PANCADASI

CHAPTERS 1 TO 10
with summary of CHAPTERS 11 TO 15

Talks By Swami Paramarthananda

Transcribed by Sri V.K. Vancheeswaran

Edited by Sri Praveen Bhat

October 2021 Edition

Published by :
Arsha Avinash Foundation
104 Third Street, Tatabad, Coimbatore 641012, India
Phone: + 91 9487373635
E mail: arshaavinash.in@gmail.com
www.arshaavinash.in
NOTE: Swami Paramarthananda has not verified the transcription of
talks. The transcriptions have been done with Swamiji’s
blessings by his disciple.

User License

Copyright Notices On behalf of the copyright owner Vedanta Vidyarthi

Sangha(VVS)

Copyright management (books © & digital streaming ) ©Yogamalika and Mantra.

Swami Paramarthananda's talks are digitally recorded, mastered, archived and

streamed by Yogamalika LLC and Mantra authorised by VVS. All rights reserved.
We take security vulnerabilities, copyright violation and user privacy very seriously.

Terms & Conditions and User License of Discourses by Swami

Paramarthananda in the form of Books & posts etc

Books and Posts are for single user license only; These artefacts may not be
reproduced by the user in part or in full or archived in any website, or any other
channels. We request users to avoid posting and circulating these artefacts of
Swami Paramarthananda’s classes & books on the internet or in any form.

Contact

For any reporting please contact the administrator at mantraglobus@gmail.com.

 i

॥पञ्चदशी॥
Pañcadaśī

Table of Contents
Class 1.......................................................................................................................................................1
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................1
Chapter I: Tattva-viveka................................................................................................................................3
śloka 1...................................................................................................................................................3
śloka 2...................................................................................................................................................4
śloka 3...................................................................................................................................................5
Class 2.......................................................................................................................................................6
śloka 4...................................................................................................................................................9
Class 3.....................................................................................................................................................10
śloka 5.................................................................................................................................................12
śloka 6.................................................................................................................................................14
Class 4.....................................................................................................................................................15
śloka 7.................................................................................................................................................16
śloka 8.................................................................................................................................................17
Class 5.....................................................................................................................................................19
śloka 9.................................................................................................................................................20
śloka 10...............................................................................................................................................21
śloka 11...............................................................................................................................................21
śloka 12...............................................................................................................................................23
śloka 13...............................................................................................................................................23
Class 6.....................................................................................................................................................24
śloka 14...............................................................................................................................................25
śloka 15...............................................................................................................................................26
śloka 16...............................................................................................................................................27
śloka 17...............................................................................................................................................28
Class 7.....................................................................................................................................................29
śloka 18...............................................................................................................................................30
śloka 19...............................................................................................................................................31
śloka 20...............................................................................................................................................32
śloka 21...............................................................................................................................................32
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 ii

śloka 22...............................................................................................................................................33
Class 8.....................................................................................................................................................33
śloka 23...............................................................................................................................................34
śloka 24...............................................................................................................................................35
śloka 25...............................................................................................................................................36
śloka 26...............................................................................................................................................36
śloka 27...............................................................................................................................................37
Class 9....................................................................................................................................................38
śloka 28...............................................................................................................................................38
śloka 29...............................................................................................................................................40
śloka 30...............................................................................................................................................41
śloka 31...............................................................................................................................................41
śloka 32...............................................................................................................................................42
Class 10...................................................................................................................................................43
śloka 33...............................................................................................................................................44
śloka 34...............................................................................................................................................45
śloka 35...............................................................................................................................................45
śloka 36...............................................................................................................................................46
Class 11...................................................................................................................................................47
śloka 37...............................................................................................................................................48
śloka 38...............................................................................................................................................49
śloka 39...............................................................................................................................................51
śloka 40...............................................................................................................................................52
Class 12...................................................................................................................................................52
śloka 41...............................................................................................................................................54
śloka 42...............................................................................................................................................54
śloka 43...............................................................................................................................................55
śloka 44...............................................................................................................................................56
Class 13...................................................................................................................................................57
śloka 45...............................................................................................................................................60
śloka 46...............................................................................................................................................60
śloka 47...............................................................................................................................................61
Class 14...................................................................................................................................................62
śloka 48...............................................................................................................................................63
śloka 49...............................................................................................................................................64
śloka 50...............................................................................................................................................65
Class 15...................................................................................................................................................67
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 iii

śloka 51...............................................................................................................................................69
śloka 52...............................................................................................................................................71
śloka 53...............................................................................................................................................72
Class 16...................................................................................................................................................73
śloka 54...............................................................................................................................................73
Class 17...................................................................................................................................................77
śloka 55...............................................................................................................................................78
śloka 56...............................................................................................................................................80
śloka 57...............................................................................................................................................80
śloka 58...............................................................................................................................................81
Class 18...................................................................................................................................................82
śloka 59...............................................................................................................................................83
śloka 60...............................................................................................................................................84
śloka 61...............................................................................................................................................85
śloka 62...............................................................................................................................................86
Class 19...................................................................................................................................................87
śloka 63...............................................................................................................................................89
śloka 64...............................................................................................................................................90
śloka 65...............................................................................................................................................90
Summary of Chapter I, Tattva-viveka-prakaraṇa....................................................................................91
Chapter II: Mahā-bhūta-viveka...................................................................................................................97
Class 1.....................................................................................................................................................97
śloka 1.....................................................................................................................................................97
śloka 2.................................................................................................................................................98
śloka 3.................................................................................................................................................99
śloka 4...............................................................................................................................................100
śloka 5...............................................................................................................................................100
śloka 6...............................................................................................................................................100
śloka 7...............................................................................................................................................101
Class 2...................................................................................................................................................101
śloka 8...............................................................................................................................................105
śloka 9...............................................................................................................................................105
śloka 10.............................................................................................................................................106
śloka 11.............................................................................................................................................107
śloka 12.............................................................................................................................................107
Class 3...................................................................................................................................................108
śloka 13.............................................................................................................................................110
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 iv

śloka 14.............................................................................................................................................110
śloka 15.............................................................................................................................................111
śloka 16.............................................................................................................................................112
Class 4...................................................................................................................................................112
śloka 17.............................................................................................................................................113
śloka 18.............................................................................................................................................115
śloka 19.............................................................................................................................................115
śloka 20.............................................................................................................................................116
Class 5...................................................................................................................................................117
śloka 21.............................................................................................................................................118
śloka 22.............................................................................................................................................118
śloka 23.............................................................................................................................................118
śloka 24.............................................................................................................................................119
śloka 25.............................................................................................................................................120
Class 6...................................................................................................................................................121
śloka 26.............................................................................................................................................122
śloka 27.............................................................................................................................................123
śloka 28.............................................................................................................................................124
śloka 29.............................................................................................................................................124
Class 7...................................................................................................................................................125
śloka 30.............................................................................................................................................126
śloka 31.............................................................................................................................................127
śloka 32.............................................................................................................................................127
śloka 33.............................................................................................................................................128
śloka 34.............................................................................................................................................129
Class 8...................................................................................................................................................129
śloka 35.............................................................................................................................................132
śloka 36.............................................................................................................................................132
śloka 37.............................................................................................................................................133
Class 9...................................................................................................................................................134
śloka 38.............................................................................................................................................135
śloka 39.............................................................................................................................................136
śloka 40.............................................................................................................................................137
śloka 41.............................................................................................................................................138
Class 10.................................................................................................................................................139
śloka 42.............................................................................................................................................140
śloka 43.............................................................................................................................................142
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 v

śloka 44.............................................................................................................................................142
śloka 45.............................................................................................................................................143
Class 11.................................................................................................................................................144
śloka 46.............................................................................................................................................145
śloka 47.............................................................................................................................................146
śloka 48.............................................................................................................................................148
Class 12.................................................................................................................................................149
śloka 49.............................................................................................................................................151
śloka 50.............................................................................................................................................153
śloka 51.............................................................................................................................................153
Class 13.................................................................................................................................................154
śloka 52.............................................................................................................................................155
śloka 53.............................................................................................................................................156
śloka 54.............................................................................................................................................157
śloka 55.............................................................................................................................................158
śloka 56.............................................................................................................................................158
Class 14.................................................................................................................................................159
śloka 57.............................................................................................................................................160
śloka 58.............................................................................................................................................161
śloka 59.............................................................................................................................................161
śloka 60.............................................................................................................................................162
Class 15.................................................................................................................................................163
śloka 61.............................................................................................................................................163
śloka 62.............................................................................................................................................164
śloka 63.............................................................................................................................................165
Class 16.................................................................................................................................................166
śloka 64.............................................................................................................................................168
śloka 65.............................................................................................................................................169
śloka 66.............................................................................................................................................170
Class 17.................................................................................................................................................170
śloka 67.............................................................................................................................................172
śloka 68.............................................................................................................................................173
śloka 69.............................................................................................................................................175
Class 18.................................................................................................................................................175
śloka 70.............................................................................................................................................179
śloka 71.............................................................................................................................................179
Class 19.................................................................................................................................................180
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 vi

śloka 72.............................................................................................................................................183
śloka 73.............................................................................................................................................184
Class 20.................................................................................................................................................184
śloka 74.............................................................................................................................................186
śloka 75.............................................................................................................................................187
śloka 76.............................................................................................................................................188
śloka 77.............................................................................................................................................188
Class 21.................................................................................................................................................189
śloka 78.............................................................................................................................................190
śloka 79.............................................................................................................................................190
śloka 80.............................................................................................................................................191
śloka 81.............................................................................................................................................191
śloka 82.............................................................................................................................................192
śloka 83.............................................................................................................................................192
Class 22.................................................................................................................................................193
śloka 84.............................................................................................................................................194
śloka 85.............................................................................................................................................195
śloka 86.............................................................................................................................................195
śloka 87.............................................................................................................................................196
śloka 88.............................................................................................................................................196
Class 23.................................................................................................................................................197
śloka 89.............................................................................................................................................197
śloka 90.............................................................................................................................................198
śloka 91.............................................................................................................................................198
śloka 92.............................................................................................................................................199
śloka 93.............................................................................................................................................199
śloka 94.............................................................................................................................................200
śloka 95.............................................................................................................................................200
śloka 96.............................................................................................................................................201
Class 24.................................................................................................................................................201
śloka 97.............................................................................................................................................202
śloka 98.............................................................................................................................................204
śloka 99.............................................................................................................................................204
śloka 100...........................................................................................................................................205
Class 25.................................................................................................................................................205
śloka 101...........................................................................................................................................207
śloka 102...........................................................................................................................................207
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 vii

śloka 103...........................................................................................................................................208
śloka 104...........................................................................................................................................209
Class 26.................................................................................................................................................209
śloka 105...........................................................................................................................................210
śloka 106...........................................................................................................................................210
śloka 107...........................................................................................................................................211
śloka 108...........................................................................................................................................211
śloka 109...........................................................................................................................................212
Class 27.................................................................................................................................................213
Summary of the second chapter, Mahā-bhūta-viveka-prakaraṇa........................................................213
Chapter III: Pañca-kośa-viveka..................................................................................................................218
Class 1...................................................................................................................................................218
śloka 1...............................................................................................................................................219
śloka 2...............................................................................................................................................219
śloka 3...............................................................................................................................................220
śloka 4...............................................................................................................................................221
Class 2...................................................................................................................................................222
śloka 5...............................................................................................................................................224
śloka 6...............................................................................................................................................224
śloka 7...............................................................................................................................................225
śloka 8...............................................................................................................................................226
Class 3...................................................................................................................................................227
śloka 9...............................................................................................................................................228
śloka 10.............................................................................................................................................229
śloka 11.............................................................................................................................................229
śloka 12.............................................................................................................................................230
Class 4...................................................................................................................................................231
śloka 13.............................................................................................................................................232
śloka 14.............................................................................................................................................234
śloka 15.............................................................................................................................................236
Class 5...................................................................................................................................................237
śloka 16.............................................................................................................................................239
śloka 17.............................................................................................................................................240
śloka 18.............................................................................................................................................241
śloka 19.............................................................................................................................................242
Class 6...................................................................................................................................................242
śloka 20.............................................................................................................................................243
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 viii

śloka 21.............................................................................................................................................244
śloka 22.............................................................................................................................................247
Class 7...................................................................................................................................................247
śloka 23.............................................................................................................................................248
śloka 24.............................................................................................................................................249
śloka 25.............................................................................................................................................250
śloka 26.............................................................................................................................................250
śloka 27.............................................................................................................................................251
Class 8...................................................................................................................................................252
śloka 28.............................................................................................................................................253
śloka 29.............................................................................................................................................254
śloka 30.............................................................................................................................................255
Class 9...................................................................................................................................................256
śloka 31.............................................................................................................................................257
śloka 32.............................................................................................................................................258
śloka 33.............................................................................................................................................258
śloka 34.............................................................................................................................................259
śloka 35.............................................................................................................................................260
Class 10.................................................................................................................................................261
śloka 36.............................................................................................................................................262
śloka 37.............................................................................................................................................262
śloka 38.............................................................................................................................................264
śloka 39.............................................................................................................................................264
śloka 40.............................................................................................................................................264
śloka 41.............................................................................................................................................265
śloka 42.............................................................................................................................................265
śloka 43.............................................................................................................................................266
Class 11.................................................................................................................................................266
Summary of the third chapter, Pañca-kośa-viveka-prakaraṇa..............................................................266
Chapter IV: Dvaita-viveka.........................................................................................................................272
śloka 1...............................................................................................................................................272
śloka 2...............................................................................................................................................273
śloka 3...............................................................................................................................................274
śloka 4...............................................................................................................................................275
śloka 5...............................................................................................................................................275
śloka 6...............................................................................................................................................276
Class 2...................................................................................................................................................277
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 ix

śloka 7...............................................................................................................................................278
śloka 8...............................................................................................................................................279
śloka 9...............................................................................................................................................280
śloka 10.............................................................................................................................................281
Class 3...................................................................................................................................................282
śloka 11.............................................................................................................................................283
śloka 12.............................................................................................................................................286
śloka 13.............................................................................................................................................287
Class 4...................................................................................................................................................287
śloka 14.............................................................................................................................................290
śloka 15.............................................................................................................................................292
Class 5...................................................................................................................................................292
śloka 16.............................................................................................................................................294
śloka 17.............................................................................................................................................295
śloka 18.............................................................................................................................................295
śloka 19.............................................................................................................................................296
śloka 20.............................................................................................................................................297
Class 6...................................................................................................................................................298
śloka 21.............................................................................................................................................299
śloka 22.............................................................................................................................................299
śloka 23.............................................................................................................................................300
śloka 24.............................................................................................................................................300
śloka 25.............................................................................................................................................301
śloka 26.............................................................................................................................................302
Class 7...................................................................................................................................................303
śloka 27.............................................................................................................................................304
śloka 28.............................................................................................................................................306
śloka 29.............................................................................................................................................307
Class 8...................................................................................................................................................307
śloka 30.............................................................................................................................................309
śloka 31.............................................................................................................................................310
śloka 32.............................................................................................................................................310
śloka 33.............................................................................................................................................311
Class 9...................................................................................................................................................312
śloka 34.............................................................................................................................................313
śloka 35.............................................................................................................................................314
śloka 36.............................................................................................................................................314
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 x

śloka 37.............................................................................................................................................316
Class 10.................................................................................................................................................317
śloka 38.............................................................................................................................................319
śloka 39.............................................................................................................................................319
Class 11.................................................................................................................................................321
śloka 40.............................................................................................................................................322
śloka 41.............................................................................................................................................323
śloka 42.............................................................................................................................................324
śloka 43.............................................................................................................................................325
Class 12.................................................................................................................................................325
śloka 44.............................................................................................................................................327
śloka 45.............................................................................................................................................327
śloka 46.............................................................................................................................................328
śloka 47.............................................................................................................................................329
Class 13.................................................................................................................................................329
śloka 48.............................................................................................................................................330
śloka 49.............................................................................................................................................331
śloka 50.............................................................................................................................................332
śloka 51.............................................................................................................................................333
Class 14.................................................................................................................................................334
śloka 52.............................................................................................................................................336
śloka 53.............................................................................................................................................337
śloka 54.............................................................................................................................................338
Class 15.................................................................................................................................................338
śloka 55.............................................................................................................................................340
śloka 56.............................................................................................................................................342
Class 16.................................................................................................................................................343
śloka 57.............................................................................................................................................345
śloka 58.............................................................................................................................................346
śloka 59.............................................................................................................................................347
Class 17.................................................................................................................................................348
śloka 60.............................................................................................................................................348
śloka 61.............................................................................................................................................350
śloka 62.............................................................................................................................................351
Class 18.................................................................................................................................................352
śloka 63.............................................................................................................................................353
śloka 64.............................................................................................................................................354
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xi

śloka 65.............................................................................................................................................355
śloka 66.............................................................................................................................................356
Class 19.................................................................................................................................................356
śloka 67.............................................................................................................................................358
śloka 68.............................................................................................................................................359
śloka 69.............................................................................................................................................360
Summary of the fourth chapter, Dvaita-viveka-prakaraṇa...................................................................361
Chapter V: Mahāvākyaviveka....................................................................................................................367
Class 1...................................................................................................................................................367
śloka 1...............................................................................................................................................370
Class 2...................................................................................................................................................371
śloka 2...............................................................................................................................................373
śloka 3...............................................................................................................................................374
śloka 4...............................................................................................................................................376
Class 3...................................................................................................................................................376
śloka 5...............................................................................................................................................377
śloka 6...............................................................................................................................................378
śloka 7...............................................................................................................................................380
śloka 8...............................................................................................................................................380
Chapter VI: Citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa..............................................................................................................382
Class 82.................................................................................................................................................382
śloka 1...............................................................................................................................................382
śloka 2...............................................................................................................................................384
śloka 3...............................................................................................................................................384
śloka 4...............................................................................................................................................385
śloka 5...............................................................................................................................................385
Class 83.................................................................................................................................................386
śloka 6...............................................................................................................................................387
śloka 7...............................................................................................................................................388
śloka 8...............................................................................................................................................389
śloka 9...............................................................................................................................................390
Class 84.................................................................................................................................................390
śloka 10.............................................................................................................................................392
śloka 11.............................................................................................................................................392
śloka 12.............................................................................................................................................393
śloka 13.............................................................................................................................................393
Class 85.................................................................................................................................................394
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xii

śloka 14.............................................................................................................................................395
śloka 15.............................................................................................................................................397
Class 86.................................................................................................................................................398
śloka 16.............................................................................................................................................399
śloka 17.............................................................................................................................................400
śloka 18.............................................................................................................................................400
śloka 19.............................................................................................................................................401
Class 87.................................................................................................................................................402
śloka 20.............................................................................................................................................403
śloka 21.............................................................................................................................................404
śloka 22.............................................................................................................................................404
śloka 23.............................................................................................................................................405
Class 88.................................................................................................................................................406
śloka 24.............................................................................................................................................407
śloka 25.............................................................................................................................................408
śloka 26.............................................................................................................................................409
śloka 27.............................................................................................................................................410
Class 89.................................................................................................................................................410
śloka 28.............................................................................................................................................411
śloka 29.............................................................................................................................................412
śloka 30.............................................................................................................................................413
śloka 31.............................................................................................................................................414
Class 90.................................................................................................................................................415
śloka 32.............................................................................................................................................417
śloka 33.............................................................................................................................................419
Class 91.................................................................................................................................................420
śloka 34.............................................................................................................................................421
Class 92.................................................................................................................................................424
śloka 35.............................................................................................................................................426
śloka 36.............................................................................................................................................427
śloka 37.............................................................................................................................................427
śloka 38.............................................................................................................................................428
Class 93.................................................................................................................................................429
śloka 39.............................................................................................................................................431
śloka 40.............................................................................................................................................432
śloka 41.............................................................................................................................................433
Class 94.................................................................................................................................................434
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xiii

śloka 42.............................................................................................................................................435
śloka 43.............................................................................................................................................436
śloka 44.............................................................................................................................................437
śloka 45.............................................................................................................................................437
Class 95.................................................................................................................................................438
śloka 46.............................................................................................................................................440
śloka 46.............................................................................................................................................441
śloka 48.............................................................................................................................................442
Class 96.................................................................................................................................................443
śloka 49.............................................................................................................................................444
śloka 50.............................................................................................................................................444
śloka 51.............................................................................................................................................446
śloka 52.............................................................................................................................................446
śloka 53.............................................................................................................................................447
Class 97.................................................................................................................................................448
śloka 54.............................................................................................................................................450
śloka 55.............................................................................................................................................451
śloka 56.............................................................................................................................................452
Class 98.................................................................................................................................................452
śloka 57.............................................................................................................................................455
śloka 58.............................................................................................................................................456
Class 99.................................................................................................................................................457
śloka 59.............................................................................................................................................458
śloka 60.............................................................................................................................................459
śloka 61.............................................................................................................................................460
śloka 62.............................................................................................................................................460
śloka 63.............................................................................................................................................461
Class 100...............................................................................................................................................462
śloka 64.............................................................................................................................................462
śloka 65.............................................................................................................................................463
śloka 66.............................................................................................................................................464
śloka 67.............................................................................................................................................464
śloka 68.............................................................................................................................................465
śloka 69.............................................................................................................................................465
Class 101...............................................................................................................................................466
śloka 70.............................................................................................................................................467
śloka 71.............................................................................................................................................468
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xiv

śloka 72.............................................................................................................................................468
śloka 73.............................................................................................................................................470
Class 102...............................................................................................................................................470
śloka 74.............................................................................................................................................471
śloka 75.............................................................................................................................................472
śloka 76.............................................................................................................................................473
śloka 77.............................................................................................................................................474
Class 103...............................................................................................................................................475
śloka 78.............................................................................................................................................476
śloka 79.............................................................................................................................................477
śloka 80.............................................................................................................................................477
śloka 81.............................................................................................................................................478
śloka 82.............................................................................................................................................478
śloka 83.............................................................................................................................................479
Class 104...............................................................................................................................................479
śloka 84.............................................................................................................................................480
śloka 85.............................................................................................................................................481
Class 105...............................................................................................................................................482
śloka 86.............................................................................................................................................484
śloka 87.............................................................................................................................................484
śloka 88.............................................................................................................................................485
śloka 89.............................................................................................................................................486
Class 106...............................................................................................................................................487
śloka 90.............................................................................................................................................487
śloka 91.............................................................................................................................................488
śloka 91.............................................................................................................................................489
śloka 92.............................................................................................................................................490
śloka 93............................................................................................................................................490
Class 107...............................................................................................................................................491
śloka 95.............................................................................................................................................493
śloka 96.............................................................................................................................................494
śloka 97.............................................................................................................................................495
śloka 98.............................................................................................................................................495
Class 108...............................................................................................................................................496
śloka 99.............................................................................................................................................497
śloka 100...........................................................................................................................................498
śloka 101...........................................................................................................................................499
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xv

śloka 102...........................................................................................................................................500
Class 109...............................................................................................................................................500
śloka 103...........................................................................................................................................503
Class 110...............................................................................................................................................504
śloka 104...........................................................................................................................................505
śloka 105...........................................................................................................................................506
śloka 106...........................................................................................................................................508
Class 111...............................................................................................................................................509
śloka 107...........................................................................................................................................511
śloka 108...........................................................................................................................................512
śloka 109...........................................................................................................................................513
Class 112...............................................................................................................................................514
śloka 110...........................................................................................................................................515
śloka 111...........................................................................................................................................516
śloka 112...........................................................................................................................................517
Class 113...............................................................................................................................................518
śloka 113...........................................................................................................................................519
śloka 114...........................................................................................................................................520
śloka 115...........................................................................................................................................521
śloka 116...........................................................................................................................................521
śloka 117...........................................................................................................................................521
śloka 118...........................................................................................................................................522
Class 114...............................................................................................................................................522
śloka 119...........................................................................................................................................523
śloka 120...........................................................................................................................................524
śloka 121...........................................................................................................................................524
śloka 122...........................................................................................................................................525
śloka 123...........................................................................................................................................526
Class 115...............................................................................................................................................526
śloka 124...........................................................................................................................................528
śloka 125...........................................................................................................................................529
śloka 126...........................................................................................................................................530
Class 116...............................................................................................................................................531
śloka 127...........................................................................................................................................532
śloka 128...........................................................................................................................................533
śloka 129...........................................................................................................................................534
śloka 130...........................................................................................................................................535
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xvi

Class 117...............................................................................................................................................535
śloka 131...........................................................................................................................................539
śloka 132...........................................................................................................................................540
Class 118...............................................................................................................................................541
śloka 133...........................................................................................................................................542
śloka 134...........................................................................................................................................543
śloka 135...........................................................................................................................................544
Class 119...............................................................................................................................................545
śloka 136...........................................................................................................................................547
śloka 137...........................................................................................................................................548
Class 120...............................................................................................................................................550
śloka 138...........................................................................................................................................551
śloka 139...........................................................................................................................................552
śloka 140...........................................................................................................................................553
Class 121...............................................................................................................................................554
śloka 141...........................................................................................................................................556
śloka 142...........................................................................................................................................558
śloka 143...........................................................................................................................................558
Class 122...............................................................................................................................................559
śloka 144...........................................................................................................................................560
śloka 145...........................................................................................................................................562
śloka 146...........................................................................................................................................563
Class 123...............................................................................................................................................563
śloka 147...........................................................................................................................................565
śloka 148...........................................................................................................................................567
śloka 149...........................................................................................................................................568
Class 124...............................................................................................................................................568
śloka 150...........................................................................................................................................569
śloka 151...........................................................................................................................................569
śloka 152...........................................................................................................................................570
śloka 153...........................................................................................................................................571
śloka 154...........................................................................................................................................572
Class 125...............................................................................................................................................572
śloka 155...........................................................................................................................................574
śloka 156...........................................................................................................................................574
śloka 157...........................................................................................................................................575
śloka 158...........................................................................................................................................576
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xvii

śloka 159...........................................................................................................................................576
Class 126...............................................................................................................................................577
śloka 160...........................................................................................................................................579
śloka 161...........................................................................................................................................579
śloka 162...........................................................................................................................................580
śloka 163...........................................................................................................................................581
Class 127...............................................................................................................................................582
śloka 164...........................................................................................................................................583
śloka 165...........................................................................................................................................584
śloka 166...........................................................................................................................................584
śloka 167...........................................................................................................................................585
śloka 168...........................................................................................................................................585
śloka 169...........................................................................................................................................586
Class 128...............................................................................................................................................587
śloka 170...........................................................................................................................................588
śloka 171...........................................................................................................................................589
śloka 172...........................................................................................................................................590
śloka 173...........................................................................................................................................591
Class 129...............................................................................................................................................592
śloka 174...........................................................................................................................................593
śloka 175...........................................................................................................................................594
śloka 176...........................................................................................................................................595
Class 130...............................................................................................................................................595
śloka 177...........................................................................................................................................597
śloka 178...........................................................................................................................................598
śloka 179...........................................................................................................................................599
Class 131...............................................................................................................................................600
śloka 180...........................................................................................................................................603
śloka 181...........................................................................................................................................603
śloka 182...........................................................................................................................................604
Class 132...............................................................................................................................................605
śloka 183...........................................................................................................................................607
śloka 184...........................................................................................................................................608
śloka 185...........................................................................................................................................608
śloka 186...........................................................................................................................................609
Class 133...............................................................................................................................................610
śloka 187...........................................................................................................................................611
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xviii

śloka 188...........................................................................................................................................612
śloka 189...........................................................................................................................................613
śloka 190...........................................................................................................................................614
Class 134...............................................................................................................................................614
śloka 191...........................................................................................................................................617
śloka 192...........................................................................................................................................618
śloka 193...........................................................................................................................................619
Class 135...............................................................................................................................................619
śloka 194...........................................................................................................................................621
śloka 195...........................................................................................................................................621
śloka 196...........................................................................................................................................623
śloka 197...........................................................................................................................................624
Class 136...............................................................................................................................................625
śloka 198...........................................................................................................................................627
śloka 199...........................................................................................................................................628
śloka 200...........................................................................................................................................629
Class 137...............................................................................................................................................630
śloka 201...........................................................................................................................................631
śloka 202...........................................................................................................................................632
śloka 203...........................................................................................................................................632
śloka 204...........................................................................................................................................633
śloka 205...........................................................................................................................................633
Class 138...............................................................................................................................................634
śloka 206...........................................................................................................................................635
śloka 207...........................................................................................................................................636
śloka 208...........................................................................................................................................637
śloka 209...........................................................................................................................................637
śloka 210...........................................................................................................................................638
Class 139...............................................................................................................................................639
śloka 211...........................................................................................................................................642
śloka 212...........................................................................................................................................643
śloka 213...........................................................................................................................................644
Class 140...............................................................................................................................................645
śloka 214...........................................................................................................................................648
śloka 215...........................................................................................................................................649
Class 141...............................................................................................................................................650
śloka 216...........................................................................................................................................653
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xix

śloka 217...........................................................................................................................................654
śloka 218...........................................................................................................................................655
Class 142...............................................................................................................................................655
śloka 219...........................................................................................................................................657
śloka 220...........................................................................................................................................659
śloka 221...........................................................................................................................................659
Class 143...............................................................................................................................................660
śloka 222...........................................................................................................................................661
śloka 223...........................................................................................................................................663
śloka 224...........................................................................................................................................664
Class 144...............................................................................................................................................664
śloka 225...........................................................................................................................................666
śloka 226...........................................................................................................................................667
śloka 227...........................................................................................................................................668
śloka 228...........................................................................................................................................669
Class 145...............................................................................................................................................669
śloka 229...........................................................................................................................................670
śloka 230...........................................................................................................................................672
śloka 231...........................................................................................................................................672
Class 146...............................................................................................................................................673
śloka 232...........................................................................................................................................675
śloka 233...........................................................................................................................................675
śloka 234...........................................................................................................................................677
Class 147...............................................................................................................................................678
śloka 235...........................................................................................................................................681
śloka 236...........................................................................................................................................682
Class 148...............................................................................................................................................683
śloka 237...........................................................................................................................................685
śloka 238...........................................................................................................................................686
śloka 239...........................................................................................................................................687
Class 149...............................................................................................................................................688
śloka 240...........................................................................................................................................690
śloka 241...........................................................................................................................................690
śloka 242...........................................................................................................................................692
śloka 243...........................................................................................................................................692
śloka 244...........................................................................................................................................693
Class 150...............................................................................................................................................694
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xx

śloka 245...........................................................................................................................................697
śloka 246...........................................................................................................................................698
śloka 247...........................................................................................................................................699
Class 151...............................................................................................................................................699
śloka 248...........................................................................................................................................700
śloka 249...........................................................................................................................................701
śloka 250...........................................................................................................................................703
śloka 251...........................................................................................................................................703
Class 152...............................................................................................................................................704
śloka 252...........................................................................................................................................706
śloka 253...........................................................................................................................................707
śloka 254...........................................................................................................................................708
Class 153...............................................................................................................................................709
śloka 255...........................................................................................................................................712
śloka 256...........................................................................................................................................713
Class 154...............................................................................................................................................714
śloka 257...........................................................................................................................................715
śloka 258...........................................................................................................................................716
śloka 259...........................................................................................................................................718
Class 155...............................................................................................................................................719
śloka 260...........................................................................................................................................719
śloka 261...........................................................................................................................................722
śloka 262...........................................................................................................................................722
Class 156...............................................................................................................................................723
śloka 263...........................................................................................................................................726
śloka 264...........................................................................................................................................727
śloka 265...........................................................................................................................................727
Class 157...............................................................................................................................................728
śloka 266...........................................................................................................................................729
śloka 267...........................................................................................................................................730
śloka 268...........................................................................................................................................732
śloka 269...........................................................................................................................................732
Class 158...............................................................................................................................................733
śloka 270...........................................................................................................................................735
śloka 271...........................................................................................................................................736
śloka 272...........................................................................................................................................737
śloka 273...........................................................................................................................................738
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxi

Class 159...............................................................................................................................................738
śloka 274...........................................................................................................................................740
śloka 275...........................................................................................................................................741
śloka 276...........................................................................................................................................741
śloka 277...........................................................................................................................................743
Class 160...............................................................................................................................................743
śloka 278...........................................................................................................................................744
śloka 279...........................................................................................................................................745
śloka 280...........................................................................................................................................746
śloka 281...........................................................................................................................................746
śloka 282...........................................................................................................................................747
Class 161...............................................................................................................................................747
śloka 283...........................................................................................................................................749
śloka 284...........................................................................................................................................750
śloka 285...........................................................................................................................................751
śloka 286...........................................................................................................................................752
Class 162...............................................................................................................................................752
śloka 287...........................................................................................................................................754
śloka 288...........................................................................................................................................755
śloka 289...........................................................................................................................................756
śloka 290...........................................................................................................................................757
Class 163...............................................................................................................................................757
Summary of the sixth chapter, Citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa............................................................................757
Chapter VII: Tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa.............................................................................................................763
Class 164...............................................................................................................................................763
śloka 1...............................................................................................................................................763
śloka 02.............................................................................................................................................765
śloka 03.............................................................................................................................................765
śloka 04.............................................................................................................................................767
Class 165...............................................................................................................................................768
śloka 05.............................................................................................................................................769
śloka 06.............................................................................................................................................770
śloka 07.............................................................................................................................................772
śloka 08.............................................................................................................................................773
Class 166...............................................................................................................................................773
śloka 09.............................................................................................................................................775
śloka 10.............................................................................................................................................776
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxii

śloka 11.............................................................................................................................................777
śloka 12.............................................................................................................................................778
śloka 13.............................................................................................................................................779
Class 167...............................................................................................................................................779
śloka 14.............................................................................................................................................780
śloka 15.............................................................................................................................................781
śloka 16.............................................................................................................................................783
Class 168...............................................................................................................................................784
śloka 17.............................................................................................................................................785
śloka 18.............................................................................................................................................787
śloka 19.............................................................................................................................................787
śloka 20.............................................................................................................................................788
śloka 21.............................................................................................................................................789
Class 169...............................................................................................................................................789
śloka 22.............................................................................................................................................790
śloka 23.............................................................................................................................................792
śloka 24.............................................................................................................................................792
śloka 25.............................................................................................................................................793
śloka 26.............................................................................................................................................793
śloka 27.............................................................................................................................................794
Class 170...............................................................................................................................................795
śloka 28.............................................................................................................................................796
śloka 29.............................................................................................................................................797
śloka 30.............................................................................................................................................797
śloka 31.............................................................................................................................................798
śloka 32.............................................................................................................................................798
śloka 33.............................................................................................................................................799
śloka 34.............................................................................................................................................800
Class 171...............................................................................................................................................800
śloka 35.............................................................................................................................................800
śloka 36.............................................................................................................................................801
śloka 37.............................................................................................................................................802
śloka 38.............................................................................................................................................803
śloka 39.............................................................................................................................................804
śloka 40.............................................................................................................................................805
Class 172...............................................................................................................................................805
śloka 41.............................................................................................................................................807
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxiii

śloka 42.............................................................................................................................................807
śloka 43.............................................................................................................................................808
śloka 44.............................................................................................................................................809
śloka 45.............................................................................................................................................810
śloka 46.............................................................................................................................................810
Class 173...............................................................................................................................................811
śloka 47.............................................................................................................................................811
śloka 48.............................................................................................................................................812
śloka 49.............................................................................................................................................813
śloka 50.............................................................................................................................................815
Class 174...............................................................................................................................................815
śloka 51.............................................................................................................................................817
śloka 52.............................................................................................................................................818
śloka 53.............................................................................................................................................818
Class 176...............................................................................................................................................819
śloka 54.............................................................................................................................................821
śloka 55.............................................................................................................................................823
class 176...............................................................................................................................................824
śloka 56.............................................................................................................................................827
śloka 57.............................................................................................................................................827
śloka 58.............................................................................................................................................828
śloka 59.............................................................................................................................................829
śloka 60.............................................................................................................................................830
Class 177...............................................................................................................................................831
śloka 61.............................................................................................................................................833
śloka 62.............................................................................................................................................834
śloka 63.............................................................................................................................................835
śloka 64.............................................................................................................................................836
śloka 65.............................................................................................................................................836
Class 178...............................................................................................................................................837
śloka 66.............................................................................................................................................838
śloka 67.............................................................................................................................................839
śloka 68.............................................................................................................................................840
śloka 69.............................................................................................................................................841
Class 179...............................................................................................................................................842
śloka 70.............................................................................................................................................843
śloka 71.............................................................................................................................................843
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxiv

śloka 72.............................................................................................................................................844
śloka 73.............................................................................................................................................844
śloka 74.............................................................................................................................................845
Class 180...............................................................................................................................................847
śloka 75.............................................................................................................................................848
śloka 76.............................................................................................................................................850
śloka 77.............................................................................................................................................850
Class 181...............................................................................................................................................851
śloka 78.............................................................................................................................................852
śloka 79.............................................................................................................................................853
śloka 80.............................................................................................................................................855
Class 182...............................................................................................................................................856
śloka 81.............................................................................................................................................857
śloka 82.............................................................................................................................................858
śloka 83.............................................................................................................................................858
śloka 84.............................................................................................................................................859
Class 183...............................................................................................................................................860
śloka 85.............................................................................................................................................862
śloka 86.............................................................................................................................................863
śloka 87.............................................................................................................................................864
śloka 88.............................................................................................................................................864
Class 184...............................................................................................................................................866
śloka 89.............................................................................................................................................866
śloka 90.............................................................................................................................................867
śloka 91.............................................................................................................................................869
śloka 92.............................................................................................................................................869
śloka 93.............................................................................................................................................870
śloka 94.............................................................................................................................................870
śloka 95.............................................................................................................................................871
Class 185...............................................................................................................................................871
śloka 96.............................................................................................................................................872
śloka 97.............................................................................................................................................873
Class 186...............................................................................................................................................875
śloka 98.............................................................................................................................................877
śloka 99.............................................................................................................................................877
śloka 100...........................................................................................................................................878
śloka 101...........................................................................................................................................879
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxv

śloka 102...........................................................................................................................................879
Class 187...............................................................................................................................................880
śloka 103...........................................................................................................................................882
śloka 104...........................................................................................................................................883
śloka 105...........................................................................................................................................884
Class 188...............................................................................................................................................885
śloka 106...........................................................................................................................................887
śloka 107...........................................................................................................................................888
śloka 108...........................................................................................................................................889
Class 189...............................................................................................................................................889
śloka 109...........................................................................................................................................890
śloka 110...........................................................................................................................................891
śloka 111...........................................................................................................................................891
śloka 112...........................................................................................................................................892
śloka 113...........................................................................................................................................893
Class 190...............................................................................................................................................893
śloka 114...........................................................................................................................................895
śloka 115...........................................................................................................................................896
śloka 116...........................................................................................................................................896
Class 191...............................................................................................................................................897
śloka 117...........................................................................................................................................900
śloka 118...........................................................................................................................................902
śloka 119...........................................................................................................................................903
śloka 120...........................................................................................................................................904
Class 192...............................................................................................................................................904
śloka 121...........................................................................................................................................905
śloka 122...........................................................................................................................................906
śloka 123...........................................................................................................................................907
śloka 124...........................................................................................................................................908
śloka 125...........................................................................................................................................909
śloka 126...........................................................................................................................................910
Class 193...............................................................................................................................................911
śloka 127...........................................................................................................................................913
śloka 128...........................................................................................................................................914
śloka 129...........................................................................................................................................915
śloka 130...........................................................................................................................................916
śloka 131...........................................................................................................................................917
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxvi

Class 194...............................................................................................................................................918
śloka 132...........................................................................................................................................921
śloka 132...........................................................................................................................................923
śloka 134...........................................................................................................................................924
Class 195...............................................................................................................................................925
śloka 135...........................................................................................................................................929
śloka 136...........................................................................................................................................929
Class 196...............................................................................................................................................932
śloka 137...........................................................................................................................................934
śloka 138...........................................................................................................................................934
śloka 139...........................................................................................................................................935
śloka 140...........................................................................................................................................937
śloka 141...........................................................................................................................................938
Class 197...............................................................................................................................................939
śloka 142...........................................................................................................................................940
śloka 143...........................................................................................................................................941
śloka 144...........................................................................................................................................943
śloka 145...........................................................................................................................................944
śloka 146...........................................................................................................................................945
Class 198...............................................................................................................................................946
śloka 147..........................................................................................................................................948
śloka 148...........................................................................................................................................949
śloka 149...........................................................................................................................................950
śloka 150...........................................................................................................................................951
śloka 151...........................................................................................................................................952
śloka 152...........................................................................................................................................953
Class 199...............................................................................................................................................953
śloka 153...........................................................................................................................................956
śloka 154...........................................................................................................................................957
śloka 155...........................................................................................................................................958
śloka 156...........................................................................................................................................959
śloka 157...........................................................................................................................................960
Class 200...............................................................................................................................................961
śloka 158...........................................................................................................................................963
śloka 159...........................................................................................................................................964
śloka 160...........................................................................................................................................964
śloka 161...........................................................................................................................................965
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxvii

śloka 162...........................................................................................................................................966
śloka 163...........................................................................................................................................967
śloka 164...........................................................................................................................................968
Class 201...............................................................................................................................................969
śloka 165...........................................................................................................................................970
śloka 166...........................................................................................................................................972
śloka 167...........................................................................................................................................973
śloka 168...........................................................................................................................................974
śloka 169...........................................................................................................................................975
Class 202...............................................................................................................................................976
śloka 170...........................................................................................................................................978
śloka 171...........................................................................................................................................980
śloka 172...........................................................................................................................................981
śloka 173...........................................................................................................................................982
śloka 174...........................................................................................................................................983
Class 203...............................................................................................................................................983
śloka 175...........................................................................................................................................985
śloka 176...........................................................................................................................................986
śloka 177...........................................................................................................................................987
śloka 178...........................................................................................................................................989
Class 204...............................................................................................................................................990
śloka 179...........................................................................................................................................990
śloka 180...........................................................................................................................................993
śloka 181...........................................................................................................................................994
śloka 182...........................................................................................................................................995
śloka 183...........................................................................................................................................996
Class 205...............................................................................................................................................997
śloka 184.........................................................................................................................................1000
śloka 185.........................................................................................................................................1001
śloka 186.........................................................................................................................................1003
śloka 187.........................................................................................................................................1004
Class 206.............................................................................................................................................1005
śloka 188.........................................................................................................................................1006
śloka 189.........................................................................................................................................1007
śloka 190.........................................................................................................................................1009
śloka 191.........................................................................................................................................1010
śloka 192.........................................................................................................................................1011
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxviii

Class 207.............................................................................................................................................1012
śloka 193.........................................................................................................................................1015
śloka 194.........................................................................................................................................1016
śloka 195.........................................................................................................................................1018
śloka 196.........................................................................................................................................1018
Class 208.............................................................................................................................................1019
śloka 198.........................................................................................................................................1021
śloka 198.........................................................................................................................................1022
śloka 199.........................................................................................................................................1025
śloka 200.........................................................................................................................................1025
Class 209.............................................................................................................................................1027
śloka 201.........................................................................................................................................1032
śloka 202.........................................................................................................................................1033
śloka 203.........................................................................................................................................1033
Class 210.............................................................................................................................................1035
śloka 204.........................................................................................................................................1036
śloka 205.........................................................................................................................................1037
śloka 206.........................................................................................................................................1038
śloka 207.........................................................................................................................................1039
śloka 208.........................................................................................................................................1040
Class 211.............................................................................................................................................1041
śloka 209.........................................................................................................................................1043
śloka 210.........................................................................................................................................1044
śloka 211.........................................................................................................................................1046
śloka 212.........................................................................................................................................1048
Class 212.............................................................................................................................................1049
śloka 213.........................................................................................................................................1051
śloka 214.........................................................................................................................................1052
śloka 215.........................................................................................................................................1053
śloka 216.........................................................................................................................................1054
Class 213.............................................................................................................................................1056
śloka 217.........................................................................................................................................1057
śloka 218.........................................................................................................................................1058
śloka 219.........................................................................................................................................1059
śloka 220.........................................................................................................................................1060
śloka 221.........................................................................................................................................1061
śloka 222.........................................................................................................................................1062
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxix

Class 214.............................................................................................................................................1063
śloka 223.........................................................................................................................................1064
śloka 224.........................................................................................................................................1065
śloka 225.........................................................................................................................................1066
śloka 226.........................................................................................................................................1067
śloka 227.........................................................................................................................................1068
śloka 228.........................................................................................................................................1069
śloka 229.........................................................................................................................................1070
Class 215.............................................................................................................................................1071
śloka 230.........................................................................................................................................1073
śloka 231.........................................................................................................................................1074
śloka 232.........................................................................................................................................1075
śloka 233.........................................................................................................................................1076
śloka 234.........................................................................................................................................1077
Class 216.............................................................................................................................................1078
śloka 235.........................................................................................................................................1080
śloka 236.........................................................................................................................................1081
śloka 237.........................................................................................................................................1082
śloka 238........................................................................................................................................1084
Class 217.............................................................................................................................................1085
śloka 239.........................................................................................................................................1085
śloka 240.........................................................................................................................................1091
Class 218.............................................................................................................................................1092
śloka 7.241......................................................................................................................................1095
śloka 7.242......................................................................................................................................1096
śloka 7. 243.....................................................................................................................................1097
śloka 7.244......................................................................................................................................1099
Class 219.............................................................................................................................................1099
śloka 7.245......................................................................................................................................1102
śloka 7.246......................................................................................................................................1104
śloka 7.247......................................................................................................................................1105
Class 220.............................................................................................................................................1107
śloka 7.248......................................................................................................................................1109
śloka 7.249......................................................................................................................................1110
śloka 7.250......................................................................................................................................1112
Class 221.............................................................................................................................................1113
śloka 7.251......................................................................................................................................1114
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxx

śloka 7.252......................................................................................................................................1114
śloka 7.253......................................................................................................................................1118
śloka 7.254......................................................................................................................................1119
Class 222.............................................................................................................................................1120
śloka 7.255......................................................................................................................................1122
śloka 7.256......................................................................................................................................1123
śloka 7.257......................................................................................................................................1123
śloka 7.258......................................................................................................................................1124
śloka 7.259......................................................................................................................................1125
Class 223.............................................................................................................................................1126
śloka 7.260......................................................................................................................................1128
śloka 7.261......................................................................................................................................1129
śloka 7.262......................................................................................................................................1130
śloka 263.........................................................................................................................................1131
Class 224.............................................................................................................................................1132
śloka 264.........................................................................................................................................1134
śloka 265.........................................................................................................................................1136
śloka 7.266......................................................................................................................................1137
śloka 7.267......................................................................................................................................1139
Class 225.............................................................................................................................................1140
śloka 7.268......................................................................................................................................1141
śloka 7.269......................................................................................................................................1142
śloka 7.270......................................................................................................................................1144
śloka 7.271......................................................................................................................................1146
śloka 7.272......................................................................................................................................1147
Class 226.............................................................................................................................................1148
śloka 7.273......................................................................................................................................1150
śloka 7.274......................................................................................................................................1151
śloka 275.........................................................................................................................................1151
Class 227.............................................................................................................................................1152
śloka 7.276......................................................................................................................................1156
śloka 7.277......................................................................................................................................1157
śloka 7.278......................................................................................................................................1159
Class 228.............................................................................................................................................1159
śloka 7.279......................................................................................................................................1162
śloka 7.280......................................................................................................................................1164
śloka 7.281......................................................................................................................................1165
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxi

Class 229.............................................................................................................................................1166
śloka 2.282......................................................................................................................................1169
śloka 7.283......................................................................................................................................1170
śloka 7.284......................................................................................................................................1171
śloka 7.285......................................................................................................................................1172
Class 230.............................................................................................................................................1173
śloka 7.286......................................................................................................................................1175
śloka 7. 287.....................................................................................................................................1175
śloka 7.288......................................................................................................................................1176
śloka 7.289......................................................................................................................................1177
śloka 7.290......................................................................................................................................1177
śloka 7.291......................................................................................................................................1178
Class 231.............................................................................................................................................1178
śloka 7.292......................................................................................................................................1180
śloka 7.293......................................................................................................................................1181
śloka 7.294......................................................................................................................................1181
śloka 7.295......................................................................................................................................1182
śloka 7.296......................................................................................................................................1183
śloka 7.297......................................................................................................................................1184
śloka 7.298......................................................................................................................................1184
Class 232.............................................................................................................................................1185
Summary of the seventh chapter: Tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa.....................................................................1185
Chapter VIII: Kūṭastha-dīpa-prakaraṇa...................................................................................................1193
Class 233.............................................................................................................................................1193
śloka 8.1..........................................................................................................................................1195
śloka 8.2..........................................................................................................................................1197
śloka 8.3..........................................................................................................................................1200
Class 234.............................................................................................................................................1201
śloka 8.4..........................................................................................................................................1204
śloka 8.5..........................................................................................................................................1207
Class 235.............................................................................................................................................1208
śloka 8.6..........................................................................................................................................1211
śloka 8.7..........................................................................................................................................1213
śloka 8.8..........................................................................................................................................1214
śloka 8.9..........................................................................................................................................1215
Class 236.............................................................................................................................................1215
śloka 8.10........................................................................................................................................1218
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxii

śloka 8.11........................................................................................................................................1220
śloka 8.12........................................................................................................................................1222
Class 237.............................................................................................................................................1223
śloka 8.13........................................................................................................................................1225
śloka 8.14........................................................................................................................................1225
śloka 8.15........................................................................................................................................1226
śloka 8.16........................................................................................................................................1228
śloka 8.17........................................................................................................................................1229
śloka 8.18........................................................................................................................................1230
Class 238............................................................................................................................................1231
śloka 8.19........................................................................................................................................1234
śloka 8.20........................................................................................................................................1234
śloka 8.21........................................................................................................................................1236
śloka 8.22........................................................................................................................................1238
Class 239.............................................................................................................................................1239
śloka 8.23........................................................................................................................................1243
śloka 8.24........................................................................................................................................1245
Class 240.............................................................................................................................................1246
śloka 8.25........................................................................................................................................1248
śloka 8.26........................................................................................................................................1249
śloka 8.27........................................................................................................................................1252
Class 241.............................................................................................................................................1255
śloka 8.28........................................................................................................................................1257
śloka 8.29........................................................................................................................................1258
śloka 8.30........................................................................................................................................1259
śloka 8.31........................................................................................................................................1260
śloka 8.32........................................................................................................................................1261
Class 242.............................................................................................................................................1262
śloka 8.33........................................................................................................................................1263
śloka 8.34........................................................................................................................................1265
śloka 8.35........................................................................................................................................1266
śloka 8.36........................................................................................................................................1268
Class 243.............................................................................................................................................1269
śloka 8.37........................................................................................................................................1272
śloka 8.38........................................................................................................................................1274
śloka 8.39........................................................................................................................................1276
Class 244.............................................................................................................................................1278
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxiii

śloka 8.40........................................................................................................................................1279
śloka 8.41........................................................................................................................................1281
śloka 8.42........................................................................................................................................1283
Class 245.............................................................................................................................................1285
śloka 8.43........................................................................................................................................1289
śloka 8.44........................................................................................................................................1291
śloka 8.45........................................................................................................................................1292
Class 246.............................................................................................................................................1293
śloka 8.46........................................................................................................................................1296
śloka 8.47........................................................................................................................................1298
śloka 48...........................................................................................................................................1299
śloka 8.49........................................................................................................................................1300
Class 247.............................................................................................................................................1302
śloka 50...........................................................................................................................................1304
śloka 51...........................................................................................................................................1305
śloka 8.52........................................................................................................................................1307
Class 248.............................................................................................................................................1311
śloka 8.53........................................................................................................................................1312
śloka 8.54........................................................................................................................................1315
śloka 8.55........................................................................................................................................1316
śloka 8.56........................................................................................................................................1317
Class 249.............................................................................................................................................1319
śloka 8.57 & 58...............................................................................................................................1320
śloka 8.59........................................................................................................................................1323
Class 250.............................................................................................................................................1325
śloka 8.60........................................................................................................................................1325
śloka 8.61........................................................................................................................................1326
śloka 8.62........................................................................................................................................1327
śloka 8.63........................................................................................................................................1328
śloka 8.64........................................................................................................................................1329
śloka 8.65........................................................................................................................................1330
śloka 8.66........................................................................................................................................1332
Class 251.............................................................................................................................................1332
śloka 8.67........................................................................................................................................1333
śloka 8.68........................................................................................................................................1334
śloka 8.69........................................................................................................................................1335
śloka 8.70........................................................................................................................................1336
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxiv

śloka 8.71........................................................................................................................................1337
śloka 8.72........................................................................................................................................1338
śloka 8.73........................................................................................................................................1339
śloka 8.74........................................................................................................................................1339
śloka 8.75........................................................................................................................................1340
śloka 8.76........................................................................................................................................1340
Class 252.............................................................................................................................................1341
Summary of the eighth chapter: Kūṭastha-dipa-prakaraṇa................................................................1341
Chapter IX: Dhyāna-dīpa-prakaraṇa........................................................................................................1350
Class 253.............................................................................................................................................1350
śloka 9.1..........................................................................................................................................1355
śloka 9.2..........................................................................................................................................1356
śloka 9.3..........................................................................................................................................1357
Class 254.............................................................................................................................................1358
śloka 9.4..........................................................................................................................................1358
śloka 9.5..........................................................................................................................................1362
śloka 9.6..........................................................................................................................................1363
śloka 9.7..........................................................................................................................................1363
śloka 9.8..........................................................................................................................................1364
śloka 9.9..........................................................................................................................................1364
śloka 9.10........................................................................................................................................1365
Class 255.............................................................................................................................................1365
śloka 9.11........................................................................................................................................1367
śloka 9.12........................................................................................................................................1369
śloka 9.13........................................................................................................................................1370
śloka 9.14........................................................................................................................................1370
Class 256.............................................................................................................................................1372
śloka 9.15........................................................................................................................................1374
śloka 9.16........................................................................................................................................1376
śloka 9.17........................................................................................................................................1376
śloka 9.18........................................................................................................................................1377
śloka 9.19........................................................................................................................................1378
śloka 9.20........................................................................................................................................1378
Class 257.............................................................................................................................................1379
śloka 9.21........................................................................................................................................1383
śloka 9.22........................................................................................................................................1384
śloka 9.23........................................................................................................................................1385
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxv

Class 258.............................................................................................................................................1387
śloka 9.24........................................................................................................................................1388
śloka 9.25........................................................................................................................................1390
śloka 9.26........................................................................................................................................1390
śloka 9.27........................................................................................................................................1392
śloka 9.28........................................................................................................................................1392
Class 259.............................................................................................................................................1393
śloka 9.29........................................................................................................................................1395
śloka 9.30........................................................................................................................................1396
śloka 9.31........................................................................................................................................1397
śloka 9.32........................................................................................................................................1397
śloka 9.33........................................................................................................................................1398
Class 260.............................................................................................................................................1399
śloka 9.34........................................................................................................................................1401
śloka 9.35........................................................................................................................................1402
śloka 9.36........................................................................................................................................1403
śloka 9.37........................................................................................................................................1404
śloka 9.38........................................................................................................................................1405
Class 261.............................................................................................................................................1405
śloka 9.39........................................................................................................................................1407
śloka 9.40........................................................................................................................................1409
śloka 9.41........................................................................................................................................1410
śloka 9.42........................................................................................................................................1411
śloka 9.43........................................................................................................................................1412
Class 262.............................................................................................................................................1412
śloka 9.44........................................................................................................................................1418
śloka 9.45........................................................................................................................................1419
Class 263.............................................................................................................................................1420
śloka 9.46........................................................................................................................................1422
śloka 9.47........................................................................................................................................1423
śloka 9.48........................................................................................................................................1424
śloka 9.49........................................................................................................................................1425
śloka 9.50........................................................................................................................................1425
śloka 9.51........................................................................................................................................1426
Class 264.............................................................................................................................................1427
śloka 9.52........................................................................................................................................1428
śloka 9.53........................................................................................................................................1429
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxvi

śloka 9.54........................................................................................................................................1430
śloka 9.55........................................................................................................................................1431
śloka 9.56........................................................................................................................................1432
Class 265.............................................................................................................................................1433
śloka 9.57........................................................................................................................................1435
śloka 9.58........................................................................................................................................1436
śloka 9.59........................................................................................................................................1437
śloka 9.60........................................................................................................................................1438
śloka 9.61........................................................................................................................................1439
Class 266.............................................................................................................................................1440
śloka 9.62........................................................................................................................................1441
śloka 9.63........................................................................................................................................1442
śloka 9.64........................................................................................................................................1443
śloka 9.65........................................................................................................................................1444
śloka 9.66........................................................................................................................................1444
Class 267.............................................................................................................................................1446
śloka 9.67........................................................................................................................................1446
śloka 9.68........................................................................................................................................1449
śloka 9.69........................................................................................................................................1450
śloka 9.70........................................................................................................................................1450
Class 268.............................................................................................................................................1451
śloka 9.71........................................................................................................................................1452
śloka 9.72........................................................................................................................................1454
śloka 9.73........................................................................................................................................1456
śloka 9.74........................................................................................................................................1457
Class 269.............................................................................................................................................1459
śloka 9.75........................................................................................................................................1462
śloka 9.76........................................................................................................................................1463
śloka 9.77........................................................................................................................................1464
śloka 9.78........................................................................................................................................1465
Class 270.............................................................................................................................................1466
śloka 9.79........................................................................................................................................1468
śloka 9.80........................................................................................................................................1469
śloka 9.81........................................................................................................................................1470
śloka 9.82........................................................................................................................................1471
śloka 9.83........................................................................................................................................1472
Class 271.............................................................................................................................................1472
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxvii

śloka 9.84........................................................................................................................................1475
śloka 9.85 and 9.86.........................................................................................................................1475
śloka 9.87........................................................................................................................................1477
śloka 9.88........................................................................................................................................1478
śloka 9.89........................................................................................................................................1479
Class 272.............................................................................................................................................1479
śloka 9.90........................................................................................................................................1482
śloka 9.91........................................................................................................................................1483
śloka 9.92........................................................................................................................................1484
Class 273.............................................................................................................................................1484
śloka 9.93........................................................................................................................................1486
śloka 9.94........................................................................................................................................1488
śloka 9.95........................................................................................................................................1489
śloka 9.96........................................................................................................................................1490
Class 274.............................................................................................................................................1490
śloka 9.97........................................................................................................................................1492
śloka 9.98........................................................................................................................................1494
śloka 9.99........................................................................................................................................1495
Class 275.............................................................................................................................................1496
śloka 9.100......................................................................................................................................1498
śloka 9.101......................................................................................................................................1499
śloka 9.102......................................................................................................................................1500
Class 276.............................................................................................................................................1502
śloka 9.103......................................................................................................................................1503
śloka 9.104......................................................................................................................................1504
śloka 9.105......................................................................................................................................1505
śloka 9.106......................................................................................................................................1506
śloka 9.107......................................................................................................................................1507
śloka 9.108......................................................................................................................................1509
śloka 9.109......................................................................................................................................1509
śloka 9.110......................................................................................................................................1510
Class 278.............................................................................................................................................1511
śloka 9.111......................................................................................................................................1512
śloka 9.112 to 114...........................................................................................................................1512
śloka 9.115......................................................................................................................................1513
Class 279.............................................................................................................................................1515
śloka 9.116......................................................................................................................................1516
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxviii

śloka 9.117......................................................................................................................................1517
śloka 9.118......................................................................................................................................1517
śloka 9.119......................................................................................................................................1518
śloka 9.120......................................................................................................................................1518
Class 280.............................................................................................................................................1519
śloka 9.121......................................................................................................................................1521
śloka 9.122......................................................................................................................................1522
śloka 9.123......................................................................................................................................1522
Class 281.............................................................................................................................................1524
śloka 9.124......................................................................................................................................1525
śloka 9.125......................................................................................................................................1527
śloka 9.126......................................................................................................................................1528
śloka 9.127......................................................................................................................................1529
Class 282.............................................................................................................................................1530
śloka 9.128......................................................................................................................................1531
śloka 9.129......................................................................................................................................1532
śloka 9.130......................................................................................................................................1534
śloka 9.131......................................................................................................................................1534
Class 283.............................................................................................................................................1535
śloka 9.132......................................................................................................................................1536
śloka 9.133......................................................................................................................................1537
śloka 9.134......................................................................................................................................1538
śloka 9.135......................................................................................................................................1538
Class 284.............................................................................................................................................1539
śloka 9.136......................................................................................................................................1541
śloka 9.137......................................................................................................................................1542
śloka 9.138......................................................................................................................................1543
Class 285.............................................................................................................................................1543
śloka 9.139......................................................................................................................................1545
śloka 9.140......................................................................................................................................1545
śloka 9.141......................................................................................................................................1546
śloka 9.142......................................................................................................................................1547
śloka 9.143......................................................................................................................................1547
Class 286.............................................................................................................................................1548
śloka 9.144......................................................................................................................................1548
śloka 9.145......................................................................................................................................1549
śloka 9.146......................................................................................................................................1549
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xxxix

śloka 9.147......................................................................................................................................1550
śloka 9.148......................................................................................................................................1550
śloka 9.149......................................................................................................................................1551
śloka 9.150......................................................................................................................................1551
Class 287.............................................................................................................................................1552
śloka 9.151......................................................................................................................................1552
śloka 9.152......................................................................................................................................1553
śloka 9.153......................................................................................................................................1554
śloka 9.154......................................................................................................................................1554
śloka 9.155......................................................................................................................................1555
śloka 9.156......................................................................................................................................1556
śloka 9.157......................................................................................................................................1557
śloka 9.158......................................................................................................................................1557
Class 288.............................................................................................................................................1558
Summary of the ninth chapter: Dhyāna-dīpa-prakaraṇa....................................................................1558
Chapter X: Nāṭaka-dīpa-prakaraṇa.........................................................................................................1564
Class 289.............................................................................................................................................1564
Introduction........................................................................................................................................1564
śloka 10.1........................................................................................................................................1564
śloka 10.2........................................................................................................................................1569
śloka 10.3........................................................................................................................................1570
Class 290.............................................................................................................................................1571
śloka 10.4........................................................................................................................................1572
śloka 10.5........................................................................................................................................1573
śloka 10.6........................................................................................................................................1574
Class 291.............................................................................................................................................1578
śloka 10.7........................................................................................................................................1580
śloka 10.8........................................................................................................................................1581
śloka 10.9........................................................................................................................................1582
Class 292.............................................................................................................................................1583
śloka 10.10......................................................................................................................................1584
śloka 10.11......................................................................................................................................1586
śloka 10.12......................................................................................................................................1587
śloka 10.13......................................................................................................................................1589
Class 293.............................................................................................................................................1589
śloka 10.14......................................................................................................................................1593
śloka 10.15......................................................................................................................................1594
Download from www.arshaavinash.in
 xl

Class 294.............................................................................................................................................1595
śloka 10.16......................................................................................................................................1596
śloka 10.17......................................................................................................................................1597
Class 295.............................................................................................................................................1599
śloka 10.18......................................................................................................................................1601
śloka 10.19......................................................................................................................................1603
śloka 10.20......................................................................................................................................1604
Class 296.............................................................................................................................................1605
śloka 10.21......................................................................................................................................1606
śloka 10.22......................................................................................................................................1607
śloka 10.23......................................................................................................................................1608
śloka 10.24......................................................................................................................................1609
śloka 10.25......................................................................................................................................1610
śloka 10.26......................................................................................................................................1611
Class 296.............................................................................................................................................1613
Summary of the tenth chapter: Nāṭaka-dīpa-prakaraṇa.....................................................................1613
Summary of chapters 11 to 15................................................................................................................1620
Class 297.............................................................................................................................................1620

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1

Class 1

Introduction
As announced earlier we will take up Pañcadaśī for our study from today onwards. It is a
text authored by Svāmī Vidyāraṇya. He is a great Ācārya who lived in the 14th century
and before becoming a saṃnyāsī he was known as Mādhavācārya. He was an able
minister and administrator under Vijayanagara kings.
In the later stage of life, he became one of the great Pīṭhādhipati of Sringeri Maṭha of Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya. He was also a writer in many fields and among many famous works of this
Svāmīji is Pañcadaśī as one of the best works of Vedānta śāstra. It is a compulsory text
book to be studied by all students of Vedānta.
There are many Vedāntic works which are rare and elaborate which deal with Vedāntic
teachings. In most of the books the ideas are spread all over in a disjointed manner. It is
often repeated in wrong place and often it does not have progressive development. When
we study such textbooks, there is strain on the students. There are a few Vedāntic works
where the ideas are very clearly classified. Also there is a progression in the teaching and
such works are few in number. It is always pleasing to teach such works.
In such cases, the teacher need not do much homework. It is a pleasure for the students
also and one such work happens to be Pañcadaśī. This is one of my favourite books also. It
will be useful for the serious students of Vedānta. The student of this work should have
the knowledge of Gītā and some of the Upaniṣads as well to enjoy Pañcadaśī.
This book has 15 chapters. Therefore, it is known as Pañcadaśī. Every chapter is called a
prakaraṇa. This book is also known as Pañcadaśa-prakaraṇa. The smallest chapter has
eight verses and the biggest one has around three hundred ślokas. These 15 chapters are
divided into three groups: prathama pañcaka, madhyama pañcaka and the carama
pañcaka. In each pañcaka, the title of the chapter ends with a common expression. The
first one ends with viveka-prakaraṇa, making it the viveka-pañcaka. The second one ends
with dīpa-prakaraṇa. It is called dīpa-pañcaka. In the last pañcaka each chapter ends with
ānanda-prakaraṇa. The last five are called ānanda-pañcaka.

Of course, there are some Ācāryas who connect each pañcaka to sat, cit and ānanda or tat,
tvam and asi. Totally in these 15 chapters there more than 1500 ślokas. Generally, I teach

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 2

10 chapters and then I will think what to do. Perhaps we would become videha-mukta by
that time. This is the background of Pañcadaśī. Now we will enter the first chapter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 3

Chapter I: Tattva-viveka
तत्त्वविवेकोनाम - प्रथमः परिच्छेदः ।

śloka 1
नमः श्रीशङ्करानन्दगुरुपादाम्बुजन्मने ।
सविलासमहामोहग्राहग्रासैककर्मणे ॥ १.११ ॥
namaḥ śrīśaṅkarānandagurupādāmbujanmane
savilāsamahāmohagrāhagrāsaikakarmaṇe (1.1).
The first chapter is titled Tattva-viveka prakaraṇa. The introduction is given in the first
two ślokas. The first one is in the form of Guru-namaskāra. In Vedāntic tradition one does
not differentiate between Guru and Īśvara. Here Vidyāraṇya offers namaskāra to his Guru
for successful completion of the study. There are obstacles galore— ādhyātmika,
ādhibhautika and ādhidaivika— and most of them are unknown and uncontrollable. For
invisible problem we need invisible solution. The invisible remedy is Īśvara-anugraha
alone, as parihāra for adṛṣṭa-pratibandha. Also he talks about the glory of his Guru.
I offer namaskāra to the lotus feet of Guru Śaṅkarānanda who has removed my ignorance
and given Ātma-jñāna. Śri-Śaṅkarānanda is also a brilliant scholar and has written a
commentary on Gītā, various Upaniṣads and also Ātma-purāṇa. Ātma-purāṇa is a
voluminous work condensing the Upaniṣadic teachings. To that Guru Śaṅkarānanda, I
offer my namaskāra says Vidyāraṇya.
In the beginning the author shows his felicity in Sanskrit language. Savilāsa-mahā-moha-
grāha-grāsaika-karmaṇe; the feet of his Guru are the constant destroyers of mahā-moha-
grāha, means ignorance which is compared to a huge crocodile. That is, ajñāna-crocodile is
destroyed by the teachings of his Guru.
There is a fundamental ignorance which is the cause of the every human being and his
sufferings. The mūla-ajñāna is called mahā-moha. It is a huge self-ignorance crocodile. The
crocodile in Viśṇu purāṇa refers to the ignorance alone in the Gajendra story. Other
disciplines of knowledge are called darśanas and Ātma-jñāna is called sudarśana cakra
that destroys the mahā ajñāna. The ignorance is compared to the crocodile because it
catches the person from underneath without his knowledge.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 4

The grip is so strong that it is impossible to get out of it. Crocodile is known for its strong
grip and once it grips our feet, two things happen. Our movement and our freedom is
restricted. You cannot walk or move. So crocodile is called grāsa. Second thing is you are
not going to feel comfortable with your feet inside the mouth of the crocodile. It causes
one a loss of freedom and intense pain. In the same way the mūla-ajñāna grasah also has
grasped all the jīvas. Every jīva is in the jaws of mūla-ajñāna-grasa. This causes the loss of
freedom of movement and the second is the unbearable pain that the victims suffer when
caught by the crocodile.
What emotions are there in my mind, I myself do not know. I have no control over my
emotions. If those emotions are joyous it is all right, but most of them are burdensome and
painful. These twofold problems of bondage and pain are called saṃsāra. In this verse
Vidyāraṇya calls saṃsāra as vilāsa, the consequence of the bondage in the jaws of the
crocodile. Guru’s pāda helps us to get rid of the crocodile’s grasp and be happy. The state
of mind of happiness is described by Vidyāraṇya. The wonderful description of
jīvanmukti is being narrated by Vidyāraṇya in the later ślokas. Mūla-ajñāna itself, along
with saṃsāra, is destroyed by the Guru. To such a Śaṅkarānanda Guru, I offer my
namaskāra says the author.

śloka 2
तत्पादाम्बुरुहद्वन्द्वसेवानिर्मलचेतसाम्।
सुखबोधाय तत्त्वस्य विवेकोऽयं विधीयते ॥ १.२॥
tatpādāmburuhadvandvasevānirmalacetasām.
sukhabodhāya tattvasya viveko:'yaṃ vidhīyate (1.2)
Here he introduces the subject matter. tattvasya vivekoyaṃ vidhīyate; the knowledge of
tattva which means the invisible immortal inner essence of every individual. It is also
called Ātmā. Viveka means clear knowledge. That Ātma-jñāna is being presented in this
chapter and it is called tattva-viveka-prakaraṇa. He says sukha-bodhāya for the
convenience and comfortable understanding of the people in a systematic manner or in a
progressive manner I will present this tattva-viveka.
For those who have gained required qualification, sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna-
adhikāriṇām, I present because for only prepared people this teaching will work or it will
be like sowing the seed in a barren land. Here the purity of the mind refers to sādhana-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 5

catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Then one may think what will happen to the unqualified people.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says my Guru or any Guru for that matter will help unqualified
people also. Guru will help by his blessings; the śiṣyas will be converted from unqualified
to qualified people. The very same Guru can give the qualification for the śiṣya if the latter
offers sevā to his Guru. By worshipping, namaskāra to the Guru and even mānasa
namaskāra will do. The service to the Guru makes the śiṣya qualified to gain Ātma-jñāna.
Serve the Guru and get qualification and knowledge, and then be free from the grip of
great crocodile. For those qualified people I present self-knowledge in a clear form. Thus
the mangala śloka and introduction of the entire work is presented.

śloka 3
शब्दस्पर्शादयो वेद्या वैचित्र्याज्जागरे पृथक् ।
ततोविभक्ता तत्संविदैक्यरूप्यान्न भिद्यते ॥ १.३ ॥
śabdasparśādayo vedyā vaicitryājjāgare pṛthak.
tatovibhaktā tatsaṃvidaikyarūpyānna bhidyate (1.3).
With this words he begins his teaching. First he talks about the nature of jīvātmā the
immortal invisible and inner essence of every jīva is called jīvātmā. He discusses jīvātma-
svarūpa from this verse to the 10th verse in a detailed manner. First he wants to introduce
jīvātma-svarūpa and elaborate Paramātma-svarūpa and say jīvātmā and Paramātmā are
one and the same. Jīvātma-svarūpa is called sat and it is but all-pervading consciousness;
consciousness is not limited by time and it is eternal and permanent. It is deśa-kāla-
aparicchinna unlimited by time and space; and consciousness is the nature of jīvātmā.
Now the question is what that consciousness is. He will show this in a systematic manner.
Consciousness is not a part product or property of the body, but consciousness is an
independent entity which pervades and enlivens the body; this consciousness is not
limited by the boundaries of the body but it extends beyond the body and therefore, it is
space-like consciousness and it is invisible. Just as space is everywhere, similarly
consciousness extends beyond and is invisible. This consciousness will survive even after
the fall of the body but once the body is gone, the consciousness is not available for
recognition because the body medium is gone.
I recognize light through medium alone. Similarly invisible consciousness is recognized
through every conscious body and the consciousness survives but it is invisible on the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 6

death of the body. This eternal all-pervading consciousness is the nature of Ātmā. The
eternity is indicated by the word sat. The all-pervasiveness or pūrṇatva is indicated by the
word ānanda. sat-cit-ānanda, the eternal all-pervading consciousness is the inner essence
of every individual. This is the topic from the 3rd verse to the 10th verse. The details we
will see in the next class onwards.

Class 2
śloka 3 contd.
In the first two verses of the first chapter of Pañcadaśī, Vidyāraṇya offers mangalācaraṇa a
prayer for the entire text. In the second verse he introduced the subject matter of the first
chapter of the Pañcadaśī. It is called tattva-viveka. Every chapter here is called prakaraṇa.
After introducing the subject matter, Vidyāraṇya begins his teaching from the third verse
onwards. He calls jīvātmā as sat-cit-ānanda-svarūpa. This is done from the 3rd to the 10th
verse. Then he will point out Paramātmā is also sat-cit-ānanda-svarūpa. This we can know
from the analysis.
Since both jīvātmā and Paramātmā have the same nature sat-cit-ānanda; both of them are
one and the same. In fact, we should not say both of them. Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are
seemingly different and they are not really different. The ocean and waves are seemingly
different whereas the ocean is water and waves are also water and thus we find two
names with one substance. He has taken jīvātmā status and wants to establish jīvātmā is
sat-cit-ānanda.
First he takes the word cit and explains its nature and then he will go to ‘sat’ and then to
ānanda. He analyses our own experiences and life. First we know that we are the
conscious beings unlike table or chair which is inert. We are all conscious beings and we
are endowed with the status of consciousness or sentiency. This consciousness alone
comes in contact with the objects of the universe. In the scriptures the object of the word is
divided based on the sense-organs to which the object is accessible.
One which is available for ears we call as śabda-prapañca. The śabda-prapañca is that
world of sound which is accessible only to the ears and that world will disappear once you
become deaf. The śabda-prapañca is not existent for you with the loss of ears and hearing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 7

faculty. One-fifth of the universe is called śabda-prapañca. So comes rūpa-prapañca, rasa-

prapañca, gandha-prapañca and sparśa-prapañca.
The vedyas are divided into five objects. The consciousness we possess comes in contact
with rasa-vedya, rūpa-vedya, etc. And which object the consciousness must come in
contact with is decided by two factors; the sense-organ will decide whether it is śabda-
prapañca or other prapañca, and the moment I choose the use of ears, the śabda-prapañca
is opened up while other organs are shut off. One sense-organ opens up, one segment of
the universe opens up and shuts all other four segments. In front of me so many objects
are there and it is only the thought of the mind that decides what I should see among the
various objects in front of me. The first factor is the sense-organ and the second is the
thought, to be precise. The mirror is in front of me and there is a black spot in the mirror.
Within the mirror my face is there and on the mirror the spot is there and it is for the mind
to decide whether that spot is there in the face or in the mirror. Both are in front of my
eyes but the specification is decided by the thought. The sense-organ and mind alone
decide what should come in contact with consciousness. When consciousness and the
object come in contact, we have the experience of that object. Before that, I had only
consciousness, I was a conscious being, and when the consciousness comes in contact with
a pot, the pot-consciousness-combination brings about the pot-experience. When the pot
goes away and a cow comes in, the sense-organ and the mind and the cow is there in front
of me; the consciousness and the cow come in contact and then I get cow-experience.
From this we come to know an important thing. Before coming in contact with the object
we use the word consciousness and once consciousness and pot come in contact we use
the word pot-experience. And therefore, Vidyāraṇya says experience is the name of the
consciousness itself when it comes in contact with the object. The consciousness is called
consciousness when it is not in contact with an object but the very same consciousness or
the awareness when it comes in contact with an object, the consciousness itself is renamed
as experience. Therefore, experience is another name for consciousness. We give that name
not all the time, but when the consciousness is related to an object, we call it an experience.
If śabda comes in, we call it śabda-experience and when sparśa comes in, we call it sparśa-
experience, etc. Experience is relational status of consciousness itself.
With regard to that relational status we have relational name also called experience.
Vidyāraṇya says we have many objects in the world and with every object, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 8

consciousness gets relational status of experience. If someone asks the experiences are one
or many, we can boldly say the experiences are many in the normal sense of the term.
Vidyāraṇya says we have committed a fundamental error. Many experiences are not there
as there is only one consciousness appearing as many experiences when the objects
change. There are only seemingly many experiences and all experiences are nothing but
one consciousness. The plurality of experience is an erroneous conclusion. They are all
relational names of one and the same consciousness.
When this relational status changes pot-experience changes to man-experience and it
changes to cot-experience, while in the consciousness itself, there is no change at all.
Therefore, one consciousness alone is seemingly appearing as pluralistic experiences and if
you remove objects from the experiences, pot-experience minus pot and cot-experience
minus cot, then all experiences are nothing but one and the same consciousness. I have no
status at all but when you sit in front of me to hear my classes I get the status of a Guru.
There is no change in my height. As the relational changes come, there is no change in me.
The new name is given but there is no change in me. The relational change of Guru is gone
when you leave and when you come back to hear my classes, I get the status of Guru.
The relational statuses and Guru comes and goes but my consciousness continues to be the
same. Similarly, when I get śiṣya-status in front of my Guru also, there is not change in my
body. These experiences seem to be different when you look at it from the standpoint of
the object. There is no change in the consciousness but changes are there in the name and
thought. The unchanging consciousness is there in svapna-avasthā. The consciousness is
one although objects and experiences are seemingly different. Consciousness is one in
svapna-avasthā. The undivided changeless consciousness continues in suṣupti-avasthā
also where the object is total blankness. The consciousness associated with blankness gives
the sleep experience.
This experience seems to be different and difference is in the object of experience and not
in the consciousness. Consciousness obtaining in jāgṛt-avasthā, svapna-avasthā and
suṣupti-avasthā, is one and the same, but seemingly appears to be many. The
consciousness is undivided, changeless and continues so throughout the month. Then he
says that the consciousness is undivided, uniform and changeless throughout the year,
throughout the yuga. From there, it passes to eternity. The object changes, experiences
change, but all experiences are nothing but relational names of one and the same

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 9

consciousness. The relational names are pluralistic. Experience minus object is equal to
consciousness and consciousness plus object is our experience.
The objects are different and many, but the consciousness which is related to manifold
objects appears as different experiences. The experiences are not different but the objects
are different; experience is the name of consciousness. They seem to be different
experiences and appearing manifold experiences are really not divided or manifold, even
though they appear as manifold experiences but it is One undivided consciousness.

When you look at every experience by separating it from the object, man experience minus
man is consciousness. I continue to be a sentient being. Train your mind to the experience
part and after separating the object the experience remains. There is no difference in
experience itself. Light is same in different objects which appears as manifold experiences.
Painful experience or pleasurable experience depends upon the object and not on the
experience. Experience with painful object and pleasurable object make the difference and
not the consciousness. This is the truth we will discover in the jāgṛt-avasthā. The same
thing can be extended to svapna-avasthā also.

śloka 4
तथा स्वप्नेऽत्र वेद्यन्तु न स्थिरं जागरे स्थिरम्।
तद्भेदोऽतस्तयोः संविदेकरूपा न भिद्यते ॥ १.४ ॥
tathā svapne:'tra vedyantu na sthiraṃ jāgare sthiram.
tadbhedo:'tastayoḥ saṃvidekarūpā na bhidyate (1.4).
Vidyāraṇya says you can extend the same method of analysis in the case of svapna also.
The dream objects change and the consciousness comes in contact with dream sense
objects. All objects flow and it appears flowing, the experiences being many and manifold.
They all belong to objects only and the consciousness never flows at all. Now the question
is if jāgṛt-avasthā and svapna-avasthā are similar and seemingly we experience seemingly
manifold experiences; why you divide them onto two avasthās?
Really speaking we need not differentiate and the only difference is in the waking the
object has a longer period of existence. In svapna-avasthā, the objects have fleeting
existence. In jāgṛt-avasthā, objects are relatively steady. In svapna-avasthā, they are not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 10

even relatively sthira. This alone is the minor difference but in all respects there are no
differences at all. You register in your mind that consciousness is one continuous entity in
both jāgṛt-avasthā and svapna-avasthā and there is no difference at all. The time field, the
space is different both in jāgṛt-avasthā and svapna-avasthā. The consciousness does not
differ and it is uniform and continuous. It will be the same in the next class also.

Class 3
śloka 4 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses the experiences of the three states the changeless consciousness cit is
the nature of jīvātmā and later he will talk about sat and ānanda nature of jīvātmā. Every
experience takes place only in the mind in the form of thought-mode in the mind and it is
called vṛtti. Every vṛtti or thought-mode is sentient one and it is cetana vṛtti and it is not
inert. When the body itself is insentient and the mind is insentient and the thought
occurring in the mind is to be necessarily insentient, but every vṛtti is a conscious vṛtti,
because every vṛtti is associated with consciousness.
Now the question is— what is the relationship between the consciousness and the
thought? Vidyāraṇya points out that the relationship between the consciousness and
thought is exactly similar to the relationship between the consciousness and the body. The
thought here represents an experience.
The relationship between the consciousness and the body is consciousness is not a part,
property or a product of thought. Consciousness is not a part of a thought, not a property
of thought and not even a product of the thought. Consciousness is an independent entity
which makes the thought sentient and consciousness is not limited by the size of the
thought. Consciousness continues to survive even after the fall of a thought. All these four,
Vidyāraṇya wants us to apply with regard to thought. We are experts in applying this to
the body and now we have to apply this to the thought also. Then we have got a stream of
thoughts that occurs in our mind. The stream of thoughts means one thought arises and
falls and another rises and falls like waves in the ocean.
Vidyāraṇya wants us to note that only thoughts rise and fall while the consciousness does
not rise and fall, it does not come and go and it is continuously present in our mind. As the
experiences rise and fall, experiences come and go, thoughts rise and fall or come and go,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 11

whereas the consciousness is one continuous entity, without rise and fall. There is a
plurality in thoughts, but there is no plurality in consciousness. There is arrival and
departure in thoughts, but there is no arrival and departure in the consciousness; and the
same consciousness exists in every thought, is associated with every thought and exists
between two thoughts also.
When consciousness is associated with the thought it is called experience; when it is
married to a thought it is called an experience, and when there is no thought we have no
experience, but we have consciousness continuing which you call a blank state. The blank
state is objectless consciousness and it is not emptiness. Blank state is not emptiness and it
is objectless consciousness and when it is associated with thought it is ‘objectful’
consciousness which we call experience. Experience minus object and existence minus
thought is equal to consciousness. Objectless experience and thoughtless experience is
pure consciousness.
This beautiful idea that the one and the same consciousness gets associated with dancing
thought is symbolized in Bhāgavata in the form of rāsakrīḍā. Every thought is like a Gopī,
the versatile dancers; Gopīs are many as thoughts are many and along with every Gopī
there is one Kṛṣṇa; along with every thought there is one Kṛṣṇa, consciousness. One Kṛṣṇa,
consciousness, Kṛṣṇa Paramātmā does the dance with every thought. Gopī is the state of
mind and the stream of experiences is called rāsakrīḍā that we experience. If we
understand that the consciousness is associated with every thought, but it is detached
from every thought, it is not affected by, polluted by, adversely influenced by any
thought, this understanding is nothing but ānanda.
In Taittirīya, in brahmānanda-vallī, the ānanda was translated as rasa. What is the dance
of ānanda is that every experience is a dance of ānanda, once you know that you are the
consciousness associated with every thought and not affected by any thought! First you
have to apply with the experiences of jāgṛt and then you should apply to the svapna-
experiences also. Between svapna-avasthā and jāgṛt-avasthā, the experiences are different
but the consciousness is one and the same and it is one changeless principle. It is not
pluralistic and consciousness is one; and not only is it one, it does not change at all.
However, if I see the differences in the experiences, the differences in experiences are not
because of consciousness because consciousness is the same, but differences in
experiences are because of different thoughts. The beads vary while the sūtra does not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 12

vary. Now we have to apply this law to the sleep state also. Now we will go to suṣupti-
experience.

śloka 5
सुप्तोत्त्थितस्य सौषुप्ततमोबोधो भवेत्स्मृतिः ।
सा चावबुद्धविषयावबुद्धं तत्तदा ततः ॥ १.५ ॥
suptottthitasya sauṣuptatamobodho bhavetsmṛtiḥ.
sā cāvabuddhaviṣayāvabuddhaṃ tattadā tataḥ (1.5).
Now Vidyāraṇya analyses the deep-sleep state to indicate the dreamless sleep. Here depth
means svapna-rahita suṣupti. Vidyāraṇya points out in sleep also we have a form of
experience. It is not blankness but it is experience of blankness. The only difference is that
in sleep, the experience is of one type, but in waking, the experiences are many and varied.
In sleep, we experience only one uniform experience. We will see in Tattvabodha that I did
not experience anything else and I was only totally relaxed and comfortable. The absence
of other thing is called blankness and Vedānta calls it mūla-avidyā or tamas. The absence
of everything is not a negative entity as it is everything in potential or dormant form, and
that is called avidyā.
This blankness is but comfort and joy, and this joy we want to experience anytime
willingly. We know that such an experience takes place in suṣupti, that anubhava is there,
after waking up and we are ignorant of this at the time of sleeping. None says at the time
of sleep that I am totally happy and none says I am asleep. Therefore, the anubhava or
blankness or ānanda we are not aware during sleep, but how do we know that we slept
well after we wake up from sleep. Everyone is able to recollect the sleep-experience or the
total blankness after waking up from sleep in the jāgṛt-avasthā.
How do we recollect the experience? The recollection is possible only if you have collected
the experience at the time of experience. Only if you have collected the experience, you can
‘recollect’ the experience. This is the normal rule. Recollection of suṣupti-experience
proves the suṣupti-anubhava in deep sleep state. You can remember only what you have
directly experienced. That we remember the blank experience of suṣupti proves that we
have gone through that experience in sleep, although we were unaware of it during sleep.
In suṣupti also we experience something that is called the blankness or tamas. Bodha
means the experience or knowledge and tamobodha means the knowledge of blankness. If

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 13

such an experience is to take place, thought should have been in existence in the sleep.
Even the blankness-experience has taken place in the form of thought is implied. Where
does this thought arise is our question? In suṣupti, mind is resolved and in the absence of
mind how did the thought arise? It cannot arise in the mind for the mind is resolved. We
say that the thought has taken place at the time when the mind was in a dormant state.
The mind in suṣupti is not destroyed but it is in latent condition, unmanifest condition,
and we call it kāraṇa-śarīra. The kāraṇa-śarīra can be translated as the dormant mind and
it is then the suṣupti-experience takes place. In that thought also consciousness is there. It
continues to exist in the dormant mind also and we call it kāraṇa-śarīra- vṛtti and it is
called sūkṣma-vṛtti. It is a very subtle thought. Because it is subtle we are not able
recognize at at that time and we do it only after waking. If we don’t recollect sleep-
experience, the very word sleep would not have come in our language. We invent a word
only to refer to something which we have experienced.
Therefore, sleep itself is a form of experience. And so, Vidyāraṇya says suptottthitasya
sauṣupta, a person woken from sleep has clear knowledge about sleep. No experience is
an experience. When someone tells at ten o’clock nobody was there and if none is there, to
tell none is there you need somebody. Nobody is there means there was nobody other
than me to experience the ‘nobody’. Similarly nothing was there means there was nothing
other than his consciousness and to experience that nothingness you need a thought-mode
just as to say that there is nobody in the hall. To say there is nobody, you need nobody-
thought. To say nobody, you should entertain such a thought; a blankness-experience
needs a thought and in that thought, you need consciousness. The knowledge of the
experience of suṣupti and that sleep-knowledge, which a person has in the jāgṛt-avasthā, is
it a direct knowledge or memory? Vidyāraṇya asks so. In the waking state when you talk
about sleep, is it a direct experience or memory?
In waking state you cannot have direct experience of suṣupti and the sleeping-knowledge
in waking state is a memory. If you should have a memory in waking state it is possible
only if you have direct experience of blankness during sleep state. That memory of sleep
state or blankness is avabodha-viṣaya and it causes blankness directly experienced during
the suṣupti state to be recollected in the jāgṛt-avasthā.
Vidyāraṇya says therefore, at the time of sleep, tamobodha, you have had direct
experience of the blankness in suṣupti which took place in the form of special thought

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 14

called tamovṛtti or nirvikalpa-vṛtti. It is called special thought for it has taken place in the
dormant state of the mind. Thoughts take place in waking and dream. They are sthūla-
vṛtti, savikalpaka-vṛtti, whereas in sleep we get sūkṣma-vṛtti. Vidyāraṇya want to point
out that in suṣupti also experience is there, in suṣupti also thought is there and therefore,
in suṣupti also, consciousness is there although it appears that consciousness is not there
in suṣupti. It is not true; there is consciousness in suṣupti. When a person is unconscious
or when he is in swoon, we say he is not conscious. That state appears to be without
consciousness but even in that state consciousness exists and therefore, in all the three
states including coma, consciousness is there. In coma, the thoughts will be in sūkṣma-
vṛtti. Even in samādhi, thoughts are in the form of sūkṣma-vṛttis.

śloka 6
बोधोविषयाद्भिन्नो न बोधात्स्वप्नबोधवत्।
एवं स्थानत्रयेऽप्येका संवित्तद्वद्दिनान्तरे ॥ १.६ ॥
bodhoviṣayādbhinno na bodhātsvapnabodhavat.
evaṃ sthānatraye:'pyekā saṃvittadvaddināntare (1.6).
Now Vidyāraṇya comes to the special point. suṣupti is not blankness and suṣupti has
experience and therefore, in suṣupti there is vṛtti and therefore, in suṣupti there is
consciousness along with vṛtti. The consciousness is renamed experience when it is
associated with a thought. Consciousness is there associated with sūkṣma-vṛtti in suṣupti
which takes place in dormant state. Consciousness is in and through the thought but it is
different from thought. Consciousness is not a part, product or property of thought and
consciousness continues in suṣupti also.
Consciousness is different from stream of thought in waking state and consciousness is
different from stream of thought in dream state and consciousness is different from that
sūkṣma or tamovṛtti in suṣupti. Consciousness is genderless. Consciousness in deep sleep
state shows it is different from viṣaya. That blankness-thought is different from
consciousness even though it is intimately one with the consciousness. Consciousness is
like light and different from thought also.
Thus you imagine in jāgṛt-avasthā, svapna-avasthā and suṣupti-avasthā: in jāgṛt-avasthā,
consciousness is mixed with jāgṛt-vṛtti; in svapna-avasthā, consciousness is mixed with

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 15

svapna-vṛtti and in suṣupti, consciousness is mixed with suṣupti-vṛtti. Separate the

consciousness from jāgṛt-vṛtti and keep it separately in a box; separate consciousness from
svapna-vṛtti and keep it separate in a box and separate consciousness from suṣupti-vṛtti
and keep it separately in a box. Then you will find that the consciousness is the same in all
the three states and the differences are there only in the vṛttis or thoughts but the
consciousness is one and the same.
The consciousness in suṣupti is not different from consciousness in jāgṛt, just as it is not
different from consciousness in svapna-avasthā. Consciousness in jāgṛt, consciousness in
svapna and consciousness in suṣupti is one and the same. One round of jāgṛt, svapna and
suṣupti is equal to one day. If you take a day and take all the three avasthās in one day,
consciousness continuously exists as the thread of three avasthās. Take avasthās as the
beads and consciousness as the thread.
The same consciousness will continue next day also. Tomorrow’s jāgṛt-avasthā will be
different, tomorrow’s svapna-avasthā will be different, but the consciousness will be the
same. More in the next class.

Class 4
śloka 6 contd.
The consciousness in the mind is one continuous principle which does not undergo any
change at all and what undergoes change is the thought pattern in the mind. The thoughts
rise in jāgṛt-avasthā, and thoughts set in the mind in svapna-avasthā also, and thoughts
rise and fall and in suṣupti-avasthā also and this thought is called avidyā-vṛtti or sūkṣma-
vṛtti. In all the states, the vṛttis or thoughts come and go, but consciousness never comes
and goes; it stays. It is distinct from every thought even though it is intimately associated
with every thought and when it is associated with thought then the consciousness is
renamed as an experience. When I look at a pot, the pot enters the mind through the sense-
organs when sense-organs perceives an object; the thought that arises in the mind is called
ghaṭa-ākāra-vṛtti or ghaṭa-vṛtti in short.
Consciousness was there even before the pot-thought arose and as even the pot-thought
arises, the consciousness gets associated with that pot-thought, and that consciousness
which is in association with pot-thought is called pot-experience. If pot-thought is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 16

there, consciousness will be there but pot-experience will not be there. The pot-thought is
important for a specific experience, but pot-thought alone is not sufficient; the
consciousness, of course, must be there and consciousness in association with a thought is
called an experience. If you remove all the thoughts, consequently experiences also will go
away, but consciousness will remain.
In the tenth chapter of Pañcadaśī, Vidyāraṇya gives nāṭaka-dīpa where dancers dance and
at the end of the programme, when all dancers go to the green room and the stage is
empty, the stage is not empty but there is something that continues to pervade even after
the actors go to the room. What is there is something in the stage because of which you say
stage is empty. The emptiness of the stage is known because of something and that is the
light-principle. When all thoughts go away and specific experiences go away and no more
drama happens in the mind and even at that time, consciousness continues.
In svapna-avasthā, from the evening show to night show, the light continues and that light
is the consciousness-principle. Going from svapna-avasthā to suṣupti-avasthā, you say
that the mind is blank but that blankness is also known due to continued consciousness.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says it is uniform and varieties in experience are not because of
variety of consciousness-es but varieties in experience are because of the varieties in
thoughts. Thoughts alone have varieties and diversities; they do not belong to the
caitanya. If this is true for one day, what about the next day? Next day it is the same. Next
week also it is the same. The body has become one week older. Though everything is old
and cells have been replaced, one thing is the same and that invisible immortal essence of
Śākṣi-caitanya is one and the same.

śloka 7
मासाब्दायुगकल्पेषु गतागम्येष्वनेकधा ।
नोदेति नास्तमेत्येका संविदेषा स्वयम्प्रभा ॥ १.७ ॥
māsābdāyugakalpeṣu gatāgamyeṣvanekadhā.
nodeti nāstametyekā saṃvideṣā svayamprabhā (1.7).
We said that the consciousness is ever the same, all the time. It is the same even after the
completion of sixty years; same even after the duration of the particular era like kaliyuga,
dvāpāra yuga, treta yuga and kṛta yuga, etc. Four yugas together, the consciousness
remains the same and it cannot be destroyed. One kalpa is one day of Brahmaji, 2000

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 17

chaturyugas. Like that many kalpas may come and go while the consciousness is the same
principle. There is no birth for consciousness; it is not created in time. It is the crucial
difference between Vedānta and science.
That consciousness evolves in time and before consciousness matter was there is the
argument of the scientists. Consciousness is eternally present but for life-principle, it needs
an appropriate medium and when the medium is absent, consciousness will exist in
unmanifest form but when the medium is available, consciousness is able to express in life.
The expressions will come and go. If all living beings are destroyed, consciousness
continues but since bodies and minds are not available it cannot express itself; cidābhāsa
has utpatti-nāśa but cit has no utpatti-nāśa.
Consciousness is never born and it cannot be destroyed also. How do you prove the
existence of consciousness? Vidyāraṇya says that you are a live being and only that
requires no proof; the proof is the very consciousness-principle without which you
yourself will not be alive. The prover of everything need not be proved. The prover of
everything is self-proved. In Vedānta, we call it svayam-prakāśa or svataḥ-siddha or the
self-evident. From this we derive another important corollary. Since consciousness is
eternally existent, existence must be its very intrinsic nature. If it had borrowed existence,
it will not last longer. Whatever is borrowed cannot last long. The beauty that is borrowed
from make-up will not last long. Borrowed heat of water cannot last long. Whatever is
unborrowed is intrinsic and that is called svarūpa.
Consciousness is eternally existence and consciousness enjoys unborrowed existence and
therefore, consciousness has intrinsic existence and existence is the very nature of
consciousness. Sat eva cit, cit eva sat. Therefore, jīvātmā is cit-rūpa and jīvātmā is sat-rūpa
and jīvātmā is sat-cit-rūpa.

śloka 8
इयमात्मा परानन्दः परप्रेमास्पदं यतः ।
मा न भुवं हि भूयासमिति प्रेमात्मनीक्ष्यते ॥ १.८ ॥
iyamātmā parānandaḥ parapremāspadaṃ yataḥ.
mā na bhuvaṃ hi bhūyāsamiti premātmanīkṣyate (1.8).
This sat-cit Ātmā, this existence-consciousness is jīvātmā, the real individual Self. When I
use the word I the real meaning of I is sat-cit and that alone is always there and nothing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 18

else I claim as mine. Whatever I claim as mine leaves one by one, whether it is the material
or a living being. Whatever you claim as yours walks out. The hair walks out, the tooth
walks out; sat-cit svarūpa alone you will not lose and you don’t lose consciousness at the
time of death. You lose only the expressed version of consciousness. In sleep your
consciousness is not in expressed form. Now Vidyāraṇya establishes that not only is Ātmā,
the Self, sat-cit but it is the source of ānanda as well. Ātmā alone is the source of ānanda.
If you observe the day to day happening we find a law.
Whatever that gives happiness becomes the object of love. If you say “I love Carnatic
music”, it is because it gives you joy. Suppose I don’t love pop music, it means it does not
give me joy. If it gives sorrow, I don’t like. In life we keep on liking the object of happiness
and dislike the object of the source of sorrow. Whenever a thing becomes a source of
headache, I dislike that object and I dispose it off. Previously it happened with objects and
now it happens with persons also. Whatever is an object of love is the source of happiness.
Yatra yatra premaāspadatvaṃ tatra tatra ānanda-hetutvam.
Vidyāraṇya says everybody loves oneself. Selfishness is so natural and instinctive which
means you love yourself. Therefore, Self is also an object of love. From this we can extend
logically that Self being an object of love means that it is the source of joy. Ātma-ānanda-
hetuḥ. You will come to Pañcadaśī class as long as it is ānanda-hetuḥ. Thus we have
several sources of joy and there are many things we love which are the sources of joy in
which there is one more that is I, the Ātmā, the Self. Ātmā is the object of love.
When there are many things loved the question comes which one is the most. When
someone loves you, you should know whether you are the first in the list or last in the list.
Many problems are because of this competition alone. How do you decide what is number
one in the list? What is the greatest source of joy and how do you find out? Whatever is
loved most must be the source of greatest joy; in this particular list we have to find out
which one we love the most.
On scanning we find that the truth is that the ultimate love of object is Self-love; Self-love
is the highest love. Non-Self-love is always next to or inferior to Self-love. Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad tells this fact about everybody. How to prove it logically? He gives an
interesting logic and that is any other love is conditional love. I love anyone on certain
condition. As long as the conditions are fulfilled I love and once the conditions are not
fulfilled I reject immediately. Mental rejection is instantaneous. Self-love is unconditional

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 19

whether I am rich or poor, young or old, educated or illiterate. The condition for love is
anything else I love if it takes care of my personal interest, happiness or comfort. My
personal interest alone is loved and the moment that is disturbed, one changes. The very
fact that people accept things and reject things is enough to prove the above fact. Brother
rejects brothers; father rejects sons; spouse rejects spouse. This includes God also.
A devotee also love God on certain conditions and the moment the conditions are not
fulfilled, he starts rejecting God as well. Religions are rejected. Gurus are rejected. Gods
are rejected. All loves are conditional and Self-love alone is unconditional. Therefore,
Ātmā must be parama-ānanda-hetu. You can never love anyone more than yourself.
Hence Vidyāraṇya says Self-love expresses itself. Vidyāraṇya says I want to protect myself
all the time so that I live forever and forever. Every individual thinks so: let me not die
being myself the source of love; let me not cease to exist. Everybody wants to be immortal
because everyone loves oneself.
Now the question comes as to why people commit suicide? Vedānta has thought over this
also. Even when one destroys himself or herself, it is the problem that he is facing that he
wants to put an end to and it is not Self-destruction he wants. When a poor person tries to
commit suicide, if one says I will give you the money you want, then the person will not
commit suicide. It means it is not Self-destruction but it is the poverty. Suppose I eliminate
old age anyone will like to live all the time. Self is always the object of love. More in the
next class.

Class 5
śloka 8 contd.
By avasthā-traya-viveka, Vidyāraṇya first established the continuous consciousness which
exists in everybody even when the body changes, even when the mind changes and even
when the thoughts change, and consequently even when the experiences change; all of
them undergo constant change and one consciousness-principle exists changelessly,
continuously, not only throughout one’s life but also after the fall of the body. Even sṛṣṭis
may come and go, but the consciousness continues as its very nature is sat or existence
itself. He arrived at cit first and from that he arrived at sat and then, he pointed out that
this existence-consciousness alone has to be our real nature. That is the only changeless

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 20

part of me. All other things are subject to change, arrival and departure. This is my real
nature; sat-cit alone must be my Ātmā, that is I, which is my real nature.
Now Vidyāraṇya has come to the next stage that I, the Ātmā, must be ānanda-hetu also. I
am the object of my own love, he declares. The law used here is whatever is the object of
love is a source of ānanda. Human beings love only a source of ānanda and that too as
long as it remains a source of ānanda, whereas the moment it stops to be the source of
ānanda, one lets it go. I am the source of ānanda.
Not only do I love myself, but my Self-love is unconditional which is very unique. On the
other hand, my love for others is always conditional. All the unconditional love is a myth;
it is not true. Once conditions are not fulfilled, no one loves the object or living being. Even
God is not an exception to this rule. Anātmā-love is conditional and Ātmā-love is
unconditional. Therefore, anātma-ānanda is also conditional. Conditional love is not true
love. When you love someone conditionally it is directed to the condition. If one says I
love you because you are beautiful, then as long as the other is beautiful one will love and
the moment the beauty goes, the love will turn sour. The love here is not real for it is
conditioned by beauty. Conditional love and thereby, conditional-ānanda is also not real.
Ātma-ānanda is real.
Then the question comes up— what about the scriptural statement that jñānī’s is universal
love? Is this law violated? Jñānī’s love is universal and for jñānī everyone is Ātmā. For
ajñānī, everyone is different from his Ātmā. For jñānī has discovered that I, the Ātmā, is in
everyone, his love includes the whole universe. He has Self-love and jñānī’s Self is capital
”Self” where the whole universe is included, whereas an ajñānī’s love is selfish love that
excludes the universe. Ātmā is the object of unconditional love and source of ānanda.
Everyone desires that I should always exist and I should live eternally. This love extends
towards oneself; one keeps on solving problems for no old age and everyone wants to live
eternally.

śloka 9
तत्प्रेमात्मार्थमन्यत्र नैवमन्यार्थमात्मनि ।
अतस्तत्परमन्तेन परमानन्दतात्मनः ॥ १.९ ॥
tatpremātmārthamanyatra naivamanyārthamātmani.
atastatparamantena paramānandatātmanaḥ (1.9).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 21

Here, Vidyāraṇya shows how Self-love is unconditional and the love for others is
conditional. The love shown towards other people is not for their sake but for the sake of
oneself. My love is directed towards some people because they have some connection to
me. It is a direct or indirect connection to me. Your love for the school is there until your
child studies there. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says love for others is ātmārtha, because it
serves my happiness, my joy and my comforts. Then it comes under conditional love. Love
for myself is not because of a particular school. Love for myself is unconditional and it is
not because something is there. Self-love na anyārtham is not for the sake of others and is
for myself. I love myself and I love others for myself. Self-love is parama and it is the
greatest because it is unconditional. So also Self-ānanda is unconditional and therefore, it
is greatest. Ātmā is greatest source of ānanda as it is the real source of ānanda.

śloka 10
इत्थं सच्चित्परानन्द आत्मा युक्त्या तथाविधम्।
परं ब्रह्म तयोश्चैक्यं श्रुत्यन्तेषूपदिश्यते ॥ १.१० ॥
itthaṃ saccitparānanda ātmā yuktyā tathāvidham.
paraṃ brahma tayoścaikyaṃ śrutyanteṣūpadiśyate (1.10)
In the previous two ślokas, Ātmā was established as ānanda-svarūpa purely through
reasoning. He concludes that part here. In this manner by logical reasoning Ātmā is of the
nature of sat-cit-ānanda. Then he says we come to know of param brahman also is of the
nature of sat-cit-ānanda. We come to know of Paramātmā with the help of scriptures that
there is a Paramātmā and that Paramātmā is also of the nature of sat-cit-ānanda. If jīvātmā
is also sat-cit-ānanda through scriptures then jīvātmā and Paramātmā should be identical
and this oneness is also revealed in this scriptures.. The first is known through logic and
the other two are known through scriptures. It is known in Vedānta; Paramātma-svarūpa
and also jīvātmā-paramātmā oneness is known from the mahā-vākyas of śruti like Tat
tvam asi, ahaṃ brahma asmi, etc.

śloka 11
अभाने न परं प्रेम भाने न विषयस्पृहा ।
अतोभानेऽप्यभाताऽसौ परमानन्दतात्मनः ॥ १.११ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 22

abhāne na paraṃ prema bhāne na viṣayaspṛhā.

atobhāne:'pyabhātā:'sau paramānandatātmanaḥ (1.11)
If this is so clear that Ātmā is sat-cit-ānanda-svarūpa, Brahman is also sat-cit-ānanda and
Brahman and I are one and the same, why should we have saṃsāra? There must be some
cause for saṃsāra needing ‘sādhana’ to get rid of saṃsāra and to gain mokṣa; why all
these experiences and for what? Unfortunately, this fact is not clearly known. I know this
fact only partially. Totally, I don’t know that there is no problem. Total ignorance is also
bliss! Little ignorance, little knowledge is the problem and hence Vidyāraṇya says Ātmā-
svarūpa is also partly known. We have arrived at this conclusion that Ātmā is ānanda-
svarūpa; it must be known to us and we should have known this to some extent. It is so
because we love ourselves. What is source of sorrow nobody knows! I am ānanda-svarūpa
and Self-love indicates that I have some knowledge that I am ānanda-svarūpa. Otherwise
we would not have loved ourselves.
Therefore, we instinctively know that we are ānanda-svarūpa. At the same time we don’t
know totally also. If we thoroughly know that Ātmā is eternal source of ānanda, then we
would not have gone after external objects for ānanda. I would not have gone to various
programmes also, but I go in search of ānanda outside because I don’t know that I am
ānanda-svarūpa. Else none would have attachment for external objects. We go after
external source for ānanda because we don’t know we are ānanda-svarūpa. It is known
and unknown and there is some vagueness in our knowledge. It is like reference to our
own body. Sometimes we talk as if we are our body: I am sick and I am not happy, etc.
When you say my body is not all right, it means I am not the body. Sometimes we talk as
though we are the body and sometimes as though we possess the body. From this it is
clear that we are confused.
With regard to Ātma-ānanda, our behaviour is peculiar that we are having some
confusion about ānanda-svarūpam of Ātmā. It is partly known and it is the partial
knowledge that is the cause of our problem. With total knowledge about the rope, there is
no problem. With total ignorance of rope also, there is no problem. But the partial
knowledge that is it rope or snake causes all the problems. Now our question is: why do
we have partial knowledge? This will be explained in the next verse.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 23

śloka 12
अध्येतृवर्गमध्यस्थपुत्राध्ययनशब्दवत्।
भानेऽप्यभानं भानस्य प्रतिबन्धेन युज्यते ॥ १.१२ ॥
adhyetṛvargamadhyastha putrādhyayana śabdavat.
bhāne:'pyabhānaṃ bhānasya pratibandhena yujyate (1.12).
First he gives an example for the partial knowledge. Normally we give the example of
rope-snake, etc. Here he gives a new example. Suppose some children chant Vedas. Many
children are chanting. You are there because your child chants the Vedas. You are
disappointed many of them are chanting and you want to hear how your son chants.
When you hear the sound you are not sure whether the is sound of your child or not. Here
and there you are able to hear and not continuously and constantly. Amidst them is seated
your child. In the same way Ātma-ānanda is not known clearly, so I go for ānanda
externally, but I know it is Self-ānanda, then I love myself also. Any partial knowledge is
because of some obstacle. If the obstruction is not there that knowledge would have been
total. The hearing of the sound, the experience of the sound of your child’s adhyayana-
śabda is obstructed with some obstacle. An obstacle alone obstructs total knowledge. This
obstacle may be different in different contexts. Obstacle may be due to some defect in the
eyes. There may be mixture of ropes and snakes. In the case of Ātma-ānanda, we will see
later. We just say there is some obstacle.

śloka 13
प्रतिबन्धोऽस्ति भातीति व्यवहारार्हवस्तुनि ।
तं निरस्य विरुद्धस्य तस्योत्पादनमुच्यते ॥ १.१३ ॥
pratibandho:'sti bhātīti vyavahārārhavastuni.
taṃ nirasya viruddhasya tasyotpādanamucyate (1.13).
In this verse, Vidyāraṇya defines an obstacle. Without the definition we know better and
after knowing the definition we will find it difficult to follow. An association with a new
area which is preceded by the disassociation with the old area is the definition of walking.
A pratibandha is something that obstructs total knowledge. When you have knowledge
of a thing, you describe it in a particular way. I see the object and the object exists. This
will be the description of the object and Vidyāraṇya calls this as asti-bhāti-vyavahāra. Asti
means exists and bhāti I experience that object; this is the description of the object when

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 24

you see it clearly. When there is some obstacle you don’t experience the object and you
will say it does not exist. You don’t experience it and that is why you don’t know about its
existence. Therefore, when an object is obstructed you don’t experience and you don’t
accept its existence and your description is ‘na asti na bhāti’-vyavahāra. The obstacle
transforms asti-bhāti-vyavahāra into nāsti na bhāti-vyavahāra. An obstacle is defined as
that because of which asti-bhāti-vyavahāra of the object is converted to nāsti na bhāti-
vyavahāra. More in the next class.

Class 6
śloka 13 contd.
In the first ten verses Vidyāraṇya introduced the subject matter of the entire Vedānta
śāstra, that is Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya. This has three parts, one is jīvātma-svarūpa
indicated by the word tvam, Paramātmā- svarūpa indicated by the word tat and aikya
indicated by the word asi. Vidyāraṇya said of the three portions, the jīvātma-svarūpa can
be arrived at by reasoning, especially by avasthā-traya-vicāra, and jīvātmā is sat-cit-
ānanda. The other two portions of tat is Paramātma-svarūpa and tat and asi-padārthas are
revealed by Vedānta. Tvam-padārtha alone we can arrive at with the help of logic while
tat-padārtha is revealed by Vedānta śāstra. Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya is the subject matter
of Vedānta.
From verse 11 to 13 Vidyāraṇya discusses about saṃsāra. He gave the introduction in the
11th verse because jīvātma-svarūpa is partially known to us. If we are completely ignorant
we will never suffer saṃsāra because ignorance is bliss. If we are completely wise there is
no problem, for knowledge is also bliss. But the problem is partial ignorance and partial
knowledge that is what we suffer from. What is responsible for this partial knowledge?
Some obstacle alone is responsible for the partial knowledge of our nature. He gave the
example of chanting among many children.
When an object is not obstructed, we describe: I see the object and hence the object exists.
There is an object and therefore, I experience the object. The object is perceived by me or
the object exists. So the object is there. It exists and I experience it. Therefore, any
unobstructed object deserves asti- and bhāti-vyavahāra. It is I see it description.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 25

Every one of you in front of you is asti-bhāti-vyavahāra-yogya. There is someone sitting

on the chair and in his front someone else is on the chair and the front person obstructs the
back person; he becomes asti-bhāti-vyavahāra-ayogya. Pratibandha is the obstacle. Not
only he knocks off the description but in its place the obstacle brings the opposite
vyavahāra. Even though the person had come, I would say that person had not come; an
appropriate description is not given as asti-bhāti-vyavahāra is covered, inappropriate
description is given because of the pratibandha. If you ask the nāstikas whether God is
there or not, they will say Īśvaraḥ nāsti, that there is no God because I don’t see anyone
around.
Even though Īśvara deserves asti-bhāti-vyavahāra, nāstika has some pratibandha they say
Īśvara is not there because they had not seen Īśvara. The obstacle removes asti-bhāti-
vyavahāra for all nāstikas in the case of the existence of Īśvara. They give the opposite
description so: nāsti na bhāti. The first one is called āvaraṇa and the second one is called
vikṣepa. Those who are acquainted with āvaraṇa- and vikṣepa-śakti can apply this here
and those who don’t know about it may leave this. Having defined the obstacle in general
manner, Vidyāraṇya will apply the description in the two cases.

śloka 14
तस्य हेतुः समानाभिहारः पुत्रध्वनिश्रुतौ ।
इहानादिरविद्यैव व्यामोहैकनिबन्धनम्॥ १.१४ ॥
tasya hetuḥ samānābhihāraḥ putradhvaniśrutau.
ihānādiravidyaiva vyāmohaikanibandhanam (1.14).
Pratibandha is responsible for the change in description and the obstacle may not be same
in every case; it varies from situation to situation. In the case of Vedic chanting the
pratibandha is due to the chanting of the other boys. His boy’s chanting is drowned
because of the chanting of the other boys simultaneously. The simultaneous chanting of
other boys is the cause for not hearing his chanting. It is responsible for obstruction of
Vedic chanting of the boy in the example. So the mother is not sure whether the son is
chanting the Vedic mantra or not.
With regard to Ātma-ānanda what is the obstacle? There the problem is not the chanting
or non-chanting. With regard to the fact that I am the source of infinite ānanda, externally
finite sources are there and even the fake ānanda comes from me only and not knowing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 26

these things, this person, due to beginningless ignorance, he remains in saṃsāra and
suffers the pains of saṃsāra.
Here even Īśvara is not responsible for the arrival of ignorance, for ignorance is
beginningless and it is the cause for obstruction for Ātma-ānanda. It creates so many
misconceptions also. Our ignorance is the mother of several misconceptions and
confusions regarding me and confusions regarding others also. As long as we don’t tackle
ignorance, our saṃsāra will successfully continue. Suicide is not the solution. Even pralaya
will not solve the problem. The uniqueness of ignorance is that it does not have the natural
death. The planets will collapse; the solar system will collapse if there is one thing that
does not have natural death, that is ignorance. No question of naturally and automatically
getting liberation. It is not like rivers merging with ocean. Definitely you have to gain
knowledge to get rid of ignorance and attain liberation.

śloka 15
चिदानन्दमयब्रह्मप्रतिबिम्बसमन्विता ।
तमोरजःसत्त्वगुणा प्रकृ तिर्द्विविधा च सा ॥ १.१५ ॥
cidānandamayabrahmapratibimbasamanvitā.
tamorajaḥsattvaguṇā prakṛtirdvividhā ca sā (1.15).
In the previous verse he said ignorance is the only problem of humanity and we have to
tackle ignorance. It is better we have some knowledge about ignorance. What is avidyā is
answered here. For this Vidyāraṇya introduces another important factor, Prakṛti, a
technical word and you should know that Prakṛti is the basic form of matter. Prakṛti is the
fundamental form and it is subtler than all the forms of energy and this has tamas, rajas
and sattva-guṇas. It is called triguṇātmikā Prakṛti. sattva-guṇa stands for the knowing-
faculty; rajas stands for the activity-faculty, the capacity to do an action; jñānendriya
faculty and karmendriya faculty and tamo-guṇa refers to inertia, neither knowing-capacity
nor doing-capacity. It is called dravya-śakti. It means inertia which means the nature of
jaḍa. It is inherent in the Prakṛti. Prakṛti is divided into three parts; one is sattva-pradhāna
Prakṛti, the second part is called rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti where rajo-guṇa is predominant
and third one is tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti where inertia is dominant. Of the three Prakṛtis,
first Vidyāraṇya introduces the first two Prakṛtis. That Prakṛti is twofold. This will be
explained in the next śloka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 27

Another thing we have to remember is that Prakṛti is capable of reflecting or manifesting

the consciousness-principle. This consciousness we have already discussed in the first few
ślokas. This consciousness Vidyāraṇya calls as Brahman. The word Brahman is infinite
and this is capable of giving reflection to the Prakṛti and therefore, Prakṛti enjoys
borrowed consciousness. This basic matter has reflection of Brahman. It is chidānanda-
Māyā-svarūpa Brahman that is reflected in Prakṛti.

śloka 16
सत्त्वशुद्धाविशुद्धिभ्यां मायाऽविद्ये च ते मते ।
मायाबिम्बोवशीकृ त्य तां स्यात्सर्वज्ञ ईश्वरः ॥ १.१६ ॥
sattvaśuddhāviśuddhibhyāṃ māyā:'vidye ca te mate.
māyābimbovaśīkṛtya tāṃ syātsarvajña īśvaraḥ (1.16).
What are the two Prakṛtis in which reflected consciousnesses are available? The first
Prakṛti is sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti or it is śuddha-sattva Prakṛti. śuddha-sattva means
sattva is dominant. The second Prakṛti is rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti it is called malina-
śuddha-sattva Prakṛti. sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti is called Māyā and malina-sattva Prakṛti or
rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti is called avidyā.
Māyā and avidyā are inert matter and both are two matters of original Prakṛti. In both
pratibimba caitanya is there. Imagine two mirrors one is clear mirror and another is dull,
dust-coated, broken, spotted mirror. Both have the capacity to form a reflection but the
quality of reflection will not be the same even though the original thing is the same. One
face reflection is in two mirrors but in one I have a bright reflection and in another I have
dull reflection, even though the original face is the same. Because of pure sattva and
impure sattva, the two Prakṛtis are called Māyā and avidyā. Now we have Māyā-
pratibimbita-caitanya and avidyā-pratibimbita-caitanya, first one is bright and the second
one is dull because it is based on malina-sattva.
Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya is called Īśvara. God is not the original consciousness but God
is only reflected consciousness and the good fortune of God is the brighter surface of
Prakṛti and hence God is very bright. Because of God’s grace God is able keep Māyā under
His control.
God can use Māyā as per His wish. Māyā is thus used for sṛṣṭi, sthiti and laya of the
creation. Māyā never enslaves Īśvara. Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya remains under the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 28

control of Īśvara. Since Māyā cannot affect Īśvara, Īśvara is omniscient and He does not
have pratibimba-problem and He does not need ānanda from external world; He is
sarvajña; He is omnipotent.

śloka 17
अविद्यावशगस्त्वन्यस्तद्वैचित्र्यादनेकधा ।
सा कारणशरीरं स्यात्प्राज्ञस्तत्राभिमानवान्॥ १.१७ ॥
avidyāvaśagastvanyastadvaicitryādanekadhā.
sā kāraṇaśarīraṃ syātprājñastatrābhimānavān (1.17).
Anya means the other one, which is avidyā-pratibimba, the reflection found in the dull
medium of avidyā, in which rajo-guṇa is dominant; it stifles the sattva-guṇa and had it not
stifled the same, every jīva would have been omniscient. Instead, jīva is having partial
knowledge. This avidyā-pratibimba because of the reflecting medium is dull, the jīvātmā
is also dull, and because of that, avidyā dominates this jīva. Instead of jīva utilizing the
medium as is in the case of Īśvara, here jīva becomes the slave of avidyā.
So jīva is under the control of avidyā. This avidyā is many in number because jīvas are
many in number. More the jīvas more are the reflecting medium and each one’s is one
avidyā. If any one of us has Māyā medium we would have been Īśvara. We all know we
are puccā miserable jīvas and as many jīvas are there and so many avidyās are there. Māyā
is one and avidyās are many. Because of the diversity of avidyā and plurality of avidyā
they are many varieties of jīvātmās. This avidyā alone is called kāraṇa-śarīra. This gives all
the troubles to the jīva. This jīva who is the consciousness reflected in avidyā is called
prājña jīva.
Suppose there is reflected sun in the mirror, the reflected sun is more intimate with the
mirror and many properties of the reflection are identified with the mirror. The reflection
can say either it belongs to the original sun or it can say I am one with the mirror image.
The brightness of the image belongs to the original sun. The image can claim both; it can
belong to the mirror or it can say it belongs to the sun. It should claim I belong to the
original sun and that is called wisdom but most of the reflected suns are ignoramuses.
And similarly, instead of claiming I am Paramātmā we say I am the miserable body.
Changing the party is the purpose of the Vedānta and Vedāntic study. Don’t belong to the
matter medium but belong to the Brahman. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 29

Class 7
śloka 17 contd.
Vidyāraṇya enumerates that avidyā is cause of the problems of the jīvas. Vidyāraṇya here
introduces the Vedāntic teachings and the total picture is given as jīva-Īśvara-jagat triangle
with the three factors to be analysed in all the Vedāntic teaching. Vidyāraṇya introduces
three-fold Prakṛti, one is sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti which is called Māyā and another is
rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti called avidyā and third is tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti called Prakṛti.
Prakṛti is designed into three factors Māyā, avidyā and Prakṛti.
The three are going to be responsible for the arrival of Īśvara, jīva and jagat. Māyā
contributing to Īśvara; avidyā contributing to jīvas and Prakṛtis contribution is jagat. Of
these three Māyā is only one and God should be only one. God should not contribute to
further pluralism; avidyā is manifold and Prakṛti is also one capable of multiplication and
evolution.
All the three are jaḍa by themselves. Māyā is inert matter; avidyā is jaḍa inert matter and
Prakṛti of course is inert matter. All the three inert factors play live roles. It is activated by
one principle beyond all these three: Brahman, caitanya and there is only Brahman,
caitanya, nitya sarvagata caitanya. This original consciousness will get reflected in Māyā
and when Brahman gets reflected in Māyā the pratibimba caitanya number one and Māyā
mix up and this mixture is called Īśvara. The inseparable mixture is Īśvara. The reflecting
medium and reflection cannot be separated. The original is always separate and we don’t
talk about the original consciousness.
We talk about reflecting medium and reflected consciousness namely Māyā and
pratibimba caitanya; they are inseparable ardhanārīśvara. This inseparable pair of the
universal parents, just like vāk and artha are inseparable are Māyā and pratibimba
caitanya, together called Īśvara. This Īśvara is in a fine condition. His reflecting medium is
glorious for it is sattva-pradhāna, and Īśvara has sarva-vyāpitva and sarva-guṇatva.
Whatever wonderful is Īśvara and whatever is miserable is jīva.
Now we have avidyā which is also jaḍa and here also there is a pratibimba caitanya; this
avidyā and pratibimba caitanya are also inseparable. The reflected consciousness and
reflecting medium cannot be separated. Either both exist or both perish one remaining

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 30

without the other is not possible. Avidyā and pratibimba caitanya is called prājña jīva.
This avidyā is otherwise called kāraṇa-śarīra.
Since avidyās are many in number, there are many jīvas, jīvas are many in number and the
prājña jīvas are endowed with inferior reflecting medium which is rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti.
So knowledge is partial. Wherever sattva is dominant, knowledge will be dominant and
where sattva is less dominant there will be half knowledge. Half knowledge is dangerous
and it alone is responsible for misconception. With total knowledge there is no
misconception and with total ignorance there is no misconception, but partial knowledge
is the cause of our avidyā and illusion.
Prakṛti is tamo-guṇa pradhāna. Brahman reflects in Prakṛti. Vidyāraṇya will explain this
later. Since Brahman is tamo-guṇa pradhāna the caitanya reflection is not there. In tamaḥ-
pradhāna Prakṛti the consciousness aspect will not be clearly manifest. What is manifested
is sat-aṃśa, the existence of Brahman with sadābhāsa and sat is manifest in Prakṛti blessed
by sadābhāsa Brahman. This tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti evolves into the universe. Brahman
manifest as jīva and Brahman alone through Prakṛti manifests jagat also. Īśvara part has
been talked about, the jīva part is discussed and now we will go to the jagat part. Īśvara-
jīva-jagat is the grand design of Brahman in the total creation.

śloka 18
तमः प्रधानप्रकृ तेस्तद्भोगायेश्वराज्ञया ।
वियत्पवनतेजोऽम्बु भुवोभूतानि जज्ञिरे ॥ १.१८ ॥
tamaḥ pradhānaprakṛtestadbhogāyeśvarājñayā.
viyatpavanatejo:'mbu bhuvobhūtāni jajñire (1.18).
The story continues and there is tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti. The Prakṛti means that which
can evolve and that which is subject to evolution. That which can be moulded into
manifest product and pliable substance is called Prakṛti. The moulded product is called
vikṛti or vikāra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says tamaḥ-pradhāna prakrteḥ. The Prakṛti
originated or evolved. Prakṛti consists of pañcabhūtas like ākāśa, vāyu, agni, jala and
pṛthvī, the earth. These elements are born out of tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti. They are jaḍa-
pradhāna. sattva is dormant, suppressed and hence it cannot know anything. The sattva-
and rajo- guṇa are suppressed by tamo-guṇa and therefore, pṛthvī cannot know anything

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 31

and it cannot do anything. Rajas in the table is suppressed and so it does not move. Sattva
in the table is suppressed and therefore, it cannot know anything. Sattva and rajas are
suppressed by tamo-guṇa. Any object of consumption has to be acetana. Otherwise the
bhoga-vastu will run away when you want to consume. Therefore, bhogāya, the inert
universe is meant for jīva’s bhoga. Five elements are born for prājña jīvas. Why it is for
consumption of jīva and why not for Īśvara? The jīva alone has accumulated puṇya-pāpa
and puṇya-pāpa can be exhausted by sukha-duḥkha-bhoga. Īśvara does not have sañcita,
āgāmi or prārabdha and therefore, the world is not for Īśvara’s bhoga. Then question will
come up: when the world was created first there was no karma for creation of jīvas; how
do you account for the first sṛṣṭi?
There is no first creation at all; creation is an eternal cyclic process and every time the
world is created, it is based on previous sṛṣṭi. It keeps the track of puṇya-pāpa. You can
get away from local police and laws but you cannot get away from Īśvara. Īśvara notes
every karma and Īśvara computer is not affected by virus. All are designed for the sake of
jīva indicating Īśvara is nimitta-kāraṇa and Prakṛti is upādāna-kāraṇa, material cause.

śloka 19
सत्त्वांशैः पञ्चभिस्तेषां क्रमाद्धीन्द्रियपञ्चकम्।
श्रोत्रत्वगक्षिरसनघ्राणाख्यामुपजायते ॥ १.१९ ॥
sattvāṃśaiḥ pañcabhisteṣāṃ kramāddhīndriyapañcakam.
Śrotratvagakṣirasanaghrāṇākhyāmupajāyate (1.19).
The details of creation are not given here. These details are given in Tattvabodha. He says
the five elements are born out of tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti and they are called sūkṣma-
bhūtas, subtle elements and responsible for creation of sūkṣma-śarīra. 17 organs are born
out of five subtle elements. Vidyāraṇya says each element has three guṇas being born out
of Prakṛti with three guṇas. The composition of Prakṛti is the composition of five elements.
kāraṇa-guṇah karye anuvartate. If gold has some amount of copper the ornaments also
will have the same part of copper.
A doubt may come: you said Prakṛti has tamo-guṇa but how other guṇas can be there. The
answer is he did not say Prakṛti is tamo-guṇa Prakṛti and we said tamaḥ-pradhāna
Prakṛti. That means besides tamas, other guṇas also will be there. Therefore, tamaḥ-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 32

pradhāna Prakṛti has sattva, rajas with the dominance of tamo-guṇa. The sattva-guṇa part
of five elements will produce five jñānendriyas. Five subtle guṇas produce the indriya-
pañcaka or the five jñānendriyas. The sense-organs are ear, eye, organ of touch, organ of
taste and organ of smell.

śloka 20
तैरन्तःकरणं सर्वैर्वृत्तिभेदेन तद्द्विधा ।
मनोविमर्शरूपं स्याद्बुद्धिः स्यान्निश्चयात्मिका ॥ १.२० ॥
tairantaḥkaraṇaṃ sarvairvṛttibhedena taddvidhā.
manovimarśarūpaṃ syādbuddhiḥ syānniścayātmikā (1.20).
Through the sattva parts of the elements together, sūkṣma-bhūta-sattva-aṃśa, the inner
organ antaḥkaraṇa is born. This inner organ is known by two different names.
antaḥkaraṇa is twofold. They are not two instrument but one instrument known by two
functional names, vṛtti-bhedena; vṛtti means pravṛtti and pravṛtti means functions and
vṛtti-bhedena means through different functions, even though the organ is only one.
The inner organ is one with two different names which are the mind and intellect. The
mind and intellect are two functions of one and the same inner instrument. The mind is
the name of the inner organ when it does the function of analyzing the pros and cons
called saṅkalpa-vikalpa-vyāpāra whether this is correct or that is correct; whether I should
hear or whether I should write, etc. A pendulum goes this and that side, one is saṅkalpa
and another is vikalpa, and this oscillation is called pros-and-cons-vimarśa. Buddhi is on
when after a long wavering you decide; the deciding factor is called buddhi or intellect.
The mind needs sattva-guṇa of all elements for it has to manage all the five sense-organs.
Eyes need not manage the ears; ears cannot manage the skin. However, the mind has to
manage five wavered sense-organs and therefore, it needs the sattva-guṇas of all the five
elements.

śloka 21
रजोंऽशैः पञ्चभिस्तेषां क्रमात्कर्मेन्द्रियाणि तु ।
वाक्पाणिपादपायूपस्थाभिधानानि जज्ञिरे ॥ १.२१ ॥
rajoṃ:'śaiḥ pañcabhisteṣāṃ kramātkarmendriyāṇi tu.
vākpāṇipādapāyūpasthābhidhānāni jajñire 1.21).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 33

We have seen the creation of five jñānendriyas and adhiṣṭhāna. Now we have to see pañca
prāṇas and pañca karmendriyas. The karmendriyas are born out of five rajo-guṇas of the
Prakṛti. Five karmendriyas are born of the rājasika aṃśa of five subtle elements. Doing
anything needs rajo-guṇa. The karmendriyas are vāk, pāṇi, pāda, pāyu, upastha, they are
organs of speech, hands, legs, organ of excretion and organ of procreation, respectively.
With these five names they are born in the same order of the elements.

śloka 22
तैः सर्वैः सहितैः प्राणोवृत्तिभेदात्स पञ्चधा ।
प्राणोऽपानः समानश्चोदानव्यानौ च ते पुनः ॥ १.२२ ॥
taiḥ sarvaiḥ sahitaiḥ prāṇovṛttibhedātsa pañcadhā.
prāṇo:'pānaḥ samānaścodānavyānau ca te punaḥ (1.22).
The pañca prāṇas are created out of the rājasika part put together or mixed together. The
prāṇa is born out of the sūkṣma part of all the five elements put together. Vidyāraṇya says
that there is one prāṇa with fivefold function. In Brahma-sūtra, there is a special reference
to this. It is named fivefold because of the functional differences. The word vṛtti does not
mean thought here but it means functions. It has fivefold manifestations just as one
electricity has manifold functions. Prāṇa is one śakti. In tantra śāstra, it is called kuṇḍalinī
śakti. Being coiled is called kuṇḍalinī and anything in coil form has energy in potential
form. By kindling the kuṇḍalinī śakti one gets the aṣṭa-mahā-siddhis. The five prāṇas are
prāṇa, apāna, samāna, vyāna, and udāna having five functions. So the sūkṣma-śarīra is
created. Now we will enter the creation of sthūla-śarīra.

Class 8
śloka 22 contd.
After explaining jīvātma-svarūpa as sat-cit-ānanda, Vidyāraṇya said that the human
problem is svarūpa-āvaraṇa, svarūpa-ignorance since svarūpa-avidyā is saṃsāra-kāraṇa.
Now we are more interested in knowing what avidyā exactly is before finding the solution
to the avidyā. Only then we can eliminate avidyā. Vidyāraṇya has entered into an
elaborate discussion on avidyā and its allied subject matter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 34

To understand avidyā, Vidyāraṇya introduced Prakṛti-tattva. Prakṛti cannot become active

by itself and it can become active with the activation of Brahman. This Prakṛti is divided
into Māyā, avidyā and Prakṛti representing sāttvika, rājasika and tāmāsika guṇas of
Prakṛti. Enlivened Māyā is equal to Īśvara.
Māyā with caitanya is Īśvara, avidyā enlivened by caitanya or caitanya associated by
avidyā is jīva and Prakṛti activated by caitanya evolves into this creation; this evolution of
Prakṛti into creation is explained now and Vidyāraṇya goes fast assuming that you are all
advanced Pañcadaśī students.
Out of subtle elements 17 subtle organs are created out of rajo-guṇa and sāttvika guṇas.
The tamo-guṇa of five elements are not used so far and they will be utilized today. Having
briefly talked about 17 organs, Vidyāraṇya says these organs put together are sūkṣma-
śarīra. Being make of subtle elements this body is called sūkṣma-śarīra, not visible to
sense-organ. Your mind cannot be seen by me whether you are mentally in the class. The
function of your psyche cannot be assessed by me whether it is in order. It is avyakta not
perceptible. This sūkṣma-śarīra is known as liṅga-śarīra that Vidyāraṇya introduces in the
23rd verse which we enter now.

śloka 23
बुद्धिकर्मेन्द्रियप्राणपञ्चकै र्मनसा धिया ।
शरीरं सप्तदशभिः सूक्ष्मं तल्लिङ्गमुच्यते ॥१.२३ ॥
buddhikarmendriyaprāṇapañcakairmanasā dhiyā.
śarīraṃ saptadaśabhiḥ sūkṣmaṃ talliṅgamucyate (1.23).
There is sūkṣma-śarīra in every individual that consists of seventeen limbs or components
— buddhi-karmendriya here is jñāna-karmendriya [ten], prāṇas [five] and the mind,
emotional faculty, and intellect faculty constitute the sūkṣma-śarīra. What is kāraṇa-śarīra
has already been pointed out that avidyā is kāraṇa-śarīra. rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti is equal
to avidyā and is equal to kāraṇa-śarīra and since Prakṛti is anādi, sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti
is also anādi and rajaḥ- and tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti is also anādi and therefore, avidyā is
anādi; avidyā being kāraṇa-śarīra, kāraṇa-śarīra is anādi. And therefore, it is not a created
product and it has been there from beginningless time. The sūkṣma-śarīra alone is created.
This subtle body is an indicator for self-knowledge and thereby has another name liṅga-
śarīra and liṅga means an indicator or a mark. The sūkṣma-śarīra is called liṅga because it

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 35

has the capacity to reflect the consciousness like the mirror to reflect the face, etc, thereby
being an indicator for consciousness. When a mirror reflects an object, the reflected object
is the indicator of the original object and that is why to see whether you have anything in
your eyes, you look at the mirror because the mirror indicates the conditions of your
original face.
In Sanskrit, any indicator is called a liṅga. A mirror is a liṅga to reflect your original face.
In the same way sūkṣma-śarīra is a mirror, a reflecting medium, which reveals the original
consciousness. Therefore, reflecting medium is always a liṅga for he existence original
consciousness. If reflecting medium is not there, you will never know the original
consciousness. That is why in sleep when sūkṣma-śarīra is dissolved the very existence of
consciousness is not very clear. Consciousness is not evident in a sleeping person because
sūkṣma-śarīra is dissolved. When sūkṣma-śarīra is active, sūkṣma-śarīra is evident and it
indicates the consciousness. Therefore, sūkṣma-śarīra is called liṅga. A liṅga in Śiva
temple is the symbol of Lord Śiva. Any symbol reveals something else. Therefore,
Shivaliṅga is called liṅga and sūkṣma-śarīra is called liṅga. Smoke is called liṅga to
indicate the fire. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says sūkṣma-śarīra is called liṅga-śarīra which
indirectly reveals the existence of Ātmā.

śloka 24
प्राज्ञस्तत्राभिमानेन तैजसत्वं प्रपद्यते ।
हिरण्यगर्भतामीशस्तयोर्व्यष्टिसमष्टिता ॥ १.२४ ॥
prājñastatrābhimānena taijasatvaṃ prapadyate.
hiraṇyagarbhatāmīśastayorvyaṣṭisamaṣṭitā (1.24).
He says both Īśvara and the prājña jīva identify with the sūkṣma-śarīra. Individual jīva
and samaṣṭi Īśvara are identified with sūkṣma-śarīra and they get two different names.
When Īśvara functions in sūkṣma-śarīra he is called Hiraṇyagarbha. Īśvara looked through
sūkṣma-śarīra is called Hiraṇyagarbha whereas jīva looked through sūkṣma-śarīra is
called taijasa. The one and the same caitanya identified with kāraṇa-śarīra, otherwise
called avidyā or rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti, is called prājña; prājña becomes taijasa when
identified with sūkṣma-śarīra and Īśvara becomes Hiraṇyagarbha.
Then a question comes up: if Hiraṇyagarbha is also born out of sūkṣma-śarīra and taijasa
is also born out of sūkṣma-śarīra, then what is the difference between them? Vidyāraṇya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 36

says Hiraṇyagarbha is identified with total sūkṣma-śarīra and prājña is identified with a
single sūkṣma-śarīra and that is what makes us saṃśarīs. If you are identified with
everything you are called Īśvara, and when you don’t identify with anything you are
called Brahman. Be Īśvara with total identification and be Brahman with total dis-
identification. The problem is partial identification makes the life of jīva a saṃśarī.
Hiraṇyagarbha has samaṣṭitva while taijasa has vyaṣṭitva. Hiraṇyagarbha has no problem
while taijasa has mahā problem. There is a difference of micro and macro.

śloka 25
समष्टिरीशः सर्वेषां स्वात्मतादात्म्यवेदनात्।
तदभावात्ततोऽन्ये तु कथ्यन्ते व्यष्टिसंज्ञया ॥ १.२५ ॥
samaṣṭirīśaḥ sarveṣāṃ svātmatādātmyavedanāt.
tadabhāvāttato:'nye tu kathyante vyaṣṭisaṃjñayā (1.25).
This verse is a commentary on vyaṣṭi-samaṣṭitā word occurring in the 24th śloka. Īśvara or
Hiraṇyagarbha is samaṣṭi and is identified with all the sūkṣma-śarīras. Īśvara looks upon
all sūkṣma-śarīras as one with Himself. He enjoys a Universal Self. But with regard to all
the taijasas, they don’t identify with all of them and they are bothered about their self.
They are not worried about others. They are known as individual egos. Individual egos
are problematic egos. In sleep we don’t have ego and we are so nice in sleep. The moment
we wake up the original ego comes up and we face problems. The big-I is straightforward
and the small-i is a crooked-I.

śloka 26
तद्भोगाय पुनर्भोग्यभोगायतनजन्मने ।
पञ्चीकरोति भगवान्प्रत्येकं वियदादिकम्॥ १.२६ ॥
tadbhogāya punarbhogyabhogāyatanajanmane.
pañcīkaroti bhagavānpratyekaṃ viyadādikam (1.26).
Even if a jīva has kāraṇa-śarīra, even if he has self-knowledge, these two are not sufficient
to experience saṃsāra, saṃsāra begins with the arrival of sthūla-śarīra. That is why before
the birth of sthūla-śarīra and after the death of sthūla-śarīra, no sukha -duḥkha-anubhava

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 37

is not possible. The sūkṣma-śarīra continues to survive and it travels; it contains all the
seventeen organs and kāraṇa-śarīra, Ātmā is there in the spirit and it has vāsanās, but still
that jīva cannot experience any sukha-duḥkha. This we saw elaborately in Brahma-sūtra
3.1.
Without a physical body sukha-duḥkha-anubhava is not possible. Indriyas are there and
they can function only when golakas are there. Indriyas minus golakas is as good as
nothing. All karmas will be there but they cannot give any sukha-duḥkha and if the
karmas are to fructify they should create a body. Īśvara is to create a body for a jīva to
have sukha-duḥkha. Body alone is not enough and sense-organs alone are not enough but
the both should be there.
The sthūla-śarīra is needed for bhoga and sthūla-prapañca is required for bhoga. It is the
bhoga-āyatana and it is through which the one enjoys. Both cannot be created unless there
are five gross elements. The subtle elements can produce subtle body but they cannot
create gross universe and Īśvara has to create the gross prapañca. He converts the subtle
into gross prapañca. All these are created for the jīva only as Īśvara does not have self-
ignorance and he does not have problems of karma or karma-phala. He creates everything
for jīva alone. This is the experience of taijasa jīva. The body and prapañca are required for
enjoyment; body without prapañca is of no use and prapañca without body is also useless.
All the five subtle elements are made tangible and non-concrete elements are made
concrete. Thus he grossifies the universe.

śloka 27
द्विधा विधाय चैकैकं चतुर्धा प्रथमं पुनः ।
स्वस्वेतरद्वितीयांशैर्योजनात्पञ्च पञ्च ते ॥ १.२७ ॥
dvidhā vidhāya caikaikaṃ caturdhā prathamaṃ punaḥ.
svasvetaradvitīyāṃśairyojanātpañca pañca te (1.27).
The grossification of the five elements is changing subtle elements to gross elements. At
the time of grossification they are mixed together. Īśvara the cosmic cook makes
wonderful salad or wonderful khicaḍi and mixes the five elements in particular
proportion. The proportion is each gross element will have half of that particular element
and one eighth of the other four elements. Therefore, gross ākāśa will have half ākāśa and
one eighth vāyu, jala, pṛthvī and agni. Vidyāraṇya tells how this happens. In the first stage

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 38

each subtle elements divides into half. Then one half you keep in some place. Then divide
one half of each into four equal bits. If half is divided into four, it will be one eighth each.
Therefore, we have four one-eighth bits of vāyu, agni, jalam and pṛthvī, etc. Then you
distribute the four one-eighth bits of ākāśa to other four elements. Then final product is
created. This is explained in pancikāraṇa in Tattvabodha. After the combination the subtle
elements will become gross. So Īśvara converts the sūkṣma-bhūtas into gross elements.
After grossification the elements become alloys. Each gross element is an alloy of all the
five elements. The naming is done based on the domination of the elements. So it is called
gross ākāśa, gross vāyu, etc; that is why subtle elements are called tanmātras. Subtle ākāśa
is tanmātra; tanmātra means main element matra, only. When you grossifiy only tāmāsika
part is grossified; sāttvika and rājasika are used for creating subtle bodies. More in the
next class.

Class 9
śloka 27 contd.
The creation is being presented by Vidyāraṇya to point out how avidyā causes saṃsāra.
Vidyāraṇya has also explained the process of pancikāraṇa and the pure elements the
tanmātra is grossified into alloy elements. Each element is a mixture of five and particular
elements will be dominant and the name will be given on the basis of the dominant
element. Then he explained the creation of gross universe. It is created out of raw material
that is sthūla-pañca-bhūtas.

śloka 28
तैरण्डस्तत्र भुवनभोग्यभोगाश्रयोद्भवः ।
हिरण्यगर्भः स्थूलेऽस्मिन्देहे वैश्वानरो भवेत्॥ १.२८ ॥
tairaṇḍastatra bhuvanabhogyabhogāśrayodbhavaḥ.
hiraṇyagarbhaḥ sthūle:'smindehe vaiśvānaro bhavet (1.28).
Out of the five elements, first creation is the brahmāṇḍa the cosmic egg as it were. It is
called aṇḍa because it is egg-shaped globe which was created and within that brahmāṇḍa
alone 14 lokas are created and within the brahmāṇḍa the fourteen lokas exist. The
cosmologists talk about several black holes which is supposed to be dent cosmic thing that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 39

attracts everything into itself and even the light cannot escape from that dense matter. We
will not be able to see that; it appears as black hole and is the densest form of matter. The
cosmos has many such black holes and our own universe may be a black hole; śāstra talks
about brahmāṇḍa within which our own universe exists. Fourteen lokas are seven upper
lokas and seven lower lokas.
Within the fourteen lokas bhogya, bhogāśrayas are there. The sthūla pañca-bhūtas, the
gross sense objects are there, sthūla śarīras are there and the bhoga-āyatanas are there. It
means that the jīva has to reside in the body to experience the pleasures and pains. After
death, once the jīva has left the physical body and until it gets another body, jīva exists but
cannot experience pleasure and pain. The sūkṣma-śarīra is defined as the instrument of
experience.
In short sthūla-viṣaya and sthūla-śarīra originate out of the five elements. The
manufacturing job is done by Brahman alone. Some of them are well-made and some of
them are rejected at the time of manufacture alone. You have to supply the words
Bhagavān karoti. Hiraṇyagarbha becomes the Vaiśvānara identified with sthūla-upādhi,
the gross medium. When Īśvara identifies with subtle medium he is called Hiraṇyagarbha
and when Hiraṇyagarbha is identified with gross medium Hiraṇyagarbha is called
Vaiśvānara. The Vaiśvānara is otherwise called Virāṭ. Kṛṣṇa described Himself as Virāṭ in
Gītā. Virāṭ is one that identifies with all the body with innumerable hands, legs, etc. They
are the description of Vaiśvānara or Virāṭ.
Taijasa jīvas are many. Each jīva is identified with one subtle body and as many subtle
bodies are there, so many Taijasas are there. Each Taijasa is identified with one gross body.
When identified with gross body it is called Viśva. As many Viśvas are there so many
kinds of bodies are there. Some Viśvas have deva-śarīra and they occupy higher lokas.
Other with mediocre puṇyas live in the middle loka that is the earth. There are other
Viśvas with inferior puṇya or pāpa get lower lokas. No physical body is permanent. We
all will have several chances for change of the body. We will be given infinite chances to
rise or fall and this manuṣya-śarīra is given to get liberation. If we fail we will get another
janma. Hiraṇyagarbha and taijasa are associated with sūkṣma prapañca and Virāṭ and
Viśva are associated with sthūla-śarīra. Īśvara and prājña are associated with kāraṇa-
śarīra.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 40

śloka 29
तैजसा विश्वतां याता देव तिर्यङ्नरादयः ।
ते पराग्दर्शिनः प्रत्यक्तत्त्वबोधविवर्जिताः ।
कुर्वते कर्म भोगाय कर्म कर्तुं च भुञ्जते ॥ १.२९ ॥
taijasā viśvatāṃ yātā deva tiryaṅnarādayaḥ.
te parāgdarśinaḥ pratyaktattvabodhavivarjitāḥ
kurvate karma bhogāya karma kartuṃ ca bhuñjate (1.29).
We have defined Īśvara as the brahma-caitanya reflected in Māyā, the definition of Māyā
is sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti and Māyā being pure, Īśvara is not polluted by Māyā and not
affected by Māyā; Īśvara happens to be sarvajña and Īśvara has self-knowledge. Therefore,
Īśvara is nitya-mukta-svarūpa so: with the help of Māyā I do everything but I am not
bound by puṇya-pāpa. I am not affected by saṃsāra because I am sattva-guṇa-pradhāna.
But in the case of prājña-jīvas alone there is a problem even though the very same brahma-
caitanya is reflected in avidyā which is rajaḥ-pradhāna-Prakṛti as it is not sattva-
predominant. So the sattva of jīva is polluted sattva or malina-sattva and therefore, he has
partial knowledge. If he had full knowledge he would have been Īśvara. The partial
knowledge is the cause of error. If he had been tamaḥ-pradhāna he would have been in
sleep always. He is neither totally tāmāsika nor totally sāttvika and therefore, he has
partial knowledge and has misconceptions and errors. Therefore, Īśvara never suffers any
problem and the creation is a līlā, a sport or drama and enjoyment. In the case of jīva
because of avidyā he does not know his true nature and Vidyāraṇya tells the tragic tale of
jīva.
Viśva-taijasa-prājña-jīvas do not possess the most important thing that discriminates
bondage and liberation, that is, self-knowledge, and they study everything except the
truth of Brahman, the immortal invisible Brahman. They are self-ignorant people. On
gaining self-knowledge, one gets security. Hence, every jīva feels insecure. The insecurity
is born with the birth of the baby and goes on until death.
For security, one should see inward but one looks outwards which only increases
insecurity instead of reducing it. Every object outside is insecure. Best thing I want is
peace and it is available only inside. Since they see security outside they start karma to
acquire them. Acquiring things and relationships are for security. Karma kurvate they
enter into frantic activity for gaining security. All jīvas are busy and have no time to look

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 41

into oneself. They experience the karma-phalas. This bhoga leads to more karma. Then
you consume, a kartā is kartā to become a kartā, and bhoktā is a bhoktā to again become a
bhoktā and this cycle continues forever. If you deliberately enter and enjoy it is merry-go-
round and when you are forced to get in and go round, it is sorry-go-round.

śloka 30
नद्यां कीटा इवावर्तादावर्तान्तरमाशु ते ।
व्रजन्तो जन्मनो जन्म लभन्ते नैव निर्वृतिम्॥ १.३० ॥
nadyāṃ kīṭā ivāvartādāvartāntaramāśu te.
vrajanto janmano janma labhante naiva nirvṛtim (1.30).
What is the lot of jīvas? It is the description of saṃsāra. They go from janma to janma
which means sthūla-śarīra to sthūla-śarīra travel. The sthūla-śarīra need not belong to the
same loka; it may belong to higher or lower loka. It may be horizontal or vertical
movement. It is a zig-zag movement and that is why it is called saṃsāra. It moves in a
disorderly manner. These people go from one janma to another. Such people never get
peace of mind or relaxation. All the time they are in tension and anxiety and worried
either worrying about oneself or worried about others or worry about others’ worry about
him. They worry sometimes how one has no worry! Thus worry over something or the
other is called saṃsāra.
This journey from body-to- body is a helpless journey. We don’t decide how to go from
one body to another for Yama does not tell the date of departure. Also we don’t know the
next body’s when and whereabouts. The destination and time we cannot decide.
Therefore, he gives a comparison that every jīva is like a worm which has fallen into a
river, caught up in whirlpool, goes round and round, comes out in another place, goes
along with the current and gets into another whirlpool, each whirlpool being each janma.
So the cycle of life goes on. They do not know how to come out of the river. The river-
shore is wonderful. But the whirlpool in river is a misery.

śloka 31
सत्कर्मपरिपाकात्ते करुणानिधिनोद्धृताः ।
प्राप्य तीरतरुच्छायां विश्राम्यन्ति यथासुखम्॥ १.३१ ॥
satkarmaparipākātte karuṇānidhinoddhṛtāḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 42

prāpya tīratarucchāyāṃ viśrāmyanti yathāsukham (1.31).

Vidyāraṇya says here that the worm escaping itself is ruled out. A jīva cannot escape
saṃsāra by himself. Better give up this arrogant attitude and seek external help; discover
your helplessness; surrender to a Guru; become a śiṣya; gain brahma-jñāna from the Guru
and śāstra. Then alone you can gain liberation.
How to get a right Guru is another problem. I have no method to gauge a Guru. The best
way is to surrender to the Guru and asks the Lord to send a Guru. If one does noble
karma, such karmas help to get a good Guru. Karma must ripen and you will get a Guru.
Whatever is the time in which you have come to Vedānta classes, it is the right time.
Bhagavān knows what is the right time to come to the Vedānta study or the classes.
A Guru has nothing to gain and he has gained what he has to gain. He does everything for
loka-saṅgraha only. He lifts the jīva-worms from saṃsāra-sāgara. For a person to lift a
worm is not a big job but it is a casual job. For Guru to give jñāna is not a big task but for
jīva, getting out is a big job. For the Guru to liberate a jīva is a small task. This is revealed
by Lord Kṛṣṇa who smiled when Arjuna was crying talking about the miseries of his
mental state and the malady of his relations in the Kurukṣetra war. Just as the worm is
placed under the shade of the tree, the worm has comfortable life. The worm is picked up
because of sat-karmas. This example can be taken as worm itself. The next śloka talks
about the jīva.

śloka 32
उपदेशमवाप्यैवमाचार्यात्तत्त्वदर्शिनः ।
पञ्चकोशविवेके न लभन्ते निर्वृतिं पराम्॥ १.३२ ॥
upadeśamavāpyaivamācāryāttattvadarśinaḥ.
pañcakośavivekena labhante nirvṛtiṃ parām (1.32).
In the same manner, some karuṇānidhi-Guru lifts the jīva from saṃsāra. In the example
lifting is a physical task, but in the case of jīva, it is not actual lifting of jīva but it is a
figurative lifting and jīva is identified with pañca-kośa; pañca-kośa-abhimāna is the
identification with saṃsāra. The withdrawal from pañca-kośa is the lifting process.
Receiving the teaching from Ācārya lifts the seeker to gain liberation. Guru teaches pañca-
kośa-viveka that helps one gain liberation. The shade of the tree is Ātmā and I, the jīva,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 43

lands in ahaṃ brahma asmi. Then one gains a great relief. What is pañca-kośa-viveka, we
will see in the next class.

Class 10
śloka 32 contd
Vidyāraṇya pointed out that avidyā is the cause of saṃsāra, elaborately dealt with
creation and showed how avidyā is responsible for saṃsāra. Avidyā is rajaḥpradhāna
Prakṛti in which sattva-guṇa is polluted by rajo-guṇa and tamo-guṇa. Because of the
pollution jīva who is the consciousness reflected in avidyā is having the saṃsāra problem.
But Īśvara, consciousness reflected in Māyā where sattva-guṇa is not polluted by rajas or
tamas, knows I am the original consciousness though I appear as Īśvara in the presence of
Māyā. When the mirror goes, the original face does not go but the reflection goes. This
wisdom is not there in the case of jīva and he mistakes himself to be limited reflected
consciousness and identifies with the finite medium and finite reflection, whereby he
suffers. He therefore, turns outward in search of pūrṇatva. He does not get fulfillment by
himself and he looks outside to get fulfillment.
The struggles begin with the childhood. First he gets joy with toys, then the toys are
replaced with relationships; ignorance leads to a sense of incompleteness and that leads to
desires after desires, which is called kāma, avidyā, apūrṇatva, etc. Once kāma sets in, it
will not allow me to remain at home and it will push me for eternal shopping.
Any amount of departmental stores will not give me full satisfaction. Once he is not able
to gain satisfaction in this life, he dies with the inner urge and feeling and takes new life to
fulfill the unfulfilled desires to get satisfied. So the cycle goes on and on. When the puṇya
fructifies then somebody just as the noble person lifts the worm from the whirlpool in a
river, similarly the Guru lifts the student from the shopping complex of the world to gain
liberation and gain the fullness. An incomplete one cannot get completeness from
shopping; shopping for pūrṇatva will not work. If your hunger will be satisfied or
quenching your thirst will be possible, but shopping for pūrṇatva will not work.
For this you should get upadeśa from a Guru to get jñāna. Just as the worm gets lifted by a
good man, here the Guru lifts an ignorant man figuratively from ignorance to intelligence,
from avidyā to Ātma-jñāna. The knowledge is supplied only in words. It is not supplied in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 44

packets and delivered. Through spoken words and written words; you take words that
carry thoughts or knowledge and that knowledge lifts you figuratively from the whirlpool
of ignorance.
Only through communication and systematic teaching, knowledge can be transmitted
from one head to another head. The methodology of the teaching is pañca-kośa-viveka. In
śāstric language, a method of teaching is called prakriyā. śarīratraya-viveka, pañca-kośa-
viveka, avasthā-traya-viveka, oṃkāra-viveka, dṛk-dṛśya-viveka are some of the methods
that help one to gain self-knowledge for one to get total contentment and be free from
saṃsāra. He alone will find the life worthwhile. One gets temporary relief once one fulfills
his duties also.

śloka 33
अन्नं प्राणो मनो बुद्धिरानन्दश्चेति पञ्च ते ।
कोषास्तैरावृतः स्वात्मा विस्मृत्या संसृतिं व्रजेत्॥ १.३३ ॥
annaṃ prāṇo mano buddhirānandaśceti pañca te.
koṣāstairāvṛtaḥ svātmā vismṛtyā saṃsṛtiṃ vrajet (1.33).
A jīva should undergo systematic study of Vedāntic scriptures under the guidance of a
teacher to gain Ātma-jñāna. First, Vidyāraṇya tells what is śravaṇa and here śravaṇa takes
shape of pañca-kośa-viveka; kośa means layer of personality. First he enumerates the
pañca-kośa. pañca-kośas are food, vital air, mind, intellect and bliss; there are five layers of
personality. Ātmā is hidden by anna-, prāṇa-, manas-, vijñāna- and ānanda-mayā kośas.
These kośas cover my real nature. My own real nature of consciousness is concealed by
these five kośas. Ātmā is the consciousness-principle and it cannot be concealed by
anything. To cover we need something bigger than the object. Here, for infinite Ātmā to be
covered there should be something bigger than Ātmā.
Consciousness cannot be covered by pañca-kośas because the kośas are known by
consciousness alone. Just as cloud cannot cover the sun because the sun is much much
bigger than the cloud and second reason is the very presence of cloud is known because of
sunlight only. Consciousness is not covered and cannot be covered. How does pañca-
kośas cover the Ātmā then? It is a figurative covering and the covering is distraction of our
attention in life. Our attention is directed to kośas and we don’t direct it to consciousness-
principle. It is like the movie characters covering the screen. The very movie characters

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 45

exist because of the screen alone and all the time I watch the screen alone. Because I am
preoccupied with the characters I lose sight of the fact that there is a screen. The
distraction of ours from screen to characters is called the covering.
I think of problem of manomaya, annamaya or vijñānamayā or ānandamayā and I never
think of what is that because of which the five kośas exist and survive. Because of this
ignorance, because of losing sight of Ātmā, I think of the emotional or intellectual
problems or if I don’t think of anything I sleep off. I never think what is that because of
which the five kośas are known; I don’t bother to think, because of this ignorance or
because of losing sight of Ātmā due to distraction, just as the movie characters become
more real than the screen.
The movie characters are non-existent and the screen is real, but I take the characters as
real not bothering about the real screen. When the heroine dies we shed tears; the unreal
has become real and the real has become non-existent. Similarly Ātmā is missed and
anātmā becomes a dominant factor of our life.

śloka 34
स्यात्पञ्चीकृ तभूतोत्थो देहः स्थूलोऽन्न संज्ञकः ।
लिङ्गे तु राजसैः प्राणैः प्राणः कर्मेन्द्रियैः सह ॥ १.३४ ॥
syātpañcīkṛtabhūtottho dehaḥ sthūlo:'nna saṃjñakaḥ.
liṅge tu rājasaiḥ prāṇaiḥ prāṇaḥ karmendriyaiḥ saha (1.34).
He defines pañca-kośas that was enumerated in the previous verse. Annamaya kośa is the
gross body. The physical body is born out of the raw material pañcīkṛta bhūtas or the five
gross elements. The grossified elements are the raw material of the physical body and it is
called annamaya.
prāṇamaya is a part of sūkṣma-śarīra. It consists of the ten organs of the sūkṣma-śarīra.
The pañca prāṇas and five sense-organs of action constitutes the prāṇamaya. All the ten
are born out of rajo-guṇa of five elements. All of them belong to sūkṣma-śarīra. The ten
organs put together is called prāṇamaya kośa. It represents kriyā śakti.

śloka 35
सात्त्विकै र्धीन्द्रियैः साकं विमर्षात्मा मनोमयः ।
तैरेव साकं विज्ञानमयोधीर्निश्चयात्मिका ॥ १.३५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 46

sāttvikairdhīndriyaiḥ sākaṃ vimarṣātmā manomayaḥ.

taireva sākaṃ vijñānamayodhīrniścayātmikā (1.35).
Now manomaya is explained; manomaya is a part of sūkṣma-śarīra. The mind is called
vimarśātmaka, the vascillating, Ātmā here means nature or function; it has the doubting
nature; the mind ever doubts. Born out of sattva-guṇa, this manomaya kośa doubts and
even desires and emotions are connected with manomaya.
Vijñānamaya alone ends the process of doubting. The decision may be right or wrong but
it always puts an end and this asserting property is buddhi and that buddhi along with
the same sense-organs makes the knowledge to assert itself. This is called vijñānamaya
kośa. The knowledge also belongs to intellect. Thought follows desire and desire is
followed by action. This is the whole line. This is also part of sūkṣma-śarīra. Prāṇamaya,
vijñānamaya and manomaya form the sūkṣma-śarīra; prāṇamaya should not be taken as
sthūla-śarīra; it should be taken as sūkṣma-śarīra alone. According to the scientists Ātmā
goes with the body. Even after the parting of sthūla-śarīra the vāsanās or the thoughts or
the vijñānamaya continues.

śloka 36
कारणे सत्त्वमानन्दमयोमोदादिवृत्तिभिः ।
तत्तत्कोषैस्तु तादात्म्यादात्मा तत्तन्मयो भवेत्॥ १.३६ ॥
kāraṇe sattvamānandamayomodādivṛttibhiḥ.
tattatkośaistu tādātmyādātmā tattanmayo bhavet (1.36).
Now ānandamaya kośa is defined and it is nothing but kāraṇa-śarīra which we experience
in suṣupti-avasthā. During sleep we have twofold experience one is total ignorance and
the second is ānanda or bliss. The idea is we have ignorance-part and bliss-part. Ignorance
is because of tamo-guṇa and ānanda is because of sattva-guṇa and therefore, we have
malina-sattvam. Because of tamo-guṇa and sattva-guṇa one experiences three levels of
ānanda which are priya, moda and pramoda the deep, deeper and deepest happiness. This
experiential ānanda is called ānandamaya kośa; ānandamaya is faculty of kāraṇa-śarīra.
Brahmānanda is never experiential ānanda. Thus all the five kośas have been enumerated.
What is the jīva’s problem? Instead of claiming I am the consciousness pervading the
kośas, I take the five kośas themselves as myself. I am not the pañca-kośas and I am the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 47

immortal invisible inner essence called consciousness which pervades and enlivens the
kośas; this mistaken notion that I am the kośas, this false conclusion is tādātmya. This is an
intellectual problem. Ātmā and anātmā remaining together is not a problem. Physical
togetherness of Ātmā and anātmā is not the problem for Ātmā is not polluted by anything
that happens to anātmā, just like the screen is unaffected by the type of the movie.
If physical togetherness is a problem, then you have to separate both. Ātmā’s and
anātmā’s physical togetherness is not a problem and they need not be physically separated
and they cannot be physically separated, because Ātmā being all-pervading where will
you take anātmā! They should not be physically separated because if they are physically
separate there is no vyavahāra possible; for Ātmā cannot do any transactions and anātmā
by itself cannot do any transaction. Space cannot do anything; anātmā is inert and
therefore, inert anātmā cannot do any transaction.
If you think of separating you cannot even say ahaṃ brahma asmi. Even to say ahaṃ
brahma asmi. Ātmā and anātmā should be together. Ātmā will not state ahaṃ brahma
asmi. आ nātmā being inert cannot say ahaṃ brahma asmi. The mixture alone says ahaṃ
brahma asmi and therefore, the mixture has to coexist; and therefore, physical separation
should not be attempted.
It is the intellectual conclusion that is the problem and the intellectual conclusion is I, the
consciousness, is limited by the body or affected by the body or I am dying or growing
old. Don’t separate the auspicious couple and only intellect mixing up, tādātmya, is a
problem. Think properly and clearly understand I, the consciousness, is ever-free whether
the body is there or not. When the body is there I will say I am free and when the body is
not there I won’t say, but whether I say or not I am free.
Therefore, tādātmya problem you have to sort out. Because of the intellectual mixing up of
Ātmā and anātmā, jīva acts as though he is a mortal body and that is called tanmayatva,
like identifying with the heroine, this fellow cries when the heroine dies. But he has
forgotten because of tanmayatva and what is required now is the intellect sorting out this
mess and that will be done by the Guru from the next class.

Class 11
śloka 36 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 48

Vidyāraṇya pointed out that jīvātmā is a saṃśarī because of the ignorance regarding the
real nature and when this jīvātmā has sufficient puṇya he comes across a Guru. Just as a
worm is saved from the river by a well-wisher, similarly the well-wisher Guru saves
jīvātmā from saṃsāra. In the case of a worm, saving is a physical process, but in the case of
jīvātmā, it is an intellectual process, because jīvātmā is a saṃśarī. jīvātmā is saṃśarī
because of ignorance and therefore, it is intellectual problem. It is a spiritual problem
because spirit Ātmā does not have any problem at all. Spiritual problem is an intellectual
problem which is related to the ignorance of the spirit or Ātmā.
Because of the ignorance of the spirit we call it a spiritual problem and because spirit is in
the intellect we call it an intellectual problem; the knowledge has to take place in the
intellect; the ignorance has to go from the intellect and will remove the ignorance dealing
with the spirit. The spiritual knowledge will remove the spiritual ignorance. It is through
jñāna-dāna; jñāna-dāna cannot be done physically. Words are the packings in which the
knowledge is contained and therefore, to the container lorry, here are the words. When the
words come from a Guru and they deal with knowledge of Ātmā it is called Guru-
upadeśa. It is giving knowledge to the disciples well-packed in the word-container.
The method of teaching the Guru takes here is called pañca-kośa-viveka. First Vidyāraṇya
defined the five kośas. Viveka is needed; segregation of kośa and Ātmā is required
because of the confusion. We don’t need discrimination where there is no confusion. Only
when there is confusion, we need viveka. We have consciousness-principle, miserable
pañca-kośas and we get successfully confused between cetana-Ātmā and acetana-anātmā.
Instead of claiming I am Ātmā, associating with incidental anātmā I claim dying aging
anātmā.
Therefore, this mixing up, śāstra calls tādātmya; it is the name of the problem and viveka
is the solution. We solve the problem of tādātmya mix up by viveka. What is the teaching
will be told in the following verses. The process of sorting out is called śravaṇa.

śloka 37
अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां पञ्चकोशविवेकतः ।
स्वात्मानं तत उद्धृत्य परं ब्रह्म प्रपद्यते ॥ १.३७ ॥
anvayavyatirekābhyāṃ pañcakośavivekataḥ.
svātmānaṃ tata uddhṛtya paraṃ brahma prapadyate (1.37).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 49

Our process is viveka. Vidyāraṇya now explains the instrument of the process of
separation. When we dig ore from the ground, we get gold and so many unwanted
impurities and we have to separate the gold from the impurities. For this separation they
use different methods. In some places mere washing will do; in some places magnetic
process is used to remove iron; and somewhere other instruments are used to separate,
depending upon the type of impurities to be removed.
Now in our case what is to be removed? Here the dissection is to be done through
reasoning and reasoning is the instrument used to separate and the particular type of logic
to be used here is anvaya-vyatireka-Nyāya. Pañca-kośa-viveka is the goal and anvaya-
vyatireka is the instrument to reach the goal. The five kośas are separated by using
anvaya-vyatireka intellectually like pounding the paddy and separating the chaff.
Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says Ātmā is like rice and pañca-kośas are the coverings and through
anvaya-vyatireka pure Brahman rice is taken by removing the coverings in the form of
kośas. Thus the śuddhatma rice is taken out. Pure Ātmā is extracted out of the paddy and
that jīvātmā which has been purified or separated and that jīvātmā is equated to
Paramātmā or Brahman. The unseparated jīvātmā cannot be equal to Paramātmā and the
purified jīvātmā is equated Paramātmā and he becomes one with Paramātmā. Now the
question is what the anvaya-vyatireka reasoning is.

śloka 38
अभाने स्थूलदेहस्य स्वप्ने यद्भानमात्मनः ।
सोऽन्वयो व्यतिरेकस्तद्भानेऽन्यानवभासनम्॥ १.३८ ॥
abhāne sthūladehasya svapne yadbhānamātmanaḥ.
so:'nvayo vyatirekastadbhāne:'nyānavabhāsanam (1.38).
Vidyāraṇya in these verses gives the application of anvaya-vyatireka in Jīvātmā-
Paramātmā-viveka. It has different meaning in different context. Here anvaya-vyatireka
means anuvṛtti-vyāvṛtti-Nyāya. This reasoning is used to find out whether two things are
inseparably together as one or whether they are two separate things incidentally
connected. I will give you an example. Suppose you see a woman and after talking to that
woman for sometime you have a curiosity to know whether she has real hair and teeth or
she has artificial hair and teeth. You want to know whether she has wig and denture or
whether her hair and teeth are original. There are some discerning people who know on
seeing them whether they are real or otherwise. I don’t have that capacity. Still I want to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 50

know but I cannot ask the person. After some days I go to her house without advance
information. That person comes and you see an old woman standing and then only you
know that the hair and the teeth that you saw that day is not svābhāvika-dharma but
āgantuka-dharma and they are incidental part but not intrinsic part of that person.
Previously I saw both of them together and therefore, I did not know whether hair and
teeth are intrinsic or incidental part. Before meeting that person I did not see both of them.
Also I did not see the artificial things. In both the cases I could not gain the knowledge
regarding the artificiality or reality of the hair and the teeth. When both, the person and
things, were present together, I could not know the reality; absent together, I did not
know. When I saw one of them, the person, in the absence of the other two, the artificial
things, then I recognized that these two things are not an intrinsic part of the person. I
have to see one of them during the absence of the other to know the reality. If both are
together I cannot know and if I don’t see them I cannot know and I could know the reality
only when one of them is absent and the other is present.
Appreciation or seeing the presence of that lady qualified by the absence of the other, that
is the denture and wig, meaning presence of one qualified by the absence of the other is
called anvaya. Similarly, I also see the absence of the denture, which is qualified by the
presence of the other, in this case the woman; this is called vyatireka. The presence of the
one qualified by the absence of the other is called anvaya and absence of the one qualified
by the presence of the other is called vyatireka.
Similarly through anvaya-vyatireka we will show that all the three śarīras are incidental to
me, the consciousness. Three śarīras like denture and wig are incidental and even in their
absence I continue to exist. Anvaya of the I-consciousness is qualified with the three
śarīras; I come to know that I am the threading consciousness and the bodies are like the
beads and the bodies arrive and departs while I the consciousness is always there.
I am, while the denture-like things that comes in the morning, śarīras, appear and
disappear; this type of appearing and disappearing is called anvaya-vyatireka. Ātmā and
sthūla-śarīra are not one entity but sthūla-śarīra is only an incidental addendum and an
incidental fix up that can be separable. What is the state in which they are together. It is
like seeing denture and woman together always so also in jāgṛt-avasthā Ātmā and sthūla-
śarīra are together and therefore, I am not able to find out whether sthūla-śarīra is intrinsic
part or not and Vidyāraṇya says: go to the dream example.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 51

In the dream Ātmā is there and experientially it is there as I, the consciousness, but I don’t
feel the sthūla-śarīra and therefore, in svapna-avasthā the presence of Ātmā is qualified by
absence of sthūla-śarīra. This presence of Ātmā qualifed by the absence of sthūla-śarīra is
anvaya and the absence of sthūla-śarīra by the presence of Ātmā is called vyatireka.
Anvaya focuses on the presence part and vyatireka focuses on the absence part; both are
important for our analysis.
The experience of Ātmā is qualified by non-experience of sthūla-śarīra just like the
experience of that person along without the artificial wig or denture. That is called anvaya
of Ātmā. The absence of sthūla-śarīra qualified by the presence of Ātmā or experience of
Ātmā is called vyatireka. Because of this peculiar experience the conclusion I arrive at, the
teeth are not intrinsic part of that person. Previously, hair was present and now the hair is
absent but he is there as a person. The hair comes and goes while the person is ever there.
Similarly, the sthūla-śarīra is available in jāgṛt-avasthā but not available in svapna-
avasthā, it comes and goes but Ātmā, caitanya, continues.
Therefore, Ātmā sthūla-śarīra-vyatiriktaḥ, Ātmā is different from sthūla-śarīra and sthūla-
śarīra is not an intrinsic part of Ātmā. So we get a great relief that the death of the body is
not my death. This is anvaya-vyatireka first stage. Now we will go to the next stage of
anvaya-vyatireka. Here we will take Ātmā and sūkṣma-śarīra and we will show sūkṣma-
śarīra is also incidental part of Ātmā.

śloka 39
लिङ्गाभाने सुषुप्तौ स्यादात्मनो भानमन्वयः ।
व्यतिरेकस्तु तद्भाने लिङ्गस्याभानमुच्यते ॥ १.३९ ॥
liṅgābhāne suṣuptau syādātmano bhānamanvayaḥ.
vyatirekastu tadbhāne liṅgasyābhānamucyate (1.39).
To separate the sthūla-śarīra we analysed svapna-experience. To separate sūkṣma-śarīra
we should analyse suṣupti-experience for there is presence of Ātmā. Because Ātmā is there
I am able to talk about it later. In suṣupti, the presence of Ātmā being qualified by the
absence of sūkṣma-śarīra, liṅga-abhāne, is called anvaya. Whereas liṅgasya abhānam, the
absence of sūkṣma-śarīra, tadbhāne, qualified by the presence of Ātmā is absence-focused
perception called vyatireka. The absence of sūkṣma-śarīra qualified by the presence of
Ātmā is called vyatireka. The sūkṣma-śarīra is vyāvṛtta while Ātmā is anuvṛtta. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 52

I am different from sūkṣma-śarīra also and it is like a denture to me; I use it for jāgṛt- and
svapna-vyavahāra. In jāgṛt and svapna, I put on sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra while in
suṣupti, I put them off. Now we have to separate the kāraṇa-śarīra. Before that, a side note
is added by Vidyāraṇya.

śloka 40
तद्विवेकाद्विविक्ताः स्युः कोषाः प्राणमनोधियः ।
ते हि तत्र गुणावस्थाभेदमात्रात्पृथक्कृ ताः ॥ १.४० ॥
tadvivekādviviktāḥ syuḥ koṣāḥ prāṇamanodhiyaḥ.
te hi tatra guṇāvasthābhedamātrātpṛthakkṛtāḥ (1.40).
An intellectual student may raise a question. Expecting such a question, Vidyāraṇya gives
the answer. In the introduction Vidyāraṇya talked of pañca-kośa-viveka and now he talks
of the śarīras. Therefore, he says pañca-kośas are the same as three śarīras. The sthūla-
śarīra is annamaya kośa and if sthūla-śarīra is separated, annamaya kośa is out; the
sūkṣma-śarīra is same as prāṇa, manomaya and vijñānamaya kośas. Therefore, he says by
subdividing the sūkṣma-śarīra you would have separated three kośas as prāṇa manomaya
and vijñānamaya kośas. In sūkṣma-śarīra three kośas are subdivided because of the guṇa
and the difference in the conditions. If you take prāṇamaya kośa it is different from the
other two because prāṇamaya is rajo-guṇa pradhāna whereas manomaya and
vijñānamaya are based on sattva-guṇa. Based on rajo-guṇa, prāṇamaya is separated in
understanding. How do you differentiate manomaya and vijñānamaya? There the
difference is avasthā-bheda, the conditions are different; manomaya is saṃśaya-avasthā
and vijñānamaya is the state of relief. The former is the state of aśānti and latter is the state
of śānti. Ultimately, all belong to one śarīra. We have separated two śarīras and four kośas.
More in the next class.

Class 12
śloka 40 contd.
Here Vidyāraṇya has taken up the pañca-kośa-viveka analysis which he started from the
33rd verse. Here he uses anvaya-vyatireka method to show that I am the conscious being
and the three śarīras are not my intrinsic parts, but they are incidental additions.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 53

Therefore, just as we do not include our dress in the meaning of the word I, so too we
should not include śarīras in the meaning of the word for they are only incidental
additions not intrinsic part of Ātmā.
For this we take anvaya-vyatireka method of reasoning. The essence of the reasoning is
that whatever comes and goes has to be incidental and whatever is permanently there
alone is intrinsic. Consciousness happens to be always available with me and therefore,
consciousness is my intrinsic nature. But śarīra-traya is incidental because it is subject to
arrival and departure. We take an occasion wherein the incidental part is missing.
The example, being in svapna, sthūla-śarīra we are not making use of; we do not operate
through sthūla-śarīra while experiencing svapna; the sthūla-śarīra is kept aside and
removed like the contact lens. Even though contact lens is intimately in contact otherwise,
I remove it and keep aside. In svapna-avasthā, I remove the sthūla-śarīra and keep aside; I
do not have sthūla-śarīra, but my own presence is there. The svapna is an occasion to
show the presence of I, consciousness, and absence of sthūla-śarīra. This is anvaya
reasoning and when you focus on the absence of sthūla-śarīra it is vyatireka part of
reasoning.
By showing anvaya-vyatireka, we arrive at the conclusion that I continue to exist even
without sthūla-śarīra and so, sthūla-śarīra is not my intrinsic nature. In fact I should be
happy I will get a new dress. I should be happy that I merge with Lord with videha-mukti.
This is occasion one to show that sthūla-śarīra is incidental. The second stage is suṣupti
occasion and I find I the Śākṣi-caitanya happily exists even without sūkṣma-śarīra and
sthūla-śarīra. Then, even ahaṅkāra is not there in suṣupti stage.
The entire sūkṣma-śarīra I have kept aside; although the pramātā-I or the knower-I and
ahaṅkāra are absent, I the consciousness, continues to exist. One is presence of I the Ātmā
and the absence of sūkṣma-śarīra. When we focus on Ātmā-presence it is anvaya part of
argument and when we focus on the absence of sūkṣma-śarīra it is the vyatireka part of
argument; the sūkṣma-śarīra is not my intrinsic part and it is only incidental nature
whereas caitanya is only my intrinsic nature.
The sūkṣma-śarīra is only three kośas put together: manomaya, prāṇamaya and
vijñānamaya. If sūkṣma-śarīra is incidental, three kośas are also incidental. We have seen
two śarīras and four kośas are incidental while consciousness is my real nature and is my

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 54

intrinsic nature. Now we have one more śarīra and one more kośa; the left out śarīra is
kāraṇa-śarīra and the left out kośa is ānandamaya kośa.

śloka 41
सुषुप्त्यभाने भानन्तु समाधावात्मनोऽन्वयः ।
व्यतिरेकस्त्वात्मभाने सुषुप्त्यनवभासनम्॥ १.४१ ॥
suṣuptyabhāne bhānantu samādhāvātmano:'nvayaḥ.
vyatirekastvātmabhāne suṣuptyanavabhāsanam (1.41).
Here ānandamaya kośa is taken up for study. Here we take the state in which one has
Ātma-jñāna and when ajñāna is absent. Take the state of jñāna in which one enjoys ahaṃ
brahma asmi. It is not jāgṛt-avasthā when one experiences the external world; here he is
absorbed in ahaṃ brahma asmi jñāna and it cannot be taken as jāgṛt-avasthā. You cannot
call it svapna-avasthā where it is inner world brought out of vāsanās; jñāna is not that
avasthā, else jñāna will become a dream! You cannot call it suṣupti for that is a state in
which one has self-ignorance.
In suṣupti ajñāna is there and that is why kāraṇa-śarīra is called avidyā and a jñānī when
he entertains jñāna-vṛtti there is no avidyā, there is no ignorance, and therefore, there is no
kāraṇa-śarīra called ignorance. Ātmā is present, both in ajñāna-avasthā as also in jñāna-
avasthā. At the time of jñāna-ajñāna is absent. Ajñāna is kāraṇa-śarīra according to
Tattvabodha. The presence of Ātmā and absence of kāraṇa-śarīra occurs in jñāna-avasthā
and it is called nirvikalpa-samādhi which will be discussed in detail. When you focus on
presence of Ātmā it is anvaya and when you focus on kāraṇa-śarīra, it is called vyatireka.
The kāraṇa-śarīra is also not my intrinsic part and it is only incidental and for a mukta,
kāraṇa-śarīra is totally absent. It is also subject to departure and therefore, I am different
from kāraṇa-śarīra. Thus we have separated Ātmā from śarīra-traya and pañca-kośas. We
have got pure Ātmā devoid of all the śarīras and pañca-kośas and that pounded Ātmā I
am.

śloka 42
यथामुञ्जादिषीकै वमात्मा युक्त्या समुद्धृतः ।
शरीरत्रितयाद्धीरैः परं ब्रह्मैव जायते ॥ १.४२ ॥
yathāmuñjādiṣīkaivamātmā yuktyā samuddhṛtaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 55

śarīratritayāddhīraiḥ paraṃ brahmaiva jāyate (1.42).

In this manner, through anvaya-vyatireka, pañca-kośa-viveka method Ātmā has been
extricated from or separated or discriminated or distinguished [not physically but
intellectually] as different from śarīras and pañca-kośas. This has been found by the
intellectual seekers. Inside the muñja grass there is a tender portion and you have to be
careful while removing or else the rough edge of the grass will cut your hand. So also
while separating the Ātmā, with proper understanding and correct technique, from the
three bodies, viz. gross, subtle and causal body. Only transformation that takes place the
jīva is understood as notion and I should not include śarīra-traya in me. I am essentially of
the nature of Brahman. Ātmā is Brahman. That is the meaning of Ātmā becomes Brahman.

śloka 43
परापरात्मनोरेवं युक्त्या सम्भावितैकता ।
तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्यैः सा भागत्यागेन लक्ष्यते ॥ १.४३ ॥
parāparātmanorevaṃ yuktyā sambhāvitaikatā.
tattvamasyādivākyaiḥ sā bhāgatyāgena lakṣyate (1.43).
In this manner as explained in the previous verse, the oneness of jīvātmā and Paramātmā
has been proved logically. Aikya is logically possible and it is not impossible. The body is
mortal and being identified with the body, I cannot claim immortality. Identified with the
mind, I cannot claim all-pervasiveness, for the mind is finite. Identified with kāraṇa-śarīra
also, it cannot be done. If I look at myself with any one of the bodies I have no right to
claim I am Brahman. If I look at myself from the caitanya-standpoint, the body-limitation
belongs to my body alone.
All limitations are distributed to sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra and kāraṇa-śarīra whereas I
the non-śarīra caitanya am problem-free; then what obstacle is there in accepting I am
nitya-mukta! From caitanya how can you talk of son? When you talk of son, you look at
something from the standpoint of the body alone. I have shown you how can you be
Brahman if the word ‘you’ is understood as ‘caitanya’. This truth alone, the identification
of jīvātmā and Paramātmā from caitanya-dṛṣṭi alone, is revealed in Tat tvam asi vākya. Tat
is Paramātmā, tvam is jīvātmā and asi is aikya. You the jīvātmā are the Paramātmā. You
need not become Paramātmā. You need not join Paramātmā. The grossest confusion is
jīvātmā joining Paramātmā and jīvātmā becoming Paramātmā; the right knowledge is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 56

jīvātmā owns up ‘I am Paramātmā’. Here the words are employed in a particular method
and it is called bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā method. There are several methods and I will confine
to the relevant method.
When you use the word a word in its totality, it is called primary method of employing the
word. The meaning known by that is called primary meaning. But sometimes you use the
word to reveal a part of the object. You intent to convey the part of the object and when
part is conveyed, it is called bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā-vṛtti or bhāga-vṛtti. In fact bhāga-vṛtti is
the most common thing used all the time. When I say I see you, you mean normally your
entire body. When I say ‘I see you’, I see the front portion only and not the back portion. I
mean only the visible part. ‘I ate mango’ means I mean the skin, inside portion, etc. When I
say ‘I ate mango’, it means the fleshy portion only and not the seed. You are intelligent
enough to take the full mango but you don’t understand the full mango as eaten, but you
take the eatable portion only. When I say ‘you bring mango you’ bring the entire mango
including the nut. But when I say ‘I ate mango’ you take bhāga-vṛtti.
Similarly when I use the word I the primary word includes the sūkṣma-śarīra, sthūla-
śarīra, kāraṇa-śarīra and caitanya, all put together. But when you use the word in a
different context, you filter and understand. When someone says I am fat, you take only
the sthūla-śarīra; sūkṣma-śarīra or kāraṇa-śarīra cannot be fat. Only sthūla-śarīra can be
fat. You take the bhāga-vṛtti. I am intelligent means sūkṣma-śarīra and the I refers to
bhāga-vṛtti. In sūkṣma-śarīra also you take the intellect part alone. You don’t think about
bhāga-vṛtti and mukhya-vṛtti but you are doing this without your knowledge. Then you
must not stand with sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra and nor even kāraṇa-śarīra and you
should take only part of jīvātmā. This filtering is done in your understanding. This is
called bhāga-vṛtti. By giving up a portion of jīvātmā and taking the relevant portion, such
a thing is called bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā. This is taken with the context into consideration. ‘I
am fat’ means sthūla-śarīra; in ‘I am drowsy’ it is ānandamaya, ‘I am sad’ it is manomaya,
‘I am intelligent’ it is vijñānamaya; so I am Brahman. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says that by
giving up sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra and kāraṇa-śarīra mentally, the identification
between caitanya part and Brahman is revealed.

śloka 44
गतो यदुपादानं मायामादाय तामसीम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 57

निमित्तं शुद्धसत्त्वां तामुच्यते ब्रह्म तद्गिरा ॥ १.४४ ॥

gato yadupādānaṃ māyāmādāya tāmasīm.
nimittaṃ śuddhasattvāṃ tāmucyate brahma tadgirā (1.44).
In the previous verse Vidyāraṇya pointed out that Tat tvam asi will be convey the
meaning only when the bhāga-vṛtti is employed and only secondary meaning should be
taken. Only intended meaning you should take to understand the real meaning. The
listener should be cooperate with the communicator. Tat tvam asi will communicate the
right meaning if you take bhāgatyāga vṛtti. This mahā-vākya equates jīvātmā and
Paramātmā. The jīvātmā is jīvātmā because of certain parts and Paramātmā is Paramātmā
because certain other parts; when you remove the parts from jīvātmā, it will be Ātmā, and
when from Paramātmā, you remove certain parts, Paramātmā will be Ātmā; thus we find
without the portions both Paramātmā and jīvātmā are only Ātmā at the adhiṣṭhāna. From
convex and concave mirror the face will be different or distorted images but the original
face is one. More in the next class.

Class 13
śloka 44 contd.
From the 33rd verse Vidyāraṇya shows the method of teaching, namely pañca-kośa;
through pañca-kośa-viveka, caitanya part of ātmā is separated from śarīras; from pañca-
kośa, caitanya or consciousness is separated. This separation is not a physical separation as
the ātmā is not connected with the body. The understanding of the separateness from the
body is known as asaṅgatva-jñāna or it is viveka. In a movie, the screen is associated with
every character of the movie and even though they are physically together, there is no
connection between the movie character and the screen.
Even after the removal of the characters, the screen will survive and it will not have any
mark of the presence of the characters. It will not be contaminated whatever it gets
associated with. This connectionless-ness of the screen if I understand, that cognition is
wisdom of the separateness of the movie and characters; this separateness is an intellectual
process and you can know even when the movie is going on. You need not stop the movie
to understand the purity and it does not depend on the presence and absence of the
movie. The light of consciousness, the screen of consciousness, is physically along with the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 58

śarīra-traya but the consciousness has no connection to the three śarīras and therefore,
during the presence of the body, the consciousness is not contaminated and during the
destruction of the body, the consciousness is not destroyed. The destruction of the body
does not destroy the consciousness.
The presence of the body does not contaminate the consciousness. This means the
presence and the absence of the body do not matter much for the consciousness.
Consciousness will tell the body: your presence and absence will not make much
difference. But the presence will have some entertainment value to the jīva. That is called
līlā. Īśvara’s avatāra is called līlā; jñānī’s activity is a līlā. Convert your life into a līlā;
mokṣa is conversion of life into a līlā. But we convert līlā into a life. Now sports is
becoming so serious. We have successfully converted the sports into a serious affair.
Vedānta says everything should be converted to a līlā. Therefore, separate the
consciousness and learn to identify with jīvātmā and Paramātmā aikya as revealed
through Tat tvam asi.
Having said that in 43rd verse, Vidyāraṇya explains the meaning of Tat tvam asi in these
verses. Here Vidyāraṇya says in the mahā-vākya Tat tvam asi the direct meaning of the
word tat is Paramātmā; the direct meaning of tvam is jīvātmā and the meaning of asi is
equal to. Tat tvam asi means Paramātmā is equal to Ātma-jñāna. The author says if you
take the direct meaning of these two words you will be surprised that Paramātmā and
jīvātmā are diagonally opposite in nature; one is the ruler and the other is the ruled, one is
mukta and another is baddha. Therefore, you should not take the primary meaning but
the indirect meaning. There are several methods available for taking the secondary
meaning and one is called bhāgalakṣaṇā. Here you use a word to indicate a part of the
object.
Normally a word is used to reveal the full object but in this context we use the word to
indicate a part and when a part is used, bhāga is retained another bhāga is dropped and
therefore, it is called bhāga-lakṣaṇā one part is taken and bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā means one
part is given up. I gave you the example thar normally the body includes my body, my
consciousness, my mind, etc. When you take the composite entity it is the direct meaning
but when I say I am fat, you know that sense-organ cannot be overweight and mind
cannot be overweight and therefore, overweight should be connected to the body part
alone.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 59

I am intelligent means the intellect part; when I say I am all-pervading immortal one, I
refer to Brahman. I am emotional means I refer to the mind. When I say I am all-pervading
it means it should not refer to śarīra-traya or pañca-kośas; therefore, you take the
consciousness which is not a part or property of the body, etc. It is the invisible inner
essence and that consciousness part if take you can say I am Brahman.
For this purpose Vidyāraṇya talks about the primary meaning and will talk what is to be
deleted and what should be retained. This is to be done for tat the Paramātmā also and for
tvam the jīvātmā as well. Now tat-pada-vācyārtha is being discussed here. This will be a
composite one consisting of several portions.
This Paramātmā includes Brahman, the caitanya, that is one part; this caitanya is along
with śuddhasattvāṃ māyām ādāya; here, Māyā means Prakṛti; śuddha-sattva means
sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti. sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti, rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-
pradhāna Prakṛti. sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti is Māyā and rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti is avidyā.
We said sattva Prakṛti is pure and therefore, capable of forming better reflection and rajaḥ
Prakṛti is inferior and is capable of forming poorer reflection. Here Paramātmā consists of
consciousness plus sattva Prakṛti and because of sattva Prakṛti Paramātmā has
omniscience and omnipotence, etc. Consciousness alone has no good or bad properties.
Brahman by itself does not have any good virtue and because of marriage to sattva-
pradhāna Prakṛti Brahman gets sarveśvaratva, superior virtues, etc. Then Paramātmā
takes unto Himself tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti also.
Īśvara alone knows how to use Prakṛti to produce the world. jīva with limited knowledge
cannot produce the world. Īśvara with tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti produces the universe.
Here Māyā means Prakṛti. Thus Brahman has used two Prakṛtis, sattva Prakṛti and tamaḥ
Prakṛti, and has superior virtues. This Paramātmā consisting of these factors has become
the jagat-kāraṇa. It is tat-pada-vācyārtha and that Paramātmā is jagat-kāraṇa. He is
nimitta- and upādāna-kāraṇa, the material and intellect cause of creation.
Unlike the carpenter who is only the intellect cause of the furniture, Paramātmā is also
upādāna-kāraṇa of the universe. With tamaḥ Prakṛti he becomes upādāna-kāraṇa and
with sattva Prakṛti he is the intelligent cause. This kāraṇa Paramātmā is the direct meaning
of the tat in Tat tvam asi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 60

śloka 45
यदा मलिनसत्त्वां तां कामकर्मादिदूषिताम्।
आदत्ते तत्परं ब्रह्म त्वं पदेन तदोच्यते ॥ १.४५ ॥
yadā malinasattvāṃ tāṃ kāmakarmādidūṣitām.
ādatte tatparaṃ brahma tvaṃ padena tadocyate (1.45).
Tvam refers to jīvātmā and jīvātmā is also a mixture. What are the ingredient of jīvātmā?
First is the consciousness; jīvātmā is a sentient entity; tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti Paramātmā
has taken to produce the world and taking rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti, he has become Īśvara.
What is left for jīva is rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti which is an inferior instrument and because
of the inferiority of the instrument the function is also inferior. And jīvātmā has miserable
virtues. When Īśvara is mixed with rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti, the unholy combination, the
resultant is contaminated. When mirror has dots and you find they do not belong to the
shiny face but belong to dot-pradhāna mirror. You are contaminated by puṇya-pāpa
karma, rāga-dveṣa, kāma-krodha, lobha-moha; when they come together, that mixture
rajaḥ-Prakṛti and consciousness, then it is called by tvam-pada. We have seen the primary
meaning of the word tvam. Now we will see the secondary meaning.

śloka 46
त्रितयीमपि तां मुक्त्वा परस्परविरोधिनीम्।
अखण्डं सच्चिदानन्दं महावाक्येन लक्ष्यते ॥ १.४६ ॥
tritayīmapi tāṃ muktvā parasparavirodhinīm.
akhaṇḍaṃ saccidānandaṃ mahāvākyena lakṣyate (1.46).
Whether we should take the primary meaning or the secondary meaning should be
decided on the context. If you say jīvātmā is dāsa and Paramātmā is Svāmī, jīvātmā is
alpajña and Paramātmā is sarvajña; that is, if you say I am your servant you have to
protect me and in this context I refer to myself with my weakness, then vācyārtha should
be taken and similarly Lord as the protector should include omniscience and omnipotence,
etc. When I say I am not protected by you, my Lord, you are not the protector also and I
don’t have inferior virtue and you don’t have superior virtue, I am you and you are I, he I
am and I am he, I don’t refer to either superior or inferior attributes but I refer to caitanya.
The attributes are caused by sattva- and rajas- Prakṛti association. Separate the Prakṛti and
then there is only attributeless pure consciousness; keeping this in the mind, the secondary

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 61

meaning, you are happily claiming ahaṃ brahma asmi. Vidyāraṇya asks what is wrong if I
claim that I am caitanya? Of the three Prakṛtis, sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-
pradhāna Prakṛti and rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti, you should separate. They are mutually
contradictory. One is superior and another is inferior; the superior one is cause of noble
virtues and another is cause of ignoble attributes. If your are tamas dominated you will
ever be in sleep. One leads to action that is rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti. This is called
bhāgatyāga: sat-cit-ānanda the pure consciousness you have to retain which is called sat,
eternal ānanda means all-pervading; cit means caitanya sat-cit-ānanda means nitya, pūrṇa,
caitanya. This caitanya is the implied meaning of the word tat and this caitanya is the
implied meaning of tvam also. That is why I said Parama Ātmā, Jīva Ātmā, where parama
adjective is caused by two Prakṛtis and jīva adjective is caused by one Prakṛti; if you
remove the Prakṛti parama adjective goes away and jīva adjective goes away but Ātmā
remains and that Ātmā is akhaṇḍa. It cannot be divided into jīvātmā and Paramātmā as it
is indivisible consciousness which is revealed by mahā-vākya Tat tvam asi. After knowing
Tat tvam asi, I the Ātmā appearing as jīva in this body and I myself am Paramātmā in
superior Prakṛti. There is only one I which is taking both jīvātmā-veṣa and Paramātmā-
veṣa. In certain movies, I am a beggar and in certain movies, I am a king, but in the green
room, I am neither a beggar nor a king; I am myself.

śloka 47
सोऽयमित्यादिवाक्येषु विरोधात्तदिदन्त्वयोः ।
त्यागेन भागयोरेक आश्रयो लक्ष्यते यथा ॥ १.४७ ॥
so:'yamityādivākyeṣu virodhāttadidantvayoḥ.
tyāgena bhāgayoreka āśrayo lakṣyate yathā (1.47).
Here Vidyāraṇya says all the procedure appears to be a very complicated procedure.
When I explain the steps it appears complex but we do this all the time in our day to day
transactions. We use this bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā widely. It is like studying our own internal
systems. How light enters through the lens of eyes, makes a reverse image, goes to the
retina, goes to the brain and it judges whether good or bad and gives the message. All
these things you do so quickly. Any biological phenomenon, if explained, it is most
complicated action. All take place in a fraction of a second. All the sense-organs are to
send messages to the brain while the brain has to give the order; this process is difficult to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 62

explain but it happens automatically. I am fat means it is part-communication. You meet a

new person who is eighty years old. He is fat, his hair is grey; all these things you see. You
talk to him as though he is a new person. A friend comes and tells that he is the person
with whom you studied in school days. He says so’yam devadattaḥ. This Devadatta who
is fat, has grey hair with false teeth is the same Devadatta which whom we studied long
time back. The mind goes back to that Devadatta who was thin, lean and who lot of hair
and teeth, etc. That Devadatta has some features and this Devadatta has some features,
both are different from each other. When a friend introduces, when he equates that
Devadatta with this Devadatta, how you can equate two Devadatta who have directly
opposite attributes? But the wonder is that you understand. You appreciate the equation
under one condition; you temporarily remove the dark hair, real teeth, and false teeth,
remove the superficial differentiating features and recognize that common person. The
filtered person with two opposite attributes is one and the same person. More in the next
class.

Class 14
śloka 47 contd.
Vidyāraṇya pointed out that mahā-vākya must be understood by the method of lakṣaṇā or
by implication. Accordingly the word tvam will refer to consciousness, the reflecting
medium rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti must be set aside and similarly the word tat refers to
Paramātmā and you should not take the total Paramātmā but take the consciousness and
the medium through which he references sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-pradhāna
Prakṛti, medium, should be left aside. The consciousness bhāga must be retained and
therefore, bhāgatyāga should be taken. The implied meaning of tvam should be taken and
in the same way implied meaning of tat should be taken; then you will find the aikya of tat
pada and tvam pada which refer to Ātmā, the pure consciousness. This bhāgatyāga
lakṣaṇā is used by us all the time. The example is given here. When you recognize an old
person and say that Rāma is this Rāma, that Rāma refers to the person with the past
physical attributes and this Rāma also refers to the person with the present physical
attributes. The past physical features and the present features are totally different. When
you remove the opposite physical features, this removal taking place in your

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 63

understanding, then the Rāma-vyakti is grasped without grasping the contradicting

attributes. In statements like soyam ‘that person is this person’, the past attributes referred
to that and the present attributes referred to by the word this are contradictory and we
temporarily remove the contradictory features and what is left behind is one person is
understood which was behind young age features as also the one present with old age
features. This person is revealed through bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā. In this person part of
features are absent since you have mentally removed younger and older features the
vyakti is lakṣyārtha and not vācyārtha. This is the example for bhāgatyāga lakṣyārtha. If
this is understood, the same can be extended to Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya.

śloka 48
मायाविद्ये विहायैवमुपाधी परजीवयोः ।
अखण्डं सच्चिदानन्दं परं ब्रह्मैव लक्ष्यते ॥ १.४८ ॥
māyāvidye vihāyaivamupādhī parajīvayoḥ.
akhaṇḍaṃ saccidānandaṃ paraṃ brahmaiva lakṣyate (1.48).
Paramātmā is there as a mixture of consciousness and the superior medium of expression
called Māyā. Jīvātmā has a mixture of consciousness and the inferior medium of avidyā.
This Māyā and avidyā is the superior and inferior instrument belonging to one and the
same consciousness just as one electricity belongs to a bed room lamp and the multi
purpose bright bulb. One is a bright bulb and another is dull bulb. We are the dull bulb
and Īśvara is the bright bulb. Māyā and avidyā are two upādhis. These two are the
instruments of the Paramātmā and jīvātmā respectively. Māyā is the instrument of
Paramātmā and avidyā is instrument of jīvātmā; both instruments are diagonally opposite
and once you drop the reflecting mediums, the distortions in the consciousness also is
gone. Māyā brings particular distortion, superior guṇas, to Paramātmā and avidyā brings
another type of distortion, the inferior guṇas, to jīvātmā and once they are removed and
then we have distortion-less consciousness, with neither inferior nor superior attributes.
One nirguṇa Brahman is there and that is called akhaṇḍa, divisionless, because the
dividing attributes are absent and both of them are sat-cit-ānanda. That nirguṇa Brahman
or consciousness is called Parabrahman. This is nirguṇa caitanya, utkṝṣṭa-nikṝṣṭa-upādhi-
rahita-caitanya is Parabrahman and this is revealed by the mahā-vākya. When the student
grabs the meaning of mahā-vākya, the student converts it into first person and says ahaṃ

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 64

brahma asmi. The aham here is Śākṣi-caitanya. Aham does not refer to any of the three
śarīras. Once the śarīras are dropped I don’t have any deficiency and ahaṃ brahma asmi is
understood by the student. With this 48th verse śravaṇa part of jñāna yoga is over. Jñāna
yoga consists of manana and nididhyāsana. Now we will enter manana part of jñāna yoga.

śloka 49
सविकल्पस्य लक्ष्यत्वे लक्ष्यस्य स्यादवस्तुता ।
निर्विकल्पस्य लक्ष्यत्वं न दृष्टं न च सम्भवि ॥ १.४९ ॥
savikalpasya lakṣyatve lakṣyasya syādavastutā.
nirvikalpasya lakṣyatvaṃ na dṛṣṭaṃ na ca sambhavi (1.49).
The śravaṇa part was from verse 33 to 48 and the manana portion will have four verses i.e.
up to 52. All the doubts regarding the teaching are eliminated here. The doubts or
obstacles will not give the benefit of knowledge and this obstacle belongs to intellect;
doubts are always raised by the intellect. These doubts are of two types: one is doubt of
lay person and they come from other students around. There are so many doubts raised by
other philosophers with their established systems of philosophies.
Vidyāraṇya takes up a doubt raised by a Nyāya philosopher. Therefore, this will be a bit
terse portion. Nyāya philosopher says Advaitins are in trouble and you will face logical
problem. You say Parabrahman is revealed by a Guru through mahā-vākya. The problem
is once you say Parabrahman is revealed by a Guru through mahā-vākya then
Parabrahman becomes an object of revelation, mahā-vākya becomes an instrument of
revelation, Guru is the revealer of mahā-vākya and Parabrahman becomes a member of
tripuṭī: subject, object and instrument. Any member of tripuṭī is called savikalpa. And
Vidyāraṇya argues since you say Brahman is revealed you have accepted that Brahman is
savikalpa. Once you say Brahman is savikalpa a member within duality or plurality you
are in the field of dvaita. In your own philosophy dvaita is mithyā and Advaita alone is
satya. If Brahman is within dvaita Brahman also is mithyā. Brahma mithyā savikalpāt
ghaṭavat. What is the use of knowing mithyā Brahman? You say knowledge of satya alone
will liberate. To avoid this problem Advaitin should say Brahman is nirvikalpa, it is not
within Advaita and it is satya. If Brahman is nirvikalpa certainly it will not be one of the
tripuṭīs. The problem is if it is not within the tripuṭī it will not be an object of revelation;
this means it will not be revealed by mahā-vākya. The moment it is revealed it becomes

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 65

savikalpa. If it is revealed it is mithyā. If Brahman is nirvikalpa it will be satya it cannot be

revealed. What is revealed is mithyā; it is useless. What is satya is useful and it cannot be
revealed. How are you going to tackle?
If Brahman with division is revealed, the revealed Brahman will be mithyā. On the other
hand if Brahman is nirvikalpa without division revealer-revealed division is not there, the
problem is it will not be an object of revelation and it will never be revealable. Its
revelation is not possible. It is never experienced. It is never possible. The revelation of
nirguṇa Brahman cannot be experienced. Revealer-revealed duality is not there; that
means Brahman is not an object of revelation and that means revelation of Brahman is not
possible. What is taught is not satya. This is Naiyāyika’s Pūrvapakṣa.

śloka 50
विकल्पो निर्विकल्पस्य सविकल्पस्य वा भवेत्।
आद्ये व्याहतिरन्यत्रानवस्थात्माश्रयादयः ॥ १.५० ॥
vikalpo nirvikalpasya savikalpasya vā bhavet.
ādye vyāhatiranyatrānavasthātmāśrayādayaḥ (1.50).
In logical debates there are several method of facing the challengers. One method is you
put a counter question to the challenger and show that he is an illogical person and shut
his mouth so that you need not answer his question. This method of shutting the mouth of
challenger and evading is one method but it is not a proper method. This answer is given
to show the skill of the person. The second one is yathārtha-uttara. Vidyāraṇya wants to
give both the answers. One is to show the fallacy of Nyāya philosophers and give regular
answer too. These two verses are to confuse the Naiyāyika’s mind.
Vidyāraṇya says you ask me a question: is Brahman with division or without division? It
means you treat division as a type of attribute. You ask me: does Brahman have the
attribute called division or Brahman not have the attribute of division? The question is
assuming division as an attribute and whether the division attribute is there in Brahman
or not.
Vidyāraṇya says that this question is based on the assumption that there are attributes or
properties to Brahman. You take division as a type of attribute and you ask whether this is
in Brahman or not. You cannot logically prove the existence of the attribute. If you prove
the existence of attribute then you can ask whether this is there is Brahman or not. He

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 66

himself suggests, of course, if you want to prove the existence of an attribute then I will
ask the question where does the attribute exists. An attribute has to exist somewhere being
an attribute. A property has to exist in some substance or the other. In which substance an
attribute exists? Then Vidyāraṇya suggest three options.
Vidyāraṇya wants to say there will be problem in all the options. Let us call the attribute
as A1. This A1 attribute can exist in one of the three options I will present:
• 1a. A1 rests on S-A, substance minus attribute, without any attribute.
• 1b. A1 rests on S+A1, substance with the same attribute A1.
• 1c. A1 rests on S+A2, substance with a different attribute A2.
Vidyāraṇya says in each option there is problem.
If you say A1 rests on S–A it means attribute rests on attributeless substance. This is a
contradiction. To avoid this problem, it may be said A1 rests on S+A1; it means it rests on
both of them and if you split it, A1 rest on S and A1 rests on A1. If you say A1 rests on A1,
a thing rests on itself it is called ātmāśraya-doṣa, self-dependence; it is not possible just
like you cannot sit on your own lap. You can sit on somebody else lap or something else.
Self-dependence is not possible. Third option is A1 rests on S+A2. The problem is if you
say A1 rests on S+A2 then A2 is an attribute that belongs to S. Tell me A2 rests on which
substance. A2 must rest on some substance. Vidyāraṇya says let us take four options:
• 2a. A2 rests on S-A, substance without any attribute.
• 2b. A2 rests on A1, substance with earlier attribute A1.
• 2c. A2 rests on S+A2, substance with the same attribute A2.
• 2d. A2 rests on S+A3, substance with a different attribute A3.
If A2 rests on S-A there is a contradiction. An attribute cannot rest on attribute-less
substance. A2 rests on S+A1. But the problem is in 1c we saw A1 rests on A2 and here we
state A2 rests on A1. It is like I borrow from you and you borrow from me. Then there is
logical fallacy of mutual dependence. In 2c, A2 resting on S+A2 is self-dependence. In the
other option A2 rests on S+A3. If A3 belongs to S, then A3 rests on what? Vidyāraṇya
gives five options:
• 3a. A3 rests on S-A means it is contradiction
• 3b. A3 rests on S+A1 means:
◦ A1 rests on A2 as per 1c.
◦ A2 rests on A3 as per 2d.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 67

◦ A3 rests on A1 now. It is the case of Rāma borrowing from Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa
borrowing from Śiva and Śiva borrowing from Rāma. This is cyclic-dependence.
• 3c. A3 rests on S+A2 means:
◦ A2 rests on A3 as per 2d.
◦ A3 rests on A2 means mutual-dependence. It is anyonya-āśraya.
• 3d. A3 rests on S+A3 is a case of clear self-dependence.
• 3e. A3 rests on S+A4; then A4 rests on what will be the question that goes
unanswered.
• You may say A4 rests on S+A5 and A5 rests on S+A6 but it will end up in infinite
regress. This non-conclusiveness is called anavasthā-doṣa.
True existence of attribute you cannot thus prove. For that you have to talk of substance
when you have lot of other problems. Thus it is not possible to establish whether Brahman
has any attribute or not. We will discuss further on the subject in the next class.

Class 15
śloka 50 contd.
Here Vidyāraṇya gives an example of manana. Manana aims at removing any doubt about
myself or doubt created by others belonging to other systems of philosophy. Vidyāraṇya
has taken Nyāya system of philosophy and he asked the question whether Brahman is
with division or without division. He took division as a property and Brahman is with
property or without property.
Nyāya philosophers say nirguṇa Brahman is of no use and mithyā saguṇa brahman
cannot liberate any person. Vidyāraṇya gave twofold answer; in one he pointed out that
Nyāya philosopher cannot question at all. He wanted to prove the existence of guṇa or
attribute and by logical analysis he showed the existence of guṇa or attribute cannot be
proved logically. To prove the existence of attribute he will have to tell what substance on
which the proposed attribute exists. When you enter into the question of substance you
enter into lot of problems. Therefore, the existence of attribute cannot be proved by you
and therefore, attribute-based question, you have no right to ask.
Therefore, you shut up and get out says Vidyāraṇya to Naiyāyika philosophers. The
attribute of division should belong to attributeless substance or attributed substance. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 68

former attributeless substance is indicated by 1a and latter attributed substance is given in

1b and 1c. The option should be either nirvikalpasya 1a or savikalpasya gives 1b and 1c
options. Whatever option you take you will have problems. In 1a and 1b we have problem
and 1c will take to second stage where there will be problem. 1a based on the chart vyāhati
means there contradiction. Anyatra in the case of 1b, etc, atmāśrayādhayaḥ. It means Self-
dependence, etc.
In the case of 1c you will be forced to go to second stage where you will enter into defects
such as anavasthā, atmāśraya, etc. vyāhati is also there. Then cakraka and anyonya-āśraya
are not stated in the verse, but they will also be there. In short you will have logical
problem in proving the existence of an attribute.
Vikalpa nirvikalpasya savikalpasya va ādye vyāhati. How can nirvikalpa be indicated as
savikalpa by the Tat tvam asi mahā-vākya? This is a fallacious statement. This is called
vyāhati-doṣa, an impossible doubt like in the classical example: I do not have a tongue.
To say such a statement one should have a tongue, and if one did not have the tongue,
such a statement could not have been said. This is a repetitious statement because
‘savikalpa’ itself means ‘with modifications’. Anyatra anavasthā atṃāśrayādayah.
This falls under the category of anavasthā-doṣa i.e., fallacy of mutual-dependence.
Brahman is beyond the limitations of all kinds. The use of savikalpa, etc, will lead to other
fallacies like self-dependence, circular-logic or infinite-regress, etc. Therefore, this doubt
has no basis; it is only the result of confusion in the usage of words.
These fallacies of logic are summed up as follows:
Option Attribute Rests on Doṣa Logical fallacy
in English

1a A1 S-A vyāhati contradiction

1b A1 S+A1 atṃāśraya self-dependence

1c A1 S+A2 - -known on analysing further

2a A2 S-A vyāhati contradiction

2b A2 S+A1 anyonya-āśraya mutual-dependence

2c A2 S+A2 atṃāśraya self-dependence

2d A2 S+A3 - -known on analysing further

3a A3 S-A vyāhati contradiction

3b A3 S+A1 cakraka-doṣa Circular-logic,

cyclic-dependence

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 69

3c A3 S+A2 anyonya-āśraya mutual-dependence

3d A3 S+A3 atṃāśraya self-dependence

3e A3 S+A4 anavasthā Infinite-regress, inconclusiveness

śloka 51
इदं गुणक्रियाजातिद्रव्यसम्बन्धवस्तुषु ।
समन्तेन स्वरूपस्य सर्वमेतदितीष्यताम्॥ १.५१ ॥
idaṃ guṇakriyājātidravyasambandhavastuṣu.
samantena svarūpasya sarvametaditīṣyatām (1.51).
Vidyāraṇya addresses Nyāya Vaiśeṣika philosophers. He says not only with regard to the
attribute you will have problem but all your fundamental concepts have got logical
problem. The whole Nyāya philosophy is anyāya. The whole logical system appears
logical when you study superficially. When you prove further you will have problem.
In Nyāya Vaiśeṣika system they have classified the whole universe into seven basic
principles. They name each category as a padārtha. Of those seven padārthas Vidyāraṇya
enumerates five of them in this śloka. These five padārthas if you logically analyse you are
in trouble.
The five padārthas are guṇa or attribute or properties, colour etc; kriyā means functions;
every object has its own function; third one is jāti the generality; the general characteristics
are height, weight, complexion, etc. We have one generality that we are human beings;
even though individual varies each one has one individuality or particularity; the
generality is uniting factor and particularity is differentiating factor; manuṣyatva is
generality; the next one dravya which means substance and fifth one is sambandha or
relationship, the relationship between substance and property, substance and generality
and any pair you can take, there is relationship; there is relationship between one
substance and another substance. Then viśeṣa particularity and the last one is abhāva,
non-existence or absence.
Vidyāraṇya says if we probe into any one of them you will have problem. They are
fivefold problem. Vidyāraṇya says idam samam this group of five problems; this fivefold
problem is equally applicable to kriyā, jāti, relationship also. You ask the question an
action resting on a substance whether the substance is with action or without action? If
you say action rests upon actionless substance then it will become a contradiction. So the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 70

argument goes on therefore, guṇa, kriyā, jāti, dravya, sambandha are all your basic
principles and in each one of the items there is a problem and therefore, you cannot ask
me the question.
Then naturally the student comes and asks what is your answer to his question? Is
Brahman saguṇa or nirguṇa? Nirguṇa Brahman cannot be revealed. There is no division of
Guru and śāstra possible. Revelation needs division and in nirguṇa Brahman there is no
division and therefore, nirguṇa Brahman cannot be revealed. If saguṇa brahman is
revealed it is mithyā and therefore, there is no use of revealing saguṇa brahman. What is
the answer?
The student is addressed by the teacher. tarka-śāstra person said all attributes rest on
substance. All the functions are also resting on substance. All the relationship also exists
on substance. For him the substance is the most important thing which he calls dravya or
matter. That is why he is called materialistic philosopher. For him matter is important and
upon matter everything is there. Vedānta says all these things— attribute, functions,
relationships and substance— rest on Brahman the non-dual reality. The speciality of your
Brahman substance is different from my substance. We say our Brahman is caitanya
svarūpa. We penetrate deeper than matter and for us the ultimate substance is
consciousness; it is called svarūpa in the world, svarūpa of guṇa, etc., and it is the ultimate
essence. For Nyāya philosopher, matter is the ultimate essence. For Nyāya philosopher,
substances are many and for Vedānta students, consciousness is one. Vidyāraṇya says you
have to accept that all these padārthas five items enumerated rest upon the consciousness.
Then Naiyāyika will not leave and ask further question. He will say I am ready to give up
my stand and I agree that all substances rest on one consciousness and all relationship rest
on one consciousness and similarly all functions, generality, etc. From this we come to the
conclusion that all attributes also rests on consciousness. Naiyāyika asks whether you
agree. I say yes. Then he asks the question whether Brahman is nirguṇa or saguṇa.
Vedāntin answers Brahman is nirguṇa. You say all attributes rests on attributeless
Brahman; doṣa of contradiction is applicable to you also. Now you give the same answer
that attributes rests on Brahman, doṣa is there. Vidyāraṇya says if you say that it is a
contradiction, I say there is no contradiction. This is explained in the next śloka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 71

śloka 52
विकल्पतदभावाभ्यामसंस्पृष्टात्मवस्तुनि ।
विकल्पितत्वलक्ष्यत्वसम्बन्धाद्यास्तु कल्पिताः ॥ १.५२ ॥
vikalpatadabhāvābhyāmasaṃspṛṣṭātmavastuni.
vikalpitatvalakṣyatvasambandhādyāstu kalpitāḥ (1.52).
The crucial word in this verse is kalpita. Advaitins say all attributes of the world rest on
attributeless Brahman only. Still it will not be a contradiction because the attributes of a
saguṇa brahman is of lower order of reality and the attributeless Brahman is of higher
order of reality. When it exists in lower order of reality its as good as non-existent and
therefore, there is no contradiction. The two opposite things cannot coexist if they belong
to the same order of reality and they can coexist if they belong to different orders of
reality. When a person goes to bed in a dark room, he goes to dream and in the same dark
room in the dream he travels in broad daylight and in dream he has brightness although
outside him there is darkness. In one and the same room light and darkness can coexist
because light is lower order of reality and the darkness is in higher order of reality. In dry
land mirage water is there. Dryness and water can coexist because dryness is of higher
order and water is of lower order. They can coexist and there is no contradiction at all.
In Brahman there is division or not? I will say division is there and divisions are not there.
The vyavahāra divisions are there and pāramārthika divisions are not there. The teaching
is happening in vyavahāra level. In pāramārthika no teaching can take place. Therefore, in
vyavahāra level we accept division. Brahman is the revealed, Guru is the revealer and
śāstra is the revealing instrument. Brahman becomes the revealed object from vyavahāra-
dṛṣṭi. Vikalpitatva is possible. I can happily say Brahman is revealed. Then sambandha. I
will also accept vyavahāra-sambandha pramāṇa-prameya-sambandha. The moment
Brahman is revealed, the very statement negates everything and the tripuṭī duality is
dropped. Therefore, Brahman is saguṇa from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi and nirguṇa from
pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. Brahman is not affected by vyavahāra guṇas, just as dry sand is not
wet by the mirage water. Even when mirage water is there the sand is dry and even when
I accept guṇa, Brahman is nirguṇa. You say from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi Brahman is saguṇa and
from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi Brahman is nirguṇa. Now the question is Brahman is nirguṇa
from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi then Brahman has the attribute of nirguṇa. For that Vedāntins
answers we use the word nirguṇa so long as you are in the field of guṇa and once you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 72

have negated all the guṇas the word nirguṇa also we don’t use. It is like using a thorn to
remove another thorn. Once the first thorn is removed the second thorn is dropped. I use
nirguṇa and with this all guṇas are gone and I don’t use nirguṇa also like the first thorn. It
is saguṇa-nirguṇa-vilakṣaṇa.
It is not even Advaita. As long as you see dvaita I use Advaita and once dvaita is negated I
will not use Advaita also. Saguṇatva-nirguṇatvābhyām Brahman is not connected. Even
the word nirguṇa is not the property of Brahman and it is used only until the attributes are
negated. We temporarily accept śāstra Guru tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha and tat-pada-
lakṣyārtha, etc. It is like the pole vaulter after crossing the bar, he drops the pole. He
should not argue that I cannot be ungrateful and I will not leave the pole. Then he will not
win. He cannot also argue that I will not take the pole just to drop it later. First take
saguṇa brahman and talk about nirguṇa Brahman and then you don’t talk anything. The
word nirguṇa Brahman is there until saguṇa disturbance is there. Once you are free of
disturbance even nirguṇa is not there.
In Nyāya philosophy attribute and attributeless is of the same order of reality. So both
cannot coexist. In Vedānta one is mithyā and another is satya. In other philosophy the
concept of satya and mithyā and different order of reality is not there and hence you
cannot do away logical problems. Adhyāsa-bhāṣya in Brahma-sūtra introduces different
orders of reality. The conclusion is given in the next śloka.

śloka 53
इत्थं वाक्यैस्तदर्थानुसन्धानं श्रवणं भवेत्।
युक्त्या सम्भावितत्वानुसन्धानं मननन्तु तत्॥ १.५३ ॥
itthaṃ vākyaistadarthānusandhānaṃ śravaṇaṃ bhavet.
yuktyā sambhāvitatvānusandhānaṃ mananantu tat (1.53).
Vidyāraṇya says thus we have seen śravaṇa and manana; śravaṇa teaches the mahā-vākya
and manana removes the doubts of the students and also those raised by other
philosophies. Through mahā-vākya, Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya is revealed. It is called
śravaṇa. Through logic reasoning removing the doubts is called manana. The absence of
illogicality is proved. This means Vedānta is not illogical. You prove others are illogical
and prove that you are logical.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 73

Class 16
śloka 53 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has dealt with śravaṇa and manana. Here he gives the definition of śravaṇa.
With the help of the teaching given by those Vedāntic statements is called śravaṇa; the
Upaniṣad talks about dvaita, Advaita and also Viśiṣṭādvaita. We have to find the tātparya
of all the statements and extract the right meaning or the primary teaching. To arrive at we
use only Upaniṣadic statements alone. The primary teaching according to us is Jīvātmā-
Paramātmā-aikya anusandhāna. We should also show that there is no seeming
contradiction in the Upaniṣad itself with regard to the primary teaching.
Here, the connection in the intellect has to be made and the mental application has to be
done with respect to the Upaniṣadic statement. In any language the words have several
meanings. We have to take the appropriate meaning at appropriate places. Any word in
any language has several meaning and since English language is familiar to us we are able
to take the right meaning at the right place. Therefore, you have to apply the mind to
arrive at the meaning and this mental application to the Upaniṣadic text is called śravaṇa.
Manana is defined as the elimination of logical fallacies which are attributed to us by other
people due the misconceptions. In Vedānta there is no logical fallacy. This is called the
process of manana. This we have to do repeatedly for intellect is greatest generator of
doubt. Intellect will raise newer and newer doubt. For doubtful knowledge is as good as
ignorance, you cannot use doubtful knowledge. This is manana process and a sample was
given from verses 49 to 52. Thus elimination of doubt by my intellect or others’ is called
manana. Now we will go to the topic of nididhyāsana.

śloka 54
ताभ्यां निर्विचिकित्सेऽर्थे चेतसःस्थापितस्य यत्।
एकतानत्वमेतद्धि निदिध्यासनमुच्यते ॥ १.५४ ॥
tābhyāṃ nirvicikitse:'rthe cetasaḥsthāpitasya yat.
ekatānatvametaddhi nididhyāsanamucyate (1.54).
Nine verses from 54 deals with nididhyāsana. First Vidyāraṇya points out if a person goes
through śravaṇa and manana properly, clear and doubtless knowledge can be attained;
sthiraprājñā, nissaṃśaya jñāna or samyak darśana clear sight or clear vision on Vedānta
can be gained and clear knowledge alone will give mokṣa. The knower of Ātmā is free

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 74

from sorrow. Wise person is free from the sense of insecurity. The knowledge should give
me freedom from sorrow, insecurity and other similar problems. This is the assurance
given by the Upaniṣad. In the case of some people there is some snag. Some people go
through śravaṇa and manana. They understand the teaching. But even though we do
clearly understand that we are Brahman and none other than Brahman, the promised
result we don’t seem to enjoy. It is so because grief seems to continue; fear seems to
continue; insecurity seems to continue; lack of peace of mind seems to continue. Several
problems seem to continue. How then Upaniṣads say jñāna gives mokṣa or liberation from
all the problems?
Vedānta does not seem to solve all the problems and make one free from saṃsāra. If such
a situation comes where is the snag and what is the problem? If someone says I am free
then there is no problem. If problems are there despite having clear knowledge, the matter
is to be analysed. We have knowledge of Brahman but we don’t have experience of
Brahman and this is most unfortunate suggestion. They think that Brahman-experience we
have to work for after gaining knowledge. We should know there is no event called
Brahman-experience. Any other experience is an event in time and there is no event called
Brahman-experience. Brahman is ever-experienced consciousness-principle; pratibodha-
viditam matam. There is no time when consciousness is not experienced. You are ever
conscious. There is no question of lack of Brahman-experience. Sometimes they give
another suggestion that we experience Brahman with three śarīras. We never experience
Brahman without śarīras. We want śarīra-rahita Brahman-experience. Should not we
separate śarīratraya. That is not possible. You cannot eliminate three śarīras physically.
As I have said whatever state you go into jāgṛt, svapna, suṣupti, samādhi, turīya-avasthā
turīya-atīta-avasthā, whatever avasthā you go through, kāraṇa-śarīra will continue and the
mind will be in potential form and you will come back to the śarīra even after Brahman-
experience. According to us Brahman is there all the time, three śarīras are mithyā and
Brahman is asaṅga and Brahman is pure all the time. This is called pure Brahman and
understanding is pure understanding. If you don’t understand this clearly you will work
for Brahman-experience eternally. This is one trip made by the many people endlessly. We
don’t say lack of Brahman-experience is the problem. Then where is problem? I have
knowledge but I don’t have the benefit. Then our answer is the problem is not with me or
my promise and the student has not fulfilled the conditions I have prescribed. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 75

the mistake is on the student and he is blaming me for nothing. The next question is: what
are the conditions prescribed? That is sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Therefore, when
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is lacking the jñāna will not be fruitful.
This fruitless knowledge owned by the half-cooked student must be given some name.
Different Ācāryas give different names. This Vidyāraṇya calls it parokṣa-jñāna and
another name some Ācāryas gives is unripe knowledge and the third name is
sapratibandhaka jñāna. It is obstructed knowledge. The knowledge is not allowed to
produce the benefit because of some deficiency. The water is there in the tank, the tap is
open; we should get water. If you don’t get water it is not the lack of water but there is
obstruction in the flow of water. I have some obstructions in the form of sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-asampatti. After gaining jñāna we have to work for sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti.
We gain jñāna and we go in the reverse gear and get sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti after
gaining jñāna. It is for the sake of reaping the fruit of knowledge. That process is called
nididhyāsana; nididhyāsana is setting right the deficiencies of the mind the lack of
understanding by the mind and as even the mind is set right, there will be no change in
the knowledge but the benefit of knowledge begins to flow which is expressed in the form
of water trickling. As things are set right śānti sets to increase and this reaping of result at
mental level is a gradual process.
Talk Vedānta but when it comes to detachment, if you search with focused light, you will
find serious problem. We always want to keep a few items in the list of attachment.
Vedānta says be sincere to yourself. You can cheat all the people in the world but you
cannot cheat yourself. What about śama, dama, uparati, titikṣā? All of them are in trouble
but we want jñāna-phala instantaneously. However, Vedānta says: I don’t get angry with
you. Vedānta gives it a new name; therefore, nididhyāsana is sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti
post-Vedānta. This nididhyāsana or acquisition of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti can be
done in several methods. nididhyāsana is not one particular act. Satsanga, association with
people who have abundance of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti will help. Even reading śāstra
again and again will help. Alert reading will help. Sharing Vedānta with others will help.
Teaching is a wonderful motivation for the teacher himself to do soul searching.
Discussion, reading, alert-life and imitation of a jñānī also amount to nididhyāsana.
Several methods of nididhyāsana are there and it is not for getting Brahman-experience
but nididhyāsana is acquiring sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti or improving sādhana-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 76

catuṣṭaya-sampatti acquired already or maintaining sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti which

means if a person has come in proper way with sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti, śravaṇa-
manana itself will give both jñāna and the fruit also. An adhikārī does not require
nididhyāsana. A prepared student does not require nididhyāsana.
An unprepared has to practice any one or many of the nididhyāsana and one type of
nididhyāsana is Vedāntic meditation in which a person allots some time separately sits in
proper posture of meditation and dwells upon the teaching and its implication in my life.
The teacher can give only general implication, but every student has to see what is the
implication in his or her life depending on the mental problem which is specific in each
individual. Therefore, it is person-specific and for Vedāntic meditation, yogic method of
meditation is adopted. Patañjali Yoga śāstra gives some methods of meditation and it is
called aṣṭāṅga yoga. This can be adopted in Vedāntic meditation with certain
modification. In aṣṭāṅga yoga they talk of cakra and all that. Vedāntic meditation does not
have any cakra. We don’t want some more cakra and Vedāntic meditation says any cakra
is anātmā and anātmā is mithyā. We are interested in the I, the satya. Gaudapāda calls it
manonigraha.
In this nididhyāsana a person takes a proper āsana and we discussed this elaborately in
the 6th chapter of Gītā. Proper deśa, kāla, śarīra, sthiti, withdraw sense-organ, make the
breathing smooth turn your attention to the mind, etc, are discussed in detail in Gītā. Turn
your attention to turn anātmā to Ātmā. I am not the body and I am the witness of the
body. I am not the mind I am the witness of the thought. The nature of witness is asaṅga
nirākāra caitanya, aham asmi, ahaṃ brahma asmi. This particular thought I have to
entertain. Vedāntic meditation is not a thoughtless state. We don’t believe in going to
thoughtless state. This will give only relaxation. Vedāntic meditation involves thought of
anything you think of that is Ātmā or anātmā, cetana or jaḍa. When it is Ātmā your
thought should be Ātmā satya. If you want you can think of anātmā also but remember it
is mithyā. I have a body and the body is mithyā. I have a son and he is mithyā. This is the
nature of mithyā. Either meditate upon mithyā nature of anātmā or satyatva of Ātmā and
both involve the thought that is Vedāntic thought.
Let us take the thought ahaṃ brahma asmi. Initially I entertain this thought deliberately.
When I do this there is distraction initially. The deliberate effort to bring the mind to
Vedāntic thought is called dhyāna. When I continuously strive for some time the mind

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 77

gets absorbed to this thought pattern and then effort is not required. Only until absorption
effort is required and after that distortion is not possible. Thus dhyāna and samādhi are
two steps talked about in yoga śāstra. This method of nididhyāsana is an optional method
and a student can take to this to get the benefit of knowledge. This is one of the methods
but it is not the only method. The mind should dwell upon the teaching of mahā-vākya
ahaṃ brahma asmi or Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya. The mind can dwell on anything only
through thoughts. Dwelling upon means entertaining thought in the field of Jīvātmā-
Paramātmā-aikya. When you entertain thoughts, next moment some other thought will
come. You should entertain that ahaṃ brahma asmi thought continuously and there
should be a thought flow of ahaṃ brahma asmi. Convergence of all the thoughts on the
same fact should be there. This thought convergence is called nididhyāsana or dhyāna in
yoga śāstra. This convergence is achieved by effort. There is a will involved. There is an
effort involved. Then in the next verse he will say if it continues the job will be made easy
and effortless. dhyāna leads to samādhi. More in the next class.

Class 17
śloka 54 contd.
From this verse Vidyāraṇya deals with nididhyāsana and I said that nididhyāsana is only
to attain the benefit if knowledge which may be sometimes blocked by the obstacles in the
mind and it is only lack of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Aviveka is obstacle one avairāgya
is obstacle three amumukṣutva is obstacle four. This can be removed by several methods.
Continuation of āśrama dharma dwelling of śāstra can fill up the deficiency. In all of them
activity is different and the mind deals with teaching only. Posture of body is not
important but the posture of the mind is important for perfect dhyāna.
On the other hand you may walk on the beach and still you may think of the teaching. A
man in sitting posture may not think of Vedānta. It is the mind that decides whether you
do nididhyāsana or not. Formal meditation is described in the sixth chapter of Gītā.
Bringing the mind to Vedāntic teaching is called Vedāntic meditation. Since Vidyāraṇya
talks of formal meditation, even physical posture, etc., he intends. He takes yoga śāstra
that deals with formal method of meditation where the āsana, position of sense-organs
etc., is discussed. Meditation here is not meant for gaining knowledge. Meditation is on

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 78

the teaching of Vedānta which has been doubtlessly acquired by the student through
śravaṇa and manana. Knowing part is over with śravaṇa and manana. One should have
the knowledge without any doubt; śravaṇa and manana together has given knowledge
and nididhyāsana is not meant for knowledge nor for improving knowledge, not meant
for refining knowledge nor for confirming the knowledge.
Some think that the nididhyāsana gives mystical experience, convincing mystic
experience, but it is not the aim; nididhyāsana is not for validating the knowledge.
Continue nididhyāsana until you remove the mental blocks which obstruct the flow of
benefit of knowledge. That is why Vidyāraṇya says after practicing nididhyāsana and
while practicing nididhyāsana also, śravaṇa should continue. Post-nididhyāsana śravaṇa
means having practiced nididhyāsana for some time when you listen the teaching again
you will find the teaching is directly efficacious and you find the impact of śravaṇa more
effective.
One thing you should note that śravaṇa alone is needed and nididhyāsana if done earlier
should be followed by śravaṇa. Tāna means thread; eka means single; single thread means
unbroken thread; thought flow should resemble an unbroken thread. This is achieved by
every thought having the same object. First thought should deal with Brahman, second
also with Ātmā, third also deals with Ātmā and this is called sajātīya pratyaya pravāha. It
is similar thoughts.
You make sure that this thread does not include vijātīya-pratyaya. This will break the
flow. The flow of similar thoughts unobstructed by dissimilar thoughts should be there in
the seeker’s mind. It is called cetasaḥ ekatānatvam. It may be ahaṃ brahma asmi or ahaṃ
śuddhosmi; ahaṃ buddhaḥ; ahaṃ muktaḥ, etc. Thus it need not be the same thought it
must be similar thought all deal with Ātmā. When a person implements this, this process
is called nididhyāsana. Vidyāraṇya uses the ekatānatva to remind us the definition
occurring in the yoga sūtra.

śloka 55
ध्यातृध्याने परित्यज्य क्रमाद्ध्येयैकगोचरम्।
निर्वातदीपवच्चित्तं समाधिरभिधीयते ॥ १.५५ ॥
dhyātṛdhyāne parityajya kramāddhyeyaikagocaram.
nirvātadīpavaccittaṃ samādhirabhidhīyate (1.55).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 79

When you are involved in anything spiritual or a painting you get absorbed and this
absorption is very natural faculty of the mind and it has nothing to do with spirituality.
samādhi is natural capacity of the mind. samādhi is not an extraordinary thing.
Absorption is another name for samādhi. samādhi is not a mysterious thing and it
happens in the field you love. If you like the class you are in samādhi. This samādhi is a
natural process. In yoga śāstra the normal thought process there are two things one is
thought another is object. Thought is pramāṇa and object is prameya. Thought deals with
the object. I look at the table. Table is outside and thought is inside. The distinction of
thought and object is very clear.
You think of a dead person when you go to sleep. In dream that person comes. You
interact with that person. Then that person is an object or is a thought. That person is the
thought only. Object cannot be there as he is dead and gone. You are so much absorbed in
the object of thought and you don’t take him as thought and thoughtness of thought you
lose sight of. That person has become an object. Without difference between the two, the
object and thought has become one. In absorption the object becomes so real, the thought
is missed in the object. The process of dhyāna is forgotten. The meditator as meditator is
forgotten. In dream world I don’t remember I am dreaming. Dream world has become so
real the dreamer is forgotten dream, process is forgotten, but only the dream world exists.
The meditator forgets himself as meditator, meditation process is lost sight of and only the
object of meditation is available. The dream world exists as reality. When the meditation
and meditator is gradually withdrawn, I am completely lost in the object of meditation.
When you are lost that becomes more real and the impact is much more.
In dream the tiger becomes more real and it is capable of frightening you. The mind has
the power to give the impact when you are totally absorbed. The impact of ahaṃ brahma
asmi is very effective when you are totally absorbed. This is called nirvikalpa samādhi. As
in dream you don’t feel you dream and dream process also you don’t remember. jñeya is
there but jñātā and jñāna has receded. Once a person is absorbed in a particular thought,
will-power is not required to be maintained. The thought process has gained a momentum
and even if you stop, without your deliberate will, the vṛtti continues. Subject-object
division is not there. Therefore, it is called nirvikalpaka samādhi. This Vidyāraṇya says is
talked about in Gītā through the example of the flame kept in an enclosed space, how it
remains steady and similarly the mind is steady.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 80

Are there thoughts in samādhi or not? Vidyāraṇya says thoughts are very much there in
Vedāntic samādhi. It is not a thoughtless state. Since thoughts are not deliberately
entertained you don’t feel there are thoughts. Since will is not involved you don’t feel
there are thoughts. Even in suṣupti there is a thought that I am comfortable and since will
is not involved I am not aware of the thoughts. After waking up I say I slept well and I
thoroughly enjoyed. There is thought but when thoughts are there without your will, it is
called sūkṣma vṛtti; sūkṣma vṛtti cannot be recognized at that time. In suṣupti there is
sūkṣma vṛtti, and in samādhi sūkṣma vṛttis are there. At that time you cannot recognize
and when the will comes back again, it is recollected. The recollection is proof for
collection of thoughts. Therefore, sūkṣma vṛtti is collected in suṣupti and samādhi and it is
recollected in jāgṛt-avasthā.

śloka 56
वृत्तयस्तु तदानीमज्ञाता अप्यात्मगोचराः ।
स्मरणादनुमीयन्ते व्युत्थितस्य समुत्थितात्॥ १.५६ ॥
vṛttayastu tadānīmajñātā apyātmagocarāḥ.
smaraṇādanumīyante vyutthitasya samutthitāt (1.56).
Tadānīm means nirvikalpaka-samādhi-avasthāyām. Ātma-gocara-vṛttis here means
sūkṣma-vṛttis. It does not require the backing of the will. They deal with Ātmā
chidānanda-rūpa, śivoham, soham, sat-cit-ānanda-rūpam; in suṣupti-avasthā it is ajñāna-
gocara. Here it is ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-gocara-vṛtti. They are not noticed at the time of
samādhi. Deep sleep thoughts are not noticed in sleep. Similarly “ahaṃ brahma asmi”
vṛttis are not noticed but they are there. You can infer based on the latter memory. After
this person comes out of meditation, nirvikalpaka samādhi, and recollects that I was
absorbed in Vedāntic thought, from the recollection happening later, one can infer that he
had thoughts in the samādhi avasthā, like suṣupti-avasthā. If I am recollecting now I
should have had that vṛtti during nirvikalpaka samādhi. That inference is given in
Pañcadaśī verse 5 of this chapter. Subtle thoughts in sleep and in samādhi are inferred
from latter thought of recollection.

śloka 57
वृत्तीनामनुवृत्तिस्तु प्रयत्नात्प्रथमादपि ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 81

अदृष्टासकृ दभ्याससंस्कारः सचिराद्भवेत्॥ १.५७ ॥

vṛttīnāmanuvṛttistu prayatnātprathamādapi.
adṛṣṭāsakṛdabhyāsasaṃskāraḥ sacirādbhavet (1.57).
A doubt may come we say Vedānta vṛtti is initially entertained by will-power. In
savikalpaka samādhi will is there, efforts are there and effects are there. In nirvikalpaka it
is spontaneous and it takes place without any efforts. Worry has become a process without
needing the will and we use the wonderful faculty for Vedānta. We try to change that into
the field of Vedānta. Later the vṛttis will continue. A doubt may arise what is the
guarantee the same vṛtti will continue. The mind also as servant maid if you watch ahaṃ
brahma asmi and then the same vṛtti may not continue in nirvikalpaka samādhi. The same
will continue because of three forces. They are prathama prayatna the momentum of
initial deliberate vṛtti; how long will depend upon the momentum you have created by the
initial efforts. The second factor is adṛṣṭa puṇya. You should have enough spiritual puṇya.
In yoga śāstra they divide puṇya into two types one is śukla puṇya and the other as aśukla
puṇya. One gives material benefits. Good family obedient children these are all puṇya
phala. There is another puṇya which will favour Vedāntic pursuit; niṣkāma-karma-janya
niṣkāma-upāsana-janya spiritual puṇya. Third one is the inclination; spiritual inclination is
needed or the Ātma-vāsanā is required which is caused because of repeated practice. If
you do once it is not a habit. If you continue this, it becomes a habit, if aśubha vāsanā can
be caused by adhyāsa, śubha vāsanā also can be formed by abhyāsa. The momentum
caused by initial effect, spiritual puṇya and inclination cause by Ātma-vāsanā helps one to
concentrate on dhyāna.

śloka 58
यथा दीपो निवातस्थ इत्यादिभिरनेकधा ।
भगवानिममेवार्थमर्जुनाय न्यरूपयत्॥ १.५८ ॥
yathā dīpo nivātastha ityādibhiranekadhā.
bhagavānimamevārthamarjunāya nyarūpayat (1.58).
Vidyāraṇya says Vedic samādhi can be borrowed wherever it is required. Even though
Patañjali might have gone through yoga samādhi, his conclusion is Paramātmā is
different, jīvātmā is different and jīvātmās are many, his object of meditation is different
and his purpose of meditation is different. For him the mind has to be resolved. This is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 82

yoga approach. Vedānta does not talk of dissolving the mind. Do you resolve the rope-
snake. You don’t have to resolve the rope-snake but resolution of rope-snake is the
knowledge of understanding the rope in place of snake. We say mind mithyātva should be
known to realise the satya. More in the next class.

Class 18
śloka 58 contd.
Vidyāraṇya deals with nididhyāsana or Vedāntic meditation which is to handle the
deficiencies in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. If a person has sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti in
proper measure, nididhyāsana is not required. It is required only when there is deficiency
in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. The deficiency is detected when the jñāna does not
produce the expected result. Vedānta is a pramāṇa and pramāṇa is capable of generating
knowledge and therefore, śravaṇa should generate knowledge; if śravaṇa does not
generate knowledge it is not the deficiency in Vedānta but it is the deficiency in the
student. We gradually improve the student’s mind and Vedānta seems to become more
powerful not that there is an increase in Vedānta’s efficiency, but it is improvement in the
student’s capacity to grasp the knowledge.
Take the case of child and the father listening to the English news. Father develops
knowledge at a particular level and the child at a particular level and so, there is difference
in understanding the news by the father and the child. There is a deficiency in the child to
understand the news and we find for the child the news is apramāṇa but the same news
bulletin for the father is pramāṇa. As the child improves the English knowledge, the same
news becomes pūrṇa pramāṇa.
The progression in understand is not in the pramāṇa but it is in the state of the pramātā.
Nididhyāsana improves the condition of pramātā, the seeker of knowledge and not in the
Veda pramāṇa. Therefore, nididhyāsana is a means for pramātṛ-doṣa-nivṛtti and not for
improving the pramāṇa. Pramātṛ-doṣa means the deficiency in the student and this blocks
the effectiveness of the Vedānta pramāṇa. For the refinements of pramātā we do karma
and upāsana before the Vedāntic study. When this refinement is done after Vedāntic
study, for you to get the full benefit of jñāna, it is called nididhyāsana which refines the
mind.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 83

After Vedāntic study, we don’t go back to the karma and upāsana but we do nididhyāsana
in its place to get sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and get more mumukṣutva. This
nididhyāsana can be done in several ways. The yogic meditation is one of the methods of
nididhyāsana where aṣṭāṅga yoga is adopted. The aṣṭāṅga yoga talks about four stages:
dhāraṇā, dhyāna, savikalpa samādhi and nirvikalpaka samādhi. It is an optional method
of meditation. Dhāraṇā is trying to fix the mind on teaching, dhyāna is fixing the mind on
teaching, and absorption is samādhi and when it becomes effortless, it is nirvikalpaka
samādhi. When will is not dominant, the meditator is resolved. In the effortless
absorption, the will does not function. The meditator is resolved and there is no effort in
the form of meditation. Meditation thus becomes automatic. Remember the example of
svapna, I as the projector of dream is not there in the dream. Projector is resolved as it
were and projection process also is resolved and svapna world alone is there. Similarly the
division of jñātā-jñeya are gone and therefore, it is called nirvikalpa samādhi. This
nirvikalpaka samādhi is a topic in yoga śāstra, it specializes this samādhi topic and
Vidyāraṇya has adopted this yoga śāstra here. This is not wrong because Lord Kṛṣṇa
himself in Gītā has adopted this yogic teaching. In the sixth chapter of Gītā, in the 19th
verse, Kṛṣṇa elaborates the nirvikalpaka samādhi and compared it to the flame kept in a
protected place. Gītā-śloka reads as:
yathā dīpo nivātastho neṅgate sopamā smṛtā.
yogino yatacittasya yuñjato yogamātmanaḥ;
As a lamp in a windless place flickers not, to such is likened the Yogī of subdued thought
who practices union with the Self. The yogic thought is absorbed in the ātmā. Fleeting
glimpses or passing visions should not be confused with insight into ātmā, which is the
one safeguard against tall delusions. Vidyāraṇya takes the Gītā-śloka in full in this context.
With such ślokas, Kṛṣṇa also prescribed the yogic meditation as one type of nididhyāsana
which is aimed at to gain nirvikalpaka samādhi. If I practice nididhyāsana for a long time
what will be the benefit is told in the next śloka.

śloka 59
अनादाविह संसारे सञ्चिताः कर्मकोटयः ।
अनेन विलयं यान्ति शुद्धो धर्मो विवर्धते ॥ १.५९ ॥
anādāviha saṃsāre sañcitāḥ karmakoṭayaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 84

anena vilayaṃ yānti śuddho dharmo vivardhate (1.59).

Here alone we should remember which part of yoga śāstra we accept which part we don’t
accept. As I said in the last class the very content of the teaching is different in yoga śāstra
and Vedānta. There Ātmā is many in number but in Vedānta Ātmā is only one; though
bodies are many, minds are many, Ātmā is one. In yoga śāstra Ātmās are many which we
reject. In yoga śāstra, Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are different. This also we should reject.
There is no need to meditate I am dāsa. I am Paramātmā that requires meditation. Also in
yoga śāstra mind is satya and therefore, mind has to gradually dissolve but in Vedānta
mithyā does not gradually resolve but in Vedānta mithyā is rejected outright, which is
negation by jñāna. The elimination of mind is understanding the mind as mithyā against
Ātmā, the śuddha caitanya.
Regarding the result of meditation also there are differences. In Vedānta, nididhyāsana is
to give sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. I was not an adhikārī before and now I am becoming
an adhikārī after studying Vedānta. I try to become sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna and
nididhyāsana makes me a pātra for pramāṇa to function. Even after I do nididhyāsana I
have to go through Vedānta śravaṇa. Previously I heard as an unqualified student and
now I hear after becoming a qualified student. Here he talks about the phala according to
yoga śāstra. We are not totally accepting yoga śāstra. First we will see the phala of yoga
śāstra. By the practice of yoga, the crores of karma will die away, the karma like sañcita by
the power of yoga. In Vedānta jñāna destroyes sañcita karma. It is collected in saṃsāra
when we were saṃśarīs in many janmas. The collection process of sañcita karma is
beginningless. Not only that śuddhah dharmah vivardhate; the samādhi practice produces
a new type of puṇya which is spiritual. In Vedānta we don’t talk of production of puṇya.
Karma alone produces puṇya and according to us jñāna destroys puṇya, but yoga says it
will produces puṇya. This is the yoga śāstra approach. This samādhi-abhyāsa will make
the sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. All the obstacles for the refinement of the mind will go
away is our interpretation of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and our yogic approach to
nididhyāsana.

śloka 60
धर्ममेघमिमं प्राहुः समाधिं योगवित्तमाः ।
वर्षत्येष यतो धर्मामृतधाराः सहस्रशः ॥ १.६० ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 85

dharmameghamimaṃ prāhuḥ samādhiṃ yogavittamāḥ.

varṣatyeṣa yato dharmāmṛtadhārāḥ sahasraśaḥ (1.60).
Vidyāraṇya makes it clear that this idea belongs to yoga śāstra. We have to interpret it
properly. Those who are experts in yoga śāstra say nirvikalpaka samādhi is a cloud of
dharma. It means just as rain bearing clouds shower water, samādhi is dharma-bearing
cloud. Dharma means puṇya. When you practice samādhi it will shower you with puṇya.
These are said in yoga sūtra. The puṇya bearing samādhi will shower upon dharma and
yoga-mokṣa is an event that occurs later, but in Vedānta it is not an event. We are already
mukta. This is not known to yoga śāstravādins. The stream of puṇya is like the streams of
nectar. In Vedānta the showering is amānitva, ahiṃsā, detachment, etc. All are problems
for Vedāntic students. With this half-cooked vairāgya we blame Vedānta śāstra.
Vidyāraṇya says you should practice nididhyāsana and check up your vairāgya. This is
the benefit of samādhi.

śloka 61
अमुना वासनाजाले निःशेषं प्रविलापिते ।
समूलोन्मूलिते पुण्यपापाख्ये कर्म सञ्चये ॥ १.६१ ॥
amunā vāsanājāle niḥśeṣaṃ pravilāpite.
samūlonmūlite puṇyapāpākhye karma sañcaye (1.61).
The samādhi-phala is given according to the yoga śāstra. By the constant samādhi-abhyāsa
with increase in duration and intensity one gains better benefits. All the network of
vāsanās or saṃskāra,s rāga-dveṣa saṃskāra, krodha saṃskāras which are gathered in
many janmas are resolved in nirvikalpaka samādhi, it is said. When I know what I do is
wrong and yet I do it, it is because my mind is under the grip of vāsanās. Mechanical
speech is more and deliberate speech is less. You think and act and generally we act and
think. You think and speak and generally we speak and think and this is called vāsanā
domination. In fact the vāsanā domination should not be there even before coming to
Vedānta study. The right mindfulness is one of the paths for nirvāṇa according to Buddha.
This is taught by Kṛṣṇa in karma-yoga. That is why Vidyāraṇya writes jīvanmukti-viveka.
In Kaliyuga most of the Vedāntic students enter the study without sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti. For them nididhyāsana is very important, samādhi-abhyāsa is very important.
What is to be remembered that samādhi-abhyāsa is for sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 86

improvement and not for gaining liberation. All the vāsanās are resolved totally. All the
accumulated karmas get resolved in nirvikalpaka samādhi. Here he says samādhi destroys
puṇya. In yoga śāstra the puṇya is divided into two types. One is śukla puṇya and another
is spiritual puṇya; śukla puṇya is destroyed while spiritual puṇya is generated to destroy
the sañcita karmas, etc. Five fold doṣas are the root of puṇya-pāpa in which rāga-dveṣa
play a prominent role. Among those doṣas, rāga-dveṣa, likes and dislikes, are the
prominent doṣas as that is root of puṇya-pāpa. Rāga-dveṣa will go, puṇya-pāpa will go
and all these will be destroyed by samādhi-abhyāsa and spiritual puṇya will be generated.
Vedānta says samādhi will give you sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti whatever impurities that
obstructs sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti will go. Rāga-dveṣa is one obstacle and aviveka is
another obstacle. There is delusion and my future depends upon my finance, my son, etc.
All these things should go for the Vedānta to be beneficial. After gaining sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti, you should come back to śravaṇa. Later śravaṇa will become more
powerful than the previous śravaṇa. The students are improving.

śloka 62
वाक्यमप्रतिबद्धं सत्प्राक्परोक्षावभासिते ।
करामलकवद्बोधमपरोक्षं प्रसूयते ॥ १.६२ ॥
vākyamapratibaddhaṃ satprākparokṣāvabhāsite.
karāmalakavadbodhamaparokṣaṃ prasūyate (1.62).
The student should come for re-śravaṇa is the first point to be noted. What is the
difference between pre-śravaṇa and re-śravaṇa. In the previous śravaṇa, sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti was deficient and therefore, the Vedāntic teaching was blocked and the
words were not allowed to do the job. Guru says “you are free”, but the student stares at
the Guru. He is not able to understand it, because he is not adhikārī to gain the teaching.
He is not able to comfortably say “it is true and I am free here and now”. When I say “I am
free”, I never said my body is free from body. Vedānta does not want to give freedom to
anātmā. My freedom is not the absence of problem of anātmā and my freedom is in spite
of anātmā. All body problems will be there and you cannot help it. Deha-abhimāna should
go.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya calls sapratibandha vākya, sapratibandha jñāna. Obstructed
teaching produces obstructed knowledge. It means knowledge will be there but benefit I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 87

will not gain. Teaching is obstructed because of the deficiency in the student and
obstructions takes place in the vākya, but after becoming an adhikārī the obstruction goes
and the benefit of jñāna is gained. The very statement which Guru repeats now becomes
unobstructed. The very same vākya, the very same teacher, the very same Ātmā, the very
same body remaining the same, now the teaching is capable of producing its goal of
unobstructed knowledge. The obstructed knowledge he calls parokṣa jñāna and
unobstructed knowledge he calls it aparokṣa jñāna. ‘I am free, the teacher says’ means it is
parokṣa jñāna and if one says ‘I am free’ it is aparokṣa jñāna. This is the difference between
aparokṣa jñāna and parokṣa jñāna. The knowledge is like the āmla fruit in the palm of the
hand and it so very clear without any doubt. More in the next class.

Class 19
śloka 62 contd.
We talked about the process of nididhyāsana and I pointed out that nididhyāsana is
dwelling upon the teaching which can be done by any number of ways. Repeated reading
is a form of nididhyāsana; writing is a form of nididhyāsana, discussion is a form of
nididhyāsana. It is only after going through śravaṇa and manana that nididhyāsana can be
done. Yogic samādhi-abhyāsa method is also a form of nididhyāsana. This should end in
nirvikalpaka samādhi and Vidyāraṇya talks about nididhyāsana in the form of samādhi.
He talked of the phala of samādhi. This was in keeping with the yoga śāstra. We have to
modify the phala with Vedānta. The samādhi-abhyāsa will refine only the mind and the
deficiency in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti will be filled up.
Therefore, the anadhikārī, I the unfit pramātā, now has become fit to study Vedānta. My
unfitness became an obstacle for the teaching. Previously I was not fit for the study of
Vedānta. When I received the knowledge also I happened to become a blocked knower
and the knowledge I have gained did not allow me to own up liberation. Obstructed
knowledge gave obstructed phala as I have become unfit to reap the phala,. Now I have
become yogya. Then śāstra-vākya flowing through Guru is no more obstructed. It is
unobstructed vākya. When it goes to the mind of the student, he has to listen again after

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 88

gaining samādhi. For the obstructed knowledge Vidyāraṇya gave the name parokṣa jñāna
and the unobstructed knowledge is called aparokṣa jñāna.
The deficiency in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti goes and the student becomes very bright
and understands everything. The very same vākya generates aparokṣa jñāna which means
unobstructed wisdom like the āmalaka in the hand. It is the knowledge about the Ātmā.
The Ātmā which was previously revealed in a vague manner is now very clear after
gaining sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti or after nididhyāsana-abhyāsa. The difference is not
in Guru-vākya but the improvement in understanding after gaining sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti. This plays an important role and the very efficacy of Guru’s effort is directly
dependent on sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. We should understand its significance. This
has two implications. The sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti can be roughly compared to
ripening of the mind. It is the maturing of the mind. It is also like ripening of the fruit.
When we talk about ripening of the fruit we should understand the consequences clearly.
The first consequence is it becomes sweeter and it becomes tender, colourful, beautiful and
attractive. Let us take it as sweetness. Generally people focus on the sweetness alone. But
there is another side to the ripening process. As soon as it ripens it is ready to get
separated from the tree and it is ready for delinking. If it is ordinarily ripe we can pluck it
easily. If it is riper we can touch and take it. If it is very, very ripe, the fruit just falls on its
own accord. The sweetness is consequence number one and delinking is number two. We
always take to the sweetness part. Take the mind also like the fruit and sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti is like ripening of the mind and the mind becomes virtuous.
Therefore, every eligible student has a sweet mind with sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. And
extending that every jñānī is an adhikārī. Without being an adhikārī one cannot become a
jñānī. Therefore, every jñānī is an adhikārī and every jñānī is sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampanna. Every jñānī’s mind will be sweet and ripe. He has ripened the mind. Mokṣa is
sweetness of the mind. The sweetness of mind is understandable by all. It is appealing to
all and it is motivating to all. So mokṣa is, therefore, defined as sweetness of mind.
This is only a secondary definition of mokṣa. It is only a popular definition of mokṣa and
the primary definition of mokṣa is a ripe mind separated from me the Ātmā. Ripeness of
mind indicates the fall from the mother tree and I look upon mokṣa not as the ripeness of
the mind but freedom from the connection with the mind. Delinking of the mind that I am
the connectionless Ātmā. Even though I am close to the mind, I am not the mind.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 89

Light pervades the body and it is not linked to the body. The screen pervades the
characters of the movie but it is not connected to the characters. I have no connection to
any mind not only my mind but also with any mind. This is called freedom. I am free from
the body. Then I am the consciousness which is not a part of the mind, product of the
mind or property of the mind; I am the consciousness which pervades the mind but not
limited or polluted by the conditions of the mind. I continue to survive whatever happens
to the mind and whether the mind travels after the fall of the body or body does not travel
has nothing to do with me.
The world talks of the cycle of birth, etc, but the mind has nothing to do with me. Why
should I be obsessed at all with one sthūla-śarīra or sūkṣma-śarīra as I am free from the
mind! When a jñānī says I am free from rāga-dveṣa, what he means I am free from the
mind which may or may not have rāga-dveṣa. Real mokṣa is not refinement of the mind
but real mokṣa is freedom from the mind. I get it from Tat tvam asi as even I listen to this
mahā-vākya I should own up consciousness unattached with the mind. If the mind
happens to be sweet it is because of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti acquired. That sweetness
I don’t want to claim for it belongs to anātmā and I am Ātmā which is neither sweet nor
saltish. With this nididhyāsana portion is over and the phala of nididhyāsana is aparokṣa
jñāna.

śloka 63
परोक्षं ब्रह्मविज्ञानं शाब्दं देशिकपूर्वकम्।
बुद्धिपूर्वकृ तं पापं कृ त्स्नं दहति वह्निवत्॥ १.६३ ॥
parokṣaṃ brahmavijñānaṃ śābdaṃ deśikapūrvakam.
buddhipūrvakṛtaṃ pāpaṃ kṛtsnaṃ dahati vahnivat (1.63).
Vidyāraṇya concludes the first chapter in these three verses. He talks of aparokṣa-jñāna-
and parokṣa-jñāna-phala. Both jñānas have the phala. Qualified and unqualified student
can gain jñāna with some difference in phala. Both jñānas have to be gained from śravaṇa
only. He says parokṣa brahma-vijñāna, ahaṃ brahma asmi knowledge is parokṣa which
means obstructed knowledge not fully functional because of the fault of the student who is
not sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna. The knowledge here born out of mahā-vākya is the
brahma-vijñāna. It is the mahā-vākya heard from Guru-upadeśa. This knowledge will
destroy all the pāpas. pāpas means unbecoming actions will be destroyed. Deliberate

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 90

wrong actions will go away through parokṣa jñāna. Mechanical wrong action will
continue. Since he has not gained sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti some of the adharma karma
continues. Anger comes, anxiety comes fear comes in spite of knowing Vedānta very well.
The mind has not tackled the problem for he lacks sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Unhealthy
habits should have gone even before coming to Vedānta if he had performed karma and
upāsana etc. If we don’t do that, habitual things will continue. Just as the fire burns the
fuel, the parokṣa jñāna will burn the deliberate wrong actions.

śloka 64
अपरोक्षात्मविज्ञानं शाब्दं देशिकपूर्वकम्।
संसारकारणाज्ञानतमसश्चण्डभास्करः ॥ १.६४ ॥
aparokṣātmavijñānaṃ śābdaṃ deśikapūrvakam.
Saṃsārakāraṇājñānatamasaścaṇḍabhāskaraḥ (1.64).
Aparokṣa-Ātmā-vijñāna means unobstructed Ātma-jñāna is gained by the seeker who is
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna. The unobstructed knowledge takes place for a qualified
student, which is born out of mahā-vākya. It is gained not through intuition, but in tuition;
vākya alone is pramāṇa. This mahā-vākya should come at the time of śravaṇa backed by a
Guru. With change in qualification, there is a change in the śravaṇa. The jñāna is like fierce
sun. It is the sūrya of the noon. It is like powerful sun in destroying the darkness of
ignorance. Just as powerful sun destroys darkness both inside as also outside, the
aparokṣa jñāna destroys darkness of ajñāna.
This ajñāna is the cause of saṃsāra. Once I get jñāna, I decide my liberation. The state of
my mind is incidentally free as I have nothing to do with the mind for it is mithyā. There is
one sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna and that mind does not decide my liberation but I find
my Ātma-svarūpa is ever śuddha, ever sarvagata. This mind may or may not disappear
thereafter also millions of mind may move within me. My freedom is not affected by the
presence or absence of mind. Let the society decide my liberation. I have no connection
with my mind. Now he completes the chapter by winding up the teaching.

śloka 65
इत्थं तत्त्वविवेकं विधाय विधिवन्मनः समाधाय ।
विगलितसंसृतिबन्धः प्राप्नोति पारं पदं नरो न चिरात्॥ १.६५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 91

itthaṃ tattvavivekaṃ vidhāya vidhivanmanaḥ samādhāya.

vigalitasaṃsṛtibandhaḥ prāpnoti pāraṃ padaṃ naro na cirāt (1.65).
Having performed tattva-viveka the separation of I the Ātmā from anātmā pañca-kośas,
etc, I gain jñāna, I get Ātma-jñāna straightaway. Just as space ever unconnected with
objects in the space, I should understand that I am nitya asaṅga caitanya. There is no
separation other than this understanding, studying and doing tattva-viveka which
represents śravaṇa and manana. The mind dwelling upon the teaching is called
nididhyāsana.
Guru and śāstra must be there throughout the process. This nididhyāsana becomes
important for most of the students come to Vedānta without sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti.
There are some people who have acquired it in pūrva janma and they are born as spiritual
genius. They don’t require karma, they don’t need upāsana, etc. Leave alone
nididhyāsana. Remember this can be brought forward from previous janma and for those
people the nididhyāsana, etc, process is very casual. He becomes free from saṃsāra, which
means freedom from the mind. Such person gains jīvanmukti for the mind continues to
exist. The mind continues because of the prārabdha karma. He does not admire the sweet
mind but the society likes his sweet mind.
When prārabdha ends he gains videha-mukti. The duration of jñānī’s mind depends upon
the prārabdha. That mind merges into the total mind; or sūkṣma-śarīra merges into total
sūkṣma-śarīra which means there is no punarjanma for the sūkṣma-śarīra. As far as Ātmā
is concerned it does not have any janma at all. As far as jñānī is concerned, he is not
bothered about the mithyā mind merging or otherwise. The merger of mithyā mind will
worry only the ajñānī. I am Brahman, I was Brahman and I will ever be Brahman. This
cosmic drama goes on and I have no worry and I am not concerned with this. jñāna-phala
is over. Tattva-viveka prakaraṇa is over.

Summary of Chapter I, Tattva-viveka-prakaraṇa

This chapter consists of 65 verses broadly classified into five portions. First is the
introduction. The second topic is the essence of Vedānta from verse 3 to 10. The third topic
is the cause of saṃsāra from 11 to 30. Then the fourth topic is the means of mokṣa from 31
to 64. The fifth and final topic is conclusion in verse 65.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 92

The first topic is introduction. Here Vidyāraṇya offers namaskāra to his Guru
Śaṅkarānanda. The topic is tattva-viveka. It is written for easy understanding of the
subject for the beginners.
The next topic is Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya which is the essence of Vedānta; jīvātmā is also
Ātmā and Paramātmā is also Ātmā and therefore, both of them are essentially one and the
same Ātmā only. This Ātmā is nothing but sat-cit-ānanda. This he reveals in a beautiful
way by taking the daily experiences into the account. Every experience has two portions
one is the conscious part and the other is the thought part. One caitanya-aṃśa and the
other is vṛtti-part. We go through several experiences daily and in every experience
thoughts vary but the consciousness-part does not vary. The plurality of experience
belongs to thought alone and it does not belong to consciousness; it is one in and through
every experience. If thoughts are compared to the beads of mālā, consciousness can be
compared to one inherent thread. Thread is one and permanent while the beads of
thoughts vary. This is true in all three avasthās. In short consciousness is eternal.
Consciousness is called cit and eternity is called sat and eternal consciousness is called sat-
cit. Eternity is freedom from mortality and freedom from mortality is ānanda.
Sat-cit-ānanda is the same in every jīvātmā. Thoughts are in the mind and mind is in the
body; thought containers are different but the content is same in all the cases. The
unlimited Ātmā is Parama Ātmā. Jīvātmā minus the limitation from the container is Ātmā.
That Ātmā is called Paramātmā or it is called Brahman. This Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya
alone is the essence of Vedānta. This he presented from verse 3 to verse 10. Ātmā is
ānanda because it is an object of love. Since I love myself, the Ātmā, it must the be the
source of ānanda. Nobody loves duḥkha. This is the second topic of this book.
Next comes the cause of saṃsāra. He introduces Prakṛti, the fundamental matter principle.
This he divides into three: sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti, rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-
pradhāna Prakṛti. These are the three divisions of Prakṛti which exist other than the
consciousness-principle. Then he points out the consciousness associated with sattva-
pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti together is called Īśvara. Brahman by itself
is not Īśvara.
When Brahman puts on the shirt and coat of sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-pradhāna
Prakṛti that consciousness is called Īśvara and that Īśvara is nimitta-upādāna-kāraṇa of
this world. Here also sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti part holds Īśvara to become nimitta-kāraṇa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 93

and tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti part helps Īśvara in becoming upādāna-kāraṇa. When sattva
is pradhāna Īśvara is sarvajña and when tamas is pradhāna it is material cause. The
consciousness plus sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti is Īśvara. Vidyāraṇya takes the opportunity to
explain creation elaborately. This Īśvara created universe consisting of five subtle
elements, five gross elements along with all the subtle bodies and all the gross bodies.
Vidyāraṇya explains which guṇa is responsible for karmendriya, jñānendriya and
antaḥkaraṇa.
Thus Īśvara is ready and creation is ready, sūkṣma-śarīra is ready and sthūla-śarīra is
ready. A big house is created and the occupants have to be created. Consciousness with
rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti becomes jīva and because of the varieties, jīvas are many in
number. Many jīvas are constituted of consciousness and rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti. jīvas are
not associated with sattva-pradhāna or tamaḥ-pradhāna and therefore, jīva is in trouble. If
it were sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti, he would have been omniscient like God; no problem. If it
were tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti, he would have been like table there is no problem being
totally ignorant. Īśvara has no problem because Īśvara has knowledge totally. Rajas is
having partial knowledge and partial ignorance. I know I am Brahman and I also don’t
know I am Brahman. If I had total knowledge I will know I am Brahman. Here I know I
don’t know.
Therefore, these jīvas gets into trouble and everything in creation becomes a trap. Either he
develops rāga or he develops dveṣa. If it is rāga, there is struggle to acquire things, or with
dveṣa, to run away from things and beings. This running goes on and on and it does not
end even at the time of death. It continues like serials in the T.V. so the life goes on. jīva
goes from whirlpool of sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra to another sūkṣma-śarīra and
sthūla-śarīra. Partial knowledge is breeding ground for adhyāsa or it is saṃsāra-kāraṇa.
Then comes the topic of the means of mokṣa. “How to get out of saṃsāra” is the
discussion here. This is from verse no 31 to 64 which is central portion of the first chapter.
First we should have done sufficient puṇya-karma to develop a desire for mokṣa. One
should know one is helplessly caught in saṃsāra. Then only he will have the idea to gain
mokṣa. He should lead a karma-upāsana way of life and the very interest is a great leap
forward. I also need help of someone to lift me from saṃsāra.
Then what happens is that from somewhere a well-wisher Guru appears to lift me from
saṃsāra ocean. I don’t have the resources even to judge an Ācārya whether he is genuine

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 94

or not. Everyone claims a paramparā. We have to surrender to the Lord. One of the
genuine Ācāryas gives systematic śāstra-upadeśa. Upadeśa here means teaching, though
in the context of karma-kāṇḍa it is initiation of the mantra and japa.
The systematic teaching deals with mahā-vākyas; mahā-vākya shows Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-
aikya-bodhaka-vākya. It is a statement which reveals the essential oneness of jīvātmā and
Paramātmā. I acknowledge superficial difference. It is because of this I talk about the
essential oneness. The most popular saying is Tat tvam asi. All other topics are meant to
understand the vākyas alone. All other statements are known for one purpose of
understanding the mahā-vākyas. Some of the statements are meant to reveal the meaning
of ‘tvam’ and some to reveal the meaning of ‘tat’ and some to understand the meaning of
the word ‘asi’. There are several topics and one of them is pañca-kośa analysis.
My essential nature is not annamaya kośa; it is not prāṇamaya kośa; not manomaya and
not vijñānamaya and not even ānandamaya and they are only external vestures.
Therefore, I am pañcakośa-vilakṣaṇa caitanya. When the teacher says “you are Brahman”
the teacher points the finger to you and that finger should penetrate the five kośas. It
should stop in Śākṣi-caitanya and this method is called bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā. I arrive at
consciousness and leave out pañca-kośa part. I should understand that ‘tvam’ is caitanya;
rajaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti is only a container and it is not me. This is called ‘tvam-pada-
vicāra’.
Then you go to ‘tat-pada-vicāra’. That Īśvara also has three parts, consciousness plus
sattva-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti because of which alone he is called
jagat-kāraṇa. He is looked upon as the great creator. The teacher says ‘that you leave out
tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti and tamaḥ-pradhāna Prakṛti which is only incidental veṣas of
Īśvara. It is not Īśvara’s svarūpa. It is also temporary vesture. ‘Tat’ will go up to
consciousness-principle. This consciousness by itself is not kāraṇa and consciousness by
itself is not a kārya; then you arrive at only one consciousness which is neither kārya jīva
nor kāraṇa Īśvara. There is only one kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa caitanya.
When the student receives the message making the teacher happy, he will receive it as
ahaṃ brahma asmi. This is the upadeśa part or vicāra part and it is considered as the first
level of mokṣa-marga called śravaṇa. Once you consistently study this, you will receive
the knowledge and this process is called śravaṇa. Then Vidyāraṇya says śravaṇa will give
knowledge but it produces several doubts, for intellect is capable of doubting. The doubts

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 95

are natural and Vedānta does not look doubt as a sin, but in fact the Vedānta encourages
doubts. Attitude towards doubt should be healthy. Unhealthy doubting is saying that
Guru and śāstra is wrong. Healthy doubting is I have not received the teaching properly
and there is defect in reception centre and not in transmission centre. Instead of
questioning śāstra and teaching, I should doubt my understanding. This is healthy
doubting. If you doubt the understanding you will listen to Guru again and again. You
listen until your understanding is clear and when it is clear, doubt will not be there. This is
experience of every student. This is called manana.
Then, comes the last part called nididhyāsana; śravaṇa is defined as Vedānta-vākyānām
tātparya-nirṇayaḥ. It means arriving at the central teaching of the Vedāntic statements.
manana is defined as yuktitaḥ cintanam logically analyzing that there are no logical fallacy
in the Vedāntic teachings. Third one is nididhyāsana that is defined as tātparyārtha
anusandhānam; anusandhāna means dwelling upon the central teaching. I said that
dwelling can be done in any manner and physical posture is irrelevant. You can choose
yogic method as suggested by yoga śāstra of Patañjali or Gītā 6th chapter. Physical posture
has no relevance in nididhyāsana. In upāsana physical posture is important. Gāyatrī must
be done in particular time, upāsana has adṛṣṭa phala but nididhyāsana is for assimilation
of ideas or knowledge gained.
Where puṇya is not involved posture is not important. As I dwell upon the teaching,
nothing happens to the teaching and teaching completes itself. The mind of the person
doing nididhyāsana becomes pure and the deficiency of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is
rectified. The mind becomes fitter to assimilate the teaching and as the assimilation
increases the jñāna-phala increases. jñāna is the understanding and jñāna-phala is the
experience. It is in the form of reduction of frequency in mental disturbances coming
down.
Now that the frequency of mental disturbances decreases, I am generally peaceful and
occasionally disturbed. In the intensity of disturbance there is some difference. Previously
it was mental, verbal and physical. Slowly verbal and physical disturbances reduce but the
same in the mental level takes time to reduce in its intensity. The mental disturbance does
not give problem to people outside because I don’t transfer it to others. Finally we have to
concentrate on the reduction in the recovery period. It is almost an extension of the second

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 96

one. When the disturbance is big it stays for a long time. Here the recovery period is short.
Thus one gains jīvanmukti as one reduces the mental disturbances.
Then Vidyāraṇya says having practiced nididhyāsana sufficiently, once again you listen to
Vedānta and then interesting thing happens. Once the FIR (frequency, intensity and
recovery period) reduces and I listen to Vedānta, what happens is I am able to disassociate
from the mind itself. Instead of identifying with the mind and measuring the liberation in
terms of mental condition now I say I am not the mind at all and why do I connect my
freedom to my mental condition. Now I say I was free; I am free and I will be free. Mental
condition has nothing to do with my liberation.
When I am not concerned with the mind, mind performs better. Improve your mind and
detach yourself from your mind. Then you are ever-free. This is called aparokṣa jñāna
when I boldly claim I am free irrespective of my physical and mental condition I am free.
This is given in the 14th chapter of Gītā. The mind has three fluctuating guṇas and it is
likely for mind to change. I should not worry too much with the mind. This is the topic
from 34 to 64.
Then Vidyāraṇya concludes in verse 65. He says in this manner one should do śravaṇa,
manana and nididhyāsana and enjoy jīvanmukti and videha-mukti. With this chapter one
is over.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 97

Chapter II: Mahā-bhūta-viveka

महाभूतविवेकोनाम - द्वितीयः परिच्छेदः ।

Class 1
Having completed the first chapter named tattva-viveka prakaraṇa we will now enter into
the second chapter called Mahā-bhūta-viveka-prakaraṇa. Pañcadaśī is pañca-dāsa -
prakaraṇa and as done in Gītā this is also divided into three parts each consisting of five
chapters. Each one is called pañcaka. If you study the titles of the chapter the first five end
with the word viveka. Therefore, it is called viveka-pañcaka. If you look at the titles, from
sixth to tenth chapter, it ends with dīpa. Since they all end with the word dīpa it is called
dīpa-pañcaka. Last five chapters have the titles ending with the word ānanda. So it is
called ānanda-pañcaka. We are in the first pañcaka. Now we enter the second viveka,
mahā-bhūta-viveka; mahā-bhūta means five elements, while viveka means analysis. By
way of analyzing the five elements Vidyāraṇya will reveal Brahman. It is a slightly bigger
chapter with 109 ślokas.

śloka 1
सदद्वैतं श्रुतं यत्तत्पञ्चभूतविवेकतः ।
बोद्धुं शक्यं ततो भूतपञ्चकं प्रविविच्यते ॥ २.१ ॥
sadadvaitaṃ śrutaṃ yattatpañcabhūtavivekataḥ.
boddhuṃ śakyaṃ tato bhūtapañcakaṃ pravivicyate (2.1).
The first verse is an introductory one where the subject matter is introduced. Advaita
means non-dual and therefore, it is infinite. This infinite Brahman can be known or
understood and be realized through pañca-bhūta-viveka. This includes elements and
elementals also. Since by analysis Brahman can be realized, we will do the analysis.
Vidyāraṇya does not give any philosophy of his own. He only extracts the teaching from
the original source which is Upaniṣad. Even Kṛṣṇa does not give any original teaching,
what to talk of Vidyāraṇya. Whatever he is going to say is based in the Upaniṣads. What is
the Upaniṣads that is in his mind is the question; he himself says the Advaita sat has been
mentioned in the Upaniṣad itself. Neither sat is my invention nor Advaita is my invention.
One is taken from Chāndogya Upaniṣad belonging to Sāmaveda, wherein the first five

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 98

chapter deals with upāsanas and last three chapters deal with Brahman. In the sixth
chapter Brahman is revealed as pure non-dual existence. There is a well-known mantra sat
eva somya idam agra āsīd ekam eva advitīyam. We will do it later. Keeping this in mind
Vidyāraṇya will do the analysis, since Brahman is revealed as sat, it is famously known as
sat vidyā or Brahman as pure existence. In 7th chapter Brahman is called bhūmā and it is
called bhūmā vidyā. Now the analysis is based on sat vidyā. Here alone the famous mahā-
vākya tat tvam asi occurs several times. Therefore, he says non-dual existence is revealed
in Chāndogya Upaniṣad and that non-dual existence Brahman can be known through
pañca-bhūta-viveka and therefore, we will do that analysis.

śloka 2
शब्दस्पर्शौ रूपरसौ गन्धो भूतगुणा इमे ।
एकद्वित्रिचतुः पञ्चगुणा व्योमादिषु क्रमात्॥ २.२ ॥
śabdasparśau rūparasau gandho bhūtaguṇā ime.
ekadvitricatuḥ pañcaguṇā vyomādiṣu kramāt (2.2).
Now Vidyāraṇya begins the analysis of the famous vākya sat eva idam agra āsīt. Idam
means this universe agre means before its origination āsīt means was in existence. It
existed not in this manner but in the form of pure existence and by the word pure we
mean it was without nāma-rūpa-based division. Now the existence is divided because
Rāma is, Lakṣmaṇa is, Śatrughna is. ’Is’ is common and it is one, but the names of various
individuals differ. If all of the names are dissolved, the dividing factor being absent, there
will be existence pure and simple.
So the Upaniṣad says this universe before creation was in the form of sat and it says
existence only or existence alone. Only means nothing else was there in existence. I got
water only means I could not get food. Only means negation of all other things. Upaniṣad
thus says Brahman alone was there and nothing else. The nature of Brahman is ekam eva
advitīyam. It was one only without a second. This sentence means before origination this
world was existence without a second. This sentence Vidyāraṇya will analyse from now
on. The 7th chapter has 298 verses and the first verse is a quotation if from Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad verse. In that sentence there is a word ‘idam’ which means ‘this universe’ which
is the object of our experience. Vidyāraṇya explains what is this universe.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 99

śloka 2 to 18 is the commentary of the word ‘idam’ occurring in 6.2.1 of Chāndogya

Upaniṣad. The idam consists of pañca-bhūtas the five elements. There is gradation in their
grossness. Earth is the grossest element and the space is the subtlest. If you travel from
earth to space you travel from subtler to subtler. If you travel from ākāśa to earth you
travel from subtler to the grosser; if an element has more properties it is grosser. Earth is
grossest as it has all the five elements śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa and gandha. Water has
four guṇas, agni has three guṇas, vāyu two guṇas and ākāśa one guṇa; pañca-indriya-
gocara bhūta is the grossest and eka-indriya-gocara bhūta is the subtlest.
There are five properties belonging to the five elements: sound, touch, form or colour,
taste and smell. All of them exist in a particular proportion. ākāśa has eka, vāyu two guṇas
agni three guṇas, jala four guṇas and pṛthvī has five guṇas. This we can see experientially.
Now he wants to give the pratyakṣa pramāṇa.

śloka 3
प्रतिध्वनिर्वियच्छब्दो वायौ वीसीति शब्दनम्।
अनुष्णाशीतसंस्पर्शो वह्नो भुगुभुगुध्वनिः ॥ २.३ ॥
pratidhvanirviyacchabdo vāyau vīsīti śabdanam.
anuṣṇāśītasaṃsparśo vahno bhugubhugudhvaniḥ (2.3).
Experiential support for the statement given in the previous śloka is given here; ākāśa has
only śabda guṇa. Sound obtaining in ākāśa is in subtle form and we are not able to
experience directly. We have to condition the ākāśa to hear the sound in the form of echo.
Suppose the subtle form of the fan we cannot normally hear and if you are very serious
you can hear the sūkṣma-ākāśa-śabda. Anāhata oṃkāra sound you can hear if you
carefully hear the sound.
The colours of the rainbow is there in light and you can see if you have prism. The
manifest sound the ordinary ears hear and the trained ears can hear the sūkṣma oṃkāra
śabda. Then he comes to vāyu which has two guṇas, śabda and it has touch. In ākāśa you
cannot feel the touch but in vāyu you can feel the touch. It is neither hot nor cool. With this
vāyu is over. Now we will see the fire, which has three properties. śabda, touch and the
heat. ākāśa you cannot feel the touch. vāyu has the touch of the normal temperature and it
is neither hot nor cool. It is the sparśa of the vāyu. Heat does not belong to vāyu and vāyu
by itself is neither hot not cold. In Kedarnath we have cool air but the coolness does not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 100

belong to air but it belongs to the ice. Now we will take up agni. When the fire is burning
you hear the sound. Bhugu bhugu is the sound we hear from agni besides sparśa and
rūpa.

śloka 4
उष्णः स्पर्शः प्रभा रूपं जले बुलु बुलु ध्वनिः ।
शीतास्पर्शः शुक्लरूपं रसो माधुर्यमीरितम्॥ २.४ ॥
uṣṇaḥ sparśaḥ prabhā rūpaṃ jale bulu bulu dhvaniḥ.
śītāsparśaḥ śuklarūpaṃ raso mādhuryamīritam (2.4).
We have seen the śabda guṇa of agni. The touch of agni gives the heat and vāyu is neither
hot nor cold. The colour of agni is brilliant colour, incandescent white is the colour of agni.
Now we will enter jala. The sound of jala is bulu bulu. The water by itself has cold touch.
The colour of water is dull white. Water has taste also. It is sweet, not sweet like sugar, but
ordinary natural sweet. Sweetness originally belonged to water. But the sweetness in the
water or the soundness of ākāśa is unmanifest and you need some material to manifest
and sugar manifests sweetness in water. This is the argument of tarka-śāstra.

śloka 5
भूमौ कडकडाशब्दः काठिन्यं स्पर्श इष्यते ।
नीलादिकं चित्ररूपं मधुराम्लादिको रसः ॥ २.६ ॥
bhūmau kaḍakaḍāśabdaḥ kāṭhinyaṃ sparśa iṣyate.
nīlādikaṃ citrarūpaṃ madhurāmlādiko rasaḥ.
The earth has five guṇas. It has śabda and sparśa the hardness to touch. Then it has
varieties of colours. Pṛthvī has different tastes also. Bitterness, saltish, pungent, astringent,
sweetness, sourness, etc., are some of the tastes that are seen in the pṛthvī.

śloka 6
सुरभीतरगन्धौ द्वौ गुणाः सम्यग्विवेचिताः ।
श्रोत्रं त्वक्चक्षुंषि जिह्वा घ्राणं चेन्द्रियपञ्चकम्॥ २.६ ॥
surabhītaragandhau dvau guṇāḥ samyagvivecitāḥ
śrotraṃ tvakcakṣuṃṣi jihvā ghrāṇaṃ cendriyapañcakam (2.6)

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 101

The intention of Vidyāraṇya is to comment the word idam in Chāndogya Upaniṣad

mantra. He says pṛthvī has the unique property of the smell of fragrance and its opposite.
It is the good and fowl smell. ākāśa has śabda guṇa; vāyu has śabda and sparśa; one
borrowed from ākāśa; agni has śabda, sparśa, rūpa; in jala three sāmānya guṇa and one
rasa guṇa; in pṛthvī, four are sāmānya guṇa and one viśeṣa guṇa. Every element has one
sāmānya guṇa and one or more viśeṣa guṇas. These five properties are sensed by the
sense-organs. The sensing instruments of five guṇas are also five in number. That is why
we say world is prapañca where everything is fivefold. Ear, skin, eyes, tongue and nose
are the five sense-organs. They are not the physical portions we talk about. The sense-
organs are also invisible and they are located in the body and the location that is visible is
called golaka. cakṣu indriya is invisible and cakṣu golaka is visible.
Five invisible sense-organs are golakastha or they are located in the visible physical parts
of the body. The ear is golaka and within that the indriya is there but it is not visible. Taste
indriya is in the tongue; eye is the indriya of rūpa; touch indriya is all over the body. They
grab sense guṇas or perceive five guṇas in their respective order. More in the next class.

śloka 7
कर्णादिगोलकस्थं तच्छब्दादिग्राहकं क्रमात्।
सौक्ष्म्यात्कार्यानुमेयं तत्प्रायो धावेद्बहिर्मुखम्॥ २.७ ॥
karṇādigolakasthaṃ tacchabdādigrāhakaṃ kramāt.
saukṣmyātkāryānumeyaṃ tatprāyo dhāvedbahirmukham (2.7).

Class 2
śloka 7 contd.
In this second chapter Vidyāraṇya reveals Brahman by the analysis of a pañca-bhūtas and
here Brahman is revealed as the very existence. In the first chapter we saw Brahman as the
consciousness-principle. Here we will appreciate Brahman as the existence. There is an
advantage in accepting Brahman as existence, for we experience Brahman as existence
whether it is a living being or non-living being. The experience of existence is all-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 102

pervading. It is easier to appreciate the all-pervasiveness of Brahman when Brahman is

seen as existence. When we focus on Brahman as the consciousness-principle there is a
disadvantage, as consciousness is manifest only in the living being and it is difficult for me
to see consciousness in the chair even though it is true that consciousness is there in the
chair also. If am to reveal consciousness in the chair I have to quietly shift from
consciousness to existence and I have to tell you that consciousness is equal to existence
and they are not two different things and consciousness is in the chair for the chair.
Existence is in the chair and existence is equal to consciousness and therefore,
consciousness is in the chair.
When I say Brahman is sat, it is very, very easy for me to reveal Brahman everywhere. The
method I adopt is that whatever the basic law I apply for consciousness, the same law I
apply to existence also. Existence is not a part, property, of the chair. It is an independent
principle which pervades and lends existence to the chair. Existence is not bound by the
boundary of the chair and the pure existence survives even after the chair is broken to
pieces because the pieces are now existing. Existence is pure and simple, not associated
with any name and form; the pure existence cannot be objectified. Thus applying the same
law to existence we will see Brahman is existence which is in ākāśa and therefore, you say
‘ākāśa is’ and Brahman is in vāyu and therefore, you say ‘vāyu is’. Thus Vidyāraṇya is
going to ask us to sharpen the buddhi to appreciate the part of ‘is-ness’ part alone. That is-
ness part alone in everything is nothing but Brahman.
The ākāśa-nāma-rūpa, vāyu-nāma-rūpa, agni-nāma-rūpa, etc, they are all Māyā. is-ness is
Brahman and nāma-rūpa is Māyā. This is going to be the subject matter of this second
chapter and Brahman as pure existence is discussed in the 6th chapter of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad and therefore, he starts with Chāndogya Upaniṣad vākya 6.2.1 sad eva somya
idam agra āsīt. Pure existence alone was without nāma-rūpa before the creation of the
world and the same pure existence is there now also, but with nāma-rūpa. Turn your
attention away from arriving-departing nāma-rūpa and then you will find pure existence
by focusing on the sat part. This is what he is going to say. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad
mantra there is a word idam; this universe which is nāma-rūpa-sahita sat now was
originally nāma-rūpa-rahita sat. Sahita means along with and rahita means without. And
then, what does the creation consists of? The creation consists of bhūta and bhautika
vastu; bhūta-bhautika-ātmakam idam jagat; bhūta means the five elements endowed with

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 103

five properties, śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha, while bhautika prapañca consists of the
sense-organs and the sense objects; indriya-viśaya-ātmakam bhautikam jagat. And how
many indriyas are there? Totally, we have eleven sense-organs including one mind called
antaḥkaraṇa and for each sense-organ there is corresponding field of functioning, gocara-
viśaya. For jnanendriya, śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha. Similarly, karmendriya and
mind. For each indriya requires a golaka also; the sense-organs being subtle they need a
concrete cabinet or enclosure in which the sense-organs can reside. So, indriyāṇi pañca,
golakaṇi pañca, viṣayāḥ pañca; this is pra-pañcaḥ. The world is made of five sense-organs,
five golakas and five elements and hence the universe itself is called prapañca.
Of this, Vidyāraṇya has talked about the fives sense-organs and five golakas upto verse 7
that we saw. The five sense-organs remain in five golakas and what do they do? śabdādi
grāhakam, each sense-organ grasps a particular sense object which means property. In the
scriptures, they take sense objects as śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha. Normally, we say
the eye is grasping or perceiving the clip; therefore, the clip is the object of the eye. The
śāstra says no; the clip is not the object of the eye. Only the colour of the clip is the object
of the eye. The rūpa of the clip is the object of the eye. Similarly, you never see the chair,
you only see the colour of the chair. From this, we get an interesting corollary— the sense-
organs perceive only the property and no sense-organ perceives a substance. That is why
Vedānta says that the human being can never know the substance. You may say I will
infer the substance, but it is not possible as inference is based on perception. If something
is not available for perception, it can never be inferred. And therefore, what is the
substance, we never know; the substance is apauruṣeya viṣaya. If you want to know the
substance behind the property only Vedānta can tell you. And you know what is the
substance: brahmārpaṇaṃ brahma havi; brahman is the only substance, which the sense-
organs cannot perceive. The sense-organs perceive only the property. The object of the
nose is not your coffee. Only we smell the smell of coffee. You don’t taste the coffee but
you only taste the taste of the coffee. You have to meditate on this topic; its a very
interesting topic.
Now, the next question is: how do we know that we have sense-organs? You cannot say I
see your eye because you see only the golaka and not the indriya. What is the proof for the
indriya behind the golaka? And the interesting truth is that the that the indriya is not
available for sensory perception. My indriya you cannot see, I also cannot see. Why? I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 104

cannot see my golaka itself, let alone indriya! Since sense-organs are pratyaksha pramāṇa-
agocara, not available for perception, sense-organs are known through inference, or to be
precise, arthāpatti, presumption. It is known only through inference or presumption, we
have to indirectly know that there are sense-organs. What is the method of inferring? The
reasoning is that we have five different types of sensory experiences like śabda-anubhava,
sparśa-anubhava, rūpa-anubhava, and if there are experiences there should be relevant
instrument to produce the experience. Without karaṇa, kārya cannot be produced. kārya is
sensory experience. There must be something that generates the experience and the
experience-generator is called karaṇa, the sense-organ. Eyes generate rūpa-anubhava, ear
generates hearing-anubhava, etc. It is like inferring the seed from the plant, and from my
seeing you, or like I infer your parents even though I don’t see them.
Why do you infer five sense-organs? Because I have five different sensory experiences, like
rasa, rūpa, gandha, etc. Why not one sense-organ produce all the five sensory experiences?
If eye experiences all the five senses, the blind person he will not have sparśa-, gandha-
anubhavas, etc. From that it is very clear that one sense-organ produces only one sense-
experience. There are five distinct experiences and therefore, five sense-organs.
Vidyāraṇya gives the pramāṇa for the existence of sense-organ is anumāna. Saukṣmyāt;
since sense-organs are subtle, meaning not perceptible, indriya-agocaratvāt pratyakṣa-
aviṣyatvāt, the world is perceptible to the sense-organ, but the sense-organs are not
perceptible to the world or to the sense-organs themselves. The sense-organs being
imperceptible, anumeya, it can be known only through inference. And for inference, you
require a clue. Any inference without a clue is not an inference at all; it is a speculation, a
fancy. When I see the smoke and infer the fire, it is based on a valid clue. It can’t be “there
is a cow grazing, therefore, there is fire”! It should be a relevant clue like smoke. From that
I infer fire. Similarly, for inferring the sense-organs, what is the valid clue? For inferring
sense-organ the valid clue is kārya-anumeya or sensory experience is the kārya, the
product . From the product of sensory experience we infer the sensory organ.
Tatprāyaḥ bahirmukham dhāvet, Vidyāraṇya makes an aside statement, even though not
very relevant for our study. What is that? The sense-organs are generally turned extrovert.
Prāyaḥ means generally, mostly. They function outside our body, they perceive the
external sound, touch, form, etc, generally. Dhāvet, they go out. Dhā means to travel or to
go, bahirmukham, externally. Since Vidyāraṇya says that generally they go outside, from

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 105

that we know that there are special occasions that the sense-organs perceive the properties
of the body within. Generally, outside the body, but at times, the sense-organs perceive the
śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha within the body. Now the question is what are those
occasions? When will I hear the inside sound? When you are hungry you will hear inside
sound. Although we ourselves can find out, Vidyāraṇya does not want to leave this to the
student.

śloka 8
कदाचित्पिहिते कर्णे श्रूयते शब्द आन्तरः ।
प्राणवायौ जाठराग्नौ जलपानेऽन्नभक्षणे ॥ २.८ ॥
kadācitpihite karṇe śrūyate śabda āntaraḥ.
prāṇavāyau jāṭharāgnau jalapāne:'nnabhakṣaṇe (2.8).
Kadācit, during rare occasions. In the previous verse, it was said that the sense-organs go
out generally, that is 95%, kadācit means 5%, rarely, occasionally, karṇe pihite sati, when
the earlobes are closes, when you don’t allow the external sounds to come inside, still you
hear the sound from within your own body. What are the different types of sounds?
Prāṇavāyau, the movement of the breath, or blood circulation, lub-dub, etc; āntaraḥ
śabdaḥ, the internal sound belonging to your own prāṇavāyu. And also jāṭharāgnau,
when you are hungry, a digestive fire, the samāna prāṇa requests you by producing noise
“please bring food”. And that sound is jāṭharāgni-āntaraḥ śabdaḥ; jāṭharāgnau āntaraḥ
śabdaḥ, the internal sound within the digestive fire in the stomach śrūyate is heard.

śloka 9
व्यज्यन्ते ह्यान्तराः स्पर्शा मीलने चान्तरं तमः ।
उद्गारे रसगन्धौ चेत्यक्षाणामान्तरग्रहः ॥ २.९ ॥
vyajyante hyāntarāḥ sparśā mīlane cāntaraṃ tamaḥ.
udgāre rasagandhau cetyakṣāṇāmāntaragrahaḥ (2.9).
Then what about sparśaḥ? jalapāne:'nnabhakṣaṇe āntaraḥ sparśāḥ vyajyante, while
drinking water and eating food, you feel the internal touch. You take the last two words
from the previous verse: the drinking of water, eating of the food. During those times the
internal touch, you feel the heat if its piping hot coffee, etc, or coolness of the drink if its
fridge water, etc. And annabhakṣaṇe, while eating food if the food is solid you get the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 106

hard touch and if you are eating cake, you feel the soft touch. All these four touches, you
can feel inside when you eat and drink. Vyajyante literally means are manifested, here it
means are experienced, known. The internal sound has been talked about, the internal
touch has been talked about. Now we have to go to the internal colour. What is the
internal colour? He says mīlane, when the eyelids are closed, what do you experience
within you? Total darkness. Is it internal or external? External darkness you cannot
experience because the eyelids are closed; so it has to be internal darkness. The darkness
comes under the rūpa. Internal darkness vyajyate, you have to supply the verb in singular,
is experienced. Then what about taste and smell? He says udgāre; when after eating,
especially over-eating, when there is belching from within, rasagandhau ca the taste and
smell iti in this manner āntaragrahaḥ the internal perception of the internal properties
akṣāṇām of all the five sense-organs. Thus, the senses function in the inner objects of
sounds, etc. So we experience śabda, rūpa, gandha from within. Continuing,

śloka 10
पञ्चोक्त्यादानगमनविसर्गानन्दकाः क्रियाः ।
कृ षिवाणिज्यसेवाद्याः पञ्चस्वन्तर्भवन्ति हि ॥ २.१० ॥
pañcoktyādānagamanavisargānandakāḥ kriyāḥ.
kṛṣivāṇijyasevādyāḥ pañcasvantarbhavanti hi (2.10).
He has talked about jñāna-indriya-pañcaka, jñāna-indriya-golaka-pañcaka, jñāna-indriya-
viṣaya-pañcaka, sets of five in the field of jñāna. Hereafter, he will talk about about them
in the field of karma: karmendriya-pañcaka, karmendriya-golaka-pañcaka, karmendriya-
viṣaya-pañcaka. First he takes up karmendriya-viṣaya, the five fields of activity: ukti,
ādāna, gamana, visarga, ānanda, meaning speech, grasping, movement, evacuation and
pleasure born out of procreation respectively. Vedānta assumes putra is equal to ānanda;
manasā vai samrāṭstriyamabhihāryate tasyāṃ pratirūpaḥ putro jāyate sa ānandaḥ says
Bṛhadāraṇyaka; already population explosion is there, then why am I particularly
interested in my children? pratirūpaḥ putro jāyate, because they resemble me in all
aspects, not only physically. I feel God created man in his image and we want our children
in our image and we get a sense of immortality. prajātiramṛtamānanda ityupasthe,
sarvamityākāśe, says Taittirīya, so upasthendriya represents putra-ānanda and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 107

immortality of our life. Then the question is whether only these five karmas are there?
There are so many other karmas. Why are you saying only five fields of karma? For that
Vidyāraṇya says kṛṣivāṇijyasevādyāḥ, any other action will come under agriculture,
commerce, service, etc., are included in these five types; any activity will come under the
ukti, ādāna, gamana. Pañcasu antarbhavanti, they fall within these five. The first word
pañca of the verse should be read along with kriyāḥ. There are these five main activities
and all others are sub-divisions of these five only.

śloka 11
वाक्पाणिपादपायूपस्थैरक्षैस्तत्क्रियाजनिः ।
मुखादिगोलके ष्वास्ते तत्कर्मेन्द्रियपञ्चकम्॥ २.११ ॥
vākpāṇipādapāyūpasthairakṣaistatkriyājaniḥ.
mukhādigolakeṣvāste tatkarmendriyapañcakam (2.11).
You have to extend the logic of jnanedriya to karmendriya also. karmendriya are not
physically visible, what is visible is only golaka. The indriya, you don’t see and so, it has to
be inferred. To infer, you require a clue; what is the clue? The five fold activity is the clue;
from the activity we infer the producer of the activity and that producer is the invisible
sense-organ karmendriya. Therefore he says tatkriyājaniḥ the production of five fold
kriyās is from an indivisible source: vāk, pāṇi, pāda, pāyu, upastha, meaning organ of
speech, the hand, the leg, the organ of excretion and organ of reproduction or generation.
The fivefold activity is generated by the karmendriya. The remaining verse is about
golakas: mukhādi golakeṣu āste, the five karmendriyas are located in the five golakas
beginning with the mouth; the physical mouth is the golaka for organ of speech; it is also
the golaka for taste organ; Therefore, the mouth is very important, especially in humans;
in animals, taste alone is dominant, while in human beings, speech as well; so many
problems are caused by speech. With the word ādi, other organs can be taken as the
hastendriya in hasta-golaka, padendriya in pada-golaka, etc. karmendriya-pañcaka āste, is
residing. Even though five sense-organs are there, Vidyāraṇya takes it as one single group
and uses singular.

śloka 12
मनो दशेन्द्रियाध्यक्षं हृत्पद्मगोलके स्थितम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 108

तच्चान्तःकरणं बाह्येष्वस्वातन्त्र्याद्विनेन्द्रियैः ॥ २.१२ ॥

mano daśendriyādhyakṣaṃ hṛtpadmagolake sthitam.
taccāntaḥkaraṇaṃ bāhyeṣvasvātantryādvinendriyaiḥ (2.12).
The jñānendriya and karmendriya indriya-, golaka-, viṣaya-pañcaka have been discussed
systematically, now what is left is the antaḥkaraṇa, the mind. Even though we count
manas, buddhi, citta and ahaṃkāra as four, we should remember that they are not four
organs but four functional names of one and the same organ. Antaḥkaraṇam is the
common name for them, which can be translated as internal organ. If I say mind, you will
take only the mind-part, leaving out the intellect, whereas if I say intellect, you will leave
out the mind, but if I say internal organ, it means a common name for the four-fold
functions. What is the proof for the mind? The proof for the mind is the product of the
mind as clue. The product of the mind is emotions. If emotions are generated there should
be one emotion-generator. Whether there are other emotions are not, there are worries that
prove the existence of the mind. That is one reason; there is another argument also.
We have got five sense-organs. Imagine you sit in the middle of the hall. All the five
jñānendriyas are open, but deliberately only one perception takes place at a time. When
we focus on one perception, the others seem to be closed. They are technically open but I
am not registering. There seems to be a lever which is opening one sense-organ at a time
while closing the other sense-organs. There is sometimes a blank look. What is that shuts
the eyes and open the ears without using hands and that is done by the mind. Else there
will be a traffic jam in the mind as all the śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha will gatecrash
into the mind, if not for the traffic-constable’s role being played by the mind.

Class 3
śloka 12 contd.
The indriyas belong to sūkṣma-śarīra and golakas belong to sthūla-śarīra. He talked of the
five sense-organs of action which grasp the universe for transaction. Five are for jñāna-
vyavahāra and five are for karma-vyavahāra. When you see the clip, it is jñāna-vyavahāra
but if you lift it, it is karma-vyavahāra. All transactions come under karmendriya- or
jñānendriya-vyavahāras. After enumerating the pañca karmendriyas he talks of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 109

golakas. Vidyāraṇya enumerates all of them because they include the word ‘idam’ in the
mantra of Chāndogya Upaniṣad.
Here, Vidyāraṇya introduces the mind which is like the traffic constable. There are five
paths indicated by pañca jñānendriyas, as the flow of sounds, forms, smells, colours and
touches and all of them flow through sense-organs. Wherever there is a congestion, a
police man is needed. Here the mind is the police man within who controls the traffic-flow
through five sense-organs. When you eat as you see the TV program the eating function is
done mechanically and you don’t smell or taste the food. It is the mind that decides the
main function of the sense-organ. Two things you cannot concentrate upon
simultaneously. The presiding principle, operating principle or governing principle within
is the mind and not only it controls the jñānendriya but also karmendriyas also. If mind is
an indriya, mind needs a golaka. The mind is not visible. Scientists are not able to study
the mind. The invisible mind needs a visible golaka and the golaka of the mind is hṛdaya.
Even though medical people think that the mind is there in the brain, there are some
scientists who question that particular conclusion. The śāstra does not see the brain as seat
of the mind. The śāstra takes hṛdaya as the golaka. Heart shape is like a lotus-bud turned
upside down. Therefore, hrit-padma is hṛdaya;
The word hṛdaya in śāstra has two meanings. One is vācyārtha the direct meaning is the
physical heart which is the golaka and lakṣyārtha is golahastha invisible mind is called
hṛdaya. Visible heart and invisible mind both are called hṛdaya. One is vācyārtha and
another is lakṣyārtha. There is one physical heart as vācyārtha and invisible mind as
lakṣyārtha. This mind is called the internal organ or antaḥkaraṇa. Ten sense-organs are
called outer organs and mind is called antar-indriya or antaḥkaraṇa. The mind is internal
and sense-organs are external. The word internal has nothing to do with spatial internal
things. The mind pervades all over the body even though mind has sthāna in hṛdaya and
during transaction the mental function pervades the entire body. If the mind is pervaded
only in the heart, you will not feel the mind in the hand. That is why it is said mind
pervades the entire body. If the mind is not there in the hand you will not feel anything
through the hand. During jāgṛt mind pervades the body although mind takes rest in
suṣupti. Since the mind pervades the body how do you say it is inner organ? For that
Vidyāraṇya says that the sense-organs can contact the world directly. But the mind can
contact the world only through the sense-organs. Therefore, the mediation of sense-organs

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 110

is required and the mind is said to be internal and sense-organ the external organ. The
mind does not have independent access to the world without the intervention of the sense-
organs. That is why you close the eyes and mind cannot see the forms and colours. Forms
and colours may enter through eyes but mind may not register the forms.

śloka 13
अक्षेष्वर्थार्पितेष्वेतद्गुणदोषविचारकम्।
सत्त्वं रजस्तमश्चास्य गुणा विक्रियते हि तैः ॥ २.१३ ॥
akṣeṣvarthārpiteṣvetadguṇadoṣavicārakam.
sattvaṃ rajastamaścāsya guṇā vikriyate hi taiḥ (2.13).
The first function of the mind is the traffic-regulation at the sensory level. Which sense
should enter the mind is taken care of by the mind. The second function is judging or
evaluating the things that enter the mind. The sense-organ can bring the senses but it
cannot make value-judgment. The mind alone decides what you should take. The mind
alone judges the guṇa and doṣa. The mind can do it only when the sense-organs present
the object in the presence of the mind. The job of sense-organ is presentation of the object
and the job of mind is evaluation. Without mind evaluation is not possible and without
sense-organ objects are not there for evaluation. When sense-organs are placed on the
objects, the mind immediately judges the object. This mind has three guṇas sattva, rajas
and tamas. The mind is created out of pañca-bhūtas and all pañca-bhūtas have got three
guṇas. Five elements have three guṇas and they have because their cause Māyā has three
guṇas. The mind is the product of five elements and therefore, mind has three guṇas. The
job of the guṇas is to keep the mind fully engaged in thoughts. It makes the mind savikāra.
So the mind entertains thoughts.

śloka 14
वैराग्यं क्षान्तिरौदार्यमित्याद्याः सत्त्वसम्भवाः ।
कामक्रोधौ लोभयत्नावित्याद्या रजसोत्थिताः ॥ २.१४ ॥
vairāgyaṃ kṣāntiraudāryamityādyāḥ sattvasambhavāḥ.
kāmakrodhau lobhayatnāvityādyā rajasotthitāḥ (2.14).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 111

Vidyāraṇya summarises the fourteenth chapter of Gītā. Some people have sattva-
predominance, some rajas-predominance and some tamas-predominance. So their
thoughts have distinct characteristics. From thoughts we can infer the predominance of
the person. Thought of a person will influence words and action. Brāhmaṇa is sattva-
predominant, kṣatriya is rajas-predominant and tamas-predominant. vairāgyam the
detachment is a thought pattern. śānti is tolerance. Generosity and these are the products
of sattva-guṇa. When rajo-guṇa is predominant, kāma, desire, etc., will dominate that
person. Constant inner pressure is there to perform in persons with rajas-dominance. He
wants anything the moment he wants to have it. He is a live volcano. He is short-
tempered. This is another indication of rajo-guṇa. He has greed to accomplish more and
more. He strives constantly. He is workaholic person.
Vidyāraṇya does not make value-judgment of the sattva-, rajo- and tamo-guṇa people.
rajo-guṇa is needed for citta-śuddhi and to do karmas. tamo-guṇa is also needed as one
cannot sleep without tamo-guṇa. Vidyāraṇya objectively enumerates the quality of the
people with either of the three guṇas dominating them.

śloka 15
आलस्यभ्रान्तितन्द्राद्या विकारास्तमसोत्थिताः ।
सात्त्विकैः पुण्यनिष्पत्तिः पापौत्पत्तिश्च राजसैः ॥२.१५॥
ālasyabhrāntitandrādyā vikārāstamasotthitāḥ.
sāttvikaiḥ puṇyaniṣpattiḥ pāpautpattiśca rājasaiḥ (2.15).
Tamo-guṇa produces laziness. It also produces delusion. It produces sleepy condition.
Also take the tāmasa guṇas enumerated in the 14th chapter of Gītā. All of them have
positive aspects. Sleep is a blessing and it is from sleep we refresh mentally and physically.
Rajo-guṇa is important for karma-yoga needs karma and karma needs rajo-guṇa. Jñāna
needs sattva-guṇa. If it is not handled properly all the three will bind a person. Now
Vidyāraṇya talks about how the three guṇas bind a person. He talks of the unfavourable
aspects. Sattva-guṇa will produce lot of puṇya. For Vedāntic student, puṇya is like golden
bondage and it is gold chain for it produces punarjanma.
Through rājasika thought and actions you generate pāpa. Kāma leads to krodha and anger
leads to violence and kāma to krodha and krodha to himsā and himsā leads to pāpas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 112

Kāma leads to greed and greed leads to value-compromise. Greed cannot be satisfied
through normal earnings and it leads to adharma.

śloka 16
तामसैर्नोभयं किन्तु वृथायुःक्षपणं भवेत्।
अत्राहम्प्रत्ययी कर्तेत्येवं लोकव्यवस्थितिः ॥ २.१६ ॥
tāmasairnobhayaṃ kintu vṛthāyuḥkṣapaṇaṃ bhavet.
atrāhampratyayī kartetyevaṃ lokavyavasthitiḥ (2.16)
In the previous verse it was said sattva-guṇa causes golden bondage and rājasika guṇa
causes silver bondage and tāmāsika person is happy and that is why I am tāmāsika. He
says all of you join me and don’t do either puṇya or pāpam. Through tāmasa vikāras, I
don’t do any puṇya-pāpa. I have neither puṇya shackle nor pāpa shackle. It is successful
but a tāmāsika person will waste wonderful human life. It will be a wastage of precious
human life. Why it is waste? For this Vidyāraṇya says tāmāsika person exhausts
prārabdha and he does not get any āgāmi and he should get liberation after death. Then
how is it he wastes his life. For that we ask do you remember Tattvabodha. This tāmāsika
person will exhaust prārabdha, will avoid puṇya-pāpa but the bad news is that he has old
sañcita karma and that will give next janma. He may say in the next janma I will come to
spiritual sādhana. For that our answer is who knows what will the life in the next janma.
So better live your life properly in this life and try to get Ātma-jñāna and get liberation. No
animals acquire puṇya-pāpa and exhausts prārabdha and with sañcita karma it gets
rebirth. So the topic of mind is over. The one who identifies with mind, sense-organ is
called kartā-ahaṅkāra. You can take it as cidābhāsa also. Wherever identifies with body-
mind-complex is called individual jīvātmā or kartā, more in the next class.

Class 4
śloka 16 contd.
As a part of creation Vidyāraṇya deals with pañca-bhūta-viveka. Pañca-bhūta-sṛṣṭi is
talked about in several Upaniṣads but Vidyāraṇya takes up the sṛṣṭi discussed in
Chāndogya Upaniṣad where Brahman is revealed as existence. Generally Brahman is
revealed as consciousness but here Brahman is revealed as existence. There the creation

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 113

begins in 6.2.1 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and the mantra is sad eva saumya idam agra
āsīt. Before creation the entire universe was in the form of non-dual Brahman. This is the
running meaning. Vidyāraṇya elaborately analyses each word in the mantra. The word
idam is being discussed here.
Vidyāraṇya says word idam means this. This is used for anything which is available for
objectification for our pramāṇa. pramāṇa means any instrument of knowledge pratyakṣa
or anumāna. Pañca-bhūtas are available for pramāṇa; he described pañca karmendriyas,
pañca jñānendriyas; pañca-karmendriya-golakas pañca-jñānendriya-golakas and then he
came to internal organs which is very important as coordinator of all ten sense-organs and
he introduced the mind which functions as the policeman.
The sense-organ will only present the objects and they will not make the value-judgment.
If the food is spoiled the nose will detect smell and the naming the smell as fowl and
therefore, food is spoiled and food should not be eaten is decided by the mind and it is not
a role of the nose. When Vidyāraṇya talks about antarindriya it is the common name for
ahaṅkāra, manas, buddhi and citta.
After talking about antaḥkaraṇa he talks about three guṇas which influence the thoughts
in the form of sāttvika-, rājasa- and tāmasa-vṛttis etc. Then he concluded the discussion in
the 16th verse that I, the consciousness-principle, cidābhāsa principle to be precise,
identifies with all of them and claims that I am the individual identified with body, sense-
organ and mind, etc. There is also an ahaṅkāra which claims their functions as his own.
Ears listen but ears do not say I listen. I the ahaṅkāra principle who identify with ears that
says I listen. When the legs walk the legs do not say I walk but there is an I which
identifies with the whole thing and that ahaṅkāra says: I walk. All these are already
known in the world. His job is to enumerate and classify them. Up to this we saw in the
last class.

śloka 17
स्पष्टशब्दादियुक्ते षु भौतिकत्वमतिस्फु टम्।
अक्षादावपि तच्छास्त्रयुक्तिभ्यामवधार्यताम्॥ २.१७ ॥
spaṣṭaśabdādiyukteṣu bhautikatvamatisphuṭam.
akṣādāvapi tacchāstrayuktibhyāmavadhāryatām (2.17).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 114

Here he says the physical body is made out of five elements is a very well-known fact. In
the body ākāśa, air, fire, water and gross earth is there; the very shape of the body is
determined by the water and the solid body is because of pṛthvī-tattva. Other than that the
subtle body with sense-organs and mind is also there within the body. When I touch I
don’t touch the indriya but the golaka. The mind and sense-organs are also matter alone.
Many people claim mind as consciousness particularly in the western systems and that is
why they use the expression mind and matter; we use the word mind is different from the
matter. With regard to mind there is confusion. One should know that the mind and
sense-organs are matter alone. The sūkṣma-śarīra is matter alone. The śāstra use the word
bhautika or in English we say material. Matter is called bhūta and the product out of
bhūta is called bhautika. Therefore, it does not consciousness of its own. The mind is inert
by itself. If at all the mind appears as sentient it is because of the borrowed consciousness.
What is the proof to show that mind is matter? For modern science it is very easy and for
them mind is brain the sthūla-śarīra. In Vedānta mind is sūkṣma-śarīra and not the brain.
We talk of the mind which belongs to sūkṣma-śarīra and the brain which is part of sthūla-
śarīra. This mind is bhautika. The pratyakṣa pramāṇa cannot prove this for mind is not
available for pratyakṣa as I cannot see your mind. Therefore, you need śāstra and
anumāna-pramāṇa to prove that the mind is matter.
With regard to tangible object which has clear śabda, sparśa, rūpa and gandha,
bhautikatva, their material nature, is very clear. The desk is a material and it is inert and
made of wood, etc. With regard to body there may be some difficulty but it is made of
chemical and that is why we have got a branch of science known as bio-chemistry. Body is
made up of matter. Body is inert and not sentient. If body has intrinsic consciousness, the
dead man will come back to life; why, it will not die and the universe will be
overpopulated with all the oldies. The very fact of the dead body proves that the body is
inert and before death that body was blessed by some invisible soul.
When it comes to sūkṣma-śarīra like sense-organs, pañca jñānendriya, pañca karmendriya
and the mind, prāṇa etc., it is also bhautika and its material nature is explained. We know
mind is matter from the śāstra pramāṇa alone. It is śāstra-based yukti or logic. In
Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.5.4 and 6.7.1 a statement is made that mind is a product of the
pṛthvī-tattva āpomayaḥ prāṇaḥ, the prāṇa-tattva is made of water. Without food we can

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 115

survive but without water we cannot survive. The agni-tattva is seen in vāk. Therefore,
they are all bhautika. They are product of inert elements.
Then Chāndogya Upaniṣad gives logic also for that. By way of giving the logic the
Chāndogya Upaniṣad tells a story in 6.7.1. Here Guru calls the disciple and shows that
mind functions because of the power of food that is the matter. He says for 15 days you
should not eat. You can drink water. The mind starts deteriorating. His son obeys and he
says I have done what you wanted me to do. Then father Guru chants the Ṛg, Sāma Vedas.
The son is not able to remember anything. He is not able to recollect anything. When you
eat food the mind functions and when you don’t eat anything the mind does not function.
Your emotions are also controlled by the food alone. Food influences the mind and the
chemical influences the mind, means both the food and mind belong to the same category.
A cow will be attracted by another cow and similar material mind and material objects
influence one another. Father tells the son to eat well to have the memory back. From this
Chāndogya Upaniṣad proves the influence of food on the mind.

śloka 18
एकादशेन्द्रियैर्युक्त्या शास्त्रेणाप्यवगम्यते ।
यावत्किंचिद्भवेदेतदिदं शब्दोदितं जगत्॥ २.१८ ॥
ekādaśendriyairyuktyā śāstreṇāpyavagamyate.
yāvatkiṃcidbhavedetadidaṃ śabdoditaṃ jagat (2.18)
Now he comes to the purpose of this discussion. The whole world is known through the
ten indriyas and the mind. Karmendriyas do not play much to gain knowledge but it helps
indirectly. With the help of eleven sense-organs, with the help of śabda pramāṇa,
whatever is objectified in fact the entire anātmā prapañca and the entire objectifiable
universe including the heaven on the basis of śāstra pramāṇa; is referred to by the word
idam. pratyakṣa-, anumāna-viṣaya-bhūta samasta are referred to by the word idam as per
the Chāndogya Upaniṣad sad eva idam agre āsīt ekam eva advitīyam. Now he
consolidates the meaning in the next śloka.

śloka 19
इदं सर्वं पुरा सृष्टेरेकमेवद्वितीयकम्।
सदेवासीन्नामरूपे नास्तामित्यारुणेर्वचः ॥ २.१९ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 116

idaṃ sarvaṃ purā sṛṣṭerekamevadvitīyakam.

sadevāsīnnāmarūpe nāstāmityāruṇervacaḥ (2.19)
This idam gives the meaning of idam in Chāndogya Upaniṣad mantra. Agre means in the
beginning which means at the time of creation. The whole universe before creation was
existent. Because there is no food, you cook; because of non-existence of food. The general
thinking is that only non-existent thing alone is to be created. Upaniṣad says non-existent
world is not created but it was existing before the creation. Therefore, it is said idam
sarvam sṛṣṭe purā āsīt. It means the world was present before creation. It was there but not
in this form. World was in potential form or it was in the unmanifest form. The ornament
was there but it was there in pure gold form; the furniture was there in wood form; the
world was there in the form of sat Brahman in pure existence form and that Brahman was
in non-dual form or undifferentiated form. Then there is another significant word in the
phrase sat eva. Eva means only. That is Brahman alone was present before creation. Why
Upaniṣad uses the word only. Vidyāraṇya says only means nothing else was there before
creation. There was no names and forms as obtaining now and after sṛṣṭi there are
innumerable names and forms which represents the attributes. Before creation these
attributes were also not there and names were not there. First wood is there and once you
make furniture several names come out of it like chair, table, etc. In English we call it pure
existence unadulterated by name and form. Now we have existence mixed with several
nāma-rūpas. This, our language shows. The word ‘is’ indicates the existence and the
words chair, table etc., shows the nāma-rūpa. These are the words of Guru Āruni the
author of Chāndogya Upaniṣad sixth chapter.

śloka 20
वृक्षस्य स्वगतो भेदः पत्रपुष्पफलादिभिः ।
वृक्षान्तरात्सजातीयो विजातीयः शिलादितः ॥ २.२० ॥
vṛkṣasya svagato bhedaḥ patrapuṣpaphalādibhiḥ.
vṛkṣāntarātsajātīyo vijātīyaḥ śilāditaḥ (2.20).
With the previous verse the commentary on the word idam is over. Now from the verse 20
to 25 Vidyāraṇya comments upon ekam eva advitīyam. Literally it means non-dual one
only. Why it is said one and non-dual? Further alone is also used. Why the same word is
repeated here. There is a technical reason. In Brahman three types of differences are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 117

possible and Upaniṣad wants to negate all the three types of differences so that we
understand the undifferentiated Brahman which is free from them. Ekam eva advitīyam is
used to negate the differences. They are svagata-bheda, sajātīya-bheda, vijātīya-bheda.
This we will see in the next class.

Class 5
śloka 20 contd.
Vidyāraṇya explains the Chāndogya Upaniṣad Upaniṣad vākya 6.2.1 sad eva idam agre
āsīt ekam eva advitīyam. The word idam has been already explained as the whole
universe. Sad eva āsīt means it was in existence in the form of sat. Thereafter there is a
group of three words which go together ekam eva advitīyam. Ekam means one, eva means
only and advitīyam means without a second. It means only one without second.
Now Vidyāraṇya has taken the significance of the phrase ekam eva advitīyam. The
significance he gives is these three words negate three forms of differentiation with which
every object is associated. They call svagata-bheda, sajātīya-bheda and vijātīya-bheda; the
internal difference, member-wise difference within a species and species-wise difference
respectively.
Vidyāraṇya explains the three fold differences with an example of a tree. Within the tree
there are several internal differences there are fruits, leaves, branches, trunk, etc. Each one
is different from the other. But they all belong to one tree. They are internal differences
within the tree. This is svagata-bheda. In the case of human being, head, hand, leg, etc.
Each one is different from the other but belong to one human being. The sajātīya-bheda is
that one tree is different from another tree. We talk of external differences. A mango tree is
different from a coconut tree. The specialty is other one is also tree and both trees are
members of the same species. Between a man and man the difference is sajātīya-bheda, a
star and star is sajātīya-bheda. vijātīya-bheda is this: When you talk about difference
between two members belonging to different species it is vijātīya-bheda. A tree and man is
an example, tree and a stone, etc. generally every object in the creation has bheda-traya.
Since we are used to the threefold differences, when sat is introduced we may think in the
same way that sat has three bhedas. If sat is replaced by Brahman, whether Brahman has
the three bhedas is the question. Sat is free from all the three bhedas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 118

śloka 21
तथा सद्वस्तुनो भेदत्रयं प्राप्तं निवार्यते ।
ऐक्यावधारणद्वैतप्रतिषेधैस्त्रिभिः क्रमात्॥ २.२१ ॥
tathā sadvastuno bhedatrayaṃ prāptaṃ nivāryate.
aikyāvadhāraṇadvaitapratiṣedhaistribhiḥ kramāt (2.21).
Tathā means extending in the same way, as we are used to three bhedas in dealing with
the objects; the human mind visualizes the three bhedas in the case of sat vastu also. vastu
means reality. Since the student will have this idea, the Upaniṣad wants to knock of this
assumption. The Upaniṣad negates it by using three different words ekam, eva, and
advitīyam. Ekam negates svagata-bheda; evam negates sajātīya-bheda and advitīyam
negates vijātīya-bheda. Before creation, only pure existence was there. What do you mean
by existence without svagata-bheda; without sajātīya-bheda and without vijātīya-bheda?
The explanation is given to manda-adhikārīs.

śloka 22
सतो नावयवाः शंक्यास्तदंशस्यानिरूपणात्।
नामरूपे न तस्य अंशौ तयोरद्याप्यनुद्भवात्॥ २.२२ ॥
sato nāvayavāḥ śaṃkyāstadaṃśasyānirūpaṇāt.
nāmarūpe na tasya aṃśau tayoradyāpyanudbhavāt (2.22).
What is existence without internal difference is explained here. You cannot assume
different bodies, etc, in the case of pure existence. There is no evidence to prove internal
differences in pure existence; there is no pramāṇa to show that pure existence has got top
part, middle part, etc. All nāma-rūpas are not the part of existence or sat. He says nāma-
rūpas are not part of satya-aṃśa or pure existence that is Brahman. We talk of existence
that existed before creation but the whole nāma-rūpa came only after creation. nāma-rūpa
is not part of sat and sat is svagata-bheda-rahita. Niravayava means svagata-bheda-rahita
which means the partless. Before creation there was no nāma-rūpa; this is stated in the
next śloka.

śloka 23
नामरूपोद्भवस्यैव सृष्टित्वात्सृष्टितः पुरा ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 119

न तयोरुद्भवस्तस्मात्सन्निरंशं यथा वियत्॥ २.२३ ॥

nāmarūpodbhavasyaiva sṛṣṭitvātsṛṣṭitaḥ purā.
na tayorudbhavastasmātsanniraṃśaṃ yathā viyat (2.23).
Vidyāraṇya says that you will understand what the definition of creation is. We use the
word creation without understanding what creation is. If you analyse the sṛṣṭi is nothing
but nāma-rūpa-utpatti. A carpenter does not produce any material at all as the material is
available in the form of wood and he only adds a shape to the wood. He gives shape alone
but he does not add to the content of the wood. Once the rūpa is given we decide that the
wood in this particular shape be called as a table. When another shape is given we give the
name of chair, cot, etc. The creation is nāma-rūpa-utpatti. Since this being so before
creation, nāma-rūpa cannot be there as by definition sṛṣṭi is nothing but nāma-rūpa-
utpatti. It is emergence of nāma-rūpa. Therefore, nāma-rūpa would not have been there
before creation. Therefore, existence does not have nāma-rūpa as its part. Here by
existence we mean Brahman.
The nāma-rūpa-sahita sat is available now and before creation it is nāma-rūpa-rahita sat.
Therefore, it is svagata-bheda-rahita. Some may ask how can I conceive a thing which is
partless and formless before creation? Here Brahman is compared to ākāśa. The very
introduction of the word ākāśa itself shows that there is ākāśa! Ākāśa is a padārtha; it is is
not nothingness or emptiness. It is the first and foremost creation of Brahman. It is
svagata-bheda-rahita and it does not have internal difference and it is partless. In Vedānta,
ākāśa-upāsana is prescribed as a preparation for brahma-jñāna. If my mind is able to
understand ākāśa, the subtlest one, I can realise Brahman subtler than the subtlest.

śloka 24
सदन्तरं सजातीयं न वैलक्षण्यवर्जनात्।
नामरूपोपाधिभेदं विना नैव सतो भिदा ॥ २.२४ ॥
sadantaraṃ sajātīyaṃ na vailakṣaṇyavarjanāt.
nāmarūpopādhibhedaṃ vinā naiva sato bhidā (2.24).
Here the question is the existence has sajātīya-bheda. Tree has sajātīya-bheda because a
tree has another tree. A man has sajātīya-bheda because there is another man. You can
prove it if there is another existence and then, between existence one and another existence

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 120

two, you can talk of sajātīya-bheda. There is no second existence belonging to the category
of the first existence. A second existence which belong to the same species as the first
existence is not there. To count two ‘existences’ you will have to show the difference
between one existence and the other existence. There should be attribute-wise difference;
or there should be difference to count to. Since there is no difference in existence, there is
no sajātīya-bheda. Suppose someone argues that there are two existences and two
existences are different, imagine a Pūrvapakṣa; he says there is a clip and you will say
there is a clip, or a clip is or a clip exists. Here existence is associated with a clip and we
may call it clip-existence. Here is a watch. I say watch is or there is a watch or watch exists.
Existence is associated with the watch called watch-existence. Clip-existence and watch-
existence both are different. Therefore, there is sajātīya-bheda the difference between two
existences belonging to the same species.
Vidyāraṇya says no, as the difference that you talk about belongs to only the clip and
watch, but not to the existence or the is-ness of the watch. All the differences you talk
about belong to the clip and watch and it does not belong to the existence which is only
one. Existence is not a part, property or product, but existence is an independent thing and
it continues to survive even after the object is destroyed. We cannot count the existence.
ekam sat. Therefore, there is no sajātīya-bheda. There is no difference in the existence other
than the differences in the nāma-rūpa. We have to count the nāma-rūpa and not count the
existence; nāma-rūpa and function differ from container to container, while the space does
not have plurality is elaborated in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Other than the differences in
nāma-rūpa, there is no difference in the existence.

śloka 25
विजातीयमसत्तत्तु न खल्वस्तीति गम्यते ।
नास्यातः प्रतियोगित्वं विजातीयाद्भिदा कुतः ॥ २.२५ ॥
vijātīyamasattāttu na khalvastīti gamyate.
nāsyātaḥ pratiyogitvaṃ vijātīyādbhidā kutaḥ (2.25).
Vijātīya-bheda is also not possible in the case of sat. Between tree and stone, or man or
anything other than tree, there is vijātīya-bheda. Anything other than tree is non-tree. The
difference between tree and non tree is vijātīya-bheda. Now we will take sat. There should
be difference between sat and non-sat. Vijātīya-bheda must be between sat and asat. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 121

problem is asat is that which is non-existent. Since asat is non-existence there cannot be
asat vastu. You cannot say there is non-existence. Asat cannot exist and therefore, vijātīya-
bheda cannot be there in the case of sat. Since asat is non-existence, there can be no
vijātīya-bheda between sat and asat.

Class 6
śloka 25 contd.
Vidyāraṇya gives an elaborate commentary on sad eva idam agra āsīt ekam eva
advitīyam. Having given the commentary on idam now he explains ekam eva advitīyam.
Ekam negates svagata-bheda; evam negates sajātīya-bheda and now advitīyam negating
vijātīya-bheda is being explained. Sat cannot have vijātīya-bheda. To talk about vijātīya-
bheda you should have two things of different species. A tree and another tree will have
sajātīya-bheda. A tree and non-tree will have vijātīya-bheda. A man and a non-man will
have vijātīya-bheda. Whether sat can have vijātīya-bheda is our discussion. If sat is to have
vijātīya-bheda there should be asat or non-sat, but asat means non-existence. If vijātīya-
bheda is to be established, there should be asat vastu but there cannot be such as it is non-
existence. Since asat vastu does not exist sat cannot have vijātīya-bheda. If one can prove
the existence of asat, one can prove vijātīya-bheda. Asat vastu is indeed experienced or
known by us and it is known as non-existent; and since asat vastu is not there, vijātīya-
bheda is not there. The very same idea is presented also in tarka-śāstra language.
In tarka-śāstra they say to talk about bheda you need two things. It is a property which
commonly exists between two things. A cow is different from a horse. If I say cow is
different, you will wait for the completion of the sentence. You will ask different from
what? Difference can be talked about only when there are two things. The horse that
comes after the word from is called bheda-pratiyogi that reference point from whose
standpoint the cow is different. If you say cow is different from man the man is called
bheda-pratiyogi.
Suppose you say man is different from cow, the cow is bheda-pratiyogi. This means
whenever you talk of bheda someone has to play the role of bheda-pratiyogi. Something
or the other must function as bheda-pratiyogi. Now Vidyāraṇya’s argument is if sat is to
have vijātīya-bheda, you need a bheda-pratiyogi and that must be asat. Sat for vijātīya-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 122

bheda require non-sat as bheda-pratiyogi. A non-sat or asat cannot function as bheda-

pratiyogi because asat does not exist at all. A non-existent asat cannot be a bheda-pratiyogi
and therefore, sat does not have vijātīya-bheda. What we want to say is that there is
nothing to act as pratiyogi for sat. Therefore, you cannot talk about vijātīya-bheda. Sat
does not have vijātīya-, sajātīya- and svagata-bheda.

śloka 26
एकमेवाद्वितीयं सत्सिद्धमत्र तु के चन ।
विह्वला असदेवेदं पुरासीदित्यवर्णयन्॥ २.२६ ॥
ekamevādvitīyaṃ satsiddhamatra tu kecana.
vihvalā asadevedaṃ purāsīdityavarṇayan (2.26).
Now we will take a small diversion before analyzing the vākya sad eva idam agra āsīt
ekam eva advitīyam. The topic is not required for the flow. He says when we talk about
pure existence many people who have subtle intellect are able to grasp pure existence. An
existence which is not associated with any nāma or any rūpa. Some subtle minds like us
are able to conceive but there are some other philosophers who are not able to conceive of
pure existence and therefore, they argue against it. Many people do not accept pure
nirguṇa existence. the main one is śūnyavāda Buddhism. Buddhism has four branches of
which one main branch is śūnyavāda Buddhism or nihilistic philosophers. They say pure
existence is not possible at all if you negate everything what is left behind is total
emptiness or total nothingness only. Before creation there was nothing and they quote
Taittirīya vākya asat vā idam agra āsīt. In Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad also there naiva
kiñcana idam agra āsīt. Chāndogya Upaniṣad knew that this argument will be there and
hence an objection is raised and answered. There are some people who argue before
creation there was asat. But it is not correct.
Why do they commit such a mistake? They don’t accept pure existence because pure
existence is not available for transaction just like pure consciousness. Pure existence is
pure consciousness. That is why in turīya mantra one of the word used is avyavahāryam
just pure Gold cannot be used to make ornaments; you have to mix it with something. Our
convention is that whatever is not available for transaction we conclude as non-existent. In
milk, potentially, butter is there. But before extraction the butter is not available for
transaction and therefore, if someone asks you don’t say butter is there. As long as it is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 123

available we say it is not there although it is there in milk in the potential form. So
śūnyavāda refutes the existence.
Vidyāraṇya says sad eva idam agra āsīt ekam eva advitīyam, tad siddham. Our discussion
till now has established the pure existence; undifferentiated existence has been established
by us clearly. Some philosophers like śūnyavādī Buddhists are confused and intellectually
they are not able to grasp the pure existence. Therefore, they say before creation the
universe was in the form of śūnya or asat or in the form of nothingness. This also comes in
Chāndogya Upaniṣad.

śloka 27
मग्नस्याब्धौ यथाऽक्षाणि विह्वलानि तथाऽस्य धीः ।
अखण्डैकरसं श्रुत्वा निःप्रचारा बिभेत्यतः ॥ २.२७ ॥
magnasyābdhau yathā:'kṣāṇi vihvalāni tathā:'sya dhīḥ.
akhaṇḍaikarasaṃ śrutvā niḥpracārā bibhetyataḥ (2.27).
How are they confused is indicated by a nice example. Our eyes are normally capable of
seeing things very clearly in the air. Suppose I dip under water, and if I want to see under
water, even if the eyes are open there is no clarity of vision. In the normal course we
cannot see in water but some tribal people are able to see under water. They have come to
the conclusion that you can train by habit you can see in water and still it will not be as
clear as in air. Similarly normal intellect is not able to conceive of pure existence un-
associated with something. It is difficult to conceive of pure consciousness and pure
existence and it requires śāstra-trained intellect. Eyes are incapable of functioning
normally like the eyes under water. So also the intellect of mādhyamika Buddhists are
compared to the eyes under the water. They are not able to grasp or conceive or function
properly here, whereas when they discuss all other topics they function well. Listening to
undifferentiated existence the intellect is not functioning properly. It is suppressed
intellect. That intellect is afraid of pure Brahman. Many devotees are afraid of nirguṇa
Brahman and are afraid of Advaitic teaching. When I talk of asparśa, non-dual Brahman,
etc, one is not able to accept such truth. Most of the intellects are afraid of Advaita. For
most of them Advaita does not attract. I would like to be away and not become one with
God. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says Dvaitins are afraid of nirguṇa Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 124

śloka 28
गौडाचार्या निर्विकल्पे समाधावन्ययोगिनाम्।
साकारध्याननिष्ठानामत्यन्तं भयमूचिरे ॥ २.२८ ॥
gauḍācāryā nirvikalpe samādhāvanyayoginām.
sākāradhyānaniṣṭhānāmatyantaṃ bhayamūcire ( 2.28).
Gaudapāda has discussed this topic in Māṇḍūkya kārikā. Vidyāraṇya refers to the kārikās.
Tremendous maturity is required to accept Advaita, to understand Advaita and to enjoy
the benefit of Advaita. That is why elaborate karma-yoga and upāsana. Gaudapāda clearly
says śruti itself understands for the majority Advaita is impossible to understand and śruti
considers them to be immature. So it temporarily forgets Advaita and asks all the people
to remain in dvaita as long as they want before shifting to Advaita. A day will come when
your own mind will look for Advaita as dvaita is relativity and within relativity absolute
truth cannot be there. In nirvikalpaka samādhi, other people or other seekers or non-
Advaitic seekers who are committed to dualism are scared. This Gaudapāda declared in
his kārikā.

śloka 29
अस्पर्शयोगो नामैष दुर्दर्शः सर्वयोगिभिः ।
योगिनो बिभ्यति ह्यस्मादभये भयदर्शिनः ॥ २.२९ ॥
asparśayogo nāmaiṣa durdarśaḥ sarvayogibhiḥ.
yogino bibhyati hyasmādabhaye bhayadarśinaḥ (2.29).
Vidyāraṇya quotes kārikā 39th verse. Here Gaudapāda says Advaita is frightening
because in Advaita relationship is not possible. There is no second thing in Advaita and
therefore, there is no relationship in Advaita. Every human being finds security and moral
support from some relationship or other. That is why everyone wants minimum
relationship. The people want relationship and even if they go out of family relationship
they come to Guru-śiṣya relationship and even bhakta-Īśvara relationship. Vedānta attacks
that relationship which means Vedānta attacks our very source of security. Advaita means
asparśa-yoga where all relationships are falsified. Asparśa-yoga means the wisdom of
untouchability. It is yoga of non-relationship. It cannot be grasped by all the seekers. Since
I see security in relationship, I am scared when I am asked to leave a relation. Those

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 125

people think without relationship Advaita is more insecure than dvaita. Vedānta says
there is insecurity in dvaita. He says in Advaita there is security. Most people are not able
to understand this view. More in the next class.

Class 7
śloka 29 contd.
Explaining Chāndogya Upaniṣad statement sad eva idam agra āsīt ekam eva advitīyam.
Vidyāraṇya establishes before creation pure existence was there without any sight of
differentiation. Then he takes a small diversion where he points out that many people
have difficulty in comprehending pure existence. The difficulty is faced by the
philosophers also for they are not able to take existence without any property. They are
not ready to intellectually comprehend pure existence or Advaita; the problem with lay
people is when we tell them of Advaita, they feel it will cause insecurity for them. They
think human relationship alone gives security and comfort. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya in his Gītā
points out that this is typical saṃsāra. Aham eṣām, I belong to the people; mama ete, these
people belong to me; such is the notion in which all people suffer due to which is typical
saṃsāra. When you want to live for someone it is ahaṅkāra and when you want to live
with someone it is mamakara. The lay people see the relationship as security. Therefore,
Gaudapāda says that there is a big moha or delusion in ignorant people whatever the
source of fear is, they see fearlessness and whatever is there which fearlessness is, the lay
people see fear in it. Vedāntic teaching is called asparśa-yoga and it is a yoga of being
relationless.
Vedānta sees all relationships as saṃsāra. There is no question of sacred relationship in
Vedānta. Gaudapāda begins his third chapter saying that upāsaka-upāsya relationship is
also not there. We define sacred relationship is that which helps you go beyond all
relationships including sacred relationship. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya wrote a work called
Nirvāṇa Daśakam. Madhusūdana Sarasvati writes a book on these ten verses. There Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya says there is no relationship called sacred relationship as sacred relationship
is one that takes beyond all the relationships. That is why they love the mokṣa of dvaita
philosophy because in their mokṣa even in mokṣa you can have nice relationship. Advaita
does not like the mokṣa of immature people. Their attitude of dvaita is those immature

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 126

people sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti-rahita are afraid of Advaita. They are afraid of

sannyāsī also where there is no relationship. Guru, śāstra and Īśvara is allowed in vividiṣā
sannyāsa. in vidvat sannyāsa even these three relationships are not allowed. The irony is
that the people are afraid of Advaita which is the only source of security. This is a
quotation from Māṇḍūkya kārikā 3.29.

śloka 30
भगवत्पूज्यपादाश्च शुष्कतर्क पटूनमून्।
आहुर्माध्यमिकान्भ्रान्तानचिन्त्येऽस्मिन्सदात्मनि ॥ २.३० ॥
bhagavatpūjyapādāśca śuṣkatarkapaṭūnamūn.
āhurmādhyamikānbhrāntānacintye:'sminsadātmani (2.30).
He says not only Gaudapāda criticized the Buddhist people but also Ādi Śaṅkarācārya
talks of the problems of these people; certain things needs an instrument to be seen. If you
want to see stars far away you need a telescope. If you want to see Brahman scriptural aid
is needed and problem with Buddhists is that they don’t believe in śāstra pramāṇa. We
have nothing against Buddhism with regard to values concerned. They reject Veda and
their intellect cannot understand pure existence by itself and so they end up in śūnyavāda.
He strongly criticized mādhyamika Buddhists the śūnyavādīs as deluded people. They
use wrong instrument and they are also adamant to what they view as correct. If you want
to know Brahman better use śāstra pramāṇa, but śūnyavādīs don’t accept śāstra pramāṇa.
Their problem is that they use logic without the help of śāstra. Hence their logic becomes
dry. Logic needs data, reasoning requires data. When you want to know worldly things
like age of the moon, etc., then you use logic collecting data from pratyakṣa pramāṇa. This
is the regular tarka to be used for material knowledge. This is called laukika tarka and it is
efficient with regard to anātmā-knowledge but when it comes to the knowledge of Ātmā
you cannot go in for perpetual data for Ātmā is beyond the range of perception.
The laukika tarka will not work with regard to Ātmā. Then it is called dry logic. We have
to drop perceptual data and we have to collect data from śāstra and śāstra based tarka is
called śāstra-tarka. You collect data from śravaṇa and you work on data collected from
śravaṇa. Use laukika tarka in normal cases but don’t use the same in the case of Ātma-
viṣaya. Ātmā is not accessible to scientific explanation. If someone says Vedānta is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 127

scientific, he does not know either science or Vedānta. Both are totally divergent and you
cannot combine both.

śloka 31
अनादृत्य श्रुतिं मौर्ख्यादिमे बौद्धस्तपस्विनः ।
आपेदिरे निरात्मत्वमनुमानैकचक्षुशः ॥ २.३१ ॥
anādṛtya śrutiṃ maurkhyādime bauddhastapasvinaḥ.
āpedire nirātmatvamanumānaikacakṣuśaḥ (2.31).
Vidyāraṇya says not only Gaudapāda and Ādi Śaṅkarācārya have criticized Buddhists
and even Sureśvarācārya has criticized them in Naiṣkarmya siddhi. In the third chapter
24th verse this particular śloka occurs and Vidyāraṇya quotes that. All the Buddhists are
characterwise great but they are overpowered by tamo-guṇa delusion with regard to using
appropriate instrument for appropriate knowledge. The delusion is with regard to
pramāṇa. The biggest blunder they have committed is that they ignored śāstra pramāṇa.
They reject Guru and śāstra and it is a form of egoism. Vinaya is the basic character that is
needed and all those who deny Guru and śāstra are deluded people. They think they are
superior but they are dull-witted. They believe in reasoning and rationale and they don’t
have faith in śāstra and Guru. They are therefore called anumāna-eka-cakśuka. The
reasoning is the only eye they used but they failed to use śāstra-cakṣu. Use pratyakṣa-
cakṣu or anumāna-cakṣu and also use śāstra-cakṣu. Because of the foolishness they arrived
at the conclusion of śūnyavāda. Ātmā means sat and nirātma means asat or śūnyatva. In
place of pure wonderful existence they see the śūnyatva.

śloka 32
शून्यमासीदिति ब्रूषे सद्योगं वा सदात्मताम्।
शून्यस्य न तु तद्युक्तमुभयं व्याह तत्त्वतः ॥ २.३२ ॥
śūnyamāsīditi brūṣe sadyogaṃ vā sadātmatām.
śūnyasya na tu tadyuktamubhayaṃ vyāha tattvataḥ (2.32).
Vidyāraṇya goes one more step further in criticizing śūnyavādīs. Until now he said they
ignored śruti-pramāṇa and they were anti-śruti all because they confined to reasoning.
Now he say they did not do the reasoning also properly. Vidyāraṇya says even the logic
they did not use properly because their conclusions were illogical. Now they talk about

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 128

yukti-viruddha. In sad eva idam agra āsīt ekam eva advitīyam we made a statement
before creation existence alone was and now Buddhists are saying before creation śūnya
alone was existing; śūnya means non-existence and they say before creation non-existence
existed. He says the śūnyavādīs make a statement that non-existence existed before
creation. He asks for the meaning of the sentence the non-existence was existent. In this
sentence non-existence is associated with existence; śūnya is non-existence and āsīt means
it was existent. Is this the existence connected with non-existence is it the property of
existence or non-existence. What type relation it is? Is it a property of non-existence or is it
the very nature of non-existence? Either way Vidyāraṇya says you are wrong. Non-
existence cannot have existence as property nor is the non-existence the nature of
existence. When the non-existence is, is the is-ness is the property of non-existence or is-
ness is the nature of non-existence? Then Vidyāraṇya replies either way your answer is not
correct. Both answers are not proper with regard to śūnya; śūnya with property is not
possible śūnya with svabhāva is also not correct. non-existence is a contradiction. Even the
word nothing is a contradiction. If someone says there is no one in the room is a
contradiction. There is one to say there is no one.

śloka 33
न युक्तस्तमसा सूर्यो नापि चासौ तमोमयः ।
सच्छून्ययोर्विरोधित्वाच्छून्यमासीत्कथं वद ॥ २.३३ ॥
na yuktastamasā sūryo nāpi cāsau tamomayaḥ.
sacchūnyayorvirodhitvācchūnyamāsītkathaṃ vada (2.33).
Here Vidyāraṇya mentions the contradiction pointed out in the previous śloka. Here he
gives an example of sunlight and darkness. Darkness cannot be a property of sunlight and
darkness cannot be the nature of sunlight. Therefore, he says the sun is never associated
with darkness in the form of substance and property. Nor is the sun having darkness as its
very nature. It is neither guṇa nor its svarūpa. Then they should not be contradictory to
each other. Extending the same principle sat and śūnya are diagonally opposite to each
other. This śūnya non-existence and āsīt existence can’t be combined together for both are
virodhis. Hence how can you say there was nothing before creation? This does not stand
to reasoning.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 129

śloka 34
वियदादेर्नामरूपे मायया सति कल्पिते ।
शून्यस्य नामरूपे च तथा चेज्जीव्यतां चिरम्॥ २.३४ ॥
viyadādernāmarūpe māyayā sati kalpite.
śūnyasya nāmarūpe ca tathā cejjīvyatāṃ ciram (2.34).
Now the śūnyavādīs puts a counter question to us. The question is not given here. The
answer alone is here. His question is based on our assertion that śūnya and existence
cannot go together because they have got opposite attributes. This principle the
mādhyamika questions. He says after the creation has come out you say the world is there
in front of us and the is-ness that we experience as man is, woman is, etc., the is-ness is
Brahman you declare. Existence belongs to Brahman and consciousness belongs to
Brahman. Here we see combination of world and Brahman. Entire material world is
Brahman and the consciousness and existence is Brahman. What we experience in front is
a combination of Brahman and the world. This is presented nicely in dṛk-dṛśya-viveka.
We know that the nature of the world and nature of Brahman are diagonally opposite; one
is jaḍa and another is cetana, one is divisible and the other is indivisible, one is savikāra
and the other is nirvikāra, and one is saguṇa and another is nirguṇa. In every respect
Brahman and the world are opposite. According to you Ātmā and anātmā can coexist
together. You ourselves say Brahman and the world are together even though they are
opposite in nature. When both can be together as per you, you ask us how śūnya and
existence can be together, even though they are diagonally opposite. This is an imaginary
question and Vidyāraṇya gives his answer. It is possible and don’t unnecessarily provoke
me. Vidyāraṇya will answer this question in the next class.

Class 8
śloka 34 contd.
As an introduction to analytical study of pañca-bhūtas Vidyāraṇya analyses 6.2.1 of
Chāndogya Upaniṣad vākya sad eva idam agra āsīt. Pure existence was existent before the
manifestation of the creation. Vidyāraṇya negates mādhyamika Buddhism otherwise
called śūnyavāda Buddhism. They hold before creation there was nothing there and they
called the nothingness as śūnya. Vidyāraṇya criticizes śūnyavāda. The first argument he
gave was that the śūnyavāda are nāstika people who do not accept Veda pramāṇa and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 130

Veda pramāṇa alone has the access to pure existence. They have then only tarka or
reasoning to understand pure existence. Pratyakṣa and tarka cannot function in the field of
pure existence. He gave the example of our regular eyes can function in the regular
atmosphere and when you want to see underwater eyes cannot function with its intrinsic
limitation. They reject the śruti pramāṇa.
Now he has come to the second criticism wherein Vidyāraṇya says even though they want
to come to the conclusion through logical reasoning, even their logical conclusion is not
logically sound. Their conclusion is yukti-viruddha also. Their logical problem is they
have to say before the origination of creation there was only śūnya. This very statement is
a contradiction. The word śūnya means non-existence or nothingness. Translating the
sentence it will read non-existence was existent before creation. Nothingness was existent
before creation and if you say nothing exists means it is no more nothing. The very verb
shows the existence of something. Nothingness and existence cannot go together. He gave
an example to understand and it is like sun and the night or light and darkness can never
coexist for they are mutually contradictory. Similarly śūnya and āsīt cannot coexist
because they are contradictory. Asat āsīt cannot go together. When it was pointed out
śūnyavādī raised a question. He asks how the Vedāntins accepts coexistence of Brahman
and the world, the Ātmā and anātmā. At this moment world is experienced by us and
existence of the world is clear. Now Brahman is existent. Brahman is eternal and exists all
the time. World is also existent. World and Brahman coexists. If you study their nature
they have diagonally opposite nature. One is cetana and another is acetana; one is savikāra
and another is nirvikāra. One is nirvikalpa and another is savikalpa; with parts and
partless; one is nirguṇa and another is saguṇa. In every respect Brahman and the world
are opposite and without any shame you accept coexistence of paraspara-viruddha-
svabhāva. Now śūnyavādī’s question is that the world and Brahman can coexist in spite of
opposite nature, then why śūnya and existence cannot exist? This is the imaginary
question. Vidyāraṇya gives the answer.
Two things cannot coexist if they both belong to the same order of reality. In the dream
darkness and light cannot coexist and in the waking darkness and light cannot coexist.
You go to a dark room and dream a bright light. Darkness is vyāvahārika-satya in the
room and light is prātibhāsika-satya in the dream; vyavahāra darkness and prātibhāsika
light can coexist; vyavahāra fatness and dream leanness can coexist. Similar in Vedānta

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 131

when we talk about coexistence between Brahman and world we say Brahman is
pāramārthika satya and world is vyāvahārika-satya.
Two things of opposite nature cannot coexist if both of them belong to the same order of
reality. The example given is in dream and waking darkness and light cannot coexist. Both
can coexist in a peculiar way that you go to dark room and have a dream light which is
prātibhāsika light; that is, vyāvahārika darkness and prātibhāsika light can coexist,
vyāvahārika eating and dream hunger can coexist. In Vedānta when we talk about
coexistence of Brahman and the world which are diagonally opposite, we say Brahman is
pāramārthika satya whereas the world is vyāvahārika-satya and since orders of reality are
different, they can happily coexist, just like the mirage water and dry sand can coexist in
spite of mirage water. The sand is vyāvahārika and water is prātibhāsika. That is why we
say brahma satya jagan mithyā.
The world and Brahman belong to two different orders. The name and form of the
universe, nāma-rūpa-prapañca beginning with Māyā, is vyāvahārika-satya and it is of a
lower order of reality compared to Brahman which is pāramārthika. We don’t violate the
rules is our argument. Now the śūnyavādī is happy as the opposite can coexist if it is of
two orders of reality, so he says my śūnya is of lower order of reality and he say I mean
mithyā nāma-rūpa alone. If he says so, then both can coexist. Vidyāraṇya says if your
śūnya is mithyā nāma-rūpa we have no objection in accepting the argument; śūnya as
mithyā we accept and śūnya as non-existence we cannot accept. There are millions of
nāma-rūpas that exist and so also we can take śūnya also as mithyā. If you say śūnya is
asat we cannot accept and if you say śūnya is mithyā we accept your view.
Now a technical doubt may come. What is the difference between asat and mithyā? Asat
means total non-existence. Sat means pure existence; mithyā means that which is neither
pure non-existence nor pure existence but it is anirvacanīya; sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa is mithyā.
It is seemingly existent. It is experientially existent. That is called mithyā. Vedānta says
asat and sat cannot coexist because they are diagonally opposite. But mithyā and sat can
coexist because they are of two different orders of reality. If śūnya is asat it cannot coexist
with sat. If śūnya is mithyā nāma-rūpa it can coexist with sat; śūnyavāda does not accept
world as mithyā. If you say śūnya is mithyā nāma-rūpa then may you be blessed with a
long life and better intellect, says Vidyāraṇya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 132

śloka 35
सतोऽपि नामरूपे द्वे कल्पिते चेत्तदा वद ।
कुत्रेति निरधिष्ठानो न भ्रमः क्वचिदीक्ष्यते ॥ २.३५ ॥
sato:'pi nāmarūpe dve kalpite cettadā vada.
kutreti niradhiṣṭhāno na bhramaḥ kvacidīkṣyate (2.35).
In the previous verse we said the whole nāma-rūpa-prapañca is mithyā. If śūnya has to
coexist with Brahman, we said śūnya should also be mithyā. Now śūnyavādī is upset and
argues saying why cannot we say Brahman is also mithyā nāma-rūpa. Sarvam mithyā
including Brahman is śūnyavādī’s argument. Brahma-nāma and brahma-rūpa also, not
only śūnya, is mithyā; Brahman is also mithyā nāma-rūpa. It is an interesting suggestion
given by the śūnyavādī. Then Vidyāraṇya asks a question. Mithyā means that which is
seemingly existent which has borrowed existence like mirage water has borrowed
existence from sand. The is-ness of the waker alone appear in the dream world; mithyā
snake has borrowed existence from rope. If everything has borrowed existence, tell me
who will lend the existence? If the world as well as Brahman is mithyā what will lend
existence to mithyā.
You need a lender of existence and that lender of existence is called adhiṣṭhāna and the
lender of existence is called satya; the lender of existence does not borrow existence from
anywhere. You cannot talk about total mithyā without adhiṣṭhāna. The śūnyavādī’s
blunder is that he talks about total mithyā without adhiṣṭhāna. Vedānta says there must be
one ultimate adhiṣṭhāna. Now tell me kutra, where, does the whole mithyā world rest
including mithyā Brahman? To put it in other words, what is the adhiṣṭhāna for mithyā
world and mithyā Brahman? That means what is the adhiṣṭhāna, the lender of existence?
Suppose the śūnyavādī argues that if no lender existed at all there is no adhiṣṭhāna at all
we say you cannot talk of borrower of existence unless there is a lender of existence. If
everyone borrows existence, a lender must be there. A mithyā entity bhrama, the borrower
of existence, without adhiṣṭhāna or without a lender of existence is never experienced by
anyone at anytime. If you see a false snake there must be a real rope. There is no false
thing without an adhiṣṭhāna; mithyā without satya Brahman is not possible.

śloka 36
सदासीदिति शब्दार्थभेदे द्वैगुण्यमापतेत्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 133

अभेदे पुनरुक्तिः स्यान्मैवं लोके तथेक्षणात्॥ २.३६ ॥

sadāsīditi śabdārthabhede dvaiguṇyamāpatet.
abhede punaruktiḥ syānmaivaṃ loke tathekṣaṇāt (2.36).
With the previous verse śūnyavāda diversion is over. Now Vidyāraṇya comes to the
original Chāndogya Upaniṣad vākya sad eva idam agra āsīt. He raises a possible objection.
It is a commentary on the word āsīt. The objection is the Upaniṣad says sat āsīt. The word
sad means existence. āsīt means existed. The word sat refers to existence and the word āsīt
refers to existed. Now the existence revealed by the two words is the same or different.
When I say there is clip that ‘is’ refers to existence of clip only. When I say clip was there
and was associated with the past tense but the verb is and was reveals the existence alone;
āsīt reveals existence and sad also reveals existence. The pūrvapakṣī asks whether the two
existences are one and the same or not? If you say the two are different, then you come to
duality. Sat is one existence, āsīt is another existence and therefore, there is dvaita. If you
say both are one and the same only, then he says if sad and āsīt have the same meaning
why two words are used? Then there is punarukti doṣa. The repetition becomes the doṣa.
If you say different, dvaita comes in and if you say both are same then repetition doṣa
comes in.
For two different words, if they reveal two different types of existence there will be a doṣa
as ekam eva advitīyam cannot be said because they are two things now. To avoid dvaita, if
you say both are same, then punarukti syāt there will be punarukti, repetition. This is the
object raised by Pūrvapakṣa. Vidyāraṇya has to answer this objection. Such expressions
are found in the world that seemingly repetitive expressions are seen in the world.
Therefore, such an objection should not be raised by you. Now Vidyāraṇya has to explain
further.

śloka 37
कर्तव्यं कुरुते वाक्यं ब्रूते धार्यस्य धारणम्।
इत्यादिवासनाविष्टं प्रत्यासीत्सदितीरणम्॥ २.३७ ॥
kartavyaṃ kurute vākyaṃ brūte dhāryasya dhāraṇam.
ityādivāsanāviṣṭaṃ pratyāsītsaditīraṇam (2.37).
Vidyāraṇya gives two answers to the objections. Now we have to see the motives of the
speaker. In north India sādhu means a sannyāsī. They say a good sādhu and you don’t

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 134

criticize them. Sādhu means noble, so where is the need to use the words good sādhu as it
is a clean repetition of the word. You should see the motive behind the repetition. You
should not literally take it. You understand the implication of the word.
The second argument Vidyāraṇya gives is when you talk about the condition before
creation, the language itself will break down. Within the dvaita prapañca, the language
will function but when you go beyond creation before the origination of the creation, even
intellectual conception is difficult. When someone talks about before time, to conceive of
time before time is a contradiction in the terms and the expression is itself illogical. The
situation before the creation of the world is beyond language. The word kartāvyam refers
to action and kurute also refers to action.
The words vākya and brūte both refer to what is said. In dhāryasya dhāraṇam dhāryasya
also refers to a thing to be worn and dhāraṇam also refers to wearing-action. You replace
your example with my example. Good sādhu and thanda cool drink. The student is used
to such an expression. Keeping in mind such a student to such seemingly repetitive
expression, the Guru makes this statement. Therefore, such expressions are very much
there. The teacher cannot avoid such repetition because we talk of the condition prior to
the creation. More in the next class.

Class 9
śloka 37 contd.
Here Vidyāraṇya explains the word āsīt in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad statement 6.2.1 sad
eva idam agra āsīt. Sad means existence and āsīt means existed. Both refer to the word
existence. Pūrvapakṣī asks whether the concept of existence conveyed by the word sad
and āsīt are one and the same. Pūrvapakṣī said either way you are in trouble. If you say
there are two forms of existence then ekam eva advitīyam will be wrong. If you say that
the concept of existence conveyed by the two words is one and the same then there will be
punarukti doṣa. How will you explain this?
There are two answers to the question. One we have completed in the last class. He said
we do have such expressions in the common parlance. He gave three pairs of words in the
last śloka. In all of them the same root is used twice. Here two roots are used having the
same meaning in one and the same sentence. If these examples are not clear I have given

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 135

the example of thanda cool drink and good sadhus. He is saying: don’t split hair. With this
the commentary on the word āsīt is over. Now we will go to the next portion.

śloka 38
कालाभावे पुरेत्युक्तिः कालवासनयायुतम्।
शिष्यं प्रत्येव तेनात्र द्वितीयं न हि शंक्यते ॥ २.३८ ॥
kālābhāve puretyuktiḥ kālavāsanayāyutam.
śiṣyaṃ pratyeva tenātra dvitīyaṃ na hi śaṃkyate (2.38).
In these two verses 38 and 39 Vidyāraṇya comments upon the word agre. The word agre
means long before which means before creation. At a time when creation has not
originated is the meaning of the word agre. Here pūrvapakṣī raises a doubt. The answer to
the doubt is given. The Upaniṣad says long before or at the beginning sat alone was there.
Now pūrvapakṣī says when you use the expression at the beginning you refer to kāla
location. ‘At’ refers to location. It refers to locus of time in some places and in some other
cases it refers to time. Any event or action requires time locus and space locus.
Suppose I say Pañcadaśī class they will ask where and the answer will be the locus of
place and then they will ask when and the time is given at such and such hour. The
Upaniṣad gives time location that is before the creation. The kāla tattva was present at that
time. purā is a word that reveals time locus. Before creation Brahman was there and along
with Brahman kāla was there; then how can you talk of non-duality because there is one
Brahman and another is kāla! Whether kāla is a substance or a concept, whether it is a
property, any of it means kāla is there. How does the Upaniṣad give the expression agre?
Vidyāraṇya says really speaking time also was not there. When we say Advaita it is deśa-
kāla-atīta. Therefore, really speaking word purā should not be used because there is no
kāla. Then why Upaniṣad uses the word agre and purā? Vidyāraṇya says because the
mind of the student is soaked in dvaita and all the thoughts are centered round the objects.
Every thought we have is dvaita. That is why Advaita is inconceivable for any ordinary
student. Even scholars are not able to accept Advaita. Human intellect is used to dvaita.
That is Vedānta includes Advaita even though Advaita is trans-language. Therefore,
adjectives cannot be used; adverbs cannot be used etc. Location of time, space etc., cannot
be used; then how can you form a sentence without adjective and predicate?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 136

Guru has to use one language. Agre word is therefore, a compromised expression and this
is deliberately done by the teacher because student’s mind is soaked in deśa and kāla.
There was no kāla at the time of creation. There was no kāla before creation and it came
only after creation. At the time of big bang and before big bang deśa and kāla cannot be
conceived of. Even scientists talks about deśa and kāla before creation. Kāla is absent till
the Upaniṣad uses a word referring to the time. Upaniṣad uses the word agre. Upaniṣad
uses the word purā.
Only for the communicating to that student who is still soaked in kāla-vāsanā, this agre is
used. That is why when we talk about mokṣa which is going beyond time, one has
understand mokṣa is kāla-atītatva, but student asks: when will I get mokṣa? The teacher
says you start the next course. mokṣa is kāla-atītatva. To talk of kāla when mokṣa is talked
of is a contradiction. He will teach until then when the student will not ask when. If mokṣa
is now then also I will not say anything because now means it is time location. Therefore,
this is compromised version only. There should not be any doubt of dvaita, Brahman one
and kāla number two, that is, brahma-kāla dvaita-buddhi should not come.

śloka 39
चोद्यं वा परिहारो वा क्रियतां द्वैतभाषया ।
अद्वैतभाषया चोद्यं नास्ति नापि तदुत्तरम्॥ २.३९ ॥
codyaṃ vā parihāro vā kriyatāṃ dvaitabhāṣayā.
advaitabhāṣayā codyaṃ nāsti nāpi taduttaram (2.39).
When we talk about Advaita no verbal expressions are possible. Any sentence needs
subject, verb and that itself involves duality. No sentence can be used to talk about
Advaita. Language itself breaks down. It cannot be expressed and we have to compromise
a bit. Both the Upaniṣad and the teachers compromise some and use the expression agre,
āsīt, purā, etc. In Advaita there is no question, no answer as all are possible only in mithyā
world, vyavahāra. Only within the field of dvaita, within the language of dvaita, language
is there; and from the language of Advaita, there is no language. Even the comparative
study you do it in dvaita only.
Even the word Advaita we will not use but we are forced to use the word Advaita because
of dvaitī and viśiṣṭādvaitī. In Advaita I will not even claim Advaita because there is no
dvaita to separate Advaita. The very question of choice comes in dvaita. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 137

Advaita is choiceless and therefore, conflictless. Where there is choice there is a conflict. In
Advaita there is no conflict. When question is not there, there is no answer also. This can
be extended to the 37th śloka also and sad āsīt also a compromise argument only. We talk
only to keep the students in the Guru’s fold; so the teachings are given in the above form.

śloka 40
तदा स्तिमितगम्भीरं न तेजो न तमस्ततम्।
अनाख्यमनभिव्यक्तं सत्किंचिदवशिष्यते ॥ २.४० ॥
tadā stimitagambhīraṃ na tejo na tamastatam.
anākhyamanabhivyaktaṃ satkiṃcidavaśiṣyate (2.40).
With the previous verse the commentary on the expression on agre is also over. Now
Vidyāraṇya comes to the significance of the word ‘sad’. This will go up to the verse 46.
According to the Upaniṣad, tadā at that time, agre that is purā before the manifestation of
creation, sad avaśiṣyate pure existence alone was there; nāma-rūpa-rahita existence, jagat-
rahita existence, otherwise called Brahman or Ātmā alone was there. The nature of that
pure existence is said to be in line with a verse from Yogavāsiṣṭha. Stimita means to be
motionless. When you sit in a position for long time, the legs get stimita that means leg is
not able to move at all. Acala-pratiṣṭha is the word used in Gītā for being motionless.
Gambhira means profound and in this context it is inconceivable. With the mind you
cannot conceive mano:’gocara. These are descriptions of pure existence. This cannot be
described as light or darkness. Light and darkness are relative expressions and they
belong to vyavahāra-prapañca. Light is opposed to darkness and darkness is opposed to
light.
Brahman is capable of illumining or knowing both light and darkness. Brahman is beyond
the pairs of opposite. It is all-pervading. The word all-pervading is also a compromised
expression. When there is no ‘all’ how can we say all-pervading? If we say everywhere, it
is spatial location. At that time there was no space also and where is the question of using
all-pervading.
The correct translation is deśa-atīta. It is beyond space and it is everywhere in the space. It
is indriya-agocara not available for sensory perception. It is beyond the mind and it is not
accessible to sense-organs. In short sarva-pramāṇa-agocara. Not accessible to any

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 138

instrument of knowledge. Therefore only, it is anākhya that which cannot be verbally

expressed. It is vāk-agocara and such a sad avaśiṣyate and that sad alone remains.
After saying vāk-agocara how can you say sad. Really speaking I should not use sad but
some word I have to use and therefore, it is a compromised expression to express roughly
for the sake of our communication. On scrutiny even the word pure existence cannot be
used. Sat also cannot be used, but it is used because you will otherwise take it is opposed
to sat. Pure existence alone therefore, remains.

śloka 41
ननु भूम्यादिकं मा भूत्परमाण्वन्त नाशतः ।
कथं ते वियतोऽसत्त्वं बुद्धिमारोहतीति चेत्॥ २.४१ ॥
nanu bhūmyādikaṃ mā bhūtparamāṇvanta nāśataḥ.
kathaṃ te viyato:'sattvaṃ buddhimārohatīti cet (2.41).
Now Nyāya philosopher raises a question. According to Nyāya philosophy among the
pañca-bhūtas, five elements, four alone are subject to birth and destruction. They are vāyu,
agni, water and earth. According to them before creation all the four elements were in
atomic form. Earth was in paramāṇu form. Earth as elements as we see were not there. All
the paramāṇus are so minute and they are not even visible and there is no question of
transaction.
Two bhūmi paramāṇus will form small molecules and three small molecules will join as
bigger molecules. All four elements were in the form of molecules and they formed the
earth. So also water, vāyu, etc. When they form as molecules it becomes visible. Therefore,
pralaya-kāle four elements in this form will not be there. According to them ākāśa does
not have birth and death as ākāśa is eternal. In this respect Nyāya is totally different from
Vedānta.
According to Vedānta ākāśa has an origin and dissolution. We have Veda-pramāṇa for
this. Even modern scientist talk about it. Without creation you cannot talk about the
existence of space at all. Nyāya philosophy says in the case of space there is no ākāśa
paramāṇu; ākāśa is all-pervading partless element or tattva. Therefore, he asks two
questions. How do you say that before creation pure Brahman was there? Before creation
Brahman and ākāśa must have existed because ākāśa is as eternal as Brahman. This is
question number one.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 139

The second question is assuming space is also gone, the world is gone, time is gone and
pure existence alone is there. How can the human intellect ever conceive of pure
existence? Think of anything while leaving the object and think of the ‘is-ness’ alone. I
cannot conceive of ‘is-ness’; how can I know the existence of such a thing? How can you
conceive of spaceless existence? I can think of absence of all the four elements for they are
reduced to paramāṇus.
Since they are reduced to paramāṇu form I am able to accept the absence of the four
elements before creation. I cannot accept ākāśa being absent before creation because space
is eternal. How can you talk of non-existence of space when space is eternal? Suppose
space is destroyed, how can such a concept be accepted by our intellect? The pure
existence without space cannot be conceived by our intellect. Such a concept cannot enter
our head and that means we cannot think of spaceless existence. This is the anyāya
question from Nyāya philosophers. More in the next class.

Class 10
śloka 41 contd.
Now Vidyāraṇya has come to the word ‘sad’ in Chāndogya Upaniṣad vākya. He answers
certain questions that may come to the mind of the seekers or any other philosophers. No
other system has this idea. The idea is that the existence, even though we experience as an
integral part of an object, is not a part of any object but it is an independent entity exactly
like consciousness we talk about. Consciousness is not a part or product or property, so
also existence is not a part or product or property but on the other hand it is an
independent entity and it pervades the object, unlike the property of the matter like the
sunlight that pervades the object. Existence pervades object is proved by our experience as
we always say the object is.
In all experienced objects there is one uniform adjective as: the clip is, the man is, the table
is, etc. is-ness is very much experienced by us along with every object but what Vedānta
asks us to do is a difficult and tough job. Vedānta says you experience the clip and
existence together. A clip is appreciated by the eyes because the eyes are able to see and
buddhi appreciates the existence because you say the clip is.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 140

In every experience there is an object and there is an experience also; both we experience.
When I see each one of you, I am not merely experiencing your body, but over the body,
there is something pervading; what is pervading your body? If it is midnight I would not
have seen the body but I am able to see because the body is spread or enveloped by the
prakāśa. I am not talking about the source of light but the formless light that pervades.

When I see you I see the mixture of light and the body. When you experience the clip you
experience one clip and the is-ness or the existence also. I give a small exercise to learn to
appreciate the existence aspect alone temporarily separating the object exactly like asking
you to appreciate the formless light that pervades the room without mixing the light with
any object. You can visualize and experience the formless all-pervading light in the hall
and Vedānta asks you to go one more step further. Instead of appreciating formless light
learn to appreciate the formless existence. Existence gets localized only when it is
associated with an object, nāma-rūpa-sahita; sattā as division and localization is nāma-
rūpa-rahita sattā; can you appreciate nāma-rūpa-rahita sattā?
In fact the argument we extend to consciousness also. Consciousness is existence and
existence is consciousness. Consciousness is not another thing but it is existence. It is not
that easy to visualize and it is not only difficult for ordinary people but even Naiyāyika or
Vaiśeṣika philosophers are not able realise this fact. They say I am able visualize
everything and after the destruction of everything, space will remain; then how can you
talk of pure existence without ākāśa? All elements are made out of paramāṇus; elements
are made out of integration of paramāṇus and they will be disintegrated when paramāṇus
disintegrate. At the time of creation they get into paramāṇus and when the world is
reduced to paramāṇus they are apratyakṣa. Therefore, he says I can visualize the
destruction of four elements, but how can I visualize the destruction of ākāśa because it is
eternal? How can there be non-existence of space? This is the question number one. Even
assuming the space is destroyed, he asks the second question how can I visualize the pure
existence even without space? How your intellect can visualize a space-less pure
existence? Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 42
अत्यन्तं निर्जगद्व्योम यथा ते बुद्धिमाश्रितम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 141

तथैव सन्निराकाशं कुतो नाश्रयते मतिम्॥ २.४२ ॥

atyantaṃ nirjagadvyoma yathā te buddhimāśritam.
tathaiva sannirākāśaṃ kuto nāśrayate matim (2.42).
We answer Naiyāyika’s question. The first question is how can space be destroyed at the
time of pralaya because space is eternal. The answer is who said space is eternal. You
assume things and you ask the question. Just because you are born into space, it does not
mean space is eternal. We do not know if the space is born or not and better you go to
śāstra for you accept Veda pramāṇa with regard to creation or eternity of creation. Veda
clearly points out that ākāśa is born out of Brahman and it has origination and end. In
short ākāśa is a product. Both science and śāstra confirms the origination of space and
once origination is proved the destruction is also proved since all that is born is subject to
death. So the first question is answered.
The second question is how can a person visualize spaceless pure existence? For this
Vedāntins ask a counter question. In your philosophy space is eternal. That means in your
philosophy at the time of pralaya everything will be destroyed and the worldless
objectless space alone will be there. All the elements would have gone, plants and rivers
would have gone and what would be left is worldless space. Vedāntins ask how can you
visualize worldless space? If this is possible by you, I can visulaise spaceless existence.
Therefore, he asks the question to Naiyāyikas you see objectless space which is called by
you as nirjagat vyoma. It is free from object totally.
Your intellect is able to visualize in your philosophy and if that is possible by you, I can
also visualize spaceless existence, the formless existence. That is why in Vedānta initially
they ask us to meditate upon something with forms. We have so many formful gods.
Gradually they ask you to meditate upon relatively formless things like shivaliṅgam,
saligrama, etc. It does not have well defined shape.
Once your intellect is sensitized, then Vedānta asks us to meditate upon ākāśa tattva as
Īśvara, ākāśa liṅga where the formless all-pervading space is taken as God. If you pass this
entrance examination of meditating upon the relationless and formless space as God then I
will ask you to go to existence which is also formless and all-pervading. Upāsana is of
three kinds, sākāra, ubhaya and then nirākāra upāsana. First you meditate upon God in
forms and on formless God and later on nirākāra the existence. Vidyāraṇya asks
Naiyāyika instead of formless ākāśa meditate upon formless pure existence without ākāśa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 142

Pure existence is pure consciousness the observer. It is you the observer the pure
consciousness. If pure ākāśa is visualisable why not visualize the pure existence.

śloka 43
निर्जगद्व्योम दृष्टं चेत्प्रकाशतमसी विना ।
क्व दृष्टं किंच ते पक्षे न प्रत्यक्षं वियत्खलु ॥ २.४३ ॥
nirjagadvyoma dṛṣṭaṃ cetprakāśatamasī vinā.
kva dṛṣṭaṃ kiṃca te pakṣe na pratyakṣaṃ viyatkhalu (2.43).
Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika are twin philosophies very close together. Here you can take the
Pūrvapakṣa as either Nyāya or Vaiśeṣika or Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika. He says I can visualize
ākāśa because ākāśa is visible. But you cannot visualise pure existence. Nirjagat vyoma
dṛṣṭam. He says I can visualize objectless space because it is visible.
For that, Vedāntins asks a counter question. Where did you experience pure space? Your
eyes can never experience pure space and when you look at the sky and look at the space
there also your eyes don’t experience pure space but the space mixed with light or
darkness. Eyes can perceive the space associated with either prakāśa or tamas darkness. If
both are not there you cannot perceive space at all. Without light or darkness association
where did you experience space? This is the question posed by Vedāntins. Not only that
there is a more powerful argument. In your own philosophy you have made a statement
which you have forgotten. In your philosophy you say ākāśa is apratyakṣa; the space is
not pratyakṣa and not visible for the eyes for eyes can see the forms and colours. Space has
neither form nor colour and how can the space be seen? It is contradicting your own
conclusions. Therefore, pure space is not visible still you conceive pure creation-less space
and in the same way I can visualize pure existence even though it is not visible.

śloka 44
सद्वस्तु सिद्धन्त्वस्माभिर्निश्चितैरनुभूयते ।
तूष्णीं स्थितौ न शून्यत्वं शून्यबुद्धेस्तु वर्जनात्॥ २.४४ ॥
sadvastu siddhantvasmābhirniścitairanubhūyate.
tūṣṇīṃ sthitau na śūnyatvaṃ śūnyabuddhestu varjanāt (2.44).
Here Vidyāraṇya gives further support that pure existence can be comprehended through
experiences which support this conclusion. During sleep we remain as pure existence

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 143

only. At the time of sleep all pañca-bhūtas are resolved I continue to exist but not as a
person. ‘I am’, as pure existence, continues to be there. Because I continue to exist I
happily go to sleep. I know I exist without the world, time and space. Timeless, spaceless,
objectless existence, I do experience in sleep. This I-experience occurs even during the
daytime at some moments.
In spite of this, the mind becomes silent. At that time there is no division, no time, no
space, etc. Therefore, pure existence is comprehensible by us. When I am pramātā I say I
am located in that place. In sleep I am no more a pramātā. Existence I do experience and I
experience doubtlessly. It is so because after waking up I did not know even where I was. I
slept like a log we say.
Then Pūrvapakṣa comes and raises a question which is not mentioned but the answer is
given. During the moment of silence we don’t experience anything but we experience
blankness or śūnya and how do you call it as sat? For that Vidyāraṇya gives an answer. He
says at the time of silence what we experience is not blankness and to say that, we require
something. Not only that just as presence of things requires knowledge to prove absence
also you need recognition. If I ask you whether there is a TV set, one says there is no set.
For you to say there is no set, you require the knowledge of TV. This is the argument of
Vidyāraṇya. In the mind the absence of TV thought takes place and that knowledge needs
a thought. To prove śūnya you need a śūnya-thought, but in silence, even śūnya-thought
is not there. Since the cognition of śūnya is not there you cannot say that silence is śūnya.
Then what is it? Pure existence. Therefore, whenever there is silence, we are experiencing
pure existence. Our intellect is designed to visualize the impure existence only, meaning
existence associated with nāma-rūpa, and slowly through study you have to comprehend
to visualize the pure existence.

śloka 45
सद्बुद्धिरपि चेन्नास्ति मास्त्वस्य स्वप्रभत्वतः ।
निर्मनस्कत्वसाक्षित्वात्सन्मात्रं सुगमं नृणाम्॥ २.४५ ॥
sadbuddhirapi cennāsti māstvasya svaprabhatvataḥ.
nirmanaskatvasākṣitvātsanmātraṃ sugamaṃ nṛṇām (2.45).
Now Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosopher poses another question. He says in the moment of
silence it is not śūnya vṛtti and therefore, you say it is not śūnya. You cannot say pure

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 144

existence is silence for no one entertains vṛtti during silence. Without sad vṛtti how do say
existence is there in the absence of any other pramāṇa? Just like śūnya-vṛtti is not there to
prove śūnyatva, sad-vṛtti is also not there to prove sat. This is the argument posed by the
Nyāya-Vaiśeṣikas. For that Vidyāraṇya gives the answer. I know you will ask this
question. Everything else, including śūnya, in the creation needs a thought process to
prove its existence. There is only one thing which does not need a thought process to
prove its existence for thought itself is proved by that and that is self-evident
consciousness.
Pure existence available during silence is self-evident because the pure existence is self-
effulgent consciousness. To say ‘I am’, I don’t require a thought process. You don’t require
a thought process that you attended a one hour class; śūnya needs śūnya-vṛtti to be
proven while sad does not require a sad-vṛtti to prove it’s existence. Vedāntins say let the
vṛtti not be there because we don’t require a thought to reveal the existence sat-cit Ātmā.
Because pure existence is pure consciousness is self-evident. It is not only self-evident but
also that alone illumines the absence of thought also. Therefore, pure existence is
comprehensible. More in the next class.

Class 11
śloka 45 contd.
In these verses, Vidyāraṇya explains the meaning of the word sad occurring in Chāndogya
Upaniṣad 6.2.1. Before the origination of the universe the pure existence was existent.
Naiyāyika asks the question as to how can there be pure existence without creation at all.
We are used to experience existence along with some objects or the other. For that
Vidyāraṇya answered a counter question. Before the origination what is the difficultly in
conceiving pure existence when you can conceive of ākāśa before origination?
Then in the second stage Vidyāraṇya says for you to conceive of space before creation
there is no pramāṇa at all because pratyakṣa pramāṇa cannot perceive pure space. The
śāstra pramāṇa does not talk about pure space without creation because according to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 145

śāstra when creation resolves space also resolves. We have pramāṇa when we talk of pure
existence and the pramāṇa is that wherever the mind is silent the experience is there.
Nirmanaskatva is another name for the state of silence.
Here the silence refers to mental silence. Nimanaskatva means absence of thought.
Wherever we experience the thoughtless state it is pure existence. We experience that in
mental silence. Sleep is a natural mental silence and nimanaskatva is a deliberate mental
silence you perceive. When you practice through yoga it is called samādhi. In sleep we
have got pure existence. Then Naiyāyika asks the question how you can experience pure
existence without thought.
For thought alone illumines every object. If it is thought how do you say there is pure
existence when there are no thoughts and what is the proof for the existence of pure
existence? For that Vidyāraṇya answers pure existence alone is that which does not need a
proof. Everything in the creation needs a proof through perception except pure existence.
Even silence needs proof. Pure existence alone needs no proof because it is pure
consciousness and pure consciousness does not require proof because it is self-evident and
therefore, it is ever-experienced. That is called Śākṣi-caitanya. Thought need not illumine
consciousness for consciousness is able to illumine the very absence of thought. Therefore,
pure existence is experienced by all of us. During sleep we are unqualified existence called
sāmānya sattā and when we wake up we become viśeṣa sattā; sāmānya sattā is in the form
of ‘I am’ which is common to all. ‘I am’ is sāmānya sattā which obtains in suṣupti. When
we wake up we say ‘I am’ and add individuality where the problem starts. As sāmānya sat
I am free and as viśeṣa sat I am bound by saṃsāra. As sāmānya cit I am free and as viśeṣa
cit I am bound. As sāmānya ānanda I am free and as viśeṣa ānanda I am in bondage. The
viśeṣa ānanda is subject to arrival and departure. Since pure existence is the very witness
of thoughtless state of mind, pure existence does not need a proof and it is very evident to
all. Now Vidyāraṇya winds up in the next śloka.

śloka 46
मनोजृम्भनराहित्ये यथा साक्षी निराकुलः ।
मायाजृम्भणतः पूर्वं सत्तथैव निराकुलम्॥ २.४६ ॥
manojṛmbhanarāhitye yathā sākṣī nirākulaḥ.
māyājṛmbhaṇataḥ pūrvaṃ sattathaiva nirākulam (2.46).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 146

During sleep I, the pure existence, am present as the very Śākṣi-caitanya without enjoying
any attributes, any disturbance, any activity and I am like that until the mind becomes
active. During sleep the mind is dormant. Before the activation of the mind, as long as
sleep continues, the pure existence remains undisturbed and unqualified. Vidyāraṇya says
jṛmbhana means activation, before the activation of the mind, activation of knowledge and
activation of ego or the emotions, in the absence of the mind, or before the mind starts
functioning; I the śākṣī is there as the pure existence undivided existence and during sleep
I don’t have even a location. During sleep there is no cot, no room and no Chennai. I am
nāma-rahita-sattā-rūpeṇa. I am without any transaction. I am not having the emotions
also. Here śākṣī refers to pre-sat because the topic is sad eva idam agra āsīt ekam eva
advitīyam. Extend the same thing to pralaya at macro level. Imagine your condition at
micro level and now imagine the whole universe and macro sleep you visualize and when
the individual sleeps it is called laya and when Īśvara sleeps it is called pralaya. When
individual sleeps it is nidrā and when Īśvara sleeps it is yoga-nidrā and that is the state
during the time of pralaya. In sleep you are in the form of pure existence and during
pralaya also it is pure existence and not śūnya. As is in the microcosm the same thing is
there in the macro level also.
Īśvara’s mind is called Māyā and my mind is called mind; at samaṣṭi level it is called
Māyā. In Māyā all the total vāsanās are dormant, as is in my case vāsanās are in dormant
form. Before the activation of Māyā which means when Māyā is passive, sat sadeva there
is pure existence only. The pure existence is nirākula and it is undisturbed as nāma-rūpas
are not there, transactions are not there and transaction-based thoughts are not there.
Undisturbed state is called sad in Chāndogya Upaniṣad mantra. With this Vidyāraṇya has
completed the analysis of the mantra 6.2.1 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad. After elaborate
commentary we may forget the essence of the mantra; the essence of the mantra is that
before creation, pure existence or pure consciousness was in existence.

śloka 47
निस्तत्त्वा कार्यगम्यास्य शक्तिर्मायाग्निशक्तिवत्।
न हि शक्तिः क्वचित्कै श्चिद्बुद्ध्यते कार्यतः पुरा ॥ २.४७ ॥
nistattvā kāryagamyāsya śaktirmāyāgniśaktivat.
na hi śaktiḥ kvacitkaiścidbuddhyate kāryataḥ purā (2.47).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 147

If you go to Chāndogya Upaniṣad the next mantra says from this sat Brahman the
elements were created; bhūta-traya-sṛṣṭi is pointed out here. We have to supply the other
two and take it as pañca-bhūta-sṛṣṭi. First agni, jala and pṛthvī are mentioned but we have
to add ākāśa and vāyu. Vidyāraṇya feels some notes are to be added here. From pure
Brahman universe cannot come. Pure Brahman is kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa and it is turīya.
That turīya Brahman cannot kāraṇa as kāraṇa has to under modification and pure
existence is beyond time; therefore, it is not the cause of creation. Brahman can become
cause of creation only under one condition and it must not be brahmacārī Brahman and it
has to be gṛhastha Brahman. That Brahman there is a sahadharmacāriṇī and that is Māyā
devī. Chāndogya Upaniṣad does not introduce Māyā but it introduces creation.
What is this Māyā is our question? Vidyāraṇya explains Māyā which is not stated in
Chāndogya Upaniṣad in the following thirteen ślokas. Upaniṣad makes seeming
contradictory statement: in one place Brahman is the cause of creation and in another
place it says Brahman is not the cause of creation. If Brahman is the cause of creation it is
Māyā-sahita Brahman and if Brahman is not the cause of creation it is Māyā-rahita
Brahman. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya bring Māyā. What is Māyā?
Māyā is the power of Brahman. Māyā is the śakti of Brahman. Brahman is śaktimān;
Vidyāraṇya says Māyā cannot be separate from Brahman; śakti cannot be separated from
the possessor of śakti. I have the power of speech. I cannot send the power of speech to the
class. If smart, you will send the hearing power to the class, but you cannot send the
speaking power and you have to come here with your hearing power. That is because
śakti and śaktimān have inseparable relationship. Don’t imagine Māyā was and Brahman
was there and Brahman became gṛhastha. Brahman and Māyā are beginningless and both
are beginninglessly together. They are like fire and the illumining power. These two
powers cannot be separated. They have samavāya sambandha.
How do you know there is Māyā śakti in Brahman? Any śakti or power you possess is
invisible. Just I have got speaking power and I can never see the speaking power because
it is dormant. When you speak I can hear. Any śakti is pratyakṣa-aviṣaya. Even the
burning power is invisible. You cannot see the burning power; śakti is not pratyakṣa.
Anything that is invisible can be known by inference. I see smoke but I don’t see fire yet I
know fire is there through inference; śakti is inferred but not perceived. Any inference
needs a hetu. I am able to infer fire because of smoke.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 148

Similarly for any inference you need a liṅga, an indicatory mark. For Māyā śakti what is
the indicatory mark? It can be inferred from its effect. You grandparent I can infer. It is not
pratyakṣa but anumāna. For grandparent-inference I need an indicator and that inference
is you the effect becomes the liṅga for the existence of the cause. It is called kārya-liṅga-
anumāna an inference of a cause from seeing the effect. Similarly I have speaking power
from your hearing the speech. From speech you infer the speaking power. From the effect
cause can be inferred. You experience the burning and the burning power is inferred.
In the same way Brahman cannot produce creation by itself, but I am experiencing a
creation and therefore, there must be some other factor other than Brahman which is
responsible for creation and creation becomes a liṅga an indicator for the inference of the
creative power which is called Māyā.
You can know the cause after the effect has come and if the effect has not come kāraṇa
cannot be inferred. If a dumb person is there, I cannot know only until I find he is unable
to speech. śakti kāryataḥ purā na buddhyate. Any power invisible power can be inferred if
I do something. Before the creation the causal power can never be known at any time by
anyone; it can be known only when there is creation.
Viśiṣṭādvaita also talks of Māyā śakti and we also talk of Māyā śakti. In Viśiṣṭādvaita
Brahman and Māyā belong to the same order of reality. But Vedānta says Brahman is of
higher order of reality and Māyā belongs to lower order of reality. This makes all the
difference between Viśiṣṭādvaita and Advaita.
Advaita insists on saying that Māyā is of a lower order of reality. Why call it as it belongs
to a lower order of reality? The reason is this. Māyā undergoes change. It is savikāra. If
Māyā becomes integral part of Brahman having the same degree of reality, then a change
in Māyā will affect Brahman also. A pain in the leg affects the whole body. When a part is
affected the whole is affected when both belong to the same order of reality. When I walk
on the road, on the shadow a truck passes then I don’t bother. Even though shadow is
non-separable I am not affected because shadow and myself belong to different orders of
reality.

śloka 48
न सद्वस्तु सतः शक्तिर्न हि वह्नेः स्वशक्तिता ।
सद्विलक्षणतायान्तु शक्तेः किं तत्त्वमुच्यताम्॥ २.४८ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 149

na sadvastu sataḥ śaktirna hi vahneḥ svaśaktitā.

sadvilakṣaṇatāyāntu śakteḥ kiṃ tattvamucyatām (2.48).
We can understand Brahman but what is difficult to understand is Māyā. What you
cannot understand is Māyā. If you understand it is not Māyā. Māyā is a ticklish topic.
Even philosophers struggle with Māyā. Here Vidyāraṇya explain the word nistattva or
what do you mean mithyātva of Māyā. This does not come under sat category or asat
category and it is neither existent nor an non-existent thing. It is in the ‘seemingly existent’
category. Dream does not come under existent category nor under non-existent category
because we experience it. It is seemingly existent category.
For that Vidyāraṇya says that Māyā is a power possessed by Brahman; Brahman is
possessor and Māyā is possessed. They cannot be identical. Māyā is not equal to Brahman.
They have possessor and possessor relationship. Possessor of a dog is not a dog. Brahman
is different from Māyā. Therefore, he says na sadvastu sataḥ śaktiḥ. Māyā which is
possessed by Brahman is not identical with Brahman, brahma-vilakṣaṇa māyā. It is not
separable but it is not identical with Brahman. Based on this he will develop further. More
in the next class.

Class 12
śloka 48 contd.
Sat Brahman is introduced in 6.2.1 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad and after introducing
Brahman, Upaniṣad introduces creation. Pure Brahman is not the cause of the universe
which we have clearly established for Brahman is neither kāraṇa nor kārya; kārya-kāraṇa-
vilakṣaṇa is Brahman. From Brahman nothing can be created. Once you want to introduce
Brahman, Brahman should have kāraṇatva. Nirguṇa Brahman should become saguṇa
Brahman and new Brahman should be the cause of the universe; kāraṇatva is not an
intrinsic attribute of Brahman and it is superimposed attribute of Brahman. It must be
caused by some power and that is called Māyā upādhi. In the presence of Māyā upādhi
nirguṇa Brahman becomes saguṇa Brahman and nishkāraṇa Brahman becomes kāraṇa
Brahman. Chāndogya Upaniṣad does not introduce Māyā and therefore, Vidyāraṇya
borrows this from other Upaniṣads and introduces Māyā. This is discussed from verse 47.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 150

Māyā is described as śakti of Brahman or the power of Brahman. Māyā is supposed to be

śakti of Brahman from one aspect, normally the power of a person cannot exist separate
from the person. My talking power cannot be separated and taken by somebody; śakti is
inseparable from śaktimān. Therefore, Māyā being śakti it cannot be separated from
Brahman. However, the difference is that normally a person and his power enjoys the
same order of reality. I as a person have the talking power and I and the power belong to
the same order of reality. In the case of Brahman, Brahman is satya while Māyā is mithyā.
What do you mean by mithyā? Mithyā does not come under sat or asat category; sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa is mithyā. Māyā is something which has a borrowed existence and it does not
have independent existence. When you say Māyā has a borrowed existence what do you
mean? It is an interesting thing to study.
When I say something has borrowed existence, it is a peculiar situation. Naturally the
question comes who borrows existence. An existent thing borrows existence or a non-
existent thing borrows existence? There are two possibilities. Existent thing should borrow
existence or non-existent thing should borrow existence. You cannot say existent thing
borrows existence. For it has existence. A non-existent thing borrows existence. Is it all
right? Normally who does not have money borrows money. Generally if one does not
possess a thing he has to borrow. It looks all right that a non-existent thing borrows
existence. But it is not all right. A non-existent thing is non-existent. Borrowing is an action
to do; for the action of borrowing it must be existent. To do the job of borrowing, borrower
must be existent. How can a non-existent thing borrow? Therefore, a non-existent thing
cannot borrow and an existent thing need not borrow existence. Borrower must be
different from sat and asat. Whoever borrows existence must belong to sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa
category and that sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category is Māyā. The rope-snake borrows existence
from rope; it does not belong to sat category or asat category but it belongs to sat asat
category. Brahma śakti Māyā has to be sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa enjoying existence borrowed
from Brahman. This is the conclusion of Vidyāraṇya. First Vidyāraṇya establishes Māyā is
sat-vilakṣaṇa and then he will establish asat-vilakṣaṇa. He uses a peculiar argument to
establish this.
He says brahma-śakti is different from Brahman because śakti is something possessed by
Brahman. Brahman is possessor while the śakti is possessed and possessor must be
different from possessed. I am not my talking power. I am the possessor of the talking

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 151

power, the talking power is different from me and even if I don’t talk I continue to exist or
even the talking power goes I continue to exist. Brahman is different from śakti and śakti
is different from Brahman. Replace the word Brahman by the word sat. Sat is another
name for Brahman; śakti is different from Brahman and Brahman is equal to sat and
therefore, śakti is different from sat. Therefore, śakti is sat-vilakṣaṇa. This is the first part
of Māyā definition. Later we will go to asat-vilakṣaṇa. Sat vastu Brahman is not identical
with Brahman’s power Māyā śakti. Brahman and Māyā are two separate principles not
that they are physically away but they are physically close and separate principles like I
and my talking power. They are proximate but they are two different principle. One is
substance and another is property. Brahman is not Māyā and Māyā is not Brahman but
they are intimately together. He gives an example just as fire and its burning power are
not identical. We only say fire has the burning power but we never say fire is burning
power. Once we ascertain that Māyā śakti is sat-vilakṣaṇa, then under what category this
Māyā false? Vidyāraṇya asks a question here. If it does not come under sat, we will say it
belongs to asat category. Now Vidyāraṇya will say it does not belong to asat also because
asat also cannot borrow existence. Māyā is something which borrows existence and asat a
non-existent principle that can never borrow existence.

śloka 49
शून्यत्वमिति चेच्छून्यं मायाकार्यमितीरितम्।
न शून्यं नापि सद्यादृक्तादृक्तत्त्वमिहेष्यताम्॥ २.४९ ॥
śūnyatvamiti cecchūnyaṃ māyākāryamitīritam.
Na śūnyaṃ nāpi sadyādṛktādṛktattvamiheṣyatām (2.49).
If Māyā is sat-vilakṣaṇa if is different from sat, it must belong to asat category or śūnya;
then Māyā must be śūnya. Suppose such a proposal is presented for consideration that is
not acceptable due to two reasons. We will ask the question what you mean my śūnya.
The conventional meaning of word śūnya is non-existence and you cannot say Māyā is
non-existent because a non-existent Māyā cannot borrow existence from Brahman because
to borrow something it must not be śūnya. Suppose you say Māyā exists then also there is
a problem. If Māyā exists why should it borrow existence from Brahman! This is one
answer.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 152

He gives another answer. This pūrvapakṣī said before in verse 34 that śūnya as Māyā-
kārya. In that context pūrvapakṣī to save himself from some problem he blurted out that
śūnya is Māyā-kārya. If you define śūnya as Māyā-kārya you cannot define Māyā as śūnya
because Māyā-kārya cannot be taken as Māyā. If Rāma is the son of Daśaratha, Daśaratha
cannot be Rāma; śūnya cannot be said to be Māyā and therefore, it does not come under
śūnya category. For śūnya another word is asat and it does not come under asat category.
In 34th verse you call śūnya is Māyā-kārya and here you say śūnya is Māyā; there is
contradiction. Therefore, Māyā is neither sat nor asat. It is neither śūnya asat nor sat.
Whatever be sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa, that is the category to which Māyā belongs. Whatever be
category of sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa, mithyā, we have invented a new word mithyā and
whatever be mithyā, that is the category to which Māyā belongs. Not only Māyā the entire
dream world belongs to sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. If the dream world is existent, after waking up
you would have retrieved all the dream money but dream money does not come under sat
category and it does not belong to asat category because you experience the dream world
and therefore, it is not asat. If dream is asat it cannot be experienced and if it is sat it will
not disappear. So we say dream is mithyā. It is true with rope-snake also and with every
false notion we suffer from belongs to mithyā.
Even day to day life comes under sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa only. You experience it, it is asat-
vilakṣaṇa and it goes therefore, it is sat-vilakṣaṇa. According to Vedānta everything you
experience is mithyā; mithyā is a widely accessible entity. Whatever you experience in life
comes under this category only. It is this mithyā category that is not acceptable by both
Viśiṣṭādvaita and dvaita. For them, shell silver is as real as silver, mirage water is as real as
sand and the dream world is as real as waker’s world. For Viśiṣṭādvaita sarvam satyam
and when you use the word unreal in their philosophy unreal means non-existent.
Everything is real whether it is rope-snake or mirage water, and the word unreal can be
used for only non-existent thing. For Viśiṣṭādvaitin unreal means non-existence. Therefore,
he will not accept world is unreal because world is existing. This difference must be
understood and this is true of dvaita system of philosophy also. This sat-asat philosophy is
there in Advaita alone. In Buddhism this mithyā category is there and that is why some
people criticize Advaita.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 153

śloka 50
नासदासीन्नो सदासीत्तदानीं किन्त्वभूत्तमः ।
सद्योगात्तमसः सत्त्वं न स्वतस्तन्निषेधनात्॥ २.५० ॥
nāsadāsīnno sadāsīttadānīṃ kintvabhūttamaḥ.
sadyogāttamasaḥ sattvaṃ na svatastanniṣedhanāt (2.50).
Vidyāraṇya knows once you introduce some people will misunderstand us as Buddhist.
Vidyāraṇya makes it clear that Buddhism does not accept Veda pramāṇa. We talk
everything based on the Veda only and even sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa Māyā is not our invention
but it is very much mentioned in the Vedas. Vidyāraṇya says it is mentioned in ṛgveda
nāsadīya sūkta; it tells that there was neither nothing nor anything before creation. This
does not come under ten Upaniṣads. It comes under pūrva bhāga of Veda. Along with
Brahman only Māyā was there. It refers to ajñāna and another name is Māyā. Tamas alone
was there and the nature of that Māyā is neither asat nor was it sat. It was neither non-
existent principle nor was it existent principle. If Māyā is sat and Brahman is also is sat,
Veda would not have said sad ekam eva agre advitīyam. That Māyā enjoys existence not
by itself but because of its association with sat Brahman; śruti itself negates intrinsic
existence for Māyā. If Māyā had intrinsic existence, Upaniṣad would have said it belonged
to sat category. The śruti has taken Māyā away from sat category. So Māyā is sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa. In these ideas alone Viśiṣṭādvaita, dvaita and Advaita depends. For us mithyā is
the most important thing and we say mokṣa is possible only on realization of aham satya
jagan mithyā. Then there is relief for mithyā cannot affect satya. Only if you understand
mirage water is mithyā, you will know mithyā mirage water cannot wet satya sand. I am
the only satya and everything else is mithyā and if you don’t understand this you cannot
gain liberation.

śloka 51
अत एव द्वितीयत्वं शून्यवन्नहि गण्यते ।
न लोके चैत्रतच्छक्त्योर्जीवितं गण्यते पृथक् ॥ २.५१ ॥
ata eva dvitīyatvaṃ śūnyavannahi gaṇyate.
na loke caitratacchaktyorjīvitaṃ gaṇyate pṛthak (2.51).
The corollary is brought in here. Since Māyā is mithyā it does not come under satya
category. We don’t count Māyā along with Brahman not because Māyā is non-existent but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 154

because Māyā is unreal. Unreal means mithyā; mithyā means sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa.

Everywhere we count only one Brahman because Māyā is mithyā. Māyā being mithyā, it
does not exist separate from Brahman, it is not counted as number two just as you don’t
count your shadow as number two or your reflection as number two. Pratibimba is not sat.
Nor it is non-existent because a non-existent thing you will not experience; śūnyavat
means an unreal thing is like a non-existent thing but it is not non-existent. Unreal thing
can be compared to a non-existent thing but it is not a non-existent thing. A non-existent
thing cannot be experienced like the horn of a hare or vandhya putra. True lies cannot be
there. Non-existent means that which is not experienceable. But unreal thing is
experienced very much. Mirage water is experienced; dream is experienced. By the word
unreal, we don’t mean non-existent. Unreal thing is similar to non-existent thing. In what
way it is similar to non-existent thing? The similarity is that non-existent thing is not
counted and unreal thing is also not counted. Not counting is common to both. One fellow
has no money and another fellow has counterfeit money. Both are not identical. They are
different. They are similar both are moneyless. But both are not one and the same. The
unreal and non-existent things are not one and the same. Viśiṣṭādvaita takes both as same
but Advaitins will not agree with their view. More in the next class.

Class 13
śloka 51 contd.
When Brahman becomes the creator of the Upaniṣad we have to bring in Māyā because
without Māyā śakti Brahman cannot be the creator of the universe. Even though Upaniṣad
does not introduce Māyā, Vidyāraṇya introduces Māyā. The nature of Māyā is being
discussed here and Vidyāraṇya says Māyā is mithyā for it cannot exist independently.
Upaniṣad says sad eva, idam agra āsīd ekam eva aditiyam so Māyā cannot be a separate
entity nor it can be identical with Brahman totally. Māyā is acetana tattva while Brahman
is cetana tattva and both are not the same. Can we Māyā is part of Brahman? That also we
cannot say because of several reasons. One reason is Upaniṣad clearly says Brahman is
niravayava, Brahman is partless. Even logically it will not fit in because Brahman is
beyond time and space and Brahman cannot have parts. Only when we talk of something
within space we can talk of parts. That which is beyond space which itself is partless

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 155

cannot have parts. Brahman is beyond space and therefore, Brahman cannot have any
parts. Any modification taking place will certainly affect Brahman if Māyā is taken as part
of Brahman. Any turbulence in one part of India affects the whole India. So Māyā is not
identical with Brahman and Māyā is different from Brahman. Māyā is superimposed on
Brahman; Brahman is adhiṣṭhāna and Māyā enjoys lesser degree of reality while Brahman
enjoys higher degree of reality. Dream world is not even part of waker, dream world is
superimposed on waker and dream world is different from waker; Similarly Māyā is as
though a part of Brahman, but Māyā is not really part of Brahman. All these ideas are
conveyed through a single word mithyā. Then Vidyāraṇya points out Māyā cannot be
separate from Brahman and therefore, Māyā is not counted as second thing. He gave an
example that we don’t count a person and his power separately. If I have to count all the
powers, it is neither possible nor required because it does not have separate existence. To
write a biography of a person, Caitra, we don’t give separate account of his power
separately. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 52
शक्त्याधिक्ये जीवितं चेद्वर्धते तत्र वृद्धिकृ त्।
न शक्तिः किन्तु तत्कार्यं युद्धकृ ष्यादिकं तथा ॥ २.५२ ॥
śaktyādhikye jīvitaṃ cedvardhate tatra vṛddhikṛt.
na śaktiḥ kintu tatkāryaṃ yuddhakṛṣyādikaṃ tathā (2.52).
Here a Pūrvapakṣa we have to imagine and the Pūrvapakṣa questions why Māyā has not
been counted as śakti. śakti plays an important role in one’s life. If śakti is there a person
prospers and when śakti is not there his future is not going to be better. That being so,
how can you ignore śakti? Therefore, Pūrvapakṣa argues when there is improved śakti or
more śakti his life also improves and prospers which is caused by śakti alone. That being
so why you don’t count śakti? For this Vidyāraṇya will give his answer.
Vidyāraṇya could have given a simple answer. Māyā alone responsible for creation and
since it is mithyā he says it cannot be counted. Utility is not the criteria for counting and
reality alone is the criteria for taking a thing as a real entity. Dream water is useful for
dream thirst. Dream medicine is useful for dream disease. Utility is not the criterion for
the reality. Sunset and sunrise are unreal as sun neither rises nor sets; we know it is
mithyā and that is useful for transaction and we take sunrise and sunset to perform some

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 156

transaction. Just because it is useful you cannot say the sunset and sunrise are real.
Similarly śakti may be useful but that does not make it countable. Vidyāraṇya goes a
roundabout way.
Vidyāraṇya says śakti is not responsible for improvement or prosperity of a person. A
potential will be of use only when it is implemented or put to use. Once I clarify you will
understand. Suppose a person says I know how to do yoga āsanas. Even though he knows
all āsanas he did not improve because he did not do any āsanas. Any power will not bless
unless the power is put to use. Your buying power will not get you material; you have to
use that power. A person has the knowledge of working in a company but he does not go
to office. That potential will not get him salary. Vidyāraṇya says śakti is useless and śakti-
kārya alone is useful. The implementation or manifestation of śakti alone is beneficial. The
power or potential of an individual is not useful for the improvement of his life. The
potential expressed in the form of some action or the other alone will be helpful to him.
Potential will not give you joy. You have to sing to enjoy.
A Kṣatriya can improve only conquering the neighbouring countries by expanding his
kingdom, he can become an emperor. The capacity is not enough, he has to conquer. This
is an example in the case of a Kṣatriya. If he is a Vaiśya, he has to work to prove his
capacity to produce things by farming. Only when you implement and work the potential
power will be actualized and tapped.

śloka 53
सर्वथा शक्तिमात्रस्य न पृथग्गणना क्वचित्।
शक्तिकार्यं तु नैवास्ति द्वितीयं शंक्यते कथम्॥ २.५३ ॥
sarvathā śaktimātrasya na pṛthaggaṇanā kvacit.
śaktikāryaṃ tu naivāsti dvitīyaṃ śaṃkyate katham (2.53).
Vidyāraṇya concludes power is not useful, śakti is not useful and śakti-kārya alone is
useful and since śakti cannot contribute to anything, śakti cannot be counted. śakti is
useless and therefore, it cannot be counted. Untapped power cannot be counted as
separate entity because it is useless. Now Pūrvapakṣa comes with another question. You
say śakti useless and śakti-kārya is useful; śakti-kārya can be counted but śakti cannot be
counted. Pūrvapakṣa says śakti-kārya can be counted because it is useful as is said in the
previous śloka. You count śakti-kārya as a second thing because śakti-kārya is useful. If I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 157

count this way how do you say sad eva, idam agra āsīd ekam eva aditiyam. Vidyāraṇya
says I know this. He says the Upaniṣad talks about a state before the origination of the
world. Upaniṣad talks about before the origination of the world. Before the creation the
śakti was there and śakti-kārya was not there before creation. Therefore, there is no śakti-
kārya before creation. Therefore, it cannot be counted. It can be counted but it is not there
before the creation. Then where is the question of the second thing and therefore, sad eva,
idam agra āsīd ekam eva aditiyam is perfectly all right and the Māyā cannot disturb the
non-duality of Brahman.

śloka 54
न कृ त्स्नब्रह्मवृत्तिः सा शक्तिः किन्त्वेकदेशभाक् ।
घटशक्तिर्यथा भूमौ स्निग्धमृद्येव वर्तते ॥ २.५४ ॥
na kṛtsnabrahmavṛttiḥ sā śaktiḥ kintvekadeśabhāk.
ghaṭaśaktiryathā bhūmau snigdhamṛdyeva vartate (2.54).
He has introduced Māyā and he wants to proceed further. Keeping the future
development Vidyāraṇya wants to show the whole world is one circle and bhūloka will be
one circle and then jala-tattva, then more pervasive will be agni-tattva, then vāyu and
ākāśa and sixth circle will be Māyā. Vidyāraṇya wants to present Māyā as more pervading
than even ākāśa and the seventh circle is beyond Māyā and pervades more than Māyā;
that is Brahman.
We drew the circle from smaller to bigger and Vidyāraṇya brings from bigger to smaller.
He says Brahman is the bigger circle and within Brahman not exact size of Brahman but
smaller than Brahman is Māyā. Nine-tenth of Brahman, based on some Pūrāṇa concept,
will be pervaded by Māyā. Māyā’s nine-tenth will be ākāśa and so it goes on. It is given for
the sake of visualization. It is not a literal measurement, Māyā cannot be measured and
Brahman cannot be measured. That Māyā śakti does not reside upon the entire Brahman.
On the other hand, it only occupies a particular portion of Brahman.
He gives an example. Clay is all over. In every part, the power to produce pot is not there.
With the help of loose earth you cannot make pot. That creative power, that pliability, that
flexibility is only with that part of the earth which is wet with water. He divides clay into
two parts; one is dry and that which has become pliable because of mixing with water. In
that place alone the śakti to produce a pot is there.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 158

The creative part is not in all places of earth and it is there only in certain places. It is the
power to become a pot is there only in the portion of the earth where it is wet, it is a clay,
not in all places. This is an example for śakti occupying a portion of Brahman. Similarly
Brahman also has dry and wet portion. Here the mud is wet due to water-sambandha.
Brahman is wet with Māyā-water and that portion of Brahman has the power to create
something. This is all just a visualization; there is no dry or wet Brahman, used only for
comparison.

śloka 55
पादोऽस्य विश्वा भूतानि त्रिपादस्ति स्वयं प्रभः ।
इत्येकदेशवृत्तित्वं मायाया वदति श्रुतिः ॥ २.५५ ॥
pādo:'sya viśvā bhūtāni tripādasti svayaṃ prabhaḥ.
ityekadeśavṛttitvaṃ māyāyā vadati śrutiḥ (2.55).
Now the question will come how Vidyāraṇya know all these things? Vidyāraṇya says all
these are taken from śāstra only. We do not know even something about ākāśa then what
to talk of Brahman which is beyond ākāśa! Beyond ākāśa Māyā is there and beyond Māyā
is Brahman. When we do not know ākāśa how can we know still subtler Māyā and
Brahman! This contains in the Puruṣasūkta. [mantra number 3, Chāndogya Upaniṣad
3.12.5] the whole creation occupies only a part of Brahman only it is said there. The whole
creation including ākāśa is only one quarter of Brahman it is stated there in the above
Puruṣasūkta. Māyā is also included in it because where creation is there Māyā is there and
where Māyā is there Brahman is there. The other three quarters of Brahman which is
beyond time and space is svayaṃ prabhaḥ is self-effulgent nirguṇa caitanya. Nirguṇa
caitanya is three quarters as it were and world including ākāśa is only one quarter alone as
it were. Why do I say ‘as it were’, because otherwise you will need another ākāśa? Parts
are possible within ākāśa and beyond ākāśa the language of part cannot be applied. Still
for the sake visualization we use a compromised usage that ākāśa is part of Brahman.

śloka 56
विष्टभ्याहमिदं कृ त्स्नमेकांशेन स्थितो जगत्।
इति कृ ष्णोर्जुनायाह जगतस्त्वेकदेशताम्॥ २.५६ ॥
viṣṭabhyāhamidaṃ kṛtsnamekāṃśena sthito jagat.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 159

iti kṛṣṇorjunāyāha jagatastvekadeśatām ( 2.56).

Viṣṭabhyāham idaṃ is a quotation from 10.42 of Gītā. I alone remain as a support of this
entire creation with a small portion of mine. I don’t use my entire size to support the
world. I use an insignificant part of me to support the world. All these have got
philosophical significance. In Kṛṣṇa’s mouth the whole creation was there. It only shows
that Kṛṣṇa supports the world with a small part of his. He declared that the world is only
occupying a part of Brahman. Wherever there is jagat there is Māyā and wherever there is
Māyā there is jagat. Then alone it will come under the subject we discuss here. More in the
next class.

Class 14
śloka 56 contd.
In these verses from 47 onwards up to 59, Vidyāraṇya discusses Māyā śakti for without
Māyā Brahman cannot be projected as the creator. The nature of Māyā śakti has been
establish as sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. It comes under neither sat nor asat category. It is mithyā or
anirvacaniya. Only when we establish Māyā as mithyā then alone we can conclude that
Brahman is not affected by Māyā. If Māyā also enjoys the status of Brahman, Māyā will
begin to afflict Brahman. Now it does not happen because Māyā cannot do anything to
Brahman. Māyā can do only do positive thing to Brahman and that is to create this
universe. Māyā provides vikṣepa-śakti because of which alone Brahman enjoys the status
of Īśvara. Therefore, we have to establish Māyā as mithyā and it is important for mokṣa-
siddhi. Whether Brahman is afflicted by Māyā or not? Why we are particular to establish
that Brahman is not affected by Māyā? Suppose you ask a question the answer is that I will
tell you ultimately I will equate you to Brahman and once I know Brahman is asaṅga and
unaffected and you can nicely claim that I am unaffected ever-free Brahman. Brahman’s
asaṅgatva is important for our mokṣa. Brahman’s asaṅgatva is possible only when Māyā is
mithyā and therefore, mithyātva is a crucial thing to establish.
Then Vidyāraṇya has entered into another aspect of Māyā which is of academic interest
only. He wants to give some important information found elsewhere. The topic is how
much portion of Brahman does Māyā occupies. It is not a terribly important topic and it is
said elsewhere. He points out that Māyā occupies only a portion of Brahman. By extension

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 160

I will say creation itself occupies a portion of Brahman. The advantage of this statement is
once I say creation occupies a portion of Brahman, it will mean ākāśa itself is a part of
Brahman which means Brahman is ākāśa-atīta. You cannot intellectually conceive of the
location of Brahman because Brahman is ākāśa-atīta. Whenever we talk of something our
intellect want to locate that thing. Then our intellect likes to locate that Brahman. Intellect
cannot conceive of a locationless entity. The location is twofold— one is spatial and the
other temporal, time-wise location. ‘Where and when’ question is asked by the intellect.
Brahman is deśa-kāla-atīta and Veda says you cannot intellectually conceive Brahman and
you need not conceive Brahman because you happen to be Brahman. Vidyāraṇya says
these things are based on Puruṣasūkta and Gītā. Once again Vidyāraṇya will quote some
more pramāṇas.

śloka 57
सभूमिं सर्वतो वृत्वा अत्यतिष्ठद्दशाङ्गुलम्।
विकारावर्ति चात्रास्ति श्रुतिसूत्रकृ तोर्वचः ॥ २.५७ ॥
sabhūmiṃ sarvato vṛtvā atyatiṣṭhaddaśāṅgulam.
vikārāvarti cātrāsti śrutisūtrakṛtorvacaḥ (2.57).
This is another quotation from Puruṣasūkta— sa bhūmiṃ viśvato vṛtvā
atyatiṣṭhaddaśāṅgulam, Paramātmā pervades the universe completely. Not only does
Paramātmā pervade but goes beyond the universe also, goes beyond ākāśa also; you can
include kāla also. In Nārāyaṇīya Bhaṭṭatiri says I know nirguṇa Kṛṣṇa and also saguṇa
Kṛṣṇa as well. He says I enjoy both. It says atyatiṣṭhad daśāṅgulam which means ten
inches Paramātmā exceeded. Previously it was said nirguṇa portion is much more and
saguṇa portion is one-fourth. What does it means is that nirguṇa Brahman is beyond deśa-
kāla? We are not particular about the actual measurement as they are but figurative
expressions. Understand the significance that Brahman is deśa-kāla-atīta. Then he quotes a
Brahma-sūtra quotation. vikārāvarti is the quotation. The meaning is the saguṇa-
prapañca-or kārya-prapañca-āvarti means pervading kārya prapañca vikārāvarti means
beyond the kārya prapañca. Thus Brahman has two portions one falls within the universe
and the other portion falls beyond the universe that falls within is called saguṇa and that
which falls beyond is nirguṇa Brahman which is deśa-kāla-atīta. With regard to this topic
there is pramāṇa. They are the words of the śruti and here it means Puruṣasūkta.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 161

śloka 58
निरंशेऽप्यंशमारोप्य कृ त्स्नेंऽशे वेति पृच्छतः ।
तद्भाषयोत्तरं ब्रूते श्रुतिः श्रोतुर्हितैषिणी ॥ २.५८ ॥
niraṃśe:'pyaṃśamāropya kṛtsneṃ:'śe veti pṛcchataḥ.
tadbhāṣayottaraṃ brūte śrutiḥ śroturhitaiṣiṇī (2.58).
Here Vidyāraṇya answers a possible doubt of a thinking student. In all the places Māyā
occupies a part of Brahman. In other places we have said Brahman has no parts. We have
said Brahman is niravayava. Here Vidyāraṇya answers. He says this doubt is genuine.
This is said for the purpose of understanding and temporarily accepts Māyā as a part of
Brahman. Really speaking Māyā is mithyā as good as non-existent and so where the
question of occupying Brahman is! Snake cannot be part of rope. Mirage water occupies
which part of land? When it is not there where the question of occupying is? This person is
staunchly holding on to the mirage water and I temporarily come down and accept that it
occupies the part of land and then I say there is no question of mirage water occupying the
land for there is no mirage water at all. This temporary acceptance of part for the partless
Brahman is called adhyāropa. When Māyā is negated later the part also will be negated
later.

śloka 59
सत्तत्त्वमाश्रिता शक्तिः कल्पयेत्सति विक्रियाः ।
वर्णाभित्तिगताभित्तौ चित्रं नानाविधं यथा ॥ २.५९ ॥
sattattvamāśritā śaktiḥ kalpayetsati vikriyāḥ.
varṇābhittigatābhittau citraṃ nānāvidhaṃ yathā (2.59).
He has introduced Māyā, described the nature of Māyā and pointed out that Māyā
occupies a portion of Brahman and now he explains what is the job of Māyā. Māyā with
vikṣepa-śakti projects the universe, a universe which existed in it in a potential form. Māyā
cannot create a world afresh for matter cannot be created. Reasoning and śāstra do not
allow fresh creation of matter. Māyā creates universe means Māyā manifests the universe
which was in avyakta rūpa or within Brahman itself. You project the dream universe
whatever was already in the mind in vāsanā-rūpa. vāsanā-rūpa-prapañca is avyakta,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 162

unmanifest, and it only becomes manifest in the dream. Therefore, he says Māyā śakti has
the whole universe in potential form and is based upon Brahman just like vāsanās based
in you project svapna-prapañca in you.
Similarly Māyā śakti based on Brahman projects out the creation. Māyā also projects an
unreal world. It unfurls the unreal world. Māyā projects varieties of products and they rest
upon the same adhiṣṭhāna Brahman, Māyā is based on Brahman and Māyā’s projects are
also based on Brahman. kāraṇa Māyā also is mithyā and kārya prapañca is also mithyā as
for both of them there is one common adhiṣṭhāna that is Brahman; that is sad eva, idam
agra āsīd ekam eva aditiyam. Sat is equal to Brahman. He gives an example here. It is like
the varieties of paints which are located on the wall seemingly create varieties of pictures
like rivers, mountains, etc. They are nāma-rūpa, mithyā, resting on the wall. The wall
supports the paint and paint-generated pictures as well. The wall is like Brahman and
paint is like Māyā while the pictures are like the people. Just as paint creates varieties of
pictures on the wall, Māyā creates the universe.

śloka 60
आद्यो विकार आकाशः सोऽवकाशस्वभावान्।
आकाशोऽस्तीति सत्तत्त्वमाकाशेऽप्यनुगच्छति ॥ २.६१ ॥
ādyo vikāra ākāśaḥ so:'vakāśasvabhāvān.
ākāśo:'stīti sattattvamākāśe:'pyanugacchati (2.61).
With the previous verse the discussion on Māyā is over. The above 12 verses
comprehensively discuss Māyā. Generally you will find even if the doubt about Brahman
is gone the doubt about Māyā will remain. As you read again and again you will get more
and more clarity. Now Brahman is ready and Māyā is ready, only the creation has to come
about. First they have five childrem ākāśa, vāyu, agni, jala and pṛthvī; pañca-bhūta-sṛṣṭi
will begin. In the following portion Vidyāraṇya will introduce pañca-bhūta-sṛṣṭi and also
will discuss pañca-bhūta-brahma-viveka-prakaraṇa.
First he takes up ākāśa for elaborate study. The topic is ākāśa-sṛṣṭi and ākāśa-viveka which
means ākāśa-brahma-viveka. Vidyāraṇya discusses elaborately so that he can extend the
same to the other elements. This topic will go up to the verse 76.
Ādyo vikāra means kārya. One meaning of vikāra is modification. In this context vikāra
means product. A product is nothing but a modification. The eldest child is called ākāśa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 163

The nature of ākāśa is of accommodating everything. That is why first ākāśa is created
because it can accommodate everything. Īśvara is a smart householder. He made a big
house. Then once ākāśa comes into being you say ākāśa exists, the space is existent you
say. Vidyāraṇya says when you say ākāśa exists, existence is not the nature of ākāśa.
Existence is not the nature of ākāśa but it is borrowed from Brahman. It inheres in space.
Details in the next class.

Class 15
śloka 60 contd.
Having talked about Māyā from now onwards up to 76th verse Vidyāraṇya deals with
ākāśa-sṛṣṭi and ākāśa-brahma-viveka. He first deals with the sṛṣṭi of the elements and he
starts with ākāśa. Chāndogya Upaniṣad skips ākāśa- and vāyu-sṛṣṭi. Vidyāraṇya introduce
ākāśa and vāyu also. First product out of Māyā-sahita Brahman is ākāśa; the definition of
ākāśa is avākāśa-svarūpavān having the property of accommodation. That proves
accommodation for agni, vāyu, etc. In addition to ākāśa it enjoys existence. We don’t
appreciate ākāśa as non-existent and we say ākāśa is. There is vāyu, agni and ākāśa and
that is-ness is called existence. We take it for granted the is-ness of everything. Vedānta
says nothing should be taken for granted. Space is there; ākāśa is there along with
existence. Accommodation is one feature and existence is another feature. One alone
belongs to ākāśa and another belongs to Brahman. Accommodation belongs to ākāśa and
existence is a borrowed thing from sat Brahman. Brahman alone enjoys intrinsic existence
and that existence is lent to ākāśa. There is a pot means the is-ness of the pot does not
belong to the pot but to the clay. The properties are existent. The existence belonging to
Brahman pervades ākāśa also. That is understood from our experience. Space exists means
space belongs to ākāśa and existence is borrowed from Brahman. Whenever you say
something is, the is-ness belongs to Brahman. The body is conscious means the
consciousness belongs to Brahman.

śloka 61
एकस्वभावं सत्तत्त्वमाकाशो द्विस्वभावकः ।
नावकाशः सति व्योम्नि स चैषोऽपि द्वयं स्थितम्॥ २.६१॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 164

ekasvabhāvaṃ sattattvamākāśo dvisvabhāvakaḥ.

nāvakāśaḥ sati vyomni sa caiṣo:'pi dvayaṃ sthitam (2.61).
The sat Brahman has only one property the intrinsic property Brahman has. The single
property of Brahman is existence. Whereas ākāśa has two properties; one is a borrowed
property and one is the original property; one is providing accommodation to other things
and the second borrowed feature is existence. In Brahman avākāśa the property of
accommodation is not there. Brahman cannot accommodate anything. Fortunately
Brahman need not accommodate anything. There is no second thing for Brahman to
accommodate. Brahman accommodates ākāśa we cannot say. Can we say rope
accommodates snake and can we say the waker accommodates the dream? We cannot say
rope accommodates the snake and if you use the expression you talk of relationship of the
rope and snake. The relationship will be accommodator and accommodated. The
container-contained relationship. You cannot talk of this relationship between rope and
snake because any relationship is possible only between two things enjoying the same
order of reality; ākāśa is vyāvahārika-satya and the object in it also; you can say they have
relationship. In the case of Brahman and ākāśa though, one is vyāvahārika-satya and the
other is pāramārthika satya and therefore, no relationship is possible between two things
of different orders of reality. A man in dream cannot have relationship with a waking
person. The vyāvahārika Puruṣa and pratibhasika Puruṣa cannot have any sambandha. If
you insist, then I will say the relationship is adhyāsta-adhiṣṭhāna-sambandha which
means no sambandha. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya begins Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya with adhyāsa-
bhāṣya. Brahman does not have the property of accommodation. That property belongs to
ākāśa. But in ākāśa there are two properties one is accommodation and the other is
existence property borrowed from Brahman.

śloka 62
यद्वा प्रतिध्वनिर्व्योम्नो गुणो नासौ सतीक्ष्यते ।
व्योम्नि द्वौ सद्ध्वनी तेन सदेकं द्विगुणं वियत्॥ २.६२ ॥
yadvā pratidhvanirvyomno guṇo nāsau satīkṣyate.
vyomni dvau saddhvanī tena sadekaṃ dviguṇaṃ viyat (2.62).
Here Vidyāraṇya makes a slight modification given in the previous verse. The idea he
gave was Brahman has one property and ākāśa has two properties existence and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 165

accommodation. Brahman lends property of existence to ākāśa. Here Vidyāraṇya says the
second property of ākāśa is śabda guṇah. Instead of accommodation, Vidyāraṇya says
ākāśa has the property of śabda guṇa. This śabda guṇa of ākāśa is generally experienced in
the form of echo. That is why if you want to experience the sound of the fan put your hand
in a particular way and you will hear the sound of the fan. When you enclose the space the
sound is heard; śabda guṇa is not there in Brahman. It is the property of ākāśa. Why
Vidyāraṇya changed his mind and took śabda as property instead of accommodation?
Vāyu borrows two properties from ākāśa, śabda and existence and if you take śabda guṇa,
you can say vāyu borrows śabda guṇa from ākāśa. If accommodation is taken then you
have to say vāyu borrows accommodation property. Agni, jala, and pṛthvī do not have the
property of accommodation. We all occupy the earth and how do you say earth does not
accommodate!
Never say walls or the ground accommodate you. Within the four walls space is there and
it is the enclosed space alone that accommodates you all. The walls are built to enclose the
space and not to accommodate you. What accommodates you is the space only. Therefore,
you should note that vāyu, agni, etc, do not borrow the accommodation property but the
śabda guṇa from ākāśa. Every element has śabda guṇa and that is why Vidyāraṇya
changed to śabda guṇa to ākāśa instead of accommodation.

śloka 63
या शक्तिः कल्पयेद्व्योम सा सद्व्योम्नोरभिन्नताम्।
आपाद्य धर्मधर्मित्वं व्यत्ययेनावकल्पयेत्॥ २.६३ ॥
yā śaktiḥ kalpayedvyoma sā sadvyomnorabhinnatām.
āpādya dharmadharmitvaṃ vyatyayenāvakalpayet (2.63).
Up to the creation of ākāśa the Māyā’s vikṣepa-śakti is active. The other is āvaraṇa-śakti
the power of delusion. It is the confusing power of Māyā that creates problem. We have
two things one is ākāśa and the other is Brahman, existence. Existence of Brahman is an
independent entity and existence can exist by itself without depending upon any other
factor. Existence and ākāśa are so intimate and we think we never take existence as an
independent entity but it is mixed with ākāśa. We count existence along with some object
or the other. Existence is taken along with some object or the other and we forget the
principle that the existence is an independent property of Brahman and it was

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 166

independent all the time. It loses its independent status and takes to ākāśa. This is called
tādātmya adhyāsa. It means you don’t appreciate distinctly but appreciate along with
something. If you mix up knowingly there is no problem and if you do it unknowingly
problems arise. Existence was there even before creation and it is there now also. Brahman
with Māyā first creates ākāśa. All creations have the lower order of reality. After vikṣepa-
śakti āvaraṇa-śakti takes over. It brings about a mixture. While existence is an
independent entity, ākāśa and existence we appreciate together. In this mixture of ākāśa
and existence, Brahman which is dependent on what? Ākāśa depends on existence. Noun
refers to independent substance. Adjective indicates dependence; ākāśa must be adjective
and existence must be original substance. Existence is made into an adjective or property.
When you say ākāśa is, ākāśa is the noun the substance and existence becomes an
adjective and it creates an impression existence is dependent on ākāśa. The substance is
converted into property and property is converted into substance by Māyā. It brings about
substance-property relationship or noun-adjective relationship in the reverse order. Sat
must be noun and ākāśa must be an adjective; ākāśa is nāma-rūpa and sat is original. We
have made ākāśa as noun and existence as an adjective, which is due to delusion.

Class 16
śloka 63 contd.
We study the ākāśa-sṛṣṭi and also ākāśa-brahma-viveka as the first part of pañca-bhūta-
brahma-viveka. Vidyāraṇya points out Māyā with vikṣepa-śakti the ākāśa-tattva in the
beginning and that it is endowed with śabda guṇa. Ākāśa is a product and being a kārya it
is not a substance in itself as any kārya is an addition of nāma and rūpa. A substance
cannot be produced; production of something is nothing but addition of nāma-rūpa.
Bangle-production is not production of gold but what one does is without producing an
ounce of matter, production of bangle is an addition of shape to the already existent
substance. In Vedānta production is addition of particular nāma-rūpa. Matter can never be
produced and matter cannot be destroyed. Production is giving a particular configuration.
Ākāśa is a not a production as it is nothing but a nāma-rūpa only given to the substance,
Brahman, existence-principle. Original substance is Brahman; sad eva, idam agra āsīd
ekam eva aditiyam. Existence is the basic substance which was there before the addition of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 167

nāma-rūpa. That basic substance is called existence; ākāśa is nāma-rūpa added out of
Māyā’s vikṣepa-śakti and ākāśa being a nāma-rūpa it is not a substance at all and it
depends upon the Brahman, the adhiṣṭhāna. Existence is independent and ākāśa is
dependent. What happens is this Māyā reverses the whole thing. The existence substance
is converted to dependent adjective, the property. And ākāśa the non substantial nāma-
rūpa is treated as though it is a substance. Substance is reversed into a property and nāma-
rūpa is made a substance.
Existence which is independent is made into dependent thing and ākāśa a dependent
thing is converted into an independent noun. The reversal is caused by Māyā śakti. How it
has taken place Vidyāraṇya will explain later.
Independent existence is mixed up with ākāśa. Not only existence is mixed up with ākāśa
but also the existence which is an independent substance becomes an adjective dependent
on ākāśa. We say ākāśa exists. We say space exists or you say space is existent. In both the
sentences the space is the subject. Subject is a noun and space has become a noun an
independent substance. You use the verb exists and the verb refers to an action and action
is a dependent principle. Any action is always dependent on the agent substance.
Therefore, when you say space exists the poor existence has now become a verb indicating
an action and as an action it has become dependent on the subject of the sentence the
space. Here the space has become superior and the verb has become inferior. The existence
has become a verb for an action which depends upon ākāśa. Really speaking existence is
Brahman. Brahman existed even before ākāśa is born and ākāśa is dependent on existence
and now ākāśa has become prominent and existence has become a verb dependent on
ākāśa. Subordinate has become a boss. What has become to Brahman the boss is
happening today. Servants have become masters.
Otherwise you should say ākāśa is existence. When existence becomes an adjective, it is
dependent on the noun ākāśa. Whether you say ākāśa exists or ākāśa is existent, existence
has become subordinate. Even now no one accepts existence as a noun. Vedāntic teacher
has to explain existence is not a part, property or a product of a substance and existence is
an independent entity which pervades and enlivens all and existence extends beyond
nāmas and rūpas and existence will survive even after all the objects die. I have to tell and
even after that student may not accept because existence is treated as a verb or adjective,
for in both it is subordinate while Vedānta says it is neither an adjective nor a verb but it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 168

a noun. A noun is converted into verb or adjective because of Māyā and therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says it is noun-adjective relationship in a reverse order of existence and ākāśa.

śloka 64
सतो व्योमत्वमापन्नं व्योम्नः सत्तान्तु लौकिकाः ।
तार्किकाश्चावगच्छन्ति मायाया उचितं हि तत्॥ २.६४॥
sato vyomatvamāpannaṃ vyomnaḥ sattāntu laukikāḥ.
tārkikāścāvagacchanti māyāyā ucitaṃ hi tat (2.64).
The second line of the previous line is commented upon here. How a noun is converted
into an adjective and an adjective is converted into a noun? You know gold is the
substance which existed even before making it a bangle. Goldsmith makes the bangle by
adding a particular shape. The bangle is the name connected to a shape, a form. Only after
the shape is given the bangle name is given. Only after the shape arrived the name
arrived and once the shape went the name also went. Name belongs to not a substance but
it belongs to the form. You know that a form is not a substance at all and it is only a
property. Therefore, bangle is a property. Chain is a property. Gold alone is the substance.
After the shapes are making, you call it as golden bangle or golden chain. We make the
substance as an adjective. Bangle the property has become a noun. Then we call bangle is
ten grams. Form does not have weight but bangle is treated as a substance and noun
whereas poor gold has become an adjective. When you convert gold into chain you call it
golden chain. Similarly you should not say wooden chair. This reversal has caused
saṃsāra. Existence never should become an adjective. You should not say existent space
but say spacy existence. When vāyu nāma-rūpa comes you should say airy existence and
watery existence with water nāma-rūpa, etc. You should make existence as the noun. All
the nāma-rūpas are to be taken as adjectives.
The difference between Viśiṣṭādvaita and Advaita is that in the former, the world is an
adjective or property which is as real as Brahman. An adjective and a noun enjoys the
same order of reality. In Advaita Vedānta adjective is kept one step lower than the noun.
mithyā-viśeśeṇa Viśiṣṭādvaita if you say it is all right. Space is a property added to ‘Sat
Brahman’ with existence. But we say existence as a property belongs to the substance
ākāśa. Existence is superior while ākāśa is inferior. This mistake is not only committed by
ordinary people but also by the great Naiyāyika philosophers. This is on account of Māyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 169

This confusion is perfectly becoming of the Māyā’s confusing power. You have to extend it
to the consciousness and also existence. When you say body is conscious you commit the
same mistake where the body has become a noun and consciousness has become the
property of the body. Then I have to say consciousness is not a part, property or a product
of a substance and consciousness is an independent entity which pervades and enlivens
all. And that existence extends beyond nāmas and rūpas and consciousness will survive
even after all the objects die. Consciousness is a mystery and phenomenon of
consciousness they have not understood. When I say consciousness is an independent
entity they try to extract consciousness out and unfortunately consciousness cannot be
separated into an independent substance. Only way to know is śāstra pramāṇa.

śloka 65
यद्यथा वर्तते तस्य तथात्वं भाति मानतः ।
अन्यथात्वं भ्रमेणेति न्यायोऽयं सर्वलौकिकः ॥ २.६५ ॥
yadyathā vartate tasya tathātvaṃ bhāti mānataḥ.
anyathātvaṃ bhrameṇeti nyāyo:'yaṃ sarvalaukikaḥ (2.65).
He makes a general law that Māyā is the creator of confusion because it’s function of
confusion is reversal of everything. Māyā reverses everything. Wherever moha is there,
there will be viparyaya. He says yad yathā vartate when an object enjoys a particular
status, tasya tathātvaṃ that status is appreciated exactly as it is; mānataḥ when you have
the right pramāṇa, a clear means of knowledge will help you to appreciate a thing as it is.
Bhrameṇa when there is error or misconception anyathātvaṃ the reverse order is taken;
dharma is taken as adharma and adharma is taken as dharma. Rope is taken as snake and
snake is taken as rope which is dangerous. Reverse is taken because of bhrama. This
principle is universal. Through pramāṇa a thing is appreciated as it is and through bhrama
a thing is taken wrongly. Since Māyā is reversing everything, Māyā is the producer of
bhrama. You cannot raise a non-subtantial thing to a substance. Similarly there is no
substance called body as body is a non-substantial nāma-rūpa but in our vision body has
become a substance and it is pampered and pampered; if something happens to the body
it becomes the greatest tragedy even driving one to suicide. This is done by Māyā. We

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 170

don’t try to change our understanding. But we blame Īśvara for this situation. It is all
because of noun-adjective reversal and it is called saṃsāra.

śloka 66
एवं श्रुतिविचारात्प्राक्यद्यथा वस्तु भासते ।
विचारेण विपर्येति ततस्तच्चिन्त्यतां वियत्॥ २.६६ ॥
evaṃ śrutivicārātprākyadyathā vastu bhāsate.
vicāreṇa viparyeti tatastaccintyatāṃ viyat (2.66).
The reversal has to be rectified or reversal has to be reversed. You should have a vision in
which the whole world appears as changing nāma-rūpa. It should be reduced to non-
substantial, fragile, constantly, fluidly, kaleidoscopically changing nāma-rūpa alone and
there is only one substance that is called Brahman or Ātmā whether you call it cit or sat.
Everything in the world should be seen as Brahman plus nāma-rūpa. That is why Kṛṣṇa
says yā niśā sarvabhūtānāṃ tasyāṃ jāgarti saṃyamī. yasyāṃ jāgrati bhūtāni sā niśā
paśyato muneḥ (Gītā 2.69). By reversing the day and night, Kṛṣṇa indicates the reversal of
noun and adjective. How will this reversal take place? It is because of Māyā. Māyā
produced bhrama in my head and therefore, the reversal has to take place within me and
in my intellect. No regular pramāṇa, pratyakṣa or anumāna, will work because they are
also infected by Māyā. They also reveal sat-cit as adjective only and there is only one
unaffected pramāṇa that is śāstra pramāṇa or Upaniṣad pramāṇa. That is the only
pramāṇa which says existence is a noun. It is a substance and not only it says it is a
substance but also it says it is the only substance and it is the ultimate substance. So also
consciousness is the only substance. World is only a nāma-rūpa. This is said in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad clearly. The world is nothing but name, form and function, all
the wrong methods of perception are rectified after self-enquiry. This re-reversal in the
form of rectification is caused by śruti pramāṇa. If you are interested in this reversal take
to the study of Upaniṣad. More in the next class.

Class 17
śloka 66 contd.
Because of the power of Māyā sat Brahman has become kāraṇa and ākāśa the kārya. In the
relationship between Brahman and ākāśa a peculiar thing happens. Normally kāraṇa is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 171

substance and kārya is only a nāma-rūpa which is the property. Therefore, kārya has to be
understood as a property and therefore, not a substance at all; kārya is always non-
substantial. What happens is that something covers our vision and we see every product
as though they are substances! The word table should not indicate a substance at all as it is
a product which means a rūpa and it is a property which means non-susbtantial. The
word wood should create an idea of substance. But we look upon table as substance.
Every property is mistaken as a substance. Substance is taken as an adjective while the
property is looked upon as a substance. Vedānta wants to say is that the whole creation is
a product which means the whole creation is a property which means the whole creation
is non-substantial. This should enter the head that there is no substance called the world.
The world is a name given to a set of rūpa and there is no substance called world. Having
trained our mind to see the world as a substance, instead of seeing existence as the
substance, we see it as a property of every object. The is-ness I have to learn to see as the
ultimate subject. This appears to be a difficult thing for we think that a substance should
be tangible and visible. This is our misconception.
Vedānta says visibility and tangibility are temporary properties only and they have
nothing to do with the subject. Vāyu is also thought of as a substance but it is not visible so
also the water when evaporated it is neither tangible nor visible. Visibility and tangibility
are temporary properties of the object and the non tangible and non-visible is the ultimate
and the only substance; all others are varieties of properties which are not the substance.
Non-tangible existence should be accepted as substance and the tangible visible universe
should be understood as temporary and an incidental property. This is the reversal of
dharma-dharmi padas. If we complete the first stage, we travel from Dvaita to
Viśiṣṭādvaita.
Before Vedāntic enquiry everything in the creation is appreciated in a particular way as
the world is a substance and non-tangible existence is a property. A reversal should take
place that the visible and tangible world is the property and the invisible and non-tangible
ultimate existence alone is the substance of the world. Therefore, vicāra by successful
enquiry these two are reversed. The existence becomes the substance and the world
becomes an adjective. May you enquire into ākāśa element. We have discussed only ākāśa-
sṛṣṭi. Since we have discussed ākāśa-sṛṣṭi he says you enquire on ākāśa-sṛṣṭi. We should

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 172

reverse the noun and adjective because our regular perception is wrong and what śruti
says is the right perception. Bhrama should be converted into pramā.
The second purpose the wrong perception leads to saṃsāra and the right perception saves
you from saṃsāra. In the wrong perception changing properties are treated as substance
even though they are but rūpa; if the changing properties of the pot are taken as a
substance, when the pot breaks, we don’t see it is the change of form. If we treat the pot as
a substance when the pot is destroyed, we take the pot as though a substance itself and we
begin to get attached to the pot as though it is a substance. You are objective when you
look at a form as a form. Form will be deformed and shape will be deshaped. Seeing the
property as a substance leads to saṃsāra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya pleads to make the
enquiry. Now the enquiry begins.

śloka 67
भिन्ने वियत्सती शब्दभेदाद्बुद्धेश्च भेदतः ।
वाय्वादिष्वनुवृत्तं सन्न तु व्योमेति भेदधीः ॥ २.६७ ॥
bhinne viyatsatī śabdabhedādbuddheśca bhedataḥ.
vāyvādiṣvanuvṛttaṃ sanna tu vyometi bhedadhīḥ (2.67).
How do you make the enquiry? Previously we looked upon the pot as a substance and
treated it as a single entity. The first step in the enquiry is to notice that there are two
aṃśas in the pot— first is clay and the second is nāma-rūpa. This separation you cannot
do physically but it is done intellectually. Of these two aṃśas, clay is the substance and the
pot is a property. The reason is the pot is a name given to a particular shape of clay only
and the shape is a property and not a substance. For that, first you have to see the case of
ākāśa. Similarly you see two aṃśas in ākāśa. You have to separate them, separation being
an intellectual job. When you look at it, you find that ākāśa has two distinct parts; one is
called ākāśa and the other is called existence. Normally we don’t see two aṃśas. We take it
for granted. We have to see existence as a distinct principle. They are distinct because they
have distinct words, ākāśa and is; if there are two words, there must be two aṃśas. The
concepts are also different. The concept of ākāśa and concept of existence are also
different. When I use the word is, it refers to the existence. When I say ākāśa a thought is
formed in the mind wherein ākāśa vṛtti is different and existence vṛtti is different. Not
only śabda-bheda but also the concept or understanding is different.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 173

Now the question is what should be treated as the substance and what should be taken as
the property? Whatever is extensive is to be taken as substance and whatever is left behind
be taken as property. More pervading must be the substance and whatever is less
pervading must be the property. The bangle is a property because bangle is not
everywhere in gold whereas the gold is everywhere in the bangle. The bangle is a property
and this bangle property does not pervade the entire gold. Gold pervades in all the
ornaments and therefore, gold is extensive. Clay is more extensive than the pot. A
property cannot go beyond the substance but the substance can go beyond the property.
The existence pervades vāyu, etc, also. It is not only in the ākāśa but also extends to all
other elements Therefore, existence is more extensive. However, ākāśa does not extend
everywhere. Before ākāśa-sṛṣṭi Māyā was there and Māyā pervades ākāśa but ākāśa does
not exist in Māyā compared to existence that pervades Māyā also. The whole creation is
only a part of Brahman. The whole creation includes ākāśa also. This appreciation is the
difference in understanding the ākāśa and existence. Even before ākāśa was born existence
was there.

śloka 68
सद्वस्त्वधिकवृत्तित्वाद्धर्मि व्योम्नस्तु धर्मता ।
धिया सतः पृथक्कारे ब्रूहि व्योम किमात्मकम्॥ २.६८ ॥
sadvastvadhikavṛttitvāddharmi vyomnastu dharmatā.
dhiyā sataḥ pṛthakkāre brūhi vyoma kimātmakam (2.68).
From this we can conclude what is substance and what is property. Whatever is more
extensive is the substance and whatever is less extensive is a property. Being more
extensive, sat vastu, the existence, is dharmi, the substance. Existence is the substance. On
the other hand, ākāśa is only a property being less extensive compared to existence. For
this we have śruti pramāṇa. Up to this is stage number one. Now we have to travel from
Viśiṣṭādvaita to Advaita. Brahman is the ultimate Advaita substance qualified by the
property the world. Advaita also says world is the property of Brahman. The question is
whether the world enjoys the same degree of reality as Brahman. Whether the property is
pāramārthika satya or vyāvahārika-satya is our question. Brahman enjoys pāramārthika
satya and there is no confusion between Viśiṣṭādvaita and Advaita about it. The question
is whether the world enjoys pāramārthika satya or vyāvahārika-satya. Viśiṣṭādvaita says

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 174

both enjoy same degree of reality. But we say one enjoys a higher order of reality while the
other, the world, enjoys a lower order of reality. How are we going to prove that?
We have several methods; an easier method I will tell you. If the world is the real adjective
to real Brahman then all the evils of the world will become part of Brahman. And an
adjective will certainly contaminate the substance. Therefore, the doṣas of the world will
become doṣas of Brahman. All rāga and dveṣa will belong to Brahman. We say Brahman is
ever śuddha uncontaminated by any property. The śruti very clearly states that Brahman
is pure and transcends puṇya-pāpa. In Brahman puṇya-pāpa are not there. This is possible
only if the world is taken as belonging to the lower order of reality where it cannot
contaminate the higher order of reality, just as prātibhāsika does not contaminate the
vyāvahārika. The dream water does not wet the waker’s body. Instead of giving this
method, Vidyāraṇya gives some other tougher method.
The enquiry is into ākāśa, as to whether it has its own existence or borrowed existence. It
has borrowed existence because the śruti negates the entire creation, in Brahman there is
no vāyu, no agni and no ap, etc. If śruti negates the creation, śruti should negate Brahman
also, but it does not negate Brahman. From this, it is clear that they have borrowed
existence. What is borrowed existence and who borrows existence? An existent thing
borrows existence or non-existent thing borrows existence? Sat borrows existence or asat
borrows existence? You cannot say existent thing borrows existence because already it has
the existence. Naturally you will say non-existent thing will borrow existence, but you
cannot say that because how can a non-existent thing borrow existence? Non-existent
thing cannot do anything; then how can it borrow? Only a thing that neither comes under
non-existent or existent category alone can borrow existence. That different from sat-asat
category alone can borrow and this is called mithyā; and mithyā alone borrows existence.
Mithyā does not come under either sat category or asat category. This mithyā category is
unique to Advaita. That is why in Viśiṣṭādvaita dream is satya, mirage water is satya,
rope-snake is satya and everything they say is satya and if they leave out satya, the other
category they have is non-existent thing.
We say ākāśa is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa and it has an attribute that is mithyā and it has unreal
property of Brahman. Vāyu is not a substance but it is a property. Vāyu is an unreal
property of Brahman Agni is not a substance but it is a property and it is an unreal
property of Brahman. Thus everything is a property and that too an unreal property. That

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 175

Brahman I am; we should not forget that. The day we assimilate this, we are free. We
should know the whole world is an unreal property and I am the only real substance in
which unreal property of the world dances. Whatever happens being mithyā nothing will
touch me as I am ever asaṅga; asaṅgoham asaṅgoham asaṅgoham.
Mentally separate the existence from ākāśa. Can you tell me what the nature of ākāśa is?
After separating the existence mentally, what is the nature of ākāśa? Tell me what the
nature of pot is after separating the existence. This is the question Vidyāraṇya asks the
other philosophers.

śloka 69
अवकाशात्मकं तच्चेदसत्तदिति चिन्त्यताम्।
भिन्नं सतोऽसच्च नेति वक्षि चेद्व्याहतिस्तव ॥ २.६९ ॥
avakāśātmakaṃ taccedasattaditi cintyatām.
bhinnaṃ sato:'sacca neti vakṣi cedvyāhatistava (2.69).
The Pūrvapakṣa asks what is the big difficulty there? Ākāśa is the accommodator of
everything and therefore, the nature of ākāśa is accommodating things. This is the answer
of Pūrvapakṣa. Now Vidyāraṇya says if this is your answer, you cannot say that ākāśa has
accommodating capacity when existence is separated from ākāśa; ākāśa does not have
existence and so, ākāśa will come under asat variety. You cannot say asat ākāśa has
accommodating nature. It is like telling non-existing son will send money. When you
separate existence it is asat ākāśa and then, how can you say asat ākāśa will give
accommodation? That ākāśa is asat which means non-existent. You should note this
statement of yours amounts to saying non-existent space is the accommodator of things.
To this, Pūrvapakṣa says space does not come under sat as also asat. Then Vidyāraṇya
says you cannot say that because in your philosophy mithyā does not exist at all.
‘ākāśa is different from sat as also from asat’. If you answer like this, in your system
philosophy it is a contradiction. Such a concept you do not have. You have only two: one
is sat and the other is asat. Then you will not be under your philosophy as you will be
negating your own philosophy. But I can say ākāśa comes under mithyā category. More in
the next class.

Class 18

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 176

śloka 69 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has started the main topic of bhūta-brahma-viveka from verse 60 onwards.
The first one is namely ākāśa-brahma-viveka. This will go up to the verse 76. He does this
viveka in three stages. When you look at anything for that matter, it is not one entity but in
each of them there are two aṃśas: one is ākāśa and the other is the existence or sat. In the
statement we stress the ākāśa-part and omit the is-part. Is, the existence, is Brahman.
Accept or appreciate the existence and ākāśa. This can be extended to existence and vāyu,
existence and agni, existence and prāṇa, existence and Māyā, etc. In all the things you
should discern two aṃśas. Normally you see the pot as one thing. But try to see two things
which you generally miss: clay and the pot.
Then the next stage is you have to learn to appreciate the sat or existence as the only
substance and ākāśa is a property as there is no substance called ākāśa. If you take the
example of clay and pot, the new training required is that you are habituated to see pot as
the substance as we talk about the weight of the pot and this new training is that the pot is
not a substance at all as it does not have even one ounce of weight. Pot does not have any
weight and whatever weight you talk about belongs to the clay; then, what is pot? The
weightless property is the pot. The word pot is not the name of the substance but the word
pot refers to a property, a particular shape. If the very same thing is of different shape, the
word also changes and you call it a jug. From that it is clear as the shape changes, the
word also changes and from that it is clear that the word refers to shape and not the
substance. In the same way sat Brahman is the only substance and ākāśa is a property.
This is the second stage.
This confusion comes in the mind because we write the word pot on the right-hand side
and write the word clay on the left-hand side. Noun should have been written on the
right-hand side. Whatever adjective you use is on the left-hand side. When we talk about
existent ākāśa I successfully commit the blunder and therefore, I have to reverse my
attitude. This is the second state.
Now we have to go to the third state. In the case of a clay-pot, the substance clay and the
pot that is the property enjoy the same order of reality where clay is vyāvahārika and
shape pot is also vyāvahārika. In this case the substance and property have the same order
of reality. In the case of Brahman and the world, there is a slight difference, the world the
property is of a lower order of reality than the substance Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 177

Brahman the sat is pāramārthika and the world, in this context ākāśa, is only vyāvahārika.
Third stage is appreciating ākāśa the property as mithyā. Ākāśa-dharma-mithyātva is the
third state. It is this third state Vidyāraṇya has entered into now. Vidyāraṇya establishes
ākāśa-mithyātva. We are particular about mithyātva because only when I say world is
mithyā I can boldly claim the mithyā world cannot affect satya Ātmā. Then only I can
claim freedom. Freedom is not possible if I don’t realise the mithyātva.
If I and Brahman enjoy the same order of reality, I will be overpowered by the world. As
an individual overpowered by the world I cannot claim freedom. That is the reason
whoever accepts the individual and the world having the same order of reality they will
have to say you have to depend upon God for your strength. As an individual I am a puny
creature and I can escape from world only if I pray and worship God. Else I should know
world is mithyā and then I can claim asaṅgoham, asaṅgoham, asaṅgoham. Let anything
happen I am not concerned. Jagat-mithyātva-niścaya is not an academic exercise but it is
important to gain freedom. Therefore, the Ācāryas present this topic from different angles
also. If one angle is not clear try another method. Thus, in Vedānta śāstra the word mithyā
has several definitions. Here Vidyāraṇya is attempting a new definition different from
conventional definition of mithyā. Therefore, these two ślokas are important.
To know that it is different from conventional definition, you should know the regular
definition. Still I will explain the conventional definition. It is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇatvam
mithyātvam. Mithyā is a category which is different from sat or existent category and it is
also different from asat non-existent category and it is a third unique category of sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa category. It falls in the seemingly existent category. It means you cannot say it is
sat and you cannot say it is asat also. How to prove this? For this we take the example of
rope-snake. We say the rope-snake does not come under non-existent category because I
experience it. Not only that, I get frightened on the seeing the rope-snake. Since it is
experienced. it does not come under asat category. Can I say it is sat category? When I take
a torch light and go nearby, the snake disappears. As it is negated on enquiry, it does not
come under the sat category also. If it is asat it will not be experienced if it is sat, it will not
disappear. So it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa mithyā category. You cannot categorise either of the
two and you need third category sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category. This is the popular definition
of mithyā. Vidyāraṇya changes this approach.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 178

Why should Vidyāraṇya choose a different approach? This is done because all the other
philosophers are not able to accept sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category. They say it is an
impossible definition. Either it should be existent or it should not be existent. How can it
be sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category? Many are not able to assimilate this definition. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya will suggest a new category. Here there are only two categories and abolish
sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category for you say it is contradiction. You say it should either existent
or non-existent and it cannot be seemingly existent category. Therefore, he says I will
accept there are sat and asat category; sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa we have abolished for the time
being. It is illogical for argument sake.
Now we have sat or asat categories only. Now what about the rope-snake. Will you put
the rope-snake in sat or asat category? When such a question is asked Vidyāraṇya says
since I have no choice the snake cannot come under sat category because the snake was
non-existent before, it will be non-existent later and even now it’s is-ness is borrowed from
rope only; the snake does not have its own existence and it is borrowed existence. The
rope-snake cannot come under sat category. In the new definition, we have only sat and
asat categories. Now Advaita says rope-snake comes under asat category. The logic we
give is in the past it was not, in future it will not be and in between also it is not. On
hearing this the listener is not happy and he raises a question. You classify the rope-snake
in asat category and the non-existent thing cannot present itself for me and it should not
appear at all like the rabbit’s horn which was not there earlier, in the present and in future.
The rabbit's horn comes under asat category. You say rope-snake is asat but it appears to
me; then how do you explain asat sarpa? Vidyāraṇya says there are two types of asat. One
is non-appearing asat [the rabbit's horn] and there is another type of appearing asat and
that is rope-snake. All mithyā vastu will come under a new classification of ‘appearing
asat’. Here we have sat, ābhāsamāna asat and bhāsamāna asat and Vidyāraṇya says our
ākāśa comes under the third category bhāsamāna asat. That is what he does in this śloka.
This rope-snake or ākāśa mithyā vastu will not come under sat category. If you say it is
sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa in the new approach, the sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category we have abolished;
not because we don’t like it but because they don’t like it. Can the ākāśa come under sat
category; No, sat belongs to Brahman. Ākāśa does not come under sat category. Therefore,
it comes under asat category. Then in the next śloka asat will be divided into two. This will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 179

naturally disturb the student and then Vidyāraṇya will come and introduce two types of
asat.

śloka 70
भातीति चेद्भातु नाम भूषणं मायिकस्य तत्।
यदसद्भासमानन्तन्मिथ्या स्वप्नगजादिवत्॥ २.७० ॥
bhātīti cedbhātu nāma bhūṣaṇaṃ māyikasya tat.
yadasadbhāsamānantanmithyā svapnagajādivat (2.70).
The statement in the previous verse has jolted the Pūrvapakṣa. The ākāśa represents the
whole creation. He said that ākāśa comes under asat category on the basis of the fact that
the creation was non-existent, will be non-existent later and in between also it does not
have existence. Therefore, if the creation does not have its own existence, what difficulty
you have in saying that the creation is asat? The student asks the question— are you not
disturbed? How does the asat world appear and how am I able to experience the non-
existent world? How do you say that the world is asat when it is experienced daily. We
have śāstra pramāṇa for this statement. For that, Vidyāraṇya gives his answer— let the
non-existent world appear; what is wrong? Then he asks the question how is it possible for
it is beyond our comprehension. It is unswallowable. For this Vidyāraṇya answers that is
the glory of Māyā. The very definition of Māyā is making that what cannot happen to
happen. A non-existent thing should not appear and because of Māyā non-existent thing
appears. The appearance of non-existent things is the glory of Māyā. For this we have a
special name. That is called mithyā. The rabbit’s horn is not mithyā because it comes
under non-existent non-appearing thing. However, mirage water, rope-snake, etc., come
under non-existent appearing-thing category. Whatever comes under non-existent
appearing category is mithyā. It is like the dream-elephant. The dream-elephant was non-
existent before and non-existent during the dream and is not appearing after waking up. I
gave the existence to the dream and elephant does not have existence of its own in all the
three periods of time; it is asat but it is appearing, and therefore, it is mithyā. The dream-
elephant comes under asat category. This is the new approach. We have two definitions
for asat.

śloka 71
जातिव्यक्ती देहिदेहौ गुणद्रव्ये यथा पृथक् ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 180

वियत्सतोस्तथैवास्तु पार्थक्यं कोऽत्र विस्मयः ॥ २.७१ ॥

jātivyaktī dehidehau guṇadravye yathā pṛthak.
viyatsatostathaivāstu pārthakyaṃ ko:'tra vismayaḥ (2.71).
With the previous verses third stage of analysis is also over. In the first stage, we separate
sat and ākāśa. In the second stage we saw sat as Brahman, the substance, and ākāśa as a
property. And in the third stage we have seen sat as satya and ākāśa as mithyā. If all these
three stages we have gone through we can claim ourselves jñānīs. That means hereafter
whenever you look anything in the world you look at it in three ways and finally take it as
mithyā the bhāsamāna asat. Every time we experience the world, satya-mithyā-viveka
must automatically take place. Initially it is difficult but then it naturally happens. How do
you expect me to remember this all the time? The separation is not physically done; so
how to remember all the time? Vidyāraṇya says you can do so and you do so all the time.
Vidyāraṇya gives a few examples.
The examples are the species and the specimen, the embodied and the body and the
quality and the substance. When you talk of varieties of ornaments you have jñāna-niṣṭhā
you know this is nothing but gold and gold alone. You appreciate the value of gold
although you don’t use the word gold and use the word corresponding to the ornaments,
but all the time you think of gold alone. Sarvatra suvarṇa-darśana, even though it cannot
be physically separated. Therefore, guṇa and dravya. Sat and jagat may be physically
together but remember brahma satyam jagan mithyā and aham brahma na aparaḥ.

Class 19
śloka 71 contd.
We discussed ākāśa-brahma-viveka. This is done in three stages. First we recognize ākāśa
as something consisting of two factors the ākāśa tattva and the existence principle and this
has to be done intellectually and not physically. In the second stage we have appreciated
that the existence principle is an independent substance and ākāśa as a property and not a
subject. This is a difficult job. Pot is only a property and clay is the substance. It is done by
pointing out that pot is a name given to the weightless form only and the substance is
called clay which was, which is and which will be. You introduce the word pot when the
form arrives. The nāmakaraṇa of the pot was done not on the arrival of clay, but only on

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 181

the arrival of a particular form, and from this it is clear that from the form arrived the pot
name; the moment the form goes, the pot also goes. The name corresponds to the
weightless form and pot is not the name of the substance. We understand pot as the
substance and in fact it is a misunderstanding. Thus by repeated thinking, our mind is
oriented to take the property as the substance. Ocean is a property not a substance. House
is a property not a substance. We are experts in mistaking the property as the substance.
This we practice in the case of ākāśa also. Therefore, the second stage is to understand
ākāśa as guṇa and sat Brahman as dravya or substance.
The third stage is to see that ākāśa, the property, is mithyā or it is a lower order of reality
whereas the substance Brahman is of a higher order of reality. Pāramārthika Brahman is
the substance and it has vyavahāra property called ākāśa. Vidyāraṇya tried to establish
logically and logical approach being subtle, if it is found difficult, you can go to the śāstric
method. Upaniṣad points out that Brahman is nirguṇa and ākāśa cannot be the real
property of Brahman as sat Brahman is without any attribute or guṇa. Even though ākāśa
is property it is as good as no property; it is mithyā. Both by śāstric pramāṇa and logical
pramāṇa sat satyam ākāśa mithyā. With this ākāśa-brahma-viveka part is over. Once you
have understood and assimilated the fact, whenever you see ākāśa this teaching must
come to your mind.
What you see is one and the intellect, with microsurgery, must be able to split and
appreciate that ākāśa has two aṃśas: substance and property. Vidyāraṇya says it is not a
new task I give you but you have been doing so all these days. First example is any object
with a property. You look at the green clip, it is only one thing and you know the clip is
the substance and green colour is a property and because you see one only, in the
language you say green clip. You use the word even though you don’t physically see
green separate from the clip, you see them both together, but in the intellect you
understand that it has two properties. Verbally also you use two words one to point out
the guṇa and one to the object. Why cannot you do the same with sat ākāśa? You cannot
give any excuses. You see one and intellectually appreciate two.
Now we get two more examples. One is jāti-vyakti. jāti is a species or a generic thing. In
tarka śāstra these words are commonly used. jāti and vyakti are common in tarka śāstra. In
this class there are so many people occupy this place. The human being is called as an
individual member or vyakti. If you take all the people as a whole there is one common

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 182

feature in all of them and the first is human being; the human-beingness is a common
feature and therefore, it is called a jāti. We belong to species called humanity. It is called
manuṣyatva. If tvam is not there one is a member. Manuṣya is a member. manuṣyatva is a
jāti. So also is the case with animals. In this class how many members are there and vyakti
is plural and manuṣyatva jāti is one only. Jāti is that category in which one pervades
several members. This one jāti pervades all the members which is plural. manuṣyatva is
eka and it pervades aneka.
Vidyāraṇya says when someone introduces a new animal to you for the first time, say an
elephant, when you look at the elephant and understand it as an elephant, the tarka śāstra
says not only you understand one elephant member but also the elephant jāti with several
members. You grasp elephant vyakti and elephant jāti. Simultaneously, you grasp both
elephant jāti and vyakti. When you see an elephant in Kerala and go to some other place
then you point out and say this is an elephant. Your Guru has taught only Kerala member
of the elephant but when you go to some other place if you see the elephant you are able
to understand the elephant category without being taught once again. I see that all of them
belong to elephant jāti and I say this is an elephant. What Vidyāraṇya argues is whenever
you perceive an object you understand two things— the vyakti and jāti. You see one thing
and understand all the things of the same species. The member is different and it is
elephant jāti. The member and species are understood even though they cannot be
physically separated. Similarly ākāśa and existence are understood even though they
cannot be physically separated. This is example number two.
Now I will give one more example: dehī-deha. dehī-deha means Jīvātmā and the śarīra.
Jīvātmā and śarīra we don’t physically separate and if you separate it will amount to
murder. You don’t physically separate but understand them as two separate things. One
says I do good karma in the world, I will go to heaven. When he talks about doing karma,
he refers to the physical body which does karma and as a result of karma I will got to
heaven means he refers to the Jīvātmā tattva which is inside. This separation he does
intellectually and physical he does not see the śarīra and Ātmā separately; it is not
possible. Even though I cannot physically separate I can understand and in the same way
why don’t you understand ākāśa and existence separately? The body and Jīvātmā and
guṇa-dravye, substance and property, common to all of them is they are physically
inseparable but intellectually separation can be conceived. The difference between ākāśa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 183

and existence I cannot physically separate but your buddhi should be sharp; if not you
should go to the tutorial college of upāsana to gain this knowledge. In Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad
it is said one should have sharp intellect to separate ākāśa and existence. This is logical
and is possible.

śloka 72
बुद्धोऽपि भेदो नो चित्ते निरुढिं याति चेत्तदा ।
अनैकाग्र्यात्संशयाद्वा रूढ्यभावोऽस्य ते वद ॥ २.७२ ॥
buddho:'pi bhedo no citte niruḍhiṃ yāti cettadā.
anaikāgryātsaṃśayādvā rūḍhyabhāvo:'sya te vada (2.72).
Now the student says I have sharp intellect and I understand everything. But I find the
problem is I understand everything but I am unable to derive the wisdom of the
understanding and the study. Therefore, I study this for prayojana but my problem is I am
not able to get the full benefit of the teaching. Bheda, means difference between ākāśa and
sat Brahman, has been understood by me. But the problem is in spite of that, it does not
get well-set in the mind. The knowledge is not well-established in the mind and it is very
shaky or loose or I get jñāna but I don’t get jñāna-niṣṭhā; I get prajñā but I don’t get sthira-
prajñā. The knowledge should go to the sub-conscious mind. This does not happen. More
of our responses are impulsive and that is why after the response is over, we don’t
remember that we gain knowledge. The Vedāntic study creates additional guilt when we
know that we have not assimilated the teaching. If this is the problem, what I study is not
steady in the mind and the moment I get out of the class I am once again immersed in the
worldly thoughts forgetting the teaching; this is the problem of the student.
If this is the problem, now Vidyāraṇya says I have two more questions. He asks the
knowledge is unsteady because of the unsteady mind. There are many people who can
grasp the teaching but the problem is restless and unsteady mind. The restlessness is your
problem. If the student had gained sadhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti he would not have faced
this problem. But generally the student comes through the back door and lacks śamādi-
ṣaṭka-sampatti; this is a serious problem. Even the question he does not listen to properly.
For other people the problem is different. They don’t have wandering mind and their
mind is not restless at all. But he says I am not intellectually convinced of your teaching.
The problem is different. First is conviction is there and there is no doubt but the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 184

knowledge is not available when there are problems. Second problem is that I am not
convinced of Advaita. Then even if it comes from a Swāmīji there will be problem.
Remember lack of conviction also can be the problem. Is your problem unsteady mind or
lack of conviction because of which reason this teaching does not remain in your mind?

śloka 73
अप्रमत्तो भव ध्यानादाद्येऽन्यस्मिन्विवेचनम्।
कुरु प्रमाणयुक्तिभ्यां ततो रूढतमो भवेत्॥ २.७३ ॥
apramatto bhava dhyānādādye:'nyasminvivecanam.
kuru pramāṇayuktibhyāṃ tato rūḍhatamo bhavet (2.73).
Now Vidyāraṇya says suppose the problem is the first one; you have the problem of not
following the solution, you should allot more time for study so that you have less time to
think of outside things. Simple logic: what the mind dwells upon get impressed. Once the
thing is well-printed in the mind, it will be spontaneous and this is called nididhyāsana.
In one way or the other get involved in the subject. Go through the whole teaching by one
way or the other. Even to retain your relationship, you have to spend time and this is
applicable even to hold your wife with you. So much we have advanced. Therefore, he
says spend time in the revision of your studies. Do dhyāna. Let the dhyāna be of the
teaching. How to do meditation is explained in 6th chapter of Gītā. If you are not
convinced of the teaching it is a rational problem or intellectual problem. Then you have to
seriously study the scriptures. There are many books which logically establish Advaita
and they remove all the possible doubts. More in the next class.

Class 20
śloka 73 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of ākāśa-viveka. Through the analysis he establishes that
ākāśa consists of two aṃśas: one is the ākāśa the element and the other is sattā the
existence. We experience both existence and ākāśa. We say ākāśa is or ākāśa exists, etc.,
which convey the appreciation of ākāśa exists. Satya sattā and mithyā bhūta-ākāśa are
mingled together and we experience both simultaneously. But in our intellect we should
be able to distinguish bhūta is mithyā and sattā is satya. This substance and property
experience is together; we don’t experience substance alone but we experience substance

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 185

and the property. The proof for distinction is we have invented two words substance and
property and this proves that we have distinguished both by naming the two. jāti and
vyakti; when we see a man, we experience the individual and the manuṣyatva jāti. As we
understand individual jīva and his jāti separately, we should know satya and mithyā.
When we experience dehī and deha, we experience them together and look at the body as
the person as grandfather and grandmother, etc. When he does the śrāddha etc., he refers
to the jīva as his grandfather or grandmother. Just dehī and deha are together and he is
able to understand the two separately through the intellect. You should mentally
distinguish the clip part is mithyā and the existence part is satya. You are conscious of the
clip and without being conscious of the clip you cannot know the clip. Along with the clip
there is ‘awareness’ and the awareness part is satya. This we call it as existence. In the first
chapter Vidyāraṇya distinguishes Ātmā with consciousness and now he distinguishes
Ātmā with existence. Tad eva cit and tad eva sat.
The student says: I understand the teaching very will. But he says I am not able to derive
the phala. Big hype is made in the Upaniṣad book but I find the jñāna-phala I am unable to
derive; why? Vidyāraṇya asks the question you are not able to derive the phala because
you don’t have conviction or the mind is restless and it is unable to retain the knowledge?
The retention of the knowledge should be there for all the time. Vidyāraṇya says that if
your problem is that of vikṣepa or restlessness of the mind, it essentially means lack of
sadhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Sadhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti being the first lesson one is
prone to forget it. You cannot afford to forget it; śamādi-ṣaṭka-sampatti you cannot ignore
and since you have not acquired the sadhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti the knowledge does not
bless you and better you acquire it. Before acquiring the knowledge ekāgratā is acquired
through saguṇa-upāsana but after gaining jñāna it is acquired through nirguṇa-dhyāna. It
is otherwise called nididhyāsana. Thus dhyānād and here dhyāna means nididhyāsana. By
practicing nididhyāsana, given in the third chapter of Māṇḍūkya-kārikā and 6th chapter
Gītā, you will be able to gain the benefit of Ātma-jñāna. The knowledge will not leave you
at anytime. It is readily accessible like the your name or the phone number. You don’t
meditate upon when I ask you your name and in the same way you should be able to
recall jñāna without any efforts. The knowledge should be naturally made available when
needed. Suppose the problem is not vikṣepa and you are able to concentrate and receive

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 186

the teaching, you are not convinced of the teaching and you have doubt. This can be
solved only by studying more. Is śaṃśaya is your problem, may you study Vedānta more.
If the content of Kaṭhopaniṣad is Ātma-vidyā, what is the content of Kenopaniṣad? Every
Upaniṣad talks about Ātma-vidyā; if one aspect is not clear in one Upaniṣad, the same will
be cleared in some other Upaniṣad. The essential feature is the same and to remove the
doubt and understand it clearly we have so many Upaniṣads and so many prakaraṇa-
granthas. Therefore, you may resort to enquiry with the help of pramāṇa, that is, repeated
śravaṇa, more and more, and also use of reasoning that represents manana. Śravaṇa will
remove pramāṇa-asambhāvanā, manana will remove prameya-asambhāvanā and in short,
all your doubts will go thereafter, by taking to the appropriate remedy since if the doubts
are your problem, meditation will not help. Meditation will help removal of the mind’s
restlessness. People think that meditation will bring mystic experience that will will
validate the knowledge but validation and proof is not attained through meditation.
Further, knowledge is gained only through śravaṇa as knowledge cannot be gained
through meditation. If what you need is not validation and if you want to remove
restlessness, resort to meditation. Patañjali reached the height of Nirvikalpaka samādhi
and even by the practice of yoga he did not come to Advaita. Meditation cannot prove
Advaita. By using the appropriate remedy, the knowledge will become well-rooted, well-
established, well-assimilated and well-reinforced. Prajñā will be converted to sthira-prajñā
and jñāna will be converted to jñāna-niṣṭhā.

śloka 74
ध्यानान्मानाद्युक्तितोऽपि रूढे भेदे वियत्सतोः ।
न कदाचिद्वियत्सत्यं सद्वस्तु छिद्रवन्न च ॥ २.७४ ॥
dhyānānmānādyuktito:'pi rūḍhe bhede viyatsatoḥ.
na kadācidviyatsatyaṃ sadvastu chidravanna ca (2.74).
Thus a student has to practice three fold discipline of śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana
where śravaṇa has to give knowledge, manana will remove doubts and nididhyāsana will
remove the unsteadiness of the mind. Śravaṇa will give knowledge and manana and
nididhyāsana will work negatively by removing the obstacles and the doubts. Dhyāna
refers to nididhyāsana. Māṇāt refers to śravaṇa because māṇa means pramāṇa; pramāṇa
refers to śāstra and śāstra refers to śravaṇa. Yukti is reasoning and in this context it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 187

manana. These are the three presented in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Through these three
methods the difference between ākāśa and existence Brahman you realize, bhūtākāśa as
mithyā and existence as satya. Let this knowledge be will reinforced without any doubt.
This knowledge should be well set in the mind. Ātma-jñāna plant should be well-rooted in
the mind and if it is not rooted well you cannot gain the phala of śravaṇa.
After it is well-set, you don’t require nididhyāsana. An ordinary man does not require
meditation to tell him that he is a human being. So you don’t meditate I am a human being
or I am a male, etc. Naturally you know that you are human being and you are male.
Exactly like that jñāna-niṣṭha-puruṣa never takes bhūtākāśa as satya. He never looks upon
Brahman as endowed with the nature of accommodation. Accommodation property
relates to ākāśa. That property belongs to ākāśa and Brahman does not have
accommodating property. Furthermore, śabda-guṇa also he does not take as the property
of Brahman.

śloka 75
ज्ञस्य भाति सदा व्योम निस्तत्त्वोल्लेखपूर्वकम्।
सद्वस्त्वपि विभात्यस्य निश्छिद्रत्वपुरःसरम्॥ २.७५ ॥
jñasya bhāti sadā vyoma nistattvollekhapūrvakam.
sadvastvapi vibhātyasya niśchidratvapuraḥsaram (2.75).
Ākāśa can no more deceive a jñānī. He knows the truth. He knows the mithyā-svarūpa of
ākāśa. Ākāśa reveals itself as mithyā and it does not deceive a jñānī and not only that, for
the same jñānī, sat Brahman also reveals itself all the time as one without the property of
ākāśa the property of accommodation. When you consume a tea you experience
sweetness. The tongue does not distinguish the sweetness belong to the milk or sugar.
Even though both are together entering the mouth, the intellect knows the tea does not
have sweetness and sugar does not have the tea taste. I don’t mix up sweetness with tea
and the taste of tea to sugar. Existence never belongs to the clip. For a wise person the
confusion is gone for good. You should know that eyes will help experience what is
experienced but it is the intellect that will find the difference between the substance and
the property. Jñānī will experience the world in the same way as others do. There is no
difference in his experience.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 188

śloka 76
वासनायां विवृद्धायां वियत्सत्यत्ववादिनम्।
सन्मात्राबोधयुक्तं च दृष्ट्वा विस्मयते बुधः ॥ २.७६ ॥
vāsanāyāṃ vivṛddhāyāṃ viyatsatyatvavādinam.
sanmātrābodhayuktaṃ ca dṛṣṭvā vismayate budhaḥ (2.76).
Once this vāsanā [the jñāna-vāsanā— brahma satyam jagan mithyā] is sufficiently
nourished through nididhyāsana, either by reading, writing or meditating, if the jñāna-
vāsanā is internalised, the jñānī begins to wonder the outlook of the ordinary persons. The
worldly people say the world is satya and the jñānī is unable to digest the statement of the
ignorant people. Jñānī thinks it is a simple truth that the world is mithyā and he wonders
as to how this knowledge has not dawned on the lay persons. By world here, we mean
ākāśa. Although ākāśa represents the whole creation, jñānī sympathises with the ignorant
people and he does not even argue with such persons. The wise person is surprised that
not only a lay person argues that ākāśa is satya but he also make another argument that
the sat belongs to bhūtākāśa and he does not understand the existence is not a part,
product or the property of bhūtākāśa. Existence is an independent entity that pervades the
bhūtākāśa, existence is not bound by bhūtākāśa and existence continues to exist even after
bhūtākāśa ceases to exist. Existence is seen along with the clip and existence is not the clip.
There is a difference between the existence and the clip. Existence is a separate and
independent entity. Thus the lay person does not recognize the pure existence just as
others argue consciousness is the property of the brain. Vedānta alone says consciousness
is not the property of the brain and it is an independent entity and functions through the
brain and it is not the property of the brain. Except satya and mithyā, I have understood
entire Vedānta, say some! This sad situation should improve and we should know what
satya is and what mithyā is, that existence is satyam and the world is mithyā. Worldly
people look upon the wise persons with surprise while the wise one is surprised of the
ignoramus state of the ignorant people.

śloka 77
एवमाकाशमिथ्यात्वे सत्सत्यत्वे च वासिते ।
न्यायेनानेन वाय्वादेः सद्वस्तु प्रविविच्यताम्॥ २.७७ ॥
evamākāśamithyātve satsatyatve ca vāsite.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 189

nyāyenānena vāyvādeḥ sadvastu pravivicyatām (2.77).

With the previous verse ākāśa-viveka is over. Now from this verse Vidyāraṇya enters
vāyu the second bhūta/element that follows ākāśa. He says in this manner as discussed in
the previous verses, we have understood the ākāśa-mithyātva. It should have been well-
entrenched in the mind. We can take it effortlessly that ākāśa is mithyā and sat is satya.
Jagan-mithyātva should enter the sub-conscious mind and it is called vāsite equally well-
entrenched is brahma-satyatva. Jagan-mithyātva as also brahma-satyatva should enter the
mind and both must be equally strong. Īśvara has given the pain only to attract your mind.
Therefore, in pain, we should not take the mind away from the body. It is the law of the
Lord. Practice body-meditation and body-meditation is also Vedāntic meditation if you
remember body-mithyātva. Body is mithyā and it has vyavahāra-satyatva and it is
governed by time or age; space and prārabdha which has to affect the body, I need not
protest against it as I am willing to exhaust the prārabdha. In pain, do body-mithyātva-
dhyāna and when no pain is there do brahma-satyatva dhyāna. You separate Brahman
from other four elements vāyu, agni, jala, pṛthvī etc., as well. More in the next class.

Class 21
śloka 77 contd.
Here Vidyāraṇya discusses vāyu-brahma-viveka. Once ākāśa-viveka is completed in the
vision of a jñānī who has done śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana with regard to ākāśa
and Brahman, he recognises ākāśa as mithyā and the existence in ākāśa is a totally
different entity and that independent existence alone is satya Brahman. I don’t have to put
a separate effort to know Brahman and the very existence I experience is brahma-
anubhava only. The is-ness in the Brahman is Brahman and the am-ness in me is Brahman.
The only difference is for the third person we use ‘is’ and in the first person we use ‘am’.
Both are nothing but one and the same Brahman.
Once we analyse ākāśa we know that it has two borrowed properties, one borrowed from
Brahman and another borrowed from Māyā. Existence is borrowed from Brahman and
mithyātva the unreality is originally the property of Māyā and that unreality is borrowed
from Māyā. The accommodation or sound is the intrinsic property of the ākāśa. Sat,
mithyātva and śabda are the properties of ākāśa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 190

When we go to vāyu, it will borrow sat from Brahman; mithyātva from Māyā and śabda
from ākāśa and has its own property of sparśa. Brahman has one property, Māyā has two
properties existence borrowed from Brahman and mithyātva its own property; ākāśa has
three and vāyu will have four properties. In the last class Vidyāraṇya has said you have to
analyse vāyu as you did ākāśa. By applying methodology, sat Brahman be distinguished
form vāyu, etc., also.

śloka 78
सद्वस्तुन्येकदेशस्था माया तत्रैकदेशगम्।
वियत्तत्राप्येकदेशगतो वायु प्रकल्पितः ॥ २.७८ ॥
sadvastunyekadeśasthā māyā tatraikadeśagam.
viyattatrāpyekadeśagato vāyu prakalpitaḥ (2.78)
First Vidyāraṇya talks about vāyu-sṛṣṭi. After sṛṣṭi he will talk about viveka. sṛṣṭi will be
like a cone or concentric circle as it were. Brahman will be the biggest circle; next circle
inside will be Māyā; within Māyā itself and occupying Māyā is ākāśa circle; within the
ākāśa occupying the portion of ākāśa is vāyu; it is only figurative and you should not take
it literally. This only shows Brahman is beyond all limitation.
Vāyu is less pervasive than ākāśa which is more pervasive. Subtler a thing it is more
pervasive; and grosser it is, it is lesser pervasive. Māyā is subtler than ākāśa for Māyā is
kāraṇa and ākāśa is kārya and Māyā is subtler than ākāśa. Brahman is more pervading
than Māyā for Brahman is subtler than Māyā. The word prakalpita indicates vāyu enjoys
lesser order of reality. It is only a false creation.

śloka 79
शोषस्पर्शौ गतिर्वेगो वायुधर्मा इमे मताः ।
त्रयः स्वभावाः सन्मायाव्योम्नां ये तेऽपि वायुगाः ॥ २.७९ ॥
śoṣasparśau gatirvego vāyudharmā ime matāḥ.
trayaḥ svabhāvāḥ sanmāyāvyomnāṃ ye te:'pi vāyugāḥ (2.79).
In this verse Vidyāraṇya talks about the properties of vāyu that is unborrowed property
and also mentioned about the borrowed properties. Four are its properties. Its drying
nature, it has the capacity to dry any wet thing; when there is too much vāyu our face also
dries up; it has dehydrating nature; next is the property of touch soft or hard touch; the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 191

motion or movement is the third property; ākāśa does not have motion; vāyu alone has
motion; the third property is the force of momentum; when a thing is in motion it has the
force of the motion energy; when the wind blows mildly nothing happens to us but the
same wind blows with force, it lifts even the cars. The wind becomes a tempest or a storm.
Gati is movement and vega is the power born out of movement. All these four are vāyu’s
properties or qualies. The special property of vāyu is sparśa. It has other three guṇas
borrowed from father ākāśa, grandfather Māyā and great grandfather Brahman. They are
śabda, mithyātva and sat, respectively. They also flow into vāyu. It is genetic transference.

śloka 80
वायुरस्तीति सद्भावः सतो वायौ पृथक्कृ ते ।
निस्तत्त्वरूपता मायास्वभावो व्योमगो ध्वनिः ॥ २.८०॥
vāyurastīti sadbhāvaḥ sato vāyau pṛthakkṛte.
nistattvarūpatā māyāsvabhāvo vyomago dhvaniḥ (2.80).
Vidyāraṇya says three properties sat, mithyātva and śabda are borrowed from Brahman,
Māyā and ākāśa. Vāyu exists and the existence is the property of the sat Brahman. It is
experienced by us in the form of vāyu exists and it is borrowed from sat Brahman. The
second property is mithyātva; when vāyu is separated from Brahman intellectually, the
nature of vāyu by itself is mithyā and non-existence by itself and vāyu becomes non-
existence or nistattva. This means it has only borrowed existence and it is called mithyā.
This mithyātva which is enjoyed by vāyu is taken from Māyā, the mother. The third
borrowed property is dhvani or the sound of vāyu; it is borrowed from ākāśa. Existence,
mithyātva and sound are the borrowed properties found in vāyu.

śloka 81
सतोऽनुवृत्तिः सर्वत्र व्योम्नो नेति पुरोदितम्।
व्योमानुवृत्तिरधुना कथं नव्याहतं वचः ॥ २.८१॥
sato:'nuvṛttiḥ sarvatra vyomno neti puroditam.
vyomānuvṛttiradhunā kathaṃ navyāhataṃ vacaḥ (2.81).
A Pūrvapakṣa is raised here. Here he remembers a previous portion. In the 67th verse the
context was differentiating sat and ākāśa and while doing so, Vidyāraṇya said sat
pervades all the bhūtas, the elements. He said ākāśa is unlike sat and ākāśa does not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 192

pervade vāyu and agni, etc. One is all-pervading and others are not pervading; to point
out therefore, Brahman sat is different and ākāśa is different, etc. Now Vidyāraṇya says
ākāśa pervades vāyu, etc., lending the śabda guṇa and ākāśa must be pervading them how
come you said earlier that ākāśa does not pervade. So there is contradiction in your
statement. Sat pervades all while ākāśa does not pervade the other elements. Which one
we should take is the question from Pūrvapakṣa. Here you say ākāśa pervades by lending
śabda guṇa. Is not your teaching self-contradictory? Clearly tell me whether ākāśa
pervades all the other elements or not. Vidyāraṇya says I don’t confuse but you manage to
get confused.

śloka 82
छिद्रानुवृत्तिर्नेतीति पूर्वोक्तिरधुना त्वियम्।
शब्दानुवृत्तिरेवोक्ता वचसो व्याहतिः कुतः ॥ २.८२ ॥
chidrānuvṛttirnetīti pūrvoktiradhunā tviyam.
śabdānuvṛttirevoktā vacaso vyāhatiḥ kutaḥ (2.82).
Vidyāraṇya says I stand by both the statements and there is no contradiction. When we
say ākāśa does not pervade vāyu, agni, etc., what we mean is that the essential
accommodation nature relates to ākāśa alone and this does not belong to any other
elements. Agni, jala, earth and vāyu cannot accommodate and this is the faculty of ākāśa
alone. When you say all the students are accommodated in the hall tell what
accommodates the students. It is not the hall. Walls do not accommodate anyone as the
hall is enclosed by space and that space alone accommodates people. When we say hall
accommodates means the space enclosed by the wall accommodates the people. Always
accommodation is the intrinsic nature of ākāśa and from the standpoint of accommodation
nature it does not pervade other elements. Now I have shifted the standpoint and now I
talk of śabda guṇa or property and that śabda pervades every other elements. Agni, jala,
etc., have got śabda. These two statements are made from two different angles. The house
in which we live is only the space enclosed by the walls. We live in the house means it is
space that accommodates us.

śloka 83
ननु सद्वस्तुपार्थक्यादसत्त्वं चेत्तदा कथम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 193

अव्यक्तमायावैषम्यादमायामयतापि नो ॥ २.८३॥
nanu sadvastupārthakyādasattvaṃ cettadā katham.
avyaktamāyāvaiṣamyādamāyāmayatāpi no (2.83).
Another Pūrvapakṣa is raised here. All these pūrvapakṣas are raised for us to think
properly. Vāyu is different from Brahman because it is a product born later. Vāyu is
different from Māyā also. Vāyu is born out of these two. You say vāyu is mithyā for it is
different from satya Brahman. Now the Pūrvapakṣa says why I cannot discuss slightly
differently. Vāyu is different from Māyā. Māyā is mithyā. vāyu is different from Māyā.
Therefore, vāyu is different from mithyā Māyā and therefore, why cannot I say vāyu is
satya? Vāyu is satyam because it is different from Māyā. Now tell me vāyu is satya or
mithyā. If you give such an argument I will give you another argument. The Pūrvapakṣa
says. Now say vāyu is satya. vāyu is different from Māyā; Māyā is kāraṇa and vāyu is
kārya; vāyu is avyakta and vāyu is vyakta. Māyā is mithyā and vāyu is different from
Māyā. Therefore, avyakta-māyā-vaiṣamyāt. The manifest vāyu is different from
unmanifest Māyā and so, why cannot you say vāyu is satya? Now we have to discern
where the fallacy lies. The mistake committed by the Pūrvapakṣa we should know.
Vidyāraṇya will point out in the next verse. More in the next class.

Class 22
śloka 83 contd.
Now we do vāyu-brahma-viveka from verse 77. Here also we have to apply the same
principle that existence is separate from vāyu and that existence should be understood as
Brahman and the other as mithyā-tattva. vāyu is said to be mithyā as it is different from
sat. Pūrvapakṣa’s argument is that vāyu is different from Māyā which happens to be
kāraṇa and vāyu being kārya. vāyu is available for sense organ of touch and vāyu is
vyakta and Māyā is avyakta. If vāyu is different from Māyā, we can arrive at another
conclusion that vāyu being different from Māyā, different from mithyā, it should be
treated as satya. How are we to present the answer? I gave you an example also. Suppose I
meet another person that you are different from me I am a human being and therefore,
you are not a human being. What is the mistake involved in this example and present the
fallacy. When two things are different, the differences are of two kinds. One is called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 194

sajātīya bheda and the other is called vijātīya bheda. Difference between man and man is
sajātīya bheda and difference between man and stone is vijātīya bheda. Whenever we talk
of the difference we should know clearly whether the difference is sajātīya bheda or
vijātīya bheda. sajātīya bheda should not be quoted to establish a vijātīya bheda alone. If
you do this it is a fallacy. When I say I that the other person is different, the difference
comes under sajātīya bheda. Suppose I conclude that I am a human being and you are
different means I quote sajātīya bheda and conclude in vijātīya bheda. The differences are
there as the Pūrvapakṣa claims. There are differences between Māyā and vāyu as given
above. But these differences come under sajātīya bheda. It is so because Māyā and vāyu
belongs to the same mithyā group of objects. Both fall under mithyā group because both
have borrowed existence. Within the mithyā group if there is difference between one
mithyā and another mithyā that difference will come under sajātīya bheda and this should
not be taken to prove vijātīya bheda. Similarly ākāśa and vāyu is different and ākāśa and
agni are different. You cannot argue one of them is mithyā and others are satya. All the
pañca bhūtas are different and have differences among them and they should not be taken
as vijātīya bheda. Vidyāraṇya answers the Pūrvapakṣa that both Māyā and vāyu belong to
mithyā group of objects. There need not be any doubt about it.

śloka 84
निस्तत्त्वरूपतैवात्र मायात्वस्य प्रयोजिका ।
सा शक्तिकार्ययोस्तुल्या व्यक्ताव्यक्तत्वभेदिनोः ॥ २.८४ ॥
nistattvarūpataivātra māyātvasya prayojikā |
sā śaktikāryayostulyā vyaktāvyaktatvabhedinoḥ (2.84).
Vidyāraṇya answers that both Māyā and vāyu belong to the mithyā group. Both of them
are mithyā for the criterion for mithyā status is the borrowed existence or else they are
non-existent. Borrowed existence alone is the criterion or the norm for mithyātva. This
criterion is there both in Māyā and vāyu. Śakti means Māyā and kārya means vāyu. Both
in Māyā and vāyu that criterion is present and therefore, we should conclude both of them
are mithyā. None of them is satya and satya discussion does not come at all. If at all there
are differences among them, it should be taken as internal differences among many mithyā
objects. This difference is difference between two mithyā objects. I cannot say my body is
different from your body but my body is satya and your body is mithyā, as both are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 195

mithyā. Between satya and Māyā it is vijātīya bheda and between Māyā and vāyu it is
sajātīya bheda. Even though they have sajātīya bheda that is Māyā and vāyu, in the form
of vyaktatva and avyaktatva, the internal differences are there and they are only sajātīya
bheda and this cannot establish vijātīya bheda between them.

śloka 85
सदसत्त्वविवेकस्य प्रस्तुतत्त्वात्सचिन्त्यताम्।
असतोऽवान्तरो भेद आस्तां तच्चिन्तयात्र किम्॥ २.८५ ॥
sadasattvavivekasya prastutattvātsacintyatām.
asato:'vāntaro bheda āstāṃ taccintayātra kim (2.85).
Vidyāraṇya defends his position. He says his aim is to differentiate the satya and mithyā,
sat and Māyā, sat and ākāśa and sat and vāyu; they have satya and mithyā bheda. When
that is the discussion don’t bring in the topic of difference between one mithyā and
another mithyā object. You should not confuse between sajātīya and vijātīya bhedas. Don’t
bring in sajātīya bheda when our topic is vijātīya bheda of satyam and mithyā. We have
started with the project of sat and asat or satya mithyā vivekam. Since that is our subject
matter let us focus upon that subject matter and let us not deviate from that subject. I find
focused discussion is a tough task and many people miss the subject while discussing on
the subject. We should not talk of internal differences between one mithyā and another
mithyā object. Differences are there and they are called sajātīya bhedas and that is not our
subject matter. This chapter is not intended for that particular topic.

śloka 86
सद्वस्तुब्रह्मशिष्टोंऽशोवायुर्मिथ्या यथा वियत्।
वासयित्वा चिरं वायोर्मिथ्यात्वं मरुतं त्यजेत्॥ २.८७ ॥
sadvastubrahmaśiṣṭoṃ:'śovāyurmithyā yathā viyat.
vāsayitvā ciraṃ vāyormithyātvaṃ marutaṃ tyajet (2.87).
Let us forget mithyā-mithyā bheda and let us focus on satya-mithyā bheda. In vāyu there
is existence; let us discuss that existence as Brahman and everything else other than
existence coming under mithyā. Existence which is inherent in vāyu should be separated
intellectually by the knowledge of existence as not a part, product or property and it is an
independent entity that enlivens vāyu; existence is not limited by the boundaries of vāyu

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 196

and existence survives even after vāyu goes away. Existence you should intellectually sort
out and understand it as Brahman. The remaining part of vāyu consisting of śabda guṇa,
and sparśa guṇa is mithyā. Mithyā means it exists with borrowed existence and it does not
have existence its own. It is like ākāśa. In the case of ākāśa a Pūrvapakṣa said that I am
able to understand in the class and after going home I am not able to separate, etc. For this
Vidyāraṇya said if the mind is wandering you do nididhyāsana and if you have doubts
you do manana as already discussed above. You do sufficient manana and nididhyāsana,
then whenever you experience any object dearest or hated object immediately your
intellect should see the satya-mithyā mixture in that object. You should assimilate this
satya-mithyā separation. You do this for a long time until it is well ingrained in your
subconscious mind. Once vāyu is understood as mithyā, then put vāyu in waste paper
basket for mithyā vastu is of no use and don’t give over-importance to vāyu. Saṃsāra is
giving over importance to mithyā. If I treat a mithyā vastu as satya, it is giving over-
importance. Reject the vāyu.

śloka 87
चिन्तयेद्वह्निमप्येवं मरुतो न्यूनवर्तिनम्।
ब्रह्माण्डावरणेष्वेषां न्यूनाधिकविचारणा ॥ २.८८ ॥
cintayedvahnimapyevaṃ maruto nyūnavartinam.
brahmāṇḍāvaraṇeṣveṣāṃ nyūnādhikavicāraṇā (2.88).
The vāyu-brahma-viveka topic is over. Now Vidyāraṇya enters agni-brahma-viveka.
Brahman is the common factor in all of them and the elements keep on changing. Now
Vidyāraṇya says you apply this to agni tattva also. Agni is less extensive than vāyu tattva.
vāyu is one tenth less than ākāśa and agni is one tenth less than vāyu. pṛthvī tattva is inner
cover; jala tattva is outer cover; then agni is more extensive than jala tattva. Beyond jala,
vāyu and ākāśa, there are seven concentric circles are there. This discussion of relative size
of different elements is done here. We don’t attach much importance to the size, etc.,
because everything is to be ultimately rejected as mithyā.

śloka 88
वायोर्दशांशतोन्यूनोवह्निर्वायौ प्रकल्पितः ।
पुराणोक्तं तारतम्यं दशांशैर्भूतपञ्चके ॥ २.८८ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 197

vāyordaśāṃśatonyūnovahnirvāyau prakalpitaḥ.
purāṇoktaṃ tāratamyaṃ daśāṃśairbhūtapañcake (2.88)
The size of agni is nine-tenth of vāyu and this agni is superimposed or created upon vāyu.
Vāyu is superimposed on ākāśa; ultimately everything is superimposed on Brahman only.
It is of a lower order of reality compared to Brahman. Vāyu and agni have got the same
order of reality. This gradation between the elements in the size of pañca bhūtas are based
on puranas. Thus, agni-sṛṣṭi is over. This we will do in the next class.

Class 23
śloka 88 contd.
Agni is less extensive than the vāyu and it is one tenth less of vāyu. It is stated so in the
Purānās. All these we have to take everything as sūkśhma bhūtāni. In the third skanda of
Bhāgavata these details are given. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 89
वह्निरुष्णप्रकाशात्मा पूर्वानुगतिरत्र च ।
अस्ति वह्निः सनिस्तत्त्वः शब्दवान्स्पर्शवानपि ॥ २.८९ ॥
vahniruṣṇaprakāśātmā pūrvānugatiratra ca.
asti vahniḥ sanistattvaḥ śabdavānsparśavānapi (2.89).
First Vidyāraṇya enumerates the properties of agni-tattva. Heat is the intrinsic property of
agni. In summer months we get hot air as the air is associated with agni-tattva. Prakāśa
svarūpa is another feature of agni. In addition to its own properties, it has borrowed
properties from the previous principle or the previous elements. The existence is the
property of fire borrowed from Brahman. It does not have independent existence and
therefore, it comes under mithyā category and that unreality is borrowed from Māyā. The
third borrowed property is śabda which is borrowed from ākāśa. Sparśa is the property
borrowed from vāyu. It is hot to touch. Brahman, Māyā, ākāśa and vāyu are sources of all
other borrowed properties while it has heat as its own property.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 198

śloka 90
सन्मयाव्योमवाय्वंशैर्युक्तस्याग्नेर्निजो गुणः ।
रूपं तत्र सतः सर्वमन्यद्बुद्ध्या विविच्यताम्॥ २.९० ॥
sanmayāvyomavāyvaṃśairyuktasyāgnernijo guṇaḥ.
rūpaṃ tatra sataḥ sarvamanyadbuddhyā vivicyatām (2.90)
The first line is almost the repetition of previous śloka for consolidation. The agni-tattva is
endowed with borrowed properties from Brahman, Māyā, ākāśa and vāyu. Of that agni’s
own natural un-borrowed property is brightness and the heat. Now we have to do the
viveka. Take away the sat from the whole agni and it is Brahman. Brahman’s property in
agni is existence. What will be left out will be all other guṇas borrowed from ākāśa, vāyu
and Māyā and if your remove the sat agni will not have its existence. This separation is to
be done intellectually and not physically. All our knowledge is intellectual. Either you
have intellect knowledge or you have no knowledge.

śloka 91
सतो विवेचिते वह्नौ मिथ्यात्वे सति वासिते ।
आपो दशांशतो न्यूनाः कल्पिता इति चिन्तयेत्॥ २.९१ ॥
sato vivecite vahnau mithyātve sati vāsite.
āpo daśāṃśato nyūnāḥ kalpitā iti cintayet (2.91).
With the previous verse agni viveka is over. Now we enter jala viveka. Since the
methodology is similar, Vidyāraṇya does not want to elaborate this. First Vidyāraṇya
mentions creation of water. Having done ākāśa- and vāyu- and agni-viveka, make sure
you have internalized what you have studied so far. Do manana and so that what you
learn is being internalized. You should be clear that in everything existence part is
Brahman and all the rest of the properties of elements are mithyā. After assimilating agni-
viveka enter jala-viveka says Vidyāraṇya. The mithyātva of agni must be assimilated first.
Agni-mithyātva should enter your sub-conscious mind and then you come to the creation
of water. The extent of water is one tenth less extensive than agni. It is a figurative
expression. It is not real creation either.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 199

śloka 92
सन्त्यापोऽमूः शून्यतत्त्वाः सशबदस्पर्शसंयुताः ।
रूपवत्योऽन्यधर्मानुवृत्या स्वीयो रसो गुणः ॥ २.९२ ॥
santyāpo:'mūḥ śūnyatattvāḥ saśabadasparśasaṃyutāḥ.
rūpavatyo:'nyadharmānuvṛtyā svīyo raso guṇaḥ (2.92).
The various properties of jala are enumerated. Āpaḥ is feminine in gender and plural in
number. All the adjectives here are also feminine and plural. Āpaḥ or jala is mithyā. It is
śūnya tattva. It is endowed with śabda and sparśa borrowed from vāyu and it has got a
form or colour also which can be recognized by eyes and all these properties are because
of the transference from other factors. It has got the existence tattva from Brahman. Kāraṇa
guṇa karye anuvartate. From kāraṇa the qualities are inhered to the kārya which is water.
Its own property is the unique taste because of which we are able to identify it is water. It
has got taste which is different from others.
Take away the existence part and bundle all other properties śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, etc.,
and then you see all of them are mithyā because it does not have its own existence.
With this jala-viveka is over.

śloka 93
सतो विवेचितास्वप्सु तन्मिथ्यात्वे च वासिते ।
भूमिर्दशांशतो न्यूना कल्पिताप्स्विति चिन्तयेत्॥ २.९३ ॥
sato vivecitāsvapsu tanmithyātve ca vāsite.
bhūmirdaśāṃśato nyūnā kalpitāpsviti cintayet (2.93).
Vidyāraṇya enters bhūmi-viveka. He reminds that the jala-viveka must be assimilated
before entering the bhūmi-viveka. Practice manana and nididhyāsana so that you
assimilate the viveka of one after the other right from ākāśa. We are good in separating
others but when we are told that relations and your own body are mithyā, then only the
problem comes. First separate sat from jala and then the remaining jala after filtering sat,
must be seen as mithyā. Once that is done you are ready to enter bhūmi-viveka.
Now you note that bhūmi bhūta element of earth is also a superimposed one. It is less
extensive than jala by one tenth and it is superimposed on water. This is bhūmi-sṛṣṭi. Now
we enter bhūmi-viveka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 200

śloka 94
अस्ति भूस्तत्त्वशून्यास्याः शब्दस्पर्शौ स्वरूपकौ ।
रसश्च परतो नैजो गन्धः सत्ता विविच्यताम्॥ २.९४ ॥
asti bhūstattvaśūnyāsyāḥ śabdasparśau svarūpakau.
rasaśca parato naijo gandhaḥ sattā vivicyatām (2.94).
This bhūmi has got several properties some of them borrowed and some its own. Among
the borrowed properties the first property is existence borrowed from Brahman; then it is
mithyā which is the property borrowed from Māyā. It has śabda, sparśa, rūpa and rasa,
the three colours and form borrowed from other elements. Its own property is smell.
Other elements have no smell. Here also may you differentiate the existence intellectually
and appreciate Brahman. In the entire mithyā prapañca Brahman gives you regular
darśana. Brahman gives darśana whenever you appreciate any product: table is, chair is
where is-ness is experienced all the time and that is-ness is Brahman. This is experienced
in svapna and the nothingness in suṣupti is also brahma-anubhava. What they need is not
meditation as it is a wrong direction and what they need is śravaṇa. We all have brahma-
anubhava all the time. Close your eyes you have brahma-caitanya-anubhava and when
you wake up you have the world-anubhava.

śloka 95
पृथक्कृ तायां सत्तायां भूमिर्मिथ्यावशिष्यते ।
भूमेर्दशांशतो न्यूनं ब्रह्माण्डं भूमिमध्यगम्॥ २.९५ ॥
pṛthakkṛtāyāṃ sattāyāṃ bhūmirmithyāvaśiṣyate.
bhūmerdaśāṃśato nyūnaṃ brahmāṇḍaṃ bhūmimadhyagam (2.95).
Bhūmi-viveka is over in the previous śloka. Now as an extension he comes to bhautika
prapañca. It is bhautika-brahma-viveka. The first one is called brahmāṇḍa the cosmic egg.
Bhūmi has got oval-shape or egg-shape. Our earth is also egg-shaped. Even at a micro
level elliptical is the movement. When the existence is separated from bhūmi, mithyā
bhūmi alone remains. When we say mithyā earth remains, perceptually there will not be
any difference at all. In the experience there is no difference and only in the understanding
the wise man will see the difference. The wise man will know consciousness is not a part,
property or a product of a substance and consciousness is an independent entity which
pervades and enlivens all and existence extends beyond nāmas and rūpas and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 201

consciousness will survive even after all the objects die. The existence should not be taken
as a part and one intellectually differentiates that the clip in my hand is mithyā. The
understanding is that it is mithyā. Every jñānī has got the third eye that wisely finds the
mithyātva of the bhūmi. You have to assimilate this mithyātva. Then you are ready for
bhautika prapañca which is called the cosmos which includes all the galaxies, fourteen
lokas as well. Brahmāṇḍa is one tenth lesser than the bhūmi that is sūkśhma bhūmi. This
resides in the middle of sūkśhma bhūmi elements.

śloka 96
ब्रह्माण्डमध्ये तिष्ठन्ति भुवनानि चतुर्दश ।
भुवनेषु वसन्त्येषु प्राणिदेहा यथायथम्॥ २.९६ ॥
brahmāṇḍamadhye tiṣṭhanti bhuvanāni caturdaśa.
bhuvaneṣu vasantyeṣu prāṇidehā yathāyatham (2.96)
Within brahmāṇḍa the cosmic egg are the fourteen lokas. Within these fourteen lokas
alone all the śarīras, deva-śarīra, manuṣya-śarīras, asura-śarīras, etc., reside. It is not all the
jīvas reside but it is jīva-śarīras reside. Jīva is none other than the caitanya. I am not
residing in the world but my body resides in the world. They reside according to the laws
of karma. It is not by chance we are in Chennai. If we are there, it is purely because of our
karma. Our life is well-designed by the creator. Finally, it is said that in our own body sat
is Brahman and all the rest are mithyā.

Class 24
śloka 96 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has completed pañca-bhūta-viveka till now. It is differentiation of pañca-
bhūta and Brahman; vāyu-brahma-viveka, agni-brahma-viveka, etc. The same principle of
differentiation should be extended to bhautika prapañca also. Brahmāṇḍa is seen as
pañca-bhautika-prapañca which includes the fourteen lokas as well. You should extend
this viveka or discrimination to your own body-mind-complex also. You look upon your
body as also your relation’s body also as different from Brahman. All are born with
puṇya-dominant, pāpa-dominant or almost equal mixture of puṇya and pāpa. Puṇya-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 202

dominant people go to higher loka; pāpa-dominant people go to lower loka and the
mixture of puṇya-pāpa will take them back to earth.

śloka 97
ब्रह्माण्डलोकदेहेषु सद्वस्तुनि पृथक्कृ ते ।
असन्तोऽण्डादयो भान्तु तद्भानेऽपीह का क्षतिः ॥ २.९७ ॥
brahmāṇḍalokadeheṣu sadvastuni pṛthakkṛte.
asanto:'ṇḍādayo bhāntu tadbhāne:'pīha kā kṣatiḥ (2.97).
Apply the same principle; take the fourteen lokas and take all the dehas the body; and take
all in one universal mixie and do the intellectual crushing job and crush out the juice sattā
which is not the intrinsic nature of the three; the sattā is Brahman while the functions
belong to the world. From these three factors of brahmāṇḍa that thing which alone exists
all the time the sat the existence principle has to be separated. This separation is done
intellectually. Then what is left out is the aṇḍa, the fourteen lokas and all the bodies
reduced to asat or mithyā. Then our outlook towards the world should change and I
should note that ‘I’ the observer is satya. Then I enjoy the satya status and the whole world
is brought down to the level of mithyā; and I enjoy the world that enjoys the lower order
of reality. As long as I take the world to be enjoying a higher order of reality, I will be
upset and I will be afraid of the world. The moment I take the world as vyavahāra-satya, it
belongs to lower order of reality, I will be supreme and I will have nothing to fear. This is
exactly like the svapna world that enjoys the state of prātibhāsika-satya, lower order of
reality, as compared to the jāgṛt world referred to as vyāvahārika-satya.
Similarly at the end of the viveka what happens is the level between me and the world is
filtered which means I go up in the degree of my existence and the world goes down in the
degree of its existence. Vedānta brings about the change in the relative level of status
between me and the world; I the caitanya and the world which includes body-mind-
complex which is pulled down as vyāvahārika-satya; I am otherwise called pāramārthika
satya. Vidyāraṇya says there is change in the existential stature of the world and as
regards in other features the world continues to be the same, the features being the
perceptibility of the world, the experienciability of the world that will continue. Perception
and experience will continue to be the same whether one has gained knowledge or not. In
this respect the dream example should not be taken. After waking up, I understand the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 203

dream world is prātibhāsika-satya, the dream world disappears but in the jāgṛt the world
the continue to exist even after I gain jñāna.
If jñānī does not experience the world how can he become a teacher? This is an important
difference between waking up from svapna and waking up on gaining jñāna. The first
feature which will continue is experience. The second feature is the distinction among the
objects. The distinction will be perceived as before. Not only experience continues the
divisions also continue. The third thing is there will be no change in the function of the
objects. This they technically call as arthakriyā. The purposeful function or meaningful
function of any object will not change. The food is arthakriyā of quenching the hunger;
medicine is arthakriyā of curing diseases. The different arthakriyās of the world will not
change on gaining knowledge. Therefore, jñānī will use appropriate object for appropriate
purpose. Experience will continue; differences will continue; functions will continue; but
the change will be there in the degree of reality or existential status. This status change the
degree of reality change is not visibly perceived and the truth is aham satyam jagan
mithyā. Jagat includes the body-mind-complex.
The benefit is due to this small change alone; mokṣa is gained. I the satya is not affected by
mithyā prapañca and I am free from the influences of the world. Even the grahas may
affect the body but I am detached from the body; asaṅgoham, asaṅgoham and asaṅgoham.
The experience, division and function will not change while the status of reality of the
world will change and that status change alone will give mokṣa. The experience may
continue and it will not do any harm. Their status is reduced to mithyā. They cannot touch
me.
Here I may quote an advertisement which has relevance to this Vedāntic teaching. A
ferocious dog is tied to a rope of six feet or so and it cannot go beyond the periphery of six
feet circumference being tied to a pole. There stands a small cat just one foot away from
the permissible distance to which the dog can extend its movement. The dog cannot touch
the cat being away by one foot. The cat looks at the dog amusingly as it is aware the dog
cannot touch it because it has the knowledge that the dog is tied down to a pole and the
dog as such cannot come near it. The cat is happy because it has the knowledge that the
dog cannot come near it. So too the wise man knows that nothing on earth can distract his
attention and he is free.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 204

The knowledge that the worldly things cannot touch him is the knowledge that keeps the
wise man in sheer joy. The world is the dog; I can look at the world and tell that you do
anything and the world cannot touch me because we belong to a different world of reality.
What damage is there for me! I need not close my eyes to escape from the world.

śloka 98
भूतभौतिकमायानामसमत्वेऽत्यन्तवासिते ।
सद्वस्त्वद्वैतमित्येषा धीर्विपर्येति न क्वचित्॥ २.९८ ॥
bhūtabhautikamāyānāmasamatve:'tyantavāsite.
sadvastvadvaitamityeṣā dhīrviparyeti na kvacit (2.98).
Here Vidyāraṇya says you should not stop with śravaṇa only and śravaṇa will go to the
superficial level only and the knowledge should go to the innermost crust of the
intelligence. The knowledge should be free of all the doubts. Our conviction should be
thorough or else we will run away from the world. We should have deep vāsanā that
jagan mithyā brahma satyam. It should be well-drenched in the mind. It should be in my
sub-conscious mind and it should be so natural to me. You should know the products of
pañca bhūtas, brahmāṇḍa, including deha with Māyā come under mithyā category. Once
it is well established in your mind and then alone you can boldly state that sat vastu is
non-dual. Even though I experience this world I cannot find the world as a second thing
because the world is mithyā and mithyā cannot be counted along with satya. Your present
bank balance cannot be counted with dream money or the earnings in the dream. One plus
one is equal to one and one is satya and the other is mithyā. One Brahman plus one world
is equal to Advaita only. Whatever is there is my own shadow , I am not frightened of it,
the shadow being the world. This jñāna will not undergo any change and this we call
jñāna-niṣṭhā or sthira-prajñā. Can you become jñāna-niṣṭhā and that depends on your
effort.

śloka 99
सदद्वैतात्पृथग्भूते द्वैते भूम्यादिरूपिणि ।
तत्तदर्थक्रिया लोके यथा दृष्टा तथैव सा ॥ २.९९ ॥
sadadvaitātpṛthagbhūte dvaite bhūmyādirūpiṇi.
tattadarthakriyā loke yathā dṛṣṭā tathaiva sā (2.99).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 205

Previously I said world has four features. Vedānta brings change in one feature that is the
status; experience, function and division do not undergo any change for the jñānī. As
regards the status the world, it will be of lower order of reality while my nature will be of
higher order of reality. The function will continue to be the same to the jñānī as the
knowledge will not make any difference in the taste of sugar, etc., in the mithyā prapañca.
Their respective functions will be as before. Their functions and utilities will continue to be
the same. It will be same as it is seen by the ignorant people. If the ignorant says fire burns,
the wise also will say fire is mithyā but will be away from it because fire will equally burn
the wise as also the ignorant. I as Paramātmā will not move but the body of the jñānī will
move. Therefore, the jñānī will respect the function of the persons and materials. You may
change the word but the actions remain the same. No change is needed to be liberated and
only perception of the world makes change and it make one from bondage to liberation.

śloka 100
सांख्यकाणादबौद्धाद्यैर्जगद्भेदो यथा यथा ।
उत्प्रेक्ष्यतेऽनेकयुक्त्या भवत्वेष तथा तथा ॥ २.१००॥
sāṃkhyakāṇādabauddhādyairjagadbhedo yathā yathā.
utprekṣyate:'nekayuktyā bhavatveṣa tathā tathā (2.100).
Here Vidyāraṇya says the divisions also will be there. When vyavahāra takes place you
respect bheda. This world of differences has been classified in different methods by
different philosophers. Vidyāraṇya asserts we accept all of them as they are and any form
of classification is acceptable to us. Vaiśeṣika classifies the world in to seven padārthas.
Sāṅkhya divides the world into 25 padārthas. Yoga adds Īśvara as one of the tattvas. Śaiva
philosophy adds more and makes it 37 tattvas. Advaita says there are only two satya and
mithyā. We are not particular about the pattern of division. For us any form of division is
all right. More in the next class.

Class 25
śloka 100 contd.
Vidyāraṇya concluded his bhūta-bhautika-prapañca-viveka with the 97th verse.
Consciousness and existence are both one and the same and once you separate existence
the rest will become asat which is available for experience and any experienced asat is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 206

called mithyā. Thus sat-mithyā-viveka was done. Viveka-phala or the result of

discriminative enquiry is clear knowledge and a change of perspective. The new
perspective is the whole anātmā consisting of bhūta and bhautika which includes my own
body has got a lower order of reality and I the observing consciousness have a higher
order of reality. Ātmā and anātmā are viṣama-satta; there is difference in their order of
reality. This order of reality they call ontological status. It means the science of studying
the degree of reality. Svapna is prātibhāsika-satya. jāgṛt is vyāvahārika-satya. And Ātmā is
pāramārthika-satya. The study of this degree of reality is called ontology. I and the world
do not have the same ontological status. I the caitanya am pāramārthika-satya. This new
knowledge is the result of viveka.
Then Vidyāraṇya says even though there is a change in the ontological status in all other
features the world will remain the same. Three important features will continue to be same
before and after knowledge. One is the experience of the world; we will experience sunrise
in the same way as experienced before; there will be no difference in the experiential
status. Then in the division of the world there will not change at all; there will be sajātīya,
vijātīya and svagata bheda in anātmā. In the world of anātmā we experience, there will be
three bhedas as above. The third feature is the function of the thing that will continue in
the same status as before. Vidyāraṇya emphasizes that the continuity of the experience
cannot disturb the knowledge of the wise man that I am asaṅga, I am Advaita, etc.
Advaitic teacher will continue to experience dvaita but assert Advaita. Flat earth is our
experience but earth is round is our knowledge. Similarly stationary earth is our
experience and moving earth is our knowledge which is not disturbed by the experience of
the stationary earth. The knowledge of the non-rising sun is not disturbed by the
experience of the rising sun. We know experiences can be false. There is no blue sky
though we experience blue sky. How can experience be ever taken as a valid proof?
Vedānta always gives importance to knowledge. Dvaita-experience may continue but it
does not shake our advaitic knowledge. This mithyā prapañca is divided into several
categories by different philosophers. Sāṅkhya philosophers divide the world into 25
principles. If you go to Nyāya philosophy, it divides the universe into 15 categories and
Bauddha philosophers divide it into 5 categories. We are not serious about the various
divisions because we are concerned with the negation of the whole world. We are
bothered about the status of the world. We don’t mind about the division and utility, etc.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 207

To propound these divisions those other philosophers have various arguments in support
of their statements. Each philosopher takes extreme pains to take to the number of
categories but Vedānta is not bothered about the various divisions. Let the division be as it
is. Advaitin knows that we can go with any philosophy for division as after all we don’t
have a view on division, but we say world is mithyā. That mithyātva they do not know
and therefore, they argue so much about the universe and it’s divisions.

śloka 101
अवज्ञातं सदद्वैतं निःशंकै रन्यवादिभिः ।
एवं का क्षतिर्रस्माकं तद्द्वैतमवजानताम्॥ २.१०१ ॥
avajñātaṃ sadadvaitaṃ niḥśaṃkairanyavādibhiḥ.
evaṃ kā kṣatirrasmākaṃ taddvaitamavajānatām (2.101).
The other philosophers are disturbed by this news that we are not serious about the
various divisions. If we are serious we will hold on to one particular division. This anātmā
prapañca or dvaita prapañca is not given its due importance by us, the dvaitins complain
so. For this Vidyāraṇya also complains in the same manner. If you say because of our
preoccupation we ignore dvaita, then our complaint is because of your preoccupation with
dvaita you have completely ignored Advaita. Where is the time for us to think of God. If
we ignore your philosophy you also ignore our philosophy says Vidyāraṇya to the other
philosophers. If you ignore Advaita what is wrong if we ignore dvaita asks Vidyāraṇya. If
you go further we are not even equal. They are preoccupied with dvaita and ignore
Advaita. Ours is more justifiable and preoccupation should be with satya and not with
asat. Our ignoring is legitimate and is supported by śāstra as mithyā should not be given
over-importance. Whoever is preoccupied with dvaita go from mortality to mortality
while advaitins go to immortality once and for all.

śloka 102
द्वैतावज्ञा सुस्थिता चेदद्वैता धीः स्थिरा भवेत्।
स्थैर्ये तस्याः पुमानेष जीवन्मुक्त इतीर्यते ॥ २.१०२॥
dvaitāvajñā susthitā cedadvaitā dhīḥ sthirā bhavet.
sthairye tasyāḥ pumāneṣa jīvanmukta itīryate (2.102).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 208

Since our perspective alone is correct that importance to Advaita and less importance to
dvaita alone has support of śāstra, that alone will give mokṣa. Advaita-dṛṣṭi should
dominate over dvaita-dṛṣṭi. We put dvaita in its own place. This should be well-engraved
in your mind by systematic śravaṇa, manana and long nididhyāsana. Once dvaita-
mithyātva is well-engraved advaita-jñāna will be firm. Dvaita-mithyātva and Advaita-
satyatva are two sides of the same coin and one cannot be without the other. ‘I am not the
body’ should be emphasized. We want to have motherhood and Brahmanhood with equal
grade of reality. We say one is mithyā and Brahman is satya. Once advaita-jñāna becomes
firm, and you become sthita-prajña according to Gītā, you are ready to gain the ultimate
mokṣa. Then the person who realizes this jñāna becomes a jīvanmukta. There is no
difference between jñāna and jīvanmukti. It does not produce jīvanmukti and we say the
jñāna is jīvanmukti.

śloka 103
एषा ब्राह्मी स्थितिः पार्थ नैनां प्राप्य विमुह्यति ।
स्थित्वास्यामन्तकालेऽपि ब्रह्मनिर्वाणमृच्छति ॥ २.१०३॥
eṣā brāhmī sthitiḥ pārtha naināṃ prāpya vimuhyati.
sthitvāsyāmantakāle:'pi brahmanirvāṇamṛcchati (2.103).
The clarity of knowledge alone is called jīvanmukti. Jñāna is jīvanmukti and therefore,
viveka-phala is jīvanmukti. If I say you may not accept says Vidyāraṇya and Vidyāraṇya
says it is said by Lord Kṛṣṇa in Gītā. The verse is 2.72 of Gītā that reads as eṣā brāhmī
sthitiḥ pārtha nai‘nam prāpya vimuhyati sthitvā‘syām antakāle‘pi brahmanirvāṇam
ṛcchati; the clear knowledge alone is called brahma-niṣṭhā it is said. One abides in
Brahman. Jīvātmā cannot abide in Paramātmā because Jīvātmā is Paramātmā. Abiding
here means is not forgetting the fact that I am not away from Paramātmā. Non-
forgetfulness is figuratively called abiding in Brahman. You will no more have any conflict
and you will not suffer saṃsāra after gaining this Ātma-jñāna. Freedom from saṃsāra is
called jīvanmukti and after death jīvanmukta will get videhamukti. Whenever you get this
jñāna anytime, you will become jīvanmukta even on the last day of life. When the pot
breaks the pot space merges with total space so also jīvanmukta on death merges with
Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 209

Kṛṣṇa does not say at the end of time. antakāle can be interpreted in two different ways.
One interpretation is given in this verse and the popular meaning is given in the next
verse 104. Vidyāraṇya says it can be understood as the end of confusion and not as the
time of death.

śloka 104
सदद्वैतेऽनृतद्वैते यदन्योऽन्यैक्यवीक्षणम्।
तस्यान्तकालस्तद्भेदबुद्धिरेव न चेतरः ॥ २.१०४ ॥
sadadvaite:'nṛtadvaite yadanyo:'nyaikyavīkṣaṇam.
tasyāntakālastadbhedabuddhireva na cetaraḥ (2.104).
We have a mixed up vision of sad Advaita non-dual pāramārthika brahma and anṛta
dvaita the mithyā prapañca. Both should not be mixed up for one is real and the other is
unreal. By mixing up we bring Brahman to lower level but we should raise ourselves to
Brahman level. The knowledge of the difference between the two is called Ātma-jñāna.
Cetana is pāramārthika and acetana is vyāvahārika. This antakāla is talked about by Kṛṣṇa
in his verse. It is the death of confusion stated in the śloka. More in the next class.

Class 26
śloka 104 contd.
After elaborately dealing with pañcabhūta-brahma- and bhautika-brahma-viveka,
Vidyāraṇya deals with the phala of this knowledge. The phala is in the form of jīvanmukti
and videhamukti. After jīvanmukti there will be change in the perspective of the world.
There will be change in only one important feature. Changeless feature is the experience of
the world that will continue as before. Secondly the divisions will continue as they are
sajātīya, vijātīya and svagata bheda. Third feature is the function of everything will
continue to be the same; fire will continue to be hot. Water will be cold. Food will fill the
stomach. In experience, division, function, there is no change. The fourth feature that
undergoes the change is the status of reality. Whether it is prātibhāsika, vyāvahārika or
pāramārthika will undergo change. But I the observer will remain the same. Because they
enjoyed the same degree, one will affect the other and the world will affect me with both
enjoying the same order of reality. After gaining Ātma-jñāna, I enjoy higher order of
reality and there will be change between myself and the world or the body. The world

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 210

includes my body-mind-complex. Because of the change in the reality status I get freedom
instantaneously because higher order is asaṅga with regard to lower order of reality. This
asaṅgatva alone is called jīvanmukti. Vidyāraṇya supports this by quoting a verse of Gītā
[refer to śloka 103 above] asaṅga Ātma-niṣṭhā is jīvanmukti. The first line of the quoted
Gītā verse talks about jīvanmukti and the second line about videhamukti. Once the
knowledge is gained, it is gained for good and one enjoys jīvanmukti and videhamukti. If
one gets jīvanmukti in later part of life, he will enjoy the status for lesser period of life. On
the other hand if you get the knowledge now, you will enjoy longer period of jīvanmukti
status. Now Vidyāraṇya comments upon the word antakāla which can be interpreted in
two ways. One is the final moment which means the time of death. The final moment also
indicates the final moment of the end of delusion. When the delusion ends one enjoys
jīvanmukti state. Taking ‘myself’ as viśva, taijasa and prajñā is called delusion. When I
consider myself as turīya it is called jīvanmukti status.

śloka 105
यद्वान्तकालः प्राणस्य वियोगोस्तु प्रसिद्धितः ।
तस्मिन्कालेऽपि न भ्रान्तेर्गतायाः पुनरागमः ॥ २.१०५ ॥
yadvāntakālaḥ prāṇasya viyogostu prasiddhitaḥ.
tasminkāle:'pi na bhrāntergatāyāḥ punarāgamaḥ (2.105).
Now comes the second interpretation of antakāle found in the Gītā verse 2.72. Antakāla
means prāṇasya viyogaḥ, means regular death. It means separation of body from prāṇa or
separation of prāṇa from body. Last moment is taken as moment of death. Vidyāraṇya
recommends this meaning and he says even at the fag end of life also, the delusion will
not come back. The delusion which has been removed by śravaṇa will not come back.
Delusion once gone is gone for ever and it will never come back it is asserted by
Vidyāraṇya. The wise man will die as aham brahma asmi and there is not question of
punarjanma for him. Once knowledge is gained the file is closed Vidyāraṇya says.

śloka 106
नीरोग उपविष्टो वा रुग्णो वा विलुठन्भुवि ।
मूर्च्छितो वा त्यजेदेष प्राणान्भ्रान्तिर्न सर्वथा ॥ २.१०६ ॥
nīroga upaviṣṭo vā rugṇo vā viluṭhanbhuvi.
mūrcchito vā tyajedeṣa prāṇānbhrāntirna sarvathā (2.106).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 211

At the time of death jñānī may be in five conditions. He may be in a healthy condition
without any disease, etc, or he may be sick; he may be sitting in one place quietly
withdrawn from all activities; or he may be traveling all over the world; wherever he
travels he will enjoy his real nature. There is no rule that jñānī is to be confined to one
place. As long as one is ajñānī he is bound by varṇāśrama dharma while jñānī is not bound
by this dharma. The fifth possibility is he may enter into a coma. Different jñānīs have the
same jñāna but have different prārabdha. Let him enter coma and in anyone of the
conditions, this wise person may give up his life, yet he will gain videha-mukti and he has
not punarjanma. He will not have delusion in any of the above conditions.

śloka 107
दिने दिने स्वप्नसुप्त्योरधीते विस्मृतेऽप्ययम्।
परेद्युर्नानधीतः स्यात्तत्त्वविद्या न नश्यति ॥ २.१०७ ॥
dine dine svapnasuptyoradhīte vismṛte:'pyayam.
paredyurnānadhītaḥ syāttattvavidyā na naśyati (2.107).
Here Vidyāraṇya gives justification for his statement that delusion will not come again.
The delusion can come only when the acquired knowledge goes away. This does not
happen to a jñānī when he dies. Knowledge once gained thoroughly cannot go away. This
is the case with any knowledge. Knowledge gained through śravaṇa, manana and
nididhyāsana is so imbued in the mind that knowledge will not go away and that
knowledge cannot be forgotten. Here it is a knowledge or important fact about myself.
Knowledge never dies on going to sleep as it is back after getting up again. In sleep
knowledge is dormant but it does not go away. The various things learnt during the jāgṛt
avasthā will not vanish during the svapna state and in fact the knowledge is in dormant
state. The next day this person does not wake up as an ignorant person but when he
wakes up the knowledge also wakes up the next morning. The literate people wake up as
literate people only and not as illiterate persons. This Ātma-vidyā gained through śravaṇa,
manana and nididhyāsana cannot be ever forgotten. Therefore, antakāle api this
knowledge will not go away.

śloka 108
प्रमाणोत्पादिता विद्या प्रमाणं प्रबलं विना ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 212

न नश्यति न वेदान्तात्प्रबलं मानमीक्षते ॥ २.१०८ ॥

pramāṇotpāditā vidyā pramāṇaṃ prabalaṃ vinā.
na naśyati na vedāntātprabalaṃ mānamīkṣate (2.108).
This is a topic about pramāṇa or epistemology; the analysis of what is knowledge what is
error etc. We have seen before the six pramāṇas— pratyakṣa, anumāna, śabda,
anupalabdhi, etc. Here anumāna inference, etc., are based on data received by pratyakṣa. If
you have seen the smoke and also you know smoke and fire go together, then if you see
the smoke one day you infer the fire. So also upamāna, anupalabdhi, arthāpatti, etc. These
pramāṇas are called dependent pramāṇa or secondary pramāṇa or upajīvaka-pramāṇāni.
They are secondary pramāṇa and they are based on pratyakṣa as they are subject to
verification by pratyakṣa. Secondary pramāṇa is verifiable through primary pramāṇa or
the same is negatable also sometime or the other. But pratyakṣa pramāṇa is independent
and it need not verified. It is called prabala pramāṇa because it cannot be verified by
others. It can never be confirmed or verified by any other pramāṇa. Prabala pramāṇa is
knowledge and you cannot verify further. The prabala pramāṇa gives confirmation and
not information. If there is a question as to śabda pramāṇa comes under what pramāṇa,
then you should ask a counter question whether it is laukika śabda or otherwise. All the
other books you read like magazine, all works written by human being called laukika
śabda are subject to verification and confirmation. But śāstrīya śabda or vaidika śabda
pramāṇa comes under independent pramāṇa or primary pramāṇa. Vaidika śabda cannot
be compared to laukika pramāṇa. Vaidika should be compared with pratyakṣa pramāṇa
only. Don’t say śāstra gives information as it gives confirmation. After grasping
knowledge, don’t look for confirmation. śāstra is prabala pramāṇa and there is no higher
pramāṇa to negate śāstra pramāṇa. There is no stronger pramāṇa to the śāstrīya pramāṇa.
Vedānta comes under prabala pramāṇa like pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Therefore, once the
knowledge is gained it is gained forever and therefore, mokṣa is gained without fail. So
Vidyāraṇya concludes his teaching with the winding up in śloka 109.

śloka 109
तस्माद्वेदान्तसंसिद्धं सदद्वैतं न बाध्यते ।
अन्तकालेऽप्यतो भूतविवेकान्निर्वृतिः स्थिता ॥ २.१०९ ॥
tasmādvedāntasaṃsiddhaṃ sadadvaitaṃ na bādhyate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 213

antakāle:'pyato bhūtavivekānnirvṛtiḥ sthitā (2.109).

Ātma-jñāna gives confirmed ticket for mokṣa. Here Vidyāraṇya concludes his teaching.
Since vaidika śabda is unlike laukika śabda, this non-dual existence or Brahman which
was revealed in Chāndogya Upaniṣad, is un-negatable and it is primary knowledge. No
meditation can confirm the knowledge. Meditation is not a pramāṇa at all. Meditation is
not for confirmation but it is for assimilation. The knowledge gained through pañca-
bhūta-viveka chapter is also unnegatable and therefore, it gives mokṣa or jīvanmukti and
videhamukti. The knowledge is non-displaceable. With this, the second chapter titled
bhūta-viveka-prakaraṇa is over.

Class 27

Summary of the second chapter, Mahā-bhūta-viveka-prakaraṇa.

Today I will give you a summary of the second chapter of Pañcadaśī which we have just
concluded. This chapter with 109 verses can be classified into six portions. The first topic is
verse number one called introduction. The second topic is from verse 2-46 Chāndogya
Upaniṣad vākya vicāra. Sad eva saumya idam agra āsit ekam eva advitīyam. From verse
47-59 we have the topic of Māyā. From verse 60 to 97 we have bhūta-bhautika-viveka.
Then we have from 98-108 the topic of jñāna-viveka-phala. The sixth and final topic is
verse 109 the conclusion.
The first topic is introduction in which Vidyāraṇya introduces the topic as pañca-bhūta-
viveka. He says by this viveka Brahman can be understood and therefore, we are
interested in this topic.
From 2-46 Vidyāraṇya takes up the Chāndogya Upaniṣad-vākya for introducing the sat as
an entity. All other things he is not interested in. It occurs in the sixth chapter of
Chāndogya Upaniṣad. His analysis has no connection with the sixth chapter of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad. He discusses the sat alone. Then he chooses not to analyse every word
occurring in the Upaniṣad. He attaches importance to the word sat alone. The word sat
means existence. This has to be carefully noted because generally the topic of existence is
never analysed by anyone. We are bothered about the things existing in the world and we
don’t think of analyzing what is existence. Most of the people take the existence for
granted. Even scientist don’t analyse what existence is. Nobody makes the study of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 214

existence. Most of the philosophies don’t deal with existence. Only two philosophers have
done some attempt on existence. Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika and Buddhism have made some
superficial attempts on existence. Vedānta is the most unique śāstra which analyses
existence by itself. Is existence a substance or is it a property or is it an action is the
question we want an answer to. The word exists is used as a verb or in any other manner?
Vedānta goes deep into the subject matter and it is done in Chāndogya Upaniṣad vākya. It
is the most unique teaching not arrived at by anyone in the world regarding what is
existence. Existence is not a part, property or a product of a substance but existence is an
independent entity which pervades and enlivens all. Existence extends beyond nāmas and
rūpas and existence will survive even after all the objects die. Existence is not limited by
the boundary or space as it is like space.
We use the world space even though we don’t see or touch it. We understand it as a
positive entity. Just as we understand space, Vedānta asks us to understand existence also
as a positive entity. When pot is destroyed, the destroyed is connected with pot and the ‘is’
the existence is not destroyed because ‘is’ the existence is. This existence alone is pure
consciousness. The existence is equated to consciousness in some other Upaniṣad. ekam
eva advitīyam means this existence does not have sajātīya, vijātīya, or svagata bheda.
Other than existence nothing is there. There is no second existence and existence does not
have parts also. Other than existence nothing is there. When I negate parts I negate
property also for property is a part of a thing. Negation of parts includes the negation of
property because property is a part. Partless means property-less also. This is the sat
which is the first topic introduced in the beginning. Sat is nondual attributeless existence.
Next, he introduces Māyā, an equally confusing subject-matter. Māyā is also extremely
abstract. We experience a world. This world is full of sajātīya, vijātīya and svagata bheda
and it has all types of divisions and from this it is clear that the world is different from sat.
Following śāstra-vākya you know that the world has one unique feature that it is sat-
vilakṣaṇa. It is different from sat, the existence. Refer to 6.2.1 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad. If
you don’t have śāstra in your mind you cannot use sat-vilakṣaṇa. To know what is sat you
have to study Chāndogya Upaniṣad.
Then we see another feature that is from pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi we experience the world and
therefore, world cannot be non-existent. A non-existence thing cannot be experienced by
me like rabbit’s horn or my horn. They are non-existent. They are not experienced by me

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 215

but the world is experienced. Keeping the pratyakṣa pramāṇa in view the world is asat-
vilakṣaṇa. Thus, the world has got two properties sat-vilakṣaṇa and asat-vilakṣaṇa. One is
based on śāstra pramāṇa and the other is based on pratyakṣa pramāṇa. When you apply
both pramāṇas, śāstra and pratyakṣa, ubhaya pramāṇa, you have a samanvaya pramāṇa.
Both pratyakṣa and śāstra pramāṇa are equally powerful. Pratyakṣa pramāṇa is prabala
because it is an independent pramāṇa; śabda pramāṇa if it is laukika śabda it is durbala as
it is dependent on pratyakṣa pramāṇa. However, if it is Vaidika śabda, being based on
śāstra, it is an independent pramāṇa and therefore, it is prabala. Both do not have the
power to negate the other. Attribute given by śāstra cannot be negated by pratyakṣa.
Attribute given by pratyakṣa cannot be negated by śāstra. So, the world should have both
the attributes co-existing. Therefore, world must belong to a unique category. That unique
category is called mithyā. A thing which has got sat-vilakṣaṇa attribute based śāstra
pramāṇa and asat-vilakṣaṇa attribute based on pratyakṣa pramāṇa, therefore, comes
under mithyā category.
Vidyāraṇya takes a slightly different approach. Only language is different but the meaning
is the same. Sat-vilakṣaṇa Vidyāraṇya calls as asat. From the śāstra point of view it comes
under asat category. From pratyakṣa pramāṇa point of view world is experienceable
category and therefore, it comes under sat category. World is asat as also sat category.
Thus, the world has got two features it is asat but experienceable; whatever is asat and is
experienceable is called mithyā. Rabbit’s horn is asat but non-experienceable asat and so, it
cannot be called mithyā but it is called tuccha. The world comes under asat keeping śāstra
in view. It is experienceable asat. Whether you say sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa or asat-paśyamāna it
is called mithyā. To understand mithyā you should understand two properties of the
world one based on śāstra pramāṇa and the other based on pratyakṣa pramāṇa. This
mixture entity is called mithyā. The example for sat is Brahman. The example for asat is
rabbit’s horn. It is non-experienceable asat. The next is mithyā sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. The next
part you should remember of the three things— sat, mithyā and asat—is that one cannot
become the other two. Sat cannot become mithyā or asat; asat cannot become sat or
mithyā; mithyā cannot become sat or asat. There is no corridor by which one can become
the other; even Īśvara cannot bring this conversion.
What happens to the world before sṛṣṭi or after previous pralaya? At that time is the world
is sat, asat or mithyā? We will say the world is mithyā always for it cannot become sat or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 216

asat. But the difference is the mithyā world is in a different condition. Its nature cannot be
changed. Its condition also can have pariṇāma or its avasthā can undergo a change. Like
water is water all the time now in a solid state or gaseous or liquid state. The world existed
before sṛṣṭi in mithyā state but it was in avyakta avasthā. This avyakta mithyā prapañca is
called Māyā. This very same prapañca before sṛṣṭi continues to be mithyā but it is in
avyakta state. Now it is manifest vyakta form. Avyakta mithyā prapañca is Māyā and it is
Māyā alone that is known by various names Prakṛti, avyakta or pradhāna. Here
Vidyāraṇya uses the word śakti. It is called śakti because it cannot exist separate from sat
Brahman. One reason is sat is everywhere and the second reason is this mithyā Māyā
enjoys existence only by borrowing existence from Brahman. Whoever is the person from
whom you can borrow must be nearer to you. Therefore, the word śakti is used to indicate
the power cannot exist independently or separate from the powerful person and similarly
Māyā cannot have independent existence. This Māyā śakti is the second topic introduced
by Vidyāraṇya.
From 60 to 97, he introduced six items ‘created’ one by one. They are pañca bhūtāni—
ākāśa, vāyu, agni, jala, pṛthvī and the second is bhautika prapañca with brahmāṇḍa,
fourteen worlds and all the śarīras. Now we have eight items introduced by Vidyāraṇya—
sat, Māyā, pañcabhūta and śarīras. Having taken the eight, if you look at the property each
one occupies nine tenth of the previous item. Māyā occupies nine tenth of the previous
items. Then Vidyāraṇya says each one lends property to the next one in addition to its
own natural property. Brahman has one property which is sat. Māyā has two properties
one original that is mithyātva, sat-asat-vilakṣaṇatva or asat bhāsamānatva; this mithyātva
is the intrinsic nature of Māyā not borrowed from Brahman. Ākāśa has got one and two
borrowed from the previous items. śabda is its own and mithyātva and existence are
borrowed from Brahman and Māyā. vāyu has got śabda, mithyātva and sat. So, you add
one-one property to the eight items. After adding all the properties, you find the second to
eight have got one property in common that is mithyātva and borrowed existence.
Therefore, sarva-bhinnam mithyā. This vision is called viveka-dṛṣṭi. Brahman alone is
satya and all other items are mithyā with borrowed existence. This discrimination is an
intellectual job.
From 98 to 108 viveka-phala is given. The phala is after discrimination world will have a
change in its one of the important features. There will be no difference in experience,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 217

division, function and there will a radical change in its status that world is mithyā having
dependent existence. Therefore, brahma satya jagan mithyā is understood and what is
mithyā cannot be reckoned as satya. It cannot be given over-importance. Don’t get too
much obsessed with the world. This dvaita-avajñā or mithyātva-darśana will give
jīvanmukti. With this jñāna one gets jīvanmukti. Sat Brahman is none other than I the cit. I
am the cit Brahman and satya and everything from Māyā to śarīra is mithyā. Aham satya
jagan mithyā. Freedom it gives because mithyā cannot do any harm to satya. A dream-
knife will cut the dream-body but mithyā prapañca cannot do any harm to me sat cit
Ātmā. I am unaffected by anything happening in the world. Such a person will also get
videhamukti. This is the result of viveka. With this phala topic is over.
Next, Vidyāraṇya concludes dvaita-viveka as discussed in Pañcadaśī and Vidyāraṇya asks
us to study the earlier chapter also. With this, the second chapter is over.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 218

Chapter III: Pañca-kośa-viveka

पञ्चकोशविवेकोनाम - तृतीयः परिच्छेदः ।

Class 1
Having completed the second chapter of Pañcadaśī now we will enter the third chapter
which is titled as pañca-kośa-viveka prakaraṇa. In the previous chapter we had pañca-
bhūta-viveka and now it is pañca-kośa-viveka. Here Vidyāraṇya makes an analysis of
Taittirīya Upaniṣad second chapter. It has three chapters out of which the second one is
the main chapter known as Brahmavallī, Ānandavallī or Brahmānandavallī. The
Brahmavallī is summarized in this chapter.
The second chapter begins with the words brahmavid āpnoti param, the knower of
Brahman becomes Brahman himself. Since Brahman is infinite so the knower of Brahman
attains Brahman which is infinite and therefore, knower of Brahman attains infinite which
is otherwise called freedom from finitude or mokṣa or liberation from insecurity and fear.
Saṃsāra is finitude and mokṣa is freedom from saṃsāra. Here the Upaniṣad tempts us to
the knowledge of Brahman. Now the question is what is Brahman and so the Upaniṣad
explains Brahman by using five technical expression or five features of Brahman. Here
Vidyāraṇya explains the five features.
First he gives the definition of Brahman as satya, jñāna and ananta limitless existence-
consciousness-principle. The second description is guhātīta and it resides within the cave
and the cave is explained as our own mind. The mind is also dark like the cave. The cave is
dark because of the darkness and the mind is dark because of ignorance. It is the mind-
residente or mind-dweller. Third description is Ātmā. It is satya-jñāna-ananta Brahman. It
is the real I the self. It is different from ahaṅkāra I which is the small i. The small i, is
crooked while the capital I is straightforward. Ātmā is big I. The fourth feature is pañca-
kośa-vilakṣaṇa. Five kośas like annamaya, manomaya, vijñānamaya, etc, are explained.
The fifth and final is ānanda as kośa whereas Ātmā brahma is ānanda-svarūpa. This is
reinforced in the third chapter of the Upaniṣad. Ānanda is the fifth feature. All these five
features Vidyāraṇya will present in this chapter with small change. Satya, jñāna and
ananta is treated in the end of the chapter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 219

śloka 1
गुहाहितं ब्रह्म यत्तत्पञ्चकोशविवेकतः ।
बोद्धुं शक्यं ततः कोशपञ्चकं प्रविविच्यते ॥ ३.१ ॥
guhāhitaṃ brahma yattatpañcakośa vivekataḥ.
boddhuṃ śakyaṃ tataḥ kośapañcakaṃ pravivicyate (3.1).
The first śloka is an introductory verse; kośapañcakaṃ pravivicyate we are going to
enquire into the pañca-kośa. We will find out whether it is the real I or not and the benefit
of pañca-kośa-viveka is that through which will be able to arrive at Brahman that is pañca-
kośa-vilakṣaṇa Brahman. pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa is indicated here.
That Brahman resides in the cave and that Brahman which resides in the heart can be
understood through pañca-kośa-viveka. Therefore, we enquire into pañca-kośa. This is the
introduction.

śloka 2
देहादभ्यन्तरः प्राणः प्राणादभ्यन्तरं मनः ।
ततः कर्ता ततो भोक्ता गुहा सेयं परम्परा ॥ ३.२ ॥
dehādabhyantaraḥ prāṇaḥ prāṇādabhyantaraṃ manaḥ.
tataḥ kartā tato bhoktā guhā seyaṃ paramparā (3.2).
In the previous śloka, Brahman was defined as one residing in the cave. Here Vidyāraṇya
says what we mean by cave. In his commentary, Śaṅkarācārya interprets guhā as mind or
intellect. Within the mind alone Ātmā resides as the very śākṣī of every thought. The mind
is full of ignorance. Guhā means the mind or intellect or antaḥkaraṇa, we can say.
Vidyāraṇya differs in this regard. He says the entire pañca-kośa is the big guhā with five
layers like a temple having pañca prakaras and within it is garbhaguhā and within that is
Brahman. It is a group of pañca-kośa. The outermost guhā is the body which is called
external prakara the annamaya kośa. Prakara means the temple wall. Within the
annamaya is prāṇamaya is the second prakara and here we call it as guhā because it is
ever dark. This is layer number two.
The third layer is manas or manomaya kośa. Deha should be translated as annamaya kośa
and prāṇa as prāṇamaya kośa and manas means manomaya kośa; then vijñānamaya kośa
is kartā who does the religious activities. Then tataḥ bhoktā the experiencer and interior

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 220

to vijñānamaya is ānandamaya kośa. When you get karma-phala, when you enjoy the
benefits of karma you get ānanda and that is called ānandamaya kośa. This five layer
series is called guhā in Taittirīya. Since five layers are there, the darkness must be very
thick. The innermost must be pitch-dark. We have to enter the cave and the torch light
needed to enter is the śāstra pramāṇa or śāstra-prakāśa. With the help of śāstra-prakāśa
we will discover Brahman. This discussion goes up to śloka 10. This is also the explanation
for guhā.

śloka 3
पितृभुक्तान्नजाद्वीर्याज्जातोऽन्नेनैव वर्धते ।
देहः सोऽन्नमयो नात्मा प्राक्चोर्ध्वं तदभावतः ॥ ३.३ ॥
pitṛbhuktānnajādvīryājjāto:'nnenaiva vardhate.
dehaḥ so:'nnamayo nātmā prākcordhvaṃ tadabhāvataḥ (3.3).
First he takes up annamaya kośa. At the beginning of Vedāntic study the body annamaya
we don’t call it a kośa. The body is looked upon as an external dress. For the beginner
body is Ātmā. We should say it is annamaya Ātmā and only when we discover prāṇamaya
is Ātmā annamaya becomes annamaya kośa. Deha is annamaya Ātmā. This physical body
annamaya is Ātmā in the beginning. It is called annamaya because it is the product of
anna, it is kārya of anna, and suffix Māyā means kārya. Body is a product of anna. Anna is
kāraṇa while the deha is the kārya. Once I say anna is kāraṇam the question comes
whether it is nimitta- or upādāna-kāraṇa. It is upādāna-kāraṇa which means it is sṛṣṭi-
sthiti-laya-kāraṇa. A carpenter is the kāraṇa for the table; nimitta-kāraṇa means sṛṣṭi-
matra. anna is upādāna-kāraṇa which is acetana. anna is jaḍa and jaḍa anna is upādāna-
kāraṇa and therefore, it is sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa of the body. That Taittirīya portion
Vidyāraṇya remembers here. Body is born out of anna and body is sustained by anna.
How do you say body is made out of anna? We cannot make body out of anna. How do
you say anna is kāraṇa? It is said anna is paramparayā sṛṣṭi-kāraṇa because anna the food
enters the body of the father and mother. That anna gets converted into seed and egg
respectively and because of the combination of seed and egg Puruṣa-bija and strī- śoṇita;
anna produces śukra and śoṇita which produces the physical body. So, the body is born
out of anna and anna is sṛṣṭi-kāraṇa. Vīrya is itself born out of anna; anna becomes vīrya
and vīrya becomes śarīra. Can the anna become vīrya in the vessel? It cannot become vīrya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 221

and it requires a body to become vīrya. Therefore, body is called annakārya. The body
grows because of anna alone. For the first nine months growth is through the mother’s
body. After nine months when the baby comes out, the baby grows through anna directly.
Anna is also called laya-kāraṇa as the body goes back to anna and it indirectly merges as
anna by merging into the earth. In short anna is sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa and therefore,
dehaḥ annamayam bhavati. This annamaya deha is not the real I. So Ātmā is annamaya-
kośa-vilakṣaṇa. I am not the body because the body is impermanent whereas I am
permanent. I existed in the previous janma and I will exist in the next janma if do not have
Ātma-jñāna. I is the continuous thing while the body is impermanent and impermanent
body cannot be equal to permanent Ātmā.

śloka 4
पूर्वजन्मन्यसत्त्वे तज्जन्म सम्पादयेत्कथम्।
भाविजन्मन्यसत्कर्म न भुञ्जीतेह संचितम्॥ ३.४ ॥
pūrvajanmanyasattve tajjanma sampādayetkatham.
bhāvijanmanyasatkarma na bhuñjīteha saṃcitam (3.4).
In the previous śloka Vidyāraṇya gave an argument that I am not the body. I am
permanent while the body is impermanent and permanent I cannot be impermanent body;
that is further explained here. Now a person may raise a question: how is that that I am
permanent? That is taken for granted by you; like an axiom you are saying it. Why do you
say: I am permanent, body is impermanent and therefore, I am not the body? Why cannot
we say: I am impermanent, body is impermanent and therefore, I am the body? The body
is equal to Ātmā what is wrong? Then there will be two problems. One is if the body is
taken as the Ātmā, you cannot explain the cause for the birth of the body. You cannot say
that body is born because of the past pāpa karma. In the past, the body was not there. It is
born because of somebody else’s karma. That is also not right. That kartā and bhoktā
connection will become wrong. You cannot also say it happened by accident. The big bang
theory. The huge soup of particles were there, they got condensed, condensed and
condensed. And at random, they got combined together without any thought, just like that
by accident, unicellullar organisms came. Then came aquatic creatures and it is the theory
of evolution. If you accept the theory of evolution, the whole creation is made by chance.
We don’t believe in chance and this body should be born out of some cause. Without

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 222

pūrva kāraṇa, if you talk of the arrival of body, it is defective. It is akṛta-adhyāgama-doṣa.

The body cannot be taken as Ātmā.
The second problem is if the body is Ātmā and it performs varieties of karma thereby
acquiring countless āgāmi and goes on exhausting puṇya-pāpa phala, there always will be
lot of karma unexhausted. We do something or the other and add to our karmas. Many
karmas are there without being exhausted. There will be unexhausted karmas hanging
and how can you give that karma to another body? If Ātmā is the body, the kartā goes
without exhausting the karma-phala. Kṛta-vipraṇāśa-doṣa will be found in the case of the
jīvas. Therefore, you should not say that the body is Ātmā.
Jīvātmā has to survive from beginningless time and also endlessly. The same jīvātmā alone
has to appear and disappear. No new jīvātmā will come. The world cannot provide karma
nor Īśvara can produce karma to produce a new jīva. Available jīvas alone appear in
different veṣas. Otherwise the creation is impossible. The body which was non-existent in
the pūrva janma, how can it produce karma required for the present janma? Again this
which will be non-existent in the future after death, can never experience, cannot exhaust
karmas acquired in this janma. We need the body to carry forward to the next janma to
pay the price. More in the next class.

Class 2
śloka 4 contd.
Four features are analysed here.
1. Pañca-kośa-guhā-vilakṣaṇatva, Ātmā is different from pañca-kośa; due to ignorance
there is darkness within and therefore, they are compared to guhā the cave. You
should remember it is based on Taittirīya Upaniṣad’s pañca-kośa-viveka.
2. The second feature highlighted is pañca-guhā-rahitatvam; Brahman resides within
the pañca-kośa. A person who is within this hall is different from the hall and he is
also within the hall. There is a person walking on the road outside and he is
without the hall and also different from the hall. Whatever is different, that need
not reside within. Whatever is different may be within and also different.
3. The third feature of Brahman highlighted is Atmatva. That Ātmā is within and it is
you yourself. Atmatva is the third feature; self-hood of Brahman is highlighted

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 223

here. The very same Brahman discussed in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad is talk about
here.
4. The fourth feature discussed here is that Brahman is described as satya, jñāna,
ananta Brahman.
Thus the four features are being discussed here by Vidyāraṇya. Of these four topics,
Vidyāraṇya has taken up the first one. Then Vidyāraṇya is worried whether we remember
pañca-kośas or not. So Vidyāraṇya explains what is pañca-kośa-viveka. He defines each
kośa and explains that Ātmā is different from each one of the kośas. That is, he gives kośa-
lakṣaṇa and explains that Ātmā is kośa-vilakṣaṇa.
In this śloka he explained why the body cannot be taken as Ātmā. Why should we take
Ātmā is different from body? Vidyāraṇya says if you take the body as yourself, one of the
serious questions the people ask cannot be answered. People ask why do good people
suffer and why do bad people don’t? Why I suffer always? I am a very good man. What
answer can you give? He says my suffering is not proportionate to the actions I do.
Normally action and life should be proportionate. There are three answers:
1. One answer is that you suffer for pūrva janma karma which you don’t remember
which unfortunately Īśvara remembers. You suffer the karmas of not only this life
but also the past lives.
2. If you are the body, I cannot talk about pūrva janma because the body was not there
in the last life. You existed in the last life and did karma through one body and now
you suffer for that action through this present body. If you are the body I cannot
explain why good people suffer and bad people enjoy.
3. Another answer is Īśvara is unjust. Īśvara is partial and feels like giving trouble to
some and to some others enjoyment. If you are able to accept unjust God, it is
wonderful. Unjust God, I cannot accept. If we see partiality of God, God loses his
Godliness. This can be explained in this manner. In life, everything is accidental.
There is no cause or anything can happen and don’t ask why. People’s enjoyment
and suffering do not have any cause and it actually accidentally happens.
In tradition we don’t accept second and third answers. The only answer acceptable is that
everything happens according to karma done in this or in the past janmas. I don’t
remember of the past life. What I don’t remember cannot be said to be non-existent. No.
Similarly we have gone through countless janmas and without that, there will be two-fold

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 224

problems and I will suffer for actions that I have not done. If the body is Ātmā, one who
has committed suicide will escape all the punishments. He will escape all the moral
responsibility. The śāstra says even if you commit suicide, you cannot escape the
punishment and for the crime you have committed, you have to pay the price here.
Therefore, it is said that there is someone other than the body. You have to accept a moral
order and the moral order needs pūrva janma. Otherwise there will be moral chaos.

śloka 5
पूर्णो देहे बलं यच्छन्नक्षाणां यः प्रवर्तकः ।
वायुः प्राणमयो नासावात्मा चैतन्यवर्जनात्॥ ३.५ ॥
pūrṇo dehe balaṃ yacchannakṣāṇāṃ yaḥ pravartakaḥ.
vāyuḥ prāṇamayo nāsāvātmā caitanyavarjanāt (3.5).
Vidyāraṇya has defined annamaya and also defined that it is different from Ātmā. Now he
says vāyu is prāṇamaya. It is vāyu tattva or vāyu vikāra. The features of prāṇamaya are
dehe purnah, prāṇamaya fills up annamaya. It means the entire annamaya is filled up by
prāṇamaya. Vāyu fills and pervades the annamaya kośa. Prāṇamaya is the energy-
provider to the annamaya kośa. Prāṇa alone is the śakti that gives powers to all the organs.
It gets energy and it has its own factory to produce its own energy. The raw material is
anna. There is no dearth of raw material.
Samāna prāṇa converts the food into energy and vyāna prāṇa distributes the energy all
over the body. Apāna prāṇa removes the waste. It generates and distributes energy. The
consumers of the energy are the ten sense-organs predominantly five karmendriyas. There
are some people who either speak or they eat. The energy they get from anna. Even
jñānendriyas needs some energy. It includes even antaḥkaraṇa, energized by the vāyu or
prāṇa it is said here. This is prāṇamaya. Annamaya talks of the anatomy of the body and
prāṇamaya talks about the physiological aspects of the body. He says the energy sheath is
not the Ātmā. This prāṇamaya is not Ātmā because prāṇamaya is acetana or jaḍa rūpa.
Vāyu is one of the pañca-bhūtas and prāṇamaya being bhūtātma and being jaḍa, it is not
Ātmā. I the Ātmā is not jaḍa. I am cetana only.

śloka 6
अहन्तां ममतां देहे गृहादौ च करोति यः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 225

कामाद्यवस्थया भ्रान्तो नासावात्मा मनोमयः ॥ ३.६ ॥

ahantāṃ mamatāṃ dehe gṛhādau ca karoti yaḥ.
kāmādyavasthayā bhrānto nāsāvātmā manomayaḥ (3.6).
Manomaya is defined as bhrānta which means the mind is confused or a bewildered one.
It is bewildered by kāma, krodha, lobha, moha, mada, mātsarya, etc. The general condition
of the mind is a confused state.
The function of manomaya is that it serves as the instrument of action. Manomaya karaṇa-
rūpah. It alone, through sense-organs, contacts the external world. It is not that the stimuli
from outside enter, but the mind goes out and envelops the object according to the śāstra.
It is well-explained in Dakṣiṇāmūrti-stotra. The mind goes out through the sense-organs
like five beams of light. From the torch light beam goes out and anything that falls within
the beam is seen. Similarly the cidābhāsa beam goes out through five sense-organs,
pervades the objects and the objects are thus known. Anything on the other side of the
wall is not seen because the consciousness beam does not fall on those objects. The mind
serves as an instrument for reaching out and illumining. Reaching is contact and
illumining is the phala.
Then the next problem is that ahaṅkāra and mamakara takes over; ahaṅkāra and
mamakara says that it is me and mine. The external objects will be claimed as mine or I
will say I belong to the object or person. In short, the mind is an instrument.
The mind entertains I-identification with the body. It is aham-abhimāna. Mamakara means
mine-identification. All this mischief is due to manomaya. The mind is confused; the mind
contacts the external world and identifies with external world. It is an instrument or
kāraṇa.
This manomaya is also not Ātmā. The reason is not mentioned here. The mind is subject to
modification but Ātmā is nirvikāra, changeless. Hence, the mind and Ātmā are not
identical. With this manomaya-lakṣaṇa and vilakṣaṇatva is over.

śloka 7
लीना सुप्तौ वपुर्बोधे व्याप्नुयादानखाग्रगा ।
चिच्छायोपेतधीर्नात्मा विज्ञानमयशब्दभाक् ॥ ३.७ ॥
līnā suptau vapurbodhe vyāpnuyādānakhāgragā.
cicchāyopetadhīrnātmā vijñānamayaśabdabhāk (3.7).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 226

Now vijñānamaya is defined and it is the mind endowed with consciousness. It is

caitanya-pratibimba. You can say that the intellect endowed with consciousness is
vijñānamaya. This vijñānamaya is resolved during sleep. That is why we do not have
localized individuality at the time of sleep. It is dissolved during sleep. During waking the
intellect in full intensity pervades the body. That is why when someone touches you; you
come to know of it. During sleep it does not pervade in full intensity. In this regard the
story of Ajātaśatru in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is recalled. Buddhi pervades the body. It
pervades up to the tips of the nails. If vijñānamaya and cidābhāsa pervade the nail, then
the nail will be sentient and you cannot cut the nail. The nail does not have cidābhāsa
because it does not have the reflecting medium vijñānamaya. If it pervades the hair, you
cannot cut the hair also. Vijñānamaya pervades up to the nail excluding the nail. Now the
definition is over.
Now he says that this vijñānamaya is not the Ātmā. Vijñānamaya is also subject to
modification. In suṣupti it has laya and in jāgṛt it is active; and since it goes through
unmanifestation and manifestation, it is savikāra and therefore, it is not Ātmā.

śloka 8
कर्तृत्वकरणत्वाभ्यां विक्रियेतान्तरिन्द्रियम्।
विज्ञानमनसी अन्तर्बहिश्चैते परस्परम्॥ ३.८ ॥
kartṛtvakaraṇatvābhyāṃ vikriyetāntarindriyam.
vijñānamanasī antarbahiścaite parasparam (3.8).
Here, Vidyāraṇya differentiates manomaya and vijñānamaya. There are several methods
of differentiation. Both however belong to antaḥkaraṇa. Why differentiate manomaya and
vijñānamaya if both belonging to antaḥkaraṇa? Vijñānamaya serves as kartā and
manomaya acts as kāraṇam. One is an agent and the other is karaṇa. One is the boss and
another is an employee. Vijñānamaya refers to that part of the mind which remains within
the body, whereas manomaya refers to that part of the mind that reaches the object in the
form of a vṛtti. It is like the torchlight and outgoing beams. The torchlight is in your hand
and the light beam goes out. So also the mind does not go out completely. If the whole
mind goes out, the person will die. If not mind goes out, contact will not take place. So we
have got inside aṃśa and outside aṃśa. Dravya-aṃśa is vijñānamaya the kartā and
manomaya is vṛtti-aṃśa the karaṇa. One is called vijñānamaya and another is called
manomaya. Details in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 227

Class 3
śloka 8 contd.
In this chapter known as pañca-kośa-viveka prakaraṇa Vidyāraṇya gives the teaching
given in the Brahmavallī of Taittirīya Upaniṣad. Vidyāraṇya looks upon all pañca-kośas
put together as the guhā which is slightly different from the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya.
Vidyāraṇya takes all the pañca-kośas as the guhā as against Śaṅkarācārya’s view of mind
as the guhā. Pañca-kośas are different from Ātmā. It is not only different from pañca-kośa-
guhā but is within the pañca-kośa-guhā. That Brahman which is within the pañca-kośa, is
not an object you can see within, but it happens to be the very subject I. It is to be claimed
as myself. The fourth feature is that it is in the form of limitless existence-consciousness-
principle. We discuss the first one of pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa. Each kośa is defined and then
it is said that the Ātmā is vilakṣaṇa, different from the kośa. Now we are in vijñānamaya
kośa analysis.
Manomaya is seen as different from vijñānamaya. Both are not two different materials but
there are two functional differences of one and the same material. It is different from
annamaya. It is divided into two aṃśas like one and the same person is called husband,
son and father. There is one antaḥkaraṇa but it has aṃśa-dvaya— kartṛ-aṃśa is
vijñānamaya and karaṇa is the vṛtti-aṃśa. Substance is called kartā and the vṛtti part is
called kāraṇa. The ocean has the top layer with waves while it also has a bottom layer
without any wave; kartṛ-aṃśa remains within the body but the kāraṇa vṛtti aṃśa goes out
to reach the objects. Jñāna means vṛtti aṃśa of antaḥkaraṇa. That vṛtti has cidābhāsa or the
reflected consciousness and therefore, cidābhāsa-sahita vṛtti is called jñāna. Until the vṛtti
envelops the object, the vṛtti has no shape. Then alone it takes the shape of the object. It is
called vṛtti-vyāpti. When the cidābhāsa envelops the object you get viṣaya jñāna.
The vṛtti aṃśa has bahirgamana. What remains within is kartṛ. Both of them are savikāra
says Vidyāraṇya. One is savikāra kartā and the other is savikāra karaṇa. One modification
is remaining within and the other is savikāra kartā. We have one outgoing and another
remaining in. In the form of kartā which is dravya aṃśa and the other in the form of vṛtti
aṃśa the internal mind undergoes modification. Antarindriya is a common word for both
the aṃśas. They are called vijñānamanasī together, where vijñānamaya is karaṇa-aṃśa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 228

and manomaya is called kartṛ-aṃśa. The difference between the two vijñānamaya and
manomaya is vijñānamaya remains within like the torchlight while manomaya goes out
like the beams of the torchlight. Thus mutually they help each other. Kartā cannot function
without karaṇa as the doer can do the function only with an instrument. Kartā can
function as kartā only with karaṇa and karaṇa too can function only when kartā is there.
Kartā and karaṇa should be there mutually supplementing each other. They run the show
very well. We have to remember that vijñānamaya and manomaya are not Brahmātmā
because they are subject to modification. Now we will enter ānandamaya.

śloka 9
काचिदन्तर्मुखा वृत्तिरानन्दप्रतिबिम्बभाक् ।
पुण्यभोगे भोगशान्तौ निद्रारूपेण लीयते ॥ ३.९ ॥
kācidantarmukhā vṛttirānandapratibimbabhāk.
puṇyabhoge bhogaśāntau nidrārūpeṇa līyate (3.9).
Now we come to ānandamaya and Vidyāraṇya says ānandamaya is also a unique form of
vṛtti only. In Tattvabodha we raise a question: what is ānandamaya? Priyādi vṛtti it is
mentioned in the Tattvabodha. In suṣupti we have ānanda and ajñāna because of the
special vṛttis taking place but they don’t go out and objectify things. The external world is
fully blacked out in suṣupti. Otherwise it is called shānta vṛtti. There are certain type of
vṛttis which are turned within. They are antarmukha. They are called sāttvika or shānta
vṛttis because of their quietude and because of their non-extrovert nature. They reflect the
Ātma-ānanda. On the surface of a pool of water, you can see the reflection of your face and
when the water surface is disturbed you cannot see your face. Rajo-guṇa is quietened
either because of sattva or because of tamas. Tamas is the sleep state. A jñānī is also calm
and a sleeping person is also calm. In both rajo-guṇa is suppressed. In the case of the jñānī
though, sattva is the case, whereas in the case of the sleeper, the tamo-guṇa has done the
same job. Rajas is the cause of sorrow. This introvert vṛtti is endowed with Brahmānanda
and it is called ānanda-pratibimba. This happens when you have done puṇya. Even to get
sattva or even to sleep well you need puṇya. Even to sleep you need puṇya and that is
why we say don’t wake someone up when someone sleeps. After the puṇya-bhoga is over,
that introvert vṛtti resolves in the form of nidrā. nidrā means kāraṇa-avasthā-rūpeṇa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 229

śloka 10
कादाचित्कत्वतो नात्मा स्यादानन्दमयोऽप्ययम्।
बिम्बभूतो य आनन्द आत्मासौ सर्वदा स्थितेः ॥ ३.१० ॥
kādācitkatvato nātmā syādānandamayo:'pyayam.
bimbabhūto ya ānanda ātmāsau sarvadā sthiteḥ (3.10).
Ānandamaya-lakṣaṇa is over in the previous verse. Here Vidyāraṇya points out that
Brahman is ānandamaya-vilakṣaṇa. Ānandamaya is not Ātmā because it is available only
temporarily. Ānandamaya is not continuously available whereas Brahman is nitya and
ananta, available all the time. That is why we do not have brahma-ānanda is an
experience. Pratibimba-ānanda goes away when thought goes away. Pratibimba-ānanda is
always in the from of an experience. Original bimba-ānanda is eternal. Brahma-ānanda-
anubhava you should not say and if you use it, it is a mistake. Any experience is finite and
that is why ānanda is not Ātmā. Every reflection presupposes the original. If there is a
reflected image of face in the mirror, there is an original face. You cannot look at your
original face directly. You can always see pratibimba-mukha. Any object of experience is
not permanent. The bimba-mukha ānanda is Ātmā. All these are written closely keeping in
mind the Taittirīya Upaniṣad portion. The Upaniṣad says ānanda Ātmā which alone
Vidyāraṇya writes in these lines. Pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇaḥ bimba-ānandaḥ eva brahmātmā.
That bimba-ānanda alone is Brahman and that always remains so. Your face continues to
be available even after the removal of the mirror although you don’t see your face; you
don’t doubt it before the mirror came, at the time of the mirror is present and even after
the mirror is removed in future. The brahma-ānanda is, therefore, eternal like the original
mukha being ever there whether there is mirror placed in front of the face or not.

śloka 11
ननु देहमुपक्रम्य निद्रानन्दान्तवस्तुषु ।
माभूदात्मत्वमन्यस्तु न कश्चिदनुभूयते ॥ ३.११ ॥
nanu dehamupakramya nidrānandāntavastuṣu.
mābhūdātmatvamanyastu na kaścidanubhūyate (3.11).
With the previous verse the first part is over. Brahman is pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa and now
Vidyāraṇya wants to say that it is available within the pañca-kośa itself as bimba-ānanda.
These two ślokas talk about pañca-kośa-nihitatva. Generally they say in the sthūla-śarīra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 230

this sat aspect is reflected predominantly and sūkṣma-śarīra cit aspect is reflected and in
the kāraṇa-śarīra the ānanda aspect is reflected and this brahma-ānanda is reflected in all
the three śarīras. We should remember there is sadābhāsa and ānandābhāsa in the
reflection, pratibimba.
Now Pūrvapakṣa raises a question. He says within pañca-kośa different from pañca-kośa
original brahma-ānanda resides and this means if I negate or push pañca-kośas I should be
able to see brahma-ānanda. It is like a gem is within five boxes and as I open them, I am
able to see the stone. The precious stone is pañca-box-nihita. Normally once you remove
the boxes you should be able to see the gem. After negating the pañca-kośa if brahma-
ānanda is there I should be able to see Brahman but I don’t see Brahman at all and I see
only blankness.
This person asks unfortunately deham upakramya from the annamaya kośa, up to nidrā-
ānanda or ānandamaya kośa all of them are not the Ātmā, I accept. Pūrvapakṣa is able to
appreciate the first part of the teaching. The vilakṣaṇatva, he is able to understand from
the teaching. After negating all the five, I should come across Brahman, but I don’t see
Brahman. I am not able to experience anything like Brahman after negating the pañca-
kośa. How am I to accept the existence of that Brahman? How do you say Brahman exists
within the pañca-kośa?

śloka 12
बाढं निद्रादयः सर्वेऽनुभूयन्ते न चेतरः ।
तथाप्येतेऽनुभूयन्ते येन तं को निवारयेत्॥ ३.१२ ॥
bāḍhaṃ nidrādayaḥ sarve:'nubhūyante na cetaraḥ.
tathāpyete:'nubhūyante yena taṃ ko nivārayet (3.12).
Vidyāraṇya says what you say is very correct. After the negation of pañca-kośa one is not
able to experience anything. But when you say nothing is experienced can you call it
emptiness is the question. He says what else it can be called? Vidyāraṇya says your head
may be empty, as it is like telling you came to the class, the class is canceled, and you say
nobody has come. You don’t experience anybody. You cannot say though that since the
hall is empty, none has come because there is an experiencer of such emptiness. Without
the experience of emptiness, you cannot use the expression of emptiness. There is nothing
other than the śākṣī. There is nothing other than the witness of nothing.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 231

Therefore, he says I partially agree with you. Nidrā, etc., the ānandamaya kośa and other
four kośas, or the pañca-kośas are experienced and pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa Brahman is not
experienced, I agree. However, you cannot say, therefore, there is emptiness. Don’t come
to the conclusion of emptiness and when you say nothing is experienced, as there is
someone to experience the absence; the experiencer of the emptiness exists. The very word
nothing would not have come to the dictionary, unless there is someone to talk about
nothingness! Total emptiness is illogicality. To talk about emptiness you need a talker.
How can you negate the witness of the blankness? It is because of the witness alone that
you are able to talk about the absence or emptiness.
The presence of pañca-kośa and the absence of pañca-kośa, the presence and absence of
thought, etc, is experienced by the subject whom you cannot negate. Unfortunately, the
subject can never become an object of your experience, just like you cannot see your
original face. You have to be consoled by seeing the reflected second-hand version. You
cannot experience your original face and that puṇya is there for other people only. The
five kośas and their absence is the experience by the subject-consciousness whom you
cannot negate and that Śākṣi-caitanya is Brahman. Then he will ask how to see Śākṣi-
caitanya? This can be ended with purnamadaḥ alone.

Class 4
śloka 12 contd.
Based on the second chapter of Taittirīya Brahmavallī, Vidyāraṇya reveals the nature of
Brahman. Four features of Brahman are being highlighted:
• pañca-kośa-guhā-vilakṣaṇatva,
• pañca-kośa-nihitatva,
• ātmatva and
• sat-cit-ānandatva.
We have seen that each kośa is different from Brahman. Brahman is nirvikāra while the
kośas are subject to modification. Brahman is not only different from pañca-kośas but
Brahman is available within the pañca-kośas themselves and you need not go in search of
Brahman. When we negate pañca-kośas and look for Brahman within we don’t see
anything but blankness. Vidyāraṇya says that after negating everything when you say

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 232

there is blankness, how can you talk of blankness without someone to illumine that
blankness? You will not be able to talk of blankness if it is not known, illumined and
Brahman is; pañca-kośa-śākṣī-rūpeṇa pañca-kośa-guhā-nihitam vartate. Naturally the next
question is Brahman is śākṣī of pañca-kośa, then how can we see the śākṣī? How can we
come across the śākṣī? For this Vidyāraṇya says: my dear, you can never come across śākṣī
Brahman, because unfortunately you yourself happen to be the śākṣī Brahman!
Try to look in a new different angle that I am pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa and I am pañca-kośa-
nihita and I am pañca-kośa-śākṣī and if you learn to look at from this angle, you will
realise that you are the śākṣī Brahman yourself. Also you will see that I am witness of the
blankness that is seen after the negation of the pañca-kośas. I am bhava-abhāva-śākṣī-
bhūta-caitanya Brahman is you, yourself. That Brahman is available only for claiming as
myself. Brahman is not available for objectification and it does not have perceptibility,
knowability, etc. In short, it is not an object of perception or experience and it happens to
be the ‘I’, the consciousness-principle. The third feature is ātmatva and that ātmatva will
be discussed from the next verse.

śloka 13
स्वयमेवानुभूतित्वात्विद्यते नानुभाव्यता ।
ज्ञातृज्ञानान्तराभावादज्ञेयो न त्वसत्तया ॥ ३.१३ ॥
svayamevānubhūtitvātvidyate nānubhāvyatā.
jñātṛjñānāntarābhāvādajñeyo na tvasattayā (3.13).
From this verse onwards to śloka 27, Vidyāraṇya reveals the fact that Brahman happens to
be I, myself. That Śākṣi-caitanya Brahman is never an object of experience. It is so because
if Śākṣi-caitanya has to be objectified, you need another Śākṣi-caitanya to objectify it and
that Śākṣi-caitanya you call it number two Śākṣi-caitanya and number one Śākṣi-caitanya
is objectified by number two Śākṣi-caitanya and for this you need another Śākṣi-caitanya
thus there will be anavasthā doṣa! There is no Śākṣi-caitanya to objectify the first Śākṣi-
caitanya for Śākṣi-caitanya is eka; it is only one.
There is no second Śākṣi-caitanya that can objectify the first Śākṣi-caitanya. First Śākṣi-
caitanya objectifying the second caitanya is not possible. There is no second Śākṣi-caitanya
which can objectify the first Śākṣi-caitanya. Therefore, Śākṣi-caitanya cannot be objectified
by you. If it is not objectified and if it is not available for objectification, our tendency will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 233

be that we will jump to the conclusion that there is no Brahman. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
adds that it is not because first Śākṣi-caitanya is absent but the first Śākṣi-caitanya is
present and still it cannot be objectified because there is no second Śākṣi-caitanya. It is not
because there is non-existence, but because there is no second caitanya to objectify the first
Śākṣi-caitanya.
The consciousness remains all the time; yet we are not able to perceive it or objectify it
therefore, it does not mean it is not there. It means that it remains unknown as an object.
For this Vidyāraṇya says consciousness cannot be objectified and consciousness need not
objectified, because even without objectification it is ever-experienced as consciousness.
Even without requiring any proof or process, consciousness is ever-experienced because it
is svayam-prakāśa caitanya. Therefore, svayam eva anubhutivat; it means caitanya-
rūpatvad. It is svayam-prakāśa caitanya which means it is ever-experienced.
Suppose I ask as to whether you are conscious being or not you need not have any doubt
for you are always with life and blood there because of that very consciousness. There is
no special effort required to experience the consciousness. It is constantly running aham
iti, as I. When I the brahma caitanya is ever-experienced as aham aham simultaneously
along with caitanya, the body-mind-complex is also experienced. ‘I’, the consciousness, is
evident all the time, along with the ‘I’, the body-mind-complex. It is shining
simultaneously. I include the body-mind-complex into the Ātmā, Self, because of the
confusion that I am called by the name jīvātmā caitanya. If I learn to exclude the body-
mind-complex and learn to say I am the space-like consciousness, then I know that in me
many bodies are floating, I am not one of the bodies as this body comes and goes, for it is
not an integral part of me, but it is exclusively mine, who is the Ātmā, Self. This realization
alone we call viveka or realization of the Self.
When I use the word I, excluding body-mind-complex, I am called Paramātmā caitanya.
Deha-viśiṣṭa caitanya is jīvātmā and deha-upahita caitanya is Paramātmā. It is like you see
the light falling on the hand but you have got sufficient viveka that the hand is not an
integral part of the light as the hand will come and hand will go, but the light will ever be
there. I, the Brahma caitanya, is ever there while the body-mind-complex comes and goes.
When we include the body then we are jīvātmā and if we exclude the body-mind-complex
we are Paramātmā. We don’t require new experience of Brahman because Brahman is
consciousness and consciousness is ever-experienced. What we lack is not a new

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 234

experience but what we lack is the capacity to exclude the body from ever-experienced
consciousness-experience as ‘aham’ ‘aham’ all the time during jāgṛt-, svapna- and suṣupti-
avasthās. Brahma-anubhava is not required. The superimposed limitation that I am
jīvātmā has to be knocked off and after knocking off the limitation, we don’t need any
Brahma-anubhava. In fact, it is not possible and it does not exist.
If anyone claims ‘I had Brahma-anubhava yesterday’, it is not correct. You have brahma-
anubhava all the time but you are not aware of it until you gain Ātma-jñāna that Brahman
is caitanya. Svayam eva anubhūtitvāt, it does not need a special experience. It does not
need to become an object of special experience anātmā should become an object of special
experience while Ātmā Brahman does not need anything. In brahma-jñāna, there is vṛtti-
vyāpti and not phala-vyāpti. We only negate something old and that is the limitation of
the body I have thrown upon myself like an elephant throwing dust over its body. We
don’t find anything new. Similarly, I am eternally brahma caitanya and I throw on myself
the mud of sthūla-śarīra-pariccheda, sūkṣma-śarīra-pariccheda and kāraṇa-śarīra-
paricceda; then I find that I am unable to find my real svabhāva of Brahman due to ajñāna.
The negation of the body-mind-complex is the Ātma-jñāna and we don’t need any exercise
to see Brahman as Brahman is myself and I am Brahman.

śloka 14
माधुर्यादिस्वभावानामन्यत्र स्वगुणार्पिणाम्।
स्वस्मिंस्तदर्पणापेक्षा नो न चास्तान्यदर्पकम्॥ ३.१४ ॥
mādhuryādisvabhāvānāmanyatra svaguṇārpiṇām.
svasmiṃstadarpaṇāpekṣā no na cāstānyadarpakam (3.14).
What is the process of knowledge is called epistemology. A jaḍa vastu or an inert vastu
cannot be known or experienced by me because it is jaḍa. What happens when I get the
clip-experience? What is the mechanism when I get this clip-experience? Vedānta says
when I look at the clip the antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti goes out and that envelops the object. The
vṛtti being a part of antaḥkaraṇa and antaḥkaraṇa being jaḍa, adhiṣṭhāna-vṛtti is also jaḍa.
Antaḥkaraṇa is made out of pañca-bhūtas, from the sattva-guṇas of the five elements;
Antaḥkaraṇa is bhautika and therefore, jaḍa, and thereby, antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti is also jaḍa.
This jaḍa vṛtti overlaps the jaḍa object and that also will not improve jaḍa vastu. One jaḍa
vastu cannot improve another jaḍa vastu. Because of the subtlety, antaḥkaraṇa enjoys

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 235

pratibimba caitanya otherwise called cidābhāsa and when the vṛtti pervades the object,
along with the vṛtti, caitanya also envelops and the clip gets the caitanya-sambandha; it is
pratibimba caitanya and it gets it because of the reflecting medium, the antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti.
The clip gets caitanya-sambandha through the medium of antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti with its
pratibimba caitanya enveloping the clip the jaḍa vastu. Only a secondary sambandha it
gets and what is important is caitanya-sambandha the clip gets, and because of the
caitanya-sambandha, the clip-experience takes place.
If the clip is beyond the range the clip does not have vṛtti-vyāpti; the reflecting medium
does not pervade, reflected consciousness does not pervade, and therefore, there is no
experience. Every experience is possible because of caitanya-sambandha. It is because of
caitanya-sambandha alone that a jaḍa vastu is experienced by us. The mind is experienced
because of caitanya-sambandha. Before caitanya-sambandha there is no experience and
after caitanya-sambandha there is the experience of anything.
Now the basic question is how to experience Brahman. When will Brahman get caitanya-
sambandha for Brahma-anubhava to take place? Brahman need not get caitanya-
sambandha because Brahman happens to be caitanya! Others experience pratibimba
caitanya itself and Brahman has the better version as bimba caitanya why there is need for
Brahman-experience at a particular time? There is no such thing called at a particular time
and that experience happens only in the case of all other experiences whereas Brahman is
experiences all the time because Brahman is bimba caitanya itself. The milk becomes sweet
because of sugar-sambandha. Rice becomes sweet because of sugar-sambandha. Before
sugar-sambandha, the milk was not sweet and after sugar-sambandha it is not sweet. How
is to make sugar sweet though? Sugar is sweet by itself and it does not need a sambandha
to become sweet. It does not means before or after, it is not sweet; we cannot say so. Sugar
was, is and will ever be sweet without requiring any process of sweetening.
Similarly, Brahman does not need any process of experiencing and if at all you are putting
forth the effort, through that effort, you have to only remove the superimposed attributes.
There is no Brahma-anubhava process to experience Brahman. Everything becomes sweet
because of sugar-sambandha, but sugar does not need anything to get its sweetness
because sweetness is the svarūpa of the sugar and it lends sweetness to other non-sweet
objects. The non-sweet becomes sweet and becoming sweet is a process for the milk and it
involves time, the milk should come in contact with that object. Before such sambandha, it

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 236

was not sweet and it has to become sweet. Who makes the sugar sweet? Who lends
sweetness to sugar? Vidyāraṇya says there is nothing else which can lend sweetness to
sugar. The one that lends sweetness to other does not depend upon someone to lend
sweetness to itself. Not only that, there is no second thing also which can lend sweetness
to sugar because everything other than sugar is non-sweet. There is no one else is there to
lend sweetness to sugar. The sweetness of sugar is not a result of a particular process or
operation.
Similarly, the experience of Brahman is not the result of any effort like meditation
although there are millions of people practicing very very sincere meditation seriously to
have Brahman-experience! Thousands of serious seekers are waiting for brahma-anubhava
to come at an event at the time of nirvikalpaka samādhi and they call it transcendental
experience and all. Vidyāraṇya says all this is because Vedānta is not looked into properly.
What an unfortunate thing because they will eternally waiting for something that is not
going to happen. It is like sugar is waiting for someone to give sweetness. Nothing will
happen. Then they will have to do? The only alternative is some experience will come. If
you press the eye, something is seen. Something or the other will happen if you practice
intense meditation and then you declare that I experience Brahman and write books also!
The fact is that no amount of meditation can bring you the Brahma-anubhava. We don’t
question the anubhava but we say it has nothing to do Brahma-anubhava. Brahman was
there as us and it is there now also. There is no second sugar which can lend sweetness to
the first sugar. The second sugar will need third sugar to sweeten the second sugar. For
Brahman-experience is not a process, it is an ever-available fact and it is svayam-prakāśa.

śloka 15
अर्पकान्तराराहित्येप्यस्त्येषां तत्स्वभावता ।
माभूत्तथानुभाव्यत्वं बोधात्मा तु न हीयते ॥ ३.१५ ॥
arpakāntarārāhityepyastyeṣāṃ tatsvabhāvatā.
mābhūttathānubhāvyatvaṃ bodhātmā tu na hīyate (3.15).
In the previous verse it was stated that there is no second sugar to lend sweetness to the
first sugar. Now the person is disturbed. Without borrowing sugar, the milk will be non-
sweet. The milk will remain non-sweet without borrowing sugar. If the first sugar cannot
borrow sweetness unlike milk, it is because sugar need not borrow sweetness due to its

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 237

svabhāva is sweet; the sweetness it has is its own. Even though there is no second sweet
object which can lend sweetness to sugar, sugar is sweet by itself. There is sweetness in
sugar without borrowing sweetness from any other object. So is Brahman. Brahman does
not need a special experience process at all. In the same way there is not objectification of
Brahman possible or experience of Brahman possible as an event. Caitanya-sambandha
Brahman does not need but all jaḍa vastus need caitanya-sambandha to be experienced.
The earth needs sūrya-prakāśa-sambandha, moon requires sūrya-prakāśa-sambandha to
appear bright, but sūrya does not need any sambandha for it is nitya-prakāśa. This sūrya-
prakāśa is taken as an example by Hastāmalaka. Ātmā does not need any special
experience and only we have to remove the misconception of the ever-experienced Ātmā.
Still even though Brahman is not object of experience, Brahman which is of the nature of
consciousness can never be negated. More in the next class.

Class 5
śloka 15 contd.
Here Vidyāraṇya reveals Brahman based on the second chapter of Brahma-ānanda-vallī.
First he showed Brahman is pañca-kośa-guhā-vilakṣaṇa. Brahman is different from pañca-
kośa which are comparable to series of guhas. Then he pointed out that Brahman is pañca-
kośa-nihita as it exists within pañca-kośa. Now he has come to the most important aspect
that this Brahman which is different from pañca-kośas, which is within the pañca-kośas, in
the form of the illuminator of the pañca-kośas, Śākṣi-caitanya Brahman, you cannot
objectify for that Brahman happens to be I, the very subject, who objectifies everything.
The third and the most important feature is brahmaṇaḥ ātmatvam. Śākṣi-caitanya or the
consciousness is ever in the form of the subject, it is never objectifiable and it is never
experienced at a particular time. In the form of ‘I’, the consciousness is ever-experienced in
all the three states: jāgṛt, svapna and suṣupti. When I say consciousness is ever-
experienced, we should understand if consciousness is ever-experienced, it does not
require special effort or process for its experience. The clip is not an ever-experienced
object and so, to experience it I need an effort. I should see it, between the pramāṇa eye
and the clip the prameya, there should be an alliance and then alone in the mind a thought
process takes place, as a result of which thought process the clip-experience takes place.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 238

This experience takes place at a particular time. Before the thought, the clip is not
experienced; after the thought, the clip is not experienced. During the process, because of
the thought and because of the effort, the clip is experienced by me.
Vidyāraṇya says that consciousness does not need any such process for its experience.
Consciousness does not need any alignment for its experience. Consciousness does not,
therefore, require a particular time to experience as it is ever-experienced. It is ever-
experienced because it is the nature of the consciousness itself. To convey this Vidyāraṇya
gave the example of sugar. Everything needs a process of adding the sugar to make any
other thing to get the sweetness. After mixing the sugar alone the milk becomes sweet. If
you analyse, sugar does require any process to become sweet for sweetness is its very
nature. Similarly, consciousness is experience itself and it is ever-experienced.
Consciousness being Brahman, Brahman is also ever-experienced. Therefore, Brahma-
anubhava is not an event that is to take place in time and all people always experience
Brahman before, during and after Vedāntic study. Brahma-anubhava is already there.
Then “where is the need of study of śāstra?” will the be question. The purpose is that I
have falsely added the attributes of the body on Brahman.
My problem is not the lack of Brahman-experience; Brahman is experienced as myself. Our
problem is in I or upon the I, which is none other than ever-experienced Brahman, I have
falsely added the attributes of the body and therefore, when I say ‘I am’ that ‘I am’ part
refers to Brahman only. That is why all uniformly say ‘I am’. That ‘I am’ refers to ever-
experienced sat-cit Brahman. Nobody puts a full stop after ‘I am’. The addition of other
things after ‘I am’ reveals their foolishness. Manness or womenness is an attribute of the
body added to ‘I am’, the genderless Ātmā. The emotions of the mind, etc., are
superimposed on emotionless consciousness. Our problem is only transference of the
attribute to the I. With the transference of the attribute, I am called jīvātmā and after
Vedāntic study, I re-transfer the attribute to the respective anātmā and I become
Paramātmā. You give back all the attributes to śarīratraya or kośa-pañcaka. Then you will
realize the attributeless Brahman. After the distribution of attributes, you will stand alone
without attributes and the very same ‘I am’ is called Paramātmā. Add attribute, ‘I am
jīvātmā’ and minus attribute, ‘I am Paramātmā’. The aim of Vedāntic study is to eliminate
the attributes. [refer to 18th chapter of Upadeśa-sāhasrī for further study]. That ’I’ refers to
caitanya cit, ’am’ refers to sat and attributelessness indicates anantatva. Ananta is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 239

another attribute but the word ananta indicates the absence of attributes. An empty vessel
does not add anything as it indicates not the presence of a thing but absence of the thing.
Ananta is not an attribute of Brahman but absence of attribute to Brahman. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya struggles to convey the idea that you need not struggle to experience
Brahman for you yourself are Brahman. Brahman is caitanya-svarūpa. That Brahman
cannot be negated and it is ever-evident as: aham aham. Even to say I am not here, I
should be there. Therefore, none can negate consciousness. Up to this we saw in the last
class.

śloka 16
स्वयंज्योतिर्भवत्येष पुरोऽस्मात्भासतेऽखिलात्।
तमेव भान्तमन्वेति तद्भासा भासते जगत्॥ ३.१६ ॥
svayaṃjyotirbhavatyeṣa puro:'smātbhāsate:'khilāt.
tameva bhāntamanveti tadbhāsā bhāsate jagat (3.16).
Here Vidyāraṇya gives śruti pramāṇa to show that these are not his speculations but
revealed in the Upaniṣad themselves. eṣaḥ svayaṃjyotiḥ bhavati is from 4.3.9 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad tam eva bhāntam anubhāti sarvam tasya bhāsā sarvam idam
vibhāti is from Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 2.2.11. Everything shines only after that shining light;
his shining illumines all this world; na tatra sūryo bhāti na candratārakaṃ nemā vidyuto
bhānti kuto:'yamagniḥ, tam eva bhāntam anubhāti sarvam tasya bhāsā sarvam idam
vibhāti is from 5.15 of Kaṭhopaniṣad; this means that the sun shines not there, nor the
moon and the stars these lightnings shine not, where then could this fire be. Everything
shines only after that shining light. His shining illumines this entire world. Śvetāśvatara
Upaniṣad also says in 6.14 tam eva bhāntam anubhāti sarvam tasya bhāsā sarvam idam
vibhāti which means when He shines everything shines; by His light all that is illumined.
All conclude that Ātmā-tattva is of the nature of self-effulgence and it does not require any
other object to illumine it. Brahman is Ātmā, Ātmā is consciousness and it is ever-evident
I. Only when I identify with the body I am unable to accept Brahman. We should say
consciousness is not a part, property or a product of a substance but consciousness is an
independent entity which pervades and enlivens all. Existence extends beyond nāmas and
rūpas and consciousness will survive even after all the objects die. The nature of
consciousness I should remember when I say I am the consciousness. When we define

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 240

consciousness, we forget I and when we define I, we forget the consciousness. I am the

space-like consciousness in whom all the bodies are floating and one of the floating bodies
is my body; if you remember this you can boldly declare I am Brahman, the consciousness.
The problem is that the student wants more and more proofs to say this. For him, we say it
does not require any proof. Brahman is self-effulgent and self-evident. The consciousness
is evident or experienced even before we experience any other thing. First we experience
the I; before I notice who is in front of me I experience myself. I experience this when I
wake up from sleep. Even when you want to experience Ātmā you must have desire to
have the Ātmā-experience. Even before desiring the Ātmā-experience that desirer is Ātmā.
Even before Ātmā-anubhava, Ātmā is anubhūta! Before all the anātmās, Ātmā is
experienced as I. Everything else is experienced because of Ātmā-experience only says
Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. When you experience the clip, you don’t experience the clip only but
along with the clip you experience the light. Because of the light alone you experience the
clip. This we normally omit as we don’t take it seriously. When you shift from clip-
experience, the light-experience is there in all the experiences. This you should note that
light experience is there in all our experiences. You don’t require special jñāna to
experience consciousness because consciousness is experienced all the time without even
our knowledge of experience. The whole world is illumined by the light of Ātmā or Ātma-
caitanya.

śloka 17
येनेदं जानते सर्वं तं के नान्येन जानताम्।
विज्ञातारं के न विद्याच्छक्तं वेद्ये तु साधनम्॥ ३.१७ ॥
yenedaṃ jānate sarvaṃ taṃ kenānyena jānatām.
vijñātāraṃ kena vidyācchaktaṃ vedye tu sādhanam (3.17).
This is another Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra though not an exact quotation. He
paraphrases the meaning of the mantra 4.5.15. How can the subject be ever objectified?
People know everything because of consciousness alone. That caitanya cannot be known
by anything else or it cannot objectified by anything else. Caitanya cannot be a jaḍa vastu.
Caitanya cannot know itself as eyes cannot see themselves. Caitanya cannot be known by
another caitanya for there is no other caitanya. Therefore, how do you work for experience
of Brahman? Though it is ridiculous, people work for Brahma-anubhava. The same idea is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 241

reinforced in the second line of this śloka. How can the knower be ever known and with
what instrument the knower be known? With any instrument, only an object can be
known but with any instrument, subject cannot be known. Any pramāṇa can function only
in the field of a prameya.
A pramāṇa can function only in the field of prameya. There are four fields in the creation
pramāṇa, śākṣī, pramātā, prameya. Of these, pramāṇa can function only in one field. That
field is prameya alone. The pramāṇa cannot function in all the other three fields; a
pramāṇa cannot objectify the pramāṇa itself. Eyes cannot see themselves; knife cannot cut
itself. An instrument cannot operate on the same instrument. Pramāṇa cannot function in
the field of pramātā. Instruments function in the field of object and instrument does not
function in the field of itself. An instrument does not function in the field of agent. If
pramāṇa cannot function in the field of pramāṇa and prameya itself what to talk of the
field of the śākṣī! Pramāṇa has no access to the śākṣī at all. Thus, you wait for Brahman-
experience to take place which is not possible!

śloka 18
स वेत्ति वेद्यं तत्सर्वं नान्यस्तस्यास्ति वेदिता ।
विदिताविदिताभ्यां तत्पृथक्बोधस्वरूपकम्॥ ३.१८ ॥
sa vetti vedyaṃ tatsarvaṃ nānyastasyāsti veditā.
viditāviditābhyāṃ tatpṛthakbodhasvarūpakam (3.18).
There is another quotation from Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. The second line of this verse is
based on Kena Upaniṣad 1.3. That Ātmā alone objectifies everything which is objectifiable.
In fact, the mind itself is illumined by Ātmā and sense-organs are illumined by Ātmā and
through sense-organs and the mind, the entire world is illumined by Ātmā. But there is
none to objectify or illumine that Ātmā. Another Ātmā who will objectify this Ātmā is not
there. Ātmā objectifies everything but Ātmā is not objectified by anything and even
without objectification it is known. yaḥ sākṣāt aparokṣāt brahma, that ever-evident I is
Brahman.
That Ātmā is different from both known and unknown category. It does not come under
unknown category and the known category also. We say there is a third category other
than unknown and known category. All the unknown and known come under objects.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 242

Unknown through a process of knowledge becomes known. Every unknown thing is a

feature, object, which will be known at a later date. Known is a present object. Ātmā is
neither a future object nor a present object but it is the subject. Its nature is caitanya. All
the vidita-vastus are jaḍa and all unknown things are jaḍa. Ātmā is different from anātmā.

śloka 19
बोधेऽप्यनुभवो यस्य न कथंचन जायते ।
तं कथं बोधयेच्छास्त्रं लोष्टं नरसमाकृ तिम्॥ ३.१९ ॥
bodhe:'pyanubhavo yasya na kathaṃcana jāyate.
taṃ kathaṃ bodhayecchāstraṃ loṣṭaṃ narasamākṛtim (3.19).
Here Vidyāraṇya says I have taken so much trouble to show that Brahman, the Ātmā is
ever-evident to all the people and therefore, you don’t have to work for experience of
Brahman and if at all you are to work for something, it is not for any new experience but
for the negation of the limitation of the body that you have thrown upon yourself. You
have something to renounce but not gain anything. Brahma-anubhava is not lacking to
anyone. If anyone asks for Brahma-anubhava after gaining knowledge, then Vidyāraṇya
says that person is a stupid one. Vidyāraṇya says such a person is made of clay. If anyone
does not understand this ever-experienced consciousness as Brahman, I give up teaching
for I don’t know how to teach such stupid people. Therefore, we cannot teach further. It is
easy for anyone with some thinking for none can miss Brahman at anytime. This śloka is
borrowed from Naiṣkarmyasiddhi..

Class 6
śloka 19 contd.
Various features of Brahman based on the second chapter of Taittirīya Upaniṣad are being
discussed here. Pañca-kośa-guhā-vilakṣaṇatva and pañca-kośa-guhā-nihitatva have been
discussed. Brahman is behind all the pañca-kośas and Brahman obtains within pañca-
kośas. Brahman remains in the pañca-kośas in the form of very śākṣī. Śākṣī illumines the
pañca-kośas. Vidyāraṇya says you cannot experience that śākṣī as an object because that
Śākṣi-caitanya happens to be you, yourself. Thus, Paramātmā alone exists in the form
jīvātmā behind the pañca-kośas and this ātmatva is being discussed from verse 13 to 27.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 243

Vidyāraṇya points out that Brahman being Śākṣi-caitanya as I myself, there is no need of a
separate experience to prove that Paramātmā. Everything other than ‘myself’ needs an
experience to prove it. Existence of my ‘Self’ does not need any proof as it is ever-
experienced consciousness. If there is one thing that does not need proof it is the
consciousness-principle. Vidyāraṇya gets mildly angry perhaps and he says consciousness
is the ever-experienced I-principle and in spite of listening to this repeatedly, if one says “I
have understood Brahman is the ever-experienced consciousness but tell me how to
experience Brahman”, such a student is a special specimen made out of special clay and I
want to give up teaching such a student. I surrender in front of this kind of wonderful
student. Not only I cannot teach but he says I wonder how to teach such a student for he is
a clay statue! Normally, clay is in a lump-form and now he is in a human form. Up to this,
we saw in the last class.

śloka 20
जिह्वा मेऽस्ति न वेत्युक्तिर्लज्जायै के वलं यथा ।
न बुध्यते मया बोधो बोद्धव्य इति तादृषी ॥ ३.२० ॥
jihvā me:'sti na vetyuktirlajjāyai kevalaṃ yathā.
na budhyate mayā bodho boddhavya iti tādṛṣī (3.20).
Vidyāraṇya says one cannot say I have not experienced consciousness because
consciousness by its very nature is ever-experienced as I, the conscious being. You may
not use the words “conscious being” but when you say “I am a living being” and “I am
sentient being”, it means “I am a conscious being” and therefore, Vidyāraṇya criticizes
such a thinking that “consciousness is not yet experienced by me”. The wrong thinking of
a person is quoted here. I have not experienced consciousness and not only he commits
this mistake but he adds that I wait for that consciousness. It is to be experienced in future
and some people qualify further you realize Brahman at the time of nirvikalpaka samādhi,
etc. Such a thinking process of a student who has learnt Vedānta is a contradiction and
such a statement is unfortunate like asking: do I have a tongue or not? The very statement
comes out of my mouth because of tongue only. The language is possible because of the
tongue. Tongue means language because without tongue you cannot speak at all. Being
able to speak, he raises a question “do I have a tongue or not?” and it is so contradictory
that the statement is not acceptable. It is a shame for a thinking person to ask such a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 244

question. In the same way, to say that I have not experienced consciousness is a
contradiction. Suppose another student says I don’t question this; consciousness is ever-
experienced by all people and I admit that I experience consciousness all the time. I don’t
question this but I question the experience of Brahman. Consciousness-experience I have
not doubt about, but I work for Brahma-anubhava. Then we will say that Brahman and
consciousness are one and the same as per the Upaniṣadic statements. It means Brahman
is experienced and Brahma-anubhava is an ever-obtaining fact for which one need not
work; this is the idea. Upaniṣad conveys the fact and I struggle to convey this idea. If
consciousness is experienced means you should note the four features of consciousness:
• consciousness is not a part, property or a product of a substance,
• consciousness is an independent entity which pervades and enlivens all,
• consciousness is not limited by boundaries of the body and it extends beyond
nāmas and rūpas, and
• consciousness will survive even after all the objects die.
If you remember all this, you can say ahaṃ brahma asmi without any hesitation. It is not
enough to say consciousness is distinct from the body but once you have separated
consciousness and the body cognitively, you should ask yourself which one of the two do
you claim as yourself? Suppose you choose to claim “I am the body”, you have to say “I
have consciousness and that consciousness is Brahman”. Instead of claiming body as
myself, your should claim “I am the consciousness and this consciousness has four
features and the four features are of the Brahman” and if you come in this route, you will
know that ahaṃ brahma asmi, you gain the jñāna and the ultimate mokṣa. Similarly, you
should remember I am consciousness and consciousness has four features and that four-
featured consciousness is Brahman.

śloka 21
यस्मिन्यस्मिन्नस्ति लोके बोधस्तत्तदुपेक्षणे ।
यद्बोधमात्रं तद्ब्रह्मेत्येवं धीर्ब्रह्मनिश्चयः ॥ ३.२१ ॥
yasminyasminnasti loke bodhastattadupekṣaṇe.
yadbodhamātraṃ tadbrahmetyevaṃ dhīrbrahmaniścayaḥ (3.21).
I said consciousness is an ever-experienced fact. But all other objects in the world are not
ever-experienced fact and they are experienced at a particular time but not all the time.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 245

Experience of other objects are subject to arrival and departure which is dependent on the
fact that it takes place when there is relevant thought in the mind. When the thought arises
that object is experienced and when the thought goes away that experience also goes
away. When book-thought is there book-experience is there and when I have some other
thought, book-experience goes giving way to another thought. Vidyāraṇya says in every
experience of an object, really speaking, we experience two things. Generally, we think
during pot-experience we experience pot only. During man-experience we experience man
only. Vidyāraṇya says we experience two things— one is the object, pot is experienced,
caused by the relevant thought. There is a second experience that is experience of the
consciousness itself because I say I have experience of the pot that means I am conscious of
the pot. So there is consciousness. when I am conscious of the pot, not only pot is evident
but consciousness is also evident. This consciousness is experienced or evident not because
of pot-thought. If consciousness is experienced because of the pot-thought, then
consciousness will go when the pot-thought disappears. Even if the pot-thought goes, I am
a conscious being. In every single experience, there are two things experienced:
• one is the object-experience because of thought, dependently experienced, and
• another is experience of consciousness which is self-evident.
From pot-experience, if I go to tree experience, then here also, two experiences are there:
one is the tree-thought and again consciousness which self-evidently experienced. When
thought changes, objects changes, and there is another factor other than the changing
factor, which is ever permanent and that is the consciousness, experienced by all the
people, all the time. My talk gives every new experience and in and through there is a
changeless factor which is continuously experienced by, which is the consciousness. Every
object experience minus the object is the experience of consciousness. The changing
thought, based on objective part, your remove and what is left is consciousness, which is
otherwise known as Brahman. That consciousness is present, with or without thought.
Consciousness is there in jāgṛt, svapna and suṣupti with jāgṛt-vṛtti, svapna-vṛtti or with no
vṛtti. The Gopīs change while Kṛṣṇa is one and the same and that Kṛṣṇa is brahma
caitanya.
In the world we have several experiences taking place every moment. Generally, we think
there is only one unit but we should know that in every experience there are two things
one is the object and the other is the consciousness. The common example I often give is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 246

the light and hand. You should know when I show you the hand you will often say that
there is hand alone, but the hand is made visible only because of the presence of the
pervasion of the light on the hand and in fact without the light pervasion, you will not be
able to see the hand. Similarly, when you see the object, you not only see the object, but
also the consciousness that pervades the object and in fact without the help of
consciousness, you will not be able to see the object. Vedānta says consciousness is the
most important thing in every objective experience and we enumerate the object missing
the consciousness. Caitanya-anubhava is consistently there. You experience both but at a
particular time you can focus on one thing only. When I ask you because of that the hand
is visible then you focus the light-principle. Seeing one thing and focusing the attention on
another, consciousness is experienced and now Vidyāraṇya asks you to pay attention to
the ever-experienced consciousness.
Paying attention to the consciousness is what the Vedānta teaches. By paying attention to
one thing, attention to the other is dropped. Temporarily drop your attention on the object
and focus your attention on the consciousness. don’t drop the object but pay attention to
the consciousness. By paying attention to the screen of the movie, it is temporarily
stopping focusing on the characters of the movie. Pay attention to the one factor which is
experienced all the time that I am a conscious entity. There is only one consciousness; not
that for illumining part there is one consciousness and there is another consciousness
when you see another part. Remember the objects are many but the consciousness is one
alone.
In all the three avasthās the consciousness is the same. In every day, every month, every
janma and every sṛṣṭi, the consciousness is the same. That pure consciousness segregated
from the thought and the object that consciousness alone is called Brahman. If you include
the body in the consciousness it is called jīvātmā and if you exclude the body it is
Paramātmā. Viśiṣṭa caitanya is jīvātmā and upahita caitanya is Paramātmā. When I say
“separate the body”, it is to be done intellectually and not physically. Physical separation
cannot take place because consciousness is everywhere. Separation is in terms of
understanding that consciousness is pāramārthika and body is vyāvahārika and
pāramārthika caitanya is ever-free form vyāvahārika śarīra. Vyāvahārika screen is
unaffected by the prātibhāsika movie. I am śuddha all the time. That is called mokṣa. You
are mukta all the time and you should ask “when I am not mukta”? This understanding by

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 247

paying attention to ever-present consciousness and claiming I am nitya śuddha Brahman

is called clear brahma-jñāna.

śloka 22
पञ्चकोशपरित्यागे साक्षिबोधावशेषतः ।
स्वस्वरूपं स एव स्याच्छून्यत्वं तस्य दुर्घटम्॥ ३.२२ ॥
pañcakośaparityāge sākṣibodhāvaśeṣataḥ.
svasvarūpaṃ sa eva syācchūnyatvaṃ tasya durghaṭam (3.22).
Here Vidyāraṇya points out that if a person negates pañca-kośa as anātmā as it is not
Brahman, that Brahman as a Śākṣi-caitanya will remain as my very nature. Śākṣi-caitanya
remains as an unnegatable residue or unnegatable adhiṣṭhāna. If you say I can negate
consciousness also and I will ask you to negate and tell me. If someone says: I have
negated, he will be saying: I am absent. To say consciousness is negated, he needs
consciousness. The negator consciousness is unnegatable and it remains as the ultimate
substratum all the time. Then the question comes if śākṣī alone remains how come I don’t
see that? Vidyāraṇya says you will not see that for you are that remainder consciousness
or the residual caitanya and unnegatable adhiṣṭhāna is your real nature. The real nature
means that is your very nature. That Śākṣi-caitanya is your real nature. That is the Parā
Prakṛti as per the Gītā vākya. All that you mention about you in your visiting card relates
to your body and not the Ātmā. Never look upon Brahman as śūnya. Here Vidyāraṇya
negates the Buddhist policy of śūnya. Our general conception is that what we cannot
identify we state as it is not there and extending that Brahman is not objectifiable and
therefore, we say Brahman is not there. Brahman is unobjectifiable not because it is absent,
but because it is the subject. It is illogical to say Brahman is śūnya. Vidyāraṇya remembers
Taittirīya mantra. When he discusses this chapter he remembers Taittirīya in his mind. If
someone says none has come means none other than himself has come. When you say in
meditation I come to see blankness, the blankness is due to I, the consciousness, illumining
the absence of everything else. It means anya-śūnyatva and not Ātma-śūnyatva when we
say nothing is there. More in the next class.

Class 7

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 248

śloka 22 contd.
In this third chapter, Vidyāraṇya reveals Brahman based on the teaching of the second
chapter of Taittirīya Upaniṣad. We have seen Brahman is different from pañca-kośas. Also
we have seen Brahman is within pañca-kośas. Now, we have entered the third important
feature that is this pañca-kośa-guhā-vilakṣaṇa and nihita Brahman is nothing but Śākṣi-
caitanya which illumines and objectifies pañca-kośas. This Śākṣi-caitanya, I should not try
to objectify for the Śākṣi-caitanya happens to be I myself. Śākṣi-caitanya-rūpa is nothing
but Ātmā. I am the brahma caitanya who am different from the pañca-kośas, who am
within the pañca-kośas, who am witnessing and experiencing the pañca-kośas. This is
what Vidyāraṇya said in the present śloka. That Brahman is the Śākṣi-caitanya I which
will survive or continue to exist even after shedding the pañca-kośas. That is called sākṣi-
bodha-avaśeṣataḥ. I will continue to be a remainder after the negation of all the pañca-
kośas. The negatable part of me cannot be the real me. The kośas are negatable and they
cannot be my real nature. None of the kośas are Ātmā. Heat is not the svabhāva of the
water for it disappears after sometime. What remains unnegatably is the real. Since
caitanya remains unnegatably, that Śākṣi-caitanya alone can be said to be the real I. I refer
to the body also as I when I talk about my physical parameters, but that is the fake I. It is
the ahaṅkāra I or the lower I. The real I is unnegatable Śākṣi-caitanya and this real I cannot
be śūnya even though I cannot objectify the real I. I, the consciousness, cannot be
objectified; still I am a positive entity. That unobjectified consciousness cannot be
śūnyatva. The argument it is śūnyatva is illogical.

śloka 23
अस्ति तावत्स्वयं नाम विवादाविषयत्वतः ।
स्वस्मिन्नपि विवादश्चेत्प्रतिवाद्यत्र को भवेत्॥ ३.२३ ॥
asti tāvatsvayaṃ nāma vivādāviṣayatvataḥ.
svasminnapi vivādaścetprativādyatra ko bhavet (3.23).
Vidyāraṇya says we can have an argument or debate with regard to everything in the
creation but we cannot have an argument with regard to the fact about the one who
argues! Both will take a stand as to whether that I the arguer exists or not. Suppose the
vādī says “I the arguer say I exist”, the prativādī will come and say that “I the arguer do
not exist”. Now if the prativādī claims that I am non-existent, how can there be vāda itself,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 249

as vāda requires a vādī and prativādī! The śūnyavādī is a funny person saying “I am non-
existent” and how can I have argue with a non-existent prativādī? Not there is any need to
talk about it. There is only one thing which is not available for debate. That “I exist” does
not need any argument. Even to entertain a doubt whether I exist or not, I should be
existent as a doubter; the doubter’s existence cannot be doubted. The subject or Self, the
first person singular, ever exists. I conclude the existence of the subject even before
entering into an argument, because that is proved even before the argument. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says the subject is beyond the scope of the debate as that I is self-proved. On
the other hand, if a person says it is subject to debate, it is said if a śūnyavādī says “I am
non-existent” or “Self is non-existent”, with regard to Self if there is a debate, in this
debate who will be opponent? I will say “I exist” and prativādī will say “I the arguer does
not exist”. Then I will leave without arguing because I the arguer is not existent according
to him. There cannot be a prativādī. “Who can be an opponent?” means there cannot be an
opponent. Then vivāda cannot be there and therefore, I win without any argument. I have
no problem with a śūnyavādī without uttering a single argument because he will say “I
am not there”.

śloka 24
स्वासत्त्वन्तु न कस्मैचिद्रोचते विभ्रमं विना ।
अत एव श्रुतिर्बाधं ब्रूते चासत्त्ववादिनः ॥ ३.२४ ॥
svāsattvantu na kasmaicidrocate vibhramaṃ vinā.
Ata eva śrutirbādhaṃ brūte cāsattvavādinaḥ (3.24).
Vidyāraṇya says none can say “I am non-existent”. Non-existence of oneself is not
acceptable to anyone. Even to present the proposal “I am non-existent”, that person has to
be present. Under some conditions some people say “I am non-existent”. That condition is
when one person is in the mental hospital. That person is not going to think and make the
statement. Therefore, vibhramam vinā, none can accept the proposal “I am non-existent”.
Whoever says Brahman is non-existent, whoever negates Brahman, negates himself and
negation of himself is madness; therefore, negation of Brahman is madness. Therefore,
only the Veda itself negates those people who talk about the brahma-asatva. Śruti
criticizes those who talk of non-existence of Brahman. The Śruti’s intention is that
negation of Brahman is equivalent to negation to oneself and negation of oneself is equal

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 250

to madness. A mad person is not counted in the society and he himself is not there.
Asatvādī is a śūnyavādī. Now the question where does the śruti negate the Asatvādī?

śloka 25
असद्ब्रह्मेति चेद्वेद स्वयमेव भवेदसन्।
अतोऽस्य माभूद्वेद्यत्वं स्वसत्त्वन्त्वभ्युपेयताम्॥ ३.२५ ॥
asadbrahmeti cedveda svayameva bhavedasan.
ato:'sya mābhūdvedyatvaṃ svasattvantvabhyupeyatām (3.25).
The śruti negates asat-vādī in the 6th anuvāka of Brahmānanda vallī [2.6]. asad brahma iti
ced Veda; suppose if one says Brahman is non-existent, someone claims Brahman is non-
existent, it amounts to the negation of himself, the Ātmā. Brahman-negation is equal to
Self-negation because Brahman happens to be the Self. Self-negation is contradictory
because for Self-negation, Self must be there and if it is there how will you negate it?
Accept Brahman is Śākṣi-caitanya and that Śākṣi-caitanya is “I am”. This I, the Śākṣi-
caitanya, has one uniqueness that it can never be objectifiable. It is not possible to see your
own eyes. Eyes cannot see themselves. The reflection of the eyes you can see yourself but
the original eye you cannot see yourself. It is a fact with regard to even Kṛṣṇa Paramātmā.
Similarly, I the Ātmā is unobjectifiable. This you have to accept and extending it further
you cannot say “because it is unobjectifiable, it is not there”. Avedyatva can be accepted
but don’t extend it to asatva; with regard to any anātmā you can extend this though.
Whatever is objectifiable, such an anātmā you can say it is not there. But this is not the case
with Ātmā. Rabbit’s horn is non-perceptible and “it is not there” you can say, but you
cannot apply this principle to Ātmā. It is aprameya but svaprakāśa. This brahmatva is
unobjectificable is a fact. It is sarva-pramāṇa-aviṣaya. That you should accept and you
should not extend this to non-objectifiable; and on the other hand, you should conclude
the existence alone of Ātmā. Never conclude its non-existence.

śloka 26
कीदृक्तर्हीति चेत्पृच्छेदीदृक्ता नास्ति तत्र हि ।
यदनीदृगतादृक्च तत्स्वरूपं विनिश्चिनु ॥ ३.२६ ॥
kīdṛktarhīti cetpṛcchedīdṛktā nāsti tatra hi.
yadanīdṛgatādṛkca tatsvarūpaṃ viniścinu (3.26).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 251

Now I am in this unfortunate situation. Everyone says my eyes are beautiful but I am not
able see my own eyes. I want to see how the eyes look like. I want to see the I caitanya and
I want to see how I look like. Just as I have intense curiosity, the seeker has the curiosity: is
the I the Ātmā like this object or that object? This object means any object nearby the
pratyakṣa-viṣaya or any object which is far away the parokṣa-viṣaya. Is Ātmā is pratyakṣa-
viṣaya or parokṣa-viṣaya which is referred to by the pronoun that? For this in Sanskrit two
words are there. Dṛk or dṛṣ is a suffix added to the word in Sanskrit to convey the idea of
similarity. Is Ātmā īdṛk or tādrik? Is it a pratyakṣa-viṣaya or parokṣa-viṣaya? This is the
question posed by the seeker. If you ask any such question, I will say it is neither hi īdṛk or
tādrik. It is neither like this nor like that. It is neither pratyakṣa nor parokṣa. It is
pratyakṣa-parokṣa-vilakṣaṇa. Pratyakṣa-viṣaya is anātmā and parokṣa-viṣaya also is
anātmā; how can Ātmā be ever like anātmā? How can Ātmā ever be comparable to
pratyakṣa anātmā or parokṣa anātmā? Being anātmā both are jaḍa, both are savikāra,
while Ātmā cannot be compared to savikāra and jaḍa vastu, Ātmā being nirvikāra and
cetana. You cannot compare Ātmā with anātmā. Ātmā does not have any property while
anātmā has property. That is why Ātmā is called pratyakṣa-parokṣa-vilakṣaṇa.
Can you compare Ātmā to another Ātmā then? This is also not possible because there is
only one Ātmā. For space, what can be the comparison? For ocean, there is no comparison.
You cannot compare Ātmā to any other Ātmā because there is no second Ātmā. You are
never like anyone and you are the most strange one in the creation; why do you lack self-
esteem!

śloka 27
अक्षाणां विषयस्त्वीदृक्परोक्षस्तादृगुच्यते ।
विषयो नाक्षविषयः स्वत्त्वान्नास्यपरोक्षता ॥ ३.२७ ॥
akṣāṇāṃ viṣayastvīdṛkparokṣastādṛgucyate.
viṣayo nākṣaviṣayaḥ svattvānnāsyaparokṣatā (3.27).
The previous verse is explained clearly in this verse. He says the word ‘this’ refers to the
object which is within the range of the sense-organs. The object which is beyond the sense-
organs is parokṣa. One is close-by object and the other is farther object. Farther is not in
terms of distance but it is in the form of sensory availability. Pratyakṣa and parokṣa is not
based on distance but based on the sensory accessibility. One is nearby object and the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 252

other is farther object. I am near me or far away from me? Find out the answer. More in
the next class.

Class 8
śloka 27 contd.
Dealing with the features of Brahman based on Taittirīya second chapter, first Vidyāraṇya
established pañca-kośa-guhā-vilakṣaṇatva and pañca-kośa-guhā-nihita as the very śākṣī of
pañca-kośa. Then he has come to the third and most important feature of ātmatva. That
Brahman is non different from I, the Śākṣi-caitanya. Here alone the Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-
aikya is made clear. Brahman, I understand as the I, the śākṣī. He has clearly pointed out
that I am Brahman. Because Brahman happens to be myself, Brahman is not available for
any pramāṇa or objectification. It is aprameya Brahman.
Normally wherever an object is not available for pramāṇa, our convention is that the same
is not existent. The existence of a thing is proved through a particular pramāṇa and if a
thing is not available for pramāṇa, normally we say it is non-existent. There is only one
exception to this general rule and that happens to be I, the śākṣī; I am not available for any
pramāṇa but still none can question my existence and even to question my existence, I
must exist as a questioner. The questioner of existence cannot be questioned.
Now, a question arose: if I am the śākṣī not available for objectification, then what is my
nature? For conceiving or visualizing my nature I want to have some example. Therefore,
the student asks the question is my nature like an object nearby or is like an object far
away or it is like this or like that? Then Vidyāraṇya says īdṛk-tādrik-vilakṣaṇa unlike this
or unlike that is the śākṣī. Having said this in the last śloka, Vidyāraṇya clarifies this
expression. When we say a thing is like this, we refer to pratyakṣa-viṣaya anātmā. When
we say a thing is like tādrik, the comparison is to the parokṣa-viṣaya-anātmā.
Ātmā is unlike both because, both happens to be anātmā. Whereas we find I am Ātmā the
viṣayī. It means neither pratyakṣa-viṣaya nor parokṣa-viṣaya, but I am the viṣayī, different
from pratyakṣa-viṣaya, parokṣa-viṣaya, anātmā. I am neither pratyakṣa nor parokṣa, I am
aparokṣa. Whatever is an object beyond the scope of sense-organs and known through

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 253

other than pratyakṣa are called parokṣa beyond the range of sense-organs. We say they are
tādrik.
But Ātmā is different from both anātmās and it is different from both viṣayas neither
pratyakṣa viṣaya nor parokṣa viṣaya. Viṣaya conveys the idea of being pramāṇa-
objectifiable. I do not have the status of viṣaya and I do not have the status of anātmā as I
am viṣayī. Viṣayī is Ātmā caitanya or Śākṣi-caitanya. It is not an object of pratyakṣa
pramāṇa. That is why viṣayī does not deserve the title of viṣaya. It is not a far away object
also, because it happens to be myself. Therefore, I am neither near me nor I am far away
from me. I am neither near me nor far away from me, because I am ‘me’ myself. Near and
far away relates to spatial relationship. Any relationship is possible between two different
things. And I and śākṣī are not at all different and therefore, no relationship is possible
and so, spatial relationship is also not possible. Therefore, near and far should not be used.
I am the śākṣī and the śākṣī is none but Brahman. This verse is a mahā-vākya. We have
completed ātmatva topic. Now we will enter the fourth feature which is given in
Brahmānanda-vallī as the first feature satyam jñānam anantam brahma. What was given
as first one there in the Upaniṣad is given here as the fourth topic.

śloka 28
अवेद्योऽप्यपरोक्षोऽतः स्वप्रकाशो भवत्ययम्।
सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं चेत्यस्तीह ब्रह्मलक्षणम्॥ ३.२८ ॥
avedyo:'pyaparokṣo:'taḥ svaprakāśo bhavatyayam.
satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ cetyastīha brahmalakṣaṇam (3.28).
Far away object is called parokṣa and nearby object is called pratyakṣa. Ātmā is neither
nearby nor far away object. It is pratyakṣa-parokṣa-vilakṣaṇa and we call it as aparokṣa.
This title is possible only for one thing. What is that neither near you nor far away from
you is ‘you’. It refers to I the Śākṣi-caitanya. So Vidyāraṇya says even though Brahman is
not an object of pratyakṣa or parokṣa jñāna, not objectifiable either through pratyakṣa or
parokṣa pramāṇa, it is aparokṣa as it is self-evident and it is the very I, the Śākṣi-caitanya.
The changes in the age and the changes in the avasthās do not make any change in me, the
Śākṣi-caitanya. If I am to experience the aparokṣa Ātmā, don’t say I have to sit in
meditation and go to samādhi. Aparokṣa vastu is ever-available as aham and no separate
effort is required to experience aparokṣa Ātmā. Every other thing needs an effort to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 254

experience that thing but Ātmā can be experienced without any effort and that I is
Brahman. Ayam svaprakāśo bhavati. It is ever-evident. Then why do we learn Vedānta?
The purpose of study of scriptures is not to experience Brahman because it is already
available as I, the Śākṣi-caitanya; yet we study Vedānta to negate the superimposed
limitations which are born of misconception.
The misconceptions are in the from of body-limitation and because of mind-problem, but I
don’t say mind has a problem but I say I have a problem. Attributes of anātmā I have
superimposed on myself and Vedāntic study is a cleaning process where we learn to say ‘I
am’ without taking the attributes of anātmā. I am not fat as I understand the fatness
belongs to the sthūla-śarīra.
Every attribute I add, such attribute part I negate; I am Brahman and I was Brahman.
Svaprakāśoham and this Brahman alone is called satyam jñānam anantam in Taittirīya
beginning. It is Brahma-lakṣaṇa-vākya. It is called svarūpa-lakṣaṇa and indirect definition
is called taṭastha-lakṣaṇa. It is svarūpa lakṣaṇa. There is the following definition: satyam
jñānam anantam. Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya will explain this definition from 28 to 36.

śloka 29
सत्यत्वं बाधराहित्यं जगद्बाधैकसाक्षिणः ।
बाधः किंसाक्षिको ब्रूहि न त्वसाक्षिक इष्यते ॥ ३.२९ ॥
satyatvaṃ bādharāhityaṃ jagadbādhaikasākṣiṇaḥ.
bādhaḥ kiṃsākṣiko brūhi na tvasākṣika iṣyate (3.29).
He will take up each word satya, jñāna and ananta separately for explanation. The word
satya is discussed here. Why do we call Brahman as satya? In Tattvabodha we called satya
as the one that obtains all the time, past, present and feature. Here, Vidyāraṇya calls
abādhya as satya that it can never be negated or dismissed; that which is unnegatable is
called satya. If you analyse that, every anātmā and the entire anātmā-prapañca is
negatable. At individual level, we negate it at the time of sleep and at macro-level, it is
negated at the time of pralaya. That is why individual negation is called laya and total
negation is called pralaya. At both the levels, micro and macro level the entire prapañca is
negated. There is one thing which remains unnegated. What is unnegated is the
consciousness, which is aware of the absence of everything. That which is the witness of
negated. The negation-witness is unnegatable. Or the negator is unnegatable.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 255

Otherwise, if you blindly say everything is negated, I will ask you the question “how do
you say all are negated”? If you I don’t say anything then I will say that I is sarva-abhāva
and I cannot be talked about without a śākṣī. The very word abhāva cannot come to our
dictionary without experiencing that. Abhāva, the absence of a thing, cannot be in our
dictionary unless we experience abhāva. Therefore, that which can never be negated is
called satya and Brahman is unnegatable and so, it is called satya. This unnegatability is
satya. Brahma caitanya is the ultimate witness, eka śākṣī, and it is ultimate witness of
negation of everything else. Why should we have the ultimate witness? If it is not there,
you cannot talk about negation and to talk about negation, you need a witness. Then there
is no negation of witness of negation. Therefore, the negation-less witness of negation is
Ātmā caitanya. Negation-less witness of negation is called satya Brahman.
Vidyāraṇya asks the student if you talk of negation, kiṃsākṣika, how do you know there
has been negation? What is the witness or who is the aware of you to talk about negation.
Tell me who is the śākṣī. I have given you the example before. Is there a TV set inside the
room? If a student tells there is TV what you will understand the student has witnessed
the presence of TV. If a student says there is no TV, has he witnessed the room or not? You
understand that the student who says there is no TV must have seen the absence of TV
and if you have not gone inside the room, you cannot talk of the presence as also the
absence. If you have not gone there, only answer you can give is “I don’t know”. With
sarva-bhava or sarva-abhāva, you have to talk of who is the witness of sarva-abhāva. Who
is the witness of bādha. Witness is cetana alone. Therefore, caitanya alone can be satya. Cit
alone can be sat and sat alone can be cit. The only unnegatable thing is the consciousness-
principle and therefore, that alone can be satya. You, the conscious, alone can be jagat-
kāraṇa satya Brahman.
You cannot talk about negation without a witness. TV-negation or TV-presence cannot be
done without a witness. You cannot state witness-less negation of the presence; witness-
less non-existence of a thing is never possible.

śloka 30
अपनीतेषु मूर्तेषु ह्यमूर्तं शिष्यते वियत्।
शक्येषु बाधितेष्वन्ते शिष्यते यत्तदेव तत्॥ ३.३० ॥
apanīteṣu mūrteṣu hyamūrtaṃ śiṣyate viyat.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 256

śakyeṣu bādhiteṣvante śiṣyate yattadeva tat (3.30).

Here Vidyāraṇya gives an example. Imagine a room where many things are there. To
paint the room, you remove all the things. There is a worker who removes the things one
by one. After removing all the things, you ask the question “is there anything inside”? He
says that everything is removed and there is nothing. Now, Vidyāraṇya says when you
say “there is nothing”, what is the meaning of nothing? Don’t take it for granted. Do you
mean to say nothing is there? Vidyāraṇya says you cannot say nothing is there as there is
space which is an all-pervading material. Space is not abhāva but it is one of the pañca-
bhūtas, one of the substances in the creation. It is a formless substance, amūrta dravya.
In the room there are two things one is mūrta dravya which is tangible and removable
whereas there is also amūrta dravya, ākāśa. The worker understands he has to remove
only the things that are removable. In that list of removable things, ākāśa is not included.
After removing everything, when the worker says there is nothing, nothing means there is
nothing removable but there is something unremovable, the amūrta dravya, bhūta-ākāśa.
It is there in the room. Vidyāraṇya says nothing hear means ākāśa. Ākāśa alone is there.
“Nothing is there” should be interpreted or understood as absence of everything and
presence of unremovable ākāśa. If you understand this, if the whole anātmā is negated
and when you say there is nothing, it means Ātmā is ever-present. Meditation cannot help
to realise Ātmā. When you say there is blankness or nothing, Vidyāraṇya says it is not
anything but it is unremovable consciousness. In Vedānta, śūnya means unremovable
consciousness. After every removable is removed.
When everything negatable is negated up to our thought, every external thing you have
negated, the body is negated and even the thought is negated and then you find the Śākṣi-
caitanya is available. At the end yat śiṣyate whatever remains unnegatably as the witness
consciousness that is called Brahman. Therefore, Brahman is called satya. More in the next
class.

Class 9
śloka 30 contd.
Of the four features of Brahman which Vidyāraṇya explains on the basis of Taittirīya
Upaniṣad Brahmānanda vallī. Here we discuss the fourth important feature satya-jñāna-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 257

anantatva. This satya-jñāna-anantatva is discussed up to verse 36. Vidyāraṇya discusses

satya as unnegatable Brahman. When everything negatable is negated there is sarva-
abhāva, the absence of everything. If the absence of everything has to be talked about, we
need a śākṣī to talk about the negation. This śākṣī cannot be negated because there will be
none to negate śākṣī. We have therefore, to conclude śākṣī is unnegatable. Since a witness
of negation is required to talk about the negation, there is no negation of the witness of the
negation. Therefore, Śākṣi-caitanya is always unnegatable. This unnegatable Śākṣi-
caitanya alone remains when all negatables are negated.
To communicate this idea Vidyāraṇya takes an example which we completed in the last
class. When a person removes the entire removable object from the room after removing
all the removables he says there is nothing. Vidyāraṇya asks the question what do you
mean by nothing? We cannot say there is śūnya as there is one thing which is not
removable and that one thing is ākāśa tattva. The word nothing does not mean śūnyatva
or the absence of everything but it means the absence of all that are removable alone. By
implication Vidyāraṇya says absence of all the removables is equal to the presence of
ākāśa, the unremovable. ‘Nothing’ here means space that present after the absence of all
removable things and the presence of unremovable which accommodated all the
removables. Therefore, in Vedānta niṣedha means caitanya. Just like in common-parlance,
nothing is equal to space, similarly, in Vedānta-parlance nothing means adhiṣṭhāna
caitanya. Remainder of all negatables is the presence of unnegatable which means
caitanya. Neti neti is equal to caitanya. When everything negatable is negated which
includes ākāśa also, the unnegatable Śākṣi-caitanya alone remains at the end. That
caitanya which accommodates all the negatable alone is caitanya. Cit alone can be tat.

śloka 31
सर्वबाधे न किंचिच्चेद्यन्न किंचित्तदेव तत्।
भाषा एवात्र भिद्यन्ते निर्बाधं तावदस्ति हि ॥ ३.३१ ॥
sarvabādhe na kiṃciccedyanna kiṃcit tadeva tat.
bhāṣā evātra bhidyante nirbādhaṃ tāvadasti hi (3.31).
Vidyāraṇya says suppose a person argues that after the negation of everything, nothing
remains. He says let him use the word ‘nothing’; I don’t care but I want to assert the
meaning of the word ‘nothing’ is something. We understand the word ‘nothing’ as space.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 258

There is space to accommodate everything. The word ‘nothing’ now has a positive
meaning which is Śākṣi-caitanya. All pañca-bhūtas including space is negated and yet the
remainder that is there is Śākṣi-caitanya. What you call nothing is something for me says
Vidyāraṇya. The so called nothing is called Śākṣi-caitanya Brahman. In Vedānta, śūnya
means Brahman only. Absence of negatable means presence of unnegatable which is here
Ātmā or Śākṣi-caitanya or Brahman. The negative language conveys a positive thing. What
you name as nothing is Brahman the Śākṣi-caitanya. You call it nothing but I call it Śākṣi-
caitanya. Na kiṃcit is the Pūrvapakṣa language and śākṣī is my language says
Vidyāraṇya. That Śākṣi-caitanya remains whatever the word you use; even if you say it is
śūnya. The word śūnya when we use, we call the positive entity caitanya while Buddhist
takes it as śūnya or nothing.

śloka 32
अत एव श्रुतिर्बाध्यं बाधित्वा शेषयत्यदः ।
स एष नेति नेत्यात्मेत्यतद्व्यावृत्तिरूपतः ॥ ३.३२ ॥
ata eva śrutirbādhyaṃ bādhitvā śeṣayatyadaḥ.
sa eṣa neti netyātmetyatadvyāvṛttirūpataḥ (3.32).
That is why śruti reveals Brahman in an indirect manner. It negates everything negatable.
It does not positively negate Brahman. Since unnegatable is left after the negation, śruti
negates everything possible and thereafter the remainder left out is Śākṣi-caitanya. That
Śākṣi-caitanya is Brahman and that is me myself. That is why vibhūti becomes the symbol
of everything. After destruction of everything what remains is ash. So the ash or vibhūti is
compared to Brahman. After jñānagni burns everything, Brahman remains. It is negation
of everything other than Brahman. Anātmā-niṣedha-dvārā, -rūpataḥ, by adopting that
method, the śruti keeps Brahman as the ultimate remainder. If the śruti were to reveal the
śākṣī positively, we would look around for śākṣī but we will not find for I am the śākṣī.
Śruti wants us not to look around for the śākṣī. We should never be a pramātā attempting
to objectify the śākṣī for you are the śākṣī.

śloka 33
इदं रूपं तु यद्यावत्तत्त्यक्तुं शक्यतेऽखिलम्।
अशक्यो ह्यनिदं रूपः स आत्मा बाधवर्जितः ॥ ३.३३ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 259

idaṃ rūpaṃ tu yadyāvattattyaktuṃ śakyate:'khilam.

aśakyo hyanidaṃ rūpaḥ sa ātmā bādhavarjitaḥ (3.33).
Every anātmā can be negated. Anātmā is available only when you are a pramātā using a
pramāṇa. If you are not a pramātā and if you don’t use pramāṇa, there cannot be any
prameya. Without my cooperation they all will get dissolved and that is why in svapna,
jāgṛt prapañca goes and in suṣupti, svapna prapañca goes. Everything in the creation
which can be objectified as ‘this’, whatever is objectified is negated. Their existence
depends upon me, the observer. Even if you say it is available for other people, it is
available for observer alone. Again, amṛta in heaven depends upon the observer in the
heaven. Therefore, observer can negate them anytime when he loses the observer status.
That which is not available as an object or the unobjectifiable entity, is the I, the subject,
who cannot be dropped, negated or renounced. I can renounce all except myself. You
cannot escape your Self. If I have to renounce myself, I cannot because the subject and the
object should not be identical; the kartā cannot be karma, subject cannot be object and Self-
negation is illogical; there is kartṛ-karma-virodha. That which is an object of taking or
giving up because I am that brahmatma śākṣī Ātmā which is free from all negation.
Therefore, caitanya alone is called satya.

śloka 34
सिद्धं ब्रह्मणि सत्यत्वं ज्ञानत्वं तु पुरोदितम्।
स्वयमेवानुभूतित्वादित्यादिवचनैः स्फु टम्॥ ३.३४ ॥
siddhaṃ brahmaṇi satyatvaṃ jñānatvaṃ tu puroditam.
svayamevānubhūtitvādityādivacanaiḥ sphuṭam (3.34).
We have established Brahman is satya, because Brahman is caitanya and caitanya is śākṣī
and śākṣī cannot be negated and therefore, Brahman the Śākṣi-caitanya is unnegatable
Brahman. Now we go to the next word jñāna. Vidyāraṇya says I have already explained
jñāna and therefore, it does not need any explanation. Anubhūti is another word for
caitanya. So he says which verse it is. Svayamevānubhūtitvād; in verses 13th to 22nd this
topic has been discussed. Ātmā is of the nature of self-knowledge, Self-awareness. Satya-
nature of Brahman has been explained. Caitanya- nature of Brahman has already been
talked about before. Now what is left is ananta.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 260

śloka 35
न व्यापित्वाद्देशतोऽन्तो नित्यत्वान्नापि कालतः ।
न वस्तुतोऽपि सर्वात्म्यादानन्त्यं ब्रह्मणि त्रिधा ॥ ३.३५ ॥
na vyāpitvāddeśato:'nto nityatvānnāpi kālataḥ.
na vastuto:'pi sarvātmyādānantyaṃ brahmaṇi tridhā (3.35).
Now Vidyāraṇya explains the word ananta. Anta means limitation and ananta means
limitless. Limitation is considered to be of three types:
• First is spacewise limitation deśa-pariccheda; the second one is timewise limitation
kāla-pariccheda and the third is objectwise- or propertywise-limitation or vastu-
pariccheda. When an object is located in a particular place, because of being in a
particular place, it is not available in some other place. As you are here, you are not
available at your home. This is called localization.
• Kāla-pariccheda is timewise limitation and I exist only during a particular range of
time from the date of birth to date of death. The body is there after birth and it is
not there after the date of death. These are very well-known to us.
• The next is statuswise limitation or propertywise limitation. When it is a tree, I
indirectly say it is not a man, nor it is a book. One particular assertion automatically
negates all other statuses. Man is limited by man-ness. Every particular status
excludes other status. Vastu-pariccheda is there as long as the second object is there.
Wherever there is duality vastu-pariccheda will be there.
Brahman does not have any of the three limitations. Brahman is all-pervading in the form
of the very sat or existence, cit is there in all the vastus including jaḍa vastus. Being all-
pervading, Brahman does not have space-wise limitation. Being eternal, there is no
timewise limitation also. Thirdly na vastutaḥ api. There is no objectwise limitation also
because there is no second object other than Brahman to limit Brahman. Then a doubt can
come: how do you say there is no second object? All objects are not different from
Brahman for Brahman alone is in the form of all the objects. Since Brahman alone is in the
form of every object there is no object other than Brahman. You cannot say gold is limited
by bangle. Bangle is not a second thing different from gold to limit gold. Gold alone is
chain and bangle, etc. You just have different words. When you have one vastu, where is
the question of vastu-pariccheda? Because of these reasons, Brahman has threefold

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 261

limitlessness spacewise, timewise and objectwise and that Brahman you are. More in the
next class.

Class 10
śloka 35 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has now come to the final description of Brahman given in Taittirīya
Upaniṣad beginning namely satyam jñānam anantam brahma. He deals with this topic
from verse 28. First he explained satya as Śākṣi-caitanya which is the witness of all
negations, which itself is not subject to any negation. The unnegatable witness of all
negation is seen as satya. Therefore, Brahman is called satya Brahman.
Then he pointed out that jñāna is already dealt with from verses 13 to 22 in the form of
self-evident awareness. Here the word knowledge refers to pure awareness. It does not
refer to any particular knowledge. The basis is if jñāna is particular cognition or vṛtti
jñāna, it has beginning and an end. Any particular cognitive knowledge is pramāṇa-janya.
All specific knowledge is anitya jñāna but in the definition of Brahman the Upaniṣad talks
about ananta jñāna which does not have any beginning or end. It is not the knowledge
generated by any study but the general awareness obtaining in all the people. Even that
ahaṃ brahma asmi is something that arises in the mind through Guru-upadeśa. That
brahma-vidyā is cognitive knowledge only. We talk of that knowledge as consciousness.
This jñāna is not repeated again.
Now he has come to the meaning of the word ananta. We have seen the first explanation
that shows Brahman does not have threefold limitation: spatial, timewise or objectwise. It
pervades everywhere and it is beyond time. It also does not have objectwise limitation for
there is no second object to limit Brahman. All objects we experience belong to anātmā or
jaḍa vastu while Ātmā is cetana and Brahman itself. All objects are but nāma-rūpa while
Brahman alone is satya. As you cannot count bangle as the second object different from
gold, so also all worldly objects cannot be counted separate from Brahman. Waves cannot
cause vastu-pariccheda to the ocean. Since there is no second object other than Brahman,
therefore, Vidyāraṇya says sarvātmyam, sarva-vastu-rūpatvat. Brahman has threefold
limitlessness.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 262

śloka 36
देशकालान्यवस्तूनां कल्पितत्वाच्च मायया ।
न देषादिकृ तोऽन्तोऽस्ति ब्रह्मानन्त्यं स्फुटन्ततः ॥ ३.३६ ॥
deśakālānyavastūnāṃ kalpitatvācca māyayā.
na deṣādikṛto:'nto:'sti brahmānantyaṃ sphuṭantataḥ (3.36).
The same idea Vidyāraṇya communicates in different manner. Three types of limitations
are caused by spacewise limitation, timewise limitation and objectwise limitation.
Brahman is beyond all the three limitations because world and Brahman have two
different orders of reality. Space is vyāvahārika-satya while Brahman is pāramārthika
satya. The pañca-bhūtas and the particular are vyāvahārika-satya while Brahman happens
to be pāramārthika. A vyāvahārika vastu cannot limit the pāramārthika vastu.
A dream-elephant cannot restrict the movement of the waker because the dream-elephant
is prātibhāsika-satya and it cannot make any restriction in vyāvahārika room. One can
dream a large space even if he sleeps in a small bed. Vidyāraṇya therefore, says
deśakālānyavastūnāṃ kalpitatvāt, they cannot restrict Brahman.
All non-Brahman vastus together cannot restrict Brahman. All the objects are mithyā or
vyāvahārika-satya and they belong to vyavahāra and therefore, they are mithyā and
therefore, they cannot limit the higher order of reality of Brahman. Therefore, threefold
limitation is very clear to Vidyāraṇya as not being applicable to Brahman. Therefore,
Brahman is called satyam jñānam anantam. With this fourth feature is also over. With this
actual teaching of Brahman is over. Now Vidyāraṇya adds a note on the following verses.

śloka 37
सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं यद्ब्रह्म तद्वस्तु तस्य तत्।
ईश्वरत्वन्तु जीवत्वमुपाधिद्वयकल्पितम्॥ ३.३७ ॥
satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ yadbrahma tadvastu tasya tat.
īśvaratvantu jīvatvamupādhidvayakalpitam (3.37).
In this portion Vidyāraṇya adds an important topic which is not there in Taittirīya
Upaniṣad. Until now we have seen Brahman is limitless, Brahman is without a second,
Brahman is satyam jñānam anantam and that Brahman is Ātmā, where Ātmā means I and
therefore, the secondless I alone is there and will be there. I myself am called Brahman and
I myself am called Ātmā also and so, there is no difference between Brahman and Ātmā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 263

Even though it is true from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, for the sake of some fun I the non-dual
Paramātmā put on two different veṣa from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi. I come down to vyavahāra
plane by putting on two different veṣas. Behind the veṣas is only one but I put on two
different veṣas called upādhis: one is called vyaṣṭi-upādhi and the other is called samaṣṭi-
upādhi.
One is myself jīvātmā with vyaṣṭi-upādhi and I with samaṣṭi-upādhi is Īśvara. The
teaching is correct. I myself with vyaṣṭi-upādhi is jīva and I with samaṣṭi-upādhi is
Paramātmā. The content in both is same but the container in both the cases is different.
The face is the same but in a convex mirror there is one distortion and in a concave mirror
there is another distortion. In the jīva-upādhi, the distortion is with inferior attributes and
in the case of Īśvara it is with superior attributes.
Pure Brahman is attributeless, without superior or inferior and the very presence of
attribute makes a difference. Brahman is beyond puṇya and pāpa. Because of superior
attributes Īśvara becomes the master, and jīva because of inferior attribute becomes a dāsa
and therefore, we see Svāmī-dāsa-vyavahāra starts. One who prostrates is ‘I am’ and one
who surrenders is also ‘I am’. If someone asks is there Jīva-Īśvara-bheda, we should say
from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi there is distortion and from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi there is no distortion
at all.
From vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi you have to accept Guru, śiṣya, Īśvara, world, etc. Your
understanding be clear that it is all vyavahāra but from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi there is no
difference at all. Now Vidyāraṇya talks of vyavahāra-bheda or sopādhika bheda topic.
That Brahman which we have understood as satyam jñānam anantam in the previous
portion that Brahman alone is the ultimate reality and pāramārthika satya, for that one
and the same vastu, there are two vyavahāra manifestations. Normally we say three: jīva,
jagat and Īśvara but Vidyāraṇya does not take world into account. So he says two are there
vyavahāra expression and manifestation and pāramārthika expression. One is in the form
of Godhood and the other is in jīvahood.
In Māṇḍūkya, we saw turīya is kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa. The two expressions are because
of the upādhi. They are due to reflecting medium. Śarīra-traya is responsible for jīvatva
and prapañca-traya is due to Īśvaratva. Therefore, upādhi-dvaya means vyaṣṭi-samaṣṭi-
container-dvaya, kalpitam. What are the reflecting media or upādhis?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 264

śloka 38
शक्तिरस्त्यैश्वरी काचित्सर्ववस्तुनियामिका ।
आनन्दमयमारभ्य गूढा सर्वेषु वस्तुषु ॥ ३.३८ ॥
śaktirastyaiśvarī kācitsarvavastuniyāmikā.
ānandamayamārabhya gūḍhā sarveṣu vastuṣu (3.38).
Brahman is distorted as Īśvara because of the upādhi and that upādhi which brings about
Īśvara-distortion is Māyā-upādhi. Māyā is the controller of all the creation through three
guṇas. This all-controlling Māyā śakti is hidden and inherent in all the beings beginning
from their ānandamaya kośas. All the kośas and the prapañca are controlled by Māyā
śakti.

śloka 39
वस्तुधर्मा नियम्येरं शक्त्या नैव यदा तदा ।
अन्योन्यधर्मसांकर्याद्विप्लवेत जगत्खलु ॥ ३.३९ ॥
vastudharmā niyamyeraṃ śaktyā naiva yadā tadā |
anyonyadharmasāṃkaryādviplaveta jagatkhalu (3.39).
That there is a śakti controlling the universe is proved by the consistent behaviour of
everything in the creation. The electron has negative charge and proton has positive
charge. All things happen in the same way and no object violates the universal law that
operates. The basic laws of nature never change. There is a śākṣī that controls all of them.
The properties of the objects are controlled by Māyā śakti. Water is cold, fire is hot, eyes
see and ears listen, etc. They are controlled by the Māyā śakti and if not controlled
everything, will be chaotic.
Even the organs will not do their function or it will do some other function. There will be
confusion in the universe. There will not be cosmos but there will be chaos. Our
experience is that there is universal harmony and you are able even to predict eclipses etc.,
due to Māyā śakti.

śloka 40
चिच्छायावेशतः शक्तिश्चेतनेव विभाति सा ।
तच्छक्त्युपाधिसंयोगाद्ब्रह्मैवेश्वरतां व्रजेत्॥ ३.४० ॥
cicchāyāveśataḥ śaktiścetaneva vibhāti sā.
tacchaktyupādhisaṃyogādbrahmaiveśvaratāṃ vrajet (3.40).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 265

Even though Māyā is powerful, this śakti is also inert in nature by itself. Energy is also as
much inert as matter. All are properly controlled. To control, Māyā must have an activator
and Brahman activates the śakti. Because of the entry of reflected consciousness or
cidābhāsa Māyā is able to control the whole universe. Because of the reflected
consciousness upon the Māyā śakti, it appears sentient just like the inert car runs as-
though intelligently because of the driver. Sā Māyā, that Māyā behaves as though sentient
because of the association with Brahman. Brahman is in fact seen through Māyā śakti.
Cidābhāsa is also mithyā. Through the mithyā cidābhāsa-sahita-Māyā-śakti, when you
look at Brahman, that Brahman is called Īśvara. Brahman gets the status of Īśvara when
you look at Brahman through cidābhāsa sahita Māyā. Māyā or cidābhāsa are possible only
when there is cit Brahman. The ultimate substance Brahman viewed through the
cidābhāsa sahita Māyā śakti is called Īśvara.

śloka 41
कोशोपाधिविवक्षायां याति ब्रह्मैव जीवताम्।
पिता पितामहश्चैकः पुत्रपौत्रौ यथा प्रति ॥ ३.४१ ॥
kośopādhivivakṣāyāṃ yāti brahmaiva jīvatām.
pitā pitāmahaścaikaḥ putrapautrau yathā prati (3.41).
The very same Brahman looked through miserable body, deformed, dying, kośa-upādhi-
dṛṣṭi, the very same Brahman gets the status of jīva. Neither superiority nor the inferiority
belongs to Brahman. Both are caused by the upādhi. One and the same Brahman has two
different personalities; if you ask “how?”, Vidyāraṇya says the opposite virtues can belong
to the same person. It is like one and the same person is father and grandfather. It is
possible if the standpoint is made very clear. From the standpoint of the son he is the
father and from the standpoint of the grandson he is the grandfather.

śloka 42
पुत्रादेरविवक्षायां न पिता न पितामहः ।
तद्वन्नेशो नापि जीवः शक्तिकोशाविवक्षणे ॥ ३.४२ ॥
putrāderavivakṣāyāṃ na pitā na pitāmahaḥ.
tadvanneśo nāpi jīvaḥ śaktikośāvivakṣaṇe (3.42).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 266

If you remove the son and grandson, the person will be there. Only he will lose the two
statuses of being the father and grandfather and these two statuses are āpekṣika, relative,
while the person is not so. Remove Māyā and kośa, the Īśvaratva and jīvatva will go away
but Brahman will be there. When the concave and convex mirrors are removed the
original face will be there. Grandfather-hood and fatherhood will go but the person will be
there. In the same way when Māyā śakti and individual upādhis are taken off, when the
two standpoints are abolished and there will be neither Īśvara nor the jīva as both Īśvara
and jīva are mithyā while Brahman alone is satya. With this vyavahāra role, he concludes.

śloka 43
य एवं ब्रह्म वेदैष ब्रह्मैव भवति स्वयम्।
ब्रह्मणो नास्ति जन्मातः पुनरेष न जायते ॥ ३.४३ ॥
ya evaṃ brahma vedaiṣa brahmaiva bhavati svayam.
brahmaṇo nāsti janmātaḥ punareṣa na jāyate (3.43).
This is the conclusion with phala-śruti. One who knows Brahman, he ‘becomes’ Brahman
that means he claims Brahmanhood. Brahman is free from punarapi jananam and
punarapi maraṇa. Brahman does not have punarjanma and therefore, I also do not have
any janma and I am mukta. In short, one will get jīvanmukti and videha-mukti. with this
phala śruti we conclude the third chapter.

Class 11

Summary of the third chapter, Pañca-kośa-viveka-prakaraṇa

Today I will give you a summary of the third chapter of Pañcadaśī. The third chapter
consists of 43 verses and is titled pañca-kośa-viveka-prakaraṇa, which is used to arrive at
Brahman or ātmā. And this pañca-kośa-viveka is elaborately done in Taittirīya Upaniṣad
brahma-ānanda vallī. Māṇḍūkya is famous for avasthā-traya-viveka. The first six
anuvākas of brahmānanda vallī are summarized in this chapter. This chapter begins with
an introduction. Here he says I will explain Brahman with the help of Taittirīya Upaniṣad
vākyas. The knower of Brahman attains the highest puruṣārtha which being mokṣa.
The question is what is that Brahman knowing which I can get highest puruṣārtha. The
famous Ṛg mantra is satyam jñānam anantam brahma. The Upaniṣad gives the brahma

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 267

lakṣaṇa as satyam jñānam anantam brahma. Brahman is situated within the cave, it is said.
It is very clear that it is different from the cave. Guhā-nihitatva implies guhā-vilakṣaṇatva.
Taittirīya Upaniṣad implies guhā-vilakṣaṇatva. All that which is there in Taittirīya
Upaniṣad is explained here.
What is that guhā? We have to find out. Finally, the Upaniṣad says that Brahman is
renamed as Ātmā. The very guhā mentioned by the Taittirīya Upaniṣad as annamaya,
prāṇamaya, manomaya, vijñānamaya and ānandamaya is elaborated by Vidyāraṇya here.
Upaniṣad mentions that Ātmā is within these pañca-kośas. You find the introduction in
the first chapter. The first verse is introductory verse.
Then, Vidyāraṇya takes up pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇatva of Brahman; Brahman is different
from the cave in the form of pañca-kośas. Vidyāraṇya first gives the definition of each
kośa. Annamaya is anatomical personality; prāṇamaya is physiological personality;
manomaya is psychological personality; vijñānamaya is intellectual personality and
ānandamaya is the dormant or hidden personality. All these five kośas together is called
pañca-kośa. After defining each one of them, Vidyāraṇya says that none of them is
Brahman. To say that, he gives some reasoning. The reasoning he gives is that Brahman is
nirvikāra. The very word Brahman means infinite. The superlative degree that it has
expanded maximum means infinite and it is called Brahman. It is not limited by time and
space. Time cannot bring about a change in the infinite. Therefore, Brahman is nirvikāra
while every kośa is savikāra. Savikāra kośa cannot be identical with nirvikāra Brahman.
Then how do you know the kośas are changing? Our own personal experience is there.
Our body expands and contracts. Our physiological system also changes and we are
subject to moods. About intellectual personality, we need not say much. In college days, I
was very good but now I cannot remember anything. Ānandamaya is avyakta-avasthā of
other four kośas. Even if you go by ānanda-experience that is also a form of modification
and in short all the pañca-kośas are savikāra and they are not Brahman. This Vidyāraṇya
elaborately dealt with from verse 2 to 10.
From verses 11 and 12, Vidyāraṇya pointed out Brahman is different from pañca-kośas
and it obtains in pañca-kośas as Śākṣi-caitanya. Śākṣi-rūpeṇa pañca-kośa-guhā-nihitatvam
was explained. The word located means it is recognizable within pañca-kośa like current is
there throughout the cable but to find out if current is there, it is tested in the plug point.
The all-pervading Brahman can be recognized within the pañca-kośa as the very śākṣī of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 268

pañca-kośa. It is śākṣī because in its absence pañca-kośa will not be known. Objectification
of pañca-kośas prove the presence of the subject. That it is objectified is available for daily
experience; I am aware of the five kośas and even ānandamaya kośa is experienced. This
needs an objectifier; a witness is required. If there are several photographs, the presence
of photo proves the existence of something. That is a camera and although it will not be
therein the photo, you don’t have any doubt about the existence of the camera. Śākṣī is like
camera and it is there.
Then from verses 13 to 27 which is the most important part, Vidyāraṇya points out that
Śākṣi-caitanya Brahman cannot be objectified by you because it is you yourself. It is to be
claimed as I the subject and it is available only to claim as I the subject, which is the
consciousness, all the time experienced. Here we have to remember Kenopaniṣad vākya
that the consciousness does not require any special experience but it is experienced in
every special experience. Pot-knowledge is a particular experience and in that too
consciousness is there. Similarly, man-knowledge and woman-knowledge is a specific
experience and in every specific experience, consciousness is available as a general
experience. The sunlight is experienced by me when I see student number one; when I go
to student I experience sunlight although there is shift in the object. I might not pay
attention to sunlight and I might take sunlight for granted, but I experience sunlight when
I perceive the object. Similarly, whether I pay attention to consciousness or not,
consciousness is all the time experienced when I am conscious of anything. Even when I
say there is nothing, then also I say because I am conscious of nothing. Therefore, nothing-
experience also includes consciousness-experience. Therefore, Śākṣi-caitanya Brahman in
the form of consciousness is all the time experienced by me and only the job of mine is to
claim the consciousness as the ultimate subject.
When I claim I am the Śākṣi-caitanya the consciousness ever-experienced I should know
the four features of consciousness. Consciousness is not a part, a property or a product of a
substance but consciousness is an independent entity which pervades and is not limited
by the boundaries of the body and enlivens all and consciousness extends beyond nāmas
and rūpas and consciousness will survive even after all the objects die. Even after videha-
mukti, I am the Śākṣi-caitanya everywhere. In fact, I alone experience everything through
everyone. Some I experience through this body and even after videha-mukti that I is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 269

Brahman and Brahman is to be owned up and claimed as I the Ātmā. This is the mahā-
vākya and hence it is very important.
Then from verses 28 to 36, Vidyāraṇya deals with fourth and final teaching of Brahman
satya-jñāna-anantatva. Vidyāraṇya does not deal with jñāna topic already dealt with in the
previous portion while dealing with Śākṣi-caitanya. Satya and anantatva is concentrated
upon here. Satya means that which is unnegatable. This can be seen from two different
angles. One is experiential angle and another technical angle. The whole world can be
negated by me by withdrawing the pramāṇa through which I prove the existence of the
world. When I resolve the mind and senses, or quieten the mind, the inner world is gone
and when I negate the internal and external world the whole anātmā objective world is
gone. Even after negating the external and internal worlds something is there which is
unnegatable and that is caitanya. To say that world is negated, I should be conscious of
that. Experientially, caitanya is unnegatable and therefore, it is satya.
Then, there is a second approach. A person may argue that even when I negate the world
experientially, the world is not really negated and it is only that I don’t experience the
world. A person may argue by withdrawing your sense-organs when you don’t see the
world you cannot say that the world is negated but only thing is you don’t see the world
and the world is very much there because when you operate the pramāṇas you find the
world is there as it was before. How can you say the world is negated just by withdrawing
the mind or going to the nirvikalpaka samādhi?
Therefore, technically, we say negation of the world is by śāstra pramāṇa, but Brahman is
not negated by śāstra pramāṇa. Therefore, pramāṇa-abādhyatva being satyatva the world
is mithyā because world is negated by śāstra pramāṇa. Śāstra pramāṇa, Kaṭhopaniṣad says
nena nānāsti kiñcana, neti neti ityātma in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad; and in Kaivalya
Upaniṣad, na puṇyapāpe mama nāsti nāśo na janma dehendriyabuddhirasti; na
bhūmirāpo na ca vahnirasti na cānilo me:'sti na cāmbaraṃ ca; evaṃ viditvā
paramātmarūpaṃ guhāśayaṃ niṣkalamadvitīyam; samastasākṣiṃ sadasadvihīnaṃ
prayāti śuddhaṃ paramātmarūpam. I have no earth, water, fire, air or ether, etc. Knowing
the nature of the supreme Self dwelling in the cave of the heart, stainless without a second,
the witness of all, free from the duality of existent and non-existent, one obtains the pure
nature of the supreme Self. It negates the pañca-bhūta, the śāstra pramāṇa negates and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 270

therefore, it is mithyā whereas Brahman is never negated by śāstra and on the other hand
śāstra defines Brahman as satya.
Then jñāna has already been dealt with in the previous portion. Then anantatva is free
from spatial, timewise and objectwise limitations. Vidyāraṇya gives two reasons. Since
Brahman is all-pervading Brahman does not have spatial limitation since Brahman is
eternal it has no timewise limitation and since Brahman has no second it does not have
objectwise limitation. The second approach was deśa, kāla and vastu, all of them being
mithyā, they are of lower order of reality compared to Brahman and the lower order
cannot limit the higher order. A dream person cannot limit the waker’s space. Deśa-, kāla-
and vastu-pariccheda-śūnya is Brahman. Therefore, it is satyam jñānam anantam. With
this fourth feature is also over.
With this Taittirīya Upaniṣad portion is over. Vidyāraṇya has revealed Brahman and we
are supposed to know ahaṃ brahma asmi and through this we should know brahmavit
āpnoti param. Now Vidyāraṇya feels he should discuss an incidental topic. This is not in
Taittirīya Upaniṣad and it is a bonus topic.
“How can the infinite non-dual Brahman become the dualistic universe?” is the question
posed here. How can there be Jīvātmā-Paramātmā bheda when there is only one Ātmā
caitanya? This is answered from 37 to 42. he says first “don’t ask the question how non-
dual becomes dual”? Non-dual cannot become dual and therefore, it has not become dual
and therefore, duality is only an appearance and it is only a mithyā. The next question is
“how has the seeming duality come about”? For that alone we use the expression because
of upādhi, the points of reference that one indivisible space is seen as ghaṭa-akāśa even
though ākāśa is undivided. Because of upādhis, there is bheda. Śarīra-traya is the upādhi
for jīvātmā and prapañca-traya is the upādhi for Paramātmā. Micro is upādhi for jīvātmā
while macro is the upādhi for Paramātmā.
Seen through śarīra-traya, Brahman is called jīvātmā and seen through prapañca-traya,
Brahman is called Paramātmā. It is only because of upādhis we see two things: jīvātmā
and Paramātmā. It means that you accept the presence of upādhi. Upādhi of jīva is of a
lower order of reality while Māyā upādhi is of higher order of reality. Both the upādhis
are mithyā and the division caused by the upādhis are also mithyā. Avidyā upādhi is
mithyā at an individual level. Māyā upādhi also is mithyā at the samaṣṭi level and because
of upādhi there is a division in the Ātmā as jīvātmā and Paramātmā and that division is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 271

also mithyā. Upādhi is also mithyā and upādhi-caused-division is also mithyā. But
Brahman is satya and that Brahman I myself am. I Brahman appear at macro upādhi as
Īśvara and I myself appear with micro upādhi as jīvātmā.
I am the creator of Īśvara. Having created the dream, I myself enter the dream and identify
with the bodies in the dream. I choose to identify with a particular body in the dream and
I become one of the creatures within the dream. I am the creator with one upādhi and I am
creator with another upādhi. Extend it to this world also. Both Īśvara and jīva are upādhi-
vaśād bhinnaḥ. Therefore, it is called vyavahāra-bheda or aupādhika-bheda. Therefore, “is
there Advaita or dvaita?” if someone asks, you should not answer. You should ask from
vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi or pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi I am I the caitanya and
from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi you should say there is dvaita and say there is jīva and Īśvara. Seek
the grace of God to gain pāramārthika and know ahaṃ brahma asmi. If you are
comfortable with both vyavahāra, and pāramārthika, you are the wise man.
Then Vidyāraṇya concludes the chapter with upasamhāra where he gives the phala. There
are twofold benefits: one is immediate that I own up the fact I am Brahman; brahmatva-
prāpti is a direct benefit. Just as I wake up from dream, I know I am not a dream
individual. I know I am the waker. Claiming the wakerhood is an immediate benefit. The
next benefit is that Brahman does not have janma at all. If Brahman does not have janma,
then I will have no punarjanma, I myself being Brahman. Therefore, punarjanma-abhāva,
otherwise called videha-mukti is the second phala. These twofold phala will come as you
gain this Ātma-jñāna. Pañca-kośa-viveka-prakaraṇa is over.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 272

Chapter IV: Dvaita-viveka

द्वैतविवेको नाम - चतुर्थः परिच्छेदः ।

We have completed the first three chapters of Pañcadaśī. Now, we will discuss Dvaita-
viveka-prakaraṇa. This chapter has 69 ślokas.

śloka 1
ईश्वरेणापि जीवेन सृष्टं द्वैतं प्रपञ्च्यते ।
विवेके सति जीवेन हेयो बन्धः स्फुटीभवेत्॥ ४.१ ॥
īśvareṇāpi jīvena sṛṣṭaṃ dvaitaṃ prapañcyate.
viveke sati jīvena heyo bandhaḥ sphuṭībhavet (4.1).
The first verse is an introductory verse where the author mentions the subject matter. He
says that there are two dvaitas: one is Īśvara-sṛṣṭa-dvaita in which jīva is also included
because jīva is also created by Īśvara from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi. From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi jīva is
not created by Īśvara and Īśvara also is not created by jīva but both are one and their
sambandha is aikya-sambandha. From vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi, it is kārya-kāraṇa-sambandha.
Thus, the whole creation including jīva is called Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita. Then what happens is
jīva does not remain quiet. This jīva has many faculties very similar to Īśvara. Jīva has
powers of creation and at micro level he has the capacity to create but he does not know
what to create and how to create. So, he creates confusion. It is jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita. These are
the two types of dvaita as we have Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and jīva-sṛṣṭi.
We will compare and contrast these two dvaita. Here discrimination is not between satya
and mithyā but the discrimination beween two types of mithyā one created by Īśvara and
another one created by jīva. Vidyāraṇya wants to show that jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita alone is the
cause of all problems. Īśvara-sṛṣṭi even though it is mithyā it does not create problem.
Therefore, one need not hate Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and one need not run away from Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. The
akramas you do that alone you learn to handle. One dvaita is to be discarded and another
one need not to be discarded. Therefore, heya dvaita is jīva-sṛṣṭi and aheya dvaita is
Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. Jīva-sṛṣṭi is heya dvaita that is to be rejected. It is bandha or it is bondage.
Īśvara-dvaita is not heya dvaita because it is not bondage.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 273

Therefore, we should clearly understand the two dvaita and we should give up what
should be given up but we should not give up what should not be given up. Therefore,
better you know what is favourable to you and what is not favourable to you. It is an
analysis between favourable and unfavourable duality.
By duality here we mean the entire universe including jīvas. Duality is created by Īśvara.
Duality is created by jīva also. We will discriminate between Īśvara-sṛṣṭa and jīva-sṛṣṭa
dvaita. There is a benefit that is once this discrimination is done, you will clearly know
which dvaita is bondage. Bandha-kāraṇa dvaita we will know and we will give up that.
Which dvaita should be given up we have to know discriminately. That dvaita which is to
be given up you will know. For this purpose, this chapter is written Vidyāraṇya says.

śloka 2
मायां तु प्रकृ तिं विद्यान्मायिनं तु महेश्वरम्।
स मायी सृजतीत्याहुः श्वेताश्वतर शाखिनः ॥ ४.२ ॥
māyāṃ tu prakṛtiṃ vidyānmāyinaṃ tu maheśvaram.
sa māyī sṛjatītyāhuḥ śvetāśvatara śākhinaḥ (4.2).
Having introduced two dvaitas for analysis, first he takes up Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita. This is
discussed from this śloka to 13. Īśvara-sṛṣṭi can be understood only from the scriptures. It
is apauruṣeya viṣaya. The very existence of Īśvara we can know only through śāstra. If
science is to prove Īśvara then there will be a problem. Īśvara cannot be scientifically
proved.
Therefore, Īśvara’s existence is apauruṣeya. Īśvara’s virtue is also apauruṣeya. That he is
jagat-kāraṇa also is known from śāstra only. So Vidyāraṇya gives several śāstra quotations
for he cannot talk about Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. He starts from Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. There is one
famous mantra which says Īśvara with the help of Māyā created the universe. 4.10 of
Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad reads māyāṃ tu prakṛtiṃ vidyānmāyinaṃ tu maheśvaram;
tasyavayava bhūtais tu vyaptam sarvam idam jagat. The meaning of the mantra is that
Prakṛti is Māyā and the wielder of Māyā is the great Lord. This whole world is pervaded
by beings that are part of him. Māyā is the material cause of the universe. That which is
available for shaping into a product is Māyā. Any shapable material is called Prakṛti the
material cause. This can create confusion. In several places you said brahman is the
material cause of creation. Here you say shamelessly Māyā is the material cause. Which

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 274

statement is correct? If you ask this question, Vedāntins will say both the statements are
correct, since Māyā is śakti of brahman and śakti belongs to brahman only.
If I say I talk to you or the speaking power speaks to you. My speaking power does not
exist separate from me; śakti is never different or away from sakta. It being the very
adhiṣṭhāna of upādāna-kāraṇa Māyā, brahman is also called upādāna-kāraṇa. Māyinaṃ tu
maheśvaram, the brahman is the possessor of Māyā śakti the very adhiṣṭhāna of Māyā
śakti. Both put together is called Īśvara. Up to this is the quotation. Then Vidyāraṇya adds
that Māyā-sahita Īśvara. That Lord with the creative power of Māyā created the universe
as per Śvetāśvatara branch of Kṛṣṇa yajurveda. Therefore, Īśvara created this world.

śloka 3
आत्मा वा इदमग्रेऽभूत्स ऐक्षत सृजा इति ।
सङ्कल्पेनासृजल्लोकान्स एतानिति बह्वृचाः ॥ ४.३ ॥
ātmā vā idamagre:'bhūtsa aikṣata sṛjā iti.
saṅkalpenāsṛjallokānsa etāniti bahvṛcāḥ (4.3).
This is another quotation from another Upaniṣad. This is from Aitareya Upaniṣad of Ṛg
Veda that reads as idam agre Ātmā va abhut before this world there was only ātmā. Before
creation the universe was in the form of Īśvara and it was within the Paramātmā only and
it was non-separable from Bhagavān.
Butter is named as butter only when separated from milk. When butter is not separated
you call it milk alone and you don’t mention the content of butter. Before manifestation
butter does not have a separate name and butter in milk is known as milk only but butter
gets a new name only after manifestation. World was in Īśvara but the world was not
separately mentioned. Before creation there was Īśvara alone. That is, in other words,
Paramātmā was there before creation.
That Īśvara thought that I should manifest the creation. Paramātmā himself decided to
create the universe and by mere saṅkalpa he created the whole world. He created the
fourteen lokas. We may ask how is it possible? How by saṅkalpa matra, Īśvara created the
world.
For this we should remember the example of svapna. When you want to produce an effect
with the same order of reality physical effort is needed but when the creation is of lower
order of reality you don’t require any effort and the example is svapna. To create

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 275

mansions in svapna, you don’t need anything like cement or water. For Paramātmā who is
pāramārthika satya world is vyavahāra and is of lower order and therefore, saṅkalpa is
enough. Thus, declares Ṛg Veda Upaniṣad.

śloka 4
खंवाय्वग्निजलोर्व्योषध्यन्नदेहाः क्रमादमी ।
सम्भूता ब्रह्मणस्तस्मादेतस्मादात्मनोऽखिलाः ॥ ४.४ ॥
khaṃvāyvagnijalorvyoṣadhyannadehāḥ kramādamī.
sambhūtā brahmaṇastasmādetasmādātmano:'khilāḥ (4.4).
Now Vidyāraṇya mentions Taittirīya Upaniṣad second mantra. After giving the definition
of brahman the Upaniṣad says the whole creation is mentioned. Tasmāt etasmāt ātmanaḥ
brahmaṇaḥ amī kham vāyuḥ agniḥ jalam urvī oṣadhiḥ annam dehaḥ akhilāḥ kramāt
sambhūtaḥ these namely the space, air, fire, water, earth, trees, plants, different types of
bodies, etc., were manifested in succession.
Having decided so, he did tapasyā; because Paramātmā is of the nature of pure knowledge
therefore this tapasya was also jñānātmaka. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad the word is annāt
puruṣaḥ and the word Puruṣa can create confusion. In śāstra the word Puruṣa is used for
Ātmā also. Here Puruṣa is said; we might get confusion and therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
the word Puruṣa does not refer to Ātmā but refers to the śarīra or the body. All of them are
born gradually or sequentially, one after the other. It is krama-sṛṣṭi and not akrama-sṛṣṭi.
All of them came from brahman that which is none other than ātmā. That refers to satyam
jñānam anantam brahma and this refers to guhā-nihitam.

śloka 5
बहु स्यामहमेवातः प्रजायेयेति कामतः ।
तपस्तप्त्वाऽसृजत्सर्वं जगदित्याह तैत्तिरिः ॥ ४.५ ॥
bahu syāmahamevātaḥ prajāyeyeti kāmataḥ.
tapastaptvā:'sṛjatsarvaṃ jagadityāha taittiriḥ (4.5).
In Taittirīya Upaniṣad itself later creation is mentioned once again. So Vidyāraṇya refers to
the second mention of creation in the fifth section. Aham bahusyām occurs in the mantra
and this is the thought of Īśvara. He wanted to multiply in the universe. Even Māyā
cannot be counted as a second one. The non-dual Paramātmā wanted to become many.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 276

Therefore, with a desire “let me produce through multiplication this creation” the
Paramātmā created this world. This can also create a doubt in the mind. I will remind you
once again. We generally say kāma means saṃśāra and mokṣa as freedom from kāma.
Only when one destroys his desires he is free. Bhagavān is to be liberated. If Bhagavān
should be free from saṃśāra he should be free from desire. How come the Upaniṣad says
Bhagavān had a desire? For that, we say there are two types of desires as Śaṅkarācārya
writes in Taittirīya commentary: śuddha kāma and aśuddha kāma.
Kāma born out of internal pressure and incompleteness is called aśuddha kāma and if it is
fulfilled I am happy and if not fulfilled I am unhappy. The second one is not born out of
incompleteness but it is kāma born for the completeness of other people. The people who
have died with desires are to be reborn and Bhagavān has to provide a new body and new
opportunity for them to fulfill their desires. It is not for his completeness but his desire is
for others. Jñānī’s desires are also śuddha kāma. The desire is to satisfy other people’s
desires. You can have any number of śuddha kamas but they will not bind you in saṃśāra.
Vedāntic tradition is maintained because of Guru-paramparā. This is śuddha kāma of
jñāni-paramapara.
So God willed the creation of the universe and he performed tapas for the creation of the
universe. Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad says he did tapas which is nothing but the visualization of
karmas of all the jīvarāśis. Īśvara is the controller of the karmas of all the people. Bhagavān
visualizes through his mind and that mind is called Māyā. Then comes the next question.
You say Bhagavān visualizes karma for producing creation of all jīvarāśis. Then the doubt
will be when Bhagavān creates the first sṛṣṭi, jīvarāśis will not have any karmas. If such a
doubt is expressed, who said there is a first creation? The very thought of first creation is
illogical as it is a cyclic process. The creation is made again and again and therefore,
previous karma will always be there. We don’t talk about creation without karmas. The
Lord created the whole universe says Taittirīya Upaniṣad.

śloka 6
इदमग्रे सदेवासीद्बहुत्वाय तदैक्षत ।
तेजोऽवन्नाण्डजादीनि ससर्जेति च सामगाः ॥ ४.६ ॥
idamagre sadevāsīdbahutvāya tadaikṣata.
tejo:'vannāṇḍajādīni sasarjeti ca sāmagāḥ (4.6).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 277

The Ṛg Veda Upaniṣad has been quoted. Now he comes to Sāmaveda Upaniṣad. Idam
agre sad eva āsīt we saw in the second chapter elaborately. The world was in the form of
sat before creation. That sat brahman again visualized to multiply himself to create the
universe. After visualization and after tapas Māyā-sahita-brahman created this universe.
This is said in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Tejo:'vannāṇḍajādīni sasarja. with the birth of that
desire the three great elements such as fire, water and earth and beings born out of eggs
etc., were created. After creating the pañca-bhūtas all the jīvarāśis also Īśvara created. The
jīvarāśis are classified four types. The details in the next class.

Class 2
śloka 6 contd.
In the first verse, Vidyāraṇya introduced the subject matter of the fourth chapter as a
discrimination between Īśvara and jīva-sṛṣṭi or the two types of duality created by Īśvara
and jīva. The very purpose of this discrimination is to show that of the two types of sṛṣṭis
one is cause of saṃśāra and the other is not a problem at all. Īśvara-sṛṣṭi is creation of the
wonderful universe and jīva-sṛṣṭi the private universe created by jīva is saṃśāra-kāraṇa.
Our aim is to tackle jīva-sṛṣṭi and this viveka has a practical consequences also. Having
thus introduced the subject matter, Vidyāraṇya deals with Īśvara-sṛṣṭi as we can know
about it only from the scriptures. Īśvara is not available for human instruments of
knowledge but is available only from śāstra pramāṇa. With the help of four Vedas, he
talks about the Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. We have seen mantras as he quoted a Ṛg mantra from Aitareya
Upaniṣad, Yajur mantra from Taittirīya Upaniṣad and to create this universe Īśvara has the
visualisation of the universe and jīvas and also the different karmas of the jīvas so that the
appropriate jīva can be connected to the appropriate lokas. In bhūloka who should be sent
where, etc., have to be planned which Īśvara successfully does with his macro mind called
Māyā. With the help of Māyā, Īśvara does his saṅkalpa and by mere saṅkalpa he creates
the universe and the jīvas.
Then Vidyāraṇya quoted Sāmaveda Upaniṣad and the 6th chapter of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad. Sad eva saumya idam agra āsīt ekam eva advitīyam. This brahman known as
sat visualized the whole creation starting from teja, ap and anna which means pṛthvī. Even
though only three elements are mentioned we have to add ākāśa and vāyu also.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 278

Taittirīya Upaniṣad talks about pañca-bhūtas and Chāndogya Upaniṣad talks about three
elements. In Brahma-sūtra it was argued Chāndogya Upaniṣad also we have to supply
ākāśa and vāyu.
After creating the elements Īśvara created bhautikas out of bhūtas and all the physical
bodies come under the bhautika prapañca alone. These jīvarāśis are classified into four
types:
1. aṇḍaja: born out of egg; all birds, etc., will come under this category;
2. Jverajam: that born out of the womb of the mother all mammals come under this
category;
3. udbhijja: all born out of earth breaking open the mud all plants and creepers come
under udbhijja;
4. svedaja: and the fourth one is called svedaja. All born out of moisture or pools of
water, all the insects, etc., come under svedaja.
Īśvara or Māyā sahitam brahman created the universe with elements and the elementals in
the form of bhautikas. This refers to 6.2.1 to 4 and 6.3 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad.

śloka 7
विस्फु लिङ्गा यथा वह्नेर्जायन्तेऽक्षरतस्तथा ।
विविधाश्चिज्जडा भावा इत्याथर्वणिकी श्रुतिः ॥ ४.७ ॥
visphuliṅgā yathā vahnerjāyante:'kṣaratastathā.
vividhāścijjaḍā bhāvā ityātharvaṇikī śrutiḥ (4.7).
Ṛg Veda, Yajur Veda, and Sāmaveda have been quoted. Now Vidyāraṇya quotes a mantra
from Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad which belongs to Atharvaṇa Veda 2.1.1. The mantra says:
tadetatsatyaṃ yathā sudīptātpāvakādvisphuliṅgāḥ sahasraśaḥ prabhavante sarūpāḥ;
tathākṣarādvividhāḥ somya bhāvāḥ prajāyante tatra caivāpiyanti.
The meaning of the mantra reads as this the truth: as from a blazing fire, sparks of fire
issue forth by the thousands, even so, O beloved, many kinds of beings issue forth from
the immutable and there they return thither too. Here brahman is called akṣara. In each
Upaniṣad very same brahman is known by a different name. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad, it is
called bhūmā and sat. In Muṇḍaka, akṣara is the name. In Aitareya, it is called ātmā. From
akṣara brahman all came forth; it is said so in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. All types of things

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 279

and beings are created. Cit refers to cetana padārtha and jaḍa refers to acetana prapañca;
all of them came from one brahman. All cetana vastus are created; bodies created capable
of reflecting consciousness is called cetana-sṛṣṭi. Cetana-sṛṣṭi means creation of that
material sṛṣṭi that is capable of cidābhāsa. It is creation of such acetana vastu like body,
and this acetana body is capable of having borrowed consciousness and therefore, we call
it cetana-sṛṣṭi. Both are acetanam one is called cidābhāsa-sahita-acetanam and another
cidābhāsa-rahita-acetana is jaḍa vastu. One has cidābhāsa and another does not have
cidābhāsa. Because of cidābhāsa, body is called cetana. Cit is there both in the body and
table but cidābhāsa makes the difference between cetana and acetana prapañca. An
example is given here. Just as sparks emerge out of fire, all the creation sprang out of
brahman. Fire is one, but sparks are many and fire is kāraṇa while sparks are kārya.
Similarly, from brahman many lives are born. Thus Atharvaṇa Veda also talks about
Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. The Upaniṣad vākya belonging to Atharvaṇa Veda also talks about Īśvara-
sṛṣṭi.

śloka 8
जगदव्याकृ तं पूर्वमासीद्व्याक्रियतेऽधुना ।
दृश्याभ्यां नामरूपाभ्यां विराडादिषु ते स्फु टाः ॥ ४.८ ॥
jagadavyākṛtaṃ pūrvamāsīdvyākriyate:'dhunā.
dṛśyābhyāṃ nāmarūpābhyāṃ virāḍādiṣu te sphuṭāḥ (4.8).
Now he gives another śruti quotation. Yajur Veda has two branches. He has quoted
Taittirīya Upaniṣad before. It belongs to Kṛṣṇa Yajur Veda. He quotes Śukla Yajur Veda
with Īśāvāsya Upaniṣad and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Here Vidyāraṇya quotes from
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.7. Which reads as:
taddhedaṃ tarhyavyākṛtamāsīt;
tannāmarūpābhyāmeva vyākriyatāsau nāmāyamidaṃrūpa iti;
tadidamapyetarhi nāmarūpābhyāmeva vyākriyate;
He summarises it in this verse. Before emergence or manifestation of the world, the world
was existent. The ornaments existed in gold form; our body was in existence in anna form;
the universe existed in dormant form. It was in unmanifest, causal, latent or seed form. All
are same only. Jagad avyākṛtaṃ āsīt. It existed within brahman as non-separate from
brahman. The world cannot exist independently because it is mithyā. Just as butter existed

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 280

in the milk as non-separate from milk, so also the whole world was in non-separate form
in brahman, non-separate from brahman. That brahman which is called Īśvara magnified
the potential one; he brought out to manifestation. The folded universe Īśvara unfolded
like unfolding of the flag and the unfolding is called vyākaraṇa. We regularly do this in
our dream. All the svapna-prapañca comes in the manifested form in sleep. Now in
waking the svapna prapañca is in dormant form.
That vyākaraṇa-rūpa-sṛṣṭi we do daily and Īśvara also does the same thing. He does it at
the time of creation. He does it in the form of names and forms. Substance is not created
and the carpenter’s job is addition of the shape, and when a shape is given, a particular
name is also given, but carpenter does not produce even an ounce of matter. Therefore,
Upaniṣad says nāmarūpābhyām. First it is called ākāśa brahman with particular nāma-
rūpa is called ākāśa. There is no substance called ākāśa. There is another nāma-rūpa called
vāyu. The nature of this nāma-rūpa is that they are the object of consciousness. The names
and forms are dṛśya, the object of consciousness. Without your experiencing it, you cannot
talk about the existence.
Existence presupposes experience. All the nāma-rūpas are experienceable objects of
consciousness. Consciousness is the subject ever-experiencing subject and dṛk-rūpa is
Ātmā. Now the question is why should Vidyāraṇya mention that nāma-rūpa prapañca is
dṛśya? Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad does not say that. He emphasizes dṛśya to show that
whatever is object is mithyā as per Māṇḍūkya kārikā. The unreal nāma-rūpa prapañca
brahman created. Many nāma-rūpas are created means what are they? Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad 1.4.7 generally mentions nāma-rūpa prapañca. The details are not given but that
is given in another part of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Those nāma-rūpa details are clearly
available in the case of Virāṭ, etc., mentioned in the same Upaniṣad at 1.4.4 beginning.
Now we go back to 1.4.4. of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

śloka 9
विराणानुर्नरो गावः खराश्वाजावयस्तथा ।
पिपीलिकावधिद्वन्द्वमिति वाजसनेयिनः ॥ ४.९ ॥
virāṇānurnaro gāvaḥ kharāśvājāvayastathā.
pipīlikāvadhidvandvamiti vājasaneyinaḥ (4.9).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 281

1.4.4 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad talks about sṛṣṭi. Virāṭ is born and then Manu is born it is
said. Manu is the first person of the entire human community. The entire duration of
brahman sṛṣṭi is presided by 14 Manus and one manmantara is 71 chaturyuga. Then first
Manu goes. Then the second Manu comes. One chaturyuga is 43 lakhs 20 thousand years.
Like that, 14 Manus come and go and that is one day of brahman. First 7th vaivasvata
manmantara is ruling this universe. 28th chaturyuga is this kaliyuga. Then comes nara, the
human being. Then cows were born. Then come donkeys; then aśvas horses; then ajas
goats; then avayas which means sheep; all these going up to the ant is mentioned in the
creation process. From Virāṭ up to the ants are created. All are created in the form of
couples to create the progeny to be perpetuated. This is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
statement.

śloka 10
कृ त्वा रूपान्तरं जैवं देहे प्राविशदीश्वरः ।
इति ताः श्रुतयः प्राहु जीवत्वं प्राणधारणात्॥ ४.१० ॥
kṛtvā rūpāntaraṃ jaivaṃ dehe prāviśadīśvaraḥ.
iti tāḥ śrutayaḥ prāhu jīvatvaṃ prāṇadhāraṇāt (4.10).
After creating five elements and all the elementals and after creating sthūla-śarīras and
sūkṣma-śarīra which are all jaḍa, jaḍa sūkṣma-śarīra and jaḍa prapañca cannot interact.
Jaḍa sūkṣma-śarīra has to become cetana. For this, brahman has to bless it. By entering
every sūkṣma-śarīra as reflected consciousness cidābhāsa-rūpeṇa brahman enters the
sūkṣma-śarīra. Bimba-caitanya enters the sūkṣma-śarīra and makes the otherwise jaḍa
śarīra the cetana śarīra. It is like the sun entering the water pool as reflected sun. Once it
enters the water becomes bright. Paramātmā jīva-rūpeṇa prāviṣat.
This is mentioned in 6.3.3 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad. The original consciousness modifies
itself as it were, in the form of reflected consciousness which is called rupāntara. This new
version is called daivam rupāntara and it is called Jīvātmā version of Paramātmā.
Paramātmā creates out of himself many Jīvātmā versions by entering all the sūkṣma-śarīra.
Each jīva is pratibimba of Paramātmā. That Īśvara enters the sūkṣma-śarīra of jīvas.
Thus all the śrutis declare not only the creation and they talk about the entry of brahman
also. This is called anupraveśa that is the brahman’s entry into jīva in the form of reflected
consciousness. We also do this regularly in the dream. We create the dream world and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 282

enter into the bodies of the dream jīvas and identify with each object. I have dream eyes to
see the dream world. I create the dream world and I enter the dream object. Once I enter as
an individual within the dream, I am no more the creator but I am the creature in the
dream. One is called Paramātmā and the other is called Jīvātmā. Now the question is the
entered Paramātmā be renamed as jīva.
Jīva means that which holds prāṇa in the physical body. Cidābhāsa holds prāṇa in the
body. It is cidābhāsa that carries the prāṇa at the time of death. That cidābhāsa alone holds
the prāṇa until death and the same cidābhāsa takes away the prāṇa at the time of death. It
is cidābhāsa-rūpa jīva alone holds the prāṇa. Therefore, jīva means the holder of prāṇa and
the carrier of prāṇa at the time of death. Original consciousness does not hold the prāṇa.
Else this fellow will not die. Original consciousness is there in the dead body also. Prāṇa is
not hooked to the original consciousness but it is hooked to reflected consciousness and
the prāṇa holder is called jīva. jīvatvam prāṇa dhāraṇā. It is a functional name. More in the
next class.

Class 3
śloka 10 contd
After introducing twofold creation in the form of Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and jīva-sṛṣṭi the author has
entered into the Īśvara-sṛṣṭi first. He took mantras from all the Vedas including Kṛṣṇa
Yajur Veda that brahman, with the help of Māyā, created the universe and it is uniformly
declared by all the Upaniṣads. First, five elements were created and then followed
bhautika-sṛṣṭi which included the individual as well as macrocosm Īśvara. Both vyaṣṭi and
samaṣṭi are made up of bhautika alone.
At vyaṣṭi individual level it includes sthūla and sūkṣma-śarīras and similarly we have
visible sthūla and sūkṣma prapañcas. The stars, oceans, etc., are bhautika-sṛṣṭi and the
forces which are not available for sensory perception is called sūkṣma prapañca. All are
born out of brahman with Māyā. Only they use different words in different contexts. The
names are different in different Upaniṣads.
Similarly Māyā is also replaced by avyakta, avyākṛta and avidyā, etc. This represents the
basic material or matter-principle. This consciousness matter mixture alone we call as
Īśvara. Īśvara himself out of himself evolved or brought out this universe. Here,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 283

Vidyāraṇya introduces another part of Īśvara-sṛṣṭi which is called anupraveśa. This is

there in Taittirīya Upaniṣad, Aitareya Upaniṣad and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, etc. The
very same consciousness has entered all the sūkṣma-śarīras in the form of pratibimba
caitanya. The original consciousness obtains in every sūkṣma-śarīra as ābhāsa caitanya or
pratibimba caitanya. Minus the pratibimba caitanya, body is an inert bundle, decomposing
matter, which has to be disposed at the earliest. Even sūkṣma-śarīra by itself is inert
because it is made up of jaḍa vastu. Now, on entry of pratibimba caitanya the bodies
become sentient. The live bundle of śarīra is called jīva.
The original consciousness enters into the body and the jīva comes into being and
therefore, jīva also is a Īśvara-sṛṣṭi only. In fact, Īśvara himself comes down to this universe
to play the role of jīva with two layers of costumes of sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-śarīra.
Sūkṣma-śarīra is the inner garment and sthūla-śarīra is the outer garment. Īśvara is the
master actor as he takes the role of every one of us. Everyone of us is an avatāra.
In a dream, we create the dream world and enter the dream body and create dream
individuals to transact with the dream world. This is said in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. That
alone Vidyāraṇya indicates by saying jaivam rupāntaram. Rupāntara refers to the bimba
caitanya which takes the form of pratibimba caitanya, or original consciousness takes the
form of reflected consciousness.

Even though the original sun is one, the reflected suns are many and if there are ten
mirrors down below there will be ten reflected suns although the original sun is one alone.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says that Īśvara creates and enters the body is endorsed in all the
Upaniṣads. Īśvara has created jagat as also jīva. jīva-jagat-sṛṣṭi is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. cidābhāsa
alone holds all the prāṇas in the physical body of the jīva. If the cidābhāsa chooses to go
out, the life will come to an end.
Similarly, when cidābhāsa chooses to go out, first prāṇa goes out, all sense-organs go out
and the office of jīva is closed and the body is to be cremated. Cidābhāsa is the holder of
prāṇa. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 11
चैतन्यं यदधिष्ठानं लिङ्गदेहश्च यः पुनः ।
चिच्छाया लिङ्गदेहस्था तत्संघोजीव उच्यते ॥ ४.११ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 284

caitanyaṃ yadadhiṣṭhānaṃ liṅgadehaśca yaḥ punaḥ.

cicchāyā liṅgadehasthā tatsaṃghojīva ucyate (4.11).
Jīva is defined as a mixture consisting of three factors or components. It is like a car with
many components. Car is the name of a group of things together. The word jīva has three
important factors. First is pratibimba caitanya or cidābhāsa, reflected consciousness. Any
reflection is possible only when there is a reflecting medium. If I see my reflection there
must be a mirror or a polished surface. It is called as upādhi also. These two are
inseparable; reflected consciousness cannot be talked about without reflecting medium
and reflecting medium cannot be there without reflected consciousness. Whether you see
or not whatever is in front will be reflected. The third important component is you cannot
talk about a reflection without the original to be reflected. If in the mirror there is a
reflected face, it is possible only when there is original face in front of it. Reflection means
there must be a mirror and an object in front should be there. Reflection must have a
medium and the original. Similarly reflected consciousness must have reflecting medium
and also original consciousness. Reflected consciousness presupposes reflecting medium
and original consciousness. All these three components always go together. Therefore,
these three put together is one composite entity.
Jīva, an individual with reflected consciousness, is formed in the upādhi reflecting
medium and the reflecting medium is the sūkṣma-śarīra. Even though kāraṇa-śarīra is also
a reflecting medium, kāraṇa-śarīra is in potential form and whatever is in potential form, it
is not available for transaction; so we don’t say that. As long as butter is not extracted you
don’t mention milk though potential butter is there. You don’t say I have got gold and
potential ornaments. We don’t say because what is potential we don’t enumerate because
they are not available for transaction and have no utility. We don’t count what is potential
because it is not useful for transaction. Sthūla-śarīra is also a reflecting medium only but
we don’t mention that because sthūla-śarīra cannot form a reflection directly as it can form
a reflection only through sūkṣma-śarīra.
Sthūla-śarīra has borrowed consciousness now, not directly but only through sūkṣma-
śarīra. If the physical body borrows reflection directly, the consequence will be that there
will be no dead body at all. All the dead body will have reflection and it will have
sentiency. We don’t count sthūla-śarīra because it cannot directly borrow consciousness.
Sthūla-śarīra varies from janma to janma as it is disposable ware. We use for a few decades

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 285

and then we dispose of. Sthūla-śarīra does not continue as a part of jīva all the time.
Sūkṣma-śarīra continues from janma to janma. Three factors— sūkṣma-śarīra the reflecting
medium, the reflected consciousness pratibimba caitanya and bimba caitanya— these
three put together is called jīva. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says caitanyaṃ yadadhiṣṭhānaṃ.
The first component of jīva is adhiṣṭhāna the original consciousness; this is the substratum
for the whole creation; then the next one is liṅga deha the reflecting medium called
sūkṣma-śarīra. liṅga deha means subtle body. This is second constituent of jīva. Third one
is Cit-chāyā the reflection; or caitanya pratibimba; it is otherwise called ābhāsa or
cidābhāsa. This is situated in the sūkṣma-śarīra. The reflection has to be formed
somewhere. That reflecting surface is the sūkṣma-śarīra. This mixture is called jīva. This
composite entity is called jīva. If this śloka is remembered much confusion will go away. If
someone asks a question jīva is satya or mithyā. If someone asks with sūkṣma-śarīra point
of view it is mithyā. From that standpoint of that view even Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya you
cannot say. Only from pāramārthika point of view, one will realize Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-
aikya. If he keeps reflected consciousness and reflecting medium in the mind the answer
should be mithyā. And from that standpoint jīva-brahma-aikya also you cannot say for
brahman is satya and jīva from the standpoint of reflected consciousness and reflecting
medium jīva is mithyā. Therefore, jīva-brahma-aikya cannot be there.
If you keep it in mind the original consciousness in mind by applying bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā,
if you keep original consciousness viewpoint in mind, then Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya and
jīva is satya. Jīvātmā Paramātmā is very much possible. In karma kāṇḍa, when scripture
says jīva travels after death you should keep in mind the mithyā śarīra as well as reflected
consciousness and reflecting medium. When the Upaniṣad says tat tvam asi you reject the
reflected consciousness part and intellectually reject reflecting medium part and remain as
original consciousness and boldly say ahaṃ brahma asmi. Thus the scripture uses the
word jīva in the meaning of reflected consciousness; in karma kāṇḍa reflected
consciousness is taken and in jñāna kāṇḍa original consciousness meaning is taken. When
you talk of aikya, keep in mind the original consciousness and when you talk of travel of
śarīra, you keep in mind the reflected consciousness. If you cannot do this properly you
will be in trouble. Therefore, jīva includes all the three components and we have to apply
bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā appropriately.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 286

śloka 12
माहेश्वरी तु या माया तस्या निर्माणशक्तिवत्।
विद्यते मोहशक्तिश्च तं जीवं मोहयत्यसौ ॥ ४.१२ ॥
māheśvarī tu yā māyā tasyā nirmāṇaśaktivat.
vidyate mohaśaktiśca taṃ jīvaṃ mohayatyasau (4.12).
Now he says this Īśvara is capable of creating jīvas, jagat and he is the sṛṣṭi-kartā, sthiti-
kartā and laya-kartā and Īśvara is capable of giving the results of action, he is karma-
phala-dātā. He is able to give karma-phala to jīva according to the karmas and puṇya and
phala. He creates galaxies, stars, akhilāṇḍa and he is not bound by what he does. He
enjoys his work. He is even taking avatāras which he enjoys. In Ramāvatāra and
Krishnāvatāra he suffers but enjoys as Māyā does not create any problem to Īśvara. He
enjoys the drama but once the jīva, vyāvahārika-jīva has come into the picture, within the
vyāvahārika prapañca, the very same Māyā behaves differently in the case of jīva. In the
case of jīva, Māyā keeps the jīva under her power and causes havoc to jīva and jīva is
affected by Māyā. Īśvara is the master of Māyā, but jīva is the slave of Māyā. Māyā has
twofold powers; one is called creative power which was used by Īśvara to create. It is
called vikṣepa- or sṛṣṭi-śakti. Īśvara thus creates this wonderful universe. There is another
power of Māyā which is called āvaraṇa-śakti, the concealing power which will not do any
harm to Īśvara. Āvaraṇa-śakti becomes active in the case of jīva. Kṛṣṇa says in Gītā: my
knowledge is concealed by Māyā and I have all knowledge including my real nature. In
the case of jīva he has limited knowledge which is also wrong and doubtful as he does not
understand the original consciousness and reflected consciousness. Thus Māyā confuses
jīva.
The Māyā power belongs to Maheśvara. For that Māyā, there is a power of delusion, or
concealment or tāmāsika power similar to power of creation, nirmāṇa-śaktivat, like the
vikṣepa-śakti. The creative power gets activated initially. In the case of Īśvara, āvaraṇa-
śakti is not active at all. In the case of jīva, he does not know he is in the dream. The
āvaraṇa takes place and he does not know he is in dream. Similarly, Īśvara uses vikṣepa-
śakti to create the world and once jīva comes into being, āvaraṇa-śakti becomes active.
This āvaraṇa- or moha-śakti deludes or confuses the jīvas. It does not touch Īśvara. If it
touches Īśvara, he will not be called Īśvara. Māyā touches and deludes jīva who is none

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 287

but the inferior version of that Īśvara only. Once the delusion comes, the story of saṃśāra
begins.

śloka 13
मोहादनीशतां प्राप्य मग्नो वपुषि शोचति ।
ईशसृष्टमिदं द्वैतं सर्वमुक्तं समासतः ॥ ४.१३ ॥
mohādanīśatāṃ prāpya magno vapuṣi śocati.
īśasṛṣṭamidaṃ dvaitaṃ sarvamuktaṃ samāsataḥ (4.13).
What a disaster has happened! Now the reflected consciousness has a relationship with
original consciousness and reflecting medium. Reflected consciousness is located in the
reflecting medium and if the reflecting medium is dirty, the reflected consciousness also
appears as dull. Just like the child has features of both father and mother, the reflected
consciousness has certain features of the reflecting medium and certain features of the
reflected consciousness. If the reflected consciousness is located in some place, it is because
of the reflecting medium. So also the movement. It has certain features borrowed from the
original consciousness also. The very caitanya and sentiency of cidābhāsa is borrowed
from the original consciousness. If the reflected sun is bright, the reflection is bright; that
brightness is borrowed from the sun alone. Therefore, the reflected consciousness has
features of both.
I can claim relationship with the reflecting medium or I can claim relationship with the
original consciousness; jīva, I instead of claiming I am original consciousness temporarily
appearing as reflected consciousness in the finite medium, choose to claim relationship
with reflecting medium body. This is called deha-abhimāna. Instead of brahma-niṣṭhā, I
do deha-abhimāna. Once you identify with body, the story of problem starts. So he says
jīva becomes a perfect saṃśāra because of the āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā. The cause of saṃśāra
is mentioned in this śloka. More in the next class.

Class 4
śloka 13 contd.
The fourth chapter of Pañcadaśī is titled dvaita viveka prakaraṇam and here Vidyāraṇya
discriminates between two types of dvaita. In all previous chapters, the discrimination

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 288

was between Ātmā and anātmā and between the real and unreal was done. Here, brahman
and Ātmā is not involved but we discriminate between two types of dvaita: one Īśvara-
sṛṣṭa dvaita and another jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita. Between the two, none of the two is real. Both
are unreal. Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita is mithyā and jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita is also mithyā. Now we will
do the discrimination between the two dvaitas.
Vidyāraṇya wants to point of these two dvaitas Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita is harmless and
therefore, you need not disturb Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. jīvanmuktas are not disturbed by the world.
The very fact the jīvanmuktas live in the same world indicate the objective world, as it is,
is not the cause of any disturbance. What is our creative contribution is the problem. It is
jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita that is the cause of the problem and if we learn to handle that, it will solve
the problem.
For a wise person, the whole world is nandavana and all the rivers are Ganga. It is the
perspective-change that is required. We have to change how we see. Object of experience
need not be changed but the way that we look at the world alone must be changed. That is
what Vidyāraṇya wants to establish in this chapter. Vidyāraṇya introduces the Īśvara-sṛṣṭi
for this purpose. This is concluded in this verse. Here Vidyāraṇya points out that Īśvara
with his Māyā śakti created the universe which includes all the physical bodies and all the
subtle bodies. Since this universe is inert, by itself, no transaction is possible without
caitanya. Sūkṣma-śarīra does not have its own caitanya but Īśvara lends pratibimba
caitanya to all the sūkṣma-śarīras which we call as anupraveśa. He quoted śṛuti and he
quoted anupraveśa, the formation of pratibimba caitanya, and once it is formed, all
sūkṣma-śarīras are kartā, bhoktā and pramātā. This body has pratibimba caitanya
therefore, this body will feel the touch of the clip but the clip will not feel the touch of the
body. Here in the clip, pratibimba caitanya is not there but it is there in the body.
As far as original consciousness is concerned it is there, both in the clip and in the hand.
Original consciousness is common to the hand and the clip while the reflected
consciousness is not common to the hand and the clip; the hand has original consciousness
and reflected consciousness while the clip has original consciousness alone and it does not
have reflected consciousness. So it continues to be inert matter; it is acetana padārtha.
Īśvara has distributed pratibimba caitanya such that the world has divided into two: one
experiencer and the experienced, the subject and the object and the division is caused
because of anupraveśa. Īśvara created jīva and matter while in jīva there is pratibimba

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 289

caitanya while it is not there in other matters. Īśvara happily handled Māyā, made use of
Māyā, as Māyā was under the control of Īśvara and with the help of vikṣepa-śakti, Īśvara
created the world. In the very same Māyā, there is another power which is called āvaraṇa-
śakti which is not operative in the context of Īśvara. Since the āvaraṇa-śakti does not
conceal Īśvara, Īśvara is sarvajña and asaṃśarī and nitya-mukta and ādi-guru. If Īśvara is
ignorant, the ādi-guru himself will be ignorant and if ādi-guru is ignorant, the paramparā
will be of ajñānīs.
Āvaraṇa-śakti is inoperative. Āvaraṇa-śakti waits for the opportune moment for jīva to
come. All jīvas are uniformly ignorant. And once ignorance attacks jīva, the jīva does not
know his own real nature. When I use the word I, there are so many components like
body, reflected consciousness, original consciousness; of the three, śarīra and pratibimba
caitanya are mithyā but the all-pervading original consciousness is my real nature. I am
the adhiṣṭhāna caitanya, must have been the real self-introduction. We do not know and
even after teaching we are not willing to claim original consciousness, because so thick is
our ignorance. This ordinary sun, even that powerful sun, cannot be covered by any
number of thick clouds. The day light is very evident.
Lord Śiva is bright and the brightness is that of crores of suns, but I have got so thick an
ignorance, it is so thick to cover the crores of suns, I don’t know you and I don’t realize
you. That job therefore, I hand over to you, I will show bhakti to you and that is the
contract payment; you have to scrub off the ignorance and make me wise. The āvaraṇa-
śakti begins to function in the jīva and I successfully commit the mistake that I am the
śarīra.
Once the deha-abhimāna is formed I will claim so many relationships and every
relationship is a headache. Therefore, because of the āvaraṇa-śakti of ignorance, I am
unable become wise and I am ever worried, I suffer saṃśāra in the hands of pratibimba
and Māyā and I do not have remedy for most of the problems. This is helplessness. I am
immersed in the body and also the bodies of the people around and therefore, most of the
time I worry, I constantly am in worry and if worry is the nididhyāsana, everybody will be
perfect in nididhyāsana. All these we discussed from verses 2 to 12. All these are about the
duality created by Īśvara. All have been enumerated by me. Now we will enter jīva-sṛṣṭi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 290

śloka 14
सप्तान्नब्राह्मणे द्वैतं जीवसृष्टं प्रपञ्चितम्।
अन्नानि सप्तज्ञानेन कर्मणाजनयत्पिता ॥ ४.१४ ॥
saptānnabrāhmaṇe dvaitaṃ jīvasṛṣṭaṃ prapañcitam.
annāni saptajñānena karmaṇājanayatpitā (4.14).
From this verse to verse 31 jīva-sṛṣṭi is being discussed. This is done with the help of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad portion. It is saptānna brāhmaṇa. It is the name of the fifth
section of the first chapter of the Upaniṣad. Based on that, Vidyāraṇya discusses jīva-sṛṣṭi.
When a person says that I have built a house in T.Nagar and next week I will have
gṛhapraveśa, when he has built a house what he has done? He does not know how to
build the house and he has given the construction to the contractor. Contractor has
constructed the house through the labourers. Which is correct whether I have built the
house or the contractor has built the house? Both are correct. I have contributed to the
construction of the house and contractor also has contributed to the construction of the
house. First my contribution is my desire to build the house. The next thing is that I have
paid the money and third contribution is that I have designed the house. The entire design
is chosen by me. My contribution is design, desire, money and the contractor has
implemented and constructed the house according to my design and desire. I the desirer
and the implementer, both together, materialized the house. If I the desirer is not there, the
contractor cannot construct the house. If I have the desire and the contractor is not there, I
cannot have the house constructed. Without the two the job cannot be completed. It is my
sṛṣṭi and constractor’s sṛṣṭi.
The scriptures say the world is like a huge house. This construction also requires two
factors: one has to construct the house by the contractor who has the skill to build the
house and what type of house is needed also needs to be designed by someone. Therefore,
somebody’s kāma is needed, somebody’s money is needed and desirer and implementer
are needed for the creation of the grand house of the world. Īśvara is like a contractor as
Īśvara does not have a desire for anything. Īśvara does not have a desire but Īśvara has the
knowledge and skill to construct this universe. Therefore, from the angle of construction it
is Īśvara-kārya and the nature of creation will be decided by desirer of the creation of the
world.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 291

The chooser of the creation of the world is jīva, jīva chooses the type of comfort and from
that angle world can be called jīva-sṛṣṭi. If I am the chooser of the set up, it is not one jīva
but there are infinite jīvas and each jīva through his kāma has given the contract work to
Īśvara to create the world including the ant and other jīvarāśis and through puṇya-pāpa
has asked for the set up of the world. Thus jīva-samuha has asked for the universe and if
there is no jīva, Īśvara has no reason for creating the universe. If Īśvara alone is there, the
creation cannot and will not be there. It is due to the need of the jīva that the world is
created.
After the construction of the house at the instance of jīva and done by the Īśvara, it is the
desirer who enters and experiences both the comfort and discomfort of the universe. The
contractor is not worried with the bad creation. The second one is not only the creator but
also the enjoyer of the creation. The universe is Īśvara-kārya and jīva-bhogya. If someone
asks who has created the physical body, I have wanted this physical body and every
condition of the physical body is what I have asked for. Which year the hair should
become grey also has been decided by God.
The scientist will say it is in the genetics and we will say that genetics is decided by karma.
The very same universe jīva-sṛṣṭaṃ ca and in the case of jīva it is jīva-sṛṣṭa and jīva-
bhogyaṃ ca bhavati. This is said in saptānna brāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.
Anna means food for eating and in this context anna means the object of experience, the
bhogya prapañca. Entire universe is jīvasya anna. This annātmaka prapañca, the universe
which is bhogya prapañca, is divided into seven types in this brāhmaṇa. Therefore, the
universe is called saptānna. It means bhogya prapañca and we are responsible for that
prapañca, even though we have used a contractor who is Īśvara. At the right time, you get
the body and house, and if you complain about it, he will say I have given you what you
wanted.
The duality or dualistic universe created by jīva is elaborately discussed in the above
brāhmaṇa. It is not a separate universe. From one angle, we see it as Īśvara-sṛṣṭa and from
another angle we see it as jīva-sṛṣṭa.
Geographically, Chennai is rain-shadow region because of the western ghat mountains.
There is a huge mountain and we have this place shadow region of the mountain regions.
Then we have to beg for water. This rain shadow region is created by Īśvara. The question
is who asked you to settle in Chennai. This fellow from Kerala chooses Chennai and this

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 292

only we call it karma. Rain-shadow region is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi; we are here because of

prārabdha and it is on account of jīva-sṛṣṭi.
Here Vidyāraṇya quotes Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. The word pitā means every
jīva. Pitā is the creator of the set up through my kāma and karma. I have created the set up
because of my karma and kāma. This jīva has created this set up for himself in the form of
universe consisting of the sevenfold bhogya prapañca. Through every karma and upāsana
jīva has practiced, the set up is created by Īśvara. Fourteen lokas are created and we chose
one of the fourteen lokas as per the puṇya-pāpa through upāsana which means both good
and bad thinking. Constantly thinking against someone is also an upāsana. Upāsana need
not be taken as Īśvara-upāsana but it can be taken as vṛtti-avṛtti. The next question as to
what are the seven types of anna is answered in the next śloka.

śloka 15
मर्त्यानामेकं देवान्ने द्वे पश्वान्नं चतुर्थकम्।
अन्नत्रितयमात्मार्थमन्नानां विनियोजनम्॥ ४.१५ ॥
martyānāmekaṃ devānne dve paśvānnaṃ caturthakam.
annatritayamātmārthamannānāṃ viniyojanam (4.15).
Even though the bhogya prapañca is very vast, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad takes one
sample to give us an idea. Here Vidyāraṇya enumerates the seven types of anna; their
details will be given in the next śloka. One type of anna of bhogya prapañca is suitable for
the manuṣya in general and deva-anne dve, two types of bhogya padārthas are for the
devas or the celestials. Fourth bhogya padārtha is meant for paśu or animals. The last
three are for oneself. This is the classification or allotment apportionment of the seven
portions of food. Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya will explain what are the seven items in the
following ślokas.

Class 5
śloka 15 contd.
The intention of jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita alone is the cause of saṃśāra. The proof for this is that
there are jīvanmuktas who are existing in this world, experiencing the Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita,
the world has not disappeared to jīvanmukta, but still they are not bound by the world.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 293

The jñānī asaṃśarī and ajñānī saṃśarī both live in the world, and Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita
remaining the same, if one is liberated and another is bound, the reason is one is bound
because of jīva-sṛṣṭi alone. This is what Vidyāraṇya wants to establish here. Īśvara-sṛṣṭi
was elaborately discussed earlier. Now we have entered into jīva-sṛṣṭi. The very same
universe is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and it is jīva-sṛṣṭi also. Looking from one angle it is called Īśvara-
sṛṣṭi. And looking from another angle it is called jīva-sṛṣṭi.
The universe as the product originating from God we call it Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. When we see the
world as an object of enjoyment of jīva, we call it jīva-bhogya. Īśvara-kārya is jīva-bhogya.
Since I do appropriate puṇya and pāpa the world has originated as bhogya prapañca. By I,
I mean here all the jīvas. All jīvas have done puṇya-pāpas and the world has come to
existence as our bhogya prapañca. Since our contribution is also there in the form of
puṇya-pāpa, we are responsible for the arrival of bhogya prapañca. Īśvara is also
responsible and we are also responsible and therefore, it is called Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita as
kārya prapañca and it is also jīva prapañca dvaita as bhogya prapañca. This idea
Vidyāraṇya says is not my invention but this is presented in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad,
first chapter, 5th section, saptānna brāhmaṇa. Here Upaniṣad says jīva has created this
world as bhogya prapañca because of his puṇya-pāpas. He has created for his own
pleasure and pain, while Īśvara is a contractor, a simple, innocent contractor who
implements whatever we have ordered. If this set up is here, now, I have ordered this set
up by my puṇya-pāpa mixture.
If Indra enjoys svarga loka he has ordered the svarga loka through puṇya and if other jīvas
suffer in naraka they wanted naraka through pāpa karma; poor Īśvara does not have any
personal like or dislike, either to create lower or upper loka. Suppose we imagine a
hypothetical situation that all the jīvas get liberated. That means all jīvas are free from
sañcita, āgāmi and prārabdha karmas and suppose Īśvara wants to create, but poor Īśvara
will become unemployed. However, all jīvas will not get liberated. All are not getting this
knowledge. Leave alone all other jīvarāśis do not have freewill to gain jñāna. Only a few
beings gain Ātma-jñāna although many of them know that jñānad eva kaivalyam; among
them only a few know Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya as they also know that Vedānta śravaṇa,
manana and nididhyāsana will result in Ātma-jñāna. Therefore, all the jīvas getting
liberated is out of the question and therefore, Īśvara will be employed all the time. You
need not avoid mokṣa out of compassion for Īśvara.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 294

Therefore, this whole universe is looked at as bhogya prapañca created by jīva through his
puṇya-pāpa karma and this bhogya prapañca is divided into seven divisions and it is
called sapta-anna prapañca. Vidyāraṇya enumerated them in the last verse: one for human
being; two for devas; one for animals and three internal anna for every jīva. The other
three internal anna is for jīva’s private experience.

śloka 16
व्रीह्यादिकं दर्शपूर्णमासौ क्षीरं तथा मनः ।
वाक्प्राणश्चेति सप्तत्वमन्नानामवगम्यताम्॥ ४.१६ ॥
vrīhyādikaṃ darśapūrṇamāsau kṣīraṃ tathā manaḥ.
vākprāṇaśceti saptatvamannānāmavagamyatām (4.16).
The explanation of the previous verse is given here. One anna for manuṣya was said in the
previous verse. One anna for vegetable kingdom. Rice or paddy which includes vegetable
kingdom is bhogya padārtha for manuṣya. This includes all the manuṣyas are vegetarians.
The next anna is darśa-pūrṇa-māsau. Two types of oblations offered in two rituals, darśa
rituals and pūrṇa māsa Vedic rituals done on amavasya day and on full moon day,
respectively. These two are considered to be the basic rituals to be done by every
gṛhasthas. The oblations are offered to devatas as these oblations are the food for devas.
Then kṣīraṃ the milk is the next food which is presented by Upaniṣad as paśu-anna and
the food for animals especially when they are babies. It is called paśu-anna. The next one is
manas, vāk and prāṇa, that is, the mind, speech and pañca prāṇas, the entire sūkṣma-
śarīra is also another form of anna because I experience my sūkṣma-śarīra as a jīva and
therefore, my sūkṣma-śarīra becomes my private anna. One is external shareable anna and
another is private internal anna. When we have an emotional problem, others can
sympathise with us but we have to experience the healthy or otherwise mind. The
components of manas, vāk and prāṇa are three types of food we get. In fact, Vidyāraṇya is
not interested in going to the details but he is interested to show that the whole world is a
bhogya prapañca and being bhogya prapañca is jīva-sṛṣṭi. As kārya prapañca it is Īśvara-
sṛṣṭi. As bhogya prapañca it is jīva-sṛṣṭi. For details, refer to Ādi Śaṅkarācārya’s
commentary on the saptānna brāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. In this manner, there
is sevenfold bhogya padārtha, may you understand.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 295

śloka 17
ईशेन यद्यप्येतानि निर्मितानि स्वरूपतः ।
तथापि ज्ञानकर्माभ्यां जीवो कार्षीत्तदन्नताम्॥ ४.१७ ॥
īśena yadyapyetāni nirmitāni svarūpataḥ.
tathāpi jñānakarmābhyāṃ jīvo kārṣīttadannatām (4.17).
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers a possible question from a student. How do you say bhogya
prapañca is jīva-sṛṣṭi? We know that the world is created by Īśvara; then how can we say it
is jīva-sṛṣṭi? Vidyāraṇya says that the world is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi only and there is no confusion
regarding that. What he wants to say is that the creation is ordered by jīva and therefore, it
is jīva’s creation. The world is created on the basis of the puṇya-pāpa of the jīva and for
him to gain pleasure and pain as per his puṇya-pāpas. Īśvara has created but I have
ordered and I am going to stay as my bhogya.
All these sevenfold anna are created by Īśvara only like the walls have been arranged and
cement is applied by the contractor only. Sevenfold annas are created by the God alone.
Physically, the job is done by Īśvara alone. But his contribution is objective contribution
while the real contributor is jīva alone and jīva’s puṇya-pāpas alone. He alone converts
this universe as his bhogya prapañca. Jīva utilizes this universe as bhogya prapañca. Every
sukha and every duḥkha will be tapped by jīva only and not by Īśvara. For husband, wife
is bhogya prapañca and for wife, husband is bhogya prapañca. Similarly, it is for Guru
and śiṣya also. Jīva converts it into bhogya through his pūrva-janma-karma and upāsana.
Here the word jñāna is to be read as upāsana. In this context, karma and upāsana means
both, puṇya-pāpa karma and puṇya-pāpa upāsana, decide the jīva- sṛṣṭi for us to enjoy
pleasure and pain.

śloka 18
ईशकार्यं जीवभोग्यं जगद्द्वाभ्यां समन्वितम्।
पितृजन्या भर्तृभोग्या यथा योषित्तथेष्यताम्॥ ४.१८ ॥
īśakāryaṃ jīvabhogyaṃ jagaddvābhyāṃ samanvitam.
pitṛjanyā bhartṛbhogyā yathā yoṣittatheṣyatām (4.18).
He makes it very clear here that this world has bhogya prapañca as jīva-sṛṣṭi and as kārya
prapañca it is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. The universe has two aspects or perspectives. They are kārya
and bhogya; as a kārya prapañca it is Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita and jīva-bhogya as bhogya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 296

prapañca it is jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita. Both are there. He gives an example. Yathā yoṣit, it is like a
woman. One and the same woman as a daughter of her parents, from the standpoint of the
parent, she comes under kārya padārtha. As a child to the parent, she is kārya padārtha.
After some years, the very same girl marries and goes with her husband. Though she pitṛ-
kāryā, the moment she enters the husband’s family, the girl becomes bhogya padārtha
from the standpoint of her husband. That means after marriage when she comes to new
family; everything she does gives either pleasure or pain to the new set up. Every moment
of her existence, sukha-bhoga or duḥkha-bhoga is to somebody else’s family. Śāstra goes
one step further. If a person should get a particular woman as wife, is it because of
puruṣārtha or prārabdha? But afterward after marriage it is not decided by husband and
prārabdha is the primary factor which decides husband or wife. Bhartṛhari tells in Niti-
śataka,the types of wife, children and the environments are decided by karma. What is
kārya prapañca from father’s angle, it is bhogya prapañca and from husband’s angle
though the girl remains the same.

śloka 19
मायावृत्त्यात्मको हीशसंकल्पः साधनं जनौ ।
मनो वृत्त्यात्मको जीवो संकल्पो भोगसाधनम्॥ ४.१९ ॥
māyāvṛttyātmako hīśasaṃkalpaḥ sādhanaṃ janau.
mano vṛttyātmako jīvo saṃkalpo bhogasādhanam (4.19).
Both jīva and Īśvara are responsible for this prapañca. Īśvara is responsible for kārya
prapañca and jīva is responsible for bhogya prapañca and both are the creators. What is
the instruments they used to produce the creation. Just as a carpenter uses his instruments
to produce furniture, what is the jīva’s sādhana and Īśvara sādhana? Both of them use
saṅkalpa. The nature of saṅkalpa is vṛtti-rupa, that is in the form of thoughts. Saṅkalpa-
rūpeṇa, vṛtti is used as instrument for creation. Where do the saṅkalpas exist? For Īśvara,
saṅkalpa arises in his cosmic mind called Māyā. This is Īśvarasya sādhanam for creation.
Jīva’s saṅkalpa vṛtti exists in the mind or manas. The manomaya-saṅkalpa-vṛtti is sādhana
for bhogya prapañca for jīva. The thought you entertain at the time of death determines
the next janma. Naturally the question comes if the final thought determines the next
janma, why not have good thought at the time of death? Īśvara says that it is not possible
for you do not know when your last thought is. If you want to entertain a particular

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 297

thought as the last thought, you should start rehearsals right now. That is called
manomaya jīva saṅkalpa.
Think of mokṣa and you will get mokṣa. What decides next janma is manomaya vṛtti.
Even if we say karmas decide the next janma and karma is done on the basis of saṅkalpas
alone. I want to do this karma; before every vaidika karma, a saṅkalpa is done. Ultimately,
what karma you do is based on saṅkalpa alone. Puṇya-pāpa karma alone gets converted
into the next sṛṣṭi. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says the saṅkalpa thought of Īśvara in the form
of Māyā-vṛtti decides the Īśvara-prapañca. That Īśvara decides through saṅkalpa we know
through śāstra pramāṇa. With regard to jīva-sṛṣṭi in the form of bhogya prapañca, jīva-
saṅkalpa is the basis of bhogya prapañca. This is done in the previous sṛṣṭi. The sṛṣṭi is a
cyclic process. Bhoga-sādhana is the instrument for creation of bhogya prapañca.

śloka 20
ईशनिर्मितमण्यादौ वस्तुन्येकविधे स्थिते ।
भोक्तृ धीवृत्तिनानात्वात्तद्भोगो बहुधेष्यते ॥ ४.२० ॥
īśanirmitamaṇyādau vastunyekavidhe sthite.
bhoktṛdhīvṛttinānātvāttadbhogo bahudheṣyate (4.20).
Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya explains how particular things function in our daily experience.
Imagine that three different people go for a picnic. There is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi in the form of
rivers, mountains, etc. All are exposed to the same universe. One says I am thrilled by this
experience and let us stay here for seven days. Another person says that it is not so great
and he says three days stay is sufficient. The same padārtha gives different experience
from person to person. One is happiest and the other person is not so happy. The third
person is not at all happy with no people around and he says it is like a burial ground. The
very same Īśa-kārya gives different experience to different people. The bhogya padārtha is
different from person to person.
In Vedānta, the same thing is called padārtha and viṣaya. A clip is an object and when it is
in the shop, all look at padārtha without reaction. I choose to buy as I find it useful;
thereafter, the condition, presence and absence of the clip is capable of binding me. The
very same clip in Vedānta is called viṣaya. This clip gives me pleasure or pain and the
same clip is called viṣaya. When we read obituary column we are jīvanmuktas but imagine
the very imagination or serious sickness of our only child; it makes lot of difference. It will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 298

give a great shock. For me, it is jīva-bhogya. Precious stone is kārya prapañca of Īśvara.
The precious stone being the same, three different people view it differently because of
differences in the manovṛtti. This will be elaborated which we will see in the next class.

Class 6
śloka 20 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita. Even though Īśvara has created the world, the
world has been ordered by jīva only. Every detail of the world is not determined by the
will of God but it is determined by the type of karma we have done. If the type of the
world is to be decided by God, Lord will have the choice to create the world as he liked.
Lord has compassion. If Īśvara has the right to create the world, he would have created a
world where there would be no problem and why should an all-compassionate God create
a world with all sorts of problems? It is because the world we have ordered and forgetting
what we have ordered before. When I don’t remember what happened yesterday, how I
can remember what happened in past sṛṣṭi! We can happily define the world as jīva-sṛṣṭi
also.
As a kārya prapañca the world is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and as bhogya prapañca world is jīva-sṛṣṭi.
As kārya prapañca, the world looks the same but as a bhogya padārtha, it is different to
different jīvas. As kārya, the world is the same, but as bhogya the world is sukha to one
jīva and duḥkha for another jīva. Therefore, as a bhogya prapañca it is jīva-sṛṣṭi.
Vidyāraṇya wants to convey the idea clearly and so, he said Īśa-nirmita-maṇyādau. So
many varieties of stones are created by Īśvara. Even though the thing itself is the same, the
cost and colour are uniformly the same, the way jīvas look at the very same thing is
different. When one person looks at the precious stone, one is elated and wants to
purchase it immediately. Another person wants to buy the same thing and before he could
buy, it was bought. Looking at the same lost stone gives him sorrow. The winner looking
at the cup and the loser looking at the reward cup is different. One is happy to look at the
cup, while the other one is full of sorrow. Since the attitude varies, the experience differs
on the same object, the bhogya prapañca is looked at differently by different people. Even
when object is the same, the emotions generated are variable because of not the difference

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 299

in the object, but the jīva-bhogya as they look with different emotions. What are the
different emotions? This is discussed in the next śloka.

śloka 21
हृष्यत्येको मणिं लब्ध्वा क्रुद्ध्यत्यन्यो ह्यलाभतः ।
पश्यत्येव विरक्तोऽत्र न हृष्यति न कुप्यति ॥ ४.२१ ॥
hṛṣyatyeko maṇiṃ labdhvā kruddhyatyanyo hyalābhataḥ.
paśyatyeva virakto:'tra na hṛṣyati na kupyati (4.21).
If one becomes happy having got the diamond, the other becomes angry for not getting it.
While a man of dispassion only sees the diamond, but neither he becomes happy nor
angry. For such an indifferent person, the object can cause neither joy nor sorrow. The
obstructed desire gets transformed into anger and fulfilled desire makes one greedy. One
who is absolutely detached does not know the difference between a diamond and the glass
piece. When he looks at the two people, one jumping with joy and one with anger, this
person enjoys the drama and looks on with dispassion and is neither elated nor is he
disturbed in this particular context. He is perfectly detached and calm. His attitude is
neutral. The maṇi gives three different bhogas to three different jīvas.

śloka 22
प्रियोऽप्रिय उपेक्ष्यश्चेत्याकारा मणिगास्त्रयः ।
सृष्टा जीवैरीशसृष्टं रूपं साधारणं त्रिषु ॥ ४.२२ ॥
priyo:'priya upekṣyaścetyākārā maṇigāstrayaḥ.
sṛṣṭā jīvairīśasṛṣṭaṃ rūpaṃ sādhāraṇaṃ triṣu (4.22).
Now he wants to technically analyse the situation. Actually, there is only one precious
stone. As an Īśa-kārya, a product of the Lord, the stone or universe is having the same
perceptuality. Its characteristic created by the Lord, its cost, all of them, are the same in all
the three cases ,whether the first man sees, the second sees or the third man sees. The very
same stone has certain additional attributes, invisible, and they are also added to the stone
which is called jīva-sṛṣṭi. Priya attribute is created by the first jīva and apriya attribute is
created by the second jīva and no attribute is attached to by the third jīva. Favourable is
the attribute attached to by the first jīva and hateable and unfavourable attribute attached
to by the second person with a fear of loot and the robbers killing him to get the diamond

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 300

and he thinks it will give him more insecurity and as the mind changes the attribute
towards the diamond also changes. But the third one, he neither likes it nor dislikes. This
is the attribute of the diamond. This has three attributes, different attribute viewed by
three different people, and this is created by the jīva and not by Īśvara. These attributes are
attached to the diamond. The same is the case with money also. Vidyāraṇya wants to give
another example.

śloka 23
भार्या स्नुषा ननान्दा च याता मातेत्यनेकधा ।
प्रतियोगिधिया योषिद्भिद्यते न स्वरूपतः ॥ ४.२३ ॥
bhāryā snuṣā nanāndā ca yātā mātetyanekadhā.
pratiyogidhiyā yoṣidbhidyate na svarūpataḥ (4.23).
Here, the example of woman in a family, that too in a joint family of olden days, is given.
In that family, there is one lady and there are several generations. And also brothers are
living there. How the lady is seen by different individual is given here. The height,
complexion and weight are the same. Each one looks at her differently and one likes her
while the other one hates her. Here, woman is taken as an example. This woman differs
depending upon the attribute of the relative. From the standpoint of different members of
the family, the woman differs; one looks at her as wife from the standpoint of husband;
daughter-in-law from parents-in-law; one may look at her with love and the other with
hatred; the famous sister-in-law and then husband’s brother’s wife, etc. Then she is looked
at as mother by her children. All these people look at the lady as daughter of the parent;
that is the same; when looked at by different people, different attributes are added and the
woman with additional attribute will give different emotion towards different relatives.
Her nature as Īśvara-sṛṣṭi does not however differ.

śloka 24
ननु ज्ञानानि भिद्यन्तामाकारस्तु न भिद्यते ।
योषिद्वपुष्यतिशयो न दृष्टो जीवनिर्मितः ॥ ४.२४ ॥
nanu jñānāni bhidyantāmākārastu na bhidyate.
yoṣidvapuṣyatiśayo na dṛṣṭo jīvanirmitaḥ (4.24).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 301

Now, Vidyāraṇya raises a question, a technical question, based on the previous śloka. He
will give a technical answer. The question raised by the person is this. In the previous
śloka, Vidyāraṇya said the woman differs depending upon the view of the different family
members. Now Pūrvapakṣa asks: why do you say that the woman differs from individual-
to-individual? The woman does not differ as the difference is only in the attribute of the
viewer. You should say perception differs but why do you say perceived object differs?
Therefore, he says the cognition, perception and experience differs; means I agree there.
But you don’t say this. Let us accept the difference in the perception in the attribute, in the
cognition, because there are different minds perceiving one and the same woman and the
attribute differs depending upon the mood of the mind that looks at the woman. But the
nature of the woman does not differ. The weight of the lady does not differ when looked
at by different people. No additional attribute is perceived in the woman because of the
different attributes of the different people, just because people have different attributes
towards here. There is no value addition is perceived, on the object here, although
different people look at her differently. Therefore, I don’t accept vastu-bheda but only
viṣaya-darśana-bheda is there.

śloka 25
मैवं मांसमयी योषित्काचिदन्या मनोमयी ।
मांसमय्या अभेदेऽपि भिद्यतेऽत्र मनोमयी ॥ ४.२५ ॥
maivaṃ māṃsamayī yoṣitkācidanyā manomayī.
māṃsamayyā abhede:'pi bhidyate:'tra manomayī (4.25).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says your question is relevant and looking at it superficially, your
statement is correct. Now, I talk to you on a technical view. According to Vedānta śāstra,
there are two women, one is in external bāhya prapañca made up of five elements, made
up of flesh and blood and objectively available woman to all. At the time of perception
there is internal form generated by the mind, viṣaya-ākāra-vṛtti. A pot made up of internal
thought is generated in my mind when I look at the pot. Similarly, a thought pot is
generated when you look at the pot. Even though the bāhya pot is one and the same in the
observer’s mind, in the minds, thoughts of different individuals are generated. There are
two women, and you should specify which one you look at. Don’t object to my statement
because there is a woman outside the body, objectively available to every person with
flesh and blood. She is bhautika nāri and anyā, manomayī. There is another internal

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 302

woman who occupies the mind of the observer or observers and as many observers are
there so many woman-thoughts are there.
Then, Vidyāraṇya says the woman with flesh and blood is the same and no attribute can
be added to the physical body of the woman. There is no difference at all when looked by
different relatives. Even though there is no difference in the external woman who is
maṃśa-mayi woman; yet, there are so many internal women manomayī yosid vidyate. In
my mind, I add an attribute that is priya and the another mind has apriya yoshid and so
different mind has different thought about her. So the attributes are not added to external
woman but added to by the internal mind, not common to others.

śloka 26
भ्रान्तिस्वप्नमनोराज्यस्मृतिष्वस्तु मनोमयम्।
जाग्रन्मानेन मेयस्य न मनोमयतेति चेत्॥ ४.२६ ॥
bhrāntisvapnamanorājyasmṛtiṣvastu manomayam.
jāgranmānena meyasya na manomayateti cet (4.26).
Another question is raised by the Pūrvapakṣa. We enter Advaita epistemology.
Vidyāraṇya says you can talk about internal or mind projected universe only when actual
external universe is absent as in the case of jāgṛt-avasthā and svapna-avasthā. In the
waking state, jīva experiences external universe and it is actually in front of the jīva. He
need not project the universe.
When the external world is not there, then I will have to project an internal world. When
the external world is not there, every jīva has to project an internal world of his own.
Where the sense-organs are not functioning, then there is an internal projected world and
you cannot talk about external and internal world coexisting. How can you talk of two
women and two attributes towards the same woman at the same time?
We shall accept manomaya prapañca that is mind-projected universe only when sense-
organs are not perceiving the external universe like delusion, rope-snake; when rope-
snake is perceived the sense-organs are not reporting the rope and therefore, there is
manomaya sarpa, it is a mentally projected snake which is not there.
During the dream, when the sense-organs do not sense the actual external world there is
svapna world. Then I build castles in the air, etc. This is manomaya. One builds castles in
the air because it is not available actually. In recollecting the past experience, you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 303

remember the past wonderful experience. At that point, for the mind’s eye that field is
available because sense-organs do not perceive the cool Badrinath. Only when sense-
organs are not functioning, the manomaya prapañca is there and when you perceive it, the
actual external prapañca is there in front of you. The eyes, ears, etc, see, hear, etc. When
they clearly perceive an object how can you say it is manomaya prameya?
When the actual woman is perceived Vidyāraṇya talks about manomaya yoshid of a
different order. It is like building story after stories. There cannot be manomaya yoshid in
this particular case. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣa. If such a question is raised, what should be
the answer? That we will see in the next class.

Class 7
śloka 26 contd.
Vidyāraṇya deals with jīva-dṛṣṭa dvaita. The very same universe is called jīva-dṛṣṭa dvaita
as bhogya prapañca while it is kārya prapañca from the point of view of Īśvara. Everyone
looks at the world from his own point of view and every object has new attribute as priya,
apriya and upekṣya. Depending upon the additional attribute, priya vastu will give joy,
the very same with added attribute of apriyatva will give sorrow and the very same object
as upekṣya vastu will neither give joy nor sorrow.
From the view of the perceiver, one and the same object is looked with added attributes.
The example of woman was discussed in the last class with different relative having
different view about the same woman. The kārya prapañca lady gets several attributes and
she becomes several bhogya prapañca lady to several individuals, capable of giving joy to
some and sorrow to many others. Now, Pūrvapakṣa raises a question: how can there be
different woman from the standpoint of different observers? We don’t have yoshid-bheda,
difference in woman we talk about, because there is one woman in front. The difference is
in the perception and not in the perceived woman.
Therefore, different attributes cannot be added to the woman but the attributes may in the
perception or attitudes on the part of the many individuals. Yoshid-vastu-bheda the
Pūrvapakṣa is unable to accept but he accepts viṣaya-jñāna-bheda. For that, Vidyāraṇya
gives the answer: no and that there are two ladies in every perception of the lady. Lady is
only an example. In pot-perception, there are two perceptions.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 304

In every perception, two objects are involved: one is the tangible object and the other is
non-physical and non-concrete mental object. For every perception, there is one mental
perception and in fact because of the mental perception alone, an object is perceived. The
physical object and mental object are there.
Here, Vidyāraṇya talks of the mental woman depending upon several observers. The
physical woman is one but the mental woman formed in several observers vary. The
mental woman one may have priya viśeṣaṇa and the mental woman two may have apriya
viśeṣaṇa. Vidyāraṇya says I talk of antara vastu and you talk of external object and thus
the two cannot go in line. I talk of differences from the point of view of the mind.
Pūrvapakṣa raises another question. He says I do accept mānasa viṣaya or mānasa vastu
and bāhya vastu, two objects are there. I have no problem. But what he wants to say is the
perception of the mental object takes place during svapna, during delusion, during
memory, during imagination, etc. Since the physical objects are absent, the human being
projects a mental object and reacts to that. The mental objects are experienced and
responded to. However, the mental projected object is not functional when we experience
an actual physical object. You need not project mental object when the object is in front of
you. Projected experience is relevant only when the actual object is absent and therefore,
the contention is that pratyakṣa-kale manomaya-viṣayaḥ nāsti. The bāhya-bhautika-
viṣayaḥ asti. You don’t require also. Therefore, maṃśamayī yoshid is there; you should
not talk about several manomayī yoshid existing in the several observers’ minds. Also
don’t talk of different attributes of the woman. This is the question. The answer to this
question we will see now.

śloka 27
बाढं माने तु मेयेन योगात्स्याद्विषयाकृ तिः ।
भाष्यवार्तिककाराभ्यामयमर्थ उदाहृतः ॥ ४.२७ ॥
bāḍhaṃ māne tu meyena yogātsyādviṣayākṛtiḥ.
bhāṣyavārtikakārābhyāmayamartha udāhṛtaḥ (4.27).
Ādi Śaṅkarācārya loves this topic. He discusses this topic elaborately. The essence of this
answer is that any experience of any object, whether it is in the form of memory, whether
it is in the form of perception or imagination, is possible only when the image of the object
is formed in the mind. That is called viṣaya ākāra vṛtti. Any thought has the shape of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 305

object of experience. Ghaṭa-anubhava requires ghaṭa-ākāra-vṛtti. If the mental image is not

formed, you cannot experience anything. Whatever be the program, you have to
experience it and it presupposes the formation of the mental image. Without forming the
mental image, you cannot experience any program. Experience needs mental registration
and the formation of image that is called mānasa-viṣaya. mānasa yoshid means mānasa-
yoshid-ākāra-vṛtti. The second point Vedānta says is the formation of the mental image is
necessary for direct perception also. Therefore, if anyone is to be perceived, that person
has to enter the mind; in the vṛtti-ākāra that person has to enter and only when the entry
takes place, the person-jñāna takes place. How do you differentiate the perception and
memory when the perception needs mental image? Mental image is needed, both in
mental image as also the memory. The mental image is common in all the perceptions.
Svāmī-ākāra-vṛtti is common in all perceptions. The difference is in the perception; the
mental image is generated by the external object or the sense-organs pramāṇa-janya-
mānasa-vṛtti in perception. When you remember me, it is not indriya-pramāṇa-janya-
mānasa-vṛtti. But it is mānasa-vṛtti and it is generated not out of pramāṇa but out of
vāsanā. What is common to both is mental image. In one, the image is caused by an
external object and in the other case it is caused by vāsanā-janya-manomaya-vṛtti. It is like
a cricket match you watch and none gets run and when you doze off someone gets out.
Then there is action-replay and you watch the stump flying. Imagine someone covers the
portion of the TV screen. How do you know which is live program and which one is
replay program? In TV screen you don’t see any difference. The technical difference is in
the first thing it is formed because of actual event taking place on the ground and when
you watch action replay the image is generated from the memory. What is common to
both is image; in one it is event-generated image and in the other it is memory generated
image.
Each one has one-one, priyamana yoshid, apriyamana yoshid, etc. Bāḍhaṃ means I do
accept what you say that in the case of bhrānti, etc., there is mentally projected object. But
still you should know one thing. Meyena yogāt because of the mental vṛtti’s contact with
an object because of the mānasa vṛtti contact with the external object during every
perception, the manomaya vṛtti goes out to the object from our mind. The mānasa vṛtti
thought, the thought with cidābhāsa is supposed to emerge out like the beam emerging
out of the torch light. Similarly, the mānasa vṛtti gets contact with prameya, where

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 306

prameya means the object. Yoga means contact or sambandha. The mānasa vṛtti is called
pramāṇa. It is pratyakṣa pramāṇa. When the pramāṇa vṛtti comes in contact with pramāṇa
viṣaya, the thought which is by itself formless assumes the form of the object. Thought
does not have an intrinsic shape but gets the shape of the object; it will be formed in the
antaḥkaraṇa vṛtti. That image or that shape is formed. That alone we call mānasa puruṣa,
mānasa ghaṭa, etc. In every perception, it has to take place.
How do you know this phenomena takes place? They say the light hits the object and the
reflected light hits the retina in the eyes, etc. Now you may ask how you know all these
things? We don’t apply the scientific theory but according to us it is the outgoing mānasa
theory which we call it vṛtti-vyāpti. Naturally, you will ask how you know all these
things? For this, Vidyāraṇya says that this topic has been discussed and chapters have
been closed by Bhāṣyakāra and Vārtikakāra which means Ādi Śaṅkarācārya and
Sureśvarācārya. In the Gītābhāṣya and Upaniṣadbhāṣya and secondary critical commentar
Vārtika, the matter has been discussed; it is said by Vidyāraṇya.
Vidyāraṇya has great reverence for Ādi Śaṅkarācārya and Sureśvarācārya. Now it is not
enough to say so. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya himself says I do not want to give you the
homework for you. Vidyāraṇya quotes Ādi Śaṅkarācārya’s śloka and Sureśvarācārya’s
ślokas. They are quotations taken from Upadesa sāhasri 14.3 and 4 and 30th verse is a
quotation from Sureśvarācārya’s Vārtika on Ādi Śaṅkarācārya’s Dakṣiṇāmūrtistotra.

śloka 28
मूषासिक्तं यथा ताम्रं तन्निभं जायते तथा ।
रूपादीन्व्याप्नुवच्चित्तं तन्निभं दृश्यते ध्रुवम्॥ ४.२८ ॥
mūṣāsiktaṃ yathā tāmraṃ tannibhaṃ jāyate tathā.
rūpādīn vyāpnuvaccittaṃ tannibhaṃ dṛśyate dhruvam (4.28).
The external objects assume a particular form. For this, he gives an example. He gives the
example of how they make the idol. First, the idol-maker makes a mould and thereafter
the metal is melted; the molten metal does not have its own intrinsic shape but then they
pour it into that mould. The moment it comes in contact with the mould it gets solidified.
After sometime, they remove the mould and get the metal in the form of the idol that they
want. When the formless metal fills up to contact with the mould, it gets the shape of the
mould.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 307

The thought is compared to the molten metal and the mould is compared to the object
outside; the moment they come into contact, the formless thought assumes the form of the
object. Viṣayākāra vṛtti is the idol you get in the metal form. Similarly, the mental thought
that does not have a form by itself, coming in contact with the external sense object, gets
the form of the object. That thought assumes the similar shape like ghaṭākāra vṛtti, sparśa-
ākāra vṛtti, etc. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya (who is quoted) gives another example in the next śloka.

śloka 29
व्यञ्जको वा यथा लोको व्यङ्ग्यस्याकारतामियात्।
सर्वार्थव्यञ्जकत्वाद्धीरर्थाकारा प्रदृश्यते ॥ ४.२९ ॥
vyañjako vā yathā loko vyaṅgyasyākāratāmiyāt.
sarvārthavyañjakatvāddhīrarthākārā pradṛśyate (4.29).
In the second example, the thought is compared to light. From the flame of a candle, the
light pervades the room. If the room is a square room, the light pervading the room will be
as though of the square shape of the room. If the room is round in shape, the light also will
take the same shape. Similarly, the thought also will take the shape of the object. The light
takes the shape of the illumined object. The object has a shape of its own, but the light does
not have a shape its own. Our thought is a unique light. Local light cannot illumine the
sound or smell but the mental light can illumine smell, rūpa, rasa, gandha, etc. More in the
next class.

Class 8
śloka 29 contd.
Jīva-dvaita-sṛṣṭi is being talked about and Vidyāraṇya establishes that there is jīva-dvaita
within the mind of everyone when one experiences the external world. It is not a mere
mental projection and even when we experience an outer universe, correspondingly, an
inner world is formed. If the inner world is not formed, one will not experience the
external world at all. Corresponding to bāhya prapañca there is antara prapañca also.
How the internal world is formed, Vidyāraṇya explains in these verses by taking the two
examples.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 308

First was the molten metal being poured into a mould; metal does not have a shape but
when melted, it assumes the form when poured into the mould. The thought does not
have any shape, but as even the object with which one comes in contact with, the formless
thought assumes the form of the object. The thought assumes the form, the experience of
the person takes place and then the next object comes and the thought takes the new
shape. The mind has viṣaya-ākāra-vṛtti and this one, we call the internal world-vṛtti. As
many people are there so many internal pots are there when at pot is seen. The additional
attribute of priya-ghaṭa, apriya-ghaṭa, etc., is added to the object by the antara-thought of
the jīva. After giving the molten metal example, Vidyāraṇya gives the second example of
dīpa-prakāśa.
Any prakāśa does not have a shape of its own. The bulb has a shape. But we talk about the
spreading prakāśa the light and that formless light, when it comes in contact with the
body, assumes the shape of that body. The light pervades the enclosure and whatever be
shape of the enclosure, the light takes the same shape. If you make the enclosure small, the
light becomes smaller. If the enclosure is square, the light is also square. If the enclosure is
big the light is also big. In the same way, just as the formless light assumes the field of the
object in which it is, the formless thought takes the shape of the object. In the case of the
mind, there is a superiority. The local prakāśa can take the shape of a perceptible object
alone. You cannot say that sūrya prakāśa will come in contact with the sound and will
assume the form of sound. The prakāśa can function only the field of form. It takes the
shape of the form. Prakāśa will function only in that field but the mind can come out of all
the five sense-organs. It can assume sparśa-ākāra vṛtti, gandha-ākāra vṛtti, etc. Therefore,
he tells in the second line, the thought of the mind or buddhi-vṛtti the uniqueness of
buddhi-vṛtti has sarvārthavyañjakatva.
Vyañjaka means illuminator. It assumes the form of the object to be illumined either
śabda-ākāra, rasa-ākāra, gandha-ākāra or rūpa-ākāra, etc. The mind assumes. We see
experience the various senses. If the consciousness directly illumines the object, you can
sleep in the class and you don’t require the mind. If consciousness is not directly
illumining, the mind’s presence is required. The mind is involved in the illumination of
the object. We need caitanya and manovṛtti to identify the object. Why do we need
formation of that? If thought is not required, suppose you are in the class; the mind is
there and imagine you think of someone else at home. Then my speech will go into deaf

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 309

ears. Even if the mind is there, the knowledge will not take place and that is why we need
the third item, vṛtti. Every perception needs consciousness, mind and particular vṛtti to
identify the object. Even for Brahma-jñāna it is not enough that we have consciousness, the
mind and antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti is required. That is why we say that sitting in meditation and
removing the mind and thought will not give any knowledge, but you will get rest and
relaxation. Removing the mind and thought will not produce any knowledge. Thought is
generated by the respective sense-organ.
These are the two verses quoted from Upadesa-sāhasri and now Vidyāraṇya wants to take
the support of Sureśvarācārya’s Mānasollāsa commentary 3.6 on Dakṣiṇāmūrti-stotra.

śloka 30
मातुर्मानाभिनिष्पत्तिर्निष्पन्नं मेयमेति तत्।
मेयाभिसंगतं तच्च मेयाभत्वं प्रपद्यते ॥ ४.३० ॥
māturmānābhiniṣpattirniṣpannaṃ meyameti tat.
meyābhisaṃgataṃ tacca meyābhatvaṃ prapadyate (4.30).
Three words he uses in this śloka: mātā, mānam and meyam. Mātā means pramātā; mind
along with reflected consciousness is pramātā or antaḥkaraṇa-sahita-cidābhāsa is called
pramātā. The second word is mānam, cidābhāsa-sahita antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti is pramāṇa. And
the third one is prameya which means external object of knowledge. You can imagine the
torch light and the beam of light illumining the object. Torch light is the source of beam,
the beam light goes out and the beam of light comes in contact with the object; pramātā is
the torch light and it remains within the body. But from torch light, a beam of light, the
antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti goes out and cakṣuḥ-vṛtti, rasa-vṛtti, tvak-vṛtti and vṛttis are possible in
five different places and this pramāṇa-vṛtti comes in contact with prameya and the
formless pramāṇa-vṛtti assumes the shape of the prameya. That is the essence of the śloka.
Antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti reaches the property of the object. The thought is shapeless but it takes
the shape of the object as soon as the thought reaches the object like the water assuming
the shape when poured into the shape of the vessel. In my mind, there is an internal object
and in your mind also an internal object is there. As many persons are there so many
internal objects are there. Thought object is jīva-dvaita.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 310

śloka 31
सत्येवं विषयौ द्वौ स्तो घटौ मृण्मयधीमयौ ।
मृण्मयो मानमेयः स्यात्साक्षिभाष्यस्तु धीमयः ॥ ४.३१ ॥
satyevaṃ viṣayau dvau sto ghaṭau mṛṇmayadhīmayau.
mṛṇmayo mānameyaḥ syātsākṣibhāṣyastu dhīmayaḥ (4.31).
Now he comes to the conclusion that there are two objects simultaneously existing; one is
an external physical object and the other is an internal mental object. This is the
mechanism behind every perception. There are two pots; one external and another internal
and external pot is made up of clay as clay is the material cause while the internal pot is
made up of thought. Just as we can have clay-pot, silver-pot, etc., in each, the material
cause varies while the internal pot is made up of thought, or vṛtti-maya prapañca or
manomaya prapañca. Maya is used with the material cause; the pot-maker is not the
material cause, but the clay is the material cause, so mṛnmaya-ghaṭaḥ mṛdupādāna-
kāraṇaka-ghaṭaḥ and manomaya-ghaṭaḥ mana-upādāna-kāraṇaka- ghaṭaḥ.
Then the question is how do we recognize these two pots? What is the epistemological
principle? What is the theory behind the recognition of these two pots?
We recognize the external clay pot by vṛtti and vṛtti being pramāṇa it is pramāṇa-bhāsya
while the internal pot, the pot made up of thought, is recognized directly by śākṣi-
caitanya. All the internal events are known by śākṣī. All your emotions are śākṣi-bhāsya. I
have got rāga, dvesa, kāma, krodha, etc, and all are śākṣi-bhāsya; I don’t require any
sensory perception to know my mind. All the processes are not required and these
perceptions are recognized by the Śākṣi-caitanya. As even the anger comes, you know and
you need work for it. We will study this elaborately in the eighth chapter of Pañcadaśī.
Internal objects are illumined by śākṣī. Śākṣī is svayam-prakāśa.
The external clay pot is illumined by pramāṇa. The internal pot made of thought is
illumined by śākṣī directly. Our entire dream world is śākṣi-bhāsya .

śloka 32
अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां धीमयो जीवबन्धकृ त्।
सत्यस्मिन्सुखदुःखे स्तस्तस्मिन्नसति न द्वयम्॥ ४.३२ ॥
anvayavyatirekābhyāṃ dhīmayo jīvabandhakṛt.
satyasminsukhaduḥkhe stastasminnasati na dvayam (4.32).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 311

With the previous verse the jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita topic is over. Now we enter the next topic.
Vidyāraṇya wants to show jīva-dvaita is the cause of saṃśāra. This topic goes up to verse
37. The one in whose presence we have saṃśāra and in whose absence we don’t have
saṃśāra reveals that jīva-dvaita alone is the cause of saṃśāra. If you prove co-presence
and co-absence of two things you prove kārya-kāraṇa-sambandha. By application of
anvaya co-presence reasoning and vyatireka co-absence reasoning, the internal mental
dvaita alone is established as the cause of bondage for jīva. When the internal jīva-dvaita is
present in the waking and dream states, we suffer saṃśāra. In the dream state, the internal
dvaita is generated by impressions collected in jāgṛt and the internal dvaita is generated in
svapna by the mind and vāsanā. When there is manomaya prapañca we experience
pleasure and pains called saṃśāra. This is called anvaya reasoning. In deep sleep state,
when the internal manomaya prapañca is dissolved, we don’t think of any business or any
problem. This is vyatireka reasoning.
Now he will apply the same principle to the external world and see whether it works or
not. Then our conclusion is that external world is not the cause of saṃśāra. Its presence
and absence do not make any difference to sukha and duḥkha.

śloka 33
असत्यपि च बाह्यार्थे स्वप्नादौ बध्यते नरः ।
समाधिसुप्तिमूर्च्छासु सत्यप्यस्मिन्न बध्यते ॥ ४.३३ ॥
asatyapi ca bāhyārthe svapnādau badhyate naraḥ.
samādhisuptimūrcchāsu satyapyasminna badhyate (4.33).
The anyava is applied in the second line with regard to Īśvara-dvaita. When a person
withdrawn from the external world in the deep sleep state or when a person is in swoon
imagine a cobra runs over his body. Normally, on seeing a cockroach he will run away but
when it runs over him when he is sleep state, etc., the co-presence does not work and he
does not have any fear. Bāhya prapañca and saṃśāra do not coexist and therefore, anvaya
does not apply. This person does not experience saṃśāra and anvaya does not work. In
the case of vyatireka we can take our own rope-snake example. Actual cobra is absent and
still a person experiences duḥkha even in the absence of the actual source of fear. Only
when the cobra is in the mind it causes fear and even when the cobra is absent outside but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 312

even when cobra is not there, he is afraid. This vyatireka is also not working and that is
said in the first line. This we will see in the next class.

Class 9
śloka 33 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talked about both Īśvara- and jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and now he wants to point out
that the external Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita is not the cause of bondage while jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita is
the cause of bondage. For that purpose, he uses well-known anvaya logic. Simultaneous
absence and presence are two things.
You show simultaneous presence the anvaya and simultaneous absence the vyatireka to
prove that in the case of jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita alone is the cause of saṃśāra. This he showed in
the verse number 32. In jāgṛt-avasthā and svapna-avasthā the internal jīva-dvaita is
present and we have saṃśāra in the form of sukha and duḥkha, etc. When we take to
suṣupti analysis, we find in sleep, jīva-dvaita is absent and saṃśāra is also absent and
sukha-duḥkha are not there; in fact, nearest example for mokṣa is deep sleep.
Now in the 33rd verse Vidyāraṇya points out that when we apply this logic in the case of
Īśvara-sṛṣṭi, both anvaya and vyatireka do not work. Īśvara-dvaita-bhāve saṃśāra bhāvaḥ
that we should show. In the case of suṣupti when we apply anvaya this does not work; in
suṣupti the external world exists but we don’t experience. We go to sleep happily because
when we wake up the whole thing that existed before going to sleep are safely there.
In sleep bāhya prapañca exists yet I don’t experience sukha, duḥkha, bhaya, etc. Therefore,
anvaya-vyāpti is violated. Now we will apply vyatireka. But in svapna-avasthā bāhya
prapañca even though we don’t experience the external world, a person experiences
saṃśāra caused by internal world. Vyatireka is also violated in svapna-avasthā.
In suṣupti, in samādhi and in unconscious state, even when bāhya prapañca is there, a
person is not bound and therefore, it is concluded with regard to Īśvara-dvaita anvaya-
vyatireka does not function but in the case of jīva-dvaita anvaya-vyatireka functions.
Before dealing with this verse, first I will answer a doubt raised by one of the students in
the śloka 33. In this verse Vidyāraṇya wanted to establish that the external objects are not
the cause of bondage because it cannot be established in anvaya-vyatireka logic. To show
that, Vidyāraṇya took the experience of the dream and sleep. In dream, even when the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 313

external objects are absent one experiences bondage and in sleep even when the external
objects are present the person is not bound. In the first line, external object is absent and in
the sleep it is present. How do we say so since there is a contradiction?
The external object is present in sleep and absent in dream if you go by experience, the
external object is absent both in dream and sleep. If you go by factual condition not by our
experience, external object is very much present both in dream and sleep. But Vidyāraṇya
makes a mischievous statement in dream external object is absent and in sleep the object is
present; how it is possible? Add an adjective bandha-kāraṇa-bhūta-bāhyārtha. What he
wants to show in these two statement is not proving the presence or absence of the
external world but he wants to show that the external world is not the cause of bondage.
During dream, the external world is actually there. I am lying on cot and fan is moving
and other people may be there or not even though I am not aware of it. In the external
world, there is no disturbing external objects like snake, robber or wild animals, etc. In
dream, one gets anxiety, fear etc., even though the fear-causing external objects are not
there. From that, it is clear that it is not the external object but the dreamer is bound by
fear despite the absence of external objects. In suṣupti, Vidyāraṇya argues that even
though the sleeper is surrounded by all the objects, still he is free from fear. Therefore,
despite the presence of external objects, he is free from fear. The second line reveals
anvaya-failure and the first line reveals vyatireka-failure. Anyway, the conclusion is that
the external world is not the cause of bondage but what is inside is the cause of bondage.

śloka 34
दूरदेशं गते पुत्रे जीवत्येवात्र तत्पिता ।
विप्रलम्भकवाक्येन मृतं मत्वा प्ररोदिति ॥ ४.३४ ॥
dūradeśaṃ gate putre jīvatyevātra tatpitā.
vipralambhakavākyena mṛtaṃ matvā praroditi (4.34).
He gives an example: suppose a person has a son who is living far away. Let us take he is
in US. Fortunately, that boy is very much alive and there is no problem. There is false
news from some person deliberately or because of wrong information that the son has
died in an accident, although the death news is not real. Even though the information is
false, either deliberately or due to ignorance, the son has died for the father. In Īśvara-sṛṣṭi

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 314

putra-maraṇa has not taken place. In his own world the putra-maraṇa event has taken
place. The father is affected by jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita alone and Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita has not come
to his rescue. Jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita alone has affected the father and not Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita.

śloka 35
मृतेऽपि तस्मिन्वार्तायामश्रुतायां न रोदिति ।
अतः सर्वस्य जीवस्य बन्धकृ न्मानसं जगत्॥ ४.३५ ॥
mṛte:'pi tasminvārtāyāmaśrutāyāṃ na roditi.
ataḥ sarvasya jīvasya bandhakṛnmānasaṃ jagat (4.35).
Now let us reverse the situation. Let us assume that actually the boy has died in an
accident and here the putra-maraṇa is part of the objective thing. Here, they don’t want to
tell the news deliberately to avoid the disturbance in some ongoing function. He wants for
the whole event to end. The father enjoys the function so well because he has not got the
news. For him, putra is alive but in Īśvara-sṛṣṭi, putra-maraṇa has taken place. Although in
Īśvara-sṛṣṭi, the death event has taken place, here also the person’s response depends on
jīva-sṛṣṭi alone. In jīva-sṛṣṭi here, the putra is alive but in the case of Īśvara-sṛṣṭi putra is
dead. When the news has not yet been heard by the unfortunate father, the father does not
cry at all and he talks about the boy also happily. The cause of sukha and duḥkha is not
the external world, but it is the internal world. Vidyāraṇya says the whole thing is in the
mind alone that makes sukha and duḥkha and not the external Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. It is the
internal world that is the cause of bondage and we so, have to learn to handle the internal
world. What is practical is to handle the internal world. We cannot handle the external
world. Therefore, correct yourself but don’t correct the external world.

śloka 36
विज्ञानवादो बाह्यार्थवैयर्थ्यात्स्यादिहेति चेत्।
न हृद्याकारमाधातुं बाह्यस्यापेक्षितत्त्वतः ॥ ४.३६ ॥
vijñānavādo bāhyārthavaiyarthyātsyādiheti cet.
na hṛdyākāramādhātuṃ bāhyasyāpekṣitattvataḥ (4.36).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 315

Here, Vidyāraṇya raises a technical question and answers in the next verse. It is purely an
academic and subtle topic. It is based on an important principle of some people. They say
utility is the criterion for reality. This condition is based on our common experience that
all dream-experience we consider as unreal for we are not able to utilize the dream objects.
Similarly, mirage water we experience but we cannot use the water. Therefore, it is unreal.
Therefore, they make the law yad yad niṣprayojanam tad tad mithyā. They say the
external world is not useful or the cause of sukha and duḥkha or any result for the human
being for it does not produce any sukha or duḥkha since jīva-dvaita is responsible for
pleasure and pains. Therefore, external world is niṣprayojana because all our sukha-
duḥkhas are caused by jīva-dvaita. Therefore, they indirectly assert the external world is
niṣprayojana and therefore, external world becomes unreal. When he claims external
world as unreal what he means that it is prātibhāsika-satya and Pūrvapakṣa says if we
accept this theory that jīva-dvaita alone as the cause of sukha-duḥkha, the conclusion is
that Īśvara-dvaita, external world, is prātibhāsika-satya. This is the conclusion of
Pūrvapakṣa. If Vedānta comes to this conclusion that the external world is prātibhāsika-
satya, then Vedānta will become equal to kṣaṇika-vijñāna-vāda Buddhism because they
say external world is a mental projection. Therefore, it is like a dream and prātibhāsika-
satya. It is only a subjective reality. If Vedānta also tells the same thing, then Vedānta will
become a kṣaṇika-vijñāna-vāda and you will become a Buddhist. This is the Pūrvapakṣa
argument.
In your teaching, the external world Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita becomes useless or niṣprayojana
because it is useless and it is unreal and prātibhāsika-satya like the dream, etc. If you say
so, you will become a Buddhist. [refer to Māṇḍūkya kārikā 2.2.28 to 32 for details
discussed on this subject] We say that the external world is needed for the formation or
generation of jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and therefore, external world is useful and therefore, it is
real and being vyāvahārika-satya, it is not prātibhāsika-satya. Pūrvapakṣa-argument is not
correct. The external world is required, useful and it is very much saprayojana and not
niṣprayojana. In the mind, to generate an image or thought you require Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita.
Jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita is the cause of bondage. Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita is not totally useless as it is
needed to create jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and therefore, we are not kṣaṇika-vijñāna-vādīs. We
don’t say the world is a mental projection. Vedānta does not accept their view that the
world is a projection of the mind. In Kaivalya Upaniṣad, the Vedāntin claims that world

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 316

emerged out of me, rests in me and resolves in me; then what is the difference between
kṣaṇika-vijñāna and Vedānta? In Vedānta, when we say world is our projection it is not of
the mind but it is the projection of the Ātmā. When you say that the world is a projection
of the mind, it is Buddhism but when you say that the world is a projection of Ātmā, it is
Vedānta. Even after the fall of mind, the world will remain there and therefore, the world
is useful and therefore, it is real.

śloka 37
वैयार्थ्यमस्तु वा बाह्यं न वारयितुमीश्महे ।
प्रयोजनमपेक्षन्ते न मानानिति हि स्थितिः ॥ ४.३७ ॥
vaiyārthyamastu vā bāhyaṃ na vārayitumīśmahe.
prayojanamapekṣante na mānāniti hi sthitiḥ (4.37).
There is another objection that Vidyāraṇya assumes and answers. What he says you
Advaitins say that the mental projections are based on Īśvara-dvaita and we require an
external world for the formation of the image. In the case of rope-snake we have the vision
of snake even when there is no snake outside. Why do we need external world to form an
image as we have experience wherein we experience rope-snake even when there is no
snake outside? Here, the mind gets the image of the snake without the external snake
because of pūrva-vāsanā. Therefore, jīva-dvaita can be caused by pūrva-vāsanā. Anadi-
vāsanā-janya-jīva-sṛṣṭi is possible without Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. So Īśvara-sṛṣṭi is niṣprayojana for it
is not required for forming the image also. Our conclusion is according to your theory
Īśvara-sṛṣṭi is niṣprayojana and therefore, it is prātibhāsika.
Vidyāraṇya says: let us assume that the external world is niṣprayojana. It is not useful for
forming the image and the internal world is formed because of the pūrva-vāsanā. He says
even if it is niṣprayojana you cannot say it is unreal because reality does not depend upon
utility and the world is revealed by pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Still, you have to accept
vyāvahārika-satya because even though it is useless, it is revealed by pañca pratyakṣa
pramāṇa and what is revealed as pramāṇa is reality whether it is useful or not. The utility
is not the criterion for reality as whatever is revealed by pramāṇa is a fact. External world
is revealed by pratyakṣa.
For argument sake, let us assume the external world has no utility. Then Vidyāraṇya says
still even if it is useless we cannot negate the reality of the external world or vyāvahārika-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 317

satya of the external world because it is revealed by pratyakṣa pramāṇa. When I see you
sitting in front of me how can I say it is mental projection? We don’t accept the idealism of
the Buddhist. We cannot negate the external world because the sense-organs perceive the
external world. Now Pūrvapakṣa comes up with another objection.
Here we talk about the definition of a pramāṇa, a valid means of knowledge. It is a source
of knowledge. While defining a pramāṇa, it is said that the means of knowledge is that
which reveals a unique thing which is not revealed by any other means of knowledge. The
eyes reveal the colour which the ears cannot, nose cannot and tongue cannot. The entire
varṇa-prapañca is knowable only through the eyes. A blind person can use other sense-
organs as they cannot help him to know the colour. It is irreplaceable. Not only has it
revealed something which cannot be negated by another sense-organ, but it can neither
confirm nor contradict. The ears cannot confirm the colour nor the ears can contradict the
colour-knowledge of the eye. The sound of the ears cannot be challenged by the eyes or by
any other pramāṇa. In this definition, some people add one more condition especially
pūrva-mīmāṃsā people. The Vedas reveal something which is unknowable and
unnegatable by any other pramāṇa and they reveal something that is useful. Here
Pūrvapakṣa takes that definition and he argues that if you say external world is useless, it
will mean a useless external world is revealed by pratyakṣa. If pratyakṣa pramāṇa reveals
a useless world and according to pramāṇa one condition is missing and therefore,
pratyakṣa will become apramāṇa if you accept the world as useless. Vidyāraṇya says take
a break for a week and we will answer in the next class.

Class 10
śloka 37 contd.
Vidyāraṇya takes a diversion and answers a technical question which we saw partially in
the last class. External world is not the cause of bondage. The objection was that the
external world is vyartha useless for it does not contribute anything in any manner. If it is
useless it will come under imagination category like the mirage water. Just as useless
mirage water is categorised as prātibhāsika-satya the external world also will be
categorized as prātibhāsika-satya. Vidyāraṇya says you cannot say that the external world

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 318

is useless as it indirectly useful to create the internal world which produces sukha-duḥkha.
You cannot say it is useless and unreal.
The second answer he gives is that even though external world is useless, you cannot say
it is prātibhāsika as what is revealed by a pramāṇa cannot be said to be prātibhāsika. It is
not external projection but it is a fact. It is vyavahāra because it is revealed by pratyakṣa
pramāṇa even though it is useless. That was said in the first line in this verse.
We cannot negate the external world as unreal as it is revealed by pratyakṣa pramāṇa.
Now Pūrvapakṣa raises another question which I introduced in the last class. If you say
that the external world is revealed by pratyakṣa pramāṇa, the problem is that pratyakṣa
pramāṇa will lose the status of pramāṇa and it will became invalid. It will become
apramāṇa.
According to him, a pramāṇa is a pramāṇa only when it reveals a unique and useful
entity. Pratyakṣa pramāṇa is a pramāṇa only when it reveals a prayojana vastu. This
definition of pramāṇa is given by pūrva mamasaka. The basic statements are valid
pramāṇa only if it reveals something uselful especially in the context of Vedas. Veda is
valid pramāṇa only if it reveals something useful.
This definition of pramāṇa given by pūrva Mīmāṃsaka we do not accept because the
condition of utility is not required for validity of a pramāṇa. A pramāṇa is a pramāṇa
whether it reveals a useful entity or useless entity. There is a patch in the wall and you see
it. The patch is useless but eyes are valid in revealing the patch on the wall. You cannot
say that the eyes are useful with regard to the wall but it is useless with regard to the
patch.
Fact is a fact whether the fact is useful to me or not. ‘Factness’ of a fact does not depend
upon the usefulness or not. A comb cannot be said to be not a fact to the bald man because
comb is not useful to him. A comb is a factual entity whether it is useful or useless.
Therefore, what the pramāṇa reveals is a fact whether the fact is useful or not and
pramāṇa is valid. Therefore, the external world is a fact whether it is useful or useless
world as sense-organs are a valid pramāṇa whether it reveals useless or useful entity. The
condition of prayojana is not required. In fact, we read a lot of news and many things we
read is not useful to us; yet the newspaper is a valid source of news. Jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita is
cause of bondage and not Īśvara-dvaita.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 319

śloka 38
बन्धश्चेन्मानसं द्वैतं तन्निरोधेन शाम्यति ।
अभ्यासेद्योगमेवातो ब्रह्मज्ञानेन किं वद ॥ ४.३८ ॥
bandhaścenmānasaṃ dvaitaṃ tannirodhena śāmyati.
abhyāsedyogamevāto brahmajñānena kiṃ vada (4.38).
Now, we enter the next topic which is the main topic of this chapter and it is Advaita jñānena jīva-
dvaita-nivṛttiḥ and jīva-dvaita-nivṛttyā saṃśāra-nivṛttiḥ. This topic goes up to the śloka number 66.
advaita-jñāna alone is the remedy for saṃśāra-nivṛtti. Here Pūrvapakṣa says you don’t need advaita-
jñāna for jīva-dvaita-nivṛtti. This is the argument number one and later he will argue and Advaita-
jñāna is not possible. Vidyāraṇya has to establish that there is no other method and Advaita-jñāna
alone will remove dvaita and saṃśāra.
Pūrvapakṣa says jīva-dvaita is the cause of the problem. We have see jīva-dvaita is in the
mind in the form of vṛtti. Everything we experience the world, the world obtains in the
mind in the form of a thought like the molten metal assuming the form of the object. So I
have all the vṛttis and it is the thought which is called jīva-dvaita in the form of thoughts.
If you say jīva-dvaita is the cause of bondage, it means vṛttis are the cause of bondage.
Therefore, jīva-dvaita-nivṛtti means vṛtti-nivṛtti. Vṛtti-nivṛtti can be accomplished through
aṣṭāṅga yoga abhyāsa given by Patañjali Maharṣi. Yoga is stoppage of the citta-vṛtti and
nirvikalpa samādhi is the culmination, reaching which I get freedom from vṛtti and when
the vṛtti goes the saṃśāra is gone. “Would it not be good that you attend yoga class
instead of your class?” is the question posed by the Pūrvapakṣa.
He says yoga exercise reduces many thoughts to one thought and by getting involved in
that ultimately you are free from that thought also and you gain nirvikalpaka samādhi.
This samādhi will free you from saṃśāra and he says aṣṭāṅga yoga is the solution to
saṃśāra-nivṛtti. He also says there is no use of study of prasthānatraya, etc. Even now
some believe in meditation, thought elimination, realization and freedom. Even many
Vedāntins have mistaken yoga for Veda and Yoga for mokṣa. Everyone wants to empty
the mind and this is the biggest Pūrvapakṣa as it is popular as Vedāntic study. This is the
argument of the Pūrvapakṣa.

śloka 39
तात्कालिक द्वैतशान्तावप्यागामीजनीक्षयः ।
ब्रह्मज्ञानं विना न स्यादिति वेदान्तडिण्डिमः ॥ ४.३९ ॥
tātkālika dvaitaśāntāvapyāgāmījanīkṣayaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 320

brahmajñānaṃ vinā na syāditi vedāntaḍiṇḍimaḥ (4.39).

Vidyāraṇya proclaims Vedāntic study is different from yoga, yoga is meditation-pradhāna
and Vedānta is scriptural-study-highlighted. No doubt yoga-abhyāsa will help you
eliminate thought in nivikalpaka samādhi if you practice yoga. In nirvikalpaka samādhi
you will be free from thought. Manovṛtti-śānti will take place but the problem is: how long
will you sit in samādhi! You cannot sit in samādhi lifelong for prārabdha will not allow
you to sit quiet. A person interacts with you because of the prārabdha of both. Meditator is
getting problem because his own prārabdha as also prārabdha of the family members.
Prārabdha of both will not allow him to be under samādhi and waking up will be more
miserable like a person coming out of an air-conditioned room to sunlight. After samādhi,
coming out will be a greater problem than otherwise. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya wants
temporary nirvikalpaka samādhi.
Suppose a person argues by doing prayer, etc., I will adjust prārabdha in such a way that I
can sit in nirvikalpaka samādhi throughout my life. According to them some people can
sit in samādhi throughout the life. Even the birds build nest in the beard, etc., and he does
not know what happens to him, etc. This only leads to further misconception. Constantly
sitting in samādhi will not help you get mokṣa. Even assuming you have a blessed
prārabdha to sit in nirvikalpaka samādhi throughout this life, you have only avoided the
prārabdha by yoga-abhyāsa. What will you do with your sañcita karma as it will not go by
yoga abhyāsa? Samādhi cannot destroy sañcita karma and it can be destroyed only
through jñāna.
Yoga-abhyāsa gives temporary mokṣa and it will not give you liberation from birth-death-
cycle. How can you destroy sañcita karma! Therefore, jñāna alone give you liberation and
this jñāna you can gain only through Vedāntic study. The future jīva-dvaita or saṃśāra
cannot be avoided by samādhi. Here, future has two meaning one is after getting up from
samādhi in this janma itself and also you cannot avoid jīva-dvaita in the next janma. Only
remedy is Brahma-jñāna which alone will give you the final liberation from all the karmas
and futures janmas. In samādhi, you may get only rest and relaxation but not liberation. It
will not solve saṃśāra-problem. If someone says I do yoga as a preparation for Vedāntic
study, we accept it as a stepping stone for Vedāntic study and not as replacement for
Vedāntic study. “So says Vedas” declares Vidyāraṇya in this śloka. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 321

Class 11
śloka 39 contd.
After introducing jīva and Īśvara-sṛṣṭi, Vidyāraṇya established that jīva-sṛṣṭi alone is the
cause of bondage. Īśvara-dvaita is not bandha-hetu. For attaining mokṣa, we have to
remove only jīva-sṛṣṭi and we need not eliminate Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. Therefore, in the following
verses beginning from the last śloka, jīva-sṛṣṭi-hāna through Brahma-jñāna alone is the
means of liberation. This jīva-sṛṣṭi-hāna is to be accomplished through Brahma-jñāna
alone. This is the main subject matter of this chapter.
Some people suggest that we can use some other method for jīva-sṛṣṭi-hāna and ask as to
why should we go through tougher Brahma-jñāna route? Why sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti and why śravaṇa, manana, nididhyāsana, etc., and gain jñāna when easier
method of yoga is there? Is it not yoga-samādhi a shorter and easy option for liberation
instead of tougher method of Brahma-jñāna study?
For this, Vidyāraṇya says yoga cannot independently solve the problem. Skipping
Brahma-jñāna, Vidyāraṇya says, will not work. Even if you remain in samādhi for some
time, you cannot be there all the time. Sañcita karma will not be destroyed through yoga.
All the yogas and parihāra can handle only prārabdha pāpa while sañcita karma cannot be
destroyed by any amount of puṇya karma.
Jñāna alone can destroy all the karmas: āgāmi, sañcita and prārabdha. For this,
Pūrvapakṣa comes with a new question. He does not accept jñāna will give mokṣa for
jñāna itself is not possible because Brahma-jñāna means advaita-jñāna. In the śāstra
Brahman is defined as Advaita. Attaining Brahma-jñāna means attaining advaita-jñāna
and it is not possible as long as dvaita jagat is in existence. When there is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and
dvaita prapañca in front of you how can you say aham advaita asmi? Therefore, to get
advaita-jñāna you have to eliminate dvaita. You may not remove Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita as it
does not cause bondage all right but you have to remove jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and even though
the former does not cause bondage, it will be an obstacle for gaining advaita-jñāna because
as long as dvaita is there advaita is not possible.
Therefore, you will have a tough project to get Ātma-jñāna. You have to eliminate Īśvara-
sṛṣṭa dvaita because creation is so huge. Īśvara alone can resolve dvaita prapañca. How
can you remove all Īśvara-sṛṣṭi? For jīva-dvaita-nivṛtti you need advaita-jñāna and for
Īśvara-dvaita-nivṛtti is impossible; therefore, advaita-jñāna is not possible and therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 322

you cannot remove jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and hence you cannot remove saṃśāra and if you
cannot remove saṃśāra, mokṣa you cannot attain. Therefore, your method is
impracticable. This Pūrvapakṣa objection is not written in this śloka here. He assumes
Pūrvapakṣa and for this assumed Pūrvapakṣa, Vidyāraṇya answers in the next śloka.

śloka 40
अनिवृत्तेऽपीशसृष्टे द्वैते तस्य मृषात्मताम्।
बुद्ध्वा ब्रह्माद्वयं बोद्धुं शक्यं वस्त्वैक्यवादिना ॥ ४.४० ॥
anivṛtte:'pīśasṛṣṭe dvaite tasya mṛṣātmatām.
buddhvā brahmādvayaṃ boddhuṃ śakyaṃ vastvaikyavādinā (4.40).
It is an important answer. Pūrvapakṣa said advaita-jñāna needs elimination of Īśvara-sṛṣṭa
dvaita for it is an obstacle for Advaita. It is like light and darkness, the removal of one is
the fall of the other. Vidyāraṇya says Advaita does not need the removal of dvaita
prapañca. In fact removal of Advaita prapañca is not possible.
Advaita-jñāna does not require to removal of the dvaita prapañca or the perception of
dvaita prapañca; let dvaita continue and dvaita-experience continue as we are not afraid
and we do not want to remove it. In the experienced-dvaita-prapañca we have got
satyatva-buddhi, we have a wrong notion that it is satya. Satyatva of dvaita prapañca is
our misconception or the superimposition.
The experience of sunrise is there but our problem is not experience of sunrise and our
problem is sunrise seen as a fact. It is an intellectual problem and not an external problem.
I have to get educated and enlightened in spite of the experience of the sunrise it is not a
fact, because experience is not a proof for the reality.
The stationery earth is an experience but it is not a fact. We need not remove dvaita-
experience. The superimposition of reality on dvaita prapañca is my wrong conclusion.
Therefore, remove the satyatva notion through Ātma-jñāna. This can be done by śāstra-
vicāra. When you pluck the superimposition then what is left is mithyā prapañca. Once
you know that it is mithyā dvaita and it is not opposite to Advaita. No unreal reality can
disturb reality as unreal reality cannot be counted.
Dream-music cannot be recorded and dream-sound cannot disturb the silence of higher
plane. Vyāvahārika dvaita will not disturb pāramārthika Advaita and therefore, I can gain
pāramārthika dvaita-jñāna even though I continue to experience vyāvahārika dvaita.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 323

Mithyā rope-snake is negated by pratyakṣa pramāṇa. The false snake gets eliminated by a
torch light. Dvaita prapañca is negated by śāstra pramāṇa. This we see in Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad as also in Kaṭha Upaniṣad. Advaita Brahman is possible even while
experiencing the universe. Samādhi is not required for advaita-jñāna. Vidyāraṇya says
there is no need of samādhi to gain Ātma-jñāna and to realise Advaita Brahman.
Pāramārthika Advaita teaching alone will give mokṣa without removing Īśvara-sṛṣṭi.

śloka 41
प्रलये तन्निवृत्तौ तु गुरुशास्त्राद्यभावतः ।
विरोधिद्वैताभावेऽपि न शक्यं बोद्धुमद्वयम्॥ ४.४१ ॥
pralaye tannivṛttau tu guruśāstrādyabhāvataḥ.
virodhidvaitābhāve:'pi na śakyaṃ boddhumadvayam (4.41).
Here, someone comes with an alternative suggestion offering an easy solution. With the
help of śāstra feeling mithyātva of universe is difficult. Everything is good in the class
brahma satya jagan mithyā. When we go home we cannot digest the teaching. We find it
impractical. Therefore, the easier method is you somehow wait for pralaya to come. And
you need not invite pralaya that will come some time or the other. When pralaya comes
the advantage is the entire dvaita prapañca will resolve with no obstacle for advaita-jñāna.
Let Īśvara dissolve and we will start advaita-jñāna and get mokṣa. Vidyāraṇya says in the
pralaya the entire universe will go and along with it all the instruments of knowledge also
will go. The instrument of knowledge Guru also will go and where will be śāstra! Without
them, one cannot gain knowledge. The mind in which the knowledge to take place also
will go. Any knowledge including spiritual knowledge has to take place only in the mind.
The mind is to get knowledge and so we refine the mind.
If mind is not needed to gain knowledge, why should I struggle to get sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti? sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is a process of refining the ground or the mind.
Where is the need to prepare the ground when you don’t want to bring the crop here? In
pralaya, where is Guru, śāstra, mind etc? All of them are not destroyed but are dormant.
This is the argument we give to negate the samādhi. In samādhi, we don’t get any
knowledge because Guru is not there, śāstra is not there, but the mind is stilled and when
the mind is not fuctioning, how can you get knowledge? When mind is not functioning,
with a non-functioning mind, how will get the knowledge? Let Guru be there, let śāstra be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 324

there, let mind be there and let the prapañca be there and when all are there you have to
get spiritual knowledge.
Hence pralaya is not the solution to get advaita-jñāna. The advantage we don’t question
that dvaita prapañca is resolved is the plus point but the disadvantage is along with
bathwater the baby also goes. There is no Guru, śāstra, etc, for one to gain advaita-jñāna.
Therefore, advaya or advaita-jñāna is never possible in such a situation. Jñāna is a thought
generated in the mind. So also other knowledge. Ātma-jñāna is ātmākāra-vṛtti-utpatti and
it is ahaṃ brahma asmi. It is a thought that rises in the mind. Even though there is an
advantage in pralaya, the advantage of absence of Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita, which is an obstacle
to Advaita, there is a disadvantage that along with the world, Guru and śāstra also
disappears. Therefore, waiting for pralaya is a useless exercise. In fact, we have waited for
many pralayas. Nothing has changed.

śloka 42
अबाधकं साधकं च द्वैतमीश्वरनिर्मितम्।
अपनेतुमशक्यं चेत्यास्तां तद्द्विष्यते कुतः ॥ ४.४२ ॥
abādhakaṃ sādhakaṃ ca dvaitamīśvaranirmitam.
apanetumaśakyaṃ cetyāstāṃ taddviṣyate kutaḥ (4.42).
Therefore, Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita need not be eliminated, cannot be eliminated, should not be
eliminated for one to gain advaita-jñāna. Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita cannot be eliminated for it is
too big for an individual to eliminate. Alpa-śakti jīva can neither create this universe nor
he can destroy the universe. If you close your eyes you don’t destroy the world but only
you destroy jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita you eliminate. Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita need not be eliminated
because of two reasons; one is that it is not the cause of saṃśāra and so why should we
eliminate! Not only that, it need not eliminated for it is not even an obstacle for advaita-
jñāna. The obstacle to advaita-jñāna is taking the Īśvara-sṛṣṭa jñāna as satya. Dvaita is not
the pratibandha but dvaita-satya-buddhi is the obstacle. It is the wrong notion of the sṛṣṭi
that is the obstacle and therefore, you remove that wrong notion. Thirdly, Īśvara-sṛṣṭi
should not be eliminated. Now here we say it should not eliminated because it is
positively useful to gain advaita-jñāna. Guru and śāstra and even the mind are a part of
Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita. Therefore, retain the Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita, eliminate jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 325

gain advaita-jñāna and be free. Īśvara-dvaita is friendly to me to gain advaita-jñāna and

so, why should we eliminate the Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita! Let it exist.

śloka 43
जीवद्वैतं तु शास्त्रीयमशास्त्रीयमिति द्विधा ।
उपाददीता शास्त्रीयमातत्त्वस्यावबोधनात्॥ ४.४३ ॥
jīvadvaitaṃ tu śāstrīyamaśāstrīyamiti dvidhā.
upādadītā śāstrīyamātattvasyāvabodhanāt (4.43).
Attainment of mokṣa by the negation of jīva-dvaita with the help of Brahma-jñāna is the
topic and this was established until now. Brahma-jñāna is possible and it is necessary and
this Brahma-jñāna alone can work and nothing other than Brahma-jñāna will help you
gain mokṣa. Having emphasized the importance and possibility of Brahma-jñāna, now
Vidyāraṇya enters the actual topic as to what is Brahma-jñāna and what portion is to be
eliminated, etc. It will be discussed in the foregoing ślokas. Retain Īśvara-sṛṣṭi till you get
Brahma-jñāna, like retaining the skin until the banana is ripe and deciding to eat it. After
the ripening of banana, remove the skin. At the same time, you should not eat it with
banana skin. Even in jīva-dvaita certain portions are there like banana skin and after they
have done their job you have to transcend that also. All these will be discussed by
Vidyāraṇya in the later ślokas. More in the next class.

Class 12

śloka 43 contd.
After dealing with Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita and jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita, Vidyāraṇya established jīva-
dvaita alone is the cause of saṃśāra and what we need is jīva-sṛṣṭa-dvaita-nivṛtti to gain
jñāna and mokṣa. He clearly presented that Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita cannot be, need not be and
should not be eliminated. These points we discussed in the last class.
Īśvara has given śāstras also along with sṛṣṭi. Veda we don’t look upon as one system of
philosophy founded by Ādi Śaṅkarācārya or Gaudapāda as it is a source of knowledge
free from all deficiencies which otherwise belong to ordinary human intellect. Anything
propounded by human being is saduṣṭa pramāṇa and vada is nirduṣṭa pramāṇa being
created by Īśvara. Therefore, Īśvara-sṛṣṭi cannot be and should not be eliminated. There is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 326

only one thing that should be negated, that is jīva-sṛṣṭi, and one can gain jñāna to remove
the sañcita karma. Pūrvapakṣa said Brahma-jñāna will not be possible as Brahman is to be
known as Advaita and as long as the world is there, how can there be advaita-jñāna? Here,
Vidyāraṇya said that advaita-jñāna does not need to stop perception of the universe. You
need not stop perception of the world but what is needed is the elimination of falsely
attributed reality which is intellectual misconception. It is not the problem with the world
but it is intellectual misconception and the śāstra-vicāra will rectify the intellectual
misconception. Seeing the world I will perceive it but not take it as reality.
The perception of the flatness of the earth does not disturb my knowledge that the earth is
globular or spherical. The feeling that the earth is stationery or the experience of the
stationariness of the earth does not disturb my conviction that the earth is not stationery
and the knowledge cannot be upset by the opposite experience, if the knowledge is gained
by proper pramāṇa. That is how an Advaitin enjoy the knowledge that I am non-dual even
when he is confronted by dualism. It is so because the knowledge is gained out of valid
pramāṇa. We have to destroy jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita through Brahma-jñāna. It is only after
handling jīva-dvaita that the jñānī exists as jīvanmukta in the very same world where
robbers and thieves exist. Jñānī is able to look at the positive events of the universe and
also he knows to look at the unfortunate negative events. This is the introduction.
Here, Vidyāraṇya divides jīva-dvaita itself into two. They are śāstrīya jīva-dvaita and
aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. One śāstra permits in the initial stages. It is permitted jīva-dvaita; it is
relatively harmless and it acts as a stepping stone for success. Śāstrīya jīva-dvaita is śāstra-
permitted karma. The aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita should be avoided even at the initial stages.
Our goal is śāstrīya upādadītā. May you develop attachment to those things that the śāstra
permits and avoid those that śāstras don’t adopt. Attachment to śāstra, Guru, pūjā, and
Īśvara, may you encourage and nourish. He says jīva-dvaita, may you resort to. May a
seeker resort to śāstrīya jīva-dvaita. You hold on to Guru, śāstra, Īśvara attachment until
you get clear Ātma-jñāna. You should hold the pole until you cross over the bar of the pole
vault. If one says I will give up the pole now itself, it is also foolish for you cannot reach
the height without the help of the pole. It is the crossing over the pole vault bar that is
mokṣa. So you should be judicious enough to hold the pole when required and leave it at
the appropriate time to cross the bar. So also the śāstra, Guru, etc., you hold on until you
gain jñāna and leave once you become a jñānī.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 327

śloka 44
आत्मब्रह्मविचाराख्यं शास्त्रीयं मानसं जगत्।
बुद्धे तत्त्वे तच्च हेयमिति श्रुत्यनुशासनम्॥ ४.४४ ॥
tmabrahmavicārākhyaṃ śāstrīyaṃ mānasaṃ jagat.
buddhe tattve tacca heyamiti śrutyanuśāsanam (4.44).
What is the śāstrīya jīva-dvaita? He mentions one thing very clearly. He says vicārākhyaṃ
śāstrīya mānasaṃ jagat. Vedānta-vicāra or śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana one has to
develop attachment to, one should nourish that attachment and that is called śāstrīya
mānasaṃ jagat. Vedānta-vicāra means arriving at the central teachings of Vedānta. Ātma-
brahma-aikya-vicāra is the essence of Vedānta, grasping and achieving is the central
teaching. After you achieve the jñāna, gradually leave that attachment also. Even
attachment to Vedānta-vicāra should be given up. Otherwise, when the sense-organs are
not fit enough for regular reading or listening to cassettes or reading books, etc., if you
have the attachment, when the listening faculties goes you will be in a miserable state.
Therefore, śāstra is so objective and open and it says don’t get attached to me also.
Śāstra says use me and transcend me. Similarly, ideal Guru should tell that: use and
transcend me also. He alone is the perfect Guru. Even śāstrīya jīva-dvaita should be given
up. He says this is said by śāstra itself. Transcend Veda after using the Veda. Transcend
āśrama after using āśrama. That is called freedom.

śloka 45
शास्त्राण्यधीत्य मेधावी अभ्यस्य च पुनः पुनः ।
परमं ब्रह्म विज्ञाय उल्कावत्तान्यथोत्सृजेत्॥ ४.४५ ॥
śāstrāṇyadhītya medhāvī abhyasya ca punaḥ punaḥ.
paramaṃ brahma vijñāya ulkāvattānyathotsṛjet (4.45).
All these verses are quotations taken from the Upaniṣad. This is taken from amṛta-nāda
Upaniṣad. An intellect seeker like an intelligent pole vaulter will be addicted to the pole
till he reaches the top and drop the pole once he crosses the bar. So also the seeker or a
vivekī, a qualified person having sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti should study śāstra and
detach himself once he gains jñāna. When I look into the mirror I don’t see the mirror but I
see my own Self. Even though I clean the mirror the benefit is the clarity regarding my

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 328

own image. Śāstric enquiry is not an academic pursuit but to improve my own Self and
the clarity regarding my own nature. Thorough study of scriptures is needed to get clear
knowledge of my own Self. Everywhere outside we do not approve of the scriptural
study. They say Ātmā is inside and they ask why you study Pañcadaśī outside? This is a
stupid question. You see outside in the mirror and you don’t see mirror but you your o wn
Self. There is no Self-enquiry but the śāstric enquiry. Śāstric enquiry is nothing but is Self-
enquiry. One should not stop with śravaṇa and manana and should proceed to
nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana is nothing but Vedāntic meditation. You should do
nididhyāsana until you know you are free. One should get aparokṣa jñāna of parama
Brahman the limitless or absolute Brahman. Aparokṣa jñāna of Brahman means
knowledge that I am that Brahman. If you say I know Brahman means it is parokṣa jñāna
and if you know that you are Brahman it is aparokṣa jñāna. May you give up your
attachment or emotional dependence and even your intellectual dependence on the śāstra.
You may hold on to śāstra but don’t lean on the śāstra. It does not means physical giving
up but it is emotional giving up of the śāstra. I am able to hear it is wonderful and I am
unable to hear is also wonderful. Therefore, give up dependence on śāstra.

śloka 46
ग्रन्थमभ्यस्य मेधावी ज्ञानविज्ञानतत्परः ।
पलालमिव धान्यार्थी त्यजेद्ग्रन्थमशेषतः ॥ ४.४६ ॥
granthamabhyasya medhāvī jñānavijñānatatparaḥ.
palālamiva dhānyārthī tyajedgranthamaśeṣataḥ (4.46).
This idea is taken from Brahma-bindu Upaniṣad. One has to resort to śāstra-vicāra, that is
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana are included, and when he does all these things the aim
should be clear to acquire parokṣa jñāna first and aparokṣa jñāna later. May you acquire
both parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna. That means the motive is not to tell other people I
have finished Gītā, etc. it is not to tell the people that I have done and you need not even
inform others, but it is meant for our own satisfaction and not for publicity. May your
motive be clear knowledge. The knowledge is to gain pūrṇatva and not for publicity. Then
one should give up attachment to the books also. An example is also given here. One who
wants the grain like rice, one collects the paddy as he is interested in the grain inside and
having taken the rice the external husk is thrown away. Just as the person who want s the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 329

grain removes and lets off the husk, you take jñāna from the words, jñāna being the grain
and words being the husk, after taking jñāna, throw away the words like the husk. For a
jñānī Vedānta is pramāṇa or not? In this context, for jñānī, Vedānta does not serve any
purpose.

śloka 47
तमेव धीरो विज्ञाय प्रज्ञां कुर्वीत ब्राह्मणः ।
नानुध्यायाद्बहूञ्छब्दान्वाचो विग्लापनं हि तत्॥ ४.४७ ॥
tameva dhīro vijñāya prajñāṃ kurvīta brāhmaṇaḥ.
nānudhyāyādbahūñchabdānvāco viglāpanaṃ hi tat (4.47).
This is a quotation taken from Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.7. Anyone who has sattva-
guṇa is a brāhmaṇa, sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna. One should thoroughly understand
through śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana, get saṃśaya-rahita jñāna. One should
practice nididhyāsana. Once he has come to nididhyāsana level, may he give up
attachment to all the śāstric details. May you not get intellectually gutted by that.
Ultimately holding on to the means, you should not give up the end. Your attachment to
the means becomes an obstacles to gain the end. Always remember: know what is the
means and what is the end. For the sake of Vedānta in olden days they used to study other
sciences like tarka, mīmāṃsā and vyakāraṇa. Then mīmāṃsā is the method of analyzing
the sentences; that was also studied. Tarka-śāstra is logical thinking. Therefore, Veda gives
the warning don’t be interested in the knowledge of vyakāraṇa, etc, alone. May you be
alert regarding what do you want. Keep on asking once in a while and sometimes you
discover what you want and what you do are totally disconnected. This situation you
should remember well. Never lose sight of what is your aim. Jñāna is the end you should
always remember well.

Class 13
śloka 47 contd.
Brahma-jñāna is the only means through which one gains liberation. Having given this
introduction, Vidyāraṇya discusses jīva-dvaita should be eliminated. Jīva-dvaita is divided
into two; one is śāstrīya and the other is aśāstrīya. Aśāstrīya dvaita should be eliminated
first and later śāstrīya dvaita should be eliminated after gaining jñāna. It is compared to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 330

the skin of banana and the skin can and should be removed after the fruit is ripe. You
cannot say because of the skin the banana is ripe and take the fruit along with the skin.
Śāstrīya dvaita in the form of Guru and śāstra must be retained in initial stages and gain
jñāna and thereafter Guru and śāstra are not required and one should renounce both of
them later. Renunciation should not be taken in a physical sense. It is the emotional or
intellectual dependence that is talked about here and when they are dropped the Guru
and śāstra may be around or may not be around; this will not make any difference. In
support of Guru-śāstra renunciation, śāstra itself says reject me after gaining jñāna. Guru
also says don’t hang on to me eternally.
Various Upaniṣad quotations are given in support of the above statement. Brāhmaṇaḥ
dhīraḥ tam ātmānam vijñāya, after gaining jñāna through śravaṇa and manana he or she
should know not to stop with understanding but assimilate and make it part of life and
breathe Vedānta and not merely talk about it. After gaining knowledge one should make
sure one is not addicted to other śāstra like tarka, vyākaraṇa, sāṅkhya and yoga, etc. Each
śāstra is intellectually stimulating.
Even the mīmāṃsā, tarka and vyākaraṇa are so stimulating and one may get intellectually
addicted to them. These sciences are not an end in itself and it is only a means to
understand Vedānta. You may read them instead of reading other irrelevant books.
Dvaita-śāstram na anudhyeyam. One should not study other books too much. Such study
and such excessive study will lead to weaken the personality and will not benefit you.
Therefore, transcend them.

śloka 48
तमेवैकं विजानीत ह्यन्या वाचो विमुञ्चथ ।
यच्चेद्वाङ्मनसी प्राज्ञ इत्याद्याः श्रुतयः स्फु टाः ॥ ४.४८ ॥
tamevaikaṃ vijānīta hyanyā vāco vimuñcatha.
yaccedvāṅmanasī prājña ityādyāḥ śrutayaḥ sphuṭāḥ (4.48).
May you dedicate the entire life only for this one particular purpose and all the other
things are valid only if they lead to this goal. Every action can be designed in such a way
that they lead to spiritual goal. The uniqueness of karma-yoga is most materialistic ritual
can lead to a spiritual way of life. You can convert anything into that which is spiritually
elevating by changing the attitude to Īśvara-bhāvana; then even the grossest activity of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 331

eating is called prāṇagnihotra. Prāṇa is treated as agni and swallowing of food will
become the offering to prāṇa agni called Vaiśvānara. From the grossest to the subtlest,
action, everything can be converted into spiritual elevation. And what should be the
ultimate goal? Vyavasāyātmikā buddhiḥ ekeha kurunandana, every action I should
convert into spiritual purification.
We don’t have many goals but only one goal of gaining mokṣa. Mokṣa is the only
puruṣārtha in life. You should know this value and work for that. Any books which will
not help you in this sādhana, drop it and don’t take heed of them. Therefore, there is no
worthy thing in any magazine. Śāstrically speaking it will include śāstra also which talk of
dvaita. Have sufficient knowledge to understand Vedānta and don’t get attached to them.
In short, give up all unnecessary things. This is Muṇḍaka-vākya.
Next is Kaṭha Upaniṣad vākya 1.3.13 may you practice withdrawal of speech. Control the
eating mouth and speaking mouth. First reduce the quantity and then control the quality;
meaning reduce noise pollution and thereafter control the quality. Afterwards, abide
quietly to your true nature. Learn to keep quiet for sometime and find out what is
happening all around you. So many inside things should be thrown out. The past painful
experiences which come out during quietude is called kaṣāya; try to think of the scriptural
teaching. Śāstra should be used and thereafter śāstra should be transcended. These things
come under śāstrīya dvaita.

śloka 49
अशास्त्रीयमपि द्वैतं तीव्रं मन्दमिति द्विधा ।
कामक्रोधादिकं तीव्रं मनोराज्यं तथेतरत्॥ ४.४९ ॥
aśāstrīyamapi dvaitaṃ tīvraṃ mandamiti dvidhā.
kāmakrodhādikaṃ tīvraṃ manorājyaṃ tathetarat (4.49).
Śāstrīya dvaita takes you towards spiritual journey while aśāstrīya dvaita pushes you
down. Aśāstrīya dvaita [jīva-dvaita] is divided into two types. One is called tīvra aśāstrīya
jīva-dvaita, a serious problem or more intense problem to be paid immediate attention to
and the other one is not so serious and there is no emergency. Tīvra means emergency
surgery needed and manda means you need not take it seriously.
Tīvra-category is kāma krodha-adhika. Kāma also makes the mind restless as there is some
anxiety to fulfill my desire. Krodha makes the mind disturbed which cannot stand

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 332

śravaṇa. Kāma-krodha makes the mind not to attend the spiritual study and focused
śravaṇa for even for a period of one hour. Kāma-krodha babies are inside and the mind
will not be allowed to focus on śravaṇa and manana. They are therefore, serious obstacles.
We have three types of desires; tāmāsika, rājasika and sāttvika. Tāmāsika desires are
immoral illegal ones and rājasika legal and moral but materialistic desires and they are to
be in moderation; otherwise, they will take all our lives. Drop tāmāsika and reduce
rājasika and as far as sāttvika desires are concerned, they are to be nourished. Kāma refers
to tāmāsika and rājasika. Sāttvika kāma is desire for mokṣa or jñāna or śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana or desire for sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. That desire must be intensely
nourished. Once kāma is dropped you need not take krodha for krodha is the other side of
kāma. The mind wants something to happen and if it does not happen anger comes up.
If kāma is dropped and expectation is dropped krodha will not come. Obstructed desire
will convert itself into anger. If there is no pratibaddha kāma there cannot be krodha.
Kṛṣṇa has not dealt with it separately. They say handle kāma and anger will be
automatically handled. Ādi means others; lobha, mada and matsarya and all of them come
under tīvra, aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita.
Manda dvaita is manorājya. manorājya means day-dreaming and entertaining various
desires like window shopping. I don’t have that much kāma to buy but I want to see and
enjoy, not with a wish to acquire them. Tīvra dvaita will make kāma into karma. Manda
dvaita will not do any thing as it is like building castles in the air and mind will wander.

śloka 50
उभयं तत्त्वबोधात्प्राङ्निवार्यं बोधसिद्धये ।
समः समाहितत्वं च साधनेषु श्रुतं यतः ॥ ४.५० ॥
ubhayaṃ tattvabodhātprāṅnivāryaṃ bodhasiddhaye.
samaḥ samāhitatvaṃ ca sādhaneṣu śrutaṃ yataḥ (4.50).
How should we handle tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita and manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita, the
desire and anger and the wandering nature of the mind? This is being discussed here. In
the śāstra they are popularly known as mala and vikṣepa. Malam is rāga-dveṣa and kāma-
krodha or impurity and these things alone; Vidyāraṇya calls it tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. If
we use the word rāga-dveṣa, we will not listen to them for having heard long before. The
new word is used to influence the students. These should be warded off even before

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 333

coming to Vedānta śravaṇa otherwise mind will not be available for śravaṇa. Full
attention to śravaṇa is possible only if we ward off rāga-dveṣa, kāma-krodha and mind
wandering during śravaṇa. Vidyāraṇya does not say how you can do this and we have to
supply the answer. Kāma-krodha is handled through karma-yoga sādhana, living a
religious life, a life of contribution fulfilling social, family and religious duties. Karma-
yoga is mala-nivṛtti and tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita-nivṛtti. It is like dust in the mirror and
you can dust and remove it. Sometimes, it is like the baby and to remove the dust you
have to bathe it.
Afterwards, we see the wandering mind. Being active all the time, the mind is used to
planning and implementing and it is not able to switch off and study. One does not have
the mental make-up and that mind will find problems all the time running and for him
sitting is the problem. For them, śāstra prescribed the second sādhana upāsana and
suggesting withdrawing the mind and keeping quiet. Then Vidyāraṇya says that all of
them are not my invention as all are there in the śāstra. Both are indicated in the
qualification of the student. Both here means mala-nivṛtti and vikṣepa-nivṛtti. While
talking about sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti, viveka, vairāgya and śamādi-ṣaṭka-sampatti,
we said śama, dama, titikṣā, uparati, śraddhā and samādhāna. The word śama means the
mind is free from rāga-dveṣa and mala. Only thing is if you put it in positive language it is
trust, free mind. It is possible only when rāga-dveṣa and kāma-krodha is reduced.
Samādhāna means manda-, aśāstrīya-jīva-dvaita-nivṛtti, the freedom from vikṣepa and the
mind is no more wandering. The mind converges into one point. Another word for
Samādhāna is samādhi, the capacity to remain absorbed in something.

śloka 51
बोधादूर्ध्वं च तद्धेयं जीवन्मुक्तिप्रसिद्धये ।
कामादिक्ले शबन्धेन युक्तस्य न हि मुक्तता ॥ ४.५१ ॥
odhādūrdhvaṃ ca taddheyaṃ jīvanmuktiprasiddhaye.
kāmādikleśabandhena yuktasya na hi muktatā (4.51).
Based on the mala-vikṣepa-nivṛtti free from rāga-dveṣa and vikṣepa the student is graded
into three levels: manda adhikārī, uttama adhikārī and madhyama adhikārī. In manda
adhikārī, śravaṇa does not take place. I am here but I don’t hear. The śāstra says even
sitting in the class is puṇya. This is said in Gītā by Lord Kṛṣṇa. For manda adhikārī, jñāna

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 334

does not come at all. In the madhyama adhikārī, the jñāna takes place but he does not
retain the knowledge; he does not get niṣṭhā. But the uttama adhikārī by mere śravaṇa, he
gets both jñāna and niṣṭhā. Depending upon the level of the adhikārī, what one should do
is said in the next śloka.

Class 14
śloka 51 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has now entered into the main theme of the fourth chapter that is the
elimination of jīva-dvaita for it is the cause of saṃśāra. He also points out jīva-dvaita only
can go by Brahma-jñāna. Jīva-dvaita, he divided as śāstrīya and aśāstrīya. He said śāstrīya
dvaita should not be eliminated first for it is needed for Brahma-jñāna. Retain it initially
and this will help in removing jīva-dvaita which will help you gain mokṣa and after
attaining that śāstrīya dvaita can be removed. Here, there is no physical rejection of śāstra
but it is merely intellectual. Retain śāstrīya dvaita for the time being.
Aśāstrīya dvaita is Vedānta-unfriendly dvaita and later this also is subdivided into two.
One is tīvra aśāstrīya dvaita and manda aśāstrīya dvaita. Rāga-dveṣa, etc., comes in the
first category and wandering extrovert mind comes under the latter category. Vidyāraṇya
has used a new expression as tīvra aśāstrīya dvaita for rāga-dveṣa and vikṣepa relates to
manda aśāstrīya dvaita. Jīva is covered by mala, vikṣepa and āvaraṇa. Karma-yoga relates
to mala-nivṛtti; upāsana relates to vikṣepa-nivṛtti and jñāna relates to āvaraṇa-nivṛtti.
Then depending upon the intensity of the problem, that is kamādi and manorājya or mala
and vikṣepam, he graded the students as manda, madhyama and uttama adhikārī. Manda
adhikārī has mala and vikṣepa to a great extent, madhyama adhikārī has mala and vikṣepa
to a lesser extent and uttama adhikārī is one who has removed mala and vikṣepa, almost,
by karma and upāsana.
In the case of manda adhikārī, śravaṇa does not take place properly and jñāna reception
does not take place. In the case of madhyama adhikārī, he is able to develop interest in
teaching and during the time of teaching, he focuses, he understands the knowledge and
reception takes place but the problem is that the moment śravaṇa is over he is back to
saṃśāra; reception takes place and there is no retention. Jñāna comes but jñāna-niṣṭhā he
lacks. In the case of uttama adhikārī, where these two problems are removed almost and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 335

śravaṇa itself is enough as he receives and retains the knowledge. He gets jñāna and he is
also jñāna-niṣṭhā.
The problem is with madhyama adhikārī. Now he talks about madhyama adhikārī. He has
nothing to tell about the manda adhikārī and he has nothing to tell about uttama adhikārī
for he is jñāna-niṣṭhā. In the case of the former there is nothing to tell. In the case of
madhyama adhikārī, he needs a process where jñāna can be converted into jñāna-niṣṭhā.
How to do it?
Why he gets the knowledge and why he does not get jñāna-niṣṭhā? If the mala and vikṣepa
is properly removed, he would have become uttama adhikārī. He has not removed
properly and he has not taken care of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Or kāma-krodha still
continues in his case. He is an expert in Vedānta, but he is a hostage to kāma-krodha. If
kāma-krodha problem is handled, the other problem continues which is manorājya, the
restlessness of the mind. His mind does not keep quiet even for a short while.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says: handle these two aśāstrīya dvaita. You handle and convert
jñāna into jñāna-niṣṭhā. Suppose a student asks I am satisfied with jñāna and I am not
interested in jñāna-niṣṭhā what is wrong with me? Why should I work for jñāna-niṣṭhā.
For this, Vidyāraṇya says for emotional benefit of Vedānta, inner security, fullness, etc.,
you can derive only if it is converted into jñāna-niṣṭhā. Mere jñāna will not give the
promised benefit of jīvanmukti described in Gītā. The emotional benefit described in Gītā
you will not get unless you convert jñāna into jñāna-niṣṭhā. If you should cheerfully say
ahaṃ brahma asmi you must be jñāna-niṣṭha.
The continuity of emotional problem is the proof that the madhyama adhikārī should
work to become a jñāna-niṣṭha by giving up kāma and krodha. The very same knowledge
with giving up of kāma-krodha gives better benefits. The knowledge has a greater impact
on such a person without kāma-krodha. It is just like moonlight is not seen during the
early evening although it is there but with the sunset the moon is visible although there is
no increase in the light of the moon. So also the knowledge gained by the madhyama
adhikārī, though remaining the same, gives greater benefits when he gets rid of kāma-
krodha and other malas. As even kāma-krodha is removed, the power of jñāna increases.
To clearly enjoy the benefit of mokṣa, you should remove kāma-krodha, etc. This will help
to gain jīvanmukti right now. Then one may ask is there any shortcut for he does not want
to remove kāma-krodha. People want to have some other method and Vidyāraṇya says

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 336

you have to handle the mind for jīvanmukti is to be enjoyed in the mind. Therefore, you
have to learn to tackle your mind.
It is not a physical change but emotional change that helps to enjoy the benefit of
knowledge. A mind which is shackled by weaknesses by kāma-krodha, mada-matsarya,
etc, should be freed for one to gain jīvanmukti. How to do that is said in the third chapter
of Gītā from verse 36 to 43. An undisciplined mind and intellect nourish kāma-krodha and
therefore, discipline your sense-organs; your thought pattern and the reasoning pattern to
overpower kāma-krodha. Let every person look at his thought pattern and his behaviour,
etc., and see “am I closer to animal or closer to Mahātmā?” and regularly introspect as it is
not to develop regret and not for developing guilt, but to lead to deliberation on future
life. This alert-life should be followed to gain jīvanmukti.

śloka 52
जीवन्मुक्तिरियं मा भुज्जन्माभावे त्वहंकृ ती ।
तर्हि जन्मापि तेऽस्त्येव स्वर्गमात्रात्कृ ती भवान्॥ ४.५२ ॥
jīvanmuktiriyaṃ mā bhujjanmābhāve tvahaṃkṛtī.
tarhi janmāpi te:'styeva svargamātrātkṛtī bhavān (4.52)
Here you have to imagine one of the students raises a question after listening to the
previous verse. He is highly pessimistic and he compares the mind to the wild elephant
and he wants to tie the elephant with a small rope. Even that seems to be possible but
handling the mind is very tough and it needs constant alertness.
I should know where I have gone wrong and observe my nature thought by thought,
regularize my thought pattern and bring about improvement in my behaviour. The mind-
observation and mind-study is not that easy. Māṇḍūkya kārikā compares this feat to
empty the ocean by dipping the peacock feather and removing the water slowly and
steadily. This is to show how difficult it is to change one’s character.
The most efficacious method is that I should have patience and find out why such thought
comes, why these particular emotions come to me, how they does occupy my mind and
how does it affect my mind and my life. This is called emotional intelligence. You should
have the capacity to find out the cause of the emotion and find the effect of such emotions,
etc. Therefore, it not only causes emotional problems but also physical problems. Jealousy
can also cause problem. This jealousy should be nipped at the bud. Handle the emotion.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 337

The student feels that these things are not possible. If I want jīvanmukti, I have to handle
these problems. I will say I am not interested in jīvanmukti. Can I get videha-mukti after
death as a result of jñāna? For jīvanmukti only, I need niṣṭhā which is a headache.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says I am content with videha-mukti. By videha-mukti I am
satisfied which will come later. Therefore, while living I will not get jīvanmukti and I will
continue with kāma-krodha and it does not matter with the problems I will face.
Vidyāraṇya gives the answer in the second line.
Vidyāraṇya does not question the peculiar theory. He does not say it is right or it is wrong.
Jñāna will give videha-mukti and jñāna-niṣṭhā will give jīvanmukti. Vidyāraṇya poses a
counter question if this is the argument why you voted for videha-mukti at all? You want
to retain your kāma and krodha and you want worldly enjoyment. If you are interested in
worldly enjoyment retaining kāma-krodha why you voted for videha-mukti; instead look
for svarga where wonderful pleasures are available. If you are still interested in
materialistic pleasures why do you ask for videha-mukti and why not seek svarga loka?
Why not you vote for punarjanma in svarga loka where wonderful pleasures are
available? Instead of videha-mukti, by the accomplishment of svarga you may you get
satisfied. Why are you enamoured by videha-mukti where you cannot have sense
pleasures? Videha-mukti is not a healthy thing for you. You should vote for svarga.

śloka 53
क्षयातिशयदोषेण स्वर्गो हेयो यदा तदा ।
स्वयं दोषतमात्मायं कामादिः किं न हीयते ॥ ४.५३ ॥
kṣayātiśayadoṣeṇa svargo heyo yadā tadā.
svayaṃ doṣatamātmāyaṃ kāmādiḥ kiṃ na hīyate (4.53)
Here, the student says I did not vote for svarga but voted for videha-mukti for all the
materialistic pleasures are finite in nature. Having enjoyed the wonderful pleasures in
svarga with all the healthy life, with no aging, etc., for thousands of years, how is it
possible to come back to bhūloka being necked out of heaven. I am not interested in
svarga and therefore, I vote for videha-mukti. If you have developed vairāgya for svarga
pleasures why not develop vairāgya for worldly pleasures and get rid of kāma-krodha,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 338

leading to jīvanmukti? Why do you not discard all these aśāstrīya dvaita instead of
rejecting jīvanmukti?
The problems like kāma, krodha, moha, etc., are all doṣas themselves as they are diseases
themselves. Here, Vidyāraṇya wants to make a subtle difference. Svarga is endowed with
doṣa and kāma is doṣa itself. If svarga itself you reject as endowed with doṣa, why not
reject kāma which is doṣa by itself. Even the smallest desire will create problems in life.
Once you develop kāma, it ends in karma. Even if you get the thing, the problem of
maintenance starts. Why not give up the kāma and enjoy jīvanmukti?

śloka 54
तत्त्वं बुद्ध्वापि कामादीन्निःशेषं न जहासि चेत्।
यथेष्टाचरणं ते स्यात्कर्मशास्त्रातिलङ्घिनः ॥ ४.५४ ॥
tattvaṃ buddhvāpi kāmādīnniḥśeṣaṃ na jahāsi cet.
yatheṣṭācaraṇaṃ te syātkarmaśāstrātilaṅghinaḥ (4.54)
If you don’t get jñāna-niṣṭhā and jīvanmukti, not only you will have lack of peace of mind
but saṃśāra will continue and you will have other problems also. You will start to claim
yourself as a jñānī. You will not be a sādhaka. You will say I don’t need karma-yoga and
upāsana-yoga. You will give up everything for you will claim you are a jñānī. Therefore,
the chances are you will not follow śāstric discipline claiming that you have gone beyond
all that.
The chances are that half-cooked jñānī may violate all śāstric discipline, lead an
unrestrained life and will be a bane in the society. After the study of Vedānta other people
violating discipline is understandable, but the student of Vedānta claiming I am a jñānī
should not be victim of kāma-krodha and other malas. If you do not discard the desires,
etc., fully, even after self-realization, you will end up in disregarding the scriptural
injunction and your behaviour will be an uncontrollable one. It is a terrible abuse of
Vedānta. More in the next class.

Class 15
śloka 54 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 339

After introducing Īśvara-sṛṣṭa and jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita, Vidyāraṇya established that of these
two types of dvaita, jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita is the cause of bondage and not Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita.
Then from verse 38 up to 66, Vidyāraṇya deals with the main topic of this chapter that is
the negation of jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita by attaining Brahma-jñāna. Then this jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita is
broadly classified into three varieties: one śāstrīya jīva-dvaita, tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita
and manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. After presenting these three topics, Vidyāraṇya jīva-sṛṣṭa
dvaita through Vedānta-vicāra. Everyone should take jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita initially and once
Vedānta-vicāra has brought the benefit, one does not need jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and he has
transcended Guru and śāstras. He quoted many Upaniṣad mantras.
Then he came to second jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita and this dvaita is known by different name and
one name is kāma-krodha, another name is rāga-dveṣa and yet another name is mental
impurity. Then Vidyāraṇya said one removes this impurity even before entering śāstric
study. This is otherwise called gaining sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Vidyāraṇya does not
say how to accomplish that because he assumes we are advanced students.
Therefore, better follow karma-yoga even before taking to jñāna yoga. This is elaborated in
the third chapter of Gītā. Students are classified manda, madhyama and uttama adhikārīs.
Manda is not interested in Vedāntic studies at all; they don’t bother about jñāna at all.
Uttama adhikārīs are great but they don’t have any problems being jñāna niṣṭhas. He
becomes an ideal model for Vedānta. The problem is there in the cases of madhyama
adhikārīs. Vedānta is intellectually stimulating and understanding and one can be called a
jñānī because jñāna is there but due to the lack of niṣṭhā one does not enjoy jīvanmukti-
phala. One side, jñānī floats and on the other side saṃśāra also is there. This is addressed
to madhyama adhikārīs. Now he asks why cannot you transcend kāma-krodha and enjoy
mokṣa. Kāma-krodha removal is not a one day job but it needs continuous alertness, for
every other situation is a provoking one should not lose the balance of mind when things
are favourable or unfavourable. Alertness every morning and introspection at the end of
the day is the advice given by Vidyāraṇya. No physical, verbal or mental action should
come out without ISI mark; total quality check-up should take place and nothing should
come out without checking. Since it needs mental application the madhyama adhikārī
suggests why should I struggle! As a jñānī, I am a liberated person, I will not get
punarjanma and these few years, I will forego jīvanmukti. I will vote for videha-mukti. I
will allow kāma-krodha to run riot.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 340

If you are not interested in jīvanmukti and enjoy worldly pleasure, why cannot you enjoy
svarga instead of videha-mukti? In fact videha-mukti is an obstacle to heavenly pleasures.
He may say I am not interested in heavenly pleasures for it is mixed with pain, it does not
give satisfaction and it has several defects are there in heavenly pleasures. So he says I am
not interested in heaven. Vidyāraṇya says if you are not interested in heavenly pleasures,
why cannot you reject the earthly pleasures and gain jīvanmukti? Whatever doṣa you see
in svarga you will see in ihaloka bhoga also. Once you see those doṣas, you can easily
renounce the worldly pleasures in preference to videha-mukti. Vairāgya-ānanda is
hundred times better than other ānandas get Vairāgya and get jīvanmukti. In short, why
cannot you convert yourself from madhyama adhikārī to uttama adhikārī!

śloka 55
बुद्धाद्वैतसतत्त्वस्य यथेष्टाचरणं यदि ।
शुनां तत्त्वदृशां चैव कोभेदोऽशुचिभक्षणे ॥ ४.५५ ॥
buddhādvaitasatattvasya yatheṣṭācaraṇaṃ yadi.
śunāṃ tattvadṛśāṃ caiva kobhedo:'śucibhakṣaṇe (4.55)
What all will be the consequences if the Vedāntic student does not work for jīvanmukti
and if he allows kāma-krodha to continue in the mind? First consequence will be the
kāma-krodha will be in the thought-level and the consequence will be less and once you
allow it to continue the result will be serious. On seeing the worldly people he will go on
repeating the kāma-krodha thought and once the thought gets saturated, the thoughts will
explode at śarīra-level; one will not follow śāstra vidhi and niṣedha and that will make
him lead licentious lifestyle.
If you don’t continue to handle your rāga-dveṣa which you should have done even before
the Vedāntic study, it will lead to a serious problem. In fact, rāga-dveṣa-handling is a
continuous process whether you gain jñāna or not, for the entire edifice of jñāna should be
built on sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. If you don’t give up rāga-dveṣa fully, the rāga-dveṣa
will take you off the path of karma. Kāma eṣa krodha eṣa rajoguṇasamudbhavaḥ;
mahāśano mahāpāpmā viddhyenamiha vairiṇam. They will gradually take the person
from the path of morality and life will become licentious, immoral, unrestrained, which is
called yatheṣṭācāra. And when the other people criticize this person, the problem is that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 341

this person being half-cooked Vedāntī, so he is very good in argument. Therefore, he is

intellectually brilliant enough to justify all his violations of dharma. He will say “I am
akartā, abhoktā”, “yogarato vā bhogarato vā saṃgarato vā saṃgavihīnaḥ; yasya brahmaṇi
ramate cittaṃ nandati nandati nandati eva“, he will remember all convenient verses.
Whatever you do, a jnAnI is beyond all! Therefore, the half-cooked Vedāntic mind can
justify any violation and once one reaches that stage, even God cannot help him!
Therefore, in those days, Vedānta was not made that easily available because one may
take to immoral life and justify in the name of Vedānta transcending relative good and a
bad. Transcending dharma and adharma is in the pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. At vyāvahārika
level one should follow dharma. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya strongly gets wild at such half
baked jñānīs. By doing that you will violate the Veda pūrva part which talks of dharmic
life. Such people who abuse Vedānta will get into a special naraka it is said. Because you
will violate dharma śāstra you will be taking to yatheṣṭācaraṇa.
Here, Vidyāraṇya quotes from Naiṣkarmyasiddhi. He tells the difference between the
animal and human being. The animal goes by its Prakṛti. Prakṛti means svabhāva,
inclination. Animal’s life is governed by its instinct and it does not have to think whether
it is good for others or not. It cannot think good and bad. Since it cannot think, if the
animal does not think, none will find fault with the animal. The only difference in the
human being, because of his thinking and will-power, he cannot implement his rāga-dveṣa
unconditionally. Before the implementation, he should put a check: is it in keeping with
dharma or not?
Therefore, dharma-adharma becomes the filtering factor and controlling factor; and
whichever life is controlled or regulated by dharma-adharma-viveka is called manuṣya-
life. After the study of Vedānta, if Vedānta has removed that check, that speed breaker and
that control, then Vedānta will take you to an animal-state! The difference that should
happen after the Vedāntic study is that my lifestyle should continue to follow dharma-
adharma-viveka.
A restrained jñānī and restrained ajñānī is governed by dharma-adharma. Restrained
ajñānī’s pursuit of dharma-adharma is a deliberate action and in the case of jñānī the
following of dharma and adharma spontaneously.He does not follow dharma but he is an
embodiment of dharma and jñānī is one who is incapable of violating dharma. That is the
travel from deliberate dharma to spontaneous dharma and travel should not be from

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 342

deliberate dharma to adharma. Follow dharma and adharma; otherwise, your life will be
like that of a dog.
Therefore, Sureśvarācārya says, as quoted by Vidyāraṇya, if there is a jñānī who has
understood his own real nature which is non-dual, he realizes Advaita, svataḥtvam, but
takes to yatheṣṭācāra, unrestrained life, rāga-dveṣa-prompted life, such life is a very
serious problem to him and to the society. Yatheṣṭācāra are of three kinds:
1. Kāma-ācāra: it means doing whatever one likes, right from getting up in the
morning. A dhārmic way of life means one should get up before sunrise. When the
sun rises, we look upon God that we should welcome and worship. After pūjā only,
anything should enter the mouth.These are the traditional ways of life and this
should continue whether one is a jñānī or ajñānī.
2. Kāma-vāda: whatever comes in the mouth you blurt out and thereafter say sorry.
Instead, you utter after filtering whether you can utter the word or not. Four
filtering points are there: anudvegakara, satya, priya and hita as mentioned in 17th
chapter of Gītā. If that is not done it is called kāma-vāda.
3. Kāma-bhakṣa. That is eating anything without any restriction should be avoided.
Suppose a person takes to yatheṣṭācaraṇa, then what is the difference between jñānī and
ajñānī? What is the difference between the life of jñānī and a dog, he asks? According to
our tradition, even pure food is impure if it is not offered to God. Remember the Lord
before eating. Instead of becoming God, one becomes dog if he does not follow the
discipline.

śloka 56
बोधात्पुरा मनोदोषमात्रात्क्लिष्टोऽस्यथाधुना ।
अशेषलोकनिन्दा चेत्यहो ते बोधवैभवम्॥ ४.५६ ॥
bodhāt purā manodoṣamātrātkliṣṭo:'syathādhunā.
aśeṣalokanindā cetyaho te bodhavaibhavam (4.56)
There is another consequence also when a jñānī violates the dharma or morals. He will be
criticized by the whole society for the society expects the jñānī to live as a super-human
being. Once a person has the saffron robe, even if one does not know his character, once
the vastra is seen he is seen as sākṣāt Īśvara himself. People prostrate before the jñānī and
he is put on a higher pedestal. If he violates dharma, the society will look down upon him.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 343

He is supposed to be a responsible guide of the society. Still greater danger is that he will
become a bad example for the śāstra. People will lose faith in the validity of Upaniṣad and
Gītā. The criticism will not only limited to the person but also to the scriptures. Even the
Guru of the jñānī will be criticized. Such a person will do disservice to anādi paramparā,
scriptures, and the Gurus. If you are a śāstric student your responsibility increases.
Further, family members are closely watching. Before the study of śāstra, people did not
expect anything from you. You had the problem like all other people. Previously, you
were privately disturbed. Now after studying Vedānta the disturbance is not a private
problem but the society is also disturbed for it has an expectation from you. nindā is an
additional problem for the Vedāntic seekers if they don’t follow the kāma-krodha
discipline. More in the next class.

Class 16
śloka 56 contd.
You suffered due to the defects of the mind before self-realization and now after self-
realization you are being censured by the world because of uncontrolled behaviour, etc.
Oh! Great one, what a glory of your self-realization. The kāma-krodha or rāga-dveṣa
problem, one has to handle even before coming to Vedānta-vicāra and in fact, karma-yoga
sādhana relates to solve this problem. Once this problem is solved, on gaining jñāna one
gets jīvanmukti. If one partially handles kāma-krodha, he is a madhyama adhikārī and
because of not controlling kāma-krodha, he will not gain jñāna-niṣṭhā. If jñāna is feeble,
the unconquered kāma-krodha can suppress jñāna and it cannot lead to jñāna-niṣṭhā.
Jñāna is there in the case of a madhyama adhikārī but prajñā is feeble compared to sthira
prājña. There is a war in the minds of madhyama adhikārī between jñāna and kāma-
krodha.
If one cannot control kāma-krodha, he cannot gain the full benefit of jñāna. He will not get
the benefit of Vedāntic study. Kāma-krodha will overpower him and his behaviour will be
governed by kāma-krodha and not jñāna and therefore, he will not gain jīvanmukti. He
should put forth some more efforts with the help of Vedāntic knowledge and convert

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 344

jñāna into jñāna-niṣṭhā and then kāma-krodha will not arise. Even if it arises, jñāna-niṣṭhā
will overpower kāma-krodha. Kāma-krodh will not arise in jñāna-niṣṭhā Puruṣa and such
jñāna-niṣṭhā Puruṣa will always win over kāma-krodha and this is called jīvanmukti.
Suppose a person does not complete the process, there will be several problems. Three
problems will be faced by the madhyama adhikārī with kāma-krodha deep in his
subconscious. First problem will be all efforts of Vedāntic study will go waste because that
knowledge which does not help in practical day to day life but helps only to tell other
people that I have completed reading of all the Upaniṣads, etc., will not give any benefit to
him. Time and energy will go waste.
Also there is as much pain caused by kāma-krodha as is suffered by a saṃśārī. Whether
one is a jñānī or ajñānī, the pain caused by kāma-krodha will continue to be the same in
spite of Vedāntic study. The second problem is that the whole world will laugh at this
person saying that this person claims “I am a Vedāntic student”, etc., and the world will
mock at him and he will be subjected to loka-nindā. Because the world expects Vedāntic
student to be more mature and informed than other people.
The third problem is this person becomes a bad advertisement for Vedānta. If he sets a bad
standard the people will look at the whole Vedānta as worthless and instead of blaming
the person, people will blame śāstra and Guru. Hence Vidyāraṇya says both manda and
madhyama adhikarī should control kāma-krodha before, during and after the study of
Vedānta. Kṛṣṇa says in 5.23 of Gītā:
śaknotīhaiva yaḥ soḍhuṃ prākcharīravimokṣaṇāt;
kāmakrodhodbhavaṃ vegaṃ sa yuktaḥ sa sukhī naraḥ.
The meaning of the verse is that he who is able to resist the rush of desire and anger even
here before he gives up his body, he is a Yogī, he is the happy man. In the 16th chapter
verse 21 he says:
trividhaṃ narakasyedaṃ dvāraṃ nāśanamātmanaḥ;
kāmaḥ krodhastathā lobhastasmādetattrayaṃ tyajet.
The gateway of this hell leading to the ruin of the soul is threefold: lust, anger and greed;
therefore, these three, one should abandon.
Be aware of these teaching and may you conquer kāma-krodha for you to gain the full
benefit of jñāna.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 345

śloka 57
विड्वराहादितुल्यत्वं मा काङ्क्षीस्तत्त्वविद् भवान्।
सर्वधीदोषसंत्यागाल्लोकैः पूज्यस्व देववत्॥ ४.५७ ॥
viḍvarāhāditulyatvaṃ mā kāṅkṣīstattvavid bhavān.
sarvadhīdoṣasaṃtyāgāllokaiḥ pūjyasva devavat (4.57)
The general rule is that any living being with high knowledge and power can be very
great if it has control, meaning dharma-control is there. The very same being with high
power and knowledge, if he loses restraint, the very same power and knowledge will
make the living being worse. If the tiger is unrestrained, it will cause so much of damage
to everyone. It may kill a few animals.
But when one human being loses control, he will cause much more damage to the world.
If restraint is not there, a lower being can cause lower damage and higher being can cause
higher damage. If a human being is with Vedāntic knowledge but not complete and he
does not have dharma-śāstra-restraint, the damage he will cause is much greater than the
animal. He will abuse Vedāntic knowledge and he will say I am pāpātīta, etc. All restraint
will become mithyā, kāma-krodha will become satya and he will become worse than an
animal.
Don’t become a wild animal like person like a pig wallowing in filth not following the rule
of dharma śāstra in the name of jñāna. Don’t work for low status in the name of
knowledge. You are a wise person; going upward from man to God-man should be your
travel and not man-man to animal-man. You have gained the knowledge of Vedānta and
follow sādhana a bit more to convert jñāna to jñāna-niṣṭhā.
After jñāna-niṣṭhā, you will be incapable of violating the rule. Follow the rule until you
become incapable of violating the rule. Dharma becomes my intrinsic nature. Rāma does
not possess dharma but he is the embodiment of dharma. After becoming a jñāna-niṣṭha,
even if he wants to violate dharma, he cannot do so. Be alert even after the study of
Vedānta, continue to be alert and renounce kāma-krodha problem as even they arise. Give
up kāma-krodha problem.
A question may come that you talk about kāma-krodha and you may ask whether I can
have other bad habits? Both kāma-krodha as well as the products, and in short, all the
asurī-sampat given in the 16th chapter of Gītā you follow and you will get a great benefit.
The second benefit is that the world will glorify him and in short, they will treat him as

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 346

Īśvara himself. The third benefit is that you become a best advertisement for Vedānta in
spite of all crises all around. Vedānta then will bless you.

śloka 58
काम्यादिदोषदृष्ट्याद्याः कामादित्यागहेतवः ।
प्रसिद्धा मोक्षशास्त्रेषु तानन्विष्य सुखी भव ॥ ४.५८ ॥
kāmyādidoṣadṛṣṭyādyāḥ kāmādityāgahetavaḥ.
prasiddhā mokṣaśāstreṣu tānanviṣya sukhī bhava (4.58)
Vidyāraṇya, until now, tries to convince the madhyama adhikārī to change himself to
uttama adhikārī and convert himself from jñānī to jñāna-niṣṭha. Vidyāraṇya has succeeded
in his struggle. He says I will handle kāma-krodha further. Now he asks how to handle
kāma-krodha? Vidyāraṇya says these are fundamental questions which is given in Gītā,
etc. Kāma is nourished by indriya, manas and buddhi. The sense-organs present the
object, mind desires and reinforces, and the intellect gets into wrong conclusion.
Vidyāraṇya says: may you follow the method suggested in the śāstra.
Every kāma has an object. A desire is always there for an object and the object of desire is
called kāmya. Kāma is there towards kāmya because we have got a conclusion that the
arrival of that object will improve my condition either physical or emotional, financial,
family responsibility, etc. In some respect or the other, the object will improve my status is
my assumption. Vedānta says that the assumption is confusion. Superimposition of what
is not there on a vastu is śobhana-adhyāsa.
Since it is a misconception we have to remove the misconception born out of wrong
thinking or non-thinking in which we are experts. Therefore, the solution is that you
should develop right thinking. Once there is right thinking śobhana-adhyāsa will
diappear. All the deficiencies will be clear as you watch a person closely. Therefore, he
says kāmyādi-doṣa-dṛṣṭi, seeing the deficiencies in the anātmā, all the doṣas will
disappear. See doṣa in kāmya and also doṣa in kāma and then alone desire will disappear.
Kāma covers or conceals the discriminative power. Kāma takes the discriminative power
as hostage.
Not only doṣa-dṛṣṭi is one method and there is another method given in Māṇḍūkya kārikā.
Doṣa-dṛṣṭi is seeing as a problem while mithyātva-dṛṣṭi is seeing it as a hollow one. Kṛṣṇa
says in 3.43:

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 347

evaṃ buddheḥ paraṃ buddhvā saṃstabhyātmānamātmanā;

jahi śatruṃ mahābāho kāmarūpaṃ durāsadam.
Thus, knowing him who is beyond the intelligence steadying the [lower] Self by the Self’ s
might, O mighty armed [Arjuna] destroy the enemy in the form of desire so hard to get at.
Give up deficiencies, impurities like desire, anger etc. Kṛṣṇa gives a remedy for kāma but
he does not give remedy for krodha. Our answer to that is that we do not treat anger as a
separate problem but it is a version of expectation and this alone gets converted into
anger. Behind every anger, there is a legitimate or illegitimate desire. The intensity of
anger depends on the intensity of expectations. The solutions to control anger are
temporary and the real solution depends on controlling kāma.
Vidyāraṇya does not want to deal with mokṣa śāstra. This is well-known in Gītā and there
is no need to teach this once again. He leaves this to our home work. This is elaborated in
13th and 15th chapters of Gītā. The instructions given in the Gītā are to be followed
meticulously to enjoy jīvanmukti.

śloka 59
त्यज्यतामेष कामादिर्मनोराज्ये तु का क्षतिः ।
अशेषदोषबीजत्वात्क्षतिर्भगवतेरिता ॥ ४.५९ ॥
tyajyatāmeṣa kāmādirmanorājye tu kā kṣatiḥ.
aśeṣadoṣabījatvāt kṣatirbhagavateritā (4.59)
With the previous verse, the topic of tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita is over. Now, he deals with
the mind that wanders all over or the day-dreaming mind. All the time the mind lives in
the castles built in the air and one does not live in the present. The man always lives in the
absentia. He either lives on the previous day or the next day. He lives in fantasy. This is
the problem of madhyama adhikārī. He asks: what is wrong if I live in manorājya? In this
case, I don’t create trouble for anyone. I live in my own private world of fantasy and
“what is wrong with that?” he asks. None will know what he does. What is wrong if I
enjoy in my imaginary pleasures? So madhyama adhikārī asks. For this, Vidyāraṇya says
it is true that at the thought-level you don’t have any control and it will not affect other
people. Thought-control appears as though it is not required. Vidyāraṇya says saturated
thought alone gets converted into action. Watch your thoughts, they become words; watch

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 348

your words as they become your actions; watch your actions, they becomes your
character; and watch your character, it becomes your destiny. More in the next class.

Class 17
śloka 59 contd.
Of the three types of jīva-dvaita to be handled Vidyāraṇya has dealt with two of them,
Śāstrīya jīva-dvaita and aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. As far as the first variety is concerned
Vedānta-vicāra should be utilized until we realise the benefit fully. Vedānta-vicāra is also
a means and getting attached to it is also a false attachment. Attachment has means and
validity only to attain the end. Since it is a means to attain jñāna or Ātma-niṣṭhā and then
Vedānta-vicāra becomes a non-binding pursuit. It should not become dependence. Follow
Vedānta-vicāra, convert it from binding to nonbinding.
Then he said kāma-krodha is an obstacle to jīvanmukti. Kāma-krodha should be removed
because they have bandhatva. By doṣa-darśana and mithyātva-darśana, handle tīvra
aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. Now, we talk of manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita relating to manda
adhikārī. This deals with mind wandering and manorājya. He asks why should I not enjoy
what I cannot enjoy physically and why I should not day-dream on my wishes? None
knows what happens in my mind and I also do not bother the outside society with my
mental wanderings. Therefore, manorājye there is nothing wrong in it.
Vidyāraṇya says in manorājya there is no immediate problem. We also accept their
argument. But if a person keeps on rotating that thought-pattern gradually, that gets more
and more power. Once the mind is saturated, this will overflow in thought and at physical
level also. What he imagines will become physical later, which means manda aśāstrīya
jīva-dvaita will get converted into tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. It is not doṣa and it is a doṣa-
bīja and it will lay the seed of future doṣa. All types of doṣa are there. He will become a
physical hypocrite sitting quietly not indulging in worldly activity but he will be thinking
of it quietly. Therefore, there is potential harm in his quietude. Here, there is psychological
damage because of pressure. Such damage is mentioned in Gītā by Kṛṣṇa.

śloka 60
ध्यायते विषयान्पुंसः सङ्गस्तेषूपजायते ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 349

सङ्गात्संजायते कामः कामात्क्रोधोऽभिजायते।

क्रोधाद्भवति सम्मोहः सम्मोहात्स्मृतिविभ्रमः।
स्मृतिभ्रंशाद्बुद्धिनाशो बुद्धिनाशात्प्रणश्यति ॥ ४.६० ॥
dhyāyate viṣayānpuṃsaḥ saṅgasteṣūpajāyate.
saṅgātsaṃjāyate kāmaḥ kāmātkrodho:'bhijāyate|
krodhādbhavati sammohaḥ sammohātsmṛtivibhramaḥ|
smṛtibhraṃśādbuddhināśo buddhināśātpraṇaśyati (4.60)
In Gītā 2.63 and 64 gives full details of viṣaya dhyāna which refers to manorājya of
Vidyāraṇya. It is building castles in the air. Manorājya leads to fancy for actual enjoyment.
Mental enjoyment will gradually get converted to actual enjoyment. If you continue again
and again, you would like to have the object of the thought-fancied desire. If the desire is
not fulfilled it will lead to krodha and if the desire is fulfilled the kāma will lead either to
lobha. If fulfilled it is greed and if not it will become anger and the anger will be against
everyone including Īśvara. From anger, comes temporary delusion both dharma-adharma-
aviveka and satya-mithyā-aviveka. Then, delusion will lead to smṛti-vibhrama. Whatever
we have studied will be blocked like a virus-affected computer. All my knowledge will
not come to my rescue when I am in trouble. The money which is in someone else’s bank
will not come to my help when I have an actual need. So also such knowledge will be of
no use when I am in trouble. One time misbehaviour should give the red signal; I should
become cautious and I should not commit the mistake again and again. The temporary
forgetfulness will become permanent and one will lose both viveka-śakti as also vijñāna.
This Kṛṣṇa calls buddhināśa. Once buddhināśa comes that person is spiritually destroyed.
Exactly like Jaḍabharata who renounced everything but one deer became very dear to him
and deprived him of final liberation! In the next birth he became a deer. Manorājya, if
allowed, it will cause damage later and therefore, nip in the bud at the beginning itself.
Monitor regularly and if it is not a healthy-thought better discourage such thought and
encourage and occupy the mind with some other useful thought. So we should always
have a ready healthy-diversion. It should also be readily available solution. Therefore,
may you handle manorājya carefully. Don’t allow the disease to reach the advanced state.
Same is the case with the mental disease also. Manorājya should not be allowed to grow.
Even after understanding that it is harmful, if you don’t get rid of it, it is very dangerous
to you. Be honest to yourself and ask yourself what is the goal of life. You have chosen the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 350

goal and whatever is obstacle, you should not let that obstacle to continue and to grow.
Śāstra has given the medicine for everything.

śloka 61
शक्यं जेतुं मनोराज्यं निर्विकल्पसमाधितः ।
सुसम्पादः क्रमात्सोऽपि सविकल्पसमाधिना ॥ ४.६१ ॥
śakyaṃ jetuṃ manorājyaṃ nirvikalpasamādhitaḥ.
susampādaḥ kramātso:'pi savikalpasamādhinā (4.61)
The remedy for this problem is nididhyāsana. We have talked about varieties of
nididhyāsana before. One type of nididhyāsana is being aware of my thought-pattern. I
should know what the events that happen in my mind are. This I should know. Our
problem is we are not even aware of what is happening in our mind. Deliberate life is a
very integral part of my nididhyāsana. I should know of my physical activity as also my
mental activity. Whatever I do, I should be aware of what I do. We spend lot of time in
searching for things. First deliberate life on physical level and then deliberate on verbal
and mental level. From that, we will be able to identify some unhealthy thought-pattern
depending upon the life situation. One you identify the anti-Vedāntic thought-pattern,
pro-saṃśarī thought-pattern, you should attack them and see the fact that prārabdha work
for every individual and every individual has to go through the prārabdha. Most of the
problems, we don’t accept prārabdha. Most painful thing is watching pain of another
person helplessly. This is the toughest thing in our life. Some regret and past mistake will
always trouble you.
Therefore, nididhyāsana is deliberate alert life being aware of action and thought. The
second part of nididhyāsana is where there is a problem; the special handling of giving
exclusive thought that happened in the past or that happened now. That is called sitting
meditation or samādhi-abhyāsa. I have to remain in that state for a long time.
Watching other’s problem is also an indirect problem and our prārabdha. I accept, I don’t
resist and I have to handle dark corners in my life. Manorājya is a disturbing thought-
pattern. It can be in the form of kāma, krodha, anxiety, fear or lobha, etc. Here, what we
talk about is that it can be mastered by the practice of samādhi-abhyāsa by which we mean
exclusively spending some time with the particular issue.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 351

Don’t escape and divert your attention but straightaway confront with the problem and
face the life. The details of nirvikalpaka samādhi we have discussed in the first chapter.
Nirvikalpaka samādhi can be attained gradually through practice of savikalpaka samādhi,
the sitting meditation. This is elaborated in the 6th chapter of Gītā. The eight stages
mentioned in Gītā will lead to nirvikalpaka samādhi. Gradually practice aṣṭa-anga yoga.

śloka 62
बुद्धतत्त्वेन धीदोषशून्येनैकान्तवासिना ।
दीर्घं प्रणवमुच्चार्य मनोराज्यं विजीयते ॥ ४.६२ ॥
buddhatattvena dhīdoṣaśūnyenaikāntavāsinā.
dīrghaṃ praṇavamuccārya manorājyaṃ vijīyate (4.62)
A person may say aṣṭāṅga yoga and that entire how I can practice now in my old age with
back pain and all that. Then what am I to do? Vidyāraṇya says if you know aṣṭāṅga yoga
and you can practice, then you go by that. Vidyāraṇya says physical posture does not
determine nididhyāsana but nididhyāsana is primarily determined by the mental posture.
Now, even though he perfectly follows aṣṭāṅga yoga step, we don’t accept it as
nididhyāsana when his mind wanders about. His thought-pattern should centre on the
Vedāntic teaching.
We are not saying the plate is not required for eating but we should not overemphasise its
importance. What we want is hunger-nivṛtti and it is not about the plate, etc. In the case of
meditation, even if you cannot sit on chair, etc., don’t bother about it. Concentrate on your
thought pattern and not about how you sit or where you sit; give important to your
thought. External posture is not important in nididhyāsana. This is important for upāsana
alone. When it comes to saguṇa upāsana, the external posture etc., are important. Upāsana
needs the conditions but not nididhyāsana. You go to any place where you are not
disturbed.
The kāma-krodha problem should not be there and only after handling this you can come
to nididhyāsana state. The one who has practiced śravaṇa and manana sufficiently alone
has relevance to the nididhyāsana. You should note that the nididhyāsana is relevant only
to those who has done śravaṇa and manana. If a person has not studied Vedānta he will
practice karma and upāsana yoga but here the audience is the one who has studied
śravaṇa and manana. Here we are concerned with madhyama adhikārī who has jñāna but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 352

who has not controlled kāma-krodha, etc. Jñāna is there in such adhikārī but he lacks
jñāna-niṣṭhā. Such jñānīs should allot some time to remain alone quietly and meditate. The
manorājya problem should be handled in seclusion.
The habitual thinking can be conquered by a man of self-knowledge who is devoid of
other defects of mind such as desire, etc., and who is living in solitude by prolonged
chanting of oṃkāra and meditation. He who is no more under the influence of worldly
desires and passions, when these two qualities have been firmly established in him;
ekāntavāsīna, he starts living all by himself in absolute solitude without feeling of
loneliness; this enjoins the strict adherence to the discipline laid down in each stage of life.
Before you start such a nididhyāsana practice this method, you chant a long oṃkāra. At
the time of nididhyāsana, you should chant extended oṃkāra six mātras, twelve mātras,
etc. Dīrgha prāṇava means chanting a long oṃkāra with deep breathing and this quietens
the mind. Then say “I am free” not because there is no problem but in spite of problem.

Class 18
śloka 63 contd.
After introducing three types jīva-dvaita śāstrīya jīva-dvaita, tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita
and manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita Vidyāraṇya teaches how to deal with them. First gain
knowledge of śāstra and transcend vicāra is the śāstrīya jīva-dvaita. The second one is
kāma-krodha which can be dealt with karma-yoga or other methods.
Once a method has tackled the first two, one has to deal with the manorājya or the
restlessness of the mind. Even though there is scattering nature of the mind, it will not
create immediate problem but it may lead to tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita. Don’t allow
manorājya but tackle it. The practice of aṣṭāṅga yoga is suggested to tackle manorājya.
Thought-handling is the exclusive topic of aṣṭāṅga yoga. If one has not formally
undergone the training, you need not start aṣṭāṅga yoga. In such cases, you practice
Vedānta nididhyāsana in any posture you like, in the posture which is easy and smooth.
Take the appropriate part of Vedānta and knock off the disturbing thought-pattern that
occupies the mind all the time, whether it is past regrets or future anxieties. Wipe the mind
clean and that is said in the 62nd verse which we had seen in the last class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 353

After tackling the first two, you have to come to the third one; first learn to be alone at
least for sometime everyday; practice long oṃkāra; deep breathing in and out; it has the
capacity to silence the mind. Deep breathing will bring a change within the body as even
the breathing takes place. Emphasis is not on prāṇava but emphasis is on the practice of
breathing. Whatever thoughts are there in the subconscious mind be dusted out; air the
mind with Vedāntic thought and in due course the disturbing thought will go away.

śloka 63
जिते तस्मिन्वृत्तिशून्यं मनस्तिष्ठति मूकवत्।
एतत्पदं वशिष्ठेन रामाय बहुधेरितम्॥ ४.६३ ॥
jite tasmin vṛttiśūnyaṃ manastiṣṭhati mūkavat.
etatpadaṃ vaśiṣṭhena rāmāya bahudheritam (4.63)
What happens by this nididhyāsana abhyāsa? The phala of winning over of constant
chattering and complaining and worrying of the mind will come down and the mind will
become silent. Once this is driven away, whenever you have a quiet mind, the external
sound is not there but when there is physical and mental silence, the mind will be the
noisiest one and once the manorājya is won over, the mind also will be silent. Just as a
dumb person is silent, we cannot speak similarly the mind also is silent. If a person is in
the middle of a garden, the mind is available to enjoy the garden. The mind is available to
enjoy the vast ocean and the natural environs and the surroundings. The mind has no
agenda and no plan but to enjoy the nature. Otherwise, the mind will become doubly
active with relations shouting in the mind causing disturbance.
Vidyāraṇya asks us to enjoy the silence of the mind and this alone is called liberation and
there is no brahmānanda other than the mental peace. Without śānti there is no ānanda.
This destination is the real goal of Vedānta sādhana. All our studies and knowledge
should take us to mental peace without which the knowledge will be of no use. jīvanmukti
is talked about in Yogavāsiṣṭha. Vasiṣṭha is the Ācārya and Rāma is the śiṣya.
This manas-śānti is not because of favourable external condition. If the peace of mind is on
account of external conditions then it will become saṃsāra because such peace of mind
will not be long-lasting; for the favourable condition will not be there all the time; for it is
karma depending; for our prārabdha is the mixture of puṇya-pāpa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 354

Therefore, peace of mind because of favourable condition is saṃsāra and peace of mind in
spite of unfavourable condition is called mukti. If there is peace of mind in spite of
unfavourable condition, the cause of peace of mind can only be jñāna. It is jñāna-janya
śānti alone that is not dependent on prārabdha. Any other śānti other than jñāna is not
long lasting. Vidyāraṇya gives one sample śloka from Yogavāsiṣṭha.

śloka 64
दृश्यं नास्तीति बोधेन मनसो दृश्यमार्जनम्।
सम्पन्नं चेत्तदोत्पन्ना परा निर्वाणनिर्वृतिः ॥ ४.६४ ॥
dṛśyaṃ nāstīti bodhena manaso dṛśyamārjanam.
sampannaṃ cettadotpannā parā nirvāṇanirvṛtiḥ (4.64)
Vidyāraṇya gives reference to vairāgya-prakaraṇa of Yogavāsiṣṭha and here he gives the
mechanism behind jñāna-janya śānti. Jñāna only will help reshuffling the orders of reality.
Any dṛśya is of lower order of reality, mithyā, while I the dṛk the observer śākṣī alone is
satya. Nothing in dṛśya prapañca will affect the real me. Body will be affected by deśa kāla
and weather conditions.
But I am the dṛk and dṛk-darśana will give peace of mind. With the help of jñāna, dṛśyam
nāsti, dṛśya is mithyā like svapna prapañca; it is experientially there but in reality, it is not
there and this is called dṛśya-nāstitva-bodha. We see dṛśya as mithyā and not as satya. dṛk
is satya and I am the satya dṛk.
Satya dṛśya can affect me but satya dṛśya is not there. Negate dṛśya, the satya-dṛśya-
mārjana, remove the notion that there is clear disturbing world. Negate the disturbing
notion of the disturbing world, just as the screen is not affected in any amount of events in
the movie. From the mind, may you remove the satya prapañca which occupies the mind.
Worry indicates we have attached satyatva to the mithyā prapañca. Rāga-dveṣa and kāma-
krodha indicate we have attached satyatva to jagat. This alone burdens your mind. Any
member of the world disturbs either because of rāga or dveṣa. Rāga-dveṣa generates
burden and it generates murmuring mind and murmuring mind generates saṃsāra. You
may entertain false duality but remove the thought of real duality.
Replacement of satya prapañca by mithyā prapañca will give you peace of mind. Once
you reach this state, the worry will come down and you will enjoy the nature. You will
enjoy. Living in the present and appreciating the world as it is, is called jīvanmukti. Don’t

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 355

do fast forward and go reverse. Then arises highest state of fulfillment and it is called
nirvāṇa that I have accomplished the mission for which I am born. Nirvāṇa means merger
with Brahman. The extinction of individuality is called nirvāṇa. I don’t live in a personal
world. I see Īśvara in the whole world. This is the highest goal of pūrṇatā.

śloka 65
विचारितमलं शास्त्रं चिरमुद्ग्राहितं मिथः ।
सन्त्यक्तवासनान्मौनादृते न्यस्त्युत्तमं पदम्॥ ४.६५ ॥
vicāritamalaṃ śāstraṃ ciramudgrāhitaṃ mithaḥ.
santyaktavāsanānmaunādṛte nyastyuttamaṃ padam (4.65)
There is another quotation from Yogavāsiṣṭha, śāstra-phala-vicaritam. This jīvanmukta has
analysed śāstra sufficiently. Sufficient śravaṇa has been practiced. You should practice
Vedānta sufficiently for a long time. One should be convinced by the intellect through
manana. It should be realized as fact bu my intellect. I should know ahaṃ brahma asmi is
a fact and this is accomplished by sufficient manana. The knowledge must be exchanged
and discussed. Or you can say śāstrīya jīva-dvaita and tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita have been
dealt with.
Then comes vāsanā or vāsanā based manorājya. The moment that past memory comes,
one starts crying. All the viparīta bhāvanās should weaken and be removed through
nididhyāsana. You eliminate only saṃsāra-causing vāsanās. As a result of that, there is
mental silence, other than this internal silence which is achieved through śravaṇa and
manana and nididhyāsana.
The silence in which past memory born disturbances is overpowered is achieved through
meditation. This should not occupy and grip my inner silence. There is no other superior
goal. This internal śānti alone is called jīvanmukti. This inner śānti expresses itself in the
form of compassion. When this peace of mind is there, one will not be jealous of success of
others. Otherwise, one will get annoyed and be greedy. Vedānta-phala should not be
based on the knowledge but on the sādhana practice to be with peace of mind. Brahman-
experience as an event, we negate but brahma-jñāna mental peace because of brahma-
jñāna is very much experienced.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 356

śloka 66
विक्षिप्यते कदाचिद्धीः कर्मणा भोगदायिना ।
पुनः समाहिता सा स्यात्तदैवाभ्यासपाटवात्॥ ४.६६ ॥
vikṣipyate kadāciddhīḥ karmaṇā bhogadāyinā.
punaḥ samāhitā sā syāttadaivābhyāsapāṭavāt (4.66)
The result of jīvanmukti can be clearly experienced by us expressed in two different ways
during two different situations. In life, we can have two different possible situations. No
Guru need come and give a certificate that the bearer of this certificate is a jīvanmukta. For
I know my saṃsāra. Two possible situation in which I am alone: in seclusion without any
interaction with world or people, or I have gone to bed and I am alone without sleep. This
is one situation in which I am alone. Another situation is I am interacting with people,
things and world and the prārabdha ripens every day.
A jīvanmukta in these two situations will have jīvanmukti and when one is in seclusion
we say mind is silent with no more disturbances in the mind. I don’t feel like getting out of
situation. I try to escape from my mind with the world. This is a burden only to a person
in seclusion. A cave also does not make a big difference to a jīvanmukta. He has a silent
mind; and jīvanmukta interacts with the world even though the world is not according to
expectations.
The events emerging are not to our calculations or expectations or favourable situations.
When such situations occur, watch the FIR: frequency, intensity and recovery period. For a
jīvanmukta, it becomes lesser and lesser. It is a gradual change to a jīvanmukta.
Previously, the proportion of disturbance was more and in the course of time the position
is reversed. Generally I am quiet and rarely I am disturbed. More in the next class.

Class 19
śloka 66 contd.
Now, Vidyāraṇya deals with manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita which is another word for
mental restlessness which he calls manorājya or vikṣepah. It is nothing but the absence
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. All these problems would not have arisen if the person had
come to Vedānta after sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and śravaṇa would have been more

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 357

than sufficient for sādhana-catuṣṭaya sampanna. Only if someone comes to Vedānta

without sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti, the problem arises.
The student is the knower who operates the śāstra pramāṇa. A pramāṇa can generate
jñāna only when pramātā is well-equipped. Without sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti the
student is not a healthy pramātā, well-equipped pramātā; because of this reason, śāstra
pramāṇa is not able to do a good job. If śāstra pramāṇa is not able to do a good job, the
mistake is not a mistake on account of śāstra, but it is due to the seeker, the pramātā.
Pramātā has to do some self-checking if one is not able to become a jñāna-niṣṭhā after
gaining jñāna. Therefore, nididhyāsana is acquiring sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti in
retrospective effect. When it is practiced, the knowledge gained through śravaṇa seems to
improve better and better. Manana is handled to remove the intellectual doubts.
Dehātma-bhāvanā goes and the chattering-mind having disturbing thought is gone. We
don’t talk about thoughtless mind. Jñānī also has plenty of thoughts but he is free from the
disturbing thought, a thought that proves as a burden to the one with jñāna. Then the
mind enjoys silence and this śānti is mokṣa.
Watch your mind with people and watch your mind without people. How deep is the
disturbance also you notice at mental, verbal and physical level. Such persons are able to
keep a silent face although the mind is engaged with disturbing thoughts. The reduction
in the recovery period and intensity of the disturbance is success in nididhyāsana. The
reduction, can it come to zero percent is the question? It goes on reducing. Previously, I
was generally disturbed, but occasionally I have peace of mind. Now, generally, I have
peace of mind and once in a while I am disturbed and it is manageable without any
external assistance. Now, I am able to handle the disturbance and successfully control it.
This improvement is called ripening of knowledge.
Now, the mind is free from manorājya. Even then, once in a while, the mind goes through
vikṣepa and it has reached such a level that the disturbance is in internal level and not
expressed by body- or vāk-level and other people do not know such a thing happens. Only
jñānī knows some flutter happens. This happens because of prārabdha karma. Prārabdha
brings some event or other to affect our peace of mind.
Even the very thought of people dying in fire can disturb why such things happen. There
are karmas at vyaṣṭi and samaṣṭi level and therefore, he knows how to put up with
disturbances. The prārabdha karma has to give either sukha or duḥkha. It can be any, even

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 358

at personal, family, āśrama or national level; he is exposed to a positive or negative event.

That vikṣepa is at mental level and others do not know about that. Yet, he knows how to
handle. As a sādhaka, he has led an alert life of action, words, etc. What to talk of as a
jñānī. His expertise and skill in nididhyāsana or Vedānta abhyāsa makes him neutralize
that particular disturbance.
Hence, instantaneously he is wise enough to postpone important thing in life when his
mind is disturbed. When his mind is in disturbed condition, he will postpone until his
mind is in quietude and śānti. So he becomes jñāna-niṣṭhā; with this, madhyama adhikārī
topic is over. All the three, Vidyāraṇya has successfully handled and he enjoys a healthy
mind with ripe knowledge. The phala is given in two verses 67 and 68.

śloka 67
विक्षेपो यस्य नास्त्यस्य ब्रह्मवित्त्वं न मन्यते ।
ब्रह्मैवायमिति प्राहुर्मुनयः पारदर्शिनः ॥ ४.६७ ॥
vikṣepo yasya nāstyasya brahmavittvaṃ na manyate.
brahmaivāyamiti prāhurmunayaḥ pāradarśinaḥ (4.67)
Because of long nididhyāsana, the vikṣepa has come down to the smallest level. Just as
hundred percent physical health does not exist, hundred percent mental health also does
not exist. Even for guṇātīta jñānī, the mind is saguṇa only. It is mostly sattva-guṇa all right
and hence the vikṣepa will come down to an insignificant level. When vikṣepa has come to
the ignorable level jñānī is jñāna-niṣṭha and prājña is sthiraprājña. He has the knowledge
that is not obstructed by viparīta bhāvana. Knowledge belongs to ahaṅkāra. Now it is well
enlightened ahaṅkāra.
Enlightened ahaṅkāra is the healthiest ahaṅkāra. One interesting phenomenon happens.
When ahaṅkāra is most healthy, jñānī loses his identification with his own ahaṅkāra. He
does not claim himself as a jñānī after transcending ahaṅkāra. As the ripe fruit naturally
falls, the ahaṅkāra abhimāna also goes away. He says I am neither ajñānī nor a jñānī and I
am Ātmā, jñāni-ajñāni-vilakṣaṇa. This is generally true. When body is healthy, we have no
attachment to the body. There is no deha-abhimāna. We forget the existence of the body.
Suppose one part of the body has a pin or ill-health, then we have abhimāna on the body
due to ill-health or sickness. An enlightened ahaṅkāra is lightened ahaṅkāra and that
means he doesn’t have an abhimāna: I am jñānī, I am mukta, etc. Once the manorājya,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 359

mental restlessness has come down, for that jñāni-brahmavittvaṃ na manyate and even
jñānī status is dropped. To claim “I am a jñānī”, I should have ahaṅkāra to own myself.
When I am apramāṇa, how can I claim myself as an individual? One who claims I am a
jñānī is not a jñānī; jñānītva is a guṇa belonging to ahaṅkāra.
For nirguṇa jñānī even jñānītva is not there. He is not considered to be a jñānī. Brahmavit
is jñāni-ajñāni-vilakṣaṇa. Both of them are properties of ahaṅkāra; jñānī does not have
ahaṅkāra. The knowledge takes place in the intellect and that knowledge is mithyā.
Ajñāna is also mithyā for it is destroyed, jñāna is also mithyā and my svarūpa, jñānī-I, is
both above vṛtti-jñāna and devoid of feeling of ahaṅkāra. He has clear knowledge of Veda
and he is a jñāna-niṣṭha. Those who have got jñāna-niṣṭhā alone can know whether the
other person is jñāna-niṣṭha or not. Jñāna-niṣṭhas declare they are jñāna-niṣṭhas. That
means they are Brahman. Such wise men are jñāna-niṣṭhas.

śloka 68
दर्शनादर्शने हित्वा स्वयं के वलरूपतः ।
यस्तिष्ठति स तु ब्रह्मन्ब्रह्म न ब्रह्मवित्स्वयम्॥ ४.६८ ॥
darśanādarśane hitvā svayaṃ kevalarūpataḥ.
yastiṣṭhati sa tu brahmanbrahma na brahmavitsvayam (4.68)
At this level, he is no more enamoured by jñāna also for he knows jñāna also belongs to
ahaṅkāra, pramātā and he is also not enamoured by superior ahaṅkāra or enlightened
ahaṅkāra and he does not claim he is a jñānī. All of them become a play in the mithyātva
prapañca and even jīvanmukti is not a big thing for him. Just as we are not enamoured by
hand movement now, we are not enamoured.
Suppose you see a person whose hands do not move and you go on moving the hands,
then your love for hand increases. You value the Self only when you see the contrast.
When you see people in the mental hospital then you value your sane thing. When you
enjoy mukti and when it is natural thing for you, you are not enamoured by mukti. When
you see saṃśarī only, you find you have escaped saṃsāra.
jīvanmukti he is not enamoured about. Videha-mukti is mithyā; ahaṅkāra which was
taking mithyā śarīra till now is no more taking fresh mithyā śarīra. Among innumerable
mithyā ahaṅkāras, one mithyā ahaṅkāra which was taking many mithyā bodies will not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 360

take another body. Not taking mithyā body is not a big event he considers as he thinks
himself as Brahman.
Videha-mukti also he does not count as a big event in his long life. The moment they are
not a big issue my nature of mukti is natural to me; therefore, Vidyāraṇya says he gives up
his identification with both ajñāna as well as jñāna. The whole world may glorify him as a
great jñānī but jñānī does not even claim himself as a jñānī. He remains by himself as
kevala Ātmā without Viśva, taijasa, prājña statuses.
Remember jñānī’s ahaṅkāra is mukta and he does not want claim that mukta ahaṅkāra.
Jñānī’s ahaṅkāra has all virtues and virtuous-ahaṅkāra-jñānī does not want claim as his
own. But the world glorifies his compassion, etc. from ahaṅkāra-dṛṣṭi but he does not
bother about himself for he looks upon himself as Brahman, as his real svarūpa. He does
not claim he is a jñānī but he is a jñānī from the point of view of vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi. From
pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi he is not a jñānī but he is Brahman. This is a quotation from Muktika
Upaniṣad and it also occurs in Yogavāsiṣṭha.

śloka 69
जीवन्मुक्तेः परा काष्ठा जीवद्वैतविवर्जनात्।
लभ्यतेऽसावतोऽत्रेदमीशद्वैताद्विवेचितम्॥ ४.६९ ॥
jīvanmukteḥ parā kāṣṭhā jīvadvaitavivarjanāt.
labhyate:'sāvato:'tredamīśadvaitādvivecitam (4.69)
This is the highest state of jīvanmukti. The highest state of jīvanmukti is a state in which
one does not want to claim “I am jīvanmukta”. Jīvanmukta is from the point of view of
ahaṅkāra only. To be alive is an adjective belonging to ahaṅkāra only. Rāga-dveṣa-mukti is
also from ahaṅkāra standpoint and the height of jīvanmukti is claiming I am not even
jīvanmukta.
The beauty is thar to claim I am not a jīvan mutka one has to be jīvanmukta. Running is
necessary to know running is not necessary. It is the highest state because one is totally
free from jīva-dvaita. Śāstrīya tīvra, aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita and aśāstrīya manda jīva-dvaita
jñānī sees as mithyā or unreal. The mind will be there and he will see it as mithyā.
Karuṇā, samatva, etc., he will see it as mithyā. This highest stage of jīvanmukti can be
attained by negation of jīva-dvaita. Vidyāraṇya says I have taught you jīva-dvaita so that
you can negate jīva-dvaita and attain the highest jīvanmukti. Jīva-dvaita is to be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 361

renounced by separating this jīva-dvaita from Īśvara-dvaita. I separated jīva-dvaita and

Īśvara-dvaita because I wanted to retain Īśvara-dvaita and renounce jīva-dvaita to gain
jīvanmukti followed by videha-mukti. With this, the fourth chapter is over.

Summary of the fourth chapter, Dvaita-viveka-prakaraṇa

Today I will give you a summary of the fourth chapter of Pañcadaśī. It begins with an
introductory verse where he talks about the subject matter which is dvaita viveka. The
very idea of discrimination comes only where there are two. The two types of dvaita are is
Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita and jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita. He also mentions the purpose of discrimination
which is of the two types of dvaita one is harmless and the other is harmful. Once we
know which one is harmful we can negate the harmful one and retain the harmless one.
The negation of the harmful will remove the saṃsāra and saṃsāra-nivṛtti alone is mokṣa.
Mokṣa is defined as the negation of harmful jīva-dvaita. That is the aim in view of this
analysis.
From 2nd to the 13th verse, Vidyāraṇya elaborates Īśvara-dvaita. He talks about sṛṣṭi and
takes example from all the four Vedas and the Upaniṣads. He gives the relative sṛṣṭi
vākyas to show Īśvara and Īśvara-sṛṣṭi are apauruṣeya viṣaya not available for pauruṣeya
pramāṇa. God is beyond the range of pratyakṣa-pramāṇa and even our logic or inference.
The logicians claim that Īśvara is logically provable. We logically prove that Īśvara is not
logically provable. This has been discussed in 2nd and 3rd sūtra of Brahma-sūtra. When
Īśvara himself cannot be logically known, how we can talk about his sṛṣṭi? So Vidyāraṇya
says our shelter support is Veda and therefore, he showed how Īśvara created the world.
Īśvara is a mixture of two principles, one is cetana Brahman and another is acetana Māyā.
This Īśvara with his vikṣepa-śakti of Māyā created the whole universe.
First bhūta-sṛṣṭi and then bhautika-sṛṣṭi include all physical bodies and all the sublte
bodies also. After creation, the Lord lends his own image, cidābhāsa, to every sūkṣma-
śarīra; that cidābhāsa anupraveśa is jīva-sṛṣṭi. It is the production of jīva by Īśvara. Not
only Īśvara created the world but also jīva by entering the sūkṣma-śarīra of jīva by
entering the body as ābhāsa caitanya. Up to anupraveśa the Īśvara-sṛṣṭi continues.
Here we should know the formation of cidābhāsa is called anupraveśa. Each cidābhāsa is
called jīva and as many sūkṣma-śarīras are there, so many jīvas are there. Sūkṣma-śarīras

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 362

are infinite and so, jīvas are infinite in numbers. Up to the arrival of jīva is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. It is
the creation of the world and the creation of jīva. This is Īśvara-sṛṣṭa dvaita. Then jīva
manages the rest of the show.
From 14th verse to 31st verse, we have got jīva-sṛṣṭi or jīva-sṛṣṭa dvaita or jīva-dvaita.
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that when Īśvara creates this world, he makes use of Māyā-śakti
and Māyā under Īśvara is an innocent and humble principle. Māyā does not wag her tail
or do any harm to Īśvara. Māyā serves Īśvara by making her vikṣepa śakti available to
Īśvara. The āvaraṇa-śakti Māyā never brings out to affect Īśvara because Māyā is under
Īśvara. He keeps under his control and creates and so, in the case of Īśvara vikṣepa śakti is
active but āvaraṇa-śakti is not active. The moment all the jīvas come into being, the
āvaraṇa-śakti becomes active and all the jīvas are universally ignorant, ignorant of the
wonderful fact that “I am none other than brahma-caitanya”.
The body-mind-complex is a false projection of Māyā and I am an instrument or slave; jīva
does not know. Jīva is the slave. This is anādi-kāla-pravṛtti. This confused jīva identifies
with the body and accumulates the bundles of puṇya-pāpa karmas. When this ignorant
jīva with its puṇya-pāpa karma looks at the world, the very world becomes jīvasya
bhogya-viṣayaḥ.
This jīva endowed with puṇya-pāpa karma confronts the world, looks at the world as a
viṣaya, a bhogya prapañca; from the angle of Īśvara, it is not bhogya prapañca but it is
kārya prapañca. From Īśvara’s angle this universe is kārya prapañca or the product but
from jīva’s angle it is bhogya prapañca capable of giving sukha-duḥkha-bhoga. And
therefore, when Īśvara looks at the universe nothing happens as for him prapañca is a
wonderful stage. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya addresses so in Śivānanda-lahari and says for Śiva the
world is a wonderful drama. For jīva it is bhogya prapañca.
Īśvara-dvaita and jīva-dvaita are not separate entities, but they are one and the same; the
world is called Īśvara-dvaita from Īśvara’s angle and jīva-dvaita from jīva’s angle. From
Īśvara’s angle it is kārya prapañca and from jīva’s angle it is bhogya prapañca that means
world gives me either sukha or duḥkha. Sukha-duḥkha of jīva depends upon karma and
since karmas vary, the same world is beneficial to some and to some others it is not very
good. Depending upon the constitution the place is good or bad. The world is capable of
giving sukha-duḥkha-bhoga.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 363

Vidyāraṇya says the first thing that should happen for me to have sukha-duḥkha is that
the world should enter my cidābhāsa. If the world does not enter my mind, it cannot give
sukha-duḥkha. Therefore, the first thing that should happen is that it should enter my
mind, it should become a vṛtti and it should become āntara prapañca. This entry is
because of karma. Whatever does not enter my mind cannot become my bhogya prapañca.
Even though lot of good and bad things happen in this universe, only what enters me
affects me and either gives me pleasure or pain. The world enters me through the sense-
organs. According to my perception my internal world gets the colouration.
The woman is one but when she enters the mind of the family members, either she
becomes an angel or demoness. The world becoming capable of sukha-duḥkha because of
my karma my knowledge my vāsanā, etc. is called jīva-dvaita. This he elaborately analyses
in these verses.
From 32 to 37 Vidyāraṇya establishes jīva-dvaita alone is bandha-kāraṇa. What enters
your mind and how you subjectively interpret creates varieties. Entry plus interpretation
become bhogya and these two are caused because of karma, our education and
upbringing, etc. That is why in the third chapter of Gītā it is said that there are three
factors that contribute; kāma, indriyas, sense-organs are ushers and then the intellect is the
judge and besides the mind does japa and it is capable of giving you self-knowledge. Jīva-
sṛṣṭa dvaita is bandha-hetu and not Īśa dvaita. He proves that through anvaya and
vyatireka. A person who is far away, even if he is alive the news the father receives that
the son is dead disturbs him and on the other hand even if he is actually dead and if the
father thinks the son is alive the father is not grieved at all. The entry plus interpretation is
responsible for jīva-dvaita.
From verse 38 to 66 is the most important topic, the central theme of the topic, brahma
jñānena jīva-dvaita-nivṛttiḥ is covered. For this, first, Vidyāraṇya says that since jīva-
dvaita alone is the cause of bondage you need not do anything with regard to Īśvara-
dvaita for the world does not need any improvement. Only your response and perspective
needs improvement. He makes three statements:
1. The world cannot be removed;
2. The world need not be removed;
3. The world should not be removed;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 364

For your Guru is there in the world. Removal of the world will remove Guru and śāstra
and without them you cannot gain liberation.
The next point is jīva-dvaita should be removed and can be removed. His next question: if
it can be removed how many methods are there? Vidyāraṇya says there is only one way
and that is brahma-jñāna. The logic is we will ask the question is the dvaita satya or
mithyā? If it is satya it cannot be removed. Satya cannot be removed; what cannot be
removed is satya. The world can be removed only if it is mithyā and mithyā vastu can be
removed only by knowledge. A rope-snake can be removed only by jñāna and it cannot be
driven away by garuda mantra or it cannot be caught by Irula tribes. A rope-snake will go
away only by rope-knowledge.
A Yogī asked: why cannot I sit in nirvikalpaka samādhi and the world will not enter the
mind and there is neither entry nor interpretation and therefore, saṃsāra is not there?For
that our answer is that samādhi cannot be long-lasting. You have to confront the world
even if you are in samādhi throughout the life. Then next janma will be there and so, yoga
is not the solution. You can use yoga for preparing the personality but it will not solve the
problem.
Then he divided jīva-dvaita into three types:
1. Śāstrīya jīva-dvaita
2. tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita and
3. manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita.
Of these, śāstrīya jīva-dvaita is Vedānta vicāra. Tīvra aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita is otherwise
called kāma-krodha or mala or asuri-sampat in 16th chapter of Gītā. Then manda aśāstrīya
jīva-dvaita is otherwise called manorājya by Vidyāraṇya or otherwise called vikṣepa. Then
he deals with each one.
First one is Vedānta-vicāra for that he says it should not be dropped immediately although
it is bondage ultimately. It is a golden bondage and it should be taken so initially. With the
help of that you may get brahma-jñāna and after brahma-jñāna you can drop Vedānta-
vicāra also or you need not but you do not depend upon vicāra. After jñāna, Vedānta-
vicāra is not required. Then spending the time you may choose to read or write and not
out of necessity. Only as long as it is a necessity there is a problem. Once you transcend
that there is no problem. Various examples are given in this regard. It is like a disposable

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 365

cup given with the coffee. It is a disposable cup and one disposes after drinking the coffee.
After jñāna is drunk, the Vedānta cup be disposed. This is the handling the first topic.
Then the second one is mala-nivṛtti. Vidyāraṇya say this should have been done even
before coming to Vedānta. In fact, that is the qualification for the Vedānta-vicāra and if
one has not done that before, Vedānta-vicāra jñāna will enter but it will not be fruitful.
That is why people say I get intellectual knowledge but I don’t get any benefit. Vidyāraṇya
says this has been discussed in the śāstras.
He wants us to read the appropriate Gītā chapter. Gītā has given five such methods in 16th
and 17th chapter:
1. First is viveka understanding the cause, nature and the consequence of each
positive and negative emotions; the more you understand this mind will get
included towards the positive and turn away from the negative. This is called
awareness program. It is like saying drinking is bad and at the same time the rule
cannot be enforced and hence they campaign to educate the people not to drink as
it will cause damage to the body and the mind. So also is the case with cigarette-
smoking, etc. Ultimately the discipline come from within. If I voluntarily give up
kāma-krodha then only it will be sāśvata. This is called awareness program viveka.
2. The second one is pratipakṣa-bhāvanā. For every negative thought, practice the
opposite thought.
3. Third one is prārthanā to God to give a better life and better thought.
4. Fourth method is saṅkalpa, the auto suggestion. Every morning you decide to
practice a particular virtue. Today I will not criticize anyone and I will talk good of
everyone. This is called saṅkalpa.
5. The last one is association with Sat Puruṣas who are free from mala and who are
śuddha.
These we should remember and practice all the time.
Finally, he deals with manda aśāstrīya jīva-dvaita which is called manorājya or the restless
mind. For that, he suggests nididhyāsana or aṣṭāṅga yoga. This is elaborately talked about
in Vivekacūḍāmaṇi. And as a person practices this nididhyāsana, which is learning to
dwell upon the Vedāntic teaching, one enters nirvikalpaka samādhi through savikalpaka
samādhi. Once mala and vikṣepa are gone, jñānī will become jñāna-niṣṭha. If you had

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 366

removed before śravaṇa, then śravaṇa would give you jñāna-niṣṭhā. This alone is called
jīvanmukti.
Then comes 67 and 68 which elaborate the phala. The phala is jīvanmukti or jñāna-niṣṭhā
or sthira-prājña. Vidyāraṇya makes a remark: previously I identified with ahaṅkāra and
the bondage was real and after Ātma-jñāna I will claim I am a mukta and more I claim
mukti more I am happy and this is in contrast with bandha. I am out of all problems and I
feel exhausted and after sometime the problem is forgotten and even the excitement of
mukti is gone. Now bondage becomes a fun and mukti is also seen as mithyā as bondage
is. Claiming mukti is also because of ahaṅkāra-abhimāna because jñāna belongs to
ahaṅkāra and mukti also belongs to ahaṅkāra. First mukta and then bandha-mukti-atīta.
Then, in the 69th verse, he concludes saying that I did dvaita-viveka for the sake of
elimination of jīva-dvaita by which one can gain liberation and get rid of saṃsāra. With
the 69th verse, Vidyāraṇya concludes the 4th chapter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 367

Chapter V: Mahāvākyaviveka
॥महावाक्यविवेकोनाम-पञ्चमः परिच्छेदः॥

Class 1
Now we enter the 5th chapter which is the shortest chapter with only 8 verses and it is
called mahā-vākya-viveka. It is the final chapter of the first pañcaka; it is the last of the
viveka-pañcaka chapter. From the next chapter, we will enter dīpa-pañcaka.
This chapter is the analysis of the mahā-vākya. We have seen the mahā-vākya before. Any
Vedic statement that reveals the oneness of Jīvātmā-Paramātmā aikya-bodhaka-vākya is
called a mahā-vākya. Sometimes the sentence may be small like tat tvam asi or bigger like
sa yaścāyaṃ puruṣe, yaścāsāvāditye, sa ekaḥ. The actual length is not the criterion but the
content is the criterion and the content should be Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya. Tat tvam asi
is one of the shortest mahā-vākyas.
There are so many other statements in Vedānta which do not reveal the aikya but it
prepares for the revelation of the aikya. All such vākyas that preparatory vākyas for the
revelation of aikya are called avāntara vākyas. For example, pañca-kośa-viveka is not
revealing the aikya but it talks about only jīvātmā and Paramātmā is absent in it. Similarly,
in sṛṣṭi-portion, there is Paramātmā but there is no discussion of aikya. So, when jīvātmā
alone is discussed but there is no aika or Paramātmā alone is discussed but no aikya is
talked about, all of those statements will come under avāntara vākyas. They help us
realize the meaning of the mahā-vākya.
Therefore, avāntara vākya does not have independent validity, mahā-vākya alone has
tātparya. It is like the wedding in which you will understand; the actual wedding event
will be for a day or two and there also the aikya is at muhurtha time but before that even
lots of events take place in both the families, especially in the bride’s family. Similarly,
there are so many preparations from sending invitations for marriage all over the world,
etc, maybe moon also later. They are all avāntara vyāpāra. All of them do not have any
purpose by themselves. The main purpose is the wedding function. Thus avāntara vākya
has no independent existence. Minus the wedding, all activities on both parties are futile.
Similarly, without mahavākya, all the Upaniṣadic statements will have no validity or
relevance. Therefore, mahā-vākya can be redefined as tātparya-bodhaka vākya, a vākya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 368

that reveals the central purpose of the Upaniṣad. Mahā-vākya reveals the aikya and the
benefit of it is that it generates aikya-jñāna in the minds of the seekers. Being a pramāṇa, it
generates pramā, meaning jñāna, that helps one to gain Ātma-jñāna and Ātma-jñāna gives
liberation, the goal of life.
The benefit of aikya-jñāna is removal of misconception that there is distance between God
and me. This delusion is a crucial delusion because Īśvara is the source of peace, happiness
and security. As long as I feel Īśvara is away I will feel security is away, peace is away and
happiness is away. Otherwise, like the deer in search of mirage water in the desert, we will
be in search of mirage water of peace, happiness and security. The life’s struggles will be
converted into gain. It is līlā called mokṣa. Mokṣa requires this conversion; the conversion
needs the delusion and the delusion that Īśvara is away goes on gaining the aikya-jñāna
that Īśvara, the source of peace, happiness and security is the adhiṣṭhāna, my very
svarūpa. Therefore, mahā-vākya gives liberating knowledge and so mahā-vākya is very
very crucial. How does śāstra convey this aikya and how are we understand this aikya?
Pañcadaśī itself included the mahā-vākya-vicāra in the first chapter elaborately. However,
we have to remember.
Jīvātmā consists of five components and Paramātmā consists of five components. śarīra-
traya, that is, gross, subtle and causal bodies; pratibimba caitanya and bimba caitanya;
micro reflected consciousness and original consciousness; similarly, God also has macro
pratibimba caitanya, samaṣṭi pratibimba caitanya and then bimba caitanya or original
consciousness; and at the original consciousness is one and one alone. The Upaniṣad talks
about Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya and when we enquire into that of the five components we
are able to see the aikya at the level of one component and all others will not fit and we
have to reject them by bhāga-tyāga.
At sthūla level there is no aikya; sūkṣma level there is no aikya and kāraṇa śarīra or
prapañca level also there is not aikya, and at the level of reflections also there is no aikya,
because minor reflection is small and macro reflection is big. So reject all of them not
physically but in terms of understanding. What is left behind is original consciousness, the
fifth component the bimba-, upahita- or sākṣī-caitanya is left out. At the level of this
caitanya, aikya is possible. When you remove the four components from jīvātmā, the jīva
adjective goes away. So also in the case of Paramātmā, when you remove the four
components of prapañca traya and reflected consciousnes, the adjective parama goes

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 369

away, then what is left is ātmā without any adjective. That ātmā is same, neither micro nor
macro, both in the case Paramātmā and jīvātmā.
Now a doubt may come; you say that out of five components there is aikya from the
standpoint of only one component of original consciousness and from the standpoint of
other four components there is bheda. The majority is bheda components. So the
Pūrvapakṣa says there is one abheda component while there are four bheda components.
He asks why you showcase that abheda and try to brush aside the prominent bhedas?
Advaitins says accepted. Still we will give importance to abheda because abheda is satya.
It alone is reality.
One genuine hundred rupee notes I have while you have four five hundred counterfeit
notes. There is the no use of fake notes for they don’t have any value and they cannot help
you out as they have no peace, happiness and security. You can hold the note but you
cannot use the notes. They have functional utility but it cannot help to purchase things. So
we accept it from vyavahāra-dṛṣṭi, but the utilities are superficial.
Similarly, when you want the real stuff, peace security and happiness, you have to come to
abheda alone. Yadā hyevaiṣa etasminnadṛśye'nātmye'nirukte'nilayane'bhayaṁ pratiṣṭhāṁ
vindate; atha so'bhayaṁ gato bhavati; yadā hyevaiṣa etasminnudaramantaraṁ kurute;
atha tasya bhayaṁ bhavati. Even Īśvara cannot give you permanent security as from the
vyavahāra plane, Īśvara and jīva are there and Īśvara functions as sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa-
kartā. He is the Lord of janma and Īśvara at appropriate time sends Yama to take the life of
jīva. If you want to cross over mortality even Jīva-Īśvara-bheda you have to transcend.
Even the devotee-deity relationship, upāsaka-upāsya bheda is there until sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti is gained and after Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya you have to transcend
that and this transcending is helped by aikya-jñāna which is generated by mahā-vākya
and therefore, mahā-vākya-viveka is crucial.
We have got hundreds of mahā-vākyas in all the Upaniṣads and some of the mahā-vākyas
are available even in Veda-pūrva-bhāga. But we do in our tradition is we choose four
sample mahā-vākyas from the Vedas. From each Veda we take one sample to show that all
the Vedas are committed to aikya in their teaching. If Vedas themselves contradict we will
have many problems. Fortunately, all the Vedas are uniform. Gati-sāmānyāt is Brahma-
sūtra vākya that says there is consensus in Vedic teaching:

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 370

• The first sample mahā-vākya is prajñānam brahma chosen from 3.1.1 of Aitareya
Upaniṣad belonging to Ṛg Veda and this is Ṛg Veda mahā-vākya.
• The second one is ahaṃ brahma asmi which occurs in 1.4.10 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad belonging to Śukla Yajur Veda and it is Yajur Veda mahā-vākya.
• The third one is the most famous tat tvam asi that occurs in 6.8.15 of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad belonging to Sāmaveda and it is Sāmaveda mahā-vākya;
• The fourth one is ayam ātmā brahma as second mantra of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad in
Atharvaṇa Veda and it is Atharvaṇa Veda mahā-vākya. The same mantra occurs in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad also in madhu-brāhmaṇa, last section.
Thus, four sample mahā-vākyas are taken by Vidyāraṇya for discussions. He takes this
chapter as a reminder chapter and he does not write elaborate commentary. He writes two
verses for each mahā-vākya. This is mahā-vākya-viveka the fifth chapter.

śloka 1
येनेक्षते शृणोतीदं जिघ्रति व्याकरोति च ।
स्वाद्वस्वादू विजानाति तत्प्रज्ञानमुदीरितम्॥ ५.१ ॥
yenekṣate śṛṇotīdaṃ jighrati vyākaroti ca.
svādvasvādū vijānāti tatprajñānamudīritam (5.1).
I say that this is only a reminder chapter because Vidyāraṇya does not do mahā-vākya-
vicāra. He mentions the final meaning that is already arrived at. In the normal process, we
have to take each word and then ask the question whether we should take vācyārtha or
lakṣyārtha and that among lakṣaṇās od jahad, ajahad and jahad-ajahad or bhāgatyāga we
should take the right meaning leaving the others. Vidyāraṇya here does not go through all
the process at all but he mentions the final meaning arrived at by bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā.
First, we take up prajñāna brahma, the mahā-vākya from Aitareya Upaniṣad. He gives the
final meaning of the word prajñāna. All the śarīras are removed and only the original
consciousness he gives as retained by bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā. That original consciousness by
which one sees every rūpa is prajñāna. By which one experiences the sound through the
instrument of ears; that consciousness by which one is conscious of the smell; and by
which one is aware of good and bad taste; four jñānendriyas are mentioned, indicating the
touch also. Because of which one is able to use vāk, make speech, etc, indicating all the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 371

other organs of actions; In short, that consciousness illumines the world through all the
organs is prajñāna and that prajñāna is Brahman.
We should know that it is the original consciousness that illumines the world in the form
of reflected consciousness. Nānā-chidra-ghaṭodara-sthita-mahā-dīpa-prabhā-bhāsvaraṃ.
jñānaṃ yasya tu cakṣurādi-karaṇa-dvārā bahiḥ spandate. Here the medium is mind
through which the reflected consciousness illumines the world. There is no reflected
consciousness separate from the original consciousness. The reflected consciousness
cannot exist without the original consciousness. In the night, the moon illumines the
world. Normally, this answer is right. But if you deeply think you will know that moon is
not a bright planet at all but the moon gets the light from the sun and the it illumines with
the borrowed light of the sun in the night. The sun illumines the earth during the night
also through the moon. The sun illumines the earth during the day directly. It is like the
mirror getting the light from the sun and illumining the dark room. Similarly cit illumines
the cidābhāsa through the medium of mind. That is why it is said tamava
bhāntamanubhāti sarvam. And the mind from the borrowed consciousness illumines the
world of objects. That original consciousness is called prajñāna. This is said in the Aitareya
Upaniṣad. Superficially, cidābhāsa illumines but primarily the original consciousness
illumines the world through the reflected consciousness. Cidābhāsa alone illumines but it
cannot illumine without the borrowed consciousness from the original consciousness. We
don’t take the mukhyārtha or vācyārtha and take the lakṣyārtha of cidābhāsa. If we do not
talk this meaning we cannot find Jīvātmā-Paramātmā-aikya. If you take vācyārtha
cidābhāsa, brahma-aikya will not fit in. The meaning will not fit in because brahma means
limitlessness, whereas cidābhāsa is limited. Therefore, lakṣyārtha by bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā
meaning is taken in this regard. Therefore, prajñāna means bimba caitanya giving up
cidābhāsa and retaining the cit, the original consciousness. More in the next class.

Class 2
śloka 1 contd.
Analyzing the four mahā-vākyas occurring in four Vedas, Vidyāraṇya has taken up
prajñāna Brahman occurring in Aitareya Upaniṣad. After discussing the meaning of
prajñāna now Vidyāraṇya takes up the meaning of Brahman and then aikya. Here he talks

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 372

about the padārtha jñāna and then takes up the vakyartha jñāna. Without padārtha jñāna,
vakyartha jñāna is not possible and without vakyartha jñāna, padārtha jñāna is
incomplete.
Prajñāna has been defined it as consciousness-principle, that consciousness due to which
everything is known or experienced. Everything includes everything inside as also
external to the mind. Here a question may arise: no doubt consciousness illumines the
internal world, but how do you say that the consciousness illumines the external world? It
is cidābhāsa that is illumining the external world, then how do you say cit illumines the
external world.
To this question, he says it is the cit that obtains in the mind as cidābhāsa that illumines
the world. Cidābhāsa is only a vyavahāra avatāra of cit. Therefore, we don’t differentiate
cit and cidābhāsa in this context. This is a very important point to be noted otherwise the
scriptural study become difficult. Cit and cidābhāsa are one and the same or different is
the question we face here today. Is the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness identical or different? Suppose such a question comes, we find that in
certain features they are identical and in certain features they are different also, exactly
like your original face and the reflected face.
In certain features they are identical because all the parts nose, ears, etc., are in the
reflection also. All the actions of the face is seen in the reflection also. Accepting the
identity alone you look at the mirror. We look at the mirror because of the basic
understanding that the face and its image in the mirror are identical. At the same time,
both are different also, because when the mirror goes, the reflection disappears, you don’t
give your name in the obituary column! The original you remains as it is. This is the basic
difference; in certain features they are different, it is established. This is called bheda-
abheda-sambandha. Bimba and pratibimba have got bheda as also abheda.
When you see an old photograph of yours taken some time back you say I am there in the
picture and here bheda is seen. Bheda and abheda are there and we should know in which
context bheda is kept in the mind and in what context abheda is kept in the mind. If
someone asks as to “who is the ātmā that travels after death?”, I will say cidābhāsa travels
and cit does not travels. Here, bheda is highlighted. If I say cit illumines the external and
internal world, we highlight cit itself is cidābhāsa and one cit alone illumines both the
worlds. Here abheda is highlighted.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 373

Throughout Vedānta, the intellect should be agile and must know where to keep in mind
abheda and where bheda. The reflection and the original are otherwise look-alikes. To
think that the original consciousness is seeing the world is technically wrong, because the
reflected consciousness illumines the world. Here, Vidyāraṇya assumes that after all,
reflected consciousness is nothing but the avatāra of original consciousness. Kṛṣṇa and
Viṣṇu though are one and the same, but different in another angle. Kṛṣṇa is an avatāra, has
a date of birth and a date of svargārohaṇa while Viṣṇu is birthless and endless Paramātmā.
They have bheda-abheda sambandha. Sometimes we highlight bheda and sometimes we
highlight abheda. Similarly, here also, prajñāna is caitanya where we don’t differentiate
Jīvātmā and Paramātmā. We say one is vyāvahārika-svarūpa and the other is
pāramārthika-svarūpa of ātmā.

śloka 2
चतुर्मुखेन्द्रदेवेषु मनुष्याश्वश्वगवादिषु ।
चैतन्यमेकं ब्रह्मातः प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्ममय्यपि ॥ ५.२ ॥
caturmukhendradeveṣu manuṣyāśvaśvagavādiṣu.
caitanyamekaṃ brahmātaḥ prajñānaṃ brahmamayyapi (5.2).
He now gives the meaning of Brahman. Prajñāna-pada-artha is over and now we analyse
the Brahman-pada-artha. It is caitanya the consciousness or the one original consciousness.
Where is it located? It is obtaining in all the jīvarasis, like Brahmaji, Indra, devas, who
come under uttama jīvas, manuṣya the medium jīvas, aśvas horses, cows and other
animals that come under adhama jīva without any freewill; compared to them, manuṣyas
are superior and compared to devas, manuṣyas are inferior. In all of them, there is one
inhering consciousness. It is like the thread going through the beads, costly as well as
cheaper ones. Ekam caitanyam and that eka caitanya is Brahman. This is the meaning of
Brahman occurring in Aitareya Upaniṣad.
Now, we will take up the meaning of the sentence. Because of the mahā-vākya in which
both prajñāna and Brahman are presented in sāmānādhikaraṇya, meaning in apposition,
without any preposition in between; The preposition reveals the relation between the two
words, and while doing so, it is known that there is duality. However, there is no
relationship between Brahman and prajñāna and therefore both are identical. In prajñāna
Brahman, there is no preposition which means there is no sambandha between them as

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 374

there is no duality and hence both are one and the same. Therefore, it is an Advaita-
bodhaka-vākya. Because of the absence of saṃśarga, because of the presence of
sāmānādhikaraṇya, within my body also prajñāna is Brahman; the same Brahman which
is present in all the jīvarasis is present in my body also as Śākṣi-caitanya. Therefore,
prajñāna is free from all limitations. It is pūrṇa and aparicchinna. This aikya between
prajñāna and Brahman is the vākyārtha. With this, the first mahā-vākya is over. Now, we
enter the next mahā-vākya.

śloka 3
परिपूर्णः परात्मास्मिन्देहे विद्याधिकारिणि ।
बुद्धेः साक्षितया स्थित्वा स्फु रन्नहमितीर्यते ॥ ५.३ ॥
paripūrṇaḥ parātmāsmindehe vidyādhikāriṇi.
buddheḥ sākṣitayā sthitvā sphurannahamitīryate (5.3).
Now, we enter the Yajur Veda Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mahā-vākya 1.4.10 ahaṃ brahma
asmi. First, he gives the meaning of the word aham. Aham means parātmā. The higher
self, the real self, is the original consciousness. Don’t take the cidābhāsa here. The function
of this is that it resides in the body or in this individual as Śākṣi-caitanya of the intellect.
Here, śākṣī illumining the intellect is nothing but śākṣī lending cidābhāsa to the intellect or
śākṣī forming the cidābhāsa in the intellect. It is called illumination because once
cidābhāsa is formed the intellect becomes alive and sentient. Although it is conveyed as
though there is time involved, there is really no time involved but it is the lent cidābhāsa
which makes the mind and sentient. Not only does it make the mind alive and sentient
regarding the emotion, knowledge and ignorance but it also enlivens the surroundings. Its
role is śākṣītva. It resides in the body as the witness of the buddhi. This Śākṣi-caitanya fills
up everywhere. When we talk of all-pervasiveness, you have to highlight the difference
because the original consciousness is all-pervading while the reflected consciousness is not
all-pervading but it is there only where the reflecting medium is there. Cidābhāsa is there
in a particular body and when the sūkṣma-śarīra travels the cidābhāsa also travels and in
this aspect, cidābhāsa and caitanya are different, because cit does not travel while
cidābhāsa travels.
One should have desire for mokṣa and also have sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and only in
such qualified student, ātmā shines. He says so because mahā-vākya is ahaṃ brahma asmi

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 375

whereas in the case of prajñāna Brahman, you can add all human beings and all animals
also whereas in the ahaṃ brahma asmi it is applicable to only the qualified student and he
can alone can claim Brahman as aham. All others will claim śarīra as aham. Only uttama
adhikārī will claim original consciousness is aham. That is why we say that vairāgya is the
required qualification to understand this fact. Vedānta is pramāṇa only for such students.
When a qualified student says ahaṃ brahma asmi, he knows the truth and not others who
will not believe and have doubt about these statements.
For example, in the case of medical report of an individual, to understand the report the
doctor should have the eyes to read the report, know the language to read and the special
knowledge to understand the inherent meaning of the report and interpret the report of
the individual whose report is in his hand. For ordinary people, the report is not a
pramāṇa while it is a pramāṇa to the qualified doctor with above three qualifications: one
should not be blind or have eyesight, general literacy and special literacy. So also in the
case of Vedānta, one should have three qualifications: one should be an āstika, to take
Vedānta as the pramāṇa, general literacy and special literacy.
If I am a nāstika like a Buddhist or a Jain, they don’t accept Veda as pramāṇa and nāstika
can be compared to a blind person. The second is that I should know the language of
teaching or general literacy and the general literacy should be followed by special literacy
and that special qualification is sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti which means deha-abhimāna-
abhāva. With deha-abhimāna if you read Vedānta it is like a medical report that is not
understood. Only with the needed qualification is one an uttama adhikārī, capable of
taking Vedānta as a pramāṇa.
That which is ever-experienced without requiring any special effort is consciousness. I
experience consciousness all the time and that is why I am conscious of the surrounding
people, etc. I am conscious of consciousness. This is svayam-prakāśa. It is called aham in
this mahā-vākya of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Here it is aham-pada-lakṣyārtha. The
vācyārtha of aham means that include the body, date of birth, etc. A lot of unwanted
things are included in aham when we take vācyārtha. But when we take lakṣyārtha we
take only the original consciousness, separated from the three bodies which are reflecting
mediums and also the reflected consciousness.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 376

śloka 4
स्वतः पूर्णः परात्मात्र ब्रह्मशब्देन वर्णितः ।
अस्मीत्यैक्यपरामर्शस्तेन ब्रह्म भवाम्यहम्॥ ५.४ ॥
svataḥ pūrṇaḥ parātmātra brahmaśabdena varṇitaḥ.
asmītyaikyaparāmarśastena brahma bhavāmyaham (5.4).
Through the word Brahman, pūrṇaḥ Paramātmā varṇitaḥ, the all-pervading Paramātmā is
mentioned. So what is the difference between the previous one and this one? The subtle
difference here is that all-pervading Paramātmā is called param who pervades all the
bodies and when it obtains as the śākṣī in the body enclosure, when it plays the role, it is
called aham. The same Paramātmā in the presence of buddhi-upādhi, it is called aham and
the very same consciousness without reference to buddhi, as all-pervading consciousness,
is called Brahman. From vyaṣṭi-dṛṣṭi it is aham and from samaṣṭi-dṛṣṭi it is Brahman.
Now, we will take up the word asmi. Parāmarśa means revelation. Ahaṃ brahma asmi
when you say, it means I am Brahman or Brahman is myself which means there is no
difference between Brahman and me. I am not different from myself, Brahman is not
different from me, the self. Therefore, because of the revelation of aikya in the mahā-
vākya, I am Brahman. “I am Brahman” is a fact for me because it is revealed by a pramāṇa.
Vedānta is an independent pramāṇa not requiring verification from any other pramāṇa. In
fact, it is not possible also. Just like the eyes are an independent fact-revealing pramāṇa,
which need not be confirmed by ears, etc, nor is it possible for the fact of rūpa seen by eyes
to be confirmed by the ears, etc. Therefore, I am Brahman is fact and there is no need for
corroboration through meditation. No meditation can prove this aikya. Independent fact-
revealing Veda vākya is pramāṇa.

Class 3
Śloka 4 contd.
Vidyāraṇya gives the meaning of the four sample mahā-vākyas selected from four Vedas.
We have already discussed the first two mahā-vākyas: prajñāna Brahman and
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mahā-vākya ahaṃ brahma asmi of Yajur Veda. Now we will
enter the Chāndogya Upaniṣad mahā-vākya tat tvam asi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 377

śloka 5
एकमेवाद्वितीयं सन्नामरूपविवर्जितम्।
सृष्टेः पुराधुनाप्यस्य तादृक्त्वं तदितीर्यते ॥ ५.५ ॥
ekamevādvitīyaṃ sannāmarūpavivarjitam.
sṛṣṭeḥ purādhunāpyasya tādṛktvaṃ taditīryate (5.5).
This occurs in the 6.8.15 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Here, the word tat is a pronoun, a proxy
noun that can stand for any noun. Literally, tat means that and tvam means you and asi
means are, and the sentence means you are that. Here two proxy nouns are which are you
and that. In order to know the right noun the pronouns refer to needs clear understanding.
Upaniṣad has introduced Brahman as jagat-kāraṇa. That Brahman created everything and
that Brahman has created the body and entered the body as the very consciousness of
jīvātmā and therefore, you the jīvātmā are none other than that Brahman. Before entering
the body, it is Paramātmā and after entering the body, the same Paramātmā is called
jīvātmā. After introducing Brahman as the creator, the Upaniṣad says Brahman is pure
existence. When we say pure existence, we have to remember the five things that we saw
about consciousness too:
1. Existence is not a part, property or a product of any object.
2. Existence is an independent entity which pervades objects and lends the existence
sadābhāsa, just as blessing with cidābhāsa, it blesses with sadābhāsa; and enlivens.
3. Existence is not limited by any boundaries of the object.
4. Existence continues to survive even after the disintegration of the object.
5. The surviving existence is not available for transaction, not because it is not there
but the because the medium is absent for its transaction.
That existence is pure existence, which is seen as jagat-kāraṇa Brahman. Pure existence
was there before creation. Before the arrival of kārya prapañca,kāraṇa Brahman was there
and it was free from all the nāma-rūpas. Nāma-rūpa is the name of vikāra, kārya.
Ekamevādvitīyam, it is free from all divisions known as sajātīya, vijātīya and svagata-
bheda. This very statement Vidyāraṇya analyses in the second chapter śloka 19 to 26
explains ekam eva advitīyam. Vidyāraṇya also explains what is sajātīya, vijātīya and
svagata-bheda, etc.
Pure non-dual existence was there before creation. This existence is the meaning of the
pronoun tat here is that indicates distance or remoteness, unlike the pronoun this. It means

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 378

that it is away. What type of remoteness is indicated by the word tat? Here remoteness is
of two kinds: one is spatial and the other timewise remoteness. What do we mean by
remoteness? Spatially, you cannot talk about distance of existence because it is
everywhere. Therefore then, the pronoun tat must refer to remoteness with regard to time
or kāla that one which was before the creation. Therefore, tat refers to bhūta-kāla-viśiṣṭa-
tat or existence or the existence associated with past time. It is so because the pronoun tat
refers to that time. The word tvam refers to student who is in front in the present time. The
word tvam asi refers to the present tense alone. Tat refers to something associated with
past tense. It is therefore, not possible to talk of aikya between the past and the present.
Tat refers to bhūta kāla and tvam is associated with present time and both cannot become
identical because of kāla-bheda. So vācyārtha is not fitting. Today, yesterday is not there
and in yesterday, today is not there. Now we have to go for the lakṣyārtha. How do you
do that? Remove the kāla-sambandha and take existence without connecting to the past
and future or remove the kāraṇatva associated with kāla. Tat-pada-vācyārtha is kāla-
sambandha-sahita-sattā while tat-pada-lakṣyārtha is kāla-sambandha-rahita-sattā. Even
now, the existence enjoys the same nature that it is without kāla-sambandha. Vācyārtha is
associated with kāla due to two reasons, one is the word tat and the other is due to āsīt in
the past tense, while for lakṣyārtha, remove past tense, remove kāla-sambandha and take
pure sambandha-rahita or nāma-rūpa-sambandha-rahita, bhūta-vartamāna-kāla-
sambandha-rahita, sat is the implied meaning of the word tat. It is an implied meaning
because the direct meaning is associated with the bhūta-kāla. That pure existence not
related to time or timeless existence is lakṣyārtha of the word tat. Timed existence is
vācyārtha of tat and timeless existence is the lakṣyārtha of tat. Tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha will
be stated in the next verse.

śloka 6
श्रोतुर्देहेन्द्रियातीतं वस्त्वत्र त्वंपदेरितम्।
एकता ग्राह्यतेऽसीति तदैक्यमनुभूयताम्॥ ५.६ ॥
śroturdehendriyātītaṃ vastvatra tvaṃpaderitam.
ekatā gṛāhyate:'sīti tadaikyamanubhūyatām (5.6).
The meaning of the word tvam is pure consciousness. The consciousness which five
features like consciousness is not a part, property or a product of a substance and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 379

consciousness is an independent entity which pervades and enlivens all and existence
extends beyond nāmas and rūpas which is not limited by the boundaries of the body and
consciousness will survive even after all the objects die.
Now this consciousness is beyond time but when it is associated with the body, it gets a
time slot. When I am associated with the body I become kārya ātmā and I get vartamāna-
deha-sambandha. The direct meaning of the word you is consciousness associated with
kārya status with space and time limitation. When you get involved with time, you cannot
be equated with the timeless Brahman.
Hence drop the vācyārtha and you lose śarīra-sambandha and once śarīra-sambandha is
removed, you go beyond time. You are neither kārya nor kāraṇa. You will have no nāma-
rūpa. Now you are timeless consciousness. The implied meaning of tvam is the timeless
consciousness. The implied meaning of tat is the timeless existence. The equation reveals
that timeless-existence and timeless-consciousness are not two things. The timeless
existence-consciousness is available right now and therefore, may you claim the fact now.
Vastu, the pure consciousness or the real consciousness is deha-indriya-atīta, it is beyond
sense-organs and the śarīras. That pure consciousness is available very much in the body
of the listener. He need not go to any special place nor is he to go to any avasthā. Deha-
indriya-atīta caitanya is tvaṃpaderitam, revealed through the word tvam.
Normally, when we use I it includes original consciousness, sūkṣma-śarīra, sthūla-śarīra
and kāraṇa-śarīra and reflected consciousness and only original consciousness is satya.
You have to use the word aham and intellectually remember the fact the four are mithyā
and original consciousness is the real meaning of I and remembering this fact at the time
of śravaṇa is remaining in lakṣyārtha. When I remain in lakṣyārtha, I am timeless
consciousness. As timeless consciousness, I can happily claim that I am one with timeless
existence. Therefore, he says tvampaderitam, revealed by tvampada.
What remains is asi and he says now, asi iti ekatā gṛāhyate. Gṛāhyate through causal form
is stated to make another grasp, or understand the truth of ekatā. Ekatā does not mean
union. It is one and one alone. Pure consciousness is pure existence. Pure consciousness is
non-different from pure existence. They are two different words conveying one and the
same subject. I and vastu represent Brahman. Aham eva Brahman and brahmaiva aham. It
means jīvātmā and Paramātmā are one and the same. Grasp this as a fact obtaining now.
This does not bring any new experience but it gives only an aparokṣa jñāna, a fact

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 380

obtaining now. Fact is that which obtains all the time. If it is not a fact it will be an event in
time and there is a big difference between event and fact. Event is associated with time
while fact is always is there. Grasp this as a fact obtaining all the time. With this, the third
mahā-vākya is over. Now comes the fourth and final.

śloka 7
स्वप्रकाशापरोक्षत्वमयमित्युक्तितो मतम्।
अहङ्कारादिदेहान्तात्प्रत्यगात्मेति गीयते ॥ ५.७ ॥
svaprakāśāparokṣatvamayamityuktito matam.
ahaṅkārādidehāntātpratyagātmeti gīyate (5.7).
Samaveda Chāndogya Upaniṣad mahā-vākya tat tvam asi is over. Now, in the 7th and 8th
verse, Vidyāraṇya discusses Atharvaṇa Veda Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad mahā-vākya ayam
ātmā brahma. Here, Vidyāraṇya gives the lakṣyārtha of each word. Vācyārtha does not fit
in and we have to do this homework and reject all of the other, jahad and ajahad lakṣaṇās
and take to bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā. This job has been done in the first chapter.
The meaning of word ayam means svaprakāśa-aparokṣatva; ayamityuktito matam means
ayam-padena. Through the word ayam occurring in mahā-vākya, the self-evident,
immediately obtaining or intimately obtaining consciousness is indicated. Here, the word
ayam does not refer to this. Normally, it refers to the object close by. Here, it refers to
something so close for which the distance is zero, that means ayam refers to I. Ātmā-iti
padena means through the word ātmā, innermost consciousness is revealed. It is
innermost to the five kośas consisting of annamaya, vijñānamaya kośas, etc. The entire
Pañcadaśī you can enjoy if you can remember the relative Upaniṣadic portion. This is the
meaning of ātmā which means the innermost consciousness.

śloka 8
दृश्यमानस्य सर्वस्य जगतस्तत्त्वमीर्यते ।
ब्रह्मशब्देन तद्ब्रह्म स्वप्रकाशात्मरूपकम्॥ ५.८ ॥
dṛśyamānasya sarvasya jagatastattvamīryate.
brahmaśabdena tadbrahma svaprakāśātmarūpakam (5.8).
The meaning of the word Brahman occurring in the mahā-vākya ayam ātmā brahma is the
tattva, innermost essence or the ultimate stuff dṛśyamānasya sarvasya, of the whole

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 381

cosmos. That is why Vidyāraṇya says jagataḥ. By the word brahma the substratum which
is conscious existence of the appearance of the whole world is meant. That Brahman is of
the nature of the self-effulgent pure self. You cannot keep the name and form in the mind;
if you continue to do so, the micro-macro-difference will continue to be so. The third word
in the mahā-vākya ayam ātmā brahma is Brahman. The disappearance of the individuality
is the realization of ahaṃ brahmasmi or ayam ātmā brahma mahā-vākya. When you look
at the oneness, you should not look at the nāma-rūpa. When you look at the ocean you
should not keep in mind the wave nāma-rūpa. Wave nāma-rūpa is to be kept aside and
the ocean nāma-rūpa should be kept aside and then only the water substance will be
revealed. Similarly, Brahman is the essence of the whole world as also the individual
jīvarasi. Inner essence of the world is available to me as ever-experienced consciousness.
That which is ever-experienced without any efforts on our part is Brahman it is concluded
here. With this, Atharvaṇa Veda mahā-vākya is also over. Thus, all the Upaniṣads are
struggling to reveal only one thing: you are free, you are free, you are free!

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 382

Chapter VI: Citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa

चित्रदीपोनाम - षष्ठः परिच्छेदः ।

Class 82
We have completed the first group of viveka-pañcaka. The name of every chapter had the
word viveka. Now we enter the second pañcaka. Here all the chapters have the common
word dīpa. Therefore, this group of five chapters is called dīpa-pañcaka. This chapter has
290 verses. With this background, we will enter the citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa.

śloka 1
यथा चित्रपटे दृष्टमवस्थानां चतुष्टयम्।
परमात्मनि विज्ञेयं तथावस्थाचतुष्टयम्॥ ६.१ ॥
yathā citrapaṭe dṛṣṭamavasthānāṃ catuṣṭayam.
paramātmani vijñeyaṃ tathāvasthācatuṣṭayam (6.1).
The entire chapter can be divided into two parts. The first part gives the Vedānta-
saṅgraha. For this purpose Vidyāraṇya gives examples. The example is citra-paṭa-vistāra.
It is the canvas painted on the screen. This citra-paṭa is an example for analyzing Vedānta-
saṅgraha. For Vedānta-vistāra he takes the ākāśa dṛṣṭānta, the example of space. I will give
the example first. It is a unique and original example. He says if you look at a painted wall
you can observe it has gone through four distinct stages. He says the first stage is that in
which the cloth for painting or the canvas used for painting is cleaned and kept ready. He
calls this as dhauta paṭa. Pure canvas or cleaned canvas he calls as dhauta paṭa.
Then the canvas has to be mounted on a frame and the cloth has to be stiff and it should
not be loose; for that they dip the cloth in starch lotion. Then alone the cloth is ready for
painting. The starched canvas is the second phase which he calls ghaṭṭita paṭa, stiffened
canvas.
Then it is ready for painting. The cloth is mounted on a frame and then the painter draws
the outline for the picture. That is the marking is done by drawing the outline and by
seeing the outline you can identify what will be the picture. Although you know at this

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 383

stage what the picture is but you do not have the full picture. It is a marked canvas which
means the outline of the picture is drawn. It is lāñchita paṭa.
The fourth stage is the outlines are filled up with appropriate details including different
colours. If it is a tree, a green colour is given. If it is a sannyāsī, a saffron colour is given.
The details are drawn and also it is coloured. It is the final stage of the painting and this is
called pūrita paṭa. The picture is completed including colours.
Now he says the same process is applicable to Paramātmā the caitanya also. Ātmā
caitanya has four stages before it appears as this wonderful creation. How does the
caitanya go through the four stages? Corresponding to the pure cloth which is unfit for
painting, we have śuddha caitanya which is the first stage corresponding to dhauta paṭa.
This śuddha caitanya cannot produce anything as it is kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa. Just as the
clean cloth has to be stiffened by starching, the pure Brahman has to be dipped in the
starch. For Brahman the starch is Māyā. Once Brahman is associated with Māyā it has
become a stiffened cloth as it were and it is ready to have creation. It is Māyā-sahita
caitanya and it is called Īśvara caitanya or Antaryāmī caitanya. It is the second stage.
Then things are formed in a subtle manner just as the outlines are drawn for painting the
picture. Hiraṇyagarbha comes up where the nāma-rūpas are a little bit clear.
Corresponding to the lāñchita paṭa is Hiraṇyagarbha caitanya or Sūtrātmā caitanya. All
the time there is only the canvas. What is there is one canvas as that of the painting and
caitanya in the case of Īśvara’s creation.
The fourth stage is Virāṭ caitanya where all the nāma-rūpas is completely filled and the
creation is clearly identifiable. So he introduces the four stages of caitanya by taking the
example of four stages of citra-paṭa. Then he points out how the saṃsāra comes up. Then
he will discuss why there is saṃsāra and he will talk about the solution later. In a painted
canvas, four avasthās are stages seen by us. If these four are possible in citra-paṭa the same
four stages are there in the case of caitanya also. In the case of caitanya, Brahman or
Paramātmā, four stages can be seen if you connect it with catuṣpād Ātmā given in the
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad.
The four stages of the example and the four stages of caitanya is explained now.
Vidyāraṇya is one of the best teachers of Vedānta and his teaching is one example of
consistency and clarity. Vidyāraṇya is a progressive teacher.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 384

śloka 2
यथा धौतो घट्टितश्च लाञ्छितो रञ्जितः पटः ।
चिदन्तर्यामि सूत्राणि विराट् चात्मा तथेर्यते ॥ ६.२ ॥
yathā dhauto ghaṭṭitaśca lāñchito rañjitaḥ paṭaḥ.
cidantaryāmi sūtrāṇi virāṭ cātmā tatheryate (6.2).
In the first verse, Vidyāraṇya introduced four dṛṣṭāntas and four dārṣṭāntas. Here,
Vidyāraṇya enumerates and names the avasthās. Just as the canvas has four stages as
dhouta paṭa washed cloth, ghaṭṭita paṭa the starched cloth, lāñchita paṭa outlined upon
and ranjita paṭa the coloured one; similarly, four stages are there in the case of caitanya.
First is śuddha caitanya. It is soft consciousness not stiffened one; the second stage is
Antaryāmī Ātmā. Antaryāmī definition Vidyāraṇya will give later. Then Sūtrātmā is the
third stage which is otherwise called Hiraṇyagarbha Ātmā and the fourth stage is Virāṭ
Ātmā. Then he will give the definition of each stage. First he will give the stages in
example and then explain the four stages of caitanya in the fourth śloka.

śloka 3
स्वतः शुभ्रोऽत्र धौतः स्याद्घट्टितोऽन्नविलेपनात्।
मस्याकारैर्लाञ्छितः स्याद्रञ्जितो वर्णपूरणात्॥ ६.३ ॥
svataḥ śubhro:'tra dhautaḥ syādghaṭṭito:'nnavilepanāt.
masyākārairlāñchitaḥ syādrañjito varṇapūraṇāt (6.3).
You can understand yet I will explain. In the case of citra-paṭa dṛṣṭānta, the cloth or canvas
which is pure by itself or spotless by itself is called dhauta paṭa. Here, Vidyāraṇya is
worried a bit that the examples may be extended too much and it may create a problem. In
the case of canvas, the cloth becomes pure and clean by washing. You may ask how
Brahman be cleaned. Don’t extend the example too much. Let us assume for the sake of
our study the cloth is already clean. He takes naturally pure cloth because Brahman is
naturally pure. The second stage is annavilepanāt means using starch to the cloth so that it
stands in the place proper. Anna here means starch. By dipping the cloth in starch, the
cloth becomes stiff and it is called ghaṭṭita. The third stage is lāñchita paṭa where the
outline is drawn. The outline is drawn by maṣi or with ink. The cloth that has outline
marked with ink is called lāñchita paṭa or the marked paṭa. The fourth stage is when we

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 385

paint the picture with appropriate details and colours and it is varṇa pūraṇāt. Thus, the
four stages of dṛṣṭānta is over. Now we will see the four stages of caitanya.

śloka 4
स्वतश्चिदन्तर्यामी तु मायावी सूक्ष्मसृष्टितः ।
सूत्रात्मा स्थूलसृष्ट्यैष विराडित्युच्यते परः ॥ ६.४ ॥
svataścidantaryāmī tu māyāvī sūkṣmasṛṣṭitaḥ.
Sūtrātmā sthūlasṛṣṭyaiṣa virāḍityucyate paraḥ (6.4).
The four stages of caitanya is given here. svataścit is stage one; Antaryāmī māyāvī is the
second stage; sūkṣma sṛṣṭita Sūtrātmā is the third stage; sthula sṛṣṭyaiṣa Virāṭ is the fourth
stage.
The caitanya by itself is called cit which is pure. This is the first stage. Then the very same
caitanya is dipped in Māyā, meaning the cit is associated with Māyā. The caitanya then is
called Antaryāmī. The third stage is sūkṣma sṛṣṭita when the nāma-rūpa arise and this is
the outline in the canvas. From the outline, you can know it is man or woman, or the
outline of the sūkṣma prapañca. It is partially known and partially unknown. The third
stage is called Hiraṇyagarbha or Sūtrātmā. Then comes sthūla sṛṣṭyaiṣa. All the nāma-
rūpas are emerged in concrete form with sthūla nāma-rūpa. Alone with sthūla sṛṣṭi
caitanya is called Virāṭ. Sūkṣma sṛṣṭya caitanya is Sūtrātmā. Sthūla-sṛṣṭi-viśiṣṭa caitanya is
Virāṭ. All the four are one and the same Para. As the cloth is known in the different stages
in the case of painting, Para is known in four different names as above.

śloka 5
ब्रह्माद्याःस्तम्बपर्यन्ताः प्राणिनोऽत्र जडा अपि ।
उत्तमाधमभावेन वर्तन्ते पटचित्रवत्॥ ६.५ ॥
brahmādyāḥstambaparyantāḥ prāṇino:'tra jaḍā api.
uttamādhamabhāvena vartante paṭacitravat (6.5).
He now extends the example further to introduce some more Vedāntic teaching. When
you look at the canvas by itself it is Advaita, non-dual, and you cannot have any
superiority or inferiority in the Advaita canvas. When the varieties of pictures are drawn
you forget the canvas and you look at the pictures, the eka becomes aneka and this aneka

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 386

becomes cetana aneka and acetana aneka. We do have so many objects drawn in the
canvas and even though there is no plurality or division but in the picture we have cetana
and acetana parts.
Even among cetana itself, there are many. In cetana also, we see dog and the man, the led
and the leader. All are drawn on the canvas. Eka becomes aneka; cetana-acetana-vibhāga
is there and among the cetana itself, uttama, madhyama, adhama tāratamya is there. If
you forget the picture and look at it as mere painting or nāma-rūpa, try to look at the
canvas; there is division or tāratamya? Kāma-krodha, etc., is not possible in the canvas-
dṛṣṭi and let us canvas for canvas! That is Vedānta.
In this caitanya, there are many cetana jīvas; we see uttama Brahma to the small plant or
creature in the creation. Here, we have uttama-adhama-vibhāga. We also have jaḍa
padārtha in the same caitanya as we have in the canvas. They are presented in a graded
form. Here, we are also compared to the paintings upon the śuddha caitanya which is the
canvas. Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya will introduce the divisions in the canvas and the creation.
We will see the details in the next class.

Class 83
śloka 5 contd.
In this sixth chapter of Pañcadaśī titled citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa, Vidyāraṇya presents the
Vedāntic teaching briefly and later elaborately. It is Vedānta-saṅgraha and Vedānta-
vistāra. For teaching in brief, Vidyāraṇya takes the citra-paṭa-dṛṣṭānta the example of
painting and ākāśa-dṛṣṭānta. Of the two examples, one being citra-paṭa-dṛṣṭānta, the
chapter is called citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa.
The creation is nothing but Brahman which has come from four different stages like
śuddha caitanya, kāraṇa-prapañca-sahita caitanya, sūkṣma-prapañca-sahita caitanya,
sthūla-prapañca-sahita caitanya comparable to clean cloth, starched cloth, outlined cloth
and painted cloth, respectively. That is, cit, Antaryāmī Brahman, Hiraṇyagarbha Brahman
and Virāṭ Brahman. Here, it is established that one appears as many. It is also established
that among plurality, there is tāratamya also. Similarly, in one Brahman there is
appearance of plurality and we have tāratamya also: jaḍa prapañca; superior to that,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 387

cetana animals; superior to that, cetana manuṣya and then cetana Devatās. Up to this, we
saw in the last class.

śloka 6
चित्रार्पितमनुष्याणां वस्त्राभासाः पृथक्पृथक् ।
चित्राधारेण वस्त्रेण सदृशा इव कल्पिताः ॥ ६.६ ॥
citrārpitamanuṣyāṇāṃ vastrābhāsāḥ pṛthakpṛthak.
citrādhāreṇa vastreṇa sadṛśā iva kalpitāḥ (6.6).
We have to imagine the painter, the painted pictures and after drawing all of them in
certain places where human beings are drawn, he imagines the human being wearing
different dresses. The word paṭa, he changes to ādhāra-vastra. It is all over the frame
where in those areas where human being is painted that he visualizes another vastra
which is not found in the other areas. The human beings wear another vastra which is a
visualized vastra and therefore, Vidyāraṇya calls it ābhāsa-vastra. Ābhāsa-vastra is only
on the human beings where they are there in the picture. There are certain areas where
there is only one vastra and there are certain areas where there are two vastras one ādhāra
and another ābhāsa-vastra. Next, the painter has to give different dresses for different
manuṣyas painted on the screen.
When the painter draws the painting upon a Svāmī the colour is imagined on ādhāra-
vastra or ābhāsa-vastra. Here, painter adds colour to ādhāra-vastra. In his mind the colour
is given to ābhāsa-vastra only. It is so because if he wants to paint ādhāra-vastra, he can
give any colour. The point he paints within the outline shows he is particular vastu. In that
particular place the ādhāra-vastra and ābhāsa-vastra are inseparably overlapping and
therefore, we get the confusion whether it is on ādhāra-vastra or ābhāsa-vastra. Here, I
have to use viveka between ādhāra and ābhāsa-vastra. Physically, we cannot see two
things but intellectually we know there are two vastras there: one on ādhāra paint cloth
and the other ābhāsa cloth on the painting.. The colour belongs to ābhāsa-vastra and not to
ādhāra-vastra. This is called realization.
You have to separate the ādhāra and ābhāsa-vastra intellectually and you should know
varṇa belongs to ābhāsa-vastra and not to ādhāra-vastra. If the painter wants to give paint
to the ādhāra-vastra, he could have done but he wanted to give different colour to
different items to the ābhāsa-vastra based on the karmas. In the same way in the creation

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 388

also there is ādhāra-caitanya all over. But there is ābhāsa-caitanya not everywhere but
only in special places where the conditions are there where we have got ābhāsa-caitanya.
ādhāra-caitanya is eka while the ābhāsa-caitanya is aneka. Īśvara having painted ābhāsa-
caitanya, thereafter, he gives colours. It means he gives properties and all varṇas the
different āśramas are given and Vidyāraṇya convinces all the attributes belong to ābhāsa-
caitanya while ādhāra-caitanya is avarṇa, free from colour and free from four varṇas also.
Once we understand the ābhāsa-caitanya alone has attributes and ādhāra-caitanya is free
from that, the next leap we take is saṃsāra attributes belongs to ābhāsa-caitanya only and
not ādhāra-caitanya. The next step is ābhāsa-caitanya is mithyā alone. Just as vastra is
mithyā and ādhāra-vastra alone is there. Ābhāsa-vastra as also the attribute of ābhāsa-
caitanya is mithyā. When ābhāsa-caitanya is mithyā how can its attributes be satya! Then
ask the question: am I ābhāsa-caitanya or ādhāra-caitanya? The answer is I am ādhāra-
caitanya and this is Vedānta. This essence is being taught in the following ślokas. While
ādhāra-vastra is the same, the ābhāsa vastras are of different sizes and different colours
and the ābhāsa-vastra is very similar to ādhāra-vastra at the same time. However, various
are the ābhāsa vastras. The vastra or the ābhāsa-caitanya is different based on the karma-
phala of the Jīva. Wherever you see a human being in the canvas, you must see two
vastras: one ādhāra-vastra and the other ābhāsa-vastra.

śloka 7
पृथक्पृथक्चिदाभासाश्चैतन्याध्यस्तदेहिनाम्।
कल्पान्ते जीवनामानो बहुधा संसरन्त्यमी ॥ ६.७ ॥
pṛthakpṛthakcidābhāsāścaitanyādhyastadehinām.
kalpānte jīvanāmāno bahudhā saṃsarantyamī (6.7).
In the previous verse, the example was mentioned. Here, the dārṣṭānta or the original is
discussed. In the example, ādhāra and ābhāsa-vastra was discussed. Here caitanya and
ābhāsa-caitanya are discussed for living beings who are located or superimposed upon
ādhāra-caitanya. Upon the ādhāra-caitanya jaḍa prapañca as also cetana jīvas are there.
Īśvara wants to differentiate cetana jīvas from acetana prapañca. The difference between
them is that the ābhāsa-caitanya is the extra gift given by Īśvara to the jīvarāśis and not to
mountains, fans, etc. Not only are those creations and cidābhāsas plural unlike ādhāra-
caitanya but they are also different. In a plant the ābhāsa-caitanya is very dull. In animals,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 389

the ābhāsa-caitanya is slightly better. In gorilla and dophins, it is much better. In the
human beings, the ābhāsa-caitanya is very bright as our sūkṣma-śarīra is very refined.
Ādhāra-caitanya is the same in all the beings and all the creations but the difference is only
in the cidābhāsas. This cidābhāsa is also created by Īśvara. Īśvara himself creates and
enters the śarīras as cidābhāsa.
The name of the ābhāsa-caitanya is called Jīva. This ābhāsa-caitanya who is situated upon
the ādhāra-caitanya just as ābhāsa-vastra is very much situated on ādhāra-vastra. There is
no distance between them. Similarly, ābhāsa and ādhāra-caitanya are inseparable, one is
vācyārtha aham while another is lakṣyārtha aham. Jīva-nāma is an adjective to the
cidābhāsa. The cidābhāsas are created which are called jīvas. These jīvas suffer and grieve.
These are saṃśaris suffering the life, occasionally being happy. In fact, only canvas is there
while the mountains and jīvas on the canvas are mithyā. These jīvas travel to improve
their lot, not only from one place to another, but also from one body to another.
Vidyāraṇya tries to canvas people to his teaching but nobody comes to his canvas, people
are running after the painting!

śloka 8
वस्त्राभासस्थितान्वर्णान्यद्वदाधारवस्त्रगान्।
वदन्त्यज्ञास्तथा जीवसंसारं चिद्गतं विदुः ॥ ६.८ ॥
vastrābhāsasthitānvarṇānyadvadādhāravastragān.
vadantyajñāstathā jīvasaṃsāraṃ cidgataṃ viduḥ (6.8).
We see the orange colour on the canvas. Someone asks whether the colour belongs to
ādhāra or ābhāsa-vastra. Both ābhāsa and ādhāra-vastra are one and the same. You can
know the answer only if we know the intention of the painter. If the painter wants to give
the orange colour to ādhāra vastu he would have given the colour in the whole vastra.
Now that he has given the orange colour deliberately within the outline indicates that in
his vision he has given the colour to ābhāsa-vastra which means that his colour does not
go to ādhāra-vastra. The varṇa belongs to ābhāsa-vastra and not to ādhāra-vastra.
Similarly, we should know that saṃsāra belongs to ābhāsa-caitanya and not to ādhāra-
caitanya.
The problem is that the ignorant people mix up ādhāra and ābhāsa-vastra and the people
argue that the colour belongs to the canvas and ādhāra-vastra. We ask what the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 390

visualization of the painter is? He says the colour belongs to ābhāsa-vastra although the
colour is painted on the ādhāra-vastra. In the vision of the painter, the varṇa belongs to the
ābhāsa-vastra. The ignorant people assert and say the kaṣāya varṇa belongs to ādhāra-
vastra. They superficially study and say it belongs to ādhāra-vastra.
Similarly, we wrongly say that the saṃsāra that belongs to ābhāsa-caitanya belonging to
Śākṣi-caitanya. Jīva here refers to ābhāsa-caitanya whereas cit is ādhāra-caitanya.

śloka 9
चित्रस्थपर्वतादीनां वस्त्राभासो न लिख्यते ।
सृष्टिस्थमृत्तिकादीनां चिदाभासास्तथा न हि ॥ ६.९ ॥
citrasthaparvatādīnāṃ vastrābhāso na likhyate.
sṛṣṭisthamṛttikādīnāṃ cidābhāsāstathā na hi (6.9).
Vidyāraṇya wants us to understand the difference between ādhāra and ābhāsa vastras.
Ādhāra-vastra is one but ābhāsa vastras are many. Ādhāra-vastra is all-pervading but
ābhāsa-vastra is localized. Ādhāra-caitanya is one all-pervading but ābhāsa-caitanya is
many and localized. This is highlighted here. The mountains, etc., are not painted as the
painting is done in the case of vastras. Similarly, the mud and all inert objects do not have
cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa is localized consciousness, confined to Jīva. We have two
caitanyas which is unique to Advaita: the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness. There is no cidābhāsa in the table but cit is there on the table. In the body
cit and cidābhāsa both are there. Cetana has two caitanya and acetana vastu has only one
cit caitanya. It cannot sense the surroundings because it is not alive to the surroundings in
the absence of the cidābhāsa. Bhogya prapañca is inert.
This example if you extend too much there will be problem. In the place if cidābhāsa we
give the example of vastra-ābhāsa. We said cidābhāsa is not everywhere, but it is only in
the living beings. Living beings include animals, human beings and plants. Vastra-ābhāsa
is drawn to living beings alone. You should not say cow and dog in the painting do not
have vastra. Thus, you cannot conclude dog does not have life! So some may say the
example is wrong. More in the next class.

Class 84

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 391

śloka 9 contd.
In this sixth chapter, first Vidyāraṇya gives Vedānta-saṅgraha, the essence of Vedānta,
with the help of citra-paṭa dṛṣṭānta and from 18th verse he will give Vedānta vistāra,
elaboration through ākāśa dṛṣṭānta. Through the painted canvas example Vidyāraṇya has
introduced the basic canvas which we call ādhāra-vastra; and then within the outline of
human being, there is visualized the clothing that is visualized by the painter, which we
call ābhāsa-vastra. Ādhāra-vastra is vāstava while ābhāsa-vastra is kalpita. Even though
perpetually we see two vastras, one is ādhāra- and the other is ābhāsa-vastra. In the
human dress, we see various colours. The varṇa of the Jīva’s painting relates to ābhāsa-
vastra, even though I don’t see clearly that the kaṣāya vastra of the human being is ābhāsa-
vastra and it is not ādhāra-vastra. The fact that the painter has chosen to paint the kaṣāya
varṇa within the outline of the Jīva and the painter does not want the painting to go to any
places other than the outline shows the same. Ādhāra-vastra, ābhāsa-vastra and varṇa we
should know clearly. Varṇa belongs to ābhāsa-vastra and not to ādhāra-vastra. We see
only the ādhāra-vastra and since ābhāsa-vastra is kalpita it falls under mithyā category.
We have satya ādhāra-vastra and mithyā ābhāsa-vastra and the varṇa also belongs to
mithyā only.
Now, extend this example to creation also. In the creation also there are three things.
ādhāra-caitanya in place of ādhāra-vastra which is present everywhere; the second one is
ābhāsa-caitanya which is not all over and which is within certain outlines and the outlines
here are all the living beings within which ābhāsa-caitanya is there; ādhāra-caitanya is
satya and ābhāsa-caitanya is mithyā; the third factor to be connected is in the place of
varṇa we have to put all attributes and the guṇas. All the guṇas whether they are the
guṇas of the physical body or whether they are the guṇas of the subtle body like rāga-
dveṣa, kāma-krodha and they are all connected to ābhāsa-caitanya. Sometimes, the
ādhāra-caitanya is called cit and ābhāsa-caitanya is called cidābhāsa. Then here
afterwards, we will develop further and point out and all the attributes put together is
called saṃsāra. All of them according Vedānta is called saṃsāra. Even sattva-guṇa also
falls under saṃsāra whether they are positive or negative virtues they belong to saṃsāra.
ādhāra-caitanya is saṃsāra-rahita and it is mukta. This is the fact which we have to know
to enjoy freedom and ignorance of this fact alone is the cause of saṃsāra. Vidyāraṇya has
pointed out three dṛṣṭāntas and three dārṣṭāntas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 392

śloka 10
संसारः परमार्थोऽयं संलग्नः स्वात्मवस्तुनि ।
इति भ्रान्तिरविद्या स्याद्विद्ययैषा निवर्तते ॥ ६.१० ॥
saṃsāraḥ paramārtho:'yaṃ saṃlagnaḥ svātmavastuni.
iti bhrāntiravidyā syādvidyayaiṣā nivartate (6.10).
He says the human problem is the ignorance of this fact and because of the ignorance,
there is misconception regarding this fact called avidyā. He enumerates two
misconceptions or the notions that put together is saṃsāra. Saṃsāra that belongs to
ābhāsa-caitanya has a lower order of reality which is a fact and taking this saṃsāra as
satya enjoying a higher order of reality is the notion number one. It is raising the status of
saṃsāra. Saṃsāra which enjoys only vyāvahārika-satya or which is mithyā seeing that as
satya is saṃsāra. Here is the promotion given to saṃsāra which is problem number one.
This promotion of mithyā saṃsāra to nitya is the problem number one. Seeing that
saṃsāra as located in ādhāra-caitanya is the second mistake because saṃsāra actually
belongs to the ābhāsa-caitanya only; what belongs to ābhāsa-caitanya we transfer to
ādhāra-caitanya and this false transference of ābhāsa-guṇa to ādhāra is the second mistake
we commit. This Lord Kṛṣṇa presents in Gītā as satya-mithyā mixing up which is the
problem.
These mistakes together, the two-fold bhrānti delusion, is the cause of saṃsāra. These two
put together is called ignorance. How to get sober and get over the hangover? It is possible
only through gaining jñāna. You have defined avidyā as twofold delusion but you have
not defined vidyā. Vidyāraṇya says vidyā is defined in the next śloka.

śloka 11
आत्माभासस्य जीवस्य संसारो नात्मवस्तुनः ।
इति बोधो भवेद्विद्या लभ्यतेऽसौ विचारणात्॥ ६.११ ॥
ātmābhāsasya jīvasya saṃsāro nātmavastunaḥ.
iti bodho bhavedvidyā labhyate:'sau vicāraṇāt (6.11).
ādhāra-caitanya alone is nitya-mukta-svarūpa. It is guṇa-atīta. Having plucked saṃsāra
from ādhāra-caitanya, we have to put it somewhere. We transfer to the Jīva which is
ātmābhāsa which means ābhāsa-caitanya. The moment saṃsāra is handed over to ābhāsa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 393

caitanya, the satya-status of saṃsāra will be taken away and it will be reduced to mithyā.
This is the correction of the second mistake. At the end of the second correction I will
know that I am the asaṅga adhiṣṭhāna and whatever happens anywhere will not touch me.
Jīva with ābhāsa-caitanya alone suffers saṃsāra. This knowledge alone is called vidyā.
This vidyā alone will destroy avidyā bhrānti mentioned in the previous śloka. Here, the
disease is avidyā and the medicine is vidyā or jñāna. How to get the medicine and from
which shop will I gain the medicine or how to gather this vidyā? This knowledge is
acquired through śāstric study for a length of time under the guidance of a live guru.

śloka 12
सदा विचारयेत्तस्माज्जगज्जीवपरात्मनः ।
जीवभावजगद्भावबाधे स्वात्मैव शिष्यते ॥ ६.१२ ॥
sadā vicārayettasmājjagajjīvaparātmanaḥ.
jīvabhāvajagadbhāvabādhe svātmaiva śiṣyate (6.12).
Since saṃsāra goes by the removal of avidyā, avidyā goes by vidyā, by vicāra, one should
take up vicāra. The self-knowledge comes through Self-enquiry done through śāstric study
with the help of an Ācārya. It is not gained through meditation. Meditation is needed
before vicāra to make one eligible for the study to gain jñāna. For gaining jñāna one has to
study the scriptures. You study all the time until you die. Enquire into three factors like
jagat, Jīva and parātmā or ādhāra-caitanya. Jagat refers to guṇa and saṃsāra and Jīva
refers to ābhāsa-caitanya. Śāstra alone is the instrument that helps the enquiry. I have to
augment my vision with the help of śāstra just as a telescope is needed to augment my
eyesight to see the stars. This will improve the intellectual power to enquire about Ātmā or
Brahman. Kevala intellect cannot reach the Ātmā. By the enquiry we will find that of the
three factors two are mithyā and one is satya. ābhāsa-caitanya and saṃsāra are mithyā
while ādhāra-caitanya alone is satya. Any enquiry will negate the mithyā vastu which in
this case is jagat and ābhāsa-caitanya. After enquiry, satya will be left alone just as on
enquiry, the rope is left behind after the disappearance of the snake.

śloka 13
नाप्रतीतिस्तयोर्बाधः किन्तु मिथ्यात्वनिश्चयः ।
नो चेत्सुषुप्तिमूर्च्छादौ मुच्येता यत्नतो जनः ॥ ६.१३ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 394

nāpratītistayorbādhaḥ kintu mithyātvaniścayaḥ.

no cetsuṣuptimūrcchādau mucyetā yatnato janaḥ (6.13).
Vidyāraṇya gives some clarity regarding the negation of the unreal. The negation comes
under two types. One is the negation of the dream universe. On waking up, there is
negation of the reality of the dream and the appearance of the dream is also gone. The
dream world does not appear after I wake up. There is another type of negation in which
the knowledge will negate the reality part and the appearance of the unreal will continue.
Even after the negation of mirage water, the appearance of water will be there, even after I
know that it is unreal. This cannot stop the mirage appearance and similarly the sunrise
appearance. By gaining the knowledge I can negate the sunrise but I cannot stop the
appearance of sunrise. Even after gaining knowledge, my experience is that the sun rises
in the east. Knowledge is unable to remove the appearance of sunrise. Your reflection in
the mirror also is like this. You know that it is mithyā and yet it appears even after gaining
jñāna. Knowledge negates the reality of pratibimba but you cannot stop the appearance of
the pratibimba which is there as long as there is mirror. reality you can negate but
appearance you cannot stop. If such things happen every jñānī will not see the world. The
very fact that the guru-paramparā exists and they are able to see the world indicates that
the jñāna does not stop the appearance of the world or the experience of the world.
The negation of the world is not the negation of the appearance of the world-experience. It
is clear conviction of the unreality or it will mean it means the negation of their reality and
it happens in terms of understanding. It happens in the intellect and not in Ātmā. Niścaya
is a vṛtti and it takes place in the antaḥkaraṇa and that self-knowledge does not mean
negation of the intellect and gaining something in Ātmā. Jñāna takes place in the buddhi.
“In meditation, when you transcend your intellect and abide with pure Ātmā, the flash of
self-realization will happen” is one of the misconceptions we suffer from. Vidyāraṇya says
it is clear knowledge and it has to take place in the intellect. You regain intellect and use
intellect in jāgṛt-avasthā. More in the next class.

Class 85
śloka 13 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 395

From the canvas example we have to note that the ādhāra-vastra is satya while the ābhāsa-
vastra is the visualization of the painter for the painted outline in the canvas. The varṇas
in the painting should be attributed to the ābhāsa-vastra and not to the ādhāra-vastra. The
painting is done to the outline of the human being and the painted colour belongs to the
various individuals in the painting of the individuals. This example is to be extended to
the Jīva also. The ādhāra-caitanya is satya while the ābhāsa-caitanya or cidābhāsa is
mithyā. Mithyā here means vyāvahārika-satya. The second lesson is that the attributes of
saṃsāra do not and cannot belong to ādhāra-caitanya and it belong to ābhāsa-caitanya.
This belongs to mithyā cidābhāsa and therefore, saṃsāra is also mithyā. The attributes of
the vyāvahārika-satya also will be mithyā. The attributes of rope-snake is also mithyā.
Mithyā saṃsāra belongs to mithyā ābhāsa-caitanya. adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya satya is not
affected by mithyā. Therefore, it is asaṅga caitanya or śuddha caitanya.
“Between ābhāsa-caitanya and ādhāra-caitanya which one is me?” is the question we face
now. Most of the people knowingly or unknowingly say ābhāsa-caitanya or ahaṅkāra or
which is kartā, bhoktā, pramātā, which is therefore, saṃśarī. I should claim myself as
asaṅga ādhāra-caitanya. What happens to ābhāsa-caitanya does not affect me ādhāra-
caitanya or śuddha caitanya or bimba caitanya. Knowing “I am the ādhāra-caitanya” is
jñāna. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya advises to make proper enquiry and see ādhāra-caitanya as
satya and see the other two as mithyā and claim “I am satya vastu” and live the rest of the
life happily rid of saṃsāra. Dismiss ābhāsa-caitanya and saṃsāra and then alone you will
be left with ādhāra-caitanya and enjoy the bliss. Now Vidyāraṇya defines what is meant
by negation.

śloka 14
परमात्मावशेषोऽपि तत्सत्यत्वविनिश्चयः ।
न जगद्विस्मृतिर्नो चेज्जीवन्मुक्तिर्न सम्भवेत्॥ ६.१४ ॥
paramātmāvaśeṣo:'pi tatsatyatvaviniścayaḥ.
na jagadvismṛtirno cejjīvanmuktirna sambhavet (6.14).
A thing can be negated by throwing the thing out which is called laukika method. There is
another way of negation which is by closing our eyes called the Yoga method. Vedānta
does not recommend either of the two. Vedānta suggests the jñāna method. I continue to
perceive the thing and by sheer wisdom I say there is nothing called a thing in the world.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 396

Vedāntic solution is through enquiry that there is no substance in the things and things are
but names and forms which we call as Brahman. This thing we negate by knowing the
inner essence of the thing, the whole creation consisting of Jīva and jagat. You don’t
physically destroy the world and you don’t reject it by going into samādhi. We say “look
at the truth of Jīva and jagat” and you arrive at the truth of Jīva and jagat-bhāva as ādhāra-
caitanya. Once you recognize that ādhāra-caitanya, then saṃsāra will be reduced to name
and form. This is the jñāna method of negation and it is an intellectual process of negation.
Jñāna takes place in the intellect only. This knowledge must be very clear and doubtless.
Even after understanding, perceptually the clip is available and use it for my job, but I will
say that there is no clip because of my wisdom; that clip is nothing but nāma-rūpa and
substance is something else.
The negation of ābhāsa-caitanya and saṃsāra or Jīva-bhāva and jagat-bhāva is not
stopping the experience of Jīva and jagat. Let the experience of the world continue as
usual, let the mind continue and let the thoughts also continue. What is needed is an
appropriate mind to gain this wisdom. The negation is clear understanding, wisdom that
both ābhāsa-caitanya and jagat are experientially available but factually not available. Blue
sky, blue water, rising sun and setting sun are there but factually it is not there. Ādhāra-
caitanya alone is factually there and the other two are there but they are not factual.
If you think withdrawal of thoughts is mokṣa, then you should go to sleep. That is not the
case. If that is factual Advaita suṣupti and mūrchā would have given liberation, then there
is no need of scriptural study and sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti, etc. If silencing the mind
gives liberation then there is no need of anything. Where knowledge is involved, the
education of the mind is a must and not silencing of the mind.
Although after negation of Jīva and jagat, only supreme self is revealed and firm
conviction about the reality of the self is self-realization; this does not mean that the world
should be forgotten or not experienced. Otherwise, there will not be any possibility of
liberation while living. If we don’t accept this, one can never have the bliss of jīvanmukti,
so much glorified in our scriptures.
We should see the world but not perceive the world as satya. In Yoga philosophy only
when you are silent, you gain mokṣa and we do not accept the yogic philosophy. Abiding
as Advaita Ātmā is also another form of clear understanding. If the negation is in the form
of clear understanding, the abidance as Advaita Ātmā is also another form of knowledge

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 397

or wisdom. Leaving the Paramātmā as Advaita adhiṣṭhāna after the negation of the world
is called Paramātmāvaśeṣa. We should also realize that I, the Paramātmā, am satya and
know everything else is mithyā and should not be counted anytime. I will give you an
example.
I am in a room with ten mirrors all around and I am there with ten images of mind. I say I
want to have only one figure and not the images. One person says “you be there and
remove all the mirrors”. Another says “close your eyes”. Vedāntins say “understand the
reflections present or absent are one and the same as mithyā cannot be counted along with
satya”. Without doing anything, without removing mirror or without closing the eyes, by
sheer understanding aham satya and ten others as mithyā, I remain as Advaita. Even
when I remain as Advaita with my eyes are open or closed, my Advaita is not threatened
by the presence of the ten people. I am Advaita satya all the time and perception and
transactions do not change me. Mithyā status does not and cannot affect my Advaita.
Experience cannot disturb the knowledge. Knowledge cannot be disturbed by any
experience because knowledge relates to fact and fact is that which cannot be disturbed.
Since fact cannot be disturbed, the knowledge also cannot be disturbed. No opposite
experience can disturb by knowledge. Even though I see a flat earth, my knowledge that
earth is round is not affected by my experience. I am ever Advaita and any type of
experience cannot disturb my knowledge. One should have the clarity of the
understanding. Subject knowledge in this respect is about the spirit. The subject matter or
the prameya can be different but the ādhāra is always the same. Prameyas are different
but the locus of knowledge is the intellect. If a jñānī keeps silencing the mind, he cannot
see the śiṣya, he will not know what is Pañcadaśī and what is Gītā. Then jñānī cannot do
any vyavahāra and he cannot give knowledge. But as per the Upaniṣad, jñānī alone can
give knowledge. This is the definition of abidance as the remainder Ātmā.

śloka 15
परोक्षा चापरोक्षेति विद्या द्वेधा विचारजा ।
तत्रापरोक्षविद्याप्तौ विचारोऽयं समाप्यते ॥ ६.१५ ॥
parokṣā cāparokṣeti vidyā dvedhā vicārajā.
tatrāparokṣavidyāptau vicāro:'yaṃ samāpyate (6.15).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 398

He says negation of dvaita is also clear knowledge and abidance in Advaita is also clear
knowledge. Now the question is the student may come and say I accept the fact. Then he
may ask as to how to get that knowledge. He says knowledge rises by enquiring or
analyzing the śāstra pramāṇa vākya. We often use the word Self-enquiry and when we
make this enquiry, we study śāstra. The enquiry is whether we want śāstric enquiry or
Self-enquiry. Self is within our body. The scriptures are outside, book is outside and the
self is inside. You have to ask the question who am I and take the Ātmā. This is a
philosophy. If you want to look at your face, you look into the mirror. The eyeball goes
round and round and if you practice the sādhana after 15 years you will have the
perception of the face. You cannot have direct sight even with billions of janmas. You
cannot see your eyes and eyes do not need any other instrument to see your eyes. When
you see the mirror, you don’t see the mirror but you see your own face. Superficially, it is
mirror-darśana but actually it is face-darśana. Similarly, śāstra is the mirror that reveals
my nature. Śāstric-enquiry is superficially śāstric-enquiry but in fact I make enquiry about
my self. You get the knowledge by doing Self-enquiry through śāstric-knowledge. Then
Vidyāraṇya divides the knowledge as parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna. Both the
knowledge should arise out of śāstra; details in the next class.

Class 86
śloka 15 contd.
We have seen that pāramārthika caitanya is not affected by vyāvahārika saṃśarī ābhāsa-
caitanya. In Gītā 4th chapter, it is said that the śākṣī is not affected by ahaṅkāra. The same
idea is presented in a different language here. Pāramārthika caitanya is asaṅga. Between
pāramārthika and vyāvahārika caitanya, it is concluded that I am pāramārthika caitanya
and definitely not vyāvahārika saṃśarī caitanya.
Finally, I should claim that I am the pāramārthika asaṃśarī adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. When I
arrive at the fourth stage, my spiritual journey is over, aham muktosmi is realized, I gain
liberation. Even pūrva bhāga of Veda deals with ābhāsa-caitanya for it talks about Jīvātmā
traveling from loka to loka. If a traveling Jīvātmā is talked about what is the meaning of
Jīva? The word Jīva means ābhāsa-caitanya or vācyārtha Jīva alone is meant. Lakṣyārtha
Jīva is not dealt with even in karma kāṇḍa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 399

The enquiry into the self is called vicāra. Vidyāraṇya says the knowledge born out of
vicāra is of twofold. Vicāra produces vidyā and this vidyā is twofold. One is parokṣa and
the other is aparokṣa jñāna. The definition of these two, Vidyāraṇya will give in the next
verse. Both vidyās are to be gained by vicāra alone. The two vidyās mentioned above
comes one after the other, parokṣa jñāna comes first and aparokṣa jñāna comes later. The
enquiry ends with aparokṣa jñāna prapti.

śloka 16
अस्ति ब्रह्मेति चेद्वेद परोक्षज्ञानमेव तत्।
अहं ब्रह्मेति चेद्वेद साक्षात्कारः स उच्यते ॥ ६.१६ ॥
asti brahmeti cedveda parokṣajñānameva tat.
ahaṃ brahmeti cedveda sākṣātkāraḥ sa ucyate (6.16).
What is parokṣa jñāna is defined here. When you refer to pāramārthika adhiṣṭhāna
Brahman and say there is Brahman as though it is something different and something far
away and say it is, then such knowledge comes under parokṣa jñāna. Parokṣa jñāna is
incapable of liberating a person. He will only become spiritually literate saṃśarī.
Previously, he was a spiritually illiterate saṃśarī and now he is spiritually literate saṃśarī.
Parokṣa jñāna is a stepping stone for aparokṣa jñāna. Parokṣa jñāna is a must for aparokṣa
jñāna. Dvaita-bhakti is a must for Advaita-bhakti. Without parokṣa jñāna, one will not
come to aparokṣa jñāna. Without parokṣa jñāna, aparokṣa jñāna is impossible because
parokṣa jñāna is the stepping stone for aparokṣa jñāna. Ahaṃ brahma asmi is the aparokṣa
jñāna. The day one is able to say boldly with conviction ahaṃ brahma asmi then we can
conclude he has gained aparokṣa jñāna. When we use the word ahaṃ brahman, the
lakṣyārtha refers to the ādhāra-caitanya or bimba caitanya and it does not refer to
pratibimba caitanya. Here, ‘I’ refers to the original consciousness and then I claim ahaṃ
brahman. That is called sākṣātkāra. The word sākṣātkāra is another word for aparokṣa
jñāna. Another word is also used in scriptural literature and that word is anubhava.
Remember all the three words are synonymous. The most important point to be
remembered whether you call it sākṣātkāra or anubhava it has to come during vicāra.
Here, I would like to add an aside point which Vidyāraṇya adds elsewhere. Vicāra
produces two types of knowledge. One kāraṇa can produce one kārya alone, then how can
one kāraṇa produce parokṣa and aparokṣa jñāna? The answer is Vedānta has two types of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 400

statements. One is called avāntara vākyas and another is mahāvākyas. Jīvātma-

Paramātma-aikya-bodhaka-vākya is mahā-vākya. Avāntara vākya are all the vākyas other
than mahā-vākyas. Even the descriptions of Brahman come under avāntara vākya only.
The condition for mahā-vākya is that it should tell you are that or you are Brahman.
Avāntara-vākya-vicāra will generate parokṣa jñāna and mahā-vākya will produce
aparokṣa jñāna.

śloka 17
तत्साक्षात्कारसिद्ध्यर्थमात्मतत्त्वं विविच्यते ।
येनायं सर्वसंसारात्सद्य एव विमुच्यते ॥ ६.१७ ॥
tatsākṣātkārasiddhyarthamātmatattvaṃ vivicyate.
yenāyaṃ sarvasaṃsārātsadya eva vimucyate (6.17).
Vidyāraṇya says that I will assist you in conducting mahā-vākya-vicāra parokṣa- and
aparokṣa-jñāna-siddhyartham. A guided enquiry will be introduced here. For the sake of
attaining aparokṣa jñāna the nature of Ātmā is going to be enquired into. He uses the
word ātma-tattva in general way for Vidyāraṇya will discuss this aspect elaborately later.
This is called tvam- and tat-pada-vicāra. ādhāra at micro and macro level; ābhāsa at micro
and macro level will be discussed later. On gaining this knowledge, you will get
instantaneous liberation from all forms of saṃsāra. Emotional saṃsāra we all know that
other people do not treat us as we deserve. Intellectual saṃsāra is that any mystery we are
not able to know clearly because of intellectual limitation. We do not know what is good
and what is bad, etc. Other than Brahman everything has problem and we partly know or
wrongly we know. This is intellectual saṃsāra. Freedom from all forms of saṃsāra is
mukti. With this Vedānta-saṅgraha is over.

śloka 18
कू टस्थो ब्रह्मजीवेशावित्येवं चिच्चतुर्विधा ।
घटाकाशमहाकाशौ जलाकाशाभ्रखे यथा ॥ ६.१८ ॥
kūṭastho brahmajīveśāvityevaṃ ciccaturvidhā.
ghaṭākāśamahākāśau jalākāśābhrakhe yathā (6.18).
For the sake of elaborate study of Vedānta, Vidyāraṇya introduces four types of caitanya.
Cit chaturvidham it is said. It is four-fold. It is a very famous topic in the sixth chapter and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 401

it is very famous in Pañcadaśī and it is famous in the entire Vedāntic literature.

Vidyāraṇya introduces this topic in the following three verses. Here, he gives the example
of ākāśa dividing ākāśa into fourfold. Fourfold space example is given to arrive at
Advaita. For the Vedānta-saṅgraha, the example taken is citra-paṭa or the painting on the
canvas.
The fourfold consciousness is kūṭastha, brahman, Jīva and Īśvara. Kūṭastha refers to
ādhāra-caitanya at micro or vyaṣṭi level. Brahman refers to macro samaṣṭi level and Jīva
refers to ābhāsa-caitanya at the vyaṣṭi micro level. The fourth one Īśvara refers to ābhāsa at
the macro level. The vyaṣṭi ābhāsa will be reflection in the micro medium and the macro
ākāśa is reflection in macro medium. Two ādhāra-caitanyas and two ābhāsa-caitanyas, one
pair in vyaṣṭi and another pair in samaṣṭi are introduced.
Of these four, two he will negate as mithyā, that is micro and macro ābhāsas will be
negated; then Vidyāraṇya will join the other two and they are known by two different
names but they are only one, they have nāma-bheda but not vastu-bheda. Then Advaita
caitanya alone is left. This is śāntaṃ shivam advaitam. This is the secret, but to start with
we will discuss the four.
Now, we will discuss the four names of space or ākāśa. They are ghaṭākāśa, mahākāśa,
jalākāśa and meghākāśa. Ghaṭākāśa refers to ādhāra ākāśa at vyaṣṭi level; mahākāśa refers
to ādhāra ākāśa at macro level; jalākāśa refers to ābhāsa ākāśa at vyaṣṭi level and
meghākāśa at samaṣṭi level. Thus caturvidha ākāśa is introduced. Jalākāśa and meghākāśa
will be negated as mithyā and ghaṭākāśa and mahākāśa will be combined and it will be
said that they have nāma-bheda but not vastu-bheda. This advaita-jñāna will liberate you.

śloka 19
घटावच्छिन्नखे नीरं यत्तत्र प्रतिबिम्बितः ।
साभ्रनक्षत्र-आकाशो जलाकाश-उदीर्यते ॥ ६.१९ ॥
ghaṭāvacchinnakhe nīraṃ yattatra pratibimbitaḥ.
sābhranakṣatra-ākāśo jalākāśa-udīryate (6.19).
Of the four ākāśas, the first one he does not explain for Vidyāraṇya thinks that it is simple.
Ghatākāśa is that original space which obtains in the enclosed pot. Original space ādhāra
ākāśa which is enclosed in the pot is not defined by Vidyāraṇya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 402

You imagine within the pot you hold some water. You look into the water. Imagine water
and pot is kept upside. Water surface reflects the space above. Not only space is reflected
but also the clouds moving and along with the cloud the upper face in the cloud gets
reflected. The reflected space obtaining in the pot water is called jalākāśa the reflected
space. Within the pot, there are two spaces, one is the original space which is enclosed in
the pot and the reflected space because the water is there. If you remove the water the
original space enclosed in the pot will continue but the second reflected space will go
away. When there is water, pot is sthūla-śarīra and water is sūkṣma-śarīra. In that, there is
pratibimba ākāśa called jalākāśa while the original space is called ghatākāśa. The
definition of ghatākāśa is assumed and the definition of jalākāśa is given in this verse.
More in the next class.

Class 87
śloka 19 contd.
The study of Vedānta śāstra reveals that I am asaṃśarī the original consciousness always.
the reflected consciousness comes and the reflected consciousness goes but I am not
affected. This is the aim and topic of Vedānta. This Vidyāraṇya revealed through the
painted canvas example. Then Vidyāraṇya reveals the same fact through ākāśa dṛṣṭānta.
Our analysis is discrimination of bimba and pratibimba caitanya. The words are many but
the original is one. He says original-the reflected consciousness pair itself he takes at two
levels— one is from micro and also from macro angle. One is tvam-pada-vicāra and the
other is tat-pada-vicāra. At Paramātmā level also there is a differentiation made. At the
end he will conclude; both the reflected consciousness he will negate and he will merge
the original consciousness and say there is no difference between the two. Therefore, what
will be left out is that one the original consciousness and there is no micro or macro. This
is the grand design of Vidyāraṇya’s teaching in the following lines.
Vidyāraṇya calls micro original consciousness as kūṭastha and micro reflected
consciousness is called Jīva; macro original consciousness is called Brahman and macro
reflected consciousness is called Īśvara. Of these four, Jīva and Īśvara will ultimately be
dismissed and kūṭastha and Brahman will be left out; these two also will be understood as
divisionless consciousness as only the names are two but the two are one alone. They are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 403

called as Kūṭastha, Brahman, Īśvara and to simplify this study Vidyāraṇya gives ākāśa
dṛṣṭānta making it chaturvidha ākāśa such as micro original space, micro reflected space,
macro original space and macro reflected space.
Here also, Vidyāraṇya gives four names for four spaces. It is for simplifying the teaching.
Micro original space is ghaṭākāśa; macro reflected space is jalākāśa and macro original
space is mahākāśa and macro reflected space is meghākāśa. If you are to equate ākāśa and
caitanya, ghaṭākāśa is kūṭastha caitanya, jalākāśa is equated to Jīva, mahākāśa will be
equated to Brahman and meghākāśa is equated it Īśvara. If you understand this, the sixth
chapter is over.
Here in the 19th verse, Vidyāraṇya has introduced two ākāśas at micro level that is
original space enclosed in the pot which exists whether the pot is there or pot is not there.
Imagine you pour water in the pot. Then you see the space at the surface of the pot water.
It is upper space because it reflects the space above. The space reflected in the pot has the
clouds and stars in the night or the sun if it is the day time. From that it is clear that it is
the reflection of the upper sky. When pot is broken and water gets scattered, the reflected
space will disappear and ghaṭākāśa will continue. The upper sky is reflected and it is
called jalākāśa. Here we have to supply ghaṭākāśa which is enclosed by the pot.

śloka 20
महाकाशस्य मध्ये यन्मेघमण्डलमीक्ष्यते ।
प्रतिबिम्बतया तत्र मेघाकाशो जले स्थितः ॥ ६.२० ॥
mahākāśasya madhye yanmeghamaṇḍalamīkṣyate.
pratibimbatayā tatra meghākāśo jale sthitaḥ (6.20).
Now Vidyāraṇya want to explain macro space and macro reflected space for which we
need a huge reflecting medium. Here, the rain-bearing clouds forming in the rainy season
is the medium of the reflecting medium. He introduces the macro mahākāśa, the total
original space and the rain-bearing cloud in the form of reflecting medium. Mahākāśa is
the total space; and in the middle of the mahākāśa there is a huge patch of rain-bearing
clouds which will stretch two kilometres. So we get the vast medium. This cloud is seen by
us. In those cloud waters, there is mahākāśa which is in the form of reflection of mahākāśa
at the macro level. Mahākāśa is seen in the form of macro reflected space. Now all the four
ākāśas have been introduced.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 404

Of the four ākāśas, three are perceptible, the ghatākāśa, jalākāśa and meghākāśa.
Mahākāśa we experience and recognize. Three ākāśas are directly experienced. Now, how
do you know there is reflected space in the cloud? How can you boldly say there is
meghākāśa? What is the pramāṇa for meghākāśa? Pratyakṣa is the pramāṇa for the first
two and there is no pramāṇa for the meghākāśa.

śloka 21
मेघांशरूपमुदकं तुषाराकारसंस्थितम्।
तत्र खप्रतिबिम्बोऽयं नीरत्वादनुमीयते ॥ ६.२१ ॥
meghāṃśarūpamudakaṃ tuṣārākārasaṃsthitam.
tatra khapratibimbo:'yaṃ nīratvādanumīyate (6.21).
He says the rain-bearing cloud should have water because it gives rain. The first point is
that rain-bearing cloud haswater. Megha means to give out water or pour out water. Thus
from the word it is clear that there is water in the clouds. We also know that water is not in
the form of full-fledged water particles. Before condensation and crystallization the water
exists in minute spray or particle form. The water is in the form of small particles.
Therefore, in the megha, jala is there and that jala is in the form of spray or water particles.
So there is reflecting surface in the form of water particles. Wherever there is reflecting
surface there will be reflection. Therefore, reflection is not perceived but inferred. In that
reflecting surface consisting of water particles, the mahākāśa the macro space is reflected.
It is inferred by me because that is also water. By that here we mean the clouds. Therefore,
megākāśa is logically established.

śloka 22
अधिष्ठानतया देहद्वयावच्छिन्नचेतनः ।
कू टवन्निर्विकारेण स्थितः कू टस्थ उच्यते ॥ ६.२२ ॥
adhiṣṭhānatayā dehadvayāvacchinnacetanaḥ.
kūṭavannirvikāreṇa sthitaḥ kūṭastha ucyate (6.22).
First, Vidyāraṇya talks about the mixing up of kūṭastha and Jīva caitanya at micro level
and then he will sort out this. This is called tvam-pada-viveka. The next topic is at macro
level; the original consciousness Brahman-Īśvara mixing up and brahman-Īśvara sorting
out, which is brahma-Īśvara-viveka or tat-pada-viveka. This is the second topic.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 405

The third topic is that by bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, two portions, Īśvara and Jīva, will be
negated and the left out kūṭastha tvam-pada-lakṣya and left out Brahman tat-pada-lakṣya
and their aikya will be revealed. Tvam-pada and tat-pada and tat-tvam-pada-aikya will be
revealed. Tvam tat asi is the essence of the teaching.
From verse 22 to 103, we will find kūṭastha-Jīva-viveka or tvam-pada-viveka; from verse
104 to 209 we will discuss brahma-Īśvara-viveka or tat-pada-viveka will be seen. Then
verse 210 to 246 relates to kūṭastha-brahma-aikya or asi-pada-viveka. This is Vedānta-
vistāra. This is tat tvam asi vākya-vistāra; the balance ślokas will discuss the phala of
gaining that knowledge.
There is the original consciousness which is the ādhāra-caitanya or the base consciousness
supporting deha-dvaya. The consciousness which is enclosed within sthūla-śarīra and
sūkṣma-śarīra is called original or ādhāra-caitanya. In short, all the verses in the 2nd
chapter talk of this kūṭastha the original consciousness only. Reflection is subject to change
with the reflecting medium. The original is not at all subject to any change and it remains
changeless whatever happens to the body. All that is said here is based on Gītā second
chapter.
The word kūṭastha occurs in Gītā as also in the Upaniṣad. Kūṭa means anything that is
kept in a mass or in a heap. When a thing is in a huge heap because it is too heavy you will
not be able to move. Any kūṭa is acala. Kūṭa also means an anvil used by the blacksmith.
Anvil does not change while the iron piece kept on it, the hammer will change. Anvil is
needed for changes to take place but it does not undergo any change. Brahman is the
anvil, our śarīras are pieces of iron, prārabdha is the hammer and Īśvara is the one who
makes the changes possible.

śloka 23
कू टस्थे कल्पिता बुद्धिस्तत्र चित्प्रतिबिम्बकः ।
प्राणानां धारणाज्जीवः संसारेण स युज्यते ॥ ६.२३ ॥
kūṭasthe kalpitā buddhistatra cit pratibimbakaḥ.
prāṇānāṃ dhāraṇājjīvaḥ saṃsāreṇa sa yujyate (6.23).
The micro reflected consciousness Jīva caitanya is being explained here. Upon that
kūṭastha caitanya which serves as ādhāra buddhi is created at the time of creation. Śarīra-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 406

dvaya are created out of kāraṇa-śarīra. All are created by Īśvara in keeping with karma.
Within these two śarīras what is important is buddhi. All the creation being mithyā,
Vidyāraṇya has used the word kalpita which means unreally created. Sūkṣma-śarīra
including the intellect being subtle, it has a fine texture and therefore, is capable of
forming a reflection. There is formation of caitanya pratibimba within our body. The
reflection is micro and it is indicated by the word pratibimbakaḥ.
This pratibimba caitanya alone is called Jīva. The root jīv means that holds pañca prāṇa
within the physical body. If the pratibimba caitanya chooses to leave the body it cannot
hold the prāṇa within the body and when pratibimba caitanya leaves it leaves the pañca
prāṇas also. prāṇa is tied with the body by the cidābhāsa. The caitanya pratibimba alone
carries the body. prāṇadhāraṇāt jīvaḥ and the definition of Jīva is the holder of prāṇa. This
Jīva is a saṃśarī. More in the next class.

Class 88
śloka 23 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya. For this, he has taken the example of
chaturvidha ākāśa. He has also explained the four types of ākāśas in this regard.
Corresponding to those four, caitanya has been introduced. Four ākāśas have been
compared to four caitanyas. Vidyāraṇya has introduced this and now he will analyse the
four pairs individually in the following ślokas. Ādhāra-ābhāsa-caitanya-viveka he has
taken up for discussion. It is the analysis of ghaṭākāśa and jalākāśa. The word jala here is
water in the pot.
Kūṭastha caitanya is ādhāra and adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya where the whole creation is
superimposed. Sūkṣma sthūla śarīras are superimposed on kūṭastha caitanya which is
called ādhāra-caitanya and it is also pāramārthika-satya. Kūṭa means the anvil and upon
the anvil the ironsmith keeps some iron piece which is to be shaped. The anvil remains
stationary. In the same way Brahman is stationary and over which all other things take
shape. The changeless consciousness is called kūṭastha caitanya. Nirvikāratvāt kūṭasthaḥ.
Now he gives the definition of Jīva caitanya.
Of the two śarīras sūkṣma-śarīra has a unique capacity to form the reflection of the
adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. Through sūkṣma-śarīra it extends to sthūla-śarīra also. Upon the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 407

kūṭastha the buddhi which is vyāvahārika-satya is superimposed because of avidyā or

Māyā. In the buddhi or sūkṣma-śarīra the pratibimba or cidābhāsa is formed and this
ābhāsa-caitanya is the Jīva. That the reflected consciousness is called Jīva.
Vidyāraṇya gives the reason for calling it Jīva. Whatever that holds the prāṇa in the
physical body is called Jīva. As long as cidābhāsa is there in the body so long the prāṇa
will be there and the moment the cidābhāsa changes the residence, the Jīva is out. Pañca
prāṇas cannot send cidābhāsa and continue in the body. The moment cidābhāsa quits the
prāṇas also quits leaving the body dead and lifeless.
Cidābhāsa alone holds prāṇa in the body and cidābhāsa alone takes the prāṇa from the
body. For cidābhāsa to get a transfer, the decision, the reason is not mentioned but we
should know prārabdha karma decides how long cidābhāsa should remain in the body. It
is this ābhāsa-caitanya that is otherwise called cidābhāsa or pratibimba caitanya or Jīva;
this Jīva alone is the victim of saṃsāra. This vyāvahārika cidābhāsa alone is affected by
saṃsāra. He is a helpless victim of saṃsāra in the hands of prārabdha and sañcita and
āgāmi karmas. Jīva cannot protest and whenever the karma is over, cidābhāsa will have to
leave the body. Because of karma, there is travel and sukha-duḥkha, etc is there.
All these put together is called Jīva. All karmas are vyāvahārika-satya and from the
standpoint of one mithyā another mithyā is satya. From the standpoint of dream body
dream fire is satya. From Jīva-dṛṣṭi, saṃsāra is satya. You can ignore saṃsāra as mithyā
under the condition of kūṭastha. From the point of view of Jīva you cannot brush aside
your problem. We always look at Jīva from vyāvahārika angle and then problem remains
there. Only when you look at from pāramārthika angle you will find vyāvahārika is
mithyā.

śloka 24
जलव्योम्ना घटाकाशो यथा सर्वस्तिरोहितः ।
तथा जीवेन कू टस्थः सोऽन्योऽन्याध्यास उच्यते ॥ ६.२४ ॥
jalavyomnā ghaṭākāśo yathā sarvastirohitaḥ.
tathā jīvena kūṭasthaḥ so:'nyo:'nyādhyāsa ucyate (6.24).
One problem that the Jīva faces is the vyāvahārika cidābhāsa Jīva and pāramārthika cit-
rūpa kūṭastha both of them exist in one and the same place. It will not be possible for us to
separate them physically. It is because of the coexistence in one locus that they get mixed

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 408

up. The coexistence of the ādhāra-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya or kūṭastha and Jīva
coexist in one locus and therefore, we mix them up. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya starts this mixing
up in Brahma-sūtra.
Even when you use the word I in that I itself both coexist and therefore, we mix up the
two and therefore, we get into the problem. Kūṭastha caitanya is missed and lost sight of
because of the ābhāsa-caitanya; ādhāra-caitanya is disowned like the pot space which is
lost sight of because of the water space. When you look inside the pot you see ādhāra-
caitanya which was there before the pot came or water came and after the pot came a new
ākāśa came: the space reflected in the water.
The uniqueness of water is the reflection of stars and sky space. The starry space is there
inside the sky and so we observe jalākāśa and we lose ghaṭākāśa which is eternal.
Ghaṭākāśa is overshadowed or concealed by the jalākāśa. The jalākāśa has temporarily
come and this steals the show while the original ākāśa is forgotten. The duplicate ever
overshadows the original. Māyā is best and poor Brahman is not able to market itself and
ascertain itself. Kūṭastha is concealed. The process in which we miss adhiṣṭhāna and take
the adhyāsa is the process of missing and taking is called a mistake and it is called
anyonya adhyāsa. It is mutual mixing up or confusion.

śloka 25
अयं जीवो न कू टस्थं विविनक्ति कदाचन ।
अनादिरविवेकोऽयं मूलाविद्येति गम्यताम्॥ ६.२५ ॥
ayaṃ jīvo na kūṭasthaṃ vivinakti kadācana.
anādiraviveko:'yaṃ mūlāvidyeti gamyatām (6.25).
Vidyāraṇya casually mentions anyonya adhyāsa and leaves it to us for elaboration. If you
are impatient you can go through adhyāsa bhāṣya of Brahma-sūtra. You don’t understand
the kūṭastha which is right underneath. Jīva does not understand its own svarūpa and its
higher nature. It looks all around except down below. At any time in life it does not
discriminate and understand what its very adhiṣṭhāna is. The very fact that the janma
continues is the proof that we have not understood the reality because of avidyā. This
avidyā is anādi and it is originless. It is beginningless aviveka. This mixing up is called
mūlāvidyā or basic ignorance. Not recognizing kūṭastha as distinct from Jīva is called
mūlāvidyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 409

śloka 26
विक्षेपावृतिरूपाभ्यां द्विधाविद्या प्रकल्पिता ।
न भाति नास्ति कू टस्थ इत्यापादनमावृतिः ॥ ६.२६ ॥
vikṣepāvṛtirūpābhyāṃ dvidhāvidyā prakalpitā.
na bhāti nāsti kūṭastha ityāpādanamāvṛtiḥ (6.26).
Gradually, Vidyāraṇya progresses his teaching. Mūlāvidyā has two śaktis, one is called
āvaraṇa-śakti and the other is called vikṣepa-śakti. One is the concealing power and the
other is a false projecting power. Avidyā here we mean mūlāvidyā. It exists with twofold
functions. It exists with twofold powers. Now he defines āvaraṇa-śakti and vikṣepa-śakti.
Āvaraṇa-śakti is that power which generates particular thought and particular expression.
Whichever power of avidyā generates that particular thought and expression is called
mūlāvidyā. A thought and expression dealing with negation of existence and experience
of the object in the front is negated.
The existence of kūṭastha and experience of kūṭastha both of them are negated at two
levels such as thought level and verbal level also. That is the negation of kūṭastha and
experience of kūṭastha. This niṣedha is not only two-fold but niṣedha takes at two levels. I
know Brahman exists but I don’t get Brahma-anubhava and here one negates Brahman-
experience. One is at pratyaya level and another at expression level. All these four, viz.
tattva-niṣedha at the pratyaya level, tattva-niṣedha at the verbal level, bhānaniṣedha at the
pratyaya level and bhānaniṣedha at the verbal level, are generated by the āvaraṇa-śakti of
mūlāvidyā. The twofold negation at thought and speech level is called the āvṛti. This
power to generate is called āvaraṇa-śakti.
But Vedānta says kūṭastha is Śākṣi-caitanya and the existence and experience of Śākṣi-
caitanya none can question at anytime because all the time śākṣī is experienced by us and
in fact everything is experienced because of Śākṣi-caitanya. Even though Śākṣi-caitanya is
always experienced, one boldly says that śākṣī Ātmā is not there, I have not experienced
and I have to go to samādhi to experience Ātmā. In spite of kūṭastha-bhāna and -
anubhava, this fellow says kūṭastha is not there. This situation is caused by mūlāvidyā or
Māyā. This is due to āvaraṇa-śakti. This situation is called āvṛti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 410

śloka 27
अज्ञानी विदुषा पृष्टः कू टस्थं न प्रबुध्यते ।
न भाति नास्ति कू टस्थ इति बुद्ध्वा वदत्यपि ॥ ६.२७ ॥
ajñānī viduṣā pṛṣṭaḥ kūṭasthaṃ na prabudhyate.
na bhāti nāsti kūṭastha iti buddhvā vadatyapi (6.27).
Here, both avidyā and āvaraṇa-śakti are distinctly presented. The difference between them
is very subtle but it is shown distinctly. An ignorant person does not know kūṭastha
caitanya. The ignorance which is there all the time is called mūlāvidyā. Even though
ignorance is there with him all the time, he does not know his ignorance. Not only he is
ignorant but also he does not think of his ignorance. The ignorance is not invoked at any
time. The invocation of ignorance comes only when a jñānī comes and raises this question.
An ajñānī is ignorant of kūṭastha and he has mūlāvidyā. Suppose a wise man asks a stupid
man: do you know kūṭastha caitanya? When the question is asked, then an event happens.
This ajñānī thinks in his mind because the question is asked and when he thinks, two
things happen. At mental level he thinks of kūṭastha and thinks I have not experienced
kūṭastha and therefore, there is no kūṭastha at all. This did not happen when he was doing
his work. The āvaraṇa-śakti is activated when I ask the question and that vṛtti is tattva-
bhāna-niṣedha. The other person is standing there. The wise man does not know what
happens in the other man’s mind. Then he uses tattva-bhāna-niṣedha vākya also. The
generation tattva-bhāna-niṣedha-vṛtti and vākya is activated only when a wise man raises
the question. Before asking the question, thought was there in his mind. The generating
power is called āvaraṇa-śakti. Then after the generation of thought there is generation of
expression also. He verbally expresses his avidyā. This is called āvaraṇa and expression is
called āvaraṇa-śakti and this is called mūlāvidyā. Then he will raise a possible objection.
More in the next class.

Class 89
śloka 27 contd.
Here Vidyāraṇya points out that we do not know kūṭastha adhiṣṭhāna and this ignorance
he calls it as mūlāvidyā. This alone has two version āvaraṇa-śakti and vikṣepa-śakti.
Āvaraṇa is the concealing version of ignorance and vikṣepa is the distorting version of
ignorance; one is the veiling version and the other is distorting version. Vidyāraṇya now

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 411

explains the āvaraṇa version. He says the concealing or concealment version of avidyā is
in the form of thought or verbal expression. It is in the form of particular type of thought
and particular version of speech. It is in the form of a negation. Niṣedha-śabda-pratyaya,
speech in the form of negation and thought in the form of negation. Niṣedha-śabdaḥ
niṣedha-pratyayaśca militvā āvaraṇam iti uccyate. Negation of what? The negation of the
experience and the existence of a thing; vastu-sattva and vastu-bhānam is vastu-sattva-
bhānam and niṣedha means negation. So what the final definition of āvaraṇa is vastu-
sattva-bhāna-niṣedha-śabda-pratyatau. A thought and word which negates the existence
and experience of a thing is called āvaraṇa. This is one version of ignorance. Expressed
ignorance is called āvaraṇa. Ajñānī kūṭasthaṃ na prabudhyate, an ignorant person does
not know the kūṭastha and his ignorance is called avidyā. He does not know of the
ignorance and he does not talk about the ignorance. Only when he goes and asks about the
kūṭastha he knows of his ignorance as his ignorance expresses itself. The āvaraṇa is
presented in the second line. Na bhāti, niṣedha of bhāna and nāsti, niṣedha of existence,
vastu-sattva-bhāna-niṣedha-śabda-pratyaya is āvaraṇa. The subtle difference of āvaraṇa
and pratyaya is explained in detail. Now an objection will be raised in the next śloka.

śloka 28
स्वप्रकाशे कुतोऽविद्या तां विना कथमावृतिः ।
इत्यादितर्क जालानि स्वानुभूतिर्ग्रसत्यसौ ॥ ६.२८ ॥
svaprakāśe kuto:'vidyā tāṃ vinā kathamāvṛtiḥ.
ityāditarkajālāni svānubhūtirgrasatyasau (6.28).
A question is raised by someone who says that you cannot talk about avidyā and āvaraṇa
with regard to kūṭastha caitanya. Kūṭastha-avidyā and kūṭastha-āvaraṇa are illogical
contradictions. The reason is for them being contradiction is that kūṭastha caitanya is in
the form of svayam-prakāśa, self-evident. Avidyā and āvaraṇa are in the form of darkness
or ignorance which is of the nature of aprakāśa or andhakara. Kūṭastha is prakāśa-rūpa.
This avidyā if it has to cover the kūṭastha it must be located over the kūṭastha. If avidyā
must be located on kūṭastha they must be in proximity or they must coexist. Therefore,
whenever you talk of coexistence of svaprakāśa kūṭastha and aprakāśa avidyā, how can
the light and darkness coexist? They cannot because they have got opposite attributes.
Therefore, it is illogical. Consciousness and ignorance cannot coexist. This is the argument

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 412

of Pūrvapakṣa. Upon the kūṭastha caitanya which is self-evident how can there be dark
ignorance? This is question number one. This means they cannot coexist. Without avidyā
how can there be concealment of kūṭastha; how can there be āvaraṇa of kūṭastha? Āvaraṇa
is a version of avidyā. Speech is a faculty of the mind. When I am not there how can
speech take place?
Vidyāraṇya gives his answer and he say that they coexist is proved by our experience.
When we clearly experience coexistence how can you deny what we clearly experience?
Logic has no right to question something which is evidently experienced. I am a conscious
being and there is no doubt about it. I am ignorant and both experience and ignorance
coexist. How can you question logically? Logic has no power to question the experience.
All the varieties of reasoning you give is not possible to negate the experience of
ignorance. Our own experience of ignorance and experience of āvaraṇa swallows,
meaning destroys, the reasoning and logic. My experience is powerful enough to negate
all your logic and reasoning. Therefore, your logic does not hold water.

śloka 29
स्वानुभूतावविश्वासे तर्क स्याप्यनवस्थिते ।
कथं वा तार्किकं मन्यस्तत्त्वनिश्चयमाप्नुयात्॥ ६.२९ ॥
svānubhūtāvaviśvāse tarkasyāpyanavasthite.
kathaṃ vā tārkikaṃmanyastattvaniścayamāpnuyāt (6.29).
Another interesting argument Vidyāraṇya gives. Pūrvapakṣa says that logic says they
cannot coexist. Our anubhava says they can coexist. Now there is fight between
Pūrvapakṣa logic and my anubhava. When there is contradiction between tarka and
anubhava which should be taken as proper. Between tarka and anubhava which is
stronger is our question. Anubhava is pratyakṣa. Pūrvapakṣa uses anumāna and we use
pratyakṣa anubhava. Between the two pratyakṣa alone is stronger than anumāna. Our
logic is that anumāna depends upon pratyakṣa for its very existence. Pratyakṣa does not
depend upon anumāna but anumāna depends upon the data collected through anubhava.
Therefore, anubhava will dislodge tarka.
The second argument is so: suppose without data collection I infer something, then that
inference will be baseless inference. This is a guesswork or speculation. Therefore, it

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 413

cannot be valid pramāṇa. It is only a speculation and speculation cannot be a fact. If I

speculate something without any evidence or data, another person can speculate the
opposite also for he does not need any data. All will be in a guessing game and there will
be so many speculating ideas that we cannot know which is correct. That you will not
arrive at a conclusion and there will be non-finality.
Therefore, he says if you don’t trust your pratyakṣa or anubhava pramāṇa and go by tarka
alone, then there is non-finality in logic. Each one will have his own opinion and opinion
cannot help me to arrive at the fact. By the time I conclude something another person will
come with another opinion. No opinion will be final for the basis is distorted. Any
knowledge is a knowledge only when it is based on valid data. Then how can a person
arrive at the fruit if he discards pratyakṣa and tries to hold on to anumāna! He claims
himself to be a logician but he is not a real logician because the real logician will not go by
speculation but will rest on pratyakṣa. Logic doubtless has its value, but only so long and
as far as it is utilized in such a way that it falls in line with one’s experience and with the
scriptures.

śloka 30
बुद्ध्यारोहाय तर्क श्चेदपेक्षेत तथा सति ।
स्वानुभूतियनुसारेण तर्क्यतां मा कुतर्क्यताम्॥ ६.३० ॥
buddhyārohāya tarkaścedapekṣeta tathā sati.
svānubhūtiyanusāreṇa tarkyatāṃ mā kutarkyatām (6.30).
Another gem of the verse. This aspect of study is called epistemology which means the
study of knowledge the right and wrong source of knowledge and what is reasoning and
what is wrong reasoning, etc. Now, Pūrvapakṣa says it is ok. I know that anubhava is
powerful and it is independent. It is the base for anubhava. Discarding anubhava is like
Kalidasa sitting on the branch and cutting the same branch. I know I should not do that. I
am willing to respect anubhava. But at the same time, I want to use the reasoning in a
correct manner. I want the reason to assimilate my experience. Certain experiences we will
not be able to accept. It is not a rejection of experience but what I look for is logical
reasoning for the anubhava. I got the reasoning not for negating my experience but to
assimilate my experience. Therefore, he says I want to use logic not anubhava-rejecting
logic but assimilating-logic.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 414

Sometimes logic will be required. Here, the example is that I saw him off that he left for
Delhi yesterday but today I see him in flesh and blood. My anumāna says one thing that
he left for delhi and the pratyakṣa today says that he is in Chennai. Here, the reason for his
being in Chennai is due to the fact that he got down in the next station and came back to
Chennai for some reason or the other. In the experience of the coexistence of consciousness
and ignorance, I don’t question my experience but my intellect is not able to accept this
experience because these two are opposed in nature.
The knowledge of svaprakāśa and ignorance cannot go together. Here, I have difficulty in
swallowing that consciousness and ignorance can go together being opposed to each
other. If you argue like that, Vidyāraṇya is happy he does not take the anubhava based on
logic. So Vidyāraṇya says if that is your approach, this is in keeping with the experience
and accepting the experience it should be friendly to the experience and it should be
experience-friendly logic. It should not be inimical to experience or it should not negate
the experience.

śloka 31
स्वानुभूतिरविद्यायामावृतौ च प्रदर्शिता ।
अतः कू टस्थचैतन्यमविरोधीति तर्क्यताम्॥ ६.३१ ॥
svānubhūtiravidyāyāmāvṛtau ca pradarśitā.
ataḥ kūṭasthacaitanyamavirodhīti tarkyatām (6.31).
What is the experience, Vidyāraṇya clarifies here. The experience is coexistence of
consciousness and ignorance. I am a conscious being and I am ignorant also it is very clear.
If a person goes to a Guru which is possible because he knows what he does not know. A
student is a student only when he is knowledgeable of his ignorance and Guru is a Guru
when he is knowledgeable of his knowledge. I have clearly shown the experience of our
ignorance. Our own pratyakṣa anubhava is a pramāṇa. The very same anubhava is proof
for avidyā as also āvaraṇa. Avidyā and āvaraṇa are shown to be based on anubhava. Now
we need an explanation as to how they can coexist. You use an explanation not for
rejecting coexistence but for the acceptance of their coexistence despite their nature being
opposite. They coexist because they are not inimical in nature. Bright consciousness and
dark ignorance are not inimical to each other. They are friendly. They are not inimical

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 415

because one is of higher order of reality and the other is of lower order of reality. More in
the next class.

Class 90
śloka 31 contd.
From śloka 22nd, Vidyāraṇya has entered into kūṭastha-Jīva-viveka the original
consciousness and the reflected consciousness at individual level. We need the
discrimination between kūṭastha and Jīva as they are mixed up together. the original
consciousness and the reflected consciousness occupy the same locus and they have
similar nature also. Both are self-effulgent like the original and reflected sun are equally
effulgent.
And therefore, there is possibility for confusion and we are confused. This confusion at the
individual level, Vidyāraṇya calls mūlāvidyā and this vidyā has āvaraṇa-śakti and
vikṣepa-śakti. Āvaraṇa-śakti expresses in the form of negation of the existence and
experience of the kūṭastha both at verbal and at thought level. avidyā and āvaraṇa are
there in every individual. The objection from Pūrvapakṣa is that he cannot accept
ignorance covering the kūṭastha.
The reason is for avidyā and āvaraṇa to cover kūṭastha they must exist in the same locus.
The table cloth can cover the table only when both are in the same place. For covering they
must exist together. Kūṭastha and avidyā should be in the same locus as the table and
table cloth example. Pūrvapakṣa says kūṭastha is prakāśa-rūpa while avidyā is aprakāśa-
rūpa being ignorance and how can aprakāśa and prakāśa can coexist? This is not logically
possible.
For that, Vidyāraṇya gave the answer that there is ignorance regarding kūṭastha; it is
proved by our own experience. It is pratyakṣa-siddha, the covering of kūṭastha, for none
says that I am kūṭastha caitanya. Even after teaching for several years they don’t say so;
from this it is very clear that it is mahā āvaraṇa and anubhava proves the coexistence of
ignorance and kūṭastha. Between logic and pratyakṣa the latter is stronger. Before
pratyakṣa, anumāna jñāna is invalid and is not acceptable. Logic has no power to
challenge pratyakṣa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 416

Then the logician says that I don’t challenge pratyakṣa but I use logic to understand our
anubhava of the coexistence of consciousness and ignorance. Still I cannot accept as one is
light and other is darkness and therefore, intellect has legitimacy and therefore, for the
sake of assimilation, I use logic. For this we say logic should be anubhava-friendly and not
anubhava-inimical. Vidyāraṇya says now your intellect does not accept their coexistence
because you think consciousness and ignorance are inimical to each other. You are not
able accept because you think they are virodhis. You change your assumption that they
coexist because they are not inimical. Consciousness and ajñāna are not virodhis.
Vidyāraṇya says may you use your intellect to accept the pratyakṣa that they do coexist
together. Kūṭastha caitanya is not inimical to ignorance. In fact you go one step further
that consciousness is even friendly to ignorance because for ages both have been together.
Consciousness and ignorance have been in coexistence for ages past. The very ignorance
has been together right from beginning. Even the very existence belonging to the
ignorance is lent by consciousness. When you say ajñānam asti, this asti has come from
consciousness alone. By giving existence and illumination consciousness is even
supporting ignorance. In fact, with the blessings of consciousness alone ignorance has
managed to survive for so long. Therefore, they are not enemies. Then another question
comes in.
How do you say the bright consciousness and dark ignorance are not inimical? Normally,
our experience is that where there is light, darkness will not be there. How they are
together? For this, we say consciousness is pāramārthika-satya and ajñāna belongs to
vyāvahārika-satya even though both are anādi. Caitanya is anādi and avidyā is anādi but
one is satya and another is mithyā. If ignorance is satya then it will not go and then mokṣa
is not possible at all. Suppose you say ignorance is satya and it will go away means
Brahman also will go. What we want is one should go and other should be there.
Therefore, ajñāna must go and we should be with satya. Once I know one is of higher
order and the other is of lower order then even the opposite attributes can coexist. In a
dark room you dream bright daylight. So you have got bright daylight in dream in a dark
room because darkness belongs to vyāvahārika and daylight belongs to prātibhāsika. As
vyāvahārika and prātibhāsika can coexist so also the opposite attributes can coexist if they
belong to different orders like vyāvahārika and pāramārthika.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 417

śloka 32
तच्चेद्विरोधि के नेयमावृतिर्ह्यनुभूयताम्।
विवेकस्तु विरोधीस्यात्तत्त्वज्ञानिनि दृश्यताम्॥ ६.३२ ॥
taccedvirodhi keneyamāvṛtirhyanubhūyatām.
vivekastu virodhīsyāttattvajñānini dṛśyatām (6.32).
Vidyāraṇya reconfirms the conclusions he has arrived at by giving logic. Suppose we
assume consciousness and ignorance are inimical or virodhis, then they can never coexist;
if they cannot coexist the problem would be that one can never be conscious of ignorance.
It means you cannot know ignorance and if you cannot know ignorance you cannot talk
about ignorance. We can talk about only what we know. If consciousness cannot coexist
with ignorance, I will not know my ignorance and if ignorance is not known, the student-
teacher relationship is not possible.
The definition of student is one who knows his ignorance, he wants to remove his
ignorance and therefore, he goes to teacher for removing ignorance. He is aware of
ignorance and therefore, alone there is a jijñāsā. The teacher should know that I don’t have
ignorance. If he does not know he does not have ignorance with what conviction he can
take the role of the teacher! The very Guru-śiṣya-sambandha is possible only if you talk
about presence and absence of ignorance. This is possible only if consciousness and
ignorance coexist. Ignorance will not be known if consciousness and ignorance were
opposed to each other.
Svāmī Chinmayānanda gives an example. The bridegroom will be taken in the night with
a light on the head of a person. He asks the master where I should keep the light? He was
told wherever there is darkness you keep the light. Wherever he went there was no
darkness. When light is opposed to darkness light cannot illumine the darkness.
Consciousness is a unique light which can illumine the presence of darkness. We are
conscious of darkness. Consciousness illumines not only the external darkness but also the
internal darkness of ignorance. Consciousness is not opposed to dark ignorance.
Therefore, you conclude they are not inimical.
If consciousness is not inimical to ignorance, it means consciousness cannot destroy
ignorance. Therefore, ajñāna-nāśa cannot be done by kūṭastha caitanya. Therefore, it is not
a remedy. If cidābhāsa-caitanya is inimical to ignorance we cannot have any ignorance. If

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 418

kūṭastha caitanya as also cidābhāsa-caitanya also is not inimical to ignorance, then

ignorance cannot be destroyed. He says there are two types of cidābhāsa.
One is antaḥkaraṇa-pratibimbita cidābhāsa and the second antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti-pratibimbita
cidābhāsa. One is reflected in the mind and the other is reflected in the thought.
Antaḥkaraṇa-pratibimbita cidābhāsa is sāmānya cidābhāsa but antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti-
pratibimbita cidābhāsa is viśeṣa cidābhāsa. Viśeṣa vṛtti-pratibimbita is inimical to
ignorance. Vṛtti jñāna or viśeṣa jñāna is opposed to ignorance. Thus ghaṭa-vṛtti-
pratibimbita cidābhāsa is inimical to ghaṭa-ajñāna. Pot-thought is inimical to the pot-
ajñāna. kūṭastha-vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa is kūṭastha-ajñāna nāśayati.
Therefore, when you take chemistry as the subject and when you study chemistry the
teacher produces in your mind the chemistry-vṛtti and when that vṛtti is generated in the
mind, that ignorance is removed. That viśeṣa jñāna destroys the chemistry ignorance.
Therefore, to destroy ignorance what is needed is you should ask the question ignorance
of what. Then you have to go to Guru and through mahā-vākya you should generate
kūṭastha-ākāra-vṛtti and you should develop “ahaṃ brahma asmi”-vṛtti and then only the
ignorance of ahaṃ brahma asmi will go.
Vidyāraṇya says if you have any doubt you go to a jñānī and he alone is free from
kūṭastha-ajñāna. The difference between ajñānī and jñānī, vṛtti-pratibimbita caitanya has
taken place in the jñānī and that vṛtti has not come to an ajñānī. For avidyā and āvaraṇa,
the enemy is viveka.
It is this knowledge born of discrimination that leads to the correct perception. The
āvaraṇa-śakti affects only the Jīva and not the kūṭastha caitanya. Once this knowledge is
gained the suffering resulting from wrong identification comes to an end. Vṛtti-jñāna
alone destroys ignorance. That is why scriptural study becomes important. What we want
is vṛtti to destroy ajñāna. In the mind alone vṛtti jñāna takes place. In a wise person may
you see this fact.
You say sāmānya cidābhāsa cannot destroy ignorance. But viśeṣa cidābhāsa vṛtti-
pratibimbita cidābhāsa destroys ignorance. When general cannot do how the viśeṣa can
do? Suppose there is a piece of cotton on the road. The sunlight illumines the cotton and
blesses the cotton but it does not destroy the cotton. Suppose you have got a lens the very
same sāmānya prakāśa when it comes through a magnifying glass through a magnifying
glass, it has extra power to destroy the cotton. In the same way, sāmānya cidābhāsa cannot

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 419

destroy ignorance but viśeṣa vṛtti “ahaṃ brahma asmi” alone destroys ignorance. Vṛtti is
like the magnifying glass. The cotton here is ignorance. When the vṛtti comes through the
pratibimbita cidābhāsa lens, the ignorance is destroyed as the cotton is destroyed when
the sunlight passes through the lens.

śloka 33
अविद्यावृतकू टस्थे देहद्वययुता चितिः ।
शुक्तौ रूप्यवदध्यस्ता विक्षेपाध्यास एव हि ॥ ६.३३ ॥
avidyāvṛtakūṭasthe dehadvayayutā citiḥ.
śuktau rūpyavadadhyastā vikṣepādhyāsa eva hi (6.33).
With the previous verse Vidyāraṇya concludes his answer to Pūrvapakṣa which was
raised in śloka 28. Kūṭastha caitanya cannot destroy ignorance and even cidābhāsa cannot
destroy ignorance but they will support. Only viśeṣa-pratibimbita-cidābhāsa-vṛtti can
destroy ignorance. Now he brings vikṣepa-śakti of mūlāvidyā. Āvaraṇa-śakti has been
defined. Vikṣepa-śakti projects the false entity. Erection of a false entity is the job of
vikṣepa-śakti. Vikṣepa-śakti of rope-ignorance will project the snake. Āvaraṇa-śakti will
cover the kūṭastha and vikṣepa-śakti will generate something. Three things are
superimposed by vikṣepa-śakti of mūlāvidyā. First thing is cidābhāsa is superimposition
and it called the reflected consciousness which is mithyā. If there should be the reflected
consciousness we need reflecting medium also. The very same vikṣepa-śakti produces
medium also in the form sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra. Sthūla-śarīra is one reflecting
medium and sūkṣma-śarīra is another reflecting medium, both of them are created, the
reflection is born, all the three are created or projected. Therefore, he says along with it,
twofold reflective medium is projected or created by vikṣepa-śakti of mūlāvidyā.
Now the question comes why do you mention two śarīras and what about kāraṇa-śarīra.
We don’t say kāraṇa-śarīra is created because in Tattvabodha kāraṇa-śarīra is not
presented as a created entity, as it is anādi and so, how can you include that in projection?
It is not created and if it is so, it will be kāraṇa-śarīra not kārya śarīra. Projection here is
done by the vikṣepa-śakti of mūlāvidyā and mūlāvidyā itself is kāraṇa-śarīra and
therefore, how can kāraṇa-śarīra project kāraṇa-śarīra? Kāraṇa-śarīra can project only
sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-śarīra. Therefore, two śarīras are adhyastha projection. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 420

adhiṣṭhāna of the two śarīras is kūṭastha caitanya which has been covered by āvaraṇa-
śakti of avidyā.

Class 91
śloka 33 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses individual analysis or tvam-pada-vicāra and this is needed because
Jīvātmā is a mixture of two things: kūṭastha caitanya and Jīva caitanya, kūṭastha caitanya
being the original consciousness and the Jīva caitanya being the reflected consciousness. It
is cit and cidābhāsa. It is ādhāra-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya. It is mixed up by us and
there is confusion regarding this individual and therefore, we need an enquiry and
Vidyāraṇya says confusion is caused by mūlāvidyā through its twofold problems of
āvaraṇa-śakti and creating vikṣepa-śakti. Kūṭastha caitanya is not known as existent
because of this āvaraṇa-śakti. Once āvaraṇa-śakti does the job of concealment, vikṣepa-
śakti completes the false projection which is adhyāsa or vikṣepārtha. It is this vikṣepa
adhyāsa that Vidyāraṇya explains in the 33rd verse. Upon the kūṭastha which is concealed
by avidyā or avidyā āvaraṇa-śakti upon the concealed kūṭastha sthiti or cidābhāsa or
ābhāsa-caitanya or pratibimbita caitanya is superimposed. Since cidābhāsa is the reflected
consciousness it presupposes the reflecting medium also because without reflecting
medium the reflection cannot come. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says the avidyā not only
superimposes cidābhāsa but it superimposes on the original consciousness the adhiṣṭhāna-
caitanya also. Upon that this cidābhāsa is or along with cidābhāsa the superimposition
takes place.
In the last class I raised an aside question. I asked why are you only talking about
superimposition of sthūla and sūkṣma-śarīras? Have you forgotten about kāraṇa-śarīra as
taught in Tattvabodha? Kāraṇa-śarīra is mūlāvidyā and it is anirvacanīya avidyā; it is
mūlāvidyā. Therefore, because of the mūlāvidyā is kāraṇa-śarīra which conceals kūṭastha
caitanya because kāraṇa-śarīra rūpa kūṭastha caitanya the sthūla sūkṣma-śarīra are all
projected. The mūlāvidyā never arises and kāraṇa-śarīra never arises and if it arises it will
not be called kāraṇa but called kārya. What emerges is kārya. It is not projected but
kāraṇa-śarīra was there and it is anirvacanīya. This projection is vikṣepādhyāsa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 421

Vidyāraṇya gives the example here. We have two stock examples: rope-snake or shell
silver. If you are bored with them, we will state some other thing. Vidyāraṇya tells silver
adhyāsa. After all it is imagination. He says a shell a shining shell lies on the beach and
when there is bright sun up above the sunlight falls upon the bright shell, round like a
coin and also brilliant, the shell appears like a coin which has value. Rūpya is the Sanskrit
word that has become rupee. This is the vikṣepa-śakti. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 34
इदमंशस्य सत्यत्वं शुक्तिगं रूप्य ईक्ष्यते ।
स्वयन्त्वं वस्तुता चैवं विक्षेपे वीक्ष्यतेऽन्यगम्॥ ६.३४ ॥
idamaṃśasya satyatvaṃ śuktigaṃ rūpya īkṣyate.
svayantvaṃ vastutā caivaṃ vikṣepe vīkṣyate:'nyagam (6.34).
Here, Vidyāraṇya makes a hairsplitting analysis of the mechanism of superimposition and
the erroneous projection which is known as adhyāsa or vikṣepa in śāstra. In fact, Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya introduces this topic in his famous adhyāsa bhāṣya in Brahma-sūtra.
Without understanding this, understanding Vedānta is difficult. This is an independent
analysis of the topic. We will take the example rope-snake itself. Let us imagine the
situation of rope-snake. The erroneous conception does not take place when the rope is in
broad light because it is clear that it is the rope. Suppose the place is totally dark and I
don’t see anything at all, there is no erroneous perception. In total ignorance we have total
bliss or in total knowledge there is bliss. When the rope lies in a semi-darkness, I am able
to see that there is something but the light is not bright enough to reveal exactly what it is.
It creates partial knowledge of the rope when there is partial light. It means there is partial
ignorance also. The question is which part is known and which part is not known?
For that, we will take the rope in the front. My complete knowledge is this is a rope. This
will be the complete knowledge. When there is partial darkness, I am able to grasp the first
part that ‘this is’ and it is clear but it is covered and the ropeness is not known. This ‘is-
ness’ is known but the rope part is not known. One part is knowledge and another part is
ignorance. If there is complete knowledge or complete ignorance there is no problem.
However, when there is partial knowledge and partial ignorance, my intellect does not
keep quiet and it projects something else in the place of the unknown rope. I replace the
hidden rope part by a projected part. The hidden unknown part is replaced by a projected

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 422

part and my projection is that this is a snake. Instead of saying “this is a rope” I make the
statement “this is a snake”.
“This is” part which is not covered which I know very clearly is called “sāmānya aṃśa”.
This sāmānya aṃśa is not covered due to partial light; even with partial light I am able to
experience sāmānya aṃśa and it is uncovered common part anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa. This
is known even during partial light. But the rope part called viśeṣa aṃśa is a specific part
which is covered and therefore, it is called āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa. It is a specific part unknown
or covered part. Then when the viśeṣa aṃśa is covered, my mind replaces the āvṛta viśeṣa
aṃśa by some new viśeṣa aṃśa. We don’t require anything for replacing sāmānya aṃśa.
This does not require replacement. For this āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa, I project another viśeṣa
aṃśa; snake is projected. We will give it a name adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. Adhyastha viśeṣa
aṃśa is snamke. Āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa is rope. Sāmānya aṃśa is the ‘is-ness’ part of the rope.
It is able to join the āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa also and it is able to join adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa also.
It will join both of them. At the time of ignorance “this is” anāvṛta aṃśa is joined to the
snake which is adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. Suppose I put the torch light on; then the sāmānya
aṃśa will join the rope. “This is” will join both the snake and the rope. It joins adhyastha
viśeṣa aṃśa during adhyāsa-kāla, that is during ignorance, and it joins the āvṛta viśeṣa
aṃśa, the rope, at the time of knowledge. The rope comes and goes and snake comes and
goes but ‘this is’ continues all the time. Suppose I go from one mistake to another mistake,
in adhyāsa also first I may say “this is a snake” and later I may say “this is a mala” or then
I may say “this is crack on the earth” and finally I may say “this is a rope”. “This is”
sāmānya aṃśa is there all the time.
Vidyāraṇya introduces three principles. anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa is “this is”. In the shell-
silver anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa is “this is”. Āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa is shell and adhyastha viśeṣa
aṃśa is silver coin. First Vidyāraṇya will introduce these three words in the case of shell
silver. Then Vidyāraṇya will go to the original case. In the case of Jīvātmā the anāvṛta
sāmānya aṃśa, āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa and adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. Anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa is
‘Self’. The word ‘Self’ is introduced in the place of ‘this is’. Self is called svayam. Instead of
using the word aham he uses the word svayam.
Then āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa is what is the specialty about myself. Brahmatva is the specialty or
the viśeṣa aṃśa. Both belong to kūṭastha only. One part is selfhood and the other part is
Brahmanhood. Selfhood is anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa and Brahman is āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa. Even

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 423

when you draw the money from bank you draw in the name of Self and it is sāmānya
aṃśa of kūṭastha. The viśeṣa aṃśa Brahmanhood is not known and none says one is
Brahman. Since the viśeṣa aṃśa Brahmanhood is āvṛta, it has to be replaced by something.
We need adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa and it is aham referring to ahaṅkāra. Ahaṅkāra is
otherwise called Jīva. Aham is adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa which is limited. In the place of
Brahmanhood limited aham has come. We have got Self, Brahman and aham. Self is
uncovered; Brahmanhood is covered; Brahmanhood is replaced by aham the ahaṅkāra or
Jīva. When you say I myself hear, etc., the Self part is kūṭastha the I part is ahaṅkāra. We
have to negate the I, the ahaṅkāra ego should go; you address you, ego. Once the ego the
first person is negated the Self remains without ego and gains the new status of
Brahmanhood. This will be dealt with elaborately in 18 verses.
The first line talks about anāvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa and the second line talks about anāvṛta
sāmānya aṃśa. Anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa is experienced along with the silver coin on which
is adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. It is like that because anāvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa can join āvṛta
sāmānya aṃśa later on gaining the knowledge. It is experienced upon the rūpya. rūpya is
adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. Not only that, another thing also happens. Now take this
statement: this is silver. “This is” belongs to anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa of the shell. This is
satya. “This is” refers to real shell only. The projected silver coin is unreal but because the
real part “this is” joins the unreal silver part, now there is confusion that unreal silver coin
appears as real.
Therefore, adhiṣṭhāna transfers the reality to adhyāsa, the unreal silver. When I say “this is
silver”, I look upon the shell as real silver. This is the world according to Vedānta. “This
is” belongs to adhiṣṭhāna Brahman only which is anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa. The is-ness
which belongs to adhiṣṭhāna, I transfer to the unreal world. In this sentence we have
transferred the reality of adhiṣṭhāna to the superimposition by making the statement that
“this is a snake”; in this statement itself there is confusion. Satya and mithyā I have mixed
up and transferred satyatva to mithyā part.
So Vidyāraṇya says satyatva the reality, which belongs to the shell, is falsely perceived on
the silver and is transferred to the unreal silver. If someone asks about the shell you negate
the existence of the shell and he vehemently asserts the existence of the silver thinking that
the shell is not there silver alone is there; why do you talk about the non-existent shell?
Similarly, Vedānta says Brahman alone is. The world is like the coin which does not exist

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 424

at all but we have managed with a fertile mind to transfer the is-ness of Brahman to the
world and on the other hand we question the existence of Brahman. This is called the
mahimā of avidyā and Māyā. In the same way, svayaṃtva the Selfhood, which belongs to
the kūṭastha which is anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa is perceived or experienced along with the
superimposed aham or ahaṅkāra. The ego is adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. Just as you say “this
is a snake” and in the statement real “this is” goes with false snake, so too whenever you
say “I myself”, the Self is adhiṣṭhāna and I is ego. Self is adhiṣṭhāna and you are
adhyastha. When I say “fan itself”, the Self is adhiṣṭhāna and fan is adhyāsa.
Thus, there is one Self which adhiṣṭhāna of I and adhiṣṭhāna of you and adhiṣṭhāna of he,
she or it and all of them are superimpositions. The adhiṣṭhāna is Self; the kūṭastha is
adhiṣṭhāna. Here also, there is a transference of reality from the adhiṣṭhāna to adhyāsa
exactly like taking the reality of shell and transfer to unreal silver, the reality which
belongs to the Self which is adhiṣṭhāna kūṭastha caitanya is transferred to ahaṅkāra which
is superimposed; the reality belonging to the cit is transferred to cidābhāsa. The all-
pervading consciousness is transferred to the localized cidābhāsa. I take the localized
cidābhāsa as satya and unlocalised cit alone is satya. This is the beginning. Vidyāraṇya
will elaborate that in sixteen verses.

Class 92
śloka 34 contd.
Vidyāraṇya explains the mechanism of superimposition. What exactly happens at the time
of superimposition with the example shell-silver superimposition. We introduce three
technical words for this purpose. anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa, anāvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa, adhyastha
viśeṣa aṃśa and in English we can say uncovered general part; superimposed specific
part; covered specific part; covered specific part is pushed aside and in its place
superimposed specific part has come and the covered specific part we can use the words
replaced specific part also.
We apply this first in the case of shell-silver and if it works in this case of shell-silver, we
have to apply with regard to the I, the kūṭastha, also. In the case of the shell-silver
example, this-ness and is-ness are anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśas the uncovered general parts
and the shellness is covered specific part āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśas. The shellness is not perceived

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 425

in semi-darkness but the is-ness is perceived in semi-darkness and the shellness comes
under āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa or covered specific part. Once the specific part is covered, it is
replaced by another specific part which is my own projection and the new one introduced
here is silverness, projected specific part, which displaces the covered part. The silverness
or coinness is called adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. Thisness and is-ness is called sāmānya aṃśa
or general part because this-ness and is-ness at the time of ignorance and projection joins
the silver and I say this is silver. At the time of ignorance it will join the superimposed part
and at the time of knowledge the silverness is dismissed and the shellness comes back, the
original shellness comes back and the general part drops the silverness and joins the
original shellness. Thisness and is-ness can join adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa and the āvṛta
viśeṣa aṃśa also. ajñāna-kāle it is and jñāna-kāle also it is. Since it joins both ajñāna-kāla-
viśeṣa-aṃśa and jñāna-kāla-viśeṣa-aṃśa it is called sāmānya aṃśa.
Once you understand this, you have to apply this in the case of Jīvātmā. In the vase of Jīva
the uncovered general part anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa is svayam, svam or Self. Selfhood is
sāmānya aṃśa, anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa as the Self is retained in jñāna-kāla as also in
ajñāna-kāla. The covered viśeṣa aṃśa is Brahmanhood or kūṭasthahood itself. Kūṭasthatva
nature of the kūṭastha which is the specific nature that is covered since we never say we
are changeless. On the other hand we talk about bālya, kaumarya, etc. none appreciates
the kūṭasthatva. Brahmanhood or kūṭasthatva is what anāvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa is. Kūṭastha is
Self none says Self is kūṭastha none says and in that place kūṭasthatva is replaced by
ahaṅkāra or jīvatva. Ahamtvam or ahaṅkāra or jīvātmātva is what is adhyastha viśeṣa
aṃśa. Thus kūṭastha is gone and Jīva comes or ahaṅkāra comes. The Self is kūṭastha must
be the right sentence, but we find that kūṭastha is covered and Self is I the ego the
ahaṅkāra the Jīva is the projected viśeṣa aṃśa. This is what is the approach of Vidyāraṇya.
Thisness and is-ness really belong to the shell but by pushing aside the shell, thisness and
is-ness is connected to the false silver. In the same way svayamtva Selfhold and reality
ishood or is-ness or am-ness belonging to kūṭastha are transferred to vikṣepa the
superimposed ahaṅkāra the I ness. Here, vikṣepa refers to cidābhāsa or ahaṅkāra or Jīva.
Selfhood and am-hood should go to cit but self-hood and am-hood are transferred to
cidābhāsa and we refer to the cidābhāsa instead of cit by I. How do we know that?
Because when we say “I am”, we do not appreciate ourselves as all-pervading cit but we

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 426

look upon ourselves as localized individual and once localized individuality comes it
refers to cidābhāsa and that is called vikṣepa.

śloka 35
नीलपृष्ठत्रिकोणत्वं यथा शुक्तौ तिरोहितम्।
असङ्गानन्दताद्येवं कू टस्थेऽपि तिरोहितम्॥ ६.३५ ॥
nīlapṛṣṭhatrikoṇatvaṃ yathā śuktau tirohitam.
asaṅgānandatādyevaṃ kūṭasthe:'pi tirohitam (6.35).
In the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya discussed anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa, both in the example
and the selfhood and Brahmanhood. In the example, anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśas are this and
is, while in the original sāmānya aṃśa it is selfness and amness. This was said in the verse
34.
Here, Vidyāraṇya will discuss anāvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa in the example and the original. The
shellness or shellhood, the specific nature of the shell is covered in the case of the example.
In the shell-example, the shellness is covered and what is shellness? Every shell has a
unique nature. On the front side, it will have round shining spot. The front side is round
and also shining and that is why we commit the mistake of a coin. On the posterior side, it
will not be round, but it will be triangular. Also it is not shining and it is dark or black in
colour. This is the unique feature of the shell. Shell-feature that gives shellness to the shell
is covered, nīlapṛṣṭhatrikoṇatva, because the shell is upside down, we miss the shell.
What we face is round and shining part. The sun reflects upon the round and there is
reflection and we mistake it for silver. Real shellness is covered in the case of shell silver-
example.
In the same way, in the case of kūṭastha Ātmā also the kūṭastha nature is covered.
Kūṭasthahood is covered. It is changelessness asaṅgatva and ānandatva nature. Kūṭastha
is ānanda-svarūpa and asaṅga-svarūpa. The very fact we happily introduce our parivāra
indicates that we are not asaṅga. The fact we say aham eṣām mama ete, the greatest
problem is we have taken cidābhāsa as ourself and when we take cidābhās,a asaṅga I will
become sasaṅga. I belong to them and they belong to me. This is the problem. When I miss
the cit, the asaṅga cit, and take cidābhāsa as I, I become sasaṅga ahaṅkāra, sasaṅga
Jīvātmā, related to people. The very definition of bandhu is I am bound to all of them.
Kūṭastha is relationless and that is missed and ānanda goes with this. Therefore, it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 427

asaṅgatva and ānandatva āvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa. In that place ahaṅkāra or jīvatva is projected
and asaṅga becomes sasaṅga and ānanda becomes duḥkha. Once this is covered, the
ground is ready for adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa. It is going to be cidābhāsa, ahaṅkāra, Jīva.

śloka 36
आरोपितस्य दृष्टान्ते रूप्यं नाम यथा तथा ।
कू टस्थाध्यस्तविक्षेपनामाहमिति निश्चयः ॥ ६.३६ ॥
āropitasya dṛṣṭānte rūpyaṃ nāma yathā tathā.
kūṭasthādhyastavikṣepanāmāhamiti niścayaḥ (6.36).
Now he comes to the next part. Anāvṛta sāmānya aṃśa and anāvṛta viśeṣa aṃśa are over.
Now, adhyastha viśeṣa aṃśa he takes up. In the case of shell-example, the rūpya or silver
coin superimposed specific part. In the same way, Self must be connected with kūṭastha
and instead of kūṭastha we join with finite cidābhāsa-rūpa Jīva which travels from loka to
loka. The word used for Jīva is the first singular aham the projected part. Kūṭastha cannot
be called aham, Self is the word for kūṭastha and the word aham does not belong to
adhiṣṭhāna kūṭastha but adhyastha Jīva cidābhāsa. The I, the Jīva, the cidābhāsa is false
and the Self alone is truth. That is in suṣupti-avasthā when cidābhāsa gets resolved we
don’t use the expression “I am”. In jāgṛt-avasthā and svapna-avasthā we see the I the first
person and in suṣupti when cidābhāsa gets resolved not only third person goes away, not
only you the second person goes away, even I the first person goes away. None uses the
words “I am” and you don’t say “I am asleep”. From this, it is clear I is mithyā, the word I
refers to ahaṅkāra which is mithyā, it comes along with the second and third persons and
it resolves with the second and third person. Aham, the ahaṅkāra Jīva, the cidābhāsa, is
the nāma the name of the vikṣepa the superimposed specific part, adhyastha which is
projected upon the kūṭastha the adhiṣṭhāna. Aham is the name of the superimposition
which is projected upon the kūṭastha. With this, all the three factors are explained.

śloka 37
इदमंशं स्वतः पश्यन्रूप्यमित्यभिमन्यते ।
तथा स्वं च स्वतः पश्यन्नहमित्यभिमन्यते ॥ ६.३७ ॥
idamaṃśaṃ svataḥ paśyan rūpyamityabhimanyate.
tathā svaṃ ca svataḥ paśyannahamityabhimanyate (6.37).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 428

How the superimposition takes place is explained here. The superimposition is the cause
of the greatest tragedy which is saṃsāra. He is clearly experiencing the adhiṣṭhāna shell.
The proof for the experience is that he uses the expression “this is”. Thisness and is-ness
belong to the shell only and he clearly has the shell experience, but what happens is he
mistakes that shell as the silver coin. This mistake happens because he experiences one
part and the other part is covered due to semi-darkness; because of partial experience
there is superimposition. In the same way, I experience the kūṭastha caitanya all the time;
particularly I experience that only in suṣupti. I experience Śākṣi-caitanya or kūṭastha
caitanya all the time. The localized cidābhāsa comes and goes, comes in jāgṛt and svapna,
goes during suṣupti; cidābhāsa is subject to arrival and departure but I the śākṣī is there all
the time. The problem is this knowledge is not complete. Kūṭastha is experienced only in
the form of Self generally. The selfhood of kūṭastha is experienced but that it is changeless
and ānanda-svarūpa is not known because torch light is missing. The torch light is Guru-
śāstra-upadeśa. Śāstra is the torch and Guru is the cell. When they join together and
switching on is upadeśa. Press the button and then you know Tat tvam asi. You are not
cidābhāsa but you are cit; you are not saṃśarī but you are asaṃśarī. Original cit is
nirvikāra, asaṅga, ānanda. What is known is sāmānya aṃśa svayam. What is not known is
that I am cit and I am asaṅga ānanda. The mistake we commit is the moment I use the
word aham I have become the first person and once I claim I am the first person, the
second and third person are different and I will become one of the isolated entities of the
world. The moment ahaṅkāra comes, I become an individualized mortal being. In suṣupti,
the cidābhāsa is dissolved temporarily, sthūla and sūkṣma śarīras are not available and in
sleep we are ānanda-svarūpa and we have no relationship. That relationship we know
only when we wake up and not in suṣupti. When the cidābhāsa comes, all the
relationships, etc., come. Therefore, he says all the time experiencing the Self sāmānya
aṃśa aham iti viśeṣa aṃśa is mistaken and we take ourself as ahaṅkāra.

śloka 38
इदंत्वरूप्यते भिन्ने स्वत्वाहन्ते तथेक्ष्यताम्।
सामान्यं च विशेषश्चेत्युभयत्रापि गम्यते ॥ ६.३८ ॥
idaṃtvarūpyate bhinne svatvāhante tathekṣyatām.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 429

sāmānyaṃ ca viśeṣaścetyubhayatrāpi gamyate (6.38).

When we say this is a shell or this is silver even though we experience it as one cognition
or one knowledge, that one knowledge is a mixture of sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa. In
“this is shell” there is sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa. The cognition appears as one unit
but it is combination of two. One is ajñāna kale and the other is jñāna kale. Ajñāna kale it
is “this is silver”; there is sāmānya aṃśa “this is” and “silver” is viśeṣa aṃśa. In “this is
shell” also there is sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa. On enquiry we find during jñāna-kāla
both sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa have the same order of reality. This is vyāvahārika-
satya and shell also is vyāvahārika-satya during jñāna-kāla it is satya-satya joined
together. It is vyāvahārika-satya and that is also vyāvahārika-satya and therefore, it is
right knowledge. In ajñāna-kāla we find sāmānya aṃśa this is vyāvahārika-satya. When
you say silver, silver is prātibhāsika-satya which means it is only a mental projection, a
false entity. In ajñāna-kālam sāmānya aṃśa is satya and viśeṣa satya is mithyā. From
ajñāna you come to jñāna, sāmānya aṃśa is not negated and only viśeṣa aṃśa is negated
or silver part is negated. The new lesson we learn is that during ajñāna-kāla, there is
mixing up of sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa of which sāmānya aṃśa is satya and viśeṣa
aṃśa is mithyā. We have mixed satya and mithyā. At the time of ignorance it is called
adhyāsa. This happens at the time of ajñāna. In jñāna-kāla is also, mithunikaraṇam is
there. But in jñāna-kāla, sāmānya-viśeṣa-aṃśa-mithunikaraṇam, both are satya. In jñāna-
kāla it is there but both are satya. Shell is satya. Jñāna-kale satya-sāmānya-satya-viśeṣa-
mithunikaraṇam, whereas, ajñāna-kale satya-sāmānya-anṛta-viśeṣa-mithunikaraṇam. It is
adhyāsa. This Ādi Śaṅkarācārya casually tells in the Brahma-sūtra introduction. Therefore,
the whole world lives in adhyāsa it is said. In the case of the original, whenever you say “I
myself” there is sāmānya and viśeṣa aṃśa. Self is sāmānya aṃśa. Self is satya sāmānya
aṃśa which is kūṭastha. when I say “I myself” “you yourself”, “he himself”, “she herself”,
that I, you, he, she are mithyā viśeṣa aṃśa referring to ahaṅkāra. Therefore, whenever you
say “I myself” satya-anṛta-mithunikaraṇa happens.

Class 93
Śloka 38 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 430

Vidyāraṇya is analysing the mechanism of superimposition by introducing two parts in

every cognition or perception. One is the general part and the other is the specific part.
When I say “this is a man”, “this is the table”, “this is the chair”, etc; “this is” part is the
sāmānya aṃśa and “bookness”, “manness”, “womanness”, etc., are viśeṣa aṃśas. At the
time of right knowledge, the sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa are real as both are clearly
perceived by the pramāṇa, the eye. Therefore, both sāmānya and viśeṣa are valid. But at
the time of erroneous perception or misconception, there are also two aṃśas, sāmānya and
viśeṣa aṃśas, but we make the statement “this is the snake”. “This is” part is sāmānya
aṃśa and the snakeness is viśeṣa aṃśa. Now, the sāmānya aṃśa is real because it is
properly grasped by the eyes and it is valid perception, it happens to be real even during
erroneous cognition. Sāmānya aṃśa is real during right as also at the time of wrong
cognition. Even during wrong cognition, sāmānya aṃśa is perceived by the eye and it is
valid and not negated also, but during erroneous perception the viśeṣa aṃśa is not the
right cognition. The snakeness is not valid knowledge because semi-darkness and because
of snake vāsanā, etc, there is an invalid cognition and viśeṣa aṃśa is unreal during
erroneous cognition.
Therefore, during the right cognition sāmānya aṃśa is real, viśeṣa aṃśa is also real and
two real aṃśas are together. During the wrong cognition, sāmānya aṃśa is real but viśeṣa
aṃśa is unreal. We should not say both are real or both are unreal. The total unreal
perception is never possible. Therefore, even during erroneous perception one aṃśa is
unreal and one is real. Therefore, from this fact, we can give a beautiful definition for
erroneous perception. Erroneous perception or adhyāsa is a perception in which there is
one real part and another unreal part. It is mixing up real and unreal parts. If both of them
are satya aṃśas, it is jñāna and if one is satya and the other is mithyā, it is adhyāsa; if both
are mithyā, we say such a thing is impossible and it is asambhava. Both are real or one is
real and other is unreal. It is satya-anṛta mithunikaraṇa. Once we understand this, we
should ask the question: which is satya and which is mithyā? Sāmānya satya and viśeṣa
anṛta aṃśas are mixed together. Sāmānya satya aṃśa is “this is” and viśeṣa anṛta aṃśa is
snakeness or silverness. In the case of mirage water, water is anṛta aṃśa. In the dream,
dream-I is anṛta aṃśa. When you say “I myself wrote this letter”, “I myself” sit here, there
also there is erroneous perception. Once this statement “I myself am sitting here” is
erroneous perception, which is satya and which is mithyā? Here Self is satya and I is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 431

mithyā. The word I refers to cidābhāsa and it is mithyā viśeṣa aṃśa. We can say it is finite
entity, Jīva, ahaṅkāra etc. That Self part is satya sāmānya aṃśa. It refers to cit and not
cidābhāsa. Another name is the original consciousness or adhiṣṭhāna. Similarly, when I
say “you yourself sit here”, “you” refers to cidābhāsa and self refers to satya sāmānya
aṃśa. Since we have mixed satya sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa, it become erroneous
perception. Then if you ask “what is satya viśeṣa aṃśa?”, ropeness is satya viśeṣa aṃśa. In
the case of self-knowledge, what should be the satya viśeṣa aṃśa? “Self is”, to make it
right knowledge. you should not say I, you, he, she, etc. You should either say kūṭastha or
Brahman and that will become satya viśeṣa aṃśa, which is covered during ajñāna. Satya
viśeṣa aṃśa is covered and it is covered by I, you, he and she. This Vidyāraṇya struggles
to convey this. Self is real and I is unreal, referring to ahaṅkāra or cidābhāsa.
In the case of shell silver example, “thisness” is sāmānya aṃśa and rūpyatā silverness
which is viśeṣa aṃśa, both are different because one is satya and another is mithyā.
Sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa aṃśa are different, one is satya and another is mithyā, and we
have joined together and say “this is silver”. The real and unreal can never be combined. It
is like the wedding between jāgṛt bride and svapna bridegroom. How is it possible? The
glory of ignorance is making the impossible possible and that is satya and mithyā which
cannot be connected are connected; it as “this is silver” instead of saying “this is shell”.
Selfhood which is cit or satya sāmānya aṃśa and I-hood mithyā cidābhāsa viśeṣa aṃśa are
different but we combine both due to our ignorance. So we say I myself do it. I is mithyā
and Self is satya we combine. From this, we come to know that in both the cases of the
example erroneous shell perception and of Self-perception, there is real sāmānya aṃśa and
unreal viśeṣa aṃśa experienced by us.

śloka 39
देवदत्तः स्वयं गच्छेत्त्वं वीक्षस्व स्वयं तथा ।
अहं स्वयं न शक्नोमीत्येवं लौके प्रयुज्यते ॥ ६.३९ ॥
devadattaḥ svayaṃ gacchettvaṃ vīkṣasva svayaṃ tathā.
ahaṃ svayaṃ na śaknomītyevaṃ lauke prayujyate (6.39).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives an example in support of what is said in the above śloka. In every
sentence, you should find satya sāmānya aṃśa and viśeṣa anṛta aṃśa. All the third person,
second person and first person examples are used in this verse. Here, “Devadatta will go
by himself”. It means he does not need an escort. Devadatta individualized ego,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 432

cidābhāsa, who has arrived and who will depart. Devadatta is mithyā and svayam word is
adhiṣṭhāna satya. It is kūṭastha and that alone is meant when we say Tat tvam asi. “Tvam
svayam vīkṣasva”, you see for yourself. Here also, there is satya sāmānya svayam and
mithyā viśeṣa tvam. The word tathā is just a conjunction here to mean ‘and’. The word
aham is mithyā referring to cidābhāsa only. I look upon myself as a localized entity. When
I say svayam, “I myself cannot do that”, here aham is mithyā viśeṣa aṃśa and svayam is
satya sāmānya aṃśa. The person is mithyā. They are superimposition and svayam is
adhiṣṭhāna and it is satya.
Svayam transcends all the three persons. It is different from all the three. All the three are
mutually exclusive. But svayam is inclusive in all the three. These statements are
employed in the world. In these examples we have to note one thing. When we give rope
example, snake example, etc., in the example sāmānya aṃśa comes first in the sentence
and viśeṣa aṃśa comes latter. This is silver sāmānya comes first. In the case of Devadatta it
is different. Viśeṣa aṃśa is expressed first and there is no rule that sāmānya aṃśa should
come first. One being satya and another mithyā are the only conditions for erroneous
perception.

śloka 40
इदं रूप्यमिदं वस्त्रमिति यद्वदिदं तथा ।
असौ त्वमहमित्येषु स्वयमित्यभिमन्यते ॥ ६.४० ॥
idaṃ rūpyamidaṃ vastramiti yadvadidaṃ tathā.
asau tvamahamityeṣu svayamityabhimanyate (6.40).
He extends this corollary to another statement. Satya sāmānya aṃśa is called sāmānya
aṃśa because it inheres in all the mithyā. Similarly, the word svayam which is satya
sāmānya aṃśa it goes with first person, second person and third person also. Satya
sāmānya aṃśa pervades all the mithyā viśeṣa aṃśas. Satya sāmānya aṃśa must pervade
every mithyā viśeṣa aṃśa. By definition, mithyā is that which does not have its own
existence. Is-ness can never belong to the mithyā vastu. Mithyā vastu does not enjoy is-
ness of its own and it has to borrow from somewhere and for it some has to lend the is-
ness. Every mithyā viśeṣa aṃśa has to borrow is-ness and who is to lend this, thisness.
One beggar cannot borrow from another beggar. One viśeṣa aṃśa has to borrow is-ness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 433

from satya sāmānya aṃśa. This is-ness of silver is borrowed from satya shell. This is-ness
of snake is borrowed from the rope. Otherwise, mithyā cannot enjoy even existence.
This is silver; this is dress; in such cognitions, the adhiṣṭhāna sāmānya aṃśa “this is”
pervades all of them. It inheres all of them. In the same way, svayam iti abhimanyate, the
svayam the original consciousness or satya sāmānya aṃśa is connected to or identified
with the third person, tvam the second person and aham the first person; all of them are
mithyā cidābhāsa. If you want to catch kūṭastha, you should turn your attention to
svayam or Self. If the word Self is misunderstood as ahaṅkāra, you write the word with
capital S.

śloka 41
अहन्त्वाद्भिद्यतां स्वत्वं कू टस्थे तेन किं तव ।
स्वयंशब्दार्थ एवैष कू टस्थ इति मे भवेत्॥ ६.४१ ॥
ahantvādbhidyatāṃ svatvaṃ kūṭasthe tena kiṃ tava.
svayaṃśabdārtha evaiṣa kūṭastha iti me bhavet (6.41).
A Pūrvapakṣa or student raises a question. He says, okay, I have understood that Self
refers to satya sāmānya aṃśa and aham to mithyā viśeṣa aṃśa; we constantly mix both
sāmānya and viśeṣa aṃśas. I admit to what you say that they are different. He says: why
do you talk about aham and svayam? You have introduced this chapter to reveal kūṭastha
adhiṣṭhāna and you don’t discuss kūṭastha at all but you talk about aham and svayam.
Why you have renounced the kūṭastha topic and introduced the new topic of aham and
svayam? The śiṣya did not understand what is happening and he raises the question.
Then Vidyāraṇya says svayam is another name for satya or kūṭastha. The word Self is
convenient to show that “I myself”, “he himself”, “she herself”, “you yourself” and by
introducing the word Self, I can show that the Self pervades all persons and Self is to be
seen as kūṭastha. It is a device used so that kūṭastha pervading all the cidābhāsa can be
understood. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says by the differentiation of aham and svayam, what
understanding we gather regarding kūṭastha is the question. He asks the question because
the student did not know svayam and kūṭastha are one and the same. This adhiṣṭhāna
kūṭastha is the meaning of the word svayam; that is my approach says Vidyāraṇya. The
word I does not refer to kūṭastha but the word Self refers to kūṭastha. ‘I’ refers to the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 434

reflected consciousness while the ‘Self’ refers to the original consciousness. More in the
next class.

Class 94
śloka 41 contd.
The mechanism of adhyāsa or superimposition is being discussed by Vidyāraṇya. He
wants to establish kūṭastha is the adhiṣṭhāna while Jīva, otherwise called ahaṅkāra, is
adhyāsa. Kūṭastha is the cit-rūpa the original consciousness and Jīva is cidābhāsa the
reflected consciousness. He wants to use an appropriate pronoun for that and he pointed
out that the word svayam corresponds to kūṭastha and the word aham or I corresponds to
cidābhāsa. I the first person singular, you the second person singular and he, sheor it the
third person singular refers to cidābhāsa only, because they are mutually exclusive and
different. They are also limited and therefore, they refer to cidābhāsa or Jīva or ahaṅkāra,
whereas the word Self refers to adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya, kūṭastha. Self the adhiṣṭhāna can go
with I, you, he and she, etc., also and he gave the example that in: I myself did that work,
you yourself did that work, he himself did, that itself worked, the Self inheres in the first,
second and third person and therefore, it refers to adhiṣṭhāna. I is adhyāsa but Self is
adhiṣṭhāna. This is what Vidyāraṇya established till now.
Even though we enumerate them separately the experience is not separate. In
superimpositions, adhiṣṭhāna and superimposition are experienced as one unit. In
cogniton or experience, we do not know that. When we say “this is a snake,” “this is” part
is adhiṣṭhāna and “snake” part is adhyāsa. That is why adhyāsa is explained as satya-
mithyā-mithunikaraṇa. Similarly, cidābhāsa and cit we never experience separately but
simultaneously experience cit and cidābhāsa mixed together. When I say I myself, Self part
is cit and I part is cidābhāsa and this is mixed together indiscriminately. This is called
svayam-aham-mithunikaraṇa.
Vidyāraṇya discussed all this without telling us the secret. The word svayam he used in
the meaning of kūṭastha, he did not tell till now. In all these verses, he has been using the
word svayam and aham without telling us that svayam is nothing but kūṭastha. Here, the
student not knowing that svayam refers to kūṭastha, he asks the question aham refers to
cidābhāsa superimposition and tvam refers to cit, the adhiṣṭhāna and they are different

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 435

but my question is what happens to the topic of kūṭastha which we have started long
before?
Then Vidyāraṇya smilingly answers svayam-śabdartha eva kūṭasthaḥ. The meaning of the
word Self is kūṭastha. The meaning of the word I is not kūṭastha and the meaning of the
word I is cidābhāsa. He says the word I refers to cidābhāsa and that is why in suṣupti,
when cidābhāsa resolves, we do not use the word I also. In jāgṛt-avasthā cidābhāsa is
active and we say I aham. In svapna-avasthā also, cidābhāsa is active. But in suṣupti,
cidābhāsa is resolved and none uses the word I in suṣupti. Cidābhāsa and I is well
connected. Svayam-śabdartha eva kūṭastha. The adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya which I talked about
before is the meaning of svayam-śabda. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 42
अन्यत्ववारकं स्वत्वमिति चेदन्यवारणम्।
कू टस्थस्यात्मतां वक्तु रिष्टमेव हि तद्भवेत्॥ ६.४२ ॥
anyatvavārakaṃ svatvamiti cedanyavāraṇam.
kūṭasthasyātmatāṃ vakturiṣṭameva hi tadbhavet (6.42).
Here, a Pūrvapakṣa raises a question. He does not allow Vidyāraṇya to move further. The
question is in which dictionary is the word svayam is translated as kūṭastha? You seem to
invent a new meaning to the word svayam! The word svayam means Self which excludes
everything other than the Self. When you say “it is my own pen”, it means it belong to my
Self and it does not belong to anyone. One meaning is “my own” and the other meaning is
that it does not belong to any other person. So Pūrvapakṣa says svayam means Self arrived
at by the exclusion of non-Self. This is meaning of the svayam. Nowhere the meaning
kūṭastha is given and how dare you say that svayam is kūṭastha? This is the question in
the first line. Therefore, it does not mean kūṭastha and this is the opinion of the
Pūrvapakṣa.
If you raise such a question, I will be happy says Vidyāraṇya. The word svayam excludes
all the non-Self. If we exclude all the non-Self, what is left is kūṭastha alone. The entire
sthūla sūkṣma-śarīra is not Self; cidābhāsa is also not Self; when śarīra is negated
cidābhāsa also will be negated as non-self. When cidābhāsa is gone the first, second and
third person also will go away from me. I, the cidābhāsa, also will go and you, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 436

cidābhāsa, will go away when śarīras are negated, cidābhāsas are also negated. That is
why in suṣupti all the cidābhāsas go away and even aham goes away.
Therefore, everything anya is negated means aham, tvam, are gone and what is left out is
cit or the original consciousness and that cit is the meaning of svayam. That which is left
behind after negating everything is cit or the original consciousness. That cit is changeless.
Cidābhāsa will come and go but cit legitimately refers to kūṭastha. Svayam is the negation
of everything including cidābhāsa and aham. Svayam is equal to cit and it is changeless
and therefore, it is kūṭastha; svayam finally means kūṭastha caitanya only and it is there in
suṣupti when the I-notion is gone. I-notion with the individuality goes and there remains
the Self and kūṭastha. In suṣupti, Self remains kūṭastha, remains asaṅga, caitanya alone
remains.
The negation of non-Self for arriving at the meaning of tvam, the negation of everything
including cidābhāsa is desirable to us indeed. It is desirable to reveal the kūṭastha as the
ultimate remaining cit. You negate everything and the function of svayam means negation
of everything. Therefore, svayam is an ideal word to reveal kūṭastha. Svayam naturally
does the job of neti neti! By doing that, it leaves behind the kūṭastha the original
consciousness. Therefore, for a teacher who wants to reveal kūṭastha as the Self, the
negation of everything else by using the word svayam is desirable. Hence Self is kūṭastha.

śloka 43
स्वयमात्मेति पर्यायस्तेन लोके तयोः सह ।
प्रयोगो नास्त्यतः स्वत्वमात्मत्वं चान्यवारकम्॥ ६.४३ ॥
svayamātmeti paryāyastena loke tayoḥ saha.
prayogo nāstyataḥ svatvamātmatvaṃ cānyavārakam (6.43).
He extends and reinforces his conclusion that the word svayam refers to kūṭastha Ātmā
the changeless Self only. The further proof for that is since svayam and Ātmā are identical
because the two words do not occur simultaneously. Out of ignorance, we use the same
word twice but knowingly we do not use the word containing the same meaning. The
word svayam and word Ātmā are not used together.
The word svayam and Ātmā are synonyms. Therefore, both those words are not together
in one sentence. The word saha here means together. Usage of the two words is never
done in one sentence and from this, it is clear that svayam is equal to Ātmā and Ātmā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 437

refers to kūṭastha alone. The word I refers to cidābhāsa and Self to kūṭastha. Therefore,
both the word svayam and the word Ātmā have the same function only, that of revealing
kūṭastha by negating everything else including cidābhāsa, individuality and aham. Since
both have the same function, we don’t use them together.

śloka 44
घटः स्वयं न जानातीत्येवं स्वत्वं घटादिषु ।
अचेतनेषु दृष्टं चेद्दृश्यतामात्मसत्त्वतः ॥ ६.४४ ॥
ghaṭaḥ svayaṃ na jānātītyevaṃ svatvaṃ ghaṭādiṣu.
acetaneṣu dṛṣṭaṃ ceddṛśyatāmātmasattvataḥ (6.44).
Now another question is posed by the Pūrvapakṣa. Pūrvapakṣa says I am willing to accept
the word svayam or Self refers to the adhiṣṭhāna kūṭastha caitanya and that kūṭastha
pervades the first, second and third person, but the word Self we use along with inert
object also. Ghaṭaḥ svayaṃ na jānāti, the pot does not know by itself. The river flows by
itself, no pumping is required to go down. Therefore, the word svayam or Self is used
along with inert object also. If you say that the word Self means kūṭastha then caitanya
must pervade the inert object also. Because kūṭastha caitanya pervades the human being,
human beings are sentient and if kūṭastha caitanya pervades the rivers, etc., then they
must be sentient too. We don’t see them sentient and so, there is something wrong in your
approach the Pūrvapakṣa says.
The pot itself does not know anything although we may use the words ‘the pot itself’.
Therefore, if we object that the word svayam does not imply the Self how will you answer
this doubt? The student thus tries to twist the words. To this, the teacher Vidyāraṇya gives
his answer. Let us be clear that kūṭastha caitanya pervades inert objects also. It is there in
the desk and in the wall also. The expression Self goes with inert objects also because the
kūṭastha caitanya is present in inert object also. Then the next question is: if cetana
prapañca is also pervaded by kūṭastha caitanya and acetana prapañca is also pervaded by
caitanya, how one is cetana and the other is acetana? This he answers in the next śloka.

śloka 45
चेतनाचेतनभिदा कू टस्थात्मकृ ता न हि ।
किन्तु बुद्धिकृ ताभासकृ तैवेत्यवगम्यताम्॥ ६.४५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 438

cetanācetanabhidā kūṭasthātmakṛtā na hi.

kintu buddhikṛtābhāsakṛtaivetyavagamyatām (6.45).
Vidyāraṇya makes it very clear that the kūṭastha caitanya is not responsible for the
sentient-insentient division. It is so because if kūṭastha caitanya has to be responsible it
should exist only in cetana prapañca and it will become a limited entity. The all-pervading
entity cannot be responsible for any division. For dividing you should look for a feature
which will be there in a certain area.
Manness is used for dividing a group of people for it is a feature that is there only in male
and not in female. Similarly, humanness is not there in the animal. Nirvikāra caitanya
cannot be responsible for any division because nirvikāra caitanya is all over.
Even ignorance is pervaded by kūṭastha caitanya and even emptiness is pervaded by
kūṭastha caitanya. Absolute nothingness does not exist as the very concept of nothingness
is pervaded by kūṭastha caitanya. In short, there is nothing which is not pervaded by
kūṭastha caitanya and therefore, that is not responsible for sentiency.
If kūṭastha caitanya is responsible for sentiency then everything will be sentient including
the mic. If kūṭastha caitanya is not responsible, what is responsible? You cannot say prāṇa
is responsible as prāṇa is inert, because it is not sentient by itself. You cannot say prāṇa is
responsible for sentiency and the mind is also not responsible for sentiency. A mirror
cannot illumine the room, so too prāṇa cannot do it and the mind cannot illumine the
room either.
the original consciousness cannot make the body sentient; reflecting medium cannot make
the body sentient. Then the reflected consciousness is there and it is responsible for
sentiency of anything. Wherever there is the reflected consciousness, that is sentient. It is
cidābhāsa that gives sentiency to the object. When the reflected consciousness goes, the
body turns insentient. The sentiency-insentiency division is caused by cidābhāsa or the
reflected consciousness. Cidābhāsa is caused by the reflecting medium known as buddhi.
The division is caused by cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa is caused by the reflecting medium and
so wherever reflecting medium is there, the cidābhāsa will appear making the object
sentient. More in the next class.

Class 95

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 439

śloka 45 contd.
Vidyāraṇya deals with tvam-pada which is a mixture of two principles: one is
pāramārthika, kūṭastha, bimba or Śākṣi-caitanya and the second one is vyāvahārika,
cidābhāsa, ābhāsa or pratibimba caitanya. This cidābhāsa is called ego, ahaṅkāra or Jīva.
The kūṭastha is otherwise called Ātmā also. This is mixed up because of the ignorance, we
are not aware of it and therefore, there is a confusion between kūṭastha and ahaṅkāra.
The first person I, the second person you and third person he or she belong to vyāvahārika
cidābhāsa only because of the plurality, location and division. All the three are possible for
cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa has plurality, cidābhāsa has location and cidābhāsa has division.
Since cidābhāsa is a reflection it will be only located in the reflecting medium and such
location is unavoidable, the reflections will be as many as the media, leading to plurality
and wherever there is location and plurality, the division is unavoidable. Cidābhāsa is not
cit. Naturally, the question comes up, if I, you and he, all refer to cidābhāsa, then for cit
which word we will use? We cannot use I, you and he, because they refer to plurality,
localisation and division. Kūṭastha caitanya does not have plurality, division, etc.
Vidyāraṇya establishes the word svayam or Self is the ideal word to denote kūṭastha.
What should be the appropriate name for kūṭastha Ātmā is the question here, it is a
semantic problem. Just as we have quarrel in nāmakaraṇa, in kūṭastha nāmakaraṇa also
we have a problem.
The ideal name is svayam or Self. He gave an argument in support of that and kūṭastha
pervades all the three persons, cidābhāsas, I-cidābhāsa, you-cidābhāsa and he-cidābhāsa
and therefore, you should choose a word which will go along with all the three persons.
Vidyāraṇya argues the word Self goes happily with all the three persons. In I myself, you
yourself and he himself, she herself, in all of them, the word Self happily join. The
kūṭastha also join in all of them. The Self is therefore, an ideal name for kūṭastha. The
Pūrvapakṣa makes an argument and asks a question: if the word Self can be used with
first, second and third person, the word Self is also used with inert Self. We say: the water
flows by itself, which means that the word Self is associated with water which is inert.
Pūrvapakṣa asks: since the word Self goes with inert object, the kūṭastha caitanya goes
with the inert object also.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 440

Vidyāraṇya agrees and says kūṭastha caitanya pervades inert objects also. That means
kūṭastha caitanya pervades sentient and insentient object also. If so, caitanya being in both
in the sentient and insentient, what difference is there between sentiency and insentiency?
For that Vidyāraṇya says I know you will ask that question. We are waiting to give the
answer. The sentient objects have got two caitanyas, whereas, the insentient objects have
one caitanya. How do you talk of two caitanyas conveniently being an Advaitin all the
time? For this, Vidyāraṇya says that one is kūṭastha caitanya and another is cidābhāsa-
caitanya which is mithyā, vyāvahārika caitanya. In all sentient beings, there is kūṭastha
caitanya, vyāvahārika caitanya. When we discuss the reality ābhāsa satya will not be
counted and for vyāvahārika purposes we count two caitanyas. Then Pūrvapakṣa asks
how come sentient thing has additional ābhāsa-caitanya and insentient thing is denied of
ābhāsa-caitanya? The human beings, animals, plants, etc., have ābhāsa-caitanya and the
condition for ābhāsa-caitanya and the appropriate reflecting medium should be there.
That appropriate reflecting medium is sūkṣma-kāraṇa-śarīra mixture. We generally don’t
mention kāraṇa-śarīra, but that is understood; sūkṣma-śarīra is responsible for cidābhāsa.
Wherever the sūkṣma-śarīra, the mind is there, there will be cidābhāsa. In all inert objects,
mind is not there. In the dead body, physical brain is there but sūkṣma-śarīra with the
mind is not available. Kūṭastha caitanya is every where but cidābhāsa-caitanya is through
where the mind is. Up to this, we saw in the last class.
The difference between insentient and sentient entity is not caused by kūṭastha caitanya as
it cannot make an object sentient. The difference between sentient and insentient is caused
by cidābhāsa which is caused by buddhi which means the reflecting medium. The
reflecting medium is responsible for the reflected consciousness and the reflected
consciousness is responsible for sentiency. We have the reflected consciousness, this you
may clearly note. If the Self is used along with inert object there is nothing wrong because
Ātmā caitanya is there in the inert water also.

śloka 46
यथा चेतन आभासः कू टस्थे भ्रान्तिकल्पितः ।
अचेतनो घटादिश्च तथा तत्रैव कल्पितः ॥ ६.४६ ॥
yathā cetana ābhāsaḥ kūṭasthe bhrāntikalpitaḥ.
acetano ghaṭādiśca tathā tatraiva kalpitaḥ (6.46).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 441

If you study the creation, you find that there is cetana padārtha and acetana padārtha.
Although the clip as well as the body are bhautika, the clip does not have cidābhāsa as it is
cidābhāsa-rahita-bhautika, whereas the body is cidābhāsa-sahita-bhautika. We have two
types of bhautika-padārthas. One is sentient and the other is insentient. And the third is
cidābhāsa. Of all the three, Vidyāraṇya says that all of them are mithyā. Bhautika-
padārtha the insentient clip, bhautika-padārtha the sentient body and cidābhāsa that
makes the body sentient are equally mithyā. The reflecting medium bhautika-padārtha,
non-reflecting medium bhautika padārtha such as the clip and the the reflected
consciousness are superimposed on the kūṭastha caitanya. “The clip is” means is-ness is
borrowed from kūṭastha. The cidābhāsa is when you say that is-ness is also borrowed
from kūṭastha. cetana means cetana padārtha; cidābhāsa which makes the body sentient;
reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness both of them are superimposed on
kūṭastha. The body and the reflected consciousness both of them are kalpita on kūṭastha.
Not only body and cidābhāsa and also the acetana padārtha are superimposed on
kūṭastha. The clip does not come under the reflected consciousness also and hence we
separately enumerate the clip.

śloka 46
तत्त्वेदन्तेऽपि स्वत्वमिव त्वमहमादिषु ।
सर्वत्रानुगते तेन तयोरप्यात्मतेति चेत्॥ ६.४७ ॥
tattvedante:'pi svatvamiva tvamahamādiṣu.
sarvatrānugate tena tayorapyātmateti cet (6.47).
Another objection is from Pūrvapakṣa. Still nāmakaraṇa-controversy is not over. We might
be convinced and have accepted, but the Pūrvapakṣa is not ready to give in and he raises
another objection. Whether the word Self can be used for kūṭastha or not is the question.
This has nothing to do with Vedānta. Because of the change of name nothing is going to
happen to Vedānta. Still Vidyāraṇya want to defend his stand with regard to the
nāmakaraṇa. The word Self goes along with first, second and third persons.
Similarly, the Self also goes with the three persons and therefore, we can give the name
Self. Pūrvapakṣa says the word ‘that’ also can go with all the three persons. The word
‘this’ and ‘that’ also can go with I, he and you. Why cannot we choose the words ‘this’ or
‘that’ to kūṭastha? In common parlance also, we have and in Sanskrit also we have

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 442

examples. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad’s bhūmā vidyā chapter, Nārada goes to Guru

Sanatkumāra and introduces himself as a great scholar. He gives a big introduction
regarding his qualifications. And then, he says: “That I, such a qualified person, I am, the
above described I, and the word saḥ (that) goes with the first person. Similarly, the word
saḥ goes with second person also. This we find in the Kaṭhopaniṣad. Yama says I tempted
you with all riches and even after that, you did not take anyone of them and ‘that’ kind of
great you have rejected all of them. There the word saḥ goes with the second person. Of
course, the word can go with any third person also. Pūrvapakṣa has really scratched his
head and has come out with the argument that the pronoun saḥ can go with all the three
persons so also ‘this’ and ‘that’ word can go with the first, second and third person.
So we can name kūṭastha as ‘that’ and ‘this’ and why are you vehement with your
argument that Self be used to name kūṭastha? Therefore, because of the same reasoning, I
can also apply the same reason says Pūrvapakṣa. Those two words ‘that’ and ‘this’ can be
employed for kūṭastha caitanya. Kūṭastha caitanya is with all the three cidābhāsas: first
person cidābhāsa, second person cidābhāsa and third person cidābhāsa. He does not
negate the word Self but he only asks why use the word Self only as you can use the word
‘this’ or ‘that’ also to indicate kūṭastha caitanya?

śloka 48
ते आत्मत्वेऽप्यनुगते तत्तेदन्ते ततस्तयोः ।
आत्मत्वं नैव सम्भाव्यं सम्यक्त्वादेर्यथा तथा ॥ ६.४८ ॥
te ātmatve:'pyanugate tattedante tatastayoḥ.
ātmatvaṃ naiva sambhāvyaṃ samyaktvāderyathā tathā (6.48).
Suppose we use the word saḥ as you say, then the word saḥ and the word Ātmā will
become synonymous. According to your argument saḥ will refer to kūṭastha caitanya and
the word Ātmā will also denote kūṭastha caitanya. Vidyāraṇya argues if they become
synonymous, they cannot be used in one and the same sentence. The words are used to
convey the meaning and when one word can convey the meaning, why use another word?
But what we find is in the same sentence the words saḥ and Ātmā are used in the śāstra
and therefore, they cannot be synonymous. Therefore, the word saḥ does not denote
Ātmā. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad, saḥ Ātmā is used together in the śāstra and therefore, the
word saḥ cannot be used for kūṭastha. However, the word svayam and Ātmā are not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 443

together not used. The word saḥ does not refer to kūṭastha. Samyaktvād, the word proper
goes with the first person, second and third person, and even though it goes with all the
three person the word proper can go with kūṭastha caitanya also, meaning it is an over-
extensive word, but we want a word proper that with go with the first, second and third
persons but not the kūṭastha caitanya. The conclusion is that the word svayam is the ideal
name for kūṭastha caitanya or Ātmā. More in the next class.

Class 96
śloka 48 contd.
It is true that ‘that’ and ‘this’ are associated with the Ātmā also and not limited to I, you,
he, etc. only, because Ātmā is the common substratum for all these. Even though satya and
mithyā are together, he does not understand the fact of this mixture and this is called
adhyāsa. Then Vidyāraṇya wanted an appropriate word to refer to kūṭastha caitanya.
Vidyāraṇya cannot use the word aham and he has taken the word aham to refer to ābhāsa-
caitanya. Since cidābhāsa is taken to use aham, Vidyāraṇya wanted some other word to
refer to kūṭastha Ātmā and he wanted to establish svayam or Self. He says the word
svayam fulfills two conditions and because of this, it deserves to be the name of kūṭastha
Ātmā. The first condition svayam fulfills is that it can coexist with first, second and third
person cidābhāsas. Kūṭastha is adhiṣṭhāna of the first, second and third person cidābhāsa.
The object and the object, you have to connect to word and word. This is at the padārtha-
level. Then you have to extend the principle to pada-level also; the word svayam is
associated with the word aham, the word tvam and the word saḥ. And therefore, the word
svayam ideally fits in with kūṭastha.
The second condition the word svayam fulfills is that it is never used along with Ātmā.
They never appear in proximity in a sentence and this argument Vidyāraṇya uses to prove
that they are synonymous. Synonyms do not occur in the same sentence and therefore,
svayam and Ātmā must be synonymous. If they are synonymous, the word Ātmā refers to
kūṭastha caitanya and therefore the word svayam which is synonym of Ātmā also refer to
kūṭastha caitanya.
Therefore, another name for Ātmā is svayam. It has nothing to do with Vedānta but it is a
semantic problem, a problem with the words. The other pronoun saḥ and ayam do not
fulfill these two conditions and therefore, it does not refer to kūṭastha caitanya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 444

śloka 49
तत्तेदन्ते स्वतान्यत्वे त्वन्ताहन्ते परस्परम्।
प्रतिद्वन्द्वितया लोके प्रसिद्धेनास्ति संशयः ॥ ६.४९ ॥
tattedante svatānyatve tvantāhante parasparam.
pratidvandvitayā loke prasiddhenāsti saṃśayaḥ (6.49).
The conclusion is that there are three pairs of words which are opposite to each other.
They are mutually opposed. They are ‘thatness’ and ‘thisness’; the word ‘that’ and the
word ‘this’ are mutually opposed because what is referred to as ‘that’ cannot be referred to
as ‘this’ which refers to closeness. The next is tvam, the second person singular, you and
ahantā, the first person singular are mutually opposed to each other. These two are
examples, but the third one the main pair, one relevant to us: svatā anyatve selfhood or
ātmatva referring to kūṭastha caitanya and anyatva referring to non-self, meaning
everything other than the kūṭastha, which means the entire anātma-prapañca is referred to
as anyatva. Anātmā includes the entire world, the bodies and the reflecting media also
come under anātmā, including cidābhāsa; therefore, all the first person, second person and
third person also come under anātmā alone. We should remember in this context that the
word Self alone is Ātmā and the word I, you, he and she refer to cidābhāsa and therefore,
they come under anātmā. But the kūṭastha caitanya Self refers to Ātmā. He wants to show
that in the original consciousness, there is no first, second or third person and that is why
the entire sanskrit dhātu-mañjarī is invalid. The entire śabda-mañjarī is also invalid. Then
what is Ātmā is avyava which means it is kūṭastha changeless. Anyatva anātmā includes
all the three persons and the entire world. Thus, it is well-known in this world. ‘That and
this’, ‘I and you’ and ‘Self and non-self’ are mutually opposed; for this there is no doubt.

śloka 50
अन्यतायाः प्रतिद्वन्द्वी स्वयं कू टस्थ इष्यताम्।
त्वंतायाः प्रतियोग्येषोऽहमित्यात्मनि कल्पितः ॥ ६.५० ॥
anyatāyāḥ pratidvandvī svayaṃ kūṭastha iṣyatām.
tvaṃtāyāḥ pratiyogyeṣo:'hamityātmani kalpitaḥ (6.50).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 445

Svayam, the Self, is opposed to anyatā every non-Self everything other than the Self. If you
negate all the non-self, anātmā, what will be left out is svayam, the Ātmā. To reveal the
kūṭastha, it negates the entire universe and it also negates the reflecting medium and also
reflected cidābhāsa also including Viśva, taijasa and prājña all are negated. Even the word
I has to be negated. How can I know the Self? When ‘I’ goes, you will know the Self. The
very I, the knower principle, has to be negated. Then one may ask “If I negate the I, the
knower principle, can I know the Self”?! If I can know the Self, again the knower principle
will be retained and therefore, we say that there is no question of knowing the Self,
because the very question is illogical, since knowing the Self is retaining the knower; and
retaining the knower is not negating the cidābhāsa. Therefore, you have to negate the
cidābhāsa the knower, and if you negate the knower, you are not there to know. The Self is
left behind. Then one will ask “how to know the Self is left behind”? Somehow or the
other, we want to bring back the knower!
That is why Ādi Śaṅkarācārya in his Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad makes a statement “mahā-
vākya does not help you to know the Self but it helps to negate the knower”; śabdena
pramātṛtvanivṛttiḥ. Through śabda pramāṇa the knower, the seeker, is negated and what
is left behind is Self. You don’t say “I know the Self” but you say “my svarūpa is Self”.
That svayam or Self is kūṭastha Ātmā. Similarly, this aham, the ahaṅkāra, knower
cidābhāsa is opposed to the second person you. He says aham ātmani kalpitaḥ, this
ahaṅkāra aham, cidābhāsa, is superimposed upon the svayam-kāra kūṭastha. We should
say aham is superimposed upon svayam. Caitanya-wise you should say ābhāsa-caitanya is
superimposed on kūṭastha caitanya; word-wise you should say aham is superimposed on
svayam; and in plain English, I is superimposed on the Self. Every individual of mixture of
I and the Self. That refers to mixture of I and Self. If this is used with knowledge it is
wonderful. If I transact with clear knowledge it is jīvanmukti or mokṣa. When jñānī talks
and transacts, he is aware which part is satya and which part is mithyā. karmaṇi akarma
yaḥ paśyet, akarmaṇi ca karma yaḥ; all the ślokas will be a game for him because he
understands, but we have a problem because kūṭastha and cidābhāsa are intertwined
because of our ignorance. This confusion is there because of one does not know karma
belongs to cidābhāsa and akarma belongs to kūṭastha. Therefore, there is confusion
because of fusion between Self and I.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 446

śloka 51
अहंतास्वत्वयोर्भेदे रूप्यतेदन्तयोरिव ।
स्पष्टेऽपि मोहमापन्ना एकत्वं प्रतिपेदिरे ॥ ६.५१ ॥
ahaṃtāsvatvayorbhede rūpyatedantayoriva.
spaṣṭe:'pi mohamāpannā ekatvaṃ pratipedire (6.51).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says the Self and I are of diagonally opposite nature; one is limited and
another is unlimited, cidābhāsas are many but cit is one, in cidābhāsa there is division and
in cit there is no division, cidābhāsa travels while cit does not travel, etc. Kaṭhopaniṣad
Yamadharmarāja says cidābhāsa and cit are like light and shade; they are opposite.
Normally, they should not be mixed together but the greatness of Māyā is the unmixed
pair, we mix because of our ignorance. Mixing of the unmixable is the greatness of Māyā
and ignorance. We do satya-anṛta-mithunikaraṇa.
The I, the ahaṅkāra, the cidābhāsa, and svatva, svayam, cit, kūṭastha caitanya, their
differences are very clear like hasta āmalakavat. They are very clearly different like this
shell is silver or this silver. In this statement there are two parts: ‘this’ refers to the real
shell in front. ‘This’ refers to shell the satya and ‘silver’ is mithyā and they cannot be
mixed up at all. ‘This’ and ‘silver’ cannot be mixed up but we mix up and we say “this is
silver”. Like the real this and unreal silver the difference is very clear between kūṭastha
caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya.
Even though they are diagonally opposite, people are deluded because of the power of
Māyā regarding vyāvahārika satya and pāramārthika-satya. In the example, the confusion
is between vyāvahārika satya and prātibhāsika-satya and in the original it is between
vyāvahārika satya and pāramārthika-satya. Because of this, they treat the mixture as one
composite mix even though they are two distinct entities. We mix up kūṭastha and
cidābhāsa. The adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya are mixed between Īśvara and
Jīva which will be discussed later.

śloka 52
तादात्म्याध्यास एवात्र पूर्वोक्ताविद्यया कृ तः ।
अविद्यायां निवृत्तायां तत्कार्यं विनिवर्तते ॥ ६.५२ ॥
tādātmyādhyāsa evātra pūrvoktāvidyayā kṛtaḥ.
avidyāyāṃ nivṛttāyāṃ tatkāryaṃ vinivartate (6.52).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 447

This mixing up of the Self and I, ādhāra-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya, we call satya-anṛta-
mithunikaraṇa. Vidyāraṇya uses a technical word tādātmyādhyāsa. The mixing up of real
and unreal and mistaking real as unreal and unreal as real is tādātmyādhyāsa. Why does it
happen and who manages to bring this disaster? Vidyāraṇya says avidyā is responsible for
this mistake. Avidyā, he says is the greatest acquisition from our past. Avidyā is in
abundance. This avidyā has been already talked about before verse 25 of this chapter.
Mūlāvidyā was introduced there. If this adhyāsa is going to bring about a good result,
then we can retain it. The entire saṃsāra is the cause of this adhyāsa and therefore, this
mixing up has to be dissolved. For this, its cause avidyā has to be uprooted. When avidyā
is eliminated, tatkāryaṃ vinivartate, its product also goes away. When the cause is gone,
the effect also will go away. How can we remove avidyā? Vidyāraṇya gives the answer in
the next verse.

śloka 53
अविद्यावृतितादात्म्ये विद्ययैव विनश्यतः ।
विक्षेपस्य स्वरूपं तु प्रारब्धक्षयमीक्ष्यते ॥ ६.५३ ॥
avidyāvṛtitādātmye vidyayaiva vinaśyataḥ.
vikṣepasya svarūpaṃ tu prārabdhakṣayamīkṣyate (6.53).
He says that avidyā will go only on arrival of vidyā. According to the law of universe,
darkness can be eliminated only by light. Similarly, ignorance can be eliminated only by
knowledge. There are certain goals that can be accomplished through many ways but
certain goals can be gained only through one path. For removing darkness, there is only
one method which is light. Ignorance can go only by knowledge. The knowledge does not
come in the normal course. Will knowledge gradually come? No, it will not. The
knowledge does not happen but it has to be made to happen and we have to work for it.
Whatever be your lifestyle, knowledge does not happen and we have to make it happen.
Go to a Guru and get educated. Vidyā will remove all the problems. The problem is
divided into four parts. The fundamental problem is mūlāvidyā; this mūlāvidyā has two
powers āvaraṇa-śakti and vikṣepa-śakti. Āvaraṇa-śakti covers the truth and vikṣepa-śakti
projects the false. We have mūlāvidyā, āvaraṇa and vikṣepa. After the false projection
comes, the false and the real are mixed up and this mixing up is the fourth one. The
mixing up is the fourth problem. Avidyā, āvaraṇa, vikṣepa and tādātmya adhyāsa are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 448

doing a team work to give saṃsāra and problem to us. Vidyāraṇya says knowledge will
destroy three factors, whereas the fourth factor will not be immediately destroyed; it will
be destroyed later. Avidyā, āvaraṇa and mixing up are the three that are destroyed by
knowledge in the case of Jīvanmukta. The other one will take some time and that is
vikṣepa and that is why Jīvanmukta continues to live next class also.

Class 97
śloka 53 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has introduced the four factors until now which are connected to the
adhiṣṭhāna, that is, the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya as also the ābhāsa-caitanya. The four factors
that have been introduced are avidyā or mūlāvidyā, which is the fundamental thing
because which alone the latter ones are possible and then he talked about the āvaraṇa-
śakti which covers the adhiṣṭhāna and then the next factor which he introduced is vikṣepa
the projection of śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra, sūkṣma prapañca, sthūla-śarīra and sthūla-
prapañca. Once the false entity is projected, once the snake is projected, avidyā is there,
rope-ignorance-āvaraṇa is there, rope is covered, I don’t see it, vikṣepa is there, the snake
has come up. And after the arrival of snake, another thing is involved: we mix up the
adhiṣṭhāna rope and vikṣepa snake; one is satya and another mithyā, but both are mixed
up and we see them as one unit.
No ignorant person says “I see satya rope” and “mithyā snake”. The cognition of the
ignorant person is “this is a snake” and he understands only one entity through one
cognition but that one cognition has two factors, that one belongs to satya and another
mithyā aṃśa. This mixing up of adhiṣṭhāna satya and adhyāsa mithyā is called tādātmya.
These are the four factors I want you to remember. You see it as one. For all these, the
foundation is avidyā. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says: when you destroy avidyā, all the others
will go away. Avidyā is destroyed by jñāna that is śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana.
Once avidyā, the kāraṇa, is gone, all the other latter consequences go. They are āvaraṇa,
vikṣepa and tādātmya. In the case of jñāna, the latter three will be destroyed not
simultaneously. There is some order or gradation. The order of gradation is that of the
three, two of them go immediately; that is, in the wake of knowledge itself āvṛti and
tādātmya will go. The mirage water I saw when I was unaware of the sand and once I see

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 449

the sand, the sand-ignorance is gone but from distance the mirage-water appearance
continues, because it is a phenomenon caused by the universal law. The water-perception
will continue but tādātmya is gone because you don’t mix up the desert sand and
apparent mirage water. Ignorance is gone but the appearance of mirage-water continues.
Similarly, avidyāvṛtitādātmye, āvṛti and tādātmya born out of avidyā, go away when
avidyā is destroyed.
These two born out of avidyā are destroyed on gaining jñāna. In a jñānī, because of jñāna,
two things are destroyed āvṛti and tādātmya. Jñānī is no more ignorant of the adhiṣṭhāna-
caitanya and it is no more concealed for him as he declares aham kūṭastha-caitanyam
asmi. Concealment of svarūpa is not there for him. Tādātmya is mixing up of the real-I
kūṭastha caitanya and the fake body-mind-complex, cidābhāsa. Identifying with them and
mixing with them is tādātmya and jñānī does not mix up I and the body; tattvavittu
mahābāho guṇakarmavibhāgayoḥ; guṇā guṇeṣu vartanta iti matvā na sajjate. The body
and sense-organs are in their own field but I am not doing anything, meaning he does not
mix the body with I and therefore, he is free from tādātmya. He does not mix up with
body-activity. “I am akartā” he says and śarīra-tādātmya is not there, when all the
activities are going on, paśyan śṛṇvan spṛśan jighran aśnan gacchan svapan śvasan. The
avidyā and tādātmya are destroyed by vidyā, but there is another factor which cannot be
destroyed by jñāna: vikṣepa.
Whatever is already falsely created by mūlāvidyā is called vikṣepa and that false creation,
this sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra, created by mūlāvidyā and kāraṇa- śarīra which is
mūlāvidyā. Two vikṣepas created by mūlāvidyā cannot be destroyed immediately by
knowledge. It takes some time, just like medicine takes time to cure. It depends on
individual to individual.
Ātma-jñāna will destroy sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra but it will take some time which
depends upon the length of prārabdha remaining. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says vikṣepasya
svarūpa, the nature of vikṣepa or the product of vikṣepa which is in the form sūkṣma-
śarīra and sthūla-śarīra waits for the end of prārabdha to get destroyed. The blessing is if
the vikṣepa alone continues without āvaraṇa and tādātmya, that cannot cause bondage.
Then let the mithyā body continue for any number of years, I will claim asaṅgoham
asaṅgoham; I am not going to claim bondage. Such a person is called Jīvanmukta.
Videhamukta is one in whom all the three consequences are gone.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 450

śloka 54
उपादाने विनष्टेऽपि क्षणं कार्यं प्रतीक्ष्यते ।
इत्याहुस्तार्किकास्तद्वदस्माकं किं न सम्भवेत्॥ ६.५४ ॥
upādāne vinaṣṭe:'pi kṣaṇaṃ kāryaṃ pratīkṣyate.
ityāhustārkikāstadvadasmākaṃ kiṃ na sambhavet (6.54).
In these three verses, Vidyāraṇya answers a possible objection or doubt that may be raised
by a logician or Tārkika. He says I cannot accept your statement of 53rd verse second line.
The statement is that the sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra will not be removed by jñāna but
they will need several years for exhaustion of prārabdha. In the case of Jīvanmukta, kāraṇa
is gone but kārya vikṣepa is not gone. Logician says once the cause is gone the effect must
go. Once clay is gone, the pot must go. It is a universal law. Pūrvapakṣa says in the case of
Jīvanmukta, this law is violated. In the case of Jīvanmukta, vidyā is gone but vikṣepa
śarīra-dvaya, the product of avidyā, continues; how can you say so? Vidyāraṇya answers
the question posed by Pūrvapakṣa.
He says you have also accepted a similar situation. You have no right to question my
argument. In tarka-śāstra also, they accept the law kāraṇa-nāśe kārya nāśaḥ; kāraṇa-nāśa
is kāraṇa for kārya-nāśa. The relationship between kāraṇa-nāśa and kārya-nāśa is cause-
effect relationship. kāraṇa-nāśa is kāraṇa and kārya-nāśa is kārya. Tārkika accepts it as all
right.
Now we come to the next principle of tarka-śāstra. Any kāraṇa should exist for one
moment before the kārya. Because kārya and kāraṇa cannot be simultaneous. Both cannot
have the same age and kāraṇa should be older than kārya. Therefore, kāraṇa-nāśa is
kāraṇa for you and kārya-nāśa is kārya for you. Kāraṇa-nāśa and kārya-nāśa cannot
happen simultaneously. If they happen simultaneously, they don’t have cause-effect
relationship. To enjoy cause-effect relationship, kārya should happen minimum one
moment after kāraṇa-nāśa. This is their rule. Tārkika agrees. Then Vidyāraṇya asks the
question after the kāraṇa-nāśa in that moment kārya must exist. During that one moment,
the kārya must exist because kārya-nāśa has not taken place even though kāraṇa-nāśa has
already taken place. Kārya-nāśa has not taken place means kārya exists. Therefore, in
Tarka-śāstra, kārya exists minimum one moment even after kāraṇa-nāśa. Tarka-śāstra
people have no choice there is one moment of existence of kārya even after the destruction

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 451

of kāraṇa. If you can have a kārya existing one moment after destruction of kāraṇa, why
cannot I have a vikṣepa existing even after destruction of mūlāvidyā? Duration we will
study latter, kārya can exist even after the destruction of kāraṇa.
Similarly, in a Jīvanmukta even after avidyā-nāśa, sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-śarīra can
exist and we have not violated any law. This is the argument of Vidyāraṇya. If upādāna-
kāraṇa is destroyed, kārya waits for one moment for its destruction. This law is accepted
by Tārkika people.
Then Vidyāraṇya asks if you can have kārya surviving for one moment why I cannot say
vikṣepa survives after destruction of avidyā? Now Tārkika cannot question our argument.
We say Tārkika survives for one moment. He can say Jīvanmukta can live only for one
moment. How do you talk about many years of survival after destruction of ajñāna. Why
vikṣepa continues for years? That is the question posed by the Pūrvapakṣa.

śloka 55
तन्तूनां दिनसंख्यानां तैस्तादृक्क्षण ईरितः ।
भ्रमस्यासंख्यकल्पस्य योग्यः क्षण इहेष्यताम्॥ ६.५५ ॥
tantūnāṃ dinasaṃkhyānāṃ taistādṛkkṣaṇa īritaḥ.
bhramasyāsaṃkhyakalpasya yogyaḥ kṣaṇa iheṣyatām (6.55).
Vidyāraṇya says: when you say that kārya survives for a moment after the destruction of
kāraṇa what exactly you mean is that the kārya survives for a very short while.
Vidyāraṇya says that the word short is a relative word, depending upon the field of
discussion. The meaning of the word depends upon the context of discussion. If someone
says ‘big mountain’ it means 8000 metres or 10000 metres, you look up. If you say ‘big
mosquito’ means it is different. In the context of gallaxies, it can be in millions and billions.
When we talk about pot-clay and cloth-fibre the distance is small and generally it will
survive for a few months. Therefore, in that context, when you say kārya survives for a
short while, it must be one moment. But here we talk abut mūlāvidyā and the time
duration we discuss is anādi avidyā. It is several sṛṣṭis long. Therefore, in several sṛṣṭis the
śarīras have come and compared to infinite time, at least a few years should be there
between destruction of cause and destruction of effect. Therefore, the time scale is relative.
The śarīra survives for one moment and we should take it from the sṛṣṭi-scale. From sṛṣṭi-
scale it will be few years. A short while should have one moment’s duration from kārya-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 452

kāraṇa angle. The proportionate shortness of duration is assumed for the survival of kārya
after destruction of kāraṇa. Here, we talk of adhyāsa which is several lifetimes and in fact
it is innumerable kalpas. Therefore, no law is violated.

śloka 56
विना क्षोदक्षमं मानं तैर्वृथा परिकल्प्यते ।
श्रुतियुक्त्यनुभूतिभ्यो वदतां किन्नु दुःशकम्॥ ६.५६ ॥
vinā kṣodakṣamaṃ mānaṃ tairvṛthā parikalpyate.
śrutiyuktyanubhūtibhyo vadatāṃ kinnu duḥśakam (6.56).
The word kṣaṇa changes from context to context. In this verse, Vidyāraṇya gives an
offensive argument. First, he said I am also right, now he argues you are wrong and I am
right. This kārya-nāśa survives after kāraṇa cannot be proved in your śāstra. You have a
problem as you do not have an appropriate pramāṇa for establishing the survival of the
cloth after the destruction of the thread, whereas for us, we have Śruti, yukti and
anubhava pramāṇas and so, I am right. More in the next class.

Class 98
śloka 56 contd.
Vidyāraṇya pointed out in the 52nd verse 2nd line, avidyāyam nivruttayam tadkaryam
vinivartate when mūlāvidyā is eliminated its products also get eliminated. There is a
condition to be noted. Mūlāvidyā has three products and of these three, two will be
eliminated and one will continue for sometime. Āvaraṇa, vikṣepa and tādātmya are the
three products. Tādātmya means satya-mithyā mixing up. Āvaraṇa and tādātmya will go,
while vikṣepa will continue and this alone we present in the form of prārabdha. Vikṣepa
continues means prārabdha continues and only sañcita and āgāmi is taken care of. A
question is raised by Naiyāyika. After the negation of kāraṇa, how can only two karyas be
destroyed instantaneously and how can vikṣepa or prārabdha remain? How can there be a
gap between kāraṇa-nāśa and kārya-nāśa? For this, we have some other regular answer,
which Vidyāraṇya could have given, but just to bully the Naiyāyikas, he gives the answer
based on their own principle. Having answered it, Vidyāraṇya says I borrow your own
principle because I have to answer you. Really speaking, your principle is wrong.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 453

Still I borrow your wrong principle because you have accepted this wrong principle and I
can use it to answer you. The borrowed principle is after kāraṇa-nāśa there is one moment
gap for kārya-nāśa. This is their principle. He assumes that theory because he wants to say
kāraṇa-nāśa is kāraṇa and kārya-nāśa is kārya and they have kāraṇa-kārya-sambandha
and therefore, first there is kāraṇa-nāśa and then there is kārya-nāśa.
Really speaking, their theory is wrong. We don’t accept their theory. This is upādāna-
kāraṇa. Upādāna-kāraṇa-nāśa-anantaram eka-kṣaṇa-anantaram kārya-nāśaḥ. This theory,
we don’t accept. He says the Naiyāyikas have funny illogical ideas. Vidyāraṇya does not
answer what is false or wrong in their theory, but we discuss this elsewhere while refuting
the Naiyāyika.
This we discuss elsewhere in Ādi Śaṅkarācārya bhāṣya
Gītā 18th chapter 48th verse. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says you read it there. Since
Vidyāraṇya mentions this, I will briefly mention it here. When they say kāraṇa-nāśa-
anantaram kārya-nāśaḥ, they assume kāraṇa and kārya are two separate entities. This is
their assumption. Upādāna-kāraṇa is different, kārya is also different in their philosophy;
upādāna-kāraṇa is a separate substance and kārya is also a separate substance. And
therefore, in their philosophy clay will be separate substance and pot will be another
substance. We say pot is only nāma-rūpa but the funny Naiyāyika says that the clay is a
thing and pot is also a thing. Gold is a separate substance and ornament is a separate
substance. We argue that you have no proof to show clay and pot are two separate
substances.
Sūreśvarācārya tells somewhere that if the gold and ornaments are two substances when
you give gold it will be some weight and when ornaments are made it will have some
weight and every time when you make ornaments the weight should increase and how
can you take the ornaments as another substance.
Your theory kāraṇa-nāśa-anantaram eka-kṣaṇa-anantaram kārya-nāśaḥ is absolutely
wrong. Your assumption does not hold water and therefore, your theory is wrong. Still I
will use theory to answer your question. But really speaking our answer is not based on
your theory. We don’t accept your theory. We have got some other pramāṇa to prove the
continuity of prārabdha. It is not your theory. We will not accept your theory.
The logicians have merely imagined the existence of the effect after the destruction of the
cause without any authority that can stand the test of enquiry. The logicians have the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 454

instrument of logic as the only authentic means of knowledge. They lack the authority of
Vedas, etc. Hence, their logic cannot be accepted all the time on all issues. The
authenticity of our logic is based on the proper authority of scriptures and not mere logic.
We have said prārabdha is a product of mūlāvidyā, but we say even after the destruction
of mūlāvidyā prārabdha continues and for that question we have to answer, without
resorting to their theory, which is fallacious. Vidyāraṇya says śrutiyuktyanubhūtibhyo
vadatāṃ, prārabdha-continuation after jñāna is based on three pramāṇas; even after the
destruction of āgāmi, meaning the avoidance of āgāmi, prārabdha continues. Through the
Śruti scripture, yukti reasoning and anubhūti experience, we talk of continuance of
prārabdha. We have no difficulty at all because we are backed by three powerful
pramāṇas. Vidyāraṇya does not want to say what these are, but we have seen elsewhere.
First one is Śruti pramāṇa and it is Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.14.2 that mantra says tasya
tāvadeva ciraṃ yāvanna vimokṣye:'tha sampatsye, jñānī will continue to survive as long
as the prārabdha-based body continues. Therefore, he will retain his individuality.
Therefore, the other people will be able to see his body and be able to transact with him as
long as prārabdha-based body continues, but the jñānī knows that this śarīra and
prārabdha are mithyā. The world will see the body as real but from the jñānī’s angle the
existence of the body makes no difference. Then the mantra says that after the exhaustion
of prārabdha, the body will fall which means even the vyāvahārika individuality goes
away and he is one with Parabrahman. Thus he gains videha-mukti. Śruti is our pramāṇa
for continuity of prārabdha. It is so because prārabdha comes under apauruṣeya viṣaya.
Prārabdha is adṛṣṭa viṣaya, it is beyond human pramāṇa and it is not available under
pañca pramāṇa. You can never talk about any karma with available pramāṇa. For this, you
have to go to śāstra. Śāstra says sañcita and āgāmi is destroyed and prārabdha continues,
which we have to accept as the only pramāṇa.
The next pramāṇa is yukti pramāṇa. It is supporting logic. It is the logic to understand the
Śruti statement. The intellect needs logical format to understand the logic. Our intellect
cannot conceive something unless we are told in our known language. For easy
understanding, we convert dollars into rupees or height mentioned in centimetres to feet
and inches. Similarly, intellect can understand when it is presented in a logical format and
whatever Śruti says we put it in a logical format. Many Ācāryas give different argument
for continuance of prārabdha after jñāna. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya gives an interesting argument

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 455

in Upadeśa-sāhasri. Jñāna wants to be grateful to the prārabdha. The jñāna is possible

only when there is manuṣyatva, mumukṣutva, mahāpuruṣasaṃśraya; a human body is
needed for knowledge to arise. The very arrival of knowledge is made possible because of
the human body and continuation of jñāna is also because of the body only and therefore,
jñāna needs a body, a human body and the human body came because of prārabdha. We
have got human body in the Vedic culture and because of prārabdha, we attend the
classes. It is prārabdha that made the human body possible, that made jñāna possible and
jñāna wants to show its gratitude to prārabdha and it looks upon prārabdha as a friend
and not as an enemy. Therefore, jñāna and prārabdha are not opposed to each other. This
is the logic.
The third pramāṇa is anubhava-pramāṇa. What is the anubhava pramāṇa for continuance
of prārabdha after jñāna? The very fact that there are jñānis in the world is the proof that
jñāna does not destroy prārabdha. If jñāna destroys prārabdha as even the class is going
on one by one will die on gaining jñāna! Whoever falls dead is a jñānī. Not only that, if the
rise of knowledge destroys the student, no one would come to the class to gain brahma-
vidyā!
The very fact that jñānis are there shows that jñāna does not destroy prārabdha and
because of survival of jñānī, Guru-śiṣya paramparā survives. Otherwise, there will be no
teacher to teach jñāna to the śiṣyas. Therefore, anubhava shows that jñānis are there and
that jñāna does not destroy prārabdha. What is difficult for us are always based on Śruti,
yukti, and anubhava pramāṇas. This is the negation of Naiyāyikas.

śloka 57
आस्तां दुस्तार्किकैः साकं विवादः प्रकृ तं ब्रुवे ।
स्वाहमोः सिद्धमेकत्वं कू टस्थपरिणामिनोः ॥ ६.५७ ॥
āstāṃ dustārkikaiḥ sākaṃ vivādaḥ prakṛtaṃ bruve.
svāhamoḥ siddhamekatvaṃ kūṭasthapariṇāminoḥ (6.57).
Vidyāraṇya says I have wasted lot of time dealing with illogical Naiyāyikas. I don’t want
to waste any more time. Enough of debate or discussion has been there with Tārkikas who
are illogical. He says let us come to our topic. Let us take the analysis of individual who is
a mixture of adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya. Adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya is called
kūṭastha and ābhāsa-caitanya is Jīva and of these two, one is satya and the other is mithyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 456

Every individual is satya-mithyā-caitanya-dvaya or śākṣī-ahaṅkāra-dvaya. Let me

reiterate or remind you the topic under discussion.
Let me finally tell the conclusion on this topic of identify of Jīvātmā and kūṭastha, the
oneness in the identification between svam and aham I.e., kūṭastha and cidābhāsa the
ever-changing is born out of delusion and nothing else. It is a mixture of changeless
adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya and changing ābhāsa-caitanya, which is the reflected consciousness.
the reflected consciousness is located upon reflecting medium and as long as medium
undergoes a change, the reflected consciousness also will undergo the change. Ābhāsa-
caitanya is bright for human being and ābhāsa-caitanya is not so bright in the case of
animal and plant.
Therefore, ābhāsa-caitanya is subject to change and even within one life itself the ābhāsa-
caitanya changes. When the mind becomes weaker due to brain’s weakness, I become
weak and ābhāsa-caitanya is subject to change. We have completed the tvam-pada-vicāra.
With this, Vidyāraṇya has kept the stage ready for mahā-vākya-vicāra. This much
preparation is needed for mahā-vākya-vicāra , because during mahā-vākya-vicāra, we will
talk about bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā. Actually, tvam-pada-viveka is over.

śloka 58
भ्राम्यन्ते पण्डितंमन्याः सर्वे लौकिकतार्किकाः ।
अनादृत्य श्रुतिं मौर्ख्यात्के वलां युक्तिमाश्रिताः ॥ ६.५८ ॥
bhrāmyante paṇḍitaṃmanyāḥ sarve laukikatārkikāḥ.
anādṛtya śrutiṃ maurkhyātkevalāṃ yuktimāśritāḥ (6.58).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that if a person takes to Śruti pramāṇa directly then he will have no
problem at all. With the help of Śruti pramāṇa, he will easily claim “I am the kūṭastha
caitanya” and negate ahaṅkāra and kartṛtva and cidābhāsa and ābhāsa-caitanya, etc. All
the relationships belong to ābhāsa only and if we take Śruti, our journey will be straight
and we would be free. If we don’t take to that path, what will be the tragedy? Vidyāraṇya
talks of all possible confusions if we take to other paths. He will show a series of pitfalls if
one does not take to Śruti pramāṇa. One set of pitfall into which worldly people fall into
taking ahaṅkāra as the unreal I, they are totally lost in ahaṅkāra and all their struggle is in
improvement of ahaṅkāra, instead of dropping ahaṅkāra. This is the pitfall into which
most people fall. Then there are other series of pitfalls into which variety of philosophers

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 457

get trapped. Therefore, the following verses relate to other systems of philosophy. All
other philosophers commit mistakes and thus Vidyāraṇya tempts the people to come to
mahā-vākya-vicāra.
The laymen as also learned philosophers fall into the trap and they are confused. The
laymen are obsessed by ahaṅkāra “I am kartā” and “I am bhoktā”. All the karmas they do
is to improve kartā and bhoktā. Ahaṅkāra which is to be dropped, they decorate. The next
group is a system of philosophy in which the people who are well-read but unable to
grasp the import of the scriptural statement with reference to the context, quote the unsaid
meaning of the scriptural statements without hesitation. If a person is confused wise
enough to know he is confused, there is a possibility of coming out of confusion, but if
such a person does not know he is confused, there is no escape to come out of the
confusion. All these people are confused because the Śruti pramāṇa is not given due status
or regard. They do not respect scriptural pramāṇas. They rely upon their own intelligence.
They do not know that the human intelligence has intrinsic defects. There are six doṣas in
this regard, which I will explain in the next class.

Class 99
śloka 58 contd.
Ādhāra-caitanya cannot do anything without the ābhāsa-caitanya but at the same time
ābhāsa-caitanya cannot exist without the backing of ādhāra-caitanya. Every transacting
individual is a mixture of these two caitanyas; of course, there is a third part which is very
much a part of the two, but we don’t enumerate it as it is understood. What is that third
part? For the formation of the reflection you need the reflecting medium; the very word
‘reflection’ includes the reflecting medium which is nothing but the śarīra. This śarīra we
do not enumerate and it is taken as understood. He said ādhāra-caitanya is called kūṭastha
caitanya which is called also by Self and ābhāsa-caitanya can be referred to by ahaṅkāra
aham. Ābhāsa is Jīva and it is equal to aham. Ādhāra is equal to kūṭastha which is equal to
svayam. Every individual is a mixture of svayam and aham.
The tragedy is that the individual does not know that I am a mixture of svayam and aham
or satya and mithyā and hence he has a mixture of satya and mithyā and due to his
ignorance he takes this unholy mixture as one entity. In mahā-vākya-vicāra, we will do

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 458

bhāgatyāga-lakṣaṇā, remove one part and retain the other which is Self. This was said in
verse 57. Sva refers to kūṭastha caitanya and aham refers to ahaṅkāra ābhāsa-caitanya or
the Jīva and both are mixed up. From 58 onwards, we have incidental discussion, though
not very important, this is to understand what are the various mistakes committed by
various people.

śloka 59
पूर्वापरपरामर्शविकलास्तत्र के चन ।
वाक्याभासान्स्वस्वपक्षे योजयन्त्यप्यलज्जया ॥ ६.५९ ॥
pūrvāparaparāmarśavikalāstatra kecana.
vākyābhāsānsvasvapakṣe yojayantyapyalajjayā (6.59).
We study others’ mistakes to avoid such mistakes and not to understand others’ mistakes.
The aim of this discussion is not to follow but to avoid other philosophies. parihārārtham
anya-mata-pratipādanam. This is to avoid others’ mistakes and confusions. All the
confusions are born out of only two reasons: one set of confusion is to ignore the scriptural
studies, meaning non-study and the other is wrong study.
There are six nāstika darśanas: four types of Buddhism, Jainism, etc. There are also five
āstika darśanas but they all commit wrong enquiry and come up with wrong conclusions.
Sāṅkhya-philosopher studies the Veda and goofs up the conclusions. So also Nyāya,
Vaiśeṣika, etc. All the eleven darśanas have ignored the proper study of the Śrutis. They
gave no importance to systematic study. Hence they have wrong conceptions about the
study. The study is not put under sādhana by them, but we say that the systematic study
is the most important sādhana. They are foolish and they don’t study or they don’t study
properly and therefore, they commit mistakes.
Many philosophers have no patience to study the śāstras completely and they study only
part of śāstra. They may study that Annamaya is Ātmā but they don’t go further that
Annamaya is negated. Only if one goes through the entire Upaniṣad, one will know what
is Ātmā. Among them, there are some people who don’t thoroughly study the previous
portions of śāstra and the later portion of the śāstra, but only a particular part, neither the
previous nor the later part. They study some part in the middle without studying either
the beginning part or later part.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 459

Some people having read the scripture unsystematically, having misunderstood every
idea, they quote the scriptures for their personal philosophy. For example, some people
study some random verse of Gītā every day and consider that as the philosophy of the day
to follow! Therefore, they interpret the seeming support from the scripture without
consulting the previous and later portions in support of their own false philosophy. Not
studying the scripture fully, shamelessly they quote the scriptures in support of their
wrong philosophy.

śloka 60
कू टस्थादिशरीरान्तसंघातस्यात्मतां जगुः ।
लोकायताः पामराश्च प्रत्यक्षाभासमाश्रिताः ॥ ६.६०॥
kūṭasthādiśarīrāntasaṃghātasyātmatāṃ jaguḥ.
lokāyatāḥ pāmarāśca pratyakṣābhāsamāśritāḥ (6.60).
Hereafter, various systems of philosophies are enumerated. This first one is the
materialistic philosophy which believes in the physical body as the individual, does don’t
believe in sūkṣma-śarīra, because there is no proof for sūkṣma-śarīra. We don’t see
sūkṣma-śarīra leaving the body and we don’t see sūkṣma-śarīra going to another loka and
there is no proof of existence of naraka, puṇya-pāpa and they don’t believe in that. Enjoy
thoroughly, sense control is humbug and they say make hay while the sun shines. Once
the body is gone nothing is left and there is nothing called as Ātmā separate from body.
They believe the live body is Ātmā. That is said here.
The assembly consisting of body and mind is all alive. Kūṭastha refers to sentiency,
caitanya; beginning from kūṭastha up to Annamaya kośa assembly is called Ātmā
according to them; Cārvāka philosophers declare. They don’t believe in śāstra. Belief in
śāstra is blind belief for them. According to them, there is no scientific proof for sūkṣma-
śarīra, para-loka, puṇya-pāpa and all of them are superstitious beliefs and they laugh at all
religious people. When the tragedy strikes, even religious people are prone to think as the
Cārvāka philosophers think. Only three articles of powerful, thinking and scientific
atheists, Cārvākas, may change the religious people. They think pratyakṣa pramāṇa is a
support for their conclusion. However, if you really make an enquiry, that is not a real
support, there are logical fallacies in their thinking. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya takes on the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 460

materialistic thinking and refutes them in Brahma-sūtra. Pratyakṣābhāsamāśritāḥ, they

resort to that.

śloka 61
श्रौतीकर्तुं स्वपक्षन्ते कोशमन्नमयं तथा ।
विरोचनस्य सिद्धान्तं प्रमाणं प्रतिजज्ञिरे ॥ ६.६१ ॥
śrautīkartuṃ svapakṣante kośamannamayaṃ tathā.
virocanasya siddhāntaṃ pramāṇaṃ pratijajñire (6.61).
Cārvāka philosophers do not accept śāstra pramāṇa and so, they cannot quote śāstra. For
our sake, they say they quote śāstra pramāṇa also. Refer to Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.1.1 sa vā
eṣa puruṣo:'nnarasamayaḥ, he says, anna alone is the ultimate source of the body and he
says Annamaya alone is Ātmā. Similarly, in Chāndogya Upaniṣad the asura king Virocana
misunderstands that the gross body is Ātmā. Such statements are quoted by these
materialists to make their point. [Chāndogya Upaniṣad 8.8]. Here, Devarājā and Asurarājā
go to Brahmāji and the latter starts teaching in four stages. He teaches the prathama pāda
of Viśva Ātmā, then taijasa Ātmā and then prājña Ātmā and turīya Ātmā in four stages.
Since he could not teach in one class he took four classes. Virocana discontinued the class
after attending the first class. Here, the waker I was taught to be the Ātmā and he went to
Asuraloka and taught that Virāṭ is Ātmā. It is another name for Virocana’s siddhānta;
Cārvāka’s mata is seen as Asura-siddhānta. But Devarājā Indra attended all the four class
and arrived atwhat is the real Ātmā after negating Viśva, taijasa and prājña.

śloka 62
जीवात्मनिर्गमे देहमरणस्यात्र दर्शनात्।
देहातिरिक्त एवात्मेत्याहुर्लोकायताः परे ॥ ६.६२ ॥
jīvātmanirgame dehamaraṇasyātra darśanāt.
dehātirikta evātmetyāhurlokāyatāḥ pare (6.62).
Now comes the next grade of Cārvākas little bit better. They say, there is some other
principle that makes the body alive and when the x factor is there body is alive and when
the x factor goes the body is dead. If the movement were natural to fan it would have been
moving all the time, but one fan moves with electricity moves. Hence, there is some other
factor other than the fan that makes the fan move. If consciousness is the intrinsic nature of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 461

the body, it would be all the time alive. The fact that the body is alive for sometime and
then it dies, there is some mysterious factor that makes the body alive. Just because the
scientists have not found the factor, it cannot be said that that mysterious factor is not
there. Someone nicely said that the absence of proof is not the proof of absence. Science
does not have a proof for the mysterious principle which enlivens the body; if it does not
have proof it does mean it is absent. It is like a blind man saying that I cannot prove the
colours and therefore, colours don’t exist. It is not because colours don’t exist but the blind
does not have the organ to prove the existence of the colours. Similarly, the scientists do
not have any method to prove the existence of mysterious factor. It is not that the
mysterious factor is not there, but the problem is that the scientists are deficient to prove
the existence of that mysterious factor which keeps the body alive, as long as the
mysterious factor is within the body. Once it goes, the body loses its sentiency and the
body becomes dead having lost its life. Intelligent scientists understand the deficiency of
the scientific process.
Therefore, they say Jīvātmā nirgame. There is a mysterious factor which is not available
for science and which is different from the body and when it goes out the body is dead.
This mysterious principle is ābhāsa-caitanya or cidābhāsa. When the scientists are not able
to know even the cidābhāsa, how can they know about the ādhāra-caitanya. The second
group of Cārvākas knows that there is some thing other than the body. They are another
or advanced Cārvākas.

śloka 63
प्रत्यक्षत्वेनाभिमताहं धीर्देहातिरेकिणम्।
गमयेदिन्द्रियात्मानं वच्मीत्यादिप्रयोगतः ॥ ६.६३ ॥
pratyakṣatvenābhimatāhaṃ dhīrdehātirekiṇam.
gamayedindriyātmānaṃ vacmītyādiprayogataḥ (6.63).
We have got another group of Cārvākas who are called indriya-ātm-vadinaḥ, those who
claim the sense-organs as Ātmā. They say we have the general expressions: I see, I hear
etc. I see means you refer to the eyes. Since ahaṅkāra, the I-thought, correlates with sense-
organs there is clear proof that the sense-organs are Ātmā. The I-notion or I-cognition
which is accepted by all the people pratyaksatvena, as direct experience for all, and
dehātirekiṇam which is different from the body reveals the sense-organ is the Ātmā. The I-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 462

notion or I-experience reveals that the sense-organs are the Ātmā. Regularly available I-
experience proves that the sense-organs are Ātmā. He gives a few examples. I speak; I
refer to the organ of speech vāk-indriya. I take means hasta-indriya; I walk mean pada-
indriya and first he refers to karmendriyāṇi and then he talks of jñānendriyas. Such
expressions are there. The next confusion is mana-ātma-vāda, prāṇa-ātma-vāda and all the
vādas will come up hereafter. More in the next class.

Class 100
śloka 63 contd.
The confused Cārvāka says that I am the sense-organs. When the eyes perceive colour,
everybody says I see the colour. When the ears hear the sound, none says ears hear, but
say I hear. Similarly, when the mouth talks, we say ‘I talk’. With every sense-organ, we use
the word I.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said that the confused people think and identify the sense-organs
with the Ātmā. The notion of I, the idea of I, which is looked upon or considered as every
sense-organ reveals that every sense-organ is taken as Ātmā. This I-notion which is
identified with sense-organs is taken to mean that the sense-organs are Ātmā. I-notion is in
the mind and although the mind is not visible, the notion is recognized by the language: I
speak, I see, I write, etc. Every expression indicates the notion and the notion indicates the
identification with the sense-organs and therefore, they take indriyas as the Ātmā. Up to
this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 64
वागादिनामिन्द्रियाणां कलहः श्रुतिषु श्रुतः ।
तेन चैतन्यमेतेषामात्मत्वं तत एव हि ॥ ६.६४ ॥
vāgādināmindriyāṇāṃ kalahaḥ śrutiṣu śrutaḥ.
tena caitanyameteṣāmātmatvaṃ tata eva hi (6.64).
The same Pūrvapakṣa indriyātmavādī continues. This fellow is reinforcing his philosophy
by answering a possible question that we may ask: we may argue that the sense-organs are
made out of pañca-bhūtas, pañca-bhūtas are acetana and therefore, their products also
must be acetana, whereas Ātmā is sentient and hence how can acetana indriyas be equated

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 463

to cetana Ātmā? This is the question imagined by the Pūrvapakṣa. For this, what is the
answer that we give? As far as we are concerned, we also say that the indriyas are acetana
only and they are now cetana because of borrowed cidābhāsa; that is our answer.
However, the Pūrvapakṣa does not have this idea and if he knows this, he will be an
Advaitin. He says that the sense-organs are cetana only because we hear in the Vedas that
the sense-organs quarrel amongst themselves to find out who is the superior one. Through
the story, the Upaniṣad reveals that prāṇa is the most powerful one. When prāṇa is about
to go, the whole person is disturbed and from that, they conclude that prāṇa is sreṣṭha and
all the sense-organs praise prāṇa. Since they quarrel, the Pūrvapakṣa says: therefore, they
are sentient.
The reference is given here 6.1.7 to 14 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. He does not use the
word cidābhāsa since he does not know about it, but says that the sense-organs deserves
the state of Ātmā because without their functioning, the body is insentient.

śloka 65
हैरण्यगर्भाः प्राणात्मवादिनस्त्वेवमूचिरे ।
चक्षुराद्यक्षलोपेऽपि प्राणसत्त्वे तु जीवति ॥ ६.६५ ॥
hairaṇyagarbhāḥ prāṇātmavādinastvevamūcire.
cakṣurādyakṣalope:'pi prāṇasattve tu jīvati (6.65).
These two verses 65 and 66 are about the prāṇātma-vāda; the people who follow it are
called Hairaṇyavādis as they are the worshippers of Hiraṇyagarbha. They say why not
understand the story of the quarrel between the sense-organs and you will know from the
story that the sense-organs are able to function with the help of prāṇa alone and therefore,
prāṇa is Ātmā that gives life and without which the body will lose its sentiency. They are
also called as prāṇatmavādins.
They say that when the senses such as eyes, etc., are lost, but the prāṇa has not left the
body, in that case, the life is still maintained. Hence, the prāṇamaya kośa is the Ātmā.
Prāṇa is superior even to the mind because the person is alive even in coma. Once the
prāṇa goes even if all others are in tact, still this person is considered to be dead. That is
why the organs can be donated even after death.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 464

śloka 66
प्राणो जागर्ति सुप्तेषु प्राणश्रैष्ठ्यादिकं श्रुतम्।
कोशः प्राणमयः सम्यग्विस्तरेण प्रपञ्चितः ॥ ६.६६ ॥
prāṇo jāgarti supteṣu prāṇaśraiṣṭhyādikaṃ śrutam.
kośaḥ prāṇamayaḥ samyagvistareṇa prapañcitaḥ (6.66).
The glory of prāṇa is found throughout the Upaniṣads. The prāṇa alone is awake, meaning
functions, even in the deep sleep state. Further, we also come across the passages in
scriptures, where the superiority of prāṇa over senses etc., is established. And the
prāṇamaya kośa is dealt with very exhaustively in the scriptures and therefore, prāṇa is
the Ātmā. It is not only experienced by us, but also explicitly stated in the Upaniṣad. Refer
to 1.3.7 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad; 5.1 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad; 2 and 3 of Praśna
Upaniṣad and 2.2.1 of Taittirīya Upaniṣad. The digestion goes on even during sleep
because of the presence of the prāṇa. This is one glory of prāṇa. Superiority of prāṇa over
all the 14 organs is stated in the story of the quarrel between the organs in the Upaniṣads.
The other glory is that it is the first faculty formed in the baby, that it is alive due to the
presence of prāṇa, and thereafter alone the various organs develop. Therefore, prāṇa is
considered to be the eldest child compared to the various other organs. Prāṇamaya kośa is
very elaborately discussed in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad.
Here, Vidyāraṇya does not take the trouble to negate each vāda. He assumes that we are
wise enough to negate the prāṇātma-vāda and other vādas also. He goes to the next one.

śloka 67
मन आत्मा इति मन्यन्त उपासनपरा जनाः ।
प्राणस्याभोक्तृ ता स्पष्टा भोक्तृ त्वं मनसस्ततः ॥ ६.६७ ॥
mana Ātmā iti manyanta upāsanaparā janāḥ.
prāṇasyābhoktṛtā spaṣṭā bhoktṛtvaṃ manasastataḥ (6.67).
The verses 67 and 68 are mana-ātma-vāda. He says that the mind is superior to prāṇa and
he has his own arguments. It is so because the mind alone experiences puṇya-pāpa and
sukha-duḥkha. I know I am a bhokta, prāṇa cannot be bhokta; if prāṇa were to be a
bhokta, then in suṣupti we should continue to be a bhokta as prāṇa is active then.
However, we don’t experience sukha-duḥkha in suṣupti and therefore, it is clear that
prāṇa I is not the bhokta. Only if the mind is active, I am a bhokta and therefore, the mind

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 465

is Ātmā and it is not prāṇa. The mind therefore, should be accepted as the bhokta Ātmā.
These people are called mana-ātma-vādis and they are also called upāsana-para as these
people are interested in upāsana. Prāṇa cannot function as bhokta and the mind alone
functions as bhokta and therefore, prāṇa is not the Ātmā. In sleep state prāṇa function but
no bhoga takes place and therefore, prāṇa cannot be bhokta and the mind is bhokta and
therefore, mind is the Ātmā.

śloka 68
मन एव मनुष्याणां कारणं बन्धमोक्षयोः ।
श्रुतो मनोमयः कोशस्तेनात्मेतीरितं मनः ॥ ६.६८ ॥
mana eva manuṣyāṇāṃ kāraṇaṃ bandhamokṣayoḥ.
śruto manomayaḥ kośastenātmetīritaṃ manaḥ (6.68).
We all know mana eva manuṣyāṇāṃ kāraṇaṃ bandhamokṣayoḥ a quotation from
Amṛtabindu Upaniṣad. The mind alone is the cause of bondage, the mind alone is our
liberation, the mind alone is our friend and the mind alone is the cause of enemy. This is
also stated in the Gīta. How can the mind be both a friend and enemy? Amṛtabindu
Upaniṣad says in the second line that when the mind is obsessed with sense pleasures, it is
an enemy. It is a friend when the mind has transcended the sense pleasures. Extrovert
mind is an enemy and introvert mind is our enemy. Thus the importance of the mind is
stated in the Amṛtabindu Upaniṣad. Manomaya kośa has been elaborately discussed in the
Upaniṣad, also Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.3.1.

śloka 69
विज्ञानमात्मेति पर आहुः क्षणिकवादिनः ।
यतोविज्ञानमूलत्वं मनसो गम्यते स्फु टम्॥ ६.६९ ॥
vijñānamātmeti para āhuḥ kṣaṇikavādinaḥ.
yatovijñānamūlatvaṃ manaso gamyate sphuṭam (6.69).
Now comes the next one the Vijñāna-vādī from 69 to 73 who are called Kṣaṇika-Vijñāna-
vādis which happens to a branch of Buddhism. This group is also called Yogācāra-vādī.
Throughout the day is aham-knowledge the constantly flowing I-knowledge which is
uniform, continuous and non-changing. The objects I see change but the mind never
changes. All the things come and go but the I-cognition, I-thought, I-notion, aham-vṛtti

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 466

remains constant. This aham-vṛtti the first person singular is the basis for idam-vṛtti, the
other knowledge, to take place. Without the arrival of the first person you cannot talk
about the second person you and third person he, she and others. Without subjective
thought, there cannot be objective thought. When I go to sleep, I-thought and the world-
thought goes and when I get up, everything comes up. All idam-vṛttis depend upon
aham-vṛtti, idam-vṛtti is manomaya kośa and aham-vṛtti is vijñānāmaya kośa.
Vijñānāmaya kośa is superior to manomaya kośa because manomaya is supported by
vijñānāmaya kośa. All the idam-vṛttis, any knowledge of any object, depend upon aham-
vṛtti. Vijñānāmaya kośa is the mūla of manomaya. Aham-vṛtti is the root of manovṛtti.
Therefore, vijñānāmaya kośa is Ātmā. This is known from day-to-day experience. Details
in the next class.

Class 101
śloka 69 contd.
When we refer to Jīvātmā, we treat it as one unit without understanding that this one unit
Jīvātmā is a mixture of satya pāramārthika aṃśa and another cidābhāsa or vyāvahārika
aṃśa Jīva or ahaṅkāra aṃśa. First, Vidyāraṇya dealt with the two components of Jīvātmā
and then he talks about the confusion of the people because of non-recognition of the
confusion of satya and mithyā.
Only when we don’t know the fact is one and the ignorance of the fact is also one but
rumours and gossips are many. Similarly, one tvam-padārtha-ajñāna leads to varieties of
misconception, not only at layman’a level but also at philosopher’s level. Vidyāraṇya
enumerates the confusions that prevail in the different philosophies. The different
philosophies are approached and negated each one separately refute each one of them.
This is one approach.
There is another approach. Vedāntins will not argue with each and everyone. I don’t
directly negate them but I allow them to fight amongst themselves and ultimately negate
the last one who has knocked of all others when we are left with only one opponent.
Similarly, Vidyāraṇya does not negate dehātma-vāda and allows indriyātma-vāda to
negate the former. Indriyātma-vādī says that the body cannot be Ātmā because the body
does not live eternally and therefore, there must be something else to enliven the body.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 467

Here, they believe that there is some mysterious power that keeps the body alive. Then
prāṇātma-vādī came and he said that indriyas cannot be Ātmā as people survive even
when the sense-organs don’t function. This is supported by the Upaniṣad story also.
Prāṇātma-vādī says people can survive without indriyas but none can survive without
prāṇa. Then prāṇātma-vāda is negated by mana-ātma-vādī. Prāṇa is not a bhokta and if it
were one the bhoga would continue in suṣupti. There is someone else who sleeps in
suṣupti and it is the mind which is bhokta. He knocked off prāṇātma-vāda.
Then comes Vijñāna-vādī and he is Yogācāra-bauddha. Vijñāna is the basis the mūla and
supports manas. Vijñāna is mūla or kāraṇa for the mind. So the vijñāna is superior to the
mind. He says it is clear. For Vidyāraṇya, it may be clear but for us it is not clear. Kṣaṇika
vijñānīs says vijñāna is Ātmā. Vijñāna means vijñānāmaya kośa is the Ātmā. He says it is
so because the mind has its cause in vijñāna. Manomaya is kārya of vijñānāmaya. Kāraṇa
is the source of kārya. Parents are kāraṇa and children are kārya and therefore, parents are
superior. Vijñānāmaya is the father and manomaya is the son. Vidyāraṇya finds that the
student is not so very happy with the explanation. So he further explains in the next śloka.

śloka 70
अहं वृत्तिरिदं वृत्तिरित्यन्तःकरणं द्विधा ।
विज्ञानं स्यादहंवृत्तिरिदंवृत्तिर्मनो भवेत्॥ ६.७० ॥
ahaṃ vṛttiridaṃ vṛttirityantaḥkaraṇaṃ dvidhā.
vijñānaṃ syādahaṃvṛttiridaṃvṛttirmano bhavet (6.70).
The Kṣaṇika-vijñāna-vādī says that vijñānāmaya represents the I-knowledge or the self-
knowledge. He talks of ordinary knowledge or the I-knowledge. In Kṣaṇika-vijñāna-vāda,
aham-knowledge is a constant flow. It is not changeless consciousness. Manomaya, he
says refers to all the idam-knowledge consisting of the second and third person objects.
The second and third person knowledge is ‘this’ knowledge which is all other knowledge
than ‘I’ knowledge. Whether they are in front as the second person or not in front as the
third person, they are objects only. Whether it is you-person or he-person, it is different
from me-person, therefore, they are called idam-vṛtti. Aham-vṛtti is one, while all other
vṛttis are infinite entities.
Here, Yogācāra says aham-vṛtti is vijñānāmaya and idam-vṛtti manomaya. The mind of an
individual is divided into two, bifurcates itself into two components; aham-vṛtti is the one

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 468

and idam-vṛtti is the other. In Vedāntic parlance, it is kartṛ-aṃśa and karaṇa-aṃśa. Aham-
vṛtti is kāraṇa for the second- and third-person-thought as they can come only when the I-
thought comes. What is mūla is aham-vṛtti. Aham-vṛtti is nothing but vijñānāmaya and
idam-vṛtti is called manomaya. He has not introduced kārya-kāraṇa-sambandha. Only the
definition part is over and kārya-kāraṇa-sambandha will be told in the following ślokas.

śloka 71
अहंप्रत्ययबीजत्वमिदंवृत्तेरितिस्फु टम्।
अविदित्वा स्वमात्मानं बाह्यं वेद न तु क्वचित्॥ ६.७१ ॥
ahaṃpratyayabījatvamidaṃvṛtteritisphuṭam.
aviditvā svamātmānaṃ bāhyaṃ Veda na tu kvacit (6.71).
Here, he introduces kārya-kāraṇa-sambandha. He says idaṃvṛtterahaṃpratyayabījatvam,
aham-pratyaya is the bīja for idam-pratyaya. Vijñāna he translates as aham-pratyaya
bījatva. I-notion is the cause for idam-vṛtti, this knowledge, and ‘this’ consists of second
and third person. idam-vṛtti is kārya of aham-vṛtti. This is very clear. Now, Vidyāraṇya
looks at the student whether there is any response from the student. Not seeing any
response, Vidyāraṇya continues. Without self-recognition or without being aware of the
fact ‘I am’, where the question of talking about you are or he is!
Before saying so, there should be I am. Without knowing one’s own Ātmā one cannot do
anything, but here, it is Kṣaṇika-vijñānī’s Ātmā which is not the same as we Vedāntins
say. This is the favourite topic of Ramaṇa Maharṣi. He says all problems you can talk of
because ‘I am’ is there. So enquire into the root ‘I’, instead of solving other problems. In
two minutes of enquiry, ahaṅkāra will fall off and what will be left is mūla, the Brahman
behind everything. He says it in Saddarśana, as well as Upadeśasāra.

śloka 72
क्षणे क्षणे जन्मनाशावहंवृत्तिर्मितौ यतः ।
विज्ञानं क्षणिकं तेन स्वप्रकाशं स्वतो मितेः ॥ ६.७२ ॥
kṣaṇe kṣaṇe janmanāśāvahaṃvṛttirmitau yataḥ.
vijñānaṃ kṣaṇikaṃ tena svaprakāśaṃ svato miteḥ (6.72).
Until now, the Yogācāra Buddhist has used the word vijñāna for vijñānāmaya and he has
established that vijñānāmaya is kāraṇa for manomaya and he has not said whether vijñāna

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 469

is nitya or anitya. I have used the word Kṣaṇika Vijñāna but Vidyāraṇya has not
mentioned that word. Here, Vidyāraṇya uses the kṣaṇikatva of the nature of vijñāna.
Without that, Vedānta and Yogācāra appear to be same. Yogācāra says vijñāna is Ātmā
and Vedānta also says vijñāna is Ātmā; Yogācāra says vijñāna is satya and Vedānta says
vijñāna is satya. Yogācāra says everything is mithyā and we also say everything is mithyā.
So a doubt may come as to what is the difference between Buddhism and Vedānta. In fact,
there are many people who say that Ādi Śaṅkarācārya is a hidden Buddhist.
Therefore, dissimilarities have to be highlighted. Here Yogācāra says consciousness is
temporary but in Vedānta we say consciousness is eternal. This is the main difference.
When he talks about consciousness, he recognises only that consciousness which is
reflected in the thought and thus he has come to the level of ābhāsa-caitanya, that too
reflected not in the mind, but to the cidābhāsa which is reflected in a thought.
Cidābhāsa in a thought will last as long as the thought. Thought is kṣaṇika. The
momentary thought being momentary, the reflected consciousness reflected in the
reflecting medium of thought, he has mistaken as caitanya and as the thoughts come and
go, the cidābhāsa also will come and go. The flow of mirrors will give you the flow of
reflected sunlight coming and going.
Therefore, he says aham-vṛtti, I-cognition or the I knowledge, there is constant arrival and
departure experienced. ‘I see’ is one I-thought, ‘I smell’ is another I-thought. Here, ‘I’
comes up and here ‘I’ goes; when you think of your child, the parent-I comes and the
parent-I goes; if you think of your spouse, the spouse-I comes and the spouse-I goes. It is
experienced for a kṣaṇika only. The birth and death, arrival and departure of I-thoughts
are experienced by everybody. The arrival and departure of thought takes place every
moment and he gives the example of the river we talk about. When we talk about the
continuity of a river, it is not continuously present as the water available in the present
moment is not the same as available in the earlier dip. Still you talk about the same river. It
is with reference to the flow that the river is named so. It is not the specific water that is
named Gaṅgā, but the flow of water is named Gaṅgā. This is the argument of kṣaṇika
Vijñāna-vādī. Since it is a flow, therefore, I-consciousness is momentary. Now you take a
separate sentence.
Here, he adds another important nature of this vijñāna. When all the objects come and go,
vijñāna is aware of the arrival and departure of the objects. Vijñāna knows the arrival and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 470

departure of the objects. Who knows the arrival and departure of vijñāna? This Buddhist
says vijñāna itself knows itself. Vijñāna knows the pot also, vijñāna knows time, space,
everything. When it comes to the vijñāna, vijñāna is capable of knowing itself. This is
called svasaṃvedatā in their philosophy. It is a very powerful concept which Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya refutes in the Upadeśa sāhasri. Kṣaṇika vijñāna knows itself that means
kṣaṇika vijñāna will function as subject as also the object. We do not accept his view. Since
vijñāna knows itself, it is the knower as also the known. Vijñāna is said to be self-effulgent.
To sum up, vijñāna is I-knowledge, vijñāna is momentary, vijñāna is self-revealing and
vijñāna is the cause of all other knowledge. He says this kṣaṇika vijñāna is Ātmā.

śloka 73
विज्ञानमयकोशोऽयं जीव इत्यागमा जगुः ।
सर्वसंसार एतस्य जन्मनाशसुखादिकः ॥ ६.७३ ॥
vijñānamayakośo:'yaṃ Jīva ityāgamā jaguḥ.
sarvasaṃsāra etasya janmanāśasukhādikaḥ (6.73).
This vijñānāmaya which is the embodiment of the flow of I-thought, I-knowledge, is the
real I, the Ātmā, called the Jīvātmā says Buddhist. Not only that the Buddhist quotes
Taittirīya Upaniṣad although he does not accept Veda, he only quotes that part of Veda
which is convenient to him. Taittirīya Upaniṣad says anyontara-Ātmā vijñānāmayaḥ.
Taittirīya Upaniṣad continues further and he has quoted the mantra which suits him and
or he had no patience to study what is said after vijñānāmaya mantra 2.5 of Taittirīya
Upaniṣad. Not only that, this Jīvātmā alone is the victim of saṃsāra. Etasya
sarvasaṃsāraḥ, all problems the world of transmigration, full of joys and sorrows belong
to this Jīvātmā. Why include pleasure in saṃsāra? Vedāntins say temporary pleasure is
included in saṃsāra because temporary pleasure is potential pain, there being pain when
the temporary pleasure goes. All these belong to this Jīvātmā; kṣaṇika vijñāna alone has
saṃsāra. With this Vijñāna-vādī is over. More in the next class.

Class 102
Śloka 73 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 471

I-consciousness refers to I-cognition and it is not a continuous entity but a momentary

entity and when the first one disappears the next one replaces the consciousness just like
Gaṅgā river where the water changes but we use the words, the same Gaṅgā. There is no
same Gaṅgā as one Gaṅgā is a concept but there is flowing water. Kṣaṇika vijñāna is
capable of knowing itself and also others. The subject can do two things: it can know
others and also it can know itself. That is Vijñāna-vāda. Even though he is a nāstika, does
not accept Veda pramāṇa, but he quotes Taittirīya Upaniṣad Upaniṣad mantra wrongly
and says ityāgamā jaguḥ. Anyontara-Ātmā vijñānāmayaḥ he says. Then he adds in the
second line that this Vijñānāmaya Ātmā alone is saṃsāra and he suffers sukha-duḥkha
and punarjanma. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 74
विज्ञानं क्षणिकं नात्मा विद्युदभ्रनिमेषवत्।
अन्यस्यानुपलब्धत्वाच्छून्यं माध्यमिका जगुः ॥ ६.७४ ॥
vijñānaṃ kṣaṇikaṃ nātmā vidyudabhranimeṣavat.
anyasyānupalabdhatvācchūnyaṃ mādhyamikā jaguḥ (6.74).
Mādhyamika refers to Śūnyavāda Buddhists now. They say kṣaṇika vijñāna, the
consciousness you talk about is kṣaṇika, is momentary. It is like lightning, it is fleeting; it
is abhranimeṣavat, just as the clouds in the sky will not remain in the same pattern and it
is changing like the clouds, carrier of water. It is like the winking of the eye. It is fleeting
and momentary and similarly, the Ātmā is also momentary but the I we experience is
continuous. Such consciousness cannot be of real nature. He says fleeting one cannot be
Ātmā. Vidyāraṇya does not refute his statement by himself, allowing the Buddhists to
have their argument. Since śūnyavādī does not give arguments against kṣaṇika Vijñāna-
vādī, I will give only one argument. The consciousness is momentary, you say, meaning
one will go second will come and third will go and fourth will come. Every consciousness
will know itself but it has no capacity to the other one, meaning there is no single
consciousness which knows all other. When one does not know the other, how can you
talk about the flow of consciousness? Who should talk about the flow even in the case of
Gaṅgā? Not the river itself but someone else on the shore and the not flowing can talk
about the flow. In Kṣaṇika Vijñāna-vāda there is no pramāṇa for jñānasantati. This is one

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 472

of the arguments, while Ādi Śaṅkarācārya gives several arguments. In Upadeśa-sāhasrī,

Ādi Śaṅkarācārya gives several arguments against śūnyavādī.
Between two kṣaṇika vijñāna there should be gap. However small they may be, there must
be permanently available gap and in that gap alone the kṣaṇika vijñāna rises and falls and
there is śūnya in that emptiness. Therefore, the gap is permanent and not vijñāna.
Anything else other than kṣaṇika vijñāna is not experienced by us and therefore there
must be śūnya and the emptiness alone is the ultimate ground. This they prove by sleep
experience also. In sleep, we don’t experience anything neither the subject nor the object
and we don’t even say “I am asleep” and then there is no subject or object. The śūnya is
experiences in sleep proving the śūnya and therefore, there is emptiness. This he says is
supported by Śruti pramāṇa.

śloka 75
असदेवेदमित्यादाविदमेव श्रुतं ततः ।
ज्ञानज्ञेयात्मकं सर्वं जगद्भ्रान्तिप्रकल्पितम्॥ ६.७५ ॥
asadevedamityādāvidameva śrutaṃ tataḥ.
jñānajñeyātmakaṃ sarvaṃ jagadbhrāntiprakalpitam (6.75).
Taittirīya Upaniṣad Brahmānandavallī, it is said asad vā idam agra āsīt it clearly says idam
agre asat āsīt the whole universe before its arrival was in the form of emptiness or śūnya.
Śūnya was fundamental thing and from that śūnya alone all the materials emerged.
Therefore, asat must be ādhāra and that must be not only the truth of the creation but it
must be the truth of you also and the same is experienced when you go to sleep also. He
quotes mantra 2.7.1 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Naiva iha kiñcana agre āsīt, before
creation here there was nothing. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya enters into very big argument quoting
this statement. He established that it was not śūnya-vāda. There he uses the example of
pot and clay talking about it hundreds of times. That bhāṣya is called ghaṭa-bhāṣya. He
established there that the śūnya-vāda is not correct. He says my philosophy alone is
endorsed by Veda; so says sunyavadi. If śūnya is satya, and śūnya is adhiṣṭhāna and
ultimate truth, then he says sarvam mithyā. We say everything except consciousness,
everything is mithyā but he says everything including consciousness is mithyā. We say
cetana is satya and acetana is mithyā. In his mata, both cetana and acetana is mithyā and
he says emptiness alone is satya. The entire universe, both consciousness and jaḍa, are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 473

superimposed due to delusion. The universe consisting the jñāna the consciousness and
the object of consciousness the matter are superimposed and the emptiness alone is the
adhiṣṭhāna; this is the mādhyamika view, nihilism.

śloka 76
निरधिष्ठानविभ्रान्तेरभावादात्मनोऽस्तिता ।
शून्यस्यापि ससाक्षित्वादन्यथा नोक्तिरस्य ते ॥ ६.७६ ॥
niradhiṣṭhānavibhrānterabhāvādātmano:'stitā.
śūnyasyāpi sasākṣitvādanyathā noktirasya te (6.76).
We have discussed four Cārvāka group and two Buddhists group who are nāstikas who
don’t accept Veda pramāṇa. Veda is not a pramāṇa for him but he quotes the Vedas only
to refute our theory. They are confused without Veda. Now we get another group Vaidika
group and they know Veda, all right, but they do not know how to interpret Veda. They
say ānandamaya is consciousness. Here Nyāya and mīmāṃsā philosophers are taken
collectively who refute Buddhists. They say you cannot say everything is mithyā. By
definition, mithyā is that which borrows existence from satya. If you say “everything is
mithyā”, it will means everything has borrowed existence; in which case, there must be
one to lend existence. If you say cetana and jaḍa are mithyā, then we ask the question who
lends existence to the mithyā object? Mithyā is unreal and unreal has borrowed existence.
You should show a material which lends existence and whatever lends existence is satya.
He asks: why cannot I take śūnya is adhiṣṭhāna which lends existence to the jagat? If
śūnya lends existence to mithyā prapañca, then we ask whether śūnya has existence or not
to lend? If he says it does not have existence, the we will ask how can it lend the existence
to prapañca when it does not have anything? Śūnya cannot give charity of existence when
it does not have existence. To avoid this problem, if he says that śūnya has existence, we
will say: if śūnya has existence to lend, it is no more śūnya but it is part of bhāva-padārtha.
It is sadvastu. If you say it is sat vastu but I take it as śūnya as I like the word, we don’t
have any issues because what is in a name! It is the existence of adhiṣṭhāna which appears
in adhyāsa. The very is-ness is borrowed from adhiṣṭhāna satyatva. You cannot have
unreal world without satya adhiṣṭhāna. There is no false superimposition possible without
a real adhiṣṭhāna. Ātmā is sat vastu only. Ātmā is positive existence, it is sat vastu is our
argument. Then what about the mantra? There asat means avyakta or unmanifest thing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 474

and the unmanifest thing is as-though non-existent thing because it is not available for
transaction. A lady has milk and if she is asked whether there is butter she says no
although milk has butter within. Although butter is there it is in potential form and what
is unmanifest is avyakta. You cannot say nothingness is there but it was there in
unmanifest form just like you should say butter is in avyakta form.
Further non-existence is non-existent. He argues there is no such thing called non-
existence because to prove the existence of non-existence or nothingness, you need witness
of nothing. If you are not there, you cannot say there is some thing existing or otherwise.
Bhāva and abhāva both require śākṣī. He says in meditation, I have removed all thoughts,
my head is empty and then I ask the question “how do you know there is nothing”? Then
I say: I, the consciousness-principle, is there experiencing the nothingness. If I am there to
experience nothingness, it means that it is not nothing, it is not absolute nothing. The śākṣī
is there. You can say śākṣī is there but śākṣya is not there. Even the nothingness is possible
only in the presence of a śākṣī. Relative śūnya is possible only in the presence of a śākṣī.
You cannot talk about absolute śūnya and you can talk relative śūnya which means there
is nothing other than śākṣī. Absolute non-existence is not possible. Suppose you say there
is no śākṣī for śūnya. The consequence if there is no śākṣī for śūnya, śūnya will not be
experienced and śūnya will not be known you cannot even invent the word śūnya. Unless
you have the object, how can you coin the word śūnya? It is not possible for you to talk
about śūnya because you cannot talk about something which is not experienced.
Therefore, śūnya cannot be Ātmā.

śloka 77
अन्यो विज्ञानमयत आनन्दमय आन्तरः ।
अस्तीत्येवोपलब्धव्य इति वैदिकदर्शनम्॥ ६.७७ ॥
anyo vijñānamayata ānandamaya āntaraḥ.
astītyevopalabdhavya iti vaidikadarśanam (6.77).
The Śūnyavādī helplessly admits and asks the question what is the Ātmā as per the
Vedas? Veda clearly says other than Vijñāna-Māyā, other than śūnya, there is an Ātmā
which is ānandamaya. It is an Ātmā which is different from buddhi and which is existent.
It is different from Vijñānāmaya and it negates kṣaṇika vāda. Āntara is Ātmā which is
within the vijñānāmaya and it is called ānandamaya. This view is held by some āstika

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 475

darśana and the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophers. Taittirīya Upaniṣad that says anyontara
Ātmā, refutes kṣaṇika Vijñāna-vāda. 2.3.13 of Kaṭhopaniṣad says that Ātmā is an existent
thing and it negates śūnya. Therefore, Śruti says ānandamaya is Ātmā and therefore, he
says it is Vaidika darśana. We should not be included in this group because Vidyāraṇya
gives a list of confusion and if Advaita is added here, then Advaita will come under the
confusion group. We say Ātmā is pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa and we talk of Ātmā other than
ānandamaya and their only positive feature is that they are in the āstika group. All of
them have confusion with the very identification of Ātmā. Now he will talk about the
dimension and size of Ātmā. Different philosophers say different things and this aspect
will be considered in the following ślokas. We will see in the next class.

Class 103
śloka 77 contd.
The analysis of the nature of n individual is being done by Vidyāraṇya based on the
Vedāntic teaching and he points out that every individual is a mixture of pāramārthika cit
aṃśa and vyāvahārika cidābhāsa aṃśa. This is Vedānta siddhānta. Depending upon the
context, the individual we have to state as cidābhāsa or cit. Whenever Jīvātmā is
mentioned as taking another body, etc., Jīvātmā should be taken as Jīvātmā the popular
meaning, vācyārtha. When we talk of the reality we should take cit aṃśa, pāramārthika
cit. In the entire karma-kāṇḍa, Ātmā is taken as kartā, bhoktā, pramātā and it is
cidābhāsa-rūpa-jīvātma-pradhāna. Jñāna-kāṇḍa talks of apramātā, akartā and cit which is
none other than Brahman and here the lakṣyārtha should be taken. We should read
comfortably without any problem if we take the lakṣyārtha of pāramārthika reality when
they talk of Jīvātmā. People mix up both and they have adhyāsa. This mixing up and
confusion is there in the philosophers also and Vidyāraṇya enumerates various
conclusions of various philosophers. We have seen so many darśanas which included
Cārvāka, buddhi- and śūnya-ātma-vāda. We have discussed six confused darśanas who
are nāstikas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 476

Having dealt with six nāstikas’ group, Vidyāraṇya enters the āstika-group as Naiyāyikas
and Mīmāṃsakas as they are able to go beyond the body-mind-complex. Having
transcended all of them, they come to ānandamaya instead of ānanda. But they have gone
beyond other four kośas and bauddhas. They have Veda pramāṇa but have not clearly
understood Veda properly. They mistake ānandamaya for Ātmā and in support of their
confusion they quote Śruti pramāṇa also. One is from Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.5.1 and the
other Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.3.13. They talk of negation of Vijñāna-vādī. They come under āstika
darśana for this view is held by āstika type of philosophy. Ānandamaya-ātma-vāda is of
Mīmāṃsakas and Naiyāyikas and ānanda-vāda comes under Vedāntins. This is the
confusion regarding the definition of Ātmā. Now Vidyāraṇya introduces the size of Ātmā.

śloka 78
अणुर्महान्मध्यमो वेत्येवं तत्रापि वादिनः ।
बहुधा विवदन्ते हि श्रुतियुक्तिसमाश्रयात्॥ ६.७८ ॥
aṇurmahānmadhyamo vetyevaṃ tatrāpi vādinaḥ.
bahudhā vivadante hi śrutiyuktisamāśrayāt (6.78).
In the Nyāya philosophy all the measurements are broadly divided into three categories.
One is aṇu the smallest measure possible. The other measure possible is mahān the biggest
beyond which there is no more bigger size. Two superlatives, ones is the smallest and the
other is biggest, which is called vibhu-parimāṇa. Mahān means vibhu or the biggest. The
third measurement possible is all the measurements between these two will come under
madhyama-parimāṇa. The size of all people here will come under the madhyama-
parimāṇa. He says aṇu is also niravayava partless and vibhu also is niravayava. Partless
atom and partless infinite size are called aṇu and vibhu. “Ātmā is aṇu, mahān or vibhu?”
is the question here. There also with regard to deha-, mano-, indriya-vyatirikta Ātmā, the
debaters or the debating philosophers argue in different ways by giving their own Śruti
pramāṇa and their yukti and anubhava pramāṇas. If they are nāstikas they will speak of
yukti pramāṇa. Their argument is that Ātmā is smallest atomic size or is the Ātmā is
biggest, all-pervading type or madhyama.
They quote Śruti and yukti pramāṇas. Wherever possible anubhava pramāṇa but this is
not possible; they are not beyond perception. This is the general introduction to this topic.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 477

śloka 79
अणुं वदन्त्यन्तरालाः सूक्ष्मनाडीप्रचारतः ।
रोम्णः सहस्रभागेन तुल्यासु प्रचरत्ययम्॥ ६.७९ ॥
aṇuṃ vadantyantarālāḥ sūkṣmanāḍīpracārataḥ.
romṇaḥ sahasrabhāgena tulyāsu pracaratyayam (6.79).
Three verses talk about aṇu-pramāṇa-ātma-vāda. All the philosophers the aṇuvadins are
called āntarala. Even Viśiṣṭādvaitins come under aṇu-vāda only. They consider aṇu is the
size of Ātmā. They think Brahman is vibhu and infinite jīvātmās are there and only one
Paramātmā is there. All jīvātmās are sticking to one all-pervading Paramātmā. This is
Viśiṣṭādvaita philosophy. All say Jīvātmā is aṇu.
They give Śruti support. It is said in the Upaniṣad that the Jīvātmā travels through sūkṣma
nāḍis in the physical body. This is given in 4.2.3 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad that Jīvātmā
travels through sūkṣma nāḍi the minutest nāḍis which crisscross the physical body. It
moves and the size of the nāḍi is one hundredth part of the hair, horizon tally. Whatever
the size of one, that is the nāḍi-parimāṇa and within the nāḍi the Jīvātmā travels. This is
said in the above Upaniṣad. Therefore, the size of the Ātmā must be aṇu. This we have
discussed elaborately in naṇu-sūtra in the Brahma-sūtra.

śloka 80
अणोरणीयानेषोऽणुः सूक्ष्मात्सूक्ष्मतरं त्विति ॥
अणुत्वमाहुः श्रुतयः शतशोऽथ सहस्रशः ॥ ६.८० ॥
aṇoraṇīyāneṣo:'ṇuḥ sūkṣmātsūkṣmataraṃ tviti).
aṇutvamāhuḥ śrutayaḥ śataśo:'tha sahasraśaḥ (6.80).
The previous one is yukti pramāṇa, logic. There in the previous quotation Upaniṣad does
not directly say Ātmā is aṇu. It says that within the minute nāḍi Ātmā travels and from
this we infer that Ātmā must be small because Ātmā travels through minute nāḍis. It is
Śruti based reasoning pramāṇa. Here, he gives direct Śruti pramāṇa. It is 2.20 of
Kaṭhopaniṣad which says that Ātmā is smaller than all smallest things. It is aṇu-parimāṇa.
Eṣaḥ aṇuḥ is the second quotation from 3.1.9 Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. Sūkṣmāt sūkṣmataraḥ
minutest of the minute thing in the world and the last is 20th mantra of Kaivalya
Upaniṣad. Also 3.20 of Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 478

śloka 81
वालाग्रशतभागस्य शतधा कल्पितस्य च ।
भागो जीवः स विज्ञेय इति चाहपरा श्रुतिः ॥ ६.८१ ॥
vālāgraśatabhāgasya śatadhā kalpitasya ca.
bhāgo jīvaḥ sa vijñeya iti cāhaparā śrutiḥ (6.81).
Here Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 5.9 is quoted. They produce as an authority of the Vedic text
which says Jīva is the hundredth part of the tip of a hair which has already been divided
into a hundred parts. It means ten-thousandth part of the tip of the hair is the size of the
Ātmā it is said.
Now, siddhānta cannot give an answer that it is not said so. However, the Upaniṣad does
not refer to the size of the Ātmā because it is said that the Ātmā is all-pervading, but that it
is not available for sense perception. It is a gauṇa-prayoga just as when it is said “he is a
lion”, it means “he is like a lion”. Similarly, we say it is not available for perception as it is
sūkṣma and aṇutva does not refer to the size but the imperceptibility. They take it literally
instead of taking it otherwise.

śloka 82
दिगम्बरा मध्यमत्वमाहुरापादमस्तकम्।
चैतन्यव्याप्तिसंदृष्टेरानखाग्रश्रुतेरपि ॥ ६.८२ ॥
digambarā madhyamatvamāhurāpādamastakam.
caitanyavyāptisaṃdṛṣṭerānakhāgraśruterapi (6.82).
Here, we have madhyama-parimāṇa-vāda of the Jains. The Jains are Śvetāmbara wearing
white dress and Digambara wearing space as the dress, meaning wearing no dress. The
Digambaras Jains hold that Ātmā is of the medium or intermediary size because it
animates the body from head to foot. They too quote the Veda Ātmā, the conscious
principle, pervades the body from the head to the tips of the nails.
They quote 1.4.7 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad; 4.20 of Kauśitaki Upaniṣad; caitanya
pervades the entire body and we know body is jaḍa and sentiency of the body is given by
the Ātmā. If Ātmā is only an aṇu, it cannot occupy the whole body and at any time Ātmā
should be there only in some part of the body. Ātmā is aṇu it cannot pervade the whole
body for Ātmā should be located somewhere. If Ātmā is located in one part, that part
alone will be sentient. Hence, Ātmā should be there in all parts of the body. Ātmā lends

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 479

consciousness to every part simultaneously and therefore, aṇuvāda is wrong and

madhyama-parimāṇa is correct.
Digampara Jains do no believe in Śruti but they quote Śruti for our sake: saiṣa iha
praviṣṭaḥ ānakhāgrebhyaḥ; this Jīvātmā has entered the śarīra up to the tip of the nails.
Here, the nails are excluded in the upto. If the nail is also sentient, whenever you cut the
nail you will scream. That Śruti is called ānakhāgraśruti. Naturally, the Aṇuvādin will ask:
how will you explain the sūkṣma-nāḍi travel? Aṇuvādī asks madhyama-vādī how will
you explain the Ātmā travel through the sūkṣma-nāḍis.

śloka 83
सूक्ष्मनाडी प्रचारस्तु सूक्ष्मैरवयवैर्भवेत्।
स्थूलदेहस्य हस्ताभ्यां कञ्चुकप्रतिमोकवत्॥ ६.८३ ॥
sūkṣmanāḍī pracārastu sūkṣmairavayavairbhavet.
sthūladehasya hastābhyāṃ kañcukapratimokavat (6.83).
He says, it is very simple. It is like one wearing a shirt. When I wear a shirt it is like the
body entering the shirt. The whole body cannot enter. Therefore, even when the whole
body cannot enter, a part of the body the hand is able to enter the sūkṣma-nāḍi. In the
same manner, nāḍi is like a sleeve and Ātmā is like the body. Hence, a part of the Ātmā
enters through the nāḍi; what is the problem here! Through the minute nāḍi is possible not
totally but through Ātmā’s subtle part. We wear the shirt daily. Just as the physical body
puts on the shirt with the help of the hand, Ātmā also can do or travel through the
sūkṣma-nāḍis. Then comes the next question: suppose the Ātmā takes the rebirth and
Ātmā was pervading the body and in the next janma Ātmā gets a mosquito body, how can
the Ātmā occupy a small body in the next birth? This we will see in the next week.

Class 104
śloka 83 contd.
Various confusions regarding Jīvātmā, the tvampadārtha, are being talked about by
Vidyāraṇya. There confusions were enumerated as dehātma-vāda, indriyātma-vāda,
prāṇātma-vāda, vijñāna-vāda and śūnya-vāda were discussed by Vidyāraṇya. Since Ātmā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 480

is different from vijñānāmaya, which is buddhi, all the Cārvāka-mata and bauddha-mata
are all wrong. Also the Upaniṣad says that we should accept Ātmā as a positive entity
instead of taking it as śūnya as said by śūnya-vāda. This is the view of āstikavādins. Even
so, āstikavādins have different opinions about the size and dimension of Ātmā. All
measurements are broadly categorized into three: the smallest, the biggest and the in-
between. All the different systems including Viśiṣṭādvaita claim that Jīvātmā is aṇu and he
gives Śruti quotations. Digambara Jains say Ātmā cannot be aṇu. They said it is
madhyama-parimāṇa as Ātmā is felt all over the body.
For sentiency to be there all through the body Ātmā should pervade the whole body; it is
argued by them. To this, a question was raised that Veda talks about Jīvātmā traveling
through the body in minute nādis as seen in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. If Ātmā is of the
size of the body, how it will travel through the sūkṣma nāḍi? This is their argument. For
this Digambara Jain said it is exactly like wearing a coat. We enter the sleeve where the
entire body does not and cannot enter but the hand can enter through the sleeve of the
shirt. Similarly, a small part of Ātmā will enter through the nāḍi. Then the antarālika
raised an objection for which the answer is given in the next śloka.

śloka 84
न्यूनाधिकशरीरेषु प्रवेशोऽपि गमागमैः ।
आत्मांशानां भवेत्तेन मध्यमत्वं विनिश्चितम्॥ ६.८४ ॥
nyūnādhikaśarīreṣu praveśo:'pi gamāgamaiḥ.
ātmāṃśānāṃ bhavettena madhyamatvaṃ viniścitam (6.84).
Digambara Jain says that Ātmā is of the size of the body. They accept punarjanma. Jain
and Buddhism are nāstika and both reject Veda totally but they claim their philosophies
are based on logic. The interesting thing is that both talk about punarjanma. Logically
punarjanma cannot be proved. If rebirth is scientific proof in schools and colleges one of
the lessons will be rebirth. It is not accepted by science either. No science book includes
this because none of them accept punarjanma. Both Buddhists and Jains borrow rebirth
from Veda but the source of the teaching, they reject.
Digambara Jains believe in punarjanma. What is punarjanma? The present Ātmā of the
human body with particular size may enter the small mosquito when it takes new birth.
“How it is possible?” is the question here. Then that śarīra will be inadequate to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 481

accommodate the Ātmā of human body of the previous janma. Also if the present Jīvātmā
takes the body of an elephant how the human Ātmā be accommodated by the new
elephant janma in all its parts? How do you explain punarjanma? For this Jain says we
have got the answer. Just as the physical body is subject to expansion and contraction, our
Ātmā also expands and contracts. If it is an elephant body, Ātmā will increase its avayava.
Ātmā enters into bigger body or smaller body, it can expand and contract, they argue. For
them, Ātmā is madhyama-parimāṇa so such contraction and expansion is possible. If
Ātmā is taken to be aṇu or vibhu the contraction and expansion is not possible. Thus
intermediary size of the body is logically established. Travel through the nāḍi, punarjanma
and expansion and contraction of Ātmā are explained.

śloka 85
संशस्य घटवन्नाशो भवत्येव तथा सति ।
कृ तनाशाकृ ताभ्यागमयोः को वारको भवेत्॥ ६.८५ ॥
saṃśasya ghaṭavannāśo bhavatyeva tathā sati.
kṛtanāśākṛtābhyāgamayoḥ ko vārako bhavet (6.85).
With 84th verse Jain-mata, madhyama-parimāṇa-vāda of Jain is over. Now we will take up
vibhu-parimāṇa-vāda. There are many groups that accept Ātmā is all-pervading like
Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Pūrva-mīmāṃsā and Uttara-mīmāṃsā. They say Ātmā is neither aṇu
nor madhyama but they say Ātmā is vibhu. They argue that if Ātmā is also of the shape or
size of the body, Ātmā becomes finite. According to Jains, Ātmā is sāvayava, endowed
with limbs or avayavas. According to them, Ātmā is paricchinna in size and Ātmā is
sāvayava. He says Ātmā expands and contracts. Therefore, according to them Ātmā is
paricchinna and sāvayava. Body is also paricchinna. The body is sāvayava and
madhyama-parimāṇa. Then he says paricchinna sāvayava śarīra is perishable. The body
limbs disappear as we age. From this, it is clear that the body is anitya. We argue that if
parcchinna, sāvayava body is anitya, the paricchinna sāvayava Ātmā also will be anitya.
Now Digambara Jain admits Ātmā is anitya after hearing our arguments. For this,
Vaidikas says if you Jīvātmā is anitya there will be several problems, one of them being
kṛta-hāna-akṛta-abhyāgama-doṣa. According to Jains, Jīvātmā is kartā. He accepts kartā,
karma, puṇya-pāpa and based on that, punarjanma. He admits that Jīvātmā acquires lot of
karma in this janma. All karmas do not fructify in one janma. Every moment we add to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 482

our karma. That is why some āgāmi goes to sañcita. The fact we talk about sañcita proves
that not all puṇyas fructify in this janma. We ask Jains: if you say Jīvātmā perishes along
with body what will happen to all those hanging karmas? If the kartā is dead and gone,
the karma will lapse and many karmas will disappear without giving the phala. It is
destruction of unfructified karma called kṛta-nāśa or kṛta-vipra-nāśa. This is one problem.
To solve this problem, the Digambara Jain will say that if the unfructified puṇya-pāpas get
destroyed that is illogical and improper, then he says those karmas will not go and a new
janma will emerge. All the left out karmas will be given to the new Jīvātmā. Then the
problem will be the new Jīvātmā will have to experience other’s sukha-duḥkha; for
somebody else’s karma, poor Jīva has to suffer. It is called akṛta-abhyāgama-doṣa. I get the
puṇya-pāpa phalas for karma which I have not done. How can you avoid this fallacy?
Which Digambara Jain can avoid these logical fallacies! That is they cannot avoid these
logical flaws. The best way is to let them join our mata and Ātmā is neither aṇu nor
madhyama but Ātmā is vibhu. This conclusion will be said in the next śloka in the next
class.

Class 105
śloka 85 contd.
In this chapter, Vidyāraṇya elaborately analyses tvam-pada, tat-pada and finally asi-pada
with the help of ākāśa-dṛṣṭānta. First, he established the siddhānta according to our
siddhānta, according to Vedāntic teaching. According to Vedānta, the individual consists
of three components known as kūṭastha, Jīva and the reflecting medium, the body-mind-
complex. Of the three components, two are mithyā. Therefore, Māyā’s product is also
mithyā and consciousness reflected in that is also equally mithyā. Every individual
consists of satya aṃśa the original consciousness and two mithyā aṃśas the reflected
consciousness and reflecting medium. When we listen to mahā-vākya, at that time, the
word tvam is used in the meaning of satya aṃśa and not in the meaning of mithyā aṃśa.
The reflecting medium, the physical body, can never be free because it is the slave of so
many factors, kāla, our size, etc; things come and go, so body is never-free. Cidābhāsa is
also never-free because the reflection is always under the control of the reflecting medium;
the very survival of cidābhāsa depends upon the medium. No Vedānta will say reflecting

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 483

medium is free; no teacher will say cidābhāsa is free and when he says you are free he
means the original consciousness. You are always free. The siddhānta is that the
individual consists of satya-mithyā-aṃśa-dvaya and a vivekī discriminates them both and
takes the appropriate meaning in the appropriate context. When in some other context,
you are to fill up date of birth etc., you have to write all the particulars. You cannot say “I
am Brahman without date of birth or death”.
Then Vidyāraṇya talks about the confusion prevailing in the world and most of the people
do not know siddhānta because of the ignorance of the real I. The misconception is there
not only in the laymen but also well-read Vaidika philosophers. In spite of access to Veda,
they commit mistakes. Vidyāraṇya divides the mistakes into three layers. One mistake is
with regard to the very definition of who am I. It is with regard to the lakṣaṇa. Some say
Annamaya is Ātmā, some say prāṇamaya and so on. They come under lakṣaṇa-
viprapatipatti, different notions.
Thereafter, Vidyāraṇya has come to the topic of parimāṇa-viprapatipatti. There are some
people who say that Ātmā is different from body-mind-complex. When the question of
size comes different people have different opinions. Three opinions are considered by
Vidyāraṇya. They are aṇu, vibhu and madhyama. aṇu refers to the smallest; vibhu the
biggest and madhyama everything between smallest and biggest. We have discussed the
aṇuvādīs upto 81 and from 82 onwards Vidyāraṇya discusses madhyama-parimāṇa-vāda.
Digambara Jain says Ātmā is of the size of the body. This view is refuted by the next group
of people vibhu-ātma-vādis. We accept Ātmā is vibhu all-pervading nitya sarvagata.
If the Ātmā is finite in size the problem will be just as the body is perishable, Ātmā also
will be subject to destruction. Digambara’s Ātmā is perishable. Suppose if they argue
Ātmā is perishable so what? The vibhu-vādī argues that it will create kṛta-nāśa-akṛta-
abhyāgama-doṣa will come. I analysed this in 3.4 of Pañcadaśī and the doṣa is if Ātmā also
dies along with śarīra all the exhausted karmas will be hanging. But karmas cannot hang
because karma-phala will have to be reaped; otherwise there will be disorder in the
creation. One has to exhaust the puṇya-pāpa. Otherwise, there will be lacuna in the moral-
order of the universe. The karma will go without producing result. For this, Jain gave a
suggestion: if the karmas are hanging without result, there will be fresh jīvātmās who will
be created and they will enjoy the phalas. If a person dies, the house is available for new
people; so also a fresh Jīva will enjoy the karma that he has not earned. The fresh Jīva will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 484

have to suffer for the karma which he has not done. This is also injustice and morally
wrong and this comes akṛta-abhyāgama-doṣa. Therefore, for moral order, the Ātmā
should have continuity from janma to janma. When I have done karma in the previous
janma I must enjoy the phala. Otherwise moral order will be disturbed. Ātmā therefore,
has to be eternal. For that, Ātmā should not be madhyama-parimāṇa. Ātmā should
therefore, be vibhu-parimāṇa.

śloka 86
तस्मादात्मा महानेव नैवाणुर्नापि मध्यमः ।
आकाशवत्सर्वगतो निरंशः श्रुतिसंमतः ॥ ६.८६ ॥
tasmādātmā mahāneva naivāṇurnāpi madhyamaḥ.
ākāśavatsarvagato niraṃśaḥ śrutisaṃmataḥ (6.86).
Therefore, Ātmā mahān eva. Ātmā is vibhu and it is big in terms of size. Size-wise Ātmā is
infinite in size. It is neither aṇu nor madhyama. It is all-pervading like ākāśa. It does not
have any parts and it is niravayava. It does not have head or any other parts and it is not a
composite entity but it is an indivisible entity. This is not only logically sound but also
revealed by the Vedas. Śruti pramāṇa supports our conclusion. Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.7,
Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.49 and Māṇḍūkya kārikā 3.3. Śruti clearly says Ātmā is all-
pervading. Now Vidyāraṇya will deal with the confusion regarding the nature of Ātmā.

śloka 87
इत्युक्त्वा तद्विशेषेऽपि बहुधा कलहं ययुः ।
अचिद्रू पोऽथ चिद्रू पाश्चिदचिद्रू प इत्यपि ॥ ६.८७ ॥
ityuktvā tadviśeṣe:'pi bahudhā kalahaṃ yayuḥ.
acidrūpo:'tha cidrūpāścidacidrūpa ityapi (6.87).
This is the third layer of confusion. Most of the philosophers believe Ātmā are many. If
you go to Viśiṣṭādvaita first divide Ātmā into two and they say Paramātmā is one and
jīvātmās are many. In Advaita only we say Ātmā is one and that there is no difference
between Jīvātmā and Paramātmā.
After concluding Ātmā is vibhu, all-pervading, there is an agreement and in spite of
agreement, there is internal quarrel with regarding the nature of the all-pervading Ātmā.
There are different opinions on the same subject. Here, there are three parties that say that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 485

Ātmā is all-pervading but it is inert in nature. The fellow who tells this is a cetana Jīvātmā.
There is another group that says that Ātmā is cit-rūpa, of the nature of consciousness. The
third group says that it is a mixture of jaḍa and caitanya that is called cit-acit-rūpa. Thus
they enter into a quarrel regarding the nature of Ātmā.

śloka 88
प्राभाकरास्तार्किकाश्च प्राहुरस्याचिदात्मताम्।
आकाशवद्द्रव्यमात्मा शब्दवत्तद्गुणश्चितिः ॥ ६.८८ ॥
prābhākarāstārkikāśca prāhurasyācidātmatām.
ākāśavaddravyamātmā śabdavattadguṇaścitiḥ (6.88).
He takes the first group of people who say that Ātmā is all-pervading and acit-rūpa, that
is, jaḍa-rūpa. Those who hold this opinion are jaḍa-rūpa-vādins. They are Nyāya-
Vaiśeṣika philosophers. They are also called Tārkikas. Pūrva-Mīmāṃsakas heavily depend
upon Veda-pūrva. Nyāya-Vaiśeṣikas lay prominence on tarka and they give Veda a lower
status. Pūrva-mīmāṃsaka gives step-motherly treatment to tarka but give importance to
Veda-pūrva-bhāga and they believe in rituals alone. The Pūrva-mīmāṃsakas are of two
groups. One is Bhāṭṭa-mata. Kumārīla Bhaṭṭa was a very great Pūrva-mīmāṃsaka and his
mata is called Bhāṭṭa-mata. His disciple is Prabhākara Miśra Miśra and because of his
originality and creative thinking, he differed from his own Guru and he developed his
Pūrva-mīmāṃsā version following the Pūrva-mīmāṃsā sūtras. Guru and disciple wrote
commentary on Jaimini’s Pūrva-mīmāṃsā sūtras. They are Guru and śiṣya but they made
two different versions of Jaimini sūtras. So we have Bhāṭṭa-mata and Prābhākara-mata. Of
the two matas, Advaita looks upon Bhāṭṭa-mata as closer to Vedānta and more acceptable
with regard to the commentary on Jaimini sūtras.
Prābhākara-mīmāṃsakas, Naiyāyikas and Vaiśeṣikas declare that Ātmā is jaḍa-svarūpa.
Therefore, they say just as space is all-pervading and inert in nature, exactly like space
Ātmā is all-pervading and inert in its nature. Naturally, the question will come that space
is all-pervading and inert and Ātmā is also inert and all-pervading; then what is the
difference between the two? The space has the property called śabda whereas Ātmā does
not have the property of śabda but it has the temporary property of consciousness. The
consciousness will come and go. In his philosophy, consciousness is a temporary property
and being a property it is dependent but in Vedānta, consciousness is not a part, property

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 486

or a product of a substance, but consciousness is an independent entity, which pervades

and enlivens all and it’s existence extends beyond nāmas and rūpas and consciousness
will survive even after all the objects die. Tarka philosophers say consciousness is a
property like the sound which is a property of ākāśa. Ākāśa has the property of the sound
which is supposed to be permanent. It has nitya śabda guṇa. When it comes to
consciousness, he says it has anitya cetana guṇa. Ātmā is an inert substance like space and
guṇa, the Ātmā guṇa, the property of Ātmā is temporary consciousness.

śloka 89
इच्छाद्वेषप्रयत्नाश्च धर्माधर्मौ सुखासुखे ।
तत्संस्काराश्च तस्यैते गुणाश्चितिवदीरिताः ॥ ६.८९ ॥
icchādveṣaprayatnāśca dharmādharmau sukhāsukhe.
tatsaṃskārāśca tasyaite guṇāścitivadīritāḥ (6.89).
Here he says not only consciousness is a temporary property but Ātmā has other
properties also. Totally Ātmā has nine special properties. First one is temporary
consciousness and there are eight more special properties of Ātmā. They are special
because they are not there elsewhere. They are:
• icchā, meaning rāga;
• dveṣa; he says rāga-dveṣa belongs to Ātmā;
• will, prayatna; effort is something that belongs to the body and mind but here
Ātma-guṇa is will;
• dharma and adharma; Ātmā has puṇya but we say Ātmā is nirguṇa;
• sukha-duḥkha pleasure and pain or happiness and sorrow also belong to Ātmā.
• Sukha-vāsanā and duḥkha-vāsanā is due to every experience leaving a vāsanā in
the mind which alone triggers memory. Anubhava produces vāsanā and vāsanā
produces memory. Vāsanā is hidden in the sub-consciousness. The moment I talk
about something, my words triggers vāsanās and vāsanās get converted into
memory. Thus, anubhava produces saṃskāra or sukha-duḥkha vāsanās and
saṃsāras. He says vāsanās belong to Ātmā.
Thus, nine special properties, including consciousness mentioned earlier are there for the
inert Ātmā. Even these properties will come and go. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 487

Class 106
śloka 89 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses the various confusions due to misconceptions regarding the nature
of Ātmā. First he talked about the confusion regarding the identification of Ātmā, the real
I. Then we had the confusion regarding the size of Ātmā. Now, we are in the confusion
regarding the nature of Ātmā, whether it is sentient, insentient or mixture of both. In this
context, we discussed the views of Tārkikas, Pūrva-Mīmāṃsakas and Nyāya-Vaiśeṣikas.
According to them, Ātmā is inert and gets consciousness now and then. Ātmā is also
reported to have nine special properties that include consciousness as well. The eight
properties are attachment, hatred, will-power, dharma puṇya; adharma pāpa, happiness,
unhappiness and saṃskāra or vāsanās born out of sukha-duḥkha. These nine guṇas are
called special properties because they belong to Ātmā only and they do not belong to any
other dravyas.

śloka 90
आत्मनो मनसा योगे स्वादृष्टवशतो गुणाः ।
जायन्तेऽथ प्रलीयन्ते सुषुप्तेऽदृष्टसंक्षयात्॥ ६.९० ॥
ātmano manasā yoge svādṛṣṭavaśato guṇāḥ.
jāyante:'tha pralīyante suṣupte:'dṛṣṭasaṃkṣayāt (6.90).
In the previous verse, we said Tarka considers that Ātmā has consciousness as a
temporary property which would arrive and depart. The next natural question is: when
does it arrive and how does it arrive? For Vedāntins, consciousness is never produced, but
it is eternal satyam jñānam anantam. But tarka people say Ātmā is born and how the Ātmā
is born? In Vedānta Ātmā is one. Tarka people talk of many Ātmās and all are all-
pervading. Each Ātmā is all-pervading. My Ātmā pervades all of you and your Ātmā
pervades all the students and this Ātmā is jaḍa by itself. Then he talks about the presence
of mind and each one has a mind also. As many people are there, so many minds are
there. Only difference is that the mind is not all-pervading, it is within the body and it is
aṇu-parimāṇa. Ātmā is inert and mind is also inert. One particular Ātmā and one
particular mind combine.
The moment Ātmā and mind combines, consciousness is generated. This consciousness is
a temporary property. Once it is generated, consciousness cannot exist by itself as it is a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 488

property and it needs a substance. Just like goodness of a man cannot be by itself but
needs a man. Ātmā and mind substances together generate consciousness and it will have
to rest on one of them, either Ātmā or manodravya. Consciousness being a special
property of Ātmā, the generated consciousness will rest upon Ātmā only and not upon the
mind. The mind will always be jaḍa only. It is not the beneficiary of the consciousness, but
Ātmā takes the consciousness. When a particular all-pervading Ātmā combines with a
particular mind, the nine properties beginning with consciousness are generated. Then
comes the next question. All the Ātmās must be pervading all the minds. The question is:
how do you know which Ātmā should combine with which particular mind?
How are we to determine Ātma-sambandha with mind? He says it is not random but it is
based on law of karma. Every Ātmā has dharma-adharma adṛṣṭa. If Ātmā has puṇya, it
will combine with an appropriate mind and appropriate sukha-duḥkha will be generated.
Therefore, the type of combination is determined by prārabdha karma. Even though my
mind combines with your mind also, this Ātmā does not have karma to combine with
every mind in the hall. This sambandha is determined by prārabdha. Therefore, there is no
question of confusion. The combination will continue as along as prārabdha karma is
there. Then there follows all other conditions. This stays throughout the jāgṛt-avasthā.
When that particular bunch of prārabdha gets exhausted, the combination gets snapped.
Ātma-manas-sambandha ends and Ātma-mano-viyoga takes place. It becomes jaḍa again;
how do we know? Because we experience this in suṣupti. In suṣupti-avasthā, adṛṣṭa-
saṃśayād because of prārabdha-karma-suspension takes place for a few hours during the
sleep. All the nine properties are depleted. You wake up jñāna comes and all the
experiences take place. This process take place everyday and we become jaḍa. Ātmā keeps
on going through Jaḍa, cetana, jaḍa, cetana; this is the Naiyāyika theory of Ātmā.

śloka 91
चितिमत्त्वाच्चेतनोऽयमिच्छाद्वेषप्रयत्नवान्।
स्याद्धर्माधर्मयोः कर्ता भोक्ता दुःखादिमत्त्वतः ॥ ६.९१ ॥
citimattvāccetano:'yamicchādveṣaprayatnavān.
syāddharmādharmayoḥ kartā bhoktā duḥkhādimattvataḥ (6.91).
He says the nine properties come in some chronological order; it is not random. The
sleeping Jīvātmā first gets consciousness and the first event is that the jaḍa Ātmā becomes

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 489

cetana Ātmā, a pramātā. He is capable of perceiving the environments. Previously, I was

jaḍa and could not register events but now I do so, after gaining consciousness.
From pramātā, rāga-dveṣa are generated. Once rāga-dveṣa are generated, the will-power
begins to operate. I want to go after the objects of like and go away after the object of
dislike. Prayatna represents the will for pravṛtti and nivṛtti karmas and because of these
karmas created by rāga-dveṣa, I generate dharma and adharma. Both running away and
running towards will produce dharma and adharma. This dharma and adharma will later
fructify into sukha-duḥkha.
Once sukha-duḥkha-anubhava comes, every experience is registered in the mind in the
form of vāsanā and thus saṃsāra is produced. This saṃsāra next day wakes up when
become pramātā. I get the memory that when I experienced this, I had happiness and that
experience gave me sorrow and then I have rāga-dveṣa against something and some other
things. This cycle goes on and on and on. Thus, they have chosen nine special properties of
Ātmā to explain the phenomenon of saṃsāra. When consciousness is generated, this Ātmā
becomes a cetana pramātā. Once he is a pramātā, he develops rāga-dveṣa and his will-
power is activated;
Once the will-power is operative, pramātā becomes a kartā of puṇya and pāpa. Once
dharma and adharma get fructified, they will be converted into sukha and duḥkha.
Because of the association with sukha-duḥkha, etc., meaning miśra also, one becomes an
experiencer of pleasure and pain. The kartā becomes bhokta when he experience sukha-
duḥkha.

śloka 91
यथात्र कर्मवशतः कादाचित्कं सुखादिकम्।
तथा लोकान्तरे देहे कर्मणेच्छादि जन्यते ॥ ६.९२ ॥
yathātra karmavaśataḥ kādācitkaṃ sukhādikam.
tathā lokāntare dehe karmaṇecchādi janyate (6.92).
This continues for several years; daily during suṣupti he becomes jaḍa and in jāgṛt-avasthā
and svapna-avasthā, he becomes cetana. All these depend upon the present bunch of
prārabdha and when the present bunch of prārabdha goes away, Ātmā does not have any
experience to derive from this body. Then, this body dies and Ātmā because of the next set
of prārabdha karma again gets associated with the mind in a different loka. Therefore, it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 490

said, karmavaśataḥ because of the force of karma, kādācitkaṃ sukhādikam atra bhavati,
there are temporary pleasures and pain in this loka in this body. Ātmā derives pleasure
and pain only in this loka because of the karma. Afterwards, when the karma is exhausted
lokāntare dehe the mind alone travels. The mind travels and occupies an appropriate body
and mind and body are in another loka and all-pervading Ātmā has lost the contact here,
it is not operational here and it will develop sambandha with the mind and body in that
loka.
Since Ātmā starts deriving ānanda in that loka, it appears as though Ātmā has traveled.
But ānanda-tapping area is no longer in bhū-loka but in svarga-loka. Lokāntare dehe , in a
body which is in another loka, again rāga, dveṣa, prayatna, etc., are generated in the Ātmā
in that particular loka. Whether in svarga or naraka, etc, because of the karma, Ātmā keeps
on shifting the tapping-area and the types of experience. Therefore, we have a feeling that
Ātmā travels from loka to loka while Ātmā never travels.

śloka 92
एवं च सर्वगस्यापि सम्भवेतां गमागमौ ।
कर्मकाण्डः समग्रोऽत्र प्रमाणमिति तेऽवदन्॥ ६.९३ ॥
evaṃ ca sarvagasyāpi sambhavetāṃ gamāgamau.
karmakāṇḍaḥ samagro:'tra pramāṇamiti te:'vadan (6.93).
Now he says, because of this reason, Jīvātmā appears to travel from loka to loka. The body
does not travel but as the mind travels, it gets different bodies in different loka and it looks
as though the Ātmā travels from loka to loka. Arrival and departure are figuratively
possible for Ātmā even though it is all-pervading. Arrival and departure are not literally
possible but looks as though it travels. How do we know all these things? This has the
Vedic pramāṇa. The entire karma kāṇḍa of the Veda talks about the Jīvātmā traveling
from loka to loka. Here, Vidyāraṇya makes it clear that these are the views of Prābhākaras
and Tārkikas.

śloka 93
आनन्दमयकोशो यः सुषुप्तौ परिशिष्यते ।
अस्पष्टचित्स आत्मैषां पूर्वकोशोऽस्य ते गुणाः ॥ ६.९४ ॥
ānandamayakośo yaḥ suṣuptau pariśiṣyate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 491

aspaṣṭacitsa ātmaiṣāṃ pūrvakośo:'sya te guṇāḥ (6.94).

The four verses from now on talks about Bhāṭṭa-mīmāṃsakas. Prābhākara-mīmāṃsā was
founded by Prabhākara and Bhāṭṭa-mīmāṃsā is formed by Kumārila-bhaṭṭa. The views of
both are based on the sūtras of Jaimini. Here also, we talk of the nature of Ātmā.
Prabhākara’s philosophy is over and now we are seeing the philosophy of Kumārila. He
objects and says that Prabhākara is wrong and so also are Tārkikas wrong. Ātmā is not
mere jaḍa vastu and not mere cetana vastu also. He says Vedāntin is also wrong. He says
it is a mixture: cetana- and acetana-svarūpa. For that, he uses a special word; it is
aspaṣṭacit. It is vague consciousness, consciousness is mixed with jaḍa also. To know that
Ātmā is a mixture, we have to study suṣupti-anubhava. He says that during sleep, we are
predominantly jaḍa because we are not aware of the surrounding. The very fact that we
are consciously unaware of anything, we are unconscious of the surrounding and even
ourselves, our emotions, etc, Ātmā is jaḍa. At the same time, we cannot say we are totally
jaḍa, inert, because we are able to remember and tell that we slept well. I am aware of the
fact that I am not aware of the surrounding. We are conscious of that un-consciousness
state. That means partially, consciousness is there. Through anubhava-pramāṇa or
pratyakṣa pramāṇa we come to know of cetanatva and through arthāpatti-pramāṇa we
know cetanatva. How can both cetana and acetana be together? They both coexist like the
glow worm in the night, where you will find that one part of the body is light and another
part is dark. That is our Ātmā. More in the next class.

Class 107
śloka 94 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talks about the various confusions regarding the nature, size, etc., of Jīva, of
not only the laymen but also great philosophers. He quotes the views of the philosophers.
Now he talks about the nature of Ātmā whether it comes under cit-rūpa or acit-rūpam or
cit-acit-rūpa. Whether it is inert principle, conscious or mixture of both? In this context,
first he discussed the Tārkika philosophy which was followed by Pūrva-mīmāṃsaka. They
say that this Ātmā has many other properties also like rāga, dvesa, etc. Each of the
properties is not permanent but each one is generated when Ātmā joins the mind. Jñāna,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 492

etc, is generated as a temporary property, and each one is a temporary property born out
of this combination. Numerous minds are there and innumerous jīvas are there.
If at all there is travel after death, the travel will not happen for the Ātmā but the mind
will go there to svarga loka, Ātmā will already be there, my Ātmā will come in contact
with mind, my all-pervading Ātmā will join the svarga-reached mind and experience
svarga-loka air-conditioned weather. The mind alone goes from loka-to-loka and
experiences that particular environment. This was the Naiyāyika contention.
Here, in the 94th verse we will talk of the Bhāṭṭa-mata. Bhāṭṭa-mīmāṃsaka will talk of his
own philosophy but he will not refute Nyāya philosophy. In the 16th chapter of
Upadeśasāhasrī, we had seen the refutation of Nyāya philosophy and also we discussed it
in Brahma-sūtra. The first objection that we raised is this. If Ātmā is all-pervading like
space, it has to be asaṅga like space. It is partless and it cannot have connection with
anything. This law they themselves accept. That it is formless cannot have sambandha
with anything. How can such Ātmā get connected with anything? If Ātmā and the mind is
connected, then the problem is that Ātmā being all-pervading, its connection with the
mind should always be there. Saṃyoga and viyoga is possible only when two things are
finite in nature. Now your body is joined with this class and at the end of the class viyoga
both being finite. How can you get united and separated from ākāśa, it being all-
pervading? You are always associated with the space. You say Ātmā is all-pervading and
if it is all-pervading, the mind must be connected with Ātmā all the time; then how can
mind be separated now and then?
Then Ādi Śaṅkarācārya gives another argument. He says that whenever Ātmā and mind
join together, a special property will be created and this special property goes away later.
Ādi Śaṅkarācārya asks in 16th chapter of Upadeśasāhasrī: you talk of 9 properties and let
us assume Ātmā and mind join together. Suppose happiness has to be generated, again
Ātmā and the mind should join together and if they are to join together, first I has to join
for jñāna and then it has to separate and therefore, when Ātmā and mind join to gether
and they have to get separated and they will get separated. When they joined, jñāna is
generated and when the separate, jñāna will go away. Now, if they join together again for
sukha to be generated, jñāna which was generated by the first combination is gone; so
when sukham is created in the second combination, happiness is there but consciousness
is not there! There will be no jñāna when sukha-duḥkha and pleasure and pain are there.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 493

There are some of the more innumerable logical problems. It is also Śruti-viruddha as
Veda clearly says Ātmā is jñāna-svarūpa. How can they forget satyam jñānam anantam
brahma? Ātmā is svayam jyoti-svarūpah. This reveals Ātmā as caitanya-svarūpa.
Naiyāyika is āstika and āstika means he accepts Veda pramāṇa and after accepting the
Vedas he goes against Vedic teaching. There are several loopholes and therefore, Nyāya
theory is not acceptable.
Now we will see the Bhāṭṭa view. When we go to sleep experience we find that all the
other kośas are rejected by us, we detach from the kośas in sleep and in jāgṛt we get the
kośas; the kośas goes and comes and since they are removable, therefore, they are not my
real nature. In suṣupti, ānandamaya kośa is there, even when all other kośas are gone and
therefore, ānandamaya should be my intrinsic nature. I don’t lose this ānandamaya-kośa-
nature. This is the argument of Pūrva-mīmāṃsaka. Then he himself defines it as aspaṣṭa
cit. Ānandamaya kośa is concealed consciousness, obstructed consciousness, vague
consciousness or dull consciousness. It is concealed by jaḍa-aṃśa. If cit is to be obstructed,
it has to be concealed by jaḍa-aṃśa alone, jaḍa-aṃśa-pratibaddha consciousness. During
suṣupti, cit is heavily covered by acit jaḍa-aṃśa. The aspaṣṭa cit must be Ātmā. Ātmā must
be ānandamaya and all other kośas are temporary properties of the Ātmā. All the previous
kośas and their properties like icchā, dveṣa, sukha, duḥkha, etc are their properties.

śloka 95
गूढं चैतन्यमुत्प्रेक्ष्य बोधाबोधस्वरूपताम्।
आत्मनो ब्रुवते भाट्टाश्चिदुत्प्रेक्ष्योत्थितस्मृतेः ॥ ६.९५ ॥
gūḍhaṃ caitanyamutprekṣya bodhābodhasvarūpatām.
ātmano bruvate bhāṭṭāścidutprekṣyotthitasmṛteḥ (6.95).
He himself explains further as to how the vague consciousness is the mixture of two
things, jaḍa-aṃśa and caitanya, which is hidden and concealed by the jaḍa vastu. The
Bhāṭṭa philosophers infer the concealed consciousness obtaining in suṣupti avasthā. This is
utprekṣā, presumption, of that concealed consciousness obtaining in suṣupti which is the
nature of Ātmā. If the Ātmā caitanya is concealed, there must be a concealing factor. There
must be a concealer and jaḍa-aṃśa is the concealer and what is concealed is cetana aṃśa;
cetana- and acetana-svarūpa is Ātmā so declare Bhāṭṭa philosophers. For the
presumption, arthāpatti pramāṇa, there must be a basis. Whenever we presume

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 494

something imperceptible to explain a perceived fact, it is arthāpatti pramāṇa. The example

I gave in the Upaniṣad class in the morning that the street is flooded with water. You did
not experience the night rain and even though it was not perceived, in the morning when
you see the flooded street, you conclude the night rain. In the same way, there must be a
perceived fact which is the basis for the presumption of the jaḍa-bodha-svarūpa of Ātmā
in the suṣupti. I need an experience or perceived fact. This presumption of the concealed
consciousness is based on the experience of our memory in the waking state. The memory
in the jāgṛt-avasthā is the perceived fact. Now the question is what that is. What is the
memory and how do we get the perception? Based on the memory, concealed
consciousness is presumed, postulated by us.

śloka 96
जडो भूत्वा तदास्वाप्समिति जाड्यस्मृतिस्तदा ।
विना जाड्यानुभूतिं न कथंचिदुपपद्यते ॥ ६.९६ ॥
jaḍo bhūtvā tadāsvāpsamiti jāḍyasmṛtistadā.
vinā jāḍyānubhūtiṃ na kathaṃcidupapadyate (6.96).
He makes it very clear what is the memory in the jāgṛt-avasthā, after waking from suṣupti-
avasthā: “at that time, during deep sleep state, I was like a jaḍa vastu, I was like a log of
wood; I slept and became like a log of wood”. In the manner, there is memory of the
unconscious state experienced in the sleep. From the memory, we presume there must be
an experience. Memory is not possible without any experience. If you remember now, it
means you have experienced it. Without experiencing the jaḍatva or insentiency during
sleep, you cannot remember insentiency on waking. Therefore, memory presupposes
experience of insentiency. If I have experienced insentiency in suṣupti there must be
insentiency in suṣupti. Therefore, memory proves experience, experience of insentiency
proves the presence of insentiency at that time and that insentiency cannot be total. To
experience insentiency, I must be conscious. Therefore, experience of insentiency is the
proof for partial insentiency and partial sentiency. Insentiency is there because I
experienced it. At the same, I experienced insentiency, therefore there is consciousness.
The memory is the proof of jaḍa-cetana-aṃśadvaya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 495

śloka 97
द्रष्टुर्दृष्टेरलोपश्च श्रुतः सुप्तौ ततस्त्वयम्।
अप्रकाशप्रकाशाभ्यामात्मा खद्योतवद्युतः ॥ ६.९७ ॥
draṣṭurdṛṣṭeralopaśca śrutaḥ suptau tatastvayam.
aprakāśaprakāśābhyāmātmā khadyotavadyutaḥ (6.97).
Here Bhāṭṭa philosopher says that the consciousness continuing in suṣupti in a concealed
form is revealed by the Śruti also. This we find in 4.3.23 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad: in
sleep neither the seer nor seeing is absent. Therefore, the nature of Ātmā is both luminous
and dark, like that of a firefly. The consciousness of Ātmā never goes at anytime. Draṣṭuḥ
dṛṣṭeḥ alopaḥ, caitanya continues without any break. It continues in the suṣupti. During
suṣupti, the consciousness does not go and it continues unlike Naiyāyika view. We say he
has become unconscious and Bhāṭṭa says none can become unconscious but what you call
unconscious is concealed consciousness. This has the support of Śruti. Therefore, during
suṣupti, consciousness is also there and concealing insentiency part is also there and
consciousness is jaḍa-cetana-svarūpa. In Vedānta, jaḍa-aṃśa is mithyā or lower order of
reality and therefore, it cannot be an intrinsic part of Ātmā. A rope-snake cannot be an
intrinsic part of rope. Bhāṭṭa-mata has given equal degree of reality to both. Cit
representing light and jaḍa representing darkness, can there be an object which is a
mixture of light and darkness? He says it is possible like the glowworm or firefly. One side
it will be bright and another side it will be dark. Ātmā is endowed with light and
darkness.

śloka 98
निरंशस्योभयात्मत्वं न कथंचिद्घटिष्यते ।
तेन चिद्रू प एवात्मेत्याहुः सांख्या विवेकिनः ॥ ६.९८ ॥
niraṃśasyobhayātmatvaṃ na kathaṃcidghaṭiṣyate.
tena cidrūpa evātmetyāhuḥ sāṃkhyā vivekinaḥ (6.98).
With the previous śloka the Bhāṭṭa-mata is over. He concluded that Ātmā is cit-acit-rūpa
and he has taken ānandamaya kośa as Ātmā. Ānandamaya kośa is a mixture because kośa
is jaḍa and pratibimba caitanya is cetana and here, both the reflecting medium and the
reflected consciousness is there. Reflecting medium is jaḍa-aṃśa and the reflected
consciousness is cetana aṃśa, hence he mistook that both cit and acit aṃśas are there in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 496

Ātmā. That there is an the original consciousness beyond the ānandamaya kośa, reflecting
medium, he does not know. He missed the original consciousness because you cannot
come across the original consciousness, which is because “I am” the original
consciousness.
Next comes Sāṅkhya-philosopher to negate the Bhāṭṭa philosophers. He says Ātmā is free
from parts because Ātmā is all-pervading. According to Śruti, Ātmā is niravayava and
how can you give jaḍa and cetana parts to the Ātmā? There is Śruti-virodha and there will
be logical problem also. Once you say Ātmā has parts, then Ātmā will become anitya
because whatever has parts is anitya. Whatever is sāvayava is an assembled vastu. Yat
sāvayavam tat kāryam, yat kāryam tad anityam; Ātmā karyaḥ sāvayavatvāt ghaṭavat;
Ātmā anityaḥ karyatvāt ghaṭavat. If it is eternal it cannot have division of cit and acit
division. It is kevala caitanya-svarūpa. Ātmā is not kevala jaḍa but Ātmā is kevala
caitanya-svarūpa, very close to Vedānta. Sāṅkhya is very close to Vedānta. He says Ātmā
is asaṅga and we also say it is asaṅga. He says Ātmā is all-pervading and we also say
Ātmā is all-pervading. But he says Ātmā are many and it is here that we differ with
Sāṅkhya which we will see later. Great Sāṅkhya thinkers declare that Ātmā is cit-rūpa.
Details in the next class.

Class 108
śloka 98 contd.
Vidyāraṇya is clearing the various confusions that prevail in the minds of the laymen as
also the various philosophers regarding the nature, size, and definition, etc of Ātmā. The
first group was of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophers who said that Ātmā is jaḍa-svarūpa and
Bhāṭṭa mīmāṃsā said Ātmā is cit-acit-rūpa.
Before continuing the class further, I would like to go back to verse 94 once again for the
verse can be interpreted in two ways. According to one, it is Bhāṭṭa-mata and another one
is Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika-mata.
Jīvātmā is ānandamaya kośa and during deep sleep state it is in an aspaṣṭa cit and it
resembles a mixture of jaḍa and cetana state. Aspaṣṭa reveals jaḍa obstacles and the word
cit indicates the caitanya aṃśa. So aspaṣṭa cit resembles jaḍa-cetana-padārtha.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 497

In sleep, ānandamaya kośa it resembles jaḍa-cetana-padārtha and Bhāṭṭa philosophers

mistook the jaḍa-cetana state as Ātmā. Now I want to talk about the second interpretation
possible. In sleep, Ātmā is in aspaṣṭa cit, it is in vague consciousness. Now we say aspaṣṭa
cit is jaḍa-padārtha and the consciousness is very dull. Therefore, it appears as though it is
very dull like a jaḍa padārtha when sentiency is not there. Therefore, in suṣupti
ānandamaya kośa is aspaṣṭa cit and it is vague consciousness and therefore, it resembles a
jaḍa padārtha and Naiyāyika philosopher mistakes this aspaṣṭa cit which resembles jaḍa
padārtha as the jaḍa Ātmā.
The word aspaṣṭa cit can be taken as jaḍa-cetana-padārtha or jaḍa-padārtha. In English
translation, the translator has taken the 94th verse as Naiyāyika-mata. I have taken it as
Bhāṭṭa-mata. 94th verse can be taken as the conclusion of Naiyāyika-mata or Bhāṭṭa-mata.
Both are two types of misconception. The property mentioned before rāga-dveṣa, dharma-
adharma, sukha-duḥkha, etc. belongs to aspaṣṭa Ātmā of Naiyāyikas. With 97th verse,
Bhāṭṭa-mata is also over.
I introduced Sāṅkhya-philosopher in my last class. This Sāṅkhya-philosopher refutes the
Bhāṭṭa philosopher by pointing out that Ātmā cannot have two portions like a glowworm.
It is possible for glowworm to have two portion but it is not possible for Ātmā because of
it being partless. It is beyond bheda and kāla and when space itself cannot have parts,
what to talk of Ātmā which is beyond space. If it is jaḍa, it cannot be cetana and if it is
cetana, it cannot be jaḍa. We have negated jaḍa-interpretation. Sāṅkhya-philosopher
comes close to Vedānta. Even he uses the word Puruṣa for Ātmā. This we saw in the last
class.

śloka 99
जाड्यांशः प्रकृ ते रूपं विकारि त्रिगुणं च तत्।
चितो भोगापवर्गार्थं प्रकृ तिः सा प्रवर्तते ॥ ६.९९ ॥
jāḍyāṃśaḥ prakṛte rūpaṃ vikāri triguṇaṃ ca tat.
cito bhogāpavargārthaṃ prakṛtiḥ sā pravartate (6.99).
If Ātmā is caitanya-svarūpa, how do you explain jaḍatva or insentiency that is experienced
in the suṣupti state? In suṣupti, we are almost like jaḍa. I am insentient as though I am not
aware of the surroundings. For that, Sāṅkhya-philosopher says jaḍatva is experienced, it is
there, but it does not belong to Ātmā; it belongs to anātmā. You mix jaḍatva of anātmā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 498

with Ātmā because of confusion. Ātmā is called Puruṣa and anātmā is called Prakṛti;
Puruṣa has cetanatva and there is no mixed property at all. You mix up in your buddhi
due to confusion which we call anyonya-adhyāsa. We also talk about Ātma-anātmā-
aviveka. Therefore, he says the jaḍatva experienced in suṣupti is prakṛte rūpaṃ, it is the
nature of Prakṛti, which is in the form of physical body-mind-complex because body and
mind both are modified version of Prakṛti alone. Not only that, Prakṛti-rūpa is not only
jaḍa but also subject to modification. The physical body constantly changes and the sense-
organs constantly change. Regularly, there are power fluctuations in the eyes. Ears also
have a problem. The mind is violently vikāri, so too the intellect is vikāri. All aspects of
Prakṛti are subject to change. The third property is that it is endowed with sattva, rajas and
tamas. Puruṣa does not have any of the three guṇas as it is nirguṇa.
Prakṛti is like the wife while Puruṣa is like the husband. Prakṛti struggles for the
satisfaction of Puruṣa. Puruṣa here cannot work because it is all-pervading. For the sake of
bhoga and apavarga, meaning mokṣa, one has to work. Dharma, artha and kāma three put
together is called bhoga. For the sake of chaturvidha puruṣārtha, Jīva has to work. Once
Puruṣa attains mokṣa, Prakṛti feels satisfied. This Prakṛti withdraws from Puruṣa having
successfully done its job. After giving mokṣa Prakṛti withdraws. According to Sāṅkhya
philosophy, Puruṣas are innumerable and Prakṛti has to help all Puruṣas. Prakṛti is one
but Puruṣas are many. That is why some Puruṣas are liberated and some are not.

śloka 100
असङ्गायाश्चितेर्बन्धमोक्षौ भेदाग्रहान्मतौ ।
बन्धमोक्षव्यवस्थार्थं पूर्वेषामिव चिद्भिदा ॥ ६.१०० ॥
asaṅgāyāściterbandhamokṣau bhedāgrahānmatau.
bandhamokṣavyavasthārthaṃ pūrveṣāmiva cidbhidā (6.100).
The Sāṅkhya-philosopher accepts Puruṣa, this Jīvātmā. The Puruṣa is asaṅga. This is
another thing we Vedāntins also say that Puruṣa, the caitanya, is asaṅga, relationless,
unconnected to anything. If Ātmā is asaṅga, it cannot be connected to bandha and mokṣa
also. Later, it cannot be connected to mokṣa also. If bandha comes and goes, then, Ātmā
will have connection with bandha and mokṣa. How can that be? To this, he says that all
problems of bandha and freedom from those problems relates to Prakṛti or buddhi.
However, because of indiscrimination, we find bandha-mokṣa properties belonging to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 499

Prakṛti, we transfer to Ātmā and therefore, Ātmā has transferred bandha and transferred
mokṣa. Bondage and liberation is there for the cit Ātmā or Jīvātmā or Puruṣa which is
relationless. Ātmā has no bandha and mokṣa, but bandha and mokṣa is there for the mind
alone and bandha and mokṣa has been attributed falsely to Ātmā; it is said.
Then he makes a mistake! Since some jīvas are bound and some are liberated, since
viśeṣaṇas differ, there must be many Ātmās. Therefore, we have to accept the plurality of
Ātmās. What is the mistake committed here? Once you say bandha and mokṣa are not the
properties of Ātmā, they are seeming properties of Ātmā. And the seeming properties
should cause seeming divisions, not real, and they should have said the differences are
seeming but Sāṅkhya has created a real division between bandha and mukta Ātmā! If only
he had said plurality also is seeming, he would have become an Advaitin but he says there
is plurality of Ātmā. Based on the differences in bandha and mokṣa in various individuals,
some are bound and some are liberated; hence Sāṅkhya says you have to accept our Ātmā
is different from their Ātmā and thus he concludes explaining bandha and mokṣa.
Advaitin says bandha and mokṣa do not belong to Ātmā but they belong to anātmā alone.
Caitanya-bheda, plurality of consciousness, sāṅkhyanām asti which they accept and the
Sāṅkhya-philosophers are like Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika and Bhāṭṭa philosophy, etc. Only we
Advaitins say Ātmā ekaḥ.

śloka 101
महतः परमव्यक्तमिति प्रकृ तिरुच्यते ।
श्रुतावसङ्गता तद्वदसङ्गो हीत्यतः स्फुटा ॥ ६.१०१ ॥
mahataḥ paramavyaktamiti prakṛtirucyate.
śrutāvasaṅgatā tadvadasaṅgo hītyataḥ sphuṭā (6.101).
Sāṅkhya is a Vaidika as he accepts Veda as pramāṇa also, along with pratyakṣa and
anumāna. However, he gives importance to tarka more than Vedānta and that is why
Sāṅkhya-philosopher is called Tārkika. Veda is subservient to tarka according to Sāṅkhya.
We also accept tarka, but we say Veda is main while tarka is subservient to Veda because
we know that Ātmā does not come under the field of tarka. When tarka does not have
access to Ātmā, it is like taking a telescope to see a microbe. You should use an
appropriate instrument to get the access and when it comes to apauruṣeya viṣaya, we use
tarka to understand Veda and not give importance to tarka and ignore Veda. Use tarka to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 500

pour Veda into our buddhi. Therefore, he quotes Vedic support here. He quotes 1.3.11 of
Kaṭhopaniṣad mahataḥ paramavyaktam; there, avyakta refers to Prakṛti; this is also
analysed in great detail in 4.3.15 and 4.4.22 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. They say that
Prakṛti or pradhāna is the state of equilibrium of the guṇas. When that is disturbed the
world arises. The conscious Puruṣa is associationless. Without consciousness, no creation
is possible. So the creator or Īśvara is the consciousness, endowed with Prakṛti or Māyā.
Asaṅga nature of Ātmā is very clear and he says what he says is logical as this has the
support of Veda. Ātmā is cit-rūpa, he has concluded.

śloka 102
चित्सन्निधौ प्रवृत्ताया प्रकृ तेर्हि नियामकम्।
ईश्वरं ब्रुवते योगाः स जीवेभ्यः परः श्रुतः ॥ ६.१०२ ॥
citsannidhau pravṛttāyā prakṛterhi niyāmakam.
īśvaraṃ bruvate yogāḥ sa jīvebhyaḥ paraḥ śrutaḥ (6.102).
Now comes Yoga philosophy propounded by Patañjali Rṣi. His philosophy is also in the
sūtra form. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya is famous as the author of commentary of Brahma-sūtra. For
each sūtra there is a pioneer commentator in analyzing the sūtra. This Yoga philosophy is
discussed in the following two verses. Yoga philosophy is very close to Sāṅkhya
philosophy. The primary role of Yoga is prescribing the scheme of meditation, which is
acceptable to all of us. It is called aṣṭāṅga yoga. It is close to Sāṅkhya with few differences.
Sāṅkhya-philosophers don’t accept Īśvara at all. He accepts Veda pramāṇa but does not
accept Īśvara; from Īśvara-angle he is nāstika and from Veda-angle he is āstika. In Sāṅkhya
philosophy, when they talk about Puruṣa, the word Puruṣa refers to Jīvātmā only.
Innumerable jīvas are represented by Puruṣas. They have Prakṛti and also cetana jīvātmās
are there but there is no Īśvara. Naturally, the question comes how the world is created
out of Prakṛti? Here Prakṛti is the raw material. How the world got evolved? Yoga-
philosophers asks Sāṅkhya to explain the evolution of the universe out of Prakṛti without
accepting Īśvara? Sāṅkhya will have to answer which we will see in the next class.

Class 109
śloka 102 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 501

The different views of various philosophers regarding the meaning of Jīvātmā tvam-
padārtha are being discussed in these verses. Jīva consists of the original consciousness,
the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium. Here, the original consciousness is
satya and the other two are mithyā. Now, Vidyāraṇya gives the views of several other
philosophers. Now we analyse the svarūpa of Jīvātmā whether it is cit-rūpa or acit-rūpa or
cit-acit-rūpa. Cārvāka said it is acit-rūpa; Bhāṭṭa argues it is cit-acit and arrived at the
wrong conclusion. Sāṅkhya says Ātmā is cit-rūpa, vibhu-rūpa, sarvagata, asaṅga-cit-vibhi
like space, but cit-rūpa unlike space, but having come so close to Vedānta, he makes a
blunder saying that these all-pervading Puruṣas are many in number and each one has
separate all-pervading Ātmā. After Sāṅkhya philosophy came the Yoga philosophy. Yoga
is very close to Sāṅkhya and he endorses Sāṅkhya saying Ātmā is asaṅga; then vibhu
means it is all-pervading. Yoga agrees with Sāṅkhya but he has difference of view from
Sāṅkhya. This view is based on the creation. No problem with regard to the world; world
is created and no difficulty with Jīva. How does the world evolve? Sāṅkhya says the world
has evolved from Prakṛti and Prakṛti produces mahat; mahat produces ahaṅkāra; from
ahaṅkāra sixteen items are created: the mind, ten sense-organs and five subtle elements.
Then finally from the five subtle elements, five gross elements are born. Refer to the 13th
and 7th chapters of Gītā in this regard.
Here, Vyāsācārya has borrowed from Sāṅkhya views. With regard to evolutionary
procedure also, Sāṅkhya and Yoga agree. This is different from Vedānta. Sāṅkhya has this
procedure and Yoga agrees with this procedure. The crucial question: is will the Prakṛti
evolves itself or does it require intelligent principle to govern this evolution process? The
Sāṅkhya-philosopher is very very close to Darwin. He says no God is required and by
natural selection method, creation evolved itself and it is a threat to Christianity.
There is a big discussion whether Christian philosophy of evolution should be taught or
Darwin theory should be taught. Dayānanda Svāmīji had discussion with one sect of
group. One sect’s head happened to meet Svāmīji. He said creation has come three
thousand years before only and Īśvara created the world three thousand years before.
Some of the redwood trees are five thousands years old. We have also found dinosaur
bones which are millions of years old. Svāmīji asked how dinosaurs existed millions of
years ago? That person told: do you accept Īśvara is omniscient? If Īśvara is omniscient he
created world three thousands years ago and put dinosaur bones which millions of years

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 502

old. Svāmīji said let us have a cup of coffee and diverted the subject. Sāṅkhya-philosopher
is very close to Darwin because he also says the inert matter evolves by itself.
Everything happens perfectly according to law and he accepts all the karmas. Prakṛti has
the ability to create itself the world. Yoga-philosophers don’t agree with them regarding
the creation. He says the evolution has to be supervised by some other intelligent nimitta-
kāraṇa and these arguments of Yoga, Vedāntins also accept. This is admitted in Brahma-
sūtra also 2.2.1 that any intelligent creation, well-designed creation, needs an intelligent
principle.
Thus Yoga says we should have intelligent or supervisor or nimitta-kāraṇa. Then comes
the next question: if you need an intelligent supervisor why cannot we select an intelligent
Jīva for doing this job? The question may come and then Yoga-philosophers answers Jīva
is intelligent but his intelligence is highly limited. Out of his total knowledge, fifty present
is doubtful and another twenty five percent is wrong and therefore, and rest being limited,
we require an omniscient and omnipotent Puruṣa different from Jīva Puruṣa who is an
apara Puruṣa and what we need all powerful and all-pervading Para Puruṣa Īśvara. If Jīva
is given that particular post, he will give preference to his own family members. He will be
partial and have prejudice.
Therefore, we accept a Para Puruṣa; that is Bhagavān. Having introduced a Para Puruṣa,
Yoga-philosopher says that the apara Puruṣa is under the control of that Īśvara; Īśvara is
niyāmaka the controller and Jīva is the controlled niyamya Puruṣa, controlled by God
according to his puṇya-pāpa. It means who should get what, how many years one should
live, what should be his next birth, etc, all according to his karma. Yoga adds another
feature to Jīva, which is Īśvara-niyama, while Sāṅkhya-philosopher does not believe in
Īśvara.
Vedāntins also accepts this niyamya-niyāmaka-bhāva between Jīvātmā and Īśvara,
between Jīvātmā and Paramātmā, Svāmi-dāsa-bhāva. Then a doubt may come although it
should not come. You say that Vedāntins accept this niyamya-niyāmaka-bhāva-
sambandha between Īśvara and Jīva, controller-controlled-relationship. All the time in
Vedānta, you talk of Tat tvam asi. You talk about Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya. Do you
accept between Jīvātmā-Paramātmā or do you accept abheda-sambandha? Choose one of
them. Don’t tell both. Then Vedāntins say: you have not heard the classes properly. We
accept both. Aikya also we accept and we also accept Svāmi-dāsa-bhāva. By vyāvahārika-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 503

dṛṣṭi or reflected-consciousness-dṛṣṭi there is niyamya-niyāmaka-bhāva but by

pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi original-consciousness-dṛṣṭi, aikya-sambandha. “Why do you
manufacture confusion?” is our question.
We agree with Yoga from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. He says there is one intelligent principle to
evolve creation and that evolving Prakṛti is supervised intelligently by Īśvara. This Prakṛti
is in the proximity of innumerable jīvātmās or Puruṣas. Puruṣas are eternal and śarīras
were there even before creation in avyakta form. That Prakṛti is supervised and governed
by Paramātmā Īśvara. Cit here refers to Jīvātmā Puruṣa, sannidhi means proximity,
pravṛttā means ready to evolve and niyāmaka means controller. That intelligent principle
is called Īśvara. This is the view of Yoga philosophy.
Now there may be question. We talk about the various confusions regarding Jīvātmā. Why
do you bring in Īśvara? While we talk about Jīvātmā, why should Vidyāraṇya bring that
topic? We should remember once Īśvara is introduced as controller, we should add that
Jīva is controlled by Īśvara. Controller Īśvara is not the topic but the focus is the controlled
Jīva. That controller Para Puruṣa is superior to the Jīva. Even though Īśvara is also cit-rūpa
and Jīva is also cit-rūpa; Jīva is asaṅga and Īśvara is asaṅga; Jīva is all-pervading
consciousness and Īśvara is all-pervading consciousness; and in these three respects, both
are same but the difference is that jīvas are many but Īśvara is one; jīvas are controlled
while Īśvara is the controller; Jīva has finite virtues but Īśvara has infinite virtues like
omniscience and omnipotence. This is what Yoga-philosopher says. Thus it is known from
the Veda, he says. Yoga says intelligently that my views are supported by Veda.

śloka 103
प्रधानक्षेत्रज्ञपतिर्गुणेश इति हि श्रुतिः ।
आरण्यके संभ्रमेण ह्यन्तर्याम्युपपादितः ॥ ६.१०३ ॥
pradhānakṣetrajñapatirguṇeśa iti hi śrutiḥ.
āraṇyake saṃbhrameṇa hyantaryāmyupapāditaḥ (6.103).
Here, Yoga-philosophers quote the relevant Veda mantra. First one is from Śvetāśvatara
Upaniṣad 6.16; pradhāna-kṣetrajña-pati is the quotation. The basic matter existed even
before the creation came; kṣetrajña means Jīvātmā. It says Ātmās are eternal but the śarīras
are perishable. Eternal was there; Puruṣas were there; Prakṛti cannot evolve itself because
it is jaḍa; Jīva cannot help the evolution and is the Lord of Puruṣa and Prakṛti and Jīvātmā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 504

That is what is given in Viśṇu-sahasranāma also. Īśvara is the controller from

vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi; he is the Lord of the three guṇas: sattva, rajas and tamo-guṇas; unlike
jīvas as jīvas are the slaves of the three guṇas, being bound by them. This is expressed in
14th chapter of Gītā. Īśvara is the master of the three guṇas. Up to this is the quotation. If
one vākya is not sufficient, another vākya is 3.7 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad [Antaryāmi-
brāhmaṇa]. Īśvara controls remaining inside everyone. Also it is said that this inner
controller is talked about in 18th chapter of Gītā also. With this Yoga-philosophers views
also have been given. He adds one feature that Jīvātmā is controlled by Īśvara. With this,
Vidyāraṇya concludes Jīvātmā-confusion-list. Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya will enter tat-
padārtha, Paramātmā, Īśvara. This we will see in the next class.

Class 110
śloka 103 contd.
The confusions regarding the Jīvātmā topic have been completed. The discussion on
Jīvātmā started from the 22nd verse and it has come up to verse 103. In verses 22 to 57 the
siddhānta were discussed and in 58 to 103 we discussed the various confusions of the
laymen and other various philosophers. If we remember the confusions very well and
forget our siddhānta, it is tragic. Either remember both or remember siddhānta even if you
forget the views of other philosophers. Yoga system and Sāṅkhya system have the
definition of Jīvātmā very similar because both say that Jīvātmā is asaṅga, sarva-gata and
caitanya. Caitanya-svarūpatva is also common to both and both say jīvātmās are many in
number. The minor difference is that in Yoga philosophy, Jīvātmā is Īśvara-niyamya; that
is, Jīvātmā is under the control of Īśvara and it is the unique feature in Yoga. In Sāṅkhya, it
is not there for they don’t believe in Īśvara.
According to Vedānta, Jīvātmā has three components: the original consciousness, the
reflected consciousness and reflecting medium which is śarīra-traya. It is antaḥkaraṇa, the
mind. All the three put together is Jīvātmā and of these components one is satya, the
original consciousness, and the other two are mithyā. If someone asks “whether there is
plurality in consciousness?” then we will not answer and we will say: from the standpoint
of the original consciousness, there is no plurality but from the standpoint of the reflected
consciousness there is plurality. So we will happily join Sāṅkhya and Yoga in accepting

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 505

plurality from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. With this, jīvātma-vicāra is over. That is tvam-pada-

vicāra is over. Now we will enter tat-pada-vicāra.

śloka 104
अत्रापि कलहायन्ते वादिनः स्वस्वयुक्तिभिः ।
वाक्यान्यपि यथाप्रज्ञं दार्ढ्यायोदाहरन्ति हि ॥ ६.१०४ ॥
atrāpi kalahāyante vādinaḥ svasvayuktibhiḥ.
vākyānyapi yathāprajñaṃ dārḍhyāyodāharanti hi (6.104).
From this verse, up to 209, we have Paramātma-vicāra or Īśvara-vicāra or tat-padārtha-
vicāra. Here also Vidyāraṇya will talk of our siddhānta as also the confusion of the others.
As regards Paramātmā, he will talk of the confusions first and then the siddhānta. From
104 to 121 list the confusions regarding the tat-padārtha. From 122 to 209 our siddhānta
will be discussed. We say Īśvara also has got three components: the original consciousness,
the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium. However, Īśvara has got macro
prapañca-traya and macro reflecting medium is there and therefore, Īśvara reflection is
mahā reflection. In the case of Īśvara the original consciousness will be satya and the
reflected consciousness and reflecting medium, the prapañca-traya will be mithyā; this
will be talked about later. Now we will go to other people’s view of Īśvara and their
confusions.
They debate and disagree regarding what is Īśvara. He does not use the word Īśvara but
he uses a pronoun for the noun used in the earlier verse. In the previous śloka Vidyāraṇya
has talked about Īśvara and therefore, here also we discuss Īśvara alone. All the
philosophers debate, disagree, fight and quarrel with the help of their own reasoning and
most of them being āstika-darśanas, all accept Veda pramāṇa and they quote Veda also for
everything. The body as Ātmā also has got Veda pramāṇa. Everyone will get Veda
pramāṇa and that is the advantage of the Vedas. They quote Veda-vākyāni api the Vedic
statements also. They quote to reinforce their philosophy. Here, Vidyāraṇya conveys a
subtle point that they quote Vedas for reinforcements. From that it is clear that they look
on logic as primary and thereafter they go to Veda for reinforcement. In Vedānta, we don’t
quote Veda for reinforcement because we study the Veda and out of the Veda we extract
the teaching. Vedic teaching is primary for us and thereafter we go to tarka for
reinforcement. They base their argument on tarka and go to Veda for reinforcement. They

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 506

interpret scripture according to their own understanding and according to their prejudice
and when they come to the Veda they have already formed their philosophy with the help
of tarka pramāṇa.
Therefore, theirs is a prejudiced eye as they study the Veda not to understand the Veda
but to collect the supporting quotation and whatever is not supporting them they will
forget them and use the quotation to reinforce their argument and not to study other
views. Kṛṣṇa says karma is only one factor; you do have freewill and you can alter the fate.
The fatalists don’t listen to the part of the freewill portions though they listen to Vedas, but
continue to be fatalists and they don’t want to accept the existence of freewill.
All these Nyāya Vaiśeṣika philosophers have formed a philosophy first and they study
Vedas only to draw vākyas which are suitable to their coloured, subjective, intellect and
they quote them to suit them. This is the introduction to the confusion regarding Īśvara in
the Vedas.

śloka 105
क्ले शकर्मविपाकै स्तदाशयैरप्यसंयुतः ।
पुंविशेषो भवेदीशो जीववत्सोऽप्यसङ्गचित्॥ ६.१०५ ॥
kleśakarmavipākaistadāśayairapyasaṃyutaḥ.
puṃviśeṣo bhavedīśo jīvavatso:'pyasaṅgacit (6.105).
Vidyāraṇya starts with Yoga philosophy itself. Previously, he talked about Jīva-confusion
of Yoga-philosophers. Now he gives the definition of Īśvara as given in the Yoga śāstra.
This topic goes from this verse to verse 108. He says Īśvara is also very, very similar to
Jīva. It is so because Īśvara is also asaṅga sarva-gata caitanya. Jīvas are many asaṅga sarva-
gata caitanya but Īśvara is one asaṅga sarva-gata caitanya. If both of them are asaṅga
sarva-gata caitanya how can one be Jīva another is Īśvara. For this they say Jīva is affected
by fourfold factor which makes him a saṃsārī whereas Īśvara is not affected by four
factors and therefore, Īśvara is mukta and asaṃsārī.
He enumerates four factors as: kleśa, karma, vipāka and āśaya; each one he explains. I can
explain them in terms of Vedānta but Yoga śāstra gives their definition.
1. First one is kleśa which means difficulty, pain or problem. In Yoga philosophy kleśa
is defined as fivefold problem. He defines them as:

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 507

i. the first one is avidyā. In Yoga śāstra the definition of avidyā is different from
Vedānta. There, avidyā means deha-abhimāna, anātmani ātma-buddhiḥ. I-
identification in anātmā, we call it in Vedānta śāstra as adhyāsa. This is problem
one;
ii. number two is asmitā which means ahaṅkāra; the false I, the wrong I, the ego,
generated by adhyāsa; what should be factual I is aham brahma asmi but they
interpret differently as adhyāsa or ahaṅkāra.
iii. Third one is rāga. This is attachment and it is not different from Vedāntic
definition of rāga.
iv. The fourth problem is dveṣa, the hatred or dislike towards something;
v. fifth one is abhiniveṣa which means instinctive attachment to the body and life.
The other rāga-dveṣas are developed by me. They are not born by birth. Some
develop some rāga-dveṣa in time which is not universal. Non-universal
generated artificial attachment is different and deha-abhimāna is instinctive that
is born with life. It is life-clinging which is abhiniveṣa.
These five together is called kleśas.
2. The second factor is karma. The Yoga-philosophers classify them as a group of four:
puṇya or dharma, adharma, miśra and vilakṣaṇa and he uses a special terminology
as:
i. śukla white one,
ii. kṛṣṇa black one,
iii. miśra black and white, and
iv. vilakṣaṇa which is neither black, nor white, not different from black and white
and whatever that gives spiritual growth.
3. The third factor is vipāka means phala. It is a beautiful order; kleśa will produce
karma since it includes rāga-dveṣa; karma will produce vipāka or phala; karma-
phala we classify into three and Yoga-philosophers also classify them as three. Our
classification Kṛṣṇa gives in Gita as aniṣṭa means duḥkha; iṣṭa means sukha and
miśra means sukha-duḥkha, the mixture of both sukha-duḥkha. In Yoga śāstra he
classifies into janma, āyuḥ and bhoga.
i. Janma is in the form of manuṣya-janma and other various janmas; Īśvara does
not give the body but I ask the body;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 508

ii. the second one is āyuḥ means the longevity of life whether we live how many
years long or short depends upon again karma and karma-phala;
iii. the third thing is between janma and maraṇa all our experiences are karma-
phala and it is called bhoga.
Thus we have five kleśas, four karma and three karmas are there.
4. The fourth factor is āśaya which means saṃskāras, vāsanās generated by these
experiences. The very attitude to life and world depends upon what type of
experiences we have. If we have problems we will say that the world is bad and if
we have good experiences we will say that the world is very good. If one meets two
people nice to him while traveling somewhere, he will say the whole country is
good.
All the four factors— kleśa, karma, vipāka and āśaya— decide our outlook towards life.
Saṃskāra is called āśaya because it remains in our mind or sleeps in our mind for future
expression. Saṃskāra lies hidden in the sub-conscious. It sprouts now and then and affects
our life. Jīva is one who is in the grip of these four factors: five kleśas, four karmas, three
phalas and is infinite saṃskāras.
Īśvara is the master of the four fold factors. This is the definition given by Yoga-
philosophers in yoga-sūtra 1.24 where Īśvara is defined. Īśvara is a special Ātmā.
Therefore, Puruṣa-viśeṣa is Īśvara. Īśvara is uncontaminated by kleśa, karma, vipāka and
the fourth factor of saṃskāra. He is a special Ātmā and that is why he has got an adjective
Parama for Ātmā. Īśvara is also asaṅga caitanya like Jīva as per Yoga philosophy. You can
see the evident contradiction in their philosophy with that of siddhānta. Jīva is
contaminated asaṅga caitanya and Īśvara is uncontaminated asaṅga caitanya.

śloka 106
तथापि पुंविशेषत्वाद्घटतेऽस्य नियन्तृता ।
अव्यवस्थौ बन्धमोक्षावापतेतामिहान्यथा ॥ ६.१०६ ॥
tathāpi puṃviśeṣatvādghaṭate:'sya niyantṛtā.
avyavasthau bandhamokṣāvāpatetāmihānyathā (6.106).
Even though Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are essentially the same, that is asaṅga sarva-gata
caitanya, Īśvara is a special Ātmā. Like saying all are equal, while some are more equal
than others! This special Ātmā Īśvara has Lordship or power over the other Ātmās. This

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 509

special Ātmā Īśvara has power, overlordship, over all other jīvātmās. Four factors do not
contaminate Īśvara but contaminate Jīvātmā alone. But he says even though I feel
uncomfortable I will have to accept a special Īśvara because without Īśvara, orderliness
will not be there in the world. Orderliness in the world needs a super intelligent Ātmā to
control the world and the world affairs. That cannot be one of us. Thus, we have invented
a special Ātmā in the form of Īśvara with no fourfold problem. Without accepting the
special Ātmā, all events in the creation including bandha and mokṣa will become
disorderly and the whole creation will be a mess if Īśvara is not there and therefore, we
have to accept Īśvara with super powers. More in the next class.

Class 111
śloka 106 contd.
Up to verse 103 Vidyāraṇya dealt with tvam-pada viveka or Jīvātma-viveka. Initially he
talked about Jīvātmā according to our siddhānta as the original consciousness, the
reflected consciousness and reflecting medium and then he talked about the confusion
regarding the very identify of Jīvātmā, the size of Jīvātmā, the nature of the Jīvātmā
whether it is sentient or insentient or like a glowworm, a mixture of both and the
confusion regarding the number of jīvātmās both among nāstika and āstika darśanas.
Lastly, he talks about the Yoga philosophy and from verse 194, Vidyāraṇya has entered
tat-pada-viveka or Paramātma-viveka or Īśvara-viveka. Here, he does not talk about our
siddhānta in the beginning. He talks about Īśvara with three components the original
consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium and the only difference
is in the case of Paramātmā, where the reflecting medium is so huge that the reflected
consciousness also will be very huge in its magnitude. But the original consciousness will
be common to both Jīvātmā and Īśvara. In the original consciousness, there is no
difference, but in the reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness, there are
differences. Vidyāraṇya will discuss this later. Now, he continues with the confusions the
other darśanas have.
Īśvara-confusion means it is not the confusion of Īśvara but confusion regarding Īśvara. Of
these confusions regarding Īśvara, Vidyāraṇya has started with Yoga-philosopher from
verse 105 and it will go up to 108. He accepts that Jīva is also Ātmā, Īśvara is also Ātmā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 510

and in the place of the word Ātmā he generally uses the word Puruṣa. The word Puruṣa is
a favourite word with Sāṅkhya and Yoga-philosophers. Both Jīvātmā Puruṣa and
Īśvarātmā Puruṣa have essentially the same nature asaṅga sarvagata caitanya. He uses the
expression asaṅga cit vibhu. We can understand it as asaṅga sarvagata caitanya;
relationless all-pervading consciousness is the nature of all the jīvātmās as well as the
nature of one Paramātmā. If all the jīvātmās and Paramātmā have got the same nature,
asaṅga sarvagata caitanya, what makes Jīvātmā as niyamya controlled and what makes
Paramātmā the controller, when both are same in all the features? Why do you make
someone master and others the servants? Jīvātmās are afflicted by problems in the form of
kleśas, āśaya, karma, etc, but Paramātmā is not affected by, tormented by, kleśas, karma,
vipāka, āśaya or saṃsāra: saṃsāra-yukta Jīvātmā but saṃsāra-rahita Paramātmā.
Therefore, we use the adjective Parama for Ātmā in Vedānta and in Yoga philosophy they
use the technical word Puruṣa-viśeṣa or special Puruṣa. We are non-special Puruṣas while
Īśvara is a special Puruṣa. Because of this special status, Īśvara becomes the controller.
Such an Īśvara controls all the jīvātmās and manages all their accounts, the karma-
accounts. Jīva cannot manage the karma-accounts because karma being adṛṣṭa, Jīva does
not even know the karma and then, where is the question of controlling the karma! In fact
karma controls the jīvātmās. If Jīva is given the powers to control the karma, his papas will
go to the waste-paper-basket and he will favour himself and his own people. Jagat cannot
control karma being jaḍa. Neither Jīva controls nor jagat controls and only Puruṣa-viśeṣa
Īśvara is karma-phala-dātā and we have to necessarily accept Īśvara; this Yoga-
philosopher tells the Sāṅkhya-philosophers. We accept an Īśvara, vyāvahārika Īśvara,
other than vyāvahārika Jīva and jagat a third entity. Only Sāṅkhya-philosopher does not
accept vyāvahārika Īśvara. In Vedānta also, we reject Īśvara sometimes. Sāṅkhya-
philosopher also rejects Īśvara and when both reject Īśvara, we get confused that we both
are same. We should be careful that Sāṅkhya-philosophers reject Īśvara in vyāvahārika
plane itself but Vedānta asserts that in vyāvahārika plane Īśvara should not be rejected
and Īśvara should be accepted. We vehemently contradict Sāṅkhya-philosophers.
Vyāvahārika Īśvara is different form vyāvahārika Jīva. Don’t say Jīva- Īśvara-aikya from
vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. And from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi both are different. If we negate difference
and assert aikya, we should know that aikya is from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 511

Therefore, Yoga-philosopher addresses Sāṅkhya-philosopher you have to accept Īśvara in

vyāvahārika plane, an Īśvara different from Jīva. The difference is Jīva has the entire
saṃsāra-problem and Īśvara is free from problems. Therefore, he said anyathā otherwise;
Yoga-philosophers say if you don’t accept Īśvara there will be chaos in the whole creation.
There will be utter confusion in the creation without Īśvara. Īśvara alone supervises the
following of law of karma. Another greater confusion is that one sādhaka will do all the
sādhanas and the neighbour will get liberated. The one who gets mokṣa should be the one
who does sādhanas. All these laws will be violated if Īśvara is not there. Even in the janma
of Jīva there will be confusion. Wrong body will be given to wrong Jīva upon death.
Therefore, better accept Īśvara.

śloka 107
भीषास्मादित्येवमादावसङ्गस्य परात्मनः ।
श्रुतं तद्युक्तमप्यस्य क्ले शकर्माद्यसङ्गमात्॥ ६.१०७ ॥
bhīṣāsmādityevamādāvasaṅgasya parātmanaḥ.
śrutaṃ tadyuktamapyasya kleśakarmādyasaṅgamāt (6.107).
The Yoga-philosopher continues and in support of his Īśvara he gives Śruti pramāṇa. 2.8.1
of Taittirya Upaniṣad and 2.3.3. Of Kauṣitakī Upaniṣad. The Taittirya Upaniṣad mantra
says Īśvara is the controller of all the jīvas. Not only ordinary jīvas Īśvara is the controller
even the exalted jīvas. The exalted jīvas are the one who has gone to svarga and has
become cabinet and Prime Minister in Heavenly cabinet. Indra also comes under Jīva but
he is an exalted Jīva because of superior karma. Under indra there are so may superior
jīvas in the form of various devatas. They are controlled by Īśvara. They control the jīvas
but they are controlled by Īśvara. Jīva devatas and Devatā jīvas have superior devatas
have power to control inferior manuṣya jīvas but both of them are controlled one big boss
that is Īśvara. This is said in the śāstra and it has śāstra pramāṇa. Out of fear alone Vāyu
Devatā, Agni Devatā and Yama also are afraid of Īśvara and they perform their duties
according to laws of karma. This mantra Yoga-philosophers quote in support of their
view. On account of fear of Bhagavān alone all deities function as per the laws of karma.
That overlordship or the controller status of Īśvara is mentioned in the Śruti vākyas is
quoted by Yoga-philosophers. Parātmā is Īśvara and that Īśvara is asaṅga. Yoga-
philosophers also defines Īśvara as asaṅga sarvagata caitanya. kleśa karmādi asaṅga and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 512

Īśvara is free from all restrictions and therefore, He can be the master and there is nothing
to restrict or shackle him. He is free from kleśa, karmādi, vipaka and āśaya that makes
jīvas the slaves. Īśvara’s mastery is the absence of the above four problems and Jīva’s
slavery is because of the presence of the above four problem with Jīva. This is our vision of
Īśvara supported by Śruti and yukti says Yoga-philosophers.

śloka 108
जीवानामप्यसङ्गत्वात्क्ले शादि न ह्यथापि च ।
विवेकाग्रहतः क्ले शकर्मादि प्रागुदीरितम्॥ ६.१०८ ॥
jīvānāmapyasaṅgatvātkleśādi na hyathāpi ca.
vivekāgrahataḥ kleśakarmādi prāgudīritam (6.108).
Here, the Yoga-philosopher answers a possible question from the Siddhāntī. In the
previous śloka we said Jīva’s slavery is because of the association with the fourfold
problem. Īśvara’s mastery is that he does not have connection with the four problems.
There seems to be something fishy. You say Jīva is asaṅga and Īśvara is also asaṅga and
then you say that Jīva is a slave because of association with four problems. Asaṅga means
one who does not have any association and so, how does associationless Jīva have slavery
because of association with fourfold problem? How this is possible is the question from
pūrvapakṣa. Associationless Īśvara has got mastery because of the absence of the four
factors. If the Jīva is asaṅga then Jīva should also not have any relationship with kleśa,
karma, etc. If you accept Jīva as free form all the four, then Jīva will be exactly like Īśvara
and Jīva should be a master. Yoga-philosophers somehow manage. He says: I do accept
that jīvas are also asaṅga like Īśvara. Even they are free from fourfold factor. What
happens is this: because of ignorance, Jīva superimposes these four upon the Ātmā. Four
do not belong to Jīva but because of ignorance, the four problems superimpose on Jīva.
The four qualities really belong to the mind which is a product of Prakṛti. Buddhi is a
product of Prakṛti. What is the mistake we do is that the attributes of buddhi are
transferred on Ātmā. It is very close to Vedānta. This mistake is committed because Ātmā
and buddhi are closely knit together and we commit the mistake that this belongs to
Ātmā. Nearby object is called upādhi. Upa means being closer and Ādi means attribute-
lender. It means being near it transfers its attributes. A coloured object closely being near
the crystal transfers its attribute of colour to the crystal. This is upādhi. “I am born” is an

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 513

attribute of the body and not an attribute of the Ātmā. Kleśa-karmādi attributes appear in
Ātmā because of non-discriminative knowledge on the part of the Jīva. Kleśa- karmādi
belongs to buddhi and not to Ātmā. I transfer buddhi-attributes to Ātmā. Just like we
attribute the movement to the sun although the sun is static and it is the earth that moves.
When I am happy I say its a happy day and it is transference of my emotions to the day.
Kleśa- karmādi appears in the Ātmā although Ātmā does not have them but Ātmā seems
to have them. Because of the seeming attributes, Jīvātmā has become a saṃsārī. Due to
false attributes, Jīva has become a saṃsārī. This is said in śloka 100 above.
Before going further, I will give you an aside-note. Yoga-philosophers also say Jīva’s
saṃsāra is due to wrongly transferred attributes. Jīva appears as a saṃsārī. We, the
Vedāntins, also say the same. Then what is the difference between Vedāntins and Yoga-
philosophers? Yoga-philosopher says jīvātmās are many. Then we ask the question why
do you talk about plurality of Jīvātmā. For that, he answers “I have to talk because they
have got different attributes like different kleśa, different karma, different āśaya”. Then we
ask: are they false attributes or not? Then they say they are false attributes. Then we ask:
how can the false attributes make real differences in jīvas? Then really one Jīva only
should be there. If differences are false why should you talk of plurality of jīvas when you
accept the differences are not there but they are caused by superimposition? Once they
agree that there is aikya since the differences between Jīvātmā and Īśvara are false, then
we will appreciate Yoga-philosophers. This part we agree but the corollary he does not
derive properly. That is the aside note.

śloka 109
नित्यज्ञानप्रयत्नेच्छागुणानीशस्य मन्वते ।
असङ्गस्य नियन्तृत्वमयुक्तमिति तार्किकाः ॥ ६.१०९ ॥
nityajñānaprayatnecchāguṇānīśasya manvate.
asaṅgasya niyantṛtvamayuktamiti tārkikāḥ (6.109).
Now Nyāya-philosophers define Īśvara. Before doing that, Nyāya-philosophers negate
Yoga-philosophers’ definition of Īśvara. You say Īśvara is asaṅga. You also say Īśvara is
Niyantā the controller. The contradiction here is the moment you say Īśvara is the
controller it automatically infers that there is some controlled. You cannot conceive of a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 514

boss without a servant. Niyantā presupposes niyamya. There is controller-controlled-

relationship between Īśvara and Jīva. How can one and the same Īśvara and Jīva be said to
be sambandha-rahita and sambandha-sahita? Īśvara is from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi Māyā
sahita; the very same Īśvara is nirguṇa brahman from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. Higher Īśvara
without Māyā is asaṅga and the lower Īśvara with Māyā is sasaṅga. Sattā-bhedāt, Īśvara
can be both asaṅga and sasaṅga. In the dream, I can be a rich man with five cars but in
waking I am waiting for the bus on the road. One is prātibhāsika while another is
vyāvahārika. More in the next class.

Class 112
śloka 109 contd.
After completing the tvam-padārtha discussion up to verse 103, now Vidyāraṇya
discusses Paramātmā from verse 104 onwards. Here also, he talks about the confusions in
other philosophies. He discussed the Yoga philosophy from 105. There are several
common features between Yoga and siddhānta which we have seen in the preceding
verses. Paramātmā enjoys a superior status because He is not afflicted by the fourfold
problem which afflicts Jīvātmā: kleśa, karma, vipāka and āśaya. Īśvara also controls
Jīvātmā being superior to the suffering Jīvātmā. Now, Naiyāyika comes in and he criticizes
the Īśvara as defined by the Yoga-philosophers.
His criticism is given in the two ślokas 109 and 110. He argues first: you say Īśvara is
asaṅga and then you say that Īśvara is the master, controller of Jīva. The moment Īśvara
becomes the controller of Jīva, the relationship has already former: one is controller and
the other is controlled. It is Niyamya-niyāmaka-bhāva sambandha. Then, how can you say
that the relationless Īśvara is related to Jīva as his master? Therefore, it is a contradiction
and illogical. Controllership and relationless status cannot go together. It is untenable and
it is contradictory. So declare Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophers. Now we ask: if you don’t
accept Yoga Īśvara, what is your view on Īśvara?
Many people believe Nyāya-philosophers do not accept the existence of Īśvara at all. Since
he is silent, people say different things on this point. Some people say they accept Īśvara.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 515

About Vaiśeṣikas, some say that they are Īśvaravādis and some that they do not believe
Īśvara. From the standpoint of Veda, he is a theist and form the standpoint of Īśvara he is
an atheist. We accept Īśvara. Vaiśeṣika is atheistic-theism. Therefore, Vaiśeṣika need not
define Īśvara.
Nyāya-philosophers define God in their own way. First they say God is not asaṅga. He is
not the controller of Jīva. Īśvara is endowed with all the properties and Īśvara is not pure
consciousness or nirguṇa caitanya but He is endowed with property. Jīva has got
miserable attributes but Īśvara has got noble virtues. He takes three attributes. He has
knowledge the jñāna-śakti; he has icchā-śakti and he has kriya-śakti. The Naiyāyika says
these attributes are there for Jīva also. He is exactly like Jīva but Jīva’s jñāna is anitya while
Īśvara’s jñāna is of infinite measure. Nitya jñāna, nitya icchā and nitya prayatna belong to
Īśvara.
But Jīva is never omniscient; he does have some limited knowledge which is also anitya
and he acquires them and is limited to time. The knowledge was not there in some birth
but we acquire the knowledge now in this birth. Jīva has got knowledge generated
through pramāṇa. Īśvara does not use any pramāṇa and he has the knowledge of parā and
aparā vidyā which is eternally present in Īśvara. The latter guṇas like sukha-duḥkha,
dharma-adharma and pleasure and pain, etc., are not there for Īśvara.
Īśvara of Nyāya philosophy is only the nimitta-kāraṇa of the creation. The upādāna-
kāraṇa of the world is not Īśvara but it is the eternal paramāṇu. Here nimitta and
upādāna-kāraṇas are different. For a desk, carpenter is the nimitta-kāraṇa and he is not the
upādāna-kāraṇa. In Yoga philosophy also Īśvara is nimitta-kāraṇa and upādāna-kāraṇa is
Prakṛti. In Nyāya, Īśvara is nimitta-kāraṇa and paramāṇu is upādāna-kāraṇa. In Vedānta,
Īśvara is both nimitta- and upādāna-kāraṇa. Pūrva-mīmāṃsaka is committed to Vedic
rituals and he does not believe in Īśvara. According to him, the world is ever there and
there is no creation at all. Īśvara of Naiyāyika is only nimitta-kāraṇa and therefore, in
śāstra, they give him a special name and that word is taṭastha Īśvara which means nimitta-
kāraṇa-mātra Īśvara.

śloka 110
पुंविशेषत्वमप्यस्य गुणैरेव न चान्यथा ।
सत्यकामः सत्यसंकल्प इत्यादिश्रुतिर्जगौ ॥ ६.११० ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 516

puṃviśeṣatvamapyasya guṇaireva na cānyathā.

satyakāmaḥ satyasaṃkalpa ityādiśrutirjagau (6.110).
In Sāṅkhya-Yoga philosophy, we saw Jīvātmā and Paramātmā have three common
features. Both are caitanya both are sarva-gata and both are asaṅga. Uncommon feature is
that the Jīva is afflicted with four problems while Īśvara is unaffected by any problems. In
Sāṅkhya also, Īśvara and Jīva have some common features. One is that both are all-
pervading. Both of them are essentially matter only. Jīvātmā is dravya and Paramātmā is
also a matter, dravya. Consciousness is a property of both of them. The third one both is
saguṇa. Nine guṇas are enumerated here. Īśvara is saguṇa, with property. Thus, in these
three respects, both are all-pervading, essentially material and both of them are saguṇa. If
both are common in all respects, how come Īśvara is superior, a ruler? For this, he gives
the answer that both are saguṇa but Īśvara has got superior property. Jīva has got inferior
property. Īśvara has nitya jñāna while Jīva has anitya jñāna. Jīva itself is anitya and Īśvara
is nitya. In this respect, it is similar to Vedānta. Jīva is cidābhāsa and Īśvara is cidābhāsa.
Jīva is inferior because his reflecting medium is inferior and Īśvara is superior because the
reflecting medium is superior. Because of superior attributes only, Paramātmā becomes
exalted Ātmā or superior Ātmā. Having presented such an Īśvara, Naiyāyika says that all
these are derived from Vedas only. He refers to 8.1.5, 8.7.1 to 3 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad
are quoted by Sāṅkhya-philosophers. Of the eight virtues, one is satya-kāma and satya-
saṅkalpa. All saṅkalpas of Īśvara are never invalidated. We have desires right from the
birth but only a few of our desires are fulfilled. Because of superior saṅkalpa and desires,
Īśvara is called superior to jīvas.

śloka 111
नित्यज्ञानादिमत्त्वेऽस्य सृष्टिरेव सदा भवेत्।
हिरण्यगर्भ ईशोऽतो लिङ्गदेहेन संयुतः ॥ ६.१११ ॥
nityajñānādimattve:'sya sṛṣṭireva sadā bhavet.
hiraṇyagarbha īśo:'to liṅgadehena saṃyutaḥ (6.111).
With the previous verse, the Nyāya version of Īśvara is over. Sāṅkhya, Vaiśeṣika and
Pūrva mīmāṃsā, we need not discuss because they don’t have belief in Īśvara. What is left
out now is Vedānta. Vedāntic definition of Īśvara we will not give here because here we
discuss the confusion regarding Īśvara by various other darśanas. Vidyāraṇya discusses

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 517

certain minor systems of philosophies. Some have some views on certain philosophy, they
do not have a comprehensive system and they don’t clearly discuss the various svarūpas.
Jīva, jagat, Īśvara, bandha, mokṣa and the path that takes to mokṣa should be discussed for
a system to be a major one. The following one are mini ones and they hold some views
here and there.
Here, we have Hiraṇyagarbha-vādī, philosophers who worship Hiraṇyagarbha and they
are also called Hiraṇyagarbha upāsakas. The first job is to negate the previous version on
Īśvara; if Īśvara has nitya-jñāna, nitya-pratyatna and nitya-icchā and then Īśvara will be
creating the world constantly. If all these three are operational, the creation will be
constantly there. Then there will be no pralaya at all. If a Jīva is permanently active, he will
not sleep at all. At the individual level, laya will be absent and from Īśvara-level, pralaya
will be absent! This is against Veda pramāṇa and he says Hiraṇyagarbha is Īśvara so says
this group. Here the word hiraṇya means omniscience. That which is eternally shining like
gold is Hiraṇyagarbha. Here you should not take the literal meaning of hiraṇya and
garbha which means gold and womb. One within whom omniscience is there is
Hiraṇyagarbha or we can say in simple language Sarvajña. This is acceptable to Vedāntins
also. Hiraṇyagarbha means samaṣṭi-sūkṣma-śarīra. This means it is samaṣṭi-jñāna. So
Hiraṇyagarbha is Īśvara. He is endowed with all the sūkṣma-śarīras. Sūkṣma-śarīra is
called liṅga because liṅga means an indicator or a pointer. Sūkṣma-śarīra is called a
pointer because consciousness can be recognized only through reflection in sūkṣma-śarīra.
The pure consciousness is not at all accessible. Even though consciousness is all-
pervading, we don’t recognize because it is not recognizable. Even in jaḍa vastu, pure
consciousness is there but we are able to see consciousness in Jīva only due to some
indicators. By forming the reflection, serving like a mirror, it reveals the original. Sūkṣma-
śarīra-darpaṇam cidābhāsa-dvārā cit/caitanyam bodhayati and we are able to sense
consciousness through cidābhāsa.

śloka 112
उद्गीथब्राह्मणे तस्य माहात्म्यमतिविस्तृतम्।
लिङ्गसत्त्वेऽपि जीवत्वं नास्य कर्माद्यभावतः ॥ ६.११२ ॥
udgīthabrāhmaṇe tasya māhātmyamativistṛtam.
liṅgasattve:'pi jīvatvaṃ nāsya karmādyabhāvataḥ (6.112).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 518

So Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsaka continues his argument. He says that Hiraṇyagarbha as Īśvara

is very much there in the Vedas. Here we refer to 1.3 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad although
there are many mantras in other Upaniṣads. The whole section of Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad talks about Hiraṇyagarbha upāsana alone. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad refers to
Sāmaveda Omkāra and therefore, it is called udgītha. The specialty of Sāmaveda Omkāra
is musical Omkāra. Non-musical Omkāra is Omkāra and musical Sāmaveda Omkāra is
called udgītha. More in the next class.

Class 113
Śloka 112 contd.
After jīvātma-vicāra, Vidyāraṇya has come to Paramātma-vicāra or Īśvara-vicāra from
verse 104. First, he deals with the definition of Īśvara from the standpoint of other systems
of philosophy. Three darśanas do not have Īśvara at all: Sāṅkhya, Vaiśeṣikas and Pūrva-
mīmāṃsakas. Vedānta darśana we will discuss later. He has discussed Yoga and Nyāya
and he now discusses the definitions of Īśvara of some of the minor systems. Now, we
have taken up Hiraṇyagarbha-vādis and since samaṣṭi-sūkṣma-śarīra includes all the
prāṇas and vyaṣṭi-sūkṣma-śarīras, Hiraṇyagarbha is a fit candidate to consider as Īśvara
which also has the support of the Vedas. Hiraṇyagarbha is elaborately talked about in the
third chapter of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Asato mā sad gamaya is addressed to this
Hiraṇyagarbha in the Udgītha Brāhmaṇa.
This upāsaka answers the possible objection. Generally, in Vedānta śāstra, sūkṣma-śarīra
is the cause of all the problems. Sthūla-śarīra by itself does not pose any problem. Body by
itself has no problem. Kāraṇa-śarīra does not give us any problem which is proved by our
own direct experience. In suṣupti avasthā we are in ānanda-svarūpa. All problems come
from out of sūkṣma-śarīra. In the sūkṣma-śarīra alone ahaṅkāra is there kartṛtva-bhoktṛtva
all take place. Often, the mind is said to be the villain and the mind also belongs to the
sūkṣma-śarīra. Often, mokṣa is shortly defined as liṅga-bandha. Among the Vedāntic
scholars, the short definition of mokṣa is liṅga-bhaṅga which means gaining liberation.
Liṅga-nāśa means saṃsāra-nāśa. When there is active liṅga-śarīra there is saṃsāra and
when it is dormant in suṣupti there is no saṃsāra.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 519

Now, in the previous verse, Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsaka has been defined as liṅgadehena

saṃyutaḥ and if liṅga-śarīra is saṃsāra, your Hiraṇyagarbha is associated with liṅga-
śarīra and he also falls in the web of saṃsāra; the upāsaka assumes such a question from
us. So he answers this possible question. Even though Hiraṇyagarbha is associated with
liṅga-śarīra, for him liṅga-śarīra will not cause any bondage as his liṅga-śarīra does not
suffer karma. Hiraṇyagarbha is free from karma and hence from saṃsāra. Hiraṇyagarbha
is free from kartṛtva and ajñāna and bhoktṛtva, etc. Ajñāna is the cause of saṃsāra but
Hiraṇyagarbha does not have ajñāna and hence Hiraṇyagarbha is ever free. When we are
associated with Māyā we are bonded but when Īśvara is associated with Māyā Īśvara is
master of Māyā. One is close as slave and another is close as master. So also
Hiraṇyagarbha is free. There is no jīvatva or saṃsāra even though Hiraṇyagarbha is
associated with sūkṣma-śarīra because he is free from karma, sukha-duḥkha, pūṇya-pāpa
and pleasure and pain, etc.

śloka 113
स्थूलदेहं विना लिङ्गदेहो न क्वापि दृश्यते ।
वैराजो देह ईशोऽतः सर्वतो मस्तकादिमान्॥ ६.११३ ॥
sthūladehaṃ vinā liṅgadeho na kvāpi dṛśyate.
vairājo deha īśo:'taḥ sarvato mastakādimān (6.113).
Now comes another minor philosopher who is a Virāṭ-upāsaka and he claims Virāṭ alone
is Īśvara and not Hiraṇyagarbha. This is given in two ślokas 113 and 114. He says sūkṣma-
śarīra cannot function without the support of sthūla-śarīra. That is why it is said when
sūkṣma-śarīra is free, the surviving sūkṣma-śarīra is called a spirit and it cannot interact
with the world. The surviving sūkṣma-śarīra cannot do anything because any interaction
needs the medium of sthūla-śarīra.
For getting heavenly experiences, a Jīva has to take heavenly sthūla-śarīra and without
that svarga-anubhava is not possible. In all the lokas, Jīva will get an appropriate sthūla-
śarīra to experience pleasure and pain. During the travels, the Jīva does not have any
experience without the appropriate sthūla-śarīra although it has sūkṣma-śarīra and
antaḥkaraṇa. Therefore, the very meaning or purpose or function of the sūkṣma-śarīra
depends upon the sthūla-śarīra. Therefore, sthūla-śarīra must be given importance.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 520

When we take census we take the census of sthūla-śarīra alone. If jīvas are always the
same in number, how do you explain the population explosion? When we jīvas are the
same in number we take the sūkṣma-śarīra pradhāna jīvas whereas we take only sthūla-
śarīra alone for counting the population. Some sūkṣma-śarīras from some other lokas
must have come here and the total jīvas in the entire sṛṣṭi will be the same all the time with
jīvas being recycled. Jīvas are counted only when they get sthūla-śarīras. So sthūla-śarīra is
prominent.
Therefore, Hiraṇyagarbha too can function only when there is samaṣṭi sthūla-śarīra which
is called Virāṭ and therefore, Virāṭ makes Hiraṇyagarbha meaningful. Therefore, Virāṭ is
Īśvara. Without the sthūla-śarīra cabinet or enclosure the functioning sūkṣma-śarīra is
never seen. Even when the present body is destroyed at the time of death the next physical
body is already received by Jīva in a very rudimentary form and therefore, śāstra says
even the travel of sūkṣma-śarīra needs some kind of a body. Refer to 3.1.1 of Brahmasūtra
for some more clarification on the subject. Even the travel needs a body.
Therefore, our conclusion is that since sūkṣma-śarīra cannot function without sthūla-
śarīra, Virāṭ-śarīra the samaṣṭi-sthūla-śarīra or samaṣṭi-sthūla prapañca is Īśvara. The
greatness of Virāṭ Īśvara is that He has thousands of heads all over. It only indicates all the
heads of the world are the heads of the Virāṭ. Jñānī any head he sees is the head of Īśvara.
Similarly, all heads everywhere belongs to Virāṭ.

śloka 114
सहस्रशीर्षेत्येवं हि विश्वतश्चक्षुरित्यपि ।
श्रुतमित्याहुरनिशं विश्वरूपस्य चिन्तकाः ॥ ६.११४ ॥
sahasraśīrṣetyevaṃ hi viśvataścakṣurityapi.
śrutamityāhuraniśaṃ viśvarūpasya cintakāḥ (6.114).
This Virāṭ-upāsaka says that his statement has the support of Veda also. He refers to Ṛg
Veda 1.10.90 of Puruṣa-sūkta and also 3.3 of Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. Viśva-rūpa means
Virāṭ. The worshippers of the Virāṭ have always emphasised that the Virāṭ is the Īśvara
and so say the scriptures ‘he is with thousands of heads, eyes, etc., everywhere’. Iti api
śrutam iti viśvarūpasya cintakāḥ aniśaṃ āhuḥ means: in this way the Śruti says this is
called Īśvara who is the supporter of the total gross body. The worshippers of Viśva-rūpa
meditate on Īśvara in this manner.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 521

śloka 115
सर्वतः पाणिपादत्वे कृ म्यादेरपि चेशता ।
ततश्चतुर्मुखो देव एवेशो नेतरः पुमान्॥ ६.११५ ॥
sarvataḥ pāṇipādatve kṛmyāderapi ceśatā.
tataścaturmukho deva eveśo netaraḥ pumān (6.115).
With the previous Virāṭ-upāsaka-mata is over. Here, we discuss another minor upāsaka.
He is caturmukha-brahma-upāsaka. You say Virāṭ is great because He has got heads,
hands all over. If the heads is the plurality of heads does not contribute to the glory of
Īśvara. And he says: if the legs are the criteria for Īśvara even the centipedes with plenty of
legs will be Īśvara. Therefore, your philosophy is incorrect. Therefore, Brahmāji who has
got four heads symbolizing four Vedas alone is Īśvara is their argument. He also quotes
Śruti-support.

śloka 116
पुत्रार्थं तमुपासीना एवमाहुः प्रजापतिः ।
प्रजा असृजतेत्यादिश्रुतिश्चोदाहरन्त्यमी ॥ ६.११६ ॥
putrārthaṃ tamupāsīnā evamāhuḥ prajāpatiḥ.
prajā asṛjatetyādiśrutiścodāharantyamī (6.116).
He says catur-mukha-brahma-upāsana is done by those people who pray for getting
children. They meditate on Brahmāji because Brahmāji is the sṛṣṭi-kartā. They quote the
passages in the Śruti that Brahmāji alone created all the people and therefore, Brahmāji is
the Lord of the world. This quotation occurs in Taittirīya-śākhā of pūrva bhāga of the
Vedas.

śloka 117
विष्णोर्नाभेः समुद्भूतो वेधाः कमलजस्ततः ।
विष्णुरेवेश इत्याहुर्लोके भागवता जनाः ॥ ६.११७ ॥
viṣṇornābheḥ samudbhūto vedhāḥ kamalajastataḥ.
viṣṇureveśa ityāhurloke bhāgavatā janāḥ (6.117).
Now Viṣṇu bhaktas are angered and they ask what about our Viṣṇu. You read Purāṇa
wherein Brahmā has come out of Viṣṇu and therefore, Brahmā is called Kamalaja referring

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 522

to samaṣṭi-sūkṣma-prapañca. This lotus came from the nābhi of Viṣṇu who represents
samaṣṭi-kāraṇa-sahita caitanya; from the navel of Viṣṇu the lotus came and from that lotus
Brahmāji came and therefore, Viṣṇu is the real God.

śloka 118
शिवस्य पादावन्वेष्टुं शार्ङ्ग्यशक्तस्ततः शिवः ।
ईशो न विष्णुरित्याहुः शैवा आगममानिनः ॥ ६.११८ ॥
śivasya pādāvanveṣṭuṃ śārṅgyaśaktastataḥ śivaḥ.
īśo na viṣṇurityāhuḥ śaivā āgamamāninaḥ (6.118).
The Śiva-bhakta says Viṣṇu is not that great. In the Purāṇa, it is said that when Lord Śiva
appeared as Viśva-rūpa and all were confused including Brahmā and Viṣṇu; then Śiva
said you try to find out my top and bottom. Brahmā goes up and Viṣṇu goes down to the
bottom and they could not find out the head and foot of Śiva, it is said. Therefore, Śiva is
superior is their argument. That is an Āgama-pradhāna Śaivaite or fanatic Śiva-bhakta
whereas one should be Veda-pradhāna Śiva- or Viṣṇu-bhakta for they worship all of them
in the form of pañca-āyatana-pūjā.

Class 114
śloka 118 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has started the Paramātmā-svarūpa-vicāra or tat-padārtha-vicāra from verse
104. Before coming to our siddhānta, Vidyāraṇya discusses confusions among other
darśanas regarding the concept of Īśvara. He has come to those philosophers who say
Hiraṇyagarbha is Īśvara, Virāṭ is Īśvara, Brahmāji is Īśvara and finally Viṣṇu and Śiva are
Īśvara. Viṣṇu-Īśvara-vādī says Brahmāji cannot be taken as great as Brahmāji is born out of
Viṣṇu. Then Śiva-bhakta said whether Viṣṇu is kārya or kāraṇa? He failed in one
examination set by Lord Śiva. Viṣṇu and Brahmāji could not find the head and foot of
Lord Īśvara.
From that, it is clear that both the others are finite in nature while Śiva is infinite and
therefore, our Śiva is great the Śaivaite says. For Advaitins there is one Brahman and from
Advaitin’s dṛṣṭi there is no scope for quarrel as Viṣṇu and Śiva are two names of one and
the same God. But the other fanatic āgama systems have these problems. They are not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 523

Veda-pradhānas but they are Āgama-pradhāna which is a set of non-Vedic literature and
they are in the form of Śiva- or Viṣṇu-cult. Our approach to Āgama is that we respect their
pūjā-vidhi as it is very useful for citta-śuddhi. All temple constructions are based on
Āgama-literature. In Veda, no temple is mentioned. In Vaidika-mata the pūjā is in the
form of rituals; temples are Āgama-pradhāna.
We absorb Āgama into Vedic style and absorb their temples, perform pūjā of everything
but we reject their philosophy as their philosophy is avaidika. One closest to Veda is
Śākta-āgama. That is why Śrividyā-āgama is close to Advaitins. It is Devi-āgama and that
is supposed to be the closest to Veda. Here, Vidyāraṇya negates not their ācāra or pūjā but
he negates the philosophy and their definition of God. In most of the āgamas Jīvātma-
Paramātma-aikya does not exist while this is the goal for Advaitins. There are so many
āgamas in both Śaivism and Vaiṣṇavism. Some claim Ganeśa is the greatest one and not
Śiva or Viṣṇu. He also keeps the argument ready.

śloka 119
पुरत्रयं सादयितुं विघ्नेशं सोऽप्यपूजयत्।
विनायकं प्राहुरीशं गाणपत्यमते रताः ॥ ६.११९ ॥
puratrayaṃ sādayituṃ vighneśaṃ so:'pyapūjayat.
vināyakaṃ prāhurīśaṃ gāṇapatyamate ratāḥ (6.119).
You can follow; it is very clear. The Gaṇapati-upāsakas plead that Gaṇapati alone is
superior to Śiva and Viṣṇu. They argue that your Śiva that you consider as the greatest one
has to conduct a worship for destroying the Tripura-asuras. Tripura-saṃhāra was done by
Ganeśa alone when the Tripuras were threatening the world and Lord Śiva had to destroy
them. Pratraya is seen to be śarīra-traya and ahaṅkāra is asura. Threefold ahaṅkāra is seen
as Tripura. The Tripura is destroyed by the third eye. By the knowledge of turīya, Viśva,
Taijasa and Prājña are burnt down and the burning means falsification. For that, Śiva had
to invite special Devatas also. One Sāmbaśivāṣṭaka Ādi Śaṅkarācārya has written where
Tripura-saṃhāra is mentioned in one śloka. Before going to destroy Tripura, Śiva did
Gaṇapati-pūjā. Now, it is clear that even Śiva needs the blessing of Vighneśa the remover
of obstacles and therefore, our Gaṇapati is superior to Śiva. They say Ganeśa is the
ultimate God beyond him there is no other God. And then the Ganeśa-bhakta says that
He is the ultimate boss.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 524

śloka 120
एवमन्ये स्वस्वपक्षाभिमानेनान्यथान्यथा ।
मन्त्रार्थवादकल्पादीनाश्रित्य प्रतिपेदिरे ॥ ६.१२० ॥
evamanye svasvapakṣābhimānenānyathānyathā.
mantrārthavādakalpādīnāśritya pratipedire (6.120).
In this manner, as shown from verse 104 to 119, we find different philosophers have
different definitions of Īśvara. I have not exhausted the list as there are so many people
having faith different deities. Each one is attached to his own mata and Vidyāraṇya says
he sympathizes with them. Each one thinks that the others will go to hell for not having
followed the God who he worships. They have their own Īśvara-definition in different
ways. Each one gives the description of their own heaven like Kailāsa, Vaikunṭha, etc. For
everyone, there is some Śruti-quotation to support their view. They also follow the
procedures laid down in the kalpa-śāstra that mantras and karma-kāṇḍa to worship their
respective Devatas and to support their view-point and they quote the scriptural texts.

śloka 121
अन्तर्यामिणमारभ्य स्थावरान्तेशवादिनः ।
सन्त्यश्वत्थार्क वंशादेः कुलदैवत्वदर्शनात्॥ ६.१२१ ॥
antaryāmiṇamārabhya sthāvarānteśavādinaḥ.
santyaśvatthārkavaṃśādeḥ kuladaivatvadarśanāt (6.121).
Thus, if you see different groups of people you will find each group has got its own
concept of Īśvara and its own mode of worship. All over India you will find different
kinds of worship and different kinds of deities, etc. There are varieties of killing and
giving balis, etc. That is why one is unable to understand Hinduism. Vidyāraṇya says all
of them fall under Vedānta and you can worship Īśvara in any form. Īśvara can be
represented in many ways. Worship also need not be in one way and it can be different
just as people express affection to their children in different ways.
The methods may be many but the object is one that is to communicate one bhāvanā of
bhakti. Love can be expressed in any manner as is suited to the person who conveys his
love. In our tradition, in our culture, there are innumerable different Īśvara-concepts or
definitions, the highest being Antaryāmī which is that of siddhānta. Antaryāmī is samaṣṭi-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 525

kāraṇa-prapañca-pratibimbita caitanya. Samaṣṭi-sūkṣma-śarīra-prapañca-pratibimbita

caitanya is Hiraṇyagarbha. Samaṣṭi-sthūla-śarīra-prapañca-pratibimbita-caitanya is Virāṭ.
A mountain is a sthāvara which does not move. The trees and plants are also called
sthāvara which means they do not move. There are people who call Tulasi as God as also
Antaryāmī as God. There are devotees of such Īśvara. Advaitin does not criticize anyone
but he holds his own views. If a person is obsessed we will not stop also. We don’t belong
to any one group and all groups we accommodate. There are some families whose
kuladeva is considered as a tree. Some worship banyan, vaṃśa or bamboo, tulasi, etc.,
plants and trees.
All these are worshipped by different people as kula-deva and therefore, there are
different concepts of God. If it is properly understood it is right and if it is not properly
understood it is seen as wrong. That these people worship is all right and because of lack
of understanding they quarrel among themselves. In our tradition, the family deity is
considered to be very important. It was easy in the olden days because the family lived in
the same village. Now things are different. People have spread to various places and
various countries and it is difficult to worship their family deity.

śloka 122
तत्त्वनिश्चयकामेन न्यायागमविचारिणाम्।
एकै व प्रतिपत्तिः स्यात्साप्यत्र स्फुटमुच्यते ॥ ६.१२२ ॥
tattvaniścayakāmena nyāyāgamavicāriṇām.
ekaiva pratipattiḥ syātsāpyatra sphuṭamucyate (6.122).
Now, Vidyāraṇya gives the real meaning of tat-padārtha from the point of view of
Advaitins. Suppose you have a desire to know the Īśvara-tattva to have clear knowledge,
you should follow the logical enquiry in line with the scriptural declaration. There is only
one final conclusion about the nature of Īśvara for those desirous of the truth and it is the
enquiry into Vedas. You make analysis of Veda in keeping with Nyāya. Those people,
who make such an enquiry, come to one conclusion that the all-pervading Īśvara is one.
This discussion will go up to 209.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 526

śloka 123
मायां तु प्रकृ तिं विद्यान्मायिनं तु महेश्वरम्।
अस्यावयवभूतैस्तु व्याप्तं सर्वमिदं जगत्॥ ६.१२३ ॥
māyāṃ tu prakṛtiṃ vidyānmāyinaṃ tu maheśvaram.
asyāvayavabhūtaistu vyāptaṃ sarvamidaṃ jagat (6.123).
Here, Vidyāraṇya introduces the key Upaniṣadic word which is going to be the basis for
Īśvara-svarūpa-nirṇaya. It is an Upaniṣadic mantra borrowed and placed here. It occurs in
4.10 of Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. Just as the Jīva has three components, Īśvara also has three
components: the original consciousness, the reflected consciousness and the reflecting
medium.
The crucial difference is in the reflecting medium because in the case of Jīva, the reflecting
medium is micro vyaṣṭi, individual, whereas in the case of reflecting medium is going to
be macro which is called Māyā. Māyā is introduced here as the reflecting medium. Īśvara
will be introduced as Māyā-pratibimbita caitanya the reflected consciousness obtaining in
Māyā. Māyā reflecting medium and Māyā the reflected consciousness has the adhiṣṭhāna
of the original consciousness.
Reflection cannot exist without the original. Yatra yatra the reflected consciousness tatra
tatra the original consciousness. Īśvara is Māyā plus Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya and
Māyā-adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. Since the reflecting medium is of a high quality, Īśvara will
have great attributes. Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya is called Īśvara; details in the next class.

Class 115
śloka 123 contd.
Vidyāraṇya started tat-padārtha-vicāra or Paramātma-vicāra from verse 104 and initially
he talked about the concept of Īśvara according to the other systems of philosophy and
now he has come to the definition of Īśvara according to the siddhānta. He pointed out
that our Īśvara is based on Śruti, yukti and anubhava and therefore, it is an appropriate
definition. The main Śruti-vākya that supports our definition is the Śvetāśvatara mantra.
Ādi Śaṅkarācārya quotes many mantras of the above Upaniṣad. There is a commentary
written by him and it is available but majority of the scholars hold the view that it is not
Śāṅkara-bhāṣya in the name of Ādi Śaṅkarācārya. This is a popular Upaniṣad. The mantra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 527

says that Māyā is Prakṛti which is the material cause of the universe. Prakṛti here refers to
the material cause. Gold is Prakṛti of ornaments and wood is Prakṛti of furniture. A
product born out of Prakṛti is called vikṛti; vikṛti is kārya. The entire universe is vikṛti and
Māyā is Prakṛti.
Then a doubt may come in the mind: how come Māyā is the material cause of the
universe because we have said elsewhere that Brahman is both nimitta and upādāna-
kāraṇa of the universe? The spider example is quoted in this regard. Then how can Māyā
be the upādāna-kāraṇa? Which is correct? Māyā is upādāna-kāraṇa and also Brahman is
the upādāna-kāraṇa. According to Vedānta, Māyā does not have an existence separate
from Brahman. Māyā is superimposed on Brahman and Māyā being mithyā it does not
have an existence separate from Brahman. The very is-ness behind Māyā is Brahman.
Avyakta nāma-rūpa is called Māyā and it does not have an existence of its own. The is-
ness belongs to Brahman only. We can put it in two different language. Māyā backed by
Brahman is the material cause or Brahman associated with Māyā is the material cause of
creation. Both Brahman and Māyā are required for creating the universe. Māyā provides
the nāma-rūpa part and Brahman provides the existence part. Therefore, there is nothing
wrong in saying Māyā is kāraṇa or Brahman is kāraṇa. This idea is presented in a technical
language here. Māyā is said to be pariṇāmi-upādāna-kāraṇa and Brahman is said to be the
vivarta-upādāna-kāraṇa. Whatever provides nāma-rūpa is pariṇāmi-upādāna-kāraṇa and
whatever gives existence is vivarta-upādāna-kāraṇa of the universe.
Then who is Īśvara? Īśvara is none other than the brahma-caitanya reflected in Māyā. The
pratibimba-caitanya or otherwise ābhāsa-caitanya is called Īśvara. Whenever we talk of
Īśvara we should note that there is a reflected medium, the reflected consciousness and the
original consciousness without which no reflection is possible. the original consciousness
being all-pervading, it is very much present where the reflected consciousness and Māyā
are present. The three factors put together are called Īśvara. We call Māyā-pratibimbita-
caitanya is Īśvara. Then you should include the other two also. All these three put together
is Īśvara. Jīva is also the reflected consciousness only but reflected in the individual
medium, micro medium. Macro medium reflection is called Īśvara. Even though both are
reflected— both meaning Jīvātmā and Paramātmā— are reflected in two different media,
micro and macro, there is a subtle difference. This was stated in the first chapter of
Pañcadaśī. Jīva is reflected in a micro medium and he is a slave of the medium. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 528

he is bound by the very medium in which he is reflected. But Īśvara is reflected in the
macro medium and he is not medium-dāsa and he is medium-svāmī. Therefore, Jīva is
dāsa and Paramātmā is dāsa. the original consciousness is neither dāsa nor Svāmī. Īśvara
is Maheśvara and he is the master of the creation. The entire universe is pervaded by
Īśvara because pratibimbita caitanya pervades the whole universe. Everything in the
creation is a product of Māyā and therefore, Māyī, that is Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya,
Māyā-svāmi pervades the whole creation. Pratibimbita caitanya obtaining in every
individual is called Jīva and Īśvara alone obtains in all the individuals as the Jīva. In
seventh chapter of Gita Kṛṣṇa says I alone appear in all the individuals as the Jīva, the
individual reflections. The individual reflections are called avayavas of the total reflection
and therefore, idam sarvam jagat vyāptam the whole universe is full of jīvas, individual
reflections, which is are parts of the total reflection. The world is full of individual
reflections which are part of total reflection Īśvara.

śloka 124
इति श्रुत्यनुसारेण न्यायो निर्णय ईश्वरे ।
तथा सत्यविरोधः स्यात्स्थावरान्तेशवादिनाम्॥ ६.१२४ ॥
iti śrutyanusāreṇa nyāyo nirṇaya īśvare.
tathā satyavirodhaḥ syātsthāvarānteśavādinām (6.124).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives an indirect advice that all the systems of philosophy talk about
Īśvara but the mistake they commit is that they try to establish Īśvara purely with the help
of logic or tarka. Nyāya-philosopher claims that he has logic to establish Īśvara. Vedāntins
accept Īśvara but disagree with Nyāya-philosophers. Īśvara exists but you cannot claim
Īśvara through pure logic is the argument posed by Vedānta. Those with poor knowledge
of scriptures may accept the Nyāya’s logic but Vedānta says we cannot logically prove the
existence of Īśvara. In Brahma-sūtra, this matter has been discussed in detail under
janmādasya yataḥ. We say for Īśvara the primary pramāṇa is Śruti alone.
Having taken Śruti as primary pramāṇa, then we are willing to borrow logic of Naiyāyika
as a support to the Śruti pramāṇa. As a proving logic, it is not acceptable. We will accept
yukti as sambhāvaka yukti and not as niścāyaka yukti. Taking the Śruti vākya mentioned
above, one has to assert the existence of Īśvara and that alone is nyāyya, that alone is
proper. Tarka’s field is pauruśeya viṣaya and Īśvara field is apauruśeya viṣaya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 529

Remember when we talk about the cause of creation, we face a subtle problem. Time and
space also should be understood as an integral part of the creation. Einstein’s modern
theory has proved that you cannot study time and space separate from the creation. We
study the cause of time of space being the part of the creation. We talk about the cause
which existed before the arrival of time and space. That means we talk about a cause
which existed even before the arrival of time and space. Īśvara means trans-time and -
space. Logic can work only within the framework of time and space; logic cannot
transcend time and space.
Using tarka to know Īśvara is as unintelligent as using the eyes for hearing when in doubt.
If this is done using Śruti-pramāṇa for apauruśeya viṣaya there will not be any
contradiction and there will be no problem. Not only will we get the real definition of
Īśvara but we can also accommodate all the other forms of Īśvara. We will be so generous-
minded that Śiva we will accept and Viṣṇu we will accept. We will go to Śakti-temple as
also many other temples of different deities belonging to different religions. Any other
definition will end up in theology of exclusivism and they will become fanatic and they
will take you to conversion also. Tolerance cannot be there with a finite concept of Īśvara.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says we will have an agreement with all the other systems of
philosophy also who worship even plant as Bhagavān. If you go by Śruti-pramāṇa then
our Īśvara will not be in disagreement with Īśvara of other people.

śloka 125
माया चेयं तमोरूपा तापनीये तदीरणात्।
अनुभूतिं तत्र मानं प्रतियज्ञे श्रुतिः स्वयम्॥ ६.१२५ ॥
māyā ceyaṃ tamorūpā tāpanīye tadīraṇāt.
anubhūtiṃ tatra mānaṃ pratiyajñe śrutiḥ svayam (6.125).
Īśvara has been defined as Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya and Māyā has been introduced
through Śvetāśvatara-vākya. What is Māyā is one of the biggest questions. Vidyāraṇya
analyses Māyā in detail and very meticulously. From the verse 125 to 151, Vidyāraṇya
dedicates to Māyā to say that it is not there. Vidyāraṇya quotes one Upaniṣad to define
Māyā. In none of the ten Upaniṣads Māyā has been explicitly defined. It is in that called as
Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. It has got two parts.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 530

For the second part a commentary is available in the name of Ādi Śaṅkarācārya’ s bhāṣya.
Vidyāraṇya refers to this Upaniṣad briefly as Tāpanīya Upaniṣad. There Māyā is defined
as iyam māyā ca tamorūpā tāpanīye tadīraṇāt. It is said in the Upaniṣad that this Māyā is
of the nature of ignorance or avidyā; it is not only the declaration of the Śruti but it is also
one’s anubhava. In deep sleep, we experience only ignorance when we do not know
anything as to what happens to us and to the world at large. That is why it is said that at
the level of the individuality, the ignorance is called avidyā while the same ignorance at
the samaṣṭi level is called Māyā. At both the levels, the nature of ignorance is ‘tamas’
alone. When you open your eyes it is ‘Māyā-prapañca’ that we experience and as you go
to deep sleep state you experience ignorance which is another name for Māyā.

śloka 126
जडं मोहात्मकं तच्चेत्यनुभावयति श्रुतिः ।
आबालगोपं स्पष्टत्वादानन्त्यं तस्य साब्रवीत्॥ ६.१२६ ॥
jaḍaṃ mohātmakaṃ taccetyanubhāvayati śrutiḥ.
ābālagopaṃ spaṣṭatvādānantyaṃ tasya sābravīt (6.126).
The Upaniṣad says that the entire jaḍa prapañca outside is a condensed form of Māyā
only. Māyā itself has crystallized in the form of nāma-rūpa prapañca or jaḍa prapañca.
Jaḍa means inert, inert means insentient, insentient means acit and acit is Māyā; cit is
Brahman. The world is insentient and insentient means acaitanya and acaitanya is Māyā
because everything you experience is Māyā only. When you talk of clip-experience, you
say I have got clip-experience. The clip-experience has two parts: a clip part and an
experience part. Whenever you talk of clip-experience there is a clip part and an
experience part. Clip part is jaḍa and experience part is caitanya. This cetana part is
Brahman. Therefore, wherever nāma-rūpa jaḍa prapañca is there, that is Māyā only. Veda
helps us in experiencing Māyā in the form of jaḍa prapañca. By pointing out that jaḍa is
condensed Māyā, when pralaya comes, the world is converted into invisible Māyā. The
invisible Māyā of pralaya kāla is visible in the sṛṣṭi time.
Inside also when you close your eyes and stop all sensory function, you experience total
blankness and total ignorance or total darkness. Vidyāraṇya points out that this internal
darkness is internal Māyā. Externally, it is experienced as jaḍa padārtha and internally it is
experienced as ignorance or darkness. That is why in sleep we experience total darkness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 531

and no knowledge at all and thus one tamorūpa Māyā is jaḍa padārtha outside and moha
or ajñāna inside. Therefore, mohātmaka is the feeling of Māyā felt inside. Whatever you
experience outside and whatever experiences you have inside and anything you
experience is called Māyā. You the one consciousness of external jaḍa prapañca and
internal darkness, the I, awareness consciousness, is you yourself. To experience Māyā,
what effort is required? No effort is needed and everyone experiences Māyā all the time
and therefore, Māyā is everywhere. Māyā is clear and no proof is needed and so the Śruti
declares the all-pervading nature of Māyā. This experienced universe is Māyā whether it is
in manifest form or it is in unmanifest form. In the unmanifest form, it is Māyā and
manifest form it is called universe. More in the next class.

Class 116
śloka 126 contd.
Now Vidyāraṇya has come to Vedāntic approach to tat-padārtha or Vedāntic definition of
Īśvara. While doing tat-padārtha- or Paramātma-vicāra Vidyāraṇya talked about the
Paramātmā as visualized by other systems of philosophies, i.e, the Yoga and Nyāya
system as well as many other secondary systems also. Earlier, he had pointed out that we
will get clear idea of Īśvara with Śruti pramāṇa. Īśvara cannot be arrived at with tarka or
yukti pramāṇa. The intellect will not accept anything that is not in keeping with logic or
reasoning. At the same time, we do not believe in blind rejection also. Let the reasoning be
subservient to Śruti pramāṇa. Even a modern scientist will not reject this idea because he
knows that reasoning is valid if he had collected proper data from pratyakṣa pramāṇa.
Pratyakṣa is an ideal pramāṇa when we deal with pauruṣeya viṣaya. Here in the case of
Īśvara, it is apauruṣeya viṣaya for which we have to rely upon the Śruti pramāṇa alone.
Both in Vedānta as also in science, reasoning is very important. In the case of science, we
collect various relevant data to make further research. Tarka is always under some other
higher pramāṇa. One is pratyakṣa-upajīvya-pramāṇa and the other is Śruti-upajīvya-
pramāṇa.
Depending upon the field of enquiry, anumāna has to ride either on pratyakṣa or śāstra.
With regard to the world, we take to the pratyakṣa and in the case of Īśvara-viṣaya, we
have to rely on the śāstra pramāṇa. Anumāna is always durbala pramāṇa. That is why in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 532

Īśvara-viṣaya-anumāna can be rejected by śāstra and in jagat-viṣaya it is rejected by

pratyakṣa. Light travels in a straight line but later they found that light too bends in a
nearby object.
Theory of millions of years can be rejected by pratyakṣa. Īśvara can be arrived at by Śruti,
yukti and anubhava. Here the main vākya that helps is Śvetāśvatara vākya that introduced
Māyā and said that Īśvara is Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya or Māyā-Svāmī. Īśvara is
consciousness and master of Māyā. Once we know that Īśvara is consciousness associated
with Māyā then we will have the question what is this blessed Māyā?
For that, Vidyāraṇya has entered into another Śruti. For Māyā he has taken up Nṛsiṃha-
uttara-tāpanīya Śruti. It clearly defines Māyā and we were seeing the definition in the last
class. Māyā is of the nature of tamas while Brahman is of the nature of prakāśa. Māyā is
tamorūpa. What is tamorūpa? For that Vidyāraṇya says tamas expresses in two forms: one
outside and the other inside. Outside tamas it expresses in the form of jaḍa-padārtha.
Every jaḍa-padārtha is insentient and therefore, it does not have prakāśa, it does not have
caitanya and it does not have jñāna and it is ajñāna-rūpa and therefore, tamorūpa. The
entire jaḍa prapañca will come under that and our own body is also jaḍa. If we close our
eyes and suspend all pramāṇa-vyāpāra, sensory and mental activity, the world will
disappear. This happens in suṣupti-avasthā. They call this ajñāna mohātmaka.
What is ajñāna inside and what jaḍa prapañca is outside is called Māyā. The proof for both
of them to be Māyā, the Upaniṣad says is our experience. The Śruti reveals it through our
own anubhava. As you sleep you will see ajñāna inside. As far as I am concerned you are
all jaḍa-tattva only because śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha belong to jaḍa-tattva only. I
don’t see caitanya there. This is very clear for all the human beings or living beings
beginning from bāla and gopāla from the body to the illiterate man. Bāla is small so
illiterate and gopāla has not gone to school so he is illiterate. This Māyā is experienceable
by bāla and gopāla and therefore, Māyā is everywhere both inside and outside.

śloka 127
अचिदात्मघटादिनां यत्स्वरूपं जडं हि तत्।
यत्र कुण्ठीभवेद्बुद्धिः स मोह इति लौकिकाः ॥ ६.१२७ ॥
acidātmaghaṭādināṃ yatsvarūpaṃ jaḍaṃ hi tat.
yatra kuṇṭhībhavedbuddhiḥ sa moha iti laukikāḥ (6.127).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 533

In the previous verse, Vidyāraṇya talked about tamorūpa Māyā. The external expression
called jaḍa and internal expression called moha are explained here. He gives the definition
for jaḍa in the first line and in the second line he gives the definition of moha.
What we experience as the nature of an insentient object like a pot is jaḍa. When the
intellect is unable to comprehend something, it is called as moha or delusion. And this is
popular among the common people. He defines ajñāna as that condition in which the
buddhi becomes incapable of functioning. The intellect cannot do anything.
Māyā is jaḍa vastu outside and ignorance inside put together. There is one more extension
given in Tāpanīya Upaniṣad which Vidyāraṇya does not mention here. In fact the jaḍa
prapañca we do not generally call as Māyā. Jaḍa prapañca is, really speaking, the manifest
form of Māyā. We don’t use the word Māyā but we call it prapañca. Still, there is nothing
wrong in calling it as Māyā. A bangle is known by the name bangle but there is nothing
wrong if you call it as gold.
Kārya-kāraṇayoḥ abhedāt prapañcaḥ ṁāyā iti ucchate. The world is Māyā-kārya and
Māyā is essentially the same because kāraṇa appears in the form of kārya and therefore,
we call it Māyā. The whole jaḍa prapañca in unmanifest form is called Māyā. Whether it is
manifest form or unmanifest form the jaḍa prapañca is the same. There is nothing wrong
in our definition because whether we call it jaḍa prapañca or prapañca the substance of
one and the same and there is nothing wrong in interchanging the word. Manifest jaḍa is
called prapañca and unmanifest jaḍa is called Māyā. What is common in both is jaḍa and
there is nothing wrong in interchanging the word.

śloka 128
इत्थं लौकिकदृष्ट्यैतत्सर्वैरप्यनुभूयते ।
युक्तिदृष्ट्या त्वनिर्वाच्यं नासदासीदिति श्रुतेः ॥ ६.१२८ ॥
itthaṃ laukikadṛṣṭyaitatsarvairapyanubhūyate.
yuktidṛṣṭyā tvanirvācyaṃ nāsadāsīditi śruteḥ (6.128).
Māyā is now available in the form of the universe and the universe is clearly available for
experience through pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Māyā is now in prapañca-form. Hereafter,
Vidyāraṇya will enter a technical field and he will look at Māyā from three different
angles. I will summarise that first. Pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi, tarka-dṛṣṭi and śāstra-dṛṣṭi and he will
say from pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi it will come under sat which means asat-vilakṣaṇa and it is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 534

non-existent because it is clearly perceptible. From śāstra-dṛṣṭi Māyā is not there in all the
three periods of time, because śruti says neha nānāsti kiñcana, māyā is asat, meaning sat-
vilakṣaṇa. If you combine both of them, from the reasoning-angle, if you want to reconcile
these two pramāṇa, both pramāṇa cannot be ignored as both of them are powerful. One
cannot negate the other. Can you say that the world is both sat and asat? Pratyakṣa says it
is sat and śāstra says it is asat. Therefore, can you say it is sat-asat. Sat and asat opposite to
each other and therefore, they cannot coexist. If you say it is sat alone, then you ignore
śāstra pramāṇa and if you say it is asat you ignore pratyakṣa pramāṇa.
Therefore, the world comes under both the categories; it is neither sat nor asat nor sat-asat.
Intellectually, if you take into account both śāstra and pratyakṣa pramāṇas, if you want to
assimilate the world, you have to take to the fourth variety, anirvacanīya. It is sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa. It is neither sat nor asat, nor the combination, but it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. That is
called mithyā. It does not come under existent category it does not come under non-
existent category, it does not come under existent non-existent category also. It comes
under seemingly-existent category.
Since the world is seen by pratyakṣa pramāṇa the world cannot come under asat the non-
existent category and therefore, it is asat-vilakṣaṇa. It is not non-existent. Since śāstra
negates it, it will not come under sat and therefore, it is sat-vilakṣaṇa. Combining these
two pramāṇas, we say it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa anirvacanīya mithyā. If you understand it is
Māyā and if you do not understand, it is further proof that it is Māyā! Now he comes to
yukti-angle. From the standpoint of anumāna, it has two upajīvya pramāṇas. The
anumāna takes the support of the both pratyakṣa and śāstra; then the buddhi does not
take to sat and asat and therefore, it takes to sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa.
From the standpoint of reasoning, it comes under anirvacanīya sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. This
angle Śruti itself talks from a logical angle in a particular place in nāsadīya sūkta. It comes
in Ṛg Veda 10.1.29. There the Śruti talks of creation from a logical angle. Before the
creation, the world was there in a potential form and so, it does not come under asat or
non-existent category. Asat na asti it means asat-vilakṣaṇa part is revealed. The Upaniṣad
also says it does not come under existent category also.

śloka 129
नासदासीद्विभातत्वान्नो सदासीच्च बाधनात्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 535

विद्यादृष्ट्या श्रुतं तुच्छं तस्य नित्यनिवृत्तितः ॥ ६.१२९ ॥

nāsadāsīdvibhātatvānno sadāsīcca bādhanāt.
vidyādṛṣṭyā śrutaṃ tucchaṃ tasya nityanivṛttitaḥ (6.129).
Before the creation, the world was there in a potential form and therefore, it does not come
under the non-existent category. Asat na āsīt. Asat-vilakṣaṇa part is revealed. The
Upaniṣad immediately says no sat asti, it does not come under existent category also.
The very fact it came to manifestation shows it was existent before creation. Non-existent
world cannot come to manifestation. No sat āsīt world, does not come under existent
category also. It is not at all sat and it does not come under existent category. The world is
negated from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. If you look at the world purely from śāstras, you don’t
take pratyakṣa into account. Then it comes under non-existent category. From the
standpoint of pure śāstric vision only, which is pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi only, if you take, it will
come under asat category. In all the three periods of time, the world is eternally absent.

śloka 130
तुच्छानिर्वचनीया च वास्तवी चेत्यसौ त्रिधा ।
ज्ञेया माया त्रिभिर्बोधैः श्रौतयौक्तिकलौकिकैः ॥ ६.१३० ॥
tucchānirvacanīyā ca vāstavī cetyasau tridhā.
jñeyā māyā tribhirbodhaiḥ śrautayauktikalaukikaiḥ (6.130).
This is consolidation verse for Māyā and prapañca. The essence of this Śruti is that from
Śruti-pramāṇa-dṛṣṭi, the world is asat. The world is not there in all the three periods of
time. From pratyakṣa-pramāṇa-dṛṣṭi, the world is sat. For the worldly people, the world is
there and only when the śāstra-perspective comes in, the world is asat. We try to reconcile
for both of them. When the intellect wants to assimilate both the pramāṇas, both cannot
cancel each other and the intellect has to accommodate them both. In the reconciled
version, the world is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. Now, the world is categorized as sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa which means mithyā. More in the next class.

Class 117

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 536

śloka 130 contd.

Vidyāraṇya has started the analysis of tat-pada which is Paramātmā or Īśvara and having
talked about Īśvara from the standpoint of other system now he talks about Īśvara from
the Vedānta-dṛṣṭi. According to Vedānta, Īśvara is pratibimbita caitanya or Īśvara is a
mixture of Māyā, Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya and Māyā-adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. the original
consciousness plus the reflected consciousness plus the reflecting medium Māyā is Īśvara
and Māyā being an integral part of Īśvara, we should know what is Māyā.
As a part of Īśvara-discussion, Vidyāraṇya has entered into Māyā-discussion from the
verse 125. First, he introduced Māyā based on Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. Then, he discussed
the nature of Māyā based on Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. First, he said that Māyā
expresses itself in the form of jaḍa prapañca outside and it expresses tamas or moha or
ignorance inside: jaḍa-mohatmaka. Both of them are the manifest version of Māyā because
jaḍa prapañca is manifest and during pralaya the very same Māyā remains in an
unmanifest form. That is the nature of Māyā. Then, he wanted to talk about the status of
Māyā. Will it come under sat-rūpa, asat-rūpa or sat asat-rūpa?
Vidyāraṇya wants to establish that it will not come under any of the three as you cannot
state it as existent, or non-existent or existent-non-existent; it is different from sat and asat.
Naturally, the question comes as to how do you arrive at this conclusion? Sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa definition can come only if you accept both pratyakṣa pramāṇa and Śruti
pramāṇa and try to give reconciling definition and then alone this can be understood. If
you take pratyakṣa pramāṇa alone, the definition will be one thing and if you take Śruti
pramāṇa alone, the definition will be another. If you take both and take to a reconciling
act, you can get sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa.
When I look at the creation from pratyakṣa-angle only I experience the world having the
existence of its own and the world is always experienced as existence. The world is
existent in all the three periods of time and it will come under sat category only and it only
proves the existence of the world as from the pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi, the world is not asat. It is
asat-vilakṣaṇa jagat. We see sat in the world all the time, like a man is, a woman is, and the
table is and as we experience the thing as ‘is’, the world is sat. The world is existent and
world is not non-existent; the world is satya from the angle of pratyakṣa-pramāṇa-dṛṣṭi.
We have not seen Śruti pramāṇa at all till now.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 537

Once pratyakṣa proves it as satya, all other pramāṇas are based on pratyakṣa as they are
upajīvya pramāṇas and therefore, they have no power to contradict the pratyakṣa. Science
also is based on experimental observation, therefore, it also uses pratyakṣa as upajīvya
pramāṇa. Science also accepts the existence of the world. Jagat is the expression of Māyā.
Māyā is satya and Māyā is asat-vilakṣaṇa. Those who are not exposed to Vedānta pramāṇa
have got only one pramāṇa which is pratyakṣa.
Therefore, they will say that the world is satya and they are right from their angle. Of
course, there are another group of people who have Vedānta as the only pramāṇa.
Vedānta pramāṇa is dependent on which pramāṇa? Itself being upajīvya pramāṇa, it is an
independent pramāṇa as it does not depend on any other pramāṇa and that pramāṇa is
neha nanāsti kiñcana. Sadeva idam agra āsīt ekam eva advitīyam. Brahman alone exists,
that is sat and there is nothing else; and if Brahman is sat everything else is asat.
If you take Śruti pramāṇa only, the world will come under asat in all the three periods of
time. If you take Śruti pramāṇa only, the world will come under the asat category which
means sat-vilakṣaṇa. Suppose these two quarrel, who will win if you ask, they cannot
quarrel both being upajīvya pramāṇa, both are prabala pramāṇa and they have no power
to cancel each other. Therefore, if you decide to accommodate both the pramāṇas, since
they cannot cancel each other, you have to accommodate the pramāṇas and give a new
status to the world and the new status given to the world accommodating both the
pramāṇas is that this world is both asat-vilakṣaṇa as well as sat-vilakṣaṇa.
Therefore, yukti-dṛṣṭi accommodating both of them we have to come to asat-vilakṣaṇa and
sat-vilakṣaṇa and it is neither non-existent nor existent but it is different from both and it
is seemingly existent, which alone we call it as lower order of reality. The lower order of
reality means temporarily you keep the Śruti aside and accept the existence of the world
like the dream has lower order of reality, temporarily forgetting the waker, dream is given
the reality.
If you accommodate both, the world will come under sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa and it is called
mithyā. What is the advantage of this knowledge? The advantage is that mithyā cannot
affect satya. Therefore, mithyā jagat or mithyā Māyā cannot affect satya Brahman.
Therefore, Brahman is ever-free; that is the advantage. If Brahman is ever-free what
happens to me? Then the teacher will say that that Brahman you are. You are satya and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 538

whatever you experience is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. You, the sat, are never affected by sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa Māyā and sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa prapañca.
Māyā has to be understood in threefold way. Māyā should be understood as asat when
you take śāstra pramāṇa for it alone negates the world. Asat is sat-vilakṣaṇa. The world is
sat if you take only the pratyakṣa pramāṇa. It is also a powerful pramāṇa. Whether it is sat
or asat depends upon which upajīvya pramāṇa you want to hold on to.
Suppose you keep pratyakṣa and Śruti, when you combine both of them, from that angle it
is anirvacanīya it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa as you cannot clearly categorise it as sat or sat. It is
sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa and it is mithyā and in this manner, through the standpoints or through
these three visions, Māyā is to be understood as śrauta, Upaniṣadic vision; logical vision or
intellectual vision and the third one is pratyakṣa vision or sensory vision. By śrauta-dṛṣṭi
tuccha, by yukti-dṛṣṭi anirvacanīya and by laukika-dṛṣṭi vāstavī. When the worldly people
ask you whether the world is real or not, you should say that the world is real and you
need not feel any hesitation.
When the worldly people raise the question they have only pratyakṣa pramāṇa as they are
not exposed to śāstra pramāṇa and from pratyakṣa pramāṇa the world is real. That is what
Gauḍapāda does in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. He refuses to take pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi. Therefore, he
consistently avoids pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi and talks only from śrauta-dṛṣṭi and hence he calls
prapañca as unreal. No Jīva is born; no jagat is born; no Īśvara is necessary and Brahman
was, Brahman is, Brahman will be and every thing else is negated. It is unreal like a
dream.
Once we have said that the world is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa, then you should extend it to Māyā.
Manifest Māyā is world and unmanifest world is Māyā. I hope this is clear. It is a very part
of Vedānta literature and a rare part of Pañcadaśī.
When you go from a logical angle, the yukti or logic is never independent because
reasoning always requires data collected from higher pramāṇa which is called as upajīvya
pramāṇa. Yukti is always lower and it has to hold on to another pramāṇa.
The scientists depend on the upajīvya pramāṇa of pratyakṣa alone and we say if you want
to be rational you have to take into account the other upajīvya pramāṇas which is as good
as pratyakṣa. An advaitin alone looks at the world from both śāstra and pratyakṣa
pramāṇas and therefore, the conclusion will be pratyakṣa-śāstra-dṛṣṭi and the world will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 539

become sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa and therefore, he says brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo
brahmaiva nāparaḥ.

śloka 131
अस्य सत्त्वमसत्त्वं च जगतो दर्शयत्यसौ ।
प्रसारणाच्च संकोचाद्यथा चित्रपटस्तथा ॥ ६.१३१ ॥
asya sattvamasattvaṃ ca jagato darśayatyasau.
prasāraṇācca saṃkocādyathā citrapaṭastathā (6.131).
Māyā has been defined. Māyā’s nature has been said it is jaḍatmohātmaka externally and
mohātmaka internally. The status of Māyā is mithyātva. The status is called sattā. Now,
Vidyāraṇya wants to talk about the function of Māyā. He does not want to talk about the
function of Brahman because it cannot do anything. We, therefore, need not discuss the
function of Brahman. Before creation, Māyā holds the whole world in itself in a dormant
or potential form. Mithyā Māyā holds mithyā prapañca in its potential form. That alone in
technical language they say that all nāma-rūpas are there in hidden form. It is like in a
lump of clay has a spherical form and it has all the clay product forms in a hidden manner.
The potter can generate any number of forms out of spherical clay form as the sphere is an
avyakta form containing all the geometrical forms. As even the potter creates, all the
hidden forms are brought out and then when they are manifest you give varieties of
names for varieties of forms and varieties of functions. All of them are hidden in the
spherical form. The sat-asat-vilakṣaṇaform contains the entire prapañca. This we
conventionally say as being non-existent. Whatever is in the potential form we call as non-
existent. What is potentially existent is treated as though non-existent. When there is milk,
it contains butter in the potential form. A person has only milk. Someone asks for butter.
This person who has milk in his hand should state whether the butter is there or not. He
cannot either say no because it is there in the milk and nor can he say yes because he
cannot give butter. Technically, it is there but experientially, it is not there. Even though it
is technically a bluff you don’t commit any sin. Before sṛṣṭi, the world was potentially
there in Māyā and in sṛṣṭi kāla Māyā brings the world into functionally existent. Before
that, the world was non-functional and non-useful existence was there. Māyā brings about
existence and non-existence of the world by manifesting the world at the time of sṛṣṭi and
folding the world at the time of pralaya, respectively. The manifestation is bringing the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 540

world into existence and unmanifestation is folding the world into functional non-
existence.
Māyā brings the world into existence by manifestation like a potter brings out the
geometrical form out of spherical form of clay. Māyā folds the world into functional non-
existence at the time of pralaya. Both the powers are there in Māyā. For this, he gives the
example of like the painted cloth in the citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa.

śloka 132
अस्वतन्त्रा हि माया स्यादप्रतीतेर्विना चितिम्।
स्वतन्त्रापि तथैव स्यादसङ्गस्यान्यथाकृ तेः ॥ ६.१३२ ॥
asvatantrā hi māyā syādapratītervinā citim.
svatantrāpi tathaiva syādasaṅgasyānyathākṛteḥ (6.132).
This also occurs in the Tāpanīya Upaniṣad. This says that Māyā is both svatantrā and
asvatantrā independent and dependent and it is difficult to categorise Māyā. It has both
the faculties. With regard to existence Māyā is dependent on Brahman because Māyā does
not have an existence of its own; Śruti says Brahman alone is existent, nothing else has an
existence of its own and if at all Māyā has existence it must be borrowed from Brahman.
When you say Māyā is, the very is-ness is borrowed from Brahman. Māyā is dependent on
Brahman for existence. Not only does it depend on Brahman for its existence but even to
prove its existence it depends on Brahman. Previously, we said for its existence it depends
upon Brahman. Now, we say that even to prove its existence it depends upon Brahman.
Māyā being jaḍa it cannot prove itself. It cannot declare: I am here. Jaḍa needs cetana to
prove its existence and acetana Māyā depends upon cetana Brahman to prove its
existence. Therefore, Māyā depends upon the sat of Brahman and cit of Brahman to prove
its existence and therefore, it comes under asvatantra.
Once Māyā has its borrowed existence, Māyā starts doing various things and those
various changes are not borrowed from Brahman. The functions of Māyā are not
borrowed from Brahman and from that angle, Māyā is svatantra. From functioning-angle,
it is independent and from its existence-angle, it is dependent and therefore, it is
independent and dependent. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 541

Class 118
śloka 132 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has entered into the topic of tat-padārtha Paramātmā that is Īśvara based on
Vedāntic approach. According to Vedānta, Īśvara consists of three factors: the original
consciousness, reflecting medium Māyā and the reflected consciousness Māyā-
pratibimbita-caitanya. The superior virtues are there in Īśvara not because of the original
consciousness because it has no attribute. Īśvara enjoys a higher status and attributes
because of Māyā only. Therefore, whether it is omniscience or omnipotence or any
superior virtue you mention, the glory is taken from Māyā.
We cannot discuss Īśvara without talking of Māyā. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya chooses Māyā
factor first and then he will talk about the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness. He has taken Tāpanīya Upaniṣad mantra and based on this mantra, he
writes all these things. Inside, it is in the form of ignorance and outside it is in the form of
jaḍa prapañca.
From pratyakṣa-dṛṣṭi it is sat, from śāstra-dṛṣṭi it is asat and from yukti-dṛṣṭi it is sat-asat.
Māyā folds the world into itself at the time of pralaya and it unfolds it into prapañca at the
time of sṛṣṭi or brings out the world from unmanifest to manifest form at the time of sṛṣṭi
and takes it back to unmanifest form from the manifest form at the time of pralaya.
The siddhi and asiddhi of the world is because of that Māyā alone as he said in verse 131.
It brings about its existence and non-existence by unfolding and folding the world. The
folded world is as good as non-existent and opened or unfolded world is as good as
existent for functioning. The last part of the mantra is about svatantratva and
asvatantratva. From one angle, Māyā is asvatantra and from another svatantra, meaning it
is dependent or not independent; when you say Māyā is dependent, it means that for its
very existence it has to borrow from Brahman since Māyā has no existence of its own.
When you say that Māyā is, it means that the is-ness belongs to Brahman. Not only its
existence is borrowed but even to prove its existence it needs consciousness as nothing can
be proved without consciousness. Māyā cannot prove its existence itself being jaḍa and
therefore, it depends on caitanya to prove its existence. Therefore, it is asvatantra.
There are certain other features for which it need not depend upon Brahman. Its
functioning power, etc., is not borrowed from Brahman because Brahman has no power
except being sat and cit. Whether it is vikṣepa or āvaraṇa-śakti or even converting

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 542

Brahman to universe seemingly is the act of Māyā alone. This power is there in Māyā
itself. Māyā is a dependent entity for proving its existence. It cannot be experienced
without consciousness. When I say Māyā, you should extend it to all the objects of the
world. Because of non-experience without consciousness, Māyā is dependent on Brahman
for its experience. At the same time, Māyā is svatantra, independent also, because it
transforms the asaṅga Brahman into the sasaṅga universe. Ignorance changes a rope into
snake and Māyā changes nirguṇa Brahman into saguṇa prapañca and nirvikāra Brahman
into savikāra prapañca.
The nature of Brahman and nature of prapañca are diagonally opposite but still Māyā does
this job. Ānanda Brahman into sukhātmaka prapañca. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad it is said that
the non-frightening Brahman is converted into frightening Brahman. Then a doubt may
come now: you accept Māyā as dependent from one angle and Māyā as independent from
another angle and therefore, Māyā is dependent and also independent also. From the
dependent-angle if you say Māyā is mithyā, from independent angle why cannot you say
Māyā is satya? When you analyse Māyā you call it dependent. But some other time you
say Māyā is independent.
The definition of mithyā is not mere dependence. Dependence is not the definition on
mithyā but dependence for existence is called mithyā; even if independence is there in all
other aspects we cannot call it satya. The condition for satya is not mere independence, but
independence with regard to existence. Dependence with regard to existence is mithyā.
Brahman alone deserves the status of existence. Māyā and prapañca and other things are
mithyā because they depend on Brahman for their existence. If you ask “what about me?”
then I will tell you that you are Brahman yourself. If you say “I am anything other than
Brahman”, it means I will say “you are mithyā”. If Pañcadaśī has worked and all Vedāntic
teaching has worked and if you say you are Brahman, then I will boldly declare that “you
are satya”. Even though Māyā is svatantra with regard to its function and its svātantrya is
not with regard to its existence.

śloka 133
कू टस्थासङ्गमात्मानं जडत्त्वेन करोति सा ।
चिदाभासस्वरूपेण जीवेशावपि निर्ममे ॥ ६.१३३ ॥
kūṭasthāsaṅgamātmānaṃ jaḍattvena karoti sā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 543

cidābhāsasvarūpeṇa jīveśāvapi nirmame (6.133).

Here, Vidyāraṇya explains the second line of the previous verse which says
asaṅgasyānyathākṛteḥ. Asaṅga Brahman is changed into three fold divisions. Divisionless
akhaṇḍa nirvikalpa Brahman is converted to sākhaṇḍa savikalpa divided Brahman. It is
divided into jagat, Jīva and Īśvara. All these three statuses are not there in Brahman.
Brahman does not have the status of Jīva and Brahman does not have the status of Īśvara
also. But Māyā manages to bring out these three statuses. This Brahman which is kūṭastha,
changeless, is transformed with the help of Māyā. That is why we have to say Brahman is
vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa and not pariṇāmi. Māyā changes Brahman in the form of
changing prapañca. Brahman is converted into matter. The next job is cidābhāsa-
svarūpeṇa after producing the vyaṣṭi-samaṣṭi-upādhi-śarīra-traya and prapañca-traya, it
produces two types of reflections one is cidābhāsa in vyaṣṭi-upādhi individual reflecting
medium; then cidābhāsa is created in samaṣṭi-upādhi. Unless Māyā provides the reflecting
medium how can the reflection be generated? Therefore, Māyā is responsible for micro
reflected consciousness as also macro reflected consciousness. micro reflected
consciousness is Jīva and macro reflected consciousness is Īśvara. Both Jīva and Īśvara are
created by Māyā by providing the reflecting media. Māyā created Jīva, jagat and Īśvara by
bringing out macro and micro reflected consciousness. Minus Māyā, Jīva and Īśvara
cannot be there. Brahman alone will exist. This is also given in the Uttara-tāpanīya
Upaniṣad. Māyā creates Jīva and Īśvara by producing the two reflections. Māyā creates
Jīva and Īśvara by bringing out reflections in micro and macro media. Māyā ca avidyā ca
svayam eva bhavati. The Upaniṣad also says none created Māyā and it has come of its own
accord. It does not have any cause and that is why we say it is anādi. It is beginningless.
You may get a doubt; Upaniṣad made a statement Māyā created Jīva and Īśvara by
bringing out the reflection but does that means Īśvara is created and it looks Īśvara is as
though created by Māyā in time. Even though we say Māyā brings out the reflection, the
reflection did not come at a particular time. Arrival of a reflection is not a process
happening in time and therefore, Īśvara is anādi. For our discussion, we should take that
Māyā created the jagat, Jīva and Īśvara through reflection.

śloka 134
कू टस्थमनुपददृत्य करोति जगदादिकम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 544

दुर्घटैकविधायिन्यां मायायां का चमत्कृ तिः ॥ ६.१३४ ॥

kūṭasthamanupadṛtya karoti jagadādikam.
durghaṭaikavidhāyinyāṃ māyāyāṃ kā camatkṛtiḥ (6.134).
The previous verse can create a question in the mind because there is a seeming logical
problem. The changeless Brahman is transformed into Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. This sentence is
illogical. If you put the adjective changeless Brahman, you cannot say Brahman is
changed. Therefore, don’t use both the expressions together. How can changeless
Brahman be changed into the world! This can be answered in only way alone. The
changeless Brahman is seemingly changed into Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. Once you put the words
“as though”, everything is all right. A rope cannot be really changed into a snake but rope
can be seemingly changed into a snake. If I go to dream, the sentient mind gets converted
into insentient dream mountain. It is seeming conversion. It is not Brahma-pariṇāma but it
is Brahma-vivarta. Māyā brings about this apparent change. Without hurting or affecting
the kūṭastha, without really transforming kūṭastha, it apparently produces jagat-Jīva-
Īśvara. This is the vivarta-upādāna-kāraṇa of Advaitins.
All other systems of philosophy talk about brahma-parimāṇa-vāda and they say Brahman
really changes. They say Brahman has become the world. We say brahma-vivarta-vāda.
Champion of brahma-parimāṇa-vāda is Bhrartṛprapañca. How does Māyā do all these
things? For this, it is said this is the job of Māyā. Māyā has the power to bring about this
kind of change. It makes the impossible possible. The changeless is changed into this
world. Vidyāraṇya says many people have got extraordinary powers and they do
extraordinary work once in a while. But the glory of Māyā is that it does only the
extraordinary work. It is an appreciation and not a question. It borrows existence from
Brahman and puts its hand on my own head.

śloka 135
द्रवत्वमुदके वह्नावुष्ण्यं काठिन्यमश्मनि ।
मायाया दुर्घटत्वं च स्वतः सिद्ध्यति नान्यथा ॥ ६.१३५ ॥
dravatvamudake vahnāvuṣṇyaṃ kāṭhinyamaśmani.
māyāyā durghaṭatvaṃ ca svataḥ siddhyati nānyathā (6.135).
Now, we ask Māyā how you got all these powers? Māyā cannot get this power from
Brahman for Brahman can lend only existence. Therefore, Māyā could not have borrowed

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 545

all the mysterious powers from Brahman. There is nothing else except Brahman and Māyā.
Everything else is the product of Māyā. Māyā cannot borrow from Brahman and also
elsewhere. If you ask this question, we say Brahman does not borrow and all these
mysterious skills are not acquired powers but are the intrinsic nature of Māyā. He gives an
example. If you ask fire “wherefrom you got the power of burning?”, it would say “it is
not borrowed power but it is my nature”. The nature of Māyā is doing all the illogical
things. That is why the intellect is stunned in front of Māyā. The intellect can assimilate or
is designed to absorb and understand the logical events and it will be overwhelmed in
front of Māyā because every single act of Māyā is logically impossible. If you understood
Māyā, there is something wrong! The logical categorization is not possible in the case of
Māyā. It is neither sat or asat. Therefore, he says udake dravatvam svataḥ siddhyati. Water
has dravatva, liquid state which is naturally obtained with water. Vahnau auṣṇyam the
fire has the inherent power to burn. Similarly, aśmani kāṭhinyam, the solidity is there in
the case of stone. The hardness of rock is also natural for the stone. In the same way, the
illogical existence, illogical features and illogical nature and functions are the intrinsic
nature of Māyā. Vedānta talks of the natural or intrinsic illogicality of Māyā. It is not a
borrowed property or function, it has not come from the external force but it is its nature. I
cannot logically explain Māyā and Gaudapāda establishes that you cannot logically
explain Māyā.

Class 119
śloka 135 contd.
Having come to the of topic tat-padārtha-vicāra, Vidyāraṇya analyses Īśvara which means
tat-pada in the mahā-vākya. Īśvara has three factors: the reflected consciousness, cit the
original consciousness which is inherent as adhiṣṭhāna satya and reflecting medium Māyā.
Then we will negate the reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness and will retain
the original consciousness.
Now we will analyse the vācyārtha, the vyāvahārika aspect of Īśvara. Māyā is a crucial
component of Īśvara. All the powers of Īśvara depends on Māyā śakti only. For this
purpose Vidyāraṇya took the 4th mantra of Tāpanīya Upaniṣad. Having done the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 546

Pañcadaśī portion I will briefly deal with that mantra. An elaborate study of Māyā has
been done in this Tāpanīya Upaniṣad.
First, it says Māyā ca tamorūpa, Māyā is of the nature of tamas meaning the opposite of
prakāśa or caitanya. Here, the word tamaḥ should not be taken as one of the three guṇas.
It is a general reference to being caitanya viruddha. This tamaḥ includes all the three
guṇas. The proof for Māyā is our own experience. We experience Māyā as jaḍa prapañca,
inert universe outside and mohātmaka, it is experienced as ignorance inside jaḍa prapañca
outside and put together is tamas. Ananta means it is everywhere and it is limitless and
from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi it is all-pervading. From the śāstric angle Māyā does not exist at
all. It is therefore, called tuccha, asat-rūpa or non-existent.
Idam rūpam asya is the next part of the mantra. Idam asya kārya-rūpam bhavati, this
visible aspect is the kārya version of Māyā. This experienced Māyā, the experienceable
Māyā, the visible Māyā or the tangible Māyā is vyakta-rūpa and it is the manifest version.
This tangible universe is available only during the sṛṣṭi. It will therefore, come under
kārya-rūpa Māyā. Asya vyañjikā means kāraṇa-rūpa Māyā. Kāraṇa version of Māyā is the
producer or the manifestor of this kārya-rūpa Māyā. kāraṇa-rūpa Māyā is the one which
brings out or unfolds or produces this kārya-bhūta Māyā.
Thus Māyā has two versions, kāraṇa Māyā is invisible and kārya Māyā is visible. Nitya
nivṛttā api even though it is ever non-existent, from śāstra dṛṣṭi or pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi,
mūḍhaiḥ Ātmā eva dṛṣṭā this Māyā is seen as though existent as though real Ātmā; by the
ignorant people.
This Māyā asya satvam asatvañca darśayati, Māyā brings about the existence of the world
and the non-existence of the world siddhatva-asiddhatvābhyām by its manifestation and
unmanifestation. By manifestation the world seems to come to existence and when it is
folded back it becomes non-existent exactly like the dream world. The mind does not
project the dream world now but the mind brings the dream world into existence. When
we wake up the mind makes the world into non-existent. Manifestation is production and
unmanifestation is destruction of the world.
Svatantratva-asvatantratvena it means Māyā functions as an independent entity also as
also the dependent entity also and it is svatantra in one respect or it is paratantra in
another aspect. With regard to , Māyā has to depend on Brahman because Brahman is only
source of existence. This is evident in the sixth chapter of Chāndogya Upaniṣad sad eva

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 547

idam agra āsīt. Anything else has to borrow its existence. Once the thing has come to
existence Māyā creates a problem to Brahman itself. Then Māyā subjugates Brahman the
subjugated one. Just like I provide the existence to the dream world and so also the same
dream threatens me with nightmare. Just as svapna is Bhasmāsura this universe also is a
Bhasmāsura. Once Māyā comes into existence, it converts into Jīva-jagat-rūpa sṛṣṭi.
Nirvikalpaka Brahman is converted into savikalpaka Brahman. Only existence is
borrowed but all the three guṇas belong to Māyā. From the standpoint of its function it is
svatantra. This is the meaning of 9.4 mantra of Nṛsiṃha-tāpanīya Upaniṣad.
Then Vidyāraṇya takes up the 5th mantra of Tāpanīya Upaniṣad. It says that Māyā alone
is responsible for the creation of the twofold reflection of micro reflection called Jīva and
macro reflection called Īśvara and both reflections arrive because of Māyā alone. Māyā
serves as the reflecting medium. So Māyā is responsible for the twofold reflection. Jīva is
dāsa and Īśvara is Svāmī. the original consciousness is neither dāsa nor Svāmī and only
the two reflections in vyāvahārika plane put twofold veṣa of dāsa and Svāmī. Māyā alone
is the cause of Jīva, Īśvara and jagat. Jagat is created as an apparent conversion of
Brahman; Jīvātmā and Īśvara are created not by conversion but by reflection. Thus all the
three are Māyā’s kārya. Then, begins the drama of life. Brahman being changeless how can
Māyā convert the changeless Brahman into changing Brahman? Doing the illogical is the
very definition of Māyā. Māyā does only the impossible things. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya writes
five verses on Māyā. It is capable of doing the impossible. It is not a temporary power
gathered by Māyā but it is its very nature like the liquidity in water; heat in fire and
hardness in stone. Similarly, doing the illogical is the inherent nature of Māyā. It is not
borrowed even from Brahman. This capacity is its very nature. Up to this we saw in the
last class.

śloka 136
न वेत्ति मायिनं लोको यावत्तावच्चमत्कृ तिम्।
धत्ते मनसि पश्चात्तु मायैषेत्युपशाम्यति ॥ ६.१३६ ॥
na vetti māyinaṃ loko yāvattāvaccamatkṛtim.
dhatte manasi paścāttu māyaiṣetyupaśāmyati (6.136).
Māyā will continue to do this extraordinary work as long as individual continues to be
ignorant. As the dream continues to afflict me till I know my higher nature of waking, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 548

waker I suffers the dream nightmare. So too, until the seeker knows his pāramārthika
nature or Māyā-adhiṣṭhāna the higher nature, one will suffer the saṃsāra. Here, sākṣāt
means that the adhiṣṭhāna of Māyā is Brahman itself. In the case of dreamer, he has to
know that he is the dreamer.
Suppose the dreamer continues in the dream that there is a waker and the ‘waker
knowledge’ will not remove the dream problem but he has to wake up and find that he is
the waker. Parokṣa jñāna will not help one and one should know that Māyā-adhiṣṭhāna
Brahman is oneself, else one will suffer and Māyā will continue to cast its spell on the Jīva.
Until the dreamer wakes up to his higher nature, he suffers the dream problem. So also the
Jīva should rise himself and realize pāramārthika Brahman is himself, and until such time
he will suffer the spell of Māyā and saṃsāra.
When we talk of brahma-jñāna, it is understood that he has brahma-jñāna, Māyā-jñāna
and that Brahman is myself. These three knowledges put together is Ātma-jñāna. I say in
meditation that it is not enough if we meditate on Brahman only. This alone will not
constitute brahma-jñāna. We have to bring anātmā also into meditation. Anātma-dhyāna
is also jñāna subject to the condition that you should see the mtihyatva of anātmā. Every
anātmā that disturbs me must be brought into my meditating mind and I have to say this
is mithyā and it will have to go through its karma; I don’t protest but I see it without any
reaction.
This is an integral and important part of meditation. Our saṃsāra is due to more about the
presence of anātmā than the absence of Ātma-jñāna. After the knowledge of adhiṣṭhāna,
which includes the knowledge of Māyā, this Māyā withdraws and it no more wants to
threaten me. That wooden elephant recedes into the wood which is the truth. I will
perceive the universe but it loses its capacity to subjugate me. It is like defanging the
cobra. Once you take its poison away, the cobra is no more a threat to anyone. Let the
world be nāga-ābharaṇa to you and let it not be a threat to you.

śloka 137
प्रसरन्ति हि चोद्यानि जगद्वस्तुत्ववादिषु ।
न चोदनीयं मायायां तस्याच्चोद्यैकरूपतः ॥ ६.१३७ ॥
prasaranti hi codyāni jagadvastutvavādiṣu.
na codanīyaṃ māyāyāṃ tasyāccodyaikarūpataḥ (6.137).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 549

Vidyāraṇya enters into another technical but an important aspect of Māyā. This Vedāntic
impact of Māyā is challenged by other systems of philosophy. In Vedānta itself
Viśiṣṭādvaitīns and others challenge Māyā and ask numerous questions about Māyā.
When different questions are asked they ask us to categorically define Māyā. When they
ask us to do so, naturally we will not be able to fulfill their request for our definition of
Māyā is anirvacanīya. If we are not able to do so, they accuse that we introduced Māyā
without proper explanation. Then the Pūrvapakṣa says the Advaitins themselves do not
know what is Māyā and they use the word anirvacanīya which is a weak point. Now,
Vidyāraṇya takes up this point as to whether it is our weakness or it is our wisdom. He
wants to establish that it is our wisdom. He does it in a peculiar manner.
Vidyāraṇya says that people ask varieties of questions regarding the world and its cause.
Every philosophy deals with Jīva, jagat, Īśvara, bandha, mokṣa and sādhanas to go from
bandha to mokṣa. Even a nāstika philosopher will have to talk about Īśvara to negate
Īśvara which has been introduced by other philosophers. He should give logic to the non-
existence of Īśvara. That is what Buddhists do. He has indigenously introduced the vāda
to negate the existence of Īśvara.
While discussing all these topics, “how did the world come?”, “when did it come?”,
“where did it come?” and “why it did come?” all these questions are asked. All systems of
philosophies give their own answers. Asat-kārya-vāda, saṅghāta-vāda of Buddhism, sat-
kārya-vāda, etc., different theories are propounded explaining the emergence of the world.
Then they turn to Advaita. Thus, the question regarding the world is raised to us. It is in
this context we give our reply introducing Māyā. We cannot talk about the creation
without Māyā. Once he introduces Māyā to explain the creation, they raise hundreds of
questions regarding Māyā. Vidyāraṇya says we introduced Māyā not to explain the
creation. If I am introducing to explain the creation you can ask for the explanation of
Māyā. What is the spirit and what is the significance of Māyā then?
You ask a question regarding the creation taking for granted that there is creation. All
these questions regarding creation taking for granted that there is real existent world and
by introducing Māyā we question the very existence of the world. We can answer your
question how the world came after explaining about Māyā. It is not an answer to the
world’s existence but it is to introduce the world’s existence as questionable. So he says
Māyā is not an answer but it is a question mark! If you ask a question regarding Māyā you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 550

put a question mark to a question mark! If you put a question mark after my question
mark I will put another question mark only and therefore, your very approach is
fundamentally wrong. More in the next class.

Class 120
śloka 137 contd.
Whenever the topic of the creation of the world comes up, Vedānta introduces Māyā. And
when they ask various questions regarding Māyā, they feel we are not giving clear
answers to their questions. We escape by using the word anirvacanīya. Many philosophers
think that anirvacanīya Māyā is used by Vedāntins more to escape the probing questions
of other philosophers rather than answering their questions. This is one of the charges
leveled by all other philosophers. Vidyāraṇya says that it is not so. He says we don’t want
to escape from answering all about Māyā. The question of the creation is raised by
philosophers who are called jagat-vastutva-vādis.; they think that there is a real creation,
really existent world. Intrinsic existence is called real existence. Jagat-vastutva means real
existence of the world. Once they have accepted the real existence of the world, based on
that they ask further questions how does the real world come into being, why did come,
when did it come and for what purpose did it come?
All these questions are based on the fundamental assumption that the world is. When the
question is raised by one jagat-vastutva-vādī then the other jagat-vastutva-vādī will have
to answer the question because they have a common assumption that the world is. They
should answer themselves because it is a common question. That is how asat- kārya-vādī
came in. Then came up sat-kārya-vāda. When all raised the question, Buddhists brought in
saṅghāta-vāda. Advaitins sit quietly as he does not want to enter the debate and answer
the question because he does not fall under the category jagat-vastutva-vādī category.
Then they all pull the Advaitins to debate and ask the question: when we discuss seriously
about creation, why cannot you answer the question?
Then Advaitins use the world Māyā and the other people think Māyā is not the answer to
the question and this is the greatest blunder that Māyā is given as an answer to their
question. Vidyāraṇya says Māyā is not the answer but Māyā is questioning the very status
of the world and the assumption of the world about which they raise the question. We ask

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 551

before raising the question: you have made an assumption that jagat vastu or sat jagat
asti. “There is a world” is your assumption and based on the assumption you have raised
the question. Māyā is questioning the existence of the world. We put the questioner into
an enquiry; please find out “is there a world?” and after establishing a world, then you can
question how this world came about!
Therefore, word Māyā is not an answer but Māyā is a question mark with regard to the
very existence or the very nature of the world. When a person tries to see the very nature
of the world then the question will not arise and the world will get negated. What we
want to say is that Māyā is a question mark with regard to the assumption about the
existence of the world. If he says: when I raise the question mark about Māyā you put
another question mark in front of my question mark; this is not the proper approach. We
reply: if you put a question mark in front of question, then I will put another question
mark and thus the question will be there endlessly. Māyā is questioning the very existence
of the world, which itself is an unfortunate assumption. When you question the existence
of the world rather than the cause of the world then you discover the question regarding
the world is not solved but the world gets dissolved.
Therefore, stop questioning Māyā and question the very assumption of the world’s
existence. When you question that, the world’s existence itself will get negated. This is the
answer. He says the question regarding the world arises only for jagat-vastutva-vādis as
accept the existence of the world. Therefore, let us not entertain anymore unwanted,
unintelligent enquiry about Māyā and its effect. When I don’t accept the existence of the
world, I don’t have to answer your question; this is our answer. The word Māyā means I
don’t have to answer your question. When I say I don’t have to answer your question,
then they say your answer is inappropriate. Vidyāraṇya says you may not be convinced
but I am convinced of myself.

śloka 138
चोद्येऽपि यदि चोद्यं स्यात्तच्चोद्ये चोद्यते मया ।
परिहार्यं ततश्चोद्यं न पुनः प्रतिचोद्यताम्॥ ६.१३८ ॥
codye:'pi yadi codyaṃ syāttaccodye codyate mayā.
parihāryaṃ tataścodyaṃ na punaḥ praticodyatām (6.138).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 552

We say no question should be there but there are six questions in this verse! Vidyāraṇya
said in the previous verse that Māyā is the question mark regarding the existence of the
world. Suppose in front of the question mark, if you put another question mark and
suppose he says he has not put a question mark in front of Māyā, it is as good as putting a
question mark because Māyā itself is a question mark. Whenever you raise a question
about Māyā, you put a question mark in front of my question mark. Then I will put
another question mark in front of your question mark. We say, therefore, if questions
continue to be asked about that whose very existence itself is questionable, one can go on
endlessly tossing the argument to and fro, and no conclusion will ever be possible, since
the very existence of the object of the arguments itself is in question.
Therefore, you find an answer to my question raised by introducing Māyā. The word
Māyā is to question the very existence of the world and we address all the jagat-vastutva-
vādis. All theories of creation miserably fail. Each new theory negates the previous theory
and no theory can answer the question because we have assumed the existence of the
world. You don’t ask further question to me but you answer my question: is there the
world existent? Answer my question which is put through the introduction of Māyā.
Don’t ask a counter question to me.

śloka 139
विस्मयैकशरीराया मायायाश्चोद्यरूपतः ।
अन्वेष्यः परिहारोऽस्या बुद्धिमद्भिः प्रयत्नतः ॥ ६.१३९ ॥
vismayaikaśarīrāyā māyāyāścodyarūpataḥ.
anveṣyaḥ parihāro:'syā buddhimadbhiḥ prayatnataḥ (6.139).
In the previous verse, he said codyam parihāryam, you should answer my question which
is directed towards you by the word māyā and that question is: is there a world existing?
That is explained in this śloka. He says this word Māyā I have introduced is of the nature
of wonder. A wonder is that which stuns the intellect and which makes the intellect non-
functional. This is called Māyā, a wonder. Such a Māyā which is a wonder is in the form of
a question mark regarding the world as to whether the world is sat or asat or sat-asat. You
will not be able to say anything. You cannot say it is identical with Brahman or it is located
in Brahman or outside Brahman. Any question you ask, it is a wonder. Therefore, because
it is in the form of a question mark, you should find an answer to that question regarding

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 553

the very existence of the world which you take for granted. Remember the rope-snake
example. This person thinks that he is bitten by a snake though he slipped over a rope. The
sharp portion of the rope has pricked on his skin and he felt something has bitten. Now he
wants to find out which medicine he should take on the basis of the type of the snake that
has bitten him. We say before you find out what type of snake has bitten you, first you
find out whether there was a snake or not. Vedānta asks: is there a snake or not? You are
going round and round, punarapi jananam and punarapi maraṇam.
First listen to me and find out the answer to my question whether there is world or not.
Use the right pramāṇa for the world and the things of the world. Pratyakṣa pramāṇa is
useful to know the world and to know the origin of the world but it is not useful for this;
instead take to the śāstra pramāṇa and when it is used, śoṣaṇaṃ bhavasindhośca, the
whole saṃsāra is dried up because the mirage water has dried up. Only knowledge will
help you to get over this seeming saṃsāra. You don’t see properly and you don’t have the
water to be dried up. Use śāstra pramāṇa. Go to jñāna kāṇḍa Tat tvam asi and then
everything is over. Except that, we do everything else.

śloka 140
मायात्वमेव निश्चेयमिति चेत्तर्हि निश्चिनु ।
लोकप्रसिद्धमायाया लक्षणं यत्तदीक्ष्यताम्॥ ६.१४० ॥
māyātvameva niśceyamiti cettarhi niścinu.
lokaprasiddhamāyāyā lakṣaṇaṃ yattadīkṣyatām (6.140).
Here, Pūrvapakṣa says: all right I am willing to cooperate with you. You have introduced
Māyā. You say that Māyā is not sat, Māyā does not come under asat category and it does
not come under-sat asat category but it comes under sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category. How can
there be something which is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa? This, I am not able to understand; so says
Pūrvapakṣa. There are hundreds of cases where things seem to exist and create problems
for us but when you go enquire the problem goes away. Sat-asat-vilakṣaṇatva nature I
have not clearly grasped; it appears to be a word-play; so says Pūrvapakṣa. Words do not
liberate but the meaning liberates. When we say mahā-vākya is the solution we don’t
mean you should chant mahā-vākya. It will not solve the problem. What liberates is not
the word but first grasp the word and then come to the meaning as the meaning alone
liberates. “If the meaning alone liberates, why do you talk?” you may ask me.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 554

A Guru was very thirsty and asked the śiṣya to bring water, but when he brought some
water, the Guru shouted at him: I asked for water, why did you bring the glass? Śiṣya was
bewildered. Water can remove the thirst but water cannot be brought without the
container. Take the water and drop the container. The meaning is like water but just as I
cannot handover the water without the container the word, there is no other way but the
Guru has to handover the meaning in the container called the word. The śiṣya enjoys the
container but leaves out the water and the thirst grows worse and worst. The Guru asks
the śiṣya to take water.
The teacher cannot do anything except taking glasses and he sends the words. The teacher
has kept the water meaning within and hopes that the student will take the meaning and
then drop the word. Then you can use the word when you get śiṣyas. Now, the student
says sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa is word and my head is riddled with word without knowing the
meaning. So my head is filled with word and there is no place for the meaning. Then we
say throw the word and keep the meaning and be silent. If you can keep the meaning and
use the word, then alone it is useful for the speaker and the listener. The words are the
carrier of knowledge. Words are the container of knowledge. It is like sugarcane when you
press you get juice which is jñāna.
Every pramāṇa gives you jñāna. jñāna-janakam vākyam. Now the student asks the very
word Māyā and sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa exists in the form of word and I have not grasped the
meaning. If you raise such a question, then you try to understand that I will assist you in
grasping the meaning of those words. Vidyāraṇya says the word Māyā is used by us even
in our common parlance. We use it in every magic show called indra-jāla. So we find the
magic show is called Māyā-jāla.
We use the word Māyā for what you experience intimately but when you probe, it
disappears and therefore, it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. It is Māyā. Whatever the definition we
use for magic, may you apply here also. That is why we should not go to a magician for
the method of the magic. Once you know the method, the magic is no more a magic and
magic loses its very status. Māyā you apply and you will understand. Come to the next
class.

Class 121

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 555

Śloka 140 contd.

Vidyāraṇya pointed out in śloka 139 that the very nature of Māyā is vismaya or wonder
and by the word wonder we mean that it has the nature which cannot be comprehended
by the intellect. The intellect is not able to explain it. Inexplicability is the nature of Māyā.
Asking us to explain Māyā is something impossible. It is not our inability or deficiency,
but it is because of the very nature of Māyā we are unable to explain Māyā. If it is the
deficiency of our intellect, some other stronger intellect would be able to explain it. No
intellect is able to explain it. Inexplicability is the very intrinsic nature of Māyā. You
should not ask further questions and you should know it is anirvacanīya-rūpa.
Anirvacanīya means that it cannot be classified as asat or sat and you cannot say it is or it
is not and therefore, it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa and it is not available for classification as
existence or non-existence.
When this much was said the Pūrvapakṣa says that I am not able to conceive of such a
unique category of sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. The intellect’s function is dichotomy and it wants an
answer yes or no. Therefore, the intellect is not able to conceive of a third category of sat-
asat. No other philosopher has accepted this category. None is able to accept the category
of the third philosophy. Even in Vedānta both Dvaita and Viśiṣṭādvaita accept sat or asat
and they want us to put everything under one of the two. What we find we are able to put
brahman in sat-vessel and all other thing from Māyā, ākāśa, etc., we are not able to put in
sat or asat but we want to put in a third vessel and we are forced to invent and create a
third vessel sat-asat-vilakṣaṇavessel and this none accept. Māyā is accepted by them for it
occurs in the Veda as also in Gītā. The word Māyā they accept and Gītā also mama māyā it
is said. Our contradiction is not about the word Māyā as both of us accept. What is the
category of Māyā, we have the problem with. All say that Māyā comes under sat principle
only. When you talk about the rabbit's horn they will say it will come under asat. But they
will never accept the third category. In Advaita Māyā is not sat principle and nor it is asat
principle but it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. Now he asks the question as he is not able to grasp
the possibility of sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. Vidyāraṇya says: I will try to explain this to you. We
say that the entire prapañca is anirvacanīya, mithyā and brahman alone is satya. Yet, the
world has utility as it is vyāvahārika-satya which is called mithyā; that you are unable to
accept. I will introduce prātibhāsika-satya which is also anirvacanīya. Through the
prātibhāsika anirvacanīya, I will explain another anirvacanīya. The example given is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 556

prātibhāsika-satya or inferior mithyā. vyāvahārika-satya or superior mithyā it is called.

This is explained by Gaudapāda in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad.
We have mirage water or magic show. All are examples for sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. The most
famous example is rope-snake. We show through this example that the rope-snake is sat-
asat-vilakṣaṇa category. Once others understand sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa then we will extend
this to the waking state also. First, we negate the snake and then we come to the rope also.
Thus, we bring in the rope-snake and even the rope-snake example has not convinced
other philosophers. They say rope-snake is also satya. This has not enlightened them. They
say dream also is satya. They say shell-silver also is satya. Mirage water also they call as
satya. The example has not worked for them and Vidyāraṇya tries to convince them by
showing that the rope-snake, etc., falls under sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. The definition and nature
of Māyā sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa unique category has to be convincing to me; the Pūrvapakṣa
says. If you are not convinced then I will give you a prātibhāsika example. The word Māyā
is used by the worldly people in the sense of magic. The other Māyā is called śāstra-
prasiddha-māyā. Magic is called loka-prasiddha-māyā. It is indrajāla magic. That itself
you analyse and see whether it comes under sat or asat. When you focus you will find it
not coming under sat or asat.

śloka 141
न निरूपयितुं शक्या विस्पष्टं भासते च या ।
सा मायेतीन्द्रजालादौ लोकाः सम्प्रतिपेदिरे ॥ ६.१४१ ॥
na nirūpayituṃ śakyā vispaṣṭaṃ bhāsate ca yā.
sā māyetīndrajālādau lokāḥ sampratipedire (6.141).
You focus on any prātibhāsika-satya, which is any unreal projection of the mind or any
false experience and it is subjective hallucination of the mind. Logically, it comes under
neither sat nor asat category. There are visual or audio hallucinations. In what category
you will put that? You cannot say it is sat because if it is sat all of us should be able to see
that. We cannot say it is asat because those who experience they swear having seen or
heard it. A non-existent thing cannot produce any effect. Since it produces an effect, we
classify it under sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category. So also the dream falls under this category.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 557

On waking up we don’t see the dream. An existent thing cannot be negated. A non-
existent thing cannot be experienced. Svapna is experienced; therefore, it cannot come
under non-existent thing. Svapna is experienced and therefore, it cannot be called non-
existent. Svapna is totally negated on waking up, so svapna cannot come under existent
thing also. Svapna is experienced and it is negated also and therefore, it will not come
under either of the categories and therefore, it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. That which is clearly
experienced like a dream, visual hallucination or audio hallucination are clearly
experienced by the relevant person, and that which you cannot prove as really existent is
called Māyā. That is why Viśiṣṭādvaita calls dream as real. They give brahman also the
same status.
Vedāntins argue that if you give the same status for all the things then Veda either should
negate all of them [brahman, dream and waking, etc] or should not negate anyone of
them. What Vedānta does is that it negates everything other than brahman. Vedānta
negates every blessed thing except brahman which means that they should not be given
the same status as that of brahman. Brahman is unnegatably real and these are negatably
real. When we say negatably real, it is unreal. Brahman is unnegatably real which we call
really real. Vedānta never treats brahman and the world on par. Therefore, there is a
difference and that difference is called brahma satya jagan mithyā. That is called Māyā.
Because Māyā and mithyā creates problem, so we have introduced a word that it is
vyāvahārika-satya. If the word Māyā and mithyā disturbs you I will give you a word
vyāvahārika-satya and prātibhāsika-satya. vyāvahārika-satya is real in jāgṛt-avasthā and
prātibhāsika-satya is real in svapna-avasthā. Vyāvahārika-satya is non-existent in svapna-
avasthā and prātibhāsika is non-existent in jāgṛt-avasthā each one is real in its own place
and that is why we call it relative reality. Sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa is a conditional reality. In the
case of magic show, the common people have accepted Māyā as inexplicable indrajāla
magic show. If the world accepts the word Māyā with regard to inexplicable magic show,
why cannot I use the word Māyā to this inexplicable creation which is a magic show
conducted by Īśvara? Māyāvī means Īśvara and he has the cosmic magic show whereas a
local magician has this prātibhāsika magic show. This has been accepted. There is
consensus and there is no dispute in the case of magic show.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 558

śloka 142
स्पष्टं भाति जगच्चेदमशक्यं तन्निरूपणम्।
मायामयं जगत्तस्मादीक्षस्वापक्षपाततः ॥ ६.१४२ ॥
spaṣṭaṃ bhāti jagaccedamaśakyaṃ tannirūpaṇam.
māyāmayaṃ jagattasmādīkṣasvāpakṣapātataḥ (6.142).
Vidyāraṇya says that the word magic applicable to indrajāla is applicable to the world
also. So he says idam jagat spaṣṭaṃ bhāti, the universe is so tangible and if you ask any
physicist, he will say there is nothing at all. He is unable to explain anything from gross
thing to atom, etc. They say in an atom, the space occupied by a particle that most of the
space in an atom is empty space. All the atoms put together is this wall and therefore, the
wall must be 95% empty. Therefore, more you probe, the more you find that the world
disappears scientifically. The world disappears into thin air. It proves that the
categorization as sat or asat is impossible. This is similar to a magic show. Magic is sat as
also asat.
The definition of magic is also impossible. So we say jagat is māyāmaya. It means it is
anirvacanīya. Since it is experienced it will not come under asat vastu and on waking it is
negated that means on gaining Ātma-jñāna with the help of śāstra pramāṇa, on waking up
through śāstra pramāṇa the world gets negated and therefore, it will not come under sat
category also. Śāstric negation is not a casual statement as every Upaniṣad teaches it
seriously. Therefore, may you clearly appreciate this without any prejudice that world is
mithyā. Without any prejudice you study Veda and you will find that Veda negates
everything other than brahman.

śloka 143
निरूपयितुमारब्धे निखिलैरपि पण्डितैः ।
अज्ञानं पुरतस्तेषां भाति कक्षासु कासुचित्॥ ६.१४३ ॥
nirūpayitumārabdhe nikhilairapi paṇḍitaiḥ.
ajñānaṃ puratasteṣāṃ bhāti kakṣāsu kāsucit (6.143).
Vidyāraṇya says this inexplicability of the world will be found at all levels and in all
fields. In any branch of science, the research will find itself at the state of unanswered
question. After the solution, a new question will come every time. This is Māyā-mahimā
and that is ajñāna, which will be present in one layer or another. The basis of sat-asat-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 559

vilakṣaṇa vastu is ajñāna. The basis of all unreal things is ajñāna. The unreal snake is based
on rope-ignorance. The unreal mirage water is born out of sand-ignorance; the unreal
dream is born of waker’s ignorance. That is why Ādi Śaṅkarācārya begins Brahma-sūtra
with adhyāsa-bhāṣya. The content of sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa is ajñāna. That is why when you
probe, you will find one ajñāna after another ajñāna.
The scientist say: we would have solved all questions regarding the universe and with the
help of regard one theory, called the theory of everything, we will be able to explain
everything. Still they are working for that theory. They will never arrive due to Māyā.
Then can the come across brahman atleast? They will not come across brahman because
they are themselves brahman! What is available is Māyā and they probe more and more
into Māyā and they will go deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Māyā but they will not
reach brahman. When they try to categorically explain, only ignorance or inexplicability
stares at them. Ajñāna means ignorance and this alone scares them. As they go deeper and
deeper they will reach ignorance at a deeper level alone. The world will be an eternal
mystery. Mystery is the very nature of the world and therefore, don’t try to solve this
problem but you dissolve it. The solvent in which you dissolve is jñāna. In jñāna, the
world gets dissolved. More in the next class.

Class 122
śloka 143 contd.
As a part of tat-padārtha, Īśvara-discussion, Vidyāraṇya deals with the topic of Māyā
which happens to be the most important part of Īśvara. Īśvara has three component s: one
is Māyā, the other is the original consciousness the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya and the third is
ābhāsa-caitanya; caitanya-dvaya and Māyā is Īśvara. Of the three, one is pāramārthika-
satya and the other two are vyāvahārika-satya. Māyā is vyavahārika because it is available
for pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Therefore, without discussion on Māyā we cannot discuss Īśvara.
Vidyāraṇya points out that the nature of Māyā is anirvacanīya. He pointed out that if you
take only Śruti pramāṇa into account, Śruti negates Māyā and from Śruti dṛṣṭi Māyā
comes under asat only. If you go by pauruṣeya pramāṇa or pratyakṣa pramāṇa, it cannot
negate Māyā it cannot negate prapañca and from pratyakṣa dṛṣṭi Māyā or prapañca will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 560

come under sat category only. As long as we have not introduced Vedānta Śruti pramāṇa,
one will not be agreeable to negate Māyā. Until then prapañca is sat or real only.
Once you accept Śruti and pratyakṣa or take Vedānta and pratyakṣa pramāṇa then buddhi
will have a new problem. Śruti says it is asat but you cannot say it is asat and pratyakṣa
says it is sat but you cannot say it is sat; they are mixture of both with opposite attributes.
Both Vedānta and pratyakṣa pramāṇa have to be taken into account and then we will have
the problem of whether it is sat or asat. We are in a fix to fix as to which category we can
classify Māyā or prapañca in. anirvacanīya means unclassifiable or undefinable.
Somebody asks that you say Māyā is anirvacanīya and you have defined Māyā as sat-asat-
vilakṣaṇa. This is the question from Viśiṣṭādvaita. He says it is nirvacanīya which means
definable. For that it is said when I say anirvacanīya it cannot be defined as sat or asat.
Whenever we say anirvacanīya, it should be taken that it cannot be defined either as sat or
asat. It is neither sat nor asat. Since Māyā is anirvacanīya all the paramparā that has come
out of Māyā also has the genes of the mother Māyā.
Therefore, it is also anirvacanīya. The genetic character of Māyā inheres in all the products
like ākāśa, vāyu, etc. Pratyakṣa reveals vāyu but Śruti negates vāyu, ākāśa etc. All the five
elements are said to be anirvacanīya. Anirvacanīya means whenever you probe into the
universe, you will find that your intellect is not able to explain things. Any solution will be
temporary. Once it was said that atom was fundamental. Atom is that which cannot be
divided further.
Now atom has been divided further and the probe has gone further and further and the
inexplicability stares at us at one time or the other. We will say I don’t know in the
beginning itself while the expert will say so after some time. Whatever is the field of
research, the analysis of living being or the cosmos there will be a dead end. The ignorance
stares at one time or the other. An advanced scientist will have advanced ignorance and
the ordinary people will have gross ignorance.

śloka 144
देहेन्द्रियादयो भावा वीर्येणोत्पादिताः कथम्।
कथं वा तत्र चैतन्यमित्युक्ते ते किमुत्तरम्॥ ६.१४४ ॥
dehendriyādayo bhāvā vīryeṇotpāditāḥ katham.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 561

kathaṃ vā tatra caitanyamityukte te kimuttaram (6.144).

In the previous verse, Vidyāraṇya said that there is a mystery or ignorance at different
levels. Now Vidyāraṇya takes a sample case. The biggest mystery is the one of life itself.
How did the living beings originate? What is the beginning of life? If you analyse you will
get several more questions. We see all the living beings as also the inert objects are made
of the same matter only. Our body is made up of matter and all the inert objects are also
made up of inert matters only. This is proved scientifically. The external objects are also
made up of the same materials only. Sastrically if you analyse the world and the body,
both are made up of pañca-bhautika or matter. Between the behaviour of matter in living
organisms and the behaviour of matter in inert objects, there is very wide difference. All
the scientific research only shows that there are so many differences in the matter in lives
and the object. There is big difference in complexity and in its capacity to store
information, etc. The human brain has the capacity to hold the memory and also it is able
to pass on the information to the next generation also. This capacity is not there in
ordinary elements and objects. How the ordinary chemical gets converted into
biochemistry, none is able to explain. The scientists who talk of creation say initially the
creation was not there. They say pañca-bhūtas the inert matters were there and how did
the inert matter suddenly become so complicated that from chemistry to bio-chemistry
became possible which none is able to explain. They say that there is difference in matter
in the organism and the matter outside. Vidyāraṇya says you cannot explain life and
naturally you cannot explain death also. How the biochemistry becomes ordinary
chemistry we cannot answer. How the body becomes decomposed on death, including
death itself also they cannot explain. They can answer everything except two: life and
death. You cannot say how the creation came into being.
The origin of life you cannot logically explain. This can be answered only with the help of
śāstra. From Ātmā, life has come. You think this is the answer to the question. At the end
the Vedas will say nothing has come. Life has come from Ātmā is only adhyāropa. Later, it
will be negated in the apavāda argument. How are they created or how are they born? The
answer seems to be simple that one is born of the parents through puruṣa-bīja. Father
produces bīja and bīja is born as the next generation through the womb of the mother.
Here, you assume the parents are there and when we think of the first living being, how it
came into being is our question. Scientists don’t believe and want to know how the life

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 562

came first. Vidyāraṇya asks another question how did the puruṣa-bīja is able to produce
from such a minute dot of matter. For that the other person answers that it is his nature.
How life or consciousness did come in that matter? If the chemicals can produce
consciousness why cannot we produce a baby with the combination of the chemicals?
When we create a statue out of all the materials the statue will be exact and lifelike. All
will be there but they cannot talk. After all it is a statue but what is the extraordinary
feature and how consciousness is produced is a mystery.

śloka 145
वीर्यस्यैष स्वभावश्चेत्कथं तद्विदितं त्वया ।
अन्वयव्यतिरेकौ यौ भग्नौ तौ व्यर्थवीर्यतः ॥ ६.१४५ ॥
vīryasyaiṣa svabhāvaścetkathaṃ tadviditaṃ tvayā.
anvayavyatirekau yau bhagnau tau vyarthavīryataḥ (6.145).
Here is an imaginary dialogue as to how a puruṣa-bīja produces a full-fledged baby. For
this, Pūrvapakṣa says that it is the nature of every Puruṣa as fire has uṣṇa-svabhāva. If you
give such an answer I will ask a counter question. How did you know that? This is the
question from Vidyāraṇya. Perceptually you don’t see anything in the puruṣa-bīja. Any
part of the body is but chemical, only available for chemical analysis. Perception does not
prove the availability of its quality. For that he gives an answer. I knew it through logic
says Pūrvapakṣa. Where pratyakṣa is not proving anvaya-vyatireka logic can be taken as
proof. Co-presence is called anvaya and co-absence is called vyatireka. From this, we
know that one is the cause of the other. vīrya-satve śarīra-utpattiḥ, vīrya-abhave śarīra-
utpatti-abhāva tasmad vīryaḥ śarīrasya kāraṇam. This is his answer to be supplied. For
this Vidyāraṇya gives his reply.
Whatever the logic you have given, that is negated or dismissed by me. He gives an
exception. Anvaya-vyatireka is acceptable only if it is universal. Tobacco is the cause of
cancer hundred percent if only all the people using tobacco is affected by cancer. There are
many people who use tobacco but are healthy. Then they add the cause that it is a
predisposed cause. If you ask how another person who never touches tobacco is affected
by cancer? That I don’t know, they will say. Every other day people interview so many
people and see connection and say this is the cause. You apply and say the effect is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 563

there in some more people. Kārya-kāraṇa-sambandha is the most violated rule in this
world. Every uniform law is having an exception. Kārya-kāraṇa-vāda never works and he
says there are many Puruṣas who have puruṣa-bīja but are not productive. The puruṣa-bīja
is not able to produce a child. That means your argument is an assumption and not a
proof. Your anvaya-vyatireka is falsified.

śloka 146
न जानामि किमप्येतदित्यन्ते शरणं तव ।
अत एव महन्तोऽस्याः प्रवदन्तीन्द्रजालताम्॥ ६.१४६ ॥
na jānāmi kimapyetadityante śaraṇaṃ tava.
ata eva mahanto:'syāḥ pravadantīndrajālatām (6.146).
When I ask such a further question, what will be your answer? I am not able to explain
why vandhya-vīrya does not have that svabhāva. If svabhāva is one vīrya and the same
svabhāva is not there in another vīrya you cannot call it svabhāva. The word svabhāva can
be applied only when it is universal. The utpatti capacity of vīrya is svabhāva of bīja
cannot be its svabhāva in the real sense. All the modern scientists are humble and they
thought they can solve all problems but now slowly they think that it is not possible to
solve all problems. They say that they can improve the quality of the life of the people.
This is the only difference between the scholar and layman; the scholar will say after
sometime that he does not know while the layman will say immediately. But Vedāntins
will not say anything. They don’t probe into the cause of the creation. It is like putting the
leg in a slushy mud and get caught in Māyā slush and be in trouble. That is why we
negate creation. No Jīva is born at anytime and there is no cause for origination of Jīva.
The highest reality is the brahman, in which brahman nothing was born, will be born or is
born. Therefore, he says that because of that reason the ignorance is the ultimate answer;
never probe into the magic show but enjoy the show.

Class 123

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 564

śloka 146 contd.

As a part of mahā-vākya-vicāra Vidyāraṇya has come to tat-pada-vicāra after the
completion of tvam-pada-vicāra. We have seen that Īśvara consists of three factors one is
the original consciousness, the second is cosmic reflecting medium called Māyā and the
third is the cosmic reflection Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya or cidābhāsa. Thus ādhāra-
caitanya plus ābhāsa-caitanya and Māyā put together is Īśvara. Of these three, two are
vyāvahārika-satya or mithyā that is Māyā and cidābhāsa while the third one is ādhāra-
caitanya or the original consciousness which is satya. What we are going to do in mahā-
vākya-vicāra is that the primary meaning of Īśvara we take as mixture of the three and we
will say that the secondary implied meaning to be taken in mahā-vākya study is the satya
aṃśa of Īśvara.
By applying bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā in mahā-vākya study we have to negate Māyā and
ābhāsa-caitanya and retain ādhāra-caitanya only. When Īśvara is a composite entity with
all the three factors, Īśvara will have superior virtues and no Jīva can go anyway near
Īśvara. Īśvara is saguṇa Īśvara with all virtues in superlative measure. Jīva cannot equal
the Īśvara even in a dream. Where is the question of aikya ever happening and therefore,
during mahā-vākya study we have to keep aside Māyā and Māyā-pratibimbita caitanya
and study ādhāra-caitanya alone. In mahā-vākya-vicāra Īśvara is stripped of his portfolio
and powers. Only when Māyā is close by, the power will be there and ādhāra-caitanya is
nirguṇa and powerless.
Therefore, there is no question of superiority of Īśvara because superiority is caused by
virtues and when virtues are not there where the questions of superiority are! We will
extend this to Jīva and take away his inferior virtues too. Keeping the later programme in
mind, Vidyāraṇya introduced three factors and later he can talk of bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā.
Of the three factors, the most important one is Māyā. Māyā is important, powerful,
significant and mysetrious factor and therefore, Vidyāraṇya has started discussing about
Māyā. This topic continues.
Māyā is not a factor introduced to logically answer questions regarding the creation but
Māyā is a word introduced to show the trans-logical nature of creation and therefore, any
logical questions regarding the universe are illogical. These are the very nature of the
universe. We don’t answer the question but we say the question itself is illogical. We
question the questioner. When the very nature of the world is beyond logic, how can you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 565

question the origin of the creation, legitimate end of creation, cause of creation and
purpose of creation, etc? The creation itself happens to be sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa. The existence
of creation cannot be pinpointed. The world you cannot say is sat. Even it is asat we
cannot say. The very existence of the world cannot logically be classified and if someone
asks whether the existence of Māyā is possible, there a possibility of Māyā Vidyāraṇya
says and we have got cases to establish Māyā.
Every magic show presented by a magician is such a case and the definition of magic is
that it is experienceable but not explicable. The lady is cut into two, the two portions are
separated, the magician walks up and down, then he joins the two, she steps out and you
clearly see with your eyes for it is pramāṇa-siddha. How do you explain the separation
and reunion seen by the whole audience? You see it but you cannot explain. Universe is
cutting brahman into many without cutting like this magic show. Brahman appears to be
divided as Jīva-jagat-Īśvara and all our pramāṇas reveal this duality but still the truth is
that brahman is not cut at all. Brahma-Viśṇu-Śiva are not there and Jīva-jagat-Īśvara and
sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya are not there but all our pramāṇas take and reveal the existence of these
divisions.
Brahman is one indivisible whole and therefore, our conclusion is that Māyā is the name of
our experience which cannot be logically explained. Therefore, all the great Ācāryas say
that the world itself is a cosmic magic performed by Īśvara or Māyā. Therefore, never
attempt to logically explain the creation and if you try the consequence will be you will be
encouraged by initial answers and after a particular stage you will not know as you cannot
explain creation.
The modern cosmology will say big bang is the cause of creation and they will say don’t
ask about the cause of creation and time of creation. They say there is the point of
singularity or do not ask any question. The singularity is nothing but Māyā. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says for this, indra-jāla status is given by the people. Up to this, we saw in the
last class.

śloka 147
एतस्मात्कमिवेन्द्रजालमपरं यद्गर्भवासस्थितम्
रेतश्चेतति हस्तमस्तकपदं प्रोद्भूतनानाङ्कुरम्।
पर्यायेण शिशुत्वयौवनजरारोगैरनेकै र्वृतम्

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 566

पश्यत्यत्ति शृणोति जिघ्रति तथा गच्छत्यथागच्छति ॥ ६.१४७ ॥

etasmātkimivendrajālamaparaṃ yadgarbhavāsasthitam
retaścetati hastamastakapadaṃ prodbhūtanānāṅkuram.
paryāyeṇa śiśutvayauvanajarārogairanekairvṛtam
paśyatyatti śṛṇoti jighrati tathā gacchatyathāgacchati (6.147).
Vidyāraṇya feels that Māyā’s glory is so great that it cannot be presented in a small śloka
and therefore, he changes the metre so that Māyā’s glory can be appreciated. Māyā’s glory
can be appreciated in any aspect of creation, but Vidyāraṇya focuses on the formation of
life. The greatest mystery and the greatest glory of Māyā can be appreciated when we see
the formation of life. The first is the beginning of life in the creation or in the present sṛṣṭi
for the first time and how Jīva comes after pañca-bhūtas are created. How from an inert
chemical, living beings are created we are not able to answer. Vidyāraṇya says that it is a
bigger mystery and even after living beings have come into existence out of parents, the
creation of a baby is a great magic and wonder. Out of parents how babies are conceived
and how baby grows is a medical wonder. Genetic research is going on and on but we
have not scratched the surface. The reason why that happens is not known. When a
mother conceives we take it as an easy thing but have you ever thought of the whole
process? This is a mystery. What greater magic do you want as an example other than the
formation of a baby in the womb of the mother? We are a part of the magic because we
were in our mother’s womb at one time. A dot of puruṣa-bīja or egg or sperm which is a
minutest entity which has been transferred from the father into the garbha of the mother
in a few years becomes ninety kilos of wonder! Puruṣa-bīja is alive.
People ask: when does it become alive? Life becomes alive even in the father’s body in
unmanifest form. The dot is not sufficient for manifestation of cidābhāsa. The table cannot
manifest cidābhāsa. Cit is there in the table but it is incapable of manifesting cidābhāsa. In
puruṣa-bīja there is cit and cidābhāsa cannot be fully manifest without life. Table cannot
manifest cidābhāsa now and never, but retas has the potential to manifest itself when the
baby takes shape gradually. It has the potential to serve as a reflecting medium and that is
the contribution of the parent. We cannot do it artificially. This has to come from a live
parent. How is it done is Māyā? We cannot know anything about how it is done. It is a
living principle and that is why in no religion, abortion is accepted. According to
pañcagni-vidyā, Jīva travels at various levels and Jīva comes to father’s body and mother’s

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 567

body and Jīva enters at the time of conception. This is very elaborately explained in
Brahma-sūtra and Chāndogya Upaniṣad.
Therefore, abortion is considered as a mahā-pāpa. First, it is a living being. Gradually, it
develops hands, head, the feet and other parts. So, the baby emerges as a living being. This
does not happen in the case of the table. The table does not have duplicating capacity. This
is a mystery. Some cells are capable of multiplication while some others are not capable of
multiplication. This is a mystery and it is called Māyā. Just as from vṛkṣa-bīja, emerge
trunk, leaves, branches, etc. Similarly, from puruṣa-bīja, the baby emerges with hands and
legs, etc. The very same retas has the emergence of hands, legs, etc., during the course of
time.

śloka 148
देहवद्वटधानादौ सुविचार्यावलोक्यताम्।
क्व धाना कुत्र वा वृक्षस्तस्मान्मायेति निश्चिनु ॥ ६.१४८ ॥
dehavadvaṭadhānādau suvicāryāvalokyatām.
kva dhānā kutra vā vṛkṣastasmānmāyeti niścinu (6.148).
Initially, all this happens in the womb of the mother and the baby comes out of the womb
with or without the will of the baby; at the appropriate time, the baby is brought out of the
mother. The child is delivered automatically. The choice is not given either to the baby or
the mother as to when the baby should come out. This is inbuilt in every animal including
the human being. The word dhānā means the seed. Generally, it is in plural number. Now,
Vidyāraṇya says that this is not only in the case of human being but also in the formation
of animal and plant life. It is exactly like the body of human being, the case of a banyan
tree and also in the case of animal life you can see this wonder. In the case of banyan tree,
the seed is too small but the tree is so huge and vast. All of them are packed in one seed.
Therefore, may you appreciate after thorough examination or analysis, the case of
formation of human lives and also the plant and animal kingdom.
An existent tree need not emerge and a non-existent tree cannot emerge but the tree
emerges and that is called Māyā. No theory of creation will explain the arrival of a tree.
Where is the seed and how small the seed is! From out of that small seed emerges a huge
tree and you are not able connect the cause and effect. Even karma cannot explain because

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 568

the origin of karma cannot be explained. Therefore, only Gaudapāda says there is no
creation and that the creation is Māyā. The creation of tree is Māyā. Logic and logicians
cannot really fathom the nature and mystery of the whole creation.

śloka 149
निरुक्तावभिमानं ये दधते तार्किकादयः ।
हर्षमिश्रादिभिस्ते तु खण्डनादौ सुशिक्षिताः ॥ ६.१४९ ॥
niruktāvabhimānaṃ ye dadhate tārkikādayaḥ.
harṣamiśrādibhiste tu khaṇḍanādau suśikṣitāḥ (6.149).
Here, Gaudapāda says no doubt there are several systems of philosophy which claim to
explain the creation logically. Buddhistic theory is called saṅghāta-vāda. Sat-kārya-vāda is
called pariṇāma-vāda and asat-kārya-vāda is called ārambha-vāda. So many theories are
there which claim to logically explain the creation. Now asks Pūrvapakṣa why you cannot
accept these theories and Vidyāraṇya says they are full of illogicalities. This has been
elaborately discussed in Brahma-sūtra as well. Vidyāraṇya says if you are interested in
detail, you read those books. He says don’t enquire much about Māyā.

Class 124
śloka 149 contd.
Māyā plays an important role in the status of Īśvara. the original consciousness gets
omniscient status because of Māyā and brahman is not even an object of worship.
Brahman is not available for any form of transaction. Pure brahman cannot be worshipped
and it cannot bless us also. Brahman with Māyā alone gains power, etc. What I want to say
tat-padārtha Īśvara has Māyā with its significant components. He concludes the topic here.
Māyā is not available for any kind of definition. This we have established by analyzing the
origination of anything and when we talk about origination of anything we find the logic
fails. We find all the philosophies have got logical fallacies. Of course Māyā backed by
brahman alone has all the power.
Vidyāraṇya here points out that we do not have any fanatical view on creation. If anyone
gives logically convincing answer we are ready to take it. But all the definitions given are
superficial and on enquiry we find serious problems. We have many siddhi-granthas. All

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 569

the advanced granthas take lot of efforts in analyzing other systems of philosophies. Even
in Brahma-sūtra this is done. Many other Ācāryas have done that. If you want to know the
deficiencies you may go through those books he says.
Logic should not be applied in those realms of knowledge which are beyond the bounds of
logic. Logicians do not have belief in śāstra and they put full trust on reasoning calling us
superstitious. They place lot of trust in the logical reasoning not knowing Vedānta is
beyond logic. Tārkikas do not know the limitation of tarka while we know the limitations
of tarka. They place trust and confidence in logic not knowing that Vedānta is beyond
logic. To enter in any siddhi-grantha the student should have thorough knowledge of
tarka.

śloka 150
अचिन्त्याः खलु ये भावा न तांस्तर्के षु योजयेत्।
अचिन्त्यरचनारूपं मनसापि जगत्खलु ॥ ६.१५० ॥
acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṃstarkeṣu yojayet.
acintyaracanārūpaṃ manasāpi jagatkhalu (6.150).
There are many things in the creation which transcend logic. They are neither logical nor
illogical but they are beyond logic. Logic cannot enter the field at all as ears cannot have
access into the field of colours. It can neither assert nor does it can negate. It is trans-logical
field; don’t use tarka pramāṇa. It is beyond tarka. Never subject those things to logical
analysis. By employing ineffective logic which person has answered all his doubts? Ocean
of doubts cannot be crossed by pure logic alone. The creation comes under trans-logical
experience. Within creation you can give some logic but beyond creation you cannot give
any logic. There are medical wonders such as a person according medical test cannot walk
but he walks and it is a wonder. In every field such wonders we come across in life. So we
find unfathomable is the universe. Jagat is acintya-racanā-rūpa which is inexplicable
through the mind. Where is the question of creating similar one? You cannot do that.

śloka 151
अचिन्त्यरचनाशक्तिबीजं मायेति निश्चिनु ।
मायाबीजं तदेवैकं सुषुप्तावनुभूयते ॥ ६.१५१ ॥
acintyaracanāśaktibījaṃ māyeti niścinu.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 570

māyābījaṃ tadevaikaṃ suṣuptāvanubhūyate (6.151).

This inexplicable creation must have existed before also in a potential form. That is what
we see in our experience. The baby exists in a potential form in the womb of the mother.
So also the universe exists in a bīja form and that alone is called Māyā. The inexplicable
universe existing in an inexplicable seed form is called Māyā. Māyā is the seed of this
acintya prapañca. Śakti the creative power is inexplicable; that inexplicable power Māyā
creates inexplicable prapañca. We should not say Māyā is śakti but we will say Māyā is
endowed with śakti by brahman. What will be the state of Māyā before the creation came?
You cannot destroy the world experimentally. Māyā is experienced when the whole world
goes into potential form. Now how to get the experience of Māyā? Vidyāraṇya says I will
give you. He says when you go to sleep what you experience is Māyā at a micro level.
When Viśva sleeps it is nidrā and when Īśvara sleeps it is yoga-nidrā.
Therefore, he says that non-dual, single, Māyā means seed, the jagat bīja which is
experienced by everyone in suṣupti. In suṣupti there is no sthūla-śarīra, sthūla-prapañca,
no sūkṣma-śarīra, no sūkṣma prapañca and all are resolved and it is experienced.

śloka 152
जाग्रत्स्वप्नजगत्तत्र लीनं बीज इव द्रुमः ।
तस्मादशेषजगतो वासनास्तत्र संस्थिताः ॥ ६.१५२ ॥
jāgratsvapnajagattatra līnaṃ bīja iva drumaḥ.
tasmādaśeṣajagato vāsanāstatra saṃsthitāḥ (6.152).
With the previous verse, Māyā-discussion is over. Now, he introduces the reflected
consciousness in Māyā. Īśvara-vicāra is part of tat-pada-vicāra and tat-pada-vicāra is part
of mahā-vākya-vicāra. In that Māyā seed, the whole jāgṛt and svapna prapañca resolves in
unmanifest condition. If it is not in unmanifest condition it cannot come out. A mango tree
is in an unmanifest condition in the seed, else it will not come out as a mango tree. If it is
not there in an unmanifest condition, you can get any tree from one seed. From coconut
seed alone the coconut tree is manifest. Māyā is unmanifest universe and sthūla and
svapna jagat is in unmanifest form in Māyā. Kārya prapañca itself is kāraṇa prapañca. Just
as a tree is unmanifest in the seed, the world is unmanifest in Māyā. In this context, the
whole universe is very much present in Māyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 571

śloka 153
या बुद्धिवासनास्तासु चैतन्यं प्रतिबिम्बति ।
मेघाकाशवदस्पष्टश्चिदाभासोऽनुमीयताम्॥ ६.१५३ ॥
yā buddhivāsanāstāsu caitanyaṃ pratibimbati.
meghākāśavadaspaṣṭaścidābhāso:'numīyatām (6.153).
Vidyāraṇya develops the whole thing systematically. He says that the kāraṇa-śarīra also
must have pratibimba caitanya. He wants to establish that kāraṇa prapañca or Māyā
should have the reflected consciousness. Now the question is: how to prove this point? So
he gives a logical proof. The sūkṣma-śarīra has the reflected consciousness is evidently
experienced by all of us. If sūkṣma-śarīra is not having pratibimba caitanya we will be
jaḍa.
All the sentiency is because of cidābhāsa only. All the śarīra parts are born out of pañca-
bhūtas and they are jaḍa by themselves but if they are to get cetana, they have to borrow
cidābhāsa. The mind is sentient we experience directly. There is no proof needed for this
purpose. Now Vidyāraṇya says that if the śarīras have cidābhāsa the kāraṇa also must
have cidābhāsa for kāraṇa is nothing but sthūla-sūkṣma alone in unmanifest form. Kārya
and kāraṇam are the same material alone in two avasthās.
From kārya-pratibimba-kāraṇa, pratibimba can be inferred because kāraṇa as kārya and
kāraṇa are the same material in two different states. If a bangle can be manifested from
gold state, the gold is an ornament in its previous unmanifest state. Since kārya is
manifest, the reflection is very evident and since kāraṇa is avyakta, reflection also will be
avyakta only. For this he reminds us of megha-pratibimba-ākāśa. Through inference, he
establishes that the cloud must have reflected space. The water drops have reflection we
are able to directly experience on the ground. The rain-bearing clouds consist of water
drops only and therefore, you can infer reflection there also. Similarly, he wants to say that
kāraṇa prapañca Māyā has drops of sūkṣma-śarīra because sūkṣma-śarīra in its potential
form is there in Māyā. Māyā which is the embodiment of all the sūkṣma-śarīra drops in
potential form also must have pratibimba caitanya.
The word vāsanā should be understood as the seed form of buddhi. By inference, it should
be understood that there is cidābhāsa in Māyā. This cidābhāsa is not spaṣṭa because Māyā
is everything in dormant condition and therefore, it is aspaṣṭa. Because it is aspaṣṭa we

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 572

have to use inference. Māyā-pratibimba caitanya we have to infer because it is not

pratyakṣa, like ākāśa pratibimba in the megha is inferred by us.

śloka 154
साभासमेव तद्बीजं धीरूपेण प्ररोहति ।
अतो बुद्धौ चिदाभासो विस्पष्टं प्रतिभासते ॥ ६.१५४ ॥
sābhāsameva tadbījaṃ dhīrūpeṇa prarohati.
ato buddhau cidābhāso vispaṣṭaṃ pratibhāsate (6.154).
We inferred megha pratibimba in verse 20 and 21 ibid. We will present the anumāna
vākya also. Māyā is pakṣa, endowed with pratibimba as sādhya, avyakta-buddhi-rūpatvāt
because Māyā is nothing but all buddhis in avyakta form; buddhi-vṛttivat like buddhi-
vṛtti. Just as buddhi-vṛtti has consciousness the samaṣṭi-vṛtti also should have the reflected
consciousness. In Māyā, all our minds are there in kāraṇa form. Your mind will be called
your kāraṇa-śarīra in potential form and my mind will be called my kāraṇa-śarīra in
potential form along with the sañcita karma. All with the sañcita karma will be there just
as rain clouds have the water within. Out of the cosmic megha water drops comes your
sūkṣma-śarīra as one drop and my sūkṣma-śarīra as another drop and this we cannot
experience in megha but we experience only when it gets into the vyakta form. In Māyā
also the sūkṣma-śarīras are there but they are not clear. When they become manifest the
cidābhāsa also becomes clear and then so many jīvas come out that brahman with Māyā.
The details we will see in the next class.

Class 125
śloka 154 contd.
As a part of mahā-vākya-vicāra Vidyāraṇya has come to tat-padārtha-vicāra which is
nothing but Īśvara-vicāra. Īśvara has three components the original consciousness, Māyā
and the reflected consciousness in Māyā. Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya. Vidyāraṇya
elaborately talked about Māyā, the reflecting medium, up to the verse 151. Now, he wants
to come to Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya which he calls Īśvara. While introducing Māyā-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 573

pratibimbita-caitanya he reminds us of fourfold ākāśa. That occurred in verses 20 and 21.

At vyaṣṭi level, he talked about ghaṭākāśa the space enclosed within the pot; then he
talked about jalākāśa within the pot; if there is water the space will be reflected with sun,
moon, etc. He calls it as jalākāśa; at vyaṣṭi level ghaṭākāśa is ādhāra-caitanya and jalākāśa
is ābhāsa-caitanya. Similarly, at samaṣṭi level the total space he calls it as mahākāśa and
imagines a vast body of clouds in which water droplets are there and therefore, cloud is
capable of reflecting ākāśa at macro level. The ākāśa reflected in the cloud he calls it as
meghākāśa. Thus you should remember at micro level ādhāra ākāśa and ābhāsa ākāśa and
at macro level ādhāra ākāśa and ābhāsa ākāśa. The space in the cloud is not visible to us
for we have not seen the pratibimba. Here, we have to take the anumāna-pramāṇa.
Ghaṭākāśa corresponds to kūṭastha-caitanya, tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha, jalākāśa is ahaṅkāra
caitanya, mahākāśa is equivalent of brahma caitanya and meghākāśa is equivalent of
Īśvara caitanya the reflection at macro level. Vidyāraṇya has talked about Māyā and he
talks about Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya and therefore, he talks about megha and megha-
pratibimbita-caitanya. He points out that megha the samaṣṭi water consists of all vyaṣṭi
water in the pot and whatever water available is one available in the clouds. Vyaṣṭi-
antaḥkaraṇa is included in Māyā samaṣṭi. Vyaṣṭi waters are included in the megha, the
vyaṣṭi minds are included in the samaṣṭi Māyā. All our minds were there in Māyā in the
potential form before sṛṣṭi and in the potential mind also cidābhāsa is there but in
potential form. In the potential mind cidābhāsa is in potential form and when all the
minds are created the cidābhāsas also will become evident. Vidyāraṇya says this you
regularly experience that when you go to sleep, the mind goes to unmanifest condition,
cidābhāsa also goes to unmanifest condition and we don’t feel the individuality. All our
problems are dormant with the mind and cidābhāsa being inactive. Everything when
woken up, the problem also becomes active.
The seed form of the mind which is kāraṇa-śarīras in their potential forms is with the
potential cidābhāsas; during the pralaya they were like that and at the time of sṛṣṭi in the
form of functioning mind they germinate. In short, from kāraṇa-śarīra seed sūkṣma-śarīra
sprouts and germinates. Instead of using the word sūkṣma-śarīra Vidyāraṇya uses the
word mind. When the mind is sphuṭa the reflection also becomes sphuṭa. In the manifest
mind which is converted kāraṇa-śarīra to sūkṣma-śarīra, avyakta to vyakta avasthā, the
cidābhāsa becomes very very clear. Cidābhāsa is a clean localized consciousness unlike cit

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 574

which does not have any location. The location of cidābhāsa is the reflecting medium.
Cidābhāsa is located in the mind and mind is located in the body and therefore, I
experience cidābhāsa in the body. We normally say “I am here in the hall in a corner”,
instead of saying I am everywhere.

śloka 155
मायाभासेन जीवेशौ करोतीति श्रुतौ श्रुतम्।
मेघाकाशजलाकाशाविव तौ सुव्यवस्थितौ ॥ ६.१५५ ॥
māyābhāsena jīveśau karotīti śrutau śrutam.
meghākāśajalākāśāviva tau suvyavasthitau (6.155).
Īśvara is Īśvara because of cidābhāsa although the original brahman does not have any
superior attributes and Jīva is Jīva although the original consciousness does not have any
inferior attributes. Īśvara’s īśvaratva is because of superior cidābhāsa and Jīva’s jīvatva is
because of inferior cidābhāsa. Both are caused by Māyā. Māyā is responsible for arrival of
reflection and Īśvara as also Jīva. If reflection is not there Īśvara is not possible. Īśvara
emerges because of Māyā and at vyaṣṭi level Jīva emerges because of the mind and
therefore, Upaniṣad says that Māyā is responsible for the arrival of both Īśvara and Jīva.
Both at micro and macro level, Māyā creates or brings about Jīva and Īśvara. Through
reflection, Īśvara and Jīva come into being. This is mentioned in the Śruti, the Upaniṣads.
[tāpanīya Upaniṣad]. The example given here is megākāśa and jalākāśa for the macro and
micro reflection. One corresponds to Īśvara and the other to Jīva. Thus they are well
organized and they are in good order.

śloka 156
मेघवद्वर्तते माया मेघस्थिततुषारवत्।
धीवासनाश्चिदाभासस्तुषारस्थखवत्स्थितः ॥ ६.१५६ ॥
meghavadvartate māyā meghasthitatuṣāravat.
dhīvāsanāścidābhāsastuṣārasthakhavatsthitaḥ (6.156).
Here, Vidyāraṇya equates the original and the example. Comparable to megha is Māyā. In
the total megha there are water particles that alone fills up water in the pot. In samaṣṭi
megha so many water drops are there. The pots are comparable to the mind in potential
form. Vāsanā is the kāraṇa and the mind is kāraṇa-śarīra. Droplets are compared to so

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 575

many kāraṇa-śarīras which after rain, manifestation, are converted into sūkṣma-śarīras the
minds. Now, reflection he says is cidābhāsa. All the reflections are comparable to
pratibimba ākāśa. Pratibimba ākāśa is in samaṣṭi megha and vyaṣṭi mind.

śloka 157
मायाधीनश्चिदाभासः श्रुतौ मायी महेश्वरः ।
अन्तर्यामी च सर्वज्ञो जगद्योनिः स एव हि ॥ ६.१५७ ॥
māyādhīnaścidābhāsaḥ śrutau māyī maheśvaraḥ.
Antaryāmī ca sarvajño jagadyoniḥ sa eva hi (6.157).
Through the fourfold ākāśa example he has introduced fourfold consciousness as total the
original consciousness, individual the original consciousness, total the reflected
consciousness and individual the reflected consciousness. Of these four, we will now focus
on the total reflection at macro level which is the prominent part of Īśvara so we call it
Īśvara. The superior attributes belong to Īśvara. Jīva has inferior attributes. The first
superior attribute of Īśvara is the master of the reflecting medium and at the individual
level the reflection is the slave of the reflecting medium. We are not masters of the mind,
our reflecting medium. That is why śama, dama, etc., we struggle with. Individual
reflection is the slave of the reflecting medium but the total reflection has the master in
Īśvara.
The total cidābhāsa the macro reflection obtaining in Māyā or that is formed in Māyā is
Māyī, the Lord of Māyā or the controller of Māyā or the master of Māyā and not only the
controller but through Māyā it becomes the master of the whole creation.
How do you know all this? This is the question posed by the Pūrvapakṣa. We say it is said
in the Śruti already quoted above. Refer to Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 4.9.10 [and Māṇḍūkya
Upaniṣad 6]. With the help of this Māyā, Īśvara gets so many powers and therefore, Īśvara
gets so many names. Behind successful brahman there is great lady called Māyā.
This Maheśvara is called Antaryāmī the inner controller of the whole world. He is the
omniscient controller of the whole world. Īśvara is the material cause of the creation.
Īśvara is the upādāna-kāraṇa or sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa. All these are attributed to the Lord
Īśvara reflected in Māyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 576

śloka 158
सौषुप्तमानन्दमयं प्रक्रम्यैवं श्रुतिर्जगौ ।
एष सर्वेश्वर इति सोऽयं वेदोक्त ईश्वरः ॥ ६.१५८ ॥
sauṣuptamānandamayaṃ prakramyaivaṃ śrutirjagau.
eṣa sarveśvara iti so:'yaṃ vedokta īśvaraḥ (6.158).
Vidyāraṇya says that Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad talks about the third pada of catuṣpāt Ātmā.
Viśva is the prathama pāda; in the fourth mantra the second pāda was talked about as
taijasa; the fifth and sixth mantra talks about the third pāda at vyaṣṭi level the prājña; and
in the sixth mantra samaṣṭi-kāraṇa-śarīra pratibimba is called Īśvara. Now, he will
comment upon that mantra.
Each word of the mantra will be explained here. Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad 6th mantra says the
following. The kāraṇa-śarīra is suṣupti-avasthā. After introducing suṣupti, ānandamaya,
the samaṣṭi is talked about. The omniscience and other qualities of ānandamaya-kośa as
Īśvara are not to be doubted; they have the authority of the Śruti.
After introducing prājña at the vyaṣṭi level in the sixth mantra, samaṣṭi-kāraṇa-śarīra-
pratibimbita-caitanya Īśvara is talked about as ‘eṣa sarveśvaraḥ’. Another name for
samaṣṭi kāraṇa-śarīra is called Māyā. Samaṣṭi-kāraṇa-śarīra-pratibimbita-caitanya is called
Īśvara. It is this Īśvara that has been mentioned in the Veda. Here, Veda refers to 5 and 6 of
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Now, Vidyāraṇya takes Māṇḍūkya mantra for discussion.

śloka 159
सर्वज्ञत्वादिके तस्य नैव विप्रतिपद्यताम्।
श्रौतार्थस्यावितर्क्यत्वान्मायायां सर्वसम्भवात्॥ ६.१५९ ॥
sarvajñatvādike tasya naiva vipratipadyatām.
śrautārthasyāvitarkyatvānmāyāyāṃ sarvasambhavāt (6.159).
First, he talks about the pramāṇa for the four attributes of Īśvara. Īśvara can be known
only through śāstra pramāṇa and without śāstra, either by pratyakṣa or reasoning, Īśvara
cannot be proved. Science can come up to a particular level that there are some unknown
powers which cannot be explained or proved. In Brahma-sūtra, Vedāntins have taken a lot
of trouble to prove that Īśvara cannot be proved by science. We Vedāntins establish that
the proofs of Tārkika are fallacious. The laymen may be convinced but we Vedāntins will
not accept the proof. We give reasoning with a note that our reasoning is not an

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 577

independent proof but complementary to Śruti pramāṇa. It is śruti-sammata-tarka. Their

reasoning is called kevala-tarka. It cannot prove Īśvara but ours can do it with the help of
Śruti.
The existence of Īśvara and attributes of Īśvara is primarily based on śāstra. All these are
not illogical. So he says with regard to superior attributes of Īśvara, sarvajñatva, etc., never
develop any doubt or reservation regarding the possibility of these attributes. The
teaching of Veda pramāṇa is valid and it is never to be doubted. Veda has its own unique
field and it reveals its meaning that cannot be challenged by any other pramāṇa. The eyes
are capable of revealing the colours which cannot be and need not be challenged by the
ears. So also the Veda pramāṇas. We live our lives putting the full faith in the pramāṇas of
our sense-organs. Just like pratyakṣa-upajīvya-pramāṇa is reliable, śāstra-upajīvya-
pramāṇa is also reliable in its field and it should not be questioned. Śāstra is valid in its
field and sense-organs are valid in their own fields; therefore, do not question śāstra. It is
not illogical also because in Māyā all powers are possible because Māyā is the seed of the
whole creation. All the powers you imagine have come from the source of Māyā alone.
Īśvara holds the powers of Māyā. More in the next class.

Class 126
śloka 159 contd.
As a part of tat-pada Vidyāraṇya has come to Īśvara pada vicāra. Īśvara consists of the
original consciousness, Māyā and the reflected consciousness. First, he talked about Māyā
elaborately and now he wants to talk about the reflected consciousness. He imagines the
question how can consciousness reflect in Māyā and how can Māyā form reflection? How
can you prove Māyā is reflectable thing? The mirror can reflect my face but a piece of cloth
does not reflect my face. If cloth can reflect you will see your face in the middle of the
class. In reflectable surface alone you will be able to see the thing. Māyā is samaṣṭi kāraṇa
prapañca from which all the sūkṣma-śarīras are generated because all the sūkṣma-śarīras
or minds are generated out of the kāraṇa prapañca or samaṣṭi kāraṇa-śarīra. Therefore,
Māyā is samaṣṭi kāraṇa-śarīra and it is kāraṇa prapañca and it has all the sūkṣma-śarīras
or all the minds in potential form. The mind can reflect consciousness is proved by our
experience. If mind cannot reflect consciousness the tragedy will be mind and body will be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 578

jaḍa. The mind reflects consciousness is pratyakṣa-anubhava-siddha. Now, Vidyāraṇya

argues that Māyā contains all our minds in a potential form and therefore, in Māyā
reflection must be potentially there. Just as reflection in the cloud we infer as the cloud
contains water particle and water particles can reflect is experienceable.
Therefore, Māyā has all our minds in potential form and in that samaṣṭi mind, samaṣṭi
kāraṇa-śarīra otherwise called kāraṇa prapañca is called Īśvara. Īśvara can be defined as
the original consciousness plus the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium. But
sometimes in the śāstra instead of enumerating all the three they call samaṣṭi cidābhāsa as
Īśvara and samaṣṭi cidābhāsa includes Māyā and the original consciousness. Reflection
you cannot have without a reflecting medium. Wherever the two are there the original
consciousness will be there being all-pervading. Samaṣṭi cidābhāsa includes the other two
also. This has been proved by meghākāśa dṛṣṭānta. All these are supported by Śruti
pramāṇa. All the reasoning is backed by Śruti vākya it is said by Vidyāraṇya. The
pramāṇa is 5th and 6th mantra of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad eṣa sarveśvara eṣa sarvajña
eṣo:'ntaryāmyeṣa yoniḥ sarvasya prabhavāpyayau hi bhūtānām which reads as this is the
Lord of all, this is the knower of all, this is the inner controller, this is the source of all, this
is the beginning and end of beings. Therefore, he says Īśvara is Sarvajña, etc. Īśvara is the
third pāda in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Īśvara is saguṇa because he is Māyā-sahita. Turīya
alone is nirguṇa brahman.
Now, we are in the third pāda, Īśvara. When we say that the individual is omniscient we
get a doubt everything being is limited in the case of the individual. The individual cannot
be omniscient but Īśvara’s omniscience need not be questioned as it is logically possible.
The virtues like omniscience, etc., one should not doubt or hesitate to accept. Nobody need
suspect the omniscience of the Īśvara. Māyā being the seed of the whole creation, the seed
must contain the potential form of all the creation. Whatever happens in the effect must be
there in the cause. Any knowledge invented by anyone at any place must be already
existent. A scientist can invent what exists only. What exists must be potentially exist in
the seed which is nothing but Māyā. Māyā has the present and past as also the future
knowledge and Īśvara is omnipresent and omniscient. All can exist and everything is
possible and therefore, Īśvara can have all the virtues mentioned in the 6th mantra of
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Now he will explain the mantra.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 579

śloka 160
अयं यत्सृजते विश्वं तदन्यथयितुं पुमान्।
न कोऽपि शक्तस्तेनायं सर्वेश्वर इति ईरितः ॥ ६.१६० ॥
ayaṃ yatsṛjate viśvaṃ tadanyathayituṃ pumān.
na ko:'pi śaktastenāyaṃ sarveśvara iti īritaḥ (6.160).
The first glory mentioned in the sixth mantra of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad is that Īśvara is the
most powerful one, whose power cannot be challenged by anyone. Īśvara is omnipotent
and it means whatever Īśvara has decided to bring out in the creation for execution, that
none can challenge or change. Whatever Īśvara has created before or after, none can
change the laws of creation. Scientists do not change Īśvara’s laws but understand the laws
as it is by their research. They can predict a cyclone but they cannot request the cyclone to
go somewhere. The possibility of altering of Īśvara’s creation also is in the hands of Īśvara.
We cannot do anything. No human being and even Devatās can change Īśvara’s laws. The
Lord is called all-powerful or omnipotent. We don’t have control over the creation. Even
Devatās do not have any control over what Īśvara has created. All Devatās and all other
gods are functioning as per the wish of Īśvara. Īśvara is the controller of all and he is not
controlled by anyone. Uncontrollable controller is Sarveśvara.

śloka 161
अशेषप्राणिबुद्धीनां वासनास्तत्र संस्थिताः ।
ताभिः क्रोडीकृ तं सर्वं तेन सर्वज्ञ ईरितः ॥ ६.१६१ ॥
aśeṣaprāṇibuddhīnāṃ vāsanāstatra saṃsthitāḥ.
tābhiḥ kroḍīkṛtaṃ sarvaṃ tena Sarvajña īritaḥ (6.161).
In the previous verse, Sarveśvara is explained and now Sarvajña is explained. Īśvara has
Māyā as the upādhi, Māyā is the mind of Īśvara and within Māyā all the jīvas are
included. All that was in the past, is in the present and will be in the future are in Māyā
which Īśvara is aware of. Even future intellects are in Māyā in a potential form. In the
Lord, in Māyā, the potential form or the kāraṇa-śarīra, vāsanās of all the intellects of all the
jīvas are in potential form in Īśvara. All the sūkṣma-śarīras of all the prāṇis without
exception including Bṝhaspati's intelligence are in the mind of Māyā in a potential form.
All the objects in the creation or everything in the creation is known by some Jīva or the
other Jīva. There is the law of relativity which we cannot understand easily. All the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 580

physical laws and chemical laws are knowable to one intellect or the other. Everything in
the creation is known by someone or the other.
Therefore, all the knowledge must be there in Māyā and therefore, Īśvara must necessarily
be omniscient. With that potential intellect everything in the creation is objectifiable or
known and therefore, Īśvara is Sarvajña. In short, all knowledge must reside in Māyā.
Whatever is to be invented later those laws must reside somewhere and that place is Māyā
which is the seed of all creation.

śloka 162
वासनानां परोक्षत्वात्सर्वज्ञत्वं न हीक्ष्यते ।
सर्वबुद्धिषु तद्दृष्ट्वा वासनास्वनुमीयताम्॥ ६.१६२ ॥
vāsanānāṃ parokṣatvātsarvajñatvaṃ na hīkṣyate.
sarvabuddhiṣu taddṛṣṭvā vāsanāsvanumīyatām (6.162).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that omniscience of Īśvara which he enjoys because of Māyā can be
an inferable fact but it cannot be perceived by anyone or directly experienced. It is so
because anything that is in a potential form is not perceptible. Anything potential is in
unmanifest form and unmanifest means it is not unperceptible. It is indriya-agocara. You
have speaking power. I know that you have the speaking power but it is an inference. If
you spoke in the past and if you are going to speak in the future, that power I don’t see
now when you don’t speak.
Samaṣṭi kāraṇa-śarīra is unmanifest and therefore, Māyā is unmanifest and therefore,
Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya is unmanifest and therefore, Māyā is unmanifest and
therefore, Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya is unmanifest and therefore, samaṣṭi Māyā-
pratibimbita-caitanya Īśvara is also inferred. Vāsanā means the potential form of the
intellect. Since all the potential intellect is parokṣa, and is inferable, the omniscience
belongs to samaṣṭi; kāraṇa-śarīra-pratibimbita-caitanya Īśvara is also unmanifest. When
we are asleep, the knowledge we acquired in waking is in a potential form. This I know
because I gain it when I wake up. At the time of sleep, I am not aware of myself and I
cannot know of my knowledge also. My own knowledge is not pratyakṣa to me but I infer
this because I get back the knowledge when I wake up in the morning.
Therefore, the potential knowledge in Jīva itself is parokṣa, what to talk of potential
knowledge of Īśvara. Whatever happens in vyaṣṭi can be extended at samaṣṭi level also. If

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 581

it is not pratyakṣa it is parokṣa and parokṣa jñāna can be gained through several
pramāṇas. Anumāna, arthāpatti and even śabda is pramāṇa for gaining knowledge.
In the case of parokṣa jñāna of Īśvara’s sarvajñatva the pramāṇa is anumāna alone. The
basis for the anumāna is seeing knowledge in every intellect, my intellect, your intellect
Chinese intellect, etc. We experience knowledge at the intellectual level that is kārya level
we experience knowledge and from that may you infer the knowledge in samaṣṭi kāraṇa-
śarīra. From vyaṣṭi sūkṣma-śarīra jñāna may you infer the knowledge existing in samaṣṭi
kāraṇa-śarīra. My kāraṇa-śarīra will have limited knowledge belonging to my sūkṣma-
śarīra and your kāraṇa-śarīra will have limited knowledge but when you see all intellect
having all the knowledge, then you can infer that total knowledge in samaṣṭi kāraṇa-śarīra
which is called Māyā.
Here, vāsanā means avyakta buddhi or kāraṇa-śarīra. This anumāna is not a pramāṇa
independently but anumāna is meant to support and reinforce śāstra pramāṇa. Naiyāyika
claims that they can establish Īśvara by reasoning. Sarvasya kartā sarva-Īśvaraḥ śaktimān.
Īśvara’s omniscience, omnipotence, etc., are claimed by anumāna. We borrow their
anumāna but we say your anumāna is independent pramāṇa but we say independently
anumāna cannot prove and there will be fallacy which we discussed in the 2nd and 3rd
sūtra of Brahma-sūtra. The word anumīyatām means Śruti anusāreṇa anumīyatām;
anumāna should be backed by Śruti pramāṇa.

śloka 163
विज्ञानमयमुख्येषु कोशेष्वन्यत्र चैव हि ।
अन्तस्तिष्ठन्यमयति तेनान्तर्यामितां व्रजेत्॥ ६.१६३ ॥
vijñānamayamukhyeṣu kośeṣvanyatra caiva hi.
antastiṣṭhanyamayati tenāntaryāmitāṃ vrajet (6.163).
Vidyāraṇya systematically and progressively explains the virtues of Īśvara discussed in
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad’s 6th mantra. Now, he enters the definition of Antaryāmī the inner
controller. Vidyāraṇya elaborately analyses the word Antaryāmī. This he explains with the
support of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and Gītā. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is one Upaniṣad
which dedicates one full section exclusively to elaborate the word Antaryāmī. The section
that discusses the word is called Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa. There the whole universe is
divided into three parts adhidaiva, adhibhūta and adhyātma. Adhidaiva means all the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 582

Devatās, adhibhūta means all the viṣayas and adhyātma means all individual jīvas. Jīva,
jagat and Devatās are discussed here.
For example, the eyes are called adhyātma; forms and colors are adhibhūta and sūrya
Bhagavān is adhidaiva. Like this, the whole creation is divided into three and the
Brāhmaṇa says that all the three are governed by Antaryāmī. Even Devatās are blessed by
that Īśvara. That is why we differentiate Devatās and Īśvara. Devatās are jīvas and they
also have prārabdha and karmas. They have superior prārabdha. That is why
Yamadharmarājā tells Naciketas: when I was a human being, I was not intelligent like you
and I did all rituals, which is why I got this Yama-post and I was not liberated. I want to
say that Devatās are also jīvas and all the three are supported by one Antaryāmī and that
Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa essence Vidyāraṇya summarises in this śloka. In all the individual
kośas, which come under adhyātma; adhibhūta and adhidaiva the Devatās also reside
inside as Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya known as Īśvara. The Lord resides in everyone and
controls being an inner controller and that Lord is called Antaryāmī. Since he resides in
everyone he is called Sarvāntaryāmī.

Class 127
śloka 163 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the tat-pada-vicāra of mahā-vākya. Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya and
bimba-caitanya and Māyā combined form Īśvara. Normally, one is mentioned as Īśvara
which is Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya. It is not mere pratibimbita caitanya but it goes with
Māyā the reflecting medium and adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. Therefore, now let us take the
simpler version Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya Īśvara is being talked about. Vidyāraṇya
talks about Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya Īśvara. The nature of Īśvara is mentioned in
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad’s 6th mantra. Īśvara is Sarveśvara, Sarvajña, Sarvāntaryāmī and
sarvakāraṇa. Vidyāraṇya has explained the first two. Now, he enters into the third
description Sarvāntaryāmī the inner controller of everything. He elaborately explains the
word with the help of Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad [3.7] and Gītā.
Antaryāmī is present behind all the kośas in the form of ānandamaya-pratibimbita-
caitanya. Or it is kāraṇa-śarīra-pratibimbita-caitanya that Antaryāmī resides. Also in
samaṣṭi Devatās, Antaryāmī is present. Also in the entire universe Antaryāmī is present. It

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 583

is behind adhyātma, adhibhūta and adhidaiva. The ear is called adhyātma, dik-devatā is
adhidaiva and śabda is adhibhūta. This we have seen in Tattvabodha. Behind all the three,
Antaryāmī is there. Remaining within, Antaryāmī controls everything.

śloka 164
बुद्धौ तिष्ठन्नान्तरोऽस्याधियानीक्ष्यश्च धीवपुः ।
धियमन्तर्यमयतीत्येवं वेदेन घोषितम्॥ ६.१६४ ॥
buddhau tiṣṭhannāntaro:'syādhiyānīkṣyaśca dhīvapuḥ.
dhiyamantaryamayatītyevaṃ vedena ghoṣitam (6.164).
Through the Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, we come to know of the
five features of Antaryāmī. In each, adhyātma, adhibhūta and adhidaiva, five features are
given. Vidyāraṇya takes one feature as a sample. It is our own intellect. From the
standpoint of intellect how do we understand Antaryāmī?
1. The first feature is Antaryāmī is on which resides inside the buddhi;
2. The second feature is it is inside; it resides in the buddhi and it is within the buddhi.
It is hidden behind the intellect.
3. Third feature is it cannot be known through buddhi; it is unexperienceable for the
buddhi.
4. Fourth feature is our intellect is like the medium of Antaryāmī through which the
Antaryāmī acts. Antaryāmī does not have separate medium for operation and the
buddhi is the medium of operation for Antaryāmī.
5. The fifth feature is residing within the intellect, Antaryāmī controls the buddhi;
It is in the buddhi; it is within as its essence; it is not experienceable to buddhi and it has
buddhi as its medium and it controls buddhi by remaining within the buddhi.
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad repeats it at all levels. Pṛthvī Devatā is a medium for transaction
and it controls as the Devatā and hence it is called Antaryāmī. For every adhyātma, you
have to take the five features and also for every ahdibhūta and adhidaiva. In the end, the
Upaniṣad makes a general statement that it pervades the entire intellect and makes it
function with the above five features. Now, Vidyāraṇya will explain each one of the five
features.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 584

śloka 165
तन्तुः पटे स्थितो यद्वदुपादानतया तथा ।
सर्वोपादानरूपत्वात्सर्वत्रायमवस्थितः ॥ ६.१६५ ॥
tantuḥ paṭe sthito yadvadupādānatayā tathā.
sarvopādānarūpatvātsarvatrāyamavasthitaḥ (6.165).
Īśvara resides in all. Kāraṇa must be residing within every kārya. Gold is behind all the
ornaments, clay is behind all the pots, wood is behind all the furnitures; kāraṇa is inherent
in all the kāryas. In all the clothes, the threads must be there. And Antaryāmī being
upādāna-kāraṇa behind all the kāryas, Antaryāmī must be abiding. In the example, thread
resides in the cloth. It resides as the material cause behind the product. In the same way
sarva-upādāna-rupatvāt, Īśvara being upādāna-kāraṇa of everything, Antaryāmī pervades
everything. This Antaryāmī resides everywhere. With this, the first feature is explained.
The second feature is the innermost essence of everything. This is explained in the next
verse.

śloka 166
पटादप्यान्तरस्तन्तुस्तन्तोरप्यंशुरान्तरः ।
आन्तरत्वस्य विश्रान्तिर्यत्रासावनुमीयताम्॥ ६.१६६ ॥
paṭādapyāntarastantustantorapyaṃśurāntaraḥ.
āntaratvasya viśrāntiryatrāsāvanumīyatām (6.166).
Every material cause has to be behind the effect as the thread has to be behind the cloth
and thread is considered as āntara, behind the cloth. The thread itself is not the ultimate
cause but is itself an effect. It is made out of several fibres. The thread itself is an effect and
smaller fibres are the cause. Fibre is the basis of the cloth. Fibre itself is a product born out
of cotton. Cotton becomes its material cause. From cotton, we can take any direction.
Either you can go by śāstra or science. Cotton is born out of earth; earth is the product of
jala and so it goes on. Each is one is interior to the former. Later one is the kāraṇa and
former one is kārya. The search of kāraṇa will go on and on. Now Vidyāraṇya asks what
will be the ultimate cause which itself is not an effect? The innermost essence has to be the
ultimate cause, which is a causeless cause. The culmination of the inward journey, kārya to
kāraṇa journey, ends in the Antaryāmī. The ultimate cause we have named as Antaryāmī.
The ultimate cause is not perceptible and we say that the pratyakṣa pramāṇa is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 585

possible beyond a particular level. The cause is available up to a level and beyond that
level it is invisible. Beyond that level it will be anumeya.

śloka 167
द्वित्र्यान्तरत्वकक्षाणां दर्शनेऽप्ययमान्तरः ।
न वीक्ष्यते ततो युक्तिश्रुतिभ्यामेव निर्णयः ॥ ६.१६७ ॥
dvitryāntaratvakakṣāṇāṃ darśane:'pyayamāntaraḥ.
na vīkṣyate tato yuktiśrutibhyāmeva nirṇayaḥ (6.167).
This internal journey starting from the effect to the cause can be done with pratyakṣa
pramāṇa up to a particular level only. The level internality goes deeper and deeper and as
you go more and more interior you go through several layers of internality. The degree of
internality or the level of internality or the layer of internality goes deeper and deeper, but
only two or three layers are visible to pratyakṣa pramāṇa. The ultimate layer is not visible
at all. The ultimate material cause is not available for pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Hence, we have
to apply the general principle that whatever is not available for pratyakṣa, you have know
through anumāna. You can arrive at a conclusion only through Śruti pramāṇa or yukti or
anumāna-pramāṇa.
The paramāṇu is one that cannot be divided further as per the Tārkikas. The biggest thing
in size which cannot be expanded further is called vibhu. Paramāṇu is the smallest and
vibhu is infinite. Antaryāmī is the innermost thing which is causeless. Tarka-śāstra claims
that you can arrive at the smallest and the biggest with the help of reasoning but
Vedāntins say that it is not possible but they say that anumāna should be supported by
śāstra also. Or else they say there will be a logical fallacy.
We have to get the innermost thing only through Śruti and yukti pramāṇa. The anumāna-
vākya should be āntaratva-tāratamyam kvacit-viśrāntam, tāratamyatvāt, aṇutva-
tāratamyavat. The internal journey must culminate somewhere. It is a journey of
gradation. Any journey of gradation should culminate somewhere and so also the inward
journey also should culminate somewhere and that culmination is called Antaryāmī.
Antaryāmī is the innermost culmination.

śloka 168
पटरूपेण संस्थानात्पटस्तन्तोर्वपुर्यथा ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 586

सर्वरूपेण संस्थानात्सर्वमस्य वपुस्तथा ॥ ६.१६८

paṭarūpeṇa saṃsthānātpaṭastantorvapuryathā.
sarvarūpeṇa saṃsthānātsarvamasya vapustathā (6.168).
In the second line of the previous verse, Vidyāraṇya has explained the third feature of
Antaryāmī. We can see one or two layers but the ultimate cause is not visible. Antaryāmī
is unobjectifiable. Up to a particular level, all the instruments can be studied but beyond
that level it is beyond our knowledge. The fourth feature is that one kāraṇa alone appears
in the form of different kāryas. The thread appears as a shirt, table cloth, kerchief, etc. This
is possible by assuming different nāmas and rūpas. These nāma-rūpas can be taken as
veṣa of that one cause. The wood appears in the veṣa of a chair or table. Thus it becomes
available for vyāvahārika. Similarly, gold puts on different nāma-rūpa-veṣa and appears
in different ornament forms.
Similarly, Antaryāmī puts on different veṣas. The entire adhyātma, adhibhūta and
adhidaiva are but veṣas put on by one Antaryāmī. The whole creation and objects are
veṣas or śarīras of the Antaryāmī. Cloth is like a veṣa put on by the thread. When it is in
the thread form it is of no use but only when it assumes the veṣa of clothes, it becomes
useful. Similarly, Antaryāmī during pralaya cannot do any transaction just as we in sleep
cannot do any transactions. For the sake of transaction, it puts on the veṣa of variety of
nāma-rūpa; sūkṣma-śarīra is a nāma-rūpa and sthūla-śarīra is also a nāma-rūpa.
Antaryāmī becomes Jīva and jagat. It is like the dream world. The dream you may get
today is already there in the form of Antaryāmī. Everything becomes the body of that
Lord. That is explained in the 11th chapter of Gītā as Viśvarūpa-darśana. Antaryāmī is in
the world, Antaryāmī is the innermost one, Antaryāmī is invisible, Antaryāmī has
everything as it body and Antaryāmī also controls everything.

śloka 169
तन्तोः संकोचविस्तारचलनादौ पटस्तथा ।
अवश्यमेव भवति न स्वातन्त्र्यं पटे मनाक् ॥ ६.१६९ ॥
tantoḥ saṃkocavistāracalanādau paṭastathā.
avaśyameva bhavati na svātantryaṃ paṭe manāk (6.169).
Antaryāmī is the controller of everything. Whether the cloth is folded or a open is
determined by the threads. If all the threads are folded the cloth is folded and when the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 587

threads of the cloth are open the cloth is open. The thread being the material, the cloth
does not have separate existence, so how can it move all alone? When all these things such
as contraction, expansion and movement happen to the thread, the Antaryāmī of cloth, the
cloth also helplessly goes through contraction, expansion and movement, etc. The cloth
cannot have activity of its own without the backing of the thread. Whatever happens to
the thread will happen to the cloth also. The cloth does not have freedom of its own.
Everything is controlled by Īśvara and therefore, Īśvara is the inner controller of all. If
Īśvara is the controller whether we will have freewill is the problem which will be
discussed later. Freewill also is the creation of Īśvara. More in the next class.

Class 128
śloka 169 contd.
As a part of tat-pada-vicāra Vidyāraṇya analyses the nature of Īśvara. Īśvara he said is
Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya. Jīva is antaḥkaraṇa-pratibimbita-caitanya, a slave of the
reflecting medium. Having introduced Īśvara through Śvetāśvatara mantra, Vidyāraṇya
talked of the Māṇḍūkya mantra that gives the glory of Īśvara. Īśvara is omniscient and
omnipotent and is the intelligent cause of the universe because Īśvara has the knowledge
and skill to create the universe.
Then the very same Īśvara is revealed as a material cause also. The very word yoni means
material cause out of which everything arises and into which everything resolves. It is also
the material cause that appears as the various products with the help of different nāma
and rūpa. The raw material is the inner essence of every product and in fact there is no
product separate from its raw material. Īśvara being the very material cause of the
universe including jīvas, Īśvara must be inherent in and through every Jīva and Īśvara as
the immanent principle is called Antaryāmī.
In Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad there is a section called Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa. Therein a
whole section talks about Īśvara being adhyātma, adhibhūta and adhidaiva. He explained
a sample mantra and explained the same in detail. This Antaryāmī is in everything and
everywhere. Antaryāmī is situated as the innermost essence of everyone. Being the
innermost principle it is not available for perception. The sense-organs can see only one or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 588

two levels and as you go deeper and deeper the sense-organs cannot perceive the
innermost thing.
This Īśvara does not have separate bodies but all our bodies are in Īśvara’s body. we are
sharing Īśvara’s body. I have got permission to use that body. That is why it is said in
Puruṣasūkta that I claim this body as mine and you claim your body as yours and Īśvara
claims all the bodies and therefore, Īśvara has thousands of eyes and thousands of ears etc.
Īśvara, therefore, controls every movement of the jīvas. Īśvara releases appropriate karma
gradually. Īśvara remaining in kāraṇa-śarīra, releases prārabdha karma gradually and
culminates in the death. Gradually the vāsanās are also released. Thus, karma is released
determining the conditions of the bhoktā and vāsanā is released depending on the activity
of the kartā. Thus, both prārabdha and vāsanā are released by Īśvara not according to his
whims and fancies but according to the universal laws of karma. Through sūkṣma-śarīra,
the sthūla-śarīra also goes through appropriate conditions and depending upon the
activities take place. I am moved through my kāraṇa-śarīra and you are moved through
your kāraṇa-śarīra because our karmas vary.
The movement of kāraṇa depends upon the movement of the kārya and for that he gave
the example in śloka 169 as the threads of the cloth; wherever the threads move the cloth
also moves. Early morning you unfold the thread and your saree is unfolded and
thereafter when the threads are folded the dress also is folded and when the thread is
drawn from one place to another and thus every condition of cloth depends upon the
conditions of the thread. The cloth has similar condition of that of the thread. The cloth
does not have freedom at all at anytime. From this it appears Īśvara does everything. then
what about our freewill which will be answered later.

śloka 170
तथान्तर्याम्ययं यत्र यया वासनया यथा ।
विक्रीयते तथावश्यं भवत्येव न संशयः ॥ ६.१७० ॥
tathāntaryāmyayaṃ yatra yayā vāsanayā yathā.
vikrīyate tathāvaśyaṃ bhavatyeva na saṃśayaḥ (6.170).
What was said through the example of the cloth is being extended to Īśvara. The previous
śloka is dṛṣṭānta śloka and this is dārṣṭānta śloka. The thread is comparable to Īśvara.
Īśvara is there as kāraṇa-śarīra and Īśvara is inherent in all of them. The cloth is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 589

comparable to jīvas as sūkṣma-śarīra, cidābhāsa and sthūla-śarīra. Their movement

depends upon Īśvara the kāraṇa-śarīra, Antaryāmī also acts according to the laws of
karma. Antaryāmī is present in all the jīvas as prājña and in Antaryāmī all the karmas and
vāsanās are there in unmanifest form. Which one will be released when depends upon the
law of karma. A mango seed gives a mango tree, a coconut seed gives coconut tree and
they give the fruits at different times; so also the karma and its phala.
What type of vāsanā should develop and influence the Jīva also depends upon the karma.
When the spiritual vāsanā is activated, the Jīva is interested in spirituality. Different
vāsanās at different times and different places in different manner develops in every Jīva.
And accordingly, Jīva’s life gets the direction. Thus, Antaryāmī accordingly and as the
kāraṇa-śarīra acts or manifests in that manner sūkṣma-śarīra is influenced and even
desires are designed according to the karmas and vāsanās.
Even different jñānis act according to the vāsanās of pūrva and present janmas and get
relieved. Every movement of Jīva reflects the Antaryāmī preraṇa. There is no doubt at all.
Thus Īśvara has been explained in Śvetāśvatara mantra, Māṇḍūkya mantra and
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Now, Vidyāraṇya comes to Smṛti. We have got a
beautiful Gītā śloka.

śloka 171
ईश्वरः सर्वभूतानां हृद्देशेऽर्जुन तिष्ठति ।
भ्रामयन्सर्वभूतानि यन्त्रारूढानि मायया ॥ ६.१७१ ॥
īśvaraḥ sarvabhūtānāṃ hṛddeśe:'rjuna tiṣṭhati.
bhrāmayansarvabhūtāni yantrārūḍhāni māyayā (6.171).
This is śloka physically lifted from 13.6 of Gītā. Vidyāraṇya himself will explain this verse
in three verses. The Lord resides in the hearts of everyone. We refer to the physical heart
alone as it is the golaka for the mind indriya. Indriya belongs to the subtle body and
golaka belongs to the gross body. With reference to pañca-indriyas there is no doubt about
this. Now the question is mind as an indriya also needs a golaka. We don’t know where
the mind is located. This golaka belongs to sthūla-śarīra and it is named as hṛdaya alone.
Therefore, within the physical heart antaḥkaraṇa is there and within antaḥkaraṇa, Śākṣi-
caitanya is present. It is in everybody’s heart including a criminal’s. In some people, it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 590

manifested more and in some it is manifested less. That word bhrāmayan is the translation
of Antaryāmī the controller.
Īśvara from the standpoint of original nature is akartā and abhoktā but through Māyā
upādhi He becomes a kartā. From sopādhika-dṛṣṭi kartā and nirupādhika-dṛṣṭi Īśvara is
bhoktā. Even though Īśvara becomes kartā and bhoktā through Māyā, since Īśvara is
master of Māyā, Māyā cannot overpower him and the āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā will not
confuse Īśvara and therefore, Īśvara knows “I am mithyā bhoktā and mithyā kartā and I
am not satya kartā”. Īśvara thus controls all the jīvas. Īśvara is located in the body-
enclosure. Thus physical body is the container of sūkṣma-śarīra which enclosed in sthūla-
śarīra cabinet Īśvara controls and acts as Jīva.
Have you forgotten that Īśvara and Jīva are one and the same? How do you talk of Īśvara
controlling Jīva? We here say Īśvara controls Jīva through Māyā-upādhi. When we say Jīva
is controlled the Jīva includes antaḥkaraṇa, sūkṣma-śarīra and Jīva is associated with a
miserable body. From sopādhika-dṛṣṭi we don’t talk of aikya and we agree with
Viśiṣṭādvaita. Here, Jīva and Īśvara has a sambandha. We talk of aikya when Māyā dress
is removed and then Īśvara loses his controller-status. Īśvara loses his controller-status
when Māyā is removed, Jīva loses the controlled-status when sūkṣma-śarīra is removed
and from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi we talk of aikya. But now we enjoy Viśiṣṭādvaita and then
we will talk of pāramārthika status. Remember we talk of Īśvara from vyavakarika dṛṣṭi.

śloka 172
सर्वभूतानि विज्ञानमयास्ते हृदये स्थिताः ।
तदुपादानभूतेशस्तत्र विक्रियते खलु ॥ ६.१७२ ॥
sarvabhūtāni vijñānamayāste hṛdaye sthitāḥ.
tadupādānabhūteśastatra vikriyate khalu (6.172).
Every word of Gītā śloka is explained. First, Vidyāraṇya takes the word sarva-bhūtani.
Sarva-bhūtani refers to all the Jīvātmās with sūkṣma-śarīra or vijñānāmaya-kośa.
Vijñānāmaya-kośa is prominent and it is the knowing factor or the deciding factor.
Vijñānāmaya refers to the entire sūkṣma-śarīra and Jīvātmās associated with vijñānāmayas
here is called sarva-bhūtani. Sūkṣma-śarīras are many in number and this Jīvātmā resides
in the hṛdaya of the physical body. We should note that the physical body is a temporary
enclosure of the Jīvātmā. In the previous janma, it had a different body and if we have a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 591

next janma a different physical body will be there. In the heart of the physical body, in
sūkṣma-śarīra, Jīvātmā resides.
Vijñānāmaya means Jīvātmā associated with sūkṣma-śarīra, he is a kartā-bhoktā Jīvātmā.
All the jīvātmās who are sūkṣma-śarīra-sahita-caitanya and who are called sarva-bhūtani
resides in the hṛdaya the physical heart golaka of Jīva the body. Since sūkṣma-śarīra is the
kārya, behind every kārya kāraṇa should be there and that kāraṇa, Īśvara the Antaryāmī,
is there behind every sūkṣma-śarīra and the sūkṣma prapañca. Prājña here is the kārya.
Kāraṇa-śarīra and kāraṇa prapañca are the kāraṇa. Kāraṇa at individual level we call as
prājña and at samaṣṭi level we call it as Īśvara. Īśvara the Antaryāmī is the upādāna-
kāraṇa. Īśvara which is the cause of all Jīvātmās and that Īśvara is functioning, is active, in
that hṛdaya. Where Jīva is there, there itself Īśvara is there. Jīva is kārya and Īśvara is
kāraṇa.
Behind every taijasa, prājña is there. Īśvara is Antaryāmī and Antaryāmī functions in the
hṛdaya. Even when you sleep and wakes up, the waking up is decided by karma and
prārabdha. A sleeping Jīva cannot exhaust prārabdha and Jīva is activated and is woken
up by Īśvara the karma-phala-dātr-rūpeṇa. It is this Īśvara who was called in eighth
chapter as adhiyajña. Īśvara is thus called as karma-phala-dātā. Jīva is asleep; but Īśvara
cannot afford to sleep because Īśvara is to keep track of prārabdha-fructification. When the
baby sleeps, the mother watches. When Jīva sleeps, Īśvara watches.

śloka 173
देहादिपञ्जरं यन्त्रं तदारोहोऽभिमानिता ।
विहितप्रतिसिद्धेषु प्रवृत्तिर्भ्रमणं भवेत्॥ ६.१७३ ॥
dehādipañjaraṃ yantraṃ tadāroho:'bhimānitā.
vihitapratisiddheṣu pravṛttirbhramaṇaṃ bhavet (6.173).
Vidyāraṇya has explained the word sarva-bhūtani, hṛdaya, dṛṣṭati and now he wants to
explain the word yantra-arūḍha. Yantra here is the body-cabinet or the enclosure. Here,
pañjara means the cage or cabinet or container. This is in the form of the body. Kṛṣṇa has
said there Jīvātmā has claimed on to that body. Īśvara or Jīvātmā has entered and occupied
the body. The physical body is constructed, Īśvara completes the construction of the body
and Īśvara enters into the body. According to śāstra, the physical body we receive is
received at the time of death itself as per pañcagni-vidyā. So Vidyāraṇya says entry is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 592

deha-abhimāna and it is a figurative expression. Deha-abhimāna is said to be the

occupation of the body. The occupation of the body is identification with the body. More
in the next class.

Class 129
śloka 173 contd.
Vidyāraṇya gives the analysis of Īśvara. Īśvara-analysis can be done only with the help of
śāstra-vākya as Īśvara is not available for pratyakṣa. We can take our own personal
experience as pramāṇa if we discuss our life; with regard to Jīva-vicāra we can rely on our
pratyakṣa-pramāṇa. When it is about Īśvara-vicāra we need śāstra-pramāṇa. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya takes the help of various Upaniṣad-vākyas. Īśvara is consciousness associated
with Māyā and Īśvara is also master of Māyā. Hence, Īśvara is called Māyī and Maheśvara.
We are associated with Māyā as slaves or victims of Māyā. He explained sarvajña,
sarvāntaryāmī, etc. One Īśvara is the inner controller of all living beings. This is explained
with the help of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya. One Īśvara is adhyātma, adhibhūta and
adhidaiva.
Having talked about Antaryāmī with the help of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad Śruti,
Vidyāraṇya elaborates with Gītā-vākya. In the Gītā, Antaryāmī has been talked about in
several places but the most important is the one quoted here. Īśvara resides in the hṛdaya
of all. Antar part is explained through the word hṛddeśe. Yāmī means one who controls.
Yāmī part is explained in the second line. Thus, Vidyāraṇya quoted Gītā 18.61 verse. Then,
Vidyāraṇya himself took up the commentary of Gītā-śloka. All the bhūtas here mean
vijñānāmaya-kośa-jīvas; they are controlled by Antaryāmī. These jīvātmās are mentioned
as sarva-bhūtani and controller Īśvara is samaṣṭi ānandamaya, samaṣṭi kāraṇa-śarīra or
prājña and this is none other than Īśvara. This Māyā-sahita caitanya is Antaryāmī and
Antaryāmī is none other than Īśvara.
All jīvātmās can function from an office or residence alone. Only after fixing up an office,
operations can start. Jīvātmā cannot do any vyāvahāra without any office. The body of an
ant is a small office and body of an elephant is a big office. Big or small operations require
bhoga-āyatana. The word yantra used in Gītā refers to the body. It is also called
adhiṣṭhāna. All operations need an office and the body is that office wherefrom Antaryāmī

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 593

operates. Pañjara here means an enclosure and the body is the enclosure for Jīvātmā.
Jīvātmā mounting the body means enter and occupy the body. It is nothing but the
abhimāna. Quitting the body is abhimāna-tyāga. This Jīvātmā residing in sthūla-śarīra
enclosure impels the jīvas to do varieties of activities. The activities mean vihita-
pratiṣiddha-anuṣṭhāna; the roaming of the Jīva doing varieties of karmas like vihita and
niṣiddha karmas. This is the activity of the Jīva. Īśvara makes the Jīva do all these
activities. This is said in the next śloka.

śloka 174
विज्ञानमयरूपेण तत्प्रवृत्तिस्वरूपतः ।
स्वशक्त्येशो विक्रियते मायया भ्रामणं हि तत्॥ ६.१७४ ॥
vijñānamayarūpeṇa tatpravṛttisvarūpataḥ.
svaśaktyeśo vikriyate māyayā bhrāmaṇaṃ hi tat (6.174).
In the previous verse we talked of Jīva’s activities. Here we see the activation of activities
by Īśvara. Jīva’s activities are vijñānāmaya-rūpeṇa which means one acts as kartā, bhoktā,
etc. The leader is vijñānāmaya-kartā. Activity of the prescribed and prohibited work is
meant here. The good and bad acts take place and if all the activities are to take place, the
activities should have existed potentially to manifest in the sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-
śarīra. All the plans and desires and intentions are there in potential form in sleep and
then on waking up you execute the karmas. They don’t originate at random but all happen
according to the laws of karma. All our activities are there during our sleep itself in
avyakta rūpa.
Even when desires are there, someone wants to get the job done in an appropriate manner.
Different svabhāvas and different vāsanās motivate the action and that motivator is Īśvara
at samaṣṭi level. Prāṇa alone at macro level is Īśvara and therefore, Īśvara alone prompts
jīvas to do activities according to their vāsanās and karmas. Īśvara functions in an
appropriate manner activating appropriate vāsanās and desires and that activation is
Īśvara’s function. On waking up, the saint goes to saintly activities and the sinner goes to
do sinful activities.
From the appropriate kāraṇa-śarīra, appropriate activities emerge. This activation at an
appropriate time is the job of Īśvara. Īśvara functions through activation. Īśvara does this
with his Māyā śakti at the samaṣṭi level. This Īśvara the controller is tat-pada-vācyārtha.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 594

Once Māyā is included, it is vācyārtha. It is vyāvahārika satya. Still we are in vācyārtha.

This activation of Īśvara is called māyayā bhramaṇaṁ hi tat. If someone complains as to
why Īśvara produces good activities in some jīvas and negative activities in some other
jīvas, we say Īśvara does not decide the nature of the activities. The quality is determined
by the vāsanās we have gathered. Īśvara is sāmānya-kāraṇa and our vāsanās are viśeṣa-
kāraṇa.
Here we take the example of electric drill. When it is connected to the electricity it has the
power to drill. This is the sāmānya-kāraṇa. When someone presses the button the drill
drills and the actual driller is viśeṣa-kāraṇa. Where the drill should be applied in the wood
or wall is decided by the one who holds the drill. That is called viśeṣa-kāraṇa.
Of the two, which is important? Both are important. If one keeps the drill on the wall it
will not work without electricity. If none is there to hold the drill then also the drill will
not work. Our vāsanās are viśeṣa-kāraṇa and Īśvara is sāmānya-kāraṇa. Don’t blame
Īśvara for good or bad activities. Not only does Īśvara, as Antaryāmī, control the Jīva, but
He also rides and controls the gross world of bhūtamātras, the great elements and their
functioning.

śloka 175
अन्तर्यमयतीत्युक्त्या यमेवार्थः श्रुतौ श्रुतः ।
पृथिव्यादिषु सर्वत्र न्यायोऽयं योज्यतां धिया ॥ ६.१७५ ॥
antaryamayatītyuktyā yamevārthaḥ śrutau śrutaḥ.
pṛthivyādiṣu sarvatra nyāyo:'yaṃ yojyatāṃ dhiyā (6.175).
Not only is the buddhi activated but all adhyātma, adhibhūta and adhidaiva tattvas are
activated as per Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says keeping the buddhi as
standard you extend this to all the sense-organs in the body. The same thing applies to the
five great elements also. The Lord does all this and yet is away from it all, in spite of being
the controller of the Jīvas, the gross world and of every thought in the minds of every
being.
The meaning of this Gītā śloka alone is paraphrased in Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa. This
principle of activation of the organs may you extend to the gross world and the five
elements through your thinking. You should extend it to the smallest atom as well as to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 595

the great galaxies of the world. Here, we can refer to Yakṣa-story stated in Kenopaniṣad.
The revelation of Antaryāmī Īśvara is mentioned in this Upaniṣad.

śloka 176
जानामि धर्मं न च मे प्रवृत्तिर्जानाम्यधर्मं न च मे निवृत्तिः ।
के नापि देवेन हृदि स्थितेन यथा नियुक्तोऽस्मि तथा करोमि ॥ ६.१७६ ॥
jānāmi dharmaṃ na ca me pravṛttirjānāmyadharmaṃ na ca me nivṛttiḥ.
kenāpi devena hṛdi sthitena yathā niyukto:'smi tathā karomi (6.176).
Another verse talks about the nature and the role of Antaryāmī. This śloka is borrowed
from Mahābhārata and it is the speech of Duryodhana. He says: I know what dharma is
but I cannot follow it and I know what adharma but I cannot avoid it is. There is someone
behind me who compels me to do that. He does not know it is Antaryāmī and he says
some force forces me to do this kind of the job. Dharma asks how come all do wrong
actions knowing that what they do is wrong. He says it is not that I am ignorant of dharma
śāstra. I will not follow or implement those laws. I also know what adharma is and I may
advice everyone not to do that adharma. Yet, I am not able to give it up. What compels me
to do so against my knowledge and understanding is some force or a deity that sits within
my heart.
Whatever is that persuasion and according to that unknown voice which asks me to do
various things I do various karmas. That principle is the voice of Antaryāmī. Here,
sāmānya kāraṇa and viśeṣa kāraṇa are there. The topic is of sāmānya kāraṇa as Antaryāmī
is the topic. In Gītā third chapter, the situation is different and we will call it viśeṣa-kāraṇa
as all actions are based on our vāsanās. Here, we highlight Īśvara’s part in our various
karmas. Because of repeated performance of some action, we develop a habit. The habit is
formed by repetition of action. Then, our action is not based on thinking but the actions
are vāsanā-based. Once vāsanā takes over, thinking is renounced. Whatever padārtha we
resort to is based on our vāsanās alone. Whatever we do without thinking is vāsanā-based.
That Antaryāmī is Īśvara which is tad-pada-vācyārtha occurring in the mahā-vākya. More
in the next class.

Class 130

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 596

śloka 176 contd.

As part of tat-pada-vicāra, Vidyāraṇya discusses about the Antaryāmī-nature of Īśvara
with reference to various Śruti and Smṛti statements. An individual doer corresponds to
sūkṣma-śarīra because in this śarīra alone there is the mind. Behind sūkṣma-śarīra is
kāraṇa-śarīra and kāraṇa-śarīra has all the seeds within it and therefore, we can say that
kāraṇa-śarīra does influence or control the sūkṣma-śarīra. Kāraṇa-śarīra at vyaṣṭi level is
Prājña and kāraṇa-śarīra at samaṣṭi level is Antaryāmī or Īśvara. As Antaryāmī, kāraṇa-
śarīra is behind every mind, controling the samaṣṭi as also the vyaṣṭi. In support of this,
Vidyāraṇya quotes a Mahābhārata-vākya where Duryodhana makes a statement that all
my actions are propelled by some mysterious force behind me.
The question is what is that particular Deva that is responsible for the individual’s action
plan and knowledge. There are two principles that govern our activities which is
Antaryāmī as the general principle like the electricity to drill in the drilling machine. The
direction is not determined by the electricity though and there is viśeṣa kāraṇa that
decides the working of the machine. Similarly, in the Jīva there are vāsanās that decide the
karma of the individual Jīva. Īśvara is sama to all. Sāmānya kāraṇa will only bless by
giving sat and cit. Therefore, vāsanā is one deva and Antaryāmī is another deva.
Depending upon the context we will highlight sāmānya or viśeṣa kāraṇa. Your kāma-
krodha vāsanā nourished by you alone decides your karmas. You alone develop vāsanās
but you can modify the vāsanās as well. The switch board of vāsanās is in your hand and
it is not in Antaryāmī’s hands. In Brahma-sūtra vyśamyādhikāraṇa discusses this subject
elaborately.
The rain is the sāmānya kāraṇa for all the crops to grow. We say that rain is only sāmānya
kāraṇa but in addition to the rain we need the seed, the viśeṣa kāraṇa, which is responsible
for the variety of product. Antaryāmī decides your motion and not the direction. Both are
responsible and here topic being Īśvara, he quotes Antaryāmī. Antaryāmī being uniform
in all, how come some people do dharma and some adharma? If you say Īśvara chooses
that then that Īśvara cannot be impartial and that Īśvara cannot be worshipped by jīvas.
Īśvara making one a saint and another a criminal will be negated by a thinking individual.
The reason why one is a saint and another is a sinner is being brought out in the next
śloka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 597

śloka 177
नार्थः पुरुषकारेणेत्येवं मा शंक्यतां यतः ।
ईशः पुरुषकारस्य रूपेणापि विवर्तते ॥ ६.१७७ ॥
nārthaḥ puruṣakāreṇetyevaṃ mā śaṃkyatāṃ yataḥ.
īśaḥ puruṣakārasya rūpeṇāpi vivartate (6.177).
This portion is an aside portion not required for the discussion of Īśvara. Our topic is
Antaryāmī; freewill is not our subject matter. Since this legitimate doubt will come and
people will blame Īśvara as a partial one, there is a diversion to establish the freewill
enjoyed by the Jīva so that Īśvara is saved from the blame of partiality. So, freewill is
introduced. Minus freewill, Īśvara will be the cruelest person in the world. Just as judge is
saved from cruelty by saying that the judge is not cruel and the suffering of capital
punishment is not because of the judge but the viśeṣa kāraṇa for death punishment is the
criminal’s action alone, this legitimate doubt is presented. This is given by fatalistic person
who does not accept freewill. It is from the one who believes it is predetermined by Īśvara
and fate.
Then the freewill is redundant. It is irrelevant because Īśvara has already determined the
Jīva’s action. Such a doubt should not arise; irrelevance of freewill and doubts regarding
the existence of freewill should not be entertained. When Īśvara manifests in the form of
creation, every created object has a different capacity as fire, the heat, water, the cooling
power, jñānendriya, the learning power and puruṣakāra faculty is also the manifestation
of Īśvara. When Īśvara has given a choice or freedom, it is not absolute freedom but it is
the freedom within certain rules and regulations. In the case of Wimbledon match,
organizers fix the various rules and regulations of the play and organizers do not decide
who should win. Within those rules, the players have to play and according to the talent
the players get the prize. Here, we can say that players enjoy relative freedom. Even
organizers have relative freedom but they cannot decide who can take away the cup. The
players have the freedom to play but they cannot set the rules of the game. Two forces
with relative freedom bring out a beautiful game. If anyone of them has absolute freedom,
the game is not possible. The game needs relative freedom. No freedom, no game,
absolute freedom, no game, but only when relative freedom is enjoyed by the organizers
and the players, we get a good match. So also, we all enjoy the relative freedom. We do not
enjoy absolute freedom.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 598

Nāṭaka-sūtra-dhārī is Īśvara and the game is going but there is no worry of match-fixing.
Īśvara does not decide who should get mokṣa. You work for your mokṣa based on the
rules Īśvara has created. Īśvara has created the freewill as there cannot be match without
the freedom. If we don’t enjoy the freedom we fall into the animal-category. Then we don’t
talk to such persons. Kṛṣṇa says in the second chapter that the moment the freewill is
gone, one is unfit for any one of the puruṣārthas. We will not introduce śāstra to such a
person. All the rules and regulations belong to Antaryāmī he will argue. Thus we will
enter into ridiculous argument and therefore, Īśvara creates and manifests in the form of
freewill also.

śloka 178
ईदृग्बोधेनेश्वरस्य प्रवृत्तिर्मैव वार्यताम्।
तथापीशस्य बोधेन स्वात्मासङ्गत्वधीजनिः ॥ ६.१७८ ॥
īdṛgbodheneśvarasya pravṛttirmaiva vāryatām.
tathāpīśasya bodhena svātmāsaṅgatvadhījaniḥ (6.178).
Vidyāraṇya is worried that we will go to the other extreme. One extreme is Īśvara
determines everything and nothing is in our hands. Absolute freedom is attributed to
Īśvara and there is nothing in the hands of Jīva. There is another extreme that the freewill
is absolute and there is no Īśvara at all. There is no law of creation. Claiming absolute
freedom is another extreme. So Vidyāraṇya says: don’t go to another extreme also. You do
not negate the rule of Īśvara by taking absolute freedom. Therefore, he says may you
negate or discount Antaryāmī’s role. It does not mean that you do not have freewill. Both
are there. Both are not absolutely free. Īśvara cannot create world as he wants. He creates
the world accounting the puṇya-pāpas of the jīvas. We are also not free and absolute
freedom is not there for both, but relative freedom is there for both.
Once you know that it is at a vyāvahārika level then the advantage is that I can claim
absolute freedom at pāramārthika level. As a kartā I don’t have absolute freedom and as a
karma-phala-dātā Īśvara does not have absolute freedom because both belong to the
vyāvahārika plane and both of them are mithyā. Kartā and karma-phala-dātā at empirical
level are mithyā. In sleep, both are not there. When you doze off, you cannot write your
notes as kartā and karma-phala-dātā both are resolved and this knowledge releases one to
the pāramārthika Ātmā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 599

As a vyāvahārika I, I have relative freedom and as pāramārthika I, I have absolute

freedom and I use the relative I to know the pāramārthika absolute I. With relatively free
I, I discover the absolutely free pāramārthika I. The knowledge of Īśvara, the relative
control over puruṣakāra and puruṣakāra’s relative control, one gets the knowledge of
asaṅgatva, detachment and freedom and realises the real I, the akartā I. Sṛṣṭa kartā does
not have freedom and I the uncreated Ātmā akartā Ātmā am free. Jñāna is born by
understanding the nature of Jīva and the nature of Īśvara. You have to meditate a lot on
this subject.

śloka 179
तावता मुक्तिरित्याहुः श्रुतयः स्मृतयस्तथा ।
श्रुतिस्मृती ममैवाज्ञे इत्यपीश्वरभाषितम्॥ ६.१७९ ॥
tāvatā muktirityāhuḥ śrutayaḥ smṛtayastathā.
śrutismṛtī mamaivājñe ityapīśvarabhāṣitam (6.179).
I said with the help of the relatively free I, it is called vyāvahārika or ahaṅkāra I and I have
to know absolutely free I that cannot be controlled even by Īśvara. Suppose I gain this
knowledge and I claim that I am absolutely free Ātmā, the question is after gaining this
knowledge, what will be the condition of the relative ahaṅkāra? That means the relative I,
the kartā ahaṅkāra, pramātā, what will be the condition of ahaṅkāra I after I get mukti?
Will the relative I get the absolute freedom? He wants to say that even after gaining the
knowledge, ahaṅkāra I will continue as relative free and therefore, relative I is certainly
controlled by Īśvara, which means that ahaṅkāra cannot get absolute freedom. Even a
Jīvanmukta-ahaṅkāra can decide to come to the next class and whether it happens or not is
not totally decided due to various obstacles.
The relative ahaṅkāra of a Jīvanmukta also is never-free and cannot get absolute freedom
but the same law holds well that Īśvara is also not absolutely free in the vyāvahārika sense
of the term. Īśvara is also governed by Jīva’s puṇya-pāpa and miśra. The relative Īśvara
also cannot get absolute freedom but it is teamwork with each having his own field.
Vidyāraṇya says this knowledge is enough for freedom. The knowledge of the absolute I is
more than enough for liberation. The knowledge my asaṅgatva is enough for mukti. When
I move on the road, the traffic signal is there where I stop; I understand the need of the
signal, and so too, when I voluntarily limit my freedom for the sake of the orderliness in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 600

the creation, then it will not be looked upon as bondage. Voluntarily submitting to the rule
is not bondage. If I am not matured enough even when I see the traffic signal, then what
freedom do I have? I will curse everyone and an immature person accepting voluntary
restriction is in bondage. The wise person does not look upon the old age as bondage and I
don’t look upon the death of the body as bondage. I accept the relative bondage making
the relative bondage non-bondage. It makes me a mature citizen of the country. That is
called following dharma. This much is enough for liberation. Both Śruti and Smṛti declare
that you don’t need absolute freedom at ahaṅkāra-level; Vidyāraṇya differentiates
antaryāmitva and sarveśvaratva.
The difference is subtle. Sarveśvaratva is creating the world, the laws of karma and also
the rules of the game that make him Sarveśvara. The puṇya karma gives one svarga and
pāpa karma gives naraka, etc. The scriptures in the form of Śruti and Smṛti are all my own
creation and my own commandment as an organizer of the life-match. As an organizer, I
am Īśvara and this has been declared by Īśvara Himself. This will be elaborated in the
following ślokas. Īśvara says: I have written the constitution in the form of Śruti and Smṛti.

Class 131
śloka 179 contd.
As a part of tat-padārtha-vicāra, Vidyāraṇya discusses the nature of Īśvara based on
various Śruti vākyas. He states the Lord as the inner controller of all the jīvas. Is there such
a thing as freewill at all is the question posed by some people. He says that the freewill is
viśeṣa kāraṇa and it is the integral part of the creation. Īśvara is the sāmānya kāraṇa. Since
Īśvara the sāmānya kāraṇa and the viśeṣa kāraṇa the freewill both from the creation,
Īśvara’s and Jīva’s freedom is relative. Īśvara cannot create the world as He likes but his
freedom to create the world is heavily curtailed by the puṇya-pāpa karmas of the Jīva
because those alone determine the type of creation.
Īśvara has no freedom to create the world. Had he enjoyed absolute freedom, he would
not have created the naraka but he would have created the world full of joy and
happiness. He has created the hell with some reason. But the omniscient and omnipotent
and compassionate Īśvara is not able to avoid the creation of the hell because he is
influenced by some other factors to create the hell. Being equal to all, Īśvara cannot show

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 601

impartiality and the puṇya-pāpa karma of Jīva determines the type of the world. Īśvara’s
freedom is relative.
What about Jīva’s freedom which is also relative. It is controlled by Īśvara’s law of karma.
Both being governed by the other two, the sāmānya and viśeṣa kāraṇa together will
determine the type of creation. That is the reason that at any time Īśvara wants to create
the world it presupposes the karmas of the Jīva. At any time, Jīva must have existed for
creation of the world. The creation of the world presupposes the Jīva and the karma.
Īśvara cannot create the world unless Jīva-puṇya-pāpas are there. At any time Īśvara-sṛṣṭi
presupposes the existence of Jīva and his karma. Because of this reason only, in Vedānta,
both Īśvara and Jīva are anādi. Each one has to restrict the other, control the other for the
arrival of the universe. The karma factor plays an important role in the creation of the
world by Īśvara. That is why in Vedānta they enumerate six anādi tattvas.
Six anādis are accepted in Advaita. It is given in the form of a śloka. Jīva, iso, viśuddha cit
that Jīva, Īśvara, pure consciousness śuddha caitanya or nirguṇa caitanya; the difference
between Jīva and Īśvara is vyāvahārika difference between vyāvahārika Jīva and
vyāvahārika Īśvara; though Jīva and Īśvara are identical in pāramārthika plane but they
have bheda at vyāvahārika plane. Avidyā you can call as Māyā also. The connection
between avidyā and caitanya is adhyāsa-adhiṣṭhāna-sambandha. Avidyā-caitanya-
sambandha alone is called kāla; for us Advaitins, they are all anādis. Then a question may
come: you say you are Advaitins. And having claimed as Advaitins, you enumerate six
beginningless principles; what happened to Advaita? For that Advaitin’s answer is: out of
the six, five are mithyā. They vyāvahārika anādi tattvas. Only one is pāramārthika anādi.
Viśuddha cit alone is pāramārthika-satya but vyāvahārika satya are five and we don’t care
for any number in vyāvahārika plane. Five are vyāvahārika. Because of this reason only in
the wake of knowledge five will be negated. Avidyā, Jīva, Īśvara, the difference between
Īśvara and Jīva and avidyā-caitanya-sambandha cannot be there and thus all the five are
declared as mithyā. What remains is viśuddha cit. Therefore, for our discussion we should
remember that Jīva and Īśvara are both anādi and therefore, Jīva-karmas and Īśvara-
niyamas are also anādis; Jīva-karma represents the freewill and Īśvara-niyama represents
God’s will. Any creation is controlled by the freewill in the form of karma and the Lord’s
will in the form of niyama.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 602

Viśeṣa kāraṇa and sāmānya kāraṇa both are anādi and anādi freewill and anādi Īśvara’s
will determine the creation. Īśvara cannot decide his will and he will bring pralaya only
when those bundles of karmas are exhausted. Sṛṣṭi is governed by karma, freewill; sthiti
and laya also controlled by freewill of course controlled by Lord’s will.
At vyāvahārika plane, Jīva has relative freedom and Īśvara also has relative freedom. One
consolation is that this relative freedom is enough to know the Ātmā. This knowledge is
gained by vyāvahārika Jīva and in vyāvahārika plane with the help of vyāvahārika Guru
and vyāvahārika śāstra and vyāvahārika freedom, we can gain the knowledge of
pāramārthika Ātmā. This pāramārthika Ātmā, I, has absolute freedom. Neither it is
controlled by Jīva’s will nor is it controlled by Īśvara’s niyama because pāramārthika I is
not affected by vyāvahārika.
Therefore, relatively free I should know the absolutely free higher I the Ātmā. The lower I
ahaṅkāra has to know absolutely free higher I the Ātmā. And once I discover the freedom
of absolute I, I learn to accept the relative freedom of vyāvahārika I or the ahaṅkāra I. It is
the acceptance of relative bondage. Jñānī accepts the limitation of ahaṅkāra and accepted
limitation is not bondage. Voluntarily not eating cannot be called starvation. If I am forced
not to eat is called starvation. Starvation is bondage but fasting is not bondage. Jñānī’s
ahaṅkāra has limited freedom but since he has accepted it, it is no more a bondage. As far
as Ātmā is concerned he is absolutely free. From the worldly angle, he accepts bondage
but from pāramārthika angle he says he is free. By knowing the higher I which is
absolutely free, mukti is accomplished. The knowledge that the Self is non-attached itself
constitutes mukti or liberation. Īśvara being Antaryāmī the very core of one’s personality
guiding and controlling everything, if He is asaṅga, it is only natural that the individual
should also be asaṅga. This liberation is from the clutches of the upādhis, the vāsanās and
the gross body.
Thereafter also, ahaṅkāra will have limitation and it is voluntarily accepted. Ahaṅkāra’s
biography will be governed by prārabdha and I have no complaint against it; this is the
admission of a jñānī. This is the declaration of Śruti and Smṛti. This sāmānya kāraṇa is
antaryāmitva. Then Vidyāraṇya wants to differentiate antaryāmitva and sarveśvaratva.
He says Śruti-smṛtī mamaiva ājñe; this is a quotation from Varāha-purāṇa. The complete
śloka says: Śruti-smṛtī mamaiva ājñe ullaṅghye naiva karhicit ājñālaṅghī mamadveṣī
madbhaktopi hi avaiśṇavaḥ. Śruti and Smṛti are my commandments. Therefore, they

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 603

should not be violated. These should be obeyed at all times. If someone violates the Śruti-
Smṛti rules, he becomes my enemy as he is the hater of the Lord. One who hates Īśvara’s
commandment is the hater of Īśvara. Even if he says: I am Īśvara-bhakta, even if he has
external insignia marks and claims that he is a Viśṇu-bhakta, he is not a Viśṇu-bhakta not
a Vaiṣṇava. Īśvara created the śāstra.

śloka 180
आज्ञाया भीतिहेतुत्वं भीषास्मादिति हि श्रुतम्।
सर्वेश्वरत्वमेतत्स्यादन्तर्यामित्वतः पृथक् ॥ ६.१८० ॥
ājñāyā bhītihetutvaṃ bhīṣāsmāditi hi śrutam.
sarveśvaratvametatsyādantaryāmitvataḥ pṛthak (6.180).
Īśvara’s commandments are to be followed and every commandment is a source of fear for
a human being. That is why we use the expression God-fearing. Doing the thing which is
prohibited by the God will bring pāpa and disobeying the commandment will bring
naraka; such fear is there with every Jīva. Śruti-Smṛti-ājñā is fear for every Vaidika. This
also has been said in the Veda itself. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad’s Brahmānanda-vallī, it is said
even Devatās follow their svadharma due to the fear of Īśvara. This status of Īśvara is
called sarveśvaratva. This sarveśvaratva is different from Antaryāmī status. First one is
before creation, setting and organizing infra-structure for the creation and once the
creation begins, then every law is made for the beings to operate and when it operates in
every Jīva, this is called antaryāmitva. Thus, the subtle difference between Sarveśvara and
Antaryāmī is brought out.

śloka 181
एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासन इति श्रुतिः ।
अन्तः प्रविष्टः शास्तायं जनानामिति च श्रुतिः ॥ ६.१८१ ॥
etasya vā akṣarasya praśāsana iti śrutiḥ.
antaḥ praviṣṭaḥ śāstāyaṃ janānāmiti ca śrutiḥ (6.181).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that the subtle difference is not what I have made. Veda itself
brings out the difference. The two Śruti statements are etasya vā akṣarasya praśāsana iti
śrutiḥ is one from Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Along with the creation, Īśvara introduced
the laws or the layers of constitution and this is called sarveśvaratva. The implementation

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 604

of the laws at micro level is called antaryāmitva. Puṇya of mosquito and pāpa of ours
must tally.
In every family, every affectation of every member must tally. Thus in this class if you are
all together it is the karmas of all of us together. Micro level management and
implementation is called Antaryāmī status. Having entered every Jīva, ayam this Īśvara as
Antaryāmī is the controller of all the actions of the Jīva, guided by the freewill and the
karma, thus Īśvara controls. Antaḥ praviṣṭaḥ janānām ayaṃ śāstā is the quotation from
Taittirīya Āraṇyaka. Śāstā means the controller. The first quotation is for sarveśvaratva
and the second is for antaryāmitva.

śloka 182
जगद्योनिर्भवेदेष प्रभवाप्ययकृ द्यतः ।
आविर्भावतिरोभावावुत्पत्तिप्रलयौ मतौ ॥ ६.१८२ ॥
jagadyonirbhavedeṣa prabhavāpyayakṛdyataḥ.
āvirbhāvatirobhāvāvutpattipralayau matau (6.182).
With the previous verse, the Antaryāmī-topic is over which started in the verse 163. This
word was introduced as a part of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad mantra where Sarveśvara is
explained. Now, there is a fourth remaining sarvasya yoniḥ. The word yoni is being
explained here. He says eṣaḥ jagat yoniḥ bhavet. This Sarvajña Sarveśvara Īśvara is the
material cause of the creation. Īśvara is not only the intelligent cause but also the upādāna-
kāraṇa. He is upādāna-kāraṇa because He is responsible for the emergence and
dissolution of the world. He is the cause of the emergence and dissolution of the world
and he is the ground from whom the world emerges and into whom the world dissolves.
Now the question is what do you mean by the statement that Lord is the creator and
dissolver of the world? According to our experience and reasoning, nothing can be created
or destroyed. Even science declares that matter cannot be created, matter cannot be
destroyed. If we produce anything we will enter the Naiyāyika-mata which we refute. We
say nothing can be created and therefore, Īśvara cannot create the world. It is against the
reasoning to say that Īśvara is the creator of the world.
The creation then means manifesting the world which was already there in the potential
form. No Jīva is created by Īśvara, all fourteen lokas were there, all the freewill also was
there in the potential form and all the karmas were also there. Thus Jīva, jagat, freewill and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 605

karma were there and Īśvara does not create anything. What was there in avyakta rūpa,
He makes it vyakta. So Īśvara wakes up all the jīvas. Sṛṣṭi means manifestation. Similarly,
pralaya is going from manifest to unmanifest form. Īśvara does not destroy anything
because He cannot destroy anything. All of them go to unmanifest form at the time of
pralaya. Manifestation is figuratively called creation and unmanifestation is figuratively
called pralaya. Advaitins don’t believe in creation and destruction but talk of
manifestation and unmanifestation of Jīva, jagat, freewill and karmas, etc.

Class 132
Śloka 182 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of Īśvara-vicāra as a part of the main mahā-vākya-vicāra.
He makes use of the various Upaniṣad vākyas. First he establishes that Īśvara has three
components and He has the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. He
talks of the nature of Māyā. Māyā comes under neither sat nor asat category but it itself
forms the sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa category comparable to a magic show. Īśvara is the master of
Māyā unlike the Jīva who is the slave of the reflecting medium.
In support of this he quoted Māṇḍūkya mantra. He started explaining each word of the
6th mantra of the above Upaniṣad. Īśvara is the Lord as also inner controller of the
creation. Then he pointed out the difference between Sarveśvara and the Antaryāmī. There
is subtle difference between the two. In Māṇḍūkya mantra both the words are used. And if
both words are occurring you cannot give the same meaning. If they give the same
meaning, then there will be punarukti doṣa.
So Vidyāraṇya spends two verses to show that both are different. Sarveśvara is used more
in general sense as the one who creates the universe and the laws of the universe or the
constitution-giver and the one who gives the infrastructure and general rules but the
Antaryāmī is the one who implements the laws of karma remaining behind every Jīva. The
representative of Īśvara resides behind everyone. Adhiyajña is the word used in Gītā 8th
chapter for the Īśvara residing in everyone and governing every Jīva to observe every
karma. He implements the laws of karma and He is called Antaryāmī. He gave two Śruti
quotations in the support of the statement. One is from macro dṛṣṭi and another is of micro

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 606

dṛṣṭi. It is the subtle difference in this context. With the verse 181 Vidyāraṇya completed
Antaryāmī-analysis.
From verse 163 to 181 he explains the word Antaryāmī. Now we discuss the sarvasya yoni
the sarva-kāraṇa of the creation. Sarva-yoni is explained from the verse 182. Here he says
yoni which means Īśvara is upādāna-kāraṇa of the whole creation. The nimitta-kāraṇa has
already been stressed before, that Īśvara is the intelligent cause of creation.
Not only Īśvara is the maker but also the very raw material out of which the creation has
emerged out. Nimitta-kāraṇa is always away from the creation. Similarly, intelligent cause
we cannot know as the producer is physically away. Many religions conclude Īśvara is
away in Kailāsa or Vaikuṇṭha. Īśvara is not remote only when you know Īśvara is the
material cause also as the material cause is never away from the product. Wood is never
away from the desk. Plastic is not different from chair.
When you say Īśvara is upādāna-kāraṇa he is pratyakṣa. As you see the desk you
experience wood also. Therefore, upādāna-kāraṇa is pratyakṣa. nimitta-kāraṇa is generally
parokṣa. When I understand that Īśvara is upādāna-kāraṇa, Īśvara will become pratyakṣa.
Then I understand that Īśvara is aparokṣa. Vivarta-upādāna-kāraṇa is aparokṣa-kāraṇa.
Now upādāna is explained. Viśvarūpa Īśvara we find all the time, since He is the cause of
both the origination and resolution, utpatti and pralaya. Nimitta-kāraṇa is utpatti kāraṇa
whereas upādāna-kāraṇa is utpatti-, sthiti- and laya-kāraṇa. The origination means that
the world was there in Īśvara in avyakta rūpa and Īśvara did not create the world but the
folded world Īśvara opens up. Āvirbhāva means manifesting the potential one and
converting the unmanifest to manifest as the creation. What is inferred is made pratyakṣa.
The destruction of the world is turning the manifest to unmanifest form. The visible
universe will again become invisible. The conversion of the visible into invisible is called
disappearance or pralaya. Now things are no more available for the sense-organs to
experience. Āvirbhāva is called utpatti and tirobhāva is the dissolution.
A particular manifestation will have an end but the cycle of manifestation and
unmanifestation is beginningless, endless and eternally it will continue. The universe is
eternal. Then comes the question: if the universe is eternal how will you talk about
Advaita? Once you accept the universe, dvaita has come in. If you say that the universe is
eternal, how can you talk of Advaita?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 607

For this, we say that the universe is vyāvahārikally eternal. Even if few jīvas get videha-
mukti for the others the world will eternally be there. Otherwise, Īśvara will become
unemployed! Vyavaharikally universe is eternal and if someone asks what it is
paramarthikally. For pāramārthika drṣṭi, there is no adjective. The noun universe is not
there. Therefore, Īśvara manifests and unmanifests this mithyā universe.

śloka 183
आविर्भावयति स्वस्मिन्विलीनं सकलं जगत्।
प्राणिकर्मवशादेष पटो यद्वत्प्रसारितः ॥ ६.१८३ ॥
āvirbhāvayati svasminvilīnaṃ sakalaṃ jagat.
prāṇikarmavaśādeṣa paṭo yadvatprasāritaḥ (6.183).
Vidyāraṇya explains manifestation and unmanifestation of the world. Āvirbhāva-
explanation is given here. Sakalam jagat āvirbhāvayati. The whole universe is unfolded
which was in Himself in unmanifest form, just as our dream world. Our night dream
world is already there in our mind in vāsanā-rūpa. That is why I do not see your dream
nor do you know what is going to be your dream. The dream is now in dissolved version.
At any time you doze off, vāsanās are thrown out. The entire avyakta jagat turns manifest
or vyakta and this is called creation. It is like the folded cloth opening up. Similarly, Īśvara
opens up or unfolds this universe and this unfolding is called creation. Even though Īśvara
is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, Īśvara is not absolutely free in the
vyāvahārika plane. If only he were free he could have made all fourteen lokas into svarga.
He would not have created the hell, etc.
Now, we say Antaryāmī is also controlled by Jīva. He says prāṇi-karma-vaśāt, in keeping
with puṇya-pāpa karma he creates. When puṇya-pāpa karma requires a hell, Īśvara has to
create the hell. Whom he will send to hell is also decided by the puṇya-pāpa karma.
According to the karma he decides who should go to hell and who to heaven. That means
Īśvara does not have freedom. Voluntary acceptance of restraint is not bondage. Īśvara
accepts this voluntary rule that creation should take place according to the puṇya-pāpa
karmas of all the jīvas. What happens during the first sṛṣṭi when previous sṛṣṭi was not
there and puṇya-pāpa was not there? Then we say that at anytime Īśvara wants to create,
karmas are available. Every creation is governed by karma. Īśvara is anādi, Jīva is anādi
and therefore, karmas are also anādi. This is called āvirbhāva.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 608

śloka 184
पुनस्तिरोभावयति स्वात्मन्येवाखिलं जगत्।
प्राणिकर्मक्षयवशात्संकोचितपटो यथा ॥ ६.१८४ ॥
punastirobhāvayati svātmanyevākhilaṃ jagat.
prāṇikarmakṣayavaśātsaṃkocitapaṭo yathā (6.184).
The creation moves about for a few billion janmas of jīvas and then a time comes when
Īśvara folds back the whole universe. The subject is not there in the śloka. We have to
supply Īśvara. He makes the whole world unmanifest again. Literally it means that he
makes it inexperienceable. The experienceable world is made in-experienceable. Indriya-
gocara is made indriya-agocara. Sthūla is reduced to sūkṣma and kāraṇa. Sthūla alone is
visible. Or there is a second reason also. The indriyas themselves are folded. Not only
objects are folded but also the indriyas are folded. The resolved universe is resolved into
paramāṇus as per Naiyāyika’s theory. In Sāṅkhya or Yoga philosophy, the world will
resolve into Prakṛti, the basic matter. Here, the world resolves somewhere outside. But in
Vedānta the difference is that it goes back into Īśvara Himself. Because there are no atoms
outside Īśvara and there is no Prakṛti outside Īśvara and therefore, the world goes back
into Īśvara Himself. That is why we are called cetana-kārya-vādī. This is discussed in
Brahma-sūtra. This is possible as is experienced in the dream by us everyday. The dream
world resolves into yourself when you wake up and it is unfolded when you go into
dream. Can Īśvara close the creation little bit early or little bit late? It is said that Īśvara
does not have absolute freedom for He is also governed by the same karma which governs
the jīvas in keeping with the exhaustion of the current lot of the karmas. This unfolding
and folding, the expansion and contraction, is an eternal process.

śloka 185
रात्रिघस्रौ सुप्तिबोधावुन्मीलननिमीलने ।
तूष्णींभावमनोराज्ये इव सृष्टिलयाविमौ ॥ ६.१८५ ॥
rātrighasrau suptibodhāvunmīlananimīlane.
tūṣṇīṃbhāvamanorājye iva sṛṣṭilayāvimau (6.185).
The topic is the same that Īśvara is jagat-yoni. Īśvara is the jagat-kāraṇa. This creation and
resolution is an eternal cycle. It never ends, it never had a beginning and even in mokṣa I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 609

get out of the cycle but I don’t stop the cycle as others will continue in the cycle. Here,
Vidyāraṇya gives an example. Ghas means to swallow. The daytime is called the
swallower or the swallower of the darkness which in other words means that the daytime
has come into existence. The night is called the rātri because rā means to give. Rātri means
the giver. It gives sukha and also gives bhaya; the pain is rātri. If you sleep of f, rātri gives
you pleasure and if are not asleep, it gives you fear. In short, rātri means night and ghasra
means day.
The second example is the waking and sleep, meaning just as the cycle of waking and
sleep eternally continue. The third example is that the eyelid-movement is twofold. One is
upward movement and the other one is downward movement. Upward movement is
opening of the eyes and the downward movement is the closing of the eyes. Every minute,
you close and open the eyes. Just as the opening and the closing of the eyes, Īśvara opens
and close the eyes and this is called sṛṣṭi and laya. The fourth example is the passive and
active conditions of the mind. The mental silence and mental activity is compared to sṛṣṭi
and pralaya. These two conditions are also eternally happening. During the waking state
itself, the mind is sometimes quiet and sometimes active. Like these cycles, sṛṣṭi and
pralaya is a cyclic process.

śloka 186
आविर्भावतिरोभावशक्तिमत्त्वेन हेतुना ।
आरम्भपरिणामादिचोद्यानां नात्र सम्भवः ॥ ६.१८६ ॥
āvirbhāvatirobhāvaśaktimattvena hetunā.
ārambhapariṇāmādicodyānāṃ nātra sambhavaḥ (6.186).
This theory of creation or our cosmology or our sṛṣṭi-vāda that Īśvara folds and unfolds
creation is challenged by all the other systems of philosophy. In Brahma-sūtra second
chapter, we discussed the other systems of philosophy. All have got their own theory of
creation. They strongly criticize our system. We don’t have to refute their charges also for
we do not know. Their theories have to be refuted and their charges are to be answered
also. This is the job of sṛṣṭi-grantha. He has concluded saying that they are wrong. They
say your Brahman is nirvikāra and it is changeless; then how can your Brahman produce a
creation and resolve? Hence how can Brahman be called jagat-kāraṇa? He asks the
question: how can the changeless Brahman produce all of them? We say Brahman has

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 610

Māyā śakti which can produce a universe without any change in Brahman, the latter being
vivarta-kāraṇa. It produces creation without undergoing any change with the help of
Māyā śakti. Just as a waker produces the dream world, Īśvara creates the universe.
Brahman with Māyā śakti produces the creation. More in the next class.

Class 133
śloka 186 contd
Here Vidyāraṇya refutes the theory of creation brought out by other systems of
philosophy. Ārambha-vāda or asat-kārya-vāda and pariṇāma-vāda otherwise called sat-
kārya-vāda are refuted here. This we have seen in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad third chapter.
When you raise a question: how does clay produce a pot or how does pot originate?
Whether pot was in existence before creation is our question? If the pot was existent
already, why does it need to be created? Therefore, he says that the pot was not there
before creation. When the potter works through some effort, a new pot is created out of
clay and he claims the new pot is different from clay. He introduces two substances: the
clay and pot. Since he talks about the fresh beginning of a new subject we call him
arambha-vādī. This we refuted in the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Vidyāraṇya does not go into
details. The argument we gave was that a non-existent thing cannot come into existence.
That a non-existent thing comes into existence is a wrong statement. How can you use a
verb for a thing which is not there? Even according to modern science, matter cannot be
created so asat-kārya-vāda is wrong.
Sāṅkhya says that the pot is not produced out of clay but pot is there in the form of
unmanifest nāma-rūpa and the potter brings out the unmanifest into shape and he
transforms the clay into pot. Here, a new substance is not created but the new substance is
transformed. Two substances are not there but one substance in two configurations are
there. Therefore, he says that the pot is not a new creation but it is an evolution or
modification and shaping up of clay into pot; this theory of Sāṅkhya and Yoga is called
pariṇāma-vāda.
Here, there is no beginning of a pot but what is potentially there is brought into a fact. The
problem is very pronounced when we say that Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa. The clay may
transform into pot and milk may transform into curd but Brahman cannot transform into

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 611

the world because Brahman is nirvikāra. Pariṇāma-vāda may be acceptable with regard to
changing kāraṇa but pariṇāma-vāda cannot be applied in the case of Brahman because
Brahman is changeless and unmodifiable. Pariṇāma-vāda cannot be applied in the case of
Brahman and therefore, both vādas we reject. If both are rejected, what is your vāda? We
present our vāda in two different names: one is adhyāsa-vāda or vivarta-vāda which
means that the world is not produced or transformed version of Brahman but the world is
an apparent manifestation of Brahman.
It happens āvirbhāvatirobhāvaśaktimattvena, Brahman has the power to bring out
apparent manifestation. Brahman does not produce a world and Brahman does not
transform something in to a world. Don’t ask how is it possible because you do it daily in
the dream as you create svapna-prapañca. An apparent world is created; it is called
vivarta-vāda and when you say a real world is never created then it is called ajāti-vāda.
Both are right. Many people try to differentiate ajāti-vāda and vivarta-vāda.
There are some research scholars who say that as per Ādi Śaṅkarācārya, sṛṣṭi is vivarta-
vāda and as per Gaudapāda, sṛṣṭi is ajāti-vāda. These are two different languages for the
same thing! Because of the vivarta-vāda there is no scope for
ārambhapariṇāmādicodyānāṃ. Such a question cannot be raised by either of the Sāṅkhya
or Nyāya-philosophers. According to Buddhists, things get assembled, a new name is
given and that new assemblage is called creation. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 187
अचेतनानां हेतुः स्याज्जाड्यांशेनेश्वरस्तथा ।
चिदाभासांशतस्त्वेष जीवानां कारणं भवेत्॥ ६.१८७ ॥
acetanānāṃ hetuḥ syājjāḍyāṃśeneśvarastathā.
cidābhāsāṃśatastveṣa jīvānāṃ kāraṇaṃ bhavet (6.187).
Here, an additional information is given. Īśvara is jagat-kāraṇa and he has Māyā, as also
caitanya-aṃśa. We find in the creation that the products also have two aṃśas; there is
jaḍa-aṃśa in the universe in the form of mountains, rivers, etc., the bhogya prapañca and
also cetana Jīva, bhoktā jīva. Thus, kārya prapañca has aṃśa-dvaya, kāraṇa Īśvara also has
aṃśa-dvaya and you can correlate both. Cetana aṃśa of Īśvara contributes to the cetana
Jīva and acetana aṃśa of Īśvara contributes to the acetana prapañca aṃśa. He says
cidābhāsa aṃśa of Īśvara contributes to the cidābhāsa aṃśa of all the jīvas. Īśvara has

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 612

samaṣṭi cidābhāsa and samaṣṭi cidābhāsa of Īśvara is responsible for the creation of vyaṣṭi
cidābhāsa of jīvas. The samaṣṭi acetana aṃśa samaṣṭi kāraṇa prapañca or samaṣṭi Prakṛti
or samaṣṭi Māyā is responsibnle for vyaṣṭi acetana aṃśa of sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra
of jīvas. Thus Īśvara becomes the cause of the creation of the universe.
Through acetana aṃśa Īśvara becomes the kāraṇa of all the inert objects like mountains,
rivers, etc; Īśvara is the cause of bhogya prapañca. Through his cetana or cidābhāsa aṃśa,
this Īśvara becomes the cause of cetana jīvas which is vyaṣṭi cidābhāsa. Māyā produces the
vyaṣṭi śarīra. The total the reflected consciousness produces individual the reflected
consciousness. Thus everything is clean. Thus kāraṇam bhavet, this Īśvara becomes the
cause of cetana-acetana prapañca. With this jagat-kāraṇa topic is over. Now, a Pūrvapakṣa
enters.

śloka 188
तमः प्रधानः क्षेत्राणां चित्प्रधानाश्चिदात्मनाम्।
परः कारणतामेति भावनाज्ञानकर्मभिः ॥ ६.१८८ ॥
tamaḥ pradhānaḥ kṣetrāṇāṃ citpradhānāścidātmanām.
paraḥ kāraṇatāmeti bhāvanājñānakarmabhiḥ (6.188).
The two verses are Pūrvapakṣa verses. He quotes a verse of Sūreśvarācārya’s
Bṛhadāraṇyaka vārtika. He picks up a verse and says that the verse of Sūreśvarācārya
contradicts this Vidyāraṇya’s verse. Sūreśvarācārya is the direct disciple of Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya. We will now find out what is the contradiction. This occurs in 1.4.342 verse
of the vārtika. He says Paraḥ kāraṇatām eti. Param Brahman becomes the cause of the
creation. The definition of Param Brahman is the original consciousness which is all-
pervading. the original consciousness is given as the cause of the creation. But in the
previous verse Vidyāraṇya says Māyā is the cause of jaḍa prapañca and the reflected
consciousness is the cause of jīvas. The reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness
is the cause of creation and Vidyāraṇya does not talk about the original consciousness.
Vidyāraṇya says that the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium is the cause of the
creation. In creation, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium play the part but
the original consciousness does not have any role to play in the creation. The word Para
means the original consciousness and Sūreśvarācārya says the original consciousness is
the cause of creation.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 613

the original consciousness also has two parts wherein Māyā part produces jaḍa prapañca.
Sūreśvarācārya also says that Māyā part produces jaḍa prapañca. Cetana prapañca is
produced from cit or cidābhāsa part. Whether the original consciousness or the reflected
consciousness is responsible for creation of Jīva? Vidyāraṇya says the reflected
consciousness is responsible for creation of Jīva while Sūreśvarācārya says that the original
consciousness is responsible for the creation of Jīva. Sūreśvarācārya has left off the
reflected consciousness and Vidyāraṇya has left out the original consciousness. Which is
correct? This is the question posed by Pūrvapakṣa. The nature of creation is not
determined by Brahman or Īśvara. It is determined by karma and in that there is no
disagreement. We don’t have total freedom and I say even Īśvara does not have total
freedom.
If Īśvara had the total freedom, being compassionate, he would have made everyone
happy and nobody would suffer from any problem. But compassionate Īśvara did not
create like that and it is not because he wants people to suffer but has to helplessly cause
suffering because jīvas have done those karmas. Jīvas are created on the basis of puṇya-
pāpa karmas. These are the three factors which determine the next birth: both śubha
aśubha karma, upāsana and saṃskāras, good and bad. This idea is borrowed from well-
known Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad statement 4.4 Śarīraka Brāhmaṇa. When Jīva leaves the
body three things follow. They are sūkṣma-śarīra, saṃskāras and vidyā karmas, etc. The
contradiction is this. Is cidābhāsa is responsible for cetana prapañca or cit is responsible
for cetana prapañca?

śloka 189
इति वार्तिककारेण जडचेतनहेतुता ।
परमात्मन एवोक्ता नेश्वरस्येति चेच्छ्हृणु ॥ ६.१८९ ॥
iti vārtikakāreṇa jaḍacetanahetutā.
paramātmana evoktā neśvarasyeti cecchhṛṇu (6.189).
The previous śloka quoted has been mentioned by Vārtikakāra Sūreśvarācārya. In several
places Sūreśvarācārya criticizes Ādi Śaṅkarācārya in his Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vārtika.
Paramātmā Brahman alone is said to be cause of the creation or the original consciousness
has been introduced as the cause of creation. It is the cause of cetana-acetana prapañca.
There also with regard to acetana prapañca there is no controversy. But with regard to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 614

creation of Jīva there is a problem. Sūreśvarācārya attributes the causal status to cit aṃśa
whereas you attribute this to cidābhāsa aṃśa and he asks which one is correct? If such a
Pūrvapakṣa is raised, Vidyāraṇya says I have the answer.

śloka 190
अन्योन्याध्यासमत्रापि जीवकू टस्थयोरिव ।
ईश्वरब्रह्मणोः सिद्धं कृ त्वा ब्रूते सुरेश्वरः ॥ ६.१९० ॥
anyonyādhyāsamatrāpi jīvakūṭasthayoriva.
īśvarabrahmaṇoḥ siddhaṃ kṛtvā brūte sureśvaraḥ (6.190).
I will give you the gist of the answer. The first point to be noted is that even though we
enumerate the reflecting medium, the reflected consciousness and the original
consciousness separately, we should remember they are not separate substances sitting
separately. Vidyāraṇya says first you understand all these three are available in
vyāvahārika prapañca together as one unit. The reflecting medium and the reflected
consciousness cannot be separated. Can you separate your reflection from the mirror?
Similarly, can you separate the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness? the
original consciousness and reflecting medium cannot be separated with the original
consciousness being all-pervading. The three obtain as one unit and therefore, before we
distinctly study we don’t know that there are three parts. Therefore, we have all the three
put together and therefore, the śāstra and Ācārya uses the word generally and they can
mean any one of the three. When we say that the Jīva travels after death it means that the
reflected consciousness and even the reflecting medium; only sūkṣma-śarīra part travels.
When we say Jīva is all-pervading Brahman means you should take the original
consciousness and not the other two. Similarly, the word Brahman and Īśvara are loosely
used by śāstra and Ācārya; we should know which is meant in which context and once
you sort out you will have no problem at all. This we will see in the next class.

Class 134
śloka 190 contd.
Acetana aṃśa of Īśvara produces acetana prapañca and cetana aṃśa of Īśvara produces
cetana prapañca sṛṣṭi. Sūreśvarācārya says elsewhere cit Brahman is responsible for

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 615

creation of cetana prapañca. Therefore, there is a difference of opinion. Sūreśvarācārya

says the original consciousness is responsible for cetana prapañca and you say cidābhāsa
is responsible for cetana prapañca. There is no controversy regarding the creation of
acetana prapañca. To focus on the controversy: is the original consciousness is kāraṇa or
the reflected consciousness kāraṇa of cetana-sṛṣṭi? Now, Vidyāraṇya has to give his
answer.
He says what I say alone is correct. He does not want to say Sūreśvarācārya is wrong. He
says the original consciousness cannot be said to be kāraṇa. the original consciousness is
kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa and deśa-kāla-atīta and it is beyond cause and effect. the original
consciousness cannot be the cause but the reflected consciousness is the cause. Then
Vidyāraṇya says even though the reflected consciousness is the cause, Sūreśvarācārya
does not want to make much of difference between the original consciousness and the
reflected consciousness and he does not want to highlight the difference between the two
in this context. It is generally done in the śāstra as well as in general by the Ācāryas.
Strictly, the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness are different;
sometimes Ācāryas don’t make much of a difference and they loosely use the word
Brahman to denote the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. For this,
Ācāryas say this is not a new thing we do and even in common parlance, the original and
reflection are seen as same since the original alone is treated as the reflection. Both of them
are caitanya and one alone appears as the other in the reflecting medium as one is avatāra
of the other.
In Gītā, even though Kṛṣṇa is not original Īśvara being subject to arrival and departure, in
the fourth chapter he says: I taught Veda to Sūrya; even though Kṛṣṇa is born the other
day he identifies that He and Viśṇu are one and the same. Similarly, cit when it takes
vyāvahārika avatāra that avatāra is cidābhāsa in the appropriate upādhi and therefore, we
treat them as though they are one. I have given another example also. When the friends
come home we talk of our own biography. We show the old photo and ask where I am
there in the photo because the size is different and none can identify. This person tries to
identify. Then he says “I am here”. I use the expression about the picture is as though I
myself and instead of saying my image is there in the photo we loosely use the expression
“I am in the photo”. Here, “I am there” means “my ābhāsa is there”. The original I and
ābhāsa I are equated as one. If I say there is a black dot in the face, you see in the mirror

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 616

and you wipe your face and not the image in the mirror. You see the reflected
consciousness and correct the original consciousness. What we want to say is that the
original consciousness and the reflected consciousness are strictly speaking different but
often they are loosely treated as identical. Sometimes, the scriptures say Brahman is not
kāraṇa and sometimes the scriptures says Brahman is kāraṇa. Then we resolve the
contradiction: we say Brahman is taken as the original consciousness when Brahman is not
a kāraṇa and when the very same Brahman is kāraṇa we take the reflected consciousness
Māyā.
When Sūreśvarācārya says Brahman is kāraṇa he uses the expression mixing up the
original consciousness and the reflected consciousness and therefore there is no problem.
This mixing up of the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness are two
types. One is mixing up out of ignorance without knowing that they are different and the
ignorance born mixing up is a problem and it is called mithyā-pratyaya or adhyāsa or
confusion. It is mixing up caused by ignorance. Then there is a second mixing up where I
mix it up not out of confusion, but knowingly loosely mixing them up like the photo
identification. This mixing up is not out of confusion as I know I am here and I am not
there in the picture and it is only an image. I will be there and the image may go.
Knowingly I mix up; the listener also understands and he does not argue with me. It is
called gauṇa-pratyaya. I have given several examples like sunrise and sunset. It is a wrong
statement but yet knowingly I make the statement as it is gauṇa-pratyaya. Similarly, earth
is stationary is a gauṇa-pratyaya because we know it is not stationary. In śāstra, they give
the example that this boy is a lion. When you say this boy is a lion it is a wrong statement.
Knowingly we take the boy as lion; others also don’t make any argument as it is gauṇa-
pratyaya.
Śāstra mixes up the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness and loosely
says caitanya is kāraṇa in one place and caitanya is not kāraṇa in another place but we
should take the right meaning keeping the context in mind. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
that the mixing up of the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness or the
loose usage of the original consciousness or the brahma caitanya or Māyā-pratibimbita-
caitanya like the anyonya-adhyāsa between Jīva and kūṭastha at vyaṣṭi level, vyaṣṭi cit and
vyaṣṭi cidābhāsa at samaṣṭi level also macro original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness are mixed up as has been done by the Sūreśvarācārya. At macro level Īśvara

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 617

refers to macro cidābhāsa and Brahman referring to macro cit. This mixing up at samaṣṭi
level, Sūreśvarācārya loosely makes the statement and we should translate as the original
consciousness obtaining in Māyā is the cause. Anyonya-adhyāsa is mithyā-pratyaya,
mistake committed by ignorant people. Mithyā-pratyaya is used by ignorant people but
that one he uses knowingly.

śloka 191
सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं यद्ब्रह्म तस्मात्समुत्थिताः ।
खं वाय्वग्निजलोर्व्योषध्यन्नदेहाः इति श्रुतिः ॥ ६.१९१ ॥
satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ yadbrahma tasmātsamutthitāḥ.
khaṃ vāyvagnijalorvyoṣadhyannadehāḥ iti śrutiḥ (6.191).
The mixing up of the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness has been done
by Veda also deliberately. He gives a few examples. In the Brahmānanda-vallī, first,
Brahman is defined as satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma. Brahman is absolute reality
pāramārthika-satya; jñāna means the original consciousness and not the reflected
consciousness; ananta means that it is beyond the limitations of time and space. Thus,
Brahman is defined as pāramārthika-satya and it is beyond time and space. We know that
this Brahman cannot be the kāraṇa because it has to undergo a change. To be kāraṇa
means it should be associated with kāla or time. The cause should follow the effect. Kāla-
sambandha comes with kāraṇa. Satya, jñāna and ananta is beyond time and space. We also
agree with it. The same Upaniṣad says from that Brahman which cannot be kāraṇa or
kārya, which is kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa, ākāśa is created which means that in this
statement, Brahman is kāraṇa. How can Brahman be both akāraṇa and kāraṇa? How can it
be both pāramārthika-satya and vyāvahārika satya at the same time? The Upaniṣad uses
the word tasmāt. Vidyāraṇya says that this is how Śruti mixes up.
To resolve this contradiction, when it uses satya, jñāna and ananta, you have to
understand it as the original consciousness. the original consciousness is satya, jñāna,
ananta, pāramārthika, etc. When we say that Brahman created, we have to say Brahman
has come down with Māyā, we have to take it to vyāvahārika plane and it is the reflected
consciousness inseparably associated with Māyā. This becomes jagat-kāraṇa. The
Upaniṣad loosely uses the expression Brahman is the kāraṇa. Since śāstra has mixed up,
there is nothing wrong in Sūreśvarācārya mixing up the original consciousness and the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 618

reflected consciousness. To understand this alone, you have to do śravaṇa and manana.
That Brahman is the cause of creation of ākāśa, vāyu, jala, agni and pṛthvī. Thus, Śruti
declares mixing up the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness.

śloka 192
आपातदृष्टितस्तत्र ब्रह्मणो भाति हेतुता ।
हेतोश्च सत्यता तस्मादन्योन्याध्यास इष्यते ॥ ६.१९२ ॥
āpātadṛṣṭitastatra brahmaṇo bhāti hetutā.
hetośca satyatā tasmādanyonyādhyāsa iṣyate (6.192).
If you take the two Śruti statements superficially, there would be confusion. That Brahman
is pāramārthika-satya we get from satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma. The second statement
is: from Brahman, the creation emerged and if you rearrange the statement it is evident
that Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa. If you join the two statements Brahman is satya and
Brahman is kāraṇa; therefore, satyatva and kāraṇatva we have equated. So all the three
have become one and satyatva and kāraṇatva are one. The truth is that the two cannot
coexist. The ultimate reality cannot be kāraṇa and what is kāraṇa cannot be the ultimate
reality. Pāramārthika cannot be kāraṇa as it is beyond deśa-kāla and it is associated with
kāla. So pāramārthikatva and kāraṇatva cannot coexist. What is kāraṇa cannot be
pāramārthika because kāraṇa is subject to change and therefore, it cannot be the ultimate
reality. Because of the two statements we commit two mistakes. If Pāramārthika we take
as kāraṇa, it cannot be pāramārthika. He is raising the kāraṇa to a higher level. So we
bring what is above to the lower level and what is at lower level to higher level. What is
superficial on casual look, Pāramārthika-satya Brahman, seems to have the status of
kāraṇa which is not true bringing the Brahman down. That is one mistake. The second
mistake is that the kāraṇa seems to be pāramārthika-satya and the mistake we commit is
by giving the status of pāramārthika-satyatva to kāraṇa we raise the status of kāraṇa to a
higher level.
This two-fold mistake is called anyonya-adhyāsa. It is exactly like the statement that this is
a snake. Here also we commit two mistakes. “This” refers to vyāvahārika satya rope. We
connect it to the snake and by giving snake-status to the rope we bring vyāvahārika satya
rope to prātibhāsika-satya snake. By saying “this is a snake” which is not really existent
and which does not have is-ness, we give the is-ness and make it vyāvahārika satya and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 619

by that we raise the snake to a higher level. In every adhyāsa, we commit two mistakes:
the higher one is brought to lower level and lower one is taken to higher level; they
embrace each other creating problems. Because of this mutual mixing up the original
consciousness-the reflected consciousness, mithuni-kāraṇa it is called. When it is done
knowingly it is called gauṇa-pratyaya and when done unknowingly it is mithyā-pratyaya.

śloka 193
अन्योन्याध्यासरूपोऽसावन्नलिप्तः पटो यथा ।
घट्टितेनैकतामेति तद्वद्भ्रान्तैकतांगतः ॥ ६.१९३ ॥
anyonyādhyāsarūpo:'sāvannaliptaḥ paṭo yathā.
ghaṭṭitenaikatāmeti tadvadbhrāntaikatāṃgataḥ (6.193).
In the case of ignorant people, when they read the two Śruti statements, they mix up the
original consciousness akāraṇa and the reflected consciousness kāraṇa and think that
Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa. Because of anyonya-adhyāsa-rūpa, from the ignorant people’s
point of view, real Brahman is thought of as really jagat-kāraṇa. That is why, in the
Vaitathya prakaraṇa of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad, it is said that there is no creation, there is no
Guru, there is no bandha, there is no mokṣa and so it is concluded that in reality, Brahman
alone is. This, we have to arrive at through analysis. The real world has not come out of
real Brahman. From the reflected consciousness Brahman, mithyā prapañca has emerged.
More we will see in the next class.

Class 135
śloka 193 contd.
Three components are physically inseparable as the original consciousness, the reflected
consciousness and reflecting medium Māyā. The word Brahman is also used to refer to the
original consciousness part or the reflected consciousness part of the mixture and
similarly, the word Īśvara is used to refer to the original consciousness part or the reflected
consciousness part. Since the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness are
mixed up and loosely used by śāstra, we have to take the appropriate meaning according
to the context. Kāraṇatva is an attribute or the property and the word kāraṇa also brings in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 620

a relationship. The moment you say you are parent, the relation with children is
unavoidable.
The Upaniṣad uses the word Brahman as jagat-kāraṇa especially in Taittirīya Upaniṣad
after defining Brahman as satya, jñāna and ananta. When the Upaniṣad says satyaṁ
jñānam anantam, it means it is attributeless, relationless, principle. It is beyond deśa-kāla-
sambandha. The word Brahman should refer to the original consciousness alone. The
meaning of the word Brahman should be the original consciousness only. In the next
sentence, the Upaniṣad says that from that Brahman, creation came along and now we talk
about the attribute as kāraṇa, the property. We should be agile intelligently and one
should understand the meaning of Brahman as the reflected consciousness in this latter
case. Normally, the reflected consciousness is conventionally not called as Brahman but is
called as Īśvara to avoid the confusion. The word Brahman generally refers to the original
consciousness and the word Īśvara conventionally refers to the reflected consciousness but
śāstra does not have any such rule. What we have to do is according to the context take the
meaning of the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness. When śāstra mixes
up the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness, particularly in Taittirīya
Upaniṣad, we don’t call it confusion because śāstra deliberately mixes it and when
knowingly mixed we fall it gauṇa-pratyaya. I gave you some examples in this regard in
the last class. However, some people reading the Upaniṣad mix up out of ignorance and
that is called mithyā-pratyaya and it is called anyonya-adhyāsa and that alone is called
bhrānti.
Similarly, Sūreśvarācārya also does the same thing in his vārtika. Here Sūreśvarācārya
Para is Māyā, the reflected consciousness; we should understand so. So the original
consciousness is different and it is asaṅga and the reflected consciousness is sasaṅga; we
should know what is what. Before painting the picture the canvas is stiffened by a coating
of starch. Once the coating of starch is well applied and it dries, it becomes part and parcel
of the canvas on which it is superimposed. It does not remain separate. In the same way,
because of the delusion, the sat-cit-ānanda Paramātmā becomes one with Īśvara the
creator. It is only the delusion that associates satyaṁ jñānam anantam to doership. It is this
delusion that brings the oneness between Paramātmā and Īśvara. This identity of
Paramātmā which is without upādhi, with Īśvara who is associated with upādhi is only

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 621

out of delusion and is not a reality. This is how the mutual superimposition takes place
was indicated by Sūreśvarācārya.

śloka 194
मेघाकाशमहाकाशौ विविच्येते न पामरैः ।
तद्वद्ब्रह्मैशयोरैक्यं पश्यन्त्यापातदर्शिनः ॥ ६.१९४ ॥
meghākāśamahākāśau vivicyete na pāmaraiḥ.
tadvadbrahmaiśayoraikyaṃ paśyantyāpātadarśinaḥ (6.194).
He reminds the second example where he talked about the original space that is all-
pervading. That is mahākāśa. Then there is a vast cloud with plenty of water droplets and
since water is a reflecting medium, mahākāśa can be reflected in the cloud which he calls
as meghākāśa. Where meghākāśa is there, mahākāśa is also there. Therefore, two ākāśas
are there where the clouds are. That is why when the clouds are removed, the meghākāśa
part will go and in that place mahākāśa is there which was there even before the arrival of
meghākāśa, during the existence of meghākāśa and after the diffusion of meghākāśa. Since
both coexist, people are not able to identify both correctly.
Similarly, ordinary people mix up the original consciousness as akāraṇa and the reflected
consciousness as kāraṇa. the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness is
mixed up by the ignorant people. megha-pratibimbita-ākāśa is mahākāśa. These two
spaces are not distinctly understood by the ignorant people. In the mirror, there is ākāśa
and there is adhiṣṭhāna ākāśa also, which ordinary people do not understand. People with
buddhi understand that there are two ākāśas, the reflection and the original. In the same
way, the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness being different is not seen
by the ignorant because of a superficial observation. They understand kāraṇa Brahman
and they don’t understand asaṅga Brahman because of superficial study. Because there is
a mix up we have to sort out.

śloka 195
उपक्रमादिभिर्लिङ्गैस्तात्पर्यस्य विचारणात्।
असङ्गं ब्रह्म मायावी सृजत्येष महेश्वरः ॥ ६.१९५ ॥
upakramādibhirliṅgaistātparyasya vicāraṇāt.
asaṅgaṃ brahma māyāvī sṛjatyeṣa maheśvaraḥ (6.195).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 622

Since superficial observation will only end in a mix up and confusion, therefore, one has to
make a thorough study which begins with śravaṇa and manana and with the help of
ṣaḍliṅgas. While talking about śravaṇa, six factors are to be taken into account for
thorough study. They are:
1. upakrama-upasaṁhāra; what is the thought with which the enquiry begins and
ends. Does the conclusion prove the identity between the hypothesis with which it
began and the conclusion reached?
2. abhyāsa; repetition of the truth again and again in the text so that the student does
not stray away from the main object of enquiry. Recall and repletion are thus
essential components of tātparya nirṇaya;
3. apūrvatā; for Ātma-jñāna the only authority is the Upaniṣad and nothing else;
4. phalam, prayojana; the purpose of the study of the text is clearly indicated and held
on to using the known in one’s knowledge as pointers to indicate the presence of
the unknown. The prayojana or the destination should be constantly brought back
to the mind so that one does not lose one’s way in the by-lanes of enquiry;
5. arthavāda; praising the subject matter of discussion and criticizing that which is
contrary to it. This not only helps to drive the point home but sustains the stamina
of the student on the path of enquiry into the truth, to fix his mind on the main
theme without any doubt.
6. Upapatti; establishment of the truth through examples of the appropriate kind.
These are the six steps, systematically followed together, they will bring the student to the
destination of the enquiry, which will lead to doubtless knowledge, for which the enquiry
is initiated. In this way, the anyonya-adhyāsa with reference to Īśvara and Brahman is
being established through the six rules or liṅgas.
Brahman was not a kāraṇa and no creation has come out of Brahman; this is established in
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. From Brahman, nothing was, is, or will ever be born. Then, if you
ask how the world has come out of Brahman, we will say it is from the empirical version
of Brahman or vyāvahārika version of Brahman. It is Īśvara and this pāramārthika-
vyāvahārika-difference you should register in your mind. That nothing is born out of
Brahman is a fact. Vyāvahārika version of Brahman is the reflected consciousness or
cidābhāsa and once you accept vyāvahārika version, Jīva will come up who is another
vyāvahārika version of Brahman. Vyāvahārika version of Jīva and vyāvahārika version if

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 623

Īśvara as the reflected versions will not be equal. One will be vertically elongated and
another will be horizontally elongated. Asaṅga Brahman means pāramārthika version of
Brahman is asaṅga. But māyāvī, the vyāvahārika version of Brahman is available in Māyā
as the reflected consciousness. Māyāvī is called Maheśvara and he creates the universe.
We are another version of Brahman; another vyāvahārika version is Jīva and He obtains in
Māyā; we are in avidyā and that is the problem.

śloka 196
सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं चेत्युपक्रम्योपसंहृतः ।
यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते इत्यसङ्गत्वनिर्णयः ॥ ६.१९६ ॥
satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ cetyupakramyopasaṃhṛtaḥ.
yato vāco nivartante ityasaṅgatvanirṇayaḥ (6.196).
We have said that the Upaniṣad gives both versions pāramārthika one called asaṅga
Brahman and vyāvahārika one is kāraṇa Īśvara reflection. Now the question is which one
the Upaniṣad wants to teach us? Which is the focused topic in the Upaniṣad? Is it the
vyāvahārika version of Brahman or pāramārthika version of Brahman kārya-kāraṇa-
vilakṣaṇa asaṅga Brahman the scripture wants to teach us? All bhaktas will ask: who
wants your Brahman? They will say scriptures are meant to reveal Īśvara only, we are to
be saved by Īśvara only, for that we have to go to Vaikuṇṭha or Kailāsa, permanently stay
under his shelter and care, we can eternally serve God. According to many philosophers
the scriptures are meant to reveal Īśvara and introduce him as mokṣa-prada. But Advaitins
say no; the teaching of Īśvara is not the ultimate goal of the scriptures. Īśvara, the
empirical version, is not the aim of the Upaniṣad. No doubt it talks about Īśvara at
intermediary stage and that is why Īśvara is the third pada as seen in the Māṇḍūkya
Upaniṣad. If the Upaniṣad wants to reveal third pada or Īśvara is the destination, it should
have ended at the third pada but it goes on to the fourth pada as empirical version is the
stepping stone to the final stage of fourth pada. We don’t want to go to Īśvara. We want to
gain Brahman through the step of Īśvara. We don’t want even to become Īśvara as all these
are empirical versions where deśa and kāla cannot be avoided. Even Īśvara’s freedom is
limited just as Jīva’s freedom is limited. According to the order given by Jīva or karma
alone, Īśvara can create the universe. Neither Jīva has absolute freedom nor Īśvara has the
full freedom. Our aim is to transcend from the empirical plane to pāramārthika level. All

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 624

these are included in the dream. The central theme of the Upaniṣad is absolute freedom.
Ananta Brahman cannot be kāraṇa or kārya but it is kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa. Brahman is
that from which all words withdraw as it is vāk-agocara; it is indescribable. It therefore
refers to absolute Brahman and absolute Brahman alone is beyond words. Īśvara can be
clearly defined as jagat-kāraṇa. Indescribable means absolute Brahman alone. That is the
original consciousness version and that is the absolute version of Brahman that is talked
about here. The original consciousness is the central theme here. In “Tat tvam asi” mahā-
vākya also, the original consciousness is kept in the mind. For teaching purpose, Īśvara is
introduced as a stepping stone which is called adhyāropa and later Īśvara is negated and it
is called apavāda. By that ,the original consciousness is retained.

śloka 197
मायी सृजति विश्वं संनिरुद्धस्तत्र मायया ।
अन्य इत्यपरा ब्रूते श्रुतिस्तेनेश्वरः सृजेत्॥ ६.१९७ ॥
māyī sṛjati viśvaṃ saṃniruddhastatra māyayā.
anya ityaparā brūte śrutisteneśvaraḥ sṛjet (6.197).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that all the teaching I give Jīva is relative truth, Īśvara is relative
truth and absolute is beyond both; Īśvara, kāraṇa is mithyā; Jīva, kārya is also mithyā; all
of these statements are based on the śāstras. We need tremendous emotional and
intellectual strength to assimilate the truth. Do you mean to say that Īśvara is vyāvahārika:
This is the question posed by many people. The whole class is a vyāvahārika activity,
śāstra is vyāvahārika andmy speech is vyāvahārika; it is a clean vyāvahārika project and
the teacher is also a Jīva. Advaitins says that the absolute truth is one caitanya and in the
vyāvahārika version we have to accept Jīva as Jīva and Īśvara as Īśvara. All Jīvas have
prārabdha, all have adhyātma-adhibhūta-adhidaiva problem but I do vyāvahārika prayer
to remove vyāvahārika pratibandha and to conduct vyāvahārika class dealing with
pāramārthika Brahman. Where is the confusion?
So Vidyāraṇya says whatever I say is the teaching based on śāstra. He quotes Śvetāśvatara
Upaniṣad vākya. It is very clearly stated that Māyī is the empirical version of Brahman, it
is pratibimbita caitanya and is the one associated with Māyā. The very word indicates it is
no more asaṅga with Māyā-sambandha. The empirical version of Brahman otherwise
called Īśvara or the reflected consciousness is kāraṇa as the original consciousness cannot

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 625

be kāraṇa and cannot have Māyā sambandha also. Once Māyī has created the universe, its
like the moment you light up the lamp all insects come and get trapped. So also, we all
enter as Jīva and get trapped. In that created universe like the rat trap of the universe, Jīva
is restrained, limited, controlled, helpless, bound by deśa, kāla and prārabdha due to
Māyā’s power. It is āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā that binds all the jīvas. the reflected
consciousness alone is the creator and not the original consciousness. More in the next
class.

Class 136
śloka 197 contd.
When you say Īśvara is kāraṇa, kāraṇa is a property and so, to which part of the aṃśa the
kāraṇa belongs to? This is the question discussed in these ślokas. Kāraṇatva should be
attributed to cidābhāsa only even though cidābhāsa does not exist separately but still
kāraṇatva must be attributed to cidābhāsa alone. Then the question came as how come in
certain Śruti vākyas it is said that brahman is the kāraṇa of the creation of the universe.
That brahman is the original consciousness as the reflected consciousness cannot be satya
and then Taittirīya Upaniṣad says from the original consciousness came the creation and it
means the original consciousness is kāraṇa. Then which is kāraṇa it is asked by the
Pūrvapakṣa? Vidyāraṇya says scriptures very loosely use the word brahman and
sometimes it refers to the original consciousness while sometimes it refers to the reflected
consciousness.
So also Śruti also use the word Jīva differently in different places. If Jīva is brahman how
can it travel from loka to loka? The word Jīva is also loosely used when we talk about Jīva
traveling from loka to loka; it is cidābhāsa and when we say you are brahman then you
should note that the Jīva ther erefers to the original consciousness; you should take the
meaning according to the context. When satyaṁ jñānam anantam is mentioned, this refers
to the original consciousness and when the creation-topic comes up, it being about
vyāvahārika, when vyāvahārika topic comes it the is vyāvahārika version and you should
take it as the reflected consciousness.
Therefore, we should understand from that Māyā-pratibimbita brahman is referred to
here. Thereafter, Vidyāraṇya says that this has the support of Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 626

it clearly says that Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya cidābhāsa alone is the kāraṇa and not the
original consciousness. In that universe, anyaḥ māyayā sanniruddhaḥ, the other one, that
is Jīva or avidyā-pratibimbita Jīva, is sanniruddhaḥ he is restricted limited in that universe
or bound because of Māyā. The very same Māyā is in the proximity of Īśvara also but in
front of Īśvara, Māyā is like a slave while in front of Jīva, Māyā is like a master.
Here, an interesting example is given by Svāmī Cinmayānanda. A thief was taken by a
policeman and the child asked the father who is that fellow whose hand is bound and
carried by the policeman to which the father told the son that he is a thief. Next was seen
another thief who was taken by three policemen and the father told the son this thief is a
greater thief so he is taken by three policemen. Then came on the street the president
followed by several policeman and the child asked the father here is the greatest thief who
is accompanied by a large number of policeman. Then father has to explain Vedānta to the
children and the father told the son that previously the thief was controlled by the
policeman being a criminal and now the president the controller of police, the police
accompany the president to give him security. The president is the controller of three
forces of the country. Similarly, we are controlled by saṃsāra and Īśvara is surrounded by
Māyā and Īśvara is the master. What is relevant to us is that Māyī means pratibimbita
caitanya alone who is kāraṇa of creation and not bimba-caitanya or the original
consciousness. Refer 4th chapter 9th mantra of Śvetāśvatara mantra.
Hence, cidābhāsa alone is the creator and we should not say śuddha caitanya is the
kāraṇa.
Then comes the next question. Taittirīya Upaniṣad says cit is the kāraṇa and Śvetāśvatara
says cidābhāsa is kāraṇa; then, why should you reject the former and accept the latter?
Why Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad is given the important while Taittirīya Upaniṣad is rejected?
Then we have to apply another law of interpretation that when there is two Śruti vākyas
are giving different interpretations, we have to take the one the meaning of which is
stronger, Nyāya-supported vākya being stronger. Then we have to find out the logical
support as to cit is kāraṇa or cidābhāsa is the kāraṇa. Cit cannot be kāraṇa for cit is
changeless and cit is relationless. It is both nirvikāra and asaṅga but kāraṇa is savikāra and
sasaṅga. Kāraṇa has relation with kārya. And therefore, since cit is nirvikāra and asaṅga it
cannot have the status of kāraṇa and it is anyatra dharmāt and anyatra adharmāt and
therefore, logically, cit cannot be the kāraṇa. Cidābhāsa is the subject that changes when

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 627

the reflecting medium changes; cidābhāsa is also is savikāra and it is sasaṅgam and
therefore, cidābhāsa can be logically the kāraṇa. “When cit is not kāraṇa why should
Upaniṣad say it is kāraṇa for the creation of the universe?” is the question posed by the
Pūrvapakṣa. For that, our answer is that the Upaniṣad wants us to know that cit alone
appears in Māyā as cidābhāsa and therefore, cidābhāsa is not a totally different entity but
it is a part of cit. So, there is nothing wrong when the Upaniṣad uses the word cit as you
can take cit is one appearing with Māyā and it is cidābhāsa alone that is the kāraṇa for the
creation of the universe. Cidābhāsa-pradhāna Īśvaraḥ eva jagat-kāraṇaṁ bhavati. The
main point that is being made clear in this śloka is that Īśvara is the creator and not the
Paramātmā.

śloka 198
आनन्दमय ईशोऽयं बहु स्यामित्यवैक्षत ।
हिरण्यगर्भरूपोऽभूत्सुप्तिः स्वप्नो यथा भवेत्॥ ६.१९८ ॥
ānandamaya īśo:'yaṃ bahu syāmityavaikṣata.
hiraṇyagarbharūpo:'bhūtsuptiḥ svapno yathā bhavet (6.198).
In these verses, Vidyāraṇya gives some details of creation as to how the creation evolved
from Īśvara. He compares it to citra-paṭa example, wherein the starched one is Īśvara,
marked one is Hiraṇyagarbha and the fully painted is Virāṭ, whereas the plain canvas is
pure consciousness.
This Īśvara who is omniscient and omnipotent visualized the entire creation just like the
producer visualizes what is to be produced. You need a plan and saṅkalpa is required
before creation. Creation is a complex one and it has to be designed to suit all the jīvarāśi’s
sañcita, āgāmi and which karma is to be fructified, etc. This fact is mentioned in several
Upaniṣads that Īśvara visualizes before he brings out the creation. To visualize what is the
mind Īśvara uses? It is said that Īśvara’s mind is Māyā and Īśvara’s thought is called
Māyā-vṛtti. Jīva’s thought is called manovṛtti and Īśvara’s thought is called Māyā-vṛtti. He
keeps in mind Taittirīya Upaniṣad vākya in this context. Let me multiply myself into
manifold jīvarāśis is the saṅkalpa of Īśvara just as waker multiplies himself as the dream
people. Out of his own mind, the waker multiplies himself into the dream-plurality; Īśvara
also multiplies himself and that is why he does not say let me create many but says let me

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 628

become many. That is, Īśvara is upādāna-kāraṇa and he himself becomes the world. The
subject is aham, I the Lord, may become bahu, meaning many.
He reminds us of the Māṇḍūkya-vākya when he says ānandamaya Īśvara. Kāraṇa-śarīra is
ānandamaya kośa, ānandamaya is kāraṇa, kāraṇa-śarīra is prājña and prājña corresponds
to Īśvara. Prājña and Īśvara are essentially the same; from micro angle prājña and from
macro angle it is Īśvara. Refer to Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad 5th and 6th mantra. Then Īśvara
evolves the samaṣṭi sūkṣma prapañca and from that Īśvara, after visualization,
Hiraṇyagarbha evolves itself. That alone is said in the Muṇḍaka first mantra where
brahman means Hiraṇyagarbha. He gives the example: it is exactly like we come to svapna
prapañca from suṣupti. During suṣupti we are in kāraṇa avasthā and from suṣupti we can
either wake up or we can come to dream. The individual waker becomes the individual
dreamer taijasa and the same thing can be extended to macro also from kāraṇa prapañca
to sūkṣma prapañca he became Hiraṇyagarbha.

śloka 199
क्रमेण युगपद्वैषा सृष्टिर्ज्ञेया यथाश्रुति ।
द्विविधश्रुतिसद्भावाद्द्विविधस्वप्नदर्शनात्॥ ६.१९९ ॥
krameṇa yugapadvaiṣā sṛṣṭirjñeyā yathāśruti.
dvividhaśrutisadbhāvāddvividhasvapnadarśanāt (6.199).
Here, Vidyāraṇya raises a question and answers. The question is in the first line. The
question is: does the creation come simultaneously, sequentially or gradually? We find in
jāgṛt-avasthā anything is created gradually. It is a gradual process to construct a house. So
also the creation it is doubted. In jāgṛt-avasthā the creation is gradual but in svapna-
avasthā when we have a house or building, the moment we enter the dream, the house is
readymade and we find nothing gradually happening in dream. So whether the creation is
gradual or simultaneous is the question here.
Vidyāraṇya says you can take in any manner you like for both the descriptions are given
in the śāstras. In this regard, Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.1.1, 2.6.1 and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
1.2.5 are quoted in support of the above statement. In svapna also, the construction of a
house may take time or it may be simultaneously at some other time. So either way it is all
right. For krama-sṛṣṭi Taittirīya Upaniṣad Brahmānanda-vallī beginning 2.1.1 is quoted.
Here, gradual creation is mentioned. In the latter section 2.6.1 is for the instantaneous sṛṣṭi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 629

From brahman itself all the elements came, it is said and that is the pramāṇa for
simultaneous creation. For uttama adhikārī, it is simultaneous creation for he knows the
whole thing is mithyā creation. As it is mithyā, we don’t see the order. For uttama
adhikārī, this is talked about. For madhyama adhikārī, they cannot swallow it and for
them, the gradual creation and resolution is suggested.
Ultimately, what we have to note is anyway the creation is to be negated. So the process of
creation is given little importance in the Vedāntic study. Ultimately, our knowledge is:
there was brahman, there is brahman and there will be brahman alone. Our aim is to
discover the creationless brahman. The word for that brahman is prapañcopaśama
brahman. They also call it as the cosmic reality. Therefore, any sṛṣṭi is all right; start and
finally negate the creation on gaining jñāna.

śloka 200
सूत्रात्मा सूक्ष्मदेहाख्यः सर्वजीवघनात्मकः ।
सर्वाहंमानधारित्वात्क्रियाज्ञानादिशक्तिमान्॥ ६.२०० ॥
sūtrātmā sūkṣmadehākhyaḥ sarvajīvaghanātmakaḥ.
sarvāhaṃmānadhāritvātkriyājñānādiśaktimān (6.200).
The nature of Hiraṇyagarbha is comparable to the lāñchita paṭa, the canvas that is marked.
Hiraṇyagarbha is Sūtrātmā one who is inherent in all the vyaṣṭi taijasas. Hiraṇyagarbha
the samaṣṭi is inherent in all vyaṣṭi jīvas. When you want to say Īśvara is inherent in prājña
we use the word Antaryāmī. When Hiraṇyagarbha inheres all the taijasas we don’t use the
word Antaryāmī but conventionally we use the word Sūtrātmā just as the thread goes in
and through individual beads like the thread Hiraṇyagarbha inheres in every taijasa.
Another name for Sūtrātmā is sūkṣma-dehākhya, he is called as samaṣṭi-sūkṣma-deha.
Also it is called sarva, samaṣṭi that includes all the vyaṣṭi jīvas. It is an assemblage of
sarva-bhūta-gaṇa. It is samaṣṭi of all jīvas. It identifies with not one sūkṣma-śarīra; it has
abhimāna with all the taijasas exactly like The Prime Minister is supposed to have
abhimāna with every citizen. His aham includes all the Indian citizen and when he puts
his signature it has the value of all the Indian citizens. Similarly, Hiraṇyagarbha is samaṣṭi-
deha-abhimānī. Therefore, brahman is sarva-jīva-gaṇātmā he has omniscience and
omnipotence, etc. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 630

Class 137
śloka 200 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues with the topic of tat-padārtha Īśvara. He also established Īśvara as
nimitta and upādāna-kāraṇa for the creation of the universe. Sometimes jagat-kāraṇatva is
attributed to the original consciousness and sometimes to the reflected consciousness and
sometimes to the reflecting medium. The kāraṇa status in different contexts is attributed to
either the original consciousness, the reflected consciousness or reflecting medium. All the
three are integrally together and Upaniṣad does not bother to differentiate between them.
The correct one is that the reflection alone is cause of creation. We don’t want to give
kāraṇatva to the original consciousness, it being asaṅga and attributeless caitanya. As far
as medium Māyā is concerned we can give kāraṇatva status being saguṇa and savikāra
and there is a snag as we want to state nimitta-upādāna-kāraṇa. Sarvajñatva status is to be
given and this cannot be given to jaḍa Māyā and therefore, the reflected consciousness
being the sentient principle it deserves the status of omniscient Īśvara.
Strictly speaking, we say that the reflected consciousness is jagat-kāraṇa. Īśvara is used
primarily in the sense of the reflected consciousness. The separation of the original
consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium is a cognitive process
and there is no physical separation between the three. We have to understand the
difference intellectually. Thus, Vidyāraṇya established that reflected-consciousness-
pradhāna tat-padārtha Īśvara is jagat-kāraṇa. When we study mahā-vākya, we will negate
all the three and we will refute jīvatva, as also kāraṇatva. At vyaṣṭi level, the original
consciousness does not have jīvatva as also kāraṇatva. Jīvatva should not be there,
kāryatva should not be there, all go with the reflected consciousness and reflecting
medium. The pure Īśvara-Jīva-vilakṣaṇa, kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa, original consciousness
alone will remain. Then what will remain is asaṅga, nirguṇa, original consciousness alone
will remain.
From 198 onwards, the evolution process of creation is being talked about incidentally.
Dhauta paṭa is pure brahman and ghaṭṭita paṭa is Īśvara and lāñchita paṭa is
Hiraṇyagarbha. This Hiraṇyagarbha stage of evolution is talked about from 198 to 203.
This Hiraṇyagarbha is sūkṣma-dehātmīya and he is Sūtrātmā; being the total, he is in and
through every individual and just as thread he is in and through every bead. He is like a
thread and so he is called Sūtrātmā. Therefore, only he is sarva-jīva-gaṇātmā. He is a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 631

group of all the jīvas. Remember the example of thePrime Minister. His signature does not
represent him as a person but his signature represents all the people of this country.
Similarly, Hiraṇyagarbha has attained the status because of his puṇya-pāpa karma and by
going through śukla-gati, he has extraordinary status of representing all the taijasas. Gaṇa
means samaṣṭi in this context. In every taijasa, Hiraṇyagarbha has aham iti abhimānaḥ.
Māna means abhimāna. Aham-mānaḥ means identification with abhimāna.
Hiraṇyagarbha has identification with every taijasa. He is samaṣṭi-abhimānī. Because of
that, he has samaṣṭi-icchāśakti, samaṣṭi-kriyā-śakti and samaṣṭi-jñāna-śakti.

śloka 201
प्रत्यूषे वा प्रदोषे वा मग्नो मन्दे तमस्ययम्।
लोको भाति यथा तद्वदस्पष्टं जगदीक्ष्यते ॥ ६.२०१ ॥
pratyūṣe vā pradoṣe vā magno mande tamasyayam.
loko bhāti yathā tadvadaspaṣṭaṃ jagadīkṣyate (6.201).
Here the description of Hiraṇyagarbha is given with another example. Now Vidyāraṇya
adds another new example for Hiraṇyagarbha. Hiraṇyagarbha is associated with sūkṣma
prapañca and it is neither totally unmanifest like kāraṇa prapañca nor fully manifest as
sthūla-prapañca. It is partially manifest and partially unmanifest. It is unclear. Our kāraṇa-
śarīra neither others understand nor do I understand. In kāraṇa-śarīra everything is totally
dormant. Neither you comprehend nor do I comprehend. Sthūla-śarīra is so solidly
manifest that it is available for me as also for others.
Sūkṣma-śarīra the mind is not available for you as you do not know what is in my mind,
but mind is available for me and we ourselves are able to know the conditions of sūkṣma-
śarīra whether it is about jñānendriyas or karmendriyas; it is partially manifest and
Hiraṇyagarbha will come under the vague category. For this Vidyāraṇya gives an
example. He says: when you look at the world during twilight either dawn or dusk how it
will appear. It is neither totally clear as daylight nor is it totally like midnight. I can see the
people around but I cannot clearly know who are they. It is neither totally avyakta nor
partially vyakta but vyakta and avyakta. It is twilight time. The world is enveloped in
partial darkness. In midnight it is immersed in full darkness. Ayam lokaḥ bhāti. It shines
vaguely. It shines vaguely. It is aspaṣṭa. Just like the vaguely appearing world during
dawn and dusk, sūkṣma jagat aspaṣṭam, it appears vaguely.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 632

śloka 202
सर्वतो लाञ्छितो मस्या यथा स्याद्घट्टितः पटः ।
सूक्ष्माकारैस्तथेशस्य वपुः सर्वत्र लाञ्छितम्॥ ६.२०२ ॥
sarvato lāñchito masyā yathā syādghaṭṭitaḥ paṭaḥ.
sūkṣmākāraistatheśasya vapuḥ sarvatra lāñchitam (6.202).
This ghaṭṭita paṭa the starched cloth is comparable to Īśvara where no outlines are there.
We don’t know what picture will come when it is simply a starched cloth. Now he gives
an outline and some elephants are there or some animals are there. You know that a zoo
will be there but you do not know the details of the animals which will be drawn by the
painter. The starched cloth comparable to Īśvara is avyakta now. It is marked all over with
various outlines of animals and trees. It is marked all over the canvas. He does with the
paint or ink. It is marked with simple or vague outlines. I am able to identify things but I
am unable to identify fully.
In the same way, when the evolution emerges, this kāraṇa prapañca gets converted into
sūkṣma prapañca, where things become slightly manifest. The body of the Lord which is
nothing but the Lord is sarvatra lāñchitam, marked everywhere with outlines.

śloka 203
शस्यं वा शाकजातं वा सर्वतोऽङ्कुरितं यथा ।
कोमलं तद्वदेवैष पेलवो जगदङ्कुरः ॥ ६.२०३ ॥
śasyaṃ vā śākajātaṃ vā sarvato:'ṅkuritaṃ yathā.
komalaṃ tadvadevaiṣa pelavo jagadaṅkuraḥ (6.203).
The same Hiraṇyagarbha is described with another example. This is the third example. It
is the example of a seed which sprouts into a tender plant. It is not yet grown fully to
become a full-fledged tree. It is in the plant stage. Here also we have three stages. In seed
stage we don’t know anything, it being in an unmanifest form. When it is in the tree form,
we will know all the details. In the plant condition though, it is neither totally vyakta nor
totally avyakta. So also is the case with the infant. When it is conceived we don’t know
anything but later we come to know slowly.
Here, Hiraṇyagarbha is compared to the plant. Virāṭ is going to be the tree. Just as the seed
of germinating corn or a vegetable plant becomes soft and tender by absorbing water in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 633

the same way when the world starts manifesting from Īśvara, it is in the stage of swollen
plump of softness, where the world exists in the most hazy indistinct form. In the same
way, the plant of universe which is called Hiraṇyagarbha is born. This is also tender like
the plant. Hiraṇyagarbha is subtle or sūkṣma. With this, Hiraṇyagarbha evolution is over.

śloka 204
आतपाभातलोको वा पटो वा वर्णपूरितः ।
शस्यं वा फलितं यदवत्तथा स्पष्टवपुर्विराट् ॥ ६.२०४ ॥
ātapābhātaloko vā paṭo vā varṇapūritaḥ.
śasyaṃ vā phalitaṃ yadavattathā spaṣṭavapurvirāṭ (6.204).
From Hiraṇyagarbha emerges spaṣṭa Virāṭ which is very clear. Previously, we talked
about a world during dawn or dusk. Now, he says you imagine the world in the midday
sun. It shines. Just as the world shines during the midday very clearly. Hiraṇyagarbha is
comparable to dawn and dusk and Virāṭ is comparable to the world of midday. Īśvara is
comparable to the world of midnight.
The second example is the marked canvas which has been completely painted with
varieties of colours, different animals are there and different colours are there and also
visitors are there with different garments. You also know whether they are modern or
traditional.
The third example is now that the plant is fully grown up, it has produced the grains or
the vegetables. You know the quality of the vegetable and the fruit. All of them you know
when it is fully fructified.
Just as all the three are totally vyakta, Virāṭ is also spaṣṭa, distinct. We also have kāraṇa-
śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra and what a beautiful classification you see.

śloka 205
विश्वरूपाध्याय एष उक्तः सूक्ते ऽपि पौरुषे ।
धात्रादिस्तम्बपर्यन्तानेतस्यावयवान्विदुः ॥ ६.२०५ ॥
viśvarūpādhyāya eṣa uktaḥ sūkte:'pi pauruṣe.
dhātrādistambaparyantānetasyāvayavān viduḥ (6.205).
Suddenly, Vidyāraṇya feels that someone may ask: how do you know all these things? As
we talk about samaṣṭi-sṛṣṭi when we were not there at the time of creation, someone asks

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 634

how you know the creation came in this manner? This is supported by the Upaniṣad. Sṛṣṭi-
varṇana is given in almost all the Upaniṣads. Vidyāraṇya gives two pramāṇas and one is
Śruti pramāṇa. Elaborate description of the emergence of animals, jīvas and others is given
in the Puruṣasūkta. We also have got Smṛti pramāṇa that is Viśva-rūpa-adhyāya which is
the 11th chapter of Gītā. They are clearly available in Smṛti. It is the description of Virāṭ.
Behind Virāṭ himself Hiraṇyagarbha is there just Viśva, taijasa and prājña all put together
sit in the class in the form of Jīva. When you are there, in the very same place Viśva is
there, taijasa is there and prājña is there. When I say you are lean you are Viśva-varṇana,
when I say you are intelligent you are taijasa and when I say you appear sleepy you are
prājña.
Strictly speaking Virāṭ varṇana is given in the Gītā. Since Virāṭ is samaṣṭi it includes all the
vyaṣṭi jīvas and the exalted jīvas in the form of Devatās, etc. All the individual jīvas
beginning from Brahmāji the caturmukha Brahmā to a small plant is seen in the form of
Virāṭ. From the most exalted Brahmāji to the minute plant are the parts or limbs of the
Virāṭ. Our body and our head are parts of the Virāṭ the samaṣṭi. We take Virāṭ as specific
form which appeared before Arjuna and disappears before him. Virāṭ head means all our
heads are the part of Virāṭ’s head. When I look at all of you I look at Virāṭ Puruṣa only.
Viśva-rūpa-darśana is bhāvanā-parivartana. It means change your attitude as all are Virāṭ
only. Viśvarūpa is symbolic alone. Sarvaṁ Virāṭ-mayaṁ jagat. This we should
understand. The world is Virāṭ. More in the next class.

Class 138
Śloka 205 contd.
Vidyāraṇya established the nature of Īśvara as consisting of three components brahma
caitanya, Māyā-pratibimbita-caitanya macro original consciousness plus macro reflected
consciousness plus macro medium. The macro original consciousness is śuddha Brahman,
macro reflected consciousness and big reflection samaṣṭi reflection medium Māyā and all
the three put together is tat-padārtha.
Pure consciousness is attributeless. Both Māyā and its reflection are not nirguṇa. the
reflected consciousness and reflecting medium are saguṇa and not nirguṇa. It has sattva,
rajas and tamo-guṇa and therefore, the reflection also has extraordinary attributes like

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 635

sarva-īśvaratva, sarva-antaryāmitva and sarva-kāraṇatva. This tatpadārtha Īśvara creates

the universe at two levels: as Hiraṇyagarbha, the sūkṣma prapañca and as Virāṭ, the
sthūla-prapañca. Accordingly, the reflection also gets a different name and Īśvara gets the
name Hiraṇyagarbha. In kāraṇa prapañca medium it is Īśvara and sūkṣma prapañca
medium it is Hiraṇyagarbha. At vyaṣṭi it gets the name Vaiśvānara.
Three prapañcas are called the upādhis or body of the kāraṇa, sūkṣma and Virāṭ prapañca.
Then, Vidyāraṇya said in 205 that they are not my imagination but they are talked about
in Puruṣasūkta, as also the 11th chapter of Gītā. Since Virāṭ has the totality as his body,
everything in the creation becomes a part of Virāṭ and nothing can be outside Virāṭ. All
jīvarāśis are the limbs and highest Devatā being caturmukha Brahmā. The most exalted
Devatā onwards up to a minute plant forms the śarīra of Virāṭ. Therefore, all our bodies
also will be within Virāṭ only. Virāṭ has thousands of eyes means all our eyes are Virāṭ’s
eyes and we are avayavas of Virāṭ. The wise people know and see bhāvanā-parivartana as
Viśvarūpa-darśana. Change in the attitude that all eyes belongs to Bhagavān makes
Viśvarūpa-darśana.
Niravayava Brahman it is said, niṣkala Brahman it is said and so, you should not have any
doubt that these are the avayavas of Virāṭ the saguṇa samaṣṭi. Saguṇa vyaṣṭi is the
avayava of saguṇa samaṣṭi. Here, all saguṇa vyaṣṭis, micros, are parts of saguṇa samaṣṭi.
At nirguṇa level, there is neither samaṣṭi nor vyaṣṭi; there is no part or whole. We talk of
saguṇa Virāṭ and it is vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi and therefore, we can have parts and the whole.
Every Advaitin is Viśiṣṭādvaitin in vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. The wise people know that. Up to
this we saw in the last class.

śloka 206
ईशसूत्रविराट्वेधोविष्णुरुद्रेन्द्रवह्नयः ।
विघ्नभैरवमैरालमारिका यक्षराक्षसाः ॥ ६.२०६ ॥
īśasūtravirāṭvedhoviṣṇurudrendravahnayaḥ.
vighnabhairavamairālamārikā yakṣarākṣasāḥ (6.206).
The sun, moon, stars and all other creations also form Virāṭ. If you want to worship India
you can invoke samaṣṭi bharata deśa and even a handful of sand you can worship. When
people do pūjā of Gaṅgā they perform pūjā of Gaṅgā water at one place. Doing part-pūjā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 636

is nothing but it is samaṣṭi-pūjā. Avayava-pūjā is as good as avayavi-pūjā. All Devatās are

Īśvara and all the human beings, plants and even stones and mud are Virāṭ-avayava only.
Therefore only, we worship everything. Even though it appears as mud-worship, the mud
is Virāṭ-avayava and therefore, I invoke Viśvarūpa-Īśvara. All forms of worship are valid
and will bless also. Indirectly, he gives a message to the fanatic cults or groups who claim
Śiva is the only God or Viśṇu is the real God and don’t worship others, etc. Such ideas are
born out of ignorance. Viśṇu form is also God. Śiva form is also God. Even our form is
God only.
Therefore, he gives a big list in the three ślokas. Vidyāraṇya gives a big list of Īśvara-
avayavas and says that Īśvara-avayava is not different from Īśvara. Touch the tip of the
finger and avayava-sparśana is avayavi-sparśana. Don’t fight as to which form of God is
superior, etc. Vidyāraṇya gives the list of God. Īśa kāraṇa prapañca caitanya; Virāṭ sthūla-
prapañca caitanya; here Vedhā means caturmukha Brahmā; Viśṇu and Rudra are also
enlisted as the one Virāṭ’s aspect only. You can worship anyone. Agni Devatā follows
Rudra. Vighneśvara then Bhairava and Mairāla, a rare Devatā, not so poplular; Mārikā
and then Yakṣa- and Rākṣasa-gaṇas. Rākṣasa is another group of protecting Devatās;

śloka 207
विप्रक्षत्रियविट्शूद्रा गवाश्वमृगपक्षिणः ।
अश्वत्थवटचूताद्या यववृहितृणादयः ॥ ६.२०७ ॥
viprakṣatriyaviṭśūdrā gavāśvamṛgapakṣiṇaḥ.
aśvatthavaṭacūtādyā yavavṛhitṛṇādayaḥ (6.207).
Vidyāraṇya adds to the list already given in the last śloka. All given here are the avayavas
of Virāṭ. Avayava-pūjā is as good as avayavi-pūjā. We do avayava-pūjā because avayavi-
pūjā is difficult to perform. Then follow kṣatriya, śūdras, cows, horses, animals, fig tree,
banyan, mango, wheat, rice, grass, etc., all of them are the part of Virāṭ and you can
worship any one of them. Worship never goes to vyaṣṭi but it always goes to samaṣṭi
through vyaṣṭi. That is why Hinduism is tolerant to all the religions. All these are various
aspects of God only. They all can be worshipped and not only be worshipped but also are
valid and fruitful.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 637

śloka 208
जलपाषाणमृत्काष्ठवास्याकुद्दालकादयः ।
ईश्वराः सर्व एवैते पूजिताः फलदायिनः ॥ ६.२०८ ॥
jalapāṣāṇamṛtkāṣṭhavāsyākuddālakādayaḥ.
īśvarāḥ sarva evaite pūjitāḥ phaladāyinaḥ (6.208).
Until now, Vidyāraṇya talked about the jīvarāśis up to the grass level. Now, he says not
only you can worship the living one, but also you can worship the jaḍa vastu like stone,
jala, mud, wood, hammer, spanner, spade, etc. All are able to bless those who propitiate
them by proper worship, etc. Vidyāraṇya says the phala depends upon the type of Devatā
and type of worship, etc., which is said in the next śloka.

śloka 209
यथा यथोपासते तं फलमीयुस्तथा तथा ।
फलोत्कर्षापकर्षौ तु पूज्यपूजानुसारतः ॥ ६.२०९ ॥
yathā yathopāsate taṃ phalamīyustathā tathā.
phalotkarṣāpakarṣau tu pūjyapūjānusārataḥ (6.209).
The phala will not be uniform but it will depend upon the type of pūjā, the duration of
pūjā, etc. The phala depends upon the quality and quantity of the pūjā performed by the
worshippers. An individual does upāsana of any of these manifestations of Īśvara and
according to that, he gets the appropriate result of that upāsana. That the Lord appears
before a devotee in the form which he has intensely worshipped is seen in the lives of
many Mahātmās and is not to be taken as a hallucination.
Whether a fruit of the upāsana is of the higher or lower nature depends on whether the
divine is invoked for a good or bad purpose. Those who desire to invoke evil spirits for
harmful purpose do that type of upāsana. What is relevant is that divine or absolute
power is present in and through every manifestation in the creation, big or small, inert
things or sentient beings. How that power is invoked depends upon the method of
invocation.
The difference in phala depends upon my invocation. It depends upon what type of
āhvāna I do before conducting the pūjā. The cheque leaf has no value of its own until the
amount is written. Once the amount is written the value of each cheque leaf is different
based on the amount of the cheque. So also the phala of the pūjā conducted on various

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 638

Devatās. Depnding upon my invocation and the type of pūjā I do, the phala I get. The
phala depends upon the śraddhā in performing the pūjā.

śloka 210
मुक्तिस्तु ब्रह्मतत्त्वस्य ज्ञानादेव न चान्यथा ।
स्वप्रबोधं विना नैव स्वस्वप्नं हीयते यथा ॥ ६.२१० ॥
muktistu brahmatattvasya jñānādeva na cānyathā.
svaprabodhaṃ vinā naiva svasvapnaṃ hīyate yathā (6.210).
With the previous verse, Vidyāraṇya concludes tat-padārtha-vicāra. He started this from
the verse 104. Thus, in the mahā-vākya, tvam and tat-pada-vyākhyāna is over. Now, the
word asi is there which is the most important of the three words. This starts from this
śloka and it goes up to 246. He introduces by saying that both Jīva and Īśvara fall within
saṃsāra only. Īśvara also is vyāvahārika satya and Jīva is also vyāvahārika satya and jagat
is vyāvahārika satya and by going through anyone of three you will not get liberation. By
going near God, you may get some extraordinary power but not liberation. That siddhi
also falls within saṃsāra only. Īśvara as Īśvara has only relative freedom as he cannot do
anything as he likes.
Even sṛṣṭi is not done according to Īśvara’s desire and Īśvara-sṛṣṭi is done according to the
karmas of all the jīvas. Karma restricts Jīva as also Īśvara’s freedom. If there is no karma to
restrict Īśvara’s freedom, the nature of creation will be all heavens and there will not be
any naraka at all. There will not be diseases. You cannot say He is not capable of
producing such a world. He is omniscient and omnipotent. For this, we have one answer
that Īśvara is governed by the laws of karma. If Īśvara saves someone it is also because of
the karma and prāyaścitta karmas. Prāyaścitta alone produces such phala. Law will not
function by itself but only through an intelligent agent and here it is God. If you want
absolute freedom, even by becoming Īśvara, you will not achieve the goal. By becoming
Īśvara, you will suffer the pains of all the jīvas undergoing problems due to their
prārabdha karmas. Īśvara also can get freedom only by knowing brahma satya jagan
mithyā truth. Therefore, Īśvara is able to withstand and see the suffering of the mithyātva
of sufferings and for this He has to know satya.
Whether it is Jīva or Īśvara, freedom is falsification of all sufferings. I have to falsify the
suffering of few people around me but Īśvara has to falsify the sufferings of all the jīvas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 639

Īśvara gets peace of mind only through the knowledge of jagan-mithyātva. Jagan-
mithyātva presupposes satya jñāna. Without satya jñāna there is no solution to the
saṃsāra problem.
Without this knowledge even Īśvara will have mahā problem. Jīva has to get the
knowledge and Īśvara has the knowledge. Both can save themselves only through
knowledge. What knowledge? Come to the next class.

Class 139
śloka 210 contd.
The elaborate analysis of tvam- and tat-padārtha of Tat tvam asi is over. Now, Vidyāraṇya
takes up the elaboration of asi-pada. Tvam-padārtha as also tat-pada have the original
consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium and he gave different
names for that. the original consciousness was called kūṭastha, the reflected consciousness
was called Jīva and reflecting medium is śarīra-traya. Similarly, tat-pada also has the
original consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium. At macro level
also each one was given a name. the original consciousness is called Brahman, the
reflected consciousness is called Īśvara and reflecting medium is called prapañca-traya.
From this verse onwards to verse 246, we will see aikya of both Jīva and Īśvara by the
word asi. In the mahā-vākya, Upaniṣad reveals tat-padārtha- and tvam-padārtha-aikya
and Vidyāraṇya points out that without the aikya-jñāna, liberation is not possible.
Therefore, he said that liberation is possible only by brahma-tattva-jñāna which means
Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya-jñāna. He does not tell us as to how to gain that jñāna. He has
already analysed this in the previous mahā-vākya chapter with eight verses. We have to
gather the jñāna of aikya because Upaniṣad reveals the aikya by the statement Tat tvam
asi. If you take direct and primary meaning, aikya will look absurd. Jīva and Īśvara are
diagonally opposite in all respects and so, you cannot talk about their aikya. One is micro
and another is macro, one is vyaṣṭi and another is samaṣṭi, one is alpajña and another is
sarvajña, one is kārya and the other is kāraṇa, one is saṃśarī and the other is asaṃśarī.
How can they be equal?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 640

In all respects, Jīva and Īśvara are different and therefore, aikya cannot be talked about in
the normal course. Here, we cannot go by normal thinking, because the statement has
come from nirduṣṭa Veda pramāṇa and therefore, it is a valid statement. It is not the defect
of the statement but it is because of the lack of the understanding and instead of rejecting
the understanding I should question the understanding. We should patiently and
reverentially study and then we find both Jīva and Īśvara have three components each. If
you look from the standpoint of reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness, they
are directly opposite.
For Jīva the upādhi reflecting medium is small and for Īśvara upādhi is big. From upādhi-
dṛṣṭi they cannot be equal and therefore, Upaniṣad never talks about upādhi-aikya.
Upaniṣad can never talk about upādhi-aikya because upādhis are different. Similarly,
Upaniṣad cannot talk about pratibimba-caitanya-aikya also because the nature of
reflection will depend upon the reflecting medium; in an inferior medium the reflection
will be inferior and in superior macro medium the reflection will be superior. From the
standpoint of the reflected consciousness also, aikya is not possible.
From bhāgatyāga-application you set aside the reflecting medium and the reflected
consciousness and turn your attention to the original consciousness, the adhiṣṭhāna-
caitanya, which is called kūṭastha in the case of tvam-pada adhiṣṭhāna and Īśvara in the
case of tat-pada brahma caitanya. Then we find kūṭastha and brahma caitanya are one and
the same with no attributes at all. Attributes belong to the reflected consciousness and
reflecting medium only. Kūṭastha is nirguṇa and Brahman is also nirguṇa and there is no
difference between them at all.
Then, can you say kūṭastha caitanya being Jīva-adhiṣṭhāna it is small, the original
consciousness or small nirguṇa caitanya and Brahman being adhiṣṭhāna can you say
Brahman is big nirguṇa caitanya? At nirguṇa-level there is neither big nor small. When
both are absolutely same, why do we use two different words then? This is the question
we face. One is kūṭastha adhiṣṭhāna and the other is Brahman. For this, we say the two
different names are also given from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi; as adhiṣṭhāna of vyaṣṭi it is called
kūṭastha and as adhiṣṭhāna of samaṣṭi it is called Brahman. This vyaṣṭi and samaṣṭi
difference belongs to vyāvahārika level alone.
Therefore, the name kūṭastha and Brahman which are given from vyāvahārika standpoint,
vyaṣṭi-samaṣṭi vyāvahārika-based name also must be vyāvahārika satya alone; it cannot be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 641

pāramārthika. When a person becomes rich with dream money the richness status is
because of unreal money and the richness status is also unreal. The waker is not unreal but
the richness status is unreal as it is based on dream money. the original consciousness is
real but the kūṭastha name of the original consciousness is from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi only. It
is micro-upādhi-dṛṣṭi. Similarly, Brahman name also is from macro-upādhi-dṛṣṭi and
therefore, the two words are also unreal.
From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, there is neither vyaṣṭi nor samaṣṭi uapdhi. You cannot
differentiate between kūṭastha and Brahman. That adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya is eka behind Jīva
and Īśvara. This knowledge is called adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya aikya-jñāna. Then, there is
another question. Jīva and Īśvara are different from the standpoint of reflecting medium.
Jīva and Īśvara are different from the standpoint of the reflected consciousness. Jīva and
Īśvara are one from the standpoint of the original consciousness.
Of the three components, in the two components there is bheda and from the standpoint
of one component it is aikya. Bheda seems to be stronger than abheda because bheda is
supported by two components while abheda is supported by one the original
consciousness. The answer is even though the bheda is from the standpoint of two
components both of them are mithyā. Mithyā means vyāvahārika satya and it is not
absolutely real and therefore, from mithyā dṛṣṭi there is bheda.
Therefore, bheda is mithyā. But abheda is from the standpoint of the original
consciousness which is absolutely real; abheda is satya and bheda is mithyā and therefore,
we should recognize satya abheda and should not support mithyā abheda. Satya abheda
alone is jñāna that gives liberation. It is also called pāramārthika-satya abheda-jñāna and
that alone gives mukti. Is this knowledge optional or one of the means of liberation? For
this, we say that this is the only knowledge that can give liberation and no other
knowledge can give liberation or mukti.
Without this pāramārthika-satya abheda-jñāna, mokṣa is never possible. You can postpone
the knowledge and extend the saṃsāra that is your choice but you have no choice in
avoiding it. There is no other way. All the dream problems can be permanently solved
only by one method. You can do various things but the solutions will be temporary and
they will be palliative and not curative.
Without waking up to my vyāvahārika higher nature, the prātibhāsika svapna will not go.
Your vyāvahārika svarūpa alone will drive away the prātibhāsika svapna. One’s own

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 642

dream is superimposed upon oneself and that superimposed svapna will go only by
adhiṣṭhāna jñāna. He says I the waker is the adhiṣṭhāna of my svapna and for your svapna
you the waker is the adhiṣṭhāna. When I wake up it will eliminate my svapna. If your
svapna is to go, you have to wake up.

śloka 211
अद्वितीयब्रह्मतत्त्वे स्वप्नोऽयमखिलं जगत्।
ईशजीवाद्रू पेण चेतनाचेतनात्मकम्॥ ६.२११ ॥
advitīyabrahmatattve svapno:'yamakhilaṃ jagat.
īśajīvādrūpeṇa cetanācetanātmakam (6.211).
Svapna being mithyā it is unreal, but how can you say jāgṛt saṃsāra will go on gaining
brahma-jñāna? How can this world go on gaining jñāna? The unreal svapna goes on
waking but how can the real world go on gaining jñāna? You say svapna is unreal from
whose point of view? It is real from the standpoint of the dreamer but it is unreal from the
waker’s standpoint who is the adhiṣṭhāna. Similarly, if the world is unreal, we ask
whether it is from the standpoint of Viśva, empirical pramātā? We will not say it is unreal
from vyāvahārika point of view. This world is unreal from the standpoint of turīya
caitanya and from the standpoint of Brahman when I look at the universe, the whole
universe is unreal mithyā.
Just as svapna prapañca is one type of dream and jāgṛt prapañca is another type of dream,
one we call prātibhāsika and another as vyāvahārika. Suppose we see a rope-snake in the
dream. Some Guru comes and says it is not a snake and it is a rope. When dreamer goes
near the snake and he says dream rope is unreal. Snake is also unreal and rope is real
within the dream world but both of them get dismissed from the waker’s standpoint. Jāgṛt
prapañca may be more real than svapna prapañca but from brahma-dṛṣṭi both of them are
mithyā. In this mithyā universe Jīva is part of mithyā that is vyāvahārika satya, Jīva is
cidābhāsa obtaining in micro reflecting medium, Jīva vyaṣṭi cidābhāsa is also unreal and
Īśvara is also unreal from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi.
The definition of Īśvara is another cidābhāsa in the macro reflecting medium, one may be
micro and another macro, but both are reflections and therefore, both are mithyā only. If
Īśvara is the original consciousness it cannot be called Sarvajña, Sarveśvara and Sarva-
śaktimān. All descriptions you give prove that you talk about saguṇa caitanya. Saguṇa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 643

caitanya means it is the reflected consciousness. the original consciousness will not receive
your pūjā and there is no question of blessing the devotees. If Brahman has to do all these
things, Brahman has to come to vyāvahārika plane at the reflected consciousness level and
then only Brahman can take pūjā and bless the devotees. There is no vyāvahārika in the
original consciousness. That is why Māṇḍūkya 7th mantra Brahman is called
avyavahāryam.
That is why Gaudapāda says there is no stotra and there is no namaskāra, etc. Then why
do Advaitins do pūjā one may ask. Why Advaitins do Guru pūjā, etc. the moment you talk
about Guru doing pūjā it is only the reflected consciousness and not the original
consciousness. the reflected consciousness jñānī does pūjā to the reflected consciousness
Īśvara; the reflected consciousness jñānī is micro and the reflected consciousness Īśvara is
macro. In all vyavahāras, jñānī will accept Īśvara and from pāramārthika, neither Jīva nor
Īśvara mention is possible as they are like svapna.

śloka 212
आनन्दमयविज्ञानमयावीश्वरजीवकौ ।
मायया कल्पितावेतौ ताभ्यां सर्वं प्रकल्पितम्॥ ६.२१२ ॥
ānandamayavijñānamayāvīśvarajīvakau.
māyayā kalpitāvetau tābhyāṃ sarvaṃ prakalpitam (6.212).
Here, Vidyāraṇya reminds the definition of Jīva and Īśvara as reflected in vyaṣṭi and
samaṣṭi media respectively. The individual intellect is the reflecting medium for the Jīva.
Or we can say that the mind or sūkṣma-śarīra is the reflecting medium for the Jīva.
Vidyāraṇya takes sūkṣma-śarīra as the reflecting medium and he does not take the kāraṇa-
śarīra because at the kāraṇa-śarīra level, the individual or total we do not experience
clearly. When we sleep we do not recognize the difference between my kāraṇa-śarīra, your
kāraṇa-śarīra and Īśvara’s kāraṇa-śarīra. At the kāraṇa-śarīra level, vyaṣṭi-samaṣṭi
difference is not prominent. So, he takes sūkṣma-śarīra as the reflecting medium. It is
Māyā and that Māyā he called ānandamaya. Ānandamaya means kāraṇa-śarīra in this
context, which is the reflecting medium of Īśvara. Why is such a confusing word used?
Ānandamaya word is used because now Māyā is available for our experience only in the
form of kāraṇa-śarīra in sleep. We cannot experience Māyā in any other way. How do we
experience Māyā at vyaṣṭi level? It is only during sleep that we experience Māyā in the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 644

form of kāraṇa-śarīra and therefore, he uses ānandamaya for Māyā. Why can’t we
experience Māyā during pralaya then? During pralaya, even though Māyā is there we
cannot experience it because we are resolved; we experience it only during suṣupti.
Therefore, vijñānāmaya is Jīva-upādhi and ānandamaya is Īśvara upādhi. Therefore, he
says ānandamaya and vijñānāmaya are two upādhis which belong to Īśvara and Jīva
respectively. Now, Vidyāraṇya says: both vijñānāmaya and ānandamaya are mithyā and
therefore, Īśvara and Jīva are also mithyā. This we had discussed long time before. Īśvara
has the power to create the universe, he is the builder and he has all the labour to
construct the universe. However, Īśvara cannot determine the nature of the universe but it
is determined by the karma of Jīvas. If Īśvara had the choice to create the world, there
would be no naraka. He would have created heaven alone. He creates naraka because
karma needs naraka. Jīva’s karma needs Īśvara’s creation. Both of them make the joint
venture. We say the whole thing is beginningless; the creation is anādi and the joint
venture is also anādi, which means that both Jīva and Īśvara also must be anādi. Jīva did
not come at a particular time.
Īśvara is also anādi and Jīva is also anādi, joint venture of creation also is anādi. Since
there is anādi Jīva, anādi Īśvara and anādi jagat, only manifestation takes place and there
is no question of beginning of anyone of the three. Certain karmas are operational when
there is creation and when the karma is dormant, the world goes into dormant condition.
None knows the beginning. It is eternal. It is eternally mithyā. When I gain this
knowledge, the continuity of mithyā universe will not disturb me after gaining brahma-
jñāna. I am satya adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. Jīvātmā and Īśvara are beginningless and creation
is continuously maintained.

śloka 213
ईक्षणादिप्रवेशान्ता सृष्टिरीशेन कल्पिता ।
जाग्रदादिविमोक्षान्तः संसारो जीवकल्पितः ॥ ६.२१३ ॥
īkṣaṇādipraveśāntā sṛṣṭirīśena kalpitā.
jāgradādivimokṣāntaḥ saṃsāro jīvakalpitaḥ (6.213).
If the creation is a joint venture, how is the work allocation between Jīva and Īśvara done?
There should be an understanding regarding the contribution of the two. What is the
contribution of Jīva and what is the contribution of Īśvara? Vidyāraṇya is ready to explain

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 645

this. Īśvara’s role is the visualization of the universe before the manifestation based on
Jīva’s karmas. Jīva is in a dormant form and not active. When Jīvas are asleep, the ever
wakeful Īśvara visualizes the universe with the help of Māyā, based on the karmas of all
the jīvas.
Then, he creates the pañca mahā-bhūtas, sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra and all of them until
the individual jīvas who are reflections in the individual mind where they are formed.
When the pañca-bhūtas are created, jīvas do not operate and the moment cidābhāsa is
manifest in vyaṣṭi sūkṣma-śarīra jīvas come to life and that is called praveśa. Praveśa
means formation of individual the reflected consciousness. It is in the individual sūkṣma-
śarīra or individual mind and until this comes, Jīva is in a dormant form. Once Jīvas come
up, we will start all our programs. We will forget Īśvara. We will have sukha-duḥkha and
pleasure and pain. All the rāgas appear. Details in the next class.

Class 140
śloka 213 contd.
After dealing with tvam-padārtha Jīvātmā and tat-padārtha Īśvara, now, Vidyāraṇya has
come to asi-padārtha, aikya. The topic is from 210 to 246. This aikya is revealed by mahā-
vākya Tat tvam asi. The primary meaning of the word tvam is Jīva and primary meaning
of tat is kāraṇa Parameśvara. The word tat refers to kāraṇa Īśvara and tvam refers to kārya
Jīva. When we take the primary meaning of the two words, the equation is not acceptable
to us. There is a lot of difference between the two. This statement comes from Upaniṣad
pramāṇa which cannot commit a mistake and which cannot mislead either.
The motive of a human being is always questionable and therefore, the validity of human
statement is questionable, because motive can be various. This doṣa is called vipra-
lambhaka-doṣa, which is the intrinsic deficiency of a human-statement. Always,
colouration will be there in the case of a human statement. Upaniṣad does not have any
doṣa like this and therefore, this statement should have validity. Superficially seeing, I see
the statement as absurd. We have seen Jīva and Īśvara have three components and of
them, if we take the original consciousness part the aikya perfectly fits in. Upādhis are
different; one has micro reflected consciousness and another macro reflected
consciousness and one has micro reflecting medium and another has macro reflected

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 646

medium and therefore, you have to come to the original consciousness and at the original
consciousness level both Jīva and Īśvara are one and the same. This jñāna alone gives
liberation. At that level, you cannot make the differentiation, because for differentiation
you need properties. All differentiation is based on the attributes. Attributes differentiate
the things, whereas in pure consciousness, the differentiating attributes are not there and
therefore, at the original consciousness level, there is only one, without a second.
Then came the last question: if they are identical from the angle of one component and
different from the angle of two components, difference seems to be prominent. Even
though we admit that the original consciousness is pāramārthika-satya and the reflected
consciousness or reflecting medium is vyāvahārika satya, aikya is from pāramārthika-
dṛṣṭi. From higher reality they are one and from the lower order of reality they are
different. Satya abheda and mithyā bheda.
Our argument is that the differences at mithyā level are also mithyā. In two mithyā things
differences also must be mithyā— mithyā bheda and satya abheda— and therefore, you
cannot hold on to mithyā bheda. We do admit that there is a difference between chain and
bangle and admitting such difference alone, the chain is used in the neck and bangle is
used in the hand. These differences are in the nāma-rūpa and superficial only but the
value of gold is the same behind the bangle and behind the chain. Thus, there is
pāramārthika aikya between Jīva and Īśvara. One is kūṭastha while the other is Brahman.
Before mahā-vākya we differentiated kūṭastha as vyaṣṭi the original consciousness and
Brahman as samaṣṭi the original consciousness and after mahā-vākya study we find both
are one adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya; although the words are different, both are one and the same.
Vidyāraṇya deals with the corollaries of this discovery. We should know that both Jīva
and Īśvara are ābhāsa-caitanya the reflected consciousness coming under mithyā category.
Māyayā kalpitau etau. Cidābhāsa-caitanya and Īśvara the ābhāsa-caitanya are formed in
two different reflecting media: ānandamaya-pratibimbita-caitanya Īśvara and
vijñānāmaya-pratibimbita-caitanya Jīva. Kāraṇa-pratibimbita caitanya is Īśvara and
sūkṣma-pratibimbita caitanya is Jīva. Anyway whether you call it kāraṇa-śarīra-
pratibimbita caitanya or Māyā-śarīra-pratibimbita caitanya, he says you understand that it
is pratibimbita caitanya. Īśvara and Jīva have reflection caused by Māyā. Due to Māyā
both samaṣṭi reflection and vyaṣṭi reflection, kāraṇa-śarīra reflection as also sūkṣma-śarīra
reflections are there.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 647

Once Māyā has created this Jīva and Īśvara through reflection, then Jīva and Īśvara enter
into a joint venture. That joint venture is: let us create the universe. For the creation of
universe, both contribute; Īśvara’s contribution is omniscience and omnipotence thus
giving the power. Īśvara takes the project to give pañca-bhūtas and all fourteen lokas and
gives it to jīvas. The contribution of Jīva is karma puṇya-pāpa karmas. If karmas are not
there, Īśvara does not have any basis for creation. Without the power based on karma,
Īśvara does not have the power or the basis to create the universe; puṇya for svarga-sṛṣṭi
and pāpa for naraka-sṛṣṭi and mixture is needed for bhūloka-sṛṣṭi. He visualizes the
universe before sṛṣṭi based on karmas of the jīvarāśis. This is called īkṣaṇa. He visualizes
with the special mind that is Māyā. Therefore, īkṣaṇa is Māyā-vṛtti just as our visualisation
is citta-vṛtti. After visualization the various bhūtas, etc, will emerge.
His role ends once He gives vyaṣṭi cidābhāsa to every antaḥkaraṇa; the creation is over
because without cidābhāsa every mind will be jaḍa or inert. Sthūla-śarīra will be inert and
sūkṣma-śarīra will be inert. After creating the śarīras, Īśvara has to bless the śarīras by
anupraveśa. Only at the time of anupraveśa, Jīva gains operational functions. Jīvas are
anādi, karmas are anādi. I have given you a śloka where six items are anādi according to
Vedānta. Jīva being anādi, we cannot say during anupraveśa Jīva is created but Jīva
becomes operational and until anupraveśa, Jīva is dormant. This is the part played by
Īśvara in the creation.
Once the individual Jīva has come, the prārabdha karma becomes operational. Before that,
it was dormant in the form of sañcita karma. Now prārabdha karmas are ready and its job
is to give problems. It gives certain types of sukha-duḥkha in jāgṛt-avasthā and some in
svapna-avasthā. Certain types of prārabdhas are exhausted through svapna also. Svapna-
experiences are governed by karma alone for we don’t have freewill. We are not able to
decide whether svapna should come or not and even if it comes what type of svapna
should come and therefore, it is decided by Īśvara or karma. If it is Īśvara why should
Īśvara give good svapna and some others bad svapna? Therefore, we say Īśvara does not
decide according to his whims and fancies but it is according to our own karma. When
prārabdha is temporarily suspended, we get some temporarily relief in the form of sleep.
With the amount of prārabdha problems that we face, if the sleep relaxation is not there,
we would have ended up in the mental hospital! The whole thing is well-designed.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 648

Most people are satisfied with this arrangement. Some people want to destroy all the
karma; for that, provision is there in jāgṛt-avasthā. In svapna and suṣupti, we cannot do
any sādhana and in pralaya also we cannot do any sādhana. In jāgṛt-avasthā, there is a
special provision to destroy all the karmas, prārabdha, sañcita and āgāmi karmas by
attending Pañcadaśī classes. Thus, one can gain mokṣa.
He puts mokṣa also a part of saṃsāra. Mokṣa is freedom from bondage and since saṃsāra
is vyāvahārika satya, freedom from bondage is also a part of saṃsāra as an activity done
by vyāvahārika Jīva in vyāvahārika jāgṛt-avasthā. Īśvara does not have any avasthā and he
does not have any bondage and he does not have any mokṣa also. The one who does not
have them is called Īśvara. If Īśvara needs mokṣa you need another Guru and another
sādhana and all of them would be Jīva-kalpita. All take place in vyāvahārika plane alone.
In pāramārthika plane you should note that there is no bondage, no freedom, etc. In the
pāramārthika plane, there is neither baddha nor mukta.

śloka 214
अद्वितीयं ब्रह्मतत्त्वमसङ्गं तन्न जानते ।
जीवेशयोर्मायिकयोर्वृथैव कलहं ययुः ॥ ६.२१४ ॥
advitīyaṃ brahmatattvamasaṅgaṃ tanna jānate.
jīveśayormāyikayorvṛthaiva kalahaṃ yayuḥ (6.214).
Since Jīva, jagat and Īśvara come under Māyā-śakti, Vidyāraṇya analysed Māyā and the
main point he highlighted was it is not logically categorizable. You cannot say it is
different from Brahman or identical with Brahman. The example he gave in this regard is a
magic show which we can experience but we cannot understand it. They are anirvacanīya
and if you probe into any one of them too much, still you will not be able to arrive at the
conclusion. You cannot know which is first: karma or Jīva. It is the case with freewill and
fate also. Because of freewill I acted and because of that the result has come and it is fate.
Fatalistic people argue your janma is based on fate alone. The decision is arrived by your
friends relatives. etc. The fatalists will say freewill is controlled by fate and freewill people
will say freewill controls fate. This argument is done by ignorant people who do not know
the truth that they are interrelated and do not know which controls what. The argument
continues because of Māyā. If anyone says fate alone is there, then you say it is your fate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 649

You don’t accept fate, it is your fate. If you accept fate, you say accepting is my fate;
anything in vyāvahārika is undefinable.
Similarly, who is Īśvara? That argument is endless. Vaiṣṇava will say Viśṇu is God and
Śaivaite will say Śiva is the Lord and this argument too comes under Māyā. So also is the
world. Sāṅkhya refutes Naiyāyikas and Naiyāyikas refute Sāṅkhya. You enjoy the
argument without entering into the argument. The debating people are confused and they
are in eternal argument because they do not know the adhiṣṭhāna. The ignorant people do
not know what they should know. Advitīya brahmatattva they do not know. That the non-
dual satya adhiṣṭhāna is Brahman for all the three, Jīva, jagat and Īśvara, they do not
know. In Saddarśana. Ramaṇa says Jīva jagat Īśvara dvaita-darśana continues as long as
ahaṅkāra is there and when there is no ahaṅkāra where is question of Jīva-Īśvara-bheda!
Brahmatattva is asaṅga and it has no relation. But Īśvara is related to jagat as sṛṣṭi-kartā
related to Jīva as karma-phala-dātā. Īśvara is sasaṅga, jagat is sasaṅga and Jīva is sasaṅga
but that Brahman which is tat-pada-lakṣyārtha they do not know.
What about Jīva-Īśvara-māyikao which is mithyā. The tattva of mithyā Jīva and mithyā
Īśvara, the adhiṣṭhāna, is advitīya brahma-tattva. But when we say Īśvara and Jīva are
mithyā, it disturbs many people. Therefore, we change the language. We say never use the
word mithyā Jīva and Īśvara and say vyāvahārika satya Jīva and Īśvara and in vyavahāra,
Jīva is real and Īśvara is real and any vyavahāra requires blessings of Īśvara. Teaching is a
vyavahāra. When Guru starts the class, I pray to the Lord so that I don’t confuse people.
This is the worry of the Guru. For that, Guru needs grace of Bhagavān. Teaching is a
vyavahāra. We should not undertake any vyavahāra without prayer and Īśvara-anugraha.
This tattva the ajñānis do not know. Therefore, they enter into quarrel and debate that
your God is big or my God is big, etc. They forget that any religion should aim to worship
one Īśvara represented by any form. The goal of religion is going beyond the vyāvahārika
Īśvara and arrive at Pāramārthika Brahman. One should strive to know Jīva-Īśvara-
adhiṣṭhāna. Then only it will give peace in the society. People will do anything for
religion, except following the principle. Avoid the unnecessary quarrels and religious
wars.

śloka 215
ज्ञात्वा सदा तत्त्वनिष्ठाननुमोदामहे वयम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 650

अनुशोचाम एवान्यान्न भ्रान्तैर्विवदामहे ॥ ६.२१५ ॥

jñātvā sadā tattvaniṣṭhānanumodāmahe vayam.
anuśocāma evānyānna bhrāntairvivadāmahe (6.215).
When the ajñānis quarrel, the jñānis will not enter the group because he will also get
thrashed by them because even though he has the wisdom to enlighten them, he will not
go there to enlighten them because he can do it only when they are willing to listen to him.
Quarrelling people are willing to only quarrel. We are helpless for they do not seek help.
Giving help to those who don’t need help is not helpful. Even if I have compassion, I
cannot help because help needs other person’s willingness to take it. The other person is
not willing to take it and even Īśvara is helpless there; otherwise, He would have given
free mokṣa to all the people! The people do not want help.
Therefore, wise people wait and watch and they will not interfere. It is not that they are
selfish but they know that they cannot help because the other person is not interested in
help. Wise person knows adhiṣṭhāna Brahman and they abide in that jñāna without
interfering or joining this wild noisy religious quarrel taking place all over. They do not do
anything. They may just pray to God to give them good sense. Jñānī knows at macro level
that Īśvara alone can help better than a Jīva. Therefore, they don’t interfere. We appreciate
the response of the wise people. They are not irresponsible people but are non-interfering
people who pray to Lord for improvement. When things go beyond a level to macro it is
the department of Īśvara. It is not our job. How can we deal with macro? He has promised
peace when violence breaks out. At the individual level what I can do I will do. Light one
candle by cursing the darkness. Similarly, don’t enter into the quarrel. This is the practical
advice of Vidyāraṇya and such people, I admire. We only sympathize with the quarrelling
people. We cannot convince this group. We will never debate with the confused people. If
someone says Viśṇu is God, say it is all right. Go to Śiva temple and say Śiva is great. So
also Devī temple. Say all are correct. More in the next class.

Class 141
śloka 215 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses the asi-pada which is Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya. How the aikya is
accomplished Vidyāraṇya does not explain in detail as this has been done earlier. When

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 651

we apply the primary meaning, aikya does not take place since Jīvātmā and Īśvara have
diagonally opposite attributes. The Upaniṣad gives that statement of aikya and we cannot
ignore the mahā-vākya tat tvam asi. Several examples are given; the Upaniṣad repeats the
very same statement and the Upaniṣad seriously struggles to communicate to us out of
compassion. I have to see what is the lakṣyārtha and that is how we have arrived at the
bhāgatyāga lakṣaṇā. Here, we have removed the reflecting medium and reflection and we
have retained the original consciousness and that is called as bhāga-tyāga lakṣyārtha.
Now, we appreciate the aikya. It is not a union of two consciousnesses. To talk about
union there must be two but the aikya means that the original consciousness Jīva and the
original consciousness of Īśvara are one and the same. Tvam-pada lakṣyārtha is the same
as tat-pada lakṣyārtha. There are some hidden ideas which we have to extract.
When we removed a particular part of Jīva and Īśvara, that is reflecting medium and the
reflected consciousness, and retained the original consciousness, why do we eliminate two
portions is our question. From the standpoint of those two portions aikya is not possible
and bheda is there. We have eliminated the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium
and from that angle there are differences which means from the standpoint of those two
portions, Jīva-Īśvara-bheda we accept. If abheda is there in all the three states we would
have seen the aikya in vācyārtha itself. We accept partial oneness is there and partial
difference is there. Bheda is there and abheda is also there. If you see through upādhi-
dṛṣṭi, bheda is there and if you see from the original consciousness point of view there is
no bheda. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣa says that the relationship is both aikya and bheda. This
group of philosophers is called bheda-abheda -vādis. If you stress on bheda alone, your
knowledge is incomplete and if you stress on abheda only, your knowledge is still
incomplete. So they accept both bheda and abheda and this is the contention of those
philosophers. We cannot negate their statement. We have already accepted bheda and
abheda partially. Bheda-mithyātva has to be dealt with and we have to spend lot of time to
realise the upādhi-mithyātva. Similarly, we have to see the pratibimba-mithyātva and
therefore, pratibimba-bheda-mithyātva. First it is upādhi-mithyātva and then upādhi-
bheda-mithyātva and then pratibimba-mithyātva and pratibimba-bheda-mithyātva we
have dwell upon.
All these four we cannot gloss over and we cannot casually make a statement and forget it.
We have to dwell on it. Mithyātva of Jīva and Īśvara can be assimilated only on knowing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 652

satya-abhinna caitanya. Standing upon satya-abhinna caitanya, kūṭastha brahma-abhinna

caitanya, we have to relook into Jīva, the suffering saṃśarī, Īśvara as karma-phala-dātā
and Jīva as karma-phala-bhoktā. The constant struggle goes on and on and the whole
phenomena we have look at it from advitīya caitanya. All of them are brushed aside as
another dream. The dreamness of the dream will be convincing only when I learn to look
from the waker’s angle. The unreality of the dream will be swallowable only from the
higher pedestal called the waker. Similarly, Jīva also is a dream, Īśvara is also another
dream and jagat, the fourteen lokas, are also another dream and all our knocking about are
also in dream and all these we can swallow only if we look at them from advitīya-
brahman-standpoint. Here, Vidyāraṇya tries to establish Jīva-jagat-Īśvara-mithyātva from
kūṭastha-brahma-caitanya- or pāramārthika-satya-dṛṣṭi.
First, he establishes that all the three fall within Māyā and the second point he highlights is
that if you miss pāramārthika-satya and you go on analyzing the Jīva-jagat-Īśvara triad,
you will have only so many unanswered logical questions. The whole vyāvahārika
prapañca begins within Māyā; logically, you will not be able to explain all the questions.
Therefore, the question “how did Jīva come about first?” means we will be in trouble.
“Why Īśvara is there?” and “how did all these things begin?” means you will have further
confusion. “Because of faith, freewill came” means you will have problem. “Whether sat-
kārya-vāda should be applied or asat-kārya-vāda should be applied?” you will have
problem. All these because all the three are not there. Don’t probe too much into Jīva, jagat
and Īśvara. Go to Pāramārthika and drop all these questions; you don’t solve the question
but dissolve the questions in the solvent called knowledge. Until we get into
pāramārthika-satya, we do have temporary answers, but we should note each is only a
temporary answer. When the permanent answer is there, there is no question. Because
there is no questioner. Negate the Jīva and drop the question and be śānta- prājña. First
two padas of Māṇḍūkya refers to Jīva and jagat and the third one refers to Īśvara. We
don’t accept bheda-abheda-vāda as bheda is unreal and abheda alone is satya. Whoever
has come to Advaita and has dropped all the questions regarding Jīva-jagat-Īśvara, he
alone will welcome to the Jīvanmukta class. Those who talk of bheda and other things, we
only sympathise with them. They don’t accept Śruti pramāṇa and they only believe in
pratyakṣa and hence they are in trouble. We should know logic will not lead us anywhere.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 653

śloka 216
तृणार्चकादियोगान्ता ईश्वरभ्रान्तिमाश्रिताः ।
लोकायतादिसांख्यान्ता जीवविभ्रान्तिमाश्रिताः ॥ ६.२१६ ॥
tṛṇārcakādiyogāntā īśvarabhrāntimāśritāḥ.
lokāyatādisāṃkhyāntā jīvavibhrāntimāśritāḥ (6.216).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that all the confused people can be broadly classified into two
groups. We classified them into two: one group is confused about Īśvara as to who is God
whether God is nimitta-kāraṇa or upādāna-kāraṇa also whether God has form or he is
everywhere or he is above or he is below or whether there is real Viṣṇu in milky ocean.
They are Īśvara-viṣaya confusion; they are confused about Īśvara. There is no confusion in
respect of those who don’t have belief in Īśvara. And they are atheist people who don’t
have belief in God. They don’t accept the existence of God. They don’t have Īśvara-
confusion but they have got Jīva-confusion.
For the non-believers, there is confusion of Jīva. For believers, they have two confusion
one group is about Jīva and another group about Īśvara. Third confused people are those
who probe and bother about the existence of the world. All are confused and this
confusion will not go away. When we probe with the help of Śruti we find all the three,
Īśvara, Jīva and jagat, are not there and they are mithyā when looked from the
pāramārthika angle.
We come to know the non-existence of saṃśāra only with the help of śāstra. He says from
the tribal people who worship tree, stone, etc., up to the exalted philosophers like the
Yoga-philosophers who know about the exalted being Īśvara are all confused people. All
the philosophers are associated with delusion with regard to Īśvara. The greatest delusion
for them is giving pāramārthika-satya status to Īśvara. Taking Īśvara as absolute reality is
the confusion. Giving empirical reality is all right. Īśvara is as real as the world. But both
the world and Īśvara which are equally real both together are less real than brahman, the
absolute reality. First confusion is sattā-confusion the degree of reality.
The second confusion is bheda, Īśvara-jagat-bheda and Jīva-jagat-bheda. From
vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, bheda is there but from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, bheda is not there. But
there is other group of philosophers like Cārvāka philosophers, materialistic philosopher s,
that does not believe in God. They don’t accept heaven and hell and they don’t accept
travel of Jīva to heaven and hell. He does not even accept the mind and for him, mind is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 654

brain and there is no question of mind surviving the brain. For us, after the death of the
brain, the mind survives with vāsanās. The invisible mind survives and travels; the mind
has vāsanās and it takes another brain. The mind functions through the brain. Cārvāka
philosophers cannot accept our arguments. There is no proof for the mind traveling after
death; so says the Cārvāka philosophers. This is Cārvāka philosophy.
Sāṅkhya-philosopher is a great logician, he accepts Veda pramāṇa, he believes Jīvātmā
and accepts Ātmā but he claims that there is Jīvātmā but there is no Paramātmā and there
is no Īśvara. So, Sāṅkhya has no Īśvara-confusion and his confusion relates to Jīva only.

śloka 217
अद्वितीयब्रह्मतत्त्वं न जानन्ति यदा तदा ।
भ्रान्ता एवाखिलास्तेषां क्व मुक्तिः क्वे ह वा सुखम्॥ ६.२१७ ॥
advitīyabrahmatattvaṃ na jānanti yadā tadā.
bhrāntā evākhilāsteṣāṃ kva muktiḥ kveha vā sukham (6.217).
Both of them are obsessed with either Jīva-enquiry or Īśvara-enquiry and lifelong they are
involved with vyāvahārika-satya and they have no time to enter the pāramārthika-satya.
Pratyakṣa does not have any access to pāramārthika-satya. Even the costliest car will not
travel in the ocean. Any science that is prevalent has no access to pāramārthika-satya.
Even in Veda, karmakāṇḍa does not have access to pāramārthika-satya. Jñāna-kāṇḍa alone
is the saving grace and these people scrupulously avoid that route. As long as they don’t
know of non-dual brahman they suffer from intellectual saṃśāra. Normal people suffer
only emotional saṃśāra. Ninety percent of the people suffer emotional saṃśāra. But some
others are interested in their own field; the philosopher’s saṃśāra is intellectual saṃśāra
and it will not go away until you know advitīya brahman.
They will have a question to ask the Lord. They will wait to ask the questions. All these
people are deluded and as long as threefold saṃśāra is there— intellectual saṃśāra,
emotional saṃśāra and physical saṃśāra are there— one has no way to gain Ātma-jñāna
and thereby liberation. These three saṃśaras will not go, so where is liberation for them!
There is no liberation after death. In this life also, they have no happiness; either in this life
or after death in higher loka. Come to advitīya-Īśvara-tattva, transcend Jīva and Īśvara and
reach non-dual brahman. Suppose some say they don’t want mokṣa, we have nothing to
worry about them. You don’t give gold to children but you give them chocolate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 655

śloka 218
उत्तमाधमभावश्चेत्तेषां स्यादस्तु तेन किम्।
स्वप्नस्थराज्यभिक्षाभ्यां न बुद्धः स्पृश्यते खलु ॥ ६.२१८ ॥
uttamādhamabhāvaścetteṣāṃ syādastu tena kim.
svapnastharājyabhikṣābhyāṃ na buddhaḥ spṛśyate khalu (6.218).
A great devotee has come with a stick in his hand and he is angry with Advaitin. He says I
don’t mind calling Jīva as mithyā for he is a speck in the cosmos and he has problems. He
asks: how can you treat Īśvara on equal footing with jīva? How can you say both Jīva and
Īśvara are mithyā? Īśvara is sarva-vyāpī while Jīva is limited. How can you treat Īśvara
equal to Jīva? One is uttama and the other is adhama. It is his objection. For that,
Vidyāraṇya says he admits uttama-adhama-bheda between Jīva and Īśvara. Then,
Vidyāraṇya says one is superior mithyā and another is inferior mithyā. He says it is
exactly like a king and a beggar in a dream. A king is a king and a beggar a beggar, but
both exist in a bigger dream; anādimāyayā supto yadā jīvaḥ prabudhyate;
ajamanidramasvapnamadvaitaṃ budhyate tadā. From the point of view of brahman,
superior Īśvara and inferior Jīva exist within another dream. May you wake up and may
you get up. More in the next class.

Class 142
śloka 218 contd.
In these verses beginning from verse 210 Vidyāraṇya deals with Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya
or tat-tvam-padārtha-aikya, commenting upon the asi of the mahā-vākya. He says
Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya is possible from the point of view of pāramārthika and the
original consciousness. From vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, aikya is not possible with Jīva and Īśvara
being diagonally opposite. Naturally, the question will come: when both bheda and
abheda are there, why are you partial and go on emphasizing abheda part only leaving the
bheda part?
For that, Vidyāraṇya’s answer is because the bheda belongs to a lower order of reality
from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. Bheda is important and we have to appreciate it from
vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. We should know what is ours for us to peacefully live and bheda is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 656

there from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. We should know vyāvahārika bheda, we do respect but it

becomes insignificant from the pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. Vedāntic student is more and more
interested in pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. This is the assumption of the teacher and the śāstra. That
is why as nididhyāsana is talked about, the idea is pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi becomes more and
more important. Only when pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi becomes predominant, the vyāvahārika
bheda can become insignificant. Then prārabdha karma will become significant and so on.
Therefore, whether the vyāvahārika bheda is significant or insignificant depends upon
whether pāramārthika becomes dominant or otherwise. The student who wants to benefit
from Vedānta, he should give more and more importance to pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi and then
and then alone the vyāvahārika bheda becomes insignificant, of no consequence. As long
as pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi is not dominant, as long as the people have not made pāramārthika-
dṛṣṭi as dominant in life, so long the bheda will be there and they will be educated mad
people. Then the bheda will continue; prārabdha bheda, family financial fluctuations will
continue and their effect on your body and mind will also continue. Hence, vyāvahārika
will affect vyāvahārika. They can be brushed aside only if I look from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya gives a warning to be careful. From vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi you cannot
get mukti. From vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, vyāvahārika sukha for vyāvahārika mind can never be
uniform and uniform sukha is not from vyāvahārika but it is from Ātmā that you can get
nitya sukha. Now, Pūrvapakṣa is disturbed and raises a question. How do you make both
Jīva and Īśvara as equally insignificant as mithyā? I can brush aside Jīva and Jīva is a spec
of the matter. I can dismiss Jīva but how can you treat Īśvara also on the same footing,
whose glory we talked about in the karma kāṇḍa and such a great Īśvara, the creator of the
cosmos, how can you set aside casually as mithyā? Īśvara is uttama and Jīva is adhama.
When both are different you cannot treat them equally and treat them as mithyā. Then the
answer is given. I accept that Īśvara is uttama and Jīva is adhama but because of gradation
you cannot say one is satya and the other is mithyā. Gradation can exist within mithyā
also. We can have superior mithyā and inferior mithyā. Superior mithyā cannot become
satya just because it is superior. There is a beggar in a dream and there is a king in dream
and the dream-king is uttama while the dream-beggar is adhama, but both belong to the
dream and on waking up, both are equally negated.
Similarly, from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, Jīva’s and Īśvara’s negation is instantaneous and
equal. Because of the status-gradation in the dream, the waker is neither qualified by

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 657

beggarhood nor kingship as both are equal from vyāvahārika satya. Similarly,
pāramārthika Ātmā is not affected by vyāvahārika-gradation and therefore, both are
mithyā. Vedāntic seeker should dwell up on brahman and not on mithyā Jīva or mithyā
Īśvara. Obsession on mithyā should be gradually taken away. Up to this, we saw in the
last class.

śloka 219
तस्मान्मुमुक्षिभिर्नैव मतिर्जीवेशवादयोः ।
कार्या किंतु ब्रह्मतत्त्वं विचार्य बुध्यतां च तत्॥ ६.२१९ ॥
tasmānmumukṣibhirnaiva matirjīveśavādayoḥ.
kāryā kiṃtu brahmatattvaṃ vicārya budhyatāṃ ca tat (6.219).
Vidyāraṇya advises us to discuss Jīvātmā-Īśvara definition and we discuss these topic not
as an end in itself as both are mithyā within Māyā and sooner or later our attention should
turn to pāramārthika brahman and vyāvahārika should not become an obstacle to dwell
upon pāramārthika. Vyāvahārika should be a means to reach pāramārthika.
We should not sidetrack and miss the bus and Vidyāraṇya gives a strong advice not to
spend too much time in analyzing Jīva and Īśvara, both being vyāvahārika satya. They are
only the means and not an end. In the discussion in Jīva-topic and Īśvara-topic, your
interest should not be too much and don’t take them to be at a pāramārthika level because
they are vyāvahārika.
The seekers should not waste their ability to think and enquire in trying to establish who is
right and who is wrong. On the other hand, a seeker should focus his attention only on
two things and employ his enquiring faculty to know the nature of pāramārthika, his own
true nature and experience that his sat-cit-ānanda-svarūpa. Thus, the proportion of time if
we make a study on, more time should be spent on pāramārthika rather than vyāvahārika.
Let that enquiry lead to this brahman-knowledge. Let the pāramārthika brahman be
known by you. Even after gaining knowledge, I should dwell on pāramārthika jñāna
rather than vyāvahārika viṣaya. If we are not careful, we get into a trap; once I clearly gain
the knowledge of mahā-vākya that I am pāramārthika brahman, or I am kūṭastha caitanya,
I know I was free, I am free and I will be free, I am nitya-mukta Ātmā instantaneously.
Here, the I refers to the original consciousness. This knowledge gives me instantaneous

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 658

freedom and it helps me claim the freedom which is with me all the time. The claim of
eternal freedom is the benefit of the knowledge.
The śāstra mentions that this knowledge helps me claim freedom and also says it also
gives secondary benefit to the mental health of the Jīva. Emotionally, this person is more
stable. Emotional-health-refinement is talked about as a by-product of this knowledge.
The main benefit of the knowledge is not emotional health but the main benefit is that I am
not the mind. The by-product benefit is emotional-health-improvement otherwise called
viparīta-bhāvanā-reduction. One should remember this is also vyāvahārika. Don’t be too
much interested or obsessed by vyāvahārika by-product of this knowledge. By-product
will happen when you dwell upon pāramārthika. Do not lose sight of pāramārthika and
be interested in mental study.
After the study of Vedānta, may people not get lost in the study of their own mind and
judge themselves and worry whether they deserve the title of Jīvanmukta or not. After the
study of Vedānta, we have forgotten pāramārthika and we are interested whether we are
Jīvanmukta or not, etc! The classification is based on mental condition and if you are not
careful, you will worry about your own status. If one slight emotional disturbance comes
up, you will worry whether you are jñānī or brahma-jñānī and you are obsessed with what
title you should have.
The mind is a mysterious entity and we do not have control of the mind. I am Jīvanmukta
or not I am obsessed because I attach too much on the mind. Then comes another
obsession to which level jīvanmukti is require to become a Videhamukta. One is interested
whether we have gained videha-mukti and whether we will get another body in the next
birth. Many people are obsessed whether we will gain videha-mukti or not. It is only
vyāvahārika that we talk of Jīva or videha-mukti and don’t be obsessed with the mukti-
level because they are the by-product of vyāvahārika.
Whether I have got them, don’t bother because I am pāramārthika Brahman. I don’t have
jīvanmukti or videha-mukti. I am ever mukta-svarūpa. Don’t try to classify yourself as
Jīvanmukta or Videhamukta since both of them are vyāvahārika-benefit and whether I get
or not is Īśvara’s problem. My commitment is I am neither the body, the mind nor the
kāraṇa-śarīra but I am the caitanya who doesn’t care about what happens in vyāvahārika
plane. Don’t be obsessed with jīvanmukti or videha-mukti but be obsessed with that I am
nitya-mukta.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 659

śloka 220
पूर्वपक्षतया तौ चेत्तत्त्वनिश्चयहेतुताम्।
प्राप्नुतोऽस्तु निमज्जस्य तयोर्नैतावता वशः ॥ ६.२२० ॥
pūrvapakṣatayā tau cettattvaniścayahetutām.
prāpnuto:'stu nimajjasya tayornaitāvatā vaśaḥ (6.220).
A student raises a question. He says there are so many other systems of philosophy that
give the definition of Jīva and Īśvara differently. Some of the darśanas give definition of
Īśvara and we have our own definition of Īśvara and Jīva from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. The
Pūrvapakṣa says we should analyse the definition of other people and arrive at the correct
definition. How can we totally avoid Jīvātmā-Īśvara discussion? If such a question is
raised, Vidyāraṇya says all right and if it is for the sake of clarity, we can analyse the Jīva-
definition of other systems of philosophy. Make sure you don’t get permanently lost in
that to such an extent that you don’t come to the pāramārthika. Now, Pūrvapakṣa says in
the first line as the views of the challengers of our conclusions and our definition of Jīva
and Īśvara; if we don’t clear their doubt, their doubt will become our doubt. So
Vidyāraṇya takes the Jīva-Īśvara-vadau. They act as the stepping stone to arrive at the
pāramārthika Brahman. It should be discussed as a means but not as the end.
Then Vidyāraṇya gives the answer. That vāda is useful as a stepping stone. Therefore,
may you enter the discussion. But he warns that the means should be only the means. May
you not be carried away or lost in that means forgetting the end which here is
pāramārthika Brahman. Don’t be carried away or lost in the vāsanās by entering into the
discussions only as the means, not treating them as an end in itself. Therefore, be very
alert.

śloka 221
असङ्गचिद्विभुर्जीवः सांख्योक्तस्तादृगीश्वरः ।
योगोक्तस्तत्त्वमोरर्थौ शुद्धौ ताविति चेच्छृणु ॥ ६.२२१ ॥
asaṅgacidvibhurjīvaḥ sāṃkhyoktastādṛgīśvaraḥ.
yogoktastattvamorarthau śuddhau tāviti cecchṛṇu (6.221).
Here, Vidyāraṇya has given permission to the student to enter into Jīva-Īśvara-vāda but he
has given a warning that should not be an end but it should be a means only. As an

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 660

example Vidyāraṇya takes the definition of Jīva and Īśvara given in the Sāṅkhya-Yoga
philosophy. As a stepping stone, we will be in the vyāvahārika plane. As a Pūrvapakṣa, let
us take the definition of Sāṅkhya Jīva. He says asaṅga cit vibhu Jīva. The Sāṅkhya-
philosopher says Jīva is caitanya-svarupa. It is asaṅga caitanya. He is close on our heels.
And it is all-pervading. Asaṅga ananta caitanya is the definition of Jīva given by Sāṅkhya-
philosopher.
Sāṅkhya-philosopher does not accept God and therefore, we don’t have any definition of
Īśvara. But Yoga-philosopher says Īśvara is asaṅga ananta caitanya. It is exactly like us he
also give the definition of Īśvara. More in the next class.

Class 143
śloka 221 contd.
Vidyāraṇya pointed out that the Jīvātmā and Īśvara which are the vācyārtha of tvam-pada
and tat-pada respectively have to be understood as the stepping stone to arrive at
lakṣyārtha of Īśvara and Jīva which is nothing but the original consciousness. Our focus
then must be more on kūṭastha brahma caitanya the pāramārthika-svarūpa which is ever-
free. After claiming the permanent freedom from the point of svarūpa, then don’t bother
about vyāvahārika Jīva and vyāvahārika Īśvara which are products of Māyā. Jīva and
Īśvara are also anirvacanīya because Māyā is anirvacanīya. The question-answer series on
the creation will be endless and you will be trapped in vyāvahārika Jīva and Īśvara and it
will become an obstacle to realise pāramārthika freedom.
From that standpoint, even jīvanmukti and videha-mukti are vyāvahārika by-products
only. Jīvanmukti is the status of the mind of a jñānī as to how he gained refined thoughts.
All jīvanmukti-descriptions are from the standpoint of the mental condition of the jñānī. If
you probe into the mind of jñānī, then you will be caught up into vyāvahārika. If you start
thinking all about jīvanmukti, etc., then you will slip back to vyāvahārika level instead of
thinking of pāramārthika level. Similarly, videha-mukti also is from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi
only and the definition of videha-mukti is śarīra-traya merging with the samaṣṭi, again a
vyāvahārika by-product of the knowledge.
Let us not focus on the by-product and it will happen. We should focus on our
pāramārthika nitya-mukta-svarūpa which was, which is even now and therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 661

Vidyāraṇya wants the mumukṣu to dwell upon the nitya-mukta-svarūpa which is the aim
of Vedānta. We do not even have any method to know whether at the time of my death,
whether the śarīra will merge into Īśvara or I am a half jñānī and require further
reinforcement. Bhagavān does not send a letter mentioning our grade, etc. That is
Bhagavān’s job dealing with śarīra. I will claim my sūkṣma-śarīra-śākṣī-svarūpa which is
free even now.
Therefore, don’t bother whether I am a Jīvanmukta or I will become Videhamukta. Let
others tag you as Jīvanmukta, etc. My aim is to gain nitya-mukta-svarūpa. Now, a student
raises a question. He asks: there are other systems of philosophy who talk of Jīva- and
Īśvara-svarūpa who talk differently about Vedānta? Now, the question comes whether we
are correct or they are correct? They have different definitions of Īśvara and we get a
doubt to get clarification as a part of manana. If doubt is there nididhyāsana is not
possible.
During manana, I have to handle these doubts and so should I not deal with Īśvara and
Jīva as is defined by others? Now there is a need to clear our doubt. Vidyāraṇya says do
that but ultimately come back to Advaita and let not the means become an end in itself.
Then, Vidyāraṇya himself gives his views. He himself clarifies the doubts. He introduces
their view. In Sāṅkhya and Yoga philosophy, they define Jīva as sarvagata śuddha
caitanya. We also say Jīva is asaṅga sarvagata caitanya. Sāṅkhya does not talk about Īśvara
since he does not accept Īśvara. He is nāstika from the standpoint of Īśvara and āstika from
the standpoint of Veda. He is called āstika-nāstika-vādī. But Yoga philosophy is āstika-
āstika system and it accepts Jīva and Īśvara. He defines Īśvara as of the same nature of
Jīva. That asaṅga sarvagata caitanya is the nature Īśvara. We also say Īśvara is asaṅga
sarvagata caitanya.
Now, the question is why cannot we accept them and why do we reject those two
systems? There seems to be an acceptability of difference between the Jīva and Īśvara yet
there is some difference which Vidyāraṇya will point out in the later ślokas. If such a
doubt comes may you listen Vidyāraṇya says.

śloka 222
न तत्त्वमोरुभावार्थावस्मत्सिद्धान्ततां गतौ ।
अद्वैतबोधनायैव सा कक्षा काचिदिष्यते ॥ ६.२२२ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 662

na tattvamorubhāvārthāvasmatsiddhāntatāṃ gatau.
advaitabodhanāyaiva sā kakṣā kācidiṣyate (6.222).
Vidyāraṇya says the problem is that Jīva’s nature is asaṅga sarvagata caitanya. It is every
Jīva’s nature, all-pervading asaṅga caitanya, and it includes the plants, animals, etc. Īśvara
also has the same nature. Now, we ask how many all-pervading consciousnesses are
there? And then they say there are innumerable all-pervading consciousnesses! There is
plurality of consciousnesses. Similarly, Īśvara has all-pervading consciousness. He never
says one sarvagata caitanya and he says there are many. He is dvaita-vādī. Or he is a
caitanya-bahutva-vādī as he talks about the plurality of consciousness.
There is another problem also. What about the jaḍa prapañca or the matter if you ask, he
says matter is also a separate entity which is as real as consciousness and therefore, jaḍa is
a separate reality and caitanya is separate reality and caitanyas are also many. He is a
philosopher of plurality. But we say there is no matter at all which is real. For Sāṅkhya
and Yoga, the matter is an absolute reality, as real as consciousness, and separate. Even the
real consciousness is not one but many.
Then how can I accept Sāṅkhya and Yoga-philosophers? Two separate consciousnesses as
the meaning of the two separate words tat and tvam is not acceptable to Advaita. For
them, tat-padārtha and tvam-padārtha consciousness is separate. This is not acceptable to
our siddhānta. Then Pūrvapakṣa asks: if you don’t accept two consciousnesses then why
do you use two words?
Tat and tvam are two words and when you say one consciousness is there, then why do
you explain the two words tat and tvam? For this, he says we use two words and use it as
a stepping stone to reveal one consciousness. Tat and tvam are used as an intermediary
stage or intermediary level of teaching to arrive at the non-dual Brahman. We need an
equation; when two things are evidently equal there is no need of an equation. Eight is
equal to eight; the equality is evident. When two things are unequal, there cannot an
equation. You cannot say eight is equal to nine. This is seemingly unequal thing. When
you write two separate things, they are seemingly unequal and by giving an equation, you
find both are equal. Five plus three is equal to nine minus one. Here, all the figures are
different. This is called upādhi-bheda. Even mathematics-signs are different and therefore,
we write the equation on two sides.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 663

The seeming duality is removed ultimately. I write tat-pada and tvam-pada separately and
ultimately, I say tat and tvam are one and the same. This is done through the word asi-
pada. The seeming two is taken as one. First, the teacher accepts the difference temporarily
and finally shows that both are same. The seeming duality is negated by putting an
equation. Accepting the seeming duality is the first stage. Negation of the seeming duality
is the final stage when we are shown that tat and tvam are one and the same and we end
up in Advaita. In the final stage, there is neither tat nor tvam but there is only one
caitanya. For Sāṅkhya and Yoga, the duality is there both in intermediary stage as also in
the final stage.

śloka 223
अनादिमायया भ्रान्ता जीवेशौ सुविलक्षणौ ।
मन्यन्ते तद्व्युदासाय के वलं शोधनं तयोः ॥ ६.२२३ ॥
anādimāyayā bhrāntā jīveśau suvilakṣaṇau.
manyante tadvyudāsāya kevalaṃ śodhanaṃ tayoḥ (6.223).
Vidyāraṇya clarifies that the seeming duality or difference between Jīva and Īśvara is
taken as real difference by the ignorant people. If one sees difference as seeming difference
one is a mukta. The ignorant people take the seeming difference as real. Such people are
confused, ajñānī jīvas, says Vidyāraṇya. The delusion is due to anādi Māyā.
Therefore, because of beginningless Māyā beginningless Jīva is beginninglessly deluded in
the beginningless creation. They assume jīveśau suvilakṣaṇau. This is the delusion of the
people is that they think Jīva and Īśa are suvilakṣaṇa really different. Pāramārthika bheda
is not there and our teaching is vyāvahārika bheda is there. I accept visible difference. I
don’t negate difference as pratyakṣa pramāṇa reveals difference. Vyāvahārika-bheda
Advaitins accept fully. What he says pāramārthika-bheda, the real difference, is not there.
The Guru’s job is to negate their differences from the absolute angle and thus reveal the
oneness of Jīva and Īśvara.
The unreal difference is there, meaning vyāvahārika bheda is there. It is like in svapna
there is a difference between the body of the dreamer, water of the dream, etc., we do
accept from dream-angle but from the waker’s angle it is but one mind. Therefore, through
enquiry we get purified. We find that in tvam-pada and tat-pada and accept the seeming
difference.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 664

śloka 224
अत एवात्र दृष्टान्तो योग्यः प्राक्सम्यगीरितः ।
घटाकाशमहाकाशजलाकाशाभ्रखात्मकः ॥ ६.२२४ ॥
ata evātra dṛṣṭānto yogyaḥ prāksamyagīritaḥ.
ghaṭākāśamahākāśajalākāśābhrakhātmakaḥ (6.224).
Vidyāraṇya says that is why I gave you an appropriate example. I do talk about ghatākāśa
and mahākāśa as though they are two ākāśas. The listener also thinks that there are two
ākāśas, one in the pot ghatākāśa and the other outside mahākāśa. Vedānta says ākāśa is
neither inside the pot nor the outside the pot but all the pots are inside the one indivisible
ākāśa. When ākāśa cannot be divided, how you can say inside ākāśa and outside ākāśa!
What is divisible you can add inside pot and outside pot. Space cannot be divided; how
can you use two separate adjectives then! When two separate nouns are not there, how
you can say two ākāśas are there? There is no inside and outside ākāśa but we think like
that because of our delusion.
So too, there is only one indivisible Self in which all the bodies and all the creation exists.
In the beginning stage, because of the student we use these words. There is only one Self
which cannot be qualified as inner or outer Self. With regard to caitanya, consciousness, an
appropriate example is given. Consciousness is indivisible and space is also indivisible.
Consciousness is one, space is one; consciousness is all-pervading and space is all-
pervading. Consciousness is uncontaminated and space is uncontaminated.
Then Vidyāraṇya is worried whether we remember the example and so he once again
repeats the example. He reminds us of the ghatākāśa, mahākāśa, jalākāśa and abhrākāśa
[meghākāśa] in the form of fourfold space. Vidyāraṇya feels we might have forgotten and
he repeats this in the next class.

Class 144
śloka 224 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses the asi-padārtha that is the aikya between Jīvātmā and Paramātmā
and aikya is at the original consciousness level which is pāramārthika-satya whereas at all
other levels, Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are different. At sthūla-śarīra level, it is micro and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 665

macro and sūkṣma-śarīra level also, it is micro and macro and kāraṇa-śarīra level also it is
micro and macro as Jīva and Īśvara. Since we are used to the differences at these four
levels, we may assume that there are differences at the fifth level also. However, at the
fifth level of the original consciousness, there is no difference between micro and macro.
The same difference or the vāsanā will continue at the fifth stage also and we will think
that at the original consciousness level also there is bheda. At the level of the original
consciousness level also we will think there is a difference. This habitual confusion is there
not only for a lay person but also for Sāṅkhya- and Yoga-philosophers. They think the
original consciousness of every Jīva is different and that is why they say there are so many
Ātmās. The plurality of Ātmā indicates that the confusions extends to the original
consciousness also. The Sāṅkhya-philosopher says Ātmā is asaṅga cit vibhu asaṅga
sarvagata caitanya and the same is my Ātmā and the same is his or her Ātmā. So we have
several sarvagata asaṅga Ātmā. He says one Jīvātmā has the original consciousness,
another person has the original consciousness and he says there is separate consciousness
for Jīvātmā and Īśvara.
What the Upaniṣad does is temporarily joins our confusion to win our confidence. Then it
says that the original consciousness of Jīvātmā is given one name kūṭastha and the original
consciousness of the Paramātmā Īśvara is given another name Brahman. If the original
consciousness is one and the same, two names should not be given. Veda temporarily
gives a micro name for the original consciousness at micro level as there is a micro original
consciousness. Similarly, Upaniṣad gives the name Brahman for macro original
consciousness, keeps kūṭastha as tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha and Brahman as tat-pada-
lakṣyārtha. Kūṭastha is micro original consciousness and Brahman as macro original
consciousness. One is called tat and the other is called by tvam.
Having joined us temporarily, once we are ready, the Upaniṣad puts most important mark
in the middle ‘is equal to’. Once kūṭastha is equal to mark is added to Brahman the idea of
micro and macro should go away and we should know micro-macro differences belong to
vyāvahārika-plane, vyāvahārika sūkṣma-śarīra, vyāvahārika sthūla-śarīra, vyāvahārika
kāraṇa-śarīra and vyāvahārika cidābhāsa; only in the fourfold micro-macro adjectives are
possible and at the kūṭastha level micro-macro difference is not there. We have two
different name kūṭastha and Brahman and the Upaniṣad has given names temporarily to
join the confusion of the student. Really two different names should not have been given.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 666

They are vyāvahārika names and pāramārthika caitanya cannot be called Brahman also
and kūṭastha Ātmā also.
We have superimposed two vyāvahārika names to join the student and after the sign
‘equal to’, the two different names should go away. It is neither kūṭastha nor Brahman but
it is nothing but caitanya. Therefore, even the word kūṭastha and Brahman are only
temporarily given to bring the student to our fold. The lay people and other philosopher s
think that at the original consciousness level also, micro-macro difference is there; they
think and going along with them we have used kūṭastha and Brahman only to remove
these two words later. For the removal alone, we have put two names temporarily. First is
the negation of micro-macro adjectives and thereafter we have to remove the names
kūṭastha and Brahman. Then, Vidyāraṇya says the same thing holds good with regard to
ākāśa example also which he gave in the beginning of the cidābhāsa. Therefore, only a fit
example of ghatākāśa, mahākāśa, jalākāśa and meghākāśa is given. Now, he will explain
this in the following verses.

śloka 225
जलाभ्रोपाध्यधीने ते जलाकाशाभ्रखे तयोः ।
आधारौ तु घटाकाशमहाकाशौ सुनिर्मलौ ॥ ६.२२५ ॥
jalābhropādhyadhīne te jalākāśābhrakhe tayoḥ.
ādhārau tu ghaṭākāśamahākāśau sunirmalau (6.225).
Here also, you can see the same principle working. He explains here the jala- pratibimbita
ākāśa is the reflected space in the water in the pot. The space reflected in the water of the
pot is pratibimbita ākāśa; meghākāśa is the ākāśa reflected in the clouds; both of them are
mithyā; they are mithyā because they don’t have independent existence; they have
existence borrowed from upādhi through the reflecting media jala and megha. The water
in the pot is that which represents the micro reflection. The megha represents macro jala,
macro-jala-space. When one is at the reflection level, micro-macro differences are there
and even though there is difference, the differences are mithyā since both the reflections
are mithyā.
For both the reflections, there is one adhiṣṭhāna ākāśa. Initially, we take that two
adhiṣṭhānas are there and temporarily we accept two ādhāra ākāśas. Going along with the
confused people, we say there are two adhiṣṭhānas. We have given them two different

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 667

names also temporarily. The names are ghatākāśa is the name of the original space which
is confined in the pot; it is micro original ākāśa; we deliberately commit the mistake; the
mahākāśa is the name for macro original space and here also we commit the mistake by
adding the macro to the original space. The moment we take out the micro and macro, we
find the original space is pure and unpolluted. They do not have any attributes at all. In
the same way, you have to come to Jīvātmā and Paramātmā also.

śloka 226
एवमानन्दविज्ञानमयौ मायाधियोर्वशौ ।
तदधिष्ठानकू टस्थब्रह्मणी तु सुनिर्मले ॥ ६.२२६ ॥
evamānandavijñānamayau māyādhiyorvaśau.
tadadhiṣṭhānakūṭasthabrahmaṇī tu sunirmale (6.226).
Similarly, we have two reflected consciousnesses in which micro and macro differences do
exist. In the same way, ānandamaya and vijñānamaya. Ānandamaya here represents
Īśvara, the macro cidābhāsa and this may create confusion as to how it is used for macro
cidābhāsa. Here, Vidyāraṇya wants us to remember the mantra 5 and 6 of Māṇḍūkya
Upaniṣad, where ānandamaya is equated to Īśvara. There the third pada is taken is
ānandamaya and in the sixth mantra the word eśa sarveśvara is used and ānandamaya
and Īśvara of mantra sixth are equated there.
Remembering this, Vidyāraṇya takes ānandamaya for Īśvara-cidābhāsa. I use the word
ānandamaya in the meaning of macro cidābhāsa Īśvara. Vijñānamaya refers to Jīva the
micro cidābhāsa. These two micro and macro cidābhāsa are dependent and both are
mithyā. Īśvara macro cidābhāsa is mithyā and Jīva the micro cidābhāsa is also mithyā
being dependent on two reflecting media Māyā. Māyā is the reflecting medium for
ānandamaya Īśvara and the intellect and buddhi of vijñānamaya Jīva the micro cidābhāsa.
Whatever be the medium both are dependent and they are mithyā. Since both are mithyā,
the differences among the two are also mithyā.
Both of them have got the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya the original consciousness: kūṭastha, the
original consciousness, which is adhiṣṭhāna of micro cidābhāsa and Brahman is the
adhiṣṭhāna of macro cidābhāsa Īśvara. Here also, the Upaniṣad commits a deliberate
mistake at adhiṣṭhāna-level also. We use the word micro and macro and kūṭastha and
Brahman. Sooner we use asi and once the equation is put, the adjective kūṭastha will go

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 668

and both will be one and what will be left is pure consciousness, the Brahma caitanya. In
the original consciousness there is no sāmānya and viśeṣa micro and macro. He says so
because in the case of Sāṅkhya and Yoga philosophy even at the original consciousness
level, they maintain the original-consciousness-bheda and not only difference between
two micro but they talk about micro and macro consciousness and that is why we don’t
agree with them. The kūṭastha and Brahman we use the word only temporarily to be
negated later.

śloka 227
एतत्कक्षोपयोगेन सांख्ययोगौ मतौ यदि ।
देहोऽन्नमयकक्षत्वादात्मत्वेनाभ्युपेयताम्॥ ६.२२७ ॥
etatkakṣopayogena sāṃkhyayogau matau yadi.
deho:'nnamayakakṣatvādātmatvenābhyupeyatām (6.227).
There is someone who loves Sāṅkhya-Yoga-philosophers. He says after the mahā-vākya
equation the original consciousnesses are understood as one but before the equation is put
there is an intermediary state where we have introduced the kūṭastha and Brahman the
original consciousnesses. We have given two separate adjectives micro and macro and
given two different names and during the intermediary state before equating them there
are two separate consciousnesses.
One is tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha and another is tat-pada- lakṣyārtha. During this time, the
student’s mind is similar to the philosophy of Sāṅkhya and Yoga as both talk of
differences. He says during this intermediary stage, all the students are equal to Sāṅkhya
and Yoga-philosophers. During the intermediary stage, both their views are identical.
Why cannot we accept the Sāṅkhya-Yoga philosophy because it is useful during the
temporary stage before equation? He says even if that be the case even Cārvāka
philosophy will be useful at one time or the other. So, he says when the Upaniṣad started
teaching it said Annamaya is the Ātmā. It clearly prescribes deha-ātmā-vāda and Cārvāka
philosophy also says body is the Ātmā. No doubt in the next stage the Annamaya Ātmā is
negated. If you say Cārvāka is negated later then we will say Sāṅkhya-Yoga also will not
be acceptable being negated later.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 669

śloka 228
आत्मभेदो जगत्सत्यमीशोऽन्य इति चेत्त्रयम्।
त्यज्यते तैस्तदा सांख्ययोगवेदान्तसंमतिः ॥ ६.२२८ ॥
ātmabhedo jagatsatyamīśo:'nya iti cettrayam.
tyajyate taistadā sāṃkhyayogavedāntasaṃmatiḥ (6.228).
Vidyāraṇya says no doubt we do have some similarity. Sāṅkhya, Yoga and our views are
similar, but the acceptance is mere similarity and there are major differences between the
three. There are three major differences between Sāṅkhya and Vedānta. First one is Ātmā-
bheda, differences between Ātmā. When he talks about Ātmā in plural number, he talks of
Jīvātmā-Jīvātmā-bheda and he also talks of Jīvātmā-Paramātmā bheda he has countless
Ātmās and separate Paramātmā. There is thus a major flaw that stands between us. The
second one is jagat satya the world is real. There is one real Ātmā and there is a real world
and there are countless realities but we talk of Advaita and one Ātmā: brahma satya jagat
mithyā. Paramātmā is different from Jīvātmā, this is the third one. The first two
differences are common to Sāṅkhya and Yoga and the third one is between Vedānta and
Sāṅkhya. These three obstructing flaws have to be removed for both of us to come
together. This is not possible.

Class 145
śloka 228 contd.
Here, Vidyāraṇya conveys an incidental point. That is when we compare various systems
of philosophies; we will find that there are several aspects in which they have agreements.
This is called sādharmya. They are common features with regard to various aspects.
Simultaneously, we will also find various disagreements which is called vaidharmya.
Now, the question comes whether we should reject other systems of philosophies or not?
From one point that will be rejected and on some other point the same will not be rejected.
From similarity, the system will not be rejected and on seeing the disagreements it will be
rejected. With regard to the essential teaching if there is sādharmya and if differences are
with regard to secondary features we can ignore the differences.
If you read Advaita Ācāryas themselves you will find differences of opinion even amongst
themselves. Jīvātmā definition and Īśvara definition they may present differently. They are
called prakriyā-bheda. In Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahma nāparaḥ there is no
difference. The Pūrvapakṣa expects us to accept the Sāṅkhya and Yoga-philosophers due

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 670

to some common features between us. Because of some features why cannot we accept
them?
In that respect, dehātma-vāda held by Cārvāka and by us also at a particular level of
teaching. Just because of that, we cannot accept Cārvāka teaching. The essence of Vedānta
is Vedānta negates all differences. It is the main teaching of Vedānta. abheda-siddhiḥ
advaita-siddhiḥ. They are broadly classified into three. Jīva-Jīva bheda; Jīva-jagat-bheda
and Jīva-Īśvara-bheda. These three differences are ultimately real or not? Advaita
vehemently refutes all the three bhedas while other darśanas take them to be satya.
Nyāya-philosophers accept Īśvara and he also talks about Jīva-Jīva-bheda, Jīva-Īśvara-
bheda and Jīva-jagat-bheda. Vaiśeṣika will also talk about Jīva-Jīva-bheda and Jīva-jagat-
bheda, but not Jīva-Īśvara-bheda as he is a non-believer of God. If you study the other
darśanas, they vehemently argue Jīva-Īśvara-bheda and it is essential part of the teaching.
As long as we have difference we will stoutly refute and reject Sāṅkhya-Yoga philosophy.
Jīva-Īśvara-bhedaḥ asti vyāvahārikaḥ. The moment they say this we will accept them.

śloka 229
जीवासङ्गत्वमात्रेण कृ तार्थ इति चेत्तदा ।
स्रक्चन्दनादिनित्यत्वमात्रेणापि कृ तार्थता ॥ ६.२२९ ॥
jīvāsaṅgatvamātreṇa kṛtārtha iti cettadā.
srakcandanādinityatvamātreṇāpi kṛtārthatā (6.229).
We have said Sāṅkhya and Yoga cannot join us and we cannot join them as we have
differences in essential features. They say we have differences, but they are of nonessential
nature. This we can ignore and you have your view and I have my view and still we can
have agreement. He says that is nonessential because that is not required for liberation.
Sāṅkhya is directed at mokṣa; Nyāya also is doing the same. With regard to attainment of
mokṣa the presence or absence of bheda will not affect our gaining mokṣa or liberation.
Then what is needed for liberation is discovering the asaṅga status of Jīva. Asaṅga means
relationless or untainted nature or it is not contaminable. I, the Jīvātmā, is asaṅga and once
you get this knowledge, then the liberation is instantaneous. Then the puṇya-pāpa do not
belong to me. Once I know I have no connection with karma, karma-phala and puṇya-
pāpa then punarjanma is also not there. Once I know I am asaṅga, Ātmā-liberation is
gained. Once Jīvātmā gains the knowledge of asaṅgatva, liberation is attained. The
Pūrvapakṣa says this asaṅgatva is acceptable to both Vedānta and Sāṅkhya-Yoga-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 671

philosophers also. This knowledge is required for mokṣa and therefore, why cannot we
have agreement for gaining liberation? Pūrvapakṣa says Jīva will become fulfilled. It
means muktaḥ bhavati by the mere discovery of asaṅgoham asaṅgoham punapunaḥ sat-
cit-ānanda-rupoham. This is enough for liberation. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣa view. Now,
Vidyāraṇya gives the answer.
Vidyāraṇya says as long as you accept duality there is a real Jīva, real Īśvara and real jagat.
Then each one within duality will certainly affect the other. Each one influences the other
which may be big or small. Within the field of duality everything influences everything.
Therefore, asaṅgatva in duality is not possible. You cannot pluck a flower without
disturbing the atmosphere. As long as Jīva-jagat-Īśvara is there, each one will affect the
other. Whatever happens in jagat affects the Jīva and whatever Jīva does will affect jagat.
In Advaita, we boldly talk of asaṅga Jīva and when we talk of asaṅga Jīva, for us, Jīva does
not affect pāramārthika caitanya but only vyāvahārika cidābhāsa. Adhiṣṭhāna the original
consciousness is never affected by any thing and there is no difference at the level of
pāramārthika. Cit is asaṅga but cidābhāsa is sasaṅga. For him, there is one vyāvahārika
Jīva which is real and which is different from Īśvara. Asaṅga Jīva is illogical as long as
there is duality.
The second point is the asaṅgatva status given is an imaginary status. Asaṅgatva status of
Jīva is illogical and imaginary. The third point is the imaginary status cannot solve the real
problem. He gives an example. Suppose I imagine my body is healthy permanently and it
is incapable of any diseases and I violate all health rules what will happen? Soon, I will be
in intensive care unit or Yama-loka. For dualists, asaṅgatva status of Jīva is impossible.
Based on this imaginary knowledge gaining mokṣa is impossible.
Vidyāraṇya says instead of gaining mokṣa why cannot you work for permanent ānanda
why cannot you get permanent pleasure from permanent sense-organ? He says sense-
organ is there, but there are no permanent sense objects. For that, we will ask: the sense
objects are impermanent but why cannot give you imaginary status and get permanent
pleasure? Imaginary permanent status cannot give real permanent pleasure. Vedānta says
to Sāṅkhya your status is imaginary and you imaginary status cannot give permanent
pleasure. Also says our non-dual Advaita alone give permanent pleasure.
Now, he gives a gūḍhābhisandhi answer, an intermediary answer before giving the
original answer just to tease. Instead of attaining mokṣa, by the asaṅgatva-jñāna of Jīva

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 672

why cannot you get mokṣa by nityatva jñāna of sense pleasures? Why cannot you gain the
knowledge of sense pleasures permanently? The permanence of sense pleasures is
imaginary and it is not true and for this we will says that asaṅgatva of Jīva is also
imaginary according to your philosophy.

śloka 230
यथा स्रगादिनित्यत्वं दुःसम्पाद्यं तथात्मनः ।
असङ्गत्वं न सम्भाव्यं जीवतोर्जगदीशयोः ॥ ६.२३० ॥
yathā sragādinityatvaṃ duḥsampādyaṃ tathātmanaḥ.
asaṅgatvaṃ na sambhāvyaṃ jīvatorjagadīśayoḥ (6.230).
He says you will agree that the permanence of sense pleasures is imaginary; they cannot
give real permanent pleasures because their permanence is illogical. If you agree it is
illogical and therefore, it is imaginary status, then I will say asaṅgatva also is an imaginary
status given by you. When you talk about asaṅgatva of Jīva, you say it is a real status and
when I talk of asaṅgatva of Jīva you say that it is imaginary. When the Sāṅkhya talks of
asaṅgatva of Jīva you say it is imaginary status. When siddhānta talks of it, you say it is all
right. For this, we say your Jīva is one member of the triad and when Advaita says aham
asaṅgaḥ, there, the Jīva does not refer to one member of triad but it is Advaita Ātmā.
To Sāṅkhya, Vidyāraṇya says the permanence of sense objects cannot be logically
established; it is illogical. Therefore, the permanent status is only imaginary. In the same
way asaṅgatva status of Jīvātmā cannot be logically established by you. It is not provable
and it is only imaginary as long as you accept a distinct world and distinct Īśvara different
from Jīva, talking of plurality. As long as the world and Īśvara really exist, really separate
from real Jīva and the differences among them are real, you cannot talk of asaṅgatva of
any one of the three. Even Īśvara cannot remain comfortably.

śloka 231
अवश्यं प्रकृ तिः सङ्गं पुरेवापादयेत्तथा ।
नियच्छत्येतमीशोऽपि कोऽस्य मोक्षस्तथा सति ॥ ६.२३१ ॥
avaśyaṃ prakṛtiḥ saṅgaṃ purevāpādayettathā.
niyacchatyetamīśo:'pi ko:'sya mokṣastathā sati (6.231).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 673

It is a commentary on the previous śloka. He said as long as plurality is there, you will
have relationships and relationship-based problems also. Therefore, he says Prakṛti as the
world will not allow you to remain quiet and even if you don’t want, the mind will have
śobhana-adhyāsa. You will gradually watch a tennis game between US and Australia and
gradually you will begin to get attachment and when the result comes, you will react; the
intensity will vary and expression will vary. These are all human nature. Once rāga-dveṣa
comes, then you will have pravṛtti and nivṛtti.
Once pravṛtti and nivṛtti comes, karma comes and once karma comes karma-phala comes
and then karma-phala-dātā comes and then Īśvara will begin to affect by giving karma-
phala. In fact, every moment we get experiences given by Īśvara only not because Īśvara
wants to give it but it is inevitable. Jīva is there, he does karma and Īśvara has to give
karma-phala. If he does not exhaust in one janma then next janma comes. So the cycle
goes.
First relations with Prakṛti or Māyā affect and later in due course Īśvara affects us through
karma-phala. Then Īśvara also has to influence your life and there is no choice. Thus, you
experience favourable and unfavourable experiences, sukha-duḥkha and pains and
pleasures as a result of the karma-phala. Īśvara will have to give healthy life and diseases
on the basis of your good and bad karmas. All these are due to your being in dvaita. Why
not you come to Advaita and avoid all the problems? When these two relationships are
inevitable, Jīva-jagat-saṅga and Jīva-Īśvara-saṅga, where is the question of mokṣa! There is
no question of mokṣa in dvaita. This, we need not discuss; Upaniṣad has mentioned in
several places. Where there is duality there is anxiety.

Class 146
śloka 231 contd.
After completing tvam-pada and tat-pada-vicāra Vidyāraṇya has entered into asi-pada
vicāra from verse 210. He pointed out that this advaita-jñāna, Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya-
jñāna, alone will give liberation. Without advaita-jñāna, liberation is not possible. If
advaita-jñāna we have to accept, we have to account for the anātmā. We take tvam-pada-
lakṣyārtha as caitanya and tat-pada-lakṣyārtha as caitanya and from jaḍa-upādhi-angle
there is no aikya. We accept the existence of upādhi at the individual level and prapañca at

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 674

the samaṣṭi level. Ātma-dṛṣṭi-aikya and anātma-dṛṣṭi-bheda we accept; Ātmā and anātmā
means there is no Advaita but there is dvaita. There is no difference between individual
consciousness and total consciousness, but as long as we don’t account for the world,
Advaita is not established and therefore, Vedāntins have to talk about jagan-mithyātva
and without this Advaita cannot be established. To arrive at Advaita, jagan-mithyātva is
necessary conclusion. Therefore, he said Jīva-jagat-Īśvara all the duality is relative truth;
that means Jīva is vyāvahārika satya; jagat is vyāvahārika satya and Īśvara is vyāvahārika
satya. Vyāvahārika satya is a nice name for mithyā.
Then Sāṅkhya-philosopher came with an alternative solution. He asks why we should
dismiss the world as mithyā? Let the world be there as satya and let Jīva and jagat be there
as satya and we don’t need Advaita. To avoid saying all are unreal, we will say all are real
and for mokṣa what is required is we should understand Jīvātmā is asaṅga caitanya like
space and once I know I am asaṅga naturally, nothing will affect me which means sañcita
and āgāmi cannot touch me. They don’t touch me because I am asaṅga caitanya. Without
falsifying the world and accepting the reality of the world, I will give you another method
for liberation understanding Ātmā is asaṅga caitanya. Why cannot we agree on this issue?
We will say ayam asaṅga ātmā muktaḥ. This is the question raised by Sāṅkhya in verse
229.
For that, Vidyāraṇya gave the answer that as long as there is duality asaṅgatva is
impossible because every object will affect every other object in the creation. Jīva will be
affected by Īśvara and other things as long as you accept Jīva-jagat-Īśvara-triangle. He says
by creating saṅga or relationship, Jīva will have sambandha and therefore, Vidyāraṇya
said Prakṛti in the form of world will certainly create saṅga. You have got your own taste
rāga-dveṣa and individuality, etc. Prakṛti in the form of the world will certainly create
saṅga. Īśvara being karma-adhyakṣa and karma-phala-dātā will constantly give sukha-
duḥkha to Jīva, that being his duty. This sambandha is called niyāmaka-niyamya-
sambandha. Jīva is niyamya and Īśvara is niyāmaka. That is why Īśvara is called
Antaryāmī.
Īśvara cannot give uniform happiness to all the people even though he has the power to
give happiness to all. Īśvara does everything governed by the law of karma. If the law of
karma requires to give sorrow, Īśvara will give sorrow and he cannot give happiness in
place of sorrow. Therefore, these two will be there says Vidyāraṇya to Sāṅkhya; what

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 675

freedom you can have with jagat and Īśvara on either side? Therefore, we have to
transcend this triangle. Jīva-jagat-Īśvara-triangle must be broken and we have to come to
Advaita where Jīva is not there, jagat is not there and Īśvara is also not there. Asaṅgatva is
possible only in Advaita. In Advaita, a special name has been given by Gaudapāda by
calling it asparśa.

śloka 232
अविवेककृ तः सङ्गो नियमश्चेति चेत्तदा ।
बलादापतितो मायावादः सांख्यस्य दुर्मतेः ॥ ६.२३२ ॥
avivekakṛtaḥ saṅgo niyamaśceti cettadā.
balādāpatito māyāvādaḥ sāṃkhyasya durmateḥ (6.232).
For this question Sāṅkhya gives a reply. As long as the world is there saṅga will be there.
There will also be control and where is the question of freedom? He says that this saṅga is
caused by misconception. There is no real saṅga. Therefore, world cannot create a problem
and saṅga problem created by world is aviveka-kṛta. Control caused by Īśvara is also not
real. Saṅga is unreal and niyama Īśvara control also is unreal caused by aviveka and
therefore, there is no problem. Both of them are unreal is their argument. If that be so, our
answer is if the relation caused by world is unreal then the world also must be unreal. An
unreal world alone can have unreal relationship. Jagat is also unreal. When the dream
money is unreal, my richness caused by dream money is also unreal. If the money is
earned in jāgṛt-avasthā then it is real.
Therefore, by extension jagat also must be understood as mithyā. Similarly, Īśvara control
can be unreal if only Īśvara is also mithyā. If Īśvara is mithyā, Īśvara-niyama is also
mithyā. For that, Sāṅkhya says yes they are also mithyā. Indirectly, the māyāvāda,
mithyātva of duality, has been accepted by Sāṅkhya balāt by the force of reasoning, logic.
The logic is: if the relationship has to be mithyā, the duality also has to be mithyā. Sāṅkhya
talks on our side without knowing he is supporting the Advaitins.

śloka 233
बन्धमोक्षव्यवस्थार्थमात्मनानात्वमिष्यताम्।
इति चेन्न यतो माया व्यवस्थापयितुं क्षमा ॥ ६.२३३ ॥
bandhamokṣavyavasthārthamātmanānātvamiṣyatām.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 676

iti cenna yato māyā vyavasthāpayituṃ kṣamā (6.233).

We have to go back to śloka 228 where Vidyāraṇya has said that Sāṅkhya-philosophers
have to renounce three theories if they are to join Advaitins: Ātma-bheda that there are
many jīvātmās or Ātmā nānātva; the second theory he has to renounce is jagat-satya and
Īśaḥ anyaḥ Īśvara separate from Jīva. Of these three he should give up jagat-satyatva. If
you accept the real world you cannot renounce saṅga. He has to also give up that Īśvara is
separate from Jīva. Else Īśvara will have control and as a controlled Jīva, one cannot be
free. You hold a separate Īśvara which you have to drop to avoid control. He says you
have to give up the theory that there are many separate jīvātmās. In Advaita we don’t
accept separate Jīvātmā. Gītā talks of Ātma-ekatva. For that, explanation is given in this
śloka. Sāṅkhya-philosopher explains why he talks about the plurality of jīvātmās. He gives
a reason. Many jīvātmās are saṃśaris. Jīvanmuktas are asaṃśari-jīvātmās. Others are
saṃśari-jīvātmās. In fact, in any Guru-śiṣya-sambandha one has to be saṃśarī and the
other be asaṃśarī. If both are asaṃśarī, śiṣya will not come to the class. One should be
saṃśarī and the other asaṃśarī for the Guru-śiṣya contact. Since their statuses are
different, they are different. Another problem is on gaining jñāna all be liberated or all will
not be liberated. This bandha-mokṣa-bheda should be explained properly. We have to
accept there are so many jīvātmās. These muktas are at different levels in gaining jñāna.
Better we accept there is plurality. This argument we will not accept.
For mokṣa we have to accept that there is no real world or there is no controller. We have
to accept Īśvara is mithyā and jagat is mithyā. Then the question will come how mithyā
jagat and mithyā Īśvara come into existence? Mithyā sarpa is born out of ignorance. For
mithyā jagat and mithyā Īśvara we have to find the cause. Here we bring in Māyā concept.
Sāṅkhya-philosopher will have to explain the Īśvara and jagat-mithyātva with the help of
Māyā. Once Māyā has come and functioning then we say bandha and mokṣa are also
mithyā only caused by the same Māyā. Mokṣa is mithyā because mokṣa is definition of
removal of bondage. If bondage is unreal and its removal is also unreal. Therefore, bandha
is also mithyā and mokṣa is also mithyā. If that disturbs you, we will change the words:
bandha is vyāvahārika satya and mokṣa is also vyāvahārika satya.
For dream hunger we need dream food alone. Vyāvahārika mokṣa alone neutralizes
vyāvahārika bandha. If the differences are caused by mithyā bandha or mithyā mokṣa, the
difference also must be mithyā. If the difference is caused by mithyā bandha and mithyā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 677

mokṣa, the plurality caused by them also must be mithyā. There is apparent plurality of
Jīvātmā. This job is done by our Māyā. To arrange mithyā bandha, mithyā mokṣa and
mithyā division, Māyā is sufficient and it is capable of arranging mithyā bandha and
mithyā mokṣa and this division this seeming difference Māyā is capable of making. Then
why do you bring in real bandha and real mokṣa. Except Brahman, everything else is
mithyā.

śloka 234
दुर्घटं घटयामीति विरुद्धं किं न पश्यसि ।
वास्तवौ बन्धमोक्षौ तु श्रुतिर्न सहतेतराम्॥ ६.२३४ ॥
durghaṭaṃ ghaṭayāmīti viruddhaṃ kiṃ na paśyasi.
vāstavau bandhamokṣau tu śrutirna sahatetarām (6.234).
Then the Sāṅkhya asks the question: how does Māyā arrange the plurality in the form Jīva,
jagat, Īśvara, bandh,a mokṣa, etc? What is Māyā’s method of arranging the plurality of
non-dual Brahman? What is the trick and how she does is the question here. Do you
explain in terms of sat-kārya-vāda or asat-kārya-vāda. For that Vedāntins say that this
cannot be logically explained. It does not fit in either of the two sat- and asat-kārya-vāda.
An existent creation comes or a non-existent come? If you say existent creation originates
it is sat-kārya-vāda and if you say out of non-existent the existence emerges, nothing can
come from nothing. Both are not possible.
A non-existent creation cannot do anything where is the question of origination? You
cannot logically explain and Māyā does something which cannot be logically explained.
Māyā does something impossible. The very statement is illogical. Suppose I say I will
accomplish the impossible. There is a logical complication. If I say I will accomplish then
you cannot use the word impossible. If it is impossible it cannot be accomplished.
Therefore, the question is wrong. Durghaṭaṃ ghaṭayāmi such contradictory statement of
Māyā are you not aware or don’t you see that? This is an imaginary statement from Māyā.
Such a logically contradictory statement don’t you see that it is not possible to explain?
This Vedāntins tell Sāṅkhya.
For this, Sāṅkhya tells: the answer has not satisfied me. For everything, you say mithyā. If
I ask how mithyā comes, then you say it is Māyā. If I ask how Māyā does, then you say
Māyā cannot be explained throwing me in doubt that you are logically weak and you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 678

always try to escape. For that, Vidyāraṇya says if you don’t accept Māyā, let us assume
there is no Māyā and therefore, there is no mithyā creation.
Then what is the alternative you have you have to say all are not mithyā created by Māyā;
all these are satya is the only alternative conclusion. Or you have to say everything is
satya. Then Vidyāraṇya says accepting all as satya will put us in worse logical problem.
Accepting Māyā if it disturbs you and if you accept this as satya then that will create more
problem. It will be Śruti-virodha and yukti-virodha and there will be greater logical
loophole which you have to confront. Vidyāraṇya says I will explain the logical problem
in the next class.

Class 147
śloka 234 contd.
In these verses, Vidyāraṇya establishes Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya after tvam- and tat-
padārtha-vicāra. Through this knowledge alone, one can get liberation. And the corollary
of this knowledge is if Brahman is non-dual the world cannot exist as a second real entity.
If Brahman is also real and the world is also real then there will be duality. Advaita-jñāna
presupposes the unreality of the world.
Therefore, he says the world is an unreal production by Māyā. On hearing this, the
Sāṅkhya-philosopher got disturbed. He asks why we should falsify the world and why
not we try some other method of liberation? He suggested let the world be real and we
will gain the knowledge that Ātmā is asaṅga and once we know I am asaṅga Ātmā, then I
will not be affected by the world. Let the world be there and I understand that Ātmā is not
affected by the real world. For that, Vidyāraṇya said I cannot accept that and as long as
there is real Ātmā and real world, the Ātmā will be affected by the world. Minimum thing
that will affect is kāla-tattva. Where there is duality time and space are there. Time will
affect the Ātmā also. Ātmā may avoid all saṅga but cannot avoid kāla-saṅga. Where there
is duality there is kāla. In jāgṛt- and svapna-kāla, dvaita is there and in suṣupti both are
not there. Only after waking we may complain that we overslept.
Therefore, “let the world be real and let the Ātmā be asaṅga” you cannot say. Ātmā’s
asaṅgatva needs the world’s unreality. Therefore, we have to know Ātmā is Advaita and
world is mithyā and Ātmā is unaffected by the mithyā world. Mithyātva is then extended

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 679

to bandha and mokṣa also. Just as Māyā is responsible for the mithyā world, it is
responsible for mithyā bandha and mithyā mokṣa also. Bandha-mokṣa is also mithyā.
Since both of them are mithyā the difference cause by bandha-mokṣa is also mithyā. If
differences are mithyā the plurality of Ātmā is also mithyā. If plurality of Ātmā is mithyā,
there is only one Ātmā. Siddhāntī asks why do you talk of many jīvātmās? Some may be
mutka Jīvātmā some may be baddha jīvātmā, why all these differences and gradation?
Why cannot you renounce Ātma-bahutva and accept Ātma-ekatva?
For this, Sāṅkhya-philosophers say when I accept bandha and mokṣa as mithyā and I ask
some question you again say Māyā is responsible, etc. Then if I ask what is Māyā, you
escape without saying; what is mithyā? You don’t say it is different from Brahman or
identical from Brahman. You say it cannot be logically categorisable. If you have a Māyā
concept which you cannot logically explain, it appears the Advaitic teaching is logically
weak.
When Sāṅkhya expressed this Vedāntins replay to Sāṅkhya. If you are disturbed by the
idea that bandha and mokṣa are mithyā, then tell me what is bandha and mokṣa according
to you? Then he says bandha is satya and mokṣa is also satya and my advantage is I don’t
have to bring mithyā and then Māyā. Thus, avoiding the illogical Māyā I will say bandha
is also satya and mokṣa is also satya. For this Advaitin has to counter. Advaitins said that
if you say bandha and mokṣa is satya, you have a greater logical problem. You said
bandha-mokṣa is satya to avoid the logical problem. But saying that bandha-mokṣa is
satya you will land up in greater problem than before. You will get into more serious
logical problem. Yukti-virodha and Śruti-virodha will be your problem. Real bondage and
mokṣa is logically and scripturally improper. Now we will see how. Now we will see the
logical problem first.
I said Gaudapāda has discussed this in 4.30 of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. The kārikā reads as:
anāderantavattvaṃ ca saṃsārasya na setsyati;
anantatā cā:':'dimato mokṣasya na bhaviṣyati.
The meaning of the kārikā is if the world is admitted to be beginningless, as the disputant
insists, then it cannot be non-eternal. Mokṣa or liberation cannot have a beginning and be
eternal. You say bandha is a reality and it is a real condition suffered by Jīvātmā. It is a real
condition does the real bandha has the beginning or not?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 680

Suppose he says bandha is anādi beginningless and then we say logically anything which
does not have beginning will not have an end also which he also accepts. That is why in
his philosophy there are so many beginningless things. They all are endless. And this is
accepted by Sāṅkhya and Naiyāyika also yad yad anādi tat tad ananta. If bandha is anādi
how can you talk about logical end of bandha? And so, acceptance of mokṣa is illogical.
The end of bandha you cannot talk about because bandha is beginningless.
In your philosophy mokṣa cannot be there. This problem we don’t have because bandha is
superimposition and any mithyā does not have a beginning but it will have an end.
Darkness has no beginning but it can end. Mithyā vastu can be beginningless but it can
have an end.
To avoid this he may change his stand. Bandha has the beginning. Since it has a beginning
by doing sādhana it can come to an end. And when bandha ends mokṣa can come and
therefore, we are safe. For that Advaitins say that is what you think. If bandha had the
beginning and bandha ended and then you get mokṣa, when bandha ended the mokṣa
began. Is your mokṣa with a beginning or not? Mokṣa starts on the end of bandha.
Whoever waits for mokṣa, I tell you, you will get it on 1st April! DO you see the logical
problem? He will have to talk about the beginning of mokṣa and mokṣa with a beginning
will also end, just like entry into svarga and its end.
Therefore, you will have to talk about anitya mokṣa. In your philosophy you claim your
mokṣa as nitya. Therefore, the birth of real mokṣa and its eternity is logical fallacy. First
fallacy is if you say bandha is beginningless and mokṣa comes, it is a fallacy. If the mokṣa
comes then that mokṣa cannot be permanent. For mokṣa that has a beginning, end will be
there. Anādi bandha must end and nitya ‘mokṣa should begin’ that bandha has to be
superimposition or ajñāna-janya. The mokṣa seeming to begin will be eternal. If you accept
ajñāna is the cause of bandha it is Māyā at the cosmic level. Therefore, bandha and mokṣa
is mithyā only. This is yukti-virodha. Then we have to talk about Śruti-virodha.
If the bondage is the real condition for Jīvātmā and Jīvātmā has to transform into liberated
condition then it will need time and effort because any form of transformation needs time
and effort. If the fruit has to ripen the raw condition has to change into ripe condition and
it needs effort and time. So bandha to mokṣa will be a karma-phala. If bandha is real and
mokṣa is real, a real transformation has to take place and it will be a karma-phala born out
of effort. Śruti says mokṣa is not a real transformation and we are not expecting any

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 681

transformation and it is not saṃskāra-vikāra or caturvidha-karma-phala; transformation is

always karma-phala and if mokṣa needs transformation then it will be karma-phala and
sādhana will be karma.
But the Śruti says there is no karma needed for mokṣa and it is the result of knowledge. It
is jñāna-phala. Through knowledge, we don’t get any transformation and knowledge
reveals only a fact. If I am getting mokṣa through knowledge it means knowledge reveals
the fact I was liberated, I am liberated and I will ever be liberated and from this it is clear
that liberation is an eternal fact. Then bondage is a superimposition and mithyā only. You
were never bound, you are never bound and you will never be bound. “I am bound” is an
erroneous notion. The Guru shows the mirror to the śiṣya and tells him that there is no
bondage and you are free and it is removal of the notion that I have bondage. Then alone
knowledge will be a solution. If there is real bondage, knowledge cannot be a solution,
you have to give him special lotion to remove the bondage! Knowledge is the only lotion
for removing the notion.
Therefore, Śruti also supports my stand only and therefore, Vidyāraṇya says a real
bondage and a real liberation Veda cannot tolerate and Veda cannot accept and Veda
cannot agree. Veda cannot approve the real bondage and liberation. Release is as illusory
as bondage. If bondage is real, then it is eternal and release will not be possible. Release if
it is something to be obtained, it cannot be eternal.

śloka 235
न निरोधो न चोत्पत्तिर्न बद्धो न च साधकः ।
न मुमुक्षुर्न वै मुक्त इत्येषा परमार्थता ॥ ६.२३५ ॥
na nirodho na cotpattirna baddho na ca sādhakaḥ.
na mumukṣurna vai mukta ityeṣā paramārthatā (6.235).
If bandha and mokṣa are unreal then what is real. If you ask this we will say non-bondage
and non-liberation is the reality and the eternal changeless Ātmā is the reality. Vidyāraṇya
gives a Śruti quotation for that. Only an unreal bondage can be removed by knowledge.
The unreal snake alone can be removed by knowledge. That is the support I have.
Vidyāraṇya gives another support. This we have learned in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. It occurs
in some minor Upaniṣad as well. The dāsa Upaniṣads are considered major because Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya has popularized by writing the commentary. All others are considered

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 682

minor. The particular quotation occurs in Amṛta-bindu Upaniṣad and also Gaudapāda
kārikā 2.32. There is neither real dissolution nor creation, neither real bondage nor any
sādhana for liberation, no seeker of liberation; nor is there one who is liberated. Micro-
maraṇa is unreal and macro-pralaya is unreal. Birth is unreal and death is also unreal.
At micro level birth is janma and at macro level it is called sṛṣṭi. The bound Jīva is unreal;
the sādhaka Jīva is unreal; all bound people need not become seekers and they don’t claim
we work for Brahma-jñāna. Bound people can be divided asādhaka baddha jīvas and
sādhaka baddha jīvas. Sick people can be divided as treatment-taking and non-treatment-
taking people. Sarvam mithyā. The one who is desirous of mokṣa, sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampanna-adhikārī is also mithyā. Sādhaka is one who is trying to get sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti and mumukṣu is one who has passed sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti-examination.
Then finally these are mithyā and what about mukta? Mukta Puruṣa is also not there and
he adds an important clause. This is from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. From Brahman-angle from
Ātmā-angle these are all mithyā and from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi they are all satya. For a
dreamer, dream food is satya and dream hunger is satya. But from waker’s standpoint,
dream hunger is not, food is not and hunger-removal is also not.
If you ask a Guru: if everything is mithyā why do you teach? He will say teaching is also
mithyā. Vyāvahārika-satya teaching is important and so too vyāvahārika satya liberation
and after getting mokṣa you can say all are mithyā. Complete the teaching and reject both
jñāna and mokṣa as mithyā.

śloka 236
मायाख्याया कामधेनोर्वत्सौ जीवेश्वरावुभौ ।
यथेच्छं पिबतां द्वैतं तत्त्वं त्वद्वैतमेव हि ॥ ६.२३६ ॥
māyākhyāyā kāmadhenorvatsau jīveśvarāvubhau.
yathecchaṃ pibatāṃ dvaitaṃ tattvaṃ tvadvaitameva hi (6.236).
He gives the whole picture as an imagery. If all of them are mithyā they are the product of
original mother Māyā. Jīva and Īśvara are calves born of kāmadhenu Māyā. Māyā
kāmadhenu has two calves called Jīva and Īśvara. If you remove Māyā there is Īśvara.
Brahman is the calf of neither Māyā or anything and Māyā rests in Brahman. Really
speaking there is no birth at all. Don’t stretch your imagination too much. Really speaking
there is no time involved Māyā is anādi Īśvara is anādi Brahman is anādi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 683

We say they are children because they are dependent on Māyā. They are as though
children of Māyā. Once Māyā has produced the duality of Jīva-jagat-Īśvara, then definitely
bandha-mokṣa becomes a vyāvahārika satya. Bandha-mokṣa can be taken as the milk
coming from Māyā which can be drunk by the calves. Let them drink the world of reality.
Dvaita means dvaita prapañca; let them experience the world and let Īśvara experience the
world. Īśvara is aware of world and aware of the condition of the world and hence Īśvara
is also a calf experiencing the dvaita prapañca. Jīva is also another calf drinking the milk of
dvaita prapañca. For Īśvara the milk is not bitter. For him life is a līlā and he enjoys the
milk or dvaita prapañca. But for Jīva being ajñānī the very same dvaita prapañca milk is
bitter. The food remaining the same for one it is bitter and for another it is tasty. Dvaita
prapañca milk Īśvara enjoys but Jīva suffers. Let them experience dvaita prapañca and let
the world go on and on. Let this continue.
Let the two calves of Īśvara and Jīva drink the milk of dvaita prapañca. Tattvam tu
advaitam eva; even when all serials continue and in the serial all kind of drama is going on
but behind that there is a changeless screen which is Advaita Brahman. reality is non-dual,
in which there is no Jīva, no Īśvara, no bitter milk or tasty milk or no jagat. More in the
next class.

Class 148
śloka 236 contd.
Beginning from verse 210 Vidyāraṇya deals with Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya and the asi-
pada that combines tvam-pada and tat-pada. He says only through advaita-jñāna mokṣa is
possible. We negate here Jīva-Jīva bheda and Jīva-Īśvara-bheda and Jīva and jagat bheda.
Vidyāraṇya pointed out all the differences we don’t agree with as there is only one Ātmā.
It also implies another important thing that is about Ātma-anātma-bheda. If there is Ātma-
anātma-bheda then also there will be duality one is consciousness and another is matter.
We show that anātmā is mithyā and therefore, we cannot count it as separate from Ātmā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 684

Material anātmā is experienced but cannot be counted as a second thing and therefore,
cetana Ātmā alone is there. This Ātmā alone was, Ātmā alone is and Ātmā alone will be.
What about all the sṛṣṭi, sthiti, laya, etc then? All these are not a fact but what is reality is
the consciousness or the cetana tattva.
For this, he quoted a mantra from Amṛtabindu Upaniṣad. If all are a part of the story who
is responsible for the fictitious story? Who is the author of the creation and for that
Vidyāraṇya answers that the author is Māyā. Māyā is kāmadhenu which is capable of
creating Jīva as also Īśvara. Jīva is the reflected consciousness, Īśvara is also the reflected
consciousness; Jīva is reflection in malina-sattva-pradhāna Māyā and Īśvara is reflection
śuddha-sattva-pradhāna Māyā. Both needs the Māyā medium to reflect.
This we have seen in the first chapter and now it is repeated here. We have also seen
jalākāśa and ghaṭākāśa. Any reflection needs a medium and this medium is given by
Māyā. Māyā is anādi. In the anādi Māyā, anādi Jīva and Īśvara both are reflected. Anādi
Īśvara creates the anādi world for the sake of anādi Jīva. Anādi Īśvara manifests anādi
prapañca for the sake of anādi Jīva. Creation is anādi and sṛṣṭi is not creation but it is the
manifestation of the already present creation; pralaya is not the destruction of the universe
but it is again unmanifestation of the same prapañca. Just like in the shops, every morning
spreading the wares is creation and packing the wares at night is pralaya. The things are
always in the shop. Prapañca will ever be there. Will it not be dvaita?
Then we say the whole thing including Jīva and Īśvara all are Māyā. Everything is Māyā
except Brahman is satya. In short other than Brahman everything is māyika. Aham satyaḥ
jagan mithyā. Jīva is also a calf and Īśvara is also a calf generated by Māyā in the form of
micro and macro reflection. Both of them, Jīva and Īśvara, experience dvaita created by
Māyā. Īśvara must be seeing dvaita prapañca and that is why he thinks of taking avatāra.
Both Jīva and Īśvara experience dvaita. Let them experience dvaita whereas reality is
neither Jīva nor jagat nor Īśvara but Advaita Brahman. That Brahman is nirguṇa and it
does not have inferior attributes of Jīva nor superior attributes of Īśvara also. Brahman is
nirguṇa Advaita.
The last point is the author said both Jīva and Īśvara experience dvaita prapañca. If both of
them equally experience dvaita prapañca how come one is saṃśarī and the another is
asaṃśarī? The answer is when Jīva experiences dvaita he does not know it is mithyā; the
experience is not a problem. If that is the case Īśvara also experiences the world. If dvaita-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 685

anubhava is the cause of saṃśāra then jñānī also faces saṃśāra and also Īśvara will have
saṃśāra. Dvaita-anubhava is not the problem. A Jīvanmukta happily experiences dvaita.
Dvaita-anubhava is all right and you can have any amount of any dvaita prapañca. Let the
sense-organ be open, let there be thought and let there be experience of dvaita. Seeing the
anubhūta dvaita as satya is the problem. Īśvara looks at the prapañca as mithyā. Like
Īśvara a jñānī Jīvanmukta also experiences dvaita but does not attach satyatva-buddhi and
takes Brahman alone as satya. Jīva suffers saṃśāra dvaita-satyatva-buddhi. Up to this we
saw in the last class.

śloka 237
कू टस्थब्रह्मणोर्भेदो नाममात्रादृते न हि ।
घटाकाशमहाकाशौ वियुज्येते न हि क्वचित्॥ ६.२३७ ॥
kūṭasthabrahmaṇorbhedo nāmamātrādṛte na hi.
ghaṭākāśamahākāśau viyujyete na hi kvacit (6.237).
Now Vidyāraṇya connects this knowledge to the ākāśa-dṛṣṭānta which he gave long
before. He talked about four types of ākāśa, four types of caitanya and equated them
appropriately. The four types of ākāśa is micro reflected space, macro reflected space
micro original space and macro original space. Micro reflected space is called jalākāśa; in a
pot there is water and reflection in that is jalākāśa; for macro reflected space the name is
megha-ākāśa megha is macro jala; then micro original space was called ghatākāśa original
space enclosed within the pot and macro original space is called mahākāśa.
Like that we have micro reflected consciousness in the mind; macro reflected
consciousness in Māyā the samaṣṭi; micro original consciousness the consciousness
enclosed within the individual; macro original consciousness that is the unenclosed all-
pervading consciousness and for these we have Sanskrit names. Micro reflected
consciousness is called Jīva, macro reflected consciousness is called Īśvara; micro original
consciousness is called kūṭastha and macro original consciousness is called Brahman. Here
he wants to say that the ākāśa the first and second cannot be equated whereas between
micro original space and macro original space aikya is possible; between first and second,
aikya is not possible at the reflection level. Similarly, in the case of caitanya also between
one and two micro reflection and macro reflection, between Jīva and Īśvara aikya is not
possible but between micro original consciousness kūṭastha and macro original

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 686

consciousness Brahman aikya is possible just as between ghatākāśa and mahākāśa aikya is
possible. This is revealed through Tat tvam asi.
The difference between kūṭastha and Brahman tvam-pada lakṣyārtha and Brahman the
tat-pada lakṣyārtha the micro original consciousness and macro original consciousness the
difference is only nāma-mātra. There is no difference other than the names. One is called
kūṭastha while the other is called Brahman. You cannot even say micro original
consciousness is small and macro original consciousness is big because micro and macro
are expressions borrowed from vyāvahārika level; at pāramārthika level micro and macro
expressions also cannot be used. It is a borrowed adjective and it is not their adjective.
Only at a reflection level micro and macro differences are there. But at the original level
micro-macro-bheda is not there. Bheda is there for namesake difference. Other than
nominal difference there is no difference at pāramārthika level. Now he reminds: like
ghataksa and mahākāśa are the original space enclosed and the original space unenclosed;
here another argument is which I have given in some other context. Enclosed space is
smaller but unenclosed space has so much capacity to accommodate galaxies. How can
you say that the enclosed space that is small and unenclosed big space be equated? I ask
the question what is the definition of enclosed space? Enclosed space is space within the
pot or inside the container. Space outside the space is unenclosed space and therefore, I
say space inside the pot is small. We say the very statement “the space inside the container
is small” is a statement of confusion. You can say water inside the pot. Similarly, it is not
that you make the pot and push the space. There is no question of space being inside the
pot but on the other hand all pots are inside the space. Similarly, “consciousness inside the
body is small consciousness” is wrong and you should not say consciousness inside the
body but on the other hand all bodies are in one indivisible consciousness. When
consciousness cannot be divided how can there be micro and macro and that is why
consciousness is called niravayava caitanya or niśkala Brahman. Therefore, you don’t say
micro or macro consciousness.

śloka 238
यदद्वैतं श्रुतं सृष्टेः प्राक्तदेवाद्य चोपरि ।
मुक्तावपि वृथा माया भ्रामयत्यखिलान्जनान्॥ ६.२३८ ॥
yadadvaitaṃ śrutaṃ sṛṣṭeḥ prāktadevādya copari.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 687

muktāvapi vṛthā māyā bhrāmayatyakhilān janān (6.238).

Therefore, the conclusion is Advaita was, Advaita is and Advaita will ever be. Thus
Vidyāraṇya consolidates his teaching. Advaita was present before creation. When we hear
this statement we get confusion that before creation, there was Advaita, meaning we think
now Advaita is gone and dvaita has come, and again we assume that at the time of pralaya
dvaita will go and advaita will come. That is see-saw philosophy. This is the
misconception of the people. Vidyāraṇya says it is not true and Advaita is even when we
experience dvaita. It never said there was no duality but it says there is no duality. Even
now Advaita alone is. In future also Advaita will be. It existed before sṛṣṭi and that
Advaita is there even after sṛṣṭi. After or in liberation also there will be Advaita. In short in
all the three periods of time Advaita is there. It is exactly like in TV screen is there before
switching on and off and even during the time we watch programs. In between, nothing
happens but something is seemingly happening upon the screen. Similarly, upon the
consciousness screen all the creation starts. The creation includes Jīva, jagat and Īśvara.
Māyā alone confuses the jīvas by creating a seeming reality. Even Māyā creating the
experience of duality is not a problem. After creating duality that can be experienced
Māyā covers the mind with āvaraṇa-śakti because of which the unreal appears as real. Due
to āvaraṇa-śakti Māyā confuses all the people without any reason. Why should there be
Māyā? Why cannot we abolish Māyā? Then we ask the question just because movies create
disturbance to us, do we say let us abolish movies? No. It is wonderful glory of the
creation and why should we abolish the movies! What is needed is not abolishing the
movie but the understanding that it is mithyā and after understanding it becomes a
mahimā of Īśvara. What was seen as a threat before becomes mahimā. Un-understood
Māyā is a threat and understood Māyā is ābharaṇa. Let Māyā snake continue with sattva,
rajas and tamas; let us remove the poison and not try to remove Māyā but what is needed
is the understanding.

śloka 239
ये वदन्तीत्थमेतेऽपि भ्राम्यन्तेऽविद्ययात्र किम्।
न यथा पूर्वमेतेषामत्र भ्रान्तेरदर्शनात्॥ ६.२३९ ॥
ye vadantītthamete:'pi bhrāmyante:'vidyayātra kim.
na yathā pūrvameteṣāmatra bhrānteradarśanāt (6.239).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 688

Here a question is being raised and answered. We said that we cannot stop Māyā, we need
not stop Māyā and we cannot stop dvaita-anubhava because the sense-organs are meant to
reveal dvaita only. Eyes should not see everything as same, else one needs an eye-doctor!
The sense-organs are meant to reveal dvaita. What is required is jñāna. This Pūrvapakṣa
asks when I look at jñānī I don’t see any difference in them. They do everything like all
other ajñānī people. Body is the same and overweight is the same. He eats food when
hungry. If he is a saṃnyāsī you change the wording: he takes bhikṣā and not lunch. He
stays not in the house but in āśrama but pravṛtti and nivṛtti continues to be the same. All
the actions and activities remains the same; why should I unnecessarily gain the
knowledge? All are in the delusion of pravṛtti and nivṛtti and in simple language all
vyavahāras are there. Jñānī is also concerned about the performance of the duties. That
means there is no difference. Then why should we gain jñāna? This is Pūrvapakṣa
argument. By gaining the knowledge regarding the fact that Advaita is satya or dvaita is
mithyā aham satya jagan mithyā what is the use?
For that Vidyāraṇya gives the answer in the second line. The difference is in the presence
and absence of attachment. Internally, there is a difference in the mind attribute and in the
response. All duties he will do. Father has only a contributory role and he does not have a
controlling role in the children’s future. They can only contribute. If this difference is not
known when the children don’t grow as expected the parents are confused. The parents
are disturbed. The jñānī should not bother you and what they do is not in your control.
This internal detachment reduces the worries. The differences are not external but the
difference is internal. When dvaita is satya attachment is stronger and when dvaita is
understood as mithyā the attachment is gone. Attachment towards shell-silver cannot be
as much attachment to the real silver. Rāga-dveṣas have been diluted. They have been
neutralized. The worry is not there. If there is a worry, the attachment is stronger. The
word mithyā is at the lip level and it has not come to the heart level. More in the next class.

Class 149
śloka 239 contd.
Vidyāraṇya gives the Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya as revealed in the asi-pada of mahā-vākya
Tat tvam asi. He started this in the verse 210. He pointed out that through mahā-vākya,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 689

Upaniṣad reveals kūṭastha caitanya and brahma caitanya as one and the same with only a
difference in the name. Kūṭastha is a word used from the micro-standpoint and brahman
is used from the macro-standpoint. From vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, from vyaṣṭi angle we call it
kūṭastha and from samaṣṭi angle it is Brahman but from its own standpoint there is only a
difference in name. The very idea of vyaṣṭi and samaṣṭi is in relative terms. There is one
caitanya only and in between whatever happens in the form of sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya are only
play caused by Māyā śakti. Only Māyā has some fun but we take it seriously and get
confused.
Now Pūrvapakṣa raises a question: when I look at people who talk about Advaita satya,
aikya, etc., they don’t seem to be very much different from saṃśaris. When I see their life I
don’t see any difference and they have all vyavahāra exactly like an ajñānī. In all respects I
don’t any difference either in appearance or transactions. This is Pūrvapakṣa argument.
All the so-called wise people or the so-called Pañcadaśī experts talk brilliantly of aikya,
pāramārthika, vyāvahārika, etc. Even those people roam about in saṃśāra and do all
vyavahāra s exactly like ajñānīs. He looks at the vyavahāra itself as saṃśāra. What is the
benefit of learning all these things? I don’t see any transformation at all in people. If at all
there is a transformation, I have a suspicion there is a negative transformation!
Vidyāraṇya strongly defends Advaita and says it is not so. There is certainly a
transformation which is internal and which is not visible to others. It is not a physical
transformation. Therefore, the way a jñānī looks at himself and the world and looks at
birth, death, etc., there is a change. With regard to the above two topics there is a change in
the vision, there is freedom from confusion. The two topics are: one is Advaita Ātmā the
aham the subject with regard dvaita anātmā; the way I look at myself the Advaita Ātmā
and with regard to dvaita anātmā there is a difference. Previously, dvaita was seen as
satya and now there is no more satyatva-buddhi. That is taken away.
With regard to previously there was apūrṇatva-buddhi; saṃśāra buddhi was there and
that bhrānti is also gone. What caused the saṃśāra fever? We have these two viruses
anātma-satyatvabuddhi and ātmani apūrṇatva-buddhi; these two are the cause of saṃśāra
and they are not there. Their presence and absence is not physically visible. That is why
the one who knows and those who do not know all live together. The misconception is not
seen in the jñānī.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 690

śloka 240
ऐहिकामुष्मिकः सर्वः संसारो वास्तवस्ततः ।
न भाति नास्ति चाद्वैतमित्यज्ञानिविनिश्चयः ॥ ६.२४० ॥
aihikāmuṣmikaḥ sarvaḥ saṃsāro vāstavastataḥ.
na bhāti nāsti cādvaitamityajñāniviniścayaḥ (6.240).
Vidyāraṇya says that he says concluded sarva saṃśara. The entire dualistic world the
experienced world consisting of this world and that which is suprasensuous iha loka
dvaita and para loka dvaita or the entire dvaita prapañca being taken as real is the most
misconceived and it is saṃśāra. The ignorant people are fully convinced that the world
here, the world hereafter and the worldly experience are a reality and the non-dual
Brahman is neither seen nor does it ever exist.
When I and the dṛśya prapañca, Ātmā and anātmā ,are given the same order or reality,
naturally we will count them as two one is the observed world and I the observer. Then I
will see both dṛśya and dṛk as two and I fall within the dvaita prapañca. This person will
say there is no such thing called as Advaita. He will negate Advaita Ātmā totally.
There is no such thing called non-dual reality because nobody experiences a non-dual
reality whatever we experience is dvaita one is dṛśya and another is dṛk and therefore,
where is question of Advaita Brahman! It is not there. It is non-existent because it is not
experienced.
This is not the conclusion of a lay person but also the philosophers. This is the problem of
ajñānīs. “What is not experienced does not exist” is the powerful conclusion of every
ajñānī even scripturally literate philosophers are ajñānīs and they don’t believe Advaita.
The jñānis have directly opposite conclusion. Jñānī says Advaita is there and he says
dvaita is not there. The difference is not physical but the difference is only in wisdom.
Ajñānī has the vision and jñānī has wisdom. Such a thought pattern is the conclusion of
the ajñānī.

śloka 241
ज्ञानीनां विपरीतोऽस्मान्निश्चयः सम्यगीक्ष्यते ।
स्वस्वनिश्चयतो बद्धो मुक्तोऽहं वेति मन्यते ॥ ६.२४१ ॥
jñānīnāṃ viparīto:'smānniścayaḥ samyagīkṣyate.
svasvaniścayato baddho mukto:'haṃ veti manyate (6.241).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 691

The conclusion and wisdom and the firm knowledge of the jñānī is diagonally opposite to
the misconception of the ajñānī given in the previous śloka. Jñānī is definite about it and
his wisdom is not shaken even when he lives and transacts in the world. Even when we
experience the flat earth, our notion that the earth is spherical is not affected. We
experience sunset and sunrise but we are not shaken about the fact that the earth moves
while the sun is static. The clear knowledge is not shaken by opposite experiences. If it is
shaken we have to avoid thinking about it. That is why Advaitins are never disturbed by
dvaita-anubhava as dvaita-anubhava cannot shake advaita-jñāna.
Who is liberated and who is bound? Depending upon the type of conclusion we have, we
are either baddha or mukta. He does not say it is a type of experience that causes bondage
or liberation. It is no more on their behaviour or time. They don’t determine they are
bound or liberation and all depends upon what conclusion you have regarding the
bondage and mukti. Either I am bound or I am mukta and then Vidyāraṇya adds thus one
looks upon himself. Of these two visions, if I am taking both dṛk and dṛśya as equally real
then as a dṛk I am too puny an individual and dṛśya prapañca is too overwhelmingly vast,
uncontrollable and if I see both as real I will look upon myself as constantly afflicted and
prosecuted saṃśarī. Then I will automatically think it is not possible for me to conquer the
world, worry of my own prārabdha and over my problems, etc.
Then the mokṣa will be a far cry. If both the subject and object are real then we are
permanent saṃśaris, no sādhana is worth doing and at no time we can get freedom from
the vast environments of the world. On the other hand, if I recognize that dvaita has a
lower order of reality including time and space, then I can show my thumb and challenge
dvaita prapañca for aham satya, jagan mithyā and mithyā cannot affect satya I and aham
Advaita also. A lower order of reality cannot be counted with a higher order or reality and
in Advaita alone, I see myself as satya and in Advaita alone I see mokṣa and gaining
mokṣa is a transformation. The transformation is only at the mental level and not at the
physical level. Jñānī is compared to a lion which is the king of the forest. The mind will not
think I am lonely, helpless I am, I am very weak and I am unprotected. These thoughts
will not disturb him even in svapna. This is a jñānī. Therefore, we only we have to decide
where we are. We should have the strength to say we are jñānī without any problem even
in the svapna.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 692

śloka 242
नाद्वैतमपरोक्षं चेन्न चिद्रू पेण भासनात्।
अशेषेण न भातं चेद्द्वैतं किं भासतेऽखिलम्॥ ६.२४२ ॥
nādvaitamaparokṣaṃ cenna cidrūpeṇa bhāsanāt.
aśeṣeṇa na bhātaṃ ceddvaitaṃ kiṃ bhāsate:'khilam (6.242).
Here, Vidyāraṇya removes some of the fundamental misconceptions also. Some Advaitin
students complain to Vidyāraṇya. They say I have got advaitic jñāna yet I have anxiety
and other problems. I want to find out what is the gap between my knowledge and
liberation. On introspection I have come to know that I have advaita-jñāna and I don’t
have aparokṣa Advaita-anubhava. I don’t have the direct experience of Advaita which
alone is Advaita-niścaya. That is why I have knowledge and I have saṃśāra coexisting.
Therefore, he says my problem is I have parokṣa jñāna and I don’t have aparokṣa jñāna,
direct experience. The student says Advaitam na aparokṣam which means direct. I have
only indirect knowledge or the verbal knowledge. This is question from the student.
For this, the teacher gives the answer: no, don’t say like that because Advaita is directly
experienced in the cidrūpa. In the form of aparokṣa caitanya Advaita is always directly
experienced. Now the student says: I cannot accept. I experience the caitanya all right
directly but I am not experiencing the total all-pervading consciousness. I experience
consciousness only in my body but I don’t experience consciousness anywhere. I have
partial experience of Advaita caitanya and that is why I am not liberated. He wants to
experience consciousness all over. I have not experienced that and that is why I have no
Advaita-niścaya. Then the teacher says you don’t experience dvaita also in totality. He
asks: are you having dvaita-anubhava in totality? You don’t have dvaita-anubhava
because dvaita prapañca is too big to experience in totality! Even in the objective world of
dvaita, the vision is never complete; there are many aspects which the faculties do not
perceive.

śloka 243
दिङ्मात्रेण विभानं तु द्वयोरपि समं खलु ।
द्वैतसिद्धिवदद्वैतसिद्धिस्त्वेतावता न किम्॥ ६.२४३ ॥
diṅmātreṇa vibhānaṃ tu dvayorapi samaṃ khalu.
dvaitasiddhivadadvaitasiddhistvetāvatā na kim (6.243).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 693

This is the conclusion given by the teacher based on the previous argument. He says if the
dvaita-anubhava is partial, Advaita-anubhava also will be partial. The incompleteness of
knowledge is common in both dvaita and Advaita caitanya. However, you are ready to
accept the duality, although incompleteness of knowledge is seen why you don’t accept
the non-duality for the same reason because of which you accept duality? The
incompleteness of knowledge is common to both the dual and non-dual experience. This
was the second objection raised by the student in the above śloka while accepting the non-
dual experience.
Therefore, the teacher brings out a correct vision for the student, by pointing out the
similarity in dual and non-dual experience. Further, the teacher argues: both, the man of
ignorance and the man of wisdom, see the space as blue, but one who knows that the
blueness is only an optical illusion, continues to see the blueness although the perception
is different from that of the man of ignorance. In the same manner, just as one infers the
true knowledge in dvaita, why cannot the Advaita also be deducted likewise? The Advaita
experience of non-duality is possible.

śloka 244
द्वैतेन हीनमद्वैतं द्वैतज्ञाने कथं त्विदम्।
चिद्भानं त्वविरोध्यस्य द्वैतस्यातोऽसमे उभे ॥ ६.२४४ ॥
dvaitena hīnamadvaitaṃ dvaitajñāne kathaṃ tvidam.
cidbhānaṃ tvavirodhyasya dvaitasyāto:'same ubhe (6.244).
This is the real argument of the student. The student says I experience caitanya all right.
Therefore, I have aparokṣa jñāna of caitanya all right. But aparokṣa jñāna cannot be called
advaita-jñāna because caitanya does not have the Advaita status. If I experience caitanya
directly along with body along with the world the experience of caitanya is direct but the
caitanya does not enjoy non-dual status because caitanya will enjoy non-dual status only
when there is nothing else other than caitanya. But my experience is along with the body
and along with the thought. When will caitanya enjoy non-dual status? Only when the
second thing is absent.
Therefore, the student says I have experienced caitanya but I have not experienced
Advaita caitanya because along with caitanya, I experience the world also. Therefore, as
long as dvaita-anubhava coexists caitanya-anubhava cannot be non-dual. Therefore, he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 694

says my problem is this. I have caitanya-anubhava but I do not have Advaita-caitanya-

anubhava. I have experience of consciousness but I do not have experience of non-dual
consciousness because my non-dual consciousness is affected by dvaita-anubhava.
Advaita status of caitanya is obstructed by a second thing in the creation and therefore, as
long as dvaita-anubhava is there I cannot have Advaita caitanya-anubhava. I have
caitanya-anubhava but I do not have Advaita caitanya-anubhava and therefore, I have no
aparokṣa jñāna and that is why I continue to be a saṃśarī. Caitanya-anubhava will not
obstruct dvaita status of the world. Therefore, caitanya-anubhava does not obstruct
dvaita-niścaya. But dvaita-anubhava obstructs Advaita anubhva. That is the problem.
More in the next class.

Class 150
śloka 244 contd.
Vidyāraṇya establishes that Advaita-niścaya the clear knowledge of non-duality arrived at
through mahā-vākya-vicāra alone is the cause of liberation and dvaita-niścaya will end
one in bondage. Everyone should arrive at advaita-niścaya. The author said whether we
are saṃśarī or mukta is decided by whether we have gained advaita-jñāna or dvaita-jñāna.
The student says jñāna is there but niścaya is not there in the absence of direct experience
of Advaita. For that Vidyāraṇya says how do you say so Advaita is equal to Ātmā is equal
to Brahman and is equal to caitanya. Caitanya is directly experienced by us all the time.
Therefore, if caitanya is directly experienced caitanya being Advaita, Advaita is also
directly experienced. Caitanya-aparokṣa-anubhava is Advaita-anubhava alone both being
one and the same. When we said this much the student was not satisfied. He says that I
can accept caitanya is experienced but I cannot accept it as Advaita-anubhava. He makes a
difference between caitanya-anubhava and Advaita-anubhava. If I experience caitanya
alone, purely without any other object, then that caitanya to be non-dual. Because Advaita
means it is without a second, I should experience pure caitanya without any second thing;
then I can say it is Advaita. If I experience one student in front of me without any student
around I can say experience of vidyārthi is the experience of Advaita vidyārthi. When
there are many other students I directly experience vidyārthi but it is not Advaita
vidyārthi. I experience consciousness not purely but consciousness is experienced along

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 695

with other things there are thoughts and objects when I experience caitanya. Since I have
not experienced pure consciousness, since I experience only adulterated or mixed
consciousness with thoughts and objects in addition to caitanya, how can I call it non-
dual? When I experience consciousness, it is clearly with a second thing; when I
experience a second thing along with caitanya, how can that consciousness be called
Advaita?
Therefore, his claim is as long as I have dvaita-anubhava, advaita-niścaya is not possible
says the student. He says Advaita will be a lip service and bookish knowledge because I
have not experienced Advaita because of dvaita-anubhava. While I don’t have advaita-
niścaya, dvaita-niścaya is very strong even after coming to Vedānta. It has never been
reduced. Before I came to this class I had the subject-object duality. After studying
Vedānta you have introduced a caitanya also. Then you talk about five principles.
Consciousness is not a part, property or a product of a substance and consciousness is an
independent entity which pervades and enlivens all and existence extends beyond nāmas
and rūpas and consciousness will survive even after all the objects die. All the teaching has
added to the dvaita and it has not replaced dvaita subject-object duality. I came with
duality and I listened to your Brahman and continued in duality and at the end of the class
that your Brahman also will not disturb subject-object reality.
Therefore, where is advaita-niścaya? It is possible only on that day when I experience
consciousness alone without a second thing. That experience I have not come across so far.
That is why I continue to be a saṃśarī. Experience of consciousness for the dvaita-niścaya I
already have, the experience of consciousness is not opposed and it is not an enemy. It
means consciousness of consciousness is not an enemy to dvaita and it does not remove
dvaita-niścaya. One more addition has taken place and dvaita has been not replaced by
Advaita.
After Vedānta also I meet subject-object duality. Your example and my example cannot be
equated. In the previous śloka there was an example. Caitanya cannot give advaita-
niścaya. Since my caitanya-ñāna is partial, how can there be advaita-niścaya? For that we
answered: for you dvaita-jñāna is also partial; you don’t experience the whole world. If
partial dvaita-jñāna gets you dvaita-niścaya why cannot you get advaita-niścaya with
partial Advaita-knowledge? If caitanya joins, dvaita is not disturbed but if dvaita joins,
caitanya’s Advaita status is disturbed. Therefore, advaita-niścaya needs the absence of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 696

dvaita. The student says it is only on that day when I experience pure consciousness then
alone Advaita I will have confirmation about and until then niścaya cannot take place. For
that there are people give suggestion, the general suggestion given is the consciousness is
obstructed by dvaita. The Advaita status of consciousness is disturbed by dvaita. The
disturbance is caused by thoughts and objects. For this go to samādhi.
Therefore, śravaṇa is not enough it gives book-knowledge; you don’t experience Advaita-
knowledge. In svapna-avasthā there is dvaita and in suṣupti no knowledge is possible as it
is a state of ignorance. Therefore, one should go to samādhi avasthā where you can
experience pure non-dual consciousness as there is no dvaita to obstruct Advaita. In turīya
avasthā Advaita-anubhava is possible as all thoughts are eliminated. Then pure
consciousness alone is there and then Advaita-anubhava takes place.
Therefore, people recommend nirvikalpa samādhi for Advaita-anubhava and niścaya.
Don’t unnecessarily bring nirvikalpaka samādhi as it is not logical and this should be
carefully understood. We say suppose one goes to nirvikalpaka samādhi and removes
thoughts that obstruct the Advaita status, you have negated the thoughts but you have not
negated the objects. Every thought has a corresponding object. How can the negation of
thought eliminate the object? Therefore, still there is dvaita. How can you say in samādhi
there is Advaita-anubhava?
Suppose one argues that the elimination of thought is the elimination of objects, I will ask
do you really mean that? Suppose you don’t think of your bank balance in the class and
the absence of thought can it be absence of bank balance? Suppose you want to cross the
road and you want to remove the traffic and can you eliminate the traffic by the
elimination of thoughts? Nirvikalpaka samādhi can remove the thought and not the
objects. Caitanya will continue along with the object even when thoughts are not there. To
claim samdhi will give Advaita-anubhava is illogical. We don’t accept it as logical since
you remove only the thoughts and not the objects. If I have to come to Advaita-anubhava I
have to remove thoughts as also the objects. Now, the question is how do you remove all
the objects of the world and come to pure non-dual consciousness without a second
object? Physically, it is not possible to remove dvaita. You can remove thoughts and not
the objects.
Therefore, neither physically nor experientially can you remove all dvaita because it is
impracticable. Then how do you arrive at advaita-niścaya? He says the only way to arrive

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 697

at Advaita is by understanding that everything other than caitanya is mithyā. You don’t
and you cannot negate dvaita. Maximum you can negate is your thought and that is not
the negation of dvaita. You should negate satyatva misconception of your thoughts and
objects. You never negate dvaita at any time you negate your misconception that thoughts
and objects are real.
The reality which I have attributed to thoughts and objects should be negated by
understanding they are mithyā. After knowing they are mithyā, dvaita-anubhava will be
there even if you manage to remove the thoughts. The world will be there and what you
need is the understanding that the thoughts and objects are adhyasta upon pure caitanya.
That is the right answer to arrive at Advaita. You see dvaita and realise Advaita. This is a
rare area wherein this point has been make clear.

śloka 245
एवं तर्हि शृणु द्वैतमसन्मायामयत्वतः ।
तेन वास्तवमद्वैतं परिशेषाद्विभासते ॥ ६.२४५ ॥
evaṃ tarhi śṛṇu dvaitamasanmāyāmayatvataḥ.
tena vāstavamadvaitaṃ pariśeṣādvibhāsate (6.245).
Vidyāraṇya says you listen to me. If this is your question: how can caitanya be Advaita as
long as dvaita-anubhava is there? For that Vidyāraṇya says I will give you the answer.
Understand clearly you need not and cannot remove dvaita. Even if you remove the
thought you cannot remove the object. Removal of dvaita is not possible nor it is
necessary. Dvaita is asat because it is the product of Māyā. Dvaita means thoughts and
objects are Māyāmaya. What is required is that you continue to experience all the three:
caitanya, thoughts and objects. Let the experience continue; you cannot and you need not
stop.
The reality attached to them should be dropped. Advaita alone is real and it is a clean
vision and understanding. No samādhi is involved and it is clean knowledge with the help
of śāstra pramāṇa. One neti removal of the reality of object and another neti is for removal
of the reality of the thought and once you negate the reality of both object and thought
what remains as real is caitanya which was advaya, which is advaya and which will be
advaya forever. I am always Advaita caitanya. Don’t say I have not got Advaita
knowledge. After setting aside mithyā objects and mithyā thoughts as a remainder is the-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 698

real Advaita. It remains as non-dual. It is evident, ever-experienced Advaita is there

forever.
Suppose I am in a room alone. In that room ten mirrors are there around me. Now there is
one and ten images are there. I am interested in Advaita-siddhi. I want to remove the
images and get Advaita. There are three people who give suggestion. One says break all
the mirrors and then you get Advaita-siddhi.
Another says no no no, you close your eyes and stop perceiving the images and sit in
meditation for Advaita. Third one says you need not destroy the mirror or close your eyes
and see all of them but know all of them cannot be counted because mithyā pratibimba
cannot be counted along with satya bimba which I am myself. We need not do anything.
We have to understand. So says Vidyāraṇya.

śloka 246
अचिन्त्यरचनारूपं मायैव सकलं जगत्।
इति निश्चित्य वस्तुत्वमद्वैते परिशेष्यताम्॥ ६.२४६ ॥
acintyaracanārūpaṃ māyaiva sakalaṃ jagat.
iti niścitya vastutvamadvaite pariśeṣyatām (6.246).
It is an explanation for the previous verse. He says sakalam jagat Māyā eva. The whole
dvaita prapañca which seems to obstruct Advaita is only mithyā. Mithyā is nothing but
acintya-racana-rūpa the nature we cannot imagine or visualize. Intellectually
uncategorisable as you cannot say it is sat, cannot it is asat and you cannot say it is sat-
asat. Since it is not sat it cannot be taken as real and it is only mithyā. Keep this fact in your
mind thoroughly.
What you need is registration of this fact in your mind. The reality which you attached to
dvaita you pluck the reality. You remove the reality which is our superimposition. Pluck
the reality from thought and objects and that reality may you place back on the caitanya.
Advaite caitanye on the caitanya that is non-dual. There is only one caitanya. If some asks
question about it, you ask whether you ask for ābhāsa-caitanya or ādhāra-caitanya and
then answer that ābhāsa-caitanyas are many but ādhāra-caitanya is only one. Now the
student says okay. He has another problem. When I listen to your class I remove the
reality and place it on Śākṣi-caitanya. But the problem is when I enter into vyavahāra the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 699

reality goes back to thoughts and objects. Again I experience duality and I become a
saṃśarī.

śloka 247
पुनर्द्वैतस्य वस्तुत्वं भाति चेत्त्वं तथा पुनः ।
परिशीलय को वात्र प्रयासस्तेन ते वद ॥ ६.२४७ ॥
punardvaitasya vastutvaṃ bhāti cettvaṃ tathā punaḥ.
pariśīlaya ko vātra prayāsastena te vada (6.247).
In class everything is fine and I see dvaita-mithyātva. When I go back to vyavahāra dvaita-
satyatva comes up and Vidyāraṇya says go to the class and listen to the classes until this is
thoroughly registered that dvaita is mithyā. The reality of dvaita again comes back to the
mind the moment I enter vyavahāra that too when there are problems. If this is your
complaint, may you again make an enquiry. Give some time and revise the teaching and
why do you ask the question as if you carry a load? He says I have no difficulty and
Vidyāraṇya says come to the next class also.

Class 151
śloka 247 contd.
Vidyāraṇya pointed out whether one is bound or liberated, as long as one has dvaita-
niścaya there will be bondage. As long as advaita-niścaya he will be liberated. Some say I
have advaita-jñāna but I have no advaita-niścaya; I experience dvaita directly and dvaita-
niścaya is stronger and Advaita I don’t directly experience for which Vidyāraṇya says
Advaita is caitanya and it is directly experienced by you all the time which is better than
dvaita. The direct experience of dvaita is in two avasthās, jāgṛt and svapna, whereas
Advaita caitanya is experienced in all the four avasthās. For that the student says I
experience caitanya all the time but I don’t experience Advaita-caitanya because Advaita-
caitanya experience is obstructed by dvaita experience. Therefore, I have to negate dvaita
to experience Advaita-caitanya. You want to click Advaita Brahman without disturbance.
For that we answer first of all note it clearly that you cannot remove dvaita totally and
even if you remove the thought you cannot remove the object from caitanya. That by
thought-removal you arrive at Advaita is the biggest misconception. Therefore, you will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 700

be never be able to remove dvaita as dvaita removal is not possible and dvaita removal is
not necessary. I should know whenever I experience caitanya, it is Advaita caitanya alone
all the time. It is not when dvaita goes Advaita comes and it is not so. Caitanya is Advaita
is all the time. It is so because everything else other than caitanya is mithyā; therefore, it
cannot disturb non-dual status of caitanya.
My non-dual status cannot be disturbed even if I see so many images. Advaita status of
caitanya need not be brought by thought-elimination or by object-elimination. Let me
clearly understand that I am non-dual in spite of thought. I am non-dual not by
elimination of thought but in spite of thought. Every time I experience caitanya I
experience Advaitacaitanya only. For making caitanya Advaita no effort is required; That
Advaita-caitanya is disturbed by the world is my misconception. Therefore, I struggle and
sit in meditation hoping that caitanya will become Advaita. Remove your misconception
and understand that caitanya-anubhava is always Advaita-caitanya-anubhava because
there is no second thing. It is a matter of understanding. The dvaita-experience cannot
disturb my Advaita status. Then student said that I understand; but my problem is that in
the class I can claim I am the non-dual Ātmā and experienced duality is mithyā and
therefore, it cannot disturb me. The moment I go out of the class dvaita is raised up and I
see subject-object-duality as real and the world threatens me. Even after studying Vedānta,
I am unable to identify with Advaita. I violently react to such an extent that the family
members tease me that I have not changed at all even after studying Vedānta. If satyatva
again comes you do Vedānta-vicāra again. With regard to reality of dvaita may you
enquire once again until unreality is removed by reality. Aham satya, dvaita mithyā has to
be realized. What difficulty you have in doing that? You need not go anywhere but you
have to relive the teaching. You have to butt out dvaita, because of this abhyāsa, which
alone is called nididhyāsana. With the help of the Guru or without the teacher when I
bring back the teaching again, it is called nididhyāsana. Śravaṇa replayed is nididhyāsana.
When satya is played in third person in nididhyāsana you have to carefully convert it into
first person. Converting that into first person, may you practice again and again; what
difficulty you have in doing that? Tell me what difficulty you have.

śloka 248
कियन्तं कालमिति चेत्खेदोऽयं द्वैत इष्यताम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 701

अद्वैते तु न युक्तोऽयं सर्वानार्थनिवारणात्॥ ६.२४८ ॥

kiyantaṃ kālamiti cetkhedo:'yaṃ dvaita iṣyatām.
advaite tu na yukto:'yaṃ sarvānārthanivāraṇāt (6.248).
The student says ok I will do nididhyāsana or replay the teaching; tell me how long I
should do this? If you ask such a question this is an unfortunate question and you should
not have asked the question, wherever you do a job and it is a pain in your neck, you ask
the question how long. You don’t want to enjoy and you want to complete somehow. Here
the job I have given is claiming your glory: I am ānanda-svarūpa, the world has lower
order of reality and such a wonderful truth: aham anna aham annādaḥ for dwelling up on
your glory should you feel any trouble? Dwelling upon your own glory should be
wonderful. But even the physical thing we want to enjoy because Ātmā priyaḥ. If you are
not tired of doubtful physical beauty, temporary physical duty how can you be tired of
real and doubtless beauty of satya śivam sundaram? Enjoy reveling in your glory. Vedānta
vākya is mirror which is loudly proclaiming your are śuddha, lifelong enjoy that. Ātmā
eva santuṣṭaḥ. Coming to dvaita should be painful to you. May you show the difficulty or
feel the pain with regard to dvaita vyvavahāra and then you should feel the pain and you
should ask how long. With regard to self enjoyment why do you ask how long? Is it not
strange? With regard to dvaita you will feel pain. With regard to Advaita you enjoy. This
pain or anxiety or concern with regard to Advaita is not proper. Why in Advaita there is
no neck pain? In Advaita there is no neck. There is no body. Advaita-niṣṭhā is freedom
from all problems. There is no role of husband, wife, etc. In Vedāntic meditation
asaṅgoham asaṅgoham punaḥpunaḥ, no role and no pain. It removes all the pains.
Advaita-niṣṭhā does not give pain; on the other hand it removes dvaita pain. It is relieving
centre not a torture centre.

śloka 249
क्षुत्पिपासादयो दृष्टा यथापूर्वं मयीति चेत्।
मच्छब्दवाच्येऽहङ्कारे दृश्यतां नेति को वदेत्॥ ६.२४९ ॥
kṣutpipāsādayo dṛṣṭā yathāpūrvaṃ mayīti cet.
macchabdavācye:'haṅkāre dṛśyatāṃ neti ko vadet (6.249).
The student comes with another complaint. He say no doubt it is very nice to hear that I
am Advaita and I am free from all problems and difficulties. All are not there in me. As I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 702

say this, I have the problem of hunger and thirst. Therefore, how can I say I am problem-
free when I have the pang of hunger and thirst, etc. I thought after jñāna I will not get
hungry. With no problem, I am more hungry. I see all as before. The hunger and thirst
continue with full bang even after gaining jñāna. When you say “I have got hunger-
problem” which I do you refer to? Before Pañcadaśī you had one I. Until Vedānta I use the
I loosely. After Vedānta I don’t have only one I. You should deliberate before making the
statement. Reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness is vyāvahārika hunger from
vyāvahārika ahaṅkāra because that is not in the contract. No teacher will say that
ahaṅkāra is freed for ahaṅkāra is kartā-bhoktā and it has prārabdha and prārabdha is not
burnt and prārabdha puṇya and prārabdha pāpam will have its go and affect the body.
Vedānta never said it will go away. Vedānta says you look at ahaṅkāra from śākṣi-dṛṣṭi
like movie hero from the screen standpoint. Remember the Birbal’s story. Akbar drew a
line and said make it shorter without touching the line. Everybody was breaking their
head. He drew another longer line and the line was made shorter. There are two I one is
physical I and another ideological I; the suffering and death becomes smaller when you
have change in perspective level. When the mother undergoes the change and the pain,
motherhood overpowers the pain of having the baby. The physical pain becomes bearable
from Śākṣi-caitanya-dṛṣṭi; pain is far more bearable.
During the daytime the stars are not seen because of the light of powerful sun. For jñānī
also biological problem will continue like a freedom-fighter or like that mother, the
physical pain becomes insignificant. Let the hunger and thirst as mithyā property belong
to mithyā ahaṅkāra as they are inevitable properties of ahaṅkāra and I can see them as
mithyā only when I raise my level to satya. Only if the intellect is at that level, the pain
will become insignificant. What I want to say is that the intellect has the power to reduce
the pain with change of perspective. And every Vedāntin does that only. Hunger and
thirst belong to aham-śabda-vācyārtha body and not aham-śabda-lakṣyārtha Ātmā. Ātmā
is free from hunger and thirst. Nobody says there is no hunger and thirst for ahaṅkāra.
You, the śākṣī, is free from hunger and thirst. They are there for ahaṅkāra. When we say it
is not there, it is for śākṣī lakṣyārtha.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 703

śloka 250
चिद्रू पेऽपि प्रसज्येरन्तादात्म्याध्यासतो यदि ।
माध्यासं कु रु किन्तु त्वं विवेकं कुरु सर्वदा ॥ ६.२५० ॥
cidrūpe:'pi prasajyeran tādātmyādhyāsato yadi.
mādhyāsaṃ kuru kintu tvaṃ vivekaṃ kuru sarvadā (6.250).
The next complaint from the student is this. He understands ahaṅkāra is the problem.
What happens is ahaṅkāra and śākṣī are in such a close proximity that by mistake
ahaṅkāra problem because of its proximity gets transferred to śākṣī and so I say I have the
problem. There is transference of problem from vācyārtha I to lakṣyārtha I. Like that
whenever problem comes to ahaṅkāra I feel I have the problem. How to solve this
situation? It is his question.
Because of identification of ahaṅkāra with śākṣī or because of mixing up of ahaṅkāra and
the problems of ahaṅkāra appears in the śākṣī because of transference. What to do?
Vidyāraṇya says it is very simple. Because of transference there is a problem and asks why
do you transfer ahaṅkāra problem on to you? Don’t put it upon you like the elephant
throwing mud upon itself. Don’t throw mud of ahaṅkāra on your own śākṣī head.
When there are problems bring Vedāntic teaching and remember that ahaṅkāra has
prārabdha and ahaṅkāra will have to go through ups and downs and some have remedy
and some will not have remedy. These are the ahaṅkāra-lots. That is why one works for
videha-mukti and as long as ahaṅkāra is there the ups and downs will be there. I am the
śākṣī, not affected by the ahaṅkāra-problem. May you entertain śākṣi-bhāva. Do whatever
is to be done remembering this truth. Have discrimination and for adhyāsa only remedy is
viveka. Student says I do viveka when things are fine. Vidyāraṇya says when things are
fine, you need not do any viveka. When you have to do viveka is when the problem
comes. May you do viveka all the time especially when there are problems. This alone is
called nididhyāsana-abhyāsa. Then the student comes with another complaint.

śloka 251
झटित्यध्यास आयाति दृढवासनयेति चेत्।
आवर्तयेद्विवेकं च दृढं वासयितुं सदा ॥ ६.२५१ ॥
jhaṭityadhyāsa āyāti dṛḍhavāsanayeti cet.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 704

āvartaye्dvivekaṃ ca dṛḍhaṃ vāsayituṃ sadā (6.251).

The student says I know what the problem is: adhyāsa. I know what is the solution:
viveka. I know the problem and also the remedy. Now he says even though remedy I have
kept, I can use the remedy only if advance notice is there. If this saṃsāra reaction comes to
me with advance notice I can use viveka. All these things happen instantaneously and
reactions happen even before I recognize the problem. Before batting my eyelid, I fall into
saṃsāra. All seems to be impractical. All comes because of my own old vāsanā and my
habits. I have been reacting in a particular way when a person uses a particular word. It is
so because whenever I hear the word I have reacted in that manner thousands of times
and that is registered in the unconscious mind. Unconscious mind knows to react in that
manner when that situation comes and it does not require my permission. Because of my
ingrained habit I behave as before even though I am supposed to be a Jīvanmukta. Come
to the next class.

Class 152.
śloka 251 contd.
The student points out to the Guru that advaita-niścaya is lacking because we don’t have
aparokṣa advaita-jñāna even though we have aparokṣa caitanya all the time. Caitanya is
not Advaita because along with caitanya the world is also experienced. This world-
experience is an obstacle to caitanya’s Advaita status. How can we negate the world so
that we can have Advaita-caitanya-anubhava? For this, Vidyāraṇya points out dvaita is to
be negated for caitanya to be Advaita. The negation of dvaita need not be experiential; the
negation has to be in terms of the knowledge that dvaita-experience does not affect the
Advaita status. If there are ten mirrors around me and I experience ten reflections but the
experience of reflections does not affect my non-dual status. Experienced images cannot be
counted along with me. Images are mithyā and I am original bimba. For Advaita-siddhi,
the world-experience need not be negated and the thoughts need not be negated; let there
be objects also, but what we have to negate is the reality which we have falsely attributed
to them. Dvaita-anubhava-niṣedha is not required and Advaita-satyatva-niṣedha is
needed. The reality we have attributed to dvaita has to be negated. I am Advaita and I will
be Advaita even when I have jāgṛt- and svapna-anubhava and no experience can disturb

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 705

that. Experience of sunrise does not disturb the knowledge that the sun does not rise. The
right knowledge cannot be shaken by the opposite experience. Valid knowledge gained
through valid pramāṇa cannot be shaken by opposite experience. Advaita-jñāna cannot be
shaken by dvaita-anubhava. That is why Advaita teacher can talk dvaita all the while
ascertaining Advaita. Samyak jñāna cannot be shaken by viparīta-anubhava.
Now, the student understands the whole thing. But there is a problem. He says I am able
to remember mithyā dvaita when I am sitting in front of you. Mithyā dvaita seems to
become satya dvaita later and once I take it as satya the problems come alive and
therefore, dvaita prapañca hurts me. Therefore, I flare up and my response is like any
other saṃsārī. How to handle the problem? The student says I know why the problem
comes. Whenever there is a provoking situation, the sub-conscious mind deliberately
thinks and acts and at that time the conscious mind is shut off and it is sub-conscious mind
which is impulsively and instantaneously reacting. In my sub-conscious mind there is
dvaita-satyatva-bhāvanā. The conscious mind knows dvaita-mithyātva but in the sub-
conscious mind, dvaita-satyatva is there. They are saturated because I have practiced for
decades for janmas and I have pushed this notion to the sub-conscious mind. I have
dvaita-satyatva-vāsanā. Whenever I impulsively act, jñāna is shut off. Any impulsive
action is because of my sub-conscious mind. Therefore, I get into my svabhāva.
Previously, I acted and regretted. Now, I react and regret. This is all because of vāsanā
problem; the superimposition of satyatva upon dvaita. Similarly, ahaṅkāra also is an
adhyāsa. I am the ahaṅkāra although I am Śākṣi-caitanya. I am not the reflected
consciousness but I am the original consciousness. Temporarily, I look at ahaṅkāra and the
world becomes real. There is a misconception. All are because of the old habits. It is
viparīta-vāsanā. Teacher says it is true. We have to handle the vāsanā by developing the
counter vāsanā. How to develop the counter vāsanā? How did the original vāsanā come?
The other one came because of repeated practice. If you are used to attend the class at a
particular time and at a particular day, after several classes that day and that time your
mind will think of the class. Anythin deliberate gets converted into vāsanās. What is in the
conscious mind percolates into the sub-conscious mind. Practice ahaṃ brahma asmi
vāsanā. Therefore, vivekaḥ āvartate. Develop Advaita-vāsanā and ahaṅkāra-mithyātva
vāsanā. Therefore, consequent worry is also in the same plane only and for this you have
practice and that is why nididhyāsana has been prescribed.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 706

śloka 252
विवेके द्वैतमिथ्यात्वं युक्त्यै वेति न मन्यताम्।
अचिन्त्यरचनात्वस्यानुभूतिर्हि स्वसाक्षिकी ॥ ६.२५२ ॥
viveke dvaitamithyātvaṃ yuktyai veti na manyatām.
acintyaracanātvasyānubhūtirhi svasākṣikī (6.252).
The student continues with his complaint. He says there is another problem because of
which dvaita-satyatva-vāsanā is stronger. That is why we find it difficult to knock of
dvaita-mithyātva. Mithyātva of dvaita is established through logic. By using logic when
enquiry is made whether it is sat or asat logically mithyātva is established. Therefore, one
is yukti-siddha dvaita-mithyātva we prove through logic but the dvaita-satyatva is
pratyakṣa-siddha. It is solidly experienced. It is always possible to say my pain is satya.
Satyatva is pratyakṣa-siddha and dvaita-mithyātva is yukti-siddha. Pratyakṣa-siddha is
stronger. Pratyakṣa is primary and logic is secondary.
Without collecting pratyakṣa-data how can you make an enquiry? Pratyakṣa is not
dependent on logic. Dvaita-mithyātva is weaker being logic-based and dvaita-satyatva is
stronger being pratyakṣa-based. Only through enquiring logic, dvaita-mithyātva is
established. Therefore, it is weaker only. This is the student’s complaint. Unreality of
dvaita is a weaker knowledge for me. Don’t say like that, says Vidyāraṇya. He says dvaita-
mithyātva is also pratyakṣa-siddha. I have already talked about the mysterious
inexplicable nature of dvaita. The mysterious creation of dvaita or formation of dvaita is
anubhava-siddha. It is sva-śākṣī.
It is an experience for which we ourselves are the witness and we witness the experience,
the mysterious nature of the creation, I have already talked about. Whether the seed comes
from the tree and the tree comes from the seed, we are not able to explain. How the baby
develops, etc, it is a mystery. We see the inexplicability. Verse 143, the previous and later
verses. The more you try to understand the universe the more mysterious it becomes.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says, at one level or the other the question mark continues. This
mystery we experience at medical level all the time. A man may be all right medically, but
the patient will go through so many problems. We have opposite experience also. One is
all right but the report will be having adverse features. Vidyāraṇya calls it Māyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 707

We experience the world but most of the things are inexplicable. It is an experience for
which everybody is a witness. We regularly experience the inexplicability of the world. I
only experience the inexplicability and I don’t experience mithyātva. Inexplicability alone
is technically called mithyātva. Therefore, mithyātva is also anubhava-siddha and
therefore, it is weak. Therefore, you cannot give that argument.

śloka 253
चिदप्यचिन्त्यरचना यदि तर्ह्यस्तु नो वयम्।
चितिं स्वचिन्त्यरचनां ब्रूमो नित्यत्वकारणात्॥ ६.२५३ ॥
cidapyacintyaracanā yadi tarhyastu no vayam.
citiṃ svacintyaracanāṃ brūmo nityatvakāraṇāt (6.253).
Then the student or Pūrvapakṣa comes with another question. You say dvaita is mithyā
because its formation is inexplicable. The creation of dvaita is acintya inexplicable and
mysterious. If dvaita is mithyā because its formation is inexplicable then caitanya
formation is also inexplicable. Therefore, we will have to conclude the formation if
inexplicable dvaita is mithyā and the formation of caitanya is inexplicable and therefore,
caitanya is also mithyā; this is his argument.
Therefore, he says the formation of cit is also inexplicable. That is why scientists are
probing this question. The matter alone was there. Very much later solar system was born
and then alone caitanya came and they don’t know how life came out of matter. Evolution
does not talk about evolution of life. The evolution does not explain how out of matter life
came.
Therefore, the formation of caitanya is also inexplicable. Therefore, caitanya is mithyā. If
everything is mithyā you will come to Buddhism. This is the question of the student.
Vidyāraṇya is willing to accept. The inexplicability of formation for dvaita and cit is
acceptable because of different reasons. The reason behind the inexplicability is different.
Dvaita-formation is inexplicable whether it came from sat, asat or sat-asat. If creation
being inexplicable, it is inexplicable creation. It is inexplicable because creation is anādi.
Caitanya does not have creation. Dvaita has creation and it cannot be explained. Caitanya
does not have creation and therefore, you cannot explain and therefore, you cannot equate
the inexplicability of caitanya and creation. It is anitya and its creation is inexplicable
whereas for caitanya it is nitya therefore, its creation cannot be explained.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 708

Even though inexplicability is common to both one is anitya and another is nitya. Dvaita is
anitya and Advaita is nitya. We don’t say the creation of caitanya is explicable. That means
we do accept that caitanya’s creation is inexplicable and we do accept caitanya creation is
inexplicable because it is nitya. In the case of dvaita, it is created and creation is
inexplicable. Caitanya is eternal and that is the reason scientists are not able to talk about
the origination of consciousness. Caitanya-manifestation came later and it existed even
during the big bang even when living beings were not there. There was no medium for its
expression. The caitanya did not come but cit became cidābhāsa. We can talk about the
historical type of cidābhāsa and not talk about the cit.

śloka 254
प्रागभावो नानुभूतश्चितेर्नित्या ततश्चितिः ।
द्वैतस्य प्रागभावस्तु चैतन्येनानुभूयते ॥ ६.२५४ ॥
prāgabhāvo nānubhūtaściternityā tataścitiḥ.
dvaitasya prāgabhāvastu caitanyenānubhūyate (6.254).
Then comes another question. Vidyāraṇya said dvaita has formation and origination and it
is anitya. In the case of caitanya it does not have formation or origination because it is
eternal. Now, Pūrvapakṣa asks how caitanya is not created? How do you say dvaita is
created?
For that Vidyāraṇya asks a counter question. If you say caitanya has origination it will
mean before the origination caitanya was absent? In tarka-śāstra language that absence
before origination is called prāgabhāva that is absence before birth. To prove something
has origin you have to prove before its origin it was absent to establish birth. The mother
will talk of birth in the case of birth of all of us. Now, Vidyāraṇya asks how do you prove
the prāgabhāva of the birth of caitanya? We can talk about the birth of the body. To talk
about the birth of consciousness we should know the prāgabhāva of the consciousness.
Who witnessed the absence of consciousness? Who will be conscious of the absence of
consciousness? Vidyāraṇya says to witness caitanya-abhāva you need caitanya. To witness
caitanya-prāgabhāva you need caitanya. If there is caitanya you cannot talk of
prāgabhāva. Caitanya-prāgabhāva cannot be proved and therefore, you cannot talk of
caitanya-utpatti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 709

Therefore, caitanya is nitya. Prāgabhāva means prior non-existence. When there is no

pratyakṣa pramāṇa you cannot have anumāna-pramāṇa also. Therefore, caitanya is nitya
and eternal. Therefore, we cannot talk about the racana or creation of caitanya. But in the
case of dvaita you cannot say so since dvaita has prāgabhāva. We experience it daily
during suṣupti; dvaita-prāgabhāva is experienced. Therefore, our discussion now is
inexplicable creation is common to dvaita and caitanya but dvaita creation is inexplicable
because it has a creation and the creation cannot be logically explained. In the case of
caitanya though, it has no creation and therefore, it cannot be explained. So both are
mithyā you cannot say. More in the next class.

Class 153
śloka 254 contd.
Vidyāraṇya is discussing an important topic in which he establishes Advaita caitanya is
experienced directly without any hindrance. Caitanya is self-effulgent and we effortlessly
experience the same. Not only caitanya is ever-experienced but that caitanya happens to
be Advaita all the time and whenever I have caitanya-anubhava I have Advaita caitanya-
anubhava. Because caitanya has Advaita status all the time.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said you need not bring Advaita status by negating the world and
thought. You can never negate the world. Thoughts and world need not be negated for the
Advaita status because Advaita status is always there.
Now comes the question: how do you say caitanya enjoys Advaita status all the time?
Advaita status of caitanya cannot be disturbed by the world perception. Advaita status of
‘mine’ cannot be disturbed by the world perception. If I see ten reflections of ‘mine’ in the
ten mirrors, the ten reflections cannot disturb my non-dual status because they are mithyā.
Perception of a mithyā world does not disturb my Advaita-anubhava. All the time I
experience the Advaita Ātmā and my Advaita status is not disturbed by dvaita prapañca
because of dvaita-mithyātva. If dvaita were satya it would have created reality in
difference. My Advaita status would have gone. Since dvaita is mithyā it cannot disturb

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 710

my Advaita status even when I experience the world. What is to be negated is dvaita-
satyatva-bhāvanā the reality of dvaita, whereas the dvaita-experience need not be negated.
I was Advaita, I am Advaita and I will ever be Advaita, whether I experience dvaita or I
don’t experience dvaita as dvaita experience cannot disturb my Advaita status.
Avyakta dvaita also cannot disturb my status of Advaita or non-experienced dvaita cannot
disturb my Advaita status. I enjoy Advaita-anubhava all the time because jagat is mithyā.
Caitanya is Advaita all the time because everything else other than caitanya is mithyā.
Therefore, it cannot disturb the non-dual status of caitanya. The mithyātva of dvaita is
proved through logic which is an indirect pramāṇa but the pratyakṣa directly reveals
satyatva and logic alone says it is mithyā. That is why I am not able to swallow mithyātva
because it is supported by weaker pramāṇa. We see the inexplicable origination of the
dvaita prapañca. We are not able to explain through sat-kārya-vāda or asat-kārya-vāda.
We are not able to say seed comes from the tree or the tree from the seed. The inexplicable
origination which we directly experience is mithyātva, like magic-show of a magician. He
takes a stick and a net and he keeps on moving them and a bird after bird comes out of it. I
experience the bird comes out of it but I don’t know how it comes. We experience things
but we are not able to explain. The inexplicable origin of the world shows that the world is
mithyā, due to inexplicability. Inexplicable origination is the essence of mithyātva.
Consciousness also has inexplicable origination. That I accept dvaita is also of inexplicable
origination, the Consciousness is also of inexplicable origination; the words are same but
with a slight difference. In the case of dvaita, it has origination and its origination is
inexplicable. In the case of caitanya it does not have origination, therefore, its origination is
inexplicable. Whereas caitanya has no origination therefore, its origination is inexplicable.
Don’t bring caitanya in the group. Whatever has an origin or is a product whose
origination we cannot explain is mithyā. Dvaita prapañca is a product but its origination is
inexplicable and therefore, it is mithyā. All products are mithyā we say in Vedānta.
Dvaitam mithyā karyatvāt, ghaṭavat. This statement should be carefully understood. Our
statement is that all products are mithyā. Yad kāryam tad mithyā. When I say all products
are mithyā, I don’t mean all mithyā are products. If I say all mithyā are products there will
be mistake. What about Māyā. Māyā is mithyā but it is not a product. Māyā is anādi. We
will not say that all mithyā are products. All my students are human beings does not mean
all human beings are my students. “All products are mithyā” is a correct statement. “All

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 711

mithyā are products” is not a correct statement. In this field only tarka-śāstra is taken.
They are careful in connecting the language and thought.
Then another important thing you should note. I say all products are mithyā which we
assert. It does not mean all non-products are non-mithyā either. All non-products are non-
mithyā, satya, we don’t say. All non-products are non-mithyā satya means Māyā being a
non-product will become satya. We don’t say all non-products are non-mithyā. All my
students are human beings. Let us apply the principle. “All the non-students are non-
human beings” you cannot say. When I say “all students are human beings” I don’t say
“all non-students are non-human beings”. All products are mithyā. To say all mithyā are
products is wrong.
Therefore, when we study this portion, Vidyāraṇya says all products are mithyā. He says
dvaita is a product and its origination is inexplicable and experience the inexplicable
origin, dvaita-mithyātva is directly perceptible but don’t extend it to caitanya since
caitanya is not a product. This is the aside topic. In this context Vidyāraṇya has made two
statements. Dvaita is a product and caitanya has no origin and it is not a product. How do
you prove that? For that, Vidyāraṇya applies tarka-śāstra logic. We see any product has a
date of birth. That means before the date of birth the product was absent. Therefore, any
product is absent before date of birth. Any product has prior non-existence before the date
of birth. Every kārya has prāgabhāva. In tarka-śāstra they will call kārya is prāgabhāva as
pratiyogi. How to prove something is a product. You should prove the prāgabhāva. If you
have negated the prāgabhāva then it is not a kārya. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says in verse
254 dvaita is a kārya because it has a prāgabhāva.
Before sṛṣṭi, dvaitasya prāgabhāva. Before sṛṣṭi dvaita was not there. We want to say
dvaita has prāgabhāva and caitanya has no prāgabhāva. Keep Māyā at a distance. Dvaita
has prāgabhāva during pralaya before sṛṣṭi. I accept caitanya is there, Māyā is there, but
duality is not there. Only after sṛṣṭi, dvaita comes into existence. Not only before sṛṣṭi you
need not go that far. Even in suṣupti before jāgṛt and svapna comes dvaita is not there.
Therefore, dvaita has prāgabhāva therefore, dvaita is kārya and therefore, dvaita is
mithyā. What about caitanyasya prāgabhāva. If you have to prove the birth of
Consciousness you have to talk of prāgabhāva.
Who can talk about the absence of Consciousness? Does consciousness talk about absence
of Consciousness or the matter can talk about absence of Consciousness? Consciousness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 712

cannot talk about absence of Consciousness as even it witnesses it is there; caitanya cannot
be the witness of caitanya-prāgabhāva. Then jaḍa also cannot be the witness of caitanya-
prāgabhāva because jaḍa cannot be witness of anything because it is jaḍa. It cannot be the
witness of anything. Therefore, caitanya-prāgabhāva does not have a proof. Why not we
infer caitanya-prāgabhāva? He says it cannot be because if I have to infer the fire by seeing
the smoke, fire can be the object of inference only if it had been perceived before. I should
have seen smoke and fire coexisting some time. I should have experienced the fire and
only if I had experienced the fire in the past I can infer in future. What has not been
experienced cannot be inferred. If a person never experienced fire in life he can never infer
fire based on smoke. Vyāpti-jñāna needs pratyakṣa-jñāna. What has been perceived can
alone be inferred. If caitanya-abhāva is never perceived, caitanya-abhāva cannot be
inferred. Caitanya-abhāva cannot be perceived because you need caitanya for this.
Therefore, it cannot be inferred. Why cannot we know it through śāstra? Then we say
śāstra cannot help because śāstra says satyam jñānam anantam brahma. Śāstra says
Consciousness is nitya or eternal. śāstra does not support caitanya-abhāva.
Therefore, caitanya-prāgabhāvaḥ nāsti and therefore, caitanya is not a kārya; therefore,
caitanya cannot be mithyā. That caitanya being I, I am the non-dual satya caitanya
undisturbed by mithyā dvaita, whether I perceive dvaita or not. Dvaita cannot disturb me
and this understanding is mokṣa. Vidyāraṇya says: I am surprised why people don’t get
mokṣa. Therefore, he says prāgabhāva of caitanya is never experienced by caitanya at any
time and therefore, caitanya is eternal and not a kārya.

śloka 255
प्रागभावयुतं द्वैतं रच्यते हि घटादिवत्।
तथापि रचना चिन्त्या मिथ्या तेनेन्द्रजालवत्॥ ६.२५५ ॥
prāgabhāvayutaṃ dvaitaṃ racyate hi ghaṭādivat.
tathāpi racanā cintyā mithyā tenendrajālavat (6.255).
Therefore, he restates the conclusion in these two verses. dvaitaṃ prāgabhāva-yutam.
Dvaita prapañca has prior non-existence and therefore, it is a kārya or a product. It is
created and it has an origination. It has prāgabhāva; therefore, it is a kārya and therefore, it
has origination like a pot. Not only it has origination but that origination happens to be
inexplicable. It is not logically categorisable. More I enquire, more it is a mystery! For

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 713

details, we have to go to Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad where we have studied elaborately. It

cannot be explained therefore, it is mithyā like indra-jālavat like the magic show of a
magician. From the hat he takes out things.

śloka 256
चित्प्रत्यक्षा ततोऽन्यस्य मिथ्यात्वं चानुभूयते ।
नाद्वैतमपरोक्षं चेत्येतन्न व्याहतं कथम्॥ ६.२५६ ॥
citpratyakṣā tato:'nyasya mithyātvaṃ cānubhūyate.
nādvaitamaparokṣaṃ cetyetanna vyāhataṃ katham (6.256).
Therefore, the grand conclusion. He says caitanya is directly experienced by all of us as
conscious beings. Caitanya is satya. That we have seen being not a kārya. Satya caitanya is
ever-experienced by me as I. And dvaita prapañca is always experienced by me as mithyā
as I am not able to explain its origin. Dvaita prapañca is not explainable. Caitanya is ever-
experienced as aham. The ever-experienced caitanya has to be dvaita or Advaita. He says
caitanya has to be Advaita because mithyā dvaita cannot be counted along with me. I am
satya. World should not be counted being mithyā. I alone is counted. I alone was, is and
will be and therefore, aparokṣa advaita-jñāna does not require going to any avasthā. Even
opening the eye we can say mithyā dvaita cannot be counted with me. Me means caitanya
turīya. Consciousness is ever directly experienced by me as I. The unreality of everything
else other than the cit, is also directly experienced in the form of inexplicability of its
origin.
All my problems are mithyā and they cannot touch me the caitanya. Therefore, Advaita, I
am secondless, I am non-dual. Mithyā world cannot be counted along with me the satya. It
is number two along with me. Since number two is not there, I alone am. I am secondless.
Therefore, I am Advaita because world cannot be counted. I the Advaita caitanya is
directly experienced in all the three avasthās. I am non-dual and non-dual I, the Advaita
caitanya is experienced all the time. We should never think I am dual in jāgṛt and I am
non-dual only in samādhi. This is the mistake committed by the Advaitins. There is no
need to go to nirvikalpaka samādhi to experience Advaita. Thereafter, Vidyāraṇya quotes
the Pūrvapakṣa statement and negates it. Advaita is not aparokṣa, Pūrvapakṣa said in
verse 242. Pūrvapakṣa said Advaita is not directly experienced and it is only intellectual
knowledge. But I don’t have experiential knowledge of Advaita. He quotes the statement

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 714

that it is contradiction to say that for Advaita is experienced all the time. Advaita is not
aparokṣa. This is the statement of Pūrvapakṣa. Such a statement of yours is not acceptable
as it is a contradiction. It is directly experienced all the time. We all have Advaita-
anubhava and there is no problem. More in the next class.

Class 154
śloka 256 contd.
The student expressed a particular problem and that problem is that the dvaita-anubhava
is directly experienced by all and because of dvaita-anubhava is direct it is powerful
whereas advaita-jñāna or anubhava is only indirectly known by us and therefore, advaita-
jñāna being parokṣa, being indirect, it is not strong enough. Therefore, advaita-jñāna or
Advaita-anubhava is weaker and that is why we are not able to derive the full benefit of
Vedāntic study. For that, Vidyāraṇya says there is no such thing called parokṣa jñāna of
Advaita. Advaita-jñāna or Advaita-anubhava is always aparokṣa only. The very statement
parokṣa advaita-jñāna indicates you have not received the teaching properly. Why is it so?
He gives the explanation. When you say parokṣa jñāna of something, it is something
remote or far away as parokṣa means distance. Distance may be either spacewise or
timewise. Places like Badrināth can be parokṣa because it is spatially away. When you
want to experience your own śatābhiṣeka, you want to look at yourself how you will be
then at your 80th year you can imagine— now in the computer they can even give
possibility how you will look in your 80th year— all the knowledge you get is parokṣa
jñāna and here the distance is caused by time. You have to wait to become 80. Therefore,
when something is remote in time or space then alone parokṣa jñāna is possible. If Advaita
vastu is away from you timewise or spacewise then you can hope to convert parokṣa to
aparokṣa. It is not away from you timewise or spacewise because it is in the form of ever-
experienced caitanya. Caitanya is nitya aparokṣa. There is no parokṣa caitanya-jñāna. It is
nitya. There is no spacewise or timewise distance. I the word conscious-being is conscious-
principle. Advaita vastu is not away from time. You can’t say dvaita caitanya will become
Advaita caitanya in samādhi. There is no question of dvaita caitanya becoming Advaita
caitanya by the removal of the world.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 715

The world cannot be removed by you and world need not be removed by you because the
world is mithyā and the world does not require removal. Mithyā means it is really not
there. I know the snake is mithyā. The rope-snake will not require a snake-charmer to be
removed. Caitanya need not become Advaita by removing the world; the world being
mithyā, it is as good as not there. Therefore, caitanya is Advaita caitanya all the time. It is
nitya Advaita. The mithyā prapañca cannot disturb the Advaita status of caitanya;
caitanya is Advaita. Advaita caitanya is experienced all the three avasthās. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says we are always experiencing Advaita caitanya directly; how can you say
advaita-jñāna is parokṣa? He strongly negated in the two verses. Advaitam na aparokṣam
you should not say. Advaita-jñāna is ever direct knowledge, ever aparokṣa jñāna. You
don’t have to go to another state for Advaita-anubhava. How can your statement be not
contradictory? It is contradictory. Caitanya is ever direct. Caitanya is ever Advaita. So
Advaita is ever direct. Opening your eyes and seeing the world you can say I am Advaita,
I was Advaita I will ever be Advaita. Where is the problem? Asks Vidyāraṇya. The student
comes up with another problem.

śloka 257
इत्थं ज्ञात्वाप्यसन्तुष्टाः के चित्कुत इतीर्य ताम्।
चार्वाकादेः प्रबुद्धस्याप्यात्मा देहः कुतो वद ॥ ६.२५७ ॥
itthaṃ jñātvāpyasantuṣṭāḥ kecitkuta itīrya tām.
cārvākādeḥ prabuddhasyāpyātmā dehaḥ kuto vada (6.257).
The student says until now I have indirect knowledge of Advaita. As such, I could not get
total pūrṇatva. My knowledge is indirect and book-knowledge. That suited me because I
knew the explanation that my saṃsāra continues because my advaita-jñāna is indirect.
Now, you refute that by saying that the Advaita-jñāna is not indirect but it is direct. That
means the student asks I thought my advaita-jñāna is indirect that is why my saṃsāra
continues. Now you say my knowledge is direct knowledge and if it is direct I should
have got mokṣa. That means I should boldly claim I am liberated. My problem is in
keeping your statement if I have advaita-jñāna, how come the continuation of saṃsāra?
They are able to claim jñāna but they are not able to claim liberation. There are some
people who say they don’t know whether they are free or not. The courage to claim the
knowledge does not seem to come to claim mokṣa. Why this gap? Therefore, he asks the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 716

question: if advaita-jñāna is direct only, yet why do we come across frustrated and
dissatisfied people even after gaining jñāna? This person does not want to say I have the
problem. Some people have aparokṣa jñāna but they are not totally free and they don’t
claim pūrṇatva. They have the sense of apūrṇatva, otherwise called saṃsāra. There seems
to be something standing between me and the bold claim. Answer to this question be
given, Oh! Master.
Vidyāraṇya does not want to give a direct answer. He feels is that the question is wrong. If
I know I am pūrṇa how come I think I am apūrṇa. The very question is wrong. When
jñāna and apūrṇa cannot coexist, I cannot say I know I am Brahman, but my wife is not all
right. In the first statement I say I know Brahman. The meaning of the word I is Brahman.
In the second statement the word my indicates I the Jīva the individual. The first statement
is forgotten when the second statement comes. I am Brahman is forgotten. The two
statements can never coexist. Therefore, the question is wrong. Instead of doing that he
presents differently. He wants to convey this. Even after knowledge some people are
apūrṇa. He says after knowledge, there cannot be apūrṇatva. If you say they are apūrṇa, it
means they have not gained jñāna. He asks the counter question. He asks how come an
enlightened Cārvāka claims I am the body? If a person claims I am the body, he is not
enlightened. If he is enlightened, he will not claim I am the body. The question cannot be
answered. The word enlightened is wrongly used. It does not have any meaning.
Similarly, if you ask how come after gaining knowledge, I am a saṃsārī, he says it being
knowledge, on gaining knowledge there is no saṃsāra. Saṃsāra goes the moment the
jñāna is gained. Then the student answers.

śloka 258
सम्यग्विचारो नास्त्यस्य धीदोषादिति चेत्तथा ।
असन्तुष्टाश्च शास्त्रार्थं न त्वीक्षन्ते विशेषतः ॥ ६.२५८ ॥
samyagvicāro nāstyasya dhīdoṣāditi cettathā.
asantuṣṭāśca śāstrārthaṃ na tvīkṣante viśeṣataḥ (6.258).
What will be the student’s answer? How come enlightened Cārvāka claims that I am the
body? The student answers that enlightened Cārvāka is partially enlightened Cārvāka and
he does not have complete knowledge. Experientially, we know that I am the body. Even
if a Cārvāka goes to the Upaniṣad he studies the first kośa of Taittirīya. Annamaya Ātmā is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 717

said in this Upaniṣad and thereafter he discontinued the classes. He does not continue his
enquiry and just because of his defective intellect he has the partial enlightenment. For the
so-called enlightened Cārvāka, he does not have thorough enquiry. He also has a
philosophy. The total vicāra is not there because of deficiency in his intellect. Neither he
thinks properly by himself nor does he study the Upaniṣad fully. He does not have total
enlightenment and therefore, he claims that I am the body. If the student answers the
teacher’s question like this, the teacher answers the student’s question. After knowledge,
none will say I will have knowledge. He will not say I am saṃsāra after having the
knowledge. “I have knowledge” means he has not completed his enquiry if he says “I am
apūrṇa”. There are some people who have saṃsāra even after the study of the scriptures.
Why? Because śāstra-artha they did not see fully or thoroughly or completely. He does not
say they have not experienced Advaita-anubhava. It will never come. He does not say
that. He says they have not looked into śāstra fully. They superficially understand and
think they have fully studied. We keep on speaking without putting our mind behind our
words. The greatest obstacle to all the human beings especially the Vedāntic students is he
uses the words without applying the mind to what they say. They say I am nitya-mukta
and mokṣa has not come. As even we hear the statement, we get worried. Vidyāraṇya says
look into words you are talking. Apply your mind. The meaning of the śāstra they have
not seen thoroughly. “I am a saṃsārī” statement is possible only when they lose their
mind to the scriptural teaching.
Nididhyāsana is the application of the mind to what we study. The word I has vācyārtha
and lakṣyārtha, ahaṅkāra and śākṣī. We forget the two meanings and use the word I very
loosely forgetting that ahaṅkāra is never-free while the śākṣī is ever-free. Ahaṅkāra will be
tied down to prārabdha until prārabdha’s end. In videha mukti ahaṅkāra will be free. In
videha-mukti ahaṅkāra is not there. In jīvanmukti ahaṅkāra is tied to prārabdha. When is
ahaṅkāra free? Ahaṅkāra is never-free; śākṣī is ever-free. We forget this fact. Sometimes
we refer I to śākṣī and sometimes link to ahaṅkāra. The powerful student is capable of
transferring the confusion to the Guru also. Let it be clear no one is going to get freedom.
Ahaṅkāra is never-free and śākṣī is ever-free. Switch the I from the ahaṅkāra to śākṣī and
the moment you use the word I in the meaning of ahaṅkāra you are never-free.
Ahaṅkāra will not get freedom. Jñānī is one who has accepted the ahaṅkāra’s non-freedom
comfortably; and jñānī claims śākṣī’s ever-freedom or eternal freedom. If this clarity is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 718

there I will loosely use the word I. If you knowingly move from śākṣī to ahaṅkāra, there is
no problem. Deliberately he is able switch over from ahaṅkāra to śākṣī. Others don’t apply
their mind.

śloka 259
यदा सर्वे प्रमुच्यन्ते कामा येऽस्य हृदि श्रिताः ।
इति श्रौतं फलं दृष्टं नेति चेद्दृष्टमेव तत्॥ ६.२५९ ॥
yadā sarve pramucyante kāmā ye:'sya hṛdi śritāḥ.
iti śrautaṃ phalaṃ dṛṣṭaṃ neti ceddṛṣṭameva tat (6.259).
How the student uses the word I without the application of the mind and complains to the
teacher I have studied and I have the problem. It is a typical question of non-application of
the mind. Here the student comes with a complaint. He says I have understood Vedānta.
The Śruti talks about jñāna-phala. Jñāna-phala I don’t see is the student’s complaint. What
is the jñāna-phala? Śiṣya quotes a Kaṭhopaniṣad mantra. When jñāna comes all the kāmas,
all the desires, are gone. The desires which are located in the mind are gone. The mind is
anātmā. I know I am not the mind; I know the desires are in the mind; mind’s desires are
not gone. He says desires are in the mind; I am not the mind; how come I have so many
desires. This is the confusion. Thus freedom from desires is the phala given in the śāstra.
The student’s worry is the benefit mentioned in the Śruti ‘sarva-kāma-nivṛtti phala’, I
don’t see. I don’t see freedom from kāma. I have desires in abundance. You say after
Vedānta there will be no desire. How is that I have desires even after gaining jñāna? This
is the question. Here I is loosely used without differentiating the ahaṅkāra and Ātmā. Up
to this is the student’s statement. If such a complaint comes from the student, the answer is
that you have not applied your mind properly. If you apply your mind you can see you
have accomplished the phala of freedom from kāma or desires. Then you will claim I am
Ātmā and in Ātmā I there will be no desire. Lunch-desire and dinner-desire applies to the
mind. Desires belonging to the mind should not be taken to be the desire of Ātmā. That
nitya-kāma-abhāva is the jñāna-phala. The mind and body will have hunger and thirst
because it is the nature of the body. Why do you connect your saṃsāra with the body? The
body seeks what it needs for its survival. Jñāna-phala is: I am nitya-mukta Ātmā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 719

Class 155
śloka 259 contd.
In this verse, the student raises a question that from the teaching it is clear that Ātmā is
nitya aparokṣa and experienced directly as Consciousness. Ever-experienced
Consciousness is Advaita also. Therefore, by the study of śāstra we are getting advaita-
jñāna. Therefore, the knowledge cannot be called parokṣa jñāna. Therefore, knowledge
cannot be a weak knowledge also. It must be a strong knowledge since it is direct advaita-
jñāna. If we have advaita-jñāna through śāstra how come we don’t get the benefit of jñāna!
If caitanya is aparokṣa and Advaita is nitya aparokṣa we should have phala but we don’t
feel like claiming that we are liberated. We miss some phala that is promised by the śāstra.
The student himself gives an explanation. One of the phala of aparokṣa jñāna is sarva-
kāma-nivṛtti. It is given in Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.3.14. Here Vidyāraṇya quotes half of Kaṭha
mantra. All the desires will go on gaining advaita-jñāna. This is the phala for knowledge
given by the Śruti. He says when I look at myself I don’t seem to be having that phala
despite having gained advaita-jñāna. It means I do have kāma. Since I have so many
kāmas and there is no full stop for kāma, I don’t see any phala on gaining advaita-jñāna.
That means I have not gained the knowledge. Vidyāraṇya asks who said so? If a person
has understood Vedānta and if he applies his mind, he makes a statement, the very word I
is loosely used between śākṣī and ahaṅkāra. When I have understood Vedānta when he
says there is one I and when he says I have desires then I is loosely used. If the mind is
applied after Vedāntic study there is no kāma. You don’t have kāma on gaining advaita-
jñāna. Student asks how you say that jñānī students cannot have kāma. Vidyāraṇya says I
will explain. The phala of kāma-nivṛtti is definitely there. It is pratijñā vākya answer in
nutshell.

śloka 260
यदा सर्वे प्रभिद्यन्ते हृदयग्रन्थयस्त्विति ।
कामा ग्रन्थिस्वरूपेण व्याख्याता वाक्यशेषतः ॥ ६.२६० ॥
yadā sarve prabhidyante hṛdayagranthayastviti.
kāmā granthisvarūpeṇa vyākhyātā vākyaśeṣataḥ (6.260).
I will give you the essence of the answer. The Upaniṣad has made it clear that all the
desires are located in the mind. Vedānta does not talk about the reduction or removal of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 720

desires from the mind totally. That is not the aim of Vedānta. All desires are not bad.
Īśvara himself has desire for sṛṣṭi, sthiti and pralaya, etc. jñānis have got desires for loka-
saṅgraha. Vedānta does not talk of removal of desires from the mind. Before knowledge I
have placed the I in the mind. I have identified with the mind and claimed those desires as
my desires. While the truth is that the desires belong to the mind and I am sthūla-sūkṣma-
kāraṇa-vyatirikta. I am Ātmā and Ātmā does not have any desire; even the cause for
desire is not there in Ātmā. The cause for desire is apūrṇatva. Ātmā being ever pūrṇa,
Ātmā does not have cause of desire and does not have any desire. I am ever desire-free.
The mind has binding and non-binding desires. Before Vedānta, I identified with the mind
and therefore, the desires of the mind I threw upon me. I falsely transferred the mental
desires as my desires. Vidyāraṇya says this false transference of desires are called hṛdaya-
granthi. After Ātma-jñāna mind continues to be as it is and the desires of the mind
continue as they are because Vedānta does not talk of removal of desires. Transference of
mental desires that granthi represents is negated. False transference of mental desires
upon desireless I is called granthi. Vedānta asks us to remove the granthi. After the
removal of granthi, the desires do not stop in the mind; but the transference of the desires
upon me stops. I am ever pūrṇa and I am ever desireless; the mind otherwise called
ahaṅkāra according to vyāvahārika status does the job, it is the job of the mind and I don’t
want to connect that with me.
I don’t pursue the desires for pūrṇatva. The desires of the mind are no more connected to
my pūrṇatva. Therefore, if a jñānī is a gṛhastha, his mind may desire to fulfill duties as
gṛhastha and that fulfilling duties has nothing to do with my pūrṇatva. Prārabdha will
decide many of the events but it has no connection to me, the Ātmā, who am apūrṇatva-
free and who am therefore free from desires. Therefore, duties continue with pūrṇatva.
Previously, duties were done for pūrṇatva. Mental apūrṇatva was my problem. Now it is
not so. There was anxiety. Jñānī performs his duties with pūrṇatva. Whatever desires he
has it is not for achieving pūrṇatva. Vidyāraṇya says let the mind have any number of
non-binding desires depending upon the status in the company, family, āśrama, etc. Let
them give you any number of duties as they are not done for pūrṇatva but with pūrṇatva.
Don’t abuse Vedānta; even before coming to Vedānta you must have removed adhārmic
desires in the form of attainment of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Since jñānī has sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti adhārmic desires are not there but dhārmic desires are there and they

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 721

are non-binding as he does not see them as his desires. They belong to the mind heavily
dependent on the prārabdha. This removal of transference is called granthi-bheda.
I no more transfer the desire to me. I am pūrṇa. I have no desire when I am sat-cit-ānanda
Ātmā. If the mind has desires, Vedānta does not ask you to remove the desires from the
mind. Convert adhārmic desires into dhārmic desires, convert binding desires to non-
binding desires. Therefore, he says the word kāma occurring in Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.3.14
relates to desire. It has a special meaning. If you don’t understand the meaning you will
think of removal of the desires from the mind. Vidyāraṇya says Kaṭhopaniṣad itself
explains the meaning of kāma in the next mantra. 2.3.15. The word kāma is translated as
granthi. Transference of mental desires upon the real asaṅga I who is different from the
mind. It cannot have kāma-krodha-lobha-sambandha. Nothing can stick to the I, the Ātmā.
I cannot have kāma and so, where is question of removal of kāma! Granthi-svarūpeṇa has
been explained as transference. In the example of a crystal, the redness of a flower placed
nearby is falsely transferred to the crystal and crystal appears as red in colour. What
should you do to remove the redness from the crystal? The redness from the flower cannot
be removed, need not be removed because the red flower has red colour and it cannot be
removed. Then should we remove the redness from the crystal? If you want to remove the
redness from the crystal, it need not be removed as the crystal does not have redness be it
in the past, present or future but what do you do is you remove the transference you have
formed mentally. The notion that it is a red crystal is a mental problem because of the
transference of the adjective red that belongs to the flower I have transferred to the crystal.
That is called granthi.
Transference is the job in the mind. You need not remove the desires from the mind. You
have transferred the mental desires to I the Ātmā and then you complain that I have
realized Ātmā, but I have desires. Duty-completion and my pūrṇatva have no connection.
Whether you complete all the duties itself is doubtful. Don’t connect mental connection to
your svarūpa. Let the mind be sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna. Let me have the jñāna: I am
not the mind. This is the aim of Vedānta. Granthayaḥ means knots of the heart. This
dharma-adhyāsa the transference of desires from I is called hṛdaya-granthi. All those
transferences, adhyāsas, are knocked off. Therefore, kāma-nivṛtti is equal to granthi-nivṛtti
only. Freedom from desires does not mean that the mind will be totally free of desires. It
cannot and it need not. Your very desire to attend the Vedānta class is desire and my

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 722

desire to teach is my desire. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya travelled all over India, established maṭhas
and wrote so many books. All there were done with desires only. Without desire you
cannot do anything.

śloka 261
अहङ्कारचिदात्मानावेकीकृ त्याविवेकतः ।
इदं मे स्यादिदं मे स्यादितीच्छाः कामशब्दिताः ॥ ६.२६१ ॥
ahaṅkāracidātmānāvekīkṛtyāvivekataḥ.
idaṃ me syādidaṃ me syāditīcchāḥ kāmaśabditāḥ (6.261).
He himself explains the transference. Vidyāraṇya presents it in this śloka. The problem
before coming to Vedānta is this. In the aham there is mixing up of Ātmā and anātmā.
Ātmā is cidatma and anātmā is ahaṅkāra. Ahaṅkāra is referred to as the mind with
desires. Ahaṅkāra will have desires as ahaṅkāra cannot be without desires. This aham
because of ignorance is mixed with knowledge. It is an unconscious mixing up because of
ignorance. A person uses I and connects with the three problems of ahaṅkāra:
1. Ahaṅkāra is ever apūrṇa. No ahaṅkāra is pūrṇa. ahaṅkāra is mind with cidābhāsa.
The mind is apūrṇa. Cidābhāsa is apūrṇa. Ahaṅkāra has deśa-pariccheda vastu-
pariccheda and kāla-pariccheda. Īśvara is mukta and he cannot enjoy saṃsāra.
Īśvara does not know what is bondage. Sorrow is the monopoly of Jīvātmā. First
problem that I transfer is aham apūrṇa.
2. The second transference is of desires from ahaṅkāra to Ātmā.
3. Icchā will lead to karma. Once one has desire, then there is shopping. Shopping is
not over in one janma. Then karma follows.
All the three are superimposed. That why I claim I am apūrṇa when I have desires. When
he says that there is pain in the heart. Without completing them there is no fulfillment in
me. The desire “I want a house” is ok. “I want pūrṇatva from house” is saṃsāra. I cannot
have pūrṇatva from other things. This is called saṃsāra. Because of ignorance, I have
kāma and kāma in abundance. That transference of desires to real I is postponing peace
and fulfillment to the future. This is called icchā and kāmaśabdita. This is the meaning of
the word desire.

śloka 262
अप्रवेश्य चिदात्मानं पृथक्पश्यन्नहङ्कृ तिम्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 723

इच्छस्तु कोटिवस्तूनि न बाधो ग्रन्थिभेदतः ॥ ६.२६२ ॥

apraveśya cidātmānaṃ pṛthakpaśyannahaṅkṛtim.
icchastu koṭivastūni na bādho granthibhedataḥ (6.262).
Now, Vidyāraṇya says you are free to any number of desires. Don’t connect your
pūrṇatva with the fulfillment of desires. Pūrṇatva will not increase by fulfillment of
desires or by failure in some of your duties. Make sure that the desires are not connected
to your pūrṇatva. You compare it with any of the non-binding desires or your preferences.
I need or want a coffee and I prefer a coffee. When I say I prefer I will take one of them.
That is preference. When I say preference even if it not available I am comfortable if they
don’t offer coffee. When I say I want, I get disappointed if I don’t get it. The heart must be
balanced with fulfillment or without fulfillment of the desires. The desires must be
dhārmic desires. That is why it is said sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is a must. Fulfilling
immoral desires in the jñānī is dangerous.
Don’t connect the real I with the mind or ahaṅkāra or desires with pūrṇatva. See ahaṅkāra
separately, see every desire is of anātmā and don’t say I have desire. I cannot have desires.
All the desires relate to the mind. You see separate from yourself. The separation cannot
be physically done. Therefore, separation of I and mind has to be done in the form of
understanding. After this separation, let the mind have crores of desires. Let the ahaṅkāra
or the mind have crores of dhārmic non-binding desires unconnected with my pūrṇatva. I
have desires not because of apūrṇatva. There is no harm in having desires. Already the
false transference has been taken care of. Instead of saying I work for fullness, now, I will
say I work with fullness. More in the next class.

Class 156
śloka 262 contd.
Up to verse 246 beginning from 210, Vidyāraṇya talked about kūṭastha-brahma-aikya. As
a corollary, we see the mithyātva of Jīva- and Īśvara-upādhi. When we see oneness of the
original consciousness we also see micro reflected consciousness and macro reflected
consciousness. There is abheda in the original consciousness level and bheda in the
reflected consciousness level. There is a darśana of bheda-abheda-vāda. Why not accept
both bheda and abheda, abheda at the original consciousness level and bheda the reflected

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 724

consciousness level? For this we have one answer. There is bheda from the reflected
consciousness angle and abheda in the original consciousness angle. We cannot join
bheda-abheda angle. Abheda is satya and bheda is mithyā. We do accept the existence of
bheda at mithyā level but we don’t count bheda at satya level. I accept that I experience
the image in the mirror and I accept pratibimba but I will not count that. I will accept
bheda but I will not count bheda because it is by vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi and I will count only
abheda Ātmā, Advaita Ātmā. It is an understanding of Ātmā satyatva and anātmā
mithyātva. Brahma satya and jagat mithyā is established.
From 247 onwards, the teacher is handling some of the problems of the student. He says I
have clear knowledge but I don’t seem to be a mukta Puruṣa. I have no courage to claim I
am mukta. There seems to be some snag. This we have been analyzing from 257 onwards.
We have the knowledge but we don’t apply the knowledge properly. We loosely use the
words I, mukti and bandha. Jñāna gives certain benefits to the mind in the form of relative
calmness, etc. Which I call the reduction of FIR, frequency of reaction, intensity of reaction
and recovery period after reaction. There is benefit at the mental level which we call
jīvanmukti and this is only a byproduct of jñāna; we don’t look upon it as primary benefit
even though the people are interested in that. It is not primary benefit and it is not a
benefit for me, the Ātmā. It is the benefit for mithyā anātmā as the refinement of mind. The
refinement of mithyā anātmā certainly is not the primary aim of jñāna. Jīvanmukti is a
byproduct. This anātmā, the mind continues to exist for some time until the prārabdha is
exhausted and this anātmā will merge into the total Īśvara which merger is called as
videha-mukti, which is also a byproduct. It is a byproduct because that is also something
happening at anātmā level and micro anātmā will merge with macro anātmā Īśvara.
Mithyā Jīva-śarīra will merge into Īśvara-śarīra and so, videha-mukti is also a byproduct.
Then what is the prime product or the primary benefit? Vidyāraṇya says even though the
mind in jīvanmukti will get refined and become better and the desire will come down at
the level of mind, desire will not become zero. We don’t promise perfection of the mind.
As the perfection of body does not exist so also the mind-perfection. As perfect sthūla-
śarīra is not there, perfect sūkṣma-śarīra is also not there. They will come down but they
will not become zero. The aim of a Vedāntic student is not to identify with the imperfect
mind and not to expect perfection in mind, but disown the imperfections of the mind by
claiming “I am not the mind”. The prime benefit of jñāna is knowing that I am not the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 725

body and therefore, physical imperfections do not belong to me and I am not the mind.
The mental imperfection does not belong to me and therefore, I am free from all
imperfections not because the mind is perfect but because the mental imperfections do not
belong to me. The separating of the lakṣyārtha or kūṭastha I from body-mind-complex or
from the ahaṅkāra I is the benefit of gaining jñāna. Even though mind has some a
limitation, I don’t claim to have any limitation. Even the anger which is the anger belongs
to the mind that does not belong to me. The beauty is once I detach from the mind, anger
will come down. I am free from anger in spite of anger in the mind. I am free from desire
in spite of desires in the mind. Ultimate benefit I am not the problematic mind.
The mind is free from many problems through knowledge but the mind is not totally free
from all problems. Some problem may continue and some will continue but the aim is to
disassociate from the problem. This is the new type of meditation you practice. I am free
from the problematic mind, I am different from desireful mind and therefore, I am ever-
free from desires. I have not removed desires and I have understood that I am Ātmā which
has no desire, can have no desire. Make sure I am the Ātmā and reinforce the Ātma-
svarūpa and refuse to join the anātmā, the mind, ahaṅkāra. Look at ahaṅkāra as another
anātmā object in the world having its own problems caused by prārabdha, whether it is
the body or mind. Certain types of pains ahaṅkāra has to go through because of
prārabdha. Distance yourself from ahaṅkāra. Distance from sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra
and kāraṇa-śarīra. Then let the ahaṅkāra continue to have any number of non-binding
desires. Those desires will not have poison. They will have poison only when you have the
desires which cannot be fulfilled and expect pūrṇatva from the desire. Expecting a house
is la egitimate desire butand desire for pūrṇatva from house is a wrong desire. When the
desire of house is not fulfilled, I conclude pūrṇatva has not come. In the case of jñānī, he
may have a desire for a house but he does not link it with pūrṇatva or apūrṇatva.
Pūrṇatva remains the same. Success and failures will not affect him. He keeps on acting
but ‘no result’ will not affect the pūrṇatva. Once the pūrṇatva is taken, the desire is poison
free. Once you link it with pūrṇatva, the desire is poisonous. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
you are free from desire even when the mind is full of desires. There is no harm. Even
Īśvara has desires. Granthi-bheda means I have knocked off granthi. Transfer back the
desires of the mind from upon myself called granthi; then I am desire-free. He says na
badha. This is primary benefit that I am not the mind. Imperfection of the mind we throw

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 726

upon ourselves and we complain I am not liberated. I expect a perfect mind which will not
happen. The mind will have problems. Disassociate from the mind and claim “I am free
here and now”.

śloka 263
ग्रन्थिभेदेऽपि सम्भाव्या इच्छाः प्रारब्धदोषतः ।
बुध्वापि पापबाहुल्यादसन्तोषो यथा तव ॥ ६.२६३ ॥
granthibhede:'pi sambhāvyā icchāḥ prārabdhadoṣataḥ.
budhvāpi pāpabāhulyādasantoṣo yathā tava (6.263).
He says even after jñāna, the mind will continue to have desires. I don’t transfer the mind
to I the śākṣī the kūṭastha; just as the body is to go through its prārabdha the mind also has
to go through prārabdha even after jñāna. The mind of all jñānis cannot be same; Ātmā
can be the same but anātmā cannot be the same. The composition of the mind of jñānis
will not be the same. Jñānī’s svabhāva of the mind with guṇa-composition will be different
from jñānī to jñānī. Some jñānī will not move with people and some will move with
people. In knowledge, there is no difference; in Ātmā, there is no difference. Ramaṇa
Maharṣi had a different mind. While Ādi Śaṅkarācārya traveled all over India. He
travelled a lot. He wrote books and books. But some are different totally. His avatāra is not
to sit in a cave. He wanted to revive dharma which means travelling and propagating.
Svabhāva will vary and therefore, kāma can be there in the mind of a jñānī even after
jñāna, determined by svabhāva, which is based on prārabdha. It is because of prārabdha-
sambandha. Even when another jñānī does not want to do anything he has a desire: I don’t
want to do anything. That is a form of desire and it is a desire of nivṛtti. Both are different
forms of icchā only. This happens even after jñāna. No desire will be adhārmic because
before coming to jñāna by practicing karma and upāsana yoga he has removed adharma
and therefore, the desires will be noble and it will be meant for loka-saṅgraha. In that
desire, there is no expectation of pūrṇatva and therefore, they will be non-binding desires
and their fulfillment and non-fulfillment will not make any difference to the jñānī. Kṛṣṇa
gave his own example; he said he has nothing to achieve but he was busy. You can be
actively liberated and passively liberated; you can be actively bound also and passively
bound also. Bondage and liberation has nothing to do activity or passivity but it has to do
with jñāna. That incompleteness of mind don’t connect with you, the Ātmā, caitanya. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 727

kāma is due to prārabdha and it is nothing to do with pūrṇatva. All the complaints are
because you identify with your mind. First, make sure that you are free right now. Learn
to claim that in your nididhyāsana.

śloka 264
अहङ्कारगतेच्छाद्यैर्देहव्याध्यादिभिस्तथा ।
वृक्षादिजन्मनाशैर्वा चिद्रू पात्मनि किं भवेत्॥ ६.२६४ ॥
ahaṅkāragatecchādyairdehavyādhyādibhistathā.
vṛkṣādijanmanāśairvā cidrūpātmani kiṃ bhavet (6.264).
Even for example we don’t have perfect anātmā. Even Īśvara when he takes avatāra,
Īśvara is not perfect. What happens to your mokṣa? When I say you are mukta, I mean
only you, the cit-rūpa Ātmā. In the outside world, there are so many trees born and gone.
Because of the disturbances, what will happen to I, the Ātmā? Similarly, at the body-level
so many things happen. These will happen. Because of that imperfection of the body, will
you say I the Ātmā is apūrṇa? No. The body has problems. I don’t have any problem.
These two are examples. One is bāhya-prapañca and another is śarīra. At the mental level
also, there will be a lot of improvement on account of Vedānta which I call FIR-reduction.
Still, the mind can never be perfect. Because of that imperfection in the mind, I the Ātmā is
not bound. The emotional conditions are governed by so many factors. Even when a jñānī
receives tragic news, the mind of the jñānī expresses compassion and shares the grief.
Śoka-vṛtti is there. The mind goes through the condition like a crystal taking the colour of
the flower nearby. So also the mind of the jñānī changes with the person whom he
contacts. But my svarūpa is satyam jñānam anantam brahma. This should be practiced by
the gṛhastha also. Remember the pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. Jñānī’s mind is also made of three
guṇas. Just as the fluctuations in three guṇas of the ajñānī’s mind, so also the fluctuations
are seen in the mind of the jñānī also. Jñānī is guṇatīta but jñānī’s mind is not guṇātīta.
Jñānī’s mind is predominantly sāttvika. Sometimes it is rājasika and tāmāsika. Because of
FIR, jñānī is able to control his mind. Guṇa-fluctuations are due to prārabdha.

śloka 265
ग्रन्थिभेदात्पुराप्येवमिति चेत्तन्न विस्मर ।
अयमेव ग्रन्थिभेदस्तव तेन कृ ती भवान्॥ ६.२६५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 728

granthibhedātpurāpyevamiti cettanna vismara.

ayameva granthibhedastava tena kṛtī bhavān (6.265).
Vidyāraṇya said in the previous verse whatever happens to the mind, it does not belong to
Ātmā. Jñānī claims he is Ātmā and his Ātmā is not contaminated by the mental condition.
Student asks why do you say that mental conditions will not contaminate the jñānī? This is
the condition even before. Jñānī’s Ātmā is not contaminated by the mind and desires of the
mind. This is true of ajñānīs also. Even before jñāna the mental conditions do not
contaminate the Ātmā. He says this understanding is called jñāna.
Even before I am not contaminated but I-thought I am contaminated. Contaminated is not
a problem. But the notion that I am contaminated is the problem. Our aim is to the
removal of thought that I am contaminated. Even before granthi-bheda, gaining jñāna, I
was uncontaminated; I was free from saṃsāra, kāma-krodha, etc. Why do you specially
say it is for jñānī only?
This is true for ajñānīs also. So he says if you ask such question, may not forget this fact.
Even before knowledge I am not contaminated; that is the knowledge. I am ever
uncontaminated is the knowledge. It is before jñāna and after jñāna, before sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti and after sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti for you. By this understanding,
at all times I am free and this is granthi-bheda. You are always fulfilled. What is required
is dropping the notion that you are to become free in spite of the mental condition.

Class 157
śloka 265 contd.
Vidyāraṇya says we cannot have parokṣa jñāna of Ātmā and he says Ātmā is aparokṣa and
is ever-evident as caitanya and Ātma-jñāna is aparokṣa. Dvaita cannot be counted as Ātmā
and therefore, Ātmā is Advaita also. Advaita status cannot be disturbed by mithyā
prapañca. Ātmā is nitya aparokṣa and Advaita is also nitya aparokṣa and therefore, Ātma-
jñāna has to be aparokṣa and being strong, if that be so I should be free.
Vidyāraṇya asks what denies you freedom and if at all something disturbs you it is that
you use words without applying your mind. Vedānta teaches you I the Ātmā is ever-free
and the ahaṅkāra the anātmā is never-free. ahaṅkāra is associated with the body and
therefore, body-complaints will be there. Ahaṅkāra is associated with prārabdha and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 729

prārabdha’s ups and downs are bound to be there. If I use the word I, I was, I am and I
will ever be free; then why should I look forward for freedom!
Ahaṅkāra being never-free, I cannot look forward to ahaṅkāra-freedom. As far as Ātmā is
concerned, I need not look forward to Ātmā-freedom. It is ever-free. They why should I
complain about that I have got freedom? Therefore, the problem is that I should listen or
nididhyāsana is required of the fact as ahaṅkāra I need not push mokṣa as a future event
but as Ātmā I need not wait for a future moment. This wisdom I should receive, I have to
internalize and I have to meditate upon. When this was said, the student raised another
question. The student’s comment is Ātmā is ever-free and ahaṅkāra is never-free. Whether
it is true with ajñānī or jñānī? For every one, ahaṅkāra is never-free and Ātmā is ever-free.
I have understood the fact that before jñāna this was the fact and after jñāna also it is the
fact. Now my question is Upaniṣads are promising some freedom by release of the knots
of the heart. In Muṇḍaka it talks of hṛdaya-granthi, etc. The snapping of the knots and
after the knots are snapped, this person is liberated. The Upaniṣad mantra was quoted in
verse 259. Now tell me when will those knots get snapped or what do you mean by knot-
snapping because the Upaniṣad promises freedom after the knots are snapped.
At least tell me what is the snapping of the knots of the heart due to which mokṣa is
promised. The so-called freedom you talk of is fizzled out. For that Vidyāraṇya gives a still
more disappointing note. He says the very understanding of this fact is freedom. He said
that this wisdom is about before, during and after knowledge at all times.
Ātmā is ever-free and ahaṅkāra is never-free means freedom. Don’t expect anything to
break in heart. The cessation of the knot is figuratively called and by this I have separated
ahaṅkāra and Ātmā. There is no knot-snapping other than this wisdom. Therefore, don’t
wait for something to happen again and may you be satisfied with this knowledge.

śloka 266
नैवं जानन्ति मूढाश्चेत्सोऽयं ग्रन्थिर्नचापरः ।
ग्रन्थितद्भेदमात्रेण वैषम्यं मूढबुद्धयोः ॥ ६.२६६ ॥
naivaṃ jānanti mūḍhāścetso:'yaṃ granthirnacāparaḥ.
granthitadbhedamātreṇa vaiṣamyaṃ mūḍhabuddhayoḥ (6.266).
Now, the student is enlightened and he has understood that there is no knot in the heart.
No granthi, no granthi-bheda as an event and no future mokṣa as an event. He is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 730

concerned about all other seekers. He says: my misconceptions are gone and there is no
question of knot-snapping, but there are so many seekers looking for snapping of the
knots. They do not know there is no future liberation. Are we not misleading of the knot
which is not there? Are not we dishonest and mislead the people? We are telling them
there is a knot. Vidyāraṇya says we are not misleading them. They do have a knot. They
don’t know the fact and their ignorance is the knot. Therefore, we are not misleading them
that they have the knot. The ignorance of the fact that we are ever-free is figuratively
called as a knot and understanding of this fact is called again as liberation or mokṣa.
The other saṃsāris do not know this fact that Ātmā is ever-free, ahaṅkāra is never-free and
this wisdom is required. This idea, they do not have. If you raise such a question I will say
we don’t mislead them. Ignorance of this fact is the knot and you don’t have the
ignorance-knot. Ignorance is the knot and there is no other knot. The difference between
the liberated and the bound person is this. In the case of both, Ātmā is ever-free. In the
case of both, ahaṅkāra is never-free. The difference between them is one knows the truth
and the other does not know the truth. There is no other difference in anātmā as also
Ātmā. The bheda or distinction between the wise and the ignorant is not at the body-level,
not at the mind-level. The problems of the body and mind both suffer as per their
prārabdha and svabhāva. One jñānī may be quiet and the other jñānī may talk. The granthi
is the knot of ignorance in one and tat-bheda or snapping of the that knot or removal of
ignorance has taken place in the wise. It has not taken place in the ignorant and the latter
expects the freedom. But the expectation of freedom and the struggle for freedom and
mental disturbance caused by such expectation is absent in the jñānī; he is relaxed and he
is at home. One has expectation and the other does not have expectation with regard to
freedom. With regard to śānti there is no expectation with regard to pūrṇatva. Having
talked about difference between them in all other respects, between jñānī and ajñānī there
are no differences at all. There are no other differences and differences are only in jñāna
and its absence.

śloka 267
प्रवृत्तौ वा निवृत्तौ वा देहेन्द्रियमनोधियाम्।
न किंचिदपि वैषम्यमस्त्यज्ञानिविबुद्धयोः ॥ ६.२६७ ॥
pravṛttau vā nivṛttau vā dehendriyamanodhiyām.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 731

na kiṃcidapi vaiṣamyamastyajñānivibuddhayoḥ (6.267).

With regard to the worldly activity or with regard to day-to-day vyāvahārika there is no
difference between jñānī and the ignorant. The hunger is there for jñānī and the ignorant.
The bodily discomfort is natural for both. Don’t look for physical differences between
jñānī and ajñānī. At all the levels, be it the physical body, at the indriya-level or the
mental-level, there are no differences between the jñānī and ajñānī. It is your responsibility
to take care of the body. You are trustee of the body. As a jñānī, the body is Īśvara’s and
you should be doubly careful to take care of the body. If he is a gṛhastha, he has to take to
the duties with extra care. With regard to sthūla-śarīra, indriya the sense-organs and the
mind, the mind has to share and enjoy the good news and suffer the bad news in keeping
with the requirement of the set up. The mind cannot be like a stone. Unless jñānī shares
the pain of others, how will there be compassion. It is the attitude of sharing the pain of
others.
Therefore, the mind will emphasize with the awareness that ahaṅkāra has to go through
its condition. That is the nature of ahaṅkāra. In fasting, you don’t complaint that you don’t
get food. But when you are hungry and you don’t get food, you start complaining. So also
your mind should accept any situation as it comes and not worry in expectation of things.
The difference between bondage and liberation is that the resistance of experience is
bondage and non-resistance of the same discomfort is called liberation.
The difference is in bhāvanā and in attitude. At an intellectual level also there can be
pursuit and there can be withdrawal. Unnecessary information he rejects. Jñānī is not
worried about the unnecessary information. Life is a mystery and you cannot find a reason
for every happening. Misplaced curiosity is bondage. Jñānī is not bothered about anything
and everything unnecessarily. Īśvara does everything perfectly according to his order and
we need not know all the laws that governs the creation, but we should know all of them
as vyāvahārika satya and that the events will eternally continue. Whatever knowledge is
required reinforce three thing: brahma satyam, jagan mithyā, and jīvo brahmaiva nāparaḥ.
At an intellect-level also, right curiosity and wrong curiosity we should know. Don’t waste
your time getting unnecessary information. So many questions are unanswerable. At all
levels, jñānī has pravṛtti and nivṛtti like ajñānī. There is no difference at all between a jñānī
and an ignorant.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 732

śloka 268
व्रात्यश्रोत्रिययोर्वेदपाठापाठकृ ताभिदा ।
नाहारादावस्ति भेदः सोऽयं न्यायोऽत्र योज्यताम्॥ ६.२६८ ॥
vrātyaśrotriyayorvedapāṭhāpāṭhakṛtābhidā.
nāhārādāvasti bhedaḥ so:'yaṃ nyāyo:'tra yojyatām (6.268).
Vidyāraṇya gives an example to convey the idea that the difference is in cognitive level
and otherwise, there is no difference between jñānī and ajñānī. Jñānī can look like an
ordinary person. Don’t keep on adding mysterious power to him. Don’t invent things. You
don’t require any iota of difference in the jñānī and if at all if there is anything, it is at
anātmā level and it has nothing to do with liberation. Mysticism has nothing to do with
liberation. To convey this idea, Vidyāraṇya gives an example.
Śrotrīya is the name of the Vaidika, the followers of Veda and are known as dvija. One
who belongs to Vedic family and one who has gone through upanayana, Veda adhyayana,
etc., in a proper way. There is a person who belongs to Vaidika family and does not go
through these due to any reason, doesn’t do the karmas and doesn’t study Vedas, etc., upa
karma is taking the study and utsarjana karma is stopping the study. Whatever one has
studied is to be registered in the next six months. Six months he has to do that. If a Vaidika
does not follow the Vaidika saṃskāra he is called fallen Vaidika and is called vrātyaka, he
belongs to Vaidika family and who has forfeited that status because of not following the
Vaidika karmas. There are many Vaidikas that lose their vaidikatva. Vidyāraṇya says
what the difference between vrātyaka and śrotrīyaka is.
The difference is that one studies Vedas and the other does not study the Vedas. The study
is only chanting. We are not talking about the recitation and not the study in detail. This
we cannot see physically. He says what about eating. Both eat through the mouth only.
Also talking, taking bath, cleaning dress, etc., there is no difference between jñānī and
ajñānī. The same principle can be applied in our case also. The example is with regard to
Veda-pūrva-bhāga-jñāna and we talk of Veda-anta-jñāna.

śloka 269
न द्वेष्टि सम्प्रवृत्तानि न निवृत्तानि काङ्क्षति ।
उदासीनवदासीन इति ग्रन्थिभिदोच्यते ॥ ६.२६९ ॥
na dveṣṭi sampravṛttāni na nivṛttāni kāṅkṣati.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 733

udāsīnavadāsīna iti granthibhidocyate (6.269).

Vidyāraṇya gives the support of Gītā pramāṇa from the 14th chapter; the description of
jñānī as guṇatīta. Jñānī claims: I am guṇatīta. When jñānī says I am guṇatīta, the meaning
of I is Ātmā. It is not the body or the mind. Can the mind become guṇatīta? No. Many
people think that the mind becomes guṇatīta. It is not so. The mind of anyone, whether a
jñānī or Īśvara, it cannot be guṇatīta. The mind is made out of three guṇas. The differences
can be only in proportion of guṇas. The jñānī’s mind is saguṇa, but because he has
followed karma-yoga and upāsana yoga he has refined the mind. Jñānī’s mind is
predominantly sāttvika. It cannot be rājasika or tāmāsika. What do you mean by
predominantly sāttvika?
Most of the time, it is sāttvika. Because guṇa-fluctuations are there, there is a reduction of
influence of tamas and rajas which alone we call it FIR. F means frequency in turbulence;
intensity of reaction and above all recovery period comes down. Even jñānī’s mind goes
through rājasika and tāmāsika avasthās although he is predominantly sāttvika. When the
fluctuations take place, jñānī is not over critical and he does not hate his mind because of
its fluctuation. I should reduce FIR. He knows this. Similarly, when sattva-guṇa comes
down, let the mind take rest. He allows tamo-guṇa to take its place. More in the next class.

Class 158
śloka 269 contd.
The wise man neither hates the unconducive things nor does he insist for anything of his
choice. He is indifferent to either. This is known as the destruction of the knots of the heart
in Gītā. Vidyāraṇya says Vedāntic students after Vedāntic study should be careful with
regard to the words he uses and when one is vague and loose there is problem. Until he
studies Vedānta he can afford to use the words loosely when he did not know śākṣī I and
ahaṅkāra I. Śākṣī and ahaṅkāra are physically inseparable. Śākṣī is the original
consciousness and ahaṅkāra is reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness.
All the three factors are together and ahaṅkāra cannot be separated from śākṣī and śākṣī
cannot be separated from ahaṅkāra. When I use the word I, you should know ahaṅkāra
cannot exist without śākṣī and śākṣī cannot say I because pure śākṣī without reflecting
medium and the reflected consciousness does not have sense-organs to say I. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 734

remember who says aham; the mixture alone does all transactions. When we use the word
I it is always the mixture and there is ahaṅkāra-aṃśa and śākṣi-aṃśa; ahaṅkāra-aṃśa is
anṛta-aṃśa, mithyā and śākṣī aṃśa is satya. Always both are there.
When jñānī uses the word I also the mixture is very much there and the only difference is
that the jñānī is aware of both the components the ahaṅkāra aṃśa and śākṣī aṃśa. When
jñānī introduces his śiṣya he uses the word I it is ahaṅkāra-aṃśa. He may introduce
pūrvāśrama father, mother, etc. Then he leaves the śākṣī part and talks of ahaṅkāra aṃśa.
Śākṣī bhāva he leaves and ahaṅkāra bhāva he keeps and says: I am so and so. But when he
says I am nitya-mukta, etc., the mixture alone says. When he says ahaṃ brahma asmi he
uses bhaga-tyāga-akṣaṇā; it means at the time of ahaṃ brahma asmi the ahaṅkāra-bhāva
he ignores and it will disappear in videha-mukti and he refers to śākṣī the higher
component..
Out of this mixture which component is to be taken at what time depends upon the
context. Once I clearly differentiate and learn to know the higher component, the job is
over. After the granthi-bheda, śākṣī aṃśa my own higher I remains nirvikāra all the time
and what about my lower component the ahaṅkāra part? It will remain savikāra being a
mixture of reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness the ahaṅkāra aṃśa will have
prominence.
Jñānī accepts that the ahaṅkāra aṃśa is not guṇatīta. It is an embodiment of three guṇas
and because of jñānī’s ahaṅkāra having done lot of sādhana, having become a jñānī
indicates he has practiced karma-yoga, jñāna yoga and acquired sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti. This reflects the ahaṅkāra aṃśa is sattva-guṇa-pradhānah and śākṣī aṃśa is
guṇātīta. When he refers to ahaṅkāra aṃśa he will say I am sattva-guṇa-pradhāna. Also he
knows that the sattva-guṇa-pradhāna mind though most of the time sāttvika is not fully
sāttvika all the time since it is impossible and therefore, he appreciates the ahaṅkāra
fluctuation. He admits the body- and mind-limitations and mental fluctuations also and
generally his mind does not over react to the situations. Jñānī’s mind can also be
dominated by rājasika mind, but FIR is heavily reduced in his case.
The topic in Gītā is how does the jñānī react to his mind when the mind reacts. I have
talked about two types of regular reaction and meta reaction. Ordinary people have
regular reaction. Once you become a serious Vedāntic student one will have meta reaction.
In a particular situation we get angry and we shout. Normal days we should have

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 735

forgotten. Once we become Vedāntic student after the reaction is over we begin to think
why I got angry. I get a depression that I got angry. My own self-introspection leads to my
reaction. And it causes depression that I am an unfit student, etc. We begin self-judgment
and self-criticism. Introspection will become a curse when it leads to frustration. Gītā says
that the jñānī is free from meta reaction when the mind because of guṇa-fluctuation once
in a while becomes rajas- or tamaḥ-pradhāna and he does not take to secondary reaction
because he stands aloof from the mind and understands the mind. The mind belongs to
ahaṅkāra and ahaṅkāra is not totally free, etc.
When the body is weak, the anger is more. There are more known and unknown reasons
for getting wild. I should not react too much and try to reduce FIR further and I should
not have meta reaction. A jñānī does not hate his own mind when it is rājasika or tāmāsika
sometimes. When the mind is in a wonderfully good or bad condition he does not hate or
get elated with the mind. Sāttvika, tāmāsika and rājasika fluctuations he accepts. He
remains as though indifferent without secondary reaction or over-frustration. He should
say my mukti does not depend upon the condition of the mind but it is in spite of the
condition of the mind. I being asaṅga, mental conditions cannot affect my real liberation of
the śākṣī, satya-svarūpa-aṃśa.
That is why mokṣa is defined as svarūpa-avasthānam. You claim mokṣa in spite of the
conditions of body-mind-complex, because that is mithyā vyāvahārika-aṃśa. He is not
bothered about his mental condition. It is a separation of myself from my own mind. It is
called granthi-bheda. Toughest separation of myself from higher I to lower I. It is granthi-
bheda. Bheda means snapping. This granthi connects the higher I and lower I. That is the
purpose of jñāna. This occurs in verse 22 and 23 of the 14th chapter of Gītā.

śloka 270
औदासीन्यं विधेयं चेद्वच्छशब्द व्यर्थता तदा ।
न शक्ता ह्यस्य देहाद्या इति चेद्रोग एव सः ॥ ६.२७० ॥
audāsīnyaṃ vidheyaṃ cedvacchaśabda vyarthatā tadā.
na śaktā hyasya dehādyā iti cedroga eva saḥ (6.270).
The student raises a question. He says you are quoting Gītā śloka wrongly. It does not talk
about granthi-bheda. It talks about a rule given to a spiritual sādhaka. It talks about a
sādhana to be followed by a seeker and is not a siddha-jñāni-pradhāna śloka. The sādhana

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 736

prescribed there is you should be indifferent and inactive person. Pūrvapakṣa takes it as a
vidhi-vākya. He says in the previous line it is explained that you should not hate whatever
happens running away and when things withdraw you should not run after them also.
Then what he should do? He should be indifferent to both. A sādhaka must learn to be
indifferent and passive and he should be away from all forms of activities. This is
Pūrvapakṣa.
From that, we should know it is vidhi-vākya and we should not take granthi-bheda-
pramāṇa-vākya. If you are going to interpret like that Vidyāraṇya says I cannot accept. He
says look at the expression there. Kṛṣṇa does not talk about udāsīna but says jñānī is a
person like udāsīna. Jñānī is not actually udāsīna but is like udāsīna. It means he is not
udāsīna and he can be active also. He may be inactive and may be active also. Jñānī is not
udāsīna and there is no commandment for the passiveness also if he chooses to be active.
If your view is correct, passiveness is enjoined, the suffix vat will become redundant and
therefore, there is no instruction of passivity. He can be active also. Now, he comes with
another suggestion. There may not be commandment.
Even though the jñānī has freedom, jñānī will not be active. As he is liberated and as he
has the power of knowledge he may be inactive. This is the statement of the Pūrvapakṣa.
Why cannot we interpret like this is the argument of the Pūrvapakṣa. If that is the
conclusion, all the jñānis will become weaklings and will be powerless. It will amount to
say after gaining jñāna the jñānis will become sick. It is not so and jñānis are most healthy
people. If after jñāna all Yogis become rogi will anyone be ready to attend the class? So
don’t give such funny interpretation.

śloka 271
तत्त्वबोधं क्षयव्याधिं मन्यन्ते ये महाधियः ।
तेषां प्रज्ञातिविशदा किं तेषां दुःशकं वद ॥ ६.२७१ ॥
tattvabodhaṃ kṣayavyādhiṃ manyante ye mahādhiyaḥ.
teṣāṃ prajñātiviśadā kiṃ teṣāṃ duḥśakaṃ vada (6.271).
Vidyāraṇya is teasing at the Pūrvapakṣa who misinterpreted the Gītā śloka. He says they
are Bṝhaspatis; the meaning is just opposite. Their interpretation is such: all jñānis will
become incapable of activity. We have learnt that in medical science there is a disease
kṣaya; Yogī also will become weaker and will be incapable of any activity and jñānī also

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 737

will become incapable and kṣaya-rogi also will be incapable and you have interpreted
jñānī as a kṣaya-rogi, comparing jñāna to the weakness. The whole thing is a sarcasm
agasint the arrogant intellectuals.
Their intelligence is extremely bright, so bright that they can extract any type of meaning
from any type of statement! For such dull-witted people what interpretation is difficult or
impossible? They can give any type of interpretation to any type of vākya.

śloka 272
भरतादेरप्रवृत्तिः पुराणोक्ते ति चेत्तदा ।
जक्षत्क्रीडन्रतिं विन्दन्नित्यश्रौषीर्न किं श्रुतिम्॥ ६.२७२ ॥
bharatāderapravṛttiḥ purāṇokteti cettadā.
jakṣatkrīḍanratiṃ vindannityaśrauṣīrna kiṃ śrutim (6.272).
The Pūrvapakṣa says don’t tease me like this. He says I have got a śāstric support also. He
quotes Jaḍabharata upanyāsa is his support. There, they have quoted jñānī is one who is
totally away from the world. The mud is on his body. He does not bother about bhikṣā. He
does not take bath. It shows he is indifferent to everything. So jñānī is udāsīna.
Jaḍabharata means he does not know whether he is alive or dead. He is glorified as one of
the greatest jñānis. So people think anyone who is in a cave and who does not dress
properly is a great jñānī.
An abnormal dirty person is a jñānī is the misconception of the people. Jaḍabharata and
others are people who have withdrawn from the whole world. If you view like that why
do you look at those people? There are description of other jñānis who are active also.
Why cannot you read about those people who have been active even after becoming a
jñānī? Even while he does nitya naimittika karmas his mind is one with Brahman. It
describes an active jñānī. Gītā is full of such descriptions.
In Chāndogya Upaniṣad something else is said that he quotes. There are jñānis who eat
food well; also playing in the world and enjoy the worldly pleasures also; enjoys the
association with his people; his body is surrounded by relations. He interacts with others
and enjoys the company but he is not a slave of the company. If they are there he is happy
and if they are not there he is not bothered. Jñānī can lead any type of life within his
varṇāśrama dharma. If he is gṝhasthāśrama-jñānī he can be very much in gṝhasthāśrama.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 738

Refer it Chāndogya Upaniṣad 8.12.3. It describes about a gṛhastha jñānī. Vidyāraṇya says
you quoted Purāṇa but I quote a Śruti. Nothing is wrong in activity.

śloka 273
न ह्याहारादि सन्त्यज्य भरताद्याः स्थिताः क्वचित्।
काष्ठपाषाणवत्किन्तु सङ्गभीता उदासते ॥ ६.२७३ ॥
na hyāhārādi santyajya bharatādyāḥ sthitāḥ kvacit.
kāṣṭhapāṣāṇavatkintu saṅgabhītā udāsate (6.273).
What about Jaḍabharata? Vidyāraṇya says there are no rules for a jñānī. He can choose
anyway he likes. There are no rules binding him. If prārabdha takes him to active or
passive life, he does not mind. Also jñānī makes sure that his lifestyle is such that there is
no slip from jñāna-niṣṭhā. Basic alertness is needed because the mind has the potentiality
to form saṅga. He has to choose one of the two things. Constantly watches but he does not
develop attachment unknowingly. Or he need not take risk and remain aloof. This choice
is always there for him. More in the next class.

Class 159
śloka 273 contd.
The great wise man like Jaḍabharata, etc., did not live like a wooden log or a stone, etc.,
but certainly ate, walked, slept, etc. They were indifferent to the world due to fear of
attachment. Ātmā and mind cannot have any real connection. Ātmā is asaṅga, Ātmā is at a
higher order of reality and Ātmā cannot have sambandha with the mind; we mistake the
condition of mind as the condition of myself which alone is bondage. In liberation, we find
the lower I, the ahaṅkāra I, is separated from the real I, the Ātmā. After separation, the
mind will continue to have changes caused by fluctuations by the three guṇas. Jñānī does
not stop the fluctuations of the mind since it is made up of three guṇas and its nature is to
fluctuate. A jñānī does not stop the fluctuation of the mind and jñānī cannot stop as the
mind is made up of three guṇas and its nature is to fluctuate. If jñānī says he is free, it
means not that his mind is free of fluctuation but he disowns the fluctuation of the mind
from the real I, Ātmā. One should claim I am Ātmā different from mind, free from three
guṇas all the time and this is called granthi-bheda, claiming the higher self.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 739

Vidyāraṇya then gives the supporting Gītā vākya wherein a jñānī says the mind has three
guṇas and because of sādhana made the mind is predominantly sāttvika and is free from
FIR to a great extent. All of them are low in the mind still the mind will have raj o-guṇa
and tamo-guṇa now and then and I, the Ātmā, is not connected to mind-fluctuation. This
detachment from one’s own mind is called guṇātītatva.
When the quotation was given the student raised a doubt that the śloka was not taking of
granthi-bheda but withdrawal from all activities. Because of the word udāsīna, which
means indifferent, the student mistook the Gītā word as a commandment of withdrawal
from activity. He quoted an example of Jaḍabharata who kept himself away from the
world. Therefore, does it mean that total wisdom lies in withdrawal from society? If you
quote Bhagavata-purāṇa, Vidyāraṇya quoted a Chāndogya Upaniṣad mantra where it is
said jñānī can be involved in worldly affairs. Therefore, you have to reconcile the two
quotations and our conclusion is what is important is not the presence or absence of
transaction and śāstra never compels a jñānī to be active or to be inactive.
In fact, śāstra says a jñānī is free from both vidhi and niṣedha. Then what does a jñānī do?
According to svabhāva and prārabdha, certain jñānis are active and certain jñānis are
inactive. You cannot say one is wrong and one is right. This also has been said in Gītā.
Even a jñānī goes by his svabhāva. Kṛṣṇa even gave advice to Arjuna even if you become a
jñānī you be active. Doing or not doing is not important but internally I should remember
the fact that I am not the mind and I am not even the owner of the mind but I am the
asaṅga caitanya; the condition of the mind should not affect my nitya-mukta-svarūpa. This
status is called liberation or mukti. Jñānī may be active and even at that times he knows
that he is away from the mind.
Then the question comes why Jaḍabharata was away from activity? It is said that it is his
svabhāva and it is not born out of scriptural injunction. Even though Jaḍabharata might
have withdrawn from other activities but did not withdraw from the activity of bhikṣā for
he was alive. Jaḍabharata did not give up the minimum activity required for the
maintenance of the body since he has to maintain the body until the prārabdha is
exhausted. It is a jñānī’s responsibility to maintain the body as the trustee of the body.
Previously, he was the owner of the body and now he is the trustee of the body. Body
belongs to Īśvara. Therefore, other activities required for body-maintenance is to be kept

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 740

up. They did not remain totally idle. They did not remain like a log of wood or a piece of
stone.
On the other hand they did do vyavahāra. They felt in vyavahāra, there is a possibility of
saṅga or relationship. So they kept themselves detached. Some avoided vyavahāra out of
fear of saṅga and some joined in vyavahāra and kept themselves to limit keeping their
āśrama-discipline. It is one’s own choice and Veda never interfered. The knowledge you
have received is well-protected and if you think activity will threaten, withdraw, and if
you think activity will not affect you, you can take part in the activities. Anyway, the
prārabdha will also play its role in the behavior of the jñānī.

śloka 274
सङ्गी हि बाध्यते लोके निःसङ्गः सुखमश्नुते ।
तेन सङ्गः परित्याज्यः सर्वदा सुखमिच्छता ॥ ६.२७४ ॥
saṅgī hi bādhyate loke niḥsaṅgaḥ sukhamaśnute.
tena saṅgaḥ parityājyaḥ sarvadā sukhamicchatā (6.274).
Jñānī has to be alert with his transactions with the world for it may affect FIR. In the
world, for a person who forms saṅga or attachment to any object or a person or a situation
or any anātmā, the moment attachment is formed, the status of the mithyā will change.
When saṅga is there, the mithyātva of mithyā will become duller and mithyā will
gradually appear to be satya. Therefore, saṅga will make mithyā to look like satya. Once
vyāvahārika-satya becomes pāramārthika-satya, Vedānta will be forgotten. It is not that
the jñāna will be lost, but it will be temporarily lost. So a jñānī want to be alert in this
world. One who develops attachment, that will disturb him. One, who does not have
attachment, will not be affected by the mithyātva. Mithyātva-understanding needs
intelligence and mithyātva-assimilation needs nissangatva. He effortlessly abides in
knowledge. So people like Jaḍabharata remained away from all the relationships. Saṅga
has to be given up by the mokṣa-desiring persons.
In this world, a man with attachment is miserable indeed. Therefore, one who desires
happiness should give up all attachment once for all. In fact, the same degree of
attachment is not possible all the time, either at the level of the body, or the mind or the
intellect. Every attachment keeps changing over a period of time.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 741

śloka 275
अज्ञात्वा शास्त्रहृदयं मूढो वक्त्यन्यथान्यथा ।
मूर्खाणां निर्णय स्वास्तामस्मत्सिद्धान्त उच्यते ॥ ६.२७५ ॥
ajñātvā śāstrahṛdayaṃ mūḍho vaktyanyathānyathā.
mūrkhāṇāṃ nirṇaya svāstāmasmatsiddhānta ucyate (6.275).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that many people do not know how to interpret śāstra properly
and they take one part of scripture and come to the conclusion without studying the
scripture totally and comprehensively. Jaḍabharata is taken as an abnormal person. People
think that abnormality is required for the liberation. Liberation may be abnormal but our
lifestyle need not be abnormal.
Not understanding the central teaching of the śāstra, the confused people interpret the
śāstra differently other than the right way. Why should we waste our time in talking about
their misinterpretations? Let the confusion continue because we cannot correct the world,
says Vidyāraṇya. Don’t bother too much about that. What our understanding should be,
that I want to continue, says Vidyāraṇya.

śloka 276
वैराग्यबोधोपरमाः सहायास्ते परस्परम्।
प्रायेण सह वर्तन्ते वियुज्यन्ते क्वचित्क्वचित्॥ ६.२७६ ॥
vairāgyabodhoparamāḥ sahāyāste parasparam.
prāyeṇa saha vartante viyujyante kvacitkvacit (6.276).
What is our siddhānta? I am Ātmā. I don’t need to gain liberation for I am ever-free. I am
not the mind. I am not the owner of the mind. I am asaṅga. The condition of the mind
cannot disturb or affect my ever-free nature. Even though I am not the mind and I am not
the owner of the mind, the body and mind will continue, will have to continue and I
should be a trustee of body-mind-complex. I cannot afford to ignore them; being Īśvara’s
property, I have to keep the body in fit condition.
Now a student may raise a question. He may accept that I am ever-free and conditions of
the mind have nothing to do with my liberation. As long as Pūrvapakṣa is there, the mind
has to be kept fit and healthy just as the body is to be kept fit and healthy. What should I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 742

do to maintain the mind in a fit and healthy condition not for liberation but in spite of the
mind. I don’t want to connect the mind with liberation.
As a trustee of the mind should I not make sure that the mind is kept cool and maintain
the FIR under control? I should keep the mind fit and until videha-mukti the mind will
continue and therefore, what should I do? Vidyāraṇya says I will give you the answer.
You are already free. I will give you a method to maintain the mind in a fit condition.
Three factors you pay attention to, to maintain the mind healthy as a trustee and that it’s
owner is Īśvara.
Three factors are vairāgya, bodha and uparama. This is a pratijñā-śloka and this is going to
elaborated later. Vairāgya means detachment or freedom from attachment, bodha means
knowledge and uparama means quietude. These three factors may you take care of after
jñāna also, not for liberation since I am already free but to keep it in good condition, until
the prārabdha is exhausted. It is the byproduct of jīvanmukti. I am nitya-mukta is the
knowledge. Jīvanmukti is a byproduct. Detachment, knowledge and quietude are
complementary to one another. Each one will nourish the other two. Vairāgya will nourish
bodha and uparama, bodha will nourish vairāgya and uparama, and uparama will
nourish vairāgya and bodha.
Generally, in a typical jñānī who has gone through all sādhanas properly, all the three are
there in good measure. There are some cases where some of them are dominant and some
may be lesser in measure. In such cases, there may be problem. Anyone who does not go
through the karma and upāsana yoga properly, and if such a person is intelligent, he may
receive the teaching. But other things he will lack and the three conditions do not coexist.
If there are differences in the jñānī’s behavior, it is because of differences in the proportion
of vairāgya, bodha and uparama.
Therefore, if you are interested to maintain the mind healthy, you have to take care of all
the three factors. We may decide to improve the mind as a trustee and make sure starting
as trustee, you should not end up identifying with mind or become owner of the mind.
When there is an identification with the mind, self-judgment becomes a problem.
Therefore, a warning is important. You be a vimukta person but not gradually identify
with the mind. Therefore, one should take care of the three factors. Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya
will elaborate the three factors.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 743

śloka 277
हेतुस्वरूपकार्याणि भिन्नान्येषामसंकरः ।
यथावदवगन्तव्यः शास्त्रार्थप्रविविच्यता ॥ ६.२७७ ॥
hetusvarūpakāryāṇi bhinnānyeṣāmasaṃkaraḥ.
yathāvadavagantavyaḥ śāstrārthapravivicyatā (6.277).
Before taking care of the three factors vairāgya, bodha and uparama, Vidyāraṇya says you
should know the three factors distinctly, even though they have been defined in
Tattvabodha. The cause and effect of these three dispassion, knowledge and withdrawal
are different. Those desiring to understand the correct purport of the scriptures should
understand this clearly. One should understand the essential features distinguishing one
from the other. How do you distinctly understand the various things and how to get
clarity of anything? The clarity is gained by observing the three factors. They are hetu,
svarūpa and kārya. Hetu means the cause of that thing; if you want to know x clearly you
should know the cause of x; the second thing is svarūpa the nature of x and the kārya, the
product of x. These three things you must know if you want to know about it clearly. If
you know distinctly, you know what it is and can handle it better. Similarly, vairāgya,
bodha and uparama you should know properly. More in the next class.

Class 160
śloka 277 contd.
Up to śloka 275 Vidyāraṇya established that the knowledge received from śāstra is capable
of giving liberation. In this knowledge, granthi-bheda takes place and granthi-bheda
meaning I learn to know that I am Ātmā and I stop my identification with ahaṅkāra. When
I separate myself from ahaṅkāra and claim I am the Ātmā, it is the end of the journey. Of
course, we should remember even when I claim I am Ātmā and not ahaṅkāra, to claim I
need ahaṅkāra. Because Ātmā by itself can never say I am Ātmā. Ātmā and ahaṅkāra will
coexist until videha-mukti and all the transactions are done by the mixture only and even
the statement ahaṃ brahma asmi is done by the mixture alone. The only difference is that
after knowledge even though the mixture alone says ahaṃ brahma asmi in this mixture
through bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā I use mithyā ahaṅkāra-aṃśa but I don’t claim it as myself.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 744

A jñānī employs ahaṅkāra, includes ahaṅkāra, because without that he cannot claim I and
he claims the cit-aṃśa, adhiṣṭhāna-aṃśa as aham which is free all the time. I am nitya-
mukta-svarūpa. I am not the mind, I am not even the owner of the mind but I am the
asaṅga Ātmā. My freedom has nothing to do with the condition of my mind. The Ātmā is
uncontaminated by the vicāra of the mind. With this knowledge, I am nitya-mukta Ātmā.
If I am not the mind and I am not the owner of the mind, we said Īśvara is the owner of the
mind and I am the trustee of the mind who has to run the body-mind-complex until the
contract with Īśvara is over. The duration of the contract is decided by the prārabdha.
As a trustee, I can and I should keep the mind fit and healthy and for that we can make
use of various sādhanas including jñāna. Jñāna is useful in maintaining the fitness of the
mind and if you want to do that, what are the sādhanas? Fitness of the mind is a
byproduct of the jñāna. Main purpose is claiming that I am not the mind. The maintenance
of the fitness of the mind is a byproduct and therefore, he said if you are interested I will
give you the discipline to enjoy the mind. He gave three sādhanas as vairāgya, bodha and
uparama. As a trustee once we start, sooner or later, unknowingly, we should not become
the owner of the mind. Regularly remind the mind I am the trustee of the mind and not
the owner of the mind. It is mind-maintenance project. Constantly remind oneself that my
freedom has no connection to the mind. Having introduced three sādhanas as vairāgya,
bodha and uparama, he said we should know the three disciplines distinctly.
With regard to anything, clear knowledge involves the three factors: hetu the cause,
svarūpa the nature and kārya the consequence. All the factors you should know. What to
do to know them?

śloka 278
दोषदृष्टिर्जिहासा च पुनर्भोगेष्वदीनता ।
असाधारणहेत्वाद्या वैराग्यस्य त्रयोऽप्यमी ॥ ६.२७८ ॥
doṣadṛṣṭirjihāsā ca punarbhogeṣvadīnatā.
asādhāraṇahetvādyā vairāgyasya trayo:'pyamī (6.278).
First he takes up vairāgya. What is the cause of detachment, what is feature of detachment
and what is the consequence of detachment? If you want to get detachment of anything,
first observe the doṣa of that object. Once you see the defect, you will develop detachment
from that object. A person should have doṣa-darśana in the entire anātma-prapañca. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 745

doṣa-darśana in anātma-prapañca is duḥkha-miśritattva, atṛpti and bandhakatva. Three

poisons are mixed in the anātma-prapañca. One should see and assimilate this. This is the
only hetu for vairāgya. If anyone asks what is vairāgya-kāraṇa, it is doṣa-darśana which is
otherwise called nitya-anitya-viveka.
Jihāsā means drop the attachment, the hold on anātmā, as a means of security and peace.
Making a powerful and strong major decision in life is deciding to drop the hold on
anātma-prapañca as a means of peace and security. It is an internal condition. What is the
consequence? It is the freedom from slavery with regard to anātma-prapañca. Addiction
towards them is called dīnatā. Freedom from emotional slavery or emotional addiction
and the difference from the nature and consequence are subtle. Here, by consequence, we
mean having dropped not again going back becoming a slave. Not being enslaved again is
the consequence. Deciding to drop the dependence on the mind is the consequence.
Therefore, factor number one is for healthy mind. It is not for mokṣa since you are free
Ātmā. To keep the mind healthy vairāgya is required. Jñāna does not take care of the
body. Physical health requires exercise whether one is a jñānī or ajñānī. To keep the mind
healthy, vairāgya is required.

śloka 279
श्रवणादित्रयं तद्वत्तत्त्वमित्थाविवेचनम्।
पुनर्ग्रन्थेरनुदयो बोधस्येते त्रयो मताः ॥ ६.२७९ ॥
śravaṇāditrayaṃ tadvattattvamitthāvivecanam.
punargrantheranudayo bodhasyete trayo matāḥ (6.279).
Now, he comes to the second topic bodha. Bodhah means jñāna. With regard to this also
three factors are there; śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana are called bodha-hetu.
Knowledge comes out of pramāṇa and for Ātma-jñāna, pramāṇa is Vedānta. You have to
do Vedānta-śravaṇa, Vedānta-manana and Vedānta-nididhyāsana. The nature of
knowledge in this regard is distinct understanding of Ātmā as tattva, ahaṅkāra the anātmā
as mithyā; the word I consists of two factors, it is a composite entity composed of cit and
ahaṅkāra cidābhāsa or the mind. Of the two, one is satya aṃśa and another is mithyā aṃśa
and ahaṅkāra is mithyā anātmā. I use ahaṅkāra but I am not ahaṅkāra. This satya-anṛta-
pṛthakkaraṇa is the nature of knowledge. It must be there in the mind all the time. The
problem belongs to ahaṅkāra aṃśa and ahaṅkāra is mithyā therefore, problem is mahā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 746

mithyā. It cannot touch the Ātmā aṃśa and this thought should parallelly run when I talk
about myself. The problem belongs to mithyā aṃśa alone not to my Self. Let satya-mithyā-
viveka continue and then only I can claim myself to be a jñānī. After the two aṃśas have
been separated, ahaṅkāra-aṃśa reflecting medium plus the reflected consciousness and
Ātmā as the original consciousness once I have separated they should not again join
together.
By using the technique of Kṛṣṇa, the union between the two does not take place as is the
case of Jarāsanda’s killing. After videha-mukti, Ātmā is not there. The remixing the two
should to happen. After videha-mukti the problem is not there as there will not be
ahaṅkāra. So he says granthi which means mixing up, is not there. In this context rejoining
should never happen. It should be gone for good. This is consequence of bodha.

śloka 280
यमादिर्धीनिरोधश्च व्यवहारस्य संक्षयः ।
स्युर्हेत्वाद्या उपरतेरित्यसंकर ईरितः ॥ ६.२८० ॥
yamādirdhīnirodhaśca vyavahārasya saṃkṣayaḥ.
syurhetvādyā uparaterityasaṃkara īritaḥ (6.280).
The third factor is uparama which means mental calmness, mental relaxation, mental
poise or freedom from stress. For that also, there are three factors: yama, etc. Yama here
means aṣṭāṅga yoga. Practice of aṣṭāṅga yoga is the cause of uparama, the calmness of the
mind. The nature of uparama is the thoughts in the mind are subdued and made non-
disturbing. We don’t say there are no thoughts. It is definitely not a thoughtless state.
Citta-vṛtti-nirodha is not thoughtlessness. You have thought. Only you should not have a
restless mind. It is freedom from the disturbing thought and that state is called uparama.
The reduction of vyavahāra or activities meant for the self-improvement. Jñānī has no
more desire for self-improvement because he is already pūrṇa. It is reduction of the
worldly transactions. This is the consequence of the mind. These three are the cause,
nature and consequences. In this manner, I have shown the distinction of uparama from
the other two. These three factors should be taken care of for the mind to be healthy.

śloka 281
तत्त्वबोधः प्रधानं स्यात्साक्षान्मोक्ष प्रदत्वतः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 747

बोधोपकारिणावेतौ वैराग्योपरमावुभौ ॥ ६.२८१ ॥

tattvabodhaḥ pradhānaṃ syātsākṣānmokṣa pradatvataḥ.
bodhopakāriṇāvetau vairāgyoparamāvubhau (6.281).
Of these three factors, which is primary and which is supportive is to be known first.
There are people who get lost in aṣṭāṅga yoga and Vidyāraṇya wants to make it clear th at
śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana is more important than vairāgya, bodha and uparama.
The teaching of the knowledge of tattva is pradhānam. śravaṇādi traya is extremely
important for tattvabodha and don’t ignore that. The knowledge is the direct means of
liberation. It is the cause of liberation. Because it is direct means of liberation knowledge
must be given importance.
What about vairāgya and uparama? Both of them are important but they are subservient
to jñāna. They are contributory or auxiliary or secondary means to knowledge. Without
vairāgya and uparama, jñāna is impossible and without jñāna and vairāgya and uparama
are incomplete. Quietude will not give knowledge. It will not improve the stuatus at all.
Knowledge will have to come from Guru’s teaching. Without exposing to teaching,
nirvikalpaka samādhi for long time will give nothing if one is not exposed to Vedānta
vākya, apauruṣeya pramāṇa.

śloka 282
त्रयोऽप्यत्यन्तपक्वाश्चेन्महतस्तपसः फलम्।
दुरितेन क्वचित्किंचित्कदाचित्प्रतिबध्यते ॥ ६.२८२ ॥
trayo:'pyatyantapakvāścenmahatastapasaḥ phalam.
duritena kvacitkiṃcitkadācitpratibadhyate (6.282).
Here Vidyāraṇya says that if a sādhaka has all the three in very good measure, it is rarest
of rare happening because of puṇya and sādhana of several janmas. We will do namaskāra
to such a person for it is the result of great tapas. But generally what we find is that all the
three are not full measure in all the people. Anyone of them or any two of them may be in
smaller measure in some people.

Class 161
śloka 282 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 748

Vidyāraṇya pointed out that if a person gains self-knowledge properly with the help of
the Upaniṣad pramāṇa the very knowledge itself instantaneously gives liberation and
there is no doubt about that. In the very wake of the knowledge that I am nitya mukta
Ātmā, I cannot say I have become liberated, but that I have understood I as ever liberated
I. I am different from the mind and I am not related to the mind as Ātmā is asaṅga.
Objects move in space but not are connected to space. Similarly, I am not the mind, I am
not the possessor of the mind and I am not related to the mind. There is nothing to do with
the condition of my mind. Once I gain knowledge and disassociate from the mind, the
mind becomes the property of the Lord and I am only the trustee of the Īśvara; I am
willing to take care of the mind with the help of Īśvara, maintain mental health and I can
choose to improve the mind for the convenience of the set up as the unhealthy mind
disturbs the set up. Just as the unhealthy body is a disturbance for people around me, the
unhealthy mind is a disturbance for the set up. Therefore, a jñānī can have a project of
maintaining the mental health without connecting it to his liberation; as a trustee trying to
improve his mental standard. For this, three factors vairāgya, bodha and uparama are
needed; of these, vairāgya and uparama directly helps the health of the mind and bodha
helps it in an indirect way.
When I have knowledge, I approach the mental problems objectively. When I don’t have
knowledge, my mental problem is not a mental problem but I see it as my problem. After
knowledge mental problems are a mental problem just as physical problems are physical
problem. After knowledge, we have the advantage of looking at the mental problem
objectively and look at it different from my problem. The very objectivity helps in treating
the mind better, even for the efficient surgeon if he has to do a surgery on his own only
child. The knowledge has not gone anywhere and objectivity is not there. He will say let
someone else do the operation. Objectivity is a help in solving the problem. Before
knowledge, I cannot handle my mind better because there is subjectivity and after
knowledge I can manage the mind better because I look at objectively.
After the discussion of the three factors, Vidyāraṇya says there are few seekers or
students, only a few, who have got all the three in a good measure. There are gradations
with regard to the three factors and there are only few who get good grades in all the three
due to great tapas done not only in this janma but also in all the past lives. They should be
an embodiment of stable calmness even in provoking situations. The real dhīra or matured

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 749

person is one who is calm in provocation. This calmness, detachment and knowledge is
the result of great tapas. Because of certain prārabdha-obstacles, there can be many people
who have lesser extent of one or two. This can happen even in the case of jñānis and
though jñāna may be in full measure, but due to prārabdha-pratibandha, there may be
slight obstructions in any one of these three in certain places or context at some time or the
other. There are some people who are good in young age but irritated in old age. They are
either conditioned by time place or occasions. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 283
वैराग्योपरती पूर्णे बोधस्तु प्रतिबध्यते ।
यस्य तस्य न मोक्षोऽस्ति पुण्यलोकस्तपोबलात्॥ ६.२८३ ॥
vairāgyoparatī pūrṇe bodhastu pratibadhyate.
yasya tasya na mokṣo:'sti puṇyalokastapobalāt (6.283).
This is the extension of the previous śloka. The previous talked about some rare people
who had three factors in full. He now takes the example of a person who is very high in
vairāgya and uparama, the calmness, by practicing aṣṭāṅga yoga. By sheer practice, he
learnt to remain full. Suppose knowledge is not there, what will happen? Knowledge is
obstructed and he is not convinced and takes ahaṃ brahma asmi as information as
suggested in the Upaniṣad. He does not take it as a proven fact. When the content of
knowledge is not a fact for me, it is only information. When the content of the information
is a fact for me it is knowledge. The difference between knowledge and information is how
I look upon ahaṃ brahma asmi and brahma satyam jagan mithyā. For me, it should be a
fact and then only it is called knowledge. When a student takes the ahaṃ brahma asmi as
hypothesis to be validated, the information does not liberate. He should be convinced of
the mahā-vākya. He need not tell anyone. If it is not a fact for him, even if he is called a
jñānī by the whole world it will be of no use to him and he cannot get liberated; for him
there is mokṣa. For him, nothing will go waste though. He will be reborn with some
advantage. This janma, vairāgya and uparama and the information he received will be
carried forward to the next janma. Then, in the next janma, the whole process will be an
easy affair. Vedānta-śravaṇa has primary and secondary result; the first is knowledge and
the secondary result is puṇya. If one does not get the first, he will earn puṇya. One minute

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 750

Vedānta-śravaṇa is equal to hundred aśva-medha-yāgas it is said. It will give higher janma

and sooner or later he will get conducive status to gain self-knowledge.

śloka 284
पूर्णे बोधे तदन्यौ द्वौ प्रतिबद्धौ यदा तदा ।
मोक्षो विनिश्चितः किन्तु दृष्टदुःखं न नश्यति ॥ ६.२८४ ॥
pūrṇe bodhe tadanyau dvau pratibaddhau yadā tadā.
mokṣo viniścitaḥ kintu dṛṣṭaduḥkhaṃ na naśyati (6.284).
Now, he takes the second example. Suppose in a person bodha the knowledge is clear but
the other two are obstructed i.e. vairāgya and uparama. For me, it is a fact that I am
Brahman and I am different from the mind; I am not the possessor of the mind and I am
not the mind. It is a fact for me. The other two vairāgya and calmness are obstructed. They
are deficient. We have to understand if vairāgya and uparama are totally absent or they
are very less, knowledge itself cannot take place. We do not take those who have no
vairāgya and uparama. We talk about a jñānī with deficiency of uparama and vairāgya
and the two cannot be very low but has sufficient to gain knowledge. There may be jñānis
who have clear knowledge but mind does not have perfect health and has deficiency with
regard to detachment and calmness. Then he may gain mokṣa. He may be a liberated
Ātmā. The condition does not affect his liberation. But the problem is this. Just as
unhealthy body gives problems after jñāna an unhealthy body gives problem according to
Paramātmā. Similarly, unhealthy mind will give problem and jñāna cannot stop that. The
disturbances in the mind because of lack of vairāgya and uparama, cannot be helped and
has to be suffered because of prārabdha.
The difference is if jñāna is clear the disturbances of mind will be treated as the
disturbances of the mind and it will not be connected to the fact that I am free. Mental
problems are because of the causes which we have seen. Jñānī as a trustee of the mind will
certainly address the issue just as he addresses the health of the body. He will not take that
it affects his liberation. The condition of body does not determine his liberation. The same
idea is extended to the condition of the mind and he objectively improves his mind. He
also pays attention to the mental health as the disturbed mind will disturb the set up. One
part of loka-saṅgraha is adjusting the mind. He may be liberated but he should not be a
problem to others. Just as there is no perfect physical health there is no perfect mind also.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 751

FIR can be reduced but it need not be brought to the level of zero. Dṛṣṭaduḥkha is the
name given to the mental disturbance of the jñānī which he looks objectively without
identification. Ajñānī’s mental disturbance is not dṛṣṭaduḥkha and he is in sorrow. A
jñānī’s mental disturbance he objectively looks at and objectively addresses also. The
disturbances will not be known to others. The other people will not know but jñānī
himself takes some corrective measures. Therefore, he says dṛṣṭaduḥkha na nasyati for
whom vairāgya and uparama are lesser.

śloka 285
ब्रह्मलोकतृणीकारो वैराग्यस्यावधिर्मतः ।
देहात्मवत्परात्मत्वदार्ढ्ये बोधः समाप्यते ॥ ६.२८५ ॥
brahmalokatṛṇīkāro vairāgyasyāvadhirmataḥ.
dehātmavatparātmatvadārḍhye bodhaḥ samāpyate (6.285).
In the previous verses, Vidyāraṇya talked about vairāgya, bodha and uparama. He also
said that all the three will not be found in full in all the people. He also said there will be
gradation. Now, he explains as to what is the highest mark possible in each of the three
which is ideal. Everything upto brahma-loka should appear to you like a blade of grass
with no value. All are to be seen as mithyā. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya tells in Aparokṣānubhūti
that all should be looked as crow’s dropping. This is total detachment towards everything.
Even attachment to dharma should be looked upon as crow’s dropping it is said. Anger is
also caused by attachment. Attachment disturbs the mind. Jñānis can be attached to books,
students, āśramas, etc. Even jñānis should not be attached to anyone, including the God.
This is the height theoretically possible. The idea is that jñānī should not have any
attachment to anyone. This is the highest or pinnacle of vairāgya.
Now, what is the highest in knowledge? One should be have a firm conviction that I am
free from the body and that Brahman I am or in short it is the feeling ahaṃ brahma asmi. It
should be so firm and it should become as natural as “I am the body”. Before knowledge I
think I am a man, husband of so and so, parent of so and so and the ahaṅkāra of I is so
natural, but after knowledge, I take that I am not ahaṅkāra and it should be natural that I
am Brahman all the time. Of course, for the sake of transaction, I may identify myself as
ahaṅkāra, an individual vyāvahārika identify, but let the “tamburā” Śruti be there that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 752

“ahaṅkāra is veṣa and Ātmā is real”. This should become spontaneous. The knowledge
reaches the height when you disidentify with the body and identify with Ātmā.

śloka 286
सुप्तिवद्विस्मृतिः सीमा भवेदुपरमस्य हि ।
दिशानया विनिश्चेयं तारतम्यमवान्तरम्॥ ६.२८६ ॥
suptivadvismṛtiḥ sīmā bhaveduparamasya hi.
diśānayā viniśceyaṃ tāratamyamavāntaram (6.286).
Now what is the height of calmness? He says when the mind is relaxed, the world and
events that happen around you do not stay in the mind and disturb. The events form
impressions or experiences in the mind. When we sleep at night, certain experiences stay
and also get repeated in the mind. We judge those events and the mind having its own
reactions, it continues to live in the people and in the experiences and mind flutters. This
flutter happens only when we have rāga-dveṣa against the people and events. Then, you
will remember and recall the events over where you have some attachments and the likes
caused by relationship. When the mind becomes mature, the relationship will go and
nothing or no one can make any imprint in the mind. Just as the experiences are forgotten
in sleep, for a jñānī no experience remains in the mind permanently causing a flutter. This
is height of uparama. Just as writings on the water, the experience should disappear after
the event goes. The entire mithyā prapañca should not make an imprint in the mind and I
should come and go and what should remain in the mind is ahaṃ brahma asmi feeling.
The absence of disturbing events or experiences in the mind will make a jñānī to have
peaceful sleep without any flutter of mind. This is the ideal and no one reaches the
ultimate limit. The details in the next class.

Class 162

śloka 286 contd.

Vidyāraṇya established if a person clearly received the śāstric teaching properly, the very
understanding of the teaching will give instantaneous liberation and the understanding is
that I am ever liberated Ātmā. This understanding changes the attribute of the mind that I
am not the mind; I am not the possessor of the mind and I am asaṅga Ātmā and freedom is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 753

my eternal nature and this freedom cannot be disturbed or affected by the conditions of
the mind. I will not connect my liberation with the condition of the mind. The very
knowledge should change my attitude of the mind itself through which I know. No doubt
I use the mind as an instrument to gain the knowledge and the moment I gain the
knowledge, my attitude towards the mind should change and once my attitude towards
the mind changes the mind becomes one of the anātmās in the creation. Since I don’t claim
any relationship with the mind I being asaṅga the mind becomes the property of Īśvara I
said. Īśvara has to keep the mind as long as prārabdha requires. Then my attitude is I am
the trustee of the mind superimposed. I have to maintain the mind in a fit condition for the
sake of the mind and for the sake of the people around, not because my liberation has any
connection to the mind. To keep the mind fit, Vidyāraṇya said three factors are to be taken
care of: vairāgya, bodha and uparama of which bodha the knowledge is very important. It
is so because only the knowledge maintains my attitude of my mind that I have no
connection with mind and the condition of mind has nothing to do with liberation. Only
then the mind can be handled better.
Jñānī can handle the mind better because of the objectivity. He keeps it fit by taking care of
upasarma and vairāgya. Uparama means mental relaxation. Doṣa-darśana will generate
vairāgya. The more the mind has attachment more the mind will be disturbed. The mind
has to reduce attachment to avoid disturbance. For this, the method is doṣa-darśana.
Greater the attachment, greater the disturbance; one should know that. Aṣṭāṅga yoga
helps the mind to be quiet, calm and detached. Detached and calm mind is a healthy
mind. Then, Vidyāraṇya talked of the highest in each of the three. Everything including
the Brahma-loka should be taken as a blade of grass. I am Brahman should be spontaneous
and it is the height of bodha. The height of uparama is the mind being free from all the
events and preoccupation as disturbance-thought free. Whenever we have nothing to do,
the disturbance of the mind will continue. They wait at the gateway of the mind; when the
mind is free the disturbances will occupy the mind. When the mind is free from that, it is
free like the mind in sleep. Not only forgetfulness of thought of the past but also of the
present from forming the impressions and the impressions disturbing the mind in the
future. The experiences should be like writing on water and experience should disappear
after the experience is over and nothing should stay to haunt the mind. This is called the
height of uparama. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 754

Once you have talked about the consequence of vairāgya, bodha and uparama, all the
jñānis will have minds which are in various intermediary stages. Vidyāraṇya says even
though jñāna is the same for all jñānis, the mental conditions will not be the same for all
jñānis even though they all will try to keep the mind in a fit condition; exactly like the
physical body, the bodies of different jñānis will have different levels. The mental fitness
also will vary. These differences in the mental fitness can never affect mokṣa because jñānī
does not connect anātmā mind with mokṣa. Since the mental fitness varies, we can classify
the mental conditions of the jñānis. But Vidyāraṇya says that I don’t want to do it in
Pañcadaśī. This has been done in another book. They say all of them are jñānis and all of
them are liberated and all know mental conditions don’t affect the liberation. Vidyāraṇya
says thinking in this manner or analyzing in this manner the mental states of different
jñānis you should know the gradations are there in the minds of the jñānis. Once you
accept the superlative degree, comparative and positive degrees will be there, but these
are all from worldly angle. Whatever be the body, I am free and whatever be the mind, I
am free; this is the status of the jñānis.

śloka 287
आरब्धकर्मनानात्वाद्बुद्धानामन्यथान्यथा ।
वर्तनन्तेन शास्त्रार्थे भ्रमितव्यं न पण्डितैः ॥ ६.२८७ ॥
ārabdhakarmanānātvādbuddhānāmanyathānyathā.
vartanantena śāstrārthe bhramitavyaṃ na paṇḍitaiḥ (6.287).
Vidyāraṇya says since the minds will be different, their likes and dislikes will differ and
their non-binding desires will differ. They don’t have any desires for pūrṇatva as it is
already accomplished. The mind will have non-binding desires depending upon the
prārabdha and svabhāva. Even jñāni’s activities will be dependent on the svabhāva of the
mind. Even Īśvara has non-binding desires for sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa-avatāra. Why
cannot jñānis have when even Īśvara has non-binding desires! Because of prārabdha
karma even the wise people do not live a uniform lifestyle. Some jñānis feel they should
lead a secluded life while some others go about teaching what they know and also write
books. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya did not remain in jñāna kāṇḍa but also talked about so many iṣṭa
devatās and reduced to the karma kāṇḍa level too for our sake. These differences will be
there, but seeing these differences which are superficial, being only at the mental level,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 755

may you not have any confusion regarding the śāstric teaching. All jñānis have the
understanding that they are not related to the mind. They are ever-free regardless of the
mind’s attributes and activities. The jñānis have nothing to do with the mental activities.
We should not think any active jñānī is superior and passive jñānī is an inferior jñāni. The
pūjas are anātmā governed by prārabdha and therefore, doing or not doing pūjas do not
make any differences in the jñānī’s status.

śloka 288
स्वस्वकर्मानुसारेण वर्ततन्तां ते यथा तथा ।
अविशिष्टः सर्वबोधः समा मुक्तिरिति स्थितिः ॥ ६.२८८ ॥
svasvakarmānusāreṇa vartatantāṃ te yathā tathā.
aviśiṣṭaḥ sarvabodhaḥ samā muktiriti sthitiḥ (6.288).
Vidyāraṇya says even though there are superficial conditions you should know there is no
difference in the knowledge and also in liberation. No difference in jñāna and no
difference in liberation. Don’t commit any mistake on this point. In keeping with the
prārabdha karma belonging to ahaṅkāra of the jñānis, [reflecting medium plus the
reflected consciousness] there are differences. Let them live a life. Let them remain in their
own activity or inactivity. We don’t even say a particular āśrama; that jñānī may be a
sannyāsī or jñānī may be a gṛhastha also. He may be a king like Janaka. Vidyāraṇya lets
them remain in the family duties or any thing connected with the āśrama to which they
belong as liberation has nothing to do with all these things. This does not mean adhārmic
activities because jñānis have removed adharma vāsanās even as a sādhakas. Therefore,
remember; let them remain in any dhārmic way. The knowledge of all of them as “I am
not the body, I am not the mind, I am akartā, I am abhoktā” keeps them in a liberated
state. The knowledge of the jñānis are uniform and the same. The liberation is also the
same. If you measure liberation based on the condition the liberation will not be same
amongst the jñānis. Even jīvanmukti-based mental condition will be different. Jñānis never
look as themselves on the basis of the mind and say we are nitya-mukta Ātmā. We talk of
liberation of the svarūpa. It will have gradations once you define liberation on the mental
state. Vidyāraṇya says jñānī is liberated as nitya-mukta Ātmā. Jīvanmukta and
Videhamukta is by-product of liberation. We talk of nitya-mukti which I have all the time.
Therefore, samā nitya mukti is the sthiti and this is the truth and the fact. With this,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 756

Vidyāraṇya concludes vairāgya-bodha-uparama, keeping the mind fit and looking at them
objectively.

śloka 289
जगच्चित्रं स्वचैतन्ये पटे चित्रमिवार्पितम्।
मायया तदपेक्षैव चैतन्ये परिशिष्यताम्॥ ६.२८९ ॥
jagaccitraṃ svacaitanye paṭe citramivārpitam.
māyayā tadapekṣaiva caitanye pariśiṣyatām (6.289).
If you go back to the teaching of this chapter Vidyāraṇya taught Vedānta in the beginning
of the chapter in a brief manner. He started elaborate Vedānta from verse 18 to 288. He
took an example for each teaching. Citra-paṭa-dṛṣṭānta was taken as an example in the
beginning. Brahman, Īśvara, Hiraṇyagarbha and Virāṭ were explained. Here, canvas is
compared to Brahman and universe to the painting. The elaboration of the same teaching
he did with ākāśa-dṛṣṭānta. Now that he has completed the teaching he wants to go back
to saṅkṣepa Vedānta by reminding us of citra-paṭa-dṛṣṭānta. The picture of the world is
sva-chaitanye arpita, it is superimposed upon one’s own consciousness. The whole world
is superimposed on I, the caitanya, like a painting on the canvas. Canvas is satya and it can
exist independent of the picture but the picture cannot exist independent of the canvas.
The world is mithyā and it cannot exist without Consciousness and Consciousness is satya
and it can exist independent of the world. Mithyā world is superimposed on me, the
caitanya.
If the whole world is superimposed on me and this superimposition is due to avidyā or
Māyā canvas and painting, you should know them and you should reject each one of
them. Jagat-citram you reject. It is not that we physically reject but we don’t attach reality
to that and do not cling to them emotionally. Don’t emotionally invest in mithyā prapañca.
If you emotionally invest you will have a problem. Don’t lean on the world. Take the
world as the card-board chair. Caitanyam eva the pure Consciousness is śuddha caitanya
uncontaminated by this universe and let it be kept as the remaining reality. That means
don’t throw the baby with the bath-water; don’t throw the Consciousness with the rest.
With that, he concludes the citra-paṭa-prakaraṇa. He concludes the chapter with the phala-
śruti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 757

śloka 290
चित्रदीपमिमं नित्यं येऽनुसन्दधते बुधाः ।
पश्यन्तोऽपि जगच्चित्रं ते मुह्यन्ति न पूर्ववत्॥ ६.२९० ॥
citradīpamimaṃ nityaṃ ye:'nusandadhate budhāḥ.
paśyanto:'pi jagaccitraṃ te muhyanti na pūrvavat (6.290).
Suppose the seekers regularly dwell upon this teaching, either in the form of śravaṇa or
manana or nididhyāsana; they are sure to gain Ātma-jñāna. This should be done all the
time, that is as often as possible, after attaining sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. They will
never be deluded in their life as they were before gaining Ātma-jñāna. They live in the
same family in the same world but they will be detached from them mentally. They may
experience the world but will be detached from them and their reactions will not affect
their mind. In short, they are saṃsārat muktaḥ, they are free from saṃsāra. Don’t give
substantiality to the world. Don’t be over-serious.

Class 163

Summary of the sixth chapter, Citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa

Today, I will give a summary of the sixth chapter of Pañcadaśī titled citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa.
You will remember that the 15 chapters are divided into three groups each consisting of
five chapters. First five chapters are called viveka-pañcaka each one of them titled a
particular viveka. Viveka is common to all so it is called viveka-pañcaka. From sixth to
tenth the chapters are called dīpa-prakaraṇas. Since dīpa occurs in all of them it is called
dīpa-pañcaka and the last five chapters are called ānanda-pañcaka. Any ānanda you
experience anywhere is brahmānanda only. The sixth chapter happens to be the first
chapter of dīpa-pañcaka. It is one of the big chapters of Pañcadaśī having 290 verses. Now,
we will see the important topics of this chapter.
From the first verse to the 17th verse Vidyāraṇya gives a condensed version of Vedānta.
Here alone he gives the famous example of citra-paṭa the painted canvas example.
Through this he talks about the four levels of Brahman comparing it into four levels of the
painting. The white cloth, starched cloth, marked cloth and the painted cloth. These are
the four levels of the painted cloth. So also they are śuddha Brahman, Antaryāmi
Brahman, Hiraṇyagarbha Brahman and Virāṭ Brahman. Śuddha Brahman is the Brahman

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 758

without Māyā-sambandha. Antaryāmī is Brahman starched, dipped in Māyā, fit for

creation. Māyā-sahita Brahman is stiffened starched ready. Hiraṇyagarbha Brahman is
where sūkṣma Brahman is ready and not gross but outlines in the form of sūkṣma
prapañca or Hiraṇyagarbha brahman corresponding to the marked cloth. Suppose you sit
with sūkṣma-śarīra, you are a ghost; I don’t even know whether you are here and any
transaction is possible only when sthūla-śarīra is there. Based on this, we have to draw
two lessons. One: śuddha Brahman is real whereas all others Antaryāmī, Hiraṇyagarbha
and Virāṭ cannot exist independently and they require Brahman like marked, stiffened and
painted cloth. Three are mithyā and one is satya. This is point one.
Second ingenious one is that in the painted cloth certain places paintings are there. Now,
Vidyāraṇya says where you see colours there are two vastra one is ādhāra-vastra the cloth
and the other is imagined one. It is not ādhāra-vastra but it is ābhāsa-vastra and it is there
only where the people are there. The painting is not there in all the places. The painting is
not there in ādhāra-vastra, colours belong to ābhāsa-vastra and the colours are given
where the people are there. Animals are not dressed and the painting colours belong to
ābhāsa-vastra. Varṇas belong to ābhāsa-caitanya. Just as we have ādhāra-vastra and
ābhāsa-vastra we have two caitanyas one is ābhāsa-caitanya and ādhāra-caitanya. Ābhāsa-
caitanyas are many while ādhāra-caitanya is only one. Of the two, ādhāra-caitanya is satya
and ābhāsa-caitanyas are mithyā. Everyone is a mixture of ādhāra and ābhāsa; as long as
the two are not separately understood, saṃsāra will be there. Only solution to mokṣa is to
differentiate ābhāsa and ādhāra-caitanya intellectually and I should claim myself as the
ādhāra-caitanya. The entire Vedānta is ādhāra-ābhāsa-caitanya-viveka. This is topic
number one: condensed Vedānta, vedanta-sara-saṅgraha.
From 18 to 21st verse Vidyāraṇya gives an introduction to the elaborate teaching of
Vedānta, the expanded version. Here alone, Vidyāraṇya introduces ākāśa-dṛṣṭānta. The
four spaces ghatākāśa, jalākāśa, mahākāśa and meghākāśa. The space occupied the pot,
ākāśa reflected in the water in space, mahākāśa is all-pervading space and meghākāśa is
the space reflected in vast reflecting medium of the clouds; micro space, macro space
micro reflected space and macro reflected space, micro original consciousness, macro
original consciousness, micro reflected consciousness, macro reflected consciousness.
Micro original consciousness is the Consciousness obtaining within the body-mind-
complex; micro reflected consciousness is the Consciousness reflected in the individual

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 759

mind; macro original consciousness is Consciousness which is all-pervading. Macro

reflected consciousness is the Consciousness reflected in Māyā medium, the medium
being infinitely big compared to the mind which infinitesimally small. For these four
names are given; micro original consciousness is called kūṭastha caitanya; micro reflected
consciousness is called Jīva caitanya; macro original consciousness is called brahma
caitanya and macro reflected consciousness is called Īśvara caitanya. Thus, through the
four fold ākāśa, fourfold Consciousnesses were introduced here.
From 22 to 103 kūṭastha-Jīva-viveka was done separating the micro original consciousness
and Jīva the micro reflected consciousness. Normally, we have been using the word śākṣī
in place of kūṭastha and ahaṅkāra in place of Jīva. Kūṭastha-Jīva-viveka was done
elaborately. Kūṭastha the original consciousness is limitless, all-pervading, divisionless
principle or attributeless principle whereas Jīva caitanya is reflection it is plural; it is
limited it has attributes and it has prārabdha, sañcita, etc. And the entire karma kāṇḍa
talks about the travel of Jīva caitanya; kūṭastha caitanya cannot and does not travel. It is
Jīva caitanya that travels and it has tarpaṇa, shrāddha, etc. The reflected consciousness
along with the reflecting medium, Jīva, travels all over.
Then, Vidyāraṇya makes a point revealing his skill of language also. He enters into an
enquiry. He says the word I should be taken as Jīva and the word self should be taken as
kūṭastha. For this translation, he gives a very elaborate justification. He says the word I
must refer to Jīva because the word I is different from he, you and she and the first person
is ever different from the second and third person, since I is different from you, etc. I is the
finite entity and therefore, it should refer to Jīva which is a finite entity. But the word self
can go with any person. In the sentences “he did it”, “she did it”, the self is common to the
first person, second person and all. Even when inert object falls down, we say stone fell by
it-self. Self refers to something, first, second and third persons, be it cetana or acetana.
Kūṭastha caitanya is common to cetana prapañca and acetana prapañca, self is common to
both and kūṭastha can be identified with self. Cidābhāsa is not common to both cetana and
acetana prapañca. Cidābhāsa is there only in cetana prapañca. In jaḍa prapañca, kūṭastha
caitanya is there, but cidābhāsa is not there. The difference between cetana and acetana is
the presence of caitanya and absence of cidābhāsa. The desk does not have cidābhāsa. We
have cidābhāsa. Thus we have to clearly know the difference between Jīva and kūṭastha.
Jīva is I and kūṭastha is called self. I is called aham and kūṭastha is called sva-padārtha.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 760

Thus, elaborately he made kūṭastha-Jīva-viveka. Kūṭastha is satya and Jīva is mithyā. The
greatest blessing is that saṃsāra belongs to Jīva and the moment I claim myself as
kūṭastha, the saṃsāra is gone from me because saṃsāra belongs to Jīva, who is cidābhāsa.
Cidābhāsa being mithyā, Jīva is mithyā. In between he talked about the misconception of
several philosophers also. A very big portion from 58 to 103, 49 verses deal with other
philosophical systems. He says all of them have wrongly understood the Jīva. Kūṭastha-
Jīva-viveka is the third topic. This comes under tvam-pada-viveka of Tat tvam asi.
Vācyārtha is Jīva, lakṣyārtha is kūṭastha.
From 104 to 309 the topic is brahma-Īśvara-viveka, macro original consciousness and
macro reflected consciousness, otherwise tat-padārtha-viveka of mahā-vākya. It is called
tvam-pada-sādhana. Sādhana is a technical term used for this viveka. Here also,
Vidyāraṇya elaborately talks about the nature of Brahman. The ābhāsa-caitanya reflected
consciousness is Īśvara. Here Vidyāraṇya discusses the Īśvara’s reflecting medium because
of which Īśvara has the advantage. His reflecting medium is Māyā. Our reflecting medium
is the mind, a dull reflecting medium we have and Īśvara is lucky to have sattva-guṇa-
pradhāna Māyā. Here, Vidyāraṇya discusses elaborately about Māyā and it is a rare
portion. Elaborate discussion is nowhere else in the śāstra. It is a big portion. Māyā is
discussed in detail from 125 to 151, as to how it is sat-asat-vilakṣaṇa and it is different
from both existence and non-existence and it comes under seemingness category,
compared to a magician’s magic show. It is experienceable and on enquiry it disappears.
Equally elaborately, he talks about Īśvara’s glory or attributes by taking Māṇḍūkya
mantra. Four glories of virtues based on Māṇḍūkya are elaborately analysed. Sarvajñatva,
sarveśvaratva, sarva-antaryāmitvam and sarvakāraṇatva are the four topics related to
Īśvara discussed here in detail. Īśvara has superior virtues because of the wonderful
medium of Māyā. When we talk of the reality of Brahman or Īśvara it is the most
important teaching. Of the two which is satya and which is mithyā? Even though Īśvara is
glorious, Īśvara being ābhāsa-caitanya, Īśvara is mithyā. All his attributes are also mithyā.
Incidentally, he talks about the role of freewill, etc. Some incidental features of Īśvara are
also discussed as to whether we have freewill or not. We have to note that freewill is there.
That is also a creation of God; Īśvara created everything and the very same Īśvara has
given freewill to human being. The human being will lose it if he is born as animal in the
next janma. When the cow becomes a human being, the cow will get freewill. It is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 761

functional in human birth and it is not functional in animal janma. If we become an

animal, we will lose the freewill. Thus, freewill was established. In the case of human
beings, whatever happens in human life is decided by both Īśvara as sāmānya-kāraṇa and
Jīva’s freewill as viśeṣa-kāraṇa. These are parts of the topic of brahma-Īśvara-viveka.
From 210 to 246, kūṭastha-brahma-aikya is discussed. Kūṭastha is tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha
and brahma is tat-pada-lakṣyārtha. Aikya is their oneness which is revealed by the verb
asi. Aikya means both of them are only one indivisible entity known by two different
names. Two names are not because of their division but because of our observation from
two different angles. One and the same person is seen differently as father, son and
grandfather. There is only nāma-bheda and not vastu-bheda. So also kūṭastha and
Brahman are two names seen from two angles. Micro-macro-division is only from
vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi and in pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi there is neither micro original consciousness
nor macro original consciousness.But between Jīva and Īśvara bheda is there for various
reasons. Jīva is saṃsārī and Īśvara is Sarveśvara. Jīva-Īśvara-bheda is there. You only
highlight aikya. In Veda-pūrva-bhāga, bheda is highlighted and in Veda-anta-bhāga,
abheda is highlighted. Then the question is if both bheda and abheda is there you should
be called bheda-abheda-vādī; why do you call yourself Advaita-vādī? Viśiṣṭādvaita is a
branch of bheda-abheda-vāda. For that, Vidyāraṇya says bheda is mithyā because Jīva is
ābhāsa-caitanya mithyā, Īśvara is ābhāsa-caitanya mithyā; therefore, Jīva-Īśvara-bheda is
also between mithyā Īśvara and mithyā Jīva and bheda is also mithyā just as the difference
is between dream man and dream woman is dream difference only and not real
difference. All are vyāvahārika satya and we talk about satya Advaita. Lakṣyārtha-dṛṣṭi-
aikya we talk about and not vācyārtha-dṛṣṭi-aikya.
From 247 to 289 sādhanas were talked about. A student asked I understand all things very
clearly. I will come along with all of them. But when someone asks “are you liberated?”, I
am not able to accept. How come I am unable to claim liberation? For that, Vidyāraṇya
says even after understanding Vedānta, you continue to judge yourself from the
standpoint of your mind. Vedānta says I am not the mind. You continue to judge myself
from the standpoint of the mind and as long as you judge yourself from the mind, you
cannot claim total liberation as mind cannot be perfectly free from disturbances being as it
is with three guṇas. Therefore, meditate upon the fact that I am ever mind-free or free
from mind. When I meditate on the fact I am free from mind, I am fully free and liberated

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 762

all the time. Claim your permanent freedom from distancing yourself from the mind.
Having claimed nitya muktatva you can have the hobby of improving the mind for the
benefit of the surroundings and your own mind. It can be an objective project without
connecting it to your liberation. Let the body-mind-complex be treated as Īśvara’s
property and keep it fit but never connect your liberation to the conditions of the mind. I
am free not because of the mind, but I am free in spite of the mind’s condition. Having
claimed this freedom, for the sake of improving the mind you can use three sādhanas:
vairāgya, bodha and uparama. I need not improve but for improvement of the mind, I use
these three. Bodha is most important of the three. Until videha-mukti, the mind is there. I
am asaṅga. With this objectivity, you approach the mind. If mind has attachments, learn to
handle that with vairāgya. If the mind is overactive, then also it will create problems and
then learn to relax. They are the methods of improving the mithyā mind objectively.
Remind yourself “I am free whatever the progress of the mind is”. I was, I am and I will
ever be free. This covered nididhyāsana-vairāgya-bodha-uparama-viveka. Having talked
about the sādhanas for objective improvement of the mind and subjective claiming I am
free, I should say I am ever liberated. Thus, Vidyāraṇya concludes the chapter and
whoever follows this teaching will enjoy freedom.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 763

Chapter VII: Tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa

तृप्तिदीपोनाम-सप्तमः परिच्छेदः ।

Class 164
Having completed the sixth chapter, we will enter the seventh chapter with 298 ślokas.
This chapter is called Tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa. Dīpa means light up or clarification. It clarifies
the following topics. A lamp is called a lamp because it illumines something. This chapter
is called dīpa because it illumines or enlightens the following topic of tṛpti, meaning
contentment or fulfillment. By the word tṛpti, Vidyāraṇya means the pūrṇatva or
jīvanmukti. This jīvanmukti later he defines both in a positive and negative way. It is
freedom from all types of pains sarva-duḥkha-nivṛtti. This absence of deficiency is one
definition of tṛpti. The second definition is pūrṇa-ānanda-prāpti. It is the presence of
fullness. Duḥkha-nivṛtti and sukha-prāpti is here called tṛpti or jīvanmukti. Therefore, the
seventh chapter deals with jīvanmukti in the form of duḥkha-nivṛtti and sukha-prāpti
called tṛpti. He deals with the topic by borrowing a mantra from Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad. This mantra brings out the idea very clearly. He introduces the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra in the beginning and says: through this mantra, I will talk about
jīvanmukti. Therefore, the first śloka of this chapter is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra.
With this background, we will enter into the text.

śloka 1
आत्मानं चेद्विजानीयादयमस्मीति पूरुषः ।
किमिच्छन्कस्य कामाय शरीरमनुसंज्वरेत्॥ ७.१ ॥
ātmānaṃ cedvijānīyādayamasmīti pūruṣaḥ.
kimicchankasya kāmāya śarīramanusaṃjvaret (7.1).
The first two ślokas are introductory ślokas where Vidyāraṇya introduces the mantra. The
whole śloka is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra 4.4.12. The meaning of the mantra is this.
I will give the meaning briefly. Every human being should know his Ātmā, the real nature.
Puruṣa here means human being. Vijānīyāt means everyone should know ātmānam, the
Ātmā one’s own real nature. The meaning of Ātmā is neither Viśva, taijasa or prājña but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 764

here it refers to turīya Ātmā. One should know the original consciousness which is called
kūṭastha caitanya or ādhāra-caitanya in the previous chapter. How one should know the
Ātmā? The Upaniṣad wants to make it clear that you should not know it as an object but as
the I, myself. Ayam asmi is in quotation in this śloka. The word ayam refers to turīya
Ātmā. Asmi means am. Ayam aham asmi means turīya caitanya Ātmā I am. This means
he should negate the idea I am Viśva, taijasa or prājña. This is aparokṣa Ātmā-jñāna.
This aparokṣa Ātmā-jñāna is talked about in the first line. The second line talks about the
jñāna-phala. The Upaniṣad wants to say that the jñānī will get total tṛpti or total fulfillment
or contentment. To put it in another language it means total freedom from desires. It is
freedom from all wants. Sarva-kāma-nivṛtti. To negate all the desires or kāmas the
Upaniṣad uses a different method and that method is the Upaniṣad says any desire is
possible only when there is an object of desire and subject of desire. Every desire
presupposes a desiring subject and desired object. Desiring subject is apūrṇa ahaṅkāra.
Desired object is the world, the bhogya prapañca. Only when bhoktā ahaṅkāra and
bhogya prapañca, the desiring ahaṅkāra and the desired world are there, desire can be
there. If shops are there but people are not there, desire is not possible. If people are there
but shops are not there, then also desire is not possible. Desire needs bhoktā and bhogya.
After jñāna, bhoktā is gone and bhogya prapañca is gone; then where is the desire! What
object of desire is there after jñāna? Because after jñāna, everything is negated. It is
bhogya-prapañca-niṣedha. The Upaniṣad negates the desiring ahaṅkāra also by asking the
question for what you desire? A desiring ahaṅkāra is needed for whose happiness, desire
can be entertained and Upaniṣad says where is the bhoktā Jīva! Bhoktā Jīva is also
negated. Desired object is not and desiring subject is not and when both are not there,
where are the desires? By implication, the mantra says that after jñāna there are no desires.
Because bhoktā and bhogya are not there, how can there be desires? Thus all kāmas are
gone which is called tṛpti.
Naturally, what happens is this. How can jñānī suffer or struggle in the world along with
the body? The mantra asks why should that jñānī struggle with the body? What does that
mean? All the struggles are only to fulfill the desires. It is the desire in a human being that
forces one to run after things. Therefore, the mantra says that every struggle is backed up
by kāma, desire. Therefore, when kāma ends the activities also come to an end. The person
is relaxed. The feverish activity to gain things ends and this is called tṛpti. I have given the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 765

example of puri that when it is put in oil, until it gets pūrṇa, it runs in the oil and once it
becomes pūrṇa, it remains stable. Puri is shortened form of pūrṇatva. Therefore, he is
Jīvanmukta and first line talks of jñāna and the second line talks of jñāna-phala. This one
mantra is analysed in 297 ślokas.

śloka 02
अस्याः श्रुतेरभिप्रायः सम्यगत्र विचार्यते ।
जीवन्मुक्तस्य या तृप्तिः सा तेन विशदायते ॥ ७.२ ॥
intended
of this statement The Sruti in correct manner here is enquired
asyāḥ śruterabhiprāyaḥ samyagatra vicāryate.
meaning
that which contentment
of a Jivan Mukta
jīvanmuktasya yā tṛptiḥ sā tena viśadāyate (7.2).
that tripti by this chapter will be made clear
In this seventh chapter of Pañcadaśī I will analyse the teaching of this mantra quoted
above 4.4.12 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. I will discuss without leaving anything said in
this mantra. By analysis, the contentment of a jñānī Jīvanmukta will become very clear by
this analysis. Therefore, seventh chapter is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra-vicāra.
Hereafter, he will enter into the enquiry. This will involve:
1. upakrama–upasamhara-ekatā, oneness of the postulate and the conclusion;
2. abhyāsa – emphasis of the topic in different words, in and through the text;
3. apūrvatā – uniqueness of the subject that it can be authoritatively determined
through Upaniṣadic sudy only. Vedānta is the final authority of this knowledge.
4. phala – the purpose of the subject presented in the text;
5. arthavada – the words of praise in favour of the Absolute and words of censure in
favour of the relative;
6. upapatti – essential identity between the relative and the Absolute through logical
illustrations and examples.
To explain the meaning of the word Puruṣa in this statement, the teacher first introduces
the concept of the associated factors like ‘Māyā’, ‘Jīva’ and Īśvara used in Vedānta.

śloka 03
मायाभासेन जीवेशौ करोतीति श्रुतत्वतः ।
कल्पितावेव जीवेशौ ताभ्यां सर्वं प्रकल्पितम्॥ ७.३ ॥
māyābhāsena jīveśau karotīti śrutatvataḥ.
kalpitāveva jīveśau tābhyāṃ sarvaṃ prakalpitam (7.3).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 766

First, Vidyāraṇya comments upon the mantra briefly as the first level of study. This will go
up to 28. It is a textual commentary of this mantra. By way of commenting upon this
mantra, Vidyāraṇya will talk about the entire range of spiritual sādhana. What the entire
stages one should go through to get aparokṣa jñāna and get sukha-prāpti. He divides the
sādhana into seven stages. Then from the 29th śloka, he will elaborately discuss what the
seven stages are. The whole dīpa-prakaraṇa will deal with seven stages of spiritual
sādhana culminating in total fulfillment. First, we enter the initial level of textual
commentary. In the text, first he wants to take up Puruṣa occurring in the mantra. Puruṣa
means Jīva. Naturally, the question will come how the Jīva comes into being? Therefore,
he talks about creation briefly to introduce the vyāvahārika Jīva and vyāvahārika Īśvara.
How are they formed? Both Jīva and Īśvara are pratibimbita caitanya only and it means
the reflected consciousness. How the reflections come into being is from the original
consciousness; the original consciousness alone comes down at vyāvahārika level, the
original consciousness is pāramārthika and that alone takes the avatāra at vyāvahārika
level as Jīva, the micro reflection and Īśvara, the macro reflection. You should not raise
your eyebrows because we talked about micro and macro reflection in the last chapter.
There is one kūṭastha caitanya which gets reflected in micro prapañca-traya and micro Jīva
traya. Then the question is how do we get reflecting medium that is responsible for
providing the reflecting consciousness? That is our Māyā. Therefore, Māyā provides two
reflection media and by providing the two reflecting media, Māyā is responsible for the
appearance of Jīva and Īśvara. It is with the help of Māyā that Īśvara and Jīva exist
empirically or in vyavahāra. Māyā makes Jīva and Īśvara appear in the form of the
reflected consciousness by providing individual reflecting medium and samaṣṭi reflecting
medium, vyaṣṭi ābhāsa and samaṣṭi ābhāsa. If Māyā were not there, neither Jīva reflection
nor Īśvara reflection would have been there and only the original consciousness would
have been there, which is neither Jīva nor Īśvara but brahma caitanya. How do you know
all these things? This has been mentioned in the Śruti. Upaniṣad teaches us this lesson.
Then the question is which Upaniṣad teaches this? It is given in Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya
Upaniṣad mantra 9. This Upaniṣad mantra we have already studied before. I will not give
the details. Refer to 6th chapter citra-dīpa-prakaraṇa śloka number 133. śloka itself talks
about the same idea. Māyā creates Jīva and Īśvara by providing reflecting medium. When
we use the phrase “Māyā creates them”, it should not be misunderstood that Īśvara is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 767

created in time. Since Māyā is anādi, Māyā-created Jīva and Īśvara both are anādi. Māyā,
Jīva and Īśvara are anādi. When we use the word creation, it means that Māyā creates the
reflecting medium to bring about Jīva and Īśvara. Therefore, Jīva-Īśvara-kalpitau. It means
that both Jīva and Īśvara belong to vyāvahārika plane. They are vyāvahārika satya or
mithyā only. Both of them being pratibimbita caitanya, both are mithyā. The rest of the
creation consisting of the lokas, śarīra, etc. Jīva and Īśvara will create the rest. Māyā creates
Jīva and Īśvara; Jīva and Īśvara create the rest. Ākāśa, vāyu, etc are included in Jīva’ s and
Īśvara’s creations. That is pañca-bhūtas, fourteen worlds are created by Jīva and Īśvara. It
is a cooperative endeavour.
Jīva alone cannot create the world because he does not have the capacity to create. Īśvara
also cannot create the world without Jīva’s contribution. The karma of Jīva is a very
important factor since Īśvara to decide svarga-naraka-sṛṣṭi. Īśvara creates naraka because
jīvas have done pāpas to suffer pains. Īśvara is sāmānya kāraṇa while Jīva is called viśeṣa
kāraṇa. Sāmānya-viśeṣa-kāraṇābhyām, Jīva-Īśvarābhyām sarvam prakalpitam, by them all
these things are created. Then what is the contribution of whom? For this world, who
contributed what? Vidyāraṇya says I will tell you this.

śloka 04
ईक्षणादिप्रवेशान्ता सृष्टिरीशेन कल्पिता ।
जाग्रदादिविमोक्षान्तः संसारो जीवकल्पितः ॥ ७.४ ॥
īkṣaṇādipraveśāntā sṛṣṭirīśena kalpitā.
jāgradādivimokṣāntaḥ saṃsāro jīvakalpitaḥ (7.4).
This idea also Vidyāraṇya has already talked about. This śloka has appeared in chapter 6
śloka 213. Īśvara is responsible for Īśvara-sṛṣṭi and Jīva is responsible for Jīva-sṛṣṭi. Īśvara
creates the objective universe and we create sorrow out of that by developing attachment.
Īśvara-sṛṣṭi begins with the visualization of the creation. This visualization is called īkṣaṇa.
With the mental eye, Īśvara visualizes. Māyā is the mind of Īśvara. Visualization is called
Māyā-vṛtti. It is Īśvara-saṅkalpa visualization.
Which Jīva requires manuṣya-śarīra which one needs paśu-śarīra, etc., is decided by
Īśvara. Beginning with īkṣaṇa, the creation starts. Pañca-bhūtas are created, then śarīras
are created. After the creation of sūkṣma-śarīra the Consciousness forms the reflections in
the sūkṣma-śarīra which is called Jīva and this formation of reflection in the sūkṣma-śarīra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 768

is called anupraveśa. Until then, only the total reflection was there and the individual
reflection was not formed. Once anupraveśa takes place, Jīva comes to manifestation from
kāraṇa-śarīra.
Once jīvas manifest, Īśvara goes to ananta-śayana to go to sleep. Then Īśvara’s job is over.
The rest Jīva will take care. Beginning with visualization up to entry into sūkṣma-śarīra,
pratibimbita-caitanya- vyaṣṭi-caitanya-rūpeṇa, in the form of micro reflection is done by
Īśvara. Jīva cannot do that as Jīva has not yet come and he does not have the capacity.
Once Jīva has manifest, according to karma, Jīva will go through three avasthās. How long
you will live, be awake or dream and be in suṣupti is decided by prārabdha. The avasthās
are Jīva-sṛṣṭi. Details in the next class.

Class 165
śloka 04 contd.
In the first two śloka, Vidyāraṇya introduced the subject matter which is tṛpti or
jīvanmukti which can be attained through Ātmā-jñāna. Ātmā-jñāna-janya jīvanmukti is the
subject matter. Having introduced the subject matter, he comments upon the mantra
focusing upon the first line of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra 4.4.12. If you look into
the first line, we find the word Puruṣa which means Jīva. He has taken up the word for
explanation. For this purpose, he talks of creation because Jīva is born out of creation. He
introduced Īśvara and Jīva macro Māyā and micro avidyā the two reflecting media are
there and Brahman is also there. When all three are there, how can we conclude Advaita?
Remember that out of the three, Brahman alone is pāramārthika-satya while Māyā and
avidyā are vyāvahārika satya or mithyā and therefore, they cannot be counted with
Brahman. Pāramārthika gets reflected in avidyā and once the reflection is formed, the
reflection also comes under vyāvahārika satya only. Avidyā-pratibimbita-satya is one,
Māyā-pratibimbita-satya is another; first one is Jīva and the second one is Īśvara. Entire
sṛṣṭi is a cooperative endeavour undertaken by Jīva and Īśvara. Īśvara is sāmānya kāraṇa
and Jīva is called viśeṣa kāraṇa. Īśvara provides skill, knowledge and material while Jīva
provides the blue print through his karma. Jīva through his karma decides how many
lokas must be there, how many to be up and how many down, etc. They are not decided

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 769

by Īśvara but decided through puṇya-pāpa karma. Then Īśvara and Jīva play two
different roles in this process.
Beginning with visualization upto entry into sūkṣma-śarīra, it is the job of Īśvara. Bhūta-
sṛṣṭi, etc., is done by Īśvara and once the individual reflected consciousness is formed, Jīva
becomes active. Before that Jīva was in kāraṇa-śarīra-form and then only sūkṣma-śarīra-
pratibimbita-śarīra is formed by praveśa of Īśvara. It is called anupraveśa. Once Jīva has
come into being, then the rest of the job Jīva takes care of and it is Jīva who goes through
three avasthās.
When the sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-śarīra are fully active it is jāgrat-avasthā and when it is
partially active it is svapna-avasthā and when sūkṣma-śarīra is fully dormant it is suṣupti-
avasthā. The conditions of the sūkṣma-śarīra, etc, take the Jīva goes through jāgrat, svapna
and suṣupti. Therefore, jāgrat, waking, etc, refers to avasthā-traya of the Jīva up to
liberation as discussed. Liberation relates to Jīva only and Īśvara does not require
liberation for he is not bonded to be liberated.
Freedom from problem refers to mokṣa and from jāgrat-avasthā to videha-mukti; both
belongs to Jīva. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 05
भ्रमाधिष्ठानभूतात्मा कू टस्थासङ्गचिद्वपुः ।
अन्योन्याध्यासतोऽसङ्गधीस्थजीवोऽत्र पूरुषः ॥ ७.५ ॥
bhrama-adhiṣṭhāna-bhūtātmā kūṭastha-asaṅga-cit-vapuḥ
bhramādhiṣṭhānabhūtātmā kūṭasthāsaṅgacidvapuḥ.
anyonya-adhyāsataḥ asaṅga- dhīstha-jīvaḥ atra pūruṣaḥ (5)
anyonyādhyāsato:'saṅgadhīsthajīvo:'tra pūruṣaḥ (7.5).
Now he comes to the word Puruṣa occurring in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka mantra 4.4.12. Puruṣa
here refers to Jīva only. Who is that Jīva? That is buddhi-pratibimbita caitanya Jīva, it is the
reflected consciousness located in the mind. The reflection formed in the mind is Jīva. The
mind has no real relationship with the original consciousness that is asaṅga. The mind is
vyāvahārika satya and the original consciousness is pāramārthika-satya and therefore,
they cannot have a real relationship and therefore, the word asaṅga is used. Because of
mutual transference of attributes between the original consciousness and the mind as they
are in proximity, the original consciousness is seemingly transferred to the mind and the
mind gets the consciousness or reflection. The location of the mind which does not belong
to Ātmā, that location or limitation is transferred to Ātmā and Ātmā seems to be located.
The limitation of the mind is transferred to Ātmā. Ātmā appears limited and the mind

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 770

appears sentient. This is called mutual transference of attributes. So the original

consciousness is transferred to the mind as the reflected consciousness and the reflected
consciousness in the mind is called Jīva and this Jīva is called Puruṣa in Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad.
What is the nature of the original consciousness? This is described in the first line.
Bhramādhiṣṭhānabhūtātmā means it is the adhiṣṭhāna or the substratum, which is
pāramārthika-satya, to the mithyā mind, vyāvahārika satya mind. In this line the word
bhrama is vyāvahārika satya, is equal to mithyā is equal to the mind the reflecting
medium. For reflecting medium, the original consciousness is the adhiṣṭhāna which is
called Ātmā, which is the real I. The problem is that we don’t know the real I. The real I is
not the mind and not the cidābhāsa. I is of the nature of the original consciousness and
that the original consciousness is kūṭastha changeless unlike cidābhāsa.

śloka 06
साधिष्ठानो विमोक्षादौ जीवोऽधिक्रियते न तु ।
के वलो निरधिष्ठानविभ्रान्तेः क्वाप्यसिद्धितः ॥ ७.६ ॥
sādhiṣṭhāno vimokṣādau jīvo:'dhikriyate na tu.
kevalo niradhiṣṭhānavibhrānteḥ kvāpyasiddhitaḥ (7.6).
Cidābhāsa is subject to change; when the mind is disturbed, cidābhāsa is also disturbed.
Not only that, when the reflecting medium travels from one body to another, cidābhāsa
also travels and it cannot be kūṭastha; the original consciousness alone is kūṭastha. This
original consciousness alone which is pāramārthika takes avatāra in the mind. Avatāra
means the reflected consciousness. The reflected consciousness is avatāra of the original
consciousness and avatāra is vyāvahārika satya, mithyā. Cidābhāsa is both identical from
one point and it is different also. We can claim both. When they garland the statue of a
leader, the statue is visualized as that person. It is identical from one angle and on the
other it is not so. The original consciousness and the reflected consciousness has bheda-
abheda-sambandha. Kṛṣṇa also said that I only revealed Veda in the beginning of sṛṣṭi.
Kṛṣṇa clarified I am avatāra; avatāra Viśṇu and original Viśṇu are different and are
identical also as original Viśṇu alone takes the avatāra of Rāma and Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, the
original consciousness alone having taken avatāra as the reflected consciousness is called
Jīva. The original consciousness alone appears as the reflected consciousness and that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 771

reflected consciousness is called Jīva. He has said that the Puruṣa is cidābhāsa, the
reflected consciousness obtaining in the mind.
Now, the question comes up: when you refer to the reflected consciousness, adhiṣṭhāna
the original consciousness is also there. Therefore, when you use the word Jīva, do you
include the original consciousness or not? When you refer to Jīva are you including the
original consciousness in the word Jīva or not or do you refer to the reflected
consciousness only? For that, Vidyāraṇya says let it be very clear even though we give
different name to the reflected consciousness and different name to the original
consciousness you should know both of them are always together. For the sake of
understanding, the name reflected consciousness as Jīva and the original consciousness as
kūṭastha, Ātmā, śākṣī, etc., are names given for communication. You should know the
reflected consciousness and the original consciousness are inseparable. One reason is that
the original consciousness is all-pervading and therefore, wherever the reflected
consciousness is, there the original consciousness must be there. If you have a mirror, you
have reflected sunlight and also there you will find the original sunlight side by side.
Where there is a mirror, you will see original and reflected sunlight. Remove the mirror
the reflected sunlight will go but the original sunlight will be there. Yatra yatra reflected
consciousness tatra tatra original consciousness. The word Jīva includes kūṭastha also.
That is why the teacher is able to say jīvo brahmaiva nāparaḥ. Therefore, a very important
point which can avoid the confusion is that Jīva includes kūṭastha. Kūṭastha is there with
Jīva in all the three avasthās. There is a second reason that cidābhāsa is mithyā, ābhāsa-
caitanya is mithyā and mithyā cannot exist without satya kūṭastha. The very is-ness of
cidābhāsa is borrowed from kūṭastha. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says the word Puruṣa of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad refers to Jīva along with kūṭastha. Jīva is a candidate for the
pursuit of mokṣa. The Jīva is a candidate for śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana, candidate for
karma, upāsana and eligible for mokṣa not independently but along with the adhiṣṭhāna,
the original consciousness, kūṭastha caitanya.
When Jīva says I am doing śravaṇa it means neither pure cidābhāsa nor can I refer to
kūṭastha because it cannot do śravaṇa, etc., pure cidābhāsa does not exist. It being
kūṭastha-sahita, Jīva is a mixture of both. Hereafter, whenever we use the word Jīva, we
should add kūṭastha in Jīva. It is so because mithyā cannot exist without the back up of
satya. Ābhāsa-caitanya cannot exist without ādhāra-caitanya; the reflected consciousness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 772

cannot exist without the original consciousness; hereafter, Jīva means it includes kūṭastha.
Without its adhiṣṭhāna or the original consciousness, the reflected consciousness cannot
survive. The reflected consciousness without the original consciousness is never possible.
Cidābhāsa Jīva cannot exist without kūṭastha adhiṣṭhāna and hence both go together.
Cidābhāsa cannot exist without kūṭastha at any time, even at the time of jīvanmukti. When
someone asks whether Jīva is satya or mithyā, we should always note cidābhāsa part is
mithyā whereas cit part which is very much underneath cidābhāsa is satya.
So also in the case of Īśvara, cidābhāsa part of Īśvara is mithyā or vyāvahārika only and
beneath Īśvara, adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya is there and that original consciousness part is satya.
Cidābhāsa-aṃśa is mithyā and cit-aṃśa is satya. It is true with regard to Jīva as also
Īśvara. At any time and at any place, there is no pure cidābhāsa Jīva or pure cidābhāsa
Īśvara. Jīva is a candidate along with kūṭastha.

śloka 07
अधिष्ठानांशसंयुक्तं भ्रमांशमवलम्बते ।
यदा तदाहं संसारीत्येवं जीवोऽतिमन्यते ॥ ७.७ ॥
adhiṣṭhānāṃśasaṃyuktaṃ bhramāṃśamavalambate.
yadā tadāhaṃ saṃsārītyevaṃ jīvo:'timanyate (7.7).
Therefore, whenever I use the word I, it is a mixure of Jīva and kūṭastha together. Aham-
śabdārtha is miśra-caitanya-rūpa. Miśra means mixture of ābhāsa-caitanya and ādhāra-
caitanya or the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness. Even though we
are miśras, until we study the śāstra we do not know the truth. We focus our attention
upon the Jīva part because Jīva part is more evident than the kūṭastha part. Always when
you watch the TV, is the screen evident or the character evident? Satya screen is not seen
but the mithyā characters are seen. When my attention is focused on the reflected
consciousness part I claim I am a saṃsārī. Jīva focuses on cidābhāsa part, the mithyā
cidābhāsa part, which is very much along with the adhiṣṭhāna or the original
consciousness. Even though it is along with satya part, the Jīva focuses on the mithyā part.
Instead of saying ahaṃ brahma asmi, the fellow says aham saṃsārī asmi. He has
identification with father, mother, etc. Jīvaḥ aham saṃśārī he claims. Even when he claims
I am saṃśārī, kūṭastha part is also there but he disowns his claim and it is called ajñāna-
avasthā. Due to some puṇya, he comes to a Guru and tries to disidentify with śarīra.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 773

śloka 08
भ्रमांशस्य तिरस्कारादधिष्ठानप्रधानता ।
यदा तदा चिदात्माहमसङ्गोऽस्मीति बुद्ध्यते ॥ ७.८ ॥
bhramāṃśasya tiraskārādadhiṣṭhānapradhānatā.
yadā tadā cidātmāhamasaṅgo:'smīti buddhyate (7.8).
In the Vedānta class, the teacher turns the attention of the student to the adhiṣṭhāna-aṃśa
of the same I as the I is the mixture of both. Once both kūṭastha and cidābhāsa are
introduced, the teacher asks the question which really deserves attention and teacher says
cidābhāsa does not deserve over-attention being mithyā. What is satya is important
because it is satya. Some day the student when he uses the word aham he know it is the
mixture and his attention will be focused on kūṭastha-aṃśa. The attention on cidābhāsa-
aṃśa is withdrawn which is called tiraskārāt the overlooking and not counting
bhramāṃśa meaning cidābhāsa part of aham. Cidābhāsa is falsified and sublated. The
kūṭastha aṃśa is given importance. Aṣṭavakra advices to start the day with kūṭastha-
pradhāna I and not to start it with cidābhāsa I. The moment cidābhāsa comes up it is
related to the mind and the mind has a link to the body and body to the children, etc.
Never start with ābhāsa-pradhāna aham but start with adhiṣṭhāna-pradhāna aham.
Then one will say aham asaṅgaḥ Ātmā asmi. He will not claim I am father, I am son and
instead of claiming relationship, he will claim I am asaṅga and I am the original
consciousness. He says that he knows I am the asaṅga Ātmā. Whether I am free or bound
depends upon which part of aham I want to claim. Do you want to claim ābhāsa aṃśa or
ādhāra aṃśa? Intelligent people will claim ādhāra aṃśa and ignorant people will claim the
ābhāsa aṃśa and suffer. More in the next class.

Class 166
śloka 08 contd.
Vidyāraṇya introduced the subject matter which is the analysis of jīvanmukti as presented
in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.12. The mantra was introduced as the first śloka. From
śloka 3 to 28 Vidyāraṇya gives the general meaning. There the mantra says Puruṣa should
know the Ātmā. In that sentence, he pointed out that the meaning of that word is Jīva. Jīva

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 774

should know the Ātmā. Then he defined Jīva as cidābhāsa, the reflected consciousness in
the buddhi, because that alone is the pramātā, the knower. Then he pointed out even
though we define jīva as cidābhāsa, we should always remember that cidābhāsa cannot
exist alone because a mithyā reflection cannot exist independently. Just as the reflected
face presupposes the original face, the reflected consciousness also presupposes the
original consciousness. Secondly, a false snake cannot exist independent of the real rope as
its adhiṣṭhāna. Similarly, the false cidābhāsa cannot exist independent of cit. Therefore, the
reflected consciousness always includes the original consciousness. Whenever I say Jīva
even though I define Jīva you should translate as cit-sahita-cidābhāsa. The reflected
consciousness means the original consciousness along with the reflected consciousness.
Therefore, always the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness exist as a
mixture. There is no possibility of it existing alone; wherever the reflected consciousness is
there, the original consciousness has to be there because it is all-pervading and adhiṣṭhāna.
Wherever the original consciousness is there the reflected consciousness may be there or
may not be there.
But as long as living beings are there, there the original consciousness will be associated
with the reflected consciousness. Pure reflected consciousness is not there and pure
original consciousness is not there in any living being, but only the mixture is there.
Whenever I use aham it is the original consciousness sahita the reflected consciousness or
the reflected consciousness sahita the original consciousness. Whenever I give the
description of myself, it can be either about the reflected consciousness part of me or it can
refer to the original consciousness part of me. Therefore, the reflected consciousness aṃśa
or the original consciousness aṃśa, either, I can talk about.
In the case of a lay person, he does not know I am a mixture of the reflected consciousness
and the original consciousness and therefore, he will refer to the reflected consciousness
part without knowing the original consciousness being there. That is why he says I am a
limited Jīva and I have several births and after this janma, I will travel, etc. He talks of the
reflected consciousness aṃśa without knowing the original consciousness aṃśa.
Therefore, the ignorant person is the reflected consciousness pradhāna aham. Bhramāṃśa
means the reflected consciousness aṃśa.
But here, he refers to a jñānī who has understood the two aṃśas and who knows that one
is mithyā, one is satya and who deliberately knows the reflected consciousness part and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 775

ignores or discounts it and he refers to the original consciousness aṃśa only. However,
remember when he does the tiraskāra of the reflected consciousness and refers to the
original consciousness aṃśa, for referring he has to refer to the reflected consciousness.
Even though I ignore the reflected consciousness, I have to use the reflected consciousness
to say that I am the original consciousness. Ignoring the reflected consciousness, I use it,
but refer to the original consciousness part. This is bhāgatyāga-lakṣaṇā. When I forget the
reflected consciousness part and refer to the original consciousness, I will never say I have
birth cycle, etc. And I will not expect śrāddhā and tarpaṇa from children. I don’t have any
one of them. Refer to Vaitathya prakaraṇa 32. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says in the wake of
knowledge, Jīva knows ahaṃ brahma asmi. In this statement what is pradhāna is
adhiṣṭhāna brahman for the wise person. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 09
नासङ्गेऽहंकृ तिर्युक्ता कथमस्मीति चेच्छृणु ।
एको मुख्यो द्वावमुख्यावित्यर्थस्त्रिविधोऽहमः ॥ ७.९ ॥
nāsaṅge:'haṃkṛtiryuktā kathamasmīti cecchṛṇu.
eko mukhyo dvāvamukhyāvityarthastrividho:'hamaḥ (7.9).
An important question is asked by a Pūrvapakṣa. This rises in every student some time or
the other. Who says ahaṃ brahma asmi? Does the cidābhāsa say ahaṃ brahma asmi or
does the kūṭastha say ahaṃ brahma asmi? Either way there is a problem. Cidābhāsa alone
is pramātā the knower and therefore, cidābhāsa alone must know aham but cidābhāsa the
knower can never say ahaṃ brahma asmi because cidābhāsa is never Brahman. Brahman
means infinite. Cidābhāsa the knower can know many things and claim many things but
cidābhāsa cannot say I am all-pervading Brahman as cidābhāsa is as big as the reflecting
medium and reflection cannot extend beyond the medium. My cidābhāsa cannot go
beyond my skin. Suppose my cidābhāsa pervades your body, your problem will affect me.
My cidābhāsa does not experience your mosquito-bite. We saw in Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad that cidābhāsa does not even pervade the nail and the hair. If cidābhāsa
pervades the hair in barber shop you will hear screams. There is no pain while cutting the
hair. In the hair, cidābhāsa is not there. Cidābhāsa is not all-pervading and therefore,
cidābhāsa cannot claim I am all-pervading Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 776

Can cit claim I am Brahman?. Even though cit is Brahman cit is not a pramātā or a vakta ;
cit is not a thinker, knower and talker and cannot say anything including ahaṃ brahma
asmi. Cit need not know ahaṃ brahma asmi because cit does not have saṃsāra problem to
say ahaṃ brahma asmi to know. Cit cannot say anything and cidābhāsa can say many
things. Tell me now who says ahaṃ brahma asmi? The mixture of cidābhāsa and cit alone
can say ahaṃ brahma asmi. Because there is always the mixture. Pure cidābhāsa is not and
pure cit is not and every individual is cit and cidābhāsa. In jāgrat-avasthā cidābhāsa is
there and in svapna cidābhāsa is there and in suṣupti the kāraṇa-śarīra is there. There is no
avasthā in which pure cit exists. Mixture alone can claim ahaṃ brahma asmi. How can the
mixture claim ahaṃ brahma asmi? In the mixture one part is Brahman and the other part
is not Brahman. How can the mixture claim ahaṃ brahma asmi? This question should not
come in the rest of your life and rest of your jīvanmukti life. He says the one who says I is
a mixture and when mixture uses the word aham the word aham can have three different
meanings according to the context. The first meaning is the mixture itself. The second
meaning is you refer to the cidābhāsa part of the mixture by bhāgatyāga-lakṣaṇā the cit
part is kept aside and cidābhāsa is referred to. This is the lakṣyārtha secondary meaning.
The third meaning is aham refers to cit part of the mixture and this is also bhāgatyāga-
lakṣaṇā where cidābhāsa part is set aside. The second and third meanings are secondary
meanings and both are arrived at by bhāgatyāga-lakṣaṇā. In the first meaning, the mixture
is meant. So totally, three meanings are possible for the word aham uttered by the mixture.
The word aham cannot refer to the asaṅga kūṭastha adhiṣṭhāna caitanya. It is not logical
because the statement is made by cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa has the capacity to say I and
therefore, when cidābhāsa says I, it can refer to cidābhāsa only; how can it refer to
kūṭastha? With regard to the original consciousness usage of I is illogical. How can a
person say kūṭastha aham asmi? If such a question is asked I will give you the answer. He
says for the word I or aham, three meanings are possible. One is the primary meaning
called mukhyārtha and two secondary meanings are called bhāgatyāga-lakṣyārtha.
According to the context, you should find out the meaning is secondary or primary.

śloka 10
अन्योन्याध्यासरूपेण कू टस्थाभासयोर्वपुः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 777

एकीभूय भवेन्मुख्यस्तत्र मूढैः प्रपूज्यते ॥ ७.१० ॥

anyonyādhyāsarūpeṇa kūṭasthābhāsayorvapuḥ.
ekībhūya bhavenmukhyastatra mūḍhaiḥ prapūjyate (7.10).
First, he defines the primary meaning of the word aham. The primary meaning refers to
the mixture only. The nature of kūṭastha, the original consciousness, and the nature of
ābhāsa, the reflected consciousness, are the mixed together by the mutual transference of
attributes. They are combining together and it is treated as though it is one entity exactly
like an ignorant person saying this is a snake in the case of a rope. When he refers to the
rope-snake is snake, the real rope and false snake are there. The wise man knows both but
the ignorant is not aware of satya and mithyā. The question what he refers to does not
arise. He does not know there are two things. This mixture is referred to by the confused
people even though satya and mithyā cannot be mixed up because he is a mūḍha or
ignorant. Unknowingly, the reality of cit is transferred to cidābhāsa and he treats
cidābhāsa as though satya. The limitation of cidābhāsa is transferred to cit and reality is
transferred to cidābhāsa and sees one finite real Consciousness. What is finite is not real
and what is real is not finite because of mixing up of the original consciousness and the
reflected consciousness. This miśra caitanya is mukhyārtha of the word aham referred to
only by the ignorant people.

śloka 11
पृथगाभासकू टस्थावमुख्यौ तत्र तत्त्ववित्।
पर्यायेण प्रयुङ्क्तेऽहंशब्दं लोके च वैदिके ॥ ७.११ ॥
pṛthagābhāsakūṭasthāvamukhyau tatra tattvavit.
paryāyeṇa prayuṅkte:'haṃśabdaṃ loke ca vaidike (7.11).
The two secondary meanings of the word aham are used only by the wise persons.
Because the wise persons cannot mix up the two and the very wisdom is viveka of cit and
cidābhāsa, which is the most important part of the Ātma-anātma-viveka. After gaining
knowledge, at anytime he uses the word aham he is aware that aham can refer to either
cidābhāsa part of me or the cit part of me. It is so because he has done śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana and separated cit and cidābhāsa. It is impossible for him to use aham as a
mixture. He will either refer to cidābhāsa part or cit part. When he will refer to cidābhāsa
part and when will he refer to cit part? Vidyāraṇya says in laukika vyavahāra, in all

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 778

worldly transactions, he will use cidābhāsa aham. He will say I am so and so and disciple
of so and so. Cidābhāsa alone can have appearance and disappearance, etc. But in śāstrīya
vyavahāra, when he teaches Tat tvam asi, he knows I am ahaṃ brahma asmi. Wise
persons employ the secondary meaning. The cidābhāsa alone is one secondary meaning
and kūṭastha the kevala kūṭastha is another secondary meaning.
When jñānī separates cit from cidābhāsa, the separation is not done physically. Cit and
cidābhāsa cannot be physically separated. He has done it intellectually. It is an intellectual
process. I have separated cidābhāsa and cit in my knowledge. This separate cidābhāsa and
cit are the two secondary meanings in which the wise person employs the aham śabda. In
the worldly transactions and during śāstric transaction he knows which aham he should
use. Kūṭastha is the word of aham in śāstric transactions. When he says ahaṃ brahma
asmi he will refer to kūṭastha Ātmā. When he says I will merge with Paramātmā in death,
the vyaṣṭi merging into samaṣṭi, vyaṣṭi cidābhāsa will merge into prapañca-traya caitanya
of Īśvara. Videha-mukti is from the point of cidābhāsa and from cit-angle I am ever
Paramātmā. Therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi we can happily dwell in. Only thing is it is not
vācyārtha but it is lakṣyārtha. This, Vidyāraṇya will explain in the next śloka.

śloka 12
लौकिकव्यवहारेऽहं गच्छामीत्यादिके बुधः ।
विविच्यैव चिदाभासं कू टस्थात्तं विवक्षति ॥ ७.१२ ॥
laukikavyavahāre:'haṃ gacchāmītyādike budhaḥ.
vivicyaiva cidābhāsaṃ kūṭasthāttaṃ vivakṣati (7.12).
We can understand budha means wise person. During the worldly transactions aham
gacchāmi, I am going to the Pañcadaśī class, etc, he refers to the cidābhāsa part of the
aham because cidābhāsa part alone can go while the cit part cannot go. He keeps in the
mind the cidābhāsa part which has been intellectually separated from kūṭastha. So he says
kūṭasthāt cidābhāsaṃ vivicya, he separates cidābhāsa. He knows the gacchāmi verb
cannot be applied to kūṭastha part. How can I use the verb kūṭastha? It is applicable to
cidābhāsa part. This separation the ignorant person never does because he is not even
aware that aham is a mixture. He applies aham to the mixture without knowing there are
two. The wise person always refers to the cidābhāsa part. He intends to refer cidābhāsa
and cit that are ever together. But the ignorant refers to kevala cidābhāsa alone. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 779

all the time when jñānī uses the word aham, he refers to cidābhāsa part in the worldly
transactions. The wise person always knows when he transacts with the world he always
refers to cidābhāsa I, whether the listener understands it or not.

śloka 13
असङ्गोऽहं चिदात्माहमिति शास्त्रीयदृष्टितः ।
अहंशब्दं प्रयुङ्क्तेयं कू टस्थे के वले बुधः ॥ ७.१३ ॥
asaṅgo:'haṃ cidātmāhamiti śāstrīyadṛṣṭitaḥ.
ahaṃśabdaṃ prayuṅkteyaṃ kūṭasthe kevale budhaḥ (7.13).
When the wise man uses aham in Vedānta class in śāstric terms, he refers to kūṭastha
caitanya. He knows both cidābhāsa and kūṭastha are there but his intention is to refer to
kūṭastha part for cidābhāsa is never asaṅga. Jñānī’s cidābhāsa is also sasaṅga since it is
connected to the mind. Reflection is to be connected to the reflected. Even jñānī’s body has
a mother and father. When he says I am asaṅga he refers to the kūṭastha part of the
mixture alone, having separated kūṭastha from cidābhāsa and this separation is done
cognitively and intellectually. Suppose any time if cidābhāsa goes away for sometime,
there will be no difference between inert object and jñānī. Inert object is the object with cit
but without cidābhāsa.
Without cidābhāsa one cannot realize ahaṃ brahma asmi. For this realization, he has to be
cetana. Without cidābhāsa, one is acetana. At no time pure cit is possible and pure cit is
only in the form of understanding. This is expressed as ahaṃ brahma asmi, aham cidātma
asmi; this refers to śāstrīya vyavahāra. ślokas 12 and 13 are the commentaries on the śloka
11.

Class 167
śloka 13 contd.
The wise man uses the word I as kevala kūṭastha the original consciousness when teaching
in the śāstric context or when he meditates in the morning. He then forgets the miserable
reflected consciousness and claims the original consciousness at the start of the day. Now,
a Pūrvapakṣa comes and raises a question.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 780

śloka 14
ज्ञानिताज्ञानिते त्वात्माभासस्यैव न चात्मनः ।
तथा च कथमाभासः कू टस्थोऽस्मीति बुद्ध्यताम्॥ ७.१४ ॥
jñānitājñānite tvātmābhāsasyaiva na cātmanaḥ.
tathā ca kathamābhāsaḥ kūṭastho:'smīti buddhyatām (7.14).
Further is a hairsplitting argument. The Pūrvapakṣa says the Upaniṣad tells in the mantra
Jīva should know Ātmā. The instruction given is to know the Ātmā. It refers to the
knower-principle Jīva. In this context we have to take the appropriate meaning for the
word Jīva. Pūrvapakṣa asks the question what is the meaning intended in the śāstra?
When the Śruti instructs to know, is it the commandment intended to the reflected
consciousness the secondary meaning one? The original consciousness part also cannot
know or the mixture also cannot know. Therefore, it is addressed to the reflected
consciousness part which alone can know. So the reflected consciousness part has to gain
the knowledge says Pūrvapakṣa. Neither can it know nor it can join in the knowing action;
therefore, the reflected consciousness alone can know.
The reflected consciousness can know the original consciousness; how? It can maximum
know that I am the reflected consciousness and I have got another part ādhāra and that
ādhāra is the original consciousness. He cannot claim: I am the original consciousness. The
reflected consciousness does not have the power to claim I am the original consciousness.
If it knows the original consciousness how should it refer to it? My ādhāra is the original
consciousness and that original consciousness is nitya-buddha-svabhāva. Therefore, the
knower can claim I am the knower, the reflected consciousness saṃśārī and the knower
cannot claim I am asaṃśarī.
The knower can claim I have ādhāra kūṭastha that I is asaṃśarī. The original consciousness
cannot be referred to as aham. It can maximum say the original consciousness is liberated
and it cannot say I am liberated. We try to say we are free. Pūrvapakṣa is happy to
establish that I am a saṃśārī. The knower status and non-knower status or the ignorant
status both of them are attributes. Knowerhood is an attribute and non-knowerhood is
also an attribute. Both belong to the reflected consciousness cidābhāsa only. It does not
belong to the original consciousness adhiṣṭhāna kūṭastha satya caitanya. Therefore, by

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 781

following the instruction of the Śruti I, the cidābhāsa, who am now an ajñānī can become a
jñānī cidābhāsa through the study, from ajñānī reflected consciousness to jñānī reflected
consciousness but I can never claim I am the original consciousness. I can say I have an
original consciousness at adhiṣṭhāna and that the original consciousness is free.
You don’t use the first person, singular; knower cannot say I am free and knower can say
turīya the non-knower is free. That being so, how can the reflected consciousness come to
know ‘kūṭasthaḥ asmi’? How can the reflected consciousness ever claim I am the original
consciousness? If at all it claims it cannot be called jñāna but it is a misconception. If the
reflected consciousness claims “I am the original consciousness” it will become another
adhyāsa or erroneous knowledge therefore, there is something wrong. This is the
argument of Pūrvapakṣa. This is the question from Pūrvapakṣa. Now, Vidyāraṇya has to
answer the question posed by the Pūrvapakṣa.

śloka 15
नायं दोषश्चिदाभासः कू टस्थैकस्वभाववान्।
आभासत्वस्य मिथ्यात्वात्कू टस्थत्वावशेषणात्॥ ७.१५ ॥
nāyaṃ doṣaścidābhāsaḥ kūṭasthaikasvabhāvavān.
ābhāsatvasya mithyātvātkūṭasthatvāvaśeṣaṇāt (7.15).
By this answer, Vidyāraṇya takes care of one of the possible problems that can be there in
the mind of the student. In Vedānta, we repeatedly talk of the reflected consciousness and
the original consciousness, etc., for the sake of communication. A teacher is forced to
introduce the concept of the reflected consciousness, the original consciousness and
without introducing that, he cannot talk of the travel of Jīva. The original consciousness
does not travel and the reflected version, the reflected consciousness travels, etc. No
teacher can avoid the introduction of the reflected consciousness and the original
consciousness cidābhāsa and cit. This introduction will help communication but the same
can create some fresh problems also. The constant use of the reflected consciousness and
the original consciousness we may think they are two substances like two objects in the
creation. In our mind, the two words may create an impression that two separate
Consciousnesses exist! This is the side-effect of introducing the reflected consciousness
and the original consciousness. In fact there are no two substances called the reflected
consciousness and the original consciousness. The reflected consciousness does not even

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 782

exist as a second and separate entity; in fact, the reflected consciousness is an empirical
appearance of the original consciousness itself. Therefore, the original consciousness is the
very core of the reflected consciousness. The original consciousness is the very svarūpa of
the reflected consciousness. Rope is the svarūpa of our snake. Therefore, remember, the
reflected consciousness can happily use the word I referring to the original consciousness
which is its very very core. There is nothing wrong if the reflected consciousness says “I
am the original consciousness”; it only means I am the original consciousness empirically
masking, playing the role of a knower. Instead of saying I have an original consciousness
somewhere and that original consciousness is free, you have to learn to claim “I am the
original consciousness” having put on the mask of the reflected consciousness in the
empirical plane.
Therefore, I the original consciousness myself am appearing as the knower and this
knowerhood is my unreal mask. With this unreal mask of the reflected consciousness, the
knowerhood, I claim I am really the original consciousness. Don’t separate the reflected
consciousness and the original consciousness as though they are two separate things.
Don’t imagine and deal with them as though they are two things. When wave recognizes I
am the water even though we recognize wave is mithyā and water is satya, we begin to
think as though wave has to refer to water in the third person. The wave need not refer to
the water in third person and wave can refer to water in first person as the water is the
very core of the wave. Wave is unreal mask and water is the substance. Always say I am
the cit, empirically functioning with a mask of unreal cidābhāsa. Practice claiming I am the
cit talking to you with the mask of cidābhāsa. Since cidābhāsa is unreal the knowerhood is
unreal and the limitation caused by it also is unreal and therefore, there is no problem.
This is not wrong. Cidābhāsa claiming “I am cit” is not wrong. Because cidābhāsaḥ
kūṭasthaikasvabhāvavān, cidābhāsa has cit as its very nature, very content, very
substance. It is not that cidābhāsa is one substance and cit is another substance. Then
cidābhāsa has to refer to cit substance. Cidābhāsa substantiality belongs to cit alone.
Therefore, cidābhāsa can claim I am the kūṭastha with the mask of knowerhood
empirically. Then does not it mean there are two things cidābhāsa as separate substance?
That is also not so. Cidābhāsa mask is only my temporary veṣa. I am the cit is the fact and
cidābhāsa is only my temporary veṣa. In fact cidābhāsa cannot be a knower if I am not
there. The coat cannot walk or not walk. Cidābhāsa cannot have knower status and it

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 783

cannot exist; the very person behind the coat is cit. It is behind “I am”, functioning as the
knower. What ultimately remains is kūṭastha alone as the reality when he claims I am
kūṭastha. Here cidābhāsa has been falsified at the time of knowing or claiming I am
kūṭastha.

śloka 16
कू टस्थोऽस्मीति बोधोऽपि मिथ्या चेन्नेति को वदेत्।
न हि सत्यतयाभीष्टं रज्जुसर्पविसर्पणम्॥ ७.१६ ॥
kūṭastho:'smīti bodho:'pi mithyā cenneti ko vadet.
na hi satyatayābhīṣṭaṃ rajjusarpavisarpaṇam (7.16).
I function as the knower in the empirical world, I have the knower-role and using the
knowerhood, I claim I am the cit only. The Pūrvapakṣī raises a question. I am kūṭastha cit
and I am the absolute reality. Then how do you talk? When I talk I am using the mask of
cidābhāsa. When you say you write, it means you write with a pen an incidental one that
is not part of you. Just as I am a writer with a pen, I use mithyā cidābhāsa and I get a
knower status in vyāvahārika prapañca. Then I know ahaṃ brahma asmi. Pūrvapakṣī says
all all that is fine, but if with mithyā cidābhāsa and mithyā knower status you get the
knowledge, then that knowledge also must be mithyā. Therefore, do you accept your
knowledge is mithyā? Vidyāraṇya says I have no problem. He says knowledge is also
mithyā. Pūrvapakṣī asks the question that “I am kūṭastha knowledge” is also mithyā
vyāvahārika-satya. This is Pūrvapakṣī’s quotation. Vidyāraṇya asks who said it is not?
Who said it is not mithyā? It is mithyā only. Whatever the mask cidābhāsa does is mithyā,
cidābhāsa itself being mithyā. Therefore, it is mithyā only. Then Vidyāraṇya gives the
logic also. If the rope-snake is unreal after knowledge when I say snake goes away, that
going away will be real or unreal? Going away of the snake will be unreal only. The snake
is unreal and the snake movement is also unreal. If the substance is mithyā its properties
and functions are also mithyā. If cidābhāsa is mithyā the cidābhāsa’s actions of knowing
the process of knowing is also mithyā. There is no doubt about it. When the snake itself is
mithyā, its sliding away is also bound to be mithyā. The movement of snake is not
accepted as real. It is unreal only. If someone asks ahaṃ brahma asmi jñāna is satya or
mithyā, we can say happily jñāna is also mithyā. Then he will ask the question if jñāna is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 784

also mithyā, the liberation gained by that knowledge is also mithyā. Do we work so hard
to get real liberation or unreal liberation? The answer is in the next class.

Class 168
śloka 16 contd.
After introducing Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra, Vidyāraṇya gives a brief commentary
focusing on the first line. In the first line it is said that Jīva should know its real nature the
kūṭastha svarūpa. Now, the question is what is the meaning of Jīva who has to know the
Ātmā? Vidyāraṇya defines Jīva as a mixture of the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness, cit and cidābhāsa. The question is about knowing “I am brahman”; you
cannot say mixture is knowing because knowing capacity is there only for the reflected
consciousness; kūṭastha being nirvikāra it does not have the knowing-capacity; therefore,
it cannot be a participant in the knowing process. Then can the cidābhāsa which has the
knowing capacity say ahaṃ brahma asmi, kūṭasthosmi? Pūrvapakṣī says that is not
possible as cidābhāsa can know I am cidābhāsa. Cidābhāsa can refer to kūṭastha but it
cannot say I am kūṭastha. Then who is knowing ahaṃ brahma asmi? Vidyāraṇya has to
clarify that when we use the word cidābhāsa you assume that it is a separate entity
standing separately from kūṭastha, as though cidābhāsa can independently exist and
function. First, you understand that cidābhāsa cannot independently exist, it cannot
independently function and therefore, it depends upon its substratum kūṭastha. Kūṭastha
is the very substance behind cidābhāsa. Kūṭastha alone with the cidābhāsa medium is
doing everything. Therefore, kūṭastha alone associated with cidābhāsa, mithyā cidābhāsa,
is getting the mithyā knowerhood also. Kūṭastha is the only substance and I am that
kūṭastha and I the kūṭastha who am the only substance has mithyā cidābhāsa as my
covering and medium. With the cidābhāsa, I the kūṭastha alone get the mithyā
knowerhood also.
I the kūṭastha is associated with mithyā knowerhood as superimposed on me. It is so
because cidābhāsa is superimposed on me and cidābhāsa knowerhood is also
superimposed on me. First is called substance-superimposition and the other is called
attribute-superimposition. When you say this is the snake, snakehood is superimposed on
the rope and when you say poisonous snake, poisonous is the attribute on the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 785

superimposed rope only as rope is the only substance available. I am kūṭastha and I am
cidābhāsa superimposed on me and because of cidābhāsa, I have got knowerhood status
also. Kūṭastha is the knower with mithyā knowerhood superimposed on kūṭastha.
Therefore, since I am the knower with mithyā cidābhāsa medium and since I the kūṭastha
is the knower I can happily claim: kūṭasthosmi. We don’t say cidābhāsa is the knower and
we change our stand as cidābhāsa does not exist away from kūṭastha and with cidābhāsa I
the kūṭastha is the knower. Instead of saying pen is the writer, we say I am the writer with
the pen. Similarly, instead of saying cidābhāsa is the knower I change the language; I the
kūṭastha am the knower with the superimposed cidābhāsa. But what is more important is
cidābhāsa is also mithyā, knowerhood is also mithyā and therefore, it does not affect my
asaṅga status. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says this kūṭastha with mithyā knowerhood says
aham kūṭasthaḥ asmi, ahaṃ brahma asmi. Then Pūrvapakṣa raises a doubt: if I the real
kūṭastha with mithyā knowerhood or cidābhāsa gains the knowledge, that knowledge also
must be mithyā. Vidyāraṇya says I do accept I the satya cit with mithyā cidābhāsa with
mithyā knowerhood gain the knowledge which is also mithyā, because the knowing
faculty I got because of mithyā cidābhāsa. Mithyā wife can produce mithyā son alone in
dream. Mithyā cidābhāsa can give only mithyā knowerhood and mithyā knowledge.
“Who said knowledge is satya?” asks Vidyāraṇya. Then, comes the crucial question. If the
knowledge is also mithyā what about liberation attained through knowledge? Can mithyā
knowledge give real liberation? This is the question for which the answer comes in the
next śloka.

śloka 17
तादृशेनापि बोधेन संसारो विनिवर्तते ।
यक्षानुरूपो हि बलिरित्याहुर्लौकिका जनाः ॥ ७.१७ ॥
tādṛśenāpi bodhena saṃsāro vinivartate.
yakṣānurūpo hi balirityāhurlaukikā janāḥ (7.17).
Your question is about liberation. We ask the question what do you mean be liberation?
Liberation is freedom from saṃsāra. Now, Vidyāraṇya asks the question: is saṃsāra
mithyā or satya? If saṃsāra is satya, it will never go. Brahman is satya and eternal and if
saṃsāra is also satya it will be eternal and it will not go. So we have to say that saṃsāra is
mithyā and mokṣa being elimination of mithyā saṃsāra, mokṣa will be mithyā only.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 786

Whatever mithyā does will be mithyā only. Liberation attained by this knowledge is also
mithyā only. Why should I work so hard for mithyā liberation? For that, Vidyāraṇya says
mithyā liberation even though mithyā it is capable of removing saṃsāra. And that is what
we want. We are interested in removing saṃsāra and mithyā liberation can remove
saṃsāra; why do you feel bad about working for liberation? How can mithyā liberation
remove saṃsāra? For that, Vidyāraṇya says mithyā liberation can remove saṃsāra because
saṃsāra is also mithyā. Therefore, mithyā liberation is more than enough to negate
saṃsāra because fortunately saṃsāra also happens to be mithyā only. Through mithyā
cidābhāsa, I get mithyā knowerhood and through that, I get mithyā knowledge and
through that, I get mithyā liberation and through that I get out of mithyā bondage.
What is satya? In pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, cidābhāsa is not there and therefore, knowerhood is
not there and therefore, knowledge is not there and therefore, liberation is not and
therefore, bondage is not there and therefore, I don’t require to get out of that bondage. All
are mithyā and that is enough to remove our problem. When there is hunger in the dream
what food do you need to remove the dream hunger? For this, you need dream food. The
waking food cannot remove the dream hunger although the waking food happens to be
real. I have water near my bed. In dream, I am thirsty. The dream thirst will be removed
by prātibhāsika jala alone. It is enough and a step further that jala alone can remove dream
thirst. Mithyā bondage can be removed by mithyā knowledge only. The eliminated and
the eliminator should belong to the same order of reality. If I know the bondage is mithyā,
I would not have worked for liberation. If I know bondage is mithyā I need not work for
liberation. Why should I work for removal of mithyā bondage? Until I know bondage is
mithyā, I will look upon the bondage as satya. No one is working for removal of mithyā
bondage. Before knowledge, bondage is real and therefore, I try to liberate and after
knowledge I don’t try to remove because I know it is mithyā. Nobody works for removal
of mithyā bondage. An ignorant person does not know it is mithyā. A wise person
knowing it is mithyā bondage he does not work for removal of mithyā bondage. Even by
mithyā knowledge, saṃsāra will happily go and you don’t require real knowledge for
removal of bondage; mithyā knowledge is more than enough for removing the saṃsāra
bondage for bondage happens to be mithyā. The offering of naivedya to a deity depends
upon the type of deity. For sāttvika Devatās sāttvika naivedya and rājasika Devatās
rājasika offerings. As the deity is, so the offering is. Similarly, as the problem is, so the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 787

solution should be. For dream hunger, dream food and for waker’s hunger waker’s food.
So for mithyā bondage, mithyā knowledge is enough to remove the bondage. The worldly
people have such a proverb. So you gain mithyā knowledge through mithyā scriptures
and mithyā Guru.

śloka 18
तस्मादाभासपुरुषः सकू टस्थो विविच्य तम्।
कू टस्थोऽस्मीति विज्ञातुमर्हतीत्यभ्यधात्श्रुतिः ॥ ७.१८ ॥
tasmādābhāsapuruṣaḥ sakūṭastho vivicya tam.
kūṭastho:'smīti vijñātumarhatītyabhyadhāt śrutiḥ (7.18).
Therefore, what is the meaning of the first line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra?
Puruṣa refers to cidābhāsa backed by kūṭastha or kūṭastha with the coat of cidābhāsa,
ābhāsa-kañcuka. Only when he wears a uniform, a police gets his power. So also,
cidābhāsa gets its power only when it gets the coat of kūṭastha. kūṭastha is powerless but I
the wear the unform of cidābhāsa to become the knower I. He does the viveka of kūṭastha
part of himself, cidābhāsa part of himself, he can know he wears the coat of cidābhāsa and
discriminate the real I and mithyā coat. Then I say kūṭastha asmi. This person should
know I am kūṭastha with the help of cidābhāsa overcoat. Kūṭastha knows I am kūṭastha.
They ask the question can there be a commandment with regard to knowledge? You can
have commandment with regard to action. Can there be commandment with regard to
knowledge. With regard to action I have the freedom. Since jñāna does not come under
action, you cannot have a commandment with regard to jñāna. Then how can there be a
commandment. Commandment is subdivided into various categories. Śruti says one
should know the Ātmā. In this manner, Śruti Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra commands
Jīva to know aham kūṭasthaḥ asmi.

śloka 19
असंदिग्ध अविपर्यस्त बोधो देह आत्मनीक्ष्यते ।
तद्वदत्रेति निर्णेतुमयमित्यभिधीयते ॥ ७.१९ ॥
asaṃdigdha aviparyasta bodho deha ātmanīkṣyate.
tadvadatreti nirṇetumayamityabhidhīyate (7.19).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 788

Until now, Vidyāraṇya commented Puruṣaḥ ātmānam vijānīyāt. Puruṣa should know
Ātmā as Ayam asmi this kūṭastha I am. Ātmā means kūṭastha in this context. Now,
Vidyāraṇya asks the question: what is the significance of the word ayam? He gives the
answer that the word gives the clear and direct knowledge. Bodha means knowledge.
Asaṃdigdha means without doubt. We already have clear and doubtless knowledge
about the body. We very clearly claim this body as I am and so also we should claim
kūṭastha as I am. An ordinary lay person is clear that I am the body, but the wise man has
very clear knowledge that I am kūṭastha Ātmā. To reveal this idea, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad uses the word this kūṭastha I am. Instead of saying this body I am, I should say
this kūṭastha I am.

śloka 20
देहात्मज्ञानवज्ज्ञानं देहात्मज्ञानबाधकम्।
आत्मन्येव भवेद्यस्य स नेच्छन्नपि मुच्यते ॥ ७.२० ॥
dehātmajñānavajjñānaṃ dehātmajñānabādhakam.
ātmanyeva bhavedyasya sa necchannapi mucyate (7.20).
Here, Vidyāraṇya quotes an Upadeśa-sāhasrī śloka 4.1 where Ādi Śaṅkarācārya mentions
that I am Brahman must be as sure as I am the body at this moment. Just as I am the body
is definite at the time “I am ignorant”, so also “I am the kūṭastha” I should have no doubt
for myself to be wise and be liberated. Like “I am the body” is the knowledge for an
ignorant person, in the kūṭastha Ātmā the same knowledge should come that “am ever-
free”. If a person gains such a clear and sure knowledge, he is free.
If someone asks “can I have both of them?” what would happen? The knowledge would
be ahaṃ brahma asmi and also aham dehosmi! Is it possible to have both the two notions?
Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says it is not possible because they are diagonally opposite. One has to
displace the other. Dehātma-jñāna and Ātmā-jñāna are diagonally opposite. When one has
Ātmā-jñāna, the dehātma jñāna will be eliminated. Individuality and brahma-jñāna cannot
coexist. Suppose someone says then I don’t want jñāna. Then Vedānta says go to karma
kāṇḍa and be in karma kāṇḍa and have fatherhood, motherhood, etc., but you don’t
complain. Be an individual and accept saṃsāra or drop individuality and attain mokṣa;
the choice is yours. Even if one does not want liberation, the jñāna will give liberation.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 789

śloka 21
अयमित्यपरोक्षत्वमुच्यते चेत्तदुच्यताम्।
स्वयंप्रकाशचैतन्यमपरोक्षं सदा यतः ॥ ७.२१ ॥
ayamityaparokṣatvamucyate cettaducyatām.
svayaṃprakāśacaitanyamaparokṣaṃ sadā yataḥ (7.21).
Now comes the next doubt. The word ayam is used for something which is directly
experienced in front of me. The word ‘this’ is used for something directly experienced by
me. We use it for something nearby and directly experienced. How can the word ‘this’ be
used for kūṭastha caitanya which is not an object in front of us, directly experienced by
me? Even though Ātmā is not an object in front, directly experienced, Vidyāraṇya says it is
directly and continuously experienced as the very subject. That is why it is called aparokṣa
vastu as it is an intimate entity and intimate is not as an object but it is myself. The self-
evident Consciousness or the kūṭastha caitanya which is self-evident Consciousness is
aparokṣa, directly experienced all the time. At least if you take this particular hall it is
now directly experienced but in the evening the hall is not experienced. With regard to the
object it is sometimes directly experienced and sometimes it is not. But kūṭastha is all the
time directly experienced. Sadā aparokṣa yataḥ, since it is ever directly experienced, ayam
is used. Ayam kūṭasthaḥ should be the knowledge. In this manner, one should gain the
knowledge. Then comes further question which we will see in the next class.

Class 169
śloka 21 contd.
Vidyāraṇya comments upon Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra 4.4.12. The first line of the
mantra says that Jīvātmā should know kūṭastha caitanya which is its real nature. The
mantra says ayam asmi iti, this kūṭastha caitanya I am. When this much was said a
question was raised by someone who was answered in 21st śloka based on the ayam
occurring in the mantra. The word ayam or this can be used in the case of direct
knowledge.
How can you use the expression in the case of kūṭastha caitanya? Even though kūṭastha
caitanya is not directly knowable as an object, kūṭastha caitanya is the subject. Even
though it is not objective direct knowledge, it is subjective direct knowledge. Kūṭastha
caitanya is always directly experienced as the subject I and therefore, there is nothing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 790

wrong in using the expression ayam for kūṭastha caitanya. Kūṭastha caitanya is self-
effulgent and self-experienced. Therefore, it is always experienced directly as aham the
subject. When this much is said the Pūrvapakṣa comes with a series of questions.
Vidyāraṇya will answer all these questions.

śloka 22
परोक्षमपरोक्षं च ज्ञानमज्ञानमित्यदः ।
नित्यापरोक्षरूपेऽपि द्वयं स्याद्दशमे यथा ॥ ७.२२ ॥
parokṣamaparokṣaṃ ca jñānamajñānamityadaḥ.
nityāparokṣarūpe:'pi dvayaṃ syāddaśame yathā (7.22).
The question of Pūrvapakṣa is not given in this śloka. Only the answer is there. Based on
this we have to formulate the question. It is based on the second line of the previous śloka.
Vidyāraṇya said there that kūṭastha caitanya is always directly experienced as the subject.
Now Pūrvapakṣa says if kūṭastha caitanya is ever-experienced you cannot talk of
ignorance of kūṭastha caitanya. What is ever-experienced directly as the subject is ever-
known to me. The first question is how can you talk about the ignorance of kūṭastha which
is ever-experienced directly and therefore, known.
Kūṭastha-ajñāna is a myth and it is not possible. If ignorance of kūṭastha is never possible,
you cannot talk of the knowledge of kūṭastha. Because knowledge is defined as the
removal of ignorance. If ignorance itself is not possible, how can you talk about jñāna.
Second myth is kūṭastha-jñāna.
The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra talks about kūṭastha-jñāna. The next thing he says is
this. You can talk about indirect knowledge and direct knowledge only with regard to an
object. How? When will I get the knowledge of the indirect object? When the object is far
away then I will get indirect knowledge of that object. And when the very same rem ote
object comes to proximity, either the object comes or I go there, then the very same object
which is close by is known directly. The remote object is indirectly known and proximate
object is known directly. Kūṭastha is neither a remote nor a closeby object. It is the ever-
experienced subject which cannot be a remote object. Since it cannot be a remote object,
you cannot talk about parokṣa jñāna of kūṭastha.
Then fourthly he says if you cannot talk about parokṣa jñāna you need not talk about
apraroksa jñāna also since an adjective is required to differentiate the other one. Aparokṣa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 791

jñāna adjective can be given only if there is a possibility of parokṣa jñāna. Since there is no
possibility of parokṣa jñāna, you cannot talk of aparokṣa jñāna also. Ajñāna jñāna
aparokṣa, parokṣa, etc., are wrong expressions and none of them can be used here. How
does Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.12 say that one should get aparokṣa jñāna of kūṭastha
as ayam asmi? So I don’t accept the introduction itself. This is the question you have to
supply; the answer is given here.
Vidyāraṇya says ajñāna is possible; jñāna is possible in the field also parokṣa and aparokṣa
jñāna is possible and therefore, don’t find fault with Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. He says
ajñāna-jñāna, ignorance as well as knowledge is the first pair. In the case of knowledge
also parokṣa jñāna as well aparokṣa jñāna this is the second pair. Both these pairs are very
much possible with regard to kūṭastha caitanya even though kūṭastha caitanya is ever-
experienced directly as the subject.
Next question is you cannot simply assert but you have to prove it. He says that it is so as
is the case of the tenth man. The tenth man is a well-known story like rajju-sarpa often
quoted in Vedānta. Briefly, this is the story. Ten boys decide to go on a picnic. Of these ten,
one was the leader and he collected all the boys and had taken responsibility for their
safety. They crossed a flooded river. The tenth boy decided to make sure all them are
intact. He counted nine and after counting nine, he started looking for the tenth one. The
tenth one he was not going to see because he is the tenth man. He started worrying about
the tenth man. Then a person comes and the leader tells him the whole story. That man
says that the tenth man is not lost in the river. Their conclusion was that the tenth man
was somewhere around them. This Guru will give the direct knowledge of the tenth boy.
He has the satisfaction that he is there.
They ask the Guru where is the tenth man? Then the Guru says bring all the nine and
make them stand in front of the Guru. The Guru asks the leader to count and then the
Guru says “daśamaḥ tvam asi”, “Tat tvam asi”, the tenth boy you are looking for is you
yourself and when this was revealed, he gained aparokṣa jñāna of himself who was
already aparokṣa all the time. daśamaḥ aham asmi. First it daśamaḥ asti and now
daśamaḥ aham asmi.
The tenth man who was directly experienced we have aparokṣa jñāna and parokṣa jñāna
and all these are possible in the case of daśama and the same is possible in the case of
kūṭastha Ātmā also. Also the case of Karṇa is quoted. There also they extend the same

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 792

example even though he was Kaunteya all the time, he was ignorant of the Kaunteyatva
all the time and Kunti had to tell him tat tvam asi. All the time, he was Kaunteya only.
This is going to be elaborately discussed. He brings seven avasthās; seven stages are going
to be talked about from next śloka onwards.

śloka 23
नवसंख्याहृतज्ञानो दशमो विभ्रमात्तदा ।
न वेत्ति दशमोऽस्मीति वीक्ष्यमाणोऽपि तान्नव ॥ ७.२३ ॥
navasaṃkhyāhṛtajñāno daśamo vibhramāttadā.
na vetti daśamo:'smīti vīkṣyamāṇo:'pi tānnava (7.23).
This is the first stage in the case of the daśama. Because he was involved in the counting of
the nine people, being extrovert, he was carried away by his involvement in counting the
nine because of his delusion; he did not know he was the tenth man because he was busy
searching outside even though he clearly saw the nine members; by exclusion he missed
the evident tenth one because of the absorption in the nine.

śloka 24
न भाति नास्ति दशम इति स्वं दहमं तदा ।
मत्वा वक्ति तदज्ञानकृ तमावरणं विदुः ॥ ७.२४ ॥
na bhāti nāsti daśama iti svaṃ dahamaṃ tadā.
matvā vakti tadajñānakṛtamāvaraṇaṃ viduḥ (7.24).
The first stage he calls as ajñāna. The second stage he calls āvaraṇa. Expressed ajñāna is
called āvaraṇa. It is a stage when a person refers to the object and says he does not know.
Suppose a few hundred years before people never knew that there is a country called
China and the Chinese language. They were ignorant of Chinese but they never talked
about the ignorance of Chinese. Now also, we are ignorant of Chinese but we know that
there is a language called Chinese but we do not know Chinese. This is expressed
ignorance and here this daśama says I miss the tenth man and I don’t experience him and
therefore, he is non-existent. The tenth man is not appearing to me and is not known to me
and therefore, he does not exist and he has been lost. In this manner, this person thinks of
the tenth man and declares the tenth man is neither experienced nor existent. He denies
experience as also existence. It is called āvaraṇa. Even when he is negating the tenth man

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 793

himself, the tenth man is he himself. There is ignorance and āvaraṇa also. At the time of
second stage, he thinks of the tenth man and makes the statement. This expressed
ignorance is considered to be āvaraṇa. This āvaraṇa is created by his ignorance and is the
effect of ajñāna and the effect of āvaraṇa-śakti of ignorance. The presence of ajñāna is the
first stage and activation of āvaraṇa-śakti is the second stage.

śloka 25
नद्यां ममार दशम इति शोचन्प्ररोदिति ।
अज्ञानकृ तविक्षेपं रोदनादिं विदुर्बुधः ॥ ७.२५ ॥
nadyāṃ mamāra daśama iti śocanpraroditi.
ajñānakṛtavikṣepaṃ rodanādiṃ vidurbudhaḥ (7.25).
Next is the activation of vikṣepa-śakti; the mind begins to imagine about the tenth man. What
happened to him and where he is gone? Thus, he worries. He thinks the tenth man has died in the
river. So he grieves and this expression is called ‘the projection’ by the wise, he cries aloud.
Rodanādiṃ crying, etc., he looks why such a thing happened, etc. He started hitting his head against
he tree and because of the hitting a big bump was there. Then he understood as I am the tenth man
after the knowledge, but the bunp continues. Vidyāraṇya says that is called prārabdha. It is the
bump that happened in ignorance due to prārabdha. They are called vikṣepa or projection. It is
ajñāna-kṛta vikṣepa. Vikṣepa-śakti causes this. This is the third stage of the daśama talked about by
the wise person.

śloka 26
न मृतो दशमोऽस्तीति श्रुत्वाप्तवचनं तदा ।
परोक्षत्वेन दशमं वेत्ति स्वर्गादिलोकवत्॥ ७.२६ ॥
na mṛto daśamo:'stīti śrutvāptavacanaṃ tadā.
parokṣatvena daśamaṃ vetti svargādilokavat (7.26).
This crying daśama begins to pray to different deities. He prays to Añjaneya and wants
the deity to search and find the tenth man. Because of the blessings of Añjaneya, a Guru
came and promised to fetch the tenth man. He said the tenth man is not dead but very
much alive. This is a sentence of a trustworthy person. After hearing this the daśama got
the knowledge of daśama. He got parokṣa jñāna. At the time of śravaṇa he knows the
tenth man. He knew the avāntara vākya. His conclusion is that somewhere the tenth man
is there, like hearing the description of heaven.
When we get the description of heaven we get parokṣa jñāna; even though the tenth man
is not far away, he thinks that the tenth man is far away. The teacher’s expression is “the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 794

tenth man is very much there”. Similarly, when the teacher says “there is Brahman”, it
looks as though there is Brahman even though you happen to be Brahman; you listen with
the idea that there is Brahman and have to face Brahman one day. This is called parokṣa
jñāna; that is knowledge based on what someone else has seen or heard or says. This is the
fourth stage.

śloka 27
त्वमेव दशमोऽसीति गणयित्वा प्रदर्शितः ।
अपरोक्षतया ज्ञात्वा हृष्यत्येव न रोदिति ॥ ७.२७ ॥
tvameva daśamo:'sīti gaṇayitvā pradarśitaḥ.
aparokṣatayā jñātvā hṛṣyatyeva na roditi (7.27).
In this śloka, three stages five, six and seven of daśama are talked about. This daśama heard the first
vākya and got the relative peace of mind that daśama is alive. After his mind is quietened, the
teacher brought all the nine boys and after counting the nine, at the appropriate moment, he says: tat
tvam asi. After the counting the other nine, he said tvam eva daśamaḥ asi, you are the tenth man.
Thus, the tenth man was revealed as himself, not someone to be experienced in the future. You
should not work for the experience of the tenth man. The tenth man is ever-experienced; by
listening to the words, he did not additionally experience the tenth man. No flashy experience of the
tenth man came to him. Rather he himself was already the tenth man. What happened in his case
was that the notion of the loss of the tenth man was dropped and thereby he came to know that the
tenth man was none other than he himself.

Then he rejoices and cries not thereafter. Once this aparokṣa jñāna takes place, he is happy
and he is devoid of any misery. The notion that the tenth man is someone to be
experienced goes. That alone is called aparokṣa jñāna. No new experience can come; even
if new experience comes, it will be dealing with something else and not the tenth man
since the tenth man is experienced by the tenth man. When the fact is revealed, he knows
the tenth man directly as ever-experienced I. He does not know the tenth man through a
new experience but he knows the tenth man directly as ever-experienced I. The only
change that has taken place is that the expectation to experience the tenth man goes away
jijñāsā-nivṛtti is by aparokṣa-jñāna. There is end of this eagerness to experience the tenth
man and I am relaxed. I am that Brahman. Having known the tenth man directly is
aparokṣa jñāna and this is the fifth stage.
Then all the crying stops; the anxiety is dropped. This is the sixth stage and it is śoka-
nivṛtti and he is very happy that I will not be scolded by the mother of the tenth man.
There is that ānanda and the sukha-prāpti as the seventh stage. So, every Vedāntic student

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 795

has seven stages in search of ānanda culminating in the realization that I am ānanda. More
in the next class.

Class 170
śloka 27 contd.
Vidyāraṇya gives a brief commentary on Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.12 which he
introduced in the first two ślokas. The commentary is from the 3rd śloka to the 28th śloka.
Puruṣaḥ ātmānam vijānīyāt a human being should gain aparokṣa jñāna of Ātmā, his real
nature. Vidyāraṇya defines Ātmā as kūṭastha caitanya and also he pointed out that this
Ātmā kūṭastha caitanya is nitya aparokṣa vastu meaning Ātmā is ever directly experienced
by everyone. When this statement was made, a question came up. If Ātmā is ever-
experienced, it must be ever-known; if it is ever-known, there is no question of ajñāna at
all and when ajñāna is not possible, how can you talk about jñāna? The first doubt is how
can you talk about ajñāna and jñāna of ever-experienced Ātmā therefore, ever-known
Ātmā. This is doubt one.
Second doubt is you also say Ātmā is ever directly experienced. nitya aparokṣa Ātmā you
say and quote Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Ātmā is said to be directly experienced
which means Ātmā is directly known. The second doubt is if Ātmā is directly known, how
can you talk about indirect knowledge of Ātmā? Parokṣa jñāna of Ātmā you cannot talk
about and if indirect knowledge is not possible, you need not use the expression of direct
knowledge. Here, there is no possibility of indirect knowledge. Second doubt is how can
you talk of aparokṣa jñāna and parokṣa jñāna of Ātmā? Therefore, the first instruction in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra is itself irrelevant. This was the doubt and Vidyāraṇya
sought to clarify this only by the tenth man story. The tenth man happens to be ever
directly experienced all the time and even in spite of experience because of some problem
he had the ignorance therefore, daśama-ajñāna; like daśama-ajñāna; Ātmā-ajñāna is also
possible. Similarly, like daśama-jñāna Ātmā-jñāna is also possible.
With the same story we solve the second doubt also. Daśama-jñāna is gained in two
stages. First, the man directly did not say you are daśama. First, he said daśamaḥ asti, the
tenth man is there. When this teaching was given avāntara vākya was given daśamaḥ asti,
this tenth man also gained the knowledge: there is the tenth man. He was using the third

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 796

person verb ‘is’ which is nothing but parokṣa jñāna of the tenth man who is all the while
aparokṣa. He got the indirect knowledge of the tenth man who was all the time directly
available. Here, the student also in the initial stage thinks there is Brahman all the time. All
the time you happen to be Brahman but we do say there is Brahman. This is aparokṣa-
vastunaḥ parokṣa-jñānam. It is some kind of parokṣa jñāna. He will analyse this more
elaborately later. Then, he said bring all the other nine and again count; after counting, he
said: Tat tvam asi. This is called mahā-vākya through which he came to know I am
daśama. So-called parokṣa jñāna is converted to aparokṣa jñāna. Once daśama got the
knowledge, the consequence is that all the crying halted and then they enjoyed. Thus, in
the daśama-dṛṣṭānta, we see such a case. Through the study of the daśama-dṛṣṭānta,
Vidyāraṇya wants to introduce sapta-avasthā. This will be extended to the spiritual seeker
also.

śloka 28
अज्ञान अवृतिविक्षेप द्विविधा ज्ञान तृप्तयः ।
शोकापगम इत्येते योजनीयाश्चिदात्मनि ॥ ७.२८ ॥
ajñāna avṛtivikṣepa dvividhā jñāna tṛptayaḥ.
śokāpagama ityete yojanīyāścidātmani (7.28).
The seven stages of daśama are:
1. ignorance of the tenth man;
2. avṛti, meaning concealment or veiling or expressed as I don’t know the tenth man
and therefore, he does not exist; that expressed is avṛti;
3. third one is vikṣepa, which means false projection or erroneous notion that the
tenth man has died and a tragedy has taken place;
4. Fourth and fifth are the dvividha jñāna two types of knowledge. Indirect
knowledge, parokṣa jñāna. Daśamosti is indirect knowledge.
5. Direct knowledge, aparokṣa jñāna; I am the tenth man is the direct knowledge.
6. Then the sixth one is tṛpti. Tṛpti means contentment, fulfillment or happiness and
7. The seventh one is freedom from sorrow or grief.
The seven stages we find in the daśama-dṛṣṭānta have to be extended or connected to the
cit Ātmā, to the individual also, to the spiritual seeker also. That means when we talk
about daśama, his forgetting himself crying, etc., we laugh at him. Vidyāraṇya laughs and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 797

says you are all daśama; all people are a laughable lot. The brief commentary on
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra is over. The second line of the mantra has not been
elaborately commented upon. It is freedom from sorrow, śoka-nivṛtti and consequent tṛpti
is the meaning of the second line. The elaborate analysis we will get from śloka 135 to 250.
Now our story will follow.

śloka 29
संसारासक्तचित्तः संश्चिदाभासः कदाचन ।
स्वयंप्रकाशकू टस्थं स्वतत्त्वं नैव वेत्त्ययम्॥ ७.२९ ॥
saṃsārāsaktacittaḥ saṃścidābhāsaḥ kadācana.
svayaṃprakāśakūṭasthaṃ svatattvaṃ naiva vettyayam (7.29).
From this śloka onwards, up to 47 it is the analysis of the seven avasthās with regard to I
the individual. First, he explains the first stage of ajñāna. He says cidābhāsa or Jīva who is,
of course, backed by cit is talked about here. This Jīva is very busy in saṃsāra, completely
absorbed in running the family-show. his mind is absorbed in saṃsāra or the worldly life
and therefore, this Jīva does not know his own real nature. His real nature being cit, it is
ever-experienced, svayam-prakāśa kūṭastha. At any time, he does not have time to think,
being busy. This condition is called ajñāna. Being absorbed in the worldly affairs, Jīva has
no time to know kūṭastha.

śloka 30
न भाति नास्ति कू टस्थ इति वक्ति प्रसङ्गतः ।
कर्ता भोक्ताहमस्मीति विक्षेपं प्रतिपद्यते ॥ ७.३० ॥
na bhāti nāsti kūṭastha iti vakti prasaṅgataḥ.
kartā bhoktāhamasmīti vikṣepaṃ pratipadyate (7.30).
This saṃsārī has not time to think of kūṭastha. When something happens or some
Vedāntic student comes and if he is exposed briefly to kūṭastha caitanya, the saṃśārī’s
response is almost nothing. Totally attributeless kūṭastha caitanya none experiences at any
place at any time, there is no such thing called kūṭastha caitanya says the ajñānī jīva. He
says no such thing exists and he loudly proclaims even in the context of the discussion of
the kūṭastha caitanya. This is the stage number two called expressed stage of āvaraṇa. He
says I am kartā and bhoktā but he never says aham kūṭasthaḥ asmi. Kūṭastha means I am

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 798

akartā, abhoktā, etc. This is the statement of the Jīva. This false notion and the self-
misconception is called vikṣepa. There is a wrong projection.

śloka 31
अस्ति कू टस्थ इत्यादौ परोक्षं वेत्ति वार्त्तया ।
पश्चात्कू टस्थ एवास्मीत्येवं वेत्ति विचारतः ॥ ७.३१ ॥
asti kūṭastha ityādau parokṣaṃ vetti vārttayā.
paścātkūṭastha evāsmītyevaṃ vetti vicārataḥ (7.31).
Now, he talks about the fourth stage. Because of some puṇya he is a bit interested in Veda
and Vedānta. This person comes to Vedānta and Vedānta talks about kūṭastha Brahman.
The Upaniṣad says kūṭastha-brahma asti which is called avāntara vākya. Avāntara vākya
is when Brahman is expressed as a third entity. With the help of kūṭastha-definition
obtaining in Vedānta, this Jīva knows the kūṭastha vastu indirectly. Because he makes a
statement kūṭasthaḥ asti. He says there is kūṭastha. He also says I have faith in the Vedas, I
have śraddhā, but I am unable to conceive an attributeless thing; he even feels that it may
not be there. With faith in Vedas he says ‘asti’ based on the Veda pramāṇa. We should
start with asti and then only it will end in asmi.
Thereafter, by enquiring into the mahā-vākya, he comes to know that I am the changeless
entity and I am unable to conceive Brahman not because it is not there but because I am
that kūṭastha Brahman. Conceiver cannot conceive Brahman. He gets aparokṣa jñāna. This
is the stage five.

śloka 32
कर्ता भोक्ते त्येवमादिशोकजातं प्रमुञ्चति ।
कृ तं कृ त्यं प्रापणीयं प्राप्तमित्येव तुष्यति ॥ ७.३२ ॥
kartā bhoktetyevamādiśokajātaṃ pramuñcati.
kṛtaṃ kṛtyaṃ prāpaṇīyaṃ prāptamityeva tuṣyati (7.32).
All types of griefs, the bundle of sorrows, he gives up totally. The main two things in that
bundle is ‘kartā-bhoktā-feeling’. All our duties are based on ‘kartā’. Akartā cannot have
duties. Kartā alone has endless duties. The second bundle is bhoktā-bundle. I have
completed the duty on the assumption that things will take care of themselves. Therefore,
as bhoktā the reactions to experiences is the second bundle of worries. Any worry is either

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 799

connected with kartā or bhoktā. In sleep, he is not affected by kartā- or bhoktā-feeling; so

he is a Jīvanmukta! Here he gets śoka-nivṛtti.
Everything that has to be accomplished is fully accomplished and I have total fulfillment.
Whatever I have to attain in life, I have attained. It is from the point of view of sādhya.
sādhanam samāptam and sādhyam samāptam. I am no more a sādhaka but I am siddha.
sādhana and sādhyas are associated with sādhaka or the seeker and once the means and
ends are gone, no more sādhaka is there but he is a siddha Puruṣa as he has pūrṇatva or
fulfillment. With this understanding, he enjoys, he revels life. This is the seventh stage.
While enumerating the seven stages through daśama-dṛṣṭānta, first he said tṛpti as the
sixth stage and duḥkha-nivṛtti as the seventh. Here, he talks of śoka-nivṛtti and next he
talks of tṛpti. He wants to end the chapter with tṛpti. Hence, he has kept it as the seventh
item.

śloka 33
अज्ञानमावृतिस्तद्वद्विक्षेपश्च परोक्षधीः ।
अपरोक्षमतिः शोकमोक्षस्तृप्तिर्निरङ्कुशा ॥ ७.३३ ॥
ajñānamāvṛtistadvadvikṣepaśca parokṣadhīḥ.
aparokṣamatiḥ śokamokṣastṛptirniraṅkuśā (7.33).
In this manner, he says seven stages are there for Jīva to gain liberation.
1. Ajñāna or ignorance,
2. āvṛti expressed ignorance,
3. vikṣepa false notion,
4. parokṣadhī indirect knowledge,
5. aparokṣamati direct knowledge,
6. śoka-mokṣa freedom from sorrow and
7. niraṅkuśā tṛpti unrestricted and unlimited satisfaction or limitless fulfillment
are the seven stages as enumerated by Vidyāraṇya. In any other field, tṛpti will not be full.
After gaining education, one will like to have an employment. After getting a good job
with good salary, then he wishes to get married. There is never an end to the want of
fulfillment. We know what is fulfillment but we never know fulfillment to the fullest,
without any restrictions.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 800

śloka 34
सप्तावस्था इमाः सन्ति चिदाभासस्य तास्विमौ ।
बन्धमोक्षौ स्थितौ तत्र तिस्रो बन्धकृ तः स्मृताः ॥ ७.३४ ॥
saptāvasthā imāḥ santi cidābhāsasya tāsvimau.
bandhamokṣau sthitau tatra tisro bandhakṛtaḥ smṛtāḥ (7.34).
In this manner cidābhāsasya imāḥ sapta-avasthāḥ santi the above mentioned seven
avasthās belong to Jīva. He possesses all the seven stages from the standpoint of
cidābhāsa. The original consciousness, reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness
put together belong to cidābhāsa. In those seven avasthās only, bondage and liberation are
spread over. Of these, the first three ignorance, veiling and projection are responsible for
creating bondage. The latter four are to be grouped under the mokṣa stage. First three are
the causes for bondage. They have a team work and their object is to create bondage.
Therefore, bandha is spread over those three. There is another factory and of the latter four
and they produce mokṣa or liberation. Details in the next class.

Class 171
śloka 34 contd.
Vidyāraṇya had introduced the seven avasthās or stages of Jīva while commenting upon
the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra briefly. This explanation will go up to śloka 40. First,
he talked of the seven stages from the standpoint of daśama-example. Then he discussed
from the standpoint of Jīva. Thereafter, he discusses the seven stages that the first three
stages comes under bondage and the latter four come under liberation. He discusses once
again the same topic on point of view of bondage and liberation. There are seven stages
relating to cidābhāsa as described in the previous ślokas. Both bandha and liberation are
spread over these seven stages only. Then the question is how far do the bandha and
mokṣa each spread? Among those seven stages first three are said to be the cause of
bondage. Hereafter, we will get to the third round of study of the seven stages to show
that the first three are bondage and the last four are liberation.

śloka 35
न जानामीत्युदासीनव्यवहारस्य कारणम्।
विचारप्रागभावेन युक्तमज्ञानमीरितम्॥ ७.३५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 801

na jānāmītyudāsīnavyavahārasya kāraṇam.
vicāraprāgabhāvena yuktamajñānamīritam (7.35).
He analyses the first stage of ajñāna. The experience I don’t know is called ajñāna. It is
associated with the absence of enquiry. Ignorance is always associated with the absence of
vicāra. If one enquires, ajñāna will go away. The sustaining power of ajñāna is lack of
enquiry. Lack of enquiry is the nourishing factor of ajñāna. This ajñāna and lack of enquiry
alone is the cause of indifferent disposition to jñāna and enquiry. Because I don’t know
Ātmā, because I have not made any enquiry whenever the topic of Ātmā comes up;
somewhere there is this attitude of indifference and one thinks that it has nothing to do
with him. It is the expression of the first stage of ignorance which is the expression of lack
of enquiry. This is known by the name of ajñāna. This is the first contributor to bandha.

śloka 36
अमार्गेण विचार्याथ नास्ति नो भाति चेत्यसौ ।
विपरीतव्यवहृतिरावृतेः कार्यमिष्यते ॥ ७.३६ ॥
amārgeṇa vicāryātha nāsti no bhāti cetyasau.
viparītavyavahṛtirāvṛteḥ kāryamiṣyate (7.36).
The second stage is āvaraṇa, clear expression of one’s ignorance regarding kūṭastha. This
expresses by saying there is no such thing called kūṭastha at all. He negates the existence
of kūṭastha caitanya. He negates because he has not made use of the right pramāṇa. When
you don’t use the right pramāṇa or rightly use the right pramāṇa then kūṭastha cannot be
discerned because every student will face this problem. Kūṭastha, the original
consciousness and cidābhāsa-caitanya the reflected consciousness exist together. When I
say I am, it is not that Śākṣi-caitanya alone shines but in the same location of the mind the
cidābhāsa also is experienced. I am experiencing cidābhāsa all the time, how do you say I
experience śākṣī all the time. In the mind cidābhāsa is ever-available and therefore, one is
unable to think of the presence of the śākṣī.
It is only with cidābhāsa that you ever experience; I is the śākṣī; I don’t experience śākṣī
any time but I experience cidābhāsa all the time. How do you say there is kūṭastha
caitanya which is all-pervading and is ever there? I should know that it is not mere
cidābhāsa but it is a mixture of cidābhāsa and cit that is ever-experienced in aham-
anubhava and out of this mixture, I should discern the cit part and reject cidābhāsa part.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 802

This discerning and separation cannot be done physically and it has to be done mentally
or intellectually through the taught skill. Cidābhāsa is aparokṣa, cit is also aparokṣa and
we should discern the lakṣyārtha cit from vācyārtha cidābhāsa. If the student is not alert,
he will only say cidābhāsa is self-evident and cit is not self-evident and therefore, I don’t
accept the existence of kūṭastha.
Therefore, enquiring in the wrong way, an improper method may lead to ajñāna and
vikṣepa. It is the teacher’s responsibility to talk of the pitfalls and take the student to the
right direction. The student should not be allowed to reach the contradictory conclusion
that kūṭastha is not experienced by me. He takes the I- experience as the cidābhāsa and
therefore, he says the object is the inert universe and subject is cidābhāsa and therefore,
there is cidābhāsa-subject-experience and inert-object-experience but where am I
experiencing the all-pervading kūṭastha? It is not there and how do you say kūṭastha is
evident?
Kūṭastha is not there because it is not experienced by me is the argument of the ajñānī
jīvas. Thus they reach wrong contradictory conclusion. In the I it is not mere cidābhāsa
because cit is parallely experienced in the word I. This is the function of the second stage
called concealment. This concealment second stage also contributes to the bondage. When
he negates kūṭastha, he is not going to seek kūṭastha. This person does not accept kūṭastha
itself; where is the question of discovering and acquiring kūṭastha and so, he continues to
be a saṃśārī.

śloka 37
देहद्वयचिदाभासरूपो विक्षेप ईरितः ।
कर्तृत्वाद्यखिलः शोकः संसाराख्योऽस्य बन्धकः ॥ ७.३७ ॥
dehadvayacidābhāsarūpo vikṣepa īritaḥ.
kartṛtvādyakhilaḥ śokaḥ saṃsārākhyo:'sya bandhakaḥ (7.37).
Now Vidyāraṇya enters into the description of the third stage vikṣepa. While talking
about talking vikṣepa Vidyāraṇya creates a new problem. While describing vikṣepa he
differs from the meaning given the second time. This deviation creates a problem. He
solves the problem ultimately. The definition given in 30, is because I don’t know the
kūṭastha and I take myself to be cidābhāsa, naturally I add kartṛtva and bhoktṛtva and he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 803

said kartṛtva-abhimāna is vikṣepa. Now I say I am kartā-bhoktā. This was said before.
That he repeats in the second line.
He said then there is kartṛtvādi, all the struggles in the form kartṛtv, I am a kartā, etc. Once
kartṛtva comes bhoktṛtva comes and one always enters a mess. Therefore, kartṛtvādi, I am
kartā, I am bhoktā, all the struggles the Jīva enters into. We call it pain because once I am a
kartā, duties come and every duty is one ton rock on the head. Kartṛtva is a pain in the
form of duties and bhoktṛtva is in the form of duḥkha anubhava and this śoka is the
shackles or bondage for the Jīva. They are the binding shackles and it is known by the
name saṃsāra. This kartā bhoktā is the third stage.
In the first line, Vidyāraṇya says the two bodies, the physical and subtle, cidābhāsa the
reflected consciousness, and the reflecting medium also falls under the vikṣepa only.
Because they are mithyā, Vidyāraṇya includes them in the vikṣepa. Now, in vikṣepa, he
has included the reflecting medium, the reflected consciousness and kartṛtva and
bhoktṛtva in the vikṣepa category. It is the projection caused by ajñāna. When the world is
caused by ajñāna, what to talk of body, mind and the reflected consciousness as they are
also vikṣepa only. This addition creates a problem. Pūrvapakṣa waits to attack.

śloka 38
अज्ञानमावृतिश्चैते विक्षेपात्प्राक्प्रसिद्ध्यतः ।
यद्यप्यथाप्यवस्थेते विक्षेपस्यैव नात्मनः ॥ ७.३८ ॥
ajñānamāvṛtiścaite vikṣepātprākprasiddhyataḥ.
yadyapyathāpyavasthete vikṣepasyaiva nātmanaḥ (7.38).
While describing the seven avasthās previsously, we said seven avasthās belonged to
cidābhāsa. We called vikṣepa as kartṛtva-bhoktṛtva-mixture. Vikṣepa is in third stage.
Vidyāraṇya introduces cidābhāsa in the form of projection caused by ajñāna. Pūrvapakṣa
asks if the cidābhāsa comes into existence only in the third stage, then the cidābhāsa
cannot have first two stages as belonging to the cidābhāsa. Because in the first stages
cidābhāsa is not there; how can non-existent cidābhāsa which is going to come in the third
stage be a possessor of the first two stages? Then cidābhāsa cannot have seven stages.
Vidyāraṇya cannot say I accept. In 34th śloka he has said cidābhāsa is in the seven stages.
Here, he says cidābhāsa comes in the third stage. For that Vidyāraṇya says I know you
will ask this question. If you say kartṛtva and bhoktṛtva comes in third stage, then there is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 804

no problem. That ajñāna the first stage āvṛti the second stage exist before the arrival of
vikṣepa. And in vikṣepa he has said cidābhāsa.
Therefore, ajñāna and āvṛti exist before the arrival of cidābhāsa I admit says Vidyāraṇya.
Even though this is what it is, even though it is accepted by me, still those two avasthās,
ajñāna and āvṛti belong to the vikṣepa cidābhāsa only. Ajñāna and āvṛti belong to
cidābhāsa only even though cidābhāsa is not yet born, they don’t belong to cit but belong
to cidābhāsa only. Naturally, Pūrvapakṣa asks the question how can they belong to
cidābhāsa which has not yet come into the picture?

śloka 39
विक्षेपोत्पत्तितः पूर्वमपि विक्षेपसंस्कृ तिः ।
अस्त्येव तदवस्थात्वमविरुद्धं ततस्तयोः ॥ ७.३९ ॥
vikṣepotpattitaḥ pūrvamapi vikṣepasaṃskṛtiḥ.
astyeva tadavasthātvamaviruddhaṃ tatastayoḥ (7.39).
How can the first two stages belong to not yet born cidābhāsa? This is the question.
Vidyāraṇya says previously we said vikṣepa consists of two śarīras and cidābhāsa. He
says before the two śarīras, cidābhāsa is projected and they existed in the form of kāraṇa-
śarīra in cidābhāsa it was there in unmanifest kāraṇa-śarīra in seed condition called
prājña-rūpa cidābhāsa. Viśva is not born, taijasa is not born but it was there in the form of
kāraṇa-śarīra in prājña form. Jīvas do exist in the form of kāraṇa-śarīra and cidābhāsa.
How is kāraṇa-śarīra created?
Remember kāraṇa-śarīra is not created as kāraṇa-śarīra is anādi; anādi cidābhāsa and
anādi kāraṇa-śarīra existed before and exist all the time. So ajñāna and avṛtti do not belong
to projected cidābhāsa but they belong to potential cidābhāsa.
Projected cidābhāsa is Viśva and taijasa while the potential cidābhāsa belongs to prājña.
That is why we say in sleep we are potentially there and our ignorance is also potentially
there. I, the prājña, am potentially there and ajñāna is also there in suṣupti. It is there
because when we wake up everything comes up. The definition of prājña is kāraṇa-śarīra
and cidābhāsa. Therefore, ajñāna and āvṛti belong to the potential cidābhāsa otherwise
called prājña. Don’t connect the two avasthās to cit but to the potential kāraṇa-śarīra with
prājña and cidābhāsa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 805

śloka 40
ब्रह्मण्यारोपितत्वेन ब्रह्मावस्थे इमे इति ।
नशङ्कनीयं सर्वासां ब्रह्मण्येवाधिरोपणात्॥ ७.४० ॥
brahmaṇyāropitatvena brahmāvasthe ime iti.
naśaṅkanīyaṃ sarvāsāṃ brahmaṇyevādhiropaṇāt (7.40).
The discussion here is whether ajñāna should belong to cidābhāsa or cit. Who must be the
real possessor of Ajñāna. Pūrvapakṣa says it belongs to cit but Vidyāraṇya says it belongs
to cidābhāsa. Only then sapta avasthās will tally the accout. Pūrvapakṣa wants to say
ajñāna is with Brahman and Vidyāraṇya says ajñāna is associated with cidābhāsa.
Ultimately, everything is superimposed upon the cit only we all admit. In the general
sense everything belongs to Brahman only as cit is sāmānya-āśraya of everything, being
sarva-adhiṣṭhāna. We will admit cit Brahman is sāmānya āśraya including ajñāna. We call
it sāmānya-āśraya or adhiṣṭhāna-rūpa-āśraya. But we argue that even though cit is
sāmānya-āśraya, it is cidābhāsa who has kartṛtva and bhoktṛtva; cidābhāsa alone claims “I
am ajñānī”. Ajñāna is claimed by cidābhāsa-pramātā. Since cidābhāsa is claiming ajñāna,
cidābhāsa is supposed to be viśeṣa-āśraya of ajñāna in the form of abhimānatva-āśraya.
There is a land and someone says the land belongs to me. Suppose someone asks how do
you say it belongs to you? The whole land belongs to the country and government is the
possessor of the land. No doubt Bhārata-deśa is sāmānya-āśraya but yesterday I put the
signature and I claimed the land by paying money and therefore, I claim it is my land. I
am the abhimānī of the land. Both the statements are right as one is sāmānya belonging
and the other is viśeṣa sense. In the same way, ajñāna belongs to the cit in sāmānya sense
and ajñāna belongs to cidābhāsa in the viśeṣa sense. So Jīva claims I am ajñānī. More in the
next class.

Class 172
śloka 40 contd.
In these ślokas from 29 to 47, Vidyāraṇya talks about the seven avasthās of cidābhāsa; of
them the first three come under bandha-avasthās and the last four comes under mokṣa -
avasthās. He clarifies whether the avasthās belong to cit or cidābhāsa. He want to establish
that you can say both. You can say they belong to cit and they belong to cidābhāsa from
two different angles. Brahman being the adhiṣṭhāna, the adhiṣṭhāna alone holds

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 806

everything; the entire creations are superimposed on cit Brahman and therefore, Brahman
is the owner of everything. Your house is owned by the country because the land belongs
to the country alone. But from another angle, since you have purchased the land as you
have mamakāra on the house you are the specific owner, viśeṣa-āśraya. Brahman is
sāmānya āśraya. Cidābhāsa alone claims the seven avasthās; as claimer these avasthās
belong to cidābhāsa. While talking about the seven avasthās, Vidyāraṇya said that
cidābhāsa comes to existence only in the third avasthā as vikṣepa. Then Pūrvapakṣa raised
a question: if cidābhāsa itself comes to existence in the third stage, it means cidābhāsa did
not exist during the first two stages. That being so, how do you state that the first two
stages belong to cidābhāsa? It was not non-existent in the earlier two stages; how can the
two stages belong to cidābhāsa? If the first two stages do not belong, then we cannot count
seven stages. For that he gave the answer: in the first two stages also cidābhāsa existed in
an unmanifest form. Therefore, avyakta cidābhāsa the kāraṇa-sahita-caitanya was there
during the first two stages and therefore, ajñāna and āvaraṇa belong to potential
cidābhāsa and from third stage onwards cidābhāsa is manifest. Therefore, all the seven
stages belong to cidābhāsa only, either in vyakta form or avyakta form. Our problems are
there in manifest form and during sleep our problem belongs to us in unmanifest us.
Therefore, there is nothing is wrong in saying that cidābhāsa is there in all the seven stages
although cidābhāsa is brought forth in third avasthā.
Now Pūrvapakṣa raises a question. Why do you say first two stages belong to unmanifest
cidābhāsa or kāraṇa-śarīra which were not available, being unmanifest? We don’t accept
the unmanifest state to exist. The existence is accepted only in manifestation. Why do you
say unmanifest cidābhāsa as the possessor? Pūrvapakṣa says the two avasthās ajñāna and
āvaraṇa belong to cit only and not unmanifest cidābhāsa. It is so because ajñāna and
āvaraṇa are superimposed on cit only. Therefore, they belong to Brahman. If this is your
doubt, our answer is don’t entertain such doubts. Because if you want to say avasthās
belong to Brahman because Brahman is ultimate adhiṣṭhāna then you cannot say two
avasthās belong to Brahman but you must say all avasthās belong to Brahman. Either you
say these avasthās belong to cidābhāsa or say all the avasthās belong to cit Brahman
because that is Ultimate adhiṣṭhāna of all. Therefore, he says all the seven avasthās are
superimposed on cit Brahman only. How can you selectively attach two only? Now,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 807

Pūrvapakṣa wants to give the reason why he selectively give two avasthās to Brahman
and other five to Jīva.

śloka 41
संसार्यहं विबुद्धोऽहं निःशोकस्तुष्ट इत्यपि ।
जीवगा उत्तरावस्था भान्ति न ब्रह्मगा यदि ॥ ७.४१ ॥
saṃsāryahaṃ vibuddho:'haṃ niḥśokastuṣṭa ityapi.
jīvagā uttarāvasthā bhānti na brahmagā yadi (7.41).
The intention of Pūrvapakṣa is he wants to allot two avasthās to Brahman and five to Jīva,
cidābhāsa because Jīva claims the five avasthās as his own. When he claims this, why
cannot you allot them to Jīva? He claims saying that I am saṃśārī. This saṃśārī attends the
Pañcadaśī class. The cidābhāsa Jīva alone says aham vibuddhaḥ asmi. I am free from
sorrow he claims in the sixth stage. Seventh stage of tṛpti is also claimed by cidābhāsa Jīva.
All the five stages are claimed by the cidābhāsa Jīva only. We don’t find cit Brahman
claiming I am tuṣṭa, etc. Pure cit does not claim any one of them. Cidābhāsa alone claims
all of them. So they do not belong or connect to Brahman. The conclusion of Pūrvapakṣa is
five avasthās belong to Jīva and the first two belong to Brahman because Brahman is
adhiṣṭhāna.

śloka 42
तर्ह्यज्ञोऽहं ब्रह्मसत्त्वभाने मद्दृष्टितो न हि ।
इति पूर्वे अवस्थे च भासेते जीवगे खलु ॥ ७.४२ ॥
tarhyajño:'haṃ brahmasattvabhāne maddṛṣṭito na hi.
iti pūrve avasthe ca bhāsete jīvage khalu (7.42).
Vidyāraṇya gives the answer. If you say later five avasthās belong to Jīva because Jīva
claims it, the first two avasthās also belong to Jīva only for Jīva claims the two also.
Brahman never says I am ajñānī. Brahman never says there is āvaraṇa. Therefore, if
claiming is the criterion, all of them are claimed by Jīva only. If abhimānitva is the criterion
all the avasthās are claimed by the Jīva alone as Brahman never claims any of the seven
avasthās. Then the next question is how does Jīva claim first two avasthās? Jīva claims I
am ignorant of Brahman; I am ignorant of kūṭastha-svarūpa. Then he claims second
avasthā also. The existence of Brahman and knowledge of Brahman both of them are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 808

concealed āvṛta for my experience, for my vision and for my anubhava. Brahma-sattva is
also conceived and appearance of knowledge is also conceived. It relates to the second
avasthā of āvaraṇa. Therefore, both of them are claimed by Jīva only. This ajñāna and
āvaraṇa belong to Jīva even when Jīva is in vyakta-rūpa and even in suṣupti-avasthā when
Jīva is in avyakta-rūpa as prājña. The proof is after waking up he claims I am ajñānī.
Therefore, from the standpoint of claiming, all the seven avasthās belong to Jīva and
therefore, nothing is wrong in my statement.

śloka 43
अज्ञानस्याश्रयो ब्रह्मेत्यधिष्ठानतया जगुः ।
जीवावस्थात्वमज्ञानाभिमानित्वादवादिषम्॥ ७.४३ ॥
ajñānasyāśrayo brahmetyadhiṣṭhānatayā jaguḥ.
jīvāvasthātvamajñānābhimānitvādavādiṣam (7.43).
It is a very important technical śloka. This is seriously discussed among Advaitins
themselves. Lot of discussions are there. Ajñāna belongs to Brahman or Jīva is the
question. Our answer is you can say both. As adhiṣṭhāna if you see Brahman alone is
everything then Brahman alone is adhiṣṭhāna of ajñāna also. Brahman is the possessor of
adhiṣṭhāna. From adhiṣṭhāna-dṛṣṭi Brahman is the possessor which we call sāmānya-
āśraya. From claiming angle, Jīva alone claims “I am ignorant”. When he say I want self-
knowledge, it means he is self-ajñānī devoid of self-knowledge. Since every Jīva is
working for self-knowledge, it is clear that Jīva is proudly claiming self-ignorance.
abhimānitva belongs to Jīva alone. Jīva alone has mamakāra with regard to ignorance.
From that angle, ajñāna belongs to Jīva. This we call it viśeṣa-āśraya who is Jīva.
Adhiṣṭhāna-rūpa-āśraya is Brahman; abhimāna-rūpa-āśraya is Jīva. Since Jīva claims I am
ignorant, Jīva alone should gain self-knowledge. Brahman does not claim ignorance and so
Brahman need not work for self-knowledge. Brahman is the locus of ajñāna and owner of
ajñāna from the standpoint of Brahman being adhiṣṭhāna. Adhiṣṭhāna in this context is the
substratum or pāramārthika-satya. I declare Jīva as the locus of seven avasthās. Cidābhāsa
cannot be the adhiṣṭhāna of anything, still we compromise and say cidābhāsa is āśraya
from the angle of ajñāna due to abhimāna as a claimer of ajñāna. Instead of claiming

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 809

mokṣa, we claim ajñāna. So, cidābhāsa is seen as possessor of ajñāna. All the avasthās
belong to Jīva only.

śloka 44
ज्ञानद्वयेन नष्टेऽस्मिन्नज्ञाने तत्कृ तावृतिः ।
न भाति नास्ति चेत्येषा द्विविधापि विनश्यति ॥ ७.४४ ॥
jñānadvayena naṣṭe:'sminnajñāne tatkṛtāvṛtiḥ.
na bhāti nāsti cetyeṣā dvividhāpi vinaśyati (7.44).
Until now, Vidyāraṇya has pointed out that the first three avasthās fall under bondage
group and all the three belong to Jīva only. Hereafter, he wants to show the last four put
together are called mokṣa. The next four are parokṣa jñāna, aparokṣa jñāna, śoka-nivṛtti
and tṛpti. Parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna have got twofold functions. These two are
fourth and fifth stages. Previously, while talking about the second stage, he mentioned a
point on āvaraṇa. While talking about āvaraṇa he said āvaraṇa is twofold. One is brahma
nāsti, Brahman is non-existent since the existence of Brahman is concealed which is sattva-
āvaraṇa. Brahman may be in existence, but Brahman is not existent for me and this
concealment of experience of Brahman is called bhāna-āvaraṇa. He says parokṣa jñāna
removes sattva-āvaraṇa; then there is Brahman is parokṣa jñāna. The scriptures tell me
that Brahman is there so I know Brahman is there. Jagat-kāraṇa Brahman is talked about
by Śruti and therefore, I accept Brahman and when I accept the existence of Brahman, I
will never say Brahman is non-existent. The non-existent part is negated by the parokṣa
jñāna. Parokṣa jñāna is expressed in the language ‘there is Brahman’ so a long definition is
given on Brahman.
Then, he says I know Brahman, but I have no Brahma-anubhava. Now, that experience is
covered he says and that covering of Brahman-experience is called bhāna-āvaraṇa. This
āvaraṇa goes by aparokṣa jñāna that is I am Brahman. Brahman-experience is there all the
time in all the three avasthās. Therefore, Brahman-experience is never covered. Brahman-
experience even now I have as aham aham. When I claim ahaṃ brahma asmi bhāna-
āvaraṇa goes away. Parokṣa jñāna destroys sattva-āvaraṇa and aparokṣa jñāna destroys
bhāna-āvaraṇa. When I gain knowledge my ajñāna will go away and other’s ajñāna will
continue to exist. When the ignorance is gone, two-fold āvaraṇas caused by ajñāna get
destroyed. Sattva-āvaraṇa says Brahman is not there and bhāna-āvaraṇa says Brahman-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 810

experience is not there. Both of them go away on gaining self-knowledge. That is the
benefit of fourth and fifth state of parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna. All these come under
mokṣa-avasthās.

śloka 45
परोक्षज्ञानतो नश्येदसत्त्वावृत्तिहेतुता ।
अपरोक्षज्ञाननाश्या ह्यभानावृत्तिहेतुता ॥ ७.४५ ॥
parokṣajñānato naśyedasattvāvṛttihetutā.
aparokṣajñānanāśyā hyabhānāvṛttihetutā (7.45).
That type of concealment which makes the Brahman non-existent, such concealment is
called asattvāvṛtti and that potential belonging to ajñāna is destroyed. He will say:
Brahman is there but I have not experienced it. By aparokṣa jñāna, abhānāvṛttihetutā
nāśyā. In experience, concealment, that power of ignorance is removed through aparokṣa
jñāna. Here, he does not say what gives parokṣa jñāna and what gives aparokṣa jñāna.
Later, he will say avāntara jñāna will give parokṣa jñāna and mahā-vākya jñāna will give
aparokṣa jñāna.

śloka 46
अभानावरणे नष्टे जीवत्वारोपसंक्षयात्।
कर्तृत्वाद्यखिलः शोकः संसाराख्यः निवर्तते ॥ ७.४६ ॥
abhānāvaraṇe naṣṭe jīvatvāropasaṃkṣayāt.
kartṛtvādyakhilaḥ śokaḥ saṃsārākhyaḥ nivartate (7.46).
Aparokṣa jñāna has destroyed bhāna-āvaraṇa. When the bhāna-āvaraṇa is destroyed, one
will no more complain that Brahman-experience I don’t have. When that complaint ends, I
will begin to claim I am Brahman and once I claim I am Brahman, simultaneously I cannot
claim I am a Jīva. Brahman means asaṃśarī and Jīva means saṃśārī.
The opposite claim I cannot make. Superimposition of Jīvātmā goes and the false claim of
jīvatva which was presented as the third stage before is gone now. The false claim of
vikṣepa is gone with Ātmā-jñāna. Once jīvatva goes, all the grief caused by jīvatva is also
gone. Therefore, he can claim he is liberated. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 811

Class 173
śloka 46 contd.
In these ślokas beginning from 29 Vidyāraṇya deals with the seven avasthās. First, he
defined seven stages of cidābhāsa, now he revisits once again saying that the first three
come under bondage and the latter four come under mokṣa. Two types of jñānas are
required because there are two types of āvaraṇas. While talking about the second stage of
āvaraṇa Vidyāraṇya mentioned these as sattva-āvaraṇa, one talking of existence-cover and
the second bhāna-āvaraṇa of anubhava. Parokṣa jñāna eliminates sattva-āvaraṇa and
aparokṣa jñāna eliminates the cover of experience. Therefore, we need aparokṣa jñāna;
ahaṃ brahma asmi jñāna knocks off bhāna-āvaraṇa. After aparokṣa jñāna, I will not say
Brahman is not experienced. Aparokṣa jñāna means Brahman is ever experienced as aham,
aham and aham and therefore, I don’t deny the experience of Brahman.
Parokṣa jñāna removes one covering and aparokṣa jñāna removes another covering and I
claim Brahman status and we enter the sixth stage. Once we step into stage five we
automatically enter the stage six. The second line of the śloka deals with the sixth stage. In
aparokṣa jñāna I claim Brahman status and once I claim Brahman status, the notional Jīva
status gets knocked off. The job of Brahman status is to push out the Jīva status. The
ropeness-knowledge as even it comes, it knocks off the snakeness which is a
misconception. Similarly, the Jīva status of misconception gets knocked off on gaining
aparokṣa jñāna. The misconception of Jīva status is eliminated because it is false. Anything
false falls because it is false. Jīvatva being false, in its place, Brahmatva takes over. There is
change is the rulership. What do we get out of this? By the removal of jīvatva, kartṛtva
goes away. Kartṛtva is equal to saṃsāra. Kartṛtva is saṃsāra. So goes saṃsāra and as
saṃsāra goes śoka or sorrows go away. Then the seventh stage is ānanda or fulfillment.

śloka 47
निवृत्ते सर्वसंसारे नित्यमुक्तत्वभासनात्।
निरङ्कुशा भवेत्तृप्तिः पुनः शोकासमुद्भवात्॥ ७.४७ ॥
nivṛtte sarvasaṃsāre nityamuktatvabhāsanāt.
niraṅkuśā bhavettṛptiḥ punaḥ śokāsamudbhavāt (7.47).
Once we come to the sixth stage, all saṃsāra is eliminated and withdrawn. One gets the
original nature of eternal freedom. Nitya-muktatva is the original nature of the Jīva. In the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 812

seventh stage nitya, muktatva is claimed which has been already with me. When the
concealing misconception goes away I claim my natural glory of liberated state. When I
claim my eternal freedom, the state of the mind is total contentment and I have natural
ānanda. Ānanda need not be outsourced and it need not be imported since ānanda is my
svarūpa. You have to remove the superimposed sorrow and you need not bring ānanda
for ānanda is our svarūpa. Ānanda comes as it were. It is not like pratibimba-ānanda or
existential pleasure but it is the original ānanda I get which I am. Any other ānanda goes
away but the ānanda which we talk now is a pleasure gained by the knowledge that I am
ānanda. Infinite ānanda is never attained through an experience but infinite is ever
claimed through knowledge and it is a matter for understanding not a matter for
experiencing.
The moment you experience, the experience is likely to come to an end. It does not belong
to Ātmā but it belongs to ānandamaya kośa. Tṛpti is Ātmā-ānanda and I don’t experience
it but I claim that I am that ānanda, because it is jñāna-ānanda and it will last as long as I
have this knowledge. The glory of the knowledge is that it never goes away whatever be
the conditions of the mind or emotional disturbances. Whatever is the mental condition,
jñāna is not disturbed. Ātmā-ānanda is never disturbed by the mental conditions. Whether
pratibimba is there or not, I am ānanda-svarūpa. This knowledge is called mokṣa. This
unrestrained Ātmā-ānanda is eternal and everlasting. Kosānanda cannot be there all the
time. Even for a jñānī, priya-moda-pramoda is not there all the time. My svarūpa ānanda
is there all the time in spite of unfolded ānandamaya kośa. Tṛptiḥ niraṅkuśā bhavet
bhavet. After jñāna there will be no śoka which can displace Ātmā-ānanda.
The priya-moda-pramoda will come and go for jñānī depending upon the situation but
what we say for jñānī that I am ānanda-svarūpa so always there and situations cannot
disturb the svarūpa-ānanda. Kosānanda is unpredictable, uncontrollable and
unsustainable. Kosānanda will come and go and therefore, depend upon Ātmā-ānanda. A
sorrow which will replace Ātmā-ānanda will never come.

śloka 48
अपरोक्षज्ञानशोकनिवृत्ताख्ये उभे इमे ।
अवस्थे जीवगे ब्रूते आत्मानं चेदिति श्रुतिः ॥ ७.४८ ॥
aparokṣajñānaśokanivṛttākhye ubhe ime.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 813

avasthe jīvage brūte ātmānaṃ cediti śrutiḥ (7.48).

With 47th śloka, the analysis of seven stages are over. Now, a student may wonder once
upon a time Vidyāraṇya introduced a Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra and entered into
seven avasthās. Here, the student suspects that Vidyāraṇya has forgotten the original
purpose of his commentary on the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. He says all these
things he said only to comment upon the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Of the seven
avasthās, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad refers to the fifth and sixth stages. The first line talks of
stage five and the second line talks of the sixth stage. Therefore, he says aparokṣa jñāna
direct knowledge is the fifth stage and śoka-nivṛtti freedom from saṃsāra and sorrow. The
two stages named aparokṣa jñāna and śoka-nivṛtti the Upaniṣad mentions.
Thus the first line talks about aparokṣa jñāna. From this śloka, Vidyāraṇya wants to focus
our study on aparokṣa jñāna mentioned in the first line of the mantra. From śloka 48 to 69
is the topic of aparokṣa jñāna. He wants to say that aparokṣa jñāna itself is of two types.
All these we have not seen before. The jñāna of three types: parokṣa jñāna, pratyakṣa jñāna
and aparokṣa jñāna. Here Vidyāraṇya says aparokṣa jñāna are of two types.

śloka 49
अयमित्यपरोक्षत्वमुक्तं तद्द्विविधं भवेत्।
विषयस्वप्रकाशत्वाद्धियाप्येवं तदीक्षणात्॥ ७.४९ ॥
ayamityaparokṣatvamuktaṃ taddvividhaṃ bhavet.
viṣayasvaprakāśatvāddhiyāpyevaṃ tadīkṣaṇāt (7.49).
By the word ayam occurring in the first line of the mantra, direct experience or directness
of the kūṭastha Ātmā is mentioned by the Upaniṣad. This direct experience of the object is
of two types. He says viṣaya svapraksastvat. First one is actual directness of a subject
because of its nature which he calls viṣaya viṣayasvaprakāśatvāt. The second one is it is
the understood directness of the subject. The directness of the substance which is
understood by the intellect. If you go back to the tenth man example, since the very boy is
daśama he is directly available to himself. Aparokṣatva is there in the daśama all the time.
Even when the Guru said there is a tenth person, he was the daśama. He had actual
directness all the time. Initially, the directness was not understood. It is only factual
directness. When the directness is not understood by the tenth man, he thinks the tenth
man is parokṣa and he is available indirectly somewhere. When he assumes the tenth man,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 814

he says I have got the indirect knowledge of the tenth man even when the tenth man is
available directly. Even in parokṣa jñāna the aparokṣatva is there but the directness is not
understood. As long as he has not understood, he will have parokṣa jñāna. Actual
directness will coexist with parokṣa jñāna because even when parokṣa jñāna is there actual
directness is there but not understood.
Then the Guru says Tat tvam asi will the tenth man get a new directness. Tenth man is
available all the time. He does not become aparokṣa as he is all the time aparokṣa. At the
time of mahā-vākya there is no conversion of aparokṣatva, but indirect knowledge gets
converted to understood aparokṣatva. When the actual aparokṣatva was not understood
before, the tenth man is considered to be parokṣa. All the time, Brahman is directly
experienced but the directness of Brahman is not understood. So, indirectness is
superimposed on ever-directly-experienced Brahman. Because of the superimposed
indirectness, the directness of Brahman is not claimed or appreciated. But we say that I
have not experienced Brahman. He is asking for direct experience of ever-directly-
experienced Brahman because of the non-understood directness. Directness is there but it
is not understood. In Tat tvam asi mahā-vākya the understood directness is called
aparokṣa jñāna. I give another example from my own experience. I kept orange fruit in my
room. I asked please bring the orange fruit I wanted to give prasāda to a person. This
person goes and says there is no orange. I say: I kept it there, please see. He went and
searched and said there is no orange. Then I asked him to bring any other fruit. The
episode is over. Then I entered the room and the orange was there. Then I asked him why
he had not given the orange. He said that it was ‘kamala’ phala. What I called orange he
understood as musambi and what I called musambi was different for him. The orange he
was directly experiencing and the actual aparokṣatva was there but it was not understood
aparokṣatva and he was seeing it as kamalaphala. The orange for him was parokṣa vastu.
Therefore, the Consciousness is Brahman and as Consciousness, Brahman has actual
aparokṣatva all the time. The actual aparokṣatva he took it as Jīvātmā and Upaniṣad says
what you name as Jīvātmā is what I name it as Brahman. Therefore, you have to
understand that there are two aparokṣatva and the understood aparokṣatva is after the
mahā-vākya upadeśa. Mahā-vākya upadeśa is that orange you thought is this kamala
phala is the orange that I am talking about. This is all the Jīvātmā-Paramātmā aikya vākya.
The actual aparokṣatva get converted into understood aparokṣatva and what gives

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 815

liberation is understood aparokṣatva. Then there is no need for the Guru. Actual
aparokṣatva will not give liberation. Understood aparokṣatva alone will give liberation.
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad refers to understood aparokṣatva. Then only śoka-nivṛtti will
take place.

śloka 50
परोक्षज्ञानकालेऽपि विषयस्वप्रकाशता ।
समाब्रह्म स्वप्रकाशमस्तीत्येवं विबोधनात्॥ ७.५० ॥
parokṣajñānakāle:'pi viṣayasvaprakāśatā.
samābrahma svaprakāśamastītyevaṃ vibodhanāt (7.50).
He says parokṣa jñāna is the fourth stage when we listen to the definition of Brahman as
that Brahman is satya, jñāna and ananta and the Brahman existed even before sṛṣṭi, it is
called avāntara vākya. Whatever we listen about Brahman is avāntara jñāna and this jñāna
is parokṣa jñāna. Even at that time Brahman is experienced. Brahman has actual
directness. But he is unaware of it and he does not experience it. It exists during parokṣa
jñāna also. Actual Brahman exists during parokṣa jñāna as also at the time of aparokṣa
jñāna. During both times, actual directness of Brahman is common. The ever-experienced
Brahman is He. Direct Brahman he says is parokṣa. The details will be discussed in the
next class.

Class 174
śloka 50 contd.
Parokṣa means remoteness and the word aparokṣatva means proximity and intimate. In
the context of Brahman what is the meaning of parokṣa and aparokṣatva? He says the
directness of Brahman is of two types. One aparokṣatva is natural proximity of Brahman.
Natural proximity means Brahman is proximate to everyone it being one’s svarūpa. This is
one type of aparokṣatva. He uses the expression viṣaya-svaprakāśatva. It is natural
proximity or natural intimacy or direct availability of Brahman.
Then he talks of second type of aparokṣatva that is recognized proximity of Brahman.
Jñāta-aparokṣatva. First one is svābhāvika-aparokṣatva not avagata-aparokṣatva or the
recognized proximity of directness. The reason to talk about it is sometimes the object may

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 816

be directly available therefore; directness is there in the objects. Because of some peculiar
situations, sometimes some things are directly available no one has introduced what it is.
Because of the lack of introduction, one is not aware of the object. When you have indirect
knowledge, you will have the anxiety to have the direct knowledge. Natural aparokṣatva
is concealed and therefore, there is seeming parokṣatva. The natural aparokṣatva but not
recognized aparokṣatva. In the first place it is called parokṣa jñāna even though it has
natural aparokṣatva. Only after the introduction is over, comes the second aparokṣatva
and then alone we call aparokṣa jñāna because only after that the search for jñāna will end.
In the first case the intimacy is there and it is natural intimacy and not recognized
intimacy. After introduction one is relaxed.
Brahman has vividha-aparokṣatva. Even when we say Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa, Brahman
is directly available and it is called natural direct. The knowledge he has we don’t call
aparokṣa jñāna since he has not recognized the fact and so we call it parokṣa jñāna of
Brahman. When mahā-vākya is introduced the very same aparokṣatva becomes
recognized aparokṣatva and then alone we call it aparokṣa jñāna. Even during parokṣa
jñāna Brahman has natural proximity and natural intimacy. Here, we have to note a point.
In the first stage, there is natural directness but not recognized directness. When he gets
the knowledge and directness is recognized then there is recognized directness the natural
directness is there during parokṣa jñāna and also aparokṣa jñāna also. The next question is
even during parokṣa jñāna Brahman has natural directness we say. What is the proof?
Vidyāraṇya gives the proof. This man makes a statement during parokṣa jñāna. He says
brahma asti and I ask what type of Brahman you tell me. He says svaprakāśa brahma asti.
The very word svaprakāśa means directly available Brahman. Therefore, he is using the
word directly available without recognizing the very significance of the word. It is all the
time available. How to experience the ever-experienced Brahman? The word ever-
experienced is said without knowing what he wants to say. The ‘ever-experienced
Brahman is there’; in this manner he gets parokṣa jñāna of Brahman. While referring the
parokṣa jñāna of Brahman he uses the expression svaprakāśam brahma asti which
indicates the natural intimacy. In Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad there is another powerful
mantra which Ādi Śaṅkarācārya often quotes. Yat sākṣāt aparokṣāt Brahma. –-Usastha and
Kahola Brāhmaṇa. There the word used aparokṣāt Brahman and aparokṣāt means ever
intimately experienced. He uses the expression ever-experienced and he meditates for

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 817

ever-experienced Brahman and that indicates directness is there but not recognised. From
this, we come to know natural directness is there during parokṣa jñāna and also aparokṣa
jñāna.

śloka 51
–-अहं ब्रह्मेत्यनुल्लिख्य ब्रह्मास्तीत्येवमुल्लिखेत्।
परोक्षज्ञानमेतं न भ्रान्तं बाधानिरूपणात्॥ ७.५१ ॥
ahaṃ brahmetyanullikhya brahmāstītyevamullikhet.
parokṣajñānametaṃ na bhrāntaṃ bādhānirūpaṇāt (7.51).
We talk about parokṣa jñāna of Brahman even though Brahman is aparokṣa. Now, the
academic discussion here is whether parokṣa jñāna should be considered as knowledge or
as a misconception? This is the discussion. He wants to establish that parokṣa jñāna is
jñāna only and it is not misconception. Some claim parokṣa jñāna cannot be termed as
jñāna at all and it is misconception. Vidyāraṇya wants to challenge them and refute their
idea. There is a dialogue between the two group in this regard. Vidyāraṇya asks them a
question as to why parokṣa jñāna is a misconception. There are four possible reasons for
them to claim parokṣa jñāna as bhrama. Let us analyse the reasons and I will show that
they are wrong.
A person in aparokṣa jñāna does not refer to Brahman as aham. As I am in the first person
he does not refer but says that there is jagat-kāraṇa Brahman. He does not use the word
aham. Without referring to Brahman as aham, he refers to it as “there is Brahman” at the
time of parokṣa jñāna. This should come under knowledge only. This is our argument. It
does not come under erroneous knowledge or misconception. An erroneous perception is
erroneous knowledge because it is subject to falsification later. Knowledge can be falsified
later only if the knowledge is found to be a misconception. There is Brahman; this
knowledge regarding the existence of Brahman is it negated or not? You have to say that it
is negated therefore; it is wrong knowledge you have to say. First condition is not there
that the later negation is not there. Therefore, we cannot say parokṣa jñāna is
misconception. In the case of rope-snake knowledge, snake-knowledge is ultimately
negated as misconception and is falsified. Because snake is negated we say that knowledge
is false. Brahma asti can be negated only when we say brahma nāsti and it is not so.
Because it is not falsified it cannot be called bhrānti jñāna or misconception.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 818

śloka 52
ब्रह्म नास्तीति मानं चेत्स्याद्बाध्येत तदा ध्रुवम्।
न चैवं प्रबलं मनं पश्यामोऽतो न बाध्यते ॥ ७.५२ ॥
brahma nāstīti mānaṃ cetsyādbādhyeta tadā dhruvam.
na caivaṃ prabalaṃ manaṃ paśyāmo:'to na bādhyate (7.52).
This is the explanation of the word badha-nirūpanat in the previous śloka. It is badha-
anirūpanat negation of brahma asti is not proved. That is explained here. A person knows
brahma asti. After mahā-vākya knowledge, he gets another knowledge and if that second
knowledge happens to be brahma nāsti then the later knowledge will negate the former
knowledge and the former knowledge will become misconception. In the case of Brahman,
we never get the knowledge brahma nāsti and as long as the nāsti knowledge does not
come. Brahma asti jñāna is parokṣa jñāna only.
Suppose one gets a later knowledge which is brahma nāsti and if such knowledge occurs
in the mind of the student only then the former knowledge, the previous knowledge,
brahma asti would have been negated. If it had been negated you could have called it as
misconception. No such thing has happened in the case of Brahman. Brahman is never
negated. A powerful later knowledge does not take place in the mind of the student at any
time. We don’t have any such negating knowledge and therefore, the conclusion is
parokṣa jñāna is not falsified or negated and it comes under jñāna category and not
misconception category.

śloka 53
व्यक्त्यनुल्लेखमात्रेण भ्रमत्वे स्वर्गधीरपि ।
भ्रान्तिः स्याद्व्यक्त्यनुल्लेखात्सामान्योल्लेखदर्शनात्॥ ७.५३ ॥
vyaktyanullekhamātreṇa bhramatve svargadhīrapi.
bhrāntiḥ syādvyaktyanullekhātsāmānyollekhadarśanāt (7.53).
Now, Vidyāraṇya talks of the second argument of Pūrvapakṣa. Parokṣa jñāna is a
misconception and not knowledge says Pūrvapakṣa. In parokṣa jñāna, the person has only

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 819

sāmānya knowledge and he does not know the particular specific knowledge of Brahman.
It is like telling I have got a son. I do not know the specific feature of the son.
I know only the general knowledge. It is sāmānya jñāna. I don’t have viśeṣa jñāna. It is
knowledge in which specific nature is not identified. I know you have a son. Similarly,
when you say brahma asti we have sāmānya jñāna without the clear knowledge of the
specific features of Brahman without viśeṣa jñāna. So Pūrvapakṣa says parokṣa jñāna is a
misconception because it is non-specific and it is general.
Then, Vidyāraṇya says if a general without specification becomes misconception, my
knowledge that you have children will become a misconception and in that case it will be
tantamount to your not having any children. Because it is general, it cannot be bhrama or
misconception. Vidyāraṇya gives the knowledge of the heaven or svarga as an example.
From scripture we get the knowledge of svarga. That knowledge is sāmānya knowledge
and not specific knowledge. I can only imagine the heaven. Amṛta-jñāna is only sāmānya
jñāna and just because it is sāmānya jñāna you cannot say it is misconception because this
jñāna is based on śāstra pramāṇa.
Merely because specific features are not referred to or unknown, merely because the
knowledge is general, suppose you say the knowledge is false. Suppose you say svarga-
jñāna is misconception just because that knowledge is non-specific; this is not possible
because this jñāna has Śruti pramāṇa. This Pūrvapakṣa cannot negate because the entire
karma kāṇḍa talks of the svarga as the karma-phala. Any Vaidika will not say svarga is
imaginary and we say svarga is vyāvahārika satya. So svarga-jñāna is general knowledge
but supported by śāstra. Just because it is general knowledge you cannot say it is bhrama.
More in the next class.

Class 176
śloka 53 cotnd.
Vidyāraṇya deals with the aparokṣa jñāna of brahman and first he talked about two types
of aparokṣatva of brahman which is the intrinsic nature and aparokṣatva of brahman
which is recognised after introduction. The recognized aparokṣatva alone he called
aparokṣa jñāna. The parokṣa jñāna will remove the covering regarding the brahman-
existence. Bhāna-āvaraṇa, āvaraṇa with regard to experience of brahman, goes with

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 820

aparokṣa jñāna. Now, Vidyāraṇya has taken a technical diversion regarding parokṣa jñāna
of brahman. How does one get parokṣa jñāna of brahman? Brahman asti, there is
brahman, is parokṣa jñāna, whereas aparokṣa jñāna is brahman asmi, that brahman I am.
The debate is on whether the knowledge brahma asti, that there is brahman, comes under
knowledge category or delusion category. Is parokṣa jñāna possible or should we
categorize the parokṣa jñāna as delusion? Vidyāraṇya wants to establish parokṣa jñāna as
also a type of jñāna only and it will not come under delsution. To establish this he asks a
question to Pūrvapakṣa who claims parokṣa jñāna is a delusion. He asks the question: if
you say it is bhrama jñāna, what is the reason? Vidyāraṇya himself suggests four possible
reasons. He wants to say all the four reasons are not proper reasons and therefore, you
cannot conclude parokṣa jñāna is illusion.
The first reason is do you say it is delusion since that jñāna is negated later? Is later
negatability the reason for delusion status of parokṣa jñāna brahma asti? This Vidyāraṇya
answered that it cannot be. Parokṣa jñāna is brahma asti and this jñāna is never negated
later and if it had to be negated the knowledge should have been brahma nāsti. But
unfortunately there is no brahma nāsti jñāna. Later negatability is not a sound reason.
Now, Vidyāraṇya has come to second possibility. Pūrvapakṣa argues: when we gain the
parokṣa jñāna brahma asti we have sāmānya jñāna that there is something called brahman.
I don’t have viśeṣa jñāna that this particular entity is brahman. There is non-specific
reference to brahman. And because there is no specification there is no identification of
brahman I say it is a delusion. This general reference without identification here it is called
vyakti-anullekha. Vyakti means this specific entity. This means a generalized knowledge. I
will give you an example. Sometimes, they get a bomb-threat phone call. They take some
security measures. They know there are so many luggage bags and they belong to
travelers. They ask the travelers to identify the bag. Before identification the sāmānya
knowledge is there that all bags belong to the travelers. Then each passenger has to come
and say this is my luggage. Here, the authority gets the specific knowledge and this is
called vyakti-ullekha knowledge. Brahman is there among the world is the sāmānya jñāna.
It is vyakti-anulleka-jñāna and only when you say it is Śākṣi-caitanya it is vyakti-ullekha-
jñāna. Since parokṣa jñāna is vyakti-anulleka-jñāna, a generalised knowledge, it has to be
an illusion.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 821

For that, Vidyāraṇya says if any general knowledge becomes false, then the knowledge
that there is a particular island in the Indian ocean which has a name will be invalid
knowledge. I have got general knowledge that there is a particular island and will this
general knowledge be valid knowledge or invalid knowledge? Even though the
knowledge is general, just because my knowledge is general I cannot say the knowledge is
a delusion; then the island will become non-existent. In fact, most of our knowledge is
general. Just because I don’t know, I cannot say the knowledge is a delusion; then it will
mean the knowledge does not exist. The generalized knowledge cannot be defined as an
illusion. Therefore, parokṣa jñāna of brahman cannot be said to be an illusion. If you claim
the general knowledge is delusion because of the absence of identification, even the
general knowledge of heaven which we have got from a valid source of knowledge, that is
śāstra pramāṇa, will become a delusion. That valid svarga jñāna also will become an
illusion if you say all general knowledge is an illusion, in the absence of specific
knowledge. It is right knowledge even though it is general knowledge and therefore,
general knowledge can be right and it need not be invalid. In svarga-jñāna, we do not have
any specific jñāna of the house of Indra’s palace in heaven. The knowledge of heaven is
also in the form of general reference. Just as in the case brahma asti the knowledge is
general; similarly, in the case of heaven also the general knowledge is there; so also
brahma asti knowledge cannot be called delusion.

śloka 54
अपरोक्षत्वयोग्यस्य न परोक्षमतिर्भ्रमः ।
परोक्षमित्यनुल्लेखादर्थात्पारोक्ष्यसम्भवात्॥ ७.५४ ॥
aparokṣatva yogyasya na parokṣamatirbhramaḥ.
parokṣamityanullekhādarthātpārokṣyasambhavāt (7.54).
Now, the third reason is being considered. It seems to be the right reason but Vidyāraṇya
says this also cannot be accepted. When you say parokṣa jñāna of Brahman, you indirectly
say that Brahman is parokṣa vastu because the very word indirect knowledge means it is a
knowledge of something which is indirectly available. If you say brahma-jñāna as parokṣa
jñāna you indirectly say that it is knowledge of Brahman which is not now directly
available and later it is going to be directly available. You say Brahman is not directly
available. Therefore, the word indirect knowledge conveys the idea that the object of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 822

indirect knowledge is away and is not directly available and this is the message you give
when you say that the knowledge is parokṣa jñāna. It shows the remoteness of the object.
Brahman is not a remote object, it is very close to us, I am that Brahman. Therefore, it is the
most intimately available thing and when you talk of parokṣa jñāna you talk of remoteness
of the intimate thing. It is closer than sūkṣma-śarīra, sthūla-śarīra and it is closer than my
thought. Talking about remoteness of a close-by entity is a mistake or delusion as
Brahman is aparokṣatva-yogya, fit for aparokṣa jñāna because it is always intimate.
Therefore, it is unfit for parokṣa jñāna. When I am seeing every one of you, you are fit for
aparokṣa jñāna. You are not fit for parokṣatva. Suppose I talk of parokṣa jñāna of you now,
that must be delusion only. Similarly, Brahman is aparokṣatva-yogya and your talk of
parokṣatva of something aparokṣa is you superimposing parokṣatva on aparokṣa
Brahman. Brahman is nitya aparokṣa Brahman and you talk of parokṣa jñāna; so, it has to
be a delusion only.
Brahman is fit for only aparokṣa status. Parokṣa jñāna of such a Brahman is false and
superimposition only. If this is the argument of Pūrvapakṣa, Vidyāraṇya gives the answer.
He says no. When a person gains the knowledge of Brahman from scriptures, he gains the
Brahman defining statement. He gains the knowledge jagat-kāraṇa Brahman. He does not
name parokṣa jñāna and it is not given by the student. He does not say either. That
thought does not rise in his mind. It is named parokṣa jñāna by Advaitic Ācāryas and they
know after mahā-vākya śravaṇa he is going to get aparokṣa jñāna. From the standpoint of
aparokṣa jñāna this knowledge we name as parokṣa jñāna but the one who receives the
knowledge does not deliberately talk about parokṣatva or aparokṣatva. It seems when
they dug up the earth they got some coins belonging to BC. They ask how do you prove
that it belonged to BC period. They have written themselves 100BC. What is the defect in
that? The people do not know that it is 100 BC. We later people call it 100 BC. Therefore,
remember BC people never knew they lived in BC. When we read avāntara vākya I never
identified it as parokṣa or aparokṣa but it is simple jñāna without any frills. Later, when
we study mahā-vākya we come to know that it is aparokṣa. So we have given it a name as
parokṣa jñāna but parokṣa-jñānī does not deliberately name it as parokṣa jñāna. The
student does not deliberately refer to the jñāna as parokṣa jñāna. If the student does not
refer to it as parokṣa jñāna then why do you call it parokṣa jñāna? For that, he says it gains
the parokṣa status only by implication based on the later aparokṣa jñāna. The word

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 823

parokṣa jñāna only means it is not aparokṣa. We do not deliberately dwell on the specific
application of parokṣa. If the later knowledge is aparokṣa we give the non-aparokṣatva
status. It is a title given by others not by the students. By implication the first knowledge
that is brahma asti is given the parokṣa status and it is possible to give such a name. With
this, the third reason is also negated.

śloka 55
अंशागृहीतिर्भ्रान्तिश्चेद् घटज्ञां भ्रमो भवेत्।
निरंशस्यापि संशत्वं व्यावर्त्यांशविभेदतः ॥ ७.५५ ॥
aṃśāgṛhītirbhrāntiśced ghaṭajñāṃ bhramo bhavet.
niraṃśasyāpi saṃśatvaṃ vyāvartyāṃśavibhedataḥ (7.55).
Pūrvapakṣa may argue when a person gains the knowledge brahma asti, no doubt it
comes from Veda pramāṇa, no doubt he knows Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa. The knowledge
is incomplete. It is incomplete because certain important information he has not got. He
knows the astitva, sat aspect, he knows but he has not understood Brahman is cit, caitanya
aspect, which is all the time available as aham. Sat-aṃśa he understood as parokṣa jñāna
so he says asti and he does not know cit-aṃśa. Then he would have said caitanya is always
aparokṣa. Consciousness can never be parokṣa. When sat aṃśa is understood it is parokṣa
jñāna and when he understand cit-aṃśa it is aparokṣa jñāna. Since he knows partial
knowledge I call it delusion. Whatever is incomplete knowledge that is delusion. He says
if incomplete knowledge becomes delusion, every knowledge you have is delusion. No
knowledge of ours is complete. I don’t have the knowledge of the mic and anything I see
in the world or also about the people sitting in front of me. Just because I have incomplete
knowledge of the student, it cannot be a delusion. I know you are wonderful student. This
partial knowledge cannot be a delusion just because it is partial. Similarly, Brahman-
parokṣa-jñāna is knowledge only. If parokṣa jñāna is a delusion, because certain aspects
are unknown or it is partial knowledge, can the partiality of knowledge make the
knowledge invalid? Vidyāraṇya says every jñāna is invalid only. Every knowledge in
every field is incomplete alone. Vidyāraṇya does not go into details. Even the basic
knowledge of pot will become an illusion beacuse we do not have the knowledge of the
pot and its material, how it is made, etc. The fourth option is also negated. Don’t call it
delusion. We are willing to accept it as partial knowledge.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 824

Hearing this statement some other Pūrvapakṣi wakes up and he says that you are in
trouble. You say parokṣa jñāna is valid knowledge only even though it is partial
knowledge. In parokṣa jñāna which is partial knowledge only of sat aṃśa but one knows
cit aṃśa later. You now agree Brahman has sat aṃśa and cit aṃśa unknowingly. That
means Brahman has parts. Brahman is sāvayava. Brahman might not have sajātīya-bheda,
vijātīya-bheda, but you agree Brahman has internal division svagata-bheda and once you
say Brahman is aṃśa-trayavat Brahman, then I will say Brahman is anitya, sāvayavatvāt,
ghaṭavat, because it has parts like a pot. Anything that has parts will fall apart. Brahman
also will disintegrate later. This is the Pūrvapakṣa’s question. This has nothing to do with
previous knowledge. Is Brahman sāvayava or niravayava?
For that, Vidyāraṇya gives his answer. Brahman does not have three parts sat-cit-ānanda.
They are superimposed three names on Brahman from the standpoint of the world. Sat-cit-
ānanda are three names from the point of view of the world. Since the world is mithyā,
from the standpoint of the mithyā world, Brahman has to be given some name. Then I
have to differentiate Brahman from the world and for differentiating, I have to give some
name and since Brahman is asat from standpoint of asat prapañca Brahman is called sat.
After the negation of asat prapañca, you cannot use the word sat also; then it becomes a
meaningless word. From the standpoint of the world we can call day and night but on the
sun itself, there is no day or night. You cannot use daytime as the word daytime is
relevant only when we have night time. Brahman is not asat like prapañca and for
negating asat status I use the word sat. Similarly, I see the world as jaḍa. The jaḍatva is
status of the world and I want to differentiate from jaḍa prapañca and for that I have to
use another word. Now, I want to negate the jaḍatva and therefore, I use the word cit. In
the world, I see grief and sorrow. Because I see duḥkha all over and I want to negate
prapañca duḥkha in Brahman, therefore, I use the word which is ānanda. The purpose is
different and since three aspects are to be negated, the world has three aṃśas and to
negate I have to use three words but after negation, the three words are not required.
More in the next class.

class 176
śloka 55 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 825

Vidyāraṇya had a brief discussion on the nature of parokṣa jñāna of Brahman analyzing
whether parokṣa jñāna is possible at all because Brahman happens to be aparokṣa-rūpa
and how can you have indirect knowledge of directly available entity? Through this
analysis, he established that indirect knowledge is possible even in the case of a directly
available entity when a directly available entity is not directly understood. Remember the
example of the tenth person, even though the tenth man’s status is directly available, the
directness was concealed because of ignorance. With the superimposed indirectness, an
indirect knowledge is possible just as the tenth man understanding the tenth man
indirectly. Therefore, he divided the directness of a thing itself into two types: one is
intrinsic directness in the entity which we called natural directness and the second type is
non-recognized entity which will have natural directness, but it will not have recognized
directness.
When the direct entity is not recognized, it will have indirect knowledge it may be
misunderstood or the indirectness may be or will be superimposed even upon a direct
entity. That is what happened in the case of Brahman even though it is ever directly
available, the directness is not understood, indirectness is superimposed and therefore, we
use the expression indirect knowledge. Therefore, whatever it is, the conclusion is that
direct knowledge is possible and indirect knowledge is also possible with regard to
Brahman.
What is the role of the two types of knowledge? What is the result of indirect knowledge
and what is the result of direct knowledge? The indirect knowledge will negate the
covering with regard to the existence of Brahman. Indirect knowledge will remove the
doubt regarding sat aṃśa of Brahman, with regard to existence of Brahman, which means
that when a person gets indirect knowledge he will say brahma asti and he will not
question the existence of Brahman as with regard to that there is no covering any more,
the existence is evident; sat aṃśa is clear for him. What is the problem then? However, he
will say: there is Brahman, but I have not experienced it. He is accepting the existence, but
he is negating the experience of Brahman. This non-acceptance of the experience of
Brahman is called bhāna-āvaraṇa or cit-avaraṇa. Through indirect knowledge, sat-āvaraṇa
is gone, but cit-āvaraṇa continues, that is bhāna-āvaraṇa continues, and he expresses that I
know Brahman, but I have not experienced Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 826

Further, when the aparokṣa jñāna, direct knowledge takes place, then he will say I am
Brahman and after saying “I am Brahman”, “I have not experienced Brahman” he cannot
say because if I am Brahman, I am experienced all the time; when I know I am Brahman,
Brahman is ever-experienced as I am. Therefore, I will never negate the experience of
Brahman; I will never have the covering with regard to Brahman-experience. After
aparokṣa jñāna there is no concealment of Brahman-experience. I will say Brahman ever-
existent, is Brahman is ever-experienced also. After parokṣa jñāna, I will say Brahman is
but not experienced after aparokṣa jñāna I will say Brahman is and it is ever-experienced
as aham. Therefore, he presents it in a technical language that parokṣa jñāna removes sat-
āvaraṇa and aparokṣa jñāna removes cit- or bhāna-āvaraṇa. That is going to be said in the
next śloka.
Before that, Vidyāraṇya clarifies a possible doubt also in the second line of the śloka 55.
We say that parokṣa jñāna removes sat-āvaraṇa and aparokṣa jñāna removes cit-āvaraṇa;
that means you accept Brahman has two parts one is sat and another is cit part. You say
one knowledge removes the covering of sat and another removes cit. Elsewhere, you say
Brahman is partless. Tell me whether you accept Brahman is partless or not. Whenever
they ask such a question, we should ask a counter question. Are you talking from
vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi or pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi? From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi Brahman is partless
and from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi we do accept Brahman in three parts:
1. that part of Brahman which is adhiṣṭhāna of the mithyā jagat or universe, then it is
called satya or sat; Brahman gets the name of sat when it is looked at as the
adhiṣṭhāna of asat prapañca, mithyā prapañca;
2. when the very same Brahman is looked as the adhiṣṭhāna of acit prapañca meaning
jaḍa prapañca then Brahman is given the name cit;
3. and when the very same Brahman is looked as the adhiṣṭhāna of duḥkha prapañca
or duḥkha then from the standpoint of duḥkha, Brahman the adhiṣṭhāna is called
ānanda.
Therefore, from asat-dṛṣṭi Brahman is sat. From acit-dṛṣṭi Brahman is called cit and
anānanda-dṛṣṭi, Brahman is called ānanda. That is, vyāvahārika-aṃśa-traya-satvāt
brāhmaṇaḥ api aṃśatrayam uccate.
From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, there is neither mithyā universe nor is there jaḍa prapañca, nor
is there duḥkha and when duḥkha itself is not there from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, how can I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 827

call it as ānanda? From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, sat-cit-ānanda, all these three words are
irrelevant. From vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, we call it sat-cit-ānanda Brahman. When the three
mithyā aspects asat, acit and duḥkha are to be analysed, where asat means mithyā, acit
means jaḍa and an ānanda is duḥkha, since in the world these three aspects are there, we
reveal Brahman by negating each one of them. When we negate the first it is called sat,
when we negate the second it is cit and when we negate the third it is ānanda. From
pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, we have nothing to negate and there the words sat-cit-ānanda have no
relevance. Brahman is partless from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi and three aṃśas are accepted from
vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi.

śloka 56
असत्वांशो निवर्तेत परोक्षज्ञानतस्तथा ।
अभानांशनिवृत्तिः स्यादपरोक्षधिया कृ ता ॥ ७.५६ ॥
asatvāṃśo nivarteta parokṣajñānatastathā.
abhānāṃśanivṛttiḥ syādaparokṣadhiyā kṛtā (7.56).
So we are talking all this from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. Therefore, he says in the vyāvahārika
level, through parokṣa jñāna, sat-āvaraṇa that is the concealment of existence of Brahman
is negated. That means I accept brahma asti. By gaining aparokṣa jñāna abhāna-aṃśa-
nivṛtti the concealment with regard to experience of Brahman is also negated. Bhāna
means cit-aṃśa or experience. That means I will never say Brahman is not experienced but
I will say Brahman being Consciousness, Consciousness being ever-experienced, how can I
say I don’t have Brahman-experience! I have Brahman-experience all the time. The very
idea of looking for brahman-experience is a misconception.

śloka 57
दशमोऽस्तीत्यविभ्रान्तं परोक्षज्ञानमीक्ष्यते ।
ब्रह्मास्तीत्यपि तद्वत्स्यादज्ञानावरणं समम्॥ ७.५७ ॥
daśamo:'stītyavibhrāntaṃ parokṣajñānamīkṣyate.
brahmāstītyapi tadvatsyādajñānāvaraṇaṃ samam (7.57).
He wants to compare the two types of knowledge aparokṣa and parokṣa in the case of the
tenth man and in the case of Brahman. Then he will point out what will produce aparokṣa
jñāna and parokṣa jñāna. The knowledge that the tenth man which is parokṣa jñāna the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 828

indirect knowledge of the tenth man, even though he happens to be directly available by
himself, is considered as a valid knowledge. We don’t look at it as misconception.
Vidyāraṇya emphasizes this because there are some people in Advaita itself who say that
there is no parokṣa jñāna possible and Vidyāraṇya says parokṣa jñāna is possible in the
case of Brahman.
If valid indirect knowledge is possible with regard to the tenth man who happens to be
himself, then valid indirect knowledge is possible with regard to Brahman also. Valid
indirect knowledge is equally possible with regard to brahma also and valid direct
knowledge is also possible. In both the cases, the mechanism is the same. In both cases of
daśama and Brahman, ignorance is doing the same thing the sat-aṃśa is concealed by
ajñāna. That cover is removed by parokṣa jñāna.

śloka 58
आत्मा ब्रह्मेति वाक्यार्थे निःशेषेण विचारिते ।
व्यक्तिरुल्लिख्यते यद्वद्दशमस्त्वमसीत्यतः ॥ ७.५८ ॥
Ātmā brahmeti vākyārthe niḥśeṣeṇa vicārite.
vyaktirullikhyate yadvaddaśamastvamasītyataḥ (7.58).
When parokṣa jñāna is converted into aparokṣa jñāna then the general knowledge of
Brahman’s existence is converted into specific knowledge of Brahman’s existence. General
knowledge is that Brahman is there. When aparokṣa jñāna takes place I no more say that
Brahman is existing somewhere but the knowledge gets particularized and that is
Brahman exists as me, the ever-experienced Consciousness. This particularized knowledge
is aparokṣa jñāna which takes place by mahā-vākya-vicāra. Therefore, he says ‘Ātmā
brahma’ it is vākyartha; here the vākya means mahā-vākya and artha means the sense or
the meaning of the mahā-vākya when it is thoroughly enquired into. When the Vedānta-
śravaṇa is done properly, the clear understanding takes place. One is clear understanding
of mahā-vākya and more important is the clear understanding of the fact that I the ever-
evident Consciousness am ever-free Consciousness.
Therefore, he says the specific nature of Brahman is known that we saw with the example
of ten suitcases of ten people given in the last class. I have the vision of the suitcase but
identification is not known, this identification process is called vyaktirullekhyate. The
identification of Brahman is myself. I am Brahman is the particularization of Brahman as I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 829

the caitanya. Identification is invoked as I myself exactly like the tenth man example. First
he was told daśamaḥ asti he was pleased and the satisfaction was with the knowledge that
the tenth man is somewhere; tenth man has not been identified as identity was not
invoked before but when he said daśamaḥ tvam asi then identity of tenth man is invoked.
Similarly, the mahā-vākya is the invocation of identity of Brahman. The Brahman
identification process is called mahā-vākya-vicāra as in the case of daśamaḥ tvam asi, the
tenth man you are. These portions are important from another angle also to negate one of
the misconceptions in Vedāntic field. There is a general misconception that during śravaṇa
we get parokṣa jñāna indirect knowledge of Brahman. And generally they say only during
nididhyāsana, in meditation alone, the direct knowledge takes place. śravaṇa will give
indirect knowledge and meditation will give direct experience but Vidyāraṇya negates
that and says indirect knowledge also takes place in śravaṇa and direct knowledge also
has to take place in śravaṇa only. That means the knowing process must be completed in
śravaṇa only. Without completing the knowing process, if a person practices nididhyāsana
or meditation, that nididhyāsana is only for the better śravaṇa later. I have direct
knowledge of Brahman and this conviction should take place in śravaṇa and if this does
not take place in śravaṇa, after practicing manana and nididhyāsana, aparokṣa jñāna has
to take place in śravaṇa only and that too mahā-vākya-śravaṇa. The direct knowledge is in
śravaṇa only. This Vidyāraṇya will repeatedly say in the future ślokas also. We should not
do meditation for Brahma-anubhava and this is done by the confused seekers. It is wrong
sādhana.

śloka 59
दशमः क इति प्रश्ने त्वमेवेति निराकृ ते ।
गणयित्वा स्वेन सह स्वमेव दशमं स्मरेत्॥ ७.५९ ॥
daśamaḥ ka iti praśne tvameveti nirākṛte.
gaṇayitvā svena saha svameva daśamaṃ smaret (7.59).
This idea alone Sūreśvarācārya emphasizes in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi. Through vākya-śravaṇa
alone the direct knowledge should rise. Since it is a very important topic in Vedānta,
Vidyāraṇya dwells upon that. This idea is elaborated in various ślokas. The tenth man has
parokṣa jñāna. The parokṣa jñāna is daśamaḥ asti. He says I know there is the tenth man
but I have not experienced the tenth man; how can I directly experience and identify the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 830

tenth man? And says: please show the identity; this is what he asks the Guru. Now what
does the Guru say? He does not say go and sit in meditation. He does not say nirvikalpaka
samādhi will give you experience of Brahman. Guru does not put the daśama in
meditation. He says you don’t have to do anything for the experience of the tenth man
because the tenth man happens to be you, the ever-experienced individual. What is
needed is mahā-vākya upadeśa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya answers how to experience the
tenth man. This is the question. When such a question is asked, the Guru does not ask the
questioner to meditate. He asks why do you work for the tenth man and says that the
tenth man happens to be you, the ever-experienced one. The curiosity of daśama-
experience is negated here. He does not nourish the curiosity in putting him on a
meditation-trip but he only removes the curiosity by saying: why should you look for
tenth-man-experience since you are the tenth-man, ever-experienced! The anxiety is
negated by the mahā-vākya, tenth-man-mahā-vākya. When that is negated, the tenth man
does not sit in meditation. With the help of a Guru, he brings all the other nine members
once again. When the nine are in the proximity he can claim: I am the tenth man. Starting
with other members, previously after nine he was crying but now after mahā-vākya-
upadeśa after nine counts he does not cry like before but he cries in joy.
Now also he cries in joy saying daśamaḥ aham asmi. He recognizes: I am the tenth man.
And after counting I am the tenth, what sādhana is required? No sādhana is required.
After the clear understanding that I am the tenth and clear understanding that nothing is
required other than understanding the sādhana is over and if he practices nididhyāsana
later, the type of nididhyāsana is not for jñāna, not for mokṣa because I am mukta and
nididhyāsana is reminding repeatedly that the journey is over. Nididhyāsana is claiming
the end of the journey; I am no more a sādhaka is nididhyāsana. I don’t have to work for
mokṣa is nididhyāsana. What you need is not meditation but what you need is śravaṇa
and śravaṇa is pradhāna and meditation is only to support efficient śravaṇa.

śloka 60
दशमोऽस्मीति वाक्योत्था न धीरस्य विहन्यते ।
आदिमध्यावसानेषु न नवत्वस्य संशयः ॥ ७.६० ॥
daśamo:'smīti vākyotthā na dhīrasya vihanyate.
ādimadhyāvasāneṣu na navatvasya saṃśayaḥ (7.60).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 831

When the tenth man recounts all the ten, what is the state of his mind? Previously when he
was counting, the state was disturbed state. He was worried where the tenth man is and
he suffered saṃsāra. Now he knows where navatva exists and where the tenth is there.
Navatva is outside and tenth is within himself. There is no confusion regarding the locus
of navatva and there is no confusion of daśamatva; there is no confusion regarding
anātmatva and ātmatva. There is clear knowledge of nineness and tenthness and the clear
knowledge is born out of daśamaḥ asmi the knowledge in the form of daśamaḥ asmi I am
the tenth man.
daśamosmi should be connected with the jñāna. The knowledge is born out of
daśamo:'smīti vākyotthā the statement that you are the tenth man. “I am the tenth man” is
knowledge born out of statement: “you are the tenth man”.
This knowledge is never shaken or never obstructed during the beginning of the counting
process, during the middle of the counting the process and the end of the counting
process. In short, all the time this knowledge that daśamatva belongs to me is never
doubted and also navatvasya with regard to navatva also there is no doubt at all that it
does not belong to me but it belongs to them and daśamatva never belongs to them it
belongs to me.
When we grow old and when we are about to die, even then we should know that
nityatva never belongs to the body, world, mind also but nityatva ever belongs to me and
me alone. It must be vṛtti in the death bed also. Muktatva does not belong to the world,
never belongs to the body or the mind, but it belongs to me the śākṣī. Thus, with regard to
nitya, śuddha mukta as even I use the word I must have these words as description of
myself and similarly, the sorrow belongs to the world, body and the mind but never
belongs to me, the Ātmā. More in the next class.

Class 177
śloka 60 contd.
Vidyāraṇya established that in the case of brahma-jñāna also, there are two stages in the
form of parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna. Normally, parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna is
possible with regard to a remote object. In the case of Brahman, which is intimate, both
parokṣa and aparokṣa jñāna is still possible. Parokṣa jñāna is the knowledge that Brahman

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 832

exists and aparokṣa jñāna is the knowledge that I am that Brahman. This he established
with the tenth man example. The knowledge of the tenth man being alive is parokṣa jñāna
while the knowledge that I am the tenth man is aparokṣa jñāna. Generally, when we get
parokṣa and aparokṣa jñāna, there will be two different types of pramāṇas. For example,
when I read the description of Badrinath temple form the book I get parokṣa jñāna where
the source of parokṣa jñāna is śabda pramāṇa. Śabda means words. If I want direct
knowledge of Badrinath I cannot use the book for that but I have to go to Badrinath and
directly perceive that and then alone I will get aparokṣatva or direct knowledge. Then I
will get pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Śabda pramāṇa gave parokṣa jñāna and pratyakṣa pramāṇa
gives aparokṣa jñāna. Suppose I see the smoke behind the wall, from the smoke I infer the
fire and that knowledge is only indirect knowledge. I only know that there is fire but I
don’t know the details whether it is big or small fire. If I want to know the details, I should
see the fire for myself and then I get direct knowledge or aparokṣa jñāna. With regard to
fire, parokṣa jñāna came through anumāna-pramāṇa and aparokṣa jñāna came through
pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Generally parokṣa jñāna comes by one pramāṇa and aparokṣa jñāna
comes by different pramāṇa.
Naturally, when it comes to brahma-jñāna, here also we have two one parokṣa jñāna and
aparokṣa jñāna. Now I get parokṣa jñāna through śabda pramāṇa; the question is I want to
get aparokṣa jñāna. Which pramāṇa should I use? All my previous experiences prove that
always aparokṣa jñāna is gained through some other pramāṇa. Śabda pramāṇa gave
parokṣa jñāna of Badrinath and pratyakṣa pramāṇa alone gave me aparokṣa jñāna of
Badrinath. Similarly, the crucial question is in the case of brahma-jñāna: if parokṣa jñāna
comes through Vedānta vākya, aparokṣa jñāna comes through which pramāṇa? It is an
important point. Here, Vidyāraṇya wants us to note that in the case of brahma-jñāna,
parokṣa jñāna comes through vākya, meaning śabda pramāṇa, and aparokṣa jñāna also
comes from śabda pramāṇa alone. Vedānta vākya alone is parokṣa-jñāna-kāraṇa and
Vedānta vākya alone is aparokṣa-jñāna-kāraṇa also. Śabda is cause of both parokṣa and
aparokṣa. It is not true in the case of Badrinath or inferred fire. There I use different
pramāṇas for each. In the case of Brahman, indirect knowledge and direct knowledge also
come from Vedānta vākya and śravaṇa.
Now, the question is how do you say so? How can this happen? If such a question comes
up, Vidyāraṇya will say go to the tenth man. In this case Guru’s vākya alone gave parokṣa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 833

jñāna as also aparokṣa jñāna also that the tenth man is there and tenth man I am. Vākya
can give both parokṣa and aparokṣa jñāna. Then comes the next question as to how the
same śabda pramāṇa can give two different types of knowledge? For that, our answer is
even though it is the same śabda pramāṇa the type of sentence employed is different. It
comes from Guru’s mouth only. But two different types of sentences are used. One
sentence gives parokṣa jñāna and another type gives aparokṣa jñāna. In the case of the
tenth man, there is tenth man he is not drowned in the river don’t cry, etc., gave the
parokṣa jñāna where it gives the knowledge of general existence; it is sattva-āvaraṇa-
nivartaka-jñāna. Thereafter, he changes the sentence and says the tenth man is not
generally existing but that tenth man exists in the form of the very you. For the listener, it
is not general existence but it is specific existence in the form of I myself. That type of
vākya which gives parokṣa jñāna is called avāntara-vākya which also comes under śabda
pramāṇa only; this gives general existence of Brahman and it removes the covering of the
Brahman existence. Thereafter, when the Guru says that that Brahman you are, it is called
mahā-vākya which also comes under śabda pramāṇa only. One and the same Vedāntic
book and one and the same Guru-upadeśa gives both parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna.
Avāntara-vākya-śravaṇa gives parokṣa jñāna and mahā-vākya-śravaṇa gives aparokṣa
jñāna. You don’t have to use any other means to get direct knowledge. This is what
Vidyāraṇya is struggling to convey and he gives examples from different Upaniṣads to
convey this. What are the avāntara vākyas in different Upaniṣads and what are the mahā-
vākyas in different Upaniṣads?

śloka 61
सदेवेत्यादिवाक्येन ब्रह्मसत्त्वं परोक्षतः ।
गृहीत्वा तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्याद्व्यक्तिं समुल्लिखेत्॥ ७.६१ ॥
sadevetyādivākyena brahmasattvaṃ parokṣataḥ.
gṛhītvā tattvamasyādivākyādvyaktiṃ samullikhet (7.61).
In these two ślokas, examples from Chāndogya Upaniṣad are taken. He shows what is an
avāntara vākya and what is a mahā-vākya. He gives reference to 6.2.1 of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad which introduces Brahman and when the student listens to the statement his
idea is: there is Brahman, that Brahman is pure existence, that Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa,
that Brahman has Māyā śakti and through this avāntara vākya he knows there is Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 834

The student grasps or gains the knowledge and only knows the general existence of
Brahman. Of course the Upaniṣad does not use the word Brahman the pure existence.
Then the Upaniṣad talks of the creation and how three elements came into existence, etc.
Then he talks of the sṛṣṭi in seven sections. There the student gets parokṣa jñāna alone.
Then the Guru prepares the student and having prepared the student exactly like in the
case of tenth man calling all the nine men there and when he has counted nine at that time,
he should say Tat tvam asi. You cannot tell the statement out of context. The context-
preparation is very much essential.
Therefore, the teacher has to prepare the student; existence was there, existence continues
to be there and existence is everywhere and in you also, there is is-ness in the form of I am.
The very same all-pervading existence which is in the body-mind-complex also which is
pronounced as amness, that amness is existence. Then say Tat tvam asi. That Brahman you
are. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad, nine times the teaching of Tat tvam asi is given and the
teacher has no other way but keep on repeating hoping that it will ultimately click. Here,
Chāndogya Upaniṣad reference 8.7 mantra is given. Also it is repeated in 8, 9 and 12, etc. If
the student listens as it should be listened, he is able to identify Brahman directly as I the
evident consciousness-principle. He identifies Brahman not as object but as ever-evident
Consciousness which is called aparokṣa jñāna and therefore, Tat tvam asi is called mahā-
vākya. Parokṣa jñāna and also aparokṣa jñāna are given in Vedānta vākya and no outside
pramāṇa is required. Here, vākya alone is pramāṇa. What about manana and
nididhyāsana? They are not meant for knowledge but they are meant for removal of
intellectual obstacles. Only vākya can give jñāna.

śloka 62
आदि मध्यावसानेषु स्वस्य ब्रह्मत्वधीरियम्।
नैव व्यभिचरेत्तस्मादापरोक्षं प्रतिष्ठितम्॥ ७.६२ ॥
ādi madhyāvasāneṣu svasya brahmatvadhīriyam.
naiva vyabhicarettasmādāparokṣaṃ pratiṣṭhitam (7.62).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says: once mahā-vākya has worked for me and I understand pure
existence is myself, suppose I go back to avāntara vākya once again and I read sadeva
somya idamagra āsit. When I read this vākya do I get parokṣa jñāna or aparokṣa jñāna? He
says once you gain aparokṣa jñāna it is aparokṣa all the time. Throughout the teaching,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 835

Brahman is aparokṣa only. After aparokṣa jñāna if a person does śravaṇa once again
thereafter when he goes back aparokṣa jñāna continues exactly as the tenth man. During
the beginning, middle and end of śāstra-paṭhana, this aparokṣa jñāna regarding the
Brahman-status of myself will never get displaced. Aparokṣa jñāna will not get converted
into parokṣa jñāna. Parokṣa will get converted into aparokṣa. Never will aparokṣatva get
converted into parokṣatva. Therefore, once aparokṣa jñāna I have gained then it can never
go, even if I pray to enjoy dvaita. The jñāna will not go in any circumstances. Therefore,
this knowledge is well-established. That is the reason why I say after understanding
Brahman clearly, even if the teacher talks about Brahman in third person, as even the
student listens he converts it to first person. śravaṇa will not only will help jñāna but also
it will help niṣṭhā. The student feels my biography is being talked about in all Upaniṣads.
That is called niṣṭhā.

śloka 63
जन्मादिकारणत्वाख्यलक्षणेन भृगुः पुरा ।
परोक्षेण गृहीत्वाथ विचारात्व्यक्तिमैक्षत ॥ ७.६३ ॥
janmādikāraṇatvākhyalakṣaṇena bhṛguḥ purā.
parokṣeṇa gṛhītvātha vicārāt vyaktimaikṣata (7.63).
The previous two ślokas are example avāntara vākya and mahā-vākya in Chāndogya
Upaniṣad. Now, he takes up Taittirīya Upaniṣad Bhṛgu-vallī where we have avāntara
vākya and mahā-vākya. The statement which defines Brahman is Taittirīya Upaniṣad 3.1
where teacher is Varuṇa. Here, the teaching is in the form of father-son dialogue. Bhṛgu is
the student. He goes to father Varuṇa and asks for self-knowledge. Then he gives the
definition of Brahman, the avāntara vākya. The meaning of the sentence is Brahman is
sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa. When he listens to that, the knowledge is parokṣa jñāna only. He
knows that there is Brahman which is jagat-kāraṇa Brahman. The definition of Brahman in
the form of cause of sṛṣṭi, etc is avāntara vākya in this context. This Bhṛgu heard long time
back. This knowledge is parokṣa jñāna and it is indirect knowledge. Thereafter, he
continued his enquiry to convert parokṣa jñāna into aparokṣa jñāna. If you go to
Bhṛguvallī the word used is tapas and not vicāra. Here, tapas means vicāra through
enquiry. Identification of himself Bhṛgu gained. Identifying Brahman as myself is
aparokṣa jñāna.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 836

śloka 64
यद्यपि त्वमसीत्यत्र वाक्यं नोचे भृगोः पिता ।
तथाप्यन्नं प्राणमिति विचार्यस्थलमुक्तवान्॥ ७.६४ ॥
yadyapi tvamasītyatra vākyaṃ noce bhṛgoḥ pitā.
tathāpyannaṃ prāṇamiti vicāryasthalamuktavān (7.64).
In Bhṛgu-vallī there is a question raised. The question possible is in Chāndogya Upaniṣad
avāntara vākya clearly. Mahā-vākya is also clearly there Tat tvam asi. But in Bhṛgu-vallī
avāntara vākya is there; Brahman is sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa. But mahā-vākya is not there
explicitly. Tat tvam asi upadeśa is not there from father of Bhṛgu. How can we take it as
aparokṣa jñāna without mahā-vākya? Vidyāraṇya says there also mahā-vākya is there but
not explicitly but it is implicitly there in an indirect form. The next question is where it is
hidden? Vidyāraṇya says Varuṇa says you should do enquiry amidst pañca-kośas that is
the tvam-pada of Jīvātmā and he has introduced a place of enquiry. Since already I the
Jīvātmā has been introduced by introducing the pañca-kośa the enquiry will lead to
Brahman is pañca-kośa-śākṣī-bhūta. Tat tvam asi is in hidden form. Where did Varuṇa
refer to pañca-kośa? Vidyāraṇya says annam prāṇam iti. Yato vā imāni bhūtāni jāyante is
tat-pada-vācyārtha. Therefore, mahā-vākya is there. So he says in Taittirīya-Upaniṣad’s
Bhṛgu-vallī, direct mahā-vākya in the form of ‘Tat tvam asi’ as given in Chāndogya
Upaniṣad is not given. This is the argument of Pūrvapakṣa. Annaṃ prāṇaṃ cakṣuḥ
śrotraṃ mano vācam iti; in this manner the locus of enquiry centres around tvam-pada. So
the father taught him and thus mahā-vākya is implied. Bhṛgu being an advanced student
had the capacity to capture the meaning of mahā-vākya.

śloka 65
अन्नप्राणादिकोशेषु सुविचार्य पुनः पुनः ।
आनन्दव्यक्तिमीक्षित्वा ब्रह्मलक्षाप्ययूयुजत्॥ ७.६५ ॥
annaprāṇādikośeṣu suvicārya punaḥ punaḥ.
ānandavyaktimīkṣitvā brahmalakṣāpyayūyujat (7.65).
This refers to 3.1 of Taittirīya Upaniṣad. First, he arrived at anna as Brahman. Then he
returned to his father. The father said you are in right direction and asked him to enquire

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 837

further and finally he came to ānanda. Here, we have to note clearly in the second chapter
ānandamaya kośa is mentioned but in the third chapter kośa is not mentioned.
Annaprāṇādikośeṣu suvicārya, Bhṛgu enquired thoroughly each of the five kośas. Each
time he cross checked with his father whether he was in the right direction. He identified
Brahman as ānanda Ātmā. Normally, tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha is identified as caitanya and
now here it is, as Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says, ānanda also. I, the witness, consciousness-
principle is ānanda. Then he tries to apply the definition of Brahman as sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-
kāraṇa. Whether sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya-kāraṇa is applicable to caitanya and he found caitanya
perfectly fits into jagat-kāraṇa Brahman. And therefore, caitanya is Brahman and that
Brahman is myself. More in the next class.

Class 178
śloka 65 contd.
After establishing that in the case of brahma-jñāna also there is both parokṣa jñāna and
aparokṣa jñāna, now Vidyāraṇya talks about the pramāṇa for the two types of knowledge.
To know a place called Gangotri which is parokṣa jñāna I need a book. We should know
parokṣa jñāna needs a pramāṇa. In the same way direct knowledge also needs a pramāṇa
which is pratyakṣa pramāṇa. As I said in the last class the means of parokṣa jñāna and
means of aparokṣa jñāna are different. One can be gained by śabda jñāna or through
inference also. You have parents is a parokṣa jñāna and this knowledge I get through
inference. It is only parokṣa jñāna because I have not seen your parents. When I see your
parents directly I get aparokṣa jñāna. Parokṣa jñāna can be through arthāpatti, anumāna or
śabda pramāṇa. For aparokṣa jñāna I have got pratyakṣa pramāṇa. This is the convention.
In the case of Brahman, brahma-parokṣa-jñāna I get through śabda pramāṇa. Brahma-
aparokṣa-jñāna I get again through śabda pramāṇa alone. I can say pratyakṣa pramāṇa
gives me direct knowledge but in the case of Brahman pratyakṣa cannot give direct
knowledge, sarva-indrīya-agocaratvāt. Pratyakṣa cannot give aparokṣa jñāna and other
than six pramāṇas no other pramāṇas are there.
Meditation is not included in six pramāṇas. The śāstra-śabda gives parokṣa jñāna.
Vidyāraṇya says śāstra itself gives aparokṣa jñāna also. Śāstra is pramāṇa for both parokṣa
jñāna and also aparokṣa jñāna. Avāntara vākya gives parokṣa jñāna and all the mahā-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 838

vākyas give aparokṣa jñāna. This is the important contention of Vidyāraṇya and in
support of this conclusion he gives various Śruti pramāṇas. He gave Chāndogya Upaniṣad
and Taittirīya Upaniṣad mantras in support of his contention.
In the case of Chāndogya Upaniṣad, mahā-vākya is explicitly there Tat tvam asi gives
aparokṣa jñāna but in Bhṛgu-vallī, explicit mahā-vākya is not there like Tat tvam asi. For
that, Vidyāraṇya said even though mahā-vākya is not there, there is implicit or hidden
mahā-vākya. This we discussed in detail in the last class. First, he introduced tat-pada as
jagat-kāraṇa Brahman and tvam-pada as pañca-kośa and from this student can extract
mahā-vākya. Vidyāraṇya says manda-adhikārī may find it difficult and Bhgru being
uttama adhikārī, by eliminating the kośas he came to ānanda Ātmā and said aham ānanda
Ātmā eva jagat-kāraṇa brahma asmi.
Because of this, brahma-vidyā got two titles also. So we have Vāruṇī vidyā and Bhgru-
vidyā. He clearly arrived at ānanda Ātmā which is the svarūpa of Brahman. Throughout,
Vidyāraṇya uses the word vyaktim īkṣitvā to denote aparokṣa jñāna. After arriving at
ānanda, we should note we do not talk about ānandamaya but ānanda. Ānandamaya is all
experiential pleasures and they are not equal to Brahman. Any experienced pleasures
cannot be brahmānanda. Any experienced pleasure is limited by time. We used the word
experienced it means it is past. Therefore, no experiential pleasure is brahmānanda; I the
caitanya is the witness and I am the original brahmānanda. I the original pleasure is non-
experienceable and I the experience is brahmānanda. Thereafter, he connected this ānanda
to definition of Brahman and discovered that ānanda is identical with brahma-lakṣaṇa and
therefore, both are one and the same. –-Ānanda is sṛṣṭi-kāraṇa, ānanda is sthiti-kāraṇa and
ānanda is laya-kāraṇa as well. Thus, he completed Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya. That is said
here. Brahma-lakṣaṇa is jagat-kāraṇa. He connected brahma-lakṣaṇa to ānanda Ātmā and
claimed ahaṃ brahma asmi. Refer to Bhṛgu-vallī 3.6 of Taittirīya Upaniṣad.

śloka 66
सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं चेत्येवं ब्रह्मस्वलक्षणम्।
उक्त्वा गुहाहितत्वेन कोशेष्वेतत्प्रदर्शितम्॥ ७.६६ ॥
satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ cetyevaṃ brahmasvalakṣaṇam.
uktvā guhāhitatvena kośeṣvetat pradarśitam (7.66).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 839

Now, Vidyāraṇya goes to the second chapter of Taittirīya Upaniṣad. Here, avāntara vākya
of satya jñāna ananta Brahman is given and it is the parokṣa jñāna. Brahman is pure
existence and Brahman is pure Consciousness and Brahman is infinite. Satya means pure
existence; jñāna means pure Consciousness; pure means existence which is not connected
to any object. Not connected to any nāma-rūpa is pure existence. Pure Consciousness is
the Consciousness not connected to any particular thought. Consciousness without
thought-connection or the mind-connection is called pure existence. Ananta means
limitless. Pure, limitless existence-consciousness is Brahman. In this manner brahma-
svarūpa-lakṣaṇa or intrinsic nature of Brahman is given. Here, the Guru’s name is
unknown.
Therefore, after mentioning that Brahman is directly revealed, aparokṣa jñāna is given in
the pañca-kośas as residing in the pañca-kośa-guhā. Each kośa is compared to a cave. Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya takes the mind as a cave. But Vidyāraṇya takes it as five caves. First is
Annamaya and within the caves of prāṇamaya, etc. This he also stated in the third chapter
of Pañcadaśī. Here, the words satyam jñānam anantam relate to avāntara vākya and
ānanda is compared to mahā-vākya.

śloka 67
पारोक्ष्येण विबुध्येन्द्रो य आत्मेत्यादिलक्षणात्।
अपरोक्षीकर्तुमिच्छंश्चतुर्वारं गुरुं ययौ ॥ ७.६७ ॥
pārokṣyeṇa vibudhyendro ya ātmetyādilakṣaṇāt.
aparokṣīkartumicchaṃścaturvāraṃ guruṃ yayau (7.67).
Vidyāraṇya again goes back to Chāndogya Upaniṣad for another example. Here, he goes
to eighth chapter known as Prajāpati-vidyā where Brahmāji is the teacher and Indra is the
student. Aṣṭa-guṇa-viśiṣṭa Paramātmā; Paramātmā is given eightfold features (refer to
Chāndogya Upaniṣad 8.7.1) such as being free from old age, death, disease, etc. Through
that definition of Brahman which comes under avāntara vākya, Indra got the knowledge
of Brahman. He knew Brahman indirectly or had parokṣa jñāna of Brahman. In
Chāndogya Upaniṣad, it is said that Brahmāji gave this lakṣaṇa. Whoever knows this
Brahman, he will fulfill all his desires in life through brahma-jñāna.
Virocana and Indra came to the class conducted by Prajāpati. Indra went to Prajāpati who
taught him avasthā-traya-vicāra; in the first class Viśva and second class taijasa and in the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 840

third class prājña were revealed. Turīya was called Uttama Puruṣa. In four stages, Indra
learnt and between each class Indra was asked to serve Prajāpati for thirty two years. He
got the knowledge in the fourth session as ahaṃ brahma asmi. Then he went to the Guru
Prajāpati or Brahmāji and gained aparokṣa jñāna. The knowledge is I am different from
sthūla-śarīra, I am different from sūkṣma-śarīra and I am different from kāraṇa-śarīra.

śloka 68
आत्मा वा इदमित्यादौ परोक्षं ब्रह्मलक्षितम्।
अध्यारोपापवादाभ्यां प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म दर्शितम्॥ ७.६८ ॥
Ātmā vā idamityādau parokṣaṃ brahmalakṣitam.
adhyāropāpavādābhyāṃ prajñānaṃ brahma darśitam (7.68).
Until now, Vidyāraṇya took examples from Chāndogya Upaniṣad and Taittirīya Upaniṣad
to show that parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna came from śāstra vākya only. Now, he
takes an example from Ṛg Veda Aitareya Upaniṣad 1.1 to 3.1. The teaching in the Aitareya
Upaniṣad of Ṛg Veda begins with this mantra Ātmā va idam iti ekam eva agra āsit. Before
creation, Paramātmā remained without a second. As jagat-kāraṇa, Ātmā is mentioned.
Then it is said Ātmā visualized the creation, sṛṣṭi is elaborately talked about, then sṛṣṭi is
negated and then what is left is satya the reality. Brahman is revealed indirectly as jagat-
kāraṇa. Then as per adhyāropa-avapada methodology, the creation was introduced and
later the creation was negated. Adhyāropa is the introduction of creation and apavāda is
the negation of creation. The significance of adhyāropa and apavāda is this. When the
world is accepted and negated, it means that the world is neither non-existent nor existent.
It does not come under existent or non-existent category. What is existent cannot be
negated because it is existing. What is non-existent need not be negated. Therefore,
whatever is negated will be different from existent and non-existent. It will come under
existent-nonexistent-vilakṣaṇa category.
The world does not come under existent or non-existent category. It comes under
seemingly existent category. The world is therefore, unreal. Adhyāropa-apavāda proves
the unreality of the world and it proves my body is also unreal as my body is also a part of
the world. The whole universe including the body-mind-complex is unreal. Then the
question is: what is the supporting adhiṣṭhāna because unreal cannot exist without the
back up of the real? A mirage requires sand, an unreal snake needs rope. What is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 841

adhiṣṭhāna? Anything other than the observed is adhiṣṭhāna. What is that? Other than the
observed, there is only one thing; that is I the observing consciousness-principle and that
prajñānam brahma satyam adhiṣṭhānam. After falsifying the observed universe the
observing Consciousness is revealed as the adhiṣṭhāna brahma the satya. Prajñāna
Brahman is adhiṣṭhāna and this is the mahā-vākya. Here also, Ātmā vā idamiti is avāntara
vākya, prajñāna Brahman is mahā-vākya and the teaching is complete. Atharvaṇa example
may be taken from Māṇḍūkya or Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. Now, Vidyāraṇya wants to explain
the purpose for which all the examples are given.

śloka 69
अवान्तरेण वाक्येन परोक्षब्रह्मधीर्भवेत्।
सर्वत्रैव महावाक्यविचारात्त्वपरोक्षधीः ॥ ७.६९ ॥
avāntareṇa vākyena parokṣabrahmadhīrbhavet.
sarvatraiva mahāvākyavicārāttvaparokṣadhīḥ (7.69).
By the analysis of avāntara vākya like Ātmā idam agra āsīt, parokṣa jñāna of Brahman
takes place in the minds of the seekers. By the analysis of mahā-vākyas, aparokṣa jñāna the
direct knowledge of Brahman occurs whether it is Ṛg Veda or Yajur Veda Upaniṣad. The
direct knowledge takes place from mahā-vākya-vicāra alone. There is a wide notion that
the direct knowledge comes from meditation alone: in nirvikalpaka samādhi alone
aparokṣa jñāna can arise! Vidyāraṇya negates this idea. Dhyāna cannot give any
knowledge parokṣa or aparokṣa. So he says nididhyāsana is not meant for jñāna at all.
śravaṇa alone gives knowledge. Under all circumstances, I should have a clear
understanding of mahā-vākya and this alone gives aparokṣa jñāna. The clear
understanding includes two things: one is understanding of mahā-vākya which says I am
free here and now, irrespective of the conditions of anātmā body-mind-complex. The
second is the understanding of the fact that nothing else is required other than clear
understanding for liberation. Then the question is: if the clear understanding is through
śravaṇa, if sādhana is complete with śravaṇa, why at all manana and nididhyāsana are
prescribed? Does not it mean that śravaṇa is incomplete sādhana? For that, we say even
though sādhana is complete we have viparīta-bhāvanā that the sādhana is incomplete. It is
orientation of expectation. Nididhyāsana is not to get mokṣa but it is meant for mental
orientation of expectation of mokṣa and to remind myself I was free, I am free and I will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 842

ever be free. There are certain unhealthy responses of anātmā and I should remind myself
that they have no connection to the fact that I am free. I the Ātmā am free; improvement of
my mind has nothing to do with the fact that I am free. I don’t want to connect freedom
with the conditions of my mind. More in the next class.

Class 179
śloka 69 contd.
The conditions of the body and even the mind cannot limit my freedom. Asaṅga Ātmā is
not influenced by the body and the mind. The very words asaṅga Ātmā mean that my
freedom is unconditional and it is in spite of the influence of the body-mind-complex. One
is clear understanding irrespective of the body-mind-complex and the second is that
nothing other than the clear understanding is required to claim my freedom. Once the
knowledge has taken place, the wise man will not claim I am a saṃśārī. I will be incapable
of deliberately claiming I am a saṃśārī.
Therefore, mokṣa becomes a fact for me. I judge myself: I am mukta, nothing else. After
this, anātmā the body-mind-complex may have certain issues to be tackled. Just as the
body has certain issues to be handled, the mind also will have certain issues to be tackled.
I name it viparīta-bhāvanā and I may choose to handle the issues. The handling of these
issues has nothing to do with the fact that I am free. My freedom never comes under
question or is never challenged just because I acknowledge certain mental issues and I
choose to tackle the issues by various measures including nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana is
to tackle these issues of anātmā and has nothing to do with I, the asaṅga satya Ātmā, that
is always free. If I have gone through karma-yoga and upāsana-yoga properly, the issues
to be tackled will be very less. If I have not gone through karma and upāsana properly
then there will be more issues to be tackled leading to more questions about my being free.
However, the mental disturbances cannot challenge any knowledge whether it is material
or spiritual knowledge. The knowledge cannot be shaken by emotional conditions. I am
free irrespective of the conditions of anātmā. I am free and the spiritual journey is over
where nididhyāsana is only to tackle an incidental mental issue which will not affect my
freedom. Then why should I handle the mental issues?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 843

A good refined body-mind-complex is good for worldly vyavahāras and transactions. Not
only that, other ignorant people judge my knowledge and freedom only based on my
mental behavior. Suppose I claim I am free and I have a dirty mind and I am not well-
behaved due to many negative attributes, people will lose faith in Vedānta. Therefore, the
best expression of gratitude to śāstra is that I should protect the faith of the people in
Vedānta. The people will lose faith in Vedānta if I claim that I am free with a mind and
behavior that is rotten. It is important to handle the issues of the mind objectively, without
connecting it to my freedom. The objectivity is without connecting to the fact that I am
free. This freedom is gained with śravaṇa and manana, whereas nididhyāsana is only for
incidental issue of refining the mind and not for liberation. Therefore, if mahā-vākya-
vicāra is clearly understood, my spiritual journey is over. If I ask myself, I will know that I
am a mukta. That is the clear understanding of mahā-vākya, for which every Guru
struggles to convey to his students.

śloka 70
ब्रह्मापारोक्ष्यसिद्ध्यर्थं महावाक्यमितीरितम्।
वाक्यवृत्तावतो ब्रह्मापरोक्ष्ये विमतिर्नहि ॥ ७.७० ॥
brahmāpārokṣyasiddhyarthaṃ mahāvākyamitīritam.
vākyavṛttāvato brahmāparokṣye vimatirnahi (7.70).
Here, Vidyāraṇya points out that this is the teaching of Ādi Śaṅkarācārya that aparokṣa
jñāna comes from vākya-vicāra only and not by meditation. Some think that you have to
keep on repeating ahaṃ brahma asmi and only after repeating for years the aparokṣa
jñāna will arise. We don’t agree with that thinking. For getting aparokṣa jñāna of
Brahman, mahā-vākya is the only source. This is said by Ādi Śaṅkarācārya in the famous
text called Vākyavṛtti. There is a difference of opinion or discordance regarding the source
of aparokṣa jñāna. All prominent Ācāryas of Advaita agree that the study of mahā-vākya
alone gives aparokṣa jñāna. The following ślokas are quotations from Vākyavṛtti.

śloka 71
आलम्बनतया भाति योऽस्मत्प्रत्ययशब्दयोः ।
अन्तःकरणसम्भिन्नबोधः सत्त्वम्पदाभिधः ॥ ७.७१ ॥
ālambanatayā bhāti yo:'smatpratyayaśabdayoḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 844

antaḥkaraṇasambhinnabodhaḥ sattvampadābhidhaḥ (7.71).

This is śloka 44 of Vākyavṛtti. Therein, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya talks about the primary meaning
tat and tvam. Then, he says we should go in for secondary meaning or lakṣyārtha of the
words. In Tat tvam asi mahā-vākya tvam comes as the object of the thought ‘I’ which is
normally used by all the individuals; whatever we normally understand that is the
primary meaning of the word tvam. We mean the one enclosed within the mind,
conditioned and limited by the mind or we can call it enclosed consciousness. This is a
finite one. This finite enclosed consciousness is the primary meaning of the word I. It is
also kartā, bhoktā, husband, etc. That is the primary meaning of the word tvam or we may
call it inferior consciousness.

śloka 72
मायोपाधिर्जगद्योनिः सर्वज्ञत्वादिलक्षणः ।
पारोक्ष्यशबलः सत्याद्यात्मकस्तत्पदाभिधः ॥ ७.७२ ॥
māyopādhirjagadyoniḥ sarvajñatvādilakṣaṇaḥ.
pārokṣyaśabalaḥ satyādyātmakastatpadābhidhaḥ (7.72).
This is Vākyavṛtti śloka number 45, literally taken from Ādi Śaṅkarācārya’s work. The
primary or direct meaning of tat in the mahā-vākya is Paramātmā or the Consciousness
associated with Māyā, the macro medium. It has superior virtues and it is the material
cause of the sṛṣṭi. It is also characterized by omniscience, omnipotence, etc., which
indicates the upādāna-kāraṇa. Jīvātmā has the kārya status. That Paramātmā is considered
to be remote or far away, beyond the reach of the sense-organs. That is whenever people
refer to Paramātmā, they look up, which means that Paramātmā is beyond the clouds.
These are all taṭastha-lakṣaṇa of Paramātmā. Svarūpa-lakṣaṇa of Paramātmā is satyam
jñānam anantam brahma and it is the superior Consciousness. This is what we get from
the mahā-vākya. How can the creator be equated to a creature? Therefore, what we should
do?

śloka 73
प्रत्यक्परोक्षतैकस्य सद्वितीयत्वपूर्णता ।
विरुद्ध्येते यतस्तस्माल्लक्षणा सम्प्रवर्तते ॥ ७.७३ ॥
pratyakparokṣataikasya sadvitīyatvapūrṇatā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 845

viruddhyete yatastasmāllakṣaṇā sampravartate (7.73).

We should always apply the primary meaning in the interpretation because it is primary.
Always value is there for the primary meaning only. Only when the primary meaning
does not give a meaningful sense, we should refer to the secondary meaning. In case the
sentence is invalid when we apply the primary meaning, we can come down to the
secondary meaning for the vāda vākya to become a pramāṇa. Therefore, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya
says in Vākyavṛtti 46 that we find a contradiction in the meanings when we take the
primary meanings of tat and tvam. There are two types of contradiction we see:
1. First one is Jīvātmā is pratyak which means it is I, the inner self, obtaining in the
body; therefore, tvam refers to something which is inside. But the word tat, that
Paramātmā, refers to something which is far away. How can the close-by object and
remote object be one and the same? Jīvātmā is close by and Paramātmā is far away.
There will be no resistance. When we say both of them are one and the same, there
is resistance. In mahā-vākya there is contradiction. Therefore, eka, one and the same
entity, cannot be both inside and outside. This iss contradiction one.
2. The Jīvātmā is always in plural number. There are infinite jīvātmās. They are
innumerable. There are plants, animals, Devas, etc. Each one should be apūrṇa
only, naturally. Each Jīvātmā is located in each body. Therefore, Jīvātmā is apūrṇa.
While Paramātmā is pūrṇa. One is apūrṇa and another is pūrṇa when we take the
general primary meanings before the study of Vedānta. These are the meanings by
the ordinary person before he studies Vedānta. Viśiṣṭādvaitins take Jīvātmā as aṇu.
Most of the people claim Jīvātmā is finite and Paramātmā is pūrṇa. How can
pūrṇatva and apūrṇatva be one and the same? The second contradiction is one is
finite while the other is infinite.
These opposite ideas contradict each other. Since such contradictions are there and since
the intellect is unable to swallow the idea, how can I claim “I am Īśvara”? When there is a
powerful resistance, we have to apply some lubricating oil, which is called lakṣaṇā-vṛtti in
this case. Therefore, we have to take the secondary meanings of tat and tvam.

śloka 74
तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्येषु लक्षणा भागलक्षणा ।
सोऽयमित्यादिवाक्यस्थपदयोरिव नापरा ॥ ७.७४ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 846

tattvamasyādivākyeṣu lakṣaṇā bhāgalakṣaṇā.

so:'yamityādivākyasthapadayoriva nāparā (7.74).
This is Vākyavṛtti śloka number 48. He has skipped śloka 47. It contains the rule regarding
interpretation. You apply the primary meaning first and if it contradicts perception, you
have to take the secondary meaning. In this śloka, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya shows the lakṣaṇā to
be applied. Here, he says the lakṣaṇā you apply is bhaga-lakṣaṇā. It means you take one
portion of the primary meaning and you reject the other portion. The portion of the
primary meaning is to be taken and the other portion is to be given up. In the mahā-vākya
like Tat tvam asi, etc., the secondary meaning that you apply is called bhaga-lakṣaṇā
which means partial meaning. He gives an example: soyam Devadattaḥ. That young
Devadatta is this old Devadatta. In this statement also, there are two words. Saḥ and ayam
are the two words that occur in the phrase soyam Devadattaḥ. Here, jahati lakṣaṇā should
not be applied. Ajahati lakṣaṇā should not be applied. Only bhaga-lakṣaṇā should be
applied. That young Devadatta is this old Devadatta. We refer to Devadatta who was
young before and old now. This is the same Devadatta who was young and who is old.
Young Devadatta and old Devadatta cannot be one! How can young and old be identical?
You cannot say both are one and the same. But this person makes the statement “that
young Devadatta and old Devadatta are one and the same”.
When there is open contradiction how does the intellect accept this statement?
Temporarily the contradictory adjectives must be intellectually segregated from
Devadatta. If I have to segregate the young and old adjectives, it is possible under one
condition— when temporarily, I forget the body and the bodily attributes. If I keep the
previous young body and present old body in the mind, I cannot see the aikya. Therefore,
the mind takes Devadatta stripped off of the body clothing itself. It is because if I retain
either of the body, aikya cannot be understood. Śāstra calls it Devadatta-vyakti-mātra. It is
Devadatta minus the young and old bodies. Even when you say “it is I who played in that
place fifty years ago”, that I is the present I. When you say “I am that”, you temporarily
separate yourself from the body and you refer to the person alone. Since vyakti is retained
and the body is segregated, it is called bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā.
Among all the students, you recognize that brahmacārī who was lean and now a fat one;
the people recognize me class after class; I recognize some of the students who have been
lean and who are now fat. This is called pratyabhijñā where bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā is taking

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 847

place. Equating the past and present is called recognition. In the same way, for oneness of
Jīvātmā and Paramātmā, we have to remove the superficial inferior and superior Jīva and
parama adjectives. Then, you will find Ātmā at the substratum. More in the next class.

Class 180
śloka 74 contd.
In these ślokas beginning from 70th śloka up to 96th śloka, Vidyāraṇya does a mahā-
vākya-vicāra closely following the teachings of Vākyavṛtti of Ādi Śaṅkarācārya to show
that mahā-vākya-vicāra will give aparokṣa jñāna. Now, he quotes śloka 48. I gave you the
meaning of the śloka in the last class. He says you cannot take the primary meaning of the
two words in Tat tvam asi becausee if you take the primary meaning, it will not be
logically acceptable with one having superior attributes and the other having inferior
attributes. I said in the last class that bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā is a secondary meaning where
we take a part of primary meaning while giving up the other part. This partial meaning is
called bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā. In mahā-vākya, the primary meaning of Jīvātmā is śarīra-traya
and caitanya while the primary meaning of Paramātmā is caitanya and prapañca-traya.
Through bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā one part we reject and another part we retain. The caitanya
part of the primary meaning is retained while the jaḍa part is removed. Śarīra-traya of
Jīvātmā and prapañca-traya of Paramātmā are rejected and only Ātmā is taken for
consideration wherein we find both being the same.
We cannot reject caitanya because at caitanya level, aikya is possible. At śarīra-traya and
prapañca-traya level, aikya is not possible. Even at cidābhāsa level, aikya is not possible.
At prapañca-traya level, Īśvara is superior. Wherever aikya is not possible, we reject
because the sentence talks of aikya. Therefore, we retain whatever supports aikya and we
reject whatever obstructs it. Not only we negate them because of the reason that they
obstruct aikya, but there is a major second reason that both of them are mithyā. In
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad by using the phrase neti twice in neti-neti, one negates śarīra-
traya and another neti rejects prapañca-traya because both are mithyā. Therefore, we
ignore upādhi and cidābhāsa and take caitanya. Whenever I am mukta, if I feel
uncomfortable, it is because śarīra-traya and prapañca-traya are not negated. I am having
rāga-dveṣa problem as I am including in me the sūkṣma-śarīra which has the mind with

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 848

rāga-dveṣa. If I have applied bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, there is no rāga-dveṣa problem. You

handle rāga-dveṣa separately and it should not be equated in aikya. The mithyā mind has
some problem and that is to be handled separately. One should not include the mind with
it and therefore, I cannot claim aham śuddhosmi. Śuddhatva can be claimed only if the
mind is kept aside. Bhāga-lakṣaṇā should be efficiently applied to claim ahaṃ brahma
asmi.

śloka 75
संसर्गो वा विशिष्टो वा वाक्यार्थो नात्र संमतः ।
अखण्डैकरसत्वेन वाक्यार्थो विदुषां मतः ॥ ७.७५ ॥
saṃsargo vā viśiṣṭo vā vākyārtho nātra saṃmataḥ.
akhaṇḍaikarasatvena vākyārtho viduṣāṃ mataḥ (7.75).
This is the Vākyavṛtti śloka number 38. The order is not maintained. This is a technical
śloka. In fact the very same śloka is quoted in Vedānta-sāra of Sadānanda. This śloka can
be interpreted in two different ways. One is Vedānta-sāra that is slightly tougher
interpretation. There is another interpretation which is relatively simpler that is taken in
Pañcadaśī. According to this, a Sanskrit sentence can be classified into one of the three
types of sentences:
1. Saṃśarga-artha-bodhaka-vākya. Suppose there is a sentence which reveals several
substances that have relationships; it is called saṃśarga-artha-bodhaka-vākya. An
example is Rāma goes to temple by a car. This is a saṃśarga-artha-bodhaka-vākya.
Here, the sentence reveals several substances. Rāma is revealed, car a vehicle and
temple are revealed and all have connections; one is a subject, another is an object
and the another is an instrument. Kṛṣṇa cuts a mango with a knife. There is
syntactical relationship as subject, object and instrument. The syntactical rules mean
object of action, subject of action, locus of action, beneficiary of action, etc. Such a
sentence is called saṃśarga-artha-bodhaka-vākya. Different case endings will be
there in Sanskrit but in English different prepositions will be there. The preposition
will reveal the relationships between the substances. Dvaitins will be happy in
seeing saṃśarga vākyas. This is sentence one.
2. Viśiṣṭa-artha-bodhaka-vākya. The second sentence is viśiṣṭa-artha-bodhaka-vākya
which reveals one subject with different features. It may be a person, an idol or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 849

anything with various attributes. Daśaratha-putra, Kodaṇḍapāṇi, etc. That one

Rāma has many features is revealed in the above. In this sentence, several
substances and relationships are not involved. Therefore, prepositions are absent.
We only say Daśaratha-putraḥ, Sitāpatiḥ, etc. If I say vīraḥ sundaraḥ Rāmaḥ, etc
also. Courageous and handsome Rāma is revealed. This sentence is called viśiṣṭa-
artha-bodhaka-vākya, where one substance with various viśeṣaṇas are seen. It will
not have any other case-ending. It is sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya where Sanskrit
words are in the same case-ending. Such sentences are liked by Viśiṣṭādvaitins; they
say the whole creation is one Īśvara with several attributes.
3. Akhaṇḍa-artha-bodhaka-vākya. It is a sentence which reveals essential oneness of
seemingly different people or substances. It does not talk of different attributes of
one substance. These attributes are negated and essential oneness of the object is
established when the attributes are negated. The attributes cause seeming
differences; so we negate the attributes. We see one attributeless substance. Such a
sentence is called akhaṇḍa-artha-bodhaka-vākya. Soyam Devadatta is the example
in this context. Three people are involved. Old, younger and the Devadatta behind
the older features. When you understand, you remove the older and younger
attributes and you understand the inhering continuous Devadatta behind.
Devadatta understood is nirviśeṣa one in your intellect. The understood Devadatta
is nirvishesha. Akhaṇḍa-artha-bodhaka-vākya is nirviśeṣa-Devadatta-bodhaka-
vākya. Here, no relationship is involved. No prepositions are there. Third one is
also sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya.
Third one is nirviśeṣa-artha-bodhaka sāmānādhikaraṇya-vākya. This śloka says mahā-
vākya comes under the third variety. The mahā-vākya reveals akhaṇḍa ekarasatvena, one
subject without attributes. It is nirviśeṣa-artha every time you see a person with some
differences in the personality, older and younger person, etc. Then nirviśeṣa-artha jñāna
happens and we remove the attributes to see the real Devadatta.
Here, Vidyāraṇya does not say why we cannot take the first or second. The Tat tvam asi
sentence cannot come under the first category. Words should have case-ending and all
words here are nominative case only. It is not sāmānādhikaraṇya. It cannot come under
viśiṣṭādvaita-bodhaka vākya. It reveals Paramātmā who has Jīvātmā as attribute; why
cannot we take it so? Aṅga-aṅgī-sambandha. Jīvātmā is a part of Īśvara and the world,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 850

including us, is viśeṣaṇa of Paramātmā. This is not acceptable. If we become a part of

Īśvara, all our inferior attributes will belong to Īśvara and every Jīva joining Īśvara will
make Īśvara biggest saṃśārī. You cannot say duḥkha as mithyā. In Viśiṣṭādvaita, real
duḥkha of real Jīva will become real part of Īśvara and then Īśvara will be a big saṃśārī
suffering all the sorrows. Instead of my liberation, Īśvara will become a saṃśārī. Therefore,
akhaṇḍārtha-bodhaka nirviśeṣa-pratipādaka vākya we take.

śloka 76
प्रत्यग्बोधो य आभाति सोऽद्वयानन्दलक्षणः ।
अद्वयानन्दरूपश्च प्रत्यग्बोधैकलक्षणः ॥ ७.७६ ॥
pratyagbodho ya ābhāti so:'dvayānandalakṣaṇaḥ.
advayānandarūpaśca pratyagbodhaikalakṣaṇaḥ (7.76).
This śloka also is lifted from Vākyavṛtti. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says if you take mahā-vākya as
the third type of vākya, then the understanding will be Jīvātmā is none other than
Paramātmā in his essential nature. Whatever differences we see, they are superficial
differences which do not belong to Ātmā. The essential caitanya, the original
consciousness, which is retained after the negation of śarīra-traya and cidābhāsa, this
remaining Consciousness is called pratyagbodha and that remaining Consciousness of
Jīvātmā is advayānanda-lakṣaṇa, none other than Paramātmā in his essential nature which
obtains after bhāgatyāga. In the case of Īśvara also, we have to remove superior cidābhāsa
and prapañca-traya, cit does not have attributes but attributes are there to cidābhāsa. It is
Advaya-ānanda-lakṣaṇa, non-dual and ānanda whose essential nature is the original
ānanda. Pratibimba belongs to ānandamaya kośa which is in the form of priya-vṛtti.
Moda-vṛtti, etc. Or experiential pleasures which are not real. Thus Jīvātmā is none other
than Paramātmā and Paramātmā is none other than Jīvātmā. So that identity is complete.
That Paramātmā who is essentially advaya ānanda is pratyagbodhaikalakṣaṇa, none other
than Jīvātmā who is essentially Consciousness.

śloka 77
इत्थमन्योऽन्यतादात्म्यप्रतिपत्तिर्यदा भवेत्।
अब्रह्मत्वं त्वमर्थस्य व्यवर्त्येत तदैव हि ॥ ७.७७ ॥
itthamanyo:'nyatādātmyapratipattiryadā bhavet.
abrahmatvaṃ tvamarthasya vyavartyeta tadaiva hi (7.77).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 851

What is the result of grasping this Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya. That Ādi Śaṅkarācārya gives
again in this Vākyavṛtti śloka number 40. He says when this aikya-jñāna is received, the
immediate consequence is the removal of two misconceptions centered around
Paramātmā and Jīvātmā. This error is removed just as when the rope is known as a rope,
the snakeness is eliminated. Sarpa-vṛtti goes away.
What are the two misconceptions? First one is centred on the word I. I am a finite entity;
finitude is the misconception centred on aham. Spatial finitude; I am here and not there;
the second one is timewise finitude; third one is attributewise finitude. I am a human
being means I am not animal, plant, book; they are negated. Vastu-pariccheda is limited by
humanness here.
This trividha pariccheda is finitude and Paramātmā being infinite and Paramātmā being
equated with me, my finitude gets knocked off. Through mahā-vākya when Brahman is
equated, Brahman comes to me and it knocks off the notion of the finitude. It knocks off
the notion of finitude which is called here abrahmatva. Therefore, he says in this manner
Jīvātmā-Paramātmā aikya-jñāna is revealed when that knowledge rises in the mind. The
notion of finitude centered on the Jīvātmā is displaced from my buddhi. There is no
question of time but immediately on gaining jñāna the misconception goes away. Suppose
one says “I have jñāna and the misconception is not gone”, I will say that “I have jñāna”
itself is a misconception. If it is jñāna, how can there be misconception? Therefore, the
notion one is gone. What is the second notion that is given in the next śloka? We will see it
in the next class.

Class 181
śloka 77 contd.
In these ślokas from śloka 70 up to 96, Vidyāraṇya deals with mahā-vākya as a means of
aparokṣa jñāna. Of the seven avasthās, he deals with the fifth one known as aparokṣa
jñāna. Aparokṣa jñāna is attained through mahā-vākya-vicāra. Parokṣa jñāna is also
attained through vākya-vicāra which we call avāntara-vākya-vicāra. The question is how
to do mahā-vākya-vicāra? In this context, Vidyāraṇya quotes Vākyavṛtti of Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya. When we apply bhāga-tyāga lakṣaṇa, prapañca-traya of Īśvara śarīra-traya
is eliminated and what is left is caitanya which does not have inferior or superior

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 852

attributes. The Paramātma-Jīvātma-caitanya-jñāna takes place if the vicāra is done

properly. Vicāra means analysis. The next question is somehow if I manage to appreciate
eka caitanya, what will I get out of that jñāna? Both of them are quotations from
Vākyavṛtti [śloka 40]. He says when jñāna takes place, two types of misconceptions or
errors are negated. They are born out of ignorance and as ignorance goes away,
misconceptions also go away. Though rope-ignorance is one, misconceptions born out of it
are many. One rope may be mistaken as a crack in the ground, a garland, snake, water-
stream flowing, etc; thus, misconceptions are many but ignorance is one. Jñāna will
directly destroy ignorance and once one ignorance is gone, all the misconceptions are
gone. Here also, knowledge destroys ignorance and as the ignorance goes two
misconceptions go away. One centred on Paramātmā and another on Jīvātmā. The
misconception of abrahmatva is non-brahmanhood. Brahmanhood means infinitude and
abrahmatva is finitude. Finitude is of three types: timewise, spacewise and propertywise.
They are: I am limited here as spacewise; I am living now as the kāla-pariccheda and I am
a limited individual as the vastu pariccheda. All the misconceptions go way. We should
not say finitude goes. But we should say the notion of finitude goes. The notion that “I am
finite” goes away. This notion is there in the buddhi. The transformation that happens is at
the intellectual level. The idea that I am finite goes away. Finitude is called saṃśāra. “I am
saṃśārī” notion goes away. It means I am mukta. Therefore, he said tvam-pada arthasya
finitude is knocked off. This is the prayojana number one.

śloka 78
तदर्थस्य च पारोक्ष्यं यद्येवं किं ततः शृणु ।
पूर्णानन्दैकरूपेण प्रत्यग्बोधोऽवशिष्यते ॥ ७.७७ ॥
tadarthasya ca pārokṣyaṃ yadyevaṃ kiṃ tataḥ śṛṇu.
pūrṇānandaikarūpeṇa pratyagbodho:'vaśiṣyate (7.78).
The second misconception is centered on Paramātmā; that Paramātmā is far away
pārokṣya. It is beyond sensory perception and beyond the instrument of knowledge. We
have a feeling that Īśvara is somewhere beyond our crowd. Even our dhyāna-śloka also
teaches the same thing. So the conception of Vaikuṇṭha, etc. The feeling is embedded in
our mind. This is parokṣatva. While we talk about mokṣa also we mention mokṣa is going
through śukla gati and the loka-description is given and so assume Īśvara is away.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 853

Therefore, that misconception gets strengthened. When Paramātmā is defined, we always

define as jagat-kāraṇa. By defining Paramātmā as kāraṇa, not only we make Brahman as
kāraṇa of the whole creation but that Paramātmā as remote in time and space. We imagine
timewise and spacewise distance between Īśvara and ourselves. The kāraṇa status is
negated by bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā and timewise limitation is negated as well. The
remoteness of time and space is also negated. The question “Where is Paramātmā?” means
we should not see because the very seeing will make Paramātmā an object whether you
see inside or outside. Paramātmā is I who obtains here and now. I am that Paramātmā.
Brahman’s remoteness also goes away with this understanding. In the previous śloka, we
said Jīva’s finitude goes away. Now we have concluded and remoteness of Brahman is
negated.
The misconception goes instantaneously on gaining jñāna. It is not that the rope-snake
takes time to go away on rope-knowledge. The rope-snake goes immediately on gaining
jñāna. There is no question of partial saṃsāra-nivṛtti. Then the Pūrvapakṣa asks a
question: so what? If such a thing happens that two-fold misconceptions goes away, so
what? What is the consequence of misconception-elimination? For that Ādi Śaṅkarācārya
gives his answer. This refers to Vākyavṛtti 41. I who am the inner Śākṣi-caitanya will abide
or remain in the form of non-dual and infinite or limitless ānanda. I will remain as
śivānanda rūpa; śivoham śivoham. Remaining in the original nature is called mokṣa.
Mokṣa is not becoming anything but remaining in my natural condition. It is my original
svarūpa. Be yourself. That is enough to gain liberation. You need not do anything. This
svarūpa-avasthāna is the result of mahā-vākya-vicāra.

śloka 79
एवं सति महावाक्यात्परोक्षज्ञानमीर्यते ।
यैस्तेषां शास्त्रसिद्धान्तविज्ञानं शोभतेतराम्॥ ७.७९ ॥
evaṃ sati mahāvākyātparokṣajñānamīryate.
yaisteṣāṃ śāstrasiddhāntavijñānaṃ śobhatetarām (7.79).
It is very clear that mahā-vākya-vicāra is capable of giving aparokṣa jñāna. There is a wide
misconception in the Vedāntic field itself that mahā-vākya-vicāra will give only parokṣa
jñāna; some people say so. Parokṣa jñāna means book-knowledge or intellectual
knowledge or academic knowledge. And you should never be satisfied with that and you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 854

have to work for aparokṣa jñāna by practicing meditation. This group of Vedāntins claim
that meditation alone will give aparokṣa jñāna. They translate aparokṣa jñāna as
enlightenment, direct knowledge, mystic experience, etc. Various words are used and that
alone is liberating knowledge and it has to come only in meditation. Vidyāraṇya strongly
refutes that idea here as meditation is not meant for aparokṣa jñāna but the purpose of
meditation is different and aparokṣa jñāna is mahāvākya-vicāra which is done during
śravaṇa and manana. Mahāvākyāt parokṣajñānam īryate. Some people say that only
second-hand knowledge parokṣa jñāna can take place through mahāvākya-vicāra. They
give an example in support of that which is a wrong example.
You read the description of Mānasasarovara sitting in Chennai. That knowledge cannot
give the direct knowledge but it gives only indirect knowledge. You have to go to
Mānasasarovara to get direct knowledge. For gaining liberation after gaining knowledge
you should go through meditation to get direct realization is his is Pūrvapakṣa argument.
In the case of Mānasasarovara, it is ok for it happens to be remote. Here, Upaniṣad teaches
I the caitanya was Brahman, am Brahman, will ever be Brahman and it is ever-evident
Śākṣi-caitanya. So, Vidyāraṇya says the example of Mānasasarovara does not apply in the
case of realization of Brahman. Vidyāraṇya is teasing and making fun of them; their
Vedānta knowledge is indeed great. Their knowledge of śāstra is wonderful indeed in
opposite meaning. It is a wrong idea and nididhyāsana is not meant for aparokṣa jñāna
but nididhyāsana is meant for removal of the habitual idea that I am a saṃśārī. It comes
because of the judgment of myself based on my mental condition. The mental condition is
always wrong because I am not the mind. The tendency to judge based on the mind
should be dropped. I am free despite the different conditions of the mind.
I can regularly walk to reduce my weight but it has no relation to gaining freedom.
Remember sthūla-śarīra is mithyā anātmā, sūkṣma-śarīra is mithyā anātmā, and all
thoughts are mithyā anātmā and so, how can they decide my liberation? I am Ātmā, satya.
I can do certain things to keep my body fit and I can choose to make the vyavahāra
smooth for myself and others but I cannot connect them with liberation because the mind
will always be imperfect as there will be problem all the time. Śarīratraya cannot be perfect
all the time. Even in the case of guṇātīta, the mind will be fluctuating with the guṇas.
Don’t connect the mind with Ātmā. I am unconnected with the mind. This we elaborately
discussed in the Vairāgya-bodha-uparama in the last chapter. Don’t connect the mind with

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 855

Ātmā that is ever-free. Nididhyāsana is not for aparokṣa jñāna and not even for mokṣa. I
am ever-free. It is useful to improve the mind for knocking off the self-judgment based on
the mental conditions.

śloka 80
आस्तां शास्त्रस्य सिद्धान्तो युक्त्या वाक्यात्परोक्षधीः ।
स्वर्गादिवाक्यवन्नैवं दशमे व्यभिचारतः ॥ ७.८० ॥
āstāṃ śāstrasya siddhānto yuktyā vākyātparokṣadhīḥ.
svargādivākyavannaivaṃ daśame vyabhicārataḥ (7.80).
Pūrvapakṣī comes again and he is not ready to accept what Vidyāraṇya said. Vākyavṛtti
quotation has ended. Pūrvapakṣīs are powerful people and say vākya cannot give
aparokṣa jñāna. They even give technical arguments. A sentence cannot give Advaita.
Since a sentence has many words and since they reveal many objects, therefore, a sentence
can give only relational knowledge. A sentence gives sentential knowledge which is not
Advaita. You don’t get advaita-jñāna through any vākya including mahā-vākya. The
aparokṣa jñāna is gained only in nirvikalpaka samādhi. That group is led by Vacaspathi
Miśra. He wrote a famous commentary on Ādi Śaṅkarācārya’s Brahma-sūtra bhāṣya. That
commentary is called Bhāmatī. He was a householder also. He named the bhāṣya on his
wife. Vachaspati Miśra is a champion who says that śravaṇa can give parokṣa jñāna,
meditation alone can give aparokṣa jñāna and it is generated by special power. Such
power of the mind generates aparokṣa jñāna or converts the previous parokṣa jñāna
obtained through śravaṇa. This is the view that Vidyāraṇya and many of the Ācāryas do
not agree with and therefore, Vidyāraṇya refutes Bhāmatī-maṭha.
From śabda you get aparokṣa jñāna is our argument and Bhāmatī argument is śabda gives
parokṣa jñāna alone. Let your conclusion be there. Keep your conclusion or your teaching
with yourself. When we make a logical analysis we come to know that mahāvākya-vicāra
can give only parokṣa jñāna. This is the Pūrvapakṣa argument. śravaṇa gives parokṣa
jñāna and meditation gives aparokṣa jñāna. This is their view. He gives an example. We
saw the example of Kailāsa Mānasasarovara. He gives the example of svarga. In the Veda
pūrva bhāga we get the description of svarga. Naciketas tells about the description of
svarga. When we hear the description the knowledge of svarga, it is indirect knowledge or
bookish knowledge only. In the same way mahā-vākya relates to Vedānta. Veda-anta-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 856

vākya is like Veda-pūrva-vākya of the description of svarga. This is the anumāna. A Vedic
sentence even in Vedānta can give only indirect knowledge exactly like Vedic sentence
describing svarga. Vidyāraṇya casually says it is not so. It is because there is an exception
to the rule as we find in the daśama— the tenth man— story. In the case of tenth man,
vākya did not produce indirect knowledge but he immediately realized the truth. It is an
exception to the rule. Pūrvapakṣa-vākya is an anumāna which has exceptions as well. One
of the exceptions is called vyabhicāra. That the rule has an exception is enough for our
purpose. Once the exception comes, the rule is gone. The mahā-vākya also can fall within
this exception. Because the mountain has smoke, there is fire. It is right conclusion.
Because the mountain has fire, there should be smoke. Then we can say wherever there is
fire there is smoke, but you cannot say so. In the gas stove there is fire but there is no
smoke. Therefore, when you take the rule, “wherever there is smoke there is fire”, it is
right, but you cannot say “wherever there is fire, there is smoke”. Similarly, “a statement
gives only parokṣa jñāna” is a wrong rule and the exception is daśama, tenth man, story. It
is deviation from the rule. More in the next class.

Class 182
śloka 80 contd.
Vidyāraṇya establishes that mahāvākya-vicāra is capable of giving aparokṣa jñāna of
Ātmā. He established this with the help of Vākyavṛtti ślokas of Ādi Śaṅkarācārya. He
concluded the same in the 97th śloka. Then a Pūrvapakṣa raises a question that no
sentence can give direct knowledge of any object, because any sentence consists of words
and they cannot give direct knowledge of any object. When I use the word tiger, you don’t
get the knowledge of the tiger but you get it only when you see the tiger directly. Direct
experience alone can give direct knowledge and so, how can words ever give direct
knowledge of anything? This is all the more impossible for advaita-jñāna since a sentence
has many words, many words give pluralistic knowledge and they cannot reveal Advaita!
So, mahāvākya-vicāra can give parokṣa jñāna and for aparokṣa jñāna, you need separate
exercise which is called bhāvanā, the meditation on the sentence, and it is only after
meditation that the mind gets extraordinary power; the mind gets the power to gain
advaita-jñāna. That alone can be direct knowledge, which is gained only after long

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 857

meditation and that alone can remove saṃsāra. Parokṣa jñāna is not final. Therefore,
mahāvākya-vicāra cannot give aparokṣa jñāna. Any sentence can generate indirect
knowledge because it is a sentence. Any example can be taken svargādivākyavat. This was
the Pūrvapakṣa for which Vidyāraṇya gave the answer in short as daśame vyabhicārataḥ.
He said what you say is generally correct but not universally true. You are the tenth man.
The tenth man knowledge is gained instantaneously. Generally, it is parokṣa jñāna but
exceptionally it is aparokṣa jñāna and mahā-vākya comes under such exception. The
mahā-vākya deals with something which is aparokṣa. It deals with Brahman which is
already evident as caitanya and therefore, mahāvākya can give aparokṣa jñāna. If you ask
what is meditation meant for? It is a different issue. Mahāvākya-vicāra or śravaṇa can give
aparokṣa jñāna. What is manana and nididhyāsana is a different subject. Upto this, we saw
in the last class.

śloka 81
स्वतोऽपरोक्षजीवस्य ब्रह्मत्वमभिवांछतः ।
नश्येत्सिद्धपरोक्षत्वमिति युक्तिर्महत्यहो ॥ ७.८१ ॥
svato:'parokṣajīvasya brahmatvamabhivāṃchataḥ.
naśyetsiddhaparokṣatvamiti yuktirmahatyaho (7.81).
Here, Vidyāraṇya points out: if you say mahā-vākya-vicāra gives only parokṣa jñāna, not
only it is unreasonable but also we will have funny consequences. What is that? Jīva has
gone to mahā-vākya-vicāra and when he enters Gurukula he knows he is Jīvātmā. The
teaching is only that you are Paramātmā. That “I am Jīvātmā” the student already
accepted when he starts śravaṇa. I, the Jīvātmā, is aparokṣa and is accepted by the student.
He has come to the teacher not to get the knowledge that he is aparokṣa. He wants to
know after śravaṇa to get brahmatva or asaṃśarītva status. He wants to get Paramātma-
aikya. Now, after elaborate śravaṇa you say the student gets parokṣa jñāna of Jīvātma-
Paramātma-aikya. Suppose he gets parokṣa jñāna of Jīvātmā-Paramātmā, the rule is if you
get parokṣa jñāna of something, the object of parokṣa jñāna will be parokṣa. If the student
gets Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya parokṣa jñāna, then it will mean Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya
is parokṣa If aikya is parokṣa, both Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are parokṣa. That means if
both Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are parokṣa, Jīvātmā has also become parokṣa. At the end of
elaborate śravaṇa, he has gained the knowledge, aparokṣatva status is gone!

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 858

Not only has he not got the status of brahmatva but now the aparokṣatva status also has
gone! After śravaṇa, śiṣya who came for lābha has got nāśa as the aparokṣa state has gone.
Jīva who comes to Vedānta class is aparokṣa by nature. He enjoys aparokṣatva status. The
poor student has come to get brahmatva status. He wants to add additional status of
brahmatva in addition to aparokṣatva status. After coming to the Guru, what happens. He
‘lost’ his aparokṣa status that he already had! Your interpretation makes such a conclusion.
Mahāvākya-vicāra will give parokṣa jñāna means that this will be the funny consequence.
Therefore, your reasoning is indeed wonderful. Wonderful here means it is stupid. Don’t
give such a conclusion. Vākya-vicāra has to give aparokṣa jñāna and if it does not give,
continue śravaṇa.

śloka 82
वृद्धिमिष्टवतो मूलमपि नष्टमितीरितम्।
लौकिकं वचनं सार्थं सम्पन्नं त्वत्प्रसादतः ॥ ७.८२ ॥
vṛddhimiṣṭavato mūlamapi naṣṭamitīritam.
laukikaṃ vacanaṃ sārthaṃ sampannaṃ tvatprasādataḥ (7.82).
He says even though your reasoning is funny, there is one benefit to your reasoning. There
is a proverb popular in the world. For that proverb, your reasoning will serve as an
example. A person invested money with an idea of generating some interest out of it. At
the end of a few years, not only did he not get the interest, but lost his capital also. For that
proverb, we needed some example and your interpretation serves as a wonderful
example. The śiṣya invested aparokṣatva to get brahmatva and at the end of the class he
did not get the interest of brahmatva, but he lost the capital of aparokṣatva also! For a
person who is desirous of interest, he lost his investment also after a lapse of time. Such a
popular proverb used in the world has become meaningful or valid and all because of
your contribution by the wonderful interpretation of you mahā-vākya-vicāra.

śloka 83
अन्तःकरणसंभिन्नबोधो जीवोऽपरोक्षताम्।
अर्हत्युपाधिसद्भावान्न तु ब्रह्मानुपाधितः ॥ ७.८३ ॥
antaḥkaraṇasaṃbhinnabodho jīvo:'parokṣatām.
arhatyupādhisadbhāvānna tu brahmānupādhitaḥ (7.83).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 859

This is a technical Pūrvapakṣa. He says you can never get aparokṣa jñāna of Brahman.
Brahman is of the nature of Consciousness and the Consciousness is available as the
aparokṣa I, the intimate self-evident I, only because of the availability of the antaḥkaraṇa
upādhi or medium. Because Consciousness is enclosed in the mind, it is available as Śākṣi-
caitanya. Therefore, aparokṣa anubhava is because of antaḥkaraṇa upādhi. It is because of
the mind upādhi, and only where the mind is there, I, the Śākṣi-caitanya is available. If the
mind is not there, there is no aparokṣa jñāna such as for the wall, which has no the mind.
By definition, Brahman is nirupādhika. It is upādhi-rahita. It is media-less; Brahman is not
available for aparokṣa anubhava. Śākṣī is available for aparokṣa anubhava because of the
mind. You cannot get brahma-aparokṣa-anubhava despite your aparokṣa jñāna. This is
Pūrvapakṣa-śloka.
Jīva is Consciousness obtaining in the mind. Jīva is conditioned by the mind. It is like the
enclosed space. That Jīva deserves the status of aparokṣa aham or aparokṣa caitanya.
Therefore, we can have Jīva aparokṣa jñāna because Jīva has the upādhi as the medium for
experience, whereas Brahman does not deserve the status of aparokṣatva. Paramātmā does
not deserve the status of aparokṣatva because Brahman by definition is free from all the
upādhis or the media. You can have Jīva-aparokṣa-jñāna but not brahma-aparokṣa-jñāna.
Now, Vidyāraṇya has to give his answer.

śloka 84
नैवं ब्रह्मत्वबोधस्य सोपाधिविषयत्वतः ।
यावद्विदेहकै वल्यमुपाधेरनिवारणात्॥ ७.८४ ॥
naivaṃ brahmatvabodhasya sopādhiviṣayatvataḥ.
yāvadvidehakaivalyamupādheranivāraṇāt (7.84).
When we say that Brahman does not have any upādhis, the absence of upādhi is also a
form of upādhi which will help in understanding Brahman! Therefore, upādhi-abhāva is
an upādhi for Brahman. Then he will argue only in pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi there is no upādhi
and therefore, you don’t talk about absence of the mind. In vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi alone, we
can talk of absence of the mind. It is vyāvahārika upādhi for Brahman available in
vyāvahārika avasthā. In vyāvahārika, upādhis are present that you talk about and as
opposite of that, you can conceive of absence of the upādhi also. For example, suppose
there are many vessels and in all of them except one, water is filled. In one vessel there is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 860

no water. Then I say: please bring that vessel and I say that in which water is absent. You
differentiate the vessel from the absence of water. The absence of water itself is not a thing.
Even though it is absent it helps in differentiating that vessel from others.
Therefore, when there is water present, the absence of water is also is a type of adjective to
the vessel; emptiness is an adjective to the vessel even though emptiness is nothingness!
The emptiness which is absence can serve as an adjective. Absence of hair becomes an
adjective when I identify the bald head among others. Not only presence can become an
upādhi but we find that absence also becomes an upādhi. Brahma-jñāna is gained in
vyāvahārika avasthā, but Brahman is pāramārthika. In vyāvahārika state, Brahman can
have two types of upādhis: one is presence of the mind and another the absence of the
mind also which can be talked about as upādhi. When the Upaniṣad uses neti neti, there
the niṣedha or śarīra-traya-abhāva becomes an upādhi for Brahman in vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi.
This upādhi can give me the knowledge of Brahman. The knowledge of Brahman has an
upādhi of absence of upādhi.
Thus, when you say nirguṇa Brahman, the word nirguṇa meaning absence of guṇa
becomes an upādhi of Brahman in vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. In pāramārthika, there is no nirguṇa,
no saguṇa and there is no jñāna also. There is no knower, known, etc. When we describe
pāramārthika in vyāvahārika, there that Brahman has an upādhi. The upādhi is the
absence of guṇa. Therefore, Brahman is sopādhika only in vyāvahārika avasthā. The
upādhi is absence of the mind for Brahman. And that Brahman I know aparokṣatayā, I the
mindless Consciousness is Brahman. I the ‘minded’ Consciousness is Jīva and I the
‘mindless’ Consciousness is Brahman. In pāramārthika, there is no knowledge required.
Until videha-mukti, as long as we are in the vyāvahārika field, as long as I have the
prārabdha, as long as I have the body, from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, Brahman can never be free
from conditioning or upādhi; only difference is conditioning is in the form of presence of
something or the absence of that. Either you have to describe Brahman as saguṇa or
nirguṇa, savikāra or nirvikāra, which is a relative principle. More in the next class.

Class 183
śloka 84 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 861

Vidyāraṇya established that aparokṣa jñāna of Brahman can be attained through vākya-
pramāṇa that gives aparokṣa jñāna of Brahman. How it does so, he established by
analyzing the mahā-vākya, taking the help of Vākyavṛtti text. Now, Pūrvapakṣa raises
certain questions for which Vidyāraṇya gives his answer. He says Brahman is known as
nirupādhika, without any upādhi or conditioning. If Brahman is without any
conditioning, it will be Absolute. If Brahman is Absolute, it will not be available for any
form of transaction or it will not be available for knowledge also. Knowledge is also a form
of transaction only. Knowledge also comes under vyāvahārika. Nirupādhika Brahman or
Absolute Brahman transcends all vyavahāras and that is why it is said in Māṇḍūkya as
avyavahāra. As it is not available for jñāna, how can you talk of aparokṣa jñāna?
Therefore, I cannot accept Brahma-aparokṣa-jñāna through mahā-vākya or through any
pramāṇa. For this, Vidyāraṇya gives his answer in the following four ślokas. What you say
is not acceptable. He says Brahman whose knowledge we talk about in vyāvahārika is not
nirupādhika Brahman. We do accept nirupādhika Brahman is Absolute and it is not
available for any transactions, even knowledge-transaction also. In the absolute plane,
knowledge is not possible and knowledge is not necessary because there is no saṃsāra.
Then, why should we have knowledge since there is no ignorance to negate? There cannot
be ajñāna also.
When we talk about brahma-jñāna we relate to Brahman available in vyāvahārika and that
Brahman has upādhi and we talk of sopādhika Brahman only. Nirupādhika cannot be
known, need not be known as there is no saṃsāra in nirupādhika status. Whenever we
talk about brahma-jñāna we talk of sopādhika to bring under vyāvahārika plane. You will
get the total picture after analyzing the four ślokas. Vidyāraṇya says what you say is not
correct. When we talk of brahma-jñāna the Brahman which is the object of knowledge is
only sopādhika Brahman or conditioned Brahman alone we are knowing. It is a
knowledge and for which knowledge, it is analysed as sopādhika and nirupādhika
Brahman.
Brahman cannot become an object. Until videha-mukti, a person is within vyavahāra only.
Until vyavahāra, body is there and when we talk of Brahman, it falls within sopādhika
only and not nirupādhikam. One conditioning or the other will be there until one gains
videha-mukti, due to prārabdha. Liberating brahma-jñāna also has some upādhi. What
type of upādhi does Brahman have? Any upādhi will limit Brahman. An upādhi is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 862

cause for all types of limitations. I am a human being not an animal because I have
human-upādhi. If Brahman is sopādhika will be a limited one. If limited, how can it be
liberated? If limited Brahman can liberate me anything can liberate me. What is that in
Brahman that liberates me?

śloka 85
अन्तःकरणसाहित्यराहित्याभ्यां विशिष्यते ।
उपाधिर्जीवभावस्य ब्रह्मतायाश्च नान्यथा ॥ ७.८५ ॥
antaḥkaraṇasāhityarāhityābhyāṃ viśiṣyate.
upādhirjīvabhāvasya brahmatāyāśca nānyathā (7.85).
He says Brahman has a conditioning which is the absence of all the śarīras and prapañcas.
The very absence of things can be a form of conditioning to identify Brahman from all
other finite entities. Do you remember the example of an empty vessel I gave you in the
last class? In vyāvahārika plane, presence can be an upādhi and absence also can serve as
an upādhi. But in the absolute plane, you cannot talk of absence also. You should ask
absence of what? Therefore, in the absolute plane there is neither presence nor absence of
anything. In the vyāvahārika plane, presence can be an upādhi and also absence.
Therefore, Brahman is antaḥkaraṇa-rahita caitanya and antaḥkaraṇa-sahita caitanya is
Jīvātmā. Brahman can be differentiated as Brahman with antahkāraṇa and also without
antahkāraṇa.
Without antaḥkaraṇa as an adjective of Brahman, absence can become an adjective.
Normally, an adjective is a positive adjective but Vidyāraṇya says adjective can be a
negative adjective also. In the phrase “a bald-headed person”, bald shows the absence of
hair. Similarly, barren land which is qualified as barren that refers to absence of
vegetation. So too, liberating brahma-jñāna is knowledge of that Brahman which has
absence of things as an adjective. That is called prapañca-upaśama. Turīya is defined as
niṣprapañca Brahman. Prapañca-rahita Brahman, we can talk only in vyāvahārika plane.
In pāramārthika plane, prapañca is not there; why we should talk of prapañca-rahita
Brahman? Niṣprapañca Brahman is a concept within vyāvahārika plane only. You cannot
say that Brahman is limited by absence of Brahman. Even though Brahman is qualified
with the absence of the world, the absence of the world cannot limit Brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 863

The presence of the mind is the upādhi of Brahman by which Brahman becomes Jīva or
caitanya which makes caitanya Jīvātmā. Therefore, he says Jīva-bhāvasya upādhi.
Similarly, the absence of the mind is the upādhi for caitanya which makes caitanya
Brahman. When I look at myself including the mind, I am called Jīva. When I look at
myself excluding the mind, I am Brahman. Therefore, aparokṣa brahma-jñāna is possible
by excluding the mind. I myself get two statuses with the mind I get Jīva status and
without the mind I get Brahman status. Exclude the mind, I am Brahman.

śloka 86
यथा विधिरुपाधिः स्यात्प्रतिषेधस्तथा न किम्।
सुवर्णलोहभेदेन शृङ्खलात्वं न भिद्यते ॥ ७.८६ ॥
yathā vidhirupādhiḥ syātpratiṣedhastathā na kim.
suvarṇalohabhedena śṛṅkhalātvaṃ na bhidyate (7.86).
Normally, the upādhi we talk about is always in the form of a positive entity, meaning the
presence of one thing or the other. Brahma-caitanya appears as Indra, and other celestials
and manuṣya due to its association with the upādhi in the form of śarīras. How can the
absence of a thing become the upādhi? Caitanya has the status of Brahman because of
antaḥkaraṇa-abhava as upādhi. How can such absence become upādhi? A person may ask
this question. For this, Vidyāraṇya states what is the function of the upādhi. Upādhi is that
which helps you identify something. Gold can be identified as chain, bangle, etc., because
of nāma-rūpa. The role of upādhi is to help in identifying or specifying something. To
identify someone you need an upādhi to gain its knowledge. Now, Vidyāraṇya argues if
the absence also can help identify something, why cannot I use the absence also as
upādhi? It is a means of identification. There is no rule that there should be a positive
upādhi to identify a thing. Empty vessel when I say emptiness is an upādhi that helps
identify a particular vessel. In the same way, abhāva also can serve as an upādhi in the
vyāvahārika plane. The positive adjective or feature can serve as an identification factor,
just specification factor or pinpointing factor; why cannot a negative attribute like empty
vessel, barren land, etc. too since it helps in identifying a thing?
Therefore, for brahma-jñāna, how do we identify Brahman? In fact, the very sukha-
duḥkha being limitless is in which I don’t talk of positive attribute of Brahman but the
absence of limitation! Positive and negative upādhis have got one common function of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 864

helping the listener to identify the object. As long as it serves in communication, why do
you bother whether it is positive or negative upādhi. When you want to fix a person in a
particular place you have to use any type of chain. What type of chain whether it is made
up of silver or iron as long as it serves the purpose you can use the chain without seeing
the differences. The interest is to restrain the person. Here, the teacher is interested in
communicating the jñāna; why do you bother whether it is done by using the negative or
positive upādhis? A chain status is not different just because the material is different. Why
do you bother about the material?

śloka 87
अतद्व्यावृत्तिरूपेण साक्षाद्विधिमुखेन च ।
वेदान्तानां प्रवृत्तिः स्याद्द्विधेत्याचार्यभाषितम्॥ ७.८७ ॥
atadvyāvṛttirūpeṇa sākṣādvidhimukhena ca.
vedāntānāṃ pravṛttiḥ syāddvidhetyācāryabhāṣitam (7.87).
Vidyāraṇya says this has been accepted by Ādi Śaṅkarācārya in his Vākyavṛtti that
Brahman can be described as sat and cit and Brahman can be described negatively as
prapañca-upaśama where Brahman is described as where prapañca is not there. It is
positively described as sat and cit. Both pramāṇas are accepted for Brahman to be there.
By negating everything other than Brahman, Brahman is revealed which is called niṣedha-
mukha-pramāṇa. This is one method. Another is vidhi-mukha-pramāṇa when Brahman is
described positively as pure existence or adhiṣṭhāna. It is a positive description. The
Upaniṣad functions or operates in revealing in Brahman. Upaniṣads do their job of
revealing Brahman or giving brahma-jñāna. Sometimes, it uses positive method and some
other times, negative method. Satya and jñāna will come under positive description. Neti
neti iti Ātmā is a negative method. Another vākya quoted is vijñānam ānandam brahma. It
is a positive definition. In this manner, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya has taught us in the Vākyavṛtti
śloka 28 first line.

śloka 88
अहमर्थपरित्यागादहं ब्रह्मेति धीः कुतः ।
नैवमंशस्य हि त्यागो भागलक्षणयोदितः ॥ ७.८८ ॥
ahamarthaparityāgādahaṃ brahmeti dhīḥ kutaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 865

naivamaṃśasya hi tyāgo bhāgalakṣaṇayoditaḥ (7.88).

To know ahaṃ brahma asmi what should I do? I should give up Jīva-bhāva. Only when I
exclude the mind, Jīva-bhāva goes. That is why in sleep we are all in ānanda in the absence
of the mind. In sleep, I have brahma-bhāva. Therefore, I have to exclude the mind and
claim ahaṃ brahma asmi. Now, Pūrvapakṣa asks once you exclude the mind how can
there be the word aham? The status of aham is because of the mind only. That is in sleep
there is no mind and so, I don’t use the word aham. When you exclude the mind, you
remove the meaning of the word I. Once aham-artha is gone you cannot say ahaṃ brahma
asmi. How do you claim ahaṃ brahma asmi when the word aham cannot be used because
you have excluded the mind which is the condition for using the word aham? Vidyāraṇya
is ready with the answer. When you use the word aham, aham has three components. The
mind is not the only component; cidābhāsa is there and cit is there. Cit is very much there.
Therefore, the word aham has three components and we have excluded the two— the
mind and cidābhāsa, and the primary component cit aṃśa being there, I am entitled to use
aham through bhāga-tyāga lakṣaṇā.
When with the exclusion of the meaning of the word aham or ahaṅkāra, the mind is
excluded, how can there be the knowledge ahaṃ brahma asmi? For that, Vidyāraṇya says
you cannot make such an object because the ahaṅkāra is not totally given up. If it is totally
given up, it will come under jahati lakṣaṇā. We are using bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā. The
caitanya is there. There is caitanya in ahaṅkāra since it is everywhere; that is the reality
which lends existence to everything. Caitanya is the core of everything including
ahaṅkāra. Therefore, we are not renouncing ahaṅkāra totally but we retain cit aṃśa. So
what you say is not correct. We exclude only a part of ahaṅkāra through the application of
bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā.
Remember, even when we negate the entire world we don’t negate the world totally. In
the world also, there is nāma-rūpa aṃśa and sat the existence aṃśa. We negate only nāma-
rūpa part but we don’t negate the sat part and keeping the sat part alone we say all this is
Brahman. It is done through bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā. That sat which is everywhere is
Brahman. Therefore, we can never negate anything totally because Brahman is there
everywhere. Don’t throw the baby with the bath water. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 866

Class 184
śloka 88 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the mahāvākya-vicāra and shows that mahāvākya-vicāra can give
aparokṣa jñāna: ahaṃ brahma asmi. When Paramātmā is associated with the mind, I am
Jīvātmā. Caitanya without the mind is Paramātmā. Caitanya with the absence of the mind
is called Paramātmā. Through mahā-vākya, I claim aham Paramātmā asmi.

śloka 89
अन्तःकरणसन्त्यागादवशिष्टे चिदात्मनि ।
अहं ब्रह्मेति वाक्येन ब्रह्मत्वं साक्षिणीक्ष्यते ॥ ७.८९ ॥
antaḥkaraṇasantyāgādavaśiṣṭe cidātmani.
ahaṃ brahmeti vākyena brahmatvaṃ sākṣiṇīkṣyate (7.89).
The same idea mentioned in the previous śloka is clarified here. In Tat tvam asi
understood as aham brahma asmi, the word aham that I use for Consciousness, mind,
sense-organs, etc, is to be understood. When I understand aham, I know that the mind is
used as an instrument but it is not included in the word aham. In the meaning of the word
I, I exclude the antaḥkaraṇa and cidābhāsa also and then, what is left is the original
consciousness which is otherwise called śākṣī and in that śākṣī, one recognizes limitless
Brahman status. The limitations belong to the mind and creation and we don’t talk about
the reflecting medium or the reflected consciousness both being limited but we talk of the
original consciousness Brahman which alone is limitless. The student claims being
Brahman by making the statement ahaṃ brahma asmi. When we say ahaṃ brahma asmi,
we do not physically throw the mind or we do not enter samādhi and remove the mind. Is
it entry into samādhi where the mind is wiped out or physically kept somewhere? No, the
exclusion is purely the understanding that the mind belongs to a lower order of reality
and the presence is as good as non-existence from the point of view of śākṣī. Exclusion is
mithyātva-niścaya.
When the TV shows some slum, even though the slum is with full of dirt and dust, we
understand that the scene is full of dust, and not the original TV screen as full of dust. You
don’t have to remove the programme to remove the dust in the screen as screen is asaṅga
because it belongs to higher order and movie is of lower order/ I understand I am
pāramārthika caitanya and the mind cannot be included in me in all three periods of time.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 867

This understanding is called the exclusion of the mind. Then I become mindless even
though I use the mind. Mithyā mind presence and mithyā mind absence do not make any
difference to me. By negating the mind as mithyā I claim I am satya caitanya through
ahaṃ brahma asmi.

śloka 90
स्वप्रकाशोऽपि साक्ष्येष धीवृत्त्या व्याप्यतेऽन्यवत्।
फलव्याप्यत्वमेवास्य शास्त्रकृ द्भिर्निवारितम्॥ ७.९० ॥
svaprakāśo:'pi sākṣyeṣa dhīvṛttyā vyāpyate:'nyavat.
phalavyāpyatvamevāsya śāstrakṛdbhirnivāritam (7.90).
We do accept that every knowledge has to take place in the mind alone, whether it is
material or spiritual knowledge. Secondly, every knowledge takes place only by the
pramāṇa or instrument of knowledge; any one of the pramāṇa must be involved for
creation of knowledge in the mind. That is why we don’t accept intuition as a source of
knowledge. It does not come under anyone of the six pramāṇas. We have to gain
knowledge in tuition. Some people sometime talk of intuitive feeling that happens. Why
cannot we talk of this as a pramāṇa and a means of knowledge? Do all the intuition come
true? No. Only some of them come true. That means intuition is not a reliable source of
knowledge. Since intuition is not reliable, we don’t accept that as a pramāṇa. Jñāna has to
take place in the mind and it is generated by the application of one of the six pramāṇas.
The knowledge always takes place only in the form of thought. Whether it is pot-
knowledge or cricket-score or any knowledge for that matter has to take place in the form
of thought. Every thought is not knowledge but we say every knowledge is in the form of
thought, secular or sacred knowledge. Every knowledge is called vṛtti-jñāna. A thought is
generated in the mind by the operation of one of the pramāṇas. We all know that the mind
is always pervaded by the reflected consciousness and cidābhāsa is there always in the
mind; even in suṣupti when the mind is dormant, cidābhāsa is in a dormant form. Actively
or dormantly, cidābhāsa is always there in the mind. Since the mind is pervaded by
cidābhāsa, the thought takes place. Thought is a part of the mind alone. A modification of
the mind is a thought. If the mind is pervaded by cidābhāsa we can say that all the
thoughts are pervaded by cidābhāsa. Even confusion and worry thoughts, etc., are
pervaded by cidābhāsa. Therefore, every vṛtti-jñāna has two components. One is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 868

reflecting medium part and another is the reflected consciousness part. The thought is one
part and the reflected consciousness is the second part. Every knowledge is equal to
thought plus the reflected consciousness. It is relevant thought plus Consciousness. Pot-
knowledge is pot-thought plus the reflected consciousness. Thought is reflecting medium
and there is the reflected consciousness. All knowledge has twofold component. Brahma-
jñāna also is not exception to the rule and brahma-jñāna also has two components one is
vṛtti aṃśa and cidābhāsa aṃśa. Vṛtti or thought is I am Brahman. It is thought in the mind.
There the author calls it akhaṇḍa-ākāra-vṛtti. In this thought, subject-object-division is not
there. I am Brahman. I am not talking about Brahman as an object and therefore, it is
akhaṇḍa. You can call it brahmākāra-vṛtti. Cidābhāsa is the other part. All knowledge
involves vṛtti jñāna; all vṛtti jñāna has two components. But in the case of brahma-jñāna
there is a specialty. He says only thought-part has a function in the case of brahma-jñāna,
while cidābhāsa part does not play any role (which otherwise lights up the thought). In all
forms of material knowledge, both parts play an active role. Vedānta says when I am
gaining the knowledge of a pot, then the mind according to Vedānta is supposed to go out
in the form of a beam of thought. It is like from a torch light a beam emerges. Just as a ray
comes out from the sun, from vṛtti-aṃśa, a ray comes out and pervades the pot. This
pervasion is called vṛtti-vyāpti spreading over the object. When the vṛtti pervades, since
the thought is associated with cidābhāsa, cidābhāsa also pervades and it is called ābhāsa-
vyāpti or we use the technical word phala-vyāpti. phala means cidābhāsa. Phala-vyāpti is
cidābhāsa-vyāpti or cidābhāsa-pervasion. These two perform two different jobs. Vṛtti-
vyāpti removes the ajñāna-vṛtti. Ghaṭa-vṛtti removes ghaṭa-āvaraṇa. Cidābhāsa-vyāpti
illumines and makes the pot known. It performs the part of viṣaya-prakāśana. Āvaraṇa-
nivṛtti and viṣaya-sphūrti. Because the ignorance is gone and the object is illumined by
cidābhāsa, I have the knowledge of pot and the ghaṭa-jñāna is there not concealed by
ajñāna.
The uniqueness in the case of Brahman is “ahaṃ brahma asmi” vṛtti; it is very important
because it has an important role to play of removing ignorance. Ātmā-ajñāna-nivṛtti it has
to do. Therefore, vṛtti-vyāpti plays a role in the case of brahma-jñāna. The cidābhāsa, the
reflected consciousness, need not illumine Brahman because Brahman is the original
consciousness and it need not be illumined. The reflected light is not required to illumine
the original light. The moonlight is required to illumine the earth since the earth has no

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 869

light by itself. Can we use the moonlight to illumine the sun? It is neither possible nor
needed, because the very moonlight is there because of the sun! So, the moonlight is
redundant in the case of sun-illumination. Cidābhāsa is redundant in the case of Brahman-
illumination. We don’t say cidābhāsa is absent but it has no role to play to illumine
Brahman. Suppose there is a tube-light in the room. To read the book we use the tube-
light. Two factors are used to look at the book. One is the eye and the other is the light; to
see the light I use eyes only. To know anātmā, you need thought and cidābhāsa, but to
know the Ātmā, you need thought only. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says in the case of brahma-
jñāna, vṛtti-jñāna is needed not, phala-jñāna. Six ślokas deal with this topic.
When I gain “ahaṃ brahma asmi” knowledge, I the śākṣī is pervaded or objectified by
“ahaṃ brahma asmi” vṛtti. Vṛtti-vyāpti is very much there as in the case of other objects
in the world. There is no exemption to this rule. Even though Ātmā is self-evident, we do
require a thought which is referring to Ātmā. The difference is that śākṣī is not illumined
by the cidābhāsa. Vedānta-Ācāryas negate the cidābhāsa and its function is negated.

śloka 91
बुद्धितत्स्थचिदाभासौ द्वावपि व्याप्नुतो घटम्।
तत्राज्ञानं धिया नश्येदाभासेन घटः स्फु रेत्॥ ७.९१ ॥
buddhitatsthacidābhāsau dvāvapi vyāpnuto ghaṭam.
tatrājñānaṃ dhiyā naśyedābhāsena ghaṭaḥ sphuret (7.91).
Vidyāraṇya contrasts brahma-jñāna with pot jñāna. Both the mind as also cidābhāsa will
pervade a part when we are looking at the pot. The thought of the mind goes out and
pervades the pot. Both thought and reflected-consciousness pervades the pot. Among
those two components, the ignorance which is āvaraṇa is eliminated by the thought. The
veiling or concealing ignorance is eliminated due to this and because of cidābhāsa the
reflected consciousness, the pot is illumined, because by itself, the pot is jaḍa. Caitanya has
to pervade to illumine that pot. This is in the case of pot-knowledge.

śloka 92
ब्रह्मण्यज्ञाननाशाय वृत्तिव्याप्तिरपेक्षिता ।
स्वयं स्फु रणरूपत्वान्नाभास उपयुज्यते ॥ ७.९२ ॥
brahmaṇyajñānanāśāya vṛttivyāptirapekṣitā.
svayaṃ sphuraṇarūpatvānnābhāsa upayujyate (7.92).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 870

In the case of Brahman, we do require the thought “ahaṃ brahma asmi” to remove the
brahma-ajñāna. This will be again discussed elaborately in the 8th chapter. On the other
hand, cidābhāsa is not utilized here, or phala-vyāpti is not utilized here because Brahman
is not like a pot but Brahman is self-effulgent and already self-evident. Cidābhāsa becomes
evident because of the cit alone. Ābhāsa is not utilized says Vidyāraṇya.

śloka 93
चक्षुर्दीपावपेक्ष्येते घटादेर्दर्शने तथा ।
न दीपदर्शने किन्तु चक्षुरेकमपेक्ष्यते ॥ ७.९३ ॥
cakṣurdīpāvapekṣyete ghaṭāderdarśane tathā.
na dīpadarśane kintu cakṣurekamapekṣyate (7.93).
Here, he gives an example. When you want to see a pot, you need the eye [compared to
thought] and dīpa [cidābhāsa]. Both are required because the pot is not self-luminous.
Therefore, to add luminosity to the pot, you need a light which is nothing but cidābhāsa.
On the other hand, dīpa-darśane, in the case of seeing the light, you don’t need another
torch light. You need only the eye only. Similarly, in the case of brahma-jñāna-vṛtti alone
is enough.

śloka 94
स्थितोऽप्यसौ चिदाभासो ब्रह्मण्येकीभवेत्परम्।
न तु ब्रह्मण्यतिशयं फलं कुर्याद्घटादिवत्॥ ७.९४ ॥
sthito:'pyasau cidābhāso brahmaṇyekībhavetparam.
na tu brahmaṇyatiśayaṃ phalaṃ kuryādghaṭādivat (7.94).
Here, he makes it very clear that cidābhāsa is formed or present even in the case of
brahma-jñāna. Even though it does really exist, it only mixes with the light of Brahman. It
is like the beam of moonlight is directed to the sunlight, the moonlight will join the sun
but will not increase the sunlight. So cidābhāsa only merges into the cit and it will not add
to the brightness of the original cit as it cannot add to the illumination of the cit Brahman.
Phala-vyāpti does not do any phala. Phala-vyāpti is only a dummy in this case. How do
you know all these things? For this, Vidyāraṇya says all these things are there in the śāstra.
It is not explicitly said. We have to extract the knowledge. All are there in the Veda.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 871

śloka 95
अप्रमेयमनादिं चेत्यत्र श्रुत्येदमीरितम्।
मनसैवेदमाप्तव्यमिति धीव्याप्यता श्रुता ॥ ७.९५ ॥
aprameyamanādiṃ cetyatra śrutyedamīritam.
manasaivedamāptavyamiti dhīvyāpyatā śrutā (7.95).
He says Veda has two statements which are seemingly contradictory. One says the mind
cannot know Brahman; another statement says the mind alone knows Brahman. Here it is
said the mind cannot know Brahman and in another Upaniṣad that the mind alone has to
know Brahman. He says if you understand vṛtti-vyāpti and phala-vyāpti, it will be clear.
The mind has to develop vṛtti-vyāpti and through this, remove ignorance of Brahman.
Therefore, the mind is needed to know. Through the mind one cannot know means
cidābhāsa formed by the mind cannot illumine Brahman because reflection cannot
illumine the original; therefore, we say that the mind cannot illumine Brahman. The
consolation is even though cidābhāsa cannot illumine Brahman, cidābhāsa need not
illumine it, because Brahman is self-evident and once ignorance is removed, Brahman is
known without the help of cidābhāsa. The details in the next class.

Class 185
śloka 95 contd.
Vidyāraṇya explains how aparokṣa jñāna ahaṃ brahma asmi rises in the mind of the śiṣya
when he does proper mahāvākya-vicāra under the guidance of a competent Ācārya. Also
he points out the uniqueness of this knowledge when compared to other knowledge; self-
knowledge is similar to any other knowledge but not the same. Paramātmā is involved in
both the cases. In both, the mind is involved. A thought arises in the case of the worldly
knowledge in relation to the object of knowledge; and also in spiritual knowledge a
thought arises. Here, it is akhaṇḍa-ākāra-vṛtti. The thought alone removes the ignorance
covering the object and the function of thought is ajñāna-nivṛtti. In the worldly knowledge
the thought removes viṣaya-āvaraka-ajñāna. In spiritual knowledge, it removes brahma-
āvaraka-ajñāna. There is no difference in both, material knowledge and brahma-jñāna. In
both, the reflected consciousness formation takes place. Wherever there is a medium,
reflection has to take place. Thus, in all these respects, there is no difference at all but there
is only one difference. In the case of the worldly knowledge, the objects are inert in nature,
cannot reveal themselves and something is required to illumine the object and that is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 872

reflected consciousness. The reflected consciousness has a role to play and it is called
phala-vyāpti. In the case of brahman-knowledge, the reflected consciousness need not
play that role because brahman happens to be the original consciousness and there is no
need of the reflected consciousness to reveal the original consciousness. Why should
moonlight illumine sunlight? The moonlight need not illumine the sunlight and in fact, the
sunlight need not be illumined by anything. In the case of brahma-jñāna, phala-vyāpti
does not play its role. This we said so far.
Now, in the conclusion Vidyāraṇya says this also clears a possible doubt that may come
when we read the scriptures. This unique phenomenon creates a doubt when we read the
scriptures. Somewhere scriptures say the mind cannot know brahman and in some other
places, brahman alone has to know brahman. Yat mānasa na manute is from Kenopaniṣad.
Another is aprameyam anādim the mind cannot know brahman [Amṛtabindu Upaniṣad
mantra 9] with the help of the mind alone you have to know brahman. [also refer to 4.11 of
Kaṭhopaniṣad.] These two statements are seemingly contradictory! Our answer is that the
mind is required. From vṛtti-vyāpti-angle the mind is required because thought alone
removes ignorance. From the standpoint of ignorance-removal, the mind is required and
at the same time from the standpoint of illumining brahman, the mind is not required as
the mind need not illumine brahman, which is itself self-effulgent. This is the essence of
this śloka. “Ahaṃ brahma asmi” knowledge takes place by mahāvākya-śravaṇa.

śloka 96
आत्मानं चेद्विजानीयादयमस्मीति वाक्यतः ।
ब्रह्मात्मव्यक्तिमुल्लिख्य यो बोधः सोऽभिधीयते ॥ ७.९६ ॥
ātmānaṃ cedvijānīyādayamasmīti vākyataḥ.
brahmātmavyaktimullikhya yo bodhaḥ so:'bhidhīyate (7.96).
We may wonder for what purpose Vidyāraṇya tells all these things. He says you would
have forgotten what I said in the beginning. I comment upon the first line of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra the topic being aparokṣa jñāna. The Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra says the aparokṣa jñāna has been mentioned in the Upaniṣad. It is
aparokṣa jñāna because in this knowledge, a person specifies brahman not as a general
object somewhere, but jñānī specifies brahman as himself. That jagat-kāraṇa brahman
aham asmi; specifying brahman as I is the aparokṣa jñāna.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 873

śloka 97
अस्तु बोधोऽपरोक्षोऽत्र महावाक्यात्तथाप्यसौ ।
न दृढः श्रवणादीनामाचार्यैः पुनरीरणात्॥ ७.९७ ॥
astu bodho:'parokṣo:'tra mahāvākyāt tathāpyasau.
na dṛḍhaḥ śravaṇādīnāmācāryaiḥ punarīraṇāt (7.97).
With the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya concludes mahāvākya-vicāra portion which started
in śloka 70. Now, up to 134, Vidyāraṇya talks about the obstacles for this jñāna because of
which knowledge is not able to give the benefit which it is supposed to give. The phala is
saṃsāra-nivṛtti. Generally, Vedāntic students ask the question: how can jñāna give
freedom from saṃsāra? There is some gap between jñāna-prāpti and jñāna-phala-prāpti. If
I don’t enjoy jñāna-phala, I begin to doubt whether I have gained knowledge or not. Jñāna
means understanding. I am able claim I have understood. But I have reservation to accept
this fact. It is due to jñāna-phala missing. Then I question the very existence of jñāna.
Therefore, we should know how jñāna-phala is lacking if I have jñāna. I have knowledge
and if my doubt is due to lack of phala, tell me how I lack phala if I have gained jñāna?
Vidyāraṇya says it is not due to defect of jñāna. What jñāna has done for others proves
that jñāna has the capacity to give you freedom from saṃsāra.
The mind creates certain obstacles and not allow jñāna to do its job. If the light is burning
and still the darkness does not go, then it means that the burning light is covered by
something or the other. Some obstacles are there and it is our own mind that creates
problems with its own reservations. Such obstacles are called antaḥkaraṇa-doṣa. The
obstacles are the creation of our own mind. As long as the mind gives these obstacles the
knowledge is not allowed to do its job. That is called sapratibandha aparokṣa jñāna.
The mental reservations have to be removed and the reservations coming to the mind are
classified into three types. They are three types of the obstacles not allowing the
knowledge to function:
1. The first one is pramāṇa-asambhāvanā, the reservation regarding the very essential
teaching of Vedānta as to whether Vedānta says you are Paramātmā or you are part
of Paramātmā or you are dāsa of Paramātmā. Rāmānuja says you cannot be
Paramātmā and you are part only. Madhvācārya says you are eternally dāsa and
your ānanda is serving Īśvara not joining Īśvara. These reservations create doubts.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 874

Now and then, a reservation whether this or the other is the teaching, as to which is
correct, poses a problem. It goes away by the repeated analysis of the teaching. We
have got a method of analysis. Ṣaḍliṅgadvārā, with help of six parameters we make
sure that the Upaniṣad does not have any intention other than saying that you are
the truth of the world. The Upaniṣad teaches this alone. Suppose one says I don’t
have any reservation, and accepts what you say is right. One way or the other, there
should not be any reservation regarding the content of the teaching. This is not
production of knowledge but removal of the first obstacle by analysis.
2. The second is the reservation regarding the nature of brahman or myself. It is a
doubt regarding the prameya Ātmā or brahman. The Upaniṣad says I am non-dual
Advaita Ātmā. The sense-organs report plurality, while Vedānta says that I am non-
dual. The pratyakṣa pramāṇa says I am a part of duality but śāstra pramāṇa says I
am non-dual; which one is a fact is the question. I cannot dismiss pratyakṣa
pramāṇa. It is the primary source of knowledge. For every other pramāṇa to work,
you need pratyakṣa; indrīya is needed. When the primary source of knowledge
reveals dvaita and śāstra says it is Advaita, which one is a fact and which is an
error? Thus, there is a doubt regarding the validity of two powerful sources of
knowledge: pratyakṣa and śāstra. There is reservation regarding what śāstra says.
This can be resolved only by understanding that two primary sources cannot work
in the same field. The eyes and ears cannot contradict because both operate in
different fields; they don’t function in the same field. I should know that the sense-
organs function in the vyāvahārika field whereas Vedānta functions in the
pāramārthika field. Therefore, Vedānta does not say there is Advaita in
vyāvahārika plane. Veda accepts dvaita in vyāvahārika. Veda knows there is
dvaita. However, pratyakṣa cannot contradict pāramārthika Advaita since
pratyakṣa cannot function in the pāramārthika field at all. Thus, I should know the
difference in the fields of dvaita and Advaita. When I say there Advaita, I only talk
of pāramārthika plane behind vyāvahārika prapañca. Pratyakṣa is valid in
vyāvahārika plane and Vedānta is valid in pāramārthika field. In the vyāvahārika
plane, do what you have to do. The other people will have a problem with this,
because they don’t accept the two orders of reality. Vedānta tries to reveal to us the
pāramārthika brahman.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 875

3. The third one is called viparīta-bhāvanā or the habitual non-Vedāntic thinking. All
the time, I think of various relationships, etc, when I am really asaṅga. My mind is
preoccupied with saṅga aham and I don’t rise to the level of asaṅga aham. Keeping
the saṅga aham in the mind, asaṅga Ātmā is the greatest joke of the century. The
conception of I, I in the mind and the I that is described by Vedānta are
contradictory. One is saṅga and the other is asaṅga. The meaning of the
conventional I and Vedāntic I are different. Therefore, we have to make this I
feebler and allow the other I to dominate. The regular conventional I must be
dethroned, it should be functional I and it should predominantly occupy my mind.
If this viparīta-bhāvanā does not go, the other I will be in a corner. We have to solve
the problem of ahaṅkāra I as Vedānta is meant to replace ahaṅkāra I. Suppose a
person asks I am not ready to replace the ahaṅkāra I but I want to solve the
problem of ahaṅkāra I. Then Vedānta will ask him to go to karma kāṇḍa whereby
ahaṅkāra is affected by karma and therefore, the remedy is karma alone. You
choose whether you want to solve your ahaṅkāra problem or want jñāna to replace
the ahaṅkāra. Veda has both the options and it is for you to choose what you want.
Even if a person is not ready to replace ahaṅkāra and therefore, not ready for jñāna
kāṇḍa, for him, Kṛṣṇa says in Gītā that Vedānta-śravaṇa as a byproduct can give
puṇya also. One minute Vedānta-śravaṇa is equal to hundred yāgas, tīrtha snāna in
all the rivers and giving everything as dāna to the people. Vedānta’s aim is the
domination of aham and weakening of ahaṅkāra and this is viparīta-bhāvanā-
nivṛtti.
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana are meant for pramāṇa-asambhāvanā-, prameya-
asambhāvanā- and pratibandha-nivṛtti. Then, the knowledge becomes more and more
powerful. Jñāna becomes jñāna-niṣṭhā. This is the topic from śloka 97 to 134. Keep on
listening to the teaching. The latter śravaṇa is not for giving knowledge but they are for
pratibandha-nivṛtti. The details in the next class.

Class 186
śloka 97 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 876

Mahā-vākya-vicāra is capable of giving aparokṣa jñāna. This topic he completes and from
97th śloka, Vidyāraṇya enters into another topic. Even after gaining aparokṣa jñāna, many
people are not able to reap the benefit of the knowledge. Jñāna should give jñāna-phala,
but for many people jñāna does not fructify the jīvanmukti phala because of some
obstacles. I gave you an example: when the lamp burns, the darkness must go away, but if
it is still there, it is due to the fact that the lamp is covered by something. In the case of
some people, some obstacles cover the jñāna. If people come to Vedānta after sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti, then the obstacles will not be there just as there will not be any time
gap from switching on the light and the darkness disappearing immediately. Thus, we
have students of different types and some don’t get the benefit due to pratibandha. It is
aparokṣa jñāna but obstructed aparokṣa jñāna. Another word used for that is –-adrida
jñāna. It is sapratibandha jñāna. They need a separate effort to be resolved but it is not for
gaining jñāna. Jñāna alone has to give mokṣa and so, the effort is not even for mokṣa, but it
is for removal of obstacles. Once the obstacles go apratibandha jñāna replaces
sapratibandha jñāna. Since the obstacles go away gradually, the conversion is not a
sudden process; it is a slow process. No such sudden event takes place. Obstacles recede
slowly. The benefit also becomes clear more and more slowly. On paurṇamī the moonlight
becomes brighter and brighter.
A Vedāntin should not expect any kind of sudden jerky experience. Many people present
self-realization as sudden explosive event but it is not so. Understand Vedānta as you
attend the class but the effect is not suddenly felt. As the obstacles are removed, the benefit
is more and more. You cannot pinpoint the time of realization. The topic now dealt with is
conversion of sapratibandha jñāna to apratibandha jñāna. It is removal of the obstacles.
Therefore, in this śloka, Vidyāraṇya gives the introduction. Even though there is
knowledge it is not fully functional and operational. So Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says in his
Vākyavṛtti that you have to continue your śravaṇa followed by manana and nididhyāsana.
First is for jñāna-prāpti and the second śravaṇa is for pratibandha-nivṛtti. śravaṇa-
manana-nididhyāsana are for removing the three obstacles. First is for jñāna-prāpti and
manana and nididhyāsana are for pratibandha-nivṛtti. Even after completing the first,
śravaṇa, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya asks us to do manana and nididhyāsana.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 877

śloka 98
अहं ब्रह्मेति वाक्यार्थबोधो यावद्दृढीभवेत्।
शमादिसहितस्तावदभ्यसेच्छ्रवणादिकम्॥ ७.९८ ॥
ahaṃ brahmeti vākyārthabodho yāvaddṛḍhībhavet.
śamādisahitastāvadabhyasecchravaṇādikam (7.98).
This is a quotation from Vākyavṛtti śloka 49, Brahma-sūtra 4.1.1 and also Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad 2.4.5 and 4.5.6. Yājñavalkya’s teaching to Maitreyī. That is presented in
Vakyavṛtti by Ādi Śaṅkarācārya. Even after completing one round of śravaṇa, the student
should repeat again and again with manana and nididhyāsana. You be in touch with
śāstra all the time. Then he says to make sure to pay attention to your sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti. If the sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti weakens, the jñāna also will seemingly
weaken like the embers covered by ash. Therefore, we have to revise vairāgya. Keep a
check on vairāgya and others in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Along with sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti, may you practice śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. You do it until the
knowledge becomes so natural that there is no chance of forgetting it anytime. Until jñāna
becomes apratibandha jñāna you have to continue śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana and
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti.

śloka 99
बाढं सन्ति ह्यदार्ढ्यस्य हेतवः श्रुत्यनेकता ।
असम्भाव्यत्वमर्थस्य विपरीता च भावना ॥ ७.९९ ॥
bāḍhaṃ santi hyadārḍhyasya hetavaḥ śrutyanekatā.
asambhāvyatvamarthasya viparītā ca bhāvanā (7.99).
There are three powerful obstacles which make the knowledge feebler or weaker. The
inefficiency of knowledge is felt from the fact that we don’t get jīvanmukti even after
gaining aparokṣa jñāna. When we read the description of a Jīvanmukta, we should know
that the description belongs to me and not that it is a description of anybody else. Three
obstacles are one is because of the presence of different types of Vedic statements.
Sometimes we get a doubt as to what is the main teaching of the Veda. In some places,
Jīvātmā is said to be identical with Paramātmā. It is an advaitic statement. In another
place, there are two in the body of the individual, the Jīvātmā bird and Paramātmā bird,
and clearly indicating that Jīvātmā and Paramātmā are different. We have Viśiṣṭādvaita

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 878

Brāhmaṇa. Antaryāmī-Brāhmaṇa says Paramātmā is inside the Jīva. If Paramātmā is inside

the Jīvātmā then Paramātmā and Jīvātmā have got śarīra-śarīrī-sambandha and
Viśiṣṭādvaita seems to be correct. Gītā says somewhere that Jīvātmā is an aṃśa of Īśvara.
Am I one with God, am I different from God or am I a part of God? We don’t know what
is the central teaching. It is called pramāṇa-asambhāvanā.
The internal seeming contradiction of the Vedic statements has to be removed by repeated
śravaṇa. Prameya-asambhāvanā is even though I have clearly understood that Upaniṣad
teaches Advaita, I get a new doubt because of a new contradiction. Now, I see
contradiction between Upaniṣad and my own pratyakṣa pramāṇa. The contradiction is
that the Śruti says Advaita is there while pratyakṣa shows dvaita is there everywhere.
Both of them are primary sources of knowledge. Anumāna and arthāpatti are secondary
source of knowledge. Pratyakṣa and śāstra are equally powerful pramāṇas contradicting
each other. How can we resolve this problem? All the time we use pratyakṣa and
therefore, accepting Advaita is a difficult task. Previously, Śruti-vākya-virodha and now
pratyakṣa-virodha. We have to resolve this too through śravaṇa alone. The habitual
misconception regarding myself and the world continues as any habit dies very hard.
Even with any amount of effort, it is not that easy to remove the habit. The second
śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana are for pratibandha-nivṛtti. Now, Vidyāraṇya will
elaborately analyse.

śloka 100
शाखाभेदात्कामभेदाच्छ्रुतं कर्माण्यथान्यथा ।
एवमत्रापि माशङ्कीत्यतः श्रवणमाचरेत्॥ ७.१०० ॥
śākhābhedātkāmabhedācchrutaṃ karmāṇyathānyathā.
evamatrāpi māśaṅkītyataḥ śRāvaṇamācaret (7.100).
He says we get a doubt with regard to Upaniṣadic teaching because in karma kāṇḍa
different branches of Veda teaches different karmas. Even agnihotra karmas are different
to different adhikārīs. Within one Veda, several branches are there. Originally, 1280 śākhās
were there. Now, almost all the branches are gone and may be only 12 or 15 śākhās are
available. Even though Vedas are four, there were many śākhās and different karmas were
taught. Certain karmas can be utilized for different purposes depending upon the kāma of
that person. Veda says the same ritual can be performed by changing one of the āhutis.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 879

The ritual remaining the same, the benefit is different. Then the whole āhutis, etc, undergo
change. Because of śākhā-bheda, because of kāma-bheda, there are so many varieties of
karma. Different teachings are given in karma kāṇḍa. Since we are habituated to that, we
cannot change it.
So also, we have several teachings in jñāna kāṇḍa. One is dvaita for some people and
Viśiṣṭādvaita for some others. Jñāna kāṇḍa also has several differences but the truth is that
all the śākhās of all Vedas at Upaniṣadic level teach only one thing: Jīvātma-Paramātma-
aikya or Tat tvam asi. Aikya alone is the teaching everywhere. In karma kāṇḍa, the desires
are many but in jñāna kāṇḍa only one desire is there. The rituals are many and they are
various, meaning the rituals are taught in many and varied ways. After studying karma
kāṇḍa, we may develop the misconception that in jñāna kāṇḍa also, there are different
teachings, because of extending the principles of karma kāṇḍa to jñāna kāṇḍa. Such a
doubt should not arise. To eliminate the possible doubts, go on repeating śravaṇa of the
various Upaniṣads and realize that all of them uniformly reveal the same teaching of
Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya. All the Upaniṣads teach the same Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya.

śloka 101
वेदान्तानामशेषाणामादिमध्यावसानतः ।
ब्रह्मात्मन्येव तात्पर्यमितिधीः श्रवणं भवेत्॥ ७.१०१ ॥
vedāntānāmaśeṣāṇāmādimadhyāvasānataḥ.
brahmātmanyeva tātparyamitidhīḥ śravaṇa bhavet (7.101).
This process is called śravaṇa. All the Vedāntic texts or Upaniṣads in the beginning, in the
middle and in the end have the central teaching as Brahma-Ātmā-aikya only. In other
words, it teaches Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya alone. This is what Vyāsācārya attempts in his
Brahma-sūtra. Developing the conviction of Jīvātmā-Paramātma-aikya process called
śravaṇa. First śravaṇa is to gain knowledge and second śravaṇa is aimed at gaining
conviction.

śloka 102
समन्वयाध्याय एतत्सूक्तं धीस्वास्थ्यकारिभिः ।
तर्कैः सम्भावनार्थस्य द्वितीयाध्याय ईरिता ॥ ७.१०२ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 880

samanvayādhyāya etatsūktaṃ dhīsvāsthyakāribhiḥ.

tarkaiḥ sambhāvanārthasya dvitīyādhyāya īritā (7.102).
This śravaṇa which is nothing but ascertaining the central teaching of the Upaniṣad has
been very well said in samanvayādhyāya, the first chapter of the Brahma-sūtra. It is
supposed to be equivalent to śravaṇa. The second to manana, third is nididhyāsana and
the fourth is phala adhyāya. The very word samanvaya means reconciliation of seemingly
contradictory Upaniṣadic statements.
Then we come to the second type of exercise. That is the removal of prameya-
asambhāvanā, the second obstacle. It is discussed in the second chapter of Brahma-sūtra.
Not only we have to resolve pratyakṣa-contradiction but also so many philosophies based
on dvaita are also to be contradicted. They believe in pratyakṣa pramāṇa and pratyakṣa
data like modern science. Any philosophy based on pratyakṣa data will be dvaita alone.
Every sense-organ reveals dvaita alone. Thus we have to fight not only pratyakṣa pramāṇa
but also all the philosophies relating to dvaita-darśana. Vyasa has refuted all the
philosophies. Śaiva and Vaiṣṇava talks of getting mokṣa to be near Śiva and Viṣṇu.
Advaitins are neither Śaiva or Vaiṣṇava. All localized deities are nāma-rūpas
superimposed on me, we say. More in the next class.

Class 187
śloka 102 contd.
There is a block between jñāna and jñāna-phala. This block is called sapratibandha jñāna
and this has to be converted into apratibandha jñāna. He divided the blocks into three.
Pramāṇa-asambhāvanā is removed by śravaṇa; prameya-asambhāvanā is removed by
manana and viparīta-bhāvanā is removed by nididhyāsana. The first time śravaṇa is not
for removal of obstacles but it is for acquisition of jñāna. It is called the study of Vedānta
as revealed by the teacher and the aim of the student is to grasp the teaching as revealed
by the teacher. The manana will remove the confusion regarding the interpretation of the
Vedic teaching. It is called vicāra-rūpa śravaṇa. It is textual analysis. By taking various
liṅgas, indicators, we do textual analysis to make sure the advaitic interpretation alone is
the appropriate interpretation and all others relate to mis-interpretation and lead to
confusion. All the Upaniṣadic statements are fully analysed and seeming contradictions

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 881

are resolved. The creation statements in the Upaniṣad are to be resolved. Advaitins boldly
claim there is no sṛṣṭi. Thus, we have to interpret all the statements properly keeping
interpretational consistency and establish that Vedānta teaching brahma satyam jagan
mithyā is to be established. This intellectual conviction with regard to the Upaniṣad
statement is called removal of interpretational confusion. We analyse the textual
statements. In this regard, refer to samanvaya-adhikāraṇa of Brahma-sūtra. Then we get
vicāra-rūpa śravaṇa. First is called adhyayana-śravaṇa. This type of two type of śravaṇa
we find in Vicāra-sāgara. One to gain knowledge and the other is to remove
interpretational confusion.
Now, he enters the topic of manana. I know Upaniṣad reveals Advaita only, but the
problem is how Upaniṣad can reveal Advaita as the truth when all the sense-organs and
reasoning reveals dvaita? Pratyakṣa, anumāna and most of the darśanas or systems of
philosophy reveal dvaita alone. Five āstika darśanas tarka-pradhāna-darśanas take logic
as very important. They say dvaita is the reality. They are all āstika darśana and they
believe in Vedas. These are five darśanas while we are only one. We have to analyse all
darśanas along with pratyakṣa and anumāna and establish that they are not the ultimate
reality.
Dvaita is satya but it is not absolute satya. For worldly transactional purposes, we have to
accept dvaita alone as satya. So it is called as vyāvahārika satya. For the sake of vyavahāra,
it is satya. Therefore, in the transactional field, when I perform as viśva, taijasa, prājña, I
have to accept science as real. For transactional issues, I go by science alone. Dvaita is
therefore vyāvahārika satya. Then why does Śruti negate it? Śruti never negates
vyāvahārika satya in vyāvahārika. Śruti negates vyāvahārika satya only when we look at it
from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi or turīya dṛṣṭi. We say even mokṣa is vyāvahārika satya, because
we have bandha in vyavahāra alone, but there is no bondage in pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi. In
manana, I have to understand this two-tier reality.
Now, where we have this division of satya into vyāvahārika and pāramārthika, we should
understand this fully. Until Advaita is comfortable, continue Jīva-jagat-Īśvara plurality
being comfortable Jīva-format. This is the topic of second chapter of Brahma-sūtra, that of
negation of all the other dvaita darśanas by introducing two-tier reality.
Prātibhāsika satya is svapna; vyāvahārika satya is jāgrat-avasthā; pāramārthika-satya is
turīya. This establishing of the reality of Advaita or Advaita-satya is with the help of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 882

reasoning and therefore, the second chapter of Brahma-sūtra is called Tarka-pāda. So, the
advaitic teaching should be established through the process of manana. In the third
chapter of Brahma-sūtra, all the sādhanas and nididhyāsana are discussed.

śloka 103
बहुजन्मदृढाभ्यासाद्देहादिष्वात्मधीः क्षणात्।
पुनः पुनरुदेत्येवं जगत्सत्यत्वधीरपि ॥ ७.१०३ ॥
bahujanmadṛḍhābhyāsāddehādiṣvātmadhīḥ kṣaṇāt.
punaḥ punarudetyevaṃ jagatsatyatvadhīrapi (7.103).
Now, Vidyāraṇya enters the topic of viparīta-bhāvanā. It is a very important portion. It is a
very clear presentation regarding the role of nididhyāsana. He says even after śravaṇa and
manana, after intellectual conviction of aham satyaḥ jagan mithyā, Jīva continues to have
some problem with the I-notion in the body, etc., or the I-identification. Just in a
provoking moment, the ahaṅkāra I rises, the individuality rises, the family-relationship
rises and family-worries rise and therefore, saṃśārī-thought rises and therefore,
jīvanmukti-thought goes forever, even after gaining aparokṣa jñāna. So much struggle is
there to claim Jīvanmukti, so many efforts are needed, but to become a saṃśārī it is so
simple. If it rises once in a while, it is all right, but it rises all the time. “Ahaṃ brahma
asmi” thinking does not come that easy but saṃśarītva is so easy and it comes without
difficulty. It is so because I have been a saṃśārī for many janmas from anādi kāla from
time beginningless. Every worldly experience invokes one ahaṅkāra or another ahaṅkāra.
When my son stands before me, father-ahaṅkāra rises; when my wife is before me
husband-ahaṅkāra rises and in all situations ahaṅkāra has risen and at no situation aham
śākṣī rises in me. Saṃśārī-feeling dominates me. Aham nitya-mukta, such thinking never
comes to my mind. Once ahaṅkāra dominates me, I come down to the vyāvahārika level
from the pāramārthika level.
Is the world satya or mithyā? From ahaṅkāra-dṛṣṭi, the world is satya, every problem is
satya and I will have no courage to dismiss this. Only when I rise to the level of turīya, I
can challenge and say jagat mithyā. I will be chased by prārabdha as long as I am in
ahaṅkāra-field and only in turīya, I am free of all my saṃsāra problem. The reality of the
world, the reality of the problems will loom large as long as I am a slave of ahaṅkāra.
From vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi, every issue is a serious issue. Therefore, these are the two

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 883

powerful wrong notions: I ahaṅkāra is first powerful wrong notion and all my problems
being seriously real is the second powerful wrong notion. Both exist as twins and are like
two sides of the same coin. In ahaṅkāra, we cannot say that the world is unreal. Ahaṅkāra
and reality are the two sides of the same coin. The problems will continue as long as
ahaṅkāra is there. Ahaṅkāra is never-free and Ātmā is ever-free. Decide whether you want
to be ahaṅkāra or Ātmā; the choice is yours.

śloka 104
विपरीता भावनेयमैकाग्र्यात्सा निवर्तते ।
तत्त्वोपदेशात्प्रागेव भवत्येतदुपासनात्॥ ७.१०४ ॥
viparītā bhāvaneyamaikāgryātsā nivartate.
tattvopadeśāt prāgeva bhavatyetadupāsanāt (7.104).
The twofold notions are called viparīta-bhāvanā. I am ahaṅkāra and my problems are real
are the twofold problems. The world is real means that my problems are real. These are
the two notions. This twofold notion will go away only by nididhyāsana. Thought-
reorientation in keeping with the teaching has to take place. Gaudapāda calls it
manonigraha. “I am not ahaṅkāra” should be the thought-pattern. My thought is not
regulated; that is my problem. My freedom is in spite of the problem because the problem
is itself mithyā. My freedom is not in solving the problem, but my freedom is in spite of
problem. I am satya, turīya and I am not affected by the problem. It is level-raising
meditation from vyāvahārika ahaṅkāra to pāramārthika turīya.
This shifting the level is the ultimate solution as dream problems are solved by waking.
The very dreamer is negated. The level-shifting is the meditation. This has to be done by
everyone. Even a sannyāsī is not free from ahaṅkāra I. Sannyāsa is also an āśrama
associated with ahaṅkāra and even the sannyāsī having ahaṅkāra will have vyāvahārika
problem. For one, it will be putra and another, it may be śiṣya. That is the only difference.
One will have a house and another will have an āśrama. Remember, no ahaṅkāra
including sannyāsī-ahaṅkāra is free from problem. Ahaṅkāra is, therefore, never-free and
as Ātmā alone is ever-free.
Then, Vidyāraṇya says this Vedāntic meditation will become effortless if a person has
practiced saguṇa-upāsana before coming to Vedānta. Upāsana and nididhyāsana are
almost similar processes since both are involved in thought-control. If a person comes to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 884

Vedānta after upāsana, he can effortlessly practice nididhyāsana and the duration of
nididhyāsana required is also small. Such a student is called kṝtopāsana. In Jīvanmukti-
viveka, Vidyāraṇya uses this expression. The one who has practiced lot of saguṇa-Īśvara-
dhyāna before coming to Vedānta is called kṝtopāsana. Generally, he will not require
nididhyāsana and even if he requires, it is limited nididhyāsana. If one has not practised
upāsana, the nididhyāsana required will be longer. The length of nididhyāsana required
will depend upon the length of upāsana practiced before coming to Vedānta in this or in
the previous janmas. In kaliyuga, most of the students coming to Vedānta come without
this qualification. In sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti they have problems and therefore, they
need long nididhyāsana. The difference between upāsana and nididhyāsana is this:
upāsana is dvaita-dhyāna but nididhyāsana is nirguṇa-dhyāna and it is Advaita dhyāna.

śloka 105
उपास्तयोऽत एवत्र ब्रह्मशास्त्रेऽपि चिन्तिताः ।
प्रागनभ्यासिनः पश्चाद्ब्रह्माभ्यासेन तद्भवेत्॥ ७.१०५ ॥
upāstayo:'ta evatra brahmaśāstre:'pi cintitāḥ.
prāganabhyāsinaḥ paścādbrahmābhyāsena tadbhavet (7.105).
Thus, upāsana becomes a rehearsal for nididhyāsana and that is why in Vedānta śāstra
also upāsanas are discussed. Really speaking, upāsana should be included in karma kāṇḍa
only. Therefore, legitimately, formally, officially, upāsana should occur in karma kāṇḍa;
still in jñāna kāṇḍa also, unofficially upāsanas have been included. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad,
upāsanas are included. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad, five chapters are upāsanas and three
chapters are Vedānta. Upāsana becomes a rehearsal for later nididhyāsana. Since upāsanas
are very good rehearsal for nididhyāsana, upāsanas are included in Brahma-śāstra-jñāna-
kāṇḍa. Not only varieties of upāsanas are discussed but several upāsanas are suggested to
suit nididhyāsana later.
One is iṣṭa-devatā-upāsana and it will help convergence of the mind. Second one is
viśvarūpa-upāsana which will help the expansion of the mind. Brahman being all-
pervading, I have to meditate upon Brahman not as something that comes and goes but as
all-pervading. Viśva-rūpa has many colours and forms, but Brahman does not have form
and colours. Ākāśa-upāsana is prescribed as a rehearsal for formless brahma, upāsana to
make the later upāsana easy. In bhūmā vidyā, ākāśa-upāsana is there. In śikṣā-vallī, ākāśa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 885

upāsana is there. Thus, eka-rūpa-upāsana, Viśva-rūpa-upāsana and ākāśa-upāsana are

useful. The fourth one is called ahaṅgraha-upāsana, where whatever I want to meditate I
invoke in myself. I invoke Kṛṣṇa in myself. I am Rāma. Meditate upon Devī as yourself.
Ahaṅgraha-upāsana is an ideal form of upāsana which helps later to have the thought “I
am all-pervading”, “I am all accommodating like space”, “I am asaṅga”. They are
rehearsals for nididhyāsana. Suppose a person has not practiced any of these, it is difficult
for the teacher to teach him. He will require very long nididhyāsana after Vedāntic study.
He should practice brahmābhyāsa or nididhyāsana for long. More in the next class.

Class 188
śloka 105 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses the removal of obstacles between jñāna and jñāna-phala. The clear
understanding has two components. One is the clear understanding of mahā-vākya and
the clear understanding of the fact that nothing else is needed to gain mokṣa other than
this clear understanding. śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana removes the obstacle between
jñāna and jñāna-phala. Till I get the jñāna-phala I feel that I have not got the knowledge at
all. Vidyāraṇya says your problem is not the lack of knowledge, the knowledge is enough
but what is required is the removal of obstacles. Nididhyāsana removes viparīta-bhāvanā.
First three topics are dealt with briefly. śravaṇa and manana he has already dealt with.
Vidyāraṇya directs the student to two chapters of Brahma-sūtra. śravaṇa is in first chapter
and manana is in the second chapter of the same text. He deals with nididhyāsana in detail
now. This discussion goes up to śloka 131. He sorts out all the confusions regarding
nididhyāsana. Viparīta-bhāvanā consists of two components: one is “I am the body”
notion and “world is real” notion and world means my problems. That my problems are
real is a spiritual misconception. When I say I am the body, it includes the sūkṣma-śarīra
also. Sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra carry the problems.
Even videha-mukti is also because of my identify with sūkṣma-śarīra. Sūkṣma-śarīra
should not take another sthūla-śarīra; I am worried so. My sūkṣma-śarīra after dropping
the present sthūla-śarīra should not take another sthūla-śarīra is the anxiety of every
seeker due to sūkṣma-śarīra-abhimāna. This also comes under viparīta-bhāvanā.
Vidyāraṇya says it is so powerful because I have entertained the feeling for years and for

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 886

many janmas. This will be eliminated by nididhyāsana by thought-reorientation, by

aligning it with Vedāntic teaching.
When I have anxiety for videha-mukti I should ask myself “who am I?” and then assert
that I have nothing to do with sūkṣma-śarīra, sthūla-śarīra and possible future sthūla-
śarīras; all have a mithyā place and so, why should I be over obsessed with these things?
Before Vedānta, I focused on them because I had no Vedāntic knowledge. After coming to
Vedānta, jīvanmukti and videha-mukti recede and nitya-mukta-svarūpa dominates my
mind. Knock off your misplaced anxiety. This can be easily accomplished if the student
had practiced upāsanas before. Then he can change the thought-pattern easily. Therefore,
after Vedāntic study, changing the thought-pattern is not difficult and he can
instantaneously do that. A good upāsaka does not require long nididhyāsana because he
has thought-control, but a non-upāsaka or a bad upāsaka will require long nididhyāsana
process.
Generally, in kaliyuga students of Vedānta will not be good upāsaka and therefore, they
need long process of nididhyāsana. The thought-reorientation he would have otherwise
gained through upāsana before coming to Vedānta. That is why Vedānta talks about
upāsana because it is a beautiful rehearsal for thought-control, thought-discipline,
thought-process, etc. In Vedānta śāstra also, saguṇa-upāsana is talked about even though
upāsana should not occur in jñāna kāṇḍa because upāsana belongs to karma kāṇḍa alone.
It is called mānasa karma. Many students are likely to feel guilty due to not having
practiced upāsana. If a student has not practiced upāsana before coming to Vedānta, he
will require long nididhyāsana to compensate for non-practice of upāsana. After Vedāntic
study, he will not be able to reorient the direction of thoughts and he will find the thinking
pattern will be not ahaṃ brahma asmi; after study, he will get the viparīta-bhāvanā of
deha-abhimāna and jagat-satyatva-buddhi and suffer saṃsāra. This change does not easily
happen and therefore, nididhyāsana is required.
Brahmābhyāsa is equal to nididhyāsana. Because of this, thought-reorientation takes place
and “I am free” thought is never disturbed. The changes in mithyā prapañca does not
challenge my understanding that I am free forever just like sunrise experience does not
change my thought that the sun never moves but the earth alone moves around the sun. It
means that I no more look upon myself as a traveler towards mokṣa. The travel is over
because “I am mukta” is the understanding. I no more look upon myself as a sādhaka. My

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 887

mind is siddha-buddhi and that is called reorientation of thought biography. My journey

is over, whatever happens outside.

śloka 106
तच्चिन्तनं तत्कथनमन्योन्यं तत्प्रबोधनम्।
एतदेकपरत्वं च ब्रह्माभ्यासं विदुर्बुधाः ॥ ७.१०६ ॥
taccintanaṃ tatkathanamanyonyaṃ tatprabodhanam.
etadekaparatvaṃ ca brahmābhyāsaṃ vidurbudhāḥ (7.106).
Now, the question is what is that brahmābhyāsa and what is the definition of
nididhyāsana? For this, Vidyāraṇya quotes a vākya from Yoga-vāsiṣṭha. It has 34000
ślokas. It is a significant śloka defining nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana has two definitions.
Vidyāraṇya gave one definition in the first chapter and gives another one in this chapter.
This has created some confusion also. One type of definition given in the first chapter is
that I have named as samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana as the practice of Vedāntic
samādhi. Since that definition is in the form of samādhi-abhyāsa, we closely travelled with
Yoga śāstra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya heavily borrowed from Yoga-sūtra. Deśa, kāla, āsana,
etc., is required for this purpose. Aṣṭāṅga-yoga discipline is to be followed. The same thing
is there in the sixth chapter of Gītā.
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad calls it manonigraha. Yogic meditation is not compulsory. Here, the
mind should dwell upon the teaching in one way or the other. Closing the eyes, sitting
posture ,etc., are not important here. The thought-pattern should be in keeping with the
teaching. This is called brahmābhyāsa-rūpa-nididhyāsana. Now, the question is whether
both of them are compulsory or you can choose anyone. Vidyāraṇya will say it is your
choice. There is no rule that nididhyāsana must be in the Yogic method of dhāraṇā-
dhyāna-samādhi or the other one. What is important is the mind should dwell on Vedāntic
teachings.
He defined nididhyāsana as eka-sthānatva, the word taken from Yogavāsiṣṭha. What we
should do? May your mind dwell upon the Vedāntic teaching, reminding: I am free here
and now and my freedom does not depend upon prārabdha-given experience. My
freedom is not conditioned by prārabdha experiences. Suppose you have a curious
neighbour who asks: what does your Svāmījī teach? Then share the knowledge with

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 888

anyone who is interested in the Vedāntic knowledge. You can discuss the matter and
mutually share the teaching.
In one way or the other give importance to the Vedāntic teachings. Everything else in life
is subsidiary to that. All my thoughts should be governed by this teaching. When there is
self-assessment in keeping to Vedānta, have the feeling: I am free, subject to prārabdha,
body-problems. I should look upon myself as arrived person or siddha-puruṣa not as a
sādhaka-puruṣa. You see yourself as free. This is called nididhyāsana. The idea is that the
mind should not be far away from the teaching. This is brahmābhyāsa-nididhyāsana and
not samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa-nididhyāsana. One can choose any of the two methods.

śloka 107
तमेव धीरो विज्ञाय प्रज्ञां कुर्वीत ब्राह्मणः ।
नानुध्यायाद्बहुञ्छब्दान्वाचो विग्लापनं हि तत्॥ ७.१०७ ॥
tameva dhīro vijñāya prajñāṃ kurvīta brāhmaṇaḥ.
nānudhyāyādbahuñchabdānvāco viglāpanaṃ hi tat (7.107).
After quoting Yogavāsiṣṭha pramāṇa, now, Vidyāraṇya quotes Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
mantra 4.4.21 and also Muṇḍaka 3.1.4. Tameva dhīro vijñāya is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
mantra. The mantra says sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna adhikārī has viveka-śakti and
gains knowledge through śravaṇa and manana. Prajñāṃ means nididhyāsana abhyāsa or
brahma abhyāsa. Alert living is called nididhyāsana and it means no experience in life
should invoke saṃśārī in me. “I am asaṃśarī” should not be challenged. Experience
cannot change my conviction that I am asaṃśarī in spite of the situations. May you not
dwell upon too many anātmā thoughts. The dvaita śāstra is apara vidyā. If someone says
to gain conviction, he goes back to upāsana, the teacher is not happy because Jīva-Īśvara-
bheda is underlined there. Instead of saguṇa-upāsana we suggest nirguṇa-dhyāna, rather
than going to dvaita śāstra once again. He should not think that I need Īśvara anugraha to
gain mokṣa, etc. For loka-saṅgraha, this body has to do some pūjā, etc., but I know I am
adhiṣṭhāna for vyāvahārika Jīva and the bhāvanā should be different. The prayer should
be that I am not a Jīva seeking your help and let me remember I am Ātmā ever-free
whatever happens to me at anātmā level. Don’t bring me down to Jīva-jagat-Īśvara-bheda
level. Engaging in dvaita śāstra is weakening the organ of speech. It will waste the energy.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 889

śloka 108
अनन्याश्चिन्तयन्तो मां ये जनाः पर्युपासते ।
तेषां नित्याभियुक्तानां योगक्षेमं वहाम्यहम्॥ ७.१०८ ॥
ananyāścintayanto māṃ ye janāḥ paryupāsate.
teṣāṃ nityābhiyuktānāṃ yogakṣemaṃ vahāmyaham (7.108).
This is from Gītā 9th chapter 22nd śloka. This śloka talks of one who is in the process of
nididhyāsana either before jñāna or after jñāna. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya takes it as a jñānī who is
in the process of nididhyāsana. It is for those who have discovered that they are non-
different from Īśvara. In this manner, they look upon Paramātmā. When there is Jīva-
Īśvara-bheda-darśana, since Īśvara is asaṃśarī, and I am Jīva and different from Īśvara
then I should be saṃśārī. I claim I am a saṃśārī. Bheda-darśana presupposes that I am a
saṃśārī. On the other hand, sitting down and claiming ahaṃ brahma asmi such persons
are called abheda-darśīs; if they practice nididhyāsana, they are preoccupied in Advaita
darśana and for their day-to-day life, whatever yogakṣema is required that will be taken
care of by Īśvara. Īśvara says I will take care of their security. More in the next class.

Class 189
śloka 108 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has entered into the topic of pratibandha-nivṛtti from śloka 97. Here the
obstacle is between rise of jñāna and jñāna-phala. The mahā-vākya is able to generate
knowledge in the form of ahaṃ brahma asmi. Even after this jñāna, the mind is unable to
tap the result of this vṛtti. Jñāna should produce the result and jñāna is in vṛtti-form.
Wherever there is vṛtti it is jñāna alone. Then benefit should be naturally there and one
should claim that I am free. Even though vṛtti takes place, many are unable to say ahaṃ
brahma asmi and mean ahaṃ brahma asmi as still they feel that I am a saṃśārī. Where is
the snag? This is the question. This we called pramāṇa-asambhāvanā, prameya-
asambhāvanā and viparīta asambhāvanā. We don’t have to improve the vṛtti. Only we
have to remove the obstacles. You need not switch on the light but remove the obstacles or
thick black cloth that obstructs the light. Therefore, author talks about śravaṇa, manana
and nididhyāsana to remove three layers of black cloth that obstructs the light. In the
context, we have seen samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana based on Aṣṭāṅga-yoga and
brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. In brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana we insist on

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 890

one thing that is the mind should dwell on the teaching that I am ever-free in form of
writing, listening, teaching or any method. This is second form of nididhyāsana.
Vidyāraṇya concentrates on the second type of nididhyāsana in these ślokas. You remain
in the teaching in any way you like. It is optional that you can follow both the disciplines
or any one of them you like. What is important is that you have to assimilate the teaching.
A person can dwell on ahaṃ brahma asmi and in this meditation the meditator is not
looking for any extraordinary experience as Vedāntic nididhyāsana has no connection
with any extraordinary experience. Even if there is any extraordinary experience, it has
nothing to do with Vedāntic knowledge. When the knowledge is retained in a quiet
atmosphere, then the knowledge settles deep in the mind and that is the advantage of
samādhi-abhyāsa. We don’t expect or experience any extraordinary happenings or events.
Now, Vidyāraṇya deals with brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. Then, he gives Gītā-
vākya and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad quotation. The word ananya here means one who
looks upon the Lord as non-different from himself. Non-difference means identical with
oneself. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 109
इति श्रुतिस्मृती नित्यमात्मन्येकाग्रतां धियः ।
विधत्तो विपरीताया भावनायाः क्षयाय हि ॥ ७.१०९ ॥
iti śrutismṛtī nityamātmanyekāgratāṃ dhiyaḥ.
vidhatto viparītāyā bhāvanāyāḥ kṣayāya hi (7.109).
In this manner as given in the last ślokas, Śruti vākyas and Smṛti vākyas [Gītā] command
the seeker to focus the intellect [nididhyāsana] upon the Ātmā; in short Ātmā-dhyāna or
Ātmā-cintana. In Vedāntic meditation, Ātmā-jñāna alone is not enough. More important
than Ātmā-jñāna is anātma-mithyātva-jñāna. This has to be done more than Ātmā-jñāna
because of our attachment to anātmā is more than our problem with Ātmā.
Why should I have anātma-jñāna? This question may arise. Remember anātma-jñāna is
equal to anātma-mithyātva-jñāna. Anātma-mithyātva-jñāna should be focused upon and
all family members should be included in anātmā. Sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-śarīra are
closer to our self and therefore, we have to practice the mithyātva of both the bodies to
remove the obstacles that stand in the way of liberation. This nididhyāsana has to be done
constantly without break. Whatever be the cause of the worry, meditate on the mithyātva

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 891

of the worry. This has to be done for weakening the viparīta-bhāvanā. What we look for in
our life is the reduction of viparīta-bhāvanā or the FIR-reduction. It is a gradual
transformation of my mind to reduce my worry and viparīta-bhāvanā-nivṛtti.

śloka 110
यद् यथा वर्तते तस्य तत्त्वं हित्वान्यथात्वधीः ।
विपरीता भावना स्यात्पित्रादावरिधीर्यथा ॥ ७.११० ॥
yad yathā vartate tasya tattvaṃ hitvānyathātvadhīḥ.
viparītā bhāvanā syātpitrādāvaridhīryathā (7.110).
In the two ślokas Vidyāraṇya describes the nature of viparīta-bhāvanā. One is Ātmā-
centred wrong notion and the other is anātmā-centred wrong notion. He says missing the
nature of something and taking the nature as different from what it is, is called viparīta-
bhāvanā. Ropeness is missed and in place of ripeness we superimpose the snake. One
misses the right one and takes it as something else in mistake. Suppose a thing has a
particular nature, like the rope has ropeness as its nature; suppose that original nature is
lost sight of and suppose we take something else in the place of that original thing, it is
called viparīta-bhāvanā. In the case of rope-snake, we miss the ropeness and in its place
we perceive the snakeness and that is called viparīta-bhāvanā. In English it is called
misconception. That misapprehension is called viparīta-bhāvanā. Non-apprehension and
misapprehension is called misconception. Suppose a child looks upon his own father as an
enemy, it is a viparīta-bhāvanā as the father is a well-wisher of the child. That mitratva I
lose sight of and I look at him as an enemy is called viparīta-bhāvanā. Now Vidyāraṇya
applies it in the case of Ātmā and anātmā. We have wrong notions, both in the case of
Ātmā as also in the case of anātmā.

śloka 111
आत्मा देहादिभिन्नोऽयं मिथ्या चेदं जगत्तयोः ।
देहाद्यात्मत्वसत्यत्वधीर्विपर्ययभावना ॥ ७.१११ ॥
Ātmā dehādibhinno:'yaṃ mithyā cedaṃ jagat tayoḥ.
dehādyātmatvasatyatvadhīrviparyayabhāvanā (7.111).
The two-fold viparīta-bhāvanā is that I am the Ātmā which is different from body-mind-
complex. I am different from all the anātmā the Annamaya, prāṇamaya and manomaya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 892

kośas, etc. I am already free Ātmā which includes ahaṅkāra also. It comes under anātmā
because it is sūkṣma-śarīra and cidābhāsa. That ahaṅkāra also comes under anātmā and I
am different from ahaṅkāra also. This is truth number one.
The second truth is that the whole universe is mithyā not worth worrying over. Anātmā
does not deserve any worry. The whole universe means we mean beyond our family. But
the world means it includes body-mind-complex, family and ahaṅkāra and all of them
form the world. Family-mithyātva-jñāna I carefully avoid; therefore, the saṃsāra
continues. This is the truth regarding anātmā. We are confused with regard to both Ātmā
and anātmā and we protect the confusion. We don’t want to tamper with that. We are
ready to study Vedānta but these crucial factors we escape and we don’t want to deal with
them. I have included family in Ātmā list separating from mithyā prapañca. We have the
notion that I am the dehadi anātmā. I still think I am the individual and have individuality
and this ahaṅkāra I is powerfully retained. Deha-abhimāna continues. This is mistake
number one.
Taking the jagat which includes family, body-mind-complex, that satyatva-buddhi we
maintain carefully. Satyatva is mistake number two centred on jagat anātmā which we
refuse to handle even after gaining jñāna. This is called viparyaya-bhāvanā. This is called
adhyāsa and that is why Ādi Śaṅkarācārya started Brahma-sūtra with adhyāsa bhāṣya.

śloka 112
तत्त्वभावनया नश्येत्साऽतो देहातिरिक्तताम्।
आत्मनो भावयेत्तद्वन्मिथ्यात्वं जगतोऽनिशम्॥ ७.११२ ॥
tattvabhāvanayā naśyetsā:'to dehātiriktatām.
ātmano bhāvayettadvanmithyātvaṃ jagato:'niśam (7.112).
Now, he defines nididhyāsana as deliberate negation of the two mistakes by entertaining
counter thoughts. The two-fold viparīta-bhāvanā, as already stated above, will have to be
weakened gradually by entertaining opposite thoughts. I have to deliberately tell I am not
any one of them. Nididhyāsana is of two kinds: samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana or
brahmābhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. You are not going to get new knowledge but in
śravaṇa when Brahman or Ātmā is discussed, you only replace the words while the
content is one and the same. Since twofold viparīta-bhāvanā is there, you need twofold
nididhyāsana also. May you meditate upon the thought that I am different from all the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 893

three bodies, never be bothered about your sūkṣma-śarīra. The topic of videha-mukti, after
the exhaustion of prārabdha, belongs to the seeker before coming to Vedānta and the same
thing does not apply to the one who has gained Ātmā-jñāna. After coming to Vedānta,
why should you be bothered about mithyā sūkṣma-śarīra? If you bother about it, you are
worried about the mithyā body. It is like the knowledge I know that it is rope-snake and
saying I don’t want to touch it as the rope-snake may bite me! I should meditate that I
have nothing to do with the sūkṣma-śarīra. Infinite sūkṣma-śarīras are rising and falling in
me; why should I be obsessed by a particular sūkṣma-śarīra? Even after mithyātva-
buddhi, we continue to bother about mithyā-viṣaya. This should not be done. Equally
effectively we should realize the unreality of the universe and it should be meditated
upon. Generally, Vedāntic meditation is called brahma-dhyāna.

śloka 113
किं मन्त्रजपवन्मूर्तिध्यानवच्चात्मभेदधीः ।
जगन्मिथ्यात्वधीश्चात्र व्यावर्त्या स्यादुतान्यथा ॥ ७.११३ ॥
kiṃ mantrajapavanmūrtidhyānavaccātmabhedadhīḥ.
jaganmithyātvadhīścātra vyāvartyā syādutānyathā (7.113).
Here alone, Vidyāraṇya enters into an important discussion. Is there any choice that both
are to be practiced, the two nididhyāsanas? Vidyāraṇya says that one can have his own
choice. He can do both or be may anyone of the two. Āsana, etc., are compulsory in the
case of saguṇa-upāsana. But it is not the case with nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana is different
from upāsana as it is not meant for adṛṣṭa phala but it is aimed to reduce your FIR. We
don’t say you should not sit and meditate but we say you need not do it. More in the next
class.

Class 190
śloka 113 contd.
If śravaṇa is meant for the removal of obstacles only, then the question is: what exactly is
meant of giving knowledge? śravaṇa, which is of two types. One is adhyayana-rūpa
śravaṇa, in which the student receives the knowledge as given by the Guru. There he does
not bother about how the Ācārya interprets the mantra. He is not bothered about the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 894

technical interpretation. He has faith in Ācārya. This alone has to give jñāna both parokṣa
jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna. Avāntara vākya will give parokṣa jñāna and mahā-vākya will
give the aparokṣa jñāna. This is so even during adhyayana-rūpa śravaṇa itself. Aparokṣa
jñāna has to take place through first śravaṇa. Then the second śravaṇa is vicāra-rūpa
śravaṇa; manana and nididhyāsana are meant for removing the obstacles because of
which aparokṣa jñāna is not allowed to function within me.
The student must gain liberation on gaining aparokṣa jñāna. This aparokṣa jñāna which
rises in the mind is not allowed to function fully due to viparīta-bhāvanā. These obstacles
never allow the knowledge to do what it has to do. What the student needs is to release
the obstacles and he need not work for knowledge, because knowledge he has already
gained. Then the already existing knowledge will do the job of giving liberation.
The second one is for the intellectual doubt regarding the interpretation of the śāstras. If
there are some independently thinking students, they may wonder how such an
interpretation be given to such a vākya. He might read a Viśiṣṭādvaita book which might
have given another interpretation. The entire Brahma-sūtra dwells upon the
interpretational differences only. For this only, we do vicāra-rūpa śravaṇa.
Vedānta says I am Brahman and nothing else. I am adhiṣṭhāna of this universe. Mīmāṃsā
becomes heavily important for vicāra-rūpa śravaṇa. It is mīmāṃsā-pradhāna. If the
interpretational confusions are gone, then one gains the phala of aparokṣa jñāna. Then
there is a second possibility of logical question. For Brahma satyam I want a reason and
jagan mithyā I want a reason. When that is the problem, then what we need is manana
which is tarka-pradhāna. Logically, we get convinced only on the basis of logical
interpretation. Worry is a habit, insecurity is a habit, fear is a habit and in all these things
we are experts. Saṃsāra-thought-pattern is there in the sub-conscious mind and it is to be
replaced by “I am free” thought.
Manana-nididhyāsana do not produce knowledge as they are not meant to produce
knowledge but they are meant to clean the intellect. When the intellect is free of the
obstacles, the knowledge gained through adhyayana is enough to gain mokṣa. We don’t
require anything other than understanding. It is sufficient but the obstacles are powerful
and so, one has to take steps to be free of viparīta-bhāvanā. Vidyāraṇya has dealt with
śravaṇa and manana and now, he has taken up the nididhyāsana topic.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 895

Vedāntic thinking says I am not the body representing sthūla, sūkṣma and kāraṇa śarīras.
The thought should be reinforced and we should get the conviction that I am not the body.
The unreality of the world thought should be reinforced; unreality of the world when we
say, we may include everything except my family, my body, mind and ahaṅkāra. This is
very tough but there is no other way to gain the jñāna-phala. Jagan-mithyātva should
include my family which should include my own body as well.
This nididhyāsana is of two types. One is samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. Another is
brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. This meditation is described in the 6th chapter of
Gītā and Māṇḍūkya third chapter. The second type of nididhyāsana is brahmābhyāsa-
rūpa nididhyāsana defined in the śloka 106. Vidyāraṇya himself has talked about
samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana in the first chapter. In the seventh chapter,
Vidyāraṇya talks about brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. You dwell on Vedāntic
teaching without bothering about the posture, etc. It may be repeated śravaṇa in the form
of hearing, writing notes, in the form of sharing, etc. What is relevant is that the mind
should be fixed on the nididhyāsana. Vidyāraṇya has made it clear that one may choose
the nididhyāsana he wants and he may do both or choose anyone he thinks fit for him.
Nididhyāsana in itself is not compulsory if he has acquired sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti.
For such a person, nididhyāsana is not required. Assuming that there are obstacles, the
question is: do we need both the types of nididhyāsana or anyone of them is sufficient?
Vidyāraṇya has given the choice to the seeker according to his mental state. If the aim is a
mystic experience, the samādhi-abhyāsa is compulsory. However, samādhi is not
compulsory since the aim of nididhyāsana is not a mystic experience but it is only
removing our habitual pattern of thinking. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya asks the question are
the rules of āsana, etc., compulsory or not? This starts from śloka 113 to 123. Should one
mentally repeat ahaṃ brahma asmi thought? As in the case of mantra japa and saguṇa-
upāsana, should nididhyāsana also be done so is the question. For this Vidyāraṇya says
that the thought should be there that I am different from the body and also jagat. Whether
these two thoughts one should repeat regularly or is this rule relaxable? Vidyāraṇya says
there is no rule.

śloka 114
अन्यथेति विजानीहि दृष्टार्थत्वेन भुक्तिवत्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 896

बुभुक्षुर्जपवद्भुङ्क्ते न कश्चिन्नियतः क्वचित्॥ ७.११४ ॥

anyatheti vijānīhi dṛṣṭārthatvena bhuktivat.
bubhukṣurjapavadbhuṅkte na kaścinniyataḥ kvacit (7.114).
When we do a particular action with invisible puṇya as the result, then we have to follow
every rule perfectly. This is the karma kāṇḍa rule. Once puṇya is a phala, there are rules
for every action. If you don’t follow the rules, puṇya will not accrue and in fact in some
cases pāpa will result. When we practice upāsana, upāsana produces adṛṣṭa puṇya and
therefore, the rules are to be followed meticulously. Now, our question is nididhyāsana is
meant for adṛṣṭa phala or not? It is aimed at removal of the obstacles and it is only dṛṣṭa
phala only. Upāsana is for adṛṣṭa phala. Therefore, āsana etc., are not important for
nididhyāsana. This is the conclusion, he gives in this śloka. There are some rituals for
which one has to prepare some dishes, offer that into the fire and whatever is left over that
he has to eat chanting the mantra. Here, the consuming it is to get puṇya. In that case,
there are rules and he has to follow them if he is to gain the adṛṣṭa phala of the ritual. The
rules becomes very important, being it is adṛṣṭa-phala-bhojana.

śloka 115
अश्नाति वा न वाश्नाति भुङ्क्ते वा स्वेच्छयान्यथा ।
येन के न प्रकारेण क्षुधामपनिनीषति ॥ ७.११५ ॥
aśnāti vā na vāśnāti bhuṅkte vā svecchayānyathā.
yena kena prakāreṇa kṣudhāmapaninīṣati (7.115).
When a person consumes food for removing hunger that is dṛṣṭa phala wherein he does
not follow any rule. He eats the food to satisfy his own personal wish. One can eliminate
hunger or forget hunger. If a person cannot eat food, food is given by any other method
also. The aim is hunger-nivṛtti. When you practice japa or upāsana, all rules are important.

śloka 116
नियमेन जपं कुर्यादकृ तौ प्रत्यवायतः ।
अन्यथाकरणेऽनर्थः स्वरवर्णविपर्ययात्॥ ७.११६ ॥
niyamena japaṃ kuryādakṛtau pratyavāyataḥ.
anyathākaraṇe:'narthaḥ svaravarṇaviparyayāt (7.116).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 897

When one practices regular japa he has to follow all the rules. Sandhyāvandana has to be
done according to the time schedule. If it is not done or not done properly, it will entail
pratyavāya pāpa. A Brāhmaṇa will lose Brāhmaṇa status if he does not do Gāyatrī japa.
Having lost the status, whatever other pūjā or japa he does, it will not produce the
expected result. Just as a signature has no value once one is retired from a job, so also once
he loses dvija status; anything done by him will not give him any benefit at all.
There are some people who don’t do japa properly. This also will not give the expected
result. In nididhyāsana, we don’t have any such problem at all since nididhyāsana is for
dṛṣṭa phala. More in the next class.

Class 191
śloka 116 contd.
In these ślokas, Vidyāraṇya discusses nididhyāsana as a means of removing the viparīta-
bhāvanā-pratibandha, which has to be removed for getting the benefit of knowledge. In
this context, Vidyāraṇya talks about the difference between upāsana and nididhyāsana.
Both of them happen to be mental activity, mental focusing being common in upāsana and
nididhyāsana. Although both are one and the same, there are differences he wants to say.
The main difference he says upāsana is practiced to get puṇya. Puṇya will come under
adṛṣṭa phala. Therefore, upāsana is meant for adṛṣṭa prayojana. Similarly, japa and Vedic
rituals are also meant for adṛṣṭa prayojana. Vidyāraṇya says wherever we practice
anything, for the sake of adṛṣṭa prayojana, all the rules will have to be implicitly followed
without questioning. If they say we have to offer a certain grain you should not ask why it
is to be used. Śāstra does not give any scientific reason. Therefore, the rule of rituals is if
Veda says use this, don’t question, but use that only. If Veda says don’t use means you
should not use it. Veda never gives logical or scientific reason and in the tradition also
they don’t probe into logical or scientific reason. The whole karma kāṇḍa is based on
śraddhā in Veda. If Veda asks me to do this, there must be some reason. The reason I don’t
know and I don’t want to know. I also don’t have any means to know it. I will implicitly
follow. There is deva-tarpaṇa, Ṛṣi-tarpaṇa, pitṛ-tarpaṇa and for each tarpaṇa what should
be the position of the hand, there are rules. For some, you are to pour the water from the
front of the hand and for some from the side of the hand and for some through the middle

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 898

of the two palms. If you ask me, what is the scientific reason, we don’t know, we don’t
want to know and we don’t probe into that but we will follow promptly. If a person says I
don’t believe in that, you need not know. Veda does not compel people. Veda says it is
good for you. If you follow, fine, and if you don’t have śraddhā, you need not do that.
That is your problem. The whole karma kāṇḍa is based on the faith in the Vedic statement.
There are millions of rules and you cannot follow all of them strictly. Upāsana, etc., you
should follow the rules and when mantras are chanted, they should be properly chanted.
If they say chant three times, you should not ask why three why not four? Vidyāraṇya
says only if you do those rituals as mentioned in the Veda, then alone expected puṇya will
come. If you violate the rules in any place, the expected puṇya will not come whether it is
a ritual or japa or upāsana.
Vidyāraṇya also frightens. He says not only the result may not come; if you didn’t do it
properly, it may give a negative result also. The result may be counterproductive. If you
perform a ritual, japa or upāsana in any other manner, which includes svara-varṇa-
viparyaya in the chanting of the mantra if the varṇa-viparyaya takes place which means
letters are pronounced wrongly; or svara-viparyaya the intonation is not followed
properly, anartha tales place that means a negative result may come. When we hear this,
naturally we are disturbed. We read Sanskrit in Tamil script. Therefore, mistakes take
place. We do not know svara also. We don’t know the meaning also. We are calling priests
for performance of these rituals. They also do not perform the rituals properly. They rush
in doing the rituals. For wedding, they may chant śraddhā mantra! For me, they all look
the same. We are taking a big risk in doing our japa, pūjā, etc.
Now, our worry is that if we don’t get puṇya, it does not matter, but if we will get pāpa, is
it not risky? Therefore, why cannot we drop all japa, pūjā, rituals, etc? This will be very
natural and legitimate question. Śāstra considers all these things. Remember, whatever
you think, śāstra has already thought about it. Śāstra says all the karmas are of two types.
The rituals, japa, pūjā, etc., some of them will come under nitya-naimittika karma which
are prescribed as compulsory rituals, compulsory pūjā, compulsory japa. There are some
rituals, etc., that come under optional variety which are called kāmya-prāyaścitta karmas.
They are optional; you may do or you may not do it. But nitya-naimittika karma are
considered to be compulsory. With regard to kāmya karmas, if you don’t do it properly
you may not get the result. You may get the counter result also. Remember, Kumbhakarṇa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 899

asked Brahmā the vara nirdevatvecchayā nidrāṃ he wanted nirdevatva which means
elimination of all the devas. But he made a small mistake nidravatva niveda so he enjoyed
sleep for six months. In the case of kāmya karma, the risk is real; if you do properly, result
is good and if you don’t do properly, it will be counterproductive. You can drop kāmya
and prāyaścitta karma, but in the case of nitya-naimittika karma, out of fear of the risk,
you cannot drop them because dropping them also will produce pāpa. Nitya-naimittika
karma like śrāddha, etc. don’t come under kāmya karma. Out of fear, non-performance of
śrāddha will also produce pāpa and the special name for that pāpa is pratyavaya pāpa and
therefore, Vidyāraṇya said in the first line akṛtau pratyavāyataḥ. You cannot afford to
drop such karmas. It means we are in trouble because if we don’t do also it is pāpa. If we
wrongly do also it is also pāpa. It is counterproductive. Then what to do? For that, śāstra
gives the answer. If you do you have to do nitya-naimittika karma as there is no choice.
Therefore, the first aim is try to do it properly.
Even now, there are good priests, but we don’t have time or interest to look for them, so
we have a nice excuse. There are people who can do the karma perfectly. In spite of that,
we being human being, we don’t have Sanskrit knowledge and there are bound to be
mistakes. If mistakes are there, it can be counterproductive. Then what to do? Śāstra says I
will give a method. Do all those compulsory karmas only for citta-śuddhi. Don’t ask for
any worldly result through those compulsory karmas. Only take jñāna-vairāgya-
siddhyartham or mamopātta-samasta-duritakṣaya-dvārā parameśvara-prītyartham. First,
make sure that it is done for only citta-śuddhi. At the end of all your japa, or upāsana, or
pūjā chant this śloka:
Karacaraṇakṛtaṃ vākkāyajaṃ karmajaṃ vā
śRāvaṇanayanajaṃ vā mānasaṃ vāparādham
vihitamavihitaṃ vā sarvametat kṣamasva
jaya jaya karuṇābdhe śrīmahādeva śambho.
Īśvara knows Sanskrit and he will make adjustments as he knows the intention of the
bhakta, just as the mother can read the language of the baby. Therefore, with regard to the
śrāddha tarpaṇa, nitya japa, etc, even if you chant wrongly, if you are doing these things
in the beginning, do the saṅkalpa properly citta suddhyartham japam kariṣye and at the
end, chant the mantra karacaraṇakṛtaṃ va or any other equivalent mantra. Then, the
advantage is that the wrong karmas will not be counterproductive. Even if you make all

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 900

the mistakes, even if on śrāddha day the priest chant vivaha mantra it does not matter! Let
any number of mistakes happen, śāstra says you do that karma. If you do that saṅkalpa
and brahmārpaṇa as the final prayer, then there will be no problem at all. This problem is
serious when with regard to kāmya and prāyaścitta karma as there is a real risk. Therefore,
either you take risk or drop the kāmya karma but in the case of nitya-naimittika karma
there is a risk but avoid that risk not by dropping the karma but by this twofold corrective
rectification process mentioned above. It is said in Gītā in the 17th chapter. Take a flower
take some water and offer at the feet of the Lord; any amount of mistakes it does not
matter. Therefore, if anyone of you got frightened after the previous class, you need not be
afraid but make it for citta-śuddhi and offer it to the Lord. This is an aside topic with
regard to upāsana.
Vidyāraṇya says this problem does not exist at all in the case of nididhyāsana because
nididhyāsana is not meant for adṛṣṭa phala, it is not meant for puṇya phala and it is only
to change the mental orientation, or to put it in our language, FIR-reduction is the aim of
nididhyāsana. FIR-reduction is experienceable here and now. Whether my mental reaction
comes down or not, I can watch my own mind and see the benefit unlike puṇya which is
adṛṣṭa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya differentiates nididhyāsana in śloka 117. 116 is upāsana and
117 talks about nididhyāsana.

śloka 117
क्षुधेव दृष्टबाधाकृ द्विपरीता च भावना ।
जेया के नाप्युपायेन नास्त्यत्रानुष्ठितेः क्रमः ॥ ७.११७ ॥
kṣudheva dṛṣṭabādhākṛdviparītā ca bhāvanā.
jeyā kenāpyupāyena nāstyatrānuṣṭhiteḥ kramaḥ (7.117).
All these are important ślokas as nididhyāsana is clarified in all these ślokas. He says
viparīta-bhāvanā, meaning this dehātma-bhāvanā, instead of claiming ahaṃ brahma asmi.
This counter thought is opposite of brahmātma-bhāvanā, that is dehātma-bhāvanā. Since it
is opposed to brahmātma-bhāvanā is, its called viparīta. This dehātma-bhāvanā causes
dṛṣṭa-bādhā mental disturbance, greater deha-abhimāna and I become an individual in the
world. The moment I become an individual, ahaṅkāra and mamakāra comes in. With
mamakāra, family-abhimāna also comes in. deha-abhimāna and family-abhimāna are two
sides of the same coin. With this, worries cannot be avoided, because in the body and in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 901

the family, always there will be some problem or the other. If you ask how are you they
will say everything is fine and then they will start telling the problem. Ahaṅkāra and
mamakāra are never-free from problems and therefore, it will disturb the mind. This
disturbance comes under dṛṣṭa problem. It is directly experienceable. My mental
disturbance, I know intimately.
Therefore, he says viparīta-bhāvanā dṛṣṭa-bādhā-krd. Bādhā means disturbance or pain
and dṛṣṭa-bādhā means experienceable pain at mental level in the form of worry. It is like
hunger. Kṣudheva means hunger. Since it is dṛṣṭa problem, the removal also which is
otherwise called FIR-reduction, will come under dṛṣṭa prayojana only. There is no puṇya-
pāpa involved here. It is an experienceable problem. Since there is no puṇya involved,
there are no śāstric rules involved. When there is no puṇya involved, there is no śāstric
rule also. You have to dwell on the Vedāntic teaching in one way or the other. We have to
win over and we have to master that mental problem called viparīta-bhāvanā. It will have
to be managed, restrained, controlled, handled, made insignificant. Kenāpyupāyena
means you can practice anyone of the two types of nididhyāsanas mentioned. They are
samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana and brahmābhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. Anyone of
them you follow. Even if you choose brahmābhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana, ithin
brahmābhyāsa also you have options. It was given in śloka 106 by quoting Yogavāsiṣṭha
śloka. You have so many options and repeated śravaṇa is also a form of nididhyāsana;
teaching or writing or discussing any method that is suitable to you, you follow. If you say
I will follow all of them, there is no harm. Therefore, kena is important. Here, you have a
choice.
Samādhi is not compulsory for viparīta-bhāvanā-nivṛtti. This is important because many
people say one has to go through samādhi if liberation has to come. Samādhi is presented
as a compulsory state every seeker should have to go through. But this śloka is important
because here Vidyāraṇya says it is not compulsory. We are not against samādhi but we
would like sate that that is also one of the methods. What is important is that the mind
should dwell upon the teaching. Then comes next important part atra. In this regard,
anuṣṭhiteḥ kramaḥ nāsti there are no rules at all with regard to the practice of
nididhyāsana. There are no rules at all with regard to the practice of nididhyāsana.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 902

śloka 118
उपायः पूर्वमेवोक्तस्तच्चिन्ताकथनादिकः ।
एतदेकपरत्वेऽपि निर्बन्धो ध्यानवन्न हि ॥ ७.११८ ॥
upāyaḥ pūrvamevoktastaccintākathanādikaḥ.
etadekaparatve:'pi nirbandho dhyānavanna hi (7.118).
All are important ślokas. He says I have already talked about nididhyāsana in śloka 106
which is the Yogavāsiṣṭha portion. He says pūrvameva before in śloka 106 nididhyāsana
method has been prescribed. Tat cintana means thinking Vedāntic teaching. Kathana
means discussion or talking about that teaching. Adika means etc. When two students are
making combined study it will become anyonya. If your neighbour asks what your
Svāmījī teaches, then you call it teaching and whereas when two students discuss it is
anyonya prakathana. Etadekaparatvepi means in all these methods only one condition has
to be obeyed. That condition is whatever be the discussion, it should be centred around
the three Vedāntic components. Brahma satyam or jagan mithyā or jivo brahmaiva na
apara should be the centre of the discussion. You may talk about Annamaya-kośa even
though the mind deals with anna only. Still the topic will come under Vedāntic meditation
only since you discuss Annamaya with no focus on food but with an intention of going to
prāṇamaya, manomaya, vijñānāmaya, ānandamaya and ānanda Ātmā brahma puccham
pratiṣṭhā. The bottom line is one of the three components that is called ekaparatva,
Vedāntic bottomline should be there. I have given the example of election-speech. There
they will talk about so many things, but what is the bottom-line? Give vote to our party.
That is called ekaparatva. Here also, you broadly have this as the tātparya-convergence.
Even though this condition is there, nirbandho na hi there is no question of overuse of
force with regard to the mind. In this method of nididhyāsana, the mind is not forced too
much, the mind is not restrained too much; the mind has got a wider field in
nididhyāsana. Either you can do pañca-kośa-viveka or you can do avasthā-traya-viveka or
you can do śarīra-traya-viveka; you have got a wider field and therefore, the mind is not
too much restrained in nididhyāsana. Whereas in dhyāna [upāsana] which is meant for
puṇya-pāpa, the mind has to be completely restrained to only one thought. If you are
doing namaḥśivāya japa, it should be namaḥśivāya namaḥśivāya only, especially if you do
it for puṇya phala. The mind, in this case, has a narrow field and it is like walking on a
rope. But when you walk on a wide road you can be relaxed. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 903

upāsana is rope-walking and nididhyāsana is road-walking. One-pointed thinking is

required for upāsana and the same is not required for nididhyāsana. Therefore, nirbandho
na hi there is no strain while practicing nididhyāsana; tension is not there, stress is not
there. Therefore, there is no strain on the mind while doing nididhyāsana. He does not
talk about āsana, prāṇāyāma, pratyāhāra, etc.

śloka 119
मूर्तिप्रत्ययसान्तत्यमन्यानन्तरितं धियः ।
ध्यानं तत्रातिनिर्बन्धो मनसश्चञ्चलात्मनः ॥ ७.११९ ॥
mūrtipratyayasāntatyamanyānantaritaṃ dhiyaḥ.
dhyānaṃ tatrātinirbandho manasaścañcalātmanaḥ (7.119).
In the previous śloka, he gave upāsana as the counter example for nididhyāsana. In
nididhyāsana, strain is not there unlike in upāsana where strain is there. He quoted the
example as to how difficult upāsana is because you have to keep only one thought like
walking on the rope. If it is keeping with the physical hand, holding an object physically
for sometime may be relatively easier but mentally holding on to one thought for a length
of time is almost impossible. Thus upāsana is extremely tough he says. Upāsana in the
context Vidyāraṇya calls it dhyāna. Thought should be on saguṇa Īśvara and it should not
be distracted by any other thought in the case of upāsana. The mind which is very fertile
in its imagination by the law of association by any part of deity it may go to any thought.
The mind is like a monkey and more than a monkey it is extremely agile. Therefore,
maintenance of the thought-flow is extremely difficult. This process like rope-walking is
called upāsana. Every meditator who practices this invariably gets into frustration. The
only consolation is that other people don’t know what is happening in my mind while on
meditation. They think I am in intense meditation. It does not happen that easily. This is
the definition of dhyāna.
There is extreme strain involved in that process. In fact, some people get a headache also
because when you try and go on staring at a length of time, people get headache. The
mind is not meant for such continuous concentration for hours. It is an abnormal process.
If you want to succeed in an abnormal process, you will have problem and therefore,
extreme strain is involved. Strain is there because the mind is extremely fluid. You cannot
hold the mind physically, cañcalātmanaḥ. Everybody’s mind is like that. That is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 904

greatest consolation for us on knowing that the mind of everyone is subject to change. The
mind wandering in meditation is universal and it is the very nature of the mind. There is
extreme strain in the practice of upāsana but in Vedāntic nididhyāsana such mental strain
is not there. There is no problem at all.

śloka 120
चञ्चलं हि मनः कृ ष्ण प्रमाथि बलवद्दृढम्।
तस्याहं निग्रहं मन्ये वायोरिव सुदुष्करम्॥ ७.१२० ॥
cañcalaṃ hi manaḥ kṛṣṇa pramāthi balavaddṛḍham.
tasyāhaṃ nigrahaṃ manye vāyoriva suduṣkaram (7.120).
This has reference to Gītā 6.34 where Kṛṣṇa talks about samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa
nididhyāsana. When Arjuna listens to that, Arjuna feels frustrated and therefore, Arjuna
complains to Kṛṣṇa: you ask me to concentrate on one thing but I don’t think it is possible
for me. Therefore, he said: Hey Kṛṣṇa, pramāthi balavaddṛḍham. The mind is highly
wandering. It is fluid. The disturbance in the mind can be carried to sense-organs and the
body also. When the mind is disturbed, the eyes cannot focus on something. Therefore,
turbulence here refers to its transfering its disturbance to the senses and the body; that is
why in the first chapter of Gītā even Arjuna’s mouth dries up when the mind is disturbed.
It cannot be physically restrained or clamped, like the doctor will clamp a particular organ
before surgery, the eyes and hands also can be clamped, but is there any instrument by
which the mind can be clamped? No, it is not possible. The mind is ever firm in its hold.
The mind by itself is strong. Once the mind holds on to a particular thought, that hold is
very strong and it is impossible to bring it back and even if you bring it back, again and
again it goes back to that thought only. Mastery of the mind or thought is extremely
difficult. This is brought out of my own experience. More in the next class.

Class 192
śloka 120 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talks about nididhyāsana in these ślokas and we saw that nididhyāsana is of
two types. One is samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana and the other is brahmābhyāsa-
rūpa nididhyāsana. Of these two types, a person can choose anyone of them according to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 905

his or her convenience because one has to dwell in the teaching; that alone is important.
The external conditions the posture of the body, the time, the place, etc., are not important.
But when it is the practice of upāsana, the rules become important because upāsana gives
the benefit through adṛṣṭa. Wherever adṛṣṭa is involved, you have to follow the rules as
stated in the śāstra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says if a person tries to concentrate the mind on
a particular thought as it is done in upāsana, there is tremendous mental strain involved
because the mind cannot hold on to one thought continuously. Therefore, upāsana is
extremely difficult whereas in nididhyāsana we don’t insist upon the mind dwelling on
one thought or one object. In nididhyāsana, the mind has to be in the teachings of the
Vedānta tat tvam asi and its corollary. Therefore, for upāsana the field is very limited. It is
like walking on a rope. But in nididhyāsana such a restriction is not there. It is like walking
on a highway. Therefore, he differentiates upāsana and nididhyāsana in these ślokas.
How it is difficult to remain one pointed. In support of this conclusion Vidyāraṇya gives
two quotations. One is from Gītā and the other is from Yoga-vāsiṣṭha. We saw Gītā śloka
in the last class wherein Arjuna complains to Lord Kṛṣṇa. It is extremely difficult to keep
the mind in a particular thought continuously because the mind is fickle and turbulent
and strong and dṛḍha and firm in holding to anātmā. Therefore, I consider that the control
of the mind, disciplining of the mind is extremely difficult. If it is a tangible object like a
ball, we can stop it from going beyond the field. It is possible because it is concrete.
Whereas vāyu is not concrete therefore, you cannot stop. The mind is also like vāyu; it is
not a concrete entity. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya in his commentary adds it is not difficult like vāyu
but it is more difficult than vāyu.

śloka 121
अप्यब्धिपानान्महतः सुमेरून्मूलनादपि ।
अपि वह्न्यशनात्साधो विषमश्चित्तनिग्रहः ॥ ७.१२१ ॥
apyabdhipānānmahataḥ sumerūnmūlanādapi.
api vahnyaśanātsādho viṣamaścittanigrahaḥ (7.121).
Another example is taken from Yogavāsiṣṭha to show stopping the function of the mind is
extremely difficult. Three examples are given here. Mahataḥ abdhipānāt api. Abdhi means
ocean and pāna means drinking. Mahataḥ abdhipānāt api means drinking or emptying a
huge or vast ocean. This is the first example. Sumerūnmūlanādapi means a mythological

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 906

mountain which is very huge like the Himalayas. Unmulana means lifting. The lifting of
the Sumeru or Himalayas you imagine; Rāvaṇa attempted that and you know he lost his
hand. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to lift or uproot the Himalayas or the Sumeru
mountain. Similarly, vahnyaśana consuming fire how it is difficult and even if some Yogis
may accomplish this feat, [as Agasthya is supposed to have drunk the ocean] but
manonigraha is tougher than even all these feats. Therefore, Oh! Students cittanigrahaḥ
viṣamah it is extremely difficult to regulate the mind or to keep the mind in one single
thought continuously. That is required for upāsana but one great blessing is that is not
required for nididhyāsana. It does not involve ‘one thought’ maintenance. That is said in
the next śloka.

śloka 122
कथनादौ न निर्बन्धः शृङ्खलाबद्धदेहवत्।
किन्त्वनन्तेतिहासाद्यैर्विनोदो नाट्यवद्धियः ॥ ७.१२२ ॥
kathanādau na nirbandhaḥ śṛṅkhalābaddhadehavat.
kintvanantetihāsādyairvinodo nāṭyavaddhiyaḥ (7.122).
Having talked about the difficulties of the upāsana, now, Vidyāraṇya says all these
constraints are not there in nididhyāsana. We are not even asked to follow Aṣṭāṅga-yoga
steps. If you would love to follow, it is well and good, but that is not a compulsion at all,
because we have an alternative method satcintana, satkathana, etc. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
says kathanādau na nirbandhaḥ, in following the type of nididhyāsana like kathana
[mutual sharing of the Vedāntic teaching]. Refer to śloka 106. That is referred to here by
kathanādau. You have a wide range of choice. You can either do repeated śravaṇa which
itself is a form of nididhyāsana. You can discuss, you can read and you can write any
form. The mind has to dwell on the teaching. Therefore, nirbandhaḥ nāsti. There is no
strain at all on the mind unlike upāsana. In upāsana, the condition is like
śṛṅkhalābaddhadehavat. Upāsana is comparable to a body which is tied or restrained by
shackles. Imagine a person’s hands and legs are chained and then he is asked to walk; how
difficult it is to walk. This is upāsana. That is why I gave the example of rope-walking.
You should be extremely careful. Even one small wrong doing will end in death. A wrong
step will break the upāsana. Such restraint is not there in Vedāntic nididhyāsana. You
have got a very wide field.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 907

Anantetihāsādyaiḥ the Upaniṣadic teaching has several stories the story of Nārada and
Sanatkumara, the story of Uddālaka and Śvetaketu, the story of Naciketas and
Yamadharma Rājā. The teaching contains a lot of stories and there are several examples
given like the two-bird example, the archery example and in the Kaṭhopaniṣad, the
example of a chariot. Thus, so many examples are there and you can dwell on any one of
them and land into the Vedāntic teaching. Therefore, itihāsādi means stories quoted in the
Upaniṣads. So many examples and analogies are there and through all of them you learn
Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāparaḥ. You can take any aspect for
meditation. If the mind runs all over the world, practice jagan mithyā meditation. Your
mind will travel only in one of the two, one is it will think of Ātmā or other anātmā. If it
goes towards anātmā, think jagan mithyā. If it thinks of Ātmā, think of Brahma satyam.
Let the mind go anywhere. Convert that into Vedāntic meditation. We see in dṛk-dṛśya-
viveka, details are also given. Any object in the creation has sat and cit aṃśas; which is
Ātmā-aspect? Nāma and rūpa belong to anātmā aspect. Either meditate on nāma-rūpa and
see the mithyātva or meditate on the existence aspect and see the satyatva. Everything is a
mixture of saccit and nāma-rūpa. Therefore, let the mind go anywhere you need not
restrain. Where the mind goes see the mithyātva of that nāma-rūpa. That becomes the
Vedāntic approach. Therefore, Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāparaḥ.
Many methods and many examples are given. Therefore, nididhyāsana is fun. It is a nice
game that you can enjoy. So dhiyaḥ vinodo bhavati it is a nice entertainment for the mind.
All the time, I talk about my glories only. Whenever Vedānta talks about the world, he
says the world and its events cannot touch me. Asaṅgoham, anantoham, etc. Therefore, it
is only entertainment like nāṭyavad like watching a dance programme. Nobody gets
tensed up by watching the dance programme. It is an enjoyable entertainment. The mind
did not go anywhere else and at the same time, the mind never felt the strain also. Or you
can take any serial you enjoy watching. You are in absolute samādhi. Only problem is
advertisement in between. How you enjoy the serial effortlessly? Similarly, Vedāntic
meditation is an entertainment. Vinoda means entertainment for the intellect.

śloka 123
चिदेवात्मा जगन्मिथ्येत्यत्र पर्यवसानतः ।
निदिध्यासनविक्षेपो नेतिहासादिभिर्भवेत्॥ ७.१२३ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 908

cidevātmā jaganmithyetyatra paryavasānataḥ.

nididhyāsanavikṣepo netihāsādibhirbhavet (7.123).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says no doubt Upaniṣad has anātmā part also in the teaching, it does
talk about if you take the Naciketas’ upākhyāna. It talks about son, father, sickly cows; all
those things are there. Will they not distract? Such a doubt may come up. Vidyāraṇya says
even though so many other topics are there, ultimately they all end up in only one main
teaching; even though stories are there, tātparya or convergence is only in one thing: that
is Ātmā satya anātmā mithyā. Therefore, even though we read the stories our mind will
not be taken away from Vedānta because the tātparya is Ātmā-vidyā alone. All the stories
culminate in one teaching. They converge in one thing. They focus on one thing. I am none
other than the consciousness-principle. This is the conclusion whatever be the type of text
you study; ultimately we end up in: I am not the body I am the consciousness-principle.
The second part is everything other than that, anātmā, jagat, is mithyā. The jagat includes
my family, the business and my own body and my mind and thought. Right from thought
everything else is mithyā. This is the conclusion of all the Upaniṣadic texts and Upaniṣad
related literature also. In this conlcusion alone, all the Vedāntic scriptures end. Therefore,
nididhyāsanam vikṣepo na bhavati. The mind will never be taken away from
nididhyāsana. Even though we read stories, still the mind will never be taken away
because all the stories converge into this teaching alone. Because of the Vedāntic stories,
there will not be distraction while one is involved in nididhyāsana. Other stories do not
have this as their theme. Therefore, the more you go into those stories, the mind will be
distracted from Vedāntic teaching; therefore, they will come under nididhyāsana-vikṣepa,
Whereas the stories of Śvetaketu, Satyakāma, Jābāla, Naciketas they are also stories, the
difference is they will never take you away from the central teaching Brahma satyam jagan
mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāpara. Therefore, there is difference between Upaniṣadic stories
and other stories. The Upaniṣadic stories will not disturb the mind and therefore,
nididhyāsana is undisturbed.

śloka 124
कृ षिवाणिज्यसेवादौ काव्यतर्कादिके षु च ।
विक्षिप्यते प्रवृत्ता धीस्तैस्तत्त्वस्मृत्यसम्भवात्॥ ७.१२४ ॥
kṛṣivāṇijyasevādau kāvyatarkādikeṣu ca.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 909

vikṣipyate pravṛttā dhīstaistattvasmṛtyasambhavāt (7.124).

Any vyavahāra the worldly transaction may distract the mind from the essential teaching,
that is why we say during nididhyāsana try to reduce PORT [it means four factors
involved in vyāvahārika: preoccuation, obligation, relationships and all forms of
transactions.] They make the mind preoccupied. Any time when the mind is preoccupied
watch the mind and it will be connected with any of these. Sannyāsa does not mean
wearing different clothing. It means reduction of four: preoccupation, obligation,
relationship and transaction with the external world. Few examples are given. Agriculture,
business or commerce; sevā means service; etc. Those are the worldly or materialistic
activities; similarly, kāvya which means all types of literature; novels, all of them will
come under that; then tarkādi, tarka, vyakāraṇa, mīmāṃsā are also addictive to the mind.
Even mīmāṃsā, tarka etc., are wonderful śāstra but we should know how and where to
draw the line and we should go through them only to such an extent to make Vedānta
understandable. We should not go farther than that. You should not get side-tracked by
going through the literature, etc, and lose sight of Vedāntic studies. Such individuals who
engage themselves in the activities mentioned earlier, lose the remembrance of the main
goal of contemplation. For them, the secondary thing becomes primary and the primary
becomes secondary. The study of Purāṇas, etc., on the other hand will not lead to such
forgetfulness regarding the truth itself.

śloka 125
अनुसन्दधतैवात्र भोजनादौ प्रवर्तितुम्।
शक्यतेऽत्यन्तविक्षेपाभावादाशु पुनः स्मृतेः ॥ ७.१२५ ॥
anusandadhataivātra bhojanādau pravartitum.
śakyate:'tyantavikṣepābhāvādāśu punaḥ smṛteḥ (7.125).
Then, the question will come what about consuming food? That is also worldly activity,
vyāvahārika. The food is necessary for one’s very survival. For consuming food, we don’t
need extreme thinking, prāṇāyāma, etc. It is a mechanical action. It can be done or gone
through by anyone with limited focus. Therefore, that activity cannot distract the mind too
much. That is why they put a condition also don’t be too much particular about food and
its details. Whatever food comes, you take because it is meant for removing hunger and
don’t convert it into another sensory entertainment. There also, rāga-dveṣa will come and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 910

once it comes the anger will rise its head. You take whatever food is available and this will
not disturb your Vedāntic teaching. A nididhyāsana-kartā can certainly engage in the
activity there is no problem. Food taking should not be taken as sensory entertainment.
You should not be too much particular and specific about food. That makes rāga-dveṣa
problem stronger and stronger. Reduction of rāga-dveṣa is the aim of karma-yoga.
Therefore, food rāga-dveṣa is bound to come. Once you reach nididhyāsana in jñāna-yoga
and if such person is too much insistent about food, then we will say he is an academic
student. Never complain about the food. Therefore, you can engage yourself in such
eating activities without losing sight of the Vedāntic teachings. Remember Vedāntic
teaching and without losing sight of it, one can enter Annamaya, etc, without any
difficulty. Eating food is a mechanical activity and such activities will not distract one
from the pursuit of Vedānta. For a committed student, even if there is some slight
disturbance, instantaneously he brings back the Vedāntic teachings.

śloka 126
तत्त्वविस्मृतिमात्रान्नानर्थः किन्तु विपर्ययात्।
विपर्येतुं न कालोऽस्ति झटिति स्मरतः क्वचित्॥ ७.१२६ ॥
tattvavismṛtimātrānnānarthaḥ kintu viparyayāt.
viparyetuṃ na kālo:'sti jhaṭiti smarataḥ kvacit (7.126).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that even if you forget Vedānta for a moment, it does not matter.
What creates the problem is a thought-pattern which is opposite to Vedānta like rope-
ignorance will not be a problem. What creates the problem is this snake-perception.
Ajñāna does not create problem. Adhyāsa creates problem. When I watch anything, I am
not saying it is satya or mithyā. My ego is not very active. I am just perceiving something.
There is no problem. The problem comes when the ego is activated and the world gets a
reality; then there is a problem. Ātmā is permanent. When ahaṅkāra becomes dominant
enough, it is cause to worry. If ahaṅkāra is there, to do my duty. Then it is ok. When
ahaṅkāra becomes dominant and fear, anxiety etc., comes in, then the opposite of Vedānta
takes roots. Instead of saying cit eva Ātmā it is taken as ahaṅkāra eva Ātmā. The moment
that becomes dominant, then jagat becomes real. Only from vyāvahārika angle, the world
is efficient. In fact rāga-dveṣa becomes so powerful to make the mind its slave. I the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 911

ahaṅkāra am vulnerable for pricking also. When I raise my level, Ātmā cannot be pricked
and world being mithyā cannot prick also.
The satya-mithyā-forgetfulness will cause problems. Therefore, he says by mere
forgetfulness of the tattva, the reality, there will be no problem. The problems are caused
by the opposite thought-pattern. I am ahaṅkāra is opposite-thought and therefore, the
world is capable of hurting me; that is the second problem. This is called viparyaya.
Saṃsāra starts form that moment. In the case of nididhyāsana, to immediately bring back
Vedānta, you should discard rāga-dveṣa. It is the problem. A person who immediately
recollects the teaching, is the wise man and there is not enough time for saṃsāra to come
in to the wise men. Such person has no time for viparyaya the opposite thought to enter
the mind. More in the next class.

Class 193
śloka 126 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses the topic of nididhyāsana which is meant for viparīta-bhāvanā-
nivṛtti or dehātma-vāsanā-nivṛtti. This we saw through śravaṇa and manana itself. Clear
knowledge would have come through śravaṇa and manana, if the clear conviction were
there. Nididhyāsana is not meant for either knowledge or conviction, but it is meant to set
this knowledge into our sub-conscious mind. Even after the conscious mind is convinced
in our heart of hearts, still because of the long-formed habit or vāsanā, the inner mind
continues to have powerful ahaṅkāra and mamakāra; ahaṅkāra being abhimāna in the
body-mind-complex, and mamakāra being strong abhimāna with the family. The deha-
abhimāna is called ahaṅkāra. The family-abhimāna is called mamakāra. Both ahaṅkāra
and mamakāra are un-Vedāntic thought-patterns. From the standpoint of Vedānta, I am
not the body at all, but I am Ātmā and from the Ātmā-standpoint, I can never claim
anything as mine, because Ātmā does not have relationship with anything in the creation.
Ahaṅkāra is anti Vedānta and mamakāra also is anti-Vedānta. This aham-mama remains
in the sub-conscious mind all the time and that will cause its own sub-conscious worries.
Therefore, at the conscious level, “I am ānanda-svarūpa” will be repeated, but the sub-
conscious level continues to worry about either me or my family. That means jñāna is only
at the superficial level and I have not pushed it to the sub-conscious level. This pushing
process is called nididhyāsana.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 912

Here, Vidyāraṇya says this nididhyāsana process should go along with the appropriate
pathya. When you take any medicine, not only does the doctor prescribe medicine, but
along with the medicine certain do’s and don’t’s are also prescribed. Or else, on the one
side I will take insulin and on the other side I will take sweets. Therefore, always pathya
and auṣadha must go together. –-Or else I will be pathya. So Vidyāraṇya says
nididhyāsana should be followed. It is the assimilation of knowledge. It should go with a
conducive lifestyle or vyavahāra. What type of vyavahāra is conducive Vidyāraṇya says
tattva-smāraka-vyavahāra, any type of activity which will keep you within the fold of
Vedāntic thinking that is harmless, whether it is repeated śravaṇa or sat-cintana anyonya-
prabodhana, etc. Even the type of discussion or books I read, the type of TV programme I
watch, as long as they are conducive to the Vedāntic teaching and any not vyavahāra,
lifestyle or contact, which will take me away from the teaching, either by nourishing
ahaṅkāra, nourishing mamakāra or making anātmā more and more real, nourishing rāga-
dveṣa more and more any such vyāvahārika which is against “brahma satyam jagan
mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāpara”.
Try to reduce vyavahāra. We can never make it zero after all being part of the society. If I
am gṛhastha, gṛhastha- vyavahāra will be there. If one is a sannyāsī with an āśrama he will
also have vyavahāra. Vyavahāra cannot be avoided but may you filter the vyavahāra
carefully. First, he talks about our reading habits. If you don’t have much, no problem. In
those days, people used to study tarka, mīmāṃsā, vyākaraṇa, etc. Initially, they are
emphasized because for Vedāntic study those śāstras are useful to some extent, but
Vidyāraṇya wants us to not get lost in them because each one of them is an addictive
śāstra. Like a novel, a person gets hooked to them, even Pāṇinian grammar can make you
an addict. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says may you be careful about all dvaita śāstra. All those
śāstras which talk about Jīva-Īśvara-bheda, highlighting it, all of them may you reduce.
That is why even the karma in the form of pūjā, etc., if we are not alert in every pūjā I am
invoking Īśvara. Īśvara is there and I am here. One side I talk of aikya and another side we
reinforce bheda. Therefore, may you be careful about all the vyavahāras. Where to draw
the line? Each one is to decide according to one’s own situation in life. Vidyāraṇya gives a
general set of guidelines.
Avoid dvaita śāstra. You cannot avoid eating vyavahāra. You have to deal with
unavoidable vyavahāra; to the extent required may you follow. That is what he said in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 913

śloka 125. At the same time, don’t get attached too much with some thing. In 126, he said
even if you forget Vedānta, it does not matter. Advaita-nivṛtti will not matter much. It is
dvaita projection or viparīta-bhāvanā projection that is taken as real that is an issue. The
forgetfulness of ahaṃ brahma asmi is replaced by aham dehosmi, aham manaḥ asmi.
Brahmātma-bhāvanā being forgotten is no problem but when it is replaced by dehātma-
bhāvanā, it is a problem. It is called ahaṅkāra. Once ahaṅkāra is generated the family
comes; that mamakāra will instantaneously come and mamakāra has several issues to be
worried about. So saṃsāra is born without our knowledge. Aham-mama-adhyāsāt
anarthaḥ bhavati. In the case of a person, who limits vyavahāra the worldly transactions,
even if aham-mama-adhyāsa comes, he will be able to quickly regain the memory before
he gets lost too much. In simpler vyavahāra, viparyetum kālaḥ nāsti. There is not so much
time to commit the aham-mama mistake before it gets serious, and worry becomes too
much on his being able to come back like taking bath in the ocean. Therefore, don’t get too
much submerged in dvaita-vyavahāra. He gives a warning. Therefore, may you be alert in
your worldly vyavahāra.

śloka 127
तत्त्वस्मृतेरवसरो नास्त्यन्याभ्यासशालिनः ।
प्रत्युताभ्यासघतित्वाद्बलात्तत्त्वमपेक्ष्यते ॥ ७.१२७ ॥
tattva smṛteravasaro nāstyanyābhyāsaśālinaḥ.
pratyutābhyāsaghatitvādbalāttattvamapekṣyate (7.127).
He gives a warning here to all those people who reduce nididhyāsana and get involved in
the possession, obligation, relationship and transactions, more in the worldly vyavahāra
and they go far away from the teaching. Then, coming back will become extremely
difficult and when there are problems and saṃsāra overwhelms the person, that person
will be as much suffering as an ajñānī suffers even though he is supposed to have studied
Vedānta, he is supposed to have written notes, he is supposed to have done everything.
He got away from Vedānta, neither śravaṇa nor manana nor nididhyāsana; gradually,
“brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāpara” becomes feebler and feebler, while
aham and mama becomes stronger and stronger and when prārabdha gives a shaking
shock, his condition is as bad as a total ajñānī. So don’t give into such a situation. Always
move in the chartered waters of Vedānta, never move in the unchartered waters of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 914

ahaṅkāra-mamakāra. Those people who do the adhyāsa of anya śāstra [dvaita śāstra] and
here dvaita śāstra represents getting lost in worldly vyavahāras totally because of
overconfidence that I have studied Vedānta very well. Suppose a person gets involved in
worldly vyavahāra, coming back to the teaching will not be that easy. Therefore, tattva
smṛteravasaro nāsti, there is no scope for remembering the teaching which alone has to
rescue me when prārabdha takes me to rough weathers.
Remember, even a jñānī cannot escape from prārabdha. Therefore, prārabdha at
unexpected time can bring any difficult event; therefore, Vedānta must be always ready to
protect such knowledgeable person. Knowledge is not knowledge unless it is readily
accessible from my mind when necessary. Push it to the sub-conscious mind. Otherwise,
you cannot recollect the teaching. On the other hand, all the aham-mama vyavahāra will
only weaken the Vedāntic teaching. Tattva jñāna is given up because of aham-mama
vyavahāra. That is why even before coming to Vedānta, even during karma-yoga time
itself, śāstra asks us to practice that the body and the family members do not really belong
to me but they all belong to you only O God, and thus aham-mama is weakened even
during karma-yoga. If I don’t practice that in karma-yoga and try to practice in jñāna-
yoga, it becomes tougher The parents are only instruments to get the body, they are not
producers and Īśvara only is the creator of every ‘body’; father and mother are only the
instruments. We have to practice the reduction of aham-mama and if it is practiced
through bhakti during nididhyāsana, that will become easier. Therefore, wherever aham-
mama is stronger, Vedānta is gone. We know this because worry becomes strong and “I
am ānanda-svarūpa” will be like a joke. It will not appear as a fact at all. Then, it means we
have lost Vedānta. Or we have renounced Vedānta.

śloka 128
तमेवैकं विजानीत ह्यन्या वाचो विमुञ्चथ ।
इति श्रुतं तथान्यत्र वाचो विग्लापनन्त्विति ॥ ७.१२८ ॥
tamevaikaṃ vijānīta hyanyā vāco vimuñcatha.
iti śrutaṃ tathānyatra vāco viglāpanantviti (7.128).
Vidyāraṇya reminds here the Śruti vākyas in support of his contention. He says these are
all not my ideas. This is the pathya prescribed by the śāstra itself to be followed during
nididhyāsana or brahmābhyāsa. He has already told this once in śloka 107, that he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 915

reminds here to show that it is prescribed by the śāstra itself. One is Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad
II.ii.5. Oh seekers of mokṣa, may you know only that reality which is one, everything else
being mithyā and therefore, may you drop the obsession with all other books, which deal
with anātmā which deal with dvaita, which deal with dharma, artha and kāma. Reject all
other themes in life without any hesitation. The rejection must be total and absolute. The
argument is one of the main enemies in the spiritual path as stated in Nārada-bhakti-sūtra
74 that says not to indulge in argumentativeness. Also he quotes vaco viglāpanam tat,
talking about anything else is only weakening your vocal cords [refer to 4.4.21 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad]. The arguments only leads to loss of temper, frustration and
increases one’s susceptibility to criticism and ridicule.

śloka 129
आहारादि त्यजन्नैव जीवेच्छास्त्रान्तरं त्यजन्।
किं न जीवसि येनैवं करोष्यत्र दुराग्रहम्॥ ७.१२९ ॥
āhārādi tyajannaiva jīvecchāstrāntaraṃ tyajan.
kiṃ na jīvasi yenaivaṃ karoṣyatra durāgraham (7.129).
Vidyāraṇya answers a possible question here. Why should one doing nididhyāsana give
up all the dvaita vyavahāra? He wants to ask. After all you permit him to eat. Eating itself
is a clean dvaita vyavahāra. Even śravaṇa and manana involves dvaita. If you are
permitting some dvaita vyavahāra, why cannot you allow some more dvaita vyavahāra?
Either you should ask me to give up all vyavahāra or you must permit me to do all
vyavahāra. Why are you restricting dvaita vyavahāra? For that, Vidyāraṇya says some
dvaita vyavahāras are required even for living. For the mere existence of the body, the
minimum vyavahāra like eating bathing, clothing etc., cannot be avoided. If a person is a
gṛhastha, to fulfill the gṛhastha āśrama duties, some vyavahāras cannot be avoided.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says divide the vyavahāras into two as avoidable and unavoidable.
Don’t apply the law blindly. Divide the vyavahāras into avoidable and unavoidable.
Āharādi will come under unavoidable category. Even śarīra-yatra cannot take place
without āhāra. Therefore, I am allowing that. But studying advanced vyakāraṇa, tarka,
etc., they are not required for survival; therefore, I recommend that may you give up all
those śāstras. Let the food be not be for catering to the taste, but to survive and satisfy the
hunger. Let it not be there for satisfying the sense-pleasures. By giving up other dvaita

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 916

śāstra, like Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, etc., Vidyāraṇya asks will you not survive? Such a condition
is not there says Vidyāraṇya. That being so, why are you so adamant in the pursuit of
dvaita śāstra as though they are required for survival? These are all meant for Pūrvapakṣīs
of those days. It is not meant for us. May you commit yourself to nididhyāsana.

śloka 130
जनकादेः कथं राज्यमिति चेद्दृढबोधतः ।
तथा तवापि चेत्तर्कं पठ यद्वा कृ षिं कुरु ॥ ७.१३० ॥
janakādeḥ kathaṃ rājyamiti ceddṛḍhabodhataḥ.
tathā tavāpi cettarkaṃ paṭha yadvā kṛṣiṃ kuru (7.130).
Again Vidyāraṇya answers another possible question. The student who loves vyavahāra,
worldly transactions, is not happy to restrict that. We have heard in the scriptures the king
like Janaka were very much in the world. As a king, he had all the luxuries and all the
sense-pleasures. Such kings were very much involved in ruling the country itself, which is
a powerful dvaita vyavahāra. If Janaka could be a jñānī amidst all this, why cannot we be?
Therefore, we will not follow your restrictions. This is the question. Rājya here means
administration of a kingdom. Janaka, Ajātaśatru is another powerful king and a jñānī, who
is described in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, second chapter. As that is the case, why do you
insist on me? How did they manage? Their knowledge was not a feeble psyche knowledge
but it was a well-rooted strong knowledge. Even in the worst condition, they did not
forget the truth that I am not the body and nothing belongs to me. This knowledge they
had all the time. Therefore, the rule is that manda jñāna and vyavahāra are inimical to
each other. In their case, it is not so because jñāna is dṛḍha. Even in the worst crisis, Janaka
did not forget. When only śravaṇa and manana are completed, the jñāna is not dṛḍha
because it has not been put into the sub-conscious mind. All the time, I have family-worry,
nothing else. Instead of thinking that I am everything, ānanda, what comes is worry of
various issues in the family. It means those worries are waiting in the sub-conscious mind.
That comes out anytime. It is manda jñāna as seen during nididhyāsana.
Nididhyāsana is meant to convert manda jñāna into dṛḍha jñāna. After the conversion,
you need not worry about anything. Thereafter, whatever you do after dṛḍha jñāna, there
is no danger. But during the conversion, danger is very real. Vedānta will go behind and
worry will come forward. That is why when the plant is planted, when it is a small plant,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 917

it has to be protected because it is not strong enough. Therefore, fencing is required,

barricading is required, because any goat will eat it. Aham-mama goat can come and eat
the sprouting plant. Once the plant has become a huge tree, you don’t require the fencing
or barricade. You can tie the goat itself to the tree; it cannot do anything. Even if you tie an
elephant to the tree, it will not do anything. Similarly, when the floor has been laid afresh,
it has to be protected. People cannot walk over that because the cement is fresh; so, it can
be disturbed. So barricading is done. Once when it is well set, then even elephant can walk
and nothing will happen. With śravaṇa and manana, you get jñāna but dṛḍha jñāna is got
only when the jñāna enters the sub-conscious mind. So, Vidyāraṇya wants to know to
which category you belong to. Is my knowledge a plant or a tree? If your conscience says
your knowledge is a tree, then no rules of restriction apply and you can live as you like;
nothing will affect you. If you are like a plant, you have to follow the restrictions. By firm
knowledge, Janaka could remain in dvaita vyavahāra. If your knowledge is also so firm
and unshakable, you also need no restriction. I will let you be free and will not put any
restrictions. If you have jñāna-niṣṭhā, any type of karma you can involve in. Manda jñāna
and vyāvahārika are inimical to each other. However, dṛḍha jñāna and vyavahāra are not
inimical.

śloka 131
मिथ्यात्ववासनादार्ढ्ये प्रारब्धक्षयकाङ्क्षया ।
अक्लिश्यन्तः प्रवर्तन्ते स्वस्वकर्मानुसारतः ॥ ७.१३१ ॥
mithyātvavāsanādārḍhye prārabdhakṣayakāṅkṣayā.
akliśyantaḥ pravartante svasvakarmānusārataḥ (7.131).
If people like Janaka continued in the world, they had family and possessions and they
continued in their duty of rājya paripālana, etc., it is not because of their own personal
likes and dislikes. It is not because they had strong ahaṅkāra-mamakāra, not that they
wanted to hold on to those things because of their needs. If I hold on to things because of
my needs, then there is emotional dependence, attachment, aham and mama are stronger.
He says Janaka did not continue because of his personal rāga-dveṣa. It is only because of
prārabdha that such a situation was there. Therefore, if jñānis remain in different
vyavahāras, it is purely prārabdha-based, situation-based, not their personal desire-based.
Therefore, he says mithyātvavāsanādārḍhye sati when the jagan-mithyātva is very clearly

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 918

understood where jagan-mithyātva includes family-mithyātva also and it includes my

own body-mind-mithyātva also. If this is well-entrenched in the sub-conscious, jñānī does
not want to hold on to those mithyā things because he knows it is mithyā. Then why is he
there? It is due to his prārabdha. Everyone has to exhaust their prārabdha. The intention of
the jñānī is only exhaustion of prārabdha because the body itself arrives only for that
purpose. That is the project of Īśvara. Because Īśvara is in charge of law of karma.
Therefore, if even sañcita is burnt; even if āgāmi does not arrive, jñāni’s prārabdha has to
be exhausted. This is Bhagavān’s law. Jñānī wants to cooperate with the director of the
world-show. Bhagavān is the sūtradhārī, he has made certain arrangements and I have to
fall in line according to the set up and situations. Without my freewill requiring anything,
according to the set up and situation, what is required, that jñānī allows to happen.
Therefore, he says prārabdha-kṣaya-kāṅkṣayā.. He does not have rāga for gṛhastha-āśrama
or dveṣa for sannyāsa-āśrama. He does not have rāga for āśrama he is in and dveṣa for
āśrama he is not in. rāga-dveṣa even towards āśrama should go away. Then, which āśrama
depends on prārabdha alone. Continue in that āśrama and whatever is required in the set
up, you have to do. Do whatever is required, not only to exhaust your prārabdha but for
the exhaustion of family-prārabdha also. If the children have the prārabdha to have you in
the family, you cannot take to sannyāsa. The situation will come like that. Otherwise, they
will send you out and you will helplessly take to sannyāsa. Be where you are. And remain
in the knowledge. More in the next class.

Class 194
śloka 131 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses the topic of nididhyāsana in these ślokas. We saw that two types of
nididhyāsanas are there. One is samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana and the other one is
brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. Of these two, Vidyāraṇya says the first one is
difficult whereas the second one is easier and enjoyable. The first one is difficult because in
that a person has to retain the mind in a single thought not distracted by any other
thought. It is extremely difficult to maintain the mind in a single thought for a length of
time. In the Yogavāsiṣṭha, it is said that mind-regulation is tougher than even drinking the
ocean; how lifting Kailāsa is difficult, similarly, it is difficult. In brahmābhyāsa-rūpa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 919

nididhyāsana, we are not particular about keeping the mind in a single thought but our
aim is any type of activity where the tātparya is Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo
brahmaiva nāpara. Therefore, even the study or revision of the Upaniṣad will come under
brahmābhyāsa only. In that, even though we have the story of Naciketas, etc., the topic
seems to be differen,t but in and through all of them, the undercurrent is the Ātmā-jñāna
only. Therefore, brahmābhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana is simpler and also he says there is
vinoda, which means it is a game like watching a bharatanāṭya programme. Then he says
that for anyone discussing Vedānta, etc., there is no distraction because the tātparya is
Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāpara whereas in any other laukika
vyavahāra, they are considered to be distractions because there the tātparya is not brahma
satyam jagan mithyā. Therefore, reading kāvya or reading any other dvaita śāstra, etc, will
be distractions; therefore, they have to be avoided.
Then, the student raises the question if other activities are considered a distraction, how
come Janaka and other Mahātmās continued in vyavahāra and continued to be jñānī. He
adds that manda jñāna and local vyāvahārika are inimical and it is like asking the question
whether fire and the wind are friendly or inimical? Agni and vāyu are friends or inimical?
What would you say? You should not answer. You should say it depends. When the fire is
in a small form, wind is inimical and puts out the flame. Suppose the flame is protected
and nourished and it has become a huge forest fire, I don’t know whether you read in the
news paper the forest-fire the government is fighting for four days and it has not been able
to do anything. Once the fire has become forest fire, the wind helps the fire to glow. In
nature, once the fire is big the wind becomes friendly. Similarly, laukika vyavahāra is
inimical to jñāna or not if you ask, here we talk about a sādhaka who has just gained jñāna
through śravaṇa and manana and he has not practiced sufficient nididhyāsana to make
the knowledge stronger; therefore, here we talk about a student with a flame-like
knowledge. Therefore, at that time any laukika vyavahāra can put out the knowledge and
therefore, śāstra says anyā vāco vimuñcata. Hold on to nididhyāsana. However, once a
person has strengthened the knowledge and it has become a huge fire, he need not follow
any discipline; let him get involved in any worldly vyavahāra. Even during the worst
crisis, the awareness is there and it is only a problem between two mithyā anātmā. If we
are able to remember aham nitya-mukta, the other is at anātmā level where some
prārabdha thing going on and then the jñāna is dṛḍha jñāna.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 920

Therefore, he says not to quote Janaka. He is an example for someone who has made the
knowledge like a forest fire and thereafter he is not disturbed by this. Whereas he talks
about a fresher who has just gained the knowledge and that too flickering, even when
weekly classes are going on. Therefore, he says the laukika vyavahāra is not an enemy to
dṛḍha jñāna. laukika vyavahāra is an enemy to manda jñāna. Whoever is classified as
having manda jñāna, they have to steady their knowledge. The external world is a threat
to my knowledge, it is said. The world can create rāga-dveṣa, abhimāna, etc. Thereafter,
Vidyāraṇya says oh student, if you consider your knowledge is as firm as Janaka’s, if you
can boldly say that, they you need not bother of these disciplines. Janaka could say that
even when a part of Mithilā was on fire, they say mithilāyāṃ pradīptāyāṃ na me dahyati
kiṃcana. If you don’t have that dṛḍhatva, then you have to make the knowledge dṛḍha.
How long will it take depends. If you are also confident that vyavahāra will not disturb
you who stops you from vyavahāra? Do anything so long as you are not disturbed.
Therefore, he concluded in śloka 131, vyavahāra will not disturb only when jagat-
mithyātva is very well-entrenched in the mind. Jagat-mithyātva should include family-
mithyātva and family-mithyātva should include deha-mithyātva. If it is entrenched in
your sub-conscious mind, your job is over. Such jñānis have nothing to attain since they
have gained mokṣa which includes dharma, artha and kāma. Therefore, they don’t require
any sādhana for accomplishing anything. They don’t have to use their freewill for any
specific purpose. Freewill has found its fulfillment. Since they don’t have their own goal,
what is their aim of life? Vidyāraṇya says he cooperates with God and joins Bhagavān to
get his job done. Bhagavān has given the body to exhaust its prārabdha. Whatever the
family-situation, the family has to watch, hear what is to hear, etc, they all become part of
prārabdha drama. That is the only intention; O Lord, I will cooperate with you in making
your drama successful. Therefore, he says I will do my dialogue properly. Inside, nothing
is considered a burden, because mithyā cannot be a burden on satya. The rope will not get
crushed under the weight of our perceived snake. The rope-snake cannot give its weight
on the rope. Similarly, no event in life is considered a burden. They continue to play the
role as an emperor like Janaka as a husband or wife, daughter or son, do all the duties and
keep moving on and don’t sit and cry. If they don’t have any freewill to accomplish a
particular puruṣārtha, then what will be direction of their life. In the case of an ajñānī, the
direction is governed by various desires and therefore, in that direction he can travel.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 921

Here, in the case of a jñānī, he does not have any other thing and hence the direction is this
prārabdha. According to the type of prārabdha karma, they lead the life to fulfill the
prārabdha. They do whatever is required by prārabdha in order to exhaust them.
Everywhere, prārabdha will give its fun. If one does not have prārabdha for sannyāsa,
however much he or she tries, it does not work. One obstacle or the other will come and it
will not permeate. Prārabdha gives āśrama, experiences, and the people also. A jñānī goes
according to that. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 132
अतिप्रसङ्गो मा शक्यः स्वकर्मवशवर्तिनाम्।
अस्तु वा के न शक्येत कर्म वारयितुं वद ॥ ७.१३२ ॥
atiprasaṅgo mā śakyaḥ svakarmavaśavartinām.
astu vā kena śakyeta karma vārayituṃ vada (7.132).
One should not suspect the possibility of involvement of the wise man in undue activities,
as he is strictly living according to duty-orientation. However, even if he is involved in
undue activities, who can nullify the impact of karma? That is, every one has to go
through the prārabdha. A jñānī does not have any puruṣārtha to be accomplished and
therefore, he need not use his freewill for the fulfillment of any particular desire. And the
various sādhanas prescribed in the Vedas also become irrelevant for him, because karma
kāṇḍa is either for the worldly benefit or for citta-śuddhi. Jñānī does not require the
worldly benefits and jñānī does not require citta-śuddhi as well, as he has already gone
through that. He also does not require śravaṇa and manana because they are meant for
jñāna which he has already acquired. Therefore, the entire Vedic sādhanas also have
become irrelevant to him. That is why they say he is vidhi-niṣedha-atīta. Sukha Maharṣi
writes the greatness of a jñānī. For a jñānī who is moving in Brahman, abiding in Brahman
where is vidhi and niṣedha since he is beyond vidhi-niṣedha. His life is governed not by
vidhi-niṣedha, not by dharma-adharma, but his own prārabdha. This can create a doubt
that if jñānī’s life is not governed by śāstra vidhi and niṣedha then a jñānī may violate
dharma-adharma and suppose he follows an adhārmic life what would happen? Such
people are known as yateṣṭha-ācāra not bound by vidhi and ācāra. A person who is an
atheist leads a life of yateṣṭha-ācāra. Jñānī also does not follow vidhi-niṣedha; will not his
life also be yateṣṭha-ācāra?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 922

For that, Vidyāraṇya answers don’t extend this discussion too much. The unwarranted
extension of this discussion is improper, even though at the superficial level a jñānī and an
atheist are both same. Jñānī is not governed by vidhi-niṣedha and atheist also does not
follow vidhi-niṣedha. Superficially, they look the same but essentially they are not the
same. Those jñānis who live according to prārabdha and those who don’t follow vidhi-
niṣedha don’t doubt of the possibility of over-extension of jñānī violating dharma. A jñānī
must have followed dharma-adharma as a sādhaka. The sādhana life is not for a day or
week. As a karma-yogī, several years or decades he must have restrained himself and
followed a dhārmic way of life. Even after taking sannyāsa, during śravaṇa-manana also
protecting sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti, he has to follow dharma-śāstra; without dharma-
śāstra, sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti will not be there. Daivī sampat is a must for sādhaka.
After following karma-yoga and jñāna-yoga after decades, it has become his vāsanā. If it
has entered the sub-conscious mind and it has become the second nature, there will not be
any change in his nature. For jñāna-niṣṭhā, it is his second nature to follow dharma and he
is incapable of violating dharma because dharma-vāsanās are so powerful. This is called
bādhita-anuvṛtti in technical Vedāntic language. It is the continuation of dharma-
adharma-vāsanās that is there in him. Śāstra gives freedom only to jñānī because śāstra is
so confident that jñānī is incapable of violating dharma-śāstra. When self-control is there,
external-control is not required. This is what we find in the case of a jñānī.
Even in an exceptional case, for arguments sake, suppose there is a violation because of
some prārabdha situation, Vidyāraṇya says even in that case the violation does not take
place willfully with deha-abhimāna. Since a jñānī does not have ahaṅkāra and mamakāra,
that action will not bring any āgāmi karma for him because of the absence of deha-
abhimāna. There is no will involved and no motive or rāga-dveṣa is involved in the jñānī’s
case and hence any karma activity will not affect the jñānī. In fact, that is what they say.
Lord Kṛṣṇa deliberately violated many dharmas just to show that jñānī will not incur pāpa
even if he violates dharma. But seeing Kṛṣṇa doing that, any other person does the same,
then it will become a violation. That is why they say do what Kṛṣṇa said but never do
what Kṛṣṇa did. Entire Kṛṣṇa’s biography shows whatever he does will not affect him. He
says let there be dharma-violation, if prārabdha warrants such violations. This none can
stop it. Who can stop such a rare event from happening in the case of such a jñānī? It may
happen rarely, but even then it will not affect either his jīvanmukti or videha-mukti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 923

śloka 132
ज्ञानिनोऽज्ञानिनश्चात्र समेऽप्यारब्धकर्मणि ।
न क्ले षो ज्ञानिनो धैर्यान्मूढः क्लिश्यत्यधैर्यतः ॥ ७.१३३ ॥
jñānino:'jñāninaścātra same:'pyārabdhakarmaṇi.
na kleṣo jñānino dhairyānmūḍhaḥ kliśyatyadhairyataḥ (7.133).
Many people come to Vedānta to avoid the problems in life because Vedānta is supposed
to give freedom from saṃsāra. They elaborately study the various portions of Vedānta
from Tattvabodha to Gītā, etc. They say jñāna is powerful enough to destroy all sañcita,
which I never knew, I never wanted to destroy and I was not bothered about āgāmi. I
came to Vedānta to solve the present janma’s problem and who knows about past and
future janma? Even now, I don’t know whether to believe or not. I wanted to solve the
current janma’s problem which is shocking. Now, at the end of the Tattvabodha, the
teacher says prārabdha will have to be experienced whether you study Vedānta or not.
Thereafter, they say prārabdha is a mixture of puṇya-pāpa. In this janma, you may be a
fine person but you might have acquired pāpas in past janma and some of them
materialize in the current janma. Therefore, puṇya-pāpa-prārabdha can bring any
situation in life and jñāna cannot stop that! If body has to live for many years, it will have
to live and if it has to be bedridden, it has to be; what all things the body has to go
through one has to go through. Then the question comes why should we study Vedānta?
What difference it makes and why could not you tell in the beginning about this?!
Vidyāraṇya says it does make a difference. The difference is not in changing the
prārabdha. That is why even after coming to Vedānta, many people do parihāra-karma
because jñāna will not help them. We can always say we are gṛhasthas and we can do
anything. Now, he asks what exactly jñāna does? For this, Vidyāraṇya says I do accept, I
do confess, that prārabdha karma is the same for both ajñānīs and jñānis. In sañcita karma,
there is a difference. In one, it is gone and it has not gone in another. Āgāmi also ajñānī
acquires while jñānī does not acquire. Jñānī’s prārabdha karma and ajñānī prārabdha
karma is twofold. There are two groups of prārabdha karma. He says jñāna gives strength
to the mind therefore, the way your receive the prārabdha and the way you react to
prārabdha that can be changed. Jñāna can change it. Your will can change it. Therefore, he
says jñāna gives decreased FIR and increased Triple C calmness, cheerfulness and courage

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 924

or confidence; these three positive benefits and also FIR-reduction, this is change in the
mind caused by jñāna. Jñāna has the power to give immunity. Jñāna-inoculation gives
immunity and here, Vidyāraṇya says jñānī has the courage and objectivity with regards to
his own ahaṅkāra. He can keep ahaṅkāra outside and look at it objectively, remaining as
śākṣī which an ajñānī cannot. Śākṣī of Vedānta we know or we are supposed to know. As
śākṣī, when we look at it objectivity comes. In objectivity, reaction comes down. Also,
there is mithyātva-niścaya. All the practice is through nididhyāsana. Because of satya-
śākṣī-jñāna, there is a tremendous mental strength. The experience remains the same, but
the pain becomes insignificant not worth talking about it too much. Because of the lack of
courage due to the absence of knowledge and because the mind is weak, ajñānī overreacts
to every situation.

śloka 134
मार्गे गन्त्रोर्द्वयोः श्रान्तौ समायामप्यदूरताम्।
जानन्धैर्याद्द्रुतं गच्छेदन्यस्तिष्ठति दीनधीः ॥ ७.१३४॥
mārge gantrordvayoḥ śrāntau samāyāmapyadūratām.
jānandhairyāddrutaṃ gacchedanyastiṣṭhati dīnadhīḥ (7.134).
Of the two persons walking the same path and tired equally, the one who knows the
nearness of the goal walks fast with perseverance to reach the destination, while the other
not knowing the nearness of the destination and lacking perseverance, halts on the way
before reaching goal. This is the literal meaning of the śloka. The few decades of life one
has to go through, how does one person look at it? Does it appear as a problem that I have
to go through the rest of life or it does not appear a burden? Here, also knowledge makes a
difference. Vidyāraṇya says in the case of a jñānī because of the objectivity he looks at the
ahaṅkāra objectively, as he has understood the ahaṅkāra has gone through millions of
janmas and compared to the millions janmas, one janma itself is short. Even in the present
life, what is left out is short; therefore, it does not appear to be a burden at all. When a
person who does not have the wisdom, who looks at life only from the present janma
standpoint, then he thinks of old age. The very thought of old age creates worry. If he sees
a few old people going through varieties of situations, he is anxious: how my life would be
in my old age! When we look at individual life from individual-standpoint, it is
overwhelming. But when you look at it from śākṣī-standpoint, the ahaṅkāra has gone

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 925

through several janmas, it has to go through this janma also and it does not appear to be
burdensome. Therefore, he says looking at it objectively; he knows it has to be gone
through and he is aware that the resistance in the form of worry will not change
prārabdha, having understood it objectively.
Looking at it from the standpoint of infinite janmas, this person is not worried about
prārabdha. He is not worried about the duration of life as well. All these thoughts occupy
the mind seriously in the case of an ajñānī, but it is not so in the case of a jñānī, due to the
strength of knowledge and also because of the knowledge that ahaṅkāra is mithyā.
Because of his mental courage, the day flies for him while for an ajñānī the day drags.
When you are happy, time flies and when you are unhappy, time drags. With a miserable
mind, disturbed mind, unhappy mind, depressed mind, dreaming mind, he does not even
walk. Other one is running and this person, he does not even walk! He sits wth both hands
on his head. Imagine two people walking towards Kedarnath or Amarnath. For one
person, this is the first time and therefore, he does not know what is the distance he has to
go, and how much he has to walk. However, the other person who has thoroughly
understood, knows the distance and even though both of them have to cover the same
distance, one of them who has the knowledge is not disturbed because he knows how
much more there is to cover. Even though the last short stretch which is the final lap is the
same for both the individuals, the wise person knows it is the final lap while the other
person does not know that it is the final lap. The physical tiredness is the same for both.
With regard to the path, the knowledgeable person knows that this is the final lap
compared to the long distance he had travelled. Therefore, he does not feel the tiredness
and in fact he is overjoyed having reached the last lap and he walks faster instead.
Whereas the other one, who is dead tired, and who does not know how long more he has
to travel, he stands without travelling. Similarly, the wise person knows that this life is the
final life because there is videha-mukti at the end of this journey, but the other person
does not know how many janmas more have to be taken; therefore, he is worried. Neither
the experiences disturb nor the length of life disturbs a jñānī. More in the next class.

Class 195
śloka 134 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 926

Vidyāraṇya talks about nididhyāsana as a means of removing viparīta-bhāvanā. While

going through nididhyāsana sādhana, Vidyāraṇya said a jñānī’s lifestyle is governed by
prārabdha karma because he does not have any purushsartha to be accomplished, he need
not use his freewill and he need not do any particular sādhana to attain his goal.
Naturally, the question comes: does jñānī have prārabdha karma? Will not jñāna destroy
all his karma including prārabdha? For that, we give the answer: jñāna destroys sañcita
karma and avoids āgāmi karma, but jñāna and prārabdha are friendly and therefore, jñāna
does not destroy prārabdha. I told you why jñāna is friendly to prārabdha because jñāna is
very grateful that prārabdha has given manuṣyatva the prārabdha itself has given all the
Guru and all the conducive circumstances because of the prārabdha alone this set up is
conducive for spiritual pursuit. Therefore, if jñāna arose it is because of the cooperation of
prārabdha. Therefore, jñāna calls prārabdha and tells you can continue to survive.
Anyway after exhaustion you will disappear therefore, prārabdha is there for a jñānī also.
By saying for a jñānī also we mean of course ajñānī has prārabdha. Suppose I say jñānī has
prārabdha, others may conclude that ajñānī does not have prārabdha! Therefore, we
should note jñānī as also ajñānī have prārabdha. Naturally, the question comes up: if both
go through prārabdha what is the difference that is brought by jñāna? For that,
Vidyāraṇya says there is a total difference of attitude; the first difference is that ajñāni-
prārabdha is satya therefore, the problems are also satya, whereas jñānī looks upon
prārabdha as well as problems generated by prārabdha, both, as mithyā. Therefore, the
intensity of reaction is far less; frequency, intensity and recovery [FIR] is very very low.
This is one difference.
Vidyāraṇya mentions another difference that jñānī knows that this is his final prārabdha.
There is no question of next bunch of prārabdha coming because next bunch of prārabdha
should come from past sañcita alone. That alone gives rise to punarapi jananm. For an
ajñānī, the present prārabdha is not the final prārabdha; it is only an intermediary one.
After completion, another bunch of prārabdha will come and he will take a new birth and
his journey is continuous. Ajñānī does not know whether it is going to end, when it is
going to end and therefore, he feels the tiredness of the life’s journey as overwhelming. He
is like an ‘endless desert’s middle’. I don’t know in which direction to travel and how
long, whereas in the case of a jñānī, this is not an intermediary prārabdha, but this is the
final prārabdha with which the journey is over. The Jīvātmā or ahaṅkāra merges into

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 927

Īśvara and therefore, home of mokṣa is not far away. Because of this enthusiasm, the home
has come. For jñānī, current janma is Basin Bridge and therefore, this is the final prārabdha
and he does not bother. Suppose someone asks how do I know that this is the final
prārabdha? Will Bhagavān send a notice to the jñānī that this is final prārabdha? No
messge from Bhagavān is necessary or required as once I claim nitya-mukti firmly, I am
not bothered about jīvanmukti and videha-mukti both of which are vyavahāras. Only
when I don’t claim my nitya-mukti firmly, then there is an eagerness for jīvanmukti and
videha-mukti. The beauty is when I am no more eager for videha-mukti, videha-mukti
comes.
Videha-mukti means that the sūkṣma-śarīra does not travel after death any more, because
Videhamukta does not have any more prārabdha to take rebirth. His whole body, both
sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra, merges with pañca-bhūtas after death. The mithyā
sūkṣma-śarīra travels not. If I know nitya-mukta Ātmā is only satya, I don’t bother about
the sūkṣma-śarīra’s further travel or not and when my attachment to sūkṣma-śarīra goes,
my botheration about its further travel or not goes away. Then videha-mukti is definite.
Videha-mukti is definite when you are not bothered about videha-mukti! How are you not
bothered about videha-mukti? It is by claiming nitya-mukti of my svarūpa Ātmā;
therefore, every nitya-mukta jñānī is definite about his videha-mukti and even if someone
creates a doubt, he says does not matter either way.
Therefore, he said by giving an example in the śloka 134. Suppose there is equal tiredness
for two people who are travelling on the road, even though the physical tiredness is equal,
imagine one person knows that the home is just after one furlong. Just around the corner,
the home is there; one person knows so. Imagine the other person does not know that. In
addition to the physical tiredness, there is mental anxiety and because of the anxiety, the
tiredness is felt more intensely. Whereas the other person is also equally tired, but he
smiles because he knows he is at Basin Bridge (some local area); in just another hundred
metres more, he has the knowledge that the end of the journey has come, whereas the
other does not have that knowledge. For ajñānī, the journey’s end is not known but for a
jñānī, there is this knowledge. The wise person knows that videha-mukti is not far off.
Therefore, the absence of distance of the videha-mukti destination, this Jīvanmukta jñānī
knows. That very knowledge gives him extra enthusiasm. He happily exhausts even his
difficult prārabdha. The whole śloka is an example. That person walks faster, whereas the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 928

other person who does not know how many more kms are there, is distressed in his mind
and walks slow and sometimes, not even walking, he stands there overwhelmed by the
burden of journey. Thus, prārabdha being similar, the responses are different between
jñānī and ajñānī.
With this, nididhyāsana topic is also over. With this, pratibandha-nivṛtti topic is over. This
started from śloka 97. Now, before going further, we have to take stock of the whole
situation and see where do we stand in the seventh chapter. It is a long journey. Now, the
7th chapter of Pañcadaśī is a commentary upon the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra we
said. He is commenting upon the first line of the mantra kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram
anusaṃjvaret. The commentary on the mantra is over. In this commentary, three main
ideals he discusses; that also we must remember so that we continue further. One idea he
conveys is that every Jīva goes through seven avasthās from saṃsāra to mokṣa. He has
seven stages or seven stations before gaining mokṣa. He enumerated this from śloka 33 to
134. The seven avasthās are ajñāna [ignorance]; āvaraṇa [self concealment]; vikṣepa [false
projection]; parokṣa jñāna [indirect knowledge] aparokṣa jñāna [the direct knowledge]
śoka-nivṛtti [freedom from sorrow] and tṛpti [attainment of fulfillment] that the Jīva has to
go through on his journey from saṃsāra to mokṣa. Vidyāraṇya has elaborately discussed it
with the 10th man’s story as an example. The second idea he conveyed is of these seven
stages, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad talks of two stages only, namely the 5th [aparokṣa
jñāna] and 6th stages [śoka-nivṛtti]. This idea Vidyāraṇya mentions in śloka 47 to 51. Of
these two stages, the first half of the mantra deals with stage 5 and the second half of the
mantra [Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad] deals with stage 6. The second half deals with stage 6
which is śoka-nivṛtti.
The third idea is since the first half of the mantra deals with aparokṣa jñāna, Vidyāraṇya
thoroughly talks all about aparokṣa jñāna. Mahā-vākya-jñāna alone gives aparokṣa jñāna.
After giving the means for aparokṣa jñāna, Vidyāraṇya talks about the removal of all the
obstacles, one takes to the study of brahma-vidyā to gain aparokṣa jñāna. The obstacles are
there between jñāna and jñāna-phala also. After gaining knowledge, I fail to claim that I
am nitya-mukta. There are some obstacles inside and some do not claim to be nitya-
mukta. śravaṇa removes the interpretational obstacle; manana removes logical obstacle;
and nididhyāsana removes the emotional obstacle. One is mīmāṃsā-centred and the other

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 929

is logic-centred. These stand between my understanding and freedom. This is done

through śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana.
These are the main topics discussed up to śloka 134. With 134, the commentary upon the
first line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra is over. Hereafter, we will enter into the
commentary of the second line of the same Upaniṣad of the same mantra. The second line
talks about 6th stage which is śoka-nivṛtti.

śloka 135
साक्षात्कृ तात्मधीः सम्यगविपर्ययबाधितः ।
किमिच्छन्कस्य कामाय शरीरमनुसंज्वरेत्॥ ७.१३५ ॥
sākṣātkṛtātmadhīḥ samyagaviparyayabādhitaḥ.
kimicchankasya kāmāya śarīramanusaṃjvaret (7.135).
From this śloka 135, Vidyāraṇya begins his commentary on the second line, elaborating
the process of śoka-nivṛtti and this will go up to the śloka 250. He introduces that in this
śloka: there is a person who has gone through the first five stages and has become an
aparokṣa jñānī. To him, Ātmā is directly known as I am. The knowledge through which
Ātmā is directly ‘known’ is ‘I am’. One who has aparokṣa jñāna through mahā-vākya-
vicāra is known as a jñānī. His knowledge is not obstructed by any problem. Normally, we
have an interpretational problem, logical problem and emotional problem. Mīmāṃsā-
obstacles are called interpretational problems. We have other two problems viz., logical
problems and emotional problems. Through śravaṇa and manana he has overcome
interpretational and logical problems and also aviparyayabādhita. He is no more
obstructed by viparīta-bhāvanā, the third obstacle also. Viparyaya means habitual worries,
in which we are all niṣṭhas, either about ourselves or about our family. These obstacles are
over for a jñānī. Such a jñānī is free all forms of grief as mentioned in the second line of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Incidentally, you must remember that he comments on
the line kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram anusaṃjvaret.

śloka 136
जगन्मिथ्यात्वधीभावादाक्षिप्तौ काम्यकामुकौ ।
तयोरभावे सन्तापः शाम्येन्निःस्नेहदीपवत्॥ ७.१३६ ॥
jaganmithyātvadhībhāvādākṣiptau kāmyakāmukau.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 930

tayorabhāve santāpaḥ śāmyenniḥsnehadīpavat (7.136).

The Upaniṣad negates sorrow for a jñānī by an indirect method of communication. In the
second line, the Upaniṣad negates sorrow for a jñānī but it does not do it directly.
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad does not directly negate sorrow for jñānī but it does it indirectly.
This Vidyāraṇya will discuss elaborately. The Upaniṣad says once a person gains aparokṣa
jñāna, his dṛṣṭi or vision is always in absolute reality, Brahman, the pāramārthika-satya.
When the wise person looks from pāramārthika dṛṣṭi, then the entire vyāvahārika
prapañca gets falsified, just as the dream gets falsified on waking up to vyāvahārika-satya.
The only difference between waking up and jñāna is on waking up the dream world gets
falsified and dream world disappears also, whereas on spiritual awakening, this world
gets falsified but never disappears. With regard to disappearance, the example should not
be extended. The example only conveys the dream world as also waking world are false.
The dream world disappears while the waking world does not disappear for a jñānī.
There, the example should not be extended. Remembering the dream example, we say that
the world is falsified.

Then therefore, only all the tripuṭīs get falsified. All tripuṭīs used for vyavahāra gets
falsified. Tripuṭī in this context is subject, object and their link, the seer, seen and the sight;
hearer, heard and hearing; doer, object and the doing; this triad is called tripuṭī. The whole
world consisting of all tripuṭīs gets falsified. Therefore, the Upaniṣad says the tripuṭī called
bhoktā, bhogya and bhoga also is falsified. Jñāna falsifies the world; therefore, jñāna
falsifies the tripuṭīs and therefore, jñāna falsifies bhoktā, bhogya and bhoga. Enjoyer,
ahaṅkāra who enjoys worldly pleasures is called bhoktā. Bhoktā is the name of ahaṅkāra
which wants to enjoy the worldly pleasures. Bhogya is the object of the world which is
enjoyed or which is sought after by the bhoktā. The job of bhoktā is to run after bhogya.
Anyone who is a bhoktā, a hungry bhoktā enters into a ‘mess’. The bhoktā is running after
bhogya all the time. The experiencer runs after the objects of experience for getting the
bhoga, the enjoyment or the pleasure. In the case of a jñānī, in one stroke “bhoktā, bhogya
and bhoga” tripuṭī is falsified; therefore, jñānī is free from bhoga-icchā. There is no
passion, there is no struggle to run after mithyā pleasures of the world. Therefore, tripuṭī-
nivṛtti leads to icchā-nivṛtti or kāma-nivṛtti. This alone Īśvara tells in Gītā. Kṛṣṇa conveys
the idea directly as kāma-nivṛtti, whereas the Upaniṣad goes in a roundabout way. He

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 931

sees bhoktā, bhogya and bhoga, all of them as false. Therefore, kāma-abhāva or kāma-
nivṛtti takes place. The world is falsified; tripuṭī is falsified; bhoktā-bhoga-bhogya
falsified. Therefore, kāma is falsified. And once all the desires are falsified, he need not
struggle to fulfill those desires. He need not struggle with the body, performing various
karmas and working all the time. Therefore, struggle-nivṛtti, sarva-prayatna-nivṛtti.
Therefore, one gets śoka-nivṛtti. Neither the struggle nor, therefore, the disappointment
also. With the struggle gone, the disappointment also goes away.
Vidyāraṇya divides the second line into three portions. Kim icchan what objects the jñānī
desire? This portion negates all the objects of pleasure because jñānī sees all of them as
mithyā. Kim icchan negates bhogya. Bhogya-niṣedha. This is the direction. Vidyāraṇya
will deal with it very elaborately. I give the road map. One of the tripuṭī goes. Kasya
kāmāya; for the pleasure of which bhoga, jñānī should work? Through this question the
Upaniṣad says there is no more bhoktā which also is being negated by jñānī. Once bhoktā
and bhogya are negated by implication all the bhoga-icchā all the desires for sensory
pleasures are also negated. Bhoga-icchā-niṣedha, bhoga-kāma-niṣedha by implication, that
is understood. Then comes the final part śarīram anusaṃjvaret. All the struggles through
the body for the fulfillment of various bhoga kāma are also not there. Therefore, sarva-
śoka-nivṛtti. This is the topic.
Of these three, kim icchan is being commented from śloka 135 to 191. He desires to write
so much on desirelessness. He wants or desires to write so much on desirelessness. The
jñānī has the knowledge of the false nature of the universe or the unreality of the universe.
It is existent all the time even during vyavahāra as also in the sub-conscious mind also. It
is well-entrenched in his mind. It is like having Rs. 500 fake note. I will take it if it is
genuine currency, or even if it is a fake currency and I don’t know that. However, imagine
it is a fake currency and I know it is fake, why should run after that then? Therefore, he
says because the knowledge is alive in his mind all the time, kāmya kāmyakāmukau
ākṣiptau. Bhoktā the desirer, the bhogya the desired both of them are falsified. Once
bhoktā and bhogya are negated, when two of them are not there, bhoga-pravṛtti goes
away. Therefore, all the struggles of life end and he says santāpaḥ śāmyet. All the pains of
life recede. They all die down. All forms of pains in life die down. Remember when we say
he does not have any desire for bhogya, don’t imagine only concrete objects like food,
clothing, etc., any expectation from a family member is also a bhogya. Any expectation

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 932

that I will be happy only when he e-mails is also considered as bhogya vastu. When it is
not there, I get depressed. That is also bhoktṛ-bhogya. Here bhogya is not a concrete entity
but even an enquiry I expect from people. If I get cold today, tomorrow I want everybody
to ask me “how are you and how your cold position is?” If no one enquires, I get upset. All
the subtlest bhogya, expecting love from others, expecting care from others is included
here; we have no right to expect. Any expectation is a potential time-bomb. It is so because
it can shock me. Jñānī is happy when he is enquired or even not enquired of. He thinks he
saves time in the process. More in the next class.

Class 196
śloka 136 contd.
After elaborately explaining the first line of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra which
talks about Ātmā aparokṣa jñāna, Vidyāraṇya has come to the second half of the mantra
which talks about jñāna-phala in the form of śoka-nivṛtti. Jñāna is in the first line; and
jñāna-phala-rūpa śoka-nivṛtti is in the second line. When we take the grand picture, you
should remember jñāna and śoka-nivṛtti happened to be stage five and stage six of Jīva’s
journey. The stage seven will be defined as tṛpti or the total fulfillment. It is not mentioned
in the śloka. But it is implied in the śloka. This implication of tṛpti will be discussed later
by Vidyāraṇya himself. The chapter will be concluded with tṛpti, the seventh stage. That is
why the chapter is called tṛpti-dīpa. He introduced the commentary in the śloka number
135. He first takes up kim icchan for explanation. He points out that the word kim icchan
what sense-object will a jñānī desire. Here the word kim is not praśna-arthe it is not a
question but it is a statement of fact that he does not desire any sense-objects. This is the
meaning of the word kim icchan. Vidyāraṇya adds through this expression, the Śruti
negates the bhogya prapañca. Here, negation means falsification. When Advaita Brahman
is recognized, the entire dvaita prapañca is negated. Therefore, all the tripuṭīs are negated.
Along with the other tripuṭīs, bhoktā, bhogya and bhoga, this triad also will go away. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 933

Śruti focuses upon the bhoktā- bhogya-bhoga tripuṭī. Of this also, the first one taken up for
discussion is bhogya-niṣedha.
Why does a jñānī not like or run after bhogya vastu? Having known it is mithyā, a jñānī
will not run after that, because nobody will run after a fake material. Therefore, he said
jaganmithyātvadhībhāvād. Jñānī knows well the knowledge of jagan-mithyātva. Vedāntic
meditation should include both as aspects of Brahma satyam and jagan-mithyā. Ātmā-
satyatva meditation alone is not enough. In fact, as important or more is that in which
family is also included in mithyā prapañca and our own body-mind-complex also is
included in mithyā prapañca, that dhyāna is most important. If jagan-mithyātva-dhyāna is
lacking ahaṃ brahma asmi will continue and family worry also will successfully coexist;
that is another glory of Māyā! If worry is not to coexist in knowledge, mithyātva-
knowledge is also important. This is also entrenched in the Jñānī’s mind. Because of the
niṣṭhā in jagan-mithyātva, what happens? The definition of bhoktā is cidābhāsa and
ahaṅkāra. Both are equally unreal. Cit alone is real. It is neither bhoktā nor bhogya.
Therefore, bhoktṛ-bhogya-vilakṣaṇa cit-rūpa I am. When both of them are absent, when
the world is no more bhogya for me, then it is no more capable of binding me. When an
object exists by itself, it is called a padārtha and it does not have the capacity to bind me.
Yet, the moment I develop either rāga or dveṣa towards the object, it becomes capable of
giving me happiness and unhappiness. An object of attachment disturbs me when it goes
away from me and an object of attachment disturbs me when it comes towards me. Every
bhogya viṣaya can disturb me either by arrival and departure. As long as I am a bhoktā,
there will be bhogya and as long as there is bhogya, I will be disturbed by them. Who is
responsible for that? I cannot say bhogya prapañca is responsible. My own rāga-dveṣa
alone empowers the world. Every ajñānī empowers the world to disturb him. Then, he
says: the world disturbs me. Jñānī’s first job is that he takes off rāga-dveṣa by seeing the
world with mithyātva-darśana. I cannot have rāga-dveṣa towards mithyā which is like the
fake silver. I know fake silver is a shell. The fake snake I cannot run away from because it
is fake. Mithyā rajata is an example for rāga and mithyā sarpa is an example for dveṣa.
Once I know mithyātva of rajata and sarpa, there is neither rāga nor dveṣa. This is the
deflating the world, defanging the cobra. First, remove the poison and thereafter, the
world is an ornament and even, family is an ornament.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 934

One need not take physical sannyāsa after jñāna; after defanging the family, the family
also can be an ornament as it was for Janaka. Then, he will have no more problem because
he has dis-empowered the world. The habitual worries will go only slowly. No habit can
disappear suddenly. It goes gradually only if one is alert and careful. Up to this, we saw in
the last class. Now, he gives an example in this context.nIt is like a flame which does not
have the support of oil. When the oil is depleted, what happens to the flame of the lamp?
It gradually it goes out. Here, dīpa is an example for sorrow. Dīpa will be extinguished
means that śoka will be extinguished gradually.

śloka 137
गन्धर्वपत्तने किंचिन्नैन्द्रजालिकनिर्मितम्।
जानन्कामयते किन्तु जिहासति हसन्निदम्॥ ७.१३७ ॥
gandharvapattane kiṃcinnaindrajālikanirmitam.
jānan kāmayate kintu jihāsati hasannidam (7.137).
Vidyāraṇya gives an example to show that one will not have icchā for a mithyā vastu.
Imagine a person is looking for a house either for rent or buying. Someone says that a new
city has developed and many houses are there. This person is curious to know as to what
it is. It is gandharvapattana, which is a śāstric name to indicate a fake city like the
formation of the clouds in the evening sky. You can visualize anything in the cloud.
Sometimes the clouds look like a pattana. Since it is in the sky, it belongs to the Devatās
only. Therefore, it is called city of celestials hanging in the sky. Suppose the person buys or
rents a house in gandharvapattana, how it will work? Who will buy any house there in the
sky! He drops buying the house on knowing about the gandharvapattana being a fake
city. Nobody will be seriously interested in a fake thing; that is the essence of this
statement. This is the example. Now, he wants to say that for a jñānī from pāramārthika-
dṛṣṭi, the whole universe is a shell-silver. It is mithyā.

śloka 138
आपातरमणीयेषु भोगेष्वेवं विचारवान्।
नानुरज्जति किन्त्वेतान्दोषदृष्ट्या जिहासति ॥ ७.१३८ ॥
āpātaramaṇīyeṣu bhogeṣvevaṃ vicāravān.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 935

nānurajjati kintvetān doṣadṛṣṭyā jihāsati (7.138).

From dṛṣṭānta, Vidyāraṇya comes to the world itself. Here the word bhoga means the
entire bhogya prapañca. The entire universe is āpātaramaṇa which is very attractive
superficially. Vidyāraṇya accepts the superficial beauty is there like a fake gold or a fake
diamond which certainly looks like real and it has the capacity; therefore, he says
superficial beauty is accepted but vicāravān jñānī has a different perceptive whereby he
does not look at anything superficially. He has trained his mind to study everything
properly. Right from the first level of sādhana or karma-yoga level itself, enquiry should
become my second nature. I should not fall for the gimmicks and the sale-concessions
given by Miss Māyā Devī. The whole set of people fall for goods and that is called
marketing. It was originally started by Māyā Devī. She is the greatest saleswoman of the
whole world of the earliest times. Jñānī refuses to buy the products of Māyā Devī. He
enquires into that. Once he makes an enquiry, he comes to know of the secret of the
products of the universe marketed by Māyā Devī. He never gets attracted to those goods.
Jñānī cannot physically renounce the world as he needs world to survive. He never rejects
the object but never allows the goods to empower the fake objects. If you don’t empower
them, you never gets disturbed by the world objects. Its presence and absence do not make
any difference to the jñānī. A jñānī will continue to use it with so, then the world is
harmless. Dis-empower and use the world and then you need not run away from the
world. He does not get attached to them. On the other hand, he refuses to get emotionally
hooked to the world and worldly objects. He gives up emotional dependence on them. He
does not physically throw the objects. Giving up in this context is giving up the emotional
dependence on the products. After that it is harmless. Generally, in Kerala, when they cut
the jackfruits which has some sticky substance, if you don’t know how to handle, you had
it. Generally, to remove that we use one hand and all over you get stuck with the milky
substance. You cannot renounce the jackfruit. Therefore, what are we to do? You need not
renounce. Apply oil in your hand. After oil enters into that, nothing will happen. That is
called dis-empowerment and detachment.

śloka 139
अर्थानामर्जने क्ले शस्तथैव परिरक्षणे ।
नाशे दुःखं व्यये दुःखं धिगर्थान्क्ले शकारिणः ॥ ७.१३९ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 936

arthānāmarjane kleśastathaiva parirakṣaṇe.

nāśe duḥkhaṃ vyaye duḥkhaṃ dhigarthānkleśakāriṇaḥ (7.139).
Here, Vidyāraṇya explains doṣa-darśana. Already one doṣa he has highlighted. Mithyātva
is the basic doṣa which he has already commented upon. It does not have any
substantiality of its own. According to Vedānta, there is only one substance which is
nothing but Brahman. Other than Brahman, everything is nothing but nāma-rūpa.
Therefore, the world is mistake number one. The second doṣa he comments upon in these
two ślokas. That doṣa is even while it appears to be sukha-hetu, the cause of happiness; it
has another side also. It is equally the cause of sorrow as well. It is as much or more a
cause of pain, than a cause of happiness. Vedānta goes one step further and even when
something serves as a cause of happiness, really speaking, it does generate happiness, but
it only helps bringing out my own happiness by serving as a mirror. Look at the mirror
and see your beautiful face. The gloss belongs to the mirror. The frame belongs to the
mirror. However, the beautiful face does not belong to the mirror. It only appears in the
mirror, but it is not located there. It comes from my own face and it is my own reflection.
Even the temporary joy something gives is not its own but it borrows from me and lends
me. Rather it sells it to me. You borrow a thing from me and sell it to me. Similarly, the
sense-objects reflect my happiness only but get all the credit and we fall for that. Really
speaking it is a source of pain alone.
Acquisition of property is only a pain. After acquisition, maintenance is either equal or
more pain because anyone you engage will assist for two days or three days and then he
will take leave without taking any permission. You cannot scold also. Any maintenance
requires all the paraphernalia and alternatively, however much we maintain, ultimately it
will have to go away since nothing is permanent. If you maintain well, it will have a
longer life but not eternal life. We spend the money to purchase something for our
happiness, but what happens whenever we look at the object is that instead of enjoying
the object, the amount we have spent alone comes before our mind. Rather it torments our
mind. Therefore, the jñānī says all the properties really require only condemnation, not
glorification. Of course, we should be careful; Vidyāraṇya only condemns the
empowerment of the objects. Vidyāraṇya or Veda śāstra is never against using or handling
objects, because life is impossible without using or handling the worldly objects. What he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 937

condemns is the emotional dependence on them. This is with regard to inert objects. Now
hereafter he wants to talk about attachment to people.

śloka 140
मांसपाञ्चातिकायास्तु यन्त्रलोलेऽङ्गपञ्जरे ।
स्नाय्वस्थिग्रन्थिशालिन्याः स्त्रियाः किमिव शोभनम्॥ ७..१४० ॥
māṃsapāñcātikāyāstu yantralole:'ṅgapañjare.
snāyvasthigranthiśālinyāḥ striyāḥ kimiva śobhanam (7.140).
Now, he comes to attachment of cetana vastu that can be any person or any animal. The
very word pet indicates attachment. With regard to that also, he says that the jñānī does
not fall, because of the superficial attraction or beauty. Therefore, attachment to the
physical body he accepts; certain bodies are beautiful. That is why we have Mr. universe
or Miss universe. The superficial beauty is there in the physical body but only as long as
you don’t probe beyond the skin. The skin is a beautiful cover-up. Beyond the cover if you
see, you will not fall for any physical body. It is the description of śarīra. Aṅga-pañjara
means it is a body-cabinet or a body-cage. We can roughly translate it as a physical
structure. Every physical body is nothing but a physical structure which is highly active
like a machine. An active machine is the physical body. What is the great beauty or
attraction behind the skin and within the body? If you probe into that, Vidyāraṇya says
either you must know or else I will describe. It belongs to a person or any person who is
nothing but a doll or a statue made of flesh. The flesh-doll is constituted of muscle, bone,
glands or joints, blood and so on. This is the composition of the physical body. Of the
physical body which has the physical bone and structure, what extra-ordinary beauty or
goodness is there because of which you get attached to that? What is worthwhile there to
get attached?
It is a wonderful thing to use as a means for spiritual growth. Vedānta admires the body
because the body alone has a brain, jñānendriya, karmendriya, etc. It is a wonderful
sādhana to use a medium before it disintegrates and dies. Therefore, I have to hold on to it
as long as it functions which is going to be a limited period. Therefore, you sit for a limited
duration but never hold on to it; holding on to it is treating it as an end or sādhya. Dehe
sādhana-buddhi is viveka, looking at the body as a temporary means is intelligence.
Looking at it as something to hold on to permanently is foolishness. Therefore, kim iva

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 938

śobhanam means what beauty is there in the body! Here, he has used the word striyāḥ. It
represents both male and female, not only human male and female but all śarīra. Stri is a
representative word and it should represent any physical body. There is nothing worth in
the body.

śloka 141
एवमादिषु शास्त्रेषु दोषाः सम्यक्प्रपञ्चिताः ।
विमृशन्ननिशन्तानि कथं दुःखेषु मज्जति ॥ ७.१४१ ॥
evamādiṣu śāstreṣu doṣāḥ samyakprapañcitāḥ.
vimṛśannaniśantāni kathaṃ duḥkheṣu majjati (7.141).
A jñānī, as a part of nididhyāsana, intensely assimilates the truth of anātmā. Therefore,
there are no chances for a jñānī to fall into any one of these pits. Incidentally, the previous
śloka is a quotation from Yoga-vāsiṣṭha’s Vairāgya-prakaraṇa 21.1. Vedānta often
describes the doṣas of anātmā, the world and the body, etc. When we read that repeatedly,
unknowingly, the doṣa-darśana may lead to hatred also. It may create a negative attitude,
disgust, etc. All these are unhealthy. Disgust towards the world or the body, Vedānta
never approves. Hatred also Vedānta never approves. Once the doṣa-darśana leads to
hatred, you have to see the very same doṣas have certain guṇa also. Guṇa-darśana you
have to do to balance the disgust and hatred. They say that the body is the temple, hṛdaya
is the sanctum and Ātmā is the Lord residing here. How can you hate this temple? This
has been amply defined in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad and Bhagavadgītā. You should see the
divinity of the body. But now allow to develop attachment and when attachment comes it
is doṣa-darśana. When guṇa comes it is guṇa-darśana. You should transcend both
attachment and hatred and you should keep on moving between guṇa darśana and doṣa-
darśana. Ultimately, the body is the body. Hate it never. Be not attached to it. Bhagavān
has given it to get something done. This is matured attitude. Therefore, we should be very
careful. Don’t be attached to the body and don’t hate it also. It is beautiful. All what is said
here is the truth and it is not an exaggeration. How can jñānī fall into the pit of attachment
and sorrow! He will not. A jñānī will never fall into such a pit of attachment and sorrow.
More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 939

Class 197
śloka 141 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has entered into the second line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra kim
icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram anusaṃjvaret. He has taken up the first words kim icchan
which deal with the topic of jñāna-phala. Kim icchan literally means what desire does a
jñānī have. This is not a question but it is an assertive answer. It means jñānī does not have
any desire at all towards the worldly objects and persons. icchā-niṣedha and icchā-nāśaḥ
or kāma-nāśa is the benefit as it is said in the sthitaprājña portion prajahāti yadā kāmān
sarvān pārtha manogatān. Kāma-prahana is the phala. Why a jñānī does not have kāma?
Several reasons can be given. One reason is that jñānī has a fulfillment in himself and
therefore, there is no requirement for anything to give him security, peace or happiness.
What people expect from sense-objects, he already has discovered within himself. That is
why Kṛṣṇa said ātmani eva atmanaḥ tuṣṭaḥ. First reason is that he has self fulfillment or
adequacy. It has not been said by Vidyāraṇya here, but we have to remember that. The
second reason which Vidyāraṇya mentions here is that the jñānī knows the mithyātva of
the external world and therefore, its incapacity to give anyone of these three. How can
mirage water remove the thirst of the people? The mirage water does not have the
capacity to give fulfillment. Similarly, the entire universe being mithyā, it cannot provide
peace security and happiness. Therefore, the second reason is jagan-mithyātva-darśanat.
The third reason is that already he has practiced sādhana even before gaining jñāna. He
got Ātmā-pūrṇatva-prapti even before gaining jagan-mithyātva-darśana; even before the
Vedāntic study, at the time acquisition of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti itself, he has
practiced this discipline. The discipline is viṣayeṣu doṣa-darśana. Through viveka he has
practiced doṣa-darśana and because of doṣa-darśana alone, he has developed vairāgya. In
Sādhana-pañcaka it is said that there are three doṣas:
1. one is duḥkha-miśritatva; gives pain mixed pleasure;
2. the second one is atṛpti-karatva; they cannot give total fulfillment they will create
more and more addiction;
3. the third one is bandhakatva; which means they are dependence-causing like
alcohol or sleeping pills. They are dependence-causing substances.
These three doṣas he has practiced seeing even during karma-yoga-kāla itself. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says that the habit of doṣa-darśana continues even after the jñāna-yoga. He

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 940

will renounce many other things, but this doṣa-darśana habit he does not give up.
Therefore, how he looks at doṣas was described in śloka 139 and 140 ibid. Because of the
three reasons jñānī cannot have viṣaya-icchā. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said in śloka 141
evamādiṣu śāstreṣu doṣāḥ samyak prapañcitāḥ, the doṣas of sense-objects have been
clearly and elaborately mentioned in several śāstrsa. In Sarva-vedānta-siddhanta-sāra-
saṅgraha, it is clearly stated; also refer to Vivekacūḍāmaṇi, etc. In the Purāṇas also, they
are brilliantly described. We have to see along the lines of śāstra. If we put them under
śāstra microscope, all the doṣas will be very clearly discernable. Such a jñānī who is in
touch with śāstra will never be affected in sense-desires; so concludes Vidyāraṇya. In this
context, pain refers to viṣaya-icchā or viṣaya-kāma. Jñānī will not fall into the sense-objects
trap. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 142
क्षुधया पीड्यमानोऽपि न विषं ह्यत्तुमिच्छति ।
मिष्टान्नध्वस्ततृड्जानन्नामूढस्तज्जिघत्सति ॥ ७.१४२ ॥
kṣudhayā pīḍyamāno:'pi na viṣaṃ hyattumicchati.
miṣṭānnadhvastatṛḍjānannāmūḍhastajjighatsati (7.142).
This is a śloka taken from Upadeśa-sāhasrī 18.232. Here, he gives a beautiful example to
show how a jñānī will not be trapped by a sense-object. Suppose there is some food on a
plate. This person is extremely hungry. He is afflicted by intense hunger. Naturally, his
tendency will be to pounce and swallow the food immediately as he is extremely hungry.
Suppose someone comes and tells him that the food is well-cooked but potassium cyanide
is mixed with food. Once he knows it is mixed with poison, however hungry he might be,
he will never touch that food. Once in a moment a thought may come, let me swallow and
quench my hunger. Even a hungry person cannot eat the food mixed with poison. After
knowing that it is mixed with poison, he takes that decision. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says that
there is another person who has had a heavy bhikṣā. A person is there whose hunger has
been removed by a delicious and sumptuous lunch eaten up to the full. What will be the
attitude of that person? One is a hungry person who knows it is poison and another is one
who has a full stomach. Both will not consume the poisonous food, but between the two,
in the case of first person, there is at least a remotest chance of being tempted to eat

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 941

because hunger is troubling his stomach. However, in the case of a person who is already
full, even that remote chance is not there.
Therefore, how can a wise person ever fall for the sense-object? This is the idea here. This
is a typical example for kaimutikanyāya. When the hungry person himself will not eat,
what to talk of a person who is full. Therefore, that being so, one who has eaten to the
stomach-full, will never bother to eat the food mixed with poison. Threefold poison is
mixed with viṣaya-ānanda; why should a jñānī run after this poisonous potion!

śloka 143
प्रारब्धकर्मप्राबल्याद्भोगेष्विच्छा भवेद्यदि ।
क्लिश्यनेव तदाप्येष भुङ्क्ते विष्टिगृहीतवत्॥ ७.१४३ ॥
prārabdhakarmaprābalyādbhogeṣvicchā bhavedyadi.
kliśyaneva tadāpyeṣa bhuṅkte viṣṭigṛhītavat (7.143).
Vidyāraṇya takes a small diversion here. The Upaniṣads and scriptures clearly say that a
jñānī does not have desires. As a result of the strength of the prārabdha, a wise man may
happen to have some desire for the worldly objects; even then, he experiences the objective
enjoyment as if he is dealing with an illusory ghost, i.e. without attachment and
seriousness. There are two types of sufferings:
1. an ignorant man suffers because he does not get to enjoy what he wants.
2. a man of wisdom suffers because he really does not want an object, but feels
obliged to enjoy it like a man getting too much food and not being able to enjoy it.
Apūrṇatva is born of binding desire. A binding desire has to be fulfilled. If it is not
fulfilled, there will be apūrṇatva. Not only that, when that desire or desired object goes
away from me, that will disturb me as well. Therefore, apūrṇatva-triggering desire is
called bandhaka kāma. Wherever we say jñānī does not have desire we mean that, he
doesn’t have binding desire. Here itself in the 6th chapter, Vidyāraṇya has said you can
have thousands of non-binding desires. [refer to 262 of chapter VI]. They are not desires
for fulfillment but they are desires which are expressions of his personality which he calls
as prārabdha-janita kāma. Vidyāraṇya uses a new expression prārabdha-janita kāma, the
desires born out of prārabdha, because prārabdha gives him a personality and based on
his background, parentage, his personality, his upbringing, etc., he has certain preferences
like food-habits onwards.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 942

That is why Kṛṣṇa also said everybody has his own preference. What Vedānta asks is not
to give them up. If they are immoral they should be given up. If they are not immoral, you
can certainly have them with one condition that you should not come under their control.
If it is fulfilled it is fine and if not-fulfilled equally fine. Dayānanda Svāmī says even Gods
have their own preferred vāhanas. Biggest Ganesha has a small mouse as vāhana. Śiva has
bull or Nandi; Devī has siṃha as vāhana; Muruga has mayura as vāhana. They have got
their own preferences. Why cannot they exchange? Each one has a musical instrument
also. Sarasvati has vīṇā; Kṛṣṇa has flute. Therefore, even gods show their own preferences.
It is an expression of my individuality or personality. There is nothing wrong as long as it
is not controlling me.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says because of prārabdha karma, jñānī also can have non-binding
kāma. We have said even Bhagavān desired to create the world. That is why during my
new year talk I said ABCD may you have plenty. Abcd means appropriate, balanced, clean
desires you can have hundreds and thousands. Different jñānis may have different desires
according to their own prārabdha. One jñānī’s desire is to go to Gangotri and sit in a cave.
That is also a desire. He does not want to come to madding crowd. He wants to be far far
far from the madding crowd of Chennai. Therefore, there are Svāmīs in Gangotri,
Yamunotri, etc. There are some jñānis who like to be alone. There are some jñānis who
prefer to be in the world and they go around doing loka-saṅgraha. Even when jñānis have
loka-saṅgraha-icchā all of them do not do the same loka-saṅgraha. One builds temples,
one āśrama, one builds maṭhas and one even builds hospitals and schools. Different types
of kāmas can happily arise in a jñānī also. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says he enjoys that
drama that does not hurt him. So he says because of the force of prārabdha karma or
svabhāva, he may have desires that are not binding him at all. Even a jñānī acts svasya
prakṛteḥ sadṛśam according to his personality which is determined by the proportion of
sattva, rajas and tamas.
They might also have preference for certain things in life in terms of bhikṣā, dress etc. If
they are not saṃnyāsis there is no uniform dress required. If such a desire happens it will
be harmless. In this context the word kliśya means detachment without being lost in it;
without giving scope for addiction; carefully, alertly, cautiously is kliśya. The word
literally means with pain, but Vidyāraṇya himself comments later in śloka 145 kleśas
means I am from attachment. Tadāpi means even if he enjoys in sense-pleasures, which

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 943

are legitimate non-binding pleasures, even when he enjoys and enjoys with detachment
alone. If that object is not available he will not miss it. In the middle of enjoyment it goes
away, he will not bother about such disturbances. It is so because he is already ānanda-
svarūpa. In fact, those sense-objects are only a trigger for the manifestation of his own
ānanda. They are not going to generate ānanda. They manifest his ānanda; Like an
employee working under contract, he does not have any attachment towards his
employer. He works for money. Contract-labourer does the job without developing
attachment in the field, because he is not the owner but only a temporary worker. If you
drive your car, it will remain in a good condition for long time. But when it is driven by a
driver it will become bad in no time. He is not going to be interested in your car. He gets
contract-payment. A contract-labourer never form attachment to his job. Once he has
competed his work, he goes home. He is not going to meditate on that job. The employee,
that labourer worker, after going home he is not going to think of his job and about his
employer. Similarly, jñānī is not going to dwell on that and get attached to that. In fact, he
forgets it as soon as that is over.

śloka 144
भुञ्जानास्तानपि बुधाः श्रद्धावन्तः कुटुम्बिनः ।
नाद्यापि कर्म नश्छिन्नमिति क्लिश्यन्ति सन्ततम्॥ ७.१४४ ॥
bhuñjānāstānapi budhāḥ śraddhāvantaḥ kuṭumbinaḥ.
nādyāpi karma naśchinnamiti kliśyanti santatam (7.144).
Vidyāraṇya here takes the example of gṛhastha jñānis also. This is to prove that śāstra and
traditions accept the possibility of gṛhastha jñānī. A gṛhastha has children and
grandchildren and he will enjoy children or grandchildren. Jñānī can certainly enjoy the
company of family members and children. Vidyāraṇya says they do enjoy. Anyone who
has śraddhā in the śāstra and in the teaching and who have the knowledge in the śāstra go
through family-experiences which includes certain pain due to prārabdha but it includes
lot of pleasures also with family members, etc. They certainly go through the experiences
but they have got internal detachment. Vidyāraṇya himself explains that in the next śloka.
Based on that, we have to translate this kliśyanti as with attachment with the awareness
that our prārabdha karma which makes the family-life possible; which is keeping all the
enjoyment around; the gṛhastha jñānis can enjoy. They need not isolate themselves all

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 944

alone. They are aware of all the pleasurable and painful experiences that comes due to
prārabdha. This shows the continuation of prārabdha even after becoming a jñānī.
Enjoyment is the result of puṇya karma prārabdha while pains are the result of pāpa
karma prārabdha. This awareness is there and therefore, they don’t expect those
experiences to continue all the time. They enjoy when such enjoyments are there and they
don’t bother when such enjoyments depart. Prārabdha karma is not destroyed means
prārabdha still continues and therefore, a jñānī experiences both pleasures and pains
although such a jñānī is neither for it nor he is against it.

śloka 145
नायं क्ले शोऽत्र संसारतापः किन्तु विरक्तता ।
भ्रान्तिज्ञाननिदानो हि तापः सांसारिकः स्मृतः ॥ ७.१४५ ॥
nāyaṃ kleśo:'tra saṃsāratāpaḥ kintu viraktatā.
bhrāntijñānanidāno hi tāpaḥ sāṃsārikaḥ smṛtaḥ (7.145).
In the previous two ślokas, Vidyāraṇya said jñānī will certainly go through pleasures that
the prārabdha provides. When such a possibility or opportunity comes, he need not
necessarily say no to that. There is nothing wrong in fulfilling the non-binding moral
desires. A jñānī goes through that experience in the normal course. Earlier, Vidyāraṇya
had used the word kliśyan the suffering he experiences. How is that? When Vidyāraṇya
has used the word, he himself feels that it may be misunderstood. So he clarifies the word
in this śloka. The word kleśas that I mentioned in ślokas 143 and 144 which a jñānī has at
the time of worldly pleasures, those kleśas does not convey the sense of saṃśārī pain or
duḥkha. Jñānī has to go through duḥkha when he goes through some worldly pleasures. It
does not mean pain at all. One need not feel guilty when one is with children and family
members. Kleśas refers to the attitude of detachment by which we mean that we don’t
depend upon that experience for fullness. We are not going to miss that when it goes
away.
Vairāgya is not missing when things go away. That is why I said what is a sannyāsī-mind?
A mind prepared to lose the losable. What is losabale in the creation? Everything in the
creation is losable including our own body. Only that we have forever and that we don’t
lose is Ātmā. Other than Ātmā, everything is losable; my mind is comfortable to use it and
lose it. There is nothing wrong in that. Therefore, he says this mental preparedness is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 945

called vairāgya. Vairāgya is indicated by the word kliśyan in śloka no. 143 and 144. Why
do we say jñānī has only detachment and no pain? He says pain or sorrow is defined as
that tāpa which comes because of ignorance and delusion. The pain of saṃsāra is defined
as bhrānti-jñāna-nidāna, which is caused by bhrānti-jñāna or delusion. Delusion is that the
object will be permanently there and that object will give pleasure all the time or the
person will give pleasure all the time. The very same person who gives joy for a few days
will give problems also. If this is not known and one emotionally depends upon them for
permanent peace, permanent security, and permanent joy, that is bhrānti-jñāna. Jñānī
never commits that blunder because he knows no object or person is a permanent source
of PSH, peace, security and happiness. Therefore, the pain born out of this misconception
is saṃsāra. Such a saṃsāra pain, jñānī will never have.

śloka 146
विवेके न परिक्लिश्यन्नल्पभोगेन तृप्यति ।
अन्यथानन्तभोगेऽपि नैव तृप्यति कर्हिचित्॥ ७.१४६॥
vivekena parikliśyannalpabhogena tṛpyati.
anyathānantabhoge:'pi naiva tṛpyati karhicit (7.146).
If a jñānī enjoys any sense-pleasure, what is the second difference? First difference is that
he is detached; he never allows himself to become a dependent. The moment dependence
comes anxiety appears. Anxiety is written large on the face when there is dependence.
That is one difference. Dependence is not there. The second difference is that when an
ajñānī enjoys sense-pleasures, he does not have a happiness of his own. He has not
discovered Ātmā-ānanda. Therefore, his heart is śūnya. He wants to fill up the heart by
getting those sense-pleasures but the problem is that the emptiness is so big that any
amount you add, it will not create satisfaction. It is insatiable. Therefore, nobody will say I
am fully satisfied. This satisfaction, even while enjoying, is a typical indication of ajñānī
enjoying pleasures. Whereas in the case of jñānī he says since already his heart is full, the
sense-pleasures he enjoys only trigger the Ātmā-ānanda he already has; they are not used
to generate ānanda. It is only a medium for bimbānanda to come out as pratibimba-
ānanda. It is like seeing your own face in the mirror. The mirror-face you are not going to
be jealous of, as it is your own. Therefore, even a little bit of pleasure is more than enough
for the manifestation of his full joy. In the case of a jñānī, limited pleasure brings out his

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 946

infinite joy. In the case of an ajñānī, any amount of pleasure does not give satisfaction.
Because of his viveka and his vairāgya, even with limited bhoga, he is satisfied. His
ānanda seems to be disproportional to what he has. In the case of ajñānī, he is not satisfied
with anything. More in the next class.

Class 198
śloka 146 contd.
In these ślokas, Vidyāraṇya comments upon the second line of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram anusaṃjvaret. He has taken up the
portion kim icchan what desire a jñānī will have. It is not a question, but has an answer in
itself. It means that the jñānī does not have any desire whatsoever. He gave the reasons
also. Even as a sādhaka he had doṣa-darśana in the anātma-prapañca. Therefore, he does
not have kāma. After having knowledge, there is one more additional doṣa-darśana, very
big doṣa-darśana: it is mithyā-prapañca-darśana; therefore also, he cannot have any desire.
Now, he points out even when we say jñānī does not have desires, we have to include the
adjective he does not have binding desires. He does not have immoral desires also. But
non-binding desires and moral desires jñānī can have and jñānī does have such desires
that is harmless and it does not affect jñāna or mokṣa. As I said in the last class, even
Bhagavān had desires to create the world and therefore, there is nothing wrong in jñānī
having non-binding desries. Next question will be what will be the cause of desires of a
jñānī? In the case of an ajñānī, the desires can be explained as avidyā is there. Therefore,
apūrṇatva is there. Therefore, there is desire to complete oneself. Ajñānī’s desire can be
explained because ajñāna is the cause, but in the case of a jñānī what will be the cause of
desire? If you say ajñāna he cannot be called a jñānī. For that, we have to understand one
thing that desire is a śakti. In my New Year talk, I said desire is an intrinsic śakti given to
human being by Bhagavān. By merely being a human being, jñānī human being or ajñānī
human being, we possess three śaktis: icchā śakti, jñāna śakti and kriyā śakti. Because of
these three śaktis alone, the jñānī has desired mokṣa. Because of the śakti alone the seeker
desired to do karma-yoga, upāsana yoga, etc. Therefore, icchā is natural to any human
being. This is the general law.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 947

Secondly, this general desire is later conditioned by the svabhāva also. This icchā śakti
which is universal to all will get conditioned by the svabhāva like desire to eat food. It is
general for all. Hunger is common to all. This general desire to consume food is later
conditioned by the upbringing, the culture, family and background, etc. If I am born in a
vegetarian family and another person is born non-vegetarian family, both have desire to
eat; that is common. But the desire to eat vegetarian or non-vegetarian is conditioned by
the svabhāva or upbringing. Thus, every human being has desire and the desire is
conditioned by svabhāva. It is conditioned by the immediate past, as well as pūrva-janma
also. All jñānis do not live the same life after jñāna. Some jñānis are naturally withdrawn
and quiet. Another jñānī is highly active. Svāmī Cinmayānanda repeatedly said: Guru
Tapovan discouraged when I planned to come down from Uttara Kāśī when he had so
many āśramas. Naturally, money had to be generated. The name of Cinmayānanda Trust
was Central Chinmaya Mission Trust. They had shortened the name. He said I should not
have named the trust like this because every time the trustees say CCMT. All the time,
they say the bank balance is empty. I have to run and generate money and I should have
obeyed my Guru long before. What I am saying is Tapovan Guru did not like to come
down even to Rishikesh. But Cinmayānanda travelled all over. What makes one person
withdrawn and another active? It has to be svabhāva or vāsanā only. But in that svabhāva
there will not be unethical desires because unethical desires are already handled at
sādhana level. Therefore, natural and ethical desires will continue even after becoming a
jñānī. Thus jñānī can have desires. Always negation of desire is negation of ‘binding and
unethical desires’.
Then, he said in śloka 146 even when a jñānī fulfills such a desire governed by ethics, it is
based on his svabhāva. When he fulfills any one of the desires, that desire-fulfillment will
not lead to more and more greed. In the case of an ajñānī, the desire is born out of
apūrṇatva and therefore, sense-pleasures will lead to more and more addiction. It is
generated by ajñāna and apūrṇatva. Whereas in the case of a jñānī, the desire is neither
generated by ajñāna nor by apūrṇatva; therefore, those desires or their fulfillment do not
have the capacity to breed more and enslave him. Not only that, Vidyāraṇya says even the
alpa bhoga, limited fulfillment, will give immense happiness because immense happiness
is already with him. That enjoyment helped only in bringing out the ānanda. Therefore, it
cannot bind him. So he says vivekena parikliśyan alpabhogena tṛpyati. Even with limited

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 948

bhoga, he is extremely happy because happiness is already there in him. The bimbānanda
which he has recognized is now available as pratibimba-ānanda. He knows already his
face is beautiful and so, when he sees it in a mirror, no additional things are added, he sees
his real face. That ānanda is only reflected. Therefore, he is easily satisfied. On the other
hand, anyathā, if it is ajñāna-triggered desire, anantabhoghe api naiva tṛpyati, any amount
you give he will not be satisfied. Remember like filling up the bank-cheque, any amount
you write, at the end you write ‘only’. The ‘only’ indicates atṛpti or dissatisfaction. Ten
thousand ‘only,’ one lakh ‘only’ one crore ‘only’; only indicates atṛpti.

śloka 147
न जातु कामः कामानामुपभोगेन शाम्यति ।
हविषा कृ ष्णवर्त्मेव भूय एव अभिवर्धते ॥ ७.१४७ ॥
na jātu kāmaḥ kāmānāmupabhogena śāmyati.
haviṣā kṛṣṇavartmeva bhūya eva abhivardhate (7.147).
The wise man, being discriminative about the worldly enjoyment, is satisfied with very
limited involvement. Or else on the contrary, even with unlimited enjoyments, an ignorant
man can never be satisfied. He differentiates jñānī’s desire from ajñānī’s desire; here the
author quotes a śloka. It is an explanation of the second line of the previous śloka. That is,
ajñānī’s desire can never be fulfilled or satisfied. This is a quotation taken from Manu-
saṃhitā. This occurs Nārada-Parivrājaka Upaniṣad also; refer 3 chapter 37th śloka. It says
kāmānām upabhogena kāmaḥ na śāmyati; by fulfilling the desires, the desires can never
be removed once for all. The biggest misconception people have is that they think the
desires will go away if they are fulfilled, but the śāstra says no desire will go away by its
fulfillment. On the other hand, it will occur the second time with more force. Then
naturally, he becomes helpless. First time, he deliberately fulfills the desire and the second
time, he has to fulfill the desire. In fact, the desire will demand and enforce him. The will
becomes weaker and desire becomes stronger. Third time, will is still weaker and desire is
very very strong. By the time he reaches the tenth time, desire will so absolutely become
powerful that the will is almost non-existent. He argues: where do we have freedom! The
freewill is gone forever. For any addict, freewill appears as a non-existent entity.
Therefore, no desire will weaken or go by fulfillment.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 949

A beautiful example is given. Haviṣā kṛṣṇavartma iva; kṛṣṇavartma is the name of the
fire. Why is fire called kṛṣṇavartma? Kṛṣṇa means black and vartma means trail. If in the
forest, the fire burns and travels from one area to another, wherever it has travelled you
can see the black patches, because it has burnt down everything. You can note the trail of
fire by seeing the black patch. Therefore, one which has black trail is called agni. Suppose
you add petrol then fire can only increase. Similarly, desire is like fire. More you feed the
desire, the more it will ask for. Therefore, he says just as oblations, offering like ghee, etc.,
Kṛṣṇavartma iva like the fire, bhūya eva abhivardhate more and more kāma you have to
supply. The fed desire becomes fattened. This is in the case of an ajñānī. This is a counter
example. In the case of a jñānī, such a thing will never happen.

śloka 148
परिज्ञायोपभुक्तो हि भोगो भवति तुष्टये ।
विज्ञाय सेवितश्चौरी मैत्रीमेति न चौरताम्॥ ७.१४८ ॥
parijñāyopabhukto hi bhogo bhavati tuṣṭaye.
vijñāya sevitaścaurī maitrīmeti na cauratām (7.148).
Thus kāma remains the same. If a person knows how to handle kāma, it will not create any
problem as in the case of jñānī. The very same kāma if one does not know how to handle,
the very same kāma becomes a problem. In one, it remains icchā-śakti-alaṅkāra. In another
one, kāma remains as saṃsāra. Naturally, the question will come: how can one and the
same kāma become alaṅkāra in one place and saṃsāra in another place? He says this
difference is made by knowledge. Intelligent knowledge can turn an enemy to a friend like
cobra-poison can save a human if it is rightly handled. Therefore, whether cobra-poison is
good or bad it depends upon its usage. Suppose a person moves with another person who
is a thief. He moves as a friend and quietly he takes away the possession. If I don’t know
the thief to be a thief and I move with him, after a few days I will know the fact with bitter
experience. The very same thief is used by a king after knowing that he is thief and he is
paid as a spy. Then he becomes useful. When these sense-pleasures are enjoyed with
thorough knowledge that sense-pleasures are not given by sense-objects, sense-pleasures
are nothing but my own reflection, when they go away, pleasures do not go away because
it is the only source that is myself. The sense-pleasures will only give tuṣṭi [ānanda or
happiness]. It cannot become a ‘greed’ or it cannot become an addiction. These pleasures

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 950

cannot enslave that jñānī. The sense-pleasure enjoyed should be ethical and moral. When a
king understands the thief and his skill after he has been caught and imprisoned for
reforming him, he gives employment according to his own skill. Then, the very same
thing becomes a friend. After knowing a thief to be a thief, when he is approached with
the knowledge and employed properly, that thief becomes one of the staff members in the
king’s court. He loses his thiefhood and he gains the employeehood; the person remaining
the same, the skill remaining the same, the status has been changed by intelligent
handling. So is kāma also. When the discrimination dawns, the objects of enjoyment no
more are able to delude us with their enchantment. Knowing well someone to be a thief,
when accepted with an attitude of service and compassion, he does not behave as a thief,
but extends a hand of friendship; so also the experience of enjoyment, when dealt with
understanding and discrimination, leads to satisfaction easily [unlike what is said in the
above śloka 148.

śloka 149
मनसो निगृहीतस्य लीलाभोगोऽल्पकोऽपि यः ।
तमेवालब्धविस्तारं क्लिष्टत्वाद्बहु मन्यते ॥ ७.१४९ ॥
manaso nigṛhītasya līlābhogo:'lpako:'pi yaḥ.
tamevālabdhavistāraṃ kliṣṭatvādbahu manyate (7.149).
Even the limited sense-pleasure gives immense fulfillment to a jñānī. A mind which is
very much under control, which is a wise mind, mature mind, disciplined mind, is called
nigṛhīta manas or jñānī’s mind is called so. For such a mind, alpakaḥ api līlābhogaḥ any
sense-pleasure in the form of nice music or in the form of nice food, alpakaḥ api even
though it is very very limited because jñānī does not want ānanda through that—
remember jñānī has clear idea it does not give but brings out my joys— even if it is limited
sense-pleasure without expanding further, he considers as a great fulfillment and he does
not look upon it as nonsatiating desire or fulfillment. The meaning of the word kliṣṭa
should not be taken as pain then it will give a negative meaning. That a Jñānī enjoys sense-
pleasures will not fit in here. Here, Vidyāraṇya gives a special meaning referred to śloka
145. He has given special meaning detachment. Because of his detachment, even when he
is ready for sense-pleasures and it is taken away by someone there, it is no flutter. They
give the example of Rāma in Ramayana where he was promised the empire. Before he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 951

could get the kingdom, there was no obstacle seen anywhere because the emperor had
decided and all of Ayodhyā’s people also wanted the same. Nowhere, nobody expected
any obstacle but some Mantharā comes and because of that another day, the same
emperor says you don’t have the kingdom and you have to live in the forest. Valmiki
describes Rāma as having is no change in his face when he received the first news and
when he received the second news; the arrival and the loss, both were same. That is the
condition described here. Refer to śloka 145 also.

śloka 150
बद्धमुक्तो महीपालो ग्राममात्रेण तुष्यति ।
परैर्न बद्धो नाक्रान्तो न राष्ट्रं बहु मन्यते ॥ ७.१५० ॥
baddhamukto mahīpālo grāmamātreṇa tuṣyati.
parairna baddho nākrānto na rāṣṭraṃ bahu manyate (7.150).
A king liberated from the earlier bondage feels satisfied even with a gift of a mere village;
while for an independent king, not invaded by an enemy, even the whole nation is not
satisfying enough. Here, Vidyāraṇya has given another beautiful example. Imagine one
king with a small kingdom was attacked by another king. Remember in those days, India
was nothing but a conglomeration of 56 deśas or something, they say. And the king got
defeated by another powerful king and the whole kingdom has been lost. He has been
captured also. There was a rumour that he was going to be killed. Therefore, the king
thought that I have lost everything including my life. And then the other king called him
and said that I am going to release you. This king was extremely happy and he has come
from bondage to liberation. Even by this mere release and getting back the life, this person
is pūrṇa-tṛpta. Then the other king says anyway I have decided to give you one village.
“Are you satisfied?” the king is asked. What will the king say? Even without anything he
was happy because he had become liberated. Now, giving a village is more than enough;
in fact it gives me immense joy. So is a liberated person already happy because he is
released by saṃsāra. Māyā Devī has released him from saṃsāra. Even by that mere release
he is happy. Now some sense-pleasures, like village in the place of kingdom, offered
appears too big for him.
The other king who has never been captured by anyone and whose kingdom has not been
captured by any other king, such a person who does not come under baddha-mukta

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 952

variety, for him the problem is this. Even though he has a huge kingdom, he is not happy;
even with that kingdom, he is scheming to attack the other kingdom. Therefore, he is not
satisfied with the available kingdom. That is what they tell an instance of Nasruddin
Mulla. He is supposed to be a wise man. Many stories are there. One lady was walking.
She was carrying a handbag. And mulla went near her and snatched the bag. Naturally,
that lady started chasing. He went round and round and after sometime he himself went
and gave back the bag. The lady embraced the handbag and was so happy I have this bag
with me. Then he asked the very same bag ten minutes before was with you. But at that
time you were not kissing. You did not even appreciate. When you lost it and got back, it
appears as though a great joy. Similarly, what is mokṣa-ānanda? It is ours only. Because of
ignorance we have disclaimed it and when we get back we are happy. That is all. The king
was not happy with a big kingdom.

śloka 151
विवेके जाग्रति सति दोषदर्शनलक्षणे ।
कथमारब्धकर्मापि भोगेच्छां जनयिष्यति ॥ ७.१५१ ॥
viveke jāgrati sati doṣadarśanalakṣaṇe.
kathamārabdhakarmāpi bhogecchāṃ janayiṣyati (7.151).
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers a possible Pūrvapakṣa. The Pūrvapakṣa is based on the
conventional rule avidyā-kāma-karma. Always we say that karma is born out of kāma and
kāma is born out of avidyā. This is the route map. We say when avidyā goes away then
kāma also goes away. Karma also follows suit. This is the standard law we have applied.
Now, he asks how do you talk about kāma of a jñānī, when the cause of kāma has been
already removed? This is the question from Pūrvapakṣa. Jñānī has the viveka, Ātma-
anātma-viveka, alive in his head all the time. Literally, jāgṛti means awake. Here, awake
means it is active and functional. The jñānī has practiced śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana
and has understood Ātmā as the only source of joy and that anātmā does not have any joy
at all. This he has learnt not for one year or two years but several years he has registered.
He also knows that the world cannot give happiness but give sorrow if I get attached to it.
Even that doṣa-darśana jñānī has. Therefore, he says doṣadarśanalakṣaṇe viveke. The
world has duḥkha-miśritatva, atṛptikaratva and bandhakatva, seeing these three doṣas
together is called viveka. Such a viveka is all the time active in jñānī’s mind. Under this

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 953

situation, how can a jñānī develop such a desire for sense-pleasures? Such a situation
appears illogical. However hungry a person be, once he knows the food to be mixed with
poison, one will not be ready to eat that food. For a jñānī, the world is mixed with poison
and so, how can the prārabdha karma produce bhoga-icchā or the desire for sense-
pleasures!

śloka 152
नैष दोषो यतोऽनेकविधं प्रारब्धमीक्ष्यते ।
इच्छानिच्छा परेच्छा च प्रारब्धं त्रिविधं स्मृतम्॥ ७.१५२ ॥
naiṣa doṣo yato:'nekavidhaṃ prārabdhamīkṣyate.
icchānicchā parecchā ca prārabdhaṃ trividhaṃ smṛtam (7.152).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives innovating answer being highly creative. He divides prārabdha
itself into three types. They are icchā-prārabdha, anicchā-prārabdha and anyecchā -
prārabdha or parecchā-prārabdha. He introduces three types of prārabdha. Even though
this method is not required, this is a small diversion through which he wants to introduce
this topic. We don’t find this elsewhere. They are an ingenious interpretation. This will go
up to śloka 162. First. he says Pūrvapakṣa objection is not correct. The charge that you
have made on us is improper. The charge is how can a jñānī have a desire without having
cause of desire? Desire being there without cause being there is a doṣa. That doṣa you
charged is not correct. Also he says prārabdha is of several types.: icchā-prārabdha,
anicchā-prārabdha and parecchā-prārabdha. More in the next class.

Class 199
śloka 152 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues his commentary on Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. While talking
about jñānī’s condition, Vidyāraṇya made a statement in śloka 123 that prārabdha karma
prābalyāt bhogeṣu icchā bhavet yadi. Jñānī also may have certain desires caused by
prārabdha karma. That was explained from śloka 143 to śloka 150. Now, Vidyāraṇya
presents from 151st śloka Pūrvapakṣa’s question: how can a jñānī have a desire if desire is
caused by avidyā? We generally say desires are caused by avidyā; avidyā-kāma-karma. In
the case of a jñānī, desires should not be there because the cause avidyā is not there. Not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 954

only that, he has doṣa-darśana in the world also. Avidyā is absent and doṣa-darśana is
present. This was the question asked in śloka 151. Now, Vidyāraṇya introduces three
types of prārabdha. This we saw in the last class. There is no defect in accepting desire for
a jñānī. It can be caused by prārabdha. It is not cause by avidyā but it can be caused by
prārabdha. To elaborate this idea, Vidyāraṇya divides prārabdha into three types of which
one type of prārabdha is desire-producing prārabdha. We see three types of prārabdhas
operating in the life of a jñānī. It is experienced by jñānī.
First is icchā-prārabdha, second is anicchā-prārabdha and third one is parecchā-
prārabdha. Now, Vidyāraṇya will elaborate the three in the following ślokas. Before that, I
will summarise the idea contained in these ślokas. When we say prārabdha, we have to
note two aspects of prārabdha. I have talked about this before. You have to recall this in
the present context. Whenever you want to perform something repeatedly, that produces
two types of results. One is karma that produces karma-phala. That phala is one type of
result. In addition to that, the very performance of karma creates a habit or vāsanā in the
kartā. Karma-phala and karma-vāsanā are two different types of consequences. Karma-
phala will affect future bhoktā; karma-vāsanā will affect the future kartā. Suppose a
person starts taking coffee or any other thing that can cause a habit. If he goes on taking it
for something, because of the various ingredients in the coffee it is going affect his
biological system and whatever is going to happen at that level is called karma-phala. It is
going to affect the bhoktā because he is going to experience whatever be the consequences.
The second thing is when he takes coffee regularly, he gets habituated to that ritual. The
coffee is a must at the appointed hour. Once he develops that habit on a particular day
morning at 6 o clock, his mind naturally desires for a coffee. Because of the vāsanā, the
kartā has ordered the coffee-vāsanā and coffee-vāsanā is not affecting the bhoktā but it
commands the kartā now. It asks him to go and get coffee. Do something or the other to
get coffee. Thus the vāsanā is not affecting the bhoktā, but it affects the kartā forcing him
to desire and work for the coffee. Thus, phala influences the bhoktā, while vāsanā
influences the kartā.
Similarly, prārabdha also has prārabdha phala aspects and prārabdha-vāsanā aspect. If a
young brahmacārī gets naturally interested in sannyāsa way of life, this desire to become
sannyāsī and pursue spirituality, when all the peers are working for other things in the
world, is the influence of prārabdha phala or prārabdha-vāsanā? Because this, brahmacārī

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 955

the kartā is influenced to work in the direction of sannyāsa spirituality etc., the icchā and
karma the desire to become sannyāsī and desire to go in search of Guru in the early age is
icchā and karma. Icchā and karma, desire and action belong to kartā therefore, we don’t
say prārabdha karma influence; but we say prārabdha-vāsanā goads him to become a
sannyāsī. Here, Vidyāraṇya talks about prārabdha-vāsanā which influences the kartṛtva
in the jñānī. Jñānī is also a kartā and bhoktā at vyāvahārika level even though from
pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi both of them are falsified. From vyāvahārika dṛṣṭi jñānī has
vyāvahārika kartṛtva and vyāvahārika kartā is heavily influenced by prārabdha-vāsanā.
This vāsanā alone makes some jñānīs to become active and some to be passive. In fact, the
direction or the lifestyle of jñānī kartā is influenced by the prārabdha-vāsanā. Therefore,
this prārabdha-vāsanā not only of the previous janma but also in this janma whatever be
his past lifestyle, pūrvāśrama lifestyle are there in the form of vāsanā. Vidyāraṇya says
these vāsanās will produce experiences for a jñānī through or by producing icchā.
Therefore, icchā-dvārā bhoga-pradam prārabdham it is said.
What is the first type of prārabdha? Icchā-dvārā bhoga-pradam prārabdham. That
prārabdha which will generate desire for a jñānī and through that desire, it will give him
varieties of experiences. The second type of prārabdha is where jñānī’s kartā is not
influenced, jñānī does not have any personal desire as such. Because of somebody else’s
desire the jñānī goes through certain experiences that will come under parecchā-
prārabdha. Here, it is not prārabdha-vāsanā that is affecting him but it is prārabdha-phala
that affects him. Then there is a third one which is neither jñānī’s icchā nor other’s icchā; it
is a prārabdha that gives experiences without jñānī’s desire and without other’s desire.
I will give you an example. Imagine that a musician devotee goes for jñānī’s darśana.
Because of prārabdha-vāsanā, jñānī loves music. He wanted to listen to some song due to
his vāsanā. He asked him to sing two songs. It comes under icchā-dvārā bhoga-janakam
prārabdham. It gives bhoga to a jñānī. It came through the icchā of the jñānī. Therefore, it
comes under icchā-prārabdha. I will give you another example. Imagine another devotee
goes to jñānī. He introduces himself as a musician. Jñānī does not know he is a musician.
The devotee voluntarily introduces himself as a musician and he expresses his desire to
sing a few songs and receive jñānī’s blessings before he goes for his first concert. Now, the
jñānī experiences the music. It is not that jñānī asked him but the devotee desired to sing
songs. It comes under parecchā-prārabdha. Suppose the musician sings well it will be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 956

puṇya-prārabdha jñānī will experience. Suppose he claims to be a musician but he is far

from that and jñānī is the forced audience. He cannot go outside also. When he listens to
that music, he experiences pāpa prārabdha, parecchayā exhausted. Out of courtesy. jñānī
says you sing well. Then, the musician is ready to sing another song. Then jñānī
understands that prārabdha works powerfully.
The third one is anicchā-prārabdha. The general example we give is that all the unhealthy
conditions experienced by jñānī’s body, the old age, diseases and other pains the body
undergoes in the normal course come under this category. It does not come under icchā-
prārabdha. Therefore, it cannot be parecchā-prārabdha also. Then this physical ailments,
etc., come under anicchā-prārabdha. Thus every jñānī goes through icchā-prārabdha,
parecchā-prārabdha and anicchā-prārabdha. In the icchā-prārabdha, that icchā is a non-
binding desire. Because of the prārabdha-vāsanā, he loves music, the musician comes and
therefore, he asks and suppose the musician says my throat is not all right. Then jñānī is
not going to be upset. That icchā is not a binding icchā. If the other fellow sings it is ok or
else jñānī will enjoy the silence. So jñānī has icchā, anicchā and parecchā types of
prārabdha. Here, Vidyāraṇya explains these three but he does not take jñānī example. He
takes the example of ajñānī saṃśārī because in the case of saṃśārī also Vidyāraṇya wants
to establish that these prārabdhas are there: icchā, anicchā and parecchā. When I violate
health-rules and suffer sleepless nights then it is icchā-prārabdha in the case of saṃśārī.
Suppose some family member violates health-rules and that member falls sick and then
the parent keeps awake, which means it comes under parecchā-prārabdha. The son is not
well and hence the parents don’t sleep. Thus, even in the case of an ajñānī, all these three
are possible. Now, Vidyāraṇya talks about an ajñānī’s case, even though the topic is jñānī.
He should have given jñānī’s example but I have given a jñānī’s example [music example].

śloka 153
अपथ्यसेविनश्चोरा राजदाररता अपि ।
जानन्त एव स्वानर्थमिच्छन्त्यारब्धकर्मतः ॥ ७.१५३ ॥
apathyasevinścaurā rājadāraratā api.
jānanta eva svānarthamicchantyārabdhakarmataḥ (7.153).
First, Vidyāraṇya explains icchā-prārabdha. Vidyāraṇya explains everything minutely.
There are many people who take to adhārmic activities even though they know it is wrong

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 957

to do such activities. Still, they deliberately do that and try to justify some way or the
other. How can you explain that? Rāvaṇa did that; Kaṃśa did that; Hiraṇyakaśyapu did
that. You can explain it only in one way that the prārabdha-vāsanā must have been very
strong in these cases. Human life is always a tug of war between will and vāsanā. Every
moment is a cricket or tennis match. Often, they coincide and therefore, there is no
problem. But very often they are at loggerhead with each other. Then alone, “to do or not
to do?” the question arises. At the end, either the will wins or the vāsanā wins. These are
the people who have got prārabdha, prathama vāsanā; therefore, even though they are
educated like Rāvaṇa and others, they indulge in wrong activities. Rāvaṇa was a Sāma-
vedī; yet he could not resist his vāsanā and he succumbed to evil acts and ended
miserably. He violated the rules of dharma. Here, you can take it as a general expression
and taking it as specifically as the eating habits. A person knows he has diabetes, all
problems yet he takes sweets knowing well that he should not take it to save himself from
problem. Lack of tongue-control is a serious problem for many people. Those who are
involved in immoral activities in the palace of the king are definite to be executed. Only
capital punishment the king knows, yet they take all the risks, because of prabala-
prārabdha-vāsanā. We say it is vāsanā because it influences the kartā. Through these
activities, the bhoktās experiences artham icchanti. They invite punishment for
themselves. They are inviting anartha for themselves deliberately they do that. This will
come under icchā-prārabdha. It is the prārabdha that influences the desires of a person.
This is in the case of a saṃśārī. It will not happen in the case of a jñānī. Saṃsāra becomes a
chora because of that. We have to extend it to jñānī also. Similarly, jñānī may desire certain
types of activities because of prārabdha-vāsanā. This is the icchā-prārabdha.

śloka 154
न चात्रैतद्वारयितुमीश्वरेणापि शक्यते ।
यत ईश्वर एवाह गीतायामर्जुनं प्रति ॥ ७.१५४ ॥
na cātraitadvārayitumīśvareṇāpi śakyate.
yata Īśvara evāha gītāyāmarjunaṃ prati (7.154).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says when the prārabdha-vāsanā is prabala, extremely strong, not only
the will-power is not able to restrain the vāsanā, even Bhagavān cannot help him out! This
inappropriate desire and inappropriate activity of this individual even Bhagavān cannot

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 958

stop. Rāma could not change Rāvaṇa. Kṛṣṇa himself could not save Duryodana. In fact,
Duryodana argued I know what is dharma but I will not follow. Kṛṣṇa could not change
Duryodana; Rāma could not change Rāvaṇa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says even Bhagavān
himself cannot change evil doings of the individual under influence of his icchā-
prārabdha. Kṛṣṇa himself has openly admitted the truth in Gītā III.13.

śloka 155
सदृशं चेष्टते स्वस्याः प्रकृ तेर्ज्ञानवानपि ।
प्रकृ तिं यान्ति भूतानि निग्रहः किं करिष्यति ॥ ७.१५५ ॥
sadṛśaṃ ceṣṭate svasyāḥ prakṛterjñānavānapi.
prakṛtiṃ yānti bhūtāni nigrahaḥ kiṃ kariṣyati (7.155).
Gītā reference is III.33. Even a wise person acts according to his svabhāva only. Prakṛti
here means svabhāva. Svabhāva here is prārabdha-vāsanā from pūrva-janmas. It is not
only the pūrva-janma but also the efforts of current janma is also included in this context.
The only difference between a jñānī or a spiritual sādhaka and a non-sādhaka is that the
svabhāva will generate rāga and dveṣa, svabhāva will not produce karma directly. It will
indirectly produce rāga-dveṣa. And the rāga-dveṣa will force a person to act. Thus,
svabhāva produces rāga-dveṣa and rāga-dveṣa produces action. This is the procedure and
in the case of spiritual sādhaka, when the svabhāva produces rāga-dveṣa he filters the
rāga-dveṣa by will-power. The difference between sādhaka and non-sādhaka is that a non-
sādhaka will never filter his rāga-dveṣa. Whatever be the rāga-dveṣa, he fulfills that. He
follows them, letting go philosophy. Whatever he feels he fulfills. In the case of sādhaka, in
him also rāga-dveṣa will be constantly generated by prārabdha-vāsanā, but before rāga-
dveṣa is implemented, between the generation of rāga-dveṣa and the implementation of
the rāga-dveṣa, it goes the quality control room. They have got the security-check. They
get them checked with the viveka security. With viveka, if any rāga-dveṣa is unethical
immoral he immediately nips in the bud itself and therefore, he allows healthy rāga
dveṣas to continue. Healthy rāga dveṣas are ok and it is approved. Even after jñāna, he
will not stop his desires; prārabdha-vāsanā desires he will not stop because it is not
immoral or unethical. Kṛṣṇa extends it to all the living beings and he says all the beings
live according to the program. Restraints cannot help them.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 959

śloka 156
अवश्यं भाविभावानां प्रतीकारो भवेद्यदि ।
तदा दुःखैर्न लिप्येरन्नलरामयुधिष्ठिराः ॥ ७.१५६ ॥

avaśyaṃ bhāvibhāvānāṃ pratīkāro bhavedyadi.

tadā duḥkhairna lipyeran nalarāmayudhiṣṭhirāḥ (7.156).
Here, Vidyāraṇya makes the general observation which is applicable to jñānis and all the
ajñānīs. Every work is based on the will and vāsanā put together. Will gives the direction
of life, the direction of activities and also the experiences in the life as well. Oftentimes,
vāsanā is powerful and certain times, will is more powerful. Never ask if fate or the
intellect or thought decides the issue. Never ask the question. In each confrontation, one
will be stronger than the other. You cannot say in all confrontations, will decides or the
vāsanā decides. In our own experience, we see that sometimes we are able to decide and
do and in some other times, we lose. It all depends. Where vāsanā is powerful, the human
beings succumb to the prārabdha experiences. When the prārabdha is powerful even the
greatest jñānī will have to surrender to the fate of prārabdha-anubhava. Therefore, he says
that for the events that take place necessarily its called prabala prārabdha. Why the
prārabdha strength is not uniform all time? Sometimes prārabdha is strong and sometimes
it is not so. It is so because prārabdha is the result of past karma. Past karma is not
uniform. In one and the same good karma ritual, one person can chant hundred and eight
Gāyatrī, thousand eight Gāyatrī, etc.
Since the strength of karma varies, the karma-phala prārabdha also varies; whether it is
good or bad, it will surely vary whatever you do there is no remedy means it is prabala. If
nothing works, it means prārabdha is prabala and it is strong not allowing us to escape the
bad effects of prārabdha. For the events which have to necessarily take place, pratikaro
nāsti. There is no parihāra or remedy. Such can be said to be choiceless situations. Had
there been remedies for powerful experiences, Rāma and Yudhiṣṭhira would have been
saved from the problems or embarrassments. An unidentified Mantharā could change the
biography of Rāma. It is due to prārabdha karma alone. If you want to save from problem,
pray to Īśvara to give strength to bear the problem. Remember, prārabdha is mithyā while
I am Ātmā. Ajñānī should take help from Bhagavān and jñānī takes help from Bhagavān’s

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 960

teaching, the teaching that prārabdha belongs to kartā and kartā is mithyā, bhoktā is
mithyā and I am satya. If you say this way, you are said to practice nididhyāsana. Rāma
has to go to the forest, Yudhiṣṭhira had to go to forest, while Nala lost everything. They
would not have suffered if there was a remedy for all the problems because they had all
resources to execute the remedy. Yet, they suffered. It means prārabdha could not be
overcome.

śloka 157
न चेश्वरत्वमीशस्य हीयते तावता यतः ।
अवश्यंभाविताप्येषामीश्वरेणैव निर्मिता ॥ ७.१५७ ॥
na ceśvaratvamīśasya hīyate tāvatā yataḥ.
avaśyaṃbhāvitāpyeṣāmīśvareṇaiva nirmitā (7.157).
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers an aside doubt which can come. In śloka 154, Vidyāraṇya had
made a statement īśvareṇā api vārayitum na śakyate, when prārabdha-vāsanā is so
powerful none can stop that icchā and that pravṛtti even Īśvara cannot stop it was said.
Once you say Īśvara cannot do something, whatever be that something we are not
bothered about that something; this bhakta is disturbed. How can you use the word
cannot with regard to Īśvara. We can just apply the word ‘cannot’ aplenty for anyone of
us. Most of the things we cannot do. However, Īśvara is supposed to be Sarvajña, Sarva-
śaktimān. If you say Īśvara cannot stop, Īśvara’s omnipotence will be dented. This is a
Pūrvapakṣa-statement. If you say prabala-vāsanā cannot be stopped by Īśvara then
īśvaratva or the Īśvara status, the omnipotence of the Lord, will lose credibility. Up to this
is the quotation or Pūrvapakṣa’s observation. Vidyāraṇya’s answer is ‘na’, it is not so.
Because of that statement in śloka 154 first line, the omnipotence of the Lord will be lost
and the answer is you cannot argue. Why? He gives an interesting answer. He says
Bhagavān really can change because He is omnipotent, but Bhagavān will not change
because the law of karma and vāsanā are created by Īśvara himself. If Bhagavān violates
the law of karma and vāsanā, Bhagavān will be neutralizing His own law; so he will use
all the restraints to follow the law that he has created. Just as the judge told the crying
Sanjay Dutt that you are not the terrorist yet he requested to pass the punishment as he
could not change the law. In the case of Bhagavān, he is the one who has given the laws;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 961

therefore, he can violate the law of karma but he will not violate the laws of karma. More
in the next class.

Class 200
śloka 157 contd.
This is the rule laid down by Īśvara himself that prārabdha has to be worked out by going
through it. There is no short cut out of it. Having created that inexorable rule himself, he is
in no position to break it, himself, although he can. Vidyāraṇya comments upon the
second line of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram
anusaṃjvaret. This commentary started from śloka 135. Through the second line jñāna-
phala is being talked about. As a part of that, Vidyāraṇya has introduced three fold
prārabdha for a person: icchā-prārabdha, anicchā-prārabdha and parecchā-prārabdha. Of
these three, first he has taken up icchā-prārabdha in these ślokas from śloka 153 to 157. In
this portion, Vidyāraṇya points out that prārabdha karma influences the life of every Jīva.
We don’t say prārabdha alone influences because for a human being the freewill definitely
exists. The freewill is one factor that influences our life and in addition to freewill,
prārabdha karma also is one of the influencing factors. It is common to both ajñānī and
jñānī. There also we made a subtle difference.
Prārabdha-karma-vāsanā influences the kartā aspect of the Jīva, while the prārabdha-
karma-phala will influence the bhoktā aspect. Vidyāraṇya says thus prārabdha-vāsanā of a
jñānī will influence the kartā in the jñānī by producing icchā or desires. Therefore, a jñānī
also will have desires governed by his prārabdha-vāsanā. That is why different jñānis have
different types of desires. Some love to sit quiet in one place while some others want to do
loka-saṅgraha. Even among the jñānis who do loka-saṅgraha all the jñānis do not do the
same type of loka-saṅgraha. Some people write books, some teach, some establish maṭhas
and some even schools and hospitals. Prārabdha-vāsanā can create rāga-dveṣa in the jñānī
and that is called icchā-prārabdha.
While talking about this, Vidyāraṇya made a statement this icchā and karma which is
influenced by prārabdha-vāsanā is universal for both jñānis and ajñānīs. They are all
governed by the law of karma. Vidyāraṇya also says according to the law of karma,
whatever has to happen will definitely happen, even Īśvara cannot make it otherwise.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 962

Such a statement Vidyāraṇya made in śloka 154. When Vidyāraṇya made such a
statement, the Pūrvapakṣa can have a question because in this statement Vidyāraṇya says
even Īśvara cannot alter the events which are governed by the law of karma. What is that
question? If Īśvara also cannot alter, then how can Īśvara be called omnipotent! The
omnipotent means one who cannot have a ‘cannot’. Īśvara should never say I cannot do
this. Such a doubt may come. He says here īśvaratva‘, the omnipotence of the Lord will be
lost if there is something which Īśvara cannot accomplish or alter. Vidyāraṇya says there is
no such problem. Īśvara’s omnipotence will not be affected by this. Īśvaratva will not be
affected. We don’t say Īśvara cannot. We say Īśvara will not. We say Īśvara won’t. Just like
the judge who has been given the power will not misuse it because he is bound by his
sense of justice. Therefore, Bhagavān has the law of justice also and Bhagavān will not
violate the law of justice; if Bhagavān violates the law of justice because of his compassion,
a compassionate Bhagavān violating the law of justice will become unjust Bhagavān. A
compassion which violates is not right compassion but misplaced compassion. Bhagavān
has compassion but this compassion is just compassion. Vidyāraṇya says avaśyaṃbhāvitā
api. Definiteness of the law of karma, non-violability of the law of karma is also created by
Bhagavān. Bhagavān has done this by his own sense of justice and therefore, Bhagavān
can violate the law but Bhagavān will not violate, because Bhagavān is not only
compassionate but also the non-violability of the karma also is created by Bhagavān only.
Why has Bhagavān done that? it is out of his own sense of justice. Therefore, Bhagavān
can violate the law but Bhagavān will not violate because Bhagavān is not only
compassionate Bhagavān is also just and therefore, and therefore, the omnipotence is not
disturbed. Bhagavān requires compassion and Bhagavān requires omnipotence and
Bhagavān requires justice also. Therefore, Bhagavān cannot we don’t say Bhagavān will
not we say. The condition of non-violability of law of karma is also created by Īśvara.
Thus, Bhagavān has compassion and Bhagavān has a sense of justice also. Compassion is
governed by justice and justice is governed by compassion; one cannot violate the other. If
it does, then, Bhagavān will not be Bhagavān. Suppose in the name of omnipotence
Bhagavān violates justice, then the omnipotent Lord will become unjust Lord; then, we
will not worship an unjust God. So Bhagavān requires compassion and Bhagavān requires
omnipotent and Bhagavān requires justice also. Therefore, Bhagavān can’t we don’t say,
but we say Bhagavān won’t.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 963

śloka 158
प्रश्नोत्तराभ्यामेवैतद्गम्यतेऽर्जुनकृ ष्णयोः ।
अनिच्छापूर्वकं चास्ति प्रारब्धमिति तच्छृणु ॥ ७.१५८ ॥
praśnottarābhyāmevaitadgamyate:'rjunakṛṣṇayoḥ.
anicchāpūrvakaṃ cāsti prārabdhamiti tacchṛṇu (7.158).
We should remember an aside point also. When Bhagavān cannot alter the law of karma
or prārabdha, what we mean is Bhagavān cannot capriciously according to his whim and
fancy alter it. We should remember that within the law of karma itself, Bhagavān has
given us freewill and with that freewill, a Jīva can produce a new āgāmi karma chosen in
such a way like choosing a medicine; that āgāmi karma can fight the prārabdha falling
within the law of karma only. Thus, within the law of karma, just as a person can go to the
Supreme court and ask for the change of the verdict, again according to the law of the land
itself, we do have freewill by which we can create an āgāmi puṇya that can fight
prārabdha pāpa and depending upon the relative strength, the result can be altered. Such
alteration of the result is not a violation of the law but that alteration is within the law, just
as a person goes to Supreme court and sometimes get less punishment. Sometimes one get
more punishment also! That aspect you should remember. What we say here is Bhagavān,
by mere wish, cannot alter or will not alter. Bhagavān will say I have given the freewill
and I have provided parihāras, if you want you use them. The result may change. That is
the idea that the law cannot be violated; justice cannot be violated. With śloka 157 icchā-
prārabdha topic is over. Vidyāraṇya has taken an ajñānī as an example for icchā-
prārabdha but we should remember this is applicable to a jñānī also.
Now, from śloka 158 we enter the anicchā-prārabdha topic. Prārabdha-vāsanā is
influencing the kartā even when the kartā does not want. That is the idea here. From the
discussion that took place between Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavadgītā, the following
anicchā-prārabdha topic can be clearly understood. There is a second type of prārabdha-
vāsanā which operates at the anicchā level also. Now, the question is what do we mean by
that? Vidyāraṇya says he will explain the whole thing and may you listen carefully, “I will
quote the relevant Bhagavadgītā śloka and you can understand”.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 964

śloka 159
अथ के न प्रयुक्तोऽयं पापं चरति पूरुषः ।
अनिच्छन्नपि वार्ष्णेय बलादिव नियोजितः ॥ ७.१५९ ॥
atha kena prayukto:'yaṃ pāpaṃ carati pūruṣaḥ.
anicchannapi vārṣṇeya balādiva niyojitaḥ (7.159).
You must be familiar with this śloka from Bhagavadgītā 3.36. Here, Arjuna asks a question
to Lord Kṛṣṇa. What is the invisible force within because of which a person commits pāpa?
Pāpa here means sinful actions. How a person commits a criminal act? Even though he
does not want to do that, even though he wants to be a noble person, one ends up doing;
some people take even decisions also, resolutions; how many New Year decisions we
make and against our own decisions we violate the rule! The freewill tells something, but
the kartā does something else. Therefore, he asks the question anicchān api. He does the
sinful acts as though somebody else is handling him like a puppet. That is why people say
we are puppets in the hands of someone. That means we are connected to the strings and
the strings must be handled by someone. What is that force? Normally, we will say
Bhagavān. But Kṛṣṇa says don’t blame me for your sinful acts! Your own prārabdha-
vāsanās are responsible for all your sins. This answer is given in the next śloka.

śloka 160
काम एष क्रोध एष रजोगुणसमुद्भवः ।
महाशनो महापाप्मा विद्ध्येनमिह वैरिणम्॥ ७.१६० ॥
kāma eṣa krodha eṣa rajoguṇasamudbhavaḥ.
mahāśano mahāpāpmā viddhyenamiha vairiṇam (7.160).
The powerful force within is kāma-krodha, born out of rajo-guṇa, says Kṛṣṇa. One has so
much rajo-guṇa, you cannot blame Bhagavān for that. If rajo-guṇa is predominant, it is
because of prārabdha-vāsanā which is due to my pūrva-janma-activities. Rajo-guṇa here
refers to prārabdha-vāsanās alone. The nature of kāma is responsible for greed. Greed is
responsible for all forms of corruption. Therefore, corruption sin is because of greed alone.
The second cause of sin is mahā-papma which is otherwise called anger. Anger is called
sinner because anger alone leads to violence. Desire leads to greed and anger leads to
violence. Violence is a mahā-pāpa. Mahāśana kāma and mahā-papma krodha. Both are
born out of rajo-guṇa. It is an internal enemy sitting inside making you a puppet. On the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 965

other hand, Bhagavān is only sāmānya kāraṇa while our prārabdha is viśeṣa kāraṇa.
Therefore, viśeṣa kāraṇa is your internal enemy. May you understand this fact. This
vāsanā alone, when it is very powerful, fights against the freewill and powerful vāsanā
always defeats the freewill; therefore, the freewill has a set of desires but the desires of
freewill are never allowed to be implemented, because vāsanā sometimes wins over
freewill. That is why even though I don’t want to do a certain thing, I end up doing that
very certain thing and that is called anicchā-prārabdha.

śloka 161
स्वभावजेन कौन्तेय निबद्धः स्वेन कर्मणा ।
कर्तुं नेच्छसि यन्मोहात्करिष्यस्यवशोऽपि तत्॥ ७.१६१ ॥
svabhāvajena kaunteya nibaddhaḥ svena karmaṇā.
kartuṃ necchasi yanmohātkariṣyasyavaśo:'pi tat (7.161).
All are Gītā-quotations. The previous one is that of 3.37 and now Vidyāraṇya jumps to
18th chapter 60th śloka. Here also, na icchasi yat mohāt kariṣyasi. Here also, the idea of
anicchān occurs. Lord Kṛṣṇa addresses Arjuna. He tells him that your freewill may decide
to go to the forest and lead a simple life. You don’t want to kill Bhīṣma, Drona and others.
Even if your freewill decides to live a quiet life, you will not succeed because your
svabhāva is rajo-guṇa-pradhāna. You are not only Kṣatriya by janma but you are kṣatriya
by guṇa also. If you had natural sattva-guṇa, from forest you would not have come to the
battlefield at all, but you were itching for this day; from that, it is clear that your svabhāva
is rajo-guṇa-pradhāna. It will not allow you to sit quiet even for some time. That is why
we say even if you take sannyāsa and go to Rishikesh, you will form a sannyāsī-welfare-
organization! Not only you will go on agitation but pick up other sadhus also and fight. I
am not saying it is right or wrong but what I say is that you will not be allowed to sit
quiet. Therefore, anicchān api, you will be active.
Why cannot you be dharmically active instead? You are governed by, influenced by,
persuaded by, pushed by or goaded by your own karma. Here, the word karma refers to
prārabdha-vāsanā. This prārabdha-vāsanā is the determined svabhāvajena, determined by
your own svabhāva, which is rajo-guṇa-pradhāna svabhāva. You will helplessly perform
one karma or the other. You cannot sit quiet. You will be engaged in one activity or the
other which activity you try to avoid now. You will not succeed in avoiding against your

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 966

own freewill or own icchā or your own prārabdha-vāsanā will prevail. That is why śāstric
advice is: always make your freewill align with your prārabdha-vāsanā. The choice of
profession must always be in alignment with your prārabdha-vāsanā. Don’t go by your
salary. The profession you choose should be in keeping with your vāsanā. Don’t say
stealing is my vāsanā. There is a third factor also. The profession must be governed by
will, vāsanā and dharma. For you, vāsanā is to be active and you are good in warfare. You
use your warfare skill for protecting dharma. If you feel like fighting, join the army or
police. So your vāsanā is also fulfilled and society requires police force also. That is the
idea expressed here. If you try to avoid it because of your delusion, because of ignoring
the fact of your vāsanā, you will miserably fail. All these are said to convey the idea that
prārabdha has it say in deciding your profession. Jñānīs with rajo-guṇa will be ever-active.
Jñānī’s dynamism will be a blessing to the society. If we are learning Vedānta now, it is
only because of dynamic jñānis. Other jñānis we don’t even know about, whether they
existed or not, because they sat in caves. Unwept and unsung, they disappeared! There
are jñānīs whom Bhagavān uses to propagate Vedānta. Propagation of Vedānta needs
active jñānī.

śloka 162
नानिच्छन्तो न चेच्छन्तः परदाक्षिण्यसंयुताः ।
सुखदुःखे भजन्त्येतत्परेच्छा पूर्वकर्म हि ॥ ७.१६२ ॥
nānicchanto na cecchantaḥ paradākṣiṇyasaṃyutāḥ.
sukhaduḥkhe bhajantyetatparecchā pūrvakarma hi (7.162).
Anicchā-prārabdha topic is over. Now, Vidyāraṇya gives one śloka for the third variety
that is parecchā-prārabdha. Otherwise, it is called aneccha-prārabdha. For explaining
icchā-prārabdha also, Vidyāraṇya took ajñānī saṃśārī as an example. For explaining
anicchā-prārabdha also, Vidyāraṇya takes up saṃśārī ajñānī as the example because Gītā-
quotation deals with ajñānī. Hence, Vidyāraṇya has taken up the example of an ajñānī. For
the third one, Vidyāraṇya takes up the jñānī’s life as the example. Paradākṣiṇyasaṃyutāḥ
means a person who is a jñānī compassionate towards other people. He goes through
pleasurable or painful experience by doing the loka-saṅgraha karma. Because of the
compassion of the society they perform loka-saṅgraha-karma and while doing loka-
saṅgraha, they go through pleasurable and painful experiences also. The pain they go

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 967

through is desired by himself. This pain the jñānī has not asked for. You cannot say jñānī
wanted to avoid either, because jñānī is neutral with regards to his experience. Therefore,
you cannot classify it under liked one nor you can classify it under disliked one. Purely
because of parecchā, others’ desire or others’ struggle, this will come under parecchā
pūrvakarma hi. They are prārabdha-vāsanās which express through others’ desires or
others’ requirements or others’ needs. I have another example. Whatever loka-saṅgraha
karma a jñānī does, it can be called parecchā-karma and if the jñānī gets honoured by
somebody, you cannot say jñānī wanted it; therefore, it comes under parecchā-prārabdha.
All honours, etc., will come under parecchā. This is not a Gītā śloka.

śloka 163
कथं तर्हि किमिच्छन्नित्येवमिच्छा निषिध्यते ।
नेच्छानिषेधः किन्त्विच्छाबाधो भर्जितबीजवत्॥ ७.१६३ ॥
kathaṃ tarhi kimicchannityevamicchā niṣidhyate.
necchāniṣedhaḥ kintvicchābādho bharjitabījavat (7.163).
He has explained all the three prārabdhas: icchā, anicchā and parecchā. Of these three,
what is relevant for our discussion is the first one. That is icchā-prārabdha because that is
the topic here kim icchan kasya kāmāya. Through this discussion, Vidyāraṇya has
established that jñānis do have icchā, desires, caused by prārabdha-vāsanās. Now, this will
create a problem. The problem is that in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya Upaniṣad
negates the desires. Then we quoted Bhagavadgītā. There is a contradiction introduced
now! Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad second line negates desires for a jñānī and now, through
prārabdha-vāsanā discussion, Vidyāraṇya has established that jñānis do have desires
caused by prārabdha-vāsanā. Now, the question is which one is correct? Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya himself raises a question and answers it. This is called thorough analysis. An
intelligent student asks the question after having seen the contradiction between
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya and the Vidyāraṇya’s arguments. If jñānī has desires
caused by prārabdha-vāsanā, kathaṃ icchā niṣidhyate, how are desires negated by the
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra? This is the question of the student. Vidyāraṇya wanted
this question to come up. Then only he can introduce the next topic. Whenever we say
jñānī does not have desires, we only mean jñānī does not have ‘binding desires’. By this,
we indirectly accept jñānī has non-binding desires. Refer to śloka 262. There, in the second

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 968

line, he says you can have one crore non-binding desires also. Don’t ask if they are moral
or immoral. Remember that it is understood that moral legitimate non-binding desires
jñānī can have. Icchā-niṣedha na. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad does not negate desires by the
expression kim icchan. Śruti never negates the desires.
Śruti only falsifies the desires and makes the desires mithyā. That falsification alone we
term as ‘non-binding,’ a false rope cannot bind you. Real rope will bind you. A false rope
will not bind you. Similarly, here also icchā-bādha. He gives the example of roasted seed,
a very popular example. Roasted seed exists; it is physically utilized for various purposes.
It will serve all the purposes except doing one thing that it has lost, its capacity to
germinate into plants. Similarly, every kāma, every desire, is a seed which can germinate
into punarjanma. In Muṇdakopaniṣad kāmānyaḥ kāmayate manyamānaḥ sa
kāmabhirjāyate tatra tatra, it is clearly said that desires determine your next janma.
kāmānyaḥ kāmayate saḥ kāmabhiḥ tatra tatra jāyate. Desire is the seed for punarjanma or
rebirth. Therefore, normally desire germinates into punarjanma. In the case of jñānī, since
desire is roasted with ‘jñāna fire’, the desire loses its capacity to germinate punarjanma.
Kāma is there but it will not germinate into punarapi jananam in the case of a jñānī.
Vidyāraṇya will explain this later. Here, he gives the example.

śloka 164
भर्जितानि तु बीजानि सन्त्यकार्यकराणि च ।
विद्वदिच्छा यथेष्टव्यासत्त्वबोधान्न कार्यकृ त्॥ ७.१६४ ॥
bharjitāni tu bījāni santyakāryakarāṇi ca.
vidvadicchā yatheṣṭavyāsattvabodhānna kāryakṛt (7.164).
As the roasted seeds do exist but do not possess the potency of germination, similarly, the
desire of the wise man may exist but do not create dependence in him on account of his
realization of the illusory nature of the world. The roasted seeds are incapable of doing its
primary function of germination of developing into a plant. Similarly, what is the primary
function of kāma? It is punarapi jananam punarapi maraṇam. The primary function of
kāma is perpetuation of saṃsāra-cycle. That function of perpetuation of saṃsāra-cycle is
destroyed by the jñāna-agni in the case of a jñānī. The desire of a wise person which he has
indirectly said has been roasted by vidyā. Vidyā-bharjita-icchā has been roasted like a seed
in the case of a jñānī. Here also, the desire should be considered or understood as the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 969

roasted seed. It will not do its primary function of perpetuating saṃsāra. All is because of
asattvabodha because of the knowledge of the mithyātva of the desires. More in the next
class.

Class 201
śloka 164 contd.
A desire comes out of two reasons; one, out of a sense of incompleteness, which is a
compulsion to make an effort to fill that gap; second, where there is no compulsion but
there is only joy in action. This desire is born out of plentitude. The desire of the Lord to
create is not born out of compulsion or out of necessity but out of joy – thus it becomes his
‘lila’. The world has neither a creation nor dissolution. There is neither bondage nor
liberation. The truth is that without happening, everything appears to happen. Vidyāraṇya
analyses the second line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya. While analyzing, he
established that a jñānī also can have desires caused by prārabdha-vāsanās, even though
the general rule is that the desires are born out of ajñāna. We should accept another group
of desires which will not come under ajñāna-janya desires but which will come under
prārabdha-vāsanā-janya-icchā. That is the reason different jñānīs have different types of
desires some have desires to do lokasaṅgraha, while some do not desire to do that. Even
among those who want to serve the world, all of them serve in the same field, the field
varies, the type of service varies. These differences are not caused by jñāna because jñāna
is uniform in all. These differences are not caused by Brahman because Brahman is the
same in all the individuals. The only difference in different jñānīs, the differentiating
factor, is their prārabdha only. This prārabdha-vāsanā alone persuades them and makes
them express their natural compassion in the form of different forms of service which will
help the society. Compassion is uniform but the expression of compassion is not uniform;
it will depend upon their prārabdha-vāsanā. Then naturally the question came if jñānīs
also have desires caused by prārabdha-vāsanā, how come the scriptures negate the
desires? So, in Kaṭhopaniṣad, it is said all the kāmas are gone in the case of jñānīs. In
Bhagavadgītā and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad also, indirectly desires are negated. If jñānīs
have desires, how the Śruti does negation?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 970

For that, Vidyāraṇya says I know you will ask the question. In fact, I want you to ask the
question so that I will have opportunity to deal with it. So, Vidyāraṇya is only too happy
to give the answer. He says negation is only falsification. It is exactly like the negation of
sunrise. It is not the negation of the experience of the sunrise but it is only the negation
that is only falsification of the sunrise. Therefore, icchā-niṣedha is icchā-mithyātva, called
as icchā-bādha. The technical word is badha. It will be physically present but it is as good
as absent. What do you mean by falsification? In what way is the falsified desire of a jñānī
and unfalsified desire of an ajñānī; between these two desires what is the difference? It is
like a roasted seed and unroasted seed. Both of them are seeds. Both of them are
physically available. But there is an invisible difference. The difference is not visible to the
eyes. But there is a difference. The difference is this. When a roasted seed is planted, it will
never sprout into a plant. The sprouting faculty is destroyed. The other seed will
germinate into a tree. The bādhaka-icchā will not sprout into saṃsāra and abādhaka-icchā
will sprout into saṃsāra. That is the idea given in śloka 165. The roasted seeds do not do
their regular function, their normal function. In the same way, vidvadicchā api the desire
of a Vidvān roasted in jñāna-agni will not do the function of punarapi jananam. It should
be understood in the same manner as the roasted seed it does not do its regular function
because of the knowledge and the unreality of those desires and the desired objects. When
the mind itself is falsified ,where is the question of a particular desire in the mind being
real? Everything is in the jñāna-tsunami. All of them have been flooded and overpowered.
Now, Vidyāraṇya elaborates as to what happens in the mind of the ajñānī when he enjoys
everything in life. When he enjoys anything in life it may be an object, it may be a situation
or it may be relationship itself and when that enjoyment is there in the mind, certain
thought-pattern develops, whereas in the mind of a jñānī, such thought-patterns never
happen. That makes the difference. It is a very beautiful psychology. It is a psychological
difference between jñānī and ajñānī that is given here. The following ślokas are a
commentary on this important śloka.

śloka 165
दग्धबीजमरोहेऽपि भक्षणायोपयुज्यते ।
विद्वदिच्छाप्यल्पभोगं कुर्यान्न व्यसनं बहु ॥ ७.१६५ ॥
dagdhabījamarohe:'pi bhakṣaṇāyopayujyate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 971

vidvadicchāpyalpabhogaṃ kuryānna vyasanaṃ bahu (7.165).

First, Vidyāraṇya explains the example. Take the roasted seed. Even though it cannot
sprout or germinate, it is physically present and it can be used for consumption in one
form or the other. It is very much useful. The seed is not absolutely useless. With regards
to the sprouting, it is useless. In all other respects, the seed can be useful especially here
bhogāya. Similarly, jñānī’s icchā will not function in creating saṃsāra. This icchā has got
sufficient capacity to give the bhoga. It has the bhoga-giving capacity, but it does not have
germinating capacity. The capacity is divided into two as experience-giving capacity or
pleasure-giving capacity, but germinating-capacity is not there as in the case of the roasted
seed. Therefore, he says vidvadicchā api. Like the roasted seed, the desire of the wise
person also alpabhogaṃ kuryāt, it will give the enjoyment or pleasure at that time by
entering the mind of the jñānī. But it will not create over-involvement of the mind. The
mind will not get over-involved or over-obsessed or over-enamoured or over-stressed.
The mind does not get stuck. Even though the actual enjoyment or contact might have
taken for five minutes or fifteen minutes the mind does not get stuck in the object, like in
the others’ case where the mind even after hours of the bhoga very successfully it
experiences the same. All dhyānas are a failure but when it comes to viṣaya-dhyāna, it is
very successful. This person is dear dearer and dearest. When the dearest man does
something against, the love turns into krodha. It builds up on those enjoyment. This
Vidyāraṇya calls vyasana. It means mental involvement. Later, one gets into deep
attachment and addiction, in which condition when I don’t get contact, I cannot survive.
So much he gets involved in the relationship. It is not ordinary vyasana. It becomes an
anxiety, a worry more than myself I am more worried about the parivāra. This is called
entanglement. This is where jñānī escapes and he does not get into that entanglement. I
will give the example of jack-fruit which has got milky substance which is highly sticky. If
you don’t know how to handle that, you will get stuck. First, you get it on right, then left
hand. So everything you touch, the hand gets stuck. A wise man first applies coconut oil
which is called jñāna. After applying the coconut oil, you enter the hands into jack-fruit
nothing will happen. It is not a sticky affair. This oil ajñānī does not have and therefore, he
gets into problem.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 972

śloka 166
भोगेन चरितार्थत्वात्प्रारब्धं कर्म हीयते ।
भोक्तव्यसत्यताभ्रान्त्याव्यसनं तत्र जायते ॥ ७.१६६ ॥
bhogena caritārthatvātprārabdhaṃ karma hīyate.
bhoktavyasatyatābhrāntyāvyasanaṃ tatra jāyate (7.166).
In the case of a jñānī, that particular enjoyment, experience, gives a mental experience and
its job is over and it disappears from his mind. It does not continue to occupy the mind.
These things occupy the mind and refuse to vacate the territory for the others. Therefore,
with the sensory experience, the job of the sensory objects is over. Its purpose is over once
it gives pleasure or pain. That alone is the job of prārabdha. Getting attached and addicted
is not the function of prārabdha. Ajñāna is responsible for addiction. Sense- objects are
responsible for that minimum pleasure only. In the case of a jñānī, they give minimum
pleasure and disappear. In the case of ajñānī, they linger around and the ajñānī embraces
them and gets stuck. The responsibility of the sense-object is giving that mental experience
and once the experience is given, the function of the sense-object is over. The rest of the
problem is not created by the sense-object but the immature mind creates that. And how
does it happen? It is a thorough analysis of the psychology. He says that the ajñānī has got
the delusion that the object and the experience are both a reality as it is, as well the
experience the objects give. The object in this context includes the persons also. The
experience of comfort security, joy all those experiences are taken as an absolute reality by
the ajñānī because of delusion. It gives the effects of delusion. Once the delusion comes,
the mind gets attached to that object. And I have got a big circle of aham and mama. Like
the spider has got the web. It wants to put all the insects flying around within that web.
We are all like spiders and we have also a web called ahaṅkāra-mamakara and we have
the object into the list of my objects: my house, my relationship, my name, my fame; in
that web, I include these objects as well. And once the objects have fallen under ahaṅkāra
and mamakara, worries start because preservation becomes my responsibility. I have got
that object from Bhagavān. It was Īśvara-sṛṣṭi, then within the ambit of jīva-sṛṣṭi, I claim
ownership and controllership. Then what happens? Then, I am concerned. I develop
worries. That also becomes one of the objects requiring my regular worries. Once the
object is included in the regular worry every time I pray to Īśvara, there has to be special
prayer to be invoked for each one of the objects and persons. Each one in the ahaṅkāra and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 973

mamakara has to be carefully enumerated and special prayers have to be addressed,

which means it has fallen within my abhimāna and every object of abhimāna entraps me
into saṃsāra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says the whole thing started in the feeling that the
objects and persons gives comfort. This alone entraps men. Therefore, we do viśeṣa
prārthanā.

śloka 167
मा विनश्यत्वयं भोगो वर्धतामुत्तरोत्तरम्।
मा विघ्नाः प्रतिबध्नन्तु धन्योऽस्म्यस्मादिति भ्रमः ॥ ७.१६७ ॥
mā vinaśyatvayaṃ bhogo vardhatāmuttarottaram.
mā vighnāḥ pratibadhnantu dhanyo:'smyasmāditi bhramaḥ (7.167).
Interestingly, Vidyāraṇya does not call it viśeṣa-prārthanā, directed-prayers, but he calls it
as bhrama. He calls it bhrama because it perpetuates saṃsāra. Hence it is a delusion. May
this comfort that I derive from these people and these objects and these possessions make
the emotional comfort continue all the time. Let it not face any threat from any source.
May any obstacle not hinder my enjoyment. Not only should they not go way but they
should expand further and continue to give enjoyment all the time. Let the emotional
comfort and the source of all the comforts all grow well or prosper well. These are all
special prayers regularly directed to Bhagavān. The way in which ignorant man faces
prārabdha and how he suffers because of the bondage or attachment, is the theme of this
śloka. The teacher, therefore, says the only right way to live in this world is to respond and
not to react. When such a lifestyle of non-reaction is adopted, one can work out prārabdha
and at the same time, the mind is emptied. We want Īśvara to relax all the regular laws
when it comes to my parivāra. This is the expectation and Vidyāraṇya says there is no
greater delusion than this. Let not any threat come to sources of my emotional comforts
because now everything is so fine and well; I am fulfilled and I am happy; it is very
comfortable; O Lord! Don’t disturb anything. Let it be as it is. This is the delusion.
A jñānī never prays like that. Even in karma-yoga level special prayers should be given up
and what to talk about jñāna-yoga level and what to talk about jñānī level. If at all there is
a prayer, it is: O Lord! give me the strength to accept the laws of karma and its
consequences. This is the karma-yogi’s special prayer to God. Jñāna-yogi cannot even pray
to the Lord because jñāna-yogi has changed the format from jīva-jagat-Īśvara to Ātma-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 974

anātmā. Here, Bhagavān is not there. There are only two things in the creation: I the Ātmā
and everything else the anātmā. Whatever events have to happen those are influenced by
prārabdha. Let anything happen at anātmā level because of karma. I, the Ātmā, am asaṅga
cidānanda svarūpa. Karma-yogi can ask for strength. Jñāna-yogi invokes his svarūpa,
nididhyāsana is natural whenever a problem comes. For a karma-yogi, prayer for strength
is natural whenever a problem comes. Prayer is not for solution. The nididhyāsana is so:
anātmā is mithyā influenced by karma. Nobody including Īśvara can or does change the
course of karma. I know what I am. This is the jñānī’s approach. That is given in the next
śloka.

śloka 168
यदभावि न तद्भावि भावि चेन्न तदन्यथा ।
इति चिन्ताविषग्नोऽयं बोधो भ्रमनिवर्तकः ॥ ७.१६८ ॥
yadabhāvi na tadbhāvi bhāvi cenna tadanyathā.
iti cintāviṣagno:'yaṃ bodho bhramanivartakaḥ (7.168).
Here, the first line is within a quotation. This is the thought of a jñānī. Vidyāraṇya says
that every event in life is decided by my present karma that is āgāmi and my past karma
which is prārabdha. Āgāmi and prārabdha put together will decide the events and since I
don’t know what is the prārabdha I can never know what the event is going to be. I can
understand my action in the present because I do the action. I know something about
āgāmi and also how much efforts I put forth. Prārabdha I cannot know anything about it.
Since one component is unknown, the events are unpredictable. For predicting any event,
all data must be available. I don’t have the data. Therefore, what will happen, I have no
way of predicting or knowing in advance. When I cannot know anything about it, how can
I control it? Therefore, absolutely I have no control; willed by Bhagavān, governed by
āgāmi and prārabdha, things happen. What has to happen according to this will happen
and what should not happen according to this will not happen. However, although we are
cautious that something should not happen, it cannot be avoided.
This is not a fatalistic śloka. What is the difference between fatalism and this śloka?
Fatalism is if you say everything is governed by prārabdha only then it is fatalism. Here,
we don’t say prārabdha alone governs the happenings. We say prārabdha also decides the
events. Now, whatever I am doing, the present action, say if it is a particular sickness and I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 975

take medicine; taking the medicine is my present action which alone I name as āgāmi.
Āgāmi accommodates freewill. If you say prārabdha alone is, that is fatalism. If you
accommodate āgāmi, then that is the role of freewill and freewill and fate will join together
and the appropriate result will be produced which we will never know until it happens.
We do not know it because one of the components is prārabdha and we do not know its
influence. Therefore, as they say operation is successful, but the patient dies! Āgāmi is
very good there, but prārabdha has been not cooperative. What has to happen is decided
by will and fate put together. What will not happen cannot happen. There is awareness or
understanding that the future is unpredictable, future is uncontrollable; and therefore, my
philosophy is contribute to the future, but never hope to control the future. It is the only
remedy for the poison called worry. This wisdom is the only medicine for the poison
called worry. Worry cannot change the course of events in the future. The only effect of
worry is that it spoils the health. That is the greatest contribution of worry.
There are two things citā and cintā. Citā is the funeral pyre over which the dead body is
burnt. Cintā means worry. What is common to both is that both burn the body. Citā burns
the body and cintā also burns the body. Of these two which is superior or more powerful.
The śloka says cintā is more powerful because the citā burns only the dead body that too
only once. But worry eats and destroys the live body the whole life. When that is the case
why should we unnecessarily worry about everything? Cintā is destroyer of the body.
Cintā is a special poison for which we have no remedy except by gaining jñāna. It is a slow
killer of the affected victim. This knowledge and understanding is the only destroyer of
worry and also the remover of the delusion. Whatever is available around, make use of
their presence, whatever comfort you enjoy, it is ok; whatever contribution you can give
you give; don’t think of the future. Don’t project the future and get stuck as it is
absolutely of no use. A jñānī knows this well. That is the difference between the jñānī and
ajñānī.

śloka 169
समेऽपि भोगे व्यसनं भ्रान्तो गच्छेन्न बुद्धिमान्।
अशक्यार्थस्य सङ्कल्पाद्भ्रान्तस्य व्यसनं बहु ॥ ७.१६९ ॥
same:'pi bhoge vyasanaṃ bhrānto gacchenna buddhimān.
aśakyārthasya saṅkalpādbhrāntasya vyasanaṃ bahu (7.169).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 976

The best example is what Dayānanda Svāmījī gives. The person drinks cola, etc, with a
straw. When he brings it with the straw, the tongue is tasting it is bhoga. But the eyes
could have kept quiet. It looks at the level of the drink. As even he is sucking, the level
goes down fast. Therefore, he is worrying about going down will stop his enjoyment of
drinking. He cannot even enjoy the drink. Close the eyes until the sound comes that the
glass is empty. Forget and throw away the bottle. That is called jñāna. Even though
prārabdha-enjoyment of a jñānī and prārabdha enjoyment of an ajñānī are both the same,
the deluded, ajñānī is worried about the security of the things and people; and that very
worry becomes the obstacle for relaxed enjoyment. Therefore, the deluded ajñānī is
involved and worried. Remember the eyes looking at the level are vyasana, when the
tongue actually tastes. He does not know he tastes. He drank without drinking. Thus, we
live the life without living. We live in abstentia.
This is not the case with the wise person. He does not bother about the security and its
longevity as to how long it will be there, etc. All these are because of the expectation of the
impossible. Here, the expectation is I want to have total control over my possession, that
ownership and controllership, and therefore, such and such thing should happen. The
children should grow in this manner, educated in this manner, all be married in this
manner; all should get children in this manner; these are all our own expectations. The
prārabdha of children is not in our control. In fact, I cannot have control of my own
prārabdha. How can I control the future of my family members’? Still most of the
members or gṛhasthas worry about the life of the family members. This is hoping to
control the uncontrollable. They daydream with regard to the impossible future being
possible. Because of that day-dreaming, most of the time, we worry. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says, for this deluded ajñānī, there is stress, there is strain, there is tension and
there is saṃsāra. More in the next class.

Class 202
śloka 169 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses the jñāna-phala given in the second half of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra kim icchan kasya kāmāya. After elaborate analysis, he established that
jñāna-phala is kāma-nivṛtti. Thereafter, he interpreted that the word kāma-nivṛtti does not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 977

mean the destruction of all desires but it is the destruction of the binding desires. It means
non-binding desires are possible in a jñānī. Those desires are not generated by ajñāna but
they are generated by prārabdha-vāsanā. They are non-binding desires because even
when these non-binding desires are fulfilled, when a jñānī enjoys those desires, they don’t
have the capacity to create further saṃsāra. Why it does not create further saṃsāra? Why
it creates further saṃsāra in the case of an ajñānī? The difference is very beautifully
presented here. An ajñānī also may enjoy prārabdha-vāsanā-janya bhoga. A jñānī also may
enjoy prārabdha-vāsanā-janya bhoga. When an ajñānī enjoys, his attitude is different, first
the idea of satyatva-buddhi is there. The notion of reality is there and also there is
attachment to bhoga and worry about losing that. That cintā, worry, about losing that
favourable condition is there and invariably, worry will lead to viśeṣa-prārthanā. Cintā
and viśeṣa-prārthanā is there, where abhimāna is claiming that bhoga or enjoyment and
cintā is the worry about losing that; so, invariably there is a special prayer: O Lord! Let
everything continue in the best condition as they are available now. In one corner, there is
a special prayer for dṛṣṭi-parihāra, because neighbours are watching my wonderful
condition. This cintā and viśeṣa-prārthanā indicate bhrama and this delusion alone is
responsible for further saṃsāra because abhimāna gets reinforced. That alone he said in
167th śloka how a saṃsārī enjoys favourable conditions. It is invariably along with the
prayer that we want the same kind of condition and enjoyment to continue forever. Thus
the mental strain is there.
However, in the case of a jñānī, that bhrama is not at all there. First, he does not have
satyatva-buddhi. Second, he never hopes to retain any particular condition because he
knows that prārabdha is a fluctuating factor. Therefore, what is his thought-pattern?
Saṃsārī’s viśeṣa-prārthanā is given in śloka 167 while the jñānī’s special attitude is given
in śloka 168. What is that attitude? Whatever has to come according to prārabdha will
come, whether we want or do not want. It has to go away according to prārabdha,
whether or not we want to retain that situation. I cannot change the prārabdha-flow. This
awareness he maintains in situations that are favourable and this awareness alone is the
medicine for powerful causes of saṃsāra. This is the only destroyer of the future saṃsāra.
The expectation or cintā is the slow-killer for the individual jīva. Not only this is the
medicine for the cintā but also it is the medicine for –-shama and bhrama-nivṛtti. It is the
eliminator of delusion also. Prārabdha must be all the time favourable to me and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 978

favourable prārabdha should not go away and unfavourable prārabdha should not come
to me. This is bhrama. This bhrama will go away and prārabdha will bring ups and downs
welcome. Jñānī welcomes whatever prārabdha comes and whatever goes; he gives
farewell without any problem. Resisting the arrival of prārabdha and protesting the
departure of prārabdha is bhrama. –-Jñānī has in one hand pannir and another hand
vethilai pakku. Whatever comes he receives with pannir and whatever goes he gives them
vethilai pakku and asks them to go. Resisting the arrival of prārabdha and protesting the
departure of prārabdha is bhrama. Whatever has to come will come and whatever is not to
come will not come. With the attitudinal change, the very nature of bhoga will become
different. Even though the experience of the favourable prārabdha is the same for both
jñānī and ajñānī, saṃsārī has got inner tension, worry and fear while the jñānī is free of
tension ,worry and fear. Jñānī is ready to lose the losable. And dṛṣṭi-bhaya is inherent in
ajñānī because he has got an illogical wish. Wherever there is an illogical expectation,
there will be strain because illogical expectation cannot be fulfilled. Because of the
expectation of the impossible, the unintelligent, confused and deluded person undergoes
emotional strain, fear and anxiety, etc. What is the illogical expectation? That is given in
śloka 167. Ayam bhoga this favourable conditions caused by karma or prārabdha should
be permanently be there with me is the expectation. Karma-phala he wants to be nitya.
Karma-phala is anitya; this is what we study regularly in the Veda. How can it be nitya? Is
it not foolish to expect such an impossible feat? Such an expectation will lead one to
disappointment only. Disappointment will lead one to despair and anguish. Hence, the
individual undergoes lot of emotional strain. Jñānī does not have such an expectation at
all. Therefore, when the prārabdha is favourable, he makes hay while the sun shines. Do
whatever you can do. He does not have an illogical expectation. That is said in the śloka
170

śloka 170
मायामयत्वं भोग्यस्य बुद्ध्वास्थामुपसंहरन्।
भुञ्जानोऽपि न सङ्कल्पं कुरुते व्यसनं कुतः ॥ ७.१७० ॥
māyāmayatvaṃ bhogyasya buddhvāsthāmupasaṃharan.
bhuñjāno:'pi na saṅkalpaṃ kurute vyasanaṃ kutaḥ (7.170).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 979

What is the attitude of a jñānī when favourable prārabdha brings him favourable
conditions? Vidyāraṇya says a jñānī is intensely aware of whatever he has learnt in
Vedānta classes. They are meant for using in life. Therefore, jñānī keeps it in his mind,
bright and alive. He knows well the doṣas of every bhoga or enjoyment; he remembers
duḥkha-miśritatva, atṛpti-karatva and bandhakatva. After studying Vedānta, he also
knows the mithyātva of the whole world and the people. Not only he remembers all these
factors, but he also remembers one more important factor. All the events and conditions in
life are connected to prārabdha as one of the powerful factors. Every action is influenced
by prārabdha and the āgāmi karma. Past freewill has generated prārabdha and present
freewill has generated āgāmi and therefore, every event in life is the result of prārabdha
and āgāmi karmas. Of these two, āgāmi is within my control because the present freewill I
can use as I like. But the past freewill in form of prārabdha has already been used and
therefore, prārabdha is unpredictable, uncontrollable and unsustainable. Thus, all the
events in life also are unpredictable, uncontrollable and unsustainable as they are
connected to prārabdha. This also he is intensely aware of and that he can only choose
āgāmi, that is, contributorship is in his control; yet, he knows so: I don’t have
controllership. I should not have any expectation regarding the future. I should not have
any expectation, obsession, daydreaming, fantasies, building castles in the air, whatever
you call it. He no more entertains those thought-patterns. Minimum planning is required
for deciding today’s activities. You cannot project too much regarding the future.
Therefore, he withdraws his tendency to project the future too much. Projecting the future
alone is called saṅkalpa. He does not project or plan too much regarding the future. He
will plant the āgāmi part for he knows the unpredictability of the prārabdha part. This he
intensely is aware even when he enjoys the favourable benefits of prārabdha karma. By
favourable benefit, we mean maintaining good health and leading a normal life. Even then
jñānī does not dream too much and therefore, he has no fear, no anxiety and no concern.
He never gets disappointed in his life. Why bother about too much! Enjoy today. Bother
never about tomorrow. He does not do too much of projection. Therefore, he is never
disappointed for he had not plans. Why should he worry? Where is the cause for worry?
This is not a question. It is an assertion.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 980

śloka 171
स्वप्नेन्द्रजालसदृशमचिन्त्यरचनात्मकम्।
दृष्टनष्टं जगत्पश्यन्कथं तत्रानुरज्जति ॥ ७.१७१ ॥
svapnendrajālasadṛśamacintyaracanātmakam.
dṛṣṭanaṣṭaṃ jagatpaśyankathaṃ tatrānurajjati (7.171).
In the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya said jñānī does not forget the mithyā nature of the
universe. That is being explained in this śloka. The word māyāmayatva of the previous
śloka is explained here. He says the world is similar to svapna or a magic show. It is
compared to svapna because dream is real from the standpoint of svapna-observer and
when the observer changes from dreamer to waker, from waker’s standpoint it is no more
real. From taijasa-standpoint svapna is real; from viśva-standpoint svapna is unreal.
Vidyāraṇya says jagrat is real from viśva-standpoint and jagrat is unreal either from taijasa
or from turīya-standpoint. Therefore, it is only a relative reality. Not only that, it is similar
to dream. It is like a magic show. Why it is compared to a magic show? Vidyāraṇya says
how it appears you can never explain. Logical inexplicability is acintya-racanā. Its design
and its appearance is intellectually inconceivable or inexplicable. –-For a few minutes the
magician walks from the thin air. All these magics we see with our own eyes. You can see
the magic with your eyes but you cannot explain it. So is the world says Vidyāraṇya. It is
fleeting in nature. As even you see it, it will disappear and it is not stable. As Bhartṛhari
says in vairāgya-śataka, when I look back into my life at the age of seventy or eighty my
boyhood days, even though at that time it appeared long, when I look back, I find the
boyhood days were just a second. So also is the youth. A youth is interested in sense-
pleasure; that also looks like a second and I had lost all my money in my youth. For some
time, I was very rich and before I could be aware of all these things, the old age entered
into me. Now, the body is full of wrinkles and every joint is seeking attention. Hair turns
grey. Teeth are gone one by one. With a stick I am going towards the greenroom. In the
greenroom, the Yama-dharma-rājā invites me. If you look at the whole life from the
infinite time, it is dṛṣṭa-naṣṭa. Seeing such an unstable universe, how can an intelligent
person invest all his emotions in that fleeting thing? If at all I should invest my emotion, it
must be in Ātmā and not anātmā. No intelligent person will invest in anātmā bank
emotionally.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 981

śloka 172
स्वस्वप्नमापरोक्ष्येण दृष्ट्वा पश्यन्स्वजागरम्।
चिन्तयेदप्रमत्तः सन्नुभावनुदिनं मुहुः ॥ ७.१७२ ॥
svasvapnamāparokṣyeṇa dṛṣṭvā paśyansvajāgaram.
cintayedapramattaḥ sannubhāvanudinaṃ muhuḥ (7.172).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says initially it will be extremely difficult to accept the world as mithyā
or unreal. The mind will always refuse to swallow this fact because it is intimately
experienced by every sense-organ, and it is very much tangible and outside me, it is not
my mental projection; I see this world very much outside and so, the world is outside,
experienceable, tangible and capable of generating pleasure. It gives me joy. When I enjoy
a nice dish I am able to experience pleasure. How we can say such a world is mithyā? And
Vidyāraṇya says whenever such a doubt comes, if you have to convince your intellect,
imagine svapna. You have to imagine your own existence in your svapna; when I was
existing svapna, the svapna prapañca fulfilled all those conditions. For the dreamer, the
dream world was outside him. Waker says the says it is inside. Remember for the dreamer
the world was outside and the world was clearly experienceable through the five sense-
organs and not only that, it was solidly tangible; even though we say it is a mental
projection after waking, during dream, we never saw the objects as a thought but we could
feel that object physically not with this hand, but dream hand. The dream world is
tangible, experienceable, outside and also it gives me solid pleasure as well. When I ate
something nice there I really enjoyed.
Even though all the four conditions were fulfilled, what happens? On waking up it was
reduced to a bunch of thoughts projected by my own mind. But the dreamer will never
accept the dream as unreal in the dream. However, the fact is that it is unreal. In the same
way we have to extend the logic to the waking world. The world is outside,
experienceable, tangible and capable of giving pleasure, but still it is unreal from the
standpoint of turīya. One has to meditate regularly upon this, says Vidyāraṇya. May you
regularly meditate on this fact as often as possible without fail diligently and carefully.
Jagrat and svapna both one should compare and meditate. You experience your own
dream regularly, the idea is don’t compare with another’s dream directly and intimately.
Thereafter, waking up, may you see the jagrat prapañca also. Go back to svapna through
imagination. Remaining in waking, imagine the dream and compare the waking. When

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 982

you imagine the dream, you should not visualize the dream from waker’s standpoint but
you imagine your own dream remaining as a Taijasa, how it was. Therefore, svajagaram
api paśyan. With regard to svapna, he uses the word dṛṣṭvā, after completing the dream.
When he refers to jagrat, he says paśyan while you are awake. The idea is you should do
this meditation in jagrat-avasthā. In turīya, there is no meditation or anything. In jagrat-
avasthā, while experiencing jagrat you imagine dreamer’s dream and may you do this
meditation. If I meditate on jagrat and svapna, what will happen? Vidyāraṇya says I don’t
want to give anything as homework. I don’t know what type of homework you will do.
Therefore, I will tell you the consequences in the class itself.

śloka 173
चिरं तयोः सर्वसाम्यमनुसन्धाय जागरे ।
सत्यत्वबुद्धिं संत्यज्य नानुरज्जति पूर्ववत्॥ ७.१७३ ॥
ciraṃ tayoḥ sarvasāmyamanusandhāya jāgare.
satyatvabuddhiṃ saṃtyajya nānurajjati pūrvavat (7.173).
You can practice this contemplation and if you want further assistance in this we have got
the second chapter of Māṇḍūkya kārikā which is called vaitathya prakaraṇa. Here,
Gauḍapādācārya has made a beautiful comparative study of svapna and jagrat. The wise
man having contemplated on the common points of the characteristics of the waking and
dream experience comes to renounce the notion of reality in the waking experience and
thereafter gets enchanted and attached to the enjoyments as before.
In all respects, jagrat and svapna are same; both are experienceable, both are tangible, both
are capable of giving pleasure, both appear real for the relevant observer. For dream-
observer dream is real. For waking-observer waking is real. In all respects, both are same.
Even though both are same in all respect, we say svapna is unreal but we say jagrat is real
which is not vedantically correct; therefore, you should conclude jagrat prapañca is mithyā
just as svapna is. Tayoḥ sarvasāmyam anusandhāya, one should meditate upon the fact of
similarity in all respects of jagrat and svapna. Our mental habit of looking at jagrat
prapañca as real must be displaced. Therefore, it requires very very long nididhyāsana.
The notion of reality with regard to jagrat prapañca must be scrubbed off applying the
special bleaching power. Nididhyāsana is that special bleaching power and same should
be employed to remove the stain of jagat-satyatva-bhāvanā. You should totally remove the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 983

thought of jagat-satyavāda. Then alone, the mind will not be hooked to that or attached to
that as before. How are we know whether there is attachment or not? The moment
attachment comes viśeṣa-prārthanā will appear. The prayer is the indication of satyatva-
buddhi and deha-abhimāna. Previously, when he had satyatva-buddhi, worry and viśeṣa-
prārthanā were there and now with long nididhyāsana all of them will go away.

śloka 174
इन्द्रजालमिदं द्वैतमचिन्त्यरचनात्वतः ।
इत्यविस्मरतो हानिः का वा प्रारब्धभोगतः ॥ ७.१७४ ॥
indrajālamidaṃ dvaitamacintyaracanātvataḥ.
ityavismarato hāniḥ kā vā prārabdhabhogataḥ (7.174).
Now, Vidyāraṇya connects the original topic. If with this bhāvanā a jñānī enjoys the
prārabdha-bhoga that enjoyment will be like a roasted seed only. It will not be capable of
creating attachment and karma and punarapi jananam punarapi maraṇam. The entire
circle will not be perpetuated in the case of a jñānī because of this bhāvanā. Worry
indicates abhimāna and abhimāna indicates ownership and controllership. Then I have
trespassed into Bhagavān’s territory. Bhagavān is the registered owner. We cannot claim
his property as our own and claim ownership. Bhagavān is the only owner and controller.
Bhagavān has written a board “trespassers will be prosecuted”. What is the prosecution?
Saṃsāra-anuvṛtti, imprisonment in saṃsāra. If you don’t want saṃsāra, drop your worry
and abhimāna which is what jñānī does. This dvaita prapañca is like a magic show
because of its logical inexplicability and logical undefinability. All this Vidyāraṇya had
explained in the second chapter when the topic of Māyā came in śloka 125 or so. Jñānī
remembers this fact. Also refer to śloka 171. More in the next class.

Class 203
śloka 174 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues with his commentary on the second line of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra kim icchan kasya kāmāya, etc. The second line talks about the aparokṣa-
jñāna-phala. The phala Upaniṣad mentions is sarva-icchā-nivṛtti or sarva-kāma-nāśa.
Here, the word kim in kim icchan indicates the niṣedha ākṣepārthe kim. Vidyāraṇya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 984

refines that Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad statement by pointing out that when the Upaniṣad
talks about sarva-kāma-nāśa it should not be literally taken as sarva-kāma-nāśa. We have
to add an appropriate adjective sarva-bandhaka-kāma-nāśa. All the binding desires or
aśuddha kāma are destroyed. But abandhaka kāma or non-binding desires can be there in
a jñānī. Naturally, the question will come: normally desires are born out of ajñāna, but in
the case of a jñānī, ajñāna is not there. Then from where can the non-binding desires come
for a jñānī? There is no source namely avidyā. For that, Vidyāraṇya says kāma has got two
sources. avidyā is only one of the two sources. There is another source from which kāma
can come even for a jñānī. The second source we saw was prārabdha-vāsanā; pūrva-
janma-janita-vāsanā can be there and that vāsanā can influence the kartā jñānī with kāma.
Thereafter, he said this kāma even though there for the jñānī it is a non-binding desire
which means it cannot generate bandha. He gave a beautiful example to communicate
this. He compared the desire to the roasted seed. The seed has got two capacities one is
bhoga-pradatva and the other is aṅkura-janakatva. Bhoga means taste in the tongue or
consumability.
The second capacity of the seed is aṅkura-utpādakatva. Of these two, the roasting fire does
not destroy both the powers of the seed. The fire destroys only one capacity of the seed.
The one destroyed is aṅkura-utpādakatva-śakti. Even after that it is available for cooking
consumption, etc. Sometimes, it is tastier also. Just as the fire destroys the partial power of
the seed, the jñāna fire also destroys the partial power of kāma. So now, naturally, the
question comes: kāma has got how many powers? We said just as the seed has bhoga-
pradatva-śakti and aṅkura-utpādakatva-śakti [capacity to give taste in the mouth and the
capacity to generate]. Just as the seed has twofold capacity and of them one is destroyed
by the fire, kāma also has twofold capacity one is bhoga-pradatva and saṃsāra-
utpādakatva. In the case of the seed, aṅkura-utpādakatva but in the case of kāma it is
saṃsāra-utpādakatva. We have seen by increasing kāma more and more it generates
saṃsāra. Here, Vidyāraṇya says in the case of ajñānī’s kāma, both the powers are very
much intact. That means in the case of an ajñānī, kāma will have bhoga-pradatva-śakti as
well as saṃsāra-janakatva whereas in the case of jñānī, only bhoga-pradatva continues
while saṃsāra-utpādakatva-śakti is destroyed.
Therefore, jñānī goes through vyāvahārika bhoga given by the prārabdha kāma. Even
while he goes through vyāvahārika bhoga it will not create further kāma or further

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 985

saṃsāra. Therefore, he asks the question what adverse consequences can come for a jñānī
through prārabdha-vāsanā-janya-kāma! Jñānī is the one who does not forget
jaganmithyātva and for a jñānī who remembers jaganmithyātva all the time like a tamburā
śruti: Brahma satyam jagan mithyā aham brahmaiva na aparaḥ iti avismarataḥ jñāninaḥ.
In his case, jñāna does not destroy bhoga-prada-śakti of prārabdha. It is the capacity to
give experiences. Experience-giving capacity of prārabdha is not destroyed but what is
destroyed is saṃsāra-activation power. Therefore, what adverse consequence in the form
of saṃsāra-perpetuation can come for such a jñānī even though he goes through
prārabdha! This is not a question but this contains an answer that there is no adverse
effect. This he wants to further elaborate through more examples we will see.

śloka 175
निर्बन्धस्तत्त्वविद्याया इन्द्रजालत्वसंस्मृतौ ।
प्रारब्धस्याग्रहो भोगे जीवस्य सुखदुःखयोः ॥ ७.१७५ ॥
nirbandhastattvavidyāyā indrajālatvasaṃsmṛtau.
prārabdhasyāgraho bhoge jīvasya sukhaduḥkhayoḥ (7.175).
In these ślokas up to 180 Vidyāraṇya establishes that dvaita-mithyātva jñāna and
vyāvahārika prārabdha-bhoga can coexist. It can be there in the case of jīvanmukta and
along with this knowledge that all are mithyā, in spite of this knowledge, there can be
coexistence of prārabdha-janya vyāvahārika-bhoga; worldly experiences also can continue.
There is no contradiction in their coexistence; it is so because jñāna and prārabdha
function in two different planes of orders and therefore, there is no contradiction. This
Vidyāraṇya presents in a dramatic form. Imagine jñāna is one person who is insisting on
something and prārabdha is another person who is insisting on another thing. Like that,
two children are there for a jñānī and both are insisting on two things but they are totally
in different fields therefore, they can coexist. This is what he wants to say. But it will
appear vague now. As even he explains it will fall into place.
First, he talks about insistence of jñāna. Tattvavidyāyā nirbandhaḥ. The knowledge of the
Reality which is in the intellect of a jñānī, goes on insisting on one thing. The insistence of
tattvavidyā is indrajālatvasaṃsmṛtau. It keeps on reminding jagan mithyā, jagan mithyā,
like the tamburā śruti. It wants the mind to remember the mithyātva of the universe. That
is the job of tattvavidyā and it is the constant generation of the memory of jagan-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 986

mithyātva. indrajālatva is equal to mithyātva. indrajālatva literally means magic show. In

this context, magic show is mithyātva.
Prārabdha-kāma or prārabdha-vāsanā and prārabdha-vāsanā-janya kāma has got another
work. Prārabdha also has got insistence. Its function is sukha-duḥkha-yoga-bhoge. It has
got one aim that is ahaṅkāra of jñānī should go through favourable and unfavourable
experiences, sending sukha-duḥkha-bhoga. This bhoga-pradatva is the only aim of
prārabdha. One wants to send reminder and another experiences. These are the two
functions of tattvavidyā and prārabdha. Vidyāraṇya says they can happily coexist in a
jñānī. On the one side ahaṅkāra will go through ups and downs caused by prārabdha and
on the other side jñāna will remind that all these coming and going bhogas are only
vyāvahārika satya and they are not absolutely real. This will go on. Here, jīvasya refers to
ahaṅkāra part of jīva.

śloka 176
विद्यारब्धे विरुद्ध्येते न भिन्नविषयत्वतः ।
जानद्भिरप्यैन्द्रजालो विनोदो दृश्यते खलु ॥ ७.१७६ ॥
vidyārabdhe viruddhyete na bhinnaviṣayatvataḥ.
jānadbhirapyaindrajālo vinodo dṛśyate khalu (7.176).-
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers a possible doubt. Can a falsified world give sukha-duḥkha-
bhoga for a jñānī? Whether mithyātva-niścaya and sukha-duḥkha coexist in a person is the
question. Once mithyātva is established prārabdha cannot give sukha-duḥkha-bhoga is
the assumption of the Pūrvapakṣa. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣa argues they cannot coexist.
mithyātva niścaya and prārabdha-bhoga cannot coexist is their argument. Based on that
alone, many people argue that once you falsify jīva-jagat-Īśvara how can a jñānī have
bhakti for the Lord? If Bhagavān has been falsified as mithyā or Bhagavān has been
reduced to vyāvahārika satya, how is it possible to have bhakti? Some students argue also
that after studying Vedānta, bhakti is gone. Dayānanda Svāmījī says bhakti is the fake
bhakti and let it go. Can a falsified object function and give sukha-duḥkha-bhoga? For
that, Vidyāraṇya says it is very much possible. He gives an example of the magic show.
Magic show is false, everyone knows. The cutting of the person into two pieces is false,
everybody knows well. But even after knowing it is false, how many wise people [magic-
wise wise] buy a ticket and go and enjoy the magic show! We know that all the movies

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 987

and T.V series are mithyā. Everyone knows that T.V. serials are but light and shadow. The
people who die in the serial never die. We know it is a story and nothing is real. Even now
serials are running and advertisements are coming that means such a high rating is there.
Serials are watched by mithyātva-jñānīs. We ourselves switch on and when there is a
moving scene, tears also come in our eyes. The serial’s capacity for bhoga-pradāna,
enjoyment and also emotions, has not been destroyed by your knowledge that it is nothing
but a mithyā serial.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya argues that jñāna need not destroy the bhoga-pradatva of a mithyā
object. This is the experience of everyone, everyday. Old people are all in front of T.V only.
Vidyāraṇya says in the same way, jñānī can enjoy the world serial conducted by kapaṭa-
nāṭaka-sūtradhārī called Bhagavān. Bhagavān produces infinite serials and a jñānī can
understand its mithyātva and continue to watch and while watching even he can afford to
shed one or two tears also. The only difference is just as after the serial episode is over,
even though we shed tears, afterwards we switch off and say he acted very well. Similarly,
jñānī is able to switch off the serial because he knows the higher order of reality called the
greenroom Brahman. Entering the greenroom Brahman he can say it is a nice serial that
does not mean he should not watch or he should not shed tears also. Enjoy and also get
moved. Here jagan mithyātva vidyā is exactly like serial mithyātva mithyā. In this context
some more examples are there. Sunrise example is there. Even vedic rituals are based on
sunrise leave alone loukika karma. We are able to do our activities properly all the time
knowing the sunrise is mithyā. Similarly, Here also they belong to vyāvahārika and
pāramārthika field, mithyātva is from pāramārthika dṛṣṭi and bhoga pradatvam is from
vyāvahārika dṛṣṭi. Even the local wise people who are wise with regard to a magic show,
knows well the magic show is nothing but mithyā and yet they enjoy the show and forget
after seeing the show for he knows it is mithyā.

śloka 177
जगत्सत्यत्वमापाद्य प्रारब्धं भोजयेद्यदि ।
तदा विरोधि विद्याया भोगमात्रान्न सत्यता ॥ ७.१७७ ॥
jagatsatyatvamāpādya prārabdhaṃ bhojayedyadi.
tadā virodhi vidyāyā bhogamātrānna satyatā (7.177).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 988

Viśiṣṭādvaitins and Dvaitins criticize by raising so many contradictions and Vidyāraṇya

answers all their questions. One reveals dvaita and another advaita; dvaita and advaita all
coexist, so they challenge: how can the opposite coexist? For all those questions, these
ślokas are the answers. Pratyakṣa pramāṇa reveals dvaita and dvaita appears before us
but it is never declared as pāramārthika satya, just as sunrise never declares that I am the
reality. We are committing the mistake of taking it as real but sunrise by itself does not
declare whether it is satya or mithyā; that is our job. Similarly, Vidyāraṇya says when
prārabdha gives sukha or duḥkha, it never says that it is pāramārthika satya. It only gives
the experience of sorrow and happiness but it does not say it is satya. Satyatva is a false
conclusion made by the intellect. Satyatva is not declared by the object, satyatva is not
declared by the experience; satyatva is a conclusion made by our intellect until a particular
scientist said for the first time that the earth goes around the sun. No one believed because
it was then believed that the sun went around the earth. But truth prevailed even though
majority concluded that the sun rises; only one wise man realized it is mithyā, truth
prevailed. The sun itself did not declare my rise is satya or I am mithyā. Until we made the
enquiry we took it as satya and after the enquiry we understand it as mithyā although in
the experience, there is no change at all.
Experience does not declare the reality or otherwise. Vidyāraṇya says suppose the
experience declares the reality of dvaita then there will be a contradiction because
experience declares reality of dvaita and Vedānta declares unreality of dvaita; then there
will be a fight between dvaita and advaita, experience and Vedānta. Then, we can say that
Vedānta declares unreality, experience declares dvaita, Vedānta and dvaita will fight and
one of them will be knocked off! Experience never declares its status. Therefore, he says it
is a hypothetical situation. Suppose prārabdha brings about or declares jagat-satyatva, the
reality of the universe, and after declaring its reality, suppose it gives sukha and duḥkha,
makes a person experience them, then prārabdha and Vedānta would have become
contradictory. In such a possibility, prārabdha would have become contradictory to the
vidyā, the knowledge of the unreality of the world. But what is the fact? Prārabdha never
declares that it is real. On the other hand, it only gives you experiences like a TV serial.
The actors and actresses only give you the experience and they are never declaring that we
are real. If you conclude it is real that is not the TV characters’ problem but it is the
problem of your intellect. It is capable of giving bhoga without declaring reality. By mere

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 989

experience, there is no reality. All these things, Gauḍapāda beautifully tells in his
Māṇḍūkya kārikā. Experience does not prove reality; orderliness does not prove reality;
capacity to give pleasure and pain also does not prove reality; they all only prove that they
are available for experience.

śloka 178
अनूनो जायते भोगः कल्पितैः स्वप्नवस्तुभिः ।
जाग्रत्वस्तुभिरप्येवमसत्यैर्भोग इष्यताम्॥ ७.१७८ ॥
anūno jāyate bhogaḥ kalpitaiḥ svapnavastubhiḥ.
jāgratvastubhirapyevamasatyairbhoga iṣyatām (7.178).
In the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya said an unreal object does not declare that I am real. The
objects are only giving pleasure and pain; they are not declaring themselves to be real.
Reality is something that you attribute out of your misconception. Then, another doubt
may come. The object may not declare that it is real. But the very fact that the object is able
to give pleasure and pain, is it not a proof of its reality? Why should it declare its reality? It
does not directly declare the reality but indirectly it is declaring its reality by the very fact
that it is capable of giving pleasure and pain. It is real because how can an unreal object
give pleasure and pain! This is the possible doubt. Therefore, how do you say it does not
declare the reality? It does not directly declare but it indirectly declares. For that,
Vidyāraṇya gives his answer. The answer is: you are asking the question “how can unreal
object give pleasure and pain?” as though unreal object cannot! There is no rule that an
unreal object cannot give you pleasure and pain. In fact, unreal objects can happily,
comfortably, give pleasure and pain. In fact, in our life many pleasures and pains are
caused by unreal things alone, including our TV serials. I give the example there is some
growth in some part of the body and the doctors said take biopsy. The moment doctor said
biopsy, the patient imagines different types of cancers, etc. He has checked bank balance
and also who are all in which places, etc. He has done everything. For as many days until
the result comes, he is worried. Till the result is declared, in the whole family there is a
tsunami. Now, doctors says it is all ok. Five days of pain is caused by what? What type of
cancer created the pain, the real one or the unreal one? There was no cancer at all. The
imaginary cancer can shake the whole family. Vidyāraṇya asks if a mentally projected
cancer can create sorrow; what to talk of this world which is a bigger projection! Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 990

the world can cause sukha-duḥkha but that does not prove that it is real just as the fear of
cancer does not prove that the cancer is real, because even the imaginary cancer can cause
fear. Similarly, the fear of the world cannot prove the reality of the world because even a
mithyā world can happily give pleasure and pains.
Vidyāraṇya gives the example of svapna. We know svapna is false. But many people go to
bed with the special prayers. That is for dussvapna-nāśa-stotra. Why should we pray
against dussvapna, when we know svapna is false? Even mithyā-svapna can create
problem. Even mithyā padārthataḥ, bhogaḥ jayate, one experiences sukha-duḥkha-bhoga.
That anubhava also you cannot say it is minor. Anūnaḥ jāyate bhoga means it is intense
pleasure or pain. Intense pleasure and pain can arise through dream objects. Not only
sorrow or fear, even happiness can come through svapna or unreal objects. What I want to
say is that intense pleasure and intense pains are possible through mithyā padārtha. In fact
we say only mithyā padārthas can give experience. Brahman will never you sukham or
duḥkha. You ask: can mithyā padārtha give pleasure and pain? We say: only mithyā
padārtha can give pleasure and pain. More in the next class.

Class 204
śloka 179
यदि विद्यापह्नुवीत जगत्प्रारब्धघातिनी ।
तदा स्यान्न तु मायात्वबोधेन तदपह्नवः ॥ ७.१७९ ॥
yadi vidyāpahnuvīta jagatprārabdhaghātinī.
tadā syānna tu māyātvabodhena tadapahnavaḥ (7.179).
With the topic of jñāna-phala in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra kim icchan kasya
kāmāya śarīram anusaṃjvaret which is otherwise jīvanmukti avasthā. Jīvanmukti is a
unique thing accepted only by some of the philosophers. Many do not accept the concept
of jīvanmukti. They accept liberation only after death. Therefore, jīvanmukti is unique to
advaita. Explaining the jīvanmukti is a little bit difficult task. It is so because there seems
to be a certain contradiction explaining jīvanmukti and therefore, we have to explain very
carefully. Normally, the world has the capacity to give experiences to the human beings
and by way of giving the experiences the world evokes varieties of responses also. The
world gives me experiences and also generates the appropriate responses both at physical

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 991

and mental levels. This is the unique function or natural function of the world to give
experiences and to generate responses. After jñāna, the jñānī comes to know that the world
is mithyā through jñāna. Now, the crucial question is whether the mithyā world is capable
of generating experiences and evoking responses from a jñānī? This is the question. Is the
mithyā world capable of giving experiences and evoke the physical and emotional
responses as before? Tell me yes or no, the Pūrvapakṣī asks. The Advaitin is in trouble,
whatever way the answer goes.
Suppose the Advaitin says that the mithyā world loses the capacity to give experiences
and evoke responses, then the problem will be that the law prārabdhasya bhogādeva
kṣayaḥ will be violated. The law says that even in the case of a jñānī, prārabdha can be
exhausted only through bhoga. Therefore, if the mithyā world does not give experiences
and does not evoke responses, then prārabdha-bhoga itself will not take place. Going
through experiences and responding to the experience is called bhoga. If experiences are
absent, the responses are absent, bhoga itself is absent and if jñānī does not have bhoga,
how do you say prārabdhasya bhogādeva kṣayaḥ? Therefore, to explain this statement,
you will have to accept that the mithyā world is capable of giving experiences and evoking
responses and that is how jñāninaḥ api prārabdhasya bhogādeva kṣayaḥ. Bhoga is nothing
but going through experiences and responding. Therefore, to protect the law that
prārabdhasya bhogādeva kṣayaḥ, Advaitins will have to admit that the mithyā world is
capable of giving experiences and evoking responses. But once we admit that jñānī also
has experiences and jñānī also has the physical and emotional responses then what will be
other problem? Then, where is mukti? If jñānī also goes through all the emotional
responses because of varieties of worldly experiences, that means jñānī is not free from the
tyranny of emotions. If jñānī is not free from emotional responses, how do you say he is a
jīvanmukta because he is in the same boat as the ajñānī neighbor. Therefore, bhoga is not
there means there is problem. Bhoga is there also means problem. How do you explain
jīvanmukti? This is the unique situation that an Advaitin has to explain. It should not be
mere academic explanation but it must be understandable for me in my heart. For that,
Vidyāraṇya gives the answer. The world loses its satyatva and becomes mithyā but even
after becoming mithyā the world will retain the capacity to give experiences and evoke
responses. Through jñāna, the world is falsified. Even after falsification, the world will
continue to give experiences and evoke the appropriate relevant responses, physical or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 992

emotional. This is the first answer. Therefore, prārabdhasya bhogādeva kṣayaḥ law is
retained or validated.
Even though the mithyā world continues to give experiences and evoke responses, you
cannot equate this jñānī to a saṃsārī. In the case of ajñānī saṃsārī, the satya world gives
experiences and evokes responses. In the case of a jñānī the mithyā world is giving
experience and evoking responses. Even though in both the cases, experience and
responses are there, you cannot equate both. In the case of an ajñānī, we call it saṃsāra; in
the case of a jñānī, we call it jīvanmukti. Then the next question is how do you do that?
From the standpoint of an ajñānī, he experiences and gets responses from satya prapañca;
jñānī has got experiences and responses caused by mithyā prapañca. Experiences and
responses remaining the same, how do you say one is a saṃsārī and another is
jīvanmukta? This will be the question; I hope you are following the discussion. Else the
whole thing will get hooked. For that onl,y answer is by giving the appropriate example
when a person watches a movie he has the knowledge that the movie is a fiction. And the
fiction movie also has the capacity to give experiences. They are not blank experiences, but
the experiences which will invoke responses. If it is a terror movie, horror movie, even the
sweat in the body may come, physical responses may come; a person may run to the
bathroom also. That means physical and emotional responses can be generated by a
mithyā object also. But even though the movie also generates its experiences and
responses, we don’t include the movie within saṃsāra. The movie is included in the
entertainment list. It may be horror movie, it may be comedy movie, it may be a tragedy;
irrespective of the status of the movie and in spite of its capacity to give experiences, in
spite of its capacity to evoke physical and powerful emotional responses, still we call it
entertainment. Vidyāraṇya ask if the experiences can be classified as an entertainment,
once a person knows them as mithyā worldly experiences, even emotional responses can
be classified as entertainment not saṃsāra. Thus, the mithyātva status converts saṃsāra
into an entertainment. Because it is entertainment only, a person pays money and goes to a
tragedy movie. Tragedy movie invites sorrow alone. It cannot bring happiness. It will
bring emotional pains alone. Tragedy movie has got more people than comedy. Why
should a person pay money and get emotionally disturbed? Even though it is disturbance,
from a higher angle it becomes an entertainment, because at will he can raise his
awareness to a higher level. It is becoming an entertainment only because of one reason;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 993

even though tears flow down, at will he is able to raise his level of perception from
prātibhāsika to vyāvahārika.
Similarly, for a jñānī all the world the experiences and even the powerful emotion is
shakable by raising the awareness from the relative ahaṅkāra level to the sākṣī- or Ātmā-
level. Therefore, the world can give bhoga but still for a jñānī it is an entertainment rather
than saṃsāra. Instead of the movie example, Vidyāraṇya gives a magic show example.
Suppose the self-knowledge negates the experience of the world, then prārabdha-kṣaya
cannot take place. Prārabdha also will go away. It is a hypothetical condition that he talks
about. If the knowledge negates the experience of the world, then the knowledge would
have destroyed prārabdha also and if the knowledge destroys prārabdha also, our law of
prārabdhasya bhogādeva kṣayaḥ will be falsified. All the consequences would have taken
place but vidyā does not negate the experience of the world. So the world continues,
world-experience continues and our emotional responses also will continue; the notion of
reality alone, satyasya adhyāsa part alone is removed. Therefore, the world can continue;
experience can continue; responses can continue but it will continue as an entertainment.
Māyātvabodhena, by merely understanding its mithyātva, the experience of the world is
not negated. Is it possible if you ask, Vidyāraṇya gives the indrajāla dṛṣṭānta. The world is
not negated; world’s satyatva notion alone is negated.

śloka 180
अनपह्नुत्य लोकास्तदिन्द्रजालमिदं त्विति ।
जानन्त्येवानपह्नुत्य भोगं मायात्वधीस्तथा ॥ ७.१८० ॥
anapahnutya lokāstadindrajālamidaṃ tviti.
jānantyevānapahnutya bhogaṃ māyātvadhīstathā (7.180).
Now, Vidyāraṇya gives the example part. The people of the world, when they are
watching a magic show, it is with the knowledge that it is all unreal only; yet, the
knowledge of unreality will not negate the experience of the indrajāla. Therefore, without
the negation of the magic, experience and emotional response of wonderment, etc is very
much there. In fact, he goes to the magic show only to enjoy this wonderment. Therefore,
he continues to have this knowledge that really speaking the magician does not cut the
lady; still I watch the cutting whereafter the two portions are on two sides and here the
head speaks and on the other side the legs move. I continue to enjoy knowing that it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 994

fiction only. This is the knowledge people have. If this is true, in the case of a jñānī, the
whole life is also another indrajāla. Everything is existing in space, tell me where is space
existing? You don’t have an answer. It is a wonder. When Bhagavān creates space, he
should have some space to locate the space. If he has got another space, the problem
would be the second space will require another space. Therefore, you don’t have a second
space to locate the space. Then can you say that it is located on Brahman? It cannot be
located on Brahman also because Brahman does not have any space, because Brahman is
partless and it is sajātīya-vijātīya-svagata-bheda-rahita. Therefore, Brahman does not have
space. Where is the space located? That is called Māyā. Therefore, the whole creation is
indrajāla. In fact, the Sanskrit derivation of indrajāla is Bhagavān’s trap. Indra means
Parameśvara. Jāla means a trap. Indrajāla means the whole universe is a fake trap created
by Bhagavān. Therefore, the jñānī has understood this to be a magic show. In the same
way, the knowledge of the unreality of the universe also does not remove the capacity of
the world to give experiences and responses. It is exactly like indrajāla.

śloka 181
यत्र त्वस्य जगत्स्वात्मा पश्येत्कस्तत्र के न किम्।
किं जिघ्रेत्किं वदेद्वेति श्रुतौ तु बहु घोषितम्॥ ७.१८१ ॥
yatra tvasya jagat svātmā paśyetkastatra kena kim.
kiṃ jighretkiṃ vadedveti śrutau tu bahu ghoṣitam (7.181).
Now, a Pūrvapakṣī comes with a question. We said jñāna will not remove duality, will not
remove the experiences given by the duality, will not stop the appropriate responses with
regard to experiences; so dvaita, dvaita-anubhava and dvaita-bhoga all will continue.
Jñāna will not negate that. Then what will jñāna do? It only removes the notion that it is
real. Now, Pūrvapakṣī asks how can you say so, when the Upaniṣad clearly says that a
jñānī will not perceive duality? Jñānī will not see a second thing; will not hear a second
thing; will not smell a second thing. In jñāna, there is no tripuṭī and therefore, there is no
seeing, no touching and no smelling. This is what the Upaniṣad has declared. When the
Upaniṣads are negating dvaita-experience itself, how are you admitting dvaita-experience
now? The satyatva of the world is negated. Then the next question is where does the
Upaniṣad negate it? Remember Pūrvapakṣī also is an informed person. He says there is an
Upaniṣad vākya the number is 2.4.14 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 995

same thing is repeated again 4.5.15 Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa in the same Upaniṣad. Again the
same idea comes in Īśāvāsya Upaniṣad 7th mantra.
It means jñānī will see only Brahman everywhere. If I were a jñānī I will see only Brahman
and I cannot see mic, book or anything else. The Upaniṣad says ekatvam anu paśyati. This
is Īśāvāsya. Then, Chandogya Upaniṣad also 7.24.1 also reiterates this idea. Brahman is
that in which one does not see anything, hear anything, smell anything. There is no dvaita-
anubhava at all. What is the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad quotation that occurs in the śloka?
Yatra tvasya jagat svātmā paśyet. At the time of jñāna a person looks at the world as Ātmā.
He sees everything is Ātmā. The world ‘becomes’ the Ātmā for him. For such a person,
tatra kaḥ paśyet who will see; kim paśyet what he will see; kena paśyet with what
instrument he will see. So tripuṭī is negated. Subject is negated, object is negated and the
instrument is negated. Therefore, subject, object and instrument, all the three are not there.
This is not for the eyes alone. This is for all the five jnanendrias. Who will smell with
what? Who will talk with what? Who will is the subject negation; what is object negation;
with what is instrument negation. advaita-anubhava alone must be there for a jñānī.
Dvaita-anubhava cannot be there. This is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. In the Vedas and in
the Upaniṣads it has been stated in many places. Based on this. Pūrvapakṣī will pose his
question.

śloka 182
तेन द्वैतमपह्नुत्य विद्योदेति न चान्यथा ।
तथा च विदुषो भोगः कथं स्यादिति चेच्छृणु ॥ ७.१८२ ॥
tena dvaitamapahnutya vidyodeti na cānyathā.
tathā ca viduṣo bhogaḥ kathaṃ syāditi cecchṛṇu (7.182).
The Pūrvapakṣī continues. Therefore, jñāna requires advaita-anubhava. Hence, dvaita-
experience should not be there. Not only during jñāna it should not be there but since
dvaita is permanently negated with jñāna, after jñāna also, dvaita-experience should not
be there. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī’s argument is: during jñāna and after jñāna dvaita-
anubhava should not be there. Because of that only many people say jñāna can take place
only in nirvikalpaka samādhi. The importance given to nirvikalpaka samādhi is based on
the misconception. Their view is advaita jñāna can take place only when dvaita-anubhava

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 996

is not there. The pramāṇa is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Therefore, how do you say
jñānī will have dvaita-anubhava?
Pūrvapakṣī says only after the negation of dvaita-anubhava [which means nirvikalpaka
samādhi] then alone advaita-anubhava, advaita aparokṣa jñāna can rise. Not only the
dvaita-anubhava should go away during jñāna but after jñāna also dvaita-anubhava
should go away completely. Then the advaita jñāna can be only parokṣa jñāna. It can only
be book-knowledge and it can only be intellectual knowledge. The condition for real jñāna
is that dvaita-anubhava should not be there. You should see Brahman alone in all the
places. This is what the Pūrvapakṣī’s contention. Tell me how can wise person have
prārabdha-bhoga. By quoting movie and indrajāla example, how do you talk about
prārabdha-bhoga? For that, jñānī should see the world whereas the Upaniṣad says jñānī
will not see the world, anyat na paśyati anyat na śṛṇoti anyat na jighrati. How do you
explain? If such a question is asked, I shall give you the answer.

śloka 183
सुषुप्तिविषया मुक्तिविषया वा श्रुतिस्त्विति ।
उक्तं स्वाप्ययसम्पत्त्योरिति सूत्रे ह्यतिस्फु टम्॥ ७.१८३ ॥
suṣuptiviṣayā muktiviṣayā vā śrutistviti.
uktaṃ svāpyayasampattyoriti sūtre hyatisphuṭam (7.183).
For this, two answers are possible. Vidyāraṇya gives one answer though there is another
answer also. First, I will give you the answer that is not said here. Vidyāraṇya gives an
answer so that some more questions are raised by Pūrvapakṣī. Manana takes place only
when I am comfortable with advaita. For any question, I should have minimum five
answers so that there is no doubt or vagueness. It is like a person thorough with the
topography of the place, wherever there is traffic-diversion he is able to reach home easily
for he knows many roads to reach his place. Manana-granthas will give for every question
several answers. In Carnatic music they say master knows only when for each rāga he
knows twenty songs. Only then all the shades of rāga will be clear. Here also, we study
different granthas so that we have different answers. The general answer we give is this.
Whenever the Śruti talks about or negates dvaita-darśana for a jñānī it is not dvaita-
anubhava that is negated but only dvaita-satyatva-darśana. Śruti never negates the
experience of duality. Śruti negates only the reality of duality. That is why we say dvaitam

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 997

is mithyā. If Śruti negates anubhava itself, we would have called it ‘asat’. Experience is
there. Satyatva alone is absent that is why it is called mithyā. No scientific book can negate
sunrise-experience on the earth. As long as you live on the earth, surya-udaya-anubhava
will continue. Whenever a science book negates suryodaya we should understand that
suryaodaya-satyatva is negated and we have to understand that the earth goes in the
opposite direction. Dvaita-satyatva is negated dvaita-anubhava is never negated.
If dvaita-anubhava is going to continue, then how can you talk about advaita? For that,
what is our answer? Advaita jñāna or advaita is never disturbed by mithyā dvaita-
anubhava. The experience of mithyā dvaita can never disturb advaita or advaita jñāna
also. Knowledge born out of a right source can never be negated by an opposite
experience. “I am duḥkha-rahita” knowledge can never be negated even when the tears
are flowing down because of some events in the house. Even when there is unhappiness,
Advaitin will say ‘unmanifest happiness’ therefore, even when a person is crying, what is
his svarūpa, his svarūpa is ānanda only. That knowledge cannot be negated by the
contrary experience. Jñānī can have dvaita-anubhava. Still he can assert that there is only
advaita. Then there is a second answer which alone Vidyāraṇya gives in this śloka which
we will see in the next class.

Class 205
śloka 183 contd
Vidyāraṇya answers a question raised by a Pūrvapakṣī in the previous ślokas 181 and 182.
The question is based on Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya. The Upaniṣad says for a person
who has recognized advaita, there cannot be a tripuṭī at all and since tripuṭī is not there,
what will that jñānī hear, taste or touch for every perception needs a tripuṭī in the form of
subject, object and the instrument. Therefore, he claims a jñānī cannot have dvaita-darśana
according to this Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya. If the dvaita-darśana is not there, that is
dualistic experience is absent, how can you talk about a jñānī having prārabdha-bhoga?
Because in all these ślokas before, that is before the Pūrvapakṣa śloka, Vidyāraṇya has
established that jñānī has got prārabdha and because of the prārabdha-vāsanā he might
have prārabdha-kāma and because of prārabdha-kāma he might be involved in
lokasaṅgraha and any other activities and those activities can generate bhoga also. Only

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 998

what we established is bhoga will not be a binding bhoga because he does not have
satyatva-buddhi in that. It is like watching the indrajāla you remember the example. It is
like watching the movie even though the observer goes through emotions they are not
binding emotions; in fact, they are watched as an entertainment only. Thus, Vidyāraṇya
elaborately established the possibility of bhoga.
Based on that the Pūrvapakṣa has raised a question on how can there be bhoga
[experience]. How can there be bhoga when the Upaniṣad clearly says that a jñānī does not
have duality? What is the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra kept in mind? Mantra 2.4.14 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. The same mantra occurs in 4.5.15 also. Both are Maitreyī
Brāhmaṇa in which the tripuṭī is negated for a jñānī. For that, Vidyāraṇya introduced the
answer in śloka 182 last portion. I am going to answer carefully listen. He says all the
Upaniṣadic statements which negate the dualistic experience are all statements dealing
with either suṣupti or videha-mukti. They are not talking about jīvanmukti. In suṣupti also
dvaita-anubhava is not there. In videha-mukti also dvaita-anubhava is not there, because
in videha-mukti the śarīra and sense-organs are dissolved. Therefore, a videha-mukta
cannot experience the world as an individual and a sleeper also cannot experience the
world as an individual; therefore, in those states dvaita-anubhava is absent, whereas in
jīvanmukti dvaita-anubhava is not absent; dvaita-anubhava will very much continue for a
jīvanmukta. What will go away even when he experiences dvaita in that anubhūta dvaita-
satyatva-buddhi alone will go away. The dvaita-anubhava does not go. In suṣupti and
videha-mukti dvaita-anubhava is also not there. Of course dvaita-satyatva is also not
there. So in suṣupti and videha-mukti anubhava and satyatva both are not there. At the
same time in jīvanmukti dvaita-anubhava will continue.
The technical word used is dvaita-pratīti. It means dvaita-experience will continue but
jñānī does not take it as reality. Pūrvapakṣī does not understand this difference. Therefore,
he is quoting Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya wherein dvaita-anubhava is negated.
Vidyāraṇya says they are not dealing with a jīvanmukta at all. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
vākya negating dvaita-anubhava deals with suṣupti deep-sleep state. Suṣupti is often
given as an example of videha-mukti because both do not perceive the world. Therefore, it
deals with suṣupti or mukti-viṣaya. Mukti means videha-mukti-viṣaya in this context. In
Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa if you look at a few mantras before, Yājñavalkya has clearly talked
about cit and cidābhāsa and he clearly says the original consciousness is eternally present

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 999

whereas cidābhāsa cannot be eternally present for cidābhāsa requires a reflecting medium
and the reflecting medium is the sūkṣma śarīra and during videha-mukti sūkṣma śarīra
dissolves permanently; therefore, the reflecting medium also dissolves and cidābhāsa also
dissolves and therefore, experiencer-individuality goes away. What is left behind is
original consciousness and original consciousness cannot experience any object. You
should be very clear to understand that the pure consciousness by itself without a mind,
without the sense-organs, without thought, cannot experience anything; therefore,
Yājñavalkya says pretya saṃjñā nāsti; pretya means after the death of a jñānī, after the
death of a jñānī means after videha-mukti, since cidābhāsa is no more, saṃjñā nāsti which
means cidābhāsa is not there; therefore, consequent worldly experiences are not there.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says what is presented in videha-mukti context you are wrongly
quoting in jīvanmukti context. Therefore, your quotation is wrong.
There are other statements also where the Upaniṣads negates dvaita-anubhava or world-
anubhava. The other example in this context is suṣupti. For suṣupti, the quotation is not
given here. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad quotation is in the context of videha-mukti. We have
got certain other quotations dealing with suṣupti such as Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad mantra 6.
There also, the experience of the world is negated but that is not talking about jīvanmukta
but it talks about the sleeping person. Therefore, dvaita-anubhava is absent for the sleeper
and also for videha-mukta and not for a jīvanmukta. Therefore, he says suṣupti-viṣaya
which means dealing with in the context of suṣupti. Suṣupti-viṣaya- śruti means it refers to
the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad mantra. It is dealing with videha-mukti. In short it does not deal
with jīvanmukta. Then the question is that how do you know that the above mantra deals
with videha-mukta and not jīvanmukta? I have given the reason but Vidyāraṇya has not
given the reason. Vidyāraṇya says I have no time to explain those things and it has been
discussed in Brahmasūtra 4.4.16. For jīvanmukti, the world anubhava will be there but not
for videha-mukta. Svāpyaya means one’s own nature. In suṣupti the jīvātmā the
individuality the ego dissolves into his svarūpa and therefore, suṣupti is called svāpyaya.
Sampatti means videha-mukti in this context. Both the words are borrowed Chandogya
Upaniṣad 6th chapter. Deep sleep is called svāpyaya and videha-mukti is called Sampatti.
Sampatti means merger into Brahman which happens in videha-mukti since all the three
śarīras are gone. When the pot is broken just as the pot space merges into the total space,
in videha-mukti when the pot, the body, is gone the jīvātmā ‘merges’ with Paramātmā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1000

This is the meaning of the sūtra. In suṣupti and in videha-mukti, the dvaita-experience will
not be there. Therefore, don’t quote the wrong Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya here.

śloka 184
अन्यथा याज्ञवल्क्यादेराचार्यत्वं न सम्भवेत्।
द्वैतदृष्टावविद्वत्ता द्वैतादृष्टौ न वाग्वदेत्॥ ७.१८४ ॥
anyathā yājñavalkyāderācāryatvaṃ na sambhavet.
dvaitadṛṣṭāvavidvattā dvaitādṛṣṭau na vāgvadet (7.184).

Now, Pūrvapakṣī may ask why cannot you say that dvaita-anubhava is not there for a
jīvanmukta also? Why cannot we say the wise man sees only Brahman everywhere. He
does not see the world at all. Why cannot we say so? After all brahmārpaṇaṃ
brahmahaviḥ words are there. Vidyāraṇya says suppose we say that all the wise people
jīvanmuktas will see only Brahman everywhere and they will not see the world at all, then
they will not have śiṣya-darśana; since jñānīs will not have śiṣya-darśana at all, where is
the question of teaching the disciple! Therefore, jñānīs will not be able to teach Vedānta. If
you say, let it be so, all those people who teach Vedānta will be ajñānīs! This statement is
ridiculous. The the paramparā will be andha-ajñānī-paramparā. Hence, jñānīs can see
duality or else Yājñavalkya would not have seen wife Maitreyī. Therefore, he says
‘anyathā or otherwise;’ if you don’t accept my view what will be the adverse consequence?
Yājñavalkya the great Ācārya would not have taught anything to his wife. Here, jñānī
status of Yājñavalkya is not questionable. The Upaniṣad itself refers to Yājñavalkya. In
fact, Upaniṣad presents Yājñavalkya teaching to Maitreyī. The Upaniṣad itself gives
certificate to Yājñavalkya as a great Ācārya. If the jñānīs don’t experience the world, they
will not have Ācārya status for being an Ācārya, a śiṣya is required. According to your
view, whoever sees the world will become avidvān as there will be dvaitadṛṣṭau
avidvattā, due to the perception of the world avidvattā, ajñānī status, will come according
to your theory. Since the world-perception will make a person an ajñānī and therefore,
ajñānī cannot teach. Therefore, you should say those who do not see the world alone are
jñānīs, and if the jñānīs don’t see the world then as you claim, according to the Pūrvapakṣī
views, in the absence of world-perception, the mouth will not speak because the speech
has to be directed to someone. Suppose this person says no no, even if he does not see

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1001

anyone he will just keep speaking; suppose without śiṣya-darśana a jñānī goes on
speaking, then the world would say jñānī is a madcap! They will send him to a mental
hospital. Therefore, a jīvanmukta jñānī will see the world happily. In fact, he will see it
better because his mind is clear and calm. Dvaita-anubhava also will be clear. Therefore,
jīvanmukta has got prārabdha, prārabdha-bhoga is also there.

śloka 185
निर्विकल्पसमाधौ तु द्वैतादर्शनहेतुतः ।
सैवापरोक्षविद्येति चेत्सुषुप्तिस्तथा न किम्॥ ७.१८५ ॥
nirvikalpasamādhau tu dvaitādarśanahetutaḥ.
saivāparokṣavidyeti cetsuṣuptistathā na kim (7.185).
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers another important Pūrvapakṣa. This is to refute the theory that
advaita jñāna can take place only in samādhi. There is a very powerful theory held by
many Vedāntins themselves that advaita jñāna cannot take place in the class during
śravaṇa. We can only get an idea about advaita, we can get only parokṣa jñāna but
aparokṣa jñāna can take place only in samādhi or nirvikalpaka samādhi. This is a very
powerful view held. Vidyāraṇya strongly refutes that idea in this śloka. That Pūrvapakṣī
who claims knowledge requires samādhi is based on the idea that advaita and dvaita are
contradictory. Advaita means non-duality and dvaita means duality. Since they are
contradictory to each other, the presence of one will negate the presence of the other like
dark and light. In the presence of light, darkness cannot be and in the presence of
darkness, light cannot be. His contention is that during śravaṇa is the student is in jagrat
avasthā and in jagrat avasthā his sense-organs are very much open; therefore, dvaita-
darśana is very much there. When there is dvaita-darśana in the jagrat avasthā, when the
mind is open to the world, there is dvaita-darśana; then you cannot have direct knowledge
of advaita. When there is dvaita, there cannot be advaita. They claim that you get only
indirect knowledge of advaita, it is intellectual parokṣa jñāna of advaita. To get direct
advaita-knowledge, you have to practice nididhyāsana. All the sense-organs are
withdrawn, you are no more in jagrat avasthā but you are in turīya avasthā where dvaita-
darśana is shut off or stopped. Since there is no dvaita-darśana, Ātmā is now advaita.
Since in samādhi dvaita has been removed, then and then alone, the real advaita is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1002

available, the knowledge gained at that time alone is direct advaita jñāna and that alone is
called sākṣātkāra, realization or aparokṣa jñāna. In jagrat avasthā, either in the class or
after the class, your advaita jñāna is not aparokṣa jñāna but it is only parokṣa jñāna. It is so
because it is obstructed by dvaita-darśana. Therefore, he claims Yājñavalkya was an
Ācārya and he was a jñānī but he was not a perfect jñānī because he was seeing Maitreyī!
Therefore, he did not have advaita jñāna but he had only dvaita jñāna.
Advaita jñāna is only bookish knowledge and it is like our knowledge of Kailāsa
Mānasasarovara based on reading a book. Therefore, he concludes Yājñavalkya is only a
parokṣa-jñānī. He does not have sākṣātkāra jñāna. If Yājñavalkya has to be a realized
person, he should drop teaching, dismiss Maitreyī and sit in samādhi. Only when he sits
in samādhi he will get aparokṣa jñāna and when he gets up aparokṣa goes and he will get
parokṣa jñāna. If you want permanent aparokṣa jñāna you have to keep on being in
samādhi. They talk about saptamī bhūmikā, the seventh stage of a realized person, when
he is alive, where he does not experience any world, no thought, he only enjoys
brahmānanda. He does not contact the world and the world does not contact him. You
cannot feed him. Nothing can be done. That state is advaita aparokṣa jñāna state. This is
the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. According to this view, Yājñavalkya is only a second-hand
Ācārya, not the original. Original jñānī will not talk. In nirvikalpaka samādhi, dvaita-
adarśana, there is non-perception of the world. Then everything is withdrawn and one has
gone to a thoughtless state. In aṣṭāṅga yoga the highest state is the thoughtless state. The
definition of yoga is citta-vṛtti-nirodha, the ultimate aim is to remain in the thoughtless
state. These are all Pūrvapakṣī’s misconceptions. He is raising a doubt because there are no
thoughts; no perception, no dvaita-anubhava also. Because the dvaita-anubhava is shut
off, he says aparokṣa-vidyā is gained. Here, in that state only, one experiences advaita.
There will no more dvaita prapañca, no more tripuṭī to disturb advaita. So, non-perception
of dvaita is advaita-avasthā. It is Pūrvapakṣī’s view. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣa.
That knowledge alone when obtaining in nirvikalpaka samādhi is aparokṣa vidyā,
sākṣātkāra, direct realization, exclusive enlightenment, etc. That means Yājñavalkya does
not have that vidyā because he sees Maitreyī and he is not in samādhi. If this is your
contention, Vidyāraṇya says, if advaita state is achieved by removing dualistic experience,
why should you sit in samādhi? There is no need of yama, niyama, prāṇāyāma, etc.
Bhagavān has given you an easier method to remove dvaita-anubhava and remain in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1003

advaita. In fact, in Svayaṃjyoti Brāhmaṇa, a beautiful description of suṣupti is given,

suṣupti-ānanda is given where there is no dvaita at all. In fact, every time we sleep,
whatever ānanda we enjoy is advaita ānanda alone. So why do you go to samādhi? Just go
to sleep. Attend a Vedānta class, you will get sleep, no problem! Why cannot you take
suṣupti as similar to aparokṣa-vidyā, advaita-avasthā? There also tripuṭī is absent. For that
Pūrvapakṣī, says no, no. Advaita of samādhi is different from advaita of suṣupti. Then
there will be two advaitas. In suṣupti-advaita, there is ajñāna and in samādhi-advaita,
there is jñāna. This is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī in the next śloka.

śloka 186
आत्मतत्त्वं न जानाति सुप्तौ यदि तदा त्वया ।
आत्मधीरेव विद्येति वाच्यं न द्वैतविस्मृतिः ॥ ७.१८६ ॥
ātmatattvaṃ na jānāti suptau yadi tadā tvayā.
ātmadhīreva vidyeti vācyaṃ na dvaitavismṛtiḥ (7.186).
Here, Pūrvapakṣī says don’t equate suṣupti and samādhi. It is sacrilege. Suṣupti is lowest
and most ordinary state which even animals have. Samādhi is the highest state of most
evolved person. They are not the same. A person in suṣupti does not have jñāna whereas a
person in samādhi has got jñāna. Therefore, there is a difference between samādhi and
sleep. In one, jñāna is there and in the other, ajñāna is there and jñāna is not there. A
sleeping person does not know the Ātmā. Therefore, he does not have aparokṣa jñāna
whereas the person in samādhi has got aparokṣa jñāna because he has got Ātma-tattva-
jñāna. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣin’s statement. For that, Vidyāraṇya says the following. If
you argue like this then the differentiating factor in suṣupti also dvaita-darśana is absent;
in samādhi also dvaita-darśana is absent; that is common for both; what makes a Puruṣa in
samādhi a jñānī? You say he has got jñāna. What makes a sleeping person an ajñānī? He
does not have jñāna. Whether you see dvaita or not is not the criterion. This person has
jñāna and that person does not have jñāna; therefore, what makes the difference is only
jñāna.
Therefore, he says knowledge of the self is the one which is required; why do you insist
upon nirvikalpaka samādhi because the advantage nirvikalpaka is dvaita-adarśana, that
you get in sleep also! Therefore, don’t talk about dvaita-adarśana. What makes
nirvikalpaka-samādhi-person superior is his jñāna; therefore, jñāna is what is required and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1004

that jñāna can be acquired in jagrat avasthā through śāstra. So, you should emphasise
upon jñāna not the avasthā. Self-knowledge alone is aparokṣa jñāna. Self-knowledge
alone is aparokṣa vidyā. You should empasise the knowledge part; why are you
unnecessarily giving importance to nirvikalpaka samādhi? What speciality is there? If you
say the knowledge is there, then in śravaṇa also you can get the same knowledge. If you
say in samādhi dvaita-adarśana non-experience of duality is there, for that you can go to
sleep. If you say in nirvikalpaka samādhi jñāna is there, we say that jñāna is available in
śravaṇa through sastra pramāṇa; therefore, jñāna is available in jagrat avasthā and dvaita-
adarśana is available in suṣupti-avasthā. Why do you require samādhi at all? Therefore, he
says you should not talk about the forgetfulness or non-perception of samādhi. For that,
the Pūrvapakṣī comes with another argument.

śloka 187
उभयं मिलितं विद्या यदि तर्हि घटादयः ।
अर्धविद्याभाजिनः स्युः सकलद्वैतविस्मृतेः ॥ ७.१८७ ॥
ubhayaṃ militaṃ vidyā yadi tarhi ghaṭādayaḥ.
ardhavidyābhājinaḥ syuḥ sakaladvaitavismṛteḥ (7.187).
Now, Pūrvapakṣī gives an ingenious argument. He says according to you jñāna is
available in jagrat avasthā. And dvaita-adarśana non-perception of duality is available in
suṣupti avasthā. That means these two are available in two different states. Dvaita-
adarśana non-perception is available in suṣupti. Both together are not available in these
two avasthas. In the class, in jagrat avasthā you have jñāna, not absence of the world. In
suṣupti, there is absence of the world but there is no jñāna. But in my samādhi, the
uniqueness of turīya is that there is no world at all because I have shut off everything.
Therefore, dvaita-adarśana and also I have got jñāna. Therefore, dvaita-adarśana-sahita
jñāna is available in samādhi avasthā. In suṣupti, first component is there but not the
second. In śravaṇa, the second component is there but not the first. In samādhi I don’t see
anything but I have got the knowledge aham brahma asmi. He says my definition of
aparokṣa jñāna is this mixture. It is dvaita-adarśana-sahita jñāna alone that is aparokṣa
jñāna. In the class you have got dvaita-darśana-sahita jñāna; therefore, it will come under
parokṣa jñāna. The jñāna without seeing the world you get in samādhi. So samādhi is
required. Therefore, Yājñavalkya’s knowledge is parokṣa as he was not in samādhi. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1005

mixture of the two— absence of world-experience and presence of knowledge— is

required to gain aparokṣa jñāna. I should not experience the body, the world, time, space, I
don’t experience my mind, no hunger, no thirst, etc. He says this condition is compulsory.
That is why we call such people as mystic people. Along with that, jñāna also should be
there with no mind, body, etc. That is aparokṣa jñāna. If this is your argument, Vidyāraṇya
gives a teasing answer. If realization is a mixture of absence of world-experience and
presence of knowledge, he says all the pots have got half-realization. It is so because you
define realization is a mixture of absence of the world experience and also jñāna. The pot
does not have jñāna all right but pot does not have world-experience and absence of
world-experience makes them half-realized. Then he asks why you give importance to
absence of world-experience. That is not at all required. Details in the next class.

Class 206
In these ślokas, Vidyāraṇya answers a suggestion given by one of the Pūrvapakṣīs and his
view is Ātmā-jñāna is aparokṣa jñāna only when two conditions are fulfilled. One is that
there should be the jñāna-vṛtti in the mind generated from the śāstra-guru-upadeśa
pramāṇa. He contends that this jñāna-vṛtti alone is not sufficient and that will not make it
aparokṣa jñāna. Mere jñāna-vṛtti is parokṣa jñāna only. If this jñāna-vṛtti should be
aparokṣa jñāna, along with it, there should be absence of sarva-anātma-darśana or sarva
dvaita-darśana should be absent. Dvaita-darśana should be absent. It means dvaita-
adarśana must be present. He calls it by another name dvaita-vismṛti. Both have the same
meaning. In English, it is called non-perception of the world. He claims that Ātmā-jñāna is
aparokṣa jñāna only when it is taking place with dvaita-vismṛti, non-experience of the
world. In the jāgrat-avasthā, during śravaṇa, no doubt jñāna-vṛtti is taking place but along
with it, there is dvaita-anubhava also. During the class, duality is there. In svapna also
even if we manage to have jñāna-vṛtti there also there is the problem dvaita-darśana. In
suṣupti we avoid dvaita-darśana. Jñāna-vṛtti is absent in suṣupti. Therefore, in jāgrat and
svapna, jñāna-vṛtti may be present but dvaita-darśana is present. Dvaita-adarśana is
absent. In suṣupti dvaita-adarśana condition is present but jñāna-vṛtti is absent. Therefore,
he says both these conditions are fulfilled only in nirvikalpaka samādhi because that is the
supra-conscious state where one fulfills both the conditions jñāna-vṛtti as also dvaita-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1006

adarśana. That means dvaita-darśana is absent because in nirvikalpaka samādhi sense-

organs are withdrawn, all thoughts are eliminated and I don’t see anything either
externally or mentally. There is only Ātmā-jñāna-vṛtti that alone is called aparokṣa-vidyā.
Once you accept, that the problem will be, the moment you say aparokṣa-vidyā it means
you should not see the world, all the liberated jñānis must have aparokṣa-vidyā and once
you accept aparokṣa-vidyā for them they should not see the world. Once you accept you
don’t see the world then how the prārabdha-bhoga will be experienced by the jñānī! This
is the Pūrvapakṣī argument. Vidyāraṇya has to answer.

śloka 188
मशकध्वनिमुख्यानां विक्षेपाणां बहुत्वतः ।
तत्त्वविद्या तथा न स्याद्घटादीनां यथा दृढा ॥ ७.१८८ ॥
maśakadhvanimukhyānāṃ vikṣepāṇāṃ bahutvataḥ.
tattvavidyā tathā na syādghaṭādīnāṃ yathā dṛḍhā (7.188).
Vidyāraṇya teases the Pūrvapakṣī by saying the nirvikalpaka samādhi of a pot is far
superior to your nirvikalpaka samādhi because your nirvikalpaka samādhi is extremely
fragile as it can be disturbed by anything like the humming of a mosquito or a fly. They
always have the knack of flying around the face only. If you try to sit in japa or meditation,
the mosquito disturbs the sādhaka. Vikṣepa means distraction for nirvikalpaka samādhi.
The disturbances are plenty, it is stated here. Even if one succeeds in meditation, he never
gets into samādhi due to various disturbances. Even if he goes to samādhi, it will be
disturbed by mosquito-humming. Therefore, your nirvikalpaka samādhi is of an inferior
quality whereas the pot’s nirvikalpaka samādhi is of superior quality. Even when you
compare the half-knowledge, the half-knowledge of the pot is superior to your half-
knowledge. Your artha-vidyā caused by the non-experience of the world will never be as
great as superior as knowledge of the pot’s knowledge. This is only a funny state that will
be the consequence of his condition. Don’t extend the example too much.

Non-perception of the world is not the condition for advaita-jñāna. This is a very
important law that we should remember. We can happily get advaita-jñāna even when the
dvaita prapañca is perceived by the sense-organs; seeing the duality I can say I am non-
dual brahman because non-duality knowledge is gained from the right pramāṇa. Any

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1007

knowledge produced by a pramāṇa cannot be disturbed by a counter or opposite

experience. Any knowledge generated by a valid knowledge cannot be challenged or
disturbed by the opposite experience just as we can say a star is far bigger than the entire
earth; I can happily have that knowledge even when the eyes are perceiving the little star.
Even when the eyes clearly perceives only a little star, the intellect without any hesitation
can assert that the star is not little but it is hundreds of times bigger than even the earth.
The knowledge is bigness, while the perception is smallness; the perception of the
smallness can never challenge the knowledge of the bigness. It is so because one is mithyā
and the other is satya. Smallness of star is an opitical illusion; therefore, that cannot
disturb my knowledge. Similarly, that I am non-dual I can assert even when the five sense-
organs are perceiving śabda, etc; this is vyāvahārika satya, mithyā, and I am non-dual
brahman is pāramārthika-satya. Therefore, the knowledge does not require non-
perception of the world. Therefore, I don’t have to go to nirvikalpaka samādhi. It is
absolutely not required for advaita-jñāna. If you are practicing nirvikalpaka samādhi for
any other purpose, that is your wish. But it is absolutely not required for the aparokṣa
jñāna that I was, I am and I ever will be Advaita whether the sense-organs perceive the
world or do not perceive the world. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya concludes: once the vṛtti is
generated, that very vṛtti is aparokṣa jñāna. That is said in śloka number 189.

śloka 189
आत्मधीरेव विद्येति यदि तर्हि सुखी भव ।
दुष्टचित्तं निरुन्ध्याच्चेन्निरुन्धि त्वं यथासुखम्॥ ७.१८९ ॥
ātmadhīreva vidyeti yadi tarhi sukhī bhava.
duṣṭacittaṃ nirundhyāccennirundhi tvaṃ yathāsukham (7.189).
The conclusion is the “ahaṃ brahma asmi” antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti generated by the Guru-
upadeśa which takes place in the mind during śravaṇa itself is aparokṣa jñāna. Therefore,
“ahaṃ brahma asmi” knowledge is also in the form of “ahaṃ brahma asmi” vṛtti. That
vṛtti alone is vidyā. The second condition the Pūrvapakṣī is dropping now after listening
to our answer that the pot will be more liberated; after listening to our answer the
Pūrvapakṣī seems to be convinced. Therefore, he says nirvikalpaka samādhi is not
required, non-perception of the world is not required; during śravaṇa simple listening or
properly listening when I claim “ahaṃ brahma asmi”, that itself is aparokṣa vidyā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1008

Vidyāraṇya says if you say so, then I will bless you, I will wish you all the best, because
that is our position also. Thus, we have established nirvikalpaka samādhi is not at all
required for jñāna, whether it is parokṣa or aparokṣa. Both do not require nirvikalpaka
samādhi. We have established and Pūrvapakṣī also has accepted. Now, Pūrvapakṣī says
one should practice nirvikalpaka samādhi for disciplining the mind. I agree that it is not
required for aparokṣa-vidyā or parokṣa-jñāna. Now, he says it is required to get śama,
dama, uparama, titikṣā, samādhāna, etc., for qualifications to put it in our language
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti-siddhyartham, nirvikalpaka samādhi is useful. For that
Vidyāraṇya will comment.
By the practice of nirvikalpaka samādhi, one should discipline or control, master, manage
the mind. Patañjali defines yoga as citta-vṛtti-nirodha. Since Patañjali uses the word
nirodha, Vidyāraṇya accept the word. He says you follow Patañjali Yoga if you want. And
you may practice citta-vṛtti-nirodha. Pūrvapakṣī says one should practice that nirodha. It
should be practiced to control the wavering mind, a mind which manages to worry all the
time. The mind has threefold problem: clasp problem, either ownership, or controllership-
centred worry; or family-centred worry, special-prayer centred worry or constantly
hovering over around; therefore, the mind goes astray. One should discipline the mind
through Aṣṭāṅga-yoga. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣa. If the Pūrvapakṣī says so, Vidyāraṇya
says if you find yoga is useful for getting sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti, I am never against
the practice of yoga for sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. There also, I will not say it is
compulsory. Yoga is one of the methods of it, we have also got karma-yoga, upāsana yoga,
japa, pūjā, saguṇa-Īśvara-dhyāna, etc. There are hundreds of methods to make the mind
qualified. Aṣṭāṅga-yoga is highly useful but we will never say it is compulsory. Therefore,
for jñāna it is not compulsory; for sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti also it is not compulsory. If
you find it useful you can certainly use it. As and when you want you can practice that.
Once you say nirvikalpaka samādhi is compulsory then we will be against that. Then how
or when will we know whether duṣṭa citta is sufficiently mastered or not? When I gain the
knowledge if I say I have got only knowledge and therefore, I am not yet liberated then
the mind problem is there. It is implied. Suppose you say I have got knowledge and
therefore, I am liberated; it means the mind is managed. When you feel knowledge is
insufficient, the mind has a problem. Once you say I have knowledge and therefore, I am

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1009

free, that means the mind is sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna. Until you can say that you can
practice samādhi also if you want.

śloka 190.
तदिष्टमेष्टव्यमायामयत्वस्य समीक्षणात्।
इच्छन्नप्यज्ञवन्नेच्छेत्किमिच्छन्निति हि श्रुतम्॥ ७.१९०॥
tadiṣṭameṣṭavyamāyāmayatvasya samīkṣaṇāt.
icchannapyajñavannecchetkimicchanniti hi śrutam (7.190).
In the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya said if you require the practice of samādhi we have
already discussed samādhi-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. If you find it useful you are
certainly free to practice that. Therefore, he says tad iṣṭa. Citta-nirodha is iṣṭa. For dwelling
upon mithyātva of the universe, the nididhyāsana or samādhi-abhyāsa is found to be very
useful. It is said so because all the emotional disturbances happen only because of
‘satyatva-buddhi’ in the world. The world consisting of family, our own body and our
own mind, these three are seen as satya, because of which alone the disturbance comes
and because of the disturbance alone, I always feel I have “only” knowledge; therefore, I
am not liberated. If the mental disturbance is to go, one must meditate upon mithyātva of
the universe, specially concentrating upon family-mithyātva, mind-mithyātva and body-
mithyātva. Concentrated perception of [Māyā mayatvam] mithyātva and this mithyātva-
darśana is as important as or more important than brahma-satyatva-darśana. Jagan-
mithyātva-dhyāna you can do very well and therefore, I permit you to do samādhi-
abhyāsa. Jagan-mithyātva-darśana is very desirable and therefore, may you practice
samādhi-abhyāsa of jagan-mithyātva. It is certainly useful. With the first line, the
Pūrvapakṣī has been answered. Now, Vidyāraṇya comes back to our original topic.
The original topic is that a jñānī can perceive the world even after aparokṣa jñāna and
through the world perception he can exhaust his prārabdha-vāsanā that is very much
possible for a jñānī. Therefore, jñānī will have prārabdha; jñānī will have deha-abhimāna;
jñānī will have prārabdha-vāsanā and because of that jñānī will have non-binding desires
for loka-saṅgraha also. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in jñānī having non-binding
desires. Now, the question will come; if a jñānī can have desires how did the Upaniṣad say
kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram anusaṃjvaret? That is our topic. In the above statement,
the Upaniṣad negates the desires and here, Vidyāraṇya accepts the desires. If desires are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1010

acceptable for a jñānī, why should Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad negate the desires. For that,
Vidyāraṇya says I am accepting non-binding desires, Śruti is negating binding desires;
therefore, there is no contradiction between Śruti’s negation and my acceptance. My
acceptance is regarding the non-binding desires and Śruti talks of cessation of the binding
desires. In this manner, a jñānī may entertain many desires for loka-saṅgraha, not for any
reason but to exhaust prārabdha or due to prārabdha-vāsanā. The jñānī will never
entertain desires like an ajñānī. That is why Kṛṣṇa said in Gītā:
saktāḥ karmaṇyavidvāṃso yathā kurvanti bhārata;
kuryādvidvāṃstathāsaktaścikīrṣurlokasaṅgraham.
Ajñānī is also busy and jñānī also is busy but what is the difference? One is detached and
another is attached. Therefore, kim icchan iti śrutam. Therefore, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad says what type of desires a jñānī can have. He can never have any binding
desires.

śloka 191
रागो लिङ्गमबोधस्य सन्तु रागादयो बुधे ।
इति शास्त्रद्वयं सार्थमेवं सत्यविरोधतः ॥ ७.१९१ ॥
rāgo liṅgamabodhasya santu rāgādayo budhe.
iti śāstradvayaṃ sārthamevaṃ satyavirodhataḥ (7.191).
Thus, Vidyāraṇya has established whenever we define mokṣa as sarva-kāma-nāśa in any
part of the scriptures whether it is Upaniṣad or Gītā, wherever mokṣa is defined as sarva-
kāma-nāśa you should always add an adjective and that adjective sarva-bandhaka kāma-
nāśa. It does not mean total destruction of desires. It is only destruction of binding desires.
Ādi Śaṅkarācārya uses the word aśuddha kāma. Now, Vidyāraṇya wonders is this an
adjective added by us? That adjective Śruti does not mention but we insert the adjective
because it is convenient to us. Therefore, someone may question. So Vidyāraṇya interprets
this. He says it is not my personal interpretation. All the traditional Ācāryas, beginning
from Ādi Śaṅkarācārya, Sūreśvarācārya and others also have interpreted in this manner
only. In support of this, he gives Sūreśvarācārya’s example. He has made two statements
in two different books. In one book, he has said jñānī’s don’t have desires. In another book,
the very same Ācārya has said jñānī can have desires. Naturally, there is a seeming

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1011

contradiction that can only be resolved by one method. When you say jñānī does not have
desires, it means binding desires. Jñānī can have desires means it is non-binding desires.
So he gives two quotations. rāga abodhasya liṅgam [ref. Naiṣkarmyasiddhi 4.67 śloka a
part.] Here, it is said excessive attachment to the worldly objects is the symptom of
ignorance. Any type of desire is an indication of ignorance. Liṅgam means indication.
Abodha means ignorance. What does it indirectly mean? Wherever ignorance is there,
there will be desires; wherever desire is there, there is ignorance. Jñānī will not have
ignorance because he has gained jñāna. Therefore, jñānī cannot have desires at all. This is
message one given in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi 4.67. Therefore, indirectly it means jñānī does not
have ignorance and therefore, desires also. The same Sūreśvarācārya in another place
santu rāgādayo budhe in a wise person, let there be any number of desires. That does not
mean wise man does not have desires. Let there be desires in him in plenty. It means jñānī
is allowed to have rāga-dveṣa. How do you resolve this contradiction? He says iti śāstra
dvayam. These two are the contradictory statements of Sureśvarācārya. Incidentally, the
second statement is taken from Bṛhadāraṇyaka vārtika [an elaborate analysis of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka bhāṣya written by Ādi Śaṅkarācārya upon the Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad.1.4.1539]. These two seemingly contradictory statements evam sārtham will
become meaningful only in this manner. Take one as binding desires and another as non-
binding desires and then there will not be any contradiction. In such an interpretation,
contradictions are no more there. All these things Lord Kṛṣṇa has hinted in Bhagavadgītā
by saying ndriyasyendriyasyārthe rāgadveṣau vyavasthitau. Kṛṣṇa clearly says every
sense-organ will have its own rāga-dveṣa. There, Kṛṣṇa does not say jñānī or ajñānī. Hence
it is implied Kṛṣṇa has made a general rule whether a jñānī or ajñānī; even Bhagavān like
Rāma and Kṛṣṇa have their own preferred vāhana. Therefore, even deities have got their
own rāga-dveṣa. Therefore, nothing wrong in having rāgas and dveṣas. Never become an
addict or slave to your indrīyas. You may have desires but never become a slave. You take
it as entertainment but don’t become a slave to your desires.

śloka 192
जगन्मिथ्यात्ववत्स्वात्मासङ्गत्वस्य समीक्षणात्।
कस्य कामायेति वचो भोक्त्रभावविवक्षया ॥ ७.१९२ ॥
jaganmithyātvavat svātmāsaṅgatvasya samīkṣaṇāt.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1012

kasya kāmāyeti vaco bhoktrabhāvavivakṣayā (7.192).

Now, Vidyāraṇya concludes the commentary upon the expression kim icchan. This
commentary started in śloka 135. The significance of kim icchan is jñānī does not have any
binding desires because he looks at the world as mithyā. Therefore, the indirect
significance of kim icchan is the jagan-mithyātva or bhogya-prapañca-mithyātva; that is
established. Jagan-mithyātva or bhogya-prapañca-mithyātva or bhogya-prapañca-niṣedha
is the significance of the bottom line of kim icchan. Hereafter, what we are going to do is
that we enter the discussion on kasya kāmāya. Kasya kāmāya means for whose fulfillment
will a jñānī desire an object, by saying this, the Upaniṣad says that there is no desiring
bhoktā in the jñānī. After jñāna, the desirer ahaṅkāra, the desirer bhoktā will be negated
and therefore, bhoga is not required. The significance of kasya kāmāya is bhoktṛ-niṣedha.
That will start from here and go up to 222 which we will see in the next class.

Class 207
Having concluded the analysis of the significance and status of the phrase kim icchan, the
words kasya kāmāya are now taken up for an in-depth analysis. After having established
the position of desire, the position of the desirer is taken up. Who desired what? This
question is being answered in the following ślokas.
When we enquired into the first part of the mantra kim icchan it was concluded that the
world is an illusion. The knowledge of the illusory nature of the world in the context of
kim icchan is the reason why there is no desire in the man of wisdom, because he has
come to realize the illusoriness of the world. But it does not mean that the world will
disappear. From vyāvahārika standpoint it will continue, but the wise man will not be
influenced by anything that happens in the world. He will be totally untouched. Having
discovered by personal, direct understanding that I am essentially unattached to anything
that none of the worldly objects can touch me, bhoktr-abhāva-vivakśayā the sense of
enjoyership is absent. Now, we will analyse kasya kāmāya in the context of this absence of
desire to do to enjoy, etc.
Since there are no objects to be desired and therefore, there is no desire. Previously, he
desired the object because he misunderstood the object to be real but after advaita-jñāna
the objects are perceived all right but they are understood as unreal objects and therefore,
a jñānī does not develop any desire for those unreal objects. Thereafter, Vidyāraṇya made

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1013

an incidental point also. Jñānī cannot have desire born out of ignorance because jñānī does
not have ignorance. Therefore, ignorance born desires cannot be there for a jñānī.
Vidyāraṇya adds a note that jñānī can have vāsanā-based desires, prārabdha-vāsanā-based
desires, which desires alone make a jñānī do varieties of loka-saṅgraha karmas. The
Upaniṣad does not mention that but we have to note it as an aside topic and thereafter
Vidyāraṇya adds even though a jñānī may have the vāsanā-janya-icchā that desire is as
good as no desire because those desires don’t have the capacity to bind the jñānī. They
exist like the roasted seed. The presence of the roasted seed is as good as the absence of
seed from the standpoint of sprouting. Similarly, from the standpoint of saṃsāra presence
of prārabdha-vāsanā-janya-icchā is as good as no icchā. Therefore, the Upaniṣad does not
want to count those desires. Then, which desires should be counted? The sprouting ones.
Ignorance-born desires alone should be counted and fortunately jñānī does not have any
one of the binding ignorance-born desires. Therefore, kim icchan. What binding desire a
jñānī has? He has none. This was elaborately studied starting from śloka 135 up to śloka
no. 191.
Now, from 192 onwards, Vidyāraṇya enters into kasya kāmāya commentary. It is the next
expression occurring in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. The meaning of this expression
is: for whose enjoyment should a jñānī desire sense-objects! For whose enjoyment should
be translated for which enjoyer’s enjoyment should a jñānī desire sense-objects? This
appears to be a question, which is but an assertion. Negation is the meaning for which
enjoyer’s enjoyment; by asking that the Upaniṣad conveys that there is no enjoyer to enjoy
the sense-pleasures. Previously, it was said that there was no object for enjoyment. Now,
the Upaniṣad says that there is no enjoyer to enjoy the sense-pleasures. In Sanskrit, an
enjoyer is called bhoktā. Therefore, through this question the Upaniṣad is negating the
enjoyer bhoktā. The previous portion is about bhogya-niṣedha and present portion bhoktṛ-
niṣedha. The previous portion is about object-negation and the present one is subject-
negation. Neither the object of bhoga nor the subject of bhoga exist. Therefore, the
following portion is bhoktṛ-niṣedha or ahaṅkāra-niṣedha. Because ahaṅkāra alone serves
as kartā, ahaṅkāra alone serves as the bhoktā also. Therefore, bhoktṛ-ahaṅkāra-niṣedha is
done here.
What is the definition of ahaṅkāra in this context? You should not have forgotten.
ahaṅkāra is śarīra plus cidābhāsa reflecting medium plus the reflected consciousness. Both

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1014

of them are mithyā. Śarīra-trayam api mithyā, śarīra-pratibimbita-caitanyam api mithyā.

Therefore, ahaṅkāra is mithyā. Therefore, bhoktā mithyā. Śarīra-pratibimbita-caitanya has
three names in Māṇḍūkya kārikā. They are Viśva, taijasa and prājña. All these three put
together is the mithyā ahaṅkāra that has been negated by nāntaḥprajñaṃ nabahiḥprajñaṃ
nobhayataḥprajñaṃ naprajñānaghanaṃ naprajñaṃ nāprajñam. With this, Taijasa has
gone, Viśva gone, Prājña gone; what is left out is Turīya Caitanya. It comes in Māṇḍūkya
Upaniṣad as the famous 7th mantra. In fact, Gauḍapāda kārikā 2nd chapter, 3rd and 4th
chapters are commentary on this 7th mantra only. Anyway, come to the śloka. He says
jaganmithyātvavat. Just as the unreality of the universe was conveyed, the universe
referring to bhogya prapañca was conveyed by the expression kim icchan. Just as the
unreality of bhogya prapañca was conveyed indirectly through the expression kim icchan,
in the same way bhoktrabhāvavivakṣayā with an intention to negate or falsify the bhoktṛ-
prapañca also, kasya kāmāya is given in this context. Negation in this context is
falsification. With an intention to falsify the bhoktṛ-prapañca it is said. Ahaṅkāra-abhāva is
called bhoktṛ-abhāva. With that intention vacaḥ. There is the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
expression ‘kasya kāmāya’ for the enjoyment of which enjoyer should a jñānī desire! The
next question is: how will the bhoktā be negated? How are we going to see in this project
the negation of bhoktā? Vidyāraṇya put it very carefully svātmāsaṅgatvasya samīkṣaṇāt
by looking at oneself as asaṅga Ātmā, bhoktā disappears. Ātmāsaṅgatva means the asaṅga
status of oneself samīkṣaṇāt means by clear understanding. Asaṅgoham asaṅgoham
asaṅgoham punaḥpunaḥ iti nyāyena bhoktā apagacchati.
By knowing, that I am asaṅga how will bhoktā go away? You should not blindly swallow.
How do you negate bhoktā by seeing myself as asaṅga? The logic is this. To enjoy the
bhoktā-status one should have a connection with bhogya. The husband-status is
impossible without a connection with the wife. Therefore, I will enjoy the bhoktā-status as
long as I have saṅga with the bhogya prapañca. But once I know I am asaṅga, my
connection with bhogya prapañca will go away. Previously, we said that the connection
with bhogya prapañca goes away because bhogya prapañca is mithyā. That was the
argument before. Now, he gives another argument that my connection with bhogya
prapañca goes away because I am asaṅga svarūpa; how can the asaṅga Ātmā have
connection with any blessed object just as space cannot have sambandha, connection, with
anything. I the Ātmā cannot have bhogya-sambandha; it is not possible, I cannot be called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1015

bhoktā. Since I cannot be called a bhoktā, my bhoktṛtva status must be a misconception

like rope-snake adhyāsa. Just as a false snake is superimposed on a rope because of
ignorance, bhoktā's status is superimposed on I the asaṅga Ātmā. Therefore, by my clear
knowledge just as rope-snake is negated, bhoktṛtva status is negated. Therefore,
svātmāsaṅgatvasya samīkṣaṇāt kūṭastha-svarūpa-caitanyasya jñānāt, like by rajju-jñāna,
bhoktā gets falsified. That is conveyed indirectly kasya kāmāya iti vākyena. This is
saṃkṣepa-sūtra-bhūta-śloka. The rest of the ślokas are only a commentary on this
particular idea.

śloka 193
पतिजायादिकं सर्वं तत्तद्भोगाय नेच्छति ।
किन्त्वात्मभोगार्थमिति श्रुतावुद्घोषितं बहु ॥ ७.१९३ ॥
patijāyādikaṃ sarvaṃ tattadbhogāya necchati.
kintvātmabhogārthamiti śrutāvudghoṣitaṃ bahu (7.193).
Now, a Pūrvapakṣī or an intelligent student raises a question. Vidyāraṇya himself supplies
that and he explains. You say Ātmā is abhoktā, through kasya kāmāya bhoktṛtva status is
negated and asaṅga Ātmā is revealed. This is said in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad all right.
But elsewhere in the same Upaniṣad Yājñavalkya admits that Ātmā is a bhoktā. He says
there is a portion in Yājñavalkya-Maitreyī-saṃvāda, where the former introduces Ātmā as
bhoktā only and he clearly says ātmanastu kāmāya sarvaṃ priyaṃ bhavati. Everything in
the creation is loved by people only for the sake of one’s own enjoyment [reference
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra 2.4.5 and 4.5.6]. For the enjoyment of oneself a person
loves everything in the creation. Not only that he gives a big list also. The husband loves
the wife not wife’s sake but for husband’s sake only. Once the wife becomes a headache,
he leaves her. That means wife is renounced. The other way around also similarly, the wife
loves the husband not for husband’s sake but for her own self. A big list is given. Nobody
loves anything in the creation out of love for that object he says, but that it is a conditional
love. There is one condition only. The condition is that I should be comfortable. The
moment one finds discomfort in the presence of any object including God, one will reject
that and therefore, every other love being conditional that is not real love; real love is
directed towards Ātmā only, bhoktā Ātmā, for whose enjoyment the wife, the children,
money, husband, all are there.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1016

There, the expression is ātmanaḥ kāmāya which means ātmanaḥ bhogāya which means
Ātmā is taken as bhoktā alone. By the expression ātmanaḥ kāmāya, Yājñavalkya openly
admits Ātmā is a bhoktā, but here you say bhoktṛtva is negated. Tell me clearly is Ātmā
bhoktā or abhoktā. In Maitreyī-Brāhmaṇa Ātmā is introduced as bhoktā but in this
particular mantra here bhoktṛtva is negated. Which one is correct? This is the question.
The self being untouched by the world, there has to be total absence of enjoyership in the
self. Therefore, that which is not, how can it be removed? However, the enjoyership seems
to exist, because of which one suffers or enjoys in life. The enjoyership belongs to whom?
And what is the cause of this? Naturally, the delusion about one’s own nature which is
untouched by the changing world is the cause. For the question raised by Pūrvapakṣī
Vidyāraṇya answers in the following śloka.

śloka 194
किं कू टस्थश्चिदाभासोऽथ वा किमुभयात्मकः ।
भोक्ता तत्र न कू टस्थोऽसङ्गत्वाद्भोक्तृ तां व्रजेत्॥ ७.१९४ ॥
kiṃ kūṭasthaścidābhāso:'tha vā kimubhayātmakaḥ.
bhoktā tatra na kūṭastho:'saṅgatvādbhoktṛtāṃ vrajet (7.194).
Is the pure consciousness enjoyer or the conditioned consciousness or an amalgam of the
two the enjoyer? Of the three possibilities, pure consciousness can certainly not be an
enjoyer on account of its being totally unattached like space. Let us now enquire into who
is this enjoyer?
1. Kim kūṭasthaḥ bhoktā – is bhoktā the pure undisturbed consciousness?
2. Kim cidābhāsaḥ – or is bhoktā the conditioned consciousness?
3. Kim vā ubhayātmakaḥ – or is bhoktā a mixture of the two?
Vidyāraṇya tells the Pūrvapakṣī that you read Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad completely, you
have gone through Pañcadaśī and hereafter, you should never use the word loosely.
Whenever you say Ātmā bhoktā or I am bhoktā, etc., what is the meaning of the word I?
You should ask yourself. Because we have seen that no individual is a pure individual but
every individual in the creation is a mixture of twofold caitanyas. In the 6th chapter , we
have pointed out that every individual is a mixture of twofold caitanyas. In the previous
chapter we talked about ādhāra-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya. Sometimes we refer to
them as bimba caitanya and pratibimbita caitanya. Sometimes we refer to them as cit and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1017

cidābhāsa. This mixture is integrally present in every individual. Therefore, when you use
the expression you should ask the question who is bhoktā? If Yājñavalkya in Maitreyī
Brāhmaṇa talks about a bhoktā you should tell me who is the bhoktā? There are three
possibilities ādhāra-caitanya must be bhoktā or ābhāsa-caitanya be bhoktā or the mixture
must be bhoktā. Which one we refer to, we should analyse and then only use the bhoktā
properly. In the following ślokas, Vidyāraṇya will negate the first two options and arrive
at the third option. The first two option the original consciousness can never be a bhoktā
because it is asaṅga nirvikāra caitanya; therefore, it cannot be connected with anything
including the bhogya prapañca. Therefore, the option one is ruled out.

The second option is cidābhāsa can have connection because the very formation of
cidābhāsa is in connection with the reflecting medium; therefore, cidābhāsa is a
vyāvahārika vastu. It has connection with the antahkāraṇa and therefore, it can have
connection with the bhogya prapañca. The cidābhāsa goes out through every thought and
pervades every object. Vṛtti-vyāpti, phala-vyāpti, etc. We talked about earlier. Phala-
vyāpti means cidābhāsa pervading object. The ābhāsa-caitanya can have sambandha, it is
said. Can you say ābhāsa-caitanya is bhoktā? Vidyāraṇya says that is also not possible. We
wonder how it is not possible? Vidyāraṇya says you can never talk about ābhāsa-caitanya
by itself because ābhāsa-caitanya cannot even exist by itself; where is the question of
sambandha! Before marriage, if we think of naming the children, how is it possible! The
cidābhāsa being reflection does not have an existence of its own; where is the question of
forming relationship?! Therefore, cidābhāsa by itself cannot be a bhoktā. Just as our snake
by itself cannot do anything as it does not have an existence of its own. Kevala ābhāsa-
caitanya does not exist and therefore, only the third option is possible. The mixture alone,
mithyā cidābhāsa backed by cit alone, can be a bhoktā. Therefore, the bhoktṛtva is also
mithyā. That is a different point, but the mixture has the bhoktṛtva status. Therefore,
Yājñavalkya talks about the Miśra Ātmā in the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa.
Kūṭastha caitanya being the illuminator of everything good and bad, there is no
attachment or detachment, no likes and dislikes. Therefore, the kūṭastha cannot be the
bhoktā, the enjoyer or sufferer. The ocean is not attached to the waves, the gold has no
preference for any form whether it is of Rāma or Rāvaṇa; the space has no shape of its own
but supports all shapes, whatever they are. Similarly, kūṭastha caitanya, the absolute

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1018

consciousness, being present in everything including the absence, there can be no

attachment. For example, in deep sleep the worldly objects are rejected; then the worldly
thoughts are rejected; then the last thought that ‘I am the body’ is also rejected. That being
so, how can kūṭastha caitanya be called saṅga attached? The question now arises that
kūṭastha caitanya the pure consciousness is a saṅga unattached is accepted. But being a
saṅga does not necessarily mean that it is not enjoying or suffering.

śloka 195
सुखदुःखाभिमानाख्यो विकारो भोग उच्यते ।
कू टस्थस्य विकारी चेत्येतन्न व्याहतं कथम्॥ ७.१९५॥
sukhaduḥkhābhimānākhyo vikāro bhoga ucyate.
kūṭasthasya vikārī cetyetanna vyāhataṃ katham (7.195).
This is not the second option. The second option will come later in 196. In this śloka,
Vidyāraṇya explains the reason asaṅgatvāt. We have already understood the reasoning.
But Vidyāraṇya feels that the other dull students won’t understand; therefore, he explains
the reason further. We are still in the first option only. He says any type of enjoyment is
vikāra. It is in the form of a modification, a change. Suppose there are stones in some
sweet dish; then there is pain due to stones although sweet is supposed to give pleasure.
There may not be a physical modification as bhoga means a mental modification that takes
place in an individual. At all levels vikāra takes place and that vikāra is called bhoga.
Vidyāraṇya first defines bhoga as vikāra. Any experience enjoyable or painful is a form is
modification only. What about kūṭastha or ādhāra-caitanya? Kūṭastha means
nirvikāratayā tiṣṭhati iti kūṭasthaḥ. The very word kūṭastha means nirvikāra. In the first
line he said bhoga is vikāra and in the second line he has said kūṭastha is nirvikāra. The
word kūṭastha and vikārī [association with vikāra modification, it is sukha-duḥkha-vikāra
modification in the form happy or unhappy thoughts], two expressions are contradictory.
The word bhoktā means savikāra. The word kūṭastha means nirvikāra. Nirvikāra kūṭastha
word and savikāra bhoktā word can never coexist. Therefore, kūṭastha cannot be bhoktā.
This pair of words is contradictory. Therefore, Ātmā can never be a bhoktā.

śloka 196
विकारिबुद्ध्यधीनत्वादाभासे विकृ तावपि ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1019

निरधिष्ठानविभ्रान्तिः के वला न हि तिष्ठति ॥ ७.१९६ ॥

vikāribuddhyadhīnatvādābhāse vikṛtāvapi.
niradhiṣṭhānavibhrāntiḥ kevalā na hi tiṣṭhati (7.196).

Now, Vidyāraṇya has come to the second option. He says the second option appears to be
possible when you look at it superficially. The second option is mere cidābhāsa or
cidābhāsa by itself without any connection with kūṭastha, independently can it have
bhoga or not? Superficially looking, bhoga seems to be possible because cidābhāsa can
have sambandha with the object and cidābhāsa can have modification also because any
reflection can and does undergo modification when the reflecting medium changes. When
the mirror is moving the reflection also moves and when the mirror is bright the reflection
is bright; when the mirror is dull the reflection is dull. Thus, cidābhāsa can have both
sambandha and vikāra. Therefore, it appears cidābhāsa can have bhoga. Vidyāraṇya says
that seems to be possible if you don’t think well. If you think well, you will understand
that it is also not possible. I will give you one week time to think and then we will see how
it is not possible.

Class 208
śloka 196 contd.
After having explained the expression kim icchan Vidyāraṇya has taken up the analysis of
the expression kasya kāmāya. First he established the expression kim icchan is used to
negate the bhogya prapañca and then with the expression kasya kāmāya he negates the
bhoktṛ prapañca. Thus bhogya-bhoktṛ-prapañca-dvaya Upaniṣad wants to negate. Of that,
kim icchan portion was commented up to śloka number 191 and from śloka 192
Vidyāraṇya has entered into kasya kāmāya portion. It will go up to śloka 222. When
Vidyāraṇya said that the Upaniṣad wants to negate the bhoktṛ prapañca or bhoktā a
pūrvapakṣa was raised by the student. How can you negate the bhoktā. Elsewhere in
Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa the Upaniṣad has clearly said Ātmā is the bhoktā because there is an
expression ātmanastu kāmāya sarvaṃ priyaṃ bhavati. The word kāmāya means bhogāya.
Therefore, ātmanastu bhogāya sarvam priyam bhavati means everything becomes beloved
or dear for the bhoga the enjoyment of Ātmā. If everything is pleasing for the sake of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1020

bhoga of Ātmā, it means Ātmā must be a bhoktā. Ātmanaḥ bhogāya is possible only if the
Ātmā is bhoktā. If Ātmā is abhoktā you can never use the expression ātmanaḥ bhogāya.
Therefore, the student raises the question that in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa everything is said for
bhoga of the Ātmā and Ātmā must be therefore, bhoktā and thereafter the Upaniṣad says
ātmā vāre draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyaḥ, etc. From that, it is very clear that the Ātmā
which we have to know and get liberated is the bhoktā Ātmā only. Therefore, you cannot
negate bhoktā. If you still negate the bhoktā then Ātmā being bhoktā, negation of bhoktā
will be negation of Ātmā itself! Therefore, there is something fishy here. May you clarify
and clearly tell me whether Ātmā is bhoktā or not. That Pūrvapakṣa was indicated in śloka
number 193.
From 194 onwards Vidyāraṇya entered into the answer to the question raised by
Pūrvapakṣa. Before analyzing the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa Vidyāraṇya raises an independent
question. Whenever you talk about bhoktā find out who is the bhoktā. What is the
meaning of the word bhoktā? You should know clearly. Bhoktā here means the enjoyer of
the world objects and also people. So, Vidyāraṇya raises the question as to who is the
experiencer or the enjoyer. Is it the ādhāra-caitanya or ābhāsa-caitanya, is it the original
consciousness or the reflected consciousness, or is it the mixture of both. Is it independent
original consciousness or is it independent reflected consciousness or is it the mixture of
both. Vidyāraṇya says independent original consciousness by itself can never become a
bhoktā because the original consciousness by itself is asaṅga caitanya and asaṅga caitanya
cannot experience anything because experience requires contact with an object.
Experiencer can become an experiencer only by contacting an object; therefore, experiencer
has to be sasaṅga only. Asaṅga original consciousness by itself cannot have bhoga.
Therefore, first answer is that independent original consciousness is not a bhoktā. The next
question is can independent reflected consciousness be a bhoktā? “Is independent
reflected consciousness a bhoktā?” question itself is wrong, because there is no such thing
called “independent reflected consciousness”. The reflected consciousness being mithyā, it
being a reflection, no reflection can exist independent of the original. Your face-reflection
cannot continue in the mirror after you have come for the class. Once bimba comes away,
pratibimba cannot exist. In fact the very ‘is-ness’ is borrowed from the original
consciousness. Therefore, independent reflected consciousness becoming a bhoktā is out of
contention.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1021

śloka 198
उभयात्मक एवातो लोके भोक्ता निगद्यते ।
तदृगात्मानमारभ्य कू टस्थः शेषितः श्रुतौ ॥ ७.१९७ ॥
ubhayātmaka evāto loke bhoktā nigadyate.
tadṛgātmānamārabhya kūṭasthaḥ śeṣitaḥ śrutau (7.197).
Therefore, pāriśeṣa-nyāyena, by the law of exclusion, the only possibility is the mixture of
both can only be the experiencer. In this mixture you can give prominence to either of the
two. If you want to give prominence to the reflected consciousness, you can say the
reflected consciousness is the experiencer backed by the original consciousness. Thus, you
put the reflected consciousness as the subject of the sentence and say that the original
consciousness is at the back. You can also say the original consciousness is the experiencer
through the reflected consciousness; then it becomes the experiencer. Whatever be the
language that you put, the mixture is involved. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya gave the conclusion
in śloka 197 which we were seeing in the last class. It is not one of the experiencer s, but the
mixture alone is the experiencer or the bhoktā. You can extend it to the kartā also.
Independent reflected consciousness cannot be kartā and independent original
consciousness cannot be the kartā but the mixture alone is kartā. Similarly, you can extend
it to the knower. Often the intellectual asks the question who knows ahaṃ brahma asmi?
Does the reflected consciousness know or does the original consciousness knows ahaṃ
brahma asmi? Once this conclusion comes, our journey gets stuck. Therefore, here also,
you should remember that the independent reflected consciousness cannot know;
independent original consciousness also cannot know. Therefore, the knower of ahaṃ
brahma asmi is the reflected consciousness backed by the original consciousness or the
original consciousness through the instrumentality of the reflected consciousness.
Sūreśvarācārya says the original consciousness putting on the coat of the reflected
consciousness is the knower. Just as the police, with the police coat alone he is able to
control the traffic. Without uniform, he cannot function. Similarly, the original
consciousness has to put on the uniform of the reflected consciousness to become the
knower also. Anyway, here, the context is not the knower and doer but it is the enjoyer or
experiencer. Therefore, ubhayātmaka. It is the common word for the mixture of both. The
mixture is declared to be bhoktā. Now, he wants to explain the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. In

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1022

Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa Yājñavalkya says ātmanastu kāmāya sarvaṃ priyaṃ bhavati; there the
word Ātmā is used only as bhoktā. Once you say bhogāya it has to be bhoktā only.
Therefore, in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa Yājñavalkya introduced the bhoktā Ātmā only. He asked
Maitreyī also to enquire into Ātmā only. Yājñavalkya turns the attention from the bhogya
prapañca to bhoktā Ātmā. When Maitreyī turns towards bhoktā Ātmā the student does
not know that bhoktā Ātmā is a mixture. If the student has that knowledge he will no
more be a student but he will be a jñānī. Therefore, the student does not know that the
bhoktā I is a mixture; only the teacher knows. The teacher does not reveal the fact in the
beginning of the class. Once the student’s attention is turned, then the teacher will say
bhoktā Ātmā is not a singular entity but it is a mixture of śākṣī the original consciousness
and ahaṅkāra. Later only, the student will know. Thereafter, the teacher would say that of
this mixture also, bhoktā part of the Ātmā is mithyā, the reflected consciousness part is
mithyā and the original consciousness part alone is satya. Then the student will negate the
reflected consciousness part also and abide as the original consciousness. Until the
reflected consciousness is negated, I will have the bhoktā-status and once the reflected
consciousness uniform is disowned or removed bhoktā is also dropped and abhoktā is
arrived at. Bhogya to bhoktā and bhoktā to abhoktā is our journey. When you shift from
bhogya to bhoktā, bhoktā is a mixture and bhoktā to abhoktā when you arrive off the
mixture, the reflected consciousness has been removed. Therefore, bhogya to bhoktā and
bhoktā to abhoktā should be our journey. Bhoktā is vācyārtha I and abhoktā is lakṣyārtha
I. So, bhogya to vācyārtha to lakṣyārtha I is the journey stated in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa.
Therefore, ātmanastu kāmāya sarva priyam bhavati means which segment of the journey
we are in? When Yājñavalkya talks about ātmanastu kāmāya the journey is the first
segment bhogya to bhoktā. Thereafter, the second segment bhoktā to abhoktā comes in.
Bhoktā to abhoktā journey happens just by dropping the reflected consciousness. Then, I
travel from bhoktā to abhoktā. It is the original consciousness alone without the reflected
consciousness part that is left as the final remainder, only the original consciousness part is
left in the vessel and the others are all removed.

śloka 198
आत्मा कतम इत्युक्ते याज्ञवल्क्यो विबोधयन्।
विज्ञानमयमारभ्यासङ्गं तं पर्यशेषयत्॥ ७.१९८ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1023

ātmā katama ityukte yājñavalkyo vibodhayan.

vijñānamayamārabhyāsaṅgaṃ taṃ paryaśeṣayat (7.198).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says this initial communication gap between the student and the teacher
is inevitable. When the teacher says self-knowledge gives liberation, the teacher uses the
word self in the pure śākṣī form because it is that knowledge which is going to give
liberation. Even though the teacher has this clarity, the student is not even aware that
there is a śākṣī kūṭastha caitanya behind; therefore, when any student comes to the class
for self-knowledge, initially, he understands the self not as śākṣī, not as pure ahaṅkāra
also. Pure ahaṅkāra does not exist by itself. Therefore, student comes as a mixture bhoktā.
When the student wants self-knowledge, in his mind mixture alone is present; the teacher
is aware that the student does not understand what the intention is but since there is no
other way, the teacher says let the student come with misconception. I use the self-
knowledge in one meaning and student thinks of self-knowledge in some other sense
because he does not know which self is meant by the teacher. One great advantage is that
even though the student has understood the false ‘self’, which is different from the
teacher’s intention, the advantage for the teacher is the real self is hidden within the false
self itself! Therefore, since the real self is hidden within the fake self, the teacher says let us
enquire into the self and then he removes the fake part of the fake self and behind that,
there is the real self. It is like when the person runs seeing the snake, the teacher cannot
say enquire into the rope because the other person doesn’t know the rope. Therefore, he
uses the word there is a frightening snake and what will the intelligent say is ‘let us have a
snake-enquiry’. When the teacher says let us have snake-enquiry, the teacher knows there
is no snake. Because of the student’s problem, the teacher does not mind snake-enquiry for
the snake-enquiry will end up in rope-enquiry! It is so because where the snake is, there
itself the rope is hidden. Vidyāraṇya says this is the problem in every Vedāntic class.
Therefore, everywhere where the Self-enquiry is introduced, the teacher has śākṣī in the
mind, the student has the mixture in the mind and that is how the whole study will
commence.
Vidyāraṇya gives another example from Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad. It is a dialogue between Yājñavalkya and Janaka. In Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa it is a
dialogue between Yājñavalkya and Maitreyī. Here, Yājñavalkya makes the statement:
Ātmā is the final light in which all the transactions take place. Ātmā jyotir bhavati. Jyoti

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1024

means the ultimate light in this context. If the consciousness is not there, sunlight is no
more sunlight. Moonlight is no more moonlight. Even sense-organs cannot serve as light if
the consciousness is not there. Therefore, this is the ultimate light, caitanya alone. He uses
the word Ātmā eva jyotiḥ. It is in the presence of Ātmajyoti all transactions take place.
Janaka asks the question: what is Ātmā? When Janaka asks the question Yājñavalkya
introduces the mixture Ātmā in the beginning. Pure Ātmā can never be straightaway
introduced. The reflected consciousness container is required to accommodate the original
consciousness. Svāmī Cinmayānanda gives a nice example. When the student did not
understand the teacher asked for water. The student thought it is due to throat problem he
asked for water. The teacher shouted at him why did you bring the cup. I asked for water
alone. Then the student started staring at him. Water by itself cannot be carried and it
needs a container. The student brings it with the container and the teacher also has to
receive the water along with the container. The teacher will drink only water, dropping
the container. The teacher said this is Vedānta. The original consciousness is water. The
reflected consciousness is the container the cup. The teaching has to start with the
reflected-consciousness-original-consciousness-mixture only. The teacher also will
communicate; the student also should understand. Only when student internalizes the
teaching, the reflected consciousness part will have to be given up, because without that
even tat tvam asi mahā-vākya cannot be used; for that reflected consciousness is required.
Therefore, he says when Janaka asked the question katama Ātmā which one in me is the
Ātmā, is it sthūla-śarīra; is it sūkṣma-śarīra or kāraṇa-śarīra, Yājñavalkya introduced the
teaching with vijñānāmaya Ātmā. vijñānāmaya Ātmā does not mean our Tattvabodha
vijñānāmaya kośa. Here, it refers to bhoktā Ātmā which is a mixture. It is vācyārtha-rūpa
Ātmā. Yājñavalkya says this Ātmā alone goes through avasthā-traya. The Jīvātmā or the
mixture which goes from one avasthā to another that Ātmā is introduced in the beginning
like water with cup. Finally, Yājñavalkya came to the pure asaṅga Ātmā after removing
the reflected consciousness, just as we leave the cup after drinking the water. Similarly,
asaṅga means the pure consciousness alone which was left behind as the ultimate
adhiṣṭhāna, the pāramārthika-satya. Only when the reflected consciousness is there, the
tripuṭī is possible; only when tripuṭī is there vyavahāra is possible and when tripuṭī is not
there no vyavahāra is possible. The pure Ātmā is nirvikalpa caitanya. In the absence of
tripuṭī and the reflected consciousness, who will experience what? In the intermediary

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1025

stage of teaching Ātmā is bhoktā and in the final stage of teaching Ātmā is abhoktā.
Ground is bhogya and step is bhoktā and the dais is abhoktā. Reference is 4.3.7 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

śloka 199
कोऽयमात्मेत्येवमादौ सर्वत्रात्मविचारतः ।
उभयात्मकमारभ्य कू टस्थः शेष्यते श्रुतौ ॥ ७.१९९ ॥
ko:'yamātmetyevamādau sarvatrātmavicārataḥ.
ubhayātmakamārabhya kūṭasthaḥ śeṣyate śrutau (7.199).
Having given the example of Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad,
Vidyāraṇya gives another example from Aitareya Upaniṣad 3.1.1. “What is the Ātmā?” is
the question asked by the students. There also, we find an intermediary stage where Ātmā
is defined as a mixture bhoktā. The answer given is this. It is clearly presented here that
bhoktā Ātmā yena vā paśyati yena vā śṛṇoti, etc., is the experience of bhoktā alone.
Having come to the bhoktā Ātmā mixture in the intermediary stage, at the end of that
section, it is concluded prajñānam brahma. When the Upaniṣad comes to prajñānam
brahma, there the reflected consciousness is not retained but only the original
consciousness is retained. Therefore, he says ko:'yamātmetyevamādau, in such context or
occasion as in Aitareya Upaniṣad; the same method is used elsewhere also. The Self-
enquiry takes place in two stages, it starts from the original-consciousness-reflected-
consciousness-mixture which is called bhoktā. Finally, the teaching concludes with the
original consciousness; Ātmā alone is left as a remainder.

śloka 200
कू टस्थसत्यतां स्वस्मिन्नध्यस्यात्मा विवेकतः ।
तात्विकीं भोक्तृ तां मत्वा न कदाचिज्जिहासति ॥ ७.२०० ॥
kūṭasthasatyatāṃ svasminnadhyasyātmā vivekataḥ.
tātvikīṃ bhoktṛtāṃ matvā na kadācijjihāsati (7.200).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says every student comes to the teacher only as the mixture I or the
compound I. This compound or the composite I or the self consists of real original
consciousness which is attributeless and fake reflected consciousness which is full of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1026

attributes including saṃsāra. Even though every student comes as a mixture I, he is in

such a mess that the student even does not know that he is a composite entity. It means the
teacher has lot of work. First, the teacher has to spend a lot of time explaining the
differentiation between the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. One is
all-pervading and another is confined to the mind only, etc., has to be taught to the
student. The teacher has to separate the two for the student and the unfortunate thing is
that the separating cannot be physically done. The experienced I is the reflected
consciousness, remembered I is the reflected consciousness but the recognized I when I
talk about the common I which was there in the past, and in the present whenever I talk
about the continuous I, that can refer to only the original consciousness because the
reflected consciousness is always changing. Therefore, whenever I say I was there ten
years before in that college; then I was there two years before in that institute; and now I
am here; I talk about an I which was ten years before, two years before and the present.
When I talk about the continuous I, which is called recognized I, the cognition that I is this
I and that recognized continuous I can never refer to ahaṅkāra because ahaṅkāra was
never continuous. Therefore, this I has to be separated ingeniously by differentiating the
recognized I from the experienced present I and remembered past I; different from both is
the recognized I which inheres the present and the past I. This will get subtle and
whenever the context comes, I will repeat that the original consciousness will have to be
separated only intellectually by thinking properly.
You can never experience or see it alone in any state. You can never experience the
original consciousness alone in any state. Suppose you go to a state in which the original
consciousness alone is there, do you know what is that stage? Suppose the body is in some
state and in that body the original consciousness alone is there and the reflected
consciousness is not there; that body is called a dead body! Only during death the
reflected consciousness will be absent; throughout the living period of life, you can never
come to a state of separating the reflected consciousness from the original consciousness.
The mixture of both has to be done intellectually during śravaṇa. Nididhyāsana is only
dwelling upon what I have understood and this understanding has to be grasped when
the teacher struggles to communicate. Communicating the difference between the
original-consciousness and the reflected-consciousness is the toughest challenge for a
teacher. The student comes in a mess where we started. The student does not know that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1027

the I is a mixture of the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. First, the
student should understand the difference and thereafter he can talk about the attributes of
both of them. Only when you know the difference in the substance then only you can talk
about the difference in the attributes. After differentiating, I will say the original
consciousness is satya and the reflected consciousness is mithyā. The original
consciousness is all-pervading and the reflected consciousness is limited to the body. The
original consciousness is asaṅga, the reflected consciousness is saṅga. The reflected
consciousness is always connected to the reflecting medium called the body. Once the
body-connection comes in, connection with the father, mother comes in; sibling-
connection comes; in-law-connection comes. All the saṅga will come up. Then I will have
to talk about the original consciousness as nirguṇa and the reflected consciousness as
saguṇa. All these things, student should grasp. But now, he does not even know one is
satya and another is mithyā. It is just as the reality is transferred to the snake, whereby the
snake appears real and it is frightening; similarly, the student has transferred the reality of
the original consciousness to the mithyā reflected consciousness. Therefore, when the
student arrives in the class, the reflected consciousness is also satya for the student for he
has transferred the reality of the original consciousness to the reflected consciousness just
as he does in the case of seeing the rope as snake. The is-ness of the rope has been
transferred to the snake which is not there. Once the reflected consciousness is reality, the
bhoktā’s status also will become a reality. It is so because saṅga belongs to the reflected
consciousness. Once the reflected consciousness is real, every relationship the reflected
consciousness has also becomes real, like husband, wife, mother, children, etc. Every
relationship becomes pāramārthika-satya because it belongs to the reflected consciousness
and the reflected consciousness is satya. So the relationships are also satya and therefore,
the saṃsāra is also satya. More in the next class.

Class 209
śloka 200 contd.
In these ślokas beginning form śloka 192 up to 222 Vidyāraṇya comments upon
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad portion kasya kāmāya. There, the Upaniṣad does bhoktṛ-
niṣedha negating the enjoyer or experiencer. As a part of this discussion, he takes various

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1028

other portions of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad for analysis. The main portion he has taken for
analysis is Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa where there is an interesting discussion. We have to
understand the context of discussion and only then we can know the impact of this
discussion. Yājñavalkya points out that everybody loves one’s self alone unconditionally.
It is a very powerful statement often disturbing also but it is a truthful statement.
Everybody loves one’s self alone unconditionally. That does not means people do not love
others. Yājñavalkya says everybody loves others conditionally. Love for others is
conditional, while the love for one’s self is unconditional. This itself is a part of another
discussion. It is a complex topic but it is very practical. The other topic as part of which
this comes is whatever is the ‘object’ of love, it is the source of ānanda. That is the original
discussion. Whatever is an object of unconditional love, is a source of unconditional and
permanent ānanda. As a part of that, Yājñavalkya wants to say the self alone is
unconditionally loved by all the people, at all times, in all places and under all conditions!
Since the Self-love is unconditional, the Self alone is the permanent and absolute source of
ānanda. Therefore, the discussion is: Ātmā alone is ānanda-svarūpa. It is an object of
unconditional love. Hence, it gives permanent ānanda. Since Ātmā is ānanda-svarūpa by
enquiring and finding the self you will get perennial ānanda. To establish that Self-love is
unconditional, Yājñavalkya says any other love is conditional only.
For that purpose, we divide the whole universe into two groups. The whole creation is
divided into two sādhanas and sadhyas; sādhana means instruments we use either in the
form of actions or in the form of materials; or in the form of people; various sādhanas are
means we use to accomplish various ends we want to get. Like a person who runs a
factory, to run the factory which is his goal, he is using various employees, who become
sādhanas and the factory will become the sādhya. Now, we have got three factors the
employees, the factory and myself. Which one do we love most? We generally don’t think
but Vedānta enquires. I use the people only for the sake of the factory; therefore, the
people become the means sādhanas and the factory becomes the sādhya. Between the two,
Vedānta says that you love the employees because they are contributing to your factory.
The moment they create problems, or the moment they resign their job you don’t even
enquire, where they live whether they live or otherwise. Therefore, compared to the
sādhya and sādhana, sādhya is loved more than the sādhana. Now, the question is why
am I interested so much in the factory? There is no lokasaṅgraha, etc. I run the factory for

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1029

my own benefits and therefore, the factory is the sādhya which is meant for I, the bhoktā,
that is the self. Therefore, Vedānta says the moment running the factory becomes a
headache and blood pressure increases, stress increases, the doctor says you have varieties
of health problem, in such a situation, you look to sell away the factory. It is so because I
love the factory as long as I am comfortable. The moment it creates a problem, I renounce
the factory for my sake. I renounce the sādhana for the sake of sādhya and I renounce the
sādhya for the sake of self, the enjoyer. Therefore, in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa Yājñavalkya
wants to conclude both sādhana-prīti and sādhya-prīti are all fake, pseudo, conditional.
Conditional love is fake love.
It is also a painful statement. I love a person because of his money; and the moment he
loses the money I stop loving him that means I love not the person but the pocket.
Therefore, sādhana-prīti and sādhya-prīti both are meant for the self, the bhoktā self. For
his sake alone everything else is loved. But the love of the self, bhoktā, is unconditional
because I have been loving myself right form the beginning. When I am a child I love
myself and even when I am old I love myself. Therefore, bhoktṛ-prīti is nirupādhika prīti.
Condition love is called sopādhika-prīti. Unconditional love is called nirupādhika-prīti.
Self alone is unconditionally loved. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.8 says nobody loves
anything else more than one’s self. That is not Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. tadetat preyaḥ putrāt,
etc, is found in Puruṣa-vidha Brāhmaṇa.
Now, the Pūrvapakṣī asks a question. In all the sections, the Self-love or the love of the
bhoktā is said to be unconditional. The bhoktā happens to be the source of ānanda. Then,
why should the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad negate that bhoktā? In Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa we
have said bhoktā is the Self and Self-love is unconditional; therefore, there the bhoktā is
glorified. But how come in this context, you negate that bhoktā which is the object of
unconditional love which is the source of ānanda? That is the Pūrvapakṣī’s question. For
that, Vidyāraṇya struggles to answer. What Vidyāraṇya says is when we talk about the
love for the self the bhoktā, in that self bhoktā itself two components are there. It is not
clearly divided in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. It has been loosely mentioned “Ātmā, the bhoktā, is
an object of unconditional love and source of infinite ānanda” is a loose statement. The
self, bhoktā, itself has two components such as ādhāra-caitanya, the original
consciousness, and the other is ābhāsa-caitanya, the reflected consciousness. The bhoktā
attribute does not really belong to Ātmā; even though we loosely say bhoktā Ātmā, Ātmā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1030

is abhoktā and in that abhoktā Ātmā there is a false superimposition of bhoktā’s status.
Why is this bhoktā-status falsely superimposed? It is so because, remember the example,
when there is a colourless crystal, and red flower in its proximity the redness of the flower
appears upon the crystal which is in the proximity and the red colour on the crystal is
falsely transferred redness. The redness belongs originally the flower and the redness on
the crystal is falsely transferred. Similarly, when I say I the Ātmā, I am the crystal-like
original consciousness. I am the original consciousness that can be compared to the crystal.
And in the proximity there is a cidābhāsa reflected in the mind which is intimately there.
In the mind, there is cidābhāsa and the cidābhāsa can be compared to the red flower. The
cidābhāsa red flower has the red colour called bhoktṛtva status, the enjoyer status, that
belongs to the cidābhāsa. This enjoyer status is mithyā for cidābhāsa itself is mithyā. That
enjoyer status is superimposed on abhoktā, the original consciousness. All these are mixed
up when I use the word ‘I’; these details I do not know. Vidyāraṇya says the false
bhoktṛtva is transferred to the real original consciousness. The false bhoktṛtva, the enjoyer
status, is transferred to the original consciousness and I do a second transference, where
the reality of the original consciousness is transferred to the bhoktṛtva status and when the
reality is transferred to the false bhoktṛtva, the false bhoktṛtva appears as real bhoktṛtva.
Therefore, I have transferred bhoktṛtva upon myself, the original consciousness and also I
have transferred the reality to bhoktṛtva and now I look upon myself as a real bhoktā.
This misunderstood real bhoktā is the object of love and the source of ānanda. Initially, the
Upaniṣad does not want to deal with this confusion. The bhoktā-confusion we will handle
later. Now, we have got the confusion with regard to bhogya prapañca. First, let the
attention be turned from the bhogya prapañca consisting of sādhana and sādhya. It is said
that they are the objects of conditional love and they are the objects of temporary ānanda.
By saying that, Yājñavalkya turns the attention to the bhoktā Ātmā. Once we have come to
bhoktā Ātmā, thereafter, Yājñavalkya can deal with the bhoktā Ātmā and say bhoktā-
status is mithyā and it belongs to cidābhāsa and therefore, negate that also and come to the
pure crystal that is bhoktṛtva-rahita abhoktā Ātmā that alone is really speaking loved by
all. In fact, even the bhoktā Ātmā is not unconditionally loved because when there are
serious sicknesses problems one says I want to commit suicide. When the bhoktā is full of
problem even that Self-love becomes conditional and therefore, not even the bhoktā;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1031

behind the bhoktā there is kūṭastha caitanya Ātmā and that Ātmā is to be revealed by
negating the bhoktṛtva also.
Therefore, the bhoktā-confusion Vidyāraṇya presents in the 200th śloka which we read in
the last class. He points out kūṭastha-satyatva, the reality of the original consciousness,
svasmin adhyasya, is transferred on to the ahaṅkāra, the reflected consciousness. The
reality is taken from the original consciousness and transferred to the reflected
consciousness like the is-ness which is associated with snakeness really does not belong to
the snake because there is no snake. But I say there is a snake, where the ‘is-ness’,
otherwise called the reality of the snake, is nothing but the is-ness of the rope borrowed
and transferred. The word svasmin here refers to cidābhāsa ahaṅkāra. This alone Ādi
Śaṅkarācārya presents in his famous adhyāsa-bhāṣya introduction anyonyasmin
anyonyātmakatām anyonyadharmāṃśca adhyasya. This transference is done because of
non-discrimination or the confusion. Because of the self-confusion, the bhoktā-status is
mistaken as my real status. The enjoyership, the experiencerhood, the subjecthood, is
mistaken as the real bhoktā-status and whenever we are afraid of prārabdha, some type of
anxiety comes and it frightens the bhoktā alone. So, whenever I am disturbed seeing some
news item I am taking myself as bhoktā, my real bhoktā, for I run to Navagraha-kṣetra and
the running reveals the reality I have attached to it. The bhoktṛtva is taken as real. Holding
on to that status bhoktā, enjoyer, ahaṅkāra, he refuses to give up that bhoktā-status just as
the politicians refuse to give up their chairs. Every saṃśārī refuses to give up the bhoktā
chair even though Damocles’ sword is above the head.
Vedāntic teacher says if you want to give up the problem you give up all the sources of the
problems. And the student says its very logical because if you are to give up problem you
have to give up the source of problems. He does not know the real sūkṣma in that. Guru
says you go home and come back after think well. When he goes on thinking he discovers
a terrible truth that every source of problem happens to be source of ānanda also! In the
relative world, every source of joy is the source of sorrow and also every source of sorrow
happens to be the source of joy. Therefore, the moment I decide to think, I decide to give
up them suddenly I find the source of headache, daughter or son, when I think of giving
up it means I have to give up every single member in the family. The member and
property is my own body which gives problem and it is the very same body which gives
me joy also. In sleep, body is not available, you don’t enjoy any worldly pleasures also;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1032

therefore, there is a question to renounce or not to renounce. After long thinking, the
saṃśārī decides to hold on to that and that is how Māyā Devī celebrates the victory. After
days of thinking, he decides to hold on to that and that is what Vidyāraṇya says even after
suffering so much, one is not ready to give up or renounce the world. So, Vidyāraṇya says
kadācit na jihāsati. He does not want to give up bhoktā-status, ahaṅkāra-status, father-
status, mother-status, brother-status, husband-status, Guru-status. Guru-status is also a
bhoktā-status alone. He does not want to renounce the bhoktā-status.

śloka 201
भोक्ता स्वस्यैव भोगाय पतिजायादिमिच्छति ।
एष लौकिकवृत्तान्तः श्रुत्या सम्यगनूदितः ॥ ७.२०१ ॥
bhoktā svasyaiva bhogāya patijāyādimicchati.
eṣa laukikavṛttāntaḥ śrutyā samyaganūditaḥ (7.201).
And Vidyāraṇya says Yājñavalkya talks about this confused bhoktā who is none other
than the kūṭastha with superimposed bhoktṛtva status. This confused bhoktā alone out of
unconditional love for himself wants to love a few people conditionally. The bhoktā who
loves himself unconditionally himself loves a few people around conditionally for his own
ānanda which is quoted by Yājñavalkya in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. Thus, he gives the context
of Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. He says bhoktā, this confused bhokt, who has unconditional Self-
love for his own happiness [it is nothing but total selfishness] or her own happiness
desires husband, wife, children, etc., conditionally and the moment they begin to give
problems he will think of escaping them somehow or the other. People say I will pay the
rent, you go separate, so that you can be happy. In other words, it is left unsaid that I can
be happy. This is the universal fact. It is restated by the Śruti. Śruti is not giving us the
knowledge because we already know so; it is an evident truth. It is only paraphrasing or
the restating the universal truth. The advantage of this knowledge is that we don’t expect
unconditional love from others. The benefit of this study is that we should not expect
unconditional love from others and when we don’t expect we will not have any
disappointment. Only when you expect there can be disappointment. Expecting the
wrong, this is a cause of all problems in life. If anyone says I want to go away from you, I
can happily say because you loved me conditionally and those conditions are not fulfilled
now, therefore, you are doing what any person or any living being will do. It is natural.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1033

People cry I brought up my son for twenty five years and that girl has snatched him away
from me. So, disappointments are avoided when you don’t have expectation.

śloka 202
भोग्यानां भोक्तृ शेषत्वान्मा भोग्येष्वनुरज्यताम्।
भोक्तर्येव प्रधानेऽतोऽनुरागं तं विधित्सति ॥ ७.२०२ ॥
bhogyānāṃ bhoktṛśeṣatvānmā bhogyeṣvanurajyatām.
bhoktaryeva pradhāne:'to:'nurāgaṃ taṃ vidhitsati (7.202).
Here, you should remember that Vidyāraṇya has given up the present Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra. Now, he is in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa of the Upaniṣad. Bhogyānāṃ
bhoktṛśeṣatvāt all the objects of pleasure or love are only for the sake of the comfort of the
bhoktā I. Śeṣatvāt means for the benefit of bhoktā I. This expression is restated here to
show that their love is conditional. By using the word bhoktṛ-sesa Vidyāraṇya conveys the
idea that love towards them is conditional, the condition being my comfort. From that, we
have to extend that, therefore, the ānanda from them also is conditional ānanda called
pratibimba-ānanda only. Since they are the objects of conditional love, they are only
objects of temporary ānanda or pratibimba-ānanda only. May you not go after those
pratibimba-ānanda or temporary ānanda. Don’t expect too much of ānanda if it is the
beauty of the person that attracts, that beauty is skin deep and also how long it will last! It
will not last. Therefore, don’t run after that pratibimba-ānanda. Therefore, go after the
primary source of ānanda. Bhogya is apradhāna-ānanda-hetu. Bhoktā is pradhāna-
ānanda-hetu. The Upaniṣad asks us to develop love towards the Ātmā. It commands the
seeker to love the Ātmā within rather than the anātmā. Instead of paying attention to
anātmā, pratibimba-ānanda, may you pay attention to Ātmā and gain bimba-ānanda.

śloka 203
या प्रीतिरविवेकानां विषयेष्वनपायिनी ।
त्वामनुस्मरतः सा मे हृदयान्मापसर्पतु ॥ ७.२०३ ॥
yā prītiravivekānāṃ viṣayeṣvanapāyinī.
tvāmanusmarataḥ sā me hṛdayānmāpasarpatu (7.203).
The prescription of Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa is instead showing love towards anātmā the
pratibimba-ānanda may you show love or devotion to Ātmā the bimba-ānanda three

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1034

words are synonymous anātmā, pratibimba-ānanda and bhogya prapañca. Ātmā, bimba-
ānanda and bhoktā, these three are also synonymous. Turn your love from anātmā to
Ātmā. This idea of Vedānta is conveyed in the Purāṇas also in a different language. In
Vedānta, the word Ātmā is used for eternal joy, bimba-ānanda. But the word Ātmā being
subtle, as it does not have form, colour, etc., a beginner cannot conceive that Ātmā.
Therefore, in the Purāṇas, Ātmā has been symbolized as Bhagavān. What is Ātmā in
Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa as ātmā vāre draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyaḥ, in the Purāṇas instead
of using the word Ātmā, they will advise instead of going jagat or the world, may you go
after Kṛṣṇa or Rāma or Devī. Ātmā is presented as an Iṣṭa Devatā. Where the devotee says
I have no interest in dharma, artha or kāma. Your feet only I am interested in. The feet of
Lord in that śloka is nothing but Ātmā vāre draṣṭavyaḥ. In the tenth chapter of Bhāgavata
when Gopīs leave everything and run towards Kṛṣṇa everything represents dharma, artha
and kāma, bhogya prapañca and ultimately they give up the vastra also. And they run
towards Kṛṣṇa means Kṛṣṇa represents bimba-ānanda. Kṛṣṇa the form is not the Ātmā.
Kṛṣṇa the form is symbol for the formless Ātmā. Here, Vidyāraṇya quotes a śloka from
Viśṇu-purāṇa wherein Prahlāda makes this prayer. O Lord, I should never have
attachment towards anything in the creation; if at all I should have attachment it must be
towards you and you alone. This śloka is quoted here because the Viśṇu in the Viśṇu
Purāṇa [1.20.19] is none other than the Ātmā of Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. Avivekānāṃ means
for unintelligent one; anapāyinī prīti unflinching love or attachment or devotion. The
mūḍhas or the ignorant people have unflinching love towards all the worldly objects. I
should also have the same undying love towards a different direction. I who am attached
to you, the Lord, should have unflinching devotion towards you and you alone. This is the
prayer of Prahlāda. This love should be in a different direction. That is why all the love
songs in the movie we can borrow. But only thing is instead of local people there, you
should put the name of Bhagavān in those places. Replace the object or the names with
Bhagavān that is called anapāyinī bhakti. That is why it is said tvām anusmarataḥ. My
love towards you also, hṛdayān mā apasarpatu, let it not go away from my heart at any
time. My devotion to you must be eternal. Later, that you will be replaced by the Viśṇu
alone. In Kaṭhopaniṣad pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa Ātmā is called Viśṇupadam. More in the
next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1035

Class 210
śloka 203 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad expression kasya kāmāya. It
commenced from 192 and goes up to 222. Kasya kāmāya is the negation of bhoktā. He
reestablishes by studying the saying in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. Here, the Upaniṣad has the
difficulty in communication. The word self has two meanings. One is the vācyārtha self,
the primary meaning, and the second is the lakṣyārtha self, the secondary meaning. The
primary meaning of the word self is bhoktā. Vācyārtha refers to bhoktā alone. Whereas the
secondary meaning refers to the lakṣyārtha, the śākṣī. When the Upaniṣad talks about the
Self-enquiry, the intention of the Upaniṣad is the secondary meaning only, that is the
śākṣī-enquiry. The student does not know the subtle meaning of the self. Therefore, when
the Upaniṣad talks about the Self-enquiry, the student understands only the vācyārtha self,
bhoktā-enquiry only. What the Śruti intends is abhoktā-self-enquiry, whereas what the
student understands is bhoktā-self-enquiry only. It is not the mistake of the student
because the student does not know that the word self has two meanings. The bhoktā and
abhoktā śākṣī. The Śruti is very much aware that this communication gap is taking place. I
am talking about the śākṣī self and the student is comfortably or uncomfortably
misunderstand bhoktā self and the communication gap is taking place. The teacher is
aware and the Śruti is also aware. But in spite of that the teacher has to continue to talk
because this student has no way of knowing śākṣī self in the beginning of the class.
Therefore, Śruti allows the mistake to continue. The Śruti first allows the mistake to
continue and thereafter after introducing the bhoktā Self-enquiry travelling alone the
mistake of the student later the teacher takes to the śākṣī Self-enquiry. Therefore, the
journey of the student is, first, he is attached to the bhogya prapañca; from the bhogya
prapañca first, the Śruti takes the attention to bhoktā self, vācyārtha self. That is how it
says husband loves wife not for wife sake but husband’s sake only; wife loves husband
wife’s sake, etc. These are all admitting the bhoktā-status and the Śruti says turn your
attention from bhogya prapañca to bhoktā self. Once the student has come to the bhoktā
self, the Śruti goes into further enquiry and from the vācyārtha, the Śruti comes to
lakṣyārtha self, the Self with capital S which is the śākṣī. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
bhoktā self is admitted by the Śruti only temporarily as an intermediary state between
bhogya prapañca and abhoktā śākṣī; as a stepping stone, bhoktā self is admitted. But the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1036

ultimate aim of Śruti is adhyāropa and apavāda. After admitting the bhoktā self finally
arriving at the abhoktā śākṣī, Śruti negates bhoktā also. Therefore, the ultimate aim of
Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa is not accepting bhoktā Ātmā but negating the bhoktā Ātmā only. That
is what is conveyed by kasya kāmāya. That is said here by quoting the Viśṇu Purāṇa śloka
where there is Prahlāda prayer wherein the latter seeks Bhagavān’s grace how much
attachment is there for the ignorant people towards the prapañca, that much attachment,
the same intense attachment, I should have towards Bhagavān. Therefore, attachment is
retained only, but the direction is shifted. Bhogya prapañca to Bhagavān, the attachment is
shifted. Similarly, in Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa also, attachment is shifted from bhogya to bhoktā
and then from bhoktā to abhoktā and once you come to abhoktā, you have negated both
bhogya prapañca and bhoktā ahaṅkāra; kim icchan is bhogya-prapañca-niṣedha and kasya
kāmāya is bhoktā-Ātmā-niṣedha. I hope you are following.

śloka 204
इति न्यायेन सर्वस्माद्भोग्यजाताद्विरक्तधीः ।
उपसंहृत्य तां प्रीतिं भोक्तर्येवं बुभुत्सते ॥ ७.२०४ ॥
iti nyāyena sarvasmādbhogyajātādviraktadhīḥ.
upasaṃhṛtya tāṃ prītiṃ bhoktaryevaṃ bubhutsate (7.204).
As said in Viśṇu Purāṇa, in the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa also, nobody loves the world but
everybody loves one’s self only. When this statement is heard the attachment is turned
from the anātmā, the bhogya prapañca, to bhoktā. This is what is said here as iti nyāyena.
As mentioned in the Viśṇu Purāṇa, there is redirection of attachment. There is no negation
of attachment. Attachment is allowed. But the direction is to be changed. That is why in
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti also, the second sampatti is vairāgya, but the fourth one is
mumukṣutva which means attachment only. The second value if detachment and the
fourth value is attachment. How is the Upaniṣad contradicting by giving detachment as
second qualification and attachment as the fourth qualification? The Upaniṣad says when
we talk about detachment it is turning the attachment away from anitya vastu and not
destroying you-attachment. Have the attachment but turn away from anitya vastu like the
water conserved in a reservoir is not destroyed but the water is only redirected. Therefore,
don’t throw away all your passion, love, attachment, from the heart; retain them, conserve
them and turn towards mumukṣutva, which means attachment towards mokṣa or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1037

Brahman or Bhagavān which are synonymous only. That is what is stated as iti nyāyena. A
person who has taken the attachment from the worldly objects bhogyajātāt. Sarvasmāt
means that it includes all, including the family relationships, etc; in this regard also refer to
13 chapter of Gītā, where Kṛṣṇa clarifies even attachment towards putra, dārā, gṛhastha,
etc., is an obstacle for mokṣa. Therefore, family also is included in the attachment.
Attachment should be plucked away, collected and then make a cumulative attachment
turned towards the Ātmā. Bhoktā Ātmā is an intermediary state in this context. Later, even
that attachment will be plucked and turned towards abhoktā śākṣī.
Bhoktā is the object of unconditional love and since it is the object of unconditional love,
this bhoktā Ātmā is the source of influence, ānanda. Therefore, for ānanda, don’t look
outwards. You look outwards to serve the people but you never look outwards to get
ānanda. To help the children you look in that direction. To educate them, you look in that
direction; but for ānanda, don’t look at the children, grandchildren, husband, wife, anyone
of them. For ānanda, turn towards the bhoktā Ātmā. With this intention, bubhutsate, he
seeks to know more about the Ātmā; this intelligent person seeks or attempts or struggles
to know more about the Ātmā based on Yājñavalkya’s vākya Ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ
śrotavaḥ. The word bubhutsate is a desiderative form. It also means he enters into Self-
enquiry. Also, it refers to śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsanam karoti. That alone was said in
13th chapter of Gītā also. The same amount of attachment which he had outwards that is
turned towards Ātmā.

śloka 205
स्रक्चन्दनवधूवस्त्रसुवर्णादिषु पामरः ।
अप्रमत्तो यथा तद्वन्न प्रमाद्यति भोक्तरि ॥ ७.२०५ ॥
srakcandanavadhūvastrasuvarṇādiṣu pāmaraḥ.
apramatto yathā tadvanna pramādyati bhoktari (7.205).
Here, Vidyāraṇya talks about the commitment of the student. How much passion, how
much obsession, how much desperation is there, how much thirst is there for the student
is indicated by various examples. We say manda mumukṣutva will only lead to casual
Vedāntic study; in madhyama mumukṣutva a person is slightly serious; only in tīvra
mumukṣutva a person dedicates himself for that. I give the example— if a person has not
drunk water for seven days or many days, he is desperately thirsty and he has only one

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1038

goal of life. His puruṣārtha is water only. Suppose someone holds water in hand, be it only
one glass, he is ready to drag himself and run towards that person. Now, imagine he has
varieties of valuables on his body. Diamond ring is there. Golden necklace is there.
Imagine that person does not have one glass of water. If someone says I will give you
water but give me the diamond ring. He will be ready to give anything for water. He will
not mind renouncing everything and that is called intense thirst. Here, it is for knowledge.
A few examples are given here. First one is Pāmara. It means an illiterate ordinary person.
An educated person is intensely committed to the following items. Varieties of mālās are
hanging over, varieties of perfumes, wife representing the attachments, family members,
varieties of clothes and gold. Spiritually illiterate person is passionate with regards to the
above things and he is committed to them.
An equal intensity of attachment is there for this spiritual seeker but it is not directed
towards the above things as he is attached to Vedāntic books and the scriptures. When
there is a choice, spiritual seeker’s priorities are very clear. He is not confused. He is not
careless. He is passionate with regards to Self-enquiry. Sannyāsa-āśrama has been
designed for spiritual pursuit. Veda does not want everyone to turn to sannyāsa. A thirsty
person who is not interested in this or that, such a person is accommodated only in
sannyāsa āśrama. Brahmācārya āśrama is meant for study; he is not interested in gṛhastha
āśrama and he is not interested in vānaprastha āśrama meant for upāsana and those
thirsty and desperate people with spiritual fire within have only āśrama left out for them
and that is sannyāsa āśrama, where one has no other duties and he can fully get involved
and be lost in spiritual enquiry and such a speaker is talked about here. With regard to
Self-enquiry he is intensely passionate.

śloka 206
काव्यनाटकतर्कादिमभ्यस्यति निरन्तरम्।
विजिगीषुर्यथा तद्वन्मुमुक्षुः स्वं विचारयेत्॥ ७.२०६ ॥
kāvyanāṭakatarkādimabhyasyati nirantaram.
vijigīṣuryathā tadvanmumukṣuḥ svaṃ vicārayet (7.206).
This is continuation of the previous śloka. Passion is the same but only the direction is
different. There is the next higher grade. There is an educated person who is interested in
all forms of worldly literature. He is interested in laukika śāstra. He is also interested in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1039

taking part in literary debates and seminars. He wants to show his scholarship and those
people are also interested and they have passion not in gold or perfume but the literature.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya gives the example of those who are interested in laukika śāstras.
They are interested in drama, tarka, vyākaraṇa, mīmāṃsā; all of them come under laukika
śāstra excluding mīmāṃsā. Some people are constantly engaged in these books because
they want to enter into vidvat-sadas, the literary debates. Even now, there are vidvat-
sadas going on. Such people choose a particular sūtra of Pāṇini or a person will be given a
particular sūtra and they will discuss the commentaries on such sūtras. Some will study
that minutely and talk on that particular sūtra. There will be other giant scholars for every
statement; five people will raise Pūrvapakṣa. They will criticize or point out various
defects in the interpretations, etc. Vyākaraṇa specialists are there and they will all the time
find faults. That is why Ādi Śaṅkarācārya scolded such people in his Bhaja Govindam.
These people are interested only in winning the debate, nothing more. For the vyākaraṇa-
pandit, equal intensity of passion is there; those who want to do Self-enquiry, called
mumukṣus, they make enquiry but the enquiry is regarding the self or Ātmā. This is the
second example. There are some people who do study Vedas and scriptures but they are
stuck to karma kāṇḍa.

śloka 207
जपयागोपासनादि कुरुते श्रद्धया यथा ।
स्वर्गादिवाञ्छया तद्वच्छ्रद्दध्यात्स्वे मुमुक्षया ॥ ७.२०७ ॥
japayāgopāsanādi kurute śraddhayā yathā.
svargādivāñchayā tadvacchraddadhyātsve mumukṣayā (7.207).
There is the third grade of people who are stuck in karma kāṇḍa. Karma kāṇḍa is
wonderful as an intermediary step but karma kāṇḍa is an obstacle if a person is committed
to that life long. After some time he has to go beyond that. Here, these people are all the
time interested in japa, nāma-saṅkīrtana, goṣṭi, bhajanas, divya-nāma saṅkīrtanas,
upāsanas on saguṇa Īśvara, yāgas, the rituals, etc. They are all wonderful all right. Bhakti
is involved all right but that is also only an intermediary state which they don’t know.
What is great in them is the passion for that. Most of these bhajanas are overnight. You
will find even though they have so much bodily discomforts, they love the nāma-
saṅkīrtanas so much they have bhajana throughout the night. They will attend that and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1040

take bath and go to office. What patience is required! All these they do to get the benefit
heavens, etc. “Etc” here means for any other, worldly benefits, aham-mama-centred
benefits they want. They are all family-, profession-, relationship-centred prayers they
intensely do. Vidyāraṇya admires their passion and then he says redirect that passion to
Self-enquiry. Vidyāraṇya’s advice to such people is that may you have attachment and
passion but direct them to Self-enquiry. Next, he talks about varieties of meditation
groups. He makes it clear that the ignorance can be removed only through knowledge not
at all by meditating quietly. Not knowing so, people are trapped in that. Their greatness is
that they have the passion in what they pursue. Vidyāraṇya wants that passion should be
directed towards Self-enquiry.

śloka 208
चित्तैकाग्र्यं यथा योगी महायासेन साधयेत्।
अणिमादिप्रेप्सयैवं विविच्यात्स्वं मुमुक्षया ॥ ७.२०८ ॥
cittaikāgryaṃ yathā yogī mahāyāsena sādhayet.
aṇimādiprepsayaivaṃ vivicyātsvaṃ mumukṣayā (7.208).
The Yogī is the fourth type. Yoga is stuck with Patañjali Yoga-sūtra and the meditations
prescribed in those books. This Aṣṭāṅga Yogī with the great efforts, concentrates on the
meditation. He has one-pointedness of his mind on any object outside or inside. Such
people talk about each cakra and for each cakra the description is given as to what flower
is there; how many petals are there; in each petal what type of mūla-mantra is to be
written and even they prepare diagrams and concentrate on each cakra each bījākṣara, etc.
They are not aware that such meditations cannot lead them to self-knowledge for
ignorance cannot be removed by meditation but by acquiring knowledge alone. What use
is of increasing the duration of meditation? All such things have nothing to do with
spirituality. Cakra belongs to anātmā. It has nothing to do with Ātmā. We do accept yoga
or meditation practice as our aim is that a person must have sufficient concentration to
listen to Vedāntic teaching. One should have sufficient concentration and sufficient
attention to do Guru-śāstra-upadeśa-śravaṇa. Aṇu means small and aṇimā means
smallness. The siddhi is the capacity to make the body extremely small. We have read in
Ramayana that Añjaneya in front of Surasā expanded the body. He went on expanding
and that siddhi is called mahimā. When her mouth become sufficiently big he suddenly

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1041

became small entered through the mouth and he came out through the back. Bigness is
mahimā and smallness is aṇimā. There also we have to notice that a person also has
passion for meditation. Take the same passion and direct it instead of long hours of
meditation to śravaṇa and manana. Let the focus be śravaṇa-manana-pradhāna, not this
way. The Yogis have hours and hours of concentration which is not required for sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti and even for mokṣa. They are required for gaining the mystic powers
or siddhis and such powers are considered to be the obstacles to gain jñāna. A spiritual
seeker with equal passion should do the viveka or enquiry of Ātmā within. Ātmā-vicāram
kuryāt. A man who does śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana will get mokṣa and also all the
aiśvaryas it is said. Their contention is that every jñānī will have siddhis also and from that
they go to vice versa: one who cannot produce vibhūti, etc., is not a jñānī! They conclude
that a person who does not have any siddhi is not a jñānī. It is a very big misconception.
Jñāna need not give siddhis at all. If at all there are statements they are all only artha-vāda-
vākyas and they are to be interpreted differently. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad 8th chapter it is
explained clearly that jñānī and siddhi have no connection at all. Let this passion be
redirected to gain liberation and make Self-enquiry. More in the next class.

Class 211
śloka 208 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has come to the portion kasya kāmāya and that portion is commented from
śloka 192 to 222. Vidyāraṇya says, by this expression the Upaniṣad negates bhoktā
prapañca. By expression kim icchan, bhogya is negated and by the expression kasya
kāmāya, bhoktā is negated. How bhoktā is negated is the subject matter. As a part of this
Vidyāraṇya has entered another part of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad namely Maitreyī
Brāhmaṇa. In the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa Ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavaḥ, etc, is the
instruction given by Yājñavalkya to Maitreyī and in that instruction Vidyāraṇya says that,
first, the aim of Yājñavalkya is turning the attachment towards the bhogya away from the
bhogya prapañca and turning it or redirecting it towards bhoktā. The first aim of any
teacher or Yājñavalkya here is turning the attachment from bhogya, the object of
enjoyment, to bhoktā the subject the self. During this intermediary level of teaching,
bhoktā is not negated but bhoktā is accepted. The Śruti does not negate bhoktā in the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1042

intermediary state because bhoktā himself is a mixture of ahaṅkāra and śākṣī. If you
directly throw away the bhoktā, it is like throwing the baby with bath water. Bhoktā is the
capsule or a cover; within the bhoktā the śākṣī is also there. Since śākṣī should not be
thrown away, initially the attention is turned towards bhoktā who is a mixture of
ahaṅkāra and śākṣī. Therefore, Yājñavalkya says the aim of the teacher is not removing
attachment. Attachment we should always have. The teacher only asks the attachment to
be directed towards the Ātmā, the bhoktā Ātmā, or Self-enquiry.
That is why in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti itself vairāgya is the second value and
mumukṣutva is the fourth value. While we talk about the second value attachment is
taken away from the world and that attachment is not to be thrown into the dustbin but
that attachment is conserved like the dam conserving water. Attachment collected from
the world we should carefully conserve. And that attachment we have to direct towards
mokṣa. Then it will become mumukṣutva. Greater the vairāgya, greater will be the
mumukṣutva, because the resources for mumukṣutva is collected from the world only.
That attachment towards the world alone is redirected and that gets converted into the
mumukṣutva. Or else we will not have powerful mumukṣutva. Mumukṣutva is always
weaker as long as attachment to the world is stronger. The logic behind this is because
mumukṣutva means attachment towards mokṣa and for that we have to take it away from
the world, we don’t have any other source for it. Now, let us come to our topic. Therefore,
Ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ means attachment to the world bhogya should be directed
towards the bhoktā. Here, the word bhoktā means the mixture of ahaṅkāra and śākṣī.

This attachment towards the bhogya, Vidyāraṇya divides into four types depending upon
the type of persons and the type of direction.
1. First type is pāmara Puruṣa 205. Pāmara’s attachment is towards ordinary sense-
pleasures which is also bhogya, but it is gross bhogya. He wants to eat well;
2. Second one is laukika Puruṣa 206. Laukika Puruṣa is slightly refined and educated
person. Therefore, he is attached to apara-vidyā literature, fictions, novels, movies,
art, etc. That is also bhogya prapañca but slightly refined. One wants to eat ice
cream and another wants to read fiction. That is all.
3. Third one is the Vaidika Puruṣa 207. Vaidika Puruṣa is slightly more advanced
person; therefore, by practicing Vedic rituals etc., he wants to go to higher lokas. A

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1043

little bit more refined bhoga compared to this world and the other world which is
superior. What is common to all is the bhogya icchā and only within the bhogya
prapañca there is more refinement.
4. Fourth one is Yogī Puruṣa 208. Yogī is interested in the practice of varieties of cakra-
meditation. He wants to attain extra-ordinary miraculous powers; even these
mystic powers will come under anātmā, bhogya prapañca only. This is the highest
you can imagine. What does Yājñavalkya say?
Remove the attachment from all the four. They are gross attachment, subtle attachment
subtler attachment and subtlest attachment. Come away from the four groups of pāmara,
laukika, vaidika and yaugika. You conserve all the attachments. Then, redirect them to the
scriptural study. Let it be directed towards Self-enquiry. From shelf-enquiry [shopping] to
the Self-enquiry should be our aim. The people practice hours of meditation for getting
aṇimā, mahimā, etc; all those things will lead to anātmā alone. Why do you read books as
they are but other people’s thoughts which are also dirty. May you have jijñāsā and let it
be the desire for knowledge of the self or Ātmā. This Self-enquiry is with a desire for
mokṣa.

śloka 209
कौशलानि विवर्धन्ते तेषामभ्यासपाटवात्।
यथा तद्वद्विवेकोऽस्याप्यभ्यासाद्विशदायते ॥ ७.७.२०९ ॥
kauśalāni vivardhante teṣāmabhyāsapāṭavāt.
yathā tadvadviveko:'syāpyabhyāsādviśadāyate (7.209).
Vidyāraṇya says in every field the law is the same. The more you dedicate and put forth
efforts, the more skilled you will become in that field. Practice makes a man perfect, it is
said. In any field, abhyāsa gives a better skill. If your remember Tattvabodha class, you
would have felt it is so difficult, so tough and so many Sanskrit words are there. Viveka,
vairāgya, sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra, karmendriya, jñānendriya, pancikāraṇa, all are
overwhelming and people say Tattvabodha itself is the toughest text ever seen. Now, how
do you look at it after so many years of attending classes on Vedānta? The assumption is
that Tattvabodha becomes easy as you dwell more and more. Therefore, this is true at the
level of pāmara also. He will be an expert in sense-pleasures. He knows what is cheap and
good in which shop. Laukika is an expert in literatures. Vaidika is an expert in Yogic

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1044

literatures and Yogī is an expert in nirvikalpaka samādhi. Vedāntic students will be an

expert in aham satya jagan mithyā once they have niṣṭhā. The question is one of
consistency and dedication and long efforts; there is no short cut in any field. If you gather
anything in a crash program it will not last long and it will not yield desired effect. Self-
enquiry is a long term project and Vidyāraṇya says don’t expect short cut measures to give
you mokṣa. Skills in their particular field will increase because of no extraordinary mystic
thing, extra grace given by God or blessings from Guru, but it is nothing but the student’s
commitment and dedication. Doing some homework after the class indicate love and
dedication; therefore, I will find time for Vedānta, not that I will find excuses for not
taking up Vedāntic studies. Where there is a will, there is a way. Therefore, abhyāsa is
very important. Because of their commitment to regular practice, classes may be once a
week but Vedānta abhyāsa should not be once a week. Then it should be forever, every
day, every hour, either in the form of śravaṇa or in the form of manana or a conscious
deliberate living which is called nididhyāsana. Therefore, abhyāsapāṭavāt, by the expertise
in abhyāsa, śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana or the appropriate abhyāsa in the respective
fields; in the same way, the law is the same; people ask the question: what should I do for
quick progress? There is no short cut. Dedication and commitment alone will take one to
Vedānta. Then alone Vedānta will become clearer and clearer. Reading more and more
will make the knowledge clear. Such a thing continues as you go on reading the scriptural
books. Clarity is niṣṭhā. Viśadāyate means things become clear because of abhyāsa by
regular practice.

śloka 210
विविञ्चता भोक्तृ तत्त्वं जाग्रदादिष्वसङ्गता ।
अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां साक्षिण्यध्यवसीयते ॥७.२१० ॥
viviñcatā bhoktṛtattvaṃ jāgradādiṣvasaṅgatā.
anvayavyatirekābhyāṃ sākṣiṇyadhyavasīyate (7.210).
Now, the next question is how should I do the abhyāsa? How can I do the Self-enquiry?
Can I independently practice it asking: who am I, who am? Will the Self-enquiry work if
you ask? It will never work; the śāstra clearly says if you want to do Self-enquiry, Kṛṣṇa
says tadviddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā. Therefore, I have to use Guru-śāstra-
upadeśa. Several methods of Self-enquiry are presented in the śāstra. And one of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1045

important methods is avasthā-traya-viveka by which ahaṅkāra and śākṣī are discriminated

and distinguished. Avasthā-traya-viveka is one powerful method by which variable
ahaṅkāra is segregated from the invariable consciousness śākṣī. And this avasthā-traya-
viveka is done in several Upaniṣads. In Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad it is done; in Chāndogya
Upaniṣad also in the 8th chapter Prajāpati-vidyā talks about it. In Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad also in two three places avasthā-traya-viveka is discussed. In this regard refer to
Ajātaśatru Brāhmaṇa. In the fourth chapter, third section, Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa, the
avasthā-traya-viveka is there. Vidyāraṇya refers to Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. A person should make an enquiry into the self or I, which itself
is a mixture of two factors: the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness, the
śākṣī and ahaṅkāra. And unfortunately, we cannot separate them physically. In a banana,
it is very simple: you ripen it which is called gaining sādhana-catuṣṭaya, after ripening the
banana you remove the skin and the fruit can be physically separated. Like that, I cannot
put the student in a box and make him ripen and peel sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra and
get śākṣī fruit. It is not possible.
Discrimination has to be an intellectual process. By enquiring into the variable and the
non-variables, one gets to know the reality. The experiencer is variable; the cidābhāsa is
variable; depending upon the condition of the mind, the cidābhāsa also varies. During
jāgrat-avasthā the mind is fully active; the mind, buddhi, citta, ahaṅkāra, all of them are
active; and they act through the sense-organs in the outside world, whereas in svapna, the
mind, buddhi, etc, don’t [fully] function; they don’t experience the external world also;
only the memory part of the mind the vāsanā part of the mind alone is activated. It is so
because the dream is nothing but my own memory thrown out. Therefore, the definition
of dream is partially active mind; and in the sleep the mind does not function, buddhi
does not function and even ahaṅkāra does not function and even vāsanās don’t function;
the mind is fully passive. Thus, the mind is a variable in the three avasthās and therefore,
the experiences are also variable; and this mind with cidābhāsa is called the ahaṅkāra
aṃśa, the individuality, that is variable. Then, what is common to all of them? The śākṣī,
the cit, the original consciousness is non-variable which alone I recognize as the common
individual, the recognized I. The recognized I means that I who slept before; that I who
had the dream before; that I am a waker now. When you refer to the common I, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1046

common I cannot be the cidābhāsa or the mind because they are not the same in all; only
common one is the consciousness-principle.
Therefore, anvayavyatirekābhyāṃ. Through the study of the variable and the non-
variable, anvaya is non-variable, vyatireka is variable; another word in Sanskrit is anuvṛtti
and vyāvṛtti. What do you come to know from this? Sākṣiṇi asaṅgatā adhyavasīyate. One
should come to the conclusion that the pure consciousness is asaṅga caitanya; no sukha,
no duḥkha, no emotions stick to the Ātmā; if the emotions stick to Ātmā what will
happen? All the time the emotions will continue; the very fact that you are able to drop the
emotions indicates that they belong to the mind, the variable mind and not to the
consciousness. Therefore, he says asaṅgatā. It means asaṅgatva, relationlessness,
connectionless of the Śākṣi-caitanya. Śākṣi-caitanya alone is the original consciousness.
The variable mind has the variable emotions; the non-variable consciousness is not tainted
by, not polluted by, not afflicted by any of these emotions. Thus, cidābhāsa-cit-viveka
takes place. Ahaṅkāra-śākṣī-viveka takes place. Ābhāsa-ādhāra-caitanya-viveka takes
place. This is the result of avasthā-traya-viveka. To remember the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad,
the turīya is differentiated from Viśva cidābhāsa, taijasa cidābhāsa and prājña cidābhāsa.
From all the three, turīya cit is differentiated.

śloka 211
यत्र यद्दृश्यते द्रष्टा जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्तिषु ।
तत्रैव तन्नेतरत्रेत्यनुभूतिर्हि संमता ॥ ७.२११ ॥
yatra yaddṛśyate draṣṭā jāgratsvapnasuṣuptiṣu.
tatraiva tannetaratretyanubhūtirhi saṃmatā (7.211).
Vidyāraṇya explains anvaya-vyatireka process pointing out that all the emotions are
variable. Jāgrat, svapna, suṣupti, among the three states of experience whichever
experiences are witnessed by the consciousness, the Śākṣi-caitanya, in whichever states,
say jāgrat-avasthā, experiences are intense or so overwhelming it looks as though they are
my own attributes. It looks as though I am rāgī, I am dveṣī, I am kāmī, krodhī, etc. It
appears as though those emotions are my own. The moment I go to svapna-avasthā, all the
jāgrat emotions, problems, jāgrat worries are shaken off by me; which means I can take
those emotions and I can drop those emotions and whatever can be taken and dropped,
they do not belong to me as my nature. I put on and thereafter put off all those emotions

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1047

and worries; I drop effortlessly and enter the dream and put on fresh problems. The
dream problems come and go. With dream-son you have the conversation. There also, son
is the problem. Therefore, there also you witness another set of emotions; they are never
my intrinsic nature because I am able to effortlessly shed them and come afresh back to
the waking state. From the waking state, when I look at the dream problems, my attitude
is that all of them are mithyā. I am able to laugh at them. Similarly, both of them are
shaken off in suṣupti. In suṣupti, both the dream emotions and waker emotions, all the
bhogas are all dropped. The Upaniṣadic argument is what is droppable is not your nature.
And what is your nature is undroppable just as fire can never drop its nature of heat;
therefore, this is what is said in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa that
is pointed out here. The emotion belongs to the particular state. If you belong to dream,
you cannot talk about waking. If you belong to waking, you cannot talk about dream; if
you belong to sleep, you cannot talk about either dream or waking. Thus, it is seen that
you don’t belong to any state in particular, but you are above all the three states. You
experience many people. That does not mean you belong to all the people. Therefore,
experiencing does not prove connection. Experience proves experience alone. It only
proves experience, not that I experience sorrow and therefore, I am sorrowful. I experience
sorrow is one thing and I am sorrowful is another thing. You have thrown it upon yourself
like elephant throwing mud on its own back.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says tatraiva it belongs to that state not to you. If it belongs to you,
it will be carried forward to the other states also. On the other hand, it belongs to that state
only because when that particular state is shifted, the experience also goes away; therefore,
those emotions or experiences belong to that particular avasthā only. Among those three
states, in whichever states you experience anything, that belongs to that state alone. Then
what belongs to you? The Upaniṣad says asaṅgoham asaṅgoham nothing belongs to me; it
is a drama and it is a veṣa. When I have got Daśaratha’s dress I claimed the actor as my
son Rāma. Once the veṣa is removed I don’t bother about it. In the green room there is no
sambandha. This person goes to another movie and that person to another serial.
Similarly, the family also. na mātā na pitā na bandhuḥ na guruḥ naiva śiṣyaḥ cidānandaḥ
rūpaḥ. Na itaratra. Those experiences are not there in the other states. Dream experiences
are not in the waking and waker’s experiences are not in dream. This is what is said in
English: they are mutually exclusive. They have got mutual exclusivity, otherwise called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1048

they are variable and are set to be vyatireka or vyatirikta. What is common to all is this:
Consciousness is not variable. It is common to all. Suppose in a particular state,
consciousness isn’t there. If consciousness does not ‘go’ to a particular state you will not be
able to talk about that state itself! Therefore, consciousness is common to all non-variable.
This experience is common to all people. That the experiences are mutually exclusive, that
the witness is non-exclusive common factor, I need not accept because of Śruti pramāṇa.
Vidyāraṇya says this is anubhava pramāṇa. That is why he says sammata. It is acceptable
to all. If you are not satisfied with anubhava pramāṇa, Vidyāraṇya says I will give Śruti
pramāṇa also. That is given in the next śloka.

śloka 212
स यत्तत्रेक्षते किंचित्तेनानन्वागतो भवेत्।
दृष्ट्वैव पुण्यं पापं चेत्येवं श्रुतिषु डिण्डिमः ॥ ७.२१२ ॥
sa yattatrekṣate kiṃcittenānanvāgato bhavet.
dṛṣṭvaiva puṇyaṃ pāpaṃ cetyevaṃ śrutiṣu ḍiṇḍimaḥ (7.212).
Śrutiṣu ḍiṇḍimaḥ means proclamation or declaration in all the Upaniṣads and here
Vidyāraṇya keeps in the mind the Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa mantra (refer to 4.3.15-17 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad). Each mantra talks about one avasthā. Three avasthās are there.
The Upaniṣad refers to each one. It says sa tatra yat īkṣate. That Jīvātmā the śākṣī principle
has experiences in every particular state. Various experiences in the form of puṇya phala
that is pleasurable experiences and pāpa phala the painful experiences are experienced by
one and all. The Śākṣi-caitanya only witnesses them as an object. The emotions do not
belong to the śākṣī. Śākṣī sees but it does not take those emotions as its own attributes. It is
exactly like I see the pink colour of the pink as even I look at the colour I don’t take that
colour. As even I look all of you in varieties of colours, I will see kaleidoscopically
changing colours. Remember watching something is not taking the attributes. Every
emotion, sukha-duḥkha experienced attributes belong to experienced object and never to
the experiencer subject. Therefore, I am sukhī never say. I am duḥkhī never say. I am
duḥkha śākṣī is ok. Duḥkhī, becoming sorrowful, is delusion. Duḥkha-śākṣī is wisdom.
Duḥkhī is mohah. What is mokṣa? Moha to jñāna, duḥkhī to duḥkha-śākṣī. You are śākṣī
of many things. In between, many duḥkhas or sukhas are there. You are not connected to
those emotions or experience. Anvagata means linked or connected. Ananvagata means

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1049

not linked or connected. I, the Śākṣi-caitanya, am not connected with the experience of
jāgrat, svapna or suṣupti. It is the loud proclamation of the three mantras. Like a huge fish
which moves in a river, sometimes it goes to the right side bank of the river, sometimes to
the left side and sometimes it moves through the middle of the river. One bank is like
jāgrat-avasthā, another like svapna-avasthā, middle is like suṣupti-avasthā but the huge
fish is not affected by whatever happens on the right bank, left bank or centre. Similarly,
śākṣī moves from avasthā to avasthā but is not a bhoktā of those avasthās. More in the
next class.

Class 212
śloka 212 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talks about the method of enquiry used in the Upaniṣad in general. He also
points out the aim of the Upaniṣad is first to turn the attention of the seeker from the
bhogya prapañca, the object, to the bhoktā, the subject. Therefore, he talks about the Self-
enquiry leaving the bhogya, the anātmā. It is also called as Ātma-vicāra. This bhoktā, the
self, introduced by the Upaniṣad itself happens to be a composite entity consisting of two
components; whenever anybody uses the word I, whether one is a jñānī or ajñānī, the very
word I is a mixture of two components: one is called śākṣī and the other is called
ahaṅkāra. Otherwise, we can call it as cit and cidābhāsa, inseparable mixture is the
meaning of the word I. This is so because pure śākṣī or cit can never say I am. Pure śākṣī is
changeless. It can never use the words I am. Similarly, the pure cidābhāsa also cannot say I
am because there is no such thing called pure cidābhāsa. The very existence of cidābhāsa
requires the back up of the śākṣī just as there is no rope-snake without the back up of rope.
Therefore, remember that the bhoktā I that is talked about is not the pure bhoktā but it is a
mixture of two entities: cidābhāsa and cit. Of these two, the cidābhāsa part alone is bhoktā
and cit part is abhoktā. Therefore, really speaking the bhoktā I is a mixture of bhoktā
cidābhāsa and abhoktā śākṣī which hides behind bhoktā cidābhāsa. This hiding abhoktā
‘cit’ is not known by the spiritual seeker and therefore, the Upaniṣad does not mention it.
It generally talks about the Self-enquiry as the bhoktā-enquiry. Once the student has come
to the Self-enquiry, which is the bhoktā-enquiry, the Upaniṣad educates the student.
Really speaking, bhoktā-enquiry is nothing but mixture-enquiry because it is a mixture-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1050

enquiry; what mixture? Bhoktā-abhoktā, cidābhāsa-cit mixture and this enquiry is done
with the help of avasthā-traya-viveka and after the enquiry, bhoktā cidābhāsa is refuted
and abhoktā Ātmā alone is left behind.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya’s contention is that when the spiritual enquiry culminates, the
bhoktā cidābhāsa is also negated. Why should Vidyāraṇya establish this so vehemently?
He does so because he can connect to our original topic of kim icchan kasya kāmāya
śarīram anusaṃjvaret. He points out kasya kāmāya 4.4.12 is nothing but bhoktṛ-niṣedha
which is finally accomplished. For this purpose alone, we take the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa. He
takes Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa also as the example. Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa is 2.4 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and 4.3 is called Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa. Our original mantra
that is enquired is 4.4.12 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad which occurs in Śārīraka Brāhmaṇa
mantra. For that, he takes two examples, one is Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa and the other is
Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa. These two Brāhmaṇas are taken as a case-study for our original
study of Śārīraka Brāhmaṇa. Since Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is voluminous and
Vidyāraṇya is going left and right, unless we have in the mind the topography of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, it will appear like a forest; you note this much: two sections of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad are taken for case-study to establish another section of the same
Upaniṣad. Now, we study the Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Here,
it is said in each avasthā I only experience the pleasures and pains; experience does not
become owning. When I say I experience sorrow, it is a fact, but when you say I am
sorrowful, you have owned the sorrow. Owning is a mistake but experience is a fact.
If experiencing is ‘owning’, how much good it will be! I experience all your diamond
ornaments means you have to hand over it to those who experience it. None will wear the
ornaments, anyone experiences, you have to hand over that diamond. I experience pains
in dream, I only experience the pain, but I don’t own the pain as my attribute. Experience
is a fact and ownership is ignorance or adhyāsa. Really speaking, I am only experiencing
sorrow but do not own dream-sorrow. The proof is when I wake up from the dream, that
dream-sorrow experienced is dropped in the dream and I come to the waking without the
dream-sorrow. Similarly, from waking when I go to sleep, I am dropping the waker’s
experiences in the waking state; in every state, various experiences are only perceived but
not possessed. When I perceive, I am the śākṣī, but when I possess it, I mistake myself as
the ahaṅkāra. When I say possessor, adhyāsa comes in and I become a saṃśārī. Puṇya-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1051

pāpa means sukha-duḥkha or the pleasures and pains. I don’t take the pleasures and
pains. When I come to waking those puṇya-pāpa phalas are dropped. These are two
sentences we have to put it separately. I only perceive but I don’t carry the attributes. That
is why in the 13th chapter, Kṛṣṇa said nirguṇaṃ guṇabhoktṛ ca. Guṇa-bhoktā Ātmā is the
perceiver and nirguṇa means itself free from the perceived attributes. There is a loud
proclamation in the Śruti. The final message is that śākṣī is abhoktā.

śloka 213
जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्त्यादि प्रपञ्चं यत्प्रकाशते ।
तद्ब्रह्माहमिति ज्ञात्वा सर्वबन्धैः प्रमुच्यते ॥ ७.२१३ ॥
jāgratsvapnasuṣuptyādi prapañcaṃ yatprakāśate.
tadbrahmāhamiti jñātvā sarvabandhaiḥ pramucyate (7.213).
It is a quotation from 1.17 of Kaivalya Upaniṣad. Here also, the essence of the mantra is: I
am only the perceiver of the pleasures and pains in the three avasthās but I am not the
possessor of the pleasures and pains. Cidābhāsa is said to be the possessor. Cit is not the
possessor. The jāgrat prapañca in waking state, svapna prapañca in dream state, the
blankness of the sleep state, otherwise called ajñāna or kāraṇa prapañca of the sleep state.
The ajñāna in suṣupti is nothing but the kāraṇa prapañca. Thus, jāgrat, svapna and suṣupti
are the three states. The sthūla, sūkṣma and kāraṇa prapañcas including the pleasures and
pains in them are illumined by the śākṣi-tattva. There may be a question if you carefully
read everything in the śāstra— when loosely read no problem, when carefully read,
certain questions will come— The Upaniṣad says jāgrat-svapna-suṣupti-ādi, waking,
dream and sleep, etc. You can add, etc., only when there are certain left out portion s
which we have to supply. Eyes, ears, etc, you can say because there are three more sense-
organs. After mentioning all the ten sense-organs, I cannot say “etc”, sense-organs. Now,
we have got only three states of experience; after enumerating all the three, the Upaniṣad
says “etc”. What to do? For that, we have to go to Māṇḍūkya which talks about the
intermediary state in the mantra nāntaḥprajñaṃ nabahiḥprajñaṃ nobhayataḥprajñaṃ,
where the last means half-sleep and half-awake. There are intermediary states when
people are supposed to get certain premonitions, some extraordinary experiences, etc.
That can be included by the word ādi.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1052

In all the states, varieties of pleasures and pains are experienced by the Jīva. When you use
the word I connected to the waking alone, the meaning of the word I is only Viśva. When
you use the word I associated with dream alone, the meaning is taijasa; similarly,
associated with suṣupti-avasthā, it is prājña but whenever you equate all the three— I was
asleep, I dreamt later and now I wake up— when you use the word I for all the three
simultaneously, the word I cannot be Viśva, taijasa or prājña, but it is śākṣī. Therefore, the
logic is that I associated with one state is cidābhāsa, but I associated with all the states is
the śākṣī. Therefore, he says ‘tad’ that Śākṣi-caitanya is aham. I am none other than
Brahman. The I equated to all the three states is śākṣī and that śākṣī I is Brahman. Once
you gain this knowledge you are free from all the bandhas because all the pleasures and
pains belong to cidābhāsa alone. It does not belong to I, the Śākṣi-caitanya.

śloka 214
एक एव आत्मा मन्तव्यो जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्तिषु ।
स्थानत्रयव्यतीतस्य पुनर्जन्म न विद्यते ॥ ७.२१४ ॥
eka eva ātmā mantavyo jāgratsvapnasuṣuptiṣu.
sthānatrayavyatītasya punarjanma na vidyate (7.214).
It is another quotation to reveal the abhoktā śākṣī. Abhoktā śākṣī is revealed here as a part
of bhoktṛtva-niṣedha which is our topic. This quotation is taken from Amṛtabindu
Upaniṣad 11th mantra. In all the three states of jāgrat, svapna and suṣupti Ātmā is only
one and the same. Ātmā refers to cit only and never cidābhāsa, because cidābhāsa is never
one and the same. In jāgrat-avasthā, cidābhāsa is associated with this body and the sense-
organs; in svapna-avasthā, the cidābhāsa is associated with svapna body and dream sense-
organs; therefore, the very nature of cidābhāsa varies from avasthā to avasthā. Therefore,
cidābhāsa, a mutually exclusive factor is not identical in all. Here, the Upaniṣad talks
about one and the same Ātmā in all the three states. Therefore, it should refer to cit Śākṣi-
caitanya. This Ātmā, the śākṣī, is only one. Ātmā eka eva bhavati. Then you have to
supply saḥ mantavyaḥ, that śākṣī which is common to all the three avasthās should be
known and claimed as the real I, not only the real I, but the abhoktā I, the uncontaminated
I. The Upaniṣad says sthānatrayavyatītasya. The one who claims I am the śākṣī Ātmā one
who transcends all the three avasthās who is not contaminated by all the three avasthās, is
the one who has gained Ātmā-jñāna and is one who gets liberated. The advantage is that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1053

such people do not get punarjanma. Cidābhāsa alone has punarjanma because cidābhāsa
is associated with the mind, as even the mind travels from one body to another cidābhāsa
cannot escape punarjanma. Now, I am the cit therefore, I don’t have punarjanma. Are you
worried about punarjanma of cidābhāsa? Once you know cidābhāsa is mithyā why should
you worry about punarjanma of that! Therefore, jñānī has no punarjanma. But śāstra
promises freedom from punarjanma for jñānī’s cidābhāsa. But jñānī is not worried about
it. The moment jñānī worries about that; he is no more a jñānī. This is the trick of Vedānta.

śloka 215
त्रिषु धामसु यद्भोग्यं भोक्ता भोगश्च यद्भवेत्।
तेभ्यो विलक्षणः साक्षी चिन्मात्रोऽहं सदाशिवः ॥ ७.२१५ ॥
triṣu dhāmasu yadbhogyaṃ bhoktā bhogaśca yadbhavet.
tebhyo vilakṣaṇaḥ sākṣī cinmātro:'haṃ sadāśivaḥ (7.215).
Again, another quotation from Kaivalya Upaniṣad 1.18. It is said here that bhoktā
cidābhāsa and abhoktā śākṣī are clearly segregated. Dhāma means avasthā; in all the three
states, there are relevant tripuṭīs. Every state has a relevant tripuṭī known as bhoktā,
bhoga and bhogya. In the jāgrat-avasthā bhoktā is Viśva, the waker, bhogya is sthūla-
prapañca and bhoga is sthūla-viṣaya-ānanda and duḥkha; In the svapna-avasthā taijasa is
the bhoktā, vāsanā-maya prapañca is bhogya and svapna pleasure and pain is bhoga; in
suṣupti-avasthā prājña is bhoktā; the ajñāna or kāraṇa prapañca is the bhogya and ānanda,
the pratibimba-ānanda is the bhoga. Thus, Viśva-taijasa-prājña, sthūla-sūkṣma-kāraṇa
prapañcas and sthūla-sūkṣma-ānanda bhogas are three, one of each in each avasthā.
Totally, there are nine factors. The Upaniṣad says I am different from all the nine factors.
That alone is described in the 7th mantra of Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Viśva is a cidābhāsa,
taijasa is a cidābhāsa and prājña is a cidābhāsa, while śākṣī is the cit. Viśva, taijasa and
prājña are my own reflections while I am the śākṣī. I am not cidābhāsa but I am pure
original consciousness. I am always ānanda-svarūpa. Prājña does experience ānanda, but
even prājña’s ānanda is subject to fluctuation. I am happy, sometimes I am happier and
sometimes I am happiest. Suddenly, I am back to happy, happier and sometimes I am back
to unhappy situations also. Śākṣī does not have these gradations. Gradationless ānanda I
am. Gradationless ānanda is my svarūpa. I can never experience the original ānanda just
as you can never see your own original eyes. You can never never never see the eyes

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1054

directly. Whatever eye you perceive is only the pratibimba. Only reflected ānanda can be
experienced and experiential ānanda is only the reflection. Claim I am is the state when I
enjoy original ānanda. I am ānanda-svarūpa.

śloka 216
एवं विवेचिते तत्त्वे विज्ञामयशब्दितः ।
चिदाभासो विकारी यो भोक्तृ त्वं तस्य शिष्यते ॥ ७.२१६ ॥
evaṃ vivecite tattve vijñāmayaśabditaḥ.
cidābhāso vikārī yo bhoktṛtvaṃ tasya śiṣyate (7.216).
Vidyāraṇya says after reading all these ślokas we have to have total vision like a big
painting, then the ānanda is different. Suppose you stand very close and look at the nose
of the painting, fingers of the painting or the eyes of the painting, no doubt you will have a
close vision but that is the real appreciation [of a part]. You may have seen each one of
them. But later again you have to come back and see the totality and then the total
painting has another dimension which you can never get when you look at it separately.
When you study under a Guru and you are at a particular śloka, you look at a nose, or a
finger alone which is not the totality. Nididhyāsana is going behind and seeing the whole
development and when you get the total picture of the 7th chapter or 6th chapter, it has a
different dimension. The teacher enjoys that while teaching, while the student will have to
do homework to enjoy that. Or else in a class, I do only three ślokas or five ślokas you will
never get the totality. That too, when there is a gap of one week, imagine the situation.
Therefore, if you want to really enjoy revision you alone have to do. I can keep the past
classes in my mind and I can keep the future classes in my mind. When I keep them, I get
a vantage-point-vision. If you want to enjoy you have to go back and again see bhogya,
bhoktā to śākṣī. That is why nididhyāsana has been kept as an independent exercise to be
done by the student alone. Teacher is absolutely helpless. Maximum he can do is to help in
śravaṇa. The full impact you get by nididhyāsana which is going behind and looking at
the total Natarajā which is 15ft high, etc, the I associated.
Here, he says by the Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa study avasthā-traya-viveka study, etc, what
we initially achieved is cidābhāsa-cit-viveka. This will take several hours or days or
decades. You should get that clarity. The two tattvas or the two components are in one I;
in the one word aham or I, or in the one word Self of Self-enquiry itself, two tattvas are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1055

there. The teacher struggles to communicate these two different tattvas and the teacher’s
optimism is the students have understood the difference. The I associated with any
particular state is cidābhāsa, but when the I is associated with all the three states it is
referring to the ‘cit’ alone. The experienced I is cidābhāsa; recognized I is cit. Cidābhāsa
component of the I alone has the property or the status of the bhoktā. The cidābhāsa
component alone is the connected to the bhoktā-status. Therefore, prārabdha-bhoga
belongs to cidābhāsa component alone. I should never say after I exhaust my prārabdha I
will get mukti. When I say after I exhaust prārabdha, I am identified with the bhoktā
cidābhāsa. If only I don’t claim the śākṣī, will I wait for the exhaustion of prārabdha and
videha-mukti. That is all called half-baked Vedānta. The real student can never do that
because all the prārabdha-bhogas belong to bhoktā cidābhāsa which I am not. Then he
gives two more adjectives to cidābhāsa. One is vijñānāmaya. In the beginning of the
Svayaṃjyotirbrāhmaṇa teaching Vidyāraṇya refers to a particular mantra 4.3.7 of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Here, the word vijñānāmaya is used and it refers to bhoktā
cidābhāsa alone. Then, the next question is why do you say cidābhāsa alone is bhoktā and
cit is not a bhoktā? It is not enough that you blindly assert but you should give
appropriate logic behind the teaching. Vidyāraṇya gives that logic by giving another
adjective to cidābhāsa. He gives hetu-garbha-viśeṣaṇa. He says vikārī-cidābhāsa.
Cidābhāsa is subject to change, because bhoktā is bhoktā only when he undergoes a
change in the form of sukhī, duḥkhī, etc. The very word bhoktā indicates going through
ups and downs in the form of sukhīb duḥkhī; therefore, bhoktā has to be savikāra.
Cidābhāsa is savikāra. Savikāra means changing or subject to modification. Why
cidābhāsa is savikāra? It is so because cidābhāsa is the reflected consciousness and the
reflected consciousness is associated with reflecting medium and reflecting medium is
subject to change; therefore, the reflection is also subject to change. The reflecting medium
in this case is the mind. The mind is savikāra and therefore, cidābhāsa is savikāra.
Therefore, cidābhāsa alone can be a bhoktā. To enjoy bhoktā-status, change is a
precondition. It is a prerequisite. Therefore, vikārī is a powerful hetu-garbha-viśeṣaṇa.
There is another logic also which Vidyāraṇya does not give. But I will give you. It is given
elsewhere. To be a bhoktā, association with the object of enjoyment is required. I can be an
ice-cream-bhoktā only when I have sambandha with ice-cream. Bhoktṛtva status needs
bhogya-sambandha. The cidābhāsa is vyāvahārika and this universe also is vyāvahārika

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1056

and vyāvahārika cidābhāsa and vyāvahārika prapañca can have sambandha because both
have the same order of reality. Therefore, cidābhāsa-prapañca-sambandha is possible and
as a result of sambandha, cidābhāsa can become a bhoktā. Whereas śākṣī cit is
pāramārthika and fortunately or unfortunately it can never have a sambandha with
bhogya prapañca just as the bachelor of jāgrat prapañca cannot marry a girl of svapna
prapañca. They have got so many dream-girls for their sons. They could have done but
unfortunately a dream-girl cannot marry their jāgrat-prapañca-putra because they both
belong to different orders of reality. Therefore, śākṣī cannot be a bhoktā. vikārī cidābhāsa
alone is bhoktā. Bhoktṛtva status is there for cidābhāsa and I, the śākṣī, is not a bhoktā.
Therefore, kam icchan kasya kāmāya śarīra anusanjaret. You have to connect all the ideas
to Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.12

Class 213
śloka 216 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of bhoktṛtva-niṣedha the negation of enjoyerhood or
experiencerhood based on the Bṛhadāraṇyaka-vākya kasya kāmāya and he pointed out
that this is achieved by Self-enquiry done with the help of Upaniṣad-vākyas. When the
Self-enquiry is undertaken one will understand oneself to be the mixture of two
components cidābhāsa-aṃśa and the cit-aṃśa. Of these two, cidābhāsa-aṃśa is associated
with the mind, it is the vyāvahārika tattva and it has bhoktṛtva because it is subject to
modifications in keeping with the mind, the reflecting medium. The reflected
consciousness is savikāra. Bhoktṛtva requires vikāra which means modification.
Cidābhāsa has modification and therefore, cidābhāsa is bhoktā. Whereas the original cit,
the śākṣī, does not undergo any change because it is pāramārthika tattva. Since the mind
and its modifications belong to a lower order of reality, all of them will not change the
asaṅga śākṣī. Therefore, śākṣī is nirvikāra and it is abhoktā, incapable of any experience.
Thus, the very I, the self, is a mixture of bhoktā cidābhāsa and abhoktā śākṣī. Therefore, I
am a mixture of bhoktā and abhoktā. Naturally, the question will come when I have got
both bhoktṛtva as well as abhoktṛtva, how can you negate bhoktṛtva alone and retain
abhoktṛtva? From cidābhāsa-angle, I am bhoktā and from cit-angle I am abhoktā; that
means I have the status of both bhoktā and abhoktā. How can the Upaniṣad negate only

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1057

bhoktā-status by using the expression kasya kāmāya and retain abhoktā status? Why
cannot you do the other way round? Negate the abhoktā status and retain bhoktā-status?
For that, we have to answer that bhoktā-status belongs to lower plane and abhoktā status
belongs to pāramārthika, higher plane of reality; what is lower has to be negated from the
standpoint of the higher. That is going to be the development for which Vidyāraṇya gives
his introduction. Once the composite nature of the individual is understood, then one will
know cidābhāsaḥ vikārī yaḥ tasya bhoktṛtvam, the experiencerhood is a status which can
be attributed to only the cidābhāsa because that alone is subject to modification. By
pāriśeṣa-nyāya, by the law of exclusion, the cit must be abhoktā. Up to this, we saw in the
last class.

śloka 217
मायिकोऽयं चिदाभासः श्रुतेरनुभवादपि ।
इन्द्रजालं जगत्प्रोक्तं तदन्तःपात्ययं यतः ॥ ७.२१७ ॥
māyiko:'yaṃ cidābhāsaḥ śruteranubhavādapi.
indrajālaṃ jagatproktaṃ tadantaḥpātyayaṃ yataḥ (7.217).
Now, Vidyāraṇya says of this composite entity cit and cidābhāsa, one aṃśa is māyika;
therefore, it is mithyā. Cidābhāsa portion, in our language the reflected consciousness
component of I, is māyika. It is so because from Māyā alone the mind is created. Therefore,
the mind is as good as Māyā. And cidābhāsa is created out of the mind which means
cidābhāsa, the reflection in the mind born out of Māyā. From the mind, reflection has
come; therefore, the reflection is also māyika. All the three are māyika. Therefore, he says
cidābhāsaḥ ayam māyikaḥ. This is stated in the Śruti. Previously, he has quoted Nṛsiṃha-
uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad 9. There is a relevant sentence māyā ābhāsena jīveśau karoti,
Māyā alone produces Jīva and Īśvara by forming micro reflection and macro reflection.
When Māyā produces micro reflection it is called Jīva and when the very same Māyā
produces macro reflection it is called Īśvara. Both of them are reflected consciousness, both
of them are vyāvahārika satya only. This is the quotation from the above Upaniṣad.
Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad also has a similar idea. māyāṃ tu prakṛtiṃ vidyāt māyinaṃ tu
maheśvaraḥ. This also we saw before in 4.9-10, Kaivalya Upaniṣad 1.12.14 sa eva
māyāparimohitātmā śarīramāsthāya karoti sarvam, etc. That also we saw earlier. What is
relevant is cidābhāsa is a product of Māyā. Not only it is proved through Śruti pramāṇa,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1058

but it is also anubhava pramāṇa. Our own experience also proves it. This also we
discussed before. The inexplicability proves mithyātva. The more you try to explain Jīva
the more mysterious it becomes. You will have to say Jīva is because of karma and karma
is because of Jīva. Varieties of logical problems come while studying the nature of Jīva.
Thus, since cidābhāsa is of acintya-racanā-rūpa, of inexplicable nature, it is māyika.
Also, there is a third reason. Śruti is reason one. Anubhava is the second reason. Third
explanation is ayam antaḥpātya. This cidābhāsa also falls within the world only as one of
the tripuṭī, called pramātā. The triad consists of pramātā, prameya and pramāṇa in which
cidābhāsa is pramātā. Since the pramātā cidābhāsa falls within the world, during suṣupti
when the world resolves, the pramātā cidābhāsa also resolves. During jāgrat-avasthā the
world comes forth and cidābhāsa also comes forth. From this, it is very clear that
cidābhāsa is a part of the world. He says the entire world is māyika mithyā; that we have
shown with the example of indrajāla before. Since the world is māyika mithyā, the
cidābhāsa also which falls within the world also must be mithyā. In the 6th chapter, from
śloka 125 to 153, Vidyāraṇya has elaborately dealt with Māyā and the product of Māyā,
that is the universe. This cidābhāsa falls within that Indra-jāla jagat. Because of these
reasons, because of Śruti pramāṇa, because of anubhava pramāṇa, and because of the
yukti pramāṇa, cidābhāsa is māyika and therefore, cidābhāsa is mithyā or unreal.

śloka 218
विलोपोऽस्य सुषुप्त्यादौ साक्षिणा ह्यनुभूयते ।
एतादृशं स्वस्वभावं विविनक्ति पुनः पुनः ॥ ७.२१८ ॥
vilopo:'sya suṣuptyādau sākṣiṇā hyanubhūyate.
etādṛśaṃ svasvabhāvaṃ vivinakti punaḥ punaḥ (7.218).
Because cidābhāsa is mithyā and it belongs to mithyā universe only, during the suṣupti-
avasthā the world as well as cidābhāsa are resolved. Not only that they resolve but also I
know the absence of cidābhāsa, I experience the absence of cidābhāsa during suṣupti,
because I don’t feel any localization in suṣupti. In jāgrat-avasthā cidābhāsa is active;
therefore, I feel I am located in this place; and that too in one corner of the hall; the sense
of localization is caused by cidābhāsa. During suṣupti, I don’t have the sense of
localization and therefore, there is absence. That I did not have localization in suṣupti, I
know because after waking up I am able to talk about the deep sleep state where the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1059

individuality has been resolved. Therefore, he says suṣuptyādau which means in suṣupti,
etc. Any experience in which I have a condition like sleep is called suṣupti, etc. Asya
means cidābhāsasya. Anubhūyate, it is clearly experiences sākṣiṇā with the help of śākṣī,
because during the suṣupti the śākṣī is very much there. Therefore, cidābhāsa is mithyā
and śākṣī is satya. This is the viveka a person does and Vidyāraṇya says a seeker should
dwell upon this fact repeatedly in nididhyāsana. Therefore, punaḥ punaḥ, it means
through śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana this nature of one’s self that I, the cidābhāsa
aṃśa, am mithyā, but I as the śākṣī, the higher nature, am satya. In fact, I am a mixture of
satya and mithyā.
That is what Ādi Śaṅkarācārya says in the adhyāsa bhāṣya introduction. Everybody is a
mixture of satya and mithyā. Only problem is satya is forgotten and mithyā is taken as
satya. Exactly as we do in dream, satya waker is forgotten and mithyā dreamer has
become satya. Imagine a state where you are able to dream with the knowledge that it is a
dream. It does not actually happen but imagine a condition of dreaming and remembering
or knowing the dream as a dream not after waking up but in the dream itself; that is called
jīvanmukti of the dreamer. In the same way, I continue to dream and experience the world
with the awareness is mithyā and I am originally the waker turīya. This will come not by
one day study or a few days study as in-between there is vyāvahārika and in which I claim
cidābhāsa is satya and in one hour class I say cidābhāsa is mithyā. Therefore, śravaṇa-
manana-nididhyāsana is needed to realize one’s own nature.

śloka 219
विविच्य नाशं निश्चित्य पुनर्भोगं न वाञ्छति ।
मुमूर्षुः शायितो भूमौ विवाहं कोऽभिवाञ्छति ॥ ७.२१९ ॥
vivicya nāśaṃ niścitya punarbhogaṃ na vāñchati.
mumūrṣuḥ śāyito bhūmau vivāhaṃ ko:'bhivāñchati (7.219).
What is the condition of the cidābhāsa of such a jñānī who repeatedly practices śravaṇa-
manana-nididhyāsana with regard to mithyātva of cidābhāsa and the satyatva of the
Śākṣi-caitanya? Vidyāraṇya says cidābhāsa gets more and more falsified and its power to
disturb gradually weakens. Therefore, vivicya. By repeatedly seeing the mithyātva of
cidābhāsa, its impact or power is reduced; it gets deflated; it is like watching a paper tiger
— it is a tiger but it is a paper tiger. Having done this discrimination, he has clearly

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1060

understood the nāśa, destruction of cidābhāsa. The destruction of cidābhāsa is twofold

during the jīvanmukti avasthā, cidābhāsa-destruction is its falsification. It is not physically
destroyed but it has been falsified which is called destruction and videha-mukti-kale, the
cidābhāsa is physically destroyed because the reflecting medium itself is gone. During
videha-mukti there is physical destruction. Thus, falsification during jīvanmukti and
destruction during videha-mukti is very very clear with regard to cidābhāsa. Therefore,
nāśaṃ niścitya. Therefore, cidābhāsa has become very very feeble like a dying person
during the fag end of his life. If it be asked is he alive or dead, what reply we will give?
Technically alive, but practically that person is dead. He is as good as not present as after a
few hours this person is going to die.
Similarly, cidābhāsa is weak during jīvanmukti and is going to disappear during videha-
mukti. Therefore, he can be compared to mumūrṣu, imagine there is a person who is a
vow to die. The doctors have said you can send e-mail to all the people. Only a few hours
maximum. Therefore, this person has been brought down from the cot to the ground.
There are certain practices. Mumūrṣu means maranam āsannaḥ or āsanna-maranah.
Suppose you approach that person and ask a question shall we try vivaha for you? What
will be his answer? He will say who will give a girl to me? The girl will not accept even ig
he was ready to accept. When a person is struggling for breath, where is the question of
getting married, etc! Therefore, he says which dying person would like to have or get
married? This is not the question. This is an answer: none will think of any bhoga or
enjoyment. The condition of jñānī’s cidābhāsa is similar because it has been falsified and
sooner or later it is going to go away.

śloka 220
जिह्रेति व्यवहर्तुं च भोक्ताहमिति पूर्ववत्।
छिन्ननाश इव ह्रितः क्लिश्यन्नारब्धमश्नुते ॥ ७.२२० ॥
jihreti vyavahartuṃ ca bhoktāhamiti pūrvavat.
chinnanāśa iva hritaḥ kliśyannārabdhamaśnute (7.220).
Vidyāraṇya said previously when one claimed himself to be kartā-bhoktā, a pramātā, etc.,
he was feeling very very proud. Because he did not know that all these are not his real
nature, he mistook the kartṛtva, etc., as satya and it was his misconception and ignorance;
he did not know, therefore, he was loudly proclaiming his ignorance without knowing

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1061

that it is his ignorance. Now only after this knowledge, he understands that claiming I am
a kartā, bhoktā, etc., he is only displaying his ignorance and it is an apamāna to declare
that and therefore, he does not even want to say I am kartā or I am a bhoktā or even he
does not want to say I am a jñānī. Even the status of a jñānī belongs to the pramātā only.
Ātmā is not even a pramātā. That is why in Maniṣā-pañcaka Ādi Śaṅkarācārya said
brahmaiva na brahmavit. The society declares that he is a Brahmajñānī and glorifies him
whereas the jñānī himself does not want to take the credit that I am a Brahmajñānī for
jñānī knows Brahmajñānī status is not a credit. On the other hand, that is another form of
adhyāsa.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says even to declare himself to be a bhoktā which includes a kartā
or a pramātā, all these are adhyāsa, erroneous notion, crystallized ignorance. Therefore,
bhoktā ‘aham’ iti vyavahartuṃ, to declare or to say this, he feels ashamed. Such a shame
he never felt before gaining jñāna. On the other hand, he felt he is great because I have
done this particular yāga, I have done that particular ritual, rudra, ekādaśī, etc. He feels all
these are great accomplishments while jñānī alone understands they are all delusions.
Therefore, like a person whose nose has been cut, and whose face has been disfigured,
who does not want to come in front of other people, how he feels ashamed to show his cut
nose, similarly, jñānī does not claim either kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva or pramātṛtva. He is like a
person with disfigured face, who feels shy to show himself out. Even if the prārabdha
gives varieties of bhoga, he goes through the prārabdha-bhoga which is in the form of
sukha-duḥkha caused by puṇya-pāpa. He goes through without claiming bhoktṛtva of
those experiences. Therefore, he says his experiences are to go through prārabdha and
when the prārabdha-bhoga comes the ajñānī’s tendency is that I am suffering or I am
enjoying. I am a bhoktā is the thought of an ajñānī, but in the case of a jñānī he lives
without any involvement. This special meaning Vidyāraṇya had given before also. Refer
to śloka 144. If jñānī is going to feel the pain what kind of jñāna it is? Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya himself said don’t take the dictionary meaning. Here, the word kliśyan means
without involvement or over-excitement because of favourable or unfavourable
prārabdha. With detachment, jñānī accepts prārabdha phala.

śloka 221
यदा स्वस्यापि भोक्तृ त्वं मन्तुं जिह्रेत्ययं तदा ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1062

साक्षिण्यारोपयेदेतदिति कैव कथा वृथा ॥ ७.२२१ ॥

yadā svasyāpi bhoktṛtvaṃ mantuṃ jihretyayaṃ tadā.
sākṣiṇyāropayedetaditi kaiva kathā vṛthā (7.221).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says when the jñānī wants to downplay the bhoktṛtva of cidābhāsa itself
because cidābhāsa is mithyā and therefore, its bhoktṛtva is also mithyā, therefore, he does
not want to talk much about even cidābhāsa’s bhoktṛtva, then what to talk of talking about
the bhoktṛtva of śākṣī! Because śākṣī does not have bhoktṛtva at all, how can a jñānī talk
about the bhoktṛtva of śākṣī which is non-existen? The bhoktṛtva of cidābhāsa is there for
the cidābhāsa alone. Even when that bhoktṛtva, which legitimately belongs to cidābhāsa,
that itself he does not want to talk about, because cidābhāsa is mithyā, how can he talk
about the non-existent bhoktṛtva in the Śākṣi-caitanya? He can never talk about that. That
is the idea given here. It is called kaimutika nyāya. When this cidābhāsa the seeker is
ashamed of accepting the experiencership on itself how can this experiencership be
labeled in the witness? Will such a thoughtless illogical possibility be thought of!
In the śākṣī which is pāramārthika-satya how can a jñānī transfer that bhoktṛtva? What a
story it is! It is an impossible story! It is an impossible event. How can such an event ever
take place. It is not a question. It is an assertion that such an event, a false event, can never
take place. Therefore, bhoktṛtva is negated from cidābhāsa-angle also, from cit-angle also.
From cidābhāsa-angle bhoktṛtva is negated because cidābhāsa is mithyā; from śākṣī angle
bhoktṛtva is negated because in śākṣī there is no bhoktṛtva. And therefore, Vidyāraṇya
concludes the topic of bhoktṛtva-niṣedha in the next śloka.

śloka 222
इत्यभिप्रेत्य भोक्तारमाक्षिपत्यविशङ्कया ।
कस्य कामायेति ततः शरीरानुज्वरो न हि ॥ ७.२२२ ॥
ityabhipretya bhoktāramākṣipatyaviśaṅkayā.
kasya kāmāyeti tataḥ śarīrānujvaro na hi (7.222).
Vidyāraṇya says all these points that I talked about till now from śloka number 192 up to
śloka 221, the Upaniṣad conveys in two words. They are kasya kāmāya in the
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.12 second line: kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram
anusaṃjvaret. Therefore, he says keeping all these ideas in the mind, the Upaniṣad mantra
negates or falsifies the bhoktā clearly without any doubt or vagueness. With this

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1063

expression kasya and kāmāya. With this, the commentary on kasya kāmāya is over. Now,
he takes up the next portion of the mantra śarīram anusaṃjvaret. That he will take up for
analysis. Therefore, he says śarīrānujvaro na hi. After jñāna there is no more saṃsāra
which is called śarīrānujvara. Then, what śarīra-anujvara is, Yājñavalkya will explain from
the next śloka onwards which we will see from the next class.

Class 214
śloka 222 contd.
To state that in this Ātmā there is no possibility of existence of an experiencer-sense, the
Upaniṣad uses the words kasya kāmāya iti and thus negates the very existence of the
experiencer. Thereafter, how can there be any worry about the body! This thought is
concluded in this śloka. The words kasya kāmāya iti are cited from Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad; what is the purpose underlying these words? The purpose is to indicate that
there is no one that is experiencing the joy or sorrow. In the absence of the experiencer,
when experience takes place, that is the state of realization. There is an action without an
actor, experience, experiencer, meaning that the identification with the experience has no
value; it is an illusion. Therefore kim icchan kasya kāmāya means that there is no desirer
to desire. The desires are possible only when there is a desirer, but the desirer is an
illusion. The desire for an object can die, that means the entity of desire which was born
with reference to this particular object, no more exists. Once this status, of the desirer as
well as the desire being an illusion is established, who is to desire and what. Śarīram
anusaṃjvaret is the negation of śoka or sorrow born out of the tripuṭī that is bhoktṛ-
bhogya-bhoga. Since the tripuṭī which is the cause of bhoga is gone, the cause of suffering
is also gone; and therefore, there is no śoka; thus śoka-nivṛtti is the result indicated by
śarīram anusaṃjvaret. If you go back, Vidyāraṇya has talked about the seven states of
Jīvātmā which we saw several months before. If you recollect those stages— ajñāna,
āvaraṇa, vikṣepa, parokṣa jñāna, aparokṣa jñāna, śoka-nivṛtti and tṛpti-prāpti— of these,
ajñāna, āvaraṇa and vikṣepa are stages of saṃsāra, the spiritual journey starts from the
fourth stage; that is, parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna [fifth stage], then the sixth stage is
śoka-nivṛtti freedom from sorrow or saṃsāra. The last stage is tṛpti-prāpti which is
nothing but jīvanmukti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1064

Now śarīram anusaṃjvaret expression in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad refers to the sixth
stage. This is going to be commented from the next śloka onwards. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
begins it with an introduction tataḥ śarīrānujvaro na hi. The suffering we generally call as
tāpa or śoka, it is no more there. What do you mean by freedom from śarīra-anujvara. He
himself will very elaborately discuss in the following ślokas.

śloka 223
स्थूलं सूक्ष्मं कारणं च शरीरं त्रिविधं स्मृतम्।
अवश्यं त्रिविधोऽस्त्येव तत्र तत्रोचितो ज्वरः ॥ ७.२२३ ॥
sthūlaṃ sūkṣmaṃ kāraṇaṃ ca śarīraṃ trividhaṃ smṛtam.
avaśyaṃ trividho:'styeva tatra tatrocito jvaraḥ (7.223).
From this śloka, begins the commentary on śarīram anusaṃjvaret of 4.4.12 of the
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. This will go up to śloka number 250. Even Ādi Śaṅkarācārya
does not write elaborate commentary in his Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad he writes only three
lines on this śarīram anusaṃjvaret. Every Vedāntic student should grasp this Vedāntic
commentary very well. The word jvarati means to suffer any form of pain. Jvara means
noun form and jvarati is verbal form. This jvarati or suffering itself is of two types. One is
direct suffering which is called jvarati or jvara. The second one is the indirect suffering
caused by our identification with anātmā which has direct suffering. This indirect
suffering that I the Ātmā have. It is called anujvara. Direct suffering is called jvara and
indirect suffering is called anujvara. Direct suffering is actually gone through while
indirect suffering is gone through not actually but because of identification with anātmā.
When any family members go through any form of suffering, may be ten thousands miles
away in some other country the actual suffering is gone through by them, but the indirect
suffering is gone through by the people here because of identification and that
identification can be either in the form of ahaṅkāra or mamakāra. In this list, whole world
is anātmā and identifying with the world and suffering is one form of indirect suffering.
The whole family is anātmā; therefore, identifying with them and suffering is another
indirect suffering and the Upaniṣad says that the closest anātmā is our own śarīra-traya.
And because of identification with śarīra-traya when I claim I am suffering that also will
come under anujvara. And the result of Vedānta expected is dropping all the three forms
of anujvara. The world identification anujvara gross; family identification anujvara subtle;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1065

śarīratraya anujvara is subtlest one and toughest one is to give up and here the Upaniṣad
says śarīram anusaṃjvaret.
The Upaniṣad negates freedom from śarīra-traya, abhimāna-janya anujvara. The indirect
suffering that I go through because of my identification with my own body-mind-intellect.
I the Ātmā always can have only anujvara and I the Ātmā can never have jvara. Whatever
pain I claim for myself is all anujvara only. I can never have jvara at all, this claiming jvara.
The removal of anujvara alone will lead to tṛpti-prāpti which is the seventh stage of
mokṣa. As long as I don’t give up the anujvara, crossing the sixth stage is impossible.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya takes pain to explain the anujvara issue which is a clean intellectual
problem. It is not an emotional problem. It is a clean intellectual problem only because
abhimāna is born out of Ātma-anātma-aviveka. Therefore, he will talk about the śarīra-
jvara, then he will talk about the śarīra-anujvara, then he will talk about anujvara-nivṛtti.
Now, he has the topic for 28 ślokas. Śarīra word is used by Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and
in Vedānta we talk about three sthūla-śarīra-jvara, sthūla-śarīra-anujvara. sthūla-śarīra-
anujvara-nivṛtti and same thing in the case of sūkṣma- and kāraṇa-śarīras. He starts the
śarīra trividha. He starts from the fundamentals. He says bodies are said to be threefold,
namely sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-śarīra and kāraṇa-śarīra. Then he says each śarīra has its
own intrinsic jvara, which cannot be eliminated and which is choiceless. Every śarīra will
have this jvara. Jvara-free śarīra is not there. Jvara-free śarīrī alone is possible. Therefore,
he says in each śarīra trividha jvara there is threefold problems. Jvara, in this context, is
problem. In Tamil, we hold the meaning physical suffering but here we use the word jvara
in generic terms to refer to the intrinsic problem in each anātmā. Then, he adds the
adjective avaśya. It means it will definitely be there. There is no perfect sthūla-śarīra, there
is no perfect sūkṣma-śarīra and there is no perfect kāraṇa-śarīra. So he writes avaśya.
Avaśya means definitely or certainly. Then, Vidyāraṇya will dwell upon the various
jvaras. So, Vidyāraṇya says better I enumerate the jvaras in each one of them.

śloka 224
वातपित्तश्लेष्मजन्या व्याधयः कोटिशस्तनौ ।
दुर्गन्धित्वं कुरूपत्वं दाहभङ्गादयस्तथा ॥ ७.२२४ ॥
vātapittaśleṣmajanyā vyādhayaḥ koṭiśastanau.
durgandhitvaṃ kurūpatvaṃ dāhabhaṅgādayastathā (7.224).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1066

Now, what the various jvaras belonging to the physical body are, they are stated here. In
the physical body if I begin to enumerate jvaras, the Pañcadaśī text will not be over and
therefore, I will make a general statement that there are crores of diseases. According to
ayurveda śāstra all the diseases are classified into three as vāta, pitta, śleṣma. One group of
diseases is born out of vāyu tattva, the second one is pitta which refers to agni tattva and
the third one is made of kapha which refers to the jala tattva. Because of the imbalance and
predominance of one of these three elements, diseases in crores are there and they affect
the body. These diseases come and go. In addition to that caused by the body, the body
undergoes the following problems. Further, the foul smell caused by all kinds of things
and the varieties of the deformities of the body. Dāha means burns and inflammations
caused by the burns also affect the body. In addition, we have the fractures, etc. The body
suffers. Then he says ādhayaḥ which means etc. You can add all other things also to this
list. All of them are jvaras of the body. What about the sūkṣma-śarīra? I don’t want to
dwell on these things. You know.

śloka 225
कामक्रोधादयः शान्तिदान्त्याद्या लिङ्गदेहगाः ।
ज्वराद्वयेऽपि बाधन्ते प्राप्त्याप्राप्त्या नरं क्रमात्॥ ७.२२५ ॥
kāmakrodhādayaḥ śāntidāntyādyā liṅgadehagāḥ.
jvarādvaye:'pi bādhante prāptyāprāptyā naraṃ kramāt (7.225).
So, liṅga-deha-jvara means the problems associated with sūkṣma-śarīra, especially the
mind is said to have kāma-krodha, lobha-moha, etc. Remember 16th chapter āsurī sampat.
Then śāntidāntyādyāḥ means peace of mind, quietude and calmness. The sense-organs
also come under liṅga deha sūkṣma-śarīra only. Therefore, sensory quietude and mental
peace, etc are called śāntidāntyādyāḥ. Both types of jvaras or problems afflict or affect or
hurt the śarīra of the Jīvātmā. The word dvaye refers to both groups of problems. This can
create a doubt as to how can Vidyāraṇya say both the groups afflict a person. Kāma-
krodha, etc disturb is understandable. How śānti-dānti, etc can he say afflicts a person?
Vidyāraṇya clarifies the first group affects when they are present and the second group
affects when they are absent. Therefore, I complain I don’t have as well as I don’t have.
When they were traveling in the train, a spouse said I asked you to bring water and you
have forgotten; I am thirsty, no water, I am thirsty, no water. I instructed you and you did

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1067

not bring. The spouse was fed up and I have forgotten to bring water. He said in the next
station: I will bring water. The station came and water was given. Now, spouse felt the
nagging would stop. After the train started she said I was thirsty, I was thirsty, I did not
have water. Therefore, you can always be fussy. What is and what is not creates a
problem. Some create problems by their presence and some create problem by their
absence. How can kāraṇa-śarīra have jvara?

śloka 226
स्वं परं च न वेत्त्यात्मा विनष्ट इव कारणे ।
आगामिदुःखबीजं चेत्येतदिन्द्रेण दर्शितम्॥ ७.२२६ ॥
svaṃ paraṃ ca na vettyātmā vinaṣṭa iva kāraṇe.
āgāmiduḥkhabījaṃ cetyetadindreṇa darśitam (7.226).
The jvaras of kāraṇa-śarīra Vidyāraṇya says have been talked about in Chāndogya
Upaniṣad when Indra was taught by Prajāpati. First, Viśva was taught and then taijasa
was taught and then prājña. In each state Indra says I am not satisfied with Viśva, then
taijasa and then prājña. Then alone turīya was taught to him. After being dissatisfied with
prājña I, he says prājña is associated with kāraṇa-śarīra and there Indra talks about
kāraṇa-śarīra problem. With kāraṇa-śarīra, one does not know anything. One is totally
shrouded in ignorance. One is shrouded in tamo-guṇa. One neither knows himself nor
does he know others. Even a jñānī during suṣupti cannot claim ahaṃ brahma asmi. Let it
be very clear. Many people have doubt whether jñānī sleeps or not. Even a jñānī when he
is in kāraṇa-śarīra, his mind is dissolved and therefore, there is no question of claiming
ahaṃ brahma asmi. What about Ātmā? Ātmā cannot do anything. Where is the question
of claiming? Whether one is a jñānī or ajñānī during suṣupti, there is total ignorance and
only difference is when jñānī sleeps his jñāna is in potential form in the mind while when
ajñānī sleeps for him self-knowledge is not there in potential form. How do you know
jñānī has jñāna in potential form. When he gets up he can claim happily ahaṃ brahma
asmi because the knowledge is there. Remember, even for a jñānī during deep sleep
knowledge is not active but it is only passive or dormant. Therefore, the first problem,
jvara, of kāraṇa-śarīra, is ajñāna. Otherwise, it is called as tamo-guṇa or āvaraṇa.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says Ātmā does not know himself. Ātmā does not know others
also. Therefore, as though one is absent, or one has disappeared or one has become non-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1068

existent based on this experience alone, Buddhism concluded Ātmā śūnyaḥ. Vidyāraṇya
carefully adds vinaṣṭa iva. If he does not put that iva he will become a Buddhist. Once he
puts iva it means I am as though I am not. This ajñāna is jvara number one.
What is the second jvara? He says in the kāraṇa-śarīra alone all future karmas are or future
experiences hide, tomorrow’s prārabdha are there. They are there in today’s kāraṇa-śarīra
as unfructified prārabdha. This contains not only pleasures but also lot of future pains
also. When we say āgāmi duḥkha it is not only future pains of this janma but sañcita
karmas are also in kāraṇa-śarīra; therefore, future pains belonging to infinite number of
future janmas are also hidden, because what is the standard for Bhagavān to create the
universe? Our kāraṇa-śarīra alone is the blue print for Bhagavān to create the
circumstances. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says āgāmi duḥkha. They are bīja rūpeṇa. They are
in potential or seed form. This is the jvara. This problem of kāraṇa-śarīra has been
revealed by Indra in Chāndogya Upaniṣad; refer to 8.11.1 known as Prajāpati-vidyā. Thus,
he has talked about the three jvaras of the three śarīras.

śloka 227
एते ज्वराः शरीरेषु त्रिषु स्वाभाविका मताः ।
वियोगे तु ज्वरैस्तानि शरीराण्येव नासते ॥ ७.२२७ ॥
ete jvarāḥ śarīreṣu triṣu svābhāvikā matāḥ.
viyoge tu jvaraistāni śarīrāṇyeva nāsate (7.227).
This is also important śloka. Vidyāraṇya says these jvaras are not an incidental problem of
the three śarīras. But these three jvaras are intrinsic to these three bodies; therefore, there is
no time when these three bodies are totally free from all these jvaras. It will be there in one
form or the other at all times. Even if you feel perfectly all right they will say some
problem is there with the body. Then jvara will start. Ete jvarāḥ triṣu śarīreṣu svābhāvikā
matāḥ. Svābhāvikā means natural or intrinsic. It is there in all the three bodies. We can
only have some kind of a working, functioning condition alone. There is no question of
perfect health in the case of anyone of these three. Since these three are an intrinsic nature,
these jvaras will totally go away only under one condition. When clothes we keep on
washing and the dirt reaches a particular level there is only one way of getting it free from
dirt and that is get rid of the clothes. There is no question of removing the jvaras totally
and retaining śarīra alone. He says once the jvaras are totally removed you will find there

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1069

is no śarīra at all. So, he says when all the jvaras are totally removed, assuming it does not
happen, but for the sake of argument, if all of them are totally gone or separated then you
discover yatra yatra śarīram tatra tatra jvaraḥ. Jvara-rahita śarīra does not exist. The three
bodies themselves don’t exist without any jvara. Then, he gives examples.

śloka 228
तन्तोर्वियुज्येन्न पटो वालेभ्यः कम्बलो यथा ।
मृदो घटस्तथा देहो ज्वरेभ्योऽपीति दृश्यताम्॥ ७.२२८ ॥
tantorviyujyenna paṭo vālebhyaḥ kambalo yathā.
mṛdo ghaṭastathā deho jvarebhyo:'pīti dṛśyatām (7.228).
Three examples Vidyāraṇya gives here to show that jvara is an intrinsic nature like
upādāna-kāraṇa. When jvara is removed then śravaṇa itself will not be there. From the
cloth, threads cannot be separated. If you remove all the threads what happens is that
there will not be any cloth. The second example is that the woolen blanket can never be
separate from the wool or the sheep’s hair. The third example is that a pot can never be
separated from the clay and you cannot hold on to the pot also. If this is understood, the
body and jvara can never be totally separated. Therefore, he says the body cannot be
separated from the jvara or the diseases. Since the jvara cannot be separated, we can only
try to attack the anujvara. Since jvara does not have any cure at all, you can only try to do
something with anujvara. Anujvara means claiming that I have the jvara by my
identification with anātmā or śarīra-traya. Why identify with them and make the self-
judgment? Anujvara means self-judgment. It is a self-conclusion that I have got jvara, I
have got problem and therefore, I am a saṃśārī. How many days more sādhana are
required to get out of the jvara? It means you will never get out of jvara and you can only
get out of anujvara. You can choose to do it right now also. The association with jvara is
expressed in the form of jvara. Vedāntins asks us to separate from that thought-mode and
claim other thought that I am asaṅga Ātmā. Śarīra-jvara can never go. For anātmā, jvaras
are intrinsic. Accepting the intrinsic jvara of anātmā but detaching from the intrinsic jvara
and getting out of anujvara by claiming the asaṅga Ātmā-svarūpa is the only possible
remedy; if there is any other remedy Vidyāraṇya says you teach me. No other remedy is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1070

possible. Jvara does not have cure. Anujvara is the cure. That is called abhimāna-tyāga.
This may you understand clearly.

śloka 229
चिदाभासे स्वतः कोऽपि ज्वरो नास्ति यतश्चितः ।
प्रकाशैकस्वभावत्वमेव दृष्टं न चेतरत्॥ ७.२२९ ॥
cidābhāse svataḥ ko:'pi jvaro nāsti yataścitaḥ.
prakāśaikasvabhāvatvameva dṛṣṭaṃ na cetarat (7.229).
After talking about trividha jvara, Vidyāraṇya wants to analyse the anujvara. As a
preparation, he says that caitanya does not have any form of jvara at any time. Therefore,
jvara need not be removed, it is not required. In the previous statement jvaras from
caitanya need not be removed because fortunately caitanya does not have any jvara. Once
you use the word caitanya, since we are advanced students, the question will come which
caitanya, ādhāra-caitanya or ābhāsa-caitanya, bimba caitanya or pratibimbita caitanya?
Vidyāraṇya says on scrutiny even pratibimbita caitanya really cannot have any jvara
because caitanya is of the nature of light of consciousness how can it have any jvara.
Therefore, he says cidābhāse api; just as the dirt in the earth or in the mirror cannot affect
even the reflected sun, what to talk of the original sun! If the sun appears to be spotted in
the mirror, even the spot which appears in the reflected sun, does not belong to the
reflected sun but it belongs to the mirror only. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya goes one step
further and makes an unique statement which we generally don’t make. We generally say
cidābhāsa has a problem, cit does not have a problem. Here, Vidyāraṇya goes one step
further and says cidābhāsa itself does not have jvara if you scrutinize. Even in cidābhāsa
there is no jvara of its own. Then, it means because of the proximity with the reflecting
medium, the jvara seems to be there in cidābhāsa but really speaking that is also
transferred jvara, not a real one. Jvaro nāsti yataścitaḥ. It is so because cit is in the form of
light, prakāśa-svarūpa, like the sunlight, etc. Cidābhāsa is light, therefore, it cannot have
changes such as jāyate vardhate vipariṇamate apakṣīyate, etc. Reflected light cannot have
apakṣaya, etc., therefore, this is our experience with regard to the reflection. It does not
have an intrinsic jvara of its own. Suppose you say cidābhāsa has jvara then Vidyāraṇya
will say even if you claim cidābhāsa has jvara, you are not cidābhāsa also. You are the cit
which is beyond all controversy; with regard to cidābhāsa two opinions are possible: one

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1071

may say jvara is there and also you can argue jvara is not there. Even if you take cidābhāsa
has jvara, you are not even cidābhāsa; you are the cit, which is free from all the threefold
jvaras. Therefore, only jvara one can have is anujvara and so, remove that. More details in
the next class.

Class 215
śloka 229 contd.
The cidābhāsa does not have any disorder of its own, unless associated with the three
bodies because of the nature of the consciousness and therefore, its reflection is known to
be the illuminator of the changes without undergoing any change and not of any other
nature, i.e., to suffer modification. Now, Vidyāraṇya has come to the final part of the
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra ātmānaṃ cedvijānīyādayamasmīti pūruṣaḥ,
kimicchankasya kāmāya śarīramanusaṃjvaret. In this mantra, he has come to the last part
of śarīram anusaṃjvaret which is the result of jñāna and the jñāna-phala in the form of
śoka-nivṛtti. śoka-nivṛtti is presented as anujvara-nivṛtti. Vidyāraṇya explains it in these
portions. It is very significant and he beautifully brings out the message of the Upaniṣad.
The word jvara literally means fever. Here, the Upaniṣad uses the word in the sense of any
general ailment or sickness. Vidyāraṇya says this jvara or ailment is used here, mentioned
here, not from the standpoint of sthūla-śarīra alone but from the standpoint of all the three
śarīras. Therefore, in this context the word jvara means the problems of all the three
śarīras; the ailments or the sicknesses or the problems of all the three śarīras and what all
those problems he enumerated in 224 sthūla-śarīra jvara and 225 sūkṣma-śarīra jvara and
226 kāraṇa-śarīra jvara. Thereafter, he made certain general remarks we should carefully
note. First, he pointed out that these jvaras are intrinsic to the three śarīras and therefore,
all the three śarīras will have one jvara or the other in a particular degree or intensity or
another. There is no question of absolute freedom from all the jvaras for the śarīra-traya.
This is a very important point to be noted. Freedom from jvara for the śarīra-traya does
not exist; if we define mokṣa as freedom from jvaras for the śarīra-traya then it means
mokṣa is impossible. For anyone including Bhagavān himself with his own śarīra-traya
Bhagavān’s micro śarīra-traya in avatāra or Bhagavān’s macro śarīra-traya, sthūla-sūkṣma-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1072

kāraṇa prapañca are not free from jvara. Therefore, śarīra-jvara-nivṛtti is not possible. This
is one point we should very carefully remember.
The next thing is definition of anujvara. It means because of my identification with śarīra-
traya, because of my consequent identification with the jvara-traya, the conclusion that I
have got jvara, the self-conclusion, the self-judgment, the self-evaluation that I have jvara
is called anujvara. Because of identification, because of abhimāna, because of tādātmya
claiming that I am suffering from the three jvaras, this conclusion is called anujvara.
Vedānta defines anujvara alone as saṃsāra. Vedānta never defines jvara as saṃsāra
because if Vedānta defines jvara as saṃsāra, Vedānta does not have a remedy for that. All
the possible remedies in the world can never absolutely remove the jvara-traya either; they
can temporarily remove some of the jvaras or they can reduce the intensity of some of the
other jvaras. There is no parihāra for the jvara either in Vedānta or outside Vedānta.
Therefore, Vedānta declares if you are looking for jvara-parihāra, I want to tell you clearly:
go to some other place for Vedānta cannot help you. Vedānta focuses only on anujvara.
Vedānta defines anujvara alone as saṃsāra and anujvara is not an emotional problem. It is
an intellectual problem. To use Dayānanda Svāmījī’s expression that it is cognitive issue,
moha, adhyāsa, etc. And therefore, we can try cognitive solution through an educational
program. How can this be resolved? It can be done only by one method. There is jvara in
śarīra-traya that does not mean I am suffering from jvaras. Separating the I from śarīra-
traya alone is the solution suggested by Vedānta. This separation also cannot be physically
accomplished; that also has to be done in terms of understanding, changing the mind-set,
changing the pattern of thinking, changing the language I use. These are all the things I
can do and there is no parihāra for jvara. There is parihāra for anujvara. In śloka 229 which
we completed in the last class, Vidyāraṇya conveyed another important message. He said
even cidābhāsa which is an empirical version or which is an avatāra of original cit, bimba
caitanya, does not have any jvara at all because that is also of the nature of light, prakāśa-
svarūpa. Even the ordinary sūrya-prakāśa is not afflicted by anything what to talk of the
cidābhāsa prakāśa! Therefore, he said even cidābhāsa does not have jvaras of its own.
How to prove that? If you have to prove the jvaras for cidābhāsa you have to give a fourth
group of jvaras which will afflict cidābhāsa and fourth group should be different from the
other three. We should find out: do we have another set of problems which are unique to
cidābhāsa and which do not belong to śarīra-traya? We find all our jvaras will invariably

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1073

fall into either sthūla-, sūkṣma- or kāraṇa-śarīra. Not only that, when we use the remedy
for the jvara of the śarīra-traya the cidābhāsa also claims I am free. When there is fever in
body, cidābhāsa says I have fever. When the śarīra is free from fever cidābhāsa claims I am
free from fever. From that, it is clear that the fever that we talk about does not belong to
cidābhāsa. From anvaya-vyatireka method, we can place all the known and unknown
jvaras also in the three śarīras as cidābhāsa does not have an exclusive disease of its own.
It is not that cidābhāsa has a separate jvara, and we will require separate tablet for
cidābhāsa-jvara. We don’t do that. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says cidābhāse api. It is
kaimutika nyāya. Even in the reflected consciousness jvaras are not present, what to talk of
the original consciousness! What is the reason? He gave the logic prakāśa eka
svabhavatvam. Because cidābhāsa has only one nature and that is prakāśah. It is of the
nature of light. Even the bhautika prakāśa does not have problem what to talk of the
abouthika prakāśa. cidābhāsa does not have any other nature. Up to this, we saw in the
last class.

śloka 230
चिदाभासेऽप्यसम्भाव्या ज्वराः साक्षिणि का कथा ।
एवमेवैकतां मेने चिदाभासो ह्यविद्यया ॥ ७.२३० ॥
cidābhāse:'pyasambhāvyā jvarāḥ sākṣiṇi kā kathā.
evamevaikatāṃ mene cidābhāso hyavidyayā (7.230).
He clarifies kaimutika nyāya in the first line. It can be roughly translated as “what to talk
of” Nyāya. He says jvarāḥ cidābhāse api asambhāvyāḥ you can understand. Jvaras are not
possible even in cidābhāsa. Śākṣīni ka kathā means what to talk of those in the Śākṣi-
caitanya, which is pāramārthika-satya, which is the original consciousness? The meaning
of what to talk of is that these jvaras are even remotely not possible because the very order
of reality varies. Cidābhāsa belongs to vyāvahārika and cit belongs to pāramārthika. In
fact, from cit-dṛṣṭi cidābhāsa does not even exist nor the jvaras. Jvaras are not even
existent, the how they can touch the cit! Therefore, jvaras are not at all there in śākṣī. Even
though this is the truth there is a cognitive issue. It is not an emotional problem. It is a
clean intellectual problem. It is an intellectual blunder which we successfully make. Really
we deserve an award. He says evam api even though this is the truth cidābhāsa commits
a blunder ekatāṃ mene. It identifies with the śarīra-traya instead of claiming the śākṣi-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1074

svarūpa. Śarīra-traya is a reflecting medium, śākṣī is the original nature; just as Kṛṣṇa
talked about aparā Prakṛti and parā Prakṛti, cidābhāsa is only my aparā Prakṛti nature and
cit is my original parā Prakṛti nature. In Muṇḍaka-bhāṣya I talked about cidābhāsa that it
should not be identified with the śarīra-traya and it should claim the śākṣi-svarūpa.
Cidābhāsa considered itself to be one with, to be identical with, śarīra-traya instead of
claiming itself to be nothing but cit in its real nature. Why did it commit this blunder?
Who is responsible for that? It is all because of avidyā and that too the vikṣepa avidyā or
Māyā has created this problem. Thus, cidābhāsa has two options. One is that it can go
along with the reflecting medium or it can go with the original consciousness. The election
is between the two. We all vote for the wrong party, Vidyāraṇya says.

śloka 231
साक्षिसत्यत्वमध्यस्य स्वेनोपेते वपुस्त्रये ।
तत्सर्वं वास्तवं स्वस्य स्वरूपमिति मन्यते ॥ ७.२३१ ॥
sākṣisatyatvamadhyasya svenopete vapustraye.
tatsarvaṃ vāstavaṃ svasya svarūpamiti manyate (7.231).
What is the further mischief cidābhāsa does, which makes the problem worse? It is being
said here. You have to remember three entities now. I am cidābhāsa. Here is śarīra-traya
which is reflecting medium; I am the reflected consciousness and the original
consciousness. First blunder I commit is that śarīra-jvara which belongs to śarīra only I
transfer to myself and instead of saying śarīra has jvara I say I have jvara. This is blunder
number one, transference of jvara. Then, I commit another bigger blunder. Śarīra is
vyāvahārika satya or mithyā. Jvara is also mithyā. Cidābhāsa is also mithyā. Cit alone is
satya. Then what do I do? It is very interesting. See how Vidyāraṇya communicates. We
take the reality from the śākṣī. Reality is taken from the original consciousness and that
reality is transferred to the jvara. We bring the jvara from the śarīra-traya and we bring
reality from the original consciousness and join reality and jvara and cook up this saṃsāra
which does not exist. Saṃsāra is cooked— take jvara from śarīra-traya, take satyatva from
śākṣī and make the jvara as real jvara, convert the unreal jvara into real jvara. And
thereafter, that real jvara I take on to myself and I say I am suffering from jvara called
saṃsāra. I throw that real jvara, cooked up real jvara, on to myself [cidābhāsa] and say I
am really suffering from saṃsāra jvara. Is there a remedy at all we ask? Vidyāraṇya says

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1075

this cooked up problem is called anujvara problem. It exists only in your intellect and it
does not exist anywhere in the world. Saṃsāra exists only in your intellect and it never
exists anywhere in the world. It is nothing but anujvara cooked up by the confused
intellect. All these are considered or misunderstood as absolutely real. Śarīra-traya, jvara-
traya and I, the self, all of them are not only considered real but also taken as my real
svarūpa or nature. This intellectual conclusion is called saṃsāra, a disease that comes in
the body cannot be called saṃsāra because Vedānta cannot remove the physical diseases.
Vedānta will do namaskāra and go away. A disease in the body comes under jvara and
Vedānta never promises any solution. It only try to tackle anujvara. Once the anujvara is
gone, the advantage is that I will never claim myself to be a saṃśārī. When I can stand
detached, then vyāvahārika kartā and vyāvahārika bhoktā will be roles played through
śarīra-traya. Śarīra-traya is pushed away. Then, vyāvahārika bhoktā, whatever I go
through, will be an entertainment and whatever I do as kartā will be a līlā. I am neither
kartā nor bhoktā but I am Śākṣi-caitanya. The problems of the śarīra we have told that it is
jvara of śarīra and it is an integral part and Vidyāraṇya has given three examples. Like a
thread cannot be separated from cloth, these are svarūpa.

śloka 232
एतस्मिन्भ्रान्तिकालेऽयं शरीरेषु ज्वरत्स्वथ ।
स्वयमेव ज्वरामीति मन्यते हि कुटुम्बिवत्॥ ७.२३२ ॥
etasminbhrāntikāle:'yaṃ śarīreṣu jvaratsvatha.
svayameva jvarāmīti manyate hi kuṭumbivat (7.232).
Etasmin bhrāntikāle, as long as the intellect has this problem, it is all in the buddhi; it is
not emotional issue; it is not a spiritual issue; it is not sociological issue; it is not spiritual
problem; spirit Ātmā does not have any problem. Then what is a spiritual problem? It is
an intellectual problem dealing with the spirit! It is a problem located in the intellect with
regard to the spirit or Ātmā; since the problem is intellectual, the solution also has to be
intellectual. If people ask: we have only intellectual knowledge you don’t feel complex or
diffident and you boldly declare I wanted intellect knowledge only. There is no other
knowledge required other than intellectual knowledge for the problem is intellectual.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says etasmin bhrāntikāle. When the bhranti effect or when the
moha effect is there, ayam this cidābhāsa, the empirical I, the avatāra of the original I,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1076

otherwise called ahaṅkāra also, tvam-pada vācyārtha, ayam, this cidābhāsa, śarīreṣu
jvaratsu satsu means when the three bodies are going through varieties of jvaras. When I
say jvara you should remember the three ślokas explained above in 223 to 225. cidābhāsa
claims that I am going through jvaras. And he has already said cidābhāsa also does not
have its own jvara; refer to 229. Therefore, cidābhāsa does not have any jvara at all. This
cidābhāsa is deluded aham jvarāmīti manyate. It considers like any typical gṛhastha.
When there is problem in any particular family member, even if he does not have any
problem, he throws that problem unto himself and he claims he has problem. This
transference of the problem is the problem. It is a transferred problem kuṭumbivat, like a
gṛhastha. The unfortunate things is many people consider only when you worry about the
family you are taken as a caring person. One of the biggest myths in the world is a
worrying gṛhastha is taken by people as a loving gṛhastha, a caring gṛhastha, a responsible
gṛhastha. What Vedānta says is never fall for this myth! Worry and care has absolutely no
connection to these as a person can love without worry and a person can care without
worry and a person can be extremely responsible without worry. Being a caring person is
wisdom. Being a worrying person is delusion. And that deluded person is given here as an
example. That is the time when the householder should become a ‘househeld’. I am no
more a householder I am househeld. Vidyāraṇya does not leave here. He continues
further.

śloka 233
पुत्रदारेषु तृप्यत्सु तृप्यामीति यथा वृथा ।
मन्यते पुरुषस्तद्वदाभासोऽप्यभिमन्यते ॥ ७.२३३ ॥
putradāreṣu tṛpyatsu tṛpyāmīti yathā vṛthā.
manyate puruṣastadvadābhāso:'pyabhimanyate (7.233).
Vidyāraṇya explains kuṭumbivat example here. What does the kuṭumbī do? Kuṭumba
includes children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and dāreṣu refers to the wife but
you can take spouse in general. When they go through some pain or tāpa. When any one
of them undergoes pain and as we grow older, the family gets extended further and
further, always there will be some issue or the other in some member or the other, in some
country or the other, because it is an international family and tāpa can be ādhyātmika,
ādibhautika or ādidaiviika or contextually you can say sthūla-sūkṣma-kāraṇa-śarīra-tāpa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1077

He concludes that I have got a problem, I am suffering. Whether he verbalizes or not, the
mind is preoccupied with it. One need not verbalise and say that. The very fact that the
mind is taken hostage by that issue ten thousand miles away, it is preoccupied and not
available for Pañcadaśī class indicates that it is a kuṭumbī-mind. He worries without any
logic or basis. How can somebody else’s problem be my problem? It can never be my
problem. I have a duty to chairs, etc., but I never call it as my problem. Additional duty
you can add. For, it is not my problem. I am healthy. In the same manner, here, Puruṣa
should be connected with manyate and Puruṣa here stands for kuṭumbī. Tadvat onwards
comes our current topic. In the same way, cidābhāsa ahaṅkāra also identifies with śarīra-
traya and jvara-traya.

śloka 234
विविच्य भ्रान्तिमुज्झित्वा स्वमप्यगणयन्सदा ।
चिन्तयन्साक्षिणं कस्माच्छरीरमनुसंज्वरेत्॥ ७.२३४ ॥
vivicya bhrāntimujjhitvā svamapyagaṇayan sadā.
cintayansākṣiṇaṃ kasmāccharīramanusaṃjvaret (7.234).
How a person resolves this issue, the process of resolution is beautifully presented in a
capsule form. The changing of the mind-set is based on understanding. You need not leave
the family, dress, name, the set-up, āśramas, etc. Change the mind-set based on the
teaching that alone Ādi Śaṅkarācārya calls it as sāṅkhya-buddhi. Change to sāṅkhya-
buddhi and in my language change to binary format. Not only Ādi Śaṅkarācārya but
Kṛṣṇa also uses this idiom sāṅkhya-buddhi in Gītā. What is the process involved? First,
sort out these three components of śarīra-traya: I, the cidābhāsa and the higher I the Śākṣi-
caitanya or the original consciousness. Having sorted out understand stand two of them
are vyāvahārika satya. Which two? Śarīra-traya includes jvara-traya also and cidābhāsa is
vyāvahārika; therefore, they are mithyā and they don’t deserve overimportance. Not only
that, śarīra-traya cannot be free from jvara totally. You can make some realignment, you
can mitigate some of them; some of them you can temporarily stop; but total freedom is
not there. This must be registered. This deficiency of śarīra-traya, the deficiency that it can
never be free from jvara, I cannot take it as my problem. This is the most cruicial. I should
never take it as my problem because this deficiency neither belongs to cidābhāsa nor does
it belong to Śākṣi-caitanya. Neither the lower I nor the higher I suffer s from this issue.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1078

Therefore, in my inner dialogue I have a problem. This thought should never come. For
conversational purpose, you can use some expression but it should be avoided. I should
never say I am a saṃśārī and I have problem. This thought should not come even in
svapna for which we should practice the right form now. This is called jñāna-niṣṭhā and
therefore, vivicya sort out the issue minutely. And so, you drop or throw away the
thought “I am a saṃśārī and I have got threefold jvaras and I have to solve these problem”
into waste-paper-basket. Take the thoughts away from your dictionaries and then you can
have several hobbies to improve the śarīra-traya and reduce some of the jvaras for loka-
saṅgraha. Let it be a hobby. Don’t connect it with your liberation. I am free. I am already
free. Therefore, bhrāntimujjhitvā. Svam api agaṇayan, ignore even the cidābhāsa which is
also only an empirical functional factor. Being the reflected consciousness, the very life is
dependent on reflecting medium and therefore, use the cidābhāsa but don’t be
overwhelmed by cidābhāsa for it has only a functional role just as avatāra comes and goes;
cidābhāsa is my avatāra alone. It is for the purpose of loka-saṅgraha. Use it but don’t lose
sight of your real nature. Remember your higher nature all the time. This is called
anujvara-nivṛtti. More in the next class.

Class 216
śloka 234 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has come to the final part of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad which is śarīram
anusaṃjvaret. As a part of that, first he explained the two words jvara and anujvara. The
word jvara means the intrinsic problem or ailments belonging the śarīra-traya. Sthūla-
śarīra has several ailments or diseases caused by vāta, pitta, kapha and their imbalance;
the sūkṣma-śarīra has its own problems kāma-krodha, moha, etc; kāraṇa-śarīra has all
potential problems, avyakta-jvara which are waiting to come in the future. These alone
will become the jvaras of sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra. After five years whatever
physical problems will have to come they are already there in a potential form in the
kāraṇa-śarīra. The avyakta prārabdha alone gradually unfolds and the unfolded
prārabdha expresses at sūkṣma-śarīra level and sthūla-śarīra level and now they are
deposits which are not yet matured. The kāraṇa-śarīra has avyakta jvara. All the three
śarīras have got jvaras as their svābhāvikā guṇa, as their nature. They can never be totally

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1079

free from all the jvaras. Ātyantika-nivṛtti of the jvaras from śarīra-traya is impossible.
Thereafter, he talks about anujvara. It is jvara of śarīra-traya; I superimpose myself the
Ātmā because of the identification with śarīra-traya. Because of that reason, the śarīra-
traya-jvaras are included in the word aham or I. The word I and jvaras do not have any
sambandha at all. When I create a sambandha through ignorance, I use the expression: I
have jvara. Whenever I claim I have got jvara, instead of saying śarīra-traya has got jvara, I
am the śarīrī, the dehī, the Ātmā, the kshetrajna, the Puruṣa, remember 13th chapter, I
don’t have any jvara is the fact. When I claim any jvara for myself that is called anujvara.
Vedānta wants to attack not the jvara but Vedānta’s aim is only to handle the anujvara
problem. It is so because the jvara at the śarīra-traya can never have ātyantika-nivṛtti but it
can have only āpekṣika-nivṛtti.
Therefore, the aim of the Vedāntic student is initially reduce the jvaras to some extent so
that one can come to the class. If jvaras are too much then Vedānta-vicāra itself cannot take
place. Therefore, the only aim is reduce the jvaras to that much extent which is called
āpekṣika-nivṛtti and sooner or later start attacking anujvara rather than jvara. And how do
I attack anujvara? It can be done only by changing the language claiming that I am always
jvara-rahita. Aham nitya-mukta śākṣī asmi. This anujvara-nivṛtti alone is mokṣa and never
connect jvara-nivṛtti either to the sādhana or sādhya. If jvara-nivṛtti is taken as the
sādhana, then eternally you will be doing the sādhana without any avail. Jvara-nivṛtti can
never totally take place. Jvara-nivṛtti cannot be the sādhya also. If jvara-nivṛtti is sādhya
[goal] then the goal will be eternally receding. Even after 25 years you will say mokṣa is far
away. Therefore, jvara-nivṛtti should be delinked from both sādhana and sādhya and our
only aim should be anujvara-nivṛtti. The advantage is that anujvara-nivṛtti is possible and
the moment I do that, mokṣa is that, I can say I am free irrespective of the conditions of
śarīra-traya. The jvaras of the śarīra-traya have nothing to do with my liberation. Thus, I
claim my freedom here and now. After claiming my freedom, what to do with jvara? After
claiming my freedom jvaras will continue since jvaras are intrinsic to the body. If the
jvaras continue after freedom, freedom being anujvara-nivṛtti what to with that. These are
the tricks of Vedānta. These are the secrets of Vedānta. After claiming the freedom also we
can work on reducing the jvaras. You don’t call it either sādhana or sādhya. Don’t call it
either as sādhana— if you call it sādhana you will be an eternal sādhaka. If you call it
sādhya, mokṣa will eternally recede. Don’t call it sādhana or sādhya. You call it loka-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1080

saṅgraha. Whatever you do to śarīra-traya don’t connect with either sādhana or sādhya.
The more you connect it to sādhana or sādhya, mokṣa will farther and farther away and it
will be like pedaling a stationary cycle. You will not move but develop pains in the legs.
Even after fifty years of pedaling you will be where you are. Eternally claiming sādhaka,
you will say the mind has not got pure. Therefore, start attacking the anujvara. Once you
attack anujvara, you are free here and now. As a free nitya-mukta Ātmā do whatever you
want. Everything you experience is an entertainment and everything you do is a hobby.
As nitya-mukta Ātmā I keep on improving physical; hobby is a hobby and improving the
mental health is a hobby and it is not connected with mokṣa. The moment I connect it with
mokṣa I will be eternally bound for the mind can never be perfectly jvara-free. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says sākṣiṇaṃ cintayan. Once I turn my attention from śarīra-traya to śākṣī
why should I claim the śarīra-jvaras as my jvara! I am ever jvara-free. This one can tell
even when the body temperature is 103. That is what jñānis do. They say I am jvara-
rahita meaning anujvara-rahita. The body has the jvara and not myself.

śloka 235
अयथावस्तुसर्पादिज्ञानं हेतुः पलायने ।
रज्जुज्ञानेऽहिधीध्वस्तौ कृ तमप्यनुशोचति ॥ ७.२३५ ॥
ayathāvastusarpādijñānaṃ hetuḥ palāyane.
rajjujñāne:'hidhīdhvastau kṛtamapyanuśocati (7.235).
Vidyāraṇya says once the anujvara is removed, thereafter there is no question of doing
anything or any sādhana either for duḥkha-nivṛtti or sukha-prāpti. I the śākṣī am ever-free
from duḥkha and I the śākṣī am ever of the nature of sukha. Duḥkha-nivṛtti does not
require sādhana and sukha-prāpti does not require sādhana because my anujvara is gone.
The notion that I have duḥkha is due to the mind-abhimāna I have. As long as the mind-
abhimāna is there, duḥkha-nivṛtti will be an eternal goal. The moment the mind-abhimāna
goes duḥkha-nivṛtti is not at all a goal because I do not have duḥkha for nivṛtti. For this,
he gives an example. The well-known rope-snake example is given. He says the
misconception of snake, etc, which is not a reality, which is not there upon a rope at all.
False knowledge is the cause for running away from the rope considered as a snake. The
running away from false snake will be there so long as the misconception is there and once
the misconception goes away the running will end. He will not say I know it is rope-snake

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1081

and however for safety he will run away from it. Rope-snake is verbalization but he does
not mean it. Once the rope-knowledge comes and consequently once the snake-
misconception goes away, not only he stops running but he feels ashamed of having run
away afraid of the false snake. He never feels proud that he has done so much sādhana
that he has run away from the false snake. Not only he stops sādhana in fact he feels
ashamed that he ran for one mile to escape from the false snake. Whatever sādhana he did
till now in the form of running, he feels bad. No jñānī will claim the superiority based on
the sādhana he did, because every jñānī feels ashamed to declare I have done so much
sādhana because he knows there was no problem for doing sādhana. It is not jvara-nivṛtti.
It is exactly the anujvara-nivṛtti. After anujvara is gone and again you can come back to
jvara-nivṛtti and that jvara-nivṛtti has no connection with my mokṣa. It does not come
under sādhana also. It does not come under sādhya also. That is called loka-saṅgraha.
Gṛhastha can continue to solve the problem of family. He does not call it sādhana for
mokṣa or freedom problem as sādhya. As a siddha Puruṣa he does everything as a hobby
and experiences everything as an entertainment. So you need not take to sannyāsa as any
household work has no connection with my self. This is what Vidyāraṇya tries to
emphasise.

śloka 236
मिथ्याभियोगदोषस्य प्रायश्चित्तत्वसिद्धये ।
क्षमापयन्निवात्मानं साक्षिणं शरणं गतः ॥ ७.२३६ ॥
mithyābhiyogadoṣasya prāyaścittatvasiddhaye.
kṣamāpayannivātmānaṃ sākṣiṇaṃ śaraṇaṃ gataḥ (7.236).
What does not jñānī think? Vidyāraṇya is highly imaginative. A jñānī feels very bad it
seems. Because I am really nitya-mukta śākṣī; therefore, I should have always claimed I
am asaṃśārī. Instead of claiming I am an asaṃśārī, I have all the time declared I am a
saṃśarī. All the time I have declared I am a sādhaka with aśuddhi, etc. Vidyāraṇya says
that is a false charge upon myself. It is a false acquisition or false charge on I myself. The
false acquisition is a doṣa and a pāpa karma. In dharma-śāstra it is called mithyā-
abhiyoga. It is a pāpa. That is why they say never say anything unless you have authentic
information. Even in casual talking if the information is incomplete never tell it out. If they
ask do you know, you may say I don’t know anything for half-information is as good as

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1082

no information. Don’t spread rumours adding your own creativity. It is supposed to be

mahā pāpa. Every jñānī feels I have done mithyābhiyoga with regard to my own self by
saying I am kartā, I am bhoktā, I have got śani-dāsa, I have got budha-dāsa all those things
every statement I make is a mithyābhiyoga. How long I have been doing? I have been
doing janma after janma even after studying Vedānta. It is mithyā-abhiyoga because my
mental condition has nothing to do with liberation. I am nitya-mukta, that is a fact
whatever may be the jvara level of the śarīra-traya. Therefore, the jñānī wants to ask for
forgiveness and this forgiveness is called nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana is asking
forgiveness for myself as I told until now that I am saṃśārī. Every Vedāntic student
should seek forgiveness from himself or herself and he falls at the feet of the śākṣī
repeatedly saying I am ever-free śākṣī and I am never a saṃśārī. I am but cidānanda-
svarūpa. We should do regular pārāyaṇa and if the Guru asks are you nitya-mukta or
saṃśārī, he should boldly say I am ever-free, a nitya-mukta. He should surrender to śākṣī
in the form of nididhyāsana.

śloka 237
आवृत्तपापनूत्यर्थं स्नानाद्यावर्तते यथा ।
आवर्तयन्निव ध्यानं सदा साक्षिपरायणः ॥ ७.२३७ ॥
āvṛttapāpanūtyarthaṃ snānādyāvartate yathā.
āvartayanniva dhyānaṃ sadā sākṣiparāyaṇaḥ (7.237).
If the false acquisition or the false charge mithyā-abhiyoga is done only once then the
seeking forgiveness also needs be done only once. But what is our problem is not one time,
but repeatedly we have claimed I am saṃśārī. Therefore, the prāyaścitta also
pāpanūtyarthaṃ prāyaścitta-avṛtti; and it is called regular nididhyāsana. Therefore, he
says āvṛttapāpanūtyarthaṃ. It means any pāpa which has been done repeatedly should be
eliminated. Even claiming I am sādhaka is a pāpa it is said. Sādhaka means I am not
mukta. Even the word mumukṣu is false acquisition. Mumukṣu means I am not mukta. As
if to atone for the sins he has committed in erroneously imagining himself to be a sinner,
etc., all this ‘sin’ is washed away by constant contemplation on the nature of the self. Even
if the lava of thoughts comes out, they should be allowed to go out gradually. This is the
process of washing the wrong notions in the mind until his mind is submerged in the
thought I am nitya-mukta. Remove the anujvara, meaning whatever are the conditions of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1083

the mind. Don’t mix up and mess up jvara and anujvara. Similarly, śākṣī-parāyaṇa the
Vedāntic student being committed to śākṣī must focus his attention on the nitya-mukta
śākṣī rather than complain about śarīra-traya and connect it to our liberation.
As the sins are washed by a person by taking purifying baths, charity etc., repeatedly, so
also the cidābhāsa engages himself again and again in contemplation on the witnessing
self for washing the wrong notion of one’s identify. Three changes should be brought out.
One is a change centred on I. Instead of looking at myself as a sādhaka or mumukṣu I have
shift to nitya-mukta. It is I-centred change. It is the mindset change. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya calls
it yoga-buddhi and sāṅkhya-buddhi. yoga-buddhi is looking at myself as mumukṣu and
sāṅkhya-buddhi is looking at myself as nitya-mukta. The second change in the mindset is
everything I do I see as a sādhana when I am a mumukṣu. That the mindset has to be
changed I don’t look upon any action secular or sacred even my nitya-pūjā I don’t look
upon as a sādhana. The pūjā is for the benefit for the world. It need not help me in getting
mokṣa, because I am already a nitya-mukta. I never look upon any action I do secular or
sacred and even my nitya-naimittika-karmas and even my pūjā I need not give up and I
need not look upon sādhana for my liberation. It is with regard to action side. The third
shift is my attitude towards mokṣa. If I look upon mokṣa as sādhya as a goal to be
attained, looked forward to, it is called yoga-buddhi. But if I look upon mokṣa as the
svarūpa, which is ever with me, it is mokṣe svarūpa-buddhi. If I look upon mokṣa as
sādhya it is yoga-buddhi and if I look upon mokṣa as svarūpa it is called sāṅkhya-buddhi.
If I say I have the support of God, it is yoga-buddhi and if I say I am the support of all, it is
sāṅkhya-buddhi.
During negative prārabdha if I pray it is yoga-buddhi. During negative prārabdha, if I do
nididhyāsana, it is sāṅkhya-buddhi. During the difficult prārabdha what I do decides
whether I am in yoga-buddhi or sāṅkhya-buddhi. Prayer means yoga-buddhi and
nididhyāsana means sāṅkhya-buddhi. Nididhyāsana means during negative prārabdha as
jvara— śarīra-traya will have jvara— but I don’t want to have anujvara and I don’t want to
claim that jvara as my own. This practice is called sāṅkhya-buddhi. Kṛṣṇa says in the Gītā
loke'smin dvividhā niṣṭhā purā proktā mayānagha, jñānayogena sāṅkhyānāṁ
karmayogena yoginām; you decide whether you are a Yogī with yoga-buddhi or whether
you are a Sāṅkhya with sāṅkhya-buddhi. And Vidyāraṇya requests all of us to have
sāṅkhya-buddhi right from this moment. Therefore, sadā sākṣiparāyaṇaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1084

śloka 238
उपस्थकुष्ठिनी वेश्या विलासेषु विलज्जते ।
जानतोऽग्रे तथाभासः स्वप्रख्यातौ विलज्जते ॥ ७.२३८ ॥
upasthakuṣṭhinī veśyā vilāseṣu vilajjate.
jānato:'gre tathābhāsaḥ svaprakhyātau vilajjate (7.238).
Now, we have got two cidābhāsas: the previous cidābhāsa is with yoga-buddhi, while the
present cidābhāsa is with sāṅkhya-buddhi. Previous cidābhāsa claimed connection with
śarīra-traya that is the reflecting medium. The present cidābhāsa claims oneness with the
original consciousness. The reflected consciousness can either be identified with the
reflecting medium or it can claim “I am the avatāra of the original consciousness”. The
first one is a sādhaka who claimed “I am a saṃśārī” and the second one is that which
claims “I am nitya-mukta”. Then, Vidyāraṇya says when the nitya-mukta I, the
enlightened cidābhāsa, begins to dominate more and more in our life and the enlightened
cidābhāsa is the one that claims I am the manifestation of the original consciousness, that
enlightened cidābhāsa becomes more and more dominant because of nididhyāsana,
preservation of, promotion of sāṅkhya-buddhi. Even when a small problem comes about,
attempt this practice instead of running to the astrologer. The enlightened cidābhāsa
becomes dominant. The previous saṃśārī cidābhāsa slowly withdraws. It is a figurative
expression. Ajñānī cidābhāsa and saṃśārī cidābhāsa is replaced by enlightened cidābhāsa
that claims I am the śākṣī. My vyāvahārika version is the reflected consciousness and my
original version is the original consciousness. When the enlightened I becomes dominant,
saṃśārī I feels ashamed to come into my life and claim I am a saṃśārī. It is all an
imagination. When nitya-mukta I dominates in my life, saṃśārī I becomes weaker and
weaker and it no more comes in my life. This Vidyāraṇya explains with an example, an
embarrassing example.
He says an immoral woman whose job is charming the men through her beauty and
suppose she has some physical deformities or ailments, she shies away from or feels
ashamed of her job of charming other people. She does that no more because she has a
problem. She has been weakened because of her own sickness. Previously, she was proud
that she was strong and she was an expert in her job and now she has become
upasthakuṣṭhinī deformed and therefore, she feels shy. In the same way, the cidābhāsa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1085

was strong; therefore, every time it was coming and claiming I have a problem, I have
problem; all the time it complained. Now, it has become deformed, the deformity is that its
satyatva has gone away; losing satyatva is imagined as losing the power to charm.
Falsified cidābhāsa has no power just as a paper tiger cannot frighten me. Therefore, he
says just as that person shies away in front of an informed person who knows her
weakness [the deformity], cidābhāsa can no more play with an informed and enlightened
person. In the same way, the previous cidābhāsa which was all the time frightening,
constantly looking at the horoscope which is often horror-scope thinking some dāsa or this
dāsa will come. Whether they come or not, old age is coming. Cidābhāsa will be anxious
as to what will happen. That frightening cidābhāsa has lost the power to scare me. I will
always ask what time, king or prārabdha will do to me? They can do nothing. I the śākṣī
cannot be touched by any of the above things. It has no power to declare its glory or
threatening or reducing or binding power; I am ever-free. Śākṣī is ever dominant in my
life. More in the next class.

Class 217
śloka 239
गृहीतो ब्राह्मणो म्लेच्छैः प्रायश्चित्तं चरन्पुनः ।
म्लेच्छैः सङ्कीर्यते नैव तथाभासः शरीरकैः ॥ ७.२३९ ॥
gṛhīto brāhmaṇo mlecchaiḥ prāyaścittaṃ caranpunaḥ.
mlecchaiḥ saṅkīryate naiva tathābhāsaḥ śarīrakaiḥ (7.239).
Ātmā-jñāna-phala is given in the second line of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra
4.4.12 and that phala is śarīram na anusvañjaret. This portion is being commented by
Vidyāraṇya from ślokas 223 to 250 and the gist of this jñāna-phala is śoka-nivṛtti anujvara-
nivṛtti. If you remember the sapta-avasthās, the seven stages that the Jīva goes through,
this becomes the sixth among avasthā ajñāna, āvaraṇa, vikṣepa, parokṣa jñāna aparokṣa
jñāna, śoka-nivṛtti, tṛpti-prāpti. While reading this, we should remember the general
convention that we use in our scriptures. If this is not known, there may be some difficulty
in understanding. According to Vedānta, everything that we experience is a mixture of
both satya and mithyā. Pure satya we can never experience because there is no division of
experiencer and experienced. Pure satya cannot be experienced being divisionless. Pure

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1086

mithyā does not even exist. Therefore, everything is satya-anṛta-mithunikaraṇam. Jīva is

also a mixture. Īśvara is also a mixture. Jagat the world is also a mixture of satya and anṛta
[means mithyā]. Since everything is mixture, you can look and present it in two different
ways. One way is that you can say they are all satya, with mithyā nāma-rūpa. Jīva is satya
with mithyānāma-rūpa. Jagat is satya with mithyā nāma-rūpa. Or alternatively you can
look and present in a different language that each one of them is mithyā supported by or
backed by the satya as adhiṣṭhāna. It is mithyā with satya-adhiṣṭhāna. Or it is satya with
mithyā nāma-rūpa. You cannot ask which one is correct because both of them are correct
with only difference that the focus or stress is different. That is why in the scriptures we
do have seemingly contradictory statements; in one place we say the world is mithyā;
Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāpara. And in another place we say
everything is Brahman. The whole universe is said to be Brahman. One sentence says the
world is mithyā. Another says the world is Brahman. If you connect these two, ‘world’ is
mithyā, world is Brahman, therefore, Brahman is mithyā! How can the Upaniṣad say both?
You can understand this only if you know the world has aṃśa-dvaya as nāma-rūpa aṃśa
and sat aṃśa which is the adhiṣṭhāna. If you are looking at focusing at nāma-rūpa and see
the world as nāma-rūpa, then the statement is world the nāma-rūpa is mithyā of course
backed by Brahman as the adhiṣṭhāna. On the other hand when you look at the sattā
aspect of the world, then you say world is nothing but ‘sat’ Brahman with mithyā nāma-
rūpa. These ‘seemingly contradictory’ statements are aplenty in the śāstra.
The Ācāryas also freely use these words for either denoting the mithyā aṃśa or the satya
maṃśa. In one place, we say that Jīva is mithyā; jīvatva-nivṛtti is mokṣa. At the same time,
in another place we say jivo brahmaiva nāpara. Extending this principle, the word Jīva
also can be looked from two angles because Jīva also happens to be a mixture of satya and
mithyā aṃśa. Or it is the mixture of cidābhāsa aṃśa and cit, ādhāra aṃśa. It is the original
consciousness and the reflected consciousness in our language. The jñānī Jīva, pramātā
Jīva, is seen to be neither the original consciousness nor the reflected consciousness. It is so
because they don’t separately exist for both are always together. The original
consciousness cannot be a pramātā and is not a pramātā by itself. The reflected
consciousness by itself does not even exist; therefore, remember that mere original
consciousness cannot be talked about; at the same time mere reflected consciousness
cannot be talked about. It is a mixture of both.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1087

Since it is a mixture, you can look at Jīva and present the Jīva in two ‘different’ languages,
by giving focus or emphasis on either of the two. One method is Jīva is cidābhāsa which is
the pramātā but backed by the ‘cit’ which is its original nature or higher nature. Therefore,
jñānī is the ‘pramātā cidābhāsa’ who has the ‘cit’ or ‘the original consciousness’ as the
adhiṣṭhāna, as its higher nature. So, here, the focus is that the jñānī as a cidābhāsa you say
he has known his higher nature or the real nature, etc. Always you say he is ‘cidābhāsa’
backed by cit. There is also another way of looking and presenting the same thing. Don’t
say jñānī is the cidābhāsa but directly say jñānī is ‘cit’. The focus is on the cit, the satya
aṃśa. But, you should not say jñānī is the cit you cannot say because the mere ‘cit’ cannot
give anything. Jñānī is the cit who is the knower through the cidābhāsa or medium of
operation or his own lower nature; through the cidābhāsa he knows ahaṃ brahma asmi.
Therefore, śākṣī knows ahaṃ brahma asmi through cidābhāsa or cidābhāsa knows ahaṃ
brahma asmi backed by śākṣī as the adhiṣṭhāna. Therefore, throughout the scriptures
sometimes cidābhāsa is said to be the knower, while sometimes the cit the śākṣī is said to
be the knower. When you say cidābhāsa is the knower you should add in bracket with the
‘cit’ as his very essential nature and when you say ‘cit’ is lower you should always add
through the medium of cidābhāsa.
Both these presentations we find throughout the śāstra. We should be very very agile to
understand whether it is cidābhāsa-pradhāna-dṛṣṭi or cit-pradhāna-dṛṣṭi. Of these two
types of presentations, which one is better? Laukika-dṛṣṭyā, from the worldly angle,
cidābhāsa as a jñānī everybody can easily understand because it is a localized entity. Here,
the focus is on cidābhāsa. Cidābhāsa-pradhāna presentation is from laukika-dṛṣṭi and
therefore, the people will easily appreciate. Jñānī ahaṃ brahma asmi which means he
knows his higher nature śākṣī. Jñānī is cidābhāsa and therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi is his
higher nature. This is from laukika-dṛṣṭi. Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi is that Śāstra does not want you to
even claim I am cidābhāsa. Therefore, from Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi jñānī is Brahman who knows
ahaṃ brahma asmi through his lower nature or vyāvahārika nature. In Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi, śākṣī
is given prādhānya. In oth laukika- and Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi there are advantages and
disadvantages in the communication. In laukika-dṛṣṭi when you say cidābhāsa is the
knower, and jñānī is cidābhāsa and he knows his higher nature śākṣī it looks all right. It is
so because śākṣī is his higher nature. Therefore, we are able to understand this easily but
the problem is that as long as you are going to look at yourself as a cidābhāsa jñānī you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1088

will be in triangular format only. You will be in jīva-jagat-Īśvara triangle and you will not
be able to get out of that because you will say my higher nature is Brahman. Also you will
say your higher nature is liberated. What about you? I am a saṃśārī. My higher nature is
liberated because my higher nature is identical with Brahman. I am cidābhāsa therefore, I
will continue to claim I am cidābhāsa; and I will have limited life. I will be there until the
reflected consciousness continues. The problem is that you will always hesitate to say “I
am free” and you will ever say “my higher nature is free”. This is the disadvantage when
you take yourself as cidābhāsa-pradhāna. However, the communication is convenient.
From śākṣi-pradhāna or Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi you don’t say “my higher nature is śākṣī”; you start
with “I am the śākṣī and my lower nature is cidābhāsa”. Through my lower nature
cidābhāsa, which is a veṣa, I am having the entertainment. And through the cidābhāsa
veṣa I am playing the role of ajñānī sādhaka and even mukti I am claiming all through
cidābhāsa veṣa, while I am above everything, above mokṣa and cidānanda-rūpa śivoham.
When I claim I am the śākṣī, the binary format becomes natural. Instead of saying I am a
Jīva and my higher nature is Brahman; I will say I am Brahman and my lower nature is
Jīva. The language is different but it makes a big difference. Therefore, you will find in the
śāstra both approaches are there. In Upadeśa-sāhasrī, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya takes consistently
that I am the śākṣī and I am the sādhaka and I am the knower and I become a knower
through my lower nature of cidābhāsa. I temporarily become a knower but I am Brahman
only. Such dṛṣṭis are there. Now, in this portion, what is the dṛṣṭi of Vidyāraṇya? One is
called laukika-dṛṣṭi. It has a communication-advantage. The disadvantage is that you will
be eternally in a triangular format and the binary format will be tough. In Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi
the communication is a bit difficult but binary format becomes natural. Of these two dṛṣṭis,
Vidyāraṇya in this context goes by laukika-dṛṣṭi and therefore, he is taking jñānī as the
enlightened cidābhāsa. That is the approach.
It is cidābhāsa-pradhāna description of the jñānī. How do you know that? If you ask so, it
is very simple. Look at śloka number 230 of this chapter. Evam api ekatāṃ mene
cidābhāso hi avidyayā, cidābhāsa knows ahaṃ brahma asmi. It means cidābhāsa
recognizes that my real and higher nature is Brahman alone. Therefore, here the stress is
given to cidābhāsa. Therefore, in all these ślokas, Vidyāraṇya treats the jñānī as the
cidābhāsa. Now, in these ślokas, the analysis is this: Vidyāraṇya takes three things.
Cidābhāsa is in the middle. It is the reflected consciousness. The jñānī is taken as the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1089

reflected consciousness. On one side, there is the reflecting medium and on the other side
there the original consciousness. Of this, the reflected consciousness and reflecting
medium are mithyā. The original consciousness alone is satya. Now, the reflected
consciousness until it came to Vedānta, was identifying with reflecting medium and
therefore, talking about birth, growth, death, etc. All these glories he claimed because of
his identification with mithyā. Vidyāraṇya says now the reflected consciousness has
recognized its folly and instead of associating with the inferior reflecting medium, the
reflected consciousness is claiming its original nature of the original consciousness.
Having claimed the original nature of the original consciousness it feels ashamed of
identifying itself with the reflected consciousness and the glories of body, growth, etc. It is
now feeling ashamed. Not only it feels ashamed but it is in the process of prayacitta. It is
prayacitta for all the glories it claimed till now by the wrong sambandha. In the cinmudra,
the index finger is the reflected consciousness, the three fingers are reflecting medium and
the thumb is the original consciousness. The reflected consciousness which is naturally
associated with the reflecting medium group: middle-finger sthūla-śarīra, ring-finger
sūkṣma-śarīra and little-finger kāraṇa-śarīra which is invisible. The reflected
consciousness, which was until now naturally associating with reflecting medium group,
is now claiming oneness with the original consciousness; and identified with reflecting
medium it claimed varieties of glories, every relationship, my son is gold-medallist;
laukika-dṛṣṭi glory, it is gory from Vedānta dṛṣṭi. All the family glories you claim are said
to be false and mithyā. What is the prayacitta? Prayacitta is nididhyāsana. Therefore, in the
238 śloka which we completed in the last class, we said this cidābhāsa feels ashamed for
the wrong association. That idea is being dramatically presented in the flowing ślokas. In
239 another example is given.
In those days varṇa and ācāras were prevalent, when Brāhmaṇas will not take food
outside, they cannot think of going abroad where the ācāra and anuṣṭhānas are not there.
They cannot do śrāddha, etc abroad. Suppose they get associated with a mleccha [Vaidika-
acara-rahita], even sambandha should not be there; suppose they have sambandha, they
eat something. They have to do prayacitta. Nowadays, if you say all about this, they will
arrest you because it is untouchability practice. I don’t want to say whether it is good or
bad. I only translate what is said in the śloka. The Brāhmaṇa has mleccha-sambandha. For
any occasional sambandha one should do prāyaścitta. Every ajñānī Jīva has mleccha-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1090

sambandha. Three bodies are full of jvaras we saw and asuchi we saw. Cidābhāsa had
mleccha-sambandha. Mleccha in this context is reflecting medium, while the reflected
consciousness is a Brāhmaṇa. It had reflecting-medium-sambandha and through
cinmudra-upadeśa Guru said that you are amidst mleccha, come out and do prāyaścitta.
The reflected consciousness Brāhmaṇa recognizes that I am the original consciousness and
abhivāda-paramparā is brahma-gotra. I belong to Brahman. He claims the superior
pedigree. He purifies himself. It is the example and it is highly dramatic.
We see a parallel portion in Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6th chapter. There a person is
kidnapped from Gāndhāra deśa and he is left in the forest. Ādi Śaṅkarācārya writes a
brilliant commentary and graphically describes that kidnapping as ajñāna and puṇya-
pāpa. They are kidnapping the Ātmā from its original mokṣa-sthāna. They place it in the
forest of sthūla-sūkṣma-kāraṇa-śarīra which are full of jvaras which are full of diseases.
The Guru brings the reflected consciousness out and takes him to the pristine glory of the
original consciousness.
After getting released from śarīra-traya, he regularly does prayacitta. He remains in binary
format. Any prāyaścitta karma, parihāra karma, you do, you again come back to mleccha-
sambandha and triangular format. You have again got associated with śarīra. Remember
every time you say O Lord save me, you identify with śarīra-traya mleccha-sambandha.
During problems a Karma-yogī says O Lord save me, Ajñānī says O Lord save me, but
Jñāna-yogī can never do that. That is again mleccha-sambandha. He says na puṇyam na
pāpam na saukhyam na duḥkham etc. I am cidānanda-rūpa, śivoham śivoham. I don’t
want to slip down to Jīva-bhāva and enter into special prayers. This jñānī does prayacitta
and that prayacitta is nididhyāsana. “After that, Svāmījī can I briefly go to triangular
format and come back?” one will ask. These are the new tricks used by the student and
therefore, Vidyāraṇya knows that. Mlecchaiḥ naiva saṅkīryate, thereafter again, he never
gets association with mleccha. That does not means he becomes a nāstika. Be very careful.
He may go to the Lord not for aham-mama-centred prārthanā. He can go to God no
problem. He can go to temple no problem. There is no sakāma-bhakti. Sakāma-bhakti
means aham-mama-centred prārthanā that means mleccha-sambandha. His prārthanā is
for the welfare of the whole society. That is called jñānī’s bhakti. Kṛṣṇa says jñānī is the
greatest bhakta. He is not a nāstika. He will do nitya karma and pūjā. The difference is in
the saṅkalpa, it is not for getting anything for me. It is not puruṣārtha-sādhana for me but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1091

every prayer is loka-kṣema-sādhana. The moment it becomes it is puruṣārtha-sādhana,

mleccha-saṅga has come. He does not blend. He does not mix with that. Up to this is the
example. Jñānī never gets associated with the inferior body after gaining jñāna.

śloka 240
यौवराज्ये स्थितो राजपुत्रः साम्राज्यवाञ्छया ।
राजानुकारी भवति तथा साक्ष्यनुकार्ययम्॥ ७.२४० ॥
yauvarājye sthito rājaputraḥ sāmrājyavāñchayā.
rājānukārī bhavati tathā sākṣyanukāryayam (7.240).
It is another beautiful example given by Vidyāraṇya. Until jñāna came, cidābhāsa was
identifying with the three bodies. Therefore, all the expressions are imitation of the three
bodies. When the body is getting old, the cidābhāsa never says body gets old but says I am
getting old. Thus, cidābhāsa was doing the anukaraṇa which means it imitates the
reflecting medium. It behaves like the reflecting medium. Not only in the thought-pattern
but in the language also such as “I am getting old”. The reflected consciousness
superimposes all the śarīra-traya-dharma and claimed as though its own dharma. Even
cidābhāsa does not have the wear and tear which belongs to the śarīra and then what to
talk of cit! This is said in śloka 230. There he says that the wear and tear, etc., which
belongs to the body cannot even belong to cidābhāsa, then kaimutika-nyāyena how can it
belong to the cit! Even though cidābhāsa cannot have the properties of the reflecting
medium, cidābhāsa throws all of them on itself and behaves as though it is the śarīra. It is
like males putting the female-veṣa. In the drama regularly they do this role. Then, even in
the normal behavior such people will behave like the role they play in the normal life. All
the time moving with the śarīra-traya like the lion bleating like the lamb growing up
among the lambs. Similarly, we bleat like the lamb. Now, after jñāna we should learn to
imitate not this reflecting medium but the original consciousness. Thus, the reflected
consciousness starts behaving like the original consciousness claiming ahaṃ brahma asmi
nityosmi, śuddhosmi, nirvikārosmi. When jñānī says I am nirvikāra even at that time his
throat may feel choked, but he says that he is claiming the original consciousness, the
original nature.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1092

Here, the example is like a prince who has been given the paṭṭābhiṣeka. That means he has
been chosen as the next king. What should he do? Before he gets the original kingdom,
that intermediary gap is called nididhyāsana. Therefore, he should learn to walk like the
king. When something falls down he should not bend and lift. Then, there will be people
coming and they should take it. Therefore, he should learn to claim the sāmrājya-
adhipatya. Similarly, our behavior should be mokṣa-sāmrājya-adhipatya. May you start
behaving— not bleat but behave— like mokṣa-sāmrājya-adhipati. Exact meaning we will
see in the next class.

Class 218

śloka 240 contd.

Vidyāraṇya comments upon the jñāna-phala given in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
mantra 4.4.12. The jñāna-phala is in the form of anujvara-nivṛtti or śoka-nivṛtti. This jñāna
is gained by the individual who has three components consisting of the original
consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium. The original
consciousness is the Śākṣi-caitanya, the reflected consciousness is the reflection, and
reflecting medium is the threefold reflecting media. You should remember all the three are
never physically separable and they always coexist. You cannot have one without the
other two. Naturally, the question comes who gains the knowledge ahaṃ brahma asmi
and straight and direct answer should be that the mixture alone knows ahaṃ brahma
asmi, because the original consciousness by itself cannot be a knower, the reflected
consciousness by itself cannot even exist, and reflecting medium by itself is jaḍa.
Therefore, if you separate them any one of the three cannot know. Therefore, the
knowledge is gained by the mixture only, but even though the knowledge is gained by the
mixture of the three generally, the reflected consciousness is taken as the knower, the
pramātā. By convention, generally, the reflected consciousness is taken as the pramātā, the
knower, neither the reflecting medium nor the original consciousness. What is the reason?
There is some logic also. because reflecting medium by itself is jaḍa. Therefore, it cannot be
a knower. The original consciousness by itself is nirvikāra and therefore, it cannot also
know, whereas cidābhāsa alone has a unique status it is cetana and it is savikāra also.
Thus, cidābhāsa has a unique pair of qualification; the uniqueness being cetanatva and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1093

savikāratva. Both of them are required to become a knower. Knower has to be cetana. The
knower also indicates savikāratva. Knower has to be savikāra cetana vastu. That savikāra
cetana vastu is cidābhāsa and therefore, generally, we say cidābhāsa is the knower. But
you should remember even when we give credit to cidābhāsa, cidābhāsa is always along
with the reflecting medium and the original consciousness. Although we give individual
credit but it does not exist individually; it exists only along with the other two. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says cidābhāsa the pramātā has gained this knowledge and it has done satya-
anṛta-viveka. After doing the viveka with the help of the śāstra, now, the cidābhāsa has a
choice to have an alliance with one of the two. Whether it should claim identify with the
reflecting medium part claiming I am a male, I am a female, I am young, I am old, etc.,
whether it should have anujvara crying along with the reflecting medium or whether it
should join the original consciousness and claim cit ānanda rūpa, śivoham nityoham,
śuddhoham, nirvikāroham, ānandoham, brahmāham. Which one I should join?
Until I came to Vedānta I joined the wrong party. The result has been constantly one
complaint or the other. Now, the cidābhāsa has a choice to claim that my real nature, my
original nature, is the original consciousness cit and the reflected consciousness is only an
incidental vyāvahārika version of my original śākṣi-svarūpa. He has to change the mindset
and start claiming the real nature. This also has to be done in two stages. Initially, I say I
am the cidābhāsa and the original consciousness or Śākṣi-caitanya is my higher nature. We
say even that language has to be modified. Even though this is the correct statement “I am
the cidābhāsa, cit is my higher nature” is correct statement only but even that we should
change because language changes the mindset. Language does influence the mindset;
therefore, instead of claiming cidābhāsa and Śākṣi-caitanya is my higher nature, I start
claiming “I am the śākṣī and cidābhāsa is my incidental lower vyāvahārika nature”.
Instead of saying I have the higher nature of Śākṣi-caitanya, start saying I am temporarily
using the lower nature of cidābhāsa. Only when I change the language in this manner I
can come to binary format; and only when I come to the binary format, claiming I am the
Śākṣi-caitanya, I am the original consciousness, then alone ahaṃ brahma asmi will become
natural and only then I am nitya-mukta, I will be able to claim. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
learn to practice this new version of nididhyāsana. This change of mindset will never
natural happen. You go on completing text after text and think that the mindset will
gradually change inch by inch, but the mindset will never naturally change. It requires

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1094

deliberate initiation. Also efforts are required. There are some other people who think the
mindset will change suddenly one day after some mystic experience. They think the
change of the mindset is a sudden change caused by some kind of an earth-shattering
experience; until then, “I will be a saṃśārī jīva” mindset. One day, I will experience an
explosive event in Nirvikalpaka samādhi and thereafter, suddenly start telling I am nitya
mukta Brahman. It is neither a mystic experience nor is it going to gradually happen; the
mindset change has to be initiated by me. I told in Naiṣkarmya-siddhi class niścaya
saṅkalpa and abhyāsa. I have to decide to change the mindset. What is the mindset? I am
the śākṣī functioning in the world through my incidental cidābhāsa version. I have to take
a decision, I have to take a resolve, like various vows; thereafter, I should practice this
binary format mindset. And Vidyāraṇya calls it yauvarāja-paṭṭābhiṣeka. Then start to
claim I am not cidābhāsa with a cit but I am nitya-mukta cit with incidental cidābhāsa
married to the wrong śarīra-traya with so many jvaras. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
yauvarājye sthito rājaputraḥ mumukṣuḥ sāmrājyavāñchayā to claim nitya-mukti status
that is called mokṣa-sāmrājya, which is nitya-mukti-sāmrājya, rājaputraḥ yauvarājye
sthitaḥ, who has been installed as the next king and what he should do. Even though he
has not become the king, he starts imitating the king’s authority rājānukārī bhavati starts
claiming I am nitya-mukta. In the same way, ayam śākṣi-anukārī bhavati he enjoys a
mindset which is śākṣī-centric. Literally, he imitates the śākṣī which means he does not
entertain “I am saṃśārī” buddhi. He entertains “I am nitya-mutka” buddhi. Remember
even when I entertain the thought, the mind will come up with objections and questions.
The mind will come with some excuse or the other. Sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is from
the standpoint of śarīra-traya and here, we don’t discuss with śarīra-traya, but I am
claiming nitya-mukti svarūpa of the original consciousness. Why should I complain? The
very word sādhana should be dropped. The moment I use the word sādhana I have
postponed mokṣa as a sādhya. If at all the mind has some problem, the mind has been
included in the anātmā world; improving the mind is a hobby which has no connection
with my liberation; never call improving the mind as a sādhana. Once you call it sādhana
you will say mokṣa is a sādhya and sādhana has to be completed and mokṣa will be
gained after some time. Improving the mind is a hobby which has no connection with my
liberation and I am liberated all the time. I am not bound, never was bound. This is called
binary format abhyāsa which one has to initiate. Therefore, ayam śākṣyanukarī.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1095

śloka 7.241
यो ब्रह्म वेद ब्रह्मैव भवत्येवेति श्रुतिम्।
श्रुत्वा तदेकचित्तः सन्ब्रह्म वेत्ति न चेतरत्॥ ७.२४१ ॥
yo brahma veda brahmaiva bhavatyeveti śrutim.
śrutvā tadekacittaḥ sanbrahma vetti na cetarat (7.241).
In support of this adhyāsa, Vidyāraṇya quotes the Śruti pramāṇa Muṇdakopaniṣad 3.2.9
which is the subject matter that Dayānanda Svāmījī is taking up during the January yajña.
Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati. The one who knows Brahman— that śākṣī aṃśa of
oneself is Brahman, the other two components are pramātā component and śarīra
component or the reflected consciousness component and reflecting medium component,
but the original consciousness component is this individual who is a mixture— Brahma
veda, ādhāra-caitanya-aṃśam veda; veda is the verb. Not only jānāti, but he does the
brahma-abhyāsa also. Tat-cintanam, tat-kathanam, etc. The one who does nididhyāsana
claims the ādhāra aṃśa as myself instead of claiming I have ādhāra aṃśa, he say I am the
ādhāra-caitanya. The other two I incidentally possess. Thus, by changing the language we
have to change the mindset. Therefore, brahmaiva bhavati. Such a jñānī you ask who are
you? The instantaneous answer he gives is that I am Brahman with an incidental reflecting
medium and the reflected consciousness which will be there for some time and will go
after some time. Brahmaiva bhavati, he claims I am Brahman. This is supported by
Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad vākya. Having understood tadekacittaḥ san. Any event happens
anywhere he is not going to look at it as something which affected me or which is affecting
me; or which will affect me; that I am affected by events that thought-pattern itself is
removed; asaṅgoham;
dehānyatvānna me janmajarākārśyalayādayaḥ;
śabdādiviṣayaiḥ saṅgo nirindriyatayā na ca.
amanastvānna me duḥkharāgadveṣabhayādayaḥ;
aprāṇo hyamanāḥ śubhra ityādiśrutiśāsanāt.
[refer to Adi Śaṅkarācārya in Ātmabodha] since I don’t have any the mind at all because I
being the asaṅga śākṣī, how can it complain I have got rāga-dveṣa, or I have got vāsanās;
and I have to do vāsanākṣaya! There is nothing more greater a blunder than working
vāsanākṣaya because I the ādhāra aṃśa does not have vāsanā for kṣaya. This is the type of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1096

nididhyāsana that this person practices; therefore, tadekacitta. He claims I am asaṅga,

whatever be the action; he does not want to connect any one of the action done by indrīyas
as sādhana. Even if a jñānī performs nitya-naimittika karmas he does not look upon them
as a sādhana because the moment anything is seen as a sādhana, mokṣa has been
postponed because I am sādhaka, I am doing sādhana, I will get sādhya and sādhya to
gain when? Sādhanatva-mukti is nivṛtti with regard to every ritual he performs. Then
what buddhi is there? Loka-kṣematva buddhi not sādhana for me because I don’t require
any sādhana, because I don’t need any sādhya, because I am nitya-mukti Śākṣi-caitanya.
Remaining in one thought, he dwells in Brahman. Even if he does not deliberately do that,
in the sub-conscious mind this thought-pattern alone he generates, preserves and
nourishes. brahma vetti na cetarat. When prārabdha problems come not immediately
looking for parihāra; God will solve the problem is saṃśārī’s thinking and I have no
problem to solve is the nididhyāsaka’s thinking. I have no problem to be solved; this
thought I have to deliberately entertain, it will not naturally happen and this requires an
effort. Start straightaway just now and don’t waste time. Not any other mindset which
anyway indirectly indicates that I am saṃśārī.

śloka 7.242
देवत्वकामा ह्यग्न्यादौ प्रविशन्ति यथा तथा ।
साक्षित्वेनावशेषाय स्वविनाशं स वाञ्छति ॥ ७.२४२ ॥
devatvakāmā hyagnyādau praviśanti yathā tathā.
sākṣitvenāvaśeṣāya svavināśaṃ sa vāñchati (7.242).
By systematic nourishing the new mindset “I am the problem-free śākṣī”, whatever is
there at the anātmā level or cidābhāsa level we have said even cidābhāsa does not have
problem. Therefore, any problem at any level I don’t want to look upon as my problem.
That asaṅga śākṣī aham mindset should become dominant. As this becomes dominant I
am the saṃśārī cidābhāsa identified with the jvaras of the śarīra-traya, that saṃśārī
cidābhāsa should become weaker and weaker. It’s cry of saṃsāra must be drowned in the
mokṣa claim of the śākṣī. Cidābhāsa may raise various noises about the family members
problems, etc., we don’t have total control over that. There is only one way mangala-śākṣī-
vṛtti should drown amangala-cidābhāsa-janya-vṛttis. You drown them and you overpower
them. He gives an example in this regard.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1097

There are some people who want to become devas. To become devas, there are certain
means prescribed for higher gati like Kāśī-maraṇa. If a person dies in Kāśī it is believed
that they will mokṣa; they may not get mokṣa but they will get higher gati. You need not
do anything, but manage to die in Kāśī. There are many people after certain age since they
don’t know when they will die they will go there with the only project of dying in Kāśī.
Similarly, śāstras talk about certain types of maraṇa: agni-praveśa, Gaṅgā-praveśa,
Prayāga-praveśa, etc. As a means to remove my lower status that is manuṣyatva status I
sacrifice through the process of special maraṇa and replace manuṣyatva status by devatva
status. This is the unique example he gives. That some people enter the special types of
agni at the time of maraṇa. Some people also enter the Ganges or some people go to Kāśī;
and here what is the comparison to give up the lower status and to claim a higher status?
That much alone is the example. Don’t dwell upon the dṛṣṭānta and get lost. Here, the
significance of the example is that a person wants to remove his lower status [manuṣyatva]
and replace by higher status, by a particular means which is like committing suicide.
Similarly, jñāna-abhyāsa is the fire. Jñāna-agni-praveśa a jīva does. He enters the agni and
through that he wants to remove the jīvatva status. Cidābhāsa is thus removed; in that
place śākṣi-pradhāna jīva I become. Instead of being ahaṅkāra-pradhāna or instead of
cidābhāsa-pradhāna I become śākṣi-pradhāna. Instead of claiming jvaras of the body I
claim the ānanda-svarūpa of the Ātmā or śākṣī.
The moment you take to the study of vāsanā you take it with the mind and nididhyāsana
is to claim I don’t have vāsanās for I am not the mind. If I am not the mind, I am the Śākṣi-
caitanya. Śākṣī has no vāsanā. Therefore, forget vāsanā-kṣaya, manonāśa all of them. They
are all ok for some time. But ultimately we should learn to claim that I am free here and
now or else you will be eternally complaining. Vāsanās you have acquired through the
past janmas. This cannot be fruitful. Literally trying to remove you will eternally postpone
mokṣa, successfully making the Guru miserable. Stop this idea and claim the present
freedom.

śloka 7. 243
यावत्स्वदेहदाहं स नरत्वं नैव मुञ्चति ।
तावदारब्धदेहः स्यान्नाभासत्वविमोचनम्॥ ७.२४३ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1098

yāvatsvadehadāhaṃ sa naratvaṃ naiva muñcati.

tāvadārabdhadehaḥ syānnābhāsatvavimocanam (7.243).
In the previous śloka we talked about cidābhāsa-nāśa or jīvatva-nāśa, etc. Here, he clarifies
that cidābhāsa cannot be physically destroyed as long as the mind is there because
wherever there is mind there will be cidābhāsa; the mind cannot be destroyed as long as
prārabdha is there; as long as prārabdha is there śarīra-traya will continue, cidābhāsa will
continue; therefore, their destruction is only falsification. Remember the example: when
the mirror is there reflection will be there. Reflection can be destroyed in two ways. One
destruction is the well-known destruction. You drop the mirror and destroy the reflection
to go away. The second type is you don’t do anything; you understand the reflection is
mithyā and whatever happens through the reflection I need not bother or worry. If the
mirror is convex or concave the reflection will be distorted accordingly. But the reflection’s
distortion is not my problem. If there are dots in the mirror the reflection also seems to
have dots. This falsification of reflection gives me freedom instantaneously. Thereafter, the
reflection will be physically removed. At the time of videha-mukti, cidābhāsa will
physically disappear. During videha-mukti, śarīra-traya is gone; therefore, cidābhāsa goes.
Vidyāraṇya extends the example. People enter the agni and until the agni completely
burns, the body will continue in the fire. Therefore, in the example of agni-praveśa, until
the body is completely burnt, the body continues and therefore, manuṣyatva status, which
belongs to the body that status also continues; that person does not drop or lose the
manuṣyatva status; similarly, this jñānī also will continue to have the jīvatva status or
cidābhāsa status will continue. That is why it is called jīvanmukti. Manuṣyatva does not
go away totally. Similarly, as long as prārabdha continues, the body continues; and as long
as body continues, the mind continues; about the word manonāśa also we should note: a
jñānī cannot do manonāśa, the mind also will continue and manonāśa only means
mithyātva-niścaya; only falsification is possible but the mind continues; cidābhāsa also
will continue; the varieties of experiences also will continue and cidābhāsa will make all
the noises also complaining pains; all will continue but the śākṣī’s ahaṃ brahma asmi
jñāna will drown the sound of the cidābhāsa. That is called mithyātva-niścaya. Therefore,
he says tāvadārabdhadehaḥ. As long as ārabdha deha continues, ābhāsatva-vimocanam na
bhavati; there is no question of freedom from cidābhāsa. Therefore, prārabdha-duḥkha can

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1099

be overpowered by jñāna and it can never be physically eliminated. It is overpowered but

it is not avoided.

śloka 7.244
रज्जुज्ञानेऽपि कम्पादिः शनैरेवोपशाम्यति ।
पुनर्मन्दान्धकारि सा रज्जुः क्षिप्तोरगी भवेत्॥ ७.२४४ ॥
rajjujñāne:'pi kampādiḥ śanairevopaśāmyati.
punarmandāndhakāri sā rajjuḥ kṣiptoragī bhavet (7.244).
Here, Vidyāraṇya deals with a technical topic. It is often discussed in Vedānta. That topic
is normally kāraṇa-nāśe kārya-nāśaḥ rule. When the cause is gone, the effects also must go
away. When the threads are gone, the cloth cannot survive. This is the general rule. All the
three karmas sañcita, āgāmi and prārabdha all of them are born out of ahaṅkāra; which
itself is born out of ajñāna. Ultimately, ajñāna is the cause of ahaṅkāra, kartṛtva, sañcita,
āgāmi and prārabdha. Since all of them are ajñāna-janya, once the jñāna is attained ajñāna
must go away and ajñāna goes away. If ajñāna goes away all the karmas should be
destroyed. But what do we say in Vedānta? Only sañcita and āgāmi are destroyed. If you
remember, sañcita gets destroyed, āgāmi is avoided but we say prārabdha karma
continues. All the other people ask the question: how do you say prārabdha continues?
Either you say all the three are destroyed or you say all the three are not destroyed. How
can you say after rajju- jñāna, the snake-head is gone; half sarpa is gone, but half sarpa
remains? How can you say so? Similarly, how can prārabdha continue if it is ajñāna-janya?
It is a peculiar case in Vedānta. Somehow, we have to answer this question. We cannot say
prārabdha is also destroyed. Suppose you get jñāna and prārabdha gets destroyed, it
means the moment you will find student start attending classes, one by one understands
and falls, and never goes back. If that is the result, next Pañcadaśī class nobody will come!
Therefore, so many problems will be there and jīvanmukti will be impossible; Guru will be
in trouble. Therefore, we say prārabdha continues through a particular example which we
will see in the next class.

Class 219
śloka 7.244 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1100

Vidyāraṇya discusses the jñāna-phala which is in two-fold form the first one being śoka-
nivṛtti and the second one. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra 4.4.12 which analyses this
talks about only śoka-nivṛtti as phala and does not talk about tṛpti-prāpti which
Vidyāraṇya will supply later. This śoka-nivṛtti freedom from sorrow is presented as
anujvara-nivṛtti. This anujvara-nivṛtti should be carefully understood. Here, we are not
talking about a change in the conditions of the mind itself. Jñāna will certainly bring about
certain improved conditions of the mind, but we are not talking about that here. The
improved conditions of the mind are only jñānasya avāntara-phala, a by-product or
incidental benefit. Vidyāraṇya says whatever be the conditions of the mind, improved or
unimproved, the jñānī does not take it as his condition because jñāna has given him the
capacity to disclaim the mind. Since the mind comes under anātmā and since the cit does
not have any sambandha with the mind, I the caitanya am free from śoka; not after
knowledge, but I have been free from śoka, I am free from śoka and I will be free from
śoka; in fact, there no necessity of freedom from śoka because the very talking of freedom
from śoka is an expression of ignorance. This means it would be indirectly admitting that I
am free and I want to be free. Jñānī is one who does not claim śoka as his śoka and this
non-claiming, non-owning and non-identifying of the śoka of the mind is called freedom
from śoka. This is called anujvara-nivṛtti. This is possible only in one way and I should use
‘I‘ only in the meaning of cit. In fact, the whole nididhyāsana is learning to use the word I
in the meaning of cit. This is a gradual climbing up to the top. First, I claimed reflecting
medium as myself; that is the lowest miserable stage; thereafter, teaching teaching
teaching, struggling struggling teaching, the teacher communicated that other than the
reflecting medium, there is the reflected consciousness-principle which does not belong to
reflecting medium but it is borrowed from the original consciousness.
I have to introduce the reflected consciousness and for a long time we learn claiming that I
am the reflected consciousness; I am not the body but I am the reflected consciousness
functioning manifesting located in the body. In this itself I have made lot of progress. For a
long time, I say I am the reflected consciousness and my real and higher nature is the
original consciousness. Then, the Guru will say don’t say I am the reflected consciousness
as my higher nature is the original consciousness and change the language to I am the
original consciousness and the reflected consciousness is my incidental lower nature. I
take many avatāras. And where do I take avatāras? Every mind is the place of my avatāra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1101

and in every mind I take the avatāra of the reflected consciousness and through the
reflected consciousness, I transact with the world. Until I come to this position, the
Vedāntic journey is incomplete. I should start using the word I in the meaning of the
original consciousness and thereafter, I never wait for mukti as an event, nor do I wait for
videha-mukti. The conditions and future of cidābhāsa is irrelevant to me because I am the
original consciousness and there are thousands of reflecting media [so many bodies as
reflecting medium and thousands of the reflected consciousness are there as my
manifestation]. What is going to happen to the reflected consciousness? Will it take to
another body after dropping the current body? Will it take another body or not should not
be my concern. The ignorant world does not know about the original consciousness;
therefore, for their sake I say jñānī is exhausting his prārabdha and jñānī will drop the
body at the end of prārabdha and jñānī will merge; all these are ajñāni-jana-bodhārtham.
These are all the description from the standpoint of ajñānī, but after studying Vedānta,
that type of liberation should become totally irrelevant to me. “What happens to sūkṣma-
śarīra, what happens to cidābhāsa?” that should become irrelevant; when will it become
irrelevant only when I take the word I from the sūkṣma-śarīra and I take the word I from
cidābhāsa, then alone both of them will be seen as mithyā and mithyā events are irrelevant
for the satya original consciousness; and where is satya original consciousness? I am the
satya. Therefore, videha-mukti is a description only from the ajñānī’s angle and for
Vedāntic student videha-mukti must be irrelevant because he claims I am nitya-mukta, in
whom thousands of bodies are coming and going. Why are you so particular about one
part of that mithyā snake? Why are you so particular about your sūkṣma-śarīra returning
or not returning? Even the phrase “my sūkṣma-śarīra” is wrong because Ātmā does not
have any connection with a particular sūkṣma-śarīra. Therefore, ahaṅkāra-mamakāra-
abhave why am I bothered about what will happen to my sūkṣma-śarīra? More I bother
more it indicates to understand the class better. Let the world talk about your sūkṣma-
śarīra because for the world your sūkṣma-śarīra is satya but we should not bother about
anybody’s sūkṣma-śarīra because for me any sūkṣma-śarīra is mithyā. I am nitya-mukta.
Then, Vidyāraṇya says that even after claiming this the mind might sometimes misbehave
as a saṃśārī. FIR-reduction (Frequency, intensity and recovery) will take place, lot of
changes will take place, but sometimes again the notion that I am cidābhāsa, I am the
sūkṣma-śarīra, whether there will be another janma or not etc, thoughts will appear before

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1102

the mind. Vidyāraṇya says it does happen sometimes and nididhyāsana is to remove this
obsession. Therefore, he says rajju-jnane api. Even after gaining the knowledge of rope and
after dismissing and falsifying our snake, this person says I know that there is no snake.
but till I would like to keep some safe distance so that the snake does not bite me. For
some more time, the fear and shiver etc. may continue because of viparīta-bhāvanā.
Vidyāraṇya says it is natural for the mind to develop habits and any habit will go slowly
only. Only gradually it subsides and for that you should provide the conditions for
weakening of the saṃsāra-vṛtti. That is called shifting from triangular format to the binary
format; I have to make a pratijñā, I have to take resolve, that I will deliberately practice
until the binary format becomes spontaneous and natural and that is called jñāna-niṣṭhā-
abhyāsa. If this is done that sarpa-bhaya will subside. Sometimes, if one is not alert
another day, if he comes to the same room and that pipe or that rope is there [not
removed] next day or after a week, inadvertently that snake adhyāsa may take place
because of vāsanā.
As I said, thoughts in the mind are governed by three forces or components: world-based
thoughts, will-based thoughts, vāsanā-based thoughts. World-based thoughts means
thoughts generated in the mind when I perceive the world; ghaṭa-vṛtti, paṭa-vṛtti are
thoughts generated by the world. The next one is will-based thoughts when I am planning
tomorrow’s course of action, where should it go first, etc. it is not world,based but it is
will,based. I direct my course of action in which the world does not have any influence.
Third one is vāsanā-based thoughts. It is neither based on the world nor the will, when we
worry and that worry is neither world-based nor will-based but it is vāsanā-based.
Therefore, because of the powerful vāsanā once again; when the conditions are ideal when
some unfavourable prārabdha comes or when doctors say you have to undergo a series of
tests, we go on imagining things and they are vāsanā-based. That very same innocent rope
becomes a generator, producer, of a false snake. Even though two days ago only I
understood that it was a rope-snake but the snake-vāsanā may rise again in similar
circumstances. In the same way thoughts may rise in the minds of a jñānī also.

śloka 7.245
एवमारब्धभोगोऽपि शनैः शाम्यति नो हठात्।
भोगकाले कदाचित्तु मर्त्योऽहमिति भासते ॥ ७.२४५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1103

evamārabdhabhogo:'pi śanaiḥ śāmyati no haṭhāt.

bhogakāle kadācittu martyo:'hamiti bhāsate (7.245).
The previous śloka is dṛṣṭānta śloka and the present one is dārṣṭānta śloka. The idea
conveyed here is adhyāsa can be recreated even after jñāna because of vāsanā. Before
jñāna adhyāsa is created by ajñāna, but after jñāna adhyāsa is created by prārabdha-
vāsanā. In this manner, prārabdha vāsanās also will not instantaneously go after jñāna.
That is why we say don’t expect any sudden revolutionary action to take place in your life.
Mokṣa is not going to happen as a revolutionary event. Nothing happens instantaneously.
You understand and also hundreds of questions are there. Therefore, even though you
have the knowledge, you don’t accept that you have the knowledge and doubts have to be
cleared, habits have to be reset and therefore, sudden or instantaneous change in emotions
can never happen in mokṣa. prārabdha-vāsanā will not subside instantaneously. It will go
slowly. At the mental level change is never instantaneous. Therefore, he says when the
prārabdha vāsanās are active and functioning, ahaṃ brahma asmi, ahaṃ brahma asmi,
saṃsāra is mithyā, even though he or she claims now and then, off and on, the thought
that I am a mortal human being also sometimes dominates the mind. Even though
dominant thought is ahaṃ brahma asmi, even though frequency, intensity and recovery
[FIR] is reduced, now and then saṃsāra-vāsanā will come and at that time he should look
at himself that I am different from the body and I am nitya-mukta. Here, only
nididhyāsana is required. Suppose there is worry about old age, that worry comes under
jvara only. Even that worry is jvara only. I should entertain another thought even this
worry does not belong to me. Before trying to find a remedy for the worry, the first job is
even the worry is a habitual problem of the mind and that worry also belongs to the mind;
the mind is struggling to get over that habit and even that habit is going to bind me
because I am not connected to the jvara of the mind. In a detached manner you can try to
handle jvara. First, handle the anujvara. Even the fear of the mind does not make me a
saṃśārī because I am not the mind also. Therefore, don’t worry about the worry of the
mind. First disclaim the worry and thereafter objectively as a hobby, handle the worry;
stop worrying about the worry. That is called secondary saṃsāra. Therefore, the mind has
its own issues; it is struggling; let us try to remove the mental jvara; whether it is removed
today or tomorrow, I don’t want to take it as my problem because I don’t have the worry.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1104

The worry belongs to the mind. It is not my mind because Ātmā is asaṅga; where is the
question of saying my mind is worrying!

śloka 7.246
नैतावतापराधेन तत्त्वज्ञानं विनश्यति ।
जीवन्मुक्तिव्रतं नेदं किन्तु वस्तुस्थितिः खलु ॥ ७.२४६ ॥
naitāvatāparādhena tattvajñānaṃ vinaśyati.
jīvanmuktivrataṃ nedaṃ kintu vastusthitiḥ khalu (7.246).
After jñāna if sometimes worry and fear arise, don’t worry about that worry and don’t be
afraid of that fear thinking that this worry and fear that comes after Vedāntic studies will
disturb my liberation. This worry and fear which comes after jñāna will take away or
disturb the liberation which Svāmījī gave between 11.00 and 12.00 noon; which liberation I
carefully maintain will that liberation be disturbed; if now and then worry or fear come
after the study of the Gītā, etc. Vidyāraṇya says if liberation is a condition which you are
maintaining by your efforts, then certainly liberation will be disturbed when your efforts
come down. Suppose the ceiling is about to fall and you are holding with your hand and if
you leave the hand the ceiling is to fall. Similarly, if mokṣa is a conditional state which I
am carefully maintaining by nididhyāsana or by my efforts and if my special efforts and
special thoughts if I am carefully maintaining, all the time I should be worried of
liberation. One time I am angry liberation will disappear. Vidyāraṇya says liberation is not
a conditional state that you are carefully maintaining by your efforts. Vedānta repeatedly
states that liberation is your nature and it does not depend upon any condition including
your emotional condition. We say you are not the mind and say you are by very nature a
liberated person which is witnessing the fluctuating condition of the mind, which
fluctuation you can never totally stop or control. The mind will never entertain one and
the same thought all the time as the mind is a fluctuating entity. You can be
predominantly sāttvika and even that the mind will now and then have rajas or tamas. If
mokṣa is a particular emotional state then mokṣa will be fluctuating mokṣa; therefore,
remember even if the emotional states are sometimes disturbed, that has nothing to do
with the fact that I am the original consciousness whose liberation is not determined by a
particular thought-pattern and this thought I have to entertain. Claiming my liberation I
can keep the mind generally sāttvika without connecting it with liberation. Therefore,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1105

Vidyāraṇya says just because of an emotional disturbance, caused by some pūrva vāsanā,
just because of the passing emotional disturbance caused by pūrva vāsanā your
knowledge is not going to be destroyed, the knowledge being that I am different from the
disturbed mind. I am not the mind and I am not the owner of the mind also. This
knowledge which he has struggled and gained that knowledge is not going to be
disturbed; that knowledge is called mukti. This tattva-jñāna we have already acquired and
which is there in the mind is not a particular type of vrata that we practice. mokṣa is not a
vrata that we practice which will be violated if I eat by mistake or by habit. If liberation is
a vow or result of a vow, then with any small mistake jīvanmukti will go away. Therefore,
it will be a funny thing. Remember that your liberation is not determined by a particular
mental state and it is the particular knowledge in spite of the body and problem. Idam this
lifestyle is not a vrata. It is vastu-sthiti. It is a fact which obtains all the time. Vastu-sthiti
means a fact. Therefore, don’t worry about the worry. Don’t worry about the fear. Only
remember that these do not have any thing to do with liberation. As a free person, I would
like to maintain a better mind but I don’t want to connect it to my liberation.

śloka 7.247
दशमोऽपि शिरस्ताडं रुदन्बुद्ध्वा न रोदिति ।
शिरोव्रणस्तु मासेन शनैः शाम्यति नो तदा ॥ ७.२४७ ॥
daśamo:'pi śirastāḍaṃ rudanbuddhvā na roditi.
śirovraṇastu māsena śanaiḥ śāmyati no tadā (7.247).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives an example to show that saṃsāra-vāsanā may and will continue
even after jñāna though the intensity will vary from individual to individual as it depends
upon nididhyāsana showing the continuity of jñāna. Vidyāraṇya gives an example which
is an extension of the tenth man story. This leader missed the tenth man who was he
himself. There was an intermediary time when he was grieving for losing the tenth man
and has not gained the knowledge. His grief was so intense and wondering “how I would
answer his parents“, he hit his head against a tree. The person is too much sorrowful.
Naturally, a bump came on his head which is the result of grief; grief is the result of the
loss of the tenth man and the loss of tenth man was due to ajñāna. Ajñāna causes grief
which caused banging the head on the tree and which caused the bump. The bump is the
ajñāna-phala. Grief is also ajñāna-phala. The grief and pumb both are ajñāna-phala. Then,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1106

the Guru came by and taught him tat tvam asi. When the knowledge arose, ajñāna
disappeared. When ajñāna is gone, the effect of ajñāna also should go away kāraṇa-nāśe
kārya-nāśaḥ. Ajñāna-kārya is two one is śoka the sorrow and the other is bump. The
beauty even though both are ajñāna-kārya one goes away instantaneously, the sorrow
goes away, but even after that the bump remains and continues; that is called prārabdha-
vāsanā. Therefore, even though both are kāryas of one and the same kāraṇa, you find they
are not destroyed at the same time. If that is possible in the case of śoka and the bump he
says sañcita and āgāmi are like sorrow. They will instantaneously destroy but prārabdha is
like the bump. Therefore, it continues. Therefore, prārabdha-vāsanā continues. Therefore,
only I will experience the hunger only in my body. Even though I claim I am the Ātmā
behind all the people, you should not ask then will I feel hungry when someone is
hungry? That does not happen; we continue to have body-sambandha caused by
prārabdha; kāraṇa-śarīra continues; sleep continues.
Kāraṇa-śarīra is avidyā and avidyā is gone; therefore, remember kāraṇa-śarīra will
continue only by the strength of prārabdha; sūkṣma-śarīra will continue; sthūla-śarīra will
continue; cidābhāsa will continue; hunger and thirst will continue; in old body pain will
continue; all will come under prārabdha-bump. They will not go and that is called jvara.
But anujvara goes away. I don’t claim I suffer. Remember the third capsule of Vedānta. By
my mere presence I give life to the body; and through the body-experience the world gets
reality; therefore, I only lend life to the body; body has its own prārabdha; pleasures and
pains, none can stop. Some people even now have the thought that once I detach from the
body I will not have biological pain. There are some people that quote the example:
Sadāśiva Brahmendra was walking and someone cut his hand but he did not know.
Somebody else carried the cut hand and ran behind him. Again they joined. Ramaṇa
Maharṣi underwent surgery without anesthesia. If I am liberated I should not be hurt by
mosquito bite. Therefore, daily at the end of the class I will give one needle and prick and
if it pains, you are not yet liberated. This is one of the biggest misconceptions in Vedāntic
field. Remember biological pain and liberation has no connection at all. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says daśamaḥ api. Our tenth man was crying, hitting the head against any
solid object, may be a tree or a wall. He was sobbing and crying and then after the
knowledge, he stopped his crying and wailing, but the wound on the head, the bump on
the head gradually will come down in months. It will not go away at the time of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1107

knowledge. Bump will not disappear suddenly. That is called frequency, intensity and
recovery [FIR] reduction. More in the next class.

Class 220
śloka 7.247 contd.
The topic here is viparīta-bhāvanā. Every Vedāntic student faces the issue of viparīta-
bhāvanā, mistaking the body and the mind as Ātmā or identifying with the body and
sometimes react; this wrong identification and the consequent wrong response is viparīta-
bhāvanā. Vidyāraṇya says this viparīta-bhāvanā issue is common to every Vedāntic
student. This student has to find his own or her own method of handling this issue.
Therefore, attention is required; handling is required. But one should remember one
important point. That is what Vidyāraṇya underscores here. Viparīta-bhāvanā can never
be a threat to one’s mokṣa or jñāna. Don’t take that seriously to consider the viparīta-
bhāvanā as a threat to one’s own mokṣa or jñāna because viparīta-bhāvanā can never
threaten jñāna. Viparīta-bhāvanā can never threaten mokṣa also. It is so because mokṣa
happens to be my very svarūpa and the nature of a thing can never be threatened by any
force in the creation including gods. What cannot be altered by any force is called mokṣa.
Even gods cannot threaten the mokṣa of a jñānī. Therefore, viparīta-bhāvanā can never
threaten my mokṣa; number one.
Viparīta-bhāvanā can never threaten jñāna also because jñāna is an understanding based
on the nature of a thing and since the nature can never be threatened, jñāna which is the in
keeping with the nature also can never be threatened, because jñāna deals with a fact and
as unthreatable a fact is, so unshakable is jñāna also. Therefore, let every Vedāntic student
be rest-assured and remain relaxed by remembering the truth; that I am mukta can never
be shaken or threatened by the viparīta-bhāvanā disturbances that may come. For that he
gives the example of the tenth man. Tenth man had a basic issue that he did not know that
I am the tenth man. Therefore, he had a basic grief that the tenth man is lost. By listening
to the appropriate guide he got the knowledge that the tenth man is never lost and I am
the tenth man. This fact has been known by him. Imagine the bump is there caused by
hitting the head while he was ignorant and that bump continues even after he had gained
the knowledge. Imagine while dealing with the bump there is some extra pain and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1108

because of the pain there is some sorrow. And he is crying because of the pain in the
bump. But even when he cries because of the bump that crying does not threaten the basic
fact that the tenth man has not been lost and I am the tenth man. That fact is never
threatened. Therefore, his crying is never caused by the tenth-man’s saṃsāra. That original
saṃsāra cry is gone. Crying number one is saṃsāra-crying which was caused by the loss
of the tenth man and ignorance of the fact; that cry is a serious saṃsāra-cry, primary grief.
But now when there is pain due to the bump he may shed tears because of intense pains
but that pain caused by the bump is a secondary pain; that can never revive the original
pain that of tenth man was lost, what would happen to me and how would I answer his
parents; all those things are gone. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says just like the pain of the
bump there can never be a threat to the fact and the knowledge of the fact.
Similarly, for a Vedāntic student because of prārabdha-janya-viparīta-bhāvanā a
secondary crying, a secondary grief, a secondary emotional disturbance may take place
but that can never threaten the basic thing that I happen to be nitya-mukta; my mukti
status can never be replaced by the saṃśārī status. Mokṣa is not a conditional status
maintained by following certain dos and don’ts. This is a very important point. Every
Vedāntic student should remember. Mokṣa is not a conditional status which is maintained
by following certain dos and don’ts. Therefore, mokṣa is not going to be forfeited by
violating those dos and don’ts. Whatever is a conditional status maintained by the dos and
don’ts that conditional status will be lost when those dos and don’ts are violated. If there
is a possibility of losing that status I should be all the time alert of even one small rule. A
conditional status gained by following certain conditions is losable by violating those
conditions. Mokṣa is a fact and it is my nature;the knowledge of mokṣa is dealing or
centred on that fact and therefore, viparīta-bhāvanā is to be handled but never press the
panic button just because viparīta-bhāvanā sometimes comes up. When viparīta-bhāvanā
comes redo nididhyāsana and handle the viparīta-bhāvanā but let it not be taken as such a
serious issue to the extent of taking away my mokṣa. To convey this idea Vidyāraṇya uses
the words: jīvanmukti is not a vrata. It is not a vow that you have to maintain by following
certain dos and don’ts. That you are free even while you are alive is a fact. Therefore,
viparīta-bhāvanā may come; handle it, don’t panic with the knowledge; the basic issue has
been solved. As I often give the example by winning three matches out of five, we have
won the series. The fourth match we would love to win but by not winning we are not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1109

going to lose the series-victory. Viparīta-bhāvanā will not take away the life’s victory
which has been gained by jñāna itself that is gained through śravaṇa, the valid source of
knowledge.

śloka 7.248
दशमामृतिलाभेन जातो हर्षो व्रणव्यथाम्।
तिरोधत्ते मुक्तिलाभस्तथा प्रारब्धदुःखिताम्॥ ७.२४८ ॥
daśamāmṛtilābhena jāto harṣo vraṇavyathām.
tirodhatte muktilābhastathā prārabdhaduḥkhitām (7.248).
Before gaining the jñāna when he was grieving for the tenth man, then that grief is caused
by ajñāna. Ajñāna-janya grief is the primary grief which is serious issue called saṃsāra.
The primary grief is gone away once he knows that I am the daśama; therefore, the basic
issue has been resolved. Therefore, I need not worry about the tenth man. Thereafter,
because of the bump, the crying is the secondary grief caused by viparīta-bhāvanā-janya-
duḥkha. It is only a secondary issue. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says secondary grief is weak
enough that it will not be felt that much because there is a relaxation born out of solving
the primary grief. The relaxation born out of solving the primary grief that relaxation is so
deep that this will overpower the pain caused by the bump. He may cry because of the
bump but in the inner heart there is a deeper śānti that deeper śānti will overpower the
superficial pain. The deeper śānti cause by the knowledge will overpower the superficial
aśānti caused by viparīta-bhāvanā. The example is the deeper śānti of the tenth man cause
by the knowledge that I am the tenth man that will overpower the temporary pain caused
by the bump or the viparīta-bhāvanā. We don’t negate the bump-pain but what we say is
it is overshadowed by the tṛpti I have got by knowing the tenth man.
Therefore, he says the deeper śānti or relaxation or fulfillment is called harṣa. It is born out
of daśamāmṛtilābhena by gaining the knowledge that the tenth man is alive. By gaining
the alive tenth man, the knowledge of the tenth man, produces a deeper śānti which
overshadows or stifles the superficial pain caused by the bump on the head. The pain
caused by the wound is insignificant compared to śānti gained by gaining the knowledge
that I am the tenth man. The attainment of jñāna of the fact that mokṣa is my real nature
can never be taken away even by God. God cannot deny me the mokṣa as a punishment
for violating some rules. Bhagavān cannot send an SMS to me you have violated the rule

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1110

therefore; I am taking away mokṣa because unfortunately or fortunately mokṣa happens to

be my nature. That is why we say even nididhyāsana is not a rule that we should follow
for mokṣa.
Bhagavān cannot say yesterday you did not do nididhyāsana; therefore, I will take away
mokṣa as pratyavāya-pāpa-phala. Nididhyāsana I practice for handling viparīta-bhāvanā
and not for saving my mokṣa. My mokṣa need not be saved because it is not losable. It is
not loosely connected. So don’t worry, relax says Vidyāraṇya. In the same way mukti, the
‘attainment’ of mokṣa through jñāna overshadows prārabdhaduḥkhitām superficial
disturbances caused by prārabdha-janya-vāsanās or viparīta-bhāvanā.

śloka 7.249
व्रताभावाद्यदाध्यासस्तदा भूयो विविच्यताम्।
रससेवी दिने भुङ्क्ते भूयो भूयो यथा तथा ॥ ७.२४९ ॥
vratābhāvādyadādhyāsastadā bhūyo vivicyatām.
rasasevī dine bhuṅkte bhūyo bhūyo yathā tathā (7.249).
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says first relax. Let viparīta-bhāvanā come as it does not matter. It
is not an overly serious threat. After all viparīta-bhāvanā is an adhyāsa. Adhyāsa-bhāvanā
is ever weaker for it is based on a mithyā vastu. It is never strong enough whereas jñāna
being based on satya is always strong. Therefore, vāsanā-janya adhyāsa being always
weak it can easily be brushed aside by bringing valid knowledge once again to the surface.
Jñāna cannot go away. It has to be brought to the surface of the mind once again. Handle it
but don't panic on confronting the viparīta-bhāvanā. Since jīvanmukti is not a vrata to be
carefully preserved by observing several dos and don’ts like walking on the rope or
videha-mukti for that matter, is not a vrata.
Even regarding videha-mukti, one can have nitya-viveka that I the Ātmā am asaṅga
svarūpatvāt; I don’t have deha-sambandha even now. If I have got deha-sambandha now,
then I have to get out of it at the end of prārabdha. Sthūla-śarīra has sambandha with
sūkṣma-śarīra; sthūla-śarīra has sambandha with sūkṣma-śarīra; let it be clear both śarīras
do not have sambandha with me, the Śākṣi-caitanya. Therefore, when I don’t have a
sambandha with the body in all the three periods of time, why should I wait for that at the
end of prārabdha? Videha-mukti at the end of prārabdha is only a superficial teaching for
the sake of ajñānīs. Ajñāni-jana-bodhārtham prārabdham vakti vai śrutiḥ. Videha-mukti at

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1111

the end of prārabdha is said only for the ajñānīs but as far as Vedāntic students are
concerned, jīvanmukti and videha-mukti are simultaneous because I am nitya-mukta. I
don’t have deha-sambandha even now. We should remember that it can never be
threatened by or it is not maintained by anything, that both jīvanmukti and videha-mukti
are not based on certain dos and don’ts. We should not think: suppose certain rules are
violated Bhagavān will deny me videha-mukti. Remember after Vedāntic study these
things should never bother us in any way. Enjoy the deeper śānti; that superficial aśānti
comes and goes caused by the prārabdha vāsanās; it can never deny me either of the
muktis.
Then, the next question is for the superficial aśānti caused by prārabdha-vāsanā, or
viparīta-bhāvanā; is there a medicine? It does not threaten my mokṣa is the basic thing to
understand. Then an incidental question is even though the viparīta-bhāvanā does not
threaten my mokṣa, what is the medicine to be used for handling such situations? May
you revive Ātma-anātma-viveka or may you take the five capsules:
1. I am of the nature of eternal and all-pervading consciousness;
2. I am the only source of permanent peace, security and happiness;
3. By my mere presence, I give life to the body and through the body I experience the
material world;
4. I am not affected by anything that takes place in the material world and in the
material body and
5. By forgetting my real nature, I convert life into a struggle and by remembering my
nature I convert life into a sport or entertainment. Even viparīta-bhāvanā is part of
that entertainment only.
In this manner, you take the five capsules. May you revive Ātma-anātmā-viveka. May you
relax and live and revive the Pañcadaśī class.
The next question is what should be the frequency and regularity of the capsule intake?
Whenever viparīta-bhāvanā comes, that is if and when it comes, then alone you take it as
there is no rigid rule. You are free and you need not bother about the viparīta-bhāvanā. He
talks about a person who takes a particular medicine. He called the medicine as rasa. Rasa
some people say is an Ayurvedic medicine in which there is mercury. When a medicine
containing rasa is taken, for a particular disease, the side-effect of that is hunger. Then the
doctor will say because of the rasa if you get hunger, you eat. Then the patient asked the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1112

doctor how often should I eat? For eating food the patient asks how often he should take
food. To that, the doctor says I don’t say you regularly take food but if you feel hungry,
when you feel hungry you can take food, because that is the nature of the medicine. The
mind has this nature of creating viparīta-bhāvanā now and then because of prārabdha
vāsanās. Nididhyāsana is not a specific action. It is not sitting in one place and
concentration. Two types of nididhyāsana I have pointed out. Nididhyāsana does not
mean sitting in padmāsana. Nididhyāsana means tat-cintanam tat-kathanam anyonyam
tatprabodhanam. Whatever be the condition of the body, if you remember Vedāntic
teaching you are in nididhyāsana only. May you revive that.

śloka 7.250
शमयत्यौषधेनायं दशमः स्वव्रणं यथा ।
भोगेन शमयित्वैतत्प्रारब्धं मुच्यते तथा ॥ ७.२५० ॥
śamayatyauṣadhenāyaṃ daśamaḥ svavraṇaṃ yathā.
bhogena śamayitvaitatprārabdhaṃ mucyate tathā (7.250).
How long the bump will last will depend upon the intensity of the hitting, size of the
bump and healing power of the body, etc. It may last longer or shorter which may vary
from individual to individual. It will not suddenly disappear but it is a gradual process.
Prārabdha also gradually goes; it is a gradual process. By the application of the medicine
and the waiting, the tenth man treats the bump on the head. It is by applying the medicine
and waiting that the job is done. In the same way, for the prārabdha bump also they have
to keep on applying the medicine and also wait. By going through the experiences, you
treat the prārabdha. Gradually one gets freed from prārabdha also. Here, we should
remember that from the worldly standpoint jñānī gets free from prārabdha at the time of
his physical death; for worldly people jñānī refers to the individual and therefore, from the
worldly angle jñānī gets freedom from prārabdha at the time of jñānī’s physical death. We
should remember not hold on to that idea. From laukika-dṛṣṭi jñānī gets freedom at the
time of marana-kāla, but jñānī gets liberation or freed from prārabdha on gaining the
knowledge from Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi. We should not go by the laukika explanation. Laukika
people don’t know much about Ātmā. We should go by Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi. Jñānī becomes
liberated at the time of jñāna-kāla. He knows I am the Ātmā which is akartā and abhoktā;
therefore, which does not have all the three karmas, how akartā abhoktā san Ātmā aham

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1113

can have any sambandha with any one of the three karmas?! All of them belong to
vyāvahārika mithyā plane; therefore, I am free from prārabdha also. This meditation I
have to do whenever I tend to wait for marana-kāla. This, Adi Śaṅkarācārya clearly deals
with in Aparokṣānubhūti. We should know that there are two videha-muktis, one from
laukika dṛṣṭi and another from Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi. From the worldly angle, we say jñānī is
released from prārabdha at the time of maraṇa after the exhaustion of prārabdha. With
this śloka the commentary on anusañjvaret word is over.

Ajñāna, āvṛti, vikṣepa, parokṣa-, aparokṣa-jñāna, śoka-nivṛtti and tṛpti-prāpti are seven
stages to gain jñāna. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad talks about śoka-nivṛtti; first line talks of
aparokṣa jñāna stage 5. With this, Vidyāraṇya concludes the commentary on the stage six
śoka-nivṛtti given in 2nd line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra commentary is over.

Class 221
śloka 7.250 contd.
Vidyāraṇya started his commentary from 135 and completes this in śloka 250 on
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. The phala he divided into bhogya-nivṛtti, bhoktṛ-nivṛtti
and anujvara-nivṛtti. Of this, bhogya-nivṛtti was discussed from 135 to 191, bhoktṛ-nivṛtti
from 192 to 222 and anujvara-nivṛtti from 223 to 250. Thus, in 116 ślokas, Vidyāraṇya
commented upon the second line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra namely jñāna-phala.
We also saw that anujvara-nivṛtti is only a technical presentation of śoka-nivṛtti, freedom
from saṃsāra-tāpa. With this topic, actually, the mantra-vyākhyāna is over. As I said in
the last class, Vidyāraṇya wants to convey a hidden meaning also which is not explicitly
said but implicitly present in the mantra. That is, śoka-nivṛtti includes brahma-ānanda-
prāpti, otherwise called as jīvanmukti, tṛpti-prāpti. Mokṣa consists of two components,
both components are equally important; the first one is śoka-nivṛtti and the second one is
tṛpti-prāpti, otherwise called jīvanmukti-prāpti, otherwise called brahma-ānanda-prāpti.
Freedom from sorrow alone we generally present as peace. Peace or śānti is defined as
freedom from sorrow. Vedānta is not satisfied with mere attainment of peace, but Vedānta
wants to talk about positive attainment of ānanda or tṛpti. This tṛpti alone Vidyāraṇya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1114

wants to discuss from śloka 251 to 297. Tṛpti-prāpti, brahma-ānanda-prāpti or jīvanmukti-

prāpti is the topic here. Because of this final topic alone, this chapter is called tṛpti-dīpa-
prakaraṇa. Now, we will enter śloka number 251

śloka 7.251
किमिच्छन्निति वाक्योक्तः शोकमोक्ष उदीरितः ।
आभासस्य ह्यवस्थैषा षष्ठी तृप्तिस्तु सप्तामी ॥ ७.२५१ ॥
kimicchanniti vākyoktaḥ śokamokṣa udīritaḥ.
ābhāsasya hyavasthaiṣā ṣaṣṭhī tṛptistu saptamī (7.251).
This is a transition śloka. Here, Vidyāraṇya concludes the previous topic and introduces
the next topic. The second half of the mantra begins with kim icchan. Through that
statement the following idea was conveyed, śoka-mokṣa udīritaḥ, where śoka-mokṣa
means śoka-nivṛtti. It is freedom from anujvara which means freedom from saṃsāra-tāpa.
This topic we completed in the last verse 250. This śoka-nivṛtti is the sixth stage in the
spiritual journey of cidābhāsa which is otherwise called Jīvātmā. This śoka-nivṛtti or
freedom from sorrow is the sixth state which means with śoka-nivṛtti, Jīvātmā has already
crossed five stages and successfully come to the sixth also. Naturally, when you hear the
word sixth, the mind will have the question: what are the previous five stages? If you have
tṛpti already, then I cannot do anything. But I assume that there is a curiosity to know
what the previous five are. They are ajñāna, āvaraṇa, vikespa, pratyakṣa jñāna, aparokṣa
jñāna, while śoka-nivṛtti is the sixth one. Saptamī tu tṛpti means there is one more avasthā
which is called tṛpti. It is not a negative mokṣa. It is not a negative state of mere freedom
from sorrow. Mokṣa is not a negative state of sheer or mere freedom from sorrow but it is
a positive state of ānanda-prāpti. Therefore, tṛpti is saptamī, the seventh. This saptamī
avasthā is not mentioned in the mantra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya wants to give it as a bonus.
This śloka is the introduction to that topic.

śloka 7.252
साङ्कुशा विषयैस्तृप्तिरियं तृप्तिर्निरङ्कुशा ।
कृ तं कृ त्यं प्रापणीयं प्राप्तमित्येव तृप्यति ॥ ७.२५२ ॥
sāṅkuśā viṣayaistṛptiriyaṃ tṛptirniraṅkuśā.
kṛtaṃ kṛtyaṃ prāpaṇīyaṃ prāptamityeva tṛpyati (7.252).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1115

Saṃśārī Jīvātmā experiences fulfillment in life every now-and-then when he completes

certain tasks which he has started or undertaken. When we have several worldly goals,
because of that there is certainly a sense of fulfillment. When the children complete
education, it is a great fulfillment with the present competition; there is tṛpti. But the
problem is that such tṛpti lasts for a few minutes or hours. Then, the question comes
about employment. Then again, after struggle when the employment is got, certainly there
is tṛpti. Then, one thinks of the marriage. Once they are married and if three years over
four years are over and no children born, then there are varieties of vratas, pūjā, etc. for
children-prāpti. Ahaṅkāra experiences tṛpti often and being temporary, tṛpti gets dashed
after some time. This, Vidyāraṇya calls it as sāṅkuśā tṛpti which means finite, temporary,
fluctuating, limited or conditional tṛpti. It is limited tṛpti, belonging to apūrṇa ahaṅkāra.
The tṛptis of apūrṇa-ahaṅkāra-bhoktā which comes from various bhogya-prāpti are all
sāṅkuśā tṛptis. Here, through knowledge, this jñānī is not talking about the pūrṇatva of
ahaṅkāra because ahaṅkāra can never become pūrṇa. Intelligently, he has claimed the
pūrṇatva of śākṣī Ātmā as his real nature. When the śākṣī’s pūrṇatva has been claimed
through knowledge, this pūrṇatva is not sāṅkuśā pūrṇatva but it is niraṅkuśā pūrṇatva.
The tṛpti Vedānta talks about is not the temporary tṛpti of ahaṅkāra because always
ahaṅkāra can get only temporary tṛpti. This tṛpti is niraṅkuśā because it is not ahaṅkāra-
centric but it is Ātmā-centric or śākṣī-centric. Therefore, it is free from any limitation.
When he looks at himself as pūrṇa Ātmā, how does he see the whole situation in front? He
says kṛtaṃ kṛtyaṃ prāpaṇīyaṃ prāptam. With this, pūrṇatva or mokṣa, everything that is
to be accomplished in life has been accomplished. Pūrṇatva includes dharma, artha, kāma
and everything. Therefore, prāpaṇīyaṃ prāptam. Life’s mission has been accomplished.
Prāpaṇīyaṃ means primary goal of life namely mokṣa. Prāptam means accomplishment.
Sādhyam prāptam. Therefore, what sādhana hereafter I have to do?!
All the sādhanas are for sādhya and sādhya mokṣa is already my svarūpa; since the
sādhya mokṣa is my svarūpa, it need not be accomplished hereafter. Since it is no more a
goal, I don’t have any sādhana to be performed. Therefore, all the secular and sacred
activities are my free voluntary contribution to the universe because I have nothing to be
accomplished. Kṛtyaṃ means kartāvyam and all kartāvyam are to gain mokṣa. That
kṛtyaṃ has been accomplished. Therefore, I have no sādhya. Satya is the goal to be
accomplished. Therefore, I have no more sādhana also. Now, I don’t look upon myself as

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1116

sādhaka also. Sādhaka is one who has to accomplish a sādhya through sādhana. Mokṣa is
no more a sādhya because mokṣa has been achieved already when I have realised my real
svarūpa. Since there is no sādhya, there are no more sādhana; since there is no sādhana I
can never be called a sādhaka. Therefore, hereafter, I don’t look upon myself as a sādhaka.
My nididhyāsana is removing the sādhaka-misconception about myself. Nididhyāsana is
not doing sādhana but removal of the sādhaka misconceptions about myself. Nitya-
siddha-mukta Ātmā-svarūpa aham asmi. Therefore, there is total satisfaction. This is
called tṛpti. Just thinking in this pattern he is totally fulfilled. However, remember that
thereafter also, he may or he can continue to refine the ahaṅkāra but without connecting
the ahaṅkāra refinement to mokṣa status because I have claimed that I am the pūrṇa
Ātmā; therefore, mokṣa has been accomplished by me. Thereafter, whatever I do I may do
it for various worldly purposes and it may include even the refinement of ahaṅkāra but it
has nothing to do with my pūrṇatva. It is so because ahaṅkāra’s apūrṇatva does not make
me apūrṇa as I am the Śākṣi-caitanya. Therefore, even though Vedic disciplines and rules
and regulations are followed for the ahaṅkāra refinement, it is not connected to mokṣa.
Until I receive the knowledge, ahaṅkāra refinement was connected with mokṣa; therefore,
it was a sādhana. After gaining knowledge, since ahaṅkāra refinement is not connected to
mokṣa I don’t look upon myself as a sādhaka. Imagine the team is playing a five match
series abroad. The coach has given several disciplines for winning the match. When they
play the first match they are to follow all the disciplines because it was meant for two
purposes. They want to win the first match also and also the winning the series. The
primary goal is winning the series only when they accomplish that their prime goal is
achieved. They follow the discipline and the discipline in the first match is meant for
achieving two goals: the match-victory and series-victory. They won the second match
also. When they play the second match they want to win the match and the series. They
won the second match also. When they play the third match after winning the first two
they are very eager to win because this is also a sādhana for match-victory plus series-
victory. They won the third match. When they won the third match they are excited
because they have won the series. Now, they go to the fourth match. They would love to
follow all the disciplines rules and regulation given by the coach for all the rules and
regulations are required to win the match. They don’t require any sādhana to win the
series. That victory is the primary goal of their tour which alone matters to them. They

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1117

have won the series already. Imagine the statement of the mind when they go to the fourth
match. You don’t require any sādhana for winning the series. They don’t throw away all
the discipline. They want to win the fourth match. Attention is given and importance is
given as the result of the fourth match is unpredictable and therefore, there is an anxiety:
we want to win the match but in and through all the anxiety there is a sub-conscious that
we are the winners despite the anxiety regarding the result of the current match. That
mutes the anxiety; it is certainly reduced because that anxiety is diluted by a higher sense
of achievement: we have won the series. Imagine it was a close match and we got
defeated. Certainly defeat will give disappointment for anyone who will like to win the
match. If we lose, certainly there is disappointment but even that disappointment is
heavily diluted because even if we got defeated in the match, we have won the series. We
might have lost the battle, but we have won the war. Imagine we have won the fourth
match also certainly it will give joy. Even though it will give joy it cannot improve my
status as series-victor. Series-victor status is not affected either by winning or losing the
fourth or fifth matches. Neither the victory or loss will neither increase my status nor
decease my status for it is overshadowed by the basic victory of having won the series.
Similarly, after claiming the pūrṇatva of my real nature there are several battles in the
relative life of ahaṅkāra and ahaṅkāra has to follow the disciplines for these relative match
victories but these relative victories and the failures which are match victories and failures
will not make difference in the fact that I have won the series. This internal sub-conscious
pūrṇatva while playing the fourth match not throwing away discipline but continuing to
follow the discipline is the condition of jīvanmukti; he also follows all the rules and
regulations including daivī sampat or āsurī-sampat-nivṛtti, sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti all
of them are respected; values are also respected because they are all connected to the
refinement of ahaṅkāra which will come under match-victory or match-failure. Whatever
be the condition of the ahaṅkāra, I have won the series because the primary purpose of life
is not ahaṅkāra-refinement. Primary purpose of life is Ātmā-claiming. That is
accomplished through aparokṣa jñāna. All this can be understood only under one
condition. Only when you know the value of winning the series then alone the defeat of
the match will not affect you. When I say defeat in the match will not affect you because
you have won the series, that example will be meaningful only when you understand
what is meant by winning the series. Similarly, ahaṃ brahma asmi jñāna, mokṣa, is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1118

winning the series and because of that the ahaṅkāra’s match-victory and failure will not
affect you. When I say that, suppose the student asks: what is mokṣa? The word mokṣa
and significance should be clear before coming to Vedānta. Only when saṃsāra is clearly
understood mokṣa-value is understood. When Vedānta gives that mokṣa through
teaching, I know the value of mokṣa and when I have that greatly valued mokṣa, the
ahaṅkāra’s failures in life will not be felt because I have something greater. But many
students of Vedānta have not understood the value of mokṣa. That is why we say
mumukṣutva is a very important criterion. A mumukṣu alone will know the value of
mokṣa and only when such a person claims I am mukta, then ahaṅkāra’s ups and downs
will become of no consequence. Therefore, the tṛpti he talks about is not ahaṅkāra’s
condition for ahaṅkāra has several issues. People have problems which are unsolved. The
tṛpti we talks about is of my higher nature. That is what is said here: I have accomplished
what I have to by claiming my higher nature and I have no more sādhana for winning the
series. Matches are many but I have one thing to be won and because of that there is an
internal fulfillment that only a mumukṣu can understand; others will not understand.

śloka 7.253
ऐहिकामुष्मिकव्रातसिद्ध्यै मुक्ते श्च सिद्धये ।
बहु कृ त्यं पुरास्याभूत्तत्सर्वमधुना कृ तम्॥ ७.२५३ ॥
aihikāmuṣmikavrātasiddhyai mukteśca siddhaye.
bahu kṛtyaṃ purāsyābhūttatsarvamadhunā kṛtam (7.253).
The accomplishment of mokṣa in which dharma, artha and kāma are included, he
compares that condition with all the previous struggles that he had till now. You are
satisfied after achieving the pūrṇatva. The jñānī looks at the struggles that he had before
claiming the svarūpa. He says previously, that is before gaining this knowledge, there
were lot of things to be accomplished by me for getting tṛpti. He divides the
accomplishment into three. First thing is iha-loka-viṣaya-prāpti. He had a big list of things
to be accomplished in this loka. The family-achievement, and various things and that are a
big list. We have got a big list from cook, driver and other things. After getting children
and grand children I thought they would take over my responsibilities instead of sharing
the responsibilities they give responsibilities! Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says vrata. Not only I
am particular about iha loka, but since I am born in Vedic tradition I am particular about

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1119

my next janma; śāstra talks about various conditions to get a better next janma. Therefore,
I have to follow those things also. Multitudes of things are to be done with regard to
paraloka-prāpti. Along with that somewhere in the corner there is mokṣa. One is happy if
he gets mokṣa as well! All have been accomplished now with the victory of the third
match. It is called claiming ahaṃ brahma asmi. The victory of the first match is karma-
yoga, second is upāsana yoga and victory of the third match is that I have claimed ahaṃ
brahma asmi. Then, the fourth match is the rest of the journey of ahaṅkāra. Let it continue
with no connection to winning the series. All the struggles are over. Hereafter, whatever I
do I will not call it struggle but I will call it sport or līlā. It is this conversion of the struggle
into sport that is called jīvanmukti. Remember the fifth capsule by forgetting my nature, I
convert life into a struggle and by remembering my nature I convert life into a sport or
entertainment.

śloka 7.254
तदेतत्कृ तकृ त्यत्वं प्रतियोगिपुरःसरम्।
अनुसन्दधदेवायमेवं तृप्यति नित्यशः ॥ ७.२५४ ॥
tadetatkṛtakṛtyatvaṃ pratiyogipuraḥsaram.
anusandadhadevāyamevaṃ tṛpyati nityaśaḥ (7.254).
By contrasting the present condition with the past struggle that he had until now, he
appreciates the present condition. The appreciation grows more when it is contrasted with
the previous struggles. That is why when we have a particular problem and we struggle to
solve and at last we solve, during that moment we look at the struggle and see the
completion. You contrast that completion and think it is great because you have got
comparison. After five six months, the struggle is forgotten; the very same completion
does not seem to be a great thing. If you have to appreciate the completion, again you
should recall the struggle. Similarly, mokṣa’s greatness is appreciated when it is placed
near saṃsāra. For some time, he claims mokṣa by comparing the saṃsāra. After some
time, mokṣa also he does not consider a very great accomplishment because saṃsāra was
also a joke! It is not a very big problem. Therefore, he says na dharmo na ca artho na kamo
na mokṣa. The present fulfillment is by contrasting with the past struggle, constantly
reminding or thinking or dwelling upon how I was then and how I am now. How does he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1120

enjoy tṛpti after gaining mokṣa? He will compare himself with other saṃśaris running
about with anxiety at large.

Class 222
śloka 7.254 contd.
The result of aparokṣa jñāna which is generally presented as mokṣa has two components
or two sides: one side of mokṣa is called śoka-nivṛtti and the other side of mokṣa is tṛpti-
prāpti or ānanda prāpti. Since both always go together like two sides of a coin, often we
combine them together and call it as mokṣa. Of it one side of mokṣa is in the form of śoka-
nivṛtti which has been mentioned in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra itself in the
form of anujvara-nivṛtti. The other side of mokṣa is tṛpti-prāpti. It is not mentioned in the
Upaniṣad, but Vidyāraṇya has included this portion of tṛpti-prāpti in his works. This
extends from 251 to 297. Both śoka-nivṛtti and tṛpti-prāpti have been brought about by
jñāna through revamping of the mindset which in Gītā we saw as changing the mindset
from yoga-buddhi to sāṅkhya-buddhi. It is conversion of triangular format to binary
format. This transformation takes place due to śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana and this
revamping of the mindset requires four changes I said:
1. One is learning to look at myself as nitya-mukta Ātmā and never as ahaṅkāra. This
is mindset change number one. Consistently all the time, training the mind to look
at myself as nitya-mukta Ātmā is change one.
2. The second change is never looking at any activity as a sādhana for mokṣa; secular
or sacred; never look at any activity as a sādhana for mokṣa. Every activity is loka-
kṣema-sādhana only not a mokṣa-sādhana. I am already nitya-mukta; where is the
question of sādhana?! This is significant and important and deliberate thought-
change I have to practice.
3. Then, the third change is never look at mokṣa as a sādhya a goal to be
accomplished in future; whenever there is slightest tendency of looking for mokṣa,
I negate the thought deliberately by saying mokṣa is not my goal as mokṣa is my
nature.
4. Lastly, my devotion is in the form of admiration of anātmā as viśvarūpa Īśvara
seeking no favour; my admiration of anātmā as viśvarūpa Īśvara which is natural

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1121

for niṣkāma bhakta and it will end controllership, anxiety and special prayers
backed by niṣkāma bhakti in the form of admiration of anātmā as Viśva-rūpa
Īśvara. As even I admire I enjoy the status of Viśvarūpa Īśvara.
These four change my attitude to myself, my activities, with regard to mokṣa and change
with regard to bhakta; all the four I should very sincerely, seriously, practice for a length
of time and when this is done, there is śoka-nivṛtti and tṛpti-prāpti; you will get it even if
you keep them off, lose sight of this mindset of being nitya-mukta Ātmā and even
temporarily go back to ahaṅkāra dṛṣṭi. As ahaṅkāra, there is no question of either śoka-
nivṛtti or tṛpti-prāpti. Anxiety and stress will be very carefully protected; therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says I look at myself as Ātmā and imagine my struggle as ahaṅkāra and I
contrast ahaṅkāra-pradhāna-Ātmabuddhi and śākṣi-pradhānaiĀtmābuddhi and when I
contrast these two visions, I see in one saṃsāra dominant and in the other, calmness. Thus,
Vidyāraṇya contrasts the self-assessment from ahaṅkāra angle and self-assessment from
Ātmā-angle. We always do self-assessment from ahaṅkāra-angle alone; as father I am
successful or as son I am successful and most of the parents are always worried and they
transfer their problems to the children. If the son takes sannyāsa even then the parents
think because I did not give love, therefore, the fellow has taken to sannyāsa. No mother
or father including sannyāsī is happy; as ahaṅkāra, you keep transferring the deficiencies
of every family member upon yourself. Even if you don’t, they will blame you. If you
protect them, they will blame you and if you don’t protect, they will say you have not
taken slightest interest on them. Always you get below average grade for you are not
satisfied with what you have done. Ahaṅkāra was running either for iha loka or para loka
or mokṣa phala. This is the autobiography of ahaṅkāra. When I look at myself as nitya-
mukta Ātmā, I don’t require iha loka phala I don’t require para loka phala and I don’t
require even mokṣa because unfortunately I cannot even work for mokṣa. It is so because
mokṣa happens to be my svarūpa.
Therefore, in 254, he says the jñānī contrasts these two Self-assessments, one from
ahaṅkāra- dṛṣṭi self-assessment and another Ātma-dṛṣṭi self-assessment. One making me
gloomy and the other making me bloomy. Dṛṣṭi alone is different. We constantly think of
mokṣa by this contrast method ahaṅkāra- and Ātma-dṛṣṭi. He feels total contentment and
satisfaction. He does not mind living for another few centuries also. There is no rāga-dveṣa
towards birth or death because both birth and death do not make any difference to me. I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1122

don’t even say I am afraid of punarjanma, because I am beyond janma and maraṇa. Let
ahaṅkāra come or not come what does it matter to me. Screen is not worried whether the
movie is there on it or otherwise. One saṃśārī runs after iha loka phala another runs after
para loka phala and the third goes after mokṣa. Vidyāraṇya says I won’t run for anything.

śloka 7.255
दुःखिनोऽज्ञाः संसरन्तु कामं पुत्राद्यपेक्षया ।
परमानन्दपूर्णोऽहं संसरामि किमिच्छया ॥ ७.२५५ ॥
duḥkhino:'jñāḥ saṃsarantu kāmaṃ putrādyapekṣayā.
paramānandapūrṇo:'haṃ saṃsarāmi kimicchayā (7.255).
All the miserable saṃśaris who look upon themselves as ahaṅkāra naturally will miss
everything in life and therefore, they will ever be worried. On the other hand ajñānī will
ever be happy. As ahaṅkāra I can never be complete in all respects. As ahaṅkāra pūrṇatva
is like rabbit’s horn; it does not exist. Even Bhagavān as Bhagavān can have several
complaints because I have created all these human beings; I have taught dharma-śāstra; I-
thought they will lead dhārmic life; they indulge in akrama in spite of best creation; I am
unable to convert the people; many of them are even atheists; he may feel inadequate.
Even Bhagavān can never claim mokṣa or pūrṇatva as Bhagavān because from
vyāvahārika relative dṛṣṭi Bhagavān can also feel unhappy that some of my devotees go
through choiceless struggles. Bhagavān is pūrṇa from Ātma-dṛṣṭi. No ahaṅkāra including
Bhagavān’s ahaṅkāra is pūrṇa. Only Ātmā is pūrṇa. Bhagavān enjoys pūrṇatva not as
aham Bhagavān asmi but ahaṃ brahma asmi. Jīva as jīva will have complaints, Bhagavān
as Bhagavān will have more complaints. Only Ātmā can be complaint-free. Let them
struggle in life. I should not look at myself as putra or putrī; the joy others enjoy through
the putra is also not the putra-ānanda. The so-called putra-ānanda is misunderstood
putra-pratibimbita Ātma-ānanda. This is assuming putra gives joy that we say this. Jñānī
knows there is nothing like putra-ānanda but all are putra-pratibimba Ātmā-ānanda. Any
ānanda anywhere is my svarūpa; why should I run after this ānanda and that ānanda?! I
am parama ānanda. What can I desire? In fact, people and devotees may ask what do you
want? Guru has trouble in wanting something. Even if he wants to want, he is not able to
want because he lacks nothing in his life. First one is ahaṅkāra-dṛṣṭi and the second is
from Ātma-dṛṣṭi. In this śloka, putra will come under iha loka phala.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1123

śloka 7.256
अनुतिष्ठन्तु कर्माणि परलोकायियासवः ।
सर्वलोकात्मकः कस्मादनुतिष्ठामि किं कथम्॥ ७.२५६ ॥
anutiṣṭhantu karmāṇi paralokāyiyāsavaḥ.
sarvalokātmakaḥ kasmādanutiṣṭhāmi kiṃ katham (7.256).
Again another group of ajñānīs are worried about the future of this janma and are
bothered about para loka janmas. Those who are desirous of going to better lokas, first
they wanted children and now their worry is whether the children will do the karma
properly. If they are to do karma they are to marry a girl belonging to the same varṇa.
Then, whether they will do the śrāddhā and other formalities. They are worried about
para loka. Let them do varieties of rituals and let them compel to do varieties of rituals but
as far as I am concerned, abhoktā aham akartā aham ajanma aham. This is the saṃśārī’s
worry. Where do I stand? I am not the traveling ahaṅkāra. I am not a tourist after death. I
am the Ātmā who alone appears in the form of all the fourteen lokas with nāma-rūpa; I
alone appear as bhūloka, bhuvarloka, suvarloka; aham annam aham eva idam sarvam
aham lokātmakaḥ I am of the nature of the whole universe. What ritual can I do?! How
can I do the ritual?! Here, I refers to I the Ātmā, nitya-mukta Ātmā. How can I do any
karma?! Refer to Gītā 2nd chapter. For what particular purpose?! All are not there when I
identify with the Ātmā the caitanya. Now, we will talk about the third type of ajñānīs who
are after mokṣa.

śloka 7.257
व्याचक्षतान्ते शास्त्राणि वेदानध्यापयन्तु वा ।
येऽत्राधिकारिणो मे तु नाधिकारोऽक्रियत्वतः ॥ ७.२५७ ॥
vyācakṣatānte śāstrāṇi vedānadhyāpayantu vā.
ye:'trādhikāriṇo me tu nādhikāro:'kriyatvataḥ (7.257).
The third group of ajñānīs are better ajñānīs compared to the other two; these fellows are
better for these people are called mumukṣu. Let them struggle with the śāstras in search of
mokṣa; because as ahaṅkāra they are pramātā; as pramātā they are to go after pramāṇa;
through pramāṇa they want pramā and they struggle as pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya.
Ātmā is apramātā. Therefore, he says let them enquire into the śāstras. Let those ignorant

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1124

mumukṣus enquire into or research into śāstras [śravaṇa] or let them teach or share their
knowledge in the form of nididhyāsana; let them practice śravaṇa manana or
nididhyāsana whatever they are doing; mokṣa is sādhya. All through they have been
studying and studying and even after a long teaching they want them to be blessed so that
they would gain mokṣa. Vidyāraṇya says let them do and be mumukṣus. Those ajñānīs
who have sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti should know that these also belong to ahaṅkāra.
Adhikāra means qualification. Any type of qualification is an attribute of ahaṅkāra. What
about me? I don’t look upon myself as a mumukṣu; I don’t look upon myself as sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampanna; I don’t look upon mokṣa as a sādhya; I am unqualified for all of
them. I am unqualified for karma-yoga, jñāna-yoga and I cannot perform any sādhana
because sādhanas are done by sādhaka ahaṅkāra; I am nitya siddha Ātmā. Therefore, since
I am actionless, I am not to do any sādhana or anything. with this mokṣa phala topic also
has been dealt with.

śloka 7.258
निद्राभिक्षे स्नानशौचे नेच्छामि न करोमि च ।
द्रष्टारश्चेत्कल्पयन्ति किं मे स्यादन्यकल्पनात्॥ ७.२५८ ॥
nidrābhikṣe snānaśauce necchāmi na karomi ca.
draṣṭāraścetkalpayanti kiṃ me syādanyakalpanāt (7.258).
Someone may ask you are free from all the sādhanas and bhikṣā you eat to the stomach-
full. You reject all the sādhanas conveniently, but you take bhikṣā on time. Why bhikṣā
activity? Why do you go to sleep? Why do you do snāna? In short, śarīra-yātra-karma.
Previously, we had negated all the special sādhanas and now, Vidyāraṇya deals with
śarīra-yatra-karmas not as a sādhana but living. You take to nidrā, bhikṣā practice, sauca,
the religious purity, you observe all those; what about all of them? Vidyāraṇya says who
said I am taking bhikṣā? I have never wanted bhikṣā and I will never want bhikṣā. I don’t
take bhikṣā also at any time not only after gaining jñāna but even before. The question to
this is: I gave bhikṣā yesterday and now you say I don’t need bhikṣā? You transfer
ahaṅkāra of eating bhikṣā on to me who am not ahaṅkāra. Therefore, you are doing
adhyāsa upon me the Ātmā. If you do adhyāsa it is your problem and not my problem.
Draṣṭāraḥ, other ignorant people, look upon themselves as ahaṅkāra, commit the same
mistake and look upon jñānis also from their śarīra-angle. But jñānī never looks upon

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1125

himself as ahaṅkāra or śarīra. That is why in the fourth chapter of Gītā, Kṛṣṇa said when
the jñānī is active people think he is active, jñānis say that in my presence my anātmā is
doing activity, blessed by me. By my mere presence I give life to the body and through the
body I experience the material universe. Therefore, Draṣṭāraḥ, ignorant, superimpose
ahaṅkāra activity upon me the Ātmā who is nitya akartā. They do this superimposition
and I am not bothered about that superimposition upon me, the Śākṣi-caitanya. If the
ignorant observers mistake what will come to me because of their mistake! Therefore, I am
ever-free. This he will explain in the next word.

śloka 7.259
गुञ्जापुञ्जादि दह्येत नान्यारोपितवह्निना ।
नान्यारोपितसंसारधर्मानेवमहं भजे ॥ ७.२५९ ॥
guñjāpuñjādi dahyeta nānyāropitavahninā.
nānyāropitasaṃsāradharmānevamahaṃ bhaje (7.259).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says if the world looks at me as a kartā because of the activities of the
body, it is their problem; I do not look upon myself as kartā; therefore, I do not look upon
myself as a saṃśārī; because of the imaginary kartṛtva superimposed on me by the world I
am not going to become a saṃśārī; if I look upon myself as kartā it will be saṃsāra and if
the world falsely looks upon me as a kartā I am not going become a saṃśārī. Let the world
think of me as a kartā. This is the essence of the śloka. But he gives an example. Guñjā is a
type of red seed from a plant and in certain seeds the red colour has a black dot. From a
distance, a heap of them may appear like the embers of fire. They don’t have agnitva in
them, but from distance because of my ignorance I have superimposed agni status to the
guñjā. Vidyāraṇya asks the question: can the superimposed fire status give to the heap of
guñjā the capacity to burn some material? They have got fire status now. That is the
superimposed fire status. Can the superimposed status give the guñjā the capacity to burn
some dry grass or some paper? It cannot do the burning. The idea conveyed is that the
superimposed status cannot produce any consequence. Similarly, the kartṛtva
superimposed by the world upon me will never cause saṃsāra for me. When it is
superimposed kartṛtva it cannot give me saṃsāra tāpa. I will never suffer from the
heartburn of saṃsāra caused by the superimposed kartṛtva status. I will not attain or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1126

acquire saṃsāra status cause by the kartṛtva status superimposed by other ajñānīs. The
world may look upon the jñānī as a kartā and they may even think that certain actions do
produce puṇya and certain other pāpam. Somewhere, it is said even if he commits a
murder it can never produce āgāmi puṇya or āgāmi pāpa. He will not do ādhāra is a fact.
For argument-sake even if he commits a murder, that pāpa will not affect him. More in
the next class.

Class 223
śloka 7.259 contd.

From śloka 251 Vidyāraṇya talks about the final stage of spiritual journey even though this
stage is not explicitly mentioned in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. It is hidden in the
mantra. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya wants to bring it out in these ślokas. This alone is called
jīvanmukti or tṛpti. As I have said that tṛpti alone is revealed by the very title of this
chapter tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa. This a person can attain only by changing the mindset in
keeping with the jñāna kāṇḍa of the Veda and I talked about the fourfold change in the
mindset.
1. First change is I refuse to look upon myself as a mumukṣu ahaṅkāra. But I look
upon myself as nitya-mukta Ātmā. This thought-pattern I deliberately develop,
preserve and promote, not during fifteen or twenty minutes of meditation, but
throughout my day-to-day transaction.
2. Second change is that I refuse to look upon any activity as my sādhana but look
upon all the secular and sacred activities purely as loka-kṣema-sādhana or Viśva-
rūpa-arpaṇa. I don’t expect any type of benefit out of these actions because I don’t
need any prayojana. This also I carefully maintain and promote not for fifteen
minutes but throughout the day.
3. Third change in the mind is that I refuse to look upon mokṣa as a goal that I have to
attain in future; but I look upon mokṣa as my very intrinsic nature; therefore,
available all the time;
4. Fourthly and finally, my expression of a bhakta is pure admiration of the entire
anātmā as Viśva-rūpa Īśvara and other than the sheer admiration, I don’t expect

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1127

any favour from Viśva-rūpa Īśvara because I the Ātmā don’t require any favour
whatsoever. Even if I am forced to ask some favour, the only favour I ask is sarve
bhavantu sukhinaḥ sarve santu nirāmayāḥ. This niṣkāma bhakta is the fourth
mindset that I diligently bring preserve and promote. His is the practice of the
Ātmā-niṣṭhā or jñāna-niṣṭhā.
What will be his biography in these ślokas, Vidyāraṇya identifies with such a person and
expresses his tṛpti. He saw he contrasts himself with all other ajñānīs who look upon
themselves as ahaṅkāra therefore, involved in varieties of activities either for iha loka
phala or para loka phala or mokṣa phala. For one phala or the other all the ajñānīs run
about here and there taking themselves as ahaṅkāra not knowing that ahaṅkāra can never
become free through attaining a few things. Ahaṅkāra can never be free; even jñāna cannot
make the ahaṅkāra free; jñāna helps me claiming I am not ahaṅkāra; but I am ever-free
Ātmā. Jñāna does not convert the bound ahaṅkāra into free ahaṅkāra. On the other hand
jñāna helps me in disclaiming ahaṅkāra and to claim that I am nitya-mukta Ātmā. Not
knowing this secret, ajñānīs are struggling to convert the imperfect ahaṅkāra to perfect
ahaṅkāra which is like a hare’s horn. Thereafter, Vidyāraṇya says if I am already nitya-
mukta Ātmā, requiring no sādhana no karma, why should I take bhikṣā ,etc? Why does
the Ātmā that claims to be akartā abhoktā go in search of bhikṣā? Even fixing in advance
why do you do all the bhikṣā business?
Vidyāraṇya says I don’t fix bhikṣā I don’t eat bhikṣā; by my mere presence I give life to the
body and through the body I experience the material universe. I don’t take bhikṣā, etc.
When the body eats bhikṣā, the society thinks that jñānī eats bhikṣā and they conclude I
am eating. Vidyāraṇya says I don't conclude that way. They are superimposing kartṛtva
on me whereas I don’t commit that karma. Then came the last question: I may not suffer
saṃsāra by my kartṛtva, but will not saṃsāra come about because of superimposition of
kartṛtva by others on me? Vidyāraṇya says just because they impose kartṛtva on me I am
not going to get saṃsāra just as guñjā/puñja cannot burn dry grass just because others
look upon this guñjā as fire. Guñjā is a type of seed which is very red or orange in colour
and from a distance, a heap of them appears as though that it is ember of flame.
Vidyāraṇya says just because others superimpose firehood, guñjā cannot burn anything.
Up to this we saw in the last class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1128

In this manner aham na bhaje. I don’t have kartṛtva just because others say I am kartā.
Aham na bhaje. It means I don’t acquire saṃsāra status the attributes of saṃsāra like
sañcita, āgāmi or prārabdha. They, the society, may tell I am now a Jīvanmukta and after
some time I will get Videhamukti. As a jñānī I don’t wait for videha-mukti because I am all
the time videha as I don’t have saṅga or connection with any ‘body’ at any time. Sūkṣma-
śarīra and sthūla-śarīra came together and it was called birth. Sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-
śarīra get separated that they call videha-mukti. But as far as I am concerned I don’t have
saṃyoga with sthūla-śarīra and therefore, I don't have to wait for viyoga from sthūla-
śarīra. Just as ākāśa does not sambandha with anything I don’t have any sambandha with
anything and anybody. Let others say anything but I am not connected with anything
whatsoever. I don't possess or I don't acquire anything.

śloka 7.260
शृण्वन्त्वज्ञाततत्त्वास्ते जानं कस्माच्छृणोम्यहम्।
मन्यन्तां संशयापन्ना न मन्येऽहमसंशयः ॥ ७.२६० ॥
śṛṇvantvajñātatattvāste jānaṃ kasmācchṛṇomyaham.
manyantāṃ saṃśayāpannā na manye:'hamasaṃśayaḥ (7.260).
What about śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana? Vidyāraṇya says let all other ajñānīs be
engaged in them. Why do I require any one of them? All of them are considered to be
mokṣa-sādhana and they are to be followed when I look upon mokṣa as sādhya; when
mokṣa sādhya is not there, why do I require mokṣa-sādhana? A means is required to attain
the end. Mokṣa-sādhya-siddhyartham śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana-sādhana-apekṣā,
but for me mokṣa is not a sādhya. It is so because the third mindset I practice is refusing to
look upon mokṣa as a goal and training the mind to look upon mokṣa as my svarūpa.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says I don’t require all of them; even if the body and the mind are
engaged in śravaṇa, I don’t look upon those activities as my sādhana. I don’t require them.
Therefore, he says all those saṃśaris are ajñātatattvāḥ who have not understood that Ātmā
is nitya-mukta. Let the ignorant people do more and more śravaṇa whereas I who has
understood the essence of Vedāntic teaching, I who have grasped the Vedāntic teaching in
five capsules, why should I practice śravaṇa as a sādhana? I may choose to practice
śravaṇa just like that, as an entertainment or as an enjoyment but never as a sādhana. I
don’t require it. For what purpose should I do śravaṇa, etc? Manana is for saṃśaya-nivṛtti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1129

As far as I have no doubt, why should I do manana? Those people who have doubts
regarding the teaching, either pramāṇa-asambhāvanā or prameya-asambhāvanā, have to
practice. I don’t have any doubt for Upaniṣad is very clear that tat tvam asi. Why should I
doubt the message of the Upaniṣad? A doubt can come up either when perception or logic
contradicts Vedānta but I don’t see any problem because perception and logic deal with
anātmā and Upaniṣad is talking about Ātmā; since the very subject matters are different,
why should there be a conflict regarding the teaching? Therefore, people who do not
understand this truth have doubt-galore. Let them practice manana whoever have doubts.
I have no doubt and I don’t need manana. I don’t have to do manana as a sādhana but I
may practice it as an entertainment. It has nothing to do with my mokṣa.

śloka 7.261
विपर्यस्तो निदिध्यासेत्किं ध्यानमविपर्यये ।
देहात्मत्वविपर्यासं न कदाचिद्भजाम्यहम्॥ ७.२६१ ॥
viparyasto nididhyāsetkiṃ dhyānamaviparyaye.
dehātmatvaviparyāsaṃ na kadācidbhajāmyaham (7.261).
Let others do nididhyāsana, but not me, Vidyāraṇya says. Those people who have got
viparīta-bhāvanā by which they judge themselves in terms of ahaṅkāra condition, because
of ahaṅkāra based self-judgment alone there is a conscious conclusion that I am not a
liberated one. As long as we do ahaṅkāra-based self-judgment we are never going to claim
liberation, even after fifteen million janmas for ahaṅkāra is not going to become free,
because ahaṅkāra is always subject to problems caused by sañcita, āgami prārabdha.
Therefore, there is no hope of ever getting liberation as long as ahaṅkāra-based judgment
is there. Vidyāraṇya says I have dropped that long before. My self-judgment is based on
Self. Body-mind is non-self anātmā so I don’t bother about them. Why should I judge
myself based on the body-mind-complex? I have dropped that long before. Therefore,
those who have wrong self-conclusion, let them practice nididhyāsana. Why should I
practice nididhyāsana? I have changed my mindset long before. Third mindset now being
I don’t look upon mokṣa as a sādhya. That is explained in the second line in a separate
sentence. I shall or I will never get the identification or misconception or erroneous notion
that I am the body; or I am the mind. I am neither the body nor the mind is very very clear
to me. Therefore, śravaṇa is not required; manana is not required; nididhyāsana is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1130

required. Nothing is required. Rest of my life I enjoy the freedom allowing the anātmā to
express according to its svabhāva. That is why different jñānis from the standpoint of their
body express differently; some are active, some are passive, some teach, some don’t teach,
some do service, some do not do; not all jñānis do all these things; all jñānis are the same
but they allow the anātmā to express itself differently.

śloka 7.262
अहं मनुष्य इत्यादिव्यवहारो विनाप्यमुम्।
विपर्यासं चिराभ्यस्तवासनातोऽवकल्पते ॥ ७.२६२ ॥
ahaṃ manuṣya ityādivyavahāro vināpyamum.
viparyāsaṃ cirābhyastavāsanāto:'vakalpate (7.262).
A question comes up that if a jñānī claims “I don’t have dehātma-bhāvanā”, then will
there not be a confusion in day-to-day transactions? Suppose he goes out from a hall he
will not know which chappal is his, which house is his, he may enter any house and eat
anything. If dehātma-bhāvanā is not there there will be total confusion. How does
vyavahāra take place? For that Vidyāraṇya says laukika vyavahāra does not require
deliberate thoughtful adhyāsa just as to put the food in our mouth we need not sit and
think. There is a habitual adhyāsa which does not require deliberate intellectual
conclusion. In the sub-conscious mind whatever prārabdha-vāsanā is there that vāsanā
will run the show just as early morning we get up and go through most of our ablutions
without thinking what we are doing. Even when the mind is worrying, we don’t have the
confusion where is the tooth brush or where is the tooth paste, etc. This does not require
deliberate adhyāsa. Adhyāsa is twofold: they are sāmānya adhyāsa which is habitual and
prārabdha-caused. This is universally present for all the living beings including animals.
Even animals have got deha-adhyāsa; there is no thinking involved, judgment involved,
conclusion involved. It is instinctive. Saṃsāra is not caused by sāmānya adhyāsa; that is
why animals do not have saṃsāra. That is why they don’t attend Pañcadaśī class. You
don’t teach karma-yoga or jñāna-yoga to the animals. If animals have saṃsāra Bhagavān
would have given śāstra for them also. It is so because they don’t have deliberate adhyāsa ,
but they have got sāmānya instinct. When they become human beings then alone they
begin to say: I have problems. I have got saṃsāra therefore, I require mokṣa, etc. This
second adhyāsa which is brought about by deliberate thinking, Self-awareness plus self-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1131

judgment plus self-conclusion is viśeṣa adhyāsa. That alone is the cause for saṃsāra. That
is why I give the example that when there is a dog show and one dog wins and stands as
number one and another on number two and another number three, tell me who is proud?
Suppose the press fellow goes to the first dog and asks how do you feel? It will bark and
keep quiet. The same is the result with the number three also. Who is disappointed the
owner of number three and who is proud is owner of number one. Remember viśeṣa
adhyāsa is possible only for human beings. There is self-awareness, self-judgment and
self-conclusion all the three wherever viśeṣa adhyāsa is there. Vedānta removes viśeṣa
adhyāsa. Vedānta does not and cannot remove sāmānya adhyāsa which is the result of
prārabdha, instinct; that is why even a mahā jñānī will feel hungry. It is sāmānya deha-
adhyāsa which continues for him also. Even without deliberate adhyāsa, viśeṣa adhyāsa,
the worldly transactions are possible. A jñānī will continue to say I am a human being and
I am a disciple of such and such a Guru. All those things he will say even though Ātmā is
not a disciple. From the standpoint of the body he will continue the vyavahāra as he does
it as a result of sāmānya adhyāsa which is instinctive adhyāsa born of prārabdha. This has
been there all the time and he puts his food in his mouth before gaining jñāna and even
after gaining jñāna.

śloka 263
प्रारब्धकर्मणि क्षीणे व्यवहारो निवर्तते ।
कर्माक्षये त्वसौ नैव शाम्येद्ध्यानसहस्रतः ॥ ७.२६३ ॥
prārabdhakarmaṇi kṣīṇe vyavahāro nivartate.
karmākṣaye tvasau naiva śāmyeddhyānasahasrataḥ (7.263).
Viśeṣa adhyāsa is the cause of the spiritual sādhanas. The conclusion that I am a saṃśārī
and I want liberation is viśeṣa adhyāsa unique to human beings; because of this adhyāsa,
karma-yoga, upāsana, śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana, etc, are started. The viśeṣa adhyāsa
is eliminated by jñāna. Therefore, all the viśeṣa-adhyāsa-janya-sādhanas end with the
knowledge. But even after the elimination of viśeṣa adhyāsa, sāmānya adhyāsa continues.
Therefore, sāmānya-adhyāsa-janya laukika-vyavahāra the worldly transactions born of
sāmānya adhyāsa like hunger, etc., feeling, would continue. Therefore, bhikṣā, snāna,
sauca those laukika vyavahāras continue by sheer habit. Then someone may ask: ok, you
don’t require nididhyāsana; because viśeṣa adhyāsa is eliminated. Why cannot you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1132

practice meditation for removing sāmānya adhyāsa? Vidyāraṇya says sāmānya adhyāsa is
caused by prārabdha and as long as prārabdha is there sāmānya adhyāsa will never go
away. Therefore, body will continue, hunger will continue hunger, pangs will continue;
eating will have to continue, biological pain will continue as it all comes under sāmānya
adhyāsa alone. Biological pain if it is of viśeṣa adhyāsa then with knowledge the former
pain should go away. This does not happen.
This I tell you because many people think after jñāna one will not know biological pains
and immediately they quote standard example of Sadāśiva Brahmendra and Ramaṇa
Maharṣi. This is biggest misconception maintained by even some of our students in spite
of my repeated emphasis. The second example is Ramaṇa Maharṣi without anesthesia. Let
it be very clear biological pain has nothing to do with viśeṣa adhyāsa and it has something
to do with sāmānya adhyāsa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says any amount of meditation will
not remove sāmānya adhyāsa or sāmānya-adhyāsa-based biological pain will not go away.
Therefore, he says vyāvahārika [all those transactions] the sāmānya adhyāsa and the
consequent biological feelings like hunger, thirst, pain etc., will go away only when
prārabdha karmas go away. On the other hand as long as prārabdha is not exhausted, this
sāmānya adhyāsa will never go away. Therefore, don’t think that jñāna will end the
mosquito-bite and you be free of all bodily pains. Even if you meditate thousands of
hours, biological your pain will continue. Therefore, let there not be any confusion.
Vedānta removes viśeṣa adhyāsa and not sāmānya adhyāsa. Worry comes from viśeṣa
adhyāsa alone. The animals have biological pains and not worry. More in the next class.

Class 224
śloka 7.263 contd.
From śloka 251 Vidyāraṇya talks about the jīvanmukti or tṛpti enjoyed by the jñānī and
how he looks at himself by contrasting himself with other ignorant saṃśaris. He talks
about this in these ślokas. He introduced this topic in śloka 254. From 255 onwards
Vidyāraṇya presents how a Jīvanmukta looks at himself. Vidyāraṇya says a Jīvanmukta
has practiced the binary format or the sāṅkhya-buddhi through his śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana. Therefore, he does not look upon himself as mumukṣu sādhaka but looks
upon himself as nitya-mukta siddha. I am not a mumukṣu and mokṣa is not a sādhya a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1133

goal also. But I look upon mokṣa as my very svarūpa. Since I am not a sādhaka, and since
mokṣa is not a sādhya, there is no relevance of any type of sādhana in my case. Let all
ajñānīs be engaged in varieties of laukika and śāstrīya sādhanas. Let them be engaged in
karma, upāsana, śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana; let them have varieties of sādhanas; I
don’t have any relevance for any type of sādhana; he started dismissing them one by one.
Let them do karma for citta-śuddhi but I am not a citta and so, where is the question of
śuddhi for me! Let them practice upāsana for vṛtti-ekagrata; I don’t have vṛttis at all.
Where is the question of ekāgratā? Let them do śravaṇa for ajñāna-nivṛtti; I don’t have the
problem of ajñāna, so, where is the question of śravaṇa for me! Let the doubting Thomases
be engaged in manana; I don’t have any doubt at all; why should there be manana; let
those people with deha-adhyāsa, the viparīta-bhāvanā, practice nididhyāsana; I don’t have
the problem of dehātma-adhyāsa; where is the question of nididhyāsana?
Then someone asked this person, if you don’t have dehātma-adhyāsa how you will do the
day-to-day vyavahāra? You will not know which mouth you are to put your breakfast in,
since you have no identification with anybody, if deha-adhyāsa is not there how you can
do vyāvahārika. For this there is answer. There are two types of adhyāsa one is sāmānya
and another is viśeṣa. Sāmānya adhyāsa is required for all the vyavahāras; therefore, it is
common to human beings as well as animals. But human beings have got a viśeṣa adhyāsa
also; this alone makes him a saṃśārī; and we define viśeṣa adhyāsa as self-awareness plus
self-judgment plus self-conclusion. I use my thinking intellect and question who I am and
then I come to the conclusion that I am a jīva, I am a human being, etc. This self-awareness
plus self-judgment plus self-conclusion is the unique problem of a human being. Animals
don’t have this feeling. Two dogs are not going to be jealous of the first rank dog. It does
not even know how to name. It has sāmānya adhyāsa to run the life, going through the
basic experiences and propagate its species, exhaust its prārabdha but it does not have
kartṛtva and does not even have sophisticated pramātṛtva. It has simple pramātṛtva to use
the sense-organs and find its food. It does not have pratyakṣa, anumāna, upamana,
arthāpatti, anupalabdhi and śāstra; that kind of serious pramātṛtva they don’t have. In
fact, they are said to be mukta’s liberation! In fact some people may wonder I cannot I be
born as animal in next janma. Animals are muktas as animal but due to sañcita karma it
will be born again. Viśeṣa adhyāsa is cause of saṃsāra and worry. Sāmānya adhyāsa gives
biological pains and viśeṣa adhyāsa gives emotional pain. Biological pain is not classified

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1134

as saṃsāra, but only physiological pains alone we classify as saṃsāra. Therefore,

Vidyāraṇya said that worldly vyavahāras will take place because of sāmānya adhyāsa;
jñāna will remove only viśeṣa adhyāsa and the consequent worry, etc. Why cannot you
practice nididhyāsana for removing sāmānya adhyāsa? Vidyāraṇya says any amount of
meditation will not remove sāmānya adhyāsa because it is caused by prārabdha. As long
as prārabdha is there sāmānya adhyāsa will be there. Therefore, sāmānya vyavahāra
including hunger and biological pain, etc., cannot be removed by jñāna. In fact, if jñāna
can remove sāmānya adhyāsa also, what will be the consequence? Jñānī will not know his
body and it will like the table or chair. If such a condition comes prārabdha cannot give its
pleasure and pain without sāmānya adhyāsa. Prārabdha will become redundant if jñānī
loses sāmānya adhyāsa because body will become as good as a dead body. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says even if you do thousands hours of meditation sāmānya adhyāsa and
sāmānya vyavahāra [the feeling of hunger thirst, etc] will be there and that is why for a
jñānī, bhikṣā is prescribed. The very fact bhikṣā continues indicates that sāmānya adhyāsa
cannot be avoided. If you want to avoid biological pain it has nothing to do with
spirituality. Use a pain killer or anything or self-hypnosis to avoid pain. A person
undergoes surgery by sheer practice of self-hypnosis. The lady is wide awake and there
are some people assisting her to practice hypnosis. Can you say she is a liberated person?
It has nothing to do with liberation. Generally, avoid pain or manage pain but never
connect biological pain with Vedānta or spirituality. Vedānta has nothing to say about
that. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says don't connect the two with knowledge.

śloka 264
विरलत्वं व्यवहृतेरिष्टं चेद्ध्यानमस्तु ते ।
अबाधिकां व्यवहृतिं पश्य ध्यायाम्यहं कुतः ॥ ७.२६४ ॥
viralatvaṃ vyavahṛteriṣṭaṃ ceddhyānamastu te.
abādhikāṃ vyavahṛtiṃ paśya dhyāyāmyahaṃ kutaḥ (7.264).
People try to persuade this jñānī to do some meditation. This jñānī says I don't require
meditation sādhana at all because viśeṣa adhyāsa is not there; that is gone. For vyavahāra,
sāmānya adhyāsa that is brought about prārabdha is more than enough. Prārabdha will
take care of sāmānya adhyāsa and sāmānya vyavahāra. I cannot practice sāmānya adhyāsa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1135

for it cannot be eliminated as long as prārabdha is there. Reduce vyavahāra, but sāmānya
adhyāsa and vyavahāra cannot be eliminated because prārabdha is there. Why cannot you
practice meditation for reducing the vyāvahārika because vyāvahārika is increasing
because of an active mind; by practicing meditation make the mind a little a bit slow and
then naturally you can reduce vyāvahārika? Why cannot you do meditation for reducing
vyāvahārika? How a jñānī looks at himself is the topic here. Vidyāraṇya puts within
quotation the thought of a Jīvanmukta jñānī. Therefore, the first person singular refers to
not Vidyāraṇya but the jñānī that he refers to. For that jñānī says why should I reduce
vyāvahārika? If I look upon vyāvahārika as an obstacle for my jīvanmukti then I should
reduce vyāvahārika. When I look upon vyāvahārika as a mithyā event, happening in the
mithyā śarīra and I am the satya Ātmā who can never be disturbed by the vyāvahārika
event, when I know this why should I reduce? It is like asking to reduce the number of
movies to keep the screen clean. Any number of movies played on the screen will not
affect the screen. More or less will not make a difference in the screen; viśva m darpaṇa-
dṛśya-māna-nagari-tulyam and therefore, he ways I don’t consider vyāvahārika as an
obstacle to claim my jīvanmukti. Let it be more because of more prārabdha; let it be less
because of lesser prārabdha; why should I care indriyāṇi indriyārtheṣu vartante guṇa
guṇeṣu vartante.
Viralatvam means reduction of the worldly vyāvahārika is desirable. This is the
suggestion of a student or a Pūrvapakṣī. If you claim that reduction of vyāvahārika is
required, then this jñānī says may you do meditation for reducing your vyāvahārika. If
you are disturbed by your vyavahāra and if you want to bring down vyavahāra may you
practice meditation. I will not practice meditation to reduce my vyavahāra because I don't
see vyavahāra as a threat to my mokṣa. Suppose mokṣa is like an apple which I am
balancing somehow on my hairless head, then I have to worry about the mokṣa falling off.
Mokṣa is my svarūpa, mokṣa will not go from me and so, “why should I be frightened?”
the jñānī asks. He says I look upon vyavahāra as a non-threat to my jñāna and to my
mokṣa. It is not a threat to any jñāna as also my brahma-jñāna. Two plus two is equal to
four. There is no doubt about it. It is because nothing disturbs the jñāna; that is the glory of
jñāna. Therefore, no vyavahāra can disturb the fact that I am nitya-mukta Ātmā; whatever
be the condition of the mind. Let the mind go through its own fluctuation. This I am aware

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1136

of all the time and therefore, why should I practice meditation? If you want, may you do
it. In fact, I will encourage you to do meditation says the jñānī.

śloka 265
विक्षेपो नास्ति यस्मान्मे न समाधिस्ततो मम ।
विक्षेपो वा समाधिर्वा मनसः स्याद्विकारिणः ॥ ७.२६५ ॥
vikṣepo nāsti yasmānme na samādhistato mama.
vikṣepo vā samādhirvā manasaḥ syādvikāriṇaḥ (7.265).
Here the jīvanmukta loudly proclaims: me vikṣepo nāsti; I the nitya-mukta Ātmā does not
have a problem of vikṣepa. Even if the mind has a problem of vikṣepa I don’t look upon
the mind’s problem as my problem. The mind may require some repair work but it has
nothing to do with my nitya-mukta-svarūpa. I may include the mind-repair as a hobby,
but it has nothing to do with claiming my liberation. It is so because of the conditions of
mithyā mind. I don’t have the problem of vikṣepa. Therefore, I don’t require samādhi-
abhyāsa as a remedy for vikṣepa. Samādhi is a medicine for vikṣepa. When the vikṣepa-
roga is not there, why should I practice samādhi? Therefore, yasmad vikṣepaḥ nāsti tasmat
samādhiḥ api mama nāsti. Then why should scriptures talk about all this what you call
karma-yoga, śuddhi, upāsana, yoga, etc. The scriptures have to talk about them as long as
I look upon myself as the mind. All these remedies and the diagnosis are all required
because when I approached the scriptures I was looking upon myself as the body-mind-
complex; the scriptures gave me that advice, but now that I don’t look upon myself as
body-mind-complex how can those instructions be relevant to me? Therefore, the disease
called vikṣepa; or the remedy called samādhi are meant for the mind. And remember even
samādhi will not permanently solve the problem whatever problem-solving you do for the
mind, it is all temporary we should remember and therefore, they belong to the mind
which is constantly fluctuating. Vicāra the modification of the mind are dependent on
three factors. They are will-based, world-based and vāsanā-based. Thoughts are
determined by three factors: will, world and vāsanā. Of these three, you have got a limited
control over the will; the world is not under your control; irritating people will be
irritating, you cannot do anything; and vāsanās also we cannot control because we don’t
even know what vāsanās are there. How can I control the thoughts hundred percent? I can
only contribute a little bit; therefore, we should remember that perfecting the mind is a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1137

useless proposal which we will never succeed at. Improve the mind a little bit and drop it.
It is like ripening the skin of the banana to peel off easily. Make the mind better for
dropping the identification, but not for perfecting it.

śloka 7.266
नित्यानुभवरूपस्य को मेऽत्रानुभवः पृथक् ।
कृ तं कृ त्यं प्रापणीयं प्राप्तमित्येव निश्चयः ॥ ७.२६६ ॥
nityānubhavarūpasya ko me:'trānubhavaḥ pṛthak.
kṛtaṃ kṛtyaṃ prāpaṇīyaṃ prāptamityeva niścayaḥ (7.266).
This Jīvanmukta says I am nitya-mukta, no sādhana I will practice. I don’t say I will not do
anything, but as a sādhana for mokṣa. Jñānī says I will not do anything as a sādhana for
my mokṣa. I will do hundreds of things but not for my mokṣa. As I have said loka-
kṣemārtham, loka-prayojana-siddhyartham, I can do hundreds of things including nitya
pūjā. Definitely I will not do anything for my mokṣa though. I don’t require even
meditation or samādhi-abhyāsa for removing vikṣepa, vyavahāra, etc. Then someone
comes up with a suggestion. Should not you practice samādhi-abhyāsa for the sake of
direct experience of Ātmā? You have got only the knowledge through Guru, śāstra and
upadeśa. You have understood śāstra and you have got jñāna but why don’t you work for
direct anubhava? At least for this sake you should do meditation. Therefore, you require
something because jñāna is parokṣa jñāna only but for anubhava you should do
meditation. This is the voice of a Pūrvapakṣī who wants to make this person meditate. He
will close his eyes only for one purpose and that is to sleep! This person says
nityānubhavarūpasya; why should I work for separate Ātmānubhava when the Ātmā is
ever-experienced as the caitanya all the time; as the changeless consciousness all the time;
when the Ātmānubhava is nityam why should I work for a separate Ātmānubhava.
Vidyāraṇya says there is sāmānya Ātmānubhava which is universally available for all?
Other than the sāmānya Ātmānubhava there is no separate viśeṣa Ātmānubhava for which
you require meditation. Therefore, he says for the Ātmā which is ever-available as nitya-
anubhava being that eternal consciousness in jāgrat, svapna and suṣupti; the caitanya
which is experienced in all the three states because of which alone we are able to talk
about the changing avasthās, that Ātmā is nitya caitanya, ever-experienced consciousness.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1138

Then an aside question may come up: if Ātmā, the caitanya, is ever-experienced by all,
why should I study śāstra? For that our answer is śāstra is studied not for experiencing
consciousness because consciousness is ever-experienced, but I don’t know the nature of
the ever-experienced consciousness. Śāstra teaches me the five features of consciousness.
1. Consciousness is not a part, product, or property of the body;
2. it is an independent entity which pervades and enlivens the body;
3. it is not limited by the boundaries of the body;
4. it continues to exist even after the fall of the body;
5. the surviving consciousness is not accessible because of the absence of the body
medium.
I can never know this with any method. Even science is not able to understand
consciousness as independent of matter. This additional jñāna is given by the śāstra;
anubhava we need not get because caitanya-anubhava we all have. Therefore, nitya-
anubhava-rūpasya me ātmanaḥ for me the Ātmā; hence where is the question of separate
direct experience as a new aparokṣa jñāna? What you understand from śāstra is aparoka
jñāna only. You cannot say I have only parokṣa jñāna. What we have is nitya aparokṣa
caitanya-anubhava. Suppose for argument sake, we say we have got only parokṣa jñāna,
name it as parokṣa jñāna, then we say even if you have got only parokṣa jñāna, this jñāna
is enough to claim I am nitya-mukta Ātmā. We don’t require separate aparokṣa jñāna. It is
like when we use the triangular format and depend upon Īśvara for our day-to-day
activities, what type of Īśvara-jñāna we have parokṣa or aparokṣa? The people who are
following the triangular format, do they have direct knowledge of Īśvara or indirect of
Īśvara? As anyone who talks about Bhagavān, does he have aparokṣa jñāna? He has
parokṣa jñāna alone. If parokṣa jñāna is enough to follow triangular format, our parokṣa
jñāna is enough to follow the binary format. Therefore, you don’t have to worry about any
separate mysterious mystic experience for it does not exist and even if it exists, it is not
required. Therefore, this jñānī says kṛtam kṛtyam, all the sādhanas to be done are all over
for me; I have no more sādhanas to do. Why no sādhanas? Because prāptam prāpaṇīyaṃ
because sādhya to be attained has been achieved by me already. So he says I don't require
any sādhana because the sādhya to be attained is already attained by me. I have attained
mokṣa in the form of knowledge and that mokṣa is my very svarūpa. I know that I am

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1139

nitya-mukta Ātmā all the time. All these things are not vague thinking. This is my niścaya.
Here, Jīvanmukta says without batting an eyelid that I am Jīvanmukta.

śloka 7.267
व्यवहारो लौकिको वा शास्त्रीयोऽप्यन्यथापि वा ।
ममाकर्तुरलेपस्य यथारब्धं प्रवर्तताम्॥ ७.२६७ ॥
vyavahāro laukiko vā śāstrīyo:'pyanyathāpi vā.
mamākarturalepasya yathārabdhaṃ pravartatām (7.267).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that jñānī will not do any karma for his mokṣa, but that does not
mean he should not do karma at all. He will be happily engaged in activities. Kṛṣṇa said I
have nothing to accomplish, still I am busier than many people. Vidyāraṇya says jñānī’s
activities are based on prārabdha that he has; prārabdha-vāsanā will determine his
personality and according to his inclination or according to svabhāva, even after gaining
jñāna my body-mind-complex has its own svabhāva determined by prārabdha-vāsanā and
allow the body-mind-complex to express itself either sitting quiet or engage oneself and
between the two extremes we have got several jñānis engaged in different degrees of
activities and different types of activities. This can be either laukika or śāstrīya. They may
engage themselves in teaching or build schools and colleges. He may not do pūjā at all or
he may do pūjā also. Therefore, he says in keeping with the prārabdha-vāsanā, which
belongs to the body-mind-complex [not for me I the Ātmā have neither] according to
ahaṅkāra prārabdha, laukika vyavahāra; there may be worldly activities and if one is
gṛhastha jñānī worldly activities will be their duty to the family. Or śāstrīya vyavahāra,
scriptural activities like sandhyāvandana, pañca mahāyajnas all of them will continue, but
we will not call it karma-yoga sādhana. When jñānī does pañca mahāyajña we call it loka-
saṅgraha karmas. If at all his special prayer is directed then also that will niṣkāma prayer;
let every jīva have the mental strength to go through the experiences, let them learn from
experiences and let them let those experiences contribute to the spiritual growth. There is
no sakāma prayer be it even directed prayer also as to let them grow spiritually through
the experiences, let them have mental strength to withstand those experiences. There is
nothing beyond that. Sometimes it may be a niṣiddha karma also. Therefore, anyathā
refers to even niṣiddha karma that may take place in a situation, but jñānī does not have
ahaṅkāra or rāga-dveṣa even if niṣiddha karma takes place. As Kṛṣṇa did so many things

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1140

in Mahābharata war, even the niṣiddha karmas are done without rāga-dveṣa or aham-
abhimāna. Therefore, good karmas will not produce puṇya and bad karmas will not
produce pāpa. Even if a jñānī does a niṣiddha karma, if he does it without abhimāna,
niṣiddha karma will not produce pāpa for him. Details in the next class.

Class 225
śloka 267 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talks about the seventh stage of the spiritual sādhana which is in the form of
jīvanmukti or tṛpti which is born out of entertaining a mindset which is based on Vedāntic
teaching received from the Guru. Guru can only give the teaching part, whereas changing
the mind has to be done by the student alone. The teacher is utterly helpless in this regard.
We have been seeing the change in the mindset instead of looking at myself as mumukṣu
based on the teaching; I have to claim myself as nitya-mukta Ātmā. The mumukṣu I has to
be changed to the mukta I. All the secular and sacred activities instead of seeing as my
mokṣa-sādhana I learn to look at them as loka-kṣema-sādhana. Thus, mokṣa-sādhana
attitude is replaced by loka-kṣema-sādhana attitude. This is the second important change
and the third change in the mindset is I never look forward to mokṣa as a future event that
has to come based on the teaching, but I look at mokṣa as my very svarūpa instead of
mokṣa being a sādhya which is connected to future. Mokṣa I look upon as svarūpa which
is a present fact. These three fundamental changes have to be brought about; then alone
jñāna-yoga begins. A student is a karma-yogī even when he studies Vedānta without these
changes. He becomes a Jñāna-yogī, when the jñāna-yoga begins which is only from the
day he decides to practice this new mindset. Practice of this mindset is called jñāna-yoga.
And this jñāna-yoga-abhyāsa consisting of the threefold mindset-change is important.
Then, I look upon the entire universe including the family, including my own body-mind-
complex as anātmā object which belongs to Viśva-rūpa Īśvara, which is owned and
controlled by Viśva-rūpa Īśvara and this appreciation and admiration is my niṣkāma
bhakti. As Ātmā, the ever-free one, I don’t have any favour from the Lord because what
favour I the Ātmā wants! And even if some favour is to be compulsorily asked only favour
is sarve bhavantu sukhinaḥ. This niṣkāma bhakti is the natural corollary of the change in
the mindset.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1141

And therefore, Vidyāraṇya describes the thought-pattern of this Jīvanmukta. We were

seeing śloka 267 vyavahāro laukiko vā śāstrīyo vā pravartatām. Let the worldly
transactions or religious activities go on at the anātmā level, at the body-mind level. Let
the Śivarātri abhiṣeka go on; no one says stop it; let anātmā do its activity based on not my
desire, for any benefit, but yathārabdhaṃ in keeping with the prārabdha-vāsanā whatever
activity anātmā takes to as we saw in Gītā even jñāni’s vyavahāra is based on prārabdha-
vāsanā and when all these vyavahāras take place how do I look at myself? This is
important. O Lord, save me from the prārabdha-threat is not the view mama akartuḥ I
look upon myself as akartā Ātmā. Where is the question of sañcita āgāmi or prārabdha for
I the akartā Ātmā? Therefore, karma-sambandhaḥ mama śākṣī-rūpa-rahita-ātmanaḥ nāsti
and alepasya if I don't have karma I don’t have karma-phala also; I don’t have karma-
phala-sambandha; I don’t have karma-sambandha as also karma-phala-sambandha;
karma-sambandha is called kartṛtva and karma-phala-sambandha is bhoktṛtva; both of
them are not there for me. According to ‘my’ prārabdha, means according to ahaṅkāra’s
prārabdha, let the activities go on; and when this is the mindset, karma cannot produce
āgāmi puṇya-pāpa. Any karma done with this mindset does not produce āgāmi puṇya or
āgāmi pāpa and therefore, jñānī is Jīvanmukta. Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 7.268
अथवा कृ तकृ त्योऽपि लोकानुग्रहकाम्यया ।
शास्त्रीयेणैव मार्गेण वर्तेऽहं का मम क्षतिः ॥ ७.२६८ ॥
athavā kṛtakṛtyo:'pi lokānugrahakāmyayā.
śāstrīyeṇaiva mārgeṇa varte:'haṃ kā mama kṣatiḥ (7.268).
Up to this previous śloka Vidyāraṇya said a Jīvanmukta may choose to live a life as
governed by the prārabdha itself without using his freewill or without entertaining any
desire. In this śloka, Vidyāraṇya talks about another alternative; a Jīvanmukta may
deliberately entertain a non-binding desire to help the world by taking to śāstrīya marga
even though he does not require any benefit through those sādhana; he may deliberately
choose to continue that for loka-saṅgraha kāma. By doing or not doing no difference will
be made for him in his life; neither does he require citta-śuddhi as he has citta-śuddhi
which is why he has gained knowledge; he does not seek knowledge also, he does not
seek liberation also, but still purely for the sake of blessing the world he may deliberately

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1142

follow certain disciplinse like regular japa, etc. He might do so to set an example standard
to the world. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says athavā. Even though this jñānī is absolutely
fulfilled, lokānugrahakāmyayā. A non-binding desire a jñānī can entertain and that desire
is loka-anugraha, blessing for the world. The blessing can be in any particular field of his
choice. Therefore, śāstrīyeṇaiva mārgeṇa he may rigorously follow the śāstrīya ācāra
anuṣṭhānam etc., even though he does not have to follow any ācāra anuṣṭhānam.
Therefore, śāstrīyeṇaiva mārgeṇa that is why a parama haṃśa sannyāsī in the initial stages
takes a daṇḍa to indicate the discipline that he takes unto himself and the sannyāsa
āśrama has its own disciplines like certain pārāyaṇa like Upaniṣad-pārāyaṇa, bhāṣya-
pārāyaṇas are his duty; and for the daṇḍa he has to do certain tarpaṇa that is also āśrama-
ācāra; he has to do Haṃśa-gāyatrī, prāṇava-āvṛtti, mahā-vākya-āvṛtti, etc., japa is
prescribed; all these rules and regulations come along with sannyāsa āśrama represented
by daṇḍa and the śāstra after gaining jñāna gives him the option: you can choose to follow
all those disciplines or you need not follow even these disciplines. He is allowed to
renounce the daṇḍa also. daṇḍa-visarjana. Thus a person may hold on to ācāra-anuṣṭhāna
belonging to the āśrama or he may not do that also but the general convention is that if the
jñānī is in the society, he follows all of them; otherwise the society may be misled. This is
the convention not compulsion. Therefore, śāstrīyeṇaiva mārgeṇa aham varte. A jñānī
decides I shall follow all the disciplines. Then he asks what is going to be a problem for
me, both do not make any difference as far as my pūrṇatva is concerned. What do I lose
because of doing anything! You have to remember the Gītā śloka naiva tasya kṛtenārtho
nākṛteneha kaścana in the third chapter of the Gītā. Aham varte, I shall remain in the
śāstric path. Mama kā kṣatiḥ bhavati. What am I going to lose by doing this! On the other
hand, the world is going to benefit because I will become an example, a role-model for the
world.

śloka 7.269
देवार्चनस्नानशौचभिक्षादौ वर्ततां वपुः ।
तारं जपतु वाक्तद्वत्पठत्वाम्नायमस्तकम्॥ ७.२६९॥
devārcanasnānaśaucabhikṣādau vartatāṃ vapuḥ.
tāraṃ japatu vāktadvatpaṭhatvāmnāyamastakam (7.269).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1143

Once this jñānī Jīvanmukta decides to live a religious śāstric lifestyle, naturally śāstrīya
karmas sacred activities come to the picture. The karmas are of three types kāyika karma
the physical activities; vācika karmas the oral or vocal and mānasika karmas the mental;
all the three are not required for him; he can happily drop all the three; but many jñānis
especially those who are amidst people take up the śāstrīya karmas at the kāyika, vācika
and mānasa level. In the first line of the śloka jñānī’s kāyika karma is talked about. When
he does the kāyika karma there is no saṅkalpa I should get sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti or
I should get jñāna because already I claim I am the Śākṣi-caitanya and therefore, there is
absolutely no expectation out of these karmas; kāyika karmas are those worship of Īśvara,
deva-yajña, iṣṭa-devatā-pūjā, saligrama-pūjā or meru-pūjā, etc., they may practice
regularly; then snāna. Similarly, varieties of religious snanas are there. Regular snanas one
has to do for keeping the body clean. There are some religious snanas on various
occasions; some jñānis may follow the disciplines. For sannyāsī even regarding the
shaving, rules are there. He may follow all those rules; which day how many months all
those things are prescribed. Of course special pūjas for chaturmāsa vratas are the religious
rules prescribed for saṃnyāsis.
Some regularly follow them so many levels of Ācāras are there. āhvānas are there; for four
months they are to follow certain rules and formally conclude the vratas and there are so
many śāstrīya-vidhis even for saṃnyāsis. Vidyāraṇya says a jñānī sannyāsī may choose to
follow or may not follow also as it does not make any difference. Then sauca. It means
varieties of purity religious purity. Then bhikṣā. For bhikṣā also śāstra gives two options.
One is that he can go from house to house which is called madhukari bhikṣā. He is not
supposed to eat from the same house regularly. He has to change the house; he has to take
bhikṣā from different houses. He has to take a saṅkalpa I will take to madhukari vṛtti just
as a honey bee goes to several flowers and collects a little bit of honey. Similarly, a
sannyāsī has to take bhikṣā from several houses; and there also he can have saṅkalpa
seven houses I ask or five houses I ask; or three houses I ask; he himself puts a niyama for
himself. Suppose all the seven houses nothing is given that day he considers as ekadesi or
upavāsa. Thus bhikṣā option is there. And there are some sadhus who do not want to even
do that. Their argument is that the body is created by Bhagavān through prārabdha; as
long as the prārabdha is there that will protect the body and if body has to survive bhikṣā
will come from somewhere or the other and therefore, they refuse to even go for bhikṣā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1144

Stay in one place which is called ajagara-vṛtti. In the society anybody sees him and they
offer bhikṣā he takes and if no bhikṣā comes and the result is the death of the body, he
decides that is Viśva-rūpa-Isvarasya icchā because the body belongs to Īśvara. Let Īśvara
arrange for bhikṣā. That is his attitude. Some people follow this kind of attitude. It is
python-vṛtti. It will keep its mouth open and food will come inside in the form of some
animals.
Thus, different types of bhikṣā-niyamas are followed. They are sannyāsa-ācāra-anuṣṭhāna.
The books are so many and are interesting also. Then bhikṣā ajagara or madhukara,
bhikṣādau vapuḥ vartatāṃ. Look at the words. He does not say I will follow. He says let
the body remain in some of these activities. This is the kāyika karma. Tāraṃ japatu. Tāram
means oṃkāra, prāṇava mantra. It means for saṃnyāsis oṃkāra japa is prescribed. That
also for a jñānī it is not compulsory; all the rules become optional once the mindset is
same. Therefore, tāraṃ japatu vāktadvat is there. In the same way, the organ of speech
remains in oṃkāra; or does not remain in oṃkāra. My Brahmanhood does not depend on
the tongue chanting or not chanting. It is not said whenever the tongue chants oṃkāra
you’re Brahman, the moment you stop you become non-Brahman! Once I know my
Brahmatva, which is unconditional, oṃkāra japa and ajapa will not make a difference but
what happens is the vāsanā that mantra comes, not that he deliberately wants it. tāraṃ
japatu āmnāyamastakam paṭhatu. Let the organ of speech read instead of oṃkāra japa
which is one type of vācika karma, let the vāk remain in another type of vācika karma and
what is that. paṭhana. It is reading sacred books, Veda and scriptural books and Upaniṣad-
pārāyaṇa. Let the mouth regularly as a routine do the Upaniṣad-pārāyaṇa. That is also ok.
The second line deals with vācika karma.

śloka 7.270
विष्णुं ध्यायतु धीर्यद्वा ब्रह्मानन्दे विलीयताम्।
साक्ष्यहं किंचिदप्यत्र न कुर्वे नापि कारये ॥ ७.२७० ॥
viṣṇuṃ dhyāyatu dhīryadvā brahmānande vilīyatām.
sākṣyahaṃ kiṃcidapyatra na kurve nāpi kāraye (7.270).
Let the mind be involved in certain mānasa karma also as a regular routine; it does not
matter. Viśṇum dhyāyatu. Let the mind meditate upon Viśṇu. Two forms of Viśṇus are
there, one form of Viśṇu is Aparā Prakṛti if you remember 7th chapter of Gītā the entire

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1145

universe is Viśṇu-rūpa. It is Viśva-rūpa. I admire the universe as Viśva-rūpa Īśvara. The

entire anātmā is Viśva-rūpa Īśvara. And if I want to meditate upon Parā Prakṛti Viśṇu,
that also I can do. Parā Prakṛti Viśṇu is I myself, the Śākṣi-caitanya. Thus, I can do Self-
meditation. It is Parā Prakṛti Viśṇu, nirguṇa Viśṇu, or I can meditate upon the anātmā
which is Viśva-rūpa Īśvara admiring the vibhūtis mentioned in the 10th chapter of Gītā. I
enjoy not meditation with a feeling of distress. In this meditation, there is no distress
feeling because I am Śākṣi-caitanya-rūpa. What is wrong in doing that? Meditate upon
Viśṇu. What is the difference between Viśva-rūpa Viśṇu and Viśva-rūpa Śiva? There is
difference in name only! Otherwise, there is no difference at all. You can use any word
because there is only one Viśva-rūpa Īśvara. Viśṇu and Śiva are one and the same. The
differences are seen by the people who are at a lower level. Instead of Saguṇa-rūpa-Viśṇu-
dhyāna let the mind enjoy invoking my Self as ānanda-svarūpa. Let the mind be engaged
or completely lost or absorbed in brahma-ānanda not in the form of experiential pleasure.
Experiential pleasure is brahma pratibimba-ānanda. It comes in priya-vṛtti, moda-vṛtti,
etc. We talk about svarūpa ānanda which is claimed as my very Self through cidānanda-
rūpaḥ śivoham. Let this thought the mind be engaged in. Brahma-ānanda is identical with
Ātmā-ānanda. In and through all the three karmas, kāyika, vācika and mānasa karmas,
jñānī is aware of this fact and he does not lose the mindset. The mindset is most important.
What is that? Vidyāraṇya reminds us that I am not doing karma but I am blessing the
body-mind-complex to do the karma, remembering the third capsule: by my mere
presence I give life to the body, I bless the body to do these karmas; their performance and
non-performance will not make any difference at all whatsoever in me, the Śākṣi-caitanya.
He remembers this in the beginning and at the end also. What karma I do? I do not do
even a wee bit of action. In this context when the anātmā is engaged in action at the time
of anātmā activity I don’t do anything. Even if I don’t do karma am I not persuading body-
mind-complex to do the karma, is it still not a karma? I am engaging and persuading the
body-mind-complex to do the karma. That is also indirect way of karma only. That is
called kārayitṛtva. In kartṛtva I do the karma and in kārayitṛtva I engage someone to do
the karma. Remember according to criminal law, kārayitā also will get punishment,
perhaps more. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says I am not karayita also. Śākṣī does not ask the
body to do any action. I do not engage or persuade the anātmā to do the action.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1146

śloka 7.271
एवं च कलहः कुत्र सम्भवेत्कर्मिण मम ।
विभिन्नविषयत्वेन पूर्वापरसमुद्रवत्॥ ७.२७१ ॥
evaṃ ca kalahaḥ kutra sambhavetkarmiṇa mama.
vibhinnaviṣayatvena pūrvāparasamudravat (7.271).
Vidyāraṇya says when this Jñāna-yogī is performing karma, with this mindset which I call
binary format, and a karmī or karma-yogī performing with a different mindset, outwardly
both look the same only, because both are doing kāyika karma, both are doing vācika
karma, both are doing mānasaka karma. The question may come up: what is the difference
between them? This Jñāna-yogī is also engaged. Vidyāraṇya says difference is only at the
mental level. Remember four differences: mumukṣutva-buddhi, muktatva-bhāvanā,
mokṣa-sādhanatva-bhāvanā and loka-kṣema-sādhanatva-bhāvanā and mokṣe sādhya-
bhāvanā and mokṣe svarūpa bhāvanā.
This bhāvanā alone tells me where I stand. Therefore, who knows where I stand? I only
know. None else. When I rush to the temple, and do namaskāra to Bhagavān, no one
knows what I have in the mind. God only knows. The mindset alone makes the difference.
If I look at myself as a victim requiring saving from someone, I am called karmī or karma-
yogī. When I don’t look at myself as a victim requiring the saving, then I am a Jñāna-yogī.
Therefore, he says there is difference in the mindset. Therefore, he says evam ca. In this
manner, where is the question of quarrel or debate or confusion? In this context, confusion
is between Jñāna-yogī and karmī. Both of them look the same outwardly but they need not
be confused, because internally there is a very big difference. Therefore, kalahaḥ kutra?
There is a confusion between a karmī and me the Jñāna-yogī. There is a total difference in
the mindset. That Vidyāraṇya will explain later. This is only an introduction of the subject
matter. Karmī is a saṃśārī and me an asaṃśarī. Where is the question of getting mixed up!
The difference is very very clear. The mindset or the atmosphere or the ambience or the
attitude being totally different, I should ask myself which mindset I have? I have to ask
myself because a student asks Svāmījī: where do we stand? Should we claim jñānis or half
jñānis or quarter jñānis or ajñānī? Can I claim I am Jīvanmukta? I know. Vidyāraṇya says
it is crystal clear since the very field is different between karmī and a jñānī, their mindsets
are different. There is no confusion like the eastern ocean that is Bengal and the western

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1147

Arabian sea! How they are in the opposite direction, similarly, these two mindsets are
diagonally opposite and different.

śloka 7.272
वपुर्वाग्धीषु निर्बन्धः कर्मिणो न तु साक्षिणि ।
ज्ञानिनः साक्ष्यलेपत्वे निर्बन्धो नेतरत्र हि ॥ ७.२७२ ॥
vapurvāgdhīṣu nirbandhaḥ karmiṇo na tu sākṣiṇi.
jñāninaḥ sākṣyalepatve nirbandho netaratra hi (7.272).
He says if I come under karmī category, for him or her there is some concern or
preoccupation. Generally, during the day, and especially during the pūjā prayer etc., for a
karmī the preoccupation is with anātmā. The moment body-mind-complex comes up, the
family relatives will come in. Therefore, for a karmī the ‘I’ represents a group of jīvas
connected by ahaṅkāra and mamakāra. As even he uses the word I, what naturally
surfaces is not the śākṣī, but anātmā ahaṅkāra and through ahaṅkāra, what immediately
occupies the mind is the mamakāra viṣaya. In fact even though I is singular number it
refers to a group of members as a family unit called jīvas; that is predominant, which
naturally brings the triangular format because the moment anātmā comes in, ahaṅkāra
comes up, jīva comes up, mamakāra comes up, family comes up, a group unit comes up,
and once these anātmā, ahaṅkāra, mamakāra have come, then the fear and anxiety follow.
The world is not a happy viśvarūpa! We do not know what problem will come from which
direction. As a family unit the world is a threat. The moment the threat comes, Bhagavān,
the police station, has to come to the rescue. You have to get a special blessing to be saved
from the worldly threats. Jīva is vulnerable, jagat is a threat and Īśvara is the police station.
These three are constantly floating in the mind, whether he is in kāyika karma, vācika
karma or mānasa karma. This is called a triangular mindset. As a karmī, jīva is a saṃśārī.
The atmosphere itself is different whereas śākṣī atmosphere is totally different; the word
‘I’ does not mean anātmā. Therefore, mamakāra link is itself not there. Asaṅga Ātmā
cannot have any saṅga or āśā or pāśā. All these are not there. Everything belongs to Viśva-
rūpa Īśvara. I am relaxed. More in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1148

Class 226
śloka 7.272 contd.

Vidyāraṇya talks about the seventh and final stage of a spiritual seeker’s journey. The final
stage being jīvanmukti or tṛpti-prāpti. It is not directly mentioned in Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad mantra 4.4.12. This mantra implies the seventh state. That Vidyāraṇya brings
about from śloka 251 to 297. This tṛpti that a Jīvanmukta enjoys is purely because of the
change in the mindset that he has carefully brought about. The change being I am nitya-
mukta Ātmā and I am already free. I don’t require any sādhanam for mokṣa. All the
actions done at the body level I don’t look at them as my sādhana for my liberation,
because I don’t look upon liberation as a sādhya, a goal to be accomplished in the future. I
look upon mokṣa as my ever-accomplished nature. This mindset the jñānī has practiced
and internalized. The essence of śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana is the transformation of
the mindset and also making it natural and internalization of that. This change of mindset
does not naturally happen by merely listening to Vedānta. We have to deliberately initiate
this change of mindset by watching our internal dialogue. When we are not involved in an
external activity, within the mind, a lot of internal chattering is going on. Throughout the
day they become louder when you are not active; and those inner chatterings become
subdued when we are active outside. In subdued form or louder form, the internal
dialogues and chatterings are always going on. In the nights, they become louder and in
the early morning also when we get up those mental chatterings become louder. A
spiritual seeker has to observe those because those chatterings are the clues to indicate
whether we are in triangular or binary format! What mindset we have is revealed by the
inner chattering only. Take the clue to know what type of mindset is dominating,
prevalent and he has to revamp and change those internal dialogues and chattering s.
Those dialogues must directly or indirectly reveal the new mindset. Jīvanmukti means all
those internal chatterings and all those inner dialogues. I can never know what your inner
dialogues, the inner chatterings are; only sādhaka will know. It is not para-indrīya-
pratyakṣa. I have to catch hold of those dialogues and ask the question: am I in binary or
triangular format? Once this internal dialogue and internal chatterings are naturally
conforming to this Vedāntic mindset, I am effortlessly a jñāna-niṣṭha.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1149

Vidyāraṇya says once this new mindset is well established, thereafter the jñānī can lead
any type of lifestyle either pravṛtti or nivṛtti, it does not make any difference. Only for a
sādhaka, pravṛtti becomes relevant at some time and nivṛtti becomes relevant at some
other times. Pravṛtti means engagement in activity and nivṛtti means withdrawal from
activity. A jñānī who has internalized the mindset, for him neither pravṛtti is relevant as a
sādhana nor nivṛtti is relevant as a sādhana. What type of life he leads depends upon his
prārabdha-vāsanā. One may be in pravṛtti or nivṛtti but for him both are not sādhanas but
they are only expressions of his svabhāva. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says that this jñānī may
withdraw from all the worldly activities, may withdraw from all religious activities, may
withdraw from gṛhastha āśrama, he may withdraw even from sannyāsa āśrama indicating
dropping of the daṇḍa and he may not follow any of the disciplines belonging to any one
of the four āśramas, because he does not require them. Vidyāraṇya says at the same time
he may not do it, he need not do it, but he can never say he should or should not. A jñānī
may choose to continue in gṛhastha āśrama like you. He may be fully involved in worldly
activities performing duties to the family, etc. He may be engaged in religious activities
celebrating all festivals. Pravriti is ok, nivṛtti is ok; jñānī is a jñānī whatever he does. This
he established up to śloka 270. Thereafter, he has entered into a small discussion.
Suppose a jñānī continues to be in gṛhastha āśrama and therefore, he continues to perform
the gṛhastha āśrama dharma including nitya-naimittika karma, etc. Devatā-aradhana,
pañca mahāyajna, he performs all of them. Because of these activities will he become a
karmī? Will he become jñāna-karma-samuccaya-kartā? This is a debate going on. And
there are some philosophers who argue that this jñānī is doing jñāna-karma-samuccaya
some people argue and some others argue that this jñānī has now become a karmī. They
argue in Pañcadaśī we are jñānī in binary format and at home we are karmis in triangular
format. The question is does a jñānī become a karmī when he is involved in activities? For
that, Vidyāraṇya gives the answer even though superficially a jñānī appears to be a karmī,
he also does all the pūjas, etc., because he is a gṛhastha jñānī, whether he is a karmī or
jñānī is determined not on the action but the internal mindset and the internal dialogue
and the internal chattering. Jñānī is a jñānī and he is never a karmī. Karmī is a karmī he is
never a jñānī. Jñānī is a jñānī even when his organs are involved in activities. Kṛṣṇa said in
5th chapter of Gītā. The body is involved but his mindset is that these have nothing to do
with my pūrṇatva or liberation. This mindset is what is differentiating him from karmis.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1150

External jñānī and external karmī look alike but they are different internally like eastern
and Western Ocean. This is explained in this śloka. The preoccupation of karmī is with
regard to the anātmā. His anātmā personality is dominant in him. In him, deha aṃśa,
ahaṅkāra aṃśa, kartā aṃśa, bhoktā aṃśa, jātaka aṃśa is predominant. That is called
nirbandha. The saṃśārī jīva is dominant. Even though śākṣī is within, śākṣī is far away
and kept behind. It is so because he has not studied the internal chattering and he has not
deliberately replaced them. Nididhyāsana is not a five minutes chanting. It will take a lot
of time to change the mindset. It is a deliberate replacement of internal chatterings or inner
dialogues of the mind. It is a constant process. It is to take place in waking hours because
chattering begins in the morning when you get up and it continues until you go to deep
sleep stage. In fact, it continues in dreams also! The mindset will not change naturally or
after reading Vedāntic texts but it has to be deliberately changed like weeding a garden
and planting the fruit trees and the like. Any thought-pattern which reveals triangular
format should be replaced by deliberate thought to binary format. The concern is in the
anātmā aṃśa of personality and is not in the Śākṣi-caitanya aṃśa. Jñānī has struggled and
struggled and changed the mindset very deliberately by consistent śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana. For him, concerns or attention or focus is Śākṣi-caitanya alone. I am
sambandha-rahita. I am free from karma-sambandha because I am akartā and karma-
phala-sambandha because I am abhoktā; not only karma and karma-phala-sambandha,
even all family-relation-sambandha I am free from. Jñānī does not want to spend too much
of mental time. Jñānī refuses to allow the worldly problems to cause mental disturbance.
My preoccupation decides where I stand.

śloka 7.273
एवं चान्योन्यवृत्तान्तानभिज्ञौ बधिराविव ।
विवदेतां बुद्धिमन्तो हसन्त्येव विलोक्य तौ ॥ ७.२७३ ॥
evaṃ cānyonyavṛttāntānabhijñau badhirāviva.
vivadetāṃ buddhimanto hasantyeva vilokya tau (7.273).

This crucial point the people do not register clearly. That is, the difference between a jñānī
and karmī is purely internal and it is at the level of mindset or the internal format. That
alone decides the difference. Āśrama does not differentiate. He may be brahmacārī,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1151

gṛhastha, vānaprastha or sannyāsī and that person may be male or female that person may
be sitting in meditation or otherwise. It is not that jñānī should not do any karma and he
must be all the time sitting in Nirvikalpaka samādhi and some people also ask the
question I am able to manage twenty minutes meditation, etc. Mere performance of some
karma by a jñānī will not make him a karmī. It is not the action that differentiates karmī
and a jñānī. It is the mental attitude that makes the difference. It is not samādhi or
meditation that makes the difference. Jñānī and karmī should not be differentiated by their
external features. It is the mindset that differentiates the two.

śloka 7.274
यं कर्मी न विजानाति साक्षिणं तस्य तत्त्ववित्।
ब्रह्मत्वं बुध्यतां तत्र कर्मिणः किं विहीयते ॥ ७.२७४ ॥
yaṃ karmī na vijānāti sākṣiṇaṃ tasya tattvavit.
brahmatvaṃ budhyatāṃ tatra karmiṇaḥ kiṃ vihīyate (7.274).
There is no contradiction at all in jñānī doing karma, in jñānī being engaged in hectic
activities and simultaneously claiming I am akartā-abhoktā. Even while he is doing the
activity, the jñānī says I am abhoktā and akartā. While the other karmī, other ignorant
person, should not be surprised, but should understand the significance of the jñānī’s
statement. Jñānī enjoys Brahman status that is akartā-abhoktā status. The akartā-abhoktā
status is of that śākṣī as the wise person. He is aware of what he talks about.
The śākṣī the other ignorant karmī does not know. The ignorant karmī looks at the body-
mind-complex of the jñānī alone. Therefore, karmī concludes that jñānī is , jñānī is sick
jñānī is old, jñānī is dying. All the words are relevant for a karmī for he looks at the body.
But jñānī refers to śākṣī, which the karmī does not understand. The ignorant does not
understand Vedāntic śākṣī. Let a jñānī claim I am akartā; why should a karmī oppose that?
Jñānī says his body is kartā. Karmī should not object to that. What does a karmī lose in
accepting the jñānī’s statement? Jñānī knows something which you [karmī] don’t know the
jñānī says. When a karmī says I am kartā, he is referring to something else. That is said in
the next śloka.

śloka 275
देहवाग्बुद्धयस्त्यक्ता ज्ञानिनानृतबुद्धितः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1152

कर्मी प्रवर्तयत्वाभिर्ज्ञानिनो हीयतेऽत्र किम्॥ ७.२७५ ॥

dehavāgbuddhayastyaktā jñāninānṛtabuddhitaḥ.
karmī pravartayatvābhirjñānino hīyate:'tra kim (7.275).
Here, Vidyāraṇya advises a jñānī also. When a karmī claims I am kartā-bhoktā, I have got
this and that, I am running towards parihāra, etc., jñānī also need not protest and argue
with him. It is because jñānī looks at the śākṣī of the karmī but karmī looks at his body.
Therefore, from body-angle, everything is real, problems are real. It is relevant and
meaningful to him. That is why Kṛṣṇa said in his third chapter
na buddhibhedaṃ janayedajñānāṃ karmasaṅginām;
joṣayetsarvakarmāṇi vidvān yuktaḥ samācaran (3.26)
If people are doing parihāra, don’t confuse them with the inspiration of Pañcadaśī. They
are in the world therefore, if they are doing, either encourage or keep quiet but don’t stop
them because they have neither parihāra or Vedānta. What is relevant for a jñānī is not
relevant for a karmī. For him, something else is relevant. The entire anātmā has been
mentally rejected as being of a lower order of reality. It is not worth improving. It is not
improvable also; just as the tail of a dog cannot be straightened, ahaṅkāra can never be
made free from karma. Remove ahaṅkāra only. Let me turn my attention towards
something worthwhile. Jñānī has rejected the body, organ of speech, the mind, and the
three instruments of karma, kāyika, vācika and mānasa karmas. Dehavāgbuddhayaḥ; that
compound is feminine gender. Vāk is also feminine gender. Through these instruments,
let the karmī function in the world, identifying with them, forgetting the śākṣī. If that
karmī claims “I am kartā and bhoktā” that is right. From his standpoint of the body, he is
kartā and bhoktā. Why should jñānī stop him from engaging in activity? By admitting his
action what loss is there for the jñānī? Let a karmī admit a jñānī is always akartā abhoktā.
[from the standpoint of śākṣī] and let the jñānī admit a karmī is eternal kartā and bhoktā
[from the standpoint of the body]. Since the standpoints are different why should we
quarrel whether we are kartās or bhoktas! There is no question of debate at all. More in the
next class.

Class 227
śloka 7.275 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1153

Vidyāraṇya explains the seventh stage of spiritual journey of jīvanmukti. Here,

Vidyāraṇya points out that after gaining Ātmā-jñāna jñānī does not require any sādhana
for mokṣa. Therefore, he can lead any type of life which is not based on the sādhana but
which is based on his prārabdha-vāsanā or svabhāva. For him, a life of pravṛtti is not
relevant and life of nivṛtti is also not relevant because his mokṣa does not depend upon
either pravṛtti or nivṛtti. His mokṣa depends upon the knowledge that “I am nitya-mukta
Ātmā” irrespective of the physical condition. We saw this in Gītā also. Therefore, one jñānī
may go by prārabdha without using a will of his own. He may do whatever comes
according to prārabdha. Another jñānī may deliberately choose to use his freewill for the
blessing of the society. And therefore, he may deliberate to choose to lead a life as
prescribed in the śāstra, fully following all the śāstric rules and regulations depending
upon the āśrama to which he belongs. If he is a jñānī gṛhastha he may continue all the
nitya-naimittika karmas as prescribed; if he is a jñānī sannyāsī he may follow all the
sannyāsa āśrama rules as prescribed; but what Vidyāraṇya says is that because the jñānī is
involved in karma, you cannot call him a karmī. Just because the jñānī is engaged in either
laukika karmas or Vaidika karmas, he does not become a karmī nor does he become
samucchayī [a combiner of karma with jñāna]. Whether one is a jñānī or karmī does not
depend on the external physical condition of the person but is determined by his mindset.
This is the importance of these ślokas.
The mindset is important and not the external conditions. In the case of a karmī, he does
not know who he really is. For a karmī, the word I means only ahaṅkāra. He is not aware
that there is a higher I that there is a śākṣī; all these things he does not know. Therefore, for
a karmī, the word I means ahaṅkāra and all his assessment of himself is based on
ahaṅkāra-problems, ahaṅkāra-prārabdha, ahaṅkāra-successes and ahaṅkāra-failures. In
the case of a jñānī, he is clearly aware of the fact that the word aham includes two
components. The individual or the word I includes two components one is the mithyā
ahaṅkāra component and the satya śākṣī component. These two components together
make the word I. The pure śākṣī can never say I and the pure ahaṅkāra cannot even exist.
Therefore, I is always a mixture of the ahaṅkāra component and the śākṣī component.
Jñānī has understood both these components very clearly through Ātma-anātma-viveka.
In Naiṣkarmyasiddhi, we discuss this aspect in detail. He knows one is satya and the other
is mithyā. Śākṣī component is satya and ever-free while the ahaṅkāra component is asatya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1154

and never-free. Having understood both, he uses the word I either for śākṣī or for
ahaṅkāra depending upon the context. In the worldly transactions, when people talk to
him, he cannot use the word I from śākṣī-angle; therefore, he uses the word I from
ahaṅkāra-dṛṣṭi but with the knowledge that this is not the real I. When he wants to do self-
assessment in the context of spiritual journey, he never takes the ahaṅkāra component for
self-assessment. He does it only from the standpoint of śākṣī component. Thus, a jñānī
loosely uses the word I either for ahaṅkāra or for śākṣī and he is not confused but he
knows the difference like we use the word for ourselves as well as our photo also knowing
both are different. When friends come to our room and they ask the question who is
Dayānanda Svāmī? In the picture I point out that this one is Svāmījī without saying “this is
a picture”, “this is mithyā picture of Svāmījī”. I say “this is Svāmījī”. They also don’t get
confused and go near the picture and say this is your Guru and they do nāmaskar to the
picture. Thus, they understand and still they use the word this is Svāmījī. After asking the
question, this is your Guru Svāmījī then they will ask: where is Svāmījī now? Now only
they identified, but they asked “where Svāmījī is?” and then I say “he is in Rishikesh”. I
use the word Svāmījī for the picture and also for the person without differentiating which
is the person and which the picture is! Even though I don’t differentiate, the listener does
not get confused; he also understands which is a picture and which the person is. This is
comfortably happening that means we can differentiate and use the expression loosely
after knowing the difference.
Jñānī does exactly in the same way. He uses the word I for the ahaṅkāra also knowing that
it is a mithyā picture of my Self. He uses the word I for akartā-abhoktā nitya-mukta śākṣī
also. It is not out of confusion but with knowledge he uses. The real difference becomes
evident when a jñānī has to do self-assessment in the context of spiritual journey. Imagine
every month first, we are making an assessment of our spiritual journey or every new year
I want privately, consciously, internally, assess my position in the spiritual journey; what
do I do is the question. A jñānī can never assess himself or herself as a sādhaka at any time
however much he questions. He can never look upon himself or herself as a sādhaka even
though at the ahaṅkāra level so many projects are incomplete. The incompleteness of
ahaṅkāra project does not make any difference in my self-assessment because I am mukta
irrespective of ahaṅkāra’s postion in the vyāvahārika atmosphere. Similarly, if he asks
himself “do I have any more sādhana left over to claim liberation?” Even if he does soul-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1155

searching very deeply he can never say any sādhana is left over. Viparīta-bhāvanā issue is
again from the standpoint of ahaṅkāra-level. A jñānī can never talk for his , whatever be
the mental state; I am free is the truth; therefore, I have no more sādhana left over. I never
look upon mokṣa as something to be achieved; such a person who uses the sākṣī during
self-assessment in the context of spiritual journey is never a karmī and a karmī can never
himself be a jñānī. Therefore, there is no question of a jñānī becoming a karmī at any time.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says a jñānī rejects the anātmā at the time of self-assessment
especially in the field of spiritual journey when he looks at himself, when he assesses
himself, the anātmā becomes insignificant and its successes and its failures also are equally
insignificant because mithyā anātmā’s successes and failures are mithyā only. Mithyā
anātmā is mithyā ahaṅkāra and therefore, successes and failures are also mithyā. Emotion-
based self-assessment, family-based assessment he cannot accept because for him they are
all nāma-rūpa, not worth using at the time of serious self-assessment. Therefore, for a
karmī, ahaṅkāra is very important because he does not know the śākṣī. For a jñānī, since
his standpoint is śākṣī, ahaṅkāra can never become important. Therefore, because of his
anṛta-buddhi, anṛta-bhāvanā, mithyātva-dṛṣṭi, he looks at himself only as asaṃśarī who
does not require any sādhana.
When can ahaṅkāra become liberated through sādhana? Ahaṅkāra can never do sādhana
and even if it does sādhana, ahaṅkāra will never get liberated for it will have imperfection
at emotional, physical, and intellectual level and the imperfection can never be overcome;
therefore, from ahaṅkāra-angle also sādhanas are not left over for liberation. Let ahaṅkāra
do its duty but it has no connection with liberation. This is crystal clear for a jñānī. This
self-assessment will happen only by consistent practice of binary format. In triangular
format this assessment will never happen at any time. This self-assessment can happen
only if I practice binary format for a length of time and this is a gradual change in the self-
assessment. It does not naturally happen and it is not a result of any mystic experience
also. The change in self-assessment is never a result of a sudden extraordinary mystic
experience nor is it a natural change. This transformation in self-assessment will not
naturally happen nor will it happen sudden jerky mysterious experience. It happens only
as a result of consistent abhyāsa of binary format which is called jñāna-niṣṭhā-abhyāsa.
Therefore, jñānī is never a karmī. Whereas, what about a karmī? Karmī is never a jñānī.
Karmī is eternally in triangular format and therefore, his philosophy is: I have problems, I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1156

require Bhagavān’s help and world is a threat. This will never disappear for a karmī.
Therefore, he will assess himself as a kartā only. Vidyāraṇya says let a jñānī accept karmī
as a kartā; what does he lose by allowing him to be a kartā? He loses nothing.

śloka 7.276
प्रवृत्तिर्नोपयुक्ता चेन्निवृत्तिः क्वोपयुज्यते ।
बोधे हेतुर्निवृत्तिश्चेद्बुभुत्सायां तथेतरा ॥ ७.२७६ ॥
pravṛttirnopayuktā cennivṛttiḥ kvopayujyate.
bodhe heturnivṛttiścedbubhutsāyāṃ tathetarā (7.276).
Now, a Pūrvapakṣī raises a question. This questioner’s view is a jñānī should never be
engaged in pravṛtti because a jñānī is a fulfilled person, mukta Puruṣa, and jñānī does not
have anything to accomplish; why a jñānī works in the world? If he is working in the
world he should not be a jñānī. Therefore, his visualization of a jñānī is that he must be a
sannyāsī. He should be a withdrawn sannyāsī and he should not involve in any worldly
vyavahāra. He should sit in meditation most of the time and there also most of the time he
must be in Nirvikalpaka samādhi. This abnormal extraordinary withdrawn samādhi
preferably with a long beard and if possible with a jaḍamuḍi and then only he must be a
jñānī! If a person is very much in the world and he is also in the worldly activity and in
normal dress then he must not be a jñānī. He thinks they are only scholars in Vedānta but
not realised ones. Arjuna’s confusion is there for this objectionist also. Therefore, he asks
Vidyāraṇya why should a jñānī be engaged in pravṛtti. This is a series of dialogue. The
conclusion is that jñānī can be either in pravṛtti or in nivṛtti, both sādhanas are irrelevant
to him and therefore, he need not follow them and nobody can say he should follow or
should not follow. He is free from pravṛtti-vidhi also and nivṛtti-vidhi also. Even all the
sannyāsa-vidhis in the Upaniṣad are all not for a jñānī. All the sannyāsa instructions are
not for a jñānī but they are for the mumukṣu or jijñāsu. Even vidvat-sannyāsa is for a
person who wants to practice sādhana for nididhyāsana and the one who has this niṣṭhā
for him; even that withdrawal is not required. This is the conclusion of Vidyāraṇya. There
is no need for a jñānī for withdrawing from pravṛtti and follow nivṛtti. Why should he run
away from society and what is he going to get through nivṛtti? If you ask “what is the
benefit of pravṛtti sādhana?”, I will ask “what is the benefit of nivṛtti sādhana”? This is the
statement of Vidyāraṇya. For that question Pūrvapakṣī answers. For a jñānī meditation is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1157

important withdrawal is important; jñāna-sādhana is nivṛtti or withdrawal from the

society, it is a means of knowledge. Therefore, this person must withdraw from activity.
For that, Vidyāraṇya counters: if you say nivṛtti is useful as a jñāna-sādhana, pravṛtti is
also useful as jñāna-sādhana. He says similarly, the other one the pravṛtti, the desire for
knowledge, which stands for sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti that is why I translate as jñāna-
yogyatā.

śloka 7.277
बुद्धश्चेन्न बुभुत्सेत नाप्यसौ बुध्यते पुनः ।
अबाधादनुवर्तेत बोधो न त्वन्यसाधनात्॥ ७.२७७॥
buddhaścenna bubhutseta nāpyasau budhyate punaḥ.
abādhādanuvarteta bodho na tvanyasādhanāt (7.277).
Now, you should remember the previous argument. Pravṛtti is jñāna-yogyatā-sādhana
and nivṛtti is jñāna-sādhana. Pūrvapakṣī says jñānī should not be engaged in pravṛtti.
Siddhāntī says jñānī does not require nivṛtti also. Pūrvapakṣī says if jñānī requires jñāna-
yogyatā then he should take to pravṛtti because pravṛtti is meant for jñāna-yogyatā. The
argument by Pūrvapakṣī is that jñānī does not require jñāna-yogyatā, which is why he
does not require jñāna-yogyatā-sādhana; he does not require pravṛtti and therefore, let
him take to nivṛtti. Then, Vidyāraṇya says if jñānī does not require jñāna-yogyatā, jñānī
does not require jñāna also because he has already gained jñāna. Since jñānī does not
require jñāna he does not require jñāna-sādhana also. Jñāna-sādhana is nivṛtti. Therefore,
jñānī does not require nivṛtti also; then, why do you insist that a jñānī should take to
nivṛtti? Don’t insist either pravṛtti or nivṛtti. Both are sādhanas and he does not require
both the sādhanas. Jñāna-yogyatā he does not require so pravṛtti he does not require.
Jñāna he does not require so nivṛtti he does not require. Therefore, he neither requires
pravṛtti nor nivṛtti as jñānī may follow either according to his prārabdha. He does not
require it as sādhana. Jñānī need not engage in pravṛtti to gain jñāna-yogyatā as he has
already has it. It is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. For that, Vidyāraṇya says if jñānī does not
require pravṛtti I will say jñānī does not require nivṛtti also for acquiring jñāna. Therefore,
you cannot insist on either of them.
For that, Pūrvapakṣī comes with another objection which is not given in this śloka. You
have to supply the objection. The answer is given in the second line. He says jñānī does

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1158

not require pravṛtti because he does not require jñāna-yogyatā. Jñānī does not require
nivṛtti because he does not require jñāna. He says I say jñānī requires nivṛtti for protecting
and preserving the knowledge. I recommend nivṛtti because the jñāna gained should not
fade away or go away. For protecting the jñāna, jñānī requires nivṛtti. He has to remain in
some place and should not allow any anātma-vṛtti and then alone jñāna will remain. So
one should withdraw from the world and sit in Nirvikalpaka samādhi to preserve jñāna.
This is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. If such a Pūrvapakṣa comes up, Siddhāntī says jñāna
can never be negated by karma. Karma does not have the power to negate any jñāna. Any
jñāna can be negated by only another pramāṇa. Any jñāna can be negated not by karma,
but only by another jñāna which is a real jñāna. The snake-knowledge was not negated by
running away or doing any action. The snake knowledge was negated by another
pramāṇa. Only another pramāṇa can negate the first knowledge and that too if the first
knowledge is false knowledge. These are the two important conditions. “Ahaṃ brahma
asmi” jñāna can never be negated by any karma, How about by some other pramāṇa
negating it such as pratyakṣa, anumāna, upamana? That is also not possible as all other
pramāṇas do not even deal with Ātmā. They deal with anātmā. Therefore, another
pramāṇa cannot negate and finally, since this jñāna is never false knowledge, it can never
be negated by anything. Therefore, you don’t have to do anything to protect the
knowledge. Since valid knowledge can never be negated by any laukika or Vaidika karma
or any other pramāṇa, jñāna is never threatened by anything or anyone including God.
Even God cannot threaten that knowledge! A brilliant discussion of this topic is there in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.10 bhāṣya. Jñāna will be protected. One does not require any
other sādhana to protect this jñāna. In Saddarśana, Ramaṇa Maharṣi asks this question.
Will anyone have any doubt whether I will forget the fact that “I am a human being”? No
one requires regular meditation to say that I am a human being. Jñānī does not require any
sādhana to preserve this knowledge. Therefore, it is not preserved anya-sādhanāt, by any
other sādhana. When he says anya sādhana, Pūrvapakṣī is insisting on nivṛtti and
meditation and so jñānī says I don’t meditate because ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact which
need not be preserved by any sādhana. However, one should not say that you should not
meditate. I may choose to meditate also. Nobody can command me, I am master, I am
Svāmī, Vidyāraṇya declares.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1159

śloka 7.278
नाविद्या नापि तत्कार्यं बोधं बाधितुमर्हति ।
पुरैव तत्त्वबोधेन बाधिते ते उभे यतः ॥ ७.२७८ ॥
nāvidyā nāpi tatkāryaṃ bodhaṃ bādhitumarhati.
puraiva tattvabodhena bādhite te ubhe yataḥ (7.278).
Pūrvapakṣī raises another question, whereby there is a long dialogue. He wants everyone
to become a sannyāsī. He says nivṛtti is required as even after jñāna avidyā-vāsanās may
continue. Jñāna can destroy avidyā, but even after the destruction of avidyā, it’s kārya or
avidyā-vāsanā can continue. It is called saṃsāra and he says saṃsāra may continue.
Therefore, to fight avidyā-vāsanā I have to practice nivṛtti and meditate chanting “ahaṃ
brahma asmi”. Therefore, nivṛtti is important. So go to āśrama. This is the Pūrvapakṣī’ s
argument. Vidyāraṇya says nothing doing. Same question was raised by Sūreśvarācārya
in a particular śloka. There, similar question is raised. He established samādhi-abhyāsa
should continue throughout life. For that, Sūreśvarācārya gives one answer and
Vidyāraṇya gives another answer. Sūreśvarācārya says if avidyā-vāsanās rise now and
then and threaten, you need not do any separate sādhana to fight it because if avidyā has
its vāsanās rising, jñāna also will have its vāsanās rising. Vidyā will have vidyā-vāsanās.
Therefore, you need not do anything separate; as even avidyā-vāsanā rises, Svāmījī will
come as vāsanā in your mind and that vidyā-vāsanā will automatically negate avidyā-
vāsanā. Why cannot it be the other way round and avidyā-vāsanā destroy vidyā-vāsanā?
Sūreśvarācārya says between these two vāsanās which one is stronger will overpower the
other. Remember vidyā alone is stronger because vidyā depends on satya for its existence
whereas avidyā is mithyā; therefore, always vidyā is stronger than avidyā, satya is
stronger than mithyā and vidyā-vāsanā is stronger than avidyā-vāsanā; therefore, you
don’t require anything. Vidyā will automatically generate vāsanā. Here, Vidyāraṇya says
that avidyā-vāsanā cannot threaten mithyā at all. Avidyā-vāsanā is too feeble to threaten
vidyā. Either way you don’t require any sādhana to protect vidyā; that is the conclusion.

Class 228
śloka 7.278 contd.
In these ślokas beginning from śloka 251 Vidyāraṇya talks about jñānī’s tṛpti or jīvanmukti
because jñānī does not look upon mokṣa anymore as a sādhya or goal because he sees

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1160

mokṣa as his svarūpa, nitya siddha svarūpa. Since jñānī does not have mokṣa as the
sādhya he can never look upon himself as a sādhaka. Sādhaka is one who works for
sādhya. Once he does not look upon himself as a sādhaka he does not require any
sādhana because sādhana is the effort put forth by the sādhaka to gain sādhya. It means
that if I don’t look upon myself as a sādhaka, then where is the question of sādhana?
Vidyāraṇya says sādhana is divided into two types.
1. karma-yoga-sādhana called pravṛtti and
2. jñāna-yoga-sādhana called nivṛtti.
Pravṛtti sādhana is for jñāna-yogyatā-prāpti and nivṛtti sādhana is for jñāna-prāpti. Jñānī
does not require jñāna-yogyatā and jñānī does not require jñāna because he has already
gained jñāna. Both pravṛtti and nivṛtti are not relevant for a jñānī as his own sādhana.
Pravṛtti or nivṛtti may help the society in a particular way but we are not discussing that
here. For jñānī pravṛtti and nivṛtti are not relevant as his own sādhana and both karma-
yoga and jñāna-yoga are irrelevant. Naturally, the question will come: if both are
irrelevant what will govern his lifestyle? For ajñānīs, he will either wants yogyatā or jñāna,
therefore, at least he has a direction. But in the case of a jñānī, what will determine his
direction of life or his lifestyle? If you ask śāstra says in the case of a jñānī it is not the goal
that governs his lifestyle but his svabhāva that governs his lifestyle. According to his
svabhāva he may take to the continuation of nivṛtti because as a sādhaka he had practiced
nivṛtti. Jñānī may continue in the nivṛtti itself but there is a difference between previous
nivṛtti and present nivṛtti. Before becoming a jñānī nivṛtti served as a sādhana but after
becoming a jñānī he may continue in nivṛtti marga not as a sādhana. Then why should he
continue the nivṛtti, a withdrawn lifestyle? Because that is his svabhāva not as a sādhana.
On the other hand, another person practiced nivṛtti temporarily for becoming a jñānī; he
does not require nivṛtti as sādhana; therefore, he gives up nivṛtti. There is no giving up of
sannyāsa āśrama. Gives up means he is withdrawn from quiet life and becomes active. In
fact, in our culture many great institutions are there only because those saṃnyāsi-jñānis
came back from their Himalayan abode, came back from their caves and came to society
and established institutions and therefore, a jñānī may come back to pravṛtti. In that
pravṛtti, he may involve himself in laukika sādhana or he may become a Maṭhādhipati
and involve in all the pūjās. So much pūjā he may be involved in, but still you cannot call
him a karma-yogī. It is so because karma-yogī also does pūjas, this jñānī also does pūjā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1161

may be as a Maṭhādhipati or in his own āśrama. Still, he cannot be called a karma-yogī or

a karmī. The difference is not in the pūjā; the difference is not in the mantra; difference is
not in the body but the difference is in the mindset that he has.
When a jñānī does pūjā he does not look upon him as a sādhaka doing pūjā for getting
citta-śuddhi, Guru-prāpti, jñāna-prāpti. He does not look upon the pūjā as sādhana and he
does not look upon himself as sādhaka. He does not look forward to plead God. He does
not plead at all. If at all he talks to Bhagavān it is only a hello. Maximum it is a
thanksgiving. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says pūjā does not make a person karma-yogī. Or
withdrawal from pūjā does not make a person a Jñāna-yogī. It is the mindset that makes
the difference. Therefore, our jñānī may be in a cave, not taking to any religious practices
not even japa, pūjā, pārāyaṇa nothing he does. Or he may be very much in the society
routinely following all of them. It does not make any difference for him. Now, Pūrvapakṣī
raises a question. Jñānī may not require either of them for gaining jñāna. Should he not
need it to preserve jñāna. Nivṛtti may not be required to acquire jñāna. He does not have
to go to gurukula and do śravaṇa and manana. Should he not protect the jñāna that is
acquired though? If he is engaged in active life, in summer season will not his jñāna
evaporate in the extra heat?! Vidyāraṇya says jñāna cannot be negated by anything.
Therefore, jñāna does not require any protection either by pravṛtti or by nivṛtti or by
meditation. Only if the jñāna is threatened protection is required. Jñāna can be threatened
only under two conditions I said. I repeat it because it is important:
1. If jñāna is not valid it can be threatened. That is condition one. Invalid knowledge is
threat. Invalid knowledge cannot be called knowledge.
2. The second condition is an invalid knowledge can be threatened by only another
pramāṇa. No object in the world no experience in the world; no activity in the
world, not even violent emotion, threaten a valid knowledge. Any knowledge is
knowledge irrespective of emotions. Emotions cannot challenge knowledge just like
the experience of sunrise never challenges my knowledge that the sun is not rising.
Similarly, my experience of the worst form of sorrow cannot challenge the valid
knowledge that I the witness of the sorrow am ānanda-svarūpa.
The knowledge that I am the witness of the sorrow is ānanda-svarūpa; there is only
pratibimba-ānanda missing in a sorrowful mind. Sorrow can disturb the pratibimba-
ānanda, but sorrow has no power to challenge the fact that I the witness am bimba-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1162

ānanda. Therefore, only if the knowledge is not valid it can be threatened and again it can
be threatened by another pramāṇa. Emotions cannot challenge or displace the knowledge
ahaṃ brahma asmi. And in the case of Brahman-knowledge both these conditions are not
there. The first condition of knowledge being invalid is not there because it has been
gathered from a valid source of knowledge called apauruṣeya śabda pramāṇa. Therefore,
knowledge is valid. We don’t have a second pramāṇa to challenge that knowledge because
all the pramāṇas are dealing with anātmā and my knowledge is dealing with Ātmā.
Where is the challenge for this knowledge? Therefore, even when the tears are rolling
down my eyes, I can boldly declare ānanda is my real svarūpa. Others may laugh at me
because of their ignorance. For me, this statement is valid. The tears will go after
sometime, but how can it change my ānanda-svarūpa!
Then, came the next question. Avidyā and the world may not threaten the jñāna because
avidyā is gone; world cannot threaten, another pramāṇa is not there. However, a person
may ask: suppose the avidyā-vāsanā comes and affects me what I will do? Jñāna can
destroy only avidyā. Jñāna does not have the power to destroy the vāsanās, and for this
only in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi, Sūreśvarācārya gave the answer; I told you I will give you the
reference 1st chapter 38th śloka, where he raises the question ‘will not avidyā-vāsanā
threaten?’ and for that Sūreśvarācārya says no problem; even as avidyā-vāsanās are
evoked by any situation, automatically jñāna-vāsanās also will be invoked and it will
falsify all of them. Therefore, the conclusion: jñānī does not require nivṛtti for protecting
jñāna from avidyā or even from avidyā-vāsanās. This is what he said here na avidyā
neither ignorance nor the product or effects of ignorance [adhyāsa] aham kartā, aham
bhoktā, aham pramātā, aham mātā, aham pitā, I am husband, I am wife, I am employer; all
these are avidyā-kārya, all forms of mamakāra is avidyā-kārya. Even the worry about the
family is avidyā-kārya only. All of them and you can add avidyā-vāsanā; avidyā and
avidyā-vāsanās have no capacity to negate jñāna. The reason is they have been already
made useless and toothless at the dawn of knowledge; Why! Even during the śravaṇa-
manana time itself! Therefore, jñānī is free; he is neither bound by pravṛtti-rules nor bound
by nivṛtti-rules.

śloka 7.279
बाधितं दृश्यतामक्षैस्तेन बाधो न शङ्क्यते ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1163

जीवन्नाखुर्न मार्जारं हन्ति हन्यात्कथं मृतः ॥ ७.२७९ ॥

bādhitaṃ dṛśyatāmakṣaistena bādho na śaṅkyate.
jīvannākhurna mārjāraṃ hanti hanyātkathaṃ mṛtaḥ (7.279).
In dvaita prapañca the problems the body, mind, the emotions, all of them are negated
totally out of my experience itself. Then at least I am free from troubles I can say. In the
case of Ātmā-jñāna even after negation they don’t go away and continue to exist
experientially. We can only negate the real existence but we are not able to negate
experiential existence. Again it is the example of sunrise. I can understand sun does not
really rise but sunrise experience continues. Similarly, Pūrvapakṣī asks after jñāna I may
negate all of them, but the body continues, old age continues, family, people and problems
continue. All these are experientially continuing; will they not hurt my knowledge?
Therefore, should not I wait for videha-mukti or should not I wait for their disappearance
or should not I run away from all of them and go to a cave? The doubt is that the
experienced world may threaten my knowledge. The experienced includes the family, the
body, mind and the emotional disturbances and the pain given by the prārabdha karma.
Therefore, should not I eliminate them totally? Once you accept total elimination, only two
possibilities: either you have to die or you have to sit in Nirvikalpaka samādhi for the rest
of your life. Then alone the world can be totally negated. Pūrvapakṣī asks if I don’t die or
if I don’t sit in Nirvikalpaka samādhi will not the experienced anātmā threaten
knowledge? Vidyāraṇya says nothing doing and he says after knowledge rises, the world
becomes a mithyā and mithyā vastu can never be a valid knowledge centred on satya
vastu. Any mithyā anubhava can never threaten valid knowledge centred on a satya
vastu. For this, he gives a powerful reasoning using kaimutikanyāya. Even when this
person was ignorant and when he thought the world as satya, even at that time through
the pramāṇa-vicāra, jñāna could come in the mind negating the world. The very fact that
jñāna arose in his mind, falsifying the world indicates that jñāna is stronger than even the
world which was thought as satya before. Even when I thought the world was real, the so
called real world was pushed and through Vedānta-vicāra I could get jñāna which
falsified the world. If jñāna could push the so-called real world itself, after falsification
how can the false world push jñāna?!
Let the falsified world continue during the time of jīvanmukti why should I be scared of
the continuity of the falsified universe? Let it continue like watching a fiction movie in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1164

cinema or television. I know it is false; still I am watching because I know it does not
threaten my knowledge, the knowledge that this is a movie! It will become the fifth
capsule of Vedānta. By forgetting my nature, I convert life into a struggle and by
remembering my nature, I convert life into a sport or entertainment. Therefore, why
should I switch off the television? Every day is a new episode. Let it continue because it
will not affect my real nature. With the help of the sense-organs, let the world be
experienced and I have no complaint at all. By the experience of the world, a valid
knowledge is never going to be negated by avidyā and avidyā-janya-vāsanās, valid
knowledge can never be negated or by any experience however opposite to the knowledge
the experience may be. I experience millions of small stars in the sky but I never feel
threatened and I never feel that the knowledge is threatened, the knowledge being that the
stars are not small but they are bigger than even the sun. If I feel threatened I should not
look at the stars. Why? Because I am frightened that my knowledge will be disturbed!
Similarly, the experience of the flat earth never challenges the knowledge that the earth is
not flat. My experience of stationary earth never threatens the knowledge that the earth is
moving very fast. Similarly, the worst form of sorrow cannot threaten the knowledge that
I, the witness of the sorrow, is sat-cit and ānanda-svarūpa and therefore, why should I feel
threatened! Therefore, jñānī is never frightened of the world. Here, Vidyāraṇya gives an
example. A rat or a mouse does not kill a cat. A live rat cannot kill a cat. Then somebody
asked the question. I can understand this live rat cannot kill. I have an important question
can dead rat kill the cat? If the śiṣya asks such a question to the Guru what should the
Guru do? He will run away from the Gurukula! Therefore, when the live rat itself cannot
kill the cat, how can the dead rat kill the cat? Similarly, when the ‘real world’ could not
threaten the arrival of jñāna, after the arrival of jñāna how can false world threaten the
valid knowledge? Therefore, falsified sorrow cannot disturb the knowledge that I am
ānanda-svarūpa. Adhyasta sorrow cannot disturb adhiṣṭhāna ānanda.

śloka 7.280
अपि पाशुपतास्त्रेण विद्वश्चेन्न ममार यः ।
निष्फलेषुवितुन्नाङ्गो नङ्क्ष्यतीत्यत्र का प्रमा ॥ ७.२८० ॥
api pāśupatāstreṇa vidvaścenna mamāra yaḥ.
niṣphaleṣuvitunnāṅgo naṅkṣyatītyatra kā pramā (7.280).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1165

Another example is given here to convey the same idea that the world cannot threaten
knowledge. Even the worst prārabdha cannot threaten knowledge. It seems there was a
person very strong. He was hit by Pāśupatāstra which is considered to be one of the most
powerful weapons for which the presiding deity is Lord Śiva. Arjuna did a lot of tapas to
get that Pāśupatāstra. This person was struck by Pāśupatāstra directly in the heart. What
happened to him? He was unaffected and he stood there. The Pāśupatāstra could not
harm him. He did not die even when he was hit by such a powerful weapon such as
Pāśupatāstra. This person someone wanted to kill. He created a new bow and arrow out of
the coconut’s middle portion and with that he made a stick. Normally, at the end of the
arrow there will be metal tip which will be dipped in poison. Imagine the wooden arrow
without metal tip at the end. Such an arrow is called niṣphala iṣu. Ordinary wooden arrow
[without the metal tip, without the sharp metal tip at the end], how can it kill the strong
person who has defied the Pāśupatāstra? In the same way, jñāna which is not threatened
by the world before the study of Vedānta will not be threatened by the world after the
study of Vedānta, because the world has lost its metal tip to hurt you.

śloka 7.281
आदावविद्यया चित्रैः स्वकार्यैर्जृम्भमाणया ।
युद्ध्वा बोधोऽजयत्सोद्य सुदृढो बाध्यतां कथम्॥ ७.२८१ ॥
ādāvavidyayā citraiḥ svakāryairjṛmbhamāṇayā.
yuddhvā bodho:'jayatsodya sudṛḍho bādhyatāṃ katham (7.281).
Vidyāraṇya dramatically presents the glory of knowledge. You have to imagine the
knowledge as a powerful soldier or a king who is in the battlefield. You have to imagine
avidyā as another warrior threatening and all the misconceptions all of them including
saṃsāra, sañcita, āgāmi and prārabdha are enemies and they are in millions. This jñāna
warrior is one and you have to imagine the battlefield in which the war has taken place.
What has happened after a three year Pañcadaśī course? This jñāna, the word with its
power, destroyed all avidyā, misconception and sañcita, all of them. Then the victor stands
where ignorance and misconception are fallen dead strewn all around. Vidyāraṇya says
imagine this picture. Here, Vidyāraṇya has taken jñāna as the soldier and not the jñānī.
Here, your mind is the battlefield and the Guru is trying to push the jñāna warrior into the
mind battlefield where there are millions of misconceptions and he tells you are liberated.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1166

At the end of the class ,the student is not confident and comes with ingenious excuses to
claim “I am still a saṃśārī and mokṣa is far away”. At last, hopeful, jñāna entered the
battlefield called śiṣya-hṛdaya. Then, the fight takes place between vidyā and avidyā
soldiers. Along with avidyā, all the doubts as to “whether I am an eligible candidate to
gain jñāna”, etc., and also the various viparīta-bhāvanās are also killed at the hands of
jñāna. By viparīta-bhāvanā we mean the vāsanās which are to be destroyed. It is like
dipping the darbha grass in the ocean and removing each one of them. I don’t have any
vāsanā for kṣaya the Guru repeatedly tells and at last śiṣya understands. After a long fight
of śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana fight, the knowledge won the war against avidyā
and avidyā-janya products, viparīta-bhāvanā and misconceptions. This knowledge has
become firm now because all the enemies have been destroyed. Now, the knowledge is
very very strong. How can that knowledge be threatened by the dead soldiers of avidyā,
misconceptions and viparīta-bhāvanā! Therefore, you don’t have to protect jñāna. You
don’t have to change the āśrama to protect the knowledge. Make sure the mindset you
have got that I am nitya-mukta Ātmā. More in the next class.

Class 229
śloka 281 contd.
Talking about the seventh and final stage of this spiritual journey which is in the form of
jīvanmukti or tṛpti, Vidyāraṇya points out that Jīvanmukta does not require any type of
sādhana at all, nor does he require any particular lifestyle. Karma-yoga sādhana is
associated with pravṛtti lifestyle and jñāna-yoga sādhana is associated with nivṛtti
lifestyle. The former is pañca-mahāyajña-pradhāna while the latter is associated with
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. After gaining jñāna all
are irrelevant. After jñānotpatti, jñānī need not deliberately use his freewill to perform any
particular sādhana. The jñānī after gaining jñāna he may take to one of two possibilities.
He moves with prārabdha and svabhāva; going with the current of prārabdha, with the
current of svabhava, he does not use the freewill for any particular purpose. The second
option is that a jñānī can deliberately use the freewill for loka-saṅgraha purpose and the
type of loka-saṅgraha depends upon the set up and the people surrounding him. Either he
is close with prārabdha or uses his freewill for loka-saṅgraha and that may be pravṛtti or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1167

nivṛtti lifestyle as both of them are not relevant to him personally, because his prime
mission is over. Then Pūrvapakṣī raised a question at this point: shouldn’t a jñānī use his
freewill and somehow protect the knowledge and lead a lifestyle which is conducive to the
preservation of knowledge? Previously, he used the freewill for the acquisition of
knowledge and later, should he not use the freewill and choose the lifestyle to preserve the
knowledge? Otherwise, the knowledge may go away and going away of knowledge is
same as arrival of saṃsāra. The saṃsāra waits outside. Will not jñāna go away? Should not
jñāna be preserved? This was Pūrvapakṣī’s question for which Vidyāraṇya has his answer
in these verses.
He says jñāna never requires protection. Jñāna will require protection only if there is any
source of threat for knowledge. In the entire cosmos, nobody, no event, including
Bhagavān, can be a threat to knowledge once gained, because knowledge is centred on
reality while everything else is mithyā. Mithyā does not have the power to attack either
Brahman or brahma-vidyā. Brahman is the truth and jñāna is strong because it is centred
on the truth. Therefore, after gaining knowledge nothing can be a threat; therefore, a jñānī
can be either in pravṛtti or nivṛtti. All the possible threats for knowledge Vidyāraṇya
presents as avidyā and avidyā-kārya. They are enemies to the vidyā. Avidyā’s products
alone can be possibly a threat for vidyā but on enquiry we find neither avidyā nor its
kārya can be a threat. Naturally, a question may come up: why do you talk about threat
coming from avidyā and its kārya because after gaining jñāna avidyā does not exist at all?
How can there be a threat from a non-existent avidyā. This question must come to you.
Why are you studying the threat for knowledge from avidyā when avidyā cannot even
exist after knowledge. For this, we have a technical answer. A topic we have not discussed
very often. I will briefly introduce. When jñānī gains the knowledge, the jñāna does not
destroy avidyā totally. Total destruction of avidyā does not take place through jñāna. Only
a partial destruction takes place which means partial avidyā survives. Naturally, the
question will be: which part is destroyed and which part is not destroyed? For that, we
should recall; before, we have said that avidyā has two-fold śakti one is called āvaraṇa-
śakti and another is called vikṣepa-śakti, āvaraṇa-śakti meaning the concealing power and
vikṣepa-śakti means the creating or the projecting power. We say that jñāna destroys only
the āvaraṇa-śakti of avidyā; the other part is called vikseapa śakti, otherwise other name
we use is avidyā-leśa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1168

Avidyā-leśa or vikṣepa-śaktimad-avidyā continues for a jñānī. And that alone is in the

form of jñānī’s kāraṇa-śarīra; and during the jñānī’s suṣupti he is in the avidyā-leśa only;
what kind of avidyā-leśa? An avidyā-leśa which has vikṣepa-śakti which does not have
āvaraṇa-śakti. Because of this vikṣepa-śakti alone, the two bodies of the jñānī are
surviving. The two bodies of the jñānī which means sthūla-śarīra and sūkṣma-śarīra both
continue because of that alone, the kartṛtva and bhoktṛtva, the pramātṛtva all of them
continue because of that avidyā-leśa only. Therefore, jñānī also has avidyā and avidyā-
kārya. What is jñānī’s avidyā? It is avidyā-leśa. What is avidyā-kārya? Kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva
and the pramātṛtva jñānī has as he has to see his disciples are not? If a jñānī sees his
disciples it is because of his pramātṛtva. If jñānī is speaking to his disciples it is because of
his kartṛtva; and if jñānī enjoys the wonderful responses from the disciples who claim they
are liberated, when the śiṣyas claim and congratulates jñānī has bhoktṛtva to receive this
kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva and pramātṛtva; they are avidyā-leśa kārya.
Now, the question is: will not this avidyā-leśa and avidyā-leśa-kārya in the form of
kartṛtva and bhoktṛtva affect jñāna?
The experience of the world is also because of avidyā-leśa and the experience of
prārabdha is also because of this avidyā-leśa; “will not all of them threaten jñāna?” is the
question of Pūrvapakṣī. Vidyāraṇya says none of them can threaten jñāna. Why none of
them can threaten jñāna? The āvaraṇa-śakti, the concealment, is gone. It is a concealment
which covered the truth. And what type of truth? They are twofold:
1. One truth is Brahman alone is satya that I alone is satya; that covering is gone and
therefore, a jñānī knows I am satya.
2. The second truth is the entire creation, all the transactions, the two śarīras, kartṛtva,
bhoktṛtva, pramātṛtva, prārabdha, all of them are mithyā.
The falsity of all the things the ajñānī does not know and ajñānī thinks śarīra is satya, the
mind is satya, emotions are satya, world is satya; this is the thinking of an ajñānī. In the
case of a jñānī, the truth of its falsity is very clear. In short, avidyā-leśa is satya or mithyā?
Jñānī sees avidyā-leśa as mithyā. Jñānī sees the vikṣepa-śakti as mithyā. When avidyā itself
is mithyā what about the vikṣepa! śarīra-dvaya is caused by mithyā. Kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva,
pramātṛtva is mithyā; consequent transactions are mithyā; prārabdha is mithyā; since
avidyā and its kārya are also mithyā, their continuity cannot threaten the I, Brahman, or
my knowledge of the fact that I am Brahman. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said in śloka 281: this

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1169

knowledge won the war of vidyā against avidyā and avidyā-kārya and killed all of them,
by which we mean they are falsified and therefore, incapable of doing any harm. Now, all
the avidyā-leśa and it’s kārya are like— to remember the example— are like dead rats;
when the cat is not afraid of live rats, why should it be afraid of the dead rats?! For a jñānī,
the whole creation is as good as dead because they are non-functional, just as mirage
water cannot do any function, the world cannot cause any harm to the knowledge. How
can the firm knowledge be threatened by either pravṛtti or nivṛtti?!

śloka 2.282
तिष्ठन्त्वज्ञानतत्कार्यशवा बोधेन मारिताः ।
न हानीर्बीध सम्राजः कीर्तिः प्रत्युत तस्य तैः ॥ ७.२८२॥
tiṣṭhantvajñānatatkāryaśavā bodhena māritāḥ.
na hānīrbīdha samrājaḥ kīrtiḥ pratyuta tasya taiḥ (7.282).
Vidyāraṇya is in a great victory mood. Therefore, enthusiastically he gives varieties of
examples. Imagine there is a hunter. One hunter goes to the forest with his gun and hunts
wild frightening scary animals and imagine he has killed some of the wild animals like
tiger and others. After killing them, he wants to show his glory. Hunters bring dead
animals to show them as trophy and sometimes they remove the skin and stuff the animal
or keep the head of the tiger. You can see the sharp teeth also. It is roaring and shiny eyes
are there. He keeps it in the hall. The purpose of keeping the animals is this. When those
animals were alive they were scary frightening animals. After death, the very same
animals kept in his drawing room are not only not scary but they also bring out his
hunting skill or his glory. The frightening animals have become glory proclaiming death
of animals. The animals remain the same but previously they were frightening and now
they are proclaiming the hunter’s glory. That is why the hunter prefers to keep the dead
animals in front of him and would like to keep it in the showcase so that his glory is
proclaimed. Vidyāraṇya says the whole universe is like the animals and this jñānī is the
hunter! His gun is ahaṃ brahma asmi. With that “ahaṃ brahma asmi” gun he has
destroyed the whole prapañca, śarīra-traya, sañcita, āgāmi prārabdha, kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva,
and they are all now dead. During his jīvanmukti-kāla, he wants to show case all of them,
he wants to keep the sthūla-śarīra not as a frightening one but as a trophy; similarly,
sūkṣma-śarīra, sūkṣma-prapañca sthūla-śarīra, sthūla-prapañca, similarly, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1170

surroundings, the very same world is no more frightening but that is the proclaimer of his
glory. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says all these are śavāḥ which means the stuffed animals
brought as trophy by the hunter jñānī. The world is śavāḥ and what śavāḥ can do to Śiva?
Ajñāna and all its products are śavāḥ, the stuffed dead animals. Vidyāraṇya takes
knowledge as the emperor; and this jñānī emperor stands tall in the mind of the wise
persons. There is no fear at all from the world. Pratibimba-ānanda is always fragile and it
can be threatened by the situations but jñānī is not bothered about pratibimba-ānanda and
he is busy claiming bimba-ānanda which is never fragile. On the other hand, knowledge
emperor only adds to his glory just as the frightening live animals became the glory
proclaiming trophies. Even as he is declaring the mantra throat may be choked. Throat is
always fragile. It may be affected by the external conditions. When jñānī says “I am free”
he is not referring to the body or throat but refers to I the adhiṣṭhāna Śākṣi-caitanya and he
is not threatened by anyone. The body is ever insecure but no jñānī thrives giving security
to the body.

śloka 7.283
य एवमतिशूरेण बोधेन न वियुज्यते ।
निवृत्त्या वा प्रवृत्त्या वा देहादिगतयास्य किम्॥ ७.२८३ ॥
ya evamatiśūreṇa bodhena na viyujyate.
nivṛttyā vā pravṛttyā vā dehādigatayāsya kim (7.283).
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya comes to the conclusion that nobody can decide the lifestyle of a
jñānī; even śāstra loses its capacity to give instructions to the jñānī. All śāstra-vidhis and
śāstra-niṣedhas are relevant only until one becomes a jñānī, because vidhis and niṣedhas
are based on varṇa-āśrama designation. Jñānī is one who has disowned the varṇa-āśrama
designation. He is beyond varṇa and varṇa-āśrama dharmas. When I don’t have varṇa
and āśrama; where is the need for me to be scared of the world and avidyā! When I take
myself as Ātmā, varṇa-āśramas are not there. Śāstra loses it capacity to instruct a jñānī to
do this or to do that. Therefore, jñānī is a set-free jñānī. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says a jñānī
is one who never gets out of this knowledge, this binary format, even temporarily. For
interacting with the world he may give his varṇa designation for worldly purposes, he is
beyond varṇas and varṇa-āśramas. For all the private and mental dialogues will be and
should be only in binary format. Therefore, the jñānī never gets out of this jñāna. This

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1171

jñāna alone he depends on for his security. In a triangular format, you depend upon Īśvara
for your security because as a jīva you have to hold on to Īśvara. One moment you forget,
the world stares at you and frightens you. Jñānī does not depend upon the external Īśvara
for his security but he depends upon the jñāna which tells that I am never insecure; where
is the question of seeking security from outside? This is the thought-pattern of a jñānī.
With this powerful knowledge, the jñānī feels he has the shield of knowledge. With this
shield, he can lead any type of life, either pravṛtti dealing with loka-saṅgraha or nivṛtti
enjoying. Ātmaratireva syādātmatṛptaśca mānavaḥ says Gītā 3.17. He can lead a quiet life
also. Either he can enjoy active life or choose withdrawn, secluded lifestyle. Ātmā does
not have pravṛtti or nivṛtti. Active life or passive lifestyle both are body-centred. What is
going to happen to a jñānī who is beyond the bodies? Kṛṣṇa mentions this in the 3rd
chapter of Gītā. Jñāna will always be safe and sound whether you are active or passive,
whether you are a sannyāsī or a mahā-gṛhastha with so many members in the family; first
taking care of first generation children and taking care of grand children. Let it continue.
Let the body go through prārabdha conditions but remember the fact that I was, I am and I
ever will be free; never give up this particular powerful thought, let it continue all the
time. And even when you are saying this, by chance the mithyā anātmā goes through
mithyā tears, exhausting its prārabdha, let it exhaust prārabdha; I am the Śākṣi-caitanya;
entertain this thought nothing will happen; go ahead.

śloka 7.284
प्रवृत्तावाग्रहो न्याय्यो बोधहीनस्य सर्वथा ।
स्वर्गाय वापवर्गाय योजितव्यं यतो नृभिः ॥ ७.२८४॥
pravṛttāvāgraho nyāyyo bodhahīnasya sarvathā.
svargāya vāpavargāya yojitavyaṃ yato nṛbhiḥ (7.284).
Jñānī has two options—
1. one is that he can go according to the prārabdha and svabhāva without using his
freewill because he does not require to use the freewill.
2. The second option is he can use the freewill and decide to do the loka-saṅgraha
blessing the humanity.
Once he decides to bless the humanity, what type of activity he will take up? Once the
loka-saṅgraha has been decided the type of activity will depend upon the people or the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1172

society that he is surrounded with. Suppose there are people who require karma-yoga,
who are anadhikārī— sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is not there even for smell— then to
those people he should talk about importance of karma-yoga; and if he also joins and sets
an example, serving the world, then others also will be inspired seeing the jñānī model. If
they have been there in the field for some time and they have to enter into Vedānta-vicāra,
otherwise precious life will be wasted and therefore, if he has to inspire them to do
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana he has to talk about the possession, obligation, relationship
and transactions reduction leading a simple life spending more time in śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana and reduce pañca mahāyajña. If you are all the time in pañca mahāyajña
when are you going to study Vedānta? He has to prescribe nivṛtti for them and as a model
he must also practice nivṛtti. Therefore, two types of people are introduced here. Pravṛtti-
requiring people are introduced. For a person who does not have jñāna and jñāna-yogyatā,
more and more interest must be taken in pravṛtti. Pravṛtti means pañca mahāyajña; I have
to emphasize social service; all them are required for a long time under all conditions.
These karmas are meant for the entry into svarga. I should say whether you want svarga
or whether you want citta-śuddhi, both of them require lot of karmas. If you want heaven
it is kāmya karma and if you want citta-śuddhi it is nitya-naimittika karma; either way
you should do lot of karmas. Sandhyāvandana you do, increase japa and all of them he
will have to do. Svarga means heaven. Apavarga means mokṣa and citta-śuddhi in this
context. For both of them, lot of efforts in the field of karma-yoga is to be done by the
people around.
Suppose a jñānī is teaching meditation for long time, what is the use of sitting meditation
as and in meditation they will be worrying about the family only and for such people jñānī
cannot talk about śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana or nivṛtti. Therefore, his plan will be
different. This śloka is not talking about a jñānī. That will be said in the next śloka. This
talks about the type of society the jñānī is surrounded by. In that condition what he will
do. That is said in the next śloka.

śloka 7.285
विद्वांश्चेत्तादृशां मध्ये तिष्ठेत्तदनुरोधतः ।
कायेन मनसा वाचा करोत्येवाखिलाः क्रियाः ॥ ७.२८५ ॥
vidvāṃścettādṛśāṃ madhye tiṣṭhettadanurodhataḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1173

kāyena manasā vācā karotyevākhilāḥ kriyāḥ (7.285).

If a wise person lives amidst such people described in the previous śloka, the people who
require lot of karma-yoga not śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana in keeping with their
condition, he avoids talking about śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana, vairāgya, sannyāsa;
even by mistake he does not utter! Then, what does he do? He performs all kinds of
karmas— be a Roman in Rome— through the body, through the mind, through the words;
that is what he will do. When he does, he does not think that I am doing for citta-śuddhi.
He does not say I want citta-śuddhi. He does not say even that I want sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti. Even sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is mithyā, sūkṣma-śarīra is itself mithyā; he
does not even seek sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti for I am nitya-mukta Ātmā. More in the
next class.

Class 230
śloka 7.285 contd.
The knowledge cannot be challenged by opposite experience. Therefore, Ātmā’s pūrṇatva
is unchallenged; Ātmā-jñāna is also unchallenged by any experience or events. Therefore,
jñāni’s tṛpti is not affected by the lifestyle he or she leads. The lifestyle has no connection
with Ātmā’s pūrṇatva and Ātmā-jñāna. Knowing this, śāstra gives him complete freedom
and śāstra neither prescribes pravṛtti nor nivṛtti for him. Pravṛtti means karma-anuṣṭhāna
and nivṛtti karma-parityāga. At the same time both are not prohibited for him. He is
neither bound by pravṛtti or nivṛtti nor is he barred by pravṛtti or nivṛtti because it has
nothing to do with Ātma-tṛpti or Ātmā-jñāna. Even loka-saṅgraha, the well being of the
world or service to the world, is not a commandment or a vidhi given by śāstra. When a
jñānī is not subjected to any vidhi he is not subjected to loka-saṅgraha also. If śāstra let s
loose the jñānī what will be the lifestyle of jñānī is the question. I said there are two
possibilities one is that he will go by his svabhāva, pravṛtti or nivṛtti; he goes according to
that. Of course, svabhāva will not be adhārmic because as a sādhaka he has avoided
vāsanās not for a day or two, or a week or a year, but for decades he had diligently
worked on vāsanā. That possibility is not there and he goes by his svabhāva. Alternatively,
he may choose to do loka-saṅgraha using his freewill. It is not for acquiring anything for
himself for he has no agenda before him. He will choose the freewill for loka-saṅgraha;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1174

that may be his svabhāva. Once he decides the freewill to bless the world the type of
blessing he does the type of service he offers will depend upon the surrounding society
people and their need.
Based on this surrounding set up, Vidyāraṇya divides into two. One type of people is
those who have pravṛtti. One type of people may be after artha, kāma or dharma. Instead
of mokṣa we use the word jñāna-yogyatā. If a person is interested in one of the four,
dharma, artha, kāma or mokṣa, all the appropriate means will have to be performed. For
first three, they need pravṛtti marga. If some are not interested dharma, artha, kāma, but
only jñāna-yoga for they are jñāna-yogya-jijnasus or adhikārīs. With regard to those
people, pravṛtti will not be relevant and karma-anuṣṭhāna will not be relevant as it will be
an obstacle to śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. Therefore, what they require sarva-dharma-
parityāga. They require nivṛtti. This Jīvanmukta requires nothing. One group of people
may require pravṛtti, another nivṛtti; depending upon the need either he goes to pravṛtti
or goes to nivṛtti. That is said here. Svarga represents dharma, artha and kāma and
apavarga represents jñāna-yogyatā. The people will have to do one karma or the other.
Those who want artha, dharma, kāma will have to do lot of kāmya karma and those who
want jñāna-yogyatā they have to do niṣkāma karma. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said they
must be into one karma or the other. The wise person instead of verbally inspiring them,
where the word will not have that much value, he himself will lead from the front; instead
of merely advising he himself will take to laukika-vaidika karmas. He will have to do pūjā,
pārāyaṇa, etc, in keeping with the type of people. One who wants jñāna-yogyatā his
mindset is that mokṣa is sādhya and all I do is sādhana even as he is doing saṅkalpa. That
is the mindset called yoga-mindset. And that is why he is called karma-yogī. But when
vidvān performs the very same karma, may be sandhyāvandana or agnihotra or any other
pūjā because he is a gṛhastha jñānī, when he performs that, before he starts the pūjā, he
looks at the mindset and asks what is the mindset being the student of Pañcadaśī having
assimilated the teaching? He deliberately entertains an appropriate mindset that I am not a
sādhaka; whatever I am not doing is not a sādhana and mokṣa is not a sādhya, because
mokṣa happens to be my very svarūpa. Then why I am doing all these things? So that next
generation in the family will imbibe good practice of daily pūjā and even if they are not
there, I can pray for the well-being of the whole world. Therefore, jñānī performs all the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1175

karma. Karma-yogī he can be called only when the mindset is I am the sādhaka. When
when it is that I am Ātmā he is a jñānī.

śloka 7.286
एष मध्ये बुभुत्सानां यदा तिष्ठेत्तदा पुनः ।
बोधायैषां क्रियाः सर्वा दूषयंस्त्यजतु स्वयम्॥ ७.२८६ ॥
eṣa madhye bubhutsānāṃ yadā tiṣṭhettadā punaḥ.
bodhāyaiṣāṃ kriyāḥ sarvā dūṣayaṃstyajatu svayam (7.286).
Now, Vidyāraṇya talks about the second group of people who are adhikārīs are interested
in jñāna-yoga or śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. They are called as bubhutsus, desirous of
knowledge, or jijñāsus as we saw in the 7th chapter of Gītā. When the jñānī happens to be
among them, he should not encourage pravṛtti to them for it will not produce knowledge.
He should criticize pravṛtti and talk about it’s limitation, as how long you will remain in
triangular format, etc? It requires courage but we have to do it sometime or other in some
janma or the other. This wise person will encourage the people to get up from ignorance.
He will strongly talk about the limitation of all karma including nitya-naimittika karma for
they will invoke kartṛtva and bhoktṛtva more and should impress upon them that it is not
the ultimate goal of one’s life. He has to repeatedly hit and make them get up otherwise
they will permanently be drowned in ignorance. Crores of karma cannot replace vicāra.
Śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana he has to repeatedly highlight to the people surrounding
him. You may in the midst of great crowd. It is not the place that makes the nivṛtti but the
mindset that decides nivṛtti or pravṛtti. Vidyāraṇya says he should not verbally say things
but he should stand in front and lead himself giving up those karmas. He should give up
kāmya karma, prāyaścitta karma, nitya-naimittika he should renounce or reduce giving
way for śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. Here also, when others give, up renunciation is
sādhana for them and for jñānī even renunciation is not to be seen as sādhana, but he
practices it as a role-model, a standard for others. Therefore, he uses freewill either in
pravṛtti field or nivṛtti field in accordance with the set up or surroundings.

śloka 7. 287
अविद्वदनुसारेण वृत्तिर्बुद्धस्य युज्यते ।
स्तनन्धयानुसारेण वर्तते तत्पिता यतः ॥ ७.२८७ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1176

avidvadanusāreṇa vṛttirbuddhasya yujyate.

stanandhayānusāreṇa vartate tatpitā yataḥ (7.287).
Vidyāraṇya says it is not a new thing I am teaching you. It is seen in the world. Grown up
and wise people will lead a life which will better the next generation. Parents do many
things even when they don’t need for themselves but do things for the children growing
up. Even though the father can walk on two legs still he follows like the child for the child
lacks strength but in the case of father it is not the lack of strength but he wants to go along
with the child. Even the language he uses is the child’s language. When the child is two or
three years, mother adopts the child’s language. So too, Guru uses the language of the
disciple with the hope that the student will look for Ātmā-jñāna.

śloka 7.288
अधिक्षिप्तस्ताडितो वा बालेन स्वपिता तदा ।
न क्लिश्यति न कुप्येच्च बालं प्रत्युत लालयेत्॥ ७.२८८ ॥
adhikṣiptastāḍito vā bālena svapitā tadā.
na kliśyati na kupyecca bālaṃ pratyuta lālayet (7.288).
Vidyāraṇya says in this process, even though the father’s intention and motive is good and
he wants to bring up the child to his level of maturity, often because of the immaturity of
the children, they don’t understand the intention of the father properly and therefore, they
may criticize the parents and they may even say we will leave you. In whatever way the
children behave, in spite of their misbehaviour because of the immaturity and lack of
understanding, the father will continue to have love and compassion for them and even if
they want to leave him, he will not leave them and somehow or the other, coaxing and
cajoling and using nice words, he has one aim that the child also must become exactly like
mature and grown up like thim. Similarly, Jīvanmukta is the father of the entire universe
as it were. Every human being, every ajñānī human being, is a spiritual baby, confused
baby, immature baby and jñānī handles each differently with only one motive: somehow
they should come to the level of a jñānī. That is the agenda a jñānī has which we call loka-
saṅgraha. Some part of the teaching may not be palatable to the students. Thus, they may
even use such words tantamount to criticize the teaching and the teacher. The child may
even kick and beat the parent, but the parent never bothers about them. He does not
suffer, he is not disturbed and he is not affected by the misbehaviour of the immature

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1177

baby nor does he get angry with the immature misbehaviour of the baby. On the other
hand, he fondles the baby with extra care because the baby is disturbed with no question
of misunderstanding. The jñānī is compared to the father and the entire ignorant
humanity to the child leaving aside the wise people. They are spiritual children.

śloka 7.289
निन्दितः स्तूयमानो वा विद्वानज्ञैर्न निन्दति ।
न स्तौति किन्तु तेषां स्याद्यथा बोधस्तथा चरेत्॥ ७.२८९ ॥
ninditaḥ stūyamāno vā vidvānajñairna nindati.
na stauti kintu teṣāṃ syādyathā bodhastathā caret (7.289).
Now, he comes to the dārṣṭānta. By the spiritual babies, this wise person may be criticized
and insulted. Sometimes, they may even glorify or praise. He does not retaliate any action
nor does he insult back the people who are like babies for their actions are born out of
ignorance, immaturity or the vāsanās. He understands their problem and he does not take
them as their mistakes. He has only one agenda as what he should do to make him or her
spiritually grow. Fortunately, the scriptures have presented the sādhanas for every level of
the students. That is why we say Guru must be śrotrīya brahma-niṣṭhā. Only in Vedas,
sādhanas are given for the various levels. If a person is not ready for śravaṇa, then he
should be advised to do pārāyaṇa all right, but take him to pañca mahāyajña. At the
appropriate time take him to śravaṇa, manana and nididhyāsana.

śloka 7.290
येनायं नटनेनात्र बुध्यते कार्यमेव तत्।
अज्ञप्रबोधान्नैवान्यत्कार्यमस्त्यत्र तद्विदः ॥ ७.२९० ॥
yenāyaṃ naṭanenātra budhyate kāryameva tat.
ajñaprabodhānnaivānyatkāryamastyatra tadvidaḥ (7.290).
Vidyāraṇya here jocularly says that he will have to dance to the ajñānī’s tunes. If the Guru
decides to do loka-saṅgraha, he is supposed to dance to the tune of the disciples or the
people whom he wants to take to spirituality. In this world, the wise man should behave
in such a way that the ignorant persons will be able to understand the truth by whatever
conduct he can present. The same thought is stated by Lord Kṛṣṇa in Gītā as follows:
yadyadācarati śreṣṭhastattadevetaro janaḥ;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1178

sa yatpramāṇaṃ kurute lokastadanuvartate (3.21)

As the wise man conducts himself in this world, he sets the guidelines for the ignorant.
Whatever he sets as the norm of wisdom, that is accepted by the ignorant as pramāṇa as
an example of authority. As the śreṣṭha Puruṣa behaves, so is followed by the ignorant
man. There is no project for a jñānī other than enlightening the unenlightened.

śloka 7.291
कृ तकृ त्यतया तृप्तः प्राप्तप्राप्यतया पुनः ।
तृप्यनेवं स्वमनसा मन्यतेऽसौ निरन्तरम्॥ ७.२९१ ॥
kṛtakṛtyatayā tṛptaḥ prāptaprāpyatayā punaḥ.
tṛpyanevaṃ svamanasā manyate:'sau nirantaram (7.291).
Jñānī keeps the agenda of uplifting the ignorant people from saṃsāra and he does
whatever is required according to the situations. He interacts with the disciples and also
hears their problems, but because of his interaction their problems should not get
transferred to the jñānī. At the end, mutual transference problem should not take place.
That will also not happen because jñānī comes back to binary format and sees the whole
world as a drama remembering the fifth capsule: by forgetting my nature, I convert life
into a struggle and by remembering my nature I convert life into a sport or entertainment.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says when he or she is with himself, with the internal dialogue that
goes on within his mind, the mental chatterings that are there, when he is not interacting
with the world, in the early morning when I get up, in the night before I go to bed, these
are the times saṃsāra gets evoked and worries tend to come, he watches them and seeing
the binary format all these things disappear. He is no more a sādhaka looking at the
distant mokṣa. He has nothing to be done. Things are to be done by kartā and he knows: I
am akartā. How kṛtya can is there for an akartā. I have nothing to be accomplished. If
things are away from me, I have to strive to get them and when all things are in me, why
should strive or go anywhere to get them! Therefore, he enjoys his real nature which is
called tṛpti. Details in the next class.

Class 231

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1179

śloka 7.291 contd.

We saw that a Jñāna-yogī is one who practices binary format by which he learns to use the
word I with nitya-mukta Ātmā; both in the internal dialogue and in private moments I
learn to equate I with nitya-mukta Ātmā. Because of these practices two types of anxiety
comes down:
1. One is the anxiety caused by mokṣa as a sādhya.
2. The other is the anxiety caused by varieties of karma as sādhana.
Sādhana-based anxiety and sādhya-based anxiety. sādhya-based anxiety is constantly
being concerned about when will I get mokṣa, will it get mokṣa? This constant concern is
sādhya-based anxiety because I look upon mokṣa as sādhya. How can I be more and more
assertive in my sādhana? How can I improve my quality of sādhana; all types of sādhana-
centric concerns or anxieties is the second for a spiritual seeker. When I practice the binary
format, both these anxieties are instantaneously removed because I don’t look upon mokṣa
as a sādhya but I look upon as my svarūpa. When mokṣa is no more a sādhya but svarūpa,
how can I nourish the anxieties regarding mokṣa? Therefore, those anxieties are
straightaway rejected; therefore, there is a gradual reduction in the mokṣa-centric, sādhya-
centric anxieties. And when mokṣa stops to be a sādhya I cannot look for any sādhana
because sādhanas are relevant only when mokṣa is looked upon as sādhya. Therefore, I see
the total irrelevance of sādhanas with regard to mokṣa. All the activities are nothing but
sharing the resources with the world; time resource, knowledge resource, energy resource,
but since none of them is sādhana, how can I be assertive in sādhana? Increase the
quantity, increase the quality, but all those researches and explorations will appear
irrelevant when I come to the binary format as a Jñāna-yogī. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says in
291 both the sādhya-anxiety and sādhana-anxiety fade away for a Jñāna-yogī and when
these two anxieties fade away the consequence is relaxation and tṛpti. No more spiritual
struggle will be there. Yama said in Kaṭhopaniṣad even the spiritual sādhana is a form of
spiritual struggle. Both of them are bondage and both of them go away; that means there
is tṛpti, there is contentment and there is relaxation because of the fading away of sādhya-
centric anxiety and sādhana-centric anxiety because I am no more a sādhaka. I have
practiced “I am nitya-siddha nitya-mukta Ātmā”. Sādhya should no more be a sādhya.
Sādhya is my svarūpa. Mokṣa is my svarūpa. That is indicated by the word prāpta.
Therefore, be free from both types of anxieties. This Jñāna-yogī is completely relaxed and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1180

contented. Therefore, this contentment comes in the form of tṛpti. He looks upon himself
with the mind; in his own mind, he assesses himself; he looks upon himself; all the time he
looks upon himself in the following manner. The following ślokas are in quotation and the
tṛpta jñāna-yogi’s song. It is mokṣa śama gaṇa which is enumerated from 292 to 297.

śloka 7.292
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं नित्यं स्वात्मानमञ्जसा वेद्मि ।
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं ब्रह्मानन्दो विभाति मे स्पष्टम्॥ ७.२९२ ॥
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ nityaṃ svātmānamañjasā vedmi.
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ brahmānando vibhāti me spaṣṭam (7.292).
We can imagine a musical program with Vidyāraṇya’s band. You imagine you are
entering the hall. The hall is divided into two: one is the stage where the music program is
going and the other is the audience. Who are the members of the musical troupe? All those
who are in binary format are the members, it is said. It is written on the stage: binary
format. They can enter the stage and join the music concert. Whoever likes to continue in
the triangular format they can buy popcorn and sit in the audience. They cannot sing the
song. They can only hear the song and feel it as though it is a distant dream. Maximum
they can say śābāśa (kudos) and all those things. Whether you want to be the audience or
in the musical band the choice is yours, so says Vidyāraṇya. Dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ I
am indeed rich and wealthy and fortunate. Dhanya means dhanavān which means
fortunate. Fortunate means owner of a huge fortune. It is not material wealth; vidyā-
dhanam sarva-dhanāt pradhānam. I have got the wealth that cannot be stolen by the local
burglars. They can take away other forms of wealth but not this; therefore, Vidyāraṇya or
the group of these Jñāna-yogis sing aham dhanyaḥ, I am blessed. It is repeated for
emphasis. I constantly know and claim the Ātmā as myself, nityaṃ svātmānam. I know
and claim I am Ātmā myself. When I claim Ātmā as myself, naturally, I have to claim
Ātmā-ānanda also as myself. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says the consequence is ānanda-claim.
Ātmā-claim is instantaneously followed by ānanda-claim therefore, he says dhanyohaṃ
dhanyoham. We are not talking about experiential ānanda; experiential ānanda is a
reflection. Pratibimba-ānanda is a reflection. It belongs to ānandamaya kośa. That
experiential ānanda will not be permanently there as it is subject to arrival and departure.
I am not talking about experiential pratibimba-ānanda but I claim a non-experiential

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1181

bimba-ānanda which never arrives and departs. It is not subject to loss even when
pratibimba-ānanda goes away. Therefore, brahma-ānanda means the bimba-ānanda.
Ānanda is as avident as my own svarūpa.

śloka 7.293
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं दुःखं सांसारिकं न वीक्षेऽद्य ।
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं स्वस्याज्ञानं पलायितं क्वापि ॥ ७.२९३ ॥
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ duḥkhaṃ sāṃsārikaṃ na vīkṣe:'dya.
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ svasyājñānaṃ palāyitaṃ kvāpi (7.293).

Again, dhanyohaṃ dhanyoham he repeats with the sense of fulfillment: I am fortunate

indeed because duḥkhaṃ saṃśarīkam na vīkṣe. I see all forms of duḥkha as a property of
anātmā. All forms of duḥkha biological pains belong to the biological anātmā and
psychological pains belong to psychological anātmā and anātmā will have jvaras if you
remember. Anātmās will have arriving-departing jvara but I have escaped from anujvara
because I have distanced myself from anātmā by the practice of binary format. I don't see
duḥkha in Ātmā. Any form of duḥkha experienced, I hand over to sthūla-śarīra anātmā, or
sūkṣma-śarīra anātmā and future possible duḥkha belongs to kāraṇa-śarīra Ātmā.
Anātma-sambandha-jvaras I don’t see or transfer to Ātmā. The moment I transfer to Ātmā
it is no more jvara and it will be called anujvara. Once I transfer to Ātmā, instead of saying
Ātmā has duḥkha, I have duḥkha. It will be transferred to I also. Therefore, I don’t transfer
the anātmā duḥkha to me, who am Ātmā. I don’t have anujvara problem. Therefore, he
says saṃśarīka anātmā-duḥkha I don’t see in me, the Ātmā. Transferring anātmā duḥkha
upon me, the Ātmā, is the mistake born out of ignorance and that ignorance has
disappeared somewhere, afraid of jñāna weapon. You can never say where the ignorance
went away nor can you say from where the ignorance comes. Ajñāna is mithyā and
therefore, you cannot talk about its source and you cannot talk about its disappearance;
you cannot talk about its nature. The mysterious nature of ignorance is indicated by the
word kvāpi.

śloka 7.294
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं कर्तव्यं मे न विद्यते किञ्चित्।
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं प्राप्तव्यं सर्वमद्य सम्पन्नम्॥ ७.२९४ ॥
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ kartavyaṃ me na vidyate kiñcit.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1182

dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ prāptavyaṃ sarvamadya sampannam (7.294).

What was said in the first line of śloka 291 which we started today is repeated here. There
they are the words of Vidyāraṇya but here they are from the mouth of all the jñānis. I
don’t have any sādhana to gain mokṣa. I don’t look upon any Vaidika karma or any
laukika karma as a mokṣa-sādhana. That does not mean that a jñānī should necessarily
renounce karma. Jñānī especially jñānī gṛhastha is duty-bound to do nitya-naimittika-
karmas. Karmas will continue but he does not look upon it for his mokṣa. Even before
starting the puṇya karma he remains himself: I am in binary format and therefore,
whatever puṇya is generated by this, they are meant loka-kṣemārtham, even family kṣema
as even family is seen is Viśva-rūpa Īśvara’s family; I the Ātmā has no family. It is Īśvara’s
family and it is yoga-kṣemārtham that whatever is done. What about me? One should not
state “I have got mokṣa but I have not gained dharma, artha, kāma”! Everything is
included in the mokṣa. Mokṣa is infinitude. Ātmā is not located somewhere, but
everything is in me and therefore, all the lokas are not away from me. Therefore, where is
the question of acquiring them for my fulfillment?! Others may have dharma, artha, kāma
and I may help them; that is a different thing but it has nothing to do with my pūrṇatva.
My pūrṇatva is irrespective of others’ fulfillment. It is complete. The mission is
accomplished; that is the idea. The first line removes sādhana-centred anxiety and the
second line removes sādhya-centred anxiety. I am no more a mumukṣu but I am nitya-
mukta Ātmā.

śloka 7.295
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं तृप्तिर्मे कोपमा भवेल्लोके ।
धन्योऽहं धन्योऽहं धन्यो धन्यो धन्यः पुनः पुनः ॥ ७.२९५ ॥
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ tṛptirme kopamā bhavelloke.
dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo:'haṃ dhanyo dhanyo dhanyaḥ punaḥ punaḥ (7.295).
All the people other than jñānis get pratibimba-ānanda. It is because of pratibimba-
ānanda that they enjoy some tṛpti. The people in triangular format acquire tṛpti through
pratibimba-ānanda, derived from worldly accomplishment, be it name, fame, money,
position and possession. Vidyāraṇya says, unfortunately, they don’t know the limitation
of the pratibimba-ānanda which we saw in Taittirīya Upaniṣad. Pratibimba-ānanda is
temporary; and the second limitation is it is subject to gradation. In priya-vrtti pratibimba-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1183

ānanda is little. In moda-vṛtti it is moderate, slightly higher and then in pramoda-vṛtti it is

little bit more high. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad we saw mānuṣa-ānanda gandharvaānanda,
pitṛ-ānanda, deva-gandharva-ānanda, etc. Therefore, even if they get tṛpti, that tṛpti will
not be totally satisfying because they are seeing the superior tṛpti of the neighbour;
therefore, there is no total tṛpti; there is dissatisfaction continuing all the time. Here, my
tṛpti is not born out of arriving pratibimba-ānanda not that I will reject pratibimba-
ānanda. I will enjoy when there is a nice thing I will certainly enjoy pratibimba-ānanda but
I am not a slave or dependent on that. My dependence is on the bimba-ānanda which is
my nature. Therefore, my tṛpti is un-losable. Not only that, there is no question of getting
something more or superior; therefore, tṛpti is pūrṇa also. Pūrṇa-tṛpti is available only in
the binary format. Anitya-apūrṇa-tṛpti alone is available in the triangular format.
Therefore, this jñānī asks what comparison is there in the world for this nitya-pūrṇa-tṛpti!
It is incomparable, it is matchless, because all other tṛptis in the world are pratibimba-
tṛptis, anitya-apūrṇa-tṛptis. In the ordinary world of material accomplishment in the
triangular format, we don’t negate the tṛpti but we say the tṛpti is anitya and apūrṇa. We
call it sādi sānta. It means there is next higher ānanda which you will look for. It is a
change of format but not a destination you reach.

śloka 7.296
अहो पुण्यमहो पुण्यं फलितं फलितं दृढम्।
अस्य पुण्यस्य सम्पत्तेरहो वयमहो वयम्॥ ७.२९६ ॥
aho puṇyamaho puṇyaṃ phalitaṃ phalitaṃ dṛḍham.
asya puṇyasya sampatteraho vayamaho vayam (7.296).
You can understand aho puṇyam aho puṇyam, the puṇya I should have done must be
indeed great! It is that puṇya which launched into binary format instead of retaining me in
triangular format. For that, type of puṇya required is spiritual puṇya. Material puṇya will
keep a person in triangular format and increase the set up, body, etc. That is also puṇya. It
will improve all right but it will keep but we require another type of spiritual puṇya. It
should take me out of this format and launch me in binary format; therefore, he says great
indeed is my puṇya! Great indeed is my puṇya! All that puṇya has clearly fructified. The
proof is that I am able to come to binary format; the indication is fructification of spiritual
puṇya. The comfort in binary format, the confidence that I can be in binary format are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1184

because of fructification of the karma-yoga puṇya done either in this janma or in the
previous janma. It has fructified completely because the result is visible. The visibility is I
can join the musical band instead sitting in the audience!

śloka 7.297
अहो शास्त्रमहो शास्त्रमहो गुरुरहो गुरुः।
अहो ज्ञानमहो ज्ञानमहो सुखमहो सुखम्॥ ७.२९७ ॥
aho śāstramaho śāstramaho gururaho guruḥ.
aho jñānamaho jñānamaho sukhamaho sukham (7.297)
First he gave credit to himself for gaining mokṣa. Great is indeed is the śāstra which alone
catapulted me or which alone through me took others to the binary format. Without
puṇya a person will never come to śāstra. He will attempt all other things except śāstra.
Therefore, śāstra gets the next credit. If I have tried śāstra by myself I could not have got
head or tail. The śāstric benefit came in the form of a Guru. Great indeed is the Guru who
made śāstra meaningful to me. I am wonderful, śāstra is wonderful, Guru is wonderful,
jñāna is wonderful. As a result of all these, my puṇya, Guru and śāstra, I gained jñāna,
great jñāna; that brought binary format. That is indeed great. As a result of all these things
I realised my own svarūpa which is tṛpti; nitya pūrṇa-sukha or tṛpti. With
this ,Vidyāraṇya completes the commentary on the second line of Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad. All the seven stages are over. He concludes the 7th chapter.

śloka 7.298
तृप्तिदीपमिमं नित्यं येऽनुसन्दधते बुधाः ।
ब्रह्मानन्दे निमज्जन्तस्ते तृप्यन्ति निरन्तरम्॥ ७.२९८ ॥
tṛptidīpamimaṃ nityaṃ ye:'nusandadhate budhāḥ.
brahmānande nimajjantaste tṛpyanti nirantaram (7.298).
This tṛpti deep chapter is for anusandhāna; anyone who managed to do that will get
brahma-ānanda.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1185

Class 232

Summary of the seventh chapter: Tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa

Today, I will give you the summary of the 7th chapter titled Tṛpti-dīpa-prakaraṇa which
happens to be the biggest chapter with 298 ślokas. This summary will be a bird’s eye view
of the entire chapter. For the convenience of summarizing I am not going according to
serial order of the ślokas. I take the topic discussed here and I will summarise the topics
that are discussed in the 7th chapter. I have classified these into ten topics.
1. The first topic is avatārikā or introduction. In the first two ślokas Vidyāraṇya points
out that this 7th chapter is an elaborate analysis of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra
4.4.12:
ātmānaṃ cedvijānīyādayamasmīti pūruṣaḥ;
kimicchankasya kāmāya śarīramanusaṃjvaret.
A mantra which is in the form of a śloka itself. The simple running meaning of this
mantra is the following. Puruṣa means Jīvātmā, ātmā means Paramātmā vijānīyāt
should know. Jīvātmā should know Paramātmā. How? The knowledge ayam asmi
iti the knowledge should be: Paramātmā I am. It means aikya-rūpeṇa jñānam;
otherwise, aparokṣa jñāna is to be gained. The translation of the first line is Jīvātmā
should know Paramātmā as I am Paramātmā. Then the word cet means if Jīvātmā
gains that knowledge or suppose the Jīvātmā manages to gain the knowledge,
desiring what object will the jñānī struggle with the body? It means there are no
objects to be desired. There is no bhogya vastu to be desired. Kasya kāmāya means
desiring for whose satisfaction will a jñānī struggle with the body? This means
there is nobody who should be satisfied by the jñānī because the ahaṅkāra which
requires satisfaction has been eliminated. Desiring what? The object is eliminated.
Desire for whom? The ahaṅkāra is eliminated. Thus, there is no desired, there is no
desire and there is no desired object. As such, there is no struggle with the body.
This freedom from struggle is the benefit. This is the running meaning of the
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra which Vidyāraṇya introduces in the first two
ślokas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1186

2. The next topic I take is sapta avasthā. The seven stages of the Jīvātmā during his
spiritual journey which he has to go through to gain the ultimate. This Vidyāraṇya
discusses from ślokas 23 to 47. The seven stages are the following:
1. First stage is ajñāna; it is unexpressed Brahman-ignorance. That means
Brahman-ignorance is there but he does not say I have Brahman-ignorance. It is
stage one.
2. Second stage is āvaraṇa. Āvaraṇa means it is expressed Brahman-ignorance
wherein a person knows there is something called Brahman; and then he says I
do not know that Brahman. The expressed ignorance is called āvaraṇa.
3. Third stage is vikṣepa; misconception born out of ignorance. It is nothing but the
duality in the form of bhoktā and bhogya. bhoktṛ-bhogya-dvaita is the
misconception. It is misconception because the truth is Advaita. Mistaking
Advaita as dvaita is called vikṣepa, the third stage.
4. Fourth stage is parokṣa jñāna. The knowledge that Brahman is there. There is
Brahman. This is called parokṣa jñāna and Vidyāraṇya adds two notes
regarding parokṣa jñāna. The first note is that parokṣa jñāna is born out of the
avāntara vākyas of the Upaniṣads. Avāntara vākya is any statement that defines
Brahman. All brahma-lakṣaṇa-vākyas are called avāntara-vākyas. Avāntara-
vākya reveals Brahman and it is called parokṣa jñāna. Another note Vidyāraṇya
adds is that parokṣa jñāna removes the first type of āvaraṇa. Āvaraṇa itself
which is the second item, Vidyāraṇya divides into two. One āvaraṇa is called
Brahman-existence-āvaraṇa and the second āvaraṇa is called Brahman-
experience-āvaraṇa; sattva-āvaraṇa and bhāna-āvaraṇa. Vidyāraṇya says
parokṣa jñāna removes sattva-āvaraṇa of Brahman which means people know
that Brahman is. This is the fourth stage.
5. The fifth stage is called aparokṣa jñāna. Aparokṣa jñāna is that Brahman is
myself. Then, he adds two notes on that. First note is aparokṣa jñāna is born out
of mahā-vākya. Then, the second note is aparokṣa jñāna removes bhāna-
āvaraṇa of Brahman. That is, experience-āvaraṇa of Brahman is removed
because one knows Brahman is “I am” which is experienced all the time. This is
the next stage.
6. Then the sixth stage is śoka-nivṛtti, freedom from sorrow. It is the sixth stage.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1187

7. The seventh and final stage tṛpti-prāpti or ānanda-prapti. This, Vidyāraṇya

conveys with the story of the tenth man. I don’t want to go to the story part.
3. Hereafter, we come to the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra proper. The next topic
is from line one of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. Puruṣa-vyākhyānām; a
commentary on the word Puruṣa is the third topic. This is analysed from śloka no 3
to 22. Vidyāraṇya says the word Puruṣa here refers to Jīvātmā the seeker of
knowledge. He is the knower. Then, Vidyāraṇya analyses what is the meaning of
the word Jīvātmā and he says the primary meaning of the word Jīvātmā is the
mixture of bimba-caitanya and pratibimbita-caitanya, the original consciousness
plus the reflected consciousness; this mixture is the mukhya artha or the primary
meaning of the word Jīvātmā. Even though the mukhya artha is the mixture, it has
two implied meanings lakṣyārthas. They are two. When ajñānī refers to the word
jīva he does not know it is a mixture and therefore, he refers to cidābhāsa. Kevala
cidābhāsa leaving out to the cit the original, the reflected consciousness alone
exclusively of the original consciousness, kevala cidābhāsa is the lakṣyārtha used by
ajñānī. Therefore, whenever ajñānī talks about himself he refers to the cidābhāsa
part; that is why he talks about going to other lokas, etc. When the jñānī uses the
word Jīvātmā, he uses the second lakṣyārtha. The second lakṣyārtha is that he takes
only the original consciousness part of the mixture. Whenever a jñānī uses the word
Jīvātmā or aham, he takes only the original consciousness part and he leaves out the
cidābhāsa part which is the mithyā. Jīvātmā has three meanings the mixture is the
primary meaning, cidābhāsa is the secondary meaning one and cit is the secondary
meaning two; and Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya when we talk about are we taking
mukhyārtha or lakṣyārtha one or lakṣyārtha two? It refers to lakṣyārtha two
because jñānī uses the word aham, the mixture alone is uttering the word, but
mentally he dismisses with bhāga-tyāga lakṣaṇā the cidābhāsa part and refers to the
cit aṃśa. And from the standpoint of cit aṃśa, ahaṃ brahma asmi is perfectly
possible. This is the topic from śloka no 3 to 22.
4. Then the next topic is ātmānam jānīyāt. We will take the prefix later. It means
Jīvātmā should know Paramātmā. These two words are explained from ślokas 70 to
96. This is the fourth topic. In this portion, Vidyāraṇya says Paramātmā is known
by the analysis of mahāvākya. Mahā-vākya-vicāra is the means of knowing the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1188

Paramātmā. He does mahā-vākya-vicāra heavily borrowing Adi Śaṅkarācārya’s

famous work Vākyavṛtti. The whole text is mahā-vākya-vicāra. Vidyāraṇya
borrows several ślokas and analyses the mahāvākya and arrives at the meaning; the
word Jīvātmā means the original consciousness; the word Paramātmā also means
the original consciousness; these two are one and the same. The rest are all mithyā.
The reflected consciousness part of Paramātmā is mithyā, reflected consciousness
part of Jīvātmā is mithyā, the reflecting medium part of Paramātmā is mithyā and
reflecting medium part of Jīvātmā is also mithyā. Reflecting medium at macro level
and reflecting medium at micro level are mithyā. Pratibimbita caitanya is mithyā
and bimba caitanya alone is satya. This is mahā-vākya-vicāra. This is the fourth
topic: Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya with the help of Vākyavṛtti text.
5. The sixth topic is the prefix vi occurring before the word jānīyāt. The significance of
‘vi’-vākyānām is discussed from śloka 97 to 134. The prefix vi means one should
know without obstacles. It should be a knowledge without obstacles. It should be a
conviction. Vidyāraṇya discuses three types of obstacles. One is obstacles at the
interpretation level; interpretation of the Upaniṣad; the same text is interpreted
differently by different Ācāryas. We may get doubts on interpretations. It is
interpretational obstacle called pramāṇa-asambhāvanā. The second obstacle is
intellectual or logical obstacle. Intellect may raise many logical questions or it may
feel the aikya is logically not swallowable. This intellectual doubt or logical doubt is
the second obstacle. It is called prameya-asambhāvanā. Third one is habitual
obstacle. That is the habitual identification with anātmā or with the triangular
format; that is a powerful vāsanā. In our language viparīta-bhāvanā is the third
obstacle or former vāsanā-obstacle. Therefore, the student is not able to shift to
binary format efficiently and therefore, eternally, mokṣa is successfully postponed.
We manage to postpone mokṣa. This is the third obstacle. Pramāṇa-asambhāvanā,
prameya-asambhāvanā and viparīta-bhāvanā; these three are to be eliminated by
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. Śravaṇa is to get interpretation properly ṣaḍvidha-
tātparya-liṅga-nirṇaya-dvārā. If you understand, it is wonderful. Otherwise, wish
you all the best. Then by using reasoning, we have to remove logical or intellectual
doubts. By practicing nididhyāsana, you have to remove all the doubts to shift to
binary format. He talks about the two types of nididhyāsana: one is samādhi-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1189

abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana and second one is brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana.

Nididhyāsana is practicing with the help of Aṣṭāṅga-yoga of Yoga śāstra. Yama,
niyama, āsana, prāṇāyāma, dhāraṇā, dhyāna, nirvikalpaka samādhi which has been
discussed in the first chapter of Pañcadaśī. It is discussed in the 6th chapter of Gītā
and also in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. In the seventh chapter, Vidyāraṇya talks about
another one which does not require Yoga śāstra, which does not require
Nirvikalpaka samādhi. It is brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana. It is based on
brahma-abhyāsa discussed in Yoga-vāsiṣṭha. In this nididhyāsana, your aim is to
dwell on the teaching in one way or the other. You need not sit in meditation as is
done in other nididhyāsana. First śravaṇa will be śravaṇa and later śravaṇa will
become nididhyāsana. You share with your classmates it is nididhyāsana. If
someone asks you to teach Vedānta, it is nididhyāsana. Teaching is a form of
nididhyāsana. You write or rewrite your notes, it is nididhyāsana. Dwelling on the
teaching is nididhyāsana. Thus, first chapter of Pañcadaśī stressed samādhi-rūpa-
abhyāsa nididhyāsana which seventh chapter suggests brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa
nididhyāsana.
6. Then, the sixth topic is ayam asmi. It means Ātmā should be known as Paramātmā I
am. It is called aparokṣa jñāna. Here, Vidyāraṇya makes a unique point which we
have not seen elsewhere. Some of the topics are unique. Nididhyāsana as sitting
meditation is popular all over. Uniqueness of the 7th chapter of Pañcadaśī is that
Vidyāraṇya says sitting meditation is not compulsory. Nididhyāsana can be
without sitting in a special posture, etc., which is a unique idea we find in the 7th
chapter. Similarly, another unique idea is that he says Ātmā is aparokṣa. Aparokṣa
means ever-experienced as consciousness and Ātmā being Brahman, Brahman is
also aparokṣa. Brahman is parokṣa or aparokṣa? We have to answer Brahman is
Ātmā; Ātmā is ever-experienced; never remote; it is always immediate; immediate
means there is no distance; so Brahman is aparokṣa. Then, Vidyāraṇya says this
aparokṣatva of Brahman is of two types. This is not discussed in this manner
elsewhere. Immediacy of Brahman, proximity of Brahman is of two types. One is
unrecognized proximity, ajñāta aparokṣatva and second is recognized proximity,
jñātā aparokṣatva. Vidyāraṇya says when a student listens to Brahman as jagat-
kāraṇa, he forms an idea that there is something called Brahman which is satyam

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1190

jñānam anantam; when he understands it as jagat-kāraṇa, he does not know that

Brahman is myself the ever experience awareness; therefore, jagat-kāraṇatva is
known but aparokṣatva is unknown. In the initial stages of study, Brahman is
known as jagat-kāraṇa; but Brahman’s aparokṣatva is ajñāta-aparokṣatva. Because
of the proximity being unknown he thinks Brahman is remote. So he says I have got
parokṣa jñāna of Brahman. When he says parokṣa jñāna of Brahman, he thinks
Brahman is remote and even when he thinks Brahman is remote, Brahman is
aparokṣa only. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says during parokṣa jñāna also Brahman is
aparokṣa but the aparokṣatvm is unknown like the tenth man asking where the
tenth man is? When he learns ahaṃ brahma asmi during aparokṣa jñāna also
Brahman is aparokṣa, but the difference is Brahman’s aparokṣatva is jñāta
aparokṣatva. Thus, Brahman has two types aparokṣatva: ajñāta and jñāta. This is an
interesting topic and it is a commentary on ayam asmi occurring in the first line.
This topic is from śloka 48 to 69; with this first line is over.
7. Now, we enter the second line. 7th topic kim icchan. It means what will the jñānī
desire? What object of desire jñānī has? To put it in another language what bhogya
vastu jñānī has? By asking this question, the Upaniṣad is not raising a question.
Jñānī does not have any object of desire because entire bhogya prapañca he has
falsified. Because of the falsification of the universe and because of doṣa-darśana,
jñānī has negated all the objects of desire. Therefore, jñānī does not have any icchā.
bhogya-nivṛtti is the meaning of kim iccan. This is again very elaborately discussed
from śloka 135 to 191. Vidyāraṇya says when we say jñānī does not have desire,
you should add an adjective “binding”; don’t take it literally. If you take literally,
you will have problems. We do find jñānis also have desire beginning from
Bhagavān himself. The Upaniṣad says sokāmayata. Bhagavān desires to create the
world; Bhagavān desires to sustain the world; Bhagavān desires to take avatāra; all
the jñānis had the desire to teach that is why Guru-śiṣya paramparā is there and
survives. Many jñānis wanted to share or at least write books. Vidyāraṇya had a
desire to write Pañcadaśī. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says freedom from desire is equal
to freedom from binding desires. Jñānī does not connect his pūrṇatva with the
fulfillment and the non-fulfillment of the desires. This is the primary difference.
Ajñānī’s pūrṇatva is dependent on the fulfillment or the non-fulfillment, whereas

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1191

jñānī’s pūrṇatva is not connected with the phala. icchā-nivṛtti is icchā-bādha. Icchā-
bādha means making it non-binding. There, he also discusses the desires coming
up. If jñānī already has pūrṇatva, what is the cause of his desire? Vidyāraṇya says
prārabdha-vāsanā is the cause; because of prārabdha different jñānis have different
personality, different svabhāva; depending upon the svabhāva some jñānis would
like to sit quietly, some like to do Vedāntic activities; some may even take to non-
Vedāntic activity like school, hospital, etc. Jñānī’s non-binding desires are born out
of prārabdha-vāsanās. This is the seventh topic.
8. The eight topic is kasya kāmāya occurring in the second line. For the fulfillment of
whose desire? It is the question. The Upaniṣad conveys the idea that jñānī does not
have an ahaṅkāra seeking pūrṇatva. He does not have desiring ahaṅkāra seeking
pūrṇatva because ahaṅkāra has been falsified by knowledge. Therefore, kasya
kāmāya negates bhoktā ahaṅkāra. It is nothing but cidābhāsa, cidābhāsa is falsified.
This is discussed from śloka 192 to 222. Once bhoktā and bhogya are gone there is
no binding desries for a jñānī. Therefore, he need not struggle with the body.
9. Then comes the next natural topic śarīra anusaṃjvaret. He does not struggle along
with the body. It is anujvara-nivṛtti. In simple language we can say deha-abhimāna-
nivṛtti. Therefore, iit is freedom from identification with the problems of the body.
Therefore, jñānī say in spite of problems at the body-level I claim I am free from
problems. Here, he divides the body into three well-known sthūla-, sūkṣma- and
kāraṇa-śarīra. He points out at the level of śarīra, problems can never go away
totally. It is a very important and rarely highlighted point. Problems can be reduced
but the problems can never be eliminated, even by a mahā-jñānī. Vedānta does not
promise to remove all the anātmā problems. Vedānta only says you are not anātmā;
therefore, stop claiming their problems as your own. This is called binary format.
Initially, we try to mange the anātmā-problem; later, our aim is to disown anātmā-
problems. First manage, then disown. Disowning is called anujvara-nivṛtti. This is a
very rarely highlighted point. Ātmā does not have to claim Ātma-śānti; stop
bothering about anātmā-aśānti. This is discussed from 223 to 250.
10. Then comes the last topic tṛpti-prāpti. With the previous topic mantra is over. Tṛpti
is the extension of the it and this tṛpti-prāpti and conclusion is from 251 to 298
because of which the chapter is called tṛpti-dīpa. Vidyāraṇya elaborately presents

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1192

this because as Ātmā, I don’t have any thing to complain. This claiming of non-
complaining nature is the nature of Ātmā because of which I have nothing to
complain and that claiming the nature is called tṛpti or ānanda. Vidyāraṇya
elaborately presented that. With this, tenth topic and seventh chapter titled tṛpti-
dīpa is over.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1193

Chapter VIII: Kūṭastha-dīpa-prakaraṇa

॥कू टस्थदीपोनाम-अष्टमः परिच्छेदः॥

Class 233
Introduction
Now, we will commence the 8th chapter named kūṭastha-dipa-prakaraṇa. The aim of this
is to differentiate between the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness,
ādhāra-caitanya and ābhāsa-caitanya. The differentiation of these two both at the vyaṣṭi
individual level as well as samaṣṭi level is made here. In the previous chapter while
talking about Jīva and Īśvara, tvam-padārtha and tat-padārtha, we had said that tvam-
padārtha consists of three components: the original consciousness, the reflected
consciousness and the reflecting medium. We said tat-padārtha also consists of the same
three components: the original consciousness, the reflected consciousness and the
reflecting medium. The only difference is that in the case of tvam-padārtha, the reflecting
medium is śarīra-traya, while in the case of tat-padārtha macro reflecting medium is
prapañca-traya. Because the reflecting media are different, naturally the reflections also
will have corresponding micro-macro differences. Therefore, here, we use the terms Viśva,
taijasa and prājña whereas at the macro level we use the terms Virāṭ Hiraṇyagarbha and
Īśvara or Antaryāmī. Thus, while talking about mahāvākya, tvam-pada-viveka or tat-
pada-viveka, we have been talking about the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness. Therefore, these two consciousnesses play a vital role in understanding
Vedānta in general and mahāvākya in particular. We repeatedly assert that there is no
aikya at the reflected consciousness level because there will be differences in the
reflections, based on the difference between the reflecting media. Therefore, at reflection
level, cidābhāsa level, aikya cannot be talked about. Aikya is only at the cit level, the
original consciousness only. Therefore, we have to use bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, set aside
parts or see their difference and then, appreciate the aikya at the original consciousness
level. If you go back to 6th and 7th chapters, we gave special names for the two original
consciousnesses and two reflected consciousnesses also. At the individual level, the
original consciousness is called kūṭastha, while at the total level the original consciousness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1194

is called Brahman; at the individual level, the reflected consciousness is called Jīva and at
the macro level, the reflected consciousness is called Īśvara. Thus, the word Jīva and Īśvara
represent cidābhāsas whereas kūṭastha and Brahman refer to the original consciousness.
All these we saw in the 6th chapter. Ākāśa-caturvidyā-prakriyā, mahā-ākāśa, jala-ākāśa,
megha-ākāśa, all these also we saw then. In short, what I want to say is two
consciousnesses the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness play a very
very important role understanding Vedānta in general and mahāvākya in particular.
Here, we face a peculiar problem. We take the examples like the reflection of face on the
mirror or sun upon the water, etc. In the case of examples, we are able to differentiate the
original and reflection because there is a clear distance between them. The original
consciousness and the reflected consciousness I am able to clearly differentiate in the case
of examples. For example, the original face is located on my shoulders, whereas the
reflected face is located in the mirror. There is a clean distance between the bimba-mukha
and pratibimba-mukha. Therefore, a student is able to clearly differentiate the two.
Similarly, in the case of sūrya also the original sun is away and reflection is down below.
Therefore, we are able to differentiate between the original and reflection. There is a
physical distance and distinction is clearly there between the sun and reflection and also
the face and the reflection in the mirror. What is the problem though? In the very same
body, the original consciousness is there because the original consciousness being all-
pervading it is present in the śarīra-traya. And in the very same, in the śarīra-traya the
reflected consciousness is also there. Therefore, the body is pervaded by the original
consciousness as well as the reflected consciousness. So, caitanya-dvaya-vyāptam śarīram;
original-consciousness-reflected-consciousness-dvaya-vyāptam śarīram; sāmānya-viśeṣa-
caitanya-dvaya-vyāptam-śarīram. Since the body is pervaded by both consciousnesses,
how do I differentiate between the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness?
I am supposed to claim aikya between the original consciousness and Brahman. I should
not claim aikya between the reflected consciousness and Brahman. We don’t normally see
any difference because both are coexisting in one locus. So, we are able to verbally use the
words original consciousness, reflected consciousness. We may write the examination and
pass also. It is not enough; I use these two words verbally but I should also understand the
difference between the two. Therefore, in the 8th chapter, Vidyāraṇya enters into this
technical discussion and he struggles to make us understand the difference between the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1195

original consciousness and the reflected consciousness in terms of their function. He is

going to talk about the functional differences between the original consciousness and the
reflected consciousness and through the functional difference, he wants to communicate
the difference between the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. He is
going to do it not only at the vyaṣṭi level inside the body but also w.r.t. the outside world.
We can do that by noting the difference in terms of their functioning. It is going to be one
of the abstract topics. We will have to find the micro differences and in the entire
Pañcadaśī, eighth chapter is the most technical chapter dealing with the epistemology.
What is the role of these two will be discussed. With this background, we will enter the
chapter.

śloka 8.1
खादित्यदीपिते कुड्ये दर्पणादित्यदीप्तिवत्।
कू टस्थभासितो देहो धीस्थजीवेन भास्यते ॥ ८.१ ॥
khādityadīpite kuḍye darpaṇādityadīptivat.
kūṭasthabhāsito deho dhīsthajīvena bhāsyate (8.1).
To differentiate the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness in terms of their
functional differences, Vidyāraṇya introduces an example. Of course, it is a well-known
example. One is bimba sūrya the original sun which is in the sky and the other is
pratibimba sūrya which is on a darpaṇa which means a mirror. Therefore, he introduces
two suryas or two suns. The original sun he is naming khāditya; why is the original sun
called khāditya? Kha means ākāśa or sky and āditya means sun. Since it is the sun in the
sky, it is called khāditya. Sun reflected on the mirror is called darpaṇa āditya. Darpaṇa
means reflecting mirror. Thus, we have got the original sun, and the reflected sun where
the original sun as well as the reflected sun also has illumining power. Then, Vidyāraṇya
says that imagine there is a wall. The sun in the sky is already throwing a patch of light;
therefore, khāditya-prakāśa original light is already falling on the entire wall. We will call
it sāmānya prakāśa or the general light coming from the original sun spread all over the
wall. Also imagine you are keeping a mirror in a particular angle so that the reflected sun
will throw a patch of light on the wall. It is the same wall which is already lighted by the
general sunlight sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa. The specialty of sāmānya prakāśa is that it
spreads all over. It is diffused general and pervading sunlight, whereas the reflected light

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1196

falls over the wall but it is not spread all over. It is a small patch that spreads over.
Therefore, in that particular part of the wall there is not only original light but on that
patch there is a second additional light; that part of the wall is prakāśa-dvaya-vyāpta. In
one area there are two lights pervading, on the other hand on the other area only one light
pervades. In that small patch, when you study, even though there are two lights, original
light and reflected light, unfortunately your eyes cannot differentiate which is the original
light and which is the reflected light. if you are not able to differentiate the two lights, how
do you know there are two lights? Somebody says to you “I am not able to differentiate
the two lights”, but you accept that there are two lights; then he asks: how you know there
are two lights? It is because only in that area there is greater light. Where there is a greater
light there are two sunlights where there is lesser light there is only one sunlight. It is
outside the patch all over the wall where there is lesser light; there is only one sunlight.
Now, the next question is in the area where there is lesser light I know there is only one
light. Which one is there, whether the original light or reflected light? Where there is lesser
light there is only original sunlight. Where there is brighter light there is original and also
reflected light. Here, both lights are there, more light reinforced by reflected light. He
wants to say that in the dead body there is original sunlight. In the dead body there is only
original light or the original consciousness light, but in the alive persons or alive human
being original light and reflected light, meaning the original consciousness and the
reflected consciousness are there. Then, he wants to go to the details of our experiences
and he wants to experientially differentiate the general light which is diffused all over the
area and the special light where they both are seen. This is the rough approach of this
section. It is general and diffused. Which one pervades the entire wall? There is sāmānya
light and upon the wall itself there is reflected light also. Suppose another patch of light is
thrown from the reflected sun which is formed on a mirror or any reflecting medium,
darpaṇa-āditya-dīpti. After the description you forget the original sun and you forget
reflected sun and all and now you concentrate on the wall. In the wall the diffused light is
more pervading and the brighter light is less pervading. The cidābhāsa makes the light
brighter, while we think that Brahman being great, Brahman is responsible for the brighter
light but it is responsible only for general awareness of the thing, whereas cidābhāsa alone
is responsible for focused specific brighter awareness of a thing; that is what he wants to
say. When I am looking at the hall, there is brahma-caitanya all-pervading but when I look

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1197

at one person, because of that focus, an additional light of cidābhāsa is thrown; then I
notice the existence of that person. Whoever falls within general light I will not know; I
will not even know about whether the student has come to the class. Therefore, if
somebody asks whether that student came or not, I will say I had not noticed.
Some of the things in the world fall within the general light while some of the things fall
within the specific light causes by cidābhāsa. That is what he wants to show. The example
used is the wall. Upon the deha also, which is like a wall, which has been already
generally pervaded by kūṭastha original consciousness. The proof is the very existence of
the body is borrowed from the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya only. Otherwise, the very astitva you
cannot talk about. Therefore, asti means the original consciousness is pervading. Upon this
body, suppose only the original consciousness is pervading, it will be a dead body! In fact
even during sleep, the reflected consciousness not being active, it is as good as a dead
body only. It is therefore that you are to take bath after sleep. In sleep, you are in touch
with death. Now, this body is alive and kicking because of the additional light falling on it
and that light is cidābhāsa, the reflected consciousness, which is reflected in the mind or
sūkṣma-śarīra that is comparable to a mirror. The mind serves like a mirror. Because of
that, an additional patch of light is thrown. The body has double consciousness and
therefore, body is alive. Thus, Vidyāraṇya has introduced two consciousnesses in the
body. Hereafter, he will talk about how to distinguish which is which.

śloka 8.2
अनेकदर्पणादित्यदीप्तीनां बहुसन्धिषु ।
इतरा व्यज्यते तासामभावेऽपि प्रकाशते ॥ ८.२ ॥
anekadarpaṇādityadīptīnāṃ bahusandhiṣu.
itarā vyajyate tāsāmabhāve:'pi prakāśate (8.2).
He parallely goes with the example dṛṣṭānta also as well as the original dārṣṭānta. Now, he
says let us imagine that there are many mirrors. And all these mirrors, ten, twenty or
thirty, are all throwing patches of light all over the wall. There are many jīvas. Just as there
are many minds, we can extend to the mirror also. Imagine the wall is dotted with many
patches of lights coming from the several mirrors. We know in every patch there is double
light. Now, if I want to differentiate and recognize the single original sunlight, what is the
method? That is the question. Wherever there is a brighter area, in those portions, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1198

original lights cannot be recognized because the original sunlight is overshadowed by

reflected sunlight. There is the original sunlight but I am not able to appreciate that
because over that there is reflected sunlight also. Therefore, I am not able to recognize.
There are two methods:
1. You watch the gap between the two patches of light. This is one option. About the
sun also they talk of dark spots. In sūrya how is a dark spot possible? The dark spot
in the sun is nothing but an area where the light is lesser. It is not dark but it is
lesser light. Similarly, between two patches, which is like a dark spot, which is
nothing but lesser light, that you watch and then you can recognize the original
sunlight which is not overshadowed by the reflected sunlight.
2. Another method is when the mirrors are removed or the mirrors are turned away,
then also there is no reflected sunlight. Then also you get original sunlight. In the
same way, when the mind is active with thoughts, because of the active mind
entertaining thoughts, we have got viśeṣa jñāna. Every thought deals with special
experience or the other. Ghaṭa-vṛtti means ghaṭa-jñāna, paṭa-vṛtti means paṭa-jñāna.
When the mind is active, there is a viśeṣa jñāna; every viśeṣa jñāna means there is
both reflected consciousness and the original consciousness caused by the active
mind entertaining thoughts. When the mind is not knowing anything particular, it
is not focusing on anything particular; then there is no viśeṣa jñāna, then there is
blankness between two thoughts.
There must be an experience of the blankness, dullness and absence of a specific
knowledge. That so-called blankness— I call it so called because it is not blankness,
because that blankness is also lighted by something called consciousness, not the reflected
consciousness but by general awareness which is called the diffused original
consciousness—the gap between two viśeṣa jñānas, is illumined by sāmānya jñāna. It
appears as though it is blankness but it is nothing but sāmānya caitanya or the original
consciousness. Any specific experience is equal to the original consciousness plus the
reflected consciousness. So-called blankness is equal to the original consciousness; any
specific experience is the original consciousness plus the reflected consciousness. If you go
to the wall, in between brighter patches is nothing but original sunlight, where the two
bright patches are nothing but original sunlight and reflected sunlight. Between two bright
patches even though there is no light in between it will appear as though dark, but it is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1199

darkness. There is sunlight. Similarly, in the case of a blank mind also, what is there the
general caitanya; and that caitanya is the original consciousness that is Śākṣi-caitanya.
One method is to watch between the two specific experiences. Then, we may complain: if
there is a gap between the two specific experiences, we can watch, but my mind is so
active, there is no gap at all! There is no continuation of thoughts. In meditation, they say
you meditate mantras, give gap between two mantras, try to expand the gap and try to be
aware of the blankness. Meditate upon the blankness not as blankness but as the sāmānya
caitanya. It is called amātra avyavahārya. Refer to Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. For that you need
a gap. What if I am not able to find the gap? Vidyāraṇya says don’t worry as Bhagavān
himself has provided occasion for that. Bhagavān knows you are highly rājasika and
therefore, you will not get a gap. Bhagavān has given a natural gap by providing tamo-
guṇa for even the worst rājasika person. Tamo-guṇa means out of sheer tiredness one goes
to sleep. In suṣupti, when a person says I did not experience anything particular, the
absence of particular experiences indicate the absence of the reflected consciousness. And
even at that time that blankness is known. We do talk about that as that is what the
original consciousness is, the Śākṣi-caitanya. In jāgrat-avasthā, kūṭastha and Jīva are
experienced together and in suṣupti-avasthā kūṭastha is experienced without being
disturbed by Jīva because Jīva has gone to sleep. Jīva has temporarily resolved in suṣupti-
avasthā. Second śloka is the example. Third śloka is about the original.
Remove the mirror and you will find the original sunlight. Either in the intermediary gaps
or on the total wall you can experience the original light. The only condition is that the
mirror should be active. When the mind does not function, what we experience is the
original consciousness. That is why Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad says that during suṣupti I
experience myself as non-dual I. It is the non-located I. During jāgrat-avasthā I experience
myself as a localized I. Both I s are going and coming. In jāgrat-avasthā the localized I
comes and in suṣupti-avasthā unlocalised is there. The question is which one is my real
nature and which is my incidental nature? What will be our general conclusion? During
waking the localized I or the individual I seem to be the real nature. And the non-dual I
obtaining in suṣupti-avasthā seems to be an incidental one. But what Vedānta says is: what
obtains in suṣupti-avasthā is your real nature. That means during jāgrat-avasthā whatever
nature you take is a veṣa; it is incidental; just have an entertainment, but the entertainment
has become serious! We have forgotten that it is original. It is because during suṣupti we

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1200

are dull. In jāgrat we seem to be bright and alert. It seems to be the real I, but it is not. He
says even when the reflected patches are removed, the original sunlight which is dull,
diffused and all-pervading continues to be there. This is the example. Now, Vidyāraṇya
explains our day-to-day experience.

śloka 8.3
चिदाभासविशिष्टानां तथानेकधियामसौ ।
सन्धिं धियामभावं च भासयन्प्रविविच्यताम्॥ ८.३ ॥
cidābhāsaviśiṣṭānāṃ tathānekadhiyāmasau.
sandhiṃ dhiyāmabhāvaṃ ca bhāsayanpravivicyatām (8.3).
Similarly, here also what should be compared to the special patch of light? Vidyāraṇya
says every special experience that I have [it means object that I experience] involves a
specific vṛtti where vṛtti means vṛtti-pratibimbita-caitanya and because of that, an
additional light has come which is called in Sanskrit as viśeṣa jñāna. In every specific
knowledge and every specific experience, whether it is dealing with the external world or
whether it deals with my own body-mind-complex or family, anything, it involves a
viśeṣa vṛtti. The vṛtti serves as a mirror and the mind has become active. Because it has
generated a thought, there is pratibimbita caitanya, then a special awareness has come.
Therefore, he says cidābhāsaviśiṣṭānāṃ. The vṛttis are numerous and there is a continous
flow of thoughts. In every thought there is cidābhāsa-viśiṣṭa; the reflected consciousness
has fallen over that. Therefore, every thought is like a mirror. The reflected consciousness
is formed on that. Thus, the individual is full of patches of viśeṣa jñāna which consists of
both the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. Between these viśeṣa
jñānas, the specific experiences sometimes, there is a gap. In the village when the workers
climb the arecanut tree which is slim and tall, there will be so many trees all over. And the
gap between two trees will be only a few feet. Therefore, they are so intelligent that from
one tree they don’t want to climb down and climb another tree what they do is that they
move by jumping from one tree to the other. This is similar to the life of a normal human
being. We never get grounded. We never come to the ground from one thought to another
thought. Therefore, we travel from the reflected consciousness to the reflected
consciousness and we have no opportunity to appreciate the original consciousness. Yet,
Vidyāraṇya says assuming there is a gap and in that gap of mental blankness or silenc, the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1201

original consciousness illumines the silence; otherwise you will not know there is silence.
Illumining it is the original consciousness the Śākṣi-caitanya; may you learn to separate it
from the reflected consciousness, the specific I am of the nature of eternal and all-
pervading consciousness. This is the one possibility.
The second option is if you are not able to arrive at blankness, either naturally or through
meditation, Bhagavān has given you a meditation in the form of suṣupti. That is why nidrā
samādhi-sthiti it is said. Therefore, he says there is total absence of thoughts in suṣupti. It
is the state when all the thoughts are subsided. Then also, that sleep state is illumined by
the general original consciousness; that is why sleep is not bright like jāgrat-avasthā. Sleep
is dull because there is only one, original consciousness. Jāgrat-avasthā is the original
consciousness plus the reflected consciousness and therefore bright, whereas sleep is the
original consciousness alone. Therefore, it is dull, but dull life does not mean no life. There
is the original consciousness. May you try to differentiate the original consciousness and
the reflected consciousness. More we will see in the next class.

Class 234
śloka 8.3 contd.
Vidyāraṇya deals with differentiation of cidābhāsa and cit which he calls as kūṭastha.
Therefore, the topic cidābhāsa-kūṭastha-viveka or we can also say cidābhāsa-śākṣī-viveka,
cidābhāsa being the reflected consciousness and śākṣī being the original consciousness.
How we can differentiate these two experientially is Vidyāraṇya’s attempt. First he gave
the example of sūrya-bimba-prakāśa and sūrya-pratibimba-prakāśa. You see sūrya-bimba-
prakāśa between two reflected lights. Similarly, we have to learn to differentiate cidābhāsa
and śākṣī. How to do it? Vidyāraṇya says in this third śloka. What he wants to says is
whenever the mind is active, during the active states of the mind, which means when the
thoughts are functioning, not only the mind is active but the cidābhāsa also has to be
active because when the reflecting medium is active reflection also will have to be active.
Thereafter, Vidyāraṇya says when the mind is silent, during jāgrat-avasthā or when the
mind is in suṣupti-avasthā or when the mind is in a samādhi state, when a person has
deliberately removed the thought in all the three states, the mind is dormant or inactive.
The three states are mental silence during jāgrat-avasthā which he calls the gap between

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1202

two thoughts or two experiences; we will call it temporary mental silence in jāgrat-
avasthā. Or in deep sleep state also, naturally the mind is silent or thoughtless. Or in
samādhi when a person deliberately withdraws or silences the thoughts. All the three
states are where there is a passive mental state. When we have such passive mental state,
the mind being inactive, it is dormant. And when the mind is dormant normally the
cidābhāsa also has to be dormant. Therefore, at that time since cidābhāsa is dormant or
passive in that state what is dominant is śākṣī. During suṣupti and during samādhi I
experience myself as śāki-pradhāna Jīva. This is message one. I am kūṭastha-pradhāna
Jīva as śākṣī is dominant because cidābhāsa is dormant. Cidābhāsa is dormant because
thoughts are not there and thoughts are not there as the mind is inactive. The mind’s
activity is thoughts only. Therefore, during three occasions I experience myself as śākṣi-
pradhāna Jīva. But during other occasions when the mind is active in jāgrat-avasthā, then,
because there are thoughts, that the mind is active; and because the mind is active, the
cidābhāsa also must be active. Therefore, cidābhāsa becomes dominant. It is dominant
because thoughts are there as the mind is active; mind is a reflecting medium and
therefore, when the reflecting medium is active the reflected consciousness is also must be
dominant. Naturally, when cidābhāsa is dominant, the poor śākṣī becomes dormant as it
were because śākṣī is overshadowed by the cidābhāsa.
If you remember the example: when you see reflected patch of light, behind that even
though the original sunlight is there, you cannot recognize the general sunlight because it
is overshadowed by the reflected patch of sunlight. Even though reflection is mithyā, see
its arrogance; it is capable enough to overshadow the general sunlight which is pervading
and original. In the same way, when we are active during jāgrat-avasthā, at that time,
cidābhāsa is dominant, śākṣī is in the backburner as it were and therefore, at that time, I
experience myself as cidābhāsa-pradhāna Jīva. During the active mental states, I
experience myself as cidābhāsa-pradhāna Jīva. During passive mental states, I experience
myself as Śākṣi-caitanya-pradhāna Jīva. That means I distinctly experience both of them in
one state cidābhāsa is dominant, śākṣī is dormant as though non-existent; whereas in
passive mental state, śākṣī is dominant and cidābhāsa is dormant, as though non-existent.
Therefore, śākṣi-anubhava we all do have during all the passive mental states. Not lacking
cidābhāsa- or śākṣi-anubhava— both anubhavas we do have during active mental state
and passive mental state— based on the anubhava, we have to distinguish their

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1203

characteristics. The experience part we have that is not lacking but based on the experience
we should distinctly understand what are the qualifications of cidābhāsa, like it is limited,
etc., and what are the qualification of cit. This discriminative analysis is required, though
experience we already have. This discriminative analysis is to be done by cidābhāsa-
pradhāna Jīva or śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva? This is the question. If you answer, I have passed
the examination! We have experience of both, but we require a discriminative analytical
study. This viveka, vicāra should be done by cidābhāsa-pradhāna Jīva alone because only
in that Jīva the mind is available for vicāra. If you are in śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva state, the
mind being dormant, I cannot even talk to you. This is what we are going to do in this
eighth chapter. Then, an aside question may come up. I said we have both śākṣi-anubhava
and cidābhāsa-anubhava. During the active mental state, it is cidābhāsa-pradhāna-Jīva-
anubhava and at the other times it is śākṣi-pradhāna-anubhava. Someone may ask the
question: during silent mental state, no doubt I experience śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva, but it is
only śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva. However, in that śākṣī what is mixed? During silent mental
state, cidābhāsa is dormant. Even in silent mental state we should remember we don’t
experience pure śākṣī, cidābhāsa is there; but only thing is it is as good as not being there
because it is dormant. Now someone may ask suppose I want to go to a state in which
śākṣī alone is there and cidābhāsa is absent so that I can experience pure śākṣī. What state
should I go? A paramānanda śiṣya says in silence of the mind also no doubt I experience
the śākṣī but it is not totally so for cidābhāsa is dormant; I want to remove the dormant
cidābhāsa and I want to remain as the pure śākṣī. What state I should go? Remember if
cidābhāsa becomes totally absent from me, I am dead. Remember only in the table or only
in the inert object pure śākṣī will be available without even a trace of cidābhāsa. Therefore,
desk has to meditate. It is ridiculous to talk about the experience of pure śākṣī without
cidābhāsa. It is impractical and impracticable and it will not work to experience pure śākṣī
without cidābhāsa; such an experience does not logically exist. If anyone says I have got
pure śākṣi-experience it only means that he does not know what he is talking about.
Therefore, what a living being arrives at is a mental state where one is passive or silent in
which state cidābhāsa is as good as absent. That is why use the expression śākṣi-pradhāna
Jīva. Having experienced both these jīvas, thereafter we have to study Vedānta, ask the
question: which one is my intrinsic nature and which one is an incidental nature? Should I
arrive at śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva I am or cidābhāsa-pradhāna Jīva? Cidābhāsa-pradhāna is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1204

incidental because it is due to the body-mind-complex which is vyāvahārika and mithyā

and this wisdom has to be gained. It is to be gained by cidābhāsa-pradhāna Jīva alone as
śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva cannot do anything because the mind is passive for śākṣi-pradhāna
Jīva. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says that the śākṣi-pradhāna Jīva or kūṭastha reveals or
illumines silence that obtains between thoughts or experiences. This, Vidyāraṇya calls
anekadhiyām where dhī which means thoughts. Among many thoughts,
cidābhāsaviśiṣṭānāṃ dhiyām, which are pervaded by cidābhāsa when the thoughts and
cidābhāsa subside, another thought and another cidābhāsa has not arisen, in that sandhi
asau kūṭasthaḥ bhāsayati. It is one passive mental state. Then there are two more passive
mental states. There is also a state when thoughts are not there for a long time. During
sleep thoughts are silent temporarily. But in other state silence is for a length of time and
that absence of thought for a length of time is called suṣupti-avasthā. We should not take
dream for dream also has thought. We should take dreamless state as one and another as
samādhi avasthā. In one thoughts are resolved naturally out of sheer tiredness, whereas in
the other state thoughts are not naturally resolved but deliberately by practicing Aṣṭāṅga-
yoga. I take the mind through various states to silent mind gradually: kṣiptaṃ, mūḍhaṃ,
vikṣiptam, ekāgraṃ and niruddham, the last meaning the mind is stopped or silent. We
don’t talk about that we sleep well naturally. If a person is interested in samādhi we say
you can go to samādhi also but vicāra has to be done; not in samādhi, but it has to be
during śravaṇa in jāgrat-avasthā. You go to samādhi but use this as an instance of
experience and use it for vicāra. Thus, kūṭastha is experienced by everyone. Let that
kūṭastha be separated from cidābhāsa in terms of understanding. Experience we have of
both, but you ask the question: which is my incidental nature and which is my intrinsic
nature? For that only Vedānta is there. This differentiation is important because if
cidābhāsa is my intrinsic nature, that I am a localized saṃśārī is confirmed. On the other
hand if I am śākṣī and if śākṣī is my intrinsic nature, that I am non-localised nitya-mukta
is confirmed. Therefore, discriminative study is important.

śloka 8.4
घटैकाकारधीस्था चिद्घटमेवावभासयेत्।
घटस्य ज्ञातता ब्रह्मचैतन्येनावभास्यते ॥ ८.४ ॥
ghaṭaikākāradhīsthā cidghaṭamevāvabhāsayet.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1205

ghaṭasya jñātatā brahmacaitanyenāvabhāsyate (8.4).

Vidyāraṇya enters into a deeper and technical enquiry based on what we already know.
The presentation is done in a different manner. We have studied before that there is Ātmā
the original consciousness. Let us take the experience of a pot. When I experience an
object, what is happening to the pot at the time of knowledge? This is what we call
epistemological enquiry, the study of the process of knowing. When the pot is in front of
me, through the eyes I experience the pot. At that time a pot-thought is born in the mind.
Therefore, there is a pot outside; there is a pot-thought inside; and there is Ātmā the
original consciousness śākṣī behind, which is there all the time. Of these we know pot is
jaḍa by itself because it is made of pañca sthūla bhūtas. Thought is also jaḍa inert by itself
because thought belongs to the mind and the mind is born out of pañca sūkṣma bhūtas.
One is a gross matter pot and another is a subtle matter pot-thought, both being matter,
both of them are jaḍa. Behind the pot there is thought and behind the thought there is
Śākṣi-caitanya. Śākṣī is also by nature cetana, Śākṣī is caitanya-svarūpa. Vedānta says two
events take place when we experience the pot. The first event is that the śākṣī pervades the
thought and illumines the thought by forming the reflection of caitanya upon the thought.
The inert thought is given the reflected consciousness that is cidābhāsa and when the śākṣī
blesses the thought with cidābhāsa, thought is revealed, thought is known, thought is
experienced. This we express in English as śākṣī illumines the thought. It illumines by
forming the cidābhāsa. There is no illumination without the formation of cidābhāsa.
Thereafter, objectifying it as a pot-thought, cidābhāsa spreads over the thought. The
second phenomenon is through the thought cidābhāsa spreads over the pot.
First event is that cidābhāsa spreads over the thought; the second event is cidābhāsa
spreads over the pot. Because of the śākṣī, cidābhāsa spreads over the thought and
because of thought cidābhāsa spreads over the pot. Instead of pot-thought if it is a man-
thought cidābhāsa will not spread over the pot, if it is a man-thought cidābhāsa will
spread over man only. Now, what Vedānta says is that when the second event takes place
that is cidābhāsa spreading over the pot, through the thought we say I know the pot.
Because of the second event cidābhāsa spreads over the pot and such spreading event how
do we experience? Our experience is I know the pot. Although I am using the first, second,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1206

etc, remember there is no time gap as the events take place simultaneously. For
convenience of the study, we are discussing chronology but the events are simultaneous.
The first event is that śākṣī spreads as cidābhāsa over the thought. It is experienced by us
as “I know that I know this pot”. Second event cidābhāsa spread over the pot is
experienced as “I know the pot”. In every perception there are two knowledges taking
place within. The one knowledge is I know the pot and the second is that I know I know
the pot. I know the man and I know I know the man. I know English and I know I know
English. Thus, we have got knowledge of an object and knowledge of the knowledge.
Ghaṭa-jñāna and ghaṭa-jñāna-jñāna; paṭa-jñāna and paṭa-jñāna-jñāna. Thus, in every
knowledge, the two take place simultaneously. Suppose I know the pot and I don’t know
whether I know it or not. What will be the complication? If a Russian teaches English , he
must know Russian and also he should know English then only he can teach the student.
The student knows he does not know Russian. Remember not only we know things but
we also know that we don’t know. Ghaṭa-jñāna takes place because of cidābhāsa
spreading over the thought. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya wants to say cidābhāsa is responsible
for ghaṭa-jñāna and śākṣī is responsible for ghaṭa-jñāna jñāna. I know that I have pot-
knowledge. Whenever you talk about any of the knowledge in your mind, what is
prominent? Śākṣī is prominent. When you talk about the object cidābhāsa is prominent. In
the former case śākṣī plays the prominent role because you talk about I know that I know.
Then one more extension is here. Ghaṭa-jñāna is revealed by śākṣī we say. Ghaṭa is
revealed by cidābhāsa. Before the rise of ghaṭa-jñāna, what was there? Before the rise of
ghaṭa-jñāna ghaṭa-ajñāna was there. Who was revealing this ajñāna? Vidyāraṇya says
śākṣī alone illumines ghaṭa-ajñāna before and śākṣī alone reveals ghaṭa-jñāna later.
Cidābhāsa does not reveal ghaṭa-ajñāna also and cidābhāsa does not reveal ghaṭa-jñāna
also. Cidābhāsa reveals only the ghaṭa, the pot that is outside. Both ghaṭa-ajñāna and
ghaṭa-jñāna are revealed by śākṣī. Cidābhāsa does not reveal ghaṭa-ajñāna, cidābhāsa does
not reveal ghaṭa-jñāna but cidābhāsa reveals only ghaṭa outside. Thus, you should know
these three facts. This is the difference between the function of śākṣī and function of
cidābhāsa.
Vidyāraṇya wants to present it in a different manner. Before cidābhāsa revealed the pot,
pot was there. I was ignorant of the pot but pot was there. What type of pot it was?
Vidyāraṇya says previously it was unknown pot. Thereafter, the cidābhāsa pervaded the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1207

pot. And because of the pervasion, the pot-knowledge came. And the moment pot-
knowledge came, unknown pot became known pot. So you have to visualize unknown pot
was there and it was converted into known pot and this conversion was done by
cidābhāsa. Vidyāraṇya says the job of cidābhāsa is only converting the unknown pot into
the known pot. The unknown-ness of the pot is an adjective and known-ness of the pot is
also an adjective, one was previous adjective and the other is later adjective, former and
the latter adjective. The unknown-ness of the pot and known-ness of the pot are both
illumined by the śākṣī alone. The job of cidābhāsa is for a brief period and that job is by
pervading the pot it changes the adjective; from unknown to known like scrapping the
yellow paint and by putting the red paint. It only converts the adjective by producing the
jñāna. Therefore, pot is revealed by cidābhāsa; the unknown-ness and known-ness of the
pot are revealed by śākṣī. This is only a different form of presentation. Previously, I said
that the pot is revealed by cidābhāsa and that pot-ignorance and pot-knowledge both are
revealed by śākṣī. Now, we present differently pot is revealed by cidābhāsa and the
unknown-ness of the pot and the known-ness of the pot both are revealed by Śākṣi-
caitanya or kūṭastha caitanya or brahma-caitanya the original consciousness. This is the
topic going to be elaborately developed in several ślokas from ślokas 4 to 17. This idea is
going to be gradually developed. Note the essence. Pot is revealed by cidābhāsa;
unknown-ness and known-ness of the pot both are revealed by the Śākṣi-caitanya.

śloka 8.5
अज्ञातत्वेन ज्ञातोऽयं घटो बुद्ध्युदयात्पुरा ।
ब्रह्मणैवोपरिष्टात्तु ज्ञातत्वेनेत्यसौ भिदा ॥ ८.५ ॥
ajñātatvena jñāto:'yaṃ ghaṭo buddhyudayātpurā.
brahmaṇaivopariṣṭāttu jñātatvenetyasau bhidā (8.5).
Here, Vidyāraṇya adds another stroke. In the previous śloka he said that the known-ness
of the pot is revealed by śākṣī. In this śloka, he says before the known adjective came the
pot had unknown-ness adjective that was also revealed by śākṣī only. I know that I don’t
know. Therefore, he says ayam ghaṭaḥ. This very same pot which enjoys the known-ness
as an adjective before the rise of knowledge, ayam ghaṭaḥ this very same pot was revealed
as the ‘unknown’ pot by the same śākṣī. Śākṣī’s job is illumining the two adjectives the
known adjective or unknown adjective. Known-ness is known is by śākṣī and unknown-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1208

ness is again revealed by śākṣī alone. Suppose you keep śākṣī permanently on the pot you
will be stuck there because remember cidābhāsa pervasion takes place very briefly and
thereafter you have turned your attention away after the adjective is changed. Even after
the cidābhāsa has come away the pot enjoys jñātatā, the knownness adjective continues to
be there on the pot even though you have come away. What is illumining the known-ness
when you are talking about it is śākṣī alone. The very same pot is revealed thereafter, that
is after the rise of knowledge. The difference is not in the pot. The difference is in the
adjective only and the adjective is a peculiar adjective; it is not a physical adjective which
can be chemically analysed. Suppose on the clip so many things are there, colour, weight,
etc. The clip has two adjectives also. Known and unknown clip. We add the adjective to
the clip but the known-ness and unknown-ness are not physically analyzable. It is a
peculiar adjective which will grow more and more mysterious when you analyse. The
śabda, sparśa, rūpa are also adjectives but they are one type of adjective while this is
another type: known and unknown. Remember that one and the same clip will
simultaneously have known-ness from the standpoint of some people and unknown-ness
from the standpoint of some other people. It is very difficult to physically differentiate. It
can be done by the śākṣī only.

Class 235
śloka 8.5 contd.
With the aim of cit and cidābhāsa while talking about their distinct function, Vidyāraṇya
talks about knowing anything in the creation. When we analyse the process of knowledge,
the mechanism any knowledge, we will be able to functionally differentiate the role of cit
and that of cidābhāsa. For that purpose, Vidyāraṇya introduces three points in the field of
knowing a particular object, the example being ghaṭa a pot. He makes three statements;
the ghaṭa is revealed by cidābhāsa; Before the rise of pot-knowledge, there was pot-
ignorance; so he makes the second statement pot-ignorance is revealed by the cit; pot is
revealed by cidābhāsa; before this event pot-ignorance was there and that pot-ignorance is
revealed by the cit and after, the cidābhāsa reveals the pot. There is pot-knowledge
continuing. That persistent pot-knowledge which continues after the rise of knowledge,
that pot-knowledge is also revealed by the cit. There is very subtle difference. Pot is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1209

revealed by cidābhāsa; pot-ignorance is revealed by cit previously and pot-knowledge is

also revealed by the cit only. The pot is revealed by cidābhāsa we said. How did cidābhāsa
come into being? If you remember the 7th chapter, when the eyes come in contact with the
pot, pot-thought rises in the mind and the pot-thought travels outward. Pot-thought
spreads over the pot which was called vṛtti-vyāpti. When the pot-thought pervades over
the pot, there is the reflected consciousness in the pot-thought, the reflected consciousness
which is called cidābhāsa and that cidābhāsa also pervades the pot. This is what we call as
the rising cidābhāsa. Even though I make the statement, you should remember all the
processes: eye comes in contact with pot; pot generated in the mind; thought going out
spreading over the pot; over the thought there is cidābhāsa reflection; therefore, when the
thought envelops cidābhāsa also envelops; all these we are supposed to remember; we
elaborately we studied. Refer also 7th chapter 91st śloka.
It is during this time the cidābhāsa rises and the rising cidābhāsa reveals the pot. The pot
is revealed by cidābhāsa. Before the rise of cidābhāsa the pot-ignorance was there. This
pot-ignorance cannot be revealed cidābhāsa. It is so because before the rise of cidābhāsa
there is pot-ignorance. pot-ignorance is that which existed before the rise of cidābhāsa
because once the cidābhāsa rises pot is revealed pot-ignorance will not stay there; that
means during the presence of pot-ignorance cidābhāsa has not yet risen and therefore, the
cidābhāsa cannot reveal the pot-ignorance. Therefore, it must be revealed by cit only.
Therefore, since pot-ignorance will not be there once the cidābhāsa comes, when the pot-
ignorance is there cidābhāsa would not have come which means cidābhāsa cannot reveal
the pot-ignorance; therefore, it should be revealed by cit only. Cit revealed pot-ignorance;
then one day at one time cidābhāsa arose and the cidābhāsa destroyed pot-ignorance and
what is there now? Now, pot-knowledge is there. Now, this pot-knowledge is there for
how many days. Once we have gained the pot-knowledge, pot-knowledge continues to be
there; it is a persistent thing. But the cidābhāsa which revealed the pot, has ended when I
have turned away from the pot and I have gone to other activities of the day the cidābhāsa
has already withdrawn after doing the job of revealing the pot; cidābhāsa has completed
the job and it has withdrawn because it has some other job. Therefore, since cidābhāsa,
after revealing the pot and briefly existing, would have withdrawn; the persistent pot-
knowledge cannot be revealed by the cidābhāsa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1210

After doing that, ghaṭa-vṛtti is gone and ghaṭa-vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa is also gone;
therefore, cidābhāsa does not persists to reveal the persistent pot-knowledge. Therefore,
the persistent knowledge must be revealed by cit only. Hoping that you have understood
the logic, the statements are cit alone reveals the pot-ignorance; cit alone reveals the pot-
knowledge also; persistent cit reveals anādi pot-ignorance and persistent cit reveals the
pot-knowledge also. The ananta pot-knowledge is also revealed by the persistent cit only.
Then what is the role of cidābhāsa? Cidābhāsa does not reveal pot-ignorance and
cidābhāsa does not reveal pot-knowledge also, but cidābhāsa reveals only the pot.
Vidyāraṇya presents this in a different pattern I said. I only repeat what I said in the last
class; the vṛtti-vyāpti and phala-vyāpti topic of the 7th chapter deals with only the first
part that the pot is revealed by cidābhāsa. We discussed in the 7th chapter 91st śloka.
In the 8th chapter, Vidyāraṇya adds new two topics that pot-ignorance and pot-
knowledge both are revealed by the cit. The second and the third statement he is
presenting in a slightly different manner. When you talk about pot-ignorance and pot-
knowledge, revealed by cit, you talk about your internal condition, because ignorance is
also within me and knowledge is also within me. That is why you come to the class. I can
assume that the last class is within you. When we discuss knowledge or ignorance part we
talk about the internal condition, but Vidyāraṇya wants to talk about this externally also.
For that, he changes the language. Every object in the creation will have one of the two
adjectives. It should fall either under known category or unknown category. This viśeṣaṇa-
dvaya is there. That is why when I introduce a new word if it is unknown to you, you will
raise your eyebrow. Either you don’t know or you don’t remember. When the person
raises the eyebrow he adds an adjective “unknown”. When he smiles and is relaxed he is
adding the adjective “known”. Therefore, with every object you have three components
one is the object per se; then the next unknown adjective; adjective number two is known.
These are the three associated with everything in the creation. And Vidyāraṇya wants to
say that of these three components, unknown adjective of every object or known adjective
of every object, the unknown-ness of every object or known-ness of every object is
revealed by cit.
Previously, we said ignorance and knowledge but instead of ignorance we term it as
unknown-ness and we call knowledge as known-ness. By this conversion what is the
advantage for Vidyāraṇya? The advantage is that when we talk about knowledge and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1211

ignorance we talk about internal condition, but when we talk about known-ness and
unknown-ness we talk about the external condition associated with the object. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says cit reveals the unknownness of the pot; then when I decide to visit the
pot, at that time cidābhāsa rises; the vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa rises; ghaṭa-vṛtti-
pratibimbita cidābhāsa rises. Cit does not rise at that time as cit was all the time there
illumining the unknown-ness of the pot. The moment vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa rises
Vidyāraṇya says it only changes the dress of the pot. Previously, the dress was unknown-
ness and cidābhāsa quietly changes the dress from unknown-ness to known-ness and then
it becomes a known pot; after the conversion the cidābhāsa’s job is over and it goes. It has
become a known pot and thereafter whenever I am talking about this entire known object
the known-ness of the object is revealed by cit which is always there. This is the topic; I
hope it is not too tough. The curiosity of knowledge is possible because a thing was
unknown. If it is unknown, and it is unknown that it is unknown, you will not have any
curiosity to know about the unknown object. Remember unknown-ness is known, because
of the cit. Vṛtti comes, cidābhāsa comes, ajñātatva adjective is changed to jñātatva and
thereafter by the very same cit— cit, śākṣī, kūṭastha and Brahman, all these four words are
synonyms; all words refer to the original consciousness— by that original consciousness
alone, the pot is revealed now as a known pot. This is the distinction between the ajñāta
ghaṭa and jñāta ghaṭa.

śloka 8.6
चिदाभासान्तधीवृत्तिर्ज्ञानं लोहान्तकुन्तवत्।
जाड्यमज्ञानमेताभ्यां व्याप्तः कुम्भो द्विधोच्यते ॥ ८.६ ॥
cidābhāsāntadhīvṛttirjñānaṃ lohāntakuntavat.
jāḍyamajñānametābhyāṃ vyāptaḥ kumbho dvidhocyate (8.6).
Now, he said previously pot had unknown-ness as viśeṣaṇa. Later, known-ness comes as
the change is brought out by ghaṭākāra-vṛtti which briefly arises. Now that is further
clarified. What exactly you mean by unknown-ness? It is being pervaded by ajñāna.
Ajñāna-vyāptatvam ajñātatvam. What is ignorance in this context? Pot is pervaded by
ignorance. What exactly it is? Jāḍyam ajñānam. By ignorance we mean its incapacity to
reveal itself by itself. We are able to reveal ourselves by ourselves and say I am I am but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1212

the pot is not able to say I am; nor is it able to say you are; this incapacity of the pot to
reveal its existence is called ajñāna which is called jaḍatva. Jaḍatva means inertness and
inertia is defined as ajñāna. The moon does not have luminosity of its own but it gets its
luminosity borrowed from the sun, therefore, moon is revealed because of the sun
whereas sun is able to reveal itself by itself because its own light. Similarly, here also,
ajñāna is jaḍatva which alone in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi also we see as prameyatva. In the
second line we have to write ajñāna is equal to jaḍatva; jaḍatva is equal to inertia and
inertia is the incapacity to reveal its existence by itself. By this ajñāna, the pot or any inert
object in the creation, is pervaded; this is definition of ajñāna. The pot pervaded by this
ajñāna is called ajñāta ghaṭa unknown pot. Then what is known pot. Known pot is the pot
which is pervaded by knowledge. Pot pervaded by ignorance is unknown pot; pot
pervaded by knowledge is known pot; then the question is what the knowledge which
pervades the pot is. He gives the definition of jñāna. Jñāna is nothing but the relevant
thought in the mind. It is not a mere thought. It should be the reflected consciousness
pervading the thought; that mixture is called the knowledge. Thought plus the reflected
consciousness rises in the mind like a beam of light emerging from a torch light; imagine a
torch light in the night in the dark room; the light travels outwards and spreads over a
dark object making the object luminous. Similarly, we are like torch light and vṛtti thought
plus the reflected consciousness rising from us goes out and pervades over the pot. This
mixture is called jñāna. The moment that jñāna pervades the inert pot like the sunlight
pervading over the moon, the reflected consciousness plus thought pervading the pot,
makes the pot jñāna-pervaded pot; and when the pot is pervaded by jñāna, the ajñāna is
pushed behind the darkness or ignorance is pushed behind and that pot becomes jñāta
ghaṭa known pot. Vidyāraṇya gives an example. This thought plus the reflected
consciousness is like a spear or like an arrow. It is like a javelin. Because of the sharp edge
it can remove the thin membrane like they talk about removing the cataract with a sharp
surgical knife. Similarly, like a kuntam thought with the cidābhāsa-tipped edge goes there
and ajñāna is the thin membrane, this vṛtti [wooden part] and that cidābhāsa-tipped vṛtti;
cidābhāsa-tipped thought goes there and removes the thin membrane and spreads over
the pot. Then, the unknown pot has become known pot.
Every object is either pervaded by ajñāna or pervaded by jñāna. Therefore, the pot is
pervaded by any one of these two ajñāna or jñāna, it is not pervaded by both

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1213

simultaneously; it is seen as two types of pots. Previously, it had one adjective while later
it had another adjective; the beauty of this adjective is that it is not physically traceable.
Imagine I don’t a person does not know what is a clip. Clip is placed on the table.
Previously, also it was on the table. That person comes and sees the clip and then he says
previously it was unknown clip and now it is known clip; there is a difference in the
adjective the peculiarity is you recognize the adjective but physically you don’t see any
difference in the clip. Then what is the adjective? That is the most mysterious adjective;
revealed by cit only. It cannot be physically measured by any scientist. You cannot say the
weight is increased or decreased, but there is a transformation in the clip; an invisible
transformation by which ajñāta adjective is changed to jñātā adjective. None can even
question this phenomenon. This is the job of Brahman.

śloka 8.7
अज्ञातो ब्रह्मणा भास्यो ज्ञातः कुम्भस्तथा न किम्।
ज्ञातत्वजननेनैव चिदाभासपरिक्षयः ॥ ८.७ ॥
ajñāto brahmaṇā bhāsyo jñātaḥ kumbhastathā na kim.
jñātatvajananenaiva cidābhāsaparikṣayaḥ (8.7).
He says just as the unknown-ness of the pot is revealed by cit, expending the same
principle the known-ness of the pot is also revealed by cit alone. He says ajñātaḥ kumbhaḥ
brahmaṇā bhāsyaḥ; the unknown pot or the unknown-ness of the pot is revealed by the cit
only. In the same way, the known pot is also revealed by cit; or the known-ness of the pot
is also revealed by the cit; why not? What is wrong in making that statement? The
unknown-ness can be revealed by cit itself. Then, naturally the question will come if both
are revealed by cit only, what is the job of cidābhāsa? To that, our answer is that cidābhāsa
has a third function other these two that is cit reveals only the two adjectives; but the
cidābhāsa is the one which reveals the pot component; cit only confines to unknown-ness
and known-ness, whereaas cidābhāsa has the function of revealing the pot. Therefore, he
says merely by replacing the unknown-ness of the pot by the knownness of the pot,
merely by replacing the adjective, from unknown-ness to known-ness,
cidābhāsaparikṣayaḥ; cidābhāsa has completed its job briefly by changing one adjective by
the other adjective. Therefore, you should carefully understand what the role of cit is and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1214

what the role of cidābhāsa is. Physically cit and cidābhāsa we cannot separate therefore,
we have to go through indirect method.

śloka 8.8
आभासहीनया बुद्ध्या ज्ञातत्वं नैव जन्यते ।
तादृग्बुद्धेर्विशेषः को मृदादेः स्याद्विकारिणः ॥ ८.८ ॥
ābhāsahīnayā buddhyā jñātatvaṃ naiva janyate.
tādṛgbuddherviśeṣaḥ ko mṛdādeḥ syādvikāriṇaḥ (8.8).
Vidyāraṇya answers a possible Pūrvapakṣa-objection. Someone suggests why we cannot
have like this. Cit reveals the unknown-ness of the pot where its job is over. Cit is
employed well. What he wants to suggest instead of cit having two jobs of revealing
knownness and unknownness, he says cit reveals only the unknownness of the pot, pot-
vṛtti reveals the pot and the cidābhāsa reveals the known-ness of the pot. The ghaṭa-vṛtti
reveals the ghaṭa by pervading the object. Ghaṭa-vṛtti, for pratibimbita cidābhāsa, we will
give a new job. Instead of cidābhāsa revealing the pot we will say cidābhāsa reveals the
known-ness of the pot. Three things are there: unknownness, knownness and the pot.
Ghaṭa-vṛtti and cidābhāsa each one can be given one job; why should you overload cit
with an extra job?! The difference between Pūrvapakṣī and our view is this. We said
cidābhāsa reveal the pot. He says don’t give the job to cidābhāsa only, vṛtti reveals the pot.
This is the imaginary Pūrvapakṣa. Vidyāraṇya does not mention that. He gives the answer
in this śloka. By mistake if you understand the question, what is the answer? The answer
is vṛtti cannot reveal the pot because vṛtti is also jaḍa; pot is also jaḍa. One jaḍa by
pervading another jaḍa cannot bring about the revelation just as non-luminous object
spreading over non-luminous object cannot illumine that object. If the sunlight spread
over the desk it will be revealed but suppose I am putting a non-luminous book upon non-
luminous desk, one cannot illumine the other because both of them are non-luminous.
He says because of the pervasion of vṛtti, the thought, over ghaṭa [pot] by itself, without
the assistance of cidābhāsa, mere vṛtti, mere pot-thought, can never generate jñātatvaṃ
knownness in the pot, as both of them are jaḍa by themselves. Therefore, cidābhāsa has to
help the vṛtti to reveal the pot. Therefore, the known-ness has to be revealed by cit only.
What difference is there between inert thought and inert pot? Since both of them are inert,
both of them are pervaded by ignorance and therefore, when two ignorances join, thought

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1215

is pervaded by ignorance being inert, pot is pervaded by ignorance being inert, when both
of them join together how knowledge can arise! When two ignorant people discuss what
knowledge will they add? They will add to ignorance alone and definitely no knowledge
can arise out of their discussion.

śloka 8.9
ज्ञात इत्युच्यते कुम्भो मृदा लिप्तो न कुत्रचित्।
धीमात्रव्याप्तकुम्भस्य ज्ञातत्वं नेष्यते तथा ॥ ८.९ ॥
jñāta ityucyate kumbho mṛdā lipto na kutracit.
dhīmātravyāptakumbhasya jñātatvaṃ neṣyate tathā (8.9).
One inert object pervaded by another inert object cannot make it a known object. The table
is an inert object; table cloth is another inert object; you have closed your eyes. Let us
imagine so. Unknown desk will never become a known desk when it is spread over by
another inert object. If this example is very clear, Vidyāraṇya says if the inert pot is
pervaded by a mental thought only, assuming the cidābhāsa is not pervading or not
functioning. By mere pervasion of thought, the pot cannot be known because like the table
cloth, a thought is also an inert object only because it is a product of the mind. And
therefore, by mere vṛtti-vyāpti pot can never be known. If it has to be known not only
vṛtti-vyāpti, phala-vyāpti is also required that means cidābhāsa is required that means
cidābhāsa alone illumines the pot; therefore, the known-ness of must be revealed by cit
only.

Class 236
śloka 8.9 contd.
Vidyāraṇya wants to differentiate śākṣī and cidābhāsa; śākṣī is original cit known as
kūṭastha. Cidābhāsa is the consciousness reflecting in the mind sometimes it is called
pramātā, sometimes called as ahaṅkāra, etc. I will retain the word cidābhāsa itself. To
differentiate cit and cidābhāsa, Vidyāraṇya deals with the differences in their function. By
noticing their functional differences we can differentiate these two. We have seen three
points up to the śloka number 7. In this context, Vidyāraṇya has taken the pot as an
example. The pot is called ajñāta ghaṭa unknown ghaṭa; and this unknown ghaṭa is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1216

illumined by śākṣī. It has to be illumined by śākṣī alone because cidābhāsa has not yet
arisen; if cidābhāsa had arisen the pot will not be an unknown pot itself; therefore, the
very word unknown pot indicates that cidābhāsa has not yet arrived. This unknown pot
before the arrival of cidābhāsa to make it known is śākṣi-bhāṣya he said. The second
information is at last he invited ghaṭākāra-vṛtti; along with it cidābhāsa also arose. At
some time, this vṛtti plus cidābhāsa arises; first of all we should know they have only a
brief existence; and this brief arrival of cidābhāsa will pervade the pot, both the vṛtti and
cidābhāsa and thus it will illumine the pot, generate the pot-knowledge and while
generating the pot-knowledge, the cidābhāsa removes the previous adjective of unknown-
ness and replaces it with a new adjective known-ness. jñāna-janana is equal to jñātatva-
janana, the generation of pot-knowledge is generation of known-ness adjective to the pot.
And as even the known-ness adjective is generated it replaces the unknown-adjective
which was present earlier. Since both knownness and unknownness cannot coexist,
cidābhāsa generates knownness and with that its job is over and after some time the vṛtti
subsides, cidābhāsa also subsides, and for the rest of my life the pot will exist for me as a
known pot, as a jñāta ghaṭa. The vṛtti and cidābhāsa has receded after doing its job.
Hereafter, whenever anybody asks the question about pot, you say that the pot is a known
pot and this known pot exists in your sub-conscious mind. In this treasure-house of
various known things, jñāta ghaṭa also exists even when your cidābhāsa is busy knowing
other things. Even when the vṛtti and cidābhāsa are busy in knowing other things, in you,
ghaṭa exists as jñāta ghaṭa. That such a jñāta ghaṭa exists in you is revealed by śākṣī or cit.
Thus, for every individual there is a huge list of ajñāta padārthas at any moment of life,
and another huge list of jñātā padārthas; even when you are busy knowing a particular
object you have got a list of jñāta ajñāta padārthas. How is their existence revealed? Their
existence means ajñāta jñātā padārtha existence; “who reveals their existence?” if you ask,
we say śākṣī reveals ajñāta and jñātā padārthas and cidābhāsa’s job is as we grow older
the list will be changed. Pañcadaśī after sometime hopefully changed from ajñāta list to
jñātā list. When I say there is book called Brahmavidyābharaṇam, now you have got
another padārtha added in ajñāta list. This burden was not there and you did not have
curiosity also. I put the bug saying there is a wonderful book; by adding an adjective I add
to your curiosity. Brahmavidyābharaṇam will be added into your ajñāta padārtha list and
the entire universe consisting of ajñāta and jñātā padārthas are illumined by śākṣī. The job

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1217

of cidābhāsa is changing the adjective from ajñāta to jñātā; by generating padārtha-jñāna.

This is the topic. Up to this we saw in the last class.
Then from the eight śloka a confusing diversion is taking place and this will go up to 12th
śloka. It is slightly complicated. Even if we avoid this we lose nothing. After the 7th śloka
if you have to read 13th śloka, the teaching can happily continue. Since the diversion is
there, we will see what it is. A Pūrvapakṣī is giving an alternative suggestion. We had
made three statements:
1. śākṣī illumines unknown pot;
2. cidābhāsa changes the adjective from unknown to known and
3. then śākṣī illumines the known pot.
Thus, śākṣī has job number one and job number three while cidābhāsa has the second job
of dress-changing. Now, the Pūrvapakṣi-suggestion is: you overburden the śākṣī with two
jobs. After all we have got three factors here to take up each job. Let śākṣī reveal the
unknown pot. And instead of cidābhāsa changing the adjective from unknown to known,
Pūrvapakṣī says there is a ghaṭākāra-vṛtti, cidābhāsa is formed on the ghaṭa-vṛtti and let
the ghaṭa-vṛtti change the adjective from unknown to known by generating the
knowledge. Let the vṛtti or let the vṛtti-vyāpti generate pot-knowledge and change the
adjective from ajñāta to jñātā. Then, we have got cidābhāsa sitting upon the vṛtti. And let
the cidābhāsa illumine or reveal the jñātatva adjective which has been generated by the
vṛtti. Vṛtti has changed the adjective to jñātatva and let the cidābhāsa reveal the jñāta
ghaṭa; what is wrong in this? It is just an alternative suggested. That was suggested in the
8th śloka and the answer is reinforced in the 9th which we were seeing in the last class.
Vidyāraṇya says vṛtti or vṛtti-vyāpti cannot generate knowledge by itself without utilizing
cidābhāsa. Let the vṛtti do the function of revealing the pot and changing the adjective to
pot-knowledge, he says. Vidyāraṇya says that it is not possible because vṛtti without the
help of cidābhāsa, meaning vṛtti by itself, cannot do the function of generating knowledge
and changing the adjective without utilizing cidābhāsa– Pūrvapakṣī does not say
cidābhāsa is not there; he says we don’t utilize the cidābhāsa for that function. So
Vidyāraṇya says without utilizing cidābhāsa vṛtti by itself cannot pervade the pot and
generate pot-knowledge and change the adjective from ajñāta to jñātā. Vidyāraṇya gives
his reason for this. Vṛtti or thought is also as much as jaḍa as ghaṭa. The reason is vṛtti is
born out of the mind; the mind is born out of pañca sūkṣma bhūtas; therefore, ultimately

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1218

vṛtti by itself is a product of pañca-bhūtas and thereby, bhautika. What is the difference
between jaḍa vṛtti and jaḍa ghaṭa? The only difference is jaḍa vṛtti is born out of subtle
elements and jata ghaṭa is born out of gross elements, whereas bhautikatva is common to
both. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya asks how can unknown pot become known just because a
vṛtti pervades?! It is not possible just as a pot cannot be known by applying a coating of
clay over that. This is what we saw in the last class. The inert pot when it is coated with
another inert layer of clay, ajñātā does not suddenly become jñātā; if that happens what
you have to do? To know various objects, ask somebody to give a coating of clay one by
one to know. This never happens. In the same way, the pot which is pervaded by vṛtti
alone; when Pūrvapakṣī says vṛtti alone he does not deny the presence of cidābhāsa but he
says cidābhāsa will be utilized for something else. Therefore, here the word dhī means
ghaṭākāra-vṛtti. Jñātatvaṃ naiva iṣyate it can never become known; therefore, the
conclusion is cidābhāsa will have to be utilized for generating jñātatā. The śākṣī has to
come to illumine jñātatā generated by cidābhāsa. We cannot negate the role of śākṣī.

śloka 8.10
ज्ञातत्वं नाम कुम्भेऽतश्चिदाभासफलोदयः ।
न फलं ब्रह्मचैतन्यं मनात्प्रागपि सत्वतः ॥ ८.१० ॥
jñātatvaṃ nāma kumbhe:'taścidābhāsaphalodayaḥ.
na phalaṃ brahmacaitanyaṃ manātprāgapi satvataḥ (8.10).
Naturally, the question is if the vṛtti by itself without the assistance of cidābhāsa cannot
generate jñātatva knownness on the pot then what can generate jñātatva. Pūrvapakṣī may
ask so, for which Vidyāraṇya says that alone I have been telling repeatedly knownness is
not generated by vṛtti but it is generated by vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa. That knownness
adjective which cannot be generated by vṛtti-vyāpti is nothing but the rise of the pervasion
of the cidābhāsa along with the vṛtti. When the vṛtti pervades the pot, cidābhāsa also
concurrently should pervade the pot; cidābhāsa alone has luminosity, consciousness;
therefore, that alone can make it known. Therefore, he says cidābhāsaphalodayaḥ. Udaya
means rise; otherwise you can translate it as vyapti. It is not the cidābhāsa pervading the
mind but it is the cidābhāsa on the ghaṭākāra-vṛtti. Cidābhāsa in the mind will not help
ghaṭākāra-vṛtti to rise in the mind; it should travel to the pot, should envelop the pot and
upon the ghaṭākāra-vṛtti, ghaṭākāra-vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa should envelop and that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1219

enveloping process is called jñātatva-janana. The adjective “known” has arrived. This
cidābhāsa upon the vṛtti which pervades the pot is given another name, a unique name, a
technical name and that name is phala.
Normally, the word phala is used in the context of karma-phala or in the context of any
fruit but in this context the word phala means viṣayākāra-vṛtti-pratibimbita-viṣaya-
vyāpaka cidābhāsa; this is given a technical name phala. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
cidābhāsa-udaya is the same as phala-udaya because cidābhāsa and phala are one and the
same. Phala-udaya alone is otherwise called phala-vyāpti. cidābhāsa-phalodaya alone is
called jñātatva. Now, the next question is why you call it phala? Why cannot you call it by
any other name? Why do you choose phala? It is called phala because this phala alone is
making the object known. This phala alone is otherwise called viṣaya-jñāna. This phala is
the result of pramāṇa-operation. Since phala-vyāpti or cidābhāsa-vyāpti otherwise called
jñātatā-utpatti or ghaṭa-jñāna is the result of pramāṇa-vyāpāra. The operation of any
pramāṇa has to result in this knowledge alone; and therefore, viṣaya-jñāna is called phala;
pramāṇa-vyāpāra-phala is shortened as phala.
Then, from the second line Vidyāraṇya enters into another diversion. What is that? He
says this cidābhāsa which is generated as a result of pramāṇa-vyāpāra is janya; janya
means it is generated; therefore, it is kārya-jñāna; pratibimbita is always janya and it is
always phala and it is always a kārya; because it has an origination. It originated in
pramāṇa-vyāpāra. Cidābhāsa is always janya. Therefore, it is anitya. What about cit or
Śākṣi-caitanya. It is not a phala of pramāṇa-vyāpāra. It is not kārya; it is not janya;
therefore, original caitanya is nitya while cidābhāsa is anityam. Cit is nitya. Therefore,
these two are different. Cidābhāsa and cit are different. Therefore, he says na phala this
cidābhāsa na brahma-caitanyam bhavati. It can never be equated to original cit, brahma-
caitanya or Śākṣi-caitanya because that is nitya. Even before the pramāṇa-vyāpāra, even
before the effort to gain the knowledge, Śākṣi-caitanya was already existent; therefore, this
is nitya caitanya. Ghaṭa-jñāna is anitya caitanya; therefore, vṛtti jñāna and svarūpa jñāna
are distinct. One is anitya and another is nitya. Even before the effort to know or pramāṇa-
operation, brahma-caitanya exists. Don't mix up the original consciousness and the
reflected consciousness. This leads to a question which he wants to answer in the
following two ślokas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1220

śloka 8.11
परागर्थप्रमेयेषु या फलत्वेन संमता
संवित्सैवेह मेयोऽर्थो वेदान्तोक्तिप्रमाणतः ।
parāgarthaprameyeṣu yā phalatvena saṃmatā
saṃvitsaiveha meyo:'rtho vedāntoktipramāṇataḥ (8.11).
Cit and cidābhāsa are different and not identical or to put in another language bimba
caitanya and pratibimbita caitanya are not identical but different. Vidyāraṇya says there is
a problem. The problem is if we read Sūreśvarācārya’s vārtika on Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad we get a problem. You may say that only if we read Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
mula then Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad bhāṣya and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vārtika then
alone you will have a problem. So we may plead with Vidyāraṇya please leave us as we
have not read any one of the three. Vidyāraṇya is worried suppose we have read them; we
would point out the problem. He says there seems to be a problem if you read the vārtika.
In that vārtika Sūreśvarācārya has equated the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness, bimba caitanya and pratibimba caitanya to be one and the same, but
Vidyāraṇya says the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness are different.
Which one is right is the present question? Vidyāraṇya says original and reflection are
primarily different. Original is independent and reflection is dependent; original is satya
reflection is mithyā. Therefore, they are different. But at the same time, since original alone
appears as the reflection, sometimes figuratively we take them as one and the same. I have
given the example. Whenever a person sees a group photo in which you are also there. We
tell that person in that photo I am also there. We say I am in the photo. That person who
sees the photo does not raise the objection. In this context, he understands that the word
can be used for an image or picture or ābhāsa. It does not mean that they are totally
identical. We equate even then, we equate so that the listener does not misunderstand or
get confused. There are occasions when they are equated also. I will give you two
examples where they are equated. One is:
na tatra sūryo bhāti na candratārakaṃ nemā vidyuto bhānti kuto:'yamagniḥ;
tameva bhāntamanubhāti sarvaṃ tasya bhāsā sarvamidaṃ vibhāti.
In that mantra the Upaniṣad says caitanya alone illumines everything. Strictly speaking it
should be caitanya illumines the mind forming cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa illumines the
world. Really speaking you should not say caitanya illumines everything. Everything

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1221

means everyone should be Sarvajña all the time. Caitanya illumines the mind and
cidābhāsa illumines the world. That is why in suṣupti even if caitanya is there, it is not
able to illumine the world. Therefore, strictly speaking you should never say caitanya
illumines everything and you should say caitanya illumines the mind and further the
mind illumines the world. Śruti feels even if cidābhāsa illumines the world, the cidābhāsa
is nothing but caitanya’s avatāra alone. Lord Kṛṣṇa says in Gītā I alone taught Sūrya. Here,
Kṛṣṇa equates with Viśṇu. Strictly speaking, Viśṇu was long before and Kṛṣṇa came on
Janmāṣṭamī day; therefore, there should be difference. Kṛṣṇa says avatāra and original are
one and the same. Similarly, cidābhāsa the avatāra of cit can be taken as one and the same.
Strictly speaking, they are different also. That is why we always say the relationship
between satya and mithyā is bhinnatva-abhinnatva-vilakṣaṇa; you can never say they are
totally identical and you can never say they are totally different also. Therefore, this is the
Pūrvapakṣa. The point to be noted here is cidābhāsa is different but often they are
presented as identical also. Sūreśvarācārya has figuratively equated cidābhāsa and cit in
the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad’s vārtika śloka. [vārtika 1.1.59].
The whole śloka of vārtika is bodily lifted. Samvit iha meyaḥ arthaḥ. Samvit means the
original consciousness satyam jñānam anantam brahma. It means svarūpa caitanya which
is nothing but Brahman. Meyaḥ arthaḥ means prameyaḥ arthaḥ and prameya artha means
subject matter of discussion or viṣaya. Because whenever you discuss any śāstra you are to
discuss the anubandha catuṣṭaya. Anubandha catuṣṭaya means adhikārī, viṣaya,
prayojana, sambandha. Therefore, Sūreśvarācārya asks the question for the entire Vedānta
śāstra Upaniṣad śāstra; there must be a subject matter and that subject matter is iha which
means in this Vedānta śāstra where Brahman alone is to be known and which is known
through Vedānta vākya pramāṇa. All the Vedāntic statements are called pramāṇa.
Vedānta vākya pramāṇa out of the six pramāṇas pratyakṣa, anumāna, upamāna, etc, one
is called śabda pramāṇa and śabda pramāṇa is Veda pramāṇa and Vedānta pramāṇa; it
means Veda pūrva and Vedānta pramāṇa; that Vedānta pramāṇa is stated
asVedāntayuktipramanataḥ Through that brahma-caitanya is to be known. There is no
controversy for Brahman is the subject matter of Vedānta and that Brahman is satyam
jñānam anantam brahma. That caitanya alone is available in the form of the cidābhāsa
which reveals every sense-object. That caitanya alone is available in the form of phala.
Phala means cidābhāsa in this context. It is available in every object producing the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1222

knowledge of that object. Therefore, Sūreśvarācārya says yat phalatvena sammata, that
brahma-caitanya alone is sammata is understood and accepted and acknowledged as
phala, as the cidābhāsa or viṣaya-jñāna-caitanyatvena in the form of cidābhāsa. And this
cidābhāsa rests in every external object. This is the description of cidābhāsa. Cidābhāsa
which is in every external object and that external object is an object of knowledge or that
which is known. Therefore, what Sūreśvarācārya says is when the clip is known, upon the
clip brahma-caitanya or Śākṣi-caitanya is there; but not as a Śākṣi-caitanya but is in the
form of cidābhāsa-caitanya and the carrier of cidābhāsa is clip-ākāra vṛtti. So vṛtti goes
out, pervades the clip and cidābhāsa also pervades the clip and that cidābhāsa is Śākṣi-
caitanya. Therefore, Śākṣi-caitanya alone pervades as cidābhāsa on all objects when you
perceive. Here, Sūreśvarācārya says Śākṣi-caitanya alone is in the form of cidābhāsa when
he says that Sūreśvarācārya is equating the cit and cidābhāsa. Even though factually cit is
ajanya cidābhāsa is janya; cit is nitya and cidābhāsa is anitya; even though they are
different Sūreśvarācārya says that cidābhāsa is cit and the cit alone is the subject matter of
Vedānta.
First line talks about cidābhāsa and the second line talks about cidābhāsa. Both are thus
equated. How do you reconcile this equation of cit and cidābhāsa is the question. What is
the answer? I have told you the answer: how do you say I am in the photo? When you say
I am in the photo it only means my image is in the photo. Similarly, when Sūreśvarācārya
equates them he only says they are similar and he is not saying they are identical. That is
why in English the word identical or identity has the meaning of aikya also; even in
English language identify has a meaning of similarity. That is what Viśiṣṭādvaita will say
you look like Viśṇu and are not Viśṇu. That wherever aikya is talked about they will say
similarity and here Vidyāraṇya says when Sūreśvarācārya equates cit and cidābhāsa he
only means cidābhāsa is similar to cit and not that it is exactly cit.

śloka 8.12
इति वार्तिककारेण चित्सदृश्यं विवक्षितम्
ब्रह्मचित्फलयोर्भेदः साहस्र्यां विश्रुतो यतः ॥ ८.१२ ॥
iti vārtikakāreṇa citsadṛśyaṃ vivakṣitam
brahmacitphalayorbhedaḥ sāhasryāṃ viśruto yataḥ (8.12)

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1223

In that particular śloka of vārtika Sūreśvarācārya says that the language of identify should
not be taken as the language of oneness. It should be taken as the language of similarity.
Pratibimba is like bimba, but pratibimba is not the bimba itself. Through that vārtika
śloka, only similarity between cit and cidābhāsa is revealed. In fact, the very word ābhāsa
means an image. An appearance or a semblance is the meaning of the word ābhāsa. The
very word cidābhāsa indicates that it is a semblance of cit and it is not cit itself. Therefore,
he says cidābhāsasya citsadṛśyaṃ vivakṣitam. Similarity with cit is intended by
Sūreśvarācārya. Naturally, a question will come up as to how do you know what is the
intention of Sūreśvarācārya? This question may be asked. For that Vidyāraṇya says if you
raise a Pūrvapakṣa by quoting Sūreśvarācārya I will give a reply quoting Adi
Śaṅkarācārya. Therefore, Adi Śaṅkarācārya has clearly differentiated cit and cidābhāsa
and Sūreśvarācārya, his disciple, will never contradict Adi Śaṅkarācārya. Therefore,
Sūreśvarācārya also must have accepted the difference and if he is equating you should
take it as a figurative expression alone; remember the example ‘I am in the photo’;
therefore, Vidyāraṇya says sāhasryāṃ bhedaḥ viśrutaḥ, quoting Adi Śaṅkarācārya’s
Upadeśa-sāhasrī. Here, they have quoted chapter 18.32 onwards; several ślokas are there
clearly talking about the cit and cidābhāsa. By taking the example of mukha and mukha-
ābhāsa, the differences are clearly talked about. If you have doubt, read Upadeśa-sāhasrī.
Details in the next class.

Class 237
śloka 8.12 contd.
I pointed out that from śloka number 8 to up to śloka number 12 was taken to answer the
Pūrvapakṣa and the main topic under discussion is the difference between śākṣī and
cidābhāsa. Upto 7th śloka Vidyāraṇya pointed out their difference by giving the difference
in their function, pointing out that an object like a pot is known by the cidābhāsa; then
known-ness of the pot is due to the śākṣī. The pot is known by cidābhāsa; then once the
pot is known, the pot has known-ness as its adjective or attribute, that known-ness of the
pot is known by the śākṣī. Cidābhāsa illumines the ghaṭa; śākṣī illumines the ghaṭasya
jñātatā the pot-knowledge he said. Thereafter, he made one more point that cidābhāsa is
always anitya caitanya because it rises along with the thought and it resolves with the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1224

thought. Along with ghaṭākāra-vṛtti, cidābhāsa rises and reveals the pot and thereafter it
resolves; similarly, along with paṭākāra vṛtti cidābhāsa rises, vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa
rises and it reveals the object. Therefore, vṛtti-pratibimbita cidābhāsa refers to that which
is reflected in that particular thought. Therefore, the current cidābhāsa is rising and falling
and so, it is anitya caitanya whereas Śākṣi-caitanya is always there, previously illumining
the unknown-ness of the pot, later illumining the known-ness of the pot; śākṣī is always
busy illumining either the unknown-ness of object or known-ness of the object. Therefore,
śākṣī is nitya caitanya and cidābhāsa is anitya caitanya. Therefore, both of them are
different. Functionally, they are different and from the point of view of longevity also,
they are different. Thus, the difference between śākṣī and cidābhāsa was pointed out in the
7th śloka. Then, only a diversion has taken place with two Pūrvapakṣas; one Pūrvapakṣa
has been answered and the second Pūrvapakṣa has come up because of the reference to
Sūreśvarācārya’s vārtika; in a particular śloka which we even don’t know, which we have
not seen, Sūreśvarācārya has equated śākṣī and cidābhāsa and he has pointed out that the
subject matter of Vedānta is the śākṣī which is nothing but cidābhāsa. How can
Sūreśvarācārya equate śākṣī and cidābhāsa? That was the question raised by the
Pūrvapakṣa. This occurs in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vārtika. The equation is given not
because they are totally equal but a figurative equation is given because of their similarity.
Equation is not a factual equation revealing total identity; equation is a figurative equation
because of their similarity because the original and the image are not totally equal; original
and image are only similar. I said this equation because of similarity is not only
Sūreśvarācārya’s expression. We also generally use this expression whenever we say in the
group photo I am there even though the right expression should have been in the photo
my image is there; instead of saying my image is there, I say I am there. We find because
of the equation of me and my image, nobody gets confused, neither the speaker nor the
listener because everyone knows it is only a figurative equation not total identity.
Whenever cit and cidābhāsa are equated, only their similarity is intended and it is not a
total identity. It is so because in Upadeśa-sāhasrī which is authored by Adi Śaṅkarācārya
who is the Guru of Sūreśvarācārya, that Adi Śaṅkarācārya himself clearly differentiates cit
and cidābhāsa not in one śloka or two ślokas but in several ślokas. In Upadeśa-sāhasrī
śloka 32 to many ślokas, Adi Śaṅkarācārya differentiates ādhāra-caitanya and ābhāsa-
caitanya. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya answers brahma cit, original consciousness otherwise we

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1225

can call it as śākṣī cit, kūṭastha cit or brahma cit. The word phala refers to cidābhāsa in this
context and bheda means difference between the original consciousness and the reflected
consciousness; difference between śākṣī and cidābhāsa has been clearly presented in a
detailed manner in Upadeśa-sāhasrī of Adi Śaṅkarācārya. Sūreśvarācārya will not
contradict Adi Śaṅkarācārya, latter being the former’s Guru. Adi Śaṅkarācārya talks about
real difference and Sūreśvarācārya talks about their ‘seeming’ oneness. With this diversion
topic is over. Now, we will come back to the original talk.

śloka 8.13
आभास उदितस्तस्माज्ज्ञातत्वं जनयेद्घटे ।
तत्पुनःर्ब्रह्मणा भास्यमज्ञातत्ववदेव हि ॥ ८.१३ ॥
ābhāsa uditastasmājjñātatvaṃ janayedghaṭe.
tatpunaḥrbrahmaṇā bhāsyamajñātatvavadeva hi (8.13).
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya continues with the main topic: there is a distinction between the
role of cidābhāsa and the role of śākṣī, since Pūrvapakṣī’s views are not right and our
approach alone is right what I have said in 7th śloka I would like to reinforce here. The
cidābhāsa momentarily rises whenever a particular thought rises. You should remember
the mind and cidābhāsa are not rising now. We are not talking about continuing cidābhāsa
in the mind. When a particular thought of an object rises ghaṭa-vṛtti, paṭa-vṛtti etc., when
the thought rises, the thought itself becomes a mirror and in that ghaṭa-vṛtti mirror the
cidābhāsa rises; and that is here called udhita ābhāsa. It is only there for a brief moment
and that momentary cidābhāsa will make the unknown pot known. The new created
adjective of known-ness which is referred to by word ‘tat’ is illumined by the original
consciousness which is nothing but Śākṣi-caitanya inside and the original consciousness is
called Brahman. Can you say Brahman has newly arrived to illumine the known-ness?
You cannot say because even before the known-ness arrived Brahman had a function to
illumine the unknown-ness of the object. Just as Brahman was already present illumining
the unknownness of the pot that continues illumining the known-ness of the pot. This is
the difference between the two.

śloka 8.14
धीवृत्त्याभासकुम्भानां समूहो भास्यते चिता ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1226

कुम्भमात्रफलत्वात्स एक आभासतः स्फु रेत्॥ ८.१४ ॥

dhīvṛttyābhāsakumbhānāṃ samūho bhāsyate citā.
kumbhamātraphalatvātsa eka ābhāsataḥ sphuret (8.14).
The same idea is presented in a different language. Therefore, three factors are illumined
by the śākṣī, citā brahma caitanyena, samūho bhāsyate this group of three factors is
illumined by the original consciousness. Kumbha is number one, that is the pot; when you
say pot, we should understand the pot with unknown-ness or the pot with the known-
ness. Here, the pot refers to the known-ness as well as the unknown-ness of the pot. The
second factor is ābhāsa. The cidābhāsa is also evident and it shines because of the original
consciousness only just as the reflected moon shines because of the original sun only. Dhi-
vṛtti the thought in the mind or ghaṭa-vṛtti is the third factor. Śākṣī has a wider field of
illumination. Cidābhāsa has only a restrained field to be illumined. Cidābhāsa is meant to
illumine the pot only. Phala here means object of illumination. Therefore, that one pot
alone is illumined by abhasa, ābhāsataḥ sphuret, that pot alone is illumined with
cidābhāsa. Ābhāsa has one object while śākṣī has three; therefore, also we should note the
difference between śākṣī and cidābhāsa.

śloka 8.15
चैतन्यं द्विगुणं कुम्भे ज्ञातत्वेन स्फु रेत्ततः ।
अन्येऽनुव्यवसायाख्यमाहुरेतद्यथोदितम्॥ ८.१५ ॥
caitanyaṃ dviguṇaṃ kumbhe jñātatvena sphurettataḥ.
anye:'nuvyavasāyākhyamāhuretadyathoditam (8.15).
We said previously that the unknown pot is illumined by the śākṣī. When the cidābhāsa
pervades it, the unknown pot becomes known pot. Therefore, in the known pot cidābhāsa
is pervading because the very knownness is caused by cidābhāsa; therefore, I need not say
that the known pot is pervaded by cidābhāsa. The very knownness is caused by cidābhāsa.
Previously, it was illumined by the śākṣī we said. Now, the question is when the known
pot is pervaded by cidābhāsa, is the śākṣī pervading the known pot or not? The known pot
is pervaded by cidābhāsa. We focus on the cidābhāsa-pervasion. During the cidābhāsa-
pervasion does the śākṣī continue to pervade the pot or not? If I ask so, you will laugh at
me because śākṣī has to be all the time there. Therefore, śākṣī was pervading the pot when
it was known and the śākṣī continues to pervade when the cidābhāsa pervades the pot.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1227

That means cidābhāsa does not displace the śākṣī. Coming to our wall and the sunlight
example when you throw a patch of reflected sunlight does the original sunlight continue
or get displaced? The original one continues even though you don’t notice its presence
because the reflected patch is so bright the general light is overshadowed. What we
understand is pratibimba sūrya-prakāśa does not displace bimba sūrya-prakāśa.
Extending that in the jñāta ghaṭa, in the known pot, cidābhāsa-vyāpti is also there and cit
is not displaced; cit vyāpti is also there. From this, we can make a general law that all the
known objects are pervaded by two caitanyas, when at the time of knowing they are
pervaded by two caitanyas; they are the reflected consciousness and the original
consciousness. All other objects are pervaded by the original consciousness alone; but
whenever I know something there are two caitanyas. This is the first lesson.
Thereafter, he will say how our intellect recognizes these two pervasions. Our intellect
expresses the two pervasions, which he will explain later. Whenever we see an object, the
object is pervaded by two consciousnesses. The pot is known and in that pot there is
twofold consciousness as the original consciousness and the reflected consciousness. Then,
he goes to the second stage. How do we experience this phenomenon? Experientially, how
do you say there are two consciousnesses? When you say that the pot is known, it
indicates the cidābhāsa pervasion. That the pot is known, when you talk about the known-
ness of the pot, it is referring to the cit-vyāpti. Therefore, he says because of the pervasion
of the twofold consciousness, the pot shines and also the known-ness of the pot is known.
We will make it more clear as he goes further. As the pot is known, cidābhāsa is indicated
and as the known-ness of the pot is known; cit-vyāpti is indicated. Or if you want to put it
in another language, when you talk about the pot-knowledge, or when you want to talk
about the knowledge of the pot, it is cidābhāsa and when you talk about the knowledge of
the knowledge of the pot it is śākṣī. When you talk about ghaṭa cidābhāsa function; when
you talk about ghaṭa-jñāna it is cit function. This is the difference. Now, Vidyāraṇya adds
an aside point. It is because this is discussed by all the philosophers. How do we know
ghaṭa is question one; and how do we know ghaṭa-jñāna is question number two; in tarka-
śāstra, they say we know ghaṭa the pot by the first process of the intellect. It is process
number one because of which we know the pot. Then, he says there is the second process
that takes place in the intellect; because of the second process we get the knowledge of
ghaṭa-jñāna. The first process reveals ghaṭa and second process reveals ghaṭa-jñāna. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1228

first one is called vyavasāya and second one is called anuvyavasāya in tarka-śāstra.
Vyavasāya is I know the pot and anuvyavasāya is I know the pot-knowledge. Both of
them are two processes and first process takes place first and second process second. This
is how you gain the knowledge. First, you learn Pañcadaśī and later you know that you
have learnt Pañcadaśī. Knowledge of the knowledge is called meta knowledge. Whereas,
Advaitin vehemently refutes this explanation of tarka-śāstra because he says if pot-
knowledge requires a process, and the knowledge of the pot-knowledge requires another
process then that knowledge of the knowledge of the knowledge will require third process
and the knowledge of the knowledge of the knowledge of the knowledge will require
fourth process and there will be infinite regress problem. Therefore, knowledge of the
knowledge is not another process happening in time. Knowledge of the pot is a process
happening in time; that is vyavasāya. But knowledge of the knowledge of the pot is not
another process happening in time; because of the presence of the śākṣī; knowledge of the
knowledge takes place instantaneously without our special efforts. The difference between
Vedānta and tarka is this. Knowledge of the knowledge is a separate process and effort
which has to take place in the mind and he calls it anuvyavasāya process whereas Vedānta
says anuvyavasāya is not a separate process; it does not require a separate effort and it
does not require separate time. As even the pot is known, the pot-knowledge is
simultaneously known because of the presence of the Śākṣi-caitanya. In the class, you have
to know Pañcadaśī and you are not to take separate efforts to know that you know
Pañcadaśī. The above mentioned second knowledge which means knowledge of the
knowledge the Tārkika calls it as anuvyavasāya. I will call it meta-knowledge. This meta
knowledge is accepted by both Tārkika and Vedāntin. It is something we have but the
difference is whether the meta knowledge requires a separate process or meta knowledge
is an instantaneous consequence of knowledge is the view of Tārkika and meta knowledge
does not require separate process and it automatically takes place because of Śākṣi-
caitanya is our conclusion.

śloka 8.16
घटोऽयमित्यसावुक्तिराभासस्य प्रसादतः ।
विज्ञातो घट इत्युक्तिर्ब्रह्मानुग्रहतो भवेत्॥ ८.१६ ॥
ghaṭo:'yamityasāvuktirābhāsasya prasādataḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1229

vijñāto ghaṭa ityuktirbrahmānugrahato bhavet (8.16).

What is the conclusion? This śloka is the essence of the whole discussion we had so far.
When you say this is a pot, ayam ghaṭaḥ then what is the helping thing? This statement
reveals the prasāda, the anugraha, the blessing of cidābhāsa. When I say this is a pot, it
does not mean it is the pot; pot is an example; similarly, any external object you refer to
this is a wall, this is a fan, this is a man, this is a woman, this is the sun, this is a star;
whenever you refer the object per se you need cidābhāsa’s blessings. This statement either
you make the statement or you think of the idea; I need not make the statement; I see and I
say here is a pot, here is the water, etc, ābhāsasya prasādataḥ. When do you recognize the
śākṣī’s role? When you say the pot is known underlining not the pot part but the known
adjective part, when you say the pot is known or when you refer to the known-ness of the
pot, brahmānugrahato bhavet at that time you should recognize the blessing given by the
śākṣī, that is Brahman, that is the original consciousness. This is the difference between the
function of these two. With this, that topic is over. Now, he will enter another topic.

śloka 8.17
आभासब्रह्मणी देहाद्बहिर्यद्वद्विवेचिते ।
तद्वदाभासकू टस्थौ विविच्येतां वपुष्यपि ॥ ८.१७ ॥
ābhāsabrahmaṇī dehādbahiryadvadvivecite.
tadvadābhāsakūṭasthau vivicyetāṃ vapuṣyapi (8.17).
In the ślokas 4 to 16, Vidyāraṇya differentiated the śākṣī and cidābhāsa by referring to
their roles or functions with regard to the knowledge of an external object. Therefore, from
the standpoint of the external function śākṣi-cidābhāsa-viveka is done. Therefore, we can
call it bāhya-śākṣi-cidābhāsa-viveka. But when we use the word bāhya instead of using the
word śākṣī we use the word Brahman that is the convention. We can call it the viveka
between original consciousness the reflected consciousness. Now, he says hereafter I want
to make the difference with regard to our own experience within the body. Within the
body, how to differentiate the cit and cidābhāsa through their function? Therefore, he says
outside the body ābhāsabrahmaṇī dehādbahirvivecite cidābhāsa-cit that is differentiated
externally. We will enter into a new topic. In the same manner, ābhāsakūṭasthau
vivicyetāṃ vapuṣyapi the difference between ābhāsa and kūṭastha or śākṣī let them be
separated; let the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness be differentiated

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1230

within the body also. The original consciousness remaining the same, it is located all over
the body; but even though the original consciousness is all over, when the original
consciousness outside the body we refer to we use the world Brahman; when the very
same the original consciousness is referred to within the body we change the language and
we call it śākṣī or kūṭastha. There is no difference in consciousness but only in language
we make a difference. Therefore, don’t get confused; in the first line he uses the word
ābhāsa and Brahman and in the second line he uses the word ābhāsa and kūṭastha.
Brahman is external original consciousness and kūṭastha is internal original consciousness.
This topic of discrimination between the reflected consciousness and original
consciousness within the body he had already mentioned in śloka 3. But he had not
elaborated. In śloka number 3 he said whenever the mind is active and thoughts are
available then cidābhāsa is prominent; therefore, in the active mind the prominence of
cidābhāsa can be recognized; whereas between the thoughts or in suṣupti or samādhi
avasthā when the mind is inactive, thoughts are not generated; cidābhāsa is also not
prominent. Then, śākṣī is there, sāmānya caitanya can be recognized; this he had already
said in 3rd śloka. But there he did not elaborate; now that topic he is picking up. These
ślokas could have been inserted there. In the 3rd śloka he introduced the internal
discrimination and from 4th śloka he discussed external discrimination; and again he
comes back to internal discrimination.

śloka 8.18
अहंवृत्तौ चिदाभासः कामक्रोधादिकासु च ।
संव्याप्य वर्तते तप्ते लोहे वह्निर्यथा तथा ॥ ८.१८ ॥
ahaṃvṛttau cidābhāsaḥ kāmakrodhādikāsu ca.
saṃvyāpya vartate tapte lohe vahniryathā tathā (8.18).
What he wants to say is this: in an active mind śākṣī is also there and cidābhāsa is also
there. Of these two which one is brighter. Normally, original we will think should be
brighter but truth is original is always subdued and the reflection is brighter. That is why
he gave the example when you have a patch of reflected light, the reflected light is more
powerful than the sāmānya it is said. Whenever the mind is active cidābhāsa-pradhāna is I
the Jīva. Therefore, he says ahamvṛttau when the ahaṅkāra is active, ahaṅkāra is
associated with kāma-krodha, lobha-moha, etc., or any internal emotional condition. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1231

uniqueness of this internal emotional condition they are not illumining the external world;
when there is a pot-thought the mind is extrovert then I have got emotional condition;
whenever we are worrying we are only in our own world even though thoughts are there,
they are not extrovert thought; pot-thought is an external thought; worry-thought is
thought is all right but it is not the extrovert thought but it is only introvert thought.
Therefore, the thoughts are there. At that time what is prominent is cidābhāsa. Cidābhāsa
is prominent and worry is mahā prominent! If I talk about śākṣī you will get angrier only.
Therefore, we will stop here.

Class 238
śloka 8.18 contd.
In this śloka, Vidyāraṇya concentrates upon the discrimination of cit, original
consciousness and cidābhāsa the reflected consciousness. The two consciousnesses cannot
be physically separated for wherever cidābhāsa is there, there the cit also must be there
inseparably because cidābhāsa cannot exist without cit; the cit being all-pervading, it can
never be away from cidābhāsa. Since physical separation is not possible. We have to use
some indirect method to differentiate and understand them distinctly. Therefore, in the
8th chapter, Vidyāraṇya talks about their distinct functions or roles and by differentiating
their roles he helps us to understand cit as different from cidābhāsa. This functional
differentiation is made with regard to our experiences; in our worldly experiences, which
role is played by cidābhāsa and which role is played by cit is what he analyses. He broadly
classifies these worldly experiences themselves into two; one is external and the other
internal experiences. In the context of external experiences, what is the role played by cit
and cidābhāsa and similarly, in the context of internal too. Of these two topics, Vidyāraṇya
has completed the first topic from śloka number 4 to śloka number 16; where the
functional difference between cit and cidābhāsa was shown with regard to an external
knowledge taking a pot as an example; when you talk about pot, the cidābhāsa is
revealing the presence of the pot; when you talk about the unknown-ness of the pot or
known-ness of the pot, by asserting pot is unknown or pot is known, either way pot is
associated with one of these two adjectives unknown-ness or known-ness both these
adjectives are illumined by the cit only. Both of them experienced because of śākṣī or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1232

because of cit and we only make a small difference in the usage of the language. When we
differentiate cidābhāsa and cit in the external field, the cit is named as Brahman; even
though cit is the same everywhere. But when you differentiate cidābhāsa and the cit
within, then the very same cit is named as either kūṭastha as Vidyāraṇya does in this
chapter or as I have been using the expression śākṣī. Thus, the word kūṭastha and śākṣī are
used when we refer to the cit within; the very same cit without or outside is called
Brahman. Therefore, outside we do brahma-cidābhāsa-viveka and inside we do kūṭastha-
cidābhāsa-viveka.
Now, brahma-cidābhāsa-viveka is over from śloka number 4 to 16 and from 17th śloka
onwards we have entered into kūṭastha-cidābhāsa-viveka and in my language śākṣī-
cidābhāsa-viveka; both are the same. For entering into the topic, Vidyāraṇya talks about
the internal world. For the previous topic, we took the external world in which one object
was the pot; when we do internal viveka, we should not take any external object but we
should talk about our own inner world. And an inner world in which our thoughts are
not extrovert or turned outwards, but the thoughts are introvert or turned inwards. The
inner world is the world of emotions which we experience even when our sense-organs
are closed; in fact when the sense-organs are closed we experience our emotions more
intensely. Therefore, he takes the world of emotions which exists in the form of thoughts
kāma-vṛtti, lobha-vṛtti, asūyā-vṛtti, krodha-vṛtti cintā-vṛtti; all those vṛttis are the internal
world which we experience even when our sense-organs are closed or dormant. Ideal
experience is meditation. During meditation, what do we do efficiently means we worry. I
am not talking about you, but many people. And what is the difference between the
internal thought which are dealing with worries and thoughts which are dealing with the
external world? He makes a subtle difference— when we take ghaṭa-vṛtti and paṭa-vṛtti,
etc, they are also thoughts occurring within only. But what is the specialty of those
thoughts is that not only are those thoughts bright enough within, because of the
pervasion of cidābhāsa, those thoughts themselves are bright. Not only that those
thoughts go out but they are capable of illumining the external objects also. Therefore,
extrovert thoughts are brighter thoughts which illumine themselves and not only that,
they are able to go out and illumine the external objects also. Whereas kāma-krodhādi
introvert thoughts are only bright enough to illumine themselves but they don’t have to go
out and illumine the external objects. Thus, there are bright extrovert thoughts and dull

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1233

internal thoughts and to differentiate these two types of thoughts, Vidyāraṇya gives an
example. When there is fire, the fire is so bright that it reveals itself also and it reveals the
objects which are around. Suppose a piece of iron comes in contact with the fire, that iron
piece becomes red-hot and that red-hot iron piece you put in a dark room; are you able to
get the point? Now, that iron piece is bright; how do you know it is bright? In a dark
room, you are able to identify that there is a red hot iron and it is only sufficient to
illumine itself but that brightness is not sufficient for illumining the objects around.
Instead of fire, take the tube-light; tube-light is bright enough to illumine itself and the
objects around and even the letters on the book, but a red hot iron rod or iron ball is
sufficiently bright to illumine itself.
Similarly, Vidyāraṇya says there are extrovert thoughts which are bright enough like fire
that they reveal not only themselves but they reveal the external world. Ghaṭa-vṛtti is an
extrovert thought. It reveals itself and reveals the pot outside. Whereas kāma-, krodha,
lobha, etc., are vṛttis that are introvert thoughts which are like red-hot iron ball and their
job is to illumine within and they don’t have to illumine the external world. That is why
you can have kāma-krodha etc., even when the sense-organs are closed because they
illumine themselves where the objects also is within only. Why you don’t require bright
light because it has to illumine your own emotions within; therefore, you don’t require a
bright light. In the clock, a small light will be there and that light will be sufficient to read
the time but you cannot read the book with the light of the lamp in the clock. Now,
Vidyāraṇya says in the I-thought which is introvert, kāma-krodhādi the desire, anger etc.,
which means any other emotions duḥkha-vṛtti, cintā-vṛtti, moha-vṛtti, in all of them
cidābhāsa is very much present because aham-vṛtti is part of the mind and just as the
mind can reflect consciousness the vṛttis also can reflect consciousness; therefore,
ahaṃvṛttau cidābhāsaḥ vartate; how? Samvyāpya, having pervaded the entire vṛttis; vṛttis
mean thoughts. Here, the example is this. Just as fire is there pervading a red-hot metal or
red-hot iron ball. What he wants to say which he will say in the later ślokas is that the fire
in the red-hot ball is only capable of illumining itself but it is not bright enough to throw
the light all around. Similarly, kāma-vṛtti, etc, will illumine only your small head; it cannot
pervade all around; that is why when you are in your internal world, whatever is
happening around you do not know. That is why we complain that he is in his own world.
Once you are in the internal world, teacher is out because it is not capable of spreading

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1234

enough cidābhāsa to pervade my words and illumine. These are the examples for the
internal world.

śloka 8.19
स्वमात्रं भासयेत्तप्तं लोहं नान्यत्कदाचन ।
एवमाभाससहिता वृत्तयः स्वस्वभासिकाः ॥ ८.१९ ॥
svamātraṃ bhāsayettaptaṃ lohaṃ nānyatkadācana.
evamābhāsasahitā vṛttayaḥ svasvabhāsikāḥ (8.19).
Now, he gives the significance of the examples. He moves from dṛṣṭānta to dārṣṭānta.
Taptam loham the heated iron or red-hot iron ball svamātram bhāsayet will illumine only
itself which means red hot iron ball only and it cannot illumine things around. They will
continue to be dark only; anyat kadācana na bhāsayet that red-hot metal cannot light up
anything else. Another example they give is glow worm. In the dark night, in the trees
around, you can see glow worm— in the city we don’t have opportunity for that; the glow
worm has enough light only to reveal its existence; in the glow worm light you cannot
read a book; evam in the same way ābhāsasahitā vṛttayaḥ these vṛttis also, introvert vṛttis,
which also are endowed with cidābhāsa but they are not bright enough to illumine the
external objects. That much light is enough as it has to illumine the emotions of kāma-
krodha, lobha-moha, etc. Kāma-vṛtti has to illumine kāma emotions, krodha-vṛtti is to
illumine krodha emotions and it need not illumine the external world at all; therefore,
ābhāsa sahita. These vṛttis pervaded by cidābhāsa svasvabhāsikāḥ are capable of
illumining themselves only. The thought with cidābhāsa illumines only themselves or the
respective emotions only and they will not go out to illumine the external objects.

śloka 8.20
क्रमाद्विच्छिद्य विच्छिद्य जायन्ते वृत्तयोऽखिलाः ।
सर्वा अपि विलीयन्ते सुप्तिमूर्च्छासमाधिषु ॥ ८.२० ॥
kramādvicchidya vicchidya jāyante vṛttayo:'khilāḥ.
sarvā api vilīyante suptimūrcchāsamādhiṣu (8.20).
Vidyāraṇya slowly develops and points out that these vṛttis are subject to rise and fall;
kāma-krodhādi emotions sequentially come and go. They are not simultaneous emotions,
but they sequentially come and go and their arrival and departure are determined by the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1235

rise of the vṛtti since when the vṛtti rises the cidābhāsa is also formed. When kāma-vṛtti
rises cidābhāsa is formed and kāma experience takes place. By that time krodha-vṛtti
comes when someone is obstructing the kāma and krodha emotions are experienced; these
vṛttis are sequential with a short gap in between. Even though the gap we don’t practically
experience, there are gaps between the rise and fall of the vṛttis; although cit is continuous,
cidābhāsa is not continuous; we are not talking of cidābhāsa in the mind; the mind
cidābhāsa will be continuous throughout the jāgrat-avasthā; the mind is there and
therefore, that general cidābhāsa will be continuous; but here we are talking about the
thought rising and falling and in the thought cidābhāsa rising, thoughts rising and falling
like waves rise and falling in the ocean surface. Vidyāraṇya says it is a sequential process.
Sequentially, gradually and in an orderly manner like march of the soldiers or policemen
they come in sequential order in a broken manner with intermediary brakes in between.
All the introvert vṛttis jayante rise in the mind and there will be a break; that is why if you
see the inner mind also we have a beautiful expression of play of emotions. Why do we
use the word play of emotions? It is so because they keep on changing and you think of
one member in the family smiling suddenly another member in the family with face
swollen for he is not doing well; somebody else and some other emotions and in between
Svāmījī also you remember; I don’t know what emotions come, whatever it is, it is the play
of emotions. If you are sitting on the shore on a beach, you can hear the noise of the wave
coming to the shore; and as the wave comes the noise also comes; after it has reached the
noise subsides and there is a small silence. If you have not observed that, at least for
Vidyāraṇya’s sake you go there and sit quietly. There will be a silence and again the wavy
noise will come. It will go to the shore and silence, noise and silence. Like that between
two emotions there is a gap; in that gap vṛtti is absent; cidābhāsa is there vṛtti pratimbita
cidābhāsa is absent the mind is passive as it were; the mind is resolved as it were; which is
experienced as silence and that silence is revealed by Śākṣi-caitanya says Vidyāraṇya. We
are not able to observe that gap. This silence is felt in Nirvikalpaka samādhi, when in
unconscious state, or deep sleep state. In silence what difference is possible? What will be
difference between my silence and your silence? My voice and your voice frequency
difference may be there or will be there, but when I observe silence is that silence of high
frequency and female silence is different? No! Therefore, deep sleep state, coma and
samādhi are all forms of silence caused by natural conditions; or by artificial sādhana

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1236

yoga-abhyāsa or caused by health problems. One is caused by health problems another is

caused by yoga-abhyāsa and another is caused naturally when you are tired but what is
common to all is that the mind is in silence. It is then that vṛtti and cidābhāsa are neither
there, nor is there the experience of external world of objects or the experience of internal
world of emotions or dreams. All these are preparation for cit-cidābhāsa-viveka. Now,
what we are supposed to do?

śloka 8.21
सन्धयोऽखिलवृत्तीनामभावाश्चावभासिताः ।
निर्विकारेण येनासौ कू टस्थ इति गीयते ॥ ८.२१ ॥
sandhayo:'khilavṛttīnāmabhāvāścāvabhāsitāḥ.
nirvikāreṇa yenāsau kūṭastha iti gīyate (8.21).
Here, sandhayaḥ means the gaps between two introvert emotional vṛttis. All those
intermediary silences are revealed by the śākṣī. Akhilavṛttīnām sandhayaḥ the gap
obtaining in all the thoughts, focus on that only; some people practice special meditation;
if we are alert even during our day-to-day experiences you can pick up any gap and
observe the silence; but if we are getting carried away by day-to-day activities, in a special
meditation we can chant some nāma and initially with the help of the nāma you can
remove all other worldly thoughts and thereafter you can repeat the nāma and gradually
leave a gap between two nāmas and try to observe the silence and having come to silence
you entertain the thought that this silence is not nothingness but it is pervaded by the
śākṣī which illumines that silence. Therefore, either you can artificially create silence by
deliberately practicing nāma-japa or you can observe the natural silence. Therefore, he
says sandhayaḥ the gap between the thoughts and abhāvāścā and the total absence of
thought occurring during three states. The total absence of thought occurring in three
different states suṣupti, mūrchā [unconscious state] and samādhi are the vṛtti-abhāva-
avasthās, all these three abhāvas that does not mean you should work for fainting so “I am
doing sādhana for fainting so that I can go to śākṣī”! Suṣupti is more than enough for
practicing silence. We don’t require the so called fourth avasthā called samādhi. It is not at
all required for self-knowledge. Avasthā-traya-viveka is enough. They are all illumined

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1237

by the original consciousness, nirvikāreṇa, by changeless consciousness; unlike cidābhāsa

which is subject to fluctuation and change; śākṣī is not subject to change. Therefore,
nirvikāreṇa śākṣī avabhāsitāḥ. Here a small aside note: a doubt may often come to us. The
reflecting medium is illumined by original light or reflected light? For example, let us take
the example of original light the sun. The moon is there which is bright and the moon
serves as reflecting medium which reflects the sunlight and the reflected sun light is called
moonlight and the moonlight illumines the earth. The earth is illumined by the moonlight.
Moonlight is illumined by the sunlight. Suppose you say moon is illumined by moonlight
then it means moon has its own light which means sun is not required because moon is
illumined by moonlight and earth is of course illumined with moonlight. Both earth and
the moon are illumined by moonlight therefore, abolish the sunlight. Remember we
should say the earth is illumined by the moonlight; you should never say moon is
illumined by the moonlight. Moon is illumined by the sunlight; the very formation of the
moonlight is because of the sunlight; therefore, reflecting medium is always illumined by
the original light; never never say reflecting medium is illumined by the reflected light
even though it appears so; that is not logical or correct way of conclusion.
Similarly, the mind is the reflecting medium; the mind is like the moon; and the mind has
the reflected light cidābhāsa; and the external world is like the earth; the mind illumines
the external world you can say; but you should never say the reflected cidābhāsa is
illumining the mind the reflecting medium. Never ever say cidābhāsa illumines the mind;
cidābhāsa illumines the world just as moonlight illumines the earth. But never say
moonlight illumines the moon; it is the sunlight that illumines the moon. Never say
cidābhāsa; remember that not cidābhāsa but the original nirvikāra kūṭastha Śākṣi-caitanya
illumines the silent mind. This original light that illumines the mind and make s the mind
like the moonlight; that is why moon is the presiding deity of the mind. The moonlight the
mind will illumine the earth called the world. Therefore, the changeless illuminator of the
silent mind, or the Inactive mind; because it is inactive only, it is silent. Inactive mind is
silent while the chattering mind is active and noisy. Therefore, this original consciousness
changeless consciousness, illumining the changing mind and now illumining the silent
mind. kūṭastha iti ca ucyate. It is said to be kūṭastha. Outside we named it as Brahman but
the very same cit inside is called kūṭastha and the very word kūṭastha means that which is
changeless like the anvil used by a blacksmith. Here, they have given kūṭastha is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1238

unchanging. It is like the anvil of the blacksmith. Upon the anvil, various pieces are kept
and hammering is done; hammer is subject to movement; the iron piece which is shaped
that is also changing; hammer is changing; the piece of iron is getting shaped up. While
these two are moving you require an unchanging factor that is the anvil. Suppose the anvil
also goes up and goes down then the iron piece will take to various shapes, the mind is the
iron piece; the external world of object like a hammer; they are going hammering the
mind; the world is also violently moving; the mind also is violently moving; not only that
the mind goes out of shape, all kinds of things happen. Here, blacksmith is Bhagavān.
Guṇā guṇeṣu vartante, meaning indriyāṇi indriyārtheṣu vartante, where the indriyārtha is
the hammer, indriya and manas are the iron pieces and the anvil is the caitanya. It should
not have any change. Therefore, anvil eva nirvikāratvād kūṭasthaḥ. Like a kūṭa that which
remains changeless that consciousness is called kūṭastha.

śloka 8.22
घटे द्विगुणचैतन्यं यथा बाह्ये तथान्तरे ।
वृत्तिष्वपि ततस्तत्र वैशद्यं सन्धितोऽधिकम्॥ ८.२२ ॥
ghaṭe dviguṇacaitanyaṃ yathā bāhye tathāntare.
vṛttiṣvapi tatastatra vaiśadyaṃ sandhito:'dhikam (8.22).
He goes back to bimba sūrya-prakāśa and pratibimba sūrya-prakāśa. Imagine on the wall
there is a bimba sūrya-prakāśa, the original light which is diffused all over the wall and
wherever the mirror reflection is there, a patch is thrown. The reflection itself is brighter
than the original! Sometimes, Xerox copy is brighter than the original. Where the reflected
patch of light falls, the original light is also there. Thus, there are two lights, one diffused
and the other bright and where both of them are together, it is very bright whereas
between two patches where only the original is there, the light is diffused. Now, this
example he brings back. When I am seeing a pot while discussing the previous case of
external knowledge, when I have got the knowledge of the clip, clip is pervaded by
double-consciousness. One is the original consciousness which is all-pervading not only
that because the vṛtti pervades causing vṛtti-vyāpti but phala-vyāpti is also there; phala is
equal to cidābhāsa because of the cidābhāsa-vyāpti. At the time of clip-knowledge, it has
extra brightness. Cit plus cidābhāsa double brightness is there that is why when I am

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1239

observing the clip, all the other areas of the hall there is only diffused general light of
consciousness; therefore, it is not very bright and it is not focused upon by me.
If you extend it to the internal conditions, whenever there is kāma-vṛtti or krodha-vṛtti,
etc, in that vṛtti also there are two caitanyas as cidābhāsa and cit. Therefore, during the
emotions, the mind is brighter as it were. That is why it draws your attention. The mind
exists and worry is so overpowering because internally there is dviguṇa caitanya. When
the vṛtti is revolved in the silent mind the reinforced caitanya is not there. Only diffused is
there; therefore, it looks as though there is darkness, meaning as though blank, but it is not
so; there is the presence of Śākṣi-caitanya. At the time of pot-knowledge, there dviguṇa
caitanya, there is twofold caitanya. The twofold caitanya are cit and cidābhāsa. At the time
of pot-cognition there is twofold consciousness on the pot; therefore, the world of pot is
very much existent for you and all other pots of the world are as good as non-existent. The
world is only that what it is. In the same way, within also upon the thoughts, introvert
thoughts, kāma-krodhādi vṛttiṣu api dviguṇa caitanyam asti. It means twofold caitanya
that is cidābhāsa and also the adhiṣṭhāna caitanya, that is, viśiṣṭa caitanya and upahita
caitanya both are there. Therefore, wherever and whenever vṛtti is there the brightness is
more than the original. The mind shines with extra brightness. Those details in the next
class.

Class 239
śloka 8.22 contd.
After differentiating the cit and cidābhāsa with regard to the external experiences like the
pot-experience etc., now, Vidyāraṇya has come to the discussion of the difference between
the cit and cidābhāsa from the standpoint of internal experiences. He wants to differentiate
the function of cidābhāsa and the function of cit and by differentiating the functions, we
will know the difference between the nature of cidābhāsa and cit. He points out that
cidābhāsa is very prominent whenever we have special internal experiences like kāma-
krodha, etc. When we have various internal emotional experiences, cidābhāsa is
prominent because the mind is active, thoughts are also present and therefore, upon the
mind and upon the thoughts the reflected cidābhāsa will be present; and we see that the
reflection is generally brighter than the general pervading consciousness and during the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1240

experience of emotions the brighter cidābhāsa is also there; and of course the general cit is
very much present and therefore, in all such experiences where cidābhāsa is prominent,
the cit is in the background as though it is non-existent itself! Therefore, we can call it as
the experience of cidābhāsa. On the other hand, when there is silence between the rise of
one thought and the other thought, the intermediary silence experienced in between if it is
experienced, or the silence experienced in suṣupti or samādhi or mūrchā, etc., during those
experiences the thoughts are resolved. That is why the experience is silence. During the
experience of silence, the thoughts are resolved; therefore, the mind is also inactive since
the very activity of the mind is generation of thoughts. Therefore, when the thoughts are
resolved, the mind is inactive mind, passive mind; the mind is resolved as it were and the
mind is as though unmanifest.
During silence and during absence of thoughts the mind is passive and unmanifest and
when the mind is unmanifest, naturally, cidābhāsa is also unmanifest. So cidābhāsa is also
resolved; and whatever is unmanifest is as good as absent because an unmanifest thing we
don’t experience and if we experience it is no more unmanifest. Since an unmanifest thing
is not experienced, it is as good as absent; therefore, during silence cidābhāsa is technically
there but it is as good as absent. Just as during emotions the śākṣī was as good as absent;
during silence cidābhāsa is not absent but as good as absent. And this absence of
cidābhāsa or the as good as absence of cidābhāsa can be further reinforced based on
another reason also. Whenever cidābhāsa is active and functioning, we experience a sense
of division and location. When there is silence or suṣupti cidābhāsa is as good as absent
which is proved by the fact that we don’t sense the division or location. In suṣupti also,
division is not sensed by me that I am experiencing deep sleep state; the division is not
sensed and location also is not sensed; and therefore, also we know in silence, suṣupti,
samādhi and mūrchā, cidābhāsa is as good as not there. If cidābhāsa is absent during those
times, the experience of that silence during those states, suṣupti, mūrchā, samādhi must be
because of pāriśeṣa nyāya; since cidābhāsa as good as absent that experience must be
because of śākṣī’s role only. During silence, śākṣī is prominent and therefore, we are
experiencing during silence, the śākṣī only, but there you should not ask the question: “is
śākṣī experiencing the silence?” because if I say śākṣī is experiencing the silence, there also
you are talking about the division. The moment it comes, it will mean cidābhāsa is awake,
location, division has come; therefore, experience of silence and experience of śākṣī are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1241

identical. Silence-experience is śākṣi-experience; śākṣi-experience is silence-experience.

There is no division between śākṣī and silence in silence. Only after waking up from
suṣupti because the cidābhāsa has become active then we infer the deep sleep state and
then we talk about the potential division present in suṣupti. Even that division also we
talk about during jāgrat and svapna; therefore, Vidyāraṇya concludes śākṣi-experience can
be discerned in the form of silence-experience. During jāgrat-avasthā itself during
thoughtless state or during suṣupti, mūrchā and samādhi we can experience śākṣī. But
cidābhāsa-experience can be discerned not during silence but during the experience of
emotions like kāma-krodha, etc., during silence we can experience śākṣī. Therefore, we say
emotional experiences are cidābhāsa-pradhāna anubhava and silence-experience is śākṣi-
pradhāna anubhava.
However, we should remember all the time cidābhāsa and śākṣī will be there, throughout
our living time and you can never work for a state wherein śākṣī alone is there without
cidābhāsa totally. I have talked about this before. Suppose you go to a state where śākṣī
alone is there, cidābhāsa has been totally abolished that state is called maraṇa! Therefore,
never work for kevala śākṣi-anubhava which does not exist because for that you have to
go maraṇa. In maraṇa you cannot have anything. What is possible during our life period is
śākṣi-pradhāna anubhava which is as good as kevala śākṣī because during śākṣi-pradhāna
state, cidābhāsa is as good as absent. That idea is said here in the 22nd śloka we were
seeing before, dviguṇa caitanyam asti. During the experience of pot outside, upon the pot,
there is twofold consciousness; one is the original consciousness which is already
pervading and there is also the reflected consciousness because during the pot-experience
the thought pervades the pot and along with the thought, cidābhāsa. Hence, during pot-
experience. There are two consciousnesses. During the experience of emotion, every
emotion has a particular thought and that emotional thought has twofold consciousness.
Inside the mind also during the experience of emotions there is an emotion thought called
kāma-vṛtti, krodha-vṛtti, etc., and in that thought dviguṇa caitanya is there. There is
twofold consciousness in every emotional thought which is experienced within. Up to this
we saw in the last class; therefore, during pot-experience as well as emotion-experience,
pot-experience outside and emotion-experience inside because of twofold consciousness in
both these conditions, Vidyāraṇya says we experience extra brilliance in the
consciousness. This brilliance is cause by two-fold consciousnesses.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1242

On the wall, natural sunlight and additional patch you recall in this context. Ghaṭa-
anubhava, duḥkha-anubhava, sukha-anubhava, in all the specific experiences the extra
brightness is observed. This additional brightness is in comparison to the silence that we
experience. It is the silence experienced during four conditions like the first one between
two thoughts assuming we give some gaps; suṣupti is silence number two and samādhi if
you go into is the third and fourth one we don’t get into that and that is fainting or
mūrchā. During all these silence states, the consciousness is not bright enough because
cidābhāsa is resolved. The proof for that during all the time there is no sense of division
and there is no sense of location. It is the proof for absence for cidābhāsa and since
cidābhāsa is absent we experience silence. We experience the cit or the śākṣī. As I said I
will again remind don’t ask me the question is the śākṣi experiencing the silence you
should not ask because once I use the expression again division and location will come;
therefore, we should always write experience of silence is equal to experience of śākṣī and
that is why turīya was defined as amātra caturtha. Akāra, ukara and makara is Viśva,
taijasa and prājña but for consciousness what is used is amātra the silence. Therefore,
experience of silence is experience of Śākṣi-caitanya. Śākṣī is equal to silence and silence is
equal to śākṣī. While discussing this, we gave another example some time before. I-
thought it is nice to remember that. When you vacate the room of all objects and when you
talk of absence of everything in the hall, absence of everything is the presence of ākāśa.
Ākāśa can never be vacated from the room. When everything is vacated from the room we
should say ākāśa is there and since we take ākāśa for granted we say nothing is there.
Nothing is equal to ākāśa. When the mind is empty we say the mind is empty or silence
but the emptiness or silence is not nothingness but it is equal to śākṣī just as nothingness
outside is equal to ākāśa; similarly, emptiness of the mind is silence of the mind, it is the
presence of śākṣī and therefore, silence-anubhava is śākṣi-anubhava. Emptiness-anubhava
is śākṣi-anubhava. If you insist that is emptiness I will say your head is empty. Therefore,
silence-experience is śākṣi-experience. Nobody can say I have not experienced suṣupti;
therefore, nobody lacks śākṣi-anubhava, everyone has śākṣi-anubhava, advaita-anubhava.
What we lack is not anubhava and what we lack is understanding. The understanding is
required. Śākṣī is my real nature and cidābhāsa is my incidental nature; to learn this, we
require śāstra pramāṇa. Experience we have already had and we learn this from śāstra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1243

pramāṇa. I am cit and cidābhāsa is incidental. We take we are cidābhāsa and make cit as
incidental.

śloka 8.23
ज्ञातताज्ञातते न स्तो घटवद्वृत्तिषु क्वचित्।
स्वस्य स्वेनागृहीतत्वात्ताभिश्चाज्ञाननाशनात्॥ ८.२३ ॥
jñātatājñātate na sto ghaṭavadvṛttiṣu kvacit.
svasya svenāgṛhītatvāttābhiścājñānanāśanāt (8.23).
Vidyāraṇya has made clear that śākṣi-anubhava is very evident during silence, sleep, etc.,
and therefore, we need not separately work for śākṣi-anubhava. If a person says I am not
satisfied with this silence or suṣupti, I want to specially experience śākṣī by going to
Nirvikalpaka samādhi, our answer is we are not against it. If you want to practice Yama
and niyama, dhāraṇā and dhyāna and go to samādhi and you want to have śākṣi-
anubhava in samādhi, you can work for samādhi. It is your personal decision. What
Vidyāraṇya says is that śākṣi-anubhava we already have during silence and suṣupti. With
that, he had differentiated śākṣī and cidābhāsa. Now, he makes an incidental aside point
which is not required for our development of the topic but it is an academic point to be
noted. He says when we talked about pot, we said that the pot is illumined by cidābhāsa;
and the pot has two conditions: unknown condition before and known condition later.
Unknown condition was called ajñātatā and known condition was called jñātatā.
Vidyāraṇya made a subtle remark the unknownness and knownness are revealed by śākṣī,
but pot is revealed by cidābhāsa. In that context, Vidyāraṇya had said that the pot has two
conditions unknown and known. As long as I have not experienced the pot, it will remain
unknown but when I look at the pot, thought and cidābhāsa goes out and envelop s the
pot; thereafter the pot has knownness. The pot’s knownness we said and I hope and pray
you remember this point. Now, he is going to talk about subtle differences considering
internal experiences. With regard to the emotions which are in the form of thoughts,
which are internal objects of experience, pot is an external object of experience; emotions
are thoughts which are internal objects of experience; Vidyāraṇya says with regard to the
internal objects, you cannot have ajñātatā and jñātatā; such two conditions are not
possible. With regard to emotions inside you will never have unknown condition and later
known condition because as even the emotions rise the emotions are automatically

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1244

pervaded by cidābhāsa and therefore, as even the emotions rise they are instantaneously
known. Since right from the date of birth or right from the time of birth, emotions are
already known; in fact they are born as known emotions, which means experienced
emotions and therefore, they don’t have an unknown condition at all. Whereas in the case
of external objects, they are not born with known conditions but they require my
cidābhāsa to pervade, which is an event in time and effort is involved and therefore, until I
put forth the effort I cannot experience the object. In the case of anger, as even it rises even
before it rises without any special effort, it is known, since cidābhāsa is already in the
mind. Throughout the waking state, the mind is there and cidābhāsa is also there
throughout; therefore, as even the thoughts arise, the emotions arise, it will have phala-
vyāpti, cidābhāsa-vyāpti and therefore, jñātatā will be all the time there.
Since they are always known, they are as good as self-effulgent. It is because they are
always with cidābhāsa. All the emotions are self-evident or self-effulgent because of
permanent cidābhāsa-vyāpti. Therefore, you can never say they are known at a particular
time. You can use the expression they are known only if previously they are unknown,
you can talk about the process of knowledge and you can say they become known. Since
they are eternally self-effulgent you cannot talk about unknownness and therefore only,
you cannot say they are known at a particular time. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says emotions
don’t have ajñātatā and so, you cannot talk about jñātatā. The word jñātatā is used when it
is used to remove ajñātatā. Since ajñātatā is not there, you cannot use the word jñātatā.
They are always evident. Generally, I give the example that the earth has night and
therefore, you can talk about the day time upon the earth. The word day is relevant in the
context of earth because we do have a night therefore; I have to talk about the day which
removes the night. But in the sun itself there is no night at all possible and since there is no
night, you cannot use the word day also. Day can be understood only in relation to the
night. The word known-ness refers to the removal of unknown-ness; both of them are not
there in the case of emotions as the object is experienced within. In fact, the mind and
emotions are like Ātmā and as Ātmā is evident all the time for the mind so is the mind is
always pervaded by cidābhāsa. At the same time, pot is having both unknown-ness and
knownness. In fact, you have understood it. Vidyāraṇya gives the reason for that.
He says pot becomes known when a thought pervades the pot along with the reflected
consciousness [cidābhāsa]. What are the emotions? Emotions are in the form of thoughts

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1245

or vṛttis. Suppose vṛtti has to be known; for pot to be known pot must be pervaded by
vṛtti; if vṛtti has to be known, vṛtti has to be pervaded by vṛtti. Suppose you say vṛtti is
pervaded by vṛtti then I will ask the question is the vṛtti pervaded by the same vṛtti or
another vṛtti. You cannot say vṛtti is pervaded by the same vṛtti because pervaded and
pervader cannot be one and the same. To answer that another vṛtti is pervading. Then
other vṛtti is to be known by another vṛtti and infinite regress problem will come. A vṛtti
cannot be pervaded by vṛtti and you can never say it is known. It is because to use the
expression known it has to be pervaded by a vṛtti. Since a thought is not pervaded by the
same vṛtti or another vṛtti, a thought is never pervaded by a thought. Thought cannot be
pervaded by a thought and therefore; you cannot call it a known thought. We will then
say therefore, it is unknown. Can you say therefore, it is unknown? Vidyāraṇya says the
first portion is the negation of knownness. Now, he gives the second reason. Unknown-
ness also you cannot say because of the following reason. He says vṛtti or emotions or vṛtti
in general can never be unknown because the vṛttis themselves are making all other things
known. When vṛttis are bright enough to make other things known, how can the vṛttis
themselves be unknown? The lamp is able to illumine other objects, how can you ask
whether the lamp is known or not. Whatever makes others luminous will itself be
luminous; then, how can self-evident thought be said to be unknown! Vṛttis have to be
luminous because with the help of the vṛttis ajñānanāśanāt we destroy the ignorance of all
other objects; when vṛttis are illumining other things how can those vṛttis themselves be
non-luminous or unknown?! Therefore, ajñātatā api nāsti. They are therefore, self-evident.
As even they rise, they are known.
With regard to the body-mind-complex, every object is evident.

śloka 8.24
द्विगुणीकृ तचैतन्ये जन्मनाशानुभूतितः ।
अकू टस्थं तदन्यत्तु कू टस्थमविकारितः ॥ ८.२४ ॥
dviguṇīkṛtacaitanye janmanāśānubhūtitaḥ.
akūṭasthaṃ tadanyattu kūṭasthamavikāritaḥ (8.24).
He progresses further. All specific experiences relating to the external objects or internal
emotions are cidābhāsa-pradhāna. Whereas the silence-experience whether it is in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1246

condition one to four, is cit-pradhāna. Specific experiences outside or inside are cidābhāsa-
pradhāna and silence-experience is cit-pradhāna. In all specific experiences where
cidābhāsa is pradhāna there is a sense of division, sense of location and also it is brighter.
It is brighter as there is twofold consciousness. Whereas in silence-experience which is cit-
pradhāna there is no sense of division, no sense of location and also there is no brightness
as it is a diffused general consciousness. Diffused condition refers to sāmānya caitanya.
Now, Vidyāraṇya wants to ask the question: of the two which one is śākṣī or kūṭastha?
Kūṭastha name is to be given to cidābhāsa-pradhāna anubhava or cit-pradhāna anubhava?
Vidyāraṇya gives logic here. The word kūṭastha means nirvikāra changeless. All specific
experiences external or internal, all specific experiences are subject to change. It is subject
to rise and fall and that should be connected to cidābhāsa or ahaṅkāra whereas silence-
experience which is nirvikāra, always there, that should be connected with kūṭastha.
Silence-experience is kūṭastha-anubhava or śākṣi-anubhava. All other specific experience
is only cidābhāsa-experience. If people talk about special mystic experiences coming and
going, that also has nothing to do with Ātmā for mystic experience comes and goes. It is
only an extraordinary vṛtti. In all particular experiences, specific experiences, viśeṣa
jñānas, whether they are external or internal [pot and emotions] which are endowed with
twofold consciousness and we find fake one is brighter and original is dull. We experience
rise and fall in all specific experiences ordinary or mystic; Ātmānubhava is not a particular
experience but it pervades all the particular experiences. All specific experiences are not
connected with kūṭastha and they are non-kūṭastha anubhava or cidābhāsa-pradhāna
anubhava. If you have to have kūṭastha-anubhava, in silence which is all the time there is
kūṭastha, which we will see in the next class.

Class 240
śloka 8.24 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talks about cit and cidābhāsa from the standpoint of our internal experience.
Previously, he talked about the difference between them based on the external experience,
pointing out that an external object is illumined by cidābhāsa and the known-ness and
unknown-ness of the object are illumined by the cit. He wants to analyse our internal
experience had he points out that whenever there is any particular knowledge in all those

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1247

particular knowledges or experiences we have got the cit and cidābhāsa mixed together
and that is why it is subject to fluctuation also because every particular cognition has a
particular thought and the reflection in that particular thought and as even the thoughts
are changing, the cidābhāsa also will be changing. In all such experiences, caitanya is
twofold and cidābhāsa is brighter than cit and that is why we are experiencing brightness
at that time. Whereas when there is a gap between two experiences or when there is
suṣupti or samādhi, when the mind is resolved, thoughts are also resolved, cidābhāsa is
also consequently resolved; there dviguṇīkṛtacaitanya is not there and there is only the
cinmātra. Therefore, that experience is sāmānya-caitanya-anubhava which he calls as
kūṭastha-anubhava or śākṣi-anubhava. Therefore, he says in the 24th śloka which we were
seeing in the last class, in the context of all special experiences when the consciousness is
twofold, janmanāśānubhūtitaḥ, we have the experience of the arrival and departure of
those experiences and that means they are fluctuating; they are savikāra experiences;
therefore, akūṭastha. All those changing experiences are based on the non-kūṭastha
caitanya [non-kūṭastha caitanya means cidābhāsa-caitanya]. Thus, in all specific
experiences cidābhāsa is prominent what we are experiencing is cidābhāsa which
overshadows the śākṣī even though it is very much there; the cidābhāsa overshadows the
kūṭastha. Therefore, that is akūṭastha. In the second line, tad should be understood as
viśeṣa jñāna. Akūṭastham bhavati, it is akūṭastha caitanya which means it is changing
consciousness which is cidābhāsa. Whereas all the specific experiences have subsided as in
silence or deep sleep state, we are experiencing the non-fluctuating consciousness because
fluctuation comes because of thought- and cidābhāsa-fluctuation. When fluctuating
thoughts have resolved, fluctuating cidābhāsa has resolved, fluctuating experiences have
resolved, non fluctuating generalized unlocalised consciousness alone is there during
suṣupti, silence, etc. that is called anyat caitanya. The other ‘dull’ consciousness is
kūṭastha. It is the experience of kūṭastha, it is the experience of śākṣī, which everyone has
gone through because whether you have gone to samādhi or not; one thing you cannot
deny is the suṣupti-anubhava. We call it kūṭastha because the consciousness obtaining at
that time does not have any fluctuation and the moment you experience, the mind has
come, thoughts have come, cidābhāsa has come and therefore, fluctuation has come;
otherwise it is non-fluctuating consciousness which is Śākṣi-caitanya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1248

śloka 8.25
अन्तःकरणतद्वृत्तिसाक्षीत्यादावनेकधा ।
कू टस्थः एव सर्वत्र पूर्वाचार्यैर्विनिश्चितः ॥ ८.२५ ॥
antaḥkaraṇatadvṛttisākṣītyādāvanekadhā.
kūṭasthaḥ eva sarvatra pūrvācāryairviniścitaḥ (8.25).
Even though Vidyāraṇya is learned enough to claim that what I have understood is the
right knowledge and even though he has that status, because of his humility he does not
claim Self-authenticity. He takes the support of the great Ācāryas before; sometimes he
quotes Sūreśvarācārya and here Adi Śaṅkarācārya himself. Even though Kālīdāsa is a
greatest scholar he does not take validation from anyone else but when he writes himself
writes, in one of the work he writes a maṅgala śloka:
ā paritoṣād viduṣāṃ na sādhu manye prayogavijñānam;
balavad api śikṣitānām ātmani apratyayaṃ cetaḥ.
It is just an aside topic. Kālīdāsa says until some scholars have read my works and they
have given the certificate that it has been well done, I don’t consider my work is authentic
enough. Until then, my knowledge of using Sanskrit I am not very sure. Even the greatest
scholar sometimes does have a problem of ātmani apratyayaṃ cetaḥ. Their own intellect
does not have total self-confidence. Similarly, Vidyāraṇya even though he is one of the
greatest Ācārya of Advaita, he says whatever I say has been talked about by Adi
Śaṅkarācārya. Therefore, my work should be valid. So he gives pramāṇa for his works.
This cit-cidābhāsa-viveka has been done in this manner convincingly or clearly by the
previous great Ācāryas and he gives one example as a support. ‘antaḥkaraṇa-tad-vṛtti-
śākṣī’. This is taken from Vākyavṛtti of Adi Śaṅkarācārya. It is a mahā-vākya-vicāra done
by Adi Śaṅkarācārya. That book itself is called Vākyavṛtti. In the footnote, the number has
been given śloka number 11. It is a relatively short work with fifty and odd ślokas. Here, it
is the 11th śloka which begins with antaḥkaraṇatadvṛttisākṣī. In that śloka cit has been
differentiated from cidābhāsa. Cit is defined as witness śākṣī illumining antaḥkaraṇa and
tadvṛtti that is illumining the mind and the thoughts. I have given one point that you
should always remember: when somebody asks the question cit illumines the mind or
cidābhāsa illumines the mind, you should say that cit illumines the mind. Cidābhāsa
illumines the world or external objects. The general rule is that the reflection never
illumines the reflecting medium; the original alone illumines the reflecting medium. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1249

reflection illumines everything else other than the original and the reflecting medium.
Therefore, the mind is illumined by the śākṣī. Adi Śaṅkarācārya has clearly said in
Vākyavṛtti iti ādau. In such mantras or ślokas, it is said in manifold ways that kūṭasthaḥ
eva sarvatra viniścitaḥ, kūṭastha alone has been talked about in the name of śākṣī
illumining the mind and the thoughts in all similar places. This is one pramāṇa.
Vidyāraṇya wants to give another supporting pramāṇa to show that this is not one
example and I can give you any number of examples because you don’t have the time but
I am confining to giving examples. It is from Upadeśa-sāhasrī ref is 18th chapter. Here,
Adi Śaṅkarācārya elaborately analyses the cidābhāsa. From that, he gives one example in
the next śloka.

śloka 8.26
आत्माभासाश्रयश्चैवं मुखाभासाश्रया यथा ।
गम्यन्ते शास्त्रयुक्तिभ्यामित्याभासश्च वर्णितः ॥ ८.२६ ॥
ātmābhāsāśrayaścaivaṃ mukhābhāsāśrayā yathā.
gamyante śāstrayuktibhyāmityābhāsaśca varṇitaḥ (8.26).
This is taken from Upadeśa-sāhasrī [refer to 18.43]. The quotation of three quarters of the
śloka. ātmābhāsāśraya onwards up to the second line śāstrayuktibhyām. The fourth
quarter has been changed and Vidyāraṇya has written his own views in this manner
ābhāsa have been described by Adi Śaṅkarācārya. It is a very often quoted śloka. The
original consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium these three can
be compared to the original face, reflected face and reflecting medium that is the mirror. In
all respects, you can take this comparison as an example because there are several
similarities between the reflected face and the reflected consciousness. Therefore, this
example is ideal. He says yathā which means just as the following example mukha-
ābhāsa-āśraya. As the three factors, evam in the same manner every Jīva is also a mixture
of three factors. Whenever I use the word I, that I has got all the three components: the
original consciousness, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium. Therefore,
Ātmā [the original consciousness] ābhāsa [the reflected consciousness] and āśraya
[reflecting medium]; in the case of the individual śarīra-traya the three bodies serve as the
reflecting medium but we simplify it and say the mind is the reflecting medium; but the
mind represents the śarīra-traya. Thus, this is gamyante can be carefully understood. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1250

existence of the three components in the word ‘I’ can be gamyante means nyāyante known
with the help of Śruti pramāṇa and also with the help of yukti pramāṇa, by logic also.
With this, the internal differentiation between cit and cidābhāsa is over. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya concludes iti in this manner ābhāsa has been described.
Before going to the next topic I would like to clear a possible doubt that may come. If the
doubt has not come, you are lucky and I could have dropped it; but if it comes later at
some time, it will be a problem. Therefore, I will clarify the doubt, in the 24 th and previous
ślokas, Vidyāraṇya pointed out that during silence in the jāgrat-avasthā during samādhi,
during suṣupti, during mūrchā, etc., the mind has resolved thoughts have resolved;
cidābhāsa has also resolved therefore, what is there is cidābhāsa-rahita kūṭastha cit is
there. Śākṣi-caitanya. Therefore, everybody is experiencing kūṭastha or śākṣī in suṣupti-
avasthā. But with regard to this statement, there may be a question. In Tattvabodha and
other books we have learnt that in suṣupti what is there is nothing but prājña. I don’t
know whether it is Tattvabodha. If you have forgotten you are lucky. If you remember in
jāgrat-avasthā Viśva is there; in svapna-avasthā taijasa is there; in suṣupti-avasthā prājña is
there. And śākṣī is something different from Viśva, taijasa and prājña. In Māṇḍūkya
kārikā, we loudly proclaim nāntaḥprajñaṃ na bahiṣprajñaṃ, etc. Therefore, śākṣī the
turīya is something different from Viśva, taijasa and prājña. In jāgrat-avasthā, Viśva-
anubhava; in svapna-avasthā we get taijasa-anubhava; in suṣupti-avasthā we are getting
only prājña-anubhava; so how then Vidyāraṇya can say that in suṣupti-avasthā that it is
śākṣi-anubhava? Are we experiencing prājña or śākṣī the turīya? Such a question may
come up. For that, what is our answer? I will say it is ok. I will explain it. Prājña is defined
as the I obtaining in the suṣupti-avasthā; in the suṣupti-avasthā the original consciousness
is definitely there being all-pervading all the time. In suṣupti-avasthā, the reflecting
medium and the reflection, that is the mind and cidābhāsa are there or not? In suṣupti-
avasthā, the mind and cidābhāsa are there or not? Suppose I ask, half of you will say yes
and half of you will say no. That is what we have to resolve, we can say yes as well as no
because technically the mind and cidābhāsa are there in unmanifest form or passive form,
but when it is there in unmanifest form, since it is passive and not functioning we can also
say it is as good as absent or not there because whatever is only potentially there is as
good as not there. When I have got milk from which I have not taken out the butter,
within the milk, butter is there or not? It is there because it is extractable later. Suppose

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1251

someone comes and asks do you have some butter? Do you argue I have unmanifest
butter? You are right also, but practically you say I don’t have butter even though you are
telling a lie because he can argue that milk is there and within milk butter is there.
Similarly, when you have til seed you can’t say you have no oil. When it is in unmanifest
form it is as good as not there.
If you include unmanifest cidābhāsa along with cit it is called prājña. If you include the
unmanifest cidābhāsa in the cit which is the truth only it is called prājña. However, when
you exclude the unmanifest cidābhāsa because unmanifest cidābhāsa is as good as absent
or not there because it does not create a sense of division in you, it does not create a sense
location in you, no particular experience is possible also, like certain family members scold
your presence as good for nothing and you are of no use. Therefore, we can also say that
in suṣupti the antaḥkaraṇa and cidābhāsa or the ahaṅkāra are absent and from that angle
experientially it is śākṣi-anubhava only. Therefore, śākṣī and prājña are technically
different but experientially there is no difference. I will give you an example. Suppose
there are two glasses of water. It is in transparent glasses. I ask you to see this pure water.
Suppose I ask you to go out and then I say that I am going to add a small amount of salt in
one of the glasses and stir to mix it well. You should come back. you should tell me what
is pure water and what is impure water or water with avyakta lavaṇa, unmanifest salt. I
want you to identify in which glass salt is there in unmanifest form. For all practical
purposes both can be given as an example for pure water. If I want to show you pure
water I can take glass number one also and I can show you glass number two also. Even
though technically, one of them is not pure water, but experientially both are the same
only. Therefore, in Vedānta we have got both the statements that in suṣupti we are prājña
and in suṣupti we are Brahman. In Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, prājña and turīya are
equated even though technically they are different but experientially they are one and the
same. Therefore, if you have to experience śākṣī or turīya you need not go to the fourth
avasthā. Even in fourth avasthā, suppose a person goes to samādhi avasthā, there the
mind will be there in potential form alone. Suppose in samādhi avyakta mind goes away,
what will happen? First of all, he will be dead! In all possible avasthās, ahaṅkāra is going
to be there but that is quoted as an example for śākṣi-anubhava. Therefore, prājña and
turīya are technically different but experientially one and the same. Since Vidyāraṇya
wanted to teach from the experience-angle, he has equated suṣupti-anubhava as śākṣi-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1252

anubhava. There is nothing wrong in what Vidyāraṇya does. I am defending Vidyāraṇya

as though my defense. It is done for our clarity.

śloka 8.27
बुद्ध्यवच्छिन्नकू टस्थो लोकान्तरगमागमौ ।
कर्तुं शक्तो घटाकाश इवाभासेन किं वद ॥ ८.२७ ॥
buddhyavacchinnakūṭastho lokāntaragamāgamau.
kartuṃ śakto ghaṭākāśa ivābhāsena kiṃ vada (8.27).
With 26th śloka, āntara cidābhāsa-cit-viveka is over. Up to the 16th śloka we had bāhya
cidābhāsa-cit-viveka taking ghaṭa as an example. From 17th śloka up to 26th śloka, we had
āntara cidābhāsa-cit-viveka. The only difference is in the context of bāhya viveka cit is
called Brahman and in the context of āntara viveka cit is called as kūṭastha or śākṣī. Only
the name is different. Both are cit-cidābhāsa-viveka alone.

From this 27th śloka onwards, Vidyāraṇya enters into another highly technical subject
matter which we have not done in any of our previous classes. It was discussed in
Vicārasāgara but we have not taken up before. This topic goes from 27th śloka to 68th
śloka. We can call it ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra. I will give you a general introduction for this
topic. When we are giving the definition of a Jīva, we take different examples according to
the context. One example which we have been taking till now is That original
consciousness is taken as the cit the śākṣī, the reflected consciousness is brought in to
define Jīva. The definition of Jīva is ābhāsa-caitanya or pratibimbita caitanya. If you
remember the 6th chapter vyaṣṭi-pratibimbita caitanya is Jīva and samaṣṭi-pratibimbita
caitanya is Īśvara; we talked about caturvidha-ākāśa-prakriyā: ghaṭākāśa, mahākāśa
meghākāśa, etc.; if you remember there are two reflecting media, one śarīra-traya and
another is prapañca-traya. The consciousness reflected in śarīra-traya is Jīva and that
reflected in prapañca-traya is Īśvara. Thus, we have been using the example of reflection.
This method of teaching is called ābhāsa-vāda or pratibimba-vāda. It is a method in which
Jīva is defined as the reflected consciousness. It is called ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā. Otherwise,
pratibimba-vāda prakriyā. Prakriyā means method of teaching. There also, they make
further sub-division ābhāsa-vāda and pratibimba-vāda even though they are practically
the same; they make some hairsplitting difference between these two vādas also which we

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1253

are not going to do now. During our discussion, we will take them as practically the same.
We will take ābhāsa-vāda or pratibimba-vāda. Pratibimba is primarily used by
Padmapādācārya, while ābhāsa-vāda is primarily used by Sūreśvarācārya, Vidyāraṇya
and others. Ācāryas also have their own likes and dislikes. Sometimes Jīva is defined not
as the reflected consciousness but they give the example of mahākāśa and ghaṭākāśa, the
space which is all-pervading and space which is enclosed within a pot. Here, we don’t
take the reflection but we take the example of enclosure. Mahākāśa is compared to
Paramātmā and ghaṭākāśa the enclosed consciousness is defined as Jīvātmā. This
methodology of teaching is called avaccheda-vāda-prakriyā. Avaccheda means enclosure
or circumscribing. This method was used by Gaudapādācārya in Māṇḍūkya kārikā 3rd
chapter in the beginning from the 3rd śloka up to 10th śloka. He gives the example of
ākāśa as Brahman and the ghaṭākāśa as the Jīva. There are so many ghaṭas; similarly, there
are so many ghaṭākāśas depending upon the size of the pot, we have got small ghaṭākāśa
which can only accommodate a small amount when born and this example is given to
define the Jīva.
Now, between these two prakriyās, ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā and avaccheda-vāda-prakriyā,
which method is better or superior? This is the question. This is called sibling-riv alry. We
are all children of Advaita only; within Advaita the fight is on. What is Adi Śaṅkarācārya’s
approach? He does not want to find out which is one is superior. His aim is that these are
two methods of teaching used as a means. We should not bother too much about the
differences in the means and get lost. Whatever is the prakriyā we have to come to the
end. Therefore, he does not bother too much about the relative superiority among these
prakriyās which later subdivided into three prakriyās: Ābhāsa-vāda, pratibimba-vāda and
avaccheda-vāda. Therefore, Adi Śaṅkarācārya without comparing these prakriyās he uses
these prakriyās wherever he wants to use. In the Maniṣā-pañcaka, he gives the example of
the reflected sun and he also gives the example of enclosed space. From that, it is clear that
we need not really quarrel on the method of teaching. Therefore, Adi Śaṅkarācārya does
not differentiate them and even Gaudapāda does not want to differentiate because he has
used avaccheda-vāda-prakriyā in the Māṇḍūkya kārikā. As far as the Upaniṣads are
concerned, we have got both examples. In the Upaniṣad also both the examples are
available that is why the Ācāryas are taking the support of the Upaniṣad also. We use both
examples and both the vādas. Gaudapāda is the Guru’s Guru. He is Parama Guru of Adi

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1254

Śaṅkarācārya. He has also not differentiated; Adi Śaṅkarācārya also has not differentiated.
All the later Ācāryas entered into some debate. It is all mock fight and it is not real fight
just to sharpen our intellect and thinking. Ācāryas who came after Adi Śaṅkarācārya
assessed the different prakriyās; they are pratibimba-vāda of Padmapādācārya, ābhāsa-
vāda of Sūreśvarācārya. For us, both are one and the same and avaccheda-vāda of
Vācaspati-miśra, Ācārya Bhāmatīkāra. They are trying to find out the relative superiority
of them. Why we are not really bothered about taking sides? I have given you the reasons
that the differences are only with regard to the means but the end is one. Not only that,
once we come to Brahman, Jīva itself is going to be negated as mithyā! Now, to define
mithyā Jīva is it better to use avaccheda-vāda or pratibimba-vāda? Adi Śaṅkarācārya will
say anyway we are going to negate the Jīva finally as mithyā, why do you quarrel to find
out which vāda is better? Whichever you are comfortable you use and what I have found
is that in different contexts, different vādas are more handy. In karma kāṇḍa context, I find
ābhāsa-vāda is very useful; in jñāna kāṇḍa context, the avaccheda-vāda is more useful. In
different contexts, different vādas are handy. Anyway, we are going to throw them away
later. But Vidyāraṇya wants to have some fun and you also take it as fun. It is an academic
analysis. Don’t get lost. Here, the study is that ābhāsa-vāda is superior or avaccheda-vāda
is superior? The quarrel is between Sūreśvarācārya and Vācaspati-miśra. Vidyāraṇya is
going to vote for whom. Vidyāraṇya is going to vote for Sūreśvarācārya. It is so because he
belongs to Śṛṅgerī Maṭha and Vidyāraṇya was the Ācārya of the same Maṭha where
Sūreśvarācārya was first Ācārya, belongs to the same paramparā. Sūreśvarācārya is the
direct disciple of Adi Śaṅkarācārya whereas Vācaspati-miśra is of a later generation.
Whatever be the reason, Vidyāraṇya is going to vote for abhāsa-vāda.
For that, he puts a Pūrvapakṣa. Pūrvapakṣī is avaccheda-vādī. What are his arguments?
He gives several arguments. One argument I will give now which Vidyāraṇya gives later.
Another argument does he not mention here and I will tell at the end. This is called
gaurava doṣa argument. In Vedānta and tarka-śāstra gaurava is a doṣa even though in
Tamil gaurava means be respectable. When you can explain a phenomenon with less
number of factors and more number of factors, you should always use the simpler
phenomenon; giving up more number of factors you should go for the lesser one because
it is simple. You don’t want to travel with many things. One thing which can do two, it is
better. The intellect also will feel light if I introduce less number of technical terms; if I am

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1255

introducing more number of terms it is only going to create confusion to the student.
Therefore, avaccheda-vādī says that in avaccheda-vāda there is an advantage of lāghava. It
is simplicity whereas in ābhāsa-vāda there is a doṣa of gaurava of including more number
of terms. He says in ābhāsa-vāda Jīva will have three components: the original
consciousness, the reflected consciousness and the reflecting medium. There is twofold
consciousness. Three components are require to define the Jīva. In the example we have
original face, mirror and reflected face. But in avaccheda-vāda, I don't have to bring in
three factors. Ghaṭākāśa and mahākāśa when you analyse there is only one all-pervading
ākāśa. And you introduce a pot which is an enclosure. When you talk about an enclosed
ākāśa, the enclosed ākāśa is not an addition at all; it is only all-pervading ākāśa obtaining
within the pot. It is the same all-pervading ākāśa; I don’t introduce pratibimba ākāśa but
only one ākāśa enclosed it is ghaṭākāśa and unenclosed it is mahākāśa. Similarly, one
caitanya enclosed is called Jīvātmā and unenclosed is called Paramātmā. Therefore, how
many factors are required? Ākāśa and ghaṭa are only two components needed. In your
example, you have three. Between two and three, the former is better with lesser load. So
give up ābhāsa-vāda and vote for avaccheda-vāda. You can give the individuality to
ghaṭākāśa also. We can have big ghaṭākāśa or little one litre ghaṭākāśa; when the pot is big
two litre ghaṭākāśa. When ghaṭa moves ākāśa also moves. Plurality can be explained,
individuality can be explained and also, travel can be explained. All can be explained with
avaccheda-vāda. Therefore, ābhāsa-vāda should not be used. This is the Pūrvapakṣa
argument. Vidyāraṇya will say no; avaccheda-vāda may explain certain phenomena and
may be useful for certain purposes but ābhāsa-vāda is required to explain certain other
things. How? It will be explained in the next class.

Class 241
śloka 8.27 contd.
With the 26th śloka Vidyāraṇya has completed the cit-cidābhāsa-viveka both with regard
to the external world of objects as well as the internal world of thoughts. Having
completed this primary topic, now from 27th śloka up to 58th śloka, Vidyāraṇya enters a
technical topic namely ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra, an enquiry into ābhāsa-vāda. It is used to
define Jīva and Īśvara. Here, he is concentrating on the ābhāsa-vāda in the context of Jīva-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1256

definition. According to ābhāsa-vāda, Jīva is defined as consciousness reflected in the

mind, Īśvara defined as consciousness reflected in Māyā, whereas Jīva is defined as
reflection. This ābhāsa-vāda is challenged by another advaitic Ācārya who defines not as
the reflected consciousness but as enclosed consciousness which is called avaccheda-vāda
and the contention of the Pūrvapakṣī here is that avaccheda-vāda is a better proposal
because here we can explain with two factors whereas ābhāsa-vāda requires three
components to define Jīva. In the last class, I explained that to define Jīva as ābhāsa or
reflection, three factors required are the original consciousness, the reflected consciousness
and reflecting medium; the mind is require and the reflection, the reflected consciousness
is required. The original consciousness, reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness
three components are require to define Jīva in ābhāsa-vāda or pratibimba-vāda.
Avaccheda-vāda claims that in avaccheda-vāda, we don’t require a reflection at all as one
all-pervading consciousness is there; when the very same consciousness obtains within the
mind, the same consciousness in enclosed form is Jīva. In this definition of Jīva, we require
only one consciousness and the mind, only two factors are required; enclosed
consciousness is not a third entity because it is one consciousness itself available within
the mind and we are not introducing another reflected consciousness. Therefore, in
avaccheda-vāda there is lāghava, simplicity, whereas in ābhāsa-vāda, there is gaurava;
that is more factors than the former. Gaurava is a doṣa for it is uses other unnecessary
factors. In fact, we can call it a burden. This is the Pūrvapakṣa. Vidyāraṇya will refute
gaurava doṣa in ābhāsa-vāda. How does he refute? He points out that avaccheda-vāda
will not completely explain the Jīva properly; ābhāsa-vāda is required to define the Jīva
and therefore, three components are necessary. When out of necessity we add a
component, that addition is not considered as gaurava. Gaurava doṣa is a doṣa only when
you add an external factor unnecessarily, but when I prove the necessity then it is no more
gaurava. Therefore, they say prāmāṇikagauravaṃ dośāya na bhavati; addition of a factor
will not be a doṣa if it is proved necessary by pramāṇa. This is what Vidyāraṇya is going
to do. First we will see the Pūrvapakṣa.
The Jīva who is none other than the kūṭastha original consciousness which is enclosed
within the mind is not an additional reflection we are talking about. The same
consciousness like mahākāśa obtaining within the room ākāśa; similarly, avacchinna
kūṭastha means avacchinna caitanya. That Jīva is capable of traveling from one loka to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1257

another loka for taking rebirth, travel means he can be a successful saṃśārī without
requiring a cidābhāsa as the enclosed consciousness itself can be a Jīva itself, can be a kartā
itself, can acquire puṇya-pāpa and itself can travel from one loka to another. Everything
that a Jīva does, enclosed consciousness can do. Therefore, enclosed consciousness can
serve as a Jīva. Therefore, kartum śaktaḥ means can do the job of arrival and departure to
lokāntara, the various lokas; after all, what is the definition of Jīva? Jīva is a saṃśārī and
saṃśārī means a traveler. Enclosed consciousness can happily serve as a traveler Jīva.
Who is declaring this? It is avaccheda-vādī who is declaring this and he gives an example
also. The pot-space is enclosed within a pot and which is carrying water or milk or butter
milk; just as this pot-space can travel from one place to another and when the pot goes
away the pot-space also travels. The proof for this is the pot-space is holding the milk and
the milk is also travelling. Suppose pot alone travels the pot-space does not travel means
that by the time you take the pot elsewhere, the milk will remain in the starting place! Pot
travels, enclosed space travels and the content also travels. The mind is like the pot;
enclosed consciousness is Jīva; puṇya-pāpa is the milk. Therefore, the mind travels,
caitanya travels with the mind and within puṇya-pāpas are there and that also will travel
along with the mind. Therefore, we can say the enclosed consciousness is kartā bhoktā
Jīva. Avaccheda-vādī raises a question to ābhāsa-vādī: ābhāsena kim prayojanam? You
unnecessarily introduce the reflected consciousness. May you answer this question of
mine. This is Pūrvapakṣa. Vidyāraṇya will answer and he is not disturbed at all.

śloka 8.28
शृण्वसङ्गः परिच्छेदमात्राज्जीवो भवेन्न हि ।
अन्यथा घटकुड्याद्यैरवच्छिन्नस्य जीवता ॥ ८.२८ ॥
śṛṇvasaṅgaḥ paricchedamātrājjīvo bhavenna hi.
anyathā ghaṭakuḍyādyairavacchinnasya jīvatā (8.28).
Vidyāraṇya answers. You say I have got gaurava doṣa and to solve you give a suggestion.
In your suggestion, there is a greater doṣa which is called atiprasaṅga doṣa. Vidyāraṇya
tells avaccheda-vādī. In asaṅga kūṭastha, the word asaṅga refers to kūṭastha original
consciousness. Jīvo nahi bhavet, can never become a Jīva; paricchedamātrāt, by merely
being enclosed within the mind. By merely being enclosed within the mind, enclosed
status itself cannot make the consciousness a Jīva. Pariccheda means mere enclosing or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1258

getting an enclosed status. Vidyāraṇya adds if consciousness becomes a Jīva, merely

because it is enclosed in the mind, then the problem will be the very same consciousness is
enclosed within a pot also. It is obtaining within the pot as well. You don’t have the
fundamental doubt about it. The original consciousness being all-pervading, it is enclosed
within the pot, within the room, within the desk also. And according to avaccheda-vādī,
the enclosed consciousness is Jīva, which means within the pot also there will be Jīva,
within the desk also, there must be desk Jīva; and once the desk becomes a Jīva, because of
availability of consciousness, I will have to make a special request to the desk during the
class: don’t change your legs like the students! A student is shifting the legs because they
are jīvas. If the desk starts stretching its legs I will have trouble; desk is not a Jīva in spite
of consciousness, all-pervading consciousness, obtaining within the desk also! Therefore, if
you define Jīva as paricchinna caitanya there will atiprasaṅga doṣa, will have extension
into unchartered waters. Then, pot will become Jīva and desk will become Jīva. The
consciousness which is enclosed within a ghaṭa or a pot, walls, avacchinna caitanya, that
enclosed consciousness also will become Jīva; in short, everything will become Jīva and
there will be no inert matter at all. Even this microphone has the consciousness enclosed
within its periphery. Therefore, sarvam Jīva-mayam. There will be no jagat at all. In
Tripura story, they talk about the city flying. Vidyāraṇya asks: what you are talking?

śloka 8.29
न कुड्यसादृशी बुद्धिः स्वच्छत्वादिति चेत्तथा ।
अस्तु नाम परिच्छेदे किं स्वाच्छ्येन भवेत्तव ॥ ८.२९ ॥
na kuḍyasādṛśī buddhiḥ svacchatvāditi cettathā.
astu nāma paricchede kiṃ svācchyena bhavettava (8.29).
Now, avaccheda-vādī puts a counter question. That question is: how can you equate a pot
and a mind? No doubt pot is jaḍa and the mind is also jaḍa; pot is bhautika, the mind is
also bhautika. Even though both are same in all respects, pot is made up of gross matter,
sthūla bhautika; it is the mind that even though bhautika, is made of sūkṣma bhūtani;
therefore, the mind is a finer matter. Therefore, pot also encloses consciousness or
consciousness is enclosed by pot also, consciousness is enclosed by the mind also, but
there is a difference in the enclosed consciousness because one is enclosed by a grosser
matter and another is enclosed by a finer matter. Because of the distinction in the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1259

enclosing material, you have to make a difference. Wherever consciousness is enclosed by

grosser material it is not a Jīva; wherever consciousness is enclosed by finer material that
alone becomes Jīva. Therefore, that difference should be accepted. Therefore, there is no
atiprasaṅga doṣa. This is the statement of avaccheda-vādī.
Now, Pūrvapakṣī says buddhiḥ kuḍyasādṛśī na, the mind even though a matter it is not
like a pot or like the wall. Pūrvapakṣī agrees both of them are bhautika and jaḍa, but he
says even though both are bhautika and jaḍa, one is finer one and the other is grosser. He
says the mind is finer matter. If this is the answer given by avaccheda-vādī, then the
ābhāsa-vādī will give the following reply. Let it be so. Let the mind be finer material. Even
if the mind is a finer material, the mind-enclosed consciousness cannot become a Jīva just
as pot-enclosed consciousness is not Jīva. Similarly, the mind-enclosed consciousness
cannot become a Jīva even if the mind is a finer material. What advantage you are getting
paricchede with regard to the enclosed status of consciousness? The answer is that the
enclosed status of consciousness will be the same whether it is enclosed in a grosser
material or whether it is enclosed by a finer material; enclosed status is the same for both
ghaṭa-avacchinna caitanya or buddhi-avacchinna caitanya. If one becomes Jīva other also
will become Jīva; if other is not Jīva this one also will not become Jīva. With regard to the
enclosed status what difference you find just because of enclosing material is finer or
grosser? Vidyāraṇya feels he has not conveyed the idea clearly therefore, he gives a very
brilliant example. Example alone often clinches the argument.

śloka 8.30
प्रस्थेन दारुजन्येन कांस्यजन्येन वा न हि ।
विक्रे तुस्तण्डुलादिनां परिमाणं विशिष्यते ॥ ८.३० ॥
prasthena dārujanyena kāṃsyajanyena vā na hi.
vikretustaṇḍulādināṃ parimāṇaṃ viśiṣyate (8.30).
Look at the example. Example should be clearly understood. Sometimes when a person
wants to sell any material, they use a measure to measure the material that is to be sold.
When he uses a vessel for measuring that a vessel is called a measure. The definition of a
measure is that measure is nothing but another name for space only; it is not the all-
pervading space, but the space which is enclosed and having a particular definite volume.
It is enclosed space that is called a measure. If that vessel is not there you don’t call it a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1260

measure. It gets the name measure only when that enclosure is there, when you want to
measure a liquid like milk with the help of the measure; really speaking you are not using
the material for measuring but you use that space alone. Therefore, the definition of a
measure is space which is enclosed. Now, Vidyāraṇya asks the question: once the
definition of a measure is enclosed space, does it matter what type of material is used to
enclose that particular volume? Vidyāraṇya says that the material does not matter if the
volume enclosed is a plastic material or enclosed by gold or silver; even if it is enclosed by
gold the measure will be one litre; the material will not mater for definition as it is just
enclosing space and it does not talk about the material. Definition of measure only
specified the enclosed status of the space; it does not specify the enclosing material and
that is why a seller can replace the plastic measure by a gold measure also in his business;
he will never have loss or gain by changing the material of the measure. The enclosing
material does not matter. Similarly, in your definition of Jīva it is the enclosed status of
consciousness which specifies a Jīva; the enclosing material does not enter the definition
and according to your division, pot-enclosed consciousness and the mind-enclosed
consciousness, both must by your definition become Jīva. The measure does not undergo
any change one ltr will be one ltr whether the measure is made of silver, copper or gold or
plastic when it encloses the same volume of space. A business man cannot say I sold one
measure with a plastic measure and today I sold it using the vessel made of gold and I
incurred loss today. Pot-enclosed consciousness and the mind-enclosed consciousness,
both will be same; either both will become cetana or acetana and you cannot differentiate
the two enclosed consciousnesses. Therefore, avaccheda-vāda has this loophole.

śloka 8.31
परिमाणविशेषेऽपि प्रतिबिम्बो विशिष्यते ।
कांस्ये यदि तदा बुद्धावप्याभासो भवेद्बलात्॥ ८.३१ ॥
parimāṇaviśeṣe:'pi pratibimbo viśiṣyate.
kāṃsye yadi tadā buddhāvapyābhāso bhavedbalāt (8.31).
Here, Pūrvapakṣī raises another question. Of course it is a silly question. He says ok, in a
wooden measure also rice is of the same amount and in metal measure also the rice is of
the same amount. But in wooden measure we don’t see the reflection of the rice. Whereas
when it is put in a metal you can see the reflection. Therefore, in one, the measure is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1261

same, but reflection is there with no difference in the measure metal being a finer material,
whereas wood being not that fine it does not have the reflection; therefore, the same
measure plus reflection but the same measure no reflection. This is Pūrvapakṣī’ s big
question.
Vidyāraṇya says within the pot also consciousness is there in the same measure. The head
is also of the same size of the pot. Therefore, the enclosed consciousness is of the same
measure within the pot within the head. Even though the measure is the same mind being
finer material there is consciousness reflection which reflection is not there in the pot that
is why we define Jīva as the reflected consciousness. Why cannot you accept that?
Whatever argument you have give for yours, suits mine also. If the mind being made up
of finer subtle elements, the mind has ābhāsa-caitanya and therefore, it becomes a Jīva,
while pot does not have ābhāsa-caitanya and therefore, it is not a Jīva, Jīva is ābhāsa.

śloka 8.32
ईषद्भासनमाभासः प्रतिबिम्बस्तथाविधः ।
बिम्बलक्षणहीनः सन्बिम्बवद्भासते स हि ॥ ८.३२ ॥
īṣadbhāsanamābhāsaḥ pratibimbastathāvidhaḥ.
bimbalakṣaṇahīnaḥ sanbimbavadbhāsate sa hi (8.32).
Here, Vidyāraṇya goes to the next topic. He says that the reflected consciousness can be
called ābhāsa also; it can be called by the name pratibimba also. For all practical reasons,
ābhāsa and pratibimba can be taken as the same. In the advanced text books, they do make
finer difference between ābhāsa and pratibimba. But that, Vidyāraṇya ignores. Reflection
is called ābhāsa because it has partial image of the original. Pratibimba is also the same. It
has the partial resemblance to the original. Since ābhāsa and pratibimba means the same
that is an entity which is a reflection or image which has a partial resemblance to the
original. A photo can be called ābhāsa or a statue can be called ābhāsa. The statue has
partial resemblance to the original. Both images, reflection and shadow can be called
ābhāsa. My shadow on the wall has partial resemblance to the original. Ābhāsa and
pratibimba do not have all the characteristics of the original. It has certain features of the
original and therefore, resemblance to the original is there. If all features are there it will be
original. If no feature is there it cannot be called reflection or image. Therefore, all are not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1262

there, some of them are absent; partial features is called resemblance. That is called Jīva.
Details in the next class.

Class 242
śloka 8.32 contd.
After dealing with viveka between cit and cidābhāsa both outside the body in the external
world and the emotions in the internal world, from 27th śloka up to 68th śloka Vidyāraṇya
has entered into big technical topic establishing ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā which is a
particular method of teaching Vedānta. It is used for defining Jīva and Īśvara and which is
used for explaining the travel of the Jīva after death. Thus ābhāsa-vāda is useful in
defining saguṇa Jīva, in defining saguṇa Īśvara and also in explaining the travel of the Jīva
after death. Therefore, ābhāsa-vāda holds an important role in Vedāntic teaching method
and the method of teaching is technically called a prakriyā. We do have similar prakriyās
to define saguṇa Jīva, saguṇa Īśvara and the travel of Jīva, another one being pratibimba-
vāda prakriyā which is very close to ābhāsa-vāda and we treat them as the same in this
context. There is another prakriyā also known as avaccheda-vāda. The aim of Vidyāraṇya
in this portion is to establish the advantages of the ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā as contrasted
with the avaccheda-vāda-prakriyā. From the 27th śloka onwards, we saw and established
a doṣa a deficiency in avaccheda-vāda. It has an advantage of lāghava [introducing less
number of factors] where they manage with the all-pervading consciousness and enclosed
consciousness without introducing a reflected additional consciousness. The avoidance of
additional consciousness is an advantage and therefore, avaccheda-vāda should be
considered. For that, Vidyāraṇya said that if the reflection can be avoided and Vedānta can
be established then the reflection will be an unnecessary addition and an unnecessary
addition is called gaurava doṣa but when the addition is a necessary addition it cannot be
called gaurava doṣa. How reflection is necessary Vidyāraṇya established. His argument is
that if reflection is not required, and if if mere enclosure of consciousness will make a Jīva
then what will be the problem? Every pot will have an enclosed consciousness. Pot is also
matter; our brain is also like a fine version of clay alone. Brain is also a matter. If this
enclosed consciousness can become alive why cannot the pot-enclosed consciousness or
even a statue in Marina beach become alive? The statues have eyes and ears and enclosed

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1263

consciousness is also there. Why cannot Gandhiji statue sit for some time after standing for
a long time is painful?! Why does it not happen?
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya’s argument is that enclosed consciousness status cannot give Jīva
status. There must be a reflection also to do so. He gave the example of a measure being an
enclosed space; when enclosed space of a measure gives a measure status the enclosing
material does not count at all. Therefore, enclosure or avaccheda is not sufficient, a
reflection is required. Then, in the 32nd śloka, Vidyāraṇya points out that in this context
he does not want to make a subtle difference between ābhāsa and pratibimba even though
in advanced text books they do make a subtle difference, Vidyāraṇya says we will avoid
that internal difference. For all practices ābhāsa and pratibimba we will treat them as the
same. The nature of ābhāsa, Vidyāraṇya is explaining. Ābhāsa is an image and is also a
resemblance of the original only. It is a partial similarity. Resemblance is the definition of
an image or ābhāsa. Reflection is also exactly an image because a reflection also is a partial
resemblance of the original. Ābhāsa is also partial resemblance and pratibimba is also a
partial resemblance. In English, image as well as reflection is a partial reflection of the
original. What is common between the definitions of both ābhāsa and pratibimba? He says
bimba-lakṣaṇa-hīnaḥ, without having all the features of the original, else if the photo also
has all the features of the original that also will start walking about, pictures will come
alive. Therefore, the image or a picture or a photo does not have all the features of the
original. Similarly, a reflection also does not have all the features of the original. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says bimba-lakṣaṇa-hinah.

śloka 8.33
ससङ्गत्वविकाराभ्यां बिम्बलक्षणहीनता ।
स्फू र्तिरूपत्वमेतस्य बिम्बवद्भासनं विदुः ॥ ८.३३ ॥
sasaṅgatvavikārābhyāṃ bimbalakṣaṇahīnatā.
sphūrtirūpatvametasya bimbavadbhāsanaṃ viduḥ (8.33).
Now, Vidyāraṇya explains further. In the previous śloka, he said pratibimba has
resemblance to the original which means in certain features it resembles, original also it
doesn’t have all the features of the original. That means some features are there and some
features are not there. Naturally, the question will be between ābhāsa-caitanya and
ādhāra-caitanya or pratibimbita caitanya and bimba caitanya what are the resembling

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1264

features and what are the non-resembling features? In the previous śloka, he did not
specify them but he only said some resemble and some don’t resemble like original leaf
and plastic leaf. In texture and colour there is resemblance but where they don’t resemble
the original leaf will fade and the other will not fade. In these respects, they are different
exactly like that between ābhāsa and original the reflection is always associated with the
reflecting medium. It can never be asaṅga. That is why it is located where the medium is
and it is as big as the medium or as dull as the medium and it also moves along with the
medium, because it is inseparably connected to the medium; therefore, ābhāsa is sasaṅga,
having relationship or association. This is feature one.
The second feature is vikāra. It means change or modification. It’s brightness will never be
the same and it is subject to increase and decrease, depending upon the type of medium. it
cannot have emotions and awareness etc. The plant cidābhāsa is dull and animal
cidābhāsa is brighter and human cidābhāsa is still more brighter and among the human
cidābhāsa itself you can find the brightness varies and in human beings, before lunch the
cidābhāsa has a certain brightness and after lunch try reading Pañcadaśī and you know
what brightness the cidābhāsa has! The cidābhāsa also has a different intensity of light as
if affected by voltage fluctuation. The cidābhāsa is like cit and cit is asaṅgo’yam Puruṣaḥ.
It does not have any association with anything because cit is pāramārthika-satya while
everything else is either vyāvahārika or prātibhāsika. How can there be an association
between higher and lower orders of reality? A boy of jāgrat-avasthā and a girl of svapna-
avasthā can never get married; asaṅgatvāt, because no relationship is possible between the
two. Similarly, fluctuation is not there for cit, original consciousness. Therefore, with
regard to these two aspects, bimba-lakṣaṇa-hīnatā, ābhāsa lacks the features of the
original. It is the absence of [applicability of] the definition of the original to the reflection
with regard to the above two. Then, what is the common feature? We have talked about
two uncommon features. Now, the question is what is the common feature between the
original and duplicate? Both of them are effulgent, just like the original sun and the
reflected sun are both effulgent. Not only are both effulgent, even pratibimba light has the
power to illumine as we find on Pūrṇimā night, the moonlight is capable of sending light
to earth far away from its place. It has prakāśatva. The effulgence of ābhāsa is called
bimbavat bhāsanaṃ, it is the resemblance of the ābhāsa with the original. Therefore, in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1265

prakāśa aspect there is commonness, but in relation and modification there is

uncommonness. The uncommonness they call it vaidharmya.

śloka 8.34
न हि धीभावभावित्वादाभासोऽस्ति धियः पृथक् ।
इति चेदल्पमेवोक्तं धीरप्येवं स्वदेहतः ॥ ८.३४ ॥
na hi dhībhāvabhāvitvādābhāso:'sti dhiyaḥ pṛthak.
iti cedalpamevoktaṃ dhīrapyevaṃ svadehataḥ (8.34).
Here, Vidyāraṇya raises a possible Pūrvapakṣa from the avaccheda-vādī or it can be from
any person in general who objects to the ābhāsa-vāda prakriyā. A Pūrvapakṣī may raise a
question and Vidyāraṇya answers that question. The first line is Pūrvapakṣa and the
second line is the answer. Cidābhāsa never experienced being separate from the mind.
Cidābhāsa is never experienced independent of the mind by anyone. It is always
experienced when the mind is manifest and when the mind is not manifest, cidābhāsa is
not experienced and when it is not experienced independently, why do you introduce
cidābhāsa as an independent entity? Having introduced cidābhāsa as an external factor
you say that the mind is borrowing cidābhāsa. First, you make it an external thing and
thereafter, you say that mind borrows cidābhāsa; and you are saying Ātmā is lending
cidābhāsa; thus, you are introducing an external cidābhāsa, you are introducing a
borrowing process and you introduce a lending process! What is the proof for the
existence of an independent or external cidābhāsa? We never experience cidābhāsa
independently. Therefore, he says cidābhāsa is invariably experienced along with the
mind only. Dhībhāvabhāvitvādābhāsa, dhībhāve bhavati, means cidābhāsa exists only
when the mind exists; cidābhāsa does not exist when the mind resolved. When it is not
separately experienced why do you give it extraneous existence? It does not exist separate
from the mind and therefore, you need not talk about cidābhāsa coming and Ātmā giving
it; that is meaningless. From the mind, there is no separate cidābhāsa. This is Pūrvapakṣa.
If such a question is asked, the reply is: you are trying to negate the separate existence of
cidābhāsa just because it is never experienced separately. Then, Vidyāraṇya argues: in that
case, nobody has experienced the mind separate from the body, whether it is our mind or
your mind, the mind is experienced only when the body is there; after the body is
removed or burnt, nobody experiences the existence of the mind, nobody experiences the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1266

travel of the mind; in which case, how can you talk about a separate existence of the mind
as different from the body? If you are going by experience, the mind’s existence separately
should be rejected, just as for scientists the mind never exists surviving after death. That is
why they ask for the proof how do you prove that your forefather is travelling and
existing? Why are you wasting all the money and life in giving śrāddhā and tarpaṇa? We
don’t see the mind travelling; we don’t see cidābhāsa travelling and experientially, we
don’t have any proof of separate existence of cidābhāsa and the mind also. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says if you reject the mind, I will reject the cidābhāsa also, because both are
never experienced independently! Then, you can never say body and mind! Therefore, he
says iti cet. If you are arguing based on experience, your argument is too feeble to stand
scrutiny. Your argument is too weak, says Vidyāraṇya. What is the deficiency in the
argument? The mind is also never experienced separate from the body, exactly like
cidābhāsa not being experienced separate from the mind. The mind also is not experienced
separate from the body and if you negate cidābhāsa, I will negate the mind also. Are you
ready?

śloka 8.35
देहे मृतेऽपि बुद्धिश्चेच्छास्त्रादस्ति तथा सति ।
बुद्धेरन्यश्चिदाभासः प्रवेशश्रुतिषु श्रुतः ॥ ८.३५ ॥
dehe mṛte:'pi buddhiścecchāstrādasti tathā sati.
buddheranyaścidābhāsaḥ praveśaśrutiṣu śrutaḥ (8.35).
I accept the survival of the mind and its independent existence even after the body is
destroyed; even after the brain is destroyed, I accept the existence of the mind; all the
puṇya-pāpa vāsanās, all of them and the mind travel too. Even though I have not
experienced the mind separate from the body, still I accept. Vidyāraṇya asks how? He says
I accept because for me śāstra is also a pramāṇa. Many things which are not experienced
by our sense-organs, but I do accept because they have been revealed by the śāstra and for
me śāstra is a valid source of knowledge. Therefore, once the source is valid, there can be
no doubt about it. I have not directly measured something, but still I call it my knowledge,
because I believe the calculations done by the scientists. Once I accept the scientists, what I
learn will not be called belief, but it is called knowledge or fact. Whether something is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1267

belief or fact will depend upon the status I give to the source; once the source I look upon
as valid, I never call it as belief. In fact 90 percent of our information including what is
happening in Jammu & Kashmir is it belief or knowledge. How do you differentiate? If
you take the reporter as a valid source of knowledge, then your news item will become
knowledge. Otherwise, it will be just another belief; for a Vaidika, Veda is more valid than
all the scientific statements put together in the world and therefore, what he gathers from,
he never calls it belief and he calls it fact or knowledge. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī says for me
there is a mind separate from the body and that the mind travels. It is fact and I have
knowledge. Here, pramāṇa is śāstra alone. Vidyāraṇya says if that is so, cidābhāsa is not
part of the mind but it is something outside the mind, given by the Ātmā. This knowledge
I have gathered from the śāstra. I have come to know that the mind does not have intrinsic
consciousness; therefore, it has borrowed, it is eternally borrowed consciousness. The
pramāṇa is śāstra alone. For you, śāstra is pramāṇa for the mind’s separate existence; for
me also śāstra is pramāṇa for cidābhāsa’s being separate from the mind. The body dies
and is even burnt down into ashes; there is a sūkṣma-śarīra and in that sūkṣma-śarīra,
there is the mind; there is puṇya-pāpa; there is travel. Others will say that it is a belief and
it is not knowledge. Vaidika will, however, not call it a belief as for him it is knowledge. It
is a fact for him. To call it a fact, the pramāṇa is śāstra. All the scientific equations in our
colleges, we derived those equations and we have taken them from so many people who
have experimented and given; we have trust in them and therefore, we call it knowledge.
Similarly, śāstram pramāṇam asti. In this case, if you have śāstra pramāṇa I have also got
the śāstra pramāṇa. Cidābhāsa is something different from the mind. It is not an integral
or intrinsic nature of the mind. By giving further logic we support the śāstric teaching that
the mind does not have intrinsic consciousness. What is the logical support for this
statement? The mind is also changing, whatever is changing is matter and whatever is
matter is inert. Therefore, antaḥkaraṇa is jaḍa savikāratvāt ghaṭavat. antaḥkaraṇam jaḍam
bhautikatvāt, ghaṭavat. Therefore, consciousness in the mind cannot belong to the mind
and it must have been borrowed from Ātmā; that is why it is called as cit-ābhāsa. There is
a cidābhāsa which is revealed in the Śruti pramāṇa. He cannot say your Śruti pramāṇa, it
is wrong. If “my Śruti pramāṇa” is right then there will be utter confusion. Everyone will
take one one part of the Śruti and then there will be a problem. The entire Veda is
pramāṇa. Then, the next question is where the Śruti pramāṇa is? Vidyāraṇya asks where

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1268

your Śruti is? For him, the Śruti pramāṇa is Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, Śārīraka Brāhmaṇa
4.4. savijñāno bhavati savijñānamevānvavakrāmati| taṃ vidyākarmaṇī samanvārabhete
pūrvaprajñā ca, the mind leaves the body Śruti vākya is there. In the 15th chapter of Gītā,
manaḥṣaṣṭhānīndriyāṇi prakṛtisthāni karṣati, the mind leaves the body. Śruti and Smṛti
vākyas he has to support that the mind can survive even after leaving the body. Then,
Vidyāraṇya says if you have śāstra pramāṇa I also have got my own dear śāstra vākya. He
says praveśa śrutisu. Praveśa Śruti means Anupraveśa-Śruti. Anupraveśa-Śruti means
those Vedic statements which talks about the entry of Ātmā into the body. If Ātmā has to
enter the body-mind-complex it can be only in one way. The original Ātmā can never enter
the body-mind-complex; why? The original Ātmā cannot enter the body-mind-complex
because Ātmā being all-pervading where the question of Ātmā’s entry into the body-
mind-complex?! Therefore, when the Upaniṣad talks about the entry, it can only refer to
the cidābhāsa, the Ātmā’s reflection forming in the mind alone can be called as the entry,
just as the original sun enters the mirror in the form of pratibimba surya. There are so
many praveśa vākyas; it is there in Taittirīya Upaniṣad; in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.7 a
very big Anupraveśa-Śruti is there; Adi Śaṅkarācārya writes very elaborate commentary
on this śloka. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad brahma-ānanda-valli, it is there. in Aitareya Upaniṣad
also it is there. Vidyāraṇya refers to Aitareya praveśa Śruti.

śloka 8.36
धीयुक्तस्य प्रवेशश्चेन्नैतरेये धियः पृथक् ।
आत्मा प्रवेशं सङ्कल्प्य प्रविष्ट इति गीयते ॥ ८.३६ ॥
dhīyuktasya praveśaścennaitareye dhiyaḥ pṛthak.
ātmā praveśaṃ saṅkalpya praviṣṭa iti gīyate (8.36).
Here, Pūrvapakṣī raises another objection. It is hairsplitting and it is very intelligent. In the
praveśa Śruti Ātmā entering the mind is not stated, but Ātmā entering the body is
mentioned. When we talk about Ātmā entering the physical body, it means the mind
entering the physical body; along with Ātmā. If the Śruti talks about Ātmā entering the
mind, then you can say Ātmā enters the mind in the form of cidābhāsa and if Ātmā as
cidābhāsa should enter the mind then cidābhāsa cannot be the intrinsic nature the mind;
because if it is the intrinsic nature then cidābhāsa need not enter; so if Ātmā is entering the
mind, then you can talk about the cidābhāsa separate from the mind; but what Śruti talks

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1269

about is Ātmā enters the body and when Ātmā enters the body, it is the mind that along
with consciousness is entering the body; then, you cannot say Ātmā as cidābhāsa is
entering the mind. Therefore, he says dhīyuktasya; it means Ātmā along with the mind
has praveśa, has the entry into the body. Ātmā along with the mind has the entry into the
body; that alone is said to be that Ātmā is entering the mind in the form of cidābhāsa. Up
to this is Pūrvapakṣa.
If this is Pūrvapakṣī argument, then Vidyāraṇya says no, because in Taittirīya Upaniṣad
and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad the entry statement is slightly vague. Only Ātmā’s entry is
talked about whether it is entering the mind or generally the body or creation that is not
very clearly stated in both the Upaniṣads. But in Aitareya Upaniṣad it is very clearly said
that Ātmā enters the sūkṣma-śarīra which includes the mind also. If the Ātmā is to enter
the mind as said in Aitareya, then you have to accept that there is a cidābhāsa entry and if
cidābhāsa is entering the mind, the idea conveyed here is cidābhāsa or consciousness is
not an intrinsic part of the mind. What is intrinsic you cannot talk about it’s entry. The
language of entry cannot be used if consciousness is intrinsic to the mind. Therefore, he
says it is in the Aitareya Upaniṣad [I.iii.11.12]; in fact Vidyāraṇya summarises those two
mantras in the next two ślokas. Here, the mantra is introduced. Praveśaṃ saṅkalpya,
Ātmā visualizes the praveśa. The creator Ātmā, the Paramātmā praveśaṃ saṅkalpya;
before praveśa there is a saṅkalpa for creation; let me create so:'kāmayata bahusyāṃ
prajāyeyeti; all these things you should remember; Ātmā visualizes, let me create of all of
them; after visualizing and implementing the creation Ātmā visualized the entry in the
form of cidābhāsa. It is said to have entered. While talking about Ātma-saṅkalpa, dhiyaḥ
pṛthak, Ātmā is not along with the buddhi. Buddhi is also part of creation only. Ātmā is
separate from that. Ātmā independent of the mind visualized praveśa and entered the
mind in the form of cidābhāsa. Therefore, you have to accept my statement. Details in the
next class.

Class 243
śloka 8.36 contd.
From the 27th up to 68th śloka Vidyāraṇya has entered into ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra
establishing the ābhāsa-vāda by negating the avaccheda-vāda. These two methodologies

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1270

are used for the sake of defining Jīva and Īśvara. In ābhāsa-vāda, the vyaṣṭi-pratibimbita
caitanya will be called Jīva whereas samaṣṭi-pratibimbita caitanya will be called Īśvara. In
avaccheda-vāda, vyaṣṭi-avacchinna caitanya is called Jīva and samaṣṭi-avacchinna caitanya
is called Īśvara. These two vādas are used only to define Jīva and Īśvara and ultimately
both of them are not interested in establishing Jīva and Īśvara, but their aim is by negating
both Jīva and Īśvara as only vyāvahārika satya, showing pāramārthika-satya as Brahman.
Ultimately, whether we are going to use ābhāsa-vāda or avaccheda-vāda will not matter
much for us since both define only vyāvahārika Jīva and vyāvahārika Īśvara. Therefore,
the difference is only in the mithyā field of Jīva and Īśvara. The satya is neither ābhāsa nor
avaccheda, neither Jīva nor Īśvara, neither kārya nor kāraṇa, neither vyaṣṭi nor samaṣṭi,
but only one Absoltue Brahman and once we arrive at that Brahman, all those become
irrelevant for us. Therefore, we should bother not too much about the internal differences;
still, the Ācāryas wants to talk about one prakriyā over the other. Vidyāraṇya supports
ābhāsa-vāda and he quotes Śruti pramāṇa in support of his conclusion and the Śruti
support is Anupraveśa-Śruti in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Śruti says Ātmā has entered
into the body-mind-complex; since Ātmā is all-pervading, there cannot be entry of Ātmā
directly and therefore, we have to interpret the entry as the formation of cidābhāsa in the
body-mind-complex alone. Thus, the entry-statement supports the formation of cidābhāsa
in the mind and therefore, it is clear that śāstra supports cidābhāsa. What is the role of the
cidābhāsa which has entered the mind? The role of cidābhāsa is that the inert mind,
insentient mind is converted into sentient mind because of the formation of cidābhāsa;
what better pramāṇa you require for the presence of cidābhāsa in the mind?! This much
Vidyāraṇya said and when it was said the avaccheda-vādī Pūrvapakṣī puts a counter
question in śloka 36 which we were seeing in the last class. When the Śruti talks about
Ātmā’s entry the Śruti does not talk about Ātmā’s entry into the mind. Having created the
world, Ātmā or Brahman entered the world; why do you take it as entering into the mind?
Therefore, he says Ātmā is not entering the mind; cidābhāsa is not formed in the mind;
then what is the meaning of the entry? He says the mind enters into the body; when the
mind enters the body, the all-pervading consciousness is enclosed in the mind also. He
accepts enclosed consciousness but he does not accept the reflected consciousness. So he
says the mind enters the body and along with the mind, enclosed consciousness also
enters the body; therefore, there is no question of cidābhāsa entering the mind? Then what

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1271

is entering? Ātma-anupraveśa is equal to buddhi-avacchinna-caitanyasya sthūla-sarire

anupraveśaḥ alone and there is no pramāṇa for cidābhāsa entering the mind. Therefore, he
said the buddhi-avacchinna-caitanya, that is buddhi and the enclosed consciousness
together is entering the body and after that entry, the body becomes a live body. Why do
you unnecessarily introduce cidābhāsa as it is not required? Up to this is Pūrvapakṣa.
If such a question is raised by avaccheda-vādī, our answer is this. Your statement is not
correct. In Aitareya Upaniṣad there is a praveśa Śruti which you have not noticed. You are
only thinking about the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and Taittirīya Upaniṣad but you have to
focus your attention to the Praveśa-Śruti in the Aitareya Upaniṣad mantra 1.3.11-12. The
Upaniṣad here says that Ātmā creates the universe and it creates all the bodies also and it
has created the sūkṣma-śarīra consisting of all the organs including the mind also. Thus,
the creation of the mind has been mentioned in the above Upaniṣad and after that the
Ātmā, of course Māyā-sahita, takes a saṅkalpa. All the bodies are themselves jaḍa being
born out of pañca-bhūtas which is also jaḍa and therefore, they cannot function
themselves. Therefore, “let me enter” is the saṅkalpa of the Ātmā. When, there, the
Upaniṣad talks about the entry, the entry is not only in the body, the entry includes into
the mind also as the creation of the mind has been separately mentioned and into the
created mind, Ātmā enters. Therefore, you cannot interpret the entry as the mind’s entry
into the body. You should interpret the entry as Ātmā’s entry into the mind and of course
into the body, later. Therefore, the entry into the mind is distinctly mentioned in the
Aitareya. It is not a general entry creating vagueness but there is a specific entry into the
body and the mind. It can be looked into by another way also. Pūrvapakṣī said the Ātmā
with the mind entered the body. It is Ātmā plus the mind that entered the body is
Pūrvapakṣī’s view.

Now, Aitareya quotation says Ātmā praveśaṃ saṅkalpya, Ātmā which is not mixed with
the mind, Ātmā itself separate from the mind [Pūrvapakṣī says along with the mind], did
the saṅkalpa separate from the mind and having done the saṅkalpa Ātmā entered the
mind; that means before entry the saṅkalpa is done and saṅkalpa is done without the
mind alone. Therefore, it is clear that Anupraveśa-Śruti talks about Ātmā’s entry into the
mind and that entry alone is called as the formation of cidābhāsa; don’t imagine entry as a
physical movement. The sun enters the water as the reflection means not that the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1272

reflection will slowly travel inch by inch; sun enters the mirror as a reflection means the
sun enters the mirror in the form of formation of the reflection. Entry is equal to formation.
Also you should note when I say there is a formation of reflection in the mirror, don’t
imagine that there is a time gap, that you keep the mirror and for some time the mirror is
dark and after some time, slowly the reflection is formed; even though we use the verb
formation, there is no time involved in the formation. As even the mirror is created, as
even the mirror is brought out, the sunlight-reflection is instantaneous; similarly, the mind
forms the reflection of the Ātmā instantaneously when the mind is created. What is the
purpose of this discussion? It is to show that once I say Ātmā forms the reflection, I will
understand that the mind does not have consciousness-principle of its own. Formation of
reflection means borrowed consciousness and that means that the mind is inert by itself.
Similarly, when I use the words borrowed consciousness, again you should not imagine
time that the mind is born and after two minutes, the mind decides to borrow
consciousness and phones to Ātmā, I would like to borrow some consciousness; remember
all the words are used but they never take any action or time. The idea is that the mind
does not have intrinsic consciousness but it has borrowed consciousness. That borrowed
consciousness is called cidābhāsa. Thus, he says that Ātmā, the Self, visualized the entry
even without any association with the mind, independently Ātmā visualized the entry and
thereafter Ātmā entered not the body but entered the mind. Thus, it has been clearly stated
in the Aitareya Upaniṣad.

śloka 8.37
कथं न्विदं साक्षदेहं मदृते स्यादितीरणात्।
विदार्य मूर्ध्नः सीमानं प्रविष्टः संसरत्ययम्॥ ८.३७ ॥
kathaṃ nvidaṃ sākṣadehaṃ madṛte syāditīraṇāt.
vidārya mūrdhnaḥ sīmānaṃ praviṣṭaḥ saṃsaratyayam (8.37).
Here, Vidyāraṇya is paraphrasing those two Aitareya Upaniṣad mantras 1.3.11 and 1.3.12.
In the previous śloka, he said Aitareya Upaniṣad says but he did not say what the
Upaniṣad said. That is given here. The exact mantra is not quoted. He borrows some of the
prominent words from the mantra and he makes his own śloka giving the essence. The
Upaniṣad says ‘this is the visualization of Ātmā’. That Ātmā is introduced in the Aitareya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1273

Upaniṣad; first mantra ātmā vā idameka evāgra āsīt. nānyatkiñcana miṣat. Ātmā alone
was there before sṛṣṭi and nothing else was there. Thereafter, Ātmā visualized and the sṛṣṭi
is very elaborately talked about. In the first chapter, first section, first chapter, second
section, pañca-bhūta-sṛṣṭi, śarīra-sṛṣṭi, Devatā-sṛṣṭi, anna-sṛṣṭi are talked about and in each
state the verb is given to indicate that before creation Ātmā visualized the whole gamut of
creation. When I say Ātmā, it is Māyā-sahita Ātmā. Now, in this mantra it is said
everything is created including the bodies and the minds, sense-organs, all of them were
created and without the Ātmā they are all jaḍa vastu or insentient only. Therefore, even
though there is no time gap, the Upaniṣad is visualizing a time gap. The entire creation
which has trillions of physical bodies and trillions of sūkṣma-śarīras encased within the
body and they are like dead bodies now, which have to be injected with life. Life-injection
is nothing but cidābhāsa-injection, all the dead bodies will wake up. So you have to
imagine the dead bodies and the dead sūkṣma-śarīras are lying down and therefore, they
don’t see each other. Good thing they don’t fight each other also. The body-mind-complex
that is lying all over as it were and the Ātmā visualizes without my blessing the body can
never become active. So it enters the mind in the form of cidābhāsa. Ātmā is not only
lending consciousness and before it should lend, the very existence of the body-mind-
complex is also lent by Ātmā and therefore, Ātmā visualizes: how can all the mithyā
vastus even exist if I don’t lend existence?! How can all these gain existence without my
lending them existence? They exist now like statues; they don’t have consciousness!
Therefore, Ātmā again visualizes; all these are imaginations. Don’t think first existence he
gave one injection and then he gave another injection for consciousness. Don’t imagine it
to be literal. We only visualize so; how will all function if I don’t lend consciousness?! In
Aitareya, there is another type of imagination. All these details are not there in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and Taittirīya Upaniṣad. In this Upaniṣad, the whole creation
process is explained in detail. Ātmā visualizes: through which I should enter? Ātmā did
not want to enter through any one of the popular holes, that is, sense-organs. Ātmā
therefore, created a special hole called brahmarandhra, that śukla-gati hole we say. It is
called brahma-randhra because not only the Jīva goes in through that but during krama-
mukti, goes out as well. Randhra means the gateway through which Brahman enters. It is
this which Vidyāraṇya paraphrases here. The skull is not one whole piece but several
pieces joined together; therefore, intermediary gap will be there. That is why when you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1274

call the electrician to put a nail, if there are tiles he will choose the gap between the tiles
that is called sīma. Similarly, we have two tiles here in the skull and Īśvara wants to put a
nail; therefore, he drills a hole. Bhagavān must have used the electric gadget! Having
drilled a hole, having pierced the skull, he made his entry into the body. He entered the
body in the form of cidābhāsa and this cidābhāsa is called Jīva. The tragedy is that after
entering the body, cidābhāsa has become alive [and bound], because it is the reflected
consciousness and therefore, it is effulgent and because of its effulgence the body and the
mind also has become effulgent. Now, cidābhāsa has a choice. Either it should claim the
original consciousness as myself because the original consciousness alone has entered as
cidābhāsa into the mind or it has another choice that it can claim the reflecting medium as
I am. Which one is the better option? Should I claim reflecting medium as myself or
should I claim the original consciousness as myself. We have done very carefully the
wrong thing! We identify with the mind and the mind goes through the three avasthās. In
Aitareya Upaniṣad three avasthās are talked about. I identify with the mind and identify
with the avasthās also. And identified with avasthā, I will have saṃsāra. Therefore, I
become the fittest candidate for saṃsāra to perpetuate itself. This is the truth of saṃsāra.
Instead of I am sārathī we say I am saṃśārī. This is the truth of cidābhāsa.

śloka 8.38
कथं प्रविष्टोऽसङ्गश्चेत्सृष्टिर्वास्य कथं वद ।
मायिकत्वं तयोस्तुल्यं विनाशश्च समस्तयोः ॥ ८.३८ ॥
kathaṃ praviṣṭo:'saṅgaścetsṛṣṭirvāsya kathaṃ vada.
māyikatvaṃ tayostulyaṃ vināśaśca samastayoḥ (8.38).
Now, avaccheda-vādī raises another general question. It is just a fun question and
Vidyāraṇya will give a fun answer. Asaṅga-Ātmā katham praviṣṭaḥ? This is avaccheda-
vādī’s question to ābhāsa-vādī. This Ātmā cannot have any relationship with anyone; how
can the relationless Ātmā enter the mind and get related to the mind? Abhimāna, relation,
etc., alone is entry. How can asaṅga Ātmā enter a reflecting medium? How can asaṅga
Ātmā get related to the mind when it is said to be relationless? In the question itself,
reasoning is also involved! How can asaṅga Ātmā enter that means because it is asaṅga
how can it enter? It cannot enter is the objection. If you ask such a seemingly intelligent
question, I will ask a counter question. The question of entry comes only after sṛṣṭi. Now, I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1275

will ask you a question: how did asaṅga Ātmā create the world? To create, something
should become a kāraṇa and to be a kāraṇa, it should have relationship with kārya.
Therefore, creation itself means saṅga is involved because creation means kāraṇatva status
and kāraṇatva means relationship with kārya; you cannot use the word kāraṇa without
relationship with kārya. How can the fellow be called a parent without relationship with
children? You asked about entry and I will answer that question later. You please tell me
how asaṅga Ātmā without kāraṇa status, asaṅga akāraṇa Ātmā, created a kārya?
Thereafter, I will answer the question. This is our question to avaccheda-vādī. How can
there be a creation? You answer the question. You should answer this first because the
entry comes after the creation. Thereafter, I will answer. This is the counter question to
avaccheda-vādī.
Then, Pūrvapakṣī gives the answer to our counter question. For that, he says mayikatvam.
Asaṅga Ātmā cannot create a real world but apparent world can be created. There is no
problem for that just as the dry land cannot create water but the dry land can create plenty
of mirage water. Even after creating it, the land is asaṅga Ātmā. Therefore, if the asaṅga
dry sand can create mirage water falsely, the asaṅga Ātmā can create a mithyā world with
its Māyā-śakti. Therefore, my answer is asaṅga Ātmā creates mithyā world with Māyā-
śakti. Mayikatva is his answer. After giving the answer he raises a question to us. He says I
have answered your counter question; now, you answer to me as to how asaṅga Ātmā
enters into the mind? If apparent creation is possible, the entry also can happen
apparently; therefore, praveśaḥ api māyikaḥ bhavati. Just as mayika sṛṣṭi is possible,
māyika praveśa is also possible. Therefore, cidābhāsa is mithyā, the mind is mithyā, entry
is mithyā and saṃsāra is mithyā. Let all the things happen at cidābhāsa level. Everything
is possible. Therefore, he says māyikatvaṃ tayostulyaṃ. For the sṛṣṭi also and entry also,
mayikatva is common. That means just as sṛṣṭi is apparent according to you, entry is also
apparent according to me, which is very much possible. Because of the same reason only,
the cidābhāsa will have destruction also. When the mind resolves, cidābhāsa also will
resolve. If someone asks how apparent cidābhāsa resolves, then I will ask a counter
question how can sṛṣṭi resolve during pralaya? Apparent sṛṣṭi came up and can resolve
and so apparent cidābhāsa came up and can resolve. Your question is also apparent.
Cidābhāsa praveśa and sṛṣṭi and cidābhāsa pralaya and sṛṣṭi pralaya, both are sama,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1276

which means same. Tayoḥ refers to sṛṣṭi and cidābhāsa, both of them resolve in the same
way which means apparently māyayā.

śloka 8.39
समुप्त्यायैव भूतेभ्यस्तान्येवानुविनश्यति ।
विस्पष्टमिति मैत्रेय्य याज्ञवल्क्य उवाच हि ॥ ८.३९॥
samuptyāyaiva bhūtebhyastānyevānuvinaśyati.
vispaṣṭamiti maitreyya yājñavalkya uvāca hi (8.39).
Vidyāraṇya gives further support to his statement by quoting Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
vākya. It is an important portion which clearly talks about two consciousnesses, one is
ābhāsa-caitanya and the other is ādhāra-caitanya. The reflected consciousness and the
original consciousness, two consciousnesses are there, we have got clear pramāṇa in the
Upaniṣad. One consciousness is satya and the other is mithyā; one consciousness is nitya
and another consciousness is anitya; cidābhāsa is supposed to take birth when the mind is
born and it is subject to death when the mind goes away. Thus, one consciousness comes
and goes while another consciousness never comes and goes. In the dead body when the
consciousness goes from the dead body which consciousness goes? In the dead body, the
original consciousness is very much there and it continues for it is nitya caitanya, ajanya
caitanya, sarvagata caitanya and that consciousness is all over in the matter. It is conscious
in the sense that it has ādhāra-caitanya but we say it is unconscious or inert from the
standpoint of the reflected consciousness. Fortunately or unfortunately, transaction is
possible only with the reflected consciousness whereas the original consciousness cannot
contribute to any transaction. Thus, clear distinction between the original consciousness
and the reflected consciousness we get in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad in Maitreyī-
Yājñavalkya-saṃvāda. There, Yājñavalkya teaches Maitreyī. This is also a paraphrasing of
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra. A scientist can at the maximum study cidābhāsa alone
and suppose in future the scientists are able chemically manufacture a machine or a
gadget and if chemical composition is such that it begins or it becomes alive. They are
struggling to do that. If that suddenly becomes alive, that means they have created
consciousness. Even then, what consciousness they have created, they have managed to
manufacture the reflected consciousness only, but that itself is going to take a long time.
They have developed the skill to create sūkṣma-śarīra out of chemicals and in that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1277

sūkṣma-śarīra the cidābhāsa has come. Vedānta is talking about not the creatable
cidābhāsa but we are talking about satyam jñānam anantam, the uncreatable original
consciousness which is our nature. The reflected consciousness itself, they have not
understood. They tamper with the reflected consciousness only and we are studying about
the original consciousness that is satya. They have not accomplished much. Sūkṣma-śarīra
is also made of pañca-bhūtas. The definition of sūkṣma-śarīra in Tattvabodha is pañca-
bhūtas. From sūkṣma-śarīra or along with the sūkṣma-śarīra, the reflection also rises. That
is why during deep sleep state, the mind is resolved, cidābhāsa is also resolved, that is
why there is no waking transaction, no dream transaction; transactional consciousness
resolves when the mind is resolved and when you wake up, the mind also wakes up. The
transactional awareness, the empirical awareness, called mithyā cidābhāsa rises when you
wake up from sleep. Therefore, cidābhāsa is rising consciousness and because it is rising,
that rising will have setting also. Therefore, tāni eva anuvinaśyati. Along with sūkṣma-
śarīra, along with the mind, empirical consciousness dies; that is why in a sleep, empirical
consciousness is resolved. During pralaya also, empirical consciousness is resolved. And
even after the evolution of this creation, there can be a time when the inert lokas alone are.
After the big bang, matter group was there but was no light and after some time the
consciousness was born, when they say what does it mean?It means that after some time
only, sūkṣma-śarīras were born and along with the sūkṣma-śarīra the empirical
consciousness was created. Until then, only matter was there. Nobody was interacting.
Yājñavalkya does a mischief here, because he is only teaching his wife. He did not
differentiate between ābhāsa-caitanya and ādhāra-caitanya. He said consciousness
perishes. Naturally, when you hear that consciousness perishes you will only get a shock
because we have learnt that caitanya is anādi and ananta. But her husband is contradicting
saying caitanya perishes; therefore, Maitreyī gets a shock and she asks: you contradict as
usual. What are you talking? One time you say consciousness is eternal and another time
consciousness is perishing? Then, Yājñavalkya says there are two consciousnesses, one is
cidābhāsa and another is cit. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says this Yājñavalkya vākya is a
pramāṇa for cidābhāsa and my ābhāsa-vāda has Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad support. The
details in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1278

Class 244
śloka 8.39 contd.
Vidyāraṇya establishes ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā which is employed in Vedāntic teaching to
define Jīva and Īśvara. In this prakriyā, we introduce the reflected consciousness which
has vyāvahārika satya and which is different from the original consciousness which is
pāramārthika-satya. This reflection is called ābhāsa which is vyāvahārika, otherwise it is
mithyā. And Vidyāraṇya now gives the Śruti support to point out that ābhāsa-vāda has
the backing of the Śruti vākya, primary Śruti vākya being anupraveśa mentioned in
several Upaniṣads. Whenever Upaniṣad talks about consciousness entering the body-
mind-complex, the entry can be interpreted as only the formation of reflection. No other
entry is possible because consciousness being all-pervading where is the question of it
entering anywhere for it has already entered all the places being all-pervading! By
brahman entering, we mean entering the mind as pratibimbita caitanya and Brahman
entering is nothing but the formation of the reflection. The popular example is the original
sun entering a bowl of water down below in the form of the reflected sun, which we can
clearly experience in the bowl of water. Therefore, the first pramāṇa is anupraveśa vākya.
That is there in Taittirīya Upaniṣad and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Here, Vidyāraṇya
quoted Aitareya vākya where caitanya entering the mind is clearly stated. From this, it is
clear the mind has cidābhāsa. Thereafter, he takes another Śruti vākya from
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad which we were seeing in 39th śloka. In this, Yājñavalkya teaches
Maitreyī in which he talks about the arrival of caitanya as well as departure of caitanya.
Arriving and departing caitanya is introduced by Yājñavalkya to Maitreyī. The arrival and
departure can never be the original consciousness for it is eternal and it is all-pervading;
an eternal and all-pervading entity can never arrive and depart. Still Yājñavalkya says it is
possible. The word bhūta refers to the pañca-bhūtas and pañca-bhūtas refers to sūkṣma-
śarīra which is a product of pañca-bhūtas. Therefore, from the sūkṣma-śarīra the caitanya
emerges. When the sūkṣma-śarīra dissolves during pralaya along with the sūkṣma-śarīra
the caitanya also departs or disappears. Later another vākya says after death there is no
consciousness, what a terrible statement. From this, it is very clear that Upaniṣad talks
about another consciousness which is subject to appearance and disappearance. This
consciousness must be other than the original consciousness; therefore, what will it be as it
can be cidābhāsa only. Why do you avaccheda-vādī bother about it? Therefore, we address

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1279

him oh, avaccheda-vādin, why are you negating ābhāsa when Śruti pramāṇa is solidly
there? What you are doing is very much an ābhāsa, it is not a very good thing to do. This
is what we see now. Vācyārtha of bhutebhyaḥ is pañca-mahā-bhutebhyaḥ but lakṣyārtha
is the pañca-mahā-bhūta-janya-sūkṣma-śarīrebhyaḥ. Only when śarīras are there, the
consciousness will not be there in any material entity. I gave you the example: if the dead
body is there all over there will be no experiencing consciousness. Therefore, from those
sūkṣma-śarīras the caitanya samuptyāya meaning appears, manifests, emerges, cidābhāsa
or the reflected consciousness appears from reflecting medium. Not only that, tāni again
refers to pañca-bhūtas. It is vācyārtha and pañca-bhūtas refers to pañca-bhūta-vikāra-
rūpa-sūkṣma-bhūtani. Along with sūkṣma-śarīra, along with the minds or along with the
reflecting medium, when reflecting medium dissolves, the reflected consciousness cannot
survive. In fact, we experience it every day during suṣupti-avasthā. In sleep, reflecting
medium and the reflected consciousness dissolves, that is why I am not aware of things
happenings around. Prājña of sleep is not the original consciousness but it refers to the
reflected consciousness. Even the English expression unconsciousness refers to the
reflected consciousness alone. What perishes is the reflected consciousness only. This is
taken from Yājñavalkya- Maitreyī dialogues. Refer to Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.6.13 th
mantra. It is called Maitreyī-Brāhmaṇa. Maitreyī also comes in 4 th chapter, 5th Brāhmaṇa.
Nobody has the privilege; from that, it is clear in Veda, ladies are important.

śloka 8.40
अविनाश्ययमात्मेति कू टस्थः प्रविवेचितः ।
मात्रासंसर्ग इत्येवमसङ्गत्वस्य कीर्तनात्॥ ८.४० ॥
avināśyayamātmeti kūṭasthaḥ pravivecitaḥ.
mātrāsaṃsarga ityevamasaṅgatvasya kīrtanāt (8.40).
In the last śloka, Vidyāraṇya talked about the two features of cidābhāsa; one is cidābhāsa
that appears along with the mind, the reflecting medium; from this, we come to know two
things. One is cidābhāsa that is invariably associated with reflecting medium; therefore,
cidābhāsa is sasaṅga. [related]. It is definitely sasaṅga because it appears along with
reflecting medium and disappears along with the reflecting medium. That means
inseparably tied to the reflecting medium because any reflection is related to the reflecting
medium; therefore, one feature is that it is sasaṅga. The second feature of cidābhāsa is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1280

because the mind is subject to arrival and departure cidābhāsa also will be anitya only. It
is so because it is subject to appearance and disappearance. Therefore, anityatva is the
second feature of cidābhāsa. Sasaṅgatva is a feature and anityatva is feature two. Now, in
this śloka, Vidyāraṇya talks about the original consciousness which has two diagonally
opposite feature. The original consciousness is asaṅga and in the place of anityatva, the
original consciousness is nitya. For that also, I have got clear Śruti vākya. Therefore, he
gives the Śruti vākya in support of the original consciousness. So, clearly we find this
distinction between the original consciousness and reflecting medium. We have got
statements but with Śruti support, nowhere this is presented so nicely: ayam Ātmā avināśī
asti this is a statement occurring in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra 4.5.14. Here,
Yājñavalkya says the Ātmā is avināśī; avināśī means imperishable. In the previous verse,
we saw anuvinaśyati it meant cidābhāsa is perishable, and when you say avināśī it refers
to cit, the imperishable. The cit is clearly seen different from cidābhāsa. In another place,
mātrāsaṃsarga iti evam asaṅgatvasya kīrtanāt.
There is another Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya [refer to 4.3.15]. In this mantra, Upaniṣad
says mātrāsaṃsargastu asya bhavati is a complete sentence. Here, Vidyāraṇya says
mātrāsaṃsarga. It can be split in two different ways according to the context. In this
context, Vidyāraṇya splits the word as mātra plus asaṃśarga. mātra means panca-bhūtani.
Mātra primarily means tanmātrāṇi or pañca-bhūtas and by implication, the word mātra
refers to the sūkṣma-śarīra or the mind, to be precise. Asaṃśarga means relationless. By
using the expression mātra asaṃśarga, the Upaniṣad talks about another consciousness
which is not connected with the mind. In the previous śloka, we talked of one connected to
the mind and here, we talk of one unconnected with the mind and that is the original
consciousness. Relationlessness of the original consciousness is called by the name
kūṭastha. You can also call it as bimba caitanya or Śākṣi-caitanya or the original
consciousness. Therefore, here, two features of the original consciousness are nityatva and
asaṅgatva. Here is a small note. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad occurs in śukla Yajur Veda and
this Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad has two versions: one Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad occurs in
śukla Yajur Veda in a particular branch called kāṇva śākhā. And another is called
mādhyandina śākhā. In kāṇva śākhā also the Upaniṣad occurs and mādhyandina śākhā
also this Upaniṣad occurs. Between these two, there are only very minor differences. In
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, one sentence may be extra or a particular word may be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1281

differently used. The differences are only minor. Adi Śaṅkarācārya’s commentary is on the
kāṇva Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and Vidyāraṇya has written on mādhyandina
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Therefore, whenever we say Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
generally we can mix up both because 99 percent is repetition in both, but in certain cases
there are differences. Mātra saṃśarga, this expression occurs only in mādhyandina śākhā
of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Therefore, the 4.3.15 that is given in the footnote occurs in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad but if you refer to your book it will not be there, because
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad we followed is Adi Śaṅkarācārya which is kāṇva śākhā and
therefore, we have to note the other commentary of Vidyāraṇya. Thus, cidābhāsa is also
clearly talked about, cit is also clearly talked about and therefore, ābhāsa-vāda has a sound
foundation.

śloka 8.41
जीवापेतं वाव किल शरीरं म्रियते न सः ।
इत्यत्र न विमोक्षोऽर्थः किन्तु लोकान्तरे गतिः ॥ ८.४१ ॥
jīvāpetaṃ vāva kila śarīraṃ mriyate na saḥ.
ityatra na vimokṣo:'rthaḥ kintu lokāntare gatiḥ (8.41).
Here, another Pūrvapakṣa may come. All these Ācāryas thoroughly analyse and they
remember Śruti vākya occurring in all the Upaniṣads. Vidyāraṇya raises those questions
and answers and indirectly teaches how to raise question and answer. Here, the problem
is in 39th śloka where they talked about the destruction of cidābhāsa when the reflecting
medium perishes or disappears. We said cidābhāsa is perishable [Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa] and
it perishes with the mind, the mind being the reflecting medium. Cidābhāsa is the name of
Jīva because we talk about Jīva only whether Jīva is avacchina caitanya or pratibimbita
caitanya., whether it is enclosed consciousness or the reflected consciousness. We have
taken it as the reflected consciousness and not enclosed consciousness given by the
avaccheda-vādī. Once you say cidābhāsa is perishable since cidābhāsa is the definition of
Jīva, it will mean Jīva is perishable. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī says in 39th śloka, backed by
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad that Jīva is said to be perishable, but in Chāndogya Upaniṣad in
the 6th Brāhmaṇa refer to mantra 6.11.3 where the Upaniṣad gives the example of a tree.
When you cut the branch of the tree, only branch perishes, but the tree survives and you
cut the second branch, that branch goes away but the tree continues. By cutting a few

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1282

branches, the tree does not perish. Extending this, the Upaniṣad says even if you cut the
branch, trunk, etc., only the physical tree will perish, but the Jīva within the tree will not
perish. Therefore, it makes the statement jīvāpetaṃ vāva kila śarīraṃ mriyate na saḥ,
when you say that the tree perishes, it only means that the tree’s physical body, perishes
but the Jīva does not perish. Similarly, when you say a person dies, the person’s physical
body alone dies and the Jīva does not die. Rāma dies means Rāma’s body dies and the
Rāma Jīva survives. Thus, in that tree example the Upaniṣad says Jīva will never die and
whenever you talk of the death of Jīva, you only talk about the physical body alone while
the Jīva itself survives; not only Jīva survives but it travels also and it takes another body
and the Upaniṣad says Jīva never dies. The physical body dies but the Jīva never dies. This
is the Śruti vākya in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa says Jīva perishes. Is it not
a contradiction? Tell me whether Jīva perishes or not?
Vidyāraṇya says both statements are correct. We can explain it in two different ways. One
is during the sṛṣṭi time Jīva does not perish even though the physical body repeatedly dies
and newer and newer bodies are born; only the bodies will perish and jīvas do not die
during the presence of creation and that is said in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Jīva does not
perish means throughout the sṛṣṭi Jīva does not perish and it will travel from body to
body. That is one explanation. Or it will continue to exist throughout the sṛṣṭi and only in
pralaya Jīva will resolve. That is said in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Or the second explanation
is that even during pralaya Jīva will continue; throughout the sṛṣṭi Jīva will be there and
during pralaya also Jīva will be there and only during videha mukti Jīva will perish.
Therefore, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad talks about the destruction of Jīva during videha-
mukti and Chāndogya Upaniṣad talks of the immortality of Jīva until videha-mukti. It is
immortal because even after death Jīva continues and even during pralaya Jīva continues.
During many sṛṣṭis and many pralayas Jīva continues and therefore, Jīva is immortal.
Therefore, there is no contradiction. Leaving out Jīva or excluding the Jīva, the body alone
perishes. Jīva is immortal. It is not quoting Chāndogya vākya but paraphrases Chāndogya
vākya. In this particular context, vimokṣaḥ na arthaḥ; it does not talk about Absolute
immortality of the Jīva. It talks about the relative immortality of Jīva up to videha-mukti.
Therefore, āpekṣika nityatva is talked about and not absolute nityatva; however, the
original consciousness is not relatively immortal but it is absolutely immortal and even
during videha-mukti, cit will continue and that cidābhāsa will not continue in videha-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1283

mukti. On the other hand, it only talks about the relative survival and also travelling into
other lokas. Relative immortality and travel in various other lokas alone are talked about.
Therefore, the original consciousness is absolutely immortal and the reflected
consciousness is relatively immortal. The reflected consciousness will continue during
trillions of cycles of creation and the reflected consciousness will end only during the
rarest of the moment and that moment is videha-mukti-kale eva.

śloka 8.42
नाहं ब्रह्मेति बुध्येत स विनाशीति चेन्न तत्।
सामानाधिकरण्यस्य बाधायामपि सम्भवात्॥ ८.४२ ॥
nāhaṃ brahmeti budhyeta sa vināśīti cenna tat.
sāmānādhikaraṇyasya bādhāyāmapi sambhavāt (8.42).
With the 41st śloka, Vidyāraṇya has clearly established the existence of the reflected
consciousness and also the support of Śruti pramāṇa. Now, he introduces another
technical Pūrvapakṣa and enters into another technical topic. His intellect never gets tired
though it is intellectually tiring to talk to Pūrvapakṣa and also answer them so easily.
Avaccheda-vādī Pūrvapakṣī says you have a problem. He says once you say that there is
cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa is the Jīva, and that cidābhāsa Jīva alone is the meaning of aham
or I, or tvam you, etc., then mahā-vākya you will never be able to explain properly. Ahaṃ
brahma asmi you will never be able to say because the word aham refers to cidābhāsa
which is mithyā. Brahman refers to the cit, original consciousness; sad eva saumya idam
agra āsīt, it is satya caitanya. How can aham the mithyā cidābhāsa and Brahman which is
satya caitanya be equated? Jīva can only say that I am mithyā. That Brahman alone is
satya. You should say That original consciousness is satya and I am only mithyā
cidābhāsa. You can never talk about aikya-sāmānādhikaraṇya. How will you explain the
mahāvākya? You are in trouble. It is said by avaccheda-vādī and not any other
Pūrvapakṣī. Vidyāraṇya without any disturbance says I can explain mahā-vākya with no
problem at all.
The Jīva who looks at himself as mithyā Jīva can never claim I am Brahman or ahaṃ
brahma asmi. He will not know and he cannot know and if he says that it will be a
mistake; how can mithyā and satya ever be equated? Ordinary Jīva cannot comprehend
that I am Brahman because I am cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa is vināśī and it is perishable

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1284

whereas Brahman is imperishable. How can I the perishable Jīva claim that I am the
imperishable Brahman? At the time of videha-mukti I the Jīva will not be there. How can I
claim that I am Brahman? Both these sentences must be in inverted commas. If such a
Pūrvapakṣa is raised tat na, that objection does not stand enquiry. It is not correct because
mahā-vakya-sāmānādhikaraṇya, a technical word used; for mahāvākya like tat tvam asi,
ahaṃ brahma asmi, etc, this sāmānādhikaraṇya can be explained in two different ways.
One method of explantion is called aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya and another method is
called bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya. Both ways it can be interpreted. In this particular
case, your objection can be answered by employing the method of bādha samādhikaranya
interpretation. Here also, there is a possibility sāmānādhikaraṇyasya bādhāyām, all these
technical details come because language or words always have different meanings
according to the context. Therefore, the meanings of the words are always fluid. Not only
in śāstra, but also in common communication we don’t generally think and analyse the
word-meaning thoroughly but we take the meaning appropriately in the context and take
to communication without thinking; how we don’t think but we understand
appropriately? Vaguely we understand correctly. I will give you a typical example. When
there is a pot; the pot a person drops down. The pot being fragile, it is destroyed. Pot
perishes. I use the expression pot is destroyed. When I say pot is destroyed do I include
the clay in the word pot? If you analyse I can never include the clay because clay has not
been destroyed because it is very visible and still I say pot is destroyed. Here. I am using
the word pot in which only the nāma-rūpa part is included and I am comfortably
excluding the clay part because the verb destroyed is applicable only to the nāma-rūpa
part and not the clay part. Therefore, when I say pot is destroyed I am excluding the
content clay from the word pot. You understand without thinking into those details.
Suppose I say pot weighs one kg., when I am talking about one kg as the weight of pot,
there in the word pot, the content clay is included or not? The content clay is included. If
you exclude the clay, pot will not have any weight. When you say pot weighs one kg, the
word pot includes the content clay. When you say pot is destroyed it excludes the content.
And clay is satya. Therefore, words are used including the content satya and sometimes
words are used excluding the content satya. In all our conversations, words are loosely
used, sometimes content is included and sometimes excluded.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1285

In Vedānta too, cidābhāsa or Jīva the word can also be used in twofold ways as above.
Cidābhāsa can include cit which is the content and the essence of cidābhāsa, because the
very is-ness of cidābhāsa is borrowed from cit, which is very much behind or in and
through cidābhāsa just as the clay is very much in and through the pot. Since cidābhāsa is
always with cit, I can use the cidābhāsa with cit or without cit. If I use the word with cit,
mahāvākya must be interpreted in one way; if you use the word cidābhāsa excluding the
cit, mahāvākya will have to be interpreted in another way. The word Jīva also can be used
as cidābhāsa excluding the cit or the word Jīva can be used for cidābhāsa including the cit.
If you include aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya and if you exclude bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya this
is going to be the explanation given by Vidyāraṇya; details we will see in the next class.

Class 245
śloka 8. 42 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses the ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā which is one of the methods used in
defining Jīva and Īśvara and according to this prakriyā, Jīva is defined as cidābhāsa, the
reflected consciousness, obtaining in an individual reflecting medium and Īśvara is
another cidābhāsa the reflected consciousness obtaining in macro reflecting medium.
Thus, both Jīva and Īśvara are defined as reflections. Various aspects of ābhāsa-vāda are
discussed and lastly he established there is Śruti pramāṇa in support of ābhāsa-vāda,
especially Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya is there which clearly talks about a temporary
consciousness other than the permanent consciousness. This temporary consciousness can
refer to ābhāsa which rises along with the reflecting medium and which will certainly
resolve along with the reflecting medium; during sṛṣṭi when the antahkāraṇas are created,
along with the creation of the mind, cidābhāsa also will emerge at the time of pralaya; the
cidābhāsa also will resolve. Thus, there is temporary consciousness other than the
permanent consciousness which has been talked about in the Upaniṣad. This temporary
cidābhāsa alone we call as Jīva. This much was established by Vidyāraṇya and when he
was very happy he has established the ābhāsa-vāda, Pūrvapakṣī comes with a technical
question. According to you, Jīva is equal to anitya cidābhāsa and this Jīva is referred to
everyone as aham. Thus, the meaning of the word aham is equal to Jīva is equal to anitya
cidābhāsa which you have elaborately established with Śruti pramāṇa. If this is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1286

definition of Jīva, how do you explain the mahāvākya ahaṃ brahma asmi where Brahman
is defined as nitya caitanya? And ahaṃ brahma asmi means it is an equation obtaining
between anitya cidābhāsa and nitya caitanya; how you can ever equate anitya cidābhāsa
and nitya brahma-caitanya? Therefore, according to this ahaṃ brahma asmi most
important mahā-vākya will be inexplicable. How are you going to sort out this issue? This
is the question raised by Pūrvapakṣī. This, I introduced in the last class.
Pūrvapakṣī says saḥ vināśī the Jīva who is equal to anitya cidābhāsa-rūpa Jīva is
perishable. That anitya cidābhāsa cannot claim to be nitya Brahman. In this manner
mahāvākya cannot work for this anitya cidābhāsa-rūpa Jīva. If such a Pūrvapakṣa is raised
na tad, that Pūrvapakṣa does not stand enquiry; I can explain this. Hereafter, a technical
explanation will come. In the last class, I pointed out the word Jīva can be used in two
different meanings according to the context. This is not only with regard to the Jīva and
any word can have two meanings according to the context. This you should remember.
The word pot can refer to the nāma-rūpa part of the pot in certain context and in certain
other context it can refer to the nāma-rūpa along with the content clay. Thus, a word can
reveal an object including its content or a word can reveal an object excluding the content.
Content inclusive object or content exlcusive object, a word can reveal according to the
context. Whenever I am talking about the creation or destruction of the pot, there the word
pot refers to the object excluding the clay. Clay is already there; when someone is creating
a pot, he is going to create a nāma-rūpa or nāma-rūpa including clay. He cannot create
clay because it is already there; keeping the clay whenever I talk about the production,
production refers to the nāma and rūpa never it can refer to the content. In fact, any
production you talk about it can be nāma-rūpa only because matter can never be produced
or destroyed. Therefore, in any language whenever you talk about creation and
destruction you are never referring to the content because the content is eternally there.
Matter is eternal. You need not go that much. Take the clay whenever you talk about
nāma-rūpa. Similarly, when I say pot is destroyed, pot refers to the nāma-rūpa; whenever
I drop the pot, clay can never be destroyed. The same amount of clay exists in the form of
pieces, or pot shreds what they call the pieces; therefore, pot is destroyed means nāma-
rūpa excluding the content. Say the pot weighs one kg. Any weight you refer to, the pot
should include the content which in this case is clay. Minus content the weight of the pot is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1287

zero. Therefore, we all have the habit of using a word to reveal an object including the
content or excluding the content.
If this is understood, Jīva the cidābhāsa, aham the Jīva, can be used including the cit or
excluding the cit. Thus, Jīva has two meanings, one is kevala cidābhāsa or cit-sahita,
kūṭastha-sahita, śākṣī-sahita cidābhāsa and I will call it a mixture. Thus, Jīva is equal to
cidābhāsa or is equal to mixture, that is cidābhāsa plus cit mixture. Depending upon the
meaning given, the mahāvākya should be interpreted appropriately. If I is equal to Jīva or
equal to mixture of cit and cidābhāsa then ahaṃ brahma asmi is aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya.
I arrive at aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya. If I is equal to Jīva and Jīva is equal to mixture with
Brahman, what is the relationship? If you take mixture as lakṣaṇā you remove cidābhāsa
part, it is bhāga-tyaga-lakṣaṇā, exclude the cidābhāsa part there will be cit alone left and
cit and Brahman are identical. This is called lakṣaṇā, aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya between
Jīva and Brahman. I have to go to the next one. Therefore, I hope you understand. Suppose
I is equal to Jīva and equal to cidābhāsa only, don’t take the mixture is equal to Brahman
when Brahman is equated; cidābhāsa and Brahman can never have identity and since
cidābhāsa, otherwise called ahaṅkāra, which is mithyā, and Brahman can never be equal.
Ahaṃ brahma asmi should be understood as bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya then, which
means what you have mistaken as the cidābhāsa is really speaking nothing but original cit
alone which is now appearing as cidābhāsa. Thus, the existence which you had given to
cidābhāsa is taken from cidābhāsa and it is handed over to cit and cit alone really exists
and cidābhāsa is only a vyāvahārika appearance of the original cit. This is called bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya. Aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya Vidyāraṇya has talked about in the
beginning of the 7th chapter from śloka number 9 to 13 if Jīva is taken as a mixture, in this
portion he is going to talk about bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya if Jīva is taken as kevala
cidābhāsa or ahaṅkāra. The following ślokas are technical analysis of mahāvākya as bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya. He will explain what is bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya and how that
should be understood by us. It is a highly technical topic. He says sāmānādhikaraṇyasya.
The mahāvākya which has sāmānādhikaraṇya relationship, sambhavāt can be interpreted
as bādhāyām also. Bādhāyām means on the displacement, sāmānādhikaraṇya. Aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya identity meaning, bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya means displacement
meaning. What is displaced by what? Mithyā is displaced by satya. Mithyā cidābhāsa is
displaced by satya cit. Mithyā cidābhāsa is displaced means mithyā cidābhāsa is falsified

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1288

and in its place satya cit is claimed. This is the meaning. This will be elaborated. This is
called saṅkṣepa vākya vākya. He is not going to elaborate the word sāmānādhikaraṇya
which he takes for granted. These are known things. I don’t want to take it for granted. I
will briefly explain sāmānādhikaraṇya though I have discussed this before.
Sāmānādhikaraṇya is the name of the relationship obtaining among two or more words. It
is not a relationship with people. This we know very much. It is relationship obtaining
among two or more words. In one word you cannot talk about relationship. Relationship
always requires two or more words; when the words have different meanings but they
reveal one and the same object, these two conditions are important. They should have
different meanings but should reveal one object; such a relationship obtaining among
more words when they have different meaning but reveal one object it is called
sāmānādhikaraṇya. Suppose there are two or more words they reveal different meaning
and also different objects then the relationship is called vaiyadhikaraṇya. In
sāmānādhikaraṇya also many words are there, in vaiyadhikaraṇya also many words are
there. In sāmānādhikaraṇya also words have different meaning and in vaiyadhikaraṇya
also different words have different meanings. Although both are same in
sāmānādhikaraṇya many words will reveal many meanings and one object, but in
vaiyadhikaraṇya many words reveal many meanings and many objects. All our sahasra-
nāma-stotras are ideal examples for aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya. There are many words with
many meanings but all refer to one object! Each word has a different meaning. That is why
Adi Śaṅkarācārya could write a bhāṣya on Viśṇu-sahasranāma. Here, even though
thousand words have thousand meanings, they all reveal one Viśṇu alone. A typical
example is Gītā-dhyāna-śloka prapanna-pārijātāya totra-vaitraka-pāṇaye, jñānamudrāya
kṛṣṇāya gītāmṛta-duhe [namaḥ], five words are there and those have five different
meanings, but all of them refer to Lord Kṛṣṇa.
Suppose I say namaḥ sūryāya somāya maṅgalāya buddhāye ca. Namaskāra to sūrya,
soma, maṅgala and buddha, four words are there, all these words have different meanings
and reveal different deity also. Sūrya means the sun who activates everyone, soma means
moon, maṅgala mars and buddha mercury; the words are different, meanings are different
and objects are also different. Soma refers to soma deva; they are luminaries but they all
are different. Here, the words have vaiyadhikaraṇya. The word adhikāraṇa refers to the
objects. Samāna adhikāraṇa means one object and vaiyadhikāraṇa means different objects.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1289

Samānam adhikāraṇam yeṣāṃ te śabdāḥ. Samāna adhikāraṇa means one object; vilakṣaṇa
adhikāraṇa means distinct objects. We have several sāmānādhikaraṇya vākyas such as
satyam jñānam anantam brahma; applying the principle, mahāvākya is also called a
sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya. Here, tvam and tat, two words are there. The meanings are also
different, one Jīva caitanya and another is Paramātmā caitanya, but ultimately they refer to
one caitanya alone. Therefore, it is called sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya. Now, the problem
here is in this sāmānādhikaraṇya mahāvākya how can Jīva and Brahman refer to one and
the same object because Jīva refers to mithyā cidābhāsa and Brahman refers to satya cit!
How can both of them refer to one and the same object or an entity? How can mithyā and
satya reveal one and the same object? It is the question for which Vidyāraṇya says the
answer has been already given by my great great great Guru Sūreśvarācārya in his
Naiṣkarmya-siddhi. This question has been answered and so my job is simple. I have only
to do a search. And look for appropriate Naiṣkarmya-siddhi śloka and for those Ācāryas
what is Google? Their own brain is the greatest Google because all these are in their head;
therefore, he is going to quote Sūreśvarācārya and answer this question.

śloka 8.43
योऽयं स्थाणुः पुमानेष पुंधिया स्थाणुधीरिव ।
ब्रह्मास्मीति धिया शेषा ह्यहं बुद्धिर्निवर्तते ॥ ८.४३ ॥
yo:'yaṃ sthāṇuḥ pumāneṣa puṃdhiyā sthāṇudhīriva.
brahmāsmīti dhiyā śeṣā hyahaṃ buddhirnivartate (8.43).
This mahāvākya having bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya is discussed by Sūreśvarācārya by
giving a well-known example and that śloka occurs in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi written by
Sūreśvarācārya himself. The reference number is given in the footnote 2.29 śloka which
means we have already seen. Here, what is the example? There was a person standing in
semi-darkness. Normally we give rope-snake example. Here, it is another example. From a
slight distance another person saw this person who was standing without movement.
Therefore, he mistook the other one as stump of a tree. Tree is sthāvara, it does not move.
Sthāṇu is mistaken for a person and the observer refers this to a friend. There is a stump of
a tree. Whereas this person who has a clear vision he knows he is not the stump of a tree
on the other hand it is a person. First he uses the word sthāṇu quoting the mistake of the
observer. The mistake is this is a stump and he says the stump is a man. Stump is real or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1290

unreal? Stump is unreal whereas the man is real. Now, here, there is a sāmānādhikaraṇya
between the unreal stump and the real man. When such a statement is made, what is the
intention of the seeker? He does not want to equate unreal stump and real man but he
wants to say that what you see as the stump does not really exist, the existence you give to
the stump should be taken away and it should be handed over to the man. Therefore,
what is the meaning of the sāmānādhikaraṇya? Plucking is the existence associated with
the unreal and handing over to the real. The moment you transfer the existence so, the
stump will get falsified or dismissed. And having displaced the stump in that place, the
seeker is reinstalling the man. This is called displacement sāmānādhikaraṇya. First, we
will understand the example.
The stump of the tree that you see is a man. Superficially seeing, it appears as though it is
equating the stump and the man, which equation cannot exist because one is unreal and
the other is real. Equation in this case is not possible. The aim here is not equation. The
aim is displacing the stump by the man. In fact, we should not say so. It is displacing the
stump-notion by the man-knowledge. There is no question of displacing the stump by the
man. All these are happening not outside but they are happening inside the mind. The
psychological process is that the stump-notion is displaced by the man-knowledge.
Similarly, when I say I am Brahman, that I, the cidābhāsa-notion is displaced by the
Brahman- or cit-knowledge. In this process, cidābhāsa is falsified. When cidābhāsa is
falsified, all the saṃsāra associated with cidābhāsa is also falsified. First, directly
associated with the mind is one relationship; through the mind it is related to the body;
through the body, it is related to the mother and father; through mother and father, hoard
of other relations arise. Cidābhāsa has sambandha to the mind, body, family and therefore,
there is worry. All the time, the mind is preoccupied with one relation or the other,
whereas cit does not have any sambandha. I the cidābhāsa is replaced by the cit. This is
going to be said here. The stump notion is stumped. Cidābhāsa is stumped by the Guru
and cidābhāsa is out. Stump-notion is displaced by the man-knowledge. Up to this is
example.
From eva onwards we come to the dārṣṭānta. In the same manner, aham-buddhi
nivartyate. I the Jīva, the cidābhāsa, the ahaṅkāra is displaced. In this context, we don’t
take Jīva as a mixture. If we take it as mixture, we will go to aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya.
Therefore, Jīva is equal to ahaṅkāra cidābhāsa. That aham-buddhi, that ahaṅkāra-notion,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1291

nivartyate; it is displaced brahma asmi iti dhiyā, by the Brahman knowledge or cit
knowledge. So the ahaṅkāra goes. Therefore, in that cit Brahman aham is also false; aham
the first person is false and by extension, tvam the second person is also found to be false
and so too, the third person is false; first person is finite because it is different from the
second and third; for the same reason, the second person is also finite and third person is
also finite. All the three are eliminated; there is only one Brahman in which tripuṭī is not
there; first person, second person and third person all these are absent; am is absent, are is
absent; is is absent. Am is existence connected with first person; are is the existence
connected with the second person; and is is the existence connected with the third person;
all these three persons and also the three localized existences are eliminated; there is one
unlocalised existence alone; it is neither the first person nor the second person, nor the
third person; you cannot use the verb am, you cannot use the verb are and you cannot use
the verb is. Therefore, Brahman alone exists. That your Brahman I is an appearance, are is
an appearance and finally is is an appearance. That will be the approach. Brahma asmi iti
dhiyā, through that knowledge, that nivṛtti alone is called the negation, elimination,
displacement or falsification.

śloka 8.44
नैष्कर्म्यसिद्धावप्येवमाचार्यैः स्पष्टमीरितम्।
सामानाधिकरण्यस्य बाधार्थत्वं ततोऽस्तु तत्॥ ८.४४ ॥
naiṣkarmyasiddhāvapyevamācāryaiḥ spaṣṭamīritam.
sāmānādhikaraṇyasya bādhārthatvaṃ tato:'stu tat (8.44).
The entire śloka is within the quotation because it is not the śloka written by Vidyāraṇya
but he has bodily lifted it from Naiṣkarmyasiddhi. Thus, in this manner, bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya has been clearly mentioned in the śloka 2.29. If you take Jīva as
cidābhāsa excluding cit, then mahāvākya will be bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Or if you use
the word I in the meaning of ahaṅkāra excluding the śākṣī, then ‘ahaṃ brahma asmi'
should be interpreted as displacement of ahaṅkāra or falsification of ahaṅkāra by bringing
the caitanya Brahman. Therefore, he says sāmānādhikaraṇyasya tad bādhārthatvaṃ astu,
let us take only that displacement meaning and let us not take the identity meaning in this
context. Tad should go with bādhārthatvaṃ. Tad is a pronoun referring to
Sūreśvarācārya’s bādhārthatvaṃ. Let us take here also.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1292

śloka 8.45
सर्वं ब्रह्मेति जगता सामानाधिकरण्यवत्।
अहं ब्रह्मेति जीवेन सामानाधिकृ तिर्भवेत्॥ ८.४५ ॥
sarvaṃ brahmeti jagatā sāmānādhikaraṇyavat.
ahaṃ brahmeti jīvena sāmānādhikṛtirbhavet (8.45).
Vidyāraṇya says that this bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya interpretation is not a new approach
as we have already applied in some other context. Therefore, it is not unknown and it is
not a new field but it is something already used by us whenever the Upaniṣad says the
entire universe is Brahman. This is also a sāmānādhikaraṇya of the two words in sarvam
khalu idam brahma. For sāmānādhikaraṇya the Sanskrit definition given is bhinna-
pravṛtti-nimittānām samāna-vibhaktikānām padānām ekasmin arthe tātparyam
sāmānādhikaraṇyam. bhinna-pravṛtti-nimittānām refers to different meaning and
samāna-vibhaktikānām words having the same case in the Sanskrit language— that is
why different cases we come across in Sanskrit language—padānām means having more
than two words; ekasmin arthe when they refer to one and the same object with more
words, more meaning but one object. He says sarvam khalu idam brahma. It is also a
sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya where sarvam refers to the world. A similar statement occurs in
Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad also:
brahmaivedamamṛtaṃ purastādbrahma paścādbrahma dakṣiṇataścottareṇa;
adhaścordhvaṃ ca prasṛtaṃ brahmaivedaṃ viśvamidaṃ variṣṭham. (2.2.12).
When you equate sarvam and Brahman we are facing the same problem. The problem is
jagat is mithyā because we say Brahma satyam jagan mithyā. And Upaniṣad says the
entire mithyā universe is Brahman. Now, we are in trouble. If the entire mithyā universe is
Brahman, Brahman also will become mithyā. Or satya Brahman is the entire universe, the
universe will become satya. Either both will become satya or both will become mithyā.
How can you ever equate mithyā universe with satya Brahman? How are we to solve this
technical problem? In mūla, classes we carefully avoid those corners. There is a problem
and we say it is not an equation; it is not aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya; but it is bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya. What you see as universe [like the stump of the tree] is really speaking
not the universe; it is Brahman alone. In that statement, the world is not equated, but
world is displaced. The world gets displaced and therefore, sarvam Brahmamayam is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1293

what bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya is. If bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya can be used for sarvam
khalvidam brahma, we can use the same sāmānādhikaraṇya for jivo brahmaiva nāpara
also.
sarvaṃ brahma iti vakye, in this statement everything is Brahman, Brahman has
displacement-sāmānādhikaraṇya relationship with jagat, that is with the world. It is not
‘identity-sāmānādhikaraṇya’ relationship but displacement-sāmānādhikaraṇya
relationship. It is because after the vākya, the world is negated. Śaṅkarācārya calls it as
bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. It is the negation of the whole universe including ahaṅkāra. It is
the negation of the first, second and third person and thus, sāmānādhikaraṇya bhavati. Its
exactly like that, Vidyāraṇya gives it as an example. It is accepted by all the people. In the
same way, it happens ahaṃ brahma iti vakye. In the statement ahaṃ brahma asmi, most
important thing is the word aham which refers to ahaṅkāra or cidābhāsa; you should not
include the śākṣī in the ahaṅkāra, else then the baby will be thrown with the bath water.
The context is Jīva is equal to ahaṅkāra. Therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi iti vakye. In that
vākya, Brahman has bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya relationship with Jīva, which means
ahaṅkāra or cidābhāsa. Therefore, Jīva can be taken as cidābhāsa, no problem; if Jīva is
equal to cidābhāsa, Jīva is mithyā you can happily say. Similarly, if someone asks am I
satya or mithyā, we should say if you mean cidābhāsa you are mithyā only. I am nobody.
But if you include the cit, you should not throw away the whole thing. I am satya with the
cidābhāsa mithyā coat. More in the next class.

Class 246
śloka 8.45 contd.
Vidyāraṇya analyses how mahāvākya should be interpreted according to ābhāsa-vāda. In
this vāda, the interpretation will depend upon the meaning of the word aham in the
mahāvākya; it refers to ahaṃ brahma asmi. The direct meaning of the word aham is Jīva.
Therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi refers to Jīvo brahma asti. What is the meaning of the word
Jīva? We do some word hair-splitting: if we take Jīva from the common or lay person’s
angle, it can refer to only cidābhāsa or ahaṅkāra. It cannot include the śākṣī, the original
consciousness, because the lay person does not even know that there is śākṣī original
consciousness behind the cidābhāsa ahaṅkāra. Therefore, in lay parlance, I is equal to Jīva

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1294

is equal to cidābhāsa is equal to ahaṅkāra; thus, the meaning of the word aham will be
ahaṅkāra, mithyā ahaṅkāra in which the śākṣī is not included because he does not know
that there is the śākṣī behind. Therefore, kevala ahaṅkāra or kevala cidābhāsa will be the
meaning of the word aham or Jīva. When such a meaning is taken, ahaṃ brahma asmi will
means ahaṅkāra is Brahman, or cidābhāsa is Brahman will be the meaning of ahaṃ
brahma asmi. From laukika-dṛṣṭi aham is equal to Jīva is equal to cidābhāsa is equal to
ahaṅkāra which is equal to mithyā. Pūrvapakṣī asks how can ahaṅkāra and satya Brahman
ever be equated through ahaṃ brahma asmi mahāvākya? It is the question of Pūrvapakṣī.
For this, Vidyāraṇya gives the answer. Mahāvākya should not be understood as an
equation mahāvākya. In this context, it is not an equation for equation is not possible
between mithyā ahaṅkāra and satya Brahman. It is not equation sāmānādhikaraṇya, it is
not aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya. What you have to do is changing, which we saw in the last
class. It is displacement sāmānādhikaraṇya, otherwise called bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya;
that should be taken and we give the example of someone revealing the fact that the snake
is a rope. When a person reveals snake as a rope, it does not mean the false snake and real
rope are identical; identity is not conveyed; then what you are seeing as snake, the so-
called snake, is really speaking nothing but a rope. Snake is nothing but rope, when this
statement is said, I convey that there is no snake at all in reality. Snake is dismissed as false
and in the place of the dismissed false snake, I am installing the rope and therefore, in the
statement the is-ness which was previously attributed to the snake is plucked from the
snake and it is given to the rope which alone really exists. Therefore, existence-
transference is accomplished through bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Therefore, when
somebody says ahaṅkāra is Brahman, it means what you think as ahaṅkāra really is not
there at all; ahaṅkāra is mithyā ahaṅkāra, a myth; ahaṅkāra means cidābhāsa and
cidābhāsa is mithyā and myth and it does not have existence of its own. When I say
ahaṅkāra is Brahman, the is-ness is taken from ahaṅkāra and given to Brahman which
finally means Brahman alone exists; ahaṅkāra does not exist at all. This one existence of
Brahman alone is falsely transferred to ahaṅkāra and the Brahman’s existence when it is
associated with false first person, the existence gets the name ‘am’. The amness of
ahaṅkāra is nothing but existence borrowed from Brahman. When I say you are Brahman,
there also the word you means ahaṅkāra and are refers to existence and in the statement
you are Brahman I am taking the existence from you the ahaṅkāra and again handing it

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1295

over to Brahman. Brahman’s existence appearing in the second person is called ‘are’. In the
first person when it joins existence, it appears as ‘am’; when the same existence joins the
second person ‘you’ it appears as ‘are’ and when the very same existence joins the third
person he is then I say there the third person also not really existent. Therefore, it is again
joined to Brahman and in Brahman existence, am is not there, are is not there and is is also
not there, because Brahman is without division of first person, second person and third
person. In Brahman ‘three person’ division is not there. That alone Ramaṇa Maharṣi says
in
tadyuṣmadorasmadi sampratiṣṭhā tasmin vinaṣṭe:'smadi mūlabodhāt;
tadyuṣmadasmanmativarjitaikā sthitirjvalantī sahajātmanaḥ syāt (16)
‘That’ and ‘thou’ are based firmly in ‘I’; from the knowledge of their origin when that ‘I’
has perished, the one without the notion of ‘that’, ‘thou’ and ‘I’, that natural state of
oneself that is shining will emerge. Initially, first, second and third persons are due to
ahaṅkāra. They come to existence because of the person’s ahaṅkāra which rises in jāgrat-
avasthā but in suṣupti-avasthā when the first person ahaṅkāra is dissolved, there is neither
second nor third person and therefore, negate all the three and what is left behind is
tadyuṣmadasmanmativarjitaikā sthitiḥ. Brahman alone exists, that existence alone appears
in the world as either ‘am existence’ or ‘are existence’ or ‘is existence’ and the existence
does not belong first, second or third person, for all the three are limited by the other two.
Therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi is ahaṅkāra-displacing sāmānādhikaraṇya vākya.
Therefore, he says sarvaṃ brahma iti vakye. In the statement sarvaṃ brahma which
occurs in Chāndogya Upaniṣad sarvam khalu idam brahma or it occurs in Muṇḍaka
Upaniṣad 2.2. Last śloka brahmaivedamamṛtaṃ purastāt, etc, in several statements, the
world and Brahman are put in sāmānādhikaraṇya. In that statement, jagatā saha along
with jagat and jagat stands for second person and third person. The whole world is either
second person, which I address as you or third person which I address as he, she or if it is
inert, it. Bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya is given by which the world is displaced as non-
existent and that existence is handed over to Brahman alone. In the same way, ahaṃ
brahma asmi vakye [occurs in 3.14.1 and 1.4.10 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad]. Here, the
word Jīva should be understood as cidābhāsa or ahaṅkāra. Cidābhāsa is dismissed and in
its place cit, Brahman is installed. Both are bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. How are we
experiencing Brahman? Whenever we experience the existence of anything, it is an

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1296

experience of Brahman because the existence does not belong to first person, second
person or third person also. Whenever you say anything exists, that existence belongs to
Brahman. First person is asat, second person is asat and third person is also asat, but
borrowing existence from Brahman all the three appear as satya, which is called mithyā.
Up to this we saw in the last class.

śloka 8.46
सामानाधिकरण्यस्य बाधार्थत्वं निराकृ तम्।
प्रयत्नतो विवरणे कू टस्थत्वविवक्षया ॥ ८.४६ ॥
sāmānādhikaraṇyasya bādhārthatvaṃ nirākṛtam.
prayatnato vivaraṇe kūṭasthatvavivakṣayā (8.46).
Vidyāraṇya introduces a problem. He says there is a book called Pañcapādikā Vivaraṇa. It
is a book written by Padmapādācārya who is a direct disciple of Adi Śaṅkarācārya. Adi
Śaṅkarācārya wrote Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya. That bhāṣya itself is so profound that several
sub-commentaries have been written on them. Upon the Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya of Adi
Śaṅkarācārya, several people have written commentaries. Padmapādācārya also wrote a
commentary on the bhāṣya and his work is called Pañcapādikā Brahma-sūtra has 16 padas
or 16 sections and he could not complete the commentary as he could write commentary
on 5 padas; even that also is not totally available. His commentary is called Pañcapādikā.
Upon the Pañcapādikā of Padmapādācārya, another Ācārya wrote a commentary which is
called Pañcapādikā Vivaraṇa. It is considered to be a very profound text which created a
tradition called Vivaraṇa mata. It is written by a great Ācārya called Prakāśātmā muni. In
that Vivaraṇa text, he writes something; the Pūrvapakṣī refers to that. Vivaraṇakāra, while
analyzing the mahāvākya, he talks about sāmānādhikaraṇya and he says the
sāmānādhikaraṇya should be taken as aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya only and you should not
take it as bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Vidyāraṇya quoted Sūreśvarācārya and till now
established mahāvākya is bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Thus, Sūreśvarācārya says bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya and Vivaraṇakāra Prakāśātmā says aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya; both
belong to Adi Śaṅkarācārya tradition, why there is sibling rivalry and which one is
correct? Vidyāraṇya raises a question: which one is correct? Both belong to our family.
They are all Advaita Ācārya. Why this confusion?

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1297

For that, Vidyāraṇya gives the answer that both of them are equally correct and it depends
upon the definition of Jīva that you take; if you take Jīva as a mixture of ahaṅkāra and
śākṣī together, we have to take on aikya meaning and if you take according to lay person’s
angle, Jīva refers to ahaṅkāra alone for he does not know there is śākṣī. From śāstric angle,
Jīva is not mere ahaṅkāra because ahaṅkāra is being mithyā it will always be associated
with satya śākṣī. The interpretation depends upon whether Jīva is kevala ahaṅkāra or Jīva
is taken as śākṣi-sahita ahaṅkāra. If Jīva is kevala ahaṅkāra what is the
sāmānādhikaraṇya? If you answer this question the whole discussion is here. If Jīva is
kevala ahaṅkāra the sāmānādhikaraṇya has to be bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya; because Jīva
will have to be dismissed, ahaṅkāra has to be dismissed and falsified; therefore, we will
take bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Therefore, Sūreśvarācārya has taken Jīva as kevala
cidābhāsa, kevala ahaṅkāra in keeping with the lay people’s angle because when a lay
person says I he only refers to the localized consciousness which means cidābhāsa only.
He does not know there is an all-pervading consciousness, which is the surviving
consciousness, not accessible because of the absence of the body medium; consciousness is
not a part, product, or property of the body; it is an independent entity which pervades
and enlivens the body; it is not limited by the boundaries of the body; it continues to exist
even after the fall of the body, etc.
Therefore, from the śāstric angle, Jīva is invariably a mixture only and once it is a mixture,
Jīva should not be totally displaced by Brahman. If Jīva is mixture of ahaṅkāra and śākṣī,
through sāmānādhikaraṇya the entire Jīva should not be thrown away since it is like
throwing the baby with the bath water; ahaṅkāra may be thrown and śākṣī should not be
thrown away and therefore, we say you don’t apply bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. How
should you interpret then? We say by bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, you retain the śākṣī part and
peel off the ahaṅkāra part or cidābhāsa; don’t throw away the banana totally and don’t eat
the banana totally. Don’t throw away because behind the skin, there is precious banana
and don’t eat totally but peel off the skin. Similarly, Jīva has ahaṅkāra skin and the sweet
śākṣī fruit and by applying bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā you remove the ahaṅkāra cidābhāsa and
what is left behind is śākṣī and that śākṣī and Brahman relate through aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya. The Vivaraṇakāra talks about aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya after peeling
ahaṅkāra from the mixture Jīva. Sūreśvarācārya is taking Jīva as the ahaṅkāra from
layman’s angle. Both of them are correct and if at all there is clarity in thinking, there will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1298

not be confusion. If the clarity is not there, everything will end up in confusion. When
there is clay in front of me, if I say potter is making the pot, there pot refers to only nāma-
rūpa he is making and therefore, in that context pot must mean nāma-rūpa because potter
is making, shaping, only the nāma-rūpa. When I say pot is half a kilo, there you should not
take nāma-rūpa alone, because nāma-rūpa does not have any weight; when I say pot is
half a kilo it is nāma-rūpa along with the clay. We use the word pot very loosely, either we
include the clay or exclude the clay; similarly, Jīva can include the śākṣī or exclude the
śākṣī. Where is the problem? At the time of negation Vivaraṇakāra has taken the meaning
of Jīva not as pure ahaṅkāra, but he has taken the Jīva as śākṣi-mixed ahaṅkāra; therefore,
he does not want to throw away Jīva totally, taking into account the kūṭastha which is
hidden behind the feel of ahaṅkāra and therefore, there is no contradiction. Vidyāraṇya
will explain that in the next few ślokas.

śloka 8.47
शोधितस्त्वं पदार्थो यः कू टस्थो ब्रह्मरूपताम्।
तस्य वक्तुं विवरणे तथोक्तमितरत्र च ॥ ८.४७ ॥
śodhitastvaṃ padārtho yaḥ kūṭastho brahmarūpatām.
tasya vaktuṃ vivaraṇe tathoktamitaratra ca (8.47).
Normally, when bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya is discussed, the author will discuss only that
one and they will not discuss aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya in that context. In some other text,
like Vākyavṛtti aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya is discussed. In that context, they will not discuss
bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Whereas, this portion is unique where Vidyāraṇya presents
both sāmānādhikaraṇyas side by side and he shows that both are ok; it depends upon the
intention of the author and there is no problem at all. The essential idea is that cidābhāsa is
mithyā and cit is satya. This is the teaching; whatever word we use, don’t get confused by
them. Therefore, previously we established bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya and now, in these
ślokas, he shows aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya. The moment you come to aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya, you should change the gear. The Jīva is no more taken as kevala
cidābhāsa and Jīva must be taken as cit-miśrita cidābhāsa and it is a mixture for mithyā
can never exist without satya behind it. Therefore, our argument is kevala cidābhāsa itself
you should not say, because there cannot be kevala cidābhāsa without cit underneath.
Therefore, now Jīva is equal to miśrita. The word I is cidābhāsa plus cit. Once it is a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1299

mixture and you receive the mahāvākya, the mixture should not be taken totally for if you
take the mixture, equation will not fit in, because cidābhāsa of Jīva has negative attributes
as opposed to cidābhāsa of Īśvara who has sarvajñatva, sarveśvaratva, etc. Therefore, in
the mixture, you cannot take both together but you have to peel off the cidābhāsa part,
which is called as bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā; and this process of peeling is called śodhana.
Śodhana means just as before cooking you take all vegetables and remove the chemicals
and dirt on the top of the vegetables, you only remove the skin but you don’t remove the
potato also. That process is called śodhana.
Similarly, the Guru takes jīvas and puts in the heat which we call sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti and the skin called cidābhāsa or the reflected consciousness plus reflecting
medium are peeled off and this process is called śodhana. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
śodhitastvaṃ padārtho yaḥ. Tvam-padārtha Jīva is cleansed by the teacher peeling of the
reflected consciousness and reflecting medium; peeling off ahaṅkāra and after peeling that
what is left behind is yaḥ kūṭasthaḥ. The original consciousness or original cit or the śākṣī
is left behind who is brahmarūpa. That original consciousness has oneness with Brahman
which is totally the original consciousness behind the total creation. The individual
original consciousness behind the individual body is identical with total the original
consciousness behind the total creation. Thus, he can quietly come to aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya taught by Prakāśātmā. It is Brahman identified with kūṭastha.
To reveal oneness of kūṭastha with Brahman it has been said so. Here, what is objected to
is that Vivaraṇakāra says don’t use bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya but use only aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya alone. This has been clarified in many other Vedāntic text books also,
the most famous one is Vākyavṛtti. Here, aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya is talked about in
detail. Of these two, which one is popular if you ask, in majority of the Vedāntic texts,
aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya alone is talked about but in some rare text books bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya is talked about. What is taught in both are same but one should
understand the teaching properly. Vidyāraṇya wants to explain now what is to be peeled
off and what is to be retained.

śloka 48
देहेन्द्रियादियुक्तस्य जीवाभासभ्रमस्य या ।
अधिष्ठानचितिः सैषा कू टस्थात्र विवक्षिता ॥ ८.४८ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1300

dehendriyādiyuktasya jīvābhāsabhramasya yā.

adhiṣṭhānacitiḥ saiṣā kūṭasthātra vivakṣitā (8.48).
There, by laukika-dṛṣṭi, it is bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Once you come to Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi
Jīva is a mixture. Jīva has adhyāsta aṃśa and adhiṣṭhāna aṃśa, vyāvahārika aṃśa and
pāramārthika aṃśa; what is vyāvahārika aṃśa? Deha-indrīya, Jīva-ābhāsa or cidābhāsa is
vyāvahārika aṃśa. Deha is vyāvahārika, indrīya is vyāvahārika, yukta means along with
the body, sense-organs, the mind, intellect and Jīva-ābhāsa; Jīva-ābhāsa should be
understood as cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa is also vyāvahārika satya. Bhrama means delusion
and it is not real existence; bhrama means adhyāsa. All these belong to adhyāsa part and
in our language, reflecting medium and the reflected consciousness all of them are
vyāvahārika components of Jīva. Wherever vyāvahārika is there, there must be
pāramārthika. It is so because of borrowed consciousness, mithyā borrows the existence
from satya which is right underneath not somewhere above. The supporting original
consciousness is the adhiṣṭhāna or ādhāra and ādhāra means the real original
consciousness which is the real component belonging to Jīva itself because in the word Jīva
we include the original consciousness, the real part also. That part component saiṣā, that
component of the mixture Jīva is called by the name kūṭastha in the mahāvākya ahaṃ
brahma asmi. The changeless consciousness is called aham in the mahāvākya.

śloka 8.49
जगद्भ्रमस्य सर्वस्य यदधिष्ठानमीरितम्।
त्रय्यन्तेषु तदत्र स्याद्ब्रह्मशब्दविवक्षितम्॥ ८.४९ ॥
jagadbhramasya sarvasya yadadhiṣṭhānamīritam.
trayyanteṣu tadatra syādbrahmaśabdavivakṣitam (8.49).
When we take the meaning of aham as kūṭastha by bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā then that aham
and Brahman will have aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya. It has already been said in the previous
two ślokas. Then what about sarvaṃ brahma? Sarvam refers to the world is Brahman,
when you say, there also should we use bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya or aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya? If you take the world purely as nāma-rūpa the entire world nāma-
rūpa is mithyā and Brahman is satya and therefore, sāmānādhikaraṇya cannot be aikya
since mithyā and satya cannot be one; therefore, it is displacement sāmānādhikaraṇya;
there is no world at all really and Brahman alone is there. This is popularly taken; suppose

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1301

you take the world not as a pure nāma-rūpa but as a miśra. It is mixture of what? You say
the world is. That means there is existence also which is interpenetrating the world
because of which alone you say world is. Therefore, the world cannot be treated as pure
nāma-rūpa but the world is a mixture of nāma-rūpa and ‘sat’ the existence. In this mixture,
which is real and which is the false component? The nāma-rūpa is false and the is-part is
real and therefore, you should never dismiss the world totally. If you take world sarva is a
mixture then sarvaṃ brahma also cannot be bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya because when you
dismiss the world sat also will go away; therefore, you should say that the world is
Brahman is by aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya and how do you see the aikya? Not directly but
from the world mixture you have to do bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, the nāma-rūpa part alone
you peel off and what will be left out is adhiṣṭhāna sat and that sat is Brahman. Again,
aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya, but generally in the case of the world is Brahman, we take as
bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya; however, we should know that there also, aikya
sāmānādhikaraṇya is possible. How to do that? He says sarvasya jagadbhramasya, of the
vyāvahārika jagat sarvasya. By writing in this manner, he says in the vākya sarvaṃ
brahma, the word sarva refers to bhrama jagat which is mithyā or vyāvahārika jagat and
in that jagat itself yad adhiṣṭhāna there is the adhiṣṭhāna in that world also; because of
which alone the world is. If there is no adhiṣṭhāna, the world will not have existence itself.
The existence which is the adhiṣṭhāna, that adhiṣṭhāna sat which is arrived at by bhāga-
tyāga lakṣaṇa. That is also aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya between the world and Brahman as
talked about. Therefore, tad that sat Brahman, sat adhiṣṭhāna is brahma-śabda-vivakṣitam
is identified with Brahman. That sat existence is brahma-śabda-vivakṣitam, is intended to
be identical with Brahman in the vākya sarvaṃ brahma when you say sat is Brahman.
That Brahman is talked about in all the Upaniṣads.
Veda is called trayī in the ritualistic context. Since Atharvaṇa Veda is not used in ritual, in
ritual context, Veda means the three Vedas. There is another reason also that Veda has
three kandas: karma, upāsana and jñāna kāṇḍa. Kāṇḍa-traya being there, all the four
Vedas put together is called trayī, that endowed with three kandas. Trayī is Vedas and
trayī-anta means Vedānta. In the Upaniṣads that existence alone is called Brahman. Thus,
we have got three options: one is both sarvaṃ brahma, ahaṃ brahman you take as bādha
sāmānādhikaraṇya or both you take as aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya or you can take sarvaṃ

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1302

brahma as bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya and ahaṃ brahman as aikya sāmānādhikaraṇya. It is

too technical and I hope I have communicated to you.

Class 247
śloka 8.49 contd.
Vidyāraṇya points out that the word Jīva can be understood in two-fold ways. From the
worldly lay person’s angle and from the śāstric angle. From the lay person’s angle the
word Jīva can mean only cidābhāsa because he uses the word I only in the meaning of a
localized sentient being; and localized consciousness can refer to only the cidābhāsa. When
he refers to the cidābhāsa, he does not know that behind cidābhāsa there is adhiṣṭhāna
sarvagata caitanya. Therefore, in his vision, Jīva means only cidābhāsa. From Śāstrīya-
dṛṣṭi, from śāstric angle, we know that cidābhāsa can never exist by itself, since cidābhāsa
is anitya it must be supported by the cit, original consciousness, which is all-pervading;
therefore, from śāstric angle, Jīva has to be taken as a mixture of mithyā cidābhāsa and
satya cit. Thus, one and the same word Jīva has two meanings cit-sahita cidābhāsa and cit-
rahita cidābhāsa. Even when I say cit-rahita cidābhāsa, you should not get confused;
cidābhāsa can never be cit-rahita, but the ignorant Jīva does not know and therefore, he
does not include the cit. Cit-rahita cidābhāsa is the kevala cidābhāsa from laukika-dṛṣṭi.
Depending upon the two meanings, mahāvākya will have to be interpreted differently
whether it is tat tvam asi mahāvākya or ahaṃ brahma asmi mahāvākya. He took the
laukika-dṛṣṭi up to śloka 45, from which angle, Jīva is equal to cidābhāsa and mithyā;
when jivo brahmaiva or tat tvam asi, ahaṃ brahma asmi, etc., are taken there the meaning
of aham refers to the mithyā Jīva only from laukika-dṛṣṭi. This mithyā Jīva and satya
Brahman can have only bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya by which the śāstra displaces or falsifies
the word aham which is mithyā. Mithyā aham, mithyā Jīva, mithyā cidābhāsa is displaced
and what remains is only satya Brahman, in which Brahman, aham is also absent, tvam is
also absent and saḥ is also absent; aham, tvam and saḥ mean first person, second person
and third person respectively; all are absent. This is the bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya
interpretation if Jīva is equal to kevala cidābhāsa.
Having interpreted in this manner, Vidyāraṇya says if the word Jīva is taken differently
from Śāstrīya-dṛṣṭi as a mixture of cit and cidābhāsa, then the mahāvākya will be different

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1303

and that interpretation is given by Vivaraṇa Ācārya in his Vivaraṇa text book. Therefore,
the different interpretation is given as an aside note from śloka 46 up to 51. It is a diversion
topic of “ahaṃ brahma asmi” vicāra or “tat tvam asi” vicāra by taking the Jīva as cit-sahita
cidābhāsa miśra. Once Jīva is equal to cit-sahita cidābhāsa, bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya
should not be taken, because when Jīva is displaced, cidābhāsa also will go, cit also will go
and therefore, Vivaraṇa Ācārya strongly criticized bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. That was
said in śloka 46. The Vivaraṇa Ācārya’s interpretation is given in these ślokas beginning
from 47 onwards. Tat-pada is a mixture and tvam-pada also is taken as a mixture of cit
and cidābhāsa. Tat-pada is also cit cidābhāsa mixture. We should apply bhāga-tyāga-
lakṣaṇā where cidābhāsa part of tvam pada is removed, cidābhāsa part of tat-pada is also
removed; micro cidābhāsa and macro cidābhāsa, inferior cidābhāsa and superior
cidābhāsa, both are knocked off and what is left behind is cit, which is neither inferior nor
superior. At cidābhāsa level alone tāratamya is there. After knocking them off, at cit level
there is aikya.
In the last two ślokas, Vidyāraṇya talked about tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha. In ahaṃ brahma
asmi vākya, aham-pada-lakṣyārtha. This lakṣyārtha is arrived at by negating vyaṣṭi
cidābhāsa and kevala cit called kūṭastha caitanya. Therefore, he said in 48th śloka
adhiṣṭhāna-sthitiratra vivakṣitam. Similarly, what is the meaning of tat-pada in
mahāvākya or brahma pada in the mahāvākya? That is said in the 49th śloka which we
saw in the last class. By the word Brahman in ahaṃ brahma asmi mahāvākya or the word
tat in tat tvam asi mahāvākya you have to choose the appropriate word. In tat tvam asi, tat
should be taken and ahaṃ brahma asmi Brahman should be taken; by the word Brahman
tat adhiṣṭhāna-caitanyam vivakṣitam. It refers to adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya after ridding off the
samaṣṭi cidābhāsa. That is not said here but we have to understand. After ridding of the
samaṣṭi cidābhāsa from the mixture by applying bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā tat adhiṣṭhāna
vivakṣitam. Yat trayyanteṣu īritam, that adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya is talked about in all the
Vedānta granthas. Last class I said trayyanta means Vedānta. It is the adhiṣṭhāna not of
individual Jīva but adhiṣṭhāna of macro cidābhāsa, not only cidābhāsa but macro universe
itself. Here, the word bhrama means adhyāsa the entire macro adhyāsa jagat. And this
macro adhyāsa consists six factors:
1. sthūla-prapañca
2. pratibimbita caitanya known as Vaiśvānara;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1304

3. sūkṣma prapañca,
4. pratibimbita caitanya called Hiraṇyagarbha;
5. kāraṇa prapañca
6. pratibimbita caitanya called Īśvara
All these are cidābhāsa reflection only. All put together is called jagat-rūpa bhrama. That
śuddha caitanya the original consciousness is the meaning of Brahman. In ahaṃ brahma
asmi, aham is also adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya, Brahman is also adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya; I the
adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya Brahman the adhiṣṭhāna caitanya or I the kūṭastha and Brahman both
are one and the same. This is the interpretation given by Vivaraṇa Ācārya; nothing wrong
in this approach.

śloka 50
एतस्मिन्नेव चैतन्ये जगदारोप्यते यदा ।
तदा तदेकदेशस्य जीवाभासस्य का कथा ॥ ८.५० ॥
etasminneva caitanye jagadāropyate yadā.
tadā tadekadeśasya jīvābhāsasya kā kathā (8.50).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says when the prapañca-traya and prapañca-traya caitanya at macro
level when they themselves are superimposed and mithyā kaimutika nyāyena what to talk
of the three śarīras and śarīra-traya-pratibimbita caitanya? When Virāṭ, Hiraṇyagarbha
and Īśvara, themselves are superimposed, what to talk of Viśva, taijasa and prājña?! When
the mahāvākya negates the macro itself then what to talk of micro! In this adhiṣṭhāna, the
original consciousness jagad eva āropyate. That eva should be connected with jagat. Jagat
means Virāṭ, Hiraṇyagarbha and Īśvara. Even Īśvara gets dismissed because anything
saguṇa has to be falsified. Īśvara being Sarvajña, sarveśvara and Sarva-śaktimān all the
attributes are there; anything saguṇa is negated; that is why in Māṇḍūkya, Īśvara was
included in the third pada and when the fourth pada came, all these three were negated.
And therefore, jagat eva means then even Virāṭ, Hiraṇyagarbha and Īśvara themselves are
in trouble at the time of mahāvākya. Until then, they are comfortable; the moment
mahāvākya comes, even these three are in trouble! Jagat eva āropyate; they are mithyā.
This being so tadā tadekadeśasya jīvābhāsasya kā kathā! Then, what to talk of the story of
the miserable puny little śarīra-traya; big wind comes, he will be blown up. From macro
angle, all the śarīra-trayas are small and therefore, that has to necessarily be mithyā only.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1305

A minute part of the universe and here universe means Virāṭ, Hiraṇyagarbha and Īśvara
and minute part of it means Viśva, taijasa and prājña. When the macro three are
superimposed, what will be the story of micro three Viśva, taijasa and prājña which is
called by the name Jīva ābhāsa which is known by the name mithyā Jīva. This is not a
question mark. What to talk of the story means Jīva ābhāsa is also superimposed only.

śloka 51
जगत्तदेकदेशाख्यसमारोप्यस्य भेदतः ।
तत्त्वंपदार्थौ भिन्नौ स्तो वस्तुतस्त्वेकता चितः ॥ ८.५१ ॥
jagattadekadeśākhyasamāropyasya bhedataḥ.
tattvaṃpadārthau bhinnau sto vastutastvekatā citaḥ (8.51).
Then a natural question can come up so: in ahaṃ brahma asmi mahāvākya, aham refers to
the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya which is the adhiṣṭhāna of micro cidābhāsa and Brahman is also
adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya adhiṣṭhāna of macro cidābhāsa. Aham is also adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya
and Brahman is also adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. When both are one and the same caitanya, how
can you use two different words? You yourselves say that aham is the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya
and Brahman is also adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya. If padārthas are one and the same, then padas
also must be one and the same. Similarly, in tat tvam asi mahāvākya, tat is adhiṣṭhāna-
caitanya of macro cidābhāsa and tvam is also adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya of micro cidābhāsa.
Both tat and tvam refer to one and the same adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya; that being so, why do
you use two different words when objects are one and the same? It will be the question.
For this, Vidyāraṇya gives his answer. Even though caitanya is one and the same, one is
adhiṣṭhāna of macro cidābhāsa and the other of micro cidābhāsa, the adhyāsa whose
adhiṣṭhāna I point out being different, two different words are given, not from the
standpoint of adhiṣṭhāna itself but from the standpoint of adhyāsa of which caitanya is the
adhiṣṭhāna. Just like one and the same space suppose I ask is it Nungambakkam and you
will say this place is called Nungambakkam. Then if I ask you, you will say this is Tamil
Nadu. Suppose I ask is this place India? Now, you tell me is this Nungambakkam, Tamil
Nadu or India? The place is the same and but you give three different names. The place
remaining the same, from the standpoint of the border that you keep in the context of the
various areas of Chennai, you call it Nungambakkam and when you talk of various states

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1306

of India you call it Tamilnadu; similarly, in the context, the standpoint becomes
responsible for two different names but the caitanya there is no difference.
Vidyāraṇya himself gave an example before: one and the same lady is called wife from
one standpoint, mother from another standpoint, sister from another standpoint and
sister-in-law from another standpoint. It is not that the height of the lady is different,
weight of the sister-in-law is different, etc; whatever be the name, height, weight and
complexion, dṛṣṭi-bhedāt nāma-bheda. One and the same caitanya as the substratum of
micro it is called aham and as the adhiṣṭhāna of macro it is called Brahman. Therefore, he
says bhedataḥ because of the difference, samāropyasya of the superimposed cidābhāsa,
not due the difference in cit itself, but because of the difference in the superimposed
cidābhāsa, being jagat in the form of macro superimposition consisting of Virāṭ,
Hiraṇyagarbha and Īśvara and tad eka deśa part of that which is micro superimposition
called Viśva, taijasa and prājña. Thus, between micro and macro there is a difference at
cidābhāsa level but at cit level we should never use the word micro cit or macro cit. At cit
level micro macro nāsti eva. Therefore, ābhāsa-bhedataḥ. Cidābhāsa being mithyā, the
differences based on the cidābhāsa also will be mithyā and therefore, the word kūṭastha is
a mithyā nāma, the word Brahman is also mithyā nāma because we differentiate kūṭastha
and Brahman based on what one macro cidābhāsa adhiṣṭhāna and another as micro
cidābhāsa adhiṣṭhāna.
Therefore, even the two names are based on cidābhāsa-difference not cit-difference. Even
the word kūṭastha and Brahman are two distinct words used based on macro-micro-
cidābhāsa-difference only but not based on cit-difference. Therefore, even that name will
ultimately go away after negation of cidābhāsa; how can you use the word kūṭastha or
Brahman! That is why in Māṇḍūkya it is said It does not have nāma and also it does not
have rūpa also. Therefore, tat-tvam-padārthau the meaning of tat-pada and the meaning
of tvam-pada are superficially different; padārtha in this context is primary meaning of tat
and primary meaning of tvam are different, caused by superficial cidābhāsa-difference.
Even though there is a superficial difference from cidābhāsa-angle, there is no difference
from the standpoint of cit. In reality, from the essential nature, original consciousness,
adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya has ekatā is only one.
Why an equation tat tvam asi? That is why Dayānanda Svāmījī says when you give an
equation, two things being evidently different equation is not possible; you cannot say five

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1307

is equal to three; you cannot write an equation five is equal to three because both are
evidently different. You cannot use an equation when two sides are evidently equal also.
Five is equal to five. Four is equal to four. Three is equal to three. You need not write
because they are evidently equal. When two are evidently different no equation is possible
and when evidently equal also there is no equation. When the two things are superficially
different but essentially one, when these two conditions are met, then alone teaching is
required about the equation; superficial difference must be there and essential oneness
also must be there: five plus three is equal to nine minus one. Now, the physical eyes are
seeing differences only because in this side totally different numbers five and three exist;
there, on the other side, it is nine and one; therefore, eyes perceive difference only and
even the mark here it is plus and there it is minus. When the eyes are reporting difference,
the arithmetic teacher should tell that five plus three is eight only essential ly and nine
minus one is eight only essentially. Therefore, they are identical. Similarly, if tat-pada and
tvam-pada are totally different tat tvam asi is not possible, if they are evidently identical
tat tvam asi is not possible; for my perception Jīva and Īśvara must be different and in fact
they must be identical, then alone there is a possibility for an equation. Therefore, don’t
ask if tat word and tvam words are different, they must be different; I write an equation
because essentially they are one and the same.

śloka 8.52
कर्तृत्वादीन्बुद्धिधर्मान्स्फू र्त्याख्यां चात्मरूपताम्।
दधद्विभाति पुरत आभासोऽतो भ्रमो भवेत्॥ ८.५२ ॥
kartṛtvādīnbuddhidharmānsphūrtyākhyāṃ cātmarūpatām.
dadhadvibhāti purata ābhāso:'to bhramo bhavet (8.52).
This is an important śloka wherein Vidyāraṇya concludes the present discussion of mahā-
vākya-vicāra. He states as to why cidābhāsa must be understood as mithyā and what is
the logic to take cidābhāsa as mithyā. He says because it is anirvacanīya vastu.
Anirvacanīya, it is inexplicable; you cannot prove its existence as also its non-existence.
Neither it is existent nor it’s nature can be clearly proved. Generally, I give an example for
this which example Adi Śaṅkarācārya has given in the Upadeśa-sāhasrī 18th chapter; of
course, the well-known example of pratibimba-mukha. Imagine there is a mirror in front.
There is the face known as bimba-mukha. In the proximity of bimba-mukha and darpaṇa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1308

mirror, I experience a third entity. The mirror is existent, bimba-mukha is existent, but I
experience a third entity called pratibimba mukha. I see pratibimba mukha very clearly. I
cannot see my original mukha. The face may be the most beautiful one, but I cannot see
my own face. Whatever face I see is not the original face but it is only pratibimba mukha.
Now, I ask the question: does the pratibimba mukha have an existence of its own? First,
take the sattā itself. The very existence of the pratibimba mukha cannot belong to the
pratibimba mukha and it is borrowed from the darpaṇa or bimba-mukha only. When
either of them is removed; either you remove the mirror or remove the face [move a little
bit away from the mirror] then the pratibimba mukha does not have sattā. Darpaṇa-
sattāyām pratibimba-sattā, darpaṇa-abhave sattā-abhāvaḥ; tasmāt pratibimbasya svayam
sattā nāsti. It has only a borrowed existence and whatever has borrowed existence is
mithyā. On the other hand, if pratibimba mukha had an independent existence as a third
entity, then even after separating the mirror and face, it will be there like the wall on the
other side; just as that continues it would have continued. First argument is sattā nāsti. It
has borrowed existence.
The second thing is it does not have even a nature of its own. It is a clean cooked up entity.
In Vedānta, the best example for cooked up entity is pratibimba mukha because if you
analyse its attribute it does not have any original attribute; some are borrowed from
original face and some attributes are borrowed from darpaṇa exactly like a salad. Salad is
not a new dish but it is nothing but some other things joined together; you call it by a new
name. Similarly, darpaṇa-mukha has several features borrowed from the original face, the
eye, the colour of the skin and whether the hair is there or not the colour of the hair all
these features of the original face that we see there. That is partially borrowed. Some
features are borrowed from the mirror also. That also we should be very clear about.
Suppose darpaṇa is dull because of thin quoting of dust, the pratibimba also will be dull;
even though the original face may be very bright the pratibimba is dull. If darpaṇa is
located two feet away, if the mirror is located two feet away from original face, the
location of pratibimba mukha wherever darpaṇa is located; and the location is borrowed
from the mirror. Therefore, remember that the location is also borrowed; its brightness is
borrowed; suppose darpaṇa moves, the motion is also borrowed; and suppose darpaṇa is
very small like Rajasthani dress small mirrors will be there and the reflections there will be
small alone. Thus, the size, movement, location etc., are borrowed from darpaṇa; other

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1309

than the attributes of darpaṇa and attributes of the original face, the pratibimba does not
have any attributes of its own. Therefore, what is pratibimba mukha? It is a cooked up
entity enjoying borrowed existence. Cooked up entity means having the attributes
borrowed from reflecting medium and the original. Vidyāraṇya says cidābhāsa is also a
reflection formed in the buddhi adhiṣṭhāna and adhiṣṭhāna is similar to darpaṇa. I the
original consciousness am the Ātmā. In the proximity of Ātmā and adhiṣṭhāna darpaṇa,
there is a mysterious third entity other than Ātmā and other than darpaṇa adhiṣṭhāna also.
There is the third entity and that is called cidābhāsa. The third entity cidābhāsa other than
Ātmā and antaḥkaraṇa have got a borrowed enclosure, because in suṣupti when the
mirror [the mind] resolves cidābhāsa also goes away. From this, it is clear it does not have
its own existence. The attributes are also cooked up, some attributes from the mind and
some attributes from the Ātmā. What are the attributes borrowed from the mind? All
modifications must be borrowed from the mind only. It is so because Ātmā does not have
any modification. Therefore, modification part of cidābhāsa is borrowed from adhiṣṭhāna.
Modifications of cidābhāsa are borrowed from the mind and the mind is inert, whereas
cidābhāsa is effulgent and the effulgence of cidābhāsa is borrowed from the original cit
only. Shining of the cit alone is the shining of cidābhāsa. Pratibimba surya is shining
because of the original bimba sūrya. Thus, we have got a mysterious cidābhāsa; i t’s
mysteriousness proves it is a fake entity. There is the story of a third person entering a
wedding maṇḍapa. An imposter goes into the wedding function. When the groom’s side
asks any question, he says I am from bride’s side and when anyone from bride’s side asks,
he can say groom’s side. Wedding-fixing itself is a problem. Therefore, nobody wants to
take a risk why should we probe into this person! Therefore, nobody questions. This
person happily enjoys. When he is taking something two people came and sat on the same
table. One was from bride’s party and the other from groom’s party. They started
enquiring about the person. He understood the moment the enquiry started he said there
is some throat problem and I will take some hot water and come. He went and cidābhāsa
is that imposter.
In Saddarśana, Ramaṇa Maharṣi has written several ślokas in this regard.
deho na jānāti sato na janma dehapramāṇo:'nya udeti madhye;
ahaṅkṛtigranthivibandhasūkṣma- śarīracetobhavajīvanāmā (26)

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1310

[which reads as the body does not know; of the truth there is no birth; in the middle of
these two, another of the size of the body rises which is of the names – ego, bondage,
subtle body, mind, the realm of becoming and the individual.] so many wonderful ślokas
reveal the mysterious nature of the cidābhāsa and therefore, it is a mithyā imposter. The
cidābhāsa carries or possesses or holds two groups of attributes borrowed from two
sources. One source is the Ātmā the śākṣī and the other from the mind. It carries some of
the attributes of the reflecting medium called buddhi; some attributes are borrowed from
reflecting medium and reflecting medium here is buddhi. They are like kartṛtva,
bhoktṛtva, pramātṛtva, etc, for all of them require modification or change. Kartā means
vicāra. Doer cannot be doer without change. Knower cannot be knower without vṛtti-
vicāra. Every doership is because of antaḥkaraṇa-vṛtti which is presented in the form of
kariṣye and kariṣye is vṛtti-vicāra and you become pūjā-kartā. Similarly, when you know
something that is also vṛtti-vicāra. No knowledge can take place without the modification
of vṛtti. Kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva and pramātṛtva are because of the modification. That is
borrowed from the reflecting medium which in this context is buddhi. This is the part
borrowed from cidābhāsa. Buddhi can give only modification. Buddhi cannot give
caitanya for buddhi by itself is jaḍa. Kartṛtva, bhoktṛtva, etc. require caitanya and
therefore, cidābhāsa borrows the effulgence from the cit. That is why it is called cit-ābhāsa
which means semblance of the cit. Therefore, he says cidābhāsa also holds the Ātma-rūpa
that is the nature of the Ātmā that is sphūrtyākhyāṃ which is the sentiency. It is cetanatva
of cidābhāsa that does not belong to cidābhāsa but is borrowed from the cit; thus, it has
two sets of attributes borrowed from reflecting medium and the original consciousness.
This cooked entity is called the reflected consciousness. Reflecting medium and the
original consciousness you take R from reflecting medium and then you take C from the
original consciousness and form reflecting consciousness. Here, the reflected
consciousness itself shows like some people borrow a paper from somebody and then he
will ask for pen. He borrows paper from someone and pen from someone and they get a
notebook. That is called mystery!

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1311

Class 248
śloka 8.52 contd.
After explaining the mahāvākya based on ābhāsa-vāda, now, Vidyāraṇya concludes that
particular discussion showing that cidābhāsa Jīva is only mithyā because it is an
intermediary entity, a cooked up entity, borrowing certain properties of Ātmā and also
borrowing certain properties of anātmā, especially the mind. I gave you the example of the
reflected face; first of all, it does not have an existence of its own and secondly, the
properties of the reflected face are partially borrowed from the mirror and partially
borrowed from the original face; thus, mixing up twofold properties, the reflection
appears as a third mysterious entity. Similarly, the cidābhāsa is also a third mysterious
entity which has Ātma-dharma as also anātma-dharma. While we discuss this, we should
remember that we assume anātmā as a second entity available and assuming Ātmā and
anātmā as two existing entities, now, we are dismissing cidābhāsa as the third mysterious
entity. And after cidābhāsa is negated, we are going to ask the same question about
anātmā also; thus, whether anātmā exists as a second entity is a separate question which
question we should not bother about now. Here, the discussion is we are assuming the
anātmā buddhi and also Ātmā is there and our discussion is whether cidābhāsa exists as a
third entity other than Ātmā and anātmā? We find that cidābhāsa cannot exist because it is
exactly like a reflection as it does not have an existence of its own. Thereafter, he pointed
out this mysterious cidābhāsa has the modification attribute which is borrowed from
anātmā and it has the attribute of sentiency which is borrowed from Ātmā. Vikāra belongs
to anātmā and cetanatva belongs to Ātmā; borrowing anātmā’s vikāra and borrowing
Ātmā’s caitanya, the ahaṅkāra cidābhāsa appears in front. That is what we saw in the last
class
The cidābhāsa is otherwise called Jīva, otherwise called ahaṅkāra, otherwise called kartā-
bhoktā-pramātā. This ahaṅkāra carries kartṛtvādi-buddhi-dharmas, the properties of the
mind in the form of varieties of modification, which alone appear as kartā ahaṅkāra,
bhoktā ahaṅkāra, pramātā ahaṅkāra; all these roles require the modification. You cannot
be a kartā without thought-modification; you cannot be a bhoktā without thought-
modification; the ahaṅkāra cannot be a pramātā without thought-modification; it carries
the modification of anātmā and also Ātma-rūpatā it also carries the Ātmā-svarūpa in the
form of caitanya or effulgence or the best translation is sentiency. This cetanatva cannot be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1312

borrowed from buddhi for it is sentient because of cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa cannot
borrow sentiency from buddhi because buddhi is jaḍa; therefore, sentiency of cidābhāsa is
borrowed from Ātmā. Thus, having borrowed these two, the ahaṅkāra is mysteriously
appearing as the Jīva. Because of this, it is anirvacanīya-svarūpa. Therefore, it is called
bhrama, bhrama means adhyāsa or it is superimposition which alone Adi Śaṅkarācārya
mentions in the introduction to Brahmasūtra, adhyāsa-bhāṣya itself. Ātmā’s and anātmā’s
properties are mixed up in the form of aham and mama and the ahaṅkāra appears. Up to
this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 8.53
का बुद्धिः कोऽयमाभासः को वात्रात्मा जगत्कथम्।
इत्यनिर्णयतो मोहः सोऽयं संसार इष्यते ॥ ८.५३ ॥
kā buddhiḥ ko:'yamābhāsaḥ ko vātrātmā jagatkatham.
ityanirṇayato mohaḥ so:'yaṃ saṃsāra iṣyate (8.53).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that saṃsāra is because of the non-understanding of four factors
clearly. The non-understanding of the four factors clearly is the cause of the problem of
saṃsāra. If you understand the four factors clearly, let the four factors continue as they
are; we are not going to remove anything; only understand and once you understand
them, what you call as problem you will rename as entertainment. We are not going to
change anything; body will be the same, old age will be the same, joint issues will be the
same, everything will remain the same, you don’t want to dismiss anything. Only you will
name the problem as an entertainment issue. The perspective alone will change and that is
more than enough. The four factors are the following:
1. number one is I the Ātmā;
2. number two is the mind, the anātmā;
3. number three the cidābhāsa, the mysterious ahaṅkāra which is born out of
combination of Ātmā and anātmā the original consciousness, reflecting medium
and the reflected consciousness;
4. and once the reflected consciousness ahaṅkāra comes into being, the world also will
automatically appear and ahaṅkāra can never exist without the experience of the
world. The moment ahaṅkāra arises, the world also will arise and the moment

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1313

ahaṅkāra dissolves temporarily as in sleep the world also will disappear. The world
is the fourth factor.
The original consciousness, reflecting medium, the reflected consciousness and the world
are the four factors. If the original consciousness alone is there, there will be no ahaṅkāra;
there will be no world also; when the world is not there, the original consciousness cannot
even say “I am the original consciousness”. Even for the original consciousness to claim “I
am the original consciousness”, it requires the reflected consciousness and reflecting
medium. Once ahaṅkāra is resolved in suṣupti-avasthā, you don’t claim “I am the śākṣī
illumining the blank state of suṣupti”; you cannot say that. Therefore, in mere original
consciousness nothing happens; no vyavahāra happens and therefore, for vyavahāra, what
is required is all the four factors. Therefore, let them all be there. Then, what we should do
is that of these four, three are mithyā. Only one alone is satya. That one is the original
consciousness, Ātmā, or the Śākṣi-caitanya. Body is not satya, family members are not
satya, but I the original consciousness alone is satya and all the three are eternally
available for continuous entertainment; now and then, short nap and long rest, both are
available. Short nap is deep sleep state, maraṇa etc., shorter naps; and long rest in the form
of pralaya is also available afterwards. Again, let the reflecting medium, the reflected
consciousness and the world rise and let them continue their drama; I have no complaint.
Therefore, satya-anṛta-viveka alone is required. Nothing need be changed in the world.
Even if there are serious problems in life, you need not do anything because the matter,
the world, is constantly changing; the problem also before you do anything; when
prārabdha goes at that time whichever doctor you meet, he is lucky. You may try
numerous doctors, the ninth one may come because of his prārabdha and at that time the
prārabdha is about to go, you are happy. The same doctor will not prove to be good when
pāpa is not at its end. This drama goes on.
Because of the lack of clear knowledge, one is ever in a deluded state. This is not the case
with one individual, but the entire humanity suffers this problem. Because of lack of
knowledge, there is moha. Lack of knowledge of what? The reflecting medium buddhi or
anātmā reflecting medium is not clearly understood. Therefore, kā buddhiḥ what is the
mind that is not clear; and that is why even after several years I know I am Brahman, but I
have some more rāga-dveṣa problem to remove. Then you say you have mixed up
Brahman with the mind. Once you say “I know I am Brahman”, you should not say “I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1314

have rāga-dveṣa”, because I the Ātmā does not have any connection with the mind itself;
when there is no connection with the mind, when dharmi itself I have no sambandha how
can I have sambandha with the dharma? Therefore, the mind is so powerful that we can
never judge ourselves separating from the mind and we always combine the mind; once
you combine the mind, you will never have the courage to say “I am free” because the
mind will not allow you claim so, because the mind is always with some issue or the other.
Therefore, clear knowledge means I have to distance myself from the mind; for that, I
should know that the mind is anātmā mithyā; that clarity is lacking.
Then, kaḥ ayam ābhāsaḥ? What is localized consciousness, limited consciousness which is
experienced in the body alone? That cidābhāsa is not clearly understood as separate from
the all-pervading cit, original consciousness. Here, Vidyāraṇya gives the example of the
wall upon which there is generalized sunlight and there is also superimposed reflected
light. The general and reflected lights are not distinctly understood. What is intellect?
What is cidābhāsa, the reflected consciousness? What exactly is the Ātmā or the original
consciousness? What is the reflected consciousness and what the original consciousness
and what is jagat vā katham? How does the world appear in front of me? Does it really
exist or is it non-existent? The existent world cannot be negated, non-existent world need
not be negated, but the Upaniṣad clearly negates the world; therefore, it does not come
under existent or non-existent variety; therefore, it is mysterious mithyā; mithyā shortened
alone is myth; therefore, atra which means here, in me, how does the world appear? Or
what is the nature of the world? This is the fourth question. These four factors iti; the
answer to these four question anirṇayataḥ has not been clearly ascertained by the
humanity.
How does the moha appear in my day-to-day life? All the four factors seem to have the
same order of reality! Once I am giving both myself and the world the same order of
reality, the world becomes too powerful and I appear to be too small; then, we get into
triangular format; the world is victimizer; I am victimized and I need a savior God; why?
because I and the world have the same order of reality. Either you can say I have brought
me down from pāramārthika to vyāvahārika or I can say I have raised the level of the
world to my level; either I have come down or the world has been raised up; either way,
both have got the same degree of reality and once they have the same degree, the world is
capable of creating fear in me. The world can be reduced to a movie or a television serial

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1315

only under one condition; this continuous episode of the world becomes a serial only
when I push it down to a lower order or I raise myself up to a higher order without tilting
the order; else, the saṃsāra order will not go and once I change the order, I automatically
come to binary format that I, the Ātmā of the higher order of reality, can never be a victim
and the world of a lower order can never victimize me. Therefore, I don’t require a savior
and special sakāma pūjā and special prāyaścitta parihāra, all of them, become
instantaneously irrelevant and when I say the world, the family is to be included and
when I say family, your own body, mind also must be seen as of a lower order. If this is
not done, it is the problem of saṃsāra.
All these are important ślokas because Vedānta reduces saṃsāra into an intellectual
problem. The basic problem is intellectual and that intellectual problem alone manifests as
emotional problem; emotional problem is only a symptomatic problem; therefore, if you
solve the emotional problem directly, you have removed only the symptoms and the basic
intellectual problem will remain. Similarly, old age, disease, etc., they seem to be a
physical problem; Vedānta says physical problem also is a symptomatic problem which is
an expression of intellectual problem; thus, all problems are in the intellect; therefore,
solution has to be intellectual. However, we should never think that the study of śāstra is
just an intellectual exercise. All problems are lack of clarity. Remember the example I give.
This person was asked suppose somebody cuts my ears or cuts your ears what will
happen? He said I cannot see! If somebody cuts the ear lobes, I cannot see! This person
must certainly be asked how can you say and what is connection between the ears and not
seeing? He said cutting the ears I don’t hear is understandable. Then, he said if you cut my
ears, where will I hold my glasses? Similarly, intellectual study of Vedānta and our family
problems don’t seem to have any connection; Vidyāraṇya says there is connection like
cutting the ears and not seeing. That saṃsāra is delusion. What is the solution?

śloka 8.54
बुद्ध्यादीनां स्वरूपं यो विविनक्ति स तत्त्ववित्।
स एव मुक्त इत्येवं वेदान्तेषु विनिश्चयः ॥ ८.५४ ॥
buddhyādīnāṃ svarūpaṃ yo vivinakti sa tattvavit.
sa eva mukta ityevaṃ vedānteṣu viniścayaḥ (8.54).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1316

If delusion is saṃsāra, knowledge alone is freedom. Therefore, he says for a person who
clearly distinguishes what is satya and what is mithyā, in satya category one component is
there and in mithyā category reflecting medium, the reflected consciousness and jagat
three components are there. The one who does the viveka, of the nature of buddhi, etc.,
means the other three, there also initially we will say I have got clear knowledge but I
have got some viparīta-bhāvanā and therefore, I have to practice long nididhyāsana to
remove viparīta-bhāvanā, but finally I should understand claiming that I have viparīta-
bhāvanā is the last viparīta-bhāvanā. It is so because to claim viparīta-bhāvanā amounts to
claim I am the mind. There is one viparīta-bhāvanā, that is, “I am the mind” is the last
viparīta-bhāvanā. That I disclaim. The teaching is mokṣa does not depend upon any
condition. That person is the knower of the truth. That person alone is mukta. That person
alone is liberated. This is the essential teaching or the conclusive teaching in the
Upaniṣads.

śloka 8.55
एवं च सति बन्धः स्यात्कस्येत्यादिकु तर्क जाः ।
विडम्बनादृढं खण्ड्याः खण्डनोक्तिप्रकारतः ॥ ८.५५ ॥
evaṃ ca sati bandhaḥ syātkasyetyādikutarkajāḥ.
viḍambanādṛḍhaṃ khaṇḍyāḥ khaṇḍanoktiprakārataḥ (8.55).
This being so, there are some other systems of philosophy who go on questioning
regarding the nature of avidyā, the nature of bondage, the nature of liberation, etc. They
present so many logical questions about bandha, mukti etc. We should understand that
the bandha-mukti themselves are not logically existent that it is not available for logical
questions and answers. Therefore, they are all fallacious reasoning. This being so, that
bondage is also because of lack of thinking and if you ask, it is like the person who is
searching for darkness with the help of a powerful light. Svāmī Cinmayānanda tells
during the wedding, there is Petromax light on his head and he went to the master and
asked where I should keep that light. He says wherever there is darkness you keep it and
this person keeping the petromax walked here and there, he went all around and
complained to the master there is no darkness, petromax is not required and I will go
away. Therefore, darkness is something which will not remain when you make an enquiry
with the light. Similarly, bondage is like darkness; it is born out of ignorance and you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1317

cannot prove it with a pramāṇa because once you use the pramāṇa it will disappear.
Therefore, proof for bondage with a pramāṇa is trying to prove the darkness with the help
of a lamp. Pramāṇa means light. The moment I take to enquiry, bandha will disappear!
Therefore, tasya bandhaḥ syāt who will or who has this bondage the question itself is
showmanship or challenge. Varieties of challenges are made against Advaita asking the
pramāṇa for proving the bondage. I can never give a pramāṇa to prove the bondage
because the lack of application of pramāṇa is the cause for the presence of bondage, just as
light cannot be used to prove the darkness for the absence of light is the cause for arrival
of darkness itself! Therefore, how can I bring a pramāṇa to show that this is the bondage?!
Bandha belongs to whom? Bandha belongs to ignorance; ignorance belongs to whom?
These questions are logical and it is like asking the question who knows ahaṃ brahma
asmi. It came in the 7th chapter. Ātmā cannot know ahaṃ brahma asmi because Ātmā
cannot do anything as Ātmā is apramātā; therefore, apramātā Ātmā cannot know ahaṃ
brahma asmi. Can anātmā know ahaṃ brahma asmi? Anātmā cannot know because of
two reasons: one is that anātmā is jaḍa and jaḍa cannot know anything; even if for
argument sake, if we say that anātmā knows, it can only know I am anātmā. It cannot say
aham Ātmā or ahaṃ brahma asmi. Other than Ātmā and anātmā, there is no third entity.
Therefore, who knows these are all fallacious reasoning because we have got a mysterious
cidābhāsa which is a mixture of Ātmā and anātmā. The mysterious mixture knows ahaṃ
brahma asmi. If you ask what that mysterious mixture is, I cannot answer that question
because the moment you probe like the imposter in a marriage pandal, the moment you
enquire “who is the mysterious mixture?”, the mixture disappears. Therefore, you should
not ask such questiona. If such questions are asked, such objections are to be firmly replied
or clearly replied. Various methods are mentioned in the Vedāntic texts. It is fully named
as Khaṇḍana-khaṇḍa-khādya. In English translation, in the fourth line, you can see the full
name of the text. It is full of reasoning and counter reasoning written by Harśa Miśra, a
great Advaitācārya. There, all the questions have been negated. False questions have been
answered by false answers.

śloka 8.56
वृत्तेः साक्षितया वृत्तेः प्रागभावस्य च स्थितः ।
बुभुत्सायां तथाज्ञोऽस्मीत्याभासाज्ञानवस्तुनः ॥ ८.५६ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1318

vṛtteḥ sākṣitayā vṛtteḥ prāgabhāvasya ca sthitaḥ.

bubhutsāyāṃ tathājño:'smītyābhāsājñānavastunaḥ (8.56).
In a particular school, just a humorous story they give. A new mathematics teacher had
come. First day of arrival, he wanted to judge the logical thinking power of the student s.
He asked a question to the students. He said my house is ten kilometres away, then what
must be my age? You have to logically arrive at my age. I am giving a clue that my house
is 10 k.m. away; what must be my age? The students were wondering how the two could
be connected! One student said it must be fifty years. All the students started laughing and
the teacher had an occasion to have some fun at the cost of the student. The teacher asked
what the logical argument that you used is. He said it is very simple. He said before you
came, we had a previous teacher and he was twenty five years and was half crack. Now, I
conclude that you must be fifty years. If illogical questions are asked, the answer must be
illogical. For the question, whatever logical connection is there, that alone is the logical
connection for the answer also. Such answers are called jāti uttaram, duruttaram, etc. In
tarka-śāstra, varieties of such arguments are given to turn the Pūrvapakṣī off. Such
arguments are given in Khaṇḍana-khaṇḍa-khādya. In these ślokas, 56, 57 and 58,
Vidyāraṇya quotes Śiva Purāṇa ślokas. Even though it is Purāṇa text book, that also talks
about kūṭastha Ātmā and that Ātmā is named as Lord Śiva. Elsewhere, the very same
Ātmā is named Viśṇu. Three ślokas describe Śiva as Ātmā. Śiva remains in every
individual as the witness consciousness of every thought that arises in the mind. The
second description the very same witness remains as the śākṣī of the absence of thoughts
also. That is, before the rise of thoughts the mind is blank sometimes because in some
people thoughts are all the time there. In the blank state of the mind before the rise of
thought, that blank state is known again because of caitanya. It is also the śākṣī of ajñāna
vastu. The entity called mysterious entity is ajñāna or ignorance. When someone asks: do
you know Ātmā which is eternal, all-pervading, etc., our answer is I don’t know the Ātmā.
Then, naturally the question will come how you know that you don’t know? Then, he will
say I know I don’t know the Ātmā. Thus, whenever we talk of any ignorance including
self-ignorance, the self-ignorance also is witnessed by the consciousness-principle that is
the witness of the ajñāna is also Śiva. Therefore, ajñānavastunaḥ vṛtteḥ sākṣitayā Śivaḥ
sthitaḥ. That ajñāna is further described, which we will see in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1319

Class 249
śloka 8.56 contd.
Up to 56th śloka, Vidyāraṇya explained about cidābhāsa, a mysterious entity which had
no existence of its own, possessing some of the features of reflecting medium mind and
some of the features of the original consciousness. Therefore, cidābhāsa has to be mithyā
since it does not have its own existence. So, the reflecting medium as also the reflected
consciousness are mithyā and there is only one satya that is the original consciousness,
which we call it as Śākṣi-caitanya or kūṭastha caitanya. The aim of Vedānta is to claim
oneself as kūṭastha caitanya. After claiming that we can put on the reflecting medium and
the reflected consciousness for the sake of transactional purposes just as we put on clothes
to come out for transaction. Similarly, the reflecting medium and the reflected
consciousness mixture is called ahaṅkāra and we can use ahaṅkāra as an overcoat for the
sake of worldly transactions, because I the kūṭastha am not available for any transaction
even to claim that I am kūṭastha. Therefore, even to claim I am kūṭastha I require the
ahaṅkāra kañcuka which means the overcoat of ahaṅkāra. Overcoat of ahaṅkāra is
required for worldly transactions. One kūṭastha alone appears as Jīva as well as Īśvara
with vyaṣṭi and samaṣṭi ahaṅkāra, respectively. Both ahamkaras have their own problems.
Even if you interview Bhagavān he will have a big list of complaints of so many families;
therefore, ahaṅkāra by itself is never-free from complaints. Whether it is Jīva vyaṣṭi or
micro ahaṅkāra or Īśvara samaṣṭi or macro ahaṅkāra, the only advantage Īśvara has is that
he already knows that Īśvara ahaṅkāra is mithyā and I am kūṭastha caitanya; therefore, for
Īśvara, sṛṣṭi is also a game, sthiti is a game and pralaya is also a game. All the time he
remembers tasya kartāram api mām viddhi akartāram avyayam.
Īśvara has the knowledge without going to a Guru. We have to acquire this knowledge by
going to a Guru but after gaining the knowledge, there is no difference between the
freedom enjoyed by Īśvara and the freedom enjoyed by me because the freedom is derived
from kūṭastha which is common to both. If Īśvara has a better kūṭastha, he will have a
better freedom. Remember that at ahaṅkāra level alone Īśvara has a better ahaṅkāra and
freedom is not based on ahaṅkāra; freedom is derived from the kūṭastha caitanya and
therefore, I can put my hands on Īśvara’s shoulders and wink at Īśvara also and say our
game is going well. You also have to helplessly continue sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya when eternally
and I also have to do my own sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya. We are all in the same boat only ahaṅkāra-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1320

wise but both of us are free śākṣī-wise. Śākṣī-wise free if you say you are wise. In support
of this Vidyāraṇya, quotes Śiva Purāṇa group of ślokas of which 56th śloka we have
completed. There, we have to supply the subject as śivasaṃjñitaḥ. Here, kūṭastha is called
Lord Śiva śāntaṃ śivam advaitam as found in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Lord Śiva is said to
be the śākṣī of these three experiences at the mental level. Three experiences are: one is
vṛtti, kūṭastha caitanya is śākṣī of the thoughts, vṛtteḥ prāgabhāvasya ca śākṣī. The same
kūṭastha is śākṣī of the blankness of the mind which is experienced in suṣupti-avasthā,
which is experienced in samādhi avasthā; even during jāgrat-avasthā, now and then, when
the mind goes blank because of some overwhelming problem, then also there is a
blankness and that blankness of the mind is witnessed by kūṭastha. And finally, ajñāta-
vastunaḥ, in suṣupti-avasthā, there is a total ignorance of both the object as well as the
subject. I neither know the world the object, nor do I know myself the subject; the total
blankness is called mula-avidyā experienced in suṣupti-avasthā. That avidyā also is
illumined by the adhiṣṭhāna śākṣī as we see in the Naiṣkarmyasiddhi third chapter
introduction. That is said here. During that state, ignorance-experience is there. In jāgrat-
avasthā, we claim I was ignorant and if I should say I was ignorant in sleep during
suṣupti, I am ignorant experience is called ajño:'smīti. I experience ignorance. That
ignorance appearing in the suṣupti-avasthā in the form of being ignorant is illumined by
the Śākṣi-caitanya or kūṭastha śākṣī. Jijñāsā means enquiry. At the time of enquiry one
thing is very clear that I am ignorant, the reason being I make the enquiry. At the time of
enquiry ignorance is evident and that evidence of self-ignorance is also because of the
Śākṣi-caitanya alone. This śākṣī alone is called Lord Śiva.

śloka 8.57 & 58

असत्यालम्बनत्वेन सत्यः सर्वजडस्य तु ।
साधकत्वेन चिद्रू पः सदा प्रेमास्पदत्वतः ॥ ८.५७ ॥
आनन्दरूपः सर्वार्थसाधकत्वेन हेतुना ।
सर्वसम्बन्धवत्त्वेन सम्पूर्णः शिवसंज्ञितः ॥ ८.५८ ॥
asatyālambanatvena satyaḥ sarvajaḍasya tu.
sādhakatvena cidrūpaḥ sadā premāspadatvataḥ (8.57).
ānandarūpaḥ sarvārthasādhakatvena hetunā.
sarvasambandhavattvena sampūrṇaḥ śivasaṃjñitaḥ (8.58).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1321

This kūṭastha śākṣī itself is known by three different names depending upon three
different functions performed by kūṭastha adhiṣṭhāna. The three functions are to help the
anātmā consisting of the entire cosmos. This anātmā is blessed by adhiṣṭhāna and
depending upon the blessing the adhiṣṭhāna is given the appropriate name. This anātmā
does not have an existence of its own. The first and foremost blessing by the adhiṣṭhāna is
to lend sattā to anātmā. You can lend money only under one condition that you should
have money. Similarly, adhiṣṭhāna is able to lend existence to the world because it has
existence itself it has as its real svarūpa. From this angle the svarūpa lakṣaṇa of adhiṣṭhāna
is sat. This is called svarūpa lakṣaṇa for it is the very nature of adhiṣṭhāna. Once it has
come into existence then the existence is to be proved, it is proved only when we are
conscious of that; without the knowledge, existence cannot be proved. Therefore,
consciousness is required to prove the existence of the anātmā. This consciousness anātmā
does not have. It is so because it is of the nature of acetana or jaḍa. Therefore, it comes
with a begging bowl for consciousness, previously it came with a begging bowl for it
wanted sat. Now, it wants cit and this cit also can be lent by the adhiṣṭhāna alone. It lends
the cit also because adhiṣṭhāna has cit as its very svarūpa. Once sat and cit are there, I exist
and then I know that I am; then we want to be happy. If the life is consistently miserable,
we will reconsider whether to exist or not and we will like to retain sat and cit when only
when life has ānanda. That is why in the first half of life, we pray for long life and as even
we grow we pray for shorter life. Sat and cit are meaningful or purposeful only when
ānanda is also there. And anātmā does not have its own original ānanda because bhūmā-
vidyā clearly says that the entire anātma-prapañca does not have even one droplet of
ānanda; therefore, the adhiṣṭhāna decides to lend ānanda also. When adhiṣṭhāna lends
ānanda to anātmā, priya, moda and pramoda pratibimba ānanda take place; when the
adhiṣṭhāna lends it is called ānanda-rūpa. Thus, sat, cit and ānanda are the svarūpa of
Lord Śiva. This Śiva is satya. This adhiṣṭhāna is sat-svarūpa; when it is serving the asatya
prapañca lending existence to the asatya prapañca, then the Lord is called satya or sat-
svarūpa. When the very same adhiṣṭhāna is proving the existence or revealing or
illumining the existence of anātmā [first I reveals the existence of the mind by lending the
cidābhāsa to the mind and through the mind it lends and illumines the existence of the
sense-organs then through the mind and through sense-organs it lends existence to
illumine the existence of the entire universe]. Thereafter I say jānāmi. Until I say jānāmi,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1322

the very existence of the world is never proved. You may say the world exists for others
but the others themselves are proved again because of me only.
Therefore, sadhakatvena means as the illuminator or revealer, sarvajaḍasya of the entire
jaḍa prapañca starting from kāraṇa-śarīra, otherwise called mūlāvidyā, which is the
closest anātmā; sūkṣma-śarīra is slightly distanced anātmā, then sthūla-śarīra and then
bāhya prapañca. The light of consciousness penetrates all these levels. The illuminator of
all the jaḍa prapañca cit-rūpaḥ bhavati. The same Lord Śiva is called cit-rūpa. Then, the
very same Śiva ānanda-rūpaḥ bhavati, as an object of love. The only object of desire is not
the object. Yājñavalkya loudly declares that nobody loves the wife or husband or children
or any blessed things, but everyone loves oneself only. The only source of ānanda is
myself alone. The object of love is ānanda and the only ānanda is myself; therefore, Ātmā
is ānanda-svarūpa. When I identify with anātmā, because of identification I see ānanda in
them. Because of aham abhimāna and mama abhimāna. By using the word mine I extend
my Ātmā to the anātmā; because I extended there; I love extended me to the child not the
child itself. I love the child because I myself am extended to the child and I use the
expression mama and it indicates the extension of I. When a thing is in the shop, I am not
attached to the products available there. I the Ātmā always is the object of love. Nobody
loves anything but everyone loves one’s Self alone. That everybody has Self-love only is a
fact. If you love yourself only, you will become selfish. You are supposed to love everyone.
We love the Self only. We want to love everyone. There is only one way that the Self to be
extended, to be seen as adhiṣṭhāna of the entire cosmos; when the universe is included in
the Self; Self-love will be included in the universal Self. The universal is included Self,
includes everything. Being the object of love all the time, ānanda rūpa, Ātmā is of the
nature of ānanda. Refer to 1st chapter verses 8 and 9 of Naiṣkarmyasiddhi. Therefore, you
have to connect the second line of 57th śloka and 1st line of 58 and you have to make a
third sentence Śivaḥ eva sadā premāspadatvāt ānandarūpaḥ bhavati. Śiva alone is the
ānanda-svarūpa because Śiva alone is always the object of love in the form of I, the Ātmā.
Turīya Śiva is sat-rūpa, cit-rūpa and ānanda-rūpa. Normally, sat-cit-ānanda alone we will
say; here, it is said it is ananta-svarūpa or pūrṇa-svarūpa. After ānanda-rūpa, we have to
put a full stop.
Further, Ātmā pervades everything and illumines everything by pervading everything. It
is so because the light illumines an object only by spreading over the object. Suppose the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1323

rays of the tube-light are confined to tube-light only, then our body will not be illumined.
Remember that when the light illumines the body, it means that the light spreads over the
body and illumines. Similarly, caitanya illumines everything not by being seated in one
place but by spreading over every object. That means every object is within the ambit of
caitanya alone. Anything outside the light will not be visible and anything outside the
caitanya cannot even be known to be in existence because the very existence cannot be
proved. Therefore, everything is included in caitanya just like everything is included in
the space. Once I know I am the caitanya, I know I am the possessor of everything and I
don’t have to acquire anything because I have toonly acquire something which is away
from me. As Ātmā nothing is away from me and there is nothing that does not belong to
Ātmā. For vyāvahārika purposes, I may not own anything but from pāramārthika angle I
am pūrṇa Ātmā. Once in a while, sit in a quiet place and meditate that you don’t lack
anything and this is called tṛpti or mokṣa which we saw in tṛpti-dīpa, the previous chapter
of Pañcadaśī. Ātmā has connection with everything and everything belongs to Ātmā. The
idea of belonging is there all the time. I belong to you and you belong to me. The sense of
belonging is there because as an individual, I always feel limited and isolated. The more I
am isolated the more insecure I am; therefore, I want people to belong to me. Once I know
that everything belongs to me, what do I lack in life? These are all serious problem s; as
even we grow old, the sense of loneliness and insecurity grows and to invoke that
belonging, we want to relate with others by talking, exchanging gifts, etc. These are
methods of reinforcing the sense of belonging. In old days, they never had any time. The
sense of belonging becomes lesser and lesser and I feel isolated and I feel rejected and I
feel pain; these are all emotional issues caused by the basic ignorance whether people talk
to me or not, whether they wish me on my birthday or not, whether they give me gifts or
not; all these things are immaterial. I lack nothing and I am pūrṇa; that is my real nature.
Therefore, Śivaḥ Ātmā is sampūrṇaḥ bhavati. I don’t lack anything and I don’t miss
anything.

śloka 8.59
इति शैवपुराणेषु कू टस्थः प्रविवेचितः ।
जीवेशत्वादिरहितः के वलः स्वप्रभः शिवः ॥ ८.५९ ॥
iti śaivapurāṇeṣu kūṭasthaḥ pravivecitaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1324

jīveśatvādirahitaḥ kevalaḥ svaprabhaḥ śivaḥ (8.59).

In this manner, as mentioned in the previous śloka, iti refers to the ślokas 56, 57 and 58,
belonging to Shiva Purāṇa ślokas, kūṭasthaḥ pravivecitaḥ, kūṭastha caitanya, the original
consciousness, has been separated clearly. It is distinguished as the adhiṣṭhāna satya
caitanya. It is distinct from the entire anātma-prapañca. In anātmā three things are
involved; normally, we will talk about jagat but here he includes three things: jagat, Jīva
and Īśvara. Jīva is anātmā number one, Īśvara is anātmā number two and jagat is anātmā
number three. The logic behind this must be clear. Jīva is the reflecting medium plus the
reflected consciousness; Jīva consists of śarīra-traya and pratibimba-traya or ābhāsa-traya,
three reflections put together Viśva, taijasa and prājña, Virāṭ, Hiraṇyagarbha and Īśvara;
the reflection also belongs to anātmā for reflection is also subject to arrival and departure
along with the medium. Jīva is Viśva-, taijasa- and prājña-rūpa pada-traya of Māṇḍūkya.
Īśvara does not fare better as Īśvara is prapañca-traya and pratibimba-traya, again the
three reflections of the three universes sthūla-prapañca-pratibimbita caitanya sūkṣma-
prapañca-pratibimbita caitanya and kāraṇa-pratibimbita caitanya, Virāṭ Hiraṇyagarbha
and Īśvara or Antaryāmī as is stated in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Īśvara is seen as the third
pada and all the three padas are anātmā and therefore, mithyā. In the fourth pada, they
are all dismissed. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says Jīva is also anātmā, Īśvara is also anātmā
and jagat is also anātmā. Debendranath Tagore was one of the champions of Brahmo
Samaj. Previously, he had read Upaniṣad and all that with some translation. Later, when
he studied the bhāṣyas he says that even Īśvara is dismissed and I was wondering what he
would do. Truth has to be ultimately understood. Īśvara is also mithyā, definition of
Īśvara being the reflected consciousness plus reflecting medium. Thus, Īśvara is different
from the original consciousness.
So he says jīveśatvādi-rahitaḥ, that turīya caitanya Śiva, who is free from jīvahood, which
stands for inferior attributes and also from Īśatva, which stands for superior attributes;
both inferior and superior attributes are not there in the Turīya Śiva. Therefore, kevala.
Kevala means non-dual Advaita. That does not mean after gaining this knowledge
“Svāmiji, should I continue my regular pūjā?”, “my bhakti comes down”, these are all the
arguments given. Just as we pay money and watch a movie knowing that it is mithyā, but
we ourselves buy ticket and not only we go but we go through all the emotions, positive
as well as negative. We are subject to emotions whether it is a movie or a serial. So we can

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1325

see this world movie and we have Jīva, Īśvara, worship and can go through all the feelings
of a bhakta also no iota of bhakta is disturbed by this wisdom. Advaita-jñānī is as much a
great bhakta as other dvaitins. Therefore, if bhakti is disturbed by jñāna, then it is to be
taken that jñāna is not clear. You can continue to put on Jīva-kañcuka and sit in front of
Īśvara and you can enjoy the pūjā all the time claiming pūrṇatva. More in the next class.

Class 250
śloka 8.59 contd.
Vidyāraṇya establishes the ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā in all these ślokas beginning from the
27th śloka to show that cidābhāsa alone appears as Jīva and Īśvara and the original
consciousness is different from both the Jīva cidābhāsa and Īśvara cidābhāsa and that
original kūṭastha caitanya is nirguṇa, śuddha and ever-free. In support of that, he gave the
Śiva Purāṇa ślokas 56 to 58. Now, he says that Śiva Purāṇa ślokas also convey the same
teaching only. This śloka we have seen in the last class. kūṭastha caitanya has been
separated from ābhāsa-caitanya. This kūṭastha caitanya is free from Jīva status and Īśvara
status; therefore, he says in the second line jīveśatvādi-rahitaḥ. Kūṭastha does not have the
Jīva attributes as also Īśvara attributes. Kūṭastha is free from inferior and superior
attributes. Both statuses are not there in the original consciousness and therefore, it is
kevala. It means advaita without sajātīya, vijātīya and svagata bhedas. It is svaprabha
which means self-evident or self-effulgent and Śiva. You can take Śiva as the Lord or take
the literal meaning of the word as auspicious. Śiva means maṅgala-rūpa. Up to this, we
saw in the last class.

śloka 8.60
मायाभासेन जीवेशौ करोतीति श्रुतत्वतः ।
मायिकावेव जीवेशौ स्वच्छौ तौ काचकुम्भवत्॥ ८.६० ॥
māyābhāsena jīveśau karotīti śrutatvataḥ.
māyikāveva jīveśau svacchau tau kācakumbhavat (8.60).
Here, Vidyāraṇya points out that cidābhāsa should be understood as vyāvahārika satya or
mithyā. It should not be taken as satya. Cit will come under satya category and cidābhāsa
should be taken under mithyā or vyāvahārika satya category. Therefore, cidābhāsa enjoys

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1326

the same status as the antaḥkaraṇa or what the world enjoys. Otherwise, there will a
problem of duality because cit is also taken as satya, cidābhāsa also as satya; there will be
two consciousnesses. Therefore, to avoid dvaita problem one should be mithyā and the
other satya. Cidābhāsa alone is mithyā. Now, question is asked: how you do prove that
cidābhāsa is mithyā? There is a Śruti vākya that says Jīva cidābhāsa and Īśvara cidābhāsa
are produced out of Māyā and anything that is a product of Māyā is mithyā. Therefore,
cidābhāsa is mithyā māyikatvāt prapañcavat. All the products of Māyā are mithyā as is
stated in the Śruti as the products of Māyā are apauruṣeya viṣaya. [Nṛsiṃhottaratāpanīya
Upaniṣad 9th mantra] Māyā alone generates or creates both Jīva and Īśvara by means of
producing the reflecting medium. Māyā itself provides itself as the reflecting medium for
the reflection of macro cidābhāsa [Īśvara] and within Māyā, the vyaṣṭi antaḥkaraṇa or
kāraṇa-śarīra is there and the latter serves as a medium for the reflection of vyaṣṭi
cidābhāsa. One Māyā itself serves as macro medium and also as micro medium and
thereby, become responsible for manifestation of macro reflection and micro reflection; as
Māyā is anādi, the reflections are also anādi.
Māyā produces means it as though produces. If we take it as produced in the literal sense
then Īśvara will be taken as produced and will have an end also! Māyā provides only a
medium for the consciousness. Therefore, kūṭastha is anādi, Māyā is anādi, Jīva is anādi
and Īśvara is also anādi. All the four are anadis only but of them, Jīva, Īśvara and Māyā are
mithyā anādi, whereas pure consciousness Brahman alone is satya anādi. In this manner,
it has been heard or it has been stated in Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. Therefore, it
is concluded that Jīva and Īśvara fall under the category of Māyā products which means
both are mithyā. However, there is a difference between the universe or pañca-bhūtas
which are Māyā-kārya and cidābhāsa which is also Māyā-kārya. One is insentient and the
other is sentient which is a unique thing. Jīva and Īśvara are sentient while the jagat is
found to be insentient. It is so because cidābhāsa is a finer product of Māyā and pañca-
bhūtas are grosser of products of Māyā. Because of the difference in the fineness of the
product, one is sentient and the other is insentient. It is comparable to the pot made of clay
and another made out of glass.

śloka 8.61
अन्नजन्यं मनोदेहात्स्वच्छं यद्वत्तथैव तौ ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1327

मायिकावपि सर्वस्मादन्यस्मात्स्वच्छतां गतौ ॥ ८.६१ ॥

annajanyaṃ manodehātsvacchaṃ yadvattathaiva tau.
māyikāvapi sarvasmādanyasmātsvacchatāṃ gatau (8.61).
The same idea is clarified with the help of another example. The idea here is that both
pañca-bhūtas and two cidābhāsas, the micro and macro, are called māyika but one is jaḍa
and another is cetana even though both are Māyā-kārya. How is it possible? One example
he gave was kācakumbhavat earlier and another example he gives here. The mind and the
body are both are nourished by and produced out of the same anna only. Anna is the
source of the mind also. Out of the same anna alone this sthūla-śarīra the body and the
mind are generated. Even though both are anna-kārya, there is a difference between the
fineness between them, one is gross and another is subtle; the gross body is not able to
reflect consciousness directly, whereas the mind is able to reflect consciousness directly.
These differences are there even though the cause happens to be one and the same anna.
Thus, out of one and the same cause, different products of different degrees of fineness is
possible.

Therefore, he says anna-janyam manaḥ. The mind although a product of anna, is svaccha
of a finer quality. That is why in the shop also the finer thread of cotton will be charged
more. How can you say so? That is how it is. If you want to buy, buy, or else get lost! The
cause remaining the same, the product can have different degrees of fineness. The mind is
the finest of the other components of the physical bodies. In the same manner, the Jīva
cidābhāsa and Īśvara cidābhāsa also happen to be a very very fine product of Māyā; they
have got extreme fineness sarvasmād anyasmāt compared to all the other jaḍa dravyas
like the three śarīras which are jaḍa, three prapañcas are jaḍa and pañca bhūtas are jaḍa.
The cidābhāsa alone is a unique product which makes it cetana dravya. Compared to all
other jaḍa vastus, svacchau they both are extremely fine even though they are the
products of Māyā. Still it is capable of creating such a fine dravya [product].

śloka 8.62
चिद्रू पत्वं च सम्भाव्यं चित्त्वेनैव प्रकाशनात्।
सर्वकल्पनशक्ताया मायाया दुष्करं न हि ॥ ८.६२ ॥
cidrūpatvaṃ ca sambhāvyaṃ cittvenaiva prakāśanāt.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1328

sarvakalpanaśaktāyā māyāyā duṣkaraṃ na hi (8.62).

Cidrūpatvaṃ ca sambhāvyaṃ the sentiency of the cidābhāsa or the sentient nature of
cidābhāsa should be accepted by us because it is proved by our own direct experience that
the cidābhāsa is sentient and śāstra need not prove; because our own experience proves
the sentiency of the cidābhāsa which we feel in our body and in our mind, etc. Therefore,
that cidābhāsa is sentient cittvenaiva prakāśanāt, means it appears for us, that means we
experience it as citvena eva only as sentient; therefore, experience proves that cidābhāsa is
sentient; śāstras prove that cidābhāsa is Māyā-kārya. This is how you have to combine
these two. Śāstra proves cidābhāsa is Māyā-kārya, experience proves that cidābhāsa is
sentient, joining śāstra and experience we combine and make a statement sentient
cidābhāsa is produced by Māyā. It is like the radium in the watch has shining nature even
in the darkroom even though it is not a light by itself, it has shining nature; similarly,
cidābhāsa has the sentiency proved by our own experience.

Then the next question we will ask is how can Māyā produce sentient cidābhāsa? For that,
he says if Māyā can produce all the other things, it can produce this also. Therefore, he
says sarvakalpanaśaktāyā māyāyā, since Māyā has the capacity to create everything. At
the same time Brahman does not create anything because it is kārya-kāraṇa-vilakṣaṇa.
Brahman does not do anything. Anything created comes from Māyā. Therefore, if there is
a temporary consciousness, that temporary consciousness also must be produced by
Māyā alone. Sarvakalpanaśaktāyā māyāyā for Māyā which is separate potent powerful
enough for producing or projecting everything, nothing is impossible and therefore,
adding a few cidābhāsas will not be very difficult for Māyā.

śloka 8.63
अस्मन्निद्रापि जीवेशौ चेतनौ स्वप्नगौ सृजेत्।
महामाया सृजत्येतावित्याश्चर्यं किमत्र ते ॥ ८.६३ ॥
asmannidrāpi jīveśau cetanau svapnagau sṛjet.
mahāmāyā sṛjatyetāvityāścaryaṃ kimatra te (8.63).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that in the dream, the power of nidrā śakti which is the micro
version of Māyā, the individual nidrā, when that nidrā śakti is capable of producing
cetana svapna jīvas, Māyā can create the waker’s cetana vastu also. When the micro is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1329

capable why can’t macro Māyā do that? Therefore, why do you suspect, why do you
doubt the possibility as you do that regularly? Therefore, he says asmad nidrā api; our
own nidrā which is micro version of Māyā creates Jīva and Īśvara belonging to the svapna.
In suṣupti-avasthā also there is a Jīva; in svapna-avasthā there is jagat and during the
svapna discussion two jīvas are talking about the vast svapna world and they are asking
the question who created the world and both the dream individuals say janmādyasya
yataḥ, there is some Īśvara who has created svapna ākāśa, svapna vāyu and they discuss
Pañcīkāraṇa also!
All these things are there in svapna also created by this nidrā alone. Nidrā has produced
Jīva, jagat and Īśvara of svapna prapañca; similarly, Māyā creates Jīva, jagat and Īśvara of
jāgrat prapañca. What is the problem? The nature of dream Jīva and dream Īśvara is
cetana. Both of them are sentient only because there also Īśvara is karma-phala-dātā that is
of svapna karma. Our sleep creates the dream world and dream individual as a part of
dream projection made of mula-avidyā at the micro level. It creates the vyāvahārika Jīva
and vyāvahārika Īśvara. Māyā creates Jīva and Īśvara; why should you raise your
eyebrows?! It is very much possible and also supported by śāstra pramāṇa also. Therefore,
atra asmin viṣaye āścaryaṃ kim? Here, Vidyāraṇya addresses the other people or the
students who have raised the objection. Whatever Māyā does, you should not be surprised
because Māyā can do anything. Īśvara’s attributes sarvagatatva, Sarva-śaktimān, etc. Jīva’s
attributes are its limitations, etc; and jagat’s attribute is śabda, sparśa, etc. Māyā can do all
these things effortlessly.

śloka 8.64
सर्वज्ञत्वादिकं चेशे कल्पयित्वा प्रदर्शयेत्।
धर्मिणं कल्पयेद्यास्याः को भारो धर्मकल्पने ॥ ८.६४ ॥
sarvajñatvādikaṃ ceśe kalpayitvā pradarśayet.
dharmiṇaṃ kalpayedyāsyāḥ ko bhāro dharmakalpane (8.64).
You have to imagine a question from the student. He asks Māyā creates Jīva, Māyā creates
jagat and Īśvara also. That Īśvara has extraordinary attributes sarva-vyāpakatva, sarva-
kartṛtva, etc. All these attributes or the powers of Īśvara who creates? Vidyāraṇya says
why are you asking such a question? It is Māyā that has created Jīva, jagat and Īśvara. It is
Māyā which has created those attributes. When the substances themselves have been

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1330

created by Māyā, what is the problem with Māyā creating the attributes?! Māyā itself is
responsible for the distinct attributes of Jīva and Īśvara. In addition to Jīva, jagat and
Īśvara, Māyā creates their attributes as well, for each of the three. Īśvara has omniscience
and omnipotence, etc. He uses the word kalpanā instead of sṛṣṭi to indicate that all of them
are of a lower order of reality as far as Brahman is concerned. All of them do not matter at
all for all of them are for the entertainment value alone for the one who remembers
pāramārthika nature.
The moment you forget kūṭastha svarūpa, cidābhāsa becomes real, Īśvara also becomes
real, puṇya-pāpa becomes real, prārabdha becomes real and then, all of them will bowl
you over. All those created by Māyā will affect cidābhāsa alone and never will they affect
the cit, the Śākṣi-caitanya. The entire creation is compared to an exhibition of the various
items produced by Māyā. Māyā exhibits Māyā’s creations of Jīva, Īśvara, etc. Don’t ask me
how Māyā can create the attributes. When Māyā can create the substances what is the
difficulty in creating the attributes?

śloka 8.65
कू टस्थेऽप्यतिशङ्क्य स्यादिति चेन्मातिशंक्यताम्।
कू टास्थमायिकत्वे तु प्रमाणं न हि वर्तते ॥ ८.६५ ॥
kūṭasthe:'pyatiśaṅkya syāditi cenmātiśaṃkyatām.
kūṭāsthamāyikatve tu pramāṇaṃ na hi vartate (8.65).
Vidyāraṇya thinks that question may be raised by the student. We have seen Māyā has
created anything you name. Jīva cidābhāsa it has created; Īśvara cidābhāsa it has created;
jagat it has created; Jīva attributes it has created; Īśvara’s attributes it has created; jagat
attributes it has created. All the six items are created by Māyā that Jīva, jagat, Īśvara and
Jīva-, jagat- and Īśvara-dharma. If it has created everything, naturally all the transactions
also must be the creation of Māyā only. If all these are created by Māyā why cannot you
add kūṭastha caitanya also in the list, that kūṭastha is also created by Māyā? Why do you
keep that one outside? After all that you have said, why do you leave out the one kūṭastha
outside the purview of creation of Māyā? Why cannot you say kūṭastha is also Māyā-
kārya? This extra doubt may come in the mind of a student. The previous doubt was
whether cidābhāsa can be created by Māyā? And for that answer has been given.
Cidābhāsa can be created by Māyā. Now, the doubt is why cannot it be taken that cit also

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1331

is created by Māyā? Now, the doubt is cit-centred doubt. So it is treated to be an additional

doubt.
If such a question is asked, our answer is you don’t extend it too much. It means never
conclude that kūṭastha is also a product of Māyā. Don’t make such a conclusion. To make
such a conclusion, you require a proof. It should be either Śruti pramāṇa or yukti pramāṇa
or some anubhava pramāṇa must be there. Cidābhāsa is a product of Māyā. There is a
pramāṇa and the pramāṇa is śāstra. Nowhere śāstra says kūṭastha is a product of Māyā
but on the other hand Śruti says Brahman is satyam jñānam anantam; thus, Upaniṣad
clearly says that jñāna, kūṭastha caitanya is satya. If kūṭastha caitanya is a product of
Māyā, it will be mithyā alone. How can the product of Māyā be satya? It cannot be.
Further, Upaniṣad clearly says satyam jñānam anantam; therefore, there is no Śruti
pramāṇa that kūṭastha caitanya is Māyā-kārya. When the original Brahman is not
available for any pramāṇa, how can it be available for yukti pramāṇa? The fundamental
lesson of Vedānta is that all the pañca pramāṇas do not have any access to kūṭastha
caitanya, the Absolute reality. When they don’t have any access to Brahman, how can they
prove it as satya or mithyā! Therefore, yukti and anubhava pramāṇas are also not there.
Śruti alone has access to Brahman. That Śruti never says Brahman is a product of Māyā.
Therefore, kūṭastha cannot be māyika, a product of Māyā. Only Brahman is not the
product of Māyā.
You can ask another question. Everything else is mithyā because they are the product of
Māyā. Brahman or kūṭastha is not mithyā because it is not product of Māyā. Then one will
ask Māyā is product or otherwise? You cannot say Māyā is a product of Māyā. It cannot
produce itself. Brahman is not the product of Māyā. Therefore, Brahman is not mithyā. It
is satya. Māyā is also not a product of Māyā. Therefore, Māyā also is satya one may say,
for it is not a product of Māyā like Brahman. That is, one may think: Māyā is satya because
it is not a product of Māyā, like Brahman. For that, we have to give only Śruti support. We
have to say Śruti negates Māyā. Śruti never negates Brahman. Even though Māyā is not a
product of Māyā, we say Māyā is mithyā not because it is a product of Māyā, but because
Śruti does not say Māyā is product of satya. In fact, Māyā is negated by Śruti pramāṇa.
Refer to Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad bhūyaścānte viśvamāyānivṛttiḥ; Māyā-nivṛtti means
negation of Māyā. Not only has that Śruti said Brahman is Advaita but has negated Māyā.
If Māyā were satya Śruti would have said there are two Brahmans! Māyā is mithyā not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1332

because it is the product of Māyā, but Māyā is mithyā because it is negated by śāstra
pramāṇa. Kūṭastha is not negated by śāstra. Therefore, he says kūṭāsthamāyikatve tu
pramāṇaṃ na hi vartate

śloka 8.66
वस्तुत्वं घोषयन्त्यस्य वेदान्ताः सकला अपि ।
सपत्नरूपं वस्त्वन्यन्न सहन्तेऽत्र किंचन ॥ ८.६६ ॥
vastutvaṃ ghoṣayantyasya vedāntāḥ sakalā api.
sapatnarūpaṃ vastvanyanna sahante:'tra kiṃcana (8.66)
He goes one more step further. Śruti does not say kūṭastha is mithyā. You don’t have the
Śruti pramāṇa for that. On the other hand, we have got several Śruti supports to show that
kūṭastha is Brahman or satya. You don’t have any Śruti pramāṇa to show that kūṭastha is
māyika. On the other hand, we have got Śruti to say that kūṭastha is not only not mithyā
but it is satya Brahman. Satyasya satya is said in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Brahman is
said to be the ultimate reality and therefore, you have no support while I have Śruti
support; therefore, I alone win. The conclusion is that Jīva cidābhāsa is mithyā, Īśvara
cidābhāsa is mithyā and jagat is mithyā. Jīva attributes are mithyā, Īśvara attributes are
mithyā and jagat attributes are mithyā. Kūṭastha caitanya alone is satya Brahman.
Therefore, all the Upaniṣads loudly proclaim that Brahman alone is satya while all things
are the products of Māyā. More in the next class.

Class 251
śloka 8.66 contd.
Vidyāraṇya concludes ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra. First, he began with ābhāsa-vāda, cidābhāsa
and then he explained mahāvākya based on ābhāsa-vāda, in which case, we have to take it
bādha sāmānādhikaraṇya. Then, he gave further support from Śiva Purāṇa and now he
wants to conclude ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra. If Jīva, jagat and Īśvara are mithyā, all reflecting
media are mithyā and reflected consciousnesses are also mithyā ,then the mind will have
the tendency to extend it to kūṭastha caitanya also. Thus, the intellect may extend so, for
which Vidyāraṇya gave the answer: you don’t have any pramāṇa to show that original
consciousness is mithyā, whereas we have pramāṇa to show that reflected consciousness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1333

is mithyā and the pramāṇa is Māyā ābhāsena jīveśau karoti [Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya

Upaniṣad]. While the Pūrvapakṣī has no pramāṇa to prove the original consciousness as
mithyā, we have several Śruti vākyas to prove the original consciousness is satya. That is
said in śloka 66. All the Upaniṣads are uniformly vastutvaṃ ghoṣayanti loudly proclaim
the reality of Brahman or the original consciousness or Śākṣi-caitanya or the kūṭastha
caitanya. Not only that, the Upaniṣad does not want to accept any second thing enjoying
the same order of reality as the original consciousness; there cannot be any second entity
as rival to the original consciousness enjoying the same order of reality. Sapatna here
means rival. Another entity claiming as much reality as the original consciousness such
rivaling dvitīya vastu is not there. We don’t say second thing is not there but we say the
second thing enjoying the same order of reality is not there. All things enjoy a lower order
of reality and having the same order ,another rival to occupy pāramārthika-satya, there is
no second one.

śloka 8.67
श्रुत्यर्थं विशदीकुर्मो न तर्कान्वच्मि किंचन ।
तेन तार्किकशंकानामत्र कोऽवसरो वद ॥ ८.६७ ॥
śrutyarthaṃ viśadīkurmo na tarkānvacmi kiṃcana.
tena tārkikaśaṃkānāmatra ko:'vasaro vada (8.67).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says when we discuss nirguṇa brahman, the macro original
consciousness and saguṇa brahman which is the macro reflected consciousness; when we
discuss nirguṇa brahman and Īśvara, all come under apauruṣeya viṣaya. The vyāvahārika
satya is pauruṣeya viṣaya. Brahman the pāramārthika-satya is apauruṣeya viṣaya, which
means not available for any one of our pramāṇas of pratyakṣa, upamāna, etc. Our human
pramāṇas cannot handle the topic and they cannot prove anything positively or
negatively. If you want to discuss the status of Brahman and Īśvara you have to go by
apauruṣeya viṣaya and śāstra alone tells us that Īśvara is mithyā and Brahman is satya.
Upaniṣad clearly says Īśvara is also projected by Māyā and Jīva is also projected by Māyā
and we have to accept the Śruti pramāṇa as whatever is projected by Māyā is mithyā and
therefore, don’t question me if you want to study the Upaniṣad. Brahman is satya is also
said by the Upaniṣad alone and as such there are no arguments or discussions in this
regard. I am only interpreting or extracting the teachings of the Śruti to arrive at Brahman

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1334

as satya, while Jīva, jagat and Īśvara all the three are mithyā. Both the ideas are extracted
from Śruti pramāṇa only. This fact is being clarified in these ślokas. All what is said is not
based on pratyakṣa or anumāna for they have no access to Brahman or Īśvara.
The Upaniṣad itself has said naiṣā tarkeṇa matirāpaneyā, this knowledge you cannot
gather through tarka; therefore, you have to gain this knowledge from Śruti alone.
Therefore, you cannot raise logical questions also. Logical questions are not allowed in
supra-logical field. You can raise the question only in the matter of understanding the
Śruti. The whole world is born out of Māyā and therefore, it is mithyā and Brahman is not
born of Māyā; therefore, it is satya. Therefore, he says not to enter laukika tarka with
regard to apauruṣeya brahma Īśvara viṣaya. There is no scope for laukika tarka.

śloka 8.68
तस्मात्कुतर्कं सन्त्यज्य मुमुक्षुः श्रुतिमाश्रयेत्।
श्रुतौ तु मायाजीवेशौ करोतीति प्रदर्शितम्॥ ८.६८ ॥
tasmātkutarkaṃ santyajya mumukṣuḥ śrutimāśrayet.
śrutau tu māyājīveśau karotīti pradarśitam (8.68).
Vidyāraṇya asks students to leave laukika tarka with regard to Īśvara as satya or mithyā,
etc. When Advaitins say Īśvara is mithyā, don’t approach the issue with emotions.
Emotional people cannot assimilate Advaita. That is why Viśiṣṭādvaita and dvaita have
problems. Īśvara-mithyātva is too difficult to swallow. Either by tarka or by emotions, you
will have problems. Therefore, give up reasoning and emotions and go by śāstra pramāṇa.
A wise student should accept Upaniṣad pramāṇa and not āgama pramāṇa. All the āgama
śāstra will give importance to saguṇa Īśvara. Vaiṣṇava āgama will give importance to
Viśṇu and Śaiva to saguṇa Śiva, etc. They will get emotionally attached to the saguṇa
Īśvara. You may be attached until sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti comes and after that
Upaniṣad will introduce higher level of reality which is not saguṇa but nirguṇa brahman
alone. One should resort to Śruti. He says śrutau tu pradarśitam what is said in Śruti or
Upaniṣad I have already said before by quoting the Upaniṣad vākyas. That Māyā alone
falsely projects Jīva, Īśvara and jagat is very clearly said in the Upaniṣads. Refer to 60th
śloka of the same chapter. Therefore, Brahma is satya, while the jagat, Īśvara and Jīva are
mithyā is established beyond any doubt. With this, ābhāsa-vāda topic is also over. Now,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1335

from 69th śloka up to the end of this chapter, Vidyāraṇya will summarise the chapter.
These are called upasaṃhāra ślokas.

śloka 8.69
ईक्षणादिप्रवेशान्ता सृष्टिरीशकृ ता भवेत्।
जाग्रदादिविमोक्षन्तः संसारो जीवकर्तृकः ॥ ८.६९ ॥
īkṣaṇādipraveśāntā sṛṣṭirīśakṛtā bhavet.
jāgradādivimokṣantaḥ saṃsāro jīvakartṛkaḥ (8.69).
Even though Jīva, jagat and Īśvara are mithyā, from empirical angle, they have got
validity. Therefore, from empirical angle we call them as vyāvahārika satya. Hence, they
all follow the law of karma and they have got their own utility just as dream water is
useful to quench the dream thirst, dream medicines are useful to cure dream diseases.
Vyāvahārika things will be available for experience, they will have their utility and
therefore, vyavahāras continue in the Jīva-jagat-Īśvara plane. Brahman is avyavahārya for
it transcends all the vyavahāras. In the vyāvahārika-satya prapañca, certain vyavahāras
are done by vyāvahārika Īśvara and certain vyavahāras are done by vyāvahārika Jīva. The
two complement each other and run the show. Even for creating the world, Īśvara has to
contribute as karma-phala-dātā and Jīva has to contribute by producing puṇya-pāpa. If
Jīva does not produce puṇya-pāpa, Īśvara cannot create the world for there will not be any
basis for creation. The very basis is called law of karma. Jīva contributes, Īśvara
contributes; if either is absent, jagat cannot come into existence. That is why we say Īśvara
is sāmānya kāraṇa and Jīva is viśeṣa kāraṇa and therefore, kāraṇa-dvaya are required for
creation.
Sṛṣṭi begins from īkṣaṇa which means planning or visualization. Planning is called īkṣaṇa
in several Upaniṣads; hence, Vidyāraṇya uses the word īkṣaṇa. Up to anupraveśa entry
into the world in the form of pratibimbita caitanya the Īśa-sṛṣṭi. From creation to
anupraveśa sṛṣṭi is the job of Īśvara and at that time Jīva does not do anything. When
ākāśa-sṛṣṭi is done, Īśvara is busy and Jīva takes rest. In pañca-bhūta-sṛṣṭi, Īśvara is busy.
After the creation of all the lokas, sūkṣma-śarīras and sthūla-śarīras, when the śarīra-
pratibimba comes up, then alone Jīva comes into manifestation and thereafter alone, Jīva
starts his vyavahāra. Up to śarīra-sṛṣṭi and śarīra-cidābhāsa-praveśa Jīva is dormant in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1336

kāraṇa avasthā; Jīva is dormant, whereas Īśvara is busy. Once the śarīra is created and the
cidābhāsas have come to existence, thereafter, Jīva begins his activity beginning with
avasthā traya— jāgrat-avasthā, svapna-avasthā and suṣupti-avasthā. Thus, the Jīva starts
his journey and goes on and on. The Jīva’s journey continues up to videha-mukti. Jīva will
take temporary rest in suṣupti, also temporary rest in maraṇa and will take temporary rest
in pralaya. Total dissolution of Jīva takes place in videha-mukti alone. Until he gains
videha-mukti, Jīva suffers saṃsāra. Jīva and Īśvara pull the creation and if either of the
two are absent, the life cannot go on and therefore, we say Jīva and Īśvara are anādi and
both are required to pull the creation. The creation is also anādi, it is said. This śloka is
already given previously in 6.213. We have discussed the same topic. Also refer to 7.4.

śloka 8.70
असङ्ग एव कू टस्थः सर्वदा नास्य कश्चन ।
भवत्यतिशयस्तेन मनस्येवं विचार्यताम्॥ ८.७० ॥
asaṅga eva kūṭasthaḥ sarvadā nāsya kaścana.
bhavatyatiśayastena manasyevaṃ vicāryatām (8.70).
Vyāvahārika Jīva and vyāvahārika Īśvara run the vyāvahārika jagat and this process has
neither a beginning nor does it have an end. Remember that only a few jīvas dissolve in
videha-mukti and there are infinite number of jīvas; a few of us dissolving will not stop
the show. Therefore, all these three are anādi and ananta as given in the 15th chapter of
the Gītā. This vyāvahārika tripuṭī in the form Jīva-jagat-Īśvara will eternally continue and
it is nitya. When this eternal drama continues, the pāramārthika caitanya will continue
undisturbed and unstirred. That caitanya is asaṅga caitanya; by its mere presence, it lends
existence to vyāvahārika Jīva, vyāvahārika jagat and vyāvahārika Īśvara. Thus, kūṭastha
lends existence and even lending existence is not the job as in its presence, other things
borrow and the show continues. Whenever ‘is-ness’ is there, that ‘is-ness’ comes from
kūṭastha caitanya alone. Whenever Īśvara says I am, the amness of Īśvara does not belong
to Īśvara but it comes from kūṭastha. Similarly, when you say I am, the amness in I, that
Jīva, that also comes from kūṭastha caitanya alone. Thus, kūṭastha lends existence
everywhere. Therefore, kūṭasthaḥ asaṅga eva sarvadā. The value addition or change or
improvement takes place for kūṭastha just as mirage water cannot increase the weight of
the sand. Before, the sand had one kg weight and after mirage water which will have one

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1337

kg, there are two kgs— we cannot say so as it does not add anything. When it disappears
it does not reduce anything also. Through all these vyāvahāras, kūṭastha is unaffected and
it is asaṅga. Let this wisdom be there behind your mind when you are involved in the
worldly transactions, especially when provoking situations come and when prārabdha
karma is not that favourable. Remember all the time that the drama is on and I am only a
śākṣī, I lend existence and I am unaffected by the drama that goes on around me. Don’t
forget this fact.
If vyāvahārika satya is also eternal and pāramārthika-satya is also eternal, is not there
duality? Again you have to say I only say there are no two pāramārthika satyas. Advaita
means there are no two pāramārthika satyas but we are not against one pāramārthika-
satya and infinite vyāvahārika satyas. Let there infinite prātibhāsika satyas also. We
negate only two pāramārthika satyas. Let the vyāvahārika satyas continue because that
cannot touch me the kūṭastha who am pāramārthika-satya. This may you remember.

śloka 8.71
न निरोधो न चोत्पत्तिर्न बद्धो न च साधकः ।
न मुमुक्षुर्न वै मुक्त इत्येषा परमार्थता ॥ ८.७१ ॥
na nirodho na cotpattirna baddho na ca sādhakaḥ.
na mumukṣurna vai mukta ityeṣā paramārthatā (8.71).
As far as vyāvahārika satya is concerned, from pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi it is as good as non-
existent. Generally, we don’t say it is non-existent, but we say it is existentially available
and yet, it does not enjoy pāramārthika existence. From pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, all the
vyavahāras are as good as not there. A rope-snake is apparently there. That is also correct;
rope-snake is not there really is also correct. It is seemingly present but really not present
and therefore, we say rope-snake is present and also we say it is not present. When we say
it is present, it is seemingly present and when we say it is not present, it is really not there.
We have mithyājāti vāda and ajāti vāda. ajāti vāda means really creation is not there; but
mithyājāti vāda means apparent creation is there.
This idea is given in Māṇḍūkya kārikā śloka 2.32. This occurs in Brahmabindu Upaniṣad
or Amṛtabindu Upaniṣad. We have seen this in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. From the
pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi, the truth is that there is no creation. Therefore, na nirodhaḥ.
Therefore, there is pralaya. And there is no bondage and there is no saṃśārī Jīva; there is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1338

no sādhaka Jīva practicing karma-yoga. There is no mumukṣu Jīva attending Vedāntic

classes; there is no mukta Jīva also at the end of this class. This is the ultimate truth. They
are really non-existent and they are all fiction. Both tragedy and comedy can become
entertainment only in a movie or TV serial. Similarly, life can become an entertainment
only when life also becomes another movie and it should not be reality and therefore, he
says everything is a fiction novel. They are not absolutely real but remember empirical
validity.

śloka 8.72
अवाङ्मनसगम्यं तं श्रुतिर्बोधयितुं सदा ।
जीवमीशं जगद्वापि समाश्रित्यावबोधयेत्॥ ८.७२ ॥
avāṅmanasagamyaṃ taṃ śrutirbodhayituṃ sadā.
jīvamīśaṃ jagadvāpi samāśrityāvabodhayet (8.72).
Vidyāraṇya answers a possible question that the Upaniṣads are meant to reveal the
pāramārthika-satya only. When they want to reveal pāramārthika-satya, why should they
talk about Jīva, jagat and Īśvara, sṛṣṭi, sādhaka, sādhana, etc? If they are all mithyā, then
why should Śruti talk about the mithyā Jīva, mithyā jagat, mithyā Īśvara, mithyā sādhana,
mithyā Guru and mithyā śiṣya? Why all these instructions are there when Upaniṣad is to
reveal pāramārthika-satya? If you ask such a question, Gaudapāda has already given the
answer. Remember the example when I ask for water you don’t bring water only but you
bring a container also, because pure water cannot be transferred from one place to another
for it requires a carrier. Similarly, pāramārthika-satya cannot be communicated without
the container called mithyā Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. Thus, mithyā Jīva-jagat-Īśvara is the
disposable cup. Use the disposable cup, drink pāramārthika-satya milk or whatever you
like and after absorbing, drop that cup. In all of them, the existence part is pāramārthika-
satya. Thus, I introduce Īśvara’s existence; then, you separate the existence part and drop
the Īśvara part; from the Jīva also, take the existence part and drop the Jīva; from the jagat
also, take the existence part and thereby drop the Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. This container is
required because pure existence is not available for talking or comprehending. That
pāramārthika-satya existence is not directly available for vāk and the mind.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1339

Therefore, bodhayatum to communicate that pure existence, resorts to the three disposable
containers as Jīva, jagat and Īśvara. Introducing them is adhyāropa and dropping the cups
after drinking coffee is taken as apavāda. Take the disposable cup as adhyāropa and drink
the coffee and the drop the disposable cup, that is called apavāda. Jīva-jagat-Īśvara are
disposable cups; drop them on realization of the truth or reality. Therefore, there is
nothing wrong in introducing Jīva-jagat-Īśvara.

śloka 8.73
यया यया भवेत्पुंसां व्युत्पत्तिः प्रत्यगात्मनि ।
सा सैव प्रक्रियेह स्यात्साध्वीत्याचार्यभाषितम्॥ ८.७२ ॥
yayā yayā bhavetpuṃsāṃ vyutpattiḥ pratyagātmani.
sā saiva prakriyeha syātsādhvītyācāryabhāṣitam (8.73).
Ābhāsa-vāda-prakriyā is used to arrive at the original consciousness and thereafter, we
will drop the ābhāsa and if we are using the pratibimba-vāda or avaccheda-vāda as used
by some other Ācāryas, Vidyāraṇya says I don’t the mind even if you use some other vāda
or method to define Jīva and Īśvara because the ultimate aim is arriving at the original
Brahman which is beyond Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. Therefore, to define Jīva-jagat-Īśvara any
definition you use, I don’t care. The ultimate aim is not Jīva, jagat or Īśvara, but our aim is
to reach the transcendental Brahman. Therefore, I have established ābhāsa-vāda, but I am
not rigid that you should use only ābhāsa-vāda. Some other definition also you may use, it
does not matter. Enclosed consciousness is one vāda and the reflected consciousness is
another vāda; whatever vāda you use it does not matter.
Somehow you should arrive at Brahman and not Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. Yayā yayā by whatever
prakriyā [the method of definition], by any methodology, pratyagātmani vyutpattiḥ
bhavet the aim is to gain brahma-jñāna about the original consciousness. Don’t ask which
vāda is correct, for any methodology is good in so far as that it reveals the original
consciousness or nirguṇa brahman. Refer to Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vārtika 1.402 śloka.

śloka 8.74
श्रुतितात्पर्यमखिलमबुध्वा भ्राम्यते जडः ।
विवेकी त्वखिलं बुध्वा तिष्ठत्यानन्दवारिधौ ॥ ८.७४ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1340

śrutitātparyamakhilamabudhvā bhrāmyate jaḍaḥ.

vivekī tvakhilaṃ budhvā tiṣṭhatyānandavāridhau (8.74).
An unintelligent student misses the message of the Śruti and he is interested in debating
whether pratibimba-vāda is better or ābhāsa-vāda is better or avaccheda-vāda is better
and he is lost in debating these different vādas, which are not important because any vāda
can be used and we don’t have to waste our time analyzing the relative merits of each
vāda. Don’t look at the container. Drink the item contained in it. A jaḍa person misses the
milk as he is lost in the prakriyās. However, an intelligent fellow enjoys infinite ānanda
which is pāramārthika Brahman.

śloka 8.75
मायामेघो जगन्नीरं वर्षत्वेष यथा तथा ।
चिदाकाशस्य नो हानिर्न वा लाभ इति स्थितिः ॥ ८.७५ ॥
māyāmegho jagannīraṃ varṣatveṣa yathā tathā.
cidākāśasya no hānirna vā lābha iti sthitiḥ (8.75).
The entire message Vidyāraṇya gives in one śloka to the intelligent student. The cloud of
Māyā showers jagannīraṃ the rain of universe. The universe is the rainy water showered
by Māyā clouds. Let the shower rain as the world according to the law of karma, but
caitanya ākāśa never becomes wet by the rain. Whatever worldly events happen, it is like
rain and I am the space unaffected by the water or the rain. This may be understood. There
is no loss or there is no gain for I am ever pūrṇa. The pūrṇatva of me is the message of all
the Upaniṣads. Remember the rain and remember that I am the sky.

śloka 8.76
इमं कू टस्थदीपं योऽनुसन्धत्ते निरन्तरम्।
स्वयं कू टस्थरूपेण दीप्यतेऽसौ निरन्तरम्॥ ८.७७ ॥
imaṃ kūṭasthadīpaṃ yo:'nusandhatte nirantaram.
svayaṃ kūṭastharūpeṇa dīpyate:'sau nirantaram (8.77).
He gives the phala Śruti that whichever student does nididhyāsana of this chapter
repeatedly, constantly, the advantage of the nididhyāsana is that he will come to the
binary format and he always abides and shines himself as kūṭastha and all the time he
enjoys nitya-mukti. With this the eighth chapter is over.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1341

Class 252

Summary of the eighth chapter: Kūṭastha-dipa-prakaraṇa

Today I will give you a summary of the 8th chapter of Pañcadaśī titled kūṭastha-dipa-
prakaraṇa. The main aim of Svāmī Vidyāraṇya in writing this chapter is to differentiate
the cidābhāsa and Śākṣi-caitanya. Cidābhāsa is the reflected consciousness and Śākṣi-
caitanya is the original consciousness. This śākṣī he names it as kūṭastha in this chapter.
That we should remember kūṭastha of this chapter is śākṣī which I mentioned are one and
the same. Having differentiated cidābhāsa and śākṣī, Vidyāraṇya establishes that
cidābhāsa is only vyāvahārika satya; otherwise, it is only mithyā which we utilize for the
worldly transactions. Cidābhāsa is a mithyā entity used for worldly transactions and our
real nature is not cidābhāsa, but it is śākṣī or kūṭastha caitanya. This śākṣī is identical with
Brahman which is nitya mukta. Therefore, a spiritual seeker has to claim the higher śākṣī
nature and abide in nitya-mukta-svarūpa instead of identifying with cidābhāsa and suffer
saṃsāra. This is the message he wants to give through this chapter. With this background,
we will briefly see the topics discussed here.
In the first three ślokas, Vidyāraṇya introduces the subject of cidābhāsa and kūṭastha, that
is the reflected consciousness and the original consciousness by giving the example of
original sunlight and the reflected sunlight which have been thrown on a wall. Imagine a
wall outside and the original sunlight is spread over the wall which is called sāmānya
sūrya-prakāśa, general sunlight or diffused sunlight. Suppose with the help of a mirror,
you throw a patch of reflected sunlight on the same wall, that reflected one is pratibimba
sūrya-prakāśa or visesa sūrya-prakāśa. Thus, there is one general pervading sāmānya
sūrya-prakāśa and there is a limited localized viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa, both fall on the wall.
We have to differentiate this sāmānya and the viśeṣa. The localized and the pervading are
to be differentiated. Vidyāraṇya said where viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa is there, brightness is
more. Where brightness is more there is double sunlight, one is the sāmānya and over that,
there is the viśeṣa also. The original and the reflection are there. Therefore, there is more
brightness whereas in other places there is only one sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa and therefore,
it is less bright or diffused. Thereafter, he pointed out where there is viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa
behind that the sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa is also there. But the problem is since they are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1342

inseparably mixed together, it is very difficult to differentiate these two in that particular
place. Sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa cannot be differentiated from viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa as they
are inseparably mixed together. If you want to know sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa you have
two options. Either watch in between where the viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśas are not there.
Imagine there are several mirrors and several viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśas between them in the
gap viśeṣa is not there what we experience is only sāmānya. One method is watching in
between the special patches. The second option is to remove the mirror and when the
mirror goes the viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa goes and what is left behind is only sāmānya sūrya-
prakāśa. When viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa is eliminated from the mirror, what is left behind is
sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa. We have to learn to differentiate sāmānya-viśeṣa-sūrya-prakāśa.
The same we have to apply for sāmānya-viśeṣa caitanya. Cidābhāsa is viśeṣa caitanya and
śākṣī is the sāmānya caitanya and the thoughts are the mirrors as it were. The thoughts in
the mind are the mirrors as it were which are responsible for the viśeṣas appearing and
disappearing. Thus, he introduces the twofold sunlight as an example in the first three
ślokas.
Then, from the fourth up to the sixteenth śloka, Vidyāraṇya talks about the differentiation
of śākṣī and cidābhāsa in the external world. Bāhya viveka external discrimination of śākṣī
and cidābhāsa by knowing their respective functions. We can functionally differentiate
cidābhāsa and the cit, the Śākṣi-caitanya. Vidyāraṇya describes that anything existent in
the world which is outside the purview of my perception will come under either the
known object category or unknown object category. Everything existent in the world, I
talk about the Prime minister, I talk about so many people, etc. When I talk about them, as
even you listen they all come under either known or unknown category and Vidyāraṇya
says all the objects coming under known and unknown category are illumined by the
Śākṣi-caitanya. Śākṣī is responsible for categorizing every existent object as the known or
the unknown. The knownness of the objects and the unknownness of the objects both are
illumined by the Śākṣi-caitanya. Cidābhāsa does not play any role at all for the objects do
not fall within the range of cidābhāsa. Therefore, all the objects in the world outside the
range of cidābhāsa are illumined by the śākṣī as known or unknown object. Therefore, the
role of śākṣī is illumining the knownness and the unknownness of the objects. jñānatā
ajñānatā ca sākṣiṇā prakāśite. If śākṣī is doing this job then what is the job left for poor
cidābhāsa? Vidyāraṇya says when an unknown object comes within the purview of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1343

cidābhāsa or which is illumined by the śākṣī as unknown, and which falls within the range
of cidābhāsa, the cidābhāsa directly pervades the object and the job of the cidābhāsa is to
remove the unknownness of the object. You take unknownness as a dark colour dress.
Imagine the object has a dark coloured cloth which is called ajñānatā unknownness and
cidābhāsa’s job is change the unknownness and make the object known; that means the
object is dressed with the new cloth, instead of ajñānatā it has become jñātā padārtha and
that object again goes away from the purview. It has gone away from the cidābhāsa’s
range and thereafter again, that object will be illumined by the śākṣī but now as a known
object. Between the unknown to known, there is a brief period when the object enters the
range of cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa changes the cloth from unknown adjective to known
adjective; cidābhāsa’s function is illumining the object. Śākṣī’s job is not illumining the
object but illumining the unknownness and knownness of the object; cidābhāsa’s job is
illumining the object and while illumining the object it does the conversion project.
Illumining is the conversion of the unknown object into known object; and thereafter, the
cidābhāsa’s job is over and the object can go out of the cidābhāsa and rest of the life the
object will continue to be a known object; Taj Mahal you might have seen long time ago,
but Taj Mahal will continue to be there as a known Taj Mahal; that knownness is not
because of cidābhāsa because Taj Mahal does not fall within the range of cidābhāsa now,
but it is because of Śākṣi-caitanya. Thus, the difference between cidābhāsa and cit is this.
The object is illumined by cidābhāsa and knownness and unknownness of the objects is
illumined by the cit or śākṣī. This is the topic from śloka number 4 to 16.
Then, from śloka 17 to 26 the same viveka Vidyāraṇya does internally; he experientially
discriminates cidābhāsa and cit. Outside discrimination is cognitive discrimination and the
internal discrimination is experiential discrimination; how can you differentiate the
experience of cidābhāsa and experience of śākṣī? That is the topic from 17 to 26. What does
Vidyāraṇya say in this regard is our question. Cidābhāsa is experienced whenever there
are thoughts in the mind and they are particular experiences. When we have thoughts in
the mind with every thought leading to a particular knowledge or particular experience,
all those particular experiences are because of the cidābhāsa, since whenever particular
experiences are there, thoughts are there; and when thoughts are there, the mind is also
active; when the active mind is there, particular cognitions are there, cidābhāsa is ruling
the roost, cidābhāsa is dominant even though śākṣī is very much there, śākṣī is behind the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1344

scene. Remember the example when there is viśeṣa sūrya-prakāśa, sāmānya sūrya-prakāśa
is not recognized because viśeṣa overpowers the sāmānya. Thus, during all specific
experiences śākṣī is behind and cidābhāsa is dominant and active. We clearly thus
experience cidābhāsa and not only we experience cidābhāsa, because of cidābhāsa we
have a sense of location also. Whenever there are specific experiences, I clearly feel that I
am an experiencer located in Chennai, located in a particular place; there is a sense of
location; śākṣī is suppressed and cidābhāsa is expressed. When there is a gap between
thoughts the thoughts have subsided, therefore, the mind is dormant, not prominent.
During that silent period, thoughts are resolved the mind is not prominent, specific
experiences are not there. Then, the cidābhāsa is resolved and it is not active. How do you
know the resolution of cidābhāsa because the mind is passive, thoughts are resolved,
specific experiences are not there? that silence period is the resolution or the temporary
resolution of cidābhāsa exactly as in the example seeing the gap between two patches of
sunlights. If a person says I don’t have a gap in the thoughts at all, because my mind is
highly active, in fact he thinks so fast two thoughts are happening simultaneously where is
the question of gap?
Vidyāraṇya says it does not matter; even the most active mind will have a particular well-
known avasthā called deep sleep state where there is neither the waker’s thoughts nor the
dream thoughts. During the sleep state, the thoughts are resolved, the mind is resolved
and specific experiences are resolved, viśeṣa caitanya cidābhāsa is also resolved. All
specific experiences are gone, be it śabda-jñāna, rūpa-jñāna, sparśa-jñāna, etc, all viśeṣa
jñānas are gone and again I don’t have a sense of location. Both, in silence or samādhi,
when a person deliberately enters into silence or in suṣupti-avasthā, natural or artificial
silence, there is no sense of location; that is the indication of cidābhāsa-resolution and
when cidābhāsa is resolved what we experience is sāmānya caitanya. That sāmānya
caitanya is Śākṣi-caitanya. What we call as blankness and what we call as silence is not the
absence of everything but the absence of everything other than śākṣī. What samādhi is,
what suṣupti is, is not blankness, it is not absence of everything, but it is absence of
everything other than śākṣī, because the world is resolved, thoughts resolved, the mind is
also resolved; based on the two experiences I should differentiate my two-fold personality.
In jāgrat-avasthā and svapna-avasthā, I have cidābhāsa-pradhāna personality and in
suṣupti-avasthā I have śākṣi-pradhāna personality. And we have both śākṣi-pradhāna

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1345

aham in suṣupti and cidābhāsa-pradhāna aham in jāgrat and svapna. Based on this, we
have to do the viveka in jāgrat-avasthā. Everyone has suṣupti-experience and therefore,
everyone has experienced both of them and our aim is to do viveka and ask the question:
which one is my real personality and which one is incidental? And by that viveka, I should
learn to claim the śākṣī as the real I and cidābhāsa as subject to arrival and departure, the
mind comes, cidābhāsa comes, thoughts come; the mind and thoughts are resolved,
cidābhāsa resolves and so, they are incidental and proved by vyatireka. Śākṣī is intrinsic
and proved by anvaya. This is the topic from 17 to 26.
You should never ask the question: how to experience the kevala śākṣī, totally without
cidābhāsa? If you have to experience pure śākṣī, totally without cidābhāsa, you have to
remove the mind from the body. The mind is responsible for cidābhāsa. Suppose the mind
quits the body, you have to die. The experience of pure śākṣī is a contradiction and there is
no question of pure śākṣi-experience. We can reach the closest version which is when the
mind is dormant, cidābhāsa is dormant. This condition is as good as pure śākṣī because
dormant cidābhāsa is as good as absence of cidābhāsa. Everyone experiences śākṣī in
suṣupti; śākṣi-anubhava, none is lacking. We don’t require any sādhana for śākṣi-
anubhava. All our sādhana is to do śākṣi-cidābhāsa-viveka for which śāstra is required.
We don’t lack anubhava, we lack viveka.

Then, from 27th śloka to 68th is the main theme of the 8 th chapter which is the analysis of
cidābhāsa. It is the enquiry into the topic of cidābhāsa. It is ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra. This is
technically significant because here, he separates the ābhāsa-vāda from avaccheda-vāda
and pratibimba-vāda which are the three methods used by advaitic Ācāryas in defining
Jīva and Īśvara. The three methods are used by advaitic Ācāryas in defining Jīva and
Īśvara and the three methods are known as ābhāsa-vāda, pratibimba-vāda and avaccheda-
vāda. We are avoiding going into the depth of the topic. I am also skipping from going
into the details. You should be aware of that. Ābhāsa-vāda is as distinct from the other two
avaccheda-vāda and pratibimba-vāda. Here five topics are discussed. This is the
subdivision of ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra.The first topic is the necessity of accepting cidābhāsa
for explaining Jīva and Īśvara. Why should you introduce a separate cidābhāsa different
from cit? That he explains by differentiating the ābhāsa-vāda from avaccheda-vāda. In
avaccheda-vāda, they avoid introducing a cidābhāsa and they explain the Jīva by

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1346

introducing the enclosed consciousness without introducing cidābhāsa. One all-pervading

consciousness is enough and you need not unnecessarily introduce cidābhāsa at all, since
you can explain Jīva by showing that enclosed consciousness within the mind. This is the
challenge given by avaccheda-vāda. Vidyāraṇya refuted it by saying that the enclosure
will not be enough to explain the Jīva. If enclosed consciousness can become Jīva, within
a pot also there is an enclosed consciousness for consciousness is all-pervading and the pot
also will become a Jīva! Therefore, since mere enclosure is not enough, avaccheda-vāda is
insufficient to explain the Jīva; therefore, cidābhāsa will have to be introduced. This is the
first topic. The necessity of introducing cidābhāsa because avaccheda-vāda is insufficient
is explained here.
The second topic is the definition of cidābhāsa. Vidyāraṇya defines cidābhāsa as the
image, an image of something which resembles the original. A photo of a person is also an
ābhāsa. Xerox copy is also an ābhāsa. A statue which you make is an ābhāsa. Thus,
anything which resembles the original, but which is not the original is called an ābhāsa.
Therefore, cidābhāsa is something which is different from cit, but which resembles the cit.
Vidyāraṇya says the reflection in the mirror also is an ābhāsa only. Thus, the definition is
any image which resembles the original is called ābhāsa. Cidābhāsa is an image of cit, the
consciousness; a Xerox copy of consciousness. It is a partial resemblance of cit. This is the
second topic.
The third topic is the scriptural support for the existence of cidābhāsa. He gave two
supports; one is of the Anupraveśa-Śruti where the Upaniṣad talks about the entry of
consciousness into the mind. When the Upaniṣad talks about entry of consciousness into
the mind, that entry can be only of cidābhāsa for cit cannot enter the mind, because
anything all-pervading cannot enter. Therefore, whatever enters must be something
localized finite other than the all-pervading one. It has to be cidābhāsa only, just as the
original sun enters the mirror in the form of reflection. Therefore, whenever we talk about
the entry of the sun into the waters or into the mirror, it cannot be original sun; imagine
the original sun can never come here and it will be very hot! It is a different sun but
resembling the sun. The second pramāṇa is in the Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa; it talks about the
birth and destruction of consciousness. It talks about temporary consciousness which rises
along with the mind and which goes along with the mind. The rising and setting
consciousness cannot be the original consciousness, because the original consciousness

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1347

does not rise and set; therefore, if there is a rising and setting consciousness, it has to be
cidābhāsa. And thus, anupraveśa is one pramāṇa and anityatva is another pramāṇa. From
this, we know there is another temporary localized consciousness which has to be
cidābhāsa. This is the third topic.
The fourth topic is the mahāvākya-interpretation based on ābhāsa-vāda, which is a
technical subject which I don’t want to enter into here again. In ābhāsa-vāda, mahāvākya
cannot be taken as Jīva-brahma-aikya, but mahāvākya should be taken as Jīva-bādha.
Through mahāvākya, the reflected consciousness is negated and the original
consciousness is retained as Brahman. The reflected consciousness cidābhāsa is negated
and when cidābhāsa goes away what remains is śākṣī or the original consciousness. In
ābhāsa-vāda, Jīva-aikya is not talked about; Jīva-bādha takes place, therefore, aikya-
sāmānādhikaraṇya you should not use, but bādha-sāmānādhikaraṇya you should use.
This is the fourth topic and it is interpretation of the mahāvākya.
The fifth and the final sub topic is ābhāsa-mithyātva. Cidābhāsa is only vyāvahārika satya
or it is mithyā. This is one of the major differences between ābhāsa-vāda and pratibimba-
vāda. In pratibimba-vāda, pratibimba is satya; how I will not go into now. Pratibimba-
vāda takes it as satya and in ābhāsa-vāda, ābhāsa is mithyā; Vidyāraṇya establishes.
Vidyāraṇya quoted Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad to show that ābhāsa is a product of
Māyā. This is the Śruti-based reasoning. Māyā ābhāsena jīveśau karoti. Māyā ‘produces’
Jīva and Īśvara through cidābhāsa by serving as a medium for the arrival of cidābhāsa.
From this, Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Śruti vākya ābhāsa is a product of Māyā. Jīva is
ābhāsa, Īśvara is ābhāsa, only difference is that one is micro ābhāsa and the other is macro
ābhāsa. One śarīra-traya ābhāsa and the other is prapañca-traya ābhāsa. Both of them are
products of Māyā. The world is a product of Māyā.
Thereafter, we can make an anumāna. Jīva-Īśvara-cidābhāsau mithyā-bhūtau both are
mithyā. Māyā-janyatvād. Being a product of Māyā, prapañcavad is like the universe.
Brahma satyam jagan mithyā we say; the world is mithyā, two cidābhāsa also must be
mithyā. Behind both Jīva and Īśvara, cit is the adhiṣṭhāna. Cidābhāsas are different, but cit
is one. Therefore, cidābhāsa-mithyātva is the fifth topic. All these are significant
technically, when we compare the three vādas: avaccheda, pratibimba and ābhāsa. I am
not cidābhāsa and I am cit. In jāgrat-avasthā and svapna-avasthā, I put on cidābhāsa veṣa
and in suṣupti-avasthā alone I am in my original nature. That is why all sleeping persons

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1348

are wonderful during sleep. Only when you get up, cidābhāsa rises, individuality rises,
rāga-dveṣa rises; that is why in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad Svayaṃjyoti and Śārīraka
Brāhmaṇas, suṣupti is taken as nearest to mokṣa. If you want to have the nearest example
for mokṣa, it is nidrā; you sleep, that is mokṣa. With this, ābhāsa-vāda-vicāra is over.
Now comes the final topic from 69 to 76. It is upasaṃhāra. It is the conclusion. In
conclusion, Vidyāraṇya says that the purpose of the Upaniṣadic study is not to study the
Jīva or Īśvara. Jīva and Īśvara are introduced only as an intermediary step and that is not
the ultimate goal of spiritual sādhana or enquiry. We cannot abolish Jīva and Īśvara; both
of them are required in karma kāṇḍa; both are required in jñāna kāṇḍa also initially to
study the tvam-pada-vācyārtha and tat-pada-vācyārtha, but our ultimate aim is
transcending Jīva and Īśvara and to claim the adhiṣṭhāna-caitanya as ahaṃ brahma asmi.
Having claimed that, I should claim I am the pāramārthika-satya and in me pāramārthika-
satya, mithyā Māyā is floating like a cloud. I am the space of all-pervading consciousness
which is pāramārthika-satya and in me, the space like consciousness, there are patches of
clouds called Māyā. Just as a cloud cannot contaminate the space, Māyā cannot
contaminate me, the Śākṣi-caitanya. This Māyā cannot keep quiet just as the clouds cannot
keep quiet. The job of the cloud is to pour waters in the form of rain constantly or now and
then, at least. Similarly, Māyā also releases the rain, rain of Jīva is one, rain of Īśvara is
another; both are cidābhāsa created. Therefore, of Jīva, Īśvara and the world, one can be
taken as hailstone and the other can be taken as rain water and the third as snow. There is
no tātparya in that. Vidyāraṇya says not only the cloud cannot contaminate the space,
even the rain or the hailstone or snow also cannot taint or affect or wet the ākāśa because
ākāśa is asaṅga-svarūpa. Similarly, Īśvara let him come as Īśvara also has some duty. He
cannot remain quiet, his duty being sṛṣṭi-sthiti-laya and also he is karma-phala-dātā.
Īśvara is active and Jīva is also active and the world is also active, rising and falling. All
these things will eternally continue. Vidyāraṇya says don't pray for stopping the process.
If you want to stop them, it is because you have given them reality; therefore, it disturbs
you and once you raise your level as pāramārthika and see the world as vyāvahārika, just
as you are not afraid of watching the serial or movie— even though it is a tragedy, still we
watch it because it is a serial we know— the entire life is a serial and like ākāśa claim the
mokṣa. It is śloka no 75. Let Māyā cloud rain the world as and when it wants. In me, the
cit, nothing happens and I am untainted whatever happens to the cidābhāsa. In

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1349

pāramārthika, they are not happening; in vyavahāra let them happen; so what? Now and
then, certain experiences I may ask. Scan the śloka and after a few ślokas convert it into so
what? This is the liberation. With this upasaṃhāra, Vidyāraṇya concludes the 8th chapter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1350

Chapter IX: Dhyāna-dīpa-prakaraṇa

॥ध्यानदीपोनाम-नवमः परिच्छेदः॥

Class 253
Introduction
Having completed the 8th chapter of Pañcadaśī, we will enter Dhyāna-dīpa chapter
consisting of 158 ślokas. In this chapter, Vidyāraṇya discusses a unique topic dealing with
a unique problem of Vedānta students. There are several problems and a unique problem
he wants to deal with here. First, we will understand the topic and then we will enter the
text. If a student studies Vedānta properly and systematically through a proper Ācārya for
a length of time, the student does clearly understand Vedāntic teaching. Really speaking, it
does not require extraordinary intelligence at all; if a person is reasonably intelligent and
properly listens, it is possible to get a clear understanding of Vedānta. Even if there is
some vagueness, if a few Vedāntic texts are studied, each text will remove a particular
type of vagueness. With the study of a few good books, clear knowledge does take place;
one can clearly understand the mahāvākya’s message. He would understand the meaning
of I which does not refer to cidābhāsa or body-mind-complex but I the Śākṣi-caitanya and
similarly, Brahman does not refer to nāma-rūpa but the word Brahman refers to existence
which pervades all the nāma-rūpas and therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi means I the Śākṣi-
caitanya is none other than the all-pervading existence, which is behind individual nāma-
rūpa as well as total nāma-rūpa. I the ‘cit’ is the ‘sat’ and I the ‘sat’ is the ‘cit’; this clear
understanding does take place which is a type of vṛtti or thought. Any understanding is a
process in the mind and the mind has only one type of process and that is vṛtti-pariṇāma
and understanding is a vṛtti, doubt is a vṛtti, error is a vṛtti, emotions are also vṛtti;
whatever happens in the mind is in the form of vṛtti or thoughts only and understanding
is also jñāna-vṛtti only. Thus, every sincere and serious student does get a jñāna-vṛtti by
proper study.
However, often, the problem is that even if the jñāna-vṛtti surfaces in the mind of the
student, somehow the student claims to the understanding but he is not willing to accept: I
have got jñāna. In a different language, he is willing to use the expression that ‘I have
clearly understood’; though he is has the mindset to accept the understanding but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1351

somehow he is not willing to to accept his ‘understanding’ as the rise of Ātmā-jñāna.

Hence, he does not have the willingness to claim that he is a jñānī! He has the
understanding and understanding is jñāna; therefore, he is a jñānī. Being a jñānī, he
should also claim that I am Brahman; Brahman is mukta; therefore, he should have the
resolve to claim that ‘I am already mukta’, a liberated one. This, somehow, some students
are not willing to accept. They will accept the understanding, but the extension part they
are a little bit worried about as to how I can claim that I have jñāna! I have an
understanding. How can I claim I am a jñānī. Thus, they refuse to claim the mukti but they
have the willingness to claim the understanding. That means they think jñāna is
something else other than understanding. Therefore, there is a consistent problem not in
all students but it is found in many students; they have the notion that understanding is
there; but still they don’t admit that they have gained the self-knowledge; they consider
real knowledge is something else; realization is something else; aparokṣa anubhava is
something else. Thus, they have jñāna-vṛtti but they don’t accept the jñāna-vṛtti as jñāna.
They have jñāna-vṛtti because they claim we understand; they have jñāna-vṛtti but they
refuse to accept jñāna-vṛtti as jñāna. Then what is jñāna? They have some opinion or the
other. Jñāna is something else which is realization; it is enlightenment; it is aparokṣa jñāna;
it is aparokṣa anubhava; that is something else they have concluded. Since they have
concluded aparokṣa jñāna as something else, their problem is that even if they have the
understanding which is jñāna-vṛtti, they don’t see it as jñāna. The peculiar situation is that
they don’t look upon jñāna-vṛtti as jñāna.
There are many students who don’t understand; therefore, they don’t have jñāna-vṛtti;
their problem is different because their problem is non-understanding because of some
obstacles or the other. They don’t have jñāna-vṛtti. That is the problem of one group of
students. Here, the unique problem is that they have understanding; jñāna-vṛtti is there;
but jñāna-vṛttau jñānatva-buddhiḥ nāsti. Once I don’t claim the understanding as jñāna,
and once I think jñāna is something else, the problem will be that I will have the
understanding and since I think jñāna is something else, I go to look forward to that jñāna
which I consider as something other than the understanding! As long as I look forward to
jñāna as something else, I will look upon myself as a successful sādhaka which means I
will continue my sādhaka status; I will continue my jijñāsu status and I will look upon
mokṣa as something to come in the future. Therefore, mokṣa is postponed, jñāna is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1352

postponed, sādhakatva status is preserved and the struggles of the journey continue. My
journey continues because I have not yet reached the destination jñāna. What he has is
jñāna-vṛtti or the understanding, while the destination is jñāna. Since jñāna I look upon as
destination and jñāna-vṛtti is not looked upon as jñāna, therefore, the spiritual journey
continues; he continues to be a mumukṣu even after gaining jñāna. He does not look upon
it as knowledge. Therefore, one is permanently in the state of waiting and never comes up
because of the simple reason that one has such a low opinion about himself or herself.
When I have such a low opinion about myself, I will fall a victim of inferiority complex so:
“I am an adhama adhikārī or a below average student”, “Jñāna can happen for great
people alone but jñāna cannot dawn on me”. Therefore, he refuses to claim the jñāna-vṛtti
as jñāna. What is the reason for this problem? Some obstacle or the other is there because
of which he refuses to claim jñāna-vṛtti as jñāna. As long as I don’t claim jñāna-vṛtti as
jñāna, I refuse to accept myself as a jñānī and when I refuse to accept myself as a jñānī, I
refuse to accept myself as mukta. Therefore, mokṣa will continue to be a distant
destination. Such a student requires not jñāna because they have the understanding which
is jñāna-vṛtti but their obstacles should go and they should learn to accept this
understanding itself as jñāna. Therefore, ahaṃ brahma asmi becomes a fact.
Therefore, I am Brahman, this acceptance should come by the removal of the various
obstacles. These obstacles can be of several types. Some are called known obstacles and
some are unknown obstacles. Known obstacles like pramāṇa-asambhāvanā, not being
convinced of the interpretation of Vedānta whether Adi Śaṅkarācārya interpretation is
correct or Ramanuja Ācārya’s interpretation is correct. It is confusion regarding the
interpretation and it is interpretational doubts or it can be logical obstacle or prameya-
asambhāvanā which also come under dṛṣṭa-pratibandha. There are some students who say
we have no doubts on Adi Śaṅkarācārya interpretation and we are convinced and we have
no interpretational or logical problems because the arguments advanced are perfectly
logical. It means there should be no doubt and they should claim jñāna and they should
claim they are nitya-mukta and their journey is complete and have gained liberation, but
they don’t do. If known obstacles are absent and if the student still continues to feel that I
have understanding yet I have to gain liberation, then the unknown obstacles alone can be
there because of which student refuses understanding as jñāna and he does not accept the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1353

jñāna-vṛtti as jñāna; and if unknown obstacles are there, we cannot use any known remedy
therefore, we have to try some other method.
Here, Vidyāraṇya prescribes to continue to dwell upon the understanding itself repeatedly
even though for you it is not jñāna but jñāna-vṛtti, may you repeat that vṛtti. Even though
it is jñāna-vṛtti in your mind it is not jñāna therefore, may you continue that seeming
jñāna-vṛtti as āvṛtti which he calls as upāsana. He calls it as “ahaṃ brahma asmi” upāsana
even though it is repetition of jñāna-vṛtti and jñāna-vṛtti repetition is called nididhyāsana
only; even though jñāna-vṛtti-āvṛtti should be called nididhyāsana but since this person
does not accept it as jñāna-vṛtti, in his mind it is not jñāna-vṛtti-āvṛtti therefore, you cannot
call it nididhyāsana. The difference between nididhyāsana and upāsana, although both are
jñāna-vṛtti-āvṛtti only, but when I do jñāna-vṛtti-āvṛtti taking it as jñāna-vṛtti then it is
nididhyāsana but when I repeat the jñāna-vṛtti without taking it as jñāna, this vṛtti-āvṛtti
will be called “ahaṃ brahma asmi” upāsana. When this ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti
takes place which is an upāsana, this upāsana can remove the adṛṣṭa obstacles, the unseen
obstacles, in the form of some pāpa prārabdha. It is also called as pratibandha prārabdha.
When ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana is continued, as even the pratibandha prārabdha goes
away, nothing new happens but the jñāna-vṛtti itself which I had not accepted as jñāna
before, now I begin to see this understanding itself as jñāna. No other jñāna is there and no
other jñāna is required also. This understanding alone is jñāna which I begin to claim for
in the mind-pratibandha is not there; therefore, the upāsana still gets converted into the
feeling “I am nitya-mukta” and no more “I am a sādhaka”, no more “mokṣa is my
destination”. To convey this idea, of the peculiar state, where jñāna has taken place and
one fails to it take it as jñāna, it being a peculiar problem, śāstra discusses by giving an
example.
In Saṅkṣepaśarīraka and in Vichārasāgara, this subject is elaborately discussed. That
example is this. It seems a king goes to the forest for hunting. While he was hunting in the
forest, by accident, he saw his own minister in the forest by name Bharchu. On seeing the
minister he was startled because previously there was a report that the Bharchu minister
ten years before went to the forest for some purpose and he was dead. The king and the
whole country had heard the report and everybody had concluded that Bharchu minister
had died and the king was extremely pained because he was one of the best ministers he
ever had. The king cried for him for several weeks and months and he had even forgotten

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1354

the minister. Now, he was standing in front of him. The king saw him. When he saw the
minister the knowledge takes place. It is knowledge called Bharchu-jñāna. The knowledge
took place, pramātā observer was there, pramāṇa is there which being cakṣu the eyes, the
king had the mind also undistracted.
Therefore, pramātā, pramāṇa and Bharchu the minister, the prameya, also is right in front.
When pramāṇa, pramātṛ, prameya come together, knowledge takes place. If the minister
had been far away, it would have been parokṣa jñāna. Aparokṣa jñāna of Bharchu takes
place because of pramātā-, prameya-, pramāṇa-sambandha. Even though the king had
jñāna-vṛtti of the minister who has been all the time good, must have been excited and
happy. Even though jñāna-vṛtti took place, because of some obstacle, he refused to accept
the minister-darśana as minister. What he had was minister-darśana, but he refused to
accept it as minister because for ten years he had clearly entertained the thought, and he
was convinced, that the minister is dead and that he must be existing in some other loka
and after ten years, how can he be there! Since he is not there, what I am seeing is not
Bharchu but the ghost of Bharchu. Therefore, he concluded Bharchu-darśana as ghost-
darśana. What he had: right or wrong knowledge? He had the right knowledge, but
because of the peculiar situation even though it was right knowledge he refused to accept
it as knowledge because of pratibandha in the mind.
Therefore, what he requires is not new Bharchu-experience for he had already Bharchu-
anubhava. He does not lack aparokṣa jñāna and he does not lack jñāna-vṛtti and even
though he had everything required because of some pratibandha he refused to accept it as
knowledge and therefore, what is require is not new pramāṇa; new anubhava is not
required; the available anubhava he should accept as Bharchu-anubhava and not ghost-
anubhava. Just by removing the obstacle, acceptance of my understanding itself as
aparokṣa jñāna alone is required. We don’t require new experience, no mystic state,
nothing is required. What is required is to see our understanding as final. As long as I take
it as non-final, I will be again looking for some final liberating knowledge and as long as I
look for some other knowledge, I will postpone mokṣa and therefore, the struggle will
continue. In the same way, when a student listens to mahāvākya, mahāvākya is the
pramāṇa for aparokṣa jñāna. Through mahāvākya pramāṇa, I understand, I have jñāna;
there are some students who refuse to accept the jñāna. Therefore, they postpone
liberating knowledge and liberation. The struggle continues. Therefore, the obstacles are to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1355

be removed. If the obstacles are known, they can be removed by a known method. But the
obstacles are unknown, I don’t feel the feeling of liberation! Somehow, they don’t know
how to express and say: I don’t feel I am liberated. When will be the liberated feeling and
for that feeling I can wait, they say. They don’t have a clear cut answer but they refuse to
accept that my svarūpa is liberated. Then, there is no clarity and there is only vagueness,
but they claim they understand. Whatever it is, repeat the understanding which is called
brahma-tattva-upāsanā and as even it is repeated, the obstacles will go away and then, the
student will accept that this understanding alone is jñāna and having jñāna alone is
accepting the content of jñāna as a fact. Ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact and if ahaṃ brahma
asmi is a fact, I am liberated here and now.
Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana or ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana, Vidyāraṇya
prescribes for the pratibandha-nivṛtti, not for new experience, but just to remove the
pratibandha; then the pratibandha is gone; what I took as non-jñāna, that itself I begin to
accept as jñāna. This understanding is jñāna. There is nothing other than this, there is no
final liberating knowledge. This upāsana is called as saṃvādi-bhrama. It is jñāna-vṛtti
which appears as though non-jñāna. It is so because the student refuses to accept it as
jñāna. Jñāna-vṛtti which is not accepted as jñāna like Bharchu-vṛtti which is jñāna, but
which is not accepted by the king. Similarly, jñāna-vṛtti which is not accepted as jñāna is
called saṃvādi-bhrama and when this saṃvādi-bhrama is repeated after some time the
pratibandha goes away. Thereafter, I begin to claim what knowledge I had all these days
alone is the wisdom and that alone is liberation. Saṃvādi-bhrama is the unique topic
introduced in the 9th chapter which we don’t find in any Vedāntic text before. Therefore,
this chapter is unique.

śloka 9.1
संवादिभ्रमवद्ब्रह्मतत्त्वोपास्त्यापि मुच्यते ।
उत्तरे तापनियेऽतः श्रुतोपास्तिरनेकधा ॥ ९.१ ॥
saṃvādibhramavadbrahmatattvopāstyāpi mucyate.
uttare tāpaniye:'taḥ śrutopāstiranekadhā (9.1).
Vidyāraṇya introduces the ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana as saṃvādi-bhrama-upāsana for
those students who refuse to accept their understanding as ‘jñāna’. This is based on
Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. It is a topic discussed in the above Upaniṣad. It is the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1356

Śruti pramāṇa. Normally, we call ahaṃ brahma asmi is nididhyāsana. The peculiarity is
that ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti is called as upāsana-vṛtti. This is because the student
refuses to accept ahaṃ brahma asmi as jñāna; we name it temporarily as upāsana from the
student’s dṛṣṭi. This is based on Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. This topic is
discussed from śloka 1 to 12.
The practice of brahma-tattva-upāsanā is otherwise is called nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana,
otherwise called ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana. For nididhyāsana to get converted into
niṣṭhā, this is the process. A person is thus liberated. Since this possibility is there, that
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is converted to nirguṇa-brahma-nididhyāsana to niṣṭhā or
liberation is gained. This has the Śruti support in Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. This
is the introductory śloka. Hereafter, he will explain saṃvādi-bhrama through several
examples. A seeming error becomes right knowledge, that is saṃvādi-bhrama. This is the
sāra of the śloka.

śloka 9.2
मणिप्रदीपप्रभयोर्मणिबुद्ध्याभिधावतोः ।
मिथ्याज्ञानाविशेषेऽपि विशेषोऽर्थक्रियां प्रति ॥ ९.२ ॥
maṇipradīpaprabhayormaṇibuddhyābhidhāvatoḥ.
mithyājñānāviśeṣe:'pi viśeṣo:'rthakriyāṃ prati (9.2).
The first example is maṇi-dīpa-prabhā-dṛṣṭānta. He will give three or four examples. First
one is saṃvādi-bhrama at pratyakṣa level. Second example is saṃvādi-bhrama at
anumāna level and third saṃvādi-bhrama at śāstra level. At all levels, there are saṃvādi-
bhramas, seeming errors getting converted into knowledge and blessing a person.
Normally, erroneous perception leads to problems; that alone we have heard of.
Erroneous perception leads to problems only. There are certain cases where error leads to
a blessing. The blessing errors are called saṃvādi bhrama. It is also called as beneficial
error. Imagine there are two rooms. There is darkness all around. In one room, there is a
small flame inside. In another room, there is a powerful gem or precious stone. All over
there is darkness. Because of the flame, the prabhā the radiance or brilliance is coming
outside the room, because of the precious stone also there is another brilliance coming
from the stone. There are two people who are standing outside. Outside, they are away
from the room. Both of them are able to see the brightness alone. Both of them are not able

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1357

to see the flame because the flame is hidden inside. The precious stone is hidden but what
is outside is maṇi-prabhā. Seeing this prabhā one person mistakes maṇi-prabhā as the
maṇi itself. He sees the prabhā. He mistakes the maṇi-prabhā as the maṇi itself even
though maṇi is hidden behind. There is the second person who mistakes dīpa-prabhā as
maṇi. Now, both of them have got erroneous perception. Erroneous perception one is
mistaking maṇi-prabhā as maṇi and another mistaken perception is dīpa-prabhā as maṇi.
Both of them with erroneous knowledge rush into the respective rooms. The first person
who had the erroneous perception finds maṇi itself. Even though it was an error, the error
led to a blessing and he discovered the maṇi. The second person also rushed to the room,
but the error did not fetch him the maṇi. He saw the dīpa only. First one is also error but it
is a good error; therefore, it is called saṃvādi-bhrama and second one does not lead to a
blessing and therefore, he calls it visaṃvādi bhrama. Similarly, ahaṃ brahma asmi even
though he repeats it as upāsana, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana later gets converted into
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna and niṣṭhā. Therefore, this upāsana is a blessing upāsana;
therefore, he calls it saṃvādi-bhrama. Maṇi in this context is the precious stone. With
regard to prayojana, there is a difference.

śloka 9.3
दीपोपवरकस्यान्तर्वर्तते तत्प्रभा बहिः ।
दृश्यते द्वार्यथान्यत्र तद्वद्दृष्टा मणेः प्रभा ॥ ९.३ ॥
dīpopavarakasyāntarvartate tatprabhā bahiḥ.
dṛśyate dvāryathānyatra tadvaddṛṣṭā maṇeḥ prabhā (9.3).
He explains the example: dīpopavarakasyāntaḥ. We have to imagine two rooms. The
doors are opening that side. I am not in front of the door else I will see both of them. I am
on the side of the room. Two doors are opened. I am able to see the front part of the door.
Inside there is a dīpa. Apavaraka means room. Within the room, there is a small flame.
The prabhā is outside the room. Dīpa is hidden, prabhā is visible. That dīpa-prabhā dvāri
dṛśyate. Dvāri means doorstep of the room. Outside, on the doorstep, the beam of light is
seen. In the same way, there is another room also. That is also opening outward and I
don’t see inside. We are able to see another beam of light coming on the door step but that
beam comes from a powerful precious stone. Two people were observing the beams of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1358

light and the precious stone. They wanted to go to one room or the other. They were
observing it for one week. More in the next class.

Class 254
śloka 9.4
दूरे प्रभाद्वयं दृष्ट्वा मणिबुद्ध्याभिधावतोः ।
प्रभायां मणिबुद्धिस्तु मिथ्याज्ञानं द्वयोरपि ॥ ९.४ ॥
dūre prabhādvayaṃ dṛṣṭvā maṇibuddhyābhidhāvatoḥ.
prabhāyāṃ maṇibuddhistu mithyājñānaṃ dvayorapi (9.4).
In this 9th chapter, Vidyāraṇya presents a unique idea which we have not seen elsewhere
in Vedānta. This is regarding the āvṛtti or repetition of the mahāvākya-vṛtti ahaṃ brahma
asmi. The whole discussion is centred on ahaṃ brahma asmi iti vṛtti-āvṛtti. Āvṛtti means
repetition. Vṛtti means thought. Vṛtti-āvṛtti is repetition of the thought. The thought in this
context is ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. Normally, this vṛtti-āvṛtti is popularly known in
Vedāntic circles as nididhyāsana. Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti is popularly known as
nididhyāsana. But in this chapter, Vidyāraṇya wants to add a new dimension to this. His
contention is that the same vṛtti-āvṛtti can exist in the form of upāsana also. That this vṛtti-
āvṛtti can exist as nididhyāsana, there is no controversy. It is well-known. We have been
talking about it, but the new lesson which Vidyāraṇya wants to add and establish is ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti can exist in the form of upāsana also. Naturally, the question will
come how you will differentiate the same: vṛtti-āvṛtti as nididhyāsana and upāsana? In
which context will it be called nididhyāsana and in which context it can be called
upāsana? Will “it” means what? “It” is ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti; in which context, is
it nididhyāsana and in which context it is upāsana? Vidyāraṇya’s contention is that when
the vṛtti is a jñāna-vṛtti then the jñāna-vṛtti is called nididhyāsana. This alone is popularly
talked about, that śravaṇa-manana will give jñāna-vṛtti and when you repeat jñāna-vṛtti it
is called as nididhyāsana. Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti will be called nididhyāsana provided
that vṛtti is jñāna-vṛtti. If it is not a jñāna-vṛtti, if it is a jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti then it will be
called upāsana. When the vṛtti is jñāna-vṛtti it’s āvṛtti is called nididhyāsana; when it is
jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti it’s āvṛtti is upāsana.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1359

Then, the next question will be: what is the difference between jñāna-vṛtti and jñāna-
ābhāsa-vṛtti? Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is jñāna-vṛtti if I see the meaning of the vṛtti as a
fact for me. Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is a jñāna-vṛtti for me if the meaning of that vṛtti or
that thought or mahāvākya the meaning of that thought is a fact for me. If it is a fact for
me, both my mindset and my lifestyle should conform to that fact. Then how it will be?
Let us see how it will be. If ahaṃ brahma asmi is jñāna-vṛtti then its meaning is a fact. That
means I am Brahman is a fact for me. And Brahman being mukta, I am Brahman, am
mukta must be a fact for me; which means my mindset is I am no more a mumukṣu. If
ahaṃ brahma asmi is a jñāna-vṛtti and if it is a fact for me, I should never look upon
myself as a mumukṣu anymore. I should look upon myself as a mukta. This means all the
secular and sacred activities I should never look upon as my sādhana and I should never
look forward to mokṣa as something that should happen to me. If I am able to possess or
enjoy that mindset, I am mukta. No activity is sādhana, mokṣa I never look forward to, if
that is my mindset then jñāna-vṛtti is a fact for me. Therefore, if I am repeating this jñāna-
vṛtti, it will become nididhyāsana; assimilation of the fact that I am already liberated; not
āvṛtti for liberation but āvṛtti in the form of assimilation of the fact that I am already free,
this vṛtti is called jñāna-vṛtti and its āvṛtti is called nididhyāsana. Suppose a person has
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti, which means he claims I have understood Vedānta, which
means jñāna-vṛtti is there, but due to some reason or the other, that vṛtti is not a fact for
him. How will I know that it is not a fact for me or not? This I know when I cannot enjoy
this mindset that “I am already mukta and I don’t have to look forward to mokṣa”, that
mindset I am not able to have and I continue to look forward to mokṣa, when the
expectation of mokṣa successfully continues. When expectation of mokṣa continues, and I
look for some sādhana or the other, which means I look upon myself as a mumukṣu or
sādhaka, that means I don’t have a mindset which is in keeping with the fact, that means
mahāvākya-vṛtti is not a fact for me because the mindset does not conform to the fact;
therefore, it is not a fact; and if it is not a fact, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is not a jñāna-vṛtti
and it can be called only a jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti. Or we can call it only ‘bhrama’, vṛtti is
jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti or it is sapratibandhaka jñāna-vṛtti. It is jñāna-vṛtti but it is obstructed
jñāna-vṛtti and because of some obstacle it has not yet become a fact for me.
Therefore, I am not able to enjoy the mindset that freedom is already mine. Vidyāraṇya’s
contention is that when there is a repetition of a jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti, you cannot call

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1360

nididhyāsana. It is so because nididhyāsana by definition is the repetition of jñāna-vṛtti.

And this is not jñāna-vṛtti but it is jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti and so, its repetition cannot be called
nididhyāsana; therefore, it will come under upāsana only. Once you say it is upāsana, it
will come under karma-kāṇḍa. Anything other than jñāna, is called karma only. Thus,
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti will become upāsana-rūpa karma for those people who
cannot enjoy the mindset that I am already free. Then, the next question is: what is the
benefit of this upāsana which is a type of karma only? Vidyāraṇya says that ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-vṛtti is not jñāna-vṛtti but jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti; because of some reason or the
other. The same vṛtti must be a jñāna-vṛtti for someone but in the same class some other
students are there, they refuse to claim it as jñāna-vṛtti. Therefore, in certain students there
who are not able to look upon it as jñāna-vṛtti; therefore, for them it is not a fact; therefore,
the mindset-transformation does not come at all; that must be because of some obstacle or
the other. Sapratibandha jñāna-vṛtti is jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti. How to convert jñāna-ābhāsa-
vṛtti into jñāna-vṛtti? Jñāna-vṛtti is jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti due to some obstacle. So remove the
obstacle and obstacle-removal will help in converting the jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti into jñāna-
vṛtti. Then, we divide the obstacles into two types. The known obstacle and unknown
obstacle. Dṛṣṭa-pratibandha and adṛṣṭa-pratibandha. If there are doubts in the
interpretation of mahāvākya, it is an interpretational obstacle and it is dṛṣṭa. It is known.
At the end of the Naiṣkarmyasiddhi class, students stare at me. At least I know where we
are. If it is an interpretational problem, it is a known problem. You can explain more,
attend more classes and study some other texts and all these are known remedies. If there
are logical doubts, I am not intellectually convinced that also will come under dṛṣṭa
pratibandha. I know this is logical problem, may be a problem raised by Viśiṣṭādvaitins.
They say there are seven illogicalities. If the logical issues are the obstacles, then that also
will come under dṛṣṭa pratibandha and then you have to do more manana.
When a student says I have no doubt in the interpretation, I don’t have any logical issues
also. If everything is clear, you are free, is it not? He says it is all fine but I am not able to
claim, of all the people, I am liberated! He is unable to specify the obstacle, but he says I
cannot yet claim or I cannot enjoy the mindset that no more do I require sādhanas. I am
still waiting for that day of gaining the jñāna and see Brahman. These obstacles come
under adṛṣṭa pratibandha. Some adṛṣṭa which is gathered in some pūrva-janma or
vartamāna janma. I don’t know about it because it is adṛṣṭa. When adṛṣṭa pratibandha is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1361

there, it has to be knocked off by adṛṣṭa only. Therefore, we require the puṇya produced
by some method or the other because adṛṣṭa pratibandha is in the form of some kind of
unknown pāpa; therefore, it has to be neutralized by some puṇya. Puṇya has to be
generated. Karma and upāsana can generate that puṇya. Vidyāraṇya says this ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-vṛtti itself which is jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti when you repeat it, it will come not
under nididhyāsana but it will come under upāsana and this upāsana-vṛtti is a type of
karma only. All upāsanas are categorized under the karma by us. This ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-vṛtti also is a type of karma and karma which is closer to what we are learning also,
instead of going back again to saguṇa-upāsana or some other karma, convert this ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-vṛtti itself into a type of upāsana which he calls as nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana,
otherwise called jñāna-ābhāsa-āvṛtti or sapradipandaka āvṛtti. It will not produce jñāna
and it will not produce mokṣa also. The upāsana-rūpa karma will neither produce jñāna
nor will it produce mokṣa then what it will do and it will just remove the adṛṣṭa
pratibandha and when the adṛṣṭa pratibandha goes away, the very same jñāna-ābhāsa-
vṛtti, rid of pratibandha, will become jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti minus pratipandha is equal to
jñāna. Jñāna-vṛtti plus pratipandha is jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti.
There is a possibility of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana to remove the adṛṣṭa pratibandha
and we don’t say this is the only method, other upāsanas are also there, but this upāsana is
ideal because one is already a student and he is studying Vedānta. Therefore, instead of
going outside Vedānta use ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-āvṛtti as upāsana. This jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti
Vidyāraṇya names it as bhrama-vṛtti. It should be called bhrama only. He calls it bhrama-
vṛtti; other names are jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti, sapratibandha ābhāsa-vṛtti; then, Vidyāraṇya
enters into the current topic. Normally, repetition of any bhrama [wrong or erroneous
vṛtti] will not produce any positive benefit. This is the normal rule. Suppose rajju-sarpa is
there and suppose a person thinks of rajju-sarpa; any erroneous thought by repetition will
not produce any positive benefit; in fact, normally, repetition of erroneous thoughts will
produce negative benefits or destructive consequences only. But Vidyāraṇya wants to say
that there are some rare occasions where bhrama-vṛtti repetition can produce positive
benefits. Vidyāraṇya wants to say there are rare occasions where bhrama-vṛttis can also
produce positive benefits. Vidyāraṇya says bhrama-āvṛtti is normally a curse; but
sometimes bhrama-āvṛtti can become Urvaśī-śāpa and produce a positive benefit and for
that constructive confusion he wants to give a new name. Useful error and that is called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1362

saṃvādi bhrama. It is an error turning into a blessing. The regular error which will be a
śāpa only is calls it visaṃvādi bhrama. Rajju-sarpa will come under the visaṃvādi
bhrama. It will not produce any positive benefit. He wants to say that ahaṃ-brahma-asmi
jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti is saṃvādi-bhrama which will become useful in removing adṛṣṭa
pratibandha not only in this level but all the levels of Vedānta and it can remove adṛṣṭa
doṣa. Therefore, all the students can practice ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana. That is why
soham upāsana is practiced by some people. Therefore, he calls it saṃvādi-bhrama. To
establish that ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti will come under saṃvādi-bhrama.
Vidyāraṇya gives a few examples where error turns into a blessing. He gives different
examples. In each example, the benefit is different. What is important is that there are
positive consequences. The positive consequences are not uniform in every example and
the example is only to show that there are positive consequences for erroneous perception.
First is thee erroneous knowledge at perception level and later it will be at anumāna level
and then at śāstra level and at all the three levels, saṃvādi-bhrama exists which can turn
into a blessing in disguise. We have to imagine there are two rooms and one room dīpa is
there and in another room maṇi is there and both are hidden from the vision of two
observers on the side of the room but only beams of light are coming out. Both of them are
able to see the dīpa-prabhā. Dīpa is invisible and dīpa-prabhā is visible. Maṇi is indivisible
and maṇi-prabhā is visible. Two prabhas are perceived by two people. The first person
mistakes dīpa-prabhā as maṇi and the second person mistakes maṇi-prabhā as maṇi. Both
of them are mistakes because dīpa-prabhā is not maṇi and maṇi-prabhā is also not maṇi.
Therefore, both of them are errors only. One is beneficial and the other non-beneficial. The
beneficial one is called saṃvādi and the other visaṃvādi. One rushes to dīpa-prabhā and
the other towards maṇi-prabhā. What is common to both is that both of them have got
erroneous knowledge. Therefore, he says prabhāyāṃ maṇibuddhistu mithyājñānaṃ. In
the consequence, there is a difference though. For one, it is Urvaśī-śāpa and for another it
is Durvāsa-śāpa.

śloka 9.5
न लभ्यते मणिर्दीपप्रभां प्रत्यभिधावता ।
प्रभायां धावतावश्यं लभ्यतैव मणिर्मणेः ॥ ९.५ ॥
na labhyate maṇirdīpaprabhāṃ pratyabhidhāvatā.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1363

prabhāyāṃ dhāvatāvaśyaṃ labhyataiva maṇirmaṇeḥ (9.5).

The message is simple. One who has error number one, that is dīpa prabhāyāṃ maṇi-
buddhi, runs towards dīpa-prabhā; from there, he will be led to dīpa-prabhā and he will
go to dīpa only which does not give any benefit to him, but when the second one rushes to
maṇi-prabhā, from maṇi-prabhā he goes to maṇi itself, which is a precious stone.
Therefore, the second one is a beneficial error. First fellow’s error led to disappointment,
whereas the second one’s error led him to some benefit. Though both of them approached
with the same erroneous notions, the consequence of one leads to benefit while the other
gains disappointment.

śloka 9.6
दीपप्रभामणिभ्रान्तिर्विसंवादिभ्रमः स्मृतः ।
मणिप्रभामणिभ्रान्तिः संवादिभ्रम उच्यते ॥ ९.६ ॥
dīpaprabhāmaṇibhrāntirvisaṃvādibhramaḥ smṛtaḥ.
maṇiprabhāmaṇibhrāntiḥ saṃvādibhrama ucyate (9.6).
The erroneous knowledge of the beam or light is called saṃvādi or visaṃvādi bhrama.
Visaṃvādi bhrama is non-beneficial error and it is a disappointing error, whereas maṇi-
prabhā-maṇi-bhranti, an erroneous knowledge of the precious stone upon the light of the
stone is called saṃvādi-bhrama and it is a blessing beneficial error. Don’t try to tally the
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti and this error too much. It will not tally hundred percent. You
will get confused. The message of the example is that an erroneous thing can become
beneficial. Among the examples themselves, there are many differences which you should
carefully remember.

śloka 9.7
बाष्पं धूमतया बुध्वा तत्राङ्गारानुमानतः ।
वह्निर्यदृच्छया लब्धः स संवादिभ्रमो मतः ॥ ९.७ ॥
bāṣpaṃ dhūmatayā budhvā tatrāṅgārānumānataḥ.
vahniryadṛcchayā labdhaḥ sa saṃvādibhramo mataḥ (9.7).
With the previous śloka, the first example is over. The first 12 ślokas are only the
examples. Vedāntic topic will come from the 13th śloka only. With the 6th śloka, the first
example is over. It is an erroneous knowledge at pratyakṣa level. Now, he gives example

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1364

for erroneous knowledge at anumāna level. It becomes a blessing. It is useful erroneous

knowledge. Bāṣpaṃ means mist, which was there in some place far away and this person
mistook the mist for smoke. He is a Tārkika. Tārkika cannot remain quiet. Anything he
will go on inferring. Yatra yatra dhumaḥ tatra tatra agniḥ. There is smoke and there must
be fire. He mistook mist as smoke. Angara means fire. This person on seeing the mist
makes an inference. This inference is technically wrong. He has not seen smoke. Inferential
knowledge is wrong. With that wrong knowledge, he went to that place. By sheer
coincidence there was fire. Even though it was an erroneous knowledge, that knowledge
led him to the real fire which he was looking for. Thus, erroneous knowledge in this
context led to a beneficial result.

śloka 9.8
गोदावर्युदकं गङ्गोदकं मत्वा विशुद्धये ।
सम्प्रोक्ष्य शुद्धिमाप्नोति स संवादिभ्रमो मतः ॥ ९.८ ॥
godāvaryudakaṃ gaṅgodakaṃ matvā viśuddhaye.
samprokṣya śuddhimāpnoti sa saṃvādibhramo mataḥ (9.8).
Here it is śāstra dṛṣṭānta. The waters of Godavari river this person saw. He mistook those
waters as Gaṅgā tīrtha. He has heard that Gaṅgā tīrtha by ācamana, prokṣaṇa etc., will
purify him. He used that water to purify himself. Therefore, viśuddhaya samprokṣya. This
is erroneous knowledge. The action of prokṣaṇa was based on an erroneous knowledge.
Therefore, the action is also erroneous action only. Still he gets the beneficial result of
purification because Godavari is also a kṣetra and it is a sacred river only. He got the
purification even though he was under erroneous knowledge. So this comes under
saṃvādi-bhrama. Here also, the message is that beneficial positive result is there; that
much alone is the message and don’t extend the example too much. This is an example for
śāstric error. The puṇya comes under śāstra for puṇya is an apauruṣeya viṣaya. It comes
under śāstra only therefore, we call it śāstrīya saṃvādi-bhrama.

śloka 9.9
ज्वरेणाप्तः सन्निपातं भ्रान्त्या नारायणं स्मरन्।
मृतः स्वर्गमवाप्नोति स संवादिभ्रमो मतः ॥ ९.९ ॥
jvareṇāptaḥ sannipātaṃ bhrāntyā nārāyaṇaṃ smaran.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1365

mṛtaḥ svargamavāpnoti sa saṃvādibhramo mataḥ (9.9).

This is another example for śāstrīya bhrama. It is an example which is closer to the famous
Ajāmila upākhyāna of Bhāgavata. It is an adaptation of that story of Ajāmila. Here,
Ajāmila goes to svarga loka. Ajāmila remembers and utters Nārāyaṇa nāma at the time of
death. When he said the word Nārāyaṇa he did not mean Bhagavān but he was thinking
of his son. Even though it is an error only, Bhagavān also committed an error and blessed
Ajāmila. He mistook that this person is uttering my name, therefore, sends dūta and he
gets the benefit. Here also, an error turns into a blessing. He is a devotee who has jvara
which means fever. He concludes that he was going to die. He remembered Lord
Nārāyaṇa erroneously, not that he was thinking of the Lord. He dies also. He attained
svarga loka and here the Nārāyaṇa-nāma-āvṛtti will come under saṃvādi-bhrama.
Vidyāraṇya wants to say is that saṃvādi-bhrama happens regularly to people and we do
use the expression, Urvashi-śāpa, etc. In English also, we have the expression: blessing in
disguise.

śloka 9.10
प्रत्यक्षस्यानुमानस्य तथा शास्त्रस्य गोचरे ।
उक्तन्यायेन संवादिभ्रमाः सन्तीह कोटिशः ॥ ९.१० ॥
pratyakṣasyānumānasya tathā śāstrasya gocare.
uktanyāyena saṃvādibhramāḥ santīha koṭiśaḥ (9.10).
He says the saṃvādi-bhrama does take place in the life of people normally. There are
plenty of saṃvādi-bhramas. It happens to the people all the time as mentioned in the
previous nine ślokas and not only they are plenty, but at all levels such as pratyakṣa,
anumāna and śāstra levels.

Class 255
śloka 9.10 contd.
In the first 12 ślokas of this 9th chapter, Vidyāraṇya differentiates two types of bhramas
saṃvādi and visaṃvādi. Bhrama means any type of false knowledge. Normally, any type
of erroneous knowledge will have only negative consequences and that is how we have
discussed bhrama in Vedānta śāstra. We talk about rajju-sarpa bhrama where the rope is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1366

erroneously known as snake and the consequences are not favourable. Similarly, the shell
is mistaken as silver, which also does not have any favourable consequences and similarly,
mirage water is an erroneous perception. In Vedānta, we have learnt that the errors are the
cause of negative consequences. Ultimately, we argue the whole saṃsāra is itself is a
grand negative consequence of basic error with regard to oneself and in adhyāsa-bhāṣya in
Brahma-sūtra Adi Śaṅkarācārya establishes the negative consequence of Self-
misconception or error only. Thus, generally we have heard error means negative
consequence. Here, Vidyāraṇya wants to introduce an idea that you need not classify all
errors as unfriendly or unfavourable as there are many favourable friendly errors also
which have positive consequences. And to establish that, he gave several examples of
erroneous knowledge at pratyakṣa level, erroneous knowledge at anumāna level and
erroneous knowledge at śāstra level; all the examples are there to show that there are
favourable errors also. In error also, there is good and bad. He gave the example in the
śāstra case where sometimes even Bhagavān commits a favourable error. In the case of
Ajāmila addressing Nārāyaṇa who was his son, Bhagavān committed an error that
Ajāmila called the original Nārāyaṇa. Even that error committed by Bhagavān becomes
favourable to Ajāmila it is said. Thus, errors can be favourable also. There is also an
interesting example in Saundaryalaharī, where Bhagavān committing an error which
becomes favourable it is said. It is beautiful and a dramatic view. I will just quote that
śloka. Adi Śaṅkarācārya says in Saundaryalaharī that a bhakta addresses God and he
wants to remain dvaita bhakta only. He is not interested in Advaita and he wants Devī to
be where she is and he wants to be where he is. He is interested only in grace of the
mother to fall upon him and therefore, he wants to address his prayer bhavāni tvaṃ dāse
mayi vitara dṛṣṭiṃ. This is what his desire is. Bhavāni, O mother Bhavāni; Bhavāni is one
of the names of goddess. Bhakta commands the Goddess: dṛṣṭiṃ vitara mayi dāse you
should direct let your glance upon me that I am only dāsa, dāsoham. He is not interested
in soham. This is the intention of the Devi-bhakta, but what happens? The word Bhavāni
has two meanings according to Sanskrit grammar. It is a grammatical mistake committed
by other God. Bhavāni has noun form also, bhavāni has verbal form also. He says you
direct your glance upon me. The mother instead of taking it as noun, she mistakes it as a
verb. In the verbal form, bhavāni means let me become. First meaning is O mother
Bhavāni and the second meaning is that there is no Bhavāni at all but let me become. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1367

next word is tvam. Bhakta sits in front of the Goddess. He addresses the Goddess bhavāni
tvam. It means let me become you. Therefore, immediately after bhavāni tvam is uttered,
Mother Goddess thought that the bhakta is interested in Advaita-aikya. If mother had
sufficient patience, at least she would have heard the rest of the sentence. Mayi dāse he is
telling. If mother had sufficient patience at least the prayer would have become clear, but
mother is so compassionate and so impatient that as even she heard these two words,
bhavāni tvam, she decided that bhakta is interested in Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya that even
before the next word came, she blessed the devotee and gave instantaneous mokṣa. It is
Advaita mokṣa. She gave mokṣa before the next word came from the mouth of the bhakta.
Within half a second, Goddess gave mokṣa even by mistaking the sentence uttered by the
bhakta! Even Mother Goddess makes saṃvādi-bhrama which is favourable to the devotee.

śloka 9.11
अन्यथा मृत्तिकादारुशिलाः स्युर्देवताः कथम्।
अग्नित्वादिधियोपास्याः कथं वा योषिदादयः ॥ ९.११ ॥
anyathā mṛttikādāruśilāḥ syurdevatāḥ katham.
agnitvādidhiyopāsyāḥ kathaṃ vā yoṣidādayaḥ (9.11).
Here, Vidyāraṇya makes another division within the favourable bhramas. Unfavourable
ones Vidyāraṇya does not mention here, but we have seen many rajju-sarpa, mirage water,
etc. They are unfavourable known as visaṃvādi bhrama. Here, he discusses the favourable
bhramas. Here, he divides saṃvādi-bhrama itself into two types: one is a favourable
committed out of ignorance which becomes accidentally a blessing. Now, Vidyāraṇya
talks about another type of favourable error which is deliberately prescribed by the śāstra
and deliberately followed by the Vaidika seeker. The second type of favourable error is not
committed out of ignorance, but it is a deliberate error prescribed by the śāstra. It is śāstra-
vihita bhrama. It is a saṃvādi-bhrama prescribed by śāstra and practiced by the seeker
which becomes favourable. Vidyāraṇya says all the upāsanas are such errors. All upāsanas
which are prescribed by the śāstra and practiced by the upāsakas are deliberate errors
committed by the person. By now itself, you must have got to know. In every upāsana, we
invoke a cetana Devatā upon an acetana ālambana. In every upāsana, we invoke a Devatā
a cetana Devatā and we are seeing the Devatā upon a śālagrāma, upon a śivaliṅga, upon
turmeric power. All of them are acetana vastu and upon that acetana vastu we see the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1368

Devatāa. Not only we see the Devatā, thereafter we do all the pūjas taking the acetana
vastu to be cetana God. We visualise hunger for the deity and we offer food, etc, on the
acetana ālambana. All of them are errors or erroneous perception. We should understand
they are all erroneous perceptions only, deliberately committed, because the definition of
error is seeing something upon something else. Seeing the rope as snake is a mistake
because rope is not a snake. Similarly, it is acetana-śilāyām, cetana-devatā-buddhi,
atasmin tadbuddhi. It is seeing something upon something which is different from that
something.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya concludes all the upāsanas are based on erroneous perception and
in fact all the pūjas are also based on erroneous perception, but even though they are
errors they produce favourable results. Citta-śuddhi, citta-aikāgra are a positive result;
that is why śāstra itself is deliberately prescribing the above upāsanas. All of them come
under saṃvādi-bhrama. This is a deliberate bhrama prescribed by śāstra and followed by
a bhakta, whereas the previous examples that are accidentally happening because of
ignorance become unfavourable errors. We knowingly commit deliberate mistakes in the
case of upāsana, knowing well that they are the saṃvādi-bhrama. There is a famous
upāsana called pañca-agni upāsana. It occurs in Chāndogya Upaniṣad and Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad and even in Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. In pañca-agni-vidyā five things are to be
meditated upon as agni. Five ālambanas are mentioned to be meditated as agni and all the
five ālambanas are different from agni. Agni-vilakṣaṇa ālambaneṣu agni-darśanam
vihitam. Vidyāraṇya mentions one of them as an example. One ālambana is a woman. You
should look upon as fire. You have to meditate upon the woman on fire. It is a wrong
perception which is deliberately practiced during pañcāgni upāsana and which is
deliberately prescribed by śāstra itself and this is also a bhrama and it is saṃvādi-bhrama.
It is so because the result is in śāstra it is said that pañcāgni upāsana will take a person to
Brahmaloka. Agni-upāsana is talked about man, woman, cloud as fire; how can they be
meditated upon agnitvādi-dhiyā, as fire principle! How can these five ālambanas be seen
as, if not as erroneous perceptions because in right perception woman should be seen as
woman! Man should be seen as a man. If he is seen as agni it is never possible other than
in bhrama and this bhrama will come under saṃvādi-bhrama because this leads to
Brahmaloka itself. Now, he wants to conclude the saṃvādi-bhrama discussion. How can

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1369

woman, man, etc., be taken as agni except under erroneous perception? So it is concluded
that all of them fall under saṃvādi-bhrama.

śloka 9.12
अयथावस्तुविज्ञानात्फलं लभ्यत ईप्सितम्।
काकतालीयतः सोऽयं संवादिभ्रम उच्यते ॥ ९.१२ ॥
ayathāvastuvijñānātphalaṃ labhyata īpsitam.
kākatālīyataḥ so:'yaṃ saṃvādibhrama ucyate (9.12).
The positive benefits vary from place to place and some benefits takes place in all the
cases. Because of erroneous perception, deliberate or accidental, śāstrīya or aśāstrīya,
śāstra prescribed or not prescribed by śāstra, a favourable benefit takes place. There is no
cause-effect relationship in crow sitting on a tree and the fruit falling but it appears as
though there is a cause-effect relationship, whenever there is ‘seeming’ cause-effect
relationship. Kākatālīya nyāya refers to a proverb which reveals a seeming cause-effect
relationship between erroneous perception and favourable result when there is no cause-
effect relationship logically, but there does seem a cause-effect relationship. Vidyāraṇya
says all cases of saṃvādi-bhrama are a kākatālīya case where bhrama seems to be the
cause and positive result is caused by the effect. Kāka-upaveśa is event one and phala-
patana is second event and these two events do not have any actual cause-effect
relationship but there is a seeming cause-effect relationship.
Similarly, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna don’t have actual cause-
effect relationship but they have a seeming cause-effect relationship and that is going to be
the topic under discussion hereafter. Dārṣṭānta here is nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and
nirguṇa-brahma-aparokṣa-jñāna will the seeming cause-effect relationship, the upāsana
leading to knowledge for it is actually possible or logically true also. But it does happen in
the form of saṃvādi-bhrama. How it will happen will be explained during the course of
discussion. Upāsana and jñāna is the error leading to knowledge. Therefore, kākatālīyataḥ
should be connected to the first line. In Sanskrit, a proverb is called a nyāya. The next
sentence is soyam, all the erroneous knowledge or erroneous pieces of knowledge wherein
there is a cause-effect relationship between erroneous knowledge and favourable results
are given a common name which is saṃvādi bhrama. Vidyāraṇya wants to establish
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana as a case of such a saṃvādi-bhrama. This is the thesis of the 9 th

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1370

chapter. The introduction is over with the 12 th śloka. Hereafter from dṛṣṭanta we will enter
dārṣṭānta.

śloka 9.13
स्वयं भ्रमोऽपि संवादी यथा सम्यक्फलप्रदः ।
ब्रह्मतत्त्वोपासनापि तथा मुक्तिफलप्रदा ॥ ९.१३ ॥
svayaṃ bhramo:'pi saṃvādī yathā samyakphalapradaḥ.
brahmatattvopāsanāpi tathā muktiphalapradā (9.13).
This is the saṅkṣepa śloka. This is the sūtra śloka which is going to be the subject matter of
the entire 9th chapter. Brahma-tattva-upāsanā api. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsanā also exists in
the form of saṃvādi-bhrama. Being saṃvādi-bhrama, it has to produce a favourable
blessing only and the blessing it produces here is being mukti-phala-pradā. It is capable of
producing mukti phala. Logically, upāsana and mokṣa cannot have cause-effect
relationship, exactly like a crow sitting and the fruit falling. Here, the cause-effect
relationship does not exist but there is a ‘seeming’ cause-effect relationship between
brahma-tattva-upāsanā and mukti phala. That is why I am calling it as saṃvādi-bhrama. If
there is a real cause-effect relationship, I will not call it as saṃvādi-bhrama. Even though
this nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a form of bhrama only, it gives the benefit of mukti phala.
You may question as to how nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can can give mukti phala. The
answer is given by Vidyāraṇya in the rest of this chapter. Yathā here refers to the previous
examples given in the last 12 ślokas. Just as a favourable error produces positive results
even though it is a form of error only, in the same way nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also will
produce mokṣa even though it is a form of error only. This is the meaning of this śloka. He
establishes his points without violating any set rules. Nowhere, this topic is discussed. The
ninth chapter is such a unique chapter.

śloka 9.14
वेदान्तेभ्यो ब्रह्मतत्त्वमखण्डैकरसात्मकम्।
परोक्षमवगम्यैतदहमस्मीत्युपासते ॥ ९.१४ ॥
vedāntebhyo brahmatattvamakhaṇḍaikarasātmakam.
parokṣamavagamyaitadahamasmītyupāsate (9.14).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1371

How does nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana come into existence? In which context, it comes into
existence and who is the unique candidate kept in the mind when nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana is introduced here? You imagine a person who has entered into Vedāntic enquiry.
This candidate has come into Vedānta-vicāra. Therefore, we are not talking about saguṇa-
brahma-upāsaka in the upāsana-kāṇḍa of the Vedas. In upāsana-kāṇḍa, brahma-upāsana
is there but they are all saguṇa-brahma-upāsana portion. We are not talking about that.
We talk about that person who has come to jñāna-kāṇḍa of Upaniṣad portion of the Vedas.
The context must be very clear. In Vedānta, there are two types of vākyas. One is called
avāntara-vākya and the other is called mahāvākya. The former is any vākya which defines
Brahma svarūpa without equating Brahman to the Jīva or the listener student without
saying tat tvam and without equating to the śrotā student. When the student is enquiring
into brahma-lakṣaṇa; here we have so many vākyas. Satyam jñānam anantam brahma is
brahma-lakṣaṇa-vākya. Arūpam avyavam nityam in Kaṭhopaniṣad is also lakṣaṇā vākya.
Thus, we have brahma-lakṣaṇa-vākya and in all of them nirguṇa-brahman is defined.
nirguṇa-brahman is defined as pure existence. Brahman is revealed as pure existence and
the entire world is revealed as nāma-rūpa superimposed on that Brahman. The nāma-
rūpas are negated and Brahman is revealed as kāraṇa Brahman and Brahma satyam jagan
mithyā. When the avāntara-vākya is enquired into, it will lead to brahma-jñāna. Śāstra
defines Brahman as pure existence which nirguṇam, niṣkalam, anantam jagat-kāraṇa, etc.
Therefore, we get brahma-jñāna, but mahāvākya we have not enquired into and only in
mahāvākya that Brahman is revealed as myself.
Therefore, as long as I don’t hear mahāvākya, I will never be able to claim ahaṃ brahma
asmi. I will say where is jagat-kāraṇam Brahma? You should know that kāraṇa Brahman is
you yourself. I gloriously give a lecture on that Brahman and Vidyāraṇya call this brahma-
jñāna is parokṣa jñāna. That brahma-jñāna is parokṣa brahma-jñāna. Imagine that
candidate does not come to mahāvākya-vicāra or even if he comes to mahāvākya-vicāra
due to some reason or the other with regard to the tvam-pada-vicāra the enquiry into my
real nature, he is not able to effectively do that vicāra, either because of non-enquiry or
because of non-effective enquiry or because of blocked enquiry. This student is able to say
Brahman is wonderful, Brahman is liberated; whenever the teacher asks the question are
you wonderful and are you liberated, he evades the answer. He is unable to look upon
himself as I am already mukta. He looks upon himself as a mumukṣu sādhaka. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1372

ahaṅkāra saṃśārī dominates him when he talks about himself. Therefore, he is unable to
accept that “I am a mukta”. In the case of such a candidate, even if you are unable to claim
ahaṃ brahma asmi, it does not matter; may you practice the thought ahaṃ brahma asmi
even though there is no conviction, may you fake the thought and then make it that ahaṃ
brahma asmi. When nirguṇa-brahman is invoked upon myself, the ālambana is myself.
Upon the I, the nirguṇa-brahman is invoked and he repeats the thought that I am mukta
Brahman. This will come under upāsana. If it is jñāna, he will say that I am mukta. If he is
not able to say that, the repetition of vṛtti comes under upāsana. Parokṣa-brahma-jñānī can
practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana in which ālambana is one’s Self. Details in the next
class.

Class 256
śloka 9.14 contd.
In the first 12 ślokas of the 9th chapter, Vidyāraṇya differentiated two types of erroneous
notions in the name of saṃvādi and asaṃvādi bhrama. Instead of visaṃvādi, we can says
asaṃvādi also for both are one and the same. Visaṃvādi bhrama will not lead to
favourable results whereas saṃvādi-bhrama will lead to favourable result, even though it
comes under bhrama or false notion category. Having differentiated this in the 12 ślokas,
from the 13th śloka onwards Vidyāraṇya introduces the central and unique theme of this
chapter, that is nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana as a case of saṃvādi-bhrama-āvṛtti. Nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is āvṛtti of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. This vṛtti-āvṛtti comes under
nididhyāsana. This topic he discusses from 13 th śloka to 29th śloka. He talks about the
context in which nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can take place; and also the candidate who is fit
for this nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The candidate is one who has entered into Vedāntic
enquiry but not completed the enquiry successfully. The one who has not entered the
enquiry cannot do nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The one who has successfully completed the
enquiry he also does not do nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The one who has never completely
come to Vedāntic enquiry, he can practice saguṇa-brahma-upāsana not nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. The one who has successfully completed the enquiry, he can do nirguṇa-brahma-
nididhyāsana but not nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The intermediary category who has
entered the enquiry, but not successfully completed; he is the candidate is point number

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1373

one. The next question is what we mean by entering enquiry but not completing or to put
it in simple language who is the candidate of partial enquiry? The candidate of non-
enquiry is also not a candidate, candidate of full enquiry is not a candidate, candidate of
partial enquiry is fit for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. I explained briefly in the last class about
the case of candidate of partial enquiry.
We have got two types of vākyas avāntara-vākya and mahāvākya. Only if you know the
difference between avāntara- and mahāvākya, the whole chapter will be meaningful. In
avāntara-vākya, Brahman is clearly defined elaborately, defined without revealing the
truth that Brahman is myself. It is defined without an equation or without bringing the
equation, Brahman is objectively presented differently. All descriptions are given and the
student who studies that properly comes to know Brahma satyam jagan mithyā. It is part
of the teaching. The third quarter jivo brahmaiva nāpara that part is not clear, either
because of non-enquiry of mahāvākya or because of deficient enquiry of mahāvākya, or
because blocked enquiry which may even be due to adṛṣṭa pratibandha. Because of visible
and invisible obstacles, enquiry is obstructed because of any one of the above three
reasons such as non-enquiry, blocked enquiry, or deficient enquiry of mahāvākya. Only
avāntara-vākya is clearly understood, therefore, he will boldly declare Brahman is
wonderful, Brahman is nitya mukta, Brahman is satya, Brahman is jñāna, Brahman is
nirguṇa, Brahman is nirākāra, Brahman is sarva-adhiṣṭhāna. Brahman is nitya mukta,
what about you? It is the problem. Therefore, he will happily and wonderfully present
Brahman as nitya-mukta adhiṣṭhāna-svarūpa of a higher order of reality. World is of a
lower order. All of them, he can fantastically explain. He can even teach others, crying that
he is in problem. Because of the lack of enquiry of mahāvākya, ahaṃ brahma asmi is not
very clear. When he uses the word aham, it is not the śākṣī that is dominant. When he uses
the word I, what is dominant in the word I is the ahaṅkāra or individuality. When
ahaṅkāra is dominant, ahaṃ brahma asmi can never be an equation because ahaṅkāra is
worry and Brahman is merry; both of them are diagonally opposite. Therefore, how can
worry and merry be equated? As even I say abam, ahaṅkāra is dominant.
In this case, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought is not an equation but it is an imagination. The
repetition of an imagination-thought will come under upāsana; repetition of an equation-
thought will become nididhyāsana. When ahaṃ brahma asmi exists as an equation for me
and when I do āvṛtti of that, I will be in nididhyāsana but when ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1374

thought exists as an imagination, that vṛtti-āvṛtti will be upāsana only. Why does the vṛtti
become an imagination or equation? It is because in the aham when the ahaṅkāra is
dominant, it becomes an imagination, but when I can use the word aham and in that
aham, the anvaya-vyatireka of Naiṣkarmyasiddhi has been efficiently done, in that aham,
the body is not included, the mind is never included, family is not included, world is not
included; I can use the word aham as sthūla-śarīra-sūkṣma-śarīra-kāraṇa-śarīra-vilakṣaṇa,
pañca-kośa-vilakṣaṇa. When the aham is śākṣi-pradhāna aham, ahaṃ brahma asmi is an
equation, but when aham is ahaṅkāra-pradhāna aham, then ahaṃ brahma asmi is an
imagination. Then, the vṛtti-āvṛtti will be upāsana only, hoping that after some time,
gradually the imagination will get converted into an equation as even the blocks are
removed.
Brahman is objectified as ‘that’ Brahman instead of ‘I’ Brahman. Here, the whole world is
reduced to nāma and rūpa as per the adhyāropa-apavāda application. He has seen the
falsity of the universe and the reality of Brahman, that Brahman which is free from
differences and division, that sajātīya-vijātīya-svagata-bheda-rahita Brahman. avāntara-
vākya can give only parokṣa jñāna. Mahāvākya alone can give aparokṣa jñāna. Since he
has not come to mahāvākya, parokṣa jñāna is indeclinable. Having indirectly known,
thereafter, he imagines that Brahman, the adhiṣṭhāna, is my ‘Self’. When he says my Self
he does not come to śākṣī aham. If he can come to śākṣī aham, it is an equation, but that is
blocked because of several reasons; therefore, one remains in localized husband I, wife I,
father I, sick I, old I, etc. That ahaṅkāra-dominated I he comes to and upon that, he
imagines Brahman. The whole thing Vidyāraṇya calls saṃvādi-bhrama. Those who have
come to the level of partial enquiry or those who have gained parokṣa jñāna, practice
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Thus, parokṣa jñānis meditate in this manner.

śloka 9.15
प्रत्यग्व्यक्तिमनुल्लिख्य शास्त्राद्विष्ण्वादिमूर्तिवत्।
अस्ति ब्रह्मेति सामान्यज्ञानमत्रं परोक्षधीः ॥ ९.१५ ॥
pratyagvyaktimanullikhya śāstrādviṣṇvādimūrtivat.
asti brahmeti sāmānyajñānamatraṃ parokṣadhīḥ (9.15).
In the previous śloka, it was said that these people gain parokṣa jñāna of Brahman. It
means that these upāsaka candidates gain parokṣa jñāna. Here, Vidyāraṇya defines what

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1375

parokṣa jñāna is. General knowledge is that there is Brahman; sāmānya jñāna means
general knowledge without specifying what that Brahman is; without identifying what
Brahman is; it is a general statement that there is Brahman. If someone asks what is the
definition of Brahman, which is also presented as pure consciousness, it is pure existence,
which is not a part, product, or property of the body; it is an independent entity which
pervades and enlivens the body; it is not limited by the boundaries of the body; it
continues to exist even after the fall of the body. The surviving consciousness is not
accessible because of the absence of the body medium. all these descriptions he will give
and he will say that there is Brahman. This is sāmānya jñāna. He gets this knowledge from
the śāstra pramāṇa. It is avāntara-vākya śāstra pramāṇa. avāntara-vākya is brahma-
lakṣaṇa-vākya. There are also taṭastha lakṣaṇa, svarūpa lakṣaṇā vākyas but all of them are
avāntara-vākyas. The unique point to be noted here is this: when he says there is Brahman,
he does not identify Brahman as nothing but I alone am that Brahman; it is intimately
available as jāgratsvapnasuṣuptiṣu sphuṭataraṃ yo:'sau samujjṛmbate pratyagrūpatayā,
which is nothing but ever-available experience. It is aham iti and it is ever-experienced I
and that I alone is that Brahman, that he does not tell at all. Therefore, he is one without
identifying it as the ever-evident aham. Brahman is the sāmānya and I have to identify
with that I the ‘non-observable observer’ adṛṣṭo draṣṭāśrutaḥ śrotāmato mantāvijñāto
vijñātā nānyo:'to:'sti draṣṭā, etc, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad goes on pouring out the
description. What else can be there other than you which can be Brahman? Without you,
nothing is identified as Brahman. That part is successfully missed. That is said here.
Anullikhya means without identifying as pratyagvyakti which means Śākṣi-caitanya.
When a person generally says there is Brahman then that jñāna is called sāmānya jñāna or
the parokṣa jñāna in Vedāntic parlance. He gives an example. The example is
viṣṇvādimūrtivat, like knowing various deities like Viśṇu, Śiva, Devī, etc., from the śāstric
description. There is the milky ocean and there is a sandy beach and all the persons and
other things are there; fantastic āsanas are there; there sākṣāt Viśṇu śaṅkha-cakra-
gadhāpāṇi is there; as even I receive the description, my knowledge is that there is Viśṇu.
Viśṇu is somewhere. I can give the description of Viśṇu also. Four hands are there, what is
the colour of the skin, what he holds in his hands, etc., but all those are parokṣa jñāna or
sāmānya jñāna. I cannot identify with anyone of the above.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1376

śloka 9.16
चतुर्भुजाद्यवगतावपि मूर्तिमनुल्लिखन्।
अक्षैः परोक्षज्ञान्येव न तदा विष्णुमीक्षते ॥ ९.१६ ॥
caturbhujādyavagatāvapi mūrtimanullikhan.
akṣaiḥ parokṣajñānyeva na tadā viṣṇumīkṣate (9.16).
He goes out of the way to explain how Viśṇu jñāna is parokṣa jñāna. He gives the reason.
The śāstra vākya clearly comprehend the form of Viśṇu endowed with four hands, etc, all
are indicated by the word ādi. There are some ślokas Viśṇu pādādi, keśa-varṇana stotras,
where the description from the toe nail onwards up to the hair of the Lord is given. Also
there is other description beyond this. If you read them, you can intimately know all the
details of Viśṇu mūrti. Even though I have such a clear knowledge, still that will not come
under pratyakṣa jñāna for it is parokṣa jñāna. It is parokṣa jñāna because even when he
describes Viśṇu that Viśṇu śarīra is not available in front of our sense-organs. If Viśṇu
stands in front of us, it is pratyakṣa jñāna or aparokṣa jñāna. Without Viśṇu in front of me
if I describe Viśṇu, it will come under indirect knowledge only. Without this identification,
that person is a parokṣa jñānī. Tadā, at the time of this Viśṇu jñāna, viṣṇumīkṣate, Viśṇu
he does not perceive or directly experience and therefore, his jñāna will come under
parokṣa jñāna. In the same way, he does not identify with Brahman as ahaṃ brahma asmi.

śloka 9.17
परोक्षत्वापराधेन भवेन्नातत्त्ववेदनम्।
प्रमाणेनैव शास्त्रेण सत्यमूर्तेर्विभासनात्॥ ९.१७ ॥
parokṣatvāparādhena bhavennātattvavedanam.
pramāṇenaiva śāstreṇa satyamūrtervibhāsanāt (9.17).
Going further, Vidyāraṇya says parokṣa jñāna of Brahman also comes under jñāna only,
because there are some others who claim there is no such thing called parokṣa jñāna at all.
Brahman being nitya aparokṣa, either you know Brahman aparokṣa-jñāna-rūpeṇa or you
don’t know Brahman. In the case of Brahman, parokṣa-jñāna is not possible. There is a
version like that and Vidyāraṇya disagrees with them and says in the case of Brahman
also, parokṣa jñāna is possible and aparokṣa jñāna is also possible. This topic he discussed
before in the 7th chapter. The topic is whether parokṣa jñāna of Brahman exists or is
parokṣa brahma-jñāna ajñāna or a bhrama? He discusses in four or five ślokas. Just

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1377

because brahma-jñāna is parokṣa jñāna, na atattvavedanam bhavet, it cannot become

erroneous knowledge. Incomplete knowledge cannot become erroneous knowledge;
incomplete knowledge is also a form of knowledge only. It will not come under error. It is
only a technical point. Just because brahma-jñāna is parokṣa jñāna, attatvavedanam na
bhavet it does not come under false knowledge or erroneous knowledge or bhrama. It is
incomplete but it is knowledge only. What is the logic behind it? He says that the logic is
that parokṣa jñāna has been gained from a valid source of knowledge and therefore, it
comes under jñāna and not under bhrama. Vidyāraṇya says this because there are some
people who say parokṣa jñāna is bhrama. There is a group of people and keeping them in
the mind, he says that parokṣa jñāna is not bhrama but it is pramā only, because that
knowledge is based on śāstra or received from śāstra pramāṇa. In the case of Brahman, it
is avāntara-vākya. In the case of Viśṇu, we have to say Purāṇa vākyena. There are several
places where Viśṇu descriptions are there. Therefore, they are taken as śāstra pramāṇa.
Therefore, parokṣa jñāna of both of them will come under jñāna and it will not come under
bhrama.

śloka 9.18
सच्चिदानन्दरूपस्य शास्त्राद्भानेऽप्यनुल्लिखन्।
प्रत्यंचं साक्षिणं तत्तु ब्रह्म साक्षान्न वीक्षते ॥ ९.१८ ॥
saccidānandarūpasya śāstrādbhāne:'pyanullikhan.
pratyaṃcaṃ sākṣiṇaṃ tattu brahma sākṣānna vīkṣate (9.18).
In the previous ślokas 16 and 17, Viśṇu parokṣa jñāna has been presented as an example.
Now, in the 18th śloka, he extends the same law to brahma parokṣa jñāna. Just as Viśṇu
parokṣa jñāna is possible through śāstra pramāṇa, brahma parokṣa jñāna is also possible
through śāstra pramāṇa. Brahman which is of the nature of saccidānanda revealed in
avāntara-vākya is clearly understood through śāstra pramāṇa. Śāstra pramāṇa again refers
to avāntara-vākya. Therefore, pratyaṃcaṃ sākṣiṇaṃ anullikhan. He does not identify that
Brahman as I the śākṣī. The moment I identify Brahman as I the ever-evident śākṣī, it will
come under aparokṣa jñāna. It is not parokṣa jñāna. I say brahma asmi. I don’t say brahma
asti. After declaring that I am Brahman, I should look upon myself as mukta. I should
never look upon myself as mumukṣu. That person does not recognize Brahman directly or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1378

immediately. Therefore, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-equation does not exist for him. Brahma asti
knowledge is there, but ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-equation does not exist.

śloka 9.19
शास्त्रोक्ते नैव मार्गेण सच्चिदानन्दनिर्णयात्।
परोक्षमपि तज्ज्ञानं तत्त्वज्ञानं न तु भ्रमः ॥ ९.१९ ॥
śāstroktenaiva mārgeṇa saccidānandanirṇayāt.
parokṣamapi tajjñānaṃ tattvajñānaṃ na tu bhramaḥ (9.19).
Parokṣa jñāna being jñāna it does not come under a bhrama or an error, Vidyāraṇya
establishes here. It is almost a restatement of 17 th śloka. There he said Viśṇu parokṣa jñāna
is not a bhrama. In this 19th śloka he says brahma parokṣa jñāna is not a bhrama. The
difference between 17th and 19th is that one is an example and in 19th it is dārṣṭānta. In both
cases, parokṣa jñāna is a jñāna and not a bhrama. The clear knowledge of Brahman as sat,
cit and ānanda, that is satyam jñānam anantam, has been received through śāstra pramāṇa
only, that is avāntara-vākya pramāṇa only. Even though that clear knowledge is parokṣa
jñāna, it is tattva-jñāna or it will come under tattva-jñāna only; parokṣa jñāna does not
come under bhrama or erroneous knowledge. That jñāna is not bhrama, bhramo na
bhavati.

śloka 9.20
ब्रह्म यद्यपि शास्त्रेषु प्रत्यक्त्वेनैव वर्णितम्।
महावाक्यैस्तथाप्येतद्दुर्बोधमविचारिणः ॥ ९.२० ॥
brahma yadyapi śāstreṣu pratyaktvenaiva varṇitam.
mahāvākyaistathāpyetaddurbodhamavicāriṇaḥ (9.20).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says all the problems are because the student is able to successfully
understand avāntara-vākya, but not the mahāvākya. The moment the focus is turned to
mahāvākya, he will never say parokṣa jñāna. He will say there is no Brahman elsewhere
other than the I the observer. Dṛk alone is satya and dṛśya is mithyā. Brahman is satya and
it has to be dṛk the observer alone. Nothing else can be Brahman other than me. That will
become clear if only he focuses on mahāvākya, but the problem is due to obstacles he is
not able to focus on mahāvākya. Therefore, he continues to brahma parokṣa jñāna waiting
for mokṣa, struggling in triangular-format, refusing to enter into binary-format. The case is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1379

of most of the students. Even after a long consistent study, they continue to brahma
parokṣa jñāna and for some reason or the other, they don’t take to mahāvākya jñāna. They
will say ahaṃ brahma asmi but they will not say aham mukta asmi. There is some block
and that block has to be eliminated. Therefore, upāsana is needed; that is how Vidyāraṇya
develops the idea here. No doubt in the śāstra main message is contained not in the
avāntara-vākya but in the mahāvākya. In fact, most of the Ācāryas translate the Upaniṣad
is equal to mahāvākya. In fact, that alone is the Upaniṣad. All others are only preparatory
stages only. Therefore, the main message is that of mahāvākya. I am Brahman myself. Tat
tvam asi in the 6th chapter of Chāndogya Upaniṣad, teacher repeatedly says that you are
Brahman yourself. Every time the student knocks his head and everything happens, but
something is missing and that is the mystery of Māyā. Mokṣa is never claimed, mokṣa is
postponed for sometime, may be next week, may be next month, but never now. This is
the problem whether it is a problem is for the student or the teacher, we do not know. The
student’s problem is that of the teacher and therefore, the teacher also struggles with the
student. The fact is that I happen to be free here and now. More in the next class.

Class 257
śloka 9.20 contd.
In the first 12 ślokas of this chapter, Vidyāraṇya talked about saṃvādi-bhrama and
visaṃvādi bhrama which is the basis for introducing nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana which is a
unique things that Vidyāraṇya wants to establish here. Saṃvādi-bhrama is the basis for
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. After introducing two bhramas, from the 13th śloka onwards, he
enters into the topic of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana to show that who is the candidate for
such an upāsana and what is the context of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The topic here is
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-adhikārī. This topic goes up to śloka 29.
While discussing nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-adhikārī, he shows that there are certain
Vedāntic students who have parokṣa jñāna of Brahman which has been gathered by the
study of the avāntara-vākyas of Vedānta. Mahāvākya which will generate aparokṣa jñāna
has not been either studied or has not been properly understood by the student or there
are some obstacles in that study; therefore, mahāvākya has not fully worked for them. The
causes may be many, whether dṛṣṭa pratibandha or adṛṣṭa pratibandha, but here we are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1380

interested in the fact that due to some pratibandha, mahāvākya has not done its job
properly or completely but avāntara-vākya has done its job. Therefore, this person has the
knowledge that there is such a thing called Brahman which is asparśam arūpam
agandham nirguṇam niṣkalam nityam nirākāram nirañjanam, nitya-shuddham, nitya-
muktam, all these details he has gathered from śāstra, but Vidyāraṇya points out this
nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is parokṣa jñāna because he does not claim that Brahman as I am. If
only he is able to claim I am that, he can parallelly claim that I am mukta Puruṣa also,
which means he will never look upon himself as a sādhaka, there is no more expectation of
mokṣa as a future event. But this person does not claim that brahma asmi but only says
brahma asti. Since this knowledge has been gained from the Vedānta vākya and since
Vedānta vākya is a valid source of knowledge, it is parokṣa jñāna and it will come under
jñāna only and it should not be taken as bhrama or erroneous knowledge. I said this topic
he has discussed in the 7th chapter. The reference śloka is chapter 7.51 to 7.55.
Here, Vidyāraṇya raises four questions: do you say it is bhrama because of the reason one;
do you say bhrama because of the reason two and the four possible reasons Vidyāraṇya
suggested and he negated all the four possible reasons and established that parokṣa jñāna
also comes under jñāna category only. That is what he refers to here. Thereafter, he
entered into the 20th śloka wherein he said that the aim of Vedānta is not giving parokṣa
jñāna, because it cannot liberate a person, therefore, through mahāvākya, śāstra wants to
convert the parokṣa jñāna into aparokṣa jñāna. Śāstra immediately follows the avāntara-
vākya by mahāvākya but in spite of śāstric efforts, the student is not able to raise his or her
level because of one problem or the other. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said avicāriṇaḥ
durbodham, especially śravaṇa will not be sufficient however efficient a teacher may be.
Aparokṣa jñāna is possible only when śravaṇa is equally complemented by manana also.
Śravaṇa reinforcing manana and manana reinforcing śravaṇa, two together should help
mahāvākya doing the job but because of some problem, some students are not able to
make independent enquiry or manana and therefore, kevala śravaṇa or kevala aptopadeśa
often does not work fully. For this, several reasons are there.
One of the reasons I pointed out in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi class which is worth remembering
in this context is that generally before coming to Vedānta the primary project of the entire
humanity is anātmā-improvement either by religious or non-religious methods. The
anātmā can be in the form of the mind or in the form of the body or in the form of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1381

family or in the form of the possessions or property; these four anātmās are dominant in
the life of any individual. If you study the mental preoccupation, if you study your
internal dialogue, the mental chattering before going to sleep or the thoughts gushing
immediately after waking up, most of the thoughts are with preoccupation with regard to
the mind, body, family and property. These anātmā issues will be there for everyone in
some form or the other. Some of them are very serious, some of them are moderately
serious, some of them are so-so. Thus, anātmā-improvement is the primary project of the
entire humanity. When a person comes to Vedānta, the first thing that he discovers is that
Vedānta has totally different thinking and it is totally different from the approach of the
entire humanity for anātmā-improvement is like straightening the tail of a dog.
Śāstra gives the example also. Therefore, anātmā-improvement as a project is bound to
fail. Except for some intermediary temporary successes here and there, it is not going to
succeed; therefore, this project can only perpetuate saṃsāra successfully. It is the first
powerful message given by the Upaniṣads. anātmā-improvement as a project is a
successfully perpetuation or worsening of saṃsāra, may you come to the conclusion as
soon as possible before starting Vedānta project. Anātmā-improvement is not the project,
but anātmā-falsification and proving anātma-mithyātva is the project of the Vedānta.
Brahma satyam jagan mithyā jivo brahmaiva nāpara is repeated thousands of times and
we also mechanically repeat without underlining the portion Brahma satyam jagan
mithyā. We have to drop the conventional project with anātmā-falsification project and we
have to succeed in that and it has to get assimilated in the hearts. Brahma satyam is
primarily for anātma-mithyātva-niścaya. In fact, jagan-mithyātva is more important
corollary than brahma-satyatva. In fact, brahma-satyatva is for arriving at the jagan-
mithyātva. Anātma-mithyātva can never be arrived at without Ātma-satyatva-niṣṭhā.
Vedānta expects us to internalize the anātma-mithyātva by practicing śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana for quite some time in the innermost heart. Anātmā-improvement project
must go away and anātma-mithyātva must get saturated in the sub-consciousness.
Thereafter, once the mithyātva has been established and it has become well internalized
then you can again retake the project, Vedānta allows so. Project you can retake after
spending several years anātma-mithyātva project whereas you can come back to anātmā-
improvement project but not for mokṣa because mokṣa through anātmā-improvement is
like a dog’s tail. Anātmā-improvement is not for mokṣa. Anātmā-falsification is for mokṣa.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1382

After gaining mokṣa, anātmā-improvement is for hobby or entertainment if you can do

that; this is the scheme envisaged by Vedānta. Change anātmā-improvement project to
anātmā-falsification project, falsify anātmā, internalize that well, thereafter enjoy paśyan
śṛṇvan spṛśan jighran aśnan gacchan svapan śvasan, all of them are not for mokṣa but they
are all for entertainment or hobby. What happens is that this message most of the student
miss. Therefore, even after coming to Vedānta anātmā-improvement project continues as
the primary goal of life in the mind, even though Vedānta repeatedly says it is like a dog’s
tail, you will miserably fail. Student knocks his head superficially and in his inner heart he
is unable to replace the project; therefore, in the sub-conscious mind this continues to
dominate. As long as this project continues, ahaṅkāra is dominant in the heart and
replacement of anātmā-improvement to anātmā-falsification is impossible. Whenever I
use the word aham, it is not the original consciousness that dominates but it is the
reflected consciousness and reflecting medium which alone will be dominating. During
śravaṇa also, what is dominating is that ahaṅkāra alone. When the mahāvākya is told,
ahaṃ brahma asmi the student repeats but the aham word is reflecting because anātmā-
improvement project is dominant, ahaṅkāra is dominant and ahaṃ brahma asmi cannot
be an equation, because ahaṅkāra and Brahman you cannot equate.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti in the mind of such a student cannot
be an equation-vṛtti. Even though the seeker is very clear about the original consciousness,
the reflected consciousness, reflecting medium, bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, jagan-lakṣaṇā, etc, all
of them are preserved in the books, they are all clear everywhere else, except in the heart
of the seeker of jñāna. The mind-improvement, body-improvement, family-improvement
and property-improvement continues; so Vidyāraṇya says that vṛtti comes under not
jñāna-vṛtti, not equation-vṛtti but it is imagination-vṛtti. When this vṛtti is repeated, it will
come under nididhyāsana or upāsana is the question posed by Vidyāraṇya. Since
ahaṅkāra is dominant it is not equation-vṛtti ;therefore, it is an imagination-vṛtti and
therefore, we will call it nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. When ahaṃ brahma asmi goes on what
occupies the mind is the various anātmā issues; therefore, he calls it nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. On the other hand, if I can drop the anātmā-improvement project with the
understanding that it is mithyā and its improvement has nothing to do with who I am or
what I am, entire anātmā is mithyā and its conditions have nothing to do with who I am or
what I am, I am irrespective of anātmā condition, I am Brahman, if I can say that and mean

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1383

that, then it is equation-vṛtti and when I repeat this equation-vṛtti, it will come under
nididhyāsana. Whether ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti repetition is upāsana or nididhyāsana,
who will decide? I can never say you practice upāsana and you practice nididhyāsana. I
cannot pick up a few students and advice but it is the student who should ask and the
student should answer whether it is equation or imagination; is it anātmā-improvement
which determines my mokṣa. I should ask the question and if I can answer, my mokṣa will
be unconditional and I am mukta and I am not expecting liberation after meditation; if I
can boldly say and repeat ahaṃ brahma asmi as a free Jīva, then what I am doing is
nididhyāsana. Therefore, for those students who cannot effectively enquire into
mahāvākya, this equation is not functional. That is being explained in the next śloka.

śloka 9.21
देहाद्यात्मत्वविभ्रान्तौ जागृत्यां न हठात्पुमान्।
ब्रह्मात्मत्वेन विज्ञातुं क्षमते मन्दधीत्वतः ॥ ९.२१ ॥
dehādyātmatvavibhrāntau jāgṛtyāṃ na haṭhātpumān.
brahmātmatvena vijñātuṃ kṣamate mandadhītvataḥ (9.21).
This idea Vidyāraṇya presents in a nutshell. Dehādyātmatvavibhrāntau, the anātmā, the
fourfold anātmā, the mind, body, family and property are seen as identical with myself, as
an object of ahaṅkāra and mamakāra. Family and property is an object of mamakāra. The
mind and body is ahaṅkāra. These are misconceptions and therefore, their condition
determines my status. Even to claim being mukta I expect them to have certain ideal
conditions and only after those ideal conditions are accomplished then alone I can claim I
am a mukta. I put mukti as a conditional event. That is called vibhrānti or delusion. Once
the delusion comes, my primary project will be anātmā-improvement. Because their
conditions determine mokṣ,a therefore, I have to work on improving the condition.
Therefore, this misconception jāgṛtyāṃ is alive in the mind, dominating the mind, whereas
the fact is that the entire anātmā is mithyā. Their condition can never determine my mokṣa
is the teaching of Vedānta, but that is missed. The mithyātva of anātmā is missed.
Therefore, anātmā is dominating and influencing my self-judgment when that [vibhranti]
is dominant in the mind. The ahaṅkāra even does not allow me to concentrate on the
teaching of Vedānta. An individual can never wholeheartedly claim, that is from the
innermost heart he cannot claim, brahmātmatvena, I am ever-free Brahman. Even as he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1384

claims, his sub-conscious mind smiles at him and asks are you free? Our own conscience
will challenge and mock me, the above statement ‘that I am free’. Once the mind
conscience questions, one is likely to retract the step that I am free. You cannot claim ahaṃ
brahma asmi forcibly for one has to really understand properly. It cannot be forced. Even
if you forcibly entertain then it will not be called jñāna but it will be called imagination or
upāsana. It is all because the student is manda-buddhi. He has not received the primary
message of Vedānta. Vedānta is not meant for anātmā-improvement but Vedānta is meant
for anātmā-falsification. No progress is possible without concentrating on mithyātva-
niścaya.

śloka 9.22
ब्रह्ममात्रं सुविज्ञेयं श्रद्धालोः शास्त्रदर्शिनः ।
अपरोक्षद्वैतबुद्धिः परोक्षद्वैतबुद्ध्यनुत्॥ ९.२२ ॥
brahmamātraṃ suvijñeyaṃ śraddhāloḥ śāstradarśinaḥ.
aparokṣadvaitabuddhiḥ parokṣadvaitabuddhyanut (9.22).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says even though brahma asmi is aparokṣa jñāna, it might be difficult to
digest to those who are manda-buddhi and for them parokṣa jñāna is possible. Brahma asti
he can say because Brahman is liberated when you say the mind does not feel any
reservation. Only when I say I am liberated, the intellect comes with so many problems.
Ahaṃ brahma asmi when I say, so many objections will come from the intellect, but when
I say that Brahman is nitya śuddha buddha mukta, intellect without any resistance, it will
say okay. Veda being pramāṇa, I am ready to accept it as a fact also for I have śraddhā in
Veda pramāṇa. So also I accept heaven with all the descriptions because I accept Veda
pramāṇa as a valid source. Also it is said satyam jñānam anantam brahma. For a person
with śraddhā in śāstra, avāntara-vākyas of the Upaniṣads reveal Brahman; otherwise you
will not know Brahman. Śraddhā must be there and one must read avāntara-vākya; only
when both of them go together, for that person brahmamātraṃ suvijñeyaṃ, Brahman
existence can be clearly grasped. The Upaniṣad says that Brahman is Advaita. Śāntaṃ,
śivam, advaitam etc. When it says brahma advaitam, it is avāntara-vākya or mahāvākya?
A doubt may come. Remember Brahman is Advaita is also an avāntara-vākya only
because if the teacher is not pointing out that Advaita Brahman you are, as long as you is
not brought in, even the introduction of the word Advaita will make the statement

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1385

avāntara-vākya and make the knowledge parokṣa jñāna only. Vidyāraṇya says this
Advaita is parokṣa jñāna as just an aside technical note.
Some technical questions may come and for that Vidyāraṇya makes this provision. The
sense-organs give him dvaita-prapañca-knowledge. He has dvaita-prapañca-jñāna
through pratyakṣa pramāṇa and through śāstra pramāṇa he has Advaita brahma-jñāna. A
question may be asked whether the two can coexist, for one is dvaita and another is
Advaita. Dvaita and Advaita being contradictory, is it possible for one and the same
person to have Advaita brahma-jñāna and dvaita-prapañca-jñāna? Vidyāraṇya says there
is no problem. Dvaita-jñāna is pratyakṣa jñāna or jñāna at pratyakṣa level. Advaita
brahma-jñāna is not pratyakṣa. It is not available for pratyakṣa at all. Then it comes under
parokṣa jñāna only. Advaita-jñāna is not gathered through sense-organs. It is gathered by
śāstra avāntara-vākya and the latter gives only parokṣa brahma-jñāna but sense-organs
gives parokṣa jñāna. If one is parokṣa and another is aparokṣa they don’t coexist in the
same field. Since the fields are different, opposites can coexist just as the light and the
darkness can coexist in two different rooms. Only in one place opposites cannot coexist.
Therefore, our candidate can have both jñāna simultaneously for the jñāna operates on
different fields. Afterwards he can practice upāsana, therefore, he says aparokṣa
[pratyakṣa] dvaita-buddhi [dvaita-jñāna], parokṣa Advaita-buddhi means parokṣa-
advaita-jñāna. Thus, we have pratyakṣa dvaita-jñāna and parokṣa advaita-jñāna.
Pratyakṣa dvaita-jñāna arose out of indrīya pramāṇa or sense-organs. Parokṣa advaita-
jñāna arose out of śāstra or to be precise avāntara-vākyas or you can say śāstra pramāṇa.
Here, two distinct pramāṇas have given two distinct knowledges in two different places
one is parokṣa and another in aparokṣa plane; therefore, they don’t cancel each other. The
two are non-contradictory and they are non-destroyer.

śloka 9.23
अपरोक्षशिलाबुद्धिर्न परोक्षेशतां नुदेत्।
प्रतिमादिषु विष्णुत्वे को वा विप्रतिपद्यते ॥ ९.२३ ॥
aparokṣaśilābuddhirna parokṣeśatāṃ nudet.
pratimādiṣu viṣṇutve ko vā vipratipadyate (9.23).
Vidyāraṇya clarifies the idea through a fantastic example. It is known to all of us. All these
show the greatness of Vidyāraṇya. Just at the right time, he gives a proper example. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1386

example is that opposite types of knowledge can coexist without hurting each other;
sometimes you rarely see in the forest a tiger and deer drinking water. It is because tiger is
not hungry during that time; rarely it happens. Similarly, intellect cannot hold opposite
ideas but rarely it does when the field is different. When a person does pūjā to a deity at
home, the deity is in the form of an idol or pratimā is made out of stone or wood or
precious stone. That pratimā is there, you can take Śiva liṅga itself. Now, he is observing
that as a stone or as Śiva? Does he have one knowledge or both the knowledge s? Does he
see Śiva there or stone there? Both knowledges are there because there are two pramāṇas
functioning. Pratyakṣa pramāṇa the eyes you cannot stop doing its function. It is not based
on your choice. The sound will be received by the ears when they are open. Similarly, eyes
are going to produce the knowledge that this is a stone and it is inert and it is jaḍa. It is
kartum akartum anyathā vā kartum na śakyam; jñāna is not kartṛ-tantra but it is vastu-
tantra.
Similarly, when there is stone, eyes will say it is acetana statue. It will come under
pratyakṣa jñāna. Because of śāstric instruction, in this particular stone you can invoke Śiva
and he does invoke Śiva and based on the śāstric method, when he has invoked, he
believes that there is Lord Śiva there and the perception of Lord Śiva is based on śāstra-
based invocation. Therefore, by śāstra pramāṇa, there is Śiva also. There is cetana Devatā
also in one and the same place; I see acetana idol and cetana Devatā also because I see the
acetana idol I am able to take it and rub also. They are not worried. At that time, stone idea
is also there. Then, they do the pūjā. At that time, his mind says it is the Devatā who is
hungry. Now, acetanatva-jñāna-bhāvanā is there and cetanatva-bhāvanā is also there in
one and the same locus. Both are generated by pramāṇas and how can cetanatva and
acetanatva coexist in one place? Vidyāraṇya says it is possible because one is pratyakṣa
whereas Devatā-sattva is not pratyakṣa but it is parokṣa based on śāstric words. I don’t see
Śiva sitting there but I see it based on śāstra vākya and therefore, Śiva-jñāna comes under
parokṣa jñāna because Devatā is not standing in front of my eyes. Else, it will come under
pratyakṣa. Therefore, it is parokṣa. Cetanatva-bhāvanā is parokṣa and acetanatva-bhāvanā
is pratyakṣa. The fields being different the two can coexist. Cow is seen as cow and also as
Lakṣmī. We don’t have any problem because we have evolved intellect.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1387

Class 258
śloka 9.23 contd.
In this chapter, Vidyāraṇya establishes that ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-dhyāna can exist in two
different ways. One is nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and another is nirguṇa-brahma-
nididhyāsana. Whether it is upāsana or nididhyāsana, it will depend upon the mindset of
the meditator. If the meditator has listened to the avāntara-vākya and mahāvākya
properly from an Ācārya, then ahaṃ brahma asmi is an equation and it is a jñāna-vṛtti for
him. If ahaṃ brahma asmi is a jñāna-vṛtti, the attitude of a person will be that I am not a
saṃśārī, but I am nitya mukta Brahman; therefore, I am not a saṃśārī and I am not looking
forward to mokṣa as an event. For mokṣa, I don’t require any sādhana at all. Even this
meditation I practice is neither for knowledge nor for liberation, because I have
understood ahaṃ brahma asmi; therefore, I don’t require liberation. Therefore, even this
meditation I don’t look upon as a sādhana for future liberation. This meditation is only to
break my habitual orientation that I am still a sādhaka. That I am a sādhaka, that I am a
mumukṣu, is a habitual orientation, which I want to break. Therefore, this vṛtti-āvṛtti is
not for mokṣa-prāpti, but mumukṣutva-vāsanā-nivṛtyartham alone. When this is the
mindset that I have, ahaṃ brahma asmi is a jñāna-vṛtti and it is an equation for me and its
repetition will come under nididhyāsana. On the other hand, if I am having the vṛtti-āvṛtti
with totally different mindset that I am still a saṃśārī, I am hoping to get liberation in
future for which I have to do different sādhanas, even this meditation I do as a sādhana for
liberation; when that is my thought-pattern, that is, I look upon myself as a mumukṣu or
sādhaka, then ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is no more an equation-vṛtti but an imagination-
vṛtti. It is no more jñāna-vṛtti but it is āropa-vṛtti. When I repeat an imagination-vṛtti, or an
āropa-vṛtti, it cannot be called jñāna-vṛtti. Therefore, its repetition cannot come under
nididhyāsana, but it should come under upāsana. It is nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana only.
Later, Vidyāraṇya will point out that upāsana can only help in removing any obstacles in
the mind; upāsana can neither give knowledge nor can it give liberation. The upāsana can
only remove the obstacles because it comes under karma, mānasa karma, which can
produce only puṇya and the puṇya can only remove the obstacles. Therefore, nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana exists as a form of karma as a means to pratibandha-nivṛtti and it is
possible for a person. If nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is for pratibandha-nivṛtti for a person,
what type of person has to practice that? He says whoever has done avāntara-vākya-vicāra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1388

thoroughly, therefore, he has nirguṇa-brahma parokṣa jñāna and those parokṣa jñānīs can
practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. These upāsakas have not done mahāvākya-vicāra or
they have not done mahāvākya-vicāra efficiently because of the deficiency of the Guru not
the śiṣya. In avāntara-vākya one gets the Advaita brahma-jñāna through śāstra pramāṇa,
but pratyakṣa pramāṇa gives pratyakṣa dvaita-jñāna. How can dvaita-jñāna and Advaita
brahma-jñāna coexist for a person at the time of upāsana? For that, he answers that there is
no problem at all because brahma advaita-jñāna is parokṣa and jagat dvaita-jñāna is
pratyakṣa. A contradiction at pratyakṣa and parokṣa level will not disturb as only in the
same level, opposites cannot coexist. In support of that, he gave a beautiful example: both
śilā-buddhi and Devatā-buddhi coexisting in one and the same pratimā or mūrti, even
though these two bhāvanā are contradictory śilā-bhāvanā means acetana-bhāvanā and
Devatā-bhāvanā means cetana-bhāvanā. Both cetanatva-darśana and acetanatva-darśana
in one and the same mūrti, how can it exist? Vidyāraṇya it can exist because śilā-bhāvanā
is pratyakṣa and Devatā-bhāvanā is parokṣa, because Devatā has not actually come in
front of him. If Devatā had actually come, it would have been pratyakṣa only. Here,
Devatā darśana is based on śāstra and Devatā is not in front of pratyakṣa pramāṇa;
therefore, cetanatva-bhāvanā is parokṣa and acetanatva-bhāvanā is pratyakṣa. Therefore,
they can happily coexist. I know it is a stone still I offer naivedya also to remove the
hunger without any conflict. How can stone get anger? I don’t raise that question. It is a
conflict-free upāsana or ārādhanā, that is possible.
Similarly, ahaṃ brahma asmi, aham advaita-brahma asmi, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can
coexist with pratyakṣa dvaita-darśana also. This is what he says in the śloka 23. Pratimā
has all the avayavas like hands, legs, etc. It is a clean statue, but pratīka does not have
avayavas, either it is in the form of śālagrāma or in the form of Śiva liṅga or turmeric
powder. They will come under pratīka. Both are jaḍa vastu only. With regard to the
contrary-bhāvanā which upāsaka or which ārādhaka faces any conflict in the mind!
Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is possible.

śloka 9.24
अश्रद्धालोरविश्वासोः नोदाहरणमर्हति ।
श्रद्धालोरेव सर्वत्र वैदिके ष्वधिकारतः ॥ ९.२४ ॥
aśraddhāloraviśvāsoḥ nodāharaṇamarhati.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1389

śraddhāloreva sarvatra vaidikeṣvadhikārataḥ (9.24).

Here, Vidyāraṇya adds an aside note: for the Viśṇu-ārādhaka, cetana-devatā-ārādhaka, of
the acetana śālagrāma, there is no conflict because he has śraddhā in the śāstra. Because of
the śāstra-śraddhā, even though his sense-organs report that it is only an acetana stone
and it does not have hunger, thirst, etc., and it is not going to hear my prayers also because
it is acetana, even though the pratyakṣa pramāṇa tells the śālagrāma will not listen to my
prayers, etc., still he offers prayers because he has śraddhā that after śāstric invocation,
Viśṇu Devatā is present there not in the pratyakṣa-rūpa but parokṣa-rūpeṇa. Viśṇu is very
much residing there and therefore, my prayers are going to be listened to and my offerings
are going to be received; therefore, whatever I do is a valid thing and for that phala also
will come. All these things are based on faith in the śāstra that upon the stone, that
invoked Devatā is present until I do yathāsthānaṃ pratiṣṭhāpayāmi. All are based on
śāstra pramāṇa only. Pratyakṣa cannot prove the presence of Viśṇu for it is totally based
on śraddhā in the śāstra. That śāstra is a valid source of knowledge; therefore, Viśṇu is
there.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says conflict will be absent only if śraddhā is there in the śāstra.
And if śraddhā is not there, he will not respect the mūrti as a cetana Devatā. He will look
upon it as acetana stone alone. Maximum he will give an art value and he may go around
the idol with shoes on. For him, there will be certainly a conflict because Devatā is not
scientifically proved. So Vidyāraṇya says where śraddhā is there, conflict will be absent;
where śraddhā is not there, Devatā-darśana is impossible. When I say there is no conflict, I
keep in the mind the people who have got śraddhā in śāstra pramāṇa. The man who does
not have śraddhā will not accept the sentiency of the idol, for sentiency cannot be proved.
For a person who has no śraddhā in śāstra, he will not be able to accept as it goes against
pratyakṣa. Don't quote a nāstika as an example in this context. When I quoted the
example, I assume that there is an āstika for he alone has parokṣa sentiency-bhāvanā and
pratyakṣa abhāva-bhāvanā. What we study is śāstra, hence one should have śraddhā in
śāstra. Before we assume whoever sits as a student in front and whatever examples we are
quoting, they all refer to āstika people only. That is taken for granted. If a nāstika comes I
will say this class is not meant for you. That is why in sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti the six
virtues include śraddhā as one. Without śraddhā, we don’t expect that person even to
attend the classes and we tell him that you will waste your time. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1390

says a person with faith in śāstra as a valid source of knowledge alone can be a student of
brahma-vidyā.

śloka 9.25
सकृ दाप्तोपदेशेन परोक्षज्ञानमुद्भवेत्।
विष्णुमूर्त्युपदेशो हि न मीमांसामपेक्षते ॥ ९.२५ ॥
sakṛdāptopadeśena parokṣajñānamudbhavet.
viṣṇumūrtyupadeśo hi na mīmāṃsāmapekṣate (9.25).
Here, Vidyāraṇya points out: to gain parokṣa jñāna through avāntara-vākya study is
relatively simpler without much problem. Gaining avāntara- vākya-śravaṇa is simpler
because our intellectual personality and emotional personality will not raise any objection
because Brahman is Advaita, Brahman is mukta, Brahman is śuddha, Brahman is ānanda-
svarūpa and I have got faith in the śāstra and śāstra talks about that, therefore, it is very
much possible. Without batting my eyelids, because of my sheer faith in śāstra, I will
shake my head; neither my emotional personality challenges or objects that teaching, nor
my intellectual personality raises an objection or challenge. Therefore, brahma asti the
intellect will easily swallow like a peeled banana. But the moment I say that ānanda
Brahman you are, instantaneously the intellect sees a contradiction because I am already
with several worries and problems; how I can accept that aham ānandosmi?

Therefore, brahma asmi will face several challenges and objections. Hence, mahāvākya-
vicāra to become meaningful, śravaṇa is not enough, manana also will be additionally
required. Therefore, he says with the simple śravaṇa, one can get parokṣa jñāna and
practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana which will not have much problem. By one time or few
times śravaṇa that is without manana, parokṣa jñāna will take place easily and everyone
will agree Brahman is nitya śuddha buddha niskāla nirākāra and he will logically establish
that also and that it is ever-free. No problem. To get the parokṣa jñāna of Viśṇu Devatā
does not require much difficult effort. We have only to read the dhyāna śloka of Viśṇu-
sahasranāma.

śloka 9.26
कर्मोपास्ती विचार्येतेऽनुष्ठेयाविनिर्णयात्।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1391

बहुशाखाविप्रकीर्णं निर्णेतुं कः प्रभुर्नरः ॥ ९.२६ ॥

karmopāstī vicāryete:'nuṣṭheyāvinirṇayāt.
bahuśākhāviprakīrṇaṃ nirṇetuṃ kaḥ prabhurnaraḥ (9.26).
Vidyāraṇya differentiates parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna. He says parokṣa jñāna is
easier for which śraddhā in the śāstra is enough. Aparokṣa jñāna needs deeper enquiry,
because here understanding is involved. To communicate this idea, he extends the same
thing through two examples: one is karma-anuṣṭhāna and karma-jñāna; upāsana-
anuṣṭhāna and upāsana-jñāna. He wants to say that karma-anuṣṭhāna is like nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana it is easier. But karma-jñāna is like nirguṇa-brahma-nididhyāsana, it
requires enquiry. It is tougher. Similarly, he makes a difference between upāsana-
anuṣṭhāna and upāsana-jñāna.
Suppose you want to know how a particular ritual is to be done, agnihotra ritual is to be
done for example. If you study the original Veda, you find there are several contradictions
in the statements. Therefore, several confusions are there with regard to the performance
of the ritual. In fact, even when you want to do certain śrāddhā or tarpaṇa you will often
find different priests giving different opinions and if you want to know which is correct,
you are going to get into a conflict. If you want to understand the ritual, you go to the
original Vedas for it is not that easy. Sometimes they the offering to this Devatā and in
another place, different Devatā is mentioned. There is order-confusion, Devatā-confusion,
etc. If you want to understand the ritual properly then vicāra is required for which pūrva-
mīmāṃsā-sūtras are there. Elaborate commentaries and sub-commentaries and different
opinions are there. Understanding a ritual involves deeper enquiry, deeper analysis and it
is an intellectual challenge. But the very same rituals many Ṛṣīs and Ācāryas have already
done the analysis; and they have given the final guidelines for performing a ritual. They
have gone through mīmāṃsā and having gone through mīmāṃsā, they have enlisted the
procedure. When you don’t want to understand the procedure and if you want to perform
implicitly, you don’t require any enquiry. You don’t require enquiry because you do
anuṣṭhāna only. If you want to know why the flower should be offered why akṣata should
be offered and what is the pramāṇa for that, then you have to go to the original scriptures
and once you go to original scriptures, because different things are said in different places,
it is difficult to follow. If you want to understand why, vicāra is required and if you want
to implicitly obey, vicāra is not required. Therefore, jñāna needs vicāra and anuṣṭhāna

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1392

requires only śravaṇa. It is simple reading or listening. In the same way, if you are to
repeat the thought I am Brahman, you don’t need vicāra, but if you want to understand
and claim freedom, then vicāra is required.

śloka 9.27
निर्णितोऽर्थः कल्पसूत्रैर्ग्रथितस्तावतास्तिकः ।
विचारमन्तरेणापि शक्तोऽनुष्ठातुमञ्जसा ॥ ९.२७ ॥
nirṇito:'rthaḥ kalpasūtrairgrathitastāvatāstikaḥ.
vicāramantareṇāpi śakto:'nuṣṭhātumañjasā (9.27).
Since vicāra is very difficult, because for that you have to go to karma-kāṇḍa of the Vedas
and their commentaries, etc, you have to study Jaimini’s commentary. The job of knowing
all about the ritual is very difficult. Ācāryas have made it simpler and given the
procedures to do the karma. Procedural śāstra is called kalpa grantha. Mīmāṃsā śāstra is
called vicāra grantha. Kalpa grantha is procedural śāstra. Here, you cannot question but
you have to obey without questioning. Here, you need not enquire into mīmāṃsā sūtra.
Even if one does not understand or have the knowledge of the meaning of the mantras or
why something is done in one particular way and not in another, one will still obtain the
fruit or siddhi of that upāsana. One should not waste time in such enquiries in an area
which is essentially governed by faith.

śloka 9.28
उपास्तीनामनुष्ठानमार्षग्रन्थेषु वर्णितम्।
विचाराक्षममर्त्याश्च तत्श्रुत्वोपासते गुरोः ॥ ९.२८ ॥
upāstīnāmanuṣṭhānamārṣagrantheṣu varṇitam.
vicārākṣamamartyāśca tatśrutvopāsate guroḥ (9.28).
The same thing is said about upāsana also. Upāsana-anuṣṭhāna also requires a procedural
book. It is called ārṣa grantha. It gives the rules for doing a particular upāsana and if you
want to understand the source vākya from the original Vedas, then you have to go in for
enquiry, commentary, sub-commentary, etc. Those who are unable to understand the
intricacies of these practices, for them the path is simple; they should merely follow
whatever the Guru instructs. Thus far, the student’s sādhana is governed by faith, to
develop strong parokṣa jñāna on the basis of what is said in the scripture, viz., that satyam

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1393

jñānam anantam brahma is one’s own essential nature. The effort to realise this statement
is upāsana or meditation for which the essential requirement is śraddhā in the scriptures.
In upāsana also, jñāna is different and anuṣṭhāna is different; similarly, nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana and nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna are different. Details in the next class.

Class 259
śloka 9.28 contd.
Vidyāraṇya differentiates ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana and ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
nididhyāsana dealing with nirguṇa-brahman. Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana follows after
gaining parokṣa jñāna of nirguṇa-brahman through avāntara-vākya. avāntara-vākya
produces nirguṇa-brahma-parokṣa-jñāna. Based on parokṣa jñāna, a person takes to
“ahaṃ brahma asmi” iti nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Vidyāraṇya points out that this is
relatively simpler. But ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-nididhyāsana follows ahaṃ-brahma-asmi
aparokṣa-jñāna which is born out of mahāvākya-vicāra. mahāvākya-vicāra gives aparokṣa
jñāna and based on that jñāna ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-nididhyāsana follows. This
nididhyāsana is tougher than the earlier one. It is so because nididhyāsana is based
aparokṣa jñāna, aparokṣa jñāna is based mahāvākya-vicāra and mahāvākya-vicāra is
tougher because there can be several obstacles at the level of mahāvākya-vicāra which are
not there in the case avāntara-vākya-vicāra. Newer and formidable obstacles are there
when a person takes to mahāvākya-vicāra. To convey this idea, that upāsana is easier and
nididhyāsana is tougher, that jñāna-nididhyāsana is tougher, he gives an example.
Example should simplify the teaching, but here the śāstric examples make the position
tougher. We are not familiar with Veda pūrva bhāga and hence they appear to be tougher.
The procedural details are given explicitly. So many instructions are strewn all over. Some
of them are seemingly contradictory. Some of them are to be inferred and not directly
mentioned. There are several complications in knowing the procedure for conducting the
ritual. For this, our Ācāryas have designed a scheme and it is called Pūrva Mīmāṃsā
scheme. Jaimini has written the sūtras and on the basis of which, Veda pūrva has to be
analysed. To know this ṣaḍ-liṅgas are to be used, which are different from ones we have
studied. We know are upakrama, upasaṃhāra, phala, arthavāda, upapatti, etc. In Pūrva
Mīmāṃsā śāstra to arrive at the procedural details they use other six pramāṇas called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1394

Śruti, liṅga, vākya, prakaraṇa, sthāna and samākhyāna. In Brahma-sūtra, I have

mentioned about this. It is a very big issue in Pūrva Mīmāṃsā śāstra. Thus, by applying
these six clues, we have to do a very big investigation as they are trying to do to know
about it. They have finally arrived at the procedural details. If you want to understand the
procedural details, you have to go to Pūrva Mīmāṃsā. What the Ācāryas have done is
after the debate is over, final conclusion they have arrived at, they made a readymade
manual. These manuals are called kalpa granthas. They will not give details of the
arguments that went by. All the argumentation portion of Pūrva Mīmāṃsā are deleted
and in the kalpa grantha what is given is the arrived-at final procedure alone. This we will
know when we study Sanskrit grammar. When in schools we want to study Sanskrit
grammar, they will give śabda-mañjarī and dhātu-mañjarī. You will chant the content, but
how they arrive at those will not be given there. If you want to know the details about the
etymology, you have to go to Pāṇinian grammar.
Similarly, what is the difference between Pūrva Mīmāṃsā and kalpa grantha? The former
is like Pāṇini sūtra where the procedural details are given whereas kalpa grantha is like
śabda mañjarī where no arguments are given but the final procedure based on which, you
are to do the ritual. In fact, you need not know, but execute what is mentioned there. Don’t
ask why. This is the difference between jñāna and anuṣṭhāna. Jñāna refers to grammar and
anuṣṭhāna requires śabda mañjarī. Jñāna requires Pūrva Mīmāṃsā grantha and anuṣṭhāna
requires kalpa grantha. Similarly, jñāna requires mahāvākya-vicāra and anuṣṭhāna
requires avāntara-vākya-vicāra. The same thing is extended to upāsana also. There is
corresponding kalpa grantha and corresponding mīmāṃsā called ārṣa grantha also. The
vicāra is difficult but following it or anuṣṭhāna is the easy process. You have got only
component parts; take the component parts like pañca-bhūtas and by addition just as
several bodies are formed, similarly, take the root and add suffixes and prefixes and the
words are formed. Vyakāraṇa means formation of the words. The entire Pāṇini grantha
contains the formation of words. If you enter into that, lives are not enough. So, the simple
method is take dhātu-mañjarī śabda-mañjarī and dictionary. With the help of that you can
learn the minimum. Similarly, he says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is possible for a wider
audience and nirguṇa-brahma-vicāra is not possible for many. Therefore,
vicārākṣamamartyāḥ. They are incapable of doing mahāvākya-vicāra. They meditate on
avāntara-vākya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1395

śloka 9.29
वेदवाक्यानि निर्णेतुमिच्छन्मीमांसतां जनः ।
आप्तोपदेशमन्त्रेण ह्यनुष्ठानं तु सम्भवेत्॥ ९.२९ ॥
vedavākyāni nirṇetumicchanmīmāṃsatāṃ janaḥ.
āptopadeśamantreṇa hyanuṣṭhānaṃ tu sambhavet (9.29).
He concludes the discussion on who is the candidate for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and the
context in which such an upāsana be practiced. Those people who are fortunate to be free
from all the obstacles and therefore, are capable of entering mahāvākya-vicāra, let those
fortunate people got to mahāvākya-vicāra which requires coming to binary-format and
which requires renunciation of triangular-format even during the crisis. Let them go to
mahāvākya-vicāra. I should be bold enough to claim I am the jagat-kāraṇa and I am ever-
free and I am God and also free from adṛṣṭa obstacles. It is by the enquiry and logic that I
will be fully convinced about what the scriptures and the seers have said, is experienced
by me as my own individual personal and direct experience. The nature of this aparokṣa
jñāna that such enquiry pursued to its logical conclusion is indicated by Gītā 13.12 where
he concludes that Brahman can be called neither sat nor asat. By merely listening to the
teaching of the avāntara-vākya of the Guru, they can go back and regularly do the
anuṣṭhāna. Anuṣṭhāna does not come under nididhyāsana. Anuṣṭhāna does not come
under jñāna also but comes under upāsana-rūpa karma. This will produce not jñāna but
produce puṇya. This upāsana-anuṣṭhāna will neither produce jñāna nor will it produce
mokṣa but it will only produce puṇya. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana karma will produce
adṛṣṭa puṇya alone and this has to remove the obstacles and when the obstacles are gone I
am ready for mahāvākya-vicāra once again. Therefore, anuṣṭhāna to nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana-rūpa-karma-anuṣṭhāna to sambhavet, it is possible to gain jñāna. Gāyatrī-japa
will produce puṇya to remove the obstacles to gain jñāna. In nididhyāsana jñāna is
involved and there, there is no question of rules and regulations. Anywhere you recollect,
it may be writing, thinking or sharing, by anything you remember that I am ever-free,
even now I am free. You invoke that thought at any time, it comes under nididhyāsana.
The purpose of nididhyāsana is not puṇya, not jñāna, or mokṣa, but nididhyāsana is to
remove the orientation that I am a sādhaka working for mokṣa. We have been holding the
view that I am sādhaka working for mokṣa and that orientation should go away by the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1396

invocation that I am already free. This invocation is not an upāsana or a karma. Thus, you
should clearly see the difference between upāsana and nididhyāsana. With this,
Vidyāraṇya concludes both the topics of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and nirguṇa-brahma-
nididhyāsana. The intermediary gap between avāntara-vākya and mahāvākya-vicāra is
the context and the candidate is that person who has either knowable obstacle or
unknowable obstacle for taking to mahāvākya-vicāra. Therefore, either there is a lack of
enquiry or deficiency of enquiry; such obstructed people are the candidates for nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana.

śloka 9.30
ब्रह्मसाक्षात्कृ तिस्त्वेवं विचारेण विना नृणाम्।
आप्तोपदेशमात्रेण न सम्भवति कुत्रचित्॥ ९.३० ॥
brahmasākṣātkṛtistvevaṃ vicāreṇa vinā nṛṇām.
āptopadeśamātreṇa na sambhavati kutracit (9.30).
From this śloka onwards, Vidyāraṇya talks about the means of aparokṣa jñāna. Nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana can never give aparokṣa jñāna. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can never give
mokṣa. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can produce only puṇya which will remove the
invisible pāpa pratibimba. If nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana cannot produce aparokṣa jñāna,
then what it produces and what will produce aparokṣa jñāna is the question and that is the
topic from śloka 20 to 52. Aparokṣa jñāna can never be generated through meditation and
it is generated only through enquiry consisting of śravaṇa and manana and this he calls as
vicāra. The repeated study of mahāvākya alone will generate aparokṣa jñāna. That is why
it is said even nididhyāsana is not to generate aparokṣa jñāna, but nididhyāsana is meant
to recollect the aparokṣa jñāna already generated from the teacher during the śravaṇa or
vicāra. Study alone has to produce aparokṣa jñāna. Later, he will say suppose a person
claims I have studied and nothing seems to have happened to me in which case the
Ācārya will say there are obstacles in the enquiry and after upāsana you should come back
to the vicāra. Ultimately, clarity must come only through the study and the indication of
clarity is that I should shift to the binary-format and sākṣātkāra is effortless binary-format.
There is no other sākṣātkāra. Āptopadeśa means avāntara-vākya-upadeśa by an Ācārya;
brahma-sākṣātkāra will never take place because you will say Brahman is ever-free. That is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1397

of no use to us at all. Aparokṣa jñāna does not take place except entering into the
mahāvākya-vicāra. Therefore, you have to continue that alone repeatedly until you can
come to the binary-format.

śloka 9.31
परोक्षज्ञानमश्रद्धा प्रतिबध्नाति नेतरत्।
अविचारोऽपरोक्षस्य ज्ञानस्य प्रतिबन्धकः ॥ ९.३१ ॥
parokṣajñānamaśraddhā pratibadhnāti netarat.
avicāro:'parokṣasya jñānasya pratibandhakaḥ (9.31).
Here, Vidyāraṇya talks about two obstacles which obstruct parokṣa jñāna from avāntara-
vākya and aparokṣa jñāna from mahāvākya-vicāra. What obstructs the knowledge from
rising in the mind of a student is being explained here. The obstacle may be knowable or
unknowable. The origination of parokṣa jñāna is obstructed by lack of śraddhā on the
Veda jñāna or accepting the nirguṇa-brahman. Even though Veda is valid pramāṇa and
whatever is said in Veda need not be verified by any other source of pramāṇa, just as
knowledge gained through the eye need not be proved by any other pramāṇa. Knowledge
gained through Veda is a fact and I don’t have to work for proving it as a fact. This
attitude towards Veda as primary source of knowledge is called śraddhā. If the śraddhā is
there, parokṣa jñāna is instantaneous. If that is not there, it is an obstacle. Lack of faith in
Veda pramāṇa is also called as aśraddhā. Therefore, for parokṣa jñāna, your job is very
simple. Remove your lack of faith in Veda and Veda pramāṇa. Lack of thorough enquiry
into mahāvākya is an obstacle to aparokṣa jñāna. Mahāvākya boldly and unconditionally
says that you say that you are free, but something in me does not allow me to claim that I
am free.

śloka 9.32
विचाराप्यपरोक्षेण ब्रह्मात्मानं न वेत्ति चेत्।
आपरोक्ष्यावसानत्वाद्भूयोभूयो विचारयेत्॥ ९.३२ ॥
vicārāpyaparokṣeṇa brahmātmānaṃ na vetti cet.
āparokṣyāvasānatvādbhūyobhūyo vicārayet (9.32).
He says that mahāvākya enquiry should culminate in aparokṣa jñāna at the time of
enquiry itself. It does not require a separate meditation; it does not require a separate

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1398

samādhi experience; it does not require any mystical experience for the generation of
aparokṣa jñāna; not only they are not requires but Vidyāraṇya says they cannot give
aparokṣa jñāna. Vidyāraṇya boldly says enquiry alone has to give ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
jñāna. He also says if your enquiry did not give that knowledge, don’t go for meditation
and samādhi, but you have to do enquiry again and again until you gain aparokṣa jñāna.
Let it take trillions of janmas ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna should come, when I make the
enquiry under the guidance of a competent Ācārya.

Meditation is not jñāna but it is for internalization of the jñāna which has already risen in
the mind. This is very important for there is a widespread impression that study gives
book-knowledge and samādhi gives experiential knowledge. This is a widespread
misconception in advaitic circles too and that misconception Vidyāraṇya blasts in this
śloka. That is why this śloka is very important. Even after enquiring into the mahāvākya,
tvam-pada-lakṣyārtha, tat-pada-lakṣyārtha, tvam-pada-vācyārtha, tat-pada-vācyārtha;
jahatī lakṣaṇā ajahatī lakṣaṇā, etc, the student finds it difficult to realise brahmātmā.
Brahmātmā s the word which indicates aikya of Brahma and Ātmā. Whenever the Guru
describes Brahman, how should student feel is the question? As even the student listens to
the description of Brahman, the feeling of a proper candidate is to know that the Guru
talks about his own Self which is within him. This must be the phenomenon.

śloka 9.33
विचारयन्नामरणं नैवात्मानं लभेत चेत्।
जन्मान्तरे लभेतैव प्रतिबन्धक्षये सति ॥ ९.३३ ॥
vicārayannāmaraṇaṃ naivātmānaṃ labheta cet.
janmāntare labhetaiva pratibandhakṣaye sati (9.33).
Some students are not confident. They ask the very same Guru some more doubts.
Suppose I am not successful in this janma, what would happen to me? Arjuna in the 6 th
chapter asked the same question. Vidyāraṇya clarifies that in the next janma there will be
ideal conditions to gain the jñāna which he missed in this janma. From the angle of next
janma, you will be called a spiritual genius. A spiritual genius in the current janma is
yoga-bhraṣṭa of the past janma. Therefore, you will become a spiritual genius even in the
young age and people will glorify such a person.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1399

Class 260
śloka 9.33 contd.
In these ślokas beginning from śloka 30 Vidyāraṇya establishes an important fact that
aparokṣa jñāna has to take place only through mahāvākya-vicāra. It is not something that
has to take place later in meditation or samādhi. It is something that should take place in
the mind of the student at the time of mahāvākya-vicāra itself. Parokṣa jñāna is gained
through avāntara-vākya-vicāra whereas aparokṣa jñāna is gained through mahāvākya-
vicāra. By words aparokṣa jñāna, we mean only a clear understanding and we do not
mean any mystic or extraordinary experience. Aparokṣa jñāna means clear understanding
or clear knowledge of the mahāvākya ahaṃ brahma asmi. How do you define clear
knowledge or understanding? My knowledge ahaṃ brahma asmi is clear when the
meaning of ahaṃ brahma asmi I look upon as a fact. Whatever is the view of the other
people when the meaning of the sentence of ahaṃ brahma asmi is looked upon it as a fact
for me, then the knowledge is called aparokṣa jñāna or clear understanding. If ahaṃ
brahma asmi is a fact for me, Brahman being nitya-mukta, I am nitya-mukta is a fact for
me. If I being nitya-mukta is a fact form me, I can no more look upon myself as a sādhaka,
because mumukṣu alone is looked upon as a sādhaka and when aham nitya-muktaḥ is a
fact for me, I can never look upon myself as a mumukṣu, because mumukṣu status and
mukta status are mutually exclusive; therefore, aham nitya-muktaḥ being a fact for me, I
can never look upon mumukṣutva as my status. It means I don’t look upon myself as a
sādhaka anymore, which means I don’t look upon mokṣa as a sādhya or the goal. The
twofold misconceptions I am incapable of holding. The two misconceptions are one
looking upon myself as a sādhaka and looking upon mokṣa as a sādhya. If my
understanding is clear and if nitya-muktatva is a fact, this is a transformation of the
mindset as a result of clear understanding. Until the mindset-transformation takes place,
there is no clear understanding.
Therefore, as long as my mindset is not transformed, I should infer I don’t have clear
understanding and as long I don’t have clear understanding, my enquiry process is
incomplete; therefore, Vidyāraṇya says continue the enquiry. Naturally, the question will
be how come there are some students who are able to get the clear understanding and also

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1400

the transformation of the mindset and how come I am not able to get that state? If some
student asks the question, that means I don’t have clear understanding, that means the
enquiry has not fructified in my case and why this question may come up.
Vidyāraṇya says it is very simple: somewhere some obstacle, known or unknown exists
and therefore, the obstacle has to be removed. Vidyāraṇya says even śravaṇa itself has the
power to remove the obstacle as a by-product. It is a very great revelation. The śravaṇa has
the primary as also secondary avāntara phala. The primary benefit is the clear
understanding which means mindset-transformation. The secondary or avāntara phala,
the by-product, is if there are obstacles, the nśravaṇa can remove the obstacles. As even
the obstacles are removed, the later śravaṇa will produce the primary benefit. Śravaṇa will
produce the by-product benefit primarily. Initial śravaṇas serve as pratibandha-nivartaka
and later śravaṇa will produce the primary benefit. That is why they say the teacher is
improving. Even ahaṃ brahma asmi will work as pratibandha-nivṛtti. The next question is
how long it will take to remove the pratibandha. Vidyāraṇya asks the question how do I
know the answer because how much pratibandhas are there I can never know for it varies
from individual to individual. Even in the regular school one student grasps on one
hearing and some others needs repetition and some needs additional tuition. Teacher
remaining the same, the students have different layers of obstacles. Therefore, continue the
śravaṇa. Even if you practice meditation, remember that meditation is not final; vicāra
alone has to give jñāna. After meditation, you have again to come back to vicāra for
knowledge has to rise in vicāra alone. That is very important śloka no 32. Here, he says
clear understanding aparokṣa jñāna has to be in vicāra and not in meditation.
mahāvākya-vicāra means in this context mahāvākya study or analysis. In maraṇa no
enquiry is possible and therefore, here it means before death happens, the vicāra should
continue until one gains jñāna. If the clear understanding does not come; the clear
understanding here means the meaning of ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact for me; nitya-
muktatva is a fact for me; that means my mindset should be changed; I should never look
upon myself anymore as a sādhaka and I don’t look upon mokṣa as a sādhya and this
mindset-transformation is the litmus test for clear understanding. If you don’t clearly
understand in this janma, Vidyāraṇya says you will get the same in the next janma. The
next question is in the next janma what I would become? I have said yoga-bhraṣṭa of the
current janma is spiritual genius of the next janma. When I am born as a spiritual genius in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1401

the next janma, how much time I will take to gain mokṣa or liberation? Vidyāraṇya says:
how do I know! It is only when the obstacles are gone, either naturally or by a relevant
sādhana.

śloka 9.34
इह वामुत्र वा विद्येत्येवं सूत्रकृ तोदितम्।
शृण्वन्तोऽप्यत्र बहवो यन्न विद्युरिति श्रुतिः ॥ ९.३४ ॥
iha vāmutra vā vidyetyevaṃ sūtrakṛtoditam.
śṛṇvanto:'pyatra bahavo yanna vidyuriti śrutiḥ (9.34).
Vidyāraṇya gives several pramāṇas in support of this teaching that even though vicāra is
uniform for all the students, even though the Guru is the same for the entire set of
students and vicāra is also the same, Guru and vicāra remaining the same, the
fructification of the vicāra will not be and cannot be uniform. The fructification of the
vicāra for the disciples will not be uniform, not because of the difference in Guru or vicāra
but because of the pratibandha level on the part of the students. Vidyāraṇya quotes
Kaṭhopaniṣad mantra. Even though fifty or hundred or two hundred may be listening to
the same teacher, even though all of them are sincere in listening to the teaching, many
students do not grasp the message. The teacher says your liberated status is unconditional.
He does not say under certain condition you will be liberated; then you can argue with the
teacher those conditions are not there in me. In fact Guru never gives any opportunity to
the student even to give excuses but in spite of that, some students manage to give some
excuses; whereas the Upaniṣad says tat tvam asi without any condition. How the message
is missed is the greatest wonder of the world! My liberated status is not dependent on any
condition; in spite of this, many manage to miss the teaching. How do you give the logical
explanation to this? Only logical explanation is that there are certain obstacles in receiving
the message and the obstacles may be known or unknown and obstacles may be dṛṣṭa or
adṛṣṭa. Sometimes we are able to identify the obstacles and sometimes we are not able to
identify the obstacles. This is the Śruti pramāṇa to prove the existence of pratibandha.
Then, he gives another pramāṇa which is taken from Brahma-sūtra. Vidyāraṇya does not
quote the sūtra, but he only paraphrasing or gives the essence of the sūtra. The knowledge
can arise in the mind of a Jīva or a mumukṣu in this janma itself while listening to the
Ācārya; the knowledge can arise in this janma and in Kenopaniṣad the student grasped the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1402

knowledge in one śravaṇa itself. Many other students did not understand anything. When
the student went away the teacher started telling a story. Some students understood after
the story and then he said start with karma-yoga. It means he started the teaching right
from the beginning that is śravaṇa. You may get jñāna in this janma or the next janma
depending upon the exhaustion of the pratibandha. In this manner, it has been said in the
Brahma-sūtra, refer to 3.4.51 of Brahma-sūtra in this regard. Sūtra runs as follows.
Knowledge can take place in this janma if the obstacles are not operating. Then Vyāsa says
tad darśanāt. That we experience in every class. Some student manages to understand
while some student manages not to understand. In Gītā, Kṛṣṇa said understanding is also
a wonder. Not understanding, managing not to understand is also a wonder. The
understanding students always wonder how the other students does not understand. For
them, this student is a wonder and for this student, others are a wonder. Teacher is a
wonder, understanding is a wonder and non-understanding student is also a wonder.

śloka 9.35
गर्भ एव शयानः सन्वामदेवोऽवबुद्धवान्।
पूर्वाभ्यस्तविचारेण यद्वदध्ययनादिषु ॥ ९.३५ ॥
garbha eva śayānaḥ sanvāmadevo:'vabuddhavān.
pūrvābhyastavicāreṇa yadvadadhyayanādiṣu (9.35).
In Brahma-sūtra, the last portion of the sūtra is tad darśanad which means we do have
cases that śravaṇa takes place in one janma and jñāna takes place in another janma. Here is
quoted the example of Vāmadeva Ṛṣi. The Upaniṣad talks about an extraordinary case of
Vāmadeva Ṛṣi. It is referred to in Aitareya Upaniṣad 2.5; in fact, it is the last mantra. While
in the womb of his mother, Vāmadeva came to realise due to the constant practice of Self-
enquiry in his earlier lives. This is evident in case of objective studies also. Vāmadeva
declared that I am not a person but I am Brahman, I am Manu, I am all the living beings
and though I previously was encased in the body, I am now no more Jīvātmā encased in
the body but I am Paramātmā itself. This is repeated here. Now, the question will come
how Vāmadeva gained the knowledge in the womb? The mother has not taught the baby
in the womb, mother being a saṃśārī. He is not taught by anyone! Within the garbha, no
Guru enters and teaches. Therefore, mahāvākya-vicāra has not taken place but jñāna has
come to Vāmadeva; that means the vicāra must have taken place in pūrva-janma. The next

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1403

question: if in pūrva-janma he had vicāra, did he get clear understanding in the pūrva-
janma. He would not have got because if he had gained knowledge in pūrva-janma he
would not have come to garbha-vāsa. In this janma, śravaṇa has not taken place and in the
pūrva-janma, jñāna has not taken place. Understanding had not fully taken place in the
last janma as Vāmadeva must have experienced some pratibandha and that pratibandha—
we do not know what pratibandha— that pratibandha must have gone during the garbha-
vāsa. The proof is that it is again the inference: pratibandha must have been there is
inference. It is because otherwise he would have got mokṣa and no punarjanma. In this
janma, pratibandha must have gone because the knowledge has taken place. Both the
presence of pratibandha in pūrva-janma and removal of pratibandha in the current janma,
we do not know by pratyakṣa pramāṇa but we know it either by anumāna or arthāpatti
pramāṇa.
Thus, we know the presence and the departure of pratibandha. That is said here. Guru is
required and in Vāmadeva’s case, Guru was in pūrva-janma and the vicāra was in pūrva-
janma it is said. Our problem is that even with the Guru we don’t understand; then,
where is the question of understanding without a Guru?! Never take exception as a rule.
Therefore, let us go through proper enquiry. Don’t take Vāmadeva Ṛṣi’s, Buddha’s or
Ramaṇa Maharṣi’s case. Sometimes we try to understand the book or solve some problem
and try to recollect a name or a śloka. In front of the person you try and you say it has
come up to the tip of the tongue and I am unable to recollect. Once you try something they
say that brain independently starts working. Even after we have dropped the exercise, the
brain starts working in that direction and they say even during the night, the brain
continue to function and therefore, after a few hours or the next day or even after a few
days, suddenly, even without your working for that, you get a solution to some problem.
He gives the popular example of those days and Vidyāraṇya himself will explain that
example here.

śloka 9.36
बहुवारमधीतेऽपि तदा नायाति चेत्पुनः ।
दिनान्तरेऽनधीत्यैव पूर्वाधीतं स्मरेत्पुमान्॥ ९.३६ ॥
bahuvāramadhīte:'pi tadā nāyāti cetpunaḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1404

dināntare:'nadhītyaiva pūrvādhītaṃ smaretpumān (9.36).

This is the explanation of the example mentioned in the previous śloka. Even though
several times the Veda mantras have been repeated, if the teaching does not get registered
in the mind clearly, and if the understanding does not come or if the registration of the
mantra does not happen, then there is an advice also. Whenever there is a serious
problem, for that matter any problem and if you seriously try to solve and you find that
there are no doors at all, the best solution is drop it, forget it and do something else. The
mind has the power to relax and recuperate and when you look at the problem again,
there will be a simple solution which you would have missed before. Freedom from
anxiety to solve the problem is required to solve the problem for the anxiety itself may
block the brain to function. When the anxiety blocks it; drop the anxiety then you will be
able to solve the problem.

śloka 9.37
कालेन परिपच्यन्ते कृ षिदर्भादयो यथा ।
तद्वदात्मविचारोऽपि शनैः कालेन पच्यते ॥ ९.३७ ॥
kālena paripacyante kṛṣidarbhādayo yathā.
tadvadātmavicāro:'pi śanaiḥ kālena pacyate (9.37).
The agricultural plants in a field ripen in due course. Of course, the example should not be
overstretched. Here, ripening is a physical process but with regard to the knowledge,
ripening is not a physical process. It is more and more for clarity and confidence. The
example we have to take only that much. Similarly, garbha, the baby in the womb also
you cannot hurry but you have to wait for ten solid months. The mother may be anxious
to know male or female. Therefore, the mother may be anxious and anxiety cannot
quicken the process. That is why three examples are given in the third chapter of the Gītā
just as smoke covering the fire that pratibandha goes away, when the mirror has the dust
the pratibandha can be removed with little effort. And in the case of the baby, the
pratibandha of the womb, will go away only after ten months. They ripen in time. Here
also, what you have to understand is there is no change happening in the knowledge itself,
but as even the obstacles go away, the knowledge seems to ripen. Ripening is not a
process; the knowledge is perceived but it is more in the removal of the obstacles. I
generally give this example. On a paurṇamī evening or the next or even previous evening,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1405

full moon will be there, but because the sun has not totally set, the full moon is not bright
enough. So you don’t even notice its presence and look for the full moon because it seems
dull. The sunlight is the obstacle for the brightness of the moon. As even as the sun sets,
the full moon starts appearing and in the midnight on a full moon, how you come out of
the house and you don’t have to look for the moon because it is so prominent. Suppose
someone says the moon has now brightened. Remember the moonlight has not increased
in brightness but the brightness seems to have increased because of the removal of the
obstructing powerful sunlight. Similarly, as even I repeatedly do vicāra the knowledge is
not improving but the obstacles are going. Then, the knowledge seemingly ripens.

śloka 9.38
पुनःपुनर्विचारोऽपि त्रिविधप्रतिबन्धतः ।
न वेत्ति तत्त्वमित्येतद्वार्तिके सम्यगीरितम्॥ ९.३८ ॥
punaḥpunarvicāro:'pi trividhapratibandhataḥ.
na vetti tattvamityetadvārtike samyagīritam (9.38).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives the support of Sūreśvarācārya’s vārtika also. Vidyāraṇya is giving
so many śāstra pramāṇas. Here it is Sūreśvarācārya’s vārtika pramāṇa. He says in some
people’s case, the pratibandha is extremely difficult to remove. When people come to
Vedānta by the back door it is difficult for them gain Ātmā-jñāna. When a person does not
go through the śāstra properly, it is difficult for such person to gain Ātmā-jñāna. Simply
reading a book “who am I?” will not help. It may work in some rare cases but in most
cases such a thing will not work. Therefore, everybody needs karma, upāsana etc. When
they are there, removal of obstacle will be quicker. More in the next class.

Class 261
śloka 9.38 contd.
In these ślokas from 30 to 50, Vidyāraṇya points out that aparokṣa jñāna is generated by
mahāvākya-vicāra while parokṣa jñāna is generated by avāntara-vākya-vicāra. From this,
it is very clear that during vicāra or śravaṇa only, both parokṣa jñāna and aparokṣa jñāna
are generated. We don’t accept meditation as a source of either knowledge or liberation.
Vidyāraṇya points out that if mahāvākya-vicāra does not generate knowledge in the mind,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1406

it is only because of some pratibandha or the other. As long as there is some obstacle or the
other, I will not take the message of the mahāvākya as a fact but I look upon the message
of the mahāvākya as information alone. When I look upon the message as information,
then for me it is not a fact. It is information provided by the mahāvākya. The moment I
look upon the message as a fact for me, then I don’t call it as information but I call it as
knowledge. The difference between information and knowledge is that the information
not seen as a fact is information and the very same information is knowledge when I look
upon it as a fact. Suppose I don’t study the mahāvākya and there is no understanding of
the mahāvākya, I receive information it is called belief. But after study and understanding
when I receive the information as a fact, then it is called knowledge. Therefore, wherever
there is knowledge, the message of the knowledge is a fact for me. Therefore, if I have
knowledge and not information, ahaṃ brahma asmi must be a fact for me. If ahaṃ brahma
asmi is a fact for me, I should be able to change my mindset based on that fact. The change
of my mindset is easy for me the moment I gain knowledge as that knowledge is a fact for
me. The transition of the mind becomes comfortable. If mahāvākya-vicāra is successful, I
have gained knowledge, and if I have the knowledge and the content of the knowledge
ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact for me, shifting from triangular-format to binary-format must
be smooth and a natural consequence. However, if I am not able to have knowledge, it is
only because of some obstacle or the other. I say I have an understanding but I treat it as
information. How to convert information into knowledge? Only when I look upon the
information as a fact it is knowledge and this conversion is obstructed by some cause or
the other. It may be a known cause or it may be an unknown cause.
This obstacle Sūreśvarācārya divides into three types because of which I treat the message
of the mahāvākya only as information even though mahāvākya comes from the Veda
pramāṇa. I accept God as a fact based on Veda pramāṇa, even though God cannot be
proved by any other pramāṇa other than Vedas. That God I am able to accept as a fact
based on Veda pramāṇa, but when the very same Veda pramāṇa tells me hundreds of
times aham nitya-muktaḥ, this we refuse to accept as a fact. God we accept but ahaṃ
brahma asmi we don’t accept! Karma-kāṇḍa pramāṇa we accept but jñāna kāṇḍa pramāṇa
we don’t accept. Some pratibandha must be the cause trividhapratibandhataḥ which is
divided into three. One understands it, meaning one claims that he has a clear
understanding, but he treats it as information. I cannot call it knowledge because only

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1407

when you treat it as a fact, I can use the word knowledge. Information is there but
knowledge is lacking because he does not have the capacity to accept it as a fact. Tat tvam
asi iti etad. It means Jīvātma-Paramātma-aikya he does not treat as a fact. He wants
another proof other than Veda pramāṇa. Either he is waiting for a mystic experience to
confirm that or he wants some other extraneous, other than Veda pramāṇa, to confirm it as
a fact. For a Vaidika, other than Veda pramāṇa what other proof is required! Even if it is
required, there is no other proof that exists. Veda is the only pramāṇa; still he waits for
some other proof to confirm the information as a fact and he eternally waits for that to
happen.
This has been said in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vārtika by Sūreśvarācārya. Refer to
sambandha-vārtika 2.94 and 2.95. it is the introductory portion of Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad. It is a part of Bṛhadāraṇyaka-Upaniṣad-vārtika written by Sūreśvarācārya.
Incidentally, vārtika is an analysis of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad bhāṣya. Vārtika is a
literature which gives greater freedom to the author. He can even critically analyse Adi
Śaṅkarācārya’s bhāṣya. He can even differ from Adi Śaṅkarācārya. He can even improve
upon Adi Śaṅkarācārya bhāṣya. Only then a commentary can be called vārtika. If
Sūreśvarācārya ventures upon critical analysis of Adi Śaṅkarācārya bhāṣya itself being a
disciple of Adi Śaṅkarācārya, what a command of knowledge must be there and
Sūreśvarācārya does even improve in some places and in some places, he modifies the
original commentary and in some other places, he adds something more. It talks about the
link between karma-kāṇḍa and jñāna kāṇḍa. In this Pañcadaśī ślokas 41 to 45 is not taken
from Bṛhadāraṇyaka-vārtika but it is taken from another book called Vārtika-sāra. Because
Bṛhadāraṇyaka-vārtika has 12000 and odd ślokas some author has condensed and he
wrote a book called Vārtika-sāra and the author is Vidyāraṇya himself. The two ślokas
from vārtika and four ślokas from Vārtika-sāra are explained in these ślokas.

śloka 9.39
कुतस्तज्ज्ञानमिति चेत्तद्धि बन्धपरिक्षयात्।
असावपि च भूतो वा भावी वा वर्तते तथा ॥ ९.३९ ॥
kutastajjñānamiti cettaddhi bandhaparikṣayāt.
asāvapi ca bhūto vā bhāvī vā vartate tathā (9.39).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1408

Sūreśvarācārya himself raises the question in the context of this discussion tat jñānam kuto
bhavati, imagine a person who has been doing mahāvākya-vicāra and has been clearly
understanding it but he treats it only as an information due to some reason or the other.
He does not have the courage to treat it as a fact. We don’t know why he does not have the
courage because after I believe or accept God based on Veda pramāṇa, other than Veda
there is no proof for the existence of God. Adi Śaṅkarācārya clearly establishes in Brahma-
sūtra other than Veda pramāṇa there is no pramāṇa for the existence of God. Science has
never proved God. Still on what basis we take refuge on a God whose existence is never
proved by any other pramāṇa? We rely upon God very heavily only based on Veda
pramāṇa. But why cannot we accept the same Veda and rely upon this also as a fact?
Somehow we are not able to do that. Sometimes one’s mind changes and he decides to
convert this treatment of information into a fact. The śraddhā in the Veda pramāṇa which
was obstructed due to some reason that gets released; the moment it is released,
information become self-knowledge and message becomes a fact. The moment I look upon
the message as a fact, I can easily change my format from triangular to binary. This
transition has to take place in the biography of every student some day or the other. Once
it happens for a student, how does it happen? Sūreśvarācārya says I can give only one
explanation: some obstacle may be there. The proof is that previously he could not come to
binary-format. Now, the obstacle is gone. It is so because he is able to come to the new
format. The presence of obstacle is inferred from his inability to come to the binary-format
and the absence of obstacle is also inferred from the arrival to the binary-format.
The conversion of information into a fact and message into knowledge does happen
because of the pratibandha-kṣaya or the various obstacles. Sometimes, it naturally
happens and sometimes we have to work for it. Such obstacles may go in the normal way
or nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also will help the removal of the obstacle. The moment the
obstacles are removed, ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact. The moment it is a fact, I don’t look
upon myself as a mumukṣu any more and I don’t look upon mokṣa as a sādhya. Hereafter,
whatever religious practices I do, I don’t look upon them as a sādhana for me. All japa and
pañca mahāyajña are converted from sādhana to are loka-saṅgraha. The mindset-
transformation is mokṣa. Other than that, there is no other mokṣa because I am already
free. This obstacle can be of three types:
1. one is bhūta pratibandha, a pratibandha which is based on the past action, etc.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1409

2. Bhāvī, it may be a pratibandha based on future event. It is a future-centric obstacle

3. or it may be vartamāna pratibandha.
It is because of these three pratibandhas, message remains information and does not
become knowledge.

śloka 9.40
अधीतवेदवेदार्थोऽप्यत एव न मुच्यते ।
हिरण्यनिधिदृष्टान्तादिदमेव हि दर्शितम्॥ ९.४० ॥
adhītavedavedārtho:'pyata eva na mucyate.
hiraṇyanidhidṛṣṭāntādidameva hi darśitam (9.40).
Sūreśvarācārya himself clarifies the idea regarding the presence of the obstacles because of
which the message does not become knowledge. Even a student who keeps on studying
all the Upaniṣads and prakaraṇa-granthas and Brahma-sūtras, etc., and his understanding
is also fantastic. He is able to teach and liberate others as well. He successfully continues to
where he was even after having gone through all the Veda śāstras. Therefore,
Sūreśvarācārya says that he has studies Veda pūrva bhāga and Veda-adhyayana he has
done. Yet, he has not converted the message into knowledge. He says body is anātmā, the
mind is anātmā, the reflected consciousness and reflecting medium is equal to ahaṅkāra
and is equal to anātmā and says the original consciousness is my real nature. Everything
he keeps on repeating and this information itself is knowledge by the change of his
attitude. There is no difference between information and knowledge. Information itself is
converted into knowledge when you look at the source of information as Veda pramāṇa,
which reveals only facts because I have accepted Bhagavān as a fact; that means I look
upon Veda as a valid pramāṇa. If Veda is not a pramāṇa for me, I should have become an
atheist, for without Veda pramāṇa God has no proof. The very fact that I am a devotee of
God reveals that I accept the Vedas as a valid pramāṇa for the existence of God. When that
Veda pramāṇa gives this message, what am I waiting for to accept the message as a fact?
Why wait for a mystic event to happen? Still I wait. Veda is a primary pramāṇa and what
Veda reveals need not be proved once again. Where is the need for another pramāṇa! And
why do I want for another proof to treat it as a fact and claim that I am free! There is a
beggar and he has a small ground and a hut on it. Under the ground he has a great
treasure. Even though the treasure is there, he has not claimed the nidhi and without

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1410

knowing that he possesses the treasure, he begs for food. Therefore, he is unable to enjoy
the treasure he has as he refuses to claim that. Through the gold-treasure-example in
which a person refuses to own his riches, similarly, if I have not studied the Vedānta I
don’t have riches but I have studied it. I have the information; only I have to claim as a
fact. That would make me rich but I don’t do that. The problem of pratibandha is revealed
here which put obstacles in his gaining jñāna.

śloka 9.41
अतीतेनापि महिषीस्नेहेन प्रतिबन्धतः ।
भिक्षुस्तत्त्वं न वेदेति गाथा लोके प्रगीयते ॥ ९.४१ ॥
atītenāpi mahiṣīsnehena pratibandhataḥ.
bhikṣustattvaṃ na vedeti gāthā loke pragīyate (9.41).
Vidyāraṇya quoted two ślokas from Sūreśvarācārya’s sambandha-vārtika. In this
quotation, the obstacles have been explained as of three kinds. Explanation of each of three
is not given here, but in Vārtika-sāra each one of the three obstacles is explained.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya quotes the śloka from Vārtika-sāra to explain each one of the
obstacles. Bhūta-pratibandha means past-centric obstacles. The next is vartamāna-
pratibandha and then the bhāvi-pratibandha the future centric-pratibandha. Here,
Vidyāraṇya refers to a student who was a king before. He had a beautiful queen and was
attached to the queen. After coming to Vedānta and after renouncing everything, as a
sannyāsī he came to Vedānta; he had left physically but in the mind the queen continues to
occupy. Because of the powerful queen-attachment, ahaṅkāra became prominent and śākṣī
became subservient. Ahaṅkāra-pradhāna Puruṣa cannot claim ahaṃ brahma asmi and
only śākṣī pradhāna Puruṣa alone can claim ahaṃ brahma asmi. When rāga-dveṣa are
dominant and mamakāras are dominant, ahaṅkāra becomes extremely powerful;
therefore, the Guru continues to say you are Brahman; and the poor śiṣya is thinking of the
absence of the queen. He says atītenāpi mahiṣīsnehena. Because of the pratibandha in the
form of mahiṣī or queen, ahaṅkāra became a fact and śākṣī became subservient. He has
understood, but there was mahiṣī-sneha. Therefore, because of that obstacle, the current
sannyāsī and the ex-gṛhastha did not know the tattva; he understood but he treated the
message as information. His understanding Vedānta does not require extraordinary
intelligence. Such a story or an anecdote is heard among the śāstric circle. May it may

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1411

come down as hearsay. There is no Purāṇa quotation given here. In Purāṇa, there is story
of Jaḍabharata who had a different type of obstacle: attachment to a deer became an
obstacle. Now, the Guru has to somehow help the student. He continues to say that four
things are mithyā: you should not have ahaṅkāra and mamakāra, family and property, the
mind and body are mithyā, the Guru keeps on saying. The śiṣyas also keep on nodding.
Still, it is not dropped. Therefore, Guru tried another new method.

śloka 9.42
अनुसृत्य गुरुः स्नेहं महिष्यां तत्त्वमुक्तवान्।
ततो यथावद्वेदैष प्रतिबन्धस्य संक्षयात्॥ ९.४२ ॥
anusṛtya guruḥ snehaṃ mahiṣyāṃ tattvamuktavān.
tato yathāvadvedaiṣa pratibandhasya saṃkṣayāt (9.42).
Guru took the mahiṣī as a representative; avasthā-traya-viveka, pañca-kośa-viveka, all of
them, he did with respect to mahiṣī herself because she is also the mixture of Ātmā and
anātmā only. When you talk about janma, mṛtyu, jarā, vyādhi and you talk of mahiṣī, 90 th
year the same will be terrible for she is also subject to death after all. He took mahiṣī as
centre for tattva-vicāra. You have to take that as a clue. If you are attached to someone, do
Ātma-anātma-viveka in that someone itself and see the body arriving, growing old and
pañca-bhūta-combination and that body also dies. In keeping with the attachment of the
śiṣya, Guru revealed the tattva; where? mahiṣyāṃ, the very śākṣī behind the śarīratraya of
mahiṣī herself; in mahiṣī itself, tattva as the śākṣī of her pañca-kośa. Then the Guru
repeatedly preached that mind is perishable, body is perishable etc., nobody loves you for
your sake and everyone loves because they find it comfortable and the moment they find
it uncomfortable, all the so called love, care, etc., will go. Slowly we have to get out the
attachment towards every blessed person in life through appropriate enquiry. Then, come
to our own body also. We have to see the very same body which is lovable in youth in old
age, our prayer is different and in our old age we want to die soon. We ourselves are not
clear whether we love or don’t love the body. From that it is clear that nothing in the
creation is really lovable. Ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyo nididhyāsitavyaḥ.
Thereafter or after using this ingenious trick, this disciple, the sannyāsī disciple or the ex-
emperor, the king who was disturbed by the mahiṣī even after taking sannyāsa,
understood the Ātmā and that realization is not any mystic experience but realization

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1412

means conversion of information into knowledge. The content of the information, the
moment I treat it as a fact, that itself is called knowledge and that knowledge alone is
called realization. Before using this trick also, Guru taught the same Vedānta only, but
now it worked because the attachment had gradually weakened. Naturally, the very same
mahāvākya-vicāra worked as a source of knowledge. Incidentally, the word mahiṣī has
another meaning also. Mahiṣī means a ‘she buffalo’ also. You can interpret the story with
that meaning also. There was a person who had a she buffalo. He was attached to the she
buffalo. When that pet died, the disturbance can be sometimes more than even one of the
family members die. She buffalo can be an object of attachment. Therefore, he became a
sannyāsī and renounced the she buffalo but whenever Vedānta is talked about he will
remember she buffalo. Whichever the object of attachment, there is nāma-rūpa and sat;
hold on to sat and decide to never to hold to the nāma-rūpa because it may have beauty,
variety and novelty, but no stability. Once you understand this, Vedānta is over.

śloka 9.43
प्रतिबन्धो वर्तमानो विषयासक्तिलक्षणः ।
प्रज्ञामान्द्यं कुतर्क श्च विपर्ययदुराग्रहः ॥ ९.४३ ॥
pratibandho vartamāno viṣayāsaktilakṣaṇaḥ.
prajñāmāndyaṃ kutarkaśca viparyayadurāgrahaḥ (9.43).
Viṣayāsakti is one, prajñāmāndya is number two kutarka is number three and
viparyayadurāgraha is the fourth and they are the vartamāna-pratibandha which we will
see in the next class.

Class 262
śloka 9.43 contd.
In these ślokas of the 9th chapter beginning from 30th śloka, Vidyāraṇya points out that
mahāvākya-vicāra is capable of giving aparokṣa jñāna directly while avāntara-vākya gives
parokṣa jñāna. Not only mahāvākya can give aparokṣa jñāna but mahāvākya-vicāra alone
can give aparokṣa jñāna. In this context, Naiṣkarmyasiddhi student should remember the
Pūrvapakṣa that is raised in that text wherein Sūreśvarācārya refers to a group of people
who claim that we get only the book-knowledge during mahāvākya-vicāra, and that book-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1413

knowledge is only indirect and secondary knowledge. They claim that in meditation and
that too in samādhi alone, direct realization or sākṣātkāra is possible. Thus, a group of
people claim so, Sūreśvarācārya raises this topic, negates this opinion and strongly
establishes that the direct knowledge or aparokṣa jñāna does not come in meditation, but
it has to come during śravaṇa, manana or through mahāvākya-vicāra. Then, he points out
that in the case of some people, mahāvākya-vicāra does not generate aparokṣa jñāna. It is
not because of deficiency of mahāvākya and it has the capacity to generate aparokṣa jñāna
because it has generated it in many students; therefore, it has the capability. If it does not
generate jñāna in some student we have to infer that the student has certain obstacles and
those obstacles will have to be removed. In fact, our contention is that śravaṇa itself has
the capacity to remove the obstacles also as a by-product. The primary benefit of śravaṇa
is generation of aparokṣa jñāna and the by-product of śravaṇa is that if there are obstacles,
they will be for a few classes and later, śravaṇa will generate the knowledge. For some
people, in addition to śravaṇa, certain extraneous sādhanas may be required, even
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is an external sādhana not for jñāna or mokṣa, but for
pratibandha-nivṛtti. Other than vicāra, the external sādhana can remove the obstacle and
after the removal of obstacle, the upāsaka has to come back to mahāvākya-vicāra. Then,
mahāvākya-vicāra will generate the knowledge. Then, he divided the obstacle into three
types viz., bhūta pratibandha, vartamāna pratibandha and bhāvī pratibandha. Of the
three, bhūta pratibandha has been dealt with in ślokas 41 and 42 which we completed in
the last class. Attachment to the queen continues in sannyāsa āśrama. This he keeps in the
head all the time.
Then, the teacher cannot understand the problem; therefore, he has to find out some
method or the other, and he said that Ātmā was revealed as the śākṣī of the mahiṣī, so that
his mind will listen. This was the method. Thereafter, we entered into vartamāna
pratibandha and in śloka 43 which we have entered into, Vidyāraṇya divides vartamāna
pratibandha itself into four types. All the four put together come under vartamāna
pratibandha. In the last class I enumerated:
1. viṣayāsakti is one;
2. prajñāmāndya is the second;
3. kutarka is third and
4. viparyayadurāgraha is the fourth..

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1414

The meaning of the four is as follows. First one is the stronger lingering attachment to the
sense-objects of the world or it may be relationship with the other human beings. viṣaya
can refer to the people and also the objects. In the previous case, the attachment is with
regard to an object which is no more now. It is a past object attachment. Here, we talk
about not the past objects but even now the object is there; that person is there; that
attachment is so strong that Vedānta does not penetrate the heart. This is called
viṣayāsakti. Kṛṣṇa said in Gītā asaktiranabhiṣvaṅgaḥ putradāragṛhādiṣu (13.10). It may be
a serious problem, especially for a gṛhastha when they are surrounding and therefore,
special effort is required. That is called viṣayāsakti which means deeper attachment.
The second problem is prajñāmāndya. Māndya means weakness of the intellect. The
intellect is not sharp enough to understand the arguments of Vedānta. jahatī lakṣaṇā,
ajahatī lakṣaṇā, soyam devadattaḥ, vyakti-mātra-jñāna, etc., when we discuss subtle
topics, some dull-intellect do not receive the subtlety; then a person has to sharpen the
mind by studying vyākaraṇa, tarka and mīmāṃsā śāstra, etc. Advaita requires sharp
intellect. If an emotional person comes to Vedāntic class to shed tears, there is no scope for
that. Such people should hear daśama skandha of the Bhāgavata. That kind so spirituality
will not work in Advaita. It is knowledge.
The third obstacle is kutarka. Tarka means logic or reasoning. Any reasoning needs data-
collection. Without collecting data, reasoning is not possible. Based on data, reasoning can
be done. Data can be collected from two different sources. Based on the source of data,
tarka is divided into two types.
1. When the data is collected through pratyakṣa pramāṇa it is called laukika tarka. All
the material sciences are based on the data collected with pratyakṣa pramāṇa
sensory data, that is the scientific reasoning which is called laukika tarka.
2. The second tarka is based on the data collected from the Vedas. We don’t collect
data with the help of telescope or microscope. It is not materialistic reasoning and it
is based on the statements occurring in the Vedas. Ākāśa has nāśa; for that I say
ākāśa has the birth. Ākāśa has end because it has origin like the pot. If someone
asked how you do know the ākāśa has the origin? For this I give the source as
tasmād vā etasmād ākāśaḥ sambhūtaḥ. Veda vākya gives me the data and based on
the datum or data, when I infer this is called śāstrīya tarka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1415

When you study karma-kāṇḍa or jñāna kāṇḍa, never use laukika tarka. Scientific
reasoning has no access to the Veda context because Veda deals with something
apauruṣeya. Therefore, the tarka used here is called śāstrīya tarka. In Vedānta class, when
a person is talking about scientific reasoning, then we call it kutarta. It is a very serious
problem for those who have got the scientific orientation all the time asking for scientific
reasoning. In the beginning itself, we should make it clear that if you are interested in that,
this class is not relevant for you. Don’t waste your time. Don’t waste my time also. Naiṣā
scientific tarkeṇa matirāpaneyā! In the first class itself, we should be clear about that. That
is called kutarka. It is the third problem or third pratibandha. This comes under
vartamāna pratibandha.
The fourth one is viparyayadurāgraha. Obstinately holding on to habitual misconception
is called durāgraha. In the triangular-format, I am ahaṅkāra-pradhāna. Vedānta teacher
struggles to convert the student from ahaṅkāra-pradhāna to śākṣi-pradhāna. This job
cannot be done by the teacher alone and student also must cooperate a little bit. If he
remains stubborn, the teacher also will become helpless.
Misconceptions are not only regular and conventional but there are śāstric misconceptions
also. This also we should note clearly because śāstra itself gives a preliminary definition of
mokṣa. For a beginner who has not been exposed to words Ātmā, Brahman, satya,
mithyā, etc., śāstra gives a preliminary definition of mokṣa for an ahaṅkāra-pradhāna
student and after we come to the study, the śāstra itself gives a revised definition of
mokṣa. The student should come to the revised definition and get out of the preliminary
provisional definition of mokṣa.
A student will have to drop that and if he does not drop any amount of study will not
benefit; clinging on to the past definition of mokṣa is a serious viparīta-bhāvanā.
Improvement of the mind is called jīvanmukti and dissolution of the mind is called
videha-mukti. By improvement of the mind we mean remove rāga-dveṣa, krodha, all in
terms of refinement or improvement of the mind that is defined as jīvanmukti; and
videha-mukti is defined as the mind along with the sūkṣma-śarīra merging into Īśvara, not
to come back again. Thus, the dissolution of the mind is called videha-mukti. This is the
preliminary definition of mokṣa which a student clings on to eternally. But the student
should gradually get out of that definition consciously and come to a refined definition of
mokṣa which is that I am the unaffected adhiṣṭhāna of the false mind. It is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1416

improvement of the mind or dissolving the mind. I falsify the mind and I claim myself to
be unaffected adhiṣṭhāna of the false mind. therefore, ever-free unaffected adhiṣṭhāna of
mithyā antaḥkaraṇa is the refined definition of mokṣa. We should internalize this
definition; otherwise binary-format we can never, never come to. We will be busy
improving the mind rather than falsifying the mind. It is like trying to remove the poison
from the rajju-sarpa. From the rope-snake you are removing the poison with no avail.
Initially, we may say that and ultimately where is the question of removing the poison
when the snake itself is not there! Therefore, falsification of the mind is the aim not
improving or dissolving the mind. We have to get out of that viparyaya.
Another preliminary definition is prārabdha-mātra-sambandha is jīvanmukti;
prārabdhasya kṣayaḥ is videha-mukti. After burning sañcita and āgāmi when I have only
prārabdha I am called jīvanmukti and prārabdha-kṣaya is videha-mukti. This is the
preliminary or primary school definition of mokṣa. We have to get out this definition also.
Otherwise, that will become viparyaya-durāgraha. The revised definition of mokṣa is I am
the unaffected adhiṣṭhāna of the false prārabdha; whose presence and absence make no
difference to me, the I the adhiṣṭhāna. Mukti is: I am the unaffected adhiṣṭhāna of false
prārabdha whose presence and absence does not make any difference for me. We have to
come to the revised definition deliberately and consciously get out of the previous
definition. Previous definition is relevant before coming to the study because before, Ātmā
was not revealed. After studying the 8 chapters of Pañcadaśī still one goes on saying I am
exhausting my prārabdha, where is the question of prārabdha for exhaustion? We have to
change our mindset to binary-format from triangular-format.
Another third preliminary definition is freedom from punarjanma or freedom from the
cycle of rebirth and death is mokṣa is our preliminary notion. It is also preliminary
because all the cycles are relevant from the standpoint of ahaṅkāra only. Now, the revised
definition is: I am the unaffected adhiṣṭhāna of the false cycle of births and deaths, both at
micro and macro level; both at individual level as well as cosmic level. The worlds appear
and disappear in me and I am not individual ahaṅkāra trying to escape from the world.
The escapist philosophy is a viparyaya-durāgraha. We should be free from the escapist
idea. I the Brahman can escape where? Where can I escape? Everything happens in me
and let it happen. Drop all the other previous definitions; otherwise, my problem will be
viparyaya-durāgraha. It is holding on to the preliminary definition of mokṣa. You don’t

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1417

tell to other people. This can be understood only by those people who have come to the
revised definitions. Therefore, these are secrets and don’t reveal to others. Else, there is
viparyaya-durāgraha. The entire four obstacles one has to get out of.

When viṣayāśakti is prominent, then we have to practice trividha-doṣa-darśana:

bandakatva, etc., and if prājña-māndya is the problem then you practice any science which
will require thinking process. Even a game which will require thinking you can take up. In
those days, tarka-śāstra, etc., were meant for sharpening the mind. You go through any
process which will sharpen the intellect. Even chess game or anything you will require
sharpening your intellect. For kutarka, you have to get out only by knowing the difference
between śāstra pramāṇa and pratyakṣa pramāṇa. Pratyakṣa is independent in its own field
and śāstra is independent and final in its own field. Both are upajīvya pramāṇas into their
respective fields, just as eyes cannot be verified with the help of ears and ears cannot be
validated through your nose. Similarly, śāstra cannot be confirmed or contradicted by any
amount of modern science. This you have to understand and that is called śraddhā.
Śraddhā will take care of kutarka obstacle.
Then viparyaya-durāgraha you get over by śravaṇa repetition. Therefore, he will say tatra
tatrocitaiḥ by the appropriate remedy as is required for a person; just because one person
took a particular medicine, for headache all the people take medicine; for headache you
will end up with stomach ache also! Even though headache is one it can be caused by
several reasons. Don’t use the same medicine. Enquire what your problem is and employ
the relevant remedy for the cure. If you don’t know the relevant remedy take the help of
the Guru. That is why we say aparokṣa jñāna is not a jerky mysterious experience because
the habitual tendencies will gradually go, just as the day becoming night gradually, not
that you can say until five twenty seven it was day and at five twenty eight it became
night. There is always an intermediary time. You cannot say day also you cannot say night
also.
Similarly, aparokṣa jñāna is not a sudden flashy experience. You understand Vedānta but
still triangular-format continues; then the teacher has to keep on hammering and
gradually you get out of that and internalize the binary-format and the binary-format
becomes natural to me. That is called I am nitya-mukta. It is effortlessly claimed and it is a
gradual process and not a sudden flash at all. Obstacles gradually weaken. Recovery from

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1418

disease is also found to be gradual, not a sudden event, when the obstacles have been
brought to kṣaya, which means brought to an end.

Thereafter, svasya brahmatvam aśnute. He is able to claim the revised definition of mokṣa.
Instead of saying my mind has a problem and therefore, I am not liberated, he says I am
liberated in spite of the problems in the mind. In the preliminary definition, he will say I
have mental problems and therefore, I am not liberated; in the revised definition, he says I
am liberated in spite of mental problems. My body might have jvara but I don’t have that.
My body is improving the mithyā mind but I am free in spite of the mental conditions.
Remember, there is no perfect mind in the entire creation. Therefore, there will be ups and
downs but let me not connect that to my freedom. I will continue to improve it but
without linking it to the fact of my nitya-mukta-svarūpa. It is this that happens which is
acceptance of the revised definition of mokṣa. This is another word I introduce, the revised
definition of mokṣa which is another word for binary-format only. What is wrong
claiming the fact that you are Brahman which is revealed by śāstra pramāṇa which cannot
be contradicted by either pratyakṣa or the material sciences of the world?! That Brahman-
status he claims boldly without being ashamed or without being arrogant. Claiming a fact
is not arrogance. If I say ahaṅkāra is free, it is foolishness. It has to be corrected. When I
say the Ātmā is free, it is not arrogance; claiming the fact is neither foolishness nor
arrogance, but it is wisdom.

śloka 9.44
शमाद्यैः श्रवणाद्यैश्च तत्र तत्रोचितैः क्षयम्।
नीतेऽस्मिन्प्रतिबन्धेऽतः स्वस्य ब्रह्मत्वमश्नुते ॥ ९.४४ ॥
śamādyaiḥ śravaṇādyaiśca tatra tatrocitaiḥ kṣayam.
nīte:'sminpratibandhe:'taḥ svasya brahmatvamaśnute (9.44).
How do you remove the vartamāna pratibandha. He gives a clue for that. It is by
maintaining the sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti especially samādhi-ṣaṭka-sampatti. The
maintenance of this is required. We study this in Tattvabodha and forget the text.
Therefore, don’t forget Tattvabodha and maintain sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. This is one
thing. May you also maintain śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. Refer to 4.4.23 of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1419

Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Then, another Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vākya 2.4.5 is also

quoted as pramāṇa for śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana.

śloka 9.45
आगामिप्रतिबन्धश्च वामदेवे समीरितः ।
एके न जन्मना क्षीणो भरतस्य त्रिजन्मभिः ॥ ९.४५ ॥
āgāmipratibandhaśca vāmadeve samīritaḥ.
ekena janmanā kṣīṇo bharatasya trijanmabhiḥ (9.45).
With the previous śloka the vartamāna pratibandha topic is over. Now, Vidyāraṇya enters
into the bhāvī pratibandha, otherwise called āgāmi pratibandha. It is dealt with in the
following ślokas 45 and 46. Here, Vidyāraṇya talks about unique type of prārabdha.
Normally, the prārabdha of a Jīva is exhausted in that current janma. When the prārabdha
is exhausted the current janma ends. Or when the current janma ends the prārabdha has
been exhausted. Therefore, the conventional thing is the end of prārabdha and end of
janma are simultaneous. If there is a next janma, the next janma is not caused for an
ignorance person, it is not caused by the current prārabdha because current prārabdha is
over with death; next janma is caused by the next bunch of prārabdha which fructifies
from sañcita part, āgāmi, etc. This is the general rule. But there are some rare exceptions to
the rule. Śāstra says, in Brahma-sūtra also we had that discussion, there are certain puṇyas
and pāpas that particular karma itself is capable of giving several good or bad janmas.
Normally, one particular karma is responsible for one particular janma or a part of that
janma, but there are certain karmas for which śāstra says that he will get good janmas
several times. Seven janmas he will be born a rich person for this particular karma.
Similarly, pāpa also. If such and such pāpa is done, seven janmas he will take suffering the
life. For mahāpāpa, he will be born a woman and he will experience the same problem he
meted out to his wife. The pāpa karma is one done in the current janma but the phala is
experienced in several janmas. Thus, a person may exhaust the prārabdha in the current
janma and in that prārabdha suppose such a puṇya or pāpa is there, that prārabdha will
survive even though this body is gone because that particular prārabdha which is the
result of some puṇya and pāpa that I have done, that karma has fructified now and
because of that this is the first janma of the seven janmas. Imagine the first janma of the
seven janmas for the pāpas he had done in the previous janma; he has taken this janma

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1420

and in the first janma he experiences the suffering. When he dies he has exhausted all the
other prārabdha but the pāpa prārabdha does not go away because that pāpa prārabdha
has given only one janma. Therefore, even after the completion of the first janma the pāpa
prārabdha waits to give second janma. In the second janma, he goes through all the
sufferings and even when he dies that pāpa prārabdha will continue for total seven
janmas. That pāpa prārabdha will continue even though the śarīra goes away with each
janma. That means there are certain types of puṇya prārabdha and pāpa prārabdha which
might not be exhausted at the end of the current janma. The pratibandha caused by
prārabdha will be taken over to the next janma. Therefore, āgāmi pratibandha means
prārabdha śeṣa because of which pratibandha is carried over to the next janma also. It is
not regular prārabdha. The example here is this. It is our Vāmadeva Ṛṣi. Vāmadeva had
some peculiar prārabdha and therefore, he required garbha-vāsa and when that
pratibandha went away in garbha-vāsa itself, then he claims ahaṃ brahma asmi. In some
cases, it may be more janmas also. This is what is called āgāmi (bhāvī) pratibandha. It is
prārabdha śeṣa pratibandha; Aitareya Upaniṣad 2.5. Vāmadeva Ṛṣi is also talked about in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.10. We are not quoting Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad mantra
where it only says Vāmadeva knew ahaṃ brahma asmi and there garbha-vāsa is not
mentioned and therefore, that quotation is not relevant here. In Aitareya alone it is said
Vāmadeva claimed in the womb of the mother ahaṃ brahma asmi. For him, he required
only one janma that too not full janma. In garbha-vāsa itself the job is over. Whereas
Jaḍabharata had three janmas. Details in the next class.

Class 263
śloka 9.45 contd.
In these ślokas beginning from śloka 30, Vidyāraṇya points out that mahāvākya-vicāra
itself, if it is properly done, is capable of giving aparokṣa jñāna. By aparokṣa jñāna what
we mean is a clear understanding of the statement ahaṃ brahma asmi that I am mukta or
asaṃśarī. This understanding itself, if there are no obstacles, is jñāna and it is mokṣa-
sādhana. If there are obstacles, this understanding itself becomes jñāna-ābhāsa. The
understanding remaining the same, it is called jñāna if it is not obstructed, and it is called
jñāna-ābhāsa if there are obstructions. How do I know whether I have got jñāna or jñāna-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1421

ābhāsa? Then alone I will know whether there are obstacles or not. If it is jñāna obstacles
are not there. If it is jñāna-ābhāsa obstacles are there. Yet, understanding is the same alone
as ahaṃ brahma asmi. How do I discover whether I have jñāna or jñāna-ābhāsa? I have
told you in the previous classes: you have to remember that ahaṃ brahma asmi is jñāna if
I look upon this message as a fact for me. Let anyone take it in any manner, but when I ask
myself quietly “oh mister (you can call your name), do you look upon this as a fact or
not”? You can give one week’s time also. And you tell yourself whether you look upon it
as a fact. My understanding is jñāna if the message is a fact for me coming from
apauruṣeya nirduṣṭa Vedānta pramāṇa. Īśvara praṇīta Veda pramāṇa is a fact for me and
if it is a fact for me, my mindset should be changed to conform to this fact. Therefore,
change of mindset alone is the test to find out whether what I have is jñāna or jñāna-
ābhāsa.
I stated twofold conversion in the mindset.
1. The first conversion is that I never look upon myself as a saṃśārī and I look upon
myself as asaṃśarī alone under all the circumstances and all my laukika and
śāstrīya karmas I never look upon as a sādhana for me and I never look upon
mokṣa as a goal to be accomplished by me. Do I have this mindset? I ask this
question to myself. Without any hesitation, if the mind says I have no reservation, I
have that mindset as the first transformation.
2. Second transformation is that triangular-format no more continues for me. It means
that there is no more: I am a victimized individual, the world and karmas are the
victimizers, and I require a saviour to run to now and then! As long as I have that
mindset, it means what I have is jñāna-ābhāsa; if I look upon the
understanding/jñāna, as a fact, I no more entertain the thought that I am a victim.
That victimised thought is replaced for good and the world and prārabdha can
never be victimizers and therefore, I can never think of a saviour to come to my
rescue.
This particular mindset-transformation is called true transformation which indicates
whether I have jñāna or jñāna-ābhāsa; it is not decided by any mystic experience. Let it be
clear: the difference between jñāna and jñāna-ābhāsa is not determined by mystic
experience in samādhi but it is purely determined by these two types of mindsets alone. If
this mindset does not take place for me, any amount of ahaṃ brahma asmi, any amount of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1422

jahatī lakṣaṇā, the original consciousness, the reflected consciousness, reflecting medium,
ajahatī lakṣaṇā, you repeat the lip service. That original consciousness is satya it is
adhiṣṭhāna, that world is adhyāsa, all these words are mere words if I am not able to bring
about this mindset-transformation; if that transformation does not take place my
understanding is named jñāna-ābhāsa. What I require is not a mystic experience but what
I require is removal of the obstacle. The obstacle-removal we can do in a directed manner
when the obstacle is clearly known. If it is an attachment with the family, that is the
problem you handle with proper thinking; if it is rāga that is the problem, if it is dvesa that
is the problem; a known obstacle can be handled by employing the known remedy.
However, often, when we search there are no known obstacles; I don’t have that much
intellect to find what is the problem; all I am clear but somehow I cannot claim Svāmījī I
am afraid what the people say. I cannot claim I am asaṃśarī because of apūrva adṛṣṭa
pratibandha; then what you can do? Wait for the pratibandha to go away. Continue the
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. Maintain the sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and continue
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana with the hope that jñāna-ābhāsa will be converted into
jñāna. The mindset-change is very very natural to me and I am able to look at myself as
asaṃśarī. This alone is the criterion with which Vidyāraṇya talked about the pratibandha
at three levels: bhūta, vartamāna and āgāmi. He says in this śloka which is elaborated later
that āgāmi pratibandha in which pratibandha-kṣaya will require another janma or janmas
also. In some cases the pratibandha-kṣaya does not take place in this janma and then he
requires future janmas depending upon the thickness of pratibandha. Therefore, he said in
the 45th śloka, 2nd line ekena janmanā kṣīṇo vāmadeve. For Vāmadeva, only one excess
janma was required and that too not a full janma because in garbha-vāsa itself the job was
over. The mission was accomplished. In some cases, one janma is not enough and many
janmas are necessary to get rid of the obstacles or pratibandhas. Up to this, we saw in the
last class.

śloka 9.46
योगभ्रष्टस्य गीतायामतीते बहुजन्मनि ।
प्रतिबन्धक्षयः प्रोक्तो न विचारोऽप्यनर्थकः ॥ ९.४६ ॥
yogabhraṣṭasya gītāyāmatīte bahujanmani.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1423

pratibandhakṣayaḥ prokto na vicāro:'pyanarthakaḥ (9.46).

Vidyāraṇya says this has been clearly mentioned in Gītā 6 th chapter wherein Arjuna, in
spite of receiving the teaching not from an ordinary Guru but Kṛṣṇa himself, has the
following question. Arjuna was lucky to get one-on-one teaching. What a blessed person
he was. That Arjuna tells in Gītā
yo:'yaṃ yogastvayā proktaḥ sāmyena madhusūdana;
etasyāhaṃ na paśyāmi cañcalatvātsthitiṃ sthirām (6.33), etc.
I have received the teaching. Everything is fine. You are the best teacher in the world. But
he is not willing to give a certificate to himself that my understanding is a fact and he
refuses to accept that he is Brahman. That is why he asks the question what would happen
to him after death? How disappointing it would have been to Kṛṣṇa but he managed to
smile and answer. He said don’t worry, in the next janma, you can continue, obstacles will
go, the understanding will be the same, with no new understanding, no new experience
but you will be able to treat it as a fact; therefore, you look upon yourself as nitya-mukta
Ātmā. That mindset-change coming alone is required. They have knowledge with
obstacles. In Gītā, the exhaustion of the obstacles of the yoga-bhraṣṭa in many future
janmas has been mentioned. Therefore, future janmas will be there for such a person not
for jñāna, not for mokṣa, but only for obstacle-removal. Then, the question will be: if future
janmas are going to be there, all my studies have gone waste?! For this, Vidyāraṇya says it
is not so. The enquiry that is done in this janma will never go waste because the
understanding will be there in the next janma also. But it is covered with the obstacles and
therefore, the understanding will be there in the future janmas but he need not get fresh
understanding. It is like after switching on the light, suppose the bulb is covered by a thick
dust for illumination of the room, only remove the black gloss; you need not switch on the
light. The switch is already on. In this janma, you have gained the knowledge. But the
light is not there because of the black gloss and in the next janma switching on is not
required but only the black gloss is to be removed. In the next janma, the fellow is born
with switch is on. Śravaṇa done in this janma will never go waste or become futile. It is
worthwhile and useful only.

śloka 9.47
प्राप्य पुण्यकृ तां लोकानात्मतत्त्वविचारतः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1424

शुचीनां श्रीमतां गेहे योगभ्रष्टोऽभिजायते ॥ ९.४७ ॥

prāpya puṇyakṛtāṃ lokānātmatattvavicārataḥ.
śucīnāṃ śrīmatāṃ gehe yogabhraṣṭo:'bhijāyate (9.47).
This is a Gītā śloka with a slight modification. As a result of the by-product puṇya,
Vedānta-śravaṇa gives twofold benefits. Vedānta is a pramāṇa if the prepared mind is
there. If it is not prepared or for the unprepared mind, Vedānta cannot serve as a
pramāṇa. For an unprepared mind, śravaṇa will not be jñāna-yoga. For him, śravaṇa will
only be karma. Śravaṇa remaining the same, it can be a pramāṇa or it can be a karma
depending upon the adhikāri-status. You will hear the Śruti as karma without grasping
the knowledge and Śravaṇa, thus, becomes puṇya karma for the anadhikārī. As a result of
Vedānta-śravaṇa taken as karma, the phala will be puṇya. Thus, he gains puṇya phala.
Those who listen to Gītā will get puṇya-loka Kṛṣṇa said in Gītā. Therefore, for Vedānta-
śravaṇa primary benefit is jñāna and by-product benefit is puṇya. For this yoga-bhraṣṭa,
the by-product puṇya will give svarga-loka-phala. Having reached the heavenly worlds,
which are reached by those who perform yāga, yajña, etc, whichever svarga-loka the
ritualists reach, also is reached by the Vedānta student who has done śravaṇa.
Thus, the hearing of śāstras is called yāga-yajña. Because of Ātma-vicāra he goes to higher
loka. In Gītā, it is said that such a person will enjoy svarga-loka-sukha also and thereafter,
he has to come back to manuṣya-loka. The one who has slipped from jñāna and who is in
jñāna-ābhāsa is called yoga-bhraṣṭa. He takes birth in the house of those who are dhārmic
people. Not only is he born to such people who have mental purity and prosperity, but
because of which pañca mahāyajña also will be possible to remove the obstacles. Without
dharma, prosperity alone is there; it will not lead one to the religious path. He is born with
mokṣa-icchā.

śloka 9.48
अथवा योगिनामेव कुले भवति धीमताम्।
निस्पृहः ब्रह्मतत्त्वस्य विचारात्तद्धि दुर्लभम्॥ ९.४८ ॥
athavā yogināmeva kule bhavati dhīmatām.
nispṛhaḥ brahmatattvasya vicārāttaddhi durlabham (9.48).
Here also, Vidyāraṇya talks about the yoga-bhraṣṭa who is unable to gain mokṣa due to
pratibandha. Those who are unable to gain mokṣa even after śravaṇa-manana-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1425

nididhyāsana, due to some obstacles or the other, get rebirth in a good family to pursue
further, to be rid of the obstacles. The same idea is stressed in this śloka also. Such a
person is born in the family of the wise people. In the previous śloka, it was said he would
be born in a rich family but here it is said that he will be born in a jñānī’s family. Total
detachment in the early childhood itself is the character of those jñāna bhraṣṭas, when they
take birth having failed to gain liberation due to various obstacles. Being born in the
family of jñānis, such a person gains knowledge from their parents themselves.

śloka 9.49
तत्र तं बुद्धिसंयोगं लभते पौर्वदेहिकम्।
यतते च ततो भूयस्तस्मादेतद्धि दुर्लभम्॥ ९.४९ ॥
tatra taṃ buddhisaṃyogaṃ labhate paurvadehikam.
yatate ca tato bhūyastasmādetaddhi durlabham (9.49).
In the previous śloka also, the first line is taken from Gītā. Similarly, in this śloka also, he
makes some partial changes to the Gītā vākya. [Gītā 4.51]. In the new janma, he will not be
called yoga-bhraṣṭa. He is called a spiritual genius. Even though from pūrva-janma-
perspective, he will be called manda buddhi, in this janma the very same person will be
called a spiritual genius! That person remembers or recollects the knowledge that he has
gained in the previous janmas partially. It is not that he fully remembers ahaṃ brahma
asmi, but he has sufficient remembrance to have attraction towards spiritual knowledge.
The attraction to the spiritual study is because of pūrva-janma vāsanā. This is not confined
to spiritual field alone but it applies to all the fields; that is why we get musical geniuses
who starts performing music concerts at a very young age. Such persons put forth more
efforts where he left in the pūrva-janma. Therefore, age-advantage is there for him. From
brahmācārya itself, he gets triple promotion and he skips gṛhastha āśrama and
vānaprastha and he takes to sannyāsa straightaway. None can explain the phenomenon
including that sannyāsī himself.

śloka 9.50
पूर्वाभ्यासेन तेनैव ह्रियते ह्यवशोऽपि सः ।
अनेकजन्मसंसिद्धस्ततो याति परां गतिम्॥ ९.५० ॥
pūrvābhyāsena tenaiva hriyate hyavaśo:'pi saḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1426

anekajanmasaṃsiddhastato yāti parāṃ gatim (9.50).

Here, the first line is from one śloka and the second is from another śloka. He says this
yoga-bhraṣṭa finds that his desire for Vedānta, his desire for sannyāsa or his desire for
mokṣa and his lack of interest in worldly matters are not born out of his will. He does not
deliberately use his will to get detached from the worldly desires, he does not use any will
and to get attracted to mokṣa also he does not use any will on his part. Everything
naturally happens to him. He finds some force pushes him desperately towards the
spiritual goal. When without will something happens, it must be because of the pūrva-
janma vāsanās alone. His actions are vāsanā-based. Vāsanā alone pulls a person either to
good or into bad actions.
Here, in the case of a yoga-bhraṣṭa it pulls him towards the spiritual goal that is good
action. Spiritual vāsanās are very powerful and it will push aside all other things outside
and that is why spiritual puṇya overpowers all the material vāsanās. Because of this
spiritual vāsanā gathered in the pūrva janmas, not in one janmas but in several pūrva
janmas, he gets attracted towards spirituality. To go from ajñāna to jñāna the journey is
long, but the journey jñāna-ābhāsa to jñāna is relatively short. Even a casual śravaṇa can
bring about the change. Even overhearing Vedānta will work for him. In the case of
Vāmadeva, even that was not necessary and he got knowledge even during garbha-vāsa.

śloka 9.51
ब्रह्मलोकाभिवाञ्छायां सम्यक्सत्यां निरुध्यताम्।
विचारयेद्य आत्मानं न तु साक्षात्करोत्ययम्॥ ९.५१ ॥
brahmalokābhivāñchāyāṃ samyaksatyāṃ nirudhyatām.
vicārayedya ātmānaṃ na tu sākṣātkarotyayam (9.51).
Here, Vidyāraṇya talks about krama-mukti possibility for the yoga-bhraṣṭa. Suppose there
is a person whose detachment from the world is incomplete. Vedānta’s primary aim is not
improvement of anātmā. That is the aim of karma-kāṇḍa and upāsana-kāṇḍa. Vedānta
may improve anātmā as a by-product, but Vedānta’s aim itself is not improvement of
anātmā. Anātmā in this context means improvement of the world, improvement of
possession, improvement of family-situation; improvement of body and improvement of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1427

the mind; none of them is the aim of Vedānta, but it is falsification of anātmā and claiming
that I need not improve for I am already nitya śuddha mukta. There is a diagonally
opposite direction between karma-upāsana-kāṇḍa and jñāna kāṇḍa. Previous one aims at
improvement of anātmā and the second one aims at falsification of anātmā. If any person
has a serious desire for improvement of any segment of anātmā, that innermost desire
becomes an obstacle in Vedānta doing its job effectively because Vedānta says: where is
the question of improvement?! It is like converting the ordinary rope-snake into a cobra.
To one that is mithyā where is the question of improvement! That should be understood
clearly. When any suppressed desire is there, when nitya-anitya-viveka and iha-amutra-
phala-bhoga-virāga is not clear, then what will happen is suppressed and lingering desires
are there for one family member or the other. Then, ahaṃ brahma asmi satyatva,niścaya
may be there but jagan-mithyātva-niścaya is never complete. He will say everything is
mithyā except his mind and body. That becomes a suppressed desire which may postpone
the conversion of jñāna-ābhāsa into jñāna. More in the next class.

Class 264
śloka 9.51 contd.
Vidyāraṇya talks about the possibility of the obstacles when a student enquires into
mahāvākya. This obstacle may be either from known or unknown sources. When one
understands mahāvākya, jñāna seems to be known to him. Because of these obstacles the
student is not able to accept the content of the mahāvākya as a fact. There is an
understanding but the message is not taken as a fact. If it is not a fact for me, I will not be
able to change my mindset to the binary-format that I am already free and mokṣa is no
more my goal. This mindset-transformation does not take place. As long as this does not
take place, the understanding cannot be called jñāna but it can be called jñāna-ābhāsa or
saṃvādi-bhrama. A person will have to repeat this jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti which will be called
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. As a result of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, the pratibandha
obstacle will go in due course. The obstacle may go in this janma itself or it may take
several janmas in the future, but one consolation is that when a person does not get this
jñāna in this janma, in the next janma the situations are conducive and that person will
come to this knowledge very soon and he or she will be able to be free from pratibandha.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1428

This promise is given by sākṣāt Kṛṣṇa Paramātmā in the 6 th chapter of Gītā. In the 48th
śloka I was referring to a small difficulty in the anvaya.
Vidyāraṇya points out that any type of obstacle always works in the form of our desire to
improve the ahaṅkāra. The primary obstacle to mahāvākya assimilation is our obsession
with our ahaṅkāra, the relative individuality which is always invoked by our attachment
to either family or possession, etc. Any type of mamakāra can always solidify and
strengthen the ahaṅkāra; stronger the ahaṅkāra, weaker the śākṣī. When I listen to
Vedānta as an ahaṅkāra-pradhāna student, then the poor teacher focuses on śākṣī and the
poor student focuses on ahaṅkāra and there is a communication gap; therefore, the
sākṣātkāra mindset-transformation does not take place.
This ahaṅkāra-invocation can take place in any manner and here, Vidyāraṇya refers to
brahma-loka-icchā as a form of an obstacle. A desire for a better possession which is desire
for better mamakāra, then naturally, I am interested in improving the ahaṅkāra alone.
Mamakāra-improvement is always ahaṅkāra-improvement only. When a person says I
want a child, the desire seems to be for a child but the real desire is for my own
fatherhood. It is also an indirect desire of improvement of ahaṅkāra. I want to become
from non-father a father. Anything other than mokṣa is nothing but fattening or
nourishing ahaṅkāra. Any anātma-abhimāna if it is intense will adversely affect the
attainment of knowledge. If you transcend the desire by viveka then it is converted into
vairāgya and there is no obstacle, but when it has not been transcended by doṣa-darśana,
that desire is there in the background as a suppressed yearning. Suppose a student
enquires into śākṣī, he has attachment to ahaṅkāra but as a hobby he enquires into Ātmā,
then what will happen? That vicāra will generate jñāna-ābhāsa; that vicāra cannot
generate jñāna. That means he will never gain that jñāna which will transform the
mindset.

śloka 9.52
वेदान्तविज्ञानसुनिश्चितार्थाः इति शास्त्रतः ।
ब्रह्मलोके सकल्पान्ते ब्रह्मणा सह मुच्यते ॥ ९.५२ ॥
vedāntavijñānasuniścitārthāḥ iti śāstrataḥ.
brahmaloke sakalpānte brahmaṇā saha mucyate (9.52).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1429

Vidyāraṇya explains the previous śloka with the help of Śruti pramāṇa. That is the well-
known mantra occurring in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad and also in the Mahānārāyaṇa
Upaniṣad which is used when inviting the sannyāsī. In that mantra there are two different
readings. Brahma-loke has been interpreted in two ways. According to Adi Śaṅkarācārya’s
interpretation the mantra talks about the jīvanmukti of the jñānī. It is the popular
interpretation. This is what I have given in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad also.
According to the second interpretation the same mantra talks about the krama-mukti.
Those who have gained jñāna and because of some pratibandha jñāna there is jñāna-
ābhāsa only, these people will go to Brahmaloka and in Brahmaloka obstacle-nivṛtti takes
place and from there they get jñāna and mokṣa. The second meaning is taken because te
brahma-loke is there in the mantra. The word brahma-loke comes there and the second
interpretation is that krama-mukti is for the one who has jñāna-ābhāsa because of some
obstacle.
Based on the second interpretation, Vidyāraṇya has written this śloka. This is written
keeping in mind the people who have gained jñāna with obstacle. Refer to 3.2.6 of
Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad and 6.2.15 of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad; Muṇḍaka mantra is the main
mantra that is kept in the mind while writing this śloka. The jñānī who has jñāna-ābhāsa
because of some pratibandha or obstacle as said in the previous śloka. His knowledge is
not jñāna but jñāna-ābhāsa. Such persons go to Brahmaloka after death travelling through
śukla gati. He will go there. In Brahmaloka, the obstacles go away and abhivāñchā also
goes away and therefore, the very same jñāna-ābhāsa, like Vāmadeva’s in the womb, the
jñāna-ābhāsa will get converted into jñāna. The mindset-transformation becomes easier for
him and therefore, he successfully comes to the binary-format. This conversion alone is
called sākṣātkāra. That sākṣātkāra will take place and then he will enjoy jīvanmukti in
Brahmaloka and at the end of the kalpa [the duration of the time of 2000 caturyugas] along
with brahma he will gain videha-mukti which is the result of mahāvākya-vicāra with
obstacle.

śloka 9.53
के षांचित्स विचारोऽपि कर्मणा प्रतिबद्ध्यते ।
श्रवणायापि बहुभिर्यो न लभ्य इति श्रुतेः ॥ ९.५३ ॥
keṣāṃcitsa vicāro:'pi karmaṇā pratibaddhyate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1430

śravaṇāyāpi bahubhiryo na labhya iti śruteḥ (9.53).

Vidyāraṇya talks about another type of student who has another type of obstacle. Here,
we are talking about another possibility. Previous one is a student who has completed
avāntara-vākya-vicāra and got parokṣa jñāna first and then he came to mahāvākya-vicāra
also. Through the mahāvākya-vicāra he got aparokṣa jñāna also. But because of some
obstacle the aparokṣa jñāna remains as jñāna-ābhāsa and because of that he is not able to
take that jñāna as a fact; therefore, mindset-transformation does not take place and
therefore, binary-format is closed. Thus, aparokṣa jñāna he has but it is aparokṣa jñāna-
ābhāsa and it has not become sākṣātkāra because of some known or unknown obstacle.
This was the previous case. There are lot of slips between the cup and the lip. So his
mahāvākya-vicāra he has completed and he congratulates the teacher also. Everything is
fantastic. But he is doubtful to claim himself he is liberated. He has the jñāna-ābhāsa or
saṃvādi-bhrama. This is about the previous student.
Now, he introduces a second student that he is not as lucky as the previous one. In his
case, he is not able to come to mahāvākya-vicāra itself with avāntara-vākya-vicāra he has
parokṣa jñāna of Brahman because of some obstacle or the other. He is unable to come to
mahāvākya-vicāra itself. Therefore, the type of knowledge he has is parokṣa jñāna. The
first case is aparokṣa jñāna-ābhāsa he has. The second case is not aparokṣa jñāna-ābhāsa
but he has parokṣa jñāna of Brahman. He will say satyam jñānam anantam brahma is
jagat-kāraṇa, etc. Everything he will put in the third person, but he is not confident that he
has gained jñāna. In his case, mahāvākya-vicāra is also obstructed. There was an obstacle
with regard to the fructification but here there is an obstacle with regard to the enquiry
itself. The obstacle here is in the form of prārabdha-phala. Such case is talked about in the
Upaniṣad itself. Refer to Kaṭhopaniṣad 1.2.7 mantra. For many people, even there is no
opportunity for mahāvākya-vicāra. Either there is no local Guru available or Guru is
available but time is not available or Guru and time are available, but health is not there.
Because of these, there is no opportunity for even mahāvākya śravaṇa.

śloka 9.54
अत्यन्तबुद्धिमान्द्याद्वा सामग्र्या वाप्यसम्भवात्।
यो विचारं न लभते ब्रह्मोपासीत सोऽनिशम्॥ ९.५४ ॥
atyantabuddhimāndyādvā sāmagryā vāpyasambhavāt.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1431

yo vicāraṃ na labhate brahmopāsīta so:'niśam (9.54).

Here, Vidyāraṇya says that both these candidates are fit for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The
first candidate is one who has aparokṣa jñāna-ābhāsa which has not been converted into
sākṣātkāra and the second one who has parokṣa jñāna. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will
come under karma only. It will not come under nididhyāsana. This karma, which is
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, will after some time remove the obstacle if any and once the
obstacle is removed, it will help both the candidates. In the case of the first candidate,
jñāna-ābhāsa will be converted into jñāna, which means I will take this message as a fact;
that means I will happily change my mindset; that is the benefit for the first candidate. For
the second candidate, the benefit is that when the pratibandha goes away, the situation
will become conducive for mahāvākya-vicāra which was previously obstructed. What is to
be noted here is that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is karma meant for removing the obstacle
for both. Mahāvākya-vicāra alone has to generate knowledge which is the main topic and
that is over with the 53rd śloka.
From 54 onwards, Vidyāraṇya will talk about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana for both these
candidates and the process of that upāsana and whether it is possible or not that he will
discuss hereafter. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana does not come under śravaṇa, does not come
under manana and does not come under nididhyāsana also. It comes under karma for
pratibandha-nivṛtti. Vidyāraṇya discusses this topic because there are some groups of
Advaitins who claim that upāsana is possible only with regard to the saguṇa-brahman,
but Vidyāraṇya wants to argue here and show that upāsana is possible with regard to
nirguṇa-brahman also. This topic will go from śloka 54 to śloka 73. That my intellect is
dull, it is known obstacle. Therefore, these will come under dṛṣṭa pratibandha only.
Another obstacle is the lack of facilities such as a book or satsaṅga, etc., vicāram na labhate
because of this one is not exposed to the Vedāntic thoughts.

śloka 9.55
निर्गुणब्रह्मतत्त्वस्य न ह्युपास्तेरसम्भवः ।
सगुणब्रह्मणीवात्र प्रत्ययावृत्तिसम्भवात्॥ ९.५५ ॥
nirguṇabrahmatattvasya na hyupāsterasambhavaḥ.
saguṇabrahmaṇīvātra pratyayāvṛttisambhavāt (9.55).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1432

Here, an objection comes from a group of Advaitins. They say nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana

does not exist and it is not possible. Upāsana can be only with regard to saguṇa-brahman.
Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is impracticable and impossible is the objection raised by a
group of Advaitins. This objection will not be raised by Viśiṣṭādvaitins or Dvaitins.
According to them, nirguṇa-brahman is not there. Therefore, this is a discussion between
two groups of Advaitins. Both of them accept nirguṇa-brahman. The controversy is there
on upāsana of nirguṇa-brahman. One group says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is not possible
and jñāna alone is possible. Vidyāraṇya says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is possible.
Vidyāraṇya says upāsana means pratyaya-āvṛtti. It is repetition of a particular thought. By
studying the avāntara-vākya, I have got parokṣa jñāna of nirguṇa-brahman. That parokṣa
jñāna of nirguṇa-brahman will be in the form of a thought only. Aparokṣa jñāna is also a
thought and parokṣa jñāna is also a thought. I have got parokṣa jñāna by avāntara-vākya-
vicāra that means nirguṇa-brahma-parokṣa-jñāna-vṛtti I do have. Once that vṛtti has been
accepted, then when that vṛtti is repeated it becomes an upāsana. It is exactly like saguṇa-
brahma-upāsana. Here, there is nirguṇa-brahma-vṛtti-āvṛtti; āvṛtti of vṛtti is possible in the
case of saguṇa-brahman as well as in the case of nirguṇa-brahman. What is your problem?
Before any upāsana there is a dhyāna śloka, what we are supposed to follow. Śāntākāraṃ
bhujagaśayanaṃ padmanābhaṃ sureśaṃ, etc., are nothing but vṛtti-āvṛtti. The same thing
you can do with regard to nirguṇa-brahman also. Anything can be a symbol for upāsana.
Karuṇātaraṅgitākṣīṃ dhṛtapāśāṅkuśapuṣpabāṇacāpām; aṇimādibhirāvṛtāṃ mayukhaiḥ
ahamityeva vibhāvaye bhavānīm. I can choose myself as a symbol for upāsana or for
invoking even Devī. If saguṇa-brahman can be invoked upon myself Vidyāraṇya says
nirguṇa-brahman also I can invoke on myself. Thus, ahaṃ brahma asmi is an invocation of
nirguṇa-brahman upon myself. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya states pratyaya-āvṛtti-sambhavāt.

śloka 9.56
अवाङ्मनसगम्यं तन्नोपास्यमिति चेत्तदा ।
अवाङ्मनसगम्यस्य वेदनं च न सम्भवेत्॥ ९.५६ ॥
avāṅmanasagamyaṃ tannopāsyamiti cettadā.
avāṅmanasagamyasya vedanaṃ ca na sambhavet (9.56).
The dialogue between the two groups is continuing. Pūrvapakṣa says nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana is not possible. He says nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible. If he says jñāna is also

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1433

not possible, we have to close the class. Siddhāntī says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is also
possible, nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is also possible. Now, the Pūrvapakṣī argues nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is not possible because nirguṇa-brahman is not an object. Since it is not
an object, you can never do the upāsana of nirguṇa-brahman which being unmeditatable
or unthinkable. For that, Vidyāraṇya says if you say nirguṇa-brahman cannot be
meditated upon because it is not an object of meditation, I will say nirguṇa-brahman
cannot be known also because it is not an object of knowledge. Therefore, if you say it is
not object of meditation I will argue it is not object of knowledge also.

Class 265
śloka 9.56 contd.
Before coming to our topic, I will confirm the reference śloka or reference mantra given in
the 52nd śloka. There two reference mantras are given. Muṇḍaka 3.2.6 and Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad 6.2.15. I was not very sure about the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad quotation, but on
checking I find that that reference is also okay. It deals with krama-mukti. In the 52nd śloka,
Vidyāraṇya talked about krama-mukti for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka if he does not get
jñāna in this janma. Regarding this krama-mukti for the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka he gave
the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad mantra. I had said that, that Muṇḍaka mantra can be taken as
jīvanmukti mantra also as well as krama-mukti mantra. Another reference is given from
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. That quotation is also okay. It is another quotation for krama-
mukti. It comes in the context of pañcāgni-vidyā-prakaraṇa. The second quotation is that
it talks about krama-mukti only but not krama-mukti for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka. It is
krama-mukti for pañcāgni-upāsaka. Even though it is not a perfect quotation, that also can
be taken. This I wanted to confirm. Now, we will go to our current topic.
Whether nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana exists or is it possible at all is the question posed by the
Pūrvapakṣa. It is a debate between two groups of Advaitins. It is a factional feud within
the Advaitins themselves. The difference between two groups must be carefully noted.
Both the groups accept nirguṇa-brahman jñāna because that is the fundamental of
Advaita. Therefore, all advaitic factions will uniformly accept that nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna
exists because we all accept that mokṣa is possible only through nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna.
There is no debate on this. Then what is the controversy? It is not with regard to the jñāna,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1434

but it is with regard to the upāsana. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is possible or not is the

debate. Vidyāraṇya wants to establish that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also exists and
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is also possible. That is what he wants to establish through this
discussion. Here, Pūrvapakṣī is one who refutes the possibility of the nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. He says upāsana is possible only with regard to saguṇa-brahman, either saguṇa
Īśvara or saguṇa Hiraṇyagarbha or saguṇa Virāṭ; saguṇa-brahma-upāsana alone is
possible and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is impossible is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. Now,
we are going to have a dialogue between Pūrvapakṣī and Siddhāntī. Pūrvapakṣī says
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is impossible and Vidyāraṇya says it is possible. To say that it is
possible Vidyāraṇya does not use a direct method. If Vidyāraṇya gives his reasons directly
that because of these reasons nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is possible, if he establishes it so, it
is a direct answer to Pūrvapakṣī. But Vidyāraṇya does not directly deal with that. He uses
an indirect method we should understand. When the Pūrvapakṣī says nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana is not possible, he gives ten reasons. Then, Vidyāraṇya answers by saying that on
the same count nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is also not possible. When Vidyāraṇya says this,
you should not get confused. Vidyāraṇya says this only for the sake argument.
Vidyāraṇya does accept nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible, but sheerly for the sake of
argument Vidyāraṇya tells Pūrvapakṣī: if you say nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is not
possible, because of such and such an argument, I will say nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is also
not possible with the same argument. Naturally, Pūrvapakṣī is provoked. Now, the
provoked Pūrvapakṣī should should drop the topic nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana but
Pūrvapakṣī has to give the argument to establish nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible
because Pūrvapakṣī believes like Siddhāntī in nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna.
Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī gives the reason to establish nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible.
Once, Pūrvapakṣī gives the reason Vidyāraṇya takes the reasons given by the Pūrvapakṣī
and says because of these reasons given by you, I will state the same reasons that you gave
to establish nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna; with the help of the same reasons I will say nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is possible. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya’s method is that he does not give the
reasons but he brings out the reasons from Pūrvapakṣī’s mouth and to bring the reasons
from Pūrvapakṣī’s mouth Vidyāraṇya temporarily asserts nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is not
possible. He argues to provoke the Pūrvapakṣī. Then Pūrvapakṣī brings up the reasons
and then Vidyāraṇya uses Pūrvapakṣī’s reasons to establish his conclusion of possibility of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1435

nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Vidyāraṇya takes the arguments from Pūrvapakṣī and uses

those arguments to establish his view point. With this background, you should read all the
ślokas or else it will be confusing. Pūrvapakṣī says that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is not
possible because nirguṇa-brahman is not an object. It is not an object of meditation. That is
said in the first line of the śloka. Nirguṇa-brahman is not an object of speech and the mind,
it is argued.

Vidyāraṇya purely to provoke the Pūrvapakṣī, this is not the conclusion of Vidyāraṇya,
but it is just for argument-sake he says because it is not an object, you cannot do upāsana,
then it being not an object, you cannot know also because whatever is known becomes an
object of knowledge. If upāsana is not possible because it is not an object of upāsana,
knowledge is also not possible because it is not an object of knowledge. Therefore, if
upāsana is impossible jñāna is also impossible says Vidyāraṇya. Vidyāraṇya does not hold
this view but he only makes the statement to provoke the Pūrvapakṣī. Once this is said
Pūrvapakṣī will be disturbed because Pūrvapakṣī believes in the possibility of knowledge;
when knowledge is negated Pūrvapakṣī will get disturbed. That is what is the aim of
Vidyāraṇya.

śloka 9.57
वागाद्यगोचराकारमित्येवं यदि वेत्त्यसौ ।
वागाद्यगोचराकारमित्युपासित नो कुतः ॥ ९.५७ ॥
vāgādyagocarākāramityevaṃ yadi vettyasau.
vāgādyagocarākāramityupāsita no kutaḥ (9.57).
Pūrvapakṣī has to establish nirguṇa-brahman jñāna. We have left the discussion of
upāsana because Vidyāraṇya has countered that nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is not possible.
Now, the Pūrvapakṣī has to say how nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible when Brahman is
not an object of knowledge. For that, Pūrvapakṣī says that a person knows Brahman not in
the form of an object but he knows Brahman that it is not an object. It is possible to know
Brahman as a non-object which means it is possible to know Brahman as subject. This is
the answer from Pūrvapakṣī. Brahman is not the object of any instrument of knowledge
like vāk. In this manner, a person can know Brahman without objectification as a non-
object in the form of the subject. Thus, Brahman can be known and therefore, brahma-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1436

jñāna is possible. Thus, without objectification, Brahman knowledge is possible.

Vidyāraṇya says wonderful. Vidyāraṇya says if you can know Brahman as a non-object,
do the upāsana of Brahman also as a non-object. Therefore, non-object brahma-upāsana is
also possible exactly like non-object Brahman knowledge is possible. Why are you
rejecting upāsana and accepting knowledge only? Either accept both or reject both.
Accepting the knowledge rejecting the upāsana is illogical. Let one meditate a non-object
also knowing a non-object. Why is it impossible? It is not a question, but means that it is
indeed possible.

śloka 9.58
सगुणत्वमुपास्यत्वाद्यदि वेद्यत्वतोऽपि तत्।
वेद्यं चेल्लक्षणावृत्त्या लक्षितं समुपास्यताम्॥ ९.५८ ॥
saguṇatvamupāsyatvādyadi vedyatvato:'pi tat.
vedyaṃ cellakṣaṇāvṛttyā lakṣitaṃ samupāsyatām (9.58).
Now, the Pūrvapakṣī says if you say nirguṇa-brahman can be meditated upon and so
upāsana is possible, then it becomes a logical contradiction. Once you say upāsana is
possible, Brahman then becomes upāsya which means meditable or thinkable. Once you
say it is upāsya, meditable, that meditability, the upāsya status will become the attribute of
Brahman. The moment Brahman becomes upāsya, upāsyatva will become an attribute;
once upāsyatva becomes an attribute, it is no more nirguṇa-brahman and it will become
saguṇa-brahman with the attribute of upāsyatva. Just like hot ice-cream is a contradiction
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a contradiction and it is not possible. The whole thing is a
statement of Pūrvapakṣī and then Vidyāraṇya says if that is your argument, I would say
nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna also will have the same logical contradiction. Again, the statement
is for argument-sake, you should remember. What will be the logical contradiction? The
contradiction is that the moment you say nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna nirguṇa-brahman
becomes knowable. Once you say nirguṇa-brahman is knowable, the knowability,
prameyatva, jñeyatva, vedyatva, will become the attribute of nirguṇa-brahman. Once it
gets knowability as an attribute it is no more nirguṇa-brahman. It will be endowed with
jñeyatva attribute and therefore, how are you accepting nirguṇa-brahman jñāna? You
should not accept such jñāna! Because of the knowability attribute, saguṇatvam bhavati.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1437

Thus, nirguṇa-brahman becomes saguṇa-brahman. If the upāsana is not possible jñāna

also will become impossible!
Now, Pūrvapakṣī comes with another argument. He wants to refute the upāsana while
accepting jñāna. He says nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible. Naturally, you raised a
question if jñāna is possible when it will have an attribute, the attribute being knowability.
Then, Pūrvapakṣī says knowability is a temporary attribute superimposed at the time of
teaching. Through the knowability attribute we will know Brahman and after knowing
Brahman we will drop the knowability attribute. Therefore, vedyatva is only a temporary
attribute used for indirectly revealing nirguṇa-brahman. Therefore, that attribute is only a
false attribute and therefore, it will not disturb nirguṇa status of Brahman. It is like the
rope is revealed as the adhiṣṭhāna of the false snake and I use the word adhiṣṭhāna only
temporarily to reveal the false snake. Similarly, we use the false attribute of knowability to
reveal nirguṇa-brahman. Therefore, it is nirguṇa only and vedyatva is a temporary
attribute used as a lakṣaṇa. This is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. Therefore, nirguṇa-
brahma-jñāna is possible. Vedyatva attribute will not disturb nirguṇa status of Brahman.
False knowability attribute will not disturb the nirguṇa status of Brahman and therefore,
nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible. This is again the argument of Pūrvapakṣī.
Vidyāraṇya says if knowability is only a false attribute then I will say upāsyatva is also a
false attribute; I did not say it is real. With the help of false upāsyatva attribute may you
meditate upon nirguṇa-brahman. If false knowability is possible, false meditability is also
possible. Thus, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana with false meditability attribute is possible just
as nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna is possible with false knowability attribute. Nirguṇa-brahman is
indirectly known with the help of false knowability attribute; it is known through
implication with false knowability attribute. It can be known with false knowability. This
is Pūrvapakṣī. Then Siddhāntī gives his answer: nirguṇa-brahman is meditable with false
meditability attribute. If that is possible, this is also possible. So Vidyāraṇya concludes his
argument.

śloka 9.59
ब्रह्म विद्धि तदेव त्वं नत्विदं यदुपासते ।
इति श्रुतेरुपास्यत्वं निषिद्धं ब्रह्मणो यदि ॥ ९.५९ ॥
brahma viddhi tadeva tvaṃ natvidaṃ yadupāsate.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1438

iti śruterupāsyatvaṃ niṣiddhaṃ brahmaṇo yadi (9.59).

Here, the whole śloka is from Pūrvapakṣī. He says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is not
possible. Further, don’t give me logic and all: it is so because of this or that. If I give logic,
you give counter-logic. I don’t understand what you say. I don’t understand what I say
also! The logic seems to be confusing. Let us go to the Śruti and he says Śruti clearly says
what you meditate upon is not Brahman. It clearly says nirguṇa-brahman is never an
object of meditation. In fact, it says whatever you meditate upon is not nirguṇa-brahman.
Kenopaniṣad clearly negates nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana; reference is 1.5. What you
meditate upon is only saguṇa-brahman and nirguṇa-brahman is never an object of
meditation. Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is not possible. What answer you will
give when I quote Kenopaniṣad? He is paraphrasing kena vākya here. Tadeva means that
non-object alone is Brahman. That subject alone is Brahman. Non-object alone is Brahman.
Whatever you meditate upon is not nirguṇa-brahman. It is a clear negation. It means
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana does not exist. It is a big, bloated bladder of bluff! Similarly, he
says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana does not exist; because of the Śruti pramāṇa, Brahman’s
meditability is negated. Brahman being an object of meditation has been negated by the
Śruti. In short, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana Śruti negates. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣī. This
doubt is answered in the next śloka.

śloka 9.60
विदितादन्यदेवेति श्रुतेर्वेद्यत्वमस्य न ।
यथा श्रुत्यैव वेद्यं तत्तथा श्रुत्याप्युपास्यताम्॥ ९.६० ॥
viditādanyadeveti śrutervedyatvamasya na.
yathā śrutyaiva vedyaṃ tattathā śrutyāpyupāsyatām (9.60).
Here, two Pūrvapakṣas and two siddhāntas are there. First line is the answer to
Pūrvapakṣa raised in the previous śloka. He said Śruti negates nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.
Vidyāraṇya says the same Kenopaniṣad negates nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna also by another
statement. Whatever you know is not Brahman. By this clear statement the Upaniṣad says
you cannot know Brahman because the moment you know Brahman, Brahman becomes
known and the Śruti says whatever is known is not Brahman. Therefore, Śruti vākya
negates brahma-jñāna and brahma-upāsana also. Refer to Kenopaniṣad 1.4. Brahman is
different from whatever you know. It means the moment you know Brahman it will not be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1439

Brahman. How is brahma-jñāna possible? Because of the Śruti vākya for this nirguṇa-
brahma knowability is also not there. That means nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna also is negated
by the Śruti. If upāsana has been negated then jñāna is also negated and Śruti support is
there for both arguments.
Now, Pūrvapakṣī comes up with another argument. Pūrvapakṣī says we know Brahman
as something other than known. It is the same thing given before. One has to know
Brahman with the Śruti vākya. In this manner, may you know Brahman. You don’t
objectify Brahman but understanding the Śruti vākya is brahma-jñāna. Śruti vākya is
Brahman is otherwise known and unknown and the moment you understand the Śruti
vākya you don’t know Brahman but your attempt to know Brahman goes away and you
abide in the knower subject. Just as by understanding the Śruti vākya, you resolve into
yourself, the mind folds back into itself, that is called knowledge. Kena says it is neither
known nor unknown. That understanding is the brahma-jñāna. May you understand the
vākya. Vākya-jñāna is brahma-jñāna and not viṣaya jñāna. This is Pūrvapakṣī’s statement.
Vidyāraṇya says you do the upāsana also in the same way. Understanding 1.5 vākya
Brahman is not an object of knowledge in that manner may you do upāsana also.

śloka 9.61
अवास्तवी वेद्यता चेदुपास्यत्वं तथा न किम्।
वृत्तिव्याप्तिर्वेद्यता चेदुपास्यत्वेऽपि तत्समम्॥ ९.६१ ॥
avāstavī vedyatā cedupāsyatvaṃ tathā na kim.
vṛttivyāptirvedyatā cedupāsyatve:'pi tatsamam (9.61).
Pūrvapakṣī continues. He says the knowability of nirguṇa-brahman is only mithyā. From
pāramārthika-dṛṣṭi it is not there at all. Therefore, I am only temporarily accepting the
same as vedya with lakṣaṇā vṛtti. The same idea is said here. Vidyāraṇya says similarly,
upāsya also we talk from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi with from lakṣaṇā vṛtti alone. Then,
Pūrvapakṣī says when I talk about knowability, I am only talking about vṛtti-vyāpti, but
phala-vyāpti is not there in the form of brahma-jñāna. Therefore, we are getting the jñāna
with the help of vṛtti-vyāpti, we negate the phala-vyāpti, that is the negation of jñāna.
Then, Vidyāraṇya says if jñāna is possible through vṛtti-vyāpti without phala-vyāpti,
upāsana also is possible through vṛtti-vyāpti without phala-vyāpti. Vṛtti-vyāpti means
kevala vṛtti-vyāpti which means without phala-vyāpti. Then, Vidyāraṇya says with regard

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1440

to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also it is kevala-vṛtti-vyāpti-mātreṇa upāsana and there is no

phala-vyāpti involved in the upāsana also. Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is
possible. Then, Pūrvapakṣī asks the question why you are so much attached to nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana? Vidyāraṇya asks why you are so much averse to nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana? If you give up your dislike for that, then I will give up my ‘like’ for that. More in
the next class.

Class 266
śloka 9.61 contd.
Here, Vidyāraṇya establishes the possibility of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana for a person who
has understood nirguṇa-brahman with the help of avāntara-vākya of Upaniṣads. Based on
that parokṣa jñāna, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can be done invoking that parokṣa jñāna of
nirguṇa-brahman, invoking on any appropriate ālambana, sometimes the ālambana
provided is oṃkāra or one can take oneself for the purpose of upāsana. This is what
Vidyāraṇya establishes here. Pūrvapakṣī tries to point out nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna alone is
possible and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is not possible. For this, Vidyāraṇya says in
whatever manner jñāna is possible, in the same manner upāsana is also possible. Jñāna is
in the form of vṛtti and upāsana is also in the form of vṛtti. If jñāna-vṛtti is possible,
upāsana-vṛtti is also is equally possible. In the 61 st śloka which we had completed, the
Pūrvapakṣī said even when we say nirguṇa-brahman is known but the knownness is only
a false attribute of Brahman; once it is known, knownness also will be dismissed later; the
knownness of Brahman is avasthāvi Pūrvapakṣī said. Vidyāraṇya said no problem. In the
same way, upāsyatva meditatedness of Brahman is also of the same category. In fact,
whatever argument you give in support of the possibility of knowledge, all those
arguments I can extend to the possibility of upāsana as well. Finally, Pūrvapakṣī said
knowledge of nirguṇa-brahman is unique unlike the knowledge of the other objects. In the
case of knowing other thing, vṛtti-vyāpti is also there. Thought also pervades the object
and phala-vyāpti is also there. It means cidābhāsa pervading and illumining the object. It
is there in the case of the objective world, but in the case of nirguṇa-brahman vṛtti-vyāpti
alone is there, cidābhāsa is formed on the vṛtti but the cidābhāsa does not have any
function to illumine Brahman. Therefore, phala-vyāpti is non-functional in nirguṇa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1441

brahma-jñāna. That is the uniqueness. Vidyāraṇya says in the same way, in nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana also only vṛtti-vyāpti is there and phala-vyāpti is not there. Therefore,
the argument you give for jñāna as kevala vṛtti-vyāpti, the same argument I will give for
upāsana. If you have forgotten vṛtti-vyāpti phala-vyāpti discussion where I had spent two
classes, you can go back to the notes. Refer to the ślokas Pañcadaśī chapter 7.90-7.95]. If
vedyata is described as vṛtti-vyāpti, then upāsyatva is also defined as vṛtti-vyāpti. Up to
this, we saw in the last class. Another place it is discussed is Vedānta-sāra 4 th or 5th chapter.
There it is in prose form and here it is in śloka form. That is the only difference.

śloka 9.62
का ते भक्तिरुपास्तौ चेत्कस्ते द्वेषस्तदीरय ।
मानाभावो न वाच्योऽस्यां बहुश्रुतिषु दर्शनात्॥ ९.६२ ॥
kā te bhaktirupāstau cetkaste dveṣastadīraya.
mānābhāvo na vācyo:'syāṃ bahuśrutiṣu darśanāt (9.62).
Pūrvapakṣī has tried his best to negate the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. He has failed in his
attempt. All the arguments Vidyāraṇya has negated successfully. Now, Pūrvapakṣī is
making an emotional appeal when the logic is no more appealing. He asks Vidyāraṇya:
why you are so much attached to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana? You try to vehemently
establish it and you seem to be obsessed with the topic. You seem to be fanatically holding
on to the topic! Why you are so much attached to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana? This is the
question from Pūrvapakṣī to Vidyāraṇya. Just as a devotee is attached to his Iṣṭa Devatā
similarly, you seem to be fanatically devoted to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Up to this is
Pūrvapakṣī. Even that emotional appeal is not able to convince Vidyāraṇya. He also gives
an answer in an emotional language. Why do you have so much hatred for nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana? If you can have hatred I can have attachment in that. Vidyāraṇya
answers why you want to negate nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana? You might not be interested
in practicing that, but why cannot you at least academically accept that there is such a
thing called nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana? It can be practiced by those people who are
interested just as in śikṣāvallī we had vyāvṛti upāsana. Even though none of us practices
this, we are accepting the existence of saṃhitopāsana.
Vidyāraṇya’s argument is whether you practice or others practice you have to accept it.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1442

If I add that in the list you should not remove it. If you don’t want to add you need not. I
will put it in the upāsana syllabus. You don’t scrap that. He says that he did not like
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana because of some śāstric reason. There is no Śruti pramāṇa in
support of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. This is the final argument from Pūrvapakṣī that you
cannot show any pramāṇa from the Śruti. For that, Vidyāraṇya’s answer is this. You
cannot say the absence of pramāṇa as your support, tells Vidyāraṇya to the Pūrvapakṣī.
The absence of pramāṇa cannot be used for negation of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. With
regard to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana you cannot argue pramāṇa-abhāva. In many
Upaniṣads, it is found that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is acceptable. Naturally, Pūrvapakṣī
will ask for the places where such instances are available. Vidyāraṇya is prepared to quote
many instances in support of his claim.

śloka 9.63
उत्तरस्मिंस्तापनीये शैब्यप्रश्नेऽथ काठके ।
माण्डुक्यादौ च सर्वत्र निर्गुणोपास्तिरीरिता ॥ ९.६३ ॥
uttarasmiṃstāpanīye śaibyapraśne:'tha kāṭhake.
māṇḍukyādau ca sarvatra nirguṇopāstirīritā (9.63).
There various Śruti references given here. The first one is from the Nṛsiṃha-uttara-
tāpanīya Upaniṣad chapter 1 mantra. Śiṣya asks Prajāpati about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
with oṃkāra ālambana. The answer is given and this Upaniṣad is very similar to
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Many mantras are similar to Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. Second one is
from Praśna Upaniṣad chapter 5 and mantra 1. The question is how we can meditate upon
Apara Brahman and Para Brahman on oṃkāra. This indicates that on oṃkāra both Apara
Brahman the saguṇa-brahman and Para Brahman the nirguṇa-brahman both can be
meditated. That is the question itself and Pippalāda answers that. There is also apara-para-
brahma-upāsana on oṃkāra ālambana that is talked about. Then, the example of Kaṭha
Upaniṣad mantra is quoted. Refer to 1.2.15 to 17. Three mantras of Kaṭhopaniṣad are
quoted here. Here also, oṃkāra is presented as the ālambana for apara brahma-upāsana
and para brahma-upāsana. Here also, both saguṇa-brahma-upāsana and nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana can be practiced according to the choice of the student. Then finally, Māṇḍūkya
Upaniṣad mantra also talks about oṃkāra and catuṣpād Brahman. In the catuṣpād
Brahman, first three are saguṇa and the fourth turīya is nirguṇa. That is talked about in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1443

seven mantras. Thereafter, from the 8th mantra up to 12th the same upāsana is talked about
there. Here also, oṃkāra is ālambana for both saguṇa-brahma- and nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. The idea to be noted here is that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is generally associated
with oṃkāra ālambana upāsana. That is why all the quotations from all the Upaniṣads
oṃkāra comes as reference. Based on the above references nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is
possible. The other example they give is Taittirīya Upaniṣad śikṣā vallī omiti brahma,
omitīdaṃ sarvam, omityetadanukṛtirha sma vā apyo śrāvayetyāśrāvayanti; that anuvāka
is again oṃkāra ālambana brahma-upāsana.

śloka 9.64
अनुष्ठानप्रकारोऽस्याः पञ्चीकरण ईरितः ।
ज्ञानसाधनमेतच्चेन्नेति के नात्र वर्णितम्॥ ९.६४ ॥
anuṣṭhānaprakāro:'syāḥ pañcīkaraṇa īritaḥ.
jñānasādhanametaccenneti kenātra varṇitam (9.64).
Vidyāraṇya continues further, now that Pūrvapakṣī has been silenced. He does not have
any more arguments. All the reasons have been refuted. Therefore, you have to imagine
that the Pūrvapakṣī has not temporarily give up, but has become silent. He has accepted
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana in the syllabus of the Vedānta grantha. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
continues further by saying if you want to know how nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana to be
practiced on oṃkāra is, suppose you are interested in practicing nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana,
I will give you the guidelines also for Adi Śaṅkarācārya has explained the practice of
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana on oṃkāra ālambana in a particular text called Pancikāraṇam.
The method of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana upon the oṃkāra ālambana has been clearly
taught in Pañcīkāraṇam. Pūrvapakṣī accepts the argument of Vidyāraṇya, but Pūrvapakṣī
asks is it not only a sādhana for jñāna. Is it not that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a sādhana
for nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna? He asks the question. For that, Vidyāraṇya says wonderful and
that is what I say. I never said nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana itself is jñāna nor do I say
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will give liberation. It is only a sādhana for getting nirguṇa-
brahma-jñāna later. Jñāna alone will give liberation. Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
is jñāna-sādhana. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a means to attain nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna.
We have clearly stated that upāsana also will come under karma only just as any other
upāsana will come under karma. So also, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a type of karma for

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1444

it is based on the kartā’s will. It is a will based mānasa-karma practiced by the upāsaka.
This upāsana will lead to knowledge later indirectly through pramāṇa. That topic we will
discuss later. Next question will be how the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a means of
nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna? That topic will be analysed later. Now, Vidyāraṇya says
wonderful and agrees with Pūrvapakṣī.

śloka 9.65
नानुतिष्ठति कोऽप्येतदिति चेन्नानुतिष्ठतु ।
पुरुषस्यापराधेन किमुपास्तिः प्रदुष्यति ॥ ९.६५ ॥
nānutiṣṭhati ko:'pyetaditi cennānutiṣṭhatu.
puruṣasyāparādhena kimupāstiḥ praduṣyati (9.65).
Now, Pūrvapakṣī makes another statement. nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana may exist,
methodology might have been said in Pancikāraṇam, accepted; it is sādhana for jñāna, that
is also acceptable, but nobody practices that! Or many people are not practicing that.
Pūrvapakṣī is making that statement. Vidyāraṇya says our discussion is not whether it is
practiced or whether they are in minority group or whether they are in majority group;
that is not the part of our discussion. Many people make unnecessary statements. Our
discussion is whether nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is valid and does it exist or not? How
many people follow it is not our discussion. Therefore, don’t give that as an argument for
refuting nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The validity of anything does not depend upon the
number of followers. Vidyāraṇya says I am not interested in the number of followers but
interested in the validity or the possibility of following nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. If the
people don’t practice, he says that is the defect of the people who are not making use of an
available jñāna-sādhana. If people are not making use of it, even though it is available, it is
the deficiency or doṣa of the people, but it is neither the doṣa of the śāstra nor even the
deficiency of the upāsana itself.

śloka 9.66
इतोऽप्यतिशयं मत्वा मन्त्रान्वश्यादिकारिणः ।
मूढा जपन्तु तेभ्योऽतिमूढाः कृ षिमुपासताम्॥ ९.६६ ॥
ito:'pyatiśayaṃ matvā mantrānvaśyādikāriṇaḥ.
mūḍhā japantu tebhyo:'timūḍhāḥ kṛṣimupāsatām (9.66).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1445

Here, Vidyāraṇya extends his arguments. Number of followers cannot determine the
validity of a sādhana. He makes a hypothetical argument. Suppose we say nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is invalid, because there are no followers or fewer followers only, then
Vidyāraṇya says your own saguṇa-brahma-upāsana will also will be in trouble. It is so
because compared to karma-kāṇḍa even for saguṇa-brahma-upāsana, followers are very
less only. Even in daily Viśṇu sahasranāma pārāyaṇa, we are supposed to do dhyāna but
we normally we do not do that. If the number is going to determine validity, not only will
I be in trouble but you also will be in trouble. Therefore, better not press this argument.
Who wants to chant mantras for getting various worldly benefits? Everyone wants
tangible benefits alone. Majority of the bhaktas are materialistic bhaktas. They don’t come
to saguṇa-upāsana itself. Suppose I say there is a mantra by which you can control the
behavior of others; almost all the parents have complaints about the behavior of their
children. We always try to change others without changing their own behavior. Mantra-
japa-kartās are more than saguṇa-brahma-upāsakas. Therefore, you Pūrvapakṣī you have
also got lesser clients only.
Thereafter, he goes one more step further. There are still more people who don’t believe in
Veda itself, who don’t believe in mantra itself, who don’t believe in tarpaṇa, śrāddhā, etc,
who don’t believe in sandhyāvandana, etc., but they believe in worldly activities and
therefore, they are atimūḍha-nāstikas. They do kṛṣi, etc, that means worldly materialistic
activities. That is, they do laukika karmas. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana has lesser number of
upāsakas, next comes saguṇa-brahma upāsakas, next one is Vaidika karma-anuṣṭhāna;
compared to Vaidika karma-anuṣṭhāna, laukika karma anuṣṭhāna is the fourth one. If you
take the number of clients, laukika karmas will have maximum numbers and Vaidika
karmas will have less numbers, Vaidika saguṇa-upāsana will have still less number and
Vaidika nirguṇa upāsaka will have still less numbers. Laukika karma number will be the
maximum while making all others invalid! Vaidikas have become minority in the world.
Even in Hindus many are not interested in religious activities. Even Brahmaṇas do not do
the religious activities. They do śrāddhā not out of reverence but out of fear. Vaidika
followers are the least. Therefore, validity is not determined by the number of followers.
Details in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1446

Class 267

śloka 9.67
तिष्ठन्तु मूढाः प्रकृ ता निर्गुणोपास्तिरीर्यते ।
विद्यैक्यात्सर्वशाखास्थान्गुणानत्रोपसंहरेत्॥ ९.६७ ॥
tiṣṭhantu mūḍhāḥ prakṛtā nirguṇopāstirīryate.
vidyaikyātsarvaśākhāsthānguṇānatropasaṃharet (9.67).
Let us not analyse mūḍha and ati-mūḍha and who are interested in vaiśya and kṛṣi, etc.
Let us come to our topic. Vidyāraṇya claims saguṇa-upāsana and nirguṇa upāsana also
exist whether they have minority or majority of followers. Let us not bother about it.
World is wide enough to accommodate all such people. Let them also survive and let us
not get into their discussion. What is our discussion? Our topic of discussion is neither
saguṇa-upāsana, nor mantra-japa, nor vaiśya kṛṣi karma, but our topic is nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana which is the subject matter of the entire 9 th chapter of Pañcadaśī. So, Vidyāraṇya
says I would continue with that topic. Having come back to this upāsana, Vidyāraṇya
enters the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana topic further based on the Brahma-sūtra text. From
this śloka onwards, Vidyāraṇya wants to discuss more on nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana based
on the Brahma-sūtra. Through this, Vidyāraṇya accomplishes two things. One is that
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana has the support of the Brahma-sūtra also. You can never
challenge my conclusion because Vyāsa himself has acknowledged or accepted and
discussed nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana in Brahma-sūtra. Vidyāraṇya gets further stronger
proof. That is one purpose. The second purpose is that he wants to add another instruction
also. If a person wants to perform nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, additional procedural
instruction he wants to give again based on Brahma-sūtra.
Therefore, I will have to give you a small background of this Brahma-sūtra discussion. In
Brahma-sūtra, there is a section called guṇa-upasaṃhāra-pāda. It means a section and the
title of that section is guṇa-upasaṃhāra-pāda. This is in the third chapter, third section of
the Brahma-sūtra. Brahma-sūtra has four chapters. Each one has four sections. This comes
in the third chapter, third section. It is a very big section. It is most academic and perhaps
the driest part of the Brahma-sūtra. In this section, it is analysed what are the upāsanas
repeated in the various Upaniṣads. Certain upāsanas are new upāsanas in a particular
Upaniṣad, whereas certain upāsanas are not new upāsanas, but they are repetition of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1447

upāsanas occurring in some other Upaniṣad or some other branch of the Vedas. In certain
cases, a particular upāsana we can easily identify as a new upāsana. The identification as a
new upāsana is easy and evident in certain cases and similarly, we can identify the
repetition of the other upāsanas. Identity is somewhere evident but there are certain
upāsanas where you cannot easily identify as a new one or it is a repetition of the old one,
because certain upāsanas very closely resemble some other upāsana like a twin brother.
When there are twin brothers you can never recognize whether it is new one or old one.
Certain upāsanas very closely resemble and in such cases you have to analyse and find out
whether they are eka upāsana or bhinna upāsana. Once this is your task, whether the
upāsanas are bhinna or abhinna, you should have some criteria. Therefore, the question
comes what are the criteria employed to find out vidyā-bheda- or upāsana-bheda-abheda-
vicāra? In the third guṇa-upasaṃhāra-pāda four criteria are mentioned in the first sūtra
itself. Keeping this criteria several upāsanas are analysed and Vyāsa establishes these
upāsanas are different and these upāsanas are identical. Therefore, the entire section
relates to upāsana-bheda-upāsana-abheda-vicāra based on the four criteria.
I will not burden you with the discussion of the four criteria and I want to say this is the
topic. If you want to enter into the four criteria, how it is employed, etc., you have to go to
that big section. Note this much this is the subject matter. Two upāsanas are identified as
one and the same one occurring in Chāndogya Upaniṣad and another in Bṛhadāraṇyaka
Upaniṣad. It is pañcāgni vidyā. There is Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana in Chāndogya Upaniṣad
and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and Taittirīya Upaniṣad śikṣāvallī and also in Praśna
Upaniṣad. There, Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana-abheda, the oneness of the upāsana in all the
different Upaniṣads is established. Now, let us assume that this has been established. This
particular Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana occurring in Chāndogya Upaniṣad is a repetition of the
upāsanas. By using the four criteria we have established the upāsana-aikya in all the four
Upaniṣads. Vidyāraṇya says you cannot full stop there. You have to add a note. When you
study Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana in different Upaniṣads we find a particular fact.
Hiraṇyagarbha’s descriptions are given in various ways in various Upaniṣads; āpnoti
svārājyam, āpnoti manasaspatim, vākpatiścakṣuṣpatiḥ, etc, is a certain description of
Hiraṇyagarbha found in Taittirīya Upaniṣad. When we read the description of the same
Hiraṇyagarbha in Chāndogya Upaniṣad, we find that certain descriptions are common but
certain new descriptions are given; also, certain descriptions in Taittirīya Upaniṣad are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1448

missing in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Even though Hiraṇyagarbha is the same in all the four
Upaniṣads, descriptions are not exactly the same. In each Upaniṣad, you find there are
certain common descriptions and certain uncommon descriptions also.
Now, the question is: suppose I want to practice Jīvātma-brahma-aikya-upāsana [or in this
case, Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana], what all descriptions should be included in the upāsana?
We will argue I don’t care for I don’t do Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana! Vyāsācārya has to
assume someone does Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana. Then, what all descriptions must be
taken? In Brahma-sūtra, in guṇa-upasaṃhāra-pāda, a conclusion has been arrived at and
what is the conclusion? All the descriptions found in all the śākhās must be compiled,
gathered and practiced as upāsana; even though you are studying Chāndogya upāsana,
when you practice Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana don’t take the attributes of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad only, but guṇas mentioned in Taittirīya Upaniṣad and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
also you have to gather. The gathering process is called upasaṃhāra. There is another
meaning that upasaṃhāra means conclusion. In the Brahma-sūtra 3 rd chapter, 3rd section
context, upasaṃhāra means gathering, compiling what all guṇas. Guṇa means the upāsya-
devatā-guṇa. It means the virtues or descriptions of the upāsya-devatā and upasaṃhāra
means all of them you should compile and all the four Upaniṣads put together talks about
one Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana. This is the topic of Brahma-sūtra 3.3 section.
Once upāsana-ekatva is established, then gathering of attributes is compulsory. If the
upāsanas are separate, you need not compile the attributes, but if the upāsana is one
upāsana, compilation or gathering of the attributes mentioned across Upaniṣads is
compulsory. This is called guṇa-upasaṃhāra-nyāya. This will come into force when the
upāsana-aikya is established. Vidyāraṇya casually mentions in the second line assuming
that we are aware of the entire third pāda of third chapter of Brahma-sūtra. Why should
Vidyāraṇya bring that topic here? Vidyāraṇya says this rule is applicable in both types of
the upāsanas. The compilation of attributes to the meditation is applicable with regard to
both the types of upāsanas, which means both saguṇa-upāsana and nirguṇa upāsana.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says that in third chapter, third pāda of Brahma-sūtra, Vyāsa talks
about saguṇa-upāsana-aikya and nirguṇa-upāsana-aikya also. He is introducing the rule
of guṇa-upasaṃhāra-nyāya with regard to both saguṇa Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsana, saguṇa
Virāṭ upāsana, as well as nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. There, Vyāsa says that when one does
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, he should bring the descriptions of the nirguṇa-brahma

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1449

collected from all the Upaniṣads. All of them we should bring together for practicing
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Thus, Vyāsācārya happily and vehemently acknowledges the
existence of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and the application of guṇa-upasaṃhāra-nyāya.
That is said in the second line.

śloka 9.68
आनन्दादेर्विधेयस्य गुणसङ्घस्य संहृतिः ।
आनन्दादय इत्यस्मिन्सूत्रे व्यासेन वर्णिता ॥ ९.६८ ॥
ānandādervidheyasya guṇasaṅghasya saṃhṛtiḥ.
ānandādaya ityasminsūtre vyāsena varṇitā (9.68).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says that the description of nirguṇa-brahman is found in all the
Upaniṣads. All the descriptions can be broadly classified into two types.
1. The description is given for the purpose of upāsana. One is called positive
description. Another is called negative description. Positive description means the
description like satya or sat; jñāna or cit; ānanda, etc., where the nature of Brahman
is revealed. They are called vidheya-guṇa. When you say satyam jñānam anantam
there are three words. While satya and jñāna are mentioned, ānanda is not
mentioned in Taittirīya Upaniṣad. Ānanda-description of Brahman is found in
Bhṛguvallī in another place. In Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, vijñānam ānandam
brahma is seen. One is found in one branch and another will be found in another
branch but all of them come under vidheya-guṇa. You should compile and form
guṇa-upasaṃhāra of positive description.
2. Not only positive descriptions are there but there are negative descriptions also. It
is said Brahman is free from such and such attribute. None of the words are
positive descriptions but they are the negation of the empirical description.
Avyavahāryam means beyond transactions. Adṛṣṭam means beyond perception;
asthūlam means beyond solidity. In Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad, adadreśyam agrāhyam
agotram avarṇam acakṣuḥśrotraṃ negative descriptions are there and they all come
under vidheya-guṇa. We have to do the compilation of the whole thing. For that
separate sūtras are written.
One sūtra is for compilation of positive description and another sūtra is there for gathering
of negative descriptions. All are for the practice of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1450

śloka 9.69
अस्थूलादेर्निषेध्यस्य गुणसङ्घस्य संहृतिः ।
तथा व्यासेन सूत्रेऽस्मिनुक्ताक्षरधियान्त्विति ॥ ९.६९ ॥
asthūlāderniṣedhyasya guṇasaṅghasya saṃhṛtiḥ.
tathā vyāsena sūtre:'sminuktākṣaradhiyāntviti (9.69).
He refers to another sūtra of Vyāsācārya in Brahma-sūtra. He gives only a portion of a
sūtra no. 3.3.33. In this particular sūtra, the word akṣara is used and akṣara is a negative
description of Brahman to mean: other than the perishable entities of the world. In
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, there is a section called Akṣara-Brāhmaṇa where Gārgī asks
about Brahman as akṣara and Yājñavalkya gives all the negative descriptions. He gives 23
negative descriptions and Vyāsa indicates that all these negative descriptions are not only
in Akṣara-Brāhmaṇa of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.8.8 but also in Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad
1.1.5-6 and Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad; all of them you have to compile. Negative description
means negating all the mithyā attributes, asthūlādeḥ it means not a concrete entity
perceptible to sense-organs. All niṣedhātmaka as to what Brahman is not is reflected upon;
it is not gross, it is not short, it is not long; etc., neti neti; not this; not this. In this manner,
qualities associated with Brahman are used for doing upāsana with reference to niṣedha.
So nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is validated in the Brahma-sūtra as well. In Praśnopaniṣad-
bhāṣya, Adi Śaṅkarācārya briefly refers to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana on oṃkāra-ālambana;
that vākya is support for Vidyāraṇya. Refer to 5.1 there. Adi Śaṅkarācārya talks about
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana on oṃkāra ālambana.

śloka 9.70
निर्गुणब्रह्मतत्त्वस्य विद्यायां गुणसंहृतिः ।
न युज्येतेत्युपालम्भो व्यासं प्रत्येव मां तु न ॥ ९.७० ॥
nirguṇabrahmatattvasya vidyāyāṃ guṇasaṃhṛtiḥ.
na yujyetetyupālambho vyāsaṃ pratyeva māṃ tu na (9.70).
Now, Vidyāraṇya imagines a question from a Pūrvapakṣī. We will never get such a
question. Vidyāraṇya is so creative and great that he imagines a logical fallacy which a
Pūrvapakṣī may raise as a question. Brahma-sūtra third chapter third pada talks about
guṇa-upasaṃhāra. Guṇa-upasaṃhāra means gathering of the guṇas or gathering of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1451

descriptions during upāsana. This is the literal translation. The Pūrvapakṣī may argue
when you practice saguṇa-brahma-upāsana, you can think of guṇa-upasaṃhāra the
compilation of the guṇas. It is logical and meaningful in the context of saguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. Now, you talk about compilation of guṇas during nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Is it
not jarring to the ears? The section is called guṇa-upasaṃhāra. In the guṇa-upasaṃhāra
section, you talk about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Thus, guṇa-upasaṃhāra and nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is a contradiction in terms like talking about hot ice cream. How is it
possible? Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī says bringing nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana in guṇa-
upasaṃhāra-pāda of Brahma-sūtra itself is a logical fallacy! Therefore, “what you say is
incorrect” is the argument forwarded by the Pūrvapakṣī to Vidyāraṇya. Compilation of
guṇas during nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is illogical. Now, Vidyāraṇya gives a smart
answer. The inclusion of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana in guṇa-upasaṃhāra-pāda is done by
Vyāsācārya. He says: why you are asking this question to me? The criticism should be
made against Vyāsācārya and Vidyāraṇya says not to blame him! Thus, he gets temporary
freedom and gets a breathing time. Now, Pūrvapakṣī has to withdraw temporarily. More
in the next class.

Class 268
śloka 9.70 contd.
Vidyāraṇya discusses a portion of Brahma-sūtra in support of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. I
gave you the background in the last class. In Brahma-sūtra, Vyāsācārya talks about the
inclusion of all the positive descriptions of brahman found in several Upaniṣads and also
all the negative descriptions of nirguṇa-brahman in all the Upaniṣads in sūtras 3.3.11 and
3.3.33 and the inclusion of the same in nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is given. The positive
descriptions are called vidheya-guṇas like satya, jñāna, etc. The negative descriptions are
called niṣedha-guṇas asthulam, anaṇu, etc. Both the vidheya and niṣedha-guṇas must be
combined or joined with nirguṇa-brahman and that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana must be
followed. This combination of the vidheya guṇa and niṣedha-guṇa is called guṇa-
upasaṃhāra. The word upasaṃhāra is a technical word which means compilation or
collation or collection or combination of all the guṇas. This theory or the principle is called
guṇa-upasaṃhāra-nyāya.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1452

In fact, the entire third pada of the third chapter of Brahma-sūtra I said is called guṇa-
upasaṃhāra-pāda. When this much is mentioned, the Pūrvapakṣī comes with an objection:
you talk about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and you talk about guṇa-upasaṃhāra. How can
both nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and guṇa-combination be there because when you use the
word nirguṇa, guṇa must not be there. When guṇa-upasaṃhāra you do, it is no more
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Therefore, the very sentence guṇa-upasaṃhāra in the context of
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a logical fallacy or contradiction. This is the charge by the
Pūrvapakṣī. This we saw in the last class in the śloka 70. Vidyāraṇya says this sarcasm
should not be directed to me, Vidyāraṇya, for the author of Brahma-sūtra is Vyāsācārya
and if Pūrvapakṣī has any objection, the same should be directed towards Vyāsācārya. Of
the seven Cirañjīvīs, one of them is Vyāsācārya. He is supposed to be near Badrinath or
somewhere. Vidyāraṇya says go to Badrinath and raise the objection. Up to this, we saw in
the last class.

śloka 9.71
हिरण्यस्मश्रुसूर्यादिमूर्तीनामनुदाहृतेः ।
अविरुद्धं निर्गुणत्वमिति चेत्तुष्यतां त्वया ॥ ९.७१ ॥
hiraṇyasmaśrusūryādimūrtīnāmanudāhṛteḥ.
aviruddhaṃ nirguṇatvamiti cettuṣyatāṃ tvayā (9.71).
The moment Vidyāraṇya directed the Pūrvapakṣī to Vyāsācārya, Pūrvapakṣī got
frightened. How can I go to Vyāsācārya now? However, I have got full faith in
Vyāsācārya. Vyāsācārya will never contradict or make an illogical statement. We can come
up with an appropriate answer to this problem. Therefore, now Pūrvapakṣī himself
decides to solve the problem with Vidyāraṇya. Vidyāraṇya is very happy for that is what
he wanted. Joining the guṇa in the context of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is solved by the
Pūrvapakṣī. He says the guṇas are of two types. One type of guṇa is popular or prasiddha
which makes Brahman as saguṇa-brahman. He gives an example which we will see later.
Such guṇas make Brahman as saguṇa-brahman. That cannot join nirguṇa-brahman. There
is another set of guṇas which are not the popular guṇas but they are the essential nature of
Brahman. They are svarūpa guṇas wherein guṇa is only a figurative expression, but
exactly it is not guṇa. We will use the word svarūpa-guṇa. Sat, cit and ānanda will come
under svarūpa-guṇa; even though they are called guṇa but there is no question of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1453

substance-attribute-relationship as we were seeing in Naiṣkarmyasiddhi class. Ātmā and

consciousness do not have substance-attribute-relationship. Consciousness is as though a
property of Ātmā but really speaking consciousness is not the property but it is the very
Ātmā, the nature itself. Similarly, satya, jñāna, etc., we don’t call guṇa; even if we call it
guṇa, we should put it within inverted comma or we should call it svarūpa-guṇa and they
should not join the conventional guṇa. Thus prasiddha-guṇa is one type and svarūpa-
guṇa is another type. It is like the heat of the fire. The heat of the fire is not prasiddha-
guṇa but it is svarūpa-guṇa. Similarly, saccidānanda is svarūpa-guṇa. This is point
number one.
Thereafter, Pūrvapakṣī says prasiddha-guṇa cannot join nirguṇa-brahman because the
moment prasiddha guṇas join nirguṇa-brahman, nirguṇa-brahman will become saguṇa-
brahman; it is a contradiction. The moment they join nirguṇa-brahman, nirguṇa will
become saguṇam. Nirguṇa-brahman and saguṇa-brahman can never coexist. Their
coexistence logically is not possible. Whereas svarūpa-guṇas being not conventional guṇa,
and they really not being the properties of Brahman, they being the very nature of
Brahman, they can happily coexist with nirguṇa-brahman. Therefore, svarūpa-guṇas do
not contradict nirguṇa-brahman. Therefore, nirguṇa-brahman has svarūpa-guṇas and they
are vidheya guṇas like sat, cit and ānanda. They are also svarūpa-guṇas and vidheya
guṇas like asthulam anaṇu; both the vidheya guṇas and niṣedha-guṇas come under
svarūpa-guṇa and they can be combined in nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Therefore,
Vyāsācārya has not committed any mistake in applying guṇa-upasaṃhāra-nyāya.
Vidyāraṇya says it is very good. Vyāsācārya has talked about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana in
Brahma-sūtra with regard to svarūpa-guṇa-upasaṃhāra. Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana exists. He quoted Pūrvapakṣī’s question and also the answers to Pūrvapakṣī.
The popular guṇas which will contradict is not to be included in nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. One example is given here. It is Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Saguṇa-brahma-upāsana
in the form of Sūrya-nārāyaṇa mentioned in Chāndogya Upaniṣad is quoted here. There,
the Lord is described as a person and the sun is taken as the face of the Lord and since the
sun has golden colour, Bhagavān Nārāyaṇa has a golden coloured face, it is said. Not only
does he have a golden face, but the rays of the sun coming from the solar disc appear like
the facial hair of Sūrya-nārāyaṇa and his facial hair is called hiraṇya-śmaśru. In that form,
may you meditate on saguṇa-brahman. Refer to Chāndogya Upaniṣad 1.6.6. If they were

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1454

included it would have become saguṇa-brahma-upāsana. In this nirguṇa-brahma-

upāsana, Vyāsācārya has excluded golden face, golden beard, golden hand and all those
physical descriptions; therefore, nirguṇa-Brahman-status is not contradicted because there
is no beard for nirguṇa-brahman, there is no head for nirguṇa-brahman, but it is satya,
jñāna, etc. Therefore, nirguṇatva is aviruddha. It is not contradiction. The whole thing is
within quotation. This is the answer suggested by the Pūrvapakṣī himself. Vidyāraṇya
says good; then, Vidyāraṇya is satisfied. Vidyāraṇya says be satisfied with your own
answer.

śloka 9.72
गुणानां लक्षकत्वेन न तत्त्वेऽन्तःप्रवेशनम्।
इति चेदस्त्वेवमेव ब्रह्मतत्त्वमुपास्यताम्॥ ९.७२ ॥
guṇānāṃ lakṣakatvena na tattve:'ntaḥpraveśanam.
iti cedastvevameva brahmatattvamupāsyatām (9.72).
Before he is totally satisfied, Pūrvapakṣī gets one more doubt. Fortunately, he himself
visualizes a doubt and he himself comes up with an answer also. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
through the mouth of Pūrvapakṣī puts the answer also to the possible question. How do
you say svarūpa guṇas do not contradict the nirguṇatva? Previously, we said there are
prasiddha-guṇa and svarūpa-guṇa. Prasiddha-guṇa cannot coexist with the nirguṇa-
brahman. And what is the prasiddha-guṇa golden beard of Sūrya-nārāyaṇa? Pūrvapakṣī
himself said that svarūpa-guṇa can coexist with nirguṇa-brahman. There is no
contradiction. The new doubt is what the specialty of the svarūpa-guṇa is? After all,
svarūpa-guṇa is also guṇa. If it is called svarūpa-guṇa it being a guṇa how can it coexist
with nirguṇa-brahman? How do you resolve this problem? You have said svarūpa-guṇa
can coexist and you have not given logical support for which Vidyāraṇya gives the
answer. He says even the svarūpa-guṇa like sat, cit and ānanda are words used for
nirguṇa-brahman only from the standpoint of vyāvahārika prapañca. The adhiṣṭhāna
nirguṇa-brahman is given the name sat, cit and ānanda only from the standpoint of
adhyasta prapañca just as rope is called the substratum only from the standpoint of the
rope-snake. After the negation of the rope-snake, the rope cannot be called by the name

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1455

substratum or adhiṣṭhāna. Similarly, nirguṇa-brahman, the adhiṣṭhāna, is given the three

names sat, cit and ānanda only from the standpoint of vyāvahārika prapañca. It is because
nirguṇa-brahman lends existence to vyāvahārika prapañca from the standpoint of the
empirical existence of vyāvahārika prapañca, Brahman is called Absolute existence. From
the standpoint of the empirical existence experienced in the vyāvahārika avasthā,
Brahman is given the name Absolute existence because without Absolute existence,
empirical existence cannot be talked about like table is, chair is, pen is, that is called
empirical existence. Therefore, from vyāvahārika sat-dṛṣṭi Brahman is sat, svarūpasya
nāma. Similarly, we experience vyāvahārika cidābhāsa, experiential awareness is there
from the standpoint of vyāvahārika cidābhāsa-dṛṣṭi. Thus, nirguṇa-brahman is named the
pāramārthika cit, Absolute consciousness from the standpoint of relative consciousness.
Similarly, from the standpoint of vyāvahārika pratibimba-ānanda-anubhava-dṛṣṭi, priya
ānanda, moda ānanda, pramoda ānanda; based on our experiential pleasure, Brahman is
called ānanda.
Thus, these three definitions can be given only from the standpoint of the threefold
vyāvahārika anubhava. When these three anubhavas are negated, nirguṇa-brahman will
continue to exist, but you cannot use the words sat, cit and ānanda. These three words will
become irrelevant and unrecognizable without the experiential existence or experiential
consciousness or experiential ānanda. You cannot talk about absolute existence, Absolute
consciousness and therefore we called Absolute consciousness is avyavahārya. Even one
verbal transaction is not possible; therefore, introduce sat, cit and ānanda based on
vyāvahārika sat, cit and ānanda or vyāvahārika sadābhāsa-, cidābhāsa-, ānandābhāsa-dṛṣṭi
and after negating these three as mithyā, these three words also are called mithyā. We
don’t say Brahman is mithyā. Don’t go at the end of the class and say Brahman is mithyā!
These three words sat, cit and ānanda are usable only when Brahman is playing the role of
adhiṣṭhāna of the universe. When the prapañca is negated, Brahman loses the adhiṣṭhāna
status also. Brahman cannot be expressed by the word sat, cit and ānanda. Otherwise, you
would have said Brahman is sat-cit-ānanda. Therefore, he says the svarūpa guṇas also are
only indicators of Brahman, meant to reveal Brahman as the adhiṣṭhāna of the universe
and when the universe is kept in the mind. Even the three words are only indicators of
nirguṇa-brahman when nirguṇa-brahman is accepted as the adhiṣṭhāna, assuming the
presence of the universe; after the negation of the universe, adhyāsa is not there; when

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1456

adhyāsa is not there, the word adhiṣṭhāna is not there; when adhiṣṭhāna word is not there,
the words sat, cit and ānanda also are not there. Even the word nirguṇa can be used only
from the standpoint of guṇa; once you have negated all the guṇas, even the word nirguṇa
become irrelevant. Even the word Advaita becomes irrelevant after dvaita is negated, just
as light cannot be used after the negation of the darkness. Since svarūpa guṇas are
indicators they cannot be included in nirguṇa-brahman. What about the word nirguṇa-
brahman? The word nirguṇa-brahman also cannot be included in nirguṇa-brahman. Then
nothing can be included. amātraścaturtho:'vyavahāryaḥ prapañcopaśamaḥ is the beautiful
Māṇḍūkya mantra. It is beyond all verbal transactions. The very world is resolved.
Therefore, svarūpa guṇas can coexist with nirguṇa-brahman temporarily. All these are
Pūrvapakṣī’s own suggestions and also the answers to the possible questions. Vidyāraṇya
says it is okay. If this is your contention, I have no objection. Let us come to our topic.
Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana you practice in this manner.

śloka 9.73
आनन्दादिभिरस्थूलादिभिश्चात्मात्र लक्षितः ।
अखण्डैकरसः सोऽहमस्मीत्येवमुपासते ॥ ९.७३ ॥
ānandādibhirasthūlādibhiḥsvātmātra lakṣitaḥ.
akhaṇḍaikarasaḥ so:'hamasmītyevamupāsate (9.73).
Based on all these discussions Vidyāraṇya says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is to be practiced
doing the guṇa-upasaṃhāra, which means combining both vidheya guṇa and niṣedha-
guṇa. How should one practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana? Thatmethodology Vidyāraṇya
presents here. Nirguṇaḥ Ātmā akhaṇḍaikarasaḥ, nirguṇa-brahman is divisionless and
homogeneous tattva. It is sajātīya-vijātīya-svagata-bheda-rahita. It is divisionless Brahman
or Ātmā. It is implied by the positive svarūpa-guṇa like ānanda. He does not say these
three svarūpa guṇas are included. Without joining brahman, remaining at a distance, they
reveal brahman. That nirguṇa Ātmā which is implied by the negative attributes niṣedha-
guṇaḥ, like asthūlādibhiḥ it means through not gross, not subtle, not big, not small, not
long, not short, etc. Through both these vidheya and niṣedhya-guṇas; ānandādibhiḥ refers
to the 3.3.11 sūtra guṇopasaṃhāra and asthūlādibhiḥ refers to 3.3.33 sūtra
guṇopasaṃhāra. Thus, nirguṇa-brahman is revealed in the Upaniṣad. That nirguṇaḥ Ātmā
aham asmi or that nirguṇa Ātmā I am. It is called abheda-upāsana. In fact, regular

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1457

sandhyāvandana itself is the practice of abheda-upāsana. Up to this is the quotation. Up to

this śloka, Vidyāraṇya elaborately and irrefutably established the possibility of nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana. This topic he started from 53rd śloka and he concludes in 73rd śloka.

śloka 9.74
बोधोपास्त्योर्विशेषः क इति चेदुच्यते शृणु ।
वस्तुतत्न्त्रो भवेद्बोधः कर्तृतन्त्रमुपासनम्॥ ९.७४ ॥
bodhopāstyorviśeṣaḥ ka iti ceducyate śṛṇu.
vastutatntro bhavedbodhaḥ kartṛtantramupāsanam (9.74).
It is another very important topic connected with the previous one. Until now, Vidyāraṇya
established the possibility of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and during the upāsana the
thought which the upāsana will be repeating that also he has said. The thought in the
mind of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will be nirguṇa-brahma aham asmi. This is the vṛtti,
upāsana-vṛtti, of the upāsaka. Now comes the fundamental question. What is the jñāna-
vṛtti of a jñānī? This is the thought-pattern of an upāsaka. Now, we do talk about nirguṇa-
brahmajñānī also. Nirguṇa-brahmajñānī possesses jñāna. Jñāna is also a vṛtti. Just as
upāsana is a vṛtti, jñāna is also a thought. What is the thought of jñānī as nirguṇa-
brahmajñānī also has exactly the same thought that I am that Ātmā? That Ātmā is
akhaṇḍa-eka-rasa and I am ānanda-lakṣita, asthūlādi-lakṣita. It means upāsana-vṛtti and
jñāna-vṛtti are exactly the same. Upāsana-vṛtti of upāsaka and jñāna-vṛtti of jñānī both
seem to be exactly the same. Tell me why you call one as upāsana and the other as jñāna?
If both are vṛttis and if both happen to be of the same nature, why do you give two
different names? This is the most fundamental question that is going to be discussed here.
Jñāna-vṛtti-upāsana-vṛtti-bheda is discussed. What is the difference between the two? It is
very elaborately discussed from śloka 74 to 122.
I will present the difference in my language first. Then, we will see how Vidyāraṇya
develops this topic. Both people have the same vṛtti. And both of them claim I have
understood the Upaniṣadic words. Both have the same mind, same type of vṛtti and both
claim to understand the words of the Upaniṣad. After this vṛtti rises in the mind, how does
a person assesses himself as a spiritual student? What type of self-assessment take place
after this vṛtti arises in the mind of the Upaniṣadic student? It is the basic question. When I
claim that I have understood the words of Vedānta, how do I look upon myself? Where do
I stand spiritually as a sādhaka? Do I consider myself as a beginning sādhaka or do I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1458

consider myself as the medium sādhaka, reasonably progressed? All these questions we
have to silently raise and have a dialogue with ourselves. How do I look upon myself?
Am I manda sādhaka or madhyama sādhaka or uttama sādhaka? How far away is my
mokṣa? I have to ask all these questions to myself. If ahaṃ brahma asmi is a jñāna-vṛtti,
what will be the type of self-assessment? As even the word sādhaka is used, I should
become allergic. Where is the question of looking at myself as a sādhaka when the śāstra
pramāṇa with clear reasoning has revealed the fact that I am not sthūla-śarīra, sūkṣma-
śarīra, kāraṇa-śarīra but I am nitya-mukta Ātmā? Where is the question of the status of
sādhakatva? Therefore, I will never ask the question because even the thought of being a
sādhaka is allergic to me. Thus, the sādhaka idea must not come to me at all. When I think
of any sādhana, even the sādhana should become irrelevant, even repetition of ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-vṛtti should not look like a sādhana for mokṣa. If at all I repeat it, it is only
enjoying the completion of the journey and it is not another sādhana I practice. Sādhaka-
status should become irrelevant and sādhana should appear a joke and mokṣa is no more
seen as a goal but it is my very nature or svarūpa. Therefore, my spiritual journey is over
and I am unconditionally liberated; I cannot consider even sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti as
a condition for mokṣa. Sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is given a condition when I look upon
myself as a sādhaka.
Looking upon myself as a sādhaka is a superimposition; when sādhakatva
superimposition is there, to tally with that superimposition of mine, Upaniṣad also does
another superimposition. I have already done one mistake and instead of telling “you
have committed a mistake”, Vedānta, out of compassion says “since you look upon
yourself as a sādhaka, I am presenting sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti”. Once I understand
Vedānta, then I am not a sādhaka itself. I am nitya-mukta Ātmā; where is the question of
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti? The relevance of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is only as long
as I look upon myself as a sādhaka. Therefore, there is no question of assessment from the
standpoint of sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti; such self-assessment also must appear
irrelevant and meaningless and therefore, unconditionally I am free. This is the answer
that comes when ahaṃ brahma asmi is a jñāna-vṛtti. If at all I practice sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti at vyāvahārika level, it is only a hobby which has no connection with my
liberated status. There is no connection, but it is a hobby and not only that, that is the best
publicity because when I become sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampanna from vyāvahārika body-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1459

mind-angle, people develop a value for Vedānta. Therefore, it is an expression of gratitude

to Vedānta from vyāvahārika-entertainment-dṛṣṭi. But no more do I look upon myself as
sādhaka, no more sādhana; even if I repeat ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti, it is not for mokṣa. It
is nothing but claiming, celebrating, the completion of the journey. Nididhyāsana is the
celebration of the completion of my journey. My misconception about me is gone. If this is
the answer that I get during self-assessment, my vṛtti is jñāna-vṛtti. Suppose the self-
assessment is I am still a mediocre sādhaka, we have no sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti itself,
we have to do lot of sādhana and at least in the next birth if we get mokṣa, we are satisfied,
if this is the thought-pattern, then we will say the very same vṛtti ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti
and aham sthūla-sūkṣma-kāraṇa-vyatiriktaḥ, all of them are called upāsana-vṛtti,
saṃvādi-bhrama and it is called jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti and you repeat the thought for mokṣa.
“I am liberated” thought you practice for mokṣa. This is the funniest upāsana called
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana but students still continue to think that they are sādhakas
listening to Pañcadaśī. Therefore, for such people we prescribe nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.
Details in the next class.

Class 269
śloka 9.74 contd.
Vidyāraṇya has entered into the most important topic of this chapter, namely the
difference between nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-vṛtti and nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti. Vṛtti
happens to be the same nirguṇa-brahma being viṣaya. If the vṛtti is the same, how do you
differentiate jñāna-vṛtti and upāsana-vṛtti is the question. There is a subtle difference I
tried to explain in the last class. In the normal course when a person goes through śravaṇa
and manana, in a proper way, the śravaṇa-manana itself will lead to clear understanding
of the teaching. This clear understanding itself is called jñāna-vṛtti, if the understanding is
able to help me change from triangular-format to binary-format. The consequence of
jñāna-vṛtti is change in format. I have to come to binary-format as a result of this
understanding. After coming to binary-format, my jñāna-vṛtti when I dwell upon
repeatedly that itself is called nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana is repetition of jñāna-vṛtti and
it is done by a person who has come to binary-format already. It is because jñāna-vṛtti will
change the format to binary one. Remaining in binary-format, when I do the abhyāsa of

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1460

jñāna-vṛtti, the purpose of that nididhyāsana is only reinforcement of my binary-format.

How this reinforcement takes place is that it should happen in the form of getting out of
the habit of triangular-format. The triangular-format continues as a habit or vāsanā. That
vāsanā I should target when I do nididhyāsana. Reinforcement of binary-format should
displace my triangular-format-vāsanā. Almost all our prayers are based on triangular-
format. We are used to regular prayers and those prayers are triangular-format-prayers,
they have become a vāsanā in me and in nididhyāsana, I should see all those conventional
prayers as irrelevant. Reinforced conventional prayers will reinforce triangular-format;
therefore, I should see the irrelevance of all the regular prayers including the prayer for
chitta-śuddhi. All are totally irrelevant in the binary-format. I should see the irrelevance of
all conventional prayers and as even I deliberately renounce those prayers, the triangular-
format mindset also becomes weaker and weaker. As the old habits die hard, the old
conventional prayers also die hard, but as they die, the binary-format becomes
strengthened and this process is called nididhyāsana. Nididhyāsana is jñāna-vṛtti-abhyāsa
and it is done by a person who is in a binary-format as a result of clear understanding.
Suppose there is another person who also claims: I have understanding. That
understanding is not strong enough to change the format from triangular- to binary-
format. Therefore, a peculiar condition is there where the understanding is there but the
student continues in triangular-format and all the prayers are triangular-format-based
prayers. Such a person has the understanding which cannot be called jñāna-vṛtti because
the word jñāna-vṛtti can be used only when it has the power to change the format. The
format-changing power whichever vṛtti has, that alone can be called jñāna-vṛtti.
Otherwise, the understanding can be called jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti or saṃvādi brahma. Such a
person will continue in the triangular-format. Therefore, he will look upon himself as a
sādhaka and he will look upon mokṣa as a sādhya to come in the future. That will
continue in his mind. Imagine remaining in the triangular-format a person dwells upon
his understanding, the name of his understanding is jñāna-ābhāsa; and remaining in the
triangular-format, he continues jñāna-ābhāsa-abhyāsa that will not be called nididhyāsana
but it will be called nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana wherein the upāsaka continues in the
triangular-format and he always looks forward to mokṣa to happen in the future.
Vidyāraṇya says this upāsaka’s jñāna-ābhāsa-abhyāsa-vṛtti when he practices it is called
upāsana and this comes under karma-yoga only. This karma-yoga called nirguṇa-brahma-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1461

upāsana can only produce puṇya. This nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana which comes under
karma-yoga will only produce puṇya, a result of which we will see later, but that is the
difference between the two. Nididhyāsana is not working for puṇya because he is already
in binary-format; I don’t have puṇya or pāpa. What for I should do nididhyāsana? His aim
is to get out of the habit of triangular-format. But upāsaka needs puṇya for coming to
binary-format later. This is subtle difference but Vidyāraṇya presents this in his own
technical language.
Between these two what is the difference? Both claim I have gone through śravaṇa
manana and both claim I have understood also, but one continues in conventional prayers
and another does not see any relevance for those conventional prayers and that is what
makes the difference in the intellect? If you ask this question— up to this is Pūrvapakṣa;
the Siddhāntī Vidyāraṇya answers the question— may you listen to carefully because the
difference is too subtle to discern. He puts in a technical language. If ahaṃ brahma asmi is
jñāna-vṛtti, it is vastu-tantra. Vastu-tantra is a technical word and in our language we can
translate when ahaṃ brahma asmi is jñāna, the meaning of the statement is a fact for me.
Vastu-tantra means the meaning of ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact for me. If ahaṃ brahma
asmi is a fact for me, mokṣa is a goal or my nature. Then mokṣa is my svarūpa or my own
real nature. It is nothing more expected by me and mokṣa is claimed as a fact. It means I
can never look upon myself as a sādhaka anymore. Outside, I may tell other people
otherwise or they may misunderstand me. Outside, I may mock these sādhaka status or
mumukṣu status but inside I am incapable of looking at myself as a sādhaka or mumukṣu.
That internal transformation is the result of jñāna-vṛtti understanding alone. In nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana, ahaṃ brahma asmi is not seen as a fact. He says is upāsana is kartṛ-
tantra. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is kartṛ-tantra and it is a visualisation of myself, I don’t
look upon it as a fact; I look upon it as an imagination or a conditioning or a visualisation
upon myself. In fact, I laugh at myself. I am liberated when I say, I laugh at myself! Even
though I cannot look upon it, at least let me imagine myself that I am liberated. Therefore,
kartṛ-tantra is an imagination or conditioning, otherwise called brainwashing. By
practicing this conditioning, my expectation is, I think, if I am repeating this vṛtti very
often, at least as a result of this, hopefully one day I will be really liberated. My hope is by
this repetition at least I will be liberated in future, but the thought is I am liberated and my
expectation by practicing the thought I am already liberated, I will be liberated in future!

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1462

When this is the approach of the meditator, then it will come under imagination or
visualisation which is called upāsana which is kartṛ-tantra.

śloka 9.75
विचाराज्जायते बोधोऽनिच्छा यं न निवर्तयेत्।
स्वोत्पत्तिमात्रात्संसारे दहत्यखिलसत्यताम्॥ ९.७५ ॥
vicārājjāyate bodho:'nicchā yaṃ na nivartayet.
svotpattimātrātsaṃsāre dahatyakhilasatyatām (9.75).
Vicārāt bodho jāyate. Jñāna-vṛtti which is capable of transforming the format or the
mindset is born out of vicāra only. Vicāra means śravaṇa and manana alone, which is to
generate jñāna-vṛtti. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana cannot produce jñāna-vṛtti. Nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana can produce puṇya alone. After nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana puṇya, one
will have to come back to vicāra once again because nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna has to arise not
through meditation but by vicāra only. Only śravaṇa and manana will produce nirguṇa-
brahma-jñāna. Once that jñāna has come, it can never go away whether I continue to
entertain that vṛtti or not. Once knowledge come, it continues in the mind, even though I
don’t entertain the thought. I have the knowledge two plus two is four. We have the
knowledge throughout, but at this moment when you are listening to the class are you
going on repeating that knowledge. That vṛtti you don’t repeat. Therefore, continuation of
knowledge does not require repetition of the vṛtti. Continuation of imagination requires
repetition of vṛtti. Imagination requires repetition and knowledge once gained does not
require repetition. The knowledge will not go away even if I don’t like that knowledge. By
the rise of that knowledge, it eliminates or removes the reality of the entire saṃsāra or
anātma-prapañca. By it’s mere origination, saṃsāra is burnt down just as on waking up,
the entire dream is falsified. In the case of the dream, it disappears from our experience
but in the wake of Vedānta jñāna, the world does not disappear but it is falsified as
mithyā. The entire reality of saṃsāra of the anātma-prapañca and all the other faculties of
the world will continue. Appearance of the world will continue, orderliness of the world
will continue, utility of the world will also will continue, when hunger is there food will
remove the hunger and when thirst is there water will remove the thirst; thus, at anātmā
level, experience, orderliness and utility will continue but the reality part alone will be
removed. Therefore, falsification of anātma-prapañca, the possession, family, world, body

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1463

and the mind are falsified all at once on gaining jñāna. That is called jñāna-vṛtti. This alone
I call binary-format. What is the uniqueness of binary-format is that it consists of two
factors Ātmā and anātmā of which one is satya and another is mithyā. Because anātmā is
mithyā, therefore, only we can see it as entertainment. We can call life as an entertainment
only when the life is a fiction or a movie. As long life is real, I can never call it an
entertainment. Entertainment status can come only when it is falsified from Ātma-dṛṣṭi.

śloka 9.76
तावता कृ तकृ त्यः सन्नित्यतृप्तिमुपागतः ।
जीवन्मुक्तिमनुप्राप्य प्रारब्धक्षयमीक्षते ॥ ९.७६ ॥
tāvatā kṛtakṛtyaḥ sannityatṛptimupāgataḥ.
jīvanmuktimanuprāpya prārabdhakṣayamīkṣate (9.76).
Thereafter, once a person has this jñāna-vṛtti, once a person has come to binary-format,
once a person has falsified the anātma-prapañca, the rest of the life, all the projects and
activities are undertaken caused by prārabdha; vāsanā will continue but the activities end
up in success or failure since all come under mithyā and all the relative success and failure
do not matter at all. Therefore, the attitude towards worldly successes and failures is one
of non-concern. After winning the series, when we play the fifth match we have already
won the series, we do work for success but success and failure will not make much of a
difference at all. Similarly, in a jñānī’s life relative successes and failures do not make any
difference at all; there is no anxiety, panic or fear and such a state is called jīvanmukti or
pūrṇatva. Therefore, he says tāvatā. By mere falsification of anātmā, a person has become
kṛtakṛtyaḥ, free from all the burdens of life, problems, family problems, health problems,
professional problems; all the struggles of life are gone. Every duty was a burden, every
duty has become now a beauty; burden has become entertainment. The jñānī has attained
nitya-tṛpti or pūrṇatva. At anātmā level, all the problems continue as they are but they are
no more burdensome. Therefore, it is jīvanmuktim anuprāpya, he enjoys or claims
jīvanmukti status.
To remember seventh chapter of Pañcadaśī, there are jvaras at the level of three śarīras:
sthūla-śarīra level, sūkṣma-śarīra level, kāraṇa-śarīra level; jvaras continue but jīvanmukti
means anujvara is no more there; jvara can never totally go away, because Vidyāraṇya
said at śarīra level jvara are bound to be there. You can only replace one jvara by another

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1464

jvara. Jvara-elimination I don’t expect to happen; we can only reshuffle jvaras. Jīvanmukti
is only anujvara-nivṛtti and jvara-falsification. jvara-falsification plus anujvara-elimination
is called jīvanmukti. Having enjoyed that prārabdhakṣayam īkṣate. This jñānī only has
only one expectation that too non-binding expectation, that is prārabdha-kṣaya, the
successful completion of the prārabdha roles which are vyāvahārika mithyā role. That
completion has nothing to do with my pūrṇatva or liberation because liberation is my
svarūpa; at anātmā level success does not matter; that is why I said it is non-binding
expectation of successful completion of the prārabdha role. Jñānī is aware that he is going
to be taken as a model by the others. Therefore, he is very particular not for his own
personal purpose, whereas for other people his lifestyle is important because for them the
roles are real. From their standpoint, role is extremely important but from my standpoint
they are not important. Therefore, he is particular about maintaining the veṣa properly
including dharma-anuṣṭhāna at vyāvahārika level. It is because as Kṛṣṇa said:
yadyadācarati śreṣṭhastattadevetaro janaḥ;
sa yatpramāṇaṃ kurute lokastadanuvartate (3.21).
Even if you are a jñānī, even if you don’t require dharma, you better follow dharma; for
other people, dharma is important although for you dharma is also mithyā after gaining
jñāna. Therefore, he expects only one thing: successful completion of the prārabdha role
from vyāvahārika-dṛṣṭi. At the same time, he does not consider the prārabdha role a
burden. The moment it becomes a burden you have given reality to that. Therefore, he is
very alert to remember that I don’t look upon prārabdha as satya.

śloka 9.77
आप्तोपदेशं विश्वस्य श्रद्धालुरविचारयन्।
चिन्तयेत्प्रत्ययैरन्यैरनन्तरितवृत्तिभिः ॥ ९.७७ ॥
āptopadeśaṃ viśvasya śraddhāluravicārayan.
cintayetpratyayairanyairanantaritavṛttibhiḥ (9.77).
In the two ślokas 75 and 76 he talked about that jñānī for whom the understanding had
changed the format for good. Now, he wants to contrast the jñānī with the upāsakā. He
also claims to have understood, but in his case the format change had not taken place and
he does not have the courage to do that. In his case, what happens is explained here.
Vidyāraṇya brings jñānī and upāsaka side by side so that we know the difference between

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1465

the two: jñānī and jñānī upāsaka. I have understood that I am jñānī whether prārabdha
knows I am a jñānī or my family members know that I am a jñānī. Family members treat
me differently. Remember your mukti does not depend upon the family members
treatment of you. This is not clear; therefore, he says this student because of non-enquiry
or improper enquiry he has understanding but it is not jñāna-vṛtti, because the
understanding has not helped in the change of the format from triangular-format to
binary-format.
Therefore, he continues in the triangular-format. He has faith in the words of the Guru. So
he says I must be Brahman all right because Guru says, Vyāsācārya says, Adi
Śaṅkarācārya says, therefore, it must be true. He wants to imagine that I must be Brahman.
A faithful student does not have jñāna-vṛtti and he has jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti. He has to
practice the upāsana which is another form of karma-yoga only. Go on repeating
manobuddhyahaṅkāra cittāni nāhaṃ… cidānandarūpaḥ śivo:'ham śivo:'ham. Even ahaṃ
brahma asmi mantra many people do with mala. Soham japa, ahaṃ brahma asmi japa,
aham viśvasya japārtham mantra; all of them he diligently practices and regularly. That is
also one of the regular habits and he hopes one day he will be liberated. He should
practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana while remaining in triangular-format. With continuous
flow of Vedāntic thoughts, he should practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. He should not be
distracted by non-Vedāntic thoughts. That vṛtti becomes important in imagination,
whereas in jñāna it will never go away whether vṛtti is continued or not. Jñāna-vṛtti-
continuation is not important whereas in upāsana, vṛtti-continuation is important.
Therefore, he should not be distracted by other thoughts and one should practice nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana.

śloka 9.78
यावच्चिन्त्यस्वरूपत्वाभिमानः स्वस्य जायते ।
तावद्विचिन्त्य पश्चाच्च तथैवामृति धारयेत्॥ ९.७८ ॥
yāvaccintyasvarūpatvābhimānaḥ svasya jāyate.
tāvadvicintya paścācca tathaivāmṛti dhārayet (9.78).
What is the aim of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka? He should increase the upāsana in the form
of duration in each session or increase the number of sessions also so that that vṛtti will get
entrenched in the sub-conscious mind, because his aim is conditioning his sub-conscious

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1466

mind. Since conditioning is his aim, because he does not believe in himself, he does not
believe that I am liberated, therefore, this imagination should become stronger and how
do you know whether it is strong or not? Until that thought continues, all the time during
day-to-day transaction also that vṛtti must continue; as Kṛṣṇa said in the 8 th chapter just as
many bhatkas continue namaḥ śivāya but they will continue worldly transactions also, all
the time doing the japa and there is a group of people have got a mala in hand and they
have a bag also. The bag they tie to the hand and within the bag is mala. Mala they hold;
they keep on talking in between also. Their aim is that the mantra should get entrenched
in the sub-conscious mind. This is a sheer conditioning, no understanding is emphasized.
Therefore, he says until abhimāna, the identification with nirguṇa-brahman, which is the
object of the upāsana, he is to continue the meditation. The conditioning that I am
Brahman should be well-entrenched in the sub-conscious mind. Until then, one has to
repeat this meditation. Literally, it is a japa which he has to continue. Nididhyāsana is not
a japa at all. In upāsana, it is a japa. Not only he should practice day in and day out,
thereafter, he has to continue that until his death also. It is so because he is worried at the
time of death if I don’t remember God I may get rebirth despite understanding that I am
Brahman. I say ahaṃ brahma asmi and I continue to be afraid of taking rebirth, therefore, I
have to practice, carefully hold ahaṃ brahma asmi upāsana until death. This is the story
of upāsaka but jñānī does not worry about rebirth of Ātmā or anātmā. Rebirth of anātmā
does not matter because it is mahā mithyā. Rebirth of Ātmā does not matter for I am
unaffected. If I worry about rebirth it is because of lack of understanding. More in the next
class.

Class 270
śloka 9.78 contd.
In this important portion from śloka 74 to 122, Vidyāraṇya differentiates nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana and nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti. When a person entertains the thought aham
satya jagan mithyā, remaining in binary-format that particular thought is called jñāna-
vṛtti. Repetition of that thought is called nididhyāsana. Jñāna-vṛtti-abhyāsa is called
nididhyāsana. When a person entertains aham satya jagan mithyā thought remaining very
much in triangular-format, that thought is jñāna-ābhāsa-vṛtti. The repetition of that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1467

thought is called nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. This is the difference between these two.

Vidyāraṇya says for a nididhyāsana aham satya is a fact which cannot be changed or
altered or disturbed by any condition in the anātmā; even if the mind has certain
disturbances, that will not challenge or question the fact that I am satya, I am unaffected
and I am mukta.
The other person is not able to accept it as a fact completely. Therefore, the thought
becomes some form of conditioning or imagination. Thus, a person can do ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-vṛtti as a conditioning as a visualisation and practice that; that practice will be called
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. For this imagination, the incentive or support is faith in the
Guru, faith in the śāstras. It is the only support on the basis of which I entertain this
thought, not because I am totally convinced of that, but because Guru and śāstra are
telling this. Therefore, based on the faith and śāstras when a person conditions his mind
with this thought, that is called upāsana and this will have to be repeated regularly until it
gets entrenched in the sub-conscious mind.
Abhimāna means identification with the object of meditation namely nirguṇa-brahman
which happens to be the subject itself. Until that identification or conditioning is well-
entrenched, is born in one’s mind strongly, so long, just as a person in triangular-format
conditions his mind that God will protect, me God will protect me; not that he has
pratyakṣa jñāna of God and he has not even seen God; he has not even proved God;
because śāstra says that if you surrender to God, God will protect you and based on that
faith in the karma-kāṇḍa and saguṇa Īśvara, sheerly because of faith he conditions himself
as a devotee that I need not worry because God is there to take care of me. I have not seen
the God because in the Purāṇas stories are told and it is all conditioning based on the
parokṣa jñāna and śraddhā only; that conditioning seems to work for a bhakta. If bhakta
can be helped by that deliberate conditioning practiced in the triangular-format why
cannot you use the same method in the case nirguṇa-brahman also? Nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana, aham nirguṇa-brahma asmi iti may you visualize or imagine. Not only he should
practice, but he should maintain that particular vṛtti all the time until death, just as
bhaktas maintain Kṛṣṇa-vṛtti, Rāma-vṛtti, hare Rāma vṛtti, etc., by sheer repetition. This
person maintains ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti also in the same manner by sheer practice. This
will come under karma-yoga only. It is not nididhyāsana. It is upāsana and upāsana comes

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1468

under karma or karma-yoga only. All this will be more and more clear as these ślokas are
taken up for discussion.

śloka 9.79
ब्रह्मचारी भिक्षमाणो युतः संवर्गविद्यया ।
संवर्गरूपतां चित्ते धारयित्वा ह्यभिक्षता ॥ ९.७९ ॥
brahmacārī bhikṣamāṇo yutaḥ saṃvargavidyayā.
saṃvargarūpatāṃ citte dhārayitvā hyabhikṣatā (9.79).
In support of this particular idea that the upāsaka should internalize the thought and send
it to the sub-conscious mind, in support of this exercise, Vidyāraṇya quotes a case
occurring in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Here, a similar idea is quoted. There is a portion
reference number is 4.3.1-8. There saṃvarga vidyā or saṃvarga upāsana is prescribed.
saṃvarga upāsana is nothing but vyaṣṭi-prāṇa-samaṣṭi-prāṇa-aikya-upāsana. Saṃvarga
means prāṇa both vyaṣṭi and samaṣṭi. At samaṣṭi level prāṇa is called vāyu-tattva and at
vyaṣṭi, vāyu is called prāṇa-tattva. Both of them are called saṃvarga, in the sense that both
of them are the resolution ground. It is the ground of resolution at the time of pralaya.
Agni, pṛthvī, jala and agni will resolve into vāyu at the time of pralaya. Therefore, vāyu is
relative resolver of everything. Of course vāyu itself will merge into ākāśa. That part we
are not taking here. In saṃvarga-vidyā, vāyu is relatively a swallower of pṛthvī, jala and
agni. Similarly, at the vyaṣṭi level when a person goes to sleep, all the functions of the
organs are resolved. They all resolve into prāṇa-tattva because during suṣupti prāṇa is not
resolved. The proof is that we get up after sleep. Therefore, during suṣupti, prāṇa is alive
but it resolves everything else. At samaṣṭi level vāyu resolves everything, therefore, both
of them are called laya-sthāna. The word saṃvarga means laya-sthāna. That in which
everything is resolved is called saṃvarga. This prāṇa at the vyaṣṭi level and vāyu at the
samaṣṭi level, their aikya is talked about. This upāsana is prescribed in Chāndogya
Upaniṣad. As a part of this upāsana Upaniṣad talks about a brahmacārī who has practiced
this upāsana for a long time. He has practiced so much that he does not look upon himself
as vyaṣṭi prāṇa or taijasa but he looks upon himself as samaṣṭi prāṇa or Hiraṇyagarbha.
This he has practiced, therefore, it is entrenched in his sub-conscious mind. With this
thought, he goes out for getting bhikṣā from outside. According to the tradition,
brahmacārī has to live on bhikṣā only. When he goes out for bhikṣā he meets two people

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1469

who are taking food. The two people eat food and lot of food is there. This brahmacārī
claims bhikṣā. Those two people think that this brahmacārī is very arrogant. He is not. But
they think that he is too proud of his knowledge and brahmācārya and all and therefore,
they deny food to him. When they deny he says when you are denying food to me, you
are denying food to samaṣṭi prāṇa who is in every body and prāṇa alone deserves all the
food in all the living beings. Then he says it is a wrong thing to deny. Even though they
have denied food to an individual without thinking twice you deny food to
Hiraṇyagarbha who is in every stomach just as Kṛṣṇa said ahaṃ vaiśvānaro bhūtvā
prāṇināṃ dehamāśritaḥ. Similarly, brahmacārī answers this way. This is because of his
upāsana that means saṃvarga vidyā had entered into his sub-conscious mind. That is why
even when the grossest activity of eating food is involved, even when he is extremely
hungry, he remembers the samaṣṭi prāṇa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says just as that
brahmacārī has conditioned himself as I am samaṣṭi prāṇa, similarly, for these nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsakas also during prārabdha problems what will come to the mind? Not that I
am suffering; even at that time, ahaṃ brahma asmi, not affected by all these things. That
should come naturally not because of understanding and conviction but because of the
practice of the upāsana. This is talked about here.

śloka 9.80
पुरुषस्येच्छया कर्तुमकर्तुम्कर्तुमन्यथा ।
शक्योपास्तिरतो नित्यं कुर्यात्प्रत्ययसन्ततिम्॥ ९.८० ॥
puruṣasyecchayā kartumakartum kartumanyathā |
śakyopāstirato nityaṃ kuryātpratyayasantatim || 9.80 ||
The same topic continues. Vidyāraṇya contrasts upāsana and nididhyāsana side by side.
He will repeatedly go forward and backward. Now, he talks about upāsana-vṛtti. All the
ślokas are upāsana-vṛtti ślokas; from 88 he will come back to jñāna-vṛtti which is
nididhyāsana. This is a deliberate vṛtti because total conviction has not come. This person
is basically in a triangular-format. He thinks himself as nirguṇa-brahman. Since it is an
imagination or visualisation it comes under a deliberate thought entertained, just as upon
a stone either we can invoke Rāma or we can invoke Viśṇu it is deliberate invocation of a
cetana Devatā knowing that it is acetana stone only. It is a deliberate superimposition.
Similarly, here also, deliberately he superimposes aham nirguṇa-brahman asmi. It is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1470

because of this deliberate superimposition that it will come under karma and wherever
karma is involved, will is involved. Since it is based on will, one can do upāsana if he
wants or drop the upāsana if he does not want or he can do upāsana in any other way
also. Whereas for a jñānī whether I think of myself as Brahman or not that thought does
not determine my status because I have understood that I am Brahman which is a fact that
cannot be altered by any condition. Therefore, for a jñānī the deliberate thinking is not
involved, but for this person, the thinking is compulsory. Therefore, it can be done or it
need not be done or it can be done in any other way also. Instead of nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana he can go to saṃvarga-vidyā as the brahmacārī did. After all, it is an imagination;
you can imagine anything upon yourself. Even though from śāstric angle ahaṃ brahma
asmi is a fact, this person is not able to still accept it as a fact; therefore, for this upāsaka it
becomes a visualisation. What a contradiction! A fact he is visualizing. It is like visualizing
the clip as a clip. It may not be a fact for you. It is possible in the next janma it may become
nirguṇa-brahman. Now, imagine you are nirguṇa-brahman. His answer is to become
nirguṇa-brahman I have to gain some more sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. You gain
sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and you become nirguṇa-brahman in the next janma, but now
may you imagine or visualize that I am nirguṇa-brahman. This is the thesis of Vidyāraṇya.
Imagine yourself as nitya-mukta.
Suppose you are afraid I don’t want even to imagine that, and say that I am happy with
saṃśārī status. Even if you cannot imagine you are brahma then akartum śakya. It is
possible to drop that upāsana also. It is possible to practice, it is possible to drop or not to
practice, that choice lies with you and now you can practice saguṇa-brahma-upāsana as
we do in Lalitāsahasranāma dhyāna śloka.

śloka 9.81
वेदाध्यायी ह्यप्रमत्तोऽधीते स्वप्नेऽपि वासितः ।
जपिता तु जपत्येव तथा ध्यातापि वासयेत्॥ ९.८१ ॥
vedādhyāyī hyapramatto:'dhīte svapne:'pi vāsitaḥ.
japitā tu japatyeva tathā dhyātāpi vāsayet (9.81).
How do we know that this particular pratyaya has entered the sub-conscious mind and
we have entrenched this aikya vāsanā, we have ingrained in the mind? In svapna also,
without our knowledge sometimes we say something, prattle in svapna and what does a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1471

man prattle in svapna is whatever has been repeated in jāgrat-avasthā; that sometimes
comes out of the mouth even though will is not involved. Similarly, we can do it and two
examples are given in this context. Suppose there is a Vedic student who is very diligent
and a sincere one. In traditional Veda patasala and all, they have to repeat the Vedas for
hours together, whether new portions or old portion. The mind is ever riddled with Veda
mantra. That is why Veda mantras themselves were taken for upāsana as is seen in
Taittirīya Upaniṣad. The very ālambana was Veda mantra. It is so because the student has
Veda mantra in his mind. These Vedic students who are diligent have got Veda vāsanā in
their minds. They are impressed with Vedic thoughts. They are saturated with Veda
mantras in their sub-conscious mind. Therefore, in svapna also they chant without their
will, what comes out of their mind are the Veda mantras.
Suppose there is a bhakta who has practiced nāma japa throughout the day, in svapna also
he will recite the japa of the nāma of the Lord unknowingly. In the same way a Vedāntic
student who is not convinced I am liberated can practice this nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.
He can saturate his mind with ahaṃ brahma asmi, aham satya jagan mithyā vāsanā.

śloka 9.82
विरोधिप्रत्ययं त्यक्त्वा नैरन्तर्येण भावयन्।
लभते वासनावेशात्स्वप्नादावपि भावनाम्॥ ९.८२ ॥
virodhipratyayaṃ tyaktvā nairantaryeṇa bhāvayan.
labhate vāsanāveśātsvapnādāvapi bhāvanām (9.82).
In the previous śloka fourth quarter, the dream experience was mentioned. That is being
continued here also. Just as Īśvara-nāma-vāsanā can saturate the mind, similarly, ahaṃ
brahma-asmi-vāsanā applying the same logic can also saturate the mind. The principles
are the same in both the cases. This upāsaka repeats nirguṇa-brahma-vṛtti continuously.
He saturates his mind with that thought. He has to come from triangular-format to binary-
format somehow or the other. All the counter-thought that I am saṃśārī, that mokṣa is far
away, should not be encouraged and I deliberately negate such thoughts, even though my
intellect is not convinced. Still I deliberate entertain aikya and negate the opposite thought
that I am saṃśārī.
Giving up even during the difficult situations, this upāsaka also will get the same
saturation as a Vedic student got as the other bhaktas like Mīrā or Tyāgarājā got the state

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1472

by uttering Kṛṣṇa nāma and Rāma nāma continuously. Even at the time of death with pain
all over, the person will die uttering the name of Kṛṣṇa or Rāma. This is possible because
of sheer practice. Similarly, it is possible here.

śloka 9.83
भुञ्जानोऽपि निज आरब्धमास्थातिशयतोऽनिशम्।
ध्यातुं शक्तो न सन्देहो विषयव्यसनी यथा ॥ ९.८३ ॥
bhuñjāno:'pi nija ārabdhamāsthātiśayato:'niśam.
dhyātuṃ śakto na sandeho viṣayavyasanī yathā (9.83).
This is very much possible if only a person is putting forth efforts just as it happens in the
case of other fields. The prārabdha may be adverse or favourable. We may wonder how I
can practice when there is pain and problem. Vidyāraṇya says you are diffident and you
need not be. This practice also can come to anyone, therefore, nija ārabdham. Even in bad
times, one can practice binary-format at the lip level. You fake it initially and later make it.
It is possible to meditate on nirguṇa-brahman.
Even during the battle you can practice it is said. Our battle cannot be as bad as
Mahābhārata battle. So we can meditate constantly if only we make sincere efforts. By
sheer commitment it is possible to practice binary-format even without total conviction.
With total conviction practice is not required. It is natural. Without total conviction
practice is involved. One is deliberate and another is spontaneous. That is the difference.
There is no doubt at all regarding its practicability. The practice is nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana in the form of saṃvādi-bhrama-abhyāsa. What I call practice is saṃvādi-bhrama-
abhyāsa or nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. He wants to give another example also. Just as a
person is obsessed with some other worldly object or person, one should be obsessed with
the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.

Class 271
śloka 9.83 contd.
Vidyāraṇya deals with the important topic of the difference between nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana and nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna or nididhyāsana in which the vṛttis happen to be
common and upāsaka also entertains ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. The jñānī or nididhyāsana

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1473

also entertains the same vṛtti, but because of the difference in the mindset one vṛtti
becomes jñāna upāsana-vṛtti and the other becomes jñāna-rūpa-nididhyāsana-vṛtti. The
difference is determined by the mindset with which this thought is entertained.
mahāvākya-vicāra has helped in changing the mindset to binary-format that I am satya
asaṅga Ātmā and everything else is mithyā nāma-rūpa including the body, mind, family,
etc. Everything is mithyā. I am satya. And I the satya am not affected by all these. This
particular mindset which I call the binary-format if that is the mindset I have, ahaṃ
brahma asmi will be a fact for me. I don’t have to constantly even entertain that thought
because fact is a fact, whether I am entertaining that particular thought or not. If you are a
mother of a child, whether you entertain that thought now or not, for you that is a fact.
Entertaining or not entertaining the thought cannot displace the fact of your motherhood.
If mahāvākya-vicāra has not taken place or has not properly taken place, a person
continues in the triangular-format I am Jīva, going through terrible prārabdha and several
problems are there and in short, I am a saṃśārī is the fact for a person in the triangular-
format. I am asaṃśarī cannot be a fact for me but only saṃśārī is a fact for me. When I am
in triangular-format, and look upon myself as a saṃśārī which is a fact for me, then ahaṃ
brahma asmi will not appear as a fact, but it will be an imagination, a thought I entertain
to suppress my worries which are disturbing me. Because saṃśārī worries are
overwhelming, I want some kind of a nice thought by which I can temporarily at least
forget those worries and when I entertain ahaṃ brahma asmi as a temporary thought to
suppress those worries, like using the perfume over the body which has naturally terrible
smell. Already I know and already in proximity I experience the body odour but what do I
do? I spray perfume all over and I have a nice feeling of the smell, for others also that
smell is there. I also have that. But inside, I know that the nice feeling is caused by the
superficial perfume; once the perfume effect is gone then the original smell will come. Just
as using a perfume to suppress the smell, remaining in triangular-format when I entertain
ahaṃ brahma asmi it is only an upāsana, a superimposition of mokṣa upon me, the
saṃśārī, because in triangular-format I am saṃśārī is the fact; only in binary-format, I see
the saṃsāra as mithyā.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says until you come to the binary-format, until this becomes a fact,
you can practice the upāsana as a sādhana and entertain the vṛtti aham nirguṇa-brahma
asmi, nitya mutka asmi, nitya śuddha asmi, etc. It is a feel good factor and it will give

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1474

some kind of a consolation. This can be converted into a conditioning also. Be positive, use
the conditional method. Basically I look upon myself as saṃśārī but conditionally myself I
brainwash myself by entertaining this thought just as upon a stone which I know as a
stone, I do the āhvāna of Bhagavān and the acetana stone is visualized as cetana
Bhagavān; thereafter I start talking to Bhagavān also. Many intense bhaktas talk to that
Bhagavān also knowing that it is nothing but a stone. How it is because they have
superimposed cetana Īśvara upon the acetana vigraha. Similarly, upon me, the saṃśārī, I
practice superimposition of nitya-mukta brahma; it is possible just as positive
superimposition is possible outside, positive superimposition is possible upon myself also.
It is called ahaṅgraha-upāsana. In Śikṣāvallī, we have seen ahaṅgraha-upāsana, an
upāsana in which I visualize myself as something greater than what I am now. But inside
when I am alone the mind tells that I am saṃśārī. Inside, the mind will continue to tell
because the upāsaka continues in triangular-format; when he is alone the saṃsāra
surfaces. Vidyāraṇya says it does not matter. Practice this upāsana continuously until
jñāna clicks for you. Therefore, he says that it is upāsaka’s superimpositional meditation.
This upāsaka even while he is going through the prārabdha ups and downs and he does
feel I am a saṃśārī; I am going through tough prārabdha that is his internal notion. Still to
suppress that saṃsāra because of his intense commitment this upāsana, that is I am fine, I
am fine, this upāsana he is deeply attached to; āsthātiśayato:'niśam means he has intense
commitment to this particular thought-pattern: I am wonderful, everything is okay, etc.
A person can continuously practice this meditation just as at bodily level perfume is used;
liquor is to suppress the mental thought and perfume is to suppress the body smell;
similarly, ahaṃ brahma asmi is used as a nice exercise to forget the worldly worries. He
can practice that. There is no doubt about this possibility just as saguṇa-Īśvara-dhyāna is
to forget the saṃsāra worries and bhaktas have used saguṇa-brahma-dhyāna. Similarly,
nirguṇa-brahma-dhyāna can be utilized. Just as addiction or attachment can be developed
in course of time, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought-addiction can also be deliberately
developed by the practice. Therefore, viṣaya-vyasani. Viṣaya stands for sense-objects or
particular person. This word viṣaya-vyasani will be explained in the following three
ślokas. It can exist both at positive level as also negative level also. It may be good
attachment or bad attachment. Here, we are not analyzing which is good and which is
bad. We only analyse the deliberate entertainment of the vṛtti.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1475

śloka 9.84
परव्यसनिनी नारी व्यग्रापि गृहकर्मणि ।
तदेवास्वादयत्यन्तः परसङ्गरसायनम्॥ ९.८४ ॥
paravyasaninī nārī vyagrāpi gṛhakarmaṇi.
tadevāsvādayatyantaḥ parasaṅgarasāyanam (9.84).
This is an example of a woman who is engaged in housework and she is intensely attached
to someone who is not present in the house; because of the absence of the person the mind
is attached to that person and thinking of that person, the body continues to perform the
duties at home. The anya may be her own child who has gone to school. Even though the
lady is involved, the mind is all the time obsessed with or attached to that baby. Another
well-known example in the Bhāgavata is the story of the Gopīs. Gopīs were involved in
the family duties but all the time their mind was in Lord Kṛṣṇa alone. The word para has
both meaning one is parabrahman or para means someone else who is not here. She is
busy with her household activities. Rasāyanam here means Īśvara-saṅga delight or the joy
enjoyed by the lady. She enjoys the amṛta of association of the Lord even though she is
engaged in the domestic activities. The thought-pattern the Kṛṣṇa thought is ānanda hetu.
This she had developed by practicing the thought and it has become the part of her
personality. Similarly, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti also can be made part of our personality
like Kṛṣṇa-vṛtti and Rāma-vṛtti, so nirguṇa-brahma-vṛtti also can be made part of our vṛtti.

śloka 9.85 and 9.86

परसङ्गं स्वादयन्त्या अपि नो गृहकर्म तत्।
कुण्ठी भवेदपि त्वेतदापातेनैव वर्तते ॥ ९.८५ ॥
गृहकृ त्यव्यसनिनी यथा सम्यक्करोति तत्।
परव्यसनिनी तद्वन्न करोत्येव सर्वथा ॥ ९.८६ ॥
parasaṅgaṃ svādayantyā api no gṛhakarma tat.
kuṇṭhī bhavedapi tvetadāpātenaiva vartate (9.85).
gṛhakṛtyavyasaninī yathā samyakkaroti tat.
paravyasaninī tadvanna karotyeva sarvathā (9.86).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says it is possible to entertain brahma-vṛtti on one side and it is also
possible to continue the worldly activities on the other. One vṛtti happens at the sub-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1476

conscious level and at the conscious level the activity can continue as Kṛṣṇa said in Gītā
tasmāt sarveṣu kāleṣu mām anusmara. Anusmara is not nididhyāsana but it is the result of
Kṛṣṇa-upāsana. One side Kṛṣṇa-thought or word will be there and on the other side you
can fight the war also. Similarly, this lady or woman is enjoying the thought of the Lord
internally because of sheer practice. The woman enjoying Kṛṣṇa-thought sometime
smiling without any reason. Others may think the woman is not okay. She is not smiling
on the objects around but she is smiling because of her association with the Lord. For that
lady, tat gṛha-karma at the conscious level, home activities or household activities, is never
obstructed. They are done properly. It is not that she puts salt in pāyasa or she does not
put sugar in sāmbhar. All those things are done properly but inside this vṛtti is
entertained. All the activities will be mechanical as the activities do not come from the
heart. It is mechanically done because the mind is elsewhere. Therefore, they half-
heartedly perform the duties without total commitment. This is an example to show the
upāsaka also can maintain ahaṃ brahma asmi continuously but he will say jñānī does not
have to do that at all. Jñānī need not maintain ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. That is going to be
the difference between upāsaka and jñānī. Jñānī need not maintain ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
vṛtti and upāsaka will have to maintain that vṛtti. That is the difference which Vidyāraṇya
will tell later. There is difference between mechanical performer who keeps in the mind
outside the house who is paravyasaninī; on the other hand there is another woman who
has no person in the mind and therefore, both conscious and sub-conscious the total
personality is involved in gṛhastha karma that person does the same karma mindfully
with mindfulness. Therefore, this person will do the job perfectly well but the other person
will do the job mechanically that difference will be there.
Similarly, upāsaka totally cannot be mindful in his vyāvahārika role whereas Vidyāraṇya
wants to say a jñānī can be totally mindful in vyāvahārika role also. That is the difference
between the upāsaka and jñānī. The subtle difference wants to show that jñānī is in a far
superior position compared to the upāsaka. Upāsaka is out of sight, out of the mind.
Knowledge means whether the class is there or not, meditation is there or not, Vedānta is
there or not, when I know ahaṃ brahma asmi, it does not depend upon any one of my
activity. But when it is upāsana the problem is when there is no class the saṃsāra will
return. That is what he wants to say here. In short, the difference is that upāsaka cannot
totally be mindful in worldly vyāvahāras but a jñānī can be mindful in the worldly

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1477

vyāvahāras just as you don’t think I am the mother, that is a fact you know in vyāvahārika
place, but you don't have to think about that. Similarly, a jñānī knows I am free and
liberation is a fact and it does not depend upon the physical condition, even emotional
condition cannot challenge the fact that I am nitya-mukta. Even the thoughts may change
to rājasa-, tāmasa-vṛtti; even when they are there, they cannot challenge the fact that all
these emotions are mithyā, emotions cannot challenge the jñānī. My freedom can never be
disturbed. It is unconditional, my mokṣa, even the thoughts and emotions cannot
challenge my mokṣa. This great difference Vidyāraṇya will show hereafter.

śloka 9.87
एवं ध्यानैकनिष्ठोऽपि लेशाल्लौकिकमाचरेत्।
तत्त्ववित्त्वविरोधित्वाल्लौकिकं सम्यगाचरेत्॥ ९.८७ ॥
evaṃ dhyānaikaniṣṭho:'pi leśāllaukikamācaret.
tattvavittvavirodhitvāllaukikaṃ samyagācaret (9.87).
Upāsaka wants to retain the ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought all the time which suppresses the
aham-saṃśārī-thought. In the case of upāsaka whenever the perfume gets diluted he has
to add a fresh spray because otherwise I am saṃśārī the bad odour will come. Thus,
upāsaka wants to be in Vedāntic field all the time; he is afraid of laukika vyavahāra
because he thinks that laukika vyavahāra may push away his mokṣa status, that worry is
there. Therefore, he wants to spend more time in meditation and he wants to withdraw
more and more and he wants to sit in a cave because he is afraid of vyāvahārika because
vyavahāra will remove ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. Upāsaka is worried about vyāvahārika.
Vidyāraṇya says jñānī is absolutely not worried about any number of worldly vyavahāras.
He does not have to withdraw and he does not have to go to a cave. How can the
transaction, mithyā transaction, disturb the fact or challenge the fact that I am all the time
free and liberated?! Movie characters cannot disturb the purity of the screen. I am the
nitya-mukta screen in which all crying and laughing navarasas are going on at
vyāvahārika level.
Therefore, he says this upāsaka who practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana as ahaṃ brahma
asmi in this manner as explained in the previous śloka, like the Gopī example, this
upāsaka is mostly committed to meditation because he is afraid of vyavahāra. He will do
minimum activity or do work to limited extent. This is the sad tale of the upāsaka. On the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1478

other hand, a jñānī knows ahaṃ brahma asmi; aham satya and aham muktaḥ, that fact
does not depend upon the active śarīra-traya or passive śarīra-traya. Whether three bodies
are active or passive, aham muktaḥ, that fact is never challenged because it is an
understood fact; an assimilated fact; therefore, he says tattvavit tu. Wise person will be
totally involved in worldly activities; he will do actions according to the āśrama to which
he belongs to. An actor may play the role of a beggar but he is not disturbed by the role
for he gets fabulous money to do that role. So also a jñānī plays his role undisturbed by the
worldly activities. Saṃśārī role cannot disturb my non-saṃśārī status. Mithyā saṃśārī role
cannot disturb satya asaṃśarī status for they are not opposed to each other just as the dry
sand and wet mirage water can happily coexist because mirage water cannot disturb the
dryness of the dry sand. Similarly, whatever vyavahāra I go through it does not disturb
my knowledge that I was, I am and I will be free. All this is entertainment drama which is
mithyā. There cannot be contradiction between vyāvahārika kartṛtva and pāramārthika
akartṛtva. They can coexist. That is why jñānī can do jñāna-karma-samuccaya. His karma
is karma-ābhāsa. We only negate jñāna-karma-samuccaya and we don’t negate jñāna-
karma-ābhāsa-samuccaya. Jñāna and karma can coexist because karma is mithyā
therefore, there is no contradiction.

śloka 9.88
मायामयः प्रपञ्चोऽयमात्मा चैतन्यरूपधृक् ।
इति बोधे विरोधः को लौकिकव्यवहारिणः ॥ ९.८८ ॥
māyāmayaḥ prapañco:'yamātmā caitanyarūpadhṛk.
iti bodhe virodhaḥ ko laukikavyavahāriṇaḥ (9.88).
For jñānī this knowledge is there. That means the statement is a fact for a jñānī. It is not an
imagination. It does not depend upon the entertaining the thought. Even when I don’t
entertain the thought it is a fact jñānī has understood. The entire universe and the events
are nothing but nāma-rūpa dance caused by Māyā. It is all fiction only. It does not have
reality. Prapañca includes possession, family, body and the mind. All of them are nāma-
rūpa, mithyā. I am not husband, wife or grandparent; aham Ātmā; I am the asaṅga Ātmā. I
am caitanya rūpa of the nature of consciousness. I am cetana tattva. I am neither acetana
śarīra or acetana antaḥkaraṇa or acetana prapañca. This I call binary-format is a fact for
him. Once it is understood exactly like watching a serial and I am shedding a tear for the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1479

heroine there. Even though I have got no such problem, it is the problem of heroine; I
know I am ānanda-svarūpa because vyavahārically I have no problem. Still deliberately I
watch it and not only I watch it; it is capable of producing emotions also. That a mithyā
serial can generate emotions in the minds but I know that the emotions are also mithyā.
Events are also mithyā. Family members may create emotions in the mind both events and
the generated emotions are part of the drama which I have deliberately entered into.
When this knowledge is there, where is the contradiction in claiming I am nitya mutka
Ātmā! Tragedy and comedy become entertainment under one condition: it is when it is a
movie or a fiction; and for a jñānī, entire life is a movie or fiction, therefore, the tragedy of
life also can be called by him an entertainment because for him it is mithyā.

śloka 9.89
अपेक्षते व्यवहृतिर्न प्रपञ्चस्य वस्तुताम्।
नाप्यात्मजाड्यं किंत्वेषा साधनान्येव काङ्क्षति ॥ ९.८९ ॥
apekṣate vyavahṛtirna prapañcasya vastutām.
nāpyātmajāḍyaṃ kiṃtveṣā sādhanānyeva kāṅkṣati (9.89).
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers a question. Suppose a jñānī knows all the vyavahāra roles are
mithyā. Will he be able to continue the vyavahāra as before? Vidyāraṇya says perfectly
possible just as we purchase a ticket for a movie and seriously spend money even after
knowing that the movie is mithyā. Not only they watch the movie but they go through the
emotions also. The movie is capable of producing the emotions. Still he enjoys going
through the emotions. Similarly, jñānī can also go through the drama called life and enjoy
all the navarasas also knowing that it is mithyā. If you can watch a movie jñānī can play
the role in the life. More in the next class.

Class 272
śloka 9.89 contd.
For nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka ahaṃ brahma asmi is not a fact. But ahaṃ brahma asmi is
only a thought, therefore, the upāsaka’s aim is to generate ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought to
repeat ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought and to maintain ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought that is his
aim; generating, repeating and maintaining ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought based on śāstra-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1480

vidhi is his aim. For the purpose of this, he has to make sure all the conditions are
conducive because maintaining the thought in the mind is not easy, the mind being very
fragile. Refer to Gītā 6th chapter. The mind is fragile, fluid, fickle, flickering. In such a
mind, maintaining a particular thought is not going to be that easy. It is this tough task the
upāsaka wants to accomplish. He has to be very carefully protecting the thought-pattern
like protecting the rangoli on waters or protecting the lamp burning from the wind. So
also nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka has to protect the mind from going astray. He has to do
everything to create conducive condition and anything that can threaten that he has to
avoid just as the flame should not be brought out as then it will get put out. He should not
do anything that will threaten and every laukika vyavahāra is a threat to the maintenance
of the vṛtti for the upāsaka; therefore, his aim is to reduce all the vyavahāras as much as
possible. He has to avoid meeting with the people also. Any contact with the external
world can shake the ahaṃ brahma asmi rangoli. Therefore, upāsaka’s aim is to generate,
repeat and maintain the thought by providing conducive situation and to avoid the
threatening situations. This is the lot of the poor upāsakas.
Jñānī, one he has understood the mahāvākya, and the vṛtti has been generated destroying
the ignorance for good; thereafter for him ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact. What he has is
knowledge. The fact also does not require any protection. Knowledge also does not
require any protection because fact and knowledge of a fact can never be threatened by
any object in the world, any events in the world, any transaction in the world. It is one of
the important principles we should remember. The knowledge of a fact also can be never
threatened by objects events and transactions. Will perceiving the sunrise threaten my
knowledge that sun never rises? It is the earth that is moving from west to east. The earth
is going in the opposite direction which creates the illusion of the sunrise. Sunrise is an
illusion and non-sunrise is a fact. That knowledge can never be threatened by experience
of sunrise or sunrise-based vyavahāra also. The sandhyāvandana vyavahāra I do
diligently, religiously, neither the experience nor the sandhyāvandana vyavahāra can
threaten my knowledge that the sun does not rise. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says jñānī does
not have to generate the ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti again and again. Jñānī need not repeat
ahaṃ brahma asmi thoughts again and again. Once the knowledge is gained it is gained
for good. Whenever he wants he can deliberate invoke the knowledge like you
deliberately invoking your phone number. You don’t meditate on phone number now. But

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1481

the moment I ask you give your phone number. Jñānī does not have to protect the fact
ahaṃ brahma asmi. Jñānī does not have to protect the thought ahaṃ brahma asmi because
that is the job of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka. Therefore, he does not have to protect either
the fact or the knowledge or the thought; there is no question of providing a conducive
condition; such a thing does not exist. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says jñānī has the knowledge
of the fact that the whole world is mithyā. I the Ātmā alone is satya and all, including
family, body and the mind and everything are mithyā. This knowledge once gained any
worldly vyavahāra does not threaten the knowledge.
Vyavahāra is a threat for an upāsaka but it is not a threat for a jñānī because worldly
transactions do not require the reality of the world. An actor playing the role of a dacoit
does not have to become a dacoit. Similarly, the Ātmā does not have to be inert just
because the world is inert. In order to view the world as an illusion, I do not have to be
illusory myself because I cannot be an illusion, I am real. Mithyātva-jñāna and laukika
vyavahāra can happily coexist. Jñāna does not threaten vyavahāra, vyavahāra does not
threaten jñāna. There is no problem between the two.
For upāsaka ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti and laukika vyavahāra cannot go coexist as
vyavahāra threatens the vṛtti; therefore, upāsaka has to withdraw from vyavahāra,
whereas the jñānī does not have to withdraw from vyavahāra. Whoever is afraid of
vyavahāra proves he does not have jñāna. Fear of vyavahāra is a loud declaration that I
don’t have jñāna. Ātma-dehatvam or dehātma-abhimāna is not required for worldly
transactions. Dehātma-abhimāna is of two types one is caused by prārabdha and it is
called sāmānya abhimanya. It is common to jñānī and ajñānī. Both feel hunger when the
body is hungry. If the jñānī does not have the sāmānya abhimanya totally, then he will not
have hunger or thirst! Jñānī has sāmānya abhimāna to differentiate his body from other
people’s body. Sāmānya abhimāna is Īśvara-sṛṣṭi. That is enough for vyāvahārika.
Biological pain is caused by sāmānya abhimāna. If it is viśeṣa, once one becomes a jñānī he
will not have any problem with the body; when you prick him with a needle he will have
no pain, but this does not happen. The body pain, etc. is governed by prārabdha. It ends
only with the death at the end of prārabdha. Biological pain and jñāna can never be
connected. Jñāna has nothing to do with biological pain. It is dependent on sāmānya-deha-
abhimāna which is dependent on prārabdha and prārabdha is dependent on Īśvara-sṛṣṭi.
Further, worldly accessories are required for sāmānya abhimāna to be active. There is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1482

second dehātma-abhimāna that is Jīva-sṛṣṭi which is caused by self-ignorance which is

called saṃsāra. It is called viśeṣa-abhimāna or viśeṣa- adhyāsa. It is called Jīva-sṛṣṭi. This
jñānī does not have and that is not required for vyavahāra. It is cognitive and intellectual
misconception. Jñānī has removed that and that is not required for worldly vyavahāra.

śloka 9.90
मनोवाक्कायतद्बाह्यपदार्थाः साधनानि तान्।
तत्त्वविन्नोपमृद्नाति व्यवहारोऽस्य नो कुतः ॥ ९.९० ॥
manovākkāyatadbāhyapadārthāḥ sādhanāni tān.
tattvavinnopamṛdnāti vyavahāro:'sya no kutaḥ (9.90).
The previous śloka is further explained. Jñānī requires sāmānya deha-abhimāna and
worldly accessories for vyavahāra. With them vyavahāra can happily go on. That is
explained in this śloka. The mind is the first accessory required for all the transactions. The
proof is in suṣupti, where the mind is dissolved and no vyavahāra takes place. In jāgrat-
avasthā, the mind is active and vyavahāra is possible. Anvaya-vyatireka proves this point.
Mano vyavahārasya sādhanam.
The second accessory is the organ of speech, next is śarīra or the body and then comes the
external object outside in the world. One is called karaṇa and another is called upakāraṇa.
A jñānī does not destroy the accessories through jñāna. Jñānī has silently removed the
reality which has been falsely attributed to them. Without doing any physical activity,
purely with intellectual knowledge he has removed the satyatva which he had falsely
attributed to them; he has plucked that away but all the features of the world continue as
they are. Experiencability continues. They can be experienced as before even after jñāna.
The second feature is the law and order will continue as before including prārabdha and
its consequences.
Third feature is the utility of the world will continue. Food will remove the hunger and
water will remove the thirst. All the things of the world have got respective utility which
is called prayojana. Jñānī does not remove experience, orderliness or utility. Satyatva
attached to them is silently plucked. Fortunately, transaction does not require satyatva.
Therefore, he transacts with the world as all others do. Eating food does not require
satyatva-buddhi. Therefore, he continues vyavahāra. Jñānī will do any vyavahāra he
wants depending upon his varṇa and āśrama. If he is a gṛhastha jñānī whatever family

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1483

duties are there those also can continue as they should, but that cannot threaten my
knowledge. If I am afraid of that, then I am not a jñānī but I am an upāsaka. He will never
hide in a cave. That is the problem of an upāsaka and not a jñānī.

śloka 9.91
उपमृद्नाति चित्तं चेद्ध्यातासौ न तु तत्त्ववित्।
न बुद्धिं मर्द्दयन्दृष्टो घटतत्त्वस्य वेदिता ॥ ९.९१ ॥
upamṛdnāti cittaṃ ceddhyātāsau na tu tattvavit.
na buddhiṃ marddayandṛṣṭo ghaṭatattvasya veditā (9.91).
Pūrvapakṣī raises a question. Jñānī may not destroy all the accessories. He has removed
the satyatva bhāvanā alone. Therefore, mithyā mind, mithyā body, mithyā vāk, mithyā
upakāraṇas also continue. Therefore, why cannot he do vyavahāra was Vidyāraṇya’s
argument. Pūrvapakṣī poses a problem. He says should not jñānī maintain ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-thought in the mithyā mind to protect his knowledge? Should he not withdraw from
vyavahāra to protect the knowledge of ahaṃ brahma asmi to gain mokṣa? If he has to
withdraw from vyavahāra how can he be engaged in vyavahāra? Pūrvapakṣī says once
jñānī indulges in vyavahāra, his mokṣa will be threatened. Therefore, he has to restrain his
mind from going astray. The person who withdraws from the world and preserves ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-thought is called nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka. He is a Yogī. Jñāna need not be
protected by the particular thought. If jñāna is protected to maintain a thought, that will
land in lot of problems. I have gathered a good amount of knowledge during the last so
many years right from the childhood. If I have to protect all these knowledges, according
to Pūrvapakṣī, I will have to maintain all the thoughts and if I don’t maintain that thought,
that knowledges will vanish!
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya argues: if protection of knowledge requires maintenance of a
particular thought, at any time you will have to maintain millions of thoughts and if any
thought you cannot maintain, that knowledge will vanish! That means for alphabet
onwards you have to go back to primary school. That is not what we experience. The
greatest saving grace is that the knowledge gained is protected and it does not require
maintenance of the thought all the time. When I ask the question do you know two plus
two is four, you are able to recover that knowledge and use that knowledge even though
you don’t maintain the thought constantly. Similarly, for a jñānī ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1484

is maintained even though he does not maintain the vṛtti because vṛtti need not be
maintained. Therefore, he gives an example. Ghaṭa-jñānī does not maintain ghaṭa-jñāna by
preserving the ghaṭa-vṛtti all the time. Ghaṭa-jñānī does not withdraw the mind to
maintain the ghaṭa-jñāna. The same law applies in the case of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna
also.

śloka 9.92
सकृ त्प्रत्ययमात्रेण घटश्चेद्भासते तदा ।
स्वप्रकाशोऽयमात्मा किं घटवच्च न भासते ॥ ९.९२ ॥
sakṛtpratyayamātreṇa ghaṭaścedbhāsate tadā.
svaprakāśo:'yamātmā kiṃ ghaṭavacca na bhāsate (9.92).
Vidyāraṇya says brahma-jñāna is superior to ghaṭa-jñāna. When ghaṭa-jñāna itself does
not require meditation to maintain it, what to talk of brahma-jñāna! Certainly it does not
require any form of meditation to maintain it. Once you gain the jñāna it is there for good.
Once a person learns from someone that it is the pot, he has ghaṭa-jñāna-vṛtti. With the
help of one ghaṭa-jñāna-vṛtti, pot is revealed to him or pot-knowledge arises in him
whenever he sees the pot in future. Once pot-knowledge arises in him pot-ignorance is
gone for good. There is no question of pot-ignorance coming back to him. The pot-
knowledge is sustained and it does not require meditation for sustenance. If this is the
condition of ghaṭa-jñāna, what is to talk of Ātmā-jñāna! Ghaṭa required cidābhāsa to
remove the covering of the pot but in the case of Ātmā even the cidābhāsa requirement is
not there. Therefore, Ātmā-jñāna is even superior to ghaṭa-jñāna. Ātmā is ever-evident
and self-effulgent. Will it not be evident for a jñānī all the time once he has gained Ātmā-
jñāna! Where is the question of meditation? Where is the question of withdrawal? Jñānī is
free to do any vyavahāra whereas upāsaka is never-free to do any vyavahāra and he has to
be bringing a lamp outside and carefully he has to protect his knowledge. Thus, upāsaka
has to be over careful. Therefore, note the difference between upāsaka and jñānī and
upāsana and jñāna.

Class 273
śloka 9.92 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1485

Vidyāraṇya deals with the topic of difference between nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and

nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna. Both the jñānī and upāsaka do have ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. In
one case it is jñāna-vṛtti and in the case of the other person it is karma vṛtti because
upāsana is a form of karma. Because of this difference we have to know some important
corollaries. Jñāna-vṛtti has to take place only once; once jñāna-vṛtti takes place it removes
ajñāna āvaraṇa producing jñāna. Once jñāna-vṛtti has removed the ajñāna āvaraṇa, and
generated jñāna, thereafter the jñāna need not be protected by preserving the vṛtti. After
jñāna, the vṛtti has no function either to produce knowledge or to preserve knowledge.
Therefore, the mind is available for any other vyavahāra and any other vṛtti or thought.
Even if the mind engages in some other vyavahāra, entertaining some other thoughts, the
jñāna that has been generated by jñāna-vṛtti will be safely preserved. Jñāna is based on
facts and facts need not be preserved by any method for fact is always a fact, just as fact
need not be preserved. So knowledge also need not be preserved by any method. That
jñāna will always be available whenever you want like I ask you what is the name of your
son or daughter? Automatically you will be able to recollect the knowledge and tell me.
You don’t require any efforts to preserve the knowledge of your son’s name. It is not
required because jñāna will go away only if ajñāna comes back; fortunately ajñāna once
gone it cannot come back. Ajñāna is anādi santa. Jñāna is sadi and ananta. Once ajñāna
goes it will never come back. Therefore, once jñāna comes it will not go back. We have got
thousands of pieces of knowledge and all of them we don’t struggle to maintain as they
are there in the mind. Therefore, jñāna-vṛtti once generated it need not be preserved by
jñānī. Therefore, jñānī’s mind is available for any other vyavahāra.
For the upāsaka ahaṃ brahma asmi is not a jñāna-vṛtti. It is not a fact for him. Therefore,
ahaṃ brahma asmi is a karma vṛtti. Karma will have to be preserved by repeating again
and again. The moment you stop that vṛtti the karma also will end. Therefore, for the
upāsakas upāsana is a karma vṛtti. Karma will have to be preserved by constant efforts.
Upāsaka gets the benefit not because of jñāna but because of upāsana. Therefore, he will
require efforts by preserving the thought all the time. For the upāsakas the mind will not
be available for any other vyavahāra. The moment some other vyavahāra comes the
upāsana-vṛtti will have to be displaced. Therefore, upāsaka should always save upāsana
either by reducing vyavahāra or by avoiding vyavahāra. For upāsaka upāsana and
vyavahāra are mutually exclusive.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1486

For jñānī preservation of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is not required. Therefore, jñāna will be

there even if he is engaged in worldly vyavahāras. No vyavahāra is a threat for a jñānī.
The external world and all the pleasures and pains and events at mithyā mind level cannot
be a threat for jñāna that I am ever nitya-mukta Ātmā. All events take place at mithyā
anātmā level. Let the mind go through sattva kārya, rajo kārya or tamo kārya, but the jñānī
is unaffected by the vyavahāras. Mithyā-vṛtti cannot challenge my knowledge that I am
satya śākṣī; that awareness helps him do vyavahāra. This is not with regard to ahaṃ
brahma asmi and this is true of any worldly knowledge also. All require one time vṛtti and
vṛtti need not be protected for preserving jñāna. Once ghaṭākāra vṛtti takes place, that
vṛtti is forever and there is no need of meditation to preserve that jñāna. So is ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-jñāna in the case of a jñānī. One time ghaṭa-vṛtti is to take place and ghaṭa-
jñāna rises in him and it will remain in the mind forever for the rest of the life. You don’t
doubt the knowledge and you continue to have ghaṭa-jñāna even though you don’t
entertain ghaṭa-vṛtti during the Pañcadaśī class. If this is the law with regard to the ghaṭa-
jñāna the same law can be extended to ahaṃ brahma asmi knowledge also. Once I
understand by generating vṛtti, thereafter I don’t have to struggle to preserve the
knowledge. That knowledge will be there even if I am involved in worldly vyavahāras.

If the law is proof for acetana ghaṭa-jñāna to be permanently there, then kaimuthika
nyāyena what to talk of Ātmā-jñāna which will be permanently there! The Ātmā is all the
time available; where is the question of losing sight of that knowledge! Anātma-jñāna
some we may gain and some of it may be lost but in the case of Ātmā-jñāna this will never
happen and Ātmā-jñāna will ever be with us. There is no question of forgetting the
Absolute Self.

śloka 9.93
स्वप्रकाशतया किं ते तद्बुद्धिस्तत्त्ववेदनम्।
बुद्धिश्च क्षणनाश्येति चोद्यं तुल्यं घटादिषु ॥ ९.९३ ॥
svaprakāśatayā kiṃ te tadbuddhistattvavedanam.
buddhiśca kṣaṇanāśyeti codyaṃ tulyaṃ ghaṭādiṣu (9.93).
Here, Pūrvapakṣī raises a question. He wants to argue that jñānī also has to preserve
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti to retain the knowledge. Knowledge-preservation requires

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1487

thought-preservation is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī. Knowledge-generation requires

thought-generation. With regards to that both Pūrvapakṣī and Siddhāntī are in agreement.
Ghaṭa-jñāna will take place only when pot-thought is generated. The controversy is jñāna-
anuvṛtti requires thought-anuvṛtti [continuation]. Pūrvapakṣī argues thought must be
preserved.
Pūrvapakṣī says Ātmā is svayam-prakāśa. Because of self-effulgence of Ātmā nobody is
going to get any benefit. The self-effulgent of Ātmā is of no use to anyone. For a jñānī also,
for a mukta Puruṣa also, Ātmā is self-effulgent. For a saṃśārī Ātmā is self-effulgent. The
self-effulgent Ātmā does not destroy saṃsāra of a saṃśārī. If the self-effulgent could have
destroyed saṃsāra, then nobody will be a saṃśārī. For everyone Ātmā is effulgent. Still,
saṃśaris are successfully continuing. What is the benefit for you or anyone of the self-
effulgent Ātmā? Therefore, self-knowledge is required. That alone can destroy ignorance
and saṃsāra. Self-knowledge is something different from self-effulgence. Self-effulgence
of Ātmā is there for all the people, but self-knowledge is not there for all the people. If self-
effulgence and self-knowledge are identical, all the people will have self-knowledge and
that means all the gurus will become unemployed. Therefore, we know that self-
knowledge is something different and it is not there for all. Then the next question is what
self-knowledge is? Self-knowledge is a thought generated in the mind by the teaching of
Guru and śāstra. Self-effulgence is natural to Ātmā. Self-knowledge is a thought, a vṛtti,
which belongs to the mind. Self-knowledge is ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought generated in
the mind by Guru and śāstra-upadeśa. Self-effulgence belongs to Ātmā and self-
knowledge is a thought belonging to the mind. Self-knowledge is to be generated by the
Guru-śāstra-upadeśa. We also agree with this. Brahmātmā vṛtti alone is called knowledge
and also it is called ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. It belongs to the mind alone. This alone is
called knowledge of truth. Here we don’t state thought is generated in what manner. That
we have to understand mahāvākya-vicāra-janya-akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti is tattva-jñāna. This
also we agree. Now, he makes a third statement. Any thought whether it is ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-thought or whether it is ghaṭa-thought or paṭa-thought or any other thought, is
kṣaṇanaśya, subject to disappearance in a moment. It is subject to momentary
disappearance. No thought will remain permanent. Thought is fleeting. This is also
Pūrvapakṣī’s argument which we do agree with.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1488

From this, Pūrvapakṣī wants to make a corollary. Since knowledge is generated by the
thought, the preservation of the knowledge must be only through the preservation of
thought and this is the extrapolation he wants to make. First, Guru must generate ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-thought. Student gets the thought ahaṃ brahma asmi. Thereafter, the
student must repeat the chant ahaṃ brahma asmi. Vidyāraṇya asks the question: are you
preserving pot-knowledge by preserving pot-thought? The greatest advantage is you do
have pot-knowledge even if during the entire Pañcadaśī class even if you don’t bring the
pot-thought to your mind. The knowledge is there. Karma requires perpetuation to
preserve it and jñāna does not require that. Therefore, he says I will raise a similar
question to you with regard to the pot-knowledge. Depending upon your answer I will
give you my answer. If you say ghaṭa-vṛtti is preserved then I will say brahma vṛtti is to be
preserved. First give me your answer and then I will give my answer is the reply from
Vidyāraṇya. Our answer is in the form of question. A similar question will come with
regard to pot-knowledge also. This is our statement. Let us see what Pūrvapakṣī says.

śloka 9.94
घटादौ निश्चिते बुद्धिर्नश्यत्येव यदा घटः ।
इष्टो नेतुं तदा शक्य इति चेत्सममात्मनि ॥ ९.९४ ॥
ghaṭādau niścite buddhirnaśyatyeva yadā ghaṭaḥ.
iṣṭo netuṃ tadā śakya iti cetsamamātmani (9.94).
All these are very important and technical ślokas differentiating upāsaka and jñānī.
Upāsaka has to struggle to remember God or remember even Brahman; saguṇa-bhakta has
to struggle to remember God; nirguṇa-upāsaka has to struggle to remember; but jñānī has
no struggle to remember because knowledge is that which is available when you want.
Pūrvapakṣī gives the answer with regard to the pot. Once pot, etc., are clearly known, by
seeing the pot and by generating ghaṭākāra-vṛtti once you have got the knowledge. The
pot-thought will disappear. Ignorance has already gone once the thought came. Once the
ignorance has gone the thought also goes away. Knowledge remains forever. The
knowledge will continue without the thought.
Whenever the ghaṭa-jñānī wants to retrieve the ghaṭa-jñāna in his mind, at that time it is
possible to bring that knowledge in the form of thought only. But the knowledge is not

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1489

preserved in the form of thought. Knowledge is gained in the form of thought; knowledge
is brought back in the form of thought; but knowledge is not preserved in the form of
thought. If this is your answer, Vidyāraṇya says the same is true with regard to brahma-
jñāna also. No jñānī constantly think about the ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna. He is not going
to have thought ahaṃ brahma asmi all the time. When he is doing worldly vyavahāra, his
mind is available for those thoughts and he is not worried about using that knowledge
because that knowledge simply is there to be retrieved whenever he wants. This is our
answer. Here, Vidyāraṇya agrees with the Pūrvapakṣī. No jñānī remembers ahaṃ brahma
asmi all the time but it is available whenever he wants, but upāsaka has to practice the
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-thought regularly.

śloka 9.95
निश्चित्य सकृ दात्मानं यदापेक्षा तदैव तत्।
वक्तुं मन्तुं तथा ध्यातुं शक्नोत्येव हि तत्त्ववित्॥ ९.९५ ॥
niścitya sakṛdātmānaṃ yadāpekṣā tadaiva tat.
vaktuṃ mantuṃ tathā dhyātuṃ śaknotyeva hi tattvavit (9.95).
Jñānī is a permanent jñānī and his body and time are available for all the worldly
vyavahāra but the vyavahāras will not threaten his knowledge. Therefore, he is
comfortably in binary-format during all the experiences of life. If he wants to bring the
knowledge to his mind whenever he wants, he can bring it either because he wants to
dwell upon the knowledge at a particular time or he wants to share that knowledge with
somebody at that time; he can devote time and the mind for the retrieving the knowledge.
Even if he does not bring the knowledge to the mind, the knowledge is there. The binary-
format has become a fact for him while the triangular-format has become irrelevant for
him. Every triangular-format is mithyā and he knows that mithyā components and events
of the components are not going to affect him in any manner. Once that has become clear
to him, then he has nothing to worry. I am mukta is a fact and once in a while I can dwell
on the fact and enjoy. Similarly, a jñānī may choose to do meditation; there is no rule that
he should not meditate. He can choose to dwell on that. Jñānī who is different from
upāsaka who is all the time trying to sit alone. He wants to think of Ātmā all the time but
jñānī does not want to do that at any time.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1490

śloka 9.96
उपासक इव ध्यायं लौकिकं विस्मरेत्यदि ।
विस्मरत्येव सा ध्यानाद्विस्मृतिर्न तु वेदनात्॥ ९.९६ ॥
upāsaka iva dhyāyaṃ laukikaṃ vismaret yadi.
vismaratyeva sā dhyānādvismṛtirna tu vedanāt (9.96).
Pūrvapakṣī raises another point in this śloka. Upāsaka also thinks of ahaṃ brahma asmi
all the time. A jñānī need not think about it all the time, but he may choose to think of it
whenever he wants. Now, the upāsaka imagines a jñānī who wants to meditate on Ātmā.
Upāsaka is also committed to dhyāna. Jñānī also has chosen to sit in meditation. Both of
them are meditating. Then, Pūrvapakṣī says because of the involvement in meditation,
jñānī also will not be able to do the laukika vyavahāra because of his commitment to
meditation. Therefore, in the case of jñānī also now, his jñāna, when he is involved in
meditation, has become opposed to vyavahāra. For him, ahaṃ brahma asmi is jñāna. Is it
not his jñāna opposed to vyavahāra because he is not able to do vyavahāra because he is
engaged in ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti-āvṛtti; therefore, jñāna can become opposed to
vyavahāra in the case of meditating jñānī. We argue jñāna is not opposed to vyavahāra.
He brings a special case where jñāna is opposed to vyavahāra in the case of a meditating
jñānī. Therefore, you have to accept jñāna is opposed to vyavahāra. This is the
Pūrvapakṣa. The meditating jñānī will not be able to do the laukika vyavahāra because he
will ignore the laukika vyavahāra, a meditating jñānī will invariably ignore the worldly
transactions exactly like a meditating upāsaka. Therefore, in this context the meditating
jñānī’s jñāna becomes opposed to vyavahāra. How do you say there is no contradiction
between jñāna and vyavahāra? If you raise such a question, I will answer in the next class.

Class 274
śloka 9.96 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues with the same topic discussing the status of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
vṛtti which is in the mind of the upāsaka and the same ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti in the
mind of a jñānī. Vidyāraṇya says in the case of the upāsaka, ahaṃ brahma asmi cannot be
termed as a jñāna-vṛtti because he does not look upon ahaṃ brahma asmi as a fact for he is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1491

not able to come to binary-format. Therefore, remaining in triangular-format, he practices

ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti as a sādhaka seeking mokṣa in the future. If ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
vṛtti is a fact for me, I never look upon myself as a sādhaka and I will never look forward
to mokṣa. Then, it is called jñāna-vṛtti. In the case of upāsaka, ahaṃ brahma asmi is not a
fact; therefore, he continues in triangular-format as a sādhaka. For him ahaṃ brahma asmi
is nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-rūpa karma. And through this sādhana, he hopes to get
liberation in the future. For the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka since upāsana is a karma, the
preservation of upāsana karma is possible only by preserving ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti all
the time which means he must spend most of the time in meditation only. For him, laukika
vyavahāra will not be possible, because laukika vyavahāra will obstruct the practice of
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. Therefore, he will look upon the worldly transactions as an
obstacle for his upāsana, his aim will be to reduce the vyavahāras as much as possible and
confine to only minimum vyavahāra because upāsana karma and laukika vyavahāra are
mutually exclusive. They cannot coexist. This is the story and the lot in the case of the
upāsaka. The story of a jñānī is totally different. For him, when ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti
arose as a result of proper mahāvākya-vicāra; that makes ahaṃ brahma asmi a fact for him
and he is in binary-format and that jñāna-vṛtti has destroyed the ignorance for good.
Therefore, jñāna continues to be there even without the continuation of a vṛtti. The crucial
point is that the upāsaka should continue the thought while a jñānī need not continue to
preserve ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. Since preservation of vṛtti is not there for him, he does
not consider laukika vyavahāra as an obstacle. Therefore, a jñānī has a choice with regard
to his mental activity, whereas the
upāsaka does not have a choice with regard to his mental activity. A jñānī has a wide
choice with regard to mental activity. He can choose to meditate on ahaṃ brahma asmi
also. He may choose nididhyāsana vṛtti if he wants or he may choose to get involved in
laukika vyavahāra for loka-saṅgraha. His body-mind-complex may be involved in any
type of laukika vyavahāra; he does not consider it as an obstacle; therefore, no problem;
and not that he should not meditate; he may be a meditating jñānī also. This is
Vidyāraṇya’s presentation. Based on that, Pūrvapakṣī objects in the śloka 96 which I
introduced in the last class. A jñānī may be meditating or may not be meditating. Here, the
Pūrvapakṣī for discussion brings a meditating jñānī. His argument is that for a meditating
jñānī also laukika vyavahāra is an obstacle because meditating needs concentration.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1492

Therefore, upāsana and laukika vyavahāra cannot coexist. Therefore, do you agree jñāna
and vyavahāra are opposed at least in the case of meditating jñānī? Jñāna and vyavahāra
are opposed to each other. This is his conclusion. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣa.
Now, Vidyāraṇya answers the Pūrvapakṣī. If a meditating jñānī ignores laukika
vyavahāra, the worldly transactions, let him ignore. Then is seen the crucial sentence. That
ignoring of the worldly activities is caused by his meditation. It is opposed to worldly
transactions. Ignoring of laukika vyavahāra is never caused because of jñāna. Between
jñāna and vyavahāra there is no opposition at all. Meditation and vyavahāra are opposed
to each other. That is how I gave the example. I may watch the sunrise regularly and do
sandhyāvandana, etc. My laukika vyavahāra is based on the sunrise. Vaidika vyavahāra is
based on the sunrise. That vyavahāra and watching the sunrise is never going to threaten
my knowledge that the sun does not rise at all. Similarly, worldly vyavahāra cannot
challenge my knowledge. Therefore, it is not jñāna that is opposed to vyavahāra. That is
why when that jñānī performs vyavahāra, in his case the vyavahāra or karma will be
named karma-ābhāsa. That jñāna and karma-ābhāsa-samuccaya can happily exist. Adi
Śaṅkarācārya negates jñāna-karma-samuccaya but not jñāna-karma-ābhāsa-samuccaya. It
is not a problem. You do any karma that will not disturb the jñāna and jñānī.

śloka 9.97
ध्यानं त्वैच्छिकमेतस्य वेदनान्मुक्तिसिद्धितः ।
ज्ञानादेव तु कैवल्यमिति शास्त्रेषु डिण्डिमः ॥ ९.९७ ॥
dhyānaṃ tvaicchikametasya vedanānmuktisiddhitaḥ.
jñānādeva tu kaivalyamiti śāstreṣu ḍiṇḍimaḥ (9.97).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says suppose there is a meditating upāsaka, that is nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsaka and imagine there is meditating jñānī also both of them look the same. Both of
them are meditating. He also might be following all the conditions applied to meditation.
Their physical postures are same; both of them repeat ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti.
Superficially, they are the same, but there is a big internal difference. Upāsaka is in
triangular-format and jñānī is in binary-format. Through this upāsaka wants to get mokṣa
one day or the other. He meditates to become mukta and even if he becomes Jīvanmukta,
he will have doubt whether he would become a videha-mukti or not.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1493

Therefore, inside, the upāsaka looks forward to mokṣa. Since he is craving for mokṣa he
has to sustain the sādhana as much as possible. For the upāsaka journey is not over.
Therefore, his aim is to sustain the meditation and if possible make it intense. This is the
inner atmosphere of an upāsaka although superficially he looks like meditating jñānī. The
latter enjoys the fact that I am already nitya-mukta Brahman and I don’t have to get
liberation in the future nor am I worried about the mind in the next janma.

When a jñānī says aham satyam jagan mithyā the entire universe is falsified; why should
he bother about one sūkṣma-śarīra continuing or not! Śāstra gives a promise that jñānī’s
sūkṣma-śarīra will not travel but he is not bothered about the validity or non-validity of
the promise because the conditions of the mithyā mind does not disturb him. Therefore, in
his meditation, he is enjoying the nitya-mukta’s status. He does not look upon meditation
as a sādhana for mokṣa. Whether he continues the meditation or not, there is no problem.
From tomorrow, he may decide not to meditate; there is no problem because he does not
require meditation sādhana for mokṣa.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says that for an upāsaka, meditation is compulsory and for a jñānī,
meditation is optional because he does not require any sādhana. In binary-format there is
no sādhana. Jñānī has already claimed the liberation by the proper mahāvākya-vicāra
going thought three stages. [Refer to 7 th chapter]. He has claimed mokṣa as my svarūpa
and svarūpa is defined as that which cannot be lost just as fire cannot lose the svarūpa of
heat. I cannot lose the svarūpa of mokṣa. It is not conditional mokṣa. Mokṣa is attained
through mere understanding itself other than understanding nothing else is required.
Understanding is not a mysterious event. It is a simple and normal process of claiming:
• I am the consciousness;
• consciousness is not a part, product, or property of the body;
• it is an independent entity which pervades and enlivens the body;
• it is not limited by the boundaries of the body;
• it continues to exist even after the fall of the body;
When I claim that, it is not a mystery, but it is a normal cognitive intellectual event. There
is no connection between Vedāntic knowledge and mysterious event. It is a matter of
knowing.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1494

śloka 9.98
तत्त्वविद्यदि न ध्यायेत्प्रवर्तेत तदा बहिः ।
प्रवर्ततां सुखेनायं को बाधोऽस्य प्रवर्तने ॥ ९.९८ ॥
tattvavidyadi na dhyāyetpravarteta tadā bahiḥ.
pravartatāṃ sukhenāyaṃ ko bādho:'sya pravartane (9.98).
Vidyāraṇya had said that for a jñānī no sādhana is required, because he has already
accomplished the goal. Even meditation is not required for a jñānī. But he loves
meditation. He may choose to meditate. For him meditation does not exist as a sādhana.
When a jñānī performs pañca mahā yajña as a gṛhastha it will not be named karma-yoga
and you have to give a different name as is said in Gītā. Karma-yoga is called so because it
functions as a sādhana for mokṣa. Jñānī needs no sādhana to gain mokṣa. Suppose a jñānī
chooses to meditate, for him, meditation will not be called a sādhana; it is again karma-
ābhāsa only. He does not require any spiritual sādhana.
Now, Pūrvapakṣī is disturbed. When one is addicted to sādhana, people are disturbed by
that also! Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī raises a question: if a jñānī does not need any spiritual
sādhana, and if he does not do any spiritual sādhana then he will be involved in worldly
vyavahāra; is it not dangerous? In the beginning we talked of withdrawal from all
activities and also suggested possession-, obligation-, and relationship- and transactions-
reduction. During the course of teaching, we have said worldly vyavahāras are dangerous
obstacles. If the jñānī engages himself in worldly vyavahāra is it not a threat to jñānī?
Suppose a jñānī does not meditate at all, the consequences will be dangerous. He may get
involved in external activities. He may get involved in āśramas, orphanages, schools and
colleges, etc. Is t not a threat to his knowledge and mokṣa? This is the statement from
Pūrvapakṣī.
Vidyāraṇya says: let jñānī get involved in all vyavahāra; let him increase all the
possession, obligation, relationship and transactions which he carefully reduced as a
sādhana. Now, there is no more value in possession, obligation, relationship and
transactions-reduction. He may increase possession, obligation, relationship and
transactions also. Let him do. Where is the harm? They are obstacles before gaining jñāna
and not after gaining jñāna. Jñāna is the greatest immunity and before that possession,
obligation, relationship and transactions were a problem. After jñāna neither laukika
vyavahāra nor possession, obligation, relationship and transactions pose any problem. Let

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1495

him get engaged in worldly activities. What is the harm in his worldly activities or karma-
kāṇḍa activities? Vyavahāra is an obstacle or not you don't answer and you ask a counter
question for whom, a sādhaka or jñānī? Don’t blindly hold on to the idea. Whether I am a
jñānī or a sādhaka, it is he who has to decide. If I feel I am still a sādhaka, follow
possession-, obligation-, relationship- and transactions-reduction, reduce vyavahāra,
practice śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. On the other hand, if mahāvākya has worked for
me, these rules are irrelevant. There is no method of another’s mental condition. I have to
assess and decide myself.

śloka 9.99
अतिप्रसङ्ग इति चेत्प्रसङ्गं तावदीरय ।
प्रसङ्गो विधिशास्त्रं चेन्न तत्तत्त्वविदं प्रति ॥ ९.९९ ॥
atiprasaṅga iti cetprasaṅgaṃ tāvadīraya.
prasaṅgo vidhiśāstraṃ cenna tattattvavidaṃ prati (9.99).
Vidyāraṇya enters another sensitive issue with regard to a jñānī’s way of life. Pūrvapakṣī
raises a question. If a jñānī does not require any sādhana he can get engaged in worldly
vyavahāra. Will there not be problem of violation of all the limits or restrictions? If jñānī is
free to do anything and if there is no sādhana, will there not be violation of limits or
exceeding the limits of transactions in worldly matters? There will be a chance for the
violation of limits. Violation will take place if jñānī is given full freedom. This is
Pūrvapakṣa.
Vidyāraṇya answers. If this is your question, tell me what you mean by the word limit?
Then we will discuss what the violation of the limit is. If I don’t mention the time the word
delay has no meaning. Pūrvapakṣī says that the Vedic rules form the proprieties. Vedas
have clearly mentioned vidhi and niṣedha and kārya and akarya. Śāstra is called the
propriety. If jñānī is given freedom, jñānī will violate the śāstric injunctions of do’s and
don’ts, he will lead a lifestyle not keeping with Vedic rules. Vidyāraṇya says the entire
Veda vidhi-niṣedha is not applicable to a jñānī. It is a bold and powerful statement. So
define what is propriety or limitation. This will raise several questions. Can a jñānī live
any life he likes which is termed as yatheṣṭācāra. Does it mean he can take law into his
own hands? It will be answered in the following ślokas.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1496

Class 275
śloka 9.99 contd.
In nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is there. In nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna
also ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is there. What is the difference between the two is being
discussed in all these ślokas. In the case of nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti
is a fact for a jñānī. Jñāna kāṇḍa of Veda is as much a valid pramāṇa as karma-kāṇḍa.
Based on the karma-kāṇḍa pramāṇa, he has accepted Īśvara as a fact. Based on that he ha s
lived his life and he had benefited even though Īśvara is not available around for
experience. Purely based on śāstra pramāṇa he had accepted Īśvara as a fact. That
acceptance has been blessing him all the time. If I can accept karma-kāṇḍa as a valid
source of knowledge, what bars him from accepting jñāna kāṇḍa also as a valid source of
knowledge? When I clearly see Vedānta mahāvākya revealing Brahman what stops me
from accepting it as a fact! Therefore, he does not have any hesitation whatsoever.
Upaniṣad reveals this fact without putting any condition. It says unconditionally whatever
be the state of your sūkṣma-, sthūla-, kāraṇa-śarīra, irrespective of the status of the śarīras,
you the Ātmā are eternally free. When the śāstra reveals the fact clearly what stops me
from accepting it as a fact! For him, rejecting mahāvākya is difficult. Therefore, he accepts
ahaṃ brahma asmi as a fact without any hesitation. If ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact my
jīvatva is displaced as my misconception. When jīvatva is displaced there is no question of
I being a sādhaka any more, looking forward to mokṣa as a future event. Brahmatva is a
fact; jīvatva is dismissed, sādhana is not required. He is not looking for something. It is
enjoying the claim that I am nitya-mukta. This is the uniqueness of jñāna-vṛtti.
When the upāsaka entertains ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti, because of some obstacle or the
other, we don’t know what obstacle it is— it may be dṛṣṭa pratibandha or adṛṣṭa
pratibandha— whatever be the obstacle, somehow he refuses to accept ahaṃ brahma asmi
as a fact for himself. Then, it is a proposal or an information suggested by Vedānta for
him. He is not willing to accept that. Since he does not accept it as a valid fact, brahmatva-
bhāvanā with regards to himself does not come; therefore, jīvatva-bhāvanā is not
displaced. Therefore, sādhakatva-bhāvanā is very much intact. Therefore, mokṣa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1497

continues to be a distant dream. He wants to practice one sādhana or the other to hasten
his journey. It is the journey towards mokṣa. For one, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti is never a
sādhana. For the other person, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti repetition is looked upon as a
sādhana. For him, all kinds of sādhanas become important; the upāsana also becomes very
important. He has to do it as often as possible. All these are important, whereas for a jñānī,
since he is no more a sādhaka, there is no sādhana relevant for him. For such a person
ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact, meditation is an option. If he loves he may do it and if he does
not want to do it, he may not do it. For a jñānī, meditation on ahaṃ brahma asmi is said to
be nididhyāsana that is reinforcing his belief in the notion that he is nitya-mukta Ātmā.
Possession, obligation, relationship and transaction is an obstacle to Ātma-vicāra.
Therefore, when a person is entering into śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana, we ask those
people to reduce the possession, obligation, relationship and transactions. When the vicāra
has generated jñāna for the generated jñāna or after the generation of jñāna, possession,
obligation, relationship and transaction is never an obstacle. That is why in Aṣṭāvakra Gītā
Janaka challenges the former and says how you can say I am a saṃśārī? He is a king and
he has so many activities but he says none can generate or cause saṃsāra for me.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says possession, obligation, relationship and transaction is no more
an obstacle, vyavahāra is no more an obstacle and it is an obstacle before vicāra but not an
obstacle after gaining jñāna. If this person does not do any sādhana, like Vedāntic
meditation, he may get involved in worldly activities. The possession, obligation,
relationship and transaction that had reduced before he may again increase. The reduced
possession, obligation, relationship and transaction may become an increased possession,
obligation, relationship and transaction. The possession, obligation, relationship and
transaction that had gone away may come back and he may get involved in laukika
vyavahāra. Is it not such a danger there? This is the argument from Pūrvapakṣī.
For that, Vidyāraṇya answers so what? All the yajñas dissolve then and there without
generating puṇya or pāpa or bondage. Let him continue in yajña also so what? Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says in the 98 th śloka, let that person remain in worldly activities; if he has that
svabhāva or vāsanā, let him do because jñānī’s lifestyle is not governed by rāga-dveṣa but
governed by prārabdha, svabhāva or vāsanā. One jñānī may have the svabhāva to be
active and another to be in a corner. He might be even not be noticed by the humanity but
it does not make any difference to him. Therefore, pravartatām. Thereafter, it cannot touch

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1498

him. He acts not for pūrṇatva but he acts with pūrṇatva which can be seen in the face
itself. When this was said, Pūrvapakṣī put another question. That question is: when jñānī
gets involved in the worldly activities, because of prārabdha, svabhāva or vāsanā, there
may be violation of propriety also. vāsanā and svabhāva may lead to unethical or
improper activities. Therefore, propriety violations may happen. This is the Pūrvapakṣī’s
argument. Vidyāraṇya asks the Pūrvapakṣī to define what is propriety? For that
Pūrvapakṣī gives the answer. Propriety means vidhi-śāstra, defined in the Vedas. It means
Vedic injunctions, the do’s and don’ts. Follow dharma and avoid adhārmic activities. This
we have seen in Taittirīya Upaniṣad śikṣāvallī. In short, karma-kāṇḍa which Kṛṣṇa
referred to in the 16th chapter. The do’s and don’ts were clearly differentiated in 16 th
chapter as do’s were called daivi sampat and don’ts were called āsurī sampat. Vedic rules
alone are meant by propriety and jñānī may violate those rules is the argument of
Pūrvapakṣī.
For the above argument Vidyāraṇya’s answer is this. With the regard to tattvavid for
whom ahaṃ brahma asmi is a fact, with regard to him, vidhi-śāstra is non-relevant. It is
so: the entire vidhi-śāstra prescribes sādhana either for citta-śuddhi or svarga-prāpti or
mokṣa-prāpti. It is for achievement of one of the four puruṣārthas. For the one who has
claimed nitya-mukta Ātmā, citta-śuddhi and all the four goals are not applicable to him.
Sādhana is relevant for a sādhaka; sādhana is not relevant for a Siddha Puruṣa.

śloka 9.100
वर्णाश्रमवयोवस्थाभिमानो यस्य विद्यते ।
तस्यैव हि निषेधाश्च विधयः सकला अपि ॥ ९.१०० ॥
varṇāśramavayovasthābhimāno yasya vidyate.
tasyaiva hi niṣedhāśca vidhayaḥ sakalā api (9.100).
He explains the previous statement in this śloka. For a tattvavid, vidhi-śāstra does not
exist or it is not relevant at all. It is incapable of commanding a jñānī. What are the reasons
for this? He says it is so because all the vidhi-niṣedhas, do’s and don’ts, prescribed in
Vedas are based on varṇa and āśramas. Except some sāmānya dharmas, except certain
general rules, which are relevant for entire humanity, most of the rules are based on varṇa
and āśrama and jñānī is one who has claimed aham varṇa-āśrama-abhimāna-atītaḥ or
varṇāśrama-rahitaḥ brahma asmi. There is no varṇa-abhimāna, no āśrama-abhimāna, no

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1499

manuṣyatva-abhimāna, nor even jīvatva-abhimāna; all these abhimānas have been

falsified for him. It seems there is a Vedic ritual, kṛṣṇakeśaḥ agnīm ādadhīta. This
particular ritual should be done by a person whose hair is still dark or black. It means this
ritual can be done only by young people. For jñānī, vidhi and niṣedha are not relevant. It
does not says jñānī need not follow the vidhi-niṣedha. From vyavahāra state, jñānī may
deliberately claim himself to be falling under one of the āśramas and may choose to
perform the ritual and even if he follows the vidhi-niṣedha it is not because it is
compulsory. Generally, jñānī chooses to follow vidhi-niṣedha not for his mokṣa as Kṛṣṇa
says in Gītā but for loka-saṅgraha as jñāni is a role-model for the society, including his
own children assuming that he is a gṛhastha. For the sake of indirectly guiding them, he
may do and even when he does, it is not for citta-śuddhi, not for śravaṇa or manana or not
even for mokṣa because inside in his mind he knows aham naiva kiñcit karomi; none of
them are sādhana for him, for he says I am nitya-mukta Ātmā. He lso considers that
everything he does is a līlā. He is not compelled to do anything but he may do anything
what he wants to do as a līlā. Jñānī’s vision is totally different which is given in the next
śloka.

śloka 9.101
वर्णाश्रमादयो देहे मायया परिकल्पिताः ।
नात्मनो बोधरूपस्येत्येवं तस्य विनिश्चयः ॥ ९.१०१ ॥
varṇāśramādayo dehe māyayā parikalpitāḥ.
nātmano bodharūpasyetyevaṃ tasya viniścayaḥ (9.101).
This is the mindset which is firmly entrenched in the jñānī. The entire dṛśya prapañca is
falsely projected by Māyā. First, I look upon dṛśya prapañca as Ātmā especially body-
mind-complex and family dṛśya prapañca; I took as myself, Ātmā-abhimāna was there.
Then, after Vedānta-vicāra, I saw the dṛśya prapañca as anātmā. Later, dṛśya prapañca is
not even anātmā because to accept anātmā is to accept a second thing other than Ātmā.
How can I afford to accept anātmā? Therefore, to negate the dṛśya prapañca as anātmā it is
neither Ātmā nor anātmā, neither sat or asat but it is mithyā as it is appearing without a
reality of its own. They are falsely projected by Māyā-śakti. That śakti belongs to Brahman
which Brahman is myself. Therefore, it is said mama Māyā. Even avoid Īśvara-Māyā in
which case you conclude that Īśvara is different from you. The entire creation including

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1500

physical body or sūkṣma-śarīra and sthūla-śarīra are the products of Māyā. First, the body
is falsely projected and upon that, varṇa-āśramas are also falsely projected. Just like a
rope-snake is not cobra but it is a viper, where is the need for an analysis as to the type of
the snake! When body itself is a rope-snake, where is the need to tell that person belongs
to varṇas, etc. Already body is mithyā and over and above how can we say varṇas are
satya! They are also mithyā and there is no need for any analysis. They are only
vyāvahārika drama. All are mithyā and how long you will spend the life worrying about
each of the issue. Why cannot you drop them? If all these are mithyā, the entire dṛśya
prapañca is mithyā but what is the adhiṣṭhāna? Dṛk is the adhiṣṭhāna. Where is the dṛk?
That dṛk the observer I myself am; dṛk is caitanya. The best meditation mantra I have seen
is from Kaivalya Upaniṣad: mayyeva sakalaṃ jātaṃ mayi sarvaṃ pratiṣṭhitam. It is the
binary-format. All the world and body-mind-complex are not there but all are mithyā;
where is the question of varṇa and āśrama! This is the definition of binary-format. How
can I talk about Brāhmaṇa and Kṣatriya karma, etc! They are all irrelevant. I may choose to
do when I take to Brāhmaṇa veṣa they are not binding upon me.

śloka 9.102
समाधिमथ कर्माणि मा करोतु करोतु वा ।
हृदयेनास्तसर्वास्थो मुक्त एवोत्तमाशयः ॥ ९.१०२ ॥
samādhimatha karmāṇi mā karotu karotu vā.
hṛdayenāstasarvāstho mukta evottamāśayaḥ (9.102).
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya concludes after jñāna-vṛtti as to no vidhi, no niṣedha. There is a
famous work called Śukāṣṭakam. It has a nididhyāsana śloka where it is made clear that
there is no vidhi or niṣedha so: nistraiguṇye pathivicarataḥ kovidhiḥ koniṣedhaḥ. It can
refer to Ātmā or mokṣa. Those people whose mindset dwells in this fact either at the
conscious level or at the sub-conscious level, for them what vidhi is binding, what niṣedha
is binding?! Let that jñānī choose to remain in samādhi if he wants to enjoy that is one
option given and it is not a compulsion. Veda is afraid of that jñānī because Veda is
vyāvahārika-satya and jñānī knows he is pāramārthika-satya. He is Brahman himself and
Veda is dependent on jñānī for its very existence. Until jñāna, Veda commanded this
person but after jñāna, Veda suddenly changes and it starts obeying the jñānī. Veda itself
which commanded with a stick until now asks why can’t you propagate the glory of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1501

Veda? Therefore, Veda gives jñānī full freedom and lets him remain in samādhi or let him
not sit one minute in meditation but let him be busy like a bee, running all over, doing any
work he likes, or let him not do either. All his cravings in life have ended. All yearnings
that come under either dharma, artha, kāma or mokṣa for him have been fulfilled. Or it
can be divided into two śreyas- or preyas-seeking; all of them have ended. He is the one
who has discovered pūrṇatva. He has neither rāga, nor dveṣa. All the struggles are driven
by rāga-dveṣa and both of them have gone. He is not attached to life or to death. Similarly,
he neither hates life nor hates death. The one who has come to Vedānta has no prayer
whatsoever. All prayers are there for ajñānī jīvas as jñānis have no attachment to death or
birth. It is all because of jñāna. From this alone, we get a corollary. Even though a jñānī is
given total freedom by the śāstra, or according to prārabdha, Veda does not have any
worry whether he would lead a licentious life and whether jñānī would abuse the freedom
or he would become a wrong example to the society. Veda is sure that jñānī will not
violate the ethical dhārmic path because of three reasons:
1. The first reason is based on this śloka all the violations are caused by rāga and
dveṣa. If you read on the newspaper, if there is corruption, it is because of rāga and
if politican is arrested because of murder, it is again because of dveṣa. Rāga-dveṣa
are responsible for violations. It means rāga-dveṣa have been falsified or
neutralized and therefore, jñānī will not be forced to indulge in any unethical
actions. First reason is that rāga-dveṣa are the cause; jñāna has handled the rāga-
dveṣa.
2. The second reason is that before gaining jñāna this person has followed dharma as a
part of karma-yoga and upāsana yoga. It is because jñānī pursues jñāna-yoga itself
only after going through karma-upāsana-yoga and therefore, he has followed an
ethical life; therefore, his vāsanās are all dharma-vāsanās. In the mind, there is only
dharma-vāsanā; therefore, even if he goes by vāsanā it will be dhārmic only. It is
like a person who has been up at four o’clock regularly. He has done for several
years because his office hours have been such. Then he retired. After retirement he
does not have to get up at 4 o’clock. He can do things slowly. But what happens is
even if he does not want to get up, even if he does not need to get up, he gets up at
the same time, the four o’clock alarm body has received and therefore, he gets up at

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1502

the usual time. Similarly, even if he is given freedom, because of dharma-vāsanā-

anuvṛtti, bādhita-anuvṛtti, jñānī will not violate dharma.
3. The last argument is that the greatest regulator of life is jñāna. Jñānī has internal
regulator and he does not need an external regulator in the form of parents, Guru,
God or even Vedas. Because of this reason, jñāna satvad, Veda says that he may do
anything as he likes. In fact, jñānī is incapable of violating dhārmic and ethical
codes and that is the reason why Veda gives him a blank cheque to do anything he
likes and it gives full freedom without giving him any rules and regulations.

Class 276
śloka 9.102 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of jñāna-upāsana-vṛtti-bheda, the difference between
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana-vṛtti and ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-vṛtti. He points out that
in the case of jñāna-vṛtti, the one who entertains this particular thought looks upon the
message of ahaṃ brahma asmi as a fact for himself, which means that he stops to look
upon himself as a sādhaka for mokṣa, but he looks upon himself as nitya-mukta Ātmā.
The more he practices the jñāna-mukti-abhyāsa he will get niṣṭhā in this; therefore, he
never looks upon himself as sādhaka and never looks upon mokṣa as sādhya. All
sādhanas become irrelevant to him. It is relevant for sādhakas for a particular sādhya.
When sādhaka and sādhya are not there, the linking sādhanas are non-relevant. Therefore,
the entire range of sādhanas prescribed both in the Veda pūrva bhāga and the Vedānta
bhāga become non-relevant to him. Therefore, śāstra also openly releases him from all the
rules and regulations. Naturally, the question comes if the vidhi-niṣedha śāstras are not
there to regulate the jñānī, if he is given a free hand and license, will he not violate all
dharma-adharma and create havoc in the society? For this, Vidyāraṇya gives the answer
that the śāstra does not want to regulate a jñānī because it is confident that jñānī has an
internal regulator or Self-regulation which is more powerful than external śāstric
regulation. The very sādhana he has practiced before has become a vāsanā in that person
and therefore, the vāsanā or habit will keep him in dharma pravṛtti and adharma nivṛtti.
The second reason is jñāna itself is the greatest regulator because jñāna brings about
compassion from a person towards the society. It is natural for everyone and which has

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1503

been blocked by ajñāna before gaining jñāna. It is the innate nature of everyone which has
been blocked by ignorance, rāga-dveṣa, etc. Jñāna removes those blocks and then
compassion is natural. It comes out in the form of loka-saṅgraha. Not that jñānī wants to
do this and it is not a will-based-effort but loka-saṅgraha is a natural consequence of
compassion, which itself is a natural consequence of jñāna. Jñāna to karuṇā or dayā, and
dayā to loka-saṅgraha flows like the sunlight coming from the sun. The best type of loka-
saṅgraha is following dharma and avoiding adharma. When that jñānī has dharma-
pravṛtti and adharma-nivṛtti, that is not deliberately practiced as a sādhana, but it is a
natural flow for a jñānī. Therefore, śāstra says he is not bound by rules because he need
not be regulated from outside. Śāstra gives him a blank cheque. Let him follow meditation
or let him remain in activity. It does not matter. He is a liberated person. He has no rāga-
dveṣa as all those have been thrown away by knowledge. He enjoys the greatest mind
which is in binary-format. He was, he is and he will ever be free.

śloka 9.103
नैष्कर्म्येण न तस्यार्थस्तस्यार्थोऽस्ति न कर्मभिः ।
न समाधानजप्याभ्यां यस्य निर्वासनं मनः ॥ ९.१०३ ॥
naiṣkarmyeṇa na tasyārthastasyārtho:'sti na karmabhiḥ.
na samādhānajapyābhyāṃ yasya nirvāsanaṃ manaḥ (9.103).
Vidyāraṇya, paraphrasing a well-known verse from Gītā 3rd chapter, says for the jñānī
who is in binary-format, no goal has to be achieved by withdrawal and for him even
possession, obligation, relationship and transactions-reduction does not exist as a sādhana.
That is considered as an important sādhana only for the sake of Vedānta-vicāra. That
sādhana is relevant only until one gains self-knowledge and since his knowledge is
internalized, jñānī can continue to be in a reduced possession, obligation, relationship and
transactions and even if he increases it, nothing will happen. Remember that possession,
obligation, relationship and transactions-reduction is only a temporary sādhana.
Thereafter, choice is given; you may live a simple life or you may live around a lot of
things around. Both do not make any difference just as Janaka’s reply to Aṣṭāvakra in
Aṣṭāvakra-Gītā. Nivṛtti is no more a sādhana for him. Withdrawal was a sādhana once
upon a time but it is not a sādhana after gaining jñāna. He does not have to practice
śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. Therefore, nivṛtti is not compulsory for him. There is no

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1504

goal to be accomplished. Even pravṛtti is not compulsory for him. Pañca-mahāyajña which
is compulsory and sādhana for him once upon time is no more sādhana for him now. He
has nothing or no benefit to be accomplished. According to svabhāva, he will act but he
has nothing to achieve either by doing some action or by not doing any action. He need
not do any meditation also. There are two types of nididhyāsanas, one is called samādhi-
abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana and another is brahma-abhyāsa-rūpa nididhyāsana [refer to
1st chapter and also 7th chapter]; both types of nididhyāsanas are relevant until the binary-
format is internalised. After internalising the binary-format, both the types of
nididhyāsanas are non-relevant.
Therefore, samādhāna, oṃkāra-japa, Saguṇa-Īśvara-japa, all have become totally non-
relevant to him. He is not going to derive any benefit out of them. Here, you should note
that śāstra says he need not do but śāstra never says he should not do. According to his
svabhāva, he may practice dhyāna, japa, karma or repeated śravaṇa, but the difference is
that even if he continues that, he does not look upon it as a sādhana. That is the main
difference. He may do mahāvākya-japa regularly, but he does not look upon the japa as
the sādhana. He is devoid of the triangular-format that I am the victimized, Bhagavān is
the saviour and the world victimizes me. Jñānī is devoid of the above notion. I am Jīva, the
younger brother, the world is the elder brother constantly creating problems and
Bhagavān is the mother constantly running around. The second mindset is I am a sādhaka,
all actions I do are sādhana and mokṣa is my sādhya; it is the second mindset of
triangular-format and both of them must go away from me. That is called viparīta-
bhāvanā. This is called vāsanā here, that is gone and I look upon myself that I can never
be persecuted by anyone, I don’t require a saviour, I am never a sādhaka and I don’t
require a sādhana. This is the mindset which is called nirvāsanām manaḥ. It is otherwise
called as binary-format mindset. For him, all the sādhanas are irrelevant.

śloka 9.104
आत्मासङ्गस्ततोऽन्यत्स्यादिन्द्रजालं हि मायिकम्।
इत्यचञ्चलनिर्णिते कुतो मनसि वासना ॥ ९.१०४ ॥
ātmāsaṅgastato:'nyatsyādindrajālaṃ hi māyikam.
ityacañcalanirṇite kuto manasi vāsanā (9.104).

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1505

Vidyāraṇya says I, the caitanya, the śākṣī, is asaṅga without any relationship with any
second thing because there is no second thing other than Ātmā; so it is said ekam eva
advitīyam. That Ātmā is myself. The second line is more important. I the Ātmā am asaṅga.
There is no second thing other than Ātmā. If it be said that dṛśya-prapañca is a second
thing, Vidyāraṇya says the entire dṛśya prapañca experienced by I the Ātmā, including the
world, family, body and the mind are the products of Māyā. It is like a magic show. It has
an appearing existence and in short, it is mithyā. It is mithyā meant for my entertainment.
I am the producer, spectator and supporter of the dṛśya prapañca drama. This dṛśya
prapañca comes under Ātma-anātmā-vilakṣaṇa category. It does not come either under
Ātmā- or anātmā-category but it comes under mithyā category. This alone I call as binary-
format.
Ātmāsaṅgaḥ tataḥ anyat syād indrajālaṃ hi māyikam. Remember this powerful line.
When this essential teaching is clearly ascertained or internalized firmly without any
wavering, one becomes a jñānī or owns up his real svabhāva. When the prārabdha brings
in fluctuation, the binary-format should be tested. How can the triangular-format vāsanā
remain in the mind? The greater I practice the binary-format, more distanced will be the
triangular-format. In fact, I will become more uncomfortable with triangular-format and
will become naturally comfortable with binary-format. In triangular-format
pratassmarāmi Parameśvara-pada-padmam and I start with Īśvara-smaraṇa. I start the
day with Ātmā-smaraṇa is the binary-format of a Jñāna-yogī and they are basically
different. When this becomes entrenched how can the other remain?!

śloka 9.105
एवं नास्ति प्रसङ्गोऽपि कुतोऽस्यातिप्रसञ्जनम्।
प्रसङ्गो यस्य तस्यैव शङ्क्येतातिप्रसञ्जनम्॥ ९.१०५ ॥
evaṃ nāsti prasaṅgo:'pi kuto:'syātiprasañjanam.
prasaṅgo yasya tasyaiva śaṅkyetātiprasañjanam (9.105).
Here, Vidyāraṇya formally concludes his answer to the question from Pūrvapakṣī in the
śloka 98. The question was that if a jñānī does not practice meditation because he does not
require nididhyāsana, then will he not lead a life in which he will be violating the
propriety of the śāstras? Then, he himself defined the propriety as vidhi-śāstra. Will he not
violate the vidhi-śāstra rules if he does not sit and meditate was the question. For that,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1506

Vidyāraṇya gave a mind-boggling answer. For jñānī, there is no question of his violating
the śāstric rules since they are not applicable to him. Only when they are applicable, there
is a chance of violation. When it is not applicable, where is the question of violation? That
topic, he concludes here in this śloka. Ambulance violating the traffic-signal does not exist
because it is exempted from the traffic-rules. They can keep moving. So also, vidhi-niṣedha
rules do not apply to jñānī; then, where is the question of violation! Where there is a rule,
there alone there is a question of violation. In the case of a jñānī, there is neither any rule
nor there is any scope for violation.

śloka 9.106
विध्यभावान्न बालस्य दृश्यतेऽतिप्रसञ्जनम्।
स्यात्कुतोऽतिप्रसङ्गोऽस्य विध्यभावे समे सति ॥ ९.१०६ ॥
vidhyabhāvānna bālasya dṛśyate:'tiprasañjanam.
syātkuto:'tiprasaṅgo:'sya vidhyabhāve same sati (9.106).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives a popular example. When a country has a particular constitution
with several do’s and don’ts many of them are applicable to those who have crossed
minority age. Even the possession, obligation, relationship and transactions will apply
only to the majors not minors. For the rules are not applicable to the minors. For one who
has not grown up sufficiently to discriminate and act, vidhi-abhāvād, many rules and
regulations are not applicable. Therefore, in the case of such minors, atiprasañjanam na
dṛśyate, we don’t find the case of violations. Even many religious practices are not
applicable; even when the young child dies, the rules with regard to the cremation, etc,
will be absent when the death happens within a particular age. They have got only one
general Nārāyaṇa-bali. After that, d13 days rituals are absent. You want to blindly apply
vidhi-śāstras. Karma-kāṇḍa rules are also like that; so also the constitution of the country.
So also jñānī comes under exemption category. May you become a baby without judgment
without, rāga-dveṣa, without crookedness. The child does not know double personality
and all that. Become a baby in terms of the mind, rāga-dveṣa-abhāva, crookedness-abhāva,
judgment-abhāva, revenge-abhāva; in all these respects, may you be like a bāla, like in
Kahola Brāhmaṇa of the 3rd chapter of Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1507

śloka 9.107
न किंचिद्वेत्ति बालश्चेत्सर्वं वेत्त्येव तत्त्ववित्।
अल्पज्ञस्यैव विधयः सर्वे स्युर्नान्ययोर्द्वयोः ॥ ९.१०७ ॥
na kiṃcidvetti bālaścetsarvaṃ vettyeva tattvavit.
alpajñasyaiva vidhayaḥ sarve syurnānyayordvayoḥ (9.107).
In any example, there is always the problem of extending the example wrongly. Adi
Śaṅkarācārya has discussed this topic in several places. Between the original and example,
there will be several common features and also there will be several uncommon features.
Between dṛṣṭānta and dārṣṭānta there are so many common features and so many
uncommon features. Common features are called sādharmya and uncommon features are
called vaidharmya. An intelligent student must be aware of both of them; having noted
both of them, an intelligent student should deliberately negate the uncommon features
and deliberately adopt the common features. When jñānī is compared to the baby, the
former will not suck the thumb! It is very important because they commit the blunder with
regard to every example given by the Advaitins. We have got many examples like rajju-
sarpa, svapna, etc. They take it very religiously but they deliberately go to uncommon
features, reject the common features and find fault with every example we give and finally
they say, therefore, Advaita is wrong! What an unfortunate thing for this often happens to
the students. Normally, the intellect goes to the uncommon features. They say baby is
ignoramus and it does not know anything. You compare the jñānī to a baby, whereas the
baby is mahā ajñānī and do you mean to say this person is mahā ajñānī? Vidyāraṇya says
don’t take the uncommon features for comparison. A baby does not do anything and
know anything. Vidyāraṇya says that they are the uncommon features which I don’t
mean. Whereas here, jñānī is tattvavit, knower of everything. It means you should not ask:
does he know cooking? Don’t ask such a question. Everything means he knows sarvam is
a mixture of Ātmā and anātmā. That is called sarvajñatva. More in the next class.

Class 277
śloka 9.107 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of jñāna-upāsana-bheda. It means the difference between
nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-vṛtti. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
as also nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti has ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. Because of some obstacle

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1508

or the other, he is not able to accept ahaṃ brahma asmi as a fact therefore, he was not able
to convert from triangular-format to binary-format. Therefore, in his case nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana serves as a form of karma-yoga capable of giving citta-śuddhi. In the case of a
jñānī, he has nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti and in his case he is able to take ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-vṛtti as a fact; therefore, he is able to change the format from triangular-format to
binary-format. Therefore, he has attained all the puruṣārthas and therefore, thereafter, he
has no sādhana to be done. For him, even meditation is an optional exercise. He may do or
he may not do also; not only meditation, but also vidhis and niṣedhas, rules and
regulations do not apply to him. Since all the vidhis and niṣedhas are not applicable to
him there is no question of violation as violations are possible only in that case where the
rule is applicable in the first place. The rules and regulations, agnihotra, etc., rituals are
applicable to only gṛhasthas. or brahmacārī there is no violation as that rule is not
applicable to him. In his ccase, sandhyāvandana-rule is there. In the case of a jñānī, no
vidhi or niṣedha are applicable. Does it mean that jñānī can lead any way of life he likes
and take to licentious life? Jñānī cannot do that for jñāna is a bigger regulation than the
śāstra vidhi-niṣedha. The Self-discipline is a more powerful force that restrains him from
doing any wrong actions. In the case of a child or baby, there is no question of violations of
any rules as for the babies, rules are not applicable. Where there is no applicability, there is
no question of violations of any rules. So too for jñānī there is no violations of rules
applicable. Jñānī is similar to the babies. No dharma law is applicable to both. Jñānī by his
mere jñāna avoids āgāmi puṇya and āgāmi pāpa also. He burns puṇya-pāpa, for him
vidhi-niṣedha don’t exist.
The moment we give an example, there is always a problem of extending the example
more than what is required. The example cannot be a hundred percent identical; if it is so,
the example will become original! Still the example is given because of partial similarity. It
is a condition for giving an example. The very fact that there is a partial similarity, the
extension will lead to partial dissimilarity also. Thus, every example will have partial
similarity and partial dissimilarity. The job of the listener is not to focus on dissimilarity
but focus on the similarity. A baby or a child does not know anything and is unintelligent
and often childish. You compare a baby to a jñānī. None can ask if jñānī is Sarvajña means
he knows to cook? It means he knows Brahman and therefore, he is different from all the
people. Vidhi-niṣedhas are applicable to the intermediary category or those with partial

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1509

knowledge. One is a baby who does not know anything whereas jñānī knows everything.
The intermediary people alone need knowledge. He does not come either under baby
group or under jñānī group. He is called ajña.

śloka 9.108
शापानुग्रहसामर्थ्यं यस्यासौ तत्त्वविद्यदि ।
न तत्शापादिसामर्थ्यं फलं स्यात्तपसो यतः ॥ ९.१०८ ॥
śāpānugrahasāmarthyaṃ yasyāsau tattvavidyadi.
na tat śāpādisāmarthyaṃ phalaṃ syāttapaso yataḥ (9.108).
From the way you describe a jñānī, he does not seem to have any great glory at all! He has
simple knowledge. Many people have studied many things and have knowledge and
much discipline. So called jñānis seems to have knowledge of Vedānta. From your
description, it seems that jñāni has only knowledge and he does not seem to be practicing
long hours for meditation as it is not applicable to him. He does not follow śāstra vidhi-
niṣedha. That way also, he is not great. Therefore, that greatness also he does not have.
Can the mere knowledge make him great? Therefore, to enjoy greatness, jñānī must have
some other thing. So the Pūrvapakṣī wants to add a qualification to a jñānī, that is he must
have some supernatural power. He should have the capacity to give śāpa or anugraha-
sāmarthya. If this is the argument of Pūrvapakṣī, Vidyāraṇya boldly says no, jñānī cannot
have even an iota of supernatural power. He is as ordinary as any other ajñānī from the
standpoint of worldly vyavahāra. All supernatural powers are gained by special tapas
meant to gain such powers. It has nothing to do with self-knowledge. It is exactly like the
Rākṣasās doing tapas to get extraordinary powers, it is the result of special austerities
done to acquire those powers.

śloka 9.109
व्यासादेरपि सामर्थ्यं दृश्यते तपसो बलात्।
शापादिकारणादन्यत्तपोज्ञानस्य कारणम्॥। १०९ ॥
vyāsāderapi sāmarthyaṃ dṛśyate tapaso balāt.
śāpādikāraṇādanyattapojñānasya kāraṇam.(109).
Now, the question raised is: how do you account for the jñānis who had extraordinary
powers in the Purāṇas like Vyāsācārya? When we read the biography of Adi Śaṅkarācārya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1510

himself, he had extraordinary powers. Then, how do you say that jñāna and power have
no connection? For that question, Vidyāraṇya gives the answer. Vyāsācārya’s
extraordinary powers are not because of his jñāna. It is because of severe austerities that he
had performed and they are responsible for his siddhis. Thus, tapas alone is kāraṇa for his
powers and not jñāna. Then, another question is raised by the Pūrvapakṣī. The question
itself is not given but the answer is given. You say jñānis need not have powers and only
those jñānis who had performed severe austerities will have the power. Pūrvapakṣī says
all jñānis should perform tapas to become jñānis. Therefore, they should have siddhis also.
For this, he has Śruti pramāṇa from Taittirīya Upaniṣad. [Bhṛgu-vallī]. For that,
Vidyāraṇya gives his answer: no. There are two types of tapas. One leads to powers and
the other to self-knowledge or assisting self-knowledge. Tapas meant for self-knowledge is
different from tapas meant for powers. This is not Vidyāraṇya’s invention. Adi
Śaṅkarācārya tells this in his Bhṛguvallī’s bhāṣya. Tapas does not mean severe austerities
or physical discomfort. Tapas in Vedāntic context mean sensory discipline and mental
focus which is required for śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana. During śravaṇa and manana,
non-preoccupation of the mind is required and acquiring that alone is called tapas. Kṛṣṇa
criticises tapas which involves severe physical discomforts and physical pains in Gītā 17 th
chapter. They come under āsurī tapas. Therefore, jñānī does not require severe austerity
type of tapas which is connected with siddhi. Therefore, a jñānī without power can
happily exist.

śloka 9.110
द्वयं यस्यास्ति तस्यैव सामर्थ्यज्ञानयोर्जनिः ।
एकैकं तु तपः कुर्वन्नेकै कं लभते फलम्॥ ९.११० ॥
dvayaṃ yasyāsti tasyaiva sāmarthyajñānayorjaniḥ.
ekaikaṃ tu tapaḥ kurvannekaikaṃ labhate phalam (9.110).
In the case of those people who have got both jñāna and tapas in the form of severe
austerities will have possession of the origination of both jñāna and sāmarthya. They will
have wisdom as well as siddhis. A person who practices only one of the two, spiritual
tapas or the materialistic tapas, as a result of that particular tapas, he will get only the
relevant result. For austere tapas, power will be the result and for sensory control tapas, he
will get jñāna. Only those who practice both types of tapas will get jñāna and power. A

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1511

spiritual seeker may learn all siddhis only to avoid them for they are materialistic in
nature. More in the next class.

Class 278
śloka 9.110 contd.
The difference between nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-vṛtti and nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti is
being discussed in these ślokas. In view of the various obstacles, one refuses to claim I am
nitya-mukta. In the case of one who has jñāna-vṛtti, he also claims ahaṃ brahma asmi. For
him that is a fact; so he looks upon himself as nitya-mukta. Therefore, the latter person
does not require anymore sādhana after understanding ahaṃ brahma asmi. He does not
require any more sādhana to retain mokṣa also because what is my nature I need not
attain as what is natural cannot be lost by me. If mokṣa is lose-able, I have to find out
methods of somehow holding on to that. Having understood ahaṃ brahma asmi I am so
relaxed that I don’t have fear of losing mokṣa. In fact, I can even challenge God: O God!
Take my mokṣa away from me. You cannot do that because you have taught me through
Vedānta that mokṣa is my nature. Therefore, for the second person to whom ahaṃ brahma
asmi is jñāna-vṛtti no sādhana is required to preserve mokṣa and he is beyond all vidhi-
niṣedha śāstra.
Vidyāraṇya takes a small diversion from śloka 109 to 113. Even if the four ślokas are taken
away from the chapter, the flow will continue. This diversion is useful information. It
removes a misconception from the people. Many people think that jñānis should have
extraordinary powers differentiating from the local ordinary people. Vidyāraṇya says
jñānis do not and need not have any extraordinary powers at all. Powers are related to
special tapas which is different from spiritual tapas. Materialistic tapas involves severe
austerities involving endurance of physical discomfort. Severe type of saguṇa-upāsanas is
required. Vedānta does not require any extraordinary powers. It needs spiritual tapas in
the form of sensory restraints as well as mental focus to practice śravaṇa-manana-
nididhyāsana without distraction or preoccupation. If a person has practiced both type of
tapas, initially before coming to Vedānta, before getting vairāgya, one might have done
materialistic tapas and got those powers and afterwards might have known their
limitations and come to spiritual tapas. The people who have got both of them are called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1512

jñānis with extraordinary powers. Suppose there are people who have practiced any one
of the two powers, he would gain only the relevant power. People with sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti will get jñāna and mokṣa. Such jñānis who looks very ordinary, don’t
do any extraordinary powers, don’t do any long meditations, they don’t forget the
teaching and in short, maintain binary-format. They don’t require vidhi and niṣedha.

śloka 9.111
सामर्थ्यहीनो निन्द्यश्चेद्यतिभिर्विधिवर्जितः ।
निन्द्यन्ते यतयोऽप्यन्यैरनिशं भोगलम्पटैः ॥ ९.१११ ॥
sāmarthyahīno nindyaścedyatibhirvidhivarjitaḥ.
nindyante yatayo:'pyanyairaniśaṃ bhogalampaṭaiḥ (9.111).
Here, the Pūrvapakṣī who is the proponent of extraordinary powers and who is the
proponent of severe austerities raises an objection. In fact, public also glorify only those
jñānis with extraordinary powers. Even if he does not have jñāna, there is someone who
does not practice anyone of those powers, people will not have respect; therefore,
Pūrvapakṣī says the ordinary jñānī without any extraordinary powers and extraordinary
austerities, who does not follow long meditation, and who is beyond vidhi and niṣedha,
such a sāmarthya-hīna and who does not follow ācāra-anuṣṭhāna, such jñānis will not
command any respect from other people. Austere people will also look down upon the
jñānis says Pūrvapakṣī. This jñānī will be criticized or looked down upon by the people.
For this, Vidyāraṇya says if that is the truth, the austere people also will be looked down
by some others. Anybody will be criticized by somebody; why do you argue in that
language? Austere people will be looked down by the people who are attached to sensory
pleasures. The ordinary jñānī does not bother about the austere people looking down
upon him. At least on Guru-pūrṇimā day he will get all kinds of thing if he is manifestly
expressly following all the rigid austerities, etc. The people who have vidhi-niṣedha
austerities, powers etc., will be able to secure bhikṣā and vastras for the whole year from
his followers. Tapas and austerities are not connected with saṃnyāsa and mokṣa.

śloka 9.112 to 114

भिक्षावस्त्रादि रक्षेयुर्यद्येते भोगतुष्टये ।
अहो यतित्वमेतेषां वैराग्यभरमन्थरम्॥ ९.११२ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1513

bhikṣāvastrādi rakṣeyuryadyete bhogatuṣṭaye.

aho yatitvameteṣāṃ vairāgyabharamantharam (9.112).
वर्णाश्रमपरान्मूर्खा निन्दन्त्वित्युच्यते यदि ।
देहात्ममतयो बुद्धं निन्दन्त्वाश्रममानिनः ॥ ९.११३ ॥
varṇāśramaparānmūrkhā nindantvityucyate yadi.
dehātmamatayo buddhaṃ nindantvāśramamāninaḥ (9.113).
तदित्थं तत्त्वविज्ञाने साधनानुपमर्दनात्।
ज्ञानिनाचरितुं शक्यं सम्यग्राज्यादि लौकिकम्॥ ९.११४ ॥
taditthaṃ tattvavijñāne sādhanānupamardanāt.
jñāninācarituṃ śakyaṃ samyagrājyādi laukikam (9.114).
These ślokas should be connected to the previous śloka. Vidyāraṇya said all the
materialistic sensuous people interested in sensory pleasure will be looked down upon by
the austere people. Austere people will be criticized by worldly people it was said. For
that austere people may give an answer. Their answer is let all the worldly people criticize
the austere saṃnyāsis. Such people may be connected to varṇa and āśramas, etc. Then, the
austere people would say: we don’t care. If the austere people don’t care about the
criticism of the worldly people, then Vidyāraṇya argues the ordinary jñānī will not bother
about the criticism coming from the so-called austere people who complain that ordinary
jñānis do not have severe austerities. Let the austere people be given all the severe rigid
practices of varṇa and āśrama. Let them criticize the ordinary jñānis who have
transcended all the tapas and disciplines. The aim of Vedānta is to transcend varṇa and
āśrama. But you claim to be in sannyāsa āśrama, which defeats the very purpose says the
Pūrvapakṣī. Jñānī does not have any abhimāna towards varṇa, āśrama or ācāra-dharma.
Not following the vidhi-niṣedha and āśrama disciplines, etc., do not make him anyway
smaller. Holding on to anātma-abhimāna the Pūrvapakṣī brings up criticism of the real
jñānis who have given up the abhimāna and therefore, they don’t care about the criticism
by the ordinary people. With this diversion topic is over.

śloka 9.115
मिथ्यात्वबुद्ध्या तत्रेच्छा नास्ति चेत्तर्हि मास्तु तत्।
ध्यायन्वाथ व्यवहरन्यथारब्धं वसत्वयम्॥ ९.११५ ॥
mithyātvabuddhyā tatrecchā nāsti cettarhi māstu tat.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1514

dhyāyanvātha vyavaharanyathārabdhaṃ vasatvayam (9.115).

After clearly understanding the meaning of the mahāvākya and after clearly claiming that
the mokṣa is my real nature, jñānī does not need any sādhana for mokṣa. He has dismissed
even sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti as a condition for mokṣa as that being my very svarūpa.
Initially, no doubt we prescribe sādhana-catuṣṭaya sampatti as a condition for mokṣa but
after grasping the message of mahāvākya, in nididhyāsana, one dismisses even sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti as a condition for mokṣa. Therefore, he does not require any sādhana
for acquiring or preserving mokṣa. Therefore, śāstra gives him a total option with regard
to the way of life he would like to lead. However, he does not have any compulsion. He
may be involved in any vyavahāra including meditation or he may choose to live an active
or passive life. During śravaṇa and manana, we insist possession-, obligation-,
relationship- and transactions-reduction but after gaining jñāna even that condition is not
there. Thus jñānī is given full freedom to do anything he likes; rather he can do things
better as he does not have any anxiety, fear or anything like that , nor does he expect any
benefit out of any such activity. He can be involved in worldly activity, as also in any
spiritual activity. He is like a king ruling a kingdom. Fear is something that arises only
when you have something lose-able. Cares, love, gratitude from others are lose-able.
Name is lose-able. As long as I hold on to things lose-able there will be fear and jñānī is
one who holds on to one thing that is not lose-able which is called Ātmā. Therefore, he has
no fear and he is ready for losing everything. All accessories of vyavahāra will continue to
be available for a jñānī for loka-saṅgraha. The accessories in this context are body, mind,
sense-organs, and devotees; therefore, jñānī may take up any activities in the world. Jñāna
has destroyed only one thing, that is the reality I falsely attributed to the body, mind,
family, profession, and the world. Gold will continue but the reality I superimposed on the
gold will go away. Since the mithyā accessories are still available why cannot a jñānī do
mithyā-vyavahāra with mithyā accessories! Even though all are mithyā from jñānī’s angle,
from the worldly standpoint they are useful to him. Therefore, let him work or let him
rest. Jñānī can look at the world in general from two different angle. One is from his own
angle. From his angle the entire world is mithyā. He can also look at the world from the
standpoint of the people, in which case the whole world is satya or real. The worldly
people look at the world from one angle that is as satya and they don’t look at the world
from the jñānī’s angle.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1515

Some jñānis who look at the world from his own angle and since he look at everything as
drama or mithyā they don’t feel like involving in worldly vyavahāras. That is the reason
why they remain withdrawn from the world. They have no inclination towards anything
in the world. There are some other jñānīs who look at the world from the worldly people
and therefore, they work for their benefit which is called loka-saṅgraha. It is his svabhāva.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya concludes let the jñānī behave in any manner they like. What is
common to all of them is that they have assimilated the essence of Vedānta. Here,
Vidyāraṇya talks about the passive jñānis who remain isolated and don’t take any part in
the worldly vyavahāras. They have no desire to enter into the worldly vyavahāras like
running an āśrama, teaching śāstras or writing any book for they consider everything as
mithyā. We should not judge whether active jñānis are superior or passive jñānis are
superior. All gradations are made by the ignorance of the worldly people. Really speaking,
there is no gradations whatsoever between jñānis.

Class 279
śloka 9.115 contd.
The topic that is being discussed is the difference between ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana-
vṛtti and ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-vṛtti. Upāsaka understands the meaning of ahaṃ
brahma asmi but continues to look upon himself as a saṃśārī or a sādhaka. While the
other person, that is the jñānī, looks upon himself as asaṃśarī on gaining ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-jñāna. Sādhana itself is a viparīta-bhāvanā and the notion of removal of viparīta-
bhāvanā itself is a sādhana in itself and that removal is called nididhyāsana. Once the
viparīta-bhāvanā goes even nididhyāsana is not required. For such people, nididhyāsana
or meditation is not a compulsion. Vidyāraṇya points out that jñāna will not destroy any
worldly vyavahāra. Worldly transactions are required only when we look at the whole
thing as plurality. The worldly things are called kārakas or accessories for transactions
with the world. Whether jñānī or ajñānī, accessories are available to both and transactions
are possible. If jñānī knows everything is mithyā why should he do any vyavahāra for all
vyavahāras are meant for dharma, artha, kāma and mokṣa. Jñānī does not expect any one
of the four puruṣārthas; why should a jñānī do vyavahāras? For that, Vidyāraṇya gives the
answer whether jñānī does vyavahāra or not, it is not will-based. It is based on his vāsanā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1516

or svabhāva. Even a jñānī leads a life according to svabhāva when he has rajaḥ-pradhāna
mind, he will enter into vyavahāra; you cannot stop him to be passive. When he does
vyavahāra it will not be for dharma, artha, kāma or mokṣa but it will be for loka-saṅgraha
even though he knows it is mithyā. Another jñānī does not feel like doing any work or
loka-saṅgraha, loka being mithyā, just like after waking up from svapna prapañca, waker
is not going to worry about the famine in svapna prapañca. One will see it as mithyā. He
will not attempt to straighten the world. If another jñānī chooses to act, it is prārabdha;
nothing wrong. Suppose a jñānī is not interested in loka-saṅgraha, if jñānī does not want
to do anything, let him not do anything. You cannot say active jñānī has superior mokṣa
and passive jñānī has inferior mokṣa. Even Bhagavān does not question him; who are you
to question the jñānī?! Both of them are governed by the prārabdha-svabhāva.

śloka 9.116
उपासकस्तु सततं ध्यायन्नेव वसेदिति ।
ध्यानेनैव कृ तं तस्य ब्रह्मत्वं विष्णुतादिवत्॥ ९.११६ ॥
upāsakastu satataṃ dhyāyanneva vasediti.
dhyānenaiva kṛtaṃ tasya brahmatvaṃ viṣṇutādivat (9.116).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says the case of upāsaka is totally different even though both jñānī and
upāsaka look similar as both entertain ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti. Still there is a very big
difference. In the case of upāsaka, I am Brahman is not a fact but it is an imagination
maintained by meditation. This imagination gives him a nice feeling. I am saṃśārī but
enjoy artificial brahmatva. After sometimes brahmatva goes and the fellow comes back to
saṃśarītva. The turmeric powder gets artificial Vināyaka-status during pūjā. So also I
temporarily get a Brahman-status during the class and after classes brahmatva-status goes,
comfort gives way to discomfort. If brahmatva is in the form of knowledge that I am
Brahman, natural brahmatva cannot be lost because classes are not there. This miserable
upāsaka has to all the time meditate to keep himself with brahma-vṛtti. It will not solve the
basic problem of saṃsāra. Even Vedānta should not artificially create mokṣa but it should
help me claim mokṣa which is my real svarūpa. Even Bhagavān cannot take mokṣa from
me. This knowledge the upāsaka lacks. For upāsaka the moment meditation goes the
brahmatva also goes.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1517

śloka 9.117
ध्यानोपादानकं यत्तद्ध्यानाभावे विलीयते ।
वास्तवी ब्रह्मता नैव ज्ञानाभावे विलीयते ॥ ९.११७ ॥
dhyānopādānakaṃ yattaddhyānābhāve vilīyate.
vāstavī brahmatā naiva jñānābhāve vilīyate (9.117).
For upāsaka, brahmatva and mokṣa is the product of meditation. Vṛtti and āvṛtti is called
meditation. Vṛtti and āvṛtti is kāraṇa and brahmatva becomes a kārya. Upāsaka has made
brahmatva to have a kārya-status. For upāsaka, dhyāna is upādāna-kāraṇa and Brahman-
status is kārya. The definition of nimitta-kāraṇa is that it relates to the creation of the
product and upādāna-kāraṇa is required for its survival and laya. A kārya has to resolve
into upādāna-kāraṇa. If brahmatva to be maintained he needs dhyāna. Continuous
meditation is needed for continuance of brahmatva. He is dependent on vṛtti-continuation.
That is true for upāsaka because for him brahmatva is artificially created through
meditation. If your brahmatva does not depend upon anything but you develop the notion
that you are Brahman, then that factual Brahman-status gives the real mokṣa which is your
svabhāva. It is nicely said in Saddarśana. Once I clearly understandd that I am Brahman,
there is no need to entertain the thought that I am Brahman. Jñānī does not do dharma out
fear of losing mokṣa for mokṣa is his real svarūpa.

śloka 9.118
ततोऽभिज्ञापकं ज्ञानं न नित्यं जनयत्यदः ।
ज्ञापकाभावमात्रेण न हि सत्यं विलीयते ॥ ९.११८ ॥
tato:'bhijñāpakaṃ jñānaṃ na nityaṃ janayatyadaḥ.
jñāpakābhāvamātreṇa na hi satyaṃ vilīyate (9.118).
For the upāsaka, brahmatva-status has an origin and the date of expiry also. For
Brahmatva has generation and expiry, therefore, he would be strict about the meditation.
He should do meditation out of fear that if meditation is stopped, the mokṣa or Brahman-
status will vanish. In the case of understanding, the brahmatva does not have a
manufacturing date and therefore, it does not have any expiry date. I need not continue
meditation out of fear of becoming saṃśārī once again. For a jñānī ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
vṛtti is not a generator of brahmatva. It is only the removal of the ignorance of the fact that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1518

brahmatva is my eternal nature. Here, the concealment is removed. Once the ignorance is
gone, it is gone for good and it will not come back again.

śloka 9.119
अस्त्येव उपासकस्यापि वास्तवी ब्रह्मतेति चेत्।
पामराणां तिरश्चां च वास्तवी ब्रह्मता न किम्॥ ९.११९ ॥
aḥastyeva upāsakasyāpi vāstavī brahmateti cet.
pāmarāṇāṃ tiraścāṃ ca vāstavī brahmatā na kim (9.119).
Pūrvapakṣī asks how it can be said jñānī’s brahmatva is natural. According to śāstra
brahmatva is natural for everyone because all the jīvas are none other than Brahman only.
Brahmatva is natural for everyone including the upāsaka. Then, why do you say jñānī’s
brahmatva is natural? Here, upāsaka refuses to claim that I am a mukta. In fact, he contests
with Guru that he is not Brahman and refuses to agree with Guru’s teaching that you are
Brahman. Since natural liberation he refuses to claim, he is forced to take artificial
meditation to accept that he is Brahman. He refuses that he has no sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti. It is a śāstric argument. Thus, Guru himself finds himself helpless to prove that
śiṣya is Brahman. Here, Vidyāraṇya asks a counter question. Why do you say upāsaka’s
brahmatva is natural? Even animals and ajñānī’s brahmatva is natural. Even the illiterate
people that illiterate to śāstra are really and naturally Brahman. It is not naturalness of
Brahman that is the question but it is whether one claims himself to be Brahman or not.
That is the question.

śloka 9.120
अज्ञानादपुमर्थत्वमुभयत्रापि तत्समम्।
उपवासाद्यथा भिक्षा वरं ध्यानं तथान्यथः ॥ ९.१२० ॥
ajñānādapumarthatvamubhayatrāpi tatsamam.
upavāsādyathā bhikṣā varaṃ dhyānaṃ tathānyathaḥ (9.120).
In the previous śloka, Pūrvapakṣī asked that Brahmatva is natural to upāsaka. Vidyāraṇya
says it is natural to everyone, why so, even the animals. However, illiterate people are not
aware that they are Brahman. It is because of knowledge that some people claim they are
Brahman and they are free but some other people who have not claimed so due to
ignorance, they are not free. It is because of ignorance, or the lack of mokṣa-puruṣārtha

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1519

that one continues to suffer saṃsāra. Because of that both have to maintain the artificial
notion that I am Brahman. It is applicable to upāsaka and also the lay people. More in the
next class

Class 280
śloka 9.120 contd.
Vidyāraṇya continues the topic of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana-vṛtti and ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-jñāna-vṛtti. One who has the upāsana-vṛtti is called nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka and
one who has jñāna-vṛtti is called nirguṇa-brahma-jñānī. He is differentiating between
brahmatva or Brahman-status enjoyed by the upāsaka and Brahman-status enjoyed by the
jñānī. He says in the case of upāsaka the brahmatva is not accepted as a fact; if it has been
accepted as a fact we will not call him an upāsaka but a jñānī. From this, it is clear for
upāsaka brahmatva is not acceptable as a fact; therefore, it is only an imagination he has
about himself. For this upāsaka brahmatva is an imagination or superimposition or an
artificial status created by upāsana-vṛtti. Upāsaka’s brahmatva is artificial projection. His
brahmatva is a kārya. Upāsaka’s brahmatva should be taken as a product or kārya. If it is a
kārya what is the upādāna-kāraṇa is the question. Vidyāraṇya says the ahaṃ-brahma-
asmi-vṛtti-repetition is the upādāna-kāraṇa. As long as he repeats the vṛtti, so long he has
artificially produced brahmatva. Vidyāraṇya, therefore, argues: since brahmatva is a
product dependent on vṛtti-repetition, the product will last only as long as the vṛtti is
continued. The moment upāsana-vṛtti is withdrawn, the kārya brahmatva of the upāsaka
will be lost just as when the clay is withdrawn, the pot goes away. The moment the
upāsana stops kāraṇa-abhāve kārya-abhāvāt. So the brahmatva-status goes away for the
upāsaka.
In the case of a jñānī who has ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti, brahmatva is not generated by
vṛtti but it is claimed as my very nature or as a fact. In the case of jñānī brahmatva is a
fact. It is not artificial. Therefore, it is not a kārya. What is actual and natural is not a
product. Jñānī’s brahmatva-status is not a kārya. Here, jñāna-vṛtti cannot be said to be
upādāna-kāraṇa of brahmatva. Through upādāna-kāraṇa, he comes to know that
brahmatva is his nature. After claiming that it is my nature, suppose the jñāna-vṛtti stops
which doesn’t mean ajñāna-vṛtti comes. It does not mean that when jñāna-vṛtti stops,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1520

ajñāna vṛtti comes. It does not mean he becomes an ajñānī. Now, the question is whether
the brahmatva status goes away just because jñānī when jñāna-vṛtti goes. Vidyāraṇya says
even if jñāna-vṛtti is not entertained by the jñānī, his brahmatva-status is never lost.
Therefore, he concludes upāsaka’s brahmatva-status is artificial and lose-able while jñānī’s
brahmatva-status is natural and unlose-able. Therefore, he concluded in śloka 118
jñāpakābhāvamātreṇa na hi satyaṃ vilīyate. Jñānī never loses his Brahman-status just
because he does not entertain the thought ahaṃ brahma asmi. Suppose you do not
entertain the thought I am a human being during the class, and if I ask the question from
vyavahāra do you lose your human status during that one hour, and become donkey or
something else! Just because you don’t entertain that thought, that status is never lost
because fact cannot be lost just because you don’t entertain the thought. Therefore, jñānī’s
brahmatva is factual which is never lose-able. Therefore, jñānī is not worried also that one
day he gets angry: will the brahmatva go away just because I have become angry! If the
brahmatva goes away by your getting angry that Brahmatva will become not factual but it
becomes an incidental status caused by a particular condition. But the knowledge is
brahmatva-status being my nature, it is never lose-able. I don’t say therefore get angry. My
teaching is not giving you freedom to get angry but what I say is if we know the fact, the
fact cannot be lost; because it is a fact. In fact, what cannot be lost is called the fact. When
this much was mentioned the Pūrvapakṣī raises a question. He completely misses the
point. He asks some other irrelevant question. Why do you say jñānī’s brahmatva is
factual? According to śāstra everyone is Brahman. Therefore, is it not that upāsaka’s
brahmatva also is factual only. He asked the question in the śloka 119. Vidyāraṇya wants
to have some fun and therefore, instead of directly answering the question, he asks a
counter question. If you ask is not upāsaka’s brahmatva factual I will ask a counter
question is not layman’s brahmatva also factual? In fact, go further: is not animal’s
brahmatva also factual? Now, Pūrvapakṣī is to answer. he says layman’s brahmatva is also
factual. But a layman because of ignorance does not claim the factual brahmatva.
Therefore, we say layman’s brahmatva is not factual. Now, Vidyāraṇya says the same
thing: nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka’s brahmatva is also factual but the problem is like a
layman, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka also is ignorant. Therefore, the upāsaka also does not
claim his brahmatva as factual. If he claims his brahmatva-status as factual we call him as
jñānī and not an upāsaka. What is imagination for him is not factual. Nirguṇa-upāsaka

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1521

and layman are the same in this respect. Both of them are ignorant. Therefore, both of
them do not claim brahmatva as factual. Both do not gain mokṣa. In the three respects
layman and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka are the same. Both of them are ignorant; both of
them do not claim brahmatva as factual; therefore, both of them are not yet liberated or
both of them are saṃśaris. This also is common to both therefore, my conclusion is
brahmatva is not factual for layman as also the nirguṇa-brahma upāsaka. It is factual for
jñānī alone.
Now comes the next question. If the layman is also ignorant, karma-yogī is also ignorant;
upāsana Yogī is also an ignorant; nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka is also ignorant; that is
common to all of them. For all of them brahmatva is not factual. All of them continue to be
saṃśaris. If all of them are same why do you spend so much time to dedicate a full chapter
for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka or upāsana. If such a question is asked, Vidyāraṇya gives an
interesting answer. The lay man also does not have factual brahmatva, nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsaka also does not have factual brahmatva, but nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka at least has
imagined brahmatva during the upāsana. But the layman does not have actual brahmatva
as also adhyastha brahmatva or the imagined brahmatvma. Between the two nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsaka is better. Vidyāraṇya gives another example. Suppose a person does not
have any food at all. He is starving. Now, someone offers some bhikṣā. It is a simple type
of food. There are three options. upavāsa is one, bhikṣā is number two and pañca pakva
paramanna is number three. If he gets the third option, none will question. When you are
to choose between bhikṣā and upavāsa, you will choose the former. Similarly, if not
vāstava brahmatva, be satisfied with adhyastha brahmatva.

śloka 9.121
पामराणां व्यवहृतेर्वरं कर्माद्यनुष्ठितिः ।
ततोऽपि सगुणोपास्तिर्निर्गुणोपासनं ततः ॥ ९.१२१ ॥
pāmarāṇāṃ vyavahṛtervaraṃ karmādyanuṣṭhitiḥ.
tato:'pi saguṇopāstirnirguṇopāsanaṃ tataḥ (9.121).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says even though all ajñānīs are similar in certain respects, we can make
a gradation from other standpoint. Ātmā-jñāna is common to lay person, karma-yogī,
upāsana Yogī and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka. All of them lack factual brahmatva and all of
them are saṃśaris. From this angle, we cannot make any difference. But from some other

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1522

angle from the standpoint of proximity to jñāna, we can make a gradation. Imagine a
person on the road, in front of Sterling road; one in Mylapore, one in Bombay and another
one is in US. All of them are not here.
Therefore, not being in Sterling club is common to all but still there is a gradation with
regard to the proximity; one is far far away and another is across the road. Similarly,
Vidyāraṇya says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka is also an ajñānī all right, but he is in the
maximum proximity to nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna. This we have to accept. Karma-yogī is
certainly better and closer to mokṣa compared to a pāmara the layman, laukika Puruṣa. He
is scripturally illiterate person. Compared to karmya Yogī saguṇa upāsaka is still more
close to mokṣa because he has come to upāsana-kāṇḍa. Compared to saguṇa-upāsaka,
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka is still superior and closer for he has come close to nirguṇa-
brahman. Nirguṇa-upāsana can be done on oṃkāra and also myself. Between oṃkāra-
ālambana-upāsana and aham-ālambana-nirguṇa-upāsana, the latter is closer than the
former. This will said in the next śloka.

śloka 9.122
यावद्विज्ञानसामीप्यं तावच्छ्रैष्ठ्यं विवर्धते ।
ब्रह्मज्ञानाय ते साक्षान्निर्गुणोपासनं शनैः ॥ ९.१२२ ॥
yāvadvijñānasāmīpyaṃ tāvacchraiṣṭhyaṃ vivardhate.
brahmajñānāya te sākṣānnirguṇopāsanaṃ śanaiḥ (9.122).
Here, Vidyāraṇya concludes the topic of the discussion on difference between ahaṃ
brahma asmi nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-vṛtti and ahaṃ brahma asmi nirguṇa-brahma-
jñāna-vṛtti. He says to the extent a particular sādhana is closer to jñāna, to that extent the
sādhana is considered superior. More it is closer more it is greater. Pāmara has no sādhana
and karma-yogī is a sādhaka but we should note karma-yoga is never closer to ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-jñāna. Saguṇa-upāsaka is closer and nirguṇa-upāsaka is still more close to
jñāna. Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana will lead to ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna which means
upāsana-vṛtti will sooner or later lead to jñāna-vṛtti. After gaining jñāna-vṛtti there is
nothing to be accomplished as ahaṃ brahma asmi will become a fact for a person.

śloka 9.123
यथा संवादिविभ्रान्तिः फलकाले प्रमायते ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1523

विद्यायते तथोपास्तिर्मुक्तिकालेऽतिपाकतः ॥ ९.१२३ ॥

yathā saṃvādivibhrāntiḥ phalakāle pramāyate.
vidyāyate tathopāstirmuktikāle:'tipākataḥ (9.123).
In the previous śloka he had stated that if nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-vṛtti is practiced by an
upāsaka it will lead to ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-vṛtti. Now, he wants to give an
explanation of the statement as to how an upāsana-vṛtti gets converted into jñāna-vṛtti.
What is the mechanism, what is the procedure? Is it a mystical event that you do upāsana
without knowing anything and one day suddenly an explosion happens? After that the
upāsana-vṛtti turned as jñāna-vṛtti. Vṛtti is same and we say one is upāsana-vṛtti and
another jñāna-vṛtti. This is the discussion to almost the end of the chapter 157. It is all
about upāsana-vṛtti to jñāna-vṛtti. I will give you the essence of the teaching. The upāsana-
vṛtti cannot automatically become jñāna-vṛtti because if upāsana-vṛtti becomes or
produces jñāna-vṛtti then upāsana itself will become pramāṇa. Whatever produces jñāna-
vṛtti is called a pramāṇa. We have got six pramāṇas like pratyakṣa, anumāna, etc. Here,
upāsana-vṛtti is not included as one of the pramāṇas; therefore, upāsana-vṛtti cannot
produce jñāna-vṛtti. Similarly, the mind also cannot produce jñāna-vṛtti by itself. The
mind is also not a pramāṇa. The mind has to assist the six pramāṇas. The mind by itself is
not a pramāṇa.
Therefore, upāsana-vṛtti cannot convert itself into jñāna-vṛtti; the mind cannot produce
jñāna-vṛtti, then tell me how upāsana-vṛtti can lead to jñāna-vṛtti? The answer is upāsana-
vṛtti-abhyāsa comes under karma. All upāsanas come under mānasa-karma. It means
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will also come under karma only. All the karmas have the
power to remove the pāpa or pratibandha, obstacles. Positively it can produce citta-
śuddhi. Through nirguṇa-upāsana if aśuddhi is gone, that mind will have to go to vākya-
vicāra once again. Upāsaka will have to go back to mahāvākya-vicāra again.
Unfortunately, when he did mahāvākya-vicāra before, because of the obstacle, that vākya
did not produce jñāna-vṛtti. Therefore, mahāvākya was not properly operated before
because of antaḥkaraṇa-pratibandhas and after the upāsana pratibandhas have been
removed, when he does vicāra the second time without obstacles he gains jñāna. Now,
ahaṃ brahma asmi is not an imagination but he is able to accept it as a fact even as he
listens to the mahāvākya. Upāsana removes pratibandha, upāsaka goes to vākya-vicāra
and upāsaka gains jñāna. This is the essence of the next topic from this śloka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1524

Class 281
śloka 123 contd.
Up to the śloka 122 Vidyāraṇya dealt with the topic of the difference between ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-upāsana-vṛtti and ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-vṛtti; one is called nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana and the other is called nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna. Having completed that
topic, now from 123 onwards up to 157, Vidyāraṇya points out how upāsana-vṛtti will
ultimately lead to jñāna-vṛtti, the process or the procedure by which upāsana-vṛtti will
ultimately lead to jñāna-vṛtti, because jñāna-vṛtti alone can lead to liberation and not
upāsana-vṛtti. In jñāna-vṛtti alone, I am able to take ahaṃ brahma asmi as a fact and only
when I can take it as a fact, I can successfully come to binary-format and therefore,
upāsana-vṛtti is not an end in itself. Vidyāraṇya says that even though it is not an end in
itself, it will help a person to come to jñāna-vṛtti and therefore, it is useful. He will
elaborately deal with this topic. Here, the main point is that if the jñāna-vṛtti should take
place it will require a pramāṇa and pramāṇa alone can produce jñāna-vṛtti. Upāsana-vṛtti
cannot automatically become jñāna-vṛtti. If upāsana-vṛtti can automatically become so,
then upāsana will become a pramāṇa. It is not acceptable. Similarly, the mind also by itself
cannot produce jñāna-vṛtti because the mind by itself is not accepted as pramāṇa. The
sense-organs are accepted as pramāṇa but the mind by itself is never accepted as a
pramāṇa. Therefore, ultimately jñāna-vṛtti will have to come through a pramāṇa only.
That pramāṇa is mahāvākya only. This nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka after practicing upāsana
for some time, as a result of the upāsana, he has to prepare the mind more, and having
prepared mind in a better manner he has to come back to mahāvākya-vicāra. If his mind
had been prepared before itself, mahāvākya-vicāra would have produced jñāna-vṛtti then
and there, but because of impurity, it could not produce jñāna-vṛtti; so nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana, being a form of karma, will help only in removing the impurity. After the
removal, whether impurity is dṛṣṭa or adṛṣṭa pāpa pratibandha— nirguṇa upāsana will
remove both— then one will have to come back to mahāvākya-vicāra. As even he does
vicāra śravaṇa itself will produce again ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-vṛtti and this time ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-vṛtti will be not upāsana-vṛtti, it will not be saṃvādi-bhrama, but it will be

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1525

sākṣāt jñāna itself. Ultimately, mahāvākya has to generate jñāna-vṛtti. That is what
Vidyāraṇya is going to deal with hereafter.
Before going to the topic, Vidyāraṇya goes back to the examples he had given before.
Nirguṇa-upāsana was called by the name saṃvādi-bhrama. In the beginning of the
chapter, he gave several examples of errors leading to the right conclusion or knowledge
and one of the examples he gave was mistaking maṇi-prabhā as the maṇi. Even though it
is a bhrama, when he goes towards maṇi-prabhā, mistaking it as a maṇi, that mistake will
ultimately lead him to the maṇi itself. This is where saṃvādi-bhrama leads to maṇi prapti.
This pratyakṣa example he gave; you should remember it. Saṃvādi-bhrama leads to maṇi
prāpti. Second example he gave was anumāna where a person mistook the mist as smoke.
What was there at a distance was some mist in the early morning and he mistook the mist
as smoke and wrongly interpreted as fire. He heard there is fire. What happened? Out of
the mistake he went to that fire and even though there was no smoke there, fire was very
much present. Therefore, what happened is that even though the pursuit of fire was based
on a wrong anumāna, later he found that he actually could find fire, wherein a mistaken
anumāna led to the actual fire. This was the second example he gave from saṃvādi-
bhrama leading to agni-prāpti. Here, the translators are using the expression leading error.
The leads to what you want just as maṇi-prabhā error takes you to actual maṇi and
anumāna bhrama error leads to actual agni. Similarly, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana also
will lead to ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-aikya. This is the sūtra-bhūta-vākya. It will be elaborated
hereafter. Just as saṃvādi-bhrama leads to actual maṇi darśana and actual agni-darśana,
in the same way, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana also lead to ahaṃ
brahma asmi jñāna. As the upāsana ripens more and more, when it removes the obstacles.
Since this upāsana comes under karma, therefore, it is considered a part of karma-yoga
only. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana comes under karma-upāsana alone. It is a form of karma-
yoga alone. Only difference is that instead of kāyika-vācika-karma it is a mānasa-karma.
As even this ripens the impurities goes away more and more.

śloka 9.124
संवादिभ्रमतः पुंसः प्रवृत्तस्यान्यमानतः ।
प्रमेति चेत्तथोपास्तिर्मान्तरे कारणायताम्॥ ९.१२४ ॥
saṃvādibhramataḥ puṃsaḥ pravṛttasyānyamānataḥ.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1526

prameti cettathopāstirmāntare kāraṇāyatām (9.124).

Here, a Pūrvapakṣī raises a very genuine question as to how can saṃvādi-bhrama or
upāsana ever lead to jñāna because upāsana is not accepted as a pramāṇa and a pramāṇa
alone can produce pramā. When we study the examples of maṇi-prabhā, and also we take
the agni-darśana, there we find the saṃvādi-bhrama itself does not produce knowledge.
Pūrvapakṣī is very observant and even in the example the bhrama itself does not produce
the pramā. When he made a wrong anumāna, that there is an agni is not based on smoke
but it is based on the mist only. Based on wrong anumāna he went after agni and the
wrong inference itself did not take him to agni. Ultimately, agni was discovered by
pratyakṣa pramāṇa.
Similarly, in the case of maṇi-prabhā-darśana also he went towards the maṇi because of
the wrong perception that is mistaking maṇi-prabhā as maṇi; wrong perception took him
towards the maṇi all right but ultimately the maṇi-discovery was with the help of cakṣu-
pramāṇa; therefore, without pramāṇa, jñāna-vṛtti cannot take place. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī
raises the question: how can nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana lead to nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna
without the operation of a pramāṇa? When this question was asked, then Vidyāraṇya
quietly adds: you are right. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will not produce jñāna-vṛtti and you
will have to come to pramāṇa, a relevant pramāṇa other than nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.
Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will help one to come to the relevant pramāṇa as that cannot
directly produce knowledge. You should remember the logic that upāsana is not a
pramāṇa.
Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī tells Vidyāraṇya for a person in the above maṇi and agni example,
who has gone towards the maṇi and agni, based on a leading error which has been useful
to go towards the maṇi and also agni, the error was cooperative, that is all okay; but
Pūrvapakṣī says the knowledge of the maṇi and the knowledge of the agni the real
knowledge of the maṇi and real knowledge of the agni was only by the application of a
relevant pramāṇa other than the error. In the case of maṇi it was the eyes that was the
pramāṇa and in the agni also it is cakṣu pramāṇa. The bhrama itself does not produce the
pramā. Therefore, Pūrvapakṣī says that saṃvādi pramā itself can never produce jñāna.
Similarly, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana cannot produce jñāna. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣī.
Vidyāraṇya finds it difficult to refute the Pūrvapakṣī. Here also, you have to come to
relevant pramāṇa. Here, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also will be a cause to come to a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1527

relevant pramāṇa. We know that mahāvākya alone is the pramāṇa; therefore, nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsaka again should come to the classes if he had left the class. Ultimately,
mahāvākya-vicāra alone has to produce knowledge. That he will tell later. He says it will
lead to relevant pramāṇa.

śloka 9.125
मूर्तिध्यानस्य मन्त्रादेरपि कारणता यदि ।
अस्तु नाम तथाप्यत्र प्रत्यासत्तिर्विशिष्यते ॥ ९.१२५ ॥
mūrtidhyānasya mantrāderapi kāraṇatā yadi.
astu nāma tathāpyatra pratyāsattirviśiṣyate (9.125).
Now a disappointed student raises a question to Vidyāraṇya. In śloka 123, Vidyāraṇya
had said upāsana-vṛtti will lead to jñāna-vṛtti which is a very vague statement. When we
listen to the statement our conclusion is that upāsana-vṛtti itself gradually in meditation
has converted into jñāna-vṛtti. The above śloka gives an impression that there is a direct
connection between upāsana and jñāna-vṛtti in meditation itself. After 124 th śloka that idea
is gone because upāsana-vṛtti will not lead to jñāna-vṛtti is said as an intermediary step.
You have to come to the relevant pramāṇa which means mahāvākya-vicāra. Thus, the
process is from upāsana-vṛtti to vākya-vicāra to jñāna-vṛtti. That intermediary vākya-
vicāra he mentions only in 124 but in the 123 rd śloka this has not been mentioned. The
student who thought directly upāsana-vṛtti will lead to jñāna-vṛtti, is now disappointed.
Now, he asks this question in disappointment. If nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also leads to
vākya-vicāra only, then what is the greatness of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. All sādhanas
also lead to mahāvākya-vicāra only. Karma-yoga also will lead to vākya-vicāra.
All karmas and all upāsanas will give jñāna through vākya-vicāra. I thought nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is an exception and now you dampening my enthusiasm by saying that
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also will help you to come back to vākya-vicāra. Then, what is
the greatness of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana to dedicate one full 9 th chapter. Mantra japa
including pañca mahāyajña also will lead to mahāvākya-vicāra. I thought nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana will be something different, but it is not the case. This being so what is
the specialty of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Up to this is Pūrvapakṣī. If such a question is
asked Vidyāraṇya says I do agree. The question is said to be genuine and relevant as it
cannot lead to jñāna directly but will lead to mahāvākya-vicāra. Yet, the specialty is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1528

nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is closer to jñāna. In it, instead of practicing bheda-upāsana he

practices abheda-upāsana and abheda-upāsana is closer abheda-jñāna. Compared to
abheda-upāsana and abheda-jñāna, the distance is farther between bheda-upāsana and
abheda-jñāna. For the upāsaka it is imagination only and it is not a fact; even though it is
an imagination, it is an imagination closer to the fact rather than farther. Therefore,
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is closer to nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna. Therefore, ahaṃ brahma
asmi practice is better than I am miserable Jīva depending upon an external guide.
Therefore, why cannot you practice ahaṃ brahma asmi?!

śloka 9.126
निर्गुणोपासनं पक्वं समाधिः स्याच्छनैस्ततः ।
यः समाधिर्निरोधाख्यः सोऽनायासेन लभ्यते ॥ ९.१२६ ॥
nirguṇopāsanaṃ pakvaṃ samādhiḥ syācchanaistataḥ.
yaḥ samādhirnirodhākhyaḥ so:'nāyāsena labhyate (9.126).
That is the reason when a person takes to vividiṣā sannyāsa, and goes to an Ācārya he has
taken sannyāsa for the purpose of śravaṇa or mahāvākya-vicāra for he has not started
mahāvākya-vicāra. Aikya is not a fact for him. Until he took to sannyāsa he practiced
bheda-pūjā and bheda-upāsana as a gṛhastha or as a brahmacārī. All the time he looked
upon God as an external entity. When he takes to sannyāsa āśrama what he does is that he
abolishes all bheda-pūjā, bheda-upāsana, bheda-pārāyaṇa, etc. Vividiṣā sannyāsī also
wants to improve his sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti but for improving sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti all his mantra japa, upāsana, etc., are all converted into abheda-mantra-japa,
abheda-upāsana and haṃśa-gāyatrī, etc. Here, the mantras are soham or ahaṃ brahma
asmi mantra. When he practices this it will be upāsana only because he has not come to
vākya-vicāra for jñāna to come. That is why in śikṣāvallī of Taittirīya Upaniṣad several
mantras are prescribed and one of them is I am the jagat-kāraṇa, jagat-adhiṣṭhāna
Brahman. He is asked to repeat the mantra and when he repeats it is certainly not jñāna
but it is upāsana. He practices and claims ahaṃ brahma asmi, the activator of the whole
universe. This is the wisdom of Triśaṅku Ṛṣi. It is jñāna for Triśaṅku but for me it is not so
since I am not ready to claim myself as Brahman. Upāsana is a type of meditation and for
that meditation he can take the help of āsana, prāṇāyāma, pratyāhāra, dhāraṇā and
dhyāna leading to samādhi or nirvikalpaka-samādhi-abhyāsa as a part of nirguṇa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1529

brahma-upāsana. It will again come under karma-yoga. It is meant to remove the obstacles
that stop one from gaining the knowledge that I am Brahman is a fact. Nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana will lead to samādhi, absorption. Samādhi in the first line refers to savikalpaka
samādhi which means deliberate repetition of the mantra without any distractions. After
savikalpaka samādhi it is easier to reach Nirvikalpaka samādhi. It is a spontaneous
absorption in that thought without requiring our deliberate efforts. This also comes under
karma-yoga as it cannot produce knowledge, because upāsana is karma and karma is not
pramāṇa. Thus, upāsana is not pramāṇa but it will help one to come back to vākya-vicāra
with better preparation. Nirvikalpaka samādhi cannot produce jñāna and one has to come
to the relevant pramāṇa. This samādhi is possible even in Saguṇa-Īśvara-upāsana also. A
person can get totally absorbed in Kṛṣṇa where he does not feel the difference between
Kṛṣṇa and himself. There also it is merger into the Devatā, but here it is merger with
nirguṇa-brahman.

śloka 9.127
निरोधलाभे पुंसोऽन्तरसङ्गं वस्तु शिष्यते ।
पुनः पुनर्वासितेऽस्मिन्वाक्याज्जायेत तत्त्वधीः ॥ ९.१२७ ॥
nirodhalābhe puṃso:'ntarasaṅgaṃ vastu śiṣyate.
punaḥ punarvāsite:'sminvākyājjāyeta tattvadhīḥ (9.127).
When a person gets Nirvikalpaka samādhi as a culmination of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
by following the Aṣṭāṅga-yoga technique of Patañjali, the upāsaka reaches a state in which
all divisions are resolved. It is meditation process on the object of meditation; jñātā-jñāna-
jñeya this vikalpa called tripuṭī has resolved because he no more deliberately practices this
upāsana. When the tripuṭī is resolved [goes back to dormant state] the Ātmā the
adhiṣṭhāna is not associated with tripuṭī. This is the height that one can reach in nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana. Ātmā alone remains after the resolution of the tripuṭī. This one has to
practice repeatedly for citta-śuddhi or citta-preparation. Since it comes under karma-yoga
this will not produce jñāna but make the mind more and more refined. When this vāsanā
that ahaṃ brahma asmi vāsanā is nourished, again and again repeatedly, then finally
tattva-jñāna is gained. Tattva-jñāna is not gained from samādhi but from mahāvākya-
vicāra. Thus, jñāna will arise; more in the next class.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1530

Class 282
śloka 9.127 contd.
When the Vedānta-śravaṇa pursued by a spiritual seeker is efficient in terms of quality
and adequate in terms of quantity, the Vedānta-śravaṇa gives the student clear
knowledge; he understands the mahāvākya clearly. Not only he understands the
mahāvākya, he also understands the fact that I have understood the mahāvākya. Then,
the student has no difficulty and he is not diffident to claim that I am jñānī and I am
liberated. After all the word jñānī means one who has got jñāna. A student who is
confident of the fact that I have understood, therefore, I have no diffidence in claiming
aham jñānī and aham mutkah for him the job of śravaṇa is over because when the śravaṇa
is efficient and adequate, I will get confidence with regard to myself and not that the
student has to go about all over and publisise everyone that I am a jñānī and I am muktah.
But I can tell myself that aham muktaḥ asmi. Once this self-confidence comes, it means
śravaṇa is adequate. Thereafter for such a Vedāntic student śravaṇa can be continued or
need not be continued; śravaṇa becomes optional. The confident student dwells upon the
teaching to implement the format-shift from triangular-format to binary-format, and this
process of shift is called nididhyāsana. Here, the student is confident that I have received
the message rightly. The format-shift is implemented not for jñāna or not for mokṣa also,
because through śravaṇa itself he has claimed jñāna and mokṣa. Nididhyāsana is for
format-shift and the format-shift is for making jñāna and mokṣa available throughout my
day and throughout my life. When śravaṇa is adequate, dwelling upon the teaching is
called nididhyāsana.
Suppose there is another Vedāntic student for whom śravaṇa is inefficient and śravaṇa is
inadequate, then naturally the understanding is also incomplete and he can never boldly
say that I have understood the teaching. He is never sure or confident of having gained
knowledge because of inefficient śravaṇa and inadequate śravaṇa. He cannot say I have
not understood or even if he has the understanding he cannot say I have understood.
Because of the diffidence he can never claim to himself “aham jñānī asmi” and “aham
muktaḥ asmi”. These two phrases he is unable to confidently claim within himself. As
long as the confidence is lacking, as long as the diffidence is prominent, it means śravaṇa
is inefficient or śravaṇa is inadequate. When such a diffident student for whom śravaṇa is
inefficient and inadequate dwells upon ahaṃ brahma asmi, meditation cannot be called

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1531

nididhyāsana for he himself is not confident of ahaṃ brahma asmi. When he is not sure
how you can call the meditation as nididhyāsana!
The ahaṃ brahma asmi meditation of a diffident student of inadequate śravaṇa is called
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Therefore, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka can never stop śravaṇa
unlike the previous confident group; when nididhyāsana is practiced format-shift takes
place, śravaṇa is optional; they can drop also whereas for this diffident group of
inadequate śravaṇa who is practicing nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, śravaṇa is not over.
Therefore, the upāsaka has to compulsorily continue the śravaṇa. The upāsaka cannot
drop śravaṇa because it is inadequate. The proof for inadequacy is the lack of confidence
on ahaṃ brahma asmi. The difference between upāsana and nididhyāsana must be clear.
For the upāsaka, upāsana is to make the śravaṇa more efficient and adequate. Vidyāraṇya
says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will help in making the śravaṇa more powerful. When the
śravaṇa is efficient and adequate, I understand the mahāvākya and I understand that I
have understood the mahāvākya; I have no hesitation in claiming aham jñānī and aham
muktaḥ. Thereafter, I can dwell on the teaching meant for format-shifting.
The role of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is making the śravaṇa efficient. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya points out that this nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka uses Aṣṭāṅga-yoga method of
Patañjali and practices dhāraṇā-dhyāna which may lead to Nirvikalpaka samādhi also; not
that samādhi is compulsory, but samādhi is a possible consequence of dhāraṇā and
dhyāna. When he has practiced this nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, the ahaṃ brahma asmi
saṃskāra gets very well-entrenched. Parallelly, he is doing śravaṇa since upāsaka can
never drop the śravaṇa. Upāsaka should continue śravaṇa and make it more efficacious.
He should understand that he has understood Brahman and should claim I am a jñānī and
I am a mukta.

śloka 9.128
निर्विकारासङ्गनित्यस्वप्रकाशैकपूर्णताः ।
बुद्धौ झटिति शास्त्रोक्ता आरोहन्त्यविवादतः ॥ ९.१२८ ॥
nirvikārāsaṅganityasvaprakāśaikapūrṇatāḥ.
buddhau jhaṭiti śāstroktā ārohantyavivādataḥ (9.128).
Vidyāraṇya says the post-upāsana śravaṇa, i.e, after the upāsana when the mind has
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-saṃskāra, when he listens to the teaching more and more, whatever

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1532

has been taught by the śāstra through the mouth of the Guru, the seeker will be in a
position to grasp that teaching of the mahāvākya. Previously, all the teachings came with
no effect, but now the position is different. Now, the student absorbs the teaching with no
difficulty. Then, he understands I am nirvikāra śākṣī, I am asaṅga śākṣī, I am nitya śākṣī, I
am svaprakāśa śākṣī, I am eka śākṣī and I am pūrṇa śākṣī; all these ideas he is able to
casually receive without any resistance. He receives the teaching without any intellectual
resistance. He knows that mahāvākya is pramāṇa with regard to Ātmā.

śloka 9.129
योगाभ्यासस्त्वेतदर्थोऽमृतबिन्द्वादिषु श्रुतः ।
एवं च दृष्टद्वारापि हेतुत्वादन्यतो वरम्॥ ९.१२९ ॥
yogābhyāsastvetadartho:'mṛtabindvādiṣu śrutaḥ.
evaṃ ca dṛṣṭadvārāpi hetutvādanyato varam (9.129).
All the ideas given by Vidyāraṇya are supported by śāstras. The existence of nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana prescribed for a diffident student has the support of śāstra, it is said.
Here, he gives the example from Amṛtabindu Upaniṣad or Brahmabindu Upaniṣad. He
has also quoted from Kaṭhopaniṣad Oṃkāra-upāsana. Even saguṇa-brahma-upāsana was
talked about previously for one to come to Vedānta-śravaṇa. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya adds
an aside note saguṇa-brahma-upāsana also will help in efficient śravaṇa. That is why
karma-yoga and upāsana yoga have been prescribed. Karma-yoga as also upāsana yoga is
meant for efficient śravaṇa. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is also meant for efficient śravaṇa
alone. Ultimately śravaṇa alone will give jñāna, śravaṇa alone will give parokṣa jñāna and
also aparokṣa jñāna. This, we must remember. Then all these three are meant for efficient
śravaṇa. They are karma-yoga, saguṇa-brahma-upāsana yoga or bheda-upāsana yoga and
thirdly nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana or abheda-upāsana yoga, meant for efficient śravaṇa.
Now, Vidyāraṇya wants to analyse if all the three are going to produce the same benefit of
better śravaṇa, of these, three which one is superior.
Vidyāraṇya says if a student has not come to Vedānta at all no śravaṇa has taken place at
all; and he has not even found a Guru; then the best one karma-yoga and saguṇa-brahma-
upāsana yoga. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana cannot be prescribed for that person because he

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1533

has not even heard Vedānta or come to a Guru. For those people, certainly karma-yoga
and saguṇa-brahma-upāsana is better. Suppose there is a student, because of some puṇya,
he has come to Vedānta and done śravaṇa about nirguṇa-brahman mahāvākya-vicāra,
bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā, he has done but the problem is śravaṇa has either been inefficient or
inadequate or both. Because of any one these reasons, he is unable to derive the jñāna; for
that person, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is a better sādhana rather than again going back to
karma-yoga and sagauna-brahma-upāsana; let him make use of Vedānta itself instead
going back to Veda pūrva and let him make use of Vedānta itself for upāsana. Thus,
Vedānta can be utilized for upāsana also. Therefore, he says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is
better than going back to saguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Then, the next question is why? Even if
we don’t ask, Vidyāraṇya does not want that. He wants to give the reason for that. He says
karma-yoga and saguṇa-brahma-upāsana will helps śravaṇa by giving puṇya or adṛṣṭa-
phala. And the puṇya will remove the obstacle from the mind and it will help in śravaṇa.
But from dṛṣṭa-phala-angle when you directly analyse, the saguṇa-brahma-upāsana will
create an obstacle from another angle. Saguṇa-brahma-upāsana will create dvaita or bheda
which will be an obstacle for ahaṃ brahma asmi. In dvaita upāsana, you always says you
are great and I am dāsa. This dāsa-buddhi, I am a mean-buddhi that lower-buddhi will
only be an obstacle to śravaṇa and when the teacher says you are great, the students says I
am unhappy.
In nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana instead of practicing dāsoham bhāvanā, he develops the
vāsanā of the habit of soham. Therefore, dṛṣṭa-phala is also favourable for śravaṇa. In
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, not only puṇya is there, but also dṛṣṭa phala of more conducive
Advaita saṃskāra is also generated. That is why abheda-upāsana is always considered to
be superior; in fact, even in sandhyāvandana itself abheda-upāsana is prescribed for a
seven year old boy who does not know anything. There is aghamarṣaṇa sūkta which
comes in Mahanārāyaṇa Upaniṣad that can be chanted during the bath which has the
mantra yohamasmi brahmāhamasmi, ahamasmi brahmāhamasmi, ahamevāhaṃ māṃ
juhomi svāhā. Abeda-upāsana works in twofold ways adṛṣṭa-rūpeṇa and dṛṣṭa-rūpeṇa.
Adṛṣṭa rūpeṇa means it produces puṇya and improves sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti and
dṛṣṭa-rūpeṇa means it creates the habit of abheda-saṃskāra. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
becomes the cause for efficient śravaṇa and jñāna; it is a superior sādhana compared to all
the other sādhanas like saguṇa-brahma-upāsana and of course karma and upāsana yoga,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1534

etc. The students who have come to Vedānta can practice more of ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-
upāsana.

śloka 9.130
उपेक्ष्य तत्तीर्थयात्रां जपादीनेव कुर्वताम्।
पिण्डं समुत्सृज्य करं लेढीति न्याय आपतेत्॥ ९.१३० ॥
upekṣya tattīrthayātrāṃ japādīneva kurvatām.
piṇḍaṃ samutsṛjya karaṃ leḍhīti nyāya āpatet (9.130).
Here, Vidyāraṇya gives a practical solution to the students who have inadequate and
inefficient śravaṇa. If the student is afraid to claim I am liberated, if he feels śravaṇa is
inadequate, and if he feels his sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is also inadequate, for
improving the sādhana and śravaṇa and improve sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti what
should that student do? Vidyāraṇya says don’t go back to all the dvaita-sādhanas. The
teacher has struggled to bring away the student from dvaita to Advaita and the student
tries to go back to dvaita! If you go back to dvaita, the teacher will have to struggle again
to bring you to Advaita. Don’t go down if you want a better mind and better śravaṇa.
Practice ahaṃ brahma asmi itself as japa or as upāsana. If a student goes back to dvaita-
sādhana, he is a stupid and an unintelligent student.

śloka 9.131
उपासकानामप्येवं विचारत्यागतो यदि ।
बाधं तस्माद्विचारस्यासम्भवे योग ईरितः ॥ ९.१३१ ॥
upāsakānāmapyevaṃ vicāratyāgato yadi.
bādhaṃ tasmādvicārasyāsambhave yoga īritaḥ (9.131).
Here, another intelligent student raises a question. Karma-yoga and saguṇa-upāsana are
compared to a sticking part of the modaka in the hand saying that it is inferior and it gives
you only limited benefit. The full modaka gives full benefit. The student asks is it not that
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana itself is inferior to śravaṇa? It is so because nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana does not give jñāna. It will only make śravaṇa efficient and śravaṇa alone will
give jñāna. Therefore, when you compare śravaṇa and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, what is
modaka? Śravaṇa becomes modaka which can give knowledge and nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana is only a sticking portion of it. Therefore, the student asks is it not that nirguṇa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1535

brahma-upāsaka is also similar to any other upāsanas which cannot give jñāna? One who
practices upāsana in the place of śravaṇa also comse back to the same helpless position of
not gaining jñāna without going through śravaṇa. Here, Vidyāraṇya says for such people
who have not done śravaṇa, we will not recommend nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana itself. It is
recommended only to one who has gone through śravaṇa but not come to the level of
claiming himself that he has gained knowledge.

Class 283
śloka 131 contd.
He says śravaṇa and manana alone will help one gain jñāna and the two should be made
efficacious. When nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana can fill in the qualification, going to saguṇa-
brahma-upāsana is foolishness and for that Vidyāraṇya gave the example: dropping the
sweet from the hand and vigorously licking remnants of the sweet. “Why cannot you take
the sweet itself?” he asks. Take nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, the sweet, Vidyāraṇya says.
When vicāra gives direct jñāna and liberation why should one go in far nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana? When saguṇa-upāsana and nirguṇa upāsana are compared, the latter is better.
Between nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and mahāvākya-vicāra the second one is always
superior than upāsana, for vicāra alone can give direct knowledge. Upāsana cannot give
knowledge for it is not a pramāṇa. So asks the Pūrvapakṣī why do you glorify nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana when vicāra is better?
To that, Vidyāraṇya says I agree what you say is wonderful. I don’t prescribe nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana in place of vicāra. I prescribe this upāsana as a supplementary sādhana
or a booster. When vicāra works well, you don’t require upāsana booster at all.
Renouncing the vicāra is like dropping the sweet and taking to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
is like licking the wrapper of the sweet. Vidyāraṇya says the question is all right. He
agrees with Pūrvapakṣī. He says that upāsana should be a supplemental dose. It should
not be main one. If I have understood the mahāvākya I will have no difficulty to declare
that I am mukta. If I understand but I am unable to claim myself as jñānī, that is the
problem. If I can claim that I understand, what is the difficulty inclaiming I am a jñānī!

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1536

Then, why I cannot claim I am mukta! Bhrama has to be converted into pramā. This is
what is needed.

śloka 9.132
बहुव्याकुलचित्तानां विचारात्तत्त्वधीर्न हि ।
योगो मुख्यस्ततस्तेषां धीदर्पस्तेन नश्यति ॥ ९.१३२ ॥
bahuvyākulacittānāṃ vicārāttattvadhīrna hi.
yogo mukhyastatasteṣāṃ dhīdarpastena naśyati (9.132).
Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana is a supplementary dose of medicine the main treatment,
that being śravaṇa or mahāvākya-vicāra which has to continue. The supplementary dose is
required if vicāra is not efficient. The vicāra is not efficient when sādhana-catuṣṭaya-
sampatti is deficient. Now, the question is: what is the indication of deficiency of sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti that obstructs one’s vicāra. He says the indication is varieties of mental
preoccupations of profession, possession, family, body and the mind. All body and the
mind may be preoccupied and hence the mind is not fully available for śravaṇa.
Preoccupied mind is a disturbed mind. Ahaṅkāra dominates the mind because of varieties
of problems. When everything goes on well with ahaṅkāra, ahaṅkāra wonders why
Vedānta? Ahaṅkāra thinks I don’t need anything for everything is going fine. When
ahaṅkāra is extremely disturbed and worried, ahaṅkāra asks the question how can I enter
into Vedānta. It is because I am so much worried. Happy ahaṅkāra does not feel the need
of Vedānta and unhappy ahaṅkāra cannot think of Vedānta! You require an intermediary
condition with sufficient problem and sufficient mental peace for enquiry. Such a
condition is rare and that is why people do not come to Vedānta or do not understand
Vedānta. They are happy and therefore, they don’t come to Vedānta and they are worried
and therefore, they don’t understand Vedānta. Those people who have so many mental
preoccupations because of some pūrva-janma puṇya they come to Vedānta and vicāra is
never efficient. Whether due to inefficient or inadequate vicāra, they are unable to gain
jñāna, whereby, the knowledge does not fructify into format conversion.
Therefore, for such preoccupied students they require extra sādhana outside Vedānta class
like some children taking extra tuition. When the shoe fits into the leg, a fit shoe is not felt
by you. When the shoe is in fit condition you don’t feel you have a shoe. When the body is
healthy you don’t feel you have a body. When the mind is free from problems you don’t

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1537

feel you have a mind. In Vedānta class ,when the body is forgotten the mind is forgotten
and therefore, ahaṅkāra is forgotten and śākṣī is dominant; then, when Ācārya says you
are Brahman, you feel everything is okay. When family problem is there and when
ahaṅkāra stands in front, ahaṅkāra-brahma-equation never works because ahaṅkāra is
problem-embodiment and Brahman is ānanda-embodiment and aikya does not work. For
those people, yoga is important for some time. For them, meditation is helpful; vicāra is
not given up but vicāra becomes gauṇa. Meditation becomes aṅgī and śravaṇa becomes
aṅgam. After some time, it must be reserved. By the practice of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana,
all the preoccupations of the mind get reduced. That alone expresses in the form of
uparama. The reduction of preoccupation is called uparama which is said in sādhana-
catuṣṭaya-sampatti as śama, dama, uparama, titikṣā. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana does not
give jñāna but it gives citta-uparama. Vidyāraṇya elaborately discussed this in the 6th
chapter, ślokas 276 to 286. Here, he pointed out that yoga and samādhi are useful and
adds, though they may not give jñāna, but they will give uparama and with uparama,
when a person does śravaṇa-manana, then the two become producers of jñāna.

śloka 9.133
अव्याकुलधियां मोहमात्रेणाच्छादितात्मनाम्।
साङ्ख्यनामा विचाराः स्यान्मुख्यो झटिति सिद्धितः ॥ ९.१३३ ॥
avyākuladhiyāṃ mohamātreṇācchāditātmanām.
sāṅkhyanāmā vicārāḥ syānmukhyo jhaṭiti siddhitaḥ (9.133).
There are some people who are opposite to those whose minds are preoccupied with
worldly matters. For some, vicāra is amukhya and dhyāna, yoga and samādhi become
pramāṇa whereas those people for whom vyākula is lesser because of previous sādhana,
because karma-yoga sādhana they did well, saguṇa-brahma-upāsana they practiced well,
pūrva-janma puṇya is reasonable, body is in a good condition, in short all the pañca
anātmās do not give serious problems. The pañca anātmās are profession, possession,
family, body and the mind! The preoccupations are less for some people. It is like people
who wear shoe and they don’t feel the feet has shoes; so also the body which is reasonably
healthy. Their problem is that their mind has one problem: profession, possession, family,
body and the mind problem is not there but their problem is self-ignorance. The āvaraṇa-
śakti alone is there. It is a thin layer. Other than self-ignorance, they don’t have any other

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1538

disturbances. Ātmā is concealed by the āvaraṇa-śakti layer of self-ignorance. Otherwise,

their mind is clean and steady. They require vicāra or śravaṇa and manana. It is otherwise
known as Sāṅkhya. This vicāra will give the result without any delay. He does not require
a very long śravaṇa. He needs limited śravaṇa. Vicāra is capable of giving jñāna followed
by liberation. Mokṣa is nothing but binary-format and it comes instantaneously to them.

śloka 9.134
यत्साङ्ख्यैः प्राप्यते स्थानं तद्योगैरपि गम्यते ।
एकं साङ्ख्यं च योगं च यः पश्यति स पश्यति ॥ ९.१३४ ॥
yatsāṅkhyaiḥ prāpyate sthānaṃ tadyogairapi gamyate.
ekaṃ sāṅkhyaṃ ca yogaṃ ca yaḥ paśyati sa paśyati (9.134).
We have two types of students, a student with several preoccupations and the second type
of student is one who does not have many preoccupations. These two exist in the society
all the time. Therefore, śāstra admits two types of Vedāntic students and designs sādhanas
also accordingly. One is Sāṅkhya-pradhāna student and the other is yoga-pradhāna
student. The difference between the two is this. Sāṅkhya-pradhāna students do not require
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana very much. They don’t require separate practice of meditation.
Even if he practices, it is not dominant. It is less dominant. There is another type of student
with all family problems. They can also attend the class but they become yoga-pradhāna
student. They may do śravaṇa but in addition to śravaṇa, they should do manonigraha,
restrain the mind. It is so because they have mental worries. It is like a person who wants
to empty the ocean by a blade of grass! For them, one worry is replaced by another worry.
Vidyāraṇya says this is not my invention but Lord Kṛṣṇa himself has taught this in Gītā 5 th
chapter, śloka 5. Antaḥkaraṇa-yogyatā is important and at the same time Vedānta-śravaṇa
also is important. Both are required when I study śāstra. All sādhanas will contribute to
either yogyatā or jñāna and śravaṇa alone contributes to jñāna. All of them including
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will contribute to yogyatā and śravaṇa alone will help gain
jñāna.

śloka 9.135
तत्कारणं साङ्ख्ययोगाधिगम्यमिति हि श्रुतिः ।
यस्तु श्रुतेर्विरुद्धः स आभासः साङ्ख्ययोगयोः ॥ ९.१३५ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1539

tatkāraṇaṃ sāṅkhyayogādhigamyamiti hi śrutiḥ.

yastu śruterviruddhaḥ sa ābhāsaḥ sāṅkhyayogayoḥ (9.135).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says for these two designs Sāṅkhya-pradhāna lifestyle and yoga-
pradhāna lifestyle, not only Smṛti pramāṇa is there, but there is Śruti pramāṇa also. Refer
to Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad, 6.13. The meaning of the Śruti is this. All the sādhanas other
than vicāra will not give jñāna. All others will only make a person eligible to gain jñāna.
Yoga in this context means karma-yoga and samādhi yoga. Yoga here also refers to
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana or saṃvādi-bhrama. Through these two methods, you should
realise that kāraṇa Brahman which has been discussed in Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. Yogyatā
and vicāra both are important. Therefore, Sāṅkhya and Yoga are equally important. This is
the message of the Śruti. More in the next class.

Class 284
śloka 9.135 contd.
In these ślokas, beginning from 123, Vidyāraṇya talks about the conversion of ahaṃ-
brahma-asmi-upāsana-vṛtti into ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-vṛtti. In support of this
conversion, Vidyāraṇya quotes a Gītā śloka: 5.5. Even though this śloka is quoted for
clarifying his teaching, this śloka itself can create a confusion. In Gītā, Kṛṣṇa says whatever
goal is reached by a Yogī the very same goal is reached by a Sāṅkhya also. In the Gītā
context, word yoga refers to karma-yogī. The word Sāṅkhya refers to a Jñāna-yogī who is
doing vicāra. The one who is in karma mārga is called Yogī and one who is in vicāra
mārga is called Sāṅkhya. Kṛṣṇa says goal reached by one who is in vicāra mārga is also
reached in karma mārga also. When we superficially study the statement it appears that
there are two independent mārgas, which are optional to pick for a sādhaka. You can
either choose vicāra mārga or you can choose karma mārga and Kṛṣṇa seems to say a
karma mārgī also will attain mokṣa without vicāra and vicāra mārgī also can attain mokṣa
without karma. The statement appears that they are two separate and independent
optional mārgas. This confusion will go away only when we study the commentaries on
Gītā śloka where the commentators make it clear that yoga or karma can never give mokṣa
independently. Since karma is not a pramāṇa, therefore, it cannot give jñāna and without
jñāna, mokṣa is never possible. Therefore, how should we interpret the śloka? Here, Yogī

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1540

should be understood as in the context of Gītā, karma-yoga-pradhāna sādhaka, but they

also have vicāra. They are not outside vicāra because without vicāra neither jñāna nor
mokṣa is possible. The word Sāṅkhya refers to the vicāra-yoga-pradhāna. They are
predominantly into enquiry and for them also karma and āśrama are involved. They are
two groups of people one karma-yoga-pradhāna with vicāra and vicāra-pradhāna with
karma. If both have both karma as well as vicāra, why do you divide them into two
groups? That is why we use the expression karma-yoga-pradhāna and the other is vicāra-
pradhāna. One is predominantly in karma and another is predominantly in vicāra but
both have to follow karma and vicāra.
The next question is why we insist on both karma and vicāra? It is so because karma alone
can give jñāna-yogyatā and vicāra alone can give jñāna. One can give jñāna-yogyatā and
the other can give jñāna. Every sādhaka requires both yogyatā and jñāna. Jñāna without
yogyatā is academic knowledge and yogyatā without jñāna is incomplete and it is
ignorance only. Therefore, the Gītā śloka must be interpreted as one is karma-pradhāna
sādhaka and the other is vicāra-pradhāna sādhaka. First group is gṛhasthas and the second
group is saṃnyāsis. Gṛhasthas also have both and saṃnyāsis also have both. It is clear that
both gṛhasthas and saṃnyāsis can get mokṣa for both have got both sādhanas, one
sādhana for yogyatā-prāpti and the other sādhana for jñāna-prāpti. Thus, the Gītā śloka
must be clearly understood. The same Gītā śloka is quoted by Vidyāraṇya in this context;
we should place in the place of karma, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. We talk about a sādhaka
who is practicing ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana for yogyatā-prāpti. Jñāna can be gained
only through vicāra. It has been made quite clear that mahāvākya-vicāra alone can give
aparokṣa jñāna. Karma and upāsana, saguṇa-brahma-upāsana and also nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana, cannot give aparokṣa jñāna. For a person with a disturbed mind, vicāra is not
efficacious and such a sādhaka should practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana for gaining
yogyatā-prāpti to gain jñāna.
Sāṅkhyayogādhigamyamiti hi śrutiḥ vadati. Śruti in this context is Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad
6.13th mantra. It says tat kāraṇam adhigamyam. That Brahman or mokṣa could be attained
by both Sāṅkhya and yoga. Sāṅkhya and yoga both are required to gain jñāna. In the yoga
— karma-yoga, saguṇa-brahma-upāsana, nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana— all of them will
come under yoga. One can practice any one of them according to his ability and
requirement. This yoga will lead to yogyatā-prāpti alone. It will make the mind more and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1541

more refined or finer to gain jñāna. Thus, yoga contributes to yogyatā. Here also, Sāṅkhya
means vicāra that is mahāvākya-śravaṇa. It should complement upāsana because vicāra
alone is pramāṇa to gain jñāna. Here, there is some confusion. Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad talks
about Sāṅkhya and yoga as a means to mokṣa. Yoga gives yogyatā and Sāṅkhya gives
jñāna. Elsewhere, in Brahma-sūtra and other books, we have treated both Sāṅkhya and
yoga as other darśanas which are called Pūrvapakṣa-philosophy. Sāṅkhya is written by
Kapila and Yoga written by Patañjali Ṛṣi. Both of them are negated by us in Brahma-sūtra.
There are several sūtras in Brahma-sūtra which refute Sāṅkhya and Yoga philosophy. At
the end it is said that the yoga written by Patañjali Ṛṣi also has a very similar philosophy;
therefore, by refuting Sāṅkhya we have refuted yoga also. Here, Vidyāraṇya without any
reservation says Sāṅkhya and yoga must be utilized to gain jñāna. How are we to
understand this? Should we follow Sāṅkhya or not, should we follow yoga or not? For
that, Vidyāraṇya says this doubt is clarified in Brahma-sūtra itself.
No doubt Sāṅkhya is a śāstra written by Kapila muni. No doubt yoga is also a śāstra
written by Patañjali Ṛṣi. Both have accepted Veda as a pramāṇa. But we find certain
portions of their teaching go against, while some other portions go in line, with Veda.
When they talk about 24 tattvas in creation, there are certain portions which are not
against Veda. Therefore, those portions can be adapted by us, there is nothing wrong
because that portion is not anti-Veda. There are certain portions where they say Prakṛti is
also satya and there are many Ātmās present, they talk about plurality of Ātmā and they
talk about the reality of Prakṛti. They are Veda-viruddha bhāga. Sāṅkhya philosophy does
not accept Īśvara which is Veda-viruddha bhāga. When you go to yoga darśana they
accept Īśvara, in that they come along with Veda but their problem is their Īśvara is only
nimitta-kāraṇa Īśvara and they don’t accept Īśvara as upādāna kāraṇa. That part of Yoga
śāstra is Veda-viruddha. They also say Ātmās are many. They also say that each Ātmā is
all-pervading. It is quite amusing. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says wherever Vedānta borrows
from Sāṅkhya yoga, we borrow Veda-aviruddha portions. We don’t refute them totally
but we refute Veda-viruddha aṃśa, both in the case of Yoga and Sāṅkhya. We accept
various yoga disciplines prescribed in Yoga philosophy.

śloka 9.136
उपासनं नातिपक्वमिह यस्य परत्र सः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1542

मरणे ब्रह्मलोके वा तत्त्वं विज्ञाय मुच्यते ॥ ९.१३६ ॥

upāsanaṃ nātipakvamiha yasya paratra saḥ.
maraṇe brahmaloke vā tattvaṃ vijñāya mucyate (9.136).
Vidyāraṇya says all upāsanas will lead to jñāna through mahāvākya-vicāra. It means the
upāsanas make the seeker get jñāna-yogyatā. The jñāna-yogyatā should be sufficient
enough for one to gain Ātmā-jñāna. The time taken for one to gain jñāna differs from
individual to individual as each is faced with various known and unknown obstacles.
Then, there is need for the removal of the various obstacles on the way to gain jñāna and
to claim that I am Brahman and I am a liberated person. This knowledge may be gained in
this life or even after death in the next janma. Vidyāraṇya wants to say like saguṇa-
brahma-upāsana, this nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also can give krama-mukti. This is the
next topic. The idea here is that one should simultaneously take to Ātma-vicāra while
practicing the various upāsanas including nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. If he gets knowledge
in this janma liberation is guaranteed, or else he may get krama-mukti after death. Again
when liberation is my nature where is the need for guarantee! If I have knowledge, I don’t
seek guarantee from śāstra, guarantee from Guru and even from God. The knowledge is
that I am free when I realise that I am nitya-mukta.

śloka 9.137
यं यं चापि स्मरन्भावं त्यजत्यन्ते कलेवरम्।
तं तेवैति यच्चित्तस्तेन यातीति शास्त्रतः ॥ ९.१३७ ॥
yaṃ yaṃ cāpi smaranbhāvaṃ tyajatyante kalevaram.
taṃ tevaiti yaccittastena yātīti śāstrataḥ (9.137).
In support of the krama-mukti phala for the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka, Vidyāraṇya quotes
a Gītā śloka. In the case of an ajñānī karmī or ajñānī upāsaka, all those who are in
triangular-format, punarjanma is compulsory and it is definite. What is their final thought
will decide their travel after death. Remember Jaḍabharata in this case. Thinking of a deer
at the time of death is the cause for him to take birth as a deer in the next janma. Praśna
Upaniṣad mantra says whatever object is there in his mind at the time of death,
accordingly he travels after death. He is reborn based on whatever is the predominant
thought at the time of death. This applies to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka also.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1543

śloka 9.138
अन्त्यप्रत्ययतो नूनं भाविजन्म तथा सति ।
निर्गुणप्रत्ययोऽपि स्यात्सगुणोपासने यथा ॥ ९.१३८ ॥
antyapratyayato nūnaṃ bhāvijanma tathā sati.
nirguṇapratyayo:'pi syātsaguṇopāsane yathā (9.138).
Now, the question is: is there punarjanma for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka? We have learnt
about saguṇa-brahma-upāsaka and that such people have krama-mukti. Whether it is
extended to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana too? Vidyāraṇya says that person is also an upāsaka
and as long as one is an upāsaka, he is not a jñānī and therefore, the law of punarjanma is
applicable. In this case also, the thought at the time of death decides his future birth. The
travel and future janma are bound to take place in the case of an upāsaka. He will get
krama-mukti. More in the next class.

Class 285
śloka 9.138 contd.
In these ślokas from 123 onwards, Vidyāraṇya talks about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-vṛtti
which being converted into nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna-vṛtti or to put it in another language,
ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana-vṛtti getting converted into ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna-vṛtti,
as jñāna alone can give liberation. This conversion is being talked about, nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana being a form of karma, it has the capacity to remove pratibandha or obstacle in
the mind. When the mental obstacles are removed mahāvākya-vicāra can become efficient
and mahāvākya-vicāra should continue along with nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The
upāsaka cannot afford to give up vicāra. Nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana however well it may
be done, by itself can never produce jñāna. This important principle must be very very
clearly underlined and noted. Ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana, however well it may be done,
cannot produce jñāna because of the reason that upāsana is never accepted as a pramāṇa
to gain jñāna. Always, a pramāṇa alone can generate knowledge and upāsana is not a
pramāṇa and therefore, whether it is saguṇa-upāsana or nirguṇa-upāsana whether it is
bheda-upāsana or abheda-upāsana or whether it is Nirvikalpaka samādhi or savikalpaka
samādhi none of them come under pramāṇa to gain jñāna. Mahāvākya alone is pramāṇa
and mahāvākya-vicāra is the employment of the pramāṇa. Aparokṣa jñāna has to come
from mahāvākya-vicāra alone. This is a non-negotiable principle. Therefore, nirguṇa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1544

brahma-upāsana must go along with mahāvākya-vicāra. Upāsana is to refine the mind

and I use vicāra to lead to jñāna. Therefore, the Ācāryas sometimes loosely make a
statement nirguṇa upāsana will lead to jñāna. Such vākyas are there and when we read
such vākya, we should take it, it is through mahāvākya-vicāra we gain jñāna. Vidyāraṇya
says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will lead to jñāna; there we should be alert and we should
understand that through mahāvākya-vicāra which is going on parallelly. This conversion
of upāsana into jñāna via vicāra can take place in this janma. This is the topic up to the
śloka 135. You can get jñāna via vicāra in this life itself or else this conversion of upāsana
into jñāna may not take place in this janma but it will take place in the latter janmas.
How can it take place in later janmas? Vidyāraṇya says: apply the same principle in the
case of saguṇa-upāsana which is a means of liberation wherein Kṛṣṇa said that whoever
remembers me at the time of death they will attain me after death which is mokṣa. There
in the 8th chapter we said saguṇa upāsaka will get mokṣa, means he will go through all the
travel and go to Brahmaloka where there are better facilities for conversion of this
knowledge and in Brahmaloka, jñāna is attained and liberation is attained which is known
as krama-mukti. In Brahma-sūtra, we had elaborate enquiry; extend the same principle to
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and those who follow this also will gain krama-mukti. All is
because he refuses to come to binary-format and remains in triangular-format. The result
is that he has to wait for krama-mukti.
Here, Pūrvapakṣī asks the question if the upāsaka has to go to Brahmaloka and attain
krama-mukti then upāsaka’s final thought becomes a significant condition. At the time of
maraṇa one has to chant oṃkāra and remember the upāsya if he has done saguṇa-upāsana
and he should think of saguṇa upāsya and if nirguṇa upāsaka he should remember
oṃkāra. This student asks the question what about nirguṇa upāsaka? Vidyāraṇya says
that he should also do that at the time of death. How is it possible? In the case of saguṇa
upāsaka, he is able to achieve that because he has practiced it throughout the life. It is
because of consistent and regular practice, at the time of death also, the thought of the
saguṇa-brahma thought is possible and in the case of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana also,
nirguṇa-vṛtti is possible and that will take him to Brahmaloka. It is only when one refuses
to gain jñāna in the current janma. The next birth is determined by the vṛtti obtaining at
the time of death. In support of that, Pūrvapakṣī quoted two pramāṇas in the previous
śloka. They are accepted by the Siddhāntī also. Smṛti pramāṇa of 8.6 of Gītā and Praśna

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1545

pramāṇa. A parallel idea is there in 3.14 of Chāndogya Upaniṣad and 4.4.5 and 6 in
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Both are famously known as tatkratu-nyāya it is parallel to
English proverb as the man thinks so he becomes. Nirguṇa upāsaka also has to follow this
Nyāya, therefore, at the time of death he should think of nirguṇa-brahman. Up to this is
Pūrvapakṣī.
For that, Vidyāraṇya says if that is your question, my answer is that nirguṇa-brahma-vṛtti
will definitely take place because of the strength of lifelong practice exactly like the
saguṇa-brahma upāsaka. All the rules are compulsory for the upāsakas and not for the
jñānis. The entire creation is mithyā for the jñānis. The whole thing is nāma-rūpa against
me who is Brahman. For a jñānī the nature of death does not play any role because his
liberation is a fact at the time of jñāna itself. All the rules are for those who are upāsakas
and or those who are in the triangular-format.

śloka 9.139
नित्यं निर्गुणरूपं तन्नाममात्रेण गीयताम्।
अर्थतोमोक्ष एवैष संवादि भ्रमवन्मतः ॥ ९.१३९ ॥
nityaṃ nirguṇarūpaṃ tannāmamātreṇa gīyatām.
arthatomokṣa evaiṣa saṃvādi bhramavanmataḥ (9.139).
Here, Vidyāraṇya answers a possible question, but not a serious one. A Pūrvapakṣī asks
suppose nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka thinks of nirguṇa-brahman at the time of death as per
tatkratu-nyāya, as a person thinks so he becomes, saguṇa bhakta will merge into saguṇa
Devatā and nirguṇa bhakta will be one with nirguṇa-brahman. The result will be nirguṇa-
brahma-aikya only, but he will not get mokṣa. For that, Vidyāraṇya says nirguṇa-brahma-
aikya alone is otherwise called as mokṣa. Such a person does not know nirguṇa-brahma-
aikya is another name for mokṣa. Nitya-nirguṇa-rūpa is called nithya nirguṇa-brahma-
aikya. But krama-mukti in our language is that nirguṇa-brahma-aikya. It is only a different
name for mokṣa. This nitya-nirguṇa-rūpa or nitya-nirguṇa-brahma-aikya, in essence, is
nothing but mokṣa. He gets krama-mukti and goes to Brahmaloka after death and from
whereon, gaining jñāna, he gets ultimate mokṣa.

śloka 9.140
तत्सामर्थ्याज्जायते धीर्मूलाविद्यानिवर्तिका ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1546

अविमुक्तोपासनेन तारकब्रह्म बुद्धिवत्॥ ९.१४० ॥

tatsāmarthyājjāyate dhīrmūlāvidyānivartikā.
avimuktopāsanena tārakabrahma buddhivat (9.140).
How will krama-mukti take place for the upāsaka? He says as a result of nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana followed throughout his life and as a result of the same nirguṇa-brahma thought
at the time of death, he reaches Brahmaloka. In Brahmaloka ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-jñāna
takes place and upāsana-vṛtti will be converted into jñāna-vṛtti. He will get Jīvātma-
Paramātma-aikya-jñāna. He gives Upaniṣad support in mantra 1 and 2 of Jābāla Upaniṣad
mantra 1 and 2 where it talks about Lord-Śiva-upāsana. Also refer to the last mantra of
Kaivalya Upaniṣad. Avimukta means not liberated which means saṃśārī. The
commentators give an ingenious definition.
Vimukta means free and free means free from all the dharma-adharma rules. All the
animals are not bound by dharma and adharma as they lack freewill. Therefore, cows are
called vimukta. Avimukta means one who is other than all the cows and he is Paśupati
who is none other than Lord Śiva. If a person does Śiva-upāsana, he will get mokṣa it is
said. When Īśvara-upāsana is done in Kāśī and if he does this at the time of death, it is said
Lord Śiva will do the upadeśa in the ears of the one who dies and he will get Jīvātma-
Paramātma-aikya and he will get liberation. It is said in the Jābāla Upaniṣad. So also
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsakas will gain jñāna in Brahmaloka and gain mukti.

śloka 9.141
सकामो निष्काम इति ह्यशरीरो निरिन्द्रियः ।
अभयं हीति मुक्तत्वं तापनीये फलं श्रुतम्॥ ९.१४१ ॥
sakāmo niṣkāma iti hyaśarīro nirindriyaḥ.
abhayaṃ hīti muktatvaṃ tāpanīye phalaṃ śrutam (9.141).
Here is another pramāṇa from Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad 5 th section 3rd mantra,
7th section 3rd mantra and 8th section 3rd mantra. Here, oṃkāra-vicāra and oṃkāra-upāsana
are talked about, exactly as in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. This can be practiced by two types of
people, one is practicing oṃkāra-brahma-vicāra and another is oṃkāra-brahma-upāsana.
Suppose one does not get jñāna, he will do oṃkāra-upāsana and as a result of which, he
will get krama-mukti and go to Brahmaloka. Here, he talks about krama-mukti for
oṃkāra-upāsakas. Niṣkāma means freedom from all available kāma and akama means

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1547

non-arrival of fresh kāma. It is means ātmani eva ātmanā tuṣṭaḥ. Binding desires are not
there for him. He can have non-binding desires for loka-saṅgraha. The second quotation is
this: this upāsaka will become Brahman through krama-mukti and as Brahman he is free
from śarīra and indrīya, etc. This is attained by oṃkāra- or nirguṇa-brahma-upāsakas. The
third quotation 8.3 says that Brahman-status is attained by the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka.
Mukti is said to be the phala for the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.

śloka 9.142
उपासनस्य सामर्थ्याद्विद्योत्पत्तिर्भवेत्ततः ।
नान्यः पन्था इति ह्येतच्छास्त्रं नैव विरुध्यते ॥ ९.१४२ ॥
upāsanasya sāmarthyādvidyotpattirbhavettataḥ.
nānyaḥ panthā iti hyetacchāstraṃ naiva virudhyate (9.142).
Vidyāraṇya in the previous śloka said nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana will get mokṣa. Naturally,
a question will come up: how can nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana give mokṣa whether it is done
in bhūloka or at the time of death or whether it is done in Brahmaloka? It is said in all the
Upaniṣad that jñāna alone will give mokṣa or liberation. An intelligent student asks a
question how do you make a śāstra-virodha-vākya? Śāstra says without jñāna one cannot
gain mokṣa. Vidyāraṇya says nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka does not get mokṣa directly but
gets jñāna before gaining mokṣa. It is only through vicāra and jñāna alone that nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana will lead to mokṣa.

śloka 9.143
निष्कामोपासनान्मुक्तिस्तापनीये समीरिता ।
ब्रह्मलोकः सकामस्य शैब्यप्रश्ने समीरितः ॥ ९.१४३ ॥
niṣkāmopāsanānmuktistāpanīye samīritā.
brahmalokaḥ sakāmasya śaibyapraśne samīritaḥ (9.143).
In all these portions, Vidyāraṇya quotes several Upaniṣad mantras in support of nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana as a means for krama-mukti. This he reinforces with the support of
Upaniṣad vākyas. This elaboration is only to make clear certain differences amongst the
Advaitins themselves regarding the phala of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Vidyāraṇya
deviates from conventional groups of saguṇa-brahma-upāsana for kramamukti and
nirguṇa-brahma-jñāna for sadyomukti and introduces a third group called nirguṇa-

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1548

brahma-upāsana for kramamukti. With oṃkāra-ālambana nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana

practice without desiring for anything else, if the upāsana is done, he gains krama-mukti
after death and goes to Brahmaloka from where on gaining jñāna he gets the ultimate
mokṣa. Here also, Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad mantras are quoted. The same topic
is discussed in the 5th chapter of Praśna Upaniṣad. More in the next class.

Class 286
śloka 9.143 contd.
Those who are unable to claim that I am nitya-mukta due to various obstacles are advised
to practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana and those people will gain krama-mukti and go to
Brahmaloka; there they will gain jñāna which will lead him to mokṣa the liberation. In this
regard, Vidyāraṇya gives support from Praśna Upaniṣad. Also quotations are given from
Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. Here, mukti is talked about to those niṣkāma-nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsakas. They get krama-mukti because they did not gain jñāna and mokṣa in
this janma. In the 5th chapter of Praśna Upaniṣad fifth disciple called Satyakāma asks the
question. The attainment of Brahmaloka is talked about for the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka.
He is the one desirous of going to Brahmaloka. It is also said that the upāsakas will gain
jñāna in Brahmaloka and gain mokṣa on gaining jñāna.

śloka 9.144
य उपास्ते त्रिमात्रेण ब्रह्मलोके स नीयते ।
स एतस्माज्जीवघनात्परं पुरुषमीक्षते ॥ ९.१४४ ॥
ya upāste trimātreṇa brahmaloke sa nīyate.
sa etasmājjīvaghanātparaṃ puruṣamīkṣate (9.144).
The relevant Praśna vākya is paraphrased here. Vidyāraṇya presents this in his own
language. There, the disciple wants to know about Oṃkāra. The whole chapter deals with
oṃkāra-upāsana alone. Pippalāda answers oṃkāra can represent both apara Brahman as
also Para Brahman. It refers to saguṇa and nirguṇa-brahman, respectively. Here, the
upāsana is divided into three types. Eka-mātra, dvi-mātra and tri-mātra oṃkāra-upāsana
or upāsana in which one mātra is highlighted ākāra-pradhāna and the second where two
mātras are highlighted ākāra and ukāra and in the final upāsana all the three mātras are

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1549

given equal importance ākāra, ukāra and makāra and for each of these upāsanas, phala is
mentioned.
With eka-mātra-upāsana one will come back to manuṣya-loka, with dvi-mātra-upāsana
one will go to svarga-loka and return to manuṣya-loka and with tri-mātra-upāsana one
will go to Brahmaloka get krama-mukti, and from there on, gaining jñāna he will gain
mokṣa. In Brahmaloka, sense-pleasures are there but this upāsaka will get an opportunity
to gain jñāna. In Brahmaloka, he claims I am Brahman. Also refer to
īkṣatikarmādhikaraṇam 1.3.13 where this krama-mukti is talked about.

śloka 9.145
अप्रतीकाधिकरणे तत्क्रतुर्न्याय ईरितः ।
ब्रह्मलोकफलं तस्मात्सकामस्येति वर्णितम्॥ ९.१४५ ॥
apratīkādhikaraṇe tatkraturnyāya īritaḥ.
brahmalokaphalaṃ tasmātsakāmasyeti varṇitam (9.145).
The same idea is discussed in Brahma-sūtra elsewhere. There is another place where some
more details regarding the upāsana are discussed. That is called
apratīkālambanādhikaraṇam. The sūtra is a long one 4.3.15 apratīkālambanānnayatīti
bādarāyaṇa ubhayathā:'doṣāttatkratuśca. In short, the whole section is called Apratīka
adhikāraṇa consisting of two sūtras 4.3.15-16. There, Vyāsācārya discusses about tatkratu
nyāya, as the one sows so he reaps. As a person meditates so he becomes after death. In
the 8th chapter of Gītā also the same topic is discussed. This also occurs in Śāṇḍīlya vidyā
using the word tatkratu. Whatever strong desire is there at the time of death, will have its
influence at the time of rebirth. This śloka and next śloka are commentaries on the śloka
144.

śloka 9.146
निर्गुणोपास्तिसामर्थ्यात्तत्र तत्त्वमवेक्षणत्।
पुनरावर्तते नायं कल्पान्ते तु विमुच्यते ॥ ९.१४६ ॥
nirguṇopāstisāmarthyāttatra tattvamavekṣaṇat.
punarāvartate nāyaṃ kalpānte tu vimucyate (9.146).
The 144th verse second line is explained in this śloka. That upāsaka, oṃkāra-nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsaka, knows tattva and claims ahaṃ brahma asmi without any reservation to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1550

claim I am a jñānī. All the students have the problem. Only to gain confidence that I am
Brahman takes time.
Sometimes one has to go to Brahmaloka through nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana to claim that I
am Brahman. It is all because of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-phala. Once he gains
knowledge in Brahmaloka, he gains mokṣa. At the time of mahā pralaya he merges with
Brahman once for all. It is said in Brahma-sūtra also. They along with Brahmāji get
liberation. The krama-mukti is talked about in the Praśna Upaniṣad.

śloka 9.147
प्रणवोपास्तयः प्रायो निर्गुणा एव वेदगाः ।
क्वचित्सगुणता प्रोक्ता प्रणवोपासनस्य हि ॥ ९.१४७ ॥
praṇavopāstayaḥ prāyo nirguṇā eva vedagāḥ.
kvacitsaguṇatā proktā praṇavopāsanasya hi (9.147).
Here, he makes a general remark before going to another Upaniṣad pramāṇa for krama-
mukti. All the oṃkāra-upāsanas found in the Vedas nirguṇah eva they are all nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsanas. We had seen Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad is one and Praśna
Upaniṣad is number two they all talk about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsanas.

All Smritis and Śrutis talk about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana except a few about saguṇa-
upāsana. In this upāsana, oṃkāra is the symbol and nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana is invoked;
these upāsanas are sometimes named as nirguṇa-oṃkāra-upāsana or nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. It is in nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana that Brahman is invoked on oṃkāra ālambana.
We call this as nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Oṃkāra-upāsana is rarely saguṇa-brahma-
upāsana also.

śloka 9.148
परापरब्रह्मरूप ओङ्कार उपवर्णितः ।
पिप्पलादेन मुनिना सत्यकामाय पृच्छते ॥ ९.१४८ ॥
parāparabrahmarūpa oṅkāra upavarṇitaḥ.
pippalādena muninā satyakāmāya pṛcchate (9.148).
Here, he says Praśna Upaniṣad is itself an example for both saguṇa and nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana upon oṃkāra. He quotes the relevant mantra 5.2. He gives the synopsis of that

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1551

mantra. Oṃkāra symbol was taught to the śiṣya for para and apara brahma-upāsana, that
is nirguṇa- and saguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Para-apara-brahma-rūpa upāsana is talked
about in the Praśna Upaniṣad.

śloka 9.149
एतदालम्बनं ज्ञात्वा यो यदिच्छति तस्य तत्।
इति प्रोक्तं यमेनापि पृच्छते नचिके तसे ॥ ९.१४९ ॥
etadālambanaṃ jñātvā yo yadicchati tasya tat.
iti proktaṃ yamenāpi pṛcchate naciketase (9.149).
Here is another quotation from Kaṭhopaniṣad 1.2.16-17. By meditating upon oṃkāra
ālambana or oṃkāra pratīka, desiring either saguṇa-brahman or nirguṇa-brahman, it can
be attained. Here also both apara and para are indicated. It is called sakāma upāsana. One
person wants to become Hiraṇyagarbha and another wants to become Brahman. For this
oṃkāra-upāsana is suggested. Saguṇa-brahma-upāsaka will reach saguṇa-brahman and
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka will reach nirguṇa-brahman. If it is a finite goal you have to
reach, and if it is an infinite goal reaching is knowing. You have to know either here or in
Brahmaloka, going to one loka or the other; you may go to any loka, even reaching
Brahmaloka but know; wherever knowledge is it is ‘attainment’ in the case of nirguṇa-
brahman. It is a very famous statement: paraṃ cet jñātavyaṃ, aparaṃ cet prāptavyam. In
this regard refer to kāryādhikaraṇam. There is an elaborate analysis establishing that
nirguṇa-brahman is never reached by travel. Why not? It is so because it happens to be
myself; where then is the question of travel!

śloka 9.150
इह वा मरणे वास्य ब्रह्मलोके ऽथवा भवेत्।
ब्रह्मसाक्षात्कृ तिः सम्यगुपासीनस्य निर्गुणम्॥ ९.१५० ॥
iha vā maraṇe vāsya brahmaloke:'thavā bhavet.
brahmasākṣātkṛtiḥ samyagupāsīnasya nirguṇam (9.150).
What is the essence of all the discussion? It is that nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka will get jñāna,
though where and when depends. He will get it somewhere at some time. For a person
who practices nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana either on oṃkāra or upon himself [ahaṅgraha
upāsana], he will gain krama-mukti and go to Brahmaloka and from there on gaining

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1552

jñāna will get merged with Brahman at the time of pralaya, along with everything. This
upāsana is meant for the person who does not claim I am Brahman. If I claim I am
Brahman, there is no need of upāsana. It is only for those who don’t claim themeselves as
Brahman. If it is a fact, I am mukta, I don’t require any sādhana; if it is not a fact for me, I
have to do upāsana ahaṃ brahma asmi. This is meant for those who stick to triangular-
format and not converting themselves to binary-format. The realization of Brahman and
claiming oneself with Brahman can take place here and now or at the time of death or on
reaching Brahmaloka after doing nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana.

Class 287
śloka 9.150 contd.
In these ślokas, from śloka 136 Vidyāraṇya talks about nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana as a
means of krama-mukti itself if a person is not able to come to knowledge in this very
janma. In support of this krama-mukti, Vidyāraṇya gives several scriptural statements as
support from Śruti, Smṛti, etc. In Brahma-sūtra also, it is discussed kāryadhikāraṇam
especially sūtra 4.3.14. This krama-mukti as a result of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana on
oṃkāra is discussed in Brahma-sūtra īkṣatikarmādhikaraṇam 1.3.13. Now, in the
following ślokas he gives another supporting pramāṇa known as Ātmā-Purāṇa or Ātmā
Gītā.

śloka 9.151
अर्थोऽयमात्मगीतायामपि स्पष्टमुदीरितः ।
विचाराक्षम आत्मानमुपासीतेति सन्ततम्॥ ९.१५१ ॥
artho:'yamātmagītāyāmapi spaṣṭamudīritaḥ.
vicārākṣama ātmānamupāsīteti santatam (9.151).
Here, Vidyāraṇya points out ‘vicārākṣamaḥ ātmānam upasita’. A person who is not able to
complete mahāvākya-vicāra properly and is not able to get aparokṣa jñāna because of one
obstacle or the other, he has only parokṣa jñāna of nirguṇa-brahman; by the analysis of
avāntara-vākyas he has parokṣa jñāna, but he is not able to do mahāvākya-vicāra because
of some obstacle; such a person who has parokṣa jñāna and is incapable of mahāvākya-
vicāra successfully. He should meditate upon Ātmā or nirguṇa-brahman regularly. This is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1553

the instruction of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. The whole thing is within quotation. This

particular instruction which I have been dealing with in all the ślokas has been taught by
another Ācārya also in Ātmā Gītā. It is also known as Ātmā-Purāṇa. It is attributed to
Śaṅkarānanda who happens to be Vidyāraṇya’s Guru himself. This Śaṅkarānanda has
written several Vedāntic works, one famous work is Ātmā-Purāṇa which is similar to
Anubhūti-prakāśa of Vidyāraṇya. It is the analysis of Upaniṣads mostly taken from Dāsa
Upaniṣads plus one or two additions like Nṛsiṃha-uttara-tāpanīya Upaniṣad. It is a
voluminous work analyzing the Upaniṣad and it is called Ātmā-Purāṇa. It is available also
with a Sanskrit commentary. In that spaṣṭaṃ udīritaḥ this idea of nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana for a parokṣa jñānī has been clearly taught. The relevant quotations are given.
They are 152, 153 and 154.

śloka 9.152
साक्षात्कर्तुमशक्तोऽपि चिन्तयेन्मामशङ्कितः ।
कालेनानुभवारूढो भवेयं फलतो ध्रुवम्॥ ९.१५२ ॥
sākṣātkartumaśakto:'pi cintayenmāmaśaṅkitaḥ.
kālenānubhavārūḍho bhaveyaṃ phalato dhruvam (9.152).
The exact number is not known, but they are quotations from Ātmā-Purāṇa only.
Śaṅkarānanda gives instruction by assuming nirguṇa-brahman as an Ācārya. Now,
Brahman talks. Oh student! Even if you are not able to claim ahaṃ brahma asmi as a fact,
and not able to come to binary-format successfully to gain aparokṣa jñāna, then you
practice meditation imagining that I am Brahman. You are not convinced that you are
Brahman but I ask you to imagine that you are Brahman; in this manner, may you
meditate without any hesitation or reservation. This upāsana itself will produce puṇya
because it is a karma and that puṇya will remove all the obstacles; then you yourself will
be able to come to jñāna in due course. Thus, you will become the viṣaya object of
aparokṣa-jñāna. In the beginning stages you are the object of meditation and later you will
become the object of aparokṣa-jñāna itself. It may happen in this janma or it may happen
at the time of death or in Brahmaloka that you will come to this knowledge proper. Here,
Brahman says I will be known to you.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1554

śloka 9.153
यथागाधनिधेर्लब्धौ नोपायः खननं विना ।
मल्लाभेऽपि तथा स्वात्मचिन्तां मुक्ता न चापरः ॥ ९.१५३ ॥
yathāgādhanidherlabdhau nopāyaḥ khananaṃ vinā.
mallābhe:'pi tathā svātmacintāṃ muktā na cāparaḥ (9.153).
Ātmā Purāṇa quotation continues. Here, an example is given for nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
and it is the example of digging a well or a borewell. How many feet we have to go down
we do not know and the borewell-machine will go on digging until the water is found.
You go on digging further and further until you find the water hoping that at some depth,
water will be available. Similarly, how long nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana should continue,
just as the digging will vary from area to area, so you should go on meditate and the
upāsana-time differs from one individual to another individual. The destination is that
ahaṃ brahma asmi must become a fact for me, aham nitya-mukta must be a fact for me, I
am no more a sādhaka must be a fact for me, I am no more a mumukṣu must be a fact for
me and that is the indication for jñāna-prāpti.

Nidhi means a treasure or water in this context. I gave the example of water as it has
become a treasure now. It is deeply located under the ground. There is no other method to
find it out other than digging, digging and digging to locate the water. This is the example.
Now comes the dārṣṭānta. In the same way, in finding me also, that is Brahman, which is
nothing but acquisition of aparokṣa jñāna, there is no other means other than svātma-cintā.
Here cintā refers to nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. Svātma means nirguṇa-brahman. Cintā
means upāsana.

śloka 9.154
देहोपलमपाकृ त्य बुद्धिकुद्दलकात्पुनः ।
खात्वा मनोभुवं भूयो गृह्णीयान्मां निधिं पुमान्॥ ९.१५४ ॥
dehopalamapākṛtya buddhikuddalakātpunaḥ.
khātvā manobhuvaṃ bhūyo gṛhṇīyānmāṃ nidhiṃ pumān (9.154).
In the previous śloka a reference of Vivekacūḍāmaṇi is given although the quotation is
from Ātmā Purāṇa. In Vivekacūḍāmaṇi śloka the same example is given. The śloka there
is different, it is a longer śloka. Discovering Brahman also involves some kind of digging.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1555

Naturally, the question will come what is the land or area to be dug and what is the
crowbar or pickaxe to be used and what are the rocks covering Brahman? That is also
extended in this śloka. The bhūmi where the Ātmā is hidden is the mind or antaḥkaraṇa.
The mind is the earth. It is something very much similar to clay soil. Deha is the rocks that
cover the Ātmā. The hard body is the rock and the earth which covers the Ātmā is the
mind. The mind is compared to the earth because inside the mind alone Śākṣi-caitanya
dwells. In Chāndogya Upaniṣad, dahara-vidyā elaborates that Ātmā dwells in the mind or
where Brahman is hidden. The buddhi is compared to the crowbar or pickaxe or any
digging instrument. It is supported by Guru-śāstra-upadeśa. With the intellect, may you
remove the body rock, the various kośas. It is not physical removal but removal is
dropping the deha-abhimāna or the attachment towards the body. As even you go
interior, the outer layers are removed as it were. In this manner, digging the mind, the
ground which is the mind as it were, repeatedly again and again, the student or the seeker
will finally grasp the nidhi, the treasure that is ‘I am the Brahman’ knowledge. This is
given in support of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. We should know the difference between
nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana-repetition and mahāvākya-vicāra-repetition; the former will
come under karma and the second will lead to aparokṣa jñāna; nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana
will lead to mahāvākya-vicāra. This you should know.

śloka 9.155
अनुभूतेरभावेऽपि ब्रह्मास्मीत्येव चिन्त्यताम्।
अप्यसत्प्राप्यते ध्यानान्नित्याप्तं ब्रह्म किं पुनः ॥ ९.१५५ ॥
anubhūterabhāve:'pi brahmāsmītyeva cintyatām.
apyasat prāpyate dhyānānnityāptaṃ brahma kiṃ punaḥ (9.155).
The quotation part is over. Vidyāraṇya continues with the topic of nirguṇa-brahma-
upāsana. Even if you are not convinced that you are Brahman, there is nothing wrong in
practicing the claim that I am Brahman. People ask the question why repeat the Brahma-
meditation? The repetition is worth doing because faking will lead to making later and the
second thing is that it can serve as a japa for it is a vākya coming from Upaniṣads. When
the mantras can give purity of the mind and can lead to knowledge, ahaṃ brahma asmi
also can be treated as mahāvākya mantra and if one cannot convert it into knowledge, let
him convert it into a japa and chant the mantra. In Taittirīya Upaniṣad, a mantra of this

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1556

type is suggested for chanting. Even if you don’t understand the meaning, even if you
repeat the mantra, the phala is jñāna-prāpti says Adi Śaṅkarācārya, though not directly
but indirectly. Mahāvākya can be used for japa or dhyāna also. All the saguṇa-mantra-
japas can be replaced by aikya-mantra-japas also by a Vedāntic student without feeling
any guilt or conflict. Bhagavān expects us to go from saguṇa to nirguṇa because the
transition-teaching is given by Bhagavān himself through the Vedas; therefore, going from
saguṇa to nirguṇa. It is not sacrilege. So saguṇa-japa can be replaced by nirguṇa- japa.
Saguṇa-brahma-upāsana can be replaced by nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. If there is jñāna, all
the above things will become irrelevant. One may choose to continue japa, etc., but it is not
compulsory and it is optional. In fact, this is suggested in sandhyāvandana itself. Let it be
meditated in this manner.
Suppose a person asks the question: suppose I repeatedly say ahaṃ brahma asmi, by this
repetition, will I get the actual Brahman-status? For that, Vidyāraṇya gives an interesting
answer. Normally, even for saguṇa-upāsana the phala prescribed is as the upāsana so the
phala is. Virāṭ-upāsanena Virāṭ-aikyam bhavati, Hiraṇyagarbha-upāsanena
Hiraṇyagarbha-aikyam bhavati; in Kaṭhopaniṣad Yama says I practiced such a sādhana as
a result of which I have become Yama. That means by upāsana upon a particular Devatā
that Devatā-status will come after death. This is the promise of the scriptures. Devatā-
upasanayā devatvam prapnoti. Vidyāraṇya asks the question when he will get certainly
not now; for he is not a Devatā; after death he will acquire devatva. It means at the time of
Devatā upāsana devatva was not there. That devatva he got later by upāsana.
Vidyāraṇya’s argument is interesting. Non-existing devatva itself because of the upāsana,
the upāsaka got later. Now, he says kaimuthika-nyāyena when nirguṇa-brahma-upāsaka
meditates ahaṃ brahma asmi as an imagination, he asks the question will I get brahmatva
later. Vidyāraṇya argues why he should get brahmatva later because even at the time of
upāsana unfortunately or fortunately he happens to be Brahman! Upāsana-kale itself
brahmatva is there, then what to talk of discovering brahmatva later. If non-existing
devatva can be gained later after upāsana why cannot the already existing brahmatva be
discovered later through upāsana because you are already Brahman yourself!

śloka 9.156
अनात्मबुद्धिशैथिल्यं फलं ध्यानाद्दिने दिने ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1557

पश्यन्नपि न चेद्ध्यायेत्कोऽपरोऽस्मात्पशुर्वद ॥ ९.१५६ ॥

anātmabuddhiśaithilyaṃ phalaṃ dhyānāddine dine.
paśyannapi na ceddhyāyetko:'paro:'smāt paśurvada (9.156).
Here, Vidyāraṇya makes another interesting observation. He says he can not only give a
guarantee that the upāsana will help you discover Brahman in yourself, but he says you
can yourself see the benefit of nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana or ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana;
that will be the proof of its efficacy. As you practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana, anātma-
abhimāna or aham-mama-abhimāna will weaken gradually, which you can feel it yourself.
It will weaken profession-, possession-, family-, body- and the mind-attachment. In the
first three you have strong mamakāra and in body and the mind you have strong
ahaṅkāra. This anātma-abhimāna will slowly weaken or fade. The litmus test for the
fading is that anxiety, fear and worry, etc., with regard to the five will fade which you can
see for yourself. You will find your response to adverse situations will slowly reduce and
go off. Frequency-, intensity- and recovery- [FIR] reduction by the practice of nirguṇa-
brahma-upāsana everyday will give you benefit of realizing Brahman. This person is as
good as an animal if he does not do upāsana even after knowing the good results of the
upāsanas.

śloka 9.157
देहाभिमानं विध्वस्य ध्यानादात्मानमद्वयम्।
पश्यन्मर्त्यो मृतो भूत्वा ह्यत्र ब्रह्म समश्नुते ॥ ९.१५७ ॥
dehābhimānaṃ vidhvasya dhyānādātmānamadvayam.
paśyanmartyo mṛto bhūtvā hyatra brahma samaśnute (9.157).
If this intelligent human being, the upāsaka, having seen the benefit of upāsana, continues
the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana it will gradually convert into vicāra, jñāna, and take him to
mokṣa without difficulty. This is the essence of this śloka. When the ahaṅkāra and
mamakāra are reduced, one will later through vicāra get advaya Ātmā aparokṣa jñāna
which will take one to liberation.

śloka 9.158
ध्यानदीपमिमं सम्यक्परामृषति यो नरः ।
मुक्तसंशय एवायं ध्यायति ब्रह्म सन्ततम्॥ ९.१५८ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1558

dhyānadīpamimaṃ samyakparāmṛṣati yo naraḥ.

muktasaṃśaya evāyaṃ dhyāyati brahma santatam (9.158).
With the previous śloka, the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana topic is over. It is conversion of
upāsana-vṛtti to jñāna-vṛtti. Suppose a student studies the 9 th chapter of Pañcadaśī well,
then he will have no doubt regarding the nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana; as a result of clearly
understanding the role, he will regularly practice nirguṇa-brahma-upāsana. With this
phala is also over. The ninth chapter of Pañcadaśī is also over.

Class 288

Summary of the ninth chapter: Dhyāna-dīpa-prakaraṇa

Today I will give you a summary of the 9 th chapter of Pañcadaśī titled dhyāna-dīpa-
prakaraṇa consisting of 158 ślokas. This chapter conveys a unique idea because of which it
is a controversial chapter and for many students it is a confusing chapter. Therefore,
before dealing with the topics of the chapter I will present the teaching contained in this
chapter in my own language independent of the text. Any idea that we have is called a
right idea only when that idea is in agreement with the fact. In Sanskrit we call it pramā.
Any idea which is not in agreement with the fact is called a wrong idea and in Sanskrit we
call it bhrama. Right idea is in agreement with the fact and wrong idea is not in agreement
with the fact. First, register in your mind right and wrong idea pramā and bhrama. Up to
this there is no problem. In this chapter, Vidyāraṇya divides the wrong idea itself into two
types. We find in the creation many things which are real and fake. Real and fake things
are found everywhere in the world. In jewellery also, we have the real and the duplicate.
Similarly, in doctors we have the real and the fake. We have asli and nakli.
Vidyāraṇya says a wrong idea is also of two types. If real and fake are possible in
everything, real and fake are possible with regard to a wrong idea itself. Therefore, a
wrong idea can be sub-divided into two types. One is a real wrong idea and the other is a
fake wrong idea! You should be highly imaginative to understand these two. What is the
difference between the real wrong idea and the fake wrong idea? A real wrong idea is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1559

really a wrong idea. Therefore, it is always a wrong idea in all the three periods of time.
Then, what is a fake wrong idea? A fake wrong idea is really not a wrong idea at all. It is a
right idea, but because of some mistake, we have falsely taken the right idea as wrong
idea. Since a fake wrong idea is really a right idea, we have only mistaken ly taken it as a
wrong idea; the fake wrong idea is subject to correction. Here, the mistake can be
corrected. When we correct the mistake with regard to a fake wrong idea, then we correct
the mistake with regard to a fake wrong idea, and we will discover that it is a right idea.
Therefore, a fake wrong idea is not a permanent wrong idea unlike the real wrong idea.
The real wrong idea is always wrong but the fake wrong idea is subject to correction, and
on correction, the fake wrong idea will be converted into the right idea. Therefore, the fake
wrong idea is a temporary wrong idea. The fake wrong idea is a convertible wrong idea.
The present fake wrong idea will tally with future right idea whereas present real wrong
idea will never tally with future right idea. Therefore, the fake wrong idea will always
conform to the future right idea. Therefore, it is called a conforming wrong idea. It is so
because it conforms to the future right idea. But the real wrong idea is a non-conforming
wrong idea because a real wrong idea will never conform to the future right idea.
Therefore, a real wrong idea is called visaṃvādi-bhrama, non-conforming wrong idea, but
a fake wrong idea is called conforming wrong idea and in Sanskrit saṃvādi-bhrama.
Now, you have to remember three words one is right idea; two is real wrong idea and
three, the fake wrong idea.
1. Right idea is called pramā;
2. real wrong idea is called visaṃvādi bhrama and
3. fake wrong idea is called saṃvādi-bhrama.
Saṃvādi-bhrama can be converted into pramā because saṃvādi-bhrama is really a right
idea only but because of mistake it has been taken as a wrong idea; on correcting the
mistake it will become a pramā. So saṃvādi-bhrama is the right idea mistaken as wrong
idea and pramā is when it is converted into right idea by correcting the mistake. This is
the stage number one. Now, let us go to the second stage. We said the fake wrong idea is
convertible into right idea; it can be corrected. Therefore, fake wrong idea or saṃvādi-
bhrama is available for conversion into pramā by various methods. Vidyāraṇya says
several methods are there for the conversion of fake wrong idea into right idea. The first
method is vicāra or the enquiry. Enquiry or vicāra converts the fake wrong idea into right

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1560

idea. In this ninth chapter the main teaching is that there is a supportive method also. It is
like pathya for medicine. He says the supportive method is repetition of the fake wrong
idea itself.
The very repetition will make the wrong one into right one. The repetition must be done
with saṃvādi-bhrama along with vicāra. It is a faster method to convert saṃvādi-bhrama
into pramā. In this repetition of saṃvādi-bhrama as a supportive method, Vidyāraṇya
calls it as upāsana. It is a unique upāsana prescribed in the ninth chapter. This helps the
process of conversion of saṃvādi-bhrama into pramā. This is the second stage of
understanding. Upāsana is nothing but saṃvādi-bhrama-āvṛtti eva.
Now, we are in third stage. To understand the two stages we don’t have any popular
examples. Therefore, I am not going to give any any example. Where popular examples
are not there, if I struggle to give an example, it will create more complication; instead of
confusing you with examples, the above two we will apply to Vedānta directly, in which
case, we can understand it better. Imagine a Guru teaches Vedānta to several disciples. He
has taught Vedānta consistently and systematically for a length of time. After completion
of the teaching, the Guru calls a disciple. He asks the question: now that I have taught you
for several years can you now claim ‘I am liberated’? Imagine the answer of the first
student is ‘I am convinced with your teaching and I can confidently claim that I am
liberated because I have understood I am not the body-mind-complex; I am the śākṣī Ātmā
and śākṣī Ātmā is ever liberated; and I am the śākṣī Ātmā and therefore, I am always
liberated; therefore, I can boldly proudly and confidently claim I am now liberated;
therefore, I am totally satisfied with the teaching because now I am free’. He also adds of
course I know that ‘My mind requires a lot of refinement and I am going to refine my
mind without any fear or concern, I will refine my mind though my liberation has no
connection with the status of the mind; the mind-refinement I will do because it is
enjoyable and useful for transactions, I will do the refinement without connecting that
with my liberation. Therefore, I have no anxiety whether I will get liberated in this janma
or will it get postponed or will it get delayed; without any such anxiety or fear I am going
to feel relaxed as a free one; I will refine the mind but I am liberated’. The student answers
like this. Then what will be the response of the teacher? Naturally, the teacher is already
happy as a teacher and now the student has successfully grasped the teaching; the
successful student makes the teacher feel that I am a successful teacher. Previously, he was

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1561

happy as a teacher; now, after listening to the answer of the student, he is more happy as a
successful teacher for the student feels “I am liberated”. This idea is a pramā for the
student. Remember the student number one for whom ‘I am liberated is an idea which is a
right idea otherwise called pramā’.

Let us come to student number two. The teacher after the private interview with student
number one calls the student number two for a private interview. He asks the same
question. Now, can you claim I am now liberated? The student after thinking for sometime
says ‘I would love to claim I am liberated; because I know if I do that you will be happy;
certainly, I would like to give you joy but I want to be honest with you. I don’t think I can
claim liberated at present. I am not confident enough to claim I am liberated. He gives lot
of śāstric reasoning also. He says I don’t have sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti in full measure.
I have a long way to go. I have no amānitva in full measure. Abhayam sattva-samśuddhi I
don’t have in full measure. Sthitaprājña lakṣaṇā I don’t tally with. Therefore, I cannot
claim I am liberated. If I claim I am liberated that idea will be a wrong idea. It will be a
fake claim and that idea will come under a wrong idea, to claim I am liberated. For student
number two claiming I am liberated is a wrong idea. Now, we will analyse for the student
number two when he claims I am liberated is a wrong idea, what kind of wrong idea it is.
Is it a real wrong idea or is it a fake wrong idea? Claiming I am liberated really speaking is
a right idea only. It is right idea from śāstra pramāṇa. From teacher’s angle also claiming I
am liberated is a right idea. But for the peculiar number two, he vehemently argues if I
claim I am liberated now it comes under for him it is a wrong idea therefore, it comes
under saṃvādi-bhrama, whereas for the student number one claiming I am liberated is a
right idea.
Vidyāraṇya says the student number two who says I am liberated is a wrong idea now; he
wants in future to claim I am liberated as a right idea. Therefore, the student number two
is interested in converting saṃvādi-bhrama into pramā. Student number one says I am
liberated and it is the right idea. For the second student it is a wrong idea. Now,
Vidyāraṇya addresses the student and teaches him how to convert saṃvādi-bhrama into
pramā I am liberated right idea from wrong idea. He wants the fake wrong idea to be
converted into a right idea. Vidyāraṇya says he has to do two sādhanas. Vicāra is primary
sādhana which he has to continue. Along with the primary sādhana, vicāra, Vidyāraṇya

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1562

gives a supportive sādhana which he calls the repetition of saṃvādi-bhrama claiming I am

liberated even though the student thinks that I am liberated is a wrong idea, since it is a
fake wrong idea. He says you repeat that along with vicāra; by this repetition the fake
wrong idea I am liberated, it will be converted into a right idea. In the future, he will claim
I am liberated like the first student. Thus, the repetition I am liberated as a supportive
sādhana along with vicāra is called ahaṃ-brahma-asmi-upāsana. It is for the student
number two to convert him into student number one. This is the thesis of the 9 th chapter.
From śloka number 1 to 12 he talks about two types of wrong ideas real wrong idea
visaṃvādi bhrama fake wrong idea saṃvādi-bhrama. He gives several examples. This is
the topic one.
The second topic is from śloka 13 to 29. It is the repetition of a fake wrong idea to convert
it into real or right idea. Fake wrong idea is saṃvādi-bhrama and the repetition is called
upāsana and the converting it into right idea is called pramā. This sādhana is talked about
for the student two. Student number two is adhikārī for this kind of upāsana to convert
saṃvādi-bhrama into pramā. Previously, he said I am not liberated to later, I am liberated,
the right idea. This is topic number two.
Third topic is from 30 to 52. It is the right idea that is pramā can be acquired only through
vicāra. vicāra is the primary and only method to acquire pramā for all people, ajñānī
student as well student number two. He has to continue until pramā takes place, whether
in this janma or in future janma.
The fourth topic is from 53 to 73. It is that upāsana is possible with regard to saṃvādi-
bhrama for the student number two. Why is it possible? What is the logic? This we have to
understand. The logic is that the upāsana of the student number two is the same as the
nididhyāsana of the student number one. Student number one in nididhyāsana repeats I
am liberated. Student number two in upāsana will repeat I am liberated. The nididhyāsana
of student one and upāsana of the student two both are essentially the same in terms of
content and process, process being repetition of the vṛtti. In the case of student one it is
pramā-āvṛtti and in the case of student two it will be named saṃvādi-bhrama-āvṛtti; since
the content and process are the same, if nididhyāsana is possible, upāsana is also possible
and if upāsana is not possible, nididhyāsana also will be impossible, since both are
essentially the same in terms of content and process. Therefore, the conclusion is that if

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1563

nididhyāsana is possible upāsana is also possible. Whatever objection you raise for
upāsana, I will raise for nididhyāsana.
The next topic is from 74 to 122. The question will be if the content and procedure are the
same for student one and student two, why do you give two different names? The content
is I am liberated, the procedure is repetition. It is the same for student one and student
two; then, why do you call that as nididhyāsana and this as upāsana? Vidyāraṇya says the
two names are given not based on the content or procedure, but two names are given
based on two different perspectives of the two students. When the student one repeats his
perspective it is a pramā and I am liberated is a fact, and I am totally relaxed and I am not
afraid of delay or postponement in liberation, still I repeat this not for getting pramā, but
to remove the habitual notion that I am a saṃśārī, that I am a sādhaka, that I am a
mumukṣu, etc. It is not for the sake of pramā. When I am liberated is repeated not for
pramā but is repeated to remove the habitual notion it is called nididhyāsana and the
purpose is viparīta-bhāvanā-nivṛtti. However, when the student number two is repeating I
am liberated, he does not repeat as a right idea. For him it is a wrong idea, it is fake wrong
idea. He repeats I am liberated thinking that it is a wrong idea. He thinks I have to do
sādhana, etc, with this perspective that it is a wrong idea and he does it to covert the
wrong idea into right idea. But this repetition is saṃvādi-bhrama-āvṛtti and it will come
under upāsana. Here, the purpose is not viparīta-bhāvanā-nivṛtti but it is to covert
saṃvādi-bhrama to pramā. When it is upāsana, it is to go with vicāra. In the case of
student number one, vicāra is not required. This is the difference between upāsana and
nididhyāsana for student number two and student one respectively, even though the
content and procedure are same only. He gives a lot of pramāṇas to support the idea.
The final topic is from 123 to 157, where he encourages the anxious student to get
liberated. He addresses the anxious student to continue the saṃvādi-bhrama-āvṛtti along
with vicāra. If you do that, one day saṃvādi-bhrama will be understood as pramā and you
will say I am liberated confidently, so confident that you will challenge everyone include
God or Guru or anyone, why cannot I claim I am liberated? Improve the mind as a hobby
but don’t connect it with the fact that I am asaṅga Ātmā whose liberation is not dependent
on the fate of the mind; this is the topic of the 9th chapter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1564

Chapter X: Nāṭaka-dīpa-prakaraṇa
॥नाटकदीपोनाम - दशमः परिच्छेदः॥

Class 289

Introduction
Having completed the 9th chapter titled Dhyāna-dīpa-prakaraṇa, we will enter the 10th
chapter titled Nāṭaka-dīpa-prakaraṇa, a small chapter consisting only 26 ślokas. The next
five chapters I will give only a general summary. In this chapter, Vidyāraṇya beautifully
reveals the śākṣī by giving the example of nāṭaka-dīpa, a lamp which is situated in a
theatre or a dance theatre. The lamp illumines the whole theatre without undergoing any
change, without participating in the programme. It is not the drama-role-player, it is not
even the spectator, it just illumines the whole programme; similarly, śākṣī changelessly
illumines the theatre where the life goes on; the participants are the tripuṭī while the śākṣī
is outside the tripuṭī without playing any one of these three roles. It is neither pramāṇa,
pramātṛ, prameya; it is neither kartā nor kāraṇa nor karma. It is tripuṭa-atīta, tripuṭi-
prakāśaka, nirvikāra śākṣī. This śākṣī is identical with Brahman which is deśa-kāla-atīta.
Time and space is available only when tripuṭī is operational. śākṣī being beyond tripuṭī, it
is beyond deśa and kāla. This is one of the most popular chapters of Pañcadaśī. This title is
also beautiful for if we understand this chapter the whole life will also become a nāṭaka
and I am only a nāṭaka-dīpa. With this background, we will enter chapter 10.

śloka 10.1
परमात्माद्वयानन्दपूर्णः पूर्वं स्वमायया ।
स्वयमेव जगद्भूत्वा प्राविशज्जीवरूपतः ॥ १०.१ ॥
paramātmādvayānandapūrṇaḥ pūrvaṃ svamāyayā.
svayameva jagadbhūtvā prāviśajjīvarūpataḥ (10.1).
Vidyāraṇya introduces the subject matter in the first five ślokas. He briefly mentions the
sṛṣṭi done by Paramātmā, he talks about the Jīva who is within the sṛṣṭi and he talks about

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1565

saṃsāra experienced by the Jīva; and then, he talks about the necessity of vicāra to remedy
the saṃsāra. In four steps, he jumps from sṛṣṭi to vicāra:
1. Paramātmā created the world,
2. the miserable Jīva is trapped in the world,
3. Jīva experiences bondage,
4. vicāra is required to release the Jīva from bondage.
Sṛṣṭi, Jīva, bandha and vicāra are the four topics discussed here. Paramātmā is said to be
nimitta-kāraṇa and upādāna-kāraṇa of the world based on the Muṇḍaka example of
spider. When we say Paramātmā is upādāna-kāraṇa, material cause, we should remember
there are two types of material causes: one is called pariṇāmi upādāna-kāraṇa and the
other is vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa. Pariṇāmi upādāna-kāraṇa produces the kārya by
undergoing a change, while the vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa produces a kārya without
undergoing a change. In the tradition we give two examples. For pariṇāmi upādāna-
kāraṇa, the example is the milk producing the curd, the seed producing the tree, in which
the kāraṇa undergoes change; in fact, it destroys itself in producing the effect. The milk
destroys itself in producing the curd, which means that after curd-production, milk is no
more available. Similarly, the seed destroys itself in producing the tree and after the tree-
production seed is not available. Suppose Paramātmā is pariṇāmi upādāna-kāraṇa, the
tragedy will be that Paramātmā will undergo a change to produce the universe, which
means like milk or like the seed it would have destroyed itself in producing the universe
and the first member in the obituary column after the universe comes into existence,
Paramātmā passed away, destroyed in producing the world if it were pariṇāmi upādāna-
kāraṇa! Thank God, Paramātmā happens to be vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa. The example for
vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa is the rope without undergoing a change produces a snake, dry
sand without undergoing a change produces mirage water, shell without undergoing a
change produces silver and waker without undergoing a change produces a dream world.
If the waker were the pariṇāmi kāraṇa once the dream comes the waker will be gone!
There will be nobody to wake up from the dream. This is vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa.
What about the gold in producing the ornament? In what category you will put the gold?
Whether gold is pariṇāmi upādāna-kāraṇa or vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa? Gold is pariṇāmi
kāraṇa or vivarta-kāraṇa or wood is pariṇāmi or vivarta-kāraṇa? We don’t think about
that, it can be either. If you are focusing on the gold-nature, it does not lose the goldness in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1566

producing the ornaments; if the goldness is destroyed no one will want ornaments
because in the production of the ornaments the gold will lose its goldness. Since gold does
not lose the goldness, you can call it vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa or if you focus on the shape
of the gold, from the standpoint of the shape it does undergo a change for which the
goldsmith will have to work. It is a job to be done for bringing about a change from gold
to the ornaments. It is not the gold-change but the shape-change. From the standpoint of
its shape, it comes under pariṇāmi upādāna-kāraṇa. Thus, gold, wood, clay, etc., they are
both upādāna-kāraṇa as also vivarta-kāraṇa. Generally, in śāstra gold is taken as pariṇāmi
upādāna-kāraṇa. Adi Śaṅkarācārya calls it as pariṇāmi kāraṇa in the context of
Chāndogya Upaniṣad.
Having understood the two kāraṇas, question is: Paramātmā comes under which
category? The answer is Paramātmā is vivarta-kāraṇa. The next question is for Paramātmā
to become the vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa and produce a universe, it should have the capacity
to produce that; that faculty or capacity or power is called Māyā. Māyā is natural to
Paramātmā. Māyā does not come at a particular time; you should not ask when did Māyā
come; you should not ask how did Māyā come; you should not ask from where did Māyā
come; because Māyā never came. Māyā is as much as anādi as Brahman is. That Māyā is
the power of Brahman to be the vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa of the whole creation; all these
are presented in one single śloka.
The next question is if Māyā also existed along with Brahman from beginningless time
then Brahman will be Advaita or sadvaita? If you include Māyā also from anādi kāla,
there will be dvaita! If you say Māyā is the attribute of Brahman, then Brahman will
become saguṇa. If Māyā is outside Brahman, Brahman will become sadvaya, with duality.
If Māyā is attribute of Brahman, then Brahman will become saguṇa. If Māyā is a part of
Brahman, Brahman will become sakala which means Brahman with parts; then Brahman
will become sāvayava.

How will you account for Māyā? I need not account for Māyā because the very word
Māyā indicates it cannot be logically accounted for. It is like many of the accounts of
people anirvacanīya. What we mean is Māyā is of a lower order of reality; it is in Brahman
but it cannot be taken into account like the shadow of a person; it is not taken into account
like the reflection of a person in the mirror; similarly, it is unaccountable. Therefore, it is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1567

neither a second thing nor an attribute, nor a part. Then, what is the word we use? It is
adhyasta. Adhyāsa means it is not a part, property or separate. With this inexplicable
Māyā, Brahman becomes vivarta-kāraṇa of the universe.
What is the nature of that Brahman? That is described here in this śloka. Paramātmā is
infinite Ātmā. It is advaya. It is non-dual in spite of Māyā being there. It is not because of
absence of Māyā but in spite of Māyā. Its nature is ānanda-svarūpa. It is embodiment of
ānanda. It is original ānanda. It does not come under experiential pleasure; experiential
pleasure by definition is pratibimba-ānanda. Why cannot bimba be experiential pleasure?
You should know the logic clearly. All experiential pleasures are pratibimba-ānanda
because experiential pleasures have got gradation and fluctuation. No experience remains
the same. Every experience comes and goes. Even during its presence it fluctuates. The
class-experience itself comes at 11 o’clock and goes at 12 o’clock and even during its
existence it is not uniformly there. Some portion you enjoy and some portion is a little bit
dry and repetitive, therefore, you get bored. Within the one hour itself tāratamya is there,
priya, moda, pramoda gradations are there. Wherever fluctuation and gradations are
there, that will come under pratibimba only. Bimbānanda does not have fluctuations or
gradations. All ānandas are fluctuating. Here ānanda is non-experiential svarūpa ānanda.
Where is that ānanda located? Pratibimba-ānanda is located wherever priya, moda and
pramoda vṛttis are there. Only in those particular minds, at that particular time,
pratibimba-ānanda is available; whereas bimba-ānanda is not at all located but it is all
over including an inert chair. If you put a mind there and create a priya vṛtti, the chair also
will begin to laugh. Now, the chair neither frowns nor smiles not because ānanda is
absent; bimba-ānanda is there but pratibimba-ānanda is not there. Pūrṇa means bimba
ānanda is all-pervading. This wonderful Paramātmā svayameva jagadbhūtvā, Paramātmā
became the universe by Itself. It converted itself as the upādāna-kāraṇa; it means
Paramātmā converted itself into the world; just as the waker converts himself into dream,
Paramātmā converted itself into the universe. Paramātmā is nimitta-kāraṇa as also
upādāna-kāraṇa. Paramātmā seemingly converts itself without undergoing a real change.
Pariṇāmi kāraṇa means transformative material cause and vivarta-kāraṇa is
transfigurative material cause. All these happened in the beginning, at the time of sṛṣṭi or
creation.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1568

How can Paramātmā do all these things? Paramātmā has done with the help of its own
Māyā which is of lower order of reality. Paramātmā is pāramārthika-satya and Māyā is
vyāvahārika satya. Svapna is prātibhāsika satya. By using the word sva, Vidyāraṇya says
Māyā does not have a separate existence of its own. It has borrowed existence and
therefore, it is mithyā. Having created all the fourteen lokas, having created all the
sūkṣma-śarīras, having created all the sthūla-śarīras, Paramātmā entered into the sūkṣma-
kāraṇa-śarīra in the form of the reflected consciousness called cidābhāsa or ābhāsa-
caitanya or pratibimbita caitanya. Prāviśat means Paramātmā entered as the reflection.
Reflection is advaya or sadvaya, reflection is non-dual or dual? Even though original is
only one, reflections are countless or infinite; because infinite minds are there, therefore,
infinite cidābhāsas are also there. Every cidābhāsa is called Jīva. Therefore, Jīva-rūpataḥ
prāviśat.
Naturally, the question will come: what is the source of the knowledge of Vidyāraṇya and
all these ideas, from where did he get? Commentators give the idea that all have come
from the Śruti. Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.2.1 sadeva somya idam agra āsīd ekam eva
advitīyam for advaya; Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.9.34 vijñānam ānandam brahma it is the
pramāṇa for ānanda; every word in the śloka is based on Śruti vākya. Also Bhṛguvallī of
Taittirīya Upaniṣad. Also, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 5.1.1 is the famous mantra
pūrṇamadaḥ pūrṇamidaṃ pūrṇāt pūrṇamudacyate śānti pāṭha. The pramāṇa for Māyā
comes from Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 4.10. māyāṃ tu prakṛtiṃ vidyānmāyinaṃ tu
maheśvaram, know Prakṛti to be Māyā and know Maheśvara [Brahman] to be the Lord of
Māyā. The whole universe is the body of Maheśvara. That is to say Brahman is
everywhere and is in every being. Then, the next question is why do you say Paramātmā
became the universe? Normally, all other people will say Bhagavān created the universe;
however here, Vidyāraṇya says Bhagavān did not create the universe but Bhagavān
became the universe. The pramāṇa is a quotation from Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.7 and 2.6 so
kāmayata| bahusyāṃ prajāyeyeti, sa tapo:'tapyata| sa tapastaptvā idaṃ sarvamasṛjata,
yadidaṃ kiñca, etc. This indicates Paramātmā became the universe as though. In the next
paragraph also, asad vā idamagra āsīt, tato vai sadajāyata,, that is the correct pramāṇa:
tadātmānaṃ svayamakuruta, Bhagavān reshaped himself into the universe. They are
pramāṇas for vivarta upādāna-kāraṇa and also anupraveśa. Thus, based on so many
Upaniṣads, culling ideas from several Upaniṣads, Vidyāraṇya has composed one śloka.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1569

śloka 10.2
देवाद्युत्तमदेहेषु प्रविष्टो देवताभवत्।
मर्त्याद्यधमदेहेषु स्थितो भजति देवताम्॥ १०.२ ॥
devādyuttamadeheṣu praviṣṭo devatābhavat.
martyādyadhamadeheṣu sthito bhajati devatām (10.2).
Here, Vidyāraṇya says infinite number of sūkṣma-śarīras are created; we don’t say infinite
number of kāraṇa-śarīras are created because if you remember Tattvabodha kāraṇa-śarīra
is defined as anādi avidyā. Since kāraṇa-śarīra is anādi, it is never created by anyone
including God therefore, even during pralaya kāraṇa-śarīras are very much there dormant
within Māyā of Brahman. Therefore, we should never say kāraṇa-śarīras are created. We
should say sūkṣma-śarīras are created after the creation of pañca-bhūtas; from sūkṣma
bhūtas sūkṣma-śarīra and from sthūla bhūtas, sthūla śarīras; thus, sūkṣma-śarīra and
sthūla śarīras are created.
All the sūkṣma-śarīras are not uniform but there is gradation. It is so because of gradation
in karma and karma-phalas. The karmas are located in the kāraṇa-śarīra in potential form.
Therefore, infinite kāraṇa-śarīras are there. In all kāraṇa-śarīras infinite karmas are there;
in the karmas, gradations are there; based on the gradations located in the kāraṇa-śarīras,
infinite varieties of sūkṣma-śarīras are generated. What about the first creation? During
the first creation, karma will not be there. You should not ask hereafter. I have warned
several times. It is so because there is no first creation and creation is an anādi cycle.
Therefore, at the time of any creation, karma is always there. If karma is absent Bhagavān
cannot create anything. Let it be clear, without karma, Bhagavān cannot create even an
iota of universe. That is why we call Bhagavān as sāmānya kāraṇa and karma as the viśeṣa
kāraṇa. Both are required for sṛṣṭi. Īśvara may be omnipotent; even that omnipotent Īśvara
cannot create the world without the viśeṣa kāraṇa called karma and karma-phala. Sūkṣma-
śarīras are not uniform. Since sūkṣma-śarīras are not uniform, the reflections also will not
be uniform; depending on the fineness of the sūkṣma-śarīras, reflections will be finer and
brighter or grosser and duller. In cit, there is no gradation but in cidābhāsa, there is
gradation. Therefore, infinite jīvas of various grades are available in the creation. This,
Vidyāraṇya broadly categories into uttama Jīvas and nikṛṣṭa Jīvas the superior jīvas and
inferior jīvas. All Devatās will come under utkṛṣṭa Jīvas and all manuṣyas will come under

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1570

nikṛṣṭa Jīvas. Animals will also come under nikṛṣṭa Jīvas but we don’t talk about them
because they don’t attend the Pañcadaśī class.
Brahman having entered into the superior reflecting medium, especially sūkṣma deha, like
Viśṇu, Brahmā, Śiva, Indra, Agni, Varuṇa— all those Devatās will come under uttama
jīvas. Deheṣu means in those reflecting media after entering as cidābhāsa, Paramātmā
Devatā abhāvād the very same Paramātmā has taken avatāra as it were in the form of
Devatā. Cidābhāsa is not considered as a separate entity because it is the lower version of
the Paramātmā only. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says Paramātmā has become so many
Devatās. The very same Paramātmā has entered the inferior sūkṣma-śarīras of manuṣyas
and animals, plants, etc. Paramātmā entering into the inferior sūkṣma-śarīras becomes
manuṣya. Manuṣyas worship the Devatās. Both are reflections only but one reflection has
become superior and another reflection has become inferior; therefore, they have got
pujya-pujaka sambandha even though originally both are one and the same Paramātmā. It
is like one actor putting on two veṣas. He has bhakta veṣas and he himself puts on Īśvara
veṣa also. Bhakta actor will do namaskāra to Īśvara actor. Now, sṛṣṭi is over. Jīvas have
arrived on the scene in the universe. So the problems have also started known as saṃsāra.

śloka 10.3
अनेकजन्मभजनात्स्वविचारं चिकीर्षति ।
विचारेण विनष्टायां मायायां शिष्यते स्वयम्॥ १०.३ ॥
anekajanmabhajanātsvavicāraṃ cikīrṣati.
vicāreṇa vinaṣṭāyāṃ māyāyāṃ śiṣyate svayam (10.3).
How long does the pūjā, bhajana, continue? It goes on for aneka janmas. Having done the
bhajana [Īśvara-bhajana] which includes varṇa-āśrama-dharma-anuṣṭhāna and also
karma-yoga and upāsana yoga. In each bhajana there is a gradual improvement. One
starts as an ārta bhakta and graduates himself to arthārthī bhakta. Each one takes many
janmas. Thereafter, he slowly becomes the third one that is jijñāsu bhakta. Therefore, he
says anekajanmabhajanād jijñāsuḥ bhaktaḥ bhavati. He becomes a spiritual seeker bhakta
having attained sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti. Now, as a jijñāsu bhakta, he is interested in
pursuing the following discipline of no more elaborate pūjas, no more elaborate fasting,
japa and tapas. They have done their jobs by generating the interest in Vedāntic studies.
Now, more time should be spent, not on ritualistic aspect of religion, but in sva vicāra. He

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1571

should be interested in Self-enquiry. Am I cidābhāsa or am I cit? It is this cit-cidābhāsa-

viveka he has to do. It means śravaṇa-manana-nididhyāsana he is interested in.
Mokṣakāraṇasāmagryāṃ bhaktireva garīyasī, among various sādhanas for liberation the
superior sādhana is bhakti. Then, all the so called bhaktas who loved bhajanas, etc., they
also are happy at last Adi Śaṅkarācārya also has come to our method. But Adi
Śaṅkarācārya disappoints all those people in the second line by defining bhakti as
attending the mahāvākya-vicāra or svasvarūpānusandhānaṃ bhaktirityabhidhīyate, it is
not nāma-saṅkīrtana; it is okay in the beginning stages but the real bhakti is Self-enquiry.
When the jijñāsā does enquiry for some time he will be converted into the fourth bhakta
who is a jñānī.
Through Self-enquiry one gain jñāna which leads to mokṣa. Vicāra means tadvijñānārthaṃ
sa gurumeva abhigacchet. It is enquiry into śāstra under the guidance of a Guru. Without
śāstra and Guru, Self-enquiry we don’t accept. It is not traditional. By the appropriate
enquiry, Māyā is eliminated. When Māyā is gone, svayam avaśiṣyate, I the Paramātmā
alone will remain. Māyā has vikṣepa-śakti and āvaraṇa-śakti. Vikṣepa-śakti of Māyā will
happily continue. Therefore, the body continues, the mind continues, the world continues,
the classes continue, all of them will continue as usual. The world will not physically
disappear because vikṣepa-śakti continues. However, the āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā is
destroyed or eliminated or neutralized. Āvaraṇa-śakti is that because of which I look at the
world as satya. It makes the world appear as real and when it goes, the world continues
while its reality is plucked away. It is like a defanged cobra. Here, when poisonous fangs
are removed, then we need not run away from the cobra but like Lord Śiva and we can
take it as ābharaṇa. Mokṣa is making the world into an ābharaṇa. The body should
become my ābharaṇa, the mind should become an ābharaṇa and the burden should
become a bhūṣaṇa. That is called binary-format. More in the next class.

Class 290
śloka 10.3 contd.
Even the entry into vicāra is the karma-phala of various janmas, it is said. When Māyā is
eliminated through Self-enquiry, what is left behind is the Jīva the enquirer and that
enquirer is Paramātmā, because Paramātmā itself with the finite body-mind-complex is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1572

called Jīva. When the Jīva negates the whole universe including his own body-mind-
complex, including his cidābhāsa aṃśa, what is left behind is cit. Jīvātmā minus cidābhāsa
is nothing but cit which is Paramātmā itself. When we talk of negation of Māyā, and it is
not that Māyā is totally eliminated, then the world itself will disappear. Māyā-vināśa
means falsification of Māyā, after which the false Māyā will continue and its vikṣepa-śakti
will continue, body continues and the world continues, but the world which was thought
to be real is reduced to a movie. Reducing the world into a movie is the falsification. Since
the world remains as mithyā prapañca, I don’t have to count the world as number two; I
can only count myself as number one. Number two is not there, even though I experience
the world, I cannot count it as the second. Therefore, it is said Advaita-svarūpa-
avasthānam bhavati. Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 10.4
अद्वयानन्दरूपस्य सद्वयत्वं च दुःखिता ।
बन्धः प्रोक्तः स्वरूपेण स्थितिर्मुक्तिरितीर्यते ॥ १०.४ ॥
advayānandarūpasya sadvayatvaṃ ca duḥkhitā.
bandhaḥ proktaḥ svarūpeṇa sthitirmuktiritīryate (10.4).
It was said that the Jīva develops desire for enquiry. Vidyāraṇya clarifies as to why does
the Jīva develop a desire for enquiry. He says it is because Jīva discovers the bondage and
the consequent pains of life. Jīva first experiences and discovers varieties of pains called
duḥkha. Initially, he has not diagnosed the problem, therefore, he does not know from
where duḥkha comes. After a lot of karma-yoga he diagnoses and says duḥkha is because
of bandha. Bandha means a sense of trapped-feeling. I am trapped in the world and I am
trapped in gṛhastha āśrama or I am trapped in sannyāsa āśrama. The sense of being
trapped in the body itself is called bondage which creates pain. When I remain throughout
the day I don’t feel trapped but someone closes me within the room, I feel I have been
trapped. In both, I remain in the room only. In one, I have chosen, therefore, I don’t have a
sense of being trapped. Trap is not an external condition but it is more of an internal
condition or feeling. This sense of being trapped is called bandha which is the cause of
pain. Bandha comes because there is a second thing to trap me. Therefore, duality is the
cause of bondage and bondage is the cause of pain. The duality itself is caused because of
avicāra, Vidyāraṇya says, since there are no two things at all, because there is Advaita

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1573

Paramātmā, when there is no duality if I feel there is a duality it is because of lack of

enquiry only.
The pain is the problem which is caused because of bondage, bondage is caused by dvaita
and dvaita is caused because of avicāra or ignorance. When you enquire, there is no
second thing at all like rope-snake. The root cause of all the problem is avicāra and the
solution should be vicāra. When I do vicāra avicāra goes; when avicāra goes duality goes;
when duality is falsified the sense of being trapped is gone; when bandha is gone duḥkha
is gone. All these, the karma-yogī diagnoses. Doing does not solve the problem but
knowing alone solves the problem. Running away from the rope-snake will not destroy
the rope-snake. On the other hand, it will get more confirmed. The faster I run away, the
more real it will become. Thus, I give more reality to the snake. Doing should be replaced
by knowing to solve the phala of rope-snake. The perception of duality which is real and
the consequent problems continue as long as you entertain the duality. The sense of I am
small, miserable, etc., is called bondage or saṃsāra. Removing the duality by falsification,
removing the sense of trapped feeling and removing the consequent pain is called mukti.
Once dvitiya goes away, I remain advayānanda-rūpeṇa. Advaya-ānanda-rūpeṇa sthitiḥ is
called mukti. What we do throughout life is that we are somebody else and we want to
change by going there and there and another fake person I become and the fake
personality does not satisfy me and therefore, again another makeover, third personality
and after makeover, I never try to be myself. Vedānta says be yourself. There is no
problem. Thereafter, you enjoy veṣa not for pūrṇatva but for fun. For fun, you do anything
and definitely not for pūrṇatva or abhaya. How all these things happen and what is the
root cause for bondage?

śloka 10.5
अविचारकृ तो बन्धो विचारेण निवर्तते ।
तस्माज्जीवपरात्मानौ सर्वदैव विचारयेत्॥ १०.५ ॥
avicārakṛto bandho vicāreṇa nivartate.
tasmājjīvaparātmānau sarvadaiva vicārayet (10.5).
Māyā is wonderful for because of beauty of Māyā alone, novelty, projection, variety is
possible. If Māyā is not there, pure Brahman is poor Brahman and it will be asparśa,
arūpa, agandha and that Brahman cannot even claim I am Brahman. Even claiming I am

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1574

Brahman or I am saccidānanda is vyāvahārika and vyāvahārika requires process,

movement, change, etc. Minus Māyā, no vyavahāra can take place. Therefore, Brahman
will be there and it will be as though non-existent as Brahman cannot claim its own
existence. Therefore, remember that Māyā is required and we should all welcome Māyā
with all reverence. When Māyā comes, vikṣepa-śakti comes, which is a blessing but along
with that āvaraṇa-śakti also comes, which is the deadly part. We try to throw away the
total Māyā, throwing the baby with the bath water. Don’t do that. Like the peeling the skin
of banana, āvaraṇa-śakti part you remove through enquiry. Thereafter, allow Māyā to play
the drama.
Because of non-enquiry due to āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā one is trapped in bondage. Vikṣepa-
śakti is a blessing but itself become a curse. Duality which is meant for entertainment, that
duality becomes a serious drama like our own dreams, our own nightmare. If the lack of
enquiry is the problem, then enquiry is the only solution. When I say bandha you have to
include sadvayatva and duḥkhitva. Here, everything goes, means it gets falsified. By
remembering my nature, I convert my life into an entertainment. Vedānta asks the
question: which one do you want to be? If you want to forget and suffer, wish you all the
best. If choose to suffer you don’t need even sympathy. A person habituated to worry,
even when there is nothing to worry, it becomes a worry for him. If you want the life to be
a game, enquire about your real Self. One should do enquiry all the time. First, it is
śravaṇa-rūpaena, then, manana-rūpeṇa and lastly nididhyāsana-rūpeṇa and the last is a
life long process, constantly aware of the teaching. If you say I have no time, so many
duties are there, then Adi Śaṅkarācārya will say take to sannyāsa; I will not say that but I
will say find time for enquiry. Starting from Jīvātmā and Paramātmā, one should end with
ekātmā. Up to this is introduction. Hereafter, the enquiry will start.

śloka 10.6
अहमित्यभिमन्ता यः कर्तासौ तस्य साधनम्।
मनस्तस्य क्रिये अन्तर्बहिर्वृत्ती क्रमोत्थिते ॥ १०.६ ॥
ahamityabhimantā yaḥ kartāsau tasya sādhanam.
manastasya kriye antarbahirvṛttī kramotthite (10.6).
Vidyāraṇya builds up a beautiful enquiry hereafter. In every śloka, he just gives one bit of
information; it is a long build up; what I propose to do is to give a general picture of the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1575

development of this enquiry. Then, we will go śloka by śloka. He wants to reveal the śākṣī
of tripuṭī pramāṇa, pramātṛ, prameya and he wants to introduce the śākṣī as the revealer
of the tripuṭī. For that, he defines each one of them and states how they function. For that
purpose, our antaḥkaraṇa or the mind in general is first sub-divided into two. One part of
the mind he calls as pramātṛ-bhāga, ahaṅkāra or kartā. All the three are synonymous. The
second part of the mind is the pramāṇa-bhāga or the kāraṇa-bhāga. He calls it manobhāga.
Here, he uses the word manas for the pramāṇa part of the mind. The third is very simple.
Any external object called the viṣaya or object of experience or prameya. All the three put
together is called tripuṭī or triad. The pramāṇa-bhāga mind sas the capacity to contact the
sense-objects and experience; that capacity of the mind is the capacity of entertaining
thoughts. Thus, the pramāṇa-bhaga mind, generates vṛtti, and the pramāṇa mind by
generating the thoughts, reveals the sense-objects called prameya. This generation of vṛtti
thought is called pramāṇa-vyāpāra. The function of pramāṇa part is to generate thoughts
which will reveal the object. This pramāṇa-vyāpāra alone is called the knowing process.
Thus, the triad of pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya through the pramāṇa-vyāpāra the knowing
process gathers knowledge. It will involve generation of thoughts. In the name of vṛtti-
vyāpti the thoughts rising from pramāṇa contact the relevant object and reveal it; every
knowing process requires the tripuṭī. It requires knower, knowing instrument and the
relevant object. That is, the two parts of the mind and the object, pramātā is one part of the
mind and pramāṇa is another part of the mind and the object. Now, we will make a subtle
enquiry.
Even though every knowing process involves three factors the knowing process reveals
only one and that is prameya. Prameya is revealed that is why it is called prameya which
means that which is revealed or known. Prameya is revealed through knowing process
which means the knowing process does not reveal the other two, pramātā and pramāṇa. If
the other two factors also were revealed through the knowing process, they also will be
called prameya. Pramāṇa will not be called pramāṇa and it will be called prameya. If the
knowing process were to reveal all the three, all the three would have become prameya
and if the tripuṭī consists of three prameyas there will be knowing process at all! Because
pramātā is pramātā and pramāṇa is pramāṇa and since both are not prameya, only the
third one, the object, is called prameya and it is very clear that the knowing process which

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1576

involves three factors is capable of revealing only one factor. This is the lesson number
one.
Now, we will go to lesson number 2. At the end of the knowing process, we know only
prameya. Here, my response to the situation is: I know the pot. Let us assume the object is
pot. The knowledge I refer to ‘I know the pot’. That means I am referring to all the three
factors at the end of the knowing process. When I say I =the pramātā knower part, know =
pramāṇa the processing part, pot = prameya object part; that means I refer to the all the
three factors! If I have to refer to all the three factors, it means all the three must have been
revealed. I cannot refer to all the three factors if all the three factors are not revealed. What
is not revealed I cannot refer to. In the knowing process, all the three are not revealed,
because the knowing process reveals only prameya factor. However, at the end of
pramāṇa operation, I know the pot which means I refer to the pramātṛ-bhāga, pramāṇa-
bhāga and prameya-bhāga; only one is revealed in the knowing process but the other two
are not revealed in the knowing process. They have also been revealed because I refer to
all the three by “I know the pot”, but the knowing process would not have revealed all the
three because it is capable of revealing only one.
Now, the question is asked when the knowing process is happening in which one factor is
revealed, the other two factors simultaneously are revealed, how and by who? Can you
say the pramātā and pramāṇa are the self-effulgent or self-revealing? That they are
capable of revealing themselves? That you cannot say because pramātṛ-bhāga is a part of
the mind which is acetana. It is so because of the five reasons dṛśyatva, bhautikatva,
saguṇatva, savikāratva and āgamāpayitva. The pramātā arises in jāgrat and svapna and
pramātā dissolves in suṣupti. Therefore, pramātā is the coming-going mind. That mind
cannot reveal itself, being jaḍa. Similarly, pramāṇa part is vṛtti part., the mind part with
vṛtti; when one part of the mind is jaḍa, the other part or the pramāṇa part or vṛtti part is
also jaḍa only. Therefore, pramāṇa cannot reveal itself. Then, can you say the knowing
process revealed? That also is not possible because the knowing process can reveal only
prameya. If it reveals the other two they also will become prameya. There are two people
in a room, both of them want to be givers. If both of them are givers there cannot be giving
action. If both of them want to receive then also there cannot be receiving action. Similarly,
if all the three are prameya, there can never be a knowing process. Therefore, the crucial
question is who reveals pramātā and pramāṇa? They don’t reveal themselves also and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1577

they are not revealed by the knowing process also. Therefore, you require something else
and that blessed something alone we have been calling śākṣī. Therefore, śākṣī alone
reveals pramātā and pramāṇa during every knowing process. The knowing process itself
reveals the prameya. This is the second lesson. Śākṣī reveals pramātā and pramāṇa during
every knowing process and the knowing process itself reveals the prameya. Then, we will
go to the third lesson.
The śākṣī revelation of pramātā and pramāṇa must simultaneously take place during
every knowing process. At the end of the knowing process, I say I know this, I am able to
say so. Therefore, during the knowing process, in that moment may be one hundredth of a
second, during every fleeting knowing process, when I am looking at the fan, when I look
at you or the book, all takes place simultaneously and fast, in every cognition. When you
are listening to the talks, the words come out like bullets! The mind is processing. In all of
them, during that one second, the knowing process reveals prameya and śākṣī during that
moment simultaneously reveals pramātā and pramāṇa. From that, it is clear that śākṣī is
not illumining pramātā by process one and śākṣī is revealing the pramāṇa through process
two later; when the first process goes, if pramātā is revealed, pramāṇa will be in darkness;
in the second process, when pramāṇa is revealed, pramātā will not be there; therefore, you
will never have the knowledge “I know the pot”, simultaneously. Therefore, śākṣī’s
revelation involves a non-process simultaneous revelation. Śākṣi-mātreṇa, without
requiring a will, without requiring an effort, without requiring time factor, without
requiring a sequential process, śākṣī reveals pramātā and pramāṇa; when I say I know, it
is because of the grace of the śākṣī. When I say I see you, referring you is the result of
knowing process and when I say I see you, the words I and see are because of the presence
of śākṣī and in every knowing process śākṣī is very much evident in the form of revealing
the pramātā and pramāṇa. Can you imagine any knowledge in which only prameya is
involved? Can one talk about a cricket match when I am not there? When I talk about
anything I must be there. There is no knowing in which only prameya is there. In every
moment, I am experiencing the śākṣī’s presence which reveals I know, I see, I hear, I smell,
etc. Therefore, the third lesson is that śākṣī reveals pramātā and pramāṇa without a
sequential process, whereas prameyas are revealed sequentially. It is so because thought
after thought and afterthought. Therefore, prameyas are revealed sequentially through a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1578

process, but pramātā and pramāṇa are non-sequentially, simultaneously, revealed by the
śākṣī by its mere presence; this is the third lesson.
Then, there is one more lesson. Even though we say knowing process reveals the prameya,
the mind directing the vṛtti to the objects and the vṛtti contacts the objects, etc, this is
possible because the śākṣī blesses the pramātā and pramāṇa with cidābhāsa while
revealing pramātā and pramāṇa; that is, how does the śākṣī reveal the mind and vṛtti is by
blessing both of them with cidābhāsa. The vṛtti contacts the objects and cidābhāsa is in the
vṛtti also. When the vṛtti contacts the object, it is the cidābhāsa which is donated by the
śākṣī alone, and cidābhāsa to the mind and thought and through thought-pipeline,
cidābhāsa is lent to the object also. Therefore, śākṣī alone through pramātā and pramāṇa is
revealing the prameya also. Even though superficially speaking, the mind and thought
alone reveal the object, but remember, through the mind and thought channel, I or śākṣī
has sent the cidābhāsa. That is why wherever thought does not go, that object is not
experienced by me. Therefore, we can say śākṣī directly reveals pramātā and pramāṇa and
śākṣī indirectly reveals the prameya. Śākṣī indirectly, means through pramātā and
pramāṇa, reveals prameya. Therefore, ultimately all the three factors pramātā, pramāṇa
and prameya are simultaneously revealed by the śākṣī alone. Two of them are revealed
directly and one indirectly. Of these three, prameya keeps changing as śabda sparśa rūpa
rasa and gandha, but the śākṣī doesn’t, throughout the day only the pramātā-, pramāṇa-
vṛtti keeps changing and prameya objects keep changing but this unchanging śākṣī is our
real nature.
This śākṣī is identical with the Paramātmā and claiming that alone is called svarūpa-
avasthāna. This will be the development for which he will give the example of nāṭaka-
dīpa. He will talk about the lamp on the top, illumining the dancer, the master and the
audience. The master will be called pramātā, dancer pramāṇa and the audience will be
called prameya. There is one light illumining all the three through that example; he will
establish that. This is the development which we will see hereafter. More in the next class.

Class 291
śloka 10.6 contd.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1579

In the first five ślokas, Vidyāraṇya introduced the subject matter of Brahman-enquiry and
the purpose. As long as Brahman-enquiry is not conducted, this advaya will appear as
sadvaya non-dual will appear as dual. Because of sadvayatva of Brahman there is duḥkha
or sorrow and also fear. From all Śruti vākyas we know duality is the cause of sorrow
which is called as bandha. It is described as the sense of being trapped. Either I feel I am
trapped in the world or I feel I am trapped in the family or I feel I am trapped in the body;
hopefully, I don’t feel trapped in the class! This trapped feeling is called saṃsāra, it is born
out of non-enquiry and what is required is enquiry. What enquiry will do is no external
change will take place. The world will appear as world, family will continue to appear and
body will be as it is; what will disappear though is the feeling that I am trapped. The
internal mental condition alone undergoes the transformation because of the
understanding that Advaita is satya and dvaita is mithyā. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
concluded the introduction: may you enquire into Brahman always in the form of either
śravaṇa, in the form of manana or in the form of nididhyāsana. It should continue until
advaita-niṣṭhā comes. After the introduction the enquiry starts from the 6 th śloka which I
introduced in the last class. Vidyāraṇya will reveal Brahman as the Śākṣi-caitanya which
reveals the tripuṭī of pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya. Śākṣī has to reveal this tripuṭī because all
these three are jaḍa by themselves; pramātā is one part of the mind, pramāṇa is another
part of the mind and prameya belongs to the external world. Pramātṛ-bhāga belongs to
antaḥkaraṇa, pramāṇa-bhāga belongs to antaḥkaraṇa and prameya belongs to outside
world. Therefore, all the three are jaḍa. This tripuṭī is revealed through śākṣī in one
simultaneous action by its presence. This is the development. Now, Vidyāraṇya defines
each one of them in pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya otherwise called kartā, kāraṇa and viṣaya.
The pramātṛ-bhāga of the mind or antaḥkaraṇa-abhimantā claims I am and it is that
entertains the I-thought as aham or ahaṅkāra. That pramātṛ-bhāga is called kartā, the
subject or the ego. Therefore, by itself it is jaḍa or insentient, because the mind itself is a
product of the five subtle elements. Asau kartā bhavati. Tasya sādhanam manaḥ. Manas is
the pramāṇa-bhāga of the antaḥkaraṇa. It serves as an instrument for pramāṇa the
pramātā the kartā. One part is pramātā and another part is pramāṇa, one part is kartā and
another part is kāraṇa. Ahaṅkāra is kartā and the mind is kāraṇa. Ahaṅkāra is pramātṛ-
bhāga and the mind is pramāṇa-bhāga; one is subjective portion and another is
instrumental portion. The subject or kartā always will use the instruments to do the action.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1580

The action will always take place at the level of instrument. So the kriyā depends upon the
kāraṇa the instrument. That is called karaṇasya kriyā or pramāṇa-vyāpāra; vyāpāra means
function. Kartā uses kāraṇa and kāraṇa has kriyā. Pramātā uses pramāṇa and pramāṇa has
pramāṇa-vyāpāra. All are synonymous. Now, the question is if one part of the
antaḥkaraṇa is the instrument what is the function of that instrumental portion?
Vidyāraṇya says the pramāṇa-bhāga has twofold functions. Inward thought is one
function of the pramāṇa and outward thought is another function of the pramāṇa or
ingoing thought is one function and outgoing thought is another function or introvert
thought is one function and extrovert thought is another function. Here, pramāṇa refers to
one part of the mind. dOf the two vṛttis internal and external we will see how they rise in
the mind simultaneously or sequentially. Internal vṛtti rises first followed by the external
vṛtti. This rises in sequence or in succession. This will be explained elaborately in the
following ślokas. The difference between inward thought and outward thought is
explained in the next śloka.

śloka 10.7
अन्तर्मुखाहमित्येषा वृत्तिः कर्तारमुल्लिखेत्।
बहिर्मुखेदमित्येषा बाह्यं वस्त्विदमुल्लिखेत्॥ १०.७ ॥
antarmukhāhamityeṣā vṛttiḥ kartāramullikhet.
bahirmukhedamityeṣā bāhyaṃ vastvidamullikhet (10.7).
Hereafter, Vidyāraṇya defines pramāṇa-vyāpāra of the inward thought and outward
thought. Antar-mukha-vṛtti means turned inward. There is no vṛtti taking place outside.
Remember all vṛttis are inside and the difference is in the direction. Inward vṛttis are
directed towards inside the mind. In another case, the direction is outside. Here, we don’t
differentiate the location but the difference is with regard to the direction of the thought.
The vṛtti turned inward is the I-thought and which does not refer to the external world. It
refers to I myself. It does not objectify sound, smell, form or touch, etc. It is a reflexive
thought. It is the I-thought which is not referring to the external world. I-thought deals
with I, myself, only. Even though it is a thought, it is not objectifying external sound, form,
taste or touch. It is an inside thought but refers to only myself. It is a Self-referral thought.
It is the I-thought. It is in the form of I-thought. It is in the form I am, I am, I am. It is a
thought which is turned inwards. That I-thought reveals the kartā, the pramātā. It refers to

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1581

the pramātā, the kartā part of the mind. By entertaining the I-thought it refers to the
kāraṇa part of the mind.
The I-thought invokes pramātā, kartā-part of the mind, but the bahir-mukha-vṛtti the
extrovert thought, which is also a function of the pramāṇa or kāraṇa-bhāga of the mind
and also takes place in the mind, is directed outwards. It is in the form of this thought or
that thought. This man, this woman, this chair, this hall, this moon, in short anything
outside the body is called extrovert thought. It is in the form of this thought. The extrovert
thought, which is pramāṇa-vyāpāra, is in the form of ‘this’ thought. All the idam-vṛttis
will reveal the external objects called prameya. Aham-vṛtti reveals pramātā and idam-vṛtti
reveals prameya and both vṛttis takes place in pramāṇa-bhāga of the antaḥkaraṇa. Both
vṛttis are inside the body, but one vṛtti is turned inwards and another outwards. This is
the difference.
We have seen pramātā and pramāṇa and two types of pramāṇa-vyāpāras and prameya we
have seen in the form of external objects bāhya vastu. All have been introduced and the
common nature of all of them is being jaḍa. Pramātā is jaḍa, aham- idam-vṛtti is jaḍa and
prameya is jaḍa and that is why hero śākṣī has to come to light the lamp before starting
the function. Now, the stage is getting ready.

śloka 10.8
इदमो ये विशेषाः स्युर्गन्धरूपरसादयः ।
असाङ्कर्येण तान्भिद्याद्घ्राणादीन्द्रियपञ्चकम्॥ १०.८ ॥
idamo ye viśeṣāḥ syurgandharūparasādayaḥ.
asāṅkaryeṇa tānbhidyādghrāṇādīndriyapañcakam (10.8).
The ego or ahaṅkāra invoked by aham-vṛtti is one only, but when I entertain idam-vṛtti,
idam turned extrovert can refer to an object in the world. The objects are infinite and
therefore, idam-vṛtti is never a singular but idam-vṛttis are countless in number. You listen
to each word and you understand them. You further form them into sentences because of
infinite idam-vṛtti. The idam-vṛttis are divided into five groups. The five groups are
gandha, rūpa, sparśa, rasa, śabda vṛttis. When you transcribe my class even though there
may be five thousand words all of them come under one category of śabda-vṛtti. All the
students and the colourful dresses will come under one group of rūpa-vṛtti. So are
gandha-vṛttis and sparśa-vṛttis. This classification of vṛttis into five, the mind cannot do it;

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1582

the mind does not have the capacity; therefore, Bhagavān has given five traffic policemen.
The five sense-organs will subdivide the idam-vṛttis into five groups. Now, we have
pramātā-pramāṇa-vyāpāra, pañca vidha prameya and the sense-organs. As I said the
uniqueness of all of them is that all of them are jaḍa and they have the five features
dṛśyatva, bhautikatva, saguṇatva, savikāratva and āgamāpayitva. All them arrive during
jāgrat-avasthā or when I am awake. When I am asleep, no pramātā, no pramāṇa, no aham-
vṛtti, no idam-vṛtti and no prameya; all them resolved when I am in suṣupti-avasthā.
When I wake up, all of them arise in my mind, when my mind is awake and active. They
appear in waking and they disappear in suṣupti-avasthā. Yet, they are jaḍa. The hero śākṣī
is the light for all, that is given in the next śloka.

śloka 10.9
कर्तारं च क्रियां तद्वद्व्यावृत्तविषयानपि ।
स्फोरयेदेकयत्नेन योऽसौ साक्ष्यत्र चिद्वपुः ॥ १०.९ ॥
kartāraṃ ca kriyāṃ tadvadvyāvṛttaviṣayānapi.
sphorayedekayatnena yo:'sau sākṣyatra cidvapuḥ (10.9).
This śākṣī, the hero of nāṭaka-dīpa-prakaraṇa or the Paramātmā was introduced in the
beginning as the creator. It is that Paramātmā who created the body-mind-complex, that
Paramātmā did the gṛha-praveśa on an auspicious day, navadvāra-pure Paramātmā is
there as the śākṣī. In the 7 th chapter, Kṛṣṇa describes it as Parā Prakṛti. There is no action
involved and by the presence of śākṣī simultaneously everything is revealed. The mind
through thoughts reveals the object sequentially only, whereas śākṣī reveals pramātā
pramāṇa-vyāpāra and prameya simultaneously. This yugapatva is the uniqueness of
śākṣī’s revelation. Śākṣī lends consciousness to the jaḍa pramātā. There is no time-bound
action and it is for the sake of understanding that we say as though it is a time-bound
process. There is no process involved. As even the mind wakes up the śākṣī lends
cidābhāsa like mother giving bed-coffee, that is, aham-vṛtti immediately appears. Śākṣī
reveals pramātā, aham-idam-vṛtti and pramātā and also the five divisions of sense-objects.
In our language, it is called prameya. Vyāpāra refers to aham-vṛtti and idam-vṛtti. All of
them is generally known as tripuṭī. Śākṣī will directly reveal the pramātā by directly
giving the cidābhāsa. Similarly, śākṣī reveals pramāṇa-bhāga of the mind also directly by
sending the cidābhāsa. However, śākṣī cannot give cidābhāsa to the prameya directly. If

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1583

śākṣī can give cidābhāsa prameya directly the advantage will be that you need not come to
the class and you will sit at home and try to listen to the class!
Śākṣī can give cidābhāsa to the external world only through pramātā and pramāṇa. Then,
it will give to pramāṇa and in the pramāṇa there is idam-vṛtti and vṛtti will travel
according to Vedānta through the sense-organs. Śākṣī in the form of cidābhāsa will go out
along with the thought and when the thought contacts the object cidābhāsa, the thought
and cidābhāsa also will pervade the object; the thought-pervasion is called vṛtti-vyāpti and
cidābhāsa-pervasion is called phala-vyāpti. When śākṣī gives cidābhāsa to a pot through
the pramātā, pramāṇa and idam-vṛtti, śākṣī will illumine the pot also. Therefore, we say
pramātā reveals prameya directly with the borrowed cidābhāsa, but śākṣī reveals the
prameya through the pramātā. This happens in jāgrat-avasthā alone. Śākṣī is sentient
cetana, Śākṣī being the nature of consciousness, cit-svarūpa. It is caitanya svarūpa, which
is different from the tripuṭī. Śākṣī does not have dṛśyatva, bhautikatva, saguṇatva,
savikāratva, and āgamāpayitva. Śākṣī does not do any action on its part. Therefore, there is
no vyavahāra or even change involved. It will remain as it is but it reveals when you say
the verb is used but verb cannot be applied. The right phrase is that in its presence, tripuṭī
gets revealed. In śākṣī’s presence, everything gets revealed. The fire remains quiet and
when the paper comes in contact, the fire became active and it started burning. Fire does
not do anything; we figuratively say that the fire burns paper. The right expression is in
the presence of fire, paper gets burnt. Similarly, in śākṣī’s presence, vyavahāra happens.
More in the next class.

Class 292
śloka 10.9 contd.
After introducing the subject matter of Brahman-enquiry as a means of liberation, in the
first five ślokas, Vidyāraṇya begins the actual enquiry from the sixth śloka, wherein he
reveals Brahman as śākṣī of tripuṭī, consisting of pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya. First, he
defines three members of the tripuṭī. He divided the mind into two portions, one is
pramātṛ-bhāga, another is pramāṇa-bhāga and the external world is called prameya. The
pramāṇa functions in the form of knowing process and it is in the form of generating vṛttis
or thoughts and it is called pramāṇa-vyāpāra. This pramāṇa-vyāpāra or activity which is

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1584

called knowing process can be in the form of two forms of aham-vṛtti and idam-vṛtti. Both
of them rise from pramāṇa-bhāga only. Both vṛttis occur in the pramāṇa-bhāga. Only
difference is aham-vṛtti rising in pramāṇa-bhāga will invoke pramāṇa-bhāga in the mind.
The idam-vṛtti rising in the same pramāṇa-bhāga is turned outwards and it will refer to
śabda-vṛtti, sparśa-vṛtti, rūpa-vṛtti, rasa-vṛtti or gandha-vṛtti. Aham-vṛtti only refers to
one, while idam-vṛtti can refer to a group of five prameyas. Thus, pramātā he defined,
pramāṇa he defined, pramāṇa-vyāpāra he defined and prameya he mentions, but did not
explain because it is very clear that the sense-objects are called prameya.
The point that should be noted aside is that all these three are jaḍa by themselves, because
pramātṛ-bhāga is a part of the mind, pramāṇa-bhāga is a part of the mind and every
thought, pramāṇa-vyāpāra, is also a part of the mind; and of course, the sense-objects are
all jaḍa in nature. Therefore, none of them has caitanya of its own either to reveal itself or
to reveal the other two. Pramātā is not self-effulgent to reveal itself and the other two.
Similarly, pramāṇa is not self-effulgent to reveal itself and the other two. Nor prameya is
self-effulgent to reveal itself and the other two, unlike the light. The light now, shines
because it has its own effulgence, it reveals itself and is able to reveal the people around.
The pramāṇa, pramātṛ and prameya, all of them, are jaḍa padārthas. Vidyāraṇya says
therefore, there is the fourth entity which is other than these three and that fourth entity is
called śākṣī. After introducing tripuṭī in 6, 7, and 8, in 9 th śloka Vidyāraṇya introduced
fourth one tripuṭi-vilakṣaṇa śākṣī which is caitanyarūpa and therefore, svayam-prakāśa.
This śākṣī alone reveals the tripuṭī, simultaneously all the three. It means it is not one after
the other. It is not a sequential revelation but it is simultaneous revelation of all the three.

śloka 10.10
ईक्षे शृणोमि जिघ्रामि स्वादयामि स्पृशाम्यहम्।
इति भासयते सर्वं नृत्यशालास्थदीपवत्॥ १०.१० ॥
īkṣe śṛṇomi jighrāmi svādayāmi spṛśāmyaham.
iti bhāsayate sarvaṃ nṛtyaśālāsthadīpavat (10.10).
What is the proof that śākṣī alone illumines the tripuṭī in one cognition and they are
simultaneously revealed? Aham īkṣe means I see. Aham śṛṇomi means I hear; jighrāmi
means I smell; svādayāmi means I taste and spṛśāmi means I touch. All these five verbs
are transitive verbs. All of them must have the object. Any rūpam, aham īkṣe because

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1585

seeing is always of some rūpa or the other. Therefore, aham rūpam īkṣe. Similarly, śṛṇomi
is a transitive verb and something you hear. Aham śabdam śṛṇomi, etc, this is our
experience. Suppose someone asks you, you will say I listen to Svāmījī’s class or discourse.
In this experience, you have aham rūpam paśyāmi as a unitary experience. I experience a
form is one experience with three components. Experience is one, but the components are
three. Aham śabdam śṛṇomi. One experience is there, but it has three components. Aham
rasam svādayāmi, one experience but there are three components. Vidyāraṇya says
observe these five unitary experiences which we normally take for granted. In each
unitary experience, there are three components.
Take the first unitary experience aham rūpam īkṣe. Aham refers to pramātā; īkṣe pramāṇa-
vyāpāra and rūpam means prameya. In one unitary experience, the tripuṭī is
simultaneously revealed. The proof is aham rūpam īkṣe. Similarly, aham śabdam śṛṇomi is
one unitary experience with three component aham pramātā, śṛṇomi is pramāṇa-vyāpāra
and śabdam is prameya. In all the five experiences, experience is unitary that is one but in
that one experience tripuṭī is simultaneously revealed. Now, Vidyāraṇya asks who is
revealing this tripuṭī simultaneously? Can you say tripuṭī itself reveals simultaneously. If
you say tripuṭī reveals simultaneously, all the three will become prameya. Then, tripuṭī
itself will not exist. Can you say pramātā reveals all the three? If pramātā reveals pramāṇa
and pramātā then pramātā will become prameya. Therefore, pramātā may be revealing
prameya through the pramāṇa but you can never say that pramātā reveals pramāṇa; then,
pramāṇa will also be prameya. Suppose pramātā reveals pramātā itself then pramātā also
will become prameya. Therefore, pramātā can reveal only prameya and it can never reveal
pramāṇa and if pramātā reveals pramāṇa, pramāṇa will become prameya and then there
will be no tripuṭī.
Suppose you say pramāṇa reveals pramātā and prameya, then the first pramāṇa itself
cannot be called pramāṇa as it will be called pramātā and suppose it reveals the other two,
the other two will become prameya that means no one can reveal all the three. Pramātā
cannot reveal the other two, prameya cannot reveal the other two and pramāṇa will not
reveal the other two; if any one of them reveal the other two, tripuṭī will crash; then, the
knowledge itself cannot take place. Therefore, if pramātā must remain a pramātā, and
pramāṇa must remain a pramāṇa, and prameya must remain a prameya, in one experience
all these three should be revealed and it is possible only when there is something outside,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1586

which reveals all these three simultaneously. To avoid the problem, suppose you say
pramātā reveals pramāṇa and turns prameya away and pushes pramāṇa second time,
then when the pramātā reveals prameya, the first pramāṇa will not be revealed; then,
pramāṇa will not exist; suppose pramātā reveals second time, then pramāṇa will become
prameya, then prameya will not be available. Then, like musical chairs they will all the
time struggle and there will be no unitary experience in which all the three are available
but all the three are shining, and if all the three are to be revealed we require a fourth
factor which alone reveals aham the pramātā and īkṣe the pramāṇa-vyāpāra and rūpam
the prameya, all these three must be simultaneously revealed by a vilakṣaṇa śākṣī.
Here alone, Vidyāraṇya introduces the example of nāṭaka-dīpa or the example of nṛtya-
śālāstha dīpa. By analysing the example, he wants to introduce all the four factors: śākṣī,
pramātā, pramāṇa and prameya. This is the introduction of the main topic. Like the lamp
located or fixed in a nṛtya-śālā, a dance hall. You have to imagine there is a dance hall,
there is a stage, audience is there and since śākṣī light is eka. Here, you have to imagine
one powerful light is located on the top and that one light simultaneously lights up both
the stage as well as the audience. Don’t imagine many lamps, then śākṣī will become
many. This will be elaborated in the following ślokas

śloka 10.11
नृत्यशालास्थितो दीपः प्रभुं सभ्यांश्च नर्तकीम्।
दीपयेदविशेषेण तदभावेऽपि दीप्यते ॥ १०.११ ॥
nṛtyaśālāsthito dīpaḥ prabhuṃ sabhyāṃśca nartakīm.
dīpayedaviśeṣeṇa tadabhāve:'pi dīpyate (10.11).
The nāṭaka-dīpa or nṛtyaśālā-dīpa example will be elaborated in five ślokas. It will be
gradually unfolded step by step. Here also, there are four items, tripuṭī and śākṣī. Here
also, you have to imagine four components. They are the master or the king who has
appointed the dancer, sabhā means hall and sabhya means people occupying the hall and
nartakī means the dancer. The master is there who is one, dancer is two on the stage, many
members in the audience is the third and fourth one is the powerful lamp illumining all
these three. The lamp located in the dance hall has lit up the whole place. The tripuṭī
consists of master, dancer and the audience, lit up by the lamp without any distinction
uniformly and simultaneously. It is an illumination without involving will or action,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1587

because the light or the fire or lamp has prakāśa all the time and therefore, it is not an
action begun at a particular time, but it is always there.
You imagine the agni in olden days, you imagine the powerful dīpa is kept and the fire
illumines without requiring any willful action. Illumination is not the job of the fire but
illumination is the nature of the fire. If illumination is a job it can start at a particular time,
but here, on the part of the fire it is not an action but it is the very nature. Such a lamp
whose nature is illumination is located in the middle without will, desire or action. The
lamp illumines all of them uniformly, simultaneously, without action. How do you know
it is not the job, but it is the nature? If it is the job, when the programme goes on, fire will
illumine; when the programme is over, why waste the energy and the fire will go and
there will be blackness. It is not like that. Whether people are there or not, the lamp shines.
In the absence of the master, audience and dancer, the lamp shines, but then, we will
change the verb accordingly. Previously, we said fire illumines the people and now, since
no one is there we will not use the word illumine for there is nothing to illumine; now, we
will say the fire shines by itself. When the object comes, you say it illumines and when the
object goes away, you use the word shines. The change of verb is in our expression, but as
far as fire is concerned, fire does not do any job. Therefore, you have to see the change.
Previously, dīpa illumines and now it is shining and previously it was transitive, and now
it is intransitive verb. Similarly, śākṣī illumines when the object is there in front of it and
when the objects are not there śākṣī does not illumine, but continues to shine by itself.

śloka 10.12
अहङ्कारं धियं साक्षी विषयानपि भासयेत्।
अहङ्काराद्यभावेऽपि स्वयं भात्येव पूर्ववत्॥ १०.१२ ॥
ahaṅkāraṃ dhiyaṃ sākṣī viṣayānapi bhāsayet.
ahaṅkārādyabhāve:'pi svayaṃ bhātyeva pūrvavat (10.12).
In the previous śloka, he explained the example. From the example, we have to note the
lamp shines when nothing is there and lamp illumines when things are there in front of it;
lamp’s illumination is uniform, it is simultaneous and lamp’s illumination is without
doing any action; desire, will, plan are not there. All these things with regard to the lamp
we have to apply to the śākṣī. Śākṣī shines, śākṣī illumines; śākṣī-illumination is uniform
and śākṣī-illumination is simultaneous, śākṣī-illumination is without will or action or

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1588

transformation, etc. It shines without any meditation. These five features we have to see
here. In suṣupti, nothing is there to illumine but śākṣī shines by itself.
Once you talk about viśeṣa jñāna you need pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya. Therefore, you
should not ask how to know the śākṣī when the tripuṭī is resolved? To answer that
question you will have to bring in tripuṭī. Pure śākṣī in the absence of tripuṭī can never be
known or experienced as a viśeṣa jñāna. It can never be experienced, that a particular
experience in the form of I saw the śākṣī and I have returned, etc; in the form of viśeṣa
jñāna or viśeṣa anubhava, śākṣī can never be known or experienced, in the absence of
tripuṭī. In Nirvikalpaka samādhi, viśeṣa Brahma-anubhava is illogical. The very word
Nirvikalpaka means tripuṭī is absent. Nirvikalpaka means tripuṭi-abhāva and no viśeṣa
anubhava or viśeṣa jñāna in the form of Brahma-anubhava or Brahman-jñāna is possible.
The moment you talk about viśeṣa jñāna, you have to come out of samādhi; therefore, you
need jāgrat-avasthā and you should bring in tripuṭī, that is why we say in śravaṇa alone,
when tripuṭī is available, śākṣī should be understood and in suṣupti, no śākṣi-anubhava
can be there. The one sāmānya anubhava when tripuṭī goes, that anubhava is what we
experience in suṣupti-avasthā, which is called sāmānya anubhava. If there is a
Nirvikalpaka samādhi, there also the anubhava will be exactly like suṣupti only.
Nirvikalpaka samādhi is an artificial suṣupti and suṣupti is a natural Nirvikalpaka
samādhi. There is no special knowledge or special experience possible logically. If you
have any special experience, it will be pramātā experiencing some prameya. It will be
either ordinary prameya or extraordinary prameya and you can never specially experience
śākṣī as one of the objects. Therefore, śākṣī shines in suṣupti. You will not say I am
sleeping because to say I am, the pramātṛ-bhāga of the mind is required, pramāṇa-bhāga
of the mind is required and pramāṇa-vyāpāra aham-vṛtti is required and if they are there,
it is no more suṣupti. Tripuṭī is absent in deep sleep.
Śākṣī shines by itself when ahaṅkārādyabhāve:'pi in the absence of tripuṭī in suṣupti-
avasthā or Nirvikalpaka samādhi, if you sit in samādhi. In jāgrat-avasthā, the tripuṭī
arises. Does the śākṣī arise in jāgrat-avasthā? Either way, you are in trouble. Suppose you
say śākṣī arises means during suṣupti it is not there. Suppose śākṣī does not arise then also
problem; the very question is wrong because śākṣī does not set or dissolve to arise. Śākṣī is
always there, what arises is tripuṭī. In jāgrat-avasthā, when the tripuṭī arises, śākṣī will
reveal pramātṛ-bhāga of the mind or the ahaṅkāra which was dissolved in kāraṇa-śarīra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1589

and that pramāṇa-bhāga or ahaṅkāra rises. Also prameya-bhāga, prapañca, also rises
which are jaḍa in nature, while śākṣī illumines simultaneously and uniformly without any
change or effort. That is why it is called avasthā-traya-śākṣī, avasthās being jāgrat, svapna
and suṣupti.

śloka 10.13
निरन्तरं भासमाने कू टस्थे ज्ञप्तिरूपतः ।
तद्भासा भास्यमानेयं बुद्धिर्नृत्यत्यनेकधा ॥ १०.१३ ॥
nirantaraṃ bhāsamāne kūṭasthe jñaptirūpataḥ.
tadbhāsā bhāsyamāneyaṃ buddhirnṛtyatyanekadhā (10.13).
How the dance programme comes about, he wants to talk about. In jāgrat-avasthā,
pramātṛ-bhāga of the mind is revealed, prameya-bhāga is also available; in the middle
pramāṇa-bhāga is there. No change happens in prameya-bhāga, the objects are same.
Nothing happens to pramātā as it is the same. When śākṣī lends cidābhāsa to pramāṇa-
bhāga, the latter gets activated, just as when the fire comes in contact with water the water
begins to bubble up and dance because of the fire principle even though fire does not
request the water to bubble. Because of the very contact just as the water begins to boil,
similarly, pramāṇa-bhāga of the mind begins to bubble up aham-vṛtti. The hall was same
before all people entered, there is no difference; the moment we enter the hall, the mind
gets to come in contact and then we begin to respond to the condition in the form of so
many various mental thoughts and the mind has its own relation. Suppose you sleep off,
the hall remains the same, body remains the same, temperature remains the same, no
reaction, no worry, no complaint; now, the tripuṭī is activated and when it is activated,
vṛttis are generated and vṛtti-generation is the dance programme of the pramāṇa-bhāga of
tripuṭī. It is there in jāgrat-avasthā and that dance programme varies. More in the next
class.

Class 293
śloka 10.13 contd.
In the first 9 ślokas of this chapter, Vidyāraṇya introduced four factors of enquiry, namely
pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya and śākṣī. During this enquiry, he indirectly revealed that the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1590

first three happen to be jaḍa in nature for pramātā is a portion of the mind; it being a
portion of the mind, it is acetana only; so also pramāṇa as this pramāṇa-bhāga is also a
part of the mind, it has to be acetana and then finally we have prameya-bhāga which
represents external sense-objects, which being the products of pañca-bhūtas are acetana.
Pramātā is revealed by the expression I which is called ahaṅkāra and the pramāṇa is in the
form of the knowing process which is expressed in the form of I see, I hear, I smell, etc.
See, smell, etc., refer to pramāṇa-bhāga which is associated with the process of vṛtti-
modification and the sense-object is revealed as an object; I see the form or colour, I hear
the sound, I smell the fragrance, etc., in the tripuṭī, all the three factors are jaḍa themselves.
The next question is if all three factors of tripuṭī are jaḍa in nature, how are we able to say I
see the form, I smell fragrance, etc., because jaḍa does not have self-consciousness, also
jaḍa does not have sentiency also. If all the three are neither self-conscious nor capable of
illumining the three, pramātā cannot reveal itself and the other two, and pramāṇa cannot
reveal itself and the other two, and prameya cannot reveal itself and the other two. None
of the tripuṭī is svayam-prakāśa or para-prakāśaka. At the same time, knowing process is
going on, in which all of them are revealed pramātā, pramāṇa and prameya are revealed.
In every cognition process, all the three are getting revealed. It is because of a fourth factor
which you have to necessarily accept which is śākṣī. Śākṣī illumines all the three in every
knowing process and since all the three are simultaneously known in every knowing
process, since all the three pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya are known, all are revealed
simultaneously by the śākṣī, therefore, śākṣī must have a unique nature. The unique
nature is that śākṣī must be self-effulgent, it should be non-material consciousness-
principle, because if it is a material principle, it will require an another śākṣī to reveal; first
we know śākṣī is non-material consciousness-principle; secondly we know śākṣī illumines
tripuṭī simultaneously. In every cognition, I am aware of all the three simultaneously. Not
that first I know, then I see and then the colour comes to be known. When I see colour
even to make the word utter there is a sequence, but in knowing the three there is no
sequence. In utterance, there is sequence for mouth cannot utter the three simultaneously.
The utterance is a sequence, but the revelation is simultaneous.
Not only it is simultaneous, it does not undergo any change to reveal the three. Suppose
śākṣī requires a particular change to reveal the pramātā, then what will happen. Through
the particular change, it will reveal only pramātā and in that modification pramāṇa will

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1591

not be revealed. If śākṣī requires specific modification to reveal the tripuṭī, during that
specific modification, pramātā will be revealed not the prameya and prameya. Then
second modification it has to undergo to know the pramāṇa and when it undergoes a
modification to reveal the pramāṇa, the pramātā would have gone away. Similarly,
prameya, when it is revealed by undergoing the specific modification the other two will
not be there. If śākṣī requires specific modification to reveal the tripuṭī, it will be able to
reveal them one at a time, but śākṣī reveals all the three simultaneously; that means śākṣī
does not require a specific modification or a specific change or a specific process to reveal
them. The first point to be noted is śākṣī is Self-revealing consciousness; śākṣī reveals the
tripuṭī simultaneously; then śākṣī reveals all the three without any change or modification
or process by mere sānidhya. Since there is no process involved, its revelation should be
uniform. It is not that it gives more consciousness to pramātā; it is not that it gives more
light to pramāṇa and prameya it is still less or for farther prameya, it has less light, etc; it is
not so. People far away are dim and the dimness is not because of the śākṣī giving lesser
consciousness but it is because of the limitation of the pramāṇa or it is because the object is
farther, but in śākṣī the amount of consciousness it reveals or it releases is uniform. It is
like the light and light sense is the same amount of illumination every second itself but
when an object is close by being closer, the object has more illumination, farther object has
lesser illumination, the difference is not because of the light itself. The Mother (Devī) sends
the same amount of grace to all the people and if some have good life and some not
having so it is not because of the gradation in mother’s grace but it is because the devotees
have blocked the grace, because of their own pāpa. More grace or less grace is caused by
the devotee alone. Similarly, śākṣī gives the same amount of caitanya all over the cosmos
and if certain things are not known, if certain things are partially known or certain things
are fully known, it is because of the pramātṛ-doṣa or pramāṇa-doṣa or doṣa in prameya.
śākṣī is aviśeṣaṇa. It uniformly, simultaneously, changelessly illumines all the three. Don’t
forget these three words.
Then an aside note; we say śākṣī reveals all the three uniformly. We give the credit to the
śākṣī but at other times we do say pramātā is revealing prameya through the pramāṇa. We
do say pramātā reveals the prameya through the pramāṇa. In some places pramātā reveals
through pramāṇa, in some places we say śākṣī reveals prameya. Now, the question is how
do you say pramātā reveals prameya in some classes and śākṣī reveals prameya in some

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1592

other classes?! The credit should go to pramātā or śākṣī. I will ask the question when you
are opening the tap the water comes from the tank. Before opening the tap, water did not
come through the tap. After opening the tap, water comes. Now, the credit should go to
the one who opens the tap or the tank? Water comes because of me the tap-opener, or tank
should take the credit? Both seem to be playing their role. Opener plays the role as
without opening water will not come; tank should take the credit as even if you open the
tap, if water is not there, air will come. The tank is important and opening the tap is also
important. Even though both should take the credit the real source is what? It is the tank
only. Therefore, tank is the primary cause and opener is supportive cause. Tank is
mukhya-kāraṇa. Similarly, if the prameya is revealed, it is because of the cidābhāsa, the
caitanya travelling to the prameya and what is the role of pramātā? Pramātā is the tap-
opener because he alone directs the pramāṇa towards the relevant sense-object and
therefore, the opening is done by the pramātā; all right, whether I should look or whether I
should hear or whether I should smell, etc, the pramātā gives the direction by controlling
the pramāṇa. Therefore, pramātā plays the role of tap-opener, but ultimately the
revelation can never be done by the pramātā because pramātā is jaḍa.
At the same time, therefore, you cannot say pramātā should be abolished. If you abolish
pramātā, it happens during suṣupti. During the suṣupti, tap-opener functions not; even
though the śākṣī is there, the consciousness tank is there, but still the Śākṣi-caitanya cannot
reveal śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha. Pramātā is the supportive cause and śākṣī is
primary cause and ultimately the credit must be given to śākṣī alone. Śākṣī reveals
pramātā and pramāṇa supported by them reveals the prameya also. Without their
support, śākṣī cannot reveal prameya. This is the message given up to the 9 th śloka. To
convey this idea, Vidyāraṇya takes nṛtya-śālā-dīpa-dṛṣṭānta or nāṭaka-dīpa-dṛṣṭānta. Here
also, four factors are there: the master, the dancer, the audience and the light. The light is
equivalent to śākṣī; master or the king is the pramātṛ-bhāga the ahaṅkāra; the dancer is the
pramāṇa-bhāga and the audience is the prameya-bhāga. This dṛṣṭānta starts from 10 th
śloka and it goes up to 15 th śloka. Śākṣī shines within the mind as self-effulgent
consciousness. It is kūṭastha; it conveys three English words, I asked you remember, the
uniformly, simultaneously and changelessly, all the three words are conveyed by one
word kūṭastha. Whenever we use a verb it conveys an action and action always has a
beginning and the end also; action involves modification or change and action is always

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1593

sequential. Verb always conveys sequence and when I say śākṣī illumines we will make a
mistake and think that it is sequential process, it is changing process and it has a
beginning and an end! Here, we use the verb but all the associated features should not be
taken. Śākṣī illumines uniformly, changelessly and simultaneously.
Pramātā begins to know prameya, on the part of pramātā, knowing is a process in the
form of entertaining a vṛtti. Pramātā’s knowing process is always non-simultaneous, non-
uniform and it is changeful. On the part of pramātā, those three things are important and
on the part of śākṣī they will not be there and therefore, it is nirantara. During sleep,
pramātā stops knowing but you cannot say during sleep, śākṣī also stops illumining.
When the śākṣī is ‘doing’ that it is done by its mere presence. Pramāṇa-bhāga becomes
sentient in the presence of śākṣī. Acetana pramāṇa-bhāga becomes cetana pramāṇa-bhāga
capable of generating thoughts, both aham-vṛtti and idam-vṛtti. It is done because of the
presence of the śākṣī. The water in a pot is stationary and motionless and keeps the water
underneath. In the presence of heat, the water bubbles. Inert mind becomes sentient when
it is pervaded by the cidābhāsa. Illumined by Śākṣi-caitanya, the mind becomes sentient.
Dancing represents aham-vṛtti and idam-vṛtti. Buddhi is equal to pramāṇa-bhāga. That
will be explained in the next śloka.

śloka 10.14
अहङ्कारः प्रभुः सभ्या विषया नर्तकी मतिः ।
तालादिधारिण्यक्षाणि दीपः साक्ष्यवभासकः ॥ १०.१४ ॥
ahaṅkāraḥ prabhuḥ sabhyā viṣayā nartakī matiḥ.
tālādidhāriṇyakṣāṇi dīpaḥ sākṣyavabhāsakaḥ (10.14).
Vidyāraṇya extends the example. The pramātṛ-bhāga can be compared to the king or the
master who is the owner of the dance troupe because they are the royal troupe and they
are paid by the king only. The king has the ownership or abhimāna of the dancer.
Ahaṅkāra has abhimāna of the mind. Therefore, ahaṅkāra is called the king. Generally, he
does not sit with the audience and the king has a special seat on the other side of the
audience. The pramāṇa is on one side and pramātā is on the other side. All the sense-
objects happen to be around the pramātā. Those sense-organs are the audience, the
members of the audience; they are many but the king is one. When I say ahaṅkāra is eka,
remember in my life there is only one ahaṅkāra. Each one has one nṛtya-śālā and ahaṅkāra

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1594

is one. For my experience, ahaṅkāra is one; for your biography, there is one ahaṅkāra; for
every biography, there is only one master. The prameya is on one side,; pramātā is on one
side, audience is on one side and between them is nartakī, the dancer, the mind, and it is
the pramāṇa-bhāga. Audience does not have abhimāna, sense-objects do not have
abhimāna, but the prabhu alone has abhimāna. If the dancer has to dance, he requires a set
of people who have to sing and do tāla, etc. They assist the dancing programme. Even
though the king asks her to dance, he needs that troupe. Here, for the mind there is a
troupe and the sense-organs are the troupe. The mind goes through varieties of emotions.
Every jāgrat-avasthā is a dance programme with navarasa. In all the dance programmes,
there is a change in the audience. The dancer of course changes. The king is happy when
the dancer dances well and vicāra is there in all the three. There is one nirvikāra vastu
which does not participate in the programme, either as the king, or as the dancer, or as the
audience, but at the same time, without that, dance programme cannot go on. That fellow
is the light. That light is nothing but the Śākṣi-caitanya in the case of the Jīva. śākṣī is
compared to dīpa. It will not say the programme is good or bad or otherwise, but at the
same time, the dance programme cannot go on without it.

śloka 10.15
स्वस्थानसंस्थितो दीपः सर्वतो भासयेद्यथा ।
स्थिरस्थायी तथा साक्षी बहिरन्तः प्रकाशयेत्॥ १०.१५ ॥
svasthānasaṃsthito dīpaḥ sarvato bhāsayedyathā.
sthirasthāyī tathā sākṣī bahirantaḥ prakāśayet (10.15).
Now, Vidyāraṇya focuses on the dīpa. He talked about the audience and the dancer and
also about the dancer’s troupe or accompaniment and the king. They are all acetana
factors. Now, he will talk about the cetana tattva, the lamp. The lamp remains where it is,
it does not move from one place to another. Without moving or changing, it reveals all the
directions simultaneously. The audience is lighted up, dancer is also lighted up, the king is
also lighted up. In the same way, motionlessness is the example. Assuming that there is
only one lamp, that one lamp illumines all the three. Don’t stretch the example. Always
between the example and the original, there will be common features and uncommon
features. The duty of the student is to always look for sādharmya aṃśa; and ignore
uncommon features which will be there. You should note them to cast them off. Never talk

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1595

about the lamp and śākṣī. If there are no differences, the lamp will become the śākṣī! You
use all your intelligence to focus on the lamp and the motionlessness of the lamp. The
pramātā and pramāṇa are inside and prameya is outside the body. The consciousness
comes out through the mind and through the thought and it gives consciousness to the
external objects also by the process called phala-vyāpti. The cidābhāsa travels along the
thoughts and cidābhāsa pervades the objects. It did not come from the thought, but it
comes from the śākṣī. Thought is not the producer of cidābhāsa but thought is the carrier
of cidābhāsa. Just as pipe is not the producer of water but the carrier of water. Here, vṛtti is
the pipeline and that is given by the śākṣī. Ultimately, the credit should go to the śākṣī
alone and the vṛtti is only a supporter like the tap-opener. The vṛtti and the mind are
supporters but the śākṣī alone is main without which vṛtti cannot arise from the mind.

Class 294
śloka 10.15 contd.
Vidyāraṇya gave the imagery of nṛtya-śālā-dīpa and explained the example from śloka
number 10. Now, he concludes the explanation of the example in śloka number 15. Four
factors were introduced in the example dīpa the light, then the king; nartakī dancer, the
audience, all of them participate in the dance programme in different ways. All of them
undergo modifications also. The dancer dances enthusiastically supported by the
orchestra around, the king has abhimāna in the dancer because king has engaged the
dancer, therefore, the king is happy when she dances well and not happy when she does
not do well; there is audience also which does not have abhimāna in the dancer; the
audience also influences the dancer to some extent. If the audience responds well, the
dancer is inspired. This is true of a teacher also. My inspiration is directly proportional to
your response, otherwise I will forget Vedānta! Therefore, the audience also has an
influence. They are the participants in the programme and there is a fourth factor which is
not a participant but at the same time without the fourth factor, the dance programme is
not possible and that is the lamp light. Similarly, pramātā is the prabhu, pramāṇa is the
dancer, the sense-objects are the prameya and all our life-experiences, happy ones and
unhappy ones, all these different ups and downs in our biography are caused by the
tripuṭī only. There is a fourth factor which is not a participant in the tripuṭī programme

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1596

without which tripuṭī itself cannot take place. That is called śākṣī. Thus, Vidyāraṇya
concluded the lamp dancer example in the last śloka.
It illumines two factors inside and one factor outside the body, the pramātā and pramāṇa
inside and prameya outside the body. One part of the mind is pramātā which is jaḍa in
nature, pramāṇa is another part of the mind which is also jaḍa in nature and pramāṇa part
of the mind can generate thoughts in the form of aham-vṛtti revealing the pramātā or
idam-vṛtti revealing the prameya. The śākṣī illumines pramātā, illumines pramāṇa and
illumines aham-vṛtti of pramāṇa and idam-vṛtti also. When the idam-vṛtti goes out, along
with the idam-vṛtti Śākṣi-caitanya also travels, but when it travels with idam-vṛtti it is
renamed as cidābhāsa. When śākṣī directly illumines it is pramātā and pramāṇa and when
śākṣī travels along with the idam-vṛtti as the pratibimbita caitanya it is named as
cidābhāsa but cidābhāsa is an avatāra of śākṣī only. Whatever credit is there for cidābhāsa,
it should go to śākṣī only. When you worship the image of an Ācārya whatever glory is
there in the image that does not belong to the image but the glory belongs to original
Ācārya only. So also cidābhāsa-mahimā is śākṣi-mahimā only. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says
śākṣī itself travels in the form of cidābhāsa reaches the pot etc, and vṛtti also pervades
called as vṛtti-vyāpti and cidābhāsa pervades as phala-vyāpti. The pramāṇa and pramātā
are directly revealed while prameya is revealed through the pipeline of pramātā and
pramāṇa. In this regard, the water pipe and tank is referred to. We experience śākṣī all the
time in all the three avasthās. When I say ‘the I’ shines because of śākṣī, when I say I see,
the word see refers to pramāṇa-vṛtti that is also because of śākṣī shining and when I say
the pot, the pot is also known because of the śākṣī. Therefore, all the time śākṣī is evident.
Up to this, we saw in the last class.

śloka 10.16
बहिरन्तर्विभागोऽयं देहापेक्षो न साक्षिणि ।
विषया बाह्यदेशस्था देहस्यान्तरहङ्कृ तिः ॥ १०.१६ ॥
bahirantarvibhāgo:'yaṃ dehāpekṣo na sākṣiṇi.
viṣayā bāhyadeśasthā dehasyāntarahaṅkṛtiḥ (10.16).
In the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya said śākṣī illumines inside as also outside. Thus, śākṣī
reveals pramāṇa, pramātā and prameya. Here, Vidyāraṇya explains inside and outside.
The division of inside and outside should be understood from the standpoint of the body

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1597

and śākṣī itself. You cannot talk inside or outside from the standpoint of the śākṣī, because
śākṣī is the all-pervading consciousness; all the insides and outsides fall within the śākṣī
only. The inside and outside is a relative term and it decides depending upon the
standpoint on which the comparison is made. The pramātā is inside the body, pramāṇa is
inside the body, cidābhāsa is inside the body; similarly, prameya is outside the body, but
cit śākṣī is not inside or outside. From the standpoint of pramātā, pramāṇa and cidābhāsa I
can say I am here but from the standpoint of śākṣī I am never located but I am all-
pervading as Śākṣi-caitanya.
Cit illumines cidābhāsa and cidābhāsa illumines the world. Always say sunlight illumines
the moon and moonlight illumines the earth. When you experience the earth you enjoy the
glory of moonlight. When you experience the moon you enjoy the glory of the sun. When I
experience the mind I enjoy the glory of śākṣī. When you say I am aware of my mind, ‘I’
means the śākṣī. When you say I am aware of the world I have identified with the mind
and cidābhāsa that means I have descended down to the level of cidābhāsa. We always
travel between śākṣī and cidābhāsa. Whenever I talk about the illumination of the mind, I
enjoy the glory of śākṣī. When there are no living beings, śākṣī will be there but the world
cannot be illumined because there will no body to open the tap in the form of pramātā and
pramāṇa.

śloka 10.17
अन्तस्था धीः सहैवाक्षैर्बहिर्याति पुनः पुनः ।
भास्यबुद्धिस्थचाञ्चल्यं साक्षिण्यारोप्यते वृथा ॥ १०.१७ ॥
antasthā dhīḥ sahaivākṣairbahiryāti punaḥ punaḥ.
bhāsyabuddhisthacāñcalyaṃ sākṣiṇyāropyate vṛthā (10.17).
Here, Vidyāraṇya talks about human problems of adhyāsa. I am aware of the mind as a
śākṣī. Therefore, I am the illuminator of the mind and the mind is the illumined. When I
am aware of the mind, I am aware of the conditions of the mind also. Here, the mind is
dancing mind vigorously. The mind goes through varieties of emotions also. I am aware of
the mind, the mind has cāñcalya. It means disturbance or fluctuation. We commit the
mistake as even I illumine the mind and I claim the cāñcalya of the mind and I say I am
disturbed. I should have said I am aware of the mental disturbance but instead of saying
that, I say I am disturbed. This is called ahaṅkāra, aham-idam adhyāsa, which is the cause

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1598

of saṃsāra. I am the illuminator of the disturbed mind and when I know it, the life will be
an entertainment. Instead of enjoying, forgetting the real nature, the mind becomes a
manobhāra the mind becomes a bhāra, if I do not know how to detach from my mind,
remaining as a śākṣī called śākṣi-bhāva. The absence of śākṣi-bhāva is saṃsāra-kāraṇa.
The mind goes outwards with the help of the five sense-organs. There, the idam-vṛtti
forms. The original consciousness is already there everywhere. The reflection travels
wherever the mirror goes, therefore, the reflection also seems to travel. Really speaking
neither the original travels nor the reflection travels, both only seem to travel but what
travels is the reflecting medium. Yet, we say cit or consciousness travels; that is what we
think. Therefore, he says the fluctuations are caused by the mind alone. The movements in
the buddhi or the mind or the vṛtti part of the mind or pramāṇa part of the mind
vigorously moves. The buddhi is objectified by me the śākṣī. That means the mind is an
object, movement is also object and śākṣī is subject. The attributes of an experienced object
belong to the experienced object and never to the experiencer subject. Therefore,
Vidyāraṇya says the illumined mind has worry. The illumined mind has fear, anxiety, etc.
Never use the words I have fear. Say the mind is worried. The mind has issues which we
can handle with the help of the mind but never use the word I have the problems. Do
whatever you like, but change the language. The change of language changes my very
attitude towards myself. Never use the language I have problem, I have tension, I have
fear, etc. You handle the problem of the mind with the help of the mind. The sunlight
falling on the moon is not affected by the condition on the moon. I am the śākṣī and I
illumine the mind and I am never affected by the mind. I am the illuminator of the mind
which is in the grip of fear. Meditate on the fact. I should see it as a fact. In Ātmabodha,
Adi Śaṅkarācārya gives an example also. There, the example is given of the moon on the
paurṇamī night. Below the moon, clouds are there. Clouds are seen because of the
moonlight. The moonlight illumines the clouds and moon is the illuminator while the
cloud is illumined. Because of the wind, cloud moves from one direction to another. When
the cloud moves fast, for the observer, it looks as though the moon is moving away fast.
We transfer the clouds movement on the moon. Similarly, we transfer the mind’s
problems upon us.
Therefore, he says that the mind’s problems are falsely transferred to the śākṣī which I am.
I am the one who am aware of my mind. In jāgrat-avasthā, I am aware of the mind; in

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1599

svapna-avasthā, I am aware of the mind and in suṣupti-avasthā, I am aware of the absence

of the mind or the dormant condition of the mind. The word śākṣī must be translated as I
am. This is beginning of the saṃsāra. This anyonya adhyāsa is the beginning of saṃsāra.
That’s why Adi Śaṅkarācārya begins the Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya with this adhyāsa problem.
The mind is jaḍa and I am cetana; how can I mistake cetana śākṣī to the jaḍa
antaḥkaraṇa?! More in the next class.

Class 295
śloka 10.17
Vidyāraṇya reveals Brahman as śākṣī, tripuṭī consisting of pramāṇa, pramātā and
prameya. The pramātā is one part of the mind and pramāṇa is another part of the mind in
the form of thoughts while prameya are the external object. The pramātā is jaḍa because it
is the mind,pramāṇa is jaḍa as it is in the form of thoughts and prameya are the external
objects which are jaḍa. All are inert in nature and if all the three are inert, how can the
knowing process be possible with these inert components since knowledge is the
phenomenon which needs consciousness-principle. You cannot imagine of a knowing
process without the consciousness-principle. Knower is not possible without
consciousness-principle, knowing process is not possible without consciousness-principle,
object cannot enjoy known status unless it has known consciousness. The knownness of
the clip is possible only when it is an object of knowledge and if it is to be an object of
knowledge it should be an object of consciousness and without consciousness, the
knownness of an inert object is not possible. Thus, knower presuppose consciousness,
knowing process presuppose consciousness and known object presupposes consciousness.
All the three by themselves don’t have consciousness of their own. All the three are
possible only when consciousness is there as the knower is inert part of the mind, knowing
process is inert part of the thoughts of the mind and objects are also inert. How the
phenomenon happens? For that, you have to accept fourth component which is different
from all the three inert tripuṭī, because of which alone, the tripuṭī gets the status of
knower, knowing process and known. The very status is possible because of an extraneous
entity, outside the three, and that extraneous entity is called Śākṣi-caitanya. In the
presence of Śākṣi-caitanya, all the three become knower, known and knowing process, but

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1600

Śākṣi-caitanya does not participate in the process. Its presence is required, but its
participation is not there. To convey the non-participating blessing, śākṣī is requires. Śākṣī
is there without participation.
Vidyāraṇya gives the example of light in the nṛtya-śālā where dance performance takes
place. The light is neither the student nor the teacher nor is it the process of
communication. The light does not participate in any one of them but the presence of the
light is required for the show to go on. Brahman was identified as tripuṭi-śākṣī. This was
explained with the help of nṛtya-śālā. The example was completed in the 15 th śloka. From
16th śloka onwards, the nature of śākṣī is described or elaborated. The śākṣī is the
illuminator of the tripuṭī and it a non-participating illuminator of tripuṭī; it is a non-
changing illuminator of the tripuṭī; it is a simultaneous illuminator of the tripuṭī. It is not
that śākṣī illumines pramāṇa first and after the job is over, it withdraws illumination and
starts redirecting or focusing on pramāṇa and ends that process and then it turns towards
prameya; it is not sequentially illumining, but it illumines simultaneously all the three.
Now, Vidyāraṇya says not only it is all these, it is an unlocated illuminator. The pramātā
has a location; pramātā being a part of the mind, it is located within the body. The
pramātā’s location is inside the body; pramāṇa also being another part of the mind,
namely thought, that is also located within the body and both of them are internal or
internally located factors or components while the prameya is located outside the body.
Thus, all the time we are dealing with located pramātā, located pramāṇa and located
prameya but when I introduce the śākṣī, your mind is driven by the habit. The habit of the
mind is to always looks for a location. Whatever I experience has a location, pramātā has a
location, pramāṇa has a location and prameya also has a location. This is called orientation
of the conventional intellect. The conventional intellect apprehends things along with
location. So the question comes: where is the blessed śākṣī located? Is it inside or outside?
Vidyāraṇya says you have to change the habit. This is called viparīta-bhāvanā. You have
to neutralize the sentence and understand that the śākṣī does not have a location and it
illumines inside pramātā-pramāṇa and it illumines outside prameya, the external objects;
it is by itself neither inside nor outside or you can say it is both inside and outside.
Therefore, he said in the last śloka, the internal-external division from the standpoint of
body is possible only when you talk about pramātā, pramāṇa or prameya but you cannot
talk about this division with regard to Śākṣi-caitanya. Then, in the 17 th śloka which I

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1601

completed in the last class, Vidyāraṇya said that even though śākṣī illumines the pramātā
and pramāṇa inside and prameya outside, don’t think that it must be running inside and
outside. Because it has to light up the three, both inside and outside, it may appear that the
poor śākṣī has to run inside and outside, like a working housewife! The śākṣī is doing
multi-tasking, therefore, it has to go inside and outside. He says nothing doing. Śākṣī is
all-pervading; wherever the mind is, wherever the thoughts are, the reflections are
automatically formed and when the reflections are formed, those objects are known.
Therefore, he says śākṣī does not go or travel inside and outside. It is the mind or thoughts
which travels inside and outside. But the travel or the motions of the mind is falsely
transferred on to the consciousness or śākṣī. Because of the intimacy or proximity, the
movement of the illumined is transferred to the illuminator because of the proximity. It is
like on the paurṇamī night, the moon is there and down below there are clouds also; the
moon is the illuminator of the cloud, cloud is illumined. When the clouds move past in
one direction, how it appears is that the moon seems to travel fast away from the clouds.
Really speaking the clouds are moving in one direction but we attribute it to the motion of
the moon in the opposite direction. I have given another example also. When you go by
train after the sādhana-camp, people wait to reach Chennai. Therefore, as even the train
comes they say Madras has come. Does Chennai come or go? Even though Chennai does
not come or go, it is the train that is coming and going but the arrival of the train is
transferred to Chennai; similarly, the motion of the tripuṭī or especially pramātā is
transferred to the śākṣī and śākṣī appears as cāñcala. That śākṣī I am, that Vidyāraṇya does
not say, but you note when the mind is turbulent instead of saying the mind is turbulent, I
say I am turbulent or I am disturbed. This is called saṃsāra. The disturbance of the mind I
superimpose on myself who is śākṣī of the mind. This is the beginning of saṃsāra; hand
over the disturbance to the mind and claim I am undisturbed śākṣī Brahman. that is called
mokṣa. The disturbance which is illumined by the śākṣī is falsely transferred to I am; this
is called adhyāsa on śākṣī. By this, we don’t get any advantage but there is a lot of
disadvantage. Therefore, he says vṛthā.

śloka 10.18
गृहान्तरगतः स्वल्पो गवाक्षादातपोऽचलः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1602

तत्र हस्ते नर्त्यमाने नृत्यतीवातपो यथा ॥ १०.१८ ॥

gṛhāntaragataḥ svalpo gavākṣādātapo:'calaḥ.
tatra haste nartyamāne nṛtyatīvātapo yathā (10.18).
The example given here is that the attribute of illumined object is falsely transferred to the
illuminator. This is extremely important because ultimately I am the illuminator or
observer of the mind and all the emotional turbulences belong to the illumined mind and
saṃsāra is not because of the mind. The saṃsāra is not even because of the emotional
disturbances of the mind; according to Vedānta saṃsāra is neither because of the mind nor
because of the disturbances of the mind; saṃsāra is because of the transference of the
disturbances. We try to handle the disturbances of the mind and that is a different exercise
altogether; Vedānta is not handling the disturbances of the mind, but Vedānta is handling
the false transference of the disturbances of the mind. We think improving the mind is
mokṣa! We don’t say improving the mind is mokṣa; mokṣa is stopping the transference of
the attributes of the mind on to myself. The subtle difference we have lost sight of.
Improving the mind may be useful for various reasons, but mokṣa is not dealing with that
topic. Mokṣa deals with transference of mental disturbances on to myself. It is saṃsāra
and mokṣa is stopping that transference. After stopping the transference, claiming I am
free as a free śākṣī, try to improve the mind when the mind can be improved faster. Stop
the transference which is called objective approach. Stop the transference of the emotional
disturbances on to yourself or ourself and claim that the disturbance has nothing to do
with me and I am free śākṣī. I want to improve the mind not as my problem but as the
mind’s problem; the advantage is then the mind can be improved faster when I try to
improve as a śākṣī, but as a pramātā who is lost in the mind, when I try to improve the
mind, it does not work at all. Śākṣi-bhāva gives mokṣa and I am better equipped to
improve the mind also. It gives twofold advantage: I get mokṣa which is primary benefit
and the byproduct is that I am better equipped to handle the anātmā mind, to handle the
mithyā mind.
The attributes of the illumined is transferred on to the illuminator. Vidyāraṇya gives a
different example. I gave the example of moon and the cloud which is given by Adi
Śaṅkarācārya in Ātmabodha. Now, Vidyāraṇya gives another example. He says imagine
there is a dark room. It is a room which does not have light of its own. Outside, there is
sunlight. Imagine a patch of sunlight enters the room through the window. It forms a

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1603

patch on the wall of the inside wall of the room. The sun does not move and the sunlight
also does not move and therefore, it is acala. Suppose I keep the hand on the path of the
sunlight and move the hand, the motion belongs to the hand only; the hand is the
illumined object and sunlight is illuminator. When I move the hand, the sunlight patch
that is formed there that also seems to move or come and go also. When I block it, it seems
to go away and when I don’t block it, it seems to appear. The motionless sunlight appears
to be moving because of the motions of the hand which is illumined by the sunlight.
Handle the mind but don’t connect it with mokṣa and as a mukta enjoy handling the
mind; delink mental improvement and your freedom. Let mental improvement be a
wonderful game or hobby.

śloka 10.19
निजस्थानस्थितः साक्षी बहिरन्तर्गमागमौ ।
अकुर्वन्बुद्धिचाञ्चल्यात्करोतीव तथा तथा ॥ १०.१९ ॥
nijasthānasthitaḥ sākṣī bahirantargamāgamau.
akurvanbuddhicāñcalyātkarotīva tathā tathā (10.19).
Now, he comes to the dārṣṭānta. In the place of the moving hand, here the moving the
mind is there. It moves vigorously. It was previously compared to the nartakī. In the place
of the sunlight, here śākṣī is there. It is the unlocated śākṣī who remains wherever it is
without any motion. Without doing anything on its own, without moving outward or
coming inwards, remaining wherever it is, the unlocatable śākṣī appears to go out and
come in, in keeping with the movement of the mind. Remember in the place of śākṣī you
have to put the word aham. I seem to come to go to various lokas and all these things are
because of the fundamental ignorance. As even we read the word śākṣī we have to convert
that into I, the original consciousness or the original real observer. It is all because of
cañcalatva of the buddhi. The body loses its capacity to move fast; as even we grow old,
the body takes a lot of time to reach somewhere, even to get up; the body’s motion is slow
but the mind’s motion is faster and faster. That vigorous motion of the mind is more and
more. The motions in the mind become emotions. Because of the mental emotions, I say I
have rāga-dveṣa; I have no sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti; how can you say that? Śākṣī
cannot have any attribute; how can you say even that? That is also born out of not
understanding Vedānta. I have sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is a mistake and I don’t have

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1604

sādhana-catuṣṭaya-sampatti is also a mistake because it is an attribute of Ātmā or anātmā.

Even that we should not say; I am the nirguṇa Ātmā.

śloka 10.20
न बाह्यो नान्तरः साक्षी बुद्धेर्देशौ हि तावुभौ ।
बुद्ध्याद्यशेषसंशान्तौ यत्र भात्यस्ति तत्र सः ॥ १०.२० ॥
na bāhyo nāntaraḥ sākṣī buddherdeśau hi tāvubhau.
buddhyādyaśeṣasaṃśāntau yatra bhātyasti tatra saḥ (10.20).
Here, Vidyāraṇya clarifies the important idea of locationlessness of śākṣī. You can never
talk about the location of śākṣī ;only with regard to anātmā padārtha you can talk about
deśa location and kāla location. Ātmā has existed even before the manifestation of deśa
and kāla. Māyā-kalpita-deśa-kāla-kalanā. During pralaya when Māyā is passive, even time
and space are absent; only when Māyā becomes active deśa and kāla are going to come.
Before the arrival of deśa kāla how can you talk about the deśa location and kāla location
of Brahman! Therefore, hunting deśa location of Brahman is the orientation of a confused
intellect and to say Ātmā is here is false and Ātmā is there is also false. Ātmā is
everywhere is also false. Because when you say it is everywhere, again you convey it is
located all over the space. Whether you say here or whether you say there or whether you
say everywhere, all these three expressions convey the idea of location. All these three
words cannot function with regard to śākṣī. He wants to say that and he wants to present
it in the form of a dialogue.
In the previous śloka, Vidyāraṇya had made a statement that śākṣī remains in its own
place without going inside or outside. He has deliberate used an adjective to confuse the
student so that a thinking student will raise a question. Now, there is a wisecrack, an
intelligent student: you say nijasthāna. When you say its own place tell me śākṣī’s own
place inside or outside? Our mind always thinks inside or outside. The question is the
nijasthāna of śākṣī is inside or outside? The moment you say inside he will sit in
meditation. He will penetrate into Annamaya, prāṇamaya, manomaya, etc, and go to
Nirvikalpaka samādhi. He will search inside for śākṣī. He silences the mind; all thoughts
are gone. This is one group of people delving deep inside, but they will not find. There are
some other people who say Ātmā is in Vaikuṇṭha or in Kailāsa. In that case, you have to
die first and go after śukla-gati, etc. you search inside you don’t find śākṣī and you search

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1605

outside and you will not find śākṣī. It is so because tat tvam asi, that śākṣī you are. He
should look upon himself as a sādhaka is the consistent blunder and we think it is a great
credit that I am a sādhaka. It is not the nijasthāna of the śākṣī. Then, the next question is if
it is not buddhi-sthāna what is the sthāna?
Then, he says I will give you a method for the position of the śākṣī. You stop the operation
of the mind because the mind alone gets associated with inside and outside. Therefore,
when all the operations of the mind have ended, when there is neither inside nor outside,
wherever the śākṣī is, that is the location of the śākṣī. This will confuse the student. When
tripuṭī is resolved inside and outside, the movement of the mind has ended and śākṣī
continues to exist. The buddhi and all other things belonging to the pramāṇa and
prameya, when all the three have subsided and stopped their functioning, when buddhi
does not run outwards in jāgrat-avasthā, the mind running inwards in suṣupti-avasthā,
and when both jāgrat-avasthā and svapna-avasthā outward running mind and inward
running mind have subsided that means either suṣupti you call or it is a state of silence or
samādhi; in suṣupti-avasthā, tripuṭī is resolved but śākṣī is there. Therefore, go to suṣupti
and find out where the śākṣī is. Wherever the śākṣī shines, śākṣī is there. It is because of
śākṣī that suṣupti is illumined and Nirvikalpaka samādhi is illumined by the śākṣī.
Because of this only, you are able to talk about it in the jāgrat-avasthā. More in the next
class.

Class 296
śloka 10.20 contd.
In this śloka, which we saw in the last class, Vidyāraṇya gave homework to the student as
an answer to the student’s question. The question was what the location of the śākṣī is?
Instead of answering the question directly, Vidyāraṇya gave an experiment. When a
person stops all knowing operations, all the knowing processes subside, the tripuṭī in the
form pramāṇa, pramātā, prameya will be resolved. When tripuṭī is resolved, śākṣī alone
will be left out. Therefore, what you should do, Vidyāraṇya’s request to the student is to
stop all the knowledge operations and thus resolve the tripuṭī and śākṣī alone will be left
behind and at that time you look for the locus of the śākṣī. Wherever we find the śākṣī
located at that time, that is the locus of the śākṣī. Śākṣī is present all the time. At that time

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1606

wherever śākṣī is located, that should be understood as the location of the śākṣī. You have
to assume the student has worked on the assignment resolved the tripuṭī and he has
attempted to locate the śākṣī. His report he submits today. What the student’s report is
and Vidyāraṇya’s response to it is stated in śloka 21.

śloka 10.21
देशः कोऽपि न भासेत यदि तर्ह्यस्त्वदेशभाक् ।
सर्वदेशप्रक्लृप्त्यैव सर्वगत्वं न तु स्वतः ॥ १०.२१ ॥
deśaḥ ko:'pi na bhāseta yadi tarhyastvadeśabhāk.
sarvadeśapraklṛptyaiva sarvagatvaṃ na tu svataḥ (10.21).
When the tripuṭī is resolved and when śākṣī alone is there, at the time of silence or at the
time of samādhi or at the time of deep sleep state, in all the three states, tripuṭī is resolved.
It is Nirvikalpaka avasthā and in the Nirvikalpaka avasthā, śākṣī is present and when I try
to locate the śākṣī, I am unable to locate as to locate, you require space. The location is
always in terms of spatial location alone, and when I try to locate the śākṣī during
Nirvikalpaka state, deśa itself is not there. Therefore, I am not able to find the locus.
Therefore, he says it is not available and it is not experienceable. It does not appear. When
space is not there, how can I talk about location! Now, Vidyāraṇya takes up. If this is your
report after investigation, then I will tell you that is the correct report because śākṣī does
not have any location. Śākṣī does not have deśa-sambandha, śākṣī does not have any
spatial location; therefore, the description of śākṣī is spaceless or locationless or in Sanskrit
deśa-atīta. If śākṣī is located in space, when the space is resolved, what will happen? Śākṣī
also will go away but the very fact that even after the resolution of the space śākṣī
continues indicates that śākṣī is spaceless and locationless. This is the right answer.
However, there is some problem in giving the answer. Vidyāraṇya says when somebody
asks the question what is the location of śākṣī, the right answer should be śākṣī is not
located anywhere or he should say śākṣī is nowhere. Śākṣī is locationless means śākṣī is to
locate anywhere that means śākṣī is nowhere is the right answer. But suppose a Guru says
śākṣī is nowhere, what will the student understand? When he says śākṣī is nowhere, the
student will conclude that śākṣī is non-existent. Therefore, the right answer the teacher
cannot tell the student because the student will misunderstand the answer as non-
existence of the śākṣī. Therefore, instead of giving the right answer that śākṣī exists but it

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1607

is nowhere, as the student will not understand, therefore, the teacher compromises. Now,
the teacher gives this answer. He cannot say nowhere; if it is said the student will conclude
śākṣī is non-existent. Then, can the teacher say śākṣī is here? If the teacher says śākṣī is
here, then the student will understand that śākṣī has a finite dimension. Then, can the
teacher śākṣī is there? That also he cannot say; then, the student will misunderstand that
śākṣī is again limited. The compromise answer given is that śākṣī is everywhere. You
cannot say śākṣī is here, there or nowhere or everywhere. Nowhere is the right answer but
everywhere is a compromise answer.
Why do you say that śākṣī being everywhere is a compromise answer? When I say śākṣī is
everywhere, the student will understand that śākṣī is located all over the space. Again, the
idea of location in space will come, but really speaking, śākṣī is not located everywhere in
space; on the other hand, the space is located in śākṣī. Therefore, the word here will
convey the idea of location, there will convey the idea of location, everywhere also will
convey the idea of location; all these three are not right answers. The right answer is it is
existent but it is nowhere. As a compromise we say it is everywhere. When the student is
advanced enough, the teacher will say śākṣī exists but it is nowhere because space itself is
located in śākṣī. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya says from the standpoint of the space which is
experienced by the mind, space is experienced by the mind, from the standpoint of the
space projected by the mind everywhere, sarvagata śākṣī. Its figuratively said to be
everywhere, but really from śākṣī’s own standpoint śākṣī cannot be said to be everywhere
also. Śākṣī is neither here, nor there, nor everywhere. It is nowhere but it is existen t as the
adhiṣṭhāna of space itself.

śloka 10.22
अन्तर्बहिर्वा सर्वं वा यं देशं परिकल्पयेत्।
बुद्धिस्तद्देशगः साक्षी तथा वस्तुषु योजयेत्॥ १०.२२ ॥
antarbahirvā sarvaṃ vā yaṃ deśaṃ parikalpayet.
buddhistaddeśagaḥ sākṣī tathā vastuṣu yojayet (10.22).
This compromise answer is explained, pointing out why śākṣī is said to be everywhere
temporarily. The mind experiences space inside and outside when it is functional.
Buddhiḥ parikalpayet, buddhi projects or experiences antarbahirdeśa, space within the
body or outside the body during the waking hours, when the tripuṭī is in operation. The

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1608

space is outside, inside and everywhere. The mind projects space and Śākṣī is present as
the adhiṣṭhāna and as the illuminator of the inside space and outside space. It is present
wherever the space is, as the adhiṣṭhāna. Since śākṣī is present behind the space as
adhiṣṭhāna we say śākṣī is everywhere. Therefore, he says śākṣī tad deśataḥ. Since śākṣī is
present as the revealer and substratum we say śākṣī is everywhere. This must be clearly
understood when I say śākṣī is everywhere that it is not located in space but it should be
understood as the locus for the space. Śākṣī is there where the space is but how is śākṣī
there? It is not located but it is the locus of space. Suppose the book is present where the
desk is, you understand it as book is located on the desk. Since book is located on the desk
when the desk is removed the book will also be removed. That is meant by location. When
I say space is there where the desk is, it is understood; you don’t think space is located on
the desk like the book, even though book is present along with the desk and space is also
presented along with the desk, what is the difference between book existing along with
the desk and space existing along with the desk? When I say space is there along with the
desk you cannot say space is located on the desk because when the desk is removed space
will not be removed. Thus, śākṣī is along with the space but śākṣī is not located in space.
Therefore, everywhere means it obtains along with the space, but it is not located in space.
This is difference between the world being located in space and śākṣī being present
everywhere. Then, Vidyāraṇya says the same thing should be extended with not only
space but also every object in the world also. Śākṣī is along with the space but not located
in the space but it is the location of the space. The same rule may you extend to every
object also. This Vidyāraṇya gives as a homework first. Then, Vidyāraṇya feels whether
the student will have time or not, therefore, he says I will myself do it as class work. In the
next śloka Vidyāraṇya himself does that.

śloka 10.23
यद्यद्रू प आदि कल्प्येत बुद्ध्या तत्तत्प्रकाशयन्।
तस्य तस्य भवेत्साक्षी स्वतो वाग्बुद्ध्यगोचरः ॥ १०.२३ ॥
yadyadrūpa ādi kalpyeta buddhyā tattatprakāśayan.
tasya tasya bhavetsākṣī svato vāgbuddhyagocaraḥ (10.23).
He extends the previous rule. Śākṣī is along with the space, but śākṣī is not located in
space. On the other hand, śākṣī is location in which space is located. Similarly, you should

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1609

extend to every object. Imagine there is a pot. Apply the same rule. Śākṣī is along with the
pot but śākṣī is not located in the pot; on the other hand, śākṣī is the locus in which pot is
located. The space itself along with the pot is located. Similarly, I look at the hall. Śākṣī is
along with the hall, but śākṣī is not located in the hall; on the other hand, the hall along
with space is located in śākṣī. The sun is along with the śākṣī. Śākṣī is not located in the
sun. On the other hand, the sun along with space is located in the śākṣī. This may you
grasp clearly. Śākṣī is along with every sense-object spreading over the sense-objects and
revealing the sense-objects, śākṣī is along with the object. Therefore, śākṣī bhavet. Śākṣī
remains along with every object. Thus, it reveals the object just as sunlight spreads over
every person while revealing a person, sunlight has to spread over; similarly, śākṣī
consciousness spreads over every object revealing the object. Then, you are to add the
three sentences: śākṣī is along with every sense-object, but śākṣī is not located in any
sense-object, śākṣī is the locus in which every sense-object along with the space is located.
From its own standpoint, vāgbuddhyagocaraḥ it cannot be described by any words. Not
only it cannot be described but also it cannot be conceived as an object. It is not
describable, nor it is conceivable by the mind. You cannot say it is there, it is here and you
cannot say it is everywhere. Even you can neither say śākṣī is in space or time or object.
When all of them are resolved even the word śākṣī cannot be used. To use the word śākṣī
you need something to be witnessed. Therefore, even the word śākṣī is a compromised
description. Śākṣī does not deserve even the word śākṣī.

śloka 10.24
कथं तादृङ्मया ग्राह्यमिति चेन्मैव गृह्यताम्।
सर्वग्रहोपसंशान्तौ स्वयमेवावशिष्यते ॥ १०.२४ ॥
kathaṃ tādṛṅmayā grāhyamiti cenmaiva gṛhyatām.
sarvagrahopasaṃśāntau svayamevāvaśiṣyate (10.24).
Now, the student is disappointed. I have come all the way to know the śākṣī because by
knowing the śākṣī, the Paramātmā, one will get liberation. That was the promise given in
the beginning. When I want to know the śākṣī, you say that it is not describable through
words and it is not knowable through the mind; then, tell me how I can know that śākṣī?
Such a śākṣī is vāgbuddhyagocaraḥ, śākṣī which is beyond the mind and words; how it
can be known! If you ask such a question, better you don’t know that. The moment you

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1610

know the śākṣī, śākṣī will become the prameya and prameya will come under one of the
tripuṭī. However, śākṣī is described as the witness of the tripuṭī and can never be a known
object. The moment you know it, it becomes prameya and once it comes under prameya, it
will come under one of the tripuṭī, whereas the definition of śākṣī is the witness of tripuṭī,
different from tripuṭī; therefore, you cannot know that therefore, maiva gṛhyatām. If you
had told this during the first chapter of Pancadaśī, I would not have attended the class
itself! Now, in the fag end you say: you don’t attempt to know it!
Then, the next question is if I don’t attempt to know it what is the proof that śākṣī exists?
For that, Vidyāraṇya answers that you don’t attempt to know the śākṣī not because śākṣī
does not exist, but because śākṣī is not something you know but śākṣī is you yourself.
Therefore, you are the śākṣī and you claim I am the śākṣī; you don’t attempt to know the
śākṣī. You learn to claim I am the śākṣī and you don’t attempt to know the śākṣī. Then, the
student gets a doubt. How can I claim I am the śākṣī? I am the pramātā, who is operating
the pramāṇa and knowing the prameya, including the class; I listen. Therefore, as a
listener of the class I am the pramātā; how do you say I should claim I am the śākṣī? For
that, Vidyāraṇya says you are by nature the śākṣī only, but temporarily you function as
pramātā, identifying with the mind which is the pramātā’s. Originally you are śākṣī only
but temporarily you function as pramātā, identified with the mind. In the beginning of the
tenth chapter, we have defined pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya. One part of the mind is
pramātā another part of thought is pramāṇa and therefore, originally you are the śākṣī;
identified with the mind, you have got the temporary pramātā status; if you drop your
pramātā status you yourself are the śākṣī. You need not know the śākṣī. Drop your
temporary pramātā status; pramātā minus the knowing status is equal to Śākṣi-caitanya.
Therefore, disidentify from the mind or drop the pramāṇa operation. Therefore, he says
when all the knowing operations subside, when you go to silence; they subside, then I am
minus knowing operation. When I am without knowing operation, I cannot be called a
pramātā; therefore, I have shed my pramātā status and I abide as Śākṣi-caitanya. In silence,
you are śākṣī. You abide yourself not as a pramātā but as a śākṣī. Then, the student asks
the next question. How do I know I am there as the śākṣī?

śloka 10.25
न तत्र मानापेक्षास्ति स्वप्रकाशस्वरूपतः ।

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1611

तादृग्व्युत्पत्त्यपेक्षा चेच्छ्रुतिं पठ गुरोर्मुखात्॥ १०.२५ ॥

na tatra mānāpekṣāsti svaprakāśasvarūpataḥ.
tādṛgvyutpattyapekṣā cecchrutiṃ paṭha gurormukhāt (10.25).
In silence, all the knowing process ends and you yourself remain as a non-knowing
principle and the non-knowing you, without the knower status or you in silence, are the
śākṣī. So you abide as I, the śākṣī. For this, student asks the question: what is the pramāṇa
to know that I am there in silence as the śākṣī? Vidyāraṇya says in silence that I am there
does not require any proof at all; that I continue to be there when I am silent also is
something accepted by everyone without requiring a proof. Nobody says during silence I
am non-existent and after silence I am born afresh! Nobody doubts the existence of one’s
Self in silence. Whatever is accepted without requiring a proof is called svayam-prakāśa.
That I am there in silence is accepted by everyone without proof. If I am not there in
silence, I cannot talk about silence and therefore, my existence in silence is self-evident
whereby, he says tatra. As such, no pramāṇa is required because I am svaprakāśa-svarūpa.
Everyone accepts this fact without asking for a proof. The same thing is applicable in
suṣupti also. Nobody asks for proof in suṣupti as to whether I am there or not. If I am not
there in suṣupti, I cannot talk about suṣupti itself. Then, the student asks the last question.
In silence, everything is absent, I accept; pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya are resolved, time is
resolved space is resolved and I am very much there as the witness of the silence, I know.
But how do I know that I is the śākṣī? How do I know this I is the śākṣī of the tripuṭī?
Vidyāraṇya says attend the class. Śāstra is meant for telling you that only. I obtaining in
silence as not one of the tripuṭī but as different from tripuṭī and it is tripuṭi-śākṣī that you
learn from the śāstra. If you want to gain the knowledge that I obtaining in silence, am
different from pramāṇa, pramātā and prameya and I am tripuṭi-śākṣī, this description you
have to get from śāstra alone. Therefore, he says if you want to know this fact, that I am
tripuṭi-śākṣī this knowledge, may you study the scriptures from a Guru’s mouth. Śruti is
not meant to know the śākṣī but Śruti is to help me claim that I obtaining in silence a s the
śākṣī which is Brahman. Then comes the last question.

śloka 10.26
यदि सर्वगृहत्यागोऽशक्यस्तर्हि धियं व्रज ।
शरणं तदधीनोऽन्तर्बहिर्वैषोऽनुभूयताम्॥ १०.२६ ॥

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1612

yadi sarvagṛhatyāgo:'śakyastarhi dhiyaṃ vraja.

śaraṇaṃ tadadhīno:'ntarbahirvaiṣo:'nubhūyatām (10.26).
Here, the student asks the final question. Śruti will not help me in knowing the śākṣī, but
Śruti will help me to claim that I who obtains in silence, that I am, the śākṣī; when I make
use of the mind I become pramātā, but when I don’t make use of the mind in silence, I am
the śākṣī. Therefore, to claim I am the śākṣī I should learn to be in silence. If I am not in
silence, I will become pramātā. To be śākṣī, I learn to be in silence. Now, the student says I
am not able to remain in silence, Svāmījī. My mind is dynamic and active and I don’t even
know what silence is. So what to do? It is very simple. If you are not able to get deliberate
silence by quieting the mind, you make use of the natural silence, which Bhagavān has
given as Nirvikalpaka-samādhi-anubhava, naturally to everyone. It is deep sleep state.
Bhagavān has given three avasthās; in two avasthās you are pramātā and in third avasthā
called suṣupti you do exist as a sasksi. That anubhava nobody can deny; therefore,
avasthā-traya-vivekana, you can understand I am śākṣī in suṣupti and I am pramātā in
jāgrat-avasthā and svapna-avasthā; my pramātā status is incidental, but my śākṣī status is
my real nature. Through avasthāthraya-viveka you can understand samādhi is not
compulsory for Ātmā-jñāna. You can attempt silence and see how that experience is and if
you are able to succeed in that, it is wonderful; otherwise also, you need not worry about
it. Bhagavān has already given nidrā state to enjoy the state of Brahman. If you are not
able to stop mental operations by practicing silence, don’t worry. Make use of your
analytical capacity by which you study your own avasthā-traya. It has to be done in jāgrat-
avasthā. In suṣupti, I am the śākṣī which is my real nature; in jāgrat-avasthā, pramātā is
my incidental nature; as śākṣī I am Brahman. Why cannot you gain that knowledge?
Therefore, he says take shelter in your analytical capacity. May you take refuge in the
intellect which has the capacity to analyse the avasthā-traya. With the help of the
analyzing intellect, may you understand that my pramātā nature is incidental and my
śākṣī nature is intrinsic. Cognitively, may you understand as pramātā I am inside the
body, but as śākṣī I am both inside and outside. May you understand this in the intellect.
With this, Vidyāraṇya concludes this viveka and the tenth chapter of Pañcadaśī is over.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1613

Class 296

Summary of the tenth chapter: Nāṭaka-dīpa-prakaraṇa

I will give you the summary of the tenth chapter titled nāṭaka-dīpa prakaraṇa consisting of
26 ślokas. This chapter can be broadly classified into five topics. We will briefly see the
essence of each of these five topics. The first topic is introduction from śloka 1 to 5, where
Vidyāraṇya establishes the necessity of an enquiry as to why jñāna-yoga is required. As a
part of that, he briefly mentions the entire process of creation, pointing out that one
Brahman itself, the pāramārthika-satya, with the help of Māyā, divides itself into three:
Jīva-, jagat- and Īśvara-rūpeṇa. One Brahman divides itself into three. For this division,
Brahman does not undergo a real change. It only undergoes a seeming change to become
Jīva-jagat-Īśvara. Since the change is a seeming change, all these three products are of a
lower order of reality known as vyāvahārika satya. Jīva is vyāvahārika satya, jagat is
vyāvahārika satya and Īśvara is also vyāvahārika satya, without any reservation or
hesitation. Having divided into these three, Brahman itself enters them to lend existence
and support. Brahman enters the Jīva also as the Śākṣi-caitanya. śākṣi-rūpeṇa jīvam
praviśyati. Brahman enters both Jīva and Īśvara as the very śākṣi-tattva. One is called Jīva-
śākṣī and the other is called Īśvara-śākṣī. The very same Brahman is available in the world
also as the adhiṣṭhāna-sattā the pure existence. That is not said here, but it is understood.
Thus, Brahman bifurcates through Māyā and enters as the Śākṣi-caitanya. When I use the
verb enters don’t imagine Brahman will slowly walk, fix a nice muhurtha, for
gṛhapraveśa. They are the expressions we use but there is no process or travel involved.
Once this vyāvahārika three are created the drama begins. It is the process of life and it
begins. Vidyāraṇya says of these three factors, jagat does not have any problem because it
is jaḍa or inert therefore, it will never complain of overheat or overcold; those complaints
are not there. Therefore, there is no saṃsāra for the jagat. Somehow, Īśvara is a lucky
chosen one! Being Īśvara, he is not affected by the āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā. Therefore, Īśvara
knows all these three are vyāvahārika satya. He does not worry too much about himself
also. He does not worry too much about the world also. Of course he does not over-worry
also because he knows vyāvahārika satya as mithyā. He knows pāramārthika-satya
Brahman. Jagat, no problem; Īśvara, there is no problem; Jīva alone gets trapped because
āvaraṇa-śakti of Māyā covers the Jīva and therefore, vyāvahārika is not known as

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1614

vyāvahārika. Therefore, it is misunderstood as pāramārthika; it is misunderstood as the

ultimate reality. Therefore, problems also will get magnified because of over estimation of
vyāvahārika. Saṃsāra is over valuing vyāvahārika. And therefore, the only solution is not
changing the vyāvahārika; we need not change the vyāvahārika; we cannot change the
vyāvahārika. When we find difficult to change our own body, our own mind, where is the
question of changing the world?! Vyāvahārika need not be changed and vyāvahārika
cannot be changed; vyāvahārika has to be understood as vyāvahārika. It is possible only
by knowing the pāramārthika Brahman. The dream is known as dream only when you
wake up and enter jāgrat-avasthā. Similarly, vyāvahārika is known as vyāvahārika only by
waking up to pāramārthika. It requires enquiry and enquiry requires preparation also.
Therefore, Vidyāraṇya said Jīva must worship Īśvara; all this he tells in a few words. I take
lot of time to explain them. Jīva has to worship the lucky Īśvara and prepare the mind and
with the prepared mind, Jīva has to make an enquiry athātho brahma jijñāsā. This enquiry
is important. This enquiry leads to nothing! Vyāvahārika will be vyāvahārika, family
members will be family members, troubleshooters will be troubleshooters, everything will
be the same. Vyāvahārika is understood as vyāvahārika then. Therefore, Vidyāraṇya
concluded tasmāt jīvaparātmānau sarvadaiva vicārayet, may you make a thorough
enquiry into the nature of Jīvātmā and Paramātmā. This is the topic number one. It is
introduction vicāra-apekṣā.
Having given the introduction, Vidyāraṇya enters into the enquiry. We enter the second
topic from śloka 6 to 10. In this portion, Vidyāraṇya introduces five factors which are
required for all transactions, especially for knowledge transaction. ---jñāna vyāvahārika
apeksita pañca gatakah, pañca ghaṭa means five factors required for all the transactions
especially the knowledge transaction. They are as follows: pramātā, pramāṇa, prameya,
vṛtti and śākṣī. Pramātā means knower, pramāṇa means the knowing instrument, primary
instrument, prameya means object of knowledge, vṛtti means the process of knowing and
śākṣī means the witness. An aside note is that out of these five components four of them
are the products of Māyā and therefore, they are inert in nature, except of course the śākṣī.
They are pramātā, pramāṇa, prameya and vṛttis. The fifth one is neither Māyā nor a
product of Māyā but it is Śākṣi-caitanya, the Paramātmā, who is housed in the body. It
original Paramātmā; Brahman alone has entered the vyāvahārika prapañca as the śākṣī.
Paramātmā plays the role of śākṣī which is the most important component in all the

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1615

transactions. The pramātā we define as one part of the mind, which is also known as
ahaṅkāra. A part of the mind is ahaṅkāra is proved since whenever the mind is active
pramātā is there, the knower is there, and whenever the mind is resolved, the pramātā
knower is also resolved. Suppose the mind resolves in the class, the knower is gone! The
ahaṅkāra, the I-notion, is also there only when the mind is there and it is active. In sleep, I
don’t claim I am this and that, etc; it is jaḍa.
Pramāṇa is another part of the same mind. Therefore, the pramāṇa mind also is a product
of Māyā and jaḍa. It refers to that part of the mind where thoughts arise. The pramāṇa
part of the mind alone is linking the pramātā and prameya. It serves as a broker, a
marriage broker connecting the pramātā and prameya! The two are linked by pramāṇa
part of the mind alone through vṛttis. Pramāṇa is the second part of the mind and it is also
jaḍa padārtha. If a person does not understand that, the student is also jaḍa! The third one
prameya is also jaḍa. It is made up of the five elements: śabda, sparśa, rūpa, rasa, gandha.
The fourth one is the process called vṛtti and for the process of vṛttis there is a group of
assistants which are called sense-organs. The sense-organs serve as the assistant for the
formation of the vṛttis. When the eyes are open, rūpa-vṛtti will come and when the ears
are open, śabda-vṛtti will come, when the nose is active gandha-vṛtti comes and the vṛtti
process is assisted by the five organs. So the vṛttis are generated. This is the fourth factor
called knowing process. The fifth factor is the śākṣī the consciousness-principle.
Then, Vidyāraṇya explains how the knowing process happens. Since all these four factors
are jaḍa in themselves, they can never reveal themselves or others. Since all of them are
inert, neither they can reveal their own existence nor can they reveal other’s existence.
That means pramātā cannot reveal itself, pramāṇa, prameya or vṛtti. Similarly, pramāṇa
cannot reveal itself, pramātā, prameya or vṛtti; similarly, prameya cannot reveal itself,
prameya and pramātā. None of them can reveal themselves nor others. A lamp can reveal
itself and others, but you don’t find the clip revealing itself or others. Similarly, four
factors are jaḍa is a fact. Therefore, no knowledge transaction is possible with the help of
the four factors. No jñāna vyavahāra is possible with the four factors and for any
vyavahāra to take place, we need the fifth important factor which we call as Śākṣi-
caitanya. Pramāṇa-pramātṛ-prameya are designed to do a particular job all right, still they
will be non-functional unless cetana tattva is there and that cetana tattva is called Śākṣi-
caitanya. What does the śākṣī do? Vidyāraṇya says śākṣī reveals all these factors

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1616

simultaneously. Śākṣī reveals pramātā, śākṣī reveals pramāṇa and śākṣī reveals vṛtti and
all these three śākṣī reveals directly and śākṣī reveals the prameya indirectly through the
pramātā, pramāṇa and the vṛttis; so the prameya is revealed. Śākṣī sarva-prakāśaka. Sarva
is equal to pramāṇa, pramātā and vṛttis. It reveals all of them simultaneously and equally
without any partiality. I am partial, therefore, I will give more light to one, less light to
one. This does not happen. It gives light to all the three simultaneously, without any
partiality, just as the sunlight and moonlight falls on the earthly objects equally,
simultaneously and uniformly. It is the simultaneous illuminator, uniform illuminator and
this illumination is not done as an action by the śākṣī; illumination is not an action on the
part of the śākṣī; it is not process on the part of the śākṣī; sānidhya-mātreṇa it is means by
its very presence the śākṣī is in a position to activate the pramātā-prameya-pramāṇa and
generate the vṛttis. Therefore, śākṣī is the changeless illuminator. So the śākṣī is all-
illuminator.
Of the four factors three are revealed directly and the fourth one prameya indirectly. Three
are pramātā, pramāṇa and vṛtti directly and prameya indirectly. One aside note is even
though śākṣī can illumine the prameya, unless pramātā and pramāṇa channelize the vṛtti
towards prameya, śākṣī cannot illumine the prameya. Unless pramātā and pramāṇa
directs to the particular prameya, śākṣī cannot reveal and therefore, śākṣī needs assistance
of the pramātā to reveal the prameya. It is like opening the dam directing the flow of water
through canals. Pramātā acts as a channeliser and pramātā is also called a knower of the
prameya. But really speaking pramātā is not the knower and pramātā is only a channeliser
because of which the prameya is known. However, we give the credit to the pramātā. The
credit is given to pramātā because it is the channeliser. When I open the tap, the water
comes and when I close the tap, water does not come; therefore, the tap takes the credit as
the source of water. The truth is tap is not the source of water but the tank alone is the real
source but tap takes the credit. Similarly, pramātā knower is only a channeliser and the
śākṣī alone is the revealer of everything. Thus, all the five components are required for the
jñāna vyavahāra. Of these five, four belong to Māyā and one is Brahman which we call as
Śākṣi-caitanya. The other four are pramāṇa, pramātṛ, prameya and the jñāna-vṛtti. The
śākṣī is Brahman itself. It is not a part of Brahman for Brahman does not have parts being
niravayava, niṣkala and akhaṇḍa. How can akhaṇḍa Brahman have a part! This is the
second topic.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1617

Now, we will go to the third topic from 11 to 15. The clarification of the five factors with
the help of a great imagery called nāṭaka-dīpa-dṛṣṭānta is given here. In English, it is
theatre-lamp-imagery. Vidyāraṇya says there also the five factors are there. Pramātā can
be compared to the king who is the organizer of a dance programme. He is also the
controller of the dancer. The pramāṇa is the dancer girl, prameya is the audience because
the king and audience come together because of the dance programme alone. Otherwise,
people are in their home and king will be in his palace. The linking factor is the dancing
girl. The process of vṛtti which is vigorous movement in the pramāṇa is the movement on
the part of the dancing girl especially if it is Kathak or Bharatanāṭya. We have to take an
example of vigorous Bharatanāṭya especially when thillana is going on. The dancing
process is compared to the vṛtti or the thoughts. And then, the most important factor is
śākṣī. Śākṣī is equal to the theatre lamp. It is the lamp that reveals the king, the dancer and
the audience. One powerful lamp in the middle of the theatre reveals the whole thing. The
light also has all the four features. The light is all-illuminator, light is simultaneous
illuminator, light is uniform illuminator and the light is changeless illuminator. Therefore,
śākṣī can be compared to a dīpa or light. That is why in the śāstra, often, Ātmā is
compared to the light. It is nāṭaka-dīpa-dṛṣṭānta even though the light does not want to be
a part of anything, yet no programme is possible without the light. The light does not do
any action, but without light no activity is possible. It is said vṛttis happen assisted by the
five sense-organs. Similarly, dance takes place assisted by an orchestra.
Then we find the fourth topic from 16 to 23. Vidyāraṇya here talks about the uniqueness of
śākṣī. He talks about the distinction of śākṣī from all the other four factors. In all the
transactions, pramātā, pramāṇa, vṛtti and prameya are active participants; either pramātā
goes to prameya like you coming to class; or prameya has to go to pramātā taking a
cassette home; and pramāṇa also has to be active generating the vṛttis. Thus, all of them
are active ingredients of the whole programme. What activity the śākṣī does? Even though
śākṣī is present there, it is not an active participant whereas the other four are active
participants in the transactions. Therefore, they are active for some time and they get tired
also after some time. Any active participant gets ---worn out and become passive. But
śākṣī is the only ingredient which does not directly participate. This is one uniqueness of
śākṣī.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1618

All the four ingredients have one active state and a passive state but śākṣī does not have
either active or passive state and it is ever the same. It does not have an active and passive
state. Therefore, it does not move from one place to another like vṛtti-vyāpti, phala-vyāpti,
etc. It is achala and nirvikāra. When all the participants get tired and resolved, all the
transactions end. Even time ends for time exists as a part of the transactions. Thus, time
and space end. After the resolution of the other four factors like time and space, śākṣī
continues to be there as same. It is not resolved. When you have to describe the śākṣī at
that time of pralaya, it is not available for any description, any perception or any location.
Therefore, you cannot say it is here; you cannot say it is there; you cannot even say it is
everywhere. When nothing is there, even space is not there; even time is not there; them,
you cannot even use the word everywhere. The word everywhere can be used when the
transactions are on and when the transactions have ended, even the word everywhere
cannot be used. In fact, the word śākṣī also cannot be used because there is nothing for
which it is the śākṣī. The uniqueness of śākṣī is that it is indescribable avyavahārya. It is
beyond thought, beyond word, beyond location, beyond perception. This is the topic from
śloka number 16 to 23.
Then comes the last topic from śloka 24 to 26. The student asks the question if the śākṣī is
beyond all transactions, how I can know that śākṣī? It is because knowing itself is a
transaction. When śākṣī is beyond all transactions how can I know the śākṣī? The moment
you know the śākṣī, then pramātā, pramāṇa, all those things arise; transactions will come
and śākṣī will become one of the prameyas in the world which we have seen. Śākṣī is
different from pramāṇa, pramātā, prameya. Pramāṇa, pramātā, prameya will come under
sākṣya. Therefore, śākṣī is neither pramātā, nor pramāṇa nor prameya. Since it is not a
prameya it is not a knowable entity. It is aprameya. Prameya is sākṣya and the śākṣī is
aprameya. Guru says you cannot know the śākṣī. This is Guru’s answer. Then, the
disappointed śiṣya asks if I cannot know the śākṣī, how do I know there is a śākṣī and it
may be a bluff! Guru gives the answer that you cannot know the śākṣī but at the same time
you cannot say śākṣī is non-existent because you are the śākṣī yourself. Then, the śiṣya
asks the question how do you say I am the śākṣī for I am only a pramātā who am
experiencing the world and your class? What is that Guru says in this context? He says
you are śākṣī but you are temporarily enjoying the pramātā status because of your
identification with the mind. This status you enjoy in jāgrat-avasthā and svapna-avasthā

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1619

when you identify with the mind. Therefore, drop your pramātā status; then, you are
śākṣī. The Guru advices holding on to pramātā status don’t try to know the śākṣī.
Dropping the pramātā status be the śākṣī. Don’t attempt to know the śākṣī but be the
śākṣī.
Then śiṣya asks the question hey Guru, how to drop the pramātā status? For that, he says
you have pramātā status only when the knowing process is on; when you drop all the
knowing activity or in another language when you are silent, you will realise that you are
śākṣī yourself. The silent you are the śākṣī. Then, the śiṣya asks when I am silent, I am
there, but how do I know that I am the śākṣī. Who reveals the śākṣī when I am silent? For
that, the Guru says the silent śākṣī need not be revealed by a process because it is
svaprakāśa or svatapramāṇaka, it is self-evident and self-effulgent and it does not require
a proof. What is evident without requiring a proof is self-effulgent śākṣī. Śākṣī is self-
revealing and it need not be revealed. Then, the śiṣya asked the final question that I am not
able to drop all the knowing processes and remain silent because my mind is a monkey
mind; therefore, I am not able to practice silence or samādhi; therefore, how can I remain a
śākṣī? Vidyāraṇya says even though you don’t go to silence deliberately, Bhagavān
himself has given natural silence in suṣupti-avasthā. Therefore, everybody experiences
silence in the form of suṣupti; through avasthāthraya-viveka, may you claim I am the śākṣī
obtaining in suṣupti. We should claim this not in suṣupti-avasthā or svapna-avasthā but in
jāgrat-avasthā. I am śākṣī obtaining in suṣupti and now also, I am the śākṣī only with an
overcoat called the pramātā. I am the śākṣī all the time. Putting on the knower status or
putting off the knower status I am all the time śākṣī and may you claim that śākṣī through
avasthā-traya-viveka. If you can observe silence, or when silence happens naturally, you
will be in a position to realise that you are Śākṣi-caitanya, the Brahman yourself. That śākṣī
is Brahman, the creator alone. And also it is that Paramātmā who reveals all the
transactions and who is beyond all transactions and who is pāramārthika-satya
supporting the vyāvahārika transactions. By claiming this, may you enjoy jīvanmukti. In
transactions, don’t say I am śākṣī Brahman and all as people will get confused! You
transact as though you are a pramātā, but understand you are a śākṣī with a pramātā
cloth. This is the last topic and this is essence of the entire chapter.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1620

Summary of chapters 11 to 15

Class 297
Of the 15 chapters of Pañcadaśī, we have completed the first ten chapters. We have
completed 1142 ślokas. I have taught Pañcadaśī a few times. Generally, I teach the ten
chapters of Pañcadaśī only. The last five chapters I omit because there are certain
controversial issues discussed in those chapters especially regarding the role of Yoga. If I
teach those chapters śloka by śloka we will have to enter into the controversial portions
and it may lead to confusion and therefore, I generally omit the chapters. But still I-
thought I will give an outline of those five chapters because the topics are interesting. They
consist of 429 ślokas. Pañcadaśī consisting of 15 chapters is broadly classified into three
sections each one known as a pañcaka just as Gītā we have got three ṣaṭkas, Pañcadaśī
three pañcakas. Each pañcaka is given a particular name also. In the first five chapters, all
the titles end with the word viveka. Tattva-, bhūta-, pañcakoṣa-, dvaita- and mahāvākya-
viveka and therefore, it is called viveka-pañcaka. The sat aspect of Brahman is focused in
these five chapters. If you study the latter five chapters from the six, all the chapters have
the title ending with the word dīpa. Citra-, tṛpti-, kūṭastha-, dhyāna- and nāṭaka-dīpa and
therefore, the middle pañcaka is called dīpa-pañcaka. Here, Vidyāraṇya focused on cit
rūpa, the light of consciousness dīpa revealing the light of consciousness. In keeping with
the same style, the last five chapters also have titles ending with the word ānanda.
brahmānande yogā-, ātmā-, advaitā-, vidyā- and viṣaya-ānanda. Of course, they are there
in the text itself. Since the ending word is ānanda common to all, the last portion is called
ānanda-pañcaka. Through the three pañcaka, the author focuses on sat, cit and ānanda
nature of Brahman. We have viveka-pañcaka, dīpa-pañcaka and ānanda-pañcaka. There is
a widely held view that the Pañcadaśī is a joint venture given by two different Ācāryas.
Pañcadaśī is not authored by one Ācārya but a joint venture by Vidyāraṇya Svāmī and the
other contributor is Bharati Tīrtha who is one of the gurus of Vidyāraṇya and also who is
the famous author of dṛk dṛśya viveka. That Bharati Tīrtha and Vidyāraṇya, Guru and
śiṣya, combined gave out this Pañcadaśī. As to each one contributed to how many
chapters, there are several different views but one view is that the first chapters consisting
of two pañcakas are presented by Vidyāraṇya Svāmī.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1621

The third pañcaka of five chapters is given out by Bharati Tīrtha Svāmīgal. This seems to
be okay because at the end of the 11 th chapter, the author makes a reference and says thus
is concluded the first chapter in the 11 th chapter end. He says the first chapter ends the text
brahma-ānanda. He does not say it is the 11 th chapter of Pañcadaśī but the first chapter of
the book titled brahma-ānanda. Thus, brahma-ānanda is a separate text which has five
chapters and which is written by Bharati Tīrtha and this brahma-ānanda text of five
chapters has been clubbed to the ten chapters of Vidyāraṇya; joined together we have
formed the Pañcadaśī. That is why if you look into the book the title of the following five
chapters they give brahma-ānande at the beginning of the five chapters, which indicates
that it is the name of a separate text written by Bharati Tīrtha. This is the background of
ānanda-pañcaka. Now, I will give you a brief outline of the five chapters.
The first chapter of this book or the 11 th chapter of Pañcadaśī is titled brahma-ānande yoga
ānanda. It consists of 134 ślokas. Vidyāraṇya establishes the ānanda-svarūpatva of
Brahman by giving three pramāṇas. The first one is primary pramāṇa namely Śruti
pramāṇa and it clearly defines Brahman as ānanda, from Taittirīya Upaniṣad Bhṛguvallī
and Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.9th chapter Vijñāna-ānandam Brahman. Third equally
famous vākya is Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7 th chapter yo vai bhūmā tat sukham. Bhūmā
means Brahman and Brahman is sukha itself it is said here. Brahman is happiness itself it
is said. Another vākya often quoted is Taittirīya Upaniṣad brahma-ānandavallī raso vai
saḥ it is ānanda-svarūpa. When we understand Brahman as ānanda we have to make a
note. It is said to be nitya or eternal and therefore, brahma-ānanda talked about is nitya
ānanda. Brahman’s nature is ānanda; Brahman is nitya, therefore, svarūpa ānanda will be
nitya alone. Since we talk about brahma-svarūpa as nitya ānanda, it is not referring to any
particular experiential pleasure. All experiential pleasures are anitya because any
experience being a mental state, it has to be anitya only. When the mind itself is anitya
how can a mental state be nitya! When mental state is anitya, experiential pleasure of
mental state has to be anitya. Brahma-svarūpa-ānanda is nitya-ānanda; therefore, brahma-
ānanda is different from all experiential pleasures. How are we to define svarūpa ānanda?
It is Happiness with capital H. I give it five features:
1. Pure happiness is not a part, product or property of the mind or a state of the mind.
2. Pure happiness is an independent entity which pervades the mind and makes the
mind happy now and then.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1622

3. Pure happiness is not limited by the boundaries of the mind;

4. Pure happiness continues to exist even after the resolution of the mind.
5. Pure happiness which continues after the resolution of the mind is not accessible or
experienceable, because there is no medium for transactions.
The suṣupti-anubhava is a pramāṇa for Brahman’s ānanda-svarūpa, because during
suṣupti everything gets resolved. The world is resolved, body is resolved, the mind is
resolved, tripuṭī is resolved, everything is resolved; the resolution is always into the
kāraṇa. When you destroy the pot, it will resolve into the mud, when you resolve the
wave, it will resolve into water and when you resolve the ornaments it will resolve into
gold. In suṣupti, we resolve into kāraṇa and kāraṇa in this context is Brahman. In suṣupti,
we all resolve into Brahman. It is said in several Upaniṣads. Praśna 4th chapter, arahar
brahma gamayati, 8th chapter Chāndogya Upaniṣad and 6 th chapter of Chāndogya
Upaniṣad. In suṣupti, we are in Brahman and we merge into Brahman. In suṣupti, in deep
sleep, we are one with Brahman which is the kāraṇa and our experience in it is ānanda.
Everyone uniformly experiences ānanda in sleep. That is why we all love to enter into
sleep and we get to come out of sleep. In suṣupti, we experience ānanda and that does not
come from the world because the world is resolved then. The source of ānanda in suṣupti
must be Brahman into which we all resolve. The suṣupti-ānanda is pramāṇa and we merge
with Brahman in suṣupti and that is ānanda-svarūpa.
A Yogī also goes to a similar state only by resolving all the dualities. The suṣupti is a
natural thing and samādhi is a deliberate effort in which I resolve the tripuṭī; suṣupti is
Nirvikalpaka avasthā and samādhi also Nirvikalpaka avasthā and in samādhi also Yogī
experiences ānanda. The source into which he resolves is kāraṇa Brahman. In support of
samādhi-ānanda, author quotes Gītā 6 th chapter which explains the ānanda of samādhi.
The pramāṇa is Śruti, then suṣupti and then samādhi of a Yogī. Vidyāraṇya highlights
yogic samādhi in the 11th chapter and therefore, the chapter is titled Yoga-ānanda. This is
the outline of Yoga-ānanda chapter.
The second chapter or the 12 th chapter is called Ātmā-ānanda-prakaraṇa. The author
establishes Brahman is ānanda-svarūpa through yukti pramāṇa or reasoning. Here, author
uses yukti pramāṇa to establish Brahman is ānanda-svarūpa. Brahman is the essential
nature of every one of us because Brahman is kāraṇa and every Jīva is born out of
Brahman; since all the jīvas are born out of Brahman, Jīva is kārya and Brahman is kāraṇa

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1623

and kāraṇa is the essential nature of every kārya. Therefore, I the Jīva have got Brahman as
my essential nature. Brahman as my essential nature is called Ātmā the Self. Therefore, I
the Self is nothing but Brahman; you the Self is nothing but Brahman. Thus, Brahman is
available in everyone as I the Ātmā. Then, you ask the question. What is the thing in the
creation which we love the most? We love lot of things but which we love permanently
and unconditionally and most is the Self. This discussion is based on 1.4 of Puruṣavidha
Brāhmaṇa and 2.4 Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa that we love the Self unconditionally but all other
things we love conditionally, it must give me joy and at least it should not give me
discomfort. The moment one starts giving me discomfort, our prayer is how to escape
from them?! The idea is whether we express it or not, for various reasons we may not
express, but an object of pain is never loved by anyone, even if the object is a closest
relation, may be children, may be sibling, may be parents. All of them are elaborately
discussed by Vidyāraṇya, particularly the problems given by the children are detailed
here. In short, what we say is I love myself the most all the time unconditionally. From
this, Vidyāraṇya makes an equation that whatever is an object of love is a source of
ānanda, or whatever is a source of ānanda is an object of love. In the first chapter of
Pañcadaśī itself, this topic has been discussed. Using this logic, based on the Upaniṣadic
reasoning itself, Vidyāraṇya concludes that Self-love is the highest love. The husband is
not loved for the husband’s sake but for one’s own sake; wife is not loved for wife’s sake
but one’s own sake.
Bharati Tīrtha establish through elaborate discussion that Ātmā alone is loved and
therefore, Ātmā is the source of ānanda and therefore, Ātmā is ānanda-svarūpa; that Ātmā
is none other than Brahman therefore, brahma-ānanda-svarūpa. Here, he divides the Self
into three. Mukhya Ātmā, mithyā Ātmā and gauṇa Ātmā. Mukhya Ātmā is the Śākṣi-
caitanya, mithyā Ātmā is body-mind-complex which is pervaded by the mukhya Ātmā.
Therefore, we identify with the body-mind-complex and claim as myself. We falsely claim
it as Self. Mukhya Ātmā is the real Self and mithyā Ātmā is falsely claimed Self, whereas
gauṇa Ātmā is external people like children, family members, etc., with whom we identify
ourselves because of mamakāra. We know that they are different from me and when the
mamakāra becomes too intense, I get tādātmya with those people; then, no more do I look
upon them as my people but I look upon them as myself and those external people are
called gauṇa Ātmā. Vidyāraṇya says gauṇa Ātmā is loved everyone [family members] and

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1624

when gauṇa Ātmā creates problems I go to the next one who is loved most, that is mithyā
Ātmā; for the benefit of mithyā Ātmā, gauṇa Ātmā is renounced. When the mithyā Ātmā
[body-mind-complex] itself gives problem, I am ready to commit suicide and ready to
renounce mithyā Ātmā also for the sake of mukhya Ātmā! Therefore, mukhya Ātmā alone
is loved most. Mukhya Ātmā is Brahman which is ānanda-svarūpa. This is the outline of
chapter 2 or 12 of Pañcadaśī titled Ātmā-ānanda-prakaraṇa.
Then, comes 3rd or 13th chapter titled Advaita ānanda consisting of 105 ślokas. Here, the
author establishes ānanda is Advaita by establishing dvaita-mithyātva. When I say I, it
means pure happiness and not experiential happiness. Brahma-ānanda, svarūpa-ānanda,
nitya-ānanda or pure happiness is non-dual. He establishes so by proving that the entire
dvaita prapañca is mithyā. Pure ānanda is nothing but Brahman. The pramāṇa is ānando
brahma vyajānāt and this pure ānanda Brahman is the jagat-kāraṇa Brahman. Instead of
saying Brahman is jagat-kāraṇa, you should say ānanda which is Brahman is the jagat-
kāraṇa. The pramāṇa is ānandādhyeva khalvimāni bhūtāni jāyante, etc, from ānanda the
world comes and in ānanda the world rests and into ānanda it resolves. The entire
prapañca is kārya. By an elaborate analysis, the author establishes that kārya does not exist
separate from kāraṇa ānanda. Kārya is only mithyā nāma and rūpa. All these things he
elaborately analyses. Since the entire kārya prapañca is mithyā, it should not be taken into
account because what is mithyā is as good as non-existent, an unreal thing is not a
countable thing and therefore, what is there is ānanda alone. The author says duḥkham
nāsti, duḥkha is an unreal superimposition upon the adhiṣṭhāna ānanda. Ānanda was,
ānanda is and ānanda will be forever. Duḥkha was not, is not and will not be. Therefore,
only one thing is there and that one thing is Advaita-ānandaḥ eva asmi. Therefore, the
whole chapter is titled Advaita ānanda. That Advaita ānanda is my Self otherwise known
to us as Brahman.
Now, we will enter the 4 th or 14th chapter called Vidyānanda consisting of 65 ślokas. Here,
the author shows how a jñānī gets ānanda through knowledge. For that, he gives two
reasons. First reason is vidyā improves vairāgya or detachment towards the entire anātmā.
Even at karma level one practices vairāgya through dveṣa-darśana. When we come to
jñāna-yoga level, this vairāgya is more reinforced because in addition to doṣa-darśana, I
see the anātmā as mithyā also. Before I said it has doṣa, now I say it is also mithyā. At
karma-yoga level, I don’t know it is mithyā but when I come to jñāna-yoga level,

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1625

mithyātva doṣa is the fourth doṣa I find. Because of the four doṣa-darśana all jñānis have
got vairāgya. The Upaniṣad says vairāgya is the source of ānanda; greater the vairāgya
greater the ānanda. Not only sense-objects give ānanda but vairāgya also can give ānanda
and the pramāṇa for this is ānanda mīmāṃsā of Taittirīya Upaniṣad second chapter where
various levels of ānanda are talked about like manuṣya-ānanda, deva-ānanda, Indra-
ānanda, Prajāpati-ānanda, etc., and the Upaniṣad says in each higher loka the ānanda is
greater. The reason is that the sense-pleasures are superior. Indra has Airāvata, Menakā,
etc. After talking about greater ānanda at higher level, the Upaniṣad says the same ānanda
is available for even sannyāsī who has the maximum vairāgya and one who is not afflicted
by desires. At every level, the Upaniṣad says the higher loka people get greater happiness
and this person also get greater happiness because greater vairāgya. Vidyā gives vairāgya
and therefore, one enjoys ānanda. Vidyā-ānanda is vairāgya-ānanda.
The second argument is that through vidyā knowledge, the jñānī understands I am
Brahman the jagat-kāraṇa. He understands the entire anātma-prapañca is kārya, mithyā,
which is born out of me, which rests in me, and which resolves into me. The world, the
kārya, does not exist separate from me, the kāraṇa. The world cannot, world will not, exist
separate from me and therefore, everything is included in me. I am all-inclusive.
Therefore, I am pūrṇa. Since all the fourteen lokas and those pleasures are included in me,
aham pūrṇosmi. Therefore, in life, I don’t miss anything. He does not say I miss anything.
He does not miss family, he does not miss money, etc. Vidyā gives pūrṇa ānanda because
of vairāgya. Vidyā produces two things; first it generates vairāgya and also pūrṇatva.
Because of vairāgya and pūrṇatva, I am always happy. Vidyāraṇya quotes several
portions of Upaniṣads in support of his claim. In short, vidyā gives me ānanda. This is the
topic of 14th chapter titled Vidya-ānanda.
Then comes the fifth chapter or the 15 th final chapter titled Viṣaya-ānanda consisting of 35
ślokas. It is a short chapter. Here, the title being Viṣaya-ānanda he says there is no such
thing called viṣaya-ānanda. Viṣaya-ānanda is a misnomer, a wrong name, coined out of
delusion. The sense-pleasure is a wrong name coined out of delusion. Here, Vidyāraṇya
establishes viṣaya does not have even a drop of ānanda quoting Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7 th
chapter nālpe sukhamasti, in the finite thing of the world there is no happiness at all.
Naturally, the question will come: if the objects do not have happiness, how come I derive
pleasure by contacting those objects? I enjoy icecream and get I get icecream-ānanda.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in

 1626

Similarly, there is ānanda in music and dance. You know the answer. A dog thinks by
biting the bone it gets blood and it misunderstand that the bone is the source of blood. By
biting the bone it injures its own mouth and the dog thinks the blood oozes from the bone!
Getting the viṣaya, a mental state is created called śanta-vṛtti or sātvika-vṛtti. At other
times we have rājasa, tāmasa-vṛtti. The author calls tāmasa-vṛtti as mūḍha-vṛtti, rājasa-
vṛtti as ghora-vṛtti and sāttvika-vṛtti is called śanta-vṛtti. The sense-object help in
quietening the mind. When you open the tap, the tap enables the tank water to flow
through the tap. Otherwise, the tap itself does not give water. Similarly, sense-objects are
but taps. When the ideal mindset comes, my own svarūpa ānanda gets reflected in that.
When those ideal conditions come, I enjoy pratibimba-ānanda and pratibimba-ānanda
refers to Ātmā or viṣaya. Pratibimba belongs to Ātmā alone for Ātmā alone is the source of
pratibimba-ānanda; therefore, all the sense-pleasures originate from Brahman, that is me.
Therefore, when jñānī enjoys sense-pleasure, he does not call it sense-pleasure, but he says
he enjoys own reflected ānanda. If you ask a jñānī “when do you enjoy brahma-ānanda?”,
he will say all pleasures are brahma-ānanda only, including the study of Pañcadaśī. Thus,
he concludes the Viṣaya-ānanda chapter by saying that viṣaya-ānanda is a misnomer for
brahma-pratibimba-ānanda. This is the fifth and 15 th chapter of Pañcadaśī. So ends
Pañcadaśī.

Download from www.arshaavinash.in