Q
r
m
THE METAPHYSICS
/
THEUPANISHADS,
YICHARSAGAR,
TRANSLATED WIT If COP 10 UK SOTES
LALA, S SREERAM,
PLEADER OP THE COURTS,.
AND
LATE TKflSEELDAK OF DEhlll,
CALCUTTA :
HEERALAL DHOLE
127, MUSJ1DBAREE STREET.
1885,
[All rights reserved.]
IRO
Z5 S 75"
VEDANTA PRESS,
JS ILAMBAR VIDYARATNA, PRINTER.
MUSJIDBAREE STREET, CALCUTTA,
TO
SIR CHARLES IT, A1TCHLSON, K.C.,SJ.,CM.F,, L.L.D.,
LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE PUNJAB AND ITS DEPENDENCIES.
FOR HIGH CHRISTIAN MORALITY, THOROUGH CONSCIENTIOUSNESS,
NEVER-CEASING ANXIETY FOR THE WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE
HE RULES OVER, AND HIS APPRECIATION OF OUR ANCIENT
LEARNING AND PHILOSOPHY,
AND
IN GRATEFUL REMEMBRANCE OF A LIFE-LONG SERVICE
UNDER GOVERNMENT,
THIS \YORTv IS BY PERMISSION DEDICATED,
BY
HIS MOST OBEDIENT AND DUTIFUL SERVANT
SREERAM,.
r f Ddhi (retired) now 1 leader of the Ddhi Court.
PREFACE;
A WORK that is already well-known needs no word of commendation,
It has made it s way in the outlying districts of the Punjab, and every
Sadhu who knows to read and write receives instruction from his Guru,
on this very work, so that by perusing it, he learns all that is worth
knowing of the Upanishads. It embodies a mass of instruction which
cannot be otherwise had, unless a large number of original works difficult
to understand, and requiring the life-time of an individual, are gone
through, It is the only work of its kind in the vernacular. To
increase its utility, and to make it easily understood without any
extraordinary pains, or the assistance of Pundits, its present garb will be
unusually facilitating to those who understand the language in which it ia
written. Where the text is obscure or requires elucidation by reference
to other subjects beyond the pale of the work in hand, ample notes and
references have been given to avoid the necessity of consulting the original
works. No pains have been spared to increase its utility, and give a true
and correct rendering of the text, so that it can be confidently recom
mended. The original work abounds in the technicalities of the original
Sanscrit from which our author has drawn largely, and their rendering into
English has always been given in the plainest terms, so that there may be
no mistake. But no philosophy can be taken up like a romance, or a book of
travel ; it requires deep thinking, and constant reading, with patience and
tranquility of mind. The times we live iu are extremely auspicious for
II PREF.vi:
works like the present. Thanks to the late Swamy Dyanand Saraswati and
other alluniini, there is an increasing activity noticeable everywhere for a
study of our Shastras and what they teach ; and the English education which
bad hitherto turned our young men into rank[materialists, or scientfic athe
ists, is now giving way for a more healthy spirit of inquiry for our ancient
philosophies. The impulse to this novel movement received no mean help
from the Theosophical Society. The noble and self-sacrificing career of
Madame Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott for regenerating our ancient litera
ture and faith, deserves the highest encomium everywhere. Had it not
been for their example and co-operation it would have taken several leng
thened periods before the revival of things as they are, could have been
accomplished.
Thus then, if the present work^would tend to increase the national
spirituality, if it would be the means of inviting the active sympathies
of our young men and old, and stimulate them to study our ancient writings
and the faith they inculcate, if it would stem the tide of materialism and
supplant it with the noble and high aspirations which Non-duality teaches,
if it will suppress bad karma and incite the good of our fellow-creatures,
we would think ourselves highly gratified and amoly repaid. It cannot bo
insisted too often, that a nation without spirituality is but on the road to
ruin and self-destruction. It is indeed a sorrowful sight to find the
struggle for existence gaining a strong ascendancy over us everywhere ;
hungering for material comforts and thirst for accumulation of wealth is
omnipotent here as in Europe, we are now no longer satisfied as our fore
fathers used to be, increased civilisation means increased luxury, that has
become a necessity and for its gratification we must have increased re
sources and that again signifies our best attention and energies in pursuit
of wealth. It cannot be expected, the present state cf things will suddenly
collapse, no, there are cycles in the^life of a nation, and all these are to be
passed as surely as night follows day, and day, night. But if our inner
consciousness may be roused to perceive and feel the utter worthlessness
PREFACE. Ill
and unreality of this world, and if we draw our lessons from the sad
experience of nations that have proceeded us, we may receive a check in
our headlong path to ruin. That this may so be is the earnest prayer
of the
TBANSLATOR.
INTRODUCTION.
WITH a view of facilitating an enquirer of self-knowledge to comprehend
the main doctrine of the Upanishads, which forms the subject of the
accompanying treatise, a few explanations, are needed ; and it is hoped
that they will be of much help to him. Non-duality or the oneness of the
Individual and Universal Spirit is the subject to be demonstrated, and an
elaborate and critical analysis of the rival systems which look upon
them as different and otherwise, have been fully discussed. That does not
concern us for the present. What we propose is to lay down a few salient
points, to give a skeleton sketch, leaving the rest to our author. In the
discussion of his subject he has brought in, a mass of arguments from all
available sources ; the work itself is a result of a vast amount of reading,
and whatever is worth knowing of the Vedas, Mimansa, Nyaya, Sankhya,
Puranas &c., has been included in it. It contains likewise a discussion
of the merits of personal and impersonal forms of worship, and seeks to
satisfactorily account for the apparent and seemingly anomalous dictum
of the several Purans, wherein each sets up a different form of worship and
particularly insisting upon it, in lieu of others. In this way, the different
sects of worshippers Vishnuvite, Sivite, Ganpat, Sakta, who have hither
to been taught to regard his especial Deity to be superior to the rest will
find much to unlearn. Reason, and analogy, with the proofs derived from
the Shastras have been amply introduced to help the comprehension, and
to erect at much labor, a neutral ground where the most inveterate bigot
will cast away his rancor, and shake hands in fraternal love and harmony
with one whom ha hacl hitherto looked upon as a fool and knave. Thus
INTRODUCTION.
then there is much to engage the attention of the reader ; caste and creed,
stands not in the way of acquiring the knowledge inculcated here ; for we
find no mention about it by our author. The only caste he seems to recog
nise is that of qualification, and any person having the necessary qualities
may profitably engage himself in its study. He will find much to interest
him, much to engage his attention, much to evoke his sympathy ; the
scale from his eyes will be dropped of and it is hoped, he will rouse to
realise a new existence ; the clue to solve the mighty problem of existence,
the end and aim of human life is here spoken out with as much fervour, as its
dignity demands, and though to realise it and form the basis of turning
a new life can only happen to the fewest of the few, to those who have
sown the seeds of knowledge in their previous births yet it can be
profitably made use of by all alike.
With this preamble, we enter into the few necessary explanations which
we have promised at the outset. Brahma is described as "Sat-chit-ananda"
Sat signifies Existence, chit Intelligence and ananda Bliss. It is
therefore essentially Existent, Intelligence aud Bliss. In the Mun-
daka Upanishad the story is related of the illustrious son of Sanaka, who
desirous of knowledge, repaired to Angiras the sage, and enquired of
him "what that was, which being known, every thing else would be known."
He was told in reply, that the wise regard "the invisible, intangible, un
related, colourless one, who has neither eyes nor ears, nor hands and feet,
eternal, all-pervading, subtle, and indestructible as the cause of all that
exists". This is the Impersonal God of the Vedds, called severally by the
names of Parabrahma, Brahma and Paramatma. It is said, piror to the
evolution of the objective world there was present only Sat the OXB
EXISTENCE Parabrahma without name or form, for name and form are indi
cations of creation, and what is created is open to destruction hence non-
eternal, therefore Parabrahma being eternal is devoid of both. The three
expletives one secondless and Existence 1 (ekam, ebam, adioaitam) with
which Parabrahma is always connected arc only for differentiating it
INTRODUCTION. o
from bodies similar and dissimilar. That is to say, as It is one and
secondless, and there exists not another body of Its kind, inasmuch as It is
eternal, while the world and its contents are non-eternal It has only one
indication. But a sect of Buddhists (Madhyamiks) contend that in the
beginning there was present Asai* or nothing instead of Sat. Virtually
they teach that nothing produced everything, which is clearly impossible.
Now if it be said, as Pardbrcthma also existed in the beginning, whence
did the materials come from which the world was ushered into existence !
The reply is as steam exists potentially in water, so was Prakriti, Maya
or Ajnana, so many names of matter residing potentially in the supreme
Brahma. To be more explicit, Parabrhma is the supreme force residing
within Matter in its primordial condition, or cosmic state. Thus then,
we have both Matter and Force, or Matter and Motion, as the Western
Scientists would have it, to satisfactorily account for whatever that exists.
So much in common with the Materialist only, the difference is yet more
marked. For, while Materialism discards any hereafter, the Vedantin
looks upon metampsychosis as the inevitable lot of humanity, and as life
means suffering and an incessant struggle, he wants to crush the seed
which produces the tree of life, and lays his axe at its root, so that there
be nothing left to produce it again.
We purposely refrain from entering into the arguments both for and
against, as they have been amply dealt with by the author, ours is only
a pencil sketch and this the reader is requested to keep in mind. Now
then with regard to intelligence ; there ara three states of consciousness
called respectively the waking, dreaming and dreamless slumber. It is
said, that consciousness of all the three conditions is one, the difference
consists in the multiformness of the objects which consciousness covers :
in other words, the several acts of cognition brought about by the sensory
organs (sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste) relate to one consciousness,
though the objects which that consciousness takes possession of, to render
them perceivable, may be many and varied ; and what is one is always
eternal ; heuce the Supreme Brahma, being eternal is also Intelligence. In
4 INTRODUCTION.
the Mundakya UpamshaJ, Brahma is described as "neither conscious
nor unconscious" neither is it cognizor, nor the object cognized ; the purpose
of all that is to shew that it is knowledge in the abstract, indicating cog
nition and not the subject of cognition ; for that would be incompatible
with truth and infinity. Now infinite cannot be marked or limited by any
thing in any direction, and a knowing subject must have objects and
cognitions to limit it, hence Parabrahma is not a cogniser. Moreover in
that case, a dualism would be involved, for whenever there is conscious
ness there is relation and rleation, implies dualism. In this way, the
knowledge of the Supreme Brahma like the heat in fire is "the abstract
essence itself." Man derives his powers of discovering or discerning from
reflection of intelligence in the internal organ, (antakaran) or mind. Now
this reflex intelligence is a reflected shadow of the Intelligence of Brahma,
which for its close proximity sheds its lustre, in the same way as a red
flower kept close to a crystal sheds its color on the glass and it appears
red ; or to quote a familiar illustration as a needle is moved by a magnet
when held close to it. Thus then, Brahma is self-luminous ; and all
objects derive their luminosity from it. The word Intelligence is here
intended to convey a very wide meaning. It may be taken for vitality, or
life essence too. Because, it is universally present from the insentient
molecule of atomic dust to the huge Andes or Himalayas, from the rank
weed infesting a stagnant pool of rain-water collected in the road-side
ditch to the gigantic Banian, and from the tiny fly dancing and frisking
before our eyes" to man, each and all has its particle of vitality its in
dividual unit of intelligence, which keeps it in its present condition of
activity ; all are equally dependent on Brahma hence its another name or
designation is "the source of all."
Brahma is likewise described as bliss. Bliss signifies cessation of
misery. As in deep sleep, when there are no dreams to trouble him, a man
cuts off his connection with the objective world, and is perfectly insen
sible to pain, he may therefore be said to be in the highest enjoyment
of felicity, and his personal experience also goes to establish it ; since on
INTRODUCTION. 6
tiding from sleep he exclaims " I was sleeping happily I knew nothing
then ;" or in the condition of being absorbed into Brahma. Here every
thing is joyj and there is no pain. We all have it in common. Ignorance
is an obstacle to our perceiving it, and if that can be destroyed by know
ledge, all illusions are at an end, the relation we establish with our
connections and worldly goods lose their hold, and we are on the road to
Nirvana.
The importance of knowledge is thus clearly established. But of all
knowledges, that which tends to know the nature of self is paramount,
and this is called a crown. But we may be asked, how can Matter have
any resemblance to Ignorance and why is it called so ? We proceed to
answer.
Ignorance is called in the Veda, as neither existent nor non-existent,
and something indescribable. Existent in so far as it is everywhere pre-
/
sent, for no one can say that he knows every thing, consequently he is igno
rant ; and non-existent because knowledge drives it away, and with that
object it has been described as antagonistic to knowledge. It is quite,
distinct from real, and unreal as neuter is neither male nor female. In this
way, though Ignorance is universally present, it cannot be mistaken for
Brdhma which also is universally present; likewise there is another simi
litude, for both of them are declared to bo unborn. Because Brahma is
eternal, and Ignoiance is not for with the advent of< knowledge it dis
appears, or is reduced to non-being, therefore it is unreal j while Brahma is
Real, therefore, as Ignorance cannot be particularized one way or the
other, as it is neither real nor unreal, neither existent nor non-existent,
and as it cannot be said to be with or without shape, it is hence indescrib
able. It cannot be contended, want of knowledge is Ignorance. For,
want is negation, non-existent and unreal, while knowledge is positive,
existent and real, therefore they cannot be connected with each other.
Ignorance abounds in darkness and knowledge abounds in luminosity,
that again constitutes another difference between them ; and for this
darkness which is identical with insentiency, Ignorance and Matter
G INTRODUCTION ,
are one. What has just boon said in regard to Ignorance applies equally
to Maya. But Maya is called illusion, and it may be askod why ?
Because it is the very nature of illusion to make an unreal snh*tnne?
appear real, like objects soon in a dream.
Illusion caii be removed only by knowledge, hence the imperative
necessity of acquiring Self-knowledge cannot be too often repeated. We
regard the world as something real, and hanker after the acquisition of
property, and accumulation of riches with the false hope that they will
procure bliss and felicity. It is an illusion to think so. Likewise the
attribution to Self, of bondage, and to regard him as an agent or instrument,
or one who is a doer of works is olso due to illusion. "All our sense, per
ceptions, the cold in the hand, the smell in the nose, sight and hearing
are illusions yet essential to existence." For as in the instance of a snake
created in a rope, an illusion of sight the mistake is removed when the
rope is fully known, so the mistaken attribution of bondage ceases only
with thorough knowledge of Self.
Having thus done with Ignorance and Illusion it remains only to
consider Matter or Pmlriti. The best definition of Matter is that which
occupies space, but a Vedantin says it to be indescribable. Because we
arc so little acquainted with its nature and properties, and the ways in
which it works that the above epithet is very appropriate. Matter is
said to possess three attributes. These are the Satioa or good, Raja or act
ive and Tama or dark ; and as every object in nature is derived from the
elements ether, water, fire, air and earth, therefore all of them have
these properties more or less. In one sense, the so-called properties are
nothing else but distinct forces, and we have thus a parallel of the
forces of attraction, and gravitation etc. Now this can be established in the
following wise :
It is said, the first (Satwa) is light, the second (Tama) is heavy
and the active force. Nc*w Satwa and Tama can do nothing till over
powered by Raja. Thus then what is light has an upward motion,
as gases, glazing fire &c. ; the sensory and active organs for their acute
INTRODUCTION, /
perception and ready prehension are likewise said to be derived from the
Satwavic quality. It is likewise possessed of luminosity, Motion is due
to the active quality or Raja. It induces action everywhere. It sets
the air in motion. The mind for its unsteadinesss is also said to be a product
of this quality. Tama is said to be heavy, because it obstructs thelumi-
" nosity of Satwct, hence Ignorance is said to be a product of Tama. The
first and the last have no velocity or motion, till acted npon by tho
second, which also receives a check from the heavy Tama, so that Raja or
the active quality cannot lead Tama anywhere and everywhere ; for by its
force Tama counterbalances its action, hence there is no breach in the order
and synchonism of natural laws. We have here a satisfactory explanation
of intelligence in Nature. It is a sterotyped argument of anthropomorphism,
that law signifies a law-giver, and as there is a display of intelligence in
natural laws, that proves the presence of mind, and for that mind
to remain there must be a requisite body, hence God almighty has
a body etc. But a pantheist says, such a creator can neither be in
finite, nor all-pervading, his pervasion must be limited by his body, for ho
cannot be present everywhere at the same time.J The especial pleadings
of both these views need not concern us, as they are beyond the scope
of the present notice. We thererfore pass on to consider the elements.
At first sight, it may appear strange that our forefathers were taught
to believe the so-called elements as simple bodies. That would imply
their ignorance of physical science and chemisty notably. For, we in our
time have been taught by Western Science to regard water, air, and earth
as compound. There is Hydrogen and Oxygen in water ; air contains oxy
gen and nitrogen besides an admixture of carbonic acid &c., and earth
is a mixture of several substances. But there is no necessity for such an
apprehension, for their elements find no place in Western Science. The
so-called elements of the West are liable at a future period, when chemical
analysis and synthesis will have attained more perfection, to be decom
posed or resolved into other simpler substances. But with regard to our
classification; that shall never happen, It is said, the elements of which
INTRODUCTIOK.
we have knowledge and which we are accustomed to use for our dmfv
wants are different from what they were in the beginning, hence we have tho
subtle and gross elements. / The latter are a result of peculiar form of
mixture called quiutuplicution (panchikaranct) as follows : Divide each
element into two equal parts; of the remaining ten parts, take the
first five of each element and divide into five equal parts, then
leaving the undivided second half of each element, add to the above
mentioned four parts, the second halves of the other four elements, each
to each. Thus then we have one element each, an eighth part of itself,
while the rest is made up by the other four elements./ And their presence
is demonstrated in the possession of qualities which naturally belong
to them. That is to say, ether is said to possess the quality of transmitting
sound, while air has sound derived from its cause ether, besides its indi
vidual property of touch ; in the same way fire has sound, touch and form ;
water sound, touch, form, nnd taste, while earth has sound, touch, form,
taste, and smell. From the same elementary combination have originated
the seven abodes placed one above the other, Bhur, Bhuvar, Swar, Mahar,
Janas, Tapas, Satya, and the S3ven nether spheres, one below the other
severally called Atala, Vitala, Sutala, Rasatala, Talatala, Mahatala a".d
Patala, together with Brahmanda, the f.M. - varieties of physical bodies
* with their adequate food and drink.
In respect to air and water we find them mentioned in the Sniti
Mimansa, tfaya, and other systems, that they are compound and not simple
bodies. Their composite nature is easily demonstrable. For instance, water
if left to stand will deposit a sediment of mud which is nothing else but
earthy particles. Even in the clearest sample of water it is easy to detect
the presence of earthy salts. But this cannot be practically proved in the
case of the other four elements. Moreover, it is said that some of the five
(vutas) elements in their subtle form have been mixed with similar subtlo
atoms of a second element, and have thus helped the production of tho
gross, while other atoms have produced similar results without any mixture.
In short, the gross is a changed condition of the subtle with and without
INTRODUCTION.
a blending of their atomy. In the gross elements we have a prolific
cause for the material universe.
What is ether ? The atmosphere which surrounds the globe does not
extend beyond thirty or forty leagues, and diminishes in substance, in
proportion to its elevation above the earth s surface. It is therefore not
very high ; beyond it, is the planetary ether of physicists and astronomers,
It fills all space, and is drawn into the interstices of the solar systems,
the stars, nebulae etc. It is all-pervading. It may be called a fluid,
but it resembles the air we have, though much rarefied than it. In
calculating the speed of heavenly bodies, resistance of ether is taken into
account by astronomers, hence it is impossible to deny its existence.
Thus far we have been mainly concerned in introducing our readers
to the signification of the technical terms abounding in the philosophy
which forms the subject of the present treatise. Without a proper compre
hension of the terms that will frequently occur, it is impossible to
master the subject in all its details, hence it was necessary that they
should be explained. We purpose now to touch upon the cardinal doctrines
of Vedantism. These are, besides non-difference of the Jiva and Brahma,
the doctrines of karma and metampsychosis.
1 Karma! is the collective totality of works good and bad which an
individual performs in life. They determine his future existence both
subjectively and objectively. That is to say, in proportion to a person s
merits, he inherits a better sphere of existence after death. That may
bring forth an abode in heaven, but after the consummation of happiness
he is sure to be hurled back to an objective life. Actions are transient,
and their fruits are likewise so, for the properties of a cause are trans
mitted to its products. Hence to abstain from works is of paramount
importance. But it may be said, it is impossible for a man to live without
doing any thing either by the active organs hands, feet, etc., or by the
mind j even if he turns into an ascetic and retires from the world, to live
in a mountain cave, certainly the necessity for appeasing calls of hunger
and thirst, of defecation, and urination, and sleep must yet continue so
10 INTRODUCTION.
that if works cease to produce re-birth, literally no one can be freed. To
avoid this difficulty, knowledge is credited with powers of destruction,
Bat all works cannot be destroyed. Apart from the daily and occasional
rites, and forbidden works, or those sanctioned in the sacred writings, there
are other works viz., accumulated, fructescent and current : that is to say,
the first refer to works which have accumulated in several previous births,
the second refer to those which have resulted in the present life and
have already commenced to bear fruit, while the third comprise the works per
formed in the present life. They will bear fruit in a future life. The
fruits of accumulated and current works are destroyed by knowledge
of Self and his identity with Brahma. But the fructescenfe, can only be
exhausted by enjoying their results during the present life- It is beyond
the scope of the present notice to enter into details. Suffice it to say,
that in this Karmaic law, we have a satisfactory solution for the
puzzling questions which so often harass us. We mean, in the instance
when "virtue starves" as said by Pope in his Ewiy on Man, or a learned
and able person with difficulty scraping together the means of a sorry meal
for himself and family, and struggling on from day to day, not knowing
when and where his troubles are to ceaso ; or a young and handsome wife
suddenly deprived of her husband in the heyday of his youthful career;
of a poor widow, poor and friendless, aged and infirm, suddenly deprived
of her son, who was her prop and support and the main-stay of life.
Now instances like these can be multiplied indefinitely, they are too common
to escape the attention of any one, but what we have said will suffice.
Here the prarabdk ikarma is the key. Fructescent works have already
commenced to bear fruit, and as that fruit is to bring forth pain and suffer
ing or the reverse, according to the nature of previous works, consequently
an individual is seen unaccountably to suffer while another who is worth
less, has for his portion all material comforts. In the case of children
dying, there is the same operation of the karmaic law. But it is said
that a person may, apart from physical circumstances, for his bad karma,
be born blind, deaf or dumb and thus be a cause of anxiety to the parents.
INTRODUCTION.
In this way, it will appear that heaven and hell are relative conditions
of happiness and misery brought forth by the deeds of an individual. But
opinions differ, for which a Vedantin is bound to accept the teachings of
his Sacred Scriptures ; he necessarily pins his faith with the truth, there
taught. He may look upon the blissful abode of the seven upper spheres
already mentioned, as a result pf merit or good works, but after their con
summation he must revisit earth in human shape and rehabilitate a body
that must be a net result of his unexhausted karma. Kapila on the other
hand, lays down the doctrine of a man s being reincarnated into a beast
or Deva, in proportion to his demerit or merit. Buddhism teaches, after
humanity, there is no more retrogression ; that is to say, when a human
being dies he must always be human in his furture reincarnations and not
take his chance with beasts and birds, or vegetables and stone.
Though equally believing in Karma, yet Kapila maintains with much
show of reason and strength of argument, his doctrine of Bharanamayasarira.
A person in his deathbed is overtaken with a fixed thought ; if he is a
lover of horse-flesh, his mind will be centered in a horse, so that when he
dies, his astral body assumes the desired body of a horse. In this way, a
person may be a rogue all his life, and yet escape the torments of subject
ive or objective suffering. In his last moments, his thoughts may overtake
Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva or any other Deva, and sure enough he goes there
to reap happiness. A practice still prevails in Bengal and other countries
to bawl out the name of Ganga, Narain and Brahma into the ears of a
dying person ; to one who is unacquainted with its signification it may
sound unnecessary and cruel. But there is a fixed object in view, it
means the momentous question of sending that person s soul to be re
ceived in heaven. If perchance, the reiteration of name does come to
occupy his mind so as to be moulded after it, if it would direct his mind
mentally to worship or remember his mantram given by his spiritual pre
ceptor, he is saved from hell-torments.
The question of heaven and hell, is a relative existence. Our ancient
writers are not very unanimous, Each author has made ample mention
of them, but thore are others who maintain quits an opposite doctrine. For
instance, heaven and hell are for the enjoyment of happiness or suffering of
misery. But who is to suffer ? Let this question be first answcrd. A
Vedantin, says the Atmi or seventh principle is neither an agent or
instrument, he is passive, and does no works, he isneither subject to re-birth,
consequently death cannot affect him, and he is free, therefore he is not
subject to pleasure and pairu Undfr such circumstances the Atma is clearly
neither responsible for the works performed by the Jiva in his career on
earth, nor is it necessary for him to appear oil the day of judgment to re
ceive his sentence of eternal happiness or eternal damnation in hell-
fire, as taught by the Christian Church. Ours is much simpler and more
reasonable. It is said, for enjoyment or suffering, a body is required, not
the subtle astral body, but the physical body which we have all got, hence
it consequently follows, reincarnation is the scene of fruition as it is for fresh
action. In this sense, there is neither heaven nor hell beyond the world.
Heaven and hell are in our own keeping. By turning the mind away from ob
jects of sensuous gratification, if we live for others, abolishing all selfish
ends, and reverently perfom all virtuous actions, we do what is best for
weak and frail man to do. The reverse of what we have just been saying
leads to a life of ineffable misery in next. Existence itself is admitted as a
twain condition in which both happiness and misery are the unavoidable lot
of all and every one of us ; a man rolling in riches attended by servants in
rich livery, living in a style befitting his rank and means, courted and
flattered by his friends and relations may appear happy to all of us, but
you will find, that he is in fact as miserable as an average human being
without his advantages. Perhaps he is childless, or the slave of an in
satiable thirst for accumulating more wealth, or he is a miserable wretch
so far as health is concerned, or he may be very unfortunate in his wife ;
no one loves him, none cares a straw for his person, all his relatives are
so many parasites anxiously waiting for the hour of death, so that
they may be remembered in his last will. Such is the rule. Here we can ex
pect no unalloyed happiness ; the poet s dream of love and bliss are too holy
INTRODUCTION. 13
to have a place here : our journey through life embraces a long period of
time, of which a part goes in acquiring the usual training and experience to
befit us in this up-hill struggle; another part is spent in fulfilling Darwin s
law of survival of the fittest. In this way, is spent the best part, landing us
now into the ladd of reflection, and decripitude, with hairs hoary sitting re
verently as a crown for all the struggles we had in the past. Now if in all
this, we maintain an unflinching honesty, honesty of word, deed and thought,
we are then more than human. Show us the man who will say that he has
been honest all his days, from the time when he arrived at years of discre
tion and we say that he is an exception. No doubt there are men, who are-
fit to be worshipped in every sense of the word men who have retired from
the sad turmoil of an empty and deceitful world to study self, to meditato
on the mystic OM, or to dwell in Samadhi. These sages or wisemen or
call them more properly theosophists, guard our destinies, a wide range of
philanthropy actuates them, nationality they know not, man is the object
of their solicitous care, and to teach and instruct is a favorite occupation
with them. We cannot say that the world has become denuded of them,
but their number is extremely few. The present writer has the good for
tune to know one, who is his preceptor, and he can hardly express his grati
tude adequately to Baba Purdumun Sing, Sadhu Nirmala.
To return from this digression to our subject, we find it laid down, that
with death we part with our physical body just as a snake casts of its coil.
Our conceptions and Karma remain impressed in the body called subtle or
astral (liny a sharira) which is again subjected to re-incarnation. It is every
where the unanimous opinion that the astral body continues to come and
go till emancipation. This is a very shadowy duplicate of the gross
body, and has seventeen characteristic features. The five vital airs Fran
and the rest ; five sensory organs, sight, hearing etc. ; five organs of
action hands, feet, mouth, anus and genitals, together with mind and
intellect [the human soul and animal soul] constitute the lingo, sharira.
By the practice of Yoga it can be projected out at a distance from the
physical body, wherever a Yogee wishes it to be ; in this way even tho
natural barriers offer no impediment to its passage.
J INTRODUCTION*
The reader will find it mentioned in its proper place the need of a con
tinued residence with a Guru-, supporting him by begging and satis
fying him in all manner by doing menial services, never troubling him
even for food but waiting to receive whatever he offers, neither asking
for instruction but bidding his time and pleasure even these require
no ordinary amount of patience by a pupil duly qualified for receiving the
necessary instruction on Brahma Vidya. Under these circumstances, it
IB easy to conceive, why the number of such qualified pupils have been
getting less and less day by day. One must leave the world to all intents and
purposes, and lead a life of absolute purity before he can acquire that know
ledge. If it be asked what is the necessity for knowledge ? For if the Jiva
be one with Brahma, and if the natural felicity and intelligence of the
latter be alike a part of the former, there is no reason why a person is
to make such a sacrifice ; or it may be argued, as in common practice, we do
not trouble ourselves any more concerning a thing already got ; similarly
the felicity of Brahma and destruction of misery being already present in
the individual, there does not exist any paramount necessity for the
acquisition of knowledge. But the reply is, as a person with a piece of
gold in his hand forgets about it and is seen to busy himself in its search,
and when pointed out by another, he recovers it to all intents and purposes,
though it never left his possession and he had it already ; similarly the en
veloping or concealing power of Ignorance hides the perception of felicity
which naturally belongs to him and knowledge alone enables him to recover
it. Then again, that knowledge, as it is antagonistic to Ignorance, which
again is nothing more or less than matter, destroys the materials out of
which the seed for the future body of the individual is to grow, hence being
removed from the fetters of consecutive re-births, he will abide for ever
in the Brahma whose sole essence is joy. Destruction of grief is eagerly
sought after by man, no matter whatever may be his position, and
as it can only be effected by knowledge, we have here another incentive.
Jjut .it may be replied, that for every kind of misery there are particular
remedies, therefore the application of remedies is equally capable of destroying
it. Clearlv, to nav so, is a mistake. For instance, medicine removes or cures
INTRODUCTION. 15
a great many diseases, that is true indeed ; but there is no certainty that
the disease would not return again in the life time of the individual; in the
same manner pangs of hunger and thirst are removed by a good dinner, and
drink, but there are yet a good many miseries which refuse to be destroyed
and there is no remedy for them, beyond knowledge. When a person loses-
his only son, his grief knows no bounds, and no remedy is more potent to
destroy his grief save the knowledge, that his so-called son was nobody ;
that it was a mere illusion which tied him in bonds of affection ; that it is
the ordinary lot of humanity from which there can be no escape ; that the
world itself is unreal and transient, and full of grief.
We are extremely selfish : without an expectation of deriving sure
benefit we never undertake a work. The authors of the Shastras under
stood human character too well to allow it to escape their notice, hence
we find it mentioned there are four incentives. Of them necessity is the
last. That is to say the necessity of studying the Shastras is pointed out
in all its bearings.
The philosophy of the Vedanta embraces two subjects, metaphysics
and physics. The first has been considered in all its aspects, including a
critical review of the arguments of the other contending systems, point
ing out their mistake and establishing truth. In the elucidation of
truth, a Vedantin s analysis and mode of arguing is simple as it is convin
cing. Our author has ransacked the whole ground covered by the
partisans of especial theories, and though he had added nothing, yet he
had, by bringing the arguments together in one place, rendered ample
service to the cause he represents, to deserve the gratitude of his readers.
In regard to the latter he is rather reticent, he dismisses the subject with
the remark that the world and its contents are unreal, therefore deserve no
especial or particular mention. Evidently he could not have done justice
to it, without putting in another volume before the public, and the
labor of the undertaking might have stood in his way. To every religious
minded person, the physics are unattracting. Even in the present day, we
find a conflict between religion and science. The Church in the West, had
INTRODUCTION.
t
received severe wounds from the artillery brought in by science (physical) ;
these wounds are now being dressed up with care and skill by her custo
dians Bibliologists ; and the recent authorised translation of the Holy
Writ has been purged of several very objectionable points. In this way, to
fit in with the facts of scientific evolution, the six days of the world which
occupied God to create it, are said to cover an immense space of time. We
happily, are not similarly placed. For we have our Brahma s day and
night, that means time enough, and we have nothing to be ashamed of.
Turning from. Physics to Metaphysics, we find a vast array of subjects,
the sum total of which is to shew the illusory nature of all phenomena ;
they are therefore unreal. The world and its contents are relatively and /
not absolutely false. As in the instance of an illusion of sight, when a
person conceives the presence of a snake in a dark night, in a bit of straw,
rope, &c., the so-called snake is discovered to be false when a light is
brought to shew what the thing lying in front is. By the help of light,
person derives the necessary knowledge of the rope, of all its parts,
when the illusion is dispelled. Similarly the illusion of the world is only
removed by a thorough knowledge of Self, who is no other but Brahma.
In the foregoing instance, the reality of the site of the snake, the rope
itself, is not at all denied ; on the other hand, everywhere it is maintained
as something substantial. Because without a site there can be no illusion.
In the absence of the rope there can be no mistake of a snake. In other
words, we must have something resting on the background, so to speak,
on which to superimpose or project through a force of ignorance the neces
sary mistake or illusion. In the case of the world and its contents, what
we objectively recognize through the medium of the several sensory or
gans are so far real, having an objective existence with the usual
form, taste, touch, <kc., but they are non-eternal, and it is an illusion to
consider them otherwise, for there is only one entity of that nature and
that is Brahma. Now in regard to our body, we are apt to confound it
and the several organs of sense, &c., with self. It is the business of meta
physics to establish a correct knowledge of Self, and to shew that the.
INTRODUCTION.
body is not Self. Neither are- the organs of sense, the vital airs, nor the
mind come under that category. They have been fully dealt upon and
with the help of the foot-notes, the reader will have enough to clear his
mind of preconceived and incorrect ideas. Therefore we need not stop for
considering them in this place. " All our sense perceptions are illusions."
This requires a proof .and we have in Astronomy a trite illustration. Stars
are classified according to their magnitude. The higher are placed in the
ascending scale, while the lower ones are nethermost. A star of the fifth
magnitude will make its ray of light appear in the earth at an immense
distance of time ; all the time the light has been travelling with its
accustomed velocity to reach our globe, and the telescope can find its site
nowhere ; the rationale is, by the time it reaches us, the star itself is lost.
Now here we have a ray of light coining from a body that was existing in
the time when that light started on its onward journey, bnt since then,
the law of change has so worked upon matter, that the star is lost in the
infinity of space. ,
To connect happiness and misery with Self is a common mistake,
universally present. We find it commonly said by all classes of persons, and
there is hardly any exception " I am very miserable" " He is very happy."
These are a few of the instances in common use daily with all individuals
according to their experience of grief or happiness. Opinions are divided
according to the several Schools of Eastern Metaphysicians. From the
Vedantin s standpoint happiness and misery are created by Jiva, upon the
relations created by him. They are not Iswar s productions. For instance,
a father has his son residing abroad on foreign service, his neighbour has
also one of his sons in a similar service, distant from home. Now when the
father of the first son, receives intelligence of the demise of his son, by a person
returning from that country, he is extremely depressed and his grief knows no
bounds ; similarly that other father is elated with the information that his
son was doing well and intended shortly to return home laden with wealth,
accompanied by a large retinue ; but the fact is otherwise, his son was ac
tually dead, while that other son was very prosperous. But the man who
INTRODUCTION.
cave the wrong information owed a grudge to the family and that is why
he put the father into unnecessary grief, but when the mail brings the
good tidings, in the hand-writing of the absent son hitherto taken for dead,
his father is extremely delighted. Thus we find, that the relationship of
the first father with his son artificially created by him, is the source of
his grief and happiness. If the son were the seat of such grief and happi
ness, then for every son, each father would feel pleasure or pain, but that
is not the case. But how is this relationship artificially created 1 By
the internal organ. It may be argued the ties of affection are natural
and it is improper to call them artificial. For throughout nature we find
even in the lower animals the same feelings for their young ones. That
indeed is correct. But what is here sought to be conveyed amounts to
this : Istoara s creations are natural. While those of a Jiva are artificial
or imaginary. If Iswara would have created happiness in those who are
called sons, another father would have felt equally for all sons of other
persons equally with his own. Thus then, an imaginary connection or
relationship created by Jiva in his internal organ through the medium of
Maya, leads him to be a source of his own misery. The conclusion is
therefore evident, that all objects have neither pleasure nor pain in them ;
but what pleasure or pain we vainly attribute to them is due to our igno
rance. This can only be rendered plain by example. Wealth is generally
believed to be a source of happiness. If it were so, all persons having
wealth ought to have been happy. But is this really the case ? By no
means.
We all know how fireflies are attracted in autumn to the light
of a lamp, they dance and frisk, hover and fall into the fire, you cannot keep
them off; to them it is a pleasure thus to be present near the fire. If fire
were endowed with such pleasing sentiments or say happiness, everyone
would have likewise felt it. In the cold winter with a bitter frost, and
sharp winds blowing, it is indeed extremely pleasant to sit by the fireside,
but when the dogdays come and the hot blasts try our nerves, we never
think of firo, we avoid it and court water ; this should not be if any subject
INTRODUCTION. 19
had in it the particles of happiness on misery. The rationale according to
the Sidhanti is, when a firefly is actuated with a desire of touching fire,
its Boodhi loses its changibility, and by a relationship with it and desire,
it is made steady, when perception of happiness is realized. When a per
son desires for an object, a relation is established between his desire and
the internal organ, it loses its unsteadiness, and therefore he cognises
felicity. Thus we find happiness is not situated in a subject, the same
thing may be a source of happiness in some and pain in others. We all
know the function of the internal organ is never fixed, or steady, it is ever
changing according to the subject which demands its attention : it is-
therefore said to be subject to birth and death. But knowledge is not so.
What is knowledge 1 This is the subject of Vedanta. Knowledge is
Self. That is the shortest and best answer. But it may be argued, know
ledge is only an attribute or quality of Self, through which he discovers
all objects. In that case the question is whether that knowledge is eter
nal or transient ? If the answer be in the affirmative that will establish
Self and knowledge identically the same. For Self is eternal and not-self
non-eternal. Therefore to say knowledge is eternal brings it in the same
category with Self. You cannot regard knowledge as a distinct substance
from Self, in that case it will be non-eternal ; so that to speak of knowledge
as eternal and yet distinct from Self, will be clearly impossible as indicating
existence of properties directly opposed to one another. If on the other
hand it be contended, knowledge is not-self. Not-self is insentient,
and devoid of intelligence, as for instance a jar. It is non-eternal
too. Because when a thing is non-eternal it is insentient. Therefore
knowledge cannot be maintained with any show of reason to be non-eternal ;
on the other hand it is eternal. But there is only one substance that is
eternal and secondless and that is Self or Brahma therefore knowledge is
identical with Self. Apart from what we have been saying there are other
considerations leading to the same conclusion. For instance, a quality of
a substance may or may not be present all along. It may appear in a
subsequent state of development, remain for a short time, then disappear.
INTRODUCTION.
We find this notably in flowers and fruits. The rich juice and sweetness
of several edible varieties of fruits are only produced in a subsequent stage of
development when they are ripening. In the prior stages these qualities
were absent, as they will disappear when over ripe. Therefore starting
with these premises, if knowledge were a quality of Self, he would be some
times conscious and at others unconscious, at least his quality will be
short-lived i. e., transient. But since knowledge is eternal in duration,
his resemblance with Self is complete.
What continues in all conditions of time is called eternal. We have
only three divisions of time waking, dreaming, and profound slumber. In
all these states knowledge continues. Even in the condition of profound
slumber the continuance of knowledge is proved by individual experience
of felicity. A person on rising from sleep exclaims " I was sleeping happily,
I knew nothing then/ This should never follow, if there is no actual
perception of felicity, and the subsequent remembrance is a fact of positive
knowledge ; for an unknown thing never crosses the memory. The sensory
organs have no relation with knowledge. For in that sleep, the senses
are at perfect obeyance ; they cease to carry on their functions yet there
is no absence of knowledge. Thus then knowledge is eternal and as Self
never exists without it, they are therefore one.
The necessity for knowledge is emancipation. Works and devotion
are quite powerless in that way, they may lead to a better abode but they
cannot make a person free from future re-births. There are various opi
nions on the subject : but from a Vedantiris view there can be no freedom
from metempsychosis without knowledge, so a theosophist has nothing
proper for him to do. He is beyond the pale of works and devotion.
They are only the nethermost rungs by which the top of the ladder is to
be reached. Good works make the mind pure, and remove its blemishes,
devotion helps to make it steady, they are therefore only means to the
acquisition of knowledge. All works are undertaken with a distinct desire
of reaping their benefits hereafter. That means re-birth, but a theosophist
has no desire of continuing his existence ; he abstains from Karma. Ho
INTRODUCTION. 21
waits only to sec his cup of fructcsccnt works which have already com
menced to bear fruit , and have produced his present existence drained ;
he is no hurry about it, he does not wish for his death to come at once
and make him fc free, but patiently abides his time. Prior to knowledge,
whatever acts he had undertaken, and what have already been done
cannot produce any more fruits, for they are destroyed by it. It is
for inculcating this grand truth that we find an emphatic mention in all
treatises dealing on the Vedanta^ that a wise person has no more need of
works and devotion, when he has obtained a thorough^ knowledge of Self ;
as a result of that, he exclaims " I am Brahma" Just as a torch is extin
guished by a traveller when he arrives at the door of his own house, or
as the husk is thrown away after the grains have been gathered.
It will thus be found, that knowledge and works with devotion are
naturally opposed to each other. For which the former brings on eman
cipation, the latter an objective existence in a better sphere, or its
reverse, according to the merit of the works and the dignity of the object
worshipped. It remains also to be observed that with thorough knowledge,
.actions arc incompatible. Why 1 Because Self is regarded by a person
engaged in works, as an agent and instrument. He is apt to exclaim " I
am doing virtuous actions and their fruits must be my portion." A wise
person has no such desire, he is devoid of virtue and vice, happiness and
misery, and he knows Self is unconditioned, the Absolute, Brahma. As
regards devotion, a theosophist knows not any distinction of worshipper and
the object worshipped. He knows everywhere there is the same play of
that one Intelligence which is nothing more or less than Brahma. Hence
he has no inclination for devotion. To look upon Self as subject to the
bondage of future re-births is the greatest of all mistakes, which knowledge
only dispels. And in this, there is nothing unique ; for as we have had
occasion to mention, just as a snake is removed from a rope, when it is
fully known, so knowledge of Self establishes his oneness with Brahma, and
he is eternal and free. As for the destruction of the snake, knowledge of
the rope alone is enough for the purpose, so in regard to emancipation,
INTRODUCTION.
knowledge of Self alone is capable of bringing it about, and there is no
need of works and devotion. In the Shastras, knowledge is called eman
cipation. It means, knowledge alone is a source of release. And works
and devotion are not included in it.
At first sight, one is bewildered to find works, (good, of course) and
devotion are helpless. They are helpless in cutting off the chain of conse
cutive re-births. That is in strict accordance to the Karmaic Law which
knows no exception. Because every action must produce a fruit ; the
meritorious works in this way bear good fruits, which a person to enjoy
must reincarnate in a better sphere ; after their consummation he is hurled
back into an earthly existence, to reap what he had sown in the past. Simi
larly the bad works lead to a nether sphere. Works and devotion are
simply means to knowledge. If it be said, no theosophist in that case, can
ever succeed in attaining emancipation. Prior to his knowledge he had
been engaged in devotion and good works, and they must necessarily sub
ject him to re-births. The reply is, there is no need for that ; save and
beyond the * fructcsccnt works which have commenced to bear fruit, and
which terminate with the present life of the individual, knowledge is capa
ble of extinguishing the seeds of past karma which are to fructify hereafter.
The natural acts of eating and sleeping, and satisfying the natural calls /
are a matter of habit, they cause him no injury. Because there is an
absence of desire in him. In other words, he is never desirous of eating
this or that, or discarding another, makes no choice of his bed. It would
thus appear that desire plays no insignificant part either in our present or
in determining the future life. But opinions are divided, and the reader will
find the arguments for and against, in the usual place. In connection with
this subject, it is worth mentioning, there are two extreme views advocated
by their respective partisans, viz. : Restraint and Immunity from restraint.
The learned author of the Panchadasi upholds the first, as there are others
of equal authority maintaining the latter view.
In the Brihadaranyakopanishad we find it mentioned, a theosophist
liberated In life is absolved from works good and bad, unsoiled by sinful
INTRODUCTION. %$
works, uninjured by what he has done and left undone. Anandagiri
says : " The theosophist so long as he lives may do good and evil as he
chooses and incur no stain, such is the efficiency of knowledge. The com
mentator of the Vedantasara Nrisinha Sarasvati reviews it in the
following words : Some one may say, it will follow from this that the
theosophist is at liberty to act as he chooses, that he can act as he likes,
cannot be denied in the presence of texts of Revelation, traditionary texta
and arguments like these not by matricide, not by paricide. 1 * He that
does not identify not-self with self, whose inner faculty is unsullied, he,
though he slay these people, neither slays them, nor is slain. He that
knows the truth is sullied neither by good actions nor by evil actions.
In ar swer to all this we reply : True, but as these texts are only eulogistic
of the theosophist ; it is not intended that he should thus act." Thus then,
we find the supporters of Immunity from restraint basing their authority
on the Vedas and Upanishads advocate Yatkestackarana, forgetting the
impossibility of such freedom of action in a person who has acquired the
supreme wisdom.
Frequent mention has been made of Illusion, and it requires a pass
ing notice before we close. The source of an illusion is ignorance. A trite
example is to mistake a rope for a snake. But it may be asked, how is it
produced. There are several ways to account for it. For instance, a
Naiyayika would say a person must have the impression of a snake seen in
a previous period of time, and a defect in his sight. Given these two con
ditions and the snake illusion is sure to follow. In other words, when a
person has seen a real snake in the past, its impression remains ever after
wards, it may be roused by the stimulus of an object resembling it, or by
the force of words adequately representing it, so that in the dark when ho
comes across a bit of string, that stimulates the dormant impression of a
snake seen in the distant past and he fancies he has a snake in front of
him, which he avoids either by running away, or avoiding it anyhow ; or
he may have defective vision and that also brings it about. But on the other
band, it cannot be urged that a person whose sight is good, is not liable to
<? INTRODUCTION.
be the subject of a similar illusion ; therefore this view is not a correct one.
The Vedantin accounts for it in quite a different way. His method is
called. " The indescribable." In the visible perception of an object, the
internal organ plays an important part. When a substance is seen, its
cognition takes place by the internal organ establishing a connection with
the object through the sense of vision ; then it assumes the shape of the
object to be cognized, drives away the ignorance resting on it, and at tho
same time illuminates or cognizes it. kl The stock illustration of this
is that of water flowing from a well or tank by means of a narrow open
channel, emptying itself into tho square beds with raised edges into which a
field is sometimes divided, for the purpose of irrigation, and assuming the
shape of those beds. The illuminated internal organ is the water, and tho
operation is called an evolution or modification of that organ." In the
case of an illusion when a rope is mistaken for a snake, the function of the
internal organ projected by the eyes, establishes a connection, with it,
but the obstacles or defects as they are called (darkness etc.,) do not de
termine the modification of that organ, as to make, it assume the shape of
the rope, consequently its envelopment of ignorance continues to be present.
No snake is actually created in it, for if it were so, a light brought to
discover what the thing lying in front is, discovers no more snake, but only
a bit of string ; this should not be ; therefore \re find, knowledge of a rope is
an obstacle to the existence of a snake : so long as we do not know it to be
so, the snake created or superimposed on it, by the force of ignorance, exists
to all intents and purposes (relatively though) to the individual subject to
that illusion. Then again, it cannot be said, no snake exists in the
rope, for on appealing to individual experience, it will be found, that in all
such instances men have been known to behave exactly as they would, if
they had a real snake before them. Since therefore you cannot particularize
one way or the other, " Snake is or is not existent" it is called * indes
cribable. It is a modification of ignorance, or better still, its changed
condition. There are two causes at work for its production and discovery.
Its formal cause is the particle of external ignorance situated on the rope,
INTRODUCTION.
which transforms it into a snake, while the particle of ignorance situated on
Intelligence discovers it in that changed condition.
The other doctrines of illusion need not detain us, as the reader will
find them amply mentioned and argued with all the resources of our
author s vast erudition. Illusion and knowledge are opposed to each other.
Illusion is a modification of the dark quality of Ignorance, while knowledge
is a modification of its good quality, which is light itself. There can be
no illusion after knowledge has once arisen.
The student of Self-knowledge is to mould his internal organ into
the modification of Brahma. Now, modification signifies- assuming the
shape of an object. In the case of formless, Brahma, how can thought be
moulded after it. This is a question that is easily met. What is meant,
implies no contradiction ; you are constantly to dwell upon non-duality of
Self and Brahma, and when that has been firmly fixed in your mind, by
repeated practice, you are indissolutely one with the subject of your
thought. In this way, " I am Brahma" is the acme of knowledge and
height of felicity. When that has been fully realized, there is no more
any hankering left after material comforts ; pleasure and pain, hunger and
thirst, heat and cold, nay the most adverse circumstances will fail to un-
ruffle the calm equanimity of a face radiant with beatific light. Various
are the means of arriving at this knowledge. The usual means < Discri-
nation, Indifference* etc., only pave the way to it ; constant study, hear
ing the precepts of a Guru versed in Brahma Jnana, consideration and
profound contemplation are the chief factors. Yoga is a sort of Self-training
that helps to make the mind unwavering and steady, and leads to the
same goal finally. All our Shastras, how muchsoever they may differ
in theory, are entirely of one accord so far as Mukti is concerned ; their
processes may differ, but the finality is everywhere the same. In this way,
that staunch advocate of Materialism, Kapila, sees no necessity of dis
carding final disenthr ailment from consecutive re-births. With him, Pra-
Tcriti SaKhyaikar is supreme knowledge. The ordinary description of know
ledge answers not the sense in which we have used it. An ignorant
SO INTRODUCTION.
person is called one who has a conceit for his body ; one may be a man of
vast reading, yet so long as he mistakes Self with this or that, his physical
body or the sensory organs, he must come under the category of the
ignorant. Because he can no more be freed till his mistake or illusion is
cleared away. Thus we find the ignorant and the wise are the respective
seats of bondage and emancipation ; for the first is marked with desire, while
the last is perfectly indifferent. The potency of desire even shakes a
man of firm intellect, and whatever indifference he may have, is put to
an extreme stretch, so that he has always to keep a thorough watch, to
mount guard on the door-way of his antukaran. His desire may unruffle
him momentarily, but the firm knowledge which he has acquired can never
bring back the perception of reality in what he has once discovered to be
unreal. He knows phenomena are unreal, material comforts equally so :
unlike a dull person, when he shews an indifference for worldly goods, at
best, it is but an invisible knowledge of their unreality and not a visible
perception ; or it may have been brought about by the presence of defects,
so that, no sooner the defect is removed he is after them again, bent more for
the accumulation of riches.j But the indifference of the wise is caused by the
visible perception of unreality, and if ever he shows any true regard for them,
that unreality is removed for the time being, but it cannot continue ever
afterwards. Just as a snake is removed, when the rope is discovered, and
there is not a possibility of its being mistaken again. Thus then, as a wise
man never becomes a subject of illusion after he has once discovered it,
his indifference is therefore called firm. Whereas in the ignorant, his
indifference is apt to come and go, hence it is said to be produced by the
presence of defects. That is to say, just as a person after coitus feels an
aversion for a female and is extremely indifferent to her, so in
wealth and riches there are defects too, which produce indifference for the time
being, till a person is re-agitated with a desire of acquisition. The ignorant
look upon their self as a mine of affliction, while a theosophist looks upon
him as one with Brahma whose sole essence is joy. But for such knowledge
to arise, there arc several grades. Hence it is said to be ordinary and
INTRODUCTION.
particular. Now the particular variety comes after ordinary knowledge,
by means of what are called Indications. In comprehending the transcen
dental phrases " That art Thou," and their like, the meaning can only be
cleared by Indication of abandoning a part of the meaning ; for instance
* That refers to Brahma and Thou Jiva. The proposition is to prove their
identity. But there is a conflicting element in their composition, for both
are Intelligence, yet one is marked with visibility, and the other with
invisibility, therefore by deleting them from both sides of the equation, we
have Intelligence equal to Intelligence.
The reader will constantly meet with the words Intelligence and Con
sciousness, Self and not-self, Being and non-being. They require a passing
notice. From a VedantirCs standpoint, there is one Intelligence pervading
everywhere ; no matter a thing may be insentient, a bit of stone for ins
tance, yet it is prevaded by it, and that is Brahma ; our next word is
only another name for it. Modern science traces in all substances the
presence of a subtle force called Odyle. It was first discovered by Riechen-
bach, who wrote a treatise on the subject but only to be laughed at. In his
experiments, very carefully conducted and including a large body of metals
metalloids and other substances, he had found the presence of magnetism
sufficient to influence a sensitive. It is everywhere present. We have
therefore sufficient grounds based on science to connect intelligence with
bodies appearing to all intents aud purposes a mass of msentiency.
Self and Atma are synonymous, they refer to the principle of individuality
the perception of " I am I. He is existence, intelligence and
bliss. What is uncreated and eternal is called being or existence. Not-
self includes all other objects in short phenomena ; while self is noumena.
Non-being is the opposite of being. It signifies unreality. What is not
eternal is called unreal. Therefore as the world we live in, with its contents,
are liable to destruction, they are unreal, while self alone is real.
Destruction of the world is called * pralaif as Maliapralay means total
destruction. But in reference to it, opinions are divided. The general
belief is that no such total destruction ever happens, and we have
s protest against it.
INTRODUCTION.
It was not intended that the whole ground covered by the accompany
ing work should figure in this preliminary notice. We had touched on the
main features of the Vedantic Doctrine to impart an idea of its philosophy
and help the reader to form correct notions of the technical terms, with which
every philosophy worth the name must necessarily abound ; and in this, wo
believe, we have done our best to succeed. It cannot be too often repeated
that the subject is as vast as it is important, and requires a patient study.
There is much to profit by, and a great deal more. To succeed in master
ing it, will depend a great deal on the personal endeavour and the amount
of labour and time spent.
And in thus bringing to a close, we cannot but acknowledge with
thanks the valuable assistance received from Babu Heeralal Dhole of
Calcutta, for the labour devoted in correcting the proofs as they were
passing through the press and expediting its publication. Labour of
an anxious professional work leaves little inclination for continued literary
effort and that will account for any shortcomings, so far as its English
version is concerned. We had aimed at correctness more than beauty
of diction, and have followed the text closely and faithfully.
S. R.
VICHAR SAGAR.
ON THE ASCERTAINMENT OF REALITY AND
THE HAPPINESS IT YIELDS,
INTRODUCTORY STAN&A,
that pure and infinite Self, who is bliss, eternal, manifested, all-
pervading, and the substratum of all that has name and form,
Whom the intellect cannot discern but who discerns it, imperishable,
without a beginning Hari, Vishnu, Mahesh, Sun, Moon, Yarun,
Yam, Force, Dhanesh, Ganesh an o*bject of meditation for ctevctit
sages everywhere, who is all kindness and consciousness. " His asso
ciate am I," thus to consider Him (as an associate) is illusion or
false knowledge. Who knows not him, confounds the objective world
* To one acquainted with the mode of worship which a non-dualist
adopts, the introductory stanza needs no explanation, But it is other
wise with the generality of readers, who may conclude it an height
of impertinence thus to raise one s own Self to the dignity of the Supreme
BRAHMA, the Absolute and Unknowable of Western Pantheists, as the
author evidently does in the opening line. On this subject tho
Panchadasi (Book IX. Verse 73.) says, " Self indicated by the signs of
bliss, sentiency &c., is the Impartite Supreme-Self. I am that Self, in
this way is he to be worshipped." But then BRAHMA is an impersonality,
actionless, without any attributes, yet to differentiate It by the indi
cations of felicity, intelligence &c., may appear puzzling and incon
sistent, inasmuch as it virtually amounts to an admission of personality
in impersonality. We find it distinctly laid down in all Veddntic works
tbat this is neither inconsistent nor unauthoritative, In the 8harirM
2 VICUARSAGAR.
for something real, in the same way as a snake is created hi a chord ;
but who looks the world as poisonous as a snake is a real knower
of Self and such Self is to be recognized as actionless, puiv and
beautiful, To Him I offer my salutation.
(Obs.) What is eternal, bliss, Self-manifested, all-pervading
and substrate of name and form.
Whom intellect cannot discern, but who discerns it.
I am that pure Self and infinite,
[This is its paraphrase.]
The purport is to establish non-duality, that is to say the Indi
vidual Spirit or Atmd is non-different from the Universal Spirit,
PARABRAHMA the Absolute, after the manner of the transcen
dental Yedic phrase " That art Thou" or " I am BRAHMA" &c. But
that Supreme Self or Brahmd has peculiar charterising traits his pre
dicate which are being set forth as follows : He is joy, self-manifest
ed, all-pervading and substrate of all that has name and form. Moreover
intellect cannot discern him, but he discerns it. That is to say, the
function of a word s strength cannot influence the individual s intellect
in such a manner as to help the cognition or perception of Brahma,
but he can only be perceived by the indications of a word acting
upon the function of the internal organ. A person whose intellect
is faulty and impure, cannot perceive him, but one whose intellect is
pure and faultless discovers him. It is to be understood from this
interpretation, that a person pure in intellect knows the Bmhma
not by the pervasion of the result, but by the pervasion of the
Sutras (Chap. III. Book II. Verse 11 and 33) Vyas expounds BRAHMA in
the concluding portion of his chapter in that way. As a Pantheist, the
author is at perfect liberty, with right and consistency in his side, to
put his BRAHMA in Hari, Vishnu, Mahesh, in short anywhere and every
where. For Brahma is here a first Principle and not a Personal God ; as
such it is everywhere present, and at all times ; even the meanest tadpole
that thrives in the smallest accumulation of water collected in a road
side ditch has its PARABRAUMA equally with the mightiest emperor that
rules the mightiest nation on the surface of the earth,
VICHARSAGAR. 3
modification of the internal organ, and as the light of a lamp discovers
another object, the modification of the internal organ has not a
similar power of discovering the Brahma ; but like a covered object
discovered by breaking the cover which conceals it, so by removing the
ignorance which rests on Brahma, It is discovered for its self-lumino
sity and therefore Brahma stands in no need of the intellect. He is
the discoverer of all objects, consequently He is said to be not a
subject of discovery for the intellect, though He discerns it.
In this manner is established his self- luminosity.* Moreover
Brahma is pure and infinite. These are the indications of differen
tiation. That is to say, if Brahma were only bliss, then it would be
mistaken for material happiness, or with the property of felicity which
a Naiydyika attributes to Self. To prevent such misconception,
* It is needless to say the Commentator leaves the matter quite unex
plained. By introducing a learned metaphysical interpretation to a plain
piece of poetry he misses his way and is bewildered himself. But it needs
clearing up hence we subjoin our interpretation as explained in the
Vedantasara : " For whilst the need of the pervasion by the modification
of the internal organ is admitted, [for the cognition of the veiled Brahma,
as of other unknown object] the need of its pervading the result viz., the
unveiled Brahmti is denied. As it has been said " For the removal of
the Ignorance [resting] on BRAHMA, its pervasion by the modification
of the internal organ is requisite ; but the authors of the Shastras deny
that [in His case] there is need of its pervading the result." For, " As Brahma
is self-luminous, the light [necessary for illuminating the jar &c.,] is not em
ployed [in His case]." As He is self-luminous, no sooner has his envelop
ing darkness of Ignorance been removed by the internal organ, He is re
vealed, and the reflection of intelligence on the internal organ required
for discovering all inanimate objects &c., is not needed in His case. It
may be asked what is the necessity of creating such a subtle distinction ?
The reply is. Brahma is regarded neither as an object of cognition, nor a
subject. According to the VEDANTA, cognition follows only when the intellect
or its reflected intelligence assumes the shape of the object, (jar &c.) it
seeks to cognise through the sight and other sensory organs. If Brahma,
were a subject or object of cognition, a relation will be created and relation
always implies dualism. Hence Brahma is knowledge m the abstract.
4 VICHARBAGAR.
the blissfulness of Brahma is said to be eternal. Material happiness
is non-eternal and the attribution of felicity to self is also non-eter
nal according to the Naiydyikas. If BRAHMA were only eternal then as
ether, time &c., are also regarded in Nydya to be eternal, consequently
there will be a pervasion of mistake, that is to say, Brahma would
in that case be mistaken with ether, time and the rest. Hence
with the eternal Brahma the indication of self-luminosity is added,
because though ether is said to be eternal, yet its luminosity is not
admitted in Nyaya, on the other hand, it is said to be insen
tient. Thus then, coupling luminosity and blissfulness as indications of
Brahma with Its eternal nature, all sources of fallacy and miscon
ception are removed. For the luminosity of the Sun, and the
luminosity of intelligence a property of self can lay no claim of
identity with Brahma as they are transient and non-eternal
[because the supporters of the transient theory of intelligence, say
all acts of consciousness follow like a continuous current of water,
in which a second conception succeeds a prior one, and so on ;] while
Brahma is pervasion. The sun is luminous but that luminosity is
finite and not all-pervading. A Naiydyika does not admit the perva
sion of Self, but looks upon him as finite. In the same way, the
transient intelligence or consicousness is also regarded as finite
and not all-pervading. Therefore Brahma has been described as self-
luminous and all-pervading.
If you say Brahma is only all-pervading, then as ether (akas)
or space, time, quarters &c., are similarly regarded in Nydya, and
as the different other schools (Prabhakar, Sankhya &c.,) put a similar
construction on the properties of Self, Prakriti &c., there is a likeli
hood of Brahma being mistaken with all and every one of them, hence
to do away with such a misconception, Brahma s pervasion is coupled
with substrate. That is to say, It is not only pervasion but substrate
of every thing that exists. [For name and form are indications of
creation.]
Now, ether and the rest are pervasive, but they are not the
substrate of name and form, similarly a Naiyayika and Prabhakar
regard Self (Atmd)tol)c pervasive, but they do not admit him to
be the substrate of name and form ; Kapila looks upon his Prakriti
VICHARSAGAR. 5
in a similar light of pervasion, but not as the substrate of all
things that have name and form. Thus then Its difference is clearly
established by the indications set forth in the above manner, and
there is no chance for a mistake or misconception.
Simply to regard Brahma as the substrate of name and form is
open to misconception, inasmuch as the illusion of a snake in a chord
produces both name and form, which are perfectly unreal, hence to
prevent such a fallacy, it is said to be undiscerniblc by the intellect
but is the discoverer of that intellect i.e., self-lurninous. Now coupling
it with this one predicate (self-luminous), perecludes all sources of
mistake with other substances (set up by the other sects) from the
indications of Brahma. Moreover according to the Veddnta, in the
illusory creation or superimposition of a snake in a chord, the
substrate of the snake s name and form is said to be the intelligence
associated with the rope and not the rope itself; and that only ordinary
(or gross) perception of the snake is produced for the time being,
to be removed after the discovery of mistake. Yet even here, the
instance does not clearly apply, because for the presence of that
one predicate already indicated, with the other indications of Brahma
^indiscernible by the intellect " &c.
If Brahma were only admitted to be self-luminous, then as there
are worshippers who regard their object of worship as Self (Atmd)
in the same light, there is consequently a mistake of Brahma with
self.* To prevent it, Brahma is said to be pure. Now those
worshippers regard Self to be self-luminous, but then he has
the impurities of Ignorance (Avidya) present in him. Thus then
* To a non-dualist who regards BRAHMA and Self to be non-different,
what is more proper than that mistake (as it is called here) to be con
firmed. It is the dictum of the Vedanta, Ujmnishads and forms the
subject of tho present treatise. But the doctrine of non-duality is in
the opposite direction, Self is mistaken with BRAHMA and taken for
such, so that no separate cognition of Self remains. This is meant,
Nothing was further from the author s mind than to introduce a
contradiction in the opening passage of his work. He has taken pains to
establish non-duality and yet to introduce duality is absurd.
6 VICHARSAGAR.
by connecting the self-luminosity of Brahma with purity, tin 1
apparent contradiction is cleared. If it be affirmed that Brahma
is pure only, then a source of fallacy crops up. For according to
Kapila, Atmd is regarded as pure, hence Brahma will be mistaken
with Self. To preclude it, Brahma has another indication and that is
infinite. Now the author of the Sankhya Philosophy does not take
Self to be infinite, hence this distinction is enough for the purpose
of distinguishing Brahma from Self. Time, place, &c., are all consider
ed as indestructible in the Sankhya system, but all material substances
dependent on them are prone to destruction, hence they are not
infinite. But Brahma is infinite to the best sense of the term,
It depends not on time, place &c., hence indestructible.
Though for the purpose of removing all unnatural inferences
it may be remarked that the connection of two such predicates as
joy, eternal &c., is enough, the introduction of several predicates has
been used to help an enquirer of truth, to know BRAHMA by Its
several indications from different standpoints. And, I am that
BRAHMA which has all those predicates. This is the purport of
the stanza.
But it may be alledged, that in the introduction, the usual vale
dictory address ought to be made either to Vishnu, Siva, or the other
Devas, and to throw them into the shade and introduce Self in
this manner is improper. That imputation is cleared in the follow
ing verse.
" From Vishnu, Mahesh, it is an infinite succession
To Law [nature] Sun, Moon, Varuna, Yama, Sakti,
Dhanes and Ganes."
Like a never ending sea, with its continuous train of waves,
Vishnu, Mahes and the rest are all a continued succession of Devas,
indicated by the waves of the sea, and infinite too, and they are each
and all of them equally identical with myself. Thus then in praising
Self they have all been duly praised, and the impropriety of praising
Self is removed.
But it may be said that Vishnu and Siva can properly be looked
upon as hwara s waves, and not of yours or your self, hence it is
VICIIARSAGAR. 7
necessary that the work must open with a praise of Iswara ; as by
watering the roots of a tree, its trunk and leaves are all
satiated, so by praising Isivara alone, all Devas are praised ; and by
praising your individual Self, no praising of the Devas can follow.
But there is no such apprehension, as will appear in the sequel,
immediately.
" That kind [God] who is omniscient,
An object of contemplation for the wise,
Whom to connect with an associate is false knowledge."
That kind Isivara is contemplated by all devout sages and his
associate of Maya is as unreal as a snake in a chord, or a city
created in a dream, so that by seeking to praise him if Self be duly
praised it applies to him, for to contrive his difference is only
imaginary.
But that Isivara resembles the pure Brahma, and as you cannot
claim an identity with It, consequently it is proper that the Imperso
nal BRAHMA (without attributes) be duly mentioned in the introduc-
try stanza, and by speaking well of It, all will be equally praised
That cannot follow from praising yourself. But it is otherwise.
Without Its knowledge the world appears real.
But like the knowledge of a rope removing the snake,
Its knowledge reduces the world to nothing.
And Self is identical with It.
As ignorance of a rope produces a snake on it, which is removed
when all the parts of that rope are fully known, so a full knowledge
of BRAHMA reduces the objective world into its normal condition
of unreality, [and there is no more any hankering left either for
the world or its goods, and a man is so to speak, on the road to eman
cipation] and I am that Pure BRAHMA. And there is no difference
whatever between them, when regarded in the light of a part and
whole, modified and modifier, or worshipper and worshipped. And
in the absence of that difference, there is likewise a want of the other
subservient conditions or relations mz. t of cause, and luminosity ;
8 VICHARSAGAR.
container, and contained ; consequently my self is proved to be with
out them, so that by praising Self, BRAHMA is duly praised.
Now there is yet another difficulty : You belong to the sect of
Dadiipuntis who are worshippers of Ramchandra and as such, it
is very proper, that you should invoke a blessing from your guardian
Deity, by duly propitiating him with the necessary praise or valedic
tion. For a satisfactory solution of this point the concluding lines
of the verse* say :
" One must want a good perception and have good deeds
to worship Ram without motive.
I am that Ram and him I offer my reverence."
That Ram, who is only to be worshipped by good deeds per
formed without a motive of reward either here or hereafter, (when
only can a person have his perception cleared in a manner, as
to perceive him) is non-different from myself, hence in the absence
of an object of worship or of devotion, to whom am I to offer my
reverence ? that is why I pay my respects to no one. Or it means :
A person who for a clear perception of the Supreme BRAHMAf has
served Ram with good actions without any aim of being benefited,
and whose self is non-different from PARABRAHMA, has no other object
for his reverence, as all are included in his Self, who is the abid
ing intelligence; and in the absence of such another object different
from Self, no proper worship can be tepded to it,
* Fifth couplet. f This word is neuter,
VIC EAR SAO A 11 9
REMARKS PREFATORY.
The Sutras, their Commentaries, and other works in Sanscrit,
There are many and several ;
Yet I speak in vernacular
For them, who are dull in intellect.
Though the Sanscrit is replete with the Vedanta, Sidhanta and
similar other works, yet the present one cannot bo termed futile,
inasmuch as, persons of dull intellect will fail to profit by the
instruction imparted in the learned language, while no such appre
hension needs be entertained with regard to " YICHAH SAGAR," as
it is written in the vernacular, which men of ordinary calibre shall
be able to comprehend. Hence for them it is useful.
By poets many works have been written in vernacular,
Well known are they in the world.
But without seeing the Vichar Sagar
Doubts cannot be dispelled.
And, so far as language is concerned, there may be many other
works like it, but none of them can remove the doubts concerning the
Reality Self which the " YICHAR SAGAR" alone is capable of doing.
For, several of the authors have written their works after hearing,
and are therefore full of errors ; besides, in some places, they impart
instruction in direct antagonism to the sacred writings, owing to their
author s inability to comprehend their real signification, as for instance
the work known as Panckbkakha. Then again, there are others,
who have written with a partial knowledge of the sarced writings
such as Atma Bodh. Hence they are quite incompetent to clear
away the doubts in regard to the (Atmd) Spirit or seventh prin
ciple in man. While there are others, who have not thoroughly
adopted the method of the Vedanta. Moreover, the present work
2
10 VICIIAR 8AGAR.
is complete in itself, it follows the Vedanta text closely, and is no
where opposed to it. It deals particularly on subjects that help
knowledge of Self, hence it is unlike the rest in the vernacular
(bhakha), but superior to them all.
VICHARSAGAR. n
SECTION I.
[Tnus having the Vedanta doctrine for its subject, the present
work is moved by similar considerations. Without them, a seeker
of knowledge will have no inclination for the work, hence I proceed
to consider them. These are : vi^ru-u^^ w ***><>*
I. The qualified person or fit vessel (adhikarT.)
II. The relation (sambandha.)
III. The subject (vishaya.)
IV. The necessity to dispel ignorance concerning the non-duality
to be demonstrated, and to acquire the blissfulness of
Brahma (pray oj ana.) ^m^nn
There are three defects in all subjects of the internal organ
(Antakarana) namely mal, vikshepa, and avarna. Abstaining
the mind from works done with a desire of reward, will cleanse it
of all impurities (mal), ft* ^ V^^ct; anQ^,^
Devotional exercises (upasfyana) will remove misapprehension
(viksjiepa] ; and knowledge, concealment or want of apprehen
sion (avarna)
One free from impurity and misapprehension,
But only ignorant,
Who is possessed of all the means,
Is called, a person qualified (in intellect).
I. The qualified individual is a person, who by the performing
of actions without a motive of reward, and devotional exer
cises, have got rid of all impurities, (mal) and misapprehension,
(vikshepa) and who is subject of one ignorance call it
(avarna) concealment or want of apprehension, and endowed
with the four means of knowledge.
The four means (sadhana) are:
12 VICHARSAGAR.
(1.) Discrimination between things eternal and non-eternal, i.e.,
transient (vivekd). C^^-T
(2.) Indifference to the enjoyment of reward ia this life or the
next. (Vynty). **^\*i\+\^ v*!***^"!
(3.) Possession of quiescence, self-restraint, faith, concentration,
abstinence, and endurance ; (jkJuit sampatl) and ; *<L ^*-u\c\;
(4.) Desire for emancipation, > ^2 1 <^*\ -^u^u^aTu^
(1.) Discrimination between eternal and non-eternal is to know
Self to be eternal, imperishable, and actionless, and is the only subs
tance of his kind, while the objective world is non-eternal and perish
able ; that is to say, antagonistic in nature to Self. It is the basis of
the other means ; for indifference and the re^t are produced from it,
(without it, they are absent,) hence it is the source or cause of the
other means from indifference to emancipation/
A sage acquainted with the drift of the Vedas, calls him indiffer
ent* who bent on the attainment of a BRAHMA, discards all other
things for they prevent his wish being realized.
(2.) Indifference to the enjoyment of reward in this life or the
next. This consists in an utter disregard for enjoyments cither in
this life or the next. For as shown in the Vedas they are the
products of actions, and actions are non-eternal, hence such enjoyments,
be it nectar or the blissful abode of heaven, must necessarily be of
short duration, [and with their cessation or destruction, the indivi
dual will be hurled to re-births], all wise men therefore discard them.
(3.) Quiescence, Self-restraint and the four other substances are :
(a.) Quiescence, (sama.)
(b.) Self-restraint, (dama.) <^H\
(c.) Faith, (sradho.) %<+]
(d.) Concentration of thought, (samadJiana.)
(e) Abstinence, (iiparati) and ;
(/; Endurance, (titiksha.)
[They are now being defined] :
(a.) Quiescence or passivity (sama) is to keep the mind aloof
from subjects which stand in the way of attaining knowledge of
Self; one possessed of it is called tranquil.
(b.) Self-restraint (dama) consists ia the restraining of the
VICHARSAGAR 13
external organs of sense, and a person who has so subdued his senses
is justly called an intellectual hero.
(c.) Faith (sradka) is to believe the utterances of the Vedas
and one s Spiritual preceptor.
(d.) Concentration of thought (samadhana) is the destruction
of all mental objects; [they distract the mind and hence prevent an
individual from concentrating his mind, already subjugated and
turned away from sensuous objects, on Self.]
(e ) Abstinence (uparati) is to abstain from all works after
having been possessed of the four means of Self-knowledge ; to look
upon all sorts of enjoyments as poison, [or to abandon, the prescribed
acts in the manner laid down in the Shastma by turning into an
ascetic.]
(/!) Endurance (titiJtsha) is to bear the extremes of heat and
cold, hunger and thirst, (pleasure and pain &c.,) with equanimity.
These six substances constitute one of the means, and are not
reckoned so many, by a person possessed of discrimination.
The acquisition of quiescence and the rest, called the six subs
tances, is looked upon as one of the four means of practice to attain
deliverance ; and not as so many distinct or new, and a person,
possessing them is called one full of discrimination/ for they help
to produce discrimination, whereby an individual is enabled to
distinguish the eternal from the non-eternal.
(4.) Emancipation is to attain BRAHMA, and to destroy bondage,
(what subjects a man to continued re-births is called bondage) ; one
desirous of release is a prince of sages. The attainment of BRAHMA
and destruction of evil are indications of emancipation or deliverance
and to wish for them is known by the term desire of release,
(moomooksha) this word and emancipation are synonymous.
These are the four means of practice for acquiring- self-knowledge.
With the three, (a) hearing, (sravana) (b) consideration, (manana)
(c) profound contemplation (nididhyasana) ; and the ascertaining
of the real signification of That (Tat) and Thou (Twain) [in the
transcendental pharse That art Thou] they are altogether eight
in number. That is to say, discrimination and the three others
together with hearing, consideration/ /profound contemplation/
U VICJIAR SAGAR.
and the ascertainment of the real indication of That and Thou
[non-duality], constitute the eight means for acquiring knowledge
of Self.
These eight are the internal/ while sacrifice and other offerings
are the external means. One engaged in the practice of the
internal/ parts company with the external/
The eight means already mentioned commencing with discri
mination and ending in the ascertainment of the real signification
of That and Thou are called internal, while sacrifice and other
similar works (yaga) are the external means of acquiring knowledge
[of Self] ; of these the last are to be avoided, and the former alone to
be practised by a seeker of truth. They are called internal because
from hearing/ or knowing them/ apparent or visible results/
(prataJcsha), are produced. Discrimination and the other three, are
subservient to that hearings inasmuch as a dull person without
them cannot ascertain the drift of the sacred writings from hearing
them ; and in the same way, hearing consideration and profound
contemplation are subservient to knowledge [of Self], for one cannot
have any knowledge without them. In like manner, without the
ascertainment of the real indication of the words That and Thou
the knowledge of non-dualiuy [the individual and universal Spirits
are one] cannot arise. Thus is determined the subserviency of the
four means discrimination/ indifference &c., to hearing and the
subserviency of hearing consideration and contemplation to
knowledge, hence they are called the eight internal means.
The external means do not yield visible* results, but clear the
mind of all ill wishes by hearing or practicising them, as for instance,
the sacrificial offerings and similar other works.
[As a rule] they are the ordinary practices of our daily concern
in life, and hence worldly, and it is quite possible that a person
engaged in their performance with a motive of reward, becomes pure
in mind, but then they hurl him to consecutive re-births hereafter,
to which, they stand as cause. [For consummation of works is
life ; and therefore, what he has sown in this, he must reap in the
next, and so on till final deliverance.] But for one, who is without
any desire of reaping any benefits from them, [or who assigns all
X \snn60\er\*, Vl7-w6c.Tpe*t ^iOct -**** Tut 01*44;,
VICIIAR SAGAR. 15
actions to the Lord (Iswara) and acts as guided by Him], the above
sacrifices and other works are merely conducive of making his mind
pure and faultless, hence their cause. Thus by his purity of mind
he derives knowledge of Self and hence they are its source ; and
therefore they are called the external, or distant while the internal
are the proximate.
Practice of the external means, sacrifice and the rest, or abandon
ing a wife, children and property &c., are for the acquisition of
Self-knowledge; they constitute a qualified person. But for such a
qualified person it is very unlikely that he shall be engaged in
sacrifice and the above works, hence they are distant. Discrimina
tion and the rest behooving of a qualified individual are therefore
near or proximate. But then, there is thia difference, that discri
mination &c., are beneficial to hearing as hearing is beneficial to
knowledge. In such a consideration of discrimination &c., hearing
and the rest are comparatively speaking internal, while with regard
to the latter the former are external.
Though discrimination and the rest have been described as
the internal means for the acquisition of Self-knowledge, and not
the external means, in all works, yet they yield visible results in
connection with ( hearing, which are therefore as acceptable to a
seeker of truth as hearing and the rest. But that does not
hold true with reference to sacrifice and similar works, which are
therefore unacceptable to him. Hence they are called internal.
In relation to sacrifice &c., they are also internal. Here even,
they are recognized as the internal means of Self-knowledge ; and
if it be duly considered, it will be found that, prior to such knowledge
ascertainment of the real indication of That and Thou in the
transcendental pharse That art Thou is the principal means for
such knowledge. Moreover hearing and the rest are not alluded as
such means. For,
Hearing [Sravana] is to ascertain the drift of the Vedas by
analysis and argument,
Consideration (manana) is the unceasing reflection on the
non-duality of the individual self and the secondless .Reality Brahma
with arguments for and against ;
4. C C \
l u
16 riCIIARSAGAn.
Profound contemplation (nididhyasana) is the continuance of
ideas conformable to Brahma, to the exclusion of the notions of
body and such other inconsistent things with It:
Meditation (Samadhi) is a ripe condition of the above profound
contemplation so that it is included in it, and not a separate means.
Now all these are not the direct means for practising Self-know
ledge, but they cause the destruction of impossible and inconsistent
ideas, and thus clear the intellect of all its blemishes and frailties.
Doubts are looked upon as impossible ideas, and antagonistic, are
the inconsistent
Hearing (of the Vedanta doctrine) clears away any lurking doubts
concerning the proofs adduced to support the subject.
Consideration removes such doubts in regard to what is to
be proved :
Whether the utterances of the Vedanta seek to expound the
secondlcss Reality Brahma, or something different, any doubts as
to the proofs adduced in support of the subject, it seeks to demon
strate, are cleared by Hearing.
Moreover consideration removes all doubts as to whether non-
duality or duality is true; and of them, non-duality is the subject
that is to be explained.
To know the body [organs] &c., as real, and to consider the
individual self and Brahma as twain, are called inconsistent ideas.
They are antagonistic to Self-knowledge and are removed by
profound contemplation.
In this way hearing, consideration, and profound contempla
tion* destroy impossible and inconsistent ideas which stand in
the way as obstacles to such knowledge ; and inasmuch aa
such obstacles are removed by hearing &c., therefore the latter are
looked upon as the source of knowledge and called so. But
then they are not the direct or evident cause. The direct means
for Self-knowledge is to hear the utterances of the Vedanta that is
to say, to ascertain their drift as has already been explained while
defining hearing.
Vedantic utterances are of two kinds (1) Avantara (2) Maha-
vakyd or involved, and transcendental.
VICHAR SAGAR 17
The first signifies such words as help the cognition of either
the Supreme-Self or the individuated Self.
The second has reference to non-duality, and establishes the
oneness of the individual self and Brahma. Hence the words
employed with this object are termed transcendental.
The first produces knowledge marked by indivisibility as Brahma
is (existent), while the second establishes knowledge marked by
visibility as " I am Brahma"
Thou art Brahma is pronounced by the teacher to create a rela
tion between the pupil and Brahma, which he no sooner perceives
than he exclaims, I am Brahma and thus acquires visible know
ledge, [knowledge in which Brahma is established as a visibility,
inasmuch as, the first personal pronoun used in conjunction with
the subject of his knowledge (Brahma) is involved in no mystery,
but something tangible, apparent and visible, and when such tangibi
lity is extended to Brahma by the non-difference existing between
the two, then the last also is rendered alike apparent and visible].
For this conditional relationship between the pupil who hears
the words, and the precepts conveyed by them, through the means
of hearing, the words relating to that hearing, are determined as
the cause of knowledge, with this difference, that the included*
or involved words relating to that hearing are called the source of
invisible knowledge, while the transcendental, under similar condi
tions, are the source of visible knowledge.
Thus then, the transcendental words bring forth only visible and
not invisible knowledge to every one. But it has been alleged
by the professor of another province, [dissenter] that, by means of
hearing consideration and profound contemplation in connection
with the words is only produced the visible knowledge, and by words
only, (without hearing and the rest) the invisible, and not the
visible knowledge. For it is sure, if words will produce such visible
knowledge, then the necessity for hearing consideration , and
profound contemplation ceases altogether. But this apprehension
is unfounded, inasmuch as they are needed for excluding or removing
the impossible and inconsistent ideas which one may hold con
cerning the Brahma, or its non-difference with individual self.
3
18 VICHAR8AGAR.
Heuce we find, though words help the cognition of the Brahma
as visible, and hearing, and the rest are useful in the manner
aforesaid (as expounded in the Sidhanta), yet one may contend,
that, after the knowledge of the visible kind has been attained
by a person, he is no more apt to blend it up with impossible
or inconsistent ideas, so that, to an advocate of words as the only
means helping the visible knowledge, the ascertainment of the real
signification of the transcendental phrase, " That art Thou" is
alone sufficient, not only to produce such knowledge, but also to
exclude all impossible and inconsistent ideas ; and consequently
hearing and the rest are futile and unnecessary.
[Now for the opposite doctrine.] Words only produce the
invisible, and the practice of hearing consideration, and profound
contemplation produces the visible knowledge. In such a view,
hearing &c., are not looked upon as futile ; but though this
doctrine has been adopted by several authors, it is not true. For,
it is in the nature of words to discern dimly an object which is
covered,* and they cannot reduce it to a visible condition ; as for
instance the knowledge derivable from the sacred writings about
heaven and its Devas, Indra and the rest ; and when an object is
uncovered, then it is rendered apparent or visible by words as well
as inapparent or invisible. When words are used to indicate the
existence of an uncovered object, then only the invisible knowledge is
proved as " the tenth personf is." Here the neuter verb implies exis
tence, which refers to the tenth, that is near, hence words establish the
invisible knowledge. But when words bring in the conception of a
* Vy&vahit literally signifies what is contiguously placed, fin inter-
Teiiing situation, relatively it is distant and mediate as also covered,
I have adopted the latter term as easy of comprehension in the same
way Avydvakit has been rendered into uncovered ; but elsewhere it has
been translated into near, and immediate, all of which the reader will
meet with as he proceeds.
f A party of ten persons were crossing a river, on alighting at the
opposite bank, one of them counts the rest and as he forgets to count him
self, necessarily he stops at number nine. His companions thinking
VICHAR SAGAR. 10
near object , and reduce it into the condition of this is then only visi
ble knowledge is said to be established by them, and not the invisible.
As for instance " Dasamata (Tenth) is". In this way, words establish
the existence of the tenth and render it visible. Similarly, BRAHMA
for its being the all-pervading spirit present in every individual
self, is extremely close or near ; hence an included word rendered
existent is capable of reducing BRAHMA into a visibility. Moreover,
like the example Dasamata is BRAHMA as the soul of every being,
and therefore near is determined by the transcendental words, so
that such words cannot imply the invisible knowledge of BRAHMA,
but indicates visible knowledge, and as has already been men
tioned that, when a thing is rendered visible, there cannot exist
any impossible or inconsistent ideas concerning it, consequently
hearing and the rest are futile. Such a view is inadmissible. Like a
Raja, in spite of a visible knowledge of his minister by name Bhur-
chhoo, who could not know he was his minister, because his know
ledge (though visible) was mixed up with inconsistent ideas, so the
transcendental words help the cognition of BRAHMA and render
it apparent or visible ; but to such persons, whose intellects are clouded
with impossible and inconsistent ideas, their blemishes stand in the
way of knowledge, and hearing and the rest are necessary for
clearing the mind ; and one who has already been freed Jrom them,
stands in no more need of hearing consideration and profound
contemplation and he may not practise them.
Thus in effect, the transcendental words and pharses are the
means of the acquisition of Self-knowledge, not so hearing and
the rest, which simply destroy the obstacles to such knowledge ;
so that, they are called the cause. Then again hearing &c., are
him to be mistaken, repeat the same process over and over, always for
getting to count the one who was counting. Thus finding the tenth
person missing, they take him for drowned, and bewail at his loss ; mean
while another person coming up to them enquires of their grief and
on being informed that their tenth is missing, he points their mistake
and shews that none of them is drowned. They now give vent to feelings
of joy, as ere now they had been expressing their sorrow.
20 VICHARSAGAR.
caused by discrimination and the rest, consequently these last
are called the means for practising self-knowledge, and one endowed
with the four means, discrimination, indifference, quiescence, and
desire of release, is called the qualified person adkikarL
II. RELATION.
The relation between the subject and the work which treats
it, is characterised as the condition of the explainer, and the
thing to be explained. Hero what explains is termed the explainer,
and that which is fit to be so explained is called the thing explain
ed. Then again, between the qualified person and the result (Phala)
is a relation characterised as a condition of obtainable (prdpya)
and obtainer (prapdka), inasmuch as the result is obtainable to
the qualified person who is therefore the obtainer. Hence the
obtainable (prapyd) is that which is to be obtained, and the obtain
er, (or prapalca} is the individual who obtains it. Between the
qualified person and consideration of the subject is a relation
characterised as the consideration of an agent or doer and
what ought to be done/ Here the qualified person is the doer
or agent and consideration or deliberation of a subject by
the exercise of reason is what ought to be done (Icartabya.)
Therefore the agent is he who does, makes, performs or practises
what he knows ; and what deserves to be so done is called Icartabya
or proper to be done. Between the work and knowledge is tho
relation characterised as the condition of product and producer ;
because due deliberation of the work produces knowledge, hence
It is the parent of knowledge which is a product derived from its
study. So that, what produces is called the parent or producer
and what is produced, is called its product or offspring. Thus is
relation set forth.
III. The Subject is the identity or oneness of tho individual-
Self with the Universal Spirit (Brahma) which is to be demonstrated
in this work, and which is the purport of all Vcdic utterances ;
and one contending against such non-duality, or who thinks them
as twain, is unwise and a disputatious antagonist of the Vedas
IV. The necessity is the acquirement of felicity which is the
essence of Bwhnw ami to be one with it, anj the removal of
VICIIARSAGAR. 21
Ignorance, the source of the world as injurious to and destruc
tive of it. For, Ignorance is the progenitor of this vast expanse,
and an efficient cause of [birth and death] and its attendant miseries,
hence it is called injurious and harmful. The attainment of supreme
felicity by the removal of Ignorance is called Desire of release
(mokska) which is the principal aim of the book, hence it is called
the supreme necessity, while the intermediate (avantar) necessity
is knowledge. Now the subject of desire or in other words, what
an individual desires to have is called supreme necessity 1 or the
chief purport of human life ; and as such desire is for the removal
of misery and the acquirement of happiness, it is applicable to all
individuals. But it is the same as desire for release, hence such
desire for release is the supreme necessity or the principal aim of
human life. It cannot be construed as knowledge. For knowledge is
the means of procuring cessation of misery and happiness, and nob
their actual destruction or acquirement, hence it is an intervening
necessity. Now an intervening necessity is such as helps the
attainment of the supreme necessity or the principal aim ; of such
a nature is knowledge. For, the knowledge derived from a study
of the work will procure emancipation, which is the supreme necessity.
Hence knowledge is determined as an intervening necessity.
But doubts may accrue as to the validity of what has just been
said in the following wise : The individuated self is like supreme
happiness itself, so say the Ved&s ; then for him to procure wha(j
he has already got is absurd and inconsistent. For, that can refer
to a thing which one has not in his possession, and not to what he
has. To introduce the least trace of such a doubt is injurious to
belief. Determine it well by repairing to a kind preceptor for
instruction and it will be found, that the apparent contradiction in
the obtaining of that which has already been obtained, resembles
the mistake concerning a bangle, said to be lost, but which is all
along present in the wrist.
The oppositionist might ray that the destruction of fruitless*
* Unreal is the proper word for anarth used by the author,
22 VICHARSAGAR.
things, and acquirement of supreme felicity is said to be the
necessity for the work. But such is impracticable, because in the
Vedas Jiva* has been linked to supreme bliss which you also
admit moreover acquirement can have reference to a thing
which one has not, to apply it otherwise, is to create a contra
diction, for to obtain what has been always in possession is wholly
impossible. Hence the acquirement of supreme bliss by Self which
is always such blissfulness himself, is in every respect contradictory.
If any one be so disposed to question, then that need not create
any disbelief in the necessity of the work, but on the other hand, he
should repair to a kind preceptor for instruction on self-knowledge,
so that his doubts may be dispersed by illustrating examples.
These examples are : As one having a bangle in his wrist may
through mistake [caused by forgetfulness or absence of mind] con
sider it to be lost, he then exclaims "I have lost my bangle" but
on discovering his mistake at the instance of another who points
to his bangle already there, he is apt to say "I have got it" Here
the bangle never left the possession of the owner, yet he took it to
be lost from mistake, so that when it was pointed out, he says "I
have got it," In other words, practicability of obtaining what ia
already in possession is thus established. Similarly, by the force of
Ignorance, a like mistake as to the supreme felicity of Self is brought
about, and he is inclined to the belief, Self is unlike such bliss,
but Brahma is ; and that a separation has taken place between him
and Brahma, which by devotional exercises he gains over. A large
body of persons are labouring under this mistake. If the greatest
of the Pandits will admit the individuated self and Brahma as twain,
and not one, he is no better than a dunce. If such a dull person,
fortunately (for good actions) come to hear the precept of a professor
on the Vedantic doctrine, and acquire it, that is to say, become master
of it, by ascertaining its real signification then he exclaims "I possess
the supreme felicity through the kindness of the preceptor and
the work itself." Now such an expression amounts to this : that
though Self is supreme blissfulness always, and as such, it did exist
prior to my being initiated into the meaning (teaching) of the
sacred Scriptures, yet as I could not make it out, that does not
VICHAR8AQAK.
necessarily establish there was a want of it ; but on the contrary
from the precepts of his professor he has learut it all, and kaowa
(through intelligence) such felicity to be his. Therefore he says, he
has now acquired the supreme felicity.
Thus is established the necessity of the work for procuring
happiness to one, who was already its possessor, [though from Ignorance
he could not appreciate, till stirred up by the kind instruction of
a professor] and it need not imply any inconsistency. Similarly, the
destruction of unreal (anarth) is practicable as in the following
illustration,
As a fact, no snake exists in a chord at all, yet illusion creates
it, which is removed no sooner the person comes to know that it
is a bit of rope. In the same way, Self is quite a separate entity
f.om the world, which is unreal like the snake, yet from Ignorance
we confound him with it [sometimes with the gross physical, at other
times with the subtle body, son, sensuous organs, vital airs, intel
lect and nothing] ; but by the advent of knowledge we discover
our mistake, and as this work seeks to impart the necessary instruc
tion for attaining self-knowledge, consequently its necessity to
stop what has already ceased to exist, and to procure that which
one is already master of, is fully established and that does not imply
any contradiction.
Now cessation of the world with its cause (Ignorance) and the
acquirement of supreme blissfulness is the purport* of the work,
But from what has already been said this is clearly impossible.
For cessation means destruction and the two words are convertible
terms, so that they reduce a thing to a condition of non-existence,
Hence the existence and non-existence of desire for release are both
expounded by them. If we say that it causes the cessation of an
useless thing then such cessation reduces it into a condition of non-
existence. So the acquirement of felicity refers to a condition of
existence. Hence both of them cannot be present at one and the
same time in the same object. For want and non-want, or existence
Purport and necessity both stand for Prayojana.
24 riCHARSAQAR
and non-existence are antagonistic of each other, hence they cannot be
present at one and the same time in the same substanco. Thus tlu -n
one may suy the necessity for the work is not clearly established.
To such a contention the reply is :
Between cessation of the world and its occupation, the difference
is nil, just as the cessation of the snake iii the chord is its know
ledge.
The removal or destruction of Ignorance and its product tire
world, is possession of Brahma (i. c., knowledge of self). Hence,
between such knowledge and the removal of Ignorance the differ
ence is nil, just as tha removal or destruction of the snake in a bit
of chord, is to possess a knowledge of it (i. c., proceeds from know
ing a chord thoroughly). Thus then, the destruction of all fancied
or imaginary objects, in a manner, resembles an occupation of them,
and the two are nou-different, according to the opinion of the
commentator. Hence the destruction of this apparent and tangible
objective world, which is also called fruitless, for it yields no results,
is Brahma itself; for Brahm t which occupies it all, is essentially exis
tent, and its destruction indicating the same existence [for they have
been shown to be equal, and things which are equal to one another are
equal to the same thing, here existence is the same thing and Brahma
and destruction of the world with its cause Ignorance being equal,
they both refer to existence] the necessity of the work is established.
Thou kind Guru ! deliver him at once from the chain of conse
cutive re-births, who reads this first section.
Thus aro the moving consideratious ordinarily declared.
VICHARSAGAR 25
SECTION II.
THE moving considerations of the work have been ordinarily declared
in the former Section, this one will treat them particularly. Of
the four means of practice which constitute a qualified individual
the desire of release is counted as one which is synonymous with
emancipation. Destruction of Ignorance with its product the world,
and the attainment of Brahma is called emancipation.
Now, a class of writers, who may be properly designated dis
senters (PooiWapalfai) contend, that such a desire of release as is
tantamount to the destruction of the world and its cause ignorance/
we seek not to have.
No one desires the destruction of the world with its cause
Ignorance, save the man of discrimination who seeks for the des
truction of the three kinds of miseries.
The destruction of Ignorance the source of the world or call
its removal, and its expectation, signifies a desire for it ; such a
desire actuates no person. But then say, what do they do instead ?
There are three kinds of miseries which a man possessed of
discrimination wants to get rid of.
They are :
(L) The spiritual or inherent (adhydtikam). *.*., U-7
( 2,) The natural (adhibhuta). 311^^ w
(3.) The accidental (adhidyva). ^A*A^(X*
(1.) The spiritual or inherent are those caused by disease,
hunger and thirst &c.
(2.) The natural are those caused by thieves, tigers, snakes &c.
(3.) The accidental are such as are caused by a Yaksha, Raksha,
Prefea (evil spirit), the planets, winter and heat.
All persons have an equal desire for the destruction of the
miseries just cited, and a man of discrimination has no desire to
seek the removal of a thing different from misery, hence it is
2G VICHARSAOAR.
established, that the destruction of Ignorance with its result the
objective world, is not the prevailing desire.
Moreover, if a Sidhanti will say, " since all are alike desirous
to be free from miseries, and as such freedom can only be produced
by the destruction of the world with its cause Ignorance, therefore
the destruction of the world with Ignorance, is absolutely needed,
before such respite can be had ;" such an assertion is clearly in
admissible.
For, the Ayurvcda contains medicines for every form of disease,
whose use will cause the removal of the disease and its accompany
ing pain ; in the same way hunger and thirst are appeased by
food and drink. In this manner every individual kind of misery
can be removed by particular remedies, so that the destruction
of Ignorance with the world is no more necessary for the removal
of misery.
The destruction of the material world, with its cause Ignorance,
and the attainment of Brahma, is called desire for release ; now that
portion of the desire for release which wants a person to reduce
the world with its cause into a state of non-existence, is clearly
impracticable, as has already been said ; the same holds true in
regard to that other portion, the attainment of Brahma! according
to the view of a Poorlapakshi.
Desire can only accrue when a person has experience of a thing.
Brahma is never experienced, hence no one desires to have it.
Here experience refers to knowledge, hence a desire to obtain
it, can only proceed from such knowledge or experience of a thing,
and what one knows not, nor has experience of, he never desires
to obtain.
Now such an extremely unknown substance is ignorance, conse
quently no one desires to have it. Then again, a qualified individual
has no knowledge of Brahma, inasmuch as one with such knowledge
is not a qualified individual, but an emancipated being ; and for
such a one, a desire to obtain Brahma is no longer possible, [for
he is already a Brahma} so that, prior to hearing the precepts of
the Vedanta, as he was full of ignorance, or ignorant of (Self)
Brahma, he can have no more desire for it (Brahma) again, This
VICHARSAOAR. 27
is why ao one desires for release, by causing the destruction of the
world with its cause, and attaining to Brahma. Hence there is
no such person who is desirous for emancipation.
The absence of a qualified person* is established in another way
by a Poorbapakshi ;
Desire of material comforts actuates all, but none seeks the road
to release.
Merely reading or hearing the work does not constitute a quali
fied person/
That is to say, all persons are bent after the acquisition of proper
ty, for enjoying happiness ; moreover such of them as have left
all such pursuits in the present life, and have entirely given them
selves up to religious asceticism, undergo severe hardships only that
they may enjoy happiness hereafter ; so that there is everywhere
a prevailing desire for the enjoyment of happiness either in the
present or the next life. And such desire for material prosperity
cannot be determined as one with desire for release ; hence it is said
the road to release is not sought after by any one. Thus is shown
why a desire of release* or emancipation is no where present amongst
men.
Further, as the prevailing desire is everywhere manifested in
the intense thirst for the acquisition of property &c., therefore no
one can be said to be subject to indifference, quiescence, self-restraint
and abstinence. Thus in the absence of the qualified individual,
the necessity for the work exists not.
Thus is set forth the contending view in regard to the qualified
person/
THE SUBJECT.
Say [then] Brahma and Jiva are one and riches cruel.
Brahma is devoid of pain ; its [knowledge] destroys all
sorts of pain with the root.
It is not possible to establish non-duality which is the subject of
the present treatise, inasmuch as Brahma is devoid of Ignorance,
conceit, anger, spite and a fixed pursuit, [which are called the five
2g VICHARSAGM,
sorts of pain] all-pervading, ami secondless, i.e., without auutin .-
thing similar to, or resembling it, while the Jiva is subject to pain,
finite and many in number for there are as many Jivas us there
are bodies so that if there would have been one Jiva present in
all bodies, then pleasure or pain affecting a single individual
would have been equally felt by all.
Moreover, what the Veddnta says in reference to pleasure and
pain as functions of the internal organ, such an organ is present
in each body, and therefore, its number is many. Hence is it, that
pleasure or pain affecting one is not felt by the rest. Besides,
a witness (wekkt) is without pleasure or pain, sccondless, whole and
free from pain ; hence is it that Jiva cannot be said to be one with
Brahma. For the Jiva is an agent or doer, and beyond him to
recognize another as a witness is tantamount to the saying " a
sterile woman s son" a clear impossibility.
Then again, if such witness be admitted, then as it is not one,
for there is present one in each body, you will have to recognize
several (and this will introduce a contradiction, for Brahma is
one while witnesses are many in number).
Now for the conclusions of the Veddnta against such contention.
Pleasure and pain are the functions of the internal organ.
Tie internal organ and its functions are not the subjects of the organs
of senses or the modification of internal organ, but arc so to the
witness ; because the subjects of the organs of senses are derived
from quintuplication of the elements ; the existing difference between
the two amounts to this : The organ of vision covers or takes pos
session of a thing that has form, in so doing, it cognizes the visibility
as well as the receptacle of such visibility, which thus constitute its
subjects; as for instance, the form of the blue or yellow pitcher, and
the receptacle of the form the pitcher, are at one time covered or
taken possession of by the organ of vision ; and thus they form its
subjects. In the same way, touch is cognized by skin, along with
its receptacle, where such touch resides, and which communicating
to Hie individual s skin enables him to feel it.
The tongue, nose and car cognize taste, smell and sound respec
tively, by covering each individual subject only aiid nut its
A
V1C1IARSAGAL. 20
receptacle. Heiicc these three, as also sight and touch are quite
helpless to cognize the internal organ. For, form and touch
are due to the quintuplication of element or elements, and they
are subjects for the organs of vision and touch respectively to cover
or take possession of, to render them apparent. But on the contrary,
the internal organ is the resulting product of elementary non-quintu-
plication, which is quite different from elementary quintuplication,
and for this existing dissimilarity, the result is the inability of the
organs, which are the products of quintuplication, to cognize such
other products, to wit, the internal organ, which is derived from
rion-quintuplication. Moreover, the external objects are the subjects
which the organs of sense take possession of, or cover (in other words
cognize), but as the mind (here means the internal organ) is internally
situated in reference to the organs (of sense) they cannot take cog
nition of it Similarly the internal organ is not the subject of its
function inasmuch as it is its receptacle hence the internal organ
cannot bo said to be the subject of its function.
Illustration. As fire supports combustion, and never forms the
subject of such combustion, but on the other hand, things dissimilar
to fire such as wood &c., are the subjects of combustion, so things
dissimilar to the internal organ constitute the subjects of its product,
its function, (briti) and not its own. In the same way, the attribute of
the internal organ is not the subject of its function. Because, if the
subject of the internal organ be determined by its function, then
its attributes of pleasure and pain will be converted into its subjects.
But such a subject-forming-function of the internal organ never
appears before it ; consequently the mental attributes (pleasure
and pain) are not the subjects of its function.
Then again, the rule constituting a subject is the distance of- a
certain thing from the function ; the thing distant is the subject
of function ; and not what is brought quite close to it. As for
example, antimony besmeared in the eyelids cannot be called
the subject of vision [the function of the eyes], for its close
contiguity ; in the same way, the attributes of pleasure and pain
from their closo contiguity to the mind (internal organ) cannot consti
tute the subjects of its function, whose receptacle is the internal
30 VICIIAR 9AGAR.
organ. Hence the internal organ with its attributes are incapable
of being cognized by the senses or by its own function ; but can
be taken possession of by the witness; and if one such witness be
admitted, then it is necessary that as it is quite capable of concerning
pleasure and pain, affecting one mind, it should feel them alike in
all, which it does not Now this introduces the admission of several
witnesses ; it is not faulty then. Because the mind (Internal organ)
which consists of intelligence, is the associate of witness ; hence it is
natural that it (witness) should be able to determine the knowledge
of the attributes of its own associate only. Therefore it is quite
unable to illumine the totality of pleasure and pain as present in
all individuals. In this manner is declared why several witnesses
cannot be one with Brahma.
Now for the Prdyojana or necessity of the work the PoorbapaJcshi
continues :
Knowledge alone cannot cause the destruction of bondage which
is without illusion and there are no substances to prove it as illusory,
therefore abstain from the expectations arising out of knowledge.
Bondage refers to Egoism and other things not pertaining to
Self. If it is present as an illusion, then knowledge removes it ;
without it, knowledge is powerless. For it is the nature of knowlege
to remove Ignorance and illusion concerning a thing which it takes
possession off ; as the knowledge of a rope removes ignorance concern
ing its parts as well as the snake illusion, so when an unreality
is covered with false knowledge, it is called Illusory attribution.
When the subject is real, knowledge cannot cause its destruction ;
therefore in relatian to Self (Atmd) the bonds are Egoism and the
rest These are likewise called illusions ; and because they arc
unreal, therefore knowledge removes them ; then again as Self has
nothing unreal in him like those comprised in bondage, which is
explained as something real, therefore to expect its destruction by
knowledge is futile.
ON TUB COMPOSITION OF ILLUSION,
Knowledge of the Reality produces conception.
In the three defects and ignorance are recognized the
substances of illusion,
VICIIAR SAGAE. 31
The text is thus explained :
Conception ia the product of the knowledge of Reality. The
three varieties of defects are those of the (1) demonstration
(2) demonstrator, and (3) what is to be demonstrated [demon
strable] ; and particular ignorance and ordinary knowledge of
the demonstrable. These are the five component entities of illusory
attribution without which it can never arise. As for example from a
nacre, illusion of silver, and from a rope, snake is created.
Here, a man who has seen a snake and nacre and knows them,
is apt to mistake a rope for a snake and nacre for silver, but one
who has neither seen, nor knows what a snake or nacre is, can
never make such a mistake, consequently we find the rule to be,
conception of the real substance as cause of illusory attribution,
Then again, contrariety cannot determine it, hence a snake cannot
create the illusion of nacre, nor can silver do that of a snake. Thus
ia established the necessity of a similarity or close resemblance,
[which is looked upon as a defect inasmuch as it creates illusion]
of the demonstrable and what is to be demonstrated being present
so as to cause the mistake, and it is therefore looked upon as its
cause. Similarly, defects in the demonstrator* as temptation, fear &c.,
as well defects in the demonstration caused by bile and other impu
rities in the eyes and other sensory organs are looked upon as
the source of illusion. Also ordinary knowledge concerning a nacre
caused in this manner "nacre is" and not its particular or differentiating
knowledge as "This is nacre," can produce it. Similarly in the
absence of ordinary knowledge, no illusion can be created. Thus
is established the sources of illusion are presence of ordinary know
ledge, and particular ignorance of the demonstrable.
These are the substances which create an illusion. All of them
must be present to bring it about, otherwise in the absence of
even one of them, no illusion results. As for instance, for making
an earthen pitcher, it is necessary that there should be present a
potter, a wheel, a revolving stick and clay, and in the absence of
one of them the pitcher cannot be produced ; so the whole of the
substances must necessarily be present to create an illusion.
Moreover, in reference to the illusion of bondage there is not
even present one ! it- causes. If bondage/ is sometimes
upon as real, then tln conception for its knowledge creates in
Self a mistake that he is subject to bondage which is thus
explained: Self alone is Real and excepting him, there is not an
other thing that is real ; consequently bondage is non-real, and no con
ception can establish it otherwise; hence in the absence of conception
concerning the reality of bondage, no illusion can arise. Then
again, Self and bondage* have no existing similarity in them ; but
on the contrary like light and darkness they arc opposed to each
other. Further, Self is internal, bondage external; Self is dis
coverer, bondage is the subject of discovery. Ilere discoverer signi
fies the agent or instrument who discovers ; the subject is what
.is discovered. No illusion is possible between the subjects of the
internal and external or vice versa. As for example, in regard
to son and his son s son &c., the body of his father is the internal
while they constitute the external. Now these cannot be mistaken for
each other, that is to say the son and the rest for the father, or the
latter for the former. Nor can it arise between the instrument
or agent, and the subject or vice versa. As for example, a pitcher
is the subject, and a lamp which discovers it is the instrument, here
no illusion can convert a lamp into a pitcher, or a pitcher into a
lamp. Similarly, from want of an existing similarity between the
internal discoverer or instrument Self and the external subject
which is to be discovered Bondage no illusion can arise concerning
Self so as to convert him into a subject of bondage. They are
antagonistic of each other, for Self is the discoverer, and bondage
is the subject which he discovers. Then again, they arc not similar
but dissimilar. Hence no illusion can possibly arise. Further,
defects of demonstration are alike wanting. Because according to
the Vedanta, from the demonstrator to every thing else, the
whole objective world is unreal and illusory,* and they are the
veritable bonds.
^ There is one Reality Self ovcry thing else besides is unreal, their
apparent reality of objective existence is due to illusion of the special
organs of seuse, sight, hearing and the rest,
VICIIARSAGAR 33
In this way prior to the illusion of bondage, to introduce a demons
trator and demonstration for determining it, is illogical ; hence
also, their defects are inadmissible. Therefore, the illusory attribu
tion of bondage to Self, cannot apply. Nor can particular Ignorance
be mistaken for Self, as they are opposed to each other. Brahma
is self-illuminated Intelligence and light, hence it is unlike Igno
rance which is darkness, therefore the first cannot be mistaken
for the latter. As the sun is opposed to darkness, so is intelligence
which manifests itself [and requires no adventitious help from
another, much less from Ignorance, which is itself darkness] opposed
to Ignorance.
Moreover, even admitting the presence of particular Ignorance
in Self, it cannot create its illusion with bondage, for what is entirely
unknown cannot be mistaken for that which is perfectly known,
But on the other hand, a subject covered by particular Ignorance,
can create an illusion with a subject whose knowledge is of the
ordinary kind. But then Brahma is free from both the above
conditions, it is so to say unconditional, hence it cannot either be
said to be a particular form of Ignorance, or ordinary Intelligence.
Then again, if you are tempted to create an illusion, you will
have to reduce Brahma into the conditions of particular and ordinary
as cited just now. That will virtually tell against the only logical
inference as to the self-manifestibility and Intelligence of Brahma.
In this manner as the non-particular manifestation which is
Brahma is unlike the particular Ignorance concerning it, or its
ordinary knowledge is wanting, no illusion can arise concerning
its subject. Hence bondage cannot be admitted as the illusion
concerning the subject of Brahma. But, that bondage is real, and
as such it cannot be removed by knowledge, consequently to say
that, the present work is necessary for procuring knowledge whereby
to remove the chain of bondage and obtain deliverance is alike
inadmissible. Then again, the conclusions expounding knowledge
as the source of the desire for release are not true ; but actions alone
can create it (emancipation). Such an assertion is determined after
the manner of (Ekbhavikbad) one whose principle is that every indi
vidual is liable to be born only twice in the following manner:
-I TTC1TAR SAGAR,
Heal bondage cannot be destroyed by fullness of kn owl edg", but
he who wants to be released must always be engaged in practising
the daily rites.
Fullness of knowledge in the above sentence implies unreason
able conclusions that is to say, to admit the cessation of bondage
from knowledge, is looked upon as an unreasonable inference ;
inasmuch as the performance of daily rites at all times can alone
procure emancipation. Such is its meaning.
Actions are of two kinds
(1). Lawful ; and
(2). Forbidden or prohibitory.
(1). Lawful actions are such as are determined in the Vedas as
produce an inclination in the individual to perform them [for they
are beneficial], (2). Forbidden are those interdicted [which one
should not do, for they are harmful.]
Natural acts (calls of nature) are not considered actions ; for
actions are those either enforced or prohibited in the concluding por
tions of the Veda^, to induce or prevent a person to perform, Hence
actions are of two (and not three) sorts.
The lawful actions are again subdivisible into four varieties,
(a.) Daily rites (nitya.)
(b.) Occasional rites (naimittika,)
(c.) Optional things (Jcamya.)
(J.) Penances (prayaschitto.)
(d.) Penances are for the destruction of sin ; as for instance
fasting for three days and abandoning the thing that has been
taken by mistake
(c.) Optional actions 7 are done with a motive of obtaining
results *, as the sacrifices done with a view of procuring rain, and
the offerings to fire for attaining the blissful abode in heaven etc.
(I.) Occasional rites, if left undone produce siu, but their per
formance brings forth neither virtue nor sin, they are not for
constant practice, but are occasionally have recourse to, for certain
purposes ; as the rites done during eclipse, or the Sradlia cere
mony. It alao includes actions done with an effort ; as for instance,
to rise from a seat oil the approach of a person old in conditiou,
V1CRARSAQAR, 31
caste, state of life, knowledge (vidya)> religion, and consciousness
(hiCLna). Here vidya refers to knowledge inculcated in the
Skastras aid to act up to them, and jnana, relates to know
ledge of the Invisible (Brahma) so that the last mentioned is
superior to the rest
(a). Daily rites produce sin if not performed, but their per
formance brings forth neither merit nor demerit. They arc always
to be done, as bathing, Sandhya &c.
These then there are the four sorts of lawful actions, together with
the prohibited, their number is five.
One desirous of release abstains from works done with a motive
of reward (kamya, or optional) as well as the forbidden ; for the former
procure a better and the latter a nether state of existence, [and
as he desires no more re-births] he avoids them. But he is always
engaged in the performr ice of the daily/ and occasional rites only,
\vheu there is any necessity for them, for some especial purpose?
For if daily and occasional rites are left undone, they will beget sin ;
and as sin reduces a person to a lower state of being [hereafter]
Lc seeks to destroy it by practising the daily and occasional rites,
in the manner just mentioned. They produce no other result,
their non-performance is sinfil, but their performance is not so.
Here then is the necessity why a person desirous of release should
always be engaged in their practice. And, if from inadvertency
or mistake he does something which the Skastms interdict [and
which he ought not have done] he must have recourse to penances
for atonement.
Penances are likew ;e necessary for the destruction of sin
caused by actions done in a previous state of existence [former life]
though so far as his present life is concerned he has done nothing
which the Shdstras can take objection to (L c.,) prohibit.
But then there is a difference [as to the method of penance to
be observed].
Penances are of two kinds :
(1). Extraordinary (asadkarna)*.
(2). Ordinary (sadharna).
(1), Extraordinary penances are those laid down iu the sacred
36 VICUARSAOAK
writings for the destruction of particular (specified) sins ; of this
nature is fasting, already mentioned.
(2). Ordinary are actions enforced in the the Shastras for the
destruction of all sins, as bathing in the Ganges, pronouncing Isivara s
name and similar others.
Now sins committed knowingly are destroyed by means of the
extraordinary penances explained in the Shastras ; while the
unknown/ as for instance, those done in a previous life, require the
ordinary penances for their removal.
Because, the extraordinary has reference to specified and parti
cular sins, whose nature is known, and for which the Shastras
provide particular means of expiation, hence they are enough for
causing the destruction of all sins committed either with knowledge,
or which have subsequently come to the knowledge of the person.
But as the sins of a past life cannot be particularized in the above
manner, nor can their nature be possibly known, hence ordinary
penances are laid down as a means for their destruction. For, they
cover all sins and remove them. [Of such nature are bathing in the
Ganges, pronouncing the name of Iswara, and the others mentioned
in the sacred writings]. These are not penances simply, but they
are included among optional things as well ; for they are done with a
motive of obtaining reward. For instance, bathing in the Ganges
enables a person to obtain a better sphere of existence, as also
pronouncing the name of Iswara does. Hence they are (kamya)
optional and as they cause the destruction of sin therefore they
are penances. As the horse sacrifice* (Asiuameda) &c., des
troy sin and secure the blissful abode of heaven, so is the case
\vith bathing in the Ganges. They are penances so far, as they
cause the destruction of sin, and optional as they procure a better
life hereafter. Hence one desirous of release does not desire for
them [for his business is to cut off the chain which produces re-births].
But those who wish for a better sphere of existence in the next
life, secure it by bathing in the Ganges at the same time as their
sins are destroyed ; as regard the others who have no desire for a
better existence, its result is simply to destroy sins. Hence when
it is practised with a desire of obtaining reward, it forms what ia
VICUARSAGAR. 37
called optional penance. When such. a desire ip absent, it is simple
penance. As the whole range of actions when actuated by a desire
of reaping benefits therefrom, hurl a person to consecutive re-births
as is said in the Vedanta, and in the absence of such a desire they
purify the internal organ, and by the help of knowledge, procure
his emancipation ; so either bathing in the Ganges or pronouncing
Iswara s name has the double property of penance, and optional
thing, to one desirous of reaping benefits ; while to that other who
has no desire, it is purely a penance. Hence a person desirous of
release undertakes the ordinary penances which destroy all sins
of a previous life though their specific nature cannot be known.
For him, the optional things of a past life produce no result ; inas
much as the desire present at the time of undertaking an action
determines the result, according to the Yedantic doctrine, . so that
when a desire of obtaining heaven co-exists with the performance
of an action, then its doer enjoys such a result in his next life after
death, and when a person is unactuated by any such motive of obtain
ing benefits, actions produce no result. In the same way, a desire
originating subsequent to the performance of an action determines
beneficial results. But as all such desires for obtaining desirable
results have ceased in a person desiring to be released, his optional
works of a prior birth produce no results for him, in the same way
as a person with a desire of becoming rich undertakes to serve a
rich man, and though his desire of becoming rich may be removed,
yet so far as results are concerned he is just the same as before,
without the ostensible means to constitute him rich ; therefore it
follows that the optional works of a previous life produce no result,
in the absence of a desire to be benefited, to a person desirous pf
emancipation. Thus is determined how actions alone are enough
to produce emancipation..
A man of discrimination never, has recourse in this life to op
tional or forbidden works which procure an upper or nether stratum
of existence. Actions commenced in a prior birth optional as well
as prohibited can only be destroyed, after reaping their fruits. The
harmful effects of daily, and occasional rites when left undone,
do not accrue to him who is .desirous of release^ and engaged in their
38 VICIIARSAGAU.
practice ; mor.^vT tlio accumulated prohibitory works of a fo. iner
life are destroyed by the ordinary penances. Then again, the accu
mulated optional works produce for him no fruits, as the desire
for their enjoyment is wanting. Therefore such a person is engaged
in practising the daily and occasional rites/ and penances of the
ordinary kind. And if in his present life he has done knowingly
prohibited action, then he practises the extraordinary penances ; or
only the daily and occasional rjtes and no penances, because the
accumulated works, both, prohibitory and optional, are destroyed by
his desire for release. As the destruction of cumulative actions for
a knowcr of Self is admitted in the Vodanta, so by abstaining
from the prohibitory works and practising the daily and occasional
rites, a person desirous of release causes the destruction of cumulative
works in his present life. Or, the cumulative optional and prohibited
actions together, subject him to one more existence, and he has there
fore to enjoy another objective existence. Or, like a devotee s body
which is a consummation in one time of all the accumulated works com
menced in several previous births, the qualified individual co&sumca
the fruits of his future subjective existences [in his present life].
Or, as the hardships suffered by him in the practise of the daily
and occasional rites are the results of his cumulated prohibitory
works of the past life, so they do not produce for him the commence
ment of another future existence after death.
The accumulated optional works commence one body, or several
bodies in one time, so that the person desirous of release is never
affected with any pain in his future life, but has all bliss for his share
of enjoyment. For the cumulated lawful actions have produced
his body, and the cumulated prohibitory actions have ceased to be
productive of any results (for the paiu attending the practice of the
daily and occasional rites have consumed them already in that
life) hence for him penances are no more necessary, but the daily
and occasional rites are enough to procure him delivereuce from
future re-birtbs. lleuce he is to practise the occasional rites when
the necessity for them arises, and the daily rites always.
This doctrine is called Ekbhavikbad* in the ShoLsiras. Here
eveu, the destruction oi bondage by kncwlodge is not the necessity
SAQAE. 30
for tho work. For what cannot be done by another .substance,
constitutes tho chief necessity. As without sight, nothing is capable
of ascertaining tho form of an object, so as to render it visible, here
sight is the necessity for seeing tho form; so actions alone arc
sufficient to cause a cessation of bondage, without any assistance
from the present treatise, Hence there does not exist any necessity
for it. In the same way, there does not exist the necessity of
tho qualified individual and subject for the present work. Further,
in tho absence of the qualified individual and the rest, no relation
can be created. Because in the absence of the subject, conditional
relationship ef explainer and what is to be explained, subsisting
between the work and its subject (which it seeks to demonstrate)
is also wanting. Then again, from tho want of qualified person
and the absence of a productive result, the relation of obtaining such
result and the individual to obtain it (that is to say the conditional
relationship of obtained and obtainer) is not created. Moreover,
in the absence of a qualified person and the ascertainment of tho
subject to be explained, no conditional relationship can be said to
exist as that of a doer and what is to be done. Also, as knowledge
is unproductive of the result aimed at desire of release or emancipa
tion, that is to say in the absence of fruitful ness in knowledge, the
relation of effect and cause between such knowledge and the treatise,
cannot bo said to exist. For the etYect can only be produced by a
thing which is productive and not barren ; and as has been just said,
knowledge itself is unproductive, besides knowledge of the thing
is also wanting. Hence between it and the work no relation can be
said to subsist.
For the ascertainment of Brahma and Jiua as one is called
knowledge, (in the Sidhanta) and such non-duality is not produced,
because they are not one ; for this has already been determined in
connection with the subject/ or that the determination of non-dua
lity [existing non-differenco of the two] is nob produced. In the
same way from an absence of moving consideration/ qualified person
and the rest, the present work cannot be commenced.
[VcdantinJ reply]. Now for a reply to the contention aboub
actions : It is said that a desire of release which is the first item of
40 V1C1IARSAGAR.
contention, cannot be created in any one. Because such desire itf
composed of two parts of which one is the destruction of Ignorance
and its effect the objective world ; and the other is the attain
ment of the Brahma : of them, the first no one has got ; but all persons
are equally desirous of destroying three kinds of misery instead, and
such can be done by the help of the individual means assigned for
each different kind of misery. Hence a person with a desire for
the destruction of the world and its cause cannot be termed as one
desirous of release. This argument is untenable as follows :
Without destruction of Ignorance and its effect the material world,
proceeds not the destruction of three kinds of misery. For this
every one desires the first portion of release.
Here the root of the objective world is called Ignorance, and
without destroying it, cessation of three kinds of misery by
other means, does not follow. Also with the destruction of the root
Ignorance (avidya) all sorts of misery and their cause disease &c.,
and the receptacle of such disease &c., the body cease to exist.
Hence for destroying the three kinds of misery, all persons seek for
the first portion of release which is the destruction of Ignorance, the
root of the world. Its purport is this: Even persons capable of
providing adequate medicines for their disease are not, as a rule,
free from misery, which is inevitable. Some may get rid of a
disease by suitable treatment, and be free from pain, and some
may not be equally fortunate ; thus medicines &c., are powerless
to remove the pain accompanying a disease in every instance ; and
even those freed from a disease by the help of medicines may be
subjected to a fresh attack from the same or another disease ;
therefore medicines are powerless to cause entire (extreme) destruc
tion of pain. One who has got rid of his pain and may be exempted
in the future from being subjected to a fresh attack, such exemption
is termed the extreme destruction. From medicines etc., cessation
of pain as a rule does not inevitably follow and it is apt to re-appear
after it has once been stopped, hence they are unable to cause its
entire or extreme destruction.
Moreover, if all the means conducive of misery be destroyed
then only can all misery be at an end, hence for cessation of misery
VI CHAR SAOAR 41
all men are equally desirous of destroying the means which conduce
to bring it forth.
These means are Ignorance (ajnana) and its effect, the objective
world ; as described in the Chandog&^Upanishad on the subject
Bhooma Vidya, where it is mentioned that the sage Narada one
day appeared before Sanat Koomar, and said, Oh Yngftban ! (Lord)
a knower of Self never experiences grief, whereas I am full of it.
I am therefore full of ignorance ; give me that instruction which
shall remove my ignorance. To this, Sanat Koomar replied, Bhooma
is without all sorts of grief, and is blissfulness ; save and beyond
Bhooma things are worthless, and undesirable, and conducive of
misery. Bhooma is the name for Brahma. Therefore the things
different from Brahma are the means of misery. Ignorance and
its active results are different from Brahma, hence they are its
means, so that with its destruction, entire destruction of all
miseries follow, as a rule. Hence, for the destruction of all miseries,
the removal of ignorance with its product, the world, by all persons,
which again constitutes the first part of the desire of release,
is clearly established. And, as mentioned by a (PoorVapokshi)
dissenter, that as desire can only arise concerning a thing which
one has experience of, and as no one has any such experience of the
Brahma, consequently to attain the Supreme Brahma, which is the
second component unit for deliverance, is never desired by any
one. To this the Sidhanti replies as follows :
Every one has experience of happiness ; Brahma is extreme
bliss ; and hence the prince of a discriminating individual wants
only to attain the supreme felicity of Brahma.
All persons have experienced happiness, hence all are desirous of
acquiring it. Moreover, Brahma is eternal blissfulness, and is so
called in the Shastras, hence a man possessing discrimination of
things real and unreal (called prince of discrimination) is desirous
of attaining Brahma.
Every one desires for happiness only, [and] wants not the subject
to have ; that constitutes the qualified individual and not the dis
criminating.
Here " happiness refers to material comforts, and such every ene
6
42 riCJ/ATl SAGAR
intends to be possessed of, but then it cannot bring forth deliverance/
or desire of release (which is the subject of the work and which
ought to be the chief aim of all) but makes him more worldly (i. r.,)
attached to the world ; consequently in the absence of a qualified
individual seeking for emancipation, the necessity for writing the
present work does not exist. In other words, it is fruitless, and
something worthless for him who is undesirous of release, or already
emancipated ; for them an inc i:iation for the subject of the work
is absent."*
But thus to say that there does not exist a person desirous of
release is absurd ; because all persons want to destroy affliction
and to acquire eternal happiness ; and desire of release is nothing
else but removal of misery in all its various phases, and the acquisi
tion of happiness. Hence is clearly established that all men are
desirous of release and not for material comforts, as have been
said. They desire happiness, whether it proceeds from the acquisition
of property &c., or its reverse. If the happiness created by the
acquirement of wealth &c., be only desired, then there will be an
absence of a desire for that bliss which attends the condition of
profound slumber. This last proceeds not from the acquisition of
property and riches; and as happiness only, that is all happiness,
is desired and not the particular one that of wealth, hence the
possession of property excludes that other. But on the contrary,
he desires self-contentment and not material prosperity, for, so far
as the latter is concerned, every one has it more or less, and there
is a constant yearning for ineffable bliss which is never destroyed,
such bliss is the desire for release and resembles (the blissful ness
of) Self.
Thus is determined that all men are desirous of release and it is
absurd to say that no such person exists. Moreover, if it be said,
The passage does not imply a contradiction. For, an emancipated
individual has no more need for a desire of obtaining release which is the
subject of all Vedantic works and such others which have taken them
for their standard like the present, for he is already freed.
AUr
//
VIGHAR SAGAR 43
there is no such person as that, consequently there cannot be any
desire for the present work, which is therefore a fruitless attempt ;
that as the work is not a means for obtaining deliverance, the absence
of any inclination (for its study) or those other means, apart from this
work, inclination for which does not constitute a bias for the sub
ject cf the work itself; or that as the qualifications quiescence self-
restraint, &c., whose possession entitle a person to study the work,
and help self-knowledge as there is no such qualified individual -
hence there is a want of inclination for the book. To say that
the study of this book is not a means for kindling a desire for
release, is absurd. For such desire is, as a rule, actuated by know
ledge, as the Vedas have it ; and knowledge is produced from hearing
the precepts of the sages and ascertaining their true signification.
Hearing is of two kinds. The first is the relation existing between
the utterances of the Vedanta and the ears ; the second is the as
certainment of the real signification of the Vedanta sayings. The first
only, for its close relation to the ears, not the second is the cause of
knowing the Brahma (self-knowledge). Hearing of avantara words
as has already been explained, is the cause of apparent knowledge.
And hearing of transcendental words leads to a knowledge of the
unapparent or invisible variety. What is thus known, is apt to be
mixed up with inconsistent and improbable ideas along with it;
hence, for their exclusion the second variety of hearing [i. e., the
ascertainment of the real signification of the words That art Thou. 1
I am Brahma. All this is Brahma &c. ] together with considera
tion and profound contemplation is to be practised. Impossible ideas
are removed by the hearing of the Vedanta sayings. The Vedanta
either expounds the Brahma, or is the explainer of a different
signification ? Of this nature are the utterances of the concluding
portion of the Sam Veda impossible ideas which are removed by
analysis and reasoning whereby their proper signification is determined.
Consideration removes the improbable ideas concerning what
is to be proved or demonstrated. The oneness of the Jiva and
Brahma is the doctrine sought to be proved in the Vedanta ;
and either this non-duality is true or its opposite duality (the
Individual and Brahma are twain and different from each other),
* VI CHAR SAGAR.
Such doubts concerning the subject to be demonstrated are calleJ
impossible ideas. They are removed by consideration. Antagonistic
or inconsistent ideas are cleared away by profound contemplation.
In this way is determined that knowledge derived from hearing*
is first the cause of kindling in a person a desire of release ; and
ascertaining the real significationf with consideration and pro
found contemplation, as they cause the destruction of inconsistent
and antagonistic ideas, is the cause of deliverance. Vedanta, the
concluding portion of the Vedas called Upanishad, though differ
ent from the present work, yet this one is equal to it in its
indication; the difference is in the matter of language (the
first in the learned Sanscrit while the latter is in the Hindee dialect) ;
and its hearing also enables a person to acquire Self-knowledge.
This will be demonstrated in the sequel. Thus then is determined
that the work by procuring knowledge is the source of the desire
for release, to say otherwise is to show stubbornness. Moreover if
it be said, that desire of release proceeds from the work, and that
the other means are equally capable of it, so that the work is
futile ; it can then be enquired what the other means are ? If the
reply be, that, in Sanscrit there are several works which establish
the non-duality of the Jiva and Brahma as for instance the
Upaniskads &c., their commentaries, all these tend to knowledge,
and knowledge procures emancipation, and that it requires no
separate qualified person, hence the present treatise is futile.
Even if such be true, then one who cannot determine the true
interpretation of the Sanscrit works Upanishads, their commen
taries &c., but at the same time is desirous of release, can derive
no profit from them ; for such a dull person the present work is
surely not profitless. Also, if there be others who say that desire
of release is produced from the work, and the Sanscrit works cannot
be read by a dull person for his want of comprehending them ; and
that there are persons who are really desirous of release but yet
* Hearing of the first variety, j Hearing 1 of the second variety,
V1GI1AR SAG Alt. 45
have no inclination for the subject of the present treatise ; because
to find out a qualified person with discrimination, indifference,
profound meditation (already explained) is very scarce, hence from
an absence of the individual means of practice for acquiring Self-
knowledge there can be no inclination for studying the work, then
it can be asked : Is there no such qualified person ? Yes, there
are not many such qualified persons, and if he says so (that there
are not many qualified individuals) all this, I admit indeed.
Then again, if another will say that there is not a qualified person
fit for knowledge of self ; such a statement implies a contradiction
and cannot be therefore entertained. For there are three defects
in a subject of the internal organs viz., blemishes, projection*
(vikshepa) and concealment ; [here] blemishes (rnala)-^ stand for
evil (sin) projection for fickleness or instability.
Good actions destroy evil or sin ; devotional exercises remove
the fault of instability ; and knowledge destroys want of apprehension.
A person who is fickle and inclined for evil mentally, cannot be a
qualified person. But then one who is freed from mental blemishes
and instability either in this life, or in a prior state of objective
* Projection, misapprehension, evolution, or power of creating is fully
illustrated in the apt illustration of a snake in a chord. Here no snake
exists, but misapprehension concerning- the chord, projects the form of
a snake on it, or creates one. Similarly avarana is concealment, or want
of apprehension. It can likewise be called envelopment, as, for instance,
from the interposition of a small cloud obstructing your field of vision
you are apt to say the sun is clouded. And this is a great mistake, for
the sun is infinitely larger than the cloud, and therefore it is quite im
possible for the latter so to enshroud the former as to cause total dark
ness, and this proceeds from a want of apprehension. In the same way,
Ignorance clouds a man s intellect, and prevents him from realizing self,
situated quite close to it, as the infinite, everlasting and uncreate, such
want of apprehension, enshrouding or concealment is Avarana. For
further information consult Dhole s Vedant-Sam p. p., 18. 19. 20.
f Mala literally filth, dirt, excrement, hence converted into blemishes
and defects, and faults in other portions of the present work.
16 VIGUAR SAGAR.
existence, by good actions and devotional exercises (literally there
fore faultless) is duly qualified for knowledge of self. For him, an
inclination of the work is possible.
"And as has already been mentioned, all persons have a particular
tendency for material prosperity, and no one wants either to have
the eternal blissfulness." This is untenable ; for, there are four sorts
of persons :
(1) Stupid, (pamara) (2) worldly, (vishayi) (3) enquiring (jijn-
dsoo) and (4) liberated (mukta.)
Stupid persons are inclined in this life for prohibited actions, but
have no tendency for works sanctioned in the Shastras or their con
ception ; to enjoy the world as laid down in the sacred writings or be
engaged in action for the enjoyment of happiness here or hereafter,
such a one is called worldly. And an enquirer is one, who for his
good conception, derives benefit from hearing the precepts of the true
sacred writings. Such a good man can only discriminate things real
and non-real in the following manner. All worldly comforts are non-
eternal, even then there is an accompanying pain along with them,
and in the end they are the cause of happiness or misery (pleasure
or pain). The very knowledge of their being non-eternal and that
those comforts will soon die out is a cause of pain even in their
enjoyment. In this way he is engrossed in all material comforts
and their reverse ; so that misery is substantial,* and its cessation
cannot proceed from the ordinary means in vogue with men;
for he who is to find the remedy for its cessation is himself subject
to it, or if he is free from it, is liable to get it anew ; and so long
as the body lasts, it is impossible to be entirely free from misery ;
because the body is the resulting product of accumulated good
and bad works, and a human body is the result of such mixed
works as well as the body of Devas. If the latter were only a pro
duct of good and virtuous actions, then after seeing such body of
a Deva different from one s own, the other Devas may envy it,
f Rupa, is form, and as a thing with a form is a substantial entity
therefore it has been so rendered.
VICHAR SAGAR 47
this need not occur. Even Indra, the principal among the Devas
is actuated by fear concerning many other Devas and Danavas this
is said in the Shastras. If, therefore, the Deva s body is only a
pure product of good and virtuous actions, then there will be an
absence of pain arising from the fear of others as just stated. Thus is
determined that such bodies are the result of the good and bad actions
mixed. The purport of the Sruti saying " A Deva is sinless" is
this : Human body alone is entitled to works, (and no other body)
so that good and bad actions done in the course of a Deva s life
do not produce their effect in the Deva s body, but the good and
bad actions done in a prior life do produce their effect in the Deva s
body, thus such body is produced from mixed actions. Moreover,
reptiles, quadrupeds, and birds are also the result of mixed actions
done in a previous state of existence, for the known miseries to
which they are subject are the result of sins, and the pleasures
of sexual intercourse &c., are the result of good actions.
Those that crawl on the body are called reptiles (tirjaka.)
Those which move by wings are called birds,
Those that walk on four legs are quadrupeds ;
Hence birds and animals are also sometimes called
(Tirjaka) as crawling by the abdomen.
Thus it shews that all bodies are the product of mixed actions ;
some are the result of a small share of sin and a greater one of good
actions, as for instance, the body of the Devas : for the presence of a
large share of meritorious actions and a small portion of bad, the
Deva sharira is made up of a small amount of bad and larger
one of good works ; with this view the Shastras lay it down that
such bodies are produced only from good actions. That is to say,
as for many Brahmins residing in a village, it is called Brahmin s
village, though other castes may be also residents in a small pro
portion, so for a preponderance of good and meritorious actions a
Deva skarira is said to be the product of good actions only. The
body of reptiles, birds and animals are not the product of good
actions only ; but that of a small fraction of it and a preponderance
of bad,
^ VICHAR SAGAR.
Good men have a disposition similar to a Deva, while bad
persons resemble snakes and other animals. Thus are all bodies
produced from good and bad works, and the result of bad is misery ;
hence misery cannot cease to exist so long as the body lasts and
such body is the result of good and bad actions, [virtue and sin].
Without their destruction, the body cannot be discontinued (future
births cannot be stopped) inasmuch as after the destruction of the
present body, a person must inherit a fresh one for the fruition of his
good and bad actions done in his present life ; so that until the good
and bad are alike destroyed he must continue to inherit fresh bodies
after death, and virtue and sin cannot be destroyed till passions
are destroyed. Because even after the fruition of the present good
and bad works is exhausted, passions and envy will produce another
train of good and bad, so that without the destruction of passions
and anger, good and bad works cannot cease to produce their usual
results, and these proceed from the supporting and antagonistic
knowledge/
Supporting or conformable produces love and the antagonistic
or unconformable, produces anger ; hence without their destruction,
love and anger must continue, and such conformable and uncon
formable knowledge can only arise from a knowledge of the (existing)
difference [in a subject]. For, the conformable and unconformable
knowledge proceed when a thing is known to be different from,
and unlike Self.
The means conducive of happiness are the conformable, while
those of misery are termed the antagonistic or unconformable.
Now they do not resemble Self in appearance [for self is substantial
while these means are not] even admitting happiness to be a subs
tantiality, its means are not so, so that when a thing is determined
as something else than substantial, then its conformable and
unconformable knowledge can be formed.
Thus to determine all things .as different from self, conformably
or unconformably according to the existing difference in their
conditions and in that of self, is the source of both conformable and
unconformable knowledge ; and so long as this difference-creat
ing knowledge is not put an end of, the conformable and the
VI V If All SAG An. 49
nnconiormable remain iu-tact. Now this difference-creating know
ledge is the result of ignorance, because all objects are centred in
ignorance which is present everywhere and in all times ; and this
is also laid down in the sacred writings.
Thus then, ignorance (of Self) is the source of all kinds of misery,
and unless ignorance concerning an object (here Self is meant) is
destroyed, its exact knowledge cannot proceed ; because when we have
known it once, we cannot be ignorant of it : that is to say, ignorance
is destroyed by the advent of knowledge. As for instance, ignorance
concerning a chord is removed by the knowledge of the unknown
chord, and not by anything else ; similarly, knowledge of self, by
removing the ignorance concerning it, is the destroying cause of
all misery, and such knowledge, helps the cognition of Brahma,
which is eternal, full of bliss, without any relation to grief (i. e.,
unconditioned).
And, inasmuch as knowledge of the Real established it as
eternal and unconditioned, so far as grief is concerned, and that
it is all blissfulness, hence the attainment of such happiness follows
as a matter of course. Thus we find that knowledge is the source from
which proceed the destruction of ignorance and the attainment of
the supreme blissfulness of Brahma, and it is necessary to have it.
A person possessing such discrimination is called an enquirer
of truth (seeker of Salf-knowledge.)
Emancipated is one who knows self different from the gross
physical, the subtle-astral and the cause-bodyto be the same as
Brahma. This knowledge is invisible knowledge.* These then are
the four varieties of persons.
Moreover, if in a stupid and worldly person, attached to the
world, there is an yearning for material comforts ; while there may
be another of the latter class who is desirous of possessing the supreme
bliss, but is ignorant of the means, which help its attainment,
yet he desists not, but finds it out by his intelligence (Boodhi)
* Intelligence marked by invisibility refers to Brahma ; such intelli
gence is universal, all-pervading, and omniscient, while Intelligence marked
by visibility refers to the Jim. It is parviscient and partial,
:.0 VI CHAR SAG AH.
and follows it. Because, to determine the means is to follow Truth,
and hear the Shastras (ascertain their true meaning by hearing the
precepts of the sages). But they are not possible for him, hence a
stupid and worldly man has no inclination for studying the work, where
by to acquire happiness, but is inclined to hunt after the other means
for procuring a cessation of misery, which again, is another cause of
dislike for the book. In this way, we see, why stupid and worldly
individuals have their dislike for the book. An emancipated indi
vidual has also a similar dislike, but his dislike proceeds from quite
a different cause. Because, an emancipated individual is a knower of
self, and, for such a knower of self, nothing more is necessary to be
done (this will be explained hereafter). Even if his desire of release
be generated by good actions, then also for him, there need not exist
a liking for the work (for the subject, which the work treats of, he
has already ascertained, and as one already possessed of knowledge
of self, he stands in no need of foreign helps).
Not so, for a seeker of truth ; without any yearning for material
comforts, but desirous of supreme bliss, and for the entire extreme
destruction of misery which can proceed only from knowledge, for
such a discriminating person a follower of truth the present work is
not futile.
Thus is determined a qualified person desirous of release.
Brahma is like a witness. Non-dual, without the smell of any
difference between it and Jiva ; anger and spite are the virtues of
the intellect (mind) and not of Brahma, [which] a blind person (un
acquainted with it) however may admit as residing in the Brdhma.
For the presence of anger and spite, which dwell in every indi
vidual mind, as has already been said, non-duality cannot be established
as the subject of the work. If such a contention be true, then the
witness without anger and spite can be determined to be one with
Brahma ; and to consider such witness to be some other agent
or instrument than Self, is tantamount to the saying a sterile woman s
son : this can never happen and hence untrue (asat). For, witness
means the agent or instrument (who is the doer, eater, etc.,) only
in an emphatic form ; without such au admission the agency of the
individual is destroyed
VICHAR UAGAR. 51
The internal organ is an associate of the one and same intelligence
to render it a witness, and the agent or instrument is only a quali
fying entity ; that is to say, possessing a distinguishing qualification
as that of an adjective and substantive.*
What serves as an associate to a thing is called associated.^
An associate is a thing which being placed near another, makes
that to be known, while it remains separate. As, according to the
Nyayika, hearing is said to be the function of the atmospheric air
situated inside the ears, so, the site of the ear is the associate of
hearing ; because wherever the ear is present, it takes cognizance of
sound and renders it known, by the help of etherj present inside,
* Indication of the conditional relation of an adjective and noun
can thus be explained : as in the phrase That Devadatta is this/ that*
refers to Devadatta seen in past time and this refers to the Devadatta
of the present time, so that, a relation is created by the exclusion of time
which is the only difference subsisting between them ; so in the sentence
That art Thou is the relation of subject and predicate (same as adjective
and noun) between Intelligence distinguished by invisibility, the indication
of the word That, and Intelligence distinguished by visibility indicated by
the word Thou, a relation constituted by the exclusion of the difference
present in them.
f Upadhi (up -f. a -f dha + e = upadlii) is a thing which communicates
its own property to another situated close to it : as for instance, when
a red flower is placed near a crystal, it imparts its red colour to the
glass which then appears red; here the flower is the associate of
the glass. In the same way, Ignorance (present in all individuals) im
parts its property of unconsciousness to Intelligence (Brahma which is
present close to the Jiva in each person) so as to render it separate
and twain (dual), hence Ignorance is the associate of Intelligence. In
like manner, the associate of a thing is called associated by it. For
instance, of Intelligence, the associate is Ignorance, consequently Intel
ligence is Ignorance-associated.
J Ether and atmosphere are convertible terms, so no apprehension
needs be entertained from their promiscuous use. Sometimes the reader
will find the word space used for it.
"2 V fCU A li SA&A&
while it retain.- its Separate individuality. In the same way, the inter
nal organ, wherever present, renders its indwelling intelligence manifest
as a witness, while it remains separate. Hence, the internal organ is
the associate of witness. From this, it is established, that the func
tion of the internal organ (antakarana) its indwelling intelligence
is the witness.
Vcsheshana is a substance which manifests an object along with
itself. As for example, " The person with the ear-ring is come." Here,
the ear-ring is the qualifying entity (adjective ^because it establishes
the approach of the person along with it [as the man that is come,
has got them in his ears and has not left them behind]. " I have seen
a blue pitcher." Here also, blue is the Visheshana (adjective) of
pitcher. In the same way, the internal organ is the adjective or
qualifying substance of Intelligence, which is the agent or instrument
(doer etc.,) and same as Jiva inasmuch as the internal organ mani
fests that Intelligence along with itself in the form of an agent or
instrument Thus the internal organ is the qualifying adjective or
the worldly : that is to say, the function of the internal organ, Intelli
gence, is its subject, and the internal organ is liable to continued births
and deaths. This will be particularly explained further on. Now,
the passions anger, spite, and the rest exist in the worldly (which
entail an individual to future re-births) and do not constitute
the condition of the witness (agent or instrument). Then again, the
predicate of the worldly is the subject of the internal organ and not
that of intelligence, which is the predicate of the internal organ. For,
between the predicate of the worldly intelligence and the instru
ment, there is no difference whatever ; inasmuch as the same intelli
gence in company with the internal organ is subjected to future
existence, and without such accompaniment of the internal organ, it
constitutes, what has been mentioned, a witness ; so that there is conse
quently no difference between the portion which constitutes the predi
cate of the worldly and the witness. If this predicate be admitted to
be the seat of pain, then the witness must alike be subject to it (for
they have been determined to be equal and non-different, and hence,
pain cannot be present in one without affecting the other in a like
way). But such is not a, fact as has been said in the Vedds " The
VI CHAR SAG All. 53
(internal) witness is free from all sorts of pain." From this it follows,
that the predicate of the worldly is also without pain (for their
condition of equality) and that all pain resides in its subject viz.,
the internal organ. With this purpose, anger and spite have been
mentioned as properties of the intellect and not that of the Jiva.
In this way, one with the internal organ is not identical with Brahma,
but the witness associated with such organ is non-different from
Brahma ; but then it has been before alleged, that such witnesses
are several (as many as there are individuals) and Brahma is only
one, hence, How can many be equal to one ? Therefore such identity
is not proved.
Moreover, " the admission of their oneness creates another difficulty,
inasmuch as Brahma is all-pervading and the (internal) witness
must also be possessed with an identical pervasion, and if so, then
it must be able to experience the happiness and misery of all indi
viduals which it never does."
Such arguments are useless. No matter about the many and one,
they imply an identity. For, as the space appropriated by several
pitchers, is different from one another ; though they are only frac
tional units of the infinite space or ether (mahakas) from which
they are non-different. Similarly, though Iswara is one witness and
the individual witnesses are many and divisible, yet they are non-
different from the all-pervading witness of the Brahma ; and these
divided and separate individual witnesses are but merely fractional
units, or the distributive segregate of the one, infinite, and indivisible
Brahma. And, the previous assertion, that happiness and misery
are not subjects of the function of the internal organ, is inconsistent.
For, even if happiness and misery are apparent witnesses, and as
such witnesses are many, yet they (happiness and misery) are only
a modification of the internal organ, its function for the time being,
determining or creating them, which the internal witness occupying
that function discovers. This is the reason why authors have deter
mined happiness and woe as subjects of the internal witness
with function ; and not without it. To illustrate it by reference to
a common saying : Let us suppose the instance of a pitcher. Here
as the pitcher has its own ether residing within it, non-different
.- VICE AH SAGAR.
from the great body of it occupying all space ; and as it serves as
a means of carrying water ; but then, the sight of a pitcher (as aii
aawciate of ether) establishes the presence of ether as well as its
function as a water-carrying medium ; in its absence, ether only
can be determined which is the same as the great body of ether :
so is intelligence the witness, and function, of the internal organ,
whose action is to discover and whose associate is the internal organ,
determined by the sight of its associate ; without the sight of the
associate of intelligence the internal organ neither can the wit
ness, nor its function of discovering, can be determined, but only
Intelligence as Brahma is established. Hence Brahma and witness
are one. Because, without discovering the associate, it cannot be
conceived as many and divided, and such witness is the indication
of Jiva (of which more hereafter.) In this way is considered non-
duality of the Jiva and Brahma, the subject of the present treatise.
Illusion proceeds from a conception, caused by knowledge
of things, similar in form to one another.
It is immaterial, whether such things are real or unreal.
Nor is it the invariable source of any defect (in the organ)
that causes it,
Nor is it the product of a given cause ; as a cloth is the
result of a weaving brush and loom etc.
Self (Atmd) free from similarity ;* (white) conch (from some
defect) appears yellow and sugar bitter (illusion).
Desire is not always its moving cause, a person possessed
of indifference sees silver in a nacre.
Ether is sometimes mistaken for blue, and pan, for a tent
Even by persons without defective sight, or jaundice, to
account for them.
If bondage be real and permanent, as has been alleged before
(by a Poorbapdkshi) then knowledge cannot destroy it ; for what
* Therefore to say, he is the same as the three upper castes JSrahmana,
Khshttrya, and Vaishnavd, is illusion,
V1CHAR SAGAR.
is false can only be destroyed by it (knowledge). Self is not com
posed of the substances of bondage which are unreal. Therefore
to say, bondage is real, and knowledge cannot remove it, is quite
inadmissible. Because it is unreal, and knowledge destroys it, [i. e,,
Self-knowledge prevents future re-incarnations.]
Moreover, according to a Poorbapakshi, it is said, that conception
produced by the knowledge of a real substance can only create an
illusion, hence its source ; as has already been said, in the instance
of a snake in a chord. Here, for such an illusion to arise, one must
have knowledge of a real snake ; he must have seen a snake and have
an abiding conception of its form in him, wherewith to mistake it in
a rope. And one who has never seen a snake, nor knows what it is
like, cannot confound it with a rope or string. In the same way,
knowledge of bondage establishes its reality [in other words as bon
dage is admittedly known by all, it must be a real substance.]
"Substances not belonging to Self are unreal. Such an inference
is untenable from the premises already advanced. For, illusion has
its source in conception produced from the knowledge of a real
substance, and as such a condition is absent, bondage is not the
attribution of illusion, but real."
But such contention is untenable. For, the conception of illusory
attribution is the source, from which, knowledge of things proceeds.
It cannot determine the real, hence is not the cause of its knowledge.
Now such things are either real or false. And if knowledge of the
real thing is alone the cause of illusion, then a person, who has not
seen the tree yielding the real Arabian date (chhoara) but who has
derived its knowledge from the sight of a common date tree (khejur)
shewn to him, by a performer of magic, and repeatedly described to
him, as the real chhoara, and he never heard otherwise, is liable to
confound the date tree for that other, and becomes the subject of
such an illusion. But this should not be ; because he is unacquainted
with the real chhoara tree, [hence your inference with their premises
are wrong. But] from my standpoint, that person s illusion is the
result of the false date tree shown to him. Hence, illusion arises from
the conception, derived from the knowledge of an existing similarity
between the thing mistaken and for what it is mistaken, And,
VICHAR SAGAR
whether A thing is time or false, conception can only proceed from
its knowledge, which again is its source. Now such a consideration
as to their mutual interdependence, implies no difference ; for it
signifies knowledge as the cause of conception ; and conception that
of illusion. So that, it establishes conception produced by knowledge
to be the source of an illusion, even if it do not signify that by con
ception is produced knowledge.
Moreover, knowledge only can never be said to be the source of
illusion. For the rule is, that a source or cause must have an uninter-
vening prior existence than its product ; as for instance, the turning
rod or potter s wheel is the cause of an earthen-pitcher. Here, the
rod had an uninterposed prior existence before the production of the
pitcher ; in the same way, if knowledge be admitted as the source
of illusion, it must have an uninterposed existence prior to the pro
duction of the illusion ; but this is not the case, inasmuch as a man
who knows a snake, is apt to confound it with a chord, a month
afterwards, and this should not be. Because, if the illusion of snake
in a chord is the product of knowing a snake, such knowledge has
been destroyed, hence there is no unintervening prior time, but
simply past time.
Unintervening means without intervention or interposition, and
intervening with interposition [so that the one has a signification of
Immediate and the other mediate ; immediate past refers to a close
proximity between the cause and its effect ; while the mediate past
must refer to the distant past, between which time and its product,
there intervenes a space of time.]
If it be said, that action must have a cause prior to it, either in
the immediate past, or ante-dated to that ; and such cause then
becomes the source of the immediate past accordingly, then it amounts
to a non-admission of sanctioned actions procuring heaven and pro
hibited works, hell, to which they stand as their respective source,
as mentioned in the Shastras.
For, mental, oral and bodily works are called actions and from
the commencement of their practice, incessant succession ceases ;
while the abode in heaven follows in another subsequent existence.
So that heaven and hell, from sanctioned or prohibited works, do not
VI CHAR SAQAR. 57
follow from the immediate past, but are the result of such actions
done in the remote past.
In the same way, to say, that the knowledge of a "snake in the
immediate past is not the source of its illusion in the chord" is absurd.
Because, it virtually leads to the admission of an illusion, from know
ledge which has been destroyed, as also the attainment of heaven and
hell from works that have ceased ; and one may as well argue in the
same strain, that a turning-rod which has ceased to exist, and a dead
potter must alike turn out a pitcher.
Because, as in the illusion of a snake in a chord, the knowledge
of the snake in the mediate past ; and for the attainment of heaven or
hell, the good and bad actions of the mediate past, are prior condi
tions, potentially present as their respective sources : so in the instance
of the pitcher, the dead potter and the destroyed turning-rod of the
mediate or distant past must be looked upon as quite capable of
turning it out. But this is plainly impossible. Hence, what exists
in the distant past cannot be determined as the source ; but some
thing subsequent to it, or the immediate past, is the source ; and also,
good and bad actions are not the source of bringing forth heaven or
hell in a future existence, but that good actions produce, in the imme.
diate future ; virtue, and bad, sin.
Now, virtue and sin are subjects of the internal organ (cons
tantly abiding in it) which in their turn, bring heaven and hell
in a subsequent time, and thus in their consummation, cease to
produce any more effects subsequently. For such a purpose, the
Shaatraa describe good and bad actions by their novelty as the
productive source of their respective results, and call them virtue
and vice. Then again, good and bad works produced from virtue
and vice have been sometimes called virtue and vice : in the same
way as a man performing a good and meritorious action is said to
be doing virtue and vice versa. Here, the meritorious action or its
reverse, is not the virtue or vice, but is the parent ; therefore actions
are called virtue and vice, in the same way, as marrow (ghee) for ins
tance, is called life in the Sfiastras, because it produces longevity.
Thus is determined, how the immediate past is the productive
source ; and as there is no knowledge of a snake in the immediate
8
55 VICHAR SAGAR.
past, i. e., a little prior to the illusion of creating it in a chord, there
fore such knowledge is not the source of the illusion ; but such
source is the conception, derived from knowledge, concerning the
reptile.
Similarly, the illusion of silver in a nacre, is due to conception
of silver. Thus then, conception is the real source from which
all illusions originate. Conception in its turn, is produced from
the knowledge of a thing.
As the results of good and bad works, virtue and vice, are
constantly present in the internal organ, so is conception derived
from the knowledge of things present there ; and a person unac
quainted with a snake, may have conception of other things, which
he has a knowledge of, so that, the snake illusion may not occur
to him, but other illusions may, produced by an existing similarity
in the condition of the two. Hence similarity, and not dissimilarity, is
the determining cause of an illusion. A snake has a similarity in an
other snake, and not in anything else. One who has never before
seen a snake and is perfectly unacquainted with it, but who knows
something else, can have no conception of a thing similar to a snake ;
hence its illusion in a chord, can never happen to him.
Conception signifies a subtle condition of knowledge. Thus it
is shewn : the source of illusion is conception of previous knowledge,
regarding a thing similar to it (illusion); and it is immaterial, that
the conception of knowledge of a real only, and not an unreal substance,
be the cause of creating an illusion. This has already been explained
in the instance of the Arabian Date-tree. So that, the conception
of false knowledge, regarding a thing, is alike productive of illusion,
and it is likewise applicable to bondage. For Egoism etc., are unlike,
self, and bondage is nothing more than their knowledge. It is
unlike the illusion of a snake in a chord, which is created only when
known, and not otherwise ; [because bondage is ever present and
requires no previous acquaintance]. Such is the dictum of the Vedds.
For this cause the non-existence of all things in the state of pro
found slumber is explained.* As in such a condition, nothing can
* When a niau sleeps profoundly without being disturbed by any
V1CHAR SAG AH. 5*
be ascertained or confused, hence the destruction of the objective
world then takes place [relatively of course to the individual who
is sleeping soundly and not to the rest of mankind]^ It is called the
controversy of sight-creation in the Shastras and will be explained
in the sequel.
Thus is derived a knowledge of Egoism and its endless modifica
tions, as well as their final destruction. Its birth and death is coeval
with its knowledge. That is to say, with the springing up of know
ledge concerning egoism, egoism arises, and with the destruction
of that knowledge, egoism is destroyed.
Egoism etc., and its knowledge, are called illusory attribution/
Though Egoism is spoken of as a testifying witness [agent or instru
ment], (it has already been explained when the Subject was considered)
its knowledge is determined in the form of such wit ness; -and its
birth and death therefore are not possible yet as it discovers the
Egoism etc., through the function of the internal organ, though not
directly, therefore such function can be said to have a beginning
and an end. This is why knowledge of Egoism is said to have
an origin and an end. And conception can be established in con
nection with it in the following wise : that is to say, the knowledge
of false individuality of a prior period of time, evolves the
subsequent individualities and so arises its knowledge. Moreover,
if it be contended, that the conception of the illusory attribu
tion of the subsequent, is due to the illusion of prior individu
alities and their conception, then the source of the first individuality
and its source in conception, cannot clearly be created. For, if
any individuality precedes it, then its knowledge can produce
conception, but prior to the first evolution of egoism there cannot
be another individuality, in the same way as the illusion concerning
a first thing cannot be said to be derived from its conception*
dreams, he cuts off all connections from the objective world, which then
ceases te exist for him in an objective condition ; and such a condition
is a trite example of ascertaining the actual condition of Self who is
actionless, undisturbed, passive and full of bliss.
* Conception is an act of memory ; knowledge creates an impression
60 VICHAR SAGAR.
For that can be admissible only if a previous Egoism were present,
then for knowledge to follow, and produce conception is an easy
and natural inference.
But such a conclusion is mainly attributable to ignorance of the
Vedantic doctrine. For the Vedanta holds (1) Brahma, (2) Iswara,
(3) Jiva, (4) Ignorance, and (5) its relation to Intelligence (cJwitanya)
and (6) the difference in uncreated (anadi) things, as the six entities
which are identified to be without an origin. A thing which is not
derived as a product of another, is identified as uncreated, or without
an origin. These six are not produced, hence they are uncreated
(suroop se anadi\ while egoism is described in the Sruti, as
having a beginning ; hence it is not uncreated, but a derivative
product. But for a continuous current, every substance can be called
as without a beginning. This continued current (of evolution, in
which one succeeds another in the usual course of nature) cannot cease
in the eternity of time, nor was there ever a time, when such subs
tances can be said to have had no existence.* [To illustrate by an
xample] a pitcher is said to be without a beginning, for there never
was a time when it was not preceded by another pitcher and so on
to the infinity of time, both upwards and downwards ; considered
iis light, every substance has a chain of continued existence,
for which it is called (anadi) without a beginning. In (Pralaya) cyclic
period of destruction of the objective world, all substances are
reduced from their objectivity into a subjective state of potentiality,
in the same way, as in profound slumber, a man though dead to the
in memory which retains it vividly, hence conception is a subsequent
t and can only be produced by the certain knowledge of a substance
For conception to follow, there must be present knowledge in a relation
of priority, so that conception of a first thing cannot be deemed a source
of illusion. But its fallacy will be pointed out in the text further on
1 This is Kapila s doctrine. He denies total destruction of the objec
tive world, but asserts instead, that there was not a time when the world
t contains wag not existing, nor will there ever be a time, when
it wu cease to exist altogether. Western Evolutionists may take note
VICHAR SAGAE. 61
external world retains conception of it in his memory ; such a con
tinuous train of existence is called without a beginning ; and it
applies to the vast expanse the world. One who is unacquainted
with it, may apprehend the non-applicability of first illusion to its
conception, as also that of egoism etc., and illusion concerning them,
before all things ; as the Sidhanta has it. But its source is deter
mined by a prior existence of its predecessor, which precedes such
illusion, so that here conception is quite, out of question, incapable
to create it.
From such a stand-point, conception produced by a previous
knowledge of similarity, can create an illusion of Egoism etc., which
serve as bonds for a continued chain of existence hereafter. (The
first line of the stanza indicates it.)
Moreover, as the faults or defects which have already been referred
to, as giving rise to illusory attribution, cannot be said to be present
in bondage, therefore bondage is real, to say so, implies a contra
diction, hence it is clearly unmaintainable. Because, if illusion
proceeds from defects and not otherwise, then defects are its source.
As for instance, the source of cloth is the weaving brush and loom,
and in their absence no cloth can be produced ; so are defects not
the source of illusion. Inasmuch as in the absence of the defect of
similarity even, Self is confounded or mistaken as having dis
tinction of caste. A Brahmin or any other casteman, has his caste-
distinction in his gross physical body, hence such caste is a creative
function of the gross body, and neither self nor the subtle body
(astral) has any thing to do with it. For, the same self and the same
subtle body rehabilitate another gross body after death, and the
caste may be different from what it was before, and the rule does
not prevail, that an individual shall retain his original caste in
all his subsequent re-births. If such distinctions of caste were due
to self or the subtle body, then, the individual would never be sub
jected to any other caste than the first, in his next journey after
death ; hence it follows, that it is the function of the gross physical
body, and not of self or the subtle body, to determine caste.
"I am a twice-born (Dvijatee) Brahmin etc." Such a saying
attributes the condition of a Brahman to Self, and apparently
^ VICHAR SAGAR.
determines his cognition so ; in the same manner, conditions of Ktshe-
trya and Vaisiva arc applicable to Self. Here, the attribution of caste
to Self is illusory; just as the projection of a snake in a chord is nob
real but apparent, (that is to say appears so) hence an illusion, so Self
is without any caste ditinctiou, and what appears, is simply an
illusory attribution of caste. Moreover, between Self and caste, there
does not exist any similarity, inasmuch as the first is all-pervading,
while the second is divisible. Self is internal, while caste is external ;
Self is the discoverer, while caste is the subject discovered by Self.
Thus then things antagonistic to Self are confounded with him.
Here the word (Dvijatee) twice-born signifies the three upper classes
Brahmin, Kshetrya and Vaiswa.
As in the absence of similarity, we have seen illusion to arise
concerning Self, so in the absence of the same similarity between
Self and bondage, such as Egoism etc., bondage is attributed to him
through illusion. The defect of similarity is hence not the cause of
illusion, for if such were the case ; then he [Brahma] could never be
confounded with caste : in the same way yellow cannot be attributed
to a conch-shell, nor can bitterness be said to exist in sugar-candy.
For if a conch is white, and yellow is an antagonistic color to white,
white and yellow have no resemblance of similarity between them.
In the same way sweetness and bitterness are directly opposed to
each other, they are not similar, but dissimilar. Hence, the presence
of similarity of a false thing is not the source of illusory attribution.
Similarly temptation, fear, and the other defects in the demonstrator,
can be construed as not its source. For, even a man free from
temptation and perfectly indifferent to the pleasures of this life or the
next, is apt to mistake silver in a nacre. This should not be, if illusion
were caused simply from the presence of defect in the see-er or
demonstrator. Neither is defect in demonstration its source. For
ether possesses no form ; yet every one confounds it with the blue
[heavens above]. Another instance of such illusion is that of a frying
pan with a tent. Likewise it cannot be asserted that from defective
sight, such illusion is produced. For, all persons cannot be equally
affected in sight as to be the subject of the same illusion. Hence, de
fect in demonstration is not the source, from which illusion originates.
V1CI1AR SAGAR. 63
In regard to the ether, it can be said, there is wanting at least
one defect in demonstration, while virtually all the defects are absent ;
besides, thereis wanting presence of similarity too ; so that, since in the
absence of all defects, ether is confounded with the blue sky, in
the same way, in the absence of all defects, Self is confounded as
subject to bondage. Here, it cannot be said, that as the necessary
defects which create an illusion are wanting, therefore bondage is
not illusionary [but real]. For, as already seen, in the absence of all
similar defects, a person is apt to mistake the ether, for the blue
heavens over-head. Hence it is natural to infer that defect is not
the invariable source of illusory attribution. A person not suffering
from biliousness or such another malady* is even liable to mistake the
ether for blue, and pan for a tent, from a similarity of appearance.
Therefore the natural conclusion is, that defect [in demonstration] is not
the cause of illusory attribution.
The word Kshema signifies peace, and the defects in demons
tration which destroy it are termed (akshema) unpeaceful. The
organs of sense through which cognition is derived are termed
(pramana) demonstrations. Thus is determined illusion uncaused
by defect.
In such a consideration, it is not necessary for a defect to be
present, to create the illusion of bondage (in Self). Moreover, the
abridged edition of Shariraka Sutras contains especial reference
to it, which for lengthiness I have abstained from entering upon ;
especially if the facts were true I would then have fully considered
defects and their nature, but since it is otherwise, I need not further
dwell upon the matter.
Thus is determined the works of illusion.
* There is a proverb which with certain restrictions generally holds
true. It says that a jaundiced individual sees every thing yellow ; hence
our author refers to it while explaining away the alleged sources of
illusion. But then, there are other classess of persons, who so to speak,
are color blind, that is to say, are quite incapable of distinguishing one color
from another,
tt VICE A R SAGAR
ON THE SOURCES OF ILLUSION.
Iii the ordinary manifestation of Intelligence (chaitanya)
ignorance dwellelth not.
But the Intelligence present in profound slumber is Ignorance.
"Ignorance has been already mentioned as particularly apt to be
confounded with reality. But as Self is illuminated by himself he
cannot be mistaken with Ignorance ; for light and darkness are natur
ally opposed to each other, (and Ignorance resembles darkness). For
instance, as in the broad daylight, the illusion of a snake in a chord
never arises, so to Self, the illusion of bondage can never be attribut
ed (for the Atma is Self-luminous.)"
Further, this even cannot be said, that if the Atma is Self-mani
fested, his intelligence is not directly opposed to ignorance. For,
if such were the case, then in the condition of profound slumber,
Self ought to have retained consciousness. But instead, we find a
man on rising from his sleep to say "I was sleeping peacefully,"
"I knew nothing then." Here, the conception of happiness is the
subject of ignorance. This happiness and the knowledge of ignor
ance in the waking condition are not visible, for we call that
knowledge visible, whose subject appears in front, which neither
happiness nor ignorance does in the waking condition, hence
not visible but they resemble remembrance ; and remembrance
concerning a thing unknown, is never possible, it can only proceed
from knowledge ; so that, the conclusion is, the happiness felt in
the condition of profound slumber is the product of ignorance ;
that is to say, it is due to unconsciousness, which is the normal
condition of ignorance. And, as such knowledge of the profound slum
bering condition is never, the result of the mind or the senses, for
they then cease to carry on their respective functions, it can be
determined as proceeding from Self. Knowledge and manifestation
have the same signification. Thus is shown, the manifested con
dition of Self in profound slumber, which manifestation is like
happiness itself, and the same as ignorance. If it were otherwise,
then tbe presence of ignorance in sleep cannot be satisfactorily
explained ; and it certainly ought not to be there. Therefore, the
V1CIIAR SAOAR. 65
Atma is self-manifested, or conscious, and between him and ignorance^
there is no antagonism present. On the contrary, ignorance helps
to determine his likeness of manifestation. For this purpose, the
Vedantin, says, ordinary Intelligence is not opposed to ignorance.
But such an antagonist is the particular Intelligence. The all-
pervading Intelligence is called ordinary/ and Intelligence present
in the function (of the internal organ) is called particular. As for
instance, ordinary fire residing potentially in a piece of wood is
not an antagonist of darkness, but the solidified particles of fire
present in a candle are so ; in the same manner, the all-pervading
Intelligence is no enemy of ignorance, but Intelligence residing
in the modification of the internal organ, after it has assumed the shape
of Brahma, is its opponent.*
Thus then, we find pure and simple Intelligence is not an anta
gonist of ignorance, but function plus Intelligence, or Intelligence
with function, are directly opposed to it. In the first condition,
intelligence destroys ignorance, and function (mental) is its coadjutor.
In the second condition, that mental function is the destroyer, while
its help-mate is Intelligence. This method of consideration seeks
to put a limit and (its supporters are the Abachhedavadins) is called
therfore the differentiating view. But there is also another view :
in which both the ordinary and particular Intelligences are looked
upon as not directly opposed to Ignorance, but function illumined
* Intelligence is differentiated into two : invisible and visible. The
former refers to Brahma, therefore all-knowing ; the latter to the Jiva there
fore parviscient. In the state of profound slumber the latter, though devoid
of all the envolpments of ignorance, yet Jiva is wrapped in ignorance
itself, and this must be got rid of, to be one with Intelligence and
blessedness (Brahma). In such a condition, when the modification of
the internal organ has assumed the shape of the Imparfcite Brahma,
he has no more ignorance left in him, he haa merged into Brahma and
become one with it ; then he is Intelligence simply. Hence such Intelli
gence and ignorance are opposed to each other. The Sruti says in
reference to the state of profound dreamless slumber : "For the illumina
tion of Intelligence Prajna enjoys felicity,"
9
6(3 VICHAR SAOAR.
with the reflection of intelligence, or the reflected intelligence with
function are so. In such a view, reflection is admitted hence its
supporters are called Abhasabadins. In this way, intelligence
which is self- manifested is established to be no antagonist of Ignorance,
but that the latter is included in, or dependent on, the furmer. So
that, the subject of Self, covered as he is by ignorance, can be easily
confounded with Intelligence , and particularly with the subject of
ignorance.
Moreover, as Self is unconditioned, i. e., neither ordinary nor
particular, as above explained, therefore neither particular know
ledge nor Ignorance can be admitted to be present in him ; so that
their attribution through mistake is clearly untenable. Such an asser
tion cannot be maintained. For, everyone admits the existence of the
Atma which means Self. No one says that "I am not existent," but
on the contrary "I am" ["I do," "I eat," "I go"]. All these clearly
establish the existence of Atma, and an universal belief in such
existence. But then, as Intelligence, blissfulness, pervasion, eternal,
pure and free, Self cannot be conceived by all. Therefore there are
two conditions present ; the first which establishes the existence
of the Atma is knowledge, the second which prevents our concep
tion of intelligence, bliss and the rest, is ignorance. Such an inference
is determined by experience, and even analogy cannot destroy it.
Of them, the condition of existence is the ordinary, while the percep
tion of Intelligence, bliss etc., derived only from knowledge, is the
particular condition. Ordinary signifies that which prevails in many
countries, and for a greater portion of time ; and Particular is
what is known in few countries, and not at all times, but some
times.
If it be said, since the Atma is intelligence, bliss etc., he is present
everywhere like truth ; and in reference to truth, the prevalence of
intelligence, bliss and the rest in a few countries ; and in regard to
the latter, the pervasion of the former in many countries, imply
an inconsistency, therefore to consider truth as constituting its
ordinary, while Intelligence, bliss etc., as forming its particular
portion is untenable. Then the reply is, as truth Atma is essen
tially known to be existent, by all persons, from their conception
V1CHA11 SAGAR. .67
of "I am" and similar other phrases ; such a conception has
nothing to do with ignorance. The advent of knowledge, or its
shutting out, cannot reduce it to non-existence. But, so long as
knowledge is shut out, a person cannot conceive Self to be intelligence
bliss etc., that conception is only brought about by knowledge of
Self; yet even in such a condition of ignorance, the bliss, intelli
gence, purity, freedom, etc., are already present there, only they are
not conceived. Hence such experience is called ordinary, and for
the matter of that, intelligence, bliss, etc., have been called to prevail
only for a short time, and truth for a greater portion of time ; though
truth and intelligence etc., do not actually limit Self into ordinary
and particular conditions. For this reason, the conception of existence
(truth or Keality) is called the ordinary portion of Self, as that of
intelligence, bliss etc., is his* particular portion. Moreover it does
not create any contradiction in what has been termed the unpar-
ticular condition. Because, the admission of ordinary and particular
can be said to tell against the unparticular condition, and as such
an admission is not made here, but reference is only made to ignorance
which creates a distinction resembling them.
In this way, to know Self as essentially existent, [truth] and from
ignorance not to know that he is intelligent, blissful, eternal, pure
and free is to attribute bondagef to him which he is not, but a mere
product of illusion. But such an illusion is destroyed by knowledge,
hence is created a necessity for the work in hand.
Also, as has baen already told, by discarding the forbidden and
optional acts, and recoursing to the practice of the daily and occa
sional rites and penances, even in the absence of the forbidden acts,
a man cannot attain the eternal abode. And, in the absence of
optional things he cannot attain to the abode of the good, and by
abstaining from the daily and occasional rites, what sin is produced
* Atma is masculine, therefore Self has always been used in that
gender, but in English, Spirit is always neuter, and Self is synonymous
with it as also with Brahma which is neuter. The reader may take
note of this, to avoid falling into mistake.
f The attribution of bondage signifies Self to be subject to re-births.
68 VI CHAR SAG An.
it is destroyed by their adopting into practice ; and by ordinary or
extraordinary penances are removed the sins committed in this, or
in a prior life. In the absence of a desire for the result, his optional
works do not procure deliverance. Hence deliverance has no
reference to knowledge, but is simply an absence of re-birth. Such
an assertion is clearly inadmissible.
For, the daily and occasional rites, produce the desirable abode
in heaven as a result, as has been proved by analogy by the commen
tator [Sankaracharya] ; hence, it is clear, that such actions will
procure the abode of the good, and not a deliverance from future
re-births. Moreover, if it be said that such actions produce no fruit,
then it will be tantamount to an admission of the fruitlessness of the
Vedas which propound them : inasmuch as from your point of view,
their non-performance is injurious and sinful, and to say that they
bring forth no bad result is to admit that sin will not be engendered
from their non-performance. For such non-performance indicates want,
while sin indicates existence, in other words an absent or non-exist
ent thing which is the same as nothing, producing sin which is
existent or something ; -and such a statement of nothing producing
something, is clearly inadmissible for they are antagonistic of each
other. Hence their non-performance cannot be admitted to produce
sin as a result. Then again, if it be said, that the non-performance
of the daily and occasional rites engender sin, then it amounts to
the admission of something being produced from nothing, which is
inconsistent as remarked by Bhagvan SreeKrishna [in the second
Chapter of Bkagvad Gita]. Therefore, the absence of such works
which is equal to nothing, cannot produce sin, which is equal to some
thing (harmful). In this way, is determined that sin is produced
from other actions besides the non-performance of daily and occasion
al rites. So that, not to admit the blissful abode of heaven (svarga)
as a result of their performance, is to reduce them into a condition
of unproductiveness, and with them, the Vedas likewise. Here
there is another proof, as to their procuring the desirable result of
abode in heaven.
Also, it is similarly inadmissible to look upon the optional works
of a prior existence, unactuated by any desire to the enjoyment of
VICHAR SAQAR. 69
fruits thereof, as barren and unproductive. For, the seed of action
produces two seedlings which are (1) desire and (2) Adrista :
of them, Adrista signifies virtue and vice or good and bad works.
Now the good produces good desires and virtue, while the bad*
bring forth harmful desires and sin. With the good desire is ori
ginated first an inclination for good works/ which in turn produce
happiness. Similarly bad desires produce an inclination for harm
ful works, which lead to misery. Thus we see, how the seed of
action produces the two seedlings, desire and Adrista. Of them, the
first has a remedy which causes its destruction ; while the second
can only cease by producing its usual results, and not otherwise.
This is the authoritative assertion of the sacred writings. In other
words, the sin engendered by harmful desires can be destroyed by
seeking the company of the good, hearing their precepts and similar
acts. Then again, virtue, produced by good works, and desires, is
sure to bring forth happiness, which in turn is destroyed by keep
ing the company of bad men and similar other bad acts. It does not
end here, but all the desirable results which the Shastras say are
produced by an inclination for them, are destroyed with their root
desire, thus proving desires to be fruitful ; but such destruction cannot
affect the Adrista which is determinately the source of enjoyment
[of good and bad alike]. Hence we find that actions must inevitably
produce their results, which cannot be removed or destroyed till
they have ceased [i. e., till the individual has enjoyed them in full,
and the consummation of results have taken place]. Such an assertion
of the Shastras makes no contradiction, nor does it imply an
inconsistency.
Thus then, the inevitable law of Karma* -entails upon the ignorant
an enjoyment of e their fruits, which can only cease with their con
summation. But to the knower of Self, it is otherwise; for actions
and their agent (results) are not derived from the excellent (Brahma)
but are due to ignorance ; and as the two are antagonistic of each
other, consequently knowledge destroys ignorance and its results :
therefore it is said, that the wise (knower of Self) obtains a respite
from the result of works, without enjoying them. As things seen
in a dream are destroyed and rendered noa-existentr iu the waking
70 VICIIAR SAGAR
state, so action, agent and result produced by the sleep of ignorance
are destroyed by the wakefulness of knowledge. But no destruction
proceeds without knowledge.
Moreover to say that no enjoyment can proceed in the absence of
a desire to enjoy the fruit of action, is to annihilate the determina
tion of Iswara ; inasmuch as, it is His determination, that the igno
rant should consummate their actions by reaping the results, so
that, when a desire is wanting, no result is to be enjoyed ; to say
so, is to do away with His determination, [and create desire as the
true determining source of all actions] ; a contradiction of what
the Shastras teach as to the reality of Isivar s determination.
[But it may be asked where is the contradiction ? The answer
is] If the optional works will produce no result to one who desires
not enjoyment, then by extending it similarly to harmful actions
one may as well say, that as such actions bring forth misery as
their result, which no one is ever desirous to have for his share,
so by shutting up his desire, he goes on performing them without
any fear of creating sin, or another equally undesirable result. But
such is not the fact. Without knowledge, actions cannot cease to pro
duce results, and as has already been pointed out, according to the
conclusions of Vedas, a person engaged in practising works unactua-
ted by any desire as to their result, is not liable to reap any fruits
thereof ; in the same way, to say that if the desire be subsequent
to the practice, even that will bring forth no enjoyment is quite
against the Vedas ; [and untrue]. For, actions done with, or without
desire of reaping fruits,"must produce their necessary results, and
the individual must certainly have to enjoy them. But then the
difference in the two is this : actions originating without a desire
for the results, clear the mind and render it pure and faultless ; while
those with desire, simply bring in their usual results \\ithout purifying
the internal organ; the first produce knowledge from hearing/
the precepts of the wise and thus procure a respite from results.
Because it is his knowledge which causes him not to desire for results.
But if from want of such hearing or any other cause, he derives
no knowledge (of Self,) then for him, actions must continue to pro
duce their usual results, though the desire for their enjoyment may
VICHAR SAOAR. 71
be wanting. This is what the Vedas conclude. Hence we see
that without knowledge, actions cannot cease producing results.
Moreover, what has already been said with regard to penances
causing the destruction of bad actions, do not hold true. For, the
past misdeeds of all previous births extending to infinity, cannot be
possibly destroyed by penances of a single life-time. Hence, the
ordinary penances such as bathing in the Ganges, pronouncing Isiuar s
name, and the rest, which cause the destruction of all sorts of sin,
arc merely so many means for obtaining Self-knowledge, and as
such, they are called destroyers of sin, because they bring forth
knowledge, which destroys sin.
Moreover, what has already been said in regard to the pains attend
ing the performance of daily and occasional rites as being produced
by the connection of the results of forbidden works ; consequently
they cannot produce any more result. Such an assertion is untenable
for the prohibited acts are infinite in variety, and the results they
produce are also infinite, so that the pains accompanying the practice
of the daily and occasional rites cannot be looked upon as enough
expiation for them.
Moreover, what has already been said in regard to optional works/
that their entire accumulated results produce the one physical body.
Even this is not possible ; inasmuch as the accumulation of such
optional works is infinite, hence they cannot determine the subjects
to be enjoyed during a single life-time ; and so far as an emancipated
practicer of Yoga is concerned, it may be said, that during one life
time, he may dissipate all his works by enjoying in several bodies ;
but with regard to the rest of mankind this is impracticable. And
furthermore, a Yogi already emancipated may attain, to extraordinary
powers ; but without knowledge, he cannot achieve his deliverance
from future re-births, as is mentioned in the Vedas.
Thus then, it is rendered apparent, that by simply abstaining
from the optional and forbidden acts and by engaging in the per
formance of the daily and occasional rites, an ignorant person, for
reaping the fruits of the latter works, as also the good and bad
actions of a previous life, is subjected to a course of consecutive re
births, extending through the infinity of time, and that he is not
72 VICHAR SAGAR.
emancipated. Hence, for the acquirement of knowledge through
the means of the present work [to procure emancipation], its necessity
is clearly established.
As things created in a dream turn out false in the wakeful
condition, and they are destroyed : so the unreality of bondage can
only be removed by the acquisition of knowledge which resembles
the waking condition. This will be particularly dwelt upon, on a
future occasion. Thus is determined the qualified individual, sub
ject/ and necessity of the work ; and in their presence the necessary
relation is also established. Hence to begin the work is not fruit
less.
Such is real bliss, supreme, manifested and kind to the indigent,
beyond the range of intellect, non-different from me.
VICIIAR SAGAR. 7-3
SECTION III.
HE, who reads this work, with a full knowledge of its four moving
considerations along with his spiritual preceptor, or hears it with a
friend, with an earnestness of mind, attains the road to emancipation
by deriving knowledge [of Self]. Easy it is, to plant the seeds of
knowledge, in the garden of intellect, for which reason, the discourse
between a preceptor and his pupil is introduced here.
Now such a discourse between a preceptor and his pupil is
termed easy, because the pupil is easily made acquainted with the
doctrine which the work treats of, and thus ascertains its drift ; hence
the work is commenced with the above dialogue.
ON THE SIGNS OF A SPIRITUAL PRECEPTOR.
He who knows well the drift of the Vedas, recognises self as the
only Reality, non-different from Brahma ; who is capable of removing
the five differences by analysis and analogical inference ; and by clear
ing Ignorance and other defects, brings Brahma vividly into the
mental conception of his pupil, as something tangible, and reduces the
objective world into its actual condition of non-reality, similar to the
illusion of a mirage ; and who speaks not of things other than
Brahma, is a real and unrivalled preceptor ; unlike those who simply
cut away the forelock of their pupils hair, to turn them into their
followers.
The above receives further elucidation from the following com
ments : " who knows well the drift of [the Vedas" is made to signify
t that the Acharya or professor is dependent entirely on the Vedas,
and has neither the inclination nor the boldness, to misinterpret them.
He does not set aside the precepts inculcated there, to replace them
with others af his own, but follows them with faith. Non-duality* hag
reference to self-knowledge, and the means helpful to its success.
A preceptor is therefore a man, who has achieved success in knowing
10
74 VICHAR SAGAR.
Self to be non-different from Brahma. A person may "be well-read in
the Vedas, but devoid of Self-knowledge ; such a one is not a fit
preceptor : then again, a man may be thoroughly versed in the
practice of Self-knowledge, but is totally ignorant, so far as the Vedas
are concerned, he cannot be called an Acharya, though he is one
Emancipated. For, he cannot clear away the doubts from the
mind of his pupils. Such of them, as have already cleared their
minds of all blemishes, and whose conceptions (convictions will be
more proper) are good, who have passed over the stage, in which
doubts distract the mind, to them, he may indeed become a preceptor.
But to the rest (who constitute the great bulk of pupils) he is quite
nnfit to impart instruction in a manner, as to dispel their doubts.
Hence the real preceptor is one dependent on the Vedas, a
knower of self capable of dispelling the five sorts of distinctions
from the mind of his pupils, by analogy and reasoning.
The distinctions are :
(1) Between Jiva and Isivara.
(2) Between one life and another.
(3) Between sentient and insentient.
(4) The distinction present in Isivara and insentient (inanimate).
(5) Between one inanimate and another.
Distinctions are likewise called sources of apprehension, for
which, they ought to be ascertained. Hence, the preceptor is one,
who having ascertained the five distinctions, removes them by
logical deductions, destroys the ignorance concerning Brahma, and
establishes Its identity with Self (Atmd) which he renders apparent.
Besides this, his lectures destroy the reality of the world (i. e., esta
blish its unreality) ; such an uncommon preceptor is the (Acharya)
real professor otherwise, one who simply shaves his head, and
causes the removal of the forelock from his pupils heads, or dis
tinguishes them with the usual signs of the religious order to which
he belongs, is no teacher at all. The real teacher is engaged in
giving his lectures, that cause a desire of release from bondage ;
he never insists on his pupils to dye their clothes red. He is well
acquainted with the Shastras and is himself free (Buddha).
Give us the signs which distinguish a knower of the Shastras ;
VICHAE SAGAE. 75
let us hear the words of a sage accordingly, so that a pupil may try
to be qualified in them.
Here, a Guru s knowledge of the Shastras is his distinguishing
sign. The means which qualify an individual to read the work,
are the signs of a pupil. Therefore the signs of the qualified person
already mentioned, constitute the signs of the pupil.
ON LOVE AND REVERENCE FOR A GURU.
The pupil must shew more love and reverence to his professor
than he does to Iswara, for without them, he may be wise, but yet,
without knowledge of self.
Without a Guru, the Vedas appear a sea full of salt, and eman
cipation cannot be had ; but his arguments pro and con are nectar.
As a person residing in the seashore, and drinking sea- water con
ceives ita brackish taste, from the brine present in it, and is therefore
put to great inconvenience and suffers pain ; so he who attempts to
ascertain the drift of the Vedas without a Guru, hurls himself in the
salt-sea of the Vedas, his mind is distracted with doubts and dis
tinctions, and he is subjected to the pain of birth and death. Hence
the interpretation of the Vedas by Ramanuja, Madhava and others,
without the assistance or instruction of a Guru, are full of distinc
tions, which they had failed to ascertain, or clear ; and for such, had
been subjected to re-births and its attendant miseries instead of
being delivered. But then, it does not mean that Ramanuja and
his compeers had nothing to do with a preceptor and they read
the Vedas themselves. What is meant is simply this : The pre
ceptor who gave them instruction, to enable them to produce the
commentaries, as they have done, cannot be called real Acharyas.
For, we have seen that such a one expounds the non-duality of the
Jiva and Brahma ; while they have sought to create a difference by
expounding duality. Hence the word Guru cannot properly be
applied to them. To call so, is unnecessary or unoccasional ; as a
pupil without an occasion for a Guru calls him preceptor, similarly
the men who instructed Ramanuja and others, in the Vedas, were
merely their teachers and not Gurus, for they taught them duality
76 V1CHAR SAOAR.
instead of delivering them from it. In the same manner, those who
read the Vedas themselves, or repair for instruction to a person not
possessing the qualifications already pointed out, experience the salt
of difference, and are subjected to transmigration.
Moreover, the arguments used for and against by a Guru well-
versed in the knowledge of Brahma, to ascertain non-duality and
promote Self-knowledg in his pupil, are more delicious than nectar,
and cause him more felicity ; as the salt is removed from the sea-
water by rain which renders it sweet, so he derives knowledge by his
discourse and is released.
A preceptor without Self-knowledge is thus declared :
The ignorant resemble the leather bags used in drawing or
carrying water from a well, while the wise are the clouds that pour
forth rain. Both read the Vedas, but the wise only, for the sake of
knowledge are to be selected, leaving the ignorant.
In other words, as in the instance of leather bags employed in
carrying water, they cannot cause its excellent taste, and hence not
its cause ; so those who draw the water of knowledge from the sea of
the Vedas by repairing to a teacher devoid of Self-knowledge, cannot
determine the excellent felicity (which proceeds from it), therefore the
ignorant are likened to the leather bags, and the wise to the rain-
clouds ; of whom the former are to be avoided and the latter selected
either for reading, or hearing the Vedas.
But here is the source of a misapprehension. For, if the Vedas are
to bs read from a wise person, to ascertain non-duality and derive
knowledge for being delivered from transmigration, then the necessity
for other Sanscrit or vernacular works, as they cannot procure that
knowledge, exists not. This is now being removed.
"A knower of Brahma is himself a Brahma! as is declared in the
Sruti: and his word is Veda, no matter whether it is in Sanscrit
or vernacular ; hence it is useless to create a difference between the
Vedas and his words. Further to say, that without the former,
no knowledge of Self can be derived, (as has just been mentioned in
the preceding paragraph) is to admit what is not the inevitable rule.
As for instance the Ayur Vedas treat of diseases and their treatment,
but a man can have thorough knowledge of medicine from a study
VIC1IAR SAGAR. 77
of Sanscrit, Vernacular or Persian works of medicine without ever
reading the Ayur Vedas; so can knowledge of the Universal Self
Brahma be derived from a study of the vernacular and other
works. With such a purpose, wise sages have declared the
Smriti, Puran, and works on History (the Mahabharat and Rama-
yana) as treatises for knowing Brahma ; so that these books will be
perfectly futile, if knowledge is only to be obtained from the Vedas.
Hence any work that expounds or treats on Self, can create know
ledge, no matter whether it be the Veda, or any other work, or a
vernacular treatise.
Serve him whose word is equal to the Veda when he is pleased,
the pupil ascertains the nature of Self.
The words of a spiritual preceptor versed in the knowledge of
Brahma are like the Vedas. Such a one is to be served by the
pupil seeking for knowledge, for, when he is pleased with his services,
then he knows what Self is like. In other words, services done to
an Acharya are more valuable than those tendered to lswdra\
inasmuch as the former bring in both visible and invisible results-,
while the latter can only bring forth the invisible. The invisible
are the results of virtue and vice produced by good and bad actions.
The visible produce tangible results independently of good or bad
deeds. By serving Isivara, is produced virtue, which purifies the
mind ; consequently the result of such service is invisible. By
serving the professor and pleasing him, independently of virtue
[produced by such a meritorious action] the pupil obtains the
benefit of his instruction, which is a visible result , and us such
service is meritorious, therefore it produces virtue, and purifies the
mind an invisible result.
Therefore, as it produces both visible and invisible results, it
is superior to serving Iswara, (which produces only invisible results),
and a pupil ought always to be engaged in doing the different sorts
of service to his Guru.
These consist : (1) In shewing reverence, by falling like a stick
before him, kissing the dust of his feet, or besmearing the body and
head with it. (2), In giving away [here giving away is equal to
dedicating or sacrificing ] body, mind, wealth and speech in his
7* VICI1AR SAG Alt.
service so that the pupil may obtain deliverance from the bondage
of future births.
(aV Dedicating the body is to perform all menial services
which the spiritual preceptor may require at the hands of his pupil
and to obey him in everything.
(b\ Dedicating the mind is to love him, so that he may
grant the pupil s wish (impart instruction), being well-pleased with
his services, or that he may be well-pleased ; and to meditate on
him constantly, looking upon him as Brahma, Sun, Ganges, or some
thing equally holy, and not to pry into his defects, which should
be considered as unreal as dreams are, if the pupil wants his own
well-being.
(c). Dedicating the wealth. Wealth consists in wife, son, land,
animals, maids, servants and other things ; dedicate is to relinquish
them and take shelter with a Guru. For, the precepter has relin
quished them already, (when he has taken the path of an ascetic)
and he will no more accept them, therefore to abandon them, is to-
follow his example. Hence it is called the dedicating of wealth ; or if
the teacher be one with family and house, then to dedicate these to
him as an offering. This is another variety of dedicating wealth.
But if any apprehension arise as to a man with family and house
being a Guru, or teacher of the knowledge of Brahma, then the
instanco of Yagyavalka, Udalak and such other well-known teachers,
who kept a family and house as well, ought to remove it. Hence a
Guru may be a man with family [as well as an ascetic].
(d). The dedicating of speech consists in knowing the utter
ances of a Guru as full of merit, purity, and free from blemishes ;
and thus to offer his intellect (so as to ascertain the drift of his
speech).
A pupil desirous of his personal benefit, should after dedicating
his body, mind, wealth etc., in the manner aforesaid, reside with
his Guru wherever he may be, or near him, and support his life
by receiving alms ; which he presents to his teacher with all respect,
never asking for a share, nor going a second round for collecting
alms in one day, in the same village, but subsisting on what he recei
ves from his teacher s kindness. And if to test his faith, his preceptor
VIC EAR SAQAR. 79.
does not give him anything, then not to part company with his
profession of begging, but to bring all he receives before him, and
present them accordingly. And then, when he finds him well-
pleased, and sitting unoccupied with anything, the pupil stands
respectfully before his preceptor, and with humility enquires, "May
he ask any question" ? And on receiving a reply in the affirmative
he seeks an answer to his enquiries.
Moreover, if for a preponderance of the good action of his past
life, the preceptor imparts instruction to a pupil, who has not served
him by dedicating body, mind, and the rest in the usual way, then
also he is sure to derive benefit. For, the results of service are two
fold. The first is to please his preceptor ; and the second is to purify
his mind, both of which results he succeeds in achieving.
Thus a pupil serving his preceptor by making an offering of
his body, mind, wealth, and speech, is sure to find the donee, helping
him always to the path of knowledge,
SO Vic II Mi SAGAR
SECTION IV.
The discourse of a pupil and Guru,
To benefit the young, say I to you.
He who in that manner seeks instruction
Is wise and sound in discrimination.
Three brothers, are sons good
Of a sovereign, who stood
Without any rival
In Heaven, earth and Fatal.
Of them, the lord was he,
King Suvasantati.
Adored alike by all,
In Heaven earth and Fatal.
The eldest of sons three
Was call d Tatwadrishti,
Adrishta was second ;
And Tarkadrishti third.
(Thus says the ling.)
"I lost my infancy in play,
Spent youth in sensuality
Amidst women, family and th rest ;
Thus had I in full, enjoyment.
In Heaven, earth and in Fatal
To acquire enjoyment, seek all."
The king by his own arms prowess,
Managed the state business.
The father now takes leave, retires
After due reflection considers :
Self alone is uncreatc and bliss,
Things different all are worthless :
VICHAE SAGAR. 31
For this, the state, he abandons
(To find Self-knowledge) to his sons.
Between whom the kingdom he divides,
Of Heaven, earth, Fatal, and gives.
Thus did the king resolve in "mind,
Asks his sons, the minister to find,
Sends for the citizens to come ;
Speaks of his indfference to them :
Says "take care of the state again.
Let one be the king of Heaven,
Another Fatal, and the third take
Benares, his capital to make.
Where dwells the internal knower
The God Siva or Maheswara ;
Where at death, hearing his precept
With ease, his abode one does get.
Where the renown of the Ganges,
The main theme of discussion is
Among men ; and where for reasons
Many, north-ward her course she runs."
Amongst his sous, divides his states.
Exhorts them to protect subjects.
For, without proper partition,
They cause much pain and dissension.
(Thus Says the King.)
Kingdom and society I relinquish, now that
I know them the source of pain of all like
Pain then, is the lot of man and each has
His share ; that is inevitable law.
The rich are ignorant, the poor spirited.
Having found its cause, I leave the world
To find Self, who is eternal blissfulness.
On vari d topics the father discourses,
Which the brothers with attention listen.
Seated aloof, they weigh and ponder over
11
82 VI CHAR SAG AH.
His word ; and learn, the world is a source of pain :
That, he wants to remove by becoming Brdhma,
Encumbering them with worldly concerns.
He is an ocean of intellect, who discards
The world, to extinguish misery and pain.
So leaving their states a source of much pain,
They betake to work for spiritual end. *
Thus after mature consideration,
They leave society and home behind
In quest of an able and proper Guru,
For obtaining emancipation.
Pronounced they, the name of their father
Subhasantati, in its literal sense.f
And took it earnestly for truth.
After much search in countries many,
Apart on the banks of the Sursari,
Amidst trees, branches and leaves,
In the wood, they find a recluse ;
Seated under theficus Religiosa,
With fingers intertwined [in prayer].
On the oneness of Jiva and Brahma
Was this man of merit lecturing to his pupils
Faultless, and intent in mind,
Dependent on him, like servants, to a king.
Seeing him employ many arguments,
To instill knowledge of non-duality.
They liken him to Sambhu in Kaylas
Affording instruction to Sanak &c.
* Self-knowledge which is the means for attaining emancipation from
future re-births.
f SulhcC means good, and santati children. Therefore it would
signify one who has good sons. Hence they armed themselves with
the faith of their goodness, so as not to be thwarted from their present
purpose.
VIGHAR SAGAR. 83
Seeing that, they take protection under him,
Prostrate on the ground like a stick ;
Kiss the dust of his feet, and besmear it
On the head and body as something precious.
Six months did they live with him.
In the manner prescribed for pupils :
Amply did they serve him, keeping
The desire of emancipation in mind.
Then \\asthe Guru well-pleased,
And asked he of them in a low voice :
What brings you and your brothers ?
Who brought you ? And why live here ?
At this, Tatwadrishti the eldest,
Makes a sign to his brothers younger
With hands joined as in prayer ;
Humbly acquaints the teacher with his desire.
(Says Tatwadrishti. )
Oh Bhagavan T We brothers three
Are sons of king Subhasantati.
Poor, young and ignorant, we want
To find out the distractions many,
That cause so much suffering.
Thou hast commanded me to speak,
Hence I do now ask of thee [for],
Thou art extremely kind to dependents.
Replies the Guru. Hear my words in answer to what you ask,
fix in your mind peace and it will destroy doubts. The pupil
finding him thus to be very kind and in his own heart yearning
for the desired success enquires : Oh Bhagavan ! Thou art a mine of
kindness, resembling Mahesa in contentment and art all-knowing ;
I have placed myself at a distance from the world which is full of
pain, with birth, death &c., &c., please instruct me as to the remedy
which will procure its destruction, and cause me to acquire the supreme
bliss, I had hitherto been always engaged in devotional excercises,
8* VIC1IAR SAGAR.
and actions. But they have not procured me the desirable result ; I
have cut myself off from the bondage of the world, please discover
that other remedy that I may succeed.
The Guru, finding in his pupil s heart the desire for release which
causes the destruction of pain and produces supreme happiness, dis
courses on the means cited in the Vedas for the purpose. Though the
Shaatraa speak differently of knowledge, yet the knowledge leading to
the destruction of duality (which creates a difference in the individual
and universal intelligence as separate and twain) is determined as the
principal means for attaining emancipation. He speaks about it
as follows : Know thou, Oh Pupil ! a man desirou? of causing
cessation of pain, attending a worldly life in the shape of birth and
death, and of acquiring the supremo happiness, has the origin
of such a desire in mistake. For, since he is supreme happiness
himself, how is it possible that he shall get it ? A desire can only be
for a thing which one has not got. Moreover, Self belongs to him,
and in that Self is centred the ineffable bliss, which he seeks for,
but that is already present there, hence such a desire is due to
mistake. Then again, the world with its births and deaths cannot
affect you, if it doe?, then only is it possible for a desire to cause
its destruction to be present. But they are not your subjects
(that is Self is not subject to birth and death, for He is eternal, un-
create, all-pervading, and internal knower). Hence in the absence
of pain, to seek its destruction is a mistake. Therefore, Pupil!
Thou art the Intelligence devoid of birth and death, eternal,
the Brahma ; and thou shouldst not admit the pain of birth and
death as subjects for thine mind.
Says Tatwadrishti. If Self be bliss, it follows then, he ought
not to desire any happiness from property and riches. Self is
therefore not blissfulness, but his relationship with the world con
stitutes the subject of happiness.
Guru. A person with an intellect averse to Self, is desirous of
property. Its means of enjoyment is called vishaya (an object
of pursuit). Hence, a desire of such enjoyment induces him to
acquire wealth, take a wife, beget children etc., which in turn
produces inconstancy of the mind (intellect literally), and prevents
VICE All SAGAR. 85
from realising blissful ness by an absence of its reflection in buddki.
But, on the other hand, when what he is desirous of having (property
and enjoyment) comes to him, his intellect [inconstancy of in
tellect] subsides and becomes the subjective function of the in
dwelling intelligence, wherein is reflected the blissfulaess of Self, and
conception of which (reflection) leads him to the error of believing
that his happiness is the result of material prosperity.
But such happiness is not inherent in property, riches and the
rest ; for then, a man satiated with one variety and seeking for
obtaining another, may as well dorive happiness from the first,
(which had satiated him) but that is never so. From my view, the
absence of happiness in that case, is due to the inconstancy of the
intellect produced by the fresh desire of possessing a fresh property.
Here there is no reflection ; or if happiness is really present in
property, then a person ought to feel it always after the first inter
view with a dear son, or any other equally beloved relation, caused
quite by accident, unexpectedly after a long absence or separation,
is over ; in other words, the happiness produced by the first meeting
ought to continue ever afterwards, but that is not so, because the
source of happiness the object of his love (son or any other) is now
near him; hence on the first interview only, happiness is produced:
inasmuch as the intellect then becomes constant and fixed, and it
blends with the object. Therefore intellect is said to be inconstant
and happiness is not inherent in riches and property.
Then again, if it were otherwise, it will be quite impossible to
expect any happiness in a state of profound meditation (where the
subject, object, and knowledge are all blended in one and their sepa
rate existence is reduced to non-being). The same rule may apply
to the state of profound slumber ; in such a condition, a person
cuts off all connection with the world, (which ceases then to exist
relatively to him) and if happiness be an inherent property of
riches and wealth, then as his connection with them ceases, he cannot
be said to conceive of it. But this is otherwise ; for, the individual
experience establishes that happiness always attends in sound sleep ;
and a man on rising is apt to say I was sleeping happily, I
knew nothing then," Hence it is established that happiness is nob
86 V1CHAR SAGAR.
inherent in property, riches and wealth etc., but in the Supreme
blissful ness (Self), and can be felt in all thingsVthe mistake arising
out of their close proximity with him. Therefore the Vedas say :
"From the presence of happiness in Self, everything is said to be
full of it." I have thus, Oh Pupil ! Made thee acquainted with the
felicity discovered by the possession of property and my conclusions
thereof. If you haive any lurking doubts about them, keep your
wits about you and I will reply them accordingly.
Tatwadrishti Oh Bhagavan ! What hast thou hitherto said i-s
in reference to the ignorant only, and does not apply to those who
have knowledge (of Self) ; for thou hast referred (in the beginning)
to a person with an intellect averse to Self, and such an aversion
can only be present in a man of ignorance and not in the wise ; so
please say in reference to the wise. Whether knowledge of happiness
be due to the desire for material comforts such as wealth etc. or
otherwise ?
Guru. Pupil, listen to me with attention. What I have said
in reference to aversion to Self does not refer to the ignorant
alone, but wlien a wise person s intellect is engaged in the manifested
external world, [in its ordinary uses and practices] then he forgets Self;
so that, for the time being, he also is equally averse to Self; more
over if the intellect of the wise be always after the modification
of Self, then his ordinary* practices as eating and the rest will
cease, hence in such a condition he (the wise) can be said to be
averse to Self. An ignorant man s intellect is always averse to
Self, while during the time w r hen a wise man s intellect is averse to
Self, (that is when it has not assumed the shape of Self) his desire
for property precludes him from the perception of felicity in Self in
common with the ignorant. But then there is this difference
between the two : when [i. e., afterwards] the perception of happiness
> There are three kinds of existences from the Vedantin stand
point called respectively (a) Parmarthika, (b) Vyvaharika and Prati-
vasika or true, practical and apparent. Here practices of the Vyvaharika
are meant by the author.
VICI1AR SAGAR. *7
derived in connection with property accrues to a wise person, he
knows that it is non-different from Self; but simply reflected from
bir&(Atma); this the ignorant does not know. Hence in regard
to the former, enjoyment of property and its attendant happiness
are in its effects similar to that realised in profound meditation.
An ignorant person is apt to commit the mistake that the happiness
which he feels from property is not a reflection of Self and its relation
with wealth aud riches etc., is a fact. But this is conceived in error.
Tatwadrishti. Oh Bhagavan ! Thou hast said, Self is " felicity
this I know full well ; and that "lam not the subject of pains
birth, death and the rest, hence in that case their destruction cannot
be possible ;" I have my doubts on this point, for if I am not the
subject of birth and death and their attending pains, then they are
quite different from myself. Please therefore inform me what is it
that is born and subjected to death. So that I may not confound it
with Self.
Guru. Pupil, Hear my word, that will clear away your doubts,
it is the source of much evil. But you and I are out of it.
Tatwadrishti. Bhagavan ! If birth, death etc., the miseries of
the world are not my subject, or that of another, then why such
pain is cognizable as something apparent and visible. An absent
or non-existent thing cannot make itself visible. As for instance,
a sterile woman s son ; flowers (are not present) in ether ; hence they
cannot be determined as actualities. In the same way, if the world
be not an actuality, it ought then to remain inapparent and invisible.
Moreover from birth to death, the world is always tangible, and its
miseries are felt and perceived as something real and actual, there
fore they cannot be said to be non-existent.
Guru. Like objects seen in a dream, or the illusion of a snake
in a chord, or the blue in ether, the objective world is due to
illusion, while in truth it is non-existent ; birth and death are due
to Ignorance concerning Self (or Brahma) ; [knowledge alone can de
termine their unreality].
Tatwadrishti. As the creation of a snake in a rope is unreal,
so you say, the attribution of pain to Self, derived from world and
its concerns, is false, But in the first case, without a knowledge of
88 VfCllAR SAOAR.
an actual snake (derived from its sight) its creation iu a rope is not
possible, please determine its production.
Guru. There are four different views in reference to the pro
duction of a snake in a rope, silver in a nacre, and the rest.
A Charvaka* calls it pervasion of non-existence [asatkhyati].
Kshanika Vijnana Vadi says it to be pervasion of Self [Intelligence]
(Atnidkhyati)-,-^ a Naiyayika% and a Vais/ieshi/ca^ says it to be a
apparent pervasion (anyatka Jchyati) ; a follower of KapilalF and a
Prabhakara!! again refer to another pervasion (Akliyati).
A Sunyavadin or Lokayatika asserts the unreality and emptiness of
the objective material world, he condemns all ceremonial rites, ridicules the
Sradha ceremony observed after death, and it is anniversary days and calls
the Vedantius " fools, knaves and buffons." Professor Wilson says of them,
[works ii p. 87] that they were called Charvaka after one of their teachers
the Muni Charvaka, their other designation, Lokayata, expresses their adop
tion of the teuet, that this being is the Be-all of existence ; they were
the advocates of materialism aiid atheism. According to Colebrook
their principal tenets were (1) the identity of the soul with the body;
(2) Akasa is not an element (3) perception is the only means of proof.
Professor Cowell says in reference to them, that their doctrines were at
one time widely prevalent in the world, for which they assumed the appella
tion of Lokayata. Wealth and desire are considered the only ends of man
and there is no future existence.
t Probably the Yogacharas are meant. They are a sect of the Bud
dhists, who maintain all is void but intelligence ; hence the Kshanika
Vijnanavadin s assertion as it admits intelligence only, can be no other
than theirs.
\ A Naiyayika or Tarkika arranges all things under sixteen heads.
Vaisheshikas arrange all things under six heads.
IT Kapila was the author of the Sankhya system of philosophy. His
doctrine of PraTcrita and Purush (Matter and Force) accounts for the evo
lution of the world. He is against a personal creator. His Purush re
presents the Atma of the Vedautins.
|| Prabhakaras are called after the well-known scholiast of the Purva-
Mimansa Prabhakara. Their doctrine is called Akhyati Vadi.
V1CHAE SAOAR. 89
The Charvaka doctrine is thus explained. A Sunyavadi says, iu
the province of a rope a snake is unreal and non-existent. Here
non-existence implies its actual want. In other words, a snake is
never actually present in a rope, though it is apt to be mistaken ; and
this is due to a previous knowledge of a snake derived from seeing it,
so that a man who has never seen it, can possibly never create it
in another object.
The Kshanika Vijnana Vadi says, no snake exists outside of
Booddhl either in a rope or in any other substance ; all objects are
cognized by (Boodhi) Intellect (and their conception retained in
memory) which then assumes the shape of what it cognizes, hence
Boodhi is transient intelligence ; that is to say, not always present,
but apt to come and go, it appears and disappears, appears with
cognition of an object and disappears after it has discovered it,
so that in the case of a snake, intelligence covers it, assumes its shape
and produces its discovery so long as the object is in close contiguity
or brought near to it, by moans of the different organs of sense.
Now this Intelligence is the same as Atma.
According to the Naiyayika and Vaishesliika, the sight of a real
snake and the presence of a defect in sight, reduces it to cognition,
and makes it appear in front as a thing quiet close. Actually a
snake is seen in a wood, and its reflection falling upon the eye, remains
impressed in it ; but then, the presence of a defect in sight also
presupposes the creation of such an illusion along with the impress
of its actual image inherent in it. It cannot be urged, that a person
whose eye-sight is good, is free from all defects, since he is equally
liable to err in the manner above indicated, therefore, the premises
advanced are not maintainable. On the contrary, a defect will dimi
nish and not increase the visional powers ; just as the solvent powers
of the gastric juice are reduced by the presence of air, bile and
mucus in the stomach, all of which are defects. In the same way,
the presence of darkness etc., in the eye, (its defects) will diminish
its power of vision. Moreover, it his already been said, that the
cognition of the snake in the wood is produced along with the inherent
defect by its impress on the retina, and that an object can be seen
situated externally to the eye ; hence sight is rendered intense by
12
90 VICHAR SAGAR.
the presence of the defect. It cannot be said, that it is quite unique ;
for, we find in diseases engendered by bile, the appetite is so
morbidly increased that a person suffering from it will consume four
times the quantity of his accustomed food* and yet will not feel satia
ted. In the same way, darkness present in the eye has the faculty
of intensifying vision, and rendering a hidden snake visible or mani
fest. In this way, a snake lurking in the woods, or somewhere else, and
its transposition or transfer in the rope present in front of us and
called the province of a rope, is spoken of in a different way, which
is therefore termed exteraneous or something different.
The author of Chintamuni expounds it in the following manner :
If the visibility of a snake living in the wood depends upon
the presence of defects in the eyes along with sight, then such
a mode of cognition may apply as well to a wall and other substances
(which are situated between the sight and the snake) hence sight can
not render visible an object which is concealed. Also the presence
of a defect in sight will prevent a person to determine the exact
form of a rope, but will make him see a snake in it, hence the rope,
and not a snake, is reduced to a different substance, and its cogni
tion also becomes different.
An AkliyMvculi says, to expound it on the principle of non-
existence is tantamount to a sterile woman s son, and rabbit s horns ;
hence it cannot be maintained. Furthermore, if it be due to a modi
fication of intelligence which assumes the shape of a snake, then as
it is said to be transient in duration, the cognition ought also to
last for a moment and not longer ; therefore such a conclusion is also
untenable. The same applies to the expounders of extraniety [another
khayti}. His first method is established faulty by the Chintamuni
Karaka ; in the same way, the method of extraniety may be proved
* It is worthy of note that the disease referred to is Diabets melli-
tus ; here the appetite becomes voracious for a time. Recent researches
have established the origin of the disease in a faulty action of the liver ; the
bile secreted by it is not entirely normal, but undergoes some metamorphosis
which gives rise to sugar, hence the author is perfectly right to connect
it with bile.
VICHAR SAGAR. 91
to be unsound by the method of Chintamuni. For (they say)
knowledge is in accordance to what is known. So that, from a rope
that is known, follows the knowledge of a snake ; surely this is con
tradictory. But it can be admitted, that where the illusion of a
snake arises in a rope, a relation or connection is established between
the rope and eyes, through tllo medium of their function (sight) ;
in which condition the rope is brought under cognition as exemplified
in the instance, " This is ;" and snake is produced from the impression
left in the mind after its sight, an action of memory. "This is a
snake." Here both of them follow and co-exist, the first is an ordi
nary knowledge of an apparent rope, and "This is a snake" is a know
ledge derived form an act of memory. But from the presence of
fear (or defect) in the individual (subject to the mistake and who
is in the position of its demonstrator) and that of darkness * (a
defect) in the eyes (which are the demonstrative proofs), he is unable
to distinguish that he has in him both the varieties of the know
ledge ; he cannot discriminate whether his apparent knowledge of
a rope is correct, or that derived from the sight of a real snake in
a prior time and left impressed in his memory is correct, so that in
the absence of knowledge of both of them, a Sankhya or Prabhakara
finds the clue far the mistake, and such absence is present where-
ever there is a mistake.
The pupil says that of the four different doctrines about
the origin of the mistake of snake in a rope thus explained, which
am I to entertain ? He therefore addresses his preceptor in the fol
lowing strain : Kind Guru teach me the best of them.
Guru. There is yet another method beyond the four already
explained, it constitutes the fifth. It is called the indescribable [Anir-
bachanya Khyati]. The Asat, are expounders of nothing ; the second
look upon intelligence and arc called the Atmakhyati, the third
depend upon a cause situated outside of the object and are called
Anyathalchyati while the fourth are called the Akhyati. They base
their doctrine on the inability to distinguish between the ordinary
*ln broad daylight no mistake occurs, but in darkness it is pretty com
mon, hence the defect of darkness is strongly insisted upon,
M n< UAR SAG AT,
knowledge of the object (rope) and the impression loft in the mind
of the absent snake. They are all inconsistent.
As according to the view of an Akhyati, the three others ;u<
faulty and unsound, so is the case with him too.
For, he says that in "this is" the first knowledge relates to an
ordinary acquaintance of it which renders it apparent ; and "this is
a snake is the result of an impression left in his memory by the
sight of a real snake in a former timo ; so that memory is admitted
while the presence of a snake in the rope lying in front is not taken
into consideration ; now in such a view, a man ought to feel no fear
nor should he run away from the supposed snake ; but as the case
is otherwise, the presence of the snake in front (in the rope) is
fully established, and not the recollection of a snake seen before.
Or from a particular acquaintance of a rope, a man may subsequently
find that his perception of a snake in it is false ; even in such an
obstacle (to the creation of a snake) its presence is determined,
while the same docs not hold true with regard to its recollection J
(he does not say that he is subject to the illusion because he recollects
to have seen a snake before.)
Moreover when he says "It is a snake" it shows that he is subject
of one knowledge only and not two (i. e., snake plus rope) ; besides
the internal organ cannot bo the subject of two perceptions at
one time, memory and apparent visibility. Therfore the doctrine
set up by the AkJiati is extremely faulty.
All the above four doctrines have been fully explained in Svarajya
sidhi and other works; and the arguments for and against have been
clearly set forth, but as they are difficult of comprehension I have
only just briefly described them.
Now for a consideration of the indescribable [Anirbachaniya].
When a subject is seen by the eyes, the internal organ asumes
its shape, drives away the ignorance which envelopes it and thus
renders it visible ; without visibility or light, cognition cannot follow.
When a rope is mistaken for a snake, the function of the internal
organ projected by the eyes establishes a connection with the rope,
but the obstacles or defects as they arc called viz, presence of dark
ness, do not determine the modification of the internal organ, so as
VIC II A 11 SAGAR 93
to make it asume the shape of tho rope, consequently its envelope-
mcnt of ignorance remains undestroyed ; since therefore the condi
tional relation of its function for the destruction of the cnvelope-
mcnt having been created, its ignorance remains in tact, how can
the rope already situated in such function ( intelligence) excite or
stimulate ignorance, so as to make it assume the modification
of a snake ? And if the action of ignorance -the creation of
a snake be true, then the knowledge of the rope nee 1 not be an
obstacle to its existence. But it is quite otherwise, for when the
actual rope is discovered, then the snake is reduced to an unreality
to non-existence and if on the contrary, it be non-existent then it
is virtually not like a sterile woman s son ; for such a condition is
quite impossible, whereas in the rope it is present and continues
so long as the mistake is not discovered. Hence (Ignorance) it
cannot be non-existent, but quite distinct from it, as also from (Sat)
existence, or being. Therefore it is described as something indescrib
able. The production of silver in nacre is in the same manner termed
indescribable ; and for these reasons it is called the indescribable
mode. As the snake is a modification of ignorance, so is its knowledge
a modification of ignorance too, and not of the internal organ. Because,
as the knowledge of the rope is an obstacle to a serpent, so is it an
obstacle to its knowledge, which should not be, if it were a modifica
tion of the internal organ. Hence knowledge is also indescribable,
and quite a distinct entity from existence and non-existence, like the
snake of ignorance. But the snake is the product of a preponderance
of (Tamo) darkness present in Ignorance along with the associated
intelligence of the rope ; and knowledge is a result of a modification
of the (Satwa) good element of ignorance inherent in the manifest
ing intelligence ; when the ignorance-associated intelligence of the
rope assumes the modification of the snake, the ignorance present in
the innate intelligence assumes its modification ; for the stimulus of
excitation which is a proximate cause of the ignorance-associated in
telligence of the chord, is also an excitor of the innate intelligence
dependent on ignorance. Hence the source of the mistake in regard to
a snake-illusion and its knowledge, proceeds in the same time as the
knowledge of the presence of the chord blends with that of ignorance,
fH VICI1AR SAGAR.
Thus then, in reference to the production of a snake-illusion its
formal or proximate cause is the particle of external ignorance (vaJtya
avidya); and the particle of ignorance situated inside the witnessing
intelligence and dependent on it, is the proximate cause of its
knowledge or perception. And as in the dreaming condition, the
particle of darkness (Tamas) of ignorance dependent in the witnessing
intelligence, assumes the modification of a subject, while its particle
of goodness assumes the modification of knowledge or perception.
Hence in dreams, the internal ignorance assumes both the modification
of subject and perception or knowledge, and that ignorance is their
proximate cause, consequently the snake in the external rope, and
the internal dream objects are said to be discovered by the witnessing
intelligence. In other words, what is discovered by the function of
ignorance is called the discoverer ^witness.]
The discovering of the mistake of the indescribable snake in the
rope called illusion, or illusory attribution, is a modification* of Igno
rance ; and intelligence is subject to another modification which is
called vivarata.^ Now parinam produces a change of form in the
same way as does a formal cause; while vivarata is possessed of proper
ties antagonistic to what an object has. As the formal cause ignorance
is indescribable, so is the snake in a chord and its knowledge equally
indescribable. Hence, the last two have equal properties in common
with Ignorance. That is to say, Ignorance brings in a change of form,
or the semblance of a difference from what it was ; it is its modifica
tion of change or parinam ; similarly the predicated intelligence
which abides in a rope and distinguishes it from another object is real.
But the presence of snake in a rope and its knowledge or perception
* Modification stands for parinam therefore it signifies a changed
condition* It applies also in the proceeding instances wherever it has
been used.
f With reference to causes it has been said that when a cause under
goes a change of form to produce an action it is called Vikara or Parinam.
But when no such actual change of form takes place, it is called vivaria
curdled milk is an instance of the first variety and snake in the rope of the
second. (Dholes Vedantasara. ;>. 34.)
VICHAR SAGAR. 95
is quite different from what has just been said to be real. Hence
the rope with its knowledge, are antagonistic in nature to the abiding
consciousness of the snake etc., (inasmuch as the first is real while
the last unreal illusory); call them naturally different, for they are
different in form from intelligence. The seat of the unreal snake
is not in the chord but in its associate of intelligence, consciousness,
or knowledge ; for, like the snake, the rope itself is a designed con
trivance and as such, one cannot take possession of, or occupy the
other ; hence the consciousness associated with the chord (and not
the chord) is the seat of the snake. Moreover, if the predicated intelli
gence of the chord be said to be its seat, even then both the chord
and intelligence will be the seat of the snake. But here, to con
nect the rope with the seat is not possible on account of the
obstacle which it introduces, so that the associated intelligence or
knowledge of the chord is such seat or occupation itself, and not its
predicated intelligence. In the same way, the manifesting or wit
nessing intelligence is the occupation of the determining knowledge
which evolves a snake. According to such a view, the subject and
its knowledge in connection with a mistake, on account of the differ
ence of their associates, creates a difference in occupation and such
seats are not one. And particularly for the stimulus of Ignorance,
the rope is not discovered, therefore it is the material cause, from
which springs both the mistake of a snake and the non-discovery
of the actual condition of a rope ; similarly its knowledge is the mate
rial cause for the destruction of both. If it be said, that knowledge
of the rope cannot destroy or remove the snake ; the reply, is the
occupation of an unreal substance can be destroyed by the knowledge
of its site or occupation. This is the inference of a non-dualist. Or
if it is alleged that the site or occupation of the false snake is the
associated knowledge of the chord and not the chord itself, so
that with the knowledge of the chord the snake cannot be removed.
Then the reply is : The knowledge of a bit of string or another
equally insentient substance is derived by the function of the internal
organ, so that the enshrouding ignorance concerning the subject
is necessary to be removed ; and envelopment is a force of ignor
ance consequently it is not dependent on the insentieucy of the
96 VICE All SAG Alt
subject, but on its abiding intelligence ; hence the function of the
internal organ after having assumed the shape of the chord (or
another object which it covers to cognize) breaks away the encasement
of ignorance from the intelligence present in the chord, and discovers
it by the reflection of intelligence residing in it (function). Intelli
gence is Self-illuminated, it needs not the help of reflection for its
discovery. This will be fully discussed further on. Thus with the
reflex intelligence of the internal organ, its functional portion acts
upon intelligence of the rope and results in the removal of envelop
ment of ignorance ; and the reflex intelligence of its function dis
covers the rope. Therefore, the subject of such function is not the
rope only, but its knowledge as well. Hence it is written in the
work Sidhanta, that the function of the internal organ forms the
subject of Brahma. In this way by the removal of the envelopment
of ignorance from the chord, the presence of the snake in it, is dis
covered by the indwelling intelligence or knowledge of the chord ;
so that the knowledge of the chord is the determining element of
the presence of the snake in it, therefore it is quite natural to expect
its removal. Now for the objections against such a view. If then
the presence of the snake is removed by the knowledge of the rope
according to the manner just explained, yet the knowledge of the
snake cannot be destroyed. For the snake is present in the know
ledge of the chord which is included in and not separated from
it, and the individual intelligence is the occupation of the know
ledge of the snake. From the first named condition is produced
the reflected knowledge of the chord, which is not separate from
it, and not the individual perception ; so that even with knowledge
of the chord, the presence of the snake along with it, is a creation
of ignorance present in the individual along with intelligence, which
is a function of the mind ; and such ignorance cannot be continued
nor removed ; but knowledge by its occupation can alone so do.
Hence the perception of the rope cannot remove the perception of
the snake from it. But such a mistake is cleared away in the
manner stated below.
Knowledge is dependent on the subject, therefore the snake
which is the subject, is removed along with the destruction of the
V1CHAE SAGAE. 97
subject ; for in its absence, the perception of the snake cannot
continue ; and if it be said that without the knowledge of the thing
actually present, the supposed or fancied contrivanca or superim-
position of another thing on it cannot be destroyed ; in other words,
here, the presence of the snake is only a fancied superimposition
on the chord, which is clear to the intelligence present in the wit
ness (individual subject to the mistake) and without its knowledge
the snake cannot cease to exist in perception ; then such an assertion
i < soon disposed of. Cessation is of two sorts, one is extreme cessation,
and the other is its final disappearance into its cause. Of them, the
first refers to the removal of the effect together with its cause. All
fancied contrivances are due to the inherent ignorance present in
objects, which is removed with its effect by the occupation of
intelligence. But the second variety does not depend on it. As
for instance, the relative destruction of all objects in the condition
of profound dreamless slumber, and their actual destruction in Pra-
laya, proceed from ignorance without the occupation of intelligence.
Here, in such a destruction, the source of the results which such actions
were to have brought about, is destroyed by their want ; similarly
without the knowledge of the witnessing agent, is removed the
perception of the snake. So that, in the absence of the subject of
perception the snake is the source of the destruction. In this way,
the snake is destroyed by the knowledge of the rope, and in the
absence of the snake, which is the subject of that knowledge, its
knowledge is also destroyed ; or both the snake and its perception,
are removed by a knowledge of the chord. Because, when it is
plainly perceived, the function of the internal organ projected by
the eyes, covers the rope, and assumes its shape ; then the function
associated with intelligence, becomes one with the associated percep
tion of the chord, and there is no more any difference between them.
But why ? Consciousness is one, and there is no difference
whatever (the actual difference is in the objects which it covers,
hence consciousness whether derived from sight, hearing etc., is all one
and the same) but that, which is produced by a difference in the
associates. The intelligence associated with the function of the
internal organ, and that associated with the rope are differentiated
13
93 VI CHAR SAOAE.
by their respective associates, function and rope ; which again an
they are divers according to the sites they occupy, thus create a
difference therefore in the associated intelligences. Also, when the
two associates co-exist, no more difference in the intelligence is
possible. It is declared ia the commentaries on the Vedanta,
that the difference in the associates situated apart, constitutes
the difference in their associated consciousness, or intelligence ;
and when both the associates are present in one place, then there
is no more difference between the associates and their associated
intelligence. Thus then, during the apparent perception of the rope,
its associated intelligence is one with, and non-different from, the
associated intelligence of function, which again is the same as the
witnessing intelligence. For, the intelligence present in the func
tion of the mind, is its discoverer and called witness.
Thus is determined that during the perception of the rope, its
associated intelligence is one with the witnessing intelligence, and
that the former as well as the latter, which is non-different from
it, proceeds from the knowledge of the rope ; and that during the
time of such perception along with the knowledge of the witness,
the fancied superimposition of the snake is destroyed. Or, as
Bidyarana Swami says in reference to a lamp : The mental function
after dispelling the Ignorance (avarana) which occupies an unknown
jar discovers it or renders it cognisable to the senses, by its indwelling
reflex intelligence, like a jar rendered visible by the light of a lamp,
which discovers it by dispelling the surrounding darkness. In the
case of the jar, the reflex intelligence of the mental function is
its knowledge, while the mental cognisor is a discoverer, (i. e.,)
brings the perception or knowledge that "it is the jar:" in this
way, the reflex intelligence of the mental function only dis
covers the jar. "I know a jar," here, the first personal pronoun
is the agent or subject, and jar is the object (of cognition), and its
knowledge, are the three constituent elements discovered by the
witnessing intelligence. In the same way, all objects have the same
three constituent elements in them, which are discovered by the wit
ness. But if the witness be full of ignorance it can discover nothing ;
hence the knowledge of the three entities enables the witness to
VIC1IARSAGAR. 99
discover, and the same knowledge of the witness can remove a
snake from a rope according to the previous method. Accordingly,
the snake and its occupation by knowledge (its inherent knowledge)
have been considered as two and different from one another, and
as it is liable to produce similar other misconceptions, I proceed to
consider the position where the snake and seat of its knowledge are
looked upon as one.
In this view, it is said that the intelligence present externally ia the
rope (vahya) is not one with the snake and the seat of its knowledge ;
for all knowledge is either dependent on the subject or witness, and
the intelligence of the rope situated outside cannot help cognition ;
similarly, if it be said that the function of the internal organ super
imposes it on the rope, that is to say, the associated intelligence of the
internal organ witness is the seat of the snake and its knowledge,
then such a snake ought to be present inside the body, in the inter
nal organ and not in the rope itself: and if it be said, that at first,
the source of the snake is inside the body in the internal organ,
whence it is projected on the rope, it will amount to an admission
of the doctrine of the expounders of Self. In this way, the associated
intelligence of the rope cannot be ascribed to be the seat of intelli
gence ; nor the associated intelligence of the internal organ can bo
determined as the site of the knowledge of the snake. Hence, though
the snake and its knowledge are not the occupation of one intelligence,
yet the modification of the internal organ after the shape of the
rope, and the ignorance dependent on its function of intelligence,
after the modification of the snake, are the respective changes
wrought upon them ; of which the latter is therefore positively the
result of ignorance. Intelligence associated with the function has a
particle of ignorance, which for its quality of darkness (Tamas) is
the formal cause of the snake, whilst its satwavic quality is the
formal cause of the knowledge of the snake. The snake and its
knowledge are the occupation of intelligence associated with function.
But as the function is situated external to the chord, its associated
intelligence is also similarly placed, hence, it is the site of the snake.
In proportion as it resembles the internal organ, so is it identified with
the agent or witness. The internal organ situated inside the body,
100 VICHAR SAG All
is modified or changed after its function, and as the intelligence
associated with it is the witness, therefore it is the seat of knowledge :
when the rope is rendered visible, then its intelligence blends,
with the associated intelligence of function, so that with the know
ledge of the rope the production of A snake and its subsequent removal
implies no inconsistency and the sight of one rope creates the mis
take of a snake, stick, wreath, or water current to different persons;
or, all may equally fancy it to be a snake ; so that in such a case, when
the person discovers the rope, the superimpositiou of the snake in the
functional intelligence is also destroyed, and who fails to discover the
rope, his illusion continues: so here even, the same functional intelli
gence is the seat of the fancied snake, and not the associated intelli
gence of the rope, stick and the rest. For if that be the case, then the
individual perception of stick, wreath &c., may be equally present in
all alike ; and from my point of view, a person sees one only, according
to the object conceived by his functional intelligence, and not another.
Thus then, the seat of the external snake and its knowledge is the func
tional intelligence which is called agent or witness. Objects seen in
a dream and their knowledge have their seat in the associated intelli
gence of the internal organ, the samo witness. Thus the modification
(parinam) of ignorance which is neither existent nor non-existent and
hence indescribable is explained, and for a similar existence and non-
existence, (that is, neither the one nor the other, but quite different
from them,) the superimposition of the snake, stick &c., &c., on a rope
is also called indescribable.
Saith the pupil. Oh Bhagavan ! let me hear that instruction
which will establish the unreality of the world.
Gum. Your ignorance of Self who is Brahma, creates this un
real world as something substantial, hence you are its receptacle as
well as its seat, in the same manner as a snake created in a rope
has for its receptacle and seat, the rope. Though the site of the
snake is said by one, to be in the intelligence associated with the
function, while another has it in the intelligence associated with the
rope, but none determines it in the rope itself; yet in the last case
the presence in intelligence of the associate is the rope, so that
ordinarily speaking, the rope is said to be the site.
VIC11AR SAG All. 101
As the site or receptacle of the false snake is the rope, so are you
the site and receptacle of the unreal world. Now this is a common
saying. As a rope has twin similarities of which one is ordinary,
and the other particular, and the ordinary resemblance refers to a
thing of similar in shape with it, while the particular is the semblance
of a snake ; here the rope is present along with the snake all the
time the illusion lasts, though in a manner non-different from it :
therefore the particular resemblance prevents the object being
recognised so long as the mistake is present, but when it is discovered
once, then the mistake or the fancied resemblance of a particular ob
ject is removed at once so has Self his two semblances, ordinary
and particular.
Sat or existence is the ordinary. Unconditioned, Uniform, Eternal
Free etc., are the characteristics of the particular. When Self is
considered to be bounded or limited by the gross or subtle body, even
in such a misconception, he is manifested as non-different from it,
and his (marked) reality is the ordinary semblance.
Moreover, in that state, the real nature of Self, unconditioned,
eternal, free is never discovered, but when that is realised then
his finity is removed ; therefore infinity, eternity, purity, pervasion,
etc., etc., constitute the features of the particular condition. The
receptacle is the reality of the ordinary substance which is the
source of the illusion, and its connection with the particular is
called its occupation. As for instance, the rope for its being the
site of the snake is called its receptacle, which is the particu
lar occupation of the rope ; in the same way, Self as a receptacle
of the phenomenal world, his ordinary condition of existence is the
receptacle for this vast expanse, while infinity and the rest are
his particular occupation. Hence, there is some difference between
receptacle and occupation as has been described by a sage named
Suraugatama in his work.
Pupil. Who is the seer of the unreal world ? Inasmuch as
its receptacle and occupation is Self, then there must be some
other seer than ho ; in the same way, as a rope is the receptacle
and site (occupation) of a snake, and its seer is a person subject
to the illusion.
102 VIC11AR SAGAR.
Guru. When the occupation is that of an insentient object, then
something different from it must be its seer ; when intelligence
itself is occupation then it requires no one else to behold it. As
in dreams, the occupation belongs to the witnessing intelligence,
which is their seer, so is self the occupation, and as such, he sees
the unreal world; so that, as the ordinary sight produces a
snake in a rope, does self behold the unreal world. Against
such an inference, it is said in the Sidhanta, that the presence,
occupation or site of the snake is in the witnessing intelli
gence, which is the seer. Accordingly to look upon the site as what
sees, cannot be maintained. In this way, is determined the illusion
which subjects self to grief. Self is not the actual sufferer, to con
sider otherwise is a mistake, but then the destruction or removal of
the mistake is not possible, just as through the force of a mantra, a
performer of magic, creates the enemy of a person, whom no one
desires nor prepares himself to destroy.
Pupil. What you have just mentioned about the unreality of
the world, and Self as not subject to grief, is true, but instruct
me the means which will enable me to recognise Self as not the
subject of birth and death with its attendant ills. Moreover, even
if it be true, as you said, that for the removal of this mistake, no re
medy is needed, yet since such unreality is the source of grief, there
fore the unreality is something in a state of actual existence, other
wise why do I realize pain, and suffer birth and death ? Hence I
want the destruction of the world ; with kindness instruct me as to
the remedy that will bring it about.
Guru. I have already told you the remedy which will cause the
destruction of the unreal world. Firmly ascertain it and you will
find Self free from pain and misery. Ignorance attributes to self the
pain which attends worldly existence ; knowledge can alone establish
it otherwise ; as the super-imposition of a snake in a rope is known,
BO does self-knowledge dissipate the belief that Self is subject to
grief, birth, and death : because a false thing cannot produce any ill
consequence to its site or occupation. For instance, as a mirage cannot
moisten the earth, so the cognition of the world as something appa
rent cannot produce any injury to me. For I am Eternal, Intelligence,
VI CHAR SAOAR. 103
and Bliss, the Brahma and this is what is called knowledge;
the one means for the attainment of emancipation. I have already
had my say on such knowledge when discoursing with you.
The formal cause of the world is ignorance which is darkness
(Tamas) itself ; with its cessation the world ceases to exist, because
after the destruction of the formative cause, its effects can no longer
continue to exist. This ignorance can only be destroyed by means of
knowledge, and not by actions and devotional excercises. For, igno
rance and knowledge are antagonistic of each other, while actions
and devotional exercises are not so. As for example, the darkness
present inside a room cannot be removed by any act, but only by the
introduction of light, so is the darkness of ignorance removed by
the light of knowledge and not by any other means. Thus, pupil,
have I given you the instruction you asked of me.
Pupil. What you have said Bhagavan, I know to be true, your
reference to Ignorance as the cause of the world, and its destruction
by knowledge, I am aware of. I know knowledge alone can deter
mine the unreality of the world, and the perception of eternal
Intelligence and Bliss by the individual self non-different from
Brahma which is the same as knowledge ; but I fail to recognise
the two as one, for in my heart I have doubts as to such non-duality
which you are expounding.
I am the doer of virtue and vice, and consequently must have
my share of enjoyment which they produce, and death, and its many
miseries. Moreover, I seek for the destruction of ignorance the
creative cause of the world, but since Brahma is not the subject
of virtue or vice, birth and death, happiness or misery, or any pain
whatever, and has no desire for knowledge, hence between my-self and
Brahma there is seen an antagonism ; how then, can you say them
to be non-dual ? Though it may be alleged that my chief purport
is not a worldly existence, and that illusion alone attributes to my-self
as being the subject of birth and death, but since Brahma is not
so subjected, hence the difference between them is clear enough.
I have yet another doubt, I have seen it mentioned in the Veda,
that in one tree of Intellect there resides two birds which are equal.
That one is the result of past actions, while the other is purity itself,
104 V1CHAR SAGAR.
beyoud the pale of enjoyment, unconditioned and is the discoverer
of him who enjoys ; its subject is the Jiva who is the agent of such
enjoyment ; and the other is called the Supreme Self (Puramatma).
Hence how, can their identity be established? Then again, the
Vedas refer to action and devotional exercises of various kinds, which
also render such non-duality fruitless. For your non-duality signi
fies either the subject of Brahma* is a modification of the Jiva or
vice versa. In the former condition (the first), the qualified person
will be wanting, consequently works and devotional exercises will
bear no fruit ; and in condition the second ^when you say the subject
of the Jiva is a modification of Brahma) the subject of such devotion
becomes one with the worshipper, hence in the absence of the latter,
all devotion will be useless ; and since the Supreme Self who is to
give the desirable results after having become one with the Jiva
will be incapable of fulfilling the desires of the individual engaged
in works, so they are useless too. Then again, what the Mimansa
says in reference to works that " action is the Lord" cannot be main
tained as true, for actions are insentient, and they are wanting in the
power of giving the desirable results. Hence from such a view, if
the Lord gives the desirable results of an action then that will tell
against non-duality of the individual Self and the Supreme Self.
Guru. I will now clear out your doubts. As in one ether there
are four distinctions, viz., the ether of a jar ; ether of water ; ether
of cloud ; and the great ether; so is one Intelligence divided into
four and called separately the uniform (kutasta) and Individual (Jiva),
Iswara and Brahma ; their mutual distinctions are similar to what
has been said about ether ; so that when you have come to realise
their perception!?, doubts will cease to trouble you, and you will be
able to solve them as they arise. For this reason, I am going to
give you a description of their likeness, by hearing which you will
be free from doubts, and thus having obtained self-knowledge, you
will be freed from the trammels of future re-births.
Now then about the ether of a jar .-when a jar is filled with
* Sayvna Brahma (with attributes) ig meant by the author.
riCHAR SAGAR. 105
water, and a portion left empty, the void or vacuum is Called by
Pandits as the ether present in the jar.
Ether in water. The reflection of the sky with its stars &c,,
in water inside a jar, with the space or ether contained in it,
(the two) constitute the watery ether. If any one will say, there
can be no reflection of the sky, for it is formless, but that the stars
alone have it, then it is removed in the following manner. If the
sky can have no reflection, it cannot likewise have any depth of
sound, which it does communicate to the human ear by the rushing
of a torrent of water ; hence one is obliged to admit the sky as pro
ducing its reflection [in water]. Form is not essentially necessary
to produce a reflection ; an echo is produced by sound which is
formless, and echo is nothing more than the reflection or shadow of
sound. Hence it is quite clear that the formless sky can produce
a reflction.
The Cloud-Ether. The ether present in clouds as well as its reflec
tion in the water which they contain, constitute the cloud-ether.
If any doubts be entertained as to the admission of the reflected
shadow of ether in the water of clouds, for without seeing such
a condition, one cannot believe it, then they are removed easily.
It is indeed true, that no one can see the presence of water in the
clouds nor the shadow of the sky, yet by inference it can be known ;
inasmuch as clouds produce rain and if it is not present in them,
they will be quite powerless to cause rain, and rain is the subject
of the clouds : and where there is water, there is a shadow of ether,
and there can be no water without such shadow. Therefore the subject
of the clouds rain is a reflected shadow of ether ; and its in
ference is a natural conclusion. For this reason, water is termed
Udaka and Odaka. *
That fluid which pervades everywhere, both within and without
is called by a Pandit, Mahakasa ("the great body of ether).
Thus has been described the four varieties of ether ; their hearing
* Odaka is not a word ; Udaka becomes Odaka when coming after
the vowels a, or a ; by union (sandlii) its u is transformed into o, as
<Ganga + Udaka = Gangodaka.
H
KH; V1C11AR SAQAR.
will enable you to distinguish one from the other, and that will
yield knowledge as a result
Intelligence present in each individual unit of Ignorance is
called the Uniform or Eternal (kutastu) ; but when the Jiva is said
to be intelligence with Boodhi combined, then the site of Boodhl
(intellect, Spiritual Intelligence or soul) is fixed in the Uniform
Intelligence, and when (Jiva is looked upon as the distributive
segregate of Ignorance with Intelligence combined, then the site or
occupation of the distributive unit of ignorance is the Uniform In
telligence. That is to say, the predicate of Jiva and its occupa
tion is called the Uniform Intelligence. It is uncreated and without a
beginning, unlike the reflex intelligence which is separate from
Brahma and derived from It. But it is Brahma-like. As the ether
of a jar is non-different from the infinite ether,but simply its modified
likeness; in the same way, the Uniform Intelligence (kutasta),
is what is indicated by the word Self. It is also called the
internal, and constitutes the personality of the individual ; and this
Jiva is the witness.
The reflection of intelligence present in Boodhi, which determines
or causes a man to be engaged in works and optional acts, is called
by the wise Jiva ; and this reflection only is not the jiva. But
as the ether of a jar with the reflected shadow of the sky is called
the ether of water, BO is Jiva the reflection of the internal Uniform
Intelligence with its reflected shadow of intelligence. Here the
conclusion is that the reflex intelligence of Boodhi, and its indwell
ing intelligence, both constitute Jiva.
It is to be remarked, from what has just been said in regard to
the Jiva as being a composition of the Uniform Intelligence with
the reflected shadow of intelligence, that it is natural to conclude
the reflection of intelligence in Boodhi is that of the Uniform Intelli
gence, and not that of Brahma which is external ; for reflection
can only proceed from a thing that is placed near it, in a position
EO as to affect it in that way, and such a thing is the internal Uni
form Intelligence. As in the instance of a red flower and crystal
placed near one another, the flower imparts its red color by the reflec
tion of its shadow, to the crystal, which then assumes a red color ;
VI CHAR SAGAR. 107
so Boodhl which is dependent on the Uniform Intelligence for its
property of discovery, receives its shadow by reflection and becomes
illuminated.
As a crystal is very brilliant, so is Boodhi very pure, for it is
the resulting product of the (Sativd) good quality. Hence the
spirit of the Uniform Intelligence is called reflex intelligence. As
in the water of a jar, there is reflection of the infinite space
or ether and not that of its internal space, inasmuch as the depth
of water rendered apparent inside a jar is not present in the space
inside it, but such depth is merely a shadow of ether, therefore such
reflection is that of the ether external to the jar ; so is the
assertion that the pervasive intelligence can produce no reflection is
cleared away. For, if ether which is equally pervading can produce its
reflection,, then the pervading Intelligence can also produce its reflected
shadow. Then again, if it be said that a substance having a form
and shape can alone produce its reflected shadow on another which
has a form : to such a statement the reply is, that is not essentially
necessary ; for as has already been pointed out, a sound is formless
yet it produces an echo, which is its reflected shadow on the ether.
Thus then we find that the reflection of intelligence is admissible.
In this way Jiva is determined to be the reflex intelligence of
Boodhi, with its indwelling intelligence ; and the indication of the
wordjivania is therefore referrible only to the Uniform Intelligence
after the exclusion of the reflected intelligence, the former of which
is the indication of Thou (Tivam). Aham also refers to Jiva, and it
indicates the same Uniform Intelligence.
In Boodhi the reflected intelligence alone enjoys virtue
and vice.
It comes and goes, but connects it not to Intelligence.
The ether of a jar is by mistake, said to be the cause of
inducing many actions.
Though it is always actionless, and always uniform.
As has already been said, Jiva is the sum of reflex intelligence
plus the uniform Intelligence, and the attributes of the Jiva are
the subjects of reflected intelligence. That is to say, virtue and
108 VICIIAR SAGAR.
vice, with the enjoyment of their results in the next life, >i iv-birth
in another sphere of abode, all these are underwent by the reflex
intelligence with Boodhi. The Uniform Intelligence is not so sub
jected, but illusion attributes them to it ; and this illusion even in
such a condition affects the individual Boodhi with its reflex intelli
gence. For, the Uniform is unconditional and unchangeable, like the
anvil which supports a piece of iron and is beaten continually by the
hammer ; or it is the unassociatcd spiritual soul centred in the sub
jects of ignorance and rendered apparent by it. Here its subjects
cannot be mistaken, as that is only possible with the reflex intelligence.
Moreover if duly considered, it will be found that virtue and vice
with their results, happiness and misery, a future life or re-birth,
are all attached to Boodhi, and absent in reflex intelligence ; but
in its combination with Boodhi they arc so. As a pitcher full of
water is inclined, or kept in a straight position, or carried about,
by its relation with the reflection of ether present inside, (in
dependently it can do nothing,) so the pitcher of Boodhi filled up
with the water of optional and lawful acts sustains [that is ta
say is the holder of] virtue, vice and the rest ; and from the relation
which the reflex intelligence bears to it, this also is alike their
holder. And as the ether of the jar is not subject to any change,
which the jar filled up with water is apt to have, so is the Uniform
Intelligence unchangeable ; in other words, not affected by any
change. So is the case with its knowledge too. Hence the attri
butes of the Jiva are inherent in the reflex intelligence, and ignorance
only attributes them to the Uniform Intelligence. Thus then Jiva
the subject of Boodhi, is tlvj Uniform with its reflex intelligence.
But such a description is harmful to Pmjna.* For his conceit of
profound slumber, he is called Pmjna. In that condition, Boodhi is
entirely absent, so that its reflection cannot be said to exist. Hence
it will be antagonistic to those Skcishvs which treat on Prajna.
For this reason, jiva has been defined separately :
* Prajna means almost ignorant. Its derivative signification is
pra + via + AJ.ia parviscicnt. Therefore parviscience differentiates the
Jiva from Iswara who is omniscient.
VIC1IAR SAGAR. 109
Or, the reflection of intelligence present in each individual
unit of ignorance,
With the inherent Uniform Intelligence is calld Jica.
The individual unit of ignorance* is called its distributive segre
gate, as its collective totality is called its collective aggregate.
The reflection of intelligence present in the first kind of igno
rance with its inherent Uniform Intelligence is the signification
of the word Jiva. It cannot imply any contraindication to Prajna.
For in profound slumber, ignorance is present along with the
reflected shadow of intelligence, which latter assumes the shape of
Boodhi, and determines the appearance of virtue and vice, and the
other phases of a worldly existence both here [and hereafter].
With this view, Boodhi has been described in some Shastras as an
associate of Jiva, but on a proper consideration it will be seen, that
such associate is Ignorance.
Now for a description of ISWARA.
The reflection of intelligence associated with Mayd, with the
inherent intelligence,
Like the ether present in clouds, is the Internal Knower,
and Free.
* Ignorance is used definitely or indefinitely to indicate one or plu
rality ; for instance as a collection of trees constitute a forest, so the
collective totality of Ignorance present everywhere in all individuals, in
diverse forms, is regarded as one. It is the associate of the excellent
Intelligence or consciousness of Brahma and is composed chiefly of the pure
Satwa quality.
Consciousness associated with this totality or collective aggregate
of Ignorance is designated the omniscient, the Lord of all, the controller
of all, the unspeakable, the internal Ruler, cause of the world and Iswara.
As the integral units of a forest signify a- variety of several trees,
so the distributive segregate of Ignorance is manifold, in no two individuals
it is alike, for this difference it is particularized as the individual unit of
ignorance, in contradistinction to the original, indivisible and Impartite
ignorance centred in Iswara, called Mahatatwa. It is the companion
of the parviscicnt finite being. Its composition also differs, for it is
110 VI CHAR SAGAR.
The reflection of intelligence in Maya with the inherent intelli
gence present in it, (the two together) constitute Iswara or Lord.
He resembles the cloud-ether. He is the internal knower, for He
controls all internally and ia always free ; for, He is devoid of envelop
ment, and is therefore not the subject of birth and death ; for this
reason, He ia eternal and free, omniscient, and all-knowing, Because
in him, Maya has a preponderance of pure Saliva quality, and
not Satwa overpowered by Rajas and Tamas ; but on the other hand,
when the two last are overpowered by the first, it is called pure Sativa
guna. It is the productive source of knowledge, hence its property is
that of discovering or illuminating, for which it is called discoverer.
The Intelligence or consciousness of Maya for this preponderance of
Sativavic quality, cannot envelop its subject, or cause another object
to be so enveloped by the reflected shadow of its intelligence, there
fore it is free and omniscient. The inherent intelligence is not
the subject of bondage and release either in jiva or Iswara. Like
ether it is one fluid, but the reflected intelligence is the portion that
is liable to them. The former is apt to be mistaken for the latter,
which alone is subject to bondage and release. The difference is
this : the envelopment of the reflex intelligence is the subject of
bondage, and when the envelopment is wanting, it is free ; and
as Iswara has it not, therefore He is always free. But in the jiva,
it is present, hence he is subject to bondage i. c., liable to re-births.
For jiva is the the reflex intelligence associated with an indivi
dual unit of Ignorance, which has naturally the property of conceal
ment. Now Maya, Avidya, and Ajnana, always refer to the same
Ignorance, but there is a difference in their composition. For,
the first is made chiefly of the pure (Satwa) good quality ; and the
last is derived from a preponderance of the impure good quality ;
while the second and third are synonymous. When the good quality
is overpowered by the active and dark qualities, it is called
impure good. Thus then, as Jiva has a preponderance of impure
made chiefly of the impure Satwa quality. Hence it is but an humble
associate, and its consciousness also has limited perception for which it is
called Prajna (almost ignorant).
V1CHAE SAGAR Ill
good quality, the reflex intelligence associated with the distributive
segregate of Ignorance, is enveloped by it, and makes him the
subject of re-births, which Iswara is not. The inherent Intelligence
associated with Maya, together with its reflection, constitute Iswara.
That is indicated by the word (Tat) That [of the transcendental phrase
That art Thou ] ; while its real signification refers only to the in
herent intelligence. Isiuara is the creator, protector and destroyer
of the world. This is the unanimous testimony of all Shastras.
Its purport is this: Intelligence, is unassociated like the astral light,
while its reflected shadow creates the world, protects and destroys
it, for which He is omniscient. He likewise delivers those who are
desirous of release, from transmigration, through kindness ; moreover
whatever force of manifestation there is, it is present in Him. The
particle of intelligence is uniformly alike and without its illumination,
no success can follow in any pursuit.
[We have now to give a description of Brahma.]
Intelligence present in and out, full and entire,
Like the all-pervading ether, is Brahma. It is neither near
[you] nor distant.*
The intelligence present in Brahma s egg f [universe] both
internally and externally and completely pervading it, like the great
body of ether is called Brahma. It is neither near, nor distant
from you, for It is (objectively) different from you, inasmuch as It has
neither name, form nor associate (unconditional), while you have all
the three hence It is called distant from you. But (subjectively)
It is present everywhere, It is the Self of every individual, and un
associated, hence It is not distant from you. If the signification of the
word Brahma be that of an associate, as It embraces all objects and
* The Vedanta doctrine propounds the contiguity of the Universal
Spirit to the Individual. The word Upanishad refers to it also, for its
etymology up + ni + shad (up near, ni certain, shad to destroy) implies
the knowledge which causes the destruction of Ignorance and enables
the individual to realize the certain contiguity of Brahma to Self.
f I means both the microcosm and the macrocosm.
11-2 riCIIAR SAGAR.
is all pervading, yet such pervasion is of two kinds : (1) Dependent
and (2) Independent. Now the dependent refers to pervasion
depending on a substance or otherwise, as for instance, the pervasion
of Maya in earth etc. Here Maya is not dependent on Intelligence
for its pervasion ; [though it is so, as regards the earth and the other
elements hence the definition does not imply a contradiction as at
first sight it is apt to create]. The independent refers to a substance
that is all-pervading itself. Hence the object of its pervasion is in
dependent. Such is Intelligence, for there is nothing equally per
vasive, or more so than it. It is the most pervasive of all, hence it
Ls called independent. A substance possessed of the above two kinds
of pervasion, is the signification of the word Brahma, They are
the subjects of intelligence associated with Maya [Illusion]. For the
predicate of the subject Maya depends on it for pervasion, while
with reference to Intelligence, it is independently pervasive. Though
the subject of J/a?/a-associated-Intelligence cannot be all-pervading
independently of Intelligence, for it is confined in one province [in
the distributive segregate of individuals, hence the Pure (Un-
associated) Intelligence is such independent pervasion yet really
they are non-distinct from one another, and the first is only another
form of the second. This necessarily brings the predicate of Intelligence
present in the subject (Maya,) to the level of independent pervasion,
and as such, it may refer literally to signify Brahma, while Its real
indication is the Pure Intelligence. Thus then the signification of
7tf?wiraand Brahma are equally known by the indications in the
manner just cited ; and that there is no different meaning. But
even hero, there is a marked difference in the indication, and
the literal signification of the words, Brahma and Isiuara ; inas
much as Brahma generally expresses the indicative indication of a
subject, and at times It only signifies the literal signification ; while
Iswara on the contrary, denotes the literal signification in most
places. For this difference the literal signification of Brahma has
been ascertained by reference to Indicative Indication. *
* Every word or sentence ( pad ) must be construed under one of
three heads m., literal ( vachya ) indicative ( lakshya ) or suggestive
VICHAR SAGAR. 113
Thus are considered the four varieties of Intelligences.
Of the four Intelligences the Jiva is unreal,
He is subjected to enjoy the fruits of merits and demerits ;
While the inherent Intelligence is Shiva.
Oh, Thou Pupil ! Of the four Intelligences already mentioned,
the reflected shadow present in the Jiva alone enjoys happiness,
or suffers misery, for good and bad actions, and their resulting pro
ducts ; and the inherent Uniform Intelligence is designated Shiva,
because it is beneficial. Thus then, your first doubt in reference
to the presence of two birds in the tree of Boodhi [Intellect,
spiritual soul, or spiritual intelligence] is fully answered ; inasmuch
as the Supreme Self and Individual Spirit are meant, with this
difference in them, that the first is Self-illuminated, while the
second is its mere reflection, and the subject of happiness and misery
for deeds good and bad ; but do not attribute to it as a place of,
abode, that wherein reside both Jiva and Faramatma.
The actor s shadow produces results, without any connection
with intelligence ;
That portion is one with it ; bad people know it to be
different.
The reflected intelligence of the Jiva (which is identically the
(Vyangya). Denotation, Indication and Suggestion or Abhidha, Lakshana,
and Vyanjana are their three functions. Our author uses both the
words Vachaya and Lakshya ; so that it is necessary to illustrate Indi
cation. This is defined in the Kavaya Prakasa 11. 9., as that imposed
function which determines the signification of a sentence or word by intro
ducing another meaning as indicated, and doing away with the literal
meaning, when it is incompatible. It has its sanction either in usage or in
the presence of a motive. As for instance "A herd station on the Ganges."
Here the literal meaning of Ganges a river is incompatible with the rest
of the sentence, for no one can live on it. Hence the bank is indicated ;
and this meaning is imposed upon the word Ganges in accordance to
usage. Besides, there is also a motive in using Ganges, instead of the bank ;
as the author sought to convey purity, coolness etc., which the latter word
cannot strictly signify.
15
m V1CHAR SAGAR.
same as Jiva) is called shadow, and actor, for he is the doer of actions ;
such actor s shadow of action which is the reflection of Iswara, is the
producer of results. Asa row of lamps placed on a wall, lights the
north, and other directions ; so has the reflected shadow a similar
relation to illuminate the past and future, besides something else.
Now such shadow is an agent, actor, or doer of actions. It likewise
gwes or produces results ; which means, the reflected intelligence
present in ji-va is the doer of meritorious and bad actions, and
reaps their results accordingly ; while the reflex intelligence present
in Iswara is the producer of such results, i. e., gives good or bad
results to the individual, in proportion to his merits and demerits,
and subjects him to enjoy happiness or suffer misery ; and that, the
Intelligence common to them both, is quite aloof, and not in any
way connected either with actions, their results, enjoyments or
production. In other words, the portion of Intelligence present
in the individual, is never subjected to perform actions or reap
their results ; nor is the same particle of intelligence present in
Iswara, a giver or producer of results. They are each quite un
connected either with actions, their results, or their production.
And he who connects that intelligence in such a relationship is
an illiterate man. Because the Intelligence common to them is
unconditional and unrelated (unassociated) ; identically they are
one and non-different. Bad men only know the individual Intelli
gence and Iswara s intelligence or vice versa as distinct. Here
bad signifies a person who is a reviler. Thus your second question
which tried to render the Vedas fruitless as they define actions
and enjoin works and devotional exercises, 011 account of admit
ting such non-duality is answered. The particle of intelligence
present in the individual as well as in Iswara is one, though their
reflections, owing to their different association, are different. Thus
both varieties of Intelligences are identical.
Pupil, Thus have I met the questions asked of me.
What you say in regard to one tree inhabited by two birds,
Of which one is an enjoyer and the other undesirous.
Intelligence aud its reflection, you make them appear
VICIIAR 8AGAR. 115
Distinct ; as you do with reference to ether and its reflection.
Say the agent and giver of results are two [and]
Intelligence reflected in Boodhi is the actor,
And that in Maya is the father (of results) ;
Of them intelligence is alike in Jiva, and Iswara,
Without the trace of distinction; and peerless.
So then know "I am Brahma."
T is the inherent Uniform Intelligence, know it means Brahma
Keep in mind its indication, the same as infinite ether.
One who knows not "I am Brahma" is poor and miserable,
and persuaded by fear.
The commentator expounds the verses in th>e following manner :
Thus I have answered your questions in reference to one tree having
two birds, of which one is an agent and the other devoid of any
desire of enjoyment. It does not establish non-duality ; [for if they
were one, same inclination would be present]. I have duly mefe
this objection. Here you are not to accept the doctrine of Jiva
and Brahma as one, but to look upon the inherent Uniform Intelli
gence and its reflection in Boodhi as distinct, like the ether in a
jar and the reflected shadow of the sky present in it. Moreover
what you said in regard to the agent or doer of actions, and devo
tional exercises, and the Supreme Self, the giver of results, as distinct
and cannot possibly be one. To that even, I have given my reply,
Jiva is not such an agent. Nor is Iswara the giver of results; but
the particle of reflex intelligence present in the former is the real
agent, while the same reflection in Iswara is the giver of results ;
and intelligence common to them both, is non-dual, without even
the trace of distinction ; as the distributive particle of ether inside
a jar is non-distinct from its collective totality, the infinite ether.
In this way, pupil, you are to determine non-duality, and regard
Self, as Brahma and say "I am Brahma." Know then Aham (Self
or egoism) signifies the Uniform Intelligence, and the word Brahma
has a similar indication with that of infinite ether ; their literal signi
fication is separate, but their indicative indication is non-different.
Hence so long as you do not perceive "I am Brahma" in reference
116 VIC II All SAG AH.
to yourself, you must admit that you are poor and miserable
and your knowledge of Self will only be a source of fear for you.
So that you shall know that you are a Brahma.
Tatwadrishti says :
Oh Bhagavan ! Who has got the knowledge I am Brahma ?
I know it not, without your words I am ignorant.
Preceptor, kindly say who possesses the knowledge I am Brahma/
without your utterances I know it not. The purport of the pupil,
in reference to the perception of such knowledge in the mind, is to
determine whether such knowledge is the subject of the Uniform
intelligence, or of Boodhi with reflex intelligence. If it be said,
that it proceeds from Uniform Intelligence, then it will be subject
to a modification of change [in that case its uniformity is destroyed]
while by connecting it with Boodhi plus reflex intelligence there will
be a mistake, for Boodhi etc., is not Brahma, Hence one cannot iden
tify it in such a manner as to say " I am Brahma." Because you have
already pointed out the oneness of the Uniform Intelligence and
Brahma ; while its reflection is quite distinct from it. Hence to know
such reflex intelligence which is a distinct entity, to be the same as
Brahma, will be an illusion similar to that of a snake in a chord.
Thus then the attribution of " I am Brahma" to Boodhi, with its
reflex of intelligence, is not real knowledge, but an illusion. Moreover,
if the knowledge " I am Brahma" be admitted as unreal, then there
will be no cessation of the unreal world, which can only proceed from a
knowledge that such perception is real ; in the same way as knowledge
of chord destroys the illusion of a snake on it. In this manner, there
is no possibility of attributing to the reflex intelligence of Boodhi the
perception of I am Brahma.
Saith the Gum.
Hear Pupil ! I speak on the seven conditions of reflex intelli
gence which is not the source of Intelligence ; in it is this knowledge.
Pupil, I will now tell you the seven conditions of reflected intelli
gence, which you (better) hear, they are without the Uniform
Intelligence as well as the knowledge "I am Brahma."
They are called (1) iguorance, (2) envelopment, (3) misconception,
VIC EAR SAGAR. 117
etc., (4) ordinary knowledge, (5) particular knowledge, (6) destruction
of misery, and (7) extreme happiness.
1. Ignorance is such as prevents a person from knowing Brahma
and he says I know it not.
2. From avarand or concealment he says there is no Brahma
and it cannot be known.
Oh Pupil, I know not Brahma is an expression due to Igno
rance, and he who uses it is ignorant. "There is no Brahma" " It
cannot be known" are expressions due to envelopment, [Why ?]
Because Ignorance is possessed of two powers called respectively asat-
wapad and avanapad ? (non-existence and want of knowledge). Both
of them are called envelopment/ Now, argument employed to
ascertain the non-existence of an object is known by the first name ;
while the second has reference to such other arguments as determine
its imperception, or want of cognition. Hence, when a person de
clares, "There is no Brahma ;" it is an instance of the first named power
present in Ignorance (non-existence) ; while that other expression
" I cannot perceive Brahma" is an instance of (a want of knowledge)
the second power. Both non-existence (non-being) and want of
knowledge are called by the name of envelopment (concealment.)
3. Misconception, error, or mistake.
To attribute birth, death, the subject of destruction ; to acknowledge
virtue and vice, weal and woe
To one s Self, and to perceive so, is in the Vedas called mistake.
Here Self refers to Uniform Intelligence ; to attribute the ills of an
worldly existence to him, and to believe that he is the entity that is
subjected to birth and death, to happiness and misery, for good and
bad actions is called misconception, error, or mistake. It is likewise
called grief.
4 & 5. The two varieties of knowledge
Are the invisible and visible.
"Brahma is" an instance of the first,
"I am Brahma" of the second kind,
[18 17 CHAR SAGAR.
The invisible destroys the non-being of Brahma
Visibility destroys all ignorance with its trammels.
The non-being of Brahma, due to envelopment, is destroyed
by the knowledge of the invisible kind, which clearly defines Its
existence by the expression "There is Brahma." For the two are
antagonistic of each other, and cannot co-exist; hence the admission
of the existence of Brahma, must do away with Its non-existence
or non-being; an-1 as such a perception is dim and vague,
(nothing definite) it is called invisible. " I am Brahma" is a defi
nite perception, hence it is called visible knowledge [or know
ledge marked by visibility] ; and it causes the destruction of
Ignorance with its trammels. For this knowledge is antagonistic
of that ignorance which says "I know not Brahma," and of that
other kind which declares "There is no Brahma." "It cannot
be cognized" varieties of concealment or envelopment as has just
been remarked ; and to the declaration "I am not a Brahma,"
but an agent of virtue and vice, and an instrument for enjoying
weal or suffering woe i. e., the same as Jiva ; which is a mistake
and these are the trammels or nets of ignorance which cannot
exist with the real, definite, and visible perception of Brahma, which
is expressed by I am Brahma.
G. Birth and death are not in me, nor is there a trace of weal
and woe ;
But I am the Uncreated Uniform Intelligence. To remove a
mistake [by this knowledge] is the best (of its kind).
I am neither the subject of birth and death, nor of happiness
and misery with the concomitant ills of a worldly phase of exis
tence, but am the Uniform Intelligence, uncreated, and unborn,
eternal). Oh Pupil ! in this way to seek the prevention of
all mistakes is to know Self, or such a knowledge is the best of
its kind. Here the reference of Uniform Intelligence as unborn,
stands for all the rest. For creation implies death, happiness and
misery, virtue and vice, so that when it is said to be unborn, it
is free from birth and the rest, and therefore by calling it uncreated
VICHAR SAGAR 119
and unborn, the mistake of attributing miseries to it, is removed or
prevented, for which it has another name also viz., destruction of grief.
7. Happiness and its nature.
To be free of doubts as to Self, is unalloyed knowledge.
Then is produced delight, that you know to be happiness.
Pupil, when you are freed from doubts as to the knowledge
of what Self is like, so as to enable you to say "I am Brahma"
(free from duality) then you will experience delight, which know-
then to be happiness.
I say to you the seven conditions, pupil for you to know.
To know them of reflections constitutes knowledge
Who derives knowledge, you asked of me
That I have replied, now ask what you like.
In other words, the drift of your question is now being rendered
apparent (or discovered) by a pupil.
Bhagavan ! I am Brahma is then of reflex Intelligence s
Thou sayst it so, and I apprehend ; yet I have a doubt.
[For]. Reflex is distinct from Brahma,
This Thou hast pointed out before.
How then to know I am Brahma,
Admit Self to be distinct from Brahma.
To know otherwise (non-duality) is unreal
Like a snake created in a rope
Remove this doubt ! Worshipful Guru !
And with thine reasons let me hear thine utterances.
Bhagavan ! Thou hast said the Uniform and reflex Intelligences
are one ; also the last is distinct from Brahma ; in that case how can
such reflected intelligence distinct from Brahma, be identified
with the knowledge and perception of I am Bramha ? The in
herent Uniform Intelligence occupying me is alone Brahma, to
know as such its reflection is only real knowledge. Moreover I
am Brahma is not real knowledge. For the first personal pronoun
signifying the principle .of Egoism, individuality, or Self, is alto
gether different from the reflex Intelligence, and as Self is same with
IL>O r irii A a
Brahma, therefore the reflection of Intelligence is quite distinct from
It, hence such a mistake confounding the reflex lutelligence with
Brahma is a false perception, similar to that of a suake in a rope.
Here false signifies unreal, erroneous perception or knowledge ;
but it cannot be applied to the knowledge of Brahma [inasmuch as
It is real].
Listen now to the signification of Egoism, Oh ye pupil
discriminating
Listen to non-duality, similar defects (to what you say
there are) many.
In plainer terms :
Though in reflex there is present the perception I am Brahma*
Yet such conceit is in the Uniform,
Which is non-different from it, pervasive and causal,
Manifesting itself as Brahma, in the removal of obstacle.
Pupil. Though the spiritual soul or intelligence (Boodhi) with
the reflex is the seat of the perception I am Brahma/ and not the
Uniform, yet such reflex knows that the Uniform Intelligence audits
principle of individuality are the Atma indicated by the first person
al pronoun I which also is the same as Aham. Now Aham
establishes the Uniform Intelligence as always non-different from
Brahma, as the space covered by a jar is always one with the
infininte space from which it cannot be in any way demarcated.
Hence the Vedantin describes this mutual relationship of the Uni
form with Brahma as Mukha Samanadikarana (a main predicament
or inference in which several things are included.
When a thing is always non-different from another thing, their
association is called a Mukshya Samanadhikarana. As for instance,
the space engrossed by a jar is always non-different from the infinite
space which is ever present along with it, therefore the jar-space
is the infinite space; and as such, the first has in relation to the
last, the condition of a predicament in which it is included with it.
In the same manner, the Uniform lutelligence has, in connection
V1CHAE SAGAE. 121
with Brahma a similar main inclusive predicament/* because they
are always non-different from one another.
Moreover, the reflex intelligence rendered apparent by the
first personal pronoun I for including or confining Self in it, ia
non-distinct from Brahma, just as the reflection of a face is non-
distinct from the face and included in it. Hence the Vedant
Shastra declares the reflex intelligence as an associate of Brahma
and included in it. This is called Vadha samanadhikarana. It means
that condition of mutual relationship, when a thing establishes its
non-difference with its companion by lapsing into It. Here the
thing is a Vadha samanadhikarana to its companion. As for instance,
the reflection of a face merges into the face (when the mirror is
withdrawn) hence they are non-distinct ; the reflection is the face
itself and not as something different, and this mutual relationship of
the reflection with the face is called (Vadh samanadhikarana)
community of reference by merging.
Or, as in a person mistaking the stump of a tree for a man, after
the tree is known the form of a man disappears and the tree is rendered
apparent. Here the person has a community of reference to the tree
of the second kind ;
Similarly by the disappearance of the reflected Intelligence, it
becomes one with Universal Intelligence, which is one with Brahma,
hence its reference to T is the same with Brahma, and not dis
tinct from it. Such a community of reference the reflex intelligence
has with Brahma, by merging or disappearing into it.
In this manner pupil, you are to determine the Uniform Intelli
gence indicated by the word T as without any distinction whatever,
and by the merging of the reflex into it, this one is likewise non-
different.
Says Tatwadrishti :
The witness and reflex are recognized in the function of Egoism,
say then, whether they are contemporaneous or otherwise.
Bhagavan, you have said that in Egoism both the witness and
* Community of reference or mutual relationship is the meaning of
-Sdmanadhikarana.
16
122 VICHAR SAGAR.
reflex are recognized to be present ; ou this subject I do not under
stand whether the function of the subject [witness] of that individu
ality, or Egoism, determines the uniform and reflex intelligence
at the same time, or at different times ; do explain it so that I may
understand.
The utterance of the reverend Guru is as follows :
Listen attentively to the essence of the reply which I give, that
will clear your darkness and bring in the light of perception [help
your knowledge].
Pupil, I will now reply to your question ; it embraces all the
points raised by you, so that if you listen attentively to it, the dark
ness of ignorance will be destroyed and the light of knowledge will
help your perception.
In one time the witness and reflex are cognised
Secondly on the subject of intelligence, the first is Self-
illuminated.
Pupil, both the witnessing and reflex intelligences are mani
fested in the principle of individuality at one time ; on all subjects,
reflex is to be taken as the reflected intelligence along with the
internal organ ; secondly means the intelligence present in the
internal organ with its reflex intelligence and which constitutes
what is called a witness, agent, or instrument and recognized, or
determined as such, by the function of the internal organ. The wit
ness is self-illuminated, and is not the subject of the function of the
internal organ with its reflection of intelligence.
The perception of a jar or another external object takes place
in the following manner :
When the Sensory organs combine with a jar etc., the function
of the internal organ issues through the senses, and assumes the
shape of the jar ; as a melted metal assumes the shape of the mould
in which it is cast, so does the function of the internal organ assume
the modification of the jar (or other external object which it
cognises) but that function is not without reflex intelligence,
but with it ; for function is only a modification or condition
s>f the internal orgao, and is called so. A the internal organ
VICHAR SAGAR. 123
is derived from the Sativa or good quality, it is naturally trans
parent and luminous, consequently the subject of its function
is reflex intelligence aud as its function is likewise transparent
and luminous and a derivative product of its action, it has also a
reflex intelligence. Moreover when the function is excited, it is
produced with the reflex intelligence from the internal organ ; even
from such a cause, the function is derived from the reflex intelli
gence, and its subject a jar is the result of Tamas or dark quality,
hence naturally insentient ; and its subject ignorance is also its
envelopment. Here a doubt may arise, that ignorance and its
envelopment are also present in the intelligence and not in a jar
for similar reasons derived from analogy ; for ignorance is dependent
on intelligence, and forms its subject, according to the Vedanta. More
over as has already been said, while treating of the seven conditions,
that ignorance is dependent on the internal organ together with
its reflection, so that the predilection for such ignorance as expressed
by the declaration "I am ignorant" can only refer to the internal
organ with its reflex intelligence. Hence intelligence is said to
be the prop or main support of ignorance, which intelligence
represents the internal organ together with reflection, because the
internal organ with its reflection of intelligence are an action of
ignorance. Now as the action of a thing cannot be its prop or support,
therefore intelligence alone is tho receptacle or support of ignorance ;
also it is the subject of ignorance. What conceals the identity
of a thing is spoken of as a subject formed by ignorance ; in con
nection with insentient objects, ignorance can play no part in con
cealing their identity or real likeness, for they are naturally covered
or enshrouded, [as they are wanting in the light of intelligence]
so that the envelopment of ignorance does not apply to them. In
this manner, Intelligence is the prop and subject of ignorance, just as
the darkness of a room envelops its interior, and forms its environ
ment and not that of a jar (present there).
(Wny) ? As ignorance is something quite distinct from intelli
genceneither existent, nor non-existent it is dependent on intelli
gence. Hence ignorance enshrouds intelligence. In the same
way, ignorance which is quite distinct from a jar, though not
124 rii HAR SAGAR.
dependent on it, yet it covers a iar and -discovers it as something
insentient ; hence ajar is always covered by the darkness of igno
rance. Because iguorance has a preponderance of darkness and ia
the productive source of all the elements, and jar is elementary in
composition, hence it is derived from ignorance : and as darkness
has naturally the property of concealment in it, therefore a jar is
naturally devoid of luminosity and is darkblind. Thus is estab
lished the natural darkness of ajar which is due to its covering of
Ignorance.* Moreover, the Ignorance dependent on the inherent
intelligence of ajar covers that intelligence, and endows it with en
vironment which is naturally covered already. Now though a body
naturally covered needs not any other covering, yet it is generally
known, that in the absence of such necessity like an uncovered object,
Ignorance [producing concealment] does cover a body which is already
enshrouded, so that a jar with its covering or envelopment of igno
rance is only rendered visible by the internal organ with its reflec
tion of intelligence assuming the shape of the jar, its function
* Ignorance is explained in quite another way. It is the same as
Mtda Pralcriti or the primordial undifferentiated cosmic matter. Sankhya s
PraJcriti (Matter) and the Vedantin s Ignorance and Maya are synony
mous. It is described as neither existent nor non-existent. Existent
since every one says I am ignorant, it is present in all men and animals,
in the inanimate world, and everywhere clso. Non-existent, because
with the advent of knowledge it disappears for a similar reason it is
called indescribable, i. e. to say something which cannot be definitely
determined. Ignorance is possessed of the three qualities, Satwa, Raja
and Tama the good, active and dark. According to Kapila Prakriti
through the changes wrought upon it from a close contiguity of the
Purusha or Spirit undergoes a change in its qualities, which disturbs its
equilibrium and induces further changes, whereby the objective world
and all it contains are produced. In such a view, there is no need of a
personal Creator. It is simply evolution brought on by the influence of
the physical forces through the change impressed upon them, by the con
tact of the Spirit, in the same way as a magnet attracts a piece of iron
and converts it into a temporary magnet, by imparting its properties.
VICI1AR SAGAR. 125
dispersing the covering of ignorance, while the reflection of intelligence
present in such function discovers or renders it visible. Thus then in
regard to all external objects, both the function and its reflex intelli
gence are applied to render them visible. For example, as in a dark
room, an earthen or iron vessel covered by an earthen salver, can be
uncovered by breaking the salver with a stick ; yet without the light
of a lamp, the vessel cannot be discovered though its envelopment
has been removed ; so ajar covered with ignorance, gets its covering
removed by the function of the internal organ, but that does not
render it visible, because the jar is naturally insentient and wanting
in light, which is also the case with function, whose province is only
to break the covering, hence the reflex is the discoverer of the jar,
i. e.> renders it visible to the eyes. In this manner, cognition by
means of sight is brought about. The same rule holds with cogni
tion by means of hearing and the rest.
This is called visible knowledge, because the function and jar
reside in the same province.
As the function of the internal organ asssumes the shape of a
jar, and between it and function, there is no relation, but the latter
is quite distinct, therefore this is called the invisible knowledge of
a jar. Now such a knowledge can only determine the existence
of a jar as Jar is, while the first renders it visible and ascertains
it definitely as "This is a jar." These then are the forms of; visible
and invisible knowledge.
Though the remembrance of a thing is its invisible knowledge
yet such remembrance is due to conception ; inference in the same
way produces invisible knowledge by analogical proofs, that is the
difference in them. While on the subject of proofs I have ascer
tained their nature. A Charvaka anly admits visible proofs. The
followers of Kanada and Suguta admit the proof established by
analogy, for by admitting the former, there will be no inclination
for enjoyment necessary to the gratification of appetite. The
sight of an uneaten dinner can produce no gratification of the
appetite ; in such a condition the visible proof is inefficient to cause
visible knowledge ; hence one who has experienced gratification by
eating a dinner, and has determined the source of gratification, may
126 VI6HAR SAGAR.
equally conceive such gratification to be present in an uneaten dinner,
for reaping which, he shows an inclination to eat, thus admitting the
proof of an analogical inference ; this is the reason why the followers
of Kanad and Suguta admit both the visible and analogical proofs.
Moreover the followers of Kapila, the author of the Sankhya
Philosophy admit the proofs derived from sound. Thoy say, visible
and analogical proofs ought not to affect a person whose father is
absent in a distant country, by the receipt of intelligence that he
is dead ; for here the death of an absent father in a distant country
cannot be rendered visibly clear to the son either by the visible
proof or an analogical inference, hence according to Kapila, sound
is the third variety of proof; that alone explains the grief which
the son suffers on receiving the intelligence of his father s death.
The followers of Gautama, the author of Naya, admit compassion
as the fourth variety of proof. Because, from an admission of the
first three proofs, when a person who has never seen a Gayal, * but
has heard a description from one residing in the woods, that it resem
bles a cow, goes into a jungle and sees the animal, he recollects
the description given of it by a resident of a forest, and from such
a recollection, he afterwards recognizes the animal to be a Gayal ;
this should not be. Hence such a distinct knowledge is due to
simili, resemblance, or comparison, which is also recognized as a
proof.
A Pravakar follower of the author of Purva Mimansa of the same
name (a disciple of Vadia of another country) cites arthapati as a
fifth variety of proof. From the sight of plumpness in a man who
eats nothing by day time, a person is apt to conceive that he takes
his food in the night, AS otherwise it is impossible for the body
not to lose flesh ; under such circumstances night-eating is a promo
ter of corpulency ; hence it is the promoting cause of corpu
lency which is its effect, therefore the knowledge of the first is
called the arthapati or denoting cause of the knowledge of corpu
lency. The knowledge of the effect of night eating is called the
* A species of ox, erroneously attributed by Hindu writers to be a
deer.
VICHAR SAQAR. 127
denoting casual proof ; and the Vadia followers of Purva Mimansa
cite a sixth proof in what is unfelt by experience (anupalabdhi).
The necessity for it is established in this manner. In a house the
absence of a jar is felt, here an object is wanting, yet it produces
the knowledge (that it is not present) : now an unperceived object
is called an unfeit or unexperienced one, therefore the imperception
of a jar, determines its absence. In this way, the source of ascer
taining the absence of an object is its imperception, which is called
(anupalabdhi praman a) or proofs unfelt by experience.
The means of producing true knowledge or perception of an
object are called proofs. The instrument which forms the subject
of unrestrained signification and different from memory, is called
Prama or real demonstrator. Knowledge of memory cannot be
called true perception or consciousness for that must be dependent on
the giver of evidence or Pramata^ which memory is not, but depen*
dent on the witnessing intelligence (instead) ; this is an admitted
fact. Moreover misconception and doubts are also admitted as
dependent on the same intelligence. For this reason recollection,
misccnception, and doubts are spoken as forms of Ignorance
(avidya) with reflection of Intelligence, and not that of the function
of the internal organ, so that they are independent of the (pramata)
senses but dependent on the Uniform Intelligence which is a witness,
agent, or instrument. Therefore knowledge which assumes the
shape of (i. e., modification of) the function of the internal organ is
dependent on the senses, but independent cf the witnessing intelli
gence and what is derived through the senses is called prama.
Knowledge derived from memory is not a function of the mind,
hence independent of the senses ; so is true perception or knowledge
hence the indications of true knowledge are necessarily called to be
distinct from memory or recollection, knowledge derived from which,
* In a former portion of the work the author refers to the sensory organs
as giver of evidence, or pramata inasmuch as all knowledge is mainly
derived from experience which they are the means of producing, and
this fact is corroborated by the Western Metaphysicians too. Hence
the senses are used for pramata*
L28 VI CHAR SAG Ml
though it forms the subject of unrestrained interpretation, yet as
puch knowledge is not distinct from memory, therefore what pro
duces the true perception, the subject of unrestrained interpretation,
is called pram** (consciousness *). Such an indication is free from
defects. Moreover some look upon knowledge derived from memory
as true perception (prama) ; we should not say, that in their mind
they do not hold the indications of true perception or conscious
ness as something distinct from memory or recollection ; but true
perception is that which forms the subject of unrestrained inter
pretation. A misconception cannot form such a subject, hence the
indications of true perception are absent in misconception ; and one
who in his mind uses knowledge derived from memory as a true
perception, such knowledge then becomes a function of his internal
organ, and not a function of ignorance independent of the witness
ing intelligence, but dependent on (pramata) proofs ; inasmuch as
the protector of the mental function is the one who gives evidence
(pramata) and not the witnessing intelligence. In this way, know
ledge produced from recollection is a function of the internal organ
in some persons and thus resembles a true perception, while in
others it is only function and hence not such perception.
Moreover, misconception and doubts are the functions of Igno
rance in every mind and dependent on the witness. This is uni
versally admitted ; also on due consideration it will be found that
knowledge derived from memory is equally a function of ignorance,
and likewise dependent on the witness, and quite unlike true per
ception or knowledge. Because the followers of Vedanta classify
knowledge of proofs under six heads, in which knowledge from
memory is not included, hence it is not true knowledge. Then
again Madhusudana Swami says it to be dependent on the wit
ness.
Knowledge from proofs is thus classified.
(1) Visible perception -f (prataksha prama) derived from sight.
* Consciousness, true perception or knowledge are synonymously
used for Frama*
t Or better as follows : Perception, inference, sound, comparison etc.
VICHAR SAGAR. 129
(2) Inferred (anumiti) derived as a natural inference.
(3) Heard (sai>c?tt) derived from sound.
(4) Similitude (upamiti) caused by resemblance.
(5) Denoting cause (arthapati)
(6) Negative (abhav)
These with the six visible proofs before mentioned, constitute
in a consecutive order the instrument or means of action (Jcarma).
The instrument or means of true perception is called visible proof
{pramana).
The extraordinary (or particular) cause is called an instrument,
while the general cause of all actions is called the ordinary cause ;
as virtue and vice for their being the general cause of all actions
are called ordinary cause and not an universal cause ; but an extra
ordinary cause is that which produces a certain action, something
definite, as for instance the turning rod of a potter. Here it
cannot produce all sorts of actions, but stands as a cause for the
production of an earthen jar, or something equally definite, hence
its cause. Therefore a turning rod is called an extraordinary cause,
as also the cause of ajar, a pitcher, etc.
Similarly Iswara and his will [i. e., volition, consciousness]
are the ordinary cause of visible perception, (i. e., the objective world
which ever floats before the consciousness of the individual) ;
because all actions are derived from him, and without him no
thing is produced. Hence Iswar is the ordinary cause. Then
again, the external organs of sense, [eyes, hearing, etc.,] are called
the extraordinary cause of visible perception. In this way, the
sensory organs, -eyes, hearing and the rest constitute the visible
proofs (prataksha pramana), though the Vedanta does not look
upon them (sensory organs) as the cause of the perception,* because
intelligence is marked by four distinctions.
* The senses are the source of illusion, hence they cannot be looked
upon as the cause or source of true perception or real knowledge. This
is the conclusion of the Vedanta. It is worthy of note, that Western
Metaphysicians have also been coming round to admit its truth.
17
13 o V1CHAR SAOAR
These are
(1) Intelligence of one who gives evidence (Pramata^,
(2) Intelligence of proofs (pramano),
(3) Intelligence of what is proved, or authentic ; same as
perception (pratna) and
(4) Proveable or finite ; or subjective Intelligence (prameya)
as it is also, called.
Thus perception is another name for intelligence, which is
eternal. It is not derived from the sensory organs, hence they are
not its cause. But then, the function of intelligence which accom
plishes true perception and determines its uses, is likewise called
perception, consciousness, or knowledge. The sensory organs are
its instruments or means. The United or finite intelligence of the
internal organ intrinsically situated, is one which gives evidence and
called so (Pramatal That internal organ issuing out of the body
through the respective channels of sight, hearing, and the rest
lengthens its size to cover the site occupied by a jar or an
other object, which it seeks to discover ; it then assumes the modi
fication or shape of that jar, by combining with it. As water,
confined in a tank, issuing through a tap, or opening, runs into
an aqueduct and is then lengthened in size till it reaches the
several beds in a garden which it irrigates ; and as in its several
stages, that water assumes the modification, or shape of the aque
duct, and the beds through which it traverses ; so the internal organ
issuing through the outlets of the sensory organs, goes to the sub
ject of its discovery (as if its bed) ; then from the body to the subject
of the jar, the elongated size of the internal organ like that of an
aqueduct, as in the above instance, is called its function, which
for limiting the intelligence is called (pramana chetan) demon
strating intelligence, and the functional intelligence or modifica
tion of the internal organ is called demonstration (pramana).
Like the water running through its beds assuming their shape,
the internal organ assumes the shape of the subject it overtakes
or covers; in this way, it is modified into a jar or another object,
and the limited intelligence is thus called (prama) the intell
gence which gives evidence. Consciousness which is the subject
VIC EAR SAGAE. 131
of a jar etc., and limited by it, is called the subjective intelligence,
as also proveable intelligence. Now those versed in the Vedas
determine their explanation and ascertain the difference between
them in the following wise :
Those who propound tha distinguishing feature to consist in the
limitedness (Abachedavadi) of the intelligence, assert that the func
tional intelligence of the internal organ is the demonstration. It is
likewise the agent and instrument ; and its associate (witness) is its
demonstrator or giver of evidence, and therefore the predicate of that
demonstrator, while the demonstration is an associate.
A predicate (visheshan) is such as enters into the nature of a
subject. It is an object capable of covering or surrounding a
subject, and, inasmuch as it seeks to differentiate or particularize
a thing from another, it is called a byavartaka [or encompasser].
As for instance a Blue jar. Here blue is a predicate of its quali
fying substantive jar, for it enters into [covers] a jar and differen
tiates it from a yellow or black etc., jar, hence blue is an encompasser,
and is likewise the predicate of jar which is the object covered.
That is to say, since, a blue jar is distinct from such another jar
that is white, black, yellow, green etc., and since this difference,
is manifested or created by the jar itself, it is called covered, or
encompassed.
It is likewise the subject or noun. As in the example, "He is
a Dandi or stick carrying person,"* here the stick is the subject of
that person. In the same way, the internal organ is the predicate
of the one which gives evidence (pramata). Because the subject of
such witness is covered or entered into by tho internal organ, and
establishes it as something distinct and particular from the intelli
gence concerning a thing to be proved (prama), thus constituting
what has already been mentioned an encompasser.
* A class of religious mendicants who burn the sacred thread, and
carry a stick in their hand. They live entirely on alms, not begging twice
in the day, nor going to a fourth house after being refused a meal in the
first three. They are given entirely to study, and religious works and
meditation. In Benares many of them are to be found ; of whom very
few are real Dandces. They dye their clothes with the red garoa
j:;2 VICHAR SAGAR.
A thing that enters not the substance of a subject, but is only aa
encompasser is called an associate (upadhi). As (according to
the Naiyaikas) the divided ether present in the external meatus
of the ear is called the organ of hearing ; here the external meatua
is the associate of the hearing organ, for it does not enter into the
subject of such hearing [situated outside, it does not cover the inter
nal parts which are concerned in the production of sound ] but is
simply an encompasser because it differentiates the ether
present in it, as something different from the ether situated outside
of it, inasmuch as it hears, which the outer ether cannot.
Likewise in the instance of the ether in a jar, the former gives
the latter space enough to contain a maund of food-grains, here
even, the ether is the associate of jar, for the creator of the space
to contain the maund of rice etc., ether cannot be entered into
by a jar ; as it is earthy in composition, it has a void space in it,
and cannot be naturally penetrated. Moreover the ether is parti
cularized from the all-pervading ether present everywhere, hence the
creator of the space to contain a maund of food-grains ether is
the associate of jar.
Similarly, the associated intelligence of the internal organ is the
associate of witness, for the nature of the witness cannot be pene
trated or covered by the internal organ, and it differentiates the
intelligence of that which is to be proved, as something distinct
from the witness, so that the same internal organ is the associate
of witness and the subject of that which gives evidence, and called
pramata chetan. In this way, intelligence associated with the
internal organ is the witness, and the subjective intelligence of the
same organ is one that gives evidence. It is the agent or instru
ment, that is to say, a doer, an eater, and is happy and miserable.
According to the doctrine ot Avasvada (who propound the
reflex intelligence) the internal organ with reflex intelligence is
the predicate of Jlva, and associate of witness, so that Jiva
is reflex intelligence with the subjective intelligence of the internal
organ, while witness is the same reflection of intelligence with the
associated intelligence of the internal organ.
Though in both these views, intelligence with its predicate is
VI CHAR SA.GAR 133
Jiva, who is subjected to an earthly existence, yet that portion
which is the subject of the predicate viz, intelligence, cannot possibly
be a subject of birth and death, happiness and misery, and the
usual phases of an earthly existence ; hence the predicate alone
refers to earthly life, which sometimes appeal s and is set forth in
the subjective intelligence, as in reference to the subjective con
ditions of virtue, and sometimes as a subject of subjective virtue ;
while in other places, both as a predicate and subject in the sub
jective conditions of virtue. As the space or ether; in a jar is des
troyed by a stick (which breaks it) ; here jar is the predicate des
troyed by the stick, and not its subject the ether, for it is impossible
to destroy it, yet in common parlance, it signifies that the stick
destroys the subjective space or ether of that jar.
Moreover, in the instance, "He is the man with the earring"; here
with the earring is a predicate, having for its subject man. Now
the predicate earring cannot be formed or created by the subject
man/ but the contrary holds true, and thus with the earring is
used to signify a subjective condition, a condition which constitutes
the predicate, the possession of the earrings in the present case.
Also in the instance, "An armed person has gone to battle" ; both
arms [of war] and person the subject have gone to battle, so that
both of them signify the occupation and are used to indicate the
constitution of the predicate.
Here an Avachedavadi looks upon the internal organ as the
predicate, while the expounders of reflex intelligence hold the
reflection of the internal organ as predicate, but both of them
agree in calling Intelligence as the subject. Now this Intelligence
i* devoid of birth and death, happiness and misery ; but the predicate
internal organ or its reflex Intelligence which is the entity that is
subjected to birth and death is used to signify the subjective intelli
gence. ( Used stands for expressing or declaring.)
Thus then is the difference in the doctrine of the two aforesaid
sects. According to an Abhasvadi the internal organ is said to
be made up with reflection of Intelligence, while the doctrine of
his rival, (Avachedvadi) does not admit of such reflection. Of these
two, the former is the best, for the ( BhashyJcar) commentator of the
134 riClIAli SAG All
Vedanta has admitted reflex intelligence as a fact, thus upholding
the doctrine of an Abhashvadi ; while in regard to the Abacked-
vadin Swami Vidyaran says it t<> be faulty.
If the finite intelligence devoid of reflection of the internal
organ be accepted as the one which gives evidence (pramata), then
the limited intelligence of a jar may equally be called so. Be
cause the internal organ is a derivative product of the elements;
so is ajar equally so. Then again, as the intelligence of the inter
nal organ is limited [distinct] call it hemmed in, sourrounded
or encompassed so is the intelligence of a jar equally limited.
Hence the intelligence constituting the predicate of the internal
organ, equally with that constituting the predicate of a jar, may
justly be considered as tho one which gives evidence ; but such de
fect is easily removed by an admission of the- reflex intelligence of
the internal organ, inasmuch as the internal organ being derived
from the Sativavic or good quality present in the elements, [ether
and the rest], is luminous and transparent, while a jar is a product
of the dark quality of the same elements, therefore not luminous
or transparent. A transparent or luminous substance is only capable
of reflecting ; a dark thing can create it not. For example a (look
ing) glass and its cover are equally produced from earth, but the
former is transparent while the latter is not, hence glass alone is
capable of showing the reflection of a person s face. In the same
way, the internal organ, being produced from the good quality
[of ether and the rest] is transparent, for which intelligence is re
flected on it. The gross physical body etc., as well as a jar, and other
substances are all products of the dark quality, hence they are not
transparent, consequently intelligence is not reflected on them.
Thus we find the internal organ to be the seat of two sorts of
manifest ibiity ; of which one is the manifest iblity of the all-
pervading Intelligence, and the other that of reflection. The first
(not the second) is present in the gross body, jar, and other objects.
Hence the internal organ for its being endowed with both the
intelligences is the pramata, while a jar etc., having only one in
telligence is not so. Those who do not admit the doctrine of
reflection of intelligence in the internal organ, are reduced to the
VI CHAR SAQAR. 135
condition of looking upon it as the seat of one intelligence, like
that of a jar etc., consequently the same all-pervading intelli
gence is present both in a jar and the internal organ, so that
for the presence of this one intelligence equally everywhere, in the
internal organ, a jar, the gross body, etc., all of them equally
with the first, must be reckoned as what gives evidence. Accord
ingly we find, wherein is the difference between the body etc., and
the internal organ. That is to say, the internal organ for its being
an action of the good qualily is transparent ; and the rest, as they are
opaque are not endowed with the property of receiving such a
reflection. And the internal organ for its capability of receiving
a reflection in combination with intelligence, is what is called
pramata, But the body, jar, etc., are not so favourably circum
stanced ; they have no property of receiving a reflection, consequent
ly without such reflex, but with only the one pervading Intelligence,
they are not pramita. Thus is determined why the doctrine of
reflex is superior to that other the Avacheda vada ; and why the
latter one is not good.
As the internal organ is possessed with the reflection of intelli
gence, so is its function endowed with a similar reflection ; this
functional reflex intelligence is called the demonstrating (pramana)
Intelligence. Intelligence over-riding the mental function which
assumes the shape of a jar etc., (for the purpose of cognising or dis
covering it) is called true knowledge, (praina). The means for
attaining such knowledge, the external organs of sense are called
(praman) proofs, for intelligence which rides over the function that
assumes the shape or modification of a subject is called true know
ledge. And it may be said, that such intelligence being perma
nent, it cannot stand in any need of the sensory organs, hence they
cannot be called as a means of true knowledge. But as all true
knowledge is not attributed to the unassociated intelligence, but
to the associated Intelligence of the mental function, after it has
assumed the shape of a subject, therefore in regard to intelligence,
in the inclination for true knowledge, the associate is the mental
function which undergoes the shape of a subject, which is due to the
senses, for they are its means,
VIC EAR SAGAL
If the associate of true knowledge mental function be due
to the sensory organs, then the associated knowledge must alike be
due to them, hence they are called the means for true knowledge.
Then again, all modifications or changes wrought upon the mind
are not called proofs. Hence when the mind situated inside the
body, takes for its subject a jar for the purpose of discovering
it, and assumes its shape, such a change or modification is alone a
proof (pramano) and its subjects or the component units of such
subject after which the mind is moulded, are called true knowledge
(prama). From the mind situated inside the body to its subject
ajar etc., and its assuming the shape of such subject, is modification
of true knowledge, so that there is not much difference between
such true knowledge and the function of the internal organ* which
is only a form of proof.
Thus then, in the cognition of an external object the mental
function issuing out of the body covers such an object, a jar and the
rest, and assumes a similar shape : in the case, of Self (Atma) that
function does not issue out, but remaining inside is moulded into
the shape of the Atma; by the same function, the concealment of
Self is driven away, when through his own luminosity he is manifest
ed or discovered in the function. For this reason, it is said, the sub
ject of the mental function, and not that of reflection of intelligence,
(a result of that function), is Self. In this way, the witness Self is
known as Self-manifested. This is clearly established.
Saith Tatwadrishti
Without relation of the senses, to know I am Brahma
How is rendered visible, Lord, explain it to me.
The visible or apparent knowledge of Brahma, destroys all
the meshes of ignorance, the invisible cannot effect it, as has already
been said ; if any doubts arise concerning the visible knowledge of
Brahma, inasmuch as cognition by the sensory organ can alone
render an object visible, which cannot apply to Brahma, for the
* Mind and internal organ (antakarana) are synonymous.
V2CIIAR SAGAR. ,137
sense of sight ia powerless to determine or render It visible ;
that the image of Rama, Krishna, etc., their human shape are
all productions of illusion, false and do not represent the Brah~
ma ; though in the Purana Ram, Krishna etc., are said to be incar
nations of Brahma, yet it does not say that their bodily figures as
represented in images are Its representation ; what it means is simply
this, that the intelligence present or inherent in such bodies ia
Brahma. Now with reference to such intelligence it may be
alleged, that its presence in all bodies is Brahma ; accordingly
its presence in the bodies of Ram and Krishna is Brahma] so
that birds and beasts as well as other creatures having the same
inherent intelligence may equally claim to be Brahma, and con
ditionally similar to a Rama or Krishna, so the natural inference
is, that the resemblance with Brahma is not the inherent intelli
gence, but to particularize It and the individual, the body is the
source. But this is clearly inadmissible. For if the impediment
of body constitutes a Brahma, in the case of Ram and Krishna,
then other creatures have their individual bodies too, they may as
well be called Brahma. But such is not the case, for bodies having
a form and features, with hands and feet, and subject to action, can
claim no identity with one which is formless and actionless, and
such a one is Brahma. Thus we find the bodies of Ram and
Krishna are not Brahma. Now the difference is this, the indi
vidual s body is dependent on his merits and demerits, and is a
product of the elements (ether and the rest). From the force of
ignorance, he is apt to connect Self with the unspiritual parts of
his body beginning with the body and ending in the mind * and
* Says the Vedanta Sara :
An illiterate person considers his son to be his Self. A Charvdka says
his gross physical body to .be his Self; another believes Self to be
identical with the senses, a third says his vital airs, Self ; there are
others again who recognise the mind as Self.
Some Buddhists affirm that Boodhi (Intellect or spiritual soul) is the
, A tma,
18
138 YICIIAR SAQAR
mine and thiue are attributions of illusion on the different parts of
the body which can only be dispelled by the precepts of a professor.
Now in reference to the body of a Ram or Krishna, virtue and
vice plays no part in its production, nor is it derived from an action
of elements ; but as the time of creation arrives after each cyclic
period of destruction, for enabling individuals to enjoy or suffer
according to- their merits and demerits of a previous birth, Isivara
though entirely dependent on his own Will, is actuated with a de
sire to create the world ; no sooner he resolves to do it, than the
world is created ; subsequently he determines to sustain it and he
maintains it accordingly. Here maintain signifies allotting to each
man his share of happiness and woe according to his merit or demerit.
Jn the midst of such determination to maintain the world by the
sheer dint of devotions on the part of his worshippers, he resolves
lo set forth the images of of Ram, Krishna, and though he is devoid
of a particular name and form, yet the image of Krishna, Pitambar,
Syam-Soonder, has its origin in his resolution. They are indepen
dent of action.
A good man as well us a bad] one may equally enjoy happiness
or suffer from misery one after the other, by serving a Ram or
Krishna; what constitutes the cause of happiness or misery is
composed of virtue and vice, hence they are said to be dependent.
Thus then, as the incarnated bodies of good and devout persona are
produced for enjoying happiness, their bodies are said to be com
posed entirely of virtue ; in the same way, the body of an Asura and
undevout person is mainly for the suffering of misery hence it
is said to be made cf vice, so that it cannot be said that such incar
nations are not the products of virtue and vice.
Then again, as the subsequent body is the result of virtue and
vice, i. e. y of good and bad actions done in a prior state of existence,
and happiness or misery which the individual has for his share is
an after effect of such works, yet the Jiva has a conceit or predi
lection for his body dependent on his own good and bad actions,
which are a source of such weal or woe. Now with regard to
Ram and Krishna this does not hold true ; their incarnations are
not due to virtue or vice, they do not enjoy happiness or suffer
VI CHAR SAGAR 139
misery, hence their bodies are independent of good and bad actions.
This is clear enough. In the same way, their bodies are not pro
duced from the elements, or changes wrought in them, but are de
pendent on Intelligence, and are a modification of pure Satwavic
guna. If the body of Krishna be a product of quintu plication* of
the elements, then the absence of rope or string to serve as bonds,
in that body as the Shastras say, will be absurd. If the body of an
emancipated Yogi, whose composition is elementary, be devoid of
bondage f yet it may possibly be present, in which case the practice
of his chief purport Yoga destroys it. In the case of Krishna,
there does not exist such a primary object, and hence it may be
inferred that his body is of itself free from bonds, consequently its
composition is not a modification of the elements.
Anandagiri in his notes on the commentaries of Mandukya,
says that the body of Ram etc., is a modified form of the elements ;
this is simply an ordinary view, and further sets forth many bodies
like the gross physical body of a man with this object ; for, as the
commentator of the Gita says, "the Supreme Self for his extreme
kindness to his creatures assumed human shape in the form of
Krishna by the force of Maya. He is devoid of birth, hence the
attribution of parentage to Basudeva, and Devaki, is simply an act
of the same illusion." In this way, the commentator describes the
body of Krishna to be due to illusion, so that his incarnation is
not a product of the elements ; but its proximate cause (upadana
karana) is illusion. An individual is forgetful of the real nature
of his Self, such is not the case with Ram and Krishna ; for
the former has his associate in ignorance, abounding in impure good
ness ; while the associate of the latter is Maya abounding in pure
* It is thus defined in the Panchadasi : Divide each element into
two equal parts, take the first half of each and divide it into four parts,
add to it (one eighth each first portion of the other elements.
f Since he is already freed, he has destroyed all bondages ; that is to
say, for him subjective re-births are no longer possible ; he has consumed
his actions in his present life by his _kno\vledge of Self, Hence he is
emancipated.
140 VICHAR SAGAR.
goodness. Hence the former is subject to delusion as a result of
ignorance, while the latter for Maya are all-knowing ; an individual
for the destruction of the envelopment of ignorance, and that of
delusion, has recourse to the instruction of a preceptor concerning
the indication of the transcendental phrase I am Brahma. That
art thou etc., while Ram aud Krishna as they are free from such
envelopment and delusion, have no necessity for a similar instruction.
But like the functional intelligence of the internal organ of a person,
the function of Isivara s Maya (i. c. Self-knowledge) proceeds without
any instruction ; such knowledge serves no purpose for him ; for in
the case of the individual, the consciousness of jar etc., breaks through
the envelopment of ignorance, and discovers the subject a jar
etc. la regard to Brahma the process is exactly similar too
for Self-knowledge destroys the envelopment of ignorance which
enshrouds the Atma, then as He is Self-manifested and luminous,
he is discovered by himself without the assistance of a second
substance, though such Self-knowledge cannot discover a subject of
cognition. In the same way as the function of Maya in Iswara
realizes the knowledge "I am Brahma" and as the subject of that
knowledge his Self (A??ict) is free from envelopment and Self-
illuminated, it serves him no purpose, either in breaking through
the envelopment or discovering his Atma to be the same as Brahma.
As in the instance of one liberated in life, the uncovered Atma
stands in no need of the mental function to break asunder the
envelopment of ignorance by the consciousness of "I am Brahma!
BO without a similar necessity for breaking through the envelop
ment, the function of Maya determines the consciousness of I am
Brahma, in Iswara in spite of any instruction. Thus then, Ram and
Krishna are different from a Jiva, they resemble Isivaro, and
their bodies are built of Maya ; but they are not Brahma but non-
real The J/ai/a-made bodies of their incarnations with features
and limbs are subjects of the sense of vision but Brahma cannot be
Been, hence It is not a subject of sight; the same holds true with
regard to touch and its especial sense ; the sense of hearing, taste
and smell. None of these senses can discover Brahma, for It is
quite a distinct entity from sound, and the rest of the organs of
VICIIAR 3AGAR. 141
especial sense, which are puite powerless to bring forth knowledge
of Brahma.
Moreover, the active organs are not the means of attaining Self-
knowledge but are a mere co-adjutor of speech, for which they can
produce no knowledge in a person ; thus we find that knowledge of
Brahma cannot in any way be perceived by the help of senses. Then
again, such knowledge is called visible, the same as Aparoksha, which
cannot apply to Brahma. Words alone can produce a knowledge
of Brahma, and that knowledge is of the invisible type. *
Guru utters :
Without the senses no visible knowledge can arise pupil,
know it not, to be the rule
Without them, is rendered visible, as weal and woe.
It is not the rule that for an object to be visible, there must be
a relation of the senses with it ; for, as in the case of perceiving happi*-
ness and misery, no senses are needed to render them visible or
apparent, therefore it cannot be said that knowledge derived from
the senses is alone to be called visible ; on the other hand, when the
mental function in relation to a subject assumes its shape, then is
produced, what is called visible knowledge. Now such a relationship
of the mental function with a subject is brought about sometimes
by the senses, at other times without them, by words, as for example
the condition of the tenth person. *j* Here the tenth person referring
to the person counting the others indicated by the word ten*
has his mental function mo lifted in the shape of ten by its relation
ship with it, consequently sound (of ten) is here the means of bring
ing in that knowledge visiblyjo himself and the others. Similarly,
* Words refer to the transcendental phrase That art Thou* etc.
Invisible knowledge signifies subjective and not an objective perception,
as in the case of idols which can be seen by the eyes and felt by the
hands etc.
t Vidt 2nd note p. 18,
V1C11AR SAGAR.
in the perception of happifiess or misery to the witness (agent or
instrument) his mental function assumes the shape or modification
of them, the function creates a relation with such pleasure or pain,
hence their knowledge is called visible. After the destruction of
previous happiness or misery, when a person subsequently comes to
recollect it, his mental function assumes the shape of its subject of
recollection, be it either happiness or its reverse ; but with the dis
appearance of such function no relation can be said to exist between
it and its subjects ; hence such a perception or consciousness can
not be called visible but is (smriti) liable to destruction. If the
property of the internal organ is to manifest or discover pleasure
and pain in the witness, yet by its function after having assumed
the shape of pleasure and pain, the witness discovers them. Though
witness is an illuminated entity, yet it discovers them through the
Instrumentality of the mental function. As for instance, the appa
rent production of silver in nacre. Here, through the force of
ignorance, the witness discovers a nacre as silver, but in the discovery
of happiness or misery, the mental function is called a coadjutor of
witness, as in the case of false silver in nacre, the function of igno
rance is termed co-adjutor. Thus then we find, that in discovering a
visible object or producing its cognition, the witness is dependent
on mental function, which if produced by the external organs of
sense in connection with an external object, then the subject of that
function is not illuminated by the witness.
It is said, that the external organs are not the source of producing
the subject of happiness and misery to the function of the internal
organ, but when they arise, that function (of internal organ) assumes
their shape without the agency of any other means ; and as the
witness overrides such function, it therefore discovers happiness
and misery. This is why witness is said to discover them. More
over in the case of an external object ajar etc., a relation is created
by the organs of vision etc., between such jar and the mental
function, hence a jar is not discovered by the witness. Similarly
when the mental function assumes the shape of Brahma, it is not
projected outside the body, but remaining inside creates a relation
ship with that Brahma, so that like the perception of happiness and
VICHAR SAG AH. 143
misery the cognition of Brahma is definite and tangible, But then,
in the modification of the mental function after happiness or misery
there is no interdependence on the external means, so that witness
illumines it ; while in the modification of the function after the shape
of Brahma, the external means of hearing the precepts of a spiritual
teacher, or the utterances of the Vedas are requisite to create a
relation between that function, and the cognition, consciousness, or
knowledge of Brahma. Hence Brahma ia not illuminated or dis
covered by the witness.*
In this way, when a relation is established between its subject
and the mental function it is called visible knowledge. I am a
Brahma is a subject of the mental function, and it has a relation
with it, hence knowledge of Brahma can be classed under visible
knowledge.^ Moreover when a fire is known, or perceived by its
smoke, the perception of smoke is visible knowledge and not that
of fire. Because by the organs of sight a relation is created between
* Witness refers to the Witnessing Intelligence, hence it has been
rendered neuter. It is superfluous to say that the several Intelligences
known respectively as the ( reflex, witness/ uniform, are all to be
regarded as one and non-dual. A difference in associates creates the
difference, while virtually the cardinal doctrine of an Adwaiti is to ad
mit that identity. But it may be urged that there hardly exists any
necessity for creating so many distinctions of the one Intelligence and
increase the difficulties of a student struggling for that knowledge. The
reply is, lio system of philosophy can be complete that does not take
note of the possible objections to be raised against it, by the rival schools,
hence, more in harmony with the Madhyamika Buddhists these several
intelligences had to be satisfactorily accounted for, the more so as they
were then firm in the popular belief. Therefore it is to be remembered
that the Uniform Intelligence which is changeless is Brahma and the reflex
Jiva ; and the two are one and without any distinction whatever, just as
water confined in a small tank is non-different from the whole body of it
collected in a vast expanse, or the integral units of forest non-different
from it. Now the word Intelligence has a very wide signification. You
may call it the Soul, Ego, Vitality or Life Principle ; or regard it as
Spirit, Consciousness, Self, or Atma*
114 VICHAE SAQAR,
the mental function and the smoke, hence its knowledge is called
visible. Also by inferences or hypothetical conception, the mental
function assumes the shape of, or is moulded into, the form of fire,
inside the body ; but between fire and that function there is no rela
tion whatever, so that knowledge of fire is not apparent or visible. Thus
then, when there is created a relation between function and its subject,
it is called visible, apparent, or tangible knowledge, perception or
consciousness ; and when no such relation is established, and the sub
ject is either distant or external, or belongs to a past or future time :
then again, when the mental function assumes the form of, or is
moulded after, its subject either from inference or the sound of
words, that is called invisible knowledge. Knowledge derived from
the senses is thus not alone a visible perception. This is not the in
variable rule, as for instance, the senses cannot cognize the percep
tion of happiness or misery, yet it is called visible knowledge ; and the
knowledge of the tenth person derived from sound is also visible. 1
In the same way Brahma produced by hearing the instructions of
a preceptor on cognition of the transcendental phrase "That art
Thou," is called, visible knowledge. This knowledge is derived from
the sound of words.
Hearing such precepts from a Guru, the gifted Tatwadrishti
Sees Brahma in Self ; delusion only created a difference
[between the two],
[End] The mental function after having been denuded of its envelop
ment* of ignorance is moulded into "I am Brahma"
This I do recognise now, kind Sir,
VICIIAR SAGAR. 145
SECTION V.
KNOWLEDGE of non-duality is apparently produced by hearing the
precept of a Guru on the utterances of the Vedas. But the second
pupil, by name Adrishta, raises objections to it in the following wise.
If the Vedas and Guru are both true, then they imply a duality and
hence injurious to non-duality ; if they are untrue, then the chief aim of
human existence (emancipation) cannot be derived from them. Thus
in both ways, the Vedas and Guru are destructive of non-duality.
If you call the Vedas and Guru untrue, [world.
Then they will be powerless to destroy the miseries of the
As the false perception of water in a sandy waste,
Is powerless to appease thirst.
Say you, a true Guru and Veda are two, contrary to the conclu
sions of Sankaracharya on non-duality ; leave such impure ideas which
belong only to the Madhyamika Buddhists ; this is the conclusion of
the proposition contained in the first line of the stanza.
Bhagavan, such doubt arises in my mind, by your kind reply
dispel it.
Says Guru to his pupil, listen to the doctrine of Sankara, it is
full of proof [and very convincing].
The four friends (Madhyamiks) speak in opposition to the Vedas ;
hear therefore the words of Vyasa which confirm Sankara s doctrine.
In Kalu various are the interpretations put on the Vedas.
Sri Sankara was born to extirpate the Buddhists ; the Lord
brought forth his image in the Ganges.
As the sun dispels darkness from the world by his light, illu
mines all objects, discovers them as they are, and removes all doubts
and antagonistic ideas ;
So Sri Sankara removes the misinterpretation and clears the
Vedas from it, he has likewise removed all doubts and determined
their true signification,
19
H6 VICIIAR SAQAR.
UNREAL DELUSIONS.
If the indication of the Vedas be artificial and ungcnuinc, them
why labour in vain ; what Vyas has said in the Purans, acknowledge
them true. The doctrines of the Madkyamiks are unsound and
illogical, that I know from the words of Vyas ; and listen to the proofs
I adduce, know what Valmika says. Hearing it, Bashishta compiled
his work, having non-duality for his doctrine plainly ; Sri Sankara
held non-duality only, his doctrine is for this reason excellent.
The words of the sage Valmika are construed as antagonistic
to the Vedas by the impure-minded only.
Now all this means, what Vyas has said in the Purans concern
ing the delusion as to the real signification of the Vedas in the
Kali-yuga. In such a crisis, the kind-hearted Siva assuming the
name of Sri Sankara, will take the form of Budrinath and reincar
nate. He will issue out of the holy river (Ganges), fix himself in his
usual place, destroy the tenets of the Sankhyas and Buddhists, and
interpret the Vedas in their true light. According to Vyas, the
doctrine of Sri Sankara is an authority, while that of the Madhyamite
(who are divided amongst themselves into sects) who hold duality to
be true is without an authority. Moreover, though the Upaniskada,
Gita and the Sutras these proceed from the Vedanta have been
construed according to their own doctrines by the Madkyamiks, such
interpretation is a forced one, while the version set forth by Sri
Sankara, and the utterances of Vyas on the subject arc alone real.
Then again, the first poet Valmika all knowing sage as he was in
his Utara Ramayaiw.., called Batltislda, insists on non-duality, more
especially, as its principal doctrine about the six kinds of (drishfi)
observation has been declared in many works on history. Hence
according to the words of Valmika, the doctrine of non-duality is autho
ritative and self-evident ; while the rival doctrine of duality which
creates a difference between the individuated Self and Brahma, in
contradiction to what Valmika says, is unsound and illogical. Thus
then, the last mentioned tenet, as it is antagonistic to the confirmed
statements of all known sages and devout persons, is for the reason of
that, called unsound and illogical. Besides such difference is opposed
to natural inference, and sound reasoning. Its fallacy has been exposed
VICIIAR 8AGAR. 147
in several works by Sri Harsa and others. But as the arguments
used are difficult of comprehension, I have abstained from introducing
them here. Then again, the utterances of the sage are all directed
against the false assumption of difference between an individual
Spirit and the Universal, and have completely broken it down ; their
hearing will likewise establish the unsoundness of the view held by
the Buddhists, so that for a qualified person, (who is hot an atheist)
arguments are no more needed. This is the indication of the three
pieces of verse heading the present remarks.
What Sri Harsa has written to break down the difference be
tween a Jiva and Brahma, and establish non-duality (in his work
he has entered largely upon it, and shown that duality does not rest
on sound reasoning),
And the works which deal exclusively on the qualification of
duality, with the arguments against it ; are difficult and the mode
of their illustration contains very abstruse arguments which no one
minds to study :
So that, what you say about breaking down the doctrine of duality,
arguments are not necessary, since it is itself untenable ; and you
know it to be so already. And as has already been said, even the
Vedas are opposed to it.
Knowledge of duality produces much pain, it is the source of
of death-pangs, hence I drive it away from the mind and show my
love for non-duality ; for as the Sruti says, "duality brings in a recollec
tion of death, which is constantly present in him and he sees it
certainly."
Who holds duality in his mind is called in the Vedas fear ; he
sees in the subject of his knowledge and mind something else, and
is no better than an animal according to the Vedas.
The second is productive of fear, while that other is natural,
The Vedas destroy the former as animals are subdued by the
Devas. (Sruti.)
[Know then] pupil, that the tenets of the Madhyamiks entail a
multitude of miseries, and he who entertains the doctrine (utterances)
of duality in his mind, so as to perceive the difference as something
VI CHAR SAGAR.
real and apparent makes non-duality disappear ; with the recollection
of duality, is removed a former remembrance of perception of its
opposite non-duality. This is illustrated in the following manner.
A Raja appoints a person by name Varchhu to manage his estate,
his officers and minister grew jealous of him, but failing to do
him any injury, as he was a great favorite with the sovereign, they
all combined to spread plunder and devastation. The Raja hearing
this called all his officers, held a court, sent for his chief ministers and
asked them to run in pursuit of and follow the plunderers, but they
replied, that as you have always known Varchhu to be your worthy
servant, now you are sending us only to die, why not send
Varchhu ? Then he (Varchhu) said, with hands joined as in prayer,
if ordered, I am ready to follow the plunderers and beat them.
The Raja granted his prayer and asked him to finish the work. He
routs them in the first encounter ; when his rivals heard of his success,
they spoke to the Raja that Varchhu had been foiled in his attempt
to overtake the robbers. On hearing such false accounts, he appoints
his chief minister in his place, honours him with a gift of the umbrella
and fan as marks of royal favor, who makes his own arrangements for
administering the state, and takes special care to keep back all infor
mation concerning Varchhu from his royal master. Varchhu hearing
this, assumed the garb of an ascetic ; for he knew fully that he would
never be allowed to have an interview with his master, and that he
will lose his life, before he reached the palace gate. He began to
contemplate thus: Till now I have enjoyed everything both
corporeal and sensual.
Like a quadruped ; with hands strong as an elephant s, heart of
a stag ; brave and nimble as a lion, and eyes tremulous like those of
a horse, and complexion excellent ; like a bird enchanted with
four fruits and flowers; face resembling those of a flamingo,
the throat of pigeon, voice sweet and melodious, surrounded with the
plumage of the peacock, face resembling a water-lilly, the chin,
a linseed flower indicating the abode of intellect, nose glossy like
the scsamum seed containing oil within or having a mole ; and color,
a beautiful faint yellow like the magnolia. The four fruits :
The upper and the lower lips red like a pomegrante, teeth set like
VICIIAR SAGAR. 149
tlic seeds of the Bad fruit, and free like a parrot, and with all the
indications of a profound intellect.
Never abstained from using the Ganges water for which all
clever persons have an attachment, fate has made another courtezan.*
With her beauty, she sits at ease, and is never left alone for a moment
by her lover, who supplies her with all sorts of enjoyments, leaving
nothing undone that can make her comfortable and happy. A dunce
only conceives such to be happiness and its season, existence in the
world, Oh rake ! Till now you have had enough of sensual enjoy
ments. Consider where is the beauty in her. She is a temple of
impurity, emitting foul odours from the genitals always. Though
her thighs resemble the plantain tree in roundness and symmetry,
yet adjacent to it is a column of faeces [i.e., the rectum] the sides
of which are full of bad smell. You are fondly attached to them,
you blind ; her mouth filled with saliva, wets your face with her kisses.
A bad looking girl she is fond of the bottle and deprives you of your
sense of the clean and unclean. Now, bad looking signifies one whose
sight provokes lascivious desires. It is said that the best part of
a female s body is her genitals, and this should be spoken of dis
paragingly ; she is formed of artifice, deceit, and poison, that I know
to be sure, and am thinking now of discarding her. Of sweets, curd,
rice-pudding, rice, butter, vegetables and other things I have had
enough, but am not yet satiated, so that in vain am I engaged in
serving another, and hence dependent for a house, orchard, garden,
or cave and riches ; I have become a slave of the king. By my own
powers have I acquired jewellery, beds, and water pots.
Yarchhu sitting alone was enjoying felicity; for in
Company no happiness can be enjoyed.
A prince healthy and young, stout and strong, with all sorts of
learning is considered by all men to be extremely happy. A king over
men and Gandharvas, with good qualities, has for his share, happiness.
[One ruling over] Gandharvas smdDevas is more blessed in that respect
than that other king. The happiness of a Gandharva and Deva
* Tilotoma, the beautiful courtezan of India, from Til or mole and
Utama excellent, i. e, beautiful.
150 VICIIAR SAGAR.
proceeding from good qualities, is equally felt by their departed
ancestral spirits. Then who knows that his good actions belong to the
Deras who procure happiness for him ? They in their turn assign their
merits to their king Indra who procures happiness to them in turn.
Brihaspati is the Guru of all Devas, he derives his happiness from
the good actions of Indra ; Prajapati derives his felicity from Brihas
pati in turn, from whom comes the fill of Brahma ; human existence
is full of miseries of diverse kinds, mixed with happiness in the
manner aforesaid in following each other (Taiterya Upanishad).
From what has been said, Brahma takes all his happiness from
the Raja who always keeps himself aloof from actions. Where then
happiness is to be foimd ? A fair woman and issue together with
riches are always a source of misery.
Ox THE MISERIES OF KEEPING COMPANY WITH
A YOUNG AND BEAUTIFUL GIKL.
Say to a young and beautiful damsel, that she is the owner
of a mass of excrements. For what sin am I subjected to the
punishment of being reckoned as an immoral and unfit person ?
Like an ox or she buffalo &c., or like a she-camel her voice is shrill ; sho
would never have me till the thousandth time.
Guiltless, yet without parting company from you, I cannot be
indifferent to wordly enjoyments, but am constantly in the midst of
sin, which as it were forms a part of my mind, and brings no end of
trouble by day and night, hence daily I know you to be ugly and
deformed. Thus a fair damsel with sweet voice is reduced into an
ugly creature producing misery, the shining skin is only loved after
all, but she is the destroyer of riches, virtue, and emancipation.
ON THE WASTING OF RICHES.
By sweet words, or frowns, or quarrels she steals all in
tellect from her lover, who blinded with lust, sees nothing but her
even in dreams, gives her jewels, riches, whatever she desires,
and all that he earns from outside ; but keeps his father
and mother in poverty, without food and clothes, never once
remembering them ; supplies her with sweets and rare fruits, which
he offers to her with all homage as if she were a goddess, his
VICHAR SAOAE. 151
attachment and love for her never cease, his very words breathe
of affection,
ON THE DESTRUCTION OF VIRTUE.
Like a parrot confined in a cage and taught to speak, un
mindful of purity or impurity, the husband treats his revered
parents according to the instructions he receives from his wife;
as a peacock dances in front of a pea-hen, to show his affec
tion for his partner, so he shews his attachment to his wife by
providing her with various suits of wearing apparel and pleases her.
When both are actuated with a desire produced by affection, then
is awakened the intoxication of lust, and the excesses committed by
its delusion are a source of wonder to those who are indifferent to
female charms. But this intoxicating passion leads one unmindful
of any sense of right and wrong, ending in madness, to commit an
act of injury in another s house, bringing on misery by the very
act which was thought to produce happiness. Violent are his
desires produced from his intoxicating passion, it affects the
female likewise, so drinking it both, the male and female are
subjected to miseries. Thus then a man s subjection to misery
induced by female beauty is to be avoided by dissociation, as insisted
upon by sages. Even the charms of beauty inducing love and affec
tion in a male are sure to end in miseries for both. Such is the un
animous testimony of all devout sages. Semen is derived from
elaboration of various kinds of food, vitality is dependent on it, in
all men. It destroys all mental pain ; when a person s mind is affected
with the bad effects of distress, and he is perfectly indifferent,
then, semen inhabiting the blood induces activity in him, for its
action resembles the active (Raja) quality ; when the mind dwells in
semen, then mental distress and its meddlesome activity are alike
destroyed ; then again a strong man knows it to be indicative of good
actions and he is delighted. When the quantity of semen is increased
it adds to his personal beauty, and gives him the flush and bright
ness of health ; its waste destroys health both corporeal and mental.
But one whose semen is never spent, does not show his body covered
with dirt; a devotee by keeping his semen, engages himself in
152 VICIIAR SAGAR
communion by an aerial intertwining of the fingers in worship,
holding the coin of semen, and in that way achieves the eight
kinds of success (siddki) over natural (occult) forces. Semen is
of all worldly things, the excellent, it is snatched by a female in her
vagina ; her love causes an incessant drain of the vital fluid and thus
spoils the man, in the same way as a crusher grinds the sugarcane
and sqeezes the juice out of it. In the Punjaub the crusher em
ployed in breaking the mounds of earth, is looked upon in connection
with cultivation as a Devta.
Repeated acts of coition drain away the semen from the system,
exhausts its supply, and thus deprives the body of its vitality.
I attribute all my evil actions to Krishna, who destroys them, in
the same manner, as a flower is deprived of its sweet scent by being
dried in contact with oil seeds which then draw the smell. He is
handsome and very rich Sree Krishna entertains many maids who
call him husband, or lord ; desirous of being re-united in love, like a
clumsy ungallant person he holds her by the hand, whose husband
never goes (near) to bed, and is abused in turn. She makes signs by her
eyes, and expresses her disapprobation of his act by winks and draw
ing up her nose, like the essence of a thousand thunder-bolts ; the
dart strikes his heart of adamant and he is laughed in turn by all
sages, who proclaim his love [with Radha]. He, nothing undaunted
clasps her in his arms humming a favourite tune of his, and cunning
as he is, gratifies his desires and then lets her go. Versed and well-
read in the Vedas, Purans, Smriti and the arguments of the Gita,
made he the last subservient to him, and played he the part of a
trickster as one does with a playing monkey.
Mind, dwell upon what has been written there. I consider the
arguments, and draw the inferences accordingly ; its simple perusal
will avail nothing, but shall be only brute-like. Hear it attentively
when a Pandit reads and explains it. When it is full well remem
bered, it resembles the Vedas in driving away all grief, and the
individual is actuated with a desire of relinquishing the world, and
retiring, thus causing the destruction of all impermanent things, which
in their turn, have brought ruin everywhere since the dawn of day,
and like a deadly poison brought death in its trail. A wise man s
VIGIIAR SAG All. 153
words are his riches, while a cunning man of the world delights in
the acquisition of property which constitute his riches ; for him,
proceeds not that sharp indifference to those material comforts
which spoil the intellect over and over, make a slave of ignorant
persons, and order others to execute his commands, while he sits
at his ease like a lord of men. A man or woman actuated with a
thirst after riches, can never have his or her mind straight. Happiness
and misery are equally unknown to them, for, they are drowned in
forget fulness. Though money is the central source of all worldly
miseries, a woman, a prostitute, and an old hag are equally marked
with the signs of hell, whom a man with indifference ever shuns.
They make their affections in artifice and deceit, and their love is
only verbal.
HOW VlKTUE AND EMANCIPATION ARE RUINED BY WOMEN.
They are the source of ruin ; with all his wits about him, a man
shall avoid them knowing it to be a fact ; a son is equally t lie source of
much grief ; in conception, birth and death, he brings endless troubles.
During pregnancy the mother s sufferings are intense, her anxieties,
whether she will bring forth a son or daughter are incessant and
not removed till the child is born ; fear of abortion is another source
of anxiety and uneasiness for her. When the morning of the ninth
month arrives, both the mother and father feel extremely anxious,
and suffer much misery, they cease not to worship the nine planetary
deities for a day, while others are engaged to propitiate the Deity by
sacrifice and offerings to good folks. Seated alone, the parents are by
day and night immersed in thought on the planetary spirits. When
from distemper the child refuses the mother s breast, the parents both
take up its tending and think of giving alms, as a few months have
already been past. During teething and the growth of hair,
another source of anxiety for the parents is to see their child getting
thin and emaciated ; they remove his forelocks and secure them in a
good place. The unclean and low dregs as a tanner, a Syud, a Maho-
medan saint, and Dervishes are, equally with a Brahmin priest, offi
ciating in the ceremony of hair splitting, saluted and homage
paid with hands clasped in prayer, Whom a Hindu never shews any
20
154 VICIIAR SAGAE.
reverence for, is now recognised [as a guardian angel] to keep the
child in health and guard or protect it from all bad influences.
Even the spirits of the infernal regions are invoked, and their aid
sought by propitiating sacrifices on the cremation spot. A Dhanaka
also receives his share, and without feeling any shame the parents
worship him ; moreover, charms and amulets are written and duly
covered placed round the neck. Worship they in their own line one
Achuta, but they tender the child to the care of another line hoping
to profit thereby ; this is simply a bad practice, and they do not
shrink from it. When small pox rages, the parents loose their
delight, leave off bathing and assume dirty habits ; and make the ass
which carries the goddess a subject of their worship, entreats the
animal and feeds it with gram while the mother carries in her
lap and makes the child ride on it.
In this way, the child is brought up with infinite care and
trouble. When he arrives at puberty, the same incessant care is bes
towed upon him. If his span of existence be ascertained to be short,
numerous are the means adopted to lengthen it; dashing their fore
heads against the ground do the parents give vent to their grief, when
death overtakes him ; they look upon their lot as the most miserable,
consider themselves as helpless, and perfectly undone ; with cries they
rend the air by day and night, and curse their existence repeatedly
and thus finish their life. Then again, in the absence of a child the
parents experience grief similar to that caused by death in them,
who had one living. If he lives he is maintained till youth when
he behaves like the felidae. Now with son means one whose son
is living, and without son or in the absence of a child signifies
one who has it not, nor ever had any.
One who had been tended with great care, if thirsty in the night
the parents give him no water to drink, lest it may produce sickness ;
they rock him to sleep in bed, heaping abuse on my head, or getting
up in the morning from the bed, a good child looks for the mother
and father, who understanding by his stare, approach him and appear
in front, while a corrupt and bad one begins his morning speech by
commencing to abuse ; with tears in his eyes he kicks up a row,
ill-treating those who come near and harassing the parents
VICIIAR SAGAR. 153
unnecessarily and incessantly. If ever he attains maturity, he never
deigns to enquire or look after the maintenance of his father and
mother, but is engaged in taking care of his own body. Such a son
is a source of constant misery.
Thus then, a person who seeks to derive any happiness from a son
is a prince of dunces. For on due consideration, it is to be seen, that he
is an unceasing source of trouble to his parents. Cast him off there
fore ; and he who expects to obtain riches by him ought to be smeared
in the face with dust. To accumulate wealth, to preserve it, and
spend it not, is the root of misery. Who in this delusion amasses
lacs fruitlessly, leaving virtue to take care of herself and discarding
the usual customs and practices of his line of descent, believing
spending to be wasting away, and if without luck such fortune is
never amassed, yet its custody, and not to spend it anyhow, are his
incessant thoughts, and at last, he dies in the midst of such endless
anxiety.
Fie to him, who is ever bent after the pursuit of wealth. A young
mother looks upon her son as a mine of wealth, but Varchhu know
ing him to be a source of incessant unhappiness has no tender
attachment, so leaves him behind.
Varchhu went to the woods alone, and quieted his mind. In his
new position he heard everything that had transpired in his absence,
and thought within himself, if the king hears him alive, or if he be
met by a third person, some mishaps may befall, so to avoid them
he becomes a powerful ghost. Having adopted this course, he repairs
to the court. All says of him, that he has become a low devil. Be
smearing the body with ashes, he enters appearance ; no sooner he
is seen than some try to drive him away, others attempt to beat
him ; men in this way abuse him and run away. The king hears the
certain news that after death Varchhu has become a ghost, he gets
up from his seat, but seeing him soon faints away. A few days after,
his majesty went on an hunting excursion. In the mountain woods
dwelleth the lion, here was also residing a devotee no other than
his own Dewan Varchhu, engaged in the practice of religious aus
terities. His very sight made the king depart, knowing and believing
him to be a ghost, thathad produced him uneasiness on a previous
15G VIC 1 II All SAGAE.
occasion. Actuated with fear the king distrusts his eyes, but puts
faith in the false reports of Varchhu s being a ghost, and recognises
not the living personality simply for the delusion of fear. In the
same way, those ignorant persons who believe in duality are led by
fear, while a believer of non-duality sees Brahma apparently and
cognizes it perceptibly in his mind, wherein dwelleth such belief.
When an ignorant person believes in duality, by hearing it, he
is ever subjected to suffer miseries, and never can possess knowledge
of Brahma ; and he who hearing it, distinguishes it as non-real, then
he becomes acquainted with the indication of the transcendental
phrase That art Thou.
Pupil, what you have heard about difference, know it to be untrue,
and such untruth is a mark of hell, and those who speak about it are
tellers of untruth, and you are right in getting angry with their
artifice which seeks to destroy happiness the end and aim of all
right-minded persons : avoid their company and hear not their pre
cepts about duality ; if you ever listen to their words, immediately
leave them. Look upon them as unclean and leave them. If the
Vedas aLd Guru are true then how do the precepts taught there
destroy the unreal miseries of the objective world ? Hear the replies
on the subject. An unreal misery is destroyed by an unreal thing.
If the Vedas and Guru are not untrue, they cannot destroy the unreal
worldly miseries. Listen to the illustration which is adduced here,
it will remove your doubts.
Like the king of heaven, Indra, there was a mighty brave king ;
he had a large number of followers like Bheem, who always used to
remain round him^ and mount guard on his gate to the number of
several thousands. Even in the temple of the inner department
they kept a strict watch with drawn swords ; on the balcony of the
highest room, was spread the royal bed covered with flowers. A bird
even could not get here, how then could any one else to reach ? Now
the king sees a dream, that a jackal has got hold of his legs, he
wants to unloose them but to no purpose ; then he shouts for help
to destroy the animal ; the sentry who were keeping guard on the
door, give him no assistance ; he then takes a stick in his hand and
gives a good beating to the animal, when it takes out the
VICE AE SAGAR. 157
teeth from the muscles of his leg. The parts where the teeth
stuck fast give pain to the Rajah, he limps with the assistance of
the stick like a lame man, and arrives at the house of the gipsy
surgeon, asks him to dress his wounds with a plaster as will
induce suppuration and bring on granulations at once ; the surgeon
replies, he has not got ready such a dressing as he requires, but if the
king would pay him in advance, he can prepare the necessary remedy.
The king then retires, having not a pice with him to give, pon
ders on the circumstance as he gets out of the house of the gipsy,
and says to himself, the fellow ought to have thanked his stars with
such a rich customer as myself for a patient, but instead, refused to
do me the service, I stand in need of, for even a rich man will wel
come my presence in his house. He took me for a man of straw,
without occupation and so drove me out of his house, but the fault
is not in him ; no one does a service for nothing. Mother, father,
friend, wife and children, all have their self-interests to serve ; if
unsuccessful they condescend not to cast any glance or consideration ;
for interested motives, they share his grief and not leave him alone
for a single hour, but when unfortunately he becomes a leper,
fingers sloughed away and with flies disturbing constantly, the
members of his dear family finding him quite unserviceable to them,
desert him and wish that he may die soon. They are disgusted
with the sight and sickened. The dearest wife will try to avoid the
infection of the disease while fanning him and adjusting his clothes.
The parents even shrink from him, and brothers who always em
braced him, will speak from behind a screen. In this way the
whole world has its motives of interest to serve, which is ever an
object of love. Fate has not made me possessed of wealth hence
I have been refused a piece of dressing here. With these thoughts
in him, he meets with a sage, who gives him a root to apply to his
wound. When the king wakes up from sleep, he finds his pain in
the wound gone. Pupil, this illustration have I given you in
the way of example, see how a false wound is removed by a false
remedy. When the Raja was the subject of a false pain, it was a
product of the actual condition of society. His (real) wealth &c.,
were of no service to him. Now the meaning of the above illustration
158 VICIIAR SAGAlt.
is this. Worldly miseries are non-real, hence for their destruc
tion the Veda and Guru must alike be false. For what is false
cannot require the aid of a true remedy to remove it. Then again, a
true remedy cannot procure the destruction of what is non-real and
unexisting. As in the instance of the foregoing Raja, he saw in a dream
a (false) jackal approach him, without finding any obstruction from
the real sentries keeping guard, and when he shouted for help, the
animal passed away unhurt by any one ; and though he had several
weapons with him, yet with a false stick a creation of his imagina
tion he kills the animal, and when he received a false wound, he
could find no real surgeon or doctor to cure him ; but had recourse
to a false surgeon, who asks money from him. Really all his treasure
was of no avail, for he could not find even a copper pice wherewith
to satisfy the (non-existent) doctor and procure a piece of dressing.
All the substantial and really existing means were perfectly useless
here, to cause a destruction of his pain and wound ; but a false sage
seen in a dream, gives him a medicine (equally false), to cause the
removal of pain along with his wound which never existed.
A similar dream is the common experience of all men. A sub
stantial thing of the waking condition is not fit to be given to any
one in a dream. Similarly the falsity of worldly miseries is removed
by the false Veda and Guru; and a real Veda and Guru are not
needed. As you said, the false impression of water in a sandy waste
(mirage) cannot appease thirst, so a false Veda Guru cannot procure
the destruction of worldly miseries which are not real ; for if it were
so, then a mirage must equally succeed to satiate thirst. Pupil,
your doubts in this respect are settled in the following manner :
If the false waters of a mirage can never remove thirst, yet your
instance is an extreme one and I find in it no similarity of condition.
In other words though the perception of false water in a sandy
waste can never succeed to appease thirst, and like the cessation of
pain by the help of a false Guru- Veda, the false water must equally
cause thirst to cease, but this never follows, hence in the same way
a false Guru- Veda can never cause the destruction of the world and
reduce it to a non-reality, yet your illustration is an exremely ill-
matched one, for between the mirage and thirst, there is a condition
VICHAR SAGAE.
of non-similarity ; as I find the water in the first mentioned condition
to be non-existent, i.e., false, while the feeling of thirst is a reality
and fact.
Your miseries are subject to the same conditions as that
of a Guru and Veda,
And are possible to be removed or destroyed by them.
Between the things where similarity exists,
I see in such similarity as a means and prevention.
In other words, between your miseries Guru and Vedas there
exists a condition of similarity so that they are quite able to cause a
destruction of your woe ; where such similarity exists between differ
ent things, it serves both as a cause and remedy. That is to say,
between a jar and earth there is this condition of similarity, the
latter is the means of the former ; between a piece of wood and fire
the same similarity is present. Here fire is called a prevention.
Now means and prevention signify cause and destruction.
Between the false perception of water in a sandy desert and
thirst, there is not such conditional similarity present, hence the
first cannot destroy the last. Now the purport is : In intelligence
is true existence, and all unrealities which are different from it have
two varieties of existence ; one is practical existence, and the second
apparent or sequential. The first refers to what is destroyed by
knowledge of Brahma and not otherwise * As for example Isivar s
creation, the objective world &c., &c. For the body together with the
sensory and active organs and the vast expanse are the created
* The Vedanta holds three kinds of existence :
(1) Paramarthika or true.
(2) Practical or Vyvaharika.
(3) Prativashika or apparent.
Brahma is the sole representative of the first, while Iswara, and his
created works including individual self, heaven and hell, and all pheno
mena are really non-existent ; but in connection with our daily practice
they are all regarded as really existing hence they are called practical :
apparent are the things produced by imagination as mirage &c.
1GO VICIIAR SAGAR
works of Iswara which arc only destroyed* (cease to exist as real)
by knowledge of Brahma, and not otherwise ; but as material, they
are open to destruction in the cyclic periods of pralaya, henco
knowledge of Brahma with or without can have no effect then ;
yet as such knowledge determines their non-reality by an actual
connection of cause and effect and the refutation which its contra
diction implies, hence it is said, that such knowledge alone can
refute their existence. In this connection, vadh is defined as the
ascertainment of the unreality of a visible substance. Now such an
ascertainment in regard to the created works of Isivara does not
proceed at first in any instance without a knowledge of Brahma,
but follows subsequent to it, so that the sequential product of the
basic unit of primordial Ignorance the phenomenal world, a creation
of Isiuara and its use in practice*)* can easily be regarded as prac
tical existence. That is to say, in connection with birth and death,
bondage, and emancipation, which determine such existence practi
cally, Isivaras creation must be regarded from a certain standpoint
as a practical existence and called so. Where such a refutation is
produced in spite of knowledge of Brahma it is called apparent
existence. As for instance, a mirage, silver mistaken for nacre, or
a snake imagined in a rope. In all these conditions [which are
simply illusory] water, silver, and snake, are destroyed by knowledge
or perception of the actual substance, hence their production was
only apparent, in contradistinction to real, and there fore called apparent
existence: that is to say, it implies a perception or knowledge of the
product of primordial Ignorance silver, and the rest and creates
them apparently, for which from a certain standpoint, they are an
apparent existence. When a substance remains unaffected and is not
destroyed in the course of time it is called true existence. Now
* Here the word destroyed used for vadh is not a happy expression.
Vadh means a refutation by contradiction between cause and effect ; but
as the commentator had used it as nasa or destruction and the reference
to the latter word in the concluding sentence, require a little discrimination
to distinguish them.
t Vide note preceding page.
VICHAR SAOAR, 161
intelligence can never be destroyed, removed, or refuted, hence it is
called truly existent.
Thus then, if the Vedas, Guru and the usual miseries of life were
regarded as equally practically existent, a condition of existing
similarity will be established between them, so that from a false
Guru, Veda, the false miseries of the world shall alike be destroyed.
And hunger and thirst are simply the attributes of prana. Now
this (prana) vital air with its attribute is only removed by a knowledge
of Brahma, so that thirst is practically existent. The water of
a mirage, is refuted or destroyed without a knowledge of .Bra/tma,but
simply from a knowlege that it is a false perception of water ; hence
it is called apparent existence. But thirst and mirage are not
subject to conditions of identity of existence ; hence a mirage cannot
destroy thirst. Thus in the instance cited here for illustration, Guru
and Veda are the destroyers, and worldly miseries are the things to be
destroyed. Between destroyers and the destroyed there is an identity
of existence, which is not the case with the subjects of the illustra
tion .g t) between water of a mirage and thirst ; for this absence of
identity or constitutional difference in their existence, the illustration
has been termed an extreme one, and unlike the first portion of it.
(Doubt) Save Brahma every thing else is unreal ; say it so.
The cause of their difference has to be said,
This doubt has overtaken me.
Lord, now cut it off.
Lord, you have spoken every thing to be unreal save Brahma ;
amongst all such unrealities, the apparent silver in nacre, a snake in
a "rope, or water in a mirage is refuted or destroyed without know
ledge of Brahma ; while worldly woe is removed subsequent to such
knowledge ; why maintain such a difference between them, and what
is its cause ?
[Reply.] All the products of Ignorance are unreal.
Pupil, what produces them, that is
The derivative cause, Ignorance
Is destroyed by knowledge.
If therefore all the products of Ignorance phenomenal world
different from Brahma are unreal, i.e., subject to destruction and
21
1C2 VICIIAR SAOAR.
therefore impermanent, then the fabricator which determines their
production is alike unreal ; but what is produced from Ignorance in
the case of an individual, is removed with the advent of knowledge.
That is to say, the presence of a snake in a rope, or water in mirage,
or silver in nacre, all are conceived in Ignorance, and with the dis
covery of the mistake caused by knowledge, they cease to exist.
Moreover, Ignorance of Brahma imputes birth and death, and the
usual miseries of existence [to Self] which Its knowledge destroys
i.e., discovers to be false and unreal.
Says the pupil :
Bhagavan, if the world be produced from ignorance of
Brahma,
How does it take place consecutively, speak unto me.
And the Guru replies in plainer terms :
Like a dream, the tangibility of phenomenal world is false
and unreal, and not derived consecutively from something preceding
it, but a mere delusion. If you know it to be gradually produced,
it will be similar to wrenching a piece of cloth soaked in mirage
water.
In other words, according to the Upanishads, the doctrine of
evolution of the world implies every thing else to be unreal, save
Intelligence. That is to say, if the production of the world has been
declared differently in the several Upanishads ; as for instance, in the
Chhandogya, it is determined as produced from the Supreme Self who
is ever existent from whom are derived, one after the other, fire, water
and earth ; and in the Taitirya Upanishad ether, air, fire, water, and
earth are said to have been produced in a consecutive serial order ;
thus has been ascertained the origin of the five elements, while else
where everything is said to be created by the Supreme Isivara, i.e.,
without any consecutive seriality ; so may these different doctrines in
regard to the origin of the Universe signify it to be an unreality. If
it were a reality or something substantial, then the Vedas would
not have determined its origin in different ways. A difference of
consideration as to the source of the world signifies the purport of
the Vedas is to determine only the secondless Brahma, and not the
Universe ; which last it seeks to reduce into the condition of an
VICUAR SAG All 163
unreal non-existence ; for its existence is illusory. As for example,
fJasrthe sake of pastime a paper elephant filled with gunpowder is made
to fly in the air, it has ears, tail etc., to straighten which- no water is
applied ; so, to produce a knowledge of non-duality by reducing this
vast expanse into a condition of non-existence, the objectivity of the
phenomenal has been attributed to illusion ; hence there has keen
no attempt made in the Vedas to determine the consecutive formation
of the universe in one way, i.e., it has used several methods to account
for its origin: thus then we know, why the several doctrines have been,
introduced; it shows the purport is simply to destroy the existence of
the objective universe, and not to ascertain its source of origin.
Moreover the commentator as well as the author of the Sutras in
the second chapter of the Sruti text, where the origin ot the universe
is dealt with, have cleared all antagonisms from it, and followed the
doctrine adopted in the Taitirya Upanishad, which they say to be the
unanimous purport of all the Upanishads. Now this has been done
simply to satisfy the enquirers of difference. Those who are un
acquainted with the purport of the utterances already made in respect
to the origin of the world, to such enquirers of difference, the
Upanishads will appear to imply contradiction, concerning the several
views they allege in connection with the subject ; to remove this,
all of them have been mentioned to support the one doctrine about
the evolution of the universe. Also, for those who cannot derive true
knowledge by determining the Brahma, the consecutive consideration
of the origin of the universe has been set forth, so that they may
ponder constantly on its destruction (lay a). The same serial order
which has caused the evolution will produce its destruction or dis
integration, but quite in a reversed order of downward progression.*
Pondering and reflecting on this subject will make the intellect fix
* Matter is eternal hence in laya? it does not cease to exist ; there
fore disintegration is a better term. It may be remarked that the
Vedanta doctrine upholds the eternity of matter, its objective condition
is destroyed in the cyclic period of destruction, but it exists potentially
or subjectively in the Parabrahma. Now this is evidently what the
Western Scientists maintain alike with the Materialists.
104 VICHAR SAOAR.
its site on non-duality. How to dwell on laya, has been mentioned
by the Vartikar Sureswaracharya, while treating quintuplication, in
his work on the subject. As the present work is intended for a better
qualified person, it does not contain any account as to the origin or
destruction of the Cosmos. But it is a veritable ocean, and shows the
right way that leads to emancipation. The universe cannot proceed
from the Brahma alone, for It is unassociated and actionless ; but
I&wara having a preponderance of Maya in him is its procreator. Hence
(Maya) illusion has been explained as something similar to Ignorance.
Recognize Intelligence to bo one with Jiva and Isivara.
Admit Maya is unborn, uncreated, endful*
And distinct from being and non-being,
And called also Ignorance or Avidya. [co-adjutor.
Intelligence is ordinarily not antagonistic to it and its
The mental function is antagonistic to
Ignorance, know this to be a fact.
The reflex-intelligence, present in Maya together with it,
Constitute the Omniscient (Isivara); Whom
Know to be the Cause of the Universe.
That is to say, Maya is dependent on the pure Intelligence which
is non-different with Jiva and Itnvara. It is said to be uncreate, or
unborn, because it is without a beginning. If it be admitted to be
a created product, then that will imply a contradiction ; for, before
the evolution of this vast expanse it must necessarily be absent, and
it cannot proceed from its product (the material world) as that will
amount to a son begetting his father. Maya must necessarily bo
admitted to be derived from intelligence. In such a view both
Iswara and Jiva are the results of Maya. Without the determination
of Maya, (its actions) Isivara and Jiva cannot be established. Hence
to say Maya is derived from the Intelligence of Jiva or that of Iswara
is absurd and untenable. Moreover the pure intelligence is unassociat
ed, actionless, and subject to no modification or change, therefore to
attribute illusion to be derived from it, will imply its being subject to
change, which it is not ; besides Maya will then be a co-adjutor of
* Impermanent.
VICIIAR SAGAR. 165
emancipation, and the several means cited in the Shastras by which
emancipation is to be attained will be rendered futile.
These are the reasons why Illusion is called uncreated without a
beginning. Endful implies subject to destruction by means of know
ledge ; and something distinct from being and non-being is what can
not be definitely classed under either heads of existence or its reverse.
Being is eternally existent, and can never be destroyed in the three
divisions of time. Intelligence is of this nature. With knowledge
is destroyed Illusion, hence it is said to be different from being ; non-
being is its opposite condition and cannot be recognized any how in
any time ; like " rabbit s horns," " a sterile woman s son," and " ether
flower," it is non-existent. Prior to knowledge (of Brahma) the
presence of illusion and its action are recognized, so that when a
person says in regard to the Cosmos I know it not/ I am ignorant
of Brahma it indicates the presence of illusion.* Then again, the
* Says Pancliadasi* in reference to Maya, Book II., v. 42 and 43.
" Maya is defined as the inherent force residing in the PARABRAHMA, which
is essentially existent and which cannot be differentiated. As the con
suming flame of fire imparts an idea of its force, so the potentiality of
force present in Self is plainly seen in the objective world. But this Maya
cannot be said to be one with PARABRAHMA, nor as something distinct, in
the same way as the consuming force of fire cannot be said to be the
fire itself. Then again if you admit it as a separate entity you cannot by
any means describe its separate or independent existence."
It will thus be evident that Maya and PARABRAHMA are but another
name for Matter and Force. We all know Force cannot exist without
Matter as a separate entity, yet to say, that it is the same as matter, is
absurd. Hence we find in the text quoted, a non-dualist asking his oppo
nent, a Madhyamik Buddhist to describe Force as a separate entity.
But it may be urged that PARABRAHMA is force and we have seen Maya
to be also a force ; therefore we have force + force or force within force,
something equally absurd. But such apparent ambiguity is far from
real. For Maya is matter in its undifferentiated condition a condition
in which the difference between matter and its indwelling potentiality is
minimised to the lowest numerical figure ; it is the boundary line of
Matter and Force, where Matter losing its grossness assumes the subtlety
of super-etherial finis where no Matter is distinguishable as such, but all
166 VI CHAR SAOAR.
subjects of a dream arc all produced from illusion which is their
proximate cause. The presence of Ignorance in the state of
is Spirit or Force. And such an inference is derived from Nature. To
quote a familiar illustration, the transition from a mineral to vegetable
is so gradual, that it is impossible to distinguish the one from the other.
Kren at the present moment, science is undecided as to whether certain
classes of the lowest vegetables belong to the mineral class, or the last in
the scale of the animal series belongs to the vegetable. So much do
they resemble each other. If such a view bo accepted, the apparent
inconsistency is removed : virtually then, the difference between Muta-
prakriti (Matter in its undifferentiated cosmic condition) and Purush
(its Spirit or PARABRAHMA) for all practical purposes is nil. *****
Now Maya is described as a force and it is elsewhere denned as something
iudescribablc which is neither existence (Sat) nor non-existence (Asat)
in short it is one with Ignorance, which again, being the chief factor of
the grand Cosmos, is the same as Frakiriti of Kapila. Therefore Maya
is nothing less than matter. Now this Maya existed potentially in the
PARABRAHMA, and if we say, that by an act of volition created He the
objective world, we imply no such contradiction, as the Hebrew s account
of God s creating the world out of nothing. But then, we may be asked,
PARABRAHMA is an impersonality and volition is due to consciousness, which
It can lay no claim to. To such of our task masters, we reply, that matter
per se is unconscious and inert and can bring forth nothing until acted
upon by an intelligent co-operation of a force and that the PARABRAUMA
is consciousness itself, consequently the impress of change which It pro
duces in the mass of inertia to make it evolve things varied and innu
merable is tantamount to the volitional agency of a Personal Creator.
Then again, if it be asked that since the PARVBRAHMA is a pure Spirit, how
can it have any connection with Matter which is Its antagonist 1 We
have seen that spirit and force are convertible terms, and we have like
wise seen that force cannot exist without Matter, hence wherever there
is force, there matter must always be ; to sum up then we find, that
Maya existed in the PARABRAHMA, and it is the same Maya which brought
forth the universe in a natural order of sequence by undergoing mutations
impressed upon it, through its force or PAHADRAJIMA. N. D. Philosophic
Inquirer, Vol. vii. p. 73.
VICHAR 8AGAR. 167
profound dreamless slumber is determined in the following manner :
A man on waking from sleep, says "I was sleeping in peace, I knew
nothing then." Now, such a recollection cannot proceed from a thing
which one is totally ignorant of [but it implies the presence of a
certain consciousness still left to enable him to be cognizant of the
fact that he knew nothing. Hence recognition of ignorance in pro
found slumber is easily established. This ignorance and illusion are
identical with one another, and there is no difference between them.
Thus the presence of Maya, is established in the three conditions of
time : waking, dreaming, and profound slumber. Hence is it dis
tinct from non-being. Thus then, as Maya is neither being nor
non-being its product is also similarly conditioned [for the qualities of
a cause-body are transmitted to its products]. From a non-dualist s
standpoint, what is neither existent nor non-existent is called unreal
and indescribable. Therefore Maya and its product cannot establish
duality ; for that is only possible if, like intelligence, Maya and its pro
duct were possessed of the property of being ; but as they are distinct
from being and non-being, that is to say, unreal, such unreality can
not create duality, as things seen in a dream are unreal and cannot
produce duality. Maya is dependent on the pure Intelligence equally
and without any distinction, present in a Jiva and Isivara, and
enshrouds the pure Brahma as the darkness inside a room envelopes
it. Now such a doctrine is called by the Shastras the supporting
view of Self the subject under consideration. Self refers to the pure
Brahma as the receptacle. It likewise indicates its subject Brahma
being enveloped in Illusion e. g., Maya envelopes Brahma.
The abridged description of Sariraka Sutras, Vedanta Mukta-
vali, Adwaita Siddhi, Adivaita Dipika, and similar other works
recognize Ignorance as the source* of covering which envelopes
Brahma. While Vachaspati says "Ignorance is dependent on the
Jiva for a dwelling, and makes Brahma its subject." When a person
says "I am ignorant," " I know not Brahma" Here the first personal
pronoun refers to the individual (Jiva), and in connection with the
* Source stands for As ray a.
168 VICIIAR SAGAR.
subjective perception of ignorance, the expression establishes its
source of dependence on him. " I know not Brahma" explains the
subject of ignorance is Brahma. Thus we find, that in both the
expressions Ignorance is dependent on the individual for a site or
dwelling place. Ignorance makes its subject Brahma, that is to
say, covers or envelopes It. But this ignorance is not one, but mul
tiform and infinite. If ignorance be admitted to be one, then its
destruction by one knowledge will preclude the possibility of its
being recognized in others, as also its resulting product, the objective
world. If it be said, up to the present time, no one has acquired
knowledge (of Self), so in the same way, it is not very probable that
any one will have it in the future. So that, the usual means hear
ing, consideration and the rest are perfectly useless for the purpose.
And as ignorance pervades universally in all beings, it is therefore
infinite. But this universal pervasion of ignorance in all beings
is a fancied conception. Isiuara and Brahmdnda* arc infinite. With
knowledge, ignorance along with Iswara and Brahmdnda are destroy
ed. And one who has not acquired knowledge is not freed, according to
Vachaspati ; but that is not true. For to say, that Iswara is a con
ception of ignorance in Jiva is directly antagonistic to what is
taught in the Sruti, Smriti and the Puranas. Iswara is infinite,
and the presence of distinction between one created being, and
another is likewise antagonistic. Hence to look upon ignorancef
as manifold is unsound, and its admission is untenable.
* Brahmdnda is the egg of Brahmd. He is one of the Hindu triad and
different from Brahma. The first is masculine, the latter is neuter. It is
impersonal.
t The author here adduces the distributive segregate of ignorance
and not its collective totality. He rests his arguments mainly on the
assumption, that if there are several ignorances present, there will be in
company with each unit one Iswara, and one world, which is clearly
not the case. But the collective totality is made of an infinite number
of individual units of ignorance, hence, it can be said to be multiform,
manifold, and infinite, but with the distinction mentioned.
VICIIAR SAOAR. 169
Moreover in the admission of manifold ignorance, Iswara and
creation are untenable. For Jiva, Isivara, and the universe are all
conceived by ignorance, so that if ignorance be multiform as
many as there are Jivas then with each individual unit of igno
rance there must be present one Iswara and one world that is to
say, both Isivara and the universe will be as many as there are
ignorances. For this reason, Vachaspati says " there are an infinite
number of Iswaras and worlds." But the view which holds ignorance
to be one is true, and that ignorance is not dependent on the Jiva,
but on the Pure Brahma. Because the condition of Jiva is due to
ignorance, and its separate existence* is quite unconceivable. It
never exists as an independent entity, and from that independent
ignorance, no Jiva can be produced. In the first place, therefore
ignorance must be dependent on something else, and next its pro
duct will be the Jiva ; like the Jiva, Isiuars condition is also a
product of ignorance which depends on him for its site. But the
collective totality of ignorancef is dependent on the Pure Brahma.
The collective totality of intelligence uncreate and the uncreated
ignorance have an interconnection with the material world which is
also uncreate. From an interconnection of intelligence and igno
rance, both Iswara and Jiva are uncreate ; but they are dependent
on ignorance, so that I am ignorant is a product of ignorance.
In this way is set forth the dependence of ignorance on Jiva.
But the collective totality of ignorance which is dependent on the
Pure Brahma cannot be conceived by the individual to enable him
to say " I am ignorant." Moreover Jiva is a product of ignorance,
hence ignorance cannot be said to be dependent on the Jiva for
its inherence or site. But the Pure Brahma is the de facto source
on which ignorance is dependent for its site, and this dependent
* Matter per se cannot possibly be conceived apart from the objects
which are found in the world. It existed in the beginning potentially
in the PARABRAHMA, by combination they brought forth the evolution of
the Cosmos.
t The collective totality of ignorance is without a beginning, it is
uncreate.
22
170 VICHAR SAG AH.
ignorance enshrouds the Brahma. " I am ignorant" is a subsequent
product and distinct from it. Thus is Jiva a vehicle of ignorance,
and ignorance with its vehicle is subject of Self; and as that igno
rance is one, it can be destroyed by knowledge. Now the intelligence
of the internal organ has a modicum of ignorance, which is removed
by knowledge. The internal organ is the seat of knowledge, and
all knowledge must proceed from it, so that its knowledge destroys
the particle of ignorance situated in it. When this follows in the case
of a person, he is called freed. But if the case be otherwise,
and no knowledge is produced in the mind, then the particle of
ignorance remains in tact, consequently the individual continues to
be a subject of bondage. In this manner bondage and emancipation*
are attributed by the supporters of ignorance.
Moreover, if after Vachaspati, any one will pin his faith with
the doctrine of ignorance being many and not one ; even that shall
be conducive to the knowledge of non-duality, hence there is
hardly any necessity for disputing or exposing its fallacies. Any
how when an enquirer obtains an insight of non-duality, he should
fix it in his mind or intellect.
Maya the vehicle of the Pure Brahma and dependent on It,
is ignorance, or call it Avld/ja and Ajnana. It is called Maya (Illu
sion) because it is possessed of numerous powers and is only affected
by reflection and arguments hence it is so named. It is destroyed
by knowledge (vidya) hence it is called (avidya) A -knowledge. It
conceals the real nature, hence it is called (ajnana) ignorance.
That intelligence which supports it is not antagonistic to it, but
such ordinary intelligence is its supporter, and helps to manifest its
presence ; on the other hand, intelligence occupying the function of
the internal organ or intelligence plus function are its antagonists.
The first three lines of the verse give a description of the actuality
of Maya. The fourth line defines the reflection in Maya and des
cribes Isivara.
Maya abounding in pure goodness, and its occupying intelligence,
these three, constitute Isivara who is omniscient, and source or cause
of the universe.
VKJHAR SAGAR. 171
There are two sorts of causes, one is called proximate, and
the other instrumental or material. The first* is defined as
that which enters into an effect and without which no effect is
produced. As for instance, earth is the proximate cause of a jar ; ifc
enters every part of a jar, and without it no jar can be produced.
What does not enter into the composition of a substance, but pro
duces an effect situated apart from it, and whose destruction does
not affect the effect, is called the instrumental or material cause.
As for instance, in the case of the above jar, a potter s revolving
wheel, and the turning stick are its instrumental cause. They do not
enter into the composition of the jar, but produce it by remaining
apart from it. Besides, the death of a potter and the destruction of
the revolving wheel and the turning rod subsequent to the produc
tion of a jar, cannot affect it in any way. These are the two sorts
of causes.
With regard to the world, Isivara is both its proximate and ins
trumental cause. As a spider is said to be a proximate and instru
mental cause of its web, so is I&wara of the world. If it be alleged,
this comparison is not an apt one, for in the case of the spider
its insentient body is the proximate, and its intelligence, the instru
mental cause of its web, hence one Iswara cannot stand for both
causes ; then the reply is : like the spider, the insentient body of
Isivara (Maya) is the proximate, and the intelligence present
therein is the instrumental cause of the world. Thus is deter
mined both a proximate and instrumental cause, so that
the instance of the spider is not an inapt one. But the prin
cipal illustration is dream. When the actions of an individual
produce no results it is destruction (pralaya). When they bring forth
results, then creation begins. In this manner, the creation of an in
dividual is dependent on the totality of his actions, good and bad
(karma). Herein consists what is called the resemblance with a Jiva.
* Upadana means, cleaving to existing objects. At death, when the
component units of the human body are dispersed, the actions of the
individual his karma and upadana produce a new body in proportion
to his merits and demerits.
172 VICHAR SAGAR.
Reflex intelligence present in ignorance abounding in impure
goodness is the Jiva, who expects to enjoy the results of action.
Pure goodness is that which overpowers the two other
qualities active and dark ; but what is overpowered by them
is called impure goodness. The reflection of intelligence present
along with ignorance abounding in impure goodness, ignorance,
and its indwelling Uniform Intelligence these three constitute a
Jiva. He is engaged in action and desires to be benefited by its
results. With a view of enabling him to enjoy the fruits of his action
in proportion to his merits and demerits, Iswara creates ; hence
Iswara cannot be said to be either partial or unkind. If it be
alleged, that in the beginning no action was present so as to produce a
high or low station in life for an individual, yet I sward did place
some in a position of felicity, and others in quite a low situation, to
make them suffer, consequently he is partial. But that is not the case.
For virtually the world is without a beginning, and the prior action
of an individual subject him to a subsequent existence to enjoy or to
suffer according to his merits and demerits. There is no first creation,
and Iswara is therefore faultless.
Prior to an individual, in proportion to his actions, good and bad,
Iswara desires to create the world, for him to reap their fruits ;
Creates he accordingly the elements, ether, air, fire, water and
earth.
Sound, touch, form, taste, and smell, (sing of) qualities.
The particle of good quality with the five (elements) produces
good,
The particle of the active quality gives rise to Prana.
Each element, with the good quality produces one sensory organ
While the active, gives origin to the active organs.
When actions are different, to give adequate fruits thereof to
individuals, then begins destruction (pralaya). Then all objects in
their subtle condition remain potentially in Maya, so that the un
finished actions of individuals also continue to exist, but in a subtle
form, in the same Maya. When such actions are able to bear fruits
then Iswara is actuated thereby with a desire to create ; with this
VICIIAR SAG All. 173
desire Maya is overpowered with an abundance of darkness, from
which are produced the elements ether, air, fire, water, and earth ;
gradually they become possessed with the five properties sound, touch,
form, taste, and smell.
Ether with its individual property sound, is produced from Maya ;
from the ether air (air is an action of ether, hence sound is present
in it along with its individual property of touch) ; from air fire (fire
is an active or resulting product of air, which being derived from
ether has sound and touch, therefore they are present in fire also
along with its individual property form) ; from fire water (water con
tains the sound of ether, touch of air, form of fire, besides its own
property of taste) ; from water the earth, which has all the four above-
mentioned properties, besides that of smell, which is its individual
quality.
Sound is present in ether in the form of echo. Air has acquired
from ether a whistling noise in it, while its touch is something quite
distinct from heat and coldness ; and darkness. The sound present
in fire resembles that of crackling ; its feel or touch is hot, and its
form that of light or luminosity. The sound of water is a gurgling
noise, its feel or touch is cool, form transparent, taste sweet ; when
water is brackish or unpleasant in taste, it is due to earth* present
in it. Otherwise water is always sweet in taste and hence drunk
by all. Its drink after taking things of pungent taste proves it to
be sweet. The sound of earth is hard, it is a deal thud, its feel is
also hard, its form is color, such as white, blue, yellow, green, etc.
Its taste is either sweet, acid, pungent, bitter, astingent, or saltish
and has both good and bad smell present in it.
Thus then we find ether has one, air two, fire three, water four,
and earth five properties, of which each has an individual quality,
while the rest are derived from their causes, therefore all the elements
* Modern chemistry traces various salts in water which produce a
brackish taste, notably the Chlorides of Sodium, Calciam, Nitrate of Potass,
Nitrate of Soda, etc. These are called earthy salts, so our author is not
at all incorrect in what he says.
174 VICHAR SAGAR.
have them in common. Iswara is the primal Cause of all.
Now both Maya and Intelligence are present in him, and as Maya
is illusion it is false, while Intelligence is real. The first two lines
of the verse indicate this.
From the good quality present in ether and the rest, is derived
the internal organ. It is the source of knowledge, which has been
shown to be a product of the same good quality also. Hence the mind
or internal organ is a product of the good qualities present in the
elements. Now these five elements have five organs of sense, which
are called vehicles, hence the five elements combined with the
quality of goodness are said to be the source of the internal organ.
Jt is derived from two words, Anta signifying internal and Karana*
a means of knowledge. Its combined signification is therefore,
what is situated inside the body and which is a means for acquiring
knowledge. Moreover, as it is a derivative product of the good
quality of ether and the rest it is called Sativavic, i.e., having good
ness, or composed of goodness. Its modification or change is called
function, which is four in number.
1. Function which determines an object as good or bad. It is
called intellect (Buddhi).
2. Function marked by determination or its reverse is called
mind.
3. Function of thinking is called intelligence (Chit).
4. The conceit of I am I determines the function of Egoism
(Akankara).
From the particle of active quality (Raja} of the five elements,
is produced the five vital airs, according to a difference in their site
and function :
1. Prana. The air situated in the heart and whose function
is to produce hunger and thirst is called Prana.
2. Apana. The air situated in the anus and whose function
is to produce the excrements urine and defecation is Apana.
3. Samana. The air situtaed in the navel and which helps
the digestion of food is called Samana.
VICIIAR &AGAR. 175
4. Udana. The air situated in the throat and whose function
is respiration is called Udana.
5. Vyana. The air present in all parts of the body with the
power of affording life to the respective portions thereof is called
Vyana.*
Besides the above, some men say there are five more airs which
they designate as follows.
(a). Nag, causing eructation,
(6). Kurma, causing the opening and shutting of the eyelids,
(c). Krikara, causing sneezing,
(d). Devadatta yawning, and
(e). Dhananjaya is the air which continues in the body after
death.
Consecutive action in a serial order is explained as follows :
From each of the active qualities inherent in ether and the other
elements has been produced the five vital airs prana and the rest,
one after another as has just been explained. It is not a combined
action of all the active qualities present in the elements. But
according to the conclusions of the Vedanta (which admit it not) it
is quintuplication. This is the opinion of Vidyaranya Swami.
Sureswaracharya (one of the principal pupils of Shankaracharya)
otherwise called Vartikakara, considers the subtle body and the five
sheaths are quite unconnected with the five airs Nag etc. They
do not form any part, or enter into the composition of the Linga
Sharira or Panchkosha. Moreover, he says that the five vital airs
prana and the rest are derived from the joint action of the active
qualities of the elements, so that the doctrine of their separate
* The vital airs are respiration (Prana) t inspiration (Apana), flatu-
ousness (Vyana\ expiration (Udana), and digestion (Samana}. Res
piration has an upward motion, and abides in the anus, etc. ; flatuousness
moves in all directions, and pervades the whole body ; expiration belongs
to the throat, has an upward course and is the ascending air ; digestion
is the assimilation of solid and liquid food, on its reaching the stomach.
Jacob s Hindu Pantheism, .p. 59,
176 VICHAR SAGAR.
production from each particle of the said quality present in each
individual element is clearly unmaintainable. Then again to say, that
the subtle body receives the other airs, Nag, Kurma, Krikar,
Dcvadatta and Dhananjaya is equally untenable. The five vital airs
are alone accepted by the subtle body. Prana resembles projection
which is an attribute of the active quality, hence it is said to be a
product of the joint action of the elements. This is meant by the
third couplet.
From the good quality present in each of the five elements are de
rived the five organs of sense. From each particle of the active quality
present in them is derived each of the active organs (i. e. t organs
of action) ; from the etherial goodness ears; aerial the skin ;. igneous
eyes ; aqueous organ of taste (tongue) ; earthy nose or organ of
smell. These five organs are means of knowledge for which they are
called sensory organs ; knowledge is produced from the good quality,
hence it is said to be derived from the good qualities of the elements.
Ears receive sound, a property of ether, for which they are said to
be derived from it. In the same way, each organ is said to be
derived from each one element, whose properties are present in it.
The organ of speech is derived from the active quality of ether,
hands from the same source of air, feet from the active quality of
fire, genitals from the active quality of water, while the same pro
perty of earth produces the anus ; the genitals mean the male and
female sexual organs concerned in the enjoyment of felicity derived
from coitus. Actions include works. These five organs of action are
means for work, for which they are called active organs. Actions
arise from the active quality, hence they are said to be derived
from the active quality present in the elements.
Recognise the creative source of the subtle in elementary
non-quintuplication.
From elementary quintuplication are produced all gross
bodies.
The cause, subtle, and gross bodies and the five sacs I know
With discrimination distinct from the Atma. To know him
to be one with them is delusion.
VICHAR SAGAR. 177
Here subtle indicates the mind or internal organ, five vital airs,
five organs of sense and the five organs of action ; all these are the
products of non-quintuplication of the elements. They cannot be
known by the sensory organs. The seat of the eyes, nose, etc., is
their subject, but the organs situated in those seats are not subject
of either the individual or the organs themselves.
Subsequent to the evolution of the subtle [bodies], were the ele
ments quintuplicated by the desire of Iswara, for the creation of the
gross. Quintuplication is said to be of two sorts. It is in this wise.
(a) Divide each element into two equal parts, and subdivide
each part into four [equal] parts, leaving the first half of each of
the five elements undisturbed, and keeping separate the sub-division
into four parts of each half. After omitting from the major half-
part, each share of the individual element add this half, to each part
of the elements.
(b) The second variety is formed in this way. First is a division of
each element into five parts of which one part is made up of four,
the other of one part ; in this way, one is major and the
other a lesser part. Now these major parts are to remain as they
are, quite separate and undisturbed. The fifth lesser part is
to be subdivided into five parts, and then by adding each of these with
each major part of the other four elements, kept separate, and keep
ing one-fifth with its own major part.
In the first method, four parts of one part remain separate, with
each half part is combined each element leaving its first half ; but
in the second, the smaller part of the fifth remains separate ; and
with the major fifth part is added each individual part of the ele
ments. In the first quintuplication of the element, to each half of
an element is added the half of another element, while in
the second, with each twenty-one parts of an individual element
is combined the four parts of another element. Therefore the
second method is an easier one. Here each element is divided into
twenty-five parts, of which twenty-one and four parts remain separate.
Then they are added in the same proportion of twenty-one of one
element with four of another, leaving its own twenty one apart. These
then are the two modes of combination called quintuplication
23
178 VH IIAR SAGAR
(Panchikarana), which means the combination of five elements with
each element. That one, which is subjected to, or produced from it
is called quintupiicated (panchkrita).
The gross Brahma s egg a subject of the senses has been de
rived from quintuplication of the elements. In the Brahma s egg
are included the several abodes designated Bhur, Bliuyar, Swar,
Mahar, Janas, Tapas and Satya, one above the other. They are the
higher abodes, while the nether ones placed one below the other
are Atala, Sutala, Patala, Vitala, Rasatala, Talatala and Mahatala.
These fourteen abodes with the requisite food-grains fit for their
inhabitants Deva, men, animal, etc., and their gross physical bodies
have all been produced in that manner. Thus have I briefly described
the creationof the cosmos. A full description of Maya with its result
ing product is not even possible with the life time of a crore of Brahmas.
This is the dictum of Valmika and Vashishta in all their writings on
history. The meaning of the two couplets is thus explained. The
third signifies the production of three sorts of bodies and the five
sh.-aths from an action of Maya.
Maya in combination with its purely good quality constitutes the
cause-body of Isivara ; while in combination with the impure good
quality of ignorance the cause-body of Jiva is the product. The
gross body is a subsequent result of the subtle body which again
owes its origin to the five subtle elements. The subtle astral body
isjierived from the mind, intellect, thought, egoism, five vital airs
five sensory and five active organs. ^The collective totality of indivi
dual subtle bodies constitute Iswar s subtle body known as Hiranya-
garbJia.} Brahmas egg in its entire grossness constitutes Iswars
gross pnysical body called Virat. Now the physical (gross) body
of a Jiva is too well known [to need any mention]. From these
three sources are derived the five sheaths orj^cs.
The cause-body is called the blissful sheath
Kosha) the cognitional (Vijnanmaya), mental (Maiwmaya) and
vital (Pranomaya) are determined in the subtle body : The five
sensory organs with (budhi) intellect a function of the internal
org"T: characterised by certitude form the cognitional sac or sheath
(Vinjnanmayakosha). The five sensory organs with the function
VICHAR SAGA1L 179
of the internal organ represent the mental sheath. The five vital
airs with the five active organs indicate the vital sheath. The gross
body is called theJoodfuLgJigatL Thus then v/e find that the five
sacs are present in the three bodies called cause, astral, and physical
[gross]. Now in Iswar s bodies are present Iswar s sheaths while
a Jiva s sheaths are present in his. The meaning of kosJia is sheath.
Because they cover the Atma like a sheath, hence the foodful and
the rest are called sheaths (or sacs).
Ignorant and unspiritually inclined persons, many in number,
mistake their Self with some one of these sheaths, from which they are
entirely different, and are debarred from cognizing Him who is the chief
witness. Hence the foodful and the rebt are said to cover the Atma.
There are others equally dull in intellect, who after the manner
of the VirocJianas say the gross body a receptacle of food
is Self ; and base their assumption on the ground that " Self is
perceived in the intellect as the particle of individuality or
egoism represented by the first personal pronoun I and this is
clearly the case with the gross body. For, an individual is apt to say
* I am a man. * I am a Brahmana. Such an experience is universal ;
and the necessary conditions of a human creature, or that of a
Brahmana, are present in the gross body ; consequently as the gross
body is the seat of individuality and perceived so by the intellect it
is Self; or Self is that which is a chief object of love. And as a son,
wealth, animals, tend to the comfort of the gross-physical body
they are objects of love ; objects which are not conducive of com
fort to that body are not loved. Love for another object is centred
in the gross body, hence it is the Atma. It derives pleasure from
the enjoyment of food and clothing of various sorts." Such is the
doctrine of Asur Siuami Virochana*
* A Charvatca calls the physical body, derived from the four elements
fire, water, air, and earth his self, and argues thus : the subject of the
perception of Egoism is self, " I am a man." " I am fat." " I am lean."
"I am a Brahmana," etc. Here the physical body is perceived as the
subject of Egoism, and is accordingly taken for a man, or his qualities o$
corpulence and of Brahman etc. Hence the body is self, or what is the
180 \ 1C II All SAG A 11
Then there are others who say the gross body is not Self; but
that something whose presence in the physical body constitutes
subject of supreme affection is self. In this way as a wife, son and the reat
are conducive to the well-being of the body, and it is the seat of the
highest affection, consequently the subject of the indications of that
extreme love the body is self, and the highest aim of humanity consists
in feeding that with good things and clothing it with good dress, jewels,
etc., and death is emancipation. Now this requires no other proof than
what actually follows in every individual and is plainly seen ; look for
instance at the appearance of a prince with all gold and jewels over, an
appearance expressing supremo indications of affection for that body, the
care bestowed on its feed and dress, providing all comforts for it, and con
trast it with the care-worn and pinched countenance of a raggamuffin,
yet even here, you will find him struggling all day long, for the mainte
nance of the body which he regards with affection and care. All these are
proofs enough and as they are everywhere visible, there can be no conten
tion against their cogency.
But this doctrine of Charvakas is clearly untenable. For if the subject
of perception of Egoism ( I ) would constitute self, in that case, the
organs of sense and action would be so ; inasmuch as they are also perceived
in the same way, as in the expressions " I see." " I hear." I speak."
Thus then the organs are also perceived as the subject of Egoism. Then
again, in regard to an individual s affection for his body, it cannot be a
subject of Egoism, consequently it is a misapplication, therefore the
physical body is not self. Moreover, wealth and riches, wife and aon, as
they shew good deal of affection for that body, evince a similar feeling for
the organs too, consequently in the absence of the highest amount of
affection, the gross body is not a subject of supreme affection, and therefore
it is not selft Further, as the body is wanting in sentiency or intelligence,
it is not self, and if a Charvaka were to Bay, juet as a mixture of quicklime
with catechu and betel leaf produces the well-known red color, BO the
body for its being a mixture of the four elements, derives its power of
knowledge. But this is clearly impossible, for if a blending of the ele
ments were to produce sentiency, knowledge or intelligence, we may as
well expect a jar, which is derived from a blending of the same four
elements to possess sontiency or knowledge, but that it has not ; besi des,
in conditions of profound sleep, fainting, and death, the body is as insentient
VICHAR SAGAR. 181
vitality and with whose departure death follows, and which is quite
distinct from it is the Atma. Life and death are dependent on the
as a jar consequently insentiency is its normal condition and hence it
is not self.
If the physical body were identical with self we would never have
fixed our belief in the identity of the body of our manhood, with that of
our youth, though they are different from each other ; and when a person
who had seen us in our boyhood comes to see after an absence of several
years, when we have attained manhood, he for the sake of recognition
recalls to our memory a few leading incidents of the past, and we exclaim
" Indeed that am I." As this is a common incident, therefore the body
is not sel_. Further, since the body is subject to birth and death, prior
to its being born or subsequent to death, it is non-existent, consequently
self who is eternal cannot be same with it. Because that will imply the
acknowledgment of two defects of destruction of actions done, and the
fruition of actions not done, after death ; both of them are inapplicable.
That is to say, if the actions performed in life, were to produce no result,
in the absenc e of self who is no agent and instrument, a person would then
cease to practise works enjoined in the Vedas, and we see the contrary
to be fact. Then again, for the existing difference of self of boyhood with
that of prime, when a person has read the Vedas in his youth and boyhood,
should enjoy no fruits subsequent to that period either in prime or old
age ; similarly all works done in the present life should yield him no
results, thus the admission of destruction of works done already and their
unproductiveness is injurious, and in a previous birth from an absence of
a do-er or agent no actions could be done, so that in the present life
whatever a person has to enjoy or suffer should be equally the case with
all, and there shall be no cause of the prevailing difference as to happi
ness or woe in its various shades, as we actually find to be the case, one is
happy, a second miserable, a third beset with difficulties, BO that, it in
impossible to acknowledge the fruition of actions not done, and along with
it, the assumption of the body being self.
Now according to Ckai-vakas the chief or ulterior aim of humanity
consists in eating, dressing, &&lt;5., but it is not so, because a desire for a
thing constitutes an ulterior aim or supreme purport, and as every one 13
desirous of acquiring happiness and removing misery, necessarily that
desire is the supreme purport of humanity, and the highest of that felicity
182 VICHAR SAGAR.
organs, so long as they remain in the body, life continues, in their
absence vitality cannot continue. And because of the experience
" I see," " I Hear," " I speak." Thus then, as the organs determine the
presence of individuality, they are no other but Self.*
and extreme destruction of misery is galled emancipation in the Sidhanta.
But enjoyment cannot be ranked with this ulterior aim, for it is apt to take
an extreme turn, and there is no limit for it ; neither can death be taken
in the light of emancipation. Dhole s PancJiadasi, p. 78.
h That is to say, Intelligence being the indication or sign of self, the
organs as they shew signs of intelligence can justly be regarded as self. This
is what another Charvaka says, but it is fallacious, because self is that
without which the body cannot last ; in the case of the organs of sense and
action, we find a person may be blind or deaf yet living ; he may be para
lysed, his hands and feet deprived of action and progression, he may be
dumb, yet living, consequently self is something distinct from the sensory
and active organs. They cite in support, the expressions " I hear," " I
see," "I am blind," <fcc. But it is to be remembered, the first person
used in connection with that hearing, sight, &c., establishes the possession
of the necessary organs with which the several functions are carried on,
consequently when it is said " I hear," &c., it means " I have ears to hear,"
or " I see with my eyes" and not " I am the eye," " I am the ear." Thus
then, the perception of (subject of Egoism) < I in connection with the
organs of sense is quite distinct from them ; then again, if their identity
be sought to be proved by similar other expressions as " My sight is in
different," " My hearing is acute" by shewing an attachment of sight, &c.,
with own self, it is simply a misapplication, for the cogniser is different
from cognition, and self being the cogniser, is different from sight, hearing,
<fcc. Moreover in mental abstraction, or absence of mind a person, sees not,
neither does he hear, though his sight and hearing are perfect ; therefore we
may lay down the insentiency of sensory organs, and what is insentient
cannot be similar to self. In connection with it, in a dead body the organs
of sense and action are all present, yet they are insentient.
Further it may be enquired whether one organ is self, or whether
their collective totality is so, or they are so many different selves. The
first is quite untenable, for if it be said that a single organ is self, a person
should die or be insentient when that is wanting ; yet the fact is otherwise ;
similarly if the collective aggregate of organs be regarded in that light,
VICE All SAGAR. 183
A worshipper of Hiranyagarbha says that his Prana (vital air)
is his self. Because in the last moments, when a man is in a
death-swoon, his son and relations notice the presence of the respira
tion^ so long as it lasts they take him to be alive, when it ceases,
he is dead. Or, because in the absence of sight, or hearing, a man
is said to be either blind or deaf, or dumb when he cannot speak,
and without the presence of the functions of the several sensory
organs, the body continues, but when there is no Prana present,
life ceases and the body falls.
Then again the expressions " I see," " I hear," establish Self to be
distinct and separate from the sensory organs, inasmuch as Self can
only be determined one with them if the above expressions will
explain " Like the eyes I see," "Like the ears I hear," but that is not
so ; on the other hand, the meaning which they seek to explain is
that with eyes I see, with ears I hear. Hence Self is distinct from
the organs of sense, sight, hearing, touch and the rest. Moreover,
in profound dreamless slumber, though the function of the senses
is absent, but as respiration continues, vitality is present for all
practical purposes, so that life and death are quite independent of
the senses. It is perfectly clear that so long as respiration goes on
life continues ; with its separation from the physical body, death
follows. Hence life and death are dependent on respiration and that
is the Atma*
then in the destruction of one single organ, all the rest should equally be
destroyed, and there should be neither life nor intelligence ; moreover if
each of them were so many different selves, then like ten elephants tied to
one tree breaking it asunder, the body will be similarly affected by desires
originating with each of these selves. Ibid.
* But Prana is not self. Because like the absence of motion in the exter
nal air, when there is no respiration going on, death does not follow, we
find plants do not respire like ourselves, yet they continue to grow,
and preserve their vitality ; in regard to animated beings, it cannot be said
that respiration goes on during or after death, yet there are instances when
it is suspended and vitality is seen to continue ; moreover in sleep, Prana
is awake, yet if it were intelligence or self, it should show the usual civi
lities to a new comer related to a person, when he arrives at his house
184 VICHAR SAGAR.
Others there are who say, like a jar, respiration* is insentient
hence not Self. Bondage and release are dependent on the Mind.
Its attachment to material comforts is the source of bondage, while
that opposite condition, when the mind is freed from any desire or
hankering after wealth, is said to be the cause of release.
while sleeping, that it does not, nor does it prevent a thief when he robs
him in sleep ; hence it is not self, but insentient and unconscious. It is
contended by the supporters of Prana, that with its exit, death follows,
therefore it is self. But this does not hold true. Because with the depar
ture [cessation of the secretion] of gastric juice, a man loses his appetite,
wastes and dies, and we may as well call it self. Moreover the superiority
of Prana mentioned in the Veda is only with a view of producing an in
clination in one engaged in devotional exercises. If it be said, there are
Sruti texts which clearly denote Prana to be self, but inasmuch as similar
texts are also found in connection with the mental sac, consequently one
is contradicted by the other, hence it is not meant so ; but it serves to
establish the non-difference of the abiding intelligence seated in them,
with Brahma. Ibid.
* Prdna includes inspiration, expiration, &c., hence it is equivalent
to respiration, therefore it need not create any misapprehension. But there
are others notably in the ranks of the < Theosophists who mistake it with
electricity, vital magnetism, and what not. Mr. Sinnett in his Esoteric
Buddhism, p. 27, says concerning it : " Vitality thus consists of Matter in
its aspect as force, and its affinity for the grosser state of matter is so great
that it cannot be separated from any given particle or mass of this except
by instantaneous translation to some other particle or mass. When a man s
body dies, by desertion of the higher principles which have rendered it a
living reality, the second or life principle, [Prana], no longer a unity itself,
is nevertheless inherent still in the particles of the body as this decomposes,
attaching iteelf to other organisms to which that very process of decom
position gives riso. Bury the body in the earth and its Jiva will attach
itself to the vegetables which springs above, or the lower animal forms
which evolve from its substance. Bury the body and indestructible Jiva
flies back none the less instantaneously to the body of the planet itself
from which it was originally borrowed, entering into some new combination
as its affinities may determine." How far this is correct it is for the reader
to judge.
VICHAR SAG All 18*
And in relation with the mind, the senses are the source of
knowledge [perception]. The senses alone without such relation
can produce no knowledge, hence for all practical purposes mind is
the chief source, and that is the Atma. According to a Kshanika
Vijnanavadi Boudha, the action of the mind is dependent on
(Buddhi) the Intellect, for mind is a transformation of Intellect,
hence this Buddhi whose intelligence or consciousness is transitory,
is the Atma and not mind. What they mean by it is this, all objects
are merely forms of consciousness, which has the property of
manifestibility ; but this consciousness springs up and disappears
every moment. A subsequent consciousness, intelligence or percep
tion, arises just in the same way as a prior one; but with the
appearance of the latter, the former disappears. In the same way,
with the appearance of a third perception, the second disappears, and
when a fourth one succeeds, the third has already ceased. Thus then
a current of perception resembles the current of a river. Now such a
current of perception is twofold ; of which one is habitual or fixed
and the other continuous. The consciousness of Egoism I am I is
called a fixed current of knowledge and Intellect ; while the
continuous variety is illustrated by the example " This jar," " This
bod} ," etc. From the current of fixed consciousness arises the current
of continuous consciousness, which latter is present in the mind
too. Since therefore, the fixed current of consciousness is due to
the action of Intellect, such intellect is said to be no other than Self.
These Buddhists consider emancipation to be obstruction, or more
properly, destruction of the continuous current which is subject to
fixed current of consciousness [by knowledge] and the permanance
or continuance of the current of a particular transient perception or
knowledge. In this manner, a Vijnanavadi thinking Intellect to
be transient and self-illuminated, says it is his Self.
A Bhatta* says, Self is unlike the transient flash of light
ning but is fixed or constant, insentient and intelligent. Now the
flhaltas are followers of Kumarila Bhatta of the Mimansaka who pre
ceded Sankaracharya by a century.
24
\7rllAR SAOAR.
purport is this a man ou waking from profound slumber says
"I was sleeping insensibly" such an expression signifies Self [indicated
by the first personal pronoun] to be insentient, and he remembers
it when he is awaken ; remembrance of an unknown thing never
takes place. lu the state of profound slumber there are no other
means [of knowledge] apart from Self, hence the source of recollec
tion in that state is knowledge, which is nothing else but Self.
Therefore like the glowworm, Self is both manifested, and its reverse ;
manifested because he is like knowledge, and unmanifested because
insentient. Now the blissful sheath is in this dual condition of
manifestibility and unmanifestibility, because the reflex-intelligence
present along with ignorance in the condition of profound dreamless
slumber is called the blissful sheath. Here the reflection of intelli
gence has the powers of manifesting, while ignorance has it not,
hence according to a Bhatta (and zFravakar too) the blissful sheath
is hi* Self.
A. Sunya-Vadi Buddhist says Self is not composed of parts,
hence one Self cannot be said to be both manifested and unmani
fested. As a glowworm has the power of luminosity in its tail
which gives light, while its body is not so conditioned, but is
dark, hence two opposite qualities are present in two portions of
its body, and that need not imply any contradiction ; but with Self
it is otherwise, for he is devoid of parts, hence the same Self cannot
be the possessor of two such opposite qualities like the glowworm,
as that of discovering and non-discovering, light and darkness,
or illuminating and unilluminating, and such an admission will make
him a composite body a body composed of parts. Now a compo
site body (as for instance, a jar etc.,) is a derivative product and
therefore liable to birth and death ; so must equally be the case with
him too. Moreover, a derivative product must necessarily have no
existence prior to its birth and subsequent to death. It is there
fore " asat" essentially non-existent. Because a body that was
non-existent in the beginning (prior to its birth) and will be so
after death, cannot be essentially existent in the intervening space,
during the time it lasts, but on the other hand, is non-existent even
then. And such being the condition of Atma [from the present
VI CHAR SAGAR. 18 r
stand point], He is essentially non-existent. Thus then we find
all substances (though different from Self) are subject to birth and
destruction equally with him, and they are all of them in their
collective totality essentially non-existent (A sat). Self and not-Self
are, equally characterised by that one condition of non-existence, so
that nothing is the highest principle. The doctrine of the
Madhyamik Buddhists, who for their doctrine of nothing are called
Atheists, explains the blissful sheath to be a form of ignorance,
because ignorance is determined in that way. Those who are igno
rant of the teachings of the Shastras which deal on non-duality, take
the world, which is merely a modification of ignorance for a reality ;
while they that are learned in the Shastras, consider it to be unreal
for it is a derivative product of ignorance, which is different from
being and non-being and something indescribable. The wise and
those delivered in life, look upon ignorance with its product, as some
thing worthless and un-desirable. Now the words un-desirable non-
being and nothing are synonymous. Thus then what is not desired
by one delivered in life ignorance is an object of fond attachment
with a believer of nothing and eagerly sought after, because he is
ignorant of the chief purport of life (Self-knowledge), and believes
the un-desirable blissful sheath to be his Self.
A Pravakar and a Naiyayika assert that Self does not resemble
nothing. For if a believer of nothing \vf;re asked whether he has
an experience of nothing or not ; and he says no, then that will
establish the absence of nothing ; but if he says yes, then what is differ
ent from his nothing is Self. This is established from his admission
of experiencing nothing. Thus Self is determined something dis
tinct from nothing, and cognizable only by the help of the mind,
and for this quality of knowledge in him, Self is called by the name
of intelligence ; naturally S-lf is insentient, so that the properties,
happiness and misery, desire and spite, effort, virtue and vice, etc., are
the subjects of Self. According to them the blissful sheath is the
Atma, and the intellect present in the cognitional sheath is his
quality of knowledge. For the intelligence present in the blissful
sheath is masked and unperceived by an indiscriminate person. A
Pravakar or Naiyayika considering the Atma to be devoid of
VIC11AR XAGAR.
intelligence in profound dreamless slumber, conclude him to bo natur
ally insentient. Hence the blissful sheath with its masked perception
is his Self. Moreover a person does not recognise himself to be
eternal intelligence, but on the contrary thinks his intelligence to
be transient, which again establishes only the function of the inter
nal organ (Buddhi) Intellect. For these reasons a Pravakara and
Naiyayika look upon the blissful sheath as their Atma having In
tellect for his quality. But this doctrine is not true. For things
that are different from Self, (ajar, a cloth, etc.,) are non-eternal, and
this difference is marked by the presence or absence of intelligence.
Self is intelligence, while a jar, a cloth, etc., are insentient. So
that, if Self were devoid of intelligence (e. y. insentient) then like a
jar, he will be reduced to impermanence and that will render release
a futile effort.
In this way, persons unacquainted with the drift of the Vedantic
utterances mistake Self with some one of the five sacs or sheaths, or
their component units, and remain ignorant of his real nature which
is that of witness and all-blissfulness ; and because such ignorance
is brought on by the sheath-like coverings that envelope the Atma
in a sac, or cover him as a sword is confined in its scabbard. These
coverings or sacs are designated sheaths. And as these five sheaths
hide the real nature of the individual viz., that of a witness, so do
the collective aggregate of/simm s five sheaths cover his real nature,
in as much as the indication of the word (Tat) That expressive of
his real nature, is abandoned by some, while its apparent signification,
expressing the internal knower as a predicate of the blissful sheath
formed of Maya, is looked upon by them as a Supreme Principle or
entity ; and they are deluded in believing Hiranyagarbha, Vishnu,
Brahma, Ganesa, Siva, Devi, Sun, etr., as also the Ficus Religion/
Asclipia Gigantia, Bamboo and an infinite variety of substances to
be the Supreme Self. Asa fact, He is universally present; and
the indication of all objects referring to Him in that way, can be
presumed to bear no distinction between the objects and Parmatma ;
yet to connect Him with the respective associates of the objects
named above, or of other substances is a delusion. Thus these men
are precluded from knowing His true nature covered by the respec*
VIC11AR SAG All.
live sheaths of the Jiva and Iswara, and mistaking Self with the
physical body etc., are engaged in works good and bad, and in the
worship of all objects from the internal knower to a bamboo, only
that they may enjoy happiness. But the result must be in
proportion to the merit of the object worshipped, for in the Isiuaras
body are included the cause, subtle, and gross bodies, so that, accor
ding to the nature of the body worshipped, the result must follow.
But emancipation can never be acquired without knowledge of
Brahma ; where there is a desire of release, an individual by his
discrimination, differentiates Isiuara from the five sheaths.
For example. As the tender and new fibres of the plant
Saccharum Munja are separated from the firmer coat of its old fibres,
so does a person by his discrimination, distinguishes or separates
the real nature of Isivara from the five sheaths. This then is the
meaning of the verses.
Now the nature of that discrimination is shewn :
Cognition of the physical body is absent in a dream, when
only Self is known.
Knowledge of the subtle body is absent in profound slumber,
when is derived a knowledge of his blis^fulness.
In meditation is manifested Self deprived of his envelop
ment, when the ignorance of the cause-body is absent.
In the dreaming state, no knowledge of the physical body is
present, but there is Self-knowledge ; in the same way knowledge
of the subtle body is absent in profound slumber ; but as Self is
blissfulness, and self-illuminated, conception of happiness is always
present. If it were otherwise, then a person on waking would never
have said " I was sleeping happily" which is a conception due to an
act of memory, from the actual perception or knowledge of felicity.
Thus, then, in the condition of profound slumber there is present
felicity, which is easily known ; but as that felicity is not subject to
material well-being, but something quite distinct, therefore Self is
said to be self-illuminated ; and for that property, consciousness of
felicity takes place. Now this felicity is in the nature of Self, hence
its cognition only explains the presence of Atma, who is rendered
1 *w VIC 11 Mi XAGAR.
tangible in that condition of profound slumber. During nu-ditation
without recognition of subject and object * a result of (Nididkya$ana)
profound contemplation, the Atma* is discovered, denuded of his
envelopment of ignorance, while the ignorance of the cause-body
disappears. Such is the way in which the three bodies stand in the
path of cognizing Self and ascertaining his true nature. Self is never
absent from one, to manifest himself in a second condition, but is
equally present in all the conditions of waking, dreaming and
profound slumber, for which, he is said to be all-pervading ; and
discrimination can determine him to be quite distinct from the gross
physical body, which is the same as the food-full sheath ; the cause
body which is no other but the blissful sheath; and the subtle-body
which constitutes the vital, mental and cognitional sheaths ; so that
from a proper discrimination of these three bodies, the five sheaths
are recognized in their true bearings. As the real nature of the
individual is distinct from his five sheaths, so is Iswaras, from their
collective aggregate constituting his five sheaths. And as the indi
cation of Jiva and Isivarct, had been fully entered into, and illus
trated (by the example of varieties of ether in the fourth section,)
and as the subsequent chapter will deal with an explanation of
the transcendental phrase, for ascertaining the true knowledge of
Self and helping his cognition, hence in this place I have only briefly
described descrimination of Self.
Thus discrimination of Self as an entity distinct from the five
sheaths, cannot be ca led a process of repetition or the re-doing of
what has already been done, because to ascertain the oneness of
the individual spirit with the Absolute, and to rest such knowledge
on a firm and sure footing, it is proper for a person to consider
nnd reflect, weigh, and analyze all arguments and reasons adduced
in support of non-duality. But the necessity of the process of
repetition, which is only another name for want of what is proper to
be done, is established by the precepts on the transcendental
phrase :
* It is the resting of the Impartite mental function on the Reality
Brahma without a second, and becoming oiie with It, by the destruction of
the three integral constituents of the Conscious Ego,
VICIIAR SAQAR.
Self is distinct from the live sheaths ; l>y knowing this good
I know the nature of Brahma.
And to know It distinct, .and separate from him is only a
mine* of delusion.
And as a sovereign reduced to beggary (in dream) cannot be
affected in purse, so the presence of the false delusion
cannot affect It in any way.
And the attribution of agent or instrument I o one, who is
actionless, destroys not his condition of secondlessness.
Oh Pupil ! By knowing Self distinct and separate from the five
sheaths, know Brahma to be one with him. This is called good
(knowledge); but then on this subject doubts may arise that Self is
an agent or instrument of virtue and vice ; and that he is subjected
after death to enjoy happiness in heaven or suffer misery in hell ;
so that he cannot be one with Brahma. But they are easily removed
in the following manner. The next three lines of the above verse
refer to those who regard Self and Brahma as twain. Now those who
have seen this duality concerning Brahma and Self, and have
heard so from the Shastras, have been led into it by the mistake of
heaven and hell, virtue and vice, which is the cause of this perfectly
false delusion ; admit it as correct. Moreover a false thing cannot
affect possession. As a king reduced to begging (in dream) cannot be
said to lose all his wealth, and be a poor man ; or as the false
Avaters of a mirage cannot affect the earth, (moisten it) or as a false
snake created in a rope cannot be said to have any poison, so to
consider Self or Brahma an agent or instrument is perfectly false,
Now an agent is one who does a good or bad action ; but Self is
actionless, hence he cannot be said to be an agent or instrument,
but is without a rival and secondless. That is to say, your Self is
one with Brahma, and neither separate nor distinct from It ; and to
consider him identical with the gross and subtle body, and its good
and bad actions, together with their productive results, birth and
* Kupa is a well, it may refer to a mine, but here the word used is
more appropriate hence allowed to stand instead of well.
I"t V 1C HA Li XAGAll.
death, lioavcn and hell, are creations of imagination derived from
ignorance and they cannot in any way aflfect your Self. Hence even
prior to knowledge, Self is one with Brahma] and in the three
conditions named Its subject Xthe body together with its proper
ties has no relation with It, but Self is eternal, and always free,
and there is no difference whatever between him ai^d Brahma.
If it be said, Self is eternal and always free like Brahma.
Then the necessity for hearing (which is a means of know
ledge) will cease.
Now this is cleared :
Like an ether-flower, this vast expanse and its agent Isivara,
there are none.
The subjects of witness, and witness, as also a discoverer,
and objects of discovery, there are none.
If subject to bondage, then only can emancipation follow;
if there be ignorance, it can be destroyed by knowledge.
And knowing this, leaves of the practice of what is proper;
then by becoming firm, attains emancipation.
The meaning is cleared by the commentator in the following
words :
In the sight of one who is liberated in life [wise] ignorance and
its product [the material world] are undesirable, and the description
of such a person is here given. Pupil, know you then, that like an
ether-flower, this material world is really non-existent, consequently
it can have no agent Iswara [that is to say, when there is no
world existing, it can have no creator.] The subjects of a witness
ignorance etc., are called Sachhya, both of them are wanting; in the
same way, there is neither a discoverer, nor the things that are to
be discovered. Therefore in the absence of a body, a jar, a cloth etc.,
there can be no discoverer. If the inherent Uniform Intelligence be
reckoned as a witness, it is impossible not to admit its presence ;
but the ordinary acceptation of witness, and in regard to the dis
covering of all visible objects by an observer, the absence ot the first
as well as the last, is what is meant here. In the same way bondage
VI CHAR SAGAR. 103
is not admitted ; hence there is no knowledge required, for this can
only be necessary to cause the destruction of ignorance which is the
source of bondage ; there is no ignorance, consequently knowledge to
destroy it, is also wanting. To know this will cause the abandon
ment of what is proper to be done ; for, either the present or the
next life, is equally undesirable and proper works are not required
for them. Then again, Self is not subject to bondage, so that for
emancipation, there is no occasion for doing the proper things. In,
this way, knowing him to be eternal, free, and Brahma, when what
is proper has been abandoned, then that individual after the separa
tion of life from his body, attains to Brahma, which is actionless. [In
other words, as one already freed freed]. Its purport is: even if
prior to knowledge of Self, He is eternal and free, and one with
Brahma, yet a person from mistake considers him to be an agent and
instrument, and seeks to acquire happiness and destroy misery by
having recourse to several means, which in their turn subject him to
great inconvenience and pain. If he gets a good teacher, to instruct
him into the Vedantic utterances, he comes to know then, that his
Self is neither an agent nor instrument, but Brahma, consequently
his Self has nothing proper to do. Such a knowledge is a result of
hearing the precepts of the Vedanta. Because Brahma is none
other but Self, hence he is every day acquired.
He who admits the necessity of doing what is proper is
ignorant.
He is a wise man, who has no need for any thing else.
[The meaning is already clearly set forth to require the use of
any explanation]. It implies that an ignorant person is always
engaged in doing works that are proper, but a wise person stands
aloof from them. He has no need of anything.
There is one Im partite, unrelated,* unborn, formless, unseen
and nameless.
It is neither Primordial Ignorance, neither the collective, nor
distributive aggregate of gross and subtle bodies
* The word asangd is unconditioned, unassociated, and unrelated.
25
VIC H All SAG Ml
Neither Viral, Prajna, Taijasa, nor Viswa ; not a deer
neither bound nor free.
The apparent tangibility of the objective world in waking
state is a work of Buddhi.
The enjoyment of all that is to be enjoyed in dream is its
exquisite play too.
What merges in the state of profound slumber; know that
to be one with the Real.
The desires created by Buddhi are surely the objects dis
covered by It.
What is called knowledge blight, and Tama dark, complete
ly destroyed,
Always unconditioned and one with Self, Brahma is Self-
illuminated.
To him nothing follows who wishes for enjoying his desires.
He seeks not to destroy them ; but a wise person has no such
expectation.
Seeing, he hears not ; hearing, he sees not ; takes all [things
at their real worth] but has taste for none.
Touches not even nectar when offered, nor quarrels with any.
Accepts not what is given, abandons what he gets ; moves
not a step, nor exerts himself.
[The purport is thus explained].
The organs do their respective work, my-Self is not related
to them.
Self is different from them, they do fonn no part of myself.
Self is the inherent, uniform, unassociated, [Intelli
gence].
I abandon enjoyment of material comforts ; the senses stand
in the same relation to myself, as a cloth scented with
camphor.
I know this for certain, he is neither an agent nor a
part.
Oh, ye lover of a body ! In this manner, though a professor in
structs his pupils on the hidden entity, principle, or essence, yet he
VICE A R SAGAR. 195
is not extremely delighted, and concieves not the Supremo felicity ;
his teacher finds that the pupil has been unsuccessful, so he
offers him further instruction in a grosser way, to enable him to
think on (lay a} destruction.
As a jar produced from earth, has that earth in all its
external parts.
As a wave, a bubble, froth etc., are all parts of the water
that produces them.
So determine the connection between a cause and its action.
The cause is present in all its products and is non-different
from them.
That is to say, as a thing made of clay, has all its parts, both in
and out, made of it, so that, all things produced from earth are earthy,
and a froth, bubble etc., represent the water of which they are mere
parts (composite) ; so the cause of an action is non-different from it,
and they are one. In the same way, the cause of this vast expanse
being Iswara, he is non-different from his works and " I am that
Iswara." In this manner, pupil you should know what destruction
[of difference] is and continue to think on it.
No\v this destruction is being briefly declared. That is to say,
the gross Brahma s egg is a product of elementary quintuplication
and its earth and water produce actions similarly earthy and aqueous,
and a product of one element shews a striking similarity to that
element only, so that all this material universe resembles the quintu-
plicated elements from which they are derived. Then again, as the
quintuplicated elements are simply products of non-quintuplicated
[subtle] elements, they are non-distinct from one another, but shew
the same similarity, identity [or affinity]. Carrying this analysis a
step further, we find that the subtle bodies derived from the subtle
elements without the fractional combination, as for instance the
internal organ etc., -must naturally have a resemblance, the
product with its cause ; and as that internal organ is derived from
the good quality of the elements ether etc., it must naturally have
a close resemblance with that good quality. Similarly, the products
derived from the active quality of the elements (for instance Prana
IDG } IC 11 A I! SAG A It.
and the other airs) must resemble that active qua ity ; ;ID 1 ill <l riva-
tive product of the active qualify of earth ;he anus .nust
resemble it in every way, as the organ of smell a product of the good
quality of that same element must resemble it. In the same way,
the tongue and genitals are like the good and active qua ities of
water; the eyes and feet, resemble the good and active qualities of
heat; skin and the hands the good and active qualities of air; organ
of hearing and speech, the good aud active qualities of ether. Thus,
then, the whole of the subtle creation ivsembles the subtle elements
from which they are each derived. While thinking in this way one
must reflect on the destruction of these non-quintuplicated elements,
in a reversed order of progression.
That is to say, water is the source of earth, hence earth is
nothing but wa:er ; for its being a product of heat, water and
heat are equal ; heat is a product of air, hence resembles it, ar.d air
a result of ether, is naturally identical with it. Matter abound
ing in darkness is the cause from which is derived ether, and
ether and matter resemb e one another. Then again, as matter
is only another form of Maya, they are naturally identical.
The principal names of the same substance are Matter, Illusion,
Ignorance, and ^.-knowledge. Here the word principal bears the
signification of a substance that absorbs all actions within it, and
fixes their destruction like an ascetic. Matter is the name of that
entity, which abounds in darkness, and is fit for being used for the
purposes of creation. As rare things are produced by magic without
the actual products of a country, and reference to consideration of
time (here magic is called Mcnja or illusion), so in the secondless,
unconditioned, Brahma, the presence of desire etc., is rare, and it
causes creation [or more properly evolution by impressing change
in their attributes of matter, and disturbing its equilibrium},
hence it is called Maya (illusion) ; and because it conceals the
real nature, it is therefore Ignorance ; and because knowledge
of Bsahma destroys such ignorance, it is therefore ^4-knowledgo
[Ai idy<i] ; and as it is never independent of intelligence, and
cannot live separately, it is called Force also. Such is the con
stitutional difference of the principal (entity, or priiiciple) in Mutter,
VIC 11 A R SAGAR. 197
and why it is called so. Now this principal substance is merely a
force derived from the Brahmaic Intelligence. And as a person s
individual powers cannot live apart from him, hence they are non-
different; so the principal form of Force present in Intelligence is
non -different from the Brahmaic intelligence. Thus the)), having
ascertained the presence of that Intelligence in all substances not
pertaining to Self, the individual must give himself up to thinking
that he is non-different from it, and then he declares " I a-n Brahma."
Who from obstruction caused by dullness of intellect are unable
even with the precepts contained in the transcendental phrase
having been explained to them, to have that knowledge of Brahma,
characterised by visibility, for them this method of thinking on the
blending of Brahma, or its fusion with every known object, has been
said to be nothing else but meditation (dhyana).
Now there subsists a difference in the signification of the two
words meditation (dhyana} and knowledge (jwtna\ Knowledge is
dependent on proofs and proveable, but independent of natural laws
and personal desire; and meditation is entirely dependent on nature,
(e. g.,) a person s desire and faith ; for instance : In the cognition of
a jar when the proofs (eyes) and the subject to be proved (ajar) are
brought into a condition of a relationship, it comes to be perceived
by the eyes in spite of a person s desire. On the fourth day of the
(bright phas ) month of Vadra, the sight of the moon is interdicted,
yet notwithstanding a person s desire not to see it, when from
some cause or other the eyes are brought into a relationship with the
moon, she is seen by the person who had been trying all the time to
avoid it; hence visible perception is dependent on the eyes (proof>)
and the subject to be seen, and quite independent of law and
personal desire.
Moreover by meditating on the Saligram (ammonite) a person
enjoys good results. Here, a person knows it to be a form of Vishnu,
with four hands indicated by the signs of conch, wheel, rod, and
lotus as the Shastras have it ; but visibly by his sight, he knows it
to be nothing else than a stone; yet for the injunction of the
Shastras, faith, and his desire, he believes it to be an image of Vishnu ;
so that the stonais trausformed into Fis/micb meditation Now this
198 V1C11AR SAGAR
meditation is of various sorts. In some instances, the object medi
tated is different in shape and form from the substance representing
it, as in the instance of the SMyruhn for Vishnu. This is called
meditation by substitute (Pratika Dhyana). The inhabitants of Bai-
kuiitha meditate on Vishnu, with his f.nir hands representing a
conch, wheel, etc., and substitute no other substance ; here the
object in iditated resembles typically, and is non-different in form
and shape with the subject of worship [as has been pointed out in the
first instance]. They have no visible knowledge of Vishnu, but
have ascertained from the Shastras, that form which they adopt in
their worship, which assign to him four hands, bearing four different
symbols, so that this meditation is according to the nature of the
object meditated. Now without la\v, faith, and desire in a person
there can be no meditation, and that is called worship, or devotional
exercise; and a faith in the utterances of Him, who has sent him
here is called belief; and the inclination of the internal organ to
enjoy the fruits of this worship (a product of its active quality) is
called desire. These are the three causes of meditation and not of
knowledge. Meditation, and not knowledge, is dependent on the
individual s continued and persevering effort. For d/iayana is
defined as the continuance of the mental function after it has been
moulded into the form of the object meditated, and if any obstacles
arise so as to cause a destruction of that function, then his persever
ing effort stems them away and fixes it firmly in the mind ; but in
regard to the mental function, knowledge this fixing is not
needed, for after the enveloping- case of ignorance has been des
troyed, the function is full of light, and subject to no destruction
either for the present or hereafter, to render it necessary for the
function to be fixed and unwavering. Therefore persevering effort
is not necessary to knowledge.
The meditation of I am Brahma is similar to the meditation
of the four handed Vishnu by the people of Baikuntha. That is
to say, it is not that in which one thing is substituted for another,
but the object of meditation is typical of the object meditated.
It has a separate name, and is called Self-medrtation, which means
reflecting o n the one^ueas of the object meditated and Self. A
VICHAR SAGAR. 199
person whose knowledge of Brahma, is not characterised by visi
bility, but having a belief in the injunctions laid down in the Vedas,
with a persevering effort, continually fixes his mental function,
and moulds it into the shape of Brahma, so as to impress, it with
the image of I am Brahma and thus by means of Self-medita
tion he becomes the possessor of knowledge, ultimately to be released
from the chain of consecutive re-births, and emancipated.
Self-meditation has been spoken of in other ways, besides
the above.
According to Sureswar Muni meditating on Om is Self-
meditation.
Hold in your mind the mystic word Brahma to be non-
distinct from your Self.
No other meditation resembles this ; and ascertain it from
quintuplication treated by him.
Who devotes himself to the exercise of this meditation is
freed.
Pupil ! According to the Munduka Upanishad, and other works
Sureswar Acharya has spoken on the subject of Self-meditation by
pronouncing the mystic word C 0m, and reflecting that to be the
same as Brahma i. e., non-different from Self. This you should prac
tise. I will just give you a brief description of it. Om is Brahma,
and you should look upon its alphabets, representing the Supreme
Brahma, to be non-different from yourself, and have your mental
function so moulded after it, that it may remain fixed or impressed
there. No other meditation can equal this, and in his work on
Quintuplication, Sureswar has particularly dealt on it. (The fourth
line is thus explained.) Though many of the Upanishads treat on
Pranab, yet the Mundaka has particular reference to it : and from
the annotations of the commentator as well as those of Anandagiri
the subject has been clearly explained. The Vardkakar* [Sureswar
Acharya] has also adopted the same method in his work on
* The Impersonal and personal worship had therefore been derived
from the Vedas ; but the question is how can idolatry be discountenanced
if personal worship rests on so very high authority?
lOO VICI1AR SAG An.
t Qiiintnplteatmn> > But such men whoso intellects are unable to
comprehend or follow the arguments used in the works .-ihvadv cited,
may derive the requisite information from the present work, for it is
purpose 1 } written lor their O3netit.
Meditating on the mystic Oni can be done in two wa} 8 accord
ing to the Upanishads , one is to identify it with the Supreme
Brahma, and thus tu reflect and meditate profoundly on that abstract
condition of I m personality which is devoid of qualities. The other
is to meditate on Brahma with qualities (personal). Now the
impersonal Bi tihma is called the Supreme Brahma, while that other
is called the (personal) Brahiiul with qualities; and one engaged in
the first sort of devotion obtains release while to the follower of
the second method can accrue the abode of Brahma. Thus then,
we find meditation of OmJ from a difference in the method, and
subject of worship, is divided into two sorts, of which the Impersonal
alone will be considered here.
For, the worshippers of the personal creator are actuated with a
desire of enjoying the fruit of their devotion, and this they get by
inheriting the blissful abode of Brahma. And as that very desire
stands an obstacle in the way of impersonal devotion ; they are preven
ted from acquiring the necessary knowledge, and therefore subjected to
bondage, and never freed. Now, while enjoining the blissf 
