5

Attainment of liberation is clearing of all the karma (both good and bad). Now my question is will a man attain liberation, the second both his good and bad karma will get nullified i.e. his karma will be zero.

If it is the case, can one attain liberation even at the age of a student?

user12458
  • 4,347
  • 9
  • 33
  • 61
  • it is the other way round, the moment one gets liberated, his karma is destroyed (you can say nullified) rather than vice versa. karma cannot be nullified (generally speaking -- there are obviously exceptions) without sadhana (bhakti, jnana, karma, raja yogas). Yes definitely one can attain liberation at the age of student, at the age of householder, at the age of adult, etc. there is no exception. One cannot easily identify such a man. Association with holy souls such as the liberated souls itself a great sadhana indeed! All the best sir – Sai Jan 12 '15 at 02:18

3 Answers3

4

Previous karma that has been set in motion in this lifetime before liberation will continue. Swami Vivekananda says that for a jivamukta (liberated while living) it is like cutting the axle on a pair of wheels. There may be some inertia from before that keeps the wheel moving for some time, but because the axle has been cut, no new inertia (karma) is generated.

Any new actions that are done generate no new karma for that person -"The fetters of the heart are broken, all doubts are resolved, and all works cease to bear fruit. " (Mundaka Upanishad II. ii. 8)

Swami Vishwananda
  • 24,140
  • 2
  • 34
  • 78
  • Brahma Sutra 484 as per Sribhasya of Sri Ramanujacharya IV/I/132/484: So long as there is body, Karma will continue. (Anaarabdha KaaryE Eva tu poorvE tadvadhE:) Opponent: If all Karmas get destroyed, it means that there will be nothing left at death. Siddhantam: The existence of body is itself due to Karma. What is meant is that all the accumulated Karmas (Sanchita Karmas) would get destroyed.Those that have started to give effect during the present life will remain to be experienced. –  Nov 18 '14 at 08:02
  • This means as per post on Vaishnavism" “Being an obstacle for the attainment of Brahman is said to be the definition of sin. For an Upaasaka, PuNya is more harmful than Paapa. Therefore he must get rid of PuNya also as he must do of Paapa. Does it make any difference to a prisoner, if he to continues to be in prison, whether the fetters are of gold or of iron? Both are the same in being obstacles to his freedom”. –  Nov 18 '14 at 08:03
3

Yes, one can attain liberation even at the age of a student. Age is no barrier for liberation. The fire of knowledge burns all actions good and bad whenever it takes effect. So the Gita says:

yathaidhāṁsi samiddho ’gnir bhasma-sāt kurute ’rjuna
jñānāgniḥ sarva-karmāṇi bhasma-sāt kurute tathā
[BG - 4.37]

Meaning
As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities.

So age is not a barrier and one can find many examples where many persons at the age of student got liberated. But mostly it happens that they have tried for liberation through various ways in their past lives.

But when actions become zero due to realisation of the Self, the body doesn't fall off. It still remains due tot he effect of Prarabdha:

utpanne tattvavijñāne prārabdhaṃ naiva muñcati [NadaBindu Up. - 22]
- Prarabdha doesn't go away at the advent of knowledge of the Self.

jñānenājñānakāryasya samūlasya layo yadi
tiṣṭhatyayaṃ kathaṃ deha iti śaṅkāvato jaḍān
samādhātuṃ bāhyadṛṣṭyā prārabdhaṃ vadati śrutiḥ
[Adhyatma Up. - 59,60]

Meaning
The ignorant person asks, "If the actions done out of ignorance get destoryed completely upon the advent of knowldge, then how can the body exist?". The Shruti in a superficial manner says its due to prarabdha.

Such a liberated person is called a jivan mukta who spends rest of his existence in the bliss of the Self. Some symptoms of that state are: discrimination will go away, desires will go away, thoughts will vanish, even concept of liberation will go away. There will be nothing to know. The person will always feel blissful. One great example of such a personality is Shriman Ramana Maharshi who got liberated while at the age of a student.

Be Happy
  • 27,110
  • 3
  • 73
  • 133
  • http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/7195/punishment-for-bad-karma-after-death-also-and-after-getting-new-body-also – C Sharper May 06 '15 at 11:38
1

The answer of the question lies in the word ZERO. According to vedas, the most prominent answer to define Param Atman is Shunya ( Zero ). Another thing to help is Bhagwat Gita, every action ( Karma ) has a response and that too equal in nature, meaning if your did good you'll get good in return not only in the same form but also in the same amount.

Moving forward if you haven't done anything, you have actually neither gained good or bad, you are in Zero Karmic State, or Zero itself, partially the Param Atman.

But There cannot be 2 Param Atmans, their only one exists and will always exist. In such case the 2 combine or merge to become one, which in results acts as liberation of the soul.

Bottom Note : No Karmas then No results, hence Liberation. And the soul's PARAM goal is to attain Shunya or Param Atman. And if you did Karmas you are destined to get results from it, whatever manner or intention you have applied to it. But if you do in manner of not doing its equal to Shunya ( or No Karma at all), this is considered under Akarmic States of Soul.

Will a man attain liberation the moment his karma is nullified? YES, whatever age he is in, student, mature or sadhu. Once the Atman is liberated it vanishes, you may only find body lying under, many would consider it death, and that could also be. There have been incidents when the world has lost people who were neither old, nor had any type of body deficiencies but died, those can be liberation but not death.

Mr. K
  • 3,447
  • 4
  • 22
  • 44
  • You should cite sources. Also, why in the world are you equating Paramatma with Shunya (nothingness)? What sect of Hinduism do you follow that teaches you that? – Keshav Srinivasan Nov 16 '14 at 16:18
  • What keshava says is right. One cannot equate Parabrahman with Shunya in Hinduism. The moment you equate Parabrahman with Shunya then it is Buddhism you are talking about. All the great acharyas Adi shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya have clearly disproved that buddhism is non-vedic...Also, as long as the Jiva is entangled in the gross body, there cannot be moksham...Jivan Muktha, may be hypotheticaly considered as partial liberation, but, actual moksha or liberation is only when one exhausts ones karmas and also gives up the prakritic body which entangles the Jivathma. –  Nov 18 '14 at 06:43
  • @Krishna, even I don't know where u brought those lines from, but I have heard from Gurus, I found this link http://shunyavada.com/ , this might help you understand. – Mr. K Nov 19 '14 at 05:22
  • @K - Please read the actual brahma sutra bhasyas of the principle Gurus (Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva). These are available online as well as in many book shops at reasonable prices. Please don't go by modern day guru's who have made a potpurri of all religions and mash it. Now, one can come up with new meaning to what shunya etc...But, in sanatana Hindu dharma, Sunya Vada is part of Buddhism which is has been disproved by all the acharyas as non-vedic #Thanks# –  Nov 19 '14 at 06:19
  • @Krishna, m not here for a figth, rather, this concept fits to my brain, not only fits it has answered me most of the question related to the Puranas which I had , I feel more contented with this concept, yet as you recommend I'll read those text you supplemented. And to the point of Buddhism, buddha is considered as vishu avatar, Thanks. – Mr. K Nov 19 '14 at 12:30
  • By the way the buddha of the current buddhism in vogue is not part avatara of Vishnu. Modern historians might disagree to an extent. But puranas reinforce that Gautama buddha is not the Buddha of Hindu Scriptures –  Nov 20 '14 at 06:16
  • @Mr.K - Neither am i interested in starting a fight with anyone. For that matter everyone is having the freedom to leave in their own paradise. But, passing of a wrong concept as part of Hinduism is what i was trying to highlight. If, it makes you happy you are welcome to be part of Shunyavada (atheism /Mahayana buddhism). But, please don't reinforce it as Hinduism. Check http://www.advaita-academy.org/Pages/PrintPost.aspx?PID=362 as more details on Shankara and Shunyavada and how critical Shankara was on Buddhism (what ever school of thought it might be) –  Nov 20 '14 at 07:21
  • @Krishna, thanks for the enlightenment, I will go through those links. – Mr. K Nov 20 '14 at 13:21
  • @Krishna Man! How I missed this conversation!! The Shunya Vada Mr. K is referring to is not the nihilistic Shunya Vada of the Buddhists. The name is same, but the concept is different. This Shunya is totally a Hindu concept and one can rightfully equate Paramatma with Shunya in Hinduism. This is an enlightening concept realizing which one can understand many things. I don't beat drums of my own theory, but it's available to anyone who wants to know the truth and is not biased. I would be pleased if you express your concerns or queries. – Be Happy Jan 11 '15 at 05:39
  • @Mr.K I am so glad that you found that site useful and it cleared most of your doubts! Please feel free to let me know if something has caused any doubt in that theory. – Be Happy Jan 11 '15 at 05:54
  • @Jabahar - So, what is this Shuya? So, you mean to say there are different sunyas. I didn't know that. Is it Apparent, Absolute etc. Sorry to say, i couldn't find sunya explicitly defined in Shankara's philosophy or prasthanatraya commentaries. That is why other commentaries try to say that it is Prachanna bouddham (Veiled buddhism). I could be absolutely wrong. I think, these are atmost, much later day developments of so called followers of Shankara. one can interpret Sunya to be something else, that is your prerogative.But, is there any proof from Shankara's works you can quote on this. –  Jan 12 '15 at 06:41
  • @jabahar, I actually got through the shunya theory many times, my father used to teach him about making urself thoughtless or shunya to attain brahman, but ur text had good reference from our textbooks, which made it more believable. I will defenitely take ur help if come accross questions. Thanks a lot for the knowledge. – Mr. K Jan 13 '15 at 08:04
  • @Krishna Nope, there is only one Shunya. And yes, it may not be present in the commentaries of others because it is something different itself. But one can certainly find mentions of it directly or indirectly in our scriptures. Regarding Shankara, I don't know why I would want to quote Him! – Be Happy Jan 16 '15 at 07:09
  • @jabahar Have you considered writing your own commentary on the Brahma Sutras (assuming you believe in the Brahma Sutras)? It would be interesting to see how the Brahma Sutras would be interpreted from your Shunyavada point of view. – Keshav Srinivasan Jan 17 '15 at 07:50
  • @KeshavSrinivasan Are you kidding me! Where is this ignorant jabahar and where is that quarrel causing Brahma Sutra! But yeah, a mad man as I am, sometimes I do think of it out of fun. – Be Happy Jan 17 '15 at 08:35
  • @jabahar - I thought, this is a forum where you provide valid proofs..But, it appears you want write your own brahma sutras. Well, you can go ahead, but it wont hold any value...Now, coming to Sunya, what is that sunya?...there is only brahman as far as advaita is concerned and if you cant give your own fanciful names terms...If, you say, both sunya and brahman exist , then you are disproving shankaras theory...if, you say sunya is illusion, then one has to come out of it... –  Jan 17 '15 at 15:49
  • My brother @Krishna, even though a fool I am, am I that fool to expect people to accept what I say? And have you even seen once in this site talking about this concept except for here? Only out of good will that I have kept mentions of this on the Internet so that it may help someone in need. Realisation and learning of a knowledge depends upon the fulfillment of some prerequisite conditions. Without that it's only harmful, so I don't preach my theory. And I am mostly a funny guy, so say things like writing commentaries out of fun only. I know how worthless I am. – Be Happy Jan 17 '15 at 18:01
  • @Krishna, i don't considered it as jabahars theory, its perfect hindu theory, the only thing i pointed is jabahar did a good research on how the text support this theory, secondly, how will considering param brahma shunya, when every meditation guru teaches to make ur mind to level of shunya with no inner thoughts merging is not right. It so commpletely fits to the concept of creation, the concept of prakrati and purush as matter and antt-matter. It just explains why everthing took place. – Mr. K Jan 18 '15 at 18:58
  • @Jabahar - I don't have anything personal against anyone or any theory. I was just saying is that none of the principle acharyas (Shankara, Ramanuja or Madhva) have directly referred to anything called Shunya to be a valid phenomenon in Vedas or Upanishads. When, i said, go ahead and write a brahma sutra of your own, it was intended enphasize that original brahma sutras don't contain any thing called shunya concept. For that matter i am equally ignorant. I just try to parrot what the great acharyas might have said by looking into various books say and what i find in valid references. –  Jan 19 '15 at 06:03
  • @jabahar - Sorry, in case i had hurt anyone, but my intention is just to lay emphasize on the fact that Shunya per se doesn't exist in any of the bonafide commentararies on Vedanta sutras, Upanishads etc, as per the little information that i have. Moreover, my mind is normal layman's mind, that it can only follow a few teachings of great acharyas, but cannot produce new theories. –  Jan 19 '15 at 06:06
  • @Mr K - What the modern so called gurus?? teach about no inner thoughts etc, itself is slightly skewed...Thoughtlessness by it self is a thought. So, there is nothing called absolute thoughtlessness etc, even if you go purely by Advaita of Shankaracharya. With this i rest my case. –  Jan 19 '15 at 06:10
  • @Krishna, you haven't hurt anyone, its just the human brain with limits, and what I think among the infinite ways to understand god, whichever decodes your mind is best. This whats decodes mine and its from the same text i understood. There can be chance that they wanted to say so only. But I or jabahar are not going against to any of the textual referencing. And brother discussions lead to better view of thing, thanks for your knowledge and I duly respect that. – Mr. K Jan 19 '15 at 07:22