Awareness, Soul and Advaita

O Learned and Devoted Servants of God,

1. The self becomes the unlimited Brahman in deep sleep as per Shankara. Please explain.

[Shri. G. Lakshman came from Mumbai to have some spiritual discussion (satsanga) with Swami. His first enquiry was about the limitation of soul in meditation and as well as in deep sleep. Swami compared the pure awareness in meditation to lump of gold, which becomes inert energy in deep sleep compared to lump of iron. This comparison was given in the poem, which was sent to Dr. Nikhil as a reply to his poem entitled Selfless Love. On this point, Shri Lakshman raised the concept of limitation of soul even in the deep sleep in which the soul is considered to be in its original state as per advaita philosophy. According to advaita, the self becomes the unlimited Brahman in deep sleep as said by Shankara (Sushuptyeka siddhah).]

Swami Replied: Shankara told that Brahman is achieved in deep sleep. The meaning of this statement is that Brahman is unknowable or unimaginable. In deep sleep, nothing is known and nothing can be imagined. Such a state indicates that Brahman is unknown and unimaginable. In this state, the soul loses its awareness since the brain and the nervous system do not function (except some signals controlling the inner biological systems, which are constant throughout the life of the human being). This means that the soul becomes inert and enters into complete ignorance about Brahman in the state of deep sleep. The full ignorance of this state speaks about the full ignorance about Brahman and therefore, Brahman is achieved in this state as completely unknowable item. The deep sleep is termed as Avyaktam in the Veda beyond which only the Lord exists (Avyaktat purusha parah). After the deep sleep, the soul knows about itself and also about the other worldly items. Therefore, the maximum possible field of knowledge of the soul is about itself as in the meditation or about other worldly items as in the awakened state or dream state. The soul cannot cross these limits of knowledge. The maximum possibility of the power of knowledge of soul is only about itself or about the world and never about Brahman or God. The soul in the state of meditation is pure awareness, which is the special work form of inert energy, and hence, it must be in the form of primary energy only. In deep sleep, it is the inert energy, which is also the form of primary energy only. Primary energy is either in the form of waves or in the form of particles (quanta) according to science. Whatever may be the theory, the energy has the form of waves or the form of particles. Hence, the soul has form and therefore, has limits even in meditation or deep sleep. Therefore, the soul is not formless.

Even the space, which is considered to be formless, is supposed to be a very subtle form of primary energy only by science through the concept of bending of space around the object. When space is energy, the space also has form of waves or particles. Therefore, there is nothing like formless in the creation. Air contains molecules, atoms and sub-atomic particles, which have form. Therefore, the word ‘formless’ has no meaning in the creation. The world is a composite of items with forms and hence, the world as a whole has form and not formless in the core region. The infinite limits of the world do not mean that the items in the world have no limits. Each item has limits and the number of such finite items is infinite. Certain items have invisible limits and this does not mean that the item has no limits. The invisibility of the limits of an item is assumed to be the absence of limits and such item is treated as formless or an item without limits. The item with visible limits is considered as an item with limits. Thus, the formless items and items without forms are distinguished by the relative sense of invisible limits and visible limits respectively. Such classification is only in relative sense and it does not mean in the absolute sense. The world with infinite limits can be taken as formless in the region of boundary only. Here, the nature of the world, which is the aggregate of finite items, is knowable in the core region. Hence, you cannot say that the world is unknowable in the core region. In the case of God, even the nature of God is unknowable in any region. The formless object meaning the infinite limits can be applied to the world, which is knowable, by its nature in the core region. But God is unknowable by His nature throughout and therefore, you cannot say that God is formless like the world. Only the limits of the world are unknowable and not the central core of the world, which consists of imaginable items. God exists in the border of the infinite limits of the world as the source of the world. This means that God is beyond world. Science has clearly proved that the awareness is a special work form of energy and hence, the soul cannot be beyond the space, since space is energy. Therefore, the soul has limits in any state.

The soul in the deep sleep exists as inert energy with finite limits confined to the human body and therefore, we cannot say that the soul has infinite limits like the world. However, if you treat the matter also as the inert energy according to law of equivalence of mass and energy, in such case, the body can be also treated as a quantum of energy, which is in continuity with the external atmosphere of the cosmos. Now, the soul, body and the cosmos become one homogenous phase in the sense of the basic form of inert primary energy (this is an assumption only and practically this single homogenous phase is not achieved), you can achieve the single infinite ocean of cosmic energy and now you can say that the soul has become Brahman. But, beware, that the word Brahman is used here to mean the infinite ocean of inert cosmic energy since the word Brahman can mean any item, which is greatest. This cosmos or cosmic energy is infinite but the whole core region is of imaginable nature containing imaginable items. Hence, it is imaginable cosmos with unimaginable limits and therefore, cannot be the unimaginable God who is unimaginable throughout. Hence, you cannot say that the soul has become the greatest unimaginable God who is also meant as another meaning for the word Brahman. The confusion in the usage of the word Brahman must be clearly removed in this context.

2. What is the difference between the realized soul and the liberated soul?

Swami replied: Realization is theoretical knowledge of the concept, whereas liberation is the practical implementation of the same concept. These two words can mean knowledge of some concept and the process of release of something bound by some other thing respectively. Realization is used in general as the knowledge of some forgotten truth and liberation also can mean release of an animal from the chain by which it is bound. In the spiritual knowledge, these two words have to be applied to the required context about which you are concerned. The causal body (soul) is superimposed on the external gross body and the internal subtle body. When the soul gets rid of these two superimpositions and realizes its own nature of pure awareness, this is called as realization according to the advaitin. The advaitin is concerned only about the realization of the self and hence, you cannot use this word in any other context. Similarly, for advaitin, the liberation means the release of the soul from the illusions of superimpositions of itself on subtle and gross bodies. The advaitin is limiting himself to these contexts only and hence, these two words cannot be used in any other context. For an ignorant villager, these two words are limited to his specific context only. For him, the realization means finding out the place of an agricultural tool forgotten by him for some time. For him, the liberation means release of the cow from its chain to go to field. You cannot bring the context of advaitin to the context of the villager and vice versa. Therefore, the realized soul and the liberated soul stand for certain specified contexts only as per the scope of the observer. However, if you are interested to know these two words in the context of final spiritual knowledge, the meanings are different.

In the final level of spiritual knowledge, the realized soul is that soul, which realizes that the unimaginable God is in a particular alive human form. Realization means knowledge of some forgotten concept. But God is always unknowable and hence, there is no point of forgetting and realizing the forgotten nature of the God. Only in the case of the knowable item, the word realization has its application. Therefore, realization of absolute God is impossible and hence, the words like the knowledge of Brahman (Brahma Jnana) or education about God (Brahma Vidya) are meaningless in the absolute sense. But these words exist and the sense of such words is to be explained. The unknowable God enters and charges the medium like the current entering a metallic wire to give the knowledge about His existence and not to give the knowledge about His nature. Hence, these words must mean the knowledge of the medium in which the unknowable Brahman exists (Astiityeva… Veda). Brahman or God always enters the common medium of human beings so that God can mix freely and also can preach the human beings through the human body. Therefore, the knowledge of the existence of Brahman in the alive human body of a particular incarnation is Brahma Jnana or Brahma Vidya, which is complete only when the contemporary human incarnation is recognized. Therefore, the realization means the recognition of the contemporary human incarnation only. To please the Lord in such alive human form, practical devotion (service) is necessary. Such service is seen in your family bonds. The service in the family bonds shows the real attraction to those bonds. When your service is diverted from the family bonds to God in the alive human form, you are a liberated soul and the liberation is from your family bonds. For such liberation, the realization of alive human form of God must be the reason (Before all this, you must be liberated from the illusion that yourself is God.). Without such reason, if the soul is liberated from the worldly bonds, it is just a state of a stone.

All the advaitins who fix themselves in the state of pure awareness or life energy without mind (subtle body) are just like the plants in the human form. All the avadhutas who are just in the state of deep sleep without even a trace of awareness of anything are just the stones in human form. All these are liberated souls from the worldly bonds but since they are not realized souls, there is no use of such liberation. Such permanent liberation from the worldly bonds and such permanent realization of the self is again due to your constant prayer to God with the rigid request to grant such permanent liberation and the subsequent grace of God only. God grants your request since you are rigid in your foolish desire. Otherwise, such liberation and such realization without the grace of God are momentary only. Shankara also stressed on the God’s grace to get such permanent realization, which was called as vasana (pumsam advaita vasana). The word ‘vasana’ here means the strong and permanent feeling of realization. The realized soul without liberation is an incapable theorist and a liberated soul without realization is an inert practical example. Both are useless. Hanuman and Gopikas are such realized and liberated souls who recognized the contemporary human incarnation and they were liberated from the worldly bonds for the sake of such alive human forms of God. The realization without liberation is like lame and liberation without realization is like blind.

Duryodhana was neither realized nor liberated soul. Dhritarashtra was a realized soul who recognized Krishna as God but not liberated from the bond of the son. Pandavas are realized souls who recognized Krishna as God but their liberation from worldly bonds was almost complete but not fully complete. The reason for such a little deficiency in the liberation was only a little deficiency in the realization. Therefore, if the realization is without any doubt, the determination will result in practice and the liberation will become complete. Dharmaraja knows that Krishna is the incarnation of Lord Narayana. His concept was that Krishna is one percent human being and ninety-nine percent Narayana. Narayana is hundred percent justice according to Dharmaraja. When Krishna asked him to tell a lie, Dharmaraja thought that the one percent human being is asking to tell the lie. According to him, Narayana is hundred percent sattvam, which is good quality. Therefore, Narayana is hundred percent good. Krishna is also good everywhere except in this instance. Therefore, Dharmaraja thought that Krishna is ninety-nine percent Narayana only. Therefore, he refused to tell the lie. This little fault in the realization led him to slip a little from the full liberation and hence, he could not liberate himself from the bond of justice. The reason for this deficiency is in the knowledge about God and also even about the qualities. No single quality can have isolated existence. God is beyond the three qualities. He is beyond sattvam also and therefore, beyond justice also (Sarva dharman… Gita, Punya Pape vidhuya… Veda). Thus, the realization becomes complete only when the divine knowledge is perfect and therefore, God in human form (Sadguru or Guru Datta) is giving stress on the propagation of the true divine knowledge. In fact, Krishna is hundred percent Narayana and one percent human being (Manushiim Tanumaashritam). This means that the full Lord Narayana entered into the human being and therefore, the total Krishna is hundred plus one and not hundred. Since the one percent human being is relatively true, in the absolute plane, Krishna is also hundred percent Narayana. Even in Narayana, Rajas and Tamas co-exist as traces, which can also predominate, whenever it is required in the divine game. For example, the same Lord Narayana became Narasimha in whom Rajas (anger) came out to almost hundred percent. In fact, Narayana is also hundred plus one because the hundred percent God entered the one percent human energetic form. Since energy and matter are one and the same according to science (E=MC²), the human body or the energetic body is one percent only.

After this discourse, a TV serial on Ayyappa (Dharma Shastra) was exhibited. Swami commented on the life history of Ayyappa. The Queen grew up Ayyappa as her own son. After sometime, she gave birth to a son. Everyone recognized Ayyappa as the God in human form through His superhuman nature. Now, Ayyappa stands as God plus the love in growing Him from the childhood. The queen feared that Ayyappa as the first son will become the king and wanted to kill Ayyappa. She asked Ayyappa to get the milk of a tiger to cure her headache so that she thought that Ayyappa will be killed by the tiger. Before the love of the delivered child, God plus some love was defeated. Where is the doubt of the defeat of God alone before the love of a delivered child? In such competing election, God will lose even His deposit! Therefore, the love on the children is gold and the love between the husband and wife is silver. But God always loves the souls to uplift them by all means (Even the punishment in hell is only to transform and uplift the soul and is not revenge.) without aspiration of any help from the souls in return. Therefore, the love of God on the souls is platinum. But the soul is not returning even gold or even silver to God for His platinum love.

3. Krishna is a Brahma Jnani or a realized soul only. Please comment.

[A comment made by somebody on the Internet]

Swami replied: There is a difference in the realization between Krishna and individual soul. Krishna imposed apparent ignorance on Him and realization means to know about His own real nature of God present in His human body. Only God knows about the real nature of God (Brahma vit Brahmaiva… Veda, Mamtu Veda na kaschana… Gita). Therefore, the knower of the real nature of God can be only God. Hence, in the case of Krishna, realization of Himself is the real sense of the word realization. But in the case of the ordinary soul, realization of itself (getting released from the superimpositions on subtle and gross bodies) is not the highest realization because the soul is not God. The highest concept of realization in the case of soul is the realization of the human medium in which God exists and realization of the truth of the self that it is not God. Therefore, the word Brahma Jnani has different senses in the case of Krishna and ordinary soul.

When Narada asked Brahma about the address of a real Brahmachari, Brahma told that Krishna living on the earth at that time was the real Brahmachari. Narada was confused because this word is used in the sense of a bachelor. But this word has its root sense in the case of Krishna because He was not a bachelor. The word Brahmachari means the knower of Brahman because the verb ‘chara’ is also having the root meaning of knowledge. Therefore, the Brahmachari means the knower of Brahman. God alone knows about Himself and hence, the knower of Brahman must be the Brahman only. Since Krishna was Brahman in the human form at that time, Brahma used this word in the root sense. From this, one should know that the human incarnation is only Brahmachari and not the bachelor human being. In the case of soul, this word can be used to the devotee who recognized the existence of Brahman in the alive human form. Except these two cases, a simple bachelor without marriage should not be called as a real Brahmachari. Therefore, not only Hanuman who is celibate is Brahmachari, but also married Gopikas were Brahmacharis. Hanuman is Brahmachari because He recognized the alive human form of God. Otherwise, Hanuman is said to be married to Suvarchala and in that sense, this word has no application. Lord Krishna told in the Gita that He has given the real spirit of the Gita or knowledge of God to Sun. Hanuman was the student of that Sun. Therefore, we must be able to see the knowledge of God in the spiritual practice of Hanuman, which was nothing but recognition of contemporary human incarnation and selfless service to it. Therefore, this concept must have been the real spirit of the Gita by reversing back.

The Veda says that there are four stages of the soul.

1. The awakened state in which the soul is called as the Vishwa where the soul is superimposed on the materialized gross body.

2. The dream state in which the soul is called as the Taijasa where the soul is superimposed on the subtle body, which is a bundle of feelings and each feeling is awareness associated with kinetic energy.

3. The meditation state in which the soul is called as Prajna where the soul is in awareness of itself as pure awareness enjoying the bliss and

4. The deep sleep state in which the soul is called as the Turiya where the soul is beyond the above three states of awareness i.e., the soul is in its original raw state of inert energy with full of ignorance about God.

If you say that the fourth state is beyond deep sleep (by treating the third state as the deep sleep, eliminating the meditation), such fourth state is not in the experience of the soul directly or indirectly. The deep sleep is indirectly experienced as full ignorance by inference after rising from the deep sleep. When you awaken from the deep sleep, you are saying that you did not know anything during the deep sleep. This does not mean that you were experiencing the ignorance during the state of deep sleep also. The ignorance during the deep sleep was indirectly experienced through inference only after awakening from the deep sleep. Hence, the deep sleep is also experienced indirectly through inference but even such indirect experience is not there for the fourth state because after the deep sleep, you are entering into the first state immediately. In absence of any authority like perception or inference for the fourth state of the soul, such a state is not acceptable to direct or indirect experience and logic. The fourth state is related to the soul and hence, you cannot say that it is beyond logic. If we take the deep sleep as the fourth state, it represents the ignorance of the soul regarding God and therefore, it is the state of soul towards and not the state of God. Therefore, the meditation state is third, which is almost considered as deep sleep. If you take the soul as prajna or pure awareness in the deep sleep, it becomes absurd because in deep sleep the awareness is totally disappearing.

In deep sleep, there is no experience of bliss during that state. But in the state of meditation, there is experience of bliss during that state. After deep sleep, the bliss is enjoyed due to conservation of energy since the nervous system was not working in deep sleep. But the bliss due to such conservation of energy is not enjoyed during the state of deep sleep. During the deep sleep, the energy is stored and the stored energy is suddenly experienced as bliss when you awake from the deep sleep. When you take food, the extra energy is supplied and in that case also, you are experiencing the same bliss. Similarly, in the deep sleep, the energy becomes excess due to absence of its expenditure. Both the states of meditation and deep sleep are almost one and the same in the sense of excess energy, which alone is giving more happiness or freshness for which the word bliss is used. If you take the state of meditation, here also all the thoughts are arrested and the excess energy is stored. In this meditation state, very little energy is spent in the awareness of itself. Thus, the deep sleep is hundred percent storage of energy and the meditation is ninety-nine percent storage of energy. Hence, the enjoyment of bliss is almost same except the difference that the bliss is enjoyed during meditation, whereas the bliss is enjoyed after the deep sleep. The merit of the meditation state is that the soul can be called as pure awareness in this state since it is enjoying the bliss directly during this state. In deep sleep, the soul is not awareness because it is transformed into inert energy and there, the word ‘prajna’ meaning pure awareness, cannot be applied. Moreover, during the deep sleep, the bliss is not directly enjoyed. Due to these points, the meditation state should be considered as the third state (sushupti) and the actual deep sleep can be considered as the fourth state (turiya), which represents the ignorance of soul towards God. The deep sleep indicates the unknowable God due to complete absence of knowledge of the soul.

Before God, the soul becomes inert item and hence, cannot know even a trace of the real nature of God. In the deep sleep, the soul disappears since the causal body dissolves into its basic form of inert energy called as primary energy. This primary energy is the ultimate item of the universe and the soul in the awakened state can recognize the existence of this primary energy only at the maximum. Therefore, the primary energy is the ultimate existence (Sat) with respect to the knowledge of the soul. Hence, the Veda says that the soul dissolves in Sat in the deep sleep and does not know about anything because the primary energy is inert (sati sampatsya na viduh…). This primary energy is the basic homogenous material cause of this entire universe and can be called as Brahman in the sense that it is the greatest in the world or in the imaginable items. Now, there is no objection if you say that the soul dissolves in the primary energy (sat), which is inert and the soul is in the state of full ignorance of anything including itself and God and the soul thus, becomes the Brahman, which is the primary energy. The entire argument of advaita is correlated in this way and yet, God is not touched by the soul because God is beyond such Brahman and is called as Parabrahman. The word Brahman is not fixed to any particular item as it is clear from the usage of this word Brahman in the sense of the Veda, which is greatest among all the scriptures. Therefore, the whole misunderstanding comes from the usage of the word Brahman. The Gita says that the Parabrahman or God is beyond Sat also (na sat tat …). God is indicated by the word ‘asat’ (asadvaa… Veda), which means that the God is not sat or primary energy i.e., God is beyond the primary energy (Mula Maya). However, the word asat also has another sense of non-existence and this sense is removed by the Gita because God is existent (naasaduchyate…).

If God is introduced through the medium of human body, atheists will not agree. Hence, Shankara selected the pure awareness as the medium of God for introduction. Even in the human incarnation, the pure awareness (soul) acts as a medium charged by God. Let us isolate that part of soul only from the human incarnation and all this isolation is only an assumption. In general, the pure awareness alone can act as the medium of God, since basically there is no objection for any item of the creation to act as medium for God. The medium charged by God can be treated as God like the metallic wire charged by current. In this way, you can call the assumed pure awareness or soul charged by God in the human incarnation as God. But a soul without God exists in every human being and Shankara called every soul as God due to the possibility of a soul to be charged by God and due to the existence of the soul charged by God in human incarnation. What is the use of all this? The atheists are mainly characterized by ego and will not accept God other than themselves. This rigid psychology of the atheist cannot be condemned in the beginning. The preacher must follow the psychology of a rigid ignorant student and should slowly uplift him. Hence, there is no other way to uplift the atheists existing in the time of Shankara (Buddhists and Purvamimaamsakas).

Shankara told that the soul in every human being is God and this satisfies the rigid psychology of the atheists. At least, they have accepted the existence of God as the existence of themselves. Buddhists were in a very pitiable condition since they were thinking that everything including themselves is nothing (shunya). Shankara brought them up by stating that there should be the soul to experience the nothing. Otherwise, when nothing is not experienced, nothing cannot be established. The Buddhists came up and accepted the existence of the soul that experiences nothing (the school of prajnavada of Dignaga). Since that soul is God, they have accepted the existence of God. But they were rigid of nothing except the soul and therefore, Shankara had to follow their rigid psychology of nothing except the soul. Hence, Shankara told that the soul is truth and God and except the soul or God, everything (world) is nothing (Brahma satyam…). The ego of the atheist was also satisfied because the soul itself is the supreme God. The purva mimamsakas were already accepting the existence of soul and world. Now, there is a contradiction between Buddhists and purva mimamsakas in the existence of the world though not in the existence of soul. To convince both these rigid and ignorant students, Shankara told that the world is neither existent nor non-existent (mithya). A negligible trace can be treated almost as non-existent and is existent in the strict sense. Since the world is a negligible dream of the soul, it is existent as well as non-existent. Thus, he combined both in the concept of the world and made them accept the existence of God as a soul.

The purva mimamsakas were interested in achieving the happiness in heaven by doing rituals. Shankara exploited their ambition for happiness and stated that the God or soul is infinite happiness (ananda). This attracted the purva mimamsakas to concentrate on God than on heaven. But in practical experience, all of them found the absence of the experience of the natural infinite happiness and this raised the doubt whether the soul is actually God in its original state. Shankara had to drag these atheists further; otherwise, they will go back to their original atheism. Then, Shankara applied another trick by stating that the ignorance of soul must be removed practically due to its long-standing effect. This long-standing influence of ignorance is called as vikshepa. Even if you awake from the dream and realize that the tiger in the dream was unreal, its effect like vibration and fear will not cease immediately. The theoretical realization removes only the apparent layer of ignorance called as avaranam. For this removal of practical effect of ignorance, Shankara suggested about the meditation of a completely liberated soul called as Eshwara, who is just a leader of the same class. Both the soul and the Eshwara are essentially the students of the same class but Eshwara, is a more meritorious student whose help can be taken by the soul. The atheist is trapped here because basically there is no difference between himself and the Eshwara. He thought that there is nothing wrong to take the help of a meritorious student of the same class so that the less meritorious student can become the same meritorious student on one day or the other. Shankara maintained the essential equality of Eshwara and the individual soul as Brahman to satisfy the continuing ego of the atheist. The atheists started meditating upon the Eshwara.

See the wonderful talent of Shankara who made the atheist not only to accept God but also meditate upon God! That is the talent of the Sadguru when God comes in human form. Nobody can handle this situation except God. The technique used by Shankara was in the line of the Vedic tradition only. The Veda is also attracting the theists by projecting God as the source of materialistic benefits here as well as in the heaven. The worship of God is introduced through this attraction (kamya karma). Slowly the theist tastes the nature of God and gets attracted to God leaving the other attractions. Shankara has extended the same to the atheists also. If you take the path of Shankara as the absolute truth, you must have been an atheist like Buddhist or purva mimamsaka. You are a grown-up student going to college and should not aspire for the chocolates given to kids to go to school. Shankara was correct in that time for those atheists since the final result was in their eternal welfare only. A psychological trick with good application for the benefit is always appreciable because ends justify means. You should take Shankara as the Guru with affection on ignorant students and not as a mere scholar who just reveals the absolute truth and goes away without bothering about the practical uplift of the students.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★