Doctrine of Liberation in Indian Religion

Author(s): Shivkumarmuni
Publisher: Munshiram Manoharlal Publisher's Pvt Ltd New Delhi

Page 44

30
THE DOCTRINE OF LIBERATION IN INDIAN RELIGIONS
Swords cut him not, fire burns him not, Water wets him not, wind dries him not... Eternal, omnipresent, fixed, immovable, everlasting is he (the human soul). 8
Like the Samkhya system, the Bhagavadgitā also makes a distinction between the soul and the body. The relationship between these two is compared to that between a person and his garments. The doctrine of rebirth is taken for granted. The embodied self undergoes the process of birth, death and rebirth. It is only in its embodied form that it is seen as a doer of deeds. Thus the Upanisadic doctrine of ātman is taught in the Bhagavadgitā also. But the impact of Sāmkhya thought on the Bhagavadgită has resulted in a new synthesis of the Upanisadic doctrine of brahman, the Samkhya doctrine of prakrti and purușa and Vaişņava theology. The growth of theistic ideas and of bhakti perhaps inspired the doctrine of mukti through divine pleasure (prasāda). In the earlier parts of the text karmayoga is expounded as the highest way to liberation of the self. It is in this context that the Bhagavadgitā teaches meditation and renunciation of attachment. As we will see below this aspect of its teaching has considerable affinity with the Buddhist and Jaina pathways to liberation.
The early Brahmanical doctrine of ātman as found in the old Upanişads and the Bhagavadgitā gave rise to different interpretations during the age of the systems. Thus the Advaita Vedānta represented by Šamkara taught the absolutistic notion of atman, whereas the Visiştādvaita Vedānta represented by Rāmānuja taught the theistic notion of atman. In Advaita Vedānta the ātman or brahman is accepted as the only ultimate reality ; the phenomenal world is described as māyā. In this system ignorance (avidyā) is assumed as the cause of bondage. Liberation (mokşa) consists in knowing the identity of ātman and brahman. In his commentary on the Brahmasūtra Śamkara seeks to establish the view that the real self (atman) is identical with the supreme self or Lord (parameśvara). The real and transcendental self, according to him, does not transmigrate. The embodied being (jiva) who appears as the doer of deeds and enjoyer of fruits is not identical with the Lord. BA In his commentary on the Bhagavadgita, Šamkara interprets this text in accordance with the Advaita doctrine. The
8. Ibid, II, 23-24. Eng. tr. by Franklin Edgerton. 8a. Brahmas ütra-Samkarabhūş ya, 1. i. 17.