The Atma Jyoti Blog

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

This is Part 5 of a serialized commentary on “A Method Of Enlightening A Disciple” from Shankara’s Upadeshasahasri–A Thousand Teachings

8) “It [the Self] is that which transcends hunger and thirst, grief, delusion, old age and death. Having realized this Self, brahmins give up the desire for sons, the desire for wealth and the desire for the worlds and lead the life of religious mendicants. That which is the desire for sons is the desire for wealth and that which is the desire for wealth is the desire for the worlds; for both these are but desires.

“Therefore a brahmin, after he is done with scholarship, should try to live on that strength which comes of scholarship. After he is done with that strength and scholarship, he becomes meditative and after he is done with both meditativeness and non-meditativeness, he becomes a knower of Brahman.

“How does the knower of Brahman behave? Howsoever he may behave, he is such indeed.

“Everything else but this is perishable.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3:5:1)

It [the Self] is that which transcends hunger and thirst, grief, delusion, old age and death. The Self is not just devoid of hunger, etc., but it exists utterly beyond such things which are impossible to it. The nature of the Self precludes such things.

Having realized this Self, brahmins give up the desire for sons, the desire for wealth and the desire for the worlds and lead the life of religious mendicants. That which is the desire for sons is the desire for wealth and that which is the desire for wealth is the desire for the worlds; for both these are but desires. When we realize that the Self is transcendent, beyond all the mirages we have been identifying with and either seeking or avoiding, we turn from them as the vain illusions they are. Seeking Brahman, we become the true Brahmins–the knowers of Brahman.

The word translated “religious mendicant” is not sannyasi or yati–both exclusively referring to official monastics–but bhikshacharyam: one who lives on food-alms (bhiksha). I have no doubt that the upanishad includes sadhus in this verse, but not exclusively. It seems to me there is a much deeper meaning here. The awakened one no longer seeks the foolish and pain-giving objects so prized by the world, and so no longer desires to “make” anything of himself or his life. Rather, he wishes to be only what he eternally is. This is why one of the Venerable Master Seung Sung’s teachings is: Make Nothing. This is profound and worthy of our pondering.

Instead of “making a life” and all that entails, the wise live seeking for nothing earthly, but only awaiting and living on the “bhiksha” that life brings to them as a consequence of their karma. They reap, but sow no more. What comes to them spontaneously, as a matter of course, is the “alms” the universe gives them to evolve through. What a blessed and free life!

Therefore a brahmin, after he is done with scholarship, should try to live on that strength which comes of scholarship. After he is done with that strength and scholarship, he becomes meditative and after he is done with both meditativeness and non-meditativeness, he becomes a knower of Brahman. When we climb a stair we start at the bottom and go to the top. That is hardly news, but the same applies to spiritual life. Egotists and simplistic children in adult bodies are always trying to be at the top instantly. But that is impossible, so the upanishad outlines the stages we should go through if we would really reach the heights of consciousness.

First there must be serious study, and from that will come the spiritual intelligence and resolve to engage in dedicated spiritual practice, particularly meditation. Through meditation he goes beyond even the duality of meditation/non-meditation, reaches the knowledge of Brahman, and attains liberation (moksha).

How does the knower of Brahman behave? Howsoever he may behave, he is such indeed. Everything else but this is perishable. The ego is always seeking ways to avoid real spiritual life, as that will be its dissolution. Philosophizing is a favorite byway, and that includes: “How can we know someone is enlightened?” This produces some maddening and hilarious theories that, as is intended, lead nowhere. For a sensible person asks: “How can I become enlightened?” and lets the rest fend for themselves. In the Gita Krishna describes the interior state of an enlightened person in terms that can be only known to the individual. No one can make a checklist and go around seeing who is and who is not enlightened. Like all spiritual life, it is totally subjective. As Yogananda’s chant says: “He who knows…he knows. None else knows.” And nothing is wrong with that, for our enlightenment never depends on another’s enlightenment. Those who think it does have a very harsh and bitter road to wander, getting nowhere until the mist of their delusion lifts. As we see from the upanishads, a true teacher says: “You are That”–not “I am That.”

There is a really third-rate movie called Blood-Bath In the House of Death starring Vincent Price. It is pretty awful, but has some funny moments. At one point the eager little groupie-Satanists are preparing for a ritual at which Satan, “the Master,” will appear. They ask their teacher, Vincent Price: “How will we know him?” And Price snaps back in disgust: “You’ll know him when you see him, stupid!” That happens to be the straight truth. So the upanishad says that an enlightened person acts like he does. He is enlightened and that is that. Everything else but that state–including deeds and words of any kind–is perishable and of no reality at all.

Read previous installments of A Catechism of Enlightenment.