TRIPURA RAHASYA OR THE MYSTERY BEYOND THE TRINITY -8

TRIPURA RAHASYA

OR

THE MYSTERY BEYOND THE TRINITY

Translated by

SWAMI SRI RAMANANANDA SARASWATHI

(Munagala S. Venkataramaiah)

Sri Ramanasramam

Tiruvannamalai

Chapter XVI: The Ego

The Self is luminous owing to its self-shining nature.

At the instant of perception of objects, such as a pot, the

ego-sense of identity with the body vanishes. There is no

experience of the complexion of the body (for instance)

simultaneous with perception of objects. Otherwise one

would be thinking, “I am fair or brown,” even while perceiving

a pot. In other words, when an object is perceived, it

is as non-self, like the body known as ‘mine’ (my body).

It should not be said that the Self does not shine as ‘I’

simultaneously with the perception of objects. If so, the

objects cannot be perceived. For when there are no lights

to illumine objects they are not perceived. It should not

Appendix I 271

also be said, ‘yet there is no ‘I’ sparkling (spurthi)’. For it

implies some distinctive form of shining and not the sheen

of pure light; this will also imply inertness. Therefore the

Self shines as pure ‘I’. On account of this, those who hold

that knowledge is self-evident, admit the experience ‘I

know the pot’ (but not ‘I have the knowledge of the pot’).

(Ghatam aham janami but not Ghata jnanavan aham).

If the Self be not admitted to shine of itself even during

our objective perceptions, it will not be proper to reject

the doubt whether ‘I am or not’. Nor should it be said

that simultaneously with objective perception the ego

shines (i.e., manifests) identical with body, etc. If in the

perception of an object the form of the object does not

manifest, the body cannot manifest itself at the time of

sensing the body, etc. It does not follow that in the

knowledge ‘He is Chaitra’, the intelligence namely the Self

of Chaitra is signified by the word ‘he’ and manifests

transcending his body-ego; for, to him Chaitra’s ego

remains unimpaired (i.e., he feels his ego-sense all the

same).

In deep sleep and samadhi the existence of ‘I’ cannot

be denied. All admit its continued existence in those states

also, because of the recollection of the experience (in those

two states). True, the Self remains continuous in those states

but it cannot be denoted by ‘I’, for the former is unmodified

Consciousness and the latter is a mode of consciousness. The

answer to such an objection is according to the Sages

well-versed in agamas, as follows: ‘I’ is of two kinds, moded

and unmoded intelligence. Mode means differentiation;

272 Tripura Rahasya

therefore moded intelligence is differentiated intelligence.

The other one is undifferentiated and is therefore

unmoded. When objectified as bodies, etc., the ego is

moded and differentiated. But in deep sleep and samadhi,

Consciousness remains unobjectified and undifferentiated;

therefore it is unmoded. It does not follow from this that

the admission of ‘I’ in samadhi will amount to admission

of the triads (e.g., cogniser, cognition and the cognised).

Since ‘I’ remains as the residue devoid of ‘non-I’, there are

no triads there. It is said in Pratyabhijna, “Although I

shine as Pure Light yet it is word in a subtle form

(paravak).” This ego is not a mode. Such is the doctrine

of Advaita.

This (unmoded Intelligence) is just the knowledge

of ‘I-I’. The agamas speak of it as Perfect Ego or Perfect

Knowledge. Because this state later finds expression to

describe it, it is said to be ‘word’ (vak); but it does not

mean audible word. It is ‘word’ in a subtle form, remaining

unspoken.

Perfect Ego cannot be denied in the unmoded Consciousness

for it will amount to inertness. Bhagavan Harina

has said: “Should ‘word’ mean differentiation in the ever-

Present Light, it would amount to saying the Sight does not

shine (of itself ).” On the other hand, ‘word’ signifies ‘profound

contemplation’. Pratyabhijna says: “Deliberation

makes clear the Self-shining Light. Were it not so, i.e., if light

should shine only in contact with an object, it would be

inert like a crystal.” Bhagavan Sri Sankara also says that

the Self, namely Chit, is always shining as ‘I’. In Viveka

Appendix I 273

Chudamani it is found, “That which constantly shines

forth as ‘I’ throughout infancy etc., waking state, etc.,

which are superimposed on it....”

Dullness of Deep Sleep

Though the Self that is Chit is Pure Solid Intelligence,

it is not like a solid rock, for that would amount

to inertness. It is pure, scintillating awareness. Its shining

nature is distinct from that of bright objects such as a

flame. This awareness is also called intelligence, deliberation,

light of consciousness, activity, vibration, the

supreme Ego, etc. Because of this nature the Supreme

Being is capable of creation and this also finds mention

in Soundarya Lahari, sloka 1.

It is not correct to say that Parama Siva remains united

with the power of maya which is indescribable (anirvachaneeya)

and illusory. Should the jagat be false (nonexistent)

like a hare’s horn, its creation must also be declared to be so.

It is not proper to say that the Lord’s nature is wasteful because

it will end in a blank, i.e., sunya. If the jagat is said to be

nonexistent like a hare’s horn, the sruti declarations such as

“From whom all these elements, all these creatures have come

forth, etc.” would amount to a madman’s ravings. Nor is it

proper to contend that acceptance of a Supreme Intelligent

Being, followed by the denial of the reality of the jagat, is

sunya vada, because false jagat inclusive of the Supreme

Reality is self-contradictory. (The correct position is: The

Supreme Being appears as or seems to be the jagat.) If you

argue that this results in duality whereas the srutis declare,

274 Tripura Rahasya

“There are not many here but only the Self,” I say you do

not understand the Advaita sastra; nowhere do the sastras

declare the jagat to be unreal. But yet they proclaim Advaita

to be certain. Srutis, which make assertions, such as “He

became all,” “Only the non-dual Supreme Being shines as

the universe,” thus declare the jagat to be real and thereby

non-duality is not impaired. Though the town reflected in a

mirror seems distinct yet it cannot exist without the mirror

and so is no other than the mirror; in the same manner

the jagat though seeming distinct is no other than the

Supreme Self. So non-duality is unimpaired.

As in the sruti mantra cited by you, “there are not

many here,” the denial relates to duality only and nothing

else. Therefore it is a sign of ignorance to declare the jagat

to be unreal. The Sages know that true knowledge consists

in realising that “all is Siva”. Suta Samhita says, “To say a

pot, etc., are unreal, is ignorance. Correctly to say a pot, etc.,

is real, is true knowledge.”

Thus the Supreme Intelligent Being by its own

supreme power of maya manifests Itself as this wonderful

universe. In the universe thus manifested, to see the jiva

distinct from the Supreme is duality and constitutes the

bondage of the individual. Knowledge of non-duality

constitutes liberation. His “independence” (svatantra, free

will), reflection of the universe, reflection of the individual

selves, reflection of bondage, reflection of liberation are

all presented within Himself by His own independent

power. Like a daydream, all these depend upon His

power of manifestation which however is not distinct

Appendix I 275

from the Supreme Intelligence. So our system is free

from any stigma. Power of deliberation always remains

constant with the Supreme Being. However in deep

sleep the reflection of inertness (jada sakti) veils it and

renders it weak; though the Supreme Being or Chit is

then shining in full, the Sages have proclaimed the

state to be one of inertness or dullness.

Chapter XVII: The Nature of Vijnana

The knowledge gained by hearing is only indirect.

Then reasoning in conformity with the sruti texts, it must

be ascertained whether indirect knowledge concerns one’s

own self or not. By reflection all doubts will vanish. After

thus ascertaining by reflection that the Self remains nondual,

contemplate the Self, that is to say, keep the mind

one-pointedly on the Self. If the mind becomes restless,

train it even forcibly. Be not effortless in this direction Yoga

Vasishta says: “Even with hands clenched and teeth ground,

pressing the limbs and forcibly withdrawing the senses, the

mind must first be brought under control.” So the utmost

effort must be made. Also the breath must forcibly be

controlled, if necessary, by means of pranayama (regulation

of breath). One-pointedness must be gained at all costs. How

long is effort necessary? Until direct experience is gained.

Thus by contemplation the inmost Self is realised. Then

contemplate ‘I am Brahman’. This is known as recognition

of the Self as Brahman (pratyabhijna jnana). Although this

amounts to unmoded samadhi (nirvikalpa) because it is

unbroken uniform knowledge, yet owing to the difference

276 Tripura Rahasya

in the methods and results, it must be recognised that these

two states are distinct. Such knowledge of the non-dual

Self annihilates ignorance.

The same is further explained. First ascertain the Self to

be real by means of sravana and manana (hearing and reflection);

then contemplate; realisation results and it is nirvikalpa

samadhi. This is the idea: Dhyana is only one; it goes by the

names of savikalpa samadhi and of nirvikalpa samadhi,

according to its stages of development. On resolving to keep

the mind still for a particular duration of time and

continuing on the trail of the resolve without forgetting

it, the period during which the contemplated object

remains uninterrupted, is said to be the duration of dhyana.

If by long practice the contemplated object remains steady

for the intended period it is savikalpa samadhi (moded

samadhi). If again by repeated practice of the same the

mind remains in unbroken contemplation even without

the initial resolve and its continued memory, it is said to

be nirvikalpa or unmoded samadhi. The following

explanation is found in the book Paramananda:

“Contemplation with a series of breaks is dhyana; the

same without break is savikalpa samadhi; stillness of mind

without contemplation and break is nirvikalpa samadhi.

Dhyana maturing and ending in nirvikalpa samadhi, the

inmost Self is realised. On breaking away from it, to

remember the experience of the inmost Self and to recall

to mind the description of the Supreme Being in the holy

texts and then to identify the one with the other, forms

recognition (prathyabhijna jnana).”

Appendix I 277

Q.: For such recognition, recollection is a necessary

ingredient. Recollection is of the mental impression

already formed; impression can be produced only in moded

knowledge and not in the unmoded state of nirvikalpa

samadhi, of one uniform unmoded Light of Consciousness.

A.: You are right. Unmoded light simply illumines objects

like a pot, etc.; it cannot produce any impression on the mind

to be reproduced later on. Otherwise a wayfarer will be able

to remember all that he saw on the way; but it is not so.

Only the moded knowledge such as “this is a pot, this is

a piece of cloth” is later recollected. Hence, whatever subtle

modes appeared in the unmoded state (e.g., here is a man;

here is Devadatta) are alone later recollected. By way of

explanation some say that the end of the nirvikalpa state

is followed by a moment of savikalpa and this helps the

formation of impressions to be recollected later.

Others: Since the pure inmost Self cannot form the

object of experience even in savikalpa samadhi, they say that

recollection is of the experience of the samadhi itself. (Because

the savikalpa samadhi is of the nature of a resolve and cannot

have the Pure Self for its object) It cannot be maintained that

in savikalpa samadhi the Pure Self forms the object of

experience. But how can the recollection arise directly from

nirvikalpa samadhi? There is no rule that savikalpa alone

should give rise to later recollection. Vikalpa means appearance

of differentiation. A wayfarer takes in very subtle impressions

of things seen on the way and recollects some of them. This

alone can explain the recollection of deep sleep after waking

from it. To the objection that recollection cannot arise from

278 Tripura Rahasya

nirvikalpa samadhi, the reply is: In any knowledge whichever

factor is clearly seen, the same will later be recollected along

with that knowledge. In recollecting a panorama all objects

in it are not clearly seen. But as it is said in Pratyabhijna

Sastra, “According to taste and according to desire” the

recollection is limited to them. In this way all differentiation

is solely a mental mode. Yet pandits think in different ways.

Therefore some say that there cannot be a recollection of

nirvikalpa samadhi. For details refer to Pratyabhijna Sastra

and its commentaries.

Chapter XIX: Characteristic of Samadhi

After realising the Self as unmoded Consciousness in

nirvikalpa samadhi, Self-realised beings keep on recollecting

it deliberately; this results in withdrawal by them in perfect

repose; this is said by the wise to be their samadhi. This is the

secret of vijnana: The hatha yogis who have not realised the

Self by sravana, etc., fall into two groups. One of them is

accomplished in the eightfold-yoga of Patanjali; the other

after gradually finishing the stage of pranayama (control of

breath), practises it more and more so that the kundalini is

aroused to go up and open the sushumna nadi. The former,

before entering samadhi, resolves to avoid all thought of the

non-self, succeeds gradually in avoiding extraneous thoughts,

then contemplates the absence of all thoughts and then,

released from contemplation as well, he is left as a residual

being. The other, with great effort makes the vital air

enter the sushumna; owing to the effort there is fatigue.

However, having entered the sushumna the fatigue vanAppendix

I 279

ishes; he feels refreshed like a man relieved of a heavy

burden. Then his mind remains as if stupefied.

Both these classes of sadhakas experience Bliss like that

of deep sleep in their own time.

As for the jnana yogis who have realised the unmoded

knowledge — the Self by sravana, etc. — even before attaining

samadhi the veil of ignorance is removed and the

unmoded Knowledge-Self is found always scintillating as the

various objects, like reflections in a mirror. Not only this,

but also before samadhi, the modes of mind vanish, leaving

the residual mind as the witness of the disappearance of

the objects, and he remains as unmoded knowledge only.

The hatha yogis’ experience is not this. Only to the jnana

yogis does ajnana (ignorance) vanish altogether in samadhi

along with its veiling and projecting or confusing powers,

whereas for the hatha yogi, although the projecting power

vanishes, the other power continues to veil the Self. To

the jnana yogi the veiling aspect is done away with in the

process of contemplation of itself, leaving nothing of it in

the culminating state of samadhi.

Q.: What is then the difference between deep sleep

and the samadhi of a hatha yogi?

A.: In his deep sleep the Self remains hidden by the

massive ignorance of darkness, like the sun behind very heavy

dark clouds; in the samadhi state, the Self, though revealed

by the sattvic mind, will not yet be clear, though it will be

like the sun behind thin white clouds.

In the case of the Jnani, his mind becomes sattvic ‘in

toto’, and thus dispels the veiling of ignorance, so that the

280 Tripura Rahasya

Self shines perfectly clear like the sun in a clear sky. The

Self-realised know this to be the right Realisation of the

Self. Jnana samadhi is thus the true samadhi (it means that

in spite of the sattvic mind developed by the hatha yogis,

their avarana (veiling) remains, without being dispelled.)

Chapter XXII: The Prarabdha of the Jnanis

The pleasures and pains of the individual are inferred

to be the results of an invisible cause, i.e., the past karma.

Since it is noticed that Jnanis also live like others, it is said

that prarabdha is not undone by one’s jnana. This holds

good for the lowest order of Jnanis only, for they are seen

to react to the environment; it does not apply to the

higher orders. The feeling of happiness affecting the mind

of the individual can be the effect of karma. The middle

and the highest classes of Jnanis are not subject to

fluctuations of mind. You cannot dispute this point because

such fluctuations are completely absent in samadhi. On

arising from samadhi, all the non-self (i.e., the jagat) shines

only as Pure Knowledge (i.e., the Self ), just as the images

are not distinct from the mirror reflecting them; happiness,

etc., thus becoming one with the Self cannot then be felt

as ‘my happiness’, etc. It follows that the Self itself cannot

be said to be ‘effects’ and no corresponding karma can be

postulated. Q.: Though his personal pleasures and pains

are not there, yet he sees others enjoy pleasures and suffer

pains; his reaction must be due to prarabdha.

A.: No. Others’ pleasures and pains are not identified

as ‘mine’. But they are perceived as one perceives a pot;

Appendix I 281

they cannot be the effects of prarabdha. Since there is no

pleasure or pain to be called ‘effects’ for him, the Jnani

cannot be said to have residual karma.

As for the lowest order of Jnani, when he engages

himself in the daily routine of life, he is likely to forget

that all is Self and take himself to be the enjoyer. Since

pleasure and pain seem to be ‘effects’ to him, he is certainly

experiencing the fruits of his past karma. Some say that

such knowledge that cannot stand the stress of daily life

cannot have a lasting value; others say otherwise.

Simultaneously with the rise of Supreme Knowledge,

the veiling power of ignorance is at an end. Only the

projecting power is operative for some time, owing to

prarabdha. It will quickly exhaust itself and no more

karma will be left to cling to new bodies (by rebirth).

Ignorance being at an end, no fresh karma will

accumulate; for the same reason there will not be any

modes of mind, for the mind vanishes like fire which

has burnt up its fuel; hence no fresh bodies will attach to

him. Therefore the Pure Being is left over and thus

liberation is inevitable. It is only too true that lapses

from Knowledge do not constitute Knowledge in

perfection. Hence the sastras distinguish the Jnani from

a Jivanmukta, i.e., one liberated while alive.

Q.: According to the dictum that a man will be reborn

according to his last thought, the Jnani of the lowest order

will also be reborn because his prarabdha is not completely

ended. Recollection of the non-self (viparita smarana) must

lead to rebirth.

A.: No. Recollection of the non-self is unavoidable to

the higher order of Jivanmuktas also. The dictum you cited

does not apply to a Jnani of any sort. Simultaneous with

the rise of Knowledge there is complete loss of ignorance;

therefore pleasures and pains no longer constitute ‘effects’

of karma. They are only transitory phenomena. Prarabdha

is conjectured simply to explain this phenomenon, but

prarabdha no longer remains for a Jnani of any order and

no recollection of non-self will arise at the last moment of

his life.

Therefore the difference between a mere Jnani and a

Jivanmukta lies in their reaction to the pains and pleasures

of life. It is said that since liberation is simultaneous with

the rise of Knowledge, it is immaterial when and how the

Jnani dies, either near holy places or in strange homes or

other places, or taken unawares by death. If he knows

perfectly even once the supreme state of Siva by means of

reflection or by sastras or by Guru’s grace, he is a Selfrealised

man, and nothing more remains for him to do.

Bliss of the Self

Cease thinking of the non-self; then blank prevails;

the knower or the witness of this is pure knowledge

without any modes; such is the Supreme Knowledge (Para

Samvit). This is full of Bliss and therefore the highest goal

(purushartha). This state is one of solid Bliss. The reason

is: Misery is the result of upadhi (limiting adjunct), which

is totally absent in the Self. This samvit is the condensation

of the sum total of bliss, consequent on all the forms of

Appendix I 283

enjoyment by all living beings put together. For samvit is

desired by one and all living beings.

Q.: Is it not pleasure from objects that is thus desired?

How can it take the form of the enjoyer?

A.: Since it is desired by all, the Self must be of the nature

of Bliss. Otherwise it will not be desired by all equally.

Q.: If it be the Self alone that is desired by all, how can

the desires be various, e.g., for the body, wealth, woman, etc.?

A.: The desire is not really for objects since it is for

one’s own sake. Hence those desirous of heaven, etc.,

undergo fasts, etc., and willingly leave their bodies, etc.

So the Self is never that which is not desired. Therefore it

must be Bliss itself.

Q.: Pleasure is obvious in the enjoyment of objects,

whereas the other bliss cannot be proved to be so; therefore

the Self cannot be admitted to be Bliss.

A.: The agamas (holy texts) declare that all sensual

pleasures are but fractions of the Bliss of the Self. This

means that just as ether is not itself visible, yet it is known

to yield space or room for a pot, etc., and thus seems

divisible by other adjuncts, such as actions etc. So also

Chit (Consciousness) though not visible, yet appears

divided by objects seeming to be the source of sensual

pleasures (which in reality are only fractions of the Bliss of

the Self ).

Q.: Your statements prove only the desire for pleasure

by the self, and not itself being bliss.

A.: Only the natural bliss of the Self prevails at the

instant of relief of one’s burden and in deep sleep. This

284 Tripura Rahasya

means: As soon as one is relieved of one’s heavy load, one

surely feels refreshed; this cannot be denied; but here there

are no objects to give pleasure, and how could it be felt

unless it is from within, i.e., from the Self?

Q.: It is due to the strain of load being removed.

A.: Removal is negative; how can a negation yield a

positive result such as pleasure? It must therefore be admitted

to be of the Self.

Q.: Relief from strain amounts to relief from pain. And

this seems to be the source of pleasure.

A.: But in deep sleep there is no strain to be removed

and yet there is the bliss of sleep. This cannot be denied

because there is the recollection of the bliss of sleep after

waking from it. This bliss cannot but be of the Self.

Q.: There is no such bliss of deep sleep.

A.: Why then do all beings desire to sleep and also

prepare for it?

Q.: If the Self be bliss, why is it not always apparent?

A.: Although there is noise constantly produced within

the body, it is not usually heard. But if you plug your ears to

prevent the intrusion of external noises, the noise is distinctly

heard from within. Similarly with the bliss of Self. It is at

present obstructed by the pains generated by the fire of desires

and other latencies. These latencies lie dormant in their

sources at the time of deep sleep and then the bliss of the

Self becomes apparent like the internal sound on plugging

the ears. While bearing the load the pain caused by it overpowers

the common misery of current vasanas and thus

predominates for the time being. As soon as the load is

thrown down, the pain relating to it disappears and in

Appendix I 285

the short interval before the rise of the current vasanas,

the bliss of Self is felt. Similarly with the other sensual

pleasures. Innumerable vasanas always remain in the heart,

pricking like thorns all the while. With the rise of a desire

for an object the force of it overpowers the other vasanas

which await their turn. When the desired object is attained,

the immediate pain of its desire is at an end; in the short

interval before the other vasanas manifest, the bliss of Self

prevails. Hence it is said that what all always desire, is

only the Bliss of the Self.

Q.: How then do all not understand that the soughtfor

pleasures are really only the Self?

A.: Owing to their ignorance of the fact that only

the bliss of the Self manifests as the pleasure of sensual

enjoyments, their attention being on the objects which

are transitory, they believe that as the enjoyments are

transitory, their bliss also is coeval with them.

APPENDIX II

Siddha Gita from Yoga Vasishta

Humble salutations to the Great Masters of all Ages!

Sri: Salutations to that Reality which inheres as the Self

in all, from which all the creations are projected, in which

they have their being and into which they are finally dissolved!

Salutations to that Intelligence which inheres as the Self in

all, from which the knower, knowledge and the known, the

seer, sight and the seen, the doer, cause and deed, are manifested!

Salutations to that Supreme Bliss which inheres as

the Self in all, which constitutes the life of all and from

whose unfathomable depths happiness is sprayed as fine

particles in Heaven or on Earth (whereon the sum total

of happiness is not equal to a particle of that unalloyed,

natural Bliss). The Siddhas (invisible and immortal beings

of the noblest order) proclaimed:

1. We adore that One which remains unfalteringly

fixed, steady and eternal, which will not therefore admit of

recurring births and deaths nor undergo modifications as

this and that, and which by unerring contemplation is

realised as one’s own Self, from which certainly proceeds

the chain of links of successive particles of happiness,

seemingly derived from and wrongly associated with

enjoyments, which are in their turn mere phenomena (viz.,

the ego and the world, or subject and object), reflected as

images on the non-dual, unique and abstract consciousness,

Appendix II 287

because they are found on rightly discriminating investigation

to merge into the Absolute Self.

Some other Siddhas bring it nearer home as follows:

2. We adore that which is realised as the Self, originating

and yet remaining as the untainted witness of the

birth of the ego, its thoughts and the world around, by

transcending the cogniser, cognition and the cognised

objects, pertaining to the wakeful and dream states, as

well as the ignorance pertaining to dreamless slumber and

made up of the latent tendencies of the mind.

Some other Siddhas:

3. We adore That which is realised as the Light

inhering as the Self and illumining all, abiding always as

the Consciousness in the believer and the nonbeliever

alike — before creation and after dissolution of the

cosmos, and in between them too — and lying hidden

even in the successive links, ceaselessly formulated as

the original sources but rendered abortive by one

conscious Self objectifying another in itself.

[Note: Sloka 2 says the Reality is realised after eliminating

all the triads. Some deny the same. There must be

some conscious self to deny it. Again, if the original cause

of creation be imagined to be as transient as the present

creation, the enduring reality beyond the successive links

cannot be denied. Or again, if a material cause be surmised,

the efficient cause cannot be overlooked. The latter is

imagined by the self. The Self must be the ultimate reality.]

4. We adore the Self as That in which all the worlds

are fixed, of which they are, from which they emerge, for

288 Tripura Rahasya

which they exist, by which all these are projected and for

which they are in their being.

5. We adore the Self which shines formless as unbroken

‘I-I’ consciousness which transcends the ego, yet comprising

all the Egos and entire knowledge; these after all make up

the whole cosmos.

6. Those who, ignoring the Lord of the Heart, go about

seeking other gods, are like the fool who throws away from

his hand the celestial gem (chintamani) which fulfils all the

desires of the possessor, and who then excavates the earth in

search of jewels.

Some Siddhas counsel Dispassion as follows:

7. The Lord of the Heart, who roots out the vigorously

growing creeper, bearing poisonous fruits of desires, is gained

after discarding everything as worthless.

8. That fool who, being aware of the evils of enjoyments,

still runs after them, must not be deemed a man but be put

down for an ass. (The male ass runs after the female, even

though kicked by her.)

9. The serpents under the cover of the senses must

forcibly be laid, as often as they raise their hoods and hiss for

prey, like mountains mercilessly hit by the thunderbolt of

Indra (the God of rain, thunder and lightning).

The other Siddhas hit on the cardinal point as follows:

10. Acquire the bliss of peace by reining in the senses

and stilling the mind. The mind does not, in its womb, hold

seeds of pain as sensual pleasures do, but purges itself of

impurities because it merges in its source as fire does when

not fed with fuel. On the mind becoming still and disapAppendix

II 289

pearing into the primal source of bliss, there arises the

Supreme Peace which holds out till final emancipation.

Refutation of the Doctrine of Void

The followers of this school of thought declare that

illusion can and does arise even in the absence of any

background (niradhishtana). In the case of a piece of shell

appearing as silver, they say that the knowledge of silver is

groundless (i.e., void); similarly with the knowledge of the

Self. Their position is briefly put as follows: On the firm

conviction that the jagat is nonexistent, by a prolonged

contemplation on the void, the thought of jagat completely

vanishing, void prevails and this is liberation.

Now to refute it — denial of the jagat is imperfect

knowledge. Just as a pot is not altogether false, but real as

clay, so also is jagat not altogether false but is real as intelligence.

Therefore to deny the jagat as being nonexistent is

only illusory knowledge. Its nonexistence cannot be established

by any proofs. Because the jagat shines as knowledge

from which the individual who proves the jagat to be real or

unreal, is not distinct; also the jagat though denied yet persists.

Though a pot may be denied, its material clay cannot be so

denied. Similarly though the jagat may be denied, its existence

as knowledge cannot be denied. The same relationship

holds between the jagat and consciousness as between a pot

and clay. However the adherents of the school of void stick

to void and deny all that is perceptible as void. But he is also

contained in the jagat which is denied by him. What is left

of him beyond denial is knowledge; this cannot be denied.

290 Tripura Rahasya

They mean to say that the moded consciousness constitutes

samsara, whereas unmoded consciousness void of all else

including the pramanas (means of valid knowledge) to prove

it, constitutes liberation. But our objection is that the one

who denies the jagat cannot deny himself and the jagat does

not cease to exist simply because one curses it. Our objection

is valid because consciousness subsists unimpaired in the

unmoded state after denying all else to exist.

Q.: (Granting your viewpoint) what is there to be

eliminated and how is non-duality established?

A.: The Vedantists say that the Supreme Sat-Chit

seems to be the asat (false) jagat, like the false reflection in

a mirror; this is anirvachaniya, i.e., inexpressible; nonduality

consists in removing this confusion and so this

jagat is eliminated. But we say — the jagat appears like

the images in a mirror. Just as these images are no other

than the mirror, the jagat is no other than the Sat-Chit.

Q.: If so, what remains to be eliminated?

A.: The sense of duality.

Q.: Is this duality included in jagat? Or is it exclusive

of it? If the former, it is real as jagat and cannot be negated;

if the latter, it leads to anirvachaniya.

A.: It is included in jagat.

Q.: How then is it eliminated?

A.: Listen! Duality is to believe that the illuminant

and the illumined are different from each other. Since

duality is nothing but illusion, denial of it puts an end to

the illusion and thus to itself. Hence it was said, “As a

matter of fact, unity is not different from diversity. One

reality alone shines forth as both”.

Appendix II 291

Now let me turn round and question the Vedantists

— Q.: Is negation indescribable or real? If the former,

jagat cannot be negated; if the latter, duality results. Nor

can you maintain that negation of the phenomenon

resolves itself as the substratum so that the negation of

jagat results in its substratum, Brahman. Of course to

admit the non-self-looking negation is simply included

in the Self and the whole jagat is nothing but the Self, is

not opposed to our view. But negation is negative in

character and it cannot be said to resolve itself into its

substratum — the Reality. The jagat can be established to

exist according to the dictum — the non-self is also the

Self. The point is only to gain purushartha by whatever

means — negation or any other. It is useless to engage in

disputes. ‘The mumukshu’ (one desirous of Liberation) and

the ‘sadhakas’ (those on the path to Liberation) are warned

not to enter into controversies with other systems or religions.

The jagat being of consciousness, like the images in a

mirror not being different from a mirror, it is real. Simply

because jagat is declared to be of the nature of consciousness,

it should not be taken that jagat is consciousness itself. Such

assumption will be the equivalent to saying that avidya ‘is’,

because it is said to be inexpressible. Just as you cannot raise

the question if avidya is, in order to be inexpressible, so also

the question cannot arise if jagat is, in order to be indistinct

from Consciousness. In this manner to know that all is

sattamatra (Self alone) is perfect Vijnana.

Sri Ramanarpanamastu

Om Tat Sat

                                                        

(End.) 

(My humble salutations H H   Bhagawan Sri Ramana Maharshi and Humble salutations H H to  Swami Sri Ramananda Saraswathi ji   for the collection)