Jnana and Jivanmukti - Pt 5

[Guest guest]

Pranams.

It is the effacement of these ideas of non-self alone that constitute

vasanakshaya. And in this sense alone is vidwat SANNYASA the PROXIMATE cause of

jivanMUKTI – in the words of Swami Vidyaranya – vidvat sannyasasya

jivanmukti hetutvat. Even a trace of vasanas has the effect of quickly dragging

the seeker downhill – akin to a ball - prachyutakelikandukah – a sport ball

that has fallen from the hand – and which very rapidly falls down the stairs.

The Shurti beginning with shanto dantah prescribes concentrated contemplation

for the sannyasin who has performed Vedanta shravana is order to be established

in the sarvatmabhava (sarvatmasiddhaye) or kaivalya. Yatih – the sannyasin –

to him alone can arise the state of being established in Brahman asat anusandhim

vihaya giving up thinking about asat remaining steadfast in the contemplation of

aham brahmasmi brahmani nishta svanubhutya by the realization of one’s real

nature as self-effulgent and everblissful

 

In the same vein, Shankara makes his position clear in the BSB as well :

“And then it has to be considered as to whether that steadfastness is meant

for anyone

belonging to any one of the four stages of life or to the MONK ALONE?.....the

conclusion will be that the MONK ALONE can be STEADFAST in BRAHMAN..

Opponent:

How can the term steadfast in Brahman, used in its derivative sense, and

possible application to people in ALL the stages of life be confined to the monk

alone?

{Here the opponent takes the position that how can you restrict what is a

generic term of being established in Brahman to one particular class of humans

i.e. the renunciates – why cannot people in all walks of life, including those

that are active as members of society, attain to steadfastness in Brahman?}

Vedantin's Reply : The term steadfastness in Brahman implies a conusmmation in

Brahman a total absorption in Brahman which is the same as the absence of ANY

OTHER PREOCCUPATION except THAT - and that is NOT POSSIBLE FOR PEOPLE IN THE

OTHER THREE STAGES.â€

So we see that the exclusivity of jnana-nishta for ONLY sannyasis has nothing to

do with the external characteristics which are only trivial incidentalities but

to the extremely crucial aspect of a consummation that requires a unwavering and

absolute commitment that is simply impossible unless one has severed links with

society – especially in a formal(ized) manner.

This severance – this ritualized self-immolation imagery is as profoundly

stark as it is irreversible. It is not a matter to be trifled with neither

dismissed as being trivial. Once a man commits to sannyasa he is as good as dead

to the world. If 2 days after this his child gets diagnosed with a dangerous

heart condition he cannot be at her bedside nor, if some other calamity befalls

his family of birth, can he change his mind a month later. He is bereft of any

possessions, completely vulnerable and exposed to the elements – be they pesty

mosquitoes or more deadly snakes and scorpions, inclemental weather, bodily

illness or the lack of food. In his autobiography Swami Tapovan describes many

of these incidents in vivid terms – same has been written of Bhagwan Ramana as

well. His only strength is that of his conviction of his Oneness with the

Supreme – that conviction alone is his only strength as Shankara says in his

Brh Up bhashya.

Expressed in a stark manner – sannyasa is nothing short of a ritualized

suicide from the kind of lifestyle we consider “normal†– and what is the

supremely ironic? The fact that this life of joys and sorrows which we all hold

on to so tencaciously is what Shanara in the Up Sahasri says is atmahatya the

real Suicide. Let us pause for a moment to reflect on that – this thing we

call “LIFE†with all its variety, and vivacity, for which we endeavor so

assiduously to cling to, with much fanfare and passion and zest – is in

Shankar’s words a suicide….the suicide we know is a “suicidal dyingâ€;

the suicide that Shankara laments about is our collective “suicidal livingâ€!

In the Mandukya 2.35 we find this very vividly presented -

This Self ayam that is beyond all imagination nirvikalpah and free from upasama

the diversity of this phenomenal world prapancha and nondual advayah has been

seen drshtah by the contemplative people munibhih the enlightened souls versed

in the Vedas vedaparagaih and unafflicted by desire fear and anger.

Shankara clarifies that the idea is that the Supreme Self is realizable ONLY BY

THE MEN OF RENUNCIATION who are free from blemishes, who are learned, and who

are devoted to the Upanishads...and not to those whose hearts are tainted by

attachment.

Further in the next verse it is said that the Knower “should behave as if

dull-witted†...  What does this mean – behave in the world as if

dull-witted is clarified in clearcut terms next verse

Mandukya 2.37

The mendicant should have no appreciation for greetings and he should be free

from rituals He should have the body and soul as his support and he should be

dependent on circumstances.

Shankara clarifies further - " that is to say having given up all desire for

external objects and having embraced the highest kind of FORMAL RENUNCIATION, in

accordance with the Vedic text " Knowing this very self the Brahmanas renounce

and lead a mendicants life (Br 3.5.1)

and the Smrti With their Self identified in that..Gita 5.17) – An interesting

term is used here in the karika chalachalaniketa - Shankara says chala is the

changing body and the achala is the unchanging Self - whenver perchance impelled

by hunger, etc such a one thinks of oneself as " I " by forgetting the reality of

the Self, which is one's niketa support and which is by nature unchanging like

the sky then the cala the body becomes his niketa i.e. place of abode. The man

of illumination who thus has the changing and the unchanging as his support but

not the man who as external obkects as his support. Also yadrrchikah bhavet he

should merely depend on strips of cloth coverings and food that come to him by

chance for the maintenance of the body

Only then the next karika clarifies does one not only become identified

tattvibhutah with the Real, and have one's delight tadaramah in the Real and

such a one does not waver aprachyutah from

the Real.

The type of austerity or tapas that a sannyasi undergoes can never be even

remotely matched by a grhastha or a householder. In the Mundaka bhashya Shankara

says that “the Self is known by tapas, by making the mind and senses

one-pointed. it is known from the smRti-s that " the greatest tapas is making the

mind and the senses one-pointed " - that form of tapas characterized by

single-pointedness is alone, by its very nature, conducive to atma darshana.. in

fact such tapas IS verily Brahman.

It is only when knowledge is accompanied by both tyaga renunciation and tapas

austerity, that it can lead to the dissolution of the mala the dirt that clouds

the antahkaranam and prevents the liberating knowledge from conferring the

highest fruit of jivanmukti and Supreme Peace. “The Atman is attained through

truth, austerity, correct knowledge and Brahmacharya (self-control), observed

CONTINUOSLY WITHOUT A BREAK.â€(Mundaka Up)

Suppose one takes the stance that jnana and karmayoga also can lead to the same?

Shankara completely refutes this position. " ... " Since the avidya of the

SELFKNOWER has been abolished he CANNOT undertake karmayoga that is rooted in

error....therefore it is rational to maintain that Karmayoga is out of question

for the self-knower...the self-knower having discharged all; duties has no

further purpose to fulfil..renunciation and karmayoga equally promote liberation

refers to the non-self-knower....which is distinct from the TOTAL RENUNCIATION

of a self-knower. " ..

“Since it is IMPOSSIBLE that renunciation of actions and Karma-yoga can be

undertaken by a knower of the Self, therefore, to say that both of them lead to

Liberation, is absurd..... But in the case of the knower of the Self, since it

is impossible to pursue both renunciation of actions and Karma-yoga, therefore,

to say that they lead to Liberation and that Karma-yoga is superior to

renunciation of actions is illogical.

 

(to be continued)

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam