Atma Bodha 1

As a child we have all been interested in toys. Whenever a new toy came our way, we were
impressed and we loved it and whenever we were not given a toy, we felt as if our world is
ruined. And then as we grew up, those toys no more remained all that important! Somehow, its
seems to have happened "slowly" and eventually ... we just grew out of them.

Perhaps at that time we did not have the maturity to question ourselves : "These toys which made
me happy earlier, how is it that they no more make me happy ?" . We never thought on those
lines then. But perhaps we should have done that. Instead of inquiring into it, we started playing
with new toys: company of friends, movies, parties etc. The old toys have been replaced with
these newer toys. ofcourse we did not call these "toys" as we felt that only children play with
toys and we were not children any more .

And then our job , our family ... these became important.

lets now ask this fundamental question: why do we want what we want ? . Right now , we might
be mumukshus seeking liberation or Moksha. But why do we want that ? Lets get to the
fundamentals. As we inquire into our lives, there is something absolutely clear: We have been
"seeking". As a child I felt I was empty without my toys. As I grew up , I felt I was empty
without certain relationships ! And usually as people grow old, their senses give away ... they no
more have control over family and circumstances ... no one gives them the importance they used
to get earlier ... so now they look for a new way to fill their sense of emptiness : Religion.
Ofcourse, this may not be the case with everyone. But the fact that we "Seek" means we see
ourselves as a lacking individual who gets fulfilled by gaining something else. So then there is
another philosophy that says "Dissolve this individuality itself" .

Our spiritual search also starts as an attempt to get rid of the sense of emptiness thats lurking in
our hearts. Vedanta does not give us a new object to fill this emptiness with. Vedanta says "You
are already fulfilled. There is no emptiness". When we hear this, we feel "How can that be ? I
feel empty, I am unfulfilled" and hence there is a tendency to do something to get rid of this
emptiness. If this sense of being empty is true, then we have to do something to get rid of it. But
if this sense of emptiness is false ... like a ghost imagined upon a post... then what we need is
clarity of vision and not an "Activity" to remove emptiness. Its exactly like a person who
imagined a ghost in a post and is now trying to get rid of it. Someone says tht you can get rid of
it by doing japa. Another person says do prayer. Yet another person would say do meditation,
observe the breath. Now dont get me wrong ... all these are upasanas [practises] that are
definitely useful. But long before putting a person into any of these , its very important to let him

know : There is no ghost, its only a post. Having known this, if the person still has some "fear"
lurking in his heart, he might be suggested some spiritual sadhanas. Without telling this, what
ever sadhana a person is given , its really not going to help.

This example of a ghost imagined on a post or a shadow (not necessarily our own) taken to be
ghost is very important. Our sense of being a lacking individual has to be ultimately seen as a
shadow or a ghost imagined on a post. That is to say that it "appears" but "is not there in reality".
Not there in reality , like the horns of a hare ... not there at all! In vedantic terms, its Mithya.
This is vedantic teaching.

This text that we have chosen for discussion is called "Atma Bodha", the teaching about "Atma".
Atma means "Me", "I". The teaching is here not to tell what Atma is, rather it is to tell what
Atma is not! This is called "Negation" [Note: Negation is not Rejection -- please see the subtle
difference]. I am not any guru / teacher. What I present here is what I have understood from the
teachings of some Mahatmas --- I have had the good fortune to meet some exceptional mahatmas
and they have conveyed this vision to me. Since I found it really useful, I share it with everyone
in the hope that its found useful.

Lets start with the text :

Quote
Verse 1:

tapobih : by austerities
Ksheena paapaanam : having purified themselves.

shaantaanam : who are calm [without mental conflicts]

veetaraaginaam : (who are)without Attachment
mumukshuunaam : who have desire for liberation.
aapekshyah : with such people in view , for them
ayam: this
atma bodhah : Self Knowledge
Vidheyate : is composed.

For such people who by austerities have become pure and calm and who have a longing to find
liberation, this text called Atma Bodha or Self Knowledge is being taught or composed.
Such a long list of qualifications often frighten people. Let me first of all tell you that these are
not to disqualify people from reading this text. For a spiritual sadhaka, the situation is like that of
a person who has nausea due to empty stomach. Until something is eaten, the nausea cannot be
cured and until nausea is cured, one cannot eat anything. The situation of a spiritual sadhaka is
often similar to this. Unless mind is pure, this Knowledge does not settle in and unless this
knowledge settles in, one cannot get the mind totally purified. Jnana is also seen as the best
purifier of the mind.
So somewhere this cycle has to be broken. If a person says "I'll not study this text until I gain all
these qualifications" , then the chances are that he is waiting for the waves of the ocean to
subside so that he can cross it. The reason mind is impure is because of ignorance and the reason
knowledge does not settle is mind is impure. Thats why Jivan Mukthi Viveka suggests that one
should practise this Bodha or teaching along with practises for manonasha [meditation and
practise of samadhi] and vasanakshaya [ignoring vasanas to make them non-binding]. Perhaps
the best way to state these qualifications is how Yoga Vasishta states it : A person who has
longing and who is neither extremely ignorant nor totally liberated is qualified to read it. Which
means anyone who has a desire to know the Truth can follow this.

Then why are these qualifications mentioned so explicitly ? Well, these qualifications are to be
developed as we learn about this Truth so that we can become best qualified. In our university,
we have a professor who often mentions the prerequisites of a course and then adds "or anyone
who is ready to develop these as the course progresses" ! Thats the idea. We need to have these
qualifications if this knowledge is to settle [if we have to own it up]. Or if we have a strong
desire for liberation, we can pick these up as we study this text. So Mumukshatvam , or the
desire to free oneself is a very important quality... if this is not there, the person would not take

the trouble to read this also. So mumukshatvam is absolutely necessary. The very fact that
mumukshatvam is there means that attachment is a little thin, because this person has understood
that the world cannot make him fulfilled. So if mumukshatvam is there then ragam is not very
strong. With some effort and with the aid of this knowledge one can develop detachment better.
When the detachment becomes strong the person naturally becomes calm and satisfied. So these
are all interlinked.

So the very fact that there is desire to find liberation means one is qualified for this knowledge.
However this mumukshatvam should not be emotional kind , it should be of inquiring kind...
where the mind is ready to inquire and find out this truth. As the teaching proceeds this person
should have the intellectual availability to "listen" and "Follow" whats taught and "See" whats
"Shown". This much is required for the student. Sometimes people have what is known as
intellectual laziness. They brilliantly cover it up by saying "All this intellectualization is useless"
but actual fact is they want to just believe and get emotional but dont have the intellectual
availability to inquire into this Truth . They do not have a mind thats ready to remain with the
subject as it is taught and see the truth thats shown. Thats why Zen religion says that the most
important prerequisite is whats called "Beginner's Mind"... This is a mind thats open and
"Seeing" whats "Shown". This is also what our sages have called "Sraddha" [Srat Dadhati iti
Sraddha... that attitude which aids us to SAT is sraddha]. So two kinds of students cannot
benefit: a) Who are not interested.
b) Who simply repeat whats said without "Seeing" what the teaching is showing.

The second kind are like a student who asks the teacher to show him moon and when the teacher
is showing , he simply looks at his finger and also makes a note of it in his diary .

What is paapam ? Paapam literally means sin. When a person is not able to have a desire for
liberation and is not able to follow the teacher with a beginner's mind ... that means there is
something thats blocking him ! His own mental disposition is such as a result of what he has
done before and how he has lived or may be how he had been thinking. This blocks his vision ,
perhaps makes him intellectually lazy. So he needs to practise some discipline to develop
intellectual alertness and readiness. This discipline is the tapas. One has to do this tapas to
eliminate intellectual laziness and also to develop detachment and desire to know the Truth. Only
when one has done this tapas will one become eligible for knowing this truth. A sadhaka should
continuously strive to gain these qualifications.

Swami Chinmayananda ji says regarding sin : "Sin is not tan action in itself but it is the tendency
(vasana) to live and think negatively, which is left over in our mind as a result tof our own wrong
actions".

To this, I would like to add a few more: the tendency to intellectual laziness, inability to have
love of God, over emotions, hallucinations, inability to see things impartially, taking sides etc.

These kind of blocking tendencies of mind which do not allow a person to lead a spiritual life
and which do not allow this knowledge to take place have to be countered through proper
sadhanas. Through tapas / austerities like japa, dhyana, fasting etc one tries to weaken these
vasanas that cause such wrong actions. That is why Tapas is required.

Thus if we have a deep desire to liberate ourselves of find moksham then we can quickly acquire
these qualities and gain this knowledge which liberates us.

Friends, as I mentioned earlier that these are not to disqualify anyone from studying and learning
this tetxt .. I would like to give some references to support this view. Ramana, as we know, used
to tell everyone "You are not the body, you are the Self", even when they could not immediately
appreciate it. We have clear explanation on this in Panchadasi :

Quote
chapter 9, 41-42:
"There is the popular saying that a monk could not realize the truth the impediment being his
past attachment to his queen (or a she-buffalo). "
"His teacher instructed him of Brahman knowing his attachment for her. When the impediment
was removed, the monk realized the truth properly"
This clearly tells us that this truth may be explained to people with some attachments but only
when they give up those attachments and get over those weaknesses can they find liberation.

When this teaching is given to a student who is not yet totally ready, indirect knowledge of the
truth arises. The student is then supposed to meditate and inquire with the aid of this indirect
knowledge to make it "Aparoksha" or Direct -- I would refrain from using the word "Experience
here". No new experience is needed here. We already have the experience, but we lack its
recognition. So this recognition is what is required. Many friends feel that there is a need for a
special experience .. like the Samadhi experience. If the Samadhi experience would lead to
liberation, then Yoga would have been sufficient for liberation. However, we will see in the next
verse that Shankaracharya dismisses all upasanas and yogas as means to liberation. He says that
jnana alone is the direct means to liberation. So its not really about an experience. What we lack
is really an intellectual disposition or the recognition of the Truth! A person who is afraid of a
shadow taking it to be a ghost ... what does he lack ? He does not lack the experience of shadow.
He lacks recognition that its a shadow and not a ghost.

Thats why, its said that a Vedantin's Samadhi is "Cit - Samadhi" as against "Citta Samadhi"
practised by yogic people. Yoga trains people to gain a kind of samadhi where they lose
consciousness of the world and everything vanishes from their vision. Then they come out and
say "I was agitated before, now i realized" ... does this not mean that their identification with
mind has not yet gone ? They are still identified with mind ! The kind of samadhi which Vedanta
students appreciate is of a totally different kind. It need not involve total vanishing of the world
[it may be there] ... it involves reveling as "Awareness" or "Self" within. Its here and now as
even yesterday it was the same. Self is ever Nirvikalpa ! Thats why When Annamalai Swami ji
asked Ramana about Samadhi, Ramana says :

Quote
"Does Samadhi mean that one is unaware of everything ?" , I asked.
"No," said Bhagavan. "Mediation will go on without our effort. That is Samadhi"
"Then what is Sahaja Samadhi ?", I asked.
Bhagavan answered by saying , " In that state meditation will always be going on. In that State
the thought , 'I am meditating' or 'I am not meditating' will not occur".

I then asked Bhagavan about periods in meditation when I was only aware of an all-pervasive
blankness.
"Sometimes nothing is seen", I said. "Is this good?"

Bhagavan did not seem to approve of all these states, "In the beginning", he said, "It is good if
meditators meditate with Self Awareness".

The state of Sahaja Samadhi contined to intrigue me. A few weeks later I asked him another
question about it, "Can one practise sahaja samadhi right from the beginning?"
Bhagavan replied by saying that one could.
"But how to practise it ", I asked. "And how does one practise nirvikalpa samadhi ? How many
different kinds of samadhi are there ?"
"There is only one kind of Samadhi", Said Bhagavan , "not many kinds. To remain temporarily
subsided in the reality without any thought is nirvikalpa Samadhi. Permanently abiding in the
Self without forgetting it is Sahaja Samadhi. Both will give the same happiness"
--> Page 234 of Living by the words of Bhagavan.

This is an important understanding. Annamalai Swami also says:

Quote
Why should you imagine that it is some new experience to be discovered or found ? You are the
Self right now, and you are aware of it right now. Do you need a new experience to prove that
you exist? The feeling "I am existing" is the Self. You pretend that you are not experiencing it, or
cover it up with all kinds of false ideas, and then you run around looking for it as if it were
something external to be reached or found.
This is a very profound statement . We do not need a new experience --- we already have it. We
need the recognition that this "I AM" is Self [or God] and we need to clearly differentiate it from
the "Objective" world ... because this "I AM" when it becomes "I AM tall", is undergoing a
change which is unreal and we need to see this unreal as unreal. Thats the whole vedantic
teaching.
Quote
Verse 2:
bodho.anyasaadhanebhyo hi saaxaanmoxaikasaadhanam|
paakasya vihinvat jhaanam vinaa moxo na sidhyati ||

BodaH : knowledge (which is explained in this text)

anyasadhanebhyah : in comparision with other means (other sadhanas)
hi : indeed
sakshaat : direct
mokshaikasadhanam: the only means for liberation.
paakasya : for cooking
vhinvat : like the fire
vinaa : without
jnanam: Knowledge
mokshah : Liberation
na : not
sidhyati : achieved/ possible.

Just as cooking is not possible without fire, Liberation is not possible without Jnanam.
Amongst the various means of liberation, Knowledge alone is the direct means.

This is a very important verse. Just in the previous verse Shankara has stressed the importance of
discipline and Upasanas like japa etc. Now these are dismissed. The purpose of these upasanas is
purification of mind, they cannot lead to Moksha or liberation. For appreciating this properly we
need to clearly know what liberation means and why upasanas cannot lead us to it. Before that I
would like to stress that Karma (Rituals etc), Upasanas (Meditation, Japa etc) and even Yoga
cannot lead us to mukti. This same thing was also told in Vivekachudamani as follows:

Quote
Verse 58 :
na yogena na saNkhyena karmaNaa no na vidyayaa|
brahmaatma-ekatva bhodena mokshasya sidyati nanyathaa ||

not by yoga, not by samkhya, not by karma nor by upasana is liberation achieved.
Its only by understanding of the oneness of Brahman and the atma. Not otherwise.

When such a strong statement is made by someone like sri Adi Shankaracharya , we need to give
it proper consideration. We will try to understand what Moksha means and why this has to be
the case. Once we gain this clarity we will be able to see where what works. Many popular
writers have not written strictly as per Shankaracharya's explanation and I really regret this. The
view that there are 4 way to liberation: karma, bhakti, jnana and raja yogas is not whats
supported by Shankara[we will see it when we reach the appropriate verses in Bhagavad Gita,
infact one can read Shankara's introduction to BG in my thread in this very forum] . So this text
teaches Atma Bodha... that is the Self Knowledge which is considered to be direct means to
liberation . Therefore understanding this text and by developing the qualities mentioned in the
previous verse , we attain liberation. That is the idea. Without understanding (Gaining full
clarity) the content of this text in some or the other form ... no matter how and what we practise
it would not lead to moksha or jivan mukti. With Shallow understanding one cannot attain Jivan
Mukti. Hence study of such texts as this from a guru is not optional.

Why is it so important to recognize that Karma, Upasanas and Yoga cannot lead us to Mukti ?
This is not the only place where this point is stressed. Shankaracharya makes it a point to
elaborate on this in all his bhasyas and also in prakarana granthas like vivekachudamani. Infact
this is explained in advanced vedantic texts like sri Rama Gita also. We can understand this
clearly if we look at our example again... There is a person who is afraid of some shadows. He
thinks they are ghosts. Any karma, upasana , yoga he does to get rid of the ghost is futile. First of
all he needs to be taught that its not a ghost but only a shadow.

In our lives too, various events / objects seem to haunt us. If I am physically sick, its something
that haunts me. Without money , I feel haunted. If the family members are fighting, I feel
haunted. So these are all shadows imagined to be ghosts ! And in meditation what do we do ? We
get into an altered state of mind ... where all these are not there. Obviously we feel peaceful. And

when we come out, all these are waiting to catch up with us. Infact this is what happens in a
bhajan session. For some time the mind is lulled into a state of peace. But if that were real
liberation, one should have come out of the bhajan session liberated. Immediately after the
bhajan one gets irritated or angry , how does one explain that ? The point is, temporary lulling of
mind is not going to help.

The story of Gautama Buddha is very illustrative in this context. He was searching for a way out
of suffering and one of the teachers taught him a way to get into nirvikalpa samadhi. But having
come out he says "This cannot be nirvana" and leaves it there. This is "Citta - Samadhi" which is
gained through yogic practises. Pathanjali was not a Advaita Vedantin. If people read Shankara's
Brahma sutra bhasyam, one would know that though the methods of Pathanjali are accepted for
purification of mind... his essential philosophy that once one empties the mind one would find
liberation is contradicted. Such a person would come out of samadhi and say "I went in and came
out of samadhi"... which clearly means that he has not yet detached himself from mind. Vedantic
samadhi is to see the mind as "the other" ... which is why we see statements in panchadasi and
ashtavakra gita saying "samadhi is of the mind and you are not the mind" .

As discussed earlier, there are events in life which seem to haunt us. These events which seem to
haunt us have to be seen as unreal .... as shadows and not ghosts. This requires a proper teacher
first. Thats why Jnana is said to be the only direct means to liberation. Here, someone may say
"Jnana in this context is Mano-Nasha or no mindness" . Its rare to find someone who understands
what Mano-nashanam means, but if we set that aside ... in the present context Jnana is definitely
not mano-nashanam. The next few verses talk about "Jnana-Abhyasa" [Practise of this
knowledge] etc. Infact in verse 5 it says that having removed ignorance this knowledge itself
dies ! So it cannot be "Self Abidance". Within this context , Jnana only means Self Knowledge
as is going to be "Taught" by the acharya. And with a little logic (logic too is important as we
will see in a later verse), one can clearly see why this knowledge has to be intellectual only. The
body being inert does not need any knowledge. Infact its not capable of "Knowing" [again
discussed later]. The Self or Awareness is totally unconcerned ... Simple Presence that does not
need any knowledge. So if at all knowledge is needed its of the mind alone. We will return to
this when we reach an appropriate verse.

Quote
Verse 3:

avirodhitayaa karma naavidyaa.N vinivartayet |

vidyaavidyaa.N nihantyeva tejastimirasa~Naghvat ||

karma: actions
avirodhitaya : being non-opposing
avidyam : (with ) ignorance
na vinivartayet : do not cause its destruction.

vidhya : Knowledge
avidhyam: ignorance
nihanti : destroys
eva: only
tejah : light
timirasanghavat: as deep darkness

Karma being non-opposing to ignorance does not destroy it. Knowledge alone destroys
ignorance, just as deep darkness is destoyed by light alone.

Shankara continues to explain why karma cannot cause liberation.

The person who is afraid of shadows is an ignorant person. Ignorance is the notion that those
shadows are ghosts and can affect him. And no matter which karma he does , without negating
this notion --- its a total waste of time.

Even as light alone destroys darkness, knowledge alone destroys ignorance. And we have
already said that the term "Knowledge" is used in this context not as some "Meditative State" : as
the 5th verse clearly says that after removing the ignorance it gets dropped. To remove
ignorance, it has to be at the same level as the ignorance. Just as if a physical object has to be hit,
I need a physical stone. An object of mental level cannot hit a physical object. similarly if mental
ignorance has to be removed, knowledge also has to be at that level alone. Swami Vivekananda
says like a thorn thats used to remove another thorn .

Karma is avirodhi ... not at conflict and is not against ignorance. Karma basically produces
results. But then, when a result is produced, I have to interpret it. We all know that Newton saw
an apple falling and then he said "There is Gravitational force". But then we have all seen apples
(or some objects) falling. The event of apple falling is available for all. But we have not got
anything out of it, why is this so ? Because we do not know the galilio's findings and Newton
was looking at the world from the standpoint of those findings. He was looking at the world with
the interpretation: "a body at rest remains at result unless external force compels it to move" !
The falling of apple , when its seen with this interpretation gives wonderful insights.

Similarly, suppose I go to a chemistry lab and then I mix up two elements ... and something
happens. Did I gain any new knowledge ? I did not because I have not got the understanding to
appreciate that event. When a chemistry student goes to the same lab and then he does this same
experiment ... what has happened now ? His understanding got cemented. What a vast difference
it is ? Ofcourse the entire chemistry was developed over the years from experiments and analysis
alone. However do we suggest that for a student these days ? We suggest that they should study
the subject and then cement it by practicals. Same thing within. Going into meditation is like
getting into an internal laboratory and observing things there. The chances are very very low that
we will come up with something outside our knowledge from such observation. May be a
Buddha / Ramana did it and those are very unique special cases. As such the process should be
to gain the knowledge and them probably upasanas etc may be used as aids to live that
knowledge out.

Any experience we have, it is as good as our interpretation of it. Suppose a person goes into
samadhi and comes out to say "I was in samadhi and came out", does it not mean that the person
has now taken himself to be the mind ? Because scriptures clearly state that you are not the mind
! So whats the chance that he comes out of samadhi and says "Hey! I am not the mind, I am now
what I was earlier " ? ! Ofcourse, if this knowledge is already there ... the same samadhi
experience could be interpreted this way. So knowledge alone removes ignorance. Infact if this
knowledge is clearly appreciated one will be able to be the Self even now without a samadhi
experience at all! Coz this samadhi is not absence of perception but a recognition of Self in and
through all perceptions. So once this understanding gets stable and clear, one is able to revel as
Self even when there is perception of objects. There is non-duality even in the apparent world of

duality. The duality is not "Rejected" or "Removed" but its "Negated" even when seen ... like in
the case of a mirage. When I know a mirage is not real water body , the mirage does not vanish,
its not rejected but then its negated ... it no more has that influence or power to make us run after
it. This is samadhi too ... and this samadhi is called Cit Samadhi ... coz its abidance as Self. It
Awarefully being here and now. Its being as Presence effortlessly.

Ignorance is our current interpretation of the shadows as ghosts and suppose I remove all those
shadows from my vision ... does it give me any new interpretation taht there are no ghosts ? I
would always be trying to get rid of those shadows and remain in meditative states... but that
does not destroy the ignorance. Thats why karma does not oppose ignorance. Infact Karma
perpetuates ignorance: the person going into meditation says "I was calm when those ghosts
were not there and now when they are there i am unhappy so they are indeed ghosts and have to
be got rid of"! This is how a person interprets the world when he does not have Self knowledge.
Thats why people get into all sorts of wierd practises and still keep on perpetuating their
ignorance!

This knowlege alone removes ignorance and its absolutely necessary to learn it from a guru. So
lets summarize... whats the role of karma ?
1. If a student is not in a position to grasp this knowledge owing to lack of mental ability or
interest, some japa etc can be useful.
2. However these karmas themselves cannot lead to mukti. Their purpose is only to make the
student eligible to grasp this knowledge and remain established in it.

Having gained this knowledge the student is supposed to do mananam and nidhidhyasanam
during the process if there are any impediments in terms of the qualifications [already mentioned
in verse 1] , they have to be removed through appropriate upasana/sadhana.

Quote
Verse 4:

paricChinna ivaajhaanaattannaashe sati kevalaH |

svaya.N prakaashate hyaatmaa meghaapaaye.N.ashumaaniva||

Parichinna ... that which is subjected to limitations

eva - as if
ajnanat - because of ignorance.
tannasho - upon destruction of ignorance
sati kevalam - Alone Remains as IS.
svayam - by itself or Alone
prakashate - Shines
hi - indeed
Atma - Self
meghopaye - upon the passing away of clouds
anshuman iva: as even the Sun (is)

The Self appears as if subject to limitations owing to ignorance. Just as when the clouds pass
away the Sun Shines Alone so too Atma Shines by itself , Alone, when ignorance is destroyed.

Destruction of ignorance is the only thing thats needed. Once ignorance is destroyed, the Self IS,
as it IS. It Just IS. Shankara gives the example of Sun. Sun appears to lose its "Illumination"
when a cloud covers it up but the moment the cloud moves away, Sun Shines of itself. Sun need
not be "revealed" , only the clouds have to be removed. So too, our scriptures, gurus, meditations
etc are not to "Reveal" the Self. Their purpose is only to remove ignorance.

This ignorance, makes the unlimited Self "as if " limited - just as a cloud makes it appear as if
the sun has lost its shine. Thus this ignorance needs to be eliminated and Shankara has already
mentioned previous verses that ignorance is eliminated only through this knowledge and not
through karma/upasana etc. We will try to understand how paricheda or causing a limitation is
possible on the limitless Self with the aid of dream model.

There is No Difference Between Waking and Dream States:

According to vedanta there is absolutely no difference between waking and the dream world
[Sarva Samanyam --> vaitathya prakaranam of mandukya upanishad]. So this world that we see
is exactly equivalent to a dream. There are very strong arguments to prove that the waking and
dream states are the same. Vaitathya prakaranam, Yoga Vasishta can be consulted for gaining
more clarity how this is firmly established. To the discerning a simple story would be sufficient:
Janaka once dreamt that he was the king of a kingdom that was having a famine. He woke up
and called his minister and asked him " Am I a king of a prosperous kingdom dreaming of a
prosperous kingdom or am I king of a famine struck kingdom dreaming the other way round ?"

There is absolutely no way to differentiate waking from a dream state, because anything that can
be done in the dream can also be done in the waking and until a person comes out of the dream
he does not know that he is in the dream. A detailed analysis of various arguments for and
against this can be found in mandukya karika.

How Are Limitations Applied In A Dream ?

Now this being so, lets just analyze how limitations get applied in a dream. What happens ?
Suppose I am sleeping and I dream that I was discussing vedanta with two of my friends friends.
In reality there is just One and yet 3 "divisions" are "as if " created. We cannot say they are
created, because in reality they are not there. We cannot say they are not there because they
"appear".. this is mithya. Mithya is that which appears to be there but really not there. Now how
has this limitation got applied ? The "dream me" is not the "real me" and yet the dream me gets
its "existence" based on "me" and in a sense is "me alone". infact all my friends that I see in my
dream are "me alone".

Firstly, there are 5 bodies imagined: A1, A2, A3. These are "Drishyas", the "Seen". And Drk or
the Seer is Awareness. In the presence of Awareness these are "imagined up". Now, A1 is "me"
[dream me, different from real me], this identification or imagination is there. This too is "seen",
Drishya. And then again A2 and A3 are my friends, this too is an imagination and these are also
drishyas or the objects that are seen.

When A1 which is "Seen" is identified with the "Seer", thats application of a limitation. Do we
see this ? A1 is an object, "out there" , the "Seen". And then "I AM A1" this is identification of
the Drk with the Drishya. Why ? Because "I" is not a "Drishya" but the "Drk". And A1 is ever a
Drishya. So now all thats happening in the "Drishya Jagat" is seen in relation to A1 and not as
"Drishyas" this is all identification with the drishya jagat. and this is how limitations are applied.

A1, which is the dream me, is physically and mentally limited in the dream. For example , A1 is
present at one place and not present at another place in the dream. But the real me has no such
restrictions, no such limitations. Due to identification with A1, its limitations are superimposed
upon myself and I see myself as limited.

Another interesting point to observe here. What is the dream content made up of ? Awareness.
And entire dream world is in "Awareness". Infact Awareness in the dream world is omnipresent :
God !

Ignorance is to Drag the limitations of Drishya Jagat Onto Ourselves:

As even in the dream, so too in the waking state. The waking state is exactly same as the dream
state. This is a dream.

Suppose something happened and due to inherent habit patterns of the mind "Anger arose".
Please note that anger comes from the subconscious as an almost "Automatic" reaction. Often
does not have it in one's control. Or may be I do not get sleep for a day and the next day I feel
extremely sleepy. These are what ? States of mind. The Self is "Witness Awareness" which is
totally untouched by this mental state. Now, when this limitation of the mind is superimposed
upon the Self , what do I say ? "I am miserable", "I am suffering", " I am frustrated" . Do we see
this ? The states of mind which are basically "There" as an "object". Its "Seen", "Drshya". And I

am "Here", the Awareness. If I do not identify with the "objective" world, I just AM. [keeping
the drishya as drishya and not identifying I can still relatively function in the drishya jagat].

Another way of looking at this: I AM is Presence. Presence is everywhere. When its conditioned
with respect to one body and one mind , it appears to be limited. When the same presence is seen
as just presence, without applying the limitations of limited adjuncts , it is unlimited.

Ignorance is this tendency of dragging the "Seen" onto the "Seer" ... the "Seen" is Mithya and it
has various limitations. Knowing this , one may continue to function in the Drishya jagat as a
drishya entity , all the time aware that he is not the drishya vasthu [the seen object]. This
becomes a play then. Not knowing this when a person takes himself to be the drishya jagat itself,
he suffers the limitations of the drishya jagat and the events that happen there.

Ignorance is only this: The "Objective" is dragged onto ourselves and we suffer. This is
ignorance. The objective world includes our entire mind and mental climate. When we learn to
"Leave" it there... "Out there" as objective... we remain absolutely Free ... here , now. just
disassociating from the "Seen"... this leaves us as "Kevala" as even when i know that this is a
dream, I alone AM.

This process of keeping the "External" things "External" is called Vishayikaranam.

Which means essentially to see the mind and mental states as objects and not to drag them onto
the subject. Once I know and appreciate that I am subject, this is a simple technique which can
be learnt and practised in day to day life.

The mind is happy, i keep it out " there " and not say "I am happy". To say "I am Happy" is to
drag that state of mind , which is the "Seen" onto the Self which is the "Seer". Thats a limitation.
When this is done, naturally when the mind is angry, i am angry. When the mind is dull, i am
dull ... all the limitations of mind follow.
So the first thing is to not drag the mental states onto myself.

We Use Words To Create These Limitations:

If we observe our minds a little we shall notice a peculiar thing... without saying "I am
unhappy", I cannot drag the mental state onto myself ! The language of mind really creates this
limitation! its through these words that we drag the states of mind onto ourselves. For example
Suppose there is pain... how does the mind react ?
1. Simple perception.
2. Pain, a name is given to the sensation.
3. Its paining me.
4. I cannot handle this pain.
5. This is really suffering, i am suffering.

Now, the first simple nameless perception is where the perception is "There" as the external
entity, the "Seen". The second name invokes the dragging process ... the step 3, we have a "Ithought" which actually drags the situation onto the Self. This is done purely with the words.
Please observe the usage of words. So the first thing, as spiritual sadhakas, is to observe the
"internal vocabulary" we use. What are the kind of words we use within and what is the effect
they have on us. When we remain wordless, the states remain "there" and are not dragged onto
the Self. and this is also self abidance.

While I have given a short synopsis of how we can live this truth out, we will try to discuss these
ideas further as we proceed with this text.

Quote
Verse 5:

ajhaanakaluSha.N jiiva.N jhaanaabhyaasaadvinirmalam |

kR^itvaa jhaana.N svaya.N nashyejjala.N katakareNuvat ||

ajnanakalusham - defiled by ignorance

jivam : jiva (individual)
jnanabhyasat - by practise of self-knowledge
vinirmalam - is purified
krutva - having done(thus purified or removed ignorance)
jnanam - sekf knowledge
svayam - itself
nashyate : gets resolved.
jalam: in water
katakarenuvat : like the power or kataka-nut

Jiva(individual) who is defiled by ignorance can purify himself with the practise of jnana or self
knowledge. Having purified the jiva (individual) the knowledge gets resolved too, as even when
the power of kataka nut is added to water it settles the impurities in it and having done that it also
settles down at the bottom.

These verses are absolutely straight to the point. This is why they give lot of clarity. In the prior
verses I have tried to explain that this jnana is not some "State of mind" because as we can see ,
Shankara is saying that this knowledge dies or dissolves too. So this knowledge is itself limited.
Swami Vivekananda ji gives the example of a thorn that removes another thorn.
Here Shankaracharya ji gives the example of kataka-nut, which is like alum which is added to
water to purify it. When this is added, it brings down the impurities in water and it itself settles
down at the bottom. now the water is purified with all impurities settled down at the bottom.
Shankara gives this example to explain how Self Knowledge works. This is why study of

scriptures is required. As one studies the scriptures, various impurities in the mind slowly vanish
and when all impurities vanish, this jnana also goes away leaving the person abiding as Self.
This jnana is only an antidote for ajnana or ignorance and we have already seen that Shankara
clearly says that ignorance cannot be eliminated through karmas and upasanas of various kinds.

So a sincere sadhaka should expose himself to this knowledge. Do we know how it is ? As one
exposes oneself to this knowledge, the "Errors" in perceptions slowly get eliminated and one
sees clearer and clearer. Just as people often read Bhagavatam or Sri Ramakrishna's Gospel. As
they just read, they develop "Bhakti" or Devotion towards God. One need not make any special
efforts to develop devotion - just listen to the stories of devotees, listen to bhagaatam,
ramayanam etc. Just by listening to all that one's mind gets purified and Bhakti is an outcome of
that purified mind! So if a person wants to develop bhakti what should he do ? Just expose
himself to the stories of bhaktas.
If instead of this, the person goes on practising various sadhanas, there will be progress but very
slow.

Same way, when one exposes oneself to the study of Yoga Vasishta under a proper guru, one
eventually develops the vision of looking at the world as a dream. This is an achievement in
itself and if the student tries to develop this with meditation its going to definitely take ages.
Thats why yoga vasishta itself suggests that one should study it regularly. Without such a study,
developing in sadhana is not easy. When our sadhanas are used to meditate on the teachings of
such a study , they really give results very fast.

Suppose I sit down to meditate and my mind is moving here and there. Why is this happening ?
Whats natural ? Please observe.
1. The mind is moving because it sees something else as interesting.
2. It finds that something else as interesting because I have fed it with that kind of thinking
earlier.
3. And I have fed it with such thinking becauses I interpreted that thing as interesting and worth
possessing.
4. I see it as interesting because it makes me fulfilled or removes a lacking in me.

This is the chain. So ultimately i like the objects of the world because they fill a "hole" in me ...
some sense of emptiness is removed. So i like them an want them. Thus they are able to rule me
and control me ! This is the whole point friends. This is the root. The root is , I think I am a
lacking individual and therefore I want to fill this emptiness with those objects. this is why mind
is agitated. IF instead of cutting at the roots, I try to control the mind out of force, its not only
going to be extremely difficult but also not likely to give results.

Its exactly like this: I come home one day to find that my room is full of water and then what do
I do ? I definitely need to clean the room, but more importantly i need to seal the leaks through
which the water seeped in. Same way, if my mind is agitated, greedy , angry, worried etc... I
definitely need to clean the mind of all this, but more importantly i need to recognize the
"wrong" idea about myself which allowed all these things to form. The person who thought that
the shadows were ghosts is haunted, worried, afraid ... why ? coz of the wrong idea that those
were ghosts and not shadows. So yes, he needs to move out of their way because when he is
with them his mind is not ready to know anything ... but then sit down and understand that they
are mere shadows and not ghosts.

so this knowledge is important. one has to develop it. And it removes the ignorance and leaves
the person as Self.

Its All About Drk-Drishya Vivekam:

Lets spend some more time on this verse. Entire Vedanta is about "Drk-Drishya Vivekam",
the differentiation between "Drk", the Seen and the "Drishya", "Seer". One has to see the "Seer"
as untouched by "Seen", this is Vivekam. If there is no vivekam, one confuses the states. This is
precisely what we see in the three states of our experience. What is happening ? Please see. The
mental state, which is "Drishya", the Seen... is "superimposed" on the "Seer".

There are no thoughts and no dullness ... I say I am clam.

There are thoughts of worry ... I say I am worried.
There are thoughts of anger ... I am angry.

There are no thoughts and i am in deep sleep ... I knew nothing.

And no thoughts fully active ... I achieved Samadhi

Please see ... The mental states which belong to the "Drishya" Jagat, are superimposed on "Me"
who am "Drk".

And then "I have to become "Drk" " ... If I am not the "Drk", there is no "Drishya" possible. I am
the Drk always.

So now, one good guy sits down before an idol of God and prays... tears roll down and he is very
calm ... he says "I am Bhakta"... situation has not changed much ... the external world ... the
drishya ... is superimposed upon drk.
It continues ... one day he is full of bhakti ... another day , no bhakti ! why ? That thought which
made him emotional has passed away. The emotion is not there now. Emotion passes away. if it
does not pass away and always remains , its not called an emotion.So a person is now bhakta,
now again angry, now unhappy, now happy ... why ? coz mind has to change... it cannot remain
changeless.
And so another person comes and says "I'll make mind not change"!!
a changeless thing does not change and that which changes cannot be made to remain changeless

another idea : mind has to die !!

There is a word manonashanam ... but it has to be properly understood. We will come back to
this. But then there is nothing like death of mind ... in the sense its often used.

These show lack of viveka.

[To Be Continued ...]