Chapter 18 - Verse 50

The perfection he has already attained consists in the body and the senses being prepared for devotion to knowledge as a result of the Grace of the Lord worshipped through his duty. Reference to this (perfection) serves as a prelude to what follows.—What is that perfection to which that reference forms a prelude?—It is the process of jnana-nishtha, or devotion to knowledge, by which he attains Brahman, the Supreme Self. That process, the way to the attainment of jnana-nishtha, do thou understand with certainty from my speech.—Is it to be described at length?—No, says the Lord; it will be described only in brief.

Absolute perfection is the consummation of Self-knowledge.

What the attainment of Brahman—referred to in the words “how he reaches Brahman,”—is, the Lord proceeds to specify in the words “that supreme consummation of knowledge.” Consummation (nishtha) means perfection, the final or highest stage.

* (Question) :—Consummation of what?

The following discussion in the form of questions and answers is intended to show that the consummation of knowledge is a well-defined end as spoken of here. It is the consummation of Brahma-jnana (knowledge of Brahman). Brahma-jnana is not different from Self-knowledge, and the nature of the Self is defined here in ii. 20 and in the Upanishads: and it can also be ascertained by reasoning upon scriptural texts, which describe him as “devoid of attachment and immutable”.—A.

(Answer) :—Of Brahma-jñāna or knowledge of Brahman.

(Question) :—Of what nature is the consummation of Brahma-jñāna?

(Answer) :—Of the same nature as Atmajnana or Self-knowledge.

(Question) :—Of what nature is the Self-knowledge?

(Answer) :—Of the same nature as the Self.

(Question) :—Of what nature is the Self?

(Answer) :—Of the nature described by the Lord and in the passages of the Upaniṣads, and (ascertainable) by nyaya or reasoning (upon the scriptural texts).

Is Self-knowledge possible at all?

(Objection) :—Knowledge or cognition (jnana) is of the form of its object. But it is nowhere admitted that the Self is an object of cognition or has a form.

(Answer) :—The Self has a form, as taught in the scriptural passages, ‘In colour like the sun’ (Sve. Up. 3-8); ‘Luminous in form’ (Chha. Up. 3-14-2); ‘Self-luminous’ (Bri. Up. 4-3-9).

(Objection) :—No; those passages are intended to remove the idea that the Self is of the nature of darkness (Tamas).—When the Self is said to be neither of the form of a substance nor of an attribute, it would follow that the Self is of the nature of darkness : and the preventing of this idea is the aim of the descriptions such as ‘In colour like the sun.’ Form is specifically denied, the Self being described as ‘formless’ (Katha-Up. 3-15). Neither is the Self an object of cognition, as taught in passages like the following : “His form stands not in (our) ken, nor can any one see Him with the eye” (Sve. Up. 4-20); “Without sound and touch” (Katha-Up. 3-15). Wherefore it is wrong to speak of a cognition of the form of the Self.

Such being the case, how can there be a cognition of the Self? Indeed, all cognition, whatever be its object, is of the form of that object. And it has been said that the Self is formless. If both the Self and the cognition thereof be formless, how is the constant meditation of Self-knowledge or the consummation thereof to be attained?

The Self reveals Himself in Pure Reason.

(Answer) :—Do not think so : for it can be shown that the Self is extremely pure, extremely clear, and extremely subtle. And Buddhi (reason) being as pure, etc., as the Self, it can put on the semblance of that aspect of the Self which is manifested as consciousness. Manas puts on a semblance of Buddhi, the sense-organs put on a semblance of Manas, and the physical body again puts on a semblance of the sense-organs. Wherefore common people look upon the mere physical body as the Self. And the Lokayatikas (materialists) who argue that consciousness is a property of the physical body declare that the Puruṣa or Soul is identical with the physical body endued with consciousness. Similarly, others again argue that consciousness is a property of the senses; others again argue that consciousness is a property of Buddhi. There are a few who hold that there is something within even beyond the Buddhi, viz., the Avyakta (the Unmanifested) also called the Avyākṛta (the Undifferentiated), in the form of Avidyā; and they say that the Avyākṛta is the Self.* Everywhere, from Buddhi down to the physical body, the cause of illusory indentification of each with the Self is its wearnig a semblance of the consciousness of the Self; and it is therefore unnecessary to impart directly a knowledge of the Self.—What then is necessary?—What is necessary is the mere elimination of the not-Self associated with the Self,— names, forms and the like; but it is unnecessary to try and teach what the consciousness of the Self is like, inasmuch as it is invariably comprehended in association with all objects of perception which are set up by avidya. Accordingly, the Vijnanavadins, the Buddhistic Idealists, hold that there is nothing real except ideas, and that these ideas require no external evidence (to prove their existence), inasmuch as it is admitted that they are self-cognized. Therefore we haveonly to eliminate what is falsely ascribed to Brahman by avidya; we have to make no more effort to acquire a knowledge of Brahman as He is quite self-evident. Though thus quite self-evident, easily knowable, quite near, and forming the very Self, Brahman appears—to the unenlightened, to those whose reason (Buddhi) is carried away by the differentiated phenomena of names and forms created by avidya—as unknown, difficult to know, very remote, as though He were a separate thing. But to those whose reason (Buddhi) has turned away from external phenomena, who have secured the grace of the Guru and attained the serenity of the self (manas), there is nothing else so blissful, so well-known, so easily knowable, and quite so near as Brahman. Accordingly, the knowledge of Brahman is said to be immediately comprehended and unopposed to dharma (ix. 2.)

Those who study and contemplate upon the Cause of the universe regard the Antaryamin, the Avyakrita endued with consciousness, as the Self.—A.

Some conceited philosophers hold that reason (Buddhi) cannot grasp the Self, as He is formless, and that therefore the Devotion of Right Knowledge is impossible of attainment.

True, it is unattainable to those who have not been properly initiated into the traditional knowledge by the Gurus (the Great Ones), who have not learned and studied the (teachings of the) Vedānta, whose intellect is quite engrossed in the external objects of senses, and who have not been trained in the right sources of knowledge. But, for those who are differently situated, (i.e., who have been duly initiated etc.,) it is quite impossible to believe in the reality of the dual—the perceiver and the perceived—of our external perception, because they perceive no reality other than the consciousness of the Self. And we have shewn in the preceding sections that this—not the reverse—is the truth, and the Lord also has declared the same in ii. 69. Wherefore it is only a cessation of the perception of the differentiated forms of the external world that can lead to a firm grasp of the real nature of the Self. For, the Self is not a thing unknown to anybody at any time, is not a thing to be reached or got rid of or acquired. If the Self be quite unknown, all undertakings intended for the benefit of oneself would have no meaning. It is not, indeed, possible to imagine that they are for the benefit of the physical body or the like which has no consciousness; nor is it possible to imagine that pleasure is for pleasure’s sake and pain is for pains’s sake. It is, moreover, the Self-knowledge which is the aim of all endeavour.* Wherefore, just as there is no need for an external evidence by which to know one’s own body, so there is no need for an external evidence by which to know the Self who is even nearer than the body. Thus it is clear that, to those who can discriminate, the Atma-jnana-nishtha (devotion to Self-knowledge) is easy of attainment.

All action enjoined in the sruti is intended only as a means to Sel knowledge. Vide, Vedanta-Sutras III. iv. 26-27—A.

Cognition and the Cogniser are self-revealed.

Those also who had that cognition (jnana) is formless and is not known by immediate perception must admit that, since an object of knowledge is apprehended through cognition, cognition is quite as immediately known as pleasure or the like.

Moreover, it cannot be maintained that cognition is a thing which one seeks to know.—If cognition were unknown, it would be a thing which has to be sought after just as an object of cognition is sought after. Just as, for example, a man seeks to reach by cognition the cognisable object such as a pot, so also would he have to seek to reach cognition by means of another cognition. But the fact is otherwise. Wherefore cognition is self-revealed, and therefore, also, is the cogniser self-revealed.

Therefore it is not for the knowledge (of Brahman or the Self) that any effort* is needed; it is needed only to prevent us from regarding the not-Self as the Self. Therefore, Devotion to Knowledge (jnana-nishtha) is easily attainable.

With a view to bring into existence something that does not already exist by means of an act enjoined in the Sruti.—A.

The Path to Absolute Perfection.

How is this consummation of knowledge † to be attained? Listen :

A continuous current of the knowledge of Brahman; the reason merging in Brahman through the elimination of all alien attributes ascribed to Him.—A.