How have we understood the term ‘Self’? Through the view of Vedanta, we understand that every living being is a blend of the subtle and the gross and that we also can learn to develop the ability to discriminate between them. In a discourse, Sri R. Rajagopala Sarma drew attention to the method of instruction of the author Vidyaranya in his work Panchadasi, which enables a clear understanding of the Self. The acharya points out that the Self or Atma cannot be ignored or accepted. If that is so, it being a passive entity, why do you attribute love etc to it, asks the opponent. There are so many objects in the world that do not catch our attention. Why can we not just leave the atma as such? The reply is that the atma cannot come under this category because it is the Self that ignores or accepts. So how can the Self ignore itself? This is the truth. Then what about the tendency to commit suicide? Does it not confirm the fact that one who yields to dislike will reject the atma and this leads to suicide? So how can the statement that the atma cannot be rejected be true? But the acharya says that though these arguments are right, the basic fault lies in the understanding of what is rejected. In the case of suicide, it is only the body and not the atma that one is angry about. Because this sarira cannot give him comfort anymore as when one is sick, he becomes averse to living. Even in the view of Vedanta that which deserves to be rejected is the sarira and not the atma. The terms ‘deha,’ ‘sarira,’ etc, indicate the body’s perishable nature. The opponent’s argument is based on the wrong perception of the atma as the body. It is the immortal atma that rejects the body mind complex.
