Contents:
1
|
|
2
|
|
3
|
|
4
|
|
5
|
|
6
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
9
|
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:
- How
do we experience this world as real if it is not a crude reality and
exists only as a thought-projection of Puruśa?
- 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
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario