ESSAYS

GREATNESS OF GAYATHRI

Everyone lives with some hope or the other. Even he who does not care for sense objects has great affinity for the Atma. The longing, "I must live long and be happy" is constantly present. That is why Neelakanta Dikshitar says:

"Numerous wives have been enjoyed. Sons and grandsons have been born. A century of years have lapsed. Yet, is the mind prepared for death? Answer truthfully". (It is not.)

The desires that stem in the minds of people can be classified under two heads. These are longing for Shreyas (highest good) and attachment to Preyas (pleasure). Men are bound by ties of affection for one of these. The Katha Upanishad declares:

"Shreyas indeed is distinct and so is Preyas. Serving different purposes, they bind men".

Common folk have desire for material objects and hence are tied down by mundane desires. Intellectuals, though they are endowed with knowledge of tradition and have the benefit of the good advices of a teacher, have longing for material pleasures and also pine for the enjoyment of heaven. As such they are shackled by attachments of two types. Since both these classes of men concern themselves with Preyas, they have to be termed Samsaris or worldly ones. Describing them our ancients have said:

"Common folk, who are extremely pitiable, are deluded with regard to food, grain, wealth and land. Even those of clear intellect are deceived by successive longing for this world, space, heaven and the world of Brahma, which are all transient".

We see some who are apparently bereft of all desires. They are termed Sanyasis. On beholding them it seems that the statement, "All have some longing or the other", is false. Describing the 'desireless' Sanyasis, the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad declares:

"Thinking, 'What shall have we, who have attained the Atma Loka, got to achieve by progeny', those who have realised the Atma do not long for offspring. Having abandoned the desires for progeny, wealth and the world, they live as ascetics". From this description too it appears clear that Sanyasis have no attachments.

While superficially this is the case, let us probe the issue with keener insight. Why do ascetics observe difficult vows? The vows must have some utility. The above cited passage shows that their strength lies in the 'Atma Loka'. Hence it is beyond doubt that they have a longing to behold the Self. That very Shruti declares:

"Desirous of this very Atma, Sanyasis abandon their homes". In the light of all this we can conclude that every man lives on with some hope or the other.

To achieve what he wishes, man employs his body, speech and mind. The course of action required to fulfil a worldly longing must be determined by the application of the worldly tests of Anvaya (concordance) and Vyatireka (discordance).

(The origination of an effect when a cause is present constitutes Anvaya. An illustration of this is the genesis of the effect, pot, when its cause, mud, is present. The non-origination of an effect in the absence of the cause is Vyatireka. The non-production of the effect, pot, in the absence of the cause, mud, serves as an example. When the tests of Anvaya and Vyatireka are dissatisfied, two objects cannot be related as cause and effect. There is no concordance and discordance between a thread and a pot and so a thread cannot constitute the cause of a pot. Worldly longings are fulfilled when the corresponding material object is procured. The pair of tests must be satisfied when applied to the consummation of a wish and the object selected for the purpose.)

Unfortunately the worldly tests of concordance and discordance are insufficient to determine ways of satiating all our wishes. They are inapplicable with regard to heaven and the Atma.

(How can these tests be applied, for we cannot comprehend heaven and the Atma by means of our sense organs?)

The Vedas have emerged from Ishwara to submerge man in an ocean of bliss. By taking recourse to the Upasanas (contemplation) and knowledge expounded therein we can consummate all our desires.

"People comprehend by means of the Veda that method which can be determined neither by sense perception nor by inference. That is why the Veda gets its status of being the Veda". That very Veda which prescribes the performance of the Darsha and Poornamasa Yagas for one who is desirous of heaven, suitable rites for the fulfilment of our other longings as also a variety of Yagas and Upasanas also teaches us the Gayathri Mantra which destroys sins, is the means to attain worldly and heavenly ends and is of the essence of contemplation on the Saguna and Nirguna aspects of the Supreme.

CLASSIFICATIONS OF MANTRAS

The meaning of the word Mantra is expounded as:

"A Mantra is that which protects one who contemplates it".

It is commonly said that there are seven crore Maha Mantras. When Maha Mantras themselves number seven crores it is quite impossible to enumerate the total number of Upa Mantras and Bhasha Mantras. Some amongst these Mantras serve to achieve worldly ends, some to attain heaven while yet others are meant for contemplation on the Saguna aspect of Brahman.

Another classification of Mantras is Vedic Mantras and Tantrik Mantras. Vedic Mantras are those which have been taught in the Vedas. The Saura Astakshari is an example. Tantrik Mantras are those expounded by the Tantra texts. Actually every syllable is a Mantra. It is said:

"There is no syllable which is not a Mantra, no root which has no medicinal value and no man who is thoroughly incompetent. Still rare is he who can suitably combine each of these to get the desired effect".

Hence it is not easy to find one who knows the Rishis, Chandas (metre) and Devatas (presiding deities) of the various Mantras. The reason for the non-fructification of our chants of Mantras is solely our ignorance about them.

"There is no inertness in the Devata (who grants the fruits). Dullness is in the man (who performs the prayer)".

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GAYATHRI

Amongst innumerable Mantras, Gayathri Mantra is most famous. The Upanishad proclaims:

"On realising the Supreme, which is the cause and the effect, the knot of the heart (desire) gets untied, all doubts get resolved and one's actions get dissipated".

In the Gita we have:

"Having attained Me, sages do not reattain birth which is the abode of sorrow and is impermanent. They get liberation"

From such utterances we understand that only when a man realises the Atma, the root of transmigratory existence is rent asunder, infinite bliss and freedom from rebirth are obtained and what is to be done is completed.

"I ask you about the entity spoken of in the Upanishads".

This utterance unequivocally declares that the Atma can be known only by taking recourse to Vedanta. To comprehend the import of Vedic utterances, it is essential that one should study the Veda. Only he who has the Yagnopaveetam is competent to master the Veda. The Vedas as also the Smriti texts, which have been authored by sages bearing in mind the dictates of the Vedas, say that such competence arises only along with initiation into the Gayathri Mantra. (Thus he who has been initiated into the Gayathri can study the Veda, comprehend its import and realise the Self.)

Maharishi Gautama has aphorised:

"Prior to the thread ceremony one may conduct oneself, converse and eat as one wishes. One should not, however, chant the Veda"

Manu had declared that a second birth accrues when Gayathri Upadesa is had. He says:

"In the birth that is conferred upon one by a teacher who is a master of the Vedas, one's mother is Savithri (Gayathri) while the preceptor is the father".

That is why Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas are called Dvijas or twice-born ones. The Veda teaches us that Gayathri is the mother of the Shruti by saying:

(Gayathri is the creatrix of Vedic Mantras.)

In the Kasi Khanda of the Puranas we encounter:

(Gayathri is the mother of the Vedas. She is the creatrix of the Brahmin. She is called Gayathri because She protects him who chants (Gayate) Her.)

Declaring the glory of the Gayathri, Manu says:

"A twice-born one is freed from even a great sin, like a snake from its slough, by chanting for a month the Gayathri Mantra, together with the Pranava (Om) and the Vyahrutis (Bhuh, Bhuvah, Suvah), a thousand times a day at a place outside the village (on the banks of a river, in a forest etc.)".

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GAYATHRI MANTRA

All utterances are either poetic or prosaic. The use of regulated syllables constitutes poetry (in Sanskrit). Amongst poetic metres, Gayathri finds a place. In the normal Gayathri metre each quarter contains six syllables. Hence for the four quarters there are a total of twenty four syllables.Katyayana has said that for the Vedic Gayathri metre each quarter has eight syllables and a complete verse has only three quarters. Thus even the Vedic Gayathri has 24 syllables. The Gayathri we commonly chant conforms to this metric regulation. The Veda itself says:

"The Gayathri has three quarters". At this juncture a query can arise. The Veda says:

"Gayathri has 24 syllables".

By this the Veda defines the Gayathri metre and specifies the number of syllables therein. If, however, we count, we are able to locate only 23 syllables. How are we to reconcile our find with the Vedic declaration?

"At the time of Arghyam (offering of sacred water) the term employed is 'Varenyam' (three syllables) while during Japa, it is 'Vareneyam' (four syllables)."

In accordance with this rule, the term 'Varenyam' occurring in the Gayathri Mantra must be assumed to have four syllables. However, it should not be intoned as if it has four syllables. By application of the above we can get the specified number of syllables. But is there any justification? (Yes). With regard to the Saura Astakshari Mantra, the Veda itself says:

"In the term 'Gruni' there are two syllables, three (and not two) in Surya and three in 'Aditya' "

Thus the Veda itself shows how the apparently seven syllabled Saura Astakshari Mantra must be deemed to have eight syllables. Just as the term 'Surya' can be taken to have three syllables, it is justifiable to deem 'Varenyam' as possessed of four syllables.

MEANING OF THE GAYATHRI MANTRA

In the Sandhya Bhashyam, the import of the Gayathri Mantra is given as follows:

—•—

This is the actual Gayathri Mantra.

तत् —Supreme Brahman. From the Gita utterance, "Om, Tat and Sat are the three names of Brahman", it follows that the word Tat connotes Brahman.

सवितुः—of the giver of the fruits of actions or of the creator of the world.

वरेण्यं —desired by those who long for liberation.

भर्गः —the effulgence that destroys ignorance. Brahman and its effulgence are not different. (Though the Atma is bliss it is said) 'the bliss of this Atma' and (in spite of Rahu being the head it is said) 'the head of Rahu'. Such statements are found in the Sastras wherein the teaching is given assuming a difference where none exists. Similar is the case here.

देवस्य —of the nature of illumination. 'Deva' means he who is luminous.

धीमहि — we meditate. "I am the Supreme" — such is the nature of this meditation wherein no differentiation between oneself and the Supreme is recognised.

धियः —activities of the Antahkaranam (Chitta or the storehouse of impressions, Manas or the thinking faculty, Buddhi or the determining faculty and Ahamkara or egoism constitute the Antahkaranam).

यः —he who. That is, the inner dweller.

नः —our

प्रचोदयात् —impels

Thus the import of the Gayathri Mantra is, "We meditate on the ignorance-destroying effulgence, longed for by those desirous of liberation, of that Supreme Brahman, who is the creator of the world (or is the bestower of the fruits of actions), is luminous and impels the activities of our Antahkaranam".

The common meaning of the Gayathri as taught by Agastya is:

"We meditate on the supreme effulgence of the God, Savita, who directs our intellects to the proper course".

NEED FOR KNOWING THE IMPORT

When chanting the Gayathri Mantra one must contemplate on its meaning. The mind must be focussed on the import and must not be allowed to wander. That Japa which is done with a tongue in the mouth, a rosary in hand and with a mind roaming in all the directions is no Japa at all. If we do not know the significance of what we do, then our faith will diminish. Further there will be no mental satisfaction. That is why even in the first part of the book Gayathri Mahima we find:

"Just as a beast of burden does not get benefit of what it carries, a twice born one who is unaware of the import does not obtain the fruit mentioned in the Veda."

The author of the Veda Anga, Niruktam, says:

"He who has studied the Veda but knows not its meaning is merely an inert one with a burden. He who comprehends the import attains total auspiciousness. Purified of sins by his knowledge, he goes to heaven".

Thus has he praised awareness of significance. Even the Veda declares:

"He who performs the Asvamedha Yaga attains certain results. So does one who comprehends the significance of the Yaga".

By saying so the Veda explains the importance of doing an act with due knowledge about it. From all that has been said above it does not mean that Japa done without comprehending the import is useless. The results obtained are less. That is all. This is made clear by the following Mantra of the Chandogya Upanishad:

"That act which is done with awareness of the meaning, faith and contemplation is more potent than an act merely performed".

Elsewhere too the Veda says:

"The Yaga done with understanding is different from that done by deluded people who know not the significance".

Further it says:

"Different indeed is that which is done with awareness from that done without it".

These passages reveal that even an ignorant man does have the competence to perform the prescribed Karmas. The import of the above discussion is that knowledge of the meaning is praiseworthy.

THE METHOD OF PERFORMING MEDITATION

As stated earlier, when performing Japa, the import of the Mantra must be contemplated. Likewise one must meditate, in the beginning itself, on the specified Devata. Though Gayathri, the power of the Supreme, is one alone, depending upon the time of meditation She must be contemplated with different names and forms. In the Parashara Madhaviya we have:

"The self-same Goddess Sandhya is regarded as Gayathri in the morning, Savithri at noon and Sarasvati in the evening".

Our ancients have cited the reason for addressing the same entity by different names.

"He who performs a sacrifice with a Vedic Mantra or teaches it without knowing its Rishi, Chandas and Devata is born in an inert state or goes to hell. Hence these must be known for each Mantra".

"He who knows the Rishi, Chandas, Devata, Viniyogam, Brahmanam, meaning and karma relating to a Mantra...." — beginning thus the Yoga Yajnavalkya eulogises the one who is aware of these.

Though Mantras originate from Ishwara, persons who have practised them and have made them known to the world are called the Rishis of the respective Mantras. The Yoga Yajnavalkya says:

"He who comprehends a Mantra and attains perfection thereby is the Rishi of that Mantra".

Chandas is the rule by which the syllables of the Mantra are regulated. The Devata of a Mantra is the divinity made known by it. The mode of utilising a Mantra constitutes Viniyogam and the text that expounds the Mantra is its Brahmanam. For the Gayathri Mantra, Viswamitra is the Rishi, Gayathri the Chandas and Savita the Devata. Upanayanam, Japa, Arghyam, etc., form its Viniyogam. Knowing these, one should do Gayathri Japa.

THE METHOD OF DOING JAPA

Japa means repetition of a Mantra. Repetition is of three kinds.

"Mental Japa is the best. Muttering without producing audible sound is middling while vocal chanting is the most inferior. Twice-born ones say this with reference to all Mantras".

Some Mantras are meant to be performed when a specific result is sought. Some others can be chanted only by a certain class of people. Yet others produce sin if they are not done. As far as the Gayathri Mantra is concerned, persons of all Ashramas (orders of life) can chant it.

"Celibates and householders must chant it 108 times while forest dwellers and ascetics should repeat it 1008 times".

With regard to the performance of Japa it is said:

"Whatever Japa is done without keeping count is all a waste. Japa must be done by using the joints of the fingers (for keeping track) and not by jerking the fingers".

Thus, it must be done employing either the joints of fingers or a Japa Mala (rosary) for keeping count. When it was said that Sanyasis can perform Gayathri Japa, only Kuteechaka, Bahudaka and Hamsa forms of ascetics were meant. It is not permitted for Paramahamsa Sanyasis.

(Sanyasa is classed as Kuteechaka, Bahudaka, Hamsa and Paramahamsa. The last kind is most exalted. Paramahamsa Sanyasis have neither tuft nor Yajnopaveetam. They carry a single Danda or holy staff.)

How indeed can Paramahamsa Sanyasis be ordered to do Gayathri Japa when they are asked to only fix their minds on Brahman, without even Saguna Upasana being compulsory?

The Gayathri Mantra must not be chanted in isolation.

"The Gayathri must be chanted together with the Pranava (Om) and the Vyahrutis (Bhuh, Bhuvah and Suvah)".

Gayathri is both a Nitya Karma that must be done at fixed times as also an expiatory Karma. Likewise it can confer whatever we desire. Says the Suta Samhita:

"O Brahmanas! What need is there to say more. By the performance of Japa and Homa employing the Gayathri Mantra, man gets all that he desires. There is no room here for doubt".

SOUL IS DISTINCT FROM THE BODY

The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad says:

(It is for the sake of the Atma that everything is dear). Bhagavatpadal upholds the same view when He writes:

(An object continues to be dear to one as long as one derives pleasure from it and is detested for the duration that it causes pain. The same object cannot be always liked or disliked. Sometimes, that which is not dear may become dear. Moreover, that which was loveable can turn unpleasant. Hence the Atma (towards which affection never wanes) is always the most beloved.)

Many think, "I do this only for him. They do this only out of love for me". Great men sacrifice their interests to help others. Sometimes, we too are ready to do so. Hence it seems that one has affection towards others for their sake itself. Actually it is not so. An object may appear good to one but not to another. We derive pleasure from worldly objects and so long for them. Though we hold that sense objects give happiness, noble ones firmly opine that these produce only sorrow. Having renounced material pleasures, they find happiness in being immersed in the Self. They cannot bear to look at the sufferings of others and so exert themselves for the welfare of the world. Hence, everyone endeavours to gain that which gives one happiness. A man may love his wife and son very much, but he has far greater affection for himself. Sri Vidyaranya illustrates this by saying, "A child may be crying because its father's thorny moustache is pricking it. Still, seeking to pacify it, the father repeatedly kisses it".

What is this Self towards which we have unending attachment? We analyse objects and try to know their nature. But it is only a rare man who tries to know his True nature, the Self. One must indeed be fortunate to know one's True nature. Says the Katha Upanishad:

(It is not given to many to even hear about the Atma. Many fail to comprehend it even when they hear of it. Wonderful is its exponent and extraordinary is the recipient of the teaching. Amazing is he who knows it on being instructed by an adept.)

Thus the Vedas themselves point out that it is difficult to understand the Atma.

THE CHARVAKA VIEW

The ignorant think that the Self, which is the repository of one's highest affection, is nothing other than the body. No Atma is perceived distinct from the body. Thoughts like, "I am fat" and "I am lean" accrue to laymen as also to scholars. In such cases, the word, 'I' connotes the body. If the Atma and body were different, thoughts, such as, "I am fair" could not have arisen. Vedantins say that such thoughts are only illusions, just as we talk about a Spatika (colourless crystal) being red in colour. But if they were to be appearances, they should vanish some day or the other. But they cease neither for the common man nor for the intellectual. Therefore, we should logically conclude that the aforesaid thoughts are real. Hence, by the word Atma we mean only the body.

Consciousness is found only where the body is present. The body is a combination of the elements. At this juncture doubts, such as, "Why is consciousness not seen in a stone, mud, etc.?" may stem. The answers are easy to provide. Just as the power of intoxication is not seen in jaggery, which is an ingredient of wine, but is seen in wine, so also life is not seen in stone, mud, etc., though they too are combinations of the elements. Consciousness arises only when the elements combine in a special way to form the body. Such a merger is not there in stones and this explains their inertness. Happiness and sorrow can be there only where consciousness abides. Consequently, they are not found in stones where there is absence of consciousness. That alone by which knowledge of objects is derived deserves to be considered a Pramana (valid means of knowledge). Knowledge arises only through the eye, ear, nose, skin and tongue. Hence, we have to accept these as Pramanas. They do not reveal any Atma that exists apart from the body.

(Knowledge is dependent on its means).

This is a universal maxim. Based on this, we cannot accept the existence of a separate Atma. For those who believe that body alone is the Atma, death itself constitutes liberation. Hence they say:

(How can the cremated return?)

Once the body disappears pleasure and pain cannot arise. Such being the case, we have no reason to worry about the happiness and sorrow accruing in another world. So we should strive to obtain joy in this birth itself.

Here, a question can be raised. This is, "If everyone is aware of what you are saying, why are you endeavouring to propagate your philosophy?". Their answer is, "In reality, wealth alone is the best acquisition for, by it we can obtain all pleasures. But there are some who, bearing the name of Astikas (theists), are desirous of deceiving others. They are incapable of experiencing sensual pleasures. Moreover, they are jealous of materialists because the latter live comfortably. Hence by saying, 'This act will lead to a bad end,' they delude people and cause impediments to enjoyment. We say that one should study our Sastra and, by concluding that there is no higher world, nor the need for to fear it, one should enjoy the pleasures of this world. We give this advice out of compassion."

Of this philosophy, it is said:

(The Charvakas pointed out the foolishness of people who abandoned what was at hand and tried to attain what they beheld not.)

This is called 'Charvaka' philosophy. It is difficult to say how many people subscribed to it in the past. But in the present days, it will not be wrong to say that it has spread everywhere. Even in foreign countries, many, regarding themselves as scholars, propound this view but with some modifications.

DARSHANAMS

If the above philosophy were to be true, the six Astika Darshanas (traditional theistic schools), which seek to lead one to higher good, would be rendered futile because every of them is opposed to it. Two diametrically contrary ideas cannot be simultaneously true. (Nyaya, Vaiseshika, Sankhya, Yoga, Poorva Mimamsa and Vedanta constitute the six Darshanas.)

By the saying,

(Darshana is that which shows us the way to the highest) it is clear that "Darshana reveals the means to liberation". All these Darshanas uniformly accept that there exists an Atma which is distinct from the body. Of course, they do differ on some other points.

OPPOSING VIEWS OF THEISM AND ATHEISM

In the Charvaka philosophy, there is no such thing as Moksha. After the death of the body, ashes alone remain. Therefore, there is none to experience heaven and hell. The Srutis and Smritis, however, say that there is an Atma different from the body and that heaven and hell exist. In the Karma Kanda of the Vedas, we encounter utterances, such as:

(Let one who is desirous of attaining heaven perform the Jyotishtoma Yaga). They show the way to attain Preyas (worldly comforts).

(The mortal becomes immortal).

Such declarations, belonging to the Jnana Kanda, enunciate the means to get Shreyas (highest good). If the aforesaid Charvaka view were to be true, all these would cease to be authoritative.

SHRUTI (VEDA)

The Karma Kanda and the Jnana Kanda together establish the existence of an independent Atma. In the Kathopanishad, which is one of the ten major Upanishads, the nature of the Atma is described through a narrative. Nachiketas asks Yama:

(Consequent on a man's death the following doubt arises. Some say that there exists the Atma apart from the body. Others declare that It does not. I seek to know this through your teachings. This is the third of the boons that I am desirous of.)

Yama replies, "Even the Devas entertain doubts in this regard", and then explains by saying

(The Atma is neither born nor does It die. It does not come into being from anything. Nothing emerges from It. Being unborn, eternal, indestructible and ancient, It does not perish when the body dies.)

The Lord teaches Arjuna the same view. In Bhagavad Gita, He says:

(Just as a man casts off worn-out clothes and dons those that are new, so does the Jiva discard worn-out bodies and enter those that are fresh.)

In the Brahma Sutras the topics is introduced in the form of an objection as:

(Some deny the existence of the Atma because Its being depends on the continuance of the body.)

(The objection is that as consciousness is seen only where there is a body it cannot have any independent existence.)

The answer is:

(But that is not so. There is distinction between the Atma and the body. This is because, even if the body exists, there need be no consciousness. An example for this is perception.)

(Perception is had when there is light. It is not there when light is absent. On this ground can one conclude that perception is a property of light? In like manner it is improper to infer that consciousness is a property of the body. Further, in a dead body there is no consciousness, though the elements constituting the body are present.)

Here, by showing that Anvaya (concordance) and Vyatireka (discordance) cannot be applied to the Atma and the body, the author of the Sutras proves that the Atma is different from the body.

In the Sankhya Sutras we have:

(The Atma exists, for there is no basis to prove that it does not.)

(It is different from the body etc., because there are differences.)

ARGUMENTS FOR ESTABLISHING THE EXISTENCE OF THE ATMA

Let us consider some other arguments to substantiate the stance of the Vedas.

It is said:

(One man experiences troubles right from his birth, while another is happy. What is the reason? How does the first act occur? How does the body subsist? Why is there no knowledge after death? In the case of lamps, seeds, sprouts, etc., it is seen that when the causes are similar, the nature of the objects produced are also uniform. If it is said that the variation is due to Karma then it is clear that Atma must have existed earlier.)

This requires elucidation. Though human bodies are of the same kind, some experience sorrow, disease and the like right from birth while some others, having wealth and health, remain happy. Why is it so? It has to be perforce conceded that virtue and sin are the causes. If merit and demerit are respectively responsible for pleasure and pain, these experiences could not have existed right from birth. After all, the cause and the effect cannot come into being at the same instant. Hence, virtue and sin must have been acquired in a previous birth.

We see a babe sucking its mother's milk. Why does it indulge in such an act? It can do so only if it knows apriori that it will derive sustenance and happiness thereby. This awareness must arise either through the words of others or from its own experience. In this birth, there is no chance for the child to have obtained this knowledge through aforesaid means. However, bereft of a conception of utility, it would not have suckled. To account for the Samskara (tendency) to drink its mother's milk, we have to conclude that it had a previous birth wherein it drank mother's milk and benefitted thereby. Being fortunate, the tendencies generated then are aroused now.

Chariots, mansions and the like which are effects of acts, serve man's ends by producing happiness and sorrow. Moreover, they are under the control of a conscious entity. There is no justification to say that the status of the body is dissimilar. If, as the Charvaka says, consciousness arises due to the combination of elements, that consciousness must permeate the components of the body. If consciousness is present in all its parts, it is unlikely that there will be any coordination. A plantain tree pulled in different directions by numerous elephants suffers destruction. Likewise, since the body will be directed by numerous conscious entities, it will be annihilated.

The shape of a pot subsists as long as the pot exists. Likewise, if consciousness is a property of the body, it must subsist as long as the body does. It follows that a corpse too must be conscious. Such, however, is not the case. The Charvaka cannot give an appropriate reply to this.

"Only where a body is seen, consciousness is perceived. Therefore the nature of the body is consciousness" — such an inference cannot be deduced. Light is necessary for objects, such as pot, to be visible.Only where light is present, can objects be visible. On such grounds, can it be asserted that perception is a property of light?

At this point, the Charvaka may say that happiness and sorrow are natural properties of the body. As such no cause need be sought. For instance we do not ask why fire is hot and bright? This argument is also improper. A mango seed buried in the ground will give rise only to a mango tree and not to a coconut tree. Likewise, only mangoes and not coconuts can be obtained from a mango tree. Therefore, if the causes are similar the effects have to be uniform. The causes for the formation of bodies are alike and so the bodies should also have similitude. Hence, happiness and sorrow also have to be uniform for all. Happiness and sorrow cannot be regarded as uncaused. Otherwise, nothing in this world will be governed by any rule. Therefore, we must concede that Dharma and Adharma are the causes of happiness and sorrow. These cannot have been acquired on this birth itself. One may ask, "Why does a sinner experience happiness?". Manu answers:

(By Adharma, such as treachery, one apparently flourishes and then perceives prosperity by acquiring much possessions. Then one overcomes foes. Finally, however, one is destroyed.)

Since he who performs good deeds also experiences sorrow, it cannot be said that he is reaping the fruits of actions done only in this birth. The causes of the happiness and sorrow experienced in that birth must be the actions performed in the birth previous to that. If we accept this, then it is established that Samsara is beginningless and also that Atma exists from time immemorial.

At this stage, a question can arise. If as accepted by Astikas (Theists), the world was created by God, why should happiness and sorrow be due to the actions done in the previous births? Why not Ishwara Himself be the cause?

Ishwara cannot be held responsible for diversity. If He is, then He cannot be God at all. A king gives reward or punishment according to the deeds done and is impartial. Else he is unfit to rule. Likewise, if Ishwara is held responsible then He is partial and cruel as He has introduced happiness and sorrow without any reason. Hence Veda Vyasa says:

(It cannot be said that Ishwara is partial or cruel because He considered other aspects. That is what the Vedas reveal.)

Ishwara bestows fruits according to the actions performed.

As it has been established that there exists an Atma which is external and different from the body, the knowledge like "I am fair" is mere illusion. It is akin to the conception, "An iron piece burns".

There are some who are able to recollect their previous births. If there were no separate conscious entity apart from the body, this would not be possible.

In the Yoga Sutra we encounter:

(Knowledge of previous birth arises from perception of Samskaras (tendencies) .)

What we have said so far falls in the realm of Anumana or inference. The Charvaka recognises only direct perception as a valid means of knowledge. Hence let us decide whether he is forced to accept inference or not.

The sun and the moon appear small to us. The Sastras tell us that they are very large. Their being at great distances from us causes them to appear small. Which, amongst these, should we accept? A normal person will accept that which seems right to his intellect. If direct perception alone were to be recognised we cannot carry on in the world.

Hence it is said:

(If direct perception alone were to be authoritative for you, how can what you speak be valid (because inference is necessary to understand speech )?)

(Therefore, you are a liar.)

If it is accepted that direct perception alone is capable of generating true knowledge, it is futile to talk to others. Afterall, their knowledge is not directly perceived by us! So there is nothing wrong in giving arguments as we have done.

Therefore it has been established that the Atma is distinct from the body. Since the Charvaka is unable to regulate his senses he propounds a convenient theory. We pray to Acharyal that the truth about the Atma, which is essential for the Jnana and Karma, always abide in our hearts.

Finally what we should say is this,

(Even if the existence of a realm attained after death is doubted, Dharma alone should be performed. Even if that (other world) does not exist, there is no loss in performing Dharma. But if it does, the Nastika is doomed.)

The Kathopanishad says:

(The means for the attainment of a higher realm after death does not become revealed to the non-discriminating man who blunders., being deluded by the lure of wealth. He who constantly thinks that there is only this world and none hereafter comes under my (Yama's) sway again and again.)