Ánanda Márga: Elementary Philosophy

Shrii Shrii Anandamurtijii

Contents:

1	What Is Dharma?
2	What Is the Cosmic Entity?
3	What Is This World?
4	Who Am I and What Am I?
5	What Is My Relation with the Universe and the Cosmic Entity?
6	How Should Human Beings Live In This World?
7	What Is the Aim of Humanity?
8	Intuitional Practice and Its Necessity
9	Why Are People Afraid of Intuitional Practice?

What Is Dharma?

Human beings are the highest-evolved beings. They possess clearly-reflected consciousness, and this makes them superior to animals. No other being has such a clear reflection of consciousness. Human beings can distinguish between good and bad with the help of their consciousness, and when in trouble they can find a way out, with its help. No one likes to live in misery and suffering, far less human beings, whose consciousness can find means of relief. Life without sorrow and suffering is a life of happiness and bliss, and that is what people desire. Everyone is in quest of happiness; in fact it is people’s nature to seek happiness. Now let us see what one does to achieve it and whether it is achieved by those means.

In their search for happiness people are first attracted towards physical enjoyments. They amass wealth and try to achieve power and position to satisfy their desires for happiness. One who has a hundred rupees is not satisfied with it, one strives for a thousand rupees, but even possessing thousands of rupees does not satisfy. One wants a million, and so on. Then it is seen that a person having influence in a district wants to extend it over a province, provincial leaders want to become national leaders, and when they have achieved that there creeps in a desire for world leadership. Mere acquisition of wealth, power and position does not satisfy a person. The acquisition of something limited only creates the want for more, and the quest for happiness finds no end. The hunger for possessing is unending. It is limitless and infinite.

However dignified or lofty the achievement, it fails to set at rest people’s unlimited quest for happiness. Those who hanker after wealth will not be satisfied until they can obtain unlimited wealth. Nor will the seeker of power, position and prestige be satisfied until he or she can get these in limitless proportions, as all these are objects of the world. The world itself is finite and cannot provide infinite objects. Naturally, therefore, the greatest worldly acquisition, even if it be the entire globe, would not secure anything of an infinite and permanent character. What then is that infinite, eternal thing which will provide everlasting happiness?

The Cosmic Entity alone is infinite and eternal. It alone is limitless. And the eternal longing of human beings for happiness can only be satiated by realization of the Infinite. The ephemeral nature of worldly possessions, power and position can only lead one to the conclusion that none of the things of the finite and limited world can set at rest the everlasting urge for happiness. Their acquisition merely gives rise to further longing. Only realization of the Infinite can do it. The Infinite can be only one, and that is the Cosmic Entity. Hence it is only the Cosmic Entity that can provide everlasting happiness – the quest for which is the characteristic of every human being. In reality, behind this human urge is hidden the desire, the longing, for attainment of the Cosmic Entity. It is the very nature of every living being. This alone is the dharma of every person.

The word dharma signifies “property”. The English word for it is “nature”, “characteristic” or “property”. The nature of fire is to burn or produce heat. It is the characteristic or property of fire and is also termed the nature of fire. Similarly, the dharma or nature of a human being is to seek the Cosmic Entity.

The degree of divinity in human beings is indicated by their clearly-reflected consciousness. Every human being, having evolved from animals, has, therefore, two aspects – the animal aspect, and the conscious aspect which distinguishes a person from animals. Animals display predominantly the animality, while human beings due to a well-reflected consciousness also possess rationality. The animality in human beings gives them a leaning towards animal life or physical enjoyment. They, under its influence, look to eating, drinking and gratification of other physical desires. They are attracted towards these and run after them under the influence of their animality but these do not provide happiness as their longing for it is infinite. Animals are satisfied with these limited enjoyments as their urge is not infinite. However large the quantity of things offered to an animal may be, it will take only those which it needs and will not bother for the rest. But humans will certainly act differently in these conditions. This only establishes that animals are satisfied with the limited, while the desire of human beings is limitless, although the desire for enjoyment in both is prompted and governed by the animal aspect of life. The difference in the two is due to the possession by the human being of a clearly-reflected consciousness, something which animals lack. The infinite nature of the human urge for absolute happiness is due to their consciousness alone. It is this consciousness alone which is not satisfied with the physical pleasure of possession, power and position – things which in spite of their huge proportions, are only transitory in character. It is their consciousness which creates in human beings the longing for the Cosmic Entity.

The objects of the world – the physical enjoyments – do not quench the thirst of the human heart for happiness. Yet we find that people are attracted by them. The animality in people draws them towards gratification of animal desires, but the rationality of their consciousness remains ungratified since all these are transitory and short-lived. They are not enough to set at rest the unending and unlimited hunger of the human consciousness. There is, thus, a constant duel in humans between their animality and rationality. The animal aspect pulls them towards instant earthly joys, while their consciousness, not being satisfied with these, draws them towards the Cosmic Entity – the Infinite. This results in the struggle between the animal aspect and consciousness. Had the carnal pleasures derived from power and position been infinite and endless, they would have set at rest the eternal quest of consciousness for happiness. But they do not, and that is why the fleeting glory of temporal joys can never secure a lasting peace in the human mind and lead people to ecstasy.

It is only the well-reflected consciousness which differentiates human beings from animals. Is it then not imperative for human beings to make use of their consciousness? If their consciousness lies dormant behind their animality, people are bound to behave like animals. They in fact become worse than animals as, even though endowed with well-reflected consciousness, they do not make use of it. Such people do not deserve the status of human beings. They are animals in human form.

The nature of consciousness is to seek for the Infinite or realize the Cosmic Entity. Only those who make use of their consciousness and follow its dictates deserve to be called human beings. Therefore, every person, by making full use of his or her reflected consciousness, earns the right to be called a human being and finds his or her dharma or nature to be only the search for the Infinite or Cosmic Entity. This longing for the Infinite is the innate quality or dharma which characterizes the human status of people.

Happiness is derived by getting what one desires. If one does not get what one desires, one cannot be happy. One becomes sad and miserable. The clearly-reflected consciousness in people, which alone distinguishes them from animals, seeks the Cosmic Entity or the Infinite. And so people derive real happiness only when they can attain the Cosmic Entity or get into the process of attaining It. Consciousness does not want earthly joys because being finite none of them satisfy it. The conclusion we arrive at is that the dharma of humanity is to realize the Infinite or the Cosmic Entity. It is only by means of this dharma that people can enjoy eternal happiness and bliss.

The characteristic or dharma of human beings is to attain Brahma. It is, therefore, necessary to see whether Brahma exists or not, as it would be futile to attempt to get something which does not actually exist. If Brahma exists, we must know what It is.

Every action a person performs, appears to have been executed by his or her physical organs, the indriyas. These organs or indriyas are ten. And it appears that almost every action that a person performs appears to have been performed because of these ten indriyas. Yet this is not actually so. If the mind does not work behind them, the indriyas by themselves cannot perform any action. It is the mind which works and the ten indriyas are merely the instruments through which the work is executed. The action which originates in mind only finds its external manifestation with the help of the indriyas. To explain this we can take the example of a person looking at a book. It is only the mind which visualizes the book with the help of the eyes. If the mind does not work the eyes will not be able to see the book. For instance, a person in an unconscious state because of anaesthesia or some other reason will not be able to see the book even if his or her eyes are wide open. In such an unconscious state the eyes are not damaged, yet they cannot perform their natural function because the contact with the mind is suspended. This is why under the influence of anaesthesia, the organs or indriyas do not function, although they remain in perfect order. Often, when we are absorbed in thought, we fail to notice a person or recognize a friend standing right in front of us. This is only because, in spite of our eyes being in perfect order and wide open, the mind, which actually performs all actions, does not make use of the indriyas, the eyes. It is the mind which works and the indriyas only help in its external manifestation.

If it is the mind only which works, let us see how it acts through these indriyas. For instance, looking at a book is an action which the mind performs with the help of the eyes. When the mind sees a book, what actually happens is that the mind, with the help of the eyes, takes the shape of something we call a book. This shape which the mind takes is different from the image which is formed on the retina, as the mind can see and become like a book even when the eyes are closed; but the eyes cannot see when the mind does not function. So it is the mind which takes the form of a book during visual perception. This portion of the mind which takes the form of the book is termed citta or mind-stuff. But even if the citta takes the form of a book, there must be something other than the citta which does the work of seeing. The part of the mind which does the work of seeing is called ahaḿtattva or doer “I”. But “I” will not be able to see anything unless “I” exists. So there must be another part of the mind which is different from these two. This third part of the mind is the part which gives the feeling of “I” and is called mahattattva. Without the feeling of the existence of “I” or knowledge of the self, no action can be performed. This feeling of “I” or knowledge of the self comes from mahattattva or buddhitattva. The collective name for these three – citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva – is mind or antahkarańa or introversial psychic force. But these three portions of mind are only the outward manifestations of mind. It is with this mind that the action of seeing a book is performed, and this is termed psychic assimilation of rúpa tanmátra.

Tanmátra is a new term and should be explained. The microscopic fraction of a wave radiated from an object and received by the indriyas is called tanmátra or inference. To explain this further, it can be said that the idea of a book is grasped with the help of rúpa tanmátra (the ideatory vibration of the nerves creates an image or figure in the mind) when one looks at the book. But if the eyes are closed or if one is in a dark place, one can still recognize the book by touch. Here the idea of the book is assimilated due to another tanmátra, that is, the tanmátra of touch or tactual perception. Again if someone drops a book out of sight or out of reach, it is possible to identify it as a book through the auditory tanmátra. Citta comes in contact with the tanmátras only when ahaḿtattva wants it to. The act of looking at or identifying the book must be done by ahaḿtattva as citta by itself does not possess the capacity to perform any function. When ahaḿtattva or the part of the mind which works wants to see a book, citta comes in contact with the organs of sight, that is, the eyes. The eyes receive the rúpa tanmátra from the book. This tanmátra which is always present in the environment in the form of waves, strikes against citta through the eyes, which form a sort of door to bring citta in contact with the outside world. Citta then takes the shape of the book, and ahaḿtattva identifies or sees it as per the shape which citta has taken. Similarly, when ahaḿtattva wants to hear something it puts citta in contact with the organs of hearing, the ears. The ears receive the sound tanmátra, which is always present in the physical environment, through the medium of sound waves. Citta, on the impact of this tanmátra, becomes the sound itself, and ahaḿtattva hears that sound. This shows that citta takes the form of whatever ahaḿtattva desires or does. To put it another way, citta manifests the actions which ahaḿtattva performs.

It has already been explained that citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva or buddhitattva constitute the mind. Citta only has the capacity to take the form which ahaḿtattva wants. Similarly ahaḿtattva only has the capacity to perform actions. It can only work. There must be something to make it work. That something is mahattattva or buddhitattva, which gives one the feeling of “I”. This feeling of “I” is derived from the mind and this “I” in the mind makes ahaḿtattva and citta perform their respective functions. Without this “I” it is not possible to feel or see a book even if, under the influence of ahaḿtattva, citta takes the shape of the book. But then this “I” is only a part of the mind. That is, there is another “I” which is the possessing “I”, or the “I” which knows that there is a mind. The existence of “I” in the mind only proves that there is another real entity which is beyond mind and which knows the existence of mind. This “I” which is the witnessing entity and witnesses the existence of mind and the existence of buddhitattva or the feeling of “I”, is called átman or unit consciousness. Thus through introspection and concentrated thinking one observes that átman and mind, that is, unit consciousness and mind, are two separate entities.

Átman or unit consciousness and mind are two separate entities, yet they must be related to each other. In the first instance it appears that I am aware of my existence. Then the same “I” that appears to prove my existence makes me work, and a part of my mind called citta takes the form of the book through tanmátras to enable me to see the book. The “I” that gives me consciousness or the “I” which witnesses the existence of my mind and therein of the “I” which gives the feeling “I exist” is átman or unit consciousness. The “I” that gives the feeling of “I exist” and also proves the existence of átman or unit consciousness, is mahattattva. The “I” that works or sees the book is ahaḿtattva and the portion of mind that takes the shape of the book and enables ahaḿtattva to see it is citta. This shows that the same “I” has a different function at each stage. How these different functions of the same “I” come about needs further clarification. The statement “I exist” presupposes the presence of “I” which is the witness of this existence. This witnessing entity is átman or unit consciousness and its presence is established by the feeling of existence that one displays by one’s every action. That this assertion of “I exist” is different from átman or unit consciousness is seen from the fact that this “I” presupposes the presence of my átman or unit consciousness. This feeling proves that unit consciousness is only consciousness and that without consciousness existence is not possible. Without consciousness there can be no feeling of existence. What then is going to witness the existence of “I”? Consciousness is therefore essential to create the feeling of mahattattva or buddhitattva. To be explicit, mahattattva or buddhitattva cannot exist without átman or unit consciousness.

But the witnessing entity and the pure “I” feeling appear to be different functional forms of the same “I”. In fact the “I” that witnesses my existence, also manifests itself as the “I” of “I exist.” The witnessing “I” is unit consciousness or átman and it manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva and thus establishes its own existence. It is the witnessing entity or unit consciousness which on taking up the function of the “I” of “I exist”, is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. Thus unit consciousness is not only consciousness, it also has a quality with the help of which it manifests itself through different functions. This quality is not consciousness, as otherwise it would not be necessary for unit consciousness to manifest itself as mahattattva and express itself as the “I” of “I exist”, which is different from the witnessing entity. Consciousness and its quality are therefore two separate entities in átman or unit consciousness. As this quality is different from consciousness, it must have been obtained from somewhere. There must be some other factor to qualify átman to make it manifest itself as mahattattva. That which gives this quality to átman is called Prakrti. In other words, it is due to Prakrti qualifying átman that it is manifested as mahattattva and gets the feeling of “I”.

Prakrti needs an explanation. Prakrti is the entity which controls natural phenomena. Prakrti is neither nature nor quality. For instance, the quality of burning is said to be the nature of fire. There must be something which gives this quality to fire; just as there is some entity which gives its quality to unit consciousness. That which qualifies unit consciousness is Prakrti and not the quality which is exhibited due to Her influence. Prakrti is a Sanskrit word and is derived pra – kr + ktin and it means to do something in a special way. Unit consciousness establishes its existence only by being qualified by Prakrti. In other words, Prakrti qualifies unit consciousness or átman to give it the feeling of its existence. Energy is required to perform any action. As Prakrti performs the action of qualifying átman or unit consciousness, She is a unique force. She is the principle which qualifies unit consciousness. It is Prakrti who, by Her influence on unit consciousness, gives it the qualities of different functions. Prakrti is a unique force – a principle. But some questions which arise are: whose principle is She, and where does She come from?

Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, and it is by His own principle that Puruśa is influenced and qualified. As Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, She must exist within Puruśa. In fact She always does. Unit consciousness and its prakrti can never be separated from each other, just as the burning principle of fire which cannot be separated from fire. Anything which acquires a characteristic quality due to the influence of a principle or force, cannot exist if that principle or force is withdrawn from it. The two will always go together, and so do unit consciousness and its principle, prakrti. Unit consciousness and its prakrti are inseparable like the two sides of a sheet of paper. The only function of Prakrti is to continually create different forms by Her influence over consciousness.

Unit consciousness is the witnessing entity and realizes its existence only when it is qualified to manifest as “I” of “I exist.” The principle of Prakrti which establishes the existence of unit consciousness by qualifying Puruśa is called sattvaguńa, the sentient principle, and the part of mind which is thus formed to give the feeling of “I exist” is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. It will be more correct to say that under the influence of sattvaguńa, unit consciousness manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva.

Every action presupposes existence. Unless I exist, I shall not be able to see. Here also we find that “I” has two different functions or aspects. The first is the witnessing entity or consciousness, which, in order to prove or realize its existence, has acquired the feeling of “I exist,” and the same “I” now performs the function of seeing. The “I” of “I exist” is the buddhitattva which, while seeing something, takes up the function of seeing in addition to establishing the existence of unit consciousness. When unit consciousness is influenced by Prakrti, it manifests itself as buddhitattva. Similarly, the additional ability to perform an action is also caused by the influence of Prakrti on buddhitattva. Prakrti will also be present in buddhitattva as it is only a manifestation of unit consciousness, and Prakrti is bound to be with unit consciousness wherever and in whatever form it may exist. The principle or guńa of Prakrti which gives this quality or capacity to buddhitattva is called rajoguńa, the mutative principle. Thus when buddhitattva is influenced by Prakrti, it displays two functions or aspects. The latter, which it gets from rajoguńa and which gives it the capacity or quality to perform an action, is known as ahaḿtattva. That is, buddhitattva manifests itself as ahaḿtattva when influenced by rajoguńa or the mutative principle of Prakrti.

Every action is bound to have a result in the end. For example, when you look at a book the result is seeing the book. How we see a book was explained earlier. Citta, which is a part of mind, picks up the form-producing tanmátra of the book and itself becomes the form of the book. It is that book that ahaḿtattva sees. Citta takes the form of what ahaḿtattva wants it to be. When ahaḿtattva sees a book, citta becomes that book, and when it hears a sound, citta becomes that sound. Citta therefore is entirely dependent on ahaḿtattva for its form. Citta keeps on changing its form at the bidding of ahaḿtattva. It must then be very closely connected with ahaḿtattva. How citta is formed needs clarification. Citta, as was explained earlier, is a part of the mind, and buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are the other two parts. Buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are manifestations of unit consciousness formed due to the influence of sattvaguńa of Prakrti over it and of rajoguńa over buddhitattva. In other words it is unit consciousness which, under the influence of Prakrti, takes up the function of ahaḿtattva in the second stage. Hence Prakrti is present in ahaḿtattva and is bound to qualify it further. In fact, it is due to Prakrti qualifying ahaḿtattva that it manifests itself as citta. The quality of Prakrti which influences ahaḿtattva is called tamoguńa, the static principle. It is as a result of the influence of tamoguńa that ahaḿtattva, or the “I” that performs actions, has to take up the mental image of the result of its action. This means that when “I” see a book, it is “I” that becomes like the book. Another “I” thus comes into being under the influence of tamoguńa. It is this “I” which takes the form of the mental image of the book during perception. This “I” which becomes like the book or takes on the form of the book is citta. Thus it is unit consciousness which gradually manifests itself as citta.

In the preceding paragraphs it was established by logic and reasoning that it is only unit consciousness which, under the influence of the different principles of its Prakrti, gradually manifests itself as citta, and as a result of this, mind comes into being. The existence of unit consciousness is essential for mind, which is only a gradual manifestation of unit consciousness under the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Mind, in fact, cannot be formed without the presence of átman or unit consciousness. But we know that mind is present in every individual. Hence átman or unit consciousness is also present in every individual. There are innumerable individuals in this universe, and as átman or unit consciousness is reflected in each one, there appear to be many átmans or unit consciousnesses. The collective name for all these átmans or unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya, Brahma or Bhagaván. Just as twelve units make a dozen, twenty make a score, and the collective name for a very large number of soldiers is an army, the collective name for all the unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya or Bhagaván. The name Bhagaván should not be construed as a mighty human figure with powerful hands and feet. It is the collection of all our átmans. The nearest word in English which may be used for átman or unit consciousness is “soul”, so Bhagaván may also be called Universal Consciousness or Universal Soul. This shows that Bhagaván does exist and that It exists as Paramátman or Universal Soul, Bhúmácaetanya or Cosmic Consciousness, or Brahma, the Eternal Blessedness.

1955, Jamalpur

What Is the Cosmic Entity?

It has been established that Brahma exists and also that It is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya, Universal Consciousness or Consciousness in its totality.

Bhúmácaetanya or Cosmic Consciousness or Consciousness in its totality is also known as Citishakti or Puruśa. It was also explained earlier that Prakrti is a principle or a unique energy or force of Puruśa (Consciousness) and that She also qualifies Puruśa. Prakrti is a principle of Puruśa and She is always so intimately bound up with him that it is impossible to separate the two. They are inseparable like fire and its burning property. Just as these two cannot be separated, Puruśa and Prakrti can also never be separated. Prakrti is the unique force, the qualifying principle of Puruśa. A force or principle which gives something a characteristic or property, cannot be separated from it. Similarly although Puruśa and Prakrti are two distinct entities, they cannot be separated. So Puruśa is bound to be present wherever there is Prakrti, and the collective term for them is Brahma.

Puruśa we know is Jiṋána, Caetanya or Consciousness. From these terms we can understand the existence of something but cannot visualize any figure or form. We can only form an idea of Puruśa or Caetanya with the help of our bhávaná (introversial flow of our objective mind). So Puruśa or Caetanya is an abstract entity and can be appreciated by our mind only in objective expression. Prakrti, the qualifying principle of this abstract entity, can also only be understood as an energy, force or principle which cannot be seen even though it qualifies the crudest of things. Its form or shape cannot be described. Fire is a crude object and its attribute, the burning principle, is also a crude quality. Yet even this attribute cannot be seen. However crude the attribute of a thing may be, it will always be subtle in form. An energy or principle can never have a shape. It cannot be seen or heard. Prakrti, also a unique force, a principle, is a subtle entity. Puruśa and Prakrti are both subtle. Brahma, the collective name for these two, is also subtle and can only be appreciated in the final stage of the mind’s merger in its source. Brahma could not, therefore, have any form or shape. It would not be possible to describe It or even to say what It looks like. Brahma must be shapeless or formless. It really cannot have a form.

It was said earlier that buddhitattva comes into being as a result of the influence of the sattvaguńa of Prakrti on the unit consciousness or átman. Ahaḿtattva is formed due to influence of rajoguńa on buddhitattva, and lastly, citta is the result of the influence of tamoguńa on ahaḿtattva. The formation of citta is dependent on ahaḿtattva, as it comes into being only as a result of the influence of tamoguńa on ahaḿtattva. The existence of citta is, therefore, not independent. If the tamoguńa of Prakrti does not influence ahaḿtattva or if ahaḿtattva ceases to exist, citta cannot be formed. But the absence of citta would not mean the absence of ahaḿtattva and Prakrti. It only means that the tamoguńa of Prakrti is not influencing ahaḿtattva and that the existence of ahaḿtattva does not depend on the presence or absence of citta. It is independent of citta. If we apply the same reasoning to ahaḿtattva we can see that it is dependent on the influence of the rajoguńa of Prakrti over buddhitattva. But the existence of buddhitattva does not depend on the presence or absence of ahaḿtattva. Buddhitattva is independent of ahaḿtattva. Similarly, the existence of buddhitattva depends on the influence of the sattvaguńa of Prakrti on unit consciousness. But the existence of unit consciousness is independent of buddhitattva. For example, steel can be moulded to form a steel pan, but that does not mean that, if the pan does not exist, steel will also not exist. As the pan is made of steel it is dependent on steel, but steel would exist even if there were no pan. The existence of steel is therefore independent of the existence of the pan. Similarly unit consciousness is independent of buddhitattva. All the different forms from citta to buddhitattva are dependent on unit consciousness, as the existence of each one of these is dependent on the other. But when we come to consciousness we can see that its existence is not dependent on any of these forms. In fact we cannot find anything on which the existence of consciousness depends. Consciousness is therefore absolutely independent.

Consciousness or Puruśa is absolutely independent. It was seen in the preceding paragraph that it is not dependent on anything and has no beginning or root cause. It is non-causal. Prakrti is the qualifying principle of Puruśa and is bound to be present wherever Puruśa exists. This, however, does not mean that Prakrti has been created by Puruśa. The burning quality of fire is its qualifying principle and always exists wherever there is fire. Yet this quality has not been created by fire. Just as fire cannot create its qualifying principle, Puruśa also cannot create Prakrti, His qualifying principle. Puruśa is even incapable of realizing His own existence without the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Such a Puruśa can surely never create Prakrti. Just as in the case of Puruśa, the origin of or cause for the creation of Prakrti cannot be found. Prakrti is also non-casual. Puruśa and Prakrti are thus both non-causal. Brahma is the combined name for Puruśa and Prakrti. Hence Brahma is certainly non-causal.

Brahma is without any beginning or root cause. It has no origin. But does Brahma have an end? If It does, we should find out how big it is. In order to find this out we will have to measure Brahma. Different instruments are required to measure different things. For instance, to measure land we need rods and chains; to measure food-grains we require scales and weights. We have to use a thermometre to measure temperature and a barometre to measure atmospheric pressure. The instrument required depends on the nature of the thing to be measured. Brahma is subtle and is only an ideological expression as we already have seen. The instrument required to measure Brahma has to be subtle. Something subtler than Brahma must be found to measure it.

All matter in this world can be classified into five rudimental factors or tattvas. It may exist as ákásha (ethereal), váyu (aerial), agni (luminous), jala (liquid), or kśiti (solid). The presence of tanmátras distinguishes something crude from something subtle. A crude thing will always have tanmátras, while a subtle thing will not have any. So anything containing a larger number of tanmátras will be cruder. There are five tanmátras: shabda (sound), sparsha (touch), rúpa (form), rasa (taste) and gandha (smell). Ákásha or the ethereal factor or the supposed subtle atmosphere beyond the atmospheres of the planets, etc., contains nothing which can be visualized. Yet it carries shabda tanmátra and is called crude. Váyu has two tanmátras – shabda and sparsha. That is, váyu carries sound and may also be felt. Váyu is thus cruder than ákásha. Agni, jala and kśiti are all still cruder, as they can be seen; they have rúpa tanmátra in addition to the other tanmátras. Therefore all the five rudimental factors or tattvas in which matter can exist are crude. None of these could make an instrument subtle enough to measure Brahma, which is a subtle entity.

In these five rudimental factors, that is, ákásha, váyu, agni, jala and kśiti, there is another element present apart from matter. This other element is mind or antahkarańa (introversial psychic force). Applying the same test to mind as we did to tanmátras, we find that mind is subtle. Only mind can be abstract; it cannot be found to contain any tanmátras. That is, mind alone is subtle and everything else in this universe is crude. Mind, therefore, is the only thing out of which an instrument for measuring Brahma can be prepared, but since mind has no tanmátras, no crude or physical form can be attributed to it. It cannot be heard, touched, seen, tasted or even smelt. In the absence of these qualities an instrument cannot be made out of mind. Mind is subtle and only has the qualities of grasping an idea, thinking and feeling. These are the ways mind can measure Brahma.

Mind is made up of buddhitattva, ahaḿtattva and citta. Buddhitattva is formed by Prakrti qualifying unit consciousness; ahaḿtattva comes into being due to the further influence of Prakrti over buddhitattva. Similarly citta comes into existence being qualified by Prakrti. Ahaḿtattva is that part of the mind which works. The capacity to perform any action is only in ahaḿtattva. Hence if Brahma is to be measured by the mind it will have to be done by ahaḿtattva. Buddhitattva separates unit consciousness and ahaḿtattva. Ahaḿtattva will thus not be able to reach unit consciousness unless it passes through buddhitattva. But ahaḿtattva is only a functional form of buddhitattva. The “I” of “I exist” of buddhitattva, becomes ahaḿtattva when it adopts the function of “I work.” The moment Ahaḿtattva reverts to buddhitattva, the functional identity of “I work” of ahaḿtattva ceases to exist. Ahaḿtattva cannot merge in unit consciousness as ahaḿtattva. It must be converted into buddhitattva before coming into contact with unit consciousness, and in that state it cannot perform any function, far less that of measuring unit consciousness. As mind is incapable of coming in contact with unit consciousness, it can never measure it. Brahma is the collective name for all the unit consciousnesses. Mind cannot measure a single unit consciousness; so the question of measuring the supreme multiple of all the multiplicities of unit consciousness does not arise. Mind can never think, feel or grasp any idea of the size of Brahma.

Mind can only determine the boundaries of something which is within its scope. It cannot set limits to a thing which is beyond its reach. The creation is only a part of Brahma. (This will be explained in the following chapter). Mind exists within this creation. On withdrawing mind (ahaḿtattva) to its limits we still find something left beyond it, which it has no capacity to comprehend. Creation thus extends beyond the limits of mind. It is infinite. Creation is only a part of it, and if a part can be infinite, Brahma, the whole, is bound to be infinite.

The combined name for Puruśa and Prakrti is Brahma. It was seen earlier that both Puruśa and Prakrti are non-causal. Naturally if they are both non-causal it means that they are also independent of each other. Neither of them is subordinate to the other. The state of Brahma where both Puruśa and Prakrti are independent, because they are non-causal, is the supreme state of Brahma or Brahmasvarúpa. Prakrti is a principle or a unique force, the function of which is to attribute guńa or to qualify Puruśa. Guńa ordinarily means an attribute or a qualification. In Sanskrit, guńa means a rope used for tying something. To attribute guńa means to bind with a rope. Prakrti qualifying or attributing guńa to Puruśa means Prakrti is binding Puruśa with a rope and driving Puruśa according to Her designs and wishes. But in the supreme state of Brahmasvarúpa, Puruśa is independent. Hence Prakrti cannot qualify or bring Puruśa under bondage; still Prakrti exists there with Puruśa, as Brahma is a combined name for them. Those asleep are incapable of using their facilities or capacity to work. They are inactive in that stage. Yet they still have capacity to work. Similarly, Prakrti is inactive in Brahmasvarúpa. She does not perform functions or is unable to perform them. The function of Prakrti is to qualify or to attribute guńa to Puruśa. Puruśa does not acquire any attributes or qualifications when Prakrti does not function. Then He is beyond guńa or without guńa.

How is it that Prakrti, whose only function is to qualify Puruśa, does not influence or is unable to qualify Puruśa in Nirguńa Brahma? There can be only two reasons for this: Prakrti is either asleep and hence inactive or is weaker than Puruśa and is thus unable to bind Puruśa. If we accept the first probability, we will have to admit that Prakrti is asleep in Nirguńa Brahma or Brahmasvarúpa. But Prakrti does qualify Brahma at some stage. If She is in the state of sleep in Nirguńa Brahma, someone will have to wake Her up so that She may qualify Puruśa. In Nirguńa Brahma there are only Puruśa and Prakrti. There is no other entity, so only Puruśa can do it. But Puruśa, we know, is even incapable of realizing His own existence without being qualified by Prakrti. How can He then perform the function of awakening Prakrti? We have, therefore, to dismiss the possibility of Prakrti being asleep in Nirguńa Brahma, otherwise in the absence of any other entity, it would not be possible to rouse Prakrti to qualify Puruśa and to manifest him as buddhitattva. Prakrti is awake even in Nirguńa Brahma. She is not asleep. The quality, dharma or function of Prakrti is to qualify Puruśa, and if She is awake in Nirguńa Brahma, She must qualify Puruśa. Puruśa in Nirguńa Brahma is not qualified in spite of the presence of Prakrti, fully awake. That Prakrti is weaker than Puruśa in Nirguńa Brahma can be the only reason for this. She is less powerful and so is unable to qualify Puruśa. This is how Prakrti and Puruśa have existed in Brahma for eternity. Puruśa, therefore, is by nature more powerful than Prakrti and is the transcendental entity and Prakrti is the innate principle. The state where Prakrti is feebler than Puruśa and is incapable of influencing or qualifying Puruśa, is the state of Nirguńa Brahma or Brahmasvarúpa, that is, the state where Puruśa in Brahma is not metamorphosed.

In the state of Brahma where Puruśa is not influenced or qualified by Prakrti and hence Puruśa in Brahma remains unexpressed, Puruśa is called Nirguńa Puruśa – Non-Qualified Consciousness – and where Puruśa is influenced and qualified by Prakrti He is called Saguńa or Guńayukta Puruśa or the Qualified Consciousness. Saguńa Brahma is therefore that stage of Brahma where Puruśa is influenced and qualified by Prakrti.

This gives rise to two questions: First, if Nirguńa Brahma is the Brahmasvarúpa or the supreme stage of Brahma then what could be Saguńa Brahma? Secondly, if Puruśa is more powerful by nature, how could He be influenced and qualified by Prakrti in Saguńa Brahma? In other words, the question is how Saguńa Brahma came into being.

Nirguńa and Saguńa are only two different states of Brahma. In the nirguńa state Puruśa and Prakrti both exist together, but Prakrti is not able to qualify Puruśa. In the saguńa state also Puruśa and Prakrti exist together, but here Prakrti influences and qualifies Puruśa. It is because of this difference in the relationship between Puruśa and Prakrti that the former is called Nirguńa and the latter is called Saguńa Brahma. Rama asleep and Rama awake only indicate the two different states of existence of the same person. It does not mean that they are two different persons. Similarly Nirguńa and Saguńa Brahma are two different states of the same Brahma.

It was concluded earlier that buddhitattva comes into being as soon as unit consciousness is qualified by Prakrti. Bhúmácaetanya, Parama Puruśa or Cosmic Consciousness is only a collective name for an infinite number of unit consciousnesses. Parama Puruśa must also follow the same principles or dharma as unit consciousness. The properties of the two must be the same, the only difference being that the scope of unit consciousness is finite, while that of Cosmic Consciousness is infinite. This must, therefore, mean that creation comes into existence as soon as Cosmic Consciousness or Parama Puruśa is influenced and qualified by Prakrti. The stage where Puruśa is qualified by Prakrti is Saguńa Brahma. The universe is created because of Saguńa Brahma.

We have to accept the existence of Saguńa Brahma, as this creation which is formed from or which comes into being because of Saguńa Brahma, can be seen at every moment of one’s existence. This also shows that Prakrti influences and qualifies Puruśa in Saguńa Brahma. There can be only two conditions under which Prakrti might influence Puruśa. Either Prakrti in Saguńa Brahma is stronger than in Nirguńa or Puruśa in saguńa is feebler than Prakrti. Prakrti, we know, is a special principle or unique force. She is present with the same intensity everywhere. She can be compared to any crude energy, for example, electricity. An electric current running though a mile-long wire will measure 440 volts at every point on the wire. The voltage will not be different at different points. Similarly Prakrti as a unique force, will always be present with the same strength everywhere. The question of Her being more powerful in Saguńa Brahma does not arise. Puruśa in Saguńa Brahma must then be weaker than Prakrti or else He could not be influenced by Prakrti. Puruśa is condensed as well as less condensed in the infinite Brahma. The consciousness of the infinite Brahma is not the same everywhere. Prakrti qualifies Puruśa finding Him feeble wherever consciousness or Puruśa is less condensed, and as a result of this creation springs forth.⁽¹⁾ Prakrti is helpless and cannot qualify Puruśa where consciousness is condensed. Puruśa is unqualified there and is called Nirguńa Brahma – the Unqualified Cosmic Entity.

Brahma is infinite and Its supreme state is Nirguńa. Wherever the infinite Puruśa (Consciousness) in Nirguńa Brahma is less condensed, he is influenced by Prakrti and we find Saguńa Brahma. Surely then Saguńa Brahma is within Nirguńa. Ahaḿtattva is like a huge iceberg in an ocean. Due to imbalance in climatic conditions, a part of the ocean gets frozen into an iceberg, but the rest of the water remains in its original state. In the same way, wherever, owing to the influence of Prakrti over Puruśa, He is less condensed in Nirguńa Brahma, He is qualified and becomes Saguńa Brahma, but the rest remains Nirguńa. Saguńa Brahma, therefore, is within Nirguńa Brahma.

Saguńa Puruśa or Qualified Consciousness is within Nirguńa or Non-Qualified Consciousness. Where Puruśa is qualified by Prakrti it is called Saguńa. We have seen earlier that the supreme state of Brahma or Brahmasvarúpa is Unqualified Consciousness. Saguńa Brahma or Qualified Consciousness is therefore not the supreme state of Brahmasvarúpa, yet It has to be called Brahma as both Puruśa and Prakrti are present. What Saguńa Brahma is can be explained by taking again the example of an iceberg in an ocean. Due to variation in the climatic conditions some of the water of the ocean changes into an iceberg. If we compare the ocean with Nirguńa Brahma, the iceberg may be compared with Saguńa Brahma. The ice is comparable to Puruśa in Saguńa Brahma, and the climate which freezes the water to Prakrti. The unfrozen water of the ocean stands for Puruśa in Nirguńa Brahma. The ice and the unchanged water of the ocean are two different forms of water only, the only difference being that climate at some places is able to change it into ice, while in other parts of the ocean the climate cannot change it into ice. Ice is only a changed form of water, but we cannot call it water; it has to be accepted as a changed form of water only. Similarly we cannot call Saguńa Brahma the supreme state of Brahma or Brahmasvarúpa. It is only another state of Brahmasvarúpa. Hence for the realization of Brahmasvarúpa or the supreme state of Brahma we shall have to know Nirguńa Brahma. The mere realization of Saguńa Brahma will not lead us to the realization of the supreme state, for it is only another status of the supreme rank.

What then is Bhagaván, Saguńa or Nirguńa? Bhagaván is a Sanskrit word derived bhaga + matup; that is, the one who has bhaga is Bhagaván. Bhaga means absolute power, benevolence and light. Bhagaván therefore is that which is the most luminous, benevolent and omnipotent (jyotirmaya, mauṋgalamaya and sarvashaktimán). So Bhagaván has these attributes or qualifications. Bhagaván thus is qualified Puruśa (Guńayukta). In Nirguńa Brahma, Puruśa is not qualified. He is qualified in Saguńa Brahma. Thus Bhagaván is only Saguńa Brahma. It is Nirguńa Brahma which is the supreme state of Brahma or Brahmasvarúpa. Brahma is only Its other status. Hence Bhagaván is not the realization of Brahmasvarúpa or the supreme state. To know Brahmasvarúpa one has to step beyond Bhagaván and has to realize Nirguńa Brahma. It is that entity which is to be attained.

1955

What Is This World?

As Brahma is the supreme multiple of the multiplicities of unit consciousness, It is consciousness in its totality. It has been shown earlier that every unit consciousness is non-causal, and so is Brahma – the multiple of all the unit consciousnesses can only be infinite if the multiplicity of unit consciousnesses is infinite. Hence the number of unit consciousnesses has to be infinite. A question here arises about the manner in which Brahma became the multiple of all the unit consciousnesses. Did the infinite number of unit consciousnesses exist before Brahma, or did Brahma multiply Itself into infinite units and hence is called the multiple of unit consciousnesses?

It was explained earlier that unit consciousness is non-causal and that every person has a unit consciousness or átman. The history of the earth however reveals that humans are not causeless. They are not even the first living beings that came onto the earth. The earth was formed from the sun. It was only a ball of fire in the beginning. Gradually it cooled down and became full of water and then land appeared. This was followed by the formation of the plant and animal kingdoms, and it was only after this that human beings evolved. Human beings are therefore dependent on the earth for their origin and cannot be said to be non-causal. But as átman or unit consciousness is causeless it could not have come into being with human beings and should have existed even before them. Unit consciousness must have existed even before the evolution of human beings; otherwise how could they get an átman or unit consciousness? Before the creation of human beings the unit consciousness could have only existed in the Cosmic Consciousness, as both these are non-causal, and as Cosmic Consciousness is only a multiple of the unit consciousnesses. It was only with the creation or evolution of humans that unit consciousness was reflected in them. Cosmic Consciousness as a multiple of unit consciousnesses must be synonymous with them. Thus we see that the infinite number of unit consciousnesses did not originally exist as units. Brahma reflected Itself as numerous unit consciousnesses, and that is why Brahma is termed the multiple of all unit consciousnesses. This also shows that human beings derive their átmans or unit consciousnesses only from the Cosmic Consciousness.

Human beings are not without beginning because their origin depends on the earth. If they have originated from the earth they must have also obtained their unit consciousness from the earth. They could not have got it from any other entity and so there must also be consciousness in the earth. For instance butter can be obtained from milk only because it exists in milk. Similarly unit consciousness exists in the earth, otherwise the human body obtained from the earth could not have unit consciousness. Butter, when it exists in milk, cannot be identified as butter till it is separated with the help of a churning machine. In the same way unit consciousness is unidentifiable or dormant in the earth and can only be perceived when the human mind is created to reflect it. It has thus to be accepted that there is consciousness even in the earth. The earth was created from the sun and the sun is only a ball of fire, the existence of which is dependent on certain gases found primarily in the aerial factor. The sun therefore depends for its existence on the aerial factor and has originated from it. Similarly the aerial factor (váyu) is dependent on the ethereal factor, because if there were no ether there would be no space for the air to exist. The origin of air can be traced to ethereal factor. We can trace back the ethereal factor to be the source of the air, sun, earth and then human beings.

A human being has unit consciousness and so the ethereal factor must also have it. If it did not have consciousness, how could a human being who has been created from it have unit consciousness? The ethereal factor is crude. It has no shape nor can its size be measured. It contains nothing and is void, yet it is called crude, because sound can travel through it. The fact that sound-waves can be formed in it shows that there must be something which makes sound-waves possible and which gives ether a crude character. Although ether is called crude, it has no crude substance in it. It is nothingness, void or just space. But logically it has to be admitted that it contains consciousness, otherwise human beings, who have been formed from the ether, would not be able to get unit consciousness. Hence the only entity which can be in the ether is consciousness. For instance, we find water in ice because it is made of water and contains nothing except water. Similarly ether, which contains nothing except consciousness, has to be made of consciousness. Consciousness is in Brahma and so ether has its origin only in Brahma. Thus the ethereal factor or vyomattattva has originated from Brahma, as has the rest of the universe; as the origin of air, fire, water, earth and the entire plant and animal kingdom has been shown to originate only from the ethereal factor. Therefore the entire creation is only made of Brahma. Brahma alone is the cause of the creation of the universe.

Saguńa Brahma, Qualified Consciousness, is the cause of the creation of the universe. In other words, the universe has originated from Saguńa Brahma. But if Saguńa Brahma or Bhagaván created the universe, a very pertinent question arises about the availability of the material or stuff from which the universe was made. Saguńa Brahma also needs some material to create the universe just as the potter needs clay to make his pots. A potter obtains his clay from the earth. So then has Saguńa Brahma also obtained the material from someone else? The material and its owner from whom Saguńa Brahma borrowed it must have existed even before Saguńa Brahma came into being, and that this owner is bigger than Saguńa Brahma has to be admitted. It could not otherwise be available to Saguńa Brahma. It has already been accepted that Brahma is non-causal. Nothing existed before Brahma and so the material from which the universe is made could not have existed before Brahma. What could be the material out of which Saguńa Brahma made this universe if nothing existed before or beyond It? The universe, which is so visibly existent, could not have been created out of nothing. The only material available to Saguńa Brahma for creation was Its own Self. Hence it has to be accepted that this creation is only Saguńa Brahma metamorphosed into all that we find in the universe.

The entire universe is formed from Saguńa Brahma. It is only Saguńa Brahma which is manifested as this creation. Is not then the statement that Saguńa Brahma is omnipresent incorrect? To say that Brahma is present in a book means that the book is a separate entity and Brahma occupies that entity. This gives the impression of two separate entities – Brahma and the book which appears to be outside Saguńa Brahma. This is completely incorrect as it has already been established that everything is made of Brahma; It has assumed the shape of everything. Hence the correct thing to say would be that the book is Brahma or that It has assumed the shape of a book also. This shows that the book and Brahma are not two separate entities and that the book did not exist before Brahma. This alone is the correct expression, for Brahma is infinite and eternal and nothing can exist beyond or before It. The book could not have existed before Brahma. In fact nothing could have existed before Brahma. Every speck of dust is only Brahma.

Brahma is the cause of the entire creation and Brahma is the collective name for Prakrti and Puruśa. Which of the two then forms the creation? We have to determine whether Puruśa or Prakrti is the stuff of which the creation is made. Prakrti is a unique force – a principle, the only function of which is to qualify Puruśa. As Prakrti is only a force, She cannot take a shape. She will otherwise lose her function of qualifying. Besides, if Prakrti becomes the creation there must be a force or principle to give a shape and form. The only other entity in Brahma who can give a form to Prakrti is Puruśa. Puruśa, who cannot even realize His existence without being qualified by Prakrti, cannot perform the tremendous task of giving Prakrti the form of creation. This makes it clear that Prakrti does not assume the shape of the creation and this leaves only Puruśa who could take these forms. Hence the stuff of which the entire creation is made is Puruśa. Prakrti qualifies Puruśa to give Him different forms and Puruśa has to follow the designs of Prakrti. For example, a potter shapes a lump of clay according to his designs. The lump of clay is comparable to Puruśa and the potter who provides the force, to Prakrti. Similarly, Prakrti gives all these shapes to Puruśa according to Her wish to create this universe. Puruśa only follows the dictates of Prakrti in forming this creation.

Puruśa alone is projected in all the different shapes of the creation. He is the stuff of which everything is made. But Puruśa is consciousness; hence everything in this creation has consciousness. There is nothing which is crude, inanimate, or without consciousness. The solid brick, the dead wood or even the earth which is ordinarily regarded as crude and lifeless are not wholly so. They are forms of the conscious entity – Puruśa. They cannot be crude and without consciousness. Yet all these appear to be crude, lifeless, and without any trace of consciousness. It is so because Puruśa, following the dictates of Prakrti, remains in the condition in which Prakrti wants Him to stay. A brick is a form of Puruśa qualified by Prakrti and Puruśa stays in that condition according to the desire of Prakrti. Prakrti here desires him to stay as a brick and so Puruśa remains as brick, considering Himself to be crude or lifeless matter. The brick is not able to expand its consciousness and remains in a lifeless state due to being qualified by the guńa of Prakrti. The influence of Prakrti makes it look like inanimate, crude matter, although it possesses consciousness. Hence there is nothing in this world which is crude; everything is a metamorphosed form of consciousness or Puruśa.

It has already been reasoned out that Puruśa is a subtle entity, which, when qualified, looks crude. In that state, as His consciousness cannot be expanded, He appears to possess lesser consciousness. Puruśa gradually appears more and more crude and finally He takes the crudest form of kśititattva or earth where we find Him as an inanimate object with His consciousness completely dormant. Thus the greater the influence of Prakrti, the more crude He appears, while with lesser influence He is subtler.

The universe has been created out of Puruśa. In other words Puruśa, when qualified by the guńa of Prakrti, has created the universe out of His own self. Puruśa, we know, is a subtle entity which can be appreciated only as an idea. Yet the moon, the sun, the stars and the planets, the atmosphere and the earth, made of subtle Puruśa, are all found in this creation. We have to admit that this creation has been formed by a subtle entity gradually becoming crude. We have already established by logical reasoning that Puruśa is subtle. So if the crude universe has been created out of this subtle entity, its seed must have existed in this subtle entity, and, on being qualified by Prakrti, germinated into this expansive universe. In the same way we get butter from milk only because it existed in milk in another form. If the seed of the crude universe existed in Him, Puruśa could not be called subtle or understandable only as an idea. Subtle is something which can be understood or appreciated as an idea only and contains no crudeness. The ethereal factor in which no perceivable crude substance can be found is called crude because sound can travel through it. The ethereal factor has no dimensions and no perceptible existence, yet merely because of the presence of the quality of permitting sound waves to travel through it, it is called crude. The presence of something makes it identifiable; it cannot be said to be subtle or understandable only as an idea. Puruśa cannot be said to be subtle, if the seed of the universe exists in Him. He has to be crude, but it has already been established that Puruśa is subtle, and so the seed of the crude universe cannot exist in Him.

Here again a contradictory situation arises. It was said earlier that the universe has been created out of Puruśa, but if the seed did not exist in Puruśa, how could the universe have been created? This sounds illogical and unreasonable, and the only logical thing to say is that the universe was never created, as Puruśa is subtle by nature and the crude universe could not have been created out of Him. It was however said earlier that the universe was created out of Him, and as it has been logically proved to be true, the only other rational statement would be to say that the crude universe was never a created reality. Yet the existence of this visible universe cannot be ignored. In fact, this crude universe is created only as a thought-projection of Puruśa. When influenced by Prakrti, a wave arises in the mind of Puruśa and as a result the entire creation becomes an imaginary entity filled with different forms. The universe comes into being only as an imaginary entity in the mind of Puruśa, and no crude stuff is required for its creation. Imaginary objects are not crude realities, for the creation of which crude stuff may be necessary. Hence Puruśa, who is subtle, can easily create the universe out of His own self. Accepting the creation to be only a thought-wave gives rise to the following doubts:

1. How do we experience this world as real if it is not a crude reality and exists only as a thought-projection of Puruśa?
2. The creation should come to an end the moment the thought-wave of Puruśa ceases to exist. Thought-waves or imaginary entities are only momentary, and their cessation should bring about complete annihilation.

When imagination brings a shape into being in a person’s mind, it does not appear to be imagination only. It is mind that imagines and, as long as a person is under the spell of imagination, every imagined object appears to be real. It is after the spell is broken that he or she realizes it to be his or her imagination only.

Let us now analyse imagination and see how an imagined object appears real in the imagination. In an earlier chapter it was explained that the part of the mind which performs all actions is ahaḿtattva (ego) and the part of the mind which shows or becomes the result of an action is called citta. For instance, when ahaḿtattva sees a book, the citta grasps the tanmátra of a book and has to take the shape of a book itself. Similarly, when a person imagines a form, the ahaḿtattva starts functioning, and citta has to take that form to enable the ahaḿtattva to see it. For example, Rama, sitting in Bhagalpur and thinking of Chowringhee in Calcutta, makes his ahaḿtattva think of Chowringhee, and his citta has to take the form of Chowringhee. At that very moment his ahaḿtattva starts seeing Chowringhee in his imagination.

In order to take the form of any object, citta grasps its tanmátra and first becomes like the rudimental factor (bhúta) or the state of matter of which the object is made. For instance on seeing a book, the citta grasps the rúpa (figure-forming) tanmátra, and before being able to take the form of the book properly, it has to become like the substance or the state of matter of which the book is made. If the book is made of paper, which falls in the kśititattva or the solid state of matter, the citta will have to become like paper or kśititattva before it can take the form of the book. Therefore, it is necessary for citta to become like the tattva or bhúta (rudimental factor) of which its object is made. Then alone will it be able to take a complete and proper shape. Why the shapes formed in the imagination appear factual can easily be understood after knowing how an imaginary shape is formed in the mind.

The external application of citta is with the help of the ten indriyas. To be more clear, citta performs all its actions (of taking different forms) with the help of the indriyas or physical organs. It is through the indriya of eyes that citta grasps the rúpa tanmátra of a book and takes the shape of a book. It was also explained earlier that ahaḿtattva pushes or drives citta to come in contact with a particular tanmátra. For instance in order to listen to a sound, ahaḿtattva sends citta to the receptive organ of the ears, to see a book to the eyes, and to smell a perfume to the nose. But while imagining Chowringhee, the help of none of the indriyas is required, because Calcutta is 250 miles away from Bhagalpur and therefore beyond the reach of all the indriyas. Thus citta loses its contact with the indriyas and takes the shape of Chowringhee on its own. When citta loses contact with the indriyas they become non-functional, and a person loses his sense of relationship and distinction of place, time and person. Rama would know of his existence in Bhagalpur with the help of his eyes only. But if citta has lost its contact with all indriyas and has instead taken the shape of Chowringhee, it will not be able to make use of the functions of the indriyas receiving tanmátras from the immediate surroundings. This makes Rama see Chowringhee in his imagination, although he may be in Bhagalpur at that moment. Because the indriyas lose their functions, citta is not able to receive the impression of Bhagalpur and ahaḿtattva cannot see any part of Bhagalpur. It sees only Chowringhee and feels itself to be in Chowringhee. Citta only takes the shape of Chowringhee at the instance of ahaḿtattva. It does not imagine; the imagination has to be done by ahaḿtattva, and citta has to become like that substance and take that shape. As soon as the imagination of ahaḿtattva ceases, citta also loses its shape, and, at the same moment, the indriyas start functioning. Then alone does Rama realize that the Chowringhee that he had been seeing existed only in imagination. It is due to this process that the imagined object appears factual as long as the spell of the imagination lasts. The moment that spell is broken it appears to be imaginary and not real.

Citta has the capacity of taking the form of an object without the help of tanmátras, only at the instance of ahaḿtattva. The shape that citta thus takes is imaginary and not real. Imagination itself is not real; the shape formed in it cannot be real. Imagination may not be real, yet citta has actually got to take a shape, and so, even if the shape is imaginary or unreal, the fact that citta becomes like it is a reality.

Imagination (kalpaná) has been analysed, and why it appears factual has also been seen. It now remains to be seen whether this universe has been created as a result of the imagination of Saguńa Brahma or not. It was said earlier that on being influenced by Prakrti, Saguńa Brahma projected Itself as this universe. This presupposes the existence of mind, as no action can be performed without mind. The multiple of all unit consciousnesses is Puruśa in the stage of Saguńa Brahma. It has been seen that every unit consciousness gets mind because of the influence of Prakrti. As Puruśa in Saguńa Brahma is a multiple of all unit consciousnesses, He also gets mind when influenced by Prakrti. His mind becomes the collection of the infinite unit minds. Just as every unit consciousness is a multiplicity of Cosmic Consciousness, so too is every unit mind a part of the Cosmic Mind. Cosmic Mind, as a collection of all the unit minds, is comprised, like them, of Buddhitattva, Ahaḿtattva and citta. Ahaḿtattva is the part which works and citta becomes the result of that action. The universe is thus created by the Ahaḿtattva of Saguńa Brahma by making its citta take the form of the creation. Citta manifests itself in a form in two ways. It could, under the orders of Ahaḿtattva, take the shape of an object either by catching the tanmátras with the help of the indriyas, or take a shape without catching any tanmátra at the instance of Ahaḿtattva as a result of the thought-waves of Ahaḿtattva. The latter is called kalpaná or imagination, that is, citta adopting the shape and form of the objects imagined in the thought-waves of Ahaḿtattva. Nothing existed before or beyond Saguńa, hence Its citta could not take the shape of any external object even if Ahaḿtattva wanted it to do so. Its citta has therefore to adopt the shapes and forms in the thought-waves or imagination of the Ahaḿtattva of Saguńa Brahma. Citta forms the result of the actions performed by Saguńa Brahma, and this universe is also a result of these actions. The universe is thus a manifestation of Saguńa Brahma’s citta. The citta of Saguńa Brahma has taken the shape and form of this universe as imagined by Its Ahaḿtattva. When citta takes a form in this way, it is called kalpaná or imagination. Hence this creation is the imagination or kalpaná of Saguńa Brahma.

The universe should not appear to be a reality, if it exists only in the imagination of Saguńa Brahma. Earlier we saw that the imagination of unit consciousness appears to be factual as long as the spell of the imagination lasts. The imagination of Saguńa which is only a multiple of all unit consciousnesses also appears to be real for the same reasons. It is this that makes the Cosmic Mind also consider its imagination to be reality. Unit mind or an individual’s mind is only a part of the Cosmic Mind, and whatever appears true to the Cosmic Mind will also appear true to the individual mind. Thus, although this vast universe exists only in the imagination, it appears to us as reality.

A magician showing his tricks in the streets often appears to throw into the air a rope which just remains there. His accomplice climbs up the rope with a sword in his hand and disappears. After a while the accomplice’s head and trunk smeared with blood fall down one after another. The entire audience becomes dumbfounded in amazement. The magician weeps and wails for his friend as he gathers the limbs in a bag, and collects four times the amount he would have normally got because of pity and sympathy that he arouses in his audience. Soon after, his accomplice is seen emerging from the audience.

How does the magician do this? The entire scene is enacted in the presence of a number of persons and it is difficult to consider it false. Yet it is such a strange show that one’s mind is not prepared to accept it as true. One is inclined to wonder whether the magician has really brought back to life his friend whose head and limbs had been severed from the trunk. The doubt that one’s eyes might have deceived one is brushed aside by the fact that so many others present have seen the same thing. Everyone could not make the same mistake. We must see what makes such an absurd thing appear true. A rope cannot stand in the air nor can anyone climb that rope. Even less believable is the idea of anyone being brought back to life after their limbs have been severed from the trunk. How then does one see it so clearly?

Everyone sees the show with the help of his indriyas – the eyes. We have seen earlier that the function of seeing any object is performed by ahaḿtattva, and citta takes the form of the object that ahaḿtattva wants to see. If the magician, with the help of his supernatural power obtained by intuitional practice, can expand his mind to such an extent that he is able to hypnotize or influence the ahaḿtattva of everyone in the audience, he will stop the independent functioning of the entire audience. The expanded mind of the magician then becomes the collective mind of all the individuals, as their minds do not function independently. It is the magician’s mind that works in place of the non-functional minds of the audience. If the magician thinks of the above show his citta will take those shapes and his ahaḿtattva will see the same show in his imagination. As long as the spell of his imagination lasts it appears to be real. The ahaḿtattva of the magician works in place of the ahaḿtattva of the onlookers, and hence whatever the magician sees as real or true appears true to them also. Since the thought-waves of the magician appear as objective reality, this show which exists in his imagination appears to be a physical occurrence. If the capacity of the magician’s mind to project is limited to a radius of a hundred yards, persons in this area only will come within the scope and influence of the magician’s expanded mind and will see the same show. Anyone outside this circle will be beyond the limit to which the magician can expand his mind; they will not see the scene like those within this area. They will only see the magician standing quietly with his eyes closed. There will be no trace of the wonderful magic. In fact the only truth or reality in the entire show is that the magician stands still with his eyes closed imagining the show which his audience sees as a concrete picture and imagines to be real. Similarly those who have fallen from the path of yoga go about showing off their supernatural powers. They create coins, currency notes or sweets out of dust. In reality no coins or sweets exist; what exists is only the display of the expanded mind of the straying disciple.

The show of the magician is a glaring example to bear testimony to the fact that this material world, though only an imagination or a thought-wave of Saguńa Brahma, appears to us as a great reality. Just as we regard the imaginary show of the magician as real, we also regard the imagination of Brahma as real. Those who are beyond the scope of the influence of the magician’s mind do not see the show. They see the truth behind it, that is, only the magician with closed eyes. Similarly, those who with the help of sádhaná or intuitional practice get beyond the scope of the Cosmic Mind, see this crude universe in its true form like the truth in the magician’s show. They are able to realize the reality of the universe. As the crude universe is only imagination or a thought-wave in the Cosmic Mind, it cannot be Satya or Absolute Truth, and only those who go beyond the Cosmic Mind can realize the truth like the truth in the magician’s show. This salvation or realization through sádhaná (intuitional practice) means knowing the ultimate or absolute truth, and those who have known this Absolute, are called Satyadraśt́á rśi.

They say Brahma alone is Satya (Ultimate Reality) and the universe is false. Let us see how far this assertion is true. This universe is formed in the imagination of Saguńa Brahma. If this universe exists only in imagination, it cannot be a reality. Had kalpaná or imagination been a reality, it would be called Satya (Ultimate Reality), and not imagination. Hence as the universe is formed in the imagination of Saguńa Brahma, it can never be Satya (Ultimate Reality). Ahaḿtattva of Saguńa Brahma imagines the universe, and its citta takes that form to create this imaginary universe as a thought-projection of Brahma. The imaginary form may not be real, yet it is a form. Similarly the imaginary form of the universe that citta takes may not be real, yet it is a fact that citta takes a form. But the form that it takes is only imaginary and thus not a reality. The citta of Brahma has manifested itself in the form of this universe, and even though the form in which it has manifested itself is imaginary, it is a fact that it has manifested itself in the form of the universe. This is a reality or Satya. The universe has a form, so it cannot be said to be unreal, but at the same time, as the form is in the imagination of Brahma, it cannot be Satya. Hence the universe has to be considered as neither true nor false; it is something between the two; it is relative truth.

The creation is a thought-wave of Brahma, and the day it ceases the universe will come to an end. This raises the question why the thought-wave has not yet come to an end, and if it has to end in the future, when that end will be. The universe has been created by Saguńa Brahma due to Prakrti qualifying the uncondensed Puruśa. This creates thought-waves in Puruśa, and as a result the universe is created. Thus this universe has been created due to Prakrti, or, to be more precise, due to Prakrti qualifying Puruśa. If Puruśa could be freed from the qualifying influence of Prakrti, the universe would come to an end, as Puruśa would not have to continue His imagination or thought-waves under Her influence. Puruśa in the qualified state of Saguńa Brahma has multiplied Himself into the infinite number of unit consciousnesses. It is due to these that Brahma is the supreme multiple of all the unit consciousnesses. In order to free Itself from the qualifying influence of Its principle (Prakrti), Saguńa Brahma will have to liberate the infinite number of unit consciousnesses from Her influence. Then alone can the creation come to an end. Saguńa Brahma contains the totality of all the many unit consciousnesses, and even if ten million unit consciousnesses were liberated from the influence of Prakrti, there would still be an infinite number left to be liberated. For whatever is taken away from the infinite, the remainder is still infinite. An infinite number means a number which cannot be counted or which never ends. So if a million or even a hundred million are taken away from an infinite number, the remainder will still be infinite. The number will not be countless or infinite if taking away any finite number, however large, makes it smaller, as that will bring its end within sight or conception. Hence however large the number of unit consciousnesses may be that are freed from the influence of Prakrti, there will still be an infinite number under Her influence in Saguńa Brahma. Saguńa Brahma will still be a multiple of an infinite number of unit consciousnesses, and as long as Saguńa Brahma is there, the creation will continue to exist. As the number of unit consciousnesses is infinite, the creation can never cease. The thought-waves in Puruśa in its Saguńa Brahma stage are created due to the influence of its qualifying principle (Prakrti) and as long as even one individual unit consciousness exists under the influence of Prakrti, the thought-wave or imagination will have to continue, and in it is the creation.

Creation is the thought-projection of Saguńa Brahma. How this creation has been formed in the imagination of Saguńa Brahma needs explanation. Rama, although in Bhagalpur, can create Chowringhee in his imagination. His citta takes the form of Chowringhee when his ahaḿtattva thinks of it. Rama’s citta is a part of his mind, and Rama creates Chowringhee in his mind. Similarly, Saguńa Brahma has created the universe in Its imagination. Its citta has become the universe as a result of the thinking of Its Ahaḿtattva. As citta is a part of the mind of Saguńa Brahma, the universe has been created in the mind of Saguńa Brahma. It has already been seen that in order to take the form of Chowringhee, Rama’s citta – a subtle entity – becomes like Chowringhee – a crude object. In order to take the form of a crude object citta has to change from subtle to crude. This change cannot happen suddenly. Citta has to gradually become crude and then alone can it take the form of Chowringhee (a crude object) properly. If milk has to be made into kśiira (a thick milk product obtained by boiling away the watery portion), it cannot be done quickly. The milk has to be boiled until it gradually becomes thicker. Only then does it adopt the thick form of kśiira. In the same way Saguńa Brahma’s subtle citta gradually crudifies and finally takes the crude form of kśititattva (solid). Hence creation, which is the transformation of citta as the result of the crudification of citta, must have gradually become crude from its subtle state.

Saguńa Brahma created the universe in Its citta by gradually crudifying Its subtle self. How did creation become crude from subtle? Prakrti qualifies Puruśa in Saguńa Brahma and that results in the creation of the universe. As in the case of unit consciousness, sattvaguńa or sentient Prakrti qualifies Puruśa first, and Buddhitattva comes into being. This gives Puruśa the feeling of “I”. Then rajoguńa or mutative Prakrti qualifies it further and the Ahaḿtattva of Saguńa Brahma is formed. Lastly static Prakrti or tamoguńa qualifies the Ahaḿtattva of Saguńa Brahma and citta is formed. The mind is composed of Buddhitattva, Ahaḿtattva and citta, and all three are subtle by nature. The subtle or abstract world or the mind of Saguńa Brahma is thus formed due to the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Buddhitattva, Ahaḿtattva and citta are the gradual transformation of Puruśa or consciousness. Buddhitattva, Ahaḿtattva and citta are all subtle, but Buddhitattva is the subtlest of the three. The next in order of subtlety is Ahaḿtattva and the last is citta – its objective counterpart. There is one idea in Buddhitattva and that is the feeling of “I”. In Ahaḿtattva we find another idea in addition to the feeling of “I” and that is the idea of “I do” (ego). Anything which contains a large number of factors is cruder than the one with less, and so Ahaḿtattva is cruder than Buddhitattva. Citta creates the result of the action of Ahaḿtattva and thereby acquires objectivity, either subtle or crude. It is cruder than Ahaḿtattva. It has been seen above that Buddhitattva is the first to come into being. It is followed by Ahaḿtattva. Citta is formed last. Thus the movement in the flow of creation is from subtle to crude.

It was explained earlier that the universe is the thought-projection of the Cosmic Mind. The influence of rajoguńa (mutative principle) creates a thought-wave in the Ahaḿtattva of Saguńa Brahma, and its objective counterpart, citta, assumes the form of the crude universe. Citta is subtle in nature, but it has to become crude like the creation. In order to become crude citta has to gradually take on the form of the five tattvas or rudimental factors, that is, vyomatattva or ákásha (ethereal), maruttattva or váyu (aerial), tejastattva or agni (luminous), jalatattva (liquid) and kśititattva (solid). All these five are crude, and the universe has been created out of these five rudimental factors. Tanmátra, we have already seen, is the subtle form in which the indriyas receive an object. There are also five tanmátras, that is, shabda (sound), sparsha (touch), rúpa (image), rasa (taste) and gandha (smell). In the subtle sphere we find that Buddhitattva is more subtle than Ahaḿtattva because the former has only the factor of “I exist” as compared to Ahaḿtattva which has two factors, “I exist” and “I do.” Similarly in the crude sphere something which contains more tanmátras is cruder than that which contains fewer tanmátras. The complete absence of tanmátras makes a thing absolutely fine or subtle. This also shows that tanmátras cannot help in the appreciation of things of the subtle sphere, where they are absent altogether. To appreciate those things one needs bhávaná – the introversial flow of the objective mind – while to know things of the crude sphere tanmátras are absolutely necessary. It is only with the help of tanmátras that things of the crude sphere can be perceived. Citta assumes the form of the creation, which is crude, and as tanmátras are necessary to know things of the crude sphere, citta has to have tanmátras. It has also to form tanmátras, as there is no other source from which it can get them. The universe is thus created from citta gradually manifesting itself as the five rudimental factors (bhúta) and the five tanmátras.

We may begin with vyoma or ákásha tattva – the ethereal factor. The void or nothingness which exists beyond the supposed atmosphere of planets, etc., is vyoma or ákásha tattva. This void indicates nothingness, yet we call it crude because it contains shabda (sound) tanmátra. The scientists call it ether. This void or ether has no form or shape. It has no weight. It contains nothing and that is why it is called void or nothingness. But sound can travel through it. Sound-waves could not be formed in the absence of a medium for their transmission. It is because of this that we call the void crude. The presence of shabda tanmátra makes it crude. But this is the subtlest realm of the crude sphere as it has only one factor, the sound tanmátra. Hence the first factor to be formed in this creation was the shabda tanmátra and ákásha tattva, the ethereal factor.

After taking the form of ákásha tattva, citta manifested itself as váyu. Váyu (air) is cruder than ákásha (ether) as in this we find the presence of two tanmátras. Air or váyu has the tanmátra of shabda (sound) as well as that of sparsha (touch). We would not be able to hear each other talk if air did not contain the shabda (sound) tanmátra. Ordinarily sound-waves are carried from place to place by the air, thus the presence of shabda (sound) tanmátra is essential. We only feel the presence of air by touch and so sparsha (touch) tanmátra is also present. Thus we find two tanmátras in váyu (aerial factor), while in ákásha or the ethereal factor there is only one tanmátra. Váyu, the aerial factor, is, therefore, cruder than ákásha, and has come into being after the ethereal factor.

Citta manifested itself as tejastattva (luminous factor) after váyutattva (aerial factor). Fire can be seen and so it can be said to have a shape or form. It contains rúpa tanmátra (the vibration due to ideation producing an image or form), otherwise we would not be able to see it. Fire can also be felt on touch. It has, therefore, both sparsha and shabda tanmátras. There are three tanmátras – rúpa, sparsha and shabda – in the luminous factor. As it has three tanmátras it is cruder than váyu and was created after váyu, the aerial factor.

Jala (liquid) was created after the luminous factor. Citta assumed a cruder form. Water is a liquid and has taste and hence contains the rasa (taste) tanmátra. Besides this it has shabda, sparsha and rúpa tanmátras also. It is thus cruder than fire. That water has shabda tanmátra can be observed by performing a simple experiment. Someone speaks on the level of the water from one bank and is heard on the other bank by an ear on the same level. Water can be touched and it has a form which can be seen. Hence it has four tanmátras – shabda, sparsha, rúpa and rasa – and is cruder than the luminous factor. Water thus came into being after fire.

Kśititattva (solid factor) was formed after jalatattva. Citta took the still cruder form of solid earth. In earth or kśiti we find a new tanmátra, gandha (smell). In kśiti we find all the five tanmátras – shabda (sound), sparsha (touch), rúpa (form), rasa (taste) and gandha (smell). Kśititattva is thus cruder than the rest of the factors. Kśititattva has shabda tanmátra, as we find sound travelling through telephone wires made of solids. Solids can be touched; they have a definite shape and taste. Lastly, it is only a solid particle which has smell. Earth, therefore, has all the five tanmátras. Earth or kśititattva is therefore the crudest of all the factors and was created last of all. It is in this final stage of transformation from subtle to crude that citta finds itself manifested in its crudest form as the solid factor.

It is due to the psychic survey of the Supreme Qualified Entity that this creation has gradually been transformed from the subtle to the crude. Its citta, according to the thought-waves of its Ahaḿtattva, has gradually changed from the subtle to the crudest form, kśititattva. As it has all the five tanmátras, kśititattva is the crudest form – an inanimate object. It has already been seen that in citta there is only a gradual metamorphosis of Puruśa. When Puruśa was qualified by Prakrti it assumed the form of citta, and it is this citta that has become inanimate as the crudest kśititattva. This consciousness, upon being qualified by Prakrti, has manifested itself as an inanimate object and has surely reached the ultimate end in that direction. In this changed condition consciousness has become absolutely as crude as an inanimate object. There could be nothing cruder than this. It is under the extreme or greatest influence of Prakrti that Cosmic Consciousness has reached the stage of an inanimate object as the crudest form of matter. In qualifying Puruśa or Cosmic Consciousness to drive it to the extreme of crudeness, the capacity of the qualifying principle (guńa) is used up completely and Prakrti is unable to qualify Puruśa further in that direction. Thus in kśititattva both Prakrti and Puruśa have become inanimate. Puruśa cannot become cruder and Prakrti cannot qualify Him any further to make Him still cruder. When Puruśa and Prakrti have both reached their limits of manifestation, the question arises if this is the end of creation. Another question also arises about the presence of animate objects like plants and animals if kśititattva is the final stage of creation. These do not appear anywhere in the formation of creation from subtle into crude. How and when these were formed is a very pertinent question.

The greater influence of Prakrti makes Puruśa (Consciousness) cruder. Where Her influence is less He is subtler. It is because of this that the extreme influence of Prakrti makes consciousness absolutely inanimate in the solid factor. The solid factor (kśititattva) appears inanimate at the very sight of it. The influence of Prakrti has hence reached its climax. Plants and animals cannot be said to be inanimate. Consciousness is reflected in them. They originate from these rudimental factors. That is, the citta of Saguńa Brahma (the Supreme Qualified Entity) which manifested itself as kśititattva now takes the form of plants and animals. It is because of this that creation is said to be formed out of the body of Brahma. Kśititattva is inanimate but the plants and animals which have originated from it have reflected consciousness and are not inanimate. They are surely more subtle than kśititattva. Kśititattva must have been formed before these, as plants and animals have been formed out of it. They do not appear anywhere in creation up to the formation of kśititattva. The fact that plants and animals are more subtle than kśititattva, suggests that after creation reaches its crudest form in kśititattva, it then advances towards subtle forms.

Creation gradually evolved from subtle to crude. Subtle citta gradually became the crudest kśititattva. Similarly, it will have to slowly return to subtlety again. Solid ghee (a butter extract) cannot be melted all at once. In the same way citta in the form of solid earth will gradually become subtle. That citta gradually advances from crude to subtle is demonstrated by the evolution of plant and animal life on earth. The first plant life on this earth appeared as the class of plants called káyii (a form of early algae and mosses). Káyii cannot be said to be inanimate because it does show some reflection of consciousness, whatever that reflection may be.

After this, plants with leaves and flowers came into being. In them we find clear signs of life, and these definitely have a clearer reflection of consciousness than káyii. Then the lower animals, followed by the higher animals, evolved. At the end of the series humans came into being. Thus we find that the most primitive creation on earth was káyii, and the most advanced was the human being. There is reflection of consciousness in káyii, but it is so blurred that one is sceptical about its presence, while in the human being we find consciousness clearly reflected. Creation evolved gradually from the káyii group of plants to humans. Similarly the reflection of consciousness gradually becomes clearer until it is complete in humans. The reflection of consciousness appears less in crude things, while in subtle things it is greater. In other words the degree of subtlety or crudeness also indicates the degree of the clarity of the reflection of consciousness. The most primitive life on the earth, káyii, shows very little consciousness, and the most advanced form of creation, the human being, exhibits a very clear reflection of consciousness. This means that káyii is the crudest form of life on earth and humans are the subtlest. They are more subtle than káyii. The process of creation in this phase is thus from crude to subtle.

It was said earlier that the supreme state of consciousness is subtle. The process of creation in this phase from crude to subtle means that creation is advancing towards Non-Qualified Consciousness. Creation is manifested in crude form out of the subtle consciousness under the qualifying influence of Prakrti, and it is again advancing from crude towards subtle. Under the qualifying pressure of Prakrti, consciousness takes a crude form first, and later again advances from that crude form to Non-Qualified Consciousness, which is subtle. Thus the entire creation has two phases. The first phase is the process of the transformation of subtle into crude and the second is that of crude into subtle.

Creation, we have seen, is the thought-projection of the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma). Puruśa in the Saguńa Brahma stage takes all these forms under the influence of Prakrti as thought-waves of Saguńa Brahma and becomes crudest in the form of kśititattva. In the next phase, when creation moves from crude to subtle, it is in fact the thought-waves of Saguńa Brahma which move towards subtlety. Humans are created last of all and in them we find fully-reflected consciousness. This leads to the conclusion that humans are the final expression in the thought-wave of Saguńa Brahma, and that beyond this stage is the merger of the unit consciousness with the Cosmic Consciousness. Cosmic Consciousness is abstract or subtle, but under the qualifying influence of Prakrti It starts manifesting Itself as the creation, first from subtle to crude and then again from the crude forms back to the subtle or abstract. The crudest stage in the creation is kśititattva, where consciousness exists as an inanimate object. Thus in the process of creation, the more consciousness moves towards crudeness, the smaller is the reflection of Cosmic Consciousness; and when it moves from crude to subtle, the reflection of Cosmic Consciousness is correspondingly greater. As consciousness is fully reflected in humans, this shows that on its return journey from crude to subtle, consciousness has made humans its final abode from whence it can merge in Cosmic Consciousness. Creation is only a thought-wave of Saguńa Brahma; the final stage of creation, the human being, is then naturally the ultimate stage of the thought-wave. Thus humans are the highest-evolved beings and are the ultimate stage in the evolution of life.

The crude universe is formed as a result of the psychic survey of the qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma), and humans appear at the last stage of this survey, while vyomatattva (ethereal factor) forms the first. In creation, besides millions of human beings, we also find animals, plants and matter in the five rudimental factors of kśiti (solid), apa (liquid), agni (luminous), váyu (aerial) and vyoma (ethereal). Humans, who form the last stage in the thought-wave of Brahma today, must have at the earliest stage also existed as the first stage or vyomatattva. They must have, in the course of the thought-wave, evolved to the next stage of váyutattva; but the first stage of vyomatattva could not have disappeared altogether, because air or váyutattva cannot exist without the presence of ether or empty space. Even when the first stage of the thought-wave evolves to the second stage, vyomatattva or ether continues to exist. The question about the replacement of vyomatattva, which has already passed on as the second stage of the thought-wave, arises here. There is only one possibility, and that is that Brahma again takes up the form of vyomatattva. Vyomatattva would have completely disappeared from existence in the course of creation if it were not replenished, just as when students are promoted from class one to class two, class one would remain vacant unless fresh students were admitted. And when the students of class two are promoted to class three, they are replaced by promotions from class one where fresh admissions are again made. This also applies to the thought-waves of Brahma. When vyomatattva (ethereal factor) gets converted into váyutattva and váyutattva becomes agni, the vacancy created by the formation of váyu from vyoma is filled by Brahma creating more vyomatattva in its thought-waves. The student who joins class one earlier will obtain his degree sooner. Similarly, unit consciousness, which formed the first stage of the thought-wave of Brahma as primitive protozoa, will, after passing from subtle to crude and then from crude to subtle, develop as humans at the earliest moment. The speck of dust, which as an intermediary state in evolution lies as an inanimate object today, will also some day be transformed into humans.

As Saguńa Brahma is subtle and creation moves from subtle to crude and then again from crude to subtle, this shows that creation is formed out of it and again marches back to it.

Puruśa is subtle by nature. It is due to the maximum influence of Prakrti that Puruśa becomes the crudest in kśititattva. When the influence of Prakrti is greater, Puruśa becomes cruder, and when that influence is less, He is more subtle. This is the reason that Puruśa becomes inanimate (jad́a) in kśititattva, where the application of the qualifying principles of Prakrti has reached its climax. After this phase creation again marches towards the subtle from its crude form and as a result its closeness to Non-Qualified Puruśa also slowly develops. The development shows the gradual release of Puruśa from the influence of Prakrti. Unless Puruśa is freed from the influence of Prakrti, His return to the Non-Qualified state is not possible. Thus we find that as creation moves from crude to subtle, Puruśa gradually becomes free from the qualifying influence of Prakrti.

Puruśa is gradually becoming free from the bondage of the influence of Prakrti in the movement of creation from crude to subtle, while in the other phase of creation, He is gradually falling more and more under the influence of Prakrti as creation moves from subtle to crude. He finally becomes inanimate (jad́a) in the form of kśititattva under the extreme influence of the qualifying principles of Prakrti. The property of Prakrti is to qualify Puruśa. In the phase of creation where the subtle changes into crude, we find that Prakrti gradually qualifies Puruśa, as a result of which He is deprived of His capacity to reflect Cosmic Consciousness, until He appears completely devoid of consciousness and lies as an inanimate object in the form of kśititattva. In the movement from subtle to crude, Prakrti exercises her qualifying property to the fullest. But in the other phase of creation, when the movement is from crude to subtle, we find that gradually the reflection of consciousness becomes clear. In other words, Puruśa is gradually becoming free from the influence of Prakrti. In this phase of creation, Prakrti is not able to exercise Her binding quality properly, because Puruśa, instead of coming further under Her influence, is becoming free as a result. How Puruśa is able to free Himself of the influence of Prakrti when Her nature or property is to qualify and influence Puruśa, needs explanation.

Under the influence of the qualifying principle of Prakrti, Bhúmácaetanya or Cosmic Consciousness has manifested Himself as an infinite number of unit consciousnesses in the creation. It is only some of these unit consciousnesses which have taken the form of kśititattva, and these are gradually being freed from the influence of Prakrti in the movement of creation from crude to subtle. The entire creation has its origin in Saguńa Brahma and so the Supreme Entity is the cause of the transformation of unit consciousness into this crude creation and also of its freedom from the qualifying force. It is Saguńa Brahma who is responsible for this. Saguńa Brahma Himself must be emancipated, if He is responsible for the emancipation of His unit consciousnesses. Otherwise Saguńa Brahma could not be the cause for the emancipation of unit consciousnesses. One who is in fetters himself cannot release others from them. If Rama and Shyama have both been locked up, Rama will never be able to get Shyama released as long as he is himself imprisoned. Rama cannot accomplish this from inside the prison no matter how hard he tries: Rama can never be the instrument of Shyama’s release. But someone who is outside the prison could free Shyama even with only a little effort: he could become the cause of his release. Those who are not free themselves cannot become the means of freeing others. Hence if Saguńa Brahma is to be the cause of the emancipation of unit consciousness, he must be someone who has himself achieved emancipation (muktapuruśa).

What is meant by muktapuruśa? In Nirguńa Brahma both Prakrti and Puruśa are independent. There Puruśa, on account of His independence, is not qualified by the qualifying principle of Prakrti, and He is Puruśa of Nirguńa Brahma. He becomes the Puruśa of Nirguńa Brahma only on attaining freedom from the influence of Prakrti. Thus one who has attained Nirguńa Brahma by means of sádhaná (intuitional practices) is muktapuruśa. On attaining the nirguńa stage one becomes free from the bondage of the principles of Prakrti. Yet if such persons come under the influence of Prakrti by their own will for a predetermined period with the intention of liberating others, they will still be muktapuruśa. They have not been bound by the influence of Prakrti. They have themselves accepted the qualifying influence of Prakrti for a certain period. Prakrti will not be able to keep them under her influence after the completion of that period. Hence a person who has attained the nirguńa stage through his or her sádhaná and who comes under the influence of Prakrti for a certain period at his or her own instance with the object of the liberation of humanity, is a muktapuruśa.

A muktapuruśa cannot be the cause of the bondage of others. Here bondage means being qualified by the principle of Prakrti. To be the cause of the bondage of others would mean coming under the influence of Prakrti. For binding others will not be possible without being qualified by Prakrti. As muktapuruśas are free from the bondage of Prakrti, they cannot be influenced by Her and so they can never be the cause of the bondage of others. As Saguńa Brahma is muktapuruśa, It also cannot be the cause of the bondage of others.

In the course of creation we find, however, that the vast universe came into being according to the will of Saguńa Brahma, when every unit consciousness came under the influence of Prakrti. Saguńa Brahma being muktapuruśa means that It Itself is mukta (emancipated), but all Its units are not free individually and have come under the control of Prakrti at the instance of Saguńa Brahma. Thus Saguńa Brahma becomes the cause of bondage of unit consciousness and Itself becomes bound. But we have already concluded that Saguńa Brahma is muktapuruśa. If that is the case, then why should all Its units come under the influence of Prakrti and why should this universe be created at all? While explaining muktapuruśa it was said earlier that those who, after attaining the nirguńa state, accept the influence of Prakrti by their own will for a fixed period with the object of helping others, are mukta (emancipated). As a muktapuruśa, Saguńa Brahma has to accept the influence of Prakrti for a certain period after attaining the nirguńa stage, with the object of serving living beings (jiivas). Every unit consciousness has its origin in Saguńa Brahma, and it is with the object of assisting them that Saguńa Brahma has freely accepted the bondage of Prakrti for a certain period. The greatest service to unit consciousness is to take it back to the supreme state where Prakrti has no influence. Hence the welfare of Puruśa lies in His being liberated from the bondage of Prakrti so that He can attain the supreme state. Saguńa Brahma thus accepts the influence of Prakrti for a certain period of time with the sole aim of also attaining the status of muktapuruśa for every one of His unit consciousnesses. It is with this aim in view that every unit consciousness comes under the influence of Prakrti at Her instance. If the emancipation of every unit consciousness is the objective, the period for which Saguńa Brahma accepts the influence of Prakrti will have to last until every unit consciousness is freed from bondage or until each of them attains the status of muktapuruśa like Saguńa Brahma.

As Saguńa Brahma wants each of Its units to become free like Itself (a muktapuruśa), It will have to form Itself into an infinite number of units in order to fulfil Its desire to liberate all of them. Ańu or unit means the minutest part or the smallest unit. In order to divide Itself into units, Saguńa Brahma had to take a crude form because it is not possible to divide a subtle thing. For instance, fire, which is a particular form of tejastattva (luminous factor), is more subtle than earth or kśititattva. Can this be divided or split into two? Striking two matches separately will produce two flames, but if the two sticks are held close together there will be only one flame, and to distinguish between the flames produced by the two sticks will be impossible. In spite of all our efforts we will not be able to draw a line of demarcation between the flames produced by the two sticks. The flames lose their individual identity to become one object or a single entity. Thus it is not possible to divide or separate fire. But if two handfuls of dust are mixed together it is possible to divide them into two distinct parts again. Thus unlike fire, earth can be divided into parts. Fire is more subtle than earth, but is cruder than ether or air. As it is not possible to divide fire, the question of dividing air, ether or Cosmic Consciousness (Bhúmácaetanya), which are far more subtle, does not arise. It is not possible to divide water or ether because, in spite of our efforts, it is not possible to discern a line of demarcation between the different parts of water. It is only earth or kśititattva, the crudest rudimental factor, which can be divided properly into desired distinct units. Saguńa Brahma had to assume a crude form so that It could divide Itself into innumerable units. It exists as units only in kśititattva (solid factor), as It cannot divide Itself into units in any other form. It can also be said that the crude universe came into being, or the phase of creation which advances from subtle to crude was introduced, only with the intention of forming infinite multiplicities of the innumerable unit consciousnesses.

It is only in kśititattva that unit consciousness comes into being. Saguńa Brahma wants every one of Its unit consciousnesses to be emancipated and, for this purpose, just as It has at Its own instance assumed the crudest form as kśititattva under the extreme influence of the qualifying principles of Prakrti, so again does It, at Its own instance, advance towards subtlety in order to gradually free Itself of the bondage. For Caetanya or Consciousness, freedom from the bondage of Prakrti means the development of subtlety and finally Its return to the Non-Qualified Supreme Entity. The phase of creation where It moves from subtle to crude has the purpose of Cosmic Consciousness forming Itself into Its infinite multiplicities as unit consciousnesses. The next phase of the movement from crude to subtle has the intention of liberating the unit consciousnesses from the bondage of Prakrti. Saguńa Brahma aims at the liberation of each of Its units, and to fulfil this purpose, It has to manifest Itself as the creation, which advances from subtle to crude and then from crude to subtle in its two phases. Thus the purpose or object of Saguńa Brahma in creating this universe is to obtain freedom for each of Its units or for all Its multiplicities and to obtain for them the status of mukapuruśa.

To become muktapuruśa, attainment of Nirguńa Brahma is essential. The desire of Saguńa Brahma to liberate each of Its units will only be fulfilled when every unit consciousness attains Nirguńa Brahma at the instance of Saguńa Brahma. The possibility or the capacity of Saguńa Brahma to obtain for Its unit consciousnesses the attainment of Nirguńa has to be examined.

Creation is only a psychic survey or kalpaná of Saguńa Brahma. Hence it is in the thought-wave of Saguńa Brahma that It forms an infinite number of unit consciousnesses in kśititattva. Psychic survey, kalpaná or thought-waves are only functions of mind, and their activities depend on the limitations of the mind creating them. It is just like the thought-wave creating Chowringhee in the mind of Rama; it is confined within the limits of Rama’s mind, and Shyama’s mind cannot see it. If kalpaná or psychic survey is confined within the limits of the mind creating it, the unit consciousness also, which exists within the expanse of a thought-wave of Saguńa Brahma, has to be confined within the limits of the mind of Saguńa Brahma. Unit consciousness cannot thus go beyond the mind of the Qualified Supreme Entity. Nirguńa Brahma is beyond the scope of the mind of Saguńa and so all the units of Saguńa Brahma cannot attain Nirguńa Brahma even if He wishes. The purpose of Saguńa Brahma to liberate and make every one of His units a muktapuruśa like Himself, is not served and becomes meaningless if every unit consciousness cannot attain Nirguńa Brahma if he desires it. We must see what Saguńa Brahma then does to achieve Its object.

Brahma is without any beginning and so is Prakrti. When Puruśa (Consciousness) is less condensed, Prakrti (Qualifying Principle) qualifies Puruśa, and Brahma then is called Saguńa Brahma or the Qualified Supreme Entity. If Brahma is eternal, the less condensed Puruśas in It must also have existed throughout eternity. The qualifying influence of Prakrti must have also been operating over Puruśa for eternity. Saguńa Brahma has thus been a qualified entity since eternity, because Prakrti has been influencing the less condensed Brahma for eternity. But earlier we saw that Saguńa Brahma is a muktapuruśa. This shows that Saguńa Brahma, which was formerly in bondage, later became emancipated. Here, however, a question arises about the agency which brings about the emancipation of Puruśa from the influence of Prakrti. There is no other entity except Prakrti, and Puruśa has been under the influence of Prakrti throughout eternity. In the absence of a third entity and as Puruśa is under the influence of Prakrti, the only course possible for His liberation is through His own desire and effort. The effort to liberate one’s self from the influence of Prakrti is called sádhaná.

Before Saguńa Brahma became free from bondage, It was called Prajápati, and after It attained emancipation by sádhaná and became muktapuruśa, It was called Hirańyagarbha.

Saguńa Brahma wants, but is not able to, obtain the nirguńa state for unit consciousnesses or unit puruśas, and Its object is not realized. The object of Saguńa Brahma could only be realized if unit consciousnesses attained Nirguńa Brahma by carrying out sádhaná like Prajápati. Sádhaná means an earnest effort or an effort with intense longing. Sádhaná for mukti (emancipation) means to make an earnest effort with an intense desire for liberation from the bondage of the qualifying principles of Prakrti. The effort with an intense desire to liberate itself from the bondage of Prakrti will only bring results if unit consciousness is alive to its subservient position and understands its bondage to the qualifying principles of Prakrti. The question of emancipation does not arise for one who does not realize his or her bondage and dependence. Hence for liberation it is necessary to be aware that one is in bondage. It is only after one realizes this that one feels the necessity to search for a method for one’s liberation. Both the realization of being in bondage and a methodical effort to obtain liberation are required by unit consciousness for attaining emancipation. Units should be so developed that they become aware of their bondage and are able to find the means to free themselves from this bondage. In kśititattva units are inanimate when they come into being. That inanimate (jad́a) unit being under the extreme influence of Prakrti is incapable of even realizing its existence and will never be able to find the means of its emancipation. Saguńa Brahma aims at the liberation of every one of Its units, but It is not able to achieve this completely in the case of jad́a. Saguńa Brahma therefore liberates them from the influence of Prakrti as far as it is possible according to Its capacity. This is the reason for humans possessing clearly-reflected consciousness, as they form the final stage of creation. In humans the expansion is not complete and they are unable to get absolute release from the bondage of the qualifying principles of Prakrti. But consciousness in humans is clearly reflected, and they are able to realize their subjugation. This also gives them the capacity to make an effort to perform sádhaná for their emancipation. It was with the intention of creating humans capable of performing sádhaná that Saguńa Brahma came under the influence of Prakrti and brought this creation into being. So humans were created only to do sádhaná and attain emancipation. Those who do not perform sádhaná for their mukti (emancipation), even though they were created for this purpose, go against the wishes of the Supreme Entity. They defeat the very purpose of the creation of human beings.

Consciousness in humans is a reflection on the mental plate, needing an ádhára or body made of the five rudimental factors originating from Saguńa Brahma, but the Cosmic Consciousness is not dependent on any ádhára or body. Saguńa Brahma or the Qualified Supreme Entity has no body like that of a human being. Humans are a thought-projection of Saguńa Brahma and exist within Its mind. Saguńa Brahma could also have had a body like a human if It had existed within the mind of another entity and come into being as its thought-projection. Saguńa Brahma is non-causal. It has no beginning and no end. As such It cannot exist in the mind of another entity and acquire a body. Consciousness in humans is only a reflection of Cosmic Consciousness, while the consciousness of Saguńa Brahma is Cosmic Consciousness Itself. Humans also receive antahkarańa (introversial psychic force) like Saguńa Brahma. But a human being’s mind is only a unit of the Cosmic Mind of Saguńa Brahma, just as his or her consciousness is only a multiplicity of Cosmic Consciousness. Humans can also create in their thought-waves in the same way as Saguńa Brahma created the universe in Its thought-waves. We saw earlier that Rama’s capacity to create Chowringhee in his imagination or thought-waves while sitting in Bhagalpur is only momentary and appears real only to him. On the other hand, Saguńa Brahma’s creation of the universe appears real and is not momentary. This is so because humans, being a part of Its creation formed as the thought-projection of Saguńa Brahma, have a relative existence together with the rest of creation. The Cosmos or Saguńa Brahma looks upon Its thought-projection as real, and the unit within naturally has to feel it as real. Humans, therefore, consider the thought-projection of the Qualified Supreme Entity and Its creation, the universe, to be a reality. While Rama’s mind and its projection in imagination is limited, within which Shyama’s mind does not work, the imagined objects formed in Rama’s mind can be seen and considered real by him only for the time the spell of his imagination lasts. Shyama’s mind does not exist within Rama’s mind and hence the former does not find these objects real. Had Shyama’s mind existed within Rama’s mind, the former would have seen Chowringhee created in the thought-waves of the latter’s mind and, like Rama, would have also considered the imaginary creation of Chowringhee to be factual. For instance, we have seen earlier that a person can extend or project his or her mind to bring the minds of others within its scope. At that time others also see that person’s imagination and consider it to be real like the magician’s rope trick. Thus human beings can also create objects in their thought-waves, but they are only replicas of their previous experience. They must see or hear about the object which they create in their imagination. As Brahma is non-causal, nothing existed before or beyond It to enable It to copy any object in Its thought-waves. Hence the thought-projections of Brahma are always new. They are not and cannot be based on past experience like the imagination of human beings. The last and most important difference between Brahma and human beings is the difference in their characteristic property, or dharma. The dharma of human beings is to do sádhaná and become a muktapuruśa (emancipated being), while that of Saguńa Brahma is to provide an opportunity to each and every one of its units to become a muktapuruśa. In fact all the effort and trouble of the Qualified Supreme Entity in creating the universe and the human beings in it is directed only towards the purpose of emancipating every one of Its units.

1955

Who Am I and What Am I?

Human beings form the last stage in the evolutionary ladder of the creation. In human beings consciousness is fully and clearly reflected in a physical body made of the five rudimental factors derived from the Cosmic body of the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma). This clear reflection of consciousness is unit consciousness (átman), and the physical body of the five factors which receives this reflection is called the human body. Thus a human being has unit consciousness (átman) and body. Being the possessor of these two shows that a human being is neither of these. If human beings were átman (unit consciousness) they could not claim it as their átman, and alternatively were they bodies only, they could not say, “This is my body.” They are different from these two. There is some other entity in human beings which claims the possession of átman and body. That other entity appears to be the owner of átman and the body. What then is that other entity?

The pure feeling of “I” is only an abstract idea. A little introspection would show that this feeling of “I exist” is an idea. It comes about as a result of thinking. This feeling of “I” can come only when there is consciousness; and it is with consciousness or jiṋána that one can take an idea and think or perform some action. The feeling of “I” is, therefore, a mental projection of consciousness; or, to be explicit, it can be said that without consciousness, or jiṋána, the knowledge of existence and thereby the idea of the feeling of “I” cannot be formed. Átman is unit consciousness or unit puruśa, and as it is within the scope of Saguńa Brahma, it will be qualified by the principles of Prakrti in the same way as has occurred in the case of Puruśa in Saguńa Brahma. It is due to the qualifying influence of the sentient principle of Prakrti that átman acquires the knowledge of existence or that the pure feeling of “I” comes into being. It is by this idea of existence that the feeling of “I” is formed, and hence the individual’s identity as “I” is this idea only. This is thus only a projection formed due to the qualifying influence of sentient Prakrti on unit consciousness. This feeling of “I” is, therefore, not átman or unit consciousness. The human beings’ individuality or their feeling of “I” is not unit consciousness. It is only an objective idea of unit consciousness, the knowledge of which comes about by the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Human beings’ feeling of “I” is thus entirely dependent on unit consciousness, just as the existence of a plank of wood is dependent on a tree. The plank cannot be called a tree, and similarly this entity of “I” cannot be unit consciousness. It is only an idea dependent on unit consciousness, formed as a result of the qualifying influence of sentient Prakrti on it.

It has been shown earlier that buddhitattva comes into being due to the qualifying influence of the sentient principle of Prakrti on the unit consciousness. This also brings about the feeling of “I” and creates the knowledge of existence of unit consciousness. The individual entity of “I”, therefore, is not unit consciousness; it is buddhitattva, which is only a part of his or her mind.

The “I” entity of human beings is buddhitattva, which is subtler than ahaḿtattva and citta. What then are ahaḿtattva and citta? It has been explained in the first chapter that ahaḿtattva (ego) comes into being as a result of the qualifying influence of the mutative principle of Prakrti on buddhitattva, whereupon the latter manifests itself as ahaḿtattva. The ahaḿtattva (ego), on being further qualified by the static principle of Prakrti, is manifested as citta. It is, in fact, buddhitattva, or the pure feeling of “I”, which is manifested as ahaḿtattva (ego) and citta due to the qualifying influence of the mutative and static principles of Prakrti. Ahaḿtattva (ego) and citta are only cruder functional forms of the human being’s “I” entity. The human being’s mind is, therefore, a further projection of his feeling of “I” (buddhitattva), and is made of that entity only.

Unit consciousness or átman is reflected only when there is a physical body made of the five rudimental factors of the Macrocosm. Buddhitattva comes into being as a result of the influence of sentient Prakrti on unit consciousness, and so buddhitattva, or the feeling of “I”, is also dependent on the physical body. Since Buddhitattva pervades every bit of the body, one feels the presence of “I” in every part of the body and is prone to identify this “I” with the body. It has, however, been explained earlier that this feeling of “I” and the body are not the same entity. They are different – the feeling of “I” is buddhitattva, and the physical body merely forms a shelter (ádhára) for it.

A human being’s feeling of “I” is thus neither his or her unit consciousness nor his or her body; it is only the mental creation of unit consciousness, termed as buddhitattva, and this “I” is further manifested as the other two functional forms of mind – ahaḿtattva (ego) and citta.

1955

What Is My Relation with the Universe and the Cosmic Entity?

Nirguńa Brahma is the supreme rank of Brahma, and this status is attained when consciousness is not under the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Saguńa Brahma, the Qualified Supreme Entity, is under the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Saguńa Brahma is also called Bhagaván. Consciousness (puruśa), on attaining freedom from the bondage of the qualifying influence of Prakrti, acquires the supreme rank and has the status of Nirguńa – Non-Qualified Consciousness. Átman or unit consciousness, being a multiple of consciousness in the Qualified Supreme Entity, is also a multiple of Bhagaván. Hence unit consciousness is also Bhagaván, and on being released from the bondage of Prakrti it merges in Nirguńa to attain the supreme rank.

In the previous chapter it was explained that the human being’s feeling of “I” is not átman or unit consciousness. The knowledge of existence or the feeling of “I” is different from unit consciousness. It has also been explained that this feeling of “I” is only a metamorphosed projection of unit consciousness. Hence the human being’s “I” entity is not Bhagaván. It is a changed or assumed form of Bhagaván. For example, a person called Rama while acting as Shahjahan on the stage will be called Shahjahan and not Rama. Rama playing the role of Shahjahan will not be the real personality of Rama. It will be only a changed or assumed personality, and as long as he continues to act that role, he will be called Shahjahan and not Rama. Similarly, as long as the feeling of “I” is the person’s identity, the person will be different from his or her átman or Bhagaván, and the person with this feeling of “I” will remain only a changed or assumed form of unit consciousness (átman). It would thus be seen that it is a person’s feeling of “I” which keeps the person away from his or her unit consciousness. In fact, it is this feeling of “I” which makes a human being a different entity from Bhagaván. On the conclusion of the drama in which Rama played the role of Shahjahan, he reverts back to his original personality and is called Rama. In the same way, on release from this feeling of “I”, the changed or assumed form of unit consciousness ceases to exist and unit consciousness (átman) becomes nirguńa (non-qualified), as this assumed form comes about only as a result of the qualifying influence of Prakrti. The termination of this changed or assumed form of unit consciousness means freedom from the bondage of Prakrti. It is hence the feeling of “I” in human beings which creates the difference between people and their unit consciousnesses. In reality it is this feeling of “I” which keeps the unit consciousness or átman from attaining the supreme rank.

A human being’s feeling of “I” is only metamorphosed unit consciousness, yet this entity of “I” is different from unit consciousness or Bhagaván, and so it is not unit consciousness that can be held responsible for performance of actions or experiencing their consequences as long as the actions are performed by that “I”. For instance, the consequences of the actions performed by Rama on the stage in the changed role of Shahjahan do not affect Rama. It would be assumed that Shahjahan only will be affected, as the doer of the act is the assumed personality and not Rama in the capacity of his original personality. Rama in his original capacity would only witness all that the assumed form does or experiences. Similarly, it is the projected or changed form of “I” which acts and also experiences the results of all actions. The unit consciousness neither performs any actions, nor experiences any results. It only witnesses the actions and also the results thereof.

In the first chapter it was said that unit consciousness is the knowing entity. It can be appreciated as the knowing or witnessing entity only, and a human being’s feeling of “I” is the other entity which creates in humans the knowledge of existence and also establishes their existence. Unit consciousness always remains a witnessing entity, and any action performed by the “I” entity has no effect on it. A witnessing or knowing entity need not be the performer of any actions, and hence the status of unit consciousness remains unchanged as witnessing entity only. Only the one who sows shall reap; hence only the entity termed as the feeling of “I” will experience the results of all actions, as this feeling is the originator of all actions. The witnessing entity or the knowing entity remains only a spectator without experiencing any results, as it does not work. For example, Rama who witnesses a football match will never get any credit for winning the match. Only the player Shyama will be called the winner. It is the actual player, Shyama, who will win or lose the game, and he alone will feel fatigued as a result of his playing. Rama, who is only a spectator, will neither win nor lose, nor will he feel exhausted and tired. Rama the spectator will witness the play and also the result of the actions. He will only know the result of the match and see Shyama exhausted as a result of his playing the game. Similarly unit consciousness or átman is a spectator witnessing all the actions performed by human beings and the results experienced by them. It does not perform any action and hence does not experience any result. Unit consciousness or átman is only a witnessing force – the all-knowing entity.

The human being’s feeling of “I” is buddhitattva. This “I” gives the idea of the knowledge of existence. It does not give any idea of performing an action. Mere feeling of existence does not indicate that “I” performs any action, and so it is not buddhitattva which acts. It has been said in the first chapter that ahaḿtattva, which comes into being as a result of the qualifying influence of Prakrti on buddhitattva, is the part of mind that works. Ahaḿtattva (ego) is not buddhitattva, as the former is formed from the latter. It is a cruder manifestation of buddhitattva. It is ahaḿtattva (ego) which works, and it is this only which experiences the results of action. Buddhitattva, which is a distinctly separate entity from ahaḿtattva and is merely pure feeling of “I”, does not perform any action and hence should not experience the result of actions. On serious reflection, however, no action appears possible without the feeling of “I” or the knowledge of existence being there; or who else would make ahaḿtattva work? It is the feeling of “I” and the knowledge of existence which inspires ahaḿtattva to work. Thus it is seen that buddhitattva does not actually perform any action, yet it is because of the knowledge of existence and feeling of “I” provided by it that a person is able to work through his or her ahaḿtattva. The feeling of “I” is therefore related to the performance of actions and in this way related to the results of actions also. To illustrate this we can take an example of two landlords whose dispute results in the free fighting of their people. As a result of this fight the actual fighters, that is, the landlords’ men, will be injured or may even die, but the landlords will remain apparently unaffected. Yet the landlords are responsible for the fight as it was started through their instigating the people. Hence apparently the person who works is directly affected, but in fact the landlords are the persons who will indirectly experience the results of the fight among their men. They alone will be the winners or losers. Similarly buddhitattva is also indirectly related to the results of actions performed by ahaḿtattva, although the actual performer of actions is ahaḿtattva, which apparently bears the consequences of actions.

That citta comes into being as a result of the qualifying influence of the static principle of Prakrti on ahaḿtattva was explained in the first chapter. It is thus ahaḿtattva which manifests itself in a cruder form as citta. The results of actions performed by ahaḿtattva are formed in citta. It was explained in detail in the first chapter that citta assumes the form of the actions of buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva with the help of the ten organs (indriyas). For instance, citta itself has to become like a book in order to enable ahaḿtattva to see a book. The same applies in order to listen to a sound. Citta is a crude manifestation of ahaḿtattva, which itself is a manifestation of buddhitattva. Citta, hence, is the crudest portion of buddhitattva and is not capable of independent action. Any independent action by a conscious entity is not tolerated by Prakrti, which tries to go against each of a person’s independent actions. As the reflection of consciousness is complete in human beings, they are able to realize their bondage, and they try to defy the authority of Prakrti. In this effort to overcome the influence of Prakrti, human beings work against Her designs, and Prakrti, in Her turn, goes against human beings’ efforts in order to maintain Her domination over them. A person’s actions, therefore, are inspired by his or her consciousness in order to break away from the bondage of Prakrti, and the results that they experience are the reactions inflicted by Prakrti to keep them under bondage.

Let us now see how an action is executed and why one has to bear the consequence in the form of reaction. Every action originates in and is performed by the mind, that is, by its three components, buddhitattva, ahaḿtattva and citta. It was explained earlier that citta has to take the form, or become like the result, of any action performed by a human being. This would mean that citta leaves its normal form and is metamorphosed into the form of the result of an action. For instance, citta has to become a book to be able to see a book. A person’s mind has to leave its normal form and become deformed in order to complete the execution of an action. The creation and the existence of mind are due to the influence of Prakrti on consciousness, and when consciousness disrupts the normal status of mind by inspiring it to work, it is not tolerated by Prakrti. Prakrti, being the dominating factor, causes a reaction to every action and brings the mind back to its former status. This is called karmaphala. Thus karmaphala is a manifestation of buddhitattva. Buddhitattva and the feeling of “I” are the same entity. It is therefore a human being’s feeling of “I” only which, on becoming crude, is transformed into citta. We have seen that a book can only be seen when citta becomes like the book. As citta is a transformation of the feeling of “I”, it is in fact a human being’s feeling of “I” which becomes like a book, and it is not a book that one sees. It is one’s own transformed self that one sees as a book. It is that transformed feeling of “I” known as citta which, on grasping the ideatory vibration of the nerves creating form (rúpa tanmátra), becomes a book itself. To hear a sound, one has to become sound itself. Thus human beings themselves become the result of their actions, and whatever one sees, feels, hears, touches or smells is their own feeling of “I” or their own transformed self.

Buddhitattva gives the inspiration to work. Ahaḿtattva executes the act, and citta has to become the result of that execution. Buddhitattva, ahaḿtattva and citta constitute the mind, and so it is the mind that works. It is the mind which will bear the consequences. The one who sows shall reap. Unit consciousness (átman) is beyond the scope of mind, and hence it neither works nor bears the consequences. It only remains a spectator in the human body.

Consciousness (Puruśa) and Its qualifying principle (Prakrti) are independent of the influence of each other in the Non-Qualified Supreme Entity (Nirguńa) where Consciousness holds the supreme rank. While in the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma), Consciousness (Puruśa) is under the bondage of Prakrti, which results in the creation of the universe according to the designs of Prakrti.

The process or reaction which restores mind to its original form, the deformity being due to the actions of mind, is experienced as karmaphala (result of actions). The intensity with which an action is performed and thus deforms the mind will be exhibited to the same extent in the reaction or karmaphala. The pressure employed against Prakrti in causing deformity in the mind will be met in order to restore mind to its normal form. For instance, a rubber ball pressed with a finger forms a depression, but on being released it returns to its original or normal form. The finger will experience an equal and opposite force at the time of reaction. Here the rubber ball is comparable to mind, and the finger to the human being’s “I” entity that makes the mind work and thereby creates depressions in it. Hence one would feel the reaction of mind returning to its original form with the same amount of intensity as was employed in creating the depression. The intentions of Prakrti to restore the original form of mind and also to punish the “I” that inspired the mind to work, are both achieved by this process of reaction. According to the rules of Prakrti, the nature of mind is to come back to its normal form by reacting to every action. Hence human beings have to bear the consequences of any type of work as reaction (karmaphala). According to the law of Prakrti, a person will experience the reaction to all their deeds, whether good or evil. For instance, if a person steals and causes suffering to the person whose things are stolen, the first person will create a distortion in his or her mind by using his or her faculty of inflicting pain. The mind will react to remove this distortion, and the person inflicting pain will experience an equal amount of pain (in mental measure) as a result of this reaction. Similarly, if people by their deeds give happiness to others, they will, as a result of the mind’s reaction attempting to come back to its normal form, experience an equal amount of happiness. This is because according to the laws of Prakrti one will experience an equal and opposite reaction in the process of mind regaining its normal form. Thus Prakrti makes a human being bear the consequences (karmaphala) of all his or her actions with the help of the instrument of mind created by Prakrti, and whatever a human being does, good or evil, they will have to experience a similar reaction (karmaphala).

No one can ever exist without doing some action or other. Even when sitting quietly, one is performing an action; the physical body may not be exerting itself, yet the ever-active mind is not still. The mind even without physical action engages itself in actions by thinking or imagining. A person may be thinking evil of someone, may even be planning to kill him; or may be thinking of ways and means of helping others in their distress. All this is action and does not need any physical exertion or movement. Even physical action is only a further projection of mental activity. It was explained earlier that all action is performed by mind and the ten organs (indriyas), which are only a further extension of citta that translate mental actions into physical activity. All actions can be classified as physical or mental. Actions performed by the mind with the help of the organs (indriyas) are physical, while those performed without their help by mind alone are mental actions. Both these actions will cause distortion in the mind, and as a result of the restoration of the mind to its normal state, they will cause a reaction which will have to be experienced. Hence any action, whether mental or physical, will make the doer experience the reaction (karmaphala).

Fully-reflected consciousness in human beings makes them realize their subjugation under the bondage of Prakrti. They do not want to continue in this position of slavery and hence work independently against Prakrti, who in turn keeps on inflicting punishment on them in the form of reactions to their actions. On this earth human beings alone have fully-reflected consciousness, and so no living beings except human beings can work independently. The laws of Prakrti punish only actions performed independently or against Her wishes. Those incapable of independent action will, hence, not receive any punishment at Her hands. It will thus be seen that except human beings no living beings experience karmaphala for their actions.

Karmaphala has to be experienced for every action, whether a good deed or an evil one. Human beings cannot exist without action even for a moment, and so they keep on working right up to the moment of their death. This spares no one from experiencing the reactions after death. Only those who work will experience the reactions (karmaphala); no one else can be substituted to experience them. How will a dead person whose physical body has been buried or burnt be able to experience the reactions (karmaphala)? This is what the following paragraphs explain.

Unit consciousness (átman) is immortal. It is always unchanged. In the course of its movement from crude to subtle, unit consciousness is reflected completely in the human body made of the five rudimental factors created by Cosmic Consciousness (Bhúmá Puruśa). Puruśa and Prakrti (Consciousness and Its principle) are inseparable, and hence with unit consciousness (puruśa) taking shelter in the human body, its principle (prakrti) is also there. The presence of Prakrti casts Her influence on unit consciousness and provides it with mind. Mind, which is an outcome of unit consciousness, and Prakrti will exist as long as these two (Puruśa and Prakrti) exist. Unit consciousness and its principle (unit puruśa and prakrti) are inseparable counterparts of each other. Hence mind will exist with unit consciousness only. It is in mind only that one gets the feeling of “I”, and as long as mind exists, the feeling of “I” will also be there. Since unit consciousness is immortal, the mind which is linked to it will not die either, and with mind the feeling of “I” will also be there. It will thus be seen that the feeling of “I” also permeates the physical body when unit consciousness (átman) takes shelter in a human body. At the time of unit consciousness leaving the body, Prakrti, which is an inseparable counterpart of unit consciousness, also leaves the body. Mind, which is a creation of Prakrti, will naturally leave the body with Her. This results in the death of the physical body. Thus death does not mean the death of unit consciousness and mind. It only means the death of the physical body. Unit consciousness (átman) and mind merely leave the physical body which they had earlier adopted as a shelter. This leads to the question of what makes unit consciousness give up the physical body. The unit consciousness could continue its march towards the subtle with the same physical body till it merged finally and completely in the subtlest Cosmic Consciousness (Bhúmácaetanya). Human beings’ bodies are made of the five rudimental factors which, as we have seen earlier, are metamorphosed crude forms of Cosmic Consciousness. [[The five rudimental factors are created during the march of Cosmic Consciousness from subtle to crude. The human physical body gradually gets created as an assemblage of many particles formed at different stages in that march towards crudeness.]] There will be some [[particles]] in the stage representing the ethereal factor and some at the stages representing the other factors – aerial, luminous, liquid and solid. Those in ethereal factor have to move on to aerial factor and so on, till they become the crudest, which is solid. This is the will of Prakrti, and Cosmic Consciousness in this creation moves on in this pattern. If this pattern, which is the law of Prakrti, has to be followed, change in the human body is inevitable, and to bring about this change, death is necessary. Assuming that unit consciousness could continue in one body as its shelter till it gets merged in Cosmic Consciousness, we are faced with the possibility of one body continuing for millions of years, as the chain of actions and reactions may not free the unit consciousness earlier than that. This would result in a total stoppage of the evolution of factors in a body for millions of years, as the chain of actions and reactions may not follow the pattern of creation and laws of Prakrti. According to the nature of Prakrti, the creation has to pass on from subtle to crude, and with the passage of time, in due course a human being will also have to give up his or her body inevitably. This also shows that the human body is made of innumerable units of the five fundamental factors in different stages of creation which, according to the pattern of creation and laws of Prakrti, will evolve into innumerable fully-reflected unit consciousnesses with innumerable human bodies as their shelters.

Hence death is inevitable. Everyone will have to give up this physical body. Death only means disassociation of unit consciousness and mind from body; as Prakrti’s creation, the mind will always remain with unit consciousness. The individuality of human beings or the idea of existence is in their feeling of “I”, which is a part of mind and always remains with it. We have seen earlier that death is only disassociation of mind from body and not the death of mind. Hence a human being’s individuality and his or her feeling of “I” will not die. This “I” will continue to exist with unit consciousness as long as the influence of Prakrti keeps on maintaining the mind. The moment Prakrti ceases to have Her influence on unit consciousness and is unable to maintain the existence of mind, this “I” will also cease to exist. Human beings’ individuality and their “I” will no longer exist, and that will be emancipation (mukti) for them.

One works with one’s mind and experiences the reactions (karmaphala) also with the mind. It is mind which converts mental action into physical activity with the help of the ten organs (indriyas), and it is mind alone which experiences the reactions (karmaphalas) as pleasure or pain. Death signifies death of the physical body, while the mind merely quits the body. The mind, which performs all actions and bears their consequences, survives to experience the reactions of the actions performed up to the very moment of death. The question about the entity that should experience the consequences of actions thus does not arise. Mind is the entity which acts and that does not die, hence it alone will have to experience the reactions (karmaphala).

Mind is subtle, and it has to take the help of some crude base (ádhára) to be able to perform actions. The crude base (ádhára) is the brain of the human body, and it is with the help of this base (ádhára) that our mind is able to work. Mind and brain are so closely connected that one cannot work without the other. The brain without the mind ceases to function, and similarly if the mind’s base, the brain, is not in proper order, the mind will not be able to work. A dead person’s body has a brain, but it does not function because it is dead and there is no mind in it. Similarly when a person becomes unconscious or is made so with the help of anaesthesia, his or her brain becomes non-functional for some time with the result that the mind also does not work, as its physical base, the brain, is not fit to function. The unconscious state is not the state of death, and so neither unit consciousness nor mind leaves the body. Although in this state mind remains within the body, it does not work due to the brain not being in proper order, and one finds oneself unable to make out anything. It is, therefore, necessary for mind to take shelter in the brain as its physical base to be able to function and even to experience the reactions (karmaphala) of its actions. After death mind quits the body, and also gives up its physical base, the brain. It had however been performing some action or other right up to the moment of death and will have to experience the reactions (karmaphala) of those actions. In fact, it is in order to experience these reactions and because of its inability to experience these reactions without the brain that the mind has to take shelter in a new body in a subsequent birth. Mind comes into being as a result of the qualifying influence of Prakrti over unit consciousness, and since unit consciousness and its principle (prakrti) are inseparable, the unit consciousness also takes shelter in a new body along with the mind. In other words, mind and unit consciousness are both reborn. They have to take another birth to complete the experience of reactions to the actions of a previous life. Thus it is seen that once one is born one has to face death, and that rebirth after death is also inescapable. This will continue to alternate as long as the journey of unit consciousness from crude to subtle (up to the final merger with Cosmic Consciousness) does not end. Unit consciousness may have to continue this journey for an infinite period, and it will have to keep on taking shelter in new bodies after discarding the old ones.

After death the mind is incapable of any action due to the lack of its physical base, the brain, and has to be reborn for experiencing reactions of its previous actions. Hence the concept of hell or heaven where human beings are supposed to proceed after death is entirely incorrect. It is believed that one experiences all the pleasures in heaven as a result of one’s good deeds and pain in hell for one’s evil deeds. But pleasure and pain cannot be experienced by the mind which in the state after death is a non-functional unit, until it acquires a new brain at the time of rebirth. Conception of a world of heaven or hell after death is a greatly mistaken fantasy. There is no other world where heaven and hell exist. It is in this mortal world only that one has to be reborn to experience the pleasures of heaven and the sufferings of hell.

Rebirth also shows that there are no such things as spirits or souls that become ghosts (pretátman). If rebirth has been rationally accepted, the question of the existence of ghosts does not arise. It is due to mind’s incapacity to work and experience reaction that it has to be reborn along with unit consciousness. This shows that mind cannot experience any reaction till it is reborn after death and hence cannot feel pleasure and pain without its physical base, the brain. Either rebirth or the existence of ghosts can be accepted, not both together, as the two are contradictory. Rationally, rebirth is bound to occur, as the mind is not able to perform any function or experience results or reaction without a brain, which it can only acquire with a new body on rebirth. If mind could function without a brain, it could carry on intuitional practice for the onward march towards the merger with Cosmic Consciousness in its existence after death, but that is not so. Mind can never function without a brain. It is because of this characteristic (dharma) of mind that rebirth has to be accepted and the existence of ghosts denied and considered only imaginary.

Since at death unit consciousness and mind leave their physical shelter, mind, due to absence of a brain, becomes non-functional. While still alive, a human being’s mind becomes non-functional in the state of unconsciousness when the brain, the physical base of the mind, ceases to function for some time. The state of unconsciousness and that of death are similar except that the former is momentary, and the mind loses awareness of the environment but does not quit the body. The latter state, that is, after death, is of a very much longer duration, and the non-functional mind quits the body for good.

Consciousness and its principle, prakrti, are inseparable counterparts. When unit consciousness leaves the physical body which is Prakrti’s creation, mind also leaves the body and takes the shelter of unit consciousness. Mind even at this stage is deformed due to the actions performed before death. In order to return to its normal form, mind will have to experience the reactions which human beings feel as pleasure and pain as a result of their deeds. Mind becomes non-functional after death due to the absence of the brain, and hence has to stay in the deformed state with all the potentiality of reactions in it. It is in this state of reactions in their potentiality that the mind quits the body and takes the shelter of unit consciousness. These potential reactions are called saḿskáras. The deformity of mind acquired due to its actions right up to the moment of death is to be found with unit consciousness as reactions in their potentiality (saḿskára) after death. These reactions due to the mind becoming non-functional cannot express themselves as the results of previous actions (karmaphala), and hence remain with unit consciousness, till it takes shelter in a new body and acquires a brain to make the mind function again. Thus it is seen that rebirth is only for finding an expression of these potential reactions and for experiencing them as the result of actions. This expression and experiencing of reactions starts from the very moment of birth, just as the mind gets compressed or changed into potential reactions (saḿskára) at the time of death. The example of a rubber ball representing the mind will explain this process clearly. An inch-deep depression may be caused in the rubber ball. This depression creates a deformity in the rubber ball. The rubber ball should, according to the laws of Prakrti, try to regain its normal form. The case with the mind, in its expansions and contractions, is similar, but due to death, regaining the normal state is not possible, as no actions can be performed after death. The mind will only be able to fulfil its desire to regain its normal form on rebirth, when a new brain is acquired. The reaction should have made the mind regain its normal form, but due to death it remains incomplete and takes the shelter of unit consciousness at the time of death as a potential force or energy (saḿskára). It is to complete this reaction that the unit consciousness takes the shelter of a new body at the time of rebirth, and the potential reaction (saḿskára), or force, gets expressed and makes the mind reappear with the depression effected in the previous life.

Action, whether good or bad, causes deformity in the mind, and in the process of regaining its normal form one experiences as reactions good results for good deeds and bad results for bad ones. After death mind takes the shelter of unit consciousness as reaction in its potentiality (saḿskára). The unit consciousness, in order to have those potential reactions expressed, will have to seek a body suitable for the expression of these reactions. For instance, Rama dies, and his mind takes the shelter of his unit consciousness (átman) as reactions in their potentiality (saḿskára). Rama according to his actions in this life should experience as reaction (karmaphala) the pain equivalent in mental measure to a fracture of an arm at the age of eight, the happiness of getting a fortune at the age of ten, and the suffering of becoming fatherless at the age of eleven. He will have to experience all this as his deformed mind regains its normal form. It is important to clarify here that the actual form of suffering is not predetermined. It cannot be said what might be the actual reaction of a particular action. For example, it is not preordained that if one commits theft his things of the same value will be stolen as a reaction. The suffering is measured in terms of mental suffering to the extent which was inflicted on others by stealing their property. Thus the measure of experiencing the result of an action is mental and is in terms of pleasure and pain, and the actual form of experience has relatively no importance. Rama has to experience the pain and pleasure of all these happenings, and so his unit consciousness will have to seek a body on rebirth, where an opportunity to experience all this will be available. In order to suffer the mental agony of loss of his father at the age of eleven years, Rama has to be born of parents where the father, according to his own actions, has also to die when Rama attains that age. If it is not so, Rama will not be able to experience his reaction (karmaphala) of the suffering of the loss of his father. Thus it is seen that unit consciousness and the potential reaction (saḿskára) cannot take shelter in any body for rebirth indiscriminately. A suitable body where the opportunity and field for experiencing their reactions (karmaphala) is available will have to be sought out. It is only in such a body that unit consciousness, along with total reactions in their potentiality, will seek shelter and be reborn.

Unit consciousness and the potential reaction (saḿskára) have to seek a body for their shelter which provides them with a suitable field for experiencing the results of their actions. What is the agency that selects this suitable field for them? Unit consciousness cannot perform any action. It is only a spectator, and mind has taken shelter in it as potential energy or force, as reactions in their potentiality (saḿskára), and so mind is also non-functional. It has been seen earlier that one has to experience reactions according to the law of Prakrti, and so it is also the responsibility of Prakrti to make us experience the remaining reactions. It is, therefore, Prakrti under whose law one has to be reborn, and Prakrti that has to find the required field and shelter for the potential reactions (saḿskára) and the unit consciousness. That is why it is said that after death Prakrti selects the proper field to suit the potential reaction. Such a field may be available in a day, or it may even take millions of years to discover it, for the mind cannot take shelter in a body till a field which suits the requirements of potential reactions is obtained. Hence it is never possible to say where and when one is to be reborn after death. There may be innumerable worlds where life exists. Unit consciousness and potential reactions may get a suitable field in any of them. Thus it is not even necessary that one be reborn only on this earth. It is thus clear that those reborn on this earth have a suitable field here alone and that they have adopted a body only for the purpose of experiencing the reactions of their previous actions. Human beings keep on performing new actions also, while experiencing the reactions of previous actions. This experiencing of the result of previous actions is called the unknown future or fate (adrśt́a). One experiences the result of one’s actions in a subsequent life and cannot then recollect the actions whose results bring happiness and grief, because a person’s memory is not large enough to remember or know the deeds of their past lives. Reactions which humans experience were collected in previous lives, and in present life they cannot make out the cause of such experiences, and hence term these experiences as fate or the unknown future. People often hold Parama Puruśa responsible for calamities that befall them, but in fact they alone are responsible, as the suffering of fate is only reaction of their own previous actions. How can Parama Puruśa be responsible?

Human beings themselves are answerable for their fate as it is their actions alone which create it. They alone will have to bear the consequences of all their actions. No one else can substitute for them. Their good deeds beget good results, while bad ones beget bad results, and they will have to experience both without any exception. This is the law of Prakrti and no one can change this law.

1955

How Should Human Beings Live In This World?

Human beings have a fully-reflected consciousness which makes them capable of independent action and also of distinguishing between good and bad. Good and bad is a relative idea; what is good and what is bad has to be determined.

The purpose of the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma) in bringing about the creation is to liberate every unit being and make it emancipated like Itself. It is only with this intention that in the last stage of the evolutionary movement from crude to subtle, human beings, representing a few units only, appear with a fully-reflected unit consciousness. The influence of Prakrti on the unit consciousness decreases with its advance towards the subtle, as we find that the unit consciousness in human beings is under a lesser influence of Prakrti than the unit consciousness in animals. This decrease in the influence of Prakrti over unit consciousness is obviously at the mercy of Saguńa Brahma. The Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma) and Prakrti must have entered into an alliance at the very beginning of creation for this to happen; otherwise, Prakrti (whose very nature is to qualify Puruśa as much as possible) would not release Puruśa from Her influence. In the phase of creation where the movement is from crude to subtle, it is found that Prakrti releases Consciousness (Puruśa) from Her bondage at Her own will. Yet the unit consciousness remains under bondage, because the movement of the creation from crude to subtle does not come to an end. If, in this subjugated position, any conscious entity acts independently, it is the nature of Prakrti to punish it. As a result of punishment, the further evolutionary movement of unit consciousness towards subtlety is temporarily affected.

In the creation it is observed that the influence of Prakrti is less where the reflection of Consciousness is clearer. If the unit consciousness could expand and enlarge the reflection of Consciousness, it would be increasing its speed towards subtlety, as the influence of Prakrti on it would be decreased. It would then be possible for unit consciousness to get back to complete subtlety quickly. Therefore, good deeds are those which enlarge the reflection of Consciousness without leading one to go against the laws of Prakrti. Following the laws of Prakrti and working according to Her dictates will eliminate the suffering of the consequences of actions (karmaphala), while enlarging the density of reflection of Consciousness will diminish the hold of Prakrti. This enables one to go back to the supreme rank very quickly. Actions which make one follow the laws of Prakrti and also increase the density of reflection of Consciousness, are called uttama karma (ideal actions), and are also called Vidyámáyá – which is associated with vaerágya and viveka.

Vaerágya is commonly understood to mean retiring from the world and leading a life of strict self-denial by practising excessive austerity. Vaerágya does not mean this. It does not make one a recluse. It only means to attempt to understand the proper use of things and to use them correctly (of course without working under the control of the crude objects of mind only). For example, alcohol is an intoxicant which is harmful for both body and mind, and hence the use of alcohol as an intoxicant is to be given up. Doctors prescribe alcohol in medicine for various diseases, and the intoxicant alcohol then becomes a medicine which relieves the patients of their suffering. Thus the same alcohol through difference in its use, changes its character from a harmful intoxicant to useful medicine. The use of alcohol as a medicine is its proper use, and anyone using it for this purpose does not place himself under the dominant influence of alcohol. This right use of a thing is vaerágya. Right use of anything within the idea of vaerágya does not make one’s mind a slave to a constant longing for the object. One becomes indifferent to it. By developing indifference or not being constantly attracted by crude things, one’s mind becomes subtle. Mind’s movement towards subtlety means a decrease in the influence of Prakrti over it, and that is an advance towards liberation (mukti), as liberation is only possible when one is released from the influence of Prakrti.

Discrimination between good and evil is viveka. To consider the use of alcohol as an intoxicant to be evil and its use as a medicine to be good is viveka. The same thing by change in its use can become good or evil, and discrimination between the two is viveka. It is with discrimination (viveka) only that mind can determine the goodness or evil in a thing or in its uses. Viveka is, therefore, necessary for following vaerágya, and vaerágya is a great contributory factor in achieving emancipation (mukti). Thus vaerágya and viveka alone are good deeds or Vidyámáyá.

Evil deeds or Avidyámáyá are just the opposite of these. Actions which dim the reflection of Consciousness and also lead one to go against the laws of Prakrti are evil deeds. Evolution of unit consciousness only means that the reflection of Consciousness becomes clearer and greater in density because of the mind becoming more subtle. This would be possible only when the speed of movement towards subtlety is increased, as then alone will mind tend to become more subtle. The more the mind is absorbed in crude objects the more unit consciousness is dragged backwards, because the reflection of Consciousness becomes dimmer with greater expression of Prakrti. Mind being absorbed in crudeness remains more under the influence of Prakrti, with the result that the onward march of unit consciousness is halted. Then actions that lead one to go against the laws of Prakrti also halt the evolutionary march towards subtlety, because the consequences of the punishment inflicted by Prakrti for defying Her have to be suffered before progressing further, and unit consciousness is debarred for that time from gaining its subtlety.

Actions which draw mind to crude objects and lead one to act against the laws of Prakrti are evil or Avidyámáyá. Avidyámáyá is the creator of the śad́ripu (six enemies) and the aśt́apásha (eight fetters). Káma (longing for earthly objects), krodha (anger), lobha (avarice), moha (attraction), mada (vanity) and mátsarya (envy) are the six enemies, while bhaya (fear), lajjá (shame), ghrńá (hatred), shauṋká (doubt), kula (high descent), shiila (complex of culture), mána (vanity) and jugupsá (backbiting) are the eight fetters. Śat́ means “six” and ripu means “enemies”. These six faculties in human beings are termed as enemies, as they absorb the mind in crudeness and stop its march towards the subtle. The supreme rank for unit consciousness is subtle, and anything which holds it back from reaching the supreme rank, is its enemy. These six faculties are, therefore, termed as six enemies. Aśt́apásha means the eight fetters. Anyone bound by fetters will lose his or her capacity of movement. In the creation we find the movement of human beings is from the crude to the subtle. That is, human beings have to move towards the subtle, but by their leaning towards the eight fetters such as lajjá, bhaya, and ghrńá, they get absorbed in crude things only and their progress towards the subtle is stopped.

To follow Vidyámáyá would be a good deed while to follow Avidyámáyá would be an evil one. Vidyámáyá gradually leads one to the subtle and Avidyámáyá stops one’s progress towards the subtle. According to the rule of creation, human movement is towards the subtle, and everyone will have to follow Vidyámáyá so that their movement towards the subtle is accelerated and one gets back to the supreme rank quickly.

Those who follow Vidyámáyá can be put into four categories: First, those who follow the laws of Prakrti and make an effort for the progress of unit consciousness. They are the good people. Second, those who follow the laws of Prakrti but are indifferent to making efforts for the progress of unit consciousness. Third, those who do not follow the laws of Prakrti and are indifferent to making efforts for the progress of unit consciousness. These are called the low. Fourth, those who do not follow the laws of Prakrti and also become the cause of the degradation of their unit consciousness. Such as these are lower than the lowest.

The purpose of the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma) in creating human beings is to make them follow Its course towards the subtle so as to take them back to the supreme rank. This forms the nature (dharma) of human beings. To get back to the supreme rank, effort for the elevation of unit consciousness is necessary, and actions should also be in keeping with the laws of Prakrti so that She does not create obstacles to progress. Hence the people of the first category, that is, good people, are natural (prákrta manuśya), as they work according to their nature (dharma), and they alone serve the purpose for which the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma) made them.

Animals also follow Prakrti, but due to the absence of clear reflection of consciousness they are not able to make any effort for the elevation of their consciousness. Persons of the second category who only follow the laws of Prakrti are in no way different from animals. They make no use of a fully-reflected unit consciousness in them. They can hence be called nothing better than beasts in the guise of humans.

Those in the third and fourth categories are really lower than the beasts. Beasts follow the laws of Prakrti and do not make any effort for the elevation of unit consciousness as it is not clearly reflected in them. Being dependent entirely on Prakrti for all their actions, animals with the passage of time develop a clearly-reflected unit consciousness. While the low and the lowest of people in the third and fourth categories make no use of the fully-reflected unit consciousness in themselves and work against the laws of Prakrti, the lowest not only work against the laws of Prakrti but also bring about further degeneration in the reflection of unit consciousness through their actions. These two are not only beasts in human form but even meaner than the beasts.

In the preceding chapter it was shown that reactions of actions (karmaphala) have to be experienced. No one is spared from experiencing them; the reactions of all one’s actions will have to be borne by oneself alone. There are many who with the intention of escaping this suffering of reaction (karmaphala) try various methods. To what extent their attempts and methods are based on reasoning and logic, and whether they can succeed in escaping the experience of reactions (karmaphala), is discussed below.

Many believe that by neutralizing the influence of the stars (grahashánti) and by rituals of offering sacrifice in repentance (práyashcitta), they will be able to escape the consequences of their actions. This belief is not correct, because according to the rule of Prakrti every action has to be followed by its reaction. The mind has to regain its normality through reactions. This is the law of Prakrti and no one can set it aside. There is, however, the possibility of accelerating or slowing the speed of the reactions which will bring the mind back to normality. For instance, the reactions which would take one month to bring the mind back to normality may, with the help of Tantra, be completed in a day or a year by accelerating or slowing the speed of reactions, but it will never be possible to eliminate them altogether. One may borrow one hundred rupees on the condition that the same will be returned within a month. It may be possible to persuade the creditor to waive the condition of payment and increase the period to a year or even to two years. The period of the return of the money can be extended, but the return of the money cannot be escaped. Similarly, a person having 150 rupees’ credit in their account with a condition that they will spend all the money in a month at the rate of five rupees a day, may spend all the 150 in one day, or may follow the original condition and take one month to spend the money. The money will only be used by the depositor whether they do it in a day or a month.

The mode of experiencing the reaction can be changed with the help of Tantric practices, like the two examples cited above, but the experience of the reaction, or fate, cannot be evaded. Karmaphala, consequences or reactions of one’s actions, will have to be experienced by a person, and at best only the intensity of suffering at a time can be reduced or increased by slowing or accelerating the speed of reactions. It is possible that the condition of returning one hundred rupees in one instalment may be too hard for the debtor and he or she may have to suffer great mental agony, but if the same amount is returned in several small instalments the debtor may not feel it at all. The period of suffering is thus increased with the help of Tantric practices with the result that one does not feel the intensity of suffering and wrongly concludes that the experiencing of reactions (karmaphala) has been evaded or stopped because of grahashánti (that is by neutralizing the influence of stars). For example, if on reading the future of a person it is found that he or she has to bear the mental suffering of fracture of an arm, it may be possible to stop the fracturing of the arm with the help of grahashánti. But the quantum of mental suffering cannot be changed or done away with. The suffering could be spread over a longer time due to a number of minor incidents. For instance, the person’s hand might get scratched, and later on he or she might fall sick. The person would go suffering in instalments till the quantum of his or her suffering equalled the mental suffering he or she was destined to get from the fracture of the arm. To revert to our earlier example, it would mean that the debtor of one hundred rupees would have to keep on repaying his or her debt in small instalments of a rupee or so until they had paid off the full hundred. Here the payment of the debt of one hundred rupees represents the mental suffering from the fracture of the arm, which was supposed to be completed in one instalment; but through flattery and persuasion of the creditor, that is, by neutralizing the influence of the stars (grahashánti), it is being paid back in small instalments. Hence as the return of the hundred rupees is not complete, the payment will have to continue.

Just as it is possible to increase the period of experiencing the reactions with the help of grahashánti, it is also possible to decrease this period. For instance, some persons wear different stones such as blue sapphires which change the mode of their experiencing the reactions. It is possible that by this one may get a fortune by winning a prize in a lottery or may get a promotion in one’s employment. This makes people believe that all this has happened due to grahashánti, but it is actually not so. Fate, or the quantum of experiencing the consequences of one’s actions, can neither be changed nor evaded. It was explained earlier that one’s actions that give happiness to others will beget happiness to oneself to the same extent in mental measure. This quantum of experiencing happiness and pleasure cannot be changed. Only the time required for experiencing it can be increased or decreased. Taking again the example of the deposit of 150 rupees, we see that the money intended to be spent in a month at the rate of five rupees a day, can be spent in one day by shortening the period of expenditure and leaving nothing for the remaining twenty-nine days of the month. The change in fate brought about by grahashánti is similar to this. For instance, the one thousand rupees that one gets as a prize in a lottery due to the influence of the blue sapphire, is the person’s own money scheduled to be received by him or her in small instalments over a long period of time. This money is received in one instalment, leaving no balance for the rest of the instalments. Yet getting a huge amount at once makes one believe that grahashánti, or the wearing of a blue sapphire, has changed one’s fate.

In fact, fate or the experiencing of reactions (karmaphala) can never be changed. It is only the duration of reactions that can be changed. That is why those who carry on intuitional practice (sádhaná) with the intention of achieving emancipation, experience pleasure and pain, happiness and agony quickly, so that they may complete the experiencing of reactions in as short a period as possible. Those who desire liberation (mukti) want it in this life itself, and so they experience everything quickly, according to their potential reactions (saḿskáras), so that nothing is left for the future life and they can obtain release from the bondage of Prakrti.

Some believe that the results gathered due to evil deeds can be compensated or washed off by the good results earned by good deeds. According to them, if the bad and good deeds are the same in number, there should be nothing left as balance to be experienced. This neither happens nor is it possible. It has been seen earlier that all actions, whether good or evil, cause a deformity in the mind. In the process of mind regaining its normal form the deformity is removed by an equal and opposite reaction. Hence deformity caused by evil actions cannot be removed by good actions as they would only make the mind more deformed. There will have to be an independent, equal and opposite reaction to every action. When every deformity is removed by an independent reaction, one will have to experience the consequences of good and bad actions separately. Hence the results of good actions cannot help one to evade the suffering of bad results due to bad actions. Evil consequences of evil deeds and good consequences of good deeds will have to be experienced separately. This is the law of Prakrti.

Logically it has been proved that the experiencing of the reaction (karmaphala) of an action cannot be evaded. That being so, blaming God (Bhagaván) for the consequences of our actions or praying to be released from bearing the consequences is only foolishness. One who performs actions will have to bear the reactions also. If you plunge your hand in fire you will surely burn it. To blame God for burning your hand is merely ignorance or stupidity. It is the nature of fire to burn, and whatsoever comes in contact with it will be burnt. Similarly, it is a self-evident law of Prakrti or Her very nature that all actions will have reactions. God (Bhagaván) is not in the least responsible for it. The performer of the actions is responsible for it. The performer of the actions is responsible for the reactions also, since God has not performed the actions. He cannot be responsible for the reactions. It is only people who are responsible for actions as well as for bearing the consequences of these actions.

Prayer is the act of asking for a favour with earnestness. It also means a solemn petition addressed to the Supreme Being for certain benefits. One prays to God for something which one does not possess or thinks one does not possess. One asks God for these favours with the faith that He alone can bestow everything and by His mere wish all wants can be satisfied. By prayer or by begging one wants to awaken His wish so that one may be granted the things one lacks. Does not one’s attempt to rouse the wish of God to fulfil these needs, upon careful and rational thinking, appear to be a reminder to God to give one something of which God has kept one deprived? It would otherwise not be necessary to remind Him in prayer of that thing or to try to arouse His wish to give. For instance, if one is in need of money, one would, with the faith that God alone can give, pray to Him for the favour of giving one money. Does not this request show God’s fault in keeping one in want of money, when He alone can give it? God alone is blamed for it, and by praying to Him for money one is precisely pointing out to Him His partiality in not giving one the money one needed. Therefore, prayer or asking for favours from God is only pointing out to the Sole Giver His mistakes in the distribution of His favours. It only presumes lack of impartiality in Him, and that is why He is blamed for making some very rich and others very poor. Praying to God for favours is only to bring to His notice the charge of partiality levelled against Him. When prayer leads to such a conclusion, it is only ignorance to ask for favours. One who performs actions will also bear the consequences, and blaming God for it as His partiality is not going to save one from bearing the consequences.

A hand plunged in fire will surely get burnt. No amount of praying is going to save it. For God’s granting such a prayer would mean either removing the burning property of fire or changing the very composition of the hand so that it is not affected by fire and does not get burnt. This is not possible. In God’s creation there is no flaw, only because all things, small or big, follow their own nature (dharma). Otherwise there would have been disorder at every step. Prayers, which only serve as a reminder to God of His partiality, cannot induce Him to change the laws of His creation. Anyone who hopes to make God change His laws through prayer only displays utter ignorance.

According to the laws of Prakrti, every action has a reaction which has to be experienced by the person who performs the action. This law is unchangeable, and praying to change this law is only wasting one’s time. Prayers cannot change fate, and the experiencing of reactions (karmaphala) is inevitable.

Stuti is lauding or eulogizing the qualities of God in a song or hymn of praise, and it cannot be given a higher status than flattery. Flattery is usually practised on one who is capable of granting a favour and from whom one seeks something. Singing the qualities of God is obviously done with the intention of pleasing Him, or else there would be no use in telling God, who is all-knowing, that He is merciful, He is almighty and He is benevolent. The intention behind eulogizing these qualities is to flatter God so that He may bestow some of His mercy. He, being almighty, may exempt one from the consequences of one’s actions by His authority. Stuti or lauding the qualities is, hence, only flattery, behind which is hidden a prayer for seeking favours. Stuti is, therefore, just as ineffective as prayer and indulging in it is also a waste of time.

Prayer and stuti serve no purpose and indulging in them is only wasting time, since obvious begging and flattery is not likely to achieve anything. Bhakti, or devotion, however, is not like this. Let us see what bhakti is. Bhakti is a Sanskrit word derived bhaj + ktin, which means “to call with devotion”. It is not stuti or flattery. It is different from prayer also. It is only to call God with devotion. The utility of this calling has to be seen. The unit consciousness which follows the purpose of creation laid down by the Qualified Supreme Entity by making an effort to return to the omnipresent Cosmic Consciousness, or those who desire emancipation, have to take recourse to bhakti. The only path that leads to Cosmic Consciousness is to devote oneself to Him completely by calling Him.

The quality or nature of the human mind is such that it becomes like the idea or entity to which it is devoted. For instance, if one starts thinking oneself to be mad, one actually becomes mad, as one’s mind is largely given over to that idea. Similarly, if one is given to believe that one is suffering from consumption, one becomes so concerned with the idea that one actually develops consumption. The human mind is so made that it has the capacity of becoming like the object to which it is attached. The unit consciousness that wants to return to Cosmic Consciousness quickly has to become devoted to Cosmic Consciousness, and this is bhakti. “I am That” is the idea to which the unit consciousness has to be completely devoted in order to become That one day. Bhakti, devotion, or calling Cosmic Consciousness, thus leads one to become like That. Bhakti or devotion is neither prayer nor stuti. Some, however, say that wanting to merge with Cosmic Consciousness or wanting emancipation is also a favour that one seeks through bhakti, and so it is also a prayer. This is not so, because the very purpose of God in creating humanity is to make the unit consciousness emancipated like Himself and to return it to the supreme rank. This is the wish of God, and everything in this creation is with that purpose and is directed towards that. One who makes an effort through bhakti to achieve the purpose for which one was brought into being, or for fulfilling the wish of God, does not pray for any favour. For even if one does not make an effort and digresses from that path, one will sooner or later be made to follow it again. Bhakti or devotion is, therefore, neither prayer nor eulogizing God (stuti). These two do not help one to achieve any result and are merely a waste of time. Bhakti is the method by which one can be completely devoted to Cosmic Consciousness, and that is the only way to achieve the quickest return to the supreme rank.

The consequences of actions (karmaphala) have to be borne. There is no way to escape them. Even prayer and lauding the qualities of God is of no help. What then is the way out? The only way is to give up evil deeds, the consequences of which keep one bound to the influence of Prakrti, by taking a lesson from the consequences that one suffers. For instance, if a hand is plunged in fire, it is bound to get burnt. This is bound to happen, and even prayer cannot relieve one of such a consequence. The only way to avoid burning is not to plunge one’s hand into fire. Similarly, if there are no evil actions the question of evil consequences does not arise.

The rule of Prakrti that one has to bear the consequences of one’s actions must also have some purpose behind it for the welfare of humanity. The purpose of the entire creation is to enable every unit to become emancipated. That is the great object of the Qualified Supreme Entity in bringing about the creation, and hence It can only be called the Great Benefactor. Even though It is emancipated, It came under the influence of Prakrti for the welfare of every unit. Karmaphala or bearing the consequences of one’s actions has been made a very strict rule only for the welfare of human beings, as it is by means of this that He (Bhagaván) restrains human beings from evil actions and leads them to emancipation. God, by His punishments, teaches humans not to indulge in evil deeds, but humans out of their ignorance only blame Him for inflicting pain and suffering. Blaming God for being partial and unkind and for inflicting pain and suffering, or even prayer and flattery for relief from suffering, are not the correct courses to adopt. The wise take the pain and suffering as a lesson through which the Great Benefactor teaches them to refrain from evil actions and develop in them discrimination. Hence abstaining from evil action is the action of the wise and the duty of every human being.

1955

What Is the Aim of Humanity?

The unveiling of the mystery of the creation shows that the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma), in order to obtain emancipation for each one of Its units, has to bring about this creation. It has to become the crudest solid factor only to be able to divide Its subtle self into units. It shows that Saguńa Brahma is an Infinite Knowing Entity (Jiṋátá) which, being subtle, cannot be divided into units. The creation is only the imagination (kalpaná) of the Infinite Knowing Entity, where It imagines Itself divided into several parts. The creation also shows that this thought-wave of imagination originates in That, only to merge back into That, and that humanity forms the tail-end of this thought-wave. Human beings are therefore bound to merge sooner or later in the subtle Saguńa Brahma (Qualified Supreme Entity) in the course of Its thought-waves. Saguńa Brahma being infinite and subtle, the separate identity of a human being, even as a subtle individual, cannot continue upon merging with That. There cannot be two similar identities when one of them is infinite, and hence after merging, humans themselves become Saguńa Brahma. We can take as an example a drop of water which, on mixing with a similar larger body of water in a tumbler, completely loses its identity as an individual drop and becomes one with the water in the tumbler. Similarly, an individual, like the drop, completely loses his or her individual identity on merging with the infinite Supreme Entity.

The merger of unit consciousness with the Qualified Supreme Entity does not completely fulfil the purpose of the creation. Unit consciousness, before it is able to achieve the non-qualified rank (nirguńa), is merged with the Qualified Entity (Saguńa Brahma), and loses its identity by becoming the Qualified Supreme Entity Itself. This defeats the very purpose of the Qualified Supreme Entity in manifesting the creation.

The wish of the Qualified Supreme Entity is to obtain merger with the Non-Qualified Entity or the supreme rank for every one of Its units. This is not fulfilled on merger of unit consciousness with It either through the effort of doing sádhaná (intuitional practice) or in the natural course of the flow of the thought-waves of the Qualified Entity. This merger with the Qualified Supreme Entity is termed mukti, which means freedom from the movement of the thought-waves of the Supreme, from the creation. This mukti or freedom is not emancipation in reality. Unit consciousness emerges out of the subtle Qualified Supreme entity in Its thought-waves and re-enters the Srśt́icakra, or Brahma Cakra (Cycle of Creation, or Cosmic Cycle), returning again to the path of emancipation. So such a mukti is not complete emancipation, since the intention of the Qualified Supreme Entity to achieve the non-qualified status for each one of Its units has not been fulfilled.

Freedom from the bondage of Prakrti is the merger with the Non-Qualified Supreme Entity or attainment of the supreme rank, and that is termed mokśa. Merger with the Non-Qualified Brahma relieves one from the influences of the Supreme Prakrti and She, not being able to influence That, will be incapable of dragging one into the creation. The unit will thus be relieved of its journeys through the creation, fulfilling the purpose or the intention of the Qualified Supreme Entity. Hence the aim of human beings is not to merge with the Qualified Supreme Entity and obtain mukti. It is higher than that. The aim is the achievement of the supreme rank, that is, obtaining mokśa or kaevalya mukti.

1955

Intuitional Practice and Its Necessity

An all-round effort for emancipation from the bondage of Prakrti is sádhaná or intuitional practice.

The question now is to determine if complete emancipation from the bondage of Prakrti is possible. It would otherwise be only a waste of time to carry out intuitional practices (sádhaná). In an earlier chapter dealing with the creation, it was explained that the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma), which was called Prajápati because of being under the influence of Prakrti (baddha puruśa), became free (mukta) from the bondage by carrying out intuitional practices (sádhaná) and was called Hirańyagarbha. It can thus be concluded that those under the bondage of Prakrti can attain freedom with the help of intuitional practice (sádhaná). Freedom from the bondage of Prakrti means attaining the nirguńa status. It is only then that one is completely emancipated from the bondage of Prakrti. Prajápati attained the status of Hirańyagarbha, that is, He became free of the bondage of Prakrti, only by doing sádhaná (intuitional practice). Emancipation from the influence of Prakrti is thus possible, and the only method of attaining it is sádhaná (intuitional practice).

The story of creation shows that in the phase of movement from crude to subtle the unit consciousness reflects itself clearly by taking shelter in a body made of the five rudimental factors derived from the Qualified Supreme Entity. On its reflecting completely, the unit consciousness also gets a mind due to the qualifying influence of Prakrti. The three principles of Prakrti, sentient, mutative and static, gave its mind the three functional forms of mahattattva, ahaḿtattva and citta, respectively. Citta is further projected through the ten physical organs or indriyas. This means that the unit consciousness, because of gradual increase in the qualifying influence of Prakrti, got metamorphosed as mahattattva or buddhitattva. Then with the increase of influence it became cruder, as ahaḿtattva, till finally it became even more crude as citta, and its citta, with the help of the ten physical organs or indriyas, started projecting in the form of crude physical actions.

The influence of Prakrti gained a hold on unit consciousness gradually, and hence in order to get out of Her hold the unit consciousness will have to retract gradually. It will have to first retract from citta to ahaḿtattva, then from ahaḿtattva to mahattattva; and finally the metamorphosed projection as mahattattva will have to be withdrawn into unit consciousness for emancipation from the hold of Prakrti. Thus intuitional practice is intended gradually to withdraw the qualifying influence of Prakrti so that She is no longer able to impose Her qualities on Consciousness.

It was said earlier that it is consciousness (puruśa) in human beings which has to carry out sádhaná (intuitional practice). Hence the preliminary sádhaná (intuitional practice) has to be carried out by the consciousness metamorphosed as citta, by which this projection of consciousness retracts into ahaḿtattva. This leaves only ahaḿtattva and mahattattva. So the next entity to carry out sádhaná is the consciousness metamorphosed as ahaḿtattva. It is to free itself from the qualifying influence of the principle of Prakrti creating it by its dissolution into mahattattva. Thus only mahattattva or pure feeling of “I” remains. This is the stage of savikalpa samádhi where only mahattattva or pure “I” feeling indistinguishable from the Cosmic “I” remains. After this mahattattva carries out sádhaná and dissolves itself in the unit consciousness completely, freeing consciousness of the qualities imposed by the influence of Prakrti. It achieves emancipation from the bondage of Prakrti, and that is called nirvikalpa samádhi. Thus the sádhaná or intuitional practice that human beings have to carry out begins with citta, to be followed by ahaḿtattva and finally by mahattattva, which emancipates consciousness completely from the qualifying influence of Prakrti.

It is not easy to liberate mind from the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Human beings have a unit consciousness, and hence is it unit prakrti only which influences it? It is not so. The Consciousness in Nirguńa Brahma (Non-Qualified Supreme Entity) is not influenced by Prakrti because there She is the weaker counterpart. Since Infinite Prakrti is not able to influence Infinite Consciousness, unit prakrti will not be in a position to influence unit consciousness either. It would be incorrect to presume that in the qualified state of Brahma it is unit prakrti which qualifies the unit consciousness. If this is not so, which prakrti does qualify the consciousness, as without prakrti qualifying it there would be no Saguńa Brahma (Qualified Supreme Entity)? It may be assumed from this that two units of prakrti qualify one unit consciousness, as a single unit prakrti is the weaker counterpart of unit consciousness. This would also lead to the assumption that Infinite Cosmic Consciousness is being qualified by two Infinite Prakrtis. This is not logical and cannot happen. Prakrti is a unique force and it can never be divided into units or parts. Hence only Infinite Prakrti can influence every unit consciousness. If Infinite Prakrti qualifies every unit consciousness by Her infinite qualifying influence, then unit consciousness has to fight against Infinite Prakrti for emancipation, it has to fight against and defeat Infinite Prakrti for emancipation, and hence sádhaná is not an easy task.

Prakrti is a composite force which is always restless, and so the creation is ever-changing. All that is manifested in this Srśt́icakra [Cycle of Creation] is metamorphosed Cosmic Consciousness, and hence changes in the Cycle of Creation also change the Cosmic Mind accordingly. That is, the Cosmic Mind also becomes restless, and that brings about changes in the flow of creation. But the changes in the flow of creation are slow and gradual, as Prakrti takes quite some time to bring about a change in the Infinite Mind. It is only because of Cosmic Consciousness being infinite that changes are gradual and not very quick. Even the ever-mutative Prakrti takes some time to bring about a rotation of the entire infinite Cosmic Mind in order to bring about a change. While bringing the Cosmic Mind under greater bondage, Prakrti also influences the unit mind, bringing about unfathomable restlessness and movement in it. Due to the complete influence of Infinite Prakrti, the unit becomes extremely disturbed and mutatory. The fickleness and ever-changing nature of the mind needs no description as everyone understands it well. This quality in the human mind is the sole gift of Prakrti, who imparts to all that She creates Her quality of perpetual restlessness.

The perpetual restlessness of Prakrti makes Her creation – the unit mind – also disturbed throughout its existence. At times or in some places it may be more agitated, while at others it may be less disturbed. Restlessness, being a quality imposed by Prakrti, will vary with the influence of Prakrti. The mind is less agitated or disturbed where the influence of Prakrti is less. Her influence is the least in mahattattva and the most in citta, and hence the former is less restless than the latter. Sádhaná or intuitional practice lessens the influence of Prakrti on unit consciousness, and with that the restlessness of mind also lessens. Prakrti alone is responsible for imparting disturbance to the mind, and with the waning of Her influence the vacillation of mind also lessens. Hence the vacillation of mind cannot be steadied unless unit consciousness is emancipated from the influence of Prakrti.

Steadying the vacillation of the mind and developing concentration of mind is the same thing. Concentration of mind is thus not possible as long as unit consciousness is not liberated from the qualifying influence of Prakrti. This is the aim of sádhaná or intuitional practice also. To concentrate the mind it would be necessary to liberate, first of all, its most exterior manifestation, the citta, from the influence of Prakrti. The next would be ahaḿtattva, and finally mahattattva or buddhitattva must be liberated from Her influence. The mind, spread in citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva, must gradually be withdrawn from them and then alone will it be concentrated. Thus concentration of mind is nothing else but sádhaná or intuitional practice, which liberates units from the influence of Prakrti.

How far concentration of mind leads to emancipation needs to be determined. Complete withdrawal of mind from its manifestations is concentration of mind, but it is not annihilation of mind. Mind is created due to the qualifying influence of Prakrti over unit consciousness, and as long as mind exists, the influence of Prakrti must be present. Concentration of mind does not mean emancipation from the bondage of Prakrti. It is only the surest path leading to emancipation. Even with complete concentration, mind exists, but the influence of Prakrti is completely unable to cause restlessness. The qualifying influence of the principle of Prakrti is the least on mahattattva, and in a concentrated mind only mahattattva is left, as the other two counterparts, ahaḿtattva and citta, are withdrawn into it. As long as mind is not annihilated, mahattattva or buddhitattva will exist. Mahattattva is the knowledge of existence or pure feeling of “I”. Hence concentration of mind is not complete emancipation (mokśa or mahánirváńa). Concentration of mind is only savikalpa samádhi, where the only feeling that remains is “I am That.”

The creation becomes crude due to the increasing influence of Prakrti. When the influence is greater, it is cruder, while with less influence, it is subtle. So in one’s mind, mahattattva is the subtlest and citta the crudest. It is with mind only that sádhaná or intuitional practice for emancipation has to be carried out. The crudeness or subtlety depends on the degree of the influence of Prakrti, and with the decrease in Her influence the mind will retract into the subtle. Ordinarily the mind is absorbed in the things of the world which come into being as a result of the highest order of the influence of Prakrti on Cosmic citta. Mind being absorbed in the external expression of crudeness undergoes even greater influence of Prakrti. It was seen earlier that with complete reflection of unit consciousness, human mind attains freedom of action, and with that arises the wish to overthrow the yoke of Prakrti. So Prakrti created two illusory opposing concepts or ideas called Máyá. These are Avidyámáyá and Vidyámáyá. People who make use of their freedom in the pursuit of Vidyámáyá soon get back to the supreme rank, because Vidyámáyá directs the mind to the subtle. While those who take recourse to Avidyámáyá keep on experiencing the reactions of their actions (karmaphala), which make them roam in the thought-waves of the Qualified Supreme Entity.

Avidyámáyá drags and absorbs the mind into crude objects. Avidyámáyá really acts as the weapon with which Prakrti keeps the mind under Her subjugation by binding it to the crude things of the world. Sádhaná or intuitional practice leads one to freedom from the bondage of Prakrti, and the mind becomes subtle. The decrease in the influence of Prakrti takes the mind towards subtlety, and the śad́ripu and aśt́apásha no longer bother and bind it. Just as the decrease in the influence of Prakrti releases one from the fetters and influence of Avidyámáyá, the converse, that the release from the fetters and influence of Avidyámáyá should decrease the influence of Prakrti, is also true. Avidyámáyá will thus never be able to help one in obtaining emancipation, as it only binds the mind and absorbs it in the crude things of the world, which make it more crude and increase the influence of Prakrti over it. To steady the vacillation of the mind, to concentrate the mind, to make the mind more subtle, are the ways to achieve freedom from the bondage of Prakrti. One who pursues Avidyámáyá will not be able to achieve any of these. A mind absorbed in the crude objects of the world will only become more crude, as vacillation will increase and concentration become an impossibility. Such a mind will never be able to achieve emancipation and become free of the bondage of Prakrti. Abandoning the pursuit of Avidyámáyá is thus imperative for achieving emancipation.

Unit consciousness secures release from the bondage of Prakrti and attains the supreme rank with the practice of sádhaná (intuitional practice). Consciousness is subdued wherever the influence of Prakrti is greater. Consciousness is absolute knowledge (jiṋána), which includes intuition and intellect. Hence the greater influence of Prakrti leads to greater ignorance as consciousness gets subdued. Decrease in the influence of Prakrti will naturally lead to greater wisdom and clear reflection of Consciousness, because the influence of Prakrti is the reason for ignorance. Intuitional practice removes or decreases the influences of Prakrti and would obviously lead one to greater knowledge (jiṋána) and a clearer reflection of Consciousness.

Sádhaná (intuitional practice) is waging war against Infinite Prakrti and becoming free of Her subjugation by winning this war. Prakrti is a unique force that controls everything, even natural phenomena. Sádhaná or intuitional practice, therefore, means achieving supremacy over this all-controlling unique force, Prakrti. It was seen earlier that Consciousness (Puruśa) and Prakrti are inseparable. Prakrti, which was the controlling entity of Puruśa before the war, comes under Puruśa’s control on being defeated in the war. Consciousness (Puruśa) thus becomes the master of the all-controlling unique force with the help of sádhaná or intuitional practice. Due to its victory in the war against Prakrti, it leaves Prakrti unable to exercise any influence over Puruśa. Sádhaná or intuitional practice will make one the possessor of immense supernatural powers.

Sádhaná begets supernatural power. What its correct and proper use is has to be determined. The supreme rank of Brahma is non-qualified (nirguńa) where Puruśa and Prakrti are together, yet Puruśa (Consciousness) is more prominent and Prakrti is not able to qualify Puruśa. Prakrti, being feebler in Nirguńa Brahma (Non-Qualified Entity), could be driven about by Puruśa (Consciousness). He could lord it over Prakrti. Yet Puruśa (Consciousness) does not do so. In the absence of Prakrti’s influence over Consciousness, the wish to lord it over Prakrti will not be aroused in Puruśa. Such a desire in Consciousness will only arise upon being influenced by Prakrti, which will only be possible when Consciousness becomes weaker than Prakrti. Hence even the desire to lord it over Prakrti will arise only out of the weakness of Consciousness, which would bring Puruśa under Prakrti’s influence and render Puruśa incapable of lording. Consciousness (Puruśa) is thus never able to lord it over Prakrti. Unit consciousness gets release from the bondage of Prakrti gradually. The use of this Puruśa-begotten power of sádhaná for lording it over Prakrti would be inviting back Prakrti’s influence. It is the qualifying influence of Prakrti only which creates the desire for the use of power. Hence by wishing to use or by actually using this power one voluntarily gets under the control of Prakrti. This results in all one’s efforts to conquer Prakrti with the help of sádhaná (intuitional practice) being counteracted by going under the control of Prakrti. There is no emancipation for such a person. One can never gain freedom from the influence of Prakrti in this way.

People use the power that comes from sádhaná in order to win the admiration of others. The exhibition of one’s supernatural powers would make others extol, respect or even worship one. Others would look upon one as a great devotee (sádhaka). This is the only reason behind the display of one’s powers. A desire to command respect and devotion from others is only being entrapped by vanity (mána) and pride (mada) of Avidyámáyá. The use of power for such objects is the pursuit of Avidyámáyá, and the pursuit of Avidyámáyá leads to degradation. Hence any use of supernatural power brings one under the control of Avidyámáyá, which inevitably leads to a fall and to degradation.

Many consider it proper to use the power begotten of sádhaná to alleviate suffering, for instance to provide relief from a serious disease. There is hardly any logic behind it. Everyone has to bear the consequences of their actions, and disease, suffering or calamities are only different forms of suffering those consequences. Bhagaván (God) is benevolent, and it is according to His laws that one has to suffer the consequences of one’s actions. It is through this suffering that one can take a lesson to abstain from evil. That is the purpose behind God’s making one suffer the consequences. Interference in this divine law with the help of supernatural powers acquired through sádhaná is not benevolence. The reaction to one’s actions (karmaphala) will have to be experienced, and it is not within the authority of even the greatest of devotees (sádhakas) to stop this. This may at best be able to postpone the suffering, but the performer of the actions will have to suffer the remaining consequences and may have to seek rebirth for this. As a punishment, suffering from a serious disease may awaken the desire for sádhaná (intuitional practice) to achieve emancipation. But many straying and ignorant disciples deprive people of the opportunity of arousing this awakening by relieving them of their suffering with the help of their sádhaná-begotten supernatural powers. They in fact do greater disservice than service to the sufferer.

The use of sádhaná-begotten power has to be regarded as a blasphemy. For is it not challenging the supremacy of God by neutralizing the effectiveness of the laws of His nature with the help of supernatural powers? One may cross a river by walking on water, may walk through raging fire, or may even perform the miracle of curing one of an incurable disease. One would invariably be using one’s powers to nullify the nature (dharma) of water and fire and to interfere with the law of Prakrti which makes one suffer reactions of all one’s actions. Anyone walking on water in a river must be drowned. Fire has the property of burning whatever may come in its contact. Similarly one has to bear the consequences of one’s actions. To evade these effects is to challenge the authority of God. It is not merely challenging, but demolishing the very constitution of creation and its laws. There could be no greater blasphemy.

Every action will have a reaction, and that has to be experienced. Use of supernatural powers is also an action. It is not only an action but a blasphemous action – an evil deed. One is bound to suffer the consequences of such an action, and as long as one has not exhausted the experiencing of all the potential reaction (saḿskára), one cannot obtain freedom from the bondage of Prakrti. Hence the use of supernatural powers bestowed by intuitional practice is not justified under any circumstance. It invariably leads to downfall and degradation, and so it is essential to refrain from the temptation of using such powers. Emancipation can be achieved by intuitional practice (sádhaná), and so there must be a special technique for it. This can only be taught by one who knows the technique. It is, therefore, necessary for learning intuitional practice to find a teacher who knows this technique. Does it then mean that a preceptor (guru) is absolutely necessary for learning intuitional practice and obtaining emancipation, or can one learn it oneself? A man in prison with his hands and feet shackled will never be able to set himself free in spite of his best efforts, unless someone else opens the prison gates and removes his shackles. Similarly people have been shackled by Prakrti and imprisoned in this wide prison – the world. It would never be possible for them to become free without the help of another person.

Besides this, it is not possible for anyone to learn an art all by themselves. One must have someone who can teach them or whom they can imitate. Such a person from whom one can learn an art is a preceptor. Intuitional practice (sádhaná) is also an art and has to be learned from a preceptor. Hence emancipation is not possible without a preceptor (guru). A guru is always a prime necessity for obtaining emancipation.

One who is in bondage cannot release others from bondage. One with shackled hands and feet cannot remove the shackles of others. Hence the person who is not emancipated cannot give emancipation to others. Only a muktapuruśa (emancipated person) is capable of becoming a preceptor. A person can be called emancipated only when he or she has obtained freedom from the qualifying influence of Prakrti. The only entity which is completely free from the influence of Prakrti is the Non-Qualified Supreme Entity (Nirguńa Brahma), and It alone can be called really emancipated.

Nirguńa Brahma or the Non-Qualified Entity can, however, never be instrumental in giving emancipation to others. It cannot, in the complete absence of the influence of Prakrti, have even the will to wish for the emancipation of others. Only that person can be a preceptor who by his or her sádhaná (intuitional practice) has attained the supreme rank but also has, at his or her own instance, taken human form again for a predetermined period for the welfare of living beings. Such a person will be under the influence of Prakrti as long as he or she maintains his or her physical body, and on his or her relinquishing it with death, he or she will return to the supreme rank – the Non-Qualified Supreme Entity.

The Qualified Supreme Entity (Bhagaván) is emancipated and so is the preceptor (guru). That shows there is no difference between the preceptor and Bhagaván. He or she cannot be any other entity except the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma). He or she is thus Saguńa Brahma or Bhagaván incarnate. The wish of the Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma) is to obtain emancipation for each of Its units, and it is with this intention that It brought forth the creation. Saguńa Brahma is formless, It cannot be seen or heard. Such an Entity cannot help humans to achieve emancipation. It has to assume a human form to help Its units, and that is the form of a preceptor (guru). The preceptor (guru) is Bhagaván incarnate; there is not the slightest doubt about this.

Although it is difficult to find a muktapuruśa or sadguru (great preceptor), it is not necessary to search for one in jungles, mountains and caves in accordance with popular belief. The purpose of the Qualified Supreme Entity in manifesting the creation is to obtain emancipation for each one of Its units. In order to fulfil this purpose, It will have to appear before anyone who has a yearning for emancipation. This yearning or state of mental uneasiness caused by the intense desire for emancipation heralds the arrival of the opportune moment. The Qualified Supreme Entity, in the form of a great preceptor, will appear to those who have reached this opportune moment by virtue of their intense desire for liberation. If this were not so, the purpose of the creation would not be served; it would be merely a trap, and the Creator, the Qualified Supreme Entity, would become the cause of bondage. Hence to wander through jungles and over mountains in quest of a great preceptor is futile. What is most essential is to kindle in one’s heart a yearning, an intense desire for emancipation.

It is necessary to know what the qualities of a great preceptor are, so that even the ignorant may recognize that person. Is the possession and display of supernatural or divine powers the characteristic of the great preceptor (sadguru)? A great preceptor is an emancipated person and is master of all the supernatural powers, but does one have to display them to be recognized as a preceptor? We saw earlier that the use of supernatural powers under any circumstances leads to degradation, as they bring the user under the control of Avidyámáyá. But Avidyámáyá cannot attract or have any influence over a liberated person. Such a one will not be influenced by Avidyámáyá under any circumstances. Thus the person who claims to be a great preceptor because of supernatural powers or who displays them, is only an impostor. Such a person is not emancipated and can never liberate others. Such a person should be avoided like a venomous serpent. The display and possession of supernatural or divine powers are not the qualities by which a great preceptor can be recognized. A great preceptor is an emancipated person. A preceptor is free from the influence of Prakrti. Avidyámáyá cannot entrap a sadguru. The six enemies – káma (longing for worldly objects), krodha (anger), lobha (avarice), moha (attraction), mada (pride), mátsarya (envy) – and the eight fetters – lajjá (shame), bhaya (fear), ghrńá (hatred), shauṋká (doubt), kula (high descent), shiila (complex of culture), mána (vanity) and jugupsá (hypocrisy and backbiting) – have no effect on an emancipated preceptor (sadguru). In order to follow the dharma (nature) of creation, a sadguru lives in complete harmony with Vidyámáyá, and practises viveka and vaerágya (discrimination and proper use of worldly things). Such a person alone is a great preceptor (sadguru).

Intuitional practice (sádhaná) has to be learned from a great preceptor (sadguru), and emancipation is obtained by its systematic practice. Nothing can be achieved by merely depending on the preceptor without carrying out intuitional practice (sádhaná). Everyone should carry out intuitional practice. Emancipation is not possible without it. Some people have the erroneous impression that they do not have to make an effort and that they will attain emancipation due to the grace of the preceptor. It is true that liberation is not possible without the great preceptor’s kindness. But one is mistaken if one thinks that liberation can be obtained without effort. One must deserve kindness and then alone will it be bestowed. It is never showered on an undeserving disciple. To deserve the grace of the sadguru one has to follow the system of intuitional practice with devotion and faith, and not assume that the great preceptor will freely give everything without any effort on the part of the disciple. Other people think that since they are the disciples of a great preceptor and since the sadguru has come to elevate the fallen, the preceptor will take them all along when leaving, in the same way as a cowherd gathers together all grazing cattle before leaving the pasture at dusk. This way of thinking is not correct. A great preceptor does not come into this world to herd his disciples like cattle. The great preceptor comes to liberate people, to elevate them to divinity. People must make a sincere effort to carry out intuitional practice (sádhaná). Idle dependence on the preceptor cannot obtain emancipation.

When one first starts intuitional practice, problems arise and present obstacles to its pursuit. Sádhaná (intuitional practice) is the effort to free oneself from the bondage of Prakrti. This subjugation is maintained due to the self-created distortions in the mind. In order to obtain liberation the mind has to be restored to its natural state by removing these distortions. It was shown earlier that these are the reactions of one’s actions, and cannot be removed without being experienced. So emancipation is not possible until one has completely experienced the remaining reactions of one’s previous lives. Ordinary people experience these reactions in the normal way, and if any still remain when they die, they are reborn to exhaust them. Those who pursue intuitional practice do not want to be born again to experience their remaining reactions. In their eagerness to attain emancipation quickly they hasten to exhaust the balance of reaction in this life. So they should regard problems as a good sign, as they speed up the exhaustion of the remaining reactions.

Sádhaná is the effort to free oneself from the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Avidyámáyá is also a quality, and that too has to be renounced. If a tenant has been occupying a house for a very long time it will be extremely difficult to suddenly evict him by force, particularly if he has been treated as a respectable tenant for a long time. He will never leave the house willingly and will place all sorts of obstacles in your path. You will have to fight against all his manoeuvres, and only when you have completely defeated him will the bully allow you to enter the house. Similarly, as one has been at the mercy of Avidyámáyá for many lives, it will not leave easily when one starts intuitional practice. Like the bullying tenant, Avidyámáyá will throw all possible obstacles across one’s path when one tries to destroy its influence. Sádhaná or intuitional practice as taught by a great preceptor is the way to remove Avidyámáyá. Only success in sádhaná can make Avidyámáyá loosen its hold. So the beginning of true sádhaná is marked by great resistance from Avidyámáyá, which, through the obstacles it creates, tries to compel one to give up sádhaná. In its attempts to subdue Avidyámáyá, sádhaná will naturally meet resistance from the evil force of Avidyámáyá. Obstacles in sádhaná (intuitional practices) should be regarded as an indication of one’s success in one’s attempt to remove Avidyámáyá. Obstacles are not created by God or the great preceptor (sadguru), as they wish every one of the units to become emancipated like themselves. They are created by Prakrti, against whom one is waging war. If one is to win, Prakrti has to be defeated with the weapon of sádhaná, against which Avidyámáyá defends itself by placing obstacles in one’s way. Obstacles in sádhaná should be regarded as good signs, indicating that the influence of Avidyámáyá is beginning to wane.

The Qualified Supreme Entity (Saguńa Brahma) has given each of Its units a fully-reflected consciousness. It manifests creation and evolves humanity in it to enable the unit to carry out intuitional practice and attain emancipation. Other living beings do not possess a fully-reflected consciousness and are capable neither of performing sádhaná nor of attaining emancipation. Unit consciousness is fully reflected in all human beings and thus everyone has an equal right to practise sádhaná. No other living beings till they are evolved to the stage of human beings have the capacity to perform intuitional practice.

As everyone has an equal right to do sádhaná, it is necessary for Saguńa Brahma (Qualified Supreme Entity) to reach everyone as a great preceptor. But this does not happen because due to people’s lack of interest in achieving emancipation, they are not able to claim their right to sádhaná. The great preceptor is available only to those who have an earnest desire for emancipation. For them only the opportune moment has arrived and they alone can claim their right to sádhaná and find a great preceptor (sadguru).

Human beings have the power of discrimination as they possess a fully-reflected unit consciousness. They can discriminate between good and evil and choose to live a good life. The desire for emancipation is good, but as every action or desire has to have a cause, so this desire also has to be aroused within human beings. Developing an earnest desire for emancipation or earning the right to do sádhaná, therefore, depends on one’s efforts. The great preceptor cannot be accused of partiality because of teaching intuitional practice only to those who really deserve it. Saguńa Brahma wants to liberate everyone, but one must earn the right do to sádhaná by one’s own efforts as, although all human beings have a fully-reflected consciousness, many are not able to develop the earnest desire for emancipation. God cannot be blamed for human indifference towards attaining emancipation which prevents one from finding a great preceptor. It is everyone’s duty (dharma) to create the desire for emancipation, as that is the wish of the Lord and that is why the Lord made the vast creation.

The aim of Saguńa Brahma is to liberate each of Its units, and that is the only reason It made this vast creation. Everyone will gain emancipation sooner or later, as that is the wish of the Lord. It may happen soon or may come about after an indefinite period. The only way to gain emancipation is through sádhaná, and so everyone will have to begin sádhaná one day in their search for liberation from the bondage of creation. The wise should therefore start sádhaná as soon as possible and gain emancipation quickly. They realize that to delay is to suffer unnecessarily under the bondage of creation, which is not their permanent home. To regard a transit camp as one’s home and suffer the rigours and difficulties of the camp is foolish: knowing that this is not the final goal and that one has no right to stay here permanently, it seems sensible to make an effort to leave as soon as possible. Everyone has to reach his or her goal some time. It is imperative for everyone to achieve emancipation quickly by practising sádhaná. This is our permanent duty.

1955

Why Are People Afraid of Intuitional Practice?

Intuitional practice, sádhaná, is the fundamental duty of everyone. Yet very few people perform this duty. Ordinarily people are afraid of doing sádhaná. It is fear that keeps them from doing intuitional practice. But how far their fear is justified remains to be seen.

At the very outset they consider giving up worldly life, as they consider this to be an essential requirement of intuitional practice. According to them sádhaná cannot be reconciled with their ordinary way of life. They regard emancipation as the privilege of ascetics, unattainable by normal worldly people. Neither is this a necessary requirement nor does it appear to be logical. An examination of the advantages derived from adopting this course shows that there are only two: It provides solitude by removing one from contact with human society, which should help in one’s intuitional practice. It also removes one from immediate contact with the temptations and troubles of the world, which may help one to destroy the influence of Avidyámáyá. It is only for these two advantages that one might consider forsaking worldly life essential for intuitional practice.

It cannot be denied that the noise of the bustling world is a hindrance to intuitional practice and makes solitude very desirable. But it was explained earlier that hindrances are created by Avidyámáyá, which is one’s own evil force. Merely leaving the human world and living in a jungle will not set one free. Avidyámáyá will go with you to the jungles and mountains and create obstacles in sádhaná by substituting the howling of animals for the bustling sounds of human society. It is natural for a person to get used to their environment and not to be disturbed by it. For example, it would be impossible for a person from a lonely village to sleep in a house in Chowringhee Square in Calcutta due to the shrieking and screeching of trams and buses, while a person living there who is used to it will sleep soundly at night. Similarly a person used to living in a city like Calcutta may find it extremely frightening to sleep in a lonely village even for one night. In the same way one may find it difficult to practise sádhaná in a noisy environment in the beginning, but after getting used to it, there would be no difficulty. To go to the jungle for solitude does not appear to have any real significance.

Let us see if retiring to the jungle is helpful in avoiding worldly temptations. A temptation such as lobha (avarice) is a principle of Avidyámáyá. It can only be overcome by reducing the influence of Avidyámáyá through intuitional practice (sádhaná). One will never be able to keep away from temptation without overcoming the influence of Avidyámáyá. This is possible only through progress in intuitional practice, and merely forsaking the world and retiring to the forest will be of little or no avail. There is no doubt that if one stays away from objects of attraction, one has no chance of using them and they may thus gradually lose their attraction; while if one is near them one may be attracted towards them more. Yet if a person is forced to renounce something it is bound to cause them mental agitation. This agitation under greater restrictions may become unbearable and result in either illness or complete downfall. Forcing oneself to leave worldly life only to keep away from its attractions will serve no purpose. This causes mental agitation and pain and may even bring about one’s downfall. To give up the world merely for one doubtful advantage, instead of developing strength of character and firmness of mind, brings one no credit. The brave live among temptations in order to face and overcome them step by step rather than avoiding them due to their fear. Sádhaná means waging war on avidyá, and to win it one has to face the enemy instead of running away or appeasing him. Thus to give up the worldly life merely due to fear of its temptations is not a reasonable approach.

To run away from normal worldly life due to fear of its trials and worries would be equally unreasonable. Living in society is troublesome, as one has to discharge one’s obligations towards one’s dependents. One has to earn money to provide for them. The agony of disease and sufferings of life must be endured as well as the problems of poverty, if one is not able to earn enough. All this creates the desire to one run away from worldly life and be free from all responsibilities except to oneself. But does this not amount to the evasion of one’s duty towards one’s family? One who runs away from worldly life avoids obligations and shows extreme selfishness. Evasion of duty and selfishness are evil actions which must have evil consequences, and unless the reactions have been completely experienced, emancipation is an impossibility. Running away from the responsibilities and worries of the world does not enable one to completely forget the family one leaves behind. They will certainly occupy the mind, and that will bring one under the influence of the moha ripu (attraction) of Avidyámáyá. Progress in intuitional practice is not possible if there is the constant influence of Avidyámáyá, and in this situation one’s mind will be constantly returning to the thought of one’s family and the people whom one left behind. To say that those who can give up worldly life get beyond suffering and worry means that they overcome the influence of Avidyámáyá, as worries cannot be avoided when Avidyámáyá influences one’s thoughts and actions. For them living in society or in the jungle makes no difference. Is it not to overthrow the influence of Avidyámáyá that one retires to the jungle? And if that has already been achieved, then to lead the life of an ascetic in the jungle or a normal worldly life will be immaterial.

Release from the influence of Avidyámáyá cannot be obtained by running away from it: one has to divert the mind towards subtlety to achieve it. For instance, constantly trying to keep away the flies hovering around a wound is not a solution unless an effort is made to heal the wound. Intuitional practice, as taught by a great preceptor, is the healing balm; it is with this that one can drive away Avidyámáyá and gain emancipation. As the influence of Avidyámáyá decreases, the temptations and troubles of the world cease to be an obstacle to intuitional practice. As this is the only way to overcome Avidyámáyá, it can easily be practised within worldly life. Avidyámáyá will disturb a person in the beginning, but once defeated, it will not be able to create any hindrance to the pursuit of intuitional practice. To lead a worldly life and also to practise sádhaná is very convenient. For a person living the normal life of a householder has far greater conveniences and advantages available to him or her than has an ascetic who renounces the world. Retreating to the jungle is not a way to obtain relief from the trials and worries of the world. There is yet another great advantage in living a worldly life. It provides one with the opportunity to serve humanity, an important aspect of intuitional practice. This great opportunity is denied to those who live in jungles. The intuitional practice taught by a great preceptor should be practised with faith and devotion. It can be practised at home; and running away from the home and family is not necessary. As one overcomes Prakrti, the influence of Avidyámáyá will disappear. Intuitional practice is the only way to subdue Avidyámáyá. Hence intuitional practice is a necessity. To differentiate between different places for sádhaná, to consider one place more suitable than another, or to regard a particular spot as good and another bad, is to divide Brahma. Every place in this creation is the manifestation of the Supreme Cosmic Entity (Brahma), and to call one place good and another bad is to attribute these qualities to Brahma. If sádhaná is based on the consideration of good and bad, it will never be possible for one to develop the feeling of oneness with the rest of creation. One will never be able to love others as oneself. To Brahma every place is the same, and sádhaná can be practised anywhere. To give up the world and run away to the jungle is illogical. Not to practise sádhaná for fear of having to give up the world is thus irrational.

Brahmacarya is the other fear which deters many from practising sádhaná. They consider Brahmacarya to merely mean celibacy or giving up of one’s physical relationship with one’s husband or wife. They are misled by the popular belief that it is otherwise not possible to perform intuitional practice (sádhaná). It is thus necessary to know the correct meaning of Brahmacarya and also know whom one should regard as a Brahmacárii. Brahmacarya means to introvert the extroversial tendencies of the mind and to devote it completely to Brahma. To understand the meaning of Brahmacarya clearly one should know what is meant by the extroversial tendencies of the mind and how these should be introverted. Creation is the manifestation of the subtle in the form of crude objects under the influence of Prakrti. The crude creation is the world that one experiences through the physical organs, while mind is the subtle part of the creation. If the influence of Prakrti increases, one’s mind is gradually converted from subtle to crude. Under the influence of Prakrti the mind becomes more extroverted and remains absorbed in the crude. Emancipation means releasing the mind from the influence of Prakrti or directing it from crudeness to subtlety. Brahma is subtle by nature, and if the mind is absorbed in crude objects, it cannot be devoted to Brahma. To divert the mind from crude objects towards the subtle is to devote it to Brahma. This can be done by decreasing the influence of Prakrti on the mind, as Prakrti alone keeps it absorbed in the crude objects around it. Brahmacarya thus means to release the mind from the influence of Prakrti, and a Brahmacárii is a person whose mind is devoted to Brahma and is always absorbed in it. Such a mind is not attracted by the crude expressions of creation; it is absorbed in the subtle and spends all its time thinking only of Brahma. This state is attainable as a result of intuitional practice. One can become a Brahmacárii only by practising sádhaná. It is only by means of sádhaná that the mind can be freed from the influence of Prakrti and diverted towards the subtle to become completely absorbed in Brahma. Ordinarily, merely overcoming the sexual urge (káma ripu) is considered as Brahmacarya; but in reality all the śad́ripu (the six enemies) and aśt́apásha (the eight fetters) are extroversial tendencies. Of these fourteen, the sexual urge is only one, and merely overcoming this cannot make one follow Brahmacarya. It is only when one is free from all the extroversial tendencies, the śad́ripu and aśt́apásha, collectively known as Avidyámáyá, that one’s mind can become Brahmacárii. The dominance of avidyá (extroversial tendencies) is so strong that it is not possible to overcome it except through intuitional practice. Those who try to attain Brahmacarya without performing intuitional practice are wasting their time. Intuitional practice will by itself gradually divert the mind from crude to subtle, and a person will slowly become Brahmacárii. The domination of the śad́ripu and the aśt́apásha, the extroversial tendencies, will diminish by itself. With the disappearance of their influence the mind will no longer remain absorbed in crudeness. It is not necessary to give up one’s conjugal life in order to begin intuitional practice. The attraction towards earthly things born out of lust (káma) and attachment (moha) makes conjugal relations a necessity. Intuitional practice helps one to overcome this need. One becomes indifferent to it. So the question of giving it up for intuitional practice does not arise. It was said earlier that sádhaná is waging war against Prakrti and defeating Her. The force of intuitional practice is certainly greater than the strength of Prakrti, and by means of it one can attain Brahmacarya. However strong may be the domination of Avidyámáyá, it can always be destroyed by intuitional practice. Intuitional practice, not taking a vow of celibacy, is essential if one is to become a Brahmacárii. It is necessary to mention here the common meaning of Brahmacarya, that is, “to preserve viirya (semen)”. Shukradhátu (seminal fluid) and viirya are necessary to nourish the nerve cells and nerve fibres. It is essential to preserve them in order to develop firmness of mind and intellectual sharpness.

Some people consider that one should start intuitional practice in old age when a person has more leisure, after one has spent the prime of one’s life earning money. People are afraid that they may face insecurity and difficulties in their old age if they do not accumulate enough wealth before their bodies weaken with age, rendering them incapable of hard work. They regard the prime of life as the period intended for earning money, and old age with its decreased capacity for hard work as the time to remember God. They are labouring under the misconception that hard work is not necessary for intuitional practice and that old age is therefore the proper time for it. Whoever is born is bound to die and one is constantly approaching death, not knowing when it will come. It is never certain if one will live to grow old. Yet people reserve the most important work of practising sádhaná for the time when the body has become completely enfeebled and the fatuous mind of old age has become entangled in the reactions of this life to such an extent that it is afraid of starting anything new. Ordinarily it is fear of one’s approaching death that makes one think of God in old age. One’s evil deeds begin to haunt one, and one starts praying and imploring God to save him or her from the consequences of one’s deeds. There is no value in remembering God in old age, when it is not possible to concentrate the mind due to the weakness and disease of the body and its preoccupation with the reactions (saḿskáras) of the deeds of this life. The mind then is caught up in the infirmities of the body, in the diseases of old age, impending death, and most of all, in memories of past incidents, and it is impossible to concentrate it. For these reasons one is incapable of intuitional practice. There is an Indian saying that only a young bamboo can be bent, and if you attempt to bend a mature one you will only break it. That is, anything new should be started early in life, and so should intuitional practice.

There are people who avoid intuitional practice (sádhaná) for fear of giving up all the pleasures and enjoyments of the world. This fear deters them from pursuing intuitional practice, although their fear has no logical basis. It was explained earlier that the objects of earthly enjoyment are created under the influence of the static principle of Prakrti, and one regards them as real due to the dominance of Avidyámáyá, which also makes people enjoy these earthly objects. Intuitional practice gradually reduces the dominance of Avidyámáyá, and then the mind is also diverted towards subtle things. Crude worldly pleasures and enjoyments lose their attraction. The longing for worldly objects (káma), the attraction for them (moha), and avarice (lobha) – the three principles of Avidyámáyá – make these seem desirable, but with the waning of the influence of these three, the mind will no longer desire them. Ordinarily the mind delights in the enjoyment of worldly pleasures and regards giving them up a torture, but when the mind no longer likes them, the question of giving them up does not arise. At that time the mind will try to run away from them, and feels relieved to be without them, instead of being tormented by their absence. For is not the unavailability of something only disturbing when we desire it very much? If we do not desire an object, we will not miss it when it is not there. For instance, an alcohol addict will be tormented if he does not get alcohol, but if a non-addict does not get a drink, he will not even feel its absence. The question of his being tormented does not arise, for he never wished for it. The mind gets diverted towards subtlety through intuitional practice, and no longer enjoys crude pursuits. When the presence of crude objects is difficult to tolerate, the question of missing them or being disturbed by their absence does not arise. Some consider it necessary to tear themselves away by force from the enjoyment of worldly things in order to pursue intuitional practice, and the fear of their desires torments them. It will, however, never be possible to control one’s mind by withdrawing it from objects of enjoyment by force. This would only make the body suffer and become sick. There is no compulsion in intuitional practice. The system of intuitional practice as taught by a great preceptor is so powerful that it imperceptibly diverts the mind from crude attractions towards subtlety, and the desire for earthly enjoyments disappears, taking with it the pain of not getting them. Not to pursue intuitional practice for fear of having to stay away from earthly pleasures and enjoyments is irrational. Those who consider it necessary are mistaken.

On careful analysis, the fears that hold one back from practising sádhaná appear to be without any foundation. To avoid intuitional practice (sádhaná), which is the fundamental duty of everyone, out of baseless fear, only shows one’s ignorance. It is, therefore, urged that no one avoid sádhaná out of unfounded fears, but rather through sádhaná realize themselves and know themselves as the Infinite Supreme Entity.

1955