13. Enlightenment and Establishment in Brahman

[The sequel comprises the conversations covering the culmination of Acharyal’s divine drama of sādhanā. They took place at Chennai (then Madras), in January 1982, at Paramahamsi Ganga Ashram, Madhya Pradesh, in December 1982 and at Sringeri, in April 1984. The conversations have been combined.]

Acharyal: Based on the words of the scripture and with the aid of reasoning, I had developed the conviction that I am not the body, organs, mind and intellect and that I am Brahman apart from which the world has no existence. The two forms of savikalpa-samādhi experienced by Me on that pourṇamī morning significantly enhanced it. In the afternoon, I read and pondered on the verses of the Ātma-vidyā-vilāsa. They made a greater impact on Me that day than before. I recalled the words:

(The Supreme Ātman shines pure, enlightened and devoid of all variety.)

Considering the word “vigalitasarvavikalpaḥ² (Devoid of all variety)”,

I reflected as follows. Even in samādhi, I have not realised the Ātman as shining totally free from diversity. After all, the sense of “I” and the awareness of the distinction of the concentrator, concentration and the object of concentration also shine, no matter how feebly. I do understand from the words of the scripture, supportive reasoning and My savikalpa-samādhis that I am pure consciousness. Were the appearance of even the vestige of duality to vanish during samādhi, leaving just the Ātman as residue, that would greatly facilitate the ripening of My present understanding and conviction into firm realisation.

A weary traveller may hear from a trustworthy person familiar with the region that the water he is seeing in the desert is a mirage. He may then reason that such should be the case. Yet, his wanting to assuage his thirst may impede his firmly realising that only desert sand stretches in front of him. Were he to move on to a new position and the sun were to be temporarily blocked by a thick layer of clouds, he might see just sand where he once saw the mirage. He might begin to perceive the mirage again a little later. Nonetheless, the temporary disappearance of the mirage would highly facilitate his firmly realising the truth of what he had been told and reflected upon. The thorough vanishing of duality during samādhi would, for Me, be helpful, like the temporary disappearance of the mirage for this hypothetical traveller.

Further, while I almost become identified with bliss in samādhi, nonetheless, I do, to a minute degree, stand apart from it as the one who enjoys it. Infinite bliss is, on the authority of the scripture, My very nature. What is My very nature cannot, undoubtedly, be known objectively by Me. It is avidyā that conjures diversity in the Truth, which is non-dual. Thus, no matter how great it may be, bliss that is experienced by Me as an object lies in the realm of avidyā. It must not be savoured but transcended.”

{It is taught in the Chāndogya-upaniṣad:

The Infinite is that where one does not see anything else, does not hear anything else and does not understand anything else. Hence, the finite is that where one sees something else, hears something else and understands something else.

Gaudapādācārya has said in His karikas on the Māndūkya-upaniṣad:

One should not enjoy happiness in that state but should become unattached through the use of discrimination.}

(Acharyal:) I should, during My meditation this evening, prevent Myself from being overwhelmed by the bliss of savikalpasamādhi. Then, by impressing upon Myself that I am bliss itself and not one who enjoys it, I should focus My mind more thoroughly on the Ātman. Once My mind were to become fully established on the Ātman and devoid of every transformation of a form other than that of the Ātman, how can any distinction between bliss and the one experiencing bliss or, for that matter, any other subject-object distinction and the sense of individuality show up at all? By establishing the mind on the Ātman and remaining without any thought, I would be acting in accordance with the instruction:

(One should gradually withdraw with the intellect endued with firmness; making the mind established in the Ātman, one should not think of anything.)

{Bhagavatpāda has concluded His commentary on the above verse by writing that this is the highest instruction about yoga.

The Maitrāyaṇī-upaniṣad teaches:

Just as a fire bereft of fuel disappears into its source, on the termination of vṛttis, the mind disappears into its basis (the Ātman).

When, having made the mind free from sleep and distractions and very steady, one attains the condition of mindlessness, then one reaches the supreme state.

The mind should be restrained only till it wanes away in the Ātman.}

(Acharyal:) I then opened the Vivekacūdāmaṇi at random. My eyes fell on a verse in which nirvikalpa-samādhi is spoken of. I read it as also the succeeding three verses; they too deal with nirvikalpa-samādhi. My reading enhanced My keenness on going beyond the stage of savikalpa-samādhi.

{At this point, Acharyal picked up the Vivekacūdāmaṇi and chanted the following verses.}

(When thus purified (of misunderstanding and the like about the Truth) by continuous practice, the mind merges in Brahman (by remaining without any thought, in the form of Brahman), then there is nirvikalpa-samādhi, which brings about the effortless experience of non-dual bliss.)

(By this samādhi, there occurs the destruction of the knot of impressions (rooted in ignorance), the annihilation of all one’s actions (leading to rebirth) and the manifestation, without effort, of one’s true nature, within and without, everywhere and for ever.)

(Reflection (on the Truth) is a hundred times superior to hearing (the Truth). Meditation (on the Truth) is a hundred thousand times greater than reflection. Nirvikalpa-samādhi is infinitely superior to that.)

(Brahman, the Reality, is realised clearly, with steady certitude, by means of nirvikalpa-samādhi but not otherwise, for, then, because of the inconstancy of mental activity, the realisation would be mixed up with other notions.)

I reached My place of meditation on the hill around one and a half hours before sunset. Sitting in the siddhāsana, I performed two cycles of prāṇāyāma together with the jālandhara, uḍḍiyāna and mūla bandhas to promote mental tranquillity. Then, as usual, I directed My gaze towards the centre of My brows and chanted the Prāṇava.

That day, I beheld an unbounded expanse of blue, resembling the sky.

The notion, “I am the non-dual Brahman apart from which nothing whatsoever exists” that was prominent and naturally persistent since the previous evening had been intensified by My savikalpa-samādhis of the morning and by My reading and reflection of the afternoon. So, I did not have to cultivate it. I had barely seen the soothing expanse of blue when it vanished. I felt Myself expanding and becoming like space. The sense of ‘I’ nearly vanished and My mind entered savikalpa-samādhi.

The bliss was very great. However, with effort, I restrained Myself from being overwhelmed by it and thought, “I am not the one experiencing bliss but am bliss itself.” In a trice, a sharp change occurred. Awareness of the distinction of the concentrator, concentration and the object of concentration completely disappeared. No more was there any sense of individuality or of space, time and objects. Only Brahman, of the nature of absolute existence, pure consciousness and ultimate bliss, shone bereft of the superimposition of even a trace of duality.

After about two hours, the mind descended to the level of savikalpa-samādhi and mild awareness of the distinction of the concentrator, concentration and the object of concentration reappeared. Though the bliss of savikalpa-samādhi was by far greater than the joy of any worldly enjoyment, it was nothing compared to the absolute, non-dual bliss of nirvikalpa-samādhi. Gradually, I became lightly aware of the body and of the build up of breathing that must have almost totally stopped earlier.

{The Maitrāyaṇī-upaniṣad declares:

The bliss that is had by the mind that has been cleansed of impurities by samādhi and which is absorbed in the Ātman cannot be described in words. It is experienced by the mind itself at that time.

About the highest samādhi, the Lord says in the Bhagavad-gītā :

At the time when the mind restrained through the practice of yoga gets withdrawn, and just when, by seeing the Ātman by the purified mind, one remains contented in the Ātman alone; when one experiences absolute bliss, which can be intuited by the intellect and which is beyond the senses, and being established thus, this person does not swerve from the Reality…

Anandagiri differentiates saṁprajñāta/savikalpa and asaṁprajñāta/nirvikalpa samādhis thus in his gloss on Bhagavatpāda’s bhāṣya on verse (VI.20) of the Bhagavad-gītā :

dvividhaḥ samādhiḥ saṁprajñāto'saṁprajñātaśca dhyeyaikākārasattvavṛttirbhedena kathañcijjñāyamānā saṁprajñātaḥ samādhiḥ kathamapi pṛthagajñāyamānā saiva sattvavṛttirasaṁprajñātaḥ samādhiḥ¹⁷ Samādhi is of two kinds; saṁprajñāta and asaṁprajñāta. The pure vṛtti (modification of the mind) of the form of just the object meditated upon constitutes saṁprajñāta-samādhi if it is somehow apprehended apart from its object. That very vṛtti constitutes asaṁprajñāta-samādhi when it is, in no way, apprehended apart from its object.

In the Sarva-vedānta-siddhānta-sāra-sangrahaḥ attributed to Bhagavatpāda, it is said about nirvikalpa-samādhi on Ātman-Brahman:

That is nirvikalpa-samādhi, which is termed yoga, wherein the mind, bereft of the modes of the knower, knowing and the object of knowledge, remains firmly established as the object (Brahman). Salt put in water remains as one with the water and does not manifest separately. Only water manifests. In like manner, the mental vṛtti (of the form of Brahman) remains as one with Brahman and does not manifest separately. The non-dual Brahman alone manifests. Due to the absence of the conception of the knower, known and object of knowledge, this samādhi is called nirvikalpa.}

(Acharyal:) When I opened My eyes, I could see the scene in front of Me and yet did not see it, for I was quite indifferent to the apparent diversity rooted in names and forms. So clear was the realisation that I was of the very nature of absolute existence that I apprehended nothing whatsoever as existing apart from Me. Everything was like bubbles on the ocean that was Myself. When I rose after some time, My body felt light like cotton wool and as I walked down the hill, it seemed as if I were on a moving canoe.

After about an hour the apprehension, “I am the Supreme Brahman other than which there is nothing” started to slowly weaken from being on par with perceiving a fruit in one’s open palm. However, even when its attenuation stopped, it was much stronger than it had been when I had sat down to meditate.

That night, when it was time for Me to go to sleep, I readied Myself to meditate. Even before a hue manifested, the notion, “I am Brahman” became greatly intensified. Without any effort, I shot past the stages of deep meditation and savikalpa-samādhi and entered nirvikalpa-samādhi. By divine grace, attaining nirvikalpa-samādhi had become very easy for Me. I remained in it for over three hours. Then, though I felt fresh, I lay down and slept for a while. I got up at My usual time of awakening.

In the last of the seven dreams in the course of which I received instructions about yoga from Śiva, the Lord had taught Me nāda-anusandhāna. After that, I began to practice it for some minutes, once a week. I have told you about this. That morning, as usual, I closed My ears, nose and mouth with My hands to commence My contemplation on the sound heard in the right ear. The ocean-like sound that I heard abruptly grew in intensity. Then, in quick succession, I heard a variety of sounds. These included those of a drum, a flute and a vīṇā.

{The Nādabindu-upaniṣad teaches:

At first, the sounds are like those proceeding from the ocean, clouds, kettle-drum and a waterfall. In the middle stage, they are like those from a mardala (a musical instrument), bell and horn. In the final stage, the sounds are like those of tinkling bells, a flute, a vīṇā and bees.

Having become insensible to everything external, the mind unites with the sound focused on, like water with milk. Then, it quickly dissolves in the space that is consciousness.}

Each sound lasted for only a few moments before being replaced by the next. I had heard the same sounds, in the same sequence, when the Lord had demonstrated nāda-anusandhāna in the dream. When the last of the sounds ended, there was just silence. My mind became extremely tranquil and suffused with bliss. The sense of “I” rapidly faded away completely and nirvikalpa-samādhi ensued. Only non-dual, objectless consciousness remained. About an hour passed before the mind descended from samādhi.

I: Did Acharyal keep the ears, nostrils and the mouth closed for the entire duration?

Acharyal: No. After having practised nāda-anusandhāna a few times, I had started using My hands to block My ears, nose and mouth for only less than a minute. Once I heard the internal sound and focused on it, I was able to continue to hear it clearly even if I lowered My hands. On this occasion, I must have, by force of habit, stopped closing My ears and nose shortly after beginning My meditation. When I emerged from samādhi, My hands were not in contact with My face at all; they were resting on My lap.

I: Before this, had Acharyal attained samādhi with some internal sound as the object just as Acharyal had with a divine form as object?

Acharyal: No. Only months later, for the fun of it, I engaged in such samādhi and also experimented with nāda-anusandhāna the way I had done with focusing on a divine form.

I: Such being the case, what was the reason for Acharyal resorting that day to nāda-anusandhāna to attain nirvikalpa-samādhi on the Absolute?

Acharyal: There was no premeditation on My part in this regard. The Lord had demonstrated nāda-anusandhāna to Me and it was His will that I experience the culmination of this form of laya-yoga that day. I do not have any other explanation.

{The Yogatattva-upaniṣad teaches:

O Brahma, with regard to practice, yoga is diverse; there is mantra-yoga, laya-yoga, haṭha-yoga and rāja-yoga.

Laya-yoga is characterised by the absorption of the mind. Myriad forms of it are spoken of.

Bhagavatpāda says in His Yogatārāvali:

There are, in the world, a lakh and a quarter forms of laya (absorptive) attentions that have been spoken of by Sadāśiva. We regard only samādhi stemming from contemplation on nāda to be the worthiest among the layas.}

(Acharyal:) That afternoon itself, I once again attained nirvikalpa-samādhi on the Supreme, this time through kuṇḍalinī-centred laya-yoga. I have told you about all My experiences related to the kuṇḍalinī that took place earlier. You would have discerned that they were unpremeditated and occurred with almost no effort of Mine. This one too was like them. I believe that Ambā, who had Herself taught Me about the kuṇḍalinī a few months after My saṁnyāsa, straightaway vouchsafed those experiences and, that afternoon, their culmination.

I had just apprehended a hue between My brows when, involuntarily, I adopted the jālandhara, uḍḍiyāna and mūla bandhas and My attention turned to the anāhata-cakra. I apprehended the kuṇḍalinī there. It seemed that the elements earth, water and fire had become absorbed in the kuṇḍalinī. As the divine Śaktī headed rapidly to the sahasrāra, leaping, as it were, from one cakra to the next higher one, air, space and the organs too duly merged into her.

When the kuṇḍalinī reached the sahasrāra, all duality, inclusive of the sense of “I” and awareness of the distinction of the agent of meditation, meditation and the object of meditation, thoroughly vanished. Just objectless consciousness of the very nature of bliss shone. This nirvikalpa-samādhi lasted for about an hour. As the mind lightly came out of nirvikalpa-samādhi, the descent of the kuṇḍalinī from the sahasrāra, through the ājñā-cakra, to the viṣuddha-cakra was discernible. I regained mild awareness of the body without sensing any further descent of the Śaktī and opened My eyes.

Though the approaches were different, there was no difference between the state I attained then and those I attained on the previous evening at the hill, at night and in the morning through nāda-anusandhāna. On all these occasions just the non-dual Truth remained, without any appearance of duality. It was now quite clear to Me that consciousness does shine in all its glory without any object whatsoever and that the Ātman is of the nature of consciousness.

Shortly after My nirvikalpa-samādhi of that afternoon, I reflected on the following lines. Suppose the Ātman were knowable like an object. The question would then arise as to who can know the Ātman. The answer cannot be that the Ātman is known objectively by Itself, for it is impossible for any entity to be both the subject and the object of a cognition. The Ātman cannot be known by the intellect, mind, organs, body and objects, for they are all inert. Moreover, the Ātman is the unchanging witness of the presence and the absence of thoughts. When the intellect and mind are themselves just objects witnessed by the Ātman, how could they be the perceivers of the Ātman? The scripture declares that the Ātman is Brahman and there is no knower other than the Ātman-Brahman. Thus, the Ātman is just not knowable like some external object.

{The Kena-upaniṣad teaches:

It is surely different from the known. (I.3)

It is said in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad:

Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known.

You cannot know That which is the knower of (mental) knowledge.

There is no other knower but This.}

Though not knowable like an inert object by any means of knowledge, the Ātman, which is none other than Brahman, is not unknown either. What is other than oneself and inert may be unknown. The Ātman, however, is one’s very self and is of the nature of consciousness. Consciousness is what reveals objects and never needs to be revealed by anything else. It is presupposed in every act of knowing and is ever self-established.

The agent of even the act of knowing, which has a beginning and an end, cannot but be subject to change. Further, only an entity subject to change can experience pleasure and pain. As the Ātman is changeless, It is neither the agent of any act, inclusive of that of knowing, nor is It subject to pleasure and pain. Agency, suffering, enjoyment of pleasure and the like belong to the changeful intellect. However, owing to avidyā, one mistakenly superimposes these that belong to the intellect on the Ātman. Also, though the intellect is inert, the consciousness of the Ātman is wrongly ascribed to it and the intellect-centred “I” passes off as a conscious agent and experiencer.

The scripture advocates realisation of Brahman not in the sense of knowing what is unknown but in the sense of getting rid of the avidyā-based superimposition on It. Whether focused on the Ātman or distracted, the mind is but an inert entity illumined by the Ātman. However, the mental vṛtti of the form of Brahman destroys, as declared by the scripture, avidyā that rests in and veils Brahman and presents It wrongly.

{Bhagavatpāda writes in His bhāṣya on verse (XVIII.50) of the Bhagavad-gītā :

What is to be undertaken is only the elimination of the superimposition on Brahman through avidyā, but no effort is needed for knowing Brahman, for It is quite self-evident. It is because the intellect is distracted by particular appearances of name and form imagined through avidyā that Brahman, even though self-evident, easily realisable, nearer than all else and identical with oneself, appears to be concealed, difficult to realise, very far and different. But to those whose intellect has become freed from external appearances and who have obtained the grace of the Guru and serenity of the mind, there is nothing more blissful, manifest, well known, easily realised and nearer than this.

In His bhāṣya on Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad (III.5.10), Bhagavatpāda writes:

All that one who has understood Brahman from the words of Guru and the scripture needs to do is to eliminate all notions of the non-Ātman. Having done so, he becomes a yogin who has accomplished his task.}

(Acharyal:) I went on to reflect as follows. Suppose a person, who is adept at yoga, feels he is established in the Ātman when he is in samādhi but that he deviates to some extent from the Reality when he emerges from samādhi and engages in activity. Such a person is not free from avidyā. Samādhi and distraction are conditions of the mind and not of the Ātman. The Ātman is ever changeless and of the nature of consciousness. Samādhi and distraction do not affect it in any way. It is because this yogin is not free from identification with the mind that he sees himself as influenced by changes in the state of the mind. He who has fully realised that he is the changeless Reality remains established in the Reality and unaffected regardless of whether his mind is in a focused, agitated or dull condition.

(O son of Pāṇḍu, he (who has gone beyond the three Gunas) neither dislikes illumination, activity and delusion (the effects of sattva, rajas and tamas respectively) when they appear, nor does he long for them when they disappear.)

I should conform to these words of the Lord and not become attached to nirvikalpa-samādhi under the delusion that for its duration I become one with Brahman.

{Bhagavatpāda’s bhāṣya on the Gauḍapāda-kārikā (II.38) runs, in part, as follows:

and thinks the Ātman to be changing in accordance with the states of the mind, or, at times, accepts the body and the like to be the Ātman and thinks, “I am now alienated from the reality that is the Ātman.” When at times the mind becomes concentrated, he thinks himself to be united with the Reality and in peace under the belief, “I am now identified with the Reality.” The knower of the Ātman should not be like that because the nature of the Ātman is ever the same and because it is impossible for anything to change its nature. He should for ever be unwavering from the Reality, with the conviction, “I am Brahman.”}

(Acharyal:) Perception of the world could affect the vision of the Truth of one who ascribes reality to duality but not of one to whom names and forms are illusory. He who firmly knows that what lies in front of him is dry sand is not affected by the appearance or disappearance of a mirage there. Likewise, he who knows that there is nothing whatsoever apart from Brahman cannot be affected either by the appearance of the mirage-like world of names and forms or its disappearance during samādhi or deep sleep.

When the existence of the Jīva (individual self) and the existence of the universe are negatived, one’s Ātman alone remains. Their negation is not their non-perception but only a firm conviction that they are unreal. If it were not so, people would attain liberation without any effort in the states such as of deep sleep and unconsciousness. The realisation of the residuary nature of the Supreme Ātman is also only the firm conviction about Its Reality. It is not forgetfulness of the world. If this were not the case, jīvanmukti (liberation from bondage even while living) would not be possible.}

(Acharyal:) In support of My conviction about the illusory nature of the world and that there exists nothing apart from the non-dual Reality, I reflected on the similarity between the states of waking and dream. I also thought of how the states of waking, dream and deep sleep rule each other out and of the persistence in all of them of consciousness, their witness.

In the evening, at about the same time as on the previous evening, I went to My place of meditation on the hill. There, I entered nirvikalpa-samādhi exactly as on the previous night. After about an hour, I opened My eyes. The falsity of names and forms was crystal clear and so was the certainty that there was nothing that was other than consciousness. Shortly, even without My shutting My eyes or making any effort, I plunged once again into nirvikalpa-samādhi. This time too the samādhi lasted for about an hour.

{The Sarasvatī-rahasya-upaniṣad speaks of two kinds of nirvikalpa-samādhi, one related to the external and the other to the internal. The verses concerned appear in identical form in the Dṛg-dṛśya-viveka.

Nirvikalpa-samādhi is that in which the mind becomes steady like a lamp kept in a windless place and in which one becomes indifferent to (internal) objects and sounds on account of complete absorption in bliss.

The insensibility, on account of bliss, of the mind (to external objects), akin to that in savikalpa-samādhi, is designated as nirvikalpa-samādhi.} (Acharyal:) Except for an hour, during which I slept, I spent the rest of the night in nirvikalpa-samādhi. It was not as though I was particular about doing so, for, by then, there was essentially no difference for Me between samādhi and the perception of the world as regards My abidance in Brahman. As I was feeling very fresh, instead of lying down, I casually sat cross-legged. Suddenly, My mind plunged into nirvikalpa-samādhi.

The next day, I went into nirvikalpa-samādhi in the morning and in the afternoon for an hour each. The conviction about the falsity of duality and of My being of the nature of changeless consciousness was so strong and steady that almost no avidyā-based notions of the non-Ātman cropped up. Those few that did were neutralised swiftly. The knowledge that Brahman alone is all this had almost fully fructified. This was My state when I went in the evening to the summit of the hill one and a half hours before sunset.

I directed My gaze to between the brows and, without any premeditation, chanted, “oṁ namaḥ śivāya” rather than just the Prāṇava. Soon, I beheld a moon-like disc of light between My brows. The mind became increasingly quiet, the sense of “I” faded away and, effortlessly, nirvikalpa-samādhi ensued. When I opened My eyes, the sun was about to set. Two birds were seated on My shoulders.

That Brahman is all was as clear as a fruit in one’s palm. My mind automatically went into nirvikalpa-samādhi once again a few minutes later and remained in that state for nearly an hour. Shortly after I regained awareness of the body and the surroundings, a big monkey bounded up to Me and positioned itself on My lap. After being cuddled for a while by Me, it left. I walked down the hill and found My attendant waiting there with a lamp.

By the grace of Acharyal and God, the “svanubhavo brahmātmanā saṁsthitiḥ⁴⁰ (direct realisation of Brahman and firm establishment in Brahman)”, spoken of in the Vivekacūdāmaṇi (in verse 2) occurred at one stroke that evening. To this day, there has been no deviation from the Reality.

{Bhagavatpāda has said in His Brahmasūtra-bhāṣya:

“I am of the nature of consciousness, one and free from all miseries” - such is the realisation of the Ātman. There is nothing else that needs to be done by the one who realises the Ātman thus.

About svanubhavaḥ (realisation of Brahman) and brahmātmanā saṁsthitiḥ (firm establishment in Brahman), which characterises jīvanmukti (liberation while living), occurring at one stroke for a renunciant, it is said in the Vāsanākṣayaprakaraṇa of the Jīvanmukti-viveka:

In the case of the person who has performed meditation to the extent of realising the prescribed object of meditation [such as a form of God] and thereafter strives for the knowledge of the Truth, by virtue of his firm obliteration of mental tendencies and dissolution of the mind, the renunciation of a knower and jīvanmukti occur automatically on the dawn of the realisation of the Truth. Such indeed is the person who is pre-eminently fit for enlightenment and considered by the scripture.

About jīvanmukti being a fact, Bhagavatpāda has written in His Brahmasūtra-bhāsya on sūtra (IV.1.15):

Furthermore, no difference of opinion is possible here as to whether or not the body is retained for some period (after enlightenment) by the knowers of Brahman. For, when somebody has the conviction in his heart that he has realised Brahman and yet retains the body, how can this be denied by anybody else? This very fact is elaborated in the Upaniṣads and Smṛtis in the course of determining the characteristics of a sthitaḥ-prajña (the man of steady knowledge of the Truth).

Bhagavatpāda has said in His Upadeśasāhasrī:

(Metrical part IV.4)

It is reasonable that, being the consequences of actions of past births that have begun to fructify and yielded the present body, knowledge of Brahman and the experience of pleasure and pain are not incompatible. Other kinds of actions (of the past that have yet to begin to yield results and those done after enlightenment) are different (and are destroyed by knowledge).

(Metrical part IV.5)

He who has the knowledge of the Ātman that negates the erroneous notion that the body is the Ātman and is as firm as the erroneous notion of the common folk that the body is the Ātman is liberated even without his wishing for it.

The Lord has said in the Bhagavad-gītā :

For the monks who have control over their mind, who are free from desire and anger and who have realised the Ātman, there is absorption in Brahman (liberation) whether they are living or dead.

In the Brhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad, the jīvanmukta is eulogised thus:

How does that knower of Brahman behave? Howsoever he may behave, he is just such.

Further,

This is the eternal glory of a knower of Brahman; it neither increases nor decreases through (good or bad) action.}

{Dates of the major events of the final phase of Acharyal's sādhanā Vision and blessing of Śiva : 5.12.1935, Thursday, Yuva-mārgaśira-śukla-daśamī Commencement of nirguṇa-dhyāna after scripture-based reflection: 6.12.1935, Friday, Yuva-mārgaśira-śukla-ekādaśī Attainment of savikalpa-samādhi on Brahman: 7.12.1935, Saturday, Yuva-mārgaśira-śukla-dvādaśī Attainment of nirvikalpa-samādhi on Brahman 10.12.1935, Tuesday, Yuva-mārgaśira-pourṇamī Final realisation of and establishment in Brahman 12.12.1935, Thursday, Yuva-mārgaśira-kṛṣṇa-dvitīyā}

✧✧✧✧