Advaita Bodha Deepika -2

Advaita Bodha Deepika

APAVADA

CHAPTER II

7-9. D.: Maya cannot but have a cause. Just as clay cannot

become a pot without the agency of a potter so also the Power

all along remaining unmanifest in Brahman can manifest only

with Isvara’s will.

M.: In dissolution there remains only the non-dual Brahman

and no Isvara. Clearly there cannot be His will. When it is said

that in dissolution all are withdrawn from manifestation and

remain unmanifest, it means that the jivas, all the universe, and

Isvara have all become unmanifest. The unmanifest Isvara cannot

exercise His will. What happens is this: just as the dormant power

of sleep displays itself as dream, so also the dormant power of

Maya displays itself as this plurality, consisting of Isvara, His will,

the universe and the jivas. Isvara is thus the product of Maya and

He cannot be the origin of His origin. Maya therefore has no

antecedent cause. In dissolution there remains only Pure Being

devoid of will, and admitting of no change. In creation Maya

hitherto remaining unmanifest in this Pure Being, shines forth as

the mind. By the play of mind, plurality appears as Isvara, the

worlds and the jivas, like magic. Maya manifest is creation, and

Maya unmanifest is dissolution. Thus of its own accord, Maya

appears or withdraws itself and has thus no beginning. Therefore

we say there was no antecedent cause for it.

10-11. D.: What is its nature?

M.: It is inexpressible. Because its existence is later

invalidated, it is not real; because it is factually experienced, it

is not unreal; nor can it be a mixture of the two opposites the

real and the unreal. Therefore the wise say that it is indescribable

(anirvachaniya).

D.: Now what is real and what is unreal?

M.: That which is the substratum of Maya, Pure Being or

Brahman, admitting of no duality, is real. The illusory

phenomenon, consisting of names and forms, and called the

universe, is unreal.

D.: What can Maya be said to be?

M.: Neither of the two. It is different from the real

substratum and also from the unreal phenomenon.

D.: Please explain this.

12-17. M.: Say there is fire; it is the substratum. The sparks

fly off from it. They are the modifications of fire. The sparks

are not seen in the fire itself, but come out of it. An observation

of this phenomenon makes us infer a power inherent in fire

which produces the sparks.

Clay is the substratum; a hollow sphere with a neck and open

mouth is made out of it, and is called a pot. This fact makes us infer

a power which is neither clay nor pot but different from both.

Water is the substratum; bubbles are its effects; a power

different from both is inferred.

A snake egg is the substratum and a young snake is the

product; a power different from the egg and the young snake

is inferred.

A seed is the substratum and the sprout, its product; a

power different from the seed and the sprout is inferred.

The unchanging jiva of deep sleep is the substratum and

dream is the effect; a power different from the jiva and the

dream is inferred after waking up from sleep.

In the same way the power laying latent in Brahman

produces the illusion of the jagat. The substratum of this power

is Brahman and the jagat is its effect. This power cannot be

either of them, but must be different from both. It cannot be

defined. However it exists. But it remains inscrutable. Therefore

we say the ‘nature’ of Maya is indescribable.

18-20. D.: What is the ‘effect’ of Maya?

M.: It consists in presenting the illusion of the jiva, Isvara

and jagat on the non-dual substratum of Brahman, by virtue of

its veiling and projecting powers.

D.: How?

M.: As soon as the power lying dormant shows forth as

mind, the latencies of the mind sprout forth and grow up like

trees which together form the universe. The mind sports with

its latencies; they rise up as thoughts and materialise as this

universe, which is thus only a dream vision. The jivas and Isvara

being its contents are as illusory as this day dream.

D.: Please explain their illusory character.

M.: The world is an object and seen as the result of the

sport of mind. The jivas and Isvara are contained in it. Parts

can be only as real as the whole. Suppose the universe is

painted in colours on a wall. The jivas and Isvara will be

figures in the painting. The figures can be only as real as the

painting itself.

21-24. Here the universe is itself a product of the mind

and Isvara and the jivas form parts of the same product.

Therefore they must be only mental projections and nothing

more. This is clear from the Sruti which says that Maya gave

rise to the illusions of Isvara and the jivas, and from the Vasishta

smriti where Vasishta says that as if by magic the latencies dance

about in the mind as, he-I-you-this-that-my son-property etc.

25-27. D.: Where does this smriti speak of Isvara, jiva

and jagat?

M.: In its statement Sohamidam, i.e., He-I-this, ‘He’ means

the unseen Isvara; ‘I’ means the jiva parading as the ego, the

doer etc.; ‘this’ means all the objective Universe. From scriptures,

reasoning and experience (sruti yukti anubhava) it is clear that

the jiva, Isvara and jagat are only mental projections.

28-29. D.: How do reasoning and experience support

this view?

M.: With the rise of mind in waking and dream, the

latencies come into play, and the jiva, Isvara and jagat appear.

With the subsidence of the latencies in deep sleep, swoon etc.,

they all disappear. This is within the experience of everyone.

Again when all the latencies are rooted out by knowledge,

the jivas, Isvara and the jagat disappear once for all. This is

within the experience of perfectly clear-sighted great sages

established in the non-dual Reality, beyond the jivas, Isvara and

jagat. Therefore we say that these are all projections of the mind.

Thus is explained the effect of Maya.

30-32. D.: What is the limit of Maya?

M.: It is the knowledge resulting from an enquiry into the

sense of the Mahavakya. Because Maya is Ignorance, and

Ignorance subsists on non enquiry. When non enquiry gives place

to enquiry, right knowledge results and puts an end to Ignorance.

Now listen. Ailments in the body are the results of past

karma; they subsist on wrong diet and increase with its

continuation. Or, the ignorance of rope, so long as it is not

enquired into, projects a snake into view and other

hallucinations follow in its wake. In the same manner although

Maya is self- evident, beginningless and spontaneous, yet it

subsists in the absence of enquiry into the nature of the Self,

manifests the universe etc., and grows more massive.

33-35. With the rise of enquiry, Maya hitherto grown

strong by its absence, loses its nourishment and gradually withers

away with all its effects, namely the jagat etc. Just as in the

absence of enquiry the ignorance factor of rope made it look a

snake but suddenly disappeared with the rise of enquiry, so also

maya flourishes in ignorance and disappears with the rise of

enquiry. Just as the rope snake and the power which produces

this illusion persist before enquiry, but after enquiry end in

simple rope, so also Maya and its effect, the jagat, persist before

enquiry, but end in pure Brahman afterwards.

36-38. D.: How can a single thing appear in two different

ways?

M.: Brahman, the non-dual-Pure-Being, presents itself as the

jagat before enquiry, and shows itself in Its true form after enquiry.

See how before proper consideration clay appears a pot

and afterwards as clay only; or gold appears as ornaments and

then is found to be only gold. Similarly with Brahman too. After

enquiry Brahman is realised to be unitary, non-dual, impartite,

and unchanged in the past, present or future. In It there is

nothing like Maya, or its effect, such as the jagat. This realisation

is known as the Supreme Knowledge and the limit of Ignorance.

Thus is described the ‘limit’ of Maya.

39. D.: What is the ‘fruit’ of Maya?

M.: That it fruitlessly vanishes into nothing, is its fruit.

A hare’s horn is mere sound having no significance. So it is with

Maya, mere sound without any meaning. Realised sages have

found it so.

40-43. D.: Then why do not all agree on this point?

M.: The ignorant believe it to be real. Those who are

thoughtful will say it is indescribable. Realised sages say that it is

non existent like the hare’s horn. It thus appears in these three

ways. People will speak of it from their own points of view.

D.: Why do the ignorant consider it real?

M.: Even when a lie is told to frighten a child, that there is

a spirit, the child believes it to be true. Similarly the ignorant

are dazed by Maya and believe it to be real. Those who enquire

into the nature of the Real Brahman and of the unreal jagat in

the light of the scriptures, finding Maya different from either

and unable to determine its nature, say it is indescribable. But

sages who had attained Supreme Knowledge through enquiry,

say, “Like a mother burnt down to ashes by her daughter, Maya

reduced to ashes by Knowledge is non existent at any time.”

44-46. D.: How can Maya be compared to a mother burnt

down to ashes by her daughter?

M.: In the process of enquiry, Maya becomes more and

more transparent and turns into Knowledge. Knowledge is thus

born of Maya, and is therefore said to be the daughter of Maya.

Maya so long flourishing on non-enquiry comes to its last days

on enquiry. Just as a crab brings forth its young only to die

itself, so also in the last days of enquiry Maya brings forth

Knowledge for its own undoing. Immediately the daughter,

Knowledge, burns her down to ashes.

D.: How can the progeny kill the parent?

M.: In a bamboo forest, the bamboos move in the wind,

rub against one another and produce fire which burns down the

parent trees. So also Knowledge born of Maya burns Maya to

ashes. Maya remains only in name like a hare’s horn. Therefore

the sages declare it non existent. Moreover, the very name implies

its unreality. The names are Avidya and Maya. Of these the former

means ‘Ignorance or that which is not’ (ya n iv±te sa Aiv±a); again,

‘Maya is that which is not’ (ya ma sa maya). Therefore it is simple

negation. Thus that it fruitlessly vanishes into nothing is its ‘fruit’.

47-49. D.: Master, Maya turns into Knowledge. Therefore

it cannot be said to vanish fruitlessly as nothing.

M.: Only if the Knowledge, the modified Maya, be real,

Maya can be said to be real. But this Knowledge is itself false.

Therefore Maya is false.

D.: How is Knowledge said to be false?

M.: The fire from the friction of the trees burns them

down and then dies out; the clearing nut carries down the

impurities of water and itself settles down with them. Similarly

this Knowledge destroys Ignorance and itself perishes. Since it

is also finally resolved, the ‘fruit’ of Maya can be only unreal.

50-52. D.: Should Knowledge also vanish in the end, how

can samsara, the effect of Ignorance, be eradicated?

M.: Samsara, the effect of Ignorance, is unreal like

Knowledge. One unreality can be undone by another unreality.

D.: How can it be done?

53. M.: A dream subject’s hunger is satisfied by dreamfood.

The one is unreal as the other and yet serves the purpose.

Similarly, though Knowledge is unreal, yet it serves the purpose.

Bondage and release are only false ideas of Ignorance. As the

appearance and disappearance of rope snake are equally false,

so are also bondage and release in Brahman.

54-55. To conclude, the Supreme Truth is only the nondual

Brahman. All else is false and does not exist at any time.

The srutis support it saying “Nothing is created or destroyed;

there is no bondage or deliverance; no one is bound or desirous

of release; there is no aspirant, no practiser and no one liberated.

This is the Supreme Truth.” Removal of Superimposition thus

consists in the knowledge of non-dual Reality, Pure Being,

beyond Maya and its effects. Its realisation is Liberation while

alive in the body (Jivanmukti).

56. Only a careful student of this chapter can be desirous

of knowing the process of enquiry into the Self as a means of

undoing the superimposition of Ignorance. The seeker fit for

such enquiry must possess the four fold qualities which will be

dealt with in the next chapter. Then the method of enquiry will

be dealt with.

A competent seeker must carefully study these two chapters

before proceeding further.

THE MEANS OF ACCOMPLISHMENT

1. To the question “How can there be samsara for the

Supreme Self of Being-Knowledge-Bliss?”, the sages answer

“When unmanifest, the power of the Self is called Maya, and

when manifest, the same is mind. This mode of Maya, the

inscrutable Mind, is the sprout of samsara for the self”.

D.: Who has said that mind is indescribable?

2-3. M.: Vasishta has said to Rama. In the non-dual

Consciousness the bhava which, different from knowledge that

is real and different from insentience that is unreal, tending to

create, projects the latencies as this thing and that thing, mixes

together the conscious and unconscious, and makes them appear

under the categories, “the sentient” and “the insentient”, itself

of the nature of both the sentient and insentient; always

vacillating and changeful is mind. Therefore it is indescribable.

4. Though itself unchanging, the Supreme Self associated

with the wrongly superimposed mind, appears to be changeful.

D.: How is that?

M.: Just as a Brahmin who is drunk, behaves strangely

when in the power of liquors, so too the Self though unchanged

by nature, associated now with mind, appears changed as the

jiva wallowing in this samsara. Hence, the Self ’s samsara is not

other than mind. The srutis say so.

5. Mind being the samsara, must be investigated. Associated

with mind which according to its modes assumes the shapes of

objects, the man seems to undergo the same changes. This eternal

secret is disclosed in the Maitryiniya Upanishad. This also is

SADHANA

CHAPTER III

confirmed by our experience and by positive and negative

induction.

6-7. D.: How is it confirmed by our experience?

M.: When in deep sleep the mind lies quiescent, the Self

remains without change and without samsara. When in dream

and waking, the mind manifests, the Self seems changed and

caught up in the samsara. Everyone knows it by experience. It

is evident from sruti, smriti, logic and experience that this samsara

is nothing but mind itself. How can any one dispute this point

which is so obvious?

8-9. D.: How does association with mind entangle the

Self in samsara?

M.: Mind whose nature is always to be thinking of this and

that, functions in the two modes — the ‘I’ mode and ‘this’ mode,

as already mentioned in Chapter I on Superimposition. Of these

two, the I-mode has always the single concept ‘I’, whereas the

this-mode varies according to the quality operating at the time,

satva, rajas or tamas, i.e., clearness, activity or dullness.

D.: Who has said so before?

10-11. M.: Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said that the mind

has these qualities, satva, rajas and tamas and changes

accordingly. In satva, dispassion, peace, beneficence, etc.,

manifest; in rajas, desire, anger, greed, fear, efforts, etc., manifest;

in tamas, sloth, confusion, dullness, etc.

12-14. Unchanged Pure Knowledge by nature, the Supreme

Self when associated with the mind changing according to the

operative qualities, becomes identified with it.

D.: How can that be?

M.: You see how water is of itself cold and tasteless. Yet

by association, it can be hot, sweet, bitter, sour, etc. Similarly

the Self, by nature Being-Knowledge-Bliss, when associated

with the I-mode, appears as the ego. Just as cold water in union

with heat becomes hot, so also the Blissful Self in union with

the ‘I’- mode becomes the misery-laden ego. Just as water,

originally tasteless, becomes sweet, bitter or sour according to

its associations, so also the Self of Pure Knowledge appears

dispassionate, peaceful, beneficent, or passionate, angry, greedy,

or dull and indolent, according to the quality of the this-mode

at the moment.

15. The sruti says that the Self associated with prana, etc.,

appears respectively as prana, mind, intellect, the earth and the

other elements, desire, anger, dispassion, etc.

16. Accordingly associated with the mind, the Self seems

changed to jiva, sunk in the misery of endless samsara, being

deluded by innumerable illusions, like I, you, it, mine, yours, etc.

17. D.: Now that samsara has fallen to the lot of the Self,

how can it be got rid of?

M.: With complete stillness of mind, samsara will disappear

root and branch. Otherwise there will be no end to samsara,

even in millions of aeons (Kalpakotikala).

18. D.: Cannot samsara be got rid of by any means other

than making the mind still?

M.: Absolutely by no other means; neither the Vedas, nor

the shastras nor austerities, nor karma, nor vows, nor gifts, nor

recital of scriptures of mystic formulae (mantras), nor worship,

nor anything else, can undo the samsara. Only stillness of mind

can accomplish the end and nothing else.

19. D.: The scriptures declare that only Knowledge can

do it. How then do you say that stillness of the mind puts an

end to samsara?

M.: What is variously described as Knowledge, Liberation,

etc., in the scriptures, is but stillness of mind.

D.: Has any one said so before?

20-27. M.: Sri Vasishta had said: When by practice the

mind stands still, all illusions of samsara disappear, root and

branch. Just as when the ocean of milk was churned for its

nectar, it was all rough, but became still and clear after the

churn (viz., mount Mandara) was taken out, so also the mind

becoming still, the samsara falls to eternal rest.

D.: How can the mind be brought to stillness?

M.: By dispassion, abandoning all that is dear to oneself,

one can by one’s efforts accomplish the task with ease. Without

this peace of mind, Liberation is impossible. Only when the

whole objective world is wiped out clean by a mind disillusioned

as a consequence of discerning knowledge that all that is not

Brahman is objective and unreal, the Supreme Bliss will result.

Otherwise in the absence of peace of mind, however much an

ignorant man may struggle and creep on in the deep abyss of

the shastras, he cannot gain Liberation.

Only that mind which by practice of yoga, having lost all

its latencies, has become pure and still like a lamp in a dome

well protected from breeze, is said to be dead. This death of

mind is the highest fulfilment. The final conclusion of all the

Vedas is that Liberation is nothing but mind stilled.

For Liberation nothing can avail, not wealth, relatives,

friends, karma consisting of movements of the limbs, pilgrimage

to sacred places, baths in sacred waters, life in celestial regions,

austerities however severe, or anything but a still mind. In similar

strain many sacred books teach that Liberation consists in doing

away with the mind. In several passages in the Yoga Vasishta, the

same idea is repeated, that the Bliss of Liberation can be reached

only by wiping out the mind, which is the root cause of samsara,

and thus of all misery.

28. In this way to kill the mind by a knowledge of the

sacred teaching, reasoning and one’s own experience, is to undo

the samsara. How else can the miserable round of births and

deaths be brought to a standstill? And how can freedom result

from it? Never. Unless the dreamer awakes, the dream does not

come to an end nor the fright of being face to face with a tiger

in the dream. Similarly unless the mind is disillusioned, the

agony of samsara will not cease. Only the mind must be made

still. This is the fulfilment of life.

29-30. D.: How can the mind be made still?

M.: Only by Sankhya. Sankhya is the process of enquiry

coupled with knowledge. The realised sages declare that the mind

has its root in non-enquiry and perishes by an informed enquiry.

D.: Please explain this process.

M.: This consists of sravana, manana, nididhyasana and

samadhi, i.e., hearing, reasoning, meditation and Blissful Peace, as

mentioned in the scriptures. Only this can make the mind still.

31-32. There is also an alternative. It is said to be yoga.

D.: What is yoga?

M.: Meditation on Pure Being free from qualities.

D.: Where is this alternative mentioned and how?

M.: In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Sri Bhagavan Krishna

has said: What is gained by Sankhya can also be gained by yoga.

Only he who knows that the result of the two processes is the

same, can be called a realised sage.

33-34. D.: How can the two results be identical?

M.: The final limit is the same for both because both of

them end in stillness of mind. This is samadhi or Blissful Peace.

The fruit of samadhi is Supreme Knowledge; this remains the

same by whichever process gained.

D.: If the fruit is the same for both, the final purpose can

be served by only one of them. Why should two processes be

mentioned instead of only one?

M.: In the world, seekers of truth are of different grades of

development. Out of consideration for them, Sri Bhagavan has

mentioned these two in order to offer a choice.

35. D.: Who is fit for the path of enquiry (Sankhya)?

M.: Only a fully qualified seeker is fit, for he can succeed

in it and not others.

36-37. D.: What are the sadhanas or requisites for this

process?

M.: The knowers say that the sadhanas consist of an ability

to discern the real from the unreal, no desire for pleasures here

or hereafter, cessation of activities (karma) and a keen desire to

be liberated. Not qualified with all these four qualities, however

hard one may try, one cannot succeed in enquiry. Therefore

this fourfold sadhana is the sine qua non for enquiry.

38. To begin with, a knowledge of the distinctive

characteristics of these sadhanas is necessary. As already pointed

out, these distinctive characteristics are of the categories (hetu,

Sv-av, kayR, Avi0, fl) cause, nature, effect, limit and fruit. These

are now described.

39-44. Discernment (viveka) can arise only in a purified

mind. Its ‘nature’ is the conviction gained by the help of sacred

teachings that only Brahman is real and all else false. Always to

remember this truth is its ‘effect’. Its end (avadhi) is to be settled

unwavering in the truth that only Brahman is and all else is

unreal. Desirelessness (vairagya) is the result of the outlook that

the world is essentially faulty. Its ‘nature’ is to renounce the

world and have no desire for anything in it. Its ‘effect’ is to turn

away in disgust from all enjoyments as from vomit. It ends

(avadhi) in treatment with contempt of all pleasures, earthly or

heavenly, as if they were vomit or burning fire or hell.

Cessation of activities (uparati) can be the outcome of the

eight fold yoga (astangayoga), namely, yama, niyama, asana,

pranayama, pratyahara, dharana, dhyana and samadhi, i.e., self

restraint, discipline, steady posture, control of breath, control

of senses, mind collected to truth, meditation and peace. Its

‘nature’ consists in restraining the mind. Its ‘effect’ is to cease

from worldly activities. It ends (avadhi) in forgetfulness of the

world as if in sleep, owing to the ending of activities. Desire to

be liberated (mumukshutva) begins with the association with

realised sages. Its ‘nature’ is the yearning for liberation. Its ‘effect’

is to stay with one’s master. It ends (avadhi) in giving up all

study of shastras and performance of religious rites.

When these have reached their limits as mentioned above,

the sadhanas are said to be perfect.

45-47. Should only one or more of these sadhanas be

perfect but not all of them, the person will after Death gain

celestial regions. If all of them are perfect, they together quickly

make the person thoroughly capable of enquiry into the Self.

Only when all the sadhanas are perfect is enquiry possible; otherwise,

not. Even if one of them remains undeveloped, it obstructs

enquiry. With this we shall deal presently.

48-49. Dispassion, etc., remaining undeveloped, discernment,

though perfect, cannot by itself remove the obstacles,

to enquiry into the Self. You see how many are well read in

Vedanta Shastra. They must all possess this virtue, but they

have not cultivated the others, dispassion etc. Therefore they

cannot undertake the enquiry into the Self. This fact makes

it plain that discernment unattended by dispassion etc.,

cannot avail.

50-51. D.: How is it that even scholars in Vedanta have

not succeeded in the pursuit of enquiry?

M.: Though they always study Vedanta and give lessons to

others yet in the absence of desirelessness they do not practise

what they have learnt.

D.: And what do they do otherwise?

M.: Like a parrot they reproduce the Vedantic jargon but

do not put the teachings into practice.

D.: What does Vedanta teach?

M.: The Vedanta teaches a man to know that all but the

non-dual Brahman is laden with misery, therefore to leave off

all desires for enjoyment, to be free from love or hate,

thoroughly to cut the knot of the ego appearing as ‘I’, you,

he, this, that, mine and yours, to rid himself of the notion of

‘I’ and ‘mine’, to live unconcerned with the pairs of opposites

as heat and cold, pain and pleasure, etc., to remain fixed in

the perfect knowledge of the equality of all and making no

distinction of any kind, never to be aware of anything but

Brahman, and always to be experiencing the Bliss of the nondual

Self.

Though Vedanta is read and well understood, if dispassion

is not practised, the desire for pleasures will not fade away. There

is no dislike for pleasing things and the desire for them cannot

leave the person. Because desire is not checked, love, anger,

etc., the ego or the ‘false-I’ in the obnoxious body, the sense of

possession represented by ‘I’ or ‘mine’ of things agreeable to

the body, the pairs of opposites like pleasure and pain, and false

values, will not disappear. However well read one may be, unless

the teachings are put into practice, one is not really learned.

Only like a parrot the man will be repeating that Brahman

alone is real and all else is false.

D.: Why should he be so?

M.: The knowers say that like a dog delighting in offal,

this man also delights in external pleasures. Though always busy

with Vedanta, reading and teaching it, he is no better than a

mean dog.

52. Having read all the shastras and well grounded in

them, they grow conceited that they are all knowing,

accomplished and worthy of respect; filled with love and hate

they presume themselves respectable; they are only packasses

esteemed for carrying heavy loads over long distances in

difficult and tortuous ways. They need not be considered as

regards non-dual Truth. In the same strain Vasishta has spoken

much more to Rama.

53. D.: Have there been those who being well read in the

shastras have not practised their teachings?

M.: Oh, many. We have also read of them in the puranas.

Once there was a Brahmin, Brahma Sarma by name. He was

well versed in the Vedas and the Vedanta and otherwise an

accomplished man too. He would not practise what he had

learnt but would give lessons in it to others. Filled with love

and hate, transgressing the code of conduct by acting according

to greed, and otherwise enjoying himself according to his own

sweet will, after death he passed to hell. For the same reason, so

many more also went the same way.

In the world we see so many learned pandits consumed by

pride and malice. No doubt a study of Vedanta makes one

discerning. But if this is not accompanied by dispassion etc., it

is useless and does not lead to enquiry.

54-56. D.: Will discernment together with dispassion meet

the end?

M.: No. In the absence of cessation of activities, these two

are not enough for a successful pursuit of enquiry. In its absence

there will be no desire to enquire into the Self. How can we

speak of success in it?

D.: What will a man with dispassion do if he does not take

to enquiry into the Self?

M.: Activities not ceasing, there is no tranquillity; being

desireless he dislikes all enjoyments and cannot find pleasure in

home, wealth, arts, etc.; so he renounces them, retires into

solitary forests and engages in severe but fruitless austerities.

The case of King Sikhidhvaja is an example of this.

57-59. D.: Then will discernment together with desirelessness

and cessation of activities achieve the end?

M.: Not without the desire to be liberated. If this desire is

wanting, there will be no incentive to enquire into the Self.

D.: What will the man be doing then?

M.: Being desireless and peaceful, he will not make any

effort but remain indifferent.

D.: Have there been men with these three qualities who

did not take to enquiry into the Self?

M.: Yes. Dispassion is implied in all austerities; the mind

too remains one pointed for tapasvis; yet they cannot enquire

into the Self.

D.: What do they do then?

M.: Averse to external pursuits, with their minds concentrated,

they will always remain austere in animated suspense

like that of deep sleep, but not enquire into the Self. As an

instance in point, the Ramayana says of Sarabhanga rishi that

after all his tapasya he went to heaven.

D.: Does not heaven form part of the fruits of enquiry?

M.: No. Enquiry must end in Liberation, and this is

freedom from repeated births and deaths which does not

admit of transit from one region to another. Sarabhanga’s

case indicates that he could not and did not enquire into the

Self. Therefore all the four qualifications are essential for

enquiry.

60-61. A simple desire to be liberated unaccompanied by

the other three qualities will not be enough. By an intense desire

for liberation a man may take to enquiry but if otherwise

unqualified, he must fail in his attempt. His case will be like

that of a lame man wistfully yearning for honey in a honey

comb high up on a tree; he cannot reach it and must remain

unhappy. Or, the seeker may approach a master, surrender to

him and profit by his guidance.

D.: What authority is there for saying that a man not

otherwise qualified but intensely desirous of liberation remains

ever unhappy?

62. M.: In the Suta Samhita it is said that those desirous of

enjoyments and yet yearning for liberation are surely bitten by

the deadly serpent of samsara and therefore dazed by its poison.

This is the authority.

In the view that all the four qualities must be together and

in full, there is complete agreement between the srutis, reason

and experience. Otherwise even if one of them is wanting,

enquiry cannot be pursued to success, but after death regions of

merit will be gained. When all the four qualities are perfect and

together present, enquiry is fruitful.

63-69. D.: In conclusion who are fit for enquiry into

the Self?

M.: Only those who have all the four requisite qualities in

full, are fit, and not others, whether versed in Vedas and shastras

or otherwise highly accomplished, nor practisers of severe

austerities, nor those strictly observing the religious rites or vows

or reciting mantras, nor worshippers of any kind, nor those

giving away large gifts, nor wandering pilgrims etc. Just as the

Vedic rites are not for the non-regenerate so also enquiry is not

for the unqualified.

D.: Can want of requisite qualities disqualify even a very

learned scholar?

M.: Be he learned in all the sacred lore or ignorant of all of

it, only the four fold requisites can qualify a man for enquiry.

The sruti says: “The one whose mind is in equipoise, senses

controlled, whose activities have ceased and who possesses

fortitude” is fit for this. From this it follows that others are not

competent but only those who are possessing the four fold virtues.

70. D.: Is any distinction made amongst seekers who are

competent?

M.: For enquiry into the Self there is absolutely no

distinction bearing on caste, stage of life or other similar matters.

Be the seeker the foremost scholar, pandit, illiterate man, child,

youth, old man, bachelor, householder, tapasvi, sanyasi, brahmin,

kshatriya, vaisya, sudra, a chandala or a woman, only these four

qualifications make up the seeker. This is the undisputed view

of the vedas and shastras.

71. D.: This cannot be. How can illiterate men, women and

chandalas be qualified to the exclusion of a pandit learned in the

shastras? He must certainly be more qualified than others. You say

that a knowledge of the shastras is no qualification but practice of

their teachings is. No one can practise what he has not known.

How can an illiterate person qualify himself in the requisite manner?

M.: In reply I ask you and you tell me — how does the

learned man qualify himself?

D.: Because he has known the teachings of the shastras

that he should not do karma for selfish ends but dedicate it to

God, he will do so; his mind will be purified; gradually he will

acquire the dispassion etc., needed for enquiry. Now tell me

how an illiterate man can qualify himself.

M.: He also can. Though not learned now, he might have

learnt the teachings in preceding births, done actions dedicated

to God; his mind being already pure enough, he can now readily

acquire the qualities needed for enquiry into the Self.

72. D.: In the illiterate man, should the sadhanas acquired

in preceding births and later lying as latencies, now manifest

themselves, why should not his learning acquired in those births

similarly manifest itself now?

M.: Some of his past karma may obstruct only the learning

from re-manifesting itself.

D.: If the learning is obstructed, how is not the sadhana

also obstructed from manifestation?

M.: Though the learning is obstructed, the fruits of his

valuable labour cannot be lost; he cannot lose his competence

for enquiry.

73. D.: What would happen if his four fold sadhanas were

obstructed as well as his learning?

M.: The result would be that for want of the requisite

qualities neither the scholar nor the other would be fit for

enquiry. Both would be equal.

74-76. D.: No. This cannot be. Though not already

qualified, the scholar having known the teachings can put them

into practice and gradually qualify himself, whereas the other

with all his studies had not already succeeded in his preceding

births, and what hope can there be now that he has forgotten

what he had learnt and his sadhanas are obstructed? Obviously

he cannot be successful in enquiry.

M.: Not so. Though illiterate a man anxious for liberation

will approach a master, learn from him the essence of the

scriptures, earnestly practise the teachings and succeed in the

end. Just as a worldly man ignorant of scriptures yet desirous of

heaven, seeks guidance from a master and by observance,

worship and discipline, gains his end, so also by a master’s

teachings even an illiterate man can certainly benefit as much

as the scholar with his knowledge.

77-78. D.: Religious rites bear fruits only according to the

earnestness of the man. Only if the seeker of Truth is earnest

can a master’s guidance act in the same manner. Otherwise how

can it be?

M.: Just as earnestness is the essential factor for reaping

fruits from karma, so it is with the practice of sadhanas by the

learned scholar or the master’s disciple. Karma or sadhana cannot

succeed if interest is wanting in them. A scholar or an illiterate

man reaps the fruits of karma according to the interest he takes

in its performance. One who is not earnest need not be considered

in any matter concerning the Vedas or a master.

79. A scholar or an illiterate man, if he has not already

qualified himself as aforesaid, but is now desirous of liberation,

should in right earnest practise the sadhanas so that he may qualify

himself now at least. He will later be fit for enquiry. So no

distinction can be made between a scholar and an illiterate man.

80. D.: If so, regarding fitness for enquiry into the Self,

how does a scholar differ from an illiterate man?

M.: The difference lies only in the learning and not in the

practice of sadhana or enquiry.

81-82. D.: No. This cannot be. Though learning does not

make any difference in sadhana, it must certainly weigh in favour

of the scholar in the pursuit of enquiry.

M.: Not so. Shastra is not the means for enquiry. The means

consist of desirelessness etc. Only these can qualify a man for

enquiry and a learning of the shastras does not make any

difference. Therefore a scholar has no advantage over an illiterate

man in the field of enquiry.

83-85. D.: Granted that dispassion etc. form the means

for success in enquiry, even with the necessary sadhanas the

enquiry into the Self must be pursued only in the light of the

shastras. Therefore the study of the shastras should be indispensable

for the successful pursuit of enquiry.

M.: Nonsense! No Shastra is required to know the Self.

Does any one look into the Shastra for the Self? Surely not.

D.: Only if the Self is already known, Shastra will not be

required for enquiry into the Self. But the seeker being deluded

has not known his true nature. How can an illiterate man realise

the Self without studying the shastras which deal with the nature

of the Self? He cannot. Therefore the shastras must be learnt as

a preliminary to realisation.

M.: In that case the knowledge of the Self got from the

shastras will be like that of heaven mentioned in the Vedas,

i.e., indirect and not directly experienced. This knowledge

corresponds to hearsay and cannot be direct perception. Just

as the knowledge of the form of Vishnu always remains indirect

and there is no direct perception of the four armed being or

again the knowledge of heaven can only be indirect in this

world, so also the knowledge of the Self contained in the

shastras can only be indirect. This leaves the man where he

was, just as ignorant as before. Only the knowledge of direct

experience can be true and useful; the Self is to be realised

and not to be talked about.

86-88. D.: Has any one said so before?

M.: Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said in Dhyana Deepika:

The Knowledge of the figure of Vishnu gained from shastras

that He has four arms, holding a disc, a conch, etc., is only

indirect and cannot be direct. The description is intended to

serve as a mental picture for worship and no one can see it

face to face. Similarly to know from the shastras that the Self

is Being-Knowledge-Bliss amounts to indirect knowledge and

cannot be the same as experience. For the Self is the inmost

being of the individual or the consciousness witnessing the

five sheaths; it is Brahman. This not being realised, a superficial

knowledge is all that is gained by reading the shastras. It is

only indirect knowledge.

D.: Vishnu or heaven being different from the Self can

only be objective whereas the Self is subjective and its

knowledge, however gained, must be only direct and cannot

be indirect.

M.: Although spontaneously and directly the Vedanta

teaches the Supreme Truth, “That thou art” meaning that the

inmost being of the individual is Brahman, yet enquiry is the

only sure means of Self realisation. Sastric knowledge is not

enough, for it can only be indirect. Only the experience resulting

from the enquiry of the Self can be direct knowledge.

89-90. Vasishta also has said to the same effect. Shastra,

Guru and upadesa are all traditional and do not straightway

make the seeker directly realise the Self. The purity of the seeker’s

mind is the sole means for realisation and not shastra nor the

guru. The self can be realised by one’s own acute discernment

and by no other means. All shastras agree on this point.

91. From this it is clear that except by enquiry the Self can

never be realised, not even by learning Vedanta.

92. D.: The Self must be realised only by a critical study of

the shastras. Otherwise what can be the enquiry into the Self

but a critical and analytical study of the shastras?

93. M.: In the body, senses etc., the concept “I” persists. With

a one pointed mind turned inwards to look out for this “I” or the

Self, which is the inmost Being within the five sheaths, is the enquiry

into the Self. To seek elsewhere outside the body by an oral recital

of Vedanta Shastra or a critical study of its words, cannot be called

enquiry into the Self which can only be a thorough investigation

into the true nature of the Self by a keen mind.

94-96. D.: Can the Self not be known by reading and

understanding the shastras?

M.: No. For the Self is Being-Knowledge-Bliss, different

from the gross, subtle and causal bodies, witnessing the three

states of waking, dream and deep sleep. Always to exercise the

vocal organs in reading the shastras, or with a thorough

knowledge of grammar, logic and diction to critically examine

the scripture and make out its meaning, cannot reveal the Self

which is within.

D.: How can it be realised?

M.: By the mind to examine the nature of the five sheaths,

by experience to determine them, then to discard each of them

step by step “this is not the Self — this is not the Self”, and by

mind thus grown subtle to look for the Self and realise It as the

witnessing Consciousness lying beyond the five sheaths — forms

the whole process. The Self cannot be seen without. It is overspread

by and lies hidden in the five sheaths. In order to find It,

the intellect must be made to turn inwards and search within,

not to look for It in the shastras. Will any man in his senses

search in a forest for a thing lost in his home? The search must be

in the place where the thing lies hidden. In the same way the Self

covered over by the five sheaths must be looked for within them

and not among the shastras. The shastras are not the place for It.

97. D.: True, the Self cannot be found in the shastras.

From them a scholar can learn the nature of the five sheaths,

intellectually examine, experience and discard them, in order

to find and realise the Self. How can the other man ignorant of

the nature of the Self or of the five sheaths pursue the enquiry?

M.: Just as the scholar learns from books, so the other learns

from the master. Later, enquiry remains the same for both.

98-99. D.: Does it follow that a master is necessary for an

illiterate man and not for a scholar?

M.: Scholar or illiterate, no one can succeed without a master.

From the beginning of time, unable to realise the Self without

a master, the seekers even learned in all the shastras always sought

a master to enlighten them. Narada went to Sanatkumara; Indra

to Brahma; Suka to king Janaka. Unless the master is gracious to

him, no man can ever be liberated.

100-101. D.: Has any one illiterate been liberated by Guru’s

Grace only?

M.: Yes. Yagnavalkya helped his wife Maitreyi to be

liberated. Many other women ignorant of the shastras e.g.,

Leela and Chudala were also liberated while alive. Therefore

even those ignorant of the shastras are qualified for enquiry

into the Self.

102-108. It must now be obvious that the make up of the

best qualified seeker consists in dispassion, resulting from

discernment of the real from the unreal, so that he discards all

enjoyments here and hereafter as if they were poison or vomit

or blazing fire, retires from all activities to remain quiet like a

man in deep sleep, but finding himself unable to remain so

owing to unbearable pains, physical and mental, as if the hair

of his head had caught fire and was burning, he cannot feel

happy nor bear the agony even a minute longer and burns in

anguish feeling “When shall I be free? How and by what means

can I be liberated?”

For the best seeker all the qualifications must be full up to

the above said category “limit” (avadhi). For the next in scale,

the good seeker, the qualifications are developed only to the

“effect” stage; for the middling, only to the “nature” stage; and

for the lowest, only to their “cause” stage. These stages determine

the success of the seeker’s efforts.

109. Immediate success attends the efforts of the best

qualified; some time elapses before the next in grade succeeds; a

longer time is required for the middling; and only a prolonged

and steady practice can enable the low-grade seeker to succeed.

110-112. Their perplexity of minds does not allow the last

two grades of seekers to take to enquiry. Their minds are more

readily composed by yoga, which is more suited to them than

enquiry. The first two grades of seekers readily profit by enquiry

which is more suited to them than yoga.

113-114. In Dhyana Deepika, Sri Vidyaranyaswami has

said: “The path of enquiry cannot lead to success to the seekers

whose minds are confused. To bring down the false notion of

their minds, yoga is necessary. The minds of those who are fully

qualified, are not confused but remain one pointed; only the

veiling power of Ignorance still hides the Self from them; they

await only awakening. Enquiry is the process of awakening;

therefore it best suits them.”

115-118. Yoga can be successful only after a long, steady,

earnest, diligent and cautious practice without needless strain.

D.: Why should one be so heedful about it?

M.: When the attempt is made to fix the mind in the Self,

it gets restive and drags the man through the senses to the objects.

However resolute and learned the man may be, his mind

remains wayward, strong, mulish, and hard to restrain. Wanton

by nature, it cannot remain steady for a moment; it must run

here, there and everywhere; now it dwells in the nether regions

and in a trice it flies up in the sky; it moves in all the directions

of the compass; and it is capricious like a monkey. It is hard to

fix it. To do so, one must be heedful.

119-121. In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna asked Sri

Bhagavan: ‘O Krishna! Is not the mind always capricious,

disturbing to the man and too strong to be checked? It is easier

to hold the air in the fist than to control the mind’.

In the Yoga Vasishta, Sri Rama asked Vasishta: ‘O master! Is

it not impossible to control the mind? One may sooner drink up

the oceans or lift up Mt. Meru or swallow flaming fire than control

the mind.’ From the words of Rama and Arjuna, and our own

experience, there can be no doubt that it is exceedingly difficult

to control the mind however able and heroic one may be.

122-124. D.: Control of mind being so difficult, how can

yoga be practised at all?

M.: By dint of practice and dispassion, the mind can be

brought under control. The same has been said by Sri Bhagavan

to Arjuna and by Vasishta to Sri Rama. Sri Krishna said : “O

Son of Kunti! There is no doubt that the mind is wayward and

difficult to control. Nevertheless by dint of practice and dispassion

it can be controlled.” Vasishta said: “O Rama, though

the mind is hard to control yet it must be subdued by dispassion

and effort even at the cost of wringing your hands, clenching

your teeth and holding down the senses and limbs; it must be

accomplished by will power.”

Therefore intense effort is necessary for the purpose.

125-127. The honey bee of the mind ever living in the

lotus of the heart turns away from the sweet honey of unequalled

Bliss of the Heart lotus, and desirous of honey bitter with misery,

collected outside as sound, touch, form, taste and smell, always

flies out through the senses. Though by dispassion the senses are

forcibly closed and the mind shut in, yet remaining within, it

will be thinking of the present or recollecting the past or building

castles in the air.

D.: How can even its subtle activities be checked and itself

completely subdued?

M.: Checking its external activities and confining it within,

this bee of the mind must be made to be drunk with the honey

of the Heart lotus, i.e., the Bliss of the Self.

128. D.: Please explain this yoga.

M.: With an intense desire for Liberation, reaching a Guru,

hearing from him the non-dual Brahman shining forth as Being-

Knowledge-Bliss of the Self, understanding It though indirectly

yet as clearly as one understands Vishnu etc., turning the mind

one pointedly to this Brahman, without taking to enquiry by

reflection (manana) always meditating on the non-dual Self of

Being-Knowledge-Bliss, attributeless and undifferentiated, is

called yoga. By its practice the mind becomes tranquil and can

gradually go to samadhi. In samadhi it will experience the

Supreme Bliss.

129-130. D.: Has any other said so before?

M.: Yes. Sri Bhagavan has said: The yogi who, controlling

the mind, always turns it upon the Self, becomes perfectly

calm, and ultimately gains Me i.e., the Bliss of Liberation.

The mind of the yogi who always practises yoga, will be steady

like a flame protected from the breeze and without movement

will pass into samadhi.

131-133. Similarly by enquiry, the mind readily gains peace

and samadhi.

D.: What is this enquiry?

M.: After hearing from the Guru about the nature of the

Self which in the shastras is spoken of as Brahman or Being-

Knowledge-Bliss, to gain a clear indirect knowledge, then

according to upadesa and by intelligent reasoning to enquire

and find out the Self which is Pure Knowledge, and the nonself

which is objective and insentient like the ego, to discern

and sift them, then directly to experience them as different from

52

ADVAITA BODHA DEEPIKA

each other, later on by meditation to extinguish all that is

objective, and to absorb into the Self the residual mind left over as

non-dual, ends in the direct experience of Supreme Bliss. Here

it has been described in brief, but the shastras deal with it

elaborately.

134. This chapter on Sadhana has dealt with these two

means, Enquiry and Yoga, for making the mind still. According

to his merits an intelligent seeker should practise either of them.

135. This Chapter is meant for the earnest student in order

that he may study carefully and analyse his qualifications to

ascertain what he already has and what more are wanted. After

properly equipping himself he can find out which of these two

methods suits him and then practise it till success.

HEARING

1. In the foregoing chapter we had seen that yoga is suited

to the lower grade of seekers and enquiry to the higher. In this

chapter we shall consider the path of enquiry which effortlessly

leads to Knowledge of Brahman.

2-4. D.: What is this path of enquiry?

M.: From the shastras it is well known to consist of sravana,

manana, nidhidhyasana and samadhi i.e., hearing the Truth,

reflection, meditation and Blissful Peace. The Vedas themselves

declare it to be so. “My dear, the Self must be heard from the

master, reflected and meditated upon.” In another place it is

said that in Blissful Peace the Self must be realised. The same

idea has been repeated by Sri Sankaracharya in his Vakyavrtti,

namely that until the meaning of the sacred text “I am Brahman”

is realised in all its true significance, one must be practising

sravana etc.

5-7. In Chitra Deepika, Sri Vidyaranyaswami has said that

enquiry is the means of knowledge and it consists in hearing

the Truth, reflection and meditation; only the state of blissful

Peace of awareness in which Brahman alone exists and nothing

else, is the true “nature” of Knowledge; the non-revival of the

knot of the ego parading as “I” which has been lost once for all,

is its “effect”; always to remain fixed as ‘I am the Supreme Self ’

just as strongly, unequivocally and unerringly as the heretofore

ignorant identification “I am the body” is its end; liberation is

its fruit. From this it follows that only hearing etc. is the enquiry

into the Self.

CHAPTER IV

SRAVANA

8-10. To hear the Supreme Truth, reflect and meditate on

it, and to remain in Samadhi form together the enquiry into

the Self. They have for their cause (Hetu) the aforesaid four

sadhanas, namely, discernment, desirelessness, tranquillity and

desire to be liberated. Which of these is essential for which part

of enquiry will be mentioned in its appropriate place. Here we

shall deal with sravana.

M.: Sravana consists in ascertaining, by means of the six

proofs considered together, that the Vedas aim at the non-dual

Brahman only.

11-12. To analyse sravana under the five categories:-

Intense desire to be liberated gives rise to it; always to be

hearing of the non-dual Brahman is its nature; the complete

removal of that aspect of the veiling power of Ignorance

which says, “It (Brahman) does not exist” is its effect; non

recurrence of this veiling power is its limit; a firm indirect

knowledge is its fruit.

13. D.: How can the desire to be liberated be said to be

its cause?

M.: In the sruti it is said: “In the state of dissolution before

creation there was only the non-dual Reality.” This Reality is

the same as the Self. Only he who is eager to be liberated will

seek the knowledge of the Self and take to hearing it. No other

is interested in It. Therefore eagerness to be liberated is the

essential requisite for this part of enquiry, viz. sravana.

14. D.: Just now you said that always to be hearing of the

non-dual Self is the nature of sravana. Who is this non-dual

Self?

M.: He is famous in the srutis as the Consciousness beyond

the gross, subtle and causal bodies, apart from the five sheaths

and witness of the waking, dream and sleep states.

15-17. D.: What can be beyond the gross, subtle and

causal bodies?

M.: Of these the gross body is composed of skin, blood,

muscles, fat, bones, nerve stuff and lymph; it is secreting and

excreting; it is born and it dies; like a wall it is insentient; like a

pot it is an object of the senses.

The subtle body is the internal organ (antahkarana) wellknown

as the mind, which functions as the ‘I’ mode and ‘this’

mode; together with the five vital airs, the five senses and the

five organs and limbs, it transmigrates to other bodies or worlds;

always remaining within a gross body it experiences pleasures

and pains.

The beginningless, neither real nor unreal, and indescribable

Ignorance manifests these subtle and gross bodies and

is therefore said to be the causal body.

Om Tat Sat

                                                        

(Continued...) 

(My humble salutations to H H Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi  and  Hinduism online dot com for the collection)

(The Blog  is reverently for all the seekers of truth, lovers of wisdom and   to share

the Hindu Dharma with others on the spiritual path and also this is purely  a non-commercial)