unities. It is, first of all, caught up in diversity, and in this consciousness of diversity
it has forgotten the unity that is behind as the purpose. It requires a Herculean effort
on the part of the understanding to realise that the intention of objective desire
through the senses is something pious and holy—namely, the realisation of the unity
of things. That is called viveka. That itself takes all the time. It may take our entire
life to understand what has happened, but once this viveka dawns, it is supposed to
be easy for the individual to wrench itself from attachment to things. That wrenching
is called vairagya. The renunciation or the detachment that we feel in respect of an
object of sense is due to an understanding that has arisen that there is some mistake
in the attachment of the senses to objects. The realisation of this mistake is viveka,
and the consequent withdrawal is vairagya.
Then comes the real practice—the abhyasa. That abhyasa is by stages, from the
lower to the higher. We have to read these sutras together. The preceding sutra
together with the present one give a single doctrine as a precept—namely, that there
are stages of ascent, and these stages of ascent have to take into consideration the
location of an object, the circumstances of the individual, the conditions under which
practice is made, etc., so that we cannot disregard any experience when it is actually
being processed through, or undergone. Detachment from the object does not mean
hatred for the object. It is not dislike; it is an understanding. And, the understanding
should be of such a nature that one should utilise the present relationship of oneself
with the object for the purpose of transcending this relationship.
The consciousness of an object implies a faith in the reality of the object; and to the
extent of the intensity of this faith, the object becomes impossible to avoid
completely. And so, it has to be refined in its relationship with oneself by a proper
method. This refinement of the relationship of oneself with the object, gradually, is
the bhoga-apavarga process. Enjoyment or experience, and freedom from the
object, is also a gradual experience. Freedom may mean ultimate freedom, kaivalya
or moksha, or it may also mean any stage of freedom that we achieve in respect of an
object to which we have been attached earlier. Even the first step in freedom is
freedom, though it is far removed from ultimate freedom.
The freedom from an object of sense cannot be achieved easily unless the nature of
the object is understood and one’s relationship to it is known properly, in its correct
context. Thus, when the understanding arises, one has also to know what to do with
that object. As it was mentioned, it is not love or hatred that we are discussing, but a
proper appreciation of the position of the object. It is a totally impersonal attitude, a
scientific attitude, where we neither love nor hate anything. We understand it; that is
all. What is the understanding? It is an appreciation of what is to be done under a
given condition—how to utilise that particular circumstance for a higher step. This
involves a double process: bhoga and apavarga. The purpose is freedom from the
object, but that freedom can be achieved only by a proper harnessing of the present
situation of the relationship with the object. It is not a sudden severing of oneself
from the object, but a gradual and very systematic process of gaining mastery over
the object and not cutting oneself off from realities, because no one can cut oneself
off from realities. The moment the reality is there as an accepted thing, it gazes at us,
stares at us, for a proper attitude from us.
Mastery over the object is what is mentioned in the sutra, vaśīkārasaṁjñā vairāgyam
(I.15). Mastery over the object can be gained only by an insight into the nature of the