Jnana Vahini

Some people declare that they have had Realisation! How can it be taken as true? When according to the statement, Aham Brahmasmi, one understands that "I am Brahman," the Jeevi who is the "I" is a mutable entity, a Vikaari. So, how can he, who is Vikaari (mutable) and with the mistaken sense of I-ness (Ahamkaari), possibly grasp himself as Brahman? It is not possible. A destitute cannot posit that he is a monarch; so too, a Jeevi who is a mutable entity cannot prove himself as Immutable Brahman, or posit that he is Brahman.

Who is this Jeevi calling himself “I”? Reflecting on this problem, he will see that this mutable and Ahamkaari “I” is the Immutable Ever-Witness, the Atma, which being forgetful of Its real nature, considers Itself affected by change, through sheer Ajnana (ignorance). When he deliberately spends thought on his identity, he will know, "I am not a Vikaari (mutable), I am the Saakshi (Witness) of the ego, the ego that suffers continuous modification;" and then, from this step, he will proceed to identify the Immutable Seer or Witness or Saakshi with himself. After this stage, there is no difficulty in realising Aham Brahmasmi.

How can it be said that it is the Saakshi (Witness) who realises Aham Brahmasmi? Who is it really that realises it? Is it the Saakshi? Or is it the Jeevi, who calls himself “I” which undergoes modifications? If we say that the Saakshi so realises, the difficulty is that it is purely the witness of the “I” and it has no sense of “I-ness”, or Aham idea. If it is said that Saakshi has that sense of I-ness, then it cannot be considered as Saakshi at all and it too then becomes a Vikaari! The realisation of “I have become Brahman” (‘becoming’ is the aspect of Vikaari) never occurs since the Saakshi has no “projected idea” (ignorance) as “I am Brahman” (“I am so and so” is the aspect of Ahamkaari). Therefore, there is no meaning in saying that the Saakshi realises, Aham Brahmasmi (Since Saakshi is neither Vikaari nor Ahamkaari).

Then, who is it that so realises this Truth? It becomes necessary to say that it is the Jeevi, the “I” that does so. For, the practices necessary for acquiring Jnana to identify with Brahman are done by the Ajnani for his liberation from the shackles of that illusion. The Saakshi has no Ajnana (ignorance) and so, it has no need of Jnana. The ignorant alone needs to take steps to acquire Jnana. Qualities like Jnana and Ajnana attach themselves only to the Jeevi, not to the Saakshi. This is proven by actual experience. Because, the Atma, the Ever-Witness, which is the apparent basis for Jnana (knowledge) and Ajnana (ignorance) is devoid of both, while the Jeevi is actively bound up with these two.

Some may doubt, how this distinction came to be. If the Jeevi that acts as “I” is asked a question, “Are you aware of the Atma, the Ever-Witness?” and if the answer is, “No. I am not aware of that Ever-Witness”, then, it is evident that Jeevi has the experience of ignorance. But seeking solace in the study of Vedanta, one infers that there must be a Saakshi or Atma. This, however, is only an indirect knowledge or Paroksha-jnanam. Later, the Saakshi or Atma is realised in actual experience through Vichara (Enquiry) after the devastation of the Abhasavaranam (obscuring or masking of the Absolute Reality with multiple ‘appearances’). This is the realisation of the Self or Jnana.

Therefore, the experience of Jnana is available only for the Jeevi because it alone has Ajnana and Jnana about the Saakshi (Witness). So, it is the Jeevi, not the Saakshi that knows Aham Brahmasmi. After the dawn of that knowledge, Ahamkaram (“I-ness”) will disappear. He absolutely becomes Brahman.

Now, who is it that experienced? What is it that was experienced? What is the experience? In the statement, “I experienced” all these are latent, isn’t it? But thereafter, to say, “I experienced” is meaningless; it is not correct; it cannot be called as Jnana. By merely experiencing the Immutable once, the mutable Jeevi cannot be transformed into Saakshi! Seeing the king once, can a beggar be transformed into a monarch? So too, the Jeevi who has once experienced the Saakshi cannot immediately become the Saakshi. Unless the mutable Jeevi transfuses into “Saakshi”, the Jeevi cannot experience Brahman and realise as Aham Brahmasmi.

If it is said that the Jeevi, who is ignorant about the Saakshi which is basis for its own existence (Adhishtana: source of its existence), can through Vichara (Enquiry), realise that it is the Saakshi, the Atma, the Brahman, how then can it declare “I am Saakshi.” When one has become king, the kingship is recognised by others and not declared by the king himself, isn’t it? That is a sign of foolishness or want of intelligence.

Caught up in the coils of change, it is very hard, well-nigh impossible, to realise one is just the witness of all this passing show. The Jeevi without realising its essential nature as Saakshi (Witness-Consciousness of its body-mind-sense), how can it realise its essential Brahman (All-pervasive) nature. Just as a beggar, after getting the glimpse of the king inside the fort, realises his (beggar’s) misidentification with the king and then immediately his delusion of sovereignty of the empire fades away; so too, as soon as the Jeevi experiences or recognises the Saakshi (the very substance of Koshas and the Innermost, Non-negatable, Non-objectifiable Self covered by Pancha-koshas) which is subtler than the sky, which is beyond the three-fold category of knower, knowledge and known, and which is Eternal, Pure, Conscious, Free, Supremely Blissful, then the Jeevi realises its self-misidentification (I-ness, Ahamkaram) and knows that - until the realisation of itself as “Saakshi”, it is impossible to realise itself as “all-pervading” Brahman.

As a matter of fact, so long as the “I-ness” persists, the realisation of Saakshi (Witness) is unattainable. The Saakshi is the inner core of everything, All-pervading, the Embodiment of Sat, Chit and Ananda (Being, Awareness and Bliss). There is nothing beyond It or outside It. It “is” everything. To say that such Paripoorna Saakshi is “I” is a meaningless expression. It is wrong also to call it the Clear Vision or Saakshatkaram.

The Shrutis did not proclaim Jeeva and Brahma samanadhikaranam (having same locus or location. It refers to words being in apposition. Words in apposition have the same number, gender and case, and are committed to reveal the same object. The two words wave and ocean, for example, denote two entirely different forms, but both forms have the same locus, water, which lends existence to both) known as Aham Brahma Asmi as Mukhya samanadhikaranam (Mukhya samanadhikaranam is the method of establishing the identity between Saakshi and Brahman). Mukhya samanadhikaranam can be explained with an example as the Akasha (Space) within one Ghatam (pot) and the Akasha in another pot. The Ghatakasha (means Saakshi) is the same as the Mahaakasha (means Brahman). The Mahaakasha is the Akasha that has filled everything everywhere. Knowing that Ghatakasha (the pot-space) and Mahaakasha (the all-pervading space) is one and the same is the Mukhya samanadhikaranam. The wind in one place is the wind in all places, the sunlight in one place is the sunlight everywhere. The God that exists in one form (visible shape) is the God that exists in all forms. Realising this truth is Mukhya samanadhikaranam. So too, Mukhya samanadhikaranam is knowing that the Saakshi (Witness), the Atma, in one body is same as the Brahman that is All-pervading.

But, the Shruti does not declare “Jeeva is Brahman; as the statement Aham Brahmasmi” as Mukhya samanadhikaranam but declares it as “Badha samanadhikaranam” (Badha samanadhikaranam is the method of establishing the identity between Jeeva and Brahman by ‘the correction of an error by negation or contradiction’). That is to say, the I-ness of the Jeeva has to be negated through Vichara (Enquiry); then finally, only Brahman remains, and thereby Jeeva realises Aham Brahmasmi which is ‘the correction of error by negation’ called Badha samanadhikaranam. Continuing as Jeevi, one cannot grasp the Brahman essence. The beggar has to forget his body to recognise that he is the king; so also, man has to bypass the human body which is the basis for his I-personality to realise and declare that “I am in God. I am God”.

To realise that one is divine, the human personality has to be ignored by inner devotion and discipline and merger with the Divine attained by realising “I am God”. Similarly, when a spiritual aspirant realises his “True Self”, or a devotee realises his “Divine nature” or a beggar realises his “kinghood”, it is not regarded as a Mukhya samanadhikaranam, but is regarded as samanadhikaranam by the negation of the manifesting mediums (Upadhis) like beggar, aspirant, devotee through Vichara (Enquiry) and also finally negating the manifesting medium – the human body, the Jeevi realises itself as Brahman. This is the teaching of the Shruti and not the Mukhya samanadhikaranam. Without negating Jeevatvam through Vichara, it is impossible to realise Brahman.

If Jeevi is Brahman, just like in a deep sleep state, he should be changeless or divisionless (Nirvikalpa). But, that is not the case when Jeevi is in a wakeful state. The Taijasa (the term associated with the Ahamkaram, where Atma is identified with the subtle body in the dream state) after a dream, gets back to this world and ponders: “Did I all this time travel over various lands, undergo multitudes of experiences? Was not all this a fantasy? I was never involved in all this; I was happily sleeping here, unaffected by everything.” As a person recovering from intoxication, or as a person freed from illness, or as a beggar coming by a fortune and forgetting his indigence, man too must realise his Absolute Existence (Sat-Chit) and enjoy Absolute Bliss (Ananda).

Experiencing identity with the Lord, the Jeevi declares, “I am Brahman. Where has all the changing world fled? How deluded I was to be caught in the tangle of Jeeva and Jagat! Past, present and future do not really exist at all. I am as the Sat-Chit-Ananda Svarupa in many forms and under various names without the three types of distinctions – Sajatiya, Vijatiya, Svagata (distinction between – the objects of same species, the objects of different species, the parts of same object).” He is immersed in Brahmanandam (the Bliss of Brahman). This is the fruition of Jnana.

Therefore, the Jeevi can realise Itself only by the destruction (negation) of all Upadhis (manifesting mediums). Until the mind is destroyed, one cannot experience the Reality. The mind undergoes two stages while being destroyed, Rupa-layam and Arupa-layam. The tendencies of the mind stuff, i.e., all Vasanas, and its modifications are the Rupas. Destroying all these is Rupa-layam. Then comes the stage of complex absorption where it is neither a sleeping state nor perception of the world, mind is free of all agitations and changes, but there is only the experience of Sat-Chit-Ananda (Being-Awareness-Bliss). This is what Arupa is and to absorb into it is called Arupa-layam. After Arupa-layam, realisation of the Brahman is experienced. However, Arupa-layam is possible only after getting released from the mortal coil. With the body, only Rupa-layam is possible and as a result one can become Jeevan-mukta (liberated while living). This state of Rupa-layam, though not attained the state of Arupa-layam, makes the person enjoy the Bliss derived from the realisation of “I am Brahman” because of the mind, which is devoid of all tendencies, is completely immersed in Brahman and has become one with Brahman. According to Siddhantam (established doctrine or principle), Saakshatkaram (realisation or direct perception of God) means realising that “I am Brahman” by dissolving all the vicissitudes of the mind, which is the manifesting medium of Jeeva, and experiencing the Brahmanandam (Absolute Bliss).

But, according to Me, Saakshatkaram means: Transformation from the stages of ignorance of Brahman, lack of spiritual practice, doubts and deep-rooted misconception of body-consciousness to the state of attaining Self-knowledge; then, putting that Jnana into practice and thereafter becoming free from the body-consciousness, doubts and all sorts of misconceptions by realising the Truth that you are of the nature of Sat-Chit-Ananda (Being-Awareness-Bliss); and always being as “Self” in that experience as Brahman is Saakshatkaram. Acharyas (Gurus) too emphasise this. Because, this is Satya (Truth).