Commentary on the Kathopanishad

by Swami Krishnananda

Discourse 4: The Best of Teachers and the Best of Students

The conversation between Nachiketas and Yama continues. This great knowledge, this vidya, this wisdom, this truth is difficult even to hear of. Many in the world have not the opportunity of even listening to what this truth can be, and there are many who listen but are not able to comprehend the meaning of what they are hearing. A competent teacher is a miracle, and a competent student is also a miracle. One who knows this is a wonder, being taught by a teacher who is also a wonder.

Na nareṇāvareṇa proktā eṣa suvijñeyo bahudhā cintyamānaḥ: ananya-prokte gatir atra nāsty aṇīyān hy atarkyam aṇupramāṇāt (1.2.8): This cannot be known unless it is taught by a person who is here designated as ananya. The word ananya also occurs in the Bhagavadgita. Ananyāś cintayanto māṁ ye janāḥ paryupāsate, teṣāṁ nityābhiyuktāṇāṁ yogakṣemaṁ vahāmyaham (B.G. 9.22): “He who undividedly contemplates on Me.” Here ananya means 'a person who is non-separate'. Anya means 'different' or 'separate'; ananya means 'not separate', 'not distant', 'not isolated from'. Ananya-prokte gatir atra: There is no hope for the student unless he is initiated or taught by one who is ananya, who is non-different from that which he teaches. A professorial knowledge is not what is meant here, because learning of an academic type is not necessarily a part of the very life and existence of the academician. Knowledge has to be non-different from the person who wields this knowledge. It is not enough if we know; we have to be that very thing which we know. Knowledge has to be non-separate from us, and we have to be non-separate from what we know. The knowledge of Truth should be the very essence of our existence. We are an embodiment of that great wisdom which we are imparting to the student. Otherwise, if we stand apart from the knowledge, the knowledge will be there in the study or in the books, and it will not be there in us. If the knowledge that emanates from us in the form of instruction is not an emanation of our own being but it is a modulation of language, an arrangement of words in a linguistic style, that knowledge will not be of any utility, because what counts finally is the being of the person, rather than the words of the person.

The knowledge of the Guru, the teacher, is a ray, a light that emanates from the very existence of the Guru, or the teacher. The knowledge is nothing but an illumination of the teacher. Thus is a possibility of knowing what Truth is. There is no way of knowing it: gatir atra nāsty. The Purusha Sukta says nānyaḥ panthā vidyate'yanāya: Unless we know this Purusha as non-separate from us, there is no way, no hope for us. In a similar way it is said gatir atra nāsty: There is no possibility of achievement of any kind unless one is instructed by a person who is ananya, non-different from Truth itself, virtually a brahmanishta. One who is established in the knowledge of Brahman is a brahmanishta. Otherwise, if it is taught by an ordinary man, it is difficult to understand.

Na nareṇāvareṇa proktā eṣa suvijñeya means 'the lower category of people'. If a lesser person than the one who is identical with knowledge is our teacher, that knowledge will not help us because the lesser person, who may be helpful to us in gaining a job-oriented education, will not have the knowledge for enlightenment. Na nareṇāvareṇa proktā eṣa suvijñeyo bahudhā cintyamānaḥ: We may go on scratching our head and thinking of it any number of times; if we have been initiated or instructed by a lesser person than the one mentioned here, there is no likelihood of our actually entering into the substance of this knowledge. Why is it so?

Aṇīyān hy atarkyam aṇupramānāt: Subtler than the atom is the subtlety of this knowledge. Gross words, words that we use in language for outer expression, cannot become adequate vehicles to convey this knowledge which is subtler than even the subtlest sound. Of all principles in the world, sound can be regarded as the subtlest. Light is also very subtle. But here is something subtler than light and heat, subtler than sound, subtler than anything that we can think of in terms of the five elements—sabda, sparsha, rupa, rasa, gandha—on account of the intense secrecy and atomic character. Here 'atomic character' does not mean a physical characteristic that is attributed to the Atman, but the impossibility of perceiving it as an object of the senses. Only that which is physically characterised can be seen by the sense organs. It is superphysical. Its subtlety lies in the fact that it is not an object of knowledge; it is knowledge itself. Because of this reason, ordinary secular instruction of any kind will not be of any utility here. We have to be instructed by one who is veritably a brahmanishta. Only a Godman can teach us.

Naiṣā tarkeṇa matir āpaneyā, proktānyenaiva sujñānāya preṣṭha: yāṁ tvam āpas satyadhritir batāsi; tvādṛṅ no bhūyān naciketaḥ praṣṭā (1.2.9): Argument is not a means of right knowledge. Logic is not going to help us, because argument is based on logical dissection of what in grammar is called the subject and the predicate. A sentence has a subject side and a predicate side. The very fact that we distinguish between the subject and the predicate in a sentence shows that they are not identical with each other. If they are one and the same, we should not use two different words. If they are unconnected, the sentence will be cut into two parts, and it will not convey a wholesome meaning. What logic or grammatical construing does, is that the apparently segregated parts of a sentence known as the subject and the predicate are brought together as two pieces of wood are dovetailed by a carpenter, yet not knowing that the two pieces of wood are always two pieces of wood. They have not become identical with each other. That is to say that logic, in its attempt at uniting two parts of a sentence which are actually sundered one from the other, will not ultimately be of any use to us because all logic is based on a certain hypothesis, and unless we logically establish the hypothesis itself, which cannot be done, logic will not help us. Logic is an intellectual activity, and as the intellect itself is a feeble medium of the individual egoistic personality, our argument, logic or disputation of any kind is not going to be of utility. Thus, this knowledge cannot come to us by logic and argument.

Naiṣā tarkeṇa matir āpaneyā, proktānyenaiva sujñānāya preṣṭha. Again the same word comes: anya. Somebody who is different from the logician has to teach us, and the one who is above the logician is the spiritual Master, like Yama himself. Then only does knowledge become rooted in our personality.

Yāṁ tvam āpas: “Nachiketas, you are blessed. You have obtained such a teacher, and the teacher has obtained such a suitable disciple. You are established in truthfulness,” says Yama. Tvādṛṅ no bhūyān naciketaḥ praṣṭā: “May I have more and more students like you, who put questions of this kind.” How happy Yama is, we can imagine. He is immensely pleased with this student. “You have obtained the best of teachers, and I have obtained the best of students. Wonderful!”

Jānāmy aham śevadhir ity anityam, na hy adhruvaiḥ prāpyate hi dhruvaṁ tat, tato mayā naciketaś cito'gnir anityair dravyaiḥ prāptavān asmi nityam (1.2.10). Yama says, “I myself have performed this sacrifice. Now it is being called the Nachiketas sacrifice. It may be called the Nachiketas sacrifice now, but that Vaishvanara-tattva worshipped in a sacrifice as this universal fire did exist earlier also. I know that all wealth and treasure is impermanent.” Śevadhi anitya: śevadhi is 'treasure', anitya is 'impermanent'. Jānāmy aham: “I know that all the glory of this world is impermanent.” Na hy adhruvaiḥ prāpyate hi dhruvaṁ: “The permanent cannot be obtained through the media of the impermanent.”

The ends and the means should have coherence between themselves. There cannot be a means which is not connected with the nature of the end, nor can there be an end which has no connection with the nature of the means. Many people say that the end justifies the means, but it does not justify it because the end is nothing but the evolution of the means, and the means is nothing but the incipient existence of the end in itself at the very beginning. So they are not two different, isolated phases of knowledge. Hence, impermanent means cannot procure permanent realities. What is there permanent in this world? Nothing whatsoever. We see everything coming and going. The world is in a state of flux. People die, all things perish, and the whole system of creation is going to be dissolved at the end of pralaya. Therefore, nothing in this world can be regarded as a means to the knowledge and realisation of the Eternal, implying thereby that we should not be attached to anything in this world. We should not cling to impermanent things, which are just the stuff of this world.

Now Yama says, “I know all this, yet what have I done?” He speaks in a very friendly way, in a very intimate manner. The teacher reveals his own inner nature to the student: tato mayā naciketaś cito'gnir anityair dravyaiḥ prāptavān asmi nityam. This is a very peculiar verse which has an intricate meaning. It has got one meaning on the one hand, and another meaning on the other hand. Some commentators say that this verse is the utterance of Nachiketas. Others say that it is spoken by Yama. It appears that it is spoken by Yama, and not by Nachiketas, because it is said: “I have performed the Nachiketas sacrifice.” Nachiketas has been initiated into the performance of the sacrifice, but he has not yet performed it, and so this statement “I have already done it” cannot be attributed to Nachiketas. Therefore, we have to conclude that these are the words of Yama himself. This is very intriguing indeed because of the fact that he says, “Knowing very well that everything is impermanent in this world, that the impermanent cannot be a means to the attainment of the Eternal, what have I done? After all, I have performed this sacrifice for the purpose of the attainment of the kingdom of this god which I am today as Yama.” He indirectly extols the student Nachiketas as perhaps even superior to himself.

It is said that the greatness of the Guru can be seen when the disciple excels the Guru. You can imagine how great the Guru should be to produce a disciple excelling himself. So, in a similar strain, as it were, Yama says anityair dravyaiḥ prāptavān asmi nityam: “Temporarily stable joys of heaven, like the joys of the god Yama himself, have been acquired by the performance of the Vaishvanara-agni sacrifice, and I did not go into the depths of the question that you are posing before me, though today I know the answer to this question.” Perhaps here Yama is referring to the development of the stages of spiritual attainment which he himself has reached, just as a teacher may speak to the student as to how he was once a little child going to nursery school, and how he was truant, how he was not a good student at all, and afterwards how he picked up things, and how he has become the genius that he appears to be today. Some such intricate implication seems to be hidden in this verse: “Though I know that all the treasures of the world are impermanent, I have performed this sacrifice which will give me only impermanent joys which temporarily look like a permanent happiness of heaven. You are greater than I.”

Kāmasyāptiṁ jagataḥ pratiṣṭhāṁ krator ānantyaṁ abhayasya pāram, stoma-mahad urugāyam pratiṣṭhāṁ dṛṣṭvā dhṛtyā dhīro naciketo'tyasrākṣīḥ (1.2.11): “You have rejected something very great and grand, Nachiketas. Nobody would do that. What have you rejected? That state which is the fulfilment of every desire. This Vaishvanara-tattva is what is referred to here. That state of Vaishvanara attainable through this sacrifice, this is the fulfilment of all desires at one stroke, not in succession. Today you are granted this, tomorrow another thing, the third day something else, and mostly your desires are apparently being fulfilled stage by stage in a state of succession in this world. All things cannot be had in one moment. But here, at one stroke, instantaneously, in a timeless grasp, as it were, you have all the desires fulfilled in this Vaishvanara-tattva.” Jagataḥ pratiṣṭhāṁ: “It is the very source, the root of this whole cosmos.” Krator ānantyaṁ abhayasya pāram: “The endless fruit accruing from the performance of all good deeds and sacrifices is that great thing. It is the ultimate state of final fearlessness, most adorable, most glorious, the final resort of all beings. I offered it to you and you have got it, and yet with the power of your will and understanding, you have abandoned even that thing. You have abandoned even the bliss and joy of Brahmaloka, to put it in other terms. O Nachiketas, how glorious, how powerful you are! Brahmaloka's joy, Vaishvanara's joy, Virat's happiness you have rejected for the sake of another thing, about which you are questioning me.”

Taṁ durdarśaṁ gūḍham anupraviṣṭaṁ guhāhitaṁ gahvareṣṭham purāṇam, adhyātma-yogādhigamena devam matvā dhīro harṣa-śokau jahāti (1.2.12): “That thing about which you are querying me is impossible of perception. Difficult is the vision of this great Truth. Very deeply hidden is that Truth. In the deepest recesses of one's own heart can this Truth be recognised. It is in the cave of the heart, or the cave of the cosmos, as you may call it; macrocosmically or microcosmically it is the deepest essence of everything ever outwardly conceived.” Gahvareṣṭham purāṇam: “It is the most ancient repository of all values, earthly as well as celestial. Such a great thing it is, impossible to perceive.” Adhyātma-yogādhigamena devam matvā dhīro harṣa-śokau jahāti: “This impossible-to-perceive Truth has to be known through the yoga known as adhyatma yoga. This great God, the God of all gods, the Real of reals, can be attained by the practice of adhyatma yoga, the yoga of the Self. The unitedness of the self with the Self, the manner in which the lower self of a person gets identified with the higher dimension of itself, the way in which the Atman gets united with Brahman, the manner in which the individual identifies himself with the cosmos, the way in which the subject melts into the object, these are some of the characteristics of adhyatma yoga. Know that great joy through this wonderful yoga known as adhyatma yoga.” This verse is also difficult to understand. “Knowing That, the great hero, the spiritual hero, abandons both the joy and the grief of this world. Neither is he exhilarated at anything he will gain, nor is he depressed by anything he appears to lose.”

Etac chrutvā samparigṛhya martyaḥ pravṛhya dharmyam aṇum etam āpya, sa modate modanīyaṁ hi labdhvā vivṛtaṁ sadma nachiketasam manye (1.2.13): “I think the door is open for you, Nachiketas. The gates of heaven are slowly opening for you.” For most of us the door is closed; for Nachiketas it is now open. Etac chrutvā: Having heard this; samparigṛhya: having grasped it also—not merely hearing it, but having grasped the meaning of it; martyaḥ: a human being; pravṛhya dharmyam: this anu, this subtle dharma, having been absorbed into one's own life, such a person enjoys the best joys of all joys which one can think of in one's mind.

Priya, moda, pramoda are the three states of joy. We can be happy in three ways. When a dear object is seen, we are happy. That is called priya. When the dear object comes very near, we are happier. That is moda. When the dear object is completely under our possession, we are happiest. That is pramoda. Priya, moda, pramoda. This pramoda cannot be had through contact with objects because it is said that we have this highest happiness only when the objects of desire are completely under our possession, but we can never have complete control over anything in this world. Objects always remain as objects; they can never become subjects. Therefore, the subject, which is totally different from the object, can never be in possession of the object. Hence, no one in this world can be happiest. There can be only a comparative degree of priya and moda, but pramoda, the actual possession of joy, is not to be granted to any mortal in this world because possession of a thing is impossible here. Possession implies unity of the subject and the object, which is not possible as long as space and time exist. Sa modate modanīyaṁ hi labdhvā: Having enjoyed that which is worth enjoying, one sees the open door.

It is said that this fort of eternal bliss has eighty-four doors, and all except one are closed. Eighty-four doors represent the eighty-four lakhs of species through which one has to pass in the process of evolution. Within this fort everyone is caught up. We can somehow come near the one door which is open, which is human-like. To all the other categories of life, which are lower, the door is closed. The mineral, the plant, the animal are the species to whom the door is closed. Only at the human level is the door open. There is only one open door, and the other doors are closed. All are inside this fort. The human being is blind and cannot see where the open door is—blind due to the ignorance, avidya, engendering kama and karma. Due to the obliteration of the knowledge of reality and the compulsion to visualise the externality of the objects of sense, the consciousness of there being an open door is completely obliterated. He is blind. So, what does the man do? He tries to feel the wall. Like a blind man going around the fort to see where the door is open, he goes, touching every little brick of this wall. He goes round and round, round and round. Somehow when he comes near that open door, he has an itching of the head. He scratches his head, and then misses the gate. That is to say, when the human being is about to be endowed with the capacity to transcend this human nature, he gets sunk in the desires characteristic of human nature. Impelled by egoism and avidya, once again the propulsion for kama and karma drowns him. He gets some itching, and then he cannot go out. Again and again, again and again he goes around and around. But Nachiketas has found the open door.

Nachiketas says, “Please speak further. Let me hear something more. Whatever you have told me up to this time appears to be related to a truth which is not of this world. There are good things and bad things in this world, there are causes and effects in this world, there are things to be done and things which ought not to be done in this world, there is past and present and future in this world, but this truth about which you are about to speak to me cannot be of this nature. It can be neither dharma nor adharma, neither good nor evil, neither cause nor effect, neither action that is permitted nor action that is prohibited, neither the past, nor the present, nor the future. What is that? Please tell me.”

Anyatra dharmād anyatrādharmād anyatrāsmāt kṛtākṛtāt, anyatra bhūtāc ca bhavyāc ca yat tat paśyasi tad vada (1.2.14). Nachiketas is slowly getting enlightened. He puts a very peculiar question once again, as he did earlier: “Tell me that which is neither good nor bad, tell me that which is neither cause nor effect, tell me that which is neither to be done nor not to be done, tell me that which is not in the past, not in the present, not in the future.” A very shrewd disciple indeed!

Nachiketas, having posed this question, evokes the answer of Yama who says, “Nachiketas, dear boy, listen to me.” Sarve vedā yat padam āmananti, tapāṁsi sarvaṇi ca yad vadanti, yad icchanto brahmacaryaṁ caranti, tat te padaṁ saṁgraheṇa bravīmi: aum ity etat (1.2.15): “I shall tell you that which all the Vedas unanimously glorify. I shall tell you that which is the goal of all kinds of tapas, or austerity, in this world. I shall tell you that which is to be attained by complete self-restraint, or brahmacharya. I shall tell you what it is. Om—this is the truth. This Om, this pranava, is the symbol, or the emblem, or the representation of universal Reality. Knowing this, one has everything in one's hand. The moment you think that you want something, that is in your hand, provided that you know what Om is.”

Let us see what it means.