(B21)- How does one realize God?

[Quick links]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After having defined what God is, and why idol worship is not something forbidden, Badarayana goes on to give some finer suggestions on God realization.

 

Firstly, worship is not some kind of ritual involving worldly implements. The word often used in the Upanishads is ‘Upaasana’ which is often considered to be equivalent of meditation or ‘Dhyana’, or even knowing deeply i.e. ‘vid’. Upanishads describe what Brahma or God is. But it is not easy to grasp the meaning since it is quite abstract. So, one should continuously ponder over the ideas suggested by the Upanishads. This continuous pondering is nothing but meditation – directing the thought streams towards the object in focus. 

 

This may remind you how Patanjali defines meditation. He says that meditation is something in which you continuously focus your mind on a chosen target. And this target could be some image, or some concept, or some sound, and so on. You go on focusing your mind on that till you become ‘one with the target’. That is when the samadhi happens. That is when the ultimate realization blooms.

 

But it may not be possible for you to directly zoom into the final target. You may need to follow some intermediate target and gradually go on to higher and subtler targets. That is why meditations normally start with a gross form of some God, and finally culminate in some abstract idea.

 

Upanishads provide an abstract definition of God. But not all can meditate on that concept since it is quite difficult to focus the mind on. So, most people need some gross form to start with. That form is called ‘Prateeka’ or symbol. Upanishads suggest various ‘Prateeka’ to be used as a person progresses in the path of realization. Badarayana has no objection to this kind of approach.

 

But he cautions that one should keep in mind the following.

 

1. The symbol itself is not God. It is just a means to reach the destination. So, one should try to see God in the symbol and not view the symbol itself as God. This is a fine difference most people overlook. Though in reality, ‘everything’ ensued from God and in a way ‘everything’ is God in the ultimate sense, equating a symbol or idol to God ‘downgrades’ the concept of God. This could limit one’s ability to go forward. So, one should ‘see’ God in the idol and not take the idol for God.

 

2. There are no specific restrictions on how one should position himself, or to which direction one has to be facing, or in which place the worship should be performed. However, it is better to follow certain guidelines.

 

a) One should worship in a seated position. If you do it while standing or moving around, it may not be possible for you to focus your mind properly. Since Upanishadic worship is nothing but meditation or concentrating the mind, one should take care to avoid any distractions of the body which are inevitable if the person is standing or moving.

 

b) Often, we think that worship should be made in a temple or a church or a mosque. Badarayana says that the place is really immaterial. Wherever you find it convenient to focus your mind, that is the right place for you. It all depends on how your mind is conditioned. A Hindu may be comfortable in a temple, while a Christian may prefer a church. Badarayana keeps the option open. The main thing is to focus the mind continuously.

 

c) There is also some belief in Hindus that the worship should be done facing east. And Muslims insist on facing the Kaaba. These are all conveniences and not mandatory according to Badarayana.

 

3. Most importantly, Badarayana says that there is nothing like ‘once for all’. Many of us make the mistake of stopping our meditative practices when we ‘think’ that we have reached the ‘ultimate’. ‘No’ says Badarayana. He says that one should continue to meditate throughout his life no matter whether he has attained realization. As long as the body exists, you need to keep practicing meditation. Otherwise, there are chances of your reverting back to mundane life.

 

There is one more point Badarayana draws our attention to. Often, we see that great masters of the past, be it Jesus Christ, or Ramakrishna Parama Hamsa, or Ramana Maharshi who suffered a lot in their life. Jesus had to undergo the torture on the cross. Ramakrishna and Ramana had a painful death due to cancer. Even great Indian philosophers like Sankara or Vivekananda had suffered serious health problems. All these men are considered to be realized men. Why did they have to suffer?

 

Bible has its own reasons to explain Jesus Christ’s agony. But Indians normally attribute one’s past Karma for the suffering one goes through. Does that mean that there is no respite from the ill effects of past Karmas even after one attains the God realization?

 

Badarayana says that there are two types of Karmas. Ones that have not yet started yielding their results and the ones that have already started yielding results. God realization nullifies all past Karmas that are yet to fructify. But that cannot stop the effects of Karma that have already started giving results. They are like a potter’s wheel that keeps rotating even after the potter has stopped rotating it. They have momentum and they continue to yield results for some time and it becomes inevitable for a person to suffer the consequences however much a realized person he is.

 

That probably explains why those great people suffered in spite of being realized souls. Their suffering should not be taken as an indication of uselessness of spiritual practices.

 

.....

 

We have been discussing about the Brahma Sutra of great Indian sage Badarayana for the past 5 months. I don’t claim that I have covered the work completely. I have only given you the essence. I want to leave you with one question to ponder over.

 

Is the ‘mediation’ talked about by the Upanishads as well as Badarayana, same as that talked about by Patanjali in his Yoga Sutra? Most Advaitis say that they are not same. They even reject Patanjali’s idea of meditation as a means to final realization. Though there is a subtle and important difference, I feel that in the ultimate sense both are same.

 

Think about it. That is food for thought till we meet once again. 

 

 

Start            Previous          

 

A series on ancient Indian composition Brahma Sutra. © Dr. King, Swami Satyapriya 2020-21