TTTTHHHHEEEE TTTTHHHHRRRREEEEEEEE SSSSYYYYSSSSTTTTEEEEMMMMSSSS ooooffff VVVVEEEEDDDDAAAANNNNTTTTAAAA An Introduction PPPPRRRREEEEFFFFAAAACCCCEEEE Vedānta is neither recondite nor impractical. If presented properly, studied earnestly and understood with an unsophisticated heart, it can be a source of inspiration here and now. The holistic view of the universe that it offers, with its stress on the Divine permeating or controlling every aspect, can help us to elevate our mind from the microcosm to the macrocosm, from the mundane to the mystic levels. Though the original source of Vedānta--the prasthānatraya--is one, its interpretations are many. In this booklet, an outline of the three major--rather, more wellknown--systems is given. A brief summary of four more, has been added at the end as an appendix. We do hope that this brochure will rouse the curiosity of the reader to study these systems more comprehensively. Swami Harshananda CONTENTS Advaita Vedānta Darśana Preamble Darśanas Vedānta Darśana Advaita Vedānta Brahman, the only Reality Anirvacanīya Khyāti Ajñāna or Avidyā Māyā Three Degrees of Reality Creation Jīva Sādhanās and Mukti Jīvanmukti and Videhamukti Locus of Avidyā Post-Śaṅkara Advaita Conclusion Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta Darśana Introduction Literature Epistemology Ontology Means of Liberation State of Liberation Conclusion Dvaita Vedānta Darśana Introduction Dvaita Literature Philosophy Pramāṇas Prameyas Theology Brahman or God Lakṣmī Jīvas or Individual Souls Prakṛti or Nature Avyākṛta-ākāśa or Unmodified Space Mokṣa or Liberation Conclusion Appendix Bhāskara Nimbārka Vallabha Baladeva AAAADDDDVVVVAAAAIIIITTTTAAAA VVVVEEEEDDDDĀĀĀĀNNNNTTTTAAAA DDDDAAAARRRRŚŚŚŚAAAANNNNAAAA PPPPRRRREEEEAAAAMMMMBBBBLLLLEEEE Man is often described as a rational animal. Once the animal in him is reasonably satisfied by the provision of basic biological and some psychological needs, the rational part gets an opportunity to evolve to higher levels. Philosophy, including metaphysics, is one of the highest aspects of this evolution. DDDDAAAARRRRŚŚŚŚAAAANNNNAAAASSSS The Indian philosophical systems have developed not only as a result of intellectual speculation but also of mystical intuition. Hence the name ‘darśana' (lit., seeing'), usually applied to them. The topics most commonly discussed by these darśanas are generally four: (a) nature of the physical world, its origin and evolution; (b) nature of man and other living beings; (c) existence of God, his nature and attributes; (d) the goal of human life and the way of attaining it. Different standpoints and differing views of these topics of discussion have naturally led to a variety of schools. These schools are broadly divided into two classes: the āstika and the nāstika. The former accept the authority of the Vedas whereas the latter do not. VVVVEEEEDDDDĀĀĀĀNNNNTTTTAAAA DDDDAAAARRRRŚŚŚŚAAAANNNNAAAA The Vedānta Darśana is the last of the former schools but has gained the most important place among them. A judicious combination of reasoning and acceptance of the authority of the Vedas, as also a long unbroken tradition, are responsible for its gaining the prominent place. Though the ‘prasthānatraya' (the three great paths') viz., the Upaniṣads, the Brahmasūtras and the Bhagavadgītā , are the basis of the Vedānta Darśana, it is the Brahmasūtras (also called Vedāntasūtras and Śārīrakasūtras ) of Bādarāyaṇa Vyāsa that occupies the key position. The sūtras (aphorisms) being quite terse and often ambiguous have naturally led to widely differing interpretations, resulting in the three well-known systems of Vedānta viz., Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita and Dvaita. The word ‘Vedānta' itself means the end or the essence of the Vedas'. It is the Upaniṣads that mainly comprise the Vedānta since they normally form the last part of the Vedic literature and contain the quintessence of their teaching. AAAADDDDVVVVAAAAIIIITTTTAAAA VVVVEEEEDDDDĀĀĀĀNNNNTTTTAAAA The Advaita Vedānta Darśana owes its systematisation as a formidable doctrine, to Gauḍapāda (7th-8th cent. A.D. ) who wrote his famous Kārikās on the Māṇḍūkyopaniṣad and Śaṅkara ( A.D. 788- 820). Śaṅkara's commentaries on the prasthānatraya as also a few independent treatises form the bedrock on which the later Advaitins built their edifices. BBBBrrrraaaahhhhmmmmaaaannnn,,,, tttthhhheeee oooonnnnllllyyyy RRRReeeeaaaalllliiiittttyyyy ‘Advaita' means non-dual,' one without a second'. The system derives this nomenclature from the fact that it recognises Brahman (the Absolute) as the only reality and denies permanent reality to the world as also to the individual souls. The entire edifice of Advaita metaphysics is built upon the foundation that Brahman is the only reality, brahma satyam.' This premise is based firmly on the famous Upaniṣadic statement sadeva somya idamarga āsīt, ekamevādvitīyam,' Dear (Śvetaketu)! In the beginning (before creation) Reality (or Brahman) alone existed, the one without a second' ( Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.2.1). Anirvacanīya Khyāti However, the world of multiplicity is a matter of our day-to-day experience. Hence it becomes necessary to offer an explanation as to how Brahman, the One without a second, appears as this world of multiple names and forms. The explanation offered by Advaita is anirvacanīya-khyāti , its theory of erroneous cognition, which defies logic. Perceiving silver in nacre in moonlight or snake in rope in insufficient light are the stock examples given by the Advaitins. In both cases there is an erroneous perception brought about by the impression of silver and snake from an earlier idea of the same, now superimposed upon nacre and rope under conditions favourable to the error. This superimposition called ‘adhyāsa' or ‘adhyāropa,' is responsible for the mithyājñāna (false knowledge) that the object perceived is silver or snake. The silver or the snake perceived is neither ‘sat' (real) nor ‘asat' (unreal). It is not ‘asat' or unreal like ‘the son of a barren woman' since it is actually perceived. Neither is it sat' or real since it disappears as soon as the substratum (the nacre or the rope) is perceived as it is. To explain such a peculiar phenomenon Śaṅkara creates, out of logical necessity, a third type of perceived objects which is ‘sad- asad-vilakṣaṇa' (different from both the real and the unreal). The ‘khyāti' or the cognition itself is described as ‘anirvacanīya,' incapable of any precise definition or description. Ajñāna or Avidyā The basic cause of this erroneous perception is termed as ajñāna or avidyā (ignorance) which is said to be bhāvarūpa (existent) and is endowed with two śaktis or powers viz., ‘āvaraṇaśakti’ (veiling power) and vikṣepaśakti' (transforming power). It veils the true nature of nacre and rope, and shows up silver and snake in their place by apparently transforming them. Such an apparently transformed object is called a ‘vivarta' of the original and the theory that propounds this is known as Vivartavāda . Since this avidyā does not make the nacre and the rope completely disappear from view, but only makes them appear as something else, it is described as ‘bhāvarūpa' or existent. MMMMāāāāyyyyāāāā An attempt may now be made to explain how this world of duality has evolved out of the nondual Reality called Brahman in the Upaniṣads. The world of duality can be broadly divided into ‘dṛk' (the seer) and ‘dṛśya' (the seen). Both these, again, are divided into the innumerable living beings (jīvas) and countless objects of creation. How does Brahman the Absolute, the One without a second, the indivisible Reality, appear divided into innumerable beings on the one side and countless objects on the other? It is avidyā that causes the one Ātman (the Self)-- incidentally, the Upaniṣads use both words, Ātman and Brahman, to indicate the same Reality--appear as many jīvas and it is māyā that causes the world of phenomena. Māyā is avidyā at the cosmic level. TTTThhhhrrrreeeeeeee DDDDeeeeggggrrrreeeeeeeessss ooooffff RRRReeeeaaaalllliiiittttyyyy Śaṅkara accepts three degrees of reality. The first, known as ‘prātibhāsika-satya' (apparent truth, illusory appearance) is illustrated in the wrong perception of silver in nacre or snake in rope. The second, called ‘vyāvahārika-satya' is illustrated by this world of our day-to-day experience. This world appearance has a much higher degree of reality and lasts till one gets ātmajñāna or brahmajñāna, realization of Truth. It is satya or true for all purposes of vyavahāra i.e., day-to-day existence or practical life. The third, designated as ‘pāramārthika-satya’, is the highest Truth and the only truth that really exists. It is Brahman or Ātman, which is nirguṇa (without attributes) and nirākāra (without forms), hence incapable of being described except in a negative way (‘neti, neti'—‘not this, not this'). CCCCrrrreeeeaaaattttiiiioooonnnn Brahman associated with māyā is Saguṇa Brahman (Brahman with attributes) or Īśvara (Lord of creation, God). It is this aspect of Brahman that is responsible for creation, preservation and destruction of the world. As for the actual order of evolution of the created world, the descriptions given in the Upaniṣads are accepted. For Śaṅkara who holds that the world process is only a vivarta (illusory appearance) due to adhyāsa (superimposition on Brahman), the very attempt to describe the various steps of evolution is a futile exercise. However, since the śruti (revealed scripture, the Upaniṣads) has done so, a place of honour must somehow be accorded to it. So he characterises such descriptions as giving ‘taṭasthalakṣaṇa' (accidental or casual characteristics) of Brahman helping us to be directed towards it, even as the branch of a tree helps us to locate the crescent in the sky. On the other hand, Brahman as it is, can be comprehended only through its ‘svarūpalakṣaṇa' (integral or essential characteristics), which is ‘sat-cit- ānanda.' ‘Sat' (eternal reality), ‘cit' (pure consciousness), and ‘ānanda' (unalloyed bliss) are not really its characteristics but its very essence. JJJJīīīīvvvvaaaa This Brahman or Ātman which is sat-cit-ānanda, has inexplicably got itself involved in the body- mind complex, the involvement being due to avidyā. Since the origin of this involvement can never be logically or satisfactorily explained, avidyā is stated to be anādi or beginningless. The involved Ātman is designated as jīva.' This jīva, the Ātman in bondage, has five kośas or sheaths, three śarīras or bodies, performs actions motivated by desires, experiences pleasure and pain due to karma and undergoes transmigration until liberation. Śaṅkara declares that this jīva, when shorn of its upādhis or limiting adjuncts like the body and the mind, is identical with Brahman, since its essential nature also is sat-cit-ānanda. SSSSāāāāddddhhhhaaaannnnāāāāssss aaaannnndddd MMMMuuuukkkkttttiiii The main trouble with the Ātman become jīva is the tādātmya or false identification with the mind and the body, brought about by adhyāropa or adhyāsa (superimposition). Hence the only way of remedying it is by apavāda or desuperimposition, by denying this identification. For this, one has first to prepare oneself by the preliminary fourfold discipline or sādhanacatuṣṭaya viz., viveka (discrimination bet- ween the eternal and the non-eternal), vairāgya (dispassion), śamādiṣaṭka (cultivation of the six virtues like self-control) and mumukṣutva (desire for liberation). Then one has to approach a competent guru (spiritual preceptor) and learn the truth from him by śravaṇa (hearing), manana (reflection) and nididhyāsana (contemplation). The most important part of the guru's teaching will be in the form of ‘mahāvākyās' (great sentences) like tat tvam asi (‘That thou art') or aham brahmāsmi '(I am Brah-man'). Śravaṇa and manana produce the deeprooted conviction that one is the spirit. Hence in nidi-dhyāsana, desuperimpostion in the form of I am not the body, nor the sense-organs, nor the mind, nor even the ego and so on, can be practised leading ultimately to the realization that one is the Ātman. This realization resulting in mukti or liberation can be had even while one is living in this body. It is known as ‘jīvanmukti.' He will attain ‘videhamukti' (liberation from future bodies) after the body falls off, the continuance of the body between the two states being due to prārabdha-karma (actions that have caused this body). Mukti or liberation from transmigration is not the gaining of a new state but recognising the already existing original state. JJJJīīīīvvvvaaaannnnmmmmuuuukkkkttttiiii aaaannnndddd VVVViiiiddddeeeehhhhaaaammmmuuuukkkkttttiiii Two kinds of mukti--jīvanmukti and videha-mukti--are envisaged in the Advaitic works. The Vivaraṇa school upholds the theory that mukti is simultaneous with jñāna. Hence Jīvanmukti is not only possible, but the only mukti that can be recognised. Continuance of the body for some more time, due to prārabdhakarma, has no effect upon jñāna. On the other hand, the Bhāmatī school holds that even after jñāna, if the body continues due to prārabdhakarma, this imposes a limitation, thereby implying the existence of a trace of avidyā. The death of the body puts an end even to this trace of avidyā and real mukti is obtained then. Since this comes after the death of the body, it is called ‘videhamukti.' LLLLooooccccuuuussss ooooffff AAAAvvvviiiiddddyyyyāāāā A favourite topic of discussion that frequently crops up in Advaita metaphysical works is the locus of avidyā. Since Brahman is the only reality that exists, it alone is the āśraya (locus) as also the viṣaya (object) of avidyā. This is one school. Sureśvara and Padmapāda are the main protagonists of this school. According to them, avidyā is one only. Since Brahman is pure consciousness, avidyā can never exist in it nor act on it. This is the opposing school propagated by Vācaspati Miśra. For him, the jīvas are the loci of avidyā and there is one avidyā for every jīva. PPPPOOOOSSSSTTTT----ŚŚŚŚAAAAṄṄṄṄKKKKAAAARRRRAAAA AAAADDDDVVVVAAAAIIIITTTTAAAA Though Śaṅkara wrote profusely, clearly enunciating the main doctrines of his school, there are certain places in his writings wherein the important aspects of certain doctrines are either vague or are capable of more than one interpretation. This has naturally, resulted in the growth of quite a voluminous post-Śaṅkara Advaita literature leading to different prasthānas or schools of thought. ‘Vārttika-prasthāna' of Sureśvara (9th cent. A.D. ) comes first in the series. This school gets its designation from the exposition contained in the ‘vārttikās' or commentaries in verse, of Sureśvara on Śaṅkara's bhāṣyas on the Bṛhadāraṇyaka and the Taittirīya Upaniṣads. According to this school, Brahman is the material cause of this world, and not māyā. The locus of avidyā is Brahman and not the jīvas. Avidyā is one only and not many. The mahāvākyas or the great Vedic dictums are capable of producing immediate cognition of the self as Brahman. Hence dhyānābhyāsa or practice of meditation on the meaning of those dictums is not necessary. The jīvas are but ābhāsas or fallacious appearances of Brahman in the individual minds. (This has earned this theory, the designation of Ābhāsavāda as opposed to Pratibimbavāda and Avacchedavāda of other schools.) The ‘Vivaraṇaprasthāna' of Padmapāda (9th cent. A.D. ) and Prakāśātman ( A.D . 1200) comes next. The name is derived from the work Pañcapādikāvivaraṇa of the latter, it being a voluminous commentary on the Pañcapādikā of Padmapāda. Though this name suggests that it covers five pādas or sections of the Brahmasūtras , only the commentary on the first four sūtras is now available. The chief doctrines of this school are: Avidyā is a jaḍātmikā śakti (a force of material nature) and is the material cause of this world. It is bhāvarūpa, a positive entity, but not real. Māyā, prakṛti, avyakta, avyākṛta, tamas, śakti etc., are all its synonyms. It is called avidyā when āvaraṇa power is predominant and māyā when vikṣepa power becomes dominant. Alternatively, it is māyā at the cosmic level and avidyā at the individual level. Avidyā rests on Brahman but acts on the jīvas. The jīvas are pratibimbas or reflections of Brahman in the antaḥkaraṇa (mind). The reflected images have no reality other than that of the original (bimba) Brahman. This theory is called Pratibimbavāda as contrasted with Ābhāsavāda . The ‘Bhāmatīprasthāna' of Vācaspati Miśra ( A.D. 840) is the third and the last of these major schools. Bhāmatī is his celebrated commentary on the Śāṅkarabhāṣya of Brahmasūtras . This school is built round the Bhāmatī along with its subsidiary commentaries Kalpataru of Amalānanda (13th cent. A.D. ) and Parimalā of Appayya Dīkṣita (16th cent. A.D. ). The views of this school can be briefly summarised as follows: Brahman is the material cause of the world, not as the locus of avidyā but as the object of avidyās supported by the jīvas. Māyā is only an accessory cause. Avidyā cannot abide in Brahman. It abides in the jīvas and is plural since the jīvas are plural. Vācaspati advocates two varieties of avidyā: the mūlāvidyā or kāraṇāvidyā (primal nescience); the tūlāvidyā or kāryāvidyā (derivative nescience). It is the latter that is responsible for bhramasaṁskāras or error impressions. Also, Vācaspati appears more inclined towards the Avacchedavāda or the theory of limitation with regard to the appearance of the jīvas. Just as a pot limits the infinite sky in itself, avidyā of the individual limits Brahman and makes it appear like a jīva. Another point of importance in this school is that the mahāvākyas do not produce anubhava (immediate cognition). It is the mind seasoned by meditation that gives such experience. Mention may also be made here of Dṛṣṭisṛṣṭivāda which advocates that the world is created simultaneously with its perception; and, Ekajīvavāda , which propounds that there is only one jīva which is in bondage and when it gets liberation, everything else disappears. Prakāśānanda (15th-16th cent. A.D. ) is the chief exponent of these schools. Advaita was subjected to continuous criticism by other Vedāntic schools as also the Buddhists and hence the growth of polemical literature became inevitable. Mention must be made of two most important works of this type: the Khaṇḍana-khaṇḍa-khādya of Śrīharṣa (12th cent. A.D. ) and the Advaita- siddhi of Madhusūdana Sarasvatī (16th cent. A.D. ). CCCCOOOONNNNCCCCLLLLUUUUSSSSIIIIOOOONNNN It should be said to the credit of Advaita Vedānta that even now it is attracting the respectful attention from scholars of the highest calibre, both Eastern and Western. VVVVIIIIŚŚŚŚIIIIṢṢṢṢṭṭṭṭĀĀĀĀDDDDVVVVAAAAIIIITTTTAAAA VVVVEEEEDDDDĀĀĀĀNNNNTTTTAAAA DDDDAAAARRRRŚŚŚŚAAAANNNNAAAA IIIINNNNTTTTRRRROOOODDDDUUUUCCCCTTTTIIIIOOOONNNN Among the wellknown philosophical systems of India, the Vedānta system--called the Vedānta ‘Darśana' and based mainly on the prasthānatraya --viz., the Upaniṣads, the Brahmasūtras and the Bhagavadgītā --has carved out for itself, a pre-eminent place. This system has, in course of time, branched off into three main streams: Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita and Dvaita. The Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta Darśana, the subject of this essay, is not the creation of Rāmānuja ( A.D. 1017-1137), but much older than him. The twelve Āḷvārs like Nammāḷvār, Kulaśekhara and Āṇḍāḷ ( A.D. 600-900), as also the Ācāryas like Nāthamuni ( A. D. 824-924), Yāmuna ( A.D. 918-1038) and Rāmānuja evolved the system out of the more ancient teachings contained in the prasthānatraya and gave it a definite shape. However, Rāmānuja was its best exponent. The pioneering and stupendous work he has turned out in the cause of this system, perhaps, justifies in its being sometimes called ‘Rāmānuja Darśana'. The demise of Rāmānuja was followed by a period of sectarian split among his followers (generally called as Śrīvaiṣṇavas) which ultimately ended in a permanent division of their ranks into two sects of Vaḍagalais and Teṅgalais. These words literally mean the followers of the northern and the southern schools respectively. The two sects developed separate sets of works, separate lineage of gurus or teachers and separate traditions in many matters of practical importance. Mention should be made here, of the following apostolic successors of Rāmānuja who were responsible for establishing the system on a firm foundation: Vedānta Deśika ( A. D. 1268-1370), Piḷḷai Lokācārya ( A. D. 1264-1327) and Māṇavāḷa Māmuni ( A. D. 1370-1443). LLLLIIIITTTTEEEERRRRAAAATTTTUUUURRRREEEE The canonical works of this system are: Gītārthasaṅgraha of Yāmuna; Vedārtha-saṅgraha , Śrībhāṣya and Gītābhāṣya of Rāmānuja; Tātparyacandrikā, Īśāvāsyabhāṣya and Rahasyatrayasāra of Vedānta Deśika and Śrutaprakāśikā of Sudarśana Sūri ( A. D. 1200-1275). The Tamil compositions of the Āḷvārs (called Nālāyira-prabandham ) and quite a few compositions of other teachers like Raṅga- rāmānuja ( A. D. 1600) are also considered as very authoritative. Viśiṣṭādvaita is essentially a philosophy of religion. In it, reason and faith coalesce to become ‘reasoned faith'. It is often identified with the older ‘Seśvara Mīmāṁsā,' and is also called ‘Ubhaya Vedānta,' (ubhaya = both) since it accepts both the Sanskrit prasthānatraya and the Tamil prabandhams as equally authoritative. Pāñcarātra treatises are also put on a par with the Vedas. EEEEPPPPIIIISSSSTTTTEEEEMMMMOOOOLLLLOOOOGGGGYYYY Rāmānuja accepts knowledge in all its levels of sense perception (pratyakṣa), inference (anumāna), and scriptural testimony (āgama or śabda) as valid, and also that it affirms reality. The principle of dharmabhūtajñāna, the logical rule of apṛthak-siddha- viśeṣaṇa, the grammatical rule of sāmānādhikaraṇya, and the realistic view of satkāryavāda are the special features of his theory of knowledge. Dharmabhūtajñāna is the consciousness of the individual soul as its attribute, through which it comes to know the nature of the external world, Self, and Īśvara or Brahman. It is eternal and all-pervasive in respect of Īśvara and the jīvas. However, owing to the limitation imposed by karma, it has become contracted in the latter. When it is purified, it expands into infinity and brings about an immediate intuition of God. The logical rule of apṛthak-siddha-viśeṣaṇa states that a viśeṣaṇa (quality) subsists in the viśeṣya (the qualified substance) and is apṛthak-siddha or has an inseparable existence. Of course, it is not absolutely identical with it. It is separate and yet inseparable. For instance, when we say that man is rational, the quality of rationality is inseparable from man, though it is not man himself. In the view of Rāmānuja, dharmabhūtajñāna is an apṛthak-siddha-viśeṣaṇa of the jīva; the jīvas and prakṛti are apṛthak-siddha- viśeṣaṇa of Brahman or Īśvara. This very truth is brought out by the grammatical rule of sāmānādhikaraṇya or co-ordinate predication, which means the application of two terms to a single entity through connotation of its two modes. For example, in the sentence ‘This is a cow,' different words connoting genus and quality (i.e. jāti and guṇa) also connote individual (vyakti) and substance (guṇin) respectively. Same is the case with the Upaniṣadic text ‘Tat tvam asi' (‘That thou art'). A substance may become the body or quality of another substance and a word connoting the body (śarīra) may connote the Self, its possessor (śarīrin) also. Therefore, in the above example, the term ‘tvam,' which connotes the jīva as the śarīra, connotes also Brahman, the śarīrin. Thus, in the highest Vedāntic sense, all terms connoting a thing or a person or a god connote also Brahman as the source, support, and the ultimate Self of all. The Sāṅkhya theory of satkāryavāda, the theory of pre-existent effect, is accepted by Rāmānuja. Consequently, the world which is a transformation (pariṇāma) of Brahman, is real and not illusory as asserted by the Advaitins. OOOONNNNTTTTOOOOLLLLOOOOGGGGYYYY Viśiṣṭādvaita accepts the three entities, viz., Brahman or Īśvara, jīva or cit, and prakṛti or acit as the ultimate realities. Hence, these three together are called ‘tattvatraya.' Of these, however, Brahman is the absolute, independent Reality, whereas the other two are dependent realities. It is for this reason that this philosophy is known as ‘Viśiṣṭādvaita' (Viśiṣṭa Advaita), a philosophy which accepts only one Reality, but with attributes or modes. Brahman of Viśiṣṭādvaita is both the Absolute of philosophy and the God of religion at the same time. Truth (satya), knowledge (jñāna), infinity (anantatva), and bliss (ānandatva) are his attributes. He is the repository of all virtues and perfection. He is the progenitor, the protector, and the destroyer of this universe. He is also the indweller and controller of everything that exists in this universe. He is the śeṣin (the whole) of whom all the jīvas and the prakṛti are śeṣa (parts). He is the granter of all boons, whether it is righteousness (dharma), worldly gain (artha), and enjoyment of pleasures (kāma) or the attainment of freedom from births and deaths (mokṣa). His form is most wonderfully beautiful, absolutely free from all imperfections and defects. Out of his infinite mercy, he incarnates himself in moments of cosmic crisis, into humanity, in order that he may recover the lost jīva. He is the master of Śrī or Lakṣmī, Bhū, and Nīlā. Śrī is of the nature of mercy. He enjoys the cosmic līla or play of creation. He creates this universe out of the cit and the acit portions of himself and yet remains unaffected in his essential nature. Since he creates in accordance with the past karma of the individual souls, he can never be accused of partiality or hardheartedness. He has a five-fold form, viz., para, vyūha, vibhava, antaryāmin and arca. The first is his form in Vaikuṇṭha, along with Śrī, Bhū, Nīlā, Ananta, Garuḍa, Viṣvaksena and others. The avatāras of Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha, who are his partial manifestations and who are the objects of contemplation by the devotees, go by the name ‘vyūha.' The incarnations of Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, Kūrma, etc., are called vibhava. As the indwelling spirit of each and every object (animate or inanimate), he is called the antaryāmin. The descent into the forms, symbols, or idols worshipped by his devotees, in order to bless them, is known as arcāvatāra. The next tattva is cit or the jīva. The jīvas are innumerable but of identical form and nature. Each jīva is essentially different from the body, mind, prāṇa, buddhi, and dharmabhūtajñāna. He is blissful (ānanda-svarūpa), atomic (aṇu), unmanifested (avyakta), unthinkable (acintya), homogeneous (niravayava), immutable (nirvikāra), substratum of consciousness and knowledge (jñānāśraya). He is (niyamya) controlled by Īśvara, and is a part of him (śeṣa). He is knower of knowledge, doer of actions, and experiencer of their results (jñātṛ, kartṛ and bhoktṛ). The jīvas can be divided into three groups: the bound (baddha), the liberated (mukta), and the eternally free (nitya). The bound souls are those who are constantly going through this transmigratory existence being attracted by and attached to the prakṛti in all its forms. Those of the bound souls who awaken to the evils of saṁsāra owing to their previous good karma and get liberated by doing spiritual practices and by the grace of God belong to the second category. Those like Ananta or Garuḍa who are never bound by the shackles of saṁsāra form the third category. The jīva, though essentially free, becomes bound in saṁsāra by the proximity of prakṛti, avidyā, karma, vāsanā and ruci. Avidyā is ignorance which manifests itself in various forms like anyathā-jñāna (knowing a thing in a way that is different from what it