Lights on the Upanishads

THE KATHOPANISHAD

“If before the body drops down one has been able to apprehend (It) here, then is one fit for embodiment in the worlds (that are His creations).”¹⁴⁷

“Day in and day out, millions of beings journey to the abode of Yama, but those who are left behind desire to stay on here permanently as if they were exemptions privileged to evade their turns in the procession. Can there be a greater wonder than this?” exclaims Yudhishthira in the Mahabharata. But to Nachiketas of the Katha Upanishad Death does not seem to be a terror, nor men desiring to live and not to die, a wonder. For with courage and not fear he proceeds to the Hall of Death and faces him; and not with indifference or disgust but with a desire to come back to life he chooses the first boon. But terror or no, Nachiketas sees the other side of life, enters the House of Death, learns the secrets of the great passage, discovers the return path to life here, blessed indeed with Yama’s assurance of his personal identity for recognition by his father. And this is really, the wonder; for the Upanishad starts with a story which, if taken literally, is absurd, incredible, less than a nursery tale.

What then is the story? What does it represent to our understanding? What is the character of Nachiketas Fire? Is there reference to Nachiketas elsewhere in the earlier texts? What is the significance of each of the boons Yama bestows upon Nachiketas? How is the last, the third boon granted ? In other words, is the question about death itself answered in clear terms and the secret revealed? If so, how? These and connected questions we shall consider in this our attempt at a correct appreciation of the question as well as the answer about the existence or non-existence of man after death.

Needless to say that we proceed on the basis that the text of the Katha Upanishad as come down to us, commented upon by the teachers of later philosophical schools, is authentic and for the purpose of our enquiry it is of no avail to pay attention to textual criticisms offered by modern critical scholarship which determines the second part and perhaps portions of the first also as a later addition to the original text. There may be reasonable grounds to come to such conclusions purely from a textual standpoint. But we cannot forget the fact that the Upanishads themselves, judged from the form of the language, are later than some of the Brahmanas, but on that account do not cease to be authentic. Besides, even though the language may belong to a slightly later period, as well as the form in which the ideas are presented, the substance, the spirit and teaching, is as old as any of the Upanishads and in fact the story of the Katha Upanishad forms part of the Kathaka Brahmana to which we shall have occasion to refer.

Let us first state the story with which the Upanishad starts and then proceed with our enquiry into the character of Nachiketas and the boons.

Vajashravas gave all his wealth as gifts; he had a son, named Nachiketas. When the gifts (the cows) were being led, Faith took possession of the young boy and he pondered over the poor character of his father’s gifts. Himself prepared to be offered as a gift, he addressed, “ Father, to whom wilt thou give me?” He repeated the question thrice. “To Death will I give you,” replied the father. Then the boy started saying, “ Among the many I walk the first, among the many I walk the mid-most Yama means to do something which by me he will accomplish today.” Departing, he addresses his father suggesting that he shall not go back on his word, for after all“ Man, mortal, withers like the fruits of the field and like the fruits of the field he is born again. In the Hall of Yama he fasts three nights and waits for his arrival. Then Yama, the son of Vivasvan, appears and grants three boons to Nachiketas since he failed to honour the guest and perform the guest-rite to him who fasted three nights in his house. For the Brahmana-guest was no less than the Vaishvanara Agni. Nachiketas chooses his first boon by which he wishes to see his father freed from anger and sorrow, tranquillised in feeling and serene in thought, and greet him back to life recognising him as the same Nachiketas. This is granted with the assurance that Gautama, his father, would recognise and with joy welcome the boy released from the jaws of death and would have sweet sleep. For the second boon he chooses the knowledge of the Celestial Fire-the Fire by which one goes to heaven where the soul rejoices, having crossed over sorrow and hunger, where there is immortality, no death, nor fear of old age. Yama grants this boon; for he expounds to him the nature of the Celestial Fire, for he knows it. He describes it as the possession of infinite existence, the foundation of all things and the thing concealed in the secret cave of our being. He tells him of Fire, the world’s beginning, of what the bricks are to him, their number, the manner of his building. Nachiketas repeats what he is taught. The Great One, mahātmā, is pleased with Nachiketas and gives an additional boon saying that the Fire would be named after him and offers him a necklace of many figures. Now, Yama continues, "He that lighteth the three fires of Nachiketas and uniteth himself with the three and doth the triple works crosseth beyond birth and death for ever. Having known the God adorable, omniscient, Brahman-born, and, realising Him, one attains to surpassing peace.” " When one has the three Nachiketas and knows this that is triple and so knowing beholds the Nechiketas Fire, he thrusts from him the cords of Death and leaving sorrow far behind enters Heaven rejoicing.” The third boon is interesting, for it is the question about death and the answer is still more interesting, not simple, but puzzling as we shall see on coming to that part of the discussion. This is the question, the third boon Nachiketas chooses. “There is this doubt that when a man has passed away, some say, “he is” and some, “this he is not”. Taught by thee I would know this. This is the third of the boons.” Yama asks him to choose another boon as the question about death is a riddle, even the gods debated this of old, the law of it is very subtle. But Nachiketas persists and refuses to take any other boon, resists all temptations—sons and grandsons blessed with longevity, horses and elephants, wealth, gold, lovely women, mighty country, happy life, untold treasures and pleasures of all kinds, offered by Yama. He is gratified to know that Nachiketas is single in his purpose and has with firm faith turned towards the path of knowledge, of Truth; his choice of the Good and the Right and discard of the sweet is definitive, a positive proof of his competence to receive the knowledge, the answer to his question. The rest of the whole Upanishad is an exposition of the answer, the great secret of true Immortality and the means of its attainment.

It is beside our purpose here to examine and expound all the passages of the text and arrive at the core of the teachings. Our object is to look into the nature of the three boons separately and show that they are not boons asked for at random or merely choices decided by the whims of the boy while he was face to face with death. Ordinarily we are accustomed to think that it is the third boon which is the most important and treat the first two not with as much care and close attention as they deserve. In fact if one misses the significance of the first and the second, one can rest assured of failing to grasp the import of the third boon—the question about death. In the first instance, the first boon is curious; if we understand it aright, then, the way is paved for following the trend of the rest. For no one who is serious will attach importance to the story part of the Upanishad as an actual occurrence; not that it is not possible that there was one Vajashravas who performed a sacrifice in which he gave all his possessions, and irritated by the repeated requests of his son Nachiketas to be given away as an offering, said angrily, "I give you to death", and later became despondent when the son departed. The story as such does not take us anywhere. But the Upanishad does not start with the story without a purpose. It is necessary to note that the Kathaka section of the Taittiriya Brahmana (XI. 8) narrates the story of Nachiketas and the three boons he gets from Yama succinctly in a short section. Except that the Upanishad amplifies it with a special stress on the character of the last boon, the question about man’s death and the answer concerning the immortal, the substance is to be found in the Brahmana and to some extent the very expressions. And we know the stories in the Brahmana are narrated to serve the purpose of prompting man to do or refrain from doing a particular act. Such texts called Declamatory texts, arthavāda in the parlance of the Mimamsakas; they may be fictitious or historical occurrences but have value in the scheme of the Brahmanas. When we study the episode of Nachiketas in this setting, the significance arrests our attention. What exactly is the inner sense, the truth, the value the story drives at? In our attempt to find the answer we must keep before our mind the general principles that govern our way of approach to these studies of the Upanishads, especially when they, partially or in full, form part of the Brahmanas. For if the Brahmanas expound the externals of the Vedic religion, the Vedic rite and worship, the Upanishads represent some phases of the inner meaning, the kernel, the spiritual and occult knowledge, the Sadhanas or practical means of developing the inner life-embodied in the hymns of the Vedic mystics. Here it is quite in place to present the reader with a passage from what Sri Aurobindo says in his foreword to the Hymns to the Mystic Fire. “They (the Vedic Rishis) discovered secrets and powers of Nature which were not those of the physical world but which could bring occult mastery over the physical things and to systematise the occult knowledge and power was also one of their preoccupations ... But all this could only be safely done by a difficult and careful training, discipline, purification of the nature; it could not be done by the ordinary man.”

Now, let us see if there is any earlier reference to Nachiketas or to the substance of the story either in the Brahmanas or in the Rig Veda. In the Taittiriya Brahmana (XI. 7), in the section previous to that which begins with the story of Nachiketas, we have the name mentioned as that of a Fire, the Flame that bridges Heaven and Earth; it is the celestial Agni who carries safe the fit soul across Death to the other side of the border of the earthly life, to the higher worlds upwards and this is called the Svargya Agni or Nachiketas Fire. But the description of that Agni quite well agrees with what is spoken of him in Yama’s exposition in the Upanishad while granting the second boon to Nachiketas, the child of Vajashravas. To this we shall have occasion to refer when enquiring into the nature of the second boon. Again there is a hymn in the Rik Samhita ascribed to the Rishi Kumara Yamayana whom Sayana in his commentary identifies with the Nachiketas of the Kathopanishad. But this is doubtful; Sayana himself is not quite certain, does not adduce any reason or give reference to Vedic texts to support the conjecture beyond quoting a line from the Taittiriya Brahmana mentioning the episode of Nachiketas and with this help he tries to explain the hymn. But he is not satisfied with his discovery of the purport of the hymn and therefore, as usual with him, gives an alternative meaning granting the possibility of the Seer Kumara being someone other than Nachiketas. But the purport of the whole hymn as explained by Sayana does not help us in getting at the real substance of it. For our purpose the identity of the Rishi is not material, but the subject-matter of this hymn of seven verses is interesting, especially the sixth verse, and throws some light on points that concern us in discussing the question of the departure of Nachiketas to the world of Yama. Below we give a close English rendering of the hymn, as it is of sufficient importance rich with suggestions bearing on our subject. The sense of the hymn will cease to offer insuperable difficulty if we remember that Yama is Aditya, the Sun of Truth in the Rig Veda, or as in the Katha text, son of Vivasvan (Sun), the Law, born of the Truth, Dharmaraja. The Rishi Kumara in the course of his self-development and spiritual achievement, by his self-exceeding occult knowledge transcends the barriers of the material life, of the earthly encasement, of the physical consciousness, develops and moves in his spiritual and subtle body in a higher consciousness to the vaster worlds above and perceives the Father, the Lord of creatures in the company of the God.

The Rishi says, "Here in this tree of goodly leaves (or flowers) Yama drinks with the Gods; (He)our Father, Lord of the creatures lovingly tends our ancient ones.”

Detracting, and in an evil (impure) way, I looked upon him who with love tends our ancient ones; and then I longed for him again.”

Yama says: “O child, you do not see the chariot you mount, wheelless, one-poled, new, that you fashioned with mind, the chariot that turns excellently on all sides.”

“Child, the chariot that you have urged from above the enlightened ones to turn towards me, that the Saman has closely come upon, placed in a ship.”

“Who begot the boy? Who made the chariot to roll on who will declare to us this day how the restoration was made ?”

“As the restoration (gift in due order) was made, the front appeared; ahead (in the front was spread the foundation (above), behind (below) the passage was made clear.”¹⁴⁸

“This is the house of Yama called the mansion of the Gods; here for him the flute is blown; here he is glorified with hymnal songs.” Rv. X. 135.

Whether or not this hymn of the Rig Veda is really the basis of the story of Nachiketas in the Katha Upanishad is not a matter of great importance to us. But the significance of the hymn cannot be missed and it obviously lies in the fact that the Rishi Kumara goes forward—shall we say upward—in a car fashioned by his mind, which is wheelless, one-poled, moving on all sides and in the very act of his going ahead, the passage behind is made, the opening is effected, so that his return journey from Yama to the Earth-life is made easy and the communication between this life and whatever is on the other side becomes natural and settled. The very enigmatic form of the hymn, the curious mask of the dialogue, the words of riddle used by Yama betray the occult character of the spiritual status the Rishi has won. The explanation of the whole hymn verse by verse is beside the mark here and we leave it to the diligent mind to discover the fuller import.

To return to the Nachiketas story: the first boon he asks of Yama is that he may be allowed to return to his father and find him tranquillised and prepared to recognise him. Yama grants the boon; in other words Nachiketas, the Soul flaming up beyond towards the higher and vaster world above could retain the thread of his personal consciousness in recovering his material encasement, and so readjust himself in his changed inner condition to the demands of physical and outer life that he could be recognised by the father who gave him up to Death. It is not improbable that vājaśravas is a significant name representing one known for his material plenitude or one who is open to inspired hearing even in the midst of material plenty. This latter suggestion is prompted by the actual wordings in the Brahmana. For it is a Voice that speaks calling him to the house of Death (tam utthitam vāk abhivadati). And when Nachiketas mentions the choice of the first boon the actual wording in the Brahmana text means " let me get back alive to my father" (pitaram eva jivan ayāni). If then we choose to take note of the significance of the name Vajashravas as the outer being and consciousness in the material plenitude of physical existence, Nachiketas is the Flame of the Soul released from the bonds of physical being, offered as the last gift of Vajashravas who consciously owns the material plenty. The boy Kumara is the son, product of Vajashravas is naciketas, not conscious of what he was being prepared for or what he himself was asking for when he offered himself as a gift in the sacrifice of his father. It is not wise to overlook the inner sense of vājaśravas and naciketas, especially in view of the fact that the Upanishad speaks of Nachiketas in the house of Yama as Vaishvanara Flame. For he is indeed the Fire in the universal Being of Matter, Life and Mind-spoken of as triņāciketas; hidden within in the human being he is the son of Man and if we may use a modern phrase, the main product of Evolution. Awake as the Flame of the uprising Soul he rises from the Earth-life to the abode of Yama, the guardian of Law, Dharmaraja, the Son of Truth symbolised by the Sun, Vivasvan. The significance of the other words and names used in the text of the Upanishad is irresistible. We may note the instance of Yama spoken of as Mrityu as well as Vaivasvata. For there are three aspects in which he can be viewed. He is Mrityu because he is the dispenser of death; he is Yama, the Restrainer, one who controls, by keeping the Cosmic Law, Dharma; that is because he is the son of Vivasvan, the Sun of Truth from which the Law is born.

These expressions clearly indicate the real nature of the first boon that Yama bestows upon Nachiketas—the boon, a capacity by which he can come back from the higher plane to the physical with the connection between this and the life beyond established, maintaining the thread of consciousness, for the opening is already made and the passage clear, to use the Vedic phrase. We may note in passing that the Sanskrit phrase sūtrātmā meant to refer to the Soul in the linga deha or subtle body, very well answers to the description of soul retaining the thread of the personal consciousness in its journey to the other side of Life and discovering the exit passage to return to the Earth-life. This, then, is the first boon the initial gain of Nachiketas which every soul aspiring to re-live a fuller life has to win by completely dying first in order to emerge into the Kingdom of the Keeper of the Law by which the Cosmic existence is preserved, through which one has to ascend the heights of existence above the cycle of life and death to the Eternal Life, Freedom, Immortality.

Let us proceed then to the second boon and look into its significance in the light of what has been stated in regard to the first. It lies in the fact that the soul which has gained the initial release from the net of the physical consciousness and earth-bound life and has maintained contact with the God, the higher Power administering the Cosmic Law, could through it gain the further knowledge of the Divine Being that presides over the Cosmic constitution of the Universe which begins with Heaven above and rests on Earth at this end. That Divine Being is called here the celestial Fire svargya agni, the source and foundation of world-existence. He is not the Brahman beyond, but born of Brahman, he is the Divine Being Omniscient, resides in Heaven, rules over the Cosmos. High above and therefore superconscient to us he transcends the earthly nature. But here, within the mortal human being he is concealed in the secret cave, in the subliminal parts. By kindling him, by lighting that Fire, hidden in the subconscience and by the proper arrangement of the various parts and building him in right order in tune with the Cosmic law, he is revealed as the Divine manifested out of the Brahman. At his revelation the soul attains to a surpassing peace. Once he is intensely realised, in the three Soul-states, on the three levels (or on the three world-planes of the Vedic order), effecting points of contact in the triple being unified with him (tri-naciketas), one crosses beyond birth and death. Therefore when a man has gained access to this triple Nachiketas, the cords of mortality are loosened and drop altogether.

It is the instruction in this occult knowledge that Nachiketas receives from Yama for the second boon. To such a soul as attained to the Divine existence the power of Prakriti, creative Nature, comes unasked and falls under its control. This is the sense of Yama favouring Nachiketas with an additional boon, unasked, the grant of the Necklace of many forms.

Now we come to the most puzzling part of the discussion, the question about death. Without fear of contradiction we may at once state that the question Nachiketas asks of Yama about death, has been among the most misunderstood of questions. Is it his desire to know what happens to man after death? Can it be that he has doubts about the survival of the soul when man dies? Such a question cannot arise, for he is already present before Yama; not only that he did appear before him, but he got the boon to come back to life as a recognisable personality. So this cannot be a question about the survival of the soul. Again by the second boon he has attained his place in a divine existence, enjoying immortality, having crossed beyond life and death. Therefore we can safely say that he is not afflicted with doubts about the immortality of the soul in the sense that it continues its existence in other worlds, the world of Heaven or Gods which he already enjoys. What then does he mean when he says "When man has passed away, some say ’He is’, some This he is not’?” Is there anything in man different from the body, senses and mind which survives their disintegration and assumes contact with another body of the same or different kind either here on earth or elsewhere in another existence? If there is such a thing,-call it spirit, purusha or soul-how can we say it is the same being, the same person that survives death and continues to be in an after-existence or takes birth? And what we usually understand by man is neither the soul separately nor the body and mind and senses, but all considered together, what we may call the human personality. Therefore when there is disorganisation of the physical organism, whatever survives does not survive as the mere spirit, Purusha, or atman, the self. For if it is survival of the Purusha alone and not with something of the human personality characteristic of the man that dies, how are we justified in calling the survival as that of the personal self? How can there be a personal self without a personality? After all it is the personality that counts for identity of which it is the stamp and expression.¹⁴⁹

Those who give the answer in the affirmative hold that there is one who is called the enjoyer (bhoktā) by virtue of his being yoked to soul, senses and mind and it is he who survives death. Those who say that a man when he dies, does not survive as a person or soul with a human personality mean by implication that personality is a developing proposition, that it is subject to constant change in the world-existence which itself is in a state of perpetual flux. If it is a colourless all-pervasive, omniscient Reality, Brahman, which resides in and supports the individual lives and minds and souls, that survives, then It being the Immortal, the Eternal One certainly persists, continues untouched by the mortality of man, survives. Therefore if man is That, then in that sense one can say he is". But if by man is meant the human personality, then, as such he does not survive and so some say “this he is not ”for the reason already stated, viz., that it is ever-changing. If nothing else survives but the One, it is the same thing as saying that when a man dies the decomposed elements are absorbed by the Universal or restored to their universal correspondences, and the Eternal One alone remains unaffected, the Immortal Being. It is just like the universal Space (mahākāsā) in the jar (ghața) remaining unaffected by the breaking of the jar and therefore surviving it. If so, for all practical purposes it comes to mean that “like corn mortal man decays and like corn he is born”, in the words of Nachiketas. But is that what the Upanishad says as regards the true nature and goal of man? It is true that the text lays emphasis on the Eternal Reality, the Supreme One, as the Immortal Being—all else is not immortal or eternal but subject to change, transitory. Even when a heavenly being, a god, deva, is said to be immortal, he is not so in his own right, his immortality is not absolute, but derived from the Eternal One, by his Cosmic status, by his proximity in Consciousness to his own Origin which is the Origin of all the gods and powers, of all the worlds and beings. If the Upanishad lectures only upon this True Immortality absolute and one and leaves it there, we can very well say that the question of Nachiketas is not answered or if answered at all it is done in such a way that the question is evaded. In that case Nachiketas might very well say, “Sir, I talk of chalk, you talk of cheese". But Yama takes care to answer the question almost as suggestions and hints indicated in a few verses, assuming the questions to refer to death of men in general, even though it may not fully apply to Nachiketas who is a special case, having already won heavenly immortality which is relative, not the highest and absolute of which Nachiketas has yet to learn from Yama for his last boon.

A single answer to the question about the death, survival and immortality of man will be misleading, is not possible at all; for the question is complicated, not simple; men are many, all are not of the same level and development, of equal wisdom and capacity for knowledge and action; for these are the factors that contribute to and are assimilated by that nature, that power, that element in man’s being which survives the extinction of the bio-physical mechanism. Therefore the Upanishad says, “Subtle is the law”. Certainly it does not teach a downright Materialism, a modern version of the ancient lokāyatika; on the other hand, Yama says, “Gautama, surely, I will tell you the Secret, the Eternal, Brahman, and also what happens to the Soul after one dies.” Again, “Some enter the womb for re-embodiment of the Spirit, some follow after the Motionless according to their deeds, according to their knowledge.” (V. 6,7.) Here what it is that actually survives and prepares for embodiment for the Spirit is not stated; but in the light of other passages which we shall presently refer to, we can take it as understood that it is the soul that is meant by the word ātman used in the text-mark the words, yatha maranaṁ präpya åtmä bhavati. Even then we have to know what exactly is the relation of the soul that takes rebirth to the Secret, the Eternal, Brahman of which Yama promises in the same breath to instruct Nachiketas. Before we consider why and how some souls for embodiment enter the womb and some not, let us see, confining ourselves to the passages of this Upanishad, how the soul that is reborn is related to the Brahman, the Eternal, the Immortal One.

The perception by the ancients of the truth about the Soul and God, the individual spirit and the universal self, the lower self and the higher spiritual Being, is recorded in the Hymns and is as old as the Rig Veda and we find a famous Rik of the mystic Dirghatamas bodily taken and cited by the Mundaka Upanishad. The same truth is expressed in a different figure here in the Katha text. If in the vision of the Vedic seer the two Selves are two birds, eternal companions, dwelling in a common tree of Life, one eating the delicious fruit of the tree and the other not eating but simply watching his fellow, the sages of the Upanishad, especially in the Katha, use a different figure to deliver the same truth, but with more explicitness, with apt analogues which are expressive symbolisms and truth-forms, rather than poetical similies; to illustrate the relation of the Twin-Souls. In the Rik of the seer the lower self is the bird who dwells in the common tree of Life with God, the supreme Soul; he is lost in the sweetness of life and therefore has fallen from his lordship. But when he sees the other who is Lord and Beloved, he realises that all this is His greatness and his grief leaves him. But how does the soul take part in and taste the fruits of life without the sanction of the other, the Lord ? To imply his sanction, it is said, he watches; for his very seeing (abhi-cākaśiti) carries with it all that is necessary to actuate the other to take part in life and therefore in that sense and to that extent he too is a sharer of the fruits of life; but he is not moved by it as the other fellow, therefore it is said he simply watches. But the Katha makes it still more explicit when it says (III. I.) that there are two who drink deep of the truth of good deeds; they dwell in the highest half of the most High (parame parārdhe); they have entered into and are lodged in the secret cave. Therefore they are not far from each other and separate. If their plenary Home is in the supreme half at the summit of the Creation and therefore far from us, they are also close within us, in the secret depths, in the heart of the creature they have entered into. One can know Him, the eater of the sweetness, madhvadam, the jiva, ever close as the Self within, that is the lord of what was and what shall be (IV. 5.); thus if the higher Self is a close companion, the Self of the lower self lodged in the heart and can be seen within the self clearly as in a mirror, high above they are both one together, inseparable as Light and Shade in the high heights of the Cosmic ladder. For the One in His manifestation as creation is said to be the Eternal Tree, Ashwattha, whose roots are above and branches are downward and it is He who is called Brahman, Immortal, the Shining One in whom all the worlds are established, and there is nothing beyond him, none can go beyond it.

Therefore in considering the relation of the reincarnating soul to the higher Self which is both within us and above us we shall not confine ourselves to a single view-point, for that will be a partial truth misleading, and therefore untruth in the result. We may cite the instance of the Upanishad describing how the Atman is perceived on different levels; within the self here he is seen as in a mirror, above in the world of Fathers as in dream, still higher as in water one sees the surface of an object and in the highest Heaven of the Spirit as Light and Shade. The same thing applies to the question of the rebirth of the soul; we can say that the soul chooses and prepares for re-embodiment and enters the womb. But the soul is neither born nor dies, this also we can say from a different view-point. For the Self within the soul is the real Soul, is the Lord seated within it, has no birth or death; or the Higher Self above watches and therefore presides over the soul here, is born not, dies not. But that truth does not apply to the re-incarnating soul. It is a fact of spiritual experience, of realisation of the truth that is related to a higher and deeper state of consciousness, to a subtler layer of being, to a vaster and wider sphere of existence. The Upanishad speaks of two halves, the higher and the lower; the former, parārdha is dominated by Knowledge, Vidya; the latter aparardha is governed by the rule of Ignorance, Avidya, and falls under the control of Death, mýtyu. If in the higher half is the open Truth, self-revealed and Immortal, in the lower field of Ignorance the Truth is veiled, beings are born and die; the cycle of birth and death rotates unceasingly. In the higher truth souls seem to be embodied and disembodied as if they were shadows the substance of which is the true Self which has neither birth nor death. Therefore the Soul which crosses beyond the Ignorance gets endued with the true vision and realises its own truth, its original Being and Self. But as long as one remains in the Ignorance the soul’s embodiment and reincarnation is actual and it is with a sense of reality it takes its course of birth and rebirth and runs the gamut of life. Taking its stand on this fact of actual experience the Upanishad speaks of the generality of human beings as bound by the spell of Ignorance under the rule of Death and that a rare one occasionally turns his eye inward and attains to Immortality. Therefore what happens to the soul when a man dies is a question to which the answer depends upon the man as to how far by his knowledge and works he has helped or hindered the soul in its circuit of life and upward march towards the truth of its Being

For any soul to take birth or rebirth it must have a vehicle to move in; for essentially the soul is Spirit and does not move in vacuum but chooses and develops by its own inherent power which is really the power of the Spirit, a natural vehicle, a body, an inseparable garb, however subtle and psychic in its kind and character it be. It is this that absorbs as much as it can the essentials of experiences in life for which it takes birth. Therefore the condition of the soul after death is determined by the direction towards which the summation of its experiences subtly lodged in its natural vehicle and body gravitates. Some may be drawn upwards to the higher worlds if such be the development and realisation in the earth-life itself. Some may be earth-bound, desire-ridden, that is to say, the soul may be still submerged in the thoughts and feelings and passions, possessed by things material, of the grosser existence or dominated by an apparent denial of the Spirit, of the higher world, of anything other than this terrestrial existence. Such people, such souls are naturally earth-bound and get back the fruits of their labour. Some, the text says, follow after the Motionless, sthānu, which means according to Shankara, that some souls go back to the condition of inanimate objects like trees, etc. It can mean the Unchanging One which is of course Brahman. Whether a human soul does actually go back to a lower birth and become a brute or log of wood, or it is rhetoric to say so, need not be considered here, and is beyond our scope.¹⁵⁰

Thus the Upanishad proclaims that the fate of the soul is determined by what it learns to do and know and has done and known. It may be asked how or why the soul chooses to do or know in a particular way different from others. Our text has a ready answer in that it says (V. 13) that it is the One, the Eternal in all that is transitory, it is the One supremely conscious in all conscious beings, it is the one that orders the desires of many and that the calm and strong behold that One within the self and theirs is the Peace of God. This disposes of the question why so many should desire in so many ways and are impelled to move and act divergently; for the simple reason is that the Origin and Impeller, preritā, is He, moving the many and lodged in the many. Therefore to know Him before the soul slowly loosens itself from the body is imperative and cannot be postponed by anyone who is determined not to die like a worm. For even when by the merit of one’s own knowledge and deed and consequent development for realisation of some kind one could secure a release from lower bonds and a status in a higher existence after death, one has to come back again here for the realisation of that One because it is here that He can be seen within one’s self as in a mirror. Our text treats as next to nonentities the souls that leave the body without knowing Him. To know Him here is to possess and be possessed by the Truth, the One, the Immortal. How to know is the question. In some of the verses hints are thrown about the means which one has to employ to practise the Yoga which yields the secret. But in the last resort one makes an exclusive choice of the Truth, the Supreme, the Self, it is then that the one, the Self reveals the Substance of Reality, its own body to the soul.

But that is the ultimate step, the immediate means in which the exclusive choice of the Self, made by the soul seems the reverse side or the consequence of the free choice of the Self to reveal itself. But, for the initial seeking of the Truth by one in the Ignorance who is tossed by the doubt whether man ceases or continues to be and if that One is within him or not, manifest or unmanifest, Faith is the first indispensable, the prime factor that makes for competence to receive the secret Knowledge. Nachiketas had it; even before he made his pilgrimage to the temple of Yama, Faith took possession of him. Later also “Teach me, I have faith (Sraddadhānāya)” implores Nachiketas. To start with faith is as a matter of course necessary, intelligible. But faith in what? Faith in the existence of Him in all manifestation, in one’s self. For how can It be known anywhere other than in him who says, “ It is ” (i.e., who has the faith that he is)? (VI. 12) First It is said to be known in its manifestation, in one’s own self; because it is both Manifest (sat) and Unmanifest (asat). Once it is known as the Manifest, then its essential truth, the Unmanifest, dawns upon man. (VI. 13.)

Therefore with faith in His presence one must proceed to discover Him within one’s own being, in the depths, in the heart. This discovery is not possible or made effective by the mere mental seeking however keen and subtle it be, though it may be helpful to discipline the mind; nor by the vital strength with all the desires and passions of life canalised and focussed contributing to its vigour, though that may be precious for its purification and disposition to come under self-control, but chiefly by the soul with all the help it can command from the instruments, mind and senses and life. The discovery by the soul of the Self, the God within us, is indeed a revelation; but it is not an experience unrelated to the material body; for it is not the result of mental analysis. It is not a metaphysical separation of the self that the Upanishad means, for it says, “One must separate Him with patience from one’s body as one separates the main fibre from a blade of grass." (VI. 17.) In such concrete terms the Upanishad delivers the authentic words in regard to the lodgement of the Spirit in the physical body of man. This is what the teaching arrives at—that the knowledge and realisation of the Truth about the Immortal, the Spirit in the mortal, is possible and necessary for man in his life on earth, that such an attainment alone prepares for his continued existence and survival after the falling of the physical sheath as an individual Soul in a well-formed, superbly centralised, transparent, subtle and spiritual encasement that can maintain itself and withstand the forces of darkness and death; for it is these and their kindred that turn and dominate the cycle of birth and rebirth in the dominion of Ignorance and falsehood, in the lower half of Cosmic existence.

This, then is the significance of the triple boon that Yama grants to Nachiketas. If the initiative for Truth-Knowledge comes from the possession of faith that gives the momentum for a self-exceeding effort to go beyond the common run of life and come face to face with the Power that knows the secrets of Cosmic existence and maintains the Cosmic law, then, that is a gain; just a primary gain, but definite and far-reaching, it brings with it for the soul of courage, calm and strength who makes the decisive choice for outreaching the routine life and repeated circuits of the crude outward consciousness, the power to open the passage leading to the other side of life and to link it with the bodily life here and return consciously through the new-found way to the material existence. This, indeed, is a kind of release from the coarser and bounded life and to that extent a partial liberation from Nature’s control. This is the meaning of the first boon, the first gain an occult power and knowledge. But it is limited in its scope; the knowledge, the power of the soul that has gained entrance into the secret chambers of Yama-dharma, the ruler of the Cosmic Law of which life and death are phases, is confined to a select portion, to a fragment of its own being, narrow, not wide, not sufficiently deep or high, not extended to the whole of its being. Therefore in the second boon, the next step is taken giving the secret, the knowledge of the Fire, the divine Being who is the origin of the worlds, the foundation of world-existence, whose Home is above, in the heights of the Cosmos, who is yet hidden within man, behind in the subliminal parts, below and above. The gain of this knowledge, of the secret and origin of world-existence, heaven and earth, includes the method of waking up this Force, lighting up this Fire within one’s being, by which the soul becomes conscious of the Divine Being of the Cosmos and builds Him in himself. In effect, the soul is widened in its sphere of knowledge, heightened in its stature, sets firm its point of contact in the triple activity of the Universe of Matter, Life and Mind; and united to the Cosmic and heavenly Fire in its threefold principle for knowledge and work it stands above, with an intense peace settling on it, immortal, out of the rolling wheel of life and death.

This is a greater gain, remarkable and grand in its conception and achievement. But this great consummation could rest permanently upon only one thing and that is the knowledge of the One and the Immortal from which the Divine Being of the Cosmos is born:

For that is the sole and absolute Being, the Immortal; on it rests the birth, the growth, the conduct, the government of the universe; in it shines the Light that, dispelling all darkness, shows the real nature of the births and deaths of beings; by it are revealed the soul-formations of the Spirit seeming to be born and reborn; it is synonymous with the unshakable and immense rock of Peace and therefore is the basis, the foreground as well as the back-ground of all true knowledge and activity in the Universe; in short, it is the first Cause and the final Effect of all movements, separative and collective, or unifying and total, in the human existence or World-being. Once the soul attains this Peace, the gain is immense, abiding, absolute and real—the gain from which other gains get their values. If the value of the first gain lies in leading to the next step, in the loosening of the cords of ego-centric life for Knowledge of the Cosmic Law and the attainment of a heavenly immortality, such an attainment itself, however grand and covetable, is shaky or falls and fails without a true and firm basis, and therefore derives its substance and value from the foremost of all attainments; and that is the winning of Immortality by the realisation of the One who transcends the All, above life and death, yet hidden in the heart, in the deepest depths of the human being. If one knows him here before the body withers away, then he lives in the Light, and surviving the earth-life and one in consciousness with that One of whom all world-existence is embodiment, he is competent to shine forth as an embodied centre of that Immortal Light, the Purusha, the One. This is the truth of the Upanishad when it exhorts:¹⁵¹