The conditionings are a result of ignorance and therefore, illusory. The qualities of limited knowledge of the jiva and omniscience of Isvara are only relative but their oneness is absolute. The true vision of the Lord is not different from Self-realization – the realization of one’s own nature. The following verse elaborates on this.
vesa-hanatah – to one who gives up (the gross and subtle conditionings); svatma-darsanam – vision of the Self (Self-realization); Isa-darsanam – vision of the Lord (God-realization); svatma-rupatah – as the Self;
One who gives up the conditionings gains Self-realization. The vision of the Lord as the Self is true God-realization.
The idea of giving up the conditionings appears suicidal. The path of Self-enquiry does not advise us to literally give up the body, senses, and mind or to destroy them. What is to be given up is the ignorance-born false notion that ‘I am the body’. When the ‘I’-notion in the body is given up, the pure Self which is of the nature of Existence-Consciousness is realized. The nature of the Lord too is Existence-Consciousness. Therefore, Self-realization is God-realization.
Can we not gain the vision of the Lord as a particular form, say, Bala Gopala or Sri Rama through meditation? It may be possible to gain such a vision by the grace of the Lord and the intensity and fervor of our practice, faith, and devotion. But such a vision of the form should not be mistaken for the vision of His true nature. A form, since it is seen, is inert, finite, and perishable. The Lord is sentient, infinite, and imperishable in nature. Therefore, we should strive to gain the vision of the Lord as one’s own true nature.
It was said in verse nineteen that the ego is destroyed when one enquires into its birthplace. The following verse describes how such an inquiry is to be conducted.
vigrahendriya-pranadhitamah – the body, senses, vital air, intellect and ignorance (as); na – not; aham – I (am); ekasat – the one Existence (and); tajjadam – it is inert; hy– indeed; asat– non-existent
I am the one Existence and not the body, senses, vital airs, intellect, and ignorance, as they are inert and indeed non-existent.
The instruction in Vedanta is, first to think over the notions we maintain about the Self and then see if it is true or false. The same system of inquiry is followed here.
When asked to introduce ourselves, we first say our name. The name surely cannot be me. It only indicates me. It is given to me to distinguish me from other beings and things. Taking myself to be the body, I introduce myself as the son of so-and-so, father of so-and-so, aged ‘x’ years and weighing ‘y’ pounds.
Is this belief that ‘I am the body’ true? If I am the body, then which body am I? Since childhood, I have changed many bodies. Every single cell of my body has perished and has been replaced several times. The childhood body is unrecognizably different from the youth body and indescribably different from the old dilapidated me. With the continuous perishing of the body, I do not perish. If I am the body, I would have perished many times over and I would, therefore, not be presently available or remember the different changes in the body. The knower of the changes in the body is clearly different from the body. I am ever present, in and through the changes of the body.
Secondly, the body is made up of the five great elements (space, air, fire, water, and earth) and is, therefore, inert. Being inert it cannot know itself or anything else. But ‘I’ know objects and am therefore sentient. The body has no sentiency of its own. Strange that I think of myself as this gross inert body!
For objects outside my body, I have the discrimination that I am the knower of the objects and therefore different from the objects. I know that I am not the book I perceive. The same discrimination deserts me, when it comes to the body which I perceive, just like I perceive the book. This lack of thinking is the cause of our sorrow. When I identify with the body, it is natural that the modifications of the body like growth or decay are thought to be my modifications. The pain of the head is my headache.
The same logic applies in the case of the sense organs of perception and action (jnanendriya and karmendriya), the vital air (prana), the mind-intellect (dhi), and ignorance (tamah). When the eye cannot see, I say, ‘I am blind’. Hunger and thirst are the characteristics of the vital airs, but I say, ‘I am hungry’. When the mind is peaceful or agitated, I say, ‘I am peaceful or agitated’. When the intellect gains knowledge of medicine, I say, ‘I am a doctor’. Even before I gained the knowledge of medicine ‘I’ was present. At that time, I said, ‘I know that I am ignorant of medicine.’
Now, is it possible for me to be a son, father, old man, glad, sad, doctor, and ignorant all at one and the same time? If I feel I am all these, it is clearly due to my identification with various conditionings. I superimpose the nature of the conditionings – body, mind, and intellect, upon myself. A person cannot be a king, beggar, and minister all at one and the same time. But an actor can assume various roles at different times. The actor, however, always remains free from the roles he plays.
The knower is sentient, whereas the known is inert and ephemeral. The body, senses, vital air, intellect, and ignorance are known and therefore inert and ephemeral. ‘I’ the knower is sentient Consciousness and of eternal Existence. The ego is not the assemblage of inert objects nor is it the pure sentient Self. Then from where does the ego arise? The body and mind appear sentient despite being inert. This appearance of sentiency is due to its association with the sentient Self. In other words, the notion ‘I am the body’ arises when the Self is in association with the body. This is the source or birthplace of the ego. But can the sentient and the insentient have any association or relationship? Can light and darkness co-exist? Being of opposing nature they can have no possible relationship. Yet the ego, ‘!’-notion, seems to connect them. By itself, the ego is neither sentient nor inert. In fact, it cannot exist. Yet it does, as it is experienced. We have seen that the inert conditioning or the pure Self alone is not the ego, and there cannot be any relationship between the two. It is a wonder that a thing which is proved impossible to exist seems to exist and is the cause of all our sorrow! What is the reason for this strange phenomenon?
The answer is ignorance of the Truth. A thing that is born due to ignorance can have no reality. If someone sees a snake in a rope, then it must be due to ignorance of the rope alone. Similarly, the ego too arises due to ignorance of the Self and since it is an effect of ignorance, it is an illusion. That is to say that it does not really exist. The ego is annihilated only by the knowledge of the Self.
For gaining Self-knowledge, the valid means of Knowledge is Vedanta. To understand the teaching of Vedanta, it is necessary to have a pure mind and to approach a true teacher, a Guru, who is well versed in the knowledge of the scriptures.
