Yama Nachiketa Samvada (यमनचिकेतसोः संवादः)

KatoUpanishad describes in great detail the story of Nachiketa’s journey to the land of death and his return from Yama’s abode. When the Yamaraja’s family members saw Nachiketa from a distance they addressed Yama with fear and devotion towards Nachiketa.

" “Hey Vaivasvata, it is common to see people coming to your place when you bring them, but someone coming on their own is an unusual sight.”"

Nachiketa is your atithi (guest)  which means he is not here to stay but will be here for only one ||tithi (a stipulated time) and then will return. He is a brahman and is if Agnideva(fire god) has appeared in this form. Therefore receive him properly, offer him ||arghya(offering to the Lord) and पाद्य||padyas  (relating to the foot ???) and then worship him. It is significant that Nachiketa is compared to Nachiket-agni (WHy is it significant), which is famous in the upanishada.

Yamaraja hastily comes to the door to receive Nachiketa. The Sruti says Nachiketa was fasting at his door since three days. The Sruti explains that even Yamaraja was afraid of offending those who were Bhagavatas (those devoted to lord), hence human beings should consider before offending them.

The Vishnu Purana (canto 3, chapter 7) describes an incident to show that even  Yamaraja feared offending the bhagavatas. Maitreya had asked Maharshi Parasara earlier as to who was the object of Yama’s affection. In response Parasara Muni quoted  Bhishma’s response to a similar query by Nakula. A Brahmana from Kalinga, a friend of Bhishma and he told to Bhishma that this is the great secret and this is called as the song of Yama and this was the discussion between Yama and servants of Yama.

The Mistakes of Offending the Bhagavatas

As Yama’s servant was about depart to earthly planet holding the death noose, Yamaraja whispered a secret into his servant’s (Yamaduta) ear– 

" “Those who have sought the refuge of Madhusudana (Krishna), such maha bhagavatas, never touch them as I may be the master to all but not of the Vaishnavas”"

Why did Yama whisper this to the Yamaduta? Because Yamraja is considered as the master to all but if it is known but when they get to know that he is not the master to everybody then his influence will be minimised and because of that some people will have less respect and that will cause disturbance. They will be less fearful of Dharma. This could be one reason and second reason is that Yamaraja is extremely respectful and fearful of talking about Bhagavata and therefore he must have spoken in their ears. Yamraja continued, “ I am been appointed as Yama for the sake of benefiting the world, by Ishwara. Therefore I am simply his servant and dont function independently. ShriHari is my Guru. whenever you see the Bhagavatas with these underlined characteristics please stay away from them.  you offer respect to them from a distance and never go close to them.” Many beautiful slokas that describe the characteristics of Bhagavata are mentioned in the vishnu puranas and because these characteristics are synonymous to Nachiketa.  It is important to recollect and relish.  

The characteristics of one who is the devotee of Bhagavan

The Bhagavata, while following the Varnashrama dharma without any discrepancy while maintaining equanimity with his friends and foes. . He does not steal other’s property, nor causes violence to other living beings, he is not affected by hatred or attachment, which is the great power and contamination of kali.   His pure consciousness doesn’t get polluted as he meditates on Janardana. Even in a lonely place if he sees gold,, he considered it to be the dirt. Vasudeva resides in the Bhagawata’s heart always, as he is friendly, calm, good natured, without envy, speaks sweet words and one who has transcended the illusory energy of the Lord. And therefore Yamaraja tells his servants that such a great bhakta who following all the aspects of yoga, it is better to stay away from such persons. 

Nachiketa possessed all these qualities therefore when Yama offered him all kinds of temptations, Nachiketa’s  response reveals his sterling qualities.  A spark even though it is just a spark, possesses all the qualities of the fire. Therefore it is not at all surprising that when Nachiketa entered Yamaloka after fasting for three days, Yama’s associates were told to bring him water and give him a resting place immediately.

Yama’s blessings

At that time Yama told him– “Oh dear Brahamana, you are my respectable guest who is qualified to receive my offerings. I offer my respectful obeisances to you because this is very beneficial for me. You stayed hungry at my doorstep for three days, this is not good for me because when a brahmana stays hungry at the house of a Grihastha then that Grihastha, all his resolve & hopes, all the benefits of good association, being truthful, speaking sweet words, his piety, cattle and children get destroyed. This great power of anna dana (sharing grain) is seen in the 1st volume of this compilation. Therefore, hey Nachiketa, to free myself from sin, please ask for three boons from me.

Nachiketa asks for boon

Nachiketa who had already reached the platform of immortality has not come to Yamaloka for boons. However, Yamaraja begging Nachketa to ask him for a boon is one of most delightful aspects of this Vedic compilation. Nachiketa was forced to ask the boons, not for himself but as a favour to Yamaraja. It was the will of the Daiva (Bhagavan).  . 

" ||Kim svit yamasya kartavyam yanmaya adya karshati||"

“What will Yamaraja gain from me?” this was Nachiketa’s first thought as he was coming to yamaloka, but is it not the grace of Bhagavan, he received such reception?  

The first boon

When one knows what boons Nachiketa asks from Yamaraja it reveals his character and one  develops  greater respect for him.

His first boon: “Anger is one of the bad trait, especially for the Brahmana and specifically  for someone who is performing Yoga which is having the eight limbs.  It is  the greatest enemy and because of my father’s anger, he has given me to the place of death and therefore I plead that let my father’s anger go away, let him be very peaceful, let him become full of pleasing attitude and then when I go back to him, that time let my father speak to me in pleasing words. This was the first boon (1.10).

The explanation in the Brahma-sutras

Sri Vedavyas in the sutra (“Anumanika adhikarana” in the Brahma sutra),

" trayanameva caivam upanyasa prasnasca || (1.4.6)"

explains that the entire Katho Upanishad is the compilation of these 3 questions and the answers to the questions. The first question and the answer is considered as the sadhaka’s characteristics who is upetra (the beneficiary)  and the others are the Upaya (the process) and Upeya (instrument to execute the process). For one is not calm, Yoga is not possible. This is elucidated in later in the Upanishad (?)

" ||na viratho discaritat  nasantho nasamahitaha"

" nasantha manasovapi prajnanena yenam apnuyath || (2.24)"

One who has not given up bad behavior, is not calm & has no control over his senses, however intelligent he may be will be unable to achieve Ishwara by his own efforts.  

The 1st boon to Nachiketa indicates what one needs to do for achieving the highest perfection, parama purushartha, Vishnu pada,  This is the universal message. Nachiketa’s father who was angry, was simply an instrument in getting this blessings by Nachiketa.  The prayers offered by Nachiketa is the secondary characteristics which sadhakas must have.  

Yama is pleased and offers the boon to Nachiket. “Your father Uddalaka Aruniya will consider you  as he does  normally.  You are his very dear son and he will be freed from anger.  when you return from the mouth of death, he will be very happy to receive you and henceforth, every night he will be happily resting “sukham ratrihi saitha mitha manyuhu” (1.11) (that means it appears that previously Nachiketa’s father was not able to sleep properly due to anger.   It indicates how Nachiketa has asked the boon so that such  anxiety of his father may disappear. This is the special meaning of the boon. 

Second boon

Now the second boon that Nachiketa asks is “we have heard that in ultimate destination there is no fear there is no old-age, no hunger, no thirst nor lamentation, and the God of the death will not enter there. We have heard that. Oh lord of death Oh Yamaraj I have great faith and shradda to achieve this land of ultimate destination and if you know that please explain to me.”

The Upanishads talk about Swarga and its explanation:

Here Nachiketa is not asking about swarg (heaven) Even though it indicates the word Swarga loka but these are not the lands where one enjoys sensuality and the land of  of Rambha and Urvasi (Apsaras- celestial beings) and king of devas Indra. Nachiketa is not asking a blessings for such pleasure. Here the word he uses as Swarga has no relation with Swarga loka. These two are totally different. But as a regular usage he used this word. The characteristics of swarga what Nachiketa is describing does not equate with the regular Swarga.  Even if someone goes to Swarga loka or heavenly planets, since it is not permanent, there is a fear of falling down. That makes it temporary. Hence it is clear that Nachiketa had in his mind the place which is free from all kinds of fear. Even the residents of that planet-- devatas even they have the fear of getting disengaged from heavenly planet. And therefore there are many stories of them falling from that place and living incognito. There are many such instances in the puranas. Therefore to conclude that Nachiketa was asking for heavenly place is minimizing and undermining the character of Nachiketa. Therefore the intelligent should understand that the word Swarga (which is used here) is synonymous to the highest planet. 

For e.g. in Keno Upanishad that Indra, Agni, Vayu, and the other devatas, it is explained that person who understands brahma vidya is freed from all kalmasha and contamination and will achieve highest place of swarga and will achieve permanent place. That is the conclusion of that Upanishad. But here the word is not swarga but that is highest destination.

" yo va yetham evam veda apahathya papananama ananthe"

" swarge loke jyehe prati tishti pratitishtati (4.9)"

In Aithreya Upanishad, Vamadeva Rishi while glorifying the brahma jnana he explains the fruit of that Brahma jnana, while praising its worth. “Those who understand the fruits, after quitting the body are raised to swarga and after fulfilling all their desire, they became immortal, this is emphasised by repetition achieving liberation.   Here also we can understand that the Swarga is nothing but the higher planet and all the acaryas have explained and accepted this. 

" ||sa evam vidvan asmacharira bedadurdvam"

" Utkramya amushmin svarge loke sarvan"

" Kamanaptva amruta samabhavat samabhavat || (2.4)"

In the Chandogya Upanishad 8.4.5 in that section, that paramapada or the final/great place of destination is described as Brahma loka “apahata papma esa brahma lokaha” this planet is the third from the earthly planet. In that land there are forests knows as “Ara,” and “nyas,”.  There are lakes knows as“airam-madi” There are “ashwatha tree, whcih is called as “Somasavan,” The eternal place of lord called “Aparajitha” the city of Aparajitha is existing in that place.   There is “hiranya” –golden hued pandal. Only those who practice brahmacarya, achieve this planet.  This clearly indicates that this is not the land of caturmukha,  Sruti does not explain any other higher planet than this Brahmaloka. 

In Kaushitaki Upanishad has same explanation is there,  in (1.21.67) Those who are on the path of Devayana( path of devatas), their ultimate destination is brhamaloka.  Just like the above description of lake, forest and beautiful pandal is also mentioned here. Here Brahmapura is described as Aparajitha that means undefeatable. The transaction of jivas journey towards Paramatma is called as “Paryanka vidya,”  This is explained in such way that  the vedantis can relish it

In Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.6 The final destination of arichiradi path is called as  the place where people travel is called archiradi.

" Esha vaha punyah sukrito brahma lokah.”"

It is amruthamaya or nectarean place  in that place parama purusha resides. This is explained in 1.2.11 and therefore all this can give us the clear understanding that this is the same parama pada.

" Yasyarvagnya sarva vitha yasmaisa mahima buhi"

divye brahma pure haiva yo mnyatma  pratishitaha” (2.2.7) One who is all knowing bhagvantha(Bhagavan) is residing in brahmapura. Same paramdhama is  It is explained in 3.2.11. as Para brahma dhama bandhu in 3.2.4; braham dhama in 3.2.6--it is described as  brahama loka.

in the “Prashnopanishat,(1.15) it is called as Brahmaloka, in (5.5) it is described, that  the planet which is higher than all other lokas, the lord of the Brahmaloka is resting in Yoga nidra, as “Purishaya,”(Just like Sri Ranganath deity).  In this way the highest platform is called as swarga and Brahamaloka.

The meaning of 2nd question and Yama’s kindness.

What is the significance of Nachiketa’s 2nd question, especially when seen from a spiritual perspective?  That means, he was asking for moksha, which is known as amruta prapti(nectarian position)beyond birth and death,  which gives the limitless fruits, it is the highest purushartha.  The 1st question was asked from “upetra’s perspective.  Here he is asking from upaya’s perspective, the process.    

Yamaraja, in reply to this question, spoke,  – “Hey Nachiketa, listen to me! Attentively hear, now I would instruct you about the agni-vidya and if you understand this agni-vidya then you will experience the unlimited loka which is nothing but parama-pada and from there you will never come back; rather you will be installed there forever. This knowledge is completely secret but others even though it is there in their heart, they will not understand as you are understanding." Therefore Yamaraja, made Nachiketa to repeat the knowledge. Here Yamaraja’s description of highest loka being eternal and unlimited indicates that the swarga mentioned here is not the ordinary swarga, but eternal abode.   

Yamaraja also benedicted Nachiketa by saying that in future, agni-vidya will be called as Nachiketa-agni. The functioning of this agni, and how to install it is explained in the Taittirya brahmana 3.11.7 and 9. Those who are the knower of the Vedas they explain- this is the good cause of Brahma upasana and cause for liberation and while studying three anuwaka, while performing three kinds of actions; yagna, adhyana and dana, or perfroming paka yagna, haviyshya yajna, and somayajna.  

" One who perform these yagnas and then be connected with that agni, in this way one who attains connection with Paramatma, he crosses over birth and death and he becomes immortal. The living entity, which appears from Paramatma and by his grace who understands Paramatma and he becomes Brahma –agya, this is real knowledge. And one who does not understand then he does not know his swarupa- constitutional nature but one who understands the nature of Paramatma, who is worthy of glorification, worships him and experiences his presence, ultimately achieves peace.  This is the way  Yama glorifies Nachiketa-agni.  It is very clear that,  if Nachiketa had gone to the regular heaven, the land of gratification, which is full of bhoga bhumi of Indra then Yamaraja would not have glorified the real swarga in such a beautiful language. It is significant that, Yamaraja himself is talking about that agni which is beneficial to crossing over birth and death.   In the  future mantras the person who has realized the “anuwakas,” which are related to Nachiketagni, such person before quitting the body, first, he becomes frees from the noose of death, crosses over the miserable ocean, achieves the highest destiny which is parampada, therein, he experiences eternal bliss.  This is nothing but moksha.  This is explained in Kathopanishad. Thereofore , there is no doubt that Yamaraja’s answer to the  second question is the grace offered by him to Nachiketa to achieve Brahama achievement, through the nachiketa-agni.""

The Third Boon

The heart of the Upanishad and the essence of the Vedas is discussed in the response to the third query. Yamaraja requests Nachiketa to ask for a third boon and Nachiketa uses the boon to clarify a doubt:

" “I am confused as to when a human being dies, some argue that he continues to live and some say he has died. Please clear my confusion."

What is the meaning of this benediction?

Nachiketa’s question is very subtle and its significance needs to be understood. It can be said  that the entire maha purva paksha of vedanta  is hidden in this question. The question resembles Arjuna’s question in the 1st chapter of the Bhagvad Gita. The Charvaka school tells that there is no atma, separate from the body. The Charvaka’s philosophy has been one of the oldest and most prominent opponents of Vedanta philosophy.  

The intelligent persons may ask whether Nachiketa’s question is  similar to the Charvaka school of thought?   If Nachiketa’s question was indicating that there is no atma beyond the body, and even if the atma exists, he does not  understand or believe in its existence?  If this is true, then why would Nachiketa ask Yamaraja about Paramapada (highest destination) for the atma which the Charvakas claim does not exist? Charvaka followers do not believe in the other world, but Nachiketa after understanding about atma, shows great faith in the highest spiritual abode, knowing the destination of jiva to be that abode. It is only after understanding this that one can think or discuss the process of  achieving that place. Therefore, Nachiketa is not questioning the existence of soul. Then what could be the meaning of such a question? (12-3-17)

The ||swarupa () of the ||Jiva () at ||moksha () is the subject of the Nachiketa’s question.

Even in Nachiketa’s time there were some people who accepted that the body as temporary and atma is eternl, here and there.  There were different understanding about life after death, lot of speculation and debate would happen.  Similarly there were diveristy of understanding in regards to Moksha.  For eg:- presently also it is observed that many different understanding are there in regards to mukti.

1. In the Nirishwara sankhya philosophy and similar other philosophers, believe that body is flitting and the atma is nirlepa (without any covering) and free from any qualities, hence  it is only a witness. This raises question about what they are  trying to say, is  that the atma exists?  Does it describe the existence of  atma in moksha or indirectly saying the atma does not exist? 
2. Similar to Sankhya philosophy, Jains accepts that there are planets beyond this planet but do not believe in the relationship between Jiva and Paramatma. Jain philosophers reject that the Lord is the master of the param pada and the relationship between the Jiva and the Paramatma.  Notably, in the same breath they talk of the existence of the atma but also present that in ||moksha (), the atma is non-existent. That means the different debate in defining moksha decides the existence or non existence of atma. Jain, Buddhist, Sankhya, Carvaka or any other philosophy differed from  may not have been in the same fashion as it is now, but even in the past in whatever name and form they were existing, they were always at loggerheads with Vedanta philosophy.  This has led to confusion amongst seekers rather than knowledge. In Mahabharata during Yaksha praksha Yudhisthira raises this same point in regards to confusion amongst the so-called philosophers. 

If somebody wants to establish logically alone the concept of paramartha (the highest destination) but logic does not have its foundation.   If one wants to  hear from sruti vakyas they may therefore appear contradictory as there could be many interpretations and conclusions, even though the rishis may have the same habits, honesty and great qualities.  That means the truth and rtha has been hidden in the heart of every living entity but not manifested.  Therefore, it must be said that only the behaviour of great personalities is the real guiding principles for all (Mahabharata aranya parva 313-118).

While there is difference between the Vedic school and other philosophies, even within the Vedic traditions there are different approaches, every one trying to prove their points, therefore Dharmaraj explains this facts to Yaksha. The following verse from the Mundaka (3.2.8) is an example.

" ||Yatha nadyaha skandamanaha samudreastangacchati nama rupe vihaya||"

When the river merges into the ocean, it is compared to the Jiva merging with the Paramatma and this is Moksha. But some questions are asked,

When the river enters into the ocean, where does its water go? 

When the waters of the river ceases to exist, then what happens to its personality (Nature??)? 

Does the river disappear or was the existence of the river an illusion? 

After the merger, is it possible for the river to survive? 

When the river merges into the ocean, what does the river experience?

When the river merges into the ocean, who experiences, the non existent river?  This is one meaningless.  The serious question is who achieves mukti and who is bound?  If Atma is only identified with his ego, then with the disappearance of ego the atma cease to existence, this is the destruction of atma in mukti.  

" ||Ahama artho na cedatma jiva ityadvasyathi||"

If we preach such Vedanta,

" ||Apasasarpe dasau moksha kathaa prastava gandhatha "

people simply by hearing about moksha, they will run way.  Because  everyone wants to be part of that bliss and completeness.   The so called moksha of non existence, which is not mentioned in the vedanta,if it is going to happen,where in one’s existence is annihilated, why would particular individual aspire for it?  Therefore in the analogy of river, many doubts come to the forefront.    If Yagnavalkya is asked, he said in   (brahada 2.4.4.12),

" na pretya sajnyasi"

, after death there is no consciousness, that means one of the  main character of jiva is consciousness, is it missing in death?  If the answer is yes, it means, it is the destruction of atma.   If the answer is yes, then why Yagnavalkya said in such a way.   if it is not there then he  has said, “vignana ghana yeva.  What is the difference between the science of living and indication of death?   This was not understood by Maitreyi, who was herself Brahmavadini, even after hearing from Yagnavalkya.  What to speak of us?   Yagnavalkya himself says ( 4.3.23 to 30) in other place also he explains; in mukti for one who wants to see and one who wants hear there is no loss of either one,  Hearer or hearing, or seeing or seer.  There is no loss in knower’s knowledge, because it is free from destruction.”   just like, when woman and man are in an embrace, similarly, when  atma is merged in the bliss of embrace of the paramatma, transcends the external and internal consciousness.  The atma stays in integrated experience.(4..2. 21).  They are not mad, but how will we understand this properly?  If Jiva does not remain in Mukti, how will develop or even endeavour for  taste about mukti.  One may ask what will atma  gain and loose in mukti?   If one is told that, it cannot be explained but experienced, some people may argue, who needs sruti? Who cares for vedanta discussion?  Those who are fools,  drunk and  unconscious  argue that, they are in mukti, how will you convince them that they are not?  It is big confusion.  Nachiketa must have heard so much arguments in this regard in his father’s place.   therefore he must be asking such specific question to Yamaraja.  Where Yudhisthira was tired but this young lad is boldly asking.