Sūtrajālam

Wisdom with Words

Yogaḥ in the Purānas

 Yogaḥ in the Viṣṇu Purānas

Yogaḥ of Liberation from the Viṣṇu Purāṇa

Article No. 5

[This Article covers Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/34 to 6/7/55] of the Vishṇu Purāṇa]

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/34]

 

 

यद्यन्तरायदोषेण दूष्यते  च अस्य मानसम् ।

जन्मान्तरैरभ्यसतो मुक्तिः पूर्व्वस्य जायते ॥ ६-७-३४ ॥

 

yadyantarāyadoṣeṇa dūṣyate ca asya mānasam  ।   

janmāntarair abhyasato muktiḥ pūrvasya jāyate ॥ 6/7/34 ॥

 

यद्य yadya-should, if to so happens; अन्तरायदोषेण antarāyadoṣeṇa-due to some internal corruption/fault/impurity; दूष्यते dūṣyate-has become bad/defiled/been corrupted ; च ca-and; अस्य  asya-this Yogi (who is a युञ्जानो yuñjāno; मानसम् mānasam-his Mind; जन्मान्तरैर janmāntarair-in a second birth; अभ्यसतो abhyasato-the same practice; मुक्तिः muktiḥ-Mokśa; पूर्व्वस्य pūrvasya-subsequently; जायते jāyate-arise/be attained.

 

“Should it happen that due to some internal corruption or fault or impurity, the Mind of this Yogi(who is a युञ्जानो yuñjāno as mentioned in [6/7/33]) has become bad/defiled/been corrupted; (such a Yogi) by resumimg the same practice (of  Yogaḥ), would be able attain Mokśa in the subsequent birth.” ॥ 6/7/34 ॥

 

 

Sanskrit Words:

  1. दुष [AGK 2, 197/2]  1. To be bad or corrupted, be spoiled or suffer damage.  2. To be defiled or violated (as a woman etc), be stained, become impure or contaminated.  3.To sin, commit a mistake, be wrong.  5. To be unchaste or.  6. To corrupt, spoil, cause to perish, hurt, destroy, defile, taint. 
  2. दोषा doṣa [AGK 2, 197/2] 1. a fault, corruption.  2. stain, contamination, pollution.

 

One who has begun Yogaḥ in real earnest is termed a युञ्जानो yuñjāno or one who has taken to Yogaḥ with the object of attaining Mokśa as mentioned in Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/33].  That is enough to safeguard the Yogi against defects/faults or corruption that may develop in his Mind due to some impediment. A defect or drawback developing and taking root in the Mind may cause a fall from the current Yogaḥ practice.  Rather than bemoan his bad luck, the Yogi should ruminate upon the fact the very decision taken by him to resort to Yogaḥ was due to an act of divine grace.  In other words, the very fact that he has yoked himself to Yogaḥ, is in the first place, a stroke of great good fortune befallen to him due to some divine intervention somewhere. If one happens to take to Yogaḥ, it is a rare event if you compare the number of people pursing worldly existence at any given moment to the number of those engaged in Yogaḥ. The Yogi must never be disheartened or discouraged

This Ṣlokaḥ reiterates Sri Krishna’s assurance to Arjuna on the general lines that no one who does good ever comes to an evil end [Gita 6/40].  It would be natural for a prospective Yogi to wonder at some stage, especially in the face of some adverse circumstances that has forced a fall from Yogaḥ, as to the outcome of the efforts put in thus far in the pursuit of Yogaḥ.  In fact Arjun speaks for all of us when he confides his great fear to Sri Krishna [Gita 6/37] as to what would happen if a person though endowed with faith, having failed to put in adequate efforts; found his Mind wandering away from Yogaḥ; and consequently fallen short of perfection (reaching the goal of Yogaḥ). Would he meet with the same fate as that of a piece of small cloud, torn away from a large mass perishing before it can reach another large cloud-mass?  Sri Krishna [Gita 6/40] gives the categorical assurance to Arjuna and through him to all Yogis that neither in the current life nor in the next would there be destruction of one who does good.  No doer of good would ever meet with an evil end.  Having said that Sri Krishna amplifies [Gita 6/41-45] how a Yogi who falls from Yogaḥ for any reason is never lost permanently.  If fall from Yogaḥ were to occur at some point in an existing birth, that Yogi would be able to resume from the same point in the next birth.  Sri Krishna declares [Gita 6/45] that even one who has fallen while practicing Yogaḥ can reach the supreme state by, “striving earnestly, becoming cleansed of all his stains, and perfected through many births”.

 

Thus, the message of this Ṣlokaḥ of the Vishnu Puraana is that a Yogi who has taken to Yogaḥ and suffered a lapse/fall for some reason need not loose hope.  He must continue to strive earnestly in that birth, concentrating on eradicating his past sins while not adding any new ones.  He must patiently await the next birth to continue his Yogaḥ with the same earnest striving.  He may have to undergo one or more  subsequent births before perfection is finally attained through  Yogaḥ.

But the Yogi whose Samādhiḥ has been fulfilled/accomplished need not wait for the next birth to attain Mokśa as the next Ṣlokaḥ tells us. 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/35]

 

विनिष्पन्नसमाधिस्त मुक्तिं तत्रैव जन्मनि ।

प्राप्रोति योगी योगाग्रिदग्धकर्म्मचयोऽचिरात्  ॥ ६-७-३५ ॥

 

viniṣpannasamādhistu muktiṃ tatraiva janmani  ।

prāpnoti yogī yogāgnidagdhakarmacayo cirāt   ॥ 6/7/35॥

 

 

विनिष्पन्नसमाधि viniṣpannasamādhi-the Samādhi that has been fulfilled/accomplished; तु tu-on the contrary; मुक्तिं muktiṃ-Mokśa or final liberation; तत्रैव tatraiva-there alone (in that very); जन्मनि janmani-in the birth; प्राप्रोति prāpnoti-acquires/obtains; योगी yogī-the Yogi;  योगाग्रिदग्धकर्म्मचयो yogāgnidagdha-karmacayo-the whole of the karmas burnt/destroyed in the fire of Yogaḥ; अचिरात् acirāt-quickly, in short time.

 

“On the contrary (with reference to context of the previous Ṣlokaḥ about the Yogi yoked to Yogaḥ), in the case of one whose Samādhiḥ has been fulfilled or accomplished, in that very birth the whole of his karmas/sins would be burnt and destroyed in a very short time in the fire of Yogaḥ, and he would obtain Mokśa.”  ॥ 6/7/35॥

 

 Sanskrit Words:

  1. दग्ध dagdha [AGK 2, 171/1] /दाहः [AGK 2, 180/1] 1. burning, conflagration.  2. glow, redness, heat.  3. place of cremation.  4. power to burn.

 

  1. अचिरात् acirāt/अचिर [AGK 1, 45/1]  1. brief, transitory, of short duration.  2. soon, quickly, just, not long hence. 

The Ṣlokaḥ says that in the case of a Yogi whose Samādhiḥ stands fulfilled/fully accomplished, the fire of Yogaḥ quickly burns all his sins away leading to Mokśa thereafter.  The phrase “मुक्तिं तत्रैव जन्मनि प्राप्रोति – muktiṃ tatraiva janmani prāpnoti” in the Ṣlokaḥ could be taken by some to imply that such a Yogi obtains Mukti while still alive. This is not true according to the definition of Mukti as envisaged by the Shāstras.  Mukti can come only after the prāṇā has left the body and the Jivātman has become disembodied.  Mokśa by definition implies cessation of embodiment or separation of the Jivātman from the body. 

The Doctrine of Liberation even when alive has been advocated by the proponents of Advaita. But certain contradictions in this Doctrine make it untenable.  We are not entering into polemics but it is our duty to point out these inconsistencies to simulate deeper thinking by those who have taken to Yogaḥ.  Embodiment by definition implies सशरीर्त्वम्-saśarīratvam and liberation is the opposite i.e. असशरीर्त्वम्- aśarīratvam.  The two i.e. embodiment and disembodiment cannot exist together in the same individual at the same point in time. Other inconsistences would also arise in the case of one who is deemed to have been liberated from a given body even while remaining within the same body. No Jivan Mukta can remain completely devoid of karmas in the interval from the advent of liberation while still alive till the actual  departure of the prāṇā.  The problem is that, for one, to be deemed a  Jivanmukta, one would have to continue to remain alive as in embodiment while observing total  inactivity as in disembodiment.  That is impossible. Compulsions with regard to the performance of karmas would arise in the case of a Jivan Mukta. So long as there is life in the body of the knower of the Brahman, scriptural injunctions with regard to Karmas both prescribed and prohibited according the varna and ashrama, would be binding on such a knower of the Brahman. If karmas were to be performed, bondage would result and the position of the Jivanmukta would become untenable in logic. In actual life, apparent Jivanmuktas have not been observed to remain perfectly actionless abstaining from performing even the most essential karmas needed to keep embodiment going to preserve the status of embodiment until the end of life. 

Another factor that undermines the tenability of the concept of the Jivanmukta is that with the dawn of vidya and the removal of ignorance and the illusion that the aatman is not the same as the body, there would be no room for the continuance of embodiment.  Thus we must interpret the phrase of the Ṣlokaḥ “muktiṃ tatraiva janmani prāpnoti” to imply that the Yogi would be liberated sometime in that very birth, when it ends,  and that he would not have to wait for more rebirths to nullify any backlog of sins as is the case of the one yoked to Yogaḥ who has suffered a fall. The Ṣlokaḥ cannot be interpreted to mean  that Mokśa would come in the current birth while the knower of the Brahman was still alive.  Mokśa is liberation from embodiment.  If one were to be alive, one would continue to be in embodiment. If one remained in embodiment, liberation would be held up because liberation by definition is the end of embodiment. The two cannot exist at the same time since one cancels and nullifies the other. Thus liberation is impossible so long as the embodiment drags on in the present birth.  Liberation has to wait for death to occur to have logical and factual justification.

   

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/36]

 

 

ब्रह्मचर्य्यमहिंसा च सत्यास्तेयापरिग्रहान् ।

सेवेत योगी निष्कामो योग्यतां स्वमनो नयन् ॥ ६-७-३६ ॥

 

brahmacaryamahiṃsā ca satyāsteyāparigrahān   ।

seveta yogī niṣkāmo yogyatāṃ svamano nayan   ॥ 6/7/36 ॥

 

ब्रह्मचर्य्यम  brahmacaryam-celibacy; अहिंसा ahiṃsā-not causing pain/injury to any living being; च सत्या ca satyā-and trutfulness; अस्तेया asteyā-not stealing; अपरिग्रहान् aparigrahān-not coveting; सेवेत seveta-in service of, honouring/devoting oneself to; योगी yogī-the Yogi; निष्कामो niṣkāmo-devoid of desires; योग्यतां yogyatāṃ- ; स्वमनो svamano-his own Mind; नयन् nayan-guiding/taking to the Brahman.

 

“Observing celibacy; not causing pain/injury to any living being; observing truthfulness; not stealing; not coveting; devoting himself to serving and honouring others; the Yogi who is devoid of desires, must make himself fit for guiding his Mind to the Self/ Brahman.”   ॥ 6/7/36 ॥

Sanskrit Words:

  1. सेवेत seveta [AGK 3, 411/1] 1. wait or attend upon, honour, worship, obey.  2. go after, pursue.  3. use, enjoy.  4. enjoy carnally. 5. to attach or devote oneself to, attend to, cultivate, practise.
  2. नयन् nayan/ [AGK 2, 252/1] 1. Leading, guiding, conducting, 2. Taking, bringing to or near.  3. obtaining

 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/37]

 

स्वाध्याय-शौच-सन्तोष-तपांसि नियतात्मवान् ।

कुर्व्वीत ब्रह्मणि तथा परस्मिन् प्रवणं मनः ॥ ६/७/३७॥

 

svādhyāyaśaucasaṃtoṣatapāṃsi niyatātmavān    ।

kurvīta brahmaṇi tathā parasminpravaṇaṃmanaḥ ॥ 6/7/37 ॥

 

 

स्वाध्याय svādhyāya-study of the scriptures; शौच śauca-cleanliness/purity; सन्तोष saṃtoṣa-contentment; तपांसि tapāṃsi-practicng penance; नियतात्मवान् niyatātmavān-remaining constantly self-restrained/diligent; कुर्व्वीत kurvīta-observing/doing all that; ब्रह्मणि brahmaṇi-the Brahman ; तथा tathā-as also; परस्मिन् parasmin-the Highest ; प्रवणं pravaṇaṃ-devoted/attached to or flowing towards ; मनः manaḥ-the Mind.

 

“By studying the Scriptures, remaining clean and pure, remaining contented, practicing penance, always remaining restrained/diligent, doing all that makes your Mind flow towards the Brahman, who is also the highest, with intense  devotion.” ॥ 6/7/37 ॥

 

 

Sanskrit Words:

  1. नि ni [AGK 2, 265/2] Mostly used as a prefix to verbs and nouns, rarely as an adverb or preposition. It is used in the following senses: 1. lowness, downward motion (‘down’, ‘under ‘below’).  2. continuance, permanence 3. restraint, confinement

 

  1. यत yat [AGK 3, 11/2] 1. restrained, curbed, controlled, subdued.  2. striving, diligent.
  2. आत्मवान् ātmavān governing oneself, self-restrained, curbing the senses.

4.कुर्व्वीत kurvīta/कुर्वत् [AGK 1, 598/1] observing, doing.

5.प्रवणं pravaṇaṃ/प्रवण pravaṇ [AGK 2, 480/2] 1.  Inclined, disposed to, tending to.  2. devoted or attached to, addicted to, intent on, prone to, full of.  3. favourably inclined or disposed towards.  4. sloping down, inclined, shelving, flowing downwards.

 

 

Keśidhvajaḥ now takes up the Aṣṭāṅga Yogaḥ proper in his celebrated discourse to Khāṇḍikyaḥ.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/38]

 

एते यमाः सनियमाः पञ्च पञ्च प्रकीर्त्तिताः ।

विशिष्टफलदाः काम्या निष्कामाणां विभुक्तिदाः  ॥ ६-७-३८ ॥

 

ete yamāḥsaniyamāḥ pañca pañca ca prakīrtitāḥ   ।

viśiṣṭaphaladāḥ kāmyā niṣkāmānāṃ vimuktidāḥ  ॥ 6/7/38 ॥

 

एते ete-these; यमाः Yamāḥ- Yamāḥ (restraint/self-control) ; स sa-together with; नियमाः Niyamāḥ-Niyamāḥ (enjoined observances) ; पञ्च पञ्च pañca pañca-five each; प्रकीर्त्तिताः prakīrtitāḥ-proclaimed/declared/celebrated; विशिष्टफलदाः viśiṣṭaphaladāḥ-bestower of excellent and distinguished fruits काम्या kāmyā-desirable;  निष्कामाणां niṣkāmānāṃ-of those without any desires/expectations ; विभुक्तिदाः vimuktidāḥ-it is the bestower of final liberation.

 

“These are the celebrated restraints/norms of self control together with enjoined observances, five each as proclaimed.  They bestow distinguished fruits on those who have desires.  On those without any desires/expectations, they bestow final liberation.”  ॥ 6/7/38 ॥

It should not be surprising that this Ṣlokaḥ says that of those who have abided by the cannons of Yamāḥ & Niyamāḥ properly; the ones who have no desires/expectations get the highest fruit i.e. liberation;  and the ones with desires get the special fruits as per their wishes. There is a compelling reason for this. Liberation cannot be granted until there is no reason whatsoever for further embodiment. If one has a fruit in mind, one has to be around in a body to enjoy that fruit.  To be around in a body for whatever reason means to continue in embodiment and that would put off liberation until all the fruits have been extinguished by experiencing them in the current or subsequent births. If one has to be born again, it would mean delay in Mukti.

Yamāḥ & Niyamāḥ have been dealt with extensively in the Yogaḥ Upaniṣhads. In this work, we have covered them in greater detail in the Chapter on Yamāḥ. & Niyamāḥ.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/39]

 

एकं भद्रासनादीनां समास्थाय गुणैर्युतः ।

यमाख्यै र्नियमाख्यै श्व युञ्जीत नियतो यतिः  ॥ ६-७-३९ ॥

 

ekaṃ bhadrāsanādīnāṃ samāsthāya guṇair yutaḥ ।

yamākhyair niyamākhyaiś ca yuñjīta niyato yatiḥ ॥ 6/7/39 ॥

 

एकं  ekaṃ-one of; भद्रासन bhadrāsana-the Bhadrāsana;अदीनां adīnāṃ-and the like; समास्थाय aggregate of; गुणै guṇair-good qualities/merits; युतः yutah-endowed with/filled with; यमाख्यै yamākhyai-derived from all the Yamāḥ ; र्नियमाख्यै niyamākhyai-derived from all the Niyamāḥ; च ca-and; युञ्जीत yuñjīta-the one who has taken to Yogaḥ for seeking mukti; नियतो niyato-one who is self-possessed, self-governed/steady; यतिः the ascetic who has controlled his passions. 

 

“Adopting any one posture selected from a choice of postures such as the Bhadrāsana and such other postures, endowed/filled with the merits/benefits derived from the observance of all the Yamāḥ and the Niyamāḥ, like ascetic who has controlled his passions (Yogaḥ should be practiced).” ॥ 6/7/39॥

 

Asanā constitute the third limb of the Ashtānga Yogaḥ.  Unless, the Yogi has performed all the Yamāḥ and Niyamāḥ with dedication and due diligence and acquired a level of the physical, mental, spiritual strength & purity  required for Yogaḥ, it would be difficult to assume  any Āsana or posture properly in the first place, let alone hold it comfortably for any length of time.  That is why this Ṣlokaḥ insists that the Yogi must be fully endowed with the merits/benefits derived from the due observance of all the Yamāḥ & Niyamāḥ.

 

 

Sanskrit Words:

  1. युतः yutah/युत yuta [AGK 3, 27/2] 1. 1 United, joined or united with 2. provided or endowed with. 3. fastened or attached to  4. accompanied or attended by.  5. filled or covered with.
  2. नियतो niyato/नियत [AGK 2, 277/2] 1. curbed, restrained.  2.self-possessed, self-governed.  3. constant, steady, sure, settled.
  3. यतिः yatiḥ 1 Restraint, check, control   2. Stopping, ceasing, rest.  3. An ascetic, one who has renounced the world and controlled his passions.

 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/40]

 

प्राणाख्यमनिलं वश्यमभ्यासात् कुरुते तु यत् ।

प्राणायामः स विज्ञेयः सबीजोऽबीज एव च ॥ ६-७-४० ॥

 

prāṇākhyamanilaṃ vaśyamabhyāsātkurute tu yat   ।

prāṇāyāmaḥsavijñeyaḥsabījo ‘bīja eva ca        ॥ 6/7/40 ॥

 

प्राण prāṇa-the vital air or life force; आख्यम ākhyam-well known; अनिलं anilaṃ-wind in the body/vital air; वश्यम vaśyam-subjugate/attain mastery over; अभ्यासात् abhyāsāt-by practice; कुरुते kurute-doing it; तु tu-indeed; यत्  yat-that; प्राणायामः prāṇāyāmaḥ-the fourth Limb of Aṣṭāṅga Yogaḥ; स sa-which; विज्ञेयः vijñeyaḥ-is known to be; सबीजो sabījo-with seed; अबीज abīja-without a seed; एव च eva ca-and verily.

 

“That by which the prāṇa and the well known winds in the body are mastered/subjugated through practice is known as prāṇāyāmaḥ (the fourth limb of the Aṣṭāṅga Yogaḥ).  Know that to be ‘with seed’ and ‘without seed’.” ।। 6/7/40 ।।

 

 

Sanskrit Words:

 

  1. आख्यम ākhyam/आख्य [AGK 1, 324/2] 1. to tell, say inform.  2. to declare, announce, 3. to call denominate.
  2. अनिलं anilaṃ [AGK 1, 103/1] 1. Wind. 2.  The God of Wind.  3.One of the subordinate deities) 49 of whom form the class of winds.  4. N. of one of the 8 Yasus i.e, the 5th.  5. The wind in the body, one of the humours.
  3. वश्यम vaśyam.वश [AGK 3,112/1] 1. under the control of/influence of.    2.obedient, submissive.  3. power, mastery, authority, subjugation.  3. to subjugate overcome, win over.

The term Prāṇā in Sanskrit has a number of connotations appropriate to the context in which it is used.  One set of meanings include the connotations of breath, respiration, vital air, the life principle.   Another set includes the Atman, the Paramātman, a Deity, a dear person.  The first set of connotations are applicable to Yogaḥ & Prāṇāyāmaḥ.

Prāṇā is the generic name for a group of like forces in the human body whose function it is to give both impetus to and regulate the different functions of the body.  This is done by operating as currents flowing through certain channels or pathways in the body called Nādis. Prāṇā is not the mere breath per-se.  The flow of the Prāṇā currents are not to be equated with the act of breathing in and out of air necessary to remain alive.  Prāṇā is the subtle force or life-principle that causes the movement of the breath.  The Prāṇā regulate and control many other aspects of human functioning in the physical, mental, and spiritual planes.  As already mentioned, Prāṇā flow as currents through channels termed Naadis developed by the Praanas themselves to act as pathways to course up and down for the regulation and efficient functioning of the human body.

We learn from the Cāndogya Upaniṣhad [5.1.13], that technically, the body can be deemed alive even after all the other organs have stopped operating so long as the Prāṇā is still there. It is also known that if the Prāṇā were to leave a body, the rest of the senses and organs would not be able to function even for a moment after the departure of the Prāṇā.  Therein lies the critical importance  of the Prāṇā. Conversely, if anything is done to revitalize the Prāṇā, one begins to feel more energetic because there is an improvement in the functional efficiency of the Mind, the major organs and senses of the body.

The Trishikhi Brāhmaṇopaniśad [77-87] gives us the names of the ten Prāṇā or Vital Airs which circulate in the ten Nādis as being (1) Prāṇā  (2) Apāna  (3) Samāna   (4) Udāna (5) Vyāna  (6) Nāga  (7) Kūrma  (8) Krkara  (9) Devadatta and (10) Dhananjaya. Note that the term ‘Prāṇā’ is the name of the whole group of ten vital airs as well as the individual name of the first and most important member of the group. In this work, we have a separate Chapter dealing with Prāṇā or Vital Airs.  In that Chapter, the topic has been covered in greater detail based on the teachings of the Purāṇa and the Yogaḥ Upaniṣhads.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/41]

 

परस्परेणाभिभवं प्राणापानौ यदानिलौ ।

कुरुतः सद्विधानेन तृतीयः संयमात्तयोः ॥ ६-७-४१ ॥

 

paraspareṇābhibhavaṃ prāṇāpānau yathānilau  ।

kurutaḥsadvidhānena tṛtīyaḥsaṃyamāttayoḥ    ॥ 6/7/41 ॥

 

परस्परेणा paraspareṇa-one against the other; अभिभवं abhibhavaṃ-to subjugate/control/overpower; प्राणापानौ prāṇāpānau-the vital airs prāṇā & apāna; यदा yada-when ; अनिलौ ānilau-the duo of vital airs; कुरुतः kurutaḥ-does control (at the same time); सद्विधानेन sadvidhānena-according to the instructions of the true Guru;  तृतीयः tṛtīyaḥ-a third; संयमा saṃyamā-form of restraint of breath; त्तयोःfrom the two

 

“Of the two vital airs, prāṇā and apāṇā, each is used   to overpower and control the other.  When the duo of vital airs is subjugated  and brought under control at the same time according to the instructions of the true Guru, a third form of breath restraint (emerges) from that.”  ॥ 6/7/41॥

 

 

Sanskrit Words:

  1. अभिभवं abhibhavaṃ / अभिभवः abhibhavah [AGK 1,192/2] defeat, subjugation, subjection, overpowering.  2. being overpowered, being attacked or affected, stupefied.

The simple act of breathing in and out is taken for granted and, for that reason, probably neglected by many people. What symptoms would a person show who is neglecting the act of inhaling and exhalation?  Well, to put it in a nut-shell, such a person would lack vitality.  His skin would appear dull and his skin colour could be pallid. He would generally look unhealthy and  lacking vitality. He would be quite unaware of the importance of breathing and the need to regulate one’s breathing in a systematic manner. When asked, he would probably admit that fact. Internally, a person is the best judge whether he or she is aware of the act of breathing or not. Externally, if one were to observe a person frequently inhaling and exhaling with deliberation with the chest heaving up and down like the waves of a placid ocean in a quiet and clean beach, we may conclude that such a person takes breathing seriously.

Today, a clean beach is as rare as a person frequently seen to draw in air with joyous determination and to exhale it without the slightest trace of a tremolo, as if the expelled air has merged with the depths somewhere. Ask yourself these questions?  Are you aware of the act of breathing every moment of your existence?  Do you regard breathing as something a person has to do consciously all the time? Are you aware that breathing cannot be left to the autonomous system if you wish to enjoy good health and clarity of the mind? Do you hark back to the act of breathing every now and then?   If your answers are in the negative, then your skin pallor is likely to be unhealthy, your Mind and your senses not operating at their full potential, and you are probably missing out on the joys of just being alive.

The Yogaḥ Upaniṣhads  deal extensively with the topic of Prāṇāyāmaḥ.  The benefits of Prāṇāyāmaḥ done properly have been enumerated therein. It is worth knowing these benefits.  One may be motivated to personally experience the efficacy of Prāṇāyāmaḥ by regular practice in the quiet of the home or at the place of work or where one may be temporarily waiting for something such as one’s turn at the dentist or in a court-case or a job interview. If this yogic breathing is done regularly and in accordance with a Guru’s instructions as an ongoing process, one will surely realise its benefits. The pay-off may come slowly but once it does, it will last a long time.  I urge the Reader to explore the Yogaḥ Upaniṣhads.  We have incorporated a separate Chapter on the subject of Prāṇāyāmaḥ in our work.  We cannot overemphasize the importance of the systematic control of breath for good health and positive attitudes in life.  This fact must be appreciated by all human beings.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/42]

 

तस्य चालम्बनवतः स्थूलं रूपं द्रिजोत्तम! ।

आलम्बनमनन्तस्य योगिनोऽभ्यसतः स्मृतम्  ॥ ६-७-४२ ॥

 

tasya cālambanavataḥ sthūlarūpaṃ dvijottama  ।

ālambanam anantasya yogino ‘bhyasataḥ smṛtam  ॥ 6/7/42 ॥

 

 

तस्य tasya-his (of the Yogi who has embarked upon prāṇāyāmaḥ); च ca-and; आलम्बनवतः  ālambanavataḥ-the Yogi who has taken resort to/brought his Mind to rest upon the Brahman; स्थूलं sthūlam-the gross or fundamental;  रूपं rūpaṃ-form; द्रिजोत्तम dvijottama-the best of the twice-born; आलम्बनम ālambanam-the name given to the act of  that would be taking recourse to/taking rest in ; अनन्तस्य anantasya-of the one without an end (Brahman); योगिनो yogino-the Yogi;अभ्यसतः in the Yogaḥ practice; स्मृतम् smṛtam-brings the Mind to rest upon. 

 

“If that Yogi (the one who after having embarked upon prāṇāyāmaḥ), were to take resort to/take shelter in the gross form of the one who is without an end (namely the Brahman), O Best of the First Born ! that would be called ālambana (as far as Yogaḥ were to be concerned).” ॥ 6/7/42 ॥

 

 

Sanskrit Words:

 

  1. आलम्बन ālambana/आलम्ब् ālamb  [AGK 1, 371/1]  1.  

to rest or lean upon, support oneself on.  2. to lay hold of, seize, take.  3. to resort to, to take  recourse to.  4.  to depend upon.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/42] introduces a technical term called ālambana and in the same context mentions that the one without an end or the Brahman is the object of the ālambana by definition. So if a Yogi were to take recourse to the Brahman or take shelter in the Brahman with his whole being during the course of Yogaḥ, that would be deemed as ālambana in the ongoing Yogaḥ.

The preceding Ṣlokaḥ i.e.,[6/7/41] makes a mention of the control of the vital airs prāṇā and apāṇā according to the Guru’s instructions; and that when both are restrained, it leads to the emergence of a third form of restraint of the breath. There is no doubt that this Ṣlokaḥ refers to recaka, pūraka, and kuṃbhakā, which together constitute prāṇāyāmaḥ.  If so, we must conclude that if there is ālambana in the course of prāṇāyāmaḥ, it must be of the type called  सबीजो sabījo-with seed type of prāṇāyāmaḥ (referred to earlier in Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/40]).  The term ālambana in the general sense connotes taking rest in/leaning upon to support oneself on/ to take shelter in/lay hold of,  to cite some senses.  Other connotations have been mentioned below.  But when  ālambana occurs during prāṇāyāmaḥ, then such a prāṇāyāmaḥ would be deemed the ‘sabījo’ or ‘with seed’ type of prāṇāyāmaḥ.    

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/43]

शब्दादिष्वनुरक्तानि निगृह्या  अक्षाणि योगवित् ।

कुर्य्याच्  च्चित्ता  अनुचारीणि प्रत्याहारपरायण,  ॥ ६-७-४३ ॥

 

śabdādiṣv anuraktāni nigṛhya  akṣāṇi Yogaḥvit ।

kuryāc cittānukārīṇi pratyāhāraparāyaṇaḥ  ॥ 6/7/43 ॥

 

शब्दादिष्व śabdādiṣva-the subtle elements such as sound and the like of which the senses and their objects are composed of together with the senses themselves; अनुरक्तानि anuraktāni-fond of/devoted to; निगृह्या nigṛhyā-brought under control अक्षाणि akṣāṇi-the sense organs and sensual perceptions ; योगवित् Yogaḥvit-the knower of Yogaḥ or the one proficient in Yogaḥ; कुर्य्याच kuryāc-brought/done; च्चित्ता cittā-the Mind; अनुचारीणि anucārīṇi-should follow/pursue; प्रत्याहार pratyāhāra-pratyāhāra or the withdrawal of the Mind from the Sense objects;  परायण  parāyaṇaḥ-something highest to resort to.  

Sanskrit Words:

  1. अनुरक्तानि anuraktāni/ अनुरक्त  anurakta[AGK 1, 118/2,]  1.Reddened, dyed, coloured. 2. Pleased, contented; loved, beloved, loyal, loyally devoted.  3.having all means favourable to him. 
  2. अनुचारीणी anucārīṇi/अनुचर् [AGK 1, 109/1] 1. to follow, pursue, go after.  2. to traverse, seek after.  3. to conduct oneself, behave.
  3. अक्षाणि akṣāṇi अक्षम्ं [MW 45/2, an organ of sense; sensual perception.

“Having brought under his control  the organs of the senses together with their sensual perceptions, all of which have become fond  of/devoted to the subtle elements such as sound and the like (of which the sense organs and their objects themselves are composed of), the Knower of Yogaḥ, should make his Mind follow/pursue the path of Pratyāhāra or Withdrawal of the Mind from the Objects of the Senses (the Fifth Limb of the Aṣṭāṅga Yogaḥ ) which is something highest (for the Mind )to resort to.” ॥  6/7/43 ॥’

From the perspective of common usage, the term शब्दः śabdah connotes sound as well as the object of the sense of hearing; the phenomenon of sound as such; a note or noise in general. At first glance, according to our common understanding, the phrase शब्दादिष्व śabdādiṣva  would seem to refer to objects of the senses such as sound in the case of hearing and so on.  But the implication of the term in the context of the Yogi extends beyond the sense organs and mere objects of the senses. In addition to sound that activates our ear-drums, the term  शब्दः  refers to one of the five Tanmātras or subtle principles, the other four being  tangibleness known as touch, odour, visibility or form, and taste. 

An object that can be felt is the object of the sense of touch and the tanmātra of touch.  If it can be seen it would be the object of the sense organ of sight and also come within the purview of the tanmātra of sight/visibility. But the tanmātras are more than what the generic names of the class might suggest. The sense impressions that the tanmātras generate are picked by the sense organs, processed by the Mind and fed to the Sentient Entity or the Knower in the Body. These tanmātras may be understood as being primary essences or subtle-elements from which emerge the five-gross elements (Mahābhūtas). The five tanmātras are the building blocks of the Universe at a very subtle and fundamental level.  They are: (1) ether (akāsha) from the subtle element called sound.  It is this that fills all space and envelops all things. (2) air (vāyu) from the subtle-element tangibleness. (3.) earth, from the element odour. (4) light or fire from the element visibility. and (5) water  from the element called taste.

All this is based on the Sāṅkhya Theory of Creation was propounded several millenia ago.  This Theory of Creation has been largely accepted by all the Schools of Hindu Philosophy that subscribe to the validity and paramountcy of the Vedaḥ. We will digress a bit to mention the current Theory of Creation in Modern Physics & Cosmology. The Super-String Theory of the Universe with loops and vibrating strings is currently the hot topic amongst Physicists and Cosmologists.  What is its essence?  According to the theory, the fundamental constituents of reality are strings of the Planck length (about 10 raised to the power of minus−33 cm) that are said to vibrate at resonant frequencies. Every string, in theory, has a unique resonance, or harmonic frequency. Different harmonics determine different fundamental particles. Harmonics and vibrations are also characteristics of sound.

The Sāṅkhyan hypothesis, formulated thousands of years ago, that reality might be based on sound and other subtle elements combining in different proportions was a brave attempt to think out-of-the-box at that time.  In fact, the Superstring Theory of today is also a very brave attempt to advance a novel Theory of the Creation of the Universe breaking out of the fetters of older scientific thinking. Both have been developed based on insights or flashes of understanding manifesting themselves in the minds of pensive thinkers.  We are not trying to suggest that the Sāṅkhya Theory and the Superstring Theory are comparable or compatible. They may well be but our aim here is different. Our point is that this Ṣlokaḥ is trying to suggest to the Yogi that he should not only try to extricate the senses from the objects to which the senses have become attached to but he should also try to extricate the senses from the very fundamental elements that have created both the senses and their objects as well. In effect, the Yogi is being asked to reach out to and to control, not just the senses themselves, but additionally control the very source of the senses and sense objects at the most subtle and fundamental level. That is our point.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/44]

 

वश्यता परमा तेन जायतेऽतिचलात्मनाम् ।

इन्द्रियाणामवश्यैस्तैर्न योगी योगसाधकः ॥ ६-७-४४॥

 

vaśyatā paramā tena jāyate ‘ticalātmanām

indriyāṇām avaśyais tair na yogī Yogaḥsādhakaḥ ॥ 6/7/44॥

 

 

वश्यता vaśyatā-having brought under control; परमा paramā-to the highest degree; तेन tena-by that (by following the injunctions given in the previous Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/43]; जायते jāyate-there will arise/manifest; अतिचलात्मनाम् aticalātmanām-in the highly unsteady and vascillating Self; इन्द्रियाणाम  indriyāṇām-of the Sense Organs; अवश्यैस् तैर् tair-if this control; न na-is not established; योगी yogī-the Yogi; योगसाधकः Yogaḥsādhakaḥ-accomplishment or fulfillment or successful completion of of Yogaḥ.

 

“There will arise in the highly unsteady and vacillating Self, the highest degree of control (over the sense organs and sensual perceptions by following the injunctions given in the previous Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/43]).  If this control is not established, the accomplishment or fulfilment or successful completion of Yogaḥ will not be possible.” ॥ 6/7/44॥

This Ṣlokaḥ uses the term अतिचलात्मनाम्  ati-cala-ātmanām referring to the Jivātman or the Self. The term ati means extremely.  The term ‘cala’ has several connotations in usage as cited below. When the Ātman is in its pristine state, it is a pure entity unaffected by matter in any way.  The range of its consciousness is infinite.  It is imperishable and permanent.  It is not frail or transitory.  In its pristine state, the ātman is neither unsteady, fickle, inconstant nor moving trembling, shaking, tremulous, or rolling. Therefore, none of the connotations of the Sanskrit term चल cala are applicable to the Self.  If so, why has the Ṣlokaḥ used this term with reference to the Jivātman?  Is the Ṣlokaḥ in error?  Was there some other term the Ṣlokaḥ may have had in mind? That is not true. 

The Ṣlokaḥ has used the term चल cala correctly and appropriately.  How so?  Of the three sets of connotations cited below, the one at Ser 2, namely the qualities of being “unsteady, fickle, inconstant” are applicable in the case of the ātman, only when it is in embodiment and not when it is in the pristine state of liberation from Matter. All the problems of a Jivātman begin as soon as it comes into contact with Prakṛti and its guṇās upon embodiment. The vāsanās and saṃskāras of most Jivātman are not sufficiently good enough to enable the Jivātman to fight off the effects of the guṇās and to resist the attractions of the sense objects.  Such Jivātman also do not have the ‘Buddhi-Yogaḥ’ to embark upon Yogaḥ to control the wayward Mind in the state of  the default pre-programming designed to facilitate the experiencing of the Universe with all its wonderous objects of enjoyment and thrills; all the pairs of opposites; all the inevitable karman and swelling of the backlog of unexpired karman awaiting fructification.  The catch is that the while the default pre-programming of the Mind enables the Jivātman to both enjoy as well suffer, it also impedes the attainment of emancipation. That is the  first objective of the Brahman in creating the Universe and inhabiting it with so many diverse and wonderful cit and acit entities.

 

With reference to the sentient entities embodied in diverse bodies inclusive of that of human beings, the two main objectives of Brahman in creation are as follows:

 

(1) to enable them to  experience the Universe of Matter. 

 

(2) to enable them to work for emancipation or final liberation from the very world which they have been put into.

It is not necessary that the term Jivātman should refer to a particular sentient entity in a human body alone. Hindu Philosophy holds that sentient entities can inhabit diverse bodies, apart from that of a human being.  A sentient entity can find itself embodied in all sorts of living beings such as plants, animals, and even in apparently inert/inanimate objects like rocks, river, hills, mountains etc.  Embodiment is basically both a challenge and an opportunity to work for embodiment in progressively higher and higher bodies culminating in a human body or that of a  Divine Being.

Hindu Philosophy postulates that the human body, for all purposes, is at the apex of this evolution.  It is the springboard to Mokśa.  Therefore, embodiment as a human being should not be wasted in such actions/deeds as will perpetuate further bondage as embodied beings either in the human body, or worse still, trigger a downward spiral into births in progressively inferior wombs.  The message is clear that a sentient entity that finds itself in a human body on birth, should seize the good fortune of embodiment in a human body to strive for Mokśa from day one. That ‘day one’ may be reckoned as the moment the Jivātman becomes conscious of its Mind-Body Complex.  We may stress here, at the risk of excessive repetition, that the Mind, the Sense Organs and the Body have all been pre-programmed to carry out the first of the two main objectives of the Brahman in this business of creation and worldly existence namely to make the sentient entity experience the wonderful world of Matter with all its pairs of opposites. During the course of worldly existence in embodiment, the Sentient Being has it’s sense of discrimination either dulled or rendered defunct.  As a result, karmas are performed, as though helplessly, that will perpetuate bondage delaying liberation sine-die.  There is nothing in the Brahman’s pre-programming of the Mind, the Senses and the Body about helping the Jivātman to even start work towards liberation let alone attain it later. Why so ? 

Let us pause for a moment to let this sink in. Are we to work for emancipation on our own?  Yes, definitely. Will the Mind-Body Complex with all the miraculous sense organs and data-transmission, collection, collation, and presentation system help the Jivātman to get out of the largely miserable worldly-existence and attain eternal freedom from matter or better still be able to enjoy the bliss of the Brahman?  The answer is a definite no.  Is the Brahman cruel or capricious?  Not at all. If we look upon the material Universe as an obstacle course designed by the Brahman in which the Mind, the Body, the Senses, the Sense Object and all the Sensual Experiences function as obstacles and, if you view all the embodied Jivātman the participants in an obstacle race where the top prize is Mokśa, our doubts would be resolved. The participants in any race cannot use a proxy to run on their behalf. The obstacles in the race cannot be expected to help the participants by diluting the degree of difficulty they are designed to present.  They cannot be expected to divert the runners to easier paths or to point out their own flaws, if any, which the participants could exploit to advantage.  We are lucky that the Mind-Body Complex remains consistent in its role of making it difficult for participants to easily negotiate them. They have not been programmed to go out to the way to deliberately create newer and more complex hurdles according to the capability of each runner and how close that runner has come to the winning line. The general dictum of the Brahman is “as you sow so you reap”. The hurdles in the path of worldly existence by themselves, are thankfully, not pro-active. Therein lies the merciful nature of the Brahman. To all the embodied Jivātman in the race for emancipation, the hidden message is that dangers of worldly existence are not unsurmountable. It is not a hopeless race to Mokśa. There is a way out but the Jivātman has to work for it.

The merciful nature of the Brahman is seen in the following expedients available to every Jiva:

  1. The Grace of the Brahman can be evoked by intense uninterrupted meditation upon the Brahman with loving devotion. The advent of Grace can lead to the grant of that Buddhi Yogaḥ that can make the Jivātman take the necessary steps to eradicate its stock of sins and unexpired karman.

 

  1. The Buddhi Yogaḥ granted by God can motivate a Jivātman to turn to the practice of Aṣṭāṅga Yogaḥ under a Guru.

We can look upon the whole business of worldly existence and the Brahman’s design from another perspective. In the final analysis, the Brahman’s compassion and respect for the Jivātman, and His own sense of Maryāda,  prevents the Brahman from instituting a race where nobody has to work for anything and where everyone gets the top prize on a plate at the starting line itself. The Brahman respects the Maryāda or sense of self-respect of the Jivātman and knows that the Jivātman will not be truly happy with a gift given ex-gratis without deserving it. Imagine the reaction of student with self-respect and a sense of honour who is about to appear for a vital examination, and who discovers at the last moment that every student appearing for that examination, except himself, has already been given both the question paper and answers one week in advance.

Thus it is that, soon after coming into contact with Matter, in the vast majority of cases, the pristine Jivātman develops the defects described by the terms ‘unsteady’, ‘fickle’, and ‘inconstant’.  Unless, a Jivātman has taken birth with very strong credentials from the past, it will begin to mirror the qualities of Prakṛti from first contact. When it comes up against formidable hurdles, it has to find a way to negotiate them successfully. Yogaḥ  is one of the important expedients available to human beings seeking emancipation.  Hence, the great need for one who has had the rare fortune of taking to Yogaḥ, to control the senses completely and to the highest degree, through Yamāḥ, Niyamāḥ, Āsana, Prāṅāyāma, and Pratyāhāra before embarking upon the three concluding stages called as Dhāraṅā, Dhyāna, and Samādhī leading to Mokśa.

Sanskrit Words:

 

  1. परमा paramā [MW 588/1] 1. most distant, remotest, extreme, last. 2. highest, primary, most prominent or conspicuous. 3. to the highest degree.
  2. चल cala [AGK 2, 74/1] 1. Moving trembling, shaking, tremulous, rolling.  2. Unsteady, fickle, inconstant, loose, unfixed.  3. Frail, transitory, perishable.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/45]

प्राणायामेन पवनैः प्रत्याहारेण चेन्द्रियैः ।

वशीकृतैस्ततः कुर्य्यात् स्थिरं चेतः शुभाश्रये    ॥ ६-७-४५ ॥

 

prāṇāyāmena pavanaiḥ pratyāhāreṇa cendriyaiḥ   ।

vaśīkṛtais tataḥ kuryāt sthiraṃ cetaḥ śubhāśraye  ॥ 6/7/45 ॥

 

प्राणायामेन prāṇāyāmena-by means of prāṅāyāma;  पवनैः pavanaiḥ-the vital airs; प्रत्याहारेण pratyāhāreṇa-by means of pratyāhāra  ;  च ca-as well; न्द्रियैः indriyaiḥ-the sense organs; वशीकृतै vaśīkṛtais-having brought under one’s control; ततः tataḥ-then; कुर्य्यात् kuryāt- ; स्थिरं sthiraṃ-stable, firm ; चेतः cetaḥ-the Mind; शुभाश्रये śubhāśraye-auspicious refuge/asylum/ shelter.

 

Sanskrit Terms:

 

आश्रये āśraye [AGK 1, 381/2] 1. A resting-place, seat, substratum.  2. That on which anything depends or rests or with which it is closely connected.  3. recipient, receptacle, a person or thing in which any quality is present or retained.  4. a place of refuge, asylum; shelter.

“Having brought under one’s control, the vital airs by means of Prāṇāyāmaḥ and the the sense organs by means of Pratyāhāra, place the stable Mind firmly in the auspicious refuge/asylum or shelter.” ॥ 6/7/45 ॥

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/46]

 

खाडिक्य उवाच

कथ्यतां मे महाभाग! चेतसो यः शुभाश्रयः ।

यदाधारमशेषं तद्धन्ति दोषसमुद्भवम्  ॥ ६-७-४६ ॥

 

khāṇḍikya uvāca:

kathyatāṃ me mahābhāga cetaso yaḥ śubhāśrayaḥ  ।

yadādhāram aśeṣaṃ tad dhanti doṣasamudbhavam   ॥ 6/7/46 ॥

 

खाडिक्य khāṇḍikya-Raja Khāṇḍikyaḥ; उवाच uvāca-spoke:

कथ्यतां kathyatāṃ-pray tell me;  मे me-me ; महाभाग mahābhāga-O One who is very lucky/prosperous; चेतसो cetaso-the Mind ; यः yaḥ-this ; शुभाश्रयः śubhāśrayaḥ-auspicious refuge/asylum/shelter; यदाधारम yadādhāram-resorting to which; अशेषं aśeṣaṃ-entirely/completely and perfectly; तद्  tad-that which; धन्ति dhanti-burns away; दोषसमुद्भवम् doṣasamudbhavam-all the sins/infirmities that may have arisen in one.

 

“Pray tell me, O exceedingly lucky & prosperous one, what is that auspicious refuge/asylum which destroys all sins & infirmities that may have arisen in one when this Mind is made to take shelter therein completely and perfectly?”  ॥ 6/7/46॥

Hearing Keśidhvajaḥ talk of “bringing under one’s control, the vital airs by means of Prāṅāyāma and the the sense organs by means of Pratyāhāra, and thereafter placing the stable Mind firmly in the auspicious refuge/asylum or shelter.”, Khāṇḍikyaḥ is convinced that Keśidhvajaḥ is well versed in the science of the ātman including Yogaḥ.  He therefore calls Keśidhvajaḥ as one who is “exceedingly lucky & prosperous.”  It takes a fair degree of knowledge of the science of the ātman for anyone to realise how lucky anyone should be deemed who is well versed in spiritual matters as well as in Yogaḥ.  That also  shows how advanced the transformation of Khāṇḍikyaḥ has been from a man of action in the material world to a man of knowledge in the spiritual world during his stay in the quiet forest with lots of time to meditate and contemplate and few distractions. Further proof of this transformation is provided by the intense interest Khāṇḍikyaḥ shows in the concept of the auspicious refuge of the Mind which is capable of destroying all sins & infirmities that may have arisen in the Mind when the Mind is made to take shelter therein. 

The stage has been reached when Raja Khāṇḍikyaḥ is no longer interested in worldly existence and its mundane joys or sorrows.  He is aiming for a much higher prize or goal.  He wants to get rid of all infirmities and sins that have arisen in his Mind by placing it in that auspicious shelter mentioned by Keśidhvajaḥ .  But what is that auspicious and miraculous refuge or shelter that can overhaul the mind, and clean it fully and perfectly? ? He knows that once his Mind has been rendered pure, he  can make a bid for Mokśa confident of success.  So he prays to Raja Keśidhvajaḥ to tell him all about that “auspicious refuge/asylum which destroys all sins & infirmities”.  Khāṇḍikyaḥ has also realised that the miraculous expedient mentioned by Keśidhvajaḥ can be adopted by any Yogi to clear the path to liberation. That is why he is eager to learn more about it from his former enemy who is perhaps, more spiritually advanced than himself.  Thus,  the context of Ṣlokaḥ  [6/7/46] of the Vishṇu Purāṇa is both thrilling as well as vital for all Yogis.

 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/47]

 

केशिध्वज उवाच

आश्रयश्चेतसो ब्रह्म द्विधा तच्च स्वभावतः ।

भूप! मूर्त्तममूर्त्तञ्च परञ्चापरमेव च ॥ ६-७-४७॥

 

uvāca:

āśrayaś cetaso brahma dvidhā tad ca svabhāvataḥ  ।

bhūpa mūrtam amūrtaṃ ca paraṃ cāparam eva ca  ॥ 6/7/47 ॥

 

 

केशिध्वज keśidhvaja-Raja Keśidhvajaḥ; उवाच uvāca-answered:

आश्रय āśrayaś-the refuge/asylum;  चेतसो cetaso-of the Mind;  ब्रह्म brahma-the Brahman; द्विधा dvidhā-two fold;  तद् tad-that;   च ca-and; स्वभावतः svabhāvataḥ-of its own accord; भूप! bhūpa-O King; मूर्त्तममूर्त्त mūrtam amūrtaṃ-with form and without form; ञ्च परञ्चापरम् ca paraṃ cāparam-as also the primary (highest) and the secondary (not the highest); एव च  eva ca- as well.

 

 

“Raja Keśidhvajaḥ answered:

And that asylum/refuge of the Mind is the Brahman that is two-fold of its own accord, O King! It is with form and without form and it is also one that is the primary (highest) and the other that is secondary (not the highest) as well.” 

॥ 6/7/47 ॥

This Ṣlokaḥ highlights three profound philosophical concepts.  Firstly, that because the Brahman is a refuge of the Mind, it is a spiritual entity and not made up any matter that the Universe as we know is composed of.  Secondly, that the Brahman is both with and without form and each of these are both supreme as well as secondary. Thirdly, the Brahman has adopted, of its own accord, the mystifying dual nature in which contradictory/complementary aspects exist in the Brahman at the same time. 

Keśidhvajaḥ explains that the Brahman is two-fold with regard to two aspects of His own nature.  One is with regard to the form of the Brahman that the Brahman has a form and also does not have a form at the very same time. The other is with regard to which is primary and which is secondary.  Our common-sense thinking tells us that mutually contradictory and mutual exclusive properties cannot exist in the same object or entity at the same time.  Our common-sense way of thinking is not unsound.  It holds good in all cases except that of the Brahman and of the Universe created by the Brahman.  Thus the same person cannot be tall and short or fat and slim or handsome and ugly at the same time.  Yet, duality with regard to certain pairs of opposites in terms of properties confront us when we consider the nature of the Brahman in the macro and micro-scales and when we study the building blocks of the Universe in the micro scale. 

 

As regards the possible form of the Brahman, the phrase मूर्त्तममूर्त्त mūrtam amūrtaṃ mentioned in this Ṣlokaḥ is important. It means “with form-without form” or in other words, the Brahman has a property that is both “manifest and unmanifest” at the same time. This means that the Brahman exhibits a sort of duality in having mutually exclusive properties at the same time. The concept that the Para Brahman can exist with a form and without any form at the same time has been reiterated by the Agni Purana [374(9] as follows:-

विष्णुभक्तः सदोत्साही ध्यातेत्थं पुरुषः स्मृतः ।

मूर्तामूर्त्तं परम्ब्रह्म हरेर्ध्यानं हि चिन्तनम् ॥ ३७४.९ ॥

 

viṣṇubhaktaḥ sadotsāhī dhyātetthaṃ puruṣaḥ smṛtaḥ  ।

mūrtāmūrtaṃ parambrahma harerdhyānaṃ hi cintanam॥ 374/9 ॥

 

 

विष्णुभक्तः viṣṇubhaktaḥ-the devotee of Sri Vishnu; सदोत्साही sadotsāhī-one who is always enthusiastic about meditation; ध्यातेत्थं dhyātetthaṃ-deemed a Meditator; पुरुषः puruṣaḥ-the person; स्मृतः smṛtaḥ-considering or viewing; मूर्तामूर्त्तं mūrtāmūrtaṃ-with form and without form; परम्ब्रह्म parambrahma-the Supreme Being; हरेर्ध्यानं harerdhyānaṃ-thinking of Sri Hari; हि hi-verily; चिन्तनम् cintanam-meditation. 

 

 

“That person is deemed as the Meditator who is a devotee of Vishnu and who is always enthusiastic about meditation upon Sri Hari. When one considers both the manifest and unmanifest forms as being that of the Para Brahman and one  thinks of Sri Hari as being in both (the forms), that would verily be Meditation.” [374(9)]

Let us get back to the Vishṇu Purāṇa Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/47].  In this Ṣlokaḥ, readers familiar with quantum theories of modern physics would recognize the flavour of quantum duality.  In the Introduction to their Paper published by the American Physical Society on 04 Feb 2020, Researchers X.F. Qian and G. S. Agarwal have written as follows, “Wave and particle are two co-existing fundamental aspects of phenomena of every single quantum object (according to L.de Broglie, Waves and Quanta). According to Bohr (Bohr, The Quantum Postulate), the two aspects are contradictory but must be regarded as complementary in the sense that only the totality of them fully characterizes the possible information about the object. On the other hand, a quantum object is obviously also fully characterized by the totality of its various specific physical properties, e.g., position, momentum, spin, coherence, etc.”

It is not within our capacity or scope to discuss the quantum ideas behind modern atomic theories, but we cannot escape a brief discussion of it if only to prepare the ground for a comparison of the Hindu Scriptures  expounding the nature of the Brahman with Modern Quantum Physics trying to make sense of the quantum world of matter. Readers should note that in the above citation in Qian and Agarwal’s Paper of 2020, Niels Bohr has been quoted as having said that “contradictory aspects cannot be ignored and should be regarded as complementary in the sense that only the totality of them fully characterizes the possible information about the object.” This means that for getting the best picture of a reality that poses a challenge to the finest and most sensitive instruments of observation, all the aspects of reality, including paradoxes and dichotomies have to be taken into account, however contradictory they may seem on the face of it. Ideas of quantum physics would not have arisen but for the baffling paradoxes encountered in the quantum world of matter and the need for a starting theory to explain the paradoxes observed.   

 

So it is with the concept of the Brahman in Hindu Philosophy.  The Brahman too cannot be observed directly or indirectly  with instruments or other physical expedients.  The best logic and deductive reasoning are inadequate and unsatisfactory. Mathematics and mathematical reasoning are also not helpful.  The Upaniṣhads declare that even thought is said to return having barely reached the proximity of the Brahman. How then did the Rishis glean any idea of the Brahman under these circumstances?  We will deal with this question shortly.  Remarkably, we see in the Vishnu Purana, the same kind of quantum philosophy propounded thousands of years later by Niels Bohr, one of the most eminent and ground-breaking physicists of the last two centuries. Other eminent scientists have supported the idea of quantum duality by their own observations and explanations.  No doubt, the Vishnu Purana came into being thousands of years before Bohr and the other distinguished Quantum Physicists & Chemists of the last  century. Just like these modern day Scientists, our Ancient Sages thousands of years earlier also struggled to make coherent sense of the complex nature of the Brahman.  Ultimately, they combined many contradictory as well as complementary terms/ideas to explain the nature of the Brahman.  The ideas of duality used by the ancient Sages to explain the nature of the Brahman in their writings as recorded in the Hindu Scriptures, sound so modern and scientific.  They sound similar to the ideas of quantum duality of modern quantum physics generally accepted as a viable reality by most hard-boiled scientists today .

Let me dwell on modern science a bit more as it will be of help us to understand the nature of quantum duality.   In physics and chemistry, the theory of wave-particle duality implies that light and matter exhibit the apparently contradictory properties of both waves and of particles. The idea of duality in reality is a core concept of quantum mechanics.  One has to accept the Philosophical idea that reality is not always cut and dried, clean and ordered, without paradoxes; logically homogenous, and satisfactory all the time.  One has to accept as plausible that what is deemed impossible and implausible under the norms of ordinary, conventional, and apparently rational thinking.  The concept of duality in science addresses the inadequacy of conventional concepts like “particle” and “wave” to meaningfully describe the behaviour of quantum objects. The idea of duality is rooted in a debate over the nature of light and matter dating back to the 1600s, when competing theories of light were proposed by Christiaan Huygens and Isaac Newton.

The work of Albert Einstein, Louis de Broglie and many others, has established that all objects have both wave and particle nature (though this phenomenon is only detectable on small scales, such as the scale of atoms), and that a suitable interpretation of quantum mechanics provides the over-arching theory resolving this clearly evident paradox. In 1905, Albert Einstein first showed that light, until then considered a form of electromagnetic waves, should also be thought of as being a particle, observable as packets of discrete energy. This dual concept was substantiated by the observations made by the by American physicist Arthur Compton in 1922, which could be explained only if light had a wave-particle duality. Louis de Broglie proposed in 1924 that electrons and other discrete bits of matter, which until then had been conceived only as material particles, also have properties associated with waves such as wavelength and frequency.

In my opinion, these eminent scientists were like Hindu Sages who had grappled with the paradoxes of the reality of the Brahman long before them. The paradox of the Brahman has always been more baffling than that of the wave-particle nature of light and matter. The Rishis were up against adverse odds in their search for some meaning in understanding the nature of the Brahman. Does that mean that the Scriptures that accept the dual nature of the Brahman are in error or invalid?  Not at all, for the Brahman cannot be described as such and the best way to get an idea of the nature of the Brahman was to accept duality and dichotomy as part of the picture. There is no definitive description of the Brahman in Hindu Philosophy. If one were to advocate a definitive picture of the Brahman, it would, in the final analysis, be considered as being “not just that, not just that”. That is the wonderful open ended nature of Hindu Philosophy. 

Niels Bohr statement that “a quantum object is obviously also fully characterized by the totality of its various specific physical properties, e.g., position, momentum, spin, coherence, etc.”, has helped mankind think of apparently illogical dualities in certain matters as an existential reality.  He has in general encouraged us to take into account all contradictions without discarding or ignoring any, in order to understand the overall picture correctly. Ancient Sages, attempting to understand the nature of the Brahman, came up against far more formidable conceptual difficulties than the dualities of light and matter. There was no previously available data or even a hypothesis regarding the Brahman’s physical properties. He was beyond the world of matter in the micro and macro scales.  The Sages faced another big hurdle. They found that the human Mind and its mental capabilities in the form of normal consciousness was insufficient to make any headway in building a picture of the nature of the Brahman. The desperate Sages meditated to find another way in sheer desperation.  Eventually, they discovered that there was a state of super-consciousness could be acquired through Yogaḥ that could be used to probe the Brahman.  This they called Samādhī. Impressions of the Brahman received in Samādhiḥ were systematically recorded in various texts principally the Upaniṣhads, Itihāsas and Purāṇa. The Sages discovered that the Brahman was fundamentally beyond all matter and beyond thought.  Luckily the Sages had discovered a means of super-consciousness higher and more powerful than the range and capabilities of normal consciousness and thoughts of the human Mind in embodiment.  From the impressions of the ancient Sages gathered in Samādhiḥ and recorded in the Hindu Scriptures thousands of years ago, it was clear that the Brahman could not be described with any certainty.  So the next best thing was to take into account all the apparently contradictory as well as complementary aspects of the Brahman and to hope for some sort of vision to arise. 

We are not trying to sell aspects of Hindu Philosophy packaged in the apparent respectability of modern science.  The two are quite respectable and effective in their own right. No packaging is needed as such to market either.  Someday, Science and Hindu Philosophy may cooperate in making more headway in explaining the nature of both the Universe and its Creator, namely the Brahman itself.  The lesson from Modern Quantum Mechanics is that Philosophic speculations about the nature of the Brahman have to accept the contradictory aspects of the Brahman as being complementary for building up a cogent Theory of the Nature of the Brahman.  Hindu Philosophy has done just that and propounded its Theory of the Brahman based on this principle. It is a feature of Hindu Philosophy that definitive views are not propounded on any question in the sense that nothing is deemed as being absolutely final.  Everything is open to questioning or revision at any time in eternity.  In general, in all discussions, an open mind is needed that is willing to accommodate dichotomies, to re-examine existing concepts in the light of new ideas or theories that may crop up from time to time as  formulated/proposed by thinkers in the field. That is the reason why Hinduism has no single all powerful Prophet whose words are deemed final, inviolable, and beyond questioning except on pain of torture, maiming or death. 

What is the meaning of the English term asylum which is generally cited as the English equivalent of the Sanskrit term आश्रय āśraya? The Cambridge Dictionary defines asylum as protection or safety, especially that given by a government to people who have been forced to leave their own countries for their safety or because of war.  In this Ṣlokaḥ, the distressed elements seeking a haven are the Jivātman caught up in the painful grind of material existence birth after birth.  The Brahman is this haven or asylum for the sentient beings.  That haven is reached by concentrating the Mind on the Brahman.

The Sanskrit term भावना bhāvanā denotes several deeper aspects apart from  the common connotations that might arise in one’s Mind such as, “fancy, thought, or idea.” The Reader is invited to ponder over the different ramifications of this term we have cited below and to themselves try to select one or more connotations deemed appropriate.  Our aim is to render in English something closest to the the real meanings of this esoteric Ṣlokaḥ. The topic of the previous Ṣlokaḥ was piloting the Mind safely into the haven of the Brahman. It is like saving a ship which is being tossed about in stormy weather and rough seas by guiding it to a safe haven in the form of a sheltered harbour giving protection from the storm.  The Brahman is the safe haven.  The Jivātman is the Captain of the Ship caught in the stormy seas.  The Mind is the Ship that the Jivātman wants to pilot it to safety.  What a wonderful analogy!! In that context, the English connotations of the Sanskrit term भावना bhāvanā, namely “meditation, contemplation, abstract meditation.” would be most appropriate.  

Keśidhvajaḥ introduces the  topic of  Dhyāna or Meditation in this Ṣlokaḥ and in the subsequent Ṣlokaḥ expands upon the categories of beings and the types of meditation associated with them.  This is an eye-opener because when we do meditation we think only of ourselves as human beings focussing our Minds on objects of choice.  But the Universe is full of diverse beings with varying levels of consciousness and intelligence.  It is a revelation that the nature of meditation of different classes of entities differ with regard to the object and modus operandi of meditation. 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/49]

 

 

ब्रह्मभावात्मिका ह्येको कर्म्मभावात्मिका परा ।

उभयात्मिका तथैवान्या त्रिविधा भावभावना ॥ ६-७-४९ ॥

 

brahmabhāvātmikā  hy ekā karmabhāvātmikā parā  ।

ubhayātmikā tathaivānyā trividhā bhāvabhāvanā ॥ 6/7/49 ॥

 

 

ब्रह्मभावात्मिका brahmabhāvātmikā-dhyāna with the characteristics of being centered in the Brahman; हि एका hy ekā- is verily one; कर्म्मभावात्मिका karmabhāvātmikā-dhyāna with the characteristics of being centered in karman; परा parā-is the other; उभयात्मिका ubhayātmikā-dhyāna with the characteristics of both; तथैव tathaiva-is also verily; अन्या anyā-yet another ; त्रिविधा  trividhā-the trio; भावभावना bhāvabhāvanā-categories of dhyāna. 

 

” Dhyāna with the characteristics of being that which is centered in the Brahman is verily one. Dhyāna with the characteristics of that which is centered in karman is the other. Dhyāna with the characteristics of both is also that is verily yet another (type of Dhyāna) thus making up the the trio of the categories of Dhyāna.”  ॥ 6/7/49 ॥

 

Ṣlokaḥ  [6/7/50]

 

सनन्दनादयो ब्रह्मन् ब्रह्मभावनया युताः ।

कर्म्मंभावनया चान्ये देवाद्याः स्थावराश्चराः ।। ६-७-5० ।।

 

sanandanādayo brahmabhāvabhāvanayā yutāḥ      ।

karmabhāvanayā cānye devādyāḥ sthāvarāś carāḥ ॥ 6/7/50 ॥

 

 

सनन्दनादयो sanandanādayo- ; ब्रह्मन् brahman-exalted/perfect Sages; ब्रह्मभावनया brahmabhāvanayā-dhyāna on the Brahman; युताः yutāḥ-endowed/filled with; कर्म्मंभावनया karmabhāvanayā-likewise endowed with dhyāna based on Karman; चान्ये cānye-and others; देवाद्याः devādyāḥ-the Gods and others; स्थावराश् sthāvarāś-stationary, immoveable, inanimate; चराः carāḥ-mobile/walking/animate.

 

” Sanandana (Kumāra, and his brothers) as exalted/perfect Sages were always rooted in the Dhyāna of the Brahman while being united with the Brahman.  Whereas the Gods and others (other semi-divine entities) as well as the  stationary, immoveable, inanimate entities (like the mountains, rocks, trees, stones etc) as well as those that were mobile, and animate (living creatures like animals, insects, birds, etc inclusive of human beings too) all adopted the work-oriented type of Dhyāna wherein consciousness, knowledge and understanding were all rooted in Karman.” ॥ 6/7/50 ॥

This Ṣlokaḥ elaborates upon the first two types of Dhyāna of the Brahman.  With regard to the first category of Dhyāna, it gives the examples of Four Legendary Sages who were the mind born sons of Brahma.  They took vows of brahṃacarya contrary to the desire of Brahma.  Having mastered the Vedaḥ, and received enlightenment, they have been roaming about the Universe since then, always remaining together, having no ostensible purpose other than the good of the Universe.  They are called Kumāras because they have always remained perpetually youthful.  There are many thrilling and inspiring instances in the Scriptures of the Kumāras being warmly welcomed and accorded deep  respect wherever they went in any age or land, in any  assembly whether comprising of Kings or Commoners, Sages or Householders, Scholars or illiterate folks and so on.  Their arrival anywhere at anytime, was invariably heralded as the harbinger of wise counsel and the advent of something for the common good.

They are named Sanaka Kumāra, Sanatana Kumāra, Sanandana Kumāra and Sanat Kumāra. Of the four, the name of Sanandana Kumāra has been mentioned in this Ṣlokaḥ as representative of the band of four kids who are not only highly esteemed Sages but inseparable brothers. One should consider the Kumāras as the force of the Universe designed to balance good and evil, and brought into existence by the Brahman out of his compassion for all living entities caught in the web of worldly existence.  If we take the Kumāras as merely a myth, we may miss the wonderful force of thoughts and wisdom they have often given to mankind.  A certain amount of faith or pretence in the reality of their existence would help greatly to feel their power for the good. In mentioning Rishi Sanandana Kumāra (and his brothers), the Ṣlokaḥ gives an example of the practitioners of the rarest of the rare type of Dhyāna which is not within the purview of even the Gods let alone mortals and lesser living beings, who are involved in Karman all the time.

We can infer from this Ṣlokaḥ that pure contemplation on the Brahman is most difficult and found only in the highest souls/minds.  Its practitioners are the rarest of the rare.  Those who are engaged in pure contemplation of the Brahman are placed even above the Gods. It is known that the exalted/perfect Sages like Sanandana and the others (his other three brothers) were always rooted in the Dhyāna of the Brahman while remaining united with the Brahman.  The concept of brahmabhāvātmikā-dhyāna is philosophically in agreement with the highest point of Vedanta, which is the Brahman.  In a System of Philosophy, wherein the main goal of existence is the attainment of the Brahman, wherein sentient entities are exhorted to work towards this main goal of existence, wherein Brahman is the lighthouse towards which all ships in the stormy seas of samsaara try to navigate as a safe haven or harbour, it is not surprising that some exalted sentient entities should perform pure and exclusive Dhyāna on the Brahman even as they happen to be rooted in the Brahman. This is the highest mental state in which there is no action whatsoever except that of being rooted in the Brahman. This is an ideal state to aim for if it lies within our capability.

But the Universe has been largely created for action and not inaction.  The purpose of the Universe is not the attainment of pure knowledge clothed in the nebulous dress of complete inaction. The Ṣlokaḥ goes onto give us some insights into the second type of Dhyāna on the Brahman flowing out Karman as the fountainhead.  It says that the Gods and others (other semi-divine entities) as well as the stationary, immoveable, inanimate entities (like the mountains, rocks, stones etc.) as well as those that are mobile, and animate (including living creatures like animals, insects, birds, etc and human beings too)  all adopt Dhyāna based on actions  wherein consciousness, knowledge and understanding are all rooted in Karman.

This Ṣlokaḥ clubs a wide range of created beings/entities who perform Dhyāna based on actions emanating out consciousness, knowledge and understanding all rooted in Karman into one category. These include the Gods, Semi-Divine Entities, as well as those that are mobile, and animate (including living creatures like animals, insects, birds, etc and human beings too);  as also entities that are stationary, immoveable, inanimate, and inert (like the mountains, rocks, stones, etc.).  

Todi Ragini, Rajasthani, About 1760

They are all said to adopt the Dhyāna or mode of meditation upon the Brahman based on actions wherein consciousness, knowledge and understanding are directly rooted in Karman.  This is understandable because the Universe has been created by the Brahman for all entities to for something through Karman and work their way through countless embodiments towards the chief goal of embodiment.  The Universe and embodiment is a real obstacle course to be navigated with real action, grit, and determination.  The Universe is not an illusory   creation or a virtual computer game where inaction and abstraction are the main skills needed for the pursuit of any goal while remaining action free.  

It is therefore not surprising that a vast majority of sentient beings in the Universe should adopt the Dhyāna of the Brahman flowing out of Karman. No entity in such a Universe can remain totally free of Karman. Another breath-taking feature of this  Ṣlokaḥ is that it declares that not only the Gods and the Demi-Gods but all human beings, all animals, insects, birds, as well as all apparently immobile and inert geographical features form part of one family of meditators.  That means Man is not unique as one endowed with consciousness or exclusively privileged as having the capability to direct thoughts towards the Brahman. The rest of our ecology and all our Deities are part of the same family as us. It is a sobering thought for men who regard the human species with unwarranted pride.  Therefore any arrogance or disdain towards animal life as well as towards the inanimate resources of the Earth is unacceptable.

A Study of a Cheetah
Shaikh Zain Ud-Din, late 18th Century

Women encircling trees to prevent them from being cut down by loggers. The scene is from a village in 1973 India. Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

It follows from this profound realisation that before we cause pain and distress to animals and birds, we have to think twice since all the non-human living beings without exception belong to the same family as us. Can we show contempt towards a member of our own family?  Can we cause pain to anyone who is part of our own family?  Can we exploit our own family for our own selfish ends? That respect and concern has to extend to what we assume to be inanimate or inert entities of creation.  Before we pollute a river or a lake or misuse a natural resource like a mountain, a hill, a stretch of beach, a forest, a well or tank or a river or ocean or an ocean beach to cite some examples, we have to think ten times.  

The clear Message of the Viśnu Purāṇa is that Mankind is answerable for any atrocity or insult committed by Man against any fellow member of his own family. Love for the ecology need not be altruistic because our survival depends upon its protection and preservation.  Concern for the ecology has to be an article of faith in all Mankind all over the Planet. We are all like Gods not in the sense of divine powers or attributes but in that we are all subject to the effects of our Karman. 

 

What is the deeper implication the Ṣlokaḥ statement that every Member of this huge family of created beings such as Gods, Demi-Gods, and all of animate and inanimate, mobile and stationery sentient or inert entities in the Universe perform karmabhāvanayā i.e. meditation upon the Brahman with their consciousness based on Karman?  It must mean that all members of this group of Meditators have a form of consciousness and intelligence, however rudimentary, to be able to meditate upon the Brahman.  That also implies having some ability that enables directing the consciousness or intelligence towards the Brahman and placing it in that abode. The idea advocated by the Viśnu Purāṇa that inanimate and inert objects of creation could have intelligence may sound like science fiction but recent research supports the concept of intelligence in apparently non-living entities.

The idea propounded by the Viśnu Purāṇa in this Ṣlokaḥ that even apparently inanimate/inert entities perform Meditation upon the Brahman of the Second Category implies the presence of consciousness or intelligence in objects we have regarded for thousands of years as inert, unconsciousness, and totally without life.  It may appear astounding and untenable. However, according to Lei Chen and Yan Liang (Beauty of Science.com), Caltech, research trends show that ,for the first time, bacteria have been observed to create organo-silicon compounds. This is not altogether unexpected because Researchers have been speculating in recent times that alien life could have a completely different chemical basis compared to normal life on Earth. For example, instead of using on water as the solvent for biological molecules to thrive and operate, s alien life-forms might depend on ammonia or methane. And instead of relying on carbon to create the molecules of life, they could use silicon.  This is just a conjecture but one that is now not deemed impossible or a figment of science fiction. So it should not be totally surprising that rocks, rivers, lakes could have a form of life and intelligence. Someday, science may  substantiate the Viśnu Purāṇa’s concept of forms of life other than the  conventional carbon-based living and intelligent entities, we are used to.  Why not?  How long can we hold the belief that we can safely ignore, discredit, and exploit the apparently inanimate entities of our Planet?  How long can we continue to refuse to admit or recognise the role that they must surely be playing in maintaining life on this Planet?  How long can we continue to treat inert and inanimate entities of our Planet as inferior to living entities?

A Blackburnian Warbler
watercolor on paper by my granddaughter Aranya

The lesson from this magnificent Ṣlokaḥ for all human beings is simple. It is that “If you value your own well-being and that of the generations to come, show deep and abiding respect for all life as well as all inert or inanimate creations whatsoever. Do not exploit or misuse any single item of creation of the Brahman.  They all meditate upon the same Brahman even as mankind does.  They all have a vital role to play in the general good and well-being of our Planet.”

Sanskrit Words:

 

  1. युत yuta [AGK 3,27/1] 1. united or joined with.  2. provided or endowed with.  3. fastened to.  4, filled or covered with.

2.स्थावर [AGK 3,430/1]  1.Fixed to one spot, stable, stationary, immoveable, inanimate.  2. inert, inactive, slow.  3. a mountain.  4. Any stationary or inanimate object (such as clay, stones, trees etc which formed the seventh creation of Brahman.

  1. चर cara [AGK 2,71/2] 1. moving, walking, grazing. 2. shaking, moveable, animate.

 

 

 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/51]

 

हिरण्यगर्भादिषु च ब्रह्मकर्म्मात्मिका द्रिधा ।

बोधाधिकारयुक्तेष विद्यते भावभावना ॥ ६-७-५१ ॥

 

hiraṇyagarbhādiṣu ca brahmakarmātmikā dvidhā ।

bodhākārayukteṣu vidyate bhāvabhāvanā  ॥ 6/7/51 ॥ 

हिरण्यगर्भादिषु hiraṇyagarbhādiṣu-the third form of contemplation upon the Brahman (referred to as ‘ubhayātmikā’ in Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/49]) and such like of the same category of meditation; च ca-and;  ब्रह्मकर्म्मात्मिका brahmakarmātmikā- is a combination of Brahman & Karman contemplation; द्विधा dvidhā-done in dual mode; बोधाधिकारयुक्तेष  bodhākārayukteṣu-consciousness or intelligence combined or coexisting with the authority to act/perform Karman as required; विद्यते vidyate-subsisting therein; भावभावना bhāvabhāvanā-Dhyāna or Contemplation or Abstract Meditation.

 

“‘Hiraṇyagarbha’ (the nomenclature of the third category of Dhyāna or contemplation upon the Brahman referred to as ‘ubhayātmikā’ in Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/49]) used here denotes pure contemplation  on the Brahman with Brahman as the basis of consciousness combined with contemplation on the Brahman with Karman as the basis of consciousness).  Such types of Meditation are dual in nature involving pure contemplation on the Brahman based only on the Brahman combined with  contemplation of the Brahman based on Karman.  This type of Dhyāna or Contemplation involves consciousness or intelligence combined or co-existing with the authority to act/perform Karman as required subsisting therein.” ॥ 6/7/51॥ 

The Sanskrit term हिरण्यगर्भः Hiraṇyagarbha means the ‘golden womb’ or ‘golden egg’. The symbol is appropriate because from the womb or the egg emerges new life.  The Universe is believed to have emerged from the that womb of life called the Hiraṇyagarbha. It is the source of the creation of Universe or the manifested cosmos in Vedic philosophy, as well as an avatar of Vishnu as per the Bhagavata Purāṇa.  The term also refers to Lord Brahma assigned to oversee the process of Creation.

Why has the third category of Dhyāna called ‘ubhayātmikā’ in Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/49], been named after Brahma the Creator in the current Ṣlokaḥ?  After all  Brahma is not the Brahman.  Brahma creates everything on the orders of the Brahman and by the powers vested in him by the Brahman.  Some Western scholars/writers are prone to treating the two as being the same because of the similarity in spelling and pronunciation. It would be serious error in Vedic Philosophy to equate the two.  The following extract from the Vedartha Sangraha by M.R.Rajagopala Ayyangar, Jan 1956, Cauvery Colour Press, Kumbakonam p.166. gives us a clear insight into why the combination of Brahma and Karma Bhāvanā has been named after  Hiraṇyagarbha or Lord Brahma who is traditionally assigned the task of supervising the process of Creation after every dissolution:-  

“That Brahma and others are Jivās may be determined also from the Vishṇu Purāṇa, where it is explained that they cannot be sacred objects of meditation (subhāśraya) owing to their association with the three kinds of mental effort (bhāvana).

Note:

 

(1) The mental effort for performing Karman capable of securing objects of pleasure is called Karman Bhāvana.

(2) The mental effort to perform the adoration of the Supreme is called Brahman Bhāvana and

(3) the mental effort required to perform both the above is called ‘Ubhaya Bhāvana’.

 

Lord Brahma has Dual-Bhāvana which is the third category of Bhāvana mentioned. In creation, he has Karman Bhāvana. At other times, he has Brahman Bhāvana.  Some (entities) have only Karman Bhāvana like most of us mortals. Great Seers like Sanaka and Sanandana have only Brahman Bhāvana.”

We know from the Scriptures, that God Brahma has to deeply meditate upon the Brahman to get the know-how and the power to create the Universe once again after dissolution. When Brahma does that it would God Brahma engrossed in “Brahman Bhāvana”.  Once creation has been put in place, Brahma has varied karmas to perform with regard to the operational aspects of the Universe. For knowledge, guidance, and direction, Brahma meditates upon the Brahman in the Karman Bhāvana mode. So much for the third category of Meditation named Hiraṇyagarbha, which is a combination of the first two. 

The Second Category of Dhyāna i.e. Dhyāna upon the Brahman with the consciousness based on Karman applies to most of the Universe including the Gods.  This is because to be born in the Universe is to perform some action or the other all the time.  A Universe meant for absolute inaction is not logical.  Creation and absolute inaction are a contradiction in terms.  To exist is to act all the time. In any case, in Hindu Philosophy the State of Kaivalya is already there to cater for perpetual being/existence  without action or interaction for those inclined that way. Karman is the third operating energy of the Universe.  The question for most of Creation is not how to avoid Karman but how to make best use of it to secure the highest goal of life.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/52]

अक्षीणेषु समस्तेषु विशेषज्ञानकर्म्मसु ।

विश्वमेतत् परं चान्यद् भेदबिन्नदृशां नृप  ॥ ६-७-५२ ॥

 

akṣīṇeṣu samasteṣu viśeṣajñānakarmasu  ।

viśvam etat paraṃ cānyad bhedabhinnadṛśāṃ nṛpa  ॥ 6/7/52 ॥

 

अक्षीणेषु akṣīṇeṣu-until there still remains in operation the residual power or potency to dominate; समस्तेषु samasteṣu-of all; विशेषज्ञानकर्म्मसु viśeṣajñānakarmasu- the knowledge/ perceptions generated by Karman; विश्वमेतत् viśvam etat- in this Universe; परं paraṃ-the highest, namely the Brahman; च ca-and; अन्याद् anyad-from everything else; भेदबिन्नदृशां bhedabhinnadṛśāṃ-the vision of difference and separation; नृप nṛpa- O King.

Sanskrit Words:

  1. क्षीण [AGK 1,637/1] 1. emaciated, waned, diminished, worn away.  2. wasted away, drastically reduced, decreased.

“Until the residual power or potency to dominate inherent in all the knowledge/perceptions generated by Karman remains undiminished or not drastically reduced, one will continue to have the vision that this Universe is   different and apart from the highest, namely the Brahman. O King.” ॥ 6/7/52 ॥

This Ṣlokaḥ suggests that one would continue to see the Universe as being different from the Brahman so long as the residual power or potency inherent in all the knowledge/perceptions generated by Karman remained  undiminished or not drastically reduced.  The implication is that once the effects of Karman have been completely neutralised,  one would behold that this Universe and all its sentient/insentient entities are not-different from the Brahman.  Non-difference cannot be taken to mean that the Universe of Cit and Acit entities are exactly the same as the Brahman. If that were to be so, it would mean that for some baffling or inexplicable reason, the Brahman has made  crores of different entities in our Universe, large or small, masquerade as Himself.  It would seem that this illusion has been designed to persist on such a massive scale that only those sentient entities who throw off the effects of Karman eventually would  discover that they have been the Brahman all the time.

It would appear that the pay-off of the highest wisdom is the realisation of absolute identity with the Brahman.  The Brahman and the Sentient Beings share some incredible properties. Both are eternal, unborn, and unchanging. The Brahman and the Jivaatman in Hindu Philosophy are both made up of the same stuff beyond any type of matter we know or can speculate about. Hindu Philosophy Texts describe both the Paramātman   and the Jivātman  as ‘sentient’ entities.  The nature of both is knowledge and bliss but as sentient entities they are more than mere knowledge as such.  They are actually  the knowers of data who can understand and make sense of it unlike ‘pure data’ which can only convey something without being able to either interpret it or cognize what it means.  Knowledge is organised data.  It is not the ‘knower. 

 

Another feature to be noted is that both, the Brahman and the Jivātman can reach out to any part of the Universe and to know everything there is to be known. When associated with Matter, the range of consciousness of the Jivātman is severely attenuated whereas no attribute of the Brahman is affected in the slightest degree from its infinitely superior level in any state or condition. It may be noted that though the two may be alike in certain common features, the Paramātman or the Brahman and the Jivātman  or the individual Soul are not the same because there are countless attributes of the Brahman that are infinite in range and degree that a Jivātman simply lacks. Both are uncreated, existing perpetually from the beginning of Time. They are both indestructible. Other than that the Brahman has innumerable auspicious attributes to an infinite degree that the Jivātman simply lacks.  The two can never e identical in all respects.

If one were to be identical with the Brahman all the time, it would mean that Sri Krishna has imparted the tenets of the Gita on the Battlefield to Himself or that the Gopi in Brindavan have languished all their love and adoration onto themselves.  The notion that when one is praying to Sri Krishna as the Brahman, one is actually praying to oneself as the exact copy of the Brahman is also unacceptable to Devotees.  It is a concept that undermines Theism and is more in line with the abstract and Godless notions of Buddhism.

Another problem with the idea that we were all to be identical with the Brahman, the effects of the Guṇā and Karman due to contact with Prakṛti which affects embodied beings so severely, would also affect the Brahman. Such an assumption would be unacceptable on any grounds in Vedanta Philosophy. The Scriptures are clear that the Brahman is above the effects of the Gunaas and the taint of Karman.

 

Therefore, we have to conclude that what this Ṣlokaḥ actually implies when it suggests that when all the effects of Karman have been eradicated,  one will behold non-difference between the Brahman and the rest of the Universe is not the realisation of absolute identity with the Brahman but the realisation of the following Vedantic Truths:-

  1. That the Brahman dwells in every entity in the state of creation and  embodiment as the in-dweller and inner-controller.

 

  1. That in the state of dissolution, the Universe and all its constituent entities go back to the Brahman and dwell in the Brahman as part of His Body while awaiting the next cycle of creation.

 

  1. That the Universe is real and that the object of creation of the Universe is twofold: (1) to provide a ground for experiencing the wonders of the Universe and (2) to provide a level-testing field for all Jivātman to work hard and qualify for emancipation. Emancipation is freedom from recurring bondage in countless embodiments and the attainment of the state of Kaivalya or the Bliss of Brahman Himself and not the realisation of absolute identity with the Brahman. Substitution of ‘the Bliss of the Brahman” as the end-goal with “Realisation of Absolute Identity”, gives a dry, abstract, and devotionally insipid satisfaction probably suited to agnostics and other abstract thinkers.

 

  1. That the Jivātman or sentient entities are not the same as the body they happen to occupy in any given birth. That every Jivātman has certain characteristics in common with the one and only Brahman. This realisation is heartening and inspiring in the sense that it confirms the Jivātman’s divine, sentient, and non-material nature. Thus, if the  Jivātman understands its own high pedigree and its clear  difference from  Prakṛti, it need not despair of attaining emancipation.

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/53]

प्रत्यस्तमितभेदं यत् सत्तामात्रमगोचरम् ।

वचसामात्मसंवेद्य तजूज्ञानं ब्रह्मसंज्ञितम् ।। ६-७-५३ ।।

 

pratyastamitabhedaṃ yat sattāmātram agocaram ।

vacasām ātmasaṃvedyaṃ taj jñānaṃ brahmasaṃjñitam ॥ 6/7/53॥

 

प्रत्यस्तमितभेदं pratyastamitabhedaṃ-(that consciousness in which) all notions of differences given up thus; यत् yat-that in which; सत्तामात्रम existence alone (abides in the consciousness); अगोचरम् agocaram-that which is not within the range; वचसामा vacasām-of speech or that which is indescribable by speech; आत्मसंवेद्य -that which can be only experienced by the ātman; तजूज्ञानं taj jñānaṃ-that consciousness; ब्रह्मसंज्ञितम् brahmasaṃjñitam-is known as the cognition of the Brahman.

 

Sanskrit Words:

  1. प्रत्यस्तम् pratyastam[MW 676/2] thrown down, laid low thrown off, given up
  2. सत्ताम sattām/सत्ता [AGK 3,323/2] 1. existence, entity, being. 2. The highest jati (genus).  3. goodness, excellence.
  3. अगोचरम् agocara/अगोचर agocara: [MW 5/1], 1. not within range.  2. unattainable, inaccessible.  3. imperceptible by the senses.  4. anything that is beyond the cognizance of the senses.  5. Brahma, one not being seen, absence.  6. out of the sight of any one (gen.), behind one’s back.

 

“(That consciousness in which) all notions of differences have been given up thus; that (consciousness) in which existence alone (abides); that (consciousness which endeavours) to cognize) that which is not within the range of speech or which is indescribable by speech but which can only be  experienced by the ātman; such consciousness is to be known as the cognition of the Brahman.” ॥ 6/7/53॥

This Ṣlokaḥ makes the profound point that “the Brahman is not within the range of Speech being indescribable by speech (words).  The Brahman can only be  experienced by the ātman.”  The Brahman is also said to be beyond the range of the Mind as the Mind and the thoughts return from the vicinity of the Brahman without any idea of the Brahman.

One will never be able to to physically behold the form of the Brahman or the Jivātman with the eyes of the flesh even as one sees and cognizes a person or any other object in real life. The Paramātman  has no fixed size ranging, as it does, from the sub-atomic to the infinite.  It has also no cognizable shape or colour.  The Jivātman also is of sub-atomic size with no tangible features which can be correlated with anything in the physical or material world as we know. In either case, both cannot be seen or beheld by the eyes of the flesh and its associated mechanism by which the eyes register light and transmit sensory date to our Brains for processing and presenting us with an image that is familiar or comparable.  The Brahman has no form and so the Brain has no comparable image in our brains with which to match the sensory inputs of the eyes.

There is unanimity amongst Hindu Philosophers that the Brahman is beyond human understanding.  This is supported by the Upaniṣhads such as the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣhad [3.4.2], Mundaka [3.1.8]. The Katha[6.12] says: “That (Atman) can never be reached by Speech, nor by the Eyes, nor even by the Mind. How can it be realized otherwise than from those who say that it exists?”  This gives us the hope that we can learn something about the Bahman under a Guru or from the  Sages and and realized Souls and their teachings recorded in the Upaniṣhads and Scriptures. The Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣhad [4/20] says: “His form does not stand within the range of the Senses. No one perceives Him with the Eye. Those who know Him through the faculty of intuition as thus seated in their heart, become immortal” The Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣhad tells us in this Ṣlokaḥ that the Brahman cannot be apprehended by the ordinary means of perception such as the Eyes and the Mind.  The term ‘intuition’ denotes a super-sensuous means of perception also called as super-consciousness  developed in the state of intense loving meditation or in deep Samādhiḥ. The Shrutis like the Vedaḥ, and the Upaniṣhad were received by our ancient Sages in states of super-consciousness normally found in deep  Dhyāna or in the final stage of the Aṣṭāṅga Yogaḥ called Samādhiḥ.

What does this Ṣlokaḥ mean when it says, “but which can only be  experienced by the ātman” referring to the knowledge of the Brahman?  How does the Jivātman experience anything at all?  We have to turn to the  Viṣiṣtādvaita Theory of Consciousness as it is  helpful in understanding how the Brahman may be experienced  when it is beyond the range of the human Mind and all its sense organs. 

We must begin with the fact that in all of the Multiverses imaginable, the Brahman and the Jivātman are the only two entities not made up of any building block of Prakṛti or Matter.  Naturally, for one spiritual entity such as the Jivātman to cognize itself and to cognize another such as the Paramātman , the power of consciousness has to be entirely spiritual or non-material. Such a purely spiritual form of consciousness used by the Jivātman is called svarūpajñyāna  or essential  consciousness.  It is of the very essence of the Jivātman.  It  is  pure  subjective  consciousness being both self-luminous and self-conscious. For better understanding, we may look upon this type of consciousness as the one used by the Jivātman in the inward direction.  It enables the Self to look inwards to know itself and to be aware of itself. This purely spiritual form of consciousness can help the Self to cognize the Brahman, otherwise outside the pale of the powers of information gathering/cognition capabilities possessed by the Mind and the Sense Organs of Prakṛti.

But there is another worldly requirement of  the Self, which involves information-gathering.  In embodiment, the Self has deal with the world and perform all sorts of karman.  The Self has to cognize objects in the external material world outside of itself extending from its immediate proximity to everything in the material Universe. In effect, because a wholly spiritual entity has to reach out to a wholly material world to cognize material objects/entities therein, the Self cannot use the first type of purely spiritual form of consciousness which is its svarūpajñyāna or its essential consciousness. It needs another type of consciousness that can act as an intermediatory between the spiritual and material worlds. Such a type of consciousness is posited to be of neither material nor spiritual nature.  It is termed ‘अजड ajaḍa’ or that which is not senseless, not stupid, not irrational or apathetic. This term has been used to give the sense that while something deemed  ajaḍa is not of a sentient/spiritual nature, it is also not inert or senseless or dull or unreactive to stimuli like inert material objects of Prakṛti. Such a type of consciousness used by the Jivātman for reaching out to the external material world has been given the technical name of Dharmabhūtajñyāna or attributive  consciousness in Viṣiṣtādvaita.

Dharmabhūtajñyāna should be viewed  is  being both  a  substance  as  well  as  its inseparable attribute.  It  is self-luminous  but  not  self-conscious.  It  is like  a  lamp which  can illuminate and show up both  itself  and  its  object  but  it cannot know either itself or its object of illumination.  We may also look upon Dharmabhūtajñyāna or attributive  consciousness as being the type of consciousness vectored outwards to reach out into the material world.  It is this form of consciousness that acts as the interface between the spiritual knower and the material data fed to it by the Mind-Body-Sense Organs System of material nature.  In the pristine state, the Dharmabhūtajñyāna of the Self is unlimited in range and comprehension.  In embodiment, due to intimate contact with Prakṛti it is severely attenuated in different Selves according to their Karman and state of knowledge.

The two types of human consciousness namely the essential and the attributive types of consciousness posited in the Viṣiṣtādvaita Theory of Consciousness represent a major breakthrough made by Rāmānujacāryā in understanding the most mysterious and difficult to comprehend nature of human consciousness.  When the Jivātman introspects upon itself, it is in effect using its inward power of consciousness to know more about itself.  As the Jivātman continues to probe itself deeper,  it comes to know that it is but the sole sentient being or the knower within the body; that it is the Master of the Body for whose benefit the Body-Mind Complex have been programmed by the Brahman to incessantly gather and feed sensory data for experiencing the material Universe. Probing further and further at deeper and deeper levels of inward-introspection, the Jivātman comes to know that there is a Super-Self dwelling within its own Self who is the Inner Controller of every cit and acit entity in the Universe without exception.  Thereafter, it would be a matter of time, before the lucky Jivātman puts two and two together and recognises that the Super-Self dwelling within itself is the very Brahman the Sages, the Scriptures, and Gurus have been speaking about for thousands of years about.

Ṣlokaḥ  [6/7/54]

 

तच्च विष्णोः परं रूपमरूपाख्यमनुत्तमम् ।

विश्वस्वरूपवैरूप्यलक्षणं परमात्मनः  ॥ ६-७-५४ ॥

 

tac ca viṣṇoḥ paraṃ rūpam rūpākhyam unattmam   ।

viśvasvarūpavairūpyalakṣaṇaṃ paramātmanaḥ   ॥ 6/7/54॥

 

 

तच्च tacca-and that; विष्णोः viṣṇoḥ-of Viṣṇu; परं paraṃ-the highest; रूपं rūpam-form; अरूप्स्य arūpasya-that form which is without any definable form as it were; अजं ajam-that is unborn; अक्षरं akṣaram-that is imperishable; विश्वस्वरूप वै viśvasvarūpa vai-that form which encompasses the Universe indeed is verily/truly; रूप्यलक्षणं- the distinctive/characteristic form; परमात्मनः paramātmanaḥ-indicative of the Supreme Being (the Brahman).

 

“And that form of Shri Viṣṇu, the most supreme form that is  devoid of form as it were; that form which  is unborn and imperishable; that form which  encompasses all the Universes indeed is verily/truly the distinctive/characteristic form indicative of the Supreme Being (the Brahman).” ॥ 6/7/54॥

Recollect that in Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/47], speaking about the nature of the refuge of the Mind called the Brahman, Keśidhvajaḥ had told Khāṇḍikyaḥ   that apprehension of the form of the Brahman presented difficulties associated with quantum duality of the kind Man faces in understanding the nature of the sub-atomic world of Matter. He had said that the form of the Brahman was, “mūrtam amūrtaṃ-with form and without form; ca paraṃ cāparam eva ca-and also the highest (primary) and not the highest (secondary); एव च  eva ca-as well.”  These mutually exclusive characteristics are said to be present in the Brahman at the same time.  The best example of quantum duality in the physical world is that of light behaving both as a wave and as a particle at the same time.

 

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/54] elaborates further on the form of the Brahman.  It says therein that the most supreme form of the Brahman that is  devoid of form as it were; that form which  is unborn and imperishable; and that form of the Brahman which encompasses everything there is; is the best estimate/definition of the form of the Brahman. It should not be surprising that the Ṣlokaḥ is forced to use  dichotomy to give us a best description of the Brahman.  Well that is how the Sages divined the Brahman as an experience in Samādhiḥ.  It is indeed the best idea we can have of a most esoteric force in the Universe.

Sanskrit Words:

 

  1. लक्षणं lakṣaṇaṃ [AGK 3, 64/2] 1. A mark, token, sign, indication, characteristic, distinctive mark. 2. An attribute, a quality.  3. A definition, accurate description.  4. Excellence, merit, good quality.

Ṣlokaḥ  [6/7/55]

न तद्योगयुजा शक्यं नृप! चिन्तयितुं यतः ।

तमः स्थूलं हरे रूपं चिन्तियेद् विश्वगोचरम् ॥ ६-७-५५ ॥

 

na tad Yogaḥyujā śakyaṃ nṛpa cintayituṃ yataḥ ।

tataḥ sthūlaṃ hare rūpaṃ cintayed viśvagocaram  ॥ 6/7/55 ॥

 

न na-it is not; तद् that (referring to the highest form of the Brahman beyond perception); योगयुजा Yogaḥyujā-the one yoked to or absorbed deeply in Yogaḥ; शक्यं śakyaṃ-feasible; नृप! nṛpa-O King!; चिन्तयितुं cintayituṃ-to behold/to think of; यतः yataḥ-for the striver who is an ascetic and devotee; तमः tamaḥ-who is also in  mental perplexity with no knowledge at all (of how to guide the Mind into the safe haven of the Brahman); स्थूलं sthūlaṃ-the form that is not subtle but gross/large/thick; हरे रूपं hare rūpaṃ- is the form of Shri Hari; चिन्तियेद् cintayed- to be thought of or contemplate upon; विश्वगोचरम् viśvagocaram-which is within the range of perception.

 

Sanskrit Words:

  1. युजा yujā [AGK 3, 26/2] 1. joined, united, yoked to 2. furnished, filled with. 3. A Sage devoted to abstract meditation.
  2. यतः yataḥ [MW 841/1] 1.a striver,an ascetic, devotee, one who has restrained his passions and abandoned the world.
  3. तमः tamaḥ [MW 438/1] mental perplexity, situated in darkness or having complete lack of any knowledge.
  4. गोचरम् gocaram [MW 382/1] 1. coming within the range of ; गोचर gocara [AGK 2, 45/1] 1.within the range of the organs of sense, an object of sense. 2. श्रवण गोचर तिष्ट  be within ear-shot.  3. नयनगोचरे  to become visible.  4. scope, range, in general.

“O King! It is not feasible to behold that (highest and most subtle/incomprehensible form of the Brahman) for the one striving who is an ascetic and a devotee yoked to Yogaḥ or absorbed deeply in Yogaḥ; who is in mental perplexity because of having  no knowledge at all (of how to guide the Mind into the safe haven of the Brahman), who should instead contemplate upon the not subtle but gross/large form of Sri Hari which is within the range of perception.” ।। 6/7/55 ।।

Ṣlokaḥ [6/7/55] tells us that there is this dual concept of the form of the Brahman.  One is the form that is said to be subtle, incomprehensible and termed अगोचर  agocara or outside the pale of all perception as in Ṣlokaḥ  ॥ 6/7/53॥.  The other is the gross, concrete, and the vast Universal form that is accessible to perception provided one has been given the divine eyes as Arjuna was in the Gita. This has been termed as the विश्वगोचरम् viśvagocaram-which is the Universal Form within the range of perception. The former अगोचर  agocara form, which is that  incomprehensible form that the Upaniṣhads describe as the one from which thought returns. Does that mean that the Brahman cannot be comprehended by the Mind.  It does. Then does it further imply that the Brahman can never be comprehended under all circumstances? No it does not.  Sages & Seers have comprehended the Brahman and they have said so in their teachings and writings.  But they have not used the apparatus of the human Mind and the Senses that are the legacy of Prakriti.  The Brahman is entirely spiritual and can be comprehended only by means of cognition that is completely spiritual.  In other words, the Brahman can be cognised as an experience by the  Ātman only by using  its  special, essential and entirely spiritual form of  consciousness called ‘svarūpajñyāna’ as mentioned in Ṣlokaḥ ॥ 6/7/53॥.  But that is very difficult and even for those who are striving  who are ascetics yoked to Yogaḥ, who are also devotees, and in full control of the body, Mind and the senses.  Even to such people, success will not come at first.

That is why the Ṣlokaḥ  advocates that the gross form of the Lord should first be meditated upon rather than subtle and incomprehensible form.  But how can that be when to behold even the gross form of Sri Hari one has to be granted divine eyes?  Recall that Arjuna had to be granted the Divine eyes to behold the World Encompassing Form of Sri Krishna as a pictorial entity on front of his own eyes. But here the Ṣlokaḥ does not want to help the Yogi obtain the sight of the Brahman as a usual pictorial or physical image of objects akin to what our human eyes commonly behold.  It is not trying to help the Yogi  see the Brahman but to experience it  within the Yogi’s own Ātman. No eyes are need for that except for intense and continuous meditation uninterrupted like a steam of oil being poured out from a large can. If that were to be done with intense loving devotion for a sufficiently long period of time by a Yogi who has previously purified his Mind and Body, and brought them under his full control.

Then the Grace of the Brahman might be invoked resulting in the grant of that highly sought and precious experience of the Brahman. The same procedure would apply to the case of a Yogi seeking to experience his own Self instead of the Highest Self.  We can only say that ‘experiencing’ something is quite different on all counts from seeing something physically as though seeing it before the eyes. We cannot dissect and explain it further.

Background: This watercolour is part of the personal sketchbook of John Johnson, an officer in the Bombay Engineers. The redcoat in the foreground is believed to be Johnson himself, drawing the waterfall near Haliyal in south-west India (the inscription below the view reads: ‘Waterfall in Soonda of the Purwar River, about 4 miles S. W. of Hullyhall taken in the dryest season.

Leave a Reply

Made with ❤

Designed by Munnitin-FB and Tata Hugger Productions

 

for happiness, zest, efficiency and good cheer in good heart

Copyright 2021 – Sūtrajālam.com, All rights reserved.