bondage is Jivanmukti or liberation in life. Now the question arises-- is the bondage the natural characteristic of the Witness (Self) or of the mind?. Since bondage ceases on the dawn of knowledge, it cannot be a characteristic of the Self, because what is natural can never be removed, like the heat of fire or the fluidity of water. If it is the natural characteristic of the mind, then also it can never be got rid of. It may be argued that though the natural characteristic of the mind cannot be completely removed, its effect can be neutralized by the practice of yoga. To this the answer given by the objector is that Praarabdha karma will make the person experience pleasure and pain and will prevent knowledge from destroying the ignorance along with its effects in its entirety. The Siddhanti's reply to this is that the human efforts prescribed by the scriptures can counteract even the effects of Praarabdha karma. If this is not so, all the sacred texts on liberation will become useless. One should not give up further effort just because of failure once. Nobody gives up eating for fear of indigestion or cooking for fear of being pestered by beggars or covering oneself with a blanket in cold weather because of the fear that there may be lice in it.

The efficacy of the efforts prescribed by scripture is known clearly from the dialogue between Vasishtha and Rama in Yogavasishtha. Rama says--"My Vasanas (the impressions of previous actions and thoughts) compel me to act in a particular way. I am powerless to go against them". Vasishtha replies-"Since you are subject to your Vasanas, your own initiative, combined with enthusiasm and effort by thought, word and deed is essential to liberate you from such dependence. Vasanas are of two kinds: good and bad. If the good Vasanas are powerful, they will themselves lead you to the attainment of liberation. If the evil Vasanas are powerful, you have to exert yourself to conquer them. The mind can be turned away, by the company of the good, from objects which are not conducive to spiritual progress. The mind is like a child. It can be disciplined by persuasion rather than by force. Control of breath (Pranaayaama) and withdrawal of the mind from external objects (Pratyaahaara) are the two methods of subduing the mind. By this method the mind becomes calm soon. When good desires arise soon after the practice of Rajayoga, it should be attributed to the practice of the yoga. One should continue with such practice in accordance with the instruction of the teacher, scripture and other valid evidence (Pramaana) until complete mastery over the mind is attained and the identity of Brahman and Atman is realized. After that, when the obstacles in the form of evil desires have vanished, even the good desires should be given up. It is thus clear that all desires (including those arising due to Praarabdha karma) can be got rid of through Yoga and so the possibility of Jivanmukti cannot be disputed.

The characteristics of Jivanmukti

The Srutis and Smritis establish the existence of the state of Jivanmukti. The Kathopanishad says (5.1),"the one already liberated is altogether liberated", which means that one who has become totally free from bondage while alive is freed from all possibility of future bondage after the fall of the body. Though during Pralaya and after death every one remains free from another birth for some time, he will certainly be born again, but one who has attained liberation in life will be free from birth for ever. The Br. Up. says, "When all the desires that are in his heart fall off entirely, the mortal becomes immortal and attains Brahman here (in this body) itself" (4.4.7). In another Sruti it is said, "Though with eyes, he is, as it were, without eyes; though with ears, he is, as it were, without ears; though with mind, he is, as it were, without mind; and though with life, he is, as it were, without life".

The Jivanmukta is described by different names such as, Sthitaprajna (man of steady wisdom), Bhagavad-bhakta (Devotee of God), Gunaatita (beyond the three Gunas), Brahmana (who has realized the Self), Ativarnaasramin (beyond the pale of the four Varnas and the four Asramas).

Jivanmukti can be attained only by a person who has given up all other actions, both Vedic and secular, who is in pursuit of knowledge alone and who is ever immersed in contemplation on the Self. Jivanmukti and Videhamukti are distinguished only by the presence and absence of the body and the sense-organs. The awareness of duality is absent in both of them.

The Jivanmukta is one for whom this phenomenal world, in which he moves and acts, has ceased to exist. In the case of an ordinary person, his mind reacts to the various forms in the world and gives him knowledge of their variety and their differences from one another. But the mind of the Jivanmukta does not get so transformed and so he does not see differences, but sees all forms only as Brahman. In deep sleep the mind does not undergo any transformation, but the seed for transformation remains. So sleep cannot be equated with the state of Jivanmukti. The Jivanmukta remains unaffected by both pleasure and pain. He is not elated by something good happening, nor is he depressed when a calamity occurs. He does not crave for anything, but subsists on whatever comes of its own accord. Though his senses function and can experience everything, his mind is absolutely calm and does not react to anything. Though his eyes see everything before him, his mind does not judge them as good or bad, favourable or unfavourable and so he is free from agitation and attachment or aversion. The senses themselves do not cause any harm. It is the mind which judges what is experienced by the senses and develops likes and dislikes in the case of an ordinary person. Since the mind of the Jivanmukta does not make any such judgment, he is free from all attachment and aversion. Because of the absence of transformation of the mind, the Jivanmukta is free from Vasanas. His mind always remains pure. He never looks upon himself as a doer of actions since he does not identify himself with the body-mind complex which alone performs all actions. Consequently he is neither elated nor depressed by the good or bad results of the actions. Others do not have any reason to fear him, because he never insults or harms others in any way. He is also not afraid of any one. He remains unaffected even if some wicked man insults or harasses him. He does not distinguish people as friend or foe. Though full of learning, he never exhibits it. His mind is absolutely free from worldly thoughts and is always fixed on contemplation of the Self. He remains cool even in matters concerning himself, just as a man attending a marriage or other ceremony in another's house remains unaffected by the gain or loss of that other person. This coolness is due not only to his freedom from worry, but also to his awareness of the fullness of his own Self. These are the characteristics of the Jivanmukta.

Videhamukti

When the body of the Jivanmukta falls, he becomes a Videhamukta, freed from his empirical existence and attains his real nature, like air resuming its tranquillity when the wind stops blowing. His subtle body is dissolved here itself. He cannot be described as 'sat', that is to say, he cannot be called 'praajna' conditioned by avidya or 'Isvara' conditioned by maayaa. He cannot be called 'asat', or made up of mere matter. He does not experience the gross objects of sense. He is neither Virat, nor Hiranyagarbha nor Isvara. Nor is he Visva, Taijasa or Praajna. Thus he does not come under the category of microcosm (vyashti) or of macrocosm (samashti).

Sthitaprajna

The man of steady wisdom (sthitaprajna) is described in the Gita as one who has acquired supreme detachment and gained complete mastery over his mind through the practice of yoga. His mind is always fixed in the Truth. When he is in Samadhi, he is absolutely free from all desires, as his mind is incapable of transformations in that state. The satisfaction he feels is reflected in the cheerfulness of his countenance. This satisfaction is the result of realization of the Self. In Samprajnata Samadhi there is the distinction of meditator, object of meditation and the act of meditation (known as Triputi). In the Samadhi which is spoken of here, which is called Asamprajnata Samadhi, these distinctions cease. The contentment in this state is not due to the transformation of the mind, but to the impression left by such transformation in the earlier state of Samprajnata Samadhi. When such a person is out of Samadhi, he is free from anxiety and pains, is indifferent to pleasures and is free from passion, fear and anger. Such a sage may, when he has come out of Samadhi, have mental transformations and experience of pleasure and pain brought about by Praarabdha karma. But he does not feel any anxiety or craving because of them, since he has attained total discrimination and detachment. Similarly passion, fear and anger, which are products of Tamoguna, have no place in his mind. He has no attachment to any person or thing nor has he any likes or dislikes, these being caused by Tamoguna, which is absent in him. As a tortoise draws in all its limbs, he withdraws his senses from their objects. The mind of the Sthitaprajna, when he is out of Samadhi, is entirely free from the grosser (Tamasic) kinds of transformation. When he is in Samadhi, his mind is subject to no transformation whatsoever.

The actual enjoyment of sense objects can be given up by a person by avoiding them, but the desire for them would still remain. This desire will go only when the Self is realized. A realized person does not need any external objects for getting happiness, he being Bliss itself. The Br. Up. says," What shall we achieve through children, we who have attained this Self" (4.4.2).

The constant practice of meditation on the Self is necessary to safeguard against inadvertently slipping down from the spiritual level reached, even for a person who has brought all his senses under control.

How a person may slip down is described in Gita, 2.62 & 63. When a man keeps on thinking of sense-objects, he develops attachment to them. Attachment leads to intense longing for the objects. If the longing is not fulfilled, anger arises. Anger leads to loss of the power of discrimination between what is right and what is wrong. This results in his giving up the practice of pondering over the Truth. This makes him unfit for liberation because of the current of opposite ideas which act as obstacles. But a man who has controlled his mind and is free from attachment and aversion even when he is in the midst of sense-objects, attains peace.

The means for the attainment of realization, such as control of the mind and senses and meditation on the Self have to be deliberately practised by the aspirant for liberation, but these become the intrinsic characteristics of the realized person. The condition of being firmly established in the knowledge of the Self, wherein all sense of separateness is obliterated by the uninterrupted flow of the light of the Self, is called Jivanmukti or liberation in life.

Bhagavadbhaktah-The True Devotee of God

He is described in Gita, ch.12, verses 13 & 14. In Samadhi the devotee's mind is fixed on God and so it is not distracted by any other thought. When out of Samadhi, though he experiences objects, he feels neither joy nor sorrow, he being indifferent to both. Verses 15 to 19 of the same chapter describe him as unaffected by all the pairs of opposites. In Naishkarmyasiddhi, 4.69 Suresvaracharya says that the good qualities such as absence of hatred manifest of their own accord and are not the result of any effort by him. They are natural to him and do not constitute the means to an end as in the case of those who are still in the stage of aspirants.

Gunaatita- one who has transcended the Gunas

Such a person is described in chapter 14 of the Bhagavad-gita. The whole world is made up of the products of the three Gunas, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. One who transcends these Gunas is a Jivanmukta. Illumination, activity and delusion are the result of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas respectively. They are active in the waking and dream states, but subside in sleep, Samadhi and absent-mindedness. Activity is of two kinds, agreeable and disagreeable. The unenlightened man hates the disagreeable and longs for the agreeable. The Gunaatita, being free from the notions of 'agreeable' and 'disagreeable', feels neither hatred nor desire. The discriminating Gunaatita remains entirely indifferent, like a disinterested onlooker witnessing two parties fighting with each other. This is because of his conviction that the Gunas in the form of the senses act and react upon the same Gunas in the form of objects and he, as the pure Atma, has nothing to do with them. The wrong notion that one is the doer of actions (and consequently the enjoyer of the results) is the cause of mental agitation. This is totally absent in the Gunaatita and so he is ever free from agitation. He is balanced in pleasure and pain. Service to the Supreme Being by the practice of knowledge and meditation accompanied by unswerving devotion are the means to be adopted by a person who wants to become a Gunaatita.

Braahmanah- the knower of Brahman

The word Braahmana denotes the knower of the supreme Self. He is entitled to become a Vidvat Sannyasin. He is devoid of all possessions. He is not concerned about the kind of garment he wears or the food he eats or the place where he rests. He accepts only the bare minimum of food, clothing and shelter necessary for bodily sustenance. He should wear only a loin cloth and carry a staff for the purpose of instilling faith in his listeners while engaged, purely out of his grace, in imparting the knowledge of Brahman to them. He should never, in spite of his sympathy for others, utter even a word about the worldly concerns of his pupils, but should always remain absorbed in meditation. He should avoid all talk other than about Brahman. Meditation is unimpeded when one is alone. The Smriti says that the religious mendicant should remain alone, because if there are two or more there is a possibility of talk among themselves on subjects such as politics or about the alms received by each. He should not give any blessing to any one because that will create distractions in his mind because of thoughts about what each person wants to have. Another Smriti says that knowledge can never be attained by one whose mind is concerned with the things of the world or with mere bookish learning or the preservation of one's body. The liberated man must give up all these. In lieu of words of blessing he should merely utter the word 'Narayana' which serves the purpose of all blessings. He should not engage himself in any effort to gain anything either for himself or for others. It is said In the Gita, 18.48 that all undertakings are clouded by defects as fire by smoke. Salutation is prescribed only for Vividisha Sannyasins thus-"A senior monk should be saluted if he belongs to the same order of monks, but never any one else". Enquiry about the relative seniority of monks and whether they belong to the same order leads to distraction of the mind and so salutation is not prescribed for Vidvat Sannyasins. Sri Sankara says in Upadesa Sahasri, 17.64- "Whom should a knower of the Self salute, when he is established in the infinite, non-dual Self which transcends all names and forms? He has nothing to do with action of any kind". Although salutation of the kind likely to cause disturbance of the mind is prohibited, that salutation which brings about tranquillity of mind is permitted. Srimad Bhagavata, 3.29.34 & 11.29.16 say--"One should salute, prostrating oneself even before a dog, a Chandala, a cow and an ass, realizing that God is present in them all in the form of the Jiva”. Praise of men is forbidden, but praise of God is enjoined, because it will lead to freedom from bondage. He who is steadfast in the knowledge of the Self should not become dejected when he does not get any food, nor should he be overjoyed when he gets it, because both are governed by destiny. He is not bound by the injunctions or prohibitions of the Vedas. Sage Narada has said in Narada-pancha-ratra, 4.2.23 that the all-pervading Lord Vishnu should be treasured up in memory and not forgotten even for a moment; all injunctions and prohibitions are subservient to this. Mahabharata, Santiparva, 237.13 says that the gods consider him to be a Braahmana who is afraid of a crowd as of a snake, of conventional honour as of death and of woman as of a corpse. This is because the company of others may lead to futile talk and honour leads to attachment which sets up tendencies adverse to the true aim of life. The Yogi, keeping in mind the path of the wise, must conduct himself in such a way that people treat him with contempt and never seek his company. Manusmriti says that one should avoid sitting close to even one's own mother, sister or daughter because the powerful sense organs can drag down even a man of wisdom (2.215).

Men of the world should avoid being alone as that may cause fear, but the opposite is applicable to Yogis. To the Yogi the vast expanse of space appears to be full of the supreme bliss of the Self since he is always absorbed in meditation and so there is no cause for fear. A crowded place is unsuitable for meditation and so the Yogi should avoid it and seek solitude.

Ativarnaasramin
(one who is beyond the pale of the four Varnas and Ashramas)

The Ativarnaasramin is described in the fifth chapter of the section on liberation in the Suta Samhita. He is the teacher of disciples belonging to all the four Ashramas. He never becomes the disciple of any one else. He is the Teacher of teachers. There is none in the world equal or superior to him. He is one who has realized the supreme Truth. He is all Bliss and is the witness of the three states of waking, dream and deep sleep. He has attained the firm conviction that Varna and Ashrama are imaginary super-impositions on the body, brought about by Maayaa and that he, being the pure Atma, has no connection with them. He knows from the Upanishads that the whole universe functions in the mere presence of the Atma which is identical with himself, just as human beings perform all their activities with the help of the light of the sun, while the sun itself is not at all involved in their activities. Just as various ornaments made of gold are nothing but gold, the universe of multifarious names and forms projected by Maayaa is nothing but Brahman. The appearance of Brahman as the universe is similar to the appearance of nacre as silver. The great Lord who is one, devoid of any relation, is like the all-pervading space, pervading all beings, big or small, high or low. He has realized that the world of the waking state is a fabrication of Maayaa, just as all objects seen in dream are the creation of delusion. Having realized that he is the Self, he is beyond all the duties enjoined for the four Ashramas.

Thus it is conclusively established in the Srutis that Jivanmukti is a reality.

Jivanmuktiviveka

of

Swami Vidyaranya

A summary

Chapter 2

On the obliteration of latent impressions (Vaasanaas)

The means to Jivanmukti are knowledge of the Reality, the dissolution of the mind and the obliteration of latent impressions. All these three have to be practised simultaneously to get the result. It is only by prolonged practice of these three that the knot of the heart can be cut. The world appears to us to be real because of having been experienced in innumerable past births. Only the prolonged practice of yoga can remove the wrong notions cultivated over numerous lives. The knowledge of the Reality, the dissolution of the mind and the elimination of vaasanaas are related mutually as cause and effect. Until the mind is dissolved, elimination of vaasanaas is not possible and until the vaasanaas are eliminated, dissolution of the mind cannot take place. The mind undergoes modifications in consonance with the objects experienced by it through the sense organs. The 'dissolution of the mind' means the mind becoming free from such modifications and remaining controlled. vaasanaa is the cause of mental modifications, such as anger, rising up all of a sudden and without any thought of past happenings or future consequences. The effacement of vaasanaas means the elimination of the scope for the rise of anger and the like, even when causes for such anger and the like exist. This is achieved by discrimination which brings about pure vaasanas such as control of the senses and the mind. If the mind is not dissolved, it will continue to react to external stimuli and emotions such as anger will arise and then there can be no effacement of vaasanaas. So also, as long as vaasanaas exist, transformation of the mind in the form of anger, etc, continues and there can be no dissolution of the mind. The two are thus related mutually as cause and effect.

The knowledge of the Reality and the dissolution of the mind are also mutually related as cause and effect. 'Knowledge of the Reality' means the conviction to the effect, "All this is verily the Atman. The phenomenal world of forms, tastes and the like is illusory, it has no real existence". As long as such a conviction has not been attained, forms, tastes and the like will continue to be looked upon as real and the mind will continue to undergo corresponding modifications. And as long as such mental modifications continue, the conviction that Brahman alone is real will not take root.

The reciprocal causal relationship between the obliteration of latent desires (vaasanaa-kshaya) and knowledge of the Reality can also be established. Knowledge of the Reality will not arise until the mind becomes free from anger and the like, which are caused by the vaasanaas. Conversely, the elimination of vaasanaas is not possible as long as false knowledge, which invests the causes of anger and other emotions with a semblance of reality, is not removed.

When one sees everything as Brahman there can be no reason for anger, fear and other such emotions. Virtues such as self-control are strengthened by the knowledge of the Reality and the knowledge of the Reality is strengthened by such virtues. Thus all the three, knowledge of the Reality, obliteration of latent impressions and the dissolution of the mind help one another to progress further. The means of accomplishing these three are personal effort accompanied by discrimination, and giving up all desire for enjoyment. Personal effort involves the determination to succeed in the effort. Discrimination means the conviction that sravana, manana and nididhyaasana are the means to the attainment of knowledge, that yoga is the means to the dissolution of the mind and that the setting up of an opposite current of vaasanaas is the means to the obliteration of impure vaasanaas. The desire for enjoyment has to be totally eliminated because once the smallest desire arises, it will grow and become stronger and stronger if left unchecked.

It has been shown before that knowledge of the Reality (Brahman) is the result of vividishaa sannyaasaa and Jivanmukti that of vidvat sannyaasaa. That means that, after having first acquired knowledge of the Reality, one should become a vidvat sannyaasi and strive for obliteration of vaasanaas and dissolution of the mind. Since he has already acquired knowledge, a doubt may arise as to why it is said that even at this stage such a person should continue to strive for all the three, namely, attainment of knowledge, obliteration of vaasanaas and dissolution of the mind. The answer is that while, for the vividisha sannyaasi, knowledge is the principal aim and the other two are subordinate thereto, for the vidvat sannyaasi the reverse is true. Though the vidvat sannyaasi no more needs sravana, etc, having already acquired knowledge, he should constantly remember the sublime truth. This is done by always thinking about the Reality, talking about it to others and meditating on it. In the episode of Lila in Laghu yogavaasishtha it has been said, “Reflecting on ‘That’, speaking about ‘That’, instructing one another about ‘That’, this is considered by the wise to be single-minded dedication and the practice of the knowledge.

When attachment and aversion are reduced to the minimum as a result of the realization of the unreality of the objective world there arises a new sense of happiness. This is called 'Brahma-abhyaasa' or the practice of Brahman. This is the means of effacing the latent impressions.

To one seeking liberation, the aims are Jivanmukti and Videhamukti. Katha Up. 2.2.1 says-" Having been liberated from ignorance while still alive, he is altogether liberated on the fall of the body". One who has divine qualities attains liberation, while one with demoniac qualities remains in bondage, as said in Gita, Ch.16. These qualities are described in the same chapter. When the evil vaasanaas inherent in a person from birth are eliminated by the cultivation of good vaasanaas through personal effort, there results Jivanmukti.

The dissolution of the mind is also mentioned in the sruti as the cause of Jivanmukti, along with the obliteration of latent impressions. Amritabindu Up. says that the mind alone is the cause of bondage as well as of liberation. A mind attached to objects of sense causes bondage and when free from attachment the very same mind is the cause of liberation. The seeker after liberation should therefore keep his mind free from attachment. The mind, devoid of attachment to sense objects, becomes free from all modifications and comes to rest in the heart. The mind should be prevented from attaining modifications (caused by desires, likes, dislikes, anger, and the like) till its dissolution in the heart. This is knowledge and also liberation.

Bondage is of two kinds: strong and moderate. Demoniac qualities, being the direct cause of misery, make up the strong kind. The mere perception of duality, not being by itself the cause of misery, is the bondage of the moderate kind. By the obliteration of latent impressions the bondage of the strong kind alone is removed, while both kinds are removed by the dissolution of the mind. It should however not be thought that the dissolution of the mind alone is sufficient since it removes both kinds of bondage. When the powerful praarabdha karma, which is the cause of happiness and misery, brings the mind into action, then the effacement of the latent impressions is necessary to remove the first kind of bondage. All the mental transformations caused by tamoguna are to be considered as strong bondage. Transformations caused by sattva and rajoguna constitute moderate bondage.

It should not be thought that, since the moderate kind of bondage (which is the mere perception of duality) is inevitable, and the strong kind can be removed by the obliteration of latent impressions, the dissolution of the mind serves no purpose. The inevitable experience of happiness and misery, caused by a weak praarabdha, can be counteracted only by the dissolution of the mind and so this is also necessary. It has been said (Panchadasi, 7.156), " If it were at all possible to prevent the experience of happiness and misery, then, Nala, Rama and Yudhishthira would never have been stricken with misery". Thus the obliteration of latent impressions and the dissolution of the mind are the direct means to Jivanmukti, and knowledge of the Reality is subordinate, being only a mediate cause, as producing the other two.

To sum up, obliteration of latent impressions and dissolution of the mind are the principal causes of Jivanmukti, while knowledge is the principal cause of Videhamukti.

A person who, without making efforts to attain knowledge of Nirguna Brahman (by sravana, etc), practises, to the extent possible, the effacement of latent impressions and dissolution of the mind and devotes himself only to Brahman with attributes (saguna), cannot attain Kaivalya, because his subtle body is not destroyed. By Kaivalya, brought about by knowledge (of Nirguna Brahman), the person is freed from bondage.

Bondage is of various kinds, signified by the expressions-- knot of ignorance, the conviction of being not Brahman, the knot of the heart, doubt, karma, hankering after objects of sense, death, rebirth and the like. All these are removed by knowledge. See Mundaka up. 2.1.10, 3.2.9, 2.2.8, Taitt.up. 2.1, Sveta.up. 3.8, Katha up. 1.3.8, Br.up. 1.4.10, Br. Su.1.1.4 & 4.1.13.

Here Swami Vidyaranya says that Videhamukti is attained at the very moment in which knowledge arises, because when all bonds, which are all due to ignorance, are destroyed by knowledge, they can never come into being again. He supports this view with the statement in Sri Sankara's Bhashya on Brahma sutra, 4.1.13- "On its attainment, future and past sins are destroyed". This view is at variance with the generally accepted definition of Videhamukti which is that when the body of a Jivanmukta falls, he becomes a Videhamukta. Ch.up, 6.14.2 says "He remains here only as long as he is not released (from the body). The moment he is released, he becomes one with the All". In Vakyavritti, 52-53 it is said, "Through the effect of praarabdha karma he becomes a Jivanmukta. Then, on the exhaustion of that karma he attains the supreme state of bliss, called Kaivalya, from which there is no return". In Brahma sutra, 4.1.19, it is said, "After exhausting the other two (the good and bad effects of Prarabdha karma), he attains it (Brahman)". Laghu Yogavaasishtha, 5.98 says that when the body falls, the Jivanmukta gives up that state and becomes a Videhamukta.

Vidyaranya says that these two positions are not contradictory because they are based on different points of view. The views quoted above take the word 'deha' in Videhamukti to mean the existing and all future bodies collectively. Therefore, according to them Videhamukti can take place only when the present body has ceased to exist and no future body is possible. But Vidyaranya uses this word in the sense of 'future body' only. Thus, as soon as it becomes clear that there can be no future embodiment for the person, he becomes a Videhamukta. Therefore, Videhamukti, in the sense of preclusion of future embodiment, is simultaneous with the rise of Self-knowledge.

Thus it is established that knowledge is the direct means of attaining Videhamukti, while the obliteration of latent impressions and the dissolution of the mind are subordinate, being only the means of attaining knowledge. For Jivanmukti the obliteration of latent impressions (vaasanaa-kshaya) and dissolution of the mind (manonaasa) are the principal means.

Now a doubt arises. When a Vividisha Sannyasi has accomplished these three means and thereby reached the stage of Vidvat Sannyasa, has he still to endeavour afresh for acquiring these? The answer is that knowledge will continue to exist, but the other two have to be striven for afresh. The student fit for the acquisition of knowledge is of two kinds: he who has practised meditation and he who has not yet done so. To the student who has practised meditation to the extent of actually realizing the object of meditation, Vidvat Sannyasa and Jivanmukti will follow of their own accord because of his firm hold over the obliteration of vaasanaas and the dissolution of the mind. Nowadays men rush in quest of Self-knowledge, out of sheer curiosity, without going through the preliminary stage of upaasanaa. They accomplish obliteration of vaasanaas and dissolution of the mind temporarily. By study, reflection and meditation on the Vedantic texts ignorance, doubt and false perception are removed and knowledge is attained. In the absence of a more powerful means which could resuscitate the ignorance, the knowledge remains steady. But the obliteration of vaasanaas and dissolution of the mind can be easily extinguished, like a lamp exposed to the breeze, for want of steady application and because of being influenced by praarabdha karma. This means that for such Vidvat sannyaasis only the knowledge continues, but the other two are to be accomplished by effort.

Vaasanaa or latent impression has been described by Vasishtha as intense hankering after things to such an extent that the mind becomes totally obsessed by it. This results in the real nature of things and their past or future effects being completely lost sight of. The person then identifies himself with the thing he hankers after and his vision becomes clouded. The blind attachment that people have towards their traditional customs and manners, their countries and their communities is cited as an example. Keeping in view the vaasanaa of this kind, it is said in Br. up, 4.5.4:-- 'He shapes his ideas in accordance with his desires, he does such acts as fulfil his ideas, he becomes that which he does'.

Vaasanaas are of two kinds: pure and impure. Impure vaasanaas result in continuation of the cycle of birth and death. The pure vaasanaa is like seeds sown after being roasted on fire, which do not sprout. It does not cause rebirth. The impure vaasanaa is described as of the form of very dense ignorance. Ignorance is that which veils the distinction between the five sheaths and the Witness Consciousness. This kind of vaasanaa is spoken of as demoniac nature in Bh. Gita, ch.16.

The pure vaasanaa is of that kind which knows what is to be known, namely, the Self. This is described in Gita, ch.13, verses 13 to 18. The conditioned and unconditioned forms of Brahman are set forth in these verses to enable the comprehension of Its tatastha-lakshana and svarupa-lakshana. The former is a random quality applied exclusively to signify a thing, for instance, pointing out the house of a particular person as that on which a crow is sitting. The latter is the quality which defines a thing by its permanent feature, as for example, 'that which is highly luminous is the moon'.

That activity of the senses which is pervaded by an undercurrent of the perception of the Reality is called 'pure vaasanaa'. This is of use only for maintaining life in the body. It does not produce either demoniac qualities like hypocrisy, vanity and the like or dharma or adharma, which lead to future birth. It is like roasted grains which do not germinate.

Impure vaasanaa is of three kinds: desire for (unblemished reputation in) the world (loka vaasanaa), obsession with learning (saastra vaasanaa) and undue attachment to the body (deha vaasanaa). The first one takes the form 'I want to be always praised by everyone'. This i

s called impure because it is something impossible of achievement. No one, however good, can always escape slander. Even absolutely blemishless Sita was slandered. People speak ill of others merely because of local peculiarities. The southern Brahmanas censure the northerners, well-versed in the Vedas, as meat-eaters. The northern Brahmanas retaliate by ridiculing the southern custom of marrying the daughter of a maternal uncle and for carrying earthenware during travel. A pure man is looked upon as a devil, a clever man as presumptuous, a man of forbearance as weak, a strong man as cruel, an absent-minded man as a thief, and a handsome man as lewd. Thus nobody can please everyone. So the scriptures advise us to treat censure and praise alike.

The obsession with learning (saastra vaasanaa) is of three kinds: addiction to study, addiction to many scriptural texts and obsession with the mechanical observance of injunctions with regard to the performance of rituals. The first only is exemplified by sage Bharadvaja, who was not satisfied with having devoted three successive lives to the study of the Vedas and continued the same in his fourth life also. This is also an impure vaasanaa because it is not possible of achievement. Indra cured him of this by explaining to him the impossibility of his undertaking and initiated him into the knowledge of the conditioned Brahman for the attainment of a higher end.

Addiction to many scriptural texts is also an impure vaasanaa because it is not the highest aim. The example for this is Durvasa. Once he went with a cart-load of scriptural works to Lord Mahadeva. Narada ridiculed him by comparing him to a donkey carrying a huge load. Durvasa became angry and threw away the books into the ocean. Lord Mahadeva then imparted to him the knowledge of the Self which does not come from study alone.

Obsession with injunctions relating to the performance of rites is exemplified by Nidagha, as described in Vishnupurana. Another example of this is Daasura who, because of the intensity of his desire to adhere to the injunctions, could not find any place in the whole world pure enough for the performance of rites. This mad desire for performing karma is also an impure vaasanaa because it results in the person continuing in the cycle of repeated birth and death. Saastra vaasanaa is also impure for another reason, namely, that it is the cause of vanity.

Deha vaasanaa is of three kinds-- looking upon the body as the Self, concern about making the body attractive and desire to remove defects in the body. The first two are clearly impure vaasanaas because they are obstacles to spiritual progress. The third is impossible of achievement because the body is essentially impure and so it is also an impure vaasanaa.

All these three vaasanaas should therefore be given up by discriminating people, since they obstruct the rise of knowledge in the seekers and affect the permanence of the knowledge acquired by the knower. The impurity of the vaasanaas arising from a demoniac nature, which take the form of hypocrisy, vanity and the like, is well-known and so it goes without saying that this has to be destroyed.

Just as the vaasanaas have to be obliterated, the mind has also to be dissolved. The Tarkikas hold that the mind is an eternal substance of atomic dimension. In this view the mind can never be dissolved. This view is not accepted by Vedantins. They hold that the mind is a substance with parts, is not eternal and is capable of transforming itself into various forms. The mind is defined thus in the Br. up, 1.5.3--"Desire, will, doubt, belief, disbelief, resoluteness, irresoluteness, shame, intelligence, fear, --- all these make up the mind". These transformations are directly perceived by the Witnessing Self. The sense organs cannot experience their objects without the co-operation of the mind. This internal organ is called manas when it performs the function of thinking and debating; it is called chitta when it performs an act of perception. This chitta is of the nature of sattva, rajas and tamas. When tamas predominates, demoniac qualities make their appearance. The predominance of rajas gives rise to the three vaasanaas-- loka vaasanaa, saastra vaasanaa and deha vaasanaa. When sattva gains mastery, divine qualities become established. Sattva is the principal material cause of the mind; rajas and tamas are only accessories. Therefore sattva is the residual native form of the mind of an enlightened person, since he has got rid of rajas and tamas. Such a mind is one-pointed, being free from rajas which is the cause of fickleness. It is also very subtle, being free from tamas which is the cause of the gross forms assumed by the not-self. Such a mind is fit to receive enlightenment.

Bondage is nothing but the bond of vaasanaas and liberation is the obliteration of vaasanaas. One should first give up the three kinds of vaasanaas relating to the world, learning and the body mentioned above, as well as the desire for objects of enjoyment. Then one should set up a current of pure vaasanaas such as friendship, compassion, contentment and indifference towards happiness and sorrow, and other pairs of opposites. The hankering after pleasures contaminates the mind. If a person is friendly towards those who are happy and looks upon their happiness as his, hankering after pleasures will vanish. Attaining mental equilibrium in this manner, one should remain attached only to knowledge of the Reality. Ultimately even the desire for knowledge should be given up, because it is also only something conceived by the mind and the intellect.

The three vaasanaas described above, namely, loka vaasanaa, saastra vaasanaa and deha vaasanaa are collectively called 'mental vaasanaa'. There is another kind of vaasanaa known as vishaya vaasanaa which relates to objects of enjoyment. By objects are meant sound, touch, form, taste and smell. Mental vaasanaa is that impression which is born of the desire for these; vaasanaas relating to objects are impressions born of actual enjoyment of desired things.

It may be asked, how is it possible to give up vaasanaas, which have no form? Things which have form, like dust and straw, can be swept away with a brush, but how to remove vaasanaas which have no form? The answer is that this can be done by cultivating friendship and similar virtues. These are described by Patanjali in his yoga aphorisms: ‘The mind becomes serene by the practice of friendship, compassion, joy, and indifference respectively, towards those who are happy, those who are suffering, those who are virtuous and those who are sinful’ (Yoga sutra 1.33). If one adopts a friendly disposition towards those who are happy, and identifies himself with them to such an extent that he looks upon their happiness as his own, he will not hanker after happiness and his mind will be calm and serene. If one has compassion for every miserable being and feels that no one should experience sorrow of any kind, then too, the mind will become serene. It has been said, “Life is as dear to all beings as it is to oneself; the wise feel compassion for every being, taking their own selves as the standard of comparison”.

If one feels joy at the sight of virtuous men, one would, of one’s own accord, perform virtuous acts. If one adopts an attitude of indifference towards sinful men, and is not tempted to adopt their means, one can keep away from sin. By all these means the mind can be made calm. By adopting an attitude of friendliness towards those who are happy, one not only becomes free from attachment, but also free from malice, jealousy, and similar defects. Malice results in maligning the virtuous. Jealousy is the unwillingness to tolerate the superiority or virtue of another. When, out of friendliness, one looks upon the happiness of others as one’s own, malice and jealousy will have no place. When one feels compassion for the miserable the vanity arising from one’s own state of prosperity vanishes. This vanity is what has been referred to in the Bhagavadgita thus: “I am the lord, I am the enjoyer, I am perfect, powerful, happy; I am rich, well-born; who is there equal to me?” (16. 14-15).

It has been said above that if a person cultivates the habit of becoming exalted when he sees a virtuous person he will become more inclined to perform such virtuous acts himself. Now a question may arise, will not such an inclination be inappropriate in a yogin? It has been said earlier under ‘saastra vaasanaa’ that the mad desire for performing karma is also an impure vaasanaa because it also leads to rebirth. The answer is that what was implied there was only acts of virtue done with a motive. The virtuous acts referred to here are those which, being ‘neither white nor black’ do not lead to rebirth. Patanjali’s yoga sutra 4.7 says: “Actions are neither white nor black in the case of yogins; in the case of others they are of three kinds”. Actions sanctioned by the scripture, when performed with desire for the fruit are ‘white’. Actions prohibited by scripture are ‘black’. Actions which partake of both these qualities are ‘mixed’. These three lead to three kinds of re-embodiment as stated by Sri Sureshvaracharya in Naishkarmyasiddhi, 1.41: “A person who, because of ignorance, considers himself as the performer of actions, attains the status of a god by doing desire-prompted good deeds, goes to hell by doing prohibited actions and attains the status of a human being by doing both good and bad deeds”.

The actions performed by a yogi are described as non-white because they are not prompted by desire.

The real yogis are only those whose minds are serene because of the cultivation of qualities such as friendliness mentioned earlier. They naturally perform only virtuous actions.

The qualities described in the previous chapter as the characteristics of the Jivanmukta and Sthitaprajna, if cultivated by the spiritual aspirant, will destroy all impure vaasanas.

One should examine one’s own mind and find out what are the impure vaasanas there. He should cultivate such pure vaasanas as are necessary to counteract his impure vaasanas. Just as a person who is disgusted with worldly life takes to renunciation, a person afflicted by impure vaasanas such as arrogance due to learning, opulence, pedigree, etc., should cultivate discrimination to counteract them.

In Laghu Yogavaasishtha king Janaka points out the means of attaining discrimination thus: One should ask oneself, ”How can one place faith in greatness? Those who were considered great in the past are no more now. Where has the fabulous wealth of emperors gone? Where are the innumerable worlds created by Brahma? The old order of things has gone into oblivion. Millions of Brahmas have come and gone. Myriads of heavens have vanished one after another. The most powerful emperors of the past are now nothing more than dust. This being so, how can the existence of persons like me be of any consequence?”

Now a question arises. The discrimination mentioned above should precede the rise of the knowledge of the Reality because such knowledge can arise only after discrimination between the eternal and the ephemeral has been acquired. Here the means to Jivanmukti such as the obliteration of vaasanaas for one who has already realized Brahman are being dealt with. Is a discussion of discrimination not out of place here?

Svami Vidyaranya explains that normally one can realize Brahman only after the acquisition of the four preliminary requisites, namely, discrimination between the eternal and the ephemeral, detachment, the six qualities starting with control of the mind, and yearning for liberation. But king Janaka is said to have attained realization as soon as he heard the Siddhagita in Yogavaasishtha. This happened because of the merit (punya) accumulated by him in past births. After that he had to cultivate discrimination in order to attain calmness of mind. So reference to discrimination at this stage is relevant in his case.

It may be objected that since all impure vaasanaas must have disappeared on the attainment of knowledge, effort to cultivate pure vaasanaas is not necessary. The answer is that it is not so as a general rule. For example, impure vaasanaas are seen to have existed even after dawn of knowledge in Yajnavalkya, Bhagiratha and others. Yajnavalkya as well as his opponents Ushasta, Kahola and others had vast pride of learning as is evident from the fact that they entered into a debate with the desire for victory. It cannot be said that they had only other knowledge and not knowledge of Brahman, because all the questions and answers in the debate related to Brahman. Their knowledge of Brahman cannot be said to be only mediate and not immediate, because in that case our knowledge of Brahman arising from their statements would be also only be mediate. Moreover, the questions put were concerned with the direct and immediate knowledge of Brahman.

Now an objection may be raised: Acharya Sankara says in Upadesa Sahasri, 12.13 that only a person who has given up the egoism that he is a knower of Brahman is a real knower of the Self and not others. In Naishkarmyasiddhi, 1.75, Sureshvaracharya says, “Identification with the body which is due to demoniac delusion is not possible for an enlightened person. If even an enlightened person has such delusion then Brahman-realization would be of no use”. It follows from these that there cannot be pride of learning in an enlightened person.

The answer to this objection is: the enlightenment referred to in these verses is that of a person who has become a Jivanmukta. It is accepted by us also that there cannot be any pride of learning in a Jivanmukta. Here we are making a distinction between a Sthitaprajna (i.e. a Jivanmukta) and a mere knower of the Self. As regards the mere knower, Sureshvaracharya says in Br. Up. Bhashyavartika, 1.4.1539 and 1.4.1746, “Let attachment and the like remain, their presence does not do any harm. What harm can avidya do when it is like a snake whose fangs have been removed? Desire, etc., arising from ignorance of the Reality are the cause of bondage, but for a knower of the Reality these do not cause bondage just as seeds which have been roasted cannot sprout even though they retain their appearance. It has been said in Varahopanishad, 3.24, 25, “Attachment, etc., are burnt out by the fire of discrimination as soon as they arise; how can they sprout?”.

Yajnavalkya, while engaged in debate with Ushasta, Kahola and others (as described in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad) had not attained the state of Jivanmukta because he was to enter vidvat sannyasa in order to obtain peace of mind. He shows, not only the desire to win over his opponents, but also greed for gold. Later he cursed Sakalya to death. But it should not be thought that such a heinous sin as killing a Brahmana would bar him from liberation; for the Kaushitaki upanishad says, “He does not lose that state by any act whatever, whether it is matricide, patricide, theft or foeticide” (3.1).

Even reputed knowers of Brahman, like Yajnavalkya, are subject to the influence of impure vaasanaa. Vasishtha says in Yogavaasishtha that Bhagiratha, though a knower of the Reality, could not get peace of mind while engaged in ruling over his kingdom because of the impact of impure vaasanaas. He therefore renounced everything and only then attained peace. It therefore follows that we should carefully examine our defects caused by impure vaasanaas, with the same strictness with which we detect the defects of others, and apply the necessary remedies. It has been said in a smriti, “If a man of the world, who is adept at detecting the defects of others, applies his skill to detect his own faults, he will certainly be liberated from the bonds of ignorance”.

To answer the question, “What is the remedy for the pride born of leaning”, it has first to be decided whose pride is meant. Is it the pride of the leaned man who seeks to show that others are inferior to him, or is it the pride of some other person who wants to show that he is superior? In the first case, the learned man should always keep in mind that some day it will be crushed by some one superior. If the pride is in some other person who wants to show that he is superior to us in knowledge, the best course will to say to oneself, “That man is puffed up with pride; let him insult or slander me; I do not lose anything thereby”. It has been said: “If they slander the Self in me, they slander only themselves. If they slander my body, I should look upon them as my friends”. In Naishkarmyasiddhi

It has been said: “What does it matter to a person who has cast off his excreta, if someone comments on its unclean nature? In the same manner, when a person has dissociated himself from both the gross and subtle bodies through discrimination, will he be affected in the least if some one speaks ill of them?” (2.16-17).

The sruti says: “Without deviating from the path of rectitude, the yogin should so conduct himself as to make people avoid his company in sheer disgust” (Naradaparivrajakopanishad, 5.30).

The two varieties of pride of learning described above which were seen in Yajnavalkya and others should be got rid of by discrimination.

The method of getting rid of the greed for wealth is described thus: “There is considerable effort and trouble involved in the acquisition of wealth, as also in its preservation; if it is spent or lost there is great anguish. O fie upon wealth, which produces unhappiness at every step”.

Anger is also of two kinds: anger in oneself directed at others, and anger in others directed to oneself. With regard to the first it is said: “While you become angry with someone who has done you some harm, why do you not feel angry with that same emotion which does even more harm by blocking your way to the attainment of the four purusharthas and which affects even your physical and mental well-being?”

With regard to the second kind, it has been said: “One should never give room for the thought, ‘I have offended none. So anger towards me is not justified’. On the other hand every one should consider as his gravest offence the inability to free himself from bondage. He should bow to the god of anger who burns away his own seat and bestows detachment by imparting the knowledge of his faults”.

Attachment to wife and children should also be eradicated in the same manner as greed and anger.

All impure vaasanaas should thus be eradicated by reminding oneself of the evil consequences that flow from them. Sage Vasishtha says in Yogavaasishtha: “If you put forth sufficient effort and destroy all vaasanaas, all your ills, physical and mental, will get dissolved. Then access to the highest state will become attainable”.

As stated by the Lord in Bhagavadgita, 2.60, 67, the turbulent senses carry away the mind of even a wise man striving for perfection. If the mind yields to the senses, its discrimination is carried away, just as a gale carries away a ship”. So one should restrain all the senses and fix the mind on the Lord as the supreme goal. The wisdom of a person who has brought his senses under control becomes steady.

When qualities such are friendship are cultivated and become firmly established, the impure vaasanaas will be obliterated.

The Naradaparivrajakopanishad says: “The mendicant who is tongue-less, impotent, lame, blind, deaf, and mad certainly attains liberation. He is tongue-less who, while eating, is not attached to the food and does not concern himself with its pleasantness or unpleasantness; while speaking he is moderate and always tells the truth with the intention of doing good to others. He is impotent who remains unaffected at the sight of a young woman of sixteen, as of a girl just born, or a woman bent double with the weight of years. He whose movements are confined to begging alms or answering the calls of nature, and do not by any means exceed a yojana (about five miles) is a lame man. He is blind, the ken of whose eye, whether standing or walking, does not extend far beyond four yoke-lengths. He who turns a deaf ear to words uttered within ear-shot, however friendly or pleasing, is said to be deaf. The mendicant who, though alert and with senses unimpaired, behaves as if he is asleep is said to be a mad man. Such a person never indulges in censure or praise, nor talk too much and treats all alike. He would never be in the company of a woman, nor recall to mind any woman seen before (3.62-68)”.

Realizing that all the insentient objects in this universe are only manifestations of pure consciousness (Brahman), one should fix the mind only on pure consciousness. Just as a goldsmith, when buying an old bracelet of gold, fixes his mind only on the weight and the colour of the gold and not on the form of the bracelet or its beauty, the seeker should fix his mind only on pure consciousness while seeing the various objects in the world. The effort in this regard should be kept up until the consciousness of the phenomenal objects is obliterated and the consciousness of Brahman becomes as natural as breathing.

He who, though awake, keeps his mind in a tranquil state and does not react to the world around, as in sleep, is the truly liberated person. The liberated man with a virile intellect, who has eradicated all desires from his heart, is ever free from all agitation of the mind, and is himself the great Isvara. Whether he is in samadhi or not, whether he performs the rituals laid down for his order or not, he stands liberated, free from all attachment. With his mind cleared of all vaasanaas, it makes no difference whether he performs karma or not. He has no concern with efforts to attain samadhi or with performing japa, etc. He may engage himself in action in the world, but he remains untouched by them. He is not dejected by adversity. He never swerves from the path of self-restraint.

King Janaka had attained this state. He therefore performed his duties as the king without the least attachment to the results. He did not think of the past or worry about the future, but lived in the present, his heart ever filled with bliss.

**********************

Introduction to Advaita Vedanta

Introduction to Advaita Vedanta

The term ‘Vedanta’ stands for the Upanishads as a whole, which form part of the Vedas. It would therefore be appropriate to give a general account of the Vedas before going on to deal with Vedanta.

In the Indian tradition, philosophy is termed ‘darsana’, a Sanskrit word meaning ’seeing’ or ‘experiencing’. This indicates that the aim of philosophy in India is direct experience of the ultimate Reality and not mere intellectual speculation as in Western philosophy.

The Indian philosophical systems are classified into two broad categories known as ‘aastika darsana’ and ‘naastika darsana’. There are no exact equivalents to these terms in English, though the terms ‘orthodox’ and ‘unorthodox’ are sometimes used. It would be wholly misleading to use the terms ‘theistic’ and ‘atheistic’ for these categories.

The term ‘aastika’ has been defined as referring to a person who, or a system which, accepts, (1) the authority of the Vedas, (2) the doctrine of rebirth and (3) the existence of other ‘lokas’ or spheres of experience. In the category of aastika darsana fall those systems which accept the authority of the Vedas. These are the six systems known as Nyaya, Vaiseshika, Sankhya, Yoga, Purvamimamsa and Uttaramimamsa (or Vedanta). Even among these six, it is only the last two that base themselves directly on the Vedas and accept nothing that goes against them. The other four systems are based more on independent grounds of logic and reasoning, but they too are not opposed to the Vedas.

In the category of naastika darsanas fall the four schools of Buddhism, Jainism and the Carvaka (or atheistic) school, which do not accept the authority of the Vedas. These also make up a total of six.

The Vedas

All the six aastika darsanas regard the Vedas as the record of the divine truths revealed to the sages (Rishis or seers) in their supra-normal consciousness. The sages are not the authors of the Vedas. They are known as ’seers’ of the Vedic mantras.

The traditional view is that the Vedas are eternal. The word ‘Veda’ means primarily ‘knowledge’ and secondarily the books in which that knowledge is recorded. This is not knowledge of the external world, but the knowledge of the supreme Truth which cannot be attained by any effort of the human mind.

It has been categorically declared by our ancient sages that the Vedas have no validity in matters which fall within the domain of other valid means of knowledge such as perception and inference. Sri Sankara says in his Bhashya on the Bhagavad-Gita, ch.18, verse 66:

The validity of the Vedas holds good only with regard to matters which cannot be known through such other valid means of knowledge as direct perception, etc., because the validity of the Vedas lies in revealing what is beyond direct perception. Even a hundred Vedic statements cannot become valid if they say that fire is cold or non-luminous. If a Vedic text says that fire is cold or non-luminous, one should assume that the intended meaning of the text is different, for otherwise its validity cannot be maintained. One should not interpret it in such a way as to contradict some other valid means of knowledge.

Because of this clear demarcation of the spheres of validity of the Vedas on the one hand and the other means of knowledge relied on by science on the other, no conflict between science and the Vedas can arise, similar to those which arose between the Church and the discoveries of scientists like Copernicus and Galileo in Europe. It is this knowledge contained in the Vedas that is considered to be eternal. Just as the law of gravity existed and operated even before it was discovered by Newton, the knowledge contained in the Vedas existed even before it became known to the sages.

The Vedas are considered to be ‘apaurusheya’, i.e., they are not human compositions. Even God is not the author of the Vedas. The eternal knowledge contained in the Vedas is only revealed by God to the sages in each cycle of creation. The Vedas are ’seen’ or ‘heard’ by the sages and recorded by them or their disciples for the benefit of posterity. The Vedas are therefore termed sruti, or ‘what is heard’. As distinguished from these are the smritis, which are all human compositions, based on the srutis.

The Itihasas and Puranas come under the category of smriti. According to Manu, the greatest lawgiver of India, the smritis should be considered as an elaboration of the Vedas. However, it is an inviolable rule that, where there is a difference between the sruti and the smriti on any matter, the sruti has to be upheld and the smriti should be interpreted in conformity with it. The truths enshrined in the Vedas have been actually experienced again and again by successive generations of great souls. The experiences of great saints like Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Bhagavan Ramana in recent times bear testimony to the authenticity of all that is stated in the Upanishads.

The Vedas are four in number– Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda. Each Veda consists of three parts– the karma-kanda, the upasana-kanda and the jnana-kanda. The karma-kanda is divided into samhitas and brahmanas. The samhitas are collections of mantras, or hymns in verse, most of which are praises or prayers addressed to various gods such as Indra, Varuna and Agni. They are chanted during the performance of sacrifices. The brahmanas are mostly in prose and contain detailed descriptions of sacrifices and instructions for the performance of sacrificial rites. The upasana-kanda deals with various meditations. The jnana-kanda consists of the Upanishads and this is what is denoted by the term ‘Vedanta’.

These three kandas are, however, not mutually exclusive compartments. The highest philosophical truths, similar to those expounded in the Upanishads, are found also in the samhita and brahmana portions which deal mainly with Vedic rituals. It is further noteworthy that the Isavasyopanishad appears in the samhita portion of the Sukla Yajurveda, the Brihadaranyakopanishad forms the concluding portion of the Satapathabrahmana of the Sukla Yajurveda, the Chandogyopanishad constitutes eight chapters of the Chandogyabrahmana of Samaveda and the Kenopanishad forms the ninth chapter of the Talavakarabrahmana of Samaveda. All these form part of jnanakanda, in spite of their being located right inside the samhitas or brahmanas. The term ‘Vedanta’ should therefore be understood to mean the ultimate conclusion or the highest philosophy of the Vedas and not the end portion of the Vedas.

The Triple Texts

The source books of Vedanta are the triple texts, Prasthanatraya, namely, the Upanishads, the Bhagavadgita and the Brahmasutras.

The Upanishads

The word ‘Upanishad’ is derived by adding the prefixes ‘upa’ (near) and ni’ (with certainty) to the verbal root ‘sad’ meaning ‘ to destroy, to go to and to loosen’. By the word ‘Upanishad’ is meant the knowledge that destroys the seeds of worldly existence such as ignorance in the case of those seekers of liberation who, after cultivating detachment towards all enjoyments, approach (upa, sad) this knowledge and then deliberate on it with steadiness and certainty (ni).

Though this knowledge is the primary meaning of the word, it is used also to denote the book that contains this knowledge, in a secondary sense. This knowledge is known as ‘Brahmavidya’. The theme of all the Upanishads is Brahman, which is identical with the individual self. This subject is dealt with in detail later on.

It is not known with any certainty how many Upanishads existed originally, but 108 are now available to us. There are commentaries, known as ‘bhashya’ by Sri Sankara on eleven of these, namely, Isa, Kena, Katha, Prasna, Mundaka, Mandukya, Aitareya, Taittiriya, Chandogya, Brihadaranyaka and Nrsimhatapani upanishads. There is also a commentary on Svetasvatara Upanishad, but there is difference of opinion among modern scholars about its authorship, though tradition attributes it to Sri Sankara.

The Bhagavadgita

This is the second of the triple texts. It forms part of the great epic Mahabharata and is given the same authority as the upanishads. As is well known, the Bhagavadgita contains the teachings of Lord Krishna to Arjuna on the battle field of Kurukshetra. Sri Sankara has described it as the essence of the Vedas.

The Brahmasutras

This work is attributed to sage Veda-Vyasa. It consists of short aphorisms, called sutras. There are in all 555 aphorisms. A total of 192 topics, known as adhikaranas are dealt with in these aphorisms. The purpose of these aphorisms is to explain the real import of various terms and statements in the upanishads and to reconcile apparent contradictions. Sri Sankara has explained the meanings of these aphorisms from the Advaitic point of view in his commentaries, known as ‘Bhashya’.

The Essence of Advaita Vedanta

The philosophy of Advaita Vedanta has attracted intellectuals from all parts of the world because of the fact that it adheres to the strict rules of logic and does not demand blind faith or unquestioning acceptance. The student of Vedanta is asked to examine and think for himself before accepting the teachings of the Guru. But he must start with an open mind, a genuine desire to understand and an attitude of respect towards the scriptures.

We find in the upanishads that the student frankly puts his doubts and objections to the Guru and the Guru very patiently clarifies his doubts and answers his objections. The upanishads are not for the intellectually indolent. There is a very important place for reason in Vedanta. The fundamental principle of Vedanta is that the final testimony of truth is actual spiritual experience. This makes it a very scientific system and therefore acceptable to intellectuals of the present day who swear by reason and the scientific method.

Dr. T.M.P.Mahadevan, the great Vedantic scholar, says in his book ‘Ramana Maharshi and His Philosophy of Existence’– “We believe that Advaita is not a sectarian doctrine. It is the culmination of all doctrines, the crown of all views. Though other views may imagine themselves to be opposed to Advaita, Advaita is opposed to none.

As Gaudapada, a pre-Sankara teacher of Advaita, says, Advaita has no quarrel with any system of philosophy. While the pluralistic world-views may be in conflict with one another, Advaita is not opposed to any of them. It recognises the measure of truth that there is in each of them; but only, that truth is not the whole. Hostility arises out of partial vision. When the whole truth is realised, there can be no hostility. (Mandukya Karika, III. 17 & 18; IV. 5)”.

The essence of Advaita has been stated by Sri Sankara in half a verse thus: – Brahman is the only Reality, the universe has only apparent reality, and the individual self is non-different from Brahman.

Brahman is the only Reality. ‘Reality’ is defined as that which does not undergo any change at any time. By this test, Brahman, which is absolutely changeless and eternal, is alone real. The world keeps on changing all the time and so it cannot be considered as real. At the same time, we cannot dismiss it as unreal, because it is actually experienced by us.

The example of a rope being mistaken for a snake in dim light is used to explain this. The snake so seen produces the same reaction, such as fear and trembling of the limbs, as a real snake would. It cannot therefore be said to be totally unreal. At the same time, on examination with the help of a lamp it is found that the snake never existed and that the rope alone was there all the time.

The snake cannot be described as both real and unreal, because these two contradictory qualities cannot exist in the same substance. It must therefore be said that the snake is neither real nor unreal. Such an object is described as ‘mithya’. Just as the snake appears because of ignorance of the fact that there is only a rope, this world appears to exist because of our ignorance of Brahman. Thus the world is also neither real nor unreal; it is also ‘mithya’. Just as the snake is superimposed on the rope, the world is superimposed on Brahman.

Our ignorance of Brahman is what is called avidya or ajnaana or nescience. This ignorance not only makes us ignorant of Brahman, but it projects the world as a reality. The world has no reality apart from Brahman, just as the illusory snake has no reality apart from the rope. When the knowledge of Brahman arises, the world is seen as a mere appearance of Brahman. The illusory snake arose from the rope, was sustained by the rope and ultimately merged into the rope. Similarly, the world arises from Brahman, is sustained by Brahman and merges into Brahman on the attainment of knowledge.

Another example is also given to explain this. Ornaments of different sizes and shapes are made out of one gold bar. Their appearance and the use for which they are meant vary, but the fact that they are all really nothing but gold, in spite of their different appearances and uses, cannot be denied. The appearance may change, a bangle may be converted into rings, but the gold always remains as gold. When we begin to look upon the bangles, rings, etc., as nothing but gold in essence, the differences between bangle and ring, ring and chain, etc., cease to count though they continue to retain their different shapes.

Similarly, on the dawn of the knowledge of Brahman (which is the same as the Self), though the different forms continue to be seen by the Jnaani, the realised soul, he sees them all only as appearances of the one Brahman. Thus the perception of difference between one person and another, or one thing and another, and the consequences of such perception, such as looking upon some as favourable and others as the opposite, and the consequent efforts to retain or get what is favourable and to get rid of or avoid what is not favourable, come to an end. This is the state of liberation even while living, which is known as Jivanmukti.

Every individual identifies himself with the physical body, the sense organs and the mind. When a person describes himself as stout or lean or fair-complexioned or dark, he is looking upon himself as the physical body to which these characteristics belong. When he says ‘I see’, ‘I hear’, ‘I smell’ and so on, he is identifying himself with the organs of sense which perform these functions. When he says ‘I am happy’ or ‘I am unhappy’, he is identifying himself with his mind. The Upanishads declare that all these identifications are wrong and that the human being is in reality not the body or the sense-organs or the mind, but Brahman, which is eternal, changeless and not affected by anything that happens to the body-mind complex.

It is Brahman that appears as the jiva or individual because of identification with the body-mind complex. This body-mind complex, which makes the infinite, all-pervading Brahman appear as an individual limited to a particular body-mind complex, is known as the limiting adjunct or upadhi of Brahman. This wrong identification, which is called bondage, is due to our ignorance of our real nature. This ignorance is what is called avidya or nescience. When this ignorance is eradicated, the person remains established in his essence as the Self or Brahman-Atman. This is liberation.

Final Comments

Thus liberation is not the attainment of some new state in some other world after the end of the present life. It is only the realisation, in this life itself, of what one has always been, namely Brahman, by the removal of the wrong notion that one is the body-mind complex. The illusory snake never existed. What existed even when the snake was seen was only the rope.

Similarly, bondage has no real existence at all. Even when we are ignorant of Brahman and think of ourselves as limited by the body, we are really none other than the infinite Brahman. Liberation is thus only the removal of the wrong identification with the body, mind and senses. The attainment of the state of liberation-in-life or Jivanmukti is the ultimate goal of human life according to the upanishads.

Three paths are laid down in the scriptures as the means to the attainment of this ultimate goal. These are karma yoga, bhakti yoga and jnaana yoga. Here the word ‘yoga’ signifies ‘the means’. That is to say, karma, bhakti and jnaana are the means to the attainment of liberation. These are, however, not independent paths, but are intrinsically bound together. Karma yoga is the performance of all duties enjoined upon one by the scriptures, as well as the duties that are incumbent on one because of one’s station in life. If these duties are performed without craving for the fruit of the actions and as an offering to God, they lead to purification of the mind by the eradication of desires and the evil consequences of desire, namely, greed, anger, jealousy and other negative emotions.

The very fact that all actions must be performed as an offering to God implies that one must have devotion to God. Thus the path of bhakti or devotion to God and the path of action, or karma yoga are intrinsically bound together and one cannot be practised without the other. Thus karma yoga and bhakti yoga form one composite whole.

As stated above, karma yoga is the means by which the mind becomes purified by the removal of all impurities in the form of desire, anger, greed, delusion, pride and jealousy. Bhakti yoga brings about concentration of mind. Only a mind which has become pure and one-pointed is capable of attaining self-knowledge. Jnaana yoga consists in hearing the exposition of the scriptures by the Guru, reflecting on what has been heard in order to remove all doubts, and meditation to realise as an actual experience what has been understood intellectually by hearing and reflection. A person who has, by this process, come to experience the truth that he is really the Atman and not the body, mind or sense-organs and remains firmly rooted in that experience is a liberated one or a Jivanmukta.