Mandukya Karika Lecture 144 on 06-March-2024

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

We have been discussing the 83rd Karika and the 4th Chapter by Gaudapadacharya. What is he telling? There are various views about Atman, about Brahman, about God. And all these views have been codified, classified into four types: Asthi, Nasthi, Asthi Nasthi, Nasthi Nasthi. And some of these are Buddhistic terms. That is why some people suspect whether Gaudapadacharya is bringing some Buddhistic philosophy into Vedanta. Some people suspect maybe he was earlier a Buddhist and later on somehow converted to Advaita Vedanta. And then he tried to mix up both of them. Some people's view. But he himself tells in the 99th penultimate Karika of this particular chapter that all these things that I have used are not spoken by Buddha. In fact, if we study Buddhistic philosophy, the highest summary of Advaita Vedanta is nothing but what Buddha had taught. Or I would put it the other way round: Buddha taught nothing but pure Upanishadic philosophy. He is talking, Buddha is talking about what we call the impersonal aspect of Brahman. Not Saguna Brahma, but Nirguna Brahma. And what can we speak about Nirguna Brahma excepting that it is indescribable. That is why it is said Neti Neti. Very interestingly, I have explained these words which come in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Why use the same word twice? Once if we say Neti, Na Eti, this is not. Then it should have been sufficient. But why twice he has used it? Because what is that instrument which tells this is a thing or this is not a thing. So first, what I see is not Brahman. So what I hear, what I smell, what I touch, through this, all, every experience, every bit of knowledge that is gathered through the five sense organs into the mind is denied. But then what remains? The mind has assumed a particular position. I will deny everything. And the second negation is to transcend, not negate, but transcend even that mind itself. And that first aspect of the mind which negates everything is called Brahmakaravrutti. So how does Brahmakaravrutti work out? Supposing I see a tree. I am an ignorant person. What do I say? I see a tree. This is created by God. God is the creator. This is created. So previously it was in the form of God. That is in an unmanifest condition. Now creation means manifest and the unmanifest becoming manifest. That is called creation. So all these are thoughts in our mind. This Brahmakaravrutti says, what is it you claim you are seeing? I am seeing a tree. No, no, that is not it. What you are seeing is only Brahman. With name and form. So Brahman with the name mango tree, with this form that you experience. So it is nothing but Brahman. Whenever we look at any ornament made of gold, it is nothing but gold. So we are looking at everything in this whole universe. Living as well as non-living is nothing but Brahman. See everything as Brahman. And this seeing everything as Brahman is a function of the mind only. So the first negation, no, it is not merely a tree. Because if it is a tree, then it is different from other trees, from other species. And different from its own species. And so many differences are there within itself. But if it is Brahman, this is an apple tree, Brahman with the dress of apple-ness. Brahman with the dress of mango-ness. Etc, etc. Ultimately every ornament made up of gold is nothing but gold. So that gold akara vritti. Hiranyakara vritti. That is called Brahmakara. Everything is reduced to one common denominator. That is called Brahman. That is called Brahmakara Vritti. Vritti means a thought in the mind. Only one thought. So that thought, in Sri Ramakrishna's analogy, like a big thorn was capable of removing every other thorn. That means what? Reduce everything to only the thorn-ness. But that thorn-ness represented by the big thorn is now to be negated. So the second neti is to negate the negator. First assume there is a negator. He negates everything. And after negating, he himself must dissolve. Like as we say, a water purifier. It not only purifies all. They say, you put all in impure water, dirty water, it removes the dirt and it disappears. It doesn't become another piece of dirt. So similarly, Brahmakara Vritti removes everything and itself will disappear. So to indicate that which negates and finally dissolves itself after negating, when there is nothing to negate, becomes negated itself, self-destruct. That is the purpose.

So whether Buddha teaches the infinite, Gaudapada teaches, Shankaracharya teaches, Sri Ramakrishna teaches, they can only say that it is a thought. Any thought about the infinite is only a thought. Anything finite, we can have some type of idea, approximation, closeness. But we cannot say. That is why it is said, where the mind itself, not to speak of the speech, returns baffled because whatever we think is not Brahman. It is a thought about Brahman. That is why Sri Ramakrishna's pithy statement, "everything in this world is polluted." That means whatever we experience becomes polluted, touched, tasted. Experience means tasting by our mind. Not necessarily. Whenever we use this word, "did I taste Brahman?" No, you did not taste Brahman. But did I taste Brahman? Yes, you tasted Brahman. What is this contradiction? The tongue did not taste it, but the mind tasted it. And whatever the mind tasted is also polluted. And this is what Sri Ramakrishnawas trying to tell. Brahman can be indicated. And this marvellous statement has been so paradoxically presented in the Kena Upanishad. "He who thinks he knows, doesn't know. He who thinks he doesn't know, he knows." It looks like a stupid, illogical statement. But the Rishi is not talking about ordinary persons. "I know what is Brahman, but not as an object. I am not objectifying Brahman. I am only talking about Brahman as myself. And whatever I talk about other than Brahman, that is not Brahman. So unobjectified Brahman is what I know. So I know unobjectified Brahman is what I am. But anything that is objectified has nothing to do with Brahman. So a wise person is one who says, I know it and yet I do not know. That means I know it as an objectless reality as myself. But at the same time, I cannot talk about it because if I talk, talking, even thinking falls under the category of duality. I am there, something else is there. Now, all opinions about Brahman, instead of that, I am using the word God, falls only under four categories. It is a fine analysis. If I have to use the modern philosophical terms, believers, non-believers, skeptics, and agnostics. So what is the difference? Believers, I believe God exists. Some people, no, God does not exist. I believe in God, asti. I do not believe in God, nasti. Then agnosticism. So God does not, there is no possibility God exists at all. But skepticism, I do not know, I do not know. Maybe He exists, maybe He does not exist. This is called asti-nasti vada. And absolutely there is no chance at all. Remember, some of the Indian schools of philosophy like Vaiseshika and also Jainism. So Gaudapada was referring to some of these schools. And every opinion can be classified under one of these four. Asti, God exists. Nasti, no, God does not exist. Asti-nasti, so I think so long as I am conscious, God exists. And when I die, who knows? Even I do not exist, you know. We do not need to go to God. Many people believe this is the only life. And after the death of this body, I will not exist anymore. There are quite a good number of people. Asti-nasti, so long as I am thinking, He is there. But with the death of my body, this is called asti-nasti. Exists so long as I am aware, does not exist when I am not aware. Many modern scientists believe this one. What do they believe? That this so-called consciousness is an epiphenomenon with the death of the brain, brain death. Even the world disappears. In fact, world and God, they are inextricably twined together. If there is no world, there is no God. If there is no God, there is no world at all. Because thinking is in the realm of duality. So this is the third view, asti-nasti. And then there is a fourth view. That is, the question does not arise at all. Nothing exists. Not only God does not exist, the world does not exist, the mind does not exist, I do not exist. So if I slap you, do you exist? So long as I feel the slap, it is only what is called imagination. Really there is no I. These are different views.

What does Gaudapada want to say by quoting these four views? That we should not waste our time thinking whether He exists or doesn't exist. Just this is what Pavahari Baba had taught to Swami Vivekananda. Probably, or I do not know, I am attributing it to Pavahari Baba. So what conversation, dialogue Swami Vivekananda had with Pavahari Baba, we do not know. But then Pavahari Baba had said, "Once you fix the goal, then forget the goal. Focus upon the path." Means, once you fix the ends, end means goal, forget about the goal. Fix all your attention with every millimeter of how I can go forward. One millimeter at a time. So that is, Swami Vivekananda appreciated it. And that is what Gaudapada wants to tell us. Focus on your sadhana. Don't go on wasting your time. Because the highest cannot be thought about. But whatever you believe, that I am a human being, I should behave like a human being. And every living being feels exactly like me. Sukha and Dukha, happiness and unhappiness. So let me see how much less harm I can do. How much less pain I can give to others. And how much I can help others feel better. That is what practical advice by Gaudapada. All the following are only, don't waste your time. In the beginning, you use your Yukti, reasoning power, to enforce, to strengthen your belief in Brahman. But once it is done, now focus on sadhana. And sadhana has nothing to do with Brahman. Sadhana has everything to do with Saguna Brahma, personal God. And then, if we do our best, at the end, we will be reaching that state which automatically takes us. If there is Brahman, we will reach Brahman. If there is no Brahman, we are not going to reach Brahman. Don't worry. Whatever you know, sadhana can be done only with Saguna Brahma. Whatever we do with body and mind, we can do only with personal God, not impersonal God. Remember, I am reminding you again and again. Even the concept of impersonal is against the concept of personal. Just as we cannot understand what is cold without its opposite called heat. What is happiness without its opposite called unhappiness. So also, we can never think about whatever the mind thinks about. The functioning capacity or mode of thinking of the mind is, it can understand things only in the shape of dualities. Not a single thing. So, as against the personal, the idea of impersonal is used. Nobody can meditate on the impersonal. That's why Sri Ramakrishna, he makes fun of the Brahman meditation. Even a six-year-old Brahman boy is meditating on the impersonal God. What to speak of their fathers and grandfathers and mothers and grandmothers.

So,

कोठ्यश्चतस्र एतास्तु ग्रहैर्यासां सदाऽऽवृतः ।

भगवानाभिरस्पृष्टो येन दृष्टः स सर्वदृक् ॥ ८४ ॥

koṭhyaścatasra etāstu grahairyāsāṃ sadā''vṛtaḥ |

bhagavānābhiraspṛṣṭo yena dṛṣṭaḥ sa sarvadṛk || 84 ||

84. These are the four alternative theories regarding (the nature of) Ātman, on account of attachment to which It always remains covered (from one’s view). He who has known that Ātman is ever-untouched by any of these (predicates) indeed sees all.

Sarvadruk means all-knowing, all-wise. So, there is a person, he doesn't bother his head. Only he understands, what is my goal in life. Goal in life is to become unselfish, to overcome all the dualities of this world. That means you cannot overcome really. We do overcome only in one state and that is called deep sleep. And Gaudapada is going to talk about these three states in order to remind us what he has been talking about earlier. So, this fourth state comes automatically. It is not a state at all, but human language requires a description. So, it is said it is a fourth state. That is, Turiya is not a fourth state. It is an indescribable, it is not even a state. A state is a condition of the mind. So, KOTYA CHATASRAHA. So, there are four alternative theories regarding the nature of Atman. We can substitute the word Atman with the word God, which Sri Ramakrishna frequently used. Four opinions, there can only be four alternative ideas. And everyone who claims, he thinks he knows the truth and he goes on clinging to it, attachment to it. So, that is why attachment covers not God, like cloud doesn't cover the sun.

I reminded you earlier, if there is a cloud, which is a small piece, how can it cover the sun, which is billions of miles across? Impossible. The cloud also should be billions of miles across. But as I said, even your little finger very across your eyeball will close everything. So, the clouds can only cover my own vision. Like that, all these opinions, they cloud our understanding. So, this can be extended in meaning. I believe Vishnu is the greatest God. I believe Shiva is the greatest God. I believe Divine Mother is the greatest God, etc. And each one go on quarreling, I am right, you are wrong, etc. So, those who are attached to them, we should not be attached to our opinions. Then what should be our attitude? Until now, God has given me this much understanding. So, with this understanding, with the help of reason, I came to this conclusion that this is my opinion, my understanding about God. But just as my opinions changed a lot, my opinion about God also are likely to change in future. But for now, I understand how I should live in this world. Let me live in this world according to my understanding and that is the right attitude. And if I behave according to my own understanding, what is my understanding? That if somebody gives me pain, I would not like it. Somebody gives me pleasure, I very much like it. So, apply this to everybody in my behaviour. Let me try not to give any pain to others. And let me try to bring as much comfort or pleasure, happiness in other persons to the extent of my capacity. Let me behave like this. Then slowly, slowly, just as a person climbing a mountain higher and higher gets larger and larger area of view, so also my understanding becomes better and better. And the ancient sage in the form of Swami Vivekananda had given a beautiful analogy for this. A man started traveling towards the sun. He has a beautiful camera, we assume. And at every few steps, he is taking a photograph. And he is moving nearer and nearer to God. Let us imagine. And he must be taking millions of pictures of the sun. But every picture that is nearer to the sun becomes more clear, bigger. So like that, as we progress in our spiritual life, and that is the only way for us to live happily in this world. So our concept of God also becomes better, clearer. And that is what Sri Ramakrishnasummed up. As man grows, God also grows altogether. And Sri Ramakrishnahas something to say about it. This is what Gaudapada wants to say. That the person who is completely caught up in his own opinion, And he said these opinions, he compares to Graha. Graha means like a crocodile or a bad star, Shani Graha or whatever it is. So these are the four opinions and they, completely attached to them, thinking this is the highest truth. Such people, they will not progress in life. But according to Vedanta, everybody will progress. Because some very painful experiences will knock the person from his cherished view. And through painful way, he also will be forced to open his mind and progress further. And Gaudapada is using the beautiful word Bhagwan. Bhagwan, God, He is not at all influenced by these ideas. We are caught in the ideas like a cloud. It can never affect the sun in any way. It only affects our vision, our behaviour. So no opinion of the mind can ever affect Bhagwan himself. By these opinions, by these four opinions, Asprashtaha, completely untouched. That means the opinion does not define God. And Enadrishtaha, he whose eyes are opened, He becomes a wise person. Then he could clearly see that Bhagwan is not affected by any of the opinions. That means Bhagwan is beyond the circle of the mind. What does he become? Sarvadrik. He becomes one with God and he is all-knowing. And this is what Sri Ramakrishna beautifully illustrates.

And so it helps us to understand a simple story. Most of you must have heard it. That a man once returned back from a wooded area. And there he beheld a very beautiful yellow-coloured animal. He did not even know what that animal was. Beautiful, bright yellow. And he said, "Today I have seen an animal which is very beautiful. And how is it? It is yellow in colour." Another man controverted him. "No, no, I have seen him yesterday. It was pure red." Another person said, "Both of you are wrong. It is pure yellow, pure green. Like that, blue and mixed colours, etc." So they decided, let us go and see. Let us see who among us is right. And fortunately for them, a man always stays under the tree on which this animal lives. And then they asked him. And then he said, "All of you are right." He said, "All of you are right. Sometimes it assumes yellow colour. Sometimes green colour. Sometimes blue colour. Sometimes red colour. And then he said, sometimes there is no colour at all. Because I see it all the time. With colour, without colour. What is Sri Ramakrishna trying to convey to us through this story? What is that animal? It is called chameleon. Chameleon, whatever you call it. And it changes its colour. And scientists know about it. Whichever is its surroundings, green, yellow, immediately its colour changes. How wonderful it is. Who can say that animals are not intelligent? Automatically they do it. So, see it is with colour, without colour, many colours. So, that means what? We should never say it is of this colour. So, Sri Ramakrishna says, never say God is only this much. He is with form or without form. With name, without name. With qualities, without qualities. He is both. I illustrated the story of a sadhu. He passed a stick across the image of Lord Jagannatha. And at one time, the stick passed without as if there is no image at all. But next second, it could not pass. So, the sadhu understood, or God made him understand, God is both with form or without form. It depends upon. So, this is what Gaudapada wants to convey. Don't go on cherishing. This is the final view. I simply say, this is my present view. I still remember, some of the disciples of Sri Ramakrishna, especially Swami Avedananda and Swami, even Mahapurush Maharaj recollects. At one time, we became believers in the non-existence of God. And nothing is hidden to Sri Ramakrishna. He said that this is also a stage in spiritual progress. A time will come when you feel God doesn't exist. Wonderful, isn't it? Then, will such a person continue his spiritual practice? Yes, because even if God doesn't exist, I cannot deny my existence. And so long as I exist, God also has to exist by force. So, marvellous, it is a stage. If we can keep that view, everything is a stage. Vaishnavism is a stage. Hinduism is a stage. Christianity is a stage. Karma Yoga is a stage. Bhakti Yoga, Raja Yoga, Gnana Yoga are only stages. Finally, when we become nearer to God, like a huge magnetic hill which unhinges everything made out of iron, so also all our ironies, contradictions will be pulled out and there will be no ship means there will be no body-mind and we become one because each soul is potentially divine. So, these are what he wants to say. So, what should be done? We should not talk vainly, but whichever view we are convinced with and then every view indicates a type of practice. Practice it and then you move forward. As soon as we move forward, we see a new light. That is very important.

Because Sri Ramakrishna, whatever he is telling in the Gospel, is nothing but pure Vedanta. What is he telling? Sri Ramakrishna recollects a story that there was a wise man. He had two sons. He sent one of the sons to a Rishi for learning. He sent both the sons. Both of them, after several years, returned. The father wanted to test how wise they had become, not how much they had become learned, but how wise. So, he asked the eldest son, "What did you learn? What did you master?" And he started quoting from hundreds of Upanishads. I exaggerated a little bit. But he was talking and the father heard. Then he asked the younger son and simply he bent his head, did not utter a word. Then the father pronounced the judgment. Like Shiva and Parvati passed the judgment on their eldest son, Ganesha. "You understood. So, you get the necklace." So, like that, you alone understood. The other man is only a pundit talking in vain. So, Sri Ramakrishna narrates a beautiful incident about Trailing Swami. It looks that once Trailing Swami was there, probably at Varanasi, and a man earnestly came to him. "Sir, how can I realize God?" Then, it was Sri Ramakrishna himself actually. "How can I realize God?" This is a way of testing also for Sri Ramakrishna. Then, Trailing Swami did not reply. After a few seconds, he started weeping uncontrollably. And after a few seconds, he started laughing uproariously. Then Sri Ramakrishna bowed down and said, "I have learnt a lot from this." If you ask any other person who has been witnessing, he will say, "I think this fellow is a madcap. Sometimes he laughs, sometimes he weeps." No. Sri Ramakrishna explained, if you can weep for the vision of God, like Trailing Swami wept uncontrollably, then God's grace will come and you will realize Him. And then you will have that unimaginably infinite uninterrupted Ananda. And laughing indicates Ananda. Weeping indicates Vyakulata. See, even though he did not open his mouth and speak about it, through his actions he had conveyed. So, through our actions only, we know whether we are progressing or not. As I mentioned many times, God is described as Sat, Chit, and Ananda. Just as a man approaching a roaring fire from a distance which is very cold, slowly his feeling of coldness reduces, feeling of heat increases. As he comes near, his body becomes heated. Anybody touching that person's body also feels the effect of the fire. But when this person, as he comes near, he becomes more and more hot. And if he becomes one with the fire, he will have the same effect as the fire. Both Ushnata and Prakashata, that is heat as well as light, both will emanate just like one with God. This is called Brahma with Brahma Eva Bhavati. And there is a Christian story, beautiful story, I think for many years I did not quote it. There was an ancient church and there was a priest who was a very great devotee of Jesus. And an old man used to come. He will sit silently. He will not speak with anybody. And then after some time, he will go away. And the priest became very curious. So one day he called him and asked, "Sir, I have been observing you many times. You sit silently. Please explain to me." The man probably found this man a fit person. So he said, "many years back, when I used to come, I prayed to God. I used to talk to God. I used to talk and God used to listen. And after some time, it so happened, God started speaking to me and I became a silent listener. And the third stage had come, that both of us are talking with each other, enjoying each other. And some time back, I passed that third stage also. Now, we just know each other. Neither I talk, He listens. Nor He talks, I listen. And we have become one. Absolutely silent. That is what Ramana Bhagwan used to say, when a person reaches the highest stage, he becomes mauni. That is the real meaning of mauna, silence. Silence means he has become one with God. Beautiful stories.

So the thoughtful person who has realized the Atman, known only by the correct understanding of the Upanishads, has never been untouched by any of these opinions. Four alternative predicates such as it exists, it doesn't exist, it both exists and doesn't exist, and absolutely doesn't exist. Then we move on to the next 85th.

प्राप्य सर्वज्ञतां कृत्स्नां ब्राह्मण्यं पदमद्वयम् ।

अनापन्नादिमध्यान्तं किमतः परमीहते ॥ ८५ ॥

prāpya sarvajñatāṃ kṛtsnāṃ brāhmaṇyaṃ padamadvayam |

anāpannādimadhyāntaṃ kimataḥ paramīhate || 85 ||

85. What else remains for him to be desired when he has attained to the state of the Brāhmaṇa—a state of complete omniscience, non-duality and a state which is without beginning, end or middle?

Such a person who has reached that state, where he doesn't have any mind, therefore no opinions, and such a person, he is called a Brahmana. Here, two things are being explained by Gaudapada. One is, who is a real Brahmana? It is a beautiful concept. Because according to Hindus, whether a person is a Shudra, Vaishya, Kshatriya or Brahmana, this classification is there. Many people accuse Hinduism of permanently classifying people into these four categories. And really, they have some ground for that conclusion. This is called Jati. That is, a person is a Brahmana by birth. No. Bhagavan Krishna had emphatically denied chaturvanyam maya srishtam. All the four castes have been created by me. How? Not by birth. It is guna, karma, vibhagashah. So, if a person has only sattva guna, he is a Brahmana. He has got sattva guna, but controlled by, seconded by, aided by rajo guna. He is a Kshatriya. A person who has got rajo guna, aided by a little bit of sattva and tamas, he is called Vaishya. A person who is dominated by tamo guna, aided by rajo guna and sattva guna, he is Kali Shudra. It is a manifestation of three gunas. Nothing to do with birth. And so their activities also are according to their nature. And sometimes the activities themselves help us to overcome, to progress in these gunas also.

So, in this 85th one, who is a Brahmana? And what is Gaudapada saying? A person who knows I am Brahman is called a Brahmana. A popular shloka also tells it. One who knows Brahman. How does he know? What way of knowledge? I am Brahman. Not that I know this mango tree. I know X, Y, Z. No. I am Brahman. There is no second. Either Brahman is me or I am Brahman. And such a person is called Brahmana. So this is one point.

What is the second point? That Bhagawan really speaking is Brahman. And Brahman is free from the beginning, from the middle and from the end. So, Shankaracharya interprets it beautifully. Adi means creation. Middle means preservation. Anta means dissolution. Srishti, sthiti and laya. So, we have to go beyond. The whole essence of Gaudapada's teaching is there is neither Jagrat, Swapna, Sushupti, neither Srishti, sthiti, laya and whatever remains after transcending these three. That means transcending the mind. That is the truth, highest truth. The whole Mandukya Upanishad is based upon that Omkara Sarvam. Omkara is everything. And Omkara is consisting of A, U and Ma. And Akara represents waking. Ukara represents dream. And Makara represents deep sleep. Jagrat, Swapna, Sushupti. But Omkara is Matrahina. That is beyond all Matra. Matra means boundary, limitation. This is what he wants to say in these two ideas.

Who is a Brahmana? The one who attains to Brahman, knows that I am Brahman. And what is the nature of Brahman? That is Brahman who about whom we can't say he is the creator, sustainer or destroyer. That is he is indescribable. Because along with creation only comes body and mind. If he is beyond body and mind, who is going to describe to whom and what language? Nothing is there. That is the essence of this one.

When a person has attained to the state of Brahman, a state of complete non-duality, which is without beginning and end or a middle, what else thereafter remains for him to desire for? That means he will not have a mind, he will not have a body. Where there is a body and mind, there is a desire. Where there is a body and mind, there is a limitation. And desire is to become unlimited. When there is no limitation, finiteness, everything is experienced as infinite, there cannot be any desires. This is exactly what is described.

So Praapya, such a person, through spiritual practice of going beyond waking, dream and dreamless, and knowing I am the Turiya, Sarvajnatham, that means he becomes what is called Chidakara, I know everything, all-knowing, every-knowing. Krishna means complete, there is no second. Brahmanyam Padam, so that state, Padam means state, Advayat means without a second, that is called Brahmanyam, that is called status of Brahmana. And what is the nature, what is the description? Anapaha, that one who is without. Apaha means one who has, Anapa means who doesn't have.

What does this Brahman, what does not he have? Adi, Mathya, Anta. Adi means beginning, that is Srishti, Mathya means sustenance, Anta means Laya, he is beyond Adi, Mathya, Anta, he is beyond birth and death, he is beyond all dualities. That means he is Brahman. Aham Sarvam, Kim Atah Paramehate, is there something left out for desire? So whenever we desire, it is something which we do not have and we feel that I am not complete without that. That is called desire. I want to become unlimited. So such a person becomes Akamataha, Poornakamaha, Akamaha. This is the meaning of it. It means to say there is nothing more for him to commit or to desire or to yearn for. Ever at peace with himself in the world, he is immersed in his own inner ecstasy. That is called Ananda. That is what Sri Ramakrishna whenever he went into Samadhi state, that's why the bliss, even after he came down, bliss used to overflow from his face and uplift all those who are nearby. And then how do we understand such a person? Because until we attain Brahman, we can never even think about Brahman, impossible. We can become Brahman, we cannot describe Brahman. That is why eto vachu nivartai is beyond namo namo prabhu vaakya mana atitha. But how do we understand? Through his behaviour. And what would be his behaviour? The end of the second chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, sthita prajna lakshana is being summarized here.

In the 86th Karika

विप्राणां विनयो ह्येष शमः प्राकृत उच्यते ।

दमः प्रकृतिदान्तत्वादेवं विद्वाञ्शमं व्रजेत् ॥ ८६ ॥

viprāṇāṃ vinayo hyeṣa śamaḥ prākṛta ucyate |

damaḥ prakṛtidāntatvādevaṃ vidvāñśamaṃ vrajet || 86 ||

86. This (i.e., the realisation of Brahman) is the humility natural to the Brāhmaṇas. Their tranquillity (of mind) is also declared to be spontaneous (by men of discrimination). They are said to have attained to the state of sense-control (not through any artificial method as it comes quite natural to them. He who thus realises Brahman which is all-peace, himself becomes peaceful and tranquil.

What does it mean? The realization of Brahman brings in its nature to the jeevanmukta. Remember a person who is in Samadhi, we don't know what he is experiencing. But a jeevanmukta while living, he can talk to us, he can listen to us, he also eats food, he also breathes so long as the body is there. But he never thinks I am the body or mind. But what comes out unstoppably from this person? So, humility. Natural to the Brahmana. Brahmana means remember a self-realized soul. Brahma, brahmajna purusha. Humility. Now what is humility? If somebody is showing you what is called great humility. You are great. I am nothing. Like every Indian job seeker, your most humble servant, as soon as he gets the job, red flag will be flying all around the office, around the boss, about anybody. But it is not like that. Humble humility is given a special definition here. Humility is not seeing anything else excepting himself. So the question of this is great, this person is great, this object is desirable, this person is not great, so I am great, I am not great, all these fall under ignorance only. But a person who sees the same Brahman everywhere, his behaviour will be I am everything. That means there is no friendship, enmity, compassion, nothing of that sort. It is indescribable state. He is the very embodiment of morality. That is what he said, viprana. Who is a vipra here? Earlier he said Brahmana. Here he is using the word vipra. Who is a vipra? That is he who knows the essence of the scriptures through direct realization. Veda Dhyanath Viprobhavati Vinaya Heshaha. So Vinaya is also called Shamaha. Prakruta means nature, very nature, the moment he knows I am Brahman. Shamaha means control of the mind. Prakruta, very naturally it comes in a jeevanmukta. He need not strive for that. And similarly Dhamaha. These two qualities are illustrated here. What is Dhamaha? Control of the sense organs and keeping oneself away from objects of temptation, attraction or keeping away from what is called objects which we do not like, dislikes and dislikes, one who goes beyond that. That special control of the sense organs as well as sense objects is called Dhamaha. Prakruti, it becomes so natural to him. Like the jasmine smell is most natural to the jasmine flower. Sandalwood smell is most natural to the sandalwood. So billions of objects in this world have their own special, what is called flavour or smell. And they are not putting on some artificial one. So Shama Dhamaha that means what? Viveka, Viragya, Shama Dhamahadi, Shatka Sampati. Shama, Dhamah, Ritiksha, Uparati and Sriddha and Samadhana. All these become very natural. But he is not a Mumukshu because he is attained to the qualities. This is what Shankaracharya says that a Samadhistha Purusha, for him all these spiritual qualities become most natural. Of these qualities, two are selected by Gaudapada called control of the external world, control of the inner world. That means control of everything. Control becomes most natural. So the realization of Brahman is itself the humility natural to the Brahmana. Their mental equipoise is also declared to be spontaneous and natural and such people are said to have attained perfect sense control as it comes quite natural to them. He who thus realizes the Brahman as oneself and that Brahman which is all peaceful so this realized soul himself becomes tranquil and peaceful and it comes so naturally spontaneously and that is what Gaudapada wants to convey in this 86th Karika and further Karikas are also illustrating this one. Finally, he is coming to the end so the nature of Brahman is being described as we are coming to the end of this commentary by Gaudapada. We will talk about it in our next class.