Ātma-anātma-viveka

Why does it say that in this human life alone one can relief from samsāra? Can other lives in other loka (spheres of experience like brahmaloka) gain moksa? This is explained in the next mantra.

yathādarśe tathātmani yathā svapne tathā pitṛloke |

yathāpsu parīva dadṛśe tathā gandharvaloke chāyātapayoriva brahmaloke ||2-3-5||

(One sees ātmā as follows:) As in a mirror, so in the mind; as in a dream, so in the pitṛloka; as in water, so in gandharvaloka; as in light and shade, so in the brahmaloka.

Yamarāja explains whether this knowledge can be acquired in any loka (sphere of experience) other than manuṣya-loka (human birth on the earth). He accepts that self-knowledge can be acquired in the other loka as well. Even so, he says that the knowledge acquired in manuṣya-loka is clearer than knowledge gained in the other loka. Therefore, the human birth is most conducive for self-knowledge. yathādarśe tathātmani - as in a mirror, so in the mind; self-knowledge gained with the human intellect (which is devoid of impurity) is crystal clear, like seeing one’s face in a clear mirror.

Self knowledge can also be acquired in pitṛloka, but it will not be as clear. yathā svapne tathā pitṛloke - as in a dream, so in the pitṛloka; self-knowledge is like a dream in the pitṛloka, because everything happens so quickly and unclearly. Since dreams are based on the impressions gathered from the waking state, thus the memory is unclear and vague. Another difficulty for self-knowledge to be clear in pitṛloka, is due to jīva’s attachment to the world.

It is also possible to acquire self-knowledge in gandharvaloka, the world of arts, dance, music, and enjoyment. yathāpsu parīva dadṛśe tathā gandharvaloke - here too, the acquired knowledge will be vague like seeing one’s face in water. It is not as clear as in a mirror. If the water is disturbed by the wind, reflection will be disturbed as well. The disturbance here is in the form of enjoyment. Finally, the knowledge acquired in brahmaloka is very clear; chāyātapayoriva brahmaloke - self-knowledge is as distinct as darkness and light.

Of these four loka, pitṛloka and gandharvaloka can be ruled out because the knowledge acquired will be unclear. Although the knowledge is crystal clear in brahmaloka, it may not be a good option. This is because it is extremely difficult to attain brahmaloka, which requires intense karma and upāsanā throughout the life and even at the time of death. Since human birth is a mixture of happiness and sorrow, thus one is able to see the futility of experience and develop vairagya. Therefore human birth is the best option for self-knowledge. Do not postpone; make full use of this birth. This is the essence of this verse.

How do I go about to knowing the truth of myself?

indriyāṇām pṛthagbhāvam udayāstamayau ca yat |

pṛthagutpadyamānānām matvā dhīro na śocati  ||2-3-6||

Having known the distinct nature of the sense organs which are created separately and (knowing their) rise and fall, the discriminative one does not grieve.

Ātma-anātma-viveka is highlighted in this verse. First, we need to discriminate between ātmā and anātma; then the knowledge of “aham brahmāsmi” is possible. Our problem starts by mixing ātmā and anātma together. This cognitive separation needs to begin with this body, since I usually take this as me (aham), not other anātmā which exists outside this body. Thus, I should learn to withdraw from identification starting with the senses where the sentiency is aware. The senses are instruments for me to use in transactions, just like how I use a pair of eyeglasses, but they are not me. If I take off my glasses, I am unable to see objects, but I continue to exist. The transactions may end, but the transactor continues to exist. We know that body is an instrument because in the waking state, I use it, but in the deep sleep state, I disown it. Whatever which is not inherent to me, is not me. This vision has to be recognised again and again.

indriyāṇām pṛthagbhāvam - the nature of organs is distinct from ātmā. pṛthagutpadyamānānām - they are created separately from their respective causes for the purpose of grasping their respective objects. The sattvic aspect of space creates organ of hearing, air creates organ of touch, fire creates organ of sight, water creates organ of taste, and earth creates organ of smell. They have their own causes, attributes, and functions; therefore, they are distinct from ātmā which is causeless, attribute-less, and not endowed with specific function. udayāstamayau ca yat - and the rising and setting of the organs with regards to the waking and deep sleep states also do not belong to ātmā. My senses come and go, but I am ever present as the witness. Thus the instruments are not my intrinsic nature. They are separately born and gone. When a person goes blind, the eyes are gone, but he still exists. Once this is understood, one loses the identification with them. Only when dis-identification with anātmā is there; then identification with ātmā is possible.

Such a discriminative person of sharp intellect never again grieves in life - matvā dhīro na śocati. Grief arises from identification with the anātmā body-mind-sense-complex. The mortality of anātmā becomes my mortality. The thought that I am mortal is a source of discomfort, because I can never accept that I am mortal, since my nature is immortal. I cannot accept anything that is against my nature. The struggle with mortality will disappear only when I drop the identification with the mortal body. The problem is not with the mortality of the body, as it is natural, but it is with the thought that I am mortal. Any grief is based on my confusion between ātmā and anātmā. Thus the problem of samsāra is not centred in the world but is centred on me (my vision); therefore this self is not to be searched outside.