ADVAITA-SAADHANAA
(Kanchi Maha-Swami's
Discourses)
ADVAITA-SAADHANAA
(Kanchi Maha-Swamigal’s Discourses)
11.
Why then tell others,what is suitable only for Sannyaasis?
I
might have named you a dud, but you may raise the question: “How is it right to
call us a dud without understanding reality? Talking without any concern for
actual state of today’s world – how is it proper?” One may also think “Eternal
Peace is of course very tempting. But to attempt it in the third stage if one
is required to don the ochre robe of Sannyasa, it is not practical. We are not
ready for it, nor do we have the maturity for it. To obtain Peace one is asked to
run away from all relationships, household and profession. But there is always
the lurking fear about what will happen if one runs away from all this; that
fear itself will take away all the peace that one is after. In the context of
our bondages of desires and attachment how can we do justice to the Ashrama of
a Sannyasi? Will it not end up in a mess? And being in that Ashrama, every
fault will be a major sacrilege. By taking up Sannyasa now itself and
attempting to live by it is only equivalent to cheating ourselves by ourselves.
And the Swami who recommends all this to us is not such a dud as to think that
we can live a Sannyasi’s life and do Atma vichara all the time. Then why does
he insist on our sitting here and keep listening to his lectures?” In other
words, you are asking why I am telling all and sundry what is only applicable
to Sannyasis and to those mature ones who are capable of Sannyasa and are
willing to take it up.
12.
Two different paths for two different aspirants
Your
question is legitimate. JnAna teachings may be done in abundance,
conferences on advaita may be held in plenty, books on the subject may be
published in cheap editions as well as for free distribution – all these
paraphernalia may draw large crowds certainly, and the books may be in high
demand, but finally those who actually carry the teachings in practice will be
few and far between. “One in a thousand makes the attempt; and even among them
a rare one persists and succeeds” says Bhagavan Himself. That is His play of MAyA!
Except for those rare ones whose good samskara from previous lives is really
strong all others are just unable to think Advaita-saadhanaa 22
seriously of getting themselves out of the rut of worldly
activities and of the pulls and pushes of the mind.
Therefore
the Lord distinguishes two categories of people in the Gita and calls one of
them eligible to do only karma and demarcates the other to be eligible to go
the jnAna path. Not only that. He says clearly it is not He who has now
made this distinction, but it has been there ever since ancient times, by the
use of the words “purA proktA”.This word ‘purA’ is what occurs in
the derivation of the word ‘purANa’. The very first ShAstra, the Vedas,
have themselves made this distinction. “proktA” means ‘well-declared’.
It is Ishvara who has given this message through the Vedas and so He
says “This has been taught by me in ancient times”. And what are the two
paths?: “jnAna yogena sAnkhyAnAM karma-yogena yoginAM”. They are jnAna
yoga and Karma yoga.
It
is jnAna yoga that is our topic of advaita-SAdhanA. It is only
for them who have very noble samskaras. They are called sAnkhyas by the Lord.
Several kinds of meanings are usually given to this. I am thinking of one in a
lighter vein. ‘sankhyA’ means counting. Population is called ‘jana-sankhyA’.
Therefore why can’t we take that ‘sAnkhyas’ means those who can be
counted easily! It is for them and for them only that jnAna-yoga or
advaita-SAdhanA is meant. Karma yoga is meant for the others.
Karma
is talked of as pravRRitti (involvement in the world) and jnAna is
talked of as nivRRitti (renunciation from the world) The two have been
clearly distinguished by Manu himself -- who gave us the most important ShAstra
-- *pravRRittaM nivRRittaM ca dvi-vidhaM karma vaidikaM* (Manu-dharma-shAstra
XII – 88). Two different types of people who have different mental make-up,
maturity and samskAra have been given two different paths. The same thing has
been said in Brahma-sutra III – 4 – 11. Just as we partition one hundred rupees
into two parts and give fifty rupees each to two different people, the paths
towards Atman have been divided as karma and jnAna and have been given
to two differently qualified people – this is what that Sutra says. This Sutra
actually occurs three-fourths way in the text of the Brahma-Sutra. But right in
the beginning itself, the same matter has been built into the very first Sutra
*athAto brahma-jijnAsA* which says “Thereafter, hence forward,
deliberation on Brahman”. This ‘thereafter’ has been explained by the Acharya
in his Bhashya. Having attained perfection in the first stage, namely the path
of karma, then having done all the SAdhanAs in the second stage (which
we are about to see), -- after all these, getting the Sannyasa through the Guru
and also the Upadesha (formal teaching) of the Mahavakyas Maha-swamigal’s
Discourses 23
and after this, one is ready and eligible to devote whole time in
a dedicated fashion to pursue the deliberations on Brahman: this is what the
Acharya says in his explanation of the first Sutra.
Those
who are gathered here -- maybe there are one or two exceptions; but the others
– are only eligible for karma yoga. Certainly they cannot cast off their karma.
“Do your karma, persistently. But don’t look for the fruits, don’t keep them as
your sole desire; do your karma because it is svadharma, it is your
duty. Leave the fruits as the responsibility of the dispenser of fruits” . This
teaching is karma yoga.
Only
after the mind has been purified by such desireless karma does one become eligible
for JnAna-yoga. In his Gita Bhashya the Acharya has made this crystal
clear. Though in modern times several persons – Tilak, Gandhi and others – say
that the gita teaching is that karma yoga is a direct path to salvation, the
Acharya has shown that it is not so. We are not directly concerned with that
topic now, but I have touched on that unknowingly; so let me ‘clear’ some
cobwebs.
*svakarmaNA
tam-abhyarchya siddhiM vindati mAnavaH* -- A person by doing his svadharma
as a dedication to God, attains the goal – so says the Gita in its last
chapter. Those who say that karma yoga is a direct SAdhanA for moksha,
interpret the word ‘siddhi’ here as ‘mokshaM’. But the Acharya explains: “The
siddhi that is spoken of here is only the eligibility for jnAna-yoga;
the end-goal (siddhi) of karma-yoga is the transition from the stage of
renunciation of the fruits of action to the stage of renunciation of karma
itself so that one can enter the stage of jnAna yoga and pursue the
enquiry of the Atman all the time”. Reading his impeccable logic with all its
pros and cons one is sure that this is the correct understanding. Wherever the
Gita extols karma yoga to the skies, it should be taken as ‘artha-vAda’,
says the Acharya. To cheer us up and encourage us to go by a certain path is
what ‘artha-vAda’ means. It is like telling the child to learn its
alphabet in order that ‘the child may become king of the country’! This
cheering up is nothing but ‘artha-vAda’. In other words, it is an
exaggeration done in the best interests and well-meant. When we wail in
desperation :“Only jnAna is the path to moksha; but I am not able to go
the jnAna path; I think I have to only sweat it out with this karma” –
the Lord, in order to cheer us up in the path which is suitable to us, says:
“Don’t under-estimate karma yoga like that, my dear; this karma yoga can do
this, can do that, in fact it will give you such and such merits”. However when
he talks about the JnAni, ‘The JnAni is nothing but myself’ (*jnAnIt-vAtmaiva
me mataM*), ‘The JnAnis are those who have reached my bhAva’ (*mad-bhAvam-AgatAH*)
– so says He in right earnest. Advaita-saadhanaa 24
The Lord has thus in His own words demarcated JnAna yoga
for sAnkhyas and karmayoga for yogis.
Bhagavan
uses the word ‘yogI’ for those who are eligible for karma-yoga. We think that a
yogi is some great one who sits with breath control and has controlled his
mind. But then why does he say that such a one does not have yet the maturity
for JnAna, but is only on some right path along karma yoga? For this
also I have a novel explanation. ‘Yoga’ implies uniting. ‘Union’ is the direct
meaning. A union requires two entities, at least. There may be three, four, or
anything higher. Only then can we talk of a union and ‘yoga’ can occur. When
there is only one thing, there is no question of that ‘union’. That remains as
Itself. There is nothing outside to unite with it. When we see it this way, a
‘yogi’ is always a dualist, ‘related’ to something else; in other words, he is
still revolving in the MAyA world. He is not someone who can stand alone
as an advaitin. [The Swami says smiling]: I am saying this in a lighter vein.
Let not scholars and pundits mistake me!
Most
of us are attached to karma (‘karma-sangis). The utmost that we can do is to do
the karma without attachment to the fruits. That itself is difficult. All our
labouring is for some kind of result. When that is so, to do the karma without
any thought for the fruit of it is certainly most difficult. And to be asked to
go a step higher – why one step, in fact several several steps – to renounce
the karma itself and be only doing the dhyana all the time, is to do the
impossible! It is to ‘karma-sangis’ the Bhagavan says: “You don’t have to do
anything in the matter of the Atman. Just keep doing your karma as a yoga. Let
the purification of the kind happen in its own course. After that you can enter
the Jnana domain”. It is the same Bhagavan who says “That path is for the
Sankhyas but this one is for you” and has thus demarcated the paths. We are going
in a certain path, and we actually are only struggling to keep in our own path;
what is the use of our knowing about another path which is supposed to be
inaccessible for us. [And the Swami says smiling]: In short, why this headache
of this sermon to us?
I
shall tell you now.
13.
Reason for telling every one
What
we are supposed to be doing is to renounce the desire for the fruits of karma;
to try to do so. That itself is formidable. Without a Maha-swamigal’s
Discourses 25
thought for the fruit of the action, to keep on doing the present svadharma
just to exhaust our previous karma balance and thereby attain a
purification of the mind is an uphill task. Just to do this – not as a means to
be able to do the nidhidhyAsana of the Jnana path; but just to reduce
the attachment to the fruits in the karma path itself – we have to clarify our
minds by learning several abstract concepts and meanings and practising several
regimens of exercise. But as a matter of fact, ultimately, all these are the
same steps that are prescribed in advaita-SAdhanA. To take sannyAsa and
do shravana, manana and nidhidhyAsana, there are SAdhanA steps
prescribed; the same steps are also necessary for progress in the right way of
doing karma yoga. But one need not have to swim in such deep waters; it is
enough to keep oneself in shallow waters – the necessity is only that much.
A
History (of India) book for the fourth grader also starts from Mohenjo Dharo
civilisation, Vedic period, Buddha’s times, Age of the Mauryas, Gupta period,
Age of the Turks, and Period of English rule, thus covering the entire
spectrum. And the same sequence of lessons is also there for a student at the
Master’s level. Certainly there is a large difference between the two levels,
but what is taught at the elementary level is also needed here at the higher
level. In the same way, on the path of JnAna also the subject-matter
that occurs at the higher level are also to be taught to the school students of
the karma yoga level, though in a smaller dose.
Going
to Switzerland,
playing ice skating there, and having a pleasant sight of the lofty mountains
there -- one may think that these are inaccessible and get a little
satisfaction by seeing them only in colour photographs. But this very
preliminary satisfaction sparks a desire to look forward to an actual
experience of these things and makes one put in an effort for the same. Finally
one may or may not go to Switzerland.
By going there one may not obtain permanent happiness. But there is a spiritual
world which gives permanent happiness. This desire for this permanent happiness
is a must for everybody. Let the actual attainment of this be far away. But
that attainment is our birthright and it is our only goal of life and we must
create a longing for ourselves in that direction. It is to generate that
longing, that this permanent happiness is projected here as if in a photograph.
There
is another reason also. Every one may not be ready for the advaita SAdhanA right
now. But that does not mean that every one is at the bottom rung of the
(spiritual) ladder. There may be different types of people: those with a little
purified mind and a little of discrimination and dispassion; and those with a
reasonably good Advaita-saadhanaa 26
purity of the three ‘karanas’ (trikarana-shuddhi) and of
discrimination and dispassion. For them to know the SAdhana-regimen is
to provoke their interest in an eager thought : “Let me make a little more
effort, correct myself so that I may go in that direction”. Just because it has
been said that “here is a path”, they may start first of all just to know what
it is and then later to actually make efforts to go along that path. Thus it
all ends up turning different types of people in the right direction. A mantra
or a Kundalini method, which might be disastrous if even slightly wrongly done,
must be protected as a secret without being made available to all and sundry.
Jnana-yoga is not like that. By revealing it to all there is nothing wrong.
One
point has to be emphasized here. Though the Acharya has prescribed
Sannyasa-Ashrama only for those who take Jnana yoga itself as their SAdhanA;
he has declared that those who are not so qualified (though they should not do
it as a SAdhanA exercise), should know about Atman and should be at
least aware of the thoughts of the Atman.
He
has written a small expository work called “Bala-bodha-sangrahaM”. ‘sangraham’
means a summary. The very name ‘bala-bodham’ indicates that it is intended for
children. In those days an eight-year old child would have his upanayanam. And
then when the child goes for gurukula-vasam, for the first few years, he still
is a child. It is for such children the teaching of Bala-bodham is intended. It
is designed by the Acharya as if a child is asking questions and the guru is
answering. The teaching is actually an advaita vedanta education. The basic
points of advaita are all given there in a nutshell. He has also mentioned the
different angas (parts) of advaita SAdhanA. Is it not clear from this
that the Acharya never intended the contents of advaita vedanta only for those
who paractise jnana yoga after acquiring all the preliminary qualifications?
Shouldn’t we understand from this that he thought that nobody should be
ignorant of the permanent truths of advaita philosophy? A direct practice of it
may happen at any time; but the methodology of the regimen, the path of SAdhanA,
should be in the knowledge of every one – that must have been the Acharya’s
contention.
We
usually think that the moment we speak of the Acharya, it is only about advaita.
His greatness however is in the fact that he did not insist on it for every
one. Just because he has structured the philosophy of advaita so strongly and
beautifully he did not keep it as a regimen of practice for all. He understood
human nature very well. So with great compassion and sympathy he allotted to
certain people only the karma path and kept advaita for the rest.
Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 27
14.
The matter of Bhakti Yoga
An
important point. Why did the Acharya, as well as Lord Krishna Himself,
demarcate only two classes of people: those who qualify for karma yoga and
those who qualify for jnAna yoga?
[Note
by VK: cf. B. G. III – 3]
Why
did they not make one more classification, namely, those who qualify for
bhakti? This is because, both the karma yogi and the jnAna yogi need to
have bhakti. In both the classes, bhakti is an important part and both have to
do it. That is why it was not separated into a class by itself. The karma
pathfinder has to show bhakti at a certain level while the jnAna pathfinder
has to do the same at a different level. Already I told you about two levels of
shraddhA. Just as we use the word bhakti-shraddhA, in bhakti also
there are two such levels! – as we have two levels of courses in Shorthand and
Typewriting!. The lower level – karma pathfinder does bhakti in order to
recognise the thought that there is an Ishvara above us who watches us
and gives punishment. He should then progress in the same level and continue to
do bhakti now to focus the mind through Love. A further progress – still in the
same ‘lower’ level, not ‘higher’ – would make him carry on bhakti with the
attitude of surrender of all fruits of action. And now at the higher level, the
jnana pathfinder does his bhakti with the thought: ‘The Brahman or the Atman
for which I am doing my SAdhanA, it is the same brahman that, in its
saguna, is the Ishvara; it is that Ishvara who has granted me the
taste in this path and it is only by His Grace that I should obtain siddhi
(success).
Above
this -- above or below, higher or lower, none of which is applicable now – is
the bhakti of those ‘siddhas’ who have reached that experiential stage (of
Brahman Realisation). For them there is no reason why they do bhakti, says
Sukacharya , one such realised soul. (Shrimad Bhagavatam I – 7 – 10).
Thus,
at all levels, there is bhakti in both karma and jnAna; that is why
bhakti is not separately mentioned.
15.
Knowledge of advaita basic requirement for every one
Thus
the entire society was conceived of by the Acharya as two classes – karma
pathfinder and jnana pathfinder – and he kept advaita SAdhanA only for
the jnana pathfinder. But though it was Advaita-saadhanaa 28
kept like that, the general knowledge about that shastra should be
there for all, including the karma pathfinder – so did he feel.
I
happen to hold his name. So I have the duty to tell every one about the advaita
siddhanta that he propagated so meticulously. That is why I began to talk on
this topic. Usually I don’t talk on this. Because there is too much talk about
advaita from every quarter and mostly it all ends up in talk and nothing in
execution; and in the process, every one has a false feeling that they have
become advaitins by just talking!. And I did not want to add to this talk and
add to the Illusion of the general run of people. But recently ,
[Note
by Ra. Ganapati: He is referring to the Shankara Jayanti celebrations at
Tandiarpet, Chennai in 1965. This talk of his and a substantial part of the
other portions were delivered to a select group of devotees, just a few days
after that celebration]
there
was a jayanthi celebration here and also a vidvat-sadas (symposium by
scholars). Some persons came to me and requested: “ Why can’t we be taught some
advaita?”. So I thought, in the name of the position I hold as an advaita-guru,
I ought at least to tell people about what the requirements are for advaita SAdhanA
and what the restrictions are therein. Those who so requested me are also
here; so without further postponement, I am now beginning ....
I
was telling you how from his elementary treatise entitled ‘Bala-bodham’, we can
easily conclude that the Acharya holds the view that every one should have the
thought about the Atman and should know about the basics of advaita shAstra.
Another
of his prakaranams for the general public is called “Prashnottara-ratna-mAlikA”.
This is also written for the average householder. It is in the form of
Questions and answers. ‘Prashna’ means question and ‘Uttara’ means reply. The
two are combined in a raga-malika fashion and called prashna-uttara-malika.
‘Who
is dead even while living?’ is one such question. *ko hatah*. The reply is:
*kriyA brashhTaH*, that is, the one who avoids doing the karma that is his due.
The same Acharya, who has said in works of Jnana like Viveka Chudamani that
“Only he who renounces all his karma regimen, takes Sannyasa and enquires into
the Atman does justice to this human birth, all others have killed their Atman;
in other words they are dead even though living” – the same Acharya now says that
man has to do only his bounden karma, otherwise he is ‘dead even while living’.
This shows that this work has been aimed at an audience of average people.
Again, to the question ‘By what is a Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 29
man free from unhappiness?’, the reply is given: ‘By an obedient
wife’ (Verse 31); ‘Who is the friend?’ – ‘Wife’ (Verse 49); again to the
question ‘Who is a true friend? The reply goes ‘certainly the wife’. All these
show that he keeps as his audience the householders who are living in the
grahasthashrama. But even in such works the Acharya does not avoid things that
pertain to the Atman. And he has done it very artistically. What I mean is,
whenever he talks about the situation of the JnAni and his state of
mind, he subtly indicates “This is not for you. You need not be right away like
this. This applies to only those who have fully taken up the Atma-SAdhanA”,
though he is actually describing the lakshana (characteristic) that pertains
wholly to a jnani. When he talks about generalities applicable to all, he just
carries on his teaching without delineating any characteristic behaviour. An
example will help the understanding.
(For
instance) Right in the beginning he talks formally about the Guru – of course,
in the style of question and answer. Then (verse 3) the first question itself
is *tvaritaM kiM kartavyaM vidushhAM*. It means ‘What should the knowing
ones do immediately?’ Mark the word ‘knowing ones’ here. ‘VidvAn’ means a
scholar, a person who knows. The plural of this is ‘vidvAmsaH’. The genitive
case of this is ‘vidushhAM’. The question raised is: ‘What is the immediate
work of the knowing ones?’. The question is not about the common man. It is
only about the higher level ‘knowing ones’. What is it that they should do with
a sense of urgency? This is the question. The reply comes: *santatic-chedaH*
-- ‘to cut asunder the chain of samsAra’. In other words, it means
to obtain the release from the repetitive deaths (and births). Thus the path to
moksha should be recalled even right at the beginning to the common man – this
view of the Acharya is implicit here. However the urgency about it is not for
the common man, it is for the ‘knowing ones’.
Later
one meets with the question: *kasmAt udvegaH syAt?* (Shloka 19) -- Of
what should one tremble? The word ‘udvega’ means trembling or fearing. That is
the direct meaning. Nowadays many use ‘udvegam’ to denote an excessive haste or
a speed of action sparked by a motive or urge. That is wrong. ‘udvegam’ means
just ‘trembling’ or ‘fearing’. The question is: “What deserves to be feared?”.
The reply comes: *samsAra araNyataH sudhiyaH* -- he says it is the
forest of samsara that has to be feared. And when saying this he characterises
it by adding the word ‘sudhiyaH’. This means ‘those with higher knowledge’. In
other words what is implied is that only the people who are qualified for the
higher knowledge think of samsara as a thing to be feared as a dangerous forest
and so they should get out of it and obtain sannyAsa. The common man
should just know that this will be Advaita-saadhanaa 30
the response of the man with higher knowledge and that is why this
question and this answer.
The
‘knower’ scholar should break off from the samsara; the man with higher
intelligence (sudhIH) should fear the forest of samsara – an average man like
us should be aware of such things. Not only that. The Acharya has said one more
thing that all of us should do; and that he says in an interesting manner.
*kiM
samsAre sAraM* (Verse 5) is the question: What is the essence of samsara?
The
answer is given: *bahusho’pi vicintyamAnaM idaM eva* -- “to keep
thinking of this again and again”.
“Of
what?’
“Just
now you asked: ‘What stuff is there in samsara?’ –that is what you have to ask
again and again and keep thinking of. The objective of this birth is to ask
oneself repeatedly whether there is any fruit for this birth and keep enquiring
about it. That is what he means by *idam eva bahusho’pi vicintyamAnaM*’’
If
one keeps asking himself like this and analysing it by one’s intellect, one
will get to know there is nothing of essence (sAra) in this samsAra.
And there will come an urge to know the Atman that is the real essence. That is
when we realise it is only by pursuing the question ‘kiM samsAre sAraM’
relentlessly we have come to this stage of longing for this most noble quest
(of the Atman). It is only this question that opens our eyes from our being a
samsAri (involved in samsAra) and thinking that that is all there is to
our life. And so if there is anything worthwhile in samsAra, it is this
question; a relentless pursuit of the question.
In
other words the shloka means that we should be constantly engaged in the
thought of the Atman. Note that he does not add the words of qualification like
‘vidvAn’ or ‘sudhIH’. So this is a teaching for all people. The
Acharya thinks that even the common man who was spoken of as ‘dead even when
living’ if he leaves off his karma, has always to keep thinking of the release
from the samsAra.
Here
he has said that the question ‘What is worthwhile in samsAra?’ should be
repeatedly asked of oneself. A little later, he raises another question (Shloka
16) “What is it that should be thought about, day and night?” : *kA
ahar-nishaM anuchintyA?*. Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 31
And he gives the reply: *samsAra-asAratA* -- namely, “the samsAra
has no worth in it”.
The
Acharya has blessed us with a work called ‘SopAna-panchakaM’. When his
devotees come to know that he was winding up his mortal journey and was ready
to reach Brahma-nirvANaM, they requested of him: “You are leaving us all. You
have given volumes of advice and teaching to us in writing. But we may not be
abole to read all of that. So before you are done with this incarnation can you
please condescend to summarise them all and give us an upadesha?”. In reply to
this he delivers what is called ‘upadesha-panchakaM’ also known as
‘sopAna-panchakaM’. ‘SopAnaM’ means staircase. In this work he gives a
step-by-step procedure for us ordinary people to start from the rock bottom
starting point and go all the way to that peak stage of
Brahman-illumination.The beginning is
*vedo
nityam adhIyatAm tad-uditaM karma svanushhTIyatAM*
“Daily
practise the recitation of the vedas and perform the karmas prescribed
therein”. So obviously all this is for those who are to proceed by the karma
path. But in the very same teaching it says: “Nurture the taste for the Atman!
Get out from the household! Get the mahavakya upadesha from the Guru!” and then
finally “Settle yourself in the Absolute Brahman”. Naturally the Acharya means
that even those who are at present qualified only for karma should be aware of
subjects connected with jnAna-yoga.
If
we continue our scrutiny like this it is confirmed that though the Acharya has
distinguished between those who are qualified for jnAna and those who
are qualified for karma just like the Lord distinguished very clearly between
sankhyas and yogis, he did feel that the majority who were qualified for karma
only should also have a basic knowledge of jnana. Bhagavan (Krishna)
also thought in the same way. He classifed Arjuna only as suited for Karma. All
of us know the familiar ‘karmany-eva adhikAras-te’ teaching. He brought
back to the battle that Arjuna who was ready to run away from the battlefield
saying he would not fight. But even in that very Gita which constituted that
advice, he has not stopped with karma yoga but has elaborated about jnAna yoga
in detail. Right in the beginning it begins only with Sankhya yoga in all its
abstractness.
[And
the Swamigal adds with a smile] : All this is ‘justification’ for me (and my
talk)! Advaita-saadhanaa 32
Experts in music pursue a lot of study about the svaras and the
ragas, their elaborations and nuances and the nyasas and the vinyasas
associated with them before they decide on a particular mode of delivery. The
child beginning to have music lessons also has the same sa-ri-ga-ma-pa-da-ni
for his practice. He may not be taught all the elaborations and the nuances of
the svaras, but the sharp and abrupt voicings of the svaras are supposed to be
enough at that stage. In the early stages it is the coordination of the shruti
and the rough fixation of the svara-sthanas that are considered to be enough.
Starting from these elementary and rough beginnings, one is taken up to all the
different nuances and gymnastics about the nyasas and vinyasas in the higher
stages of practice. So also sannyAsa comes at the end of life. What
subtle realities and techniques of practice one gets to know at that end stage,
the same realities and techniques have to be learnt by all in an elementary way
like a child learns sa-ri-ga-ma-pa-da-ni.
16.
Nitya-anitya-vastu-vivekam:
(Discrimination
between the permanent and the ephemeral)
The first one, like the
‘sa’ of music, in SAdhanA, that is, in SAdhanA-chatushTayaM,
is NityAnitya-vastu-vivekaM.
Doing our karmas sincerely
and systematically as per the ShAstras, dedicating all of them to Ishvara,
doing bhakti towards that Ishvara, by means of these attaining a certain
purification in the mind, as well as obtaining a capability to keep the mind
steady on one thing – all these constitute the first stage. First stage, not in
jnAna yoga, but in the spiritual dimensional journey of the jIva. This
belongs to karma yoga only. The second stage begins after this and that is the
first stage in jnAna yoga. And in that, the first subject of mention is
‘nityAnitya-vastu-vivekaM’. So now let us asume that we have all reached
that maturity resulting from the observance of karma and bhakti. [The Swamigal
adds with a smile]: Let us build castles in the air, or cheat ourselves so and
start to learn the ways of jnAna yoga. We certainly do a lot of
castle-building and self-cheating; let us now do it for some good purpose!
If one wants to get
involved in matters of the Atman, what should lie at the base of all that? It
is the knowledge that the Atman is the only permanent entity all other things
being only ephemeral. If this knowledge is not there, man will always remain a
samsAri and continue to suffer as he does now. The basic conviction that
‘everything that gives Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 33
us
pleasure in this world, that gives status and honour, all of that is
impermanent; nothing will ever give us permanent happiness; what gives
permanent happiness is only the Atman, the only permanent entity’ – this faith
is the most important thing. Now and then the mind may be distracted and drawn
towards several other things. At every such time one should beware and keep the
mind steady. “Should I go into this just because it gives me pleasure? Is this
an unmixed happiness? Even if it be unmixed happiness, will it be permanent?
Once the mind enters into it will not the taste of it entice it to make efforts
to go into it again and again? Would that not be a bondage of the mind? If
something will not help the mind to become pure and restful, should I enter
into it?” Such analysis has to be done by the intellect. It should keep
weighing the pros and cons about what is permanent and what is impermanent.
Only then can we hope to go the spiritual path.
This balancing analysis by
the intellect is called ‘vivekaM’. The analysis of balancing between
what is permanent and what is ephemeral is called *nitya-anitya-vastu-vivekaM*.
This is the very first step of Atma-SAdhanA.
About impermanent things we
certainly know well. In fact whatever we know well are all impermanent things!
Though what is permanent transcends the mind and speech, the shAstras do
tell us about it. It is from them that we learn the fundamental information
about the eternal Atman. Dwelling in thoughts of That which can give permanent
peace and permanent happiness, we should be able to throw off the the
impermanent things which can give only impermanent peace and happiness.
It is not necessary to
throw them off right in this beginning stage. Though they are not the permanent
entity, Atman, there are several things among the impermanent ones that can
help us go towards that permanent one. The shAstras about the Atman, the
teachings of great men about it, the holy pilgrimage centres that produce a
pure state of mind, puranas and stotras and several similar ones, are all
there. Of course none of these is the Atman. Only when even these are
nullified, the Realisation of the Atman takes place. The experience of
Permanence is that of being the Atman alone, without any thought or action. The
only Absolute Truthful experience is that and nothing else. Even if God Himself
stands before us and gives darshan, even if we are in the lap of Mother goddess
(AmbaaL herself) and She pets us – even that is not the experience of the
Permanent Reality of the Atman. However, all these can lead us to a close
proximity to that. Thus there are things of happiness – what we then consider
to be happiness – that range all the way from those which takes us to that
Permanent experience to those Advaita-saadhanaa 34
which
takes us away very far. At the beginning stage we should choose, by our
discretion, the good ones among these and use them to take us on the right
path. Recall what the God of Death (Yama) told Nachiketas: ‘By means of
impermanent entities we should reach the Permanent One’ (Kathopanishad: II –
10).
The true Sadhaka on the JnAna
path would have already escaped from the sensual pleasures that are nothing
but obstacles to spiritual growth and from those others which are far away from
the Atman, like the pleasures of gossip, and of being an idler doing nothing.
But ordinary people like us who have to start from these beginnings, have to
use our discretion (vivekaM) that can distinguish between the Permanent and the
impermanent. Movies, gluttony, addiction to coffee or cricket commentary,
reading senseless fiction, excited gossip about politics – thus there are many
more that attract us very forcefully. We have to be alert and keep thinking:
‘Would these things contribute even an iota to my spiritual growth? Should I
give them so much importance?’ What can lead us to That Permanent One and what
cannot? – a mercilessly strict balancing analysis is what
nityAnityavastu-vivekaM means. I said ‘mercilessly strict’ because our mind
always tries to rationalize doing what it likes to do; it will find all sorts
of justifications. Use the discriminatory power that does not give in to that
kind of imagination and that judges this analysis very strictly, to assess
ourself. See that it does not allow itself to ‘pass’ what deserves a ‘fail’.
What I have just said is
for the majority of us who are the average. Those who have done the Atma-SAdhanA
exclusively and attained a certain maturity must have probably released
themselves from the fascination for coffee, cricket, etc.. But even they would
have some small weaknesses connected with the satisfaction of the senses. Such
things may even be good for us at our level and might help us go up the
spiritual ladder but these might not be necessary for them. So they should
carefully search for these and release themselves of these things also.
Atman-Realisation is the only thing to be looked for; in the absence of it one
should feel like a fish out of water. It is with that kind of anguish one
should stay out of , say, even social service which may prove to be right for
the average karma yogi, even pilgrimages, and even the upAsanA method of
bhakti. Remember I told you about lying on the lap of AmbaaL – even that! All
these are impermanent; he should have the discretion to be able to avoid all
this and resort only to those that can take him deep into the Atman. “Atman is
the only thing desired; everything else is anAtma and all of them should be
discarded” -- this should be the fervent conviction.
nityAnitya-vastu-vivekaM is
also known as AtmAnAtma-vastu vivechanaM. ‘vivechanaM’ and ‘vivekaM’ are
the same. It means the capability to sort out what is good and what is bad. The
only discretion Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 35
that
advaita shAstra recommends is this capability to sort out what is AtmA
and what is anAtmA. The work “Viveka-chUDAmaNi” is also called
“AtmAnAtma-viveka-chUDAmaNi”. As soon as the mangalAcharaNaM shloka – that is,
the verse of benediction in the beginning of a work – is over, the text begins
with the topic of SAdhanA path. There he talks about the performance of
routine as per vaidika dharma, then scholarship in the vedas -- these two being
common to all paths – and then he mentions just one thing, namely
“AtmAnAtma-vivechanaM” which is the route for the JnAna pathfinder and
then goes to talk about svAnubhUti (Personal experience) and Mukti (moksha).
Later in the book the Acharya defines, at the highest level, the concept of
‘viveka’ (discrimination) that decides between the permanent and the
impermanent.
*brahma satyaM
jagan-mithyety-evaM rUpo vinishcayaH /
so’yaM
nityAnitya-vastu-vivekaH samudAhRRitaH //*
It means: Brahman is the
only Reality. The Universe is mithyA, that is, it may appear real but will
become unreal; such a firm conviction is what has been well declared as
nitya-anitya-vastu vivekaM.” Who has made the declaration? The Vedas. The
authority to declare such Truths is that of the Vedas only. The Acharya follows
that tradition and so even if he does not say “in the Vedas” he knows people
will understand it that way.
The Upanishads constitute
the ‘anta’, the finishing portion of the Vedas. Therefore we find this matter
in abundance there. Is not the very purpose of the Upanishads to take us jIvas
who are stuck in this worldly impermanence out to the Permanent One ? Starting
from the small boy Nachiketas all the way up to Indra himself several have been
known to have understood the impermanent as impermanent and comprehended the
Principle of Nitya – such stories have come down to us in Kathopanishad,
Chandogyopanishad, etc. The Lord of Death himself offered several rare gifts to
child Nachiketas, but the latter turned all of them down, saying “All these are
ephemeral; one day or other won’t they all come back to you?”. And, he insisted
on having the tattva-upadesha from the God of death himself and finally got it!
Among all the impermanent things, there is only one thing that is ever
permanent – said Yama-dharma-raja *nityo’nityAnAM*. “Whoever finds it, to him there
will be eternal peace; not for anybody else”. All that we call wealth is
anitya; nothing that belongs to anitya will ever lead to the nitya-vastu, that
is the Atman. In the Chandogya story, Virochana the King of Asuras , as well as
Indra the King of the Gods, both of them pursue the question : “What is the
Atman?”. The asura comes to the conclusion that the body is the Atman. It is
‘Asura-Vedanta’! On the other hand, Indra Advaita-saadhanaa 36
does
an analysis of experiences in the waking state, dream state and the sleeping
state, discards them one by one as unreal and finally comes to the Reality that
is the Atman. This kind of discarding is nothing but ‘nityA-nitya-vastu
vivechanam’ – the discrimination between anitya and nitya. In the Taittiriya Upanishad
Brighu Maharishi begins from the anna-maya kosha, and goes through all the
koshas, first thinking that it is Brahman and then after enquiry discarding it
and finally comes to the right conclusion that Brahman is what remains as the
substratum of even the Ananda-maya-kosha. Another way of looking at it is to
say that by proper discrimination he discarded the five koshas as impermanent
and finally got to know that the Atman is the only Permanent entity.
*neti neti* -- “Brahman is
not this, is not that; it is nothing that can be circumscribed by anything; it
is not related to another; it is not limited to anything; it is not that which
suffers; it is not that which is destroyed” so says the Brihad-Aranyaka
Upanishad. Whatever has been said here not to be Brahman, they are all matters
for the mundane world. In other words, what is circumscribed, what is related,
what is limited, what is destroyed, all these are material entities. So the
“neti, neti” analysis means to pick out the impermanent entitites of the world,
discard them as such, and hold on to the Permanent entity, Atman. “anyat ArtaM”
– “all others are having an end” . In other words, except the Atman, everything
else without exception meet their end. This idea coming again and again in
BrihadAranyaka Upanishad mantras is to distinguish the Nitya-vastu (Permanent
One) from the anityas (the impermanents).
Right in the beginning of
His Gitopadesha, Bhagavan makes it clear: Atman is the only Permanent entity.
The body from the killing of which Arjuna retreats, is nothing but ephemeral
(anitya). All experiences of the body come and go: *AgamApAyinaH anityAH*. That
which is permanent, immeasurable is only the Atman : *nityasyoktAH sharIriNaH
anAshinaH aprameyasya*, thus runs his elaboration. Later *anityam asukhaM lokaM
imaM prApya bhajasva mAM* (IX – 33) -- you have obtained a life in this
impermanent miserable world; in order to get out of this, worship Me, says He.
What does He mean by ‘Me’? He is the Atman, He is the Brahman. *ahamAtma
guDHAkeshaH sarva-bhUtAshayaH sthitaH* (X – 20) [I am established as the
indweller in the hearts of all beings]: this is His own statement. So
worshipping Him means only the meditation on the Self. The sum and substance of
what He says is: “In this world everything is impermanent; hold on to the
Atman”. The thirteenth chapter of the Gita is called ‘kshhetra-kshhetrajn~a
vibhAga-yogaM’. It is the yoga that distinguishes the body that is the
‘kshhetra’ and the conscious Atman inside that is known as ‘kshetrajn~a’. This
kshetra-kshetrajn~a yoga is nothing but the discrimination between the
permanent and the ephemeral. When the Lord defines (XIII – 5, 6)
Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 37
‘kshhetra’
as made up of the five elements, senses, the objects that senses run after,
desire (icchA), hate (dveshhaM), happiness and misery, etc., he is actually
dissecting all those that are impermanent. In the same way, he shows the
Permanent One as the kshhetrajn~a. It is clear from his further statements: “It
exists in all the universes enveloping them all; without and within all beings,
moving and unmoving, near and far away is that”. (XIII – 13,, 15). Then as He
goes along distinguishing kshhetra and kshhetrajn~a, Bhagavan says: “He who
knows the distinction between prakRRiti and purusha does not have another
birth” (XIII – 23). In other words, such a person attains moksha, says He.
Suddenly he seems to switch over to two other categories; no, kshhetraM is
prakRRiti and purushha is kshetrajn~a, as is clear from the context.
This is where he gives in a
crystallised essence the matter we have been discussing – namely
nitya-anitya-vastu vivekaM. What is known in sAnkhya shAstra as purushha
is the Absolute Reality of advaita shAstra known as Atman and Brahman.
What is called prakRRiti there (in sAnkhya) is MAyA here. Of course
there is a slight difference; but the fact that prakRRiti and purushha is the MAyA
and the Atman, respectively, is 99 percent. true. It is well known that the
Atman is the eternal Truth (nitya). So what is meant by nitya-anitya-vastu-vivekaM
is nothing but the comprehension of the Atman as separate from the effects of MAyA.
In the word ‘AtmA-anAtma-vivacanaM’, the anAtmA is nothing but MAyA. So,
to know the distinction between prakRRiti and purushha is to distinguish
between anAtmA and AtmA.
For an Atma-JnAni there
is nothing like anAtma. But being an Atma-JnAni is in the future. There
is a work called “prouDhAnubhUti” by the Acharya, a wonderful rendering in a
majestic manner of the status of a JnAni, written in such a ‘madness’
full of advaita-Ananda, that could be even mistaken by unknowing people as a
kind of pride. In fact, [the Mahaswamigal adds smiling] the ‘pride’ justifies
the name ‘prouDhAnubhUti’. In this the Acharya says very emphatically: “It is
absurd to talk about Atma-anAtma – vivechanaM. Is there a thing like anAtma? If
there is one such then how can it be negated out of existence?”. But remember,
this is the statement of one who has had the anubhUti (the Experience). But,
for those who have yet to reach that stage, the question that looms large is :
“Is there something like the Atman? It is only anAtmA that seems to be
everywhere”! For all those who have not yet reached that apex of jnAna,
it is necessary, during their efforts on the journey, to be alert and to keep
sorting out with discrimination, which is the one that is really eternal, which
is the one that is the impermanent anAtmA, and what those are that, though
impermanent, would be able to help us go to the Eternal Permanent
Advaita-saadhanaa 38
entity,
and what those are that, being impermanent, would drag us deep into further
impermanence. The Acharya, in the last but one shloka of his Bhaja Govindam,
has recommended us to do this sorting between Atman and anAtmA very carefully:
*prANAyAmaM pratyAhAraM nityAnitya-viveka-vichAraM*. The shloka after
this in Bhaja GovindaM is a phala-shruti.
The Acharya has his own
doubts whether we can do this sorting in an intelligent way; so he gives in his
prakaraNa work “anAtma-shrI-vigarhaNam” a long list of anAtma items. In
each shloka therein, the first three lines end with *tataH kim?*. It
means, “ So what? What is the use?” Status, wealth, dress and decoration,
physical beauty, fine health – there are many of this kind that we hold to be
highly esteemable and in each line one of them is mentioned, followed by a “tataH
kiM”. Three such lines in every shloka are followed by the fourth line *yena
svAtmA naiva sAkshhAt-kRRito’bhUt* (if one has not realised the Self). This
is repeated in every shloka. The meaning of this refrain is to say: If one has
not realised the Self, what is the use of his status? Of his wealth? Of his
decorative show? Of his beauty? Of his health?. One does not know the truth of
oneself; and without knowing that, what is the value of adding one’s status,
wealth and health? – this is the substance of the shlokas. Will it not look
absurd if “we don’t know somebody; but still we are going to honour that
somebody with a presentation of a purse of money”? That is the situation here,
says the Acharya. Atman is the truth of oneself; if this truth is not known
what else is going to be of value? On the other hand if one knows the Self, to
him also all these are of trivial value. In fact only if one discards all these
as trivial, one can know his own Self. Thus in any case, status, wealth,
decoration, beauty, health and whatever other things we hold to be great – all
of them are undesirable. The discarding of all of them as anAtmA (non-self)
is “anAtma-shrI vigarhaNaM”. The meanings of the word ‘shrI’ known to
everybody are: Lakshmi, auspiciousness, wealth. But there is another meaning
also: ‘poison’! Lord Shiva is keeping the poison in his throat and that is why
he is also called ‘ShrI-kanTha’. The pleasures that we consider to be of value
from wealth and auspiciousness, should be devalued as poison – this is ‘anAtma-shrI-vigarhaNaM’.
And this is nothing but another name for AtmA-anAtma-vivekaM, that is, nitya-anitya-vastu-vivekaM.
17.
Vairaagya (Dispassion)
One has to distinguish
between nitya (permanent) and anitya (impermanent), discard what
ought not to be and take what ought to be. In fact the discarding of what ought
not to be is more important. In life Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 39
itself,
between what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, it may not matter
if you don’t do what ought to be done; but by doing what ought not to be done
one invites great trouble. Take the common cold,, for instance. They say: ‘You
should have rice mixed in mustard powder, but no icecream.’ One may not eat rice
with mustard powder. But by having icecream the cold intensifies and one ends
up in fever. Thus by eating prohibited food one experiences bad consequences
immediately; on the other hand by eating the prescribed things do they
immediately help? Not necessarily; they may or may not. Again bathing in the
river Cauvery, if you do it near the shore, it is good both physically and
mentally. Those who don’t know swimming should not go into deep waters; if they
do they will be drawn into the vortex of the flow. A bath in the Cauvery may
even be missed; even if it is not missed, though the mind gets refreshed a
little, one does not observe any great improvement in health or spiritual
merit. But if one goes into deeper waters the danger of the vortex swallowing
you up is great. Thus it always happens that in this play of MAyA in the
world, the negative forces have usually more power.
It therefore follows that
once we have made an analysis of what is good for the spiritual ascent and what
is bad, thereafter we should give first priority to the discarding of those
which are bad.
Here, as I have said
earlier, the ‘thereafter’ does not mean there is a strict ‘one after the other’
rule in SAdhanA. It happens that we have to exercise all the different
steps of the SAdhanA together in a mixed fashion. At one stage some one
of them becomes important or prominent and we usually talk of it as coming
‘later’ or ‘earlier’.
When a foetus grows into a
baby, does it grow in sequence such as, first the feet, then the stomach, then
the chest and so on? All of them grow up simultaneously. So also these SAdhanAs
have to be done side by side – not one after another. At each stage the
concentration may be more in one or the other.
Thus we begin with sorting
out the good and bad. The very sorting will teach us something about the task
of discarding the bad and taking the good. And in due course of time this
sorting will become automatic, by sheer practice over a long period of time!
And that is when we have to start concentrating on the discarding of the
undesirables.
And that is the part Number
Two in the four parts of SAdhana-ChatushhTayaM. That is called *VairaagyaM*
(Dispassion). It is also called *virakti* . Advaita-saadhanaa 40
*rAgaM*
and *rakti* both mean desire or liking. The discarding of desire or liking is
*vairaagyaM* or *virakti*.
Sensual pleasures are the
greatest obstacles to Spiritual wisdom.They are pleasures of the senses. When
we run after a pleasure it means there is a desire for experiencing that
pleasure. If we have no such desire, do we run after them?
So what it means to discard
those obstacles to spiritual growth is to be rid of all desires – from the
little desire for consumption of a snack to the great one of a desire for the
obtaining of Bharat Ratna Award. This absence of desires is exactly what VairaagyaM
means.
Tirumoolar, the Tamil
mystic, describes Vairaagya parAkAshhTA (the apex of Vairaagya) as follows:
Cut off your desire; cut
off your desire!
Even with God cut off your
desire!
As you keep desiring misery
follows
Cutting off desires – that
is Happiness, Bliss!
[Tamil original: Asai
arrumingaL, Asai arrumingal !
IsanoDAyinum
Asai arrumingal !
AsaippaDappaDa
Ayvarum tunbam
Asai
viDa viDa AnandamAme ! ]
If desires are eradicated
totally, moksha is right there!. Nammazhvar has also sung: *atradu patrenil
utradu veeDu*, which means exactly the same.
‘tRshhNA’ is thirst.
Desire is a thirst. When thirst arises, the tongue craves for drinking water;
so also desire is the thirst for the enjoyment of sensual pleasures. Only when
it is gone you can get NirvANa – that was the great discovery of the Buddha,
say the Buddhistic texts.
Whatever religion there is
among civilized society it does not fail to give importance to the eradication
of desires.
Our Acharya also has given
great importance to Vairaagya that eradicates desires. In his work
*aparokshhAnubhUti*, when he refers to the SAdhanA regimen, he calls it
(shloka 3) the *vairaagyAdi chatushhTayaM* -- ‘the four parts consisting
of VairaagyaM etc.’, thus mentioning VairaagyaM as the chief
part.
How does the Acharya define
VairaagyaM, let us see: Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 41
tad-vairaagyaM
jugupsA yA darshana-shravaNAdibhiH /
dehAdi-brahma-paryante
hyanitye bhogya-vastuni //
This is the Acharya’s definition
of VairaagyaM in Viveka-chUDAmaNi (shloka 21). ‘That is indeed VairaagyaM’,
says he dramatically!
‘What is?’. Revulsion from
objects of enjoyment by this human body, all the way from those things seen,
heard, etc. in this human world to those objects of enjoyment in Brahma-loka –
that is VairaagyaM.
“jugupsA” means the feeling
of disgust that causes one to reject it. An alternative reading is ‘jihAsA’.
The meaning is the same.
Once jnAna has been
reached, then one feels love towards everything. There is no question of
revulsion then. Because, then none of the objects whether bad or tempting, will
affect him. In stages that precede that, it is not so. All objects of enjoyment
of pleasure that cause us to slip down have to be discarded with distaste --
only then one can save our Self. For the later sprouting of the personality of
Love, one has to create for oneself this feeling of aversion!
Revulsion is not of people.
Certainly not. The aversion or disgust is only towards the bondage that
originates from our attachment to them; it is only of the pleasurable things
they may offer. If one runs away from household, it is not out of aversion or
disgust of the mother, or of the wife, or son or daughter; certainly not. The
repulsion or distaste is because of the obstacles to spirituality created by
the bondage of attachment to them. The mother spoils our efforts at
soul-cleaning when we fast for the purpose, by pitying with us on our fasting
and tempting us with tasty food; when the spouse is at your side, the mind
becomes vibrant.; the son has got to be admitted in an engineering college even
if it costs a bribe of money; the daughter has to be married to a doctor
according to her own wish and accordingly a costly dowry has to be met ---
thus, each one of them binds you in a certain way. The repulsion is from this
binding. The revulsion is from such bondage of these actions and from the
enjoyable things that arise from them, not from the people concerned. Nor from
the community of animals. Even in the shloka that we are discussing, it says “bhogya-vastuni
jugupsA” – meaning, the disgust towards ‘the objects of pleasure’ and not
towards jIvas. In other words, if we isolate ourselves from the JIvas,
it is not out of hate or disgust for them but because through them we get
attached to enjoyment of experiences. Advaita-saadhanaa 42
Thus
by discrimination between the permanent and transient objects we learn that all
objects of sense-experience are transient and therefore we develop a distaste
for them *jugupsA... hyanitye bhogya-vastuni*.
Note the words *hyanitye*
instead of *anitye*. It is actually *hi anitye* that has become *hyanitye*. The
word ‘hi’ gives an emphasis to what is being said.
Only when we develop a
disgust do we stay away from those objects which generate a bondage of MAyA.
An attitude of “Leave it alone; let it be” in this matter will not be a sAtvic
attitude. It is only foolishness. “ Not being afraid of what has to be feared
is ignorance” says Tiruvalluvar. *anjuvathu anjAmai pethamai*. His Tirukkural
teaches us to be courageous men not to be afraid of anything. Even then before
one gets that courage, we should not bungle by our foolishness; so he says: “In
this world one should certainly avoid those things of which we should be
legitimately afraid; otherwise we shall only be foolish”. Ignorance and
foolishness are not far apart. Our Acharya who taught us to love everything –
the same Acharya teaches us, to develop, in the early stages of spiritual
ascent, a disgust towards those things which are in the nature of an obstacle
to the growth of spirituality.
He gives a really telling
analogy that actually may hurt us deep. It is an example which itself can be
disgusting. The same example is given by him in three books,
‘Bala-bodha-sangrahaM’, ‘aparokshAnubhUti’ and
‘sarva-vedanta-siddhanta-sara-sangrahaM’. In the first two, he says *yathaiva
kAkavishhTAyAM* and in the third, he says: *kAkasya vishhTAvat
asahya-buddhiH*. The analogy is to the leavings of a crow. Just as we have
a natural disgust for the leavings of a crow, so also there should be a disgust
towards things of sensual experience – this is the purpose of the analogy.
Suppose we are having a picnic under a tree in its shade and suddenly from the
branches of the tree a crow’s leavings fall on your plate full of excellent
food. That very moment we move away from the food in total disgust, don’t we?
Even if the crow is hushed away and we sit at another plate of good food, our
mood would have been upset and the good food refuses to go in! That kind of
disgust is what should be developed in objects of sensual enjoyment -- that is
vairaagyaM, says the Acharya. When such a disgust becomes really intense, even
a picnic will appear only as disgusting as the leavings of a crow! One will
start thinking that there is no need for a picnic when, as the Acharya has
said, it is only necessary to calm the disease of hunger by eating what one
gets by BikshhA (ritual begging).
It is not as if we are
talking only about the pleasures that one enjoys through this human body in
this world. Our distaste has to be even in Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 43
those
enjoyments one hopes to experience in the world of BrahmA. The jugupsA has
to extend that far. *dehAdi brahma-paryante*.
The Absolute Truth that is
formless and attributeless, called Brahman – that is the only thing to be
aimed. The enjoyments that may be offered by The Lord whose form is Creator
BrahmA, in his world, -- all these have to discarded as valueless.
In SAdhanA-chatushhTayaM,
when the Acharya mentions vairaagyaM he actually refers to it with a long
qualifying adjective as *ihAmutrArtha-bhoga-virAgaM* or *ihAmutra-phala-bhoga-virAgaM*.
(Brahma-sutra- bhashya: I. 1-1;
Vivekachudamani: 19).
‘iha’ + ‘amutra’ is
‘ihAmutra’. ‘iha’ means this world we live in now. ‘amutra’ means the pitR loka
or indra loka etc. which are not ‘here’ or ‘near’ but ‘far, somewhere’. The
world of the divines where several of the devas live as well as the farthest
‘brahma loka’ where Brahma lives – all of these are included in the ‘amutra’.
Tiruvalluvar says: “Those with no Money miss this world; those with no Grace
miss the other world” – ‘this world’ here is ‘iha’ and ‘the other world’ here
is ‘amutra’. The experiences in that brahma loka are also not the spiritual
experiences; nor are the bliss of the Brahma-loka the Bliss of the Atman. The
pleasure of Brahma-loka also vanishes during dissolution at the end of the
kalpa. It is not eternal or permanent like the Bliss of the Atman. Further,
even there one gets only the pleasure that keeps the distinction between
jIvAtmA and paramAtma and so it won’t be even an iota of the great Bliss of
identification of the two. Thus the ‘virAga’ is the ‘vairAgya’ in the
experience (‘bhoga’) of the objects (‘artha’) that one gets in ‘iha’ or ‘amutra’.
That is why it is ‘ihAmutrArtha-bhoga-virAgaM’. When we talk of this in
another way as ‘vairAgya’ in the experience of the fruits of this world or the
other world, he calls it ‘ihAmutra-phala-bhoga-virAgaM’. ‘artha’ is an object;
‘phala’ is that which we get from the object.
Those who have ‘vairAgya’
are known as *vIta-rAga*’s. The ‘vAtApi GanapatiM’ song has *vIta-rAginaM
vinata-yoginaM*. In Mundakopanishad (III – 2 - 5), the Rishis are said to have
obtained contentment in their Enlightenment, to have been established in the
Atman, to be ‘vIta-rAga’s (free from attachment) and finally are described as
‘prashAnta’ – those who are fully composed.
It is the distaste that
arises from vairAgya that is called *nirvedaM*. When one obtains complete
indifference to worldly matters, that is ‘nirvedaM’. Incidentally, it is this
feeling that is at the source of ‘shAnta rasa’ – says the alankAra shAstra.
‘vairAgyaM’ and ‘nirvedam’ are similar words. It is also spoken of in
the same Upanishad (I – 2 – 12) that speaks of *vItarAga*’s. The Acharyal
comments in his bhashya: The Advaita-saadhanaa 44
prefix
‘ni’ added to the root ‘vid’ gives rise to the word ‘nirvedaM’ and the meaning
is ‘vairAgyaM’ -- *vairAgyArthe*. Two things that are spoken of very
highly in the path of karma is what is known as *ishhTA-pUrtaM*, namely the
yajnas and social services. But even they are only preliminaries (*pUrvAngas*)
to be renounced after they have taken us to jnAna-yoga. Instead of
taking them to be part of karma yoga, those who think they can lead us to the
goal are only downright fools -- *pramUDha*’s, says the Upanishad. ‘Not just
ordinary fools, but totally deluded fools’. “An intelligent brahmin should
discover by analysis that even the heavens that one obtains even by the highest
type of karma are only ‘anitya’ (impermanent) ; should get the knowledge
that brahman which is actionless cannot be obtained by any action; and thus get
*nirvedaM* , that is, he should get vairAgyaM. Thereafter he should seek
a Guru who is a brahma-nishhTa, get the upadesha from him and himself get
brahma-jnAna”.
Earlier we saw that Karma
yoga is the first stage; to get the formal teaching for brahma-jnAna after
becoming a sannyAsi is the third stage; what comes in between as the second
stage is the SAdhanA-chatushhTayaM; and the second item in this
four-fold SAdhanA is vairAgyaM. But here the first stage is
spoken of as karma, then is mentioned only vairAgyaM and then quickly
the teaching of brahma-jnAna, which is actually the third stage, is
mentioned. From this it is clear that vairAgyaM alone suffices and if
one holds on to it steadfastly, all the four parts of SAdhanA-chatushhTayaM
will be acquired automatically.
When the Acharyal is
writing the BhashyaM for this Upanishad, several mantras earlier, when the
matter of the worldly apara-vidyA and the spiritual parA-vidyA comes up (I – 1
-5) he says: “All can study the Brahma-vidya intending to give Brahma-jnAna and
become very knowledgeable; but if one wants to get the experiential knowledge
of Brahman, one has to go, with vairAgyaM, to a Guru, and get the
upadeshaM – *gurvabhigamanAdi-lakshhaNaM vairAgyaM*” . Thus he refers
only to vairAgyaM here.
We saw that the Acharyal
has given the definition of ‘vairAgyaM’ as *darshana-shravaN- AdibhiH
jugupsA*, that is, “a distaste for all that is seen and all that is heard”. He
thus talks about two things ‘seen’ and ‘heard’. Recall that Lord Krishna also
mentions (in II – 52) two things *shrotavyasya shrutasya ca* -- that
which is to be heard and that which has been heard. All the nonsensical things
that we have heard and stored up in our memory constitute those that have been
‘heard’. Further those about which we are dead curious and itching to know – ‘I
should know about that and about this’ – these are the ones ‘to be
Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 45
heard’.
From both of these we should get ‘nirvedaM’ – is what the Lord is saying (in II
– 52). When the Acharyal writes the Bhashya for this he interprets ‘nirvedaM’
as ‘vairAgyaM’. The Lord says here that when the intellect which has
been totally tainted because of its being immersed in the gutter of delusion
comes out of that gutter, then one gets vairAgyaM in whatever that is
heard or whatever is to be heard. The point of taintedness by delusion is
explicitly named by the Acharya as “the confusion of the intellect in
discriminating between Atman and anAtman”. That is what was listed as number
one in chatushhTayaM. The next one is vairAgyaM. The Lord also
lists them in the same order in this shloka.
vairAgyaM is
the absence of ‘rAga’, that is, desire. One who has vairAgyaM is
VairAgi, also BairAgi. The bairAgi homeless renuciates of north India are so
called because they are VairAgis. In other words we have been equating sannyAsa
with vairAgyaM. One who has renounced rAga is VairAgi. One who is
subject to rAgas (desires) is rAgi. He who has rAga is rAgi. Such
desire-prompted individuals are called ‘kAmayamAnaH’ in the Upanishad (Br.U.
IV-4-6). Desires actually destroy a person; so the Upanishads speak of him as
‘kAma-hataH’ (Tait. U. II – 8; Br. U. IV-3-33). Analogously, he who is not
subject to desires is called ‘akAmayamAnaH’ or ‘akAma-hataH’.
Usually we interpret ‘rAga’
and ‘kAma’ both as ‘desire’ and identify them.
But there is a subtle difference between the two. At one place in the Gita (VII
– 11) Bhagavan says *kAma-rAga-vivarjitaM*, to mean ‘without kAma
and rAga’. This shows that ‘kAma’ and ‘rAga’
are two different things. What is the difference? These are the subtle
situations where our Acharyal by his extraordinary intelligence helps us with
explainations. “ ‘Kama’ is the thirst or ‘tRshhNA’
in objects not yet attained; ‘rAga’ is the attachment in objects already
attained” – thus does the Acharya distinguish the two. We shall not need this
minute distinction here. Let us take both ‘kAma’
and ‘rAga’ to mean the same thing, desire.
The Upanishad says: He who
has no vairAgyaM is a ‘kAmayamAnaH’ and he who has vairAgyaM is
‘akAmayamAnaH’. The Upansihad further talks about them. The ‘kAmayamAnaH’
thinks that karma is everything and keeps on performing his karmas, then he
reaps their fruits in the other world; when that gets exhausted he is born
again here and revolves in the same rut of karma. On the other hand the
‘akAmayamana’, that is, the one who has vairAgyaM, is, the Upanishad
goes on, ‘akAma’, ‘nishkAma’ and ‘AptakAma’ . When he throws off his desires he
is ‘akAma’ (desireless). Instead of his making efforts to get rid of desires,
when they themselves run away from him, he is ‘nishkAma’ (devoid of desires). Then
he becomes an ‘AptakAma’ – one who has Advaita-saadhanaa 46
attained
his desires! When the Upanishad speaks like this, one gets the doubt: ‘How does
an ‘akAmayamAna’ (one who is not subject to desires) have desires? What does he
desire to obtain?’. But this is explained by the next epithet which the
Upanishad uses in the series: ‘akAma’, ‘nishkAma’, ‘AptakAma’ and ‘AtmakAma’.
‘AtmakAma’ is one who has desire for the Atman only. When he gets that he
becomes an ‘AptakAma’ – he who has attained his desire. Thus the one who has vairAgyaM
becomes an akAma, nishkAma, AptakAma and AtmakAma; when he dies his jIva
does not go to any other world. The Upanishad says that he is Brahman even
while living and when the body falls, he is still immersed in Brahman (Br. U.
IV – 4 – 6) . It is the state of desirelessness, that is, vairAgyaM,
that has been said to be so qualified for Brahman-experience.
If one is not just a
‘shrotriya’ – a scholar with deep understanding of the vedas – but is also an
‘akAmahata’ , that is, one who is not destroyed by desire, he is the one who
rises step by step, each times a hundredfold, in the bliss that starts from
that of a ruler of this world to the ultimate bliss of Brahman, says
Taittiriyopanishad (II – 8) and also (though slightly in a different way) Br.U.
IV – 3 – 33. Thus here also, it is the destruction of desire, that is, being
with vairAgyaM, is the prime qualification.
In the Gita also Bhagavan
has emphasized as important, only the two things: “Practice and Dispassion”
*abhyAsaM* and *vairAgyaM*. To still the truant mind in one place
persistent efforts have to be made. Persistent effort is what ‘practice’ means.
For stilling the mind the other important requisite is Dispassion (vairAgyaM),
says He.
In the very beginning of
Gitopadesha, when he talks about the characteristics of a ‘sthita-prajna’, he
mentions as the first characteristic: *prajahAti yadA kAmAn sarvAn pArtha
manogatAn*. This itself is nothing but vairAgyaM. In the last
chapter, when he talks about what should be done in the jnAna path,
after having attained success in the path of karma, he says *nityaM vairAgyaM
samupAshritaH* (XVIII – 52) – “Dispassion to be practised uninterruptedly”.
vairAgyaM is
the distaste in everything that you see or hear. This is Acharyal’s statement
(in Vivekachudamani). Of these, putting aside ‘the seen’, the Lord says in the
Gita, as I told you already, two things “what is heard, and what is to be
heard”. Now in the same Gita when the Acharyal is doing the bhashya for *nityaM
vairAgyaM samupAshritaH*, he says “The absence of a thirst of desire in
both the seen and the unseen’ -- *dRRishhTA-dRRishTeshhu vishhayeshhu
vaitRRishhNyaM*. What does he mean by deisre in the unseen? It is the
desire for experience of heaven and in things like the post of Indra, etc. If
one goes through the regimen of veda-ordained karmas as if they are an end in
Maha-swamigal’s Discourses 47
themselves,
one obtains such pleasures of the divine world. But they are not visible to our
perception now, so they are called *adRRishhTaM*. *dRRishhTaM* means what is
seen. The unseen is *adRRishhTaM*.
Thus we see ViarAgyaM from
three different angles. One: The abandonment of the desires in everything that
we see or hear; two: the abandonment of the desires in what we have heard or
what we are going to hear; and three: the abandonment of desires in the seen
and the unseen.
[Note by Ra.
Ganapathy: In Gita XIII – 8 the word ‘VairAgyam’ occurs.
When the Acharyal
is commenting on this, he explains:
“In the senses like
sound etc. , a desireless attitude
towards the
experiences seen and unseen” .
The etc. connotes
all that can occupy the mind through the senses
– just as the
Mahaswamigal would want us to understand.]
Putting all this together
we get the meaning for *sarvAn pArtha manogatAn*, that is, any desire that can
occupy the mind has to be tabooed; that is what vairAgyaM is.
This is a very important
part of SAdhanA.
Om Tat Sat
(Continued...)
(My humble salutations to the lotus feet of H H
Kanchi Mahaswamy, great devotees and Advaita Vedanta dot org for the collection)
0 comments:
Post a Comment