|
Disciple:
But does the sage [jnani] who knows the
Self desire objects and experience bliss, or does
he not?
Guru: Although he may desire objects and
experience bliss like the ignorant person, he does
not imagine that bliss to be any different from the
bliss of the Self.
Disciple: When the misery of birth, death,
etc., is actually experienced how can it be said
that it never exists in me?
Guru: Know that the world of birth, death,
etc., is an illusory appearance like the serpent in
the rope and blueness in the sky, or like dreams,
due to your ignorance of your Self which is
Brahman.
Disciple: What is the support
[adhara] for this extensive world?
Guru: Just as the rope is the support and
basis for the delusive serpent which appears when
the rope is not recognised as such, so you are the
support and basis for the world which appears when
you do not know your Self.
Disciple: Kindly explain distinctly the
ideas of support [adhara] and basis
[adhishtana].
Guru: Even in the unreal serpent there is a
concept 'this' which is mixed up with the general
concept 'this' underlying the rope. Similarly in
the unreal world there is a concept "It exists"
which is mixed up with the general concept of
existence underlying the Self. This existence is
the support of the world. Again, just as there is
the particular concept 'rope' [besides the
general concept of 'this'] there is also the
particular concept of the Self, namely that it is
unattached, immutable, ever-liberated,
all-pervasive, etc... This is not cognised at the
time of the delusion, but, when cognised, removes
the delusion. This particular concept of Self is
the basis of the world.
Disciple: Corresponding to the seer who is
separate from the rope which is the support and
basis of the serpent, who is the seer apart from me
who is the support and basis of the world?
Guru: If the basis is insentient a separate
seer is necessary. If the basis is sentient it will
itself be the seer. Just as the witnessing
consciousness which is the basis of the dream is
itself the seer of the dream, you are yourself the
seer of the world.
Disciple: If the world of the waking state
comes into existence and falsely appears like
dreams through nescience, why should we speak of
any distinction between the waking state and the
dream state and say that the waking state has
relative, empirical [vyavaharika] reality
while the dream state has only personal
[pratibhasika] reality?
Guru: Since a dream appears without the help
of the appropriate time, space and materials on
account of nescience accompanied
by the defect [dosham] of sleep, it is
spoken of as
a personal state. Since the waking state appears in
the Supreme
Self which is free from time, space and
materials, owing
to nescience alone, it is spoken of as the relative
state. They
are thus described with reference to the three
states of Reality
[personal, relative and Absolute]. When we
think clearly there
is no difference between them. Nor is there any
difference between
the waking and the dream state.
Undifferentiated consciousness
is the only true Reality. Whatever is
different from
It is personal and has nescience as its material
cause and consciousness
as its basis.
Disciple: If that is so why is there a
cessation of the dream state even in the absence of
knowledge of Brahman while the state of waking does
not cease without knowledge of Brahman?
Guru: Although there cannot be complete
cessation of the dream
state until there is knowledge of Brahman in the
waking state,
the defect of sleep, which is the immediate cause
of the dream,
may disappear by the emergence of the waking state
which is inimical to it.
Disciple: The objects of the waking state
prior to the dream exist in the waking state
succeeding the dream also. But the objects of one
dream are not seen in the next dream. How then can
the two states be regarded as similar?
Guru: All objects are the transformation by
nescience of the
underlying consciousness. When a concept arises
they also arise
and when a concept ceases they also cease.
Therefore it cannot
be said that the objects of the previous waking
state exist
in the subsequent waking state also. As in a dream
they [the
objects of the subsequent waking state] come
into existence
for the time being. Therefore both are similar.
Disciple: Since a man who wakes up from a
dream believes the objects he sees to be the same
as before his dream, it cannot be said that they
come into existence only when there is knowledge of
them. Objects exist permanently prior to and after
the knowledge of them.
Guru: Just as the things which come into
existence for the time
being in a dream seem to have existed unchanged for
a long time,
so also do the objects which come into existence
in the waking
state on account of strong nescience. The ideas
of cause and
effect in respect of these objects are also
similar.
Disciple: If the bondage of samsara came
into existence on account of ignorance of the Self,
when did that ignorance arise?
Guru: The ignorance, arising from the Self,
which is Brahman, is mere imagination
[kalpita] and has no beginning.
Disciple: Since darkness cannot exist in the
sun, how can nescience exist in Brahman which is
pure consciousness? Even if it exists, it cannot
exist in what is clearly known or in what is not at
all known. Superimposition of a false reality upon
a true, is possible only when the general aspect of
something is known and not its particular aspect.
Brahman has no parts like general and particular;
it is attributeless; so how can there be the
superimposition of bondage?
Guru: Although Brahman is consciousness, the
general [indistinct]
aspect of that all-pervasive consciousness
which is of
the nature of effulgence is not inimical to
nescience, but helpful
to it. In deep sleep nescience coexists with
the consciousness
of the Self. The general [possibility of]
fire within
the wood is not inimical to darkness, but helpful
to it. But as
the actualised [manifest] fire produced by
rubbing the wood
is inimical to darkness, so also the distinct
consciousness produced
in the mind as Brahman is inimical to
nescience. Although
Brahman is without attributes [and cannot
therefore be
cognised], Its general existence is known even
in the state of
nescience in the form of "I am", while Its
particular aspects like
consciousness, bliss, etc., are not then known, but
are known
only in the state of knowledge. As appearances are
the result of
nescience, there can be the bondage of
superimposition in
the attributeless Brahman, which is known
as existence and
unknown as consciousness and bliss.
Disciple: Although the world is unreal it is
the cause of miseries like birth and death. An
unreal nightmare will not occur if japa is done
[before going to sleep]. Analogous to this,
what can be done to prevent the appearance of the
world?
Guru: That which appears owing to ignorance
of something will
cease to appear only through knowledge of that
something. The
serpent and the silver which appear on account of
the ignorance of the rope and the nacre will
disappear only through knowledge
of them. Similarly the world which appears
on account of
ignorance of the Self will disappear only
through knowledge
of the Self. Brahman is Infinite,
homogeneous, unattached
to anything, without birth, etc., invisible and
without name
and form. The nescience imagined in It and its
effects, namely
the individual, the Lord and the world, are unreal
in all the
three periods of time. Whatever is seen is the play
of the intellect
which is the effect of that nescience. Brahman,
while remaining
unmoved, illumines the intellect. This
intellect projects
its false imagination in the states of waking
and dreaming
and merges in the nescience in the state of deep
sleep. "Just
as the water of the mirage does not make the desert
wet this
unreal thing [world] will not do any harm
to me who is its basis."
Such a conviction is real knowledge. This is the
means of
liberation. I have already said this. Darkness will
not disappear
through anything except light; it will not
disappear through
ritualistic acts, meditation [upasana],
etc... The darkness of
nescience departs along with its effects, from him
in whose Heart
the light of knowledge arises. He remains always as
the unattached
and homogeneous Self of the form of Brahman.
Nothing came into
existence in the past. Nor is there anything
existing now. Nor
will there be anything in the future. Since
the objects that are
known do not [really] exist, the
terms 'witness'
and 'seer' are not applicable. Since there is no
bondage there
is no liberation. Since there is no nescience there
is no knowledge.
He who has known this and cast away the sense
of duty is a
sage [jnani]. Whether his senses come into
contact with
their objects or not he is unattached and free from
desires. Therefore,
even though he may appear to act, he does
nothing.
Disciple: How can the individual who is of
the form of 'I' 'I' and is numerous and finite and
subject to attachment and other forms of misery, be
identical with Brahman which is One and
all-pervasive and free from attachment and other
forms of misery? If individual and Brahman are the
same, who is it that acts? And who bestows the
fruits of action?
Guru: Although Brahman cannot be identical
with the individuality
[jiva] which is limited to the inner
organ [antahkarana]
and which is the apparent meaning of 'I', it
can be with the
Witness [Sakshi], which is the implied
meaning of
the word 'I'. It is the reflected part [abhasa
bhaga] of the jiva
which performs action. The reflected part in
Ishwara [God],
which is the apparent meaning of the word
Tat [Brahman],
bestows the fruits of action. There is no
difference in
the consciousness which is the implied meaning of
these words
[I and Tat]. Nor do these two aspects
[jiva and Ishwara] really
exist.
Disciple: Who is the jiva? Who is the
Witness [Self]? Is not a Witness other than
the jiva a sheer impossibility like the son of a
barren woman?
Guru: Just as the reflection of the sky in a
pot becomes the sky
in the water, consciousness established in the
intellect [buddhi]
along with the reflected consciousness
[abhasa] in the
intellect, accompanied by desires and action,
becomes the jiva
who is the doer, enjoyer and samsari
[materialist]. The consciousness
which is the basis
of the intellect and which is the attribute
of the jiva
or the finite [vyasti] nescience, is the
Immutable Witness
[Kutastha]. He has no beginning and is
unchanging. Features
[dharmas] like good and evil, joy and
sorrow, going to
another world and coming back to this, belong to
the reflected
consciousness alone. Even in the reflected
consciousness they
exist only in the inner organ which is its
attribute. They do not exist in the consciousness
which is the substance
part [of the jiva]. The substance part of
the jiva is the
Witness. In one and the same consciousness the
inner organ is
the adjunct [upadhi] for the ideas of
Witness and attribute for
the idea of jiva. That is to say, the single
consciousness becomes
the jiva along with the inner organ and the
Witness when
bereft of it. That is, one and the same inner organ
is the adjunct
of consciousness in the eyes of one who
lacks discrimination.
Therefore the single consciousness is the
Witness for a man of
discrimination and jiva for one who
lacks
discrimination.
Disciple: How is it possible for even the
Witness, who is manifold and limited on account of
the multiplicity of jivas, to be identical with
Brahman who is One?
Guru: Just as the space in a pot which is
manifold and limited is not different from, and in
fact is, the same as total space
[mahakasa], the Witness who is manifold and
limited is not different from Brahman but is
Brahman. It is therefore possible for It to be
identical with Brahman. Therefore know "I am
Brahman."
Disciple: For whom is this knowledge? For
the jiva or for the Witness?
Guru: Knowledge and ignorance are for the
jiva alone and not for the Witness.
Disciple: Will not the knowledge "I am
Brahman" which arises in the jiva, which is
different from Brahman, be false?
Guru:
As the Immutable Self [Kutastha]
implied in the term 'I' is always one with Brahman,
like the pot-space and Infinite space, it is
completely identical with It. As for the jiva
implied in the term 'I', it can have identity with
Brahman "by removal of obstruction" [badha
samanadhikaranyam] through negating the idea of
jiva, just as the man one imagines one sees in a
post [in a dim light] becomes one with the
post on the negation of the idea of its being a
man.
Disciple: Do the reflected consciousness
[abhasa] and the Immutable
[Kutastha] which are implied in the term
'I' exist at the same time? Or do they appear at
different times?
Guru:
They appear at the same time. The reflected
consciousness is the object of the Witness, but the
Witness is Self-cognised. When there is actual
knowledge, of pots and other external objects what
happens is this: The concept part in the concept of
the inner organ accompanied by the reflected
consciousness goes out as far as the pots and other
objects and assumes their forms and removes the
obstruction [avaranam] which naturally
covers them, on account of ignorance. Just as a
non-luminous object covered by a pot will not be
seen [in the dark] even if the pot is
broken by a stick, but can be seen with the help of
a lamp, even so the reflected part illumines the
objects.
When there is direct realisation of Brahman, which
is the Self, what happens is this: The inner organ,
with the help of the sound produced by the
important scriptural saying [mahavakya]
"Thou art That" ["Tat Tvam Asi"] when
connected with the ear, takes the form of Brahman
[Brahmakara] and loses contact with the
senses. This is like the knowledge of the tenth man
[dasama] which arises through the sound
produced by the sentence "You are the tenth man",
or like the ideas
of joy and sorrow which arise without any
[corresponding]
external objects. This concept of the form of
Brahman removes the obstruction hiding the Self and
then the
slight ignorance which still persists in the inner
organ disappears
like the dirt [in a cloth] which is removed
by soap. Thereafter
Brahman becomes manifest by Its own
effulgence, like
the light of the glorious sun which shines when
slight obstructions,
like when fingers held over one's eyes are
removed. Just as a
lamp kept in a pot shines without the aid of
another light when
the pot is broken, Brahman too does not
require the help of
the reflected consciousness.
Disciple: What are the chief
[antaranga] and secondary
[bahiranga] means of attaining this
knowledge?
Guru: Ritualistic sacrifices and similar
acts and meditation [upasana] performed
without motive are the secondary means. The four
qualifications like discrimination, the three steps
[hearing, reflection and uninterrupted
contemplation]
and [the one] enquiry into the meaning
of 'That' and 'Thou' – these eight make up the
chief means.
[The four qualifications are [1]
discrimination between what is Eternal
and what
is fleeting [nityanitya vastu viveka]
[2] absence of desire for the
enjoyment of
the fruits of one's actions in this world and the
next [ihamutrartha phala
bhoga viraga]
[3] the possession of the six virtues which
are control of the mind
[sama], control of the sense organs
[dama], cessation of activity
[uparati], fortitude
[titiksha], faith in the scriptures and the
Guru [sraddha] and concentration
of mind [samadhana]; and [4]
yearning for liberation.]
Disciple: If knowledge arises through
the 'saying' alone, where is the need for
'hearing', etc...?
Guru: Knowledge is of two kinds, namely
steady [free from defects] and unsteady
[defective]. Although an inferior aspirant
[mandadhikari] who has doubts and false
notions may
have direct knowledge through the teaching of
the 'saying'
it will not produce the proper effect; it is
defective. By constant practice of 'hearing', etc.,
the defect will be removed.
This is the aim of 'hearing', etc... In the case of
a superior
aspirant [uttama adhikari] whose inner
organ is extremely
pure and free from the doubts and false notions,
so that
steady direct knowledge will arise by merely
hearing the saying,
it is not necessary to have hearing, etc.,
[again] for removing
the defects. He alone is "liberated while alive"
[jivan mukta],
whose wisdom is firm [sthita prajna].
Disciple: What are the distinguishing marks
of the sage and the ignorant person?
Guru: The ignorant person is distinguished
by his attachment
[raga], the sage by dispassion. Even if the
ignorant person
occasionally develops dispassion, it is likely to
change since
he has not got rid of the sense of reality in the
objects of the
senses. His dispassion is superficial. On the other
hand, the
dispassion of the sage, which has developed out of
his sense of
the unreality of objects of the senses, does not
change at any
time and is therefore intense.
Disciple: Why do some persons say that
ritualistic acts [karma] accompanied by
meditation [upasana] and knowledge
[jnana] are the cause of steadiness?
Guru: The idea that the Self, which is
separate from the body,
is the doer and enjoyer and the idea that the doer,
the act and
its result are different from one another, are the
cause of
ritualistic acts; the result is impermanent
samsara. The Self is
of the nature of the unattached Brahman; the doer,
the act and
the result are not distinct from the Self; this is
knowledge, and
its fruit is Eternal liberation. So how can these
two coexist?
Disciple: So long as the inner organ exists
its natural quality of unsteadiness will not leave
even the sage. Therefore if it is not an obstacle
to liberation after death [videhamukti] how
can there be the experience of bliss of liberation
while alive? Is it not necessary for even the sage
to meditate in order to remove the unsteadiness of
the mind?
Guru: Since samadhi and distraction are the
same to a sage
of steadfast wisdom, he does not enter into any
action for
the sake of steadiness of mind. For him there is
no nescience
as a cause of his activity, nor any delusion
of difference
as a result of nescience, nor attachment and
hatred resulting
from the delusion of difference. Only
prarabdha [that
part of one's karma which has to be worked out in
this life]
remains; this is the cause of his activity. And
that being different
from person to person, there is no fixity
[order] in
regard to the activity arising out of prarabdha.
Hence the sage's
activity and inactivity are governed by
prarabdha. Therefore
there can be desire for sense enjoyment and
efforts to
attain it, as in the case of Janaka and others, on
account of the
prarabdha responsible for enjoyment. Similarly,
there can be
the desire for liberation while alive, and disgust
with sense-enjoyment
as in the case of Suka, Vamadeva and others,
on account of the
prarabdha responsible for inactivity. The
bliss of Brahman
will not become manifest owing to the
mere immobility of
the inner organ. It will become manifest
only through the
concept of the form of Brahman [Brahmakara
vritti]. Since this will arise only
through reflection
[chintana] on the meaning of the Vedanta
[texts], and
since unsteadiness will disappear even through
this, one who
desires to have the bliss of liberation while alive
has to reflect
on the meaning of Vedanta texts only and need
not meditate.
Disciple: Can the sage have too much
activity?
Guru: When activity is excessive, happiness
will decrease; when activity is less, the happiness
will be more. But knowledge remains the same.
Although activity is inimical to
that [kind
of] happiness which is distinct from liberation
while alive,
it is not inimical to liberation while alive, since
there is not
delusion of bondage by activity and inactivity so
far as the
Self is concerned.
Disciple: Since the sage cannot have
attachment on account of his seeing all objects as
non-Self, unreal and evil, what can motivate his
activity?
Guru: Although he knows the body to be
unreal, the sage may
be active on account of his prarabdha; for
instance, he may
go begging, etc., to maintain the body on account
of his prarabdha.
It is like people watching a conjuring act
even when
they know how it is done, or like an invalid doing
things that
are bad for him even though he knows that they
are.
Disciple: What is the meaning of saying that
the sage has no desires?
Guru: It is not that his inner organ will
not take the form of
desires. As the inner organ is not the product of
pure sattva alone,
but of the less prominent rajas and tamas,
in combination
with the prominent sattva, all the qualities
will more or
less exist in it. Therefore, so long as the inner
organ remains
there will not be entire absence of desires which
are modifications
of rajas. But the sage does not mistake the
desires for
characteristics of the Self. That is the
difference. He
is unattached. Though he acts he is a non-doer.
That is why
the scripture [sruti] says that the good
and bad acts done by
the body and the merit and demerit [acquired
thereby] after
attaining knowledge do not affect him.
Disciple: Is it not necessary for the sage
to enter into blissful and non-dual nirvikalpa
samadhi in which concepts are all absorbed in
nescience, as in deep sleep, and there is no
experience of nescience-covered bliss and the
concept of the inner organs in the form of Brahman
[Brahmakara vritti] is absorbed in the
effulgence of Brahman?
On hearing this the Guru laughed thinking, "Why
does he talk like a fool?"
Disciple: Won't one who, while alive, gives
up the bliss of liberation to enjoy sense
pleasures, give up liberation after death for the
desire to attain heavenly worlds?
Guru: The rejection of the bliss of
liberation while alive and the desire for worldly
enjoyments may happen in the case of a sage on
account of his prarabdha, but they will not happen
after his nescience is burnt up by his knowledge.
Therefore his life force [prana] will not
go out and he cannot become embodied again either
in this world or any other on account of prarabdha.
Hence the rejection of liberation after death and
desire for, or attainment of, other worlds is not
possible for the sage.
Disciple: What is liberation while alive?
And what is liberation after death?
Guru: The absence of the delusion of bondage
even while one is embodied, is liberation while
alive. The absorption of the gross and subtle
nescience in consciousness after the experience of
prarabdha is liberation after death. This is the
gist of the important scriptural texts.
On hearing this the disciple experienced the
direct knowledge of his Self and, after first
experiencing liberation while alive, attained
liberation after death.
|
