Dashak 7 · Samāsa 6

Śrīrāma. Advaita-brahma has been expounded; which exists devoid of imagination; for one moment it was made *tadākāra* — by this exposition.

But — 'I should become tadākāra; should remain as Brahman itself; should not return to samsāra — by fickleness — at all.'

The happiness devoid of imagination — there is no samsāra-sorrow; therefore that alone should be — should become and be.

[During] listening one becomes Brahman; again must come to the disposition; thus coming-and-going always — cannot be escaped.

The mind should go to the inner-sky; for one moment should be Brahman itself; then from there fall back onto the disposition.

Such recurrent motion in all directions — how long to make rounds? Like an insect tied with a thread to the foot.

During upadeśa-time if one becomes tadākāra, this body should fall; or should not know self-and-other — such should happen.

Without this happening, the mere speech feels shameful; becoming Brahman and carrying on samsāra — this too seems contradictory.

He who himself became Brahman — how did he come back? Such jñāna of mine does not feel proper to me.

Should become Brahman and go, or should remain in samsāra? How long to waver between the two?

In the exposition, jñāna strengthens; when one gets up and goes, it sets; again kāma-krodha flare up — at the Brahma-form.

How has such a one become Brahman? Fallen between two sides; went by sheer arrogance; his samsāra [remains].

Taking the sweetness of Brahma-happiness, the worldly pulls back; while doing samsāra, [love] arises in Brahman again.

Brahma-happiness was taken by samsāra; samsāra went by jñāna-door; both incomplete — neither of them complete.

Therefore my mind has become fickle, distracted; what is to be done with definite meaning — not even one.

Such the listener requests: in what manner should I remain now? Says 'my intellect is continuously not Brahman-form.'

Now the reply — the speaker gives beautifully; listeners should become questionless — for one moment.

Those who became Brahman and fell — they went to the mukti-pada; were the others — Vyāsa and others — also drowned?

The listener again requests: 'Śuka-muktaḥ Vāmadevaḥ vā' — this śruti; says only two are mukta — at beginning-and-end.

'The Veda bound all; Śuka and Vāmadeva are mukta; non-belief in Veda-word — how can one hold?'

Thus the listener, with Veda-support, gave reply; by extreme regard only two are established as mukta.

The speaker says next: only two mukta on the sṛṣṭi? Who could be left — speaking thus?

Many ṛṣis, many munis; siddhas, yogis, ātma-jñānīs; men of composure became countless.

[Sanskrit śloka] 'prahrāda-nārada-parāśara-puṇḍarīka-vyāsāmbarīṣa-śuka-śaunaka-bhīṣma-dālbhyān | rukmāngadārjuna-vasiṣṭha-vibhīṣaṇādīn puṇyān imān parama-bhāgavatān smarāmi'.

[Sanskrit] 'kavir hariḥ antarikṣaḥ prabuddhaḥ pippalāyanaḥ | āvirhotraḥ atha drumilaś camasaḥ karabhājanaḥ'.

And apart from these, great ones — Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Maheśvara, starting with the naked [renunciants], Videha and others.

'Only Śuka and Vāmadeva became mukta; all others drowned' — those who trust in this utterance are paḍhat-mūrkhas.

'Then how did the Veda speak? Did you falsify it?' — hearing, the speaker gave reply.

Veda speaks *pūrva-pakṣa*; the fool fixes attention only there; sādhus and learned-discerning ones do not accept this.

Even if this is accepted, then the Veda's authority has drowned; no one could be uplifted by Veda.

If Veda has no capability, who would listen to this Veda? Therefore in Veda — capability is there — to uplift people.

One who gets to receive a Veda-syllable is called a merit-heap; therefore, is there any deficiency in Veda's capability?

Veda, śāstra, purāṇa — if by fortune they are heard, by that one is purified — so say the sādhus.

A śloka, or half-śloka; or else a śloka-quarter; on hearing one word — many sins depart.

In the Veda, śāstras, Purāṇas — such utterances are arranged; Vyāsa's voice — with unfathomable greatness — has spoken.

On hearing one syllable, one is immediately purified; such glory of the books — is spoken in many places.

If apart from these two, a third is not uplifted, then what glory remains? Enough — let the wise know; to others [it is] confusion.

Vedas, śāstras, purāṇas — how can they become unauthoritative? Apart from the two, who can uplift a third?

'If you say — fallen like wood — only he became mukta', then Śuka spoke — many expositions.

'Śuka is mukta' — such utterance; the Veda spoke this as authoritative; but he was not unconscious in Brahman-form.

If the yogīśvara Śuka were unconscious in Brahman-form, then sārāsāra-vicāra — could not have been spoken.

He who has become Brahman-form — has fallen as wood — but Śuka spoke the Bhāgavata — before Parīkṣit.

The exposition of essence-non-essence — reasoning must be spoken; the moving-and-unmoving must be searched — for examples.

For a moment should become Brahman itself; for a moment should search the visible; should accomplish — for vaktṛtva by many examples.

So the Bhāgavata-exposition — Śuka spoke himself; to him bondage should not be attributed.

Therefore, while speaking and walking, without being laid motionless, mukti is gained — sāyujyatā — by Sadguru-bodha.

One is *mukta*, one is *nitya-mukta*; one is to be known as *jīvan-mukta*; one yogi is *videha-mukta* — the composed.

The conscious is *jīvan-mukta*; the unconscious is *videha-mukta*; different from both is *nitya-mukta* — know the yogeśvara.

By svarūpa-bodha, stillness — know as *taṭasthatā*; *taṭasthatā* and stillness — these are body-connections.

Here only anubhava is the cause; all the rest is purposeless; satisfaction should come to oneself — by one's own sva-anubhava.

One who has eaten to the throat-limit — they say he is hungry; by that word [he is] tormented — this does not fit.

In svarūpa there is no body; there what doubt [can be]? 'Bound-mukta' — such feeling — is toward videha.

Holding body-intellect and contemplating — Brahmā and the others would not be mukta; there what is Śuka's state — of mukta-ness?

Mukta-ness itself is bondage; mukta-bound is 'un-bound'; sva-svarūpa is self-evident — neither bound nor mukta.

With a stone of mukta-ness tied to the belly, one sinks to pātāla; the bolt of body-intellect does not fit in svarūpa.

One who has freed himself from I-ness — he alone is one mukta; mute or speaking — he is mukta.

What is to be bound — is void; there, where is the feeling of mukta? On examining, all talk of qualities is void.

[Śloka] 'baddho mukta iti vyākhyā guṇato na me vastutaḥ | guṇasya māyā-mūlatvān na me mokṣo na bandhanam'.

The *tattva-jñātā* is supremely pure; to him there is no mukta-bound; mukta-bound is sport — by māyā-quality.

Where name-and-form ceases, there where does mukta-ness remain? Mukta-bound is forgotten — along with forgetting.

'Who became bound-mukta?' — thus the listener asks; know that the afflictor — is 'I-ness' — afflicts its holder.

Thus all this effort is the delusion of ahamtā — know; the māyā-transcendent rest has not been enjoyed.

Enough — bondage and mukta-ness fell on the head of imagination; that imagination then, in truth — is true.

Therefore this is the mirage; māyā is the baseless cloud; dream is false immediately — on waking.

He who became bound-mukta in the dream did not come to waking; what became of whom — is not known at all.

Therefore all world-people who attained ātma-jñāna are mukta; by pure jñāna, mukta-ness [reveals] — as void at root.

Mukta-bound is a doubt; it holds the body of imagination; the sādhu is always doubt-free — body-transcended substance.

Enough now; next — in what manner should one remain? That very exposition — listen attentively.