Commentary on Paramahansa Nityananda's Chidakasha Gita–Number 15
by Swami Nirmalananda Giri

Chidakasha Gita:
Verses 56-62

56. In pranayama, puraka is drawing up the breath. Kumbhaka is retaining the breath. Rechaka is exhaling the breath. These three kinds of breath are from within. Nothing is taken from outside. While thus the practice is going on, the prana will move only in one nadi. We then feel the internal joy. Who can describe this Brahmananda? The outside world will then be forgotten. We will then be in the world beyond.

• In pranayama, puraka is drawing up the breath. Kumbhaka is retaining the breath. Rechaka is exhaling the breath. These three kinds of breath are from within. Nothing is taken from outside.

This is extremely important for those who work in any way with the breath. As long as the breath is an external matter involving drawing in air from outside, etc., it is not pranayama. Only when the breath becomes a fully internal process, a movement of the inner pranic forces through the subtle nadis, is it pranayama. Until then it is no more than Hatha Yoga breathing. However, there are methods which start with the external breath and lead to the internal breath, so Nityananda is not denying the value of some external practices. But it is necessary to understand that those practices will lead inward early on in meditation–he is not speaking of spending years on gross breathing in the hope of suspending the breath or “conquering the breathless state” in some unspecified future. Actually, Nityananda does not speak of “breathlessness” at all, but of the internalization of breathing.

• While thus the practice is going on, the prana will move only in one nadi. We then feel the internal joy. Who can describe this Brahmananda?

The “one nadi” is the true sushumna which is not in the center of the spine, but in the midst of the body, leading upward. The experience of the entry of the prana into the brahmarandhra is very necessary one, and is only the beginning of things–not the end or even near the end.

• The outside world will then be forgotten. We will then be in the world beyond.

“For, behold, the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21).

57. “This world” means jivatma; the “next world” means the union of jivatman and Paramatman.

“This world” is the state in which we think we are isolated points of awareness existing in material or relative modes. “The next world” is the awareness of our living, eternal union with the Supreme Spirit. Nothing as small and insignificant as either earth or heaven comes into the picture.

58. Just as small rivers enter the sea, our attention must be fixed on the internal breath.

This can only be accomplished by Right Meditation–and again it is not some future thing, but should be achieved by the yogi after only a short time of practice. It is, though, impossible for those who have not become purified by following all the observances of Yama and Niyama. Patanjali would not have made them the first step of Yoga if that were not so. Only the refinement produced by their observance makes the internal pranayama–and passing even beyond that–possible. The “small river” is the external breath, and the internal breath is the “sea” which we must then cross to the Other Shore of the union of jivatman and Paramatman.

59. What is visible is transient; it is perishable. When the mind is merged in bindu and nada, nirvikalpa samadhi is attained. Our attention is then entirely towards ananda (eternal joy). Fixing the attention between the eyebrows, the prana should enter the holy brahmarandhra. Here the light of lights becomes visible to the divine eye. This is mukti. This is eternally supreme joy. This is the place where the manas ought to dwell; this is the eternal being whence the Vedas have sprung. This is seeing Paramatman in all; this is the real place of jivatman.

• What is visible is transient; it is perishable.

This is because only physical matter is visible to the material eye, and they are both perishable, appearing for a moment and then being dissolved forever along with everything in their sphere of influence.

• When the mind is merged in bindu and nada, nirvikalpa samadhi is attained.

At the side of the ideograph for Om we find a horizontal comma shape and above it a single dot. The “comma” is nada, and the dot is bindu. Nada in the Om symbol represents the silent resonance of Om perceived in meditation (and understandable only to those that have had such experience through yoga practice). The bindu is “the point from which the subtle Omkara arises that is experienced in meditation” (A Brief Sanskrit Glossary). It is the root-entity of Om. Experiencing these two is, according to Nityananda, nirvikalpa samadhi. Here, as in aphorism 49, we find a very different concept of nirvikalpa samadhi from that of so many authors on yoga. Considering the divine greatness of Nityananda, we can safely rely on what he tells us regarding this.

• Our attention is then entirely towards ananda (eternal joy).

In the nirvikalpa state the consciousness becomes thoroughly oriented toward the ananda at the core of our being. That is why Krishna says: “Only that yogi whose joy is inward, inward his peace, and his vision inward shall come to Brahman and know Nirvana” (Bhagavad Gita 5:24).

• Fixing the attention between the eyebrows, the prana should enter the holy brahmarandhra.

In Om Yoga there are these two relevant passages:

“This is not actual concentration on the point between the eyebrows, which would cause strain and tension, but a relaxed looking upward as though looking through the point between the eyebrows–the “third eye”–at a point far distant.”

“Meditating with upturned eyes causes the subtle mental energies that pervade the body to begin moving upward into the higher centers of perception in the brain and its astral and causal counterparts. This is why in the Bhagavad Gita (5:27) Krishna speaks of the yogi “shutting out external contacts and fixing the gaze inside [within] the eyebrows.” This is usually translated “between the eyebrows”–at the so-called “third eye”–but antare bhruvoh can only mean “inside the eyebrows.” This can also legitimately be translated: “fixing the ‘seeing’ inside the eyebrows,” the idea being that at times during meditation the inner “gaze”–in the sense of awareness–becomes focused on or centered in the front of the forehead behind the eyebrows or as though looking upward through the eyebrows. You will find that this happens quite naturally when you turn your eyes upward and close them.…In the sixth chapter, verse thirteen, he says that the yogi should sit with upturned eyes, “as though gazing at the origin of his nose”–swam nasikagram samprekshya–the eyebrow level of the forehead. The purpose of this is not to concentrate on “the third eye” as is usually thought, and certainly not to make ourselves cross-eyed, but because when we lift our gaze gently upward toward the eyebrow level as though looking at a point far distant (it may help to think of looking upward into the sky), it will cause our awareness as well as our subtle life energies to begin moving upward to higher levels of consciousness.”

When this becomes steady the prana/breath enters the brahmarandhra.

• Here the light of lights becomes visible to the divine eye.

No matter how dark the place of meditation, the divine eye (divya chakshu) perceives brilliant light–the Light that is the basis of everything and which is meant by the passage: “God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). This is the expansion of Brahman as the Mahat Tattwa and the subsequent emanation of the cosmos. It is the “begetting” of the Son by the Father spoken of in the Gospels.

• This is mukti.

That is a very simple proposition!

• This is eternally supreme joy.

And so is this.

• This is the place where the manas ought to dwell.

And that happens only through perfection (siddhi) in Yoga.

• This is the eternal being whence the Vedas have sprung.

This is not the vision of God, but GOD–Brahman–Itself.

• This is seeing Paramatman in all.

And seeing is be-ing.

• This is the real place of jivatman.

Home at last.

60. The real place of the jiva is formless, indivisible. God pervades all things movable and immovable. He is the One without a second. God is the origin of the Vedas. He is the Lord of the body. He is the Lord of jivanmukti. Man to be man, must meditate on God.

The previous aphorism is being continued.

• The real place of the jiva is formless, indivisible.

This is because the jiva itself is formless and indivisible, being one with Brahman–also Formless and Indivisible. For Brahman is “the real place of the jiva,” and it is always so.

• God pervades all things movable and immovable.

Because God IS all things movable and immovable.

• He is the One without a second.

Creation is not other than Brahman, nor is the jiva.

• God is the origin of the Vedas.

This is not hard to believe, since Brahman is the origin of all–all are manifestations of Brahman.

• He is the Lord of the body.

The body lives only because Brahman dwells in there along with the jiva. As the Mundaka Upanishad says: “ Like two birds of golden plumage, inseparable companions, the individual self and the immortal Self are perched on the branches of the selfsame tree. The former tastes of the sweet and bitter fruits of the tree; the latter, tasting of neither, calmly observes. The individual self, deluded by forgetfulness of his identity with the divine Self, bewildered by his ego, grieves and is sad. But when he recognizes the worshipful Lord as his own true Self, and beholds his glory, he grieves no more” (Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.1, 2).

• He is the Lord of jivanmukti.

Jivanmukti is impossible without conscious union with God, and with that union samsara is impossible. Here once more we see the value of: “Therefore, become a yogi!” (Bhagavad Gita 6:46).

• Man to be man, must meditate on God.

This is certainly a vital principle to ever keep in mind. Sanatana Dharma is often called Manava Dharma, and it is usually thought that this expression means the Dharma expounded by Manu. But it also means Human Dharma–the path by which an aspirant can become a true human being, one who is fulfilling the very purpose of existence: the passage from humanity to divinity. This is why so few yogis–especially in the West–succeed. They try to scramble up the ladder to divinity before they are even authentic human beings. Only those who follow the principles of Sanatana Dharma–especially the Yama-Niyama observances–have any chance of achieving humanity. I realized this immediately when I went to India the first time. I had come from a demonic (asuric) background, a “culture” that was fundamentally rakshasic in nature. Therefore I needed to learn how to be human. I mean this literally. It was not easy to do, but it was worth it–without it I never could have have learned anything, really, or become a yogi. Not that Indian birth is a guarantee of humanity. Yogananda in a talk one time said that the first instruction he received from Swami Sri Yukteswar was: “Learn to behave.” He found this very puzzling, but after living in the elevated environment of the ashram for a while he came to understand perfectly–and become perfect himself.

61. He who meditates on the Reality is a sannyasi; he is a yogi. The distinction of “pariah” exists in the external. Internally, all is one without distinction. What is “pariah” is not after death. A pariah is he who has envy and pride; who holds vain discussion about religion; who talks ill of others behind their backs. Sewing is not stitching thread and cloth; but stitching manas and buddhi, i.e., merging manas in buddhi.

Now the distinction of male and female. A true female is one who is merged in the external; a true male is one who is merged in the internal. One whose buddhi is firm is male; one whose buddhi is fickle is a female. This distinction of male and female is external only. Internally such a distinction does not exist at all. When the manas and buddhi are merged in the atman, one who is physically a woman becomes spiritually a man.

• He who meditates on the Reality is a sannyasi; he is a yogi.

Two married friends of mine who were serious about spiritual life had an intuition that in time they would be required to take up monastic life. So in their next trip to India they asked their guru, Sri Anandamayi Ma, about this. Ma simply replied: “Those who do sadhana automatically become sadhus.” So that gives us some idea about the reality of the many “yogis” we find everywhere. They not only do not become sadhus, they insist that monastic life is unnecessary, and that the “householder” life is the ideal. But not according to the most renowned saint of twentieth-century India who said to another married couple of my acquaintance: “You can choose: liberation or marriage”! One time an American devotee requested me to ask Ma to bless him to find a dharmic wife. Ma’s answer was brief and unequivocal: “This body has never at any time advised anyone to be married.” (Ma always said “this body” rather than “I.”)

It is not without significance that Anandamayi Ma called all men “father” and all women “mother”–if they were not sadhus. But Ma referred to all monastics as “my friend.” The first time I wrote to her, she began her reply with the words: “Tell my friend….” So Brahmacharini Atmananda, to whom she was dictating, told my friend that had brought the letter to India: “Ma considers him a sannyasi.”

Mataji refused to enter the home of a householder. When my friend Durgaprasad Sahai (a disciple of Swami Keshabananda mentioned in Autobiography of a Yogi) asked her to visit his home, she told him of this rule. When he asked if she would at least come onto the veranda of the house, she said that she would not do so. Another friend of mine, Dr. Ghosh, told me that his marriage had been arranged and he had built a veritable mansion to live in after the wedding. He asked Ma if she would come and stay in the house before the marriage, to bless it. She agreed. But when she came there, he realized that by being married he would be banishing Ma from his home forever, so he went to her and declared he was canceling the marriage and giving the house to Ma for use as an ashram. She accepted. Ma gave instructions that from then on, whenever he travelled to any of the Anandamayi Ashrams he was to stay in her personal room. I know of no other person who had this privilege.

How could a person possibly meditate on Reality and remain immersed in Maya? When we look at the life of Yogiraj Sri Shyama Charan Lahiri (Lahiri Mahasaya), the “ideal householder yogi” we find that he was a celibate of the highest vairagya, in no way “of the world.” The same is true of Sri Ramakrishna and his disciple Sri Durga Charan Nag, who Swami Vivekananda said had no equal in his experience.

Certainly a person first becomes a sadhu, a worthy yogi, inwardly, but then it follows “as does night the day” that he formally takes up the sadhu life. What else could he do? The outer must mirror the inner.

• The distinction of “pariah” exists in the external. Internally, all is one without distinction. What is “pariah” is not after death.

Sadhus are considered the highest level of society. At the opposite end are the “untouchables” whose very proximity and touch are considered defiling by many Hindus even today. But just as the value of a sadhu is his inward character, Nityananda is pointing out that the Self within all–including the pariahs–is absolutely the same. Therefore no one is unclean by nature–just the opposite. It is contrary to dharma to label anyone a pariah by birth. All social distinctions are ended by death, therefore they have no reality in the final sense. The Self alone is the reality of all human beings.

• A pariah is he who has envy and pride.

Nityananda now tells us that there are mental pariahs whose vibrations can be harmful and even poisonous, though their Self is always pure. The envious and prideful are in the front line of spiritual pariahs, for they pollute the live of others–especially those whom they persuade to follow their ways.

• Who holds vain discussion about religion.

Empty religion is not just nothing, it is a great evil. And empty-souled religionists spread that evil, using religion as a tool of ignorance, corruption, and domination. That is why Vivekananda said that the “Christian” legacy in India was Bible, Brandy, and Batallion. Looking half a century ahead to independence, he once told some British officials: “When you leave this land, the only thing you will leave behind as a heritage is a mountain-range of broken brandy bottles.”

• Who talks ill of others behind their backs.

Hypocrisy and deception are among the most virulent of spiritual and social evils.

• Sewing is not stitching thread and cloth; but stitching manas and buddhi, i.e., merging manas in buddhi.

The buddhi must not be merged in manas, but the manas must be elevated and made one with buddhi–with the principle of spiritual intelligence within each of us. This is the real “elevation of humanity”–an intensely personal endeavor in which each one must engage if humanity is to have any better future. It is not to be found outwardly but inwardly.

• Now the distinction of male and female. A true female is one who is merged in the external; a true male is one who is merged in the internal.

Nityananda’s words in this section have nothing to do with the material body, but with the condition of the interior person. In Sanskrit “purusha” means “person” as well as “man,” and “prakriti” means primal energy-matter as well as “female.” He is explaining the psychological distinctions that apply to all, whatever the body may be.

Those who identify with the body and are immersed in material consciousness are “female,” and those who identify with the spirit and are centered in awareness of the Self are “male.” That is why a great Egyptian Christian saint, Mother Sara, used to say to many monks: “I am a real man–you are all women!” Abdul Messia, a twentieth-century saint in Egypt, used to call the Coptic bishops “women” and tell the monks to run away from them.

• One whose buddhi is firm is male; one whose buddhi is fickle is a female.

The spirit is stable, the material is ever-changing, so those who are intent on the spirit are firm in mind, and those who are immersed in externals are unstable and unreliable. This is the mental, symbolic distinction between male and female.

• This distinction of male and female is external only. Internally such a distinction does not exist at all.

Only those who realize the Self can even really understand this, much less live it and embody it.

• When the manas and buddhi are merged in the atman, one who is physically a woman becomes spiritually a man.

My friend, Saguna Hejmadi (a cousin of Papa Ramdas), was once at the Anandamayi Ashram in New Delhi (Kalkaji). Somehow an ignoramus standing nearby learned that she was a disciple of Ma Anandamayi and did a great deal of meditation. “Why are you wasting your time with all that?” he asked, “Women cannot attain liberation–only men can attain liberation.” Foolishly she began arguing with the the man, who bolstered his assertions with many scriptural quotes. In the midst of this altercation, Mother Anandamayi came walking through the room. “MA!” called out Saguna, “Is it true that women cannot attain liberation?” Still walking on, Ma nodded and answered: “That is true. Women cannot attain liberation.” Saguna stood there completely thunderstruck as the man chuckled and chortled as his “triumph.” After standing and stewing for nearly half and hour, Saguna saw Ma returning. Ma came right up to her, said: “And men do not attain liberation either!” and walked on and out of the room. Then Saguna understand: only those who transcend body identity and “live in the spirit” can attain liberation.

No one who identifies with their body prakriti can become a liberated purusha.

62. The body is the cave. In this cave dwells the atman. Atman, dwelling in the body, must attain moksha (liberation). The outward bodily parts are various; in the invisible (subtle) all is one, indivisible. Om is Pranava. Pranava pervades the form (body). Om is bodilessness and formlessness.

• The body is the cave. In this cave dwells the atman. Atman, dwelling in the body, must attain moksha (liberation).

The sole purpose of incarnation in a body is liberation–not to “work out karma,” “gain experience,” or suchlike. Those who do not utilize their human birth to attain moksha are turning the instrument of freedom into an instrument of present and future bondage. They are making the passage to heaven into the descent to hell. The body is not meant to be a prison, but the path to infinite consciousness. As Sri Ramakrishna often said, just as a fish is released into the ocean and swims away in joyful freedom, so we are meant to be released into the ocean of Satchidananda in boundless joy.

• The outward bodily parts are various; in the invisible (subtle) all is one, indivisible.

As long as we perceive the many we have not entered the True and the Real. Our meditation must reflect this principle by being focused on the One Transcendent.

• Om is Pranava. Pranava pervades the form (body). Om is bodilessness and formlessness.

And now Nityananda gives us the key to the foregoing part of this aphorism: Om. Om pervades the body as does the Atman, because Om IS the Atman. It produces the necessary unity in the consciousness of those who invoke It, and liberates us from the bonds of the body and the world of form. The following quotes will affirm this.

“The Self is of the nature of the Syllable Om. Thus the Syllable Om is the very Self. He who knows It thus enters the Self [Supreme Spirit] with his self [individual spirit]” (Mandukya Upanishad 1.8.12).

“The syllable ‘Om’ is the self” (Ribhu Gita 10:22).

“Omkar is the atman, the eternal self in you” (Nitya Sutra 87).

“Earnest seekers who, incessantly and with a steady mind, repeat ‘Om’ will attain success. By repetition of the pure ‘Om’ the mind is withdrawn from sense objects and becomes one with the Self” (Ramana Maharshi, Sri Ramana Gita 3:10,11, Ganapati Muni).

“Om is essentially the same as the Self.…And the Supreme Brahman, too, is but Om.…Om is the same as the supreme as well as the inferior Brahman…by virtue of its being a means for the attainment of Brahman” (Shankara, Commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad).

“The purport of prescribing meditation on the Pranava is this. The Pranava is Omkara…The fruition of this process is samadhi which yields release [moksha], which is the state of unsurpassable bliss” (The Collected Works of Ramana Maharshi, sixth edition, p. 25,26).