TOWARDS A MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF SPIRITUALITY BASED ON

ADVAITA (Part III):

ON SRI RAMANA’S PRINCIPLE OF PERSONAL WILL

- Raju Chidambaram, Ph.D
SUMMARY
Bhagawan Sri Ramana often taught his devotees that everything in the world happens at
the Will of Ishwara only and not at the will of the individual jeeva. But there is one
notable exception, Bhagawan used to observe: It is up to each jeeva to decide whether to
identify with the world (i.e. Non-Self) or with the Self. The present paper -the third in a
series- examines this principle in the context of the mathematical framework presented in
the earlier papers at previous WAVES conferences by this author.

INTRODUCTION
Parts I and II of this series proposed a mathematical model of spiritual detachment based
essentially on the teachings of Vedanta ( Ref 1). That model posited that all changes in
the world are the result of the interplay of Prakriti’s Wish (expressed as probabilistic
laws) and Ishwara’s Will. The spiritual evolution of a jeeva is captured in the model
using a function θ(t), representing the jeeva’s degree of spiritual detachment at time t,
varying in the range (0,π/2 radians). At the lowest level of detachment θ(t)= 0 and
indicates that the jeeva is fully identified with the world or Non-Self. At the other end of
the range, θ(t)= π/2 signifies that the jeeva is completely detached from the world and
fully absorbed in the Self. The spiritual progress of a jeeva over its many life times can be
shown by plotting (t, θ(t)) in polar coordinates (Fig 1).

☼ Point where
EXPERIENCER/ AWARENESS

Fig 1: Spiritual Progress as (t, θ(t))

J3’s progress
☼ curve meets the
vertical axis AB.
J2

B
J2
J3 attains
Perfection here.

D (t,θ(t))

C
θ(t)
A E
EXPERIENCED O-E-T

As a jeeva becomes increasingly detached from the world through sadhanas, it suffers
less and less from worldly concerns and at the same time gains more and more in purity
of mind as its selfish desires are replaced by universal love. These twin effects of
spiritual detachment on a jeeva’s life are described in the mathematical model by the
complex function ζ(t)

ζ(t) = ∫ e iθ(t) dt

As elaborated in Ref (1), the real part of ζ(t), represented by τ(t), is a measure of the
jeeva’s “suffering” cumulated over the period 0 to t, while the imaginary part, G(t) is
interpreted as the jeeva’s accumulated merit over the same period. That is,

ζ (t) = τ(t) + i.G(t) = ∫ e iθ(t) dt…… Eq. (1)

A graph of G(t) plotted against τ(t) provides an overall view of the spiritual life or “path”
of the jeeva (Fig 2). It was further explained using the model that a jeeva attains
Realization when its detachment θ(t) reaches the maximum possible value of π/2 radians.

☼ Point where
tangent to J2’s
Fig 2: Path of Jeeva “J” as path becomes
G(t)=Accumulated Merit

(τ(t), G(t)) vertical. J2

attains
Perfection here.
J2 endures no
more changes.
B
☼
C

J
A E
τ(t) EXPERIENCED TIME; O-E-T

The model viewed the material and spiritual domains somewhat differently. Changes in
the material domain were incorporated using a probabilistic approach based on the
Prakriti- Ishwara partnership mentioned earlier, whereas the spiritual evolution of the
jeeva was modeled without any explicit probabilistic elements. However Sri Ramana’s
teaching gives a large role to personal free will in a jeeva’s spiritual unfoldment. It was
therefore conjectured that both material and spiritual domains could be, and should be,
put on same conceptual footing. Presence of freewill introduces uncertainty and
uncertainty implies probabilities.

THE PROBABILISTIC APPROACH

The possibility of solving Eq. (1) in some probabilistic sense is suggested by Sri
Ramana’s assertion that the only decision left to the free-will of a jeeva is to “either
identify with the world (i.e. Non-Self) or with the Self” (Ref 2). All other decisions, by
virtue of which the world changes from moment to moment, are made as per the Will of
Ishwara, says the sage. The general implication of Sri Ramana’s profound insight is that a
jeeva has no control over the external material domain of which Ishwara is the sole
supreme ruler, but has control over its own spiritual destiny.

To see how Sri Ramana’s Principle may be incorporated into Eq. (1), consider the
complex variable z’(t) defined by

z’(t) = {1-γ(t)}/cosθ(t) + i. γ(t)/sinθ(t) Eq. (2)

where γ(t) is a random variable which takes the values 1 or 0 with probability sin2θ(t) and
cos2θ(t) respectively; 1 if the jeeva identifies itself with the Self and 0 if it is attached to
Non-Self. z’(t) is a random function of t.

With this definition we see that the expected value of z’(t), denoted by E{z’(t)}, is cos
θ(t) + i.sin θ(t) or eiθ(t). Hence

E{z(t)} =E{ ∫ z’(t) dt }= ∫ E(z’(t)) dt = ∫ e iθ(t) dt…. Eq (3)

Comparing Eq.(3) with Eq.(1), the expected path of z(t) in the probabilistic case and ζ(t)
in the deterministic case are seen to be the same. Therefore we conclude that ζ(t) can be
viewed as the expected path of a jeeva which, at time t, identifies itself with Non-Self and
Self with probabilities cos2θ(t) and sin2θ(t) respectively.

At any point in time, the gradient with respect to time of the path ζ(t) (or expected path in
the probabilistic case) is cos θ(t) + i. sin θ(t). Of this complex number, the real part
cosθ(t) is the time derivative of τ(t) and the imaginary part sinθ(t) is the time derivative of
G(t). A plot of G(t) against τ(t) is what we call as the “jeeva’s path”. The tangent of this
path at any point is the derivative of G with respect to τ and is equal to G’(t)/τ’(t) =
sinθ(t)/cosθ(t) or tanθ(t). This simply confirms the sense in which we have been using the
function θ(t) in the deterministic case, namely, as giving the “direction of the path” at
time t. Figure 3 below can be used to visualize geometrically the two cases.

Path (G(t),τ(t))
G(t)= Accumulated Merit

Figure 3
Tangent at P to the Path

Two possible
Q directions in prob. case

P(G(t),τ(t))
θ(t)
O T
S
τ(t)= Experienced Time
In the above diagram, let P be a point corresponding to time t in the path of a jeeva with
coordinates G(t),τ(t). PQ is the tangent to this path. The gradient at P is dG/dτ = tanθ(t)
= tangent of the angle QST. Thus, in the deterministic case, the direction of the jeeva at
time t is PQ.

In the probabilistic case, as per Eq. (2), the gradient z’(t) is either {1/cosθ(t) +i. 0) if γ(t)
= 0 or {0+i/sinθ(t)} if γ(t) =1. As before, since the real part of z’(t) is dτ(t)/dt and
imaginary part is dG(t)/dt, the gradient dG/dτ is either

0/(1/cosθ(t)) = 0*cosθ(t) = 0 if γ(t)=0 OR

(1/sinθ(t))/0 = ∞ if γ(t) = 1

That is, the gradient of G with respect to τ is either 0 or ∞, implying that in the
probabilistic case the instantaneous direction of the jeeva at any time t is either along the
horizontal axis or the vertical axis. As seen before, the expected direction is along PQ
which is the same as in the deterministic case.

THE MEANING OF γ(t) IN EQUATION (2)

The freedom to choose between Self and Non-Self is presumably available to jeevas all
the time. It is reasonable to assume that a jeeva’s choice at time t between these two
alternatives depends on its spiritual detachment θ(t): higher the detachment, more likely
that it will choose to identify with the Self. Choosing to identify with Self, the jeeva is a
pure witness, saakshi, untouched by suffering at that moment. Choosing to identify with
the Non-Self it becomes the suffering jeeva.

The random function γ(t) in Eq. (2) represents this fundamental, and (according to Sri
Ramana) only, freedom a jeeva has. It takes the value 0 when the choice is Non-Self and
the value 1 when the choice is Self. The probabilities of taking these values are cos2 θ(t)
and sin2 θ(t), which does imply higher probability of identifying with the Self as θ(t)
increases. θ(t) is a variable ranging between 0 and π/2 radians and, if and when θ(t)
reaches π/2, the probability of choosing the Self becomes 1; i.e. the jeeva attains
Realization at that time. Further, since we have assumed based on scriptural teachings
that θ(t) does not revert to a lower value once it reaches π/2, the jeeva remains in Self
only thereafter.

Eq. (2) implies that a jeeva can be in the witness mode (“saakshi bhava”) even if it has
not yet attained final Realization. But the likelihood of assuming the witness mode will
be low when θ(t), spiritual detachment, is small. Further, abidance in this mode is not
permanent, as is the case of a Realized jeeva.

What exactly is required of a jeeva to identify with the Self? Sri Ramana would say that
it requires only the exercise of its “will power”. A jeeva with a low degree of detachment
will need very strong will power to lift itself up and identify with the Self, since such a
jeeva has to contend with the very strong attachment it has for the world. But a jeeva that
has acquired a high degree of purity of mind through sadhanas over many lives will do it
relatively more easily. Eq. (2), as discussed below, conforms to this principle.

CHOICE, WILL POWER AND PROBABILITIES

Concepts such as disorder, entropy, chance events, and intelligent effort have been the
subject of discussion among physicists and philosophers alike for over a century. It is
generally accepted that states of disorder have a higher probability than states of order.
Therefore systems will generally assume states of higher disorder with progress of time.
However, there are many situations where intelligent and willful efforts can restore a
measure of order at least to a part of the system. In such instances the degree of order
found in the (sub)system reflects the amount of willed effort spent on it. Since the degree
of order is also inversely related to the probability, the amount of willed effort implicit in
the state of a system is inversely proportional to the a priori probability of that state.
Higher effort will be required to bring about a low probability state.

This principle is particularly suitable to decision-making situations involving multiple

choices. It applies equally to Ishwara making choices affecting the state of the world and
to jeevas making choices affecting their spirituality. As an illustration, consider a
situation where the laws of Prakriti dictate that one of two events, A or B, happens with
probabilities 99.99999999999% and 0.00000000001%, respectively. In the ordinary
course of events A is far, far more likely than B. Which of the two events will actually
happen is dependent on Ishwara’s Will. Should B happen in spite of these great odds, we
recognize a “miracle” i.e. a display of Divine Will at work. On the other hand, when A
happens there is less recognition of that Ishwara’s Will, though in reality neither A nor B
can happen without that. It is that the display of Ishwara’s Will is much stronger- and
hence more discernible- when the lower probability event happens.

Let us apply this reasoning to the decision-making situation facing the jeeva which must
choose between the “attached mode” { i.e. γ(t) = 0}and “witness mode” {γ(t) = 1}. The a
priori probability of these two modes are cos2 θ(t) and sin2 θ(t) respectively. If θ(t) is
low, sin2θ(t), the probability of identifying with the Self, is low. The jeeva can
nevertheless still choose to be in the witness mode, but the will power required is
correspondingly high; in fact the will power required varies inversely with sin2θ(t).
Similarly, for a sagely jeeva (like Sri Ramakrishna) with deep vairagya, θ(t) is high and
the will power needed to stay identified with the Non-Self is high.

Since sin2θ(t) itself varies as sinθ(t), it is inferred that the will power required to stay in
the witness mode varies as{1/sinθ(t)}. Similarly, the will power needed to stay attached
to Non-Self varies as {1/cosθ(t)}.

Eq.(2) can be therefore rewritten as

z’(t) = {1-γ(t)}WPns + i. γ(t) WPs…. Eq.(4)

where the weights WPns and WPs are quantities related to the will power needed to
identify with the Non-Self and Self respectively. z’(t) itself is now seen as a random
variable which takes on one of the two values WPns or WPs. Since z’(t) is also
representative of the direction of the spiritual path as seen in Fig 3, we have in Eq. (4) a
mathematical representation of Sri Ramana’s Principle that a jeeva’s will power is an
essential determinant of its spiritual growth 1.

It is worth noting in conclusion that the main result of this paper plays a key role in
proving a relationship between vasanas and spiritual detachment in the sequel (Ref 3.)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author acknowledges his indebtedness to Brahmaleen Gurudev Sw. Chinmayananda,
Sw. Tejomayananda, Sw. Dheerananda and several other acharyas and friends of the
Chinmaya Mission from whom he learnt Advaita Vedanta. In particular, Mr. Benjamin
Root was involved from the beginning as the concepts underlying this paper slowly took
shape. I thank him for patiently reading several versions of the paper and providing
comments regarding both the mathematical and Vedantic aspects discussed here.

This paper is one of a series which are to be incorporated into a book forthcoming from
the author. Excerpts from these papers may be quoted with due acknowledgement to the
author and the source.

REFERENCES:

1. Chidambaram, Raju “Towards A Mathematical Theory of Spirituality Based on

Advaita (Parts I and II)”- Presented at the Fifth International WAVES
Conference, Houston, TX, July 2006
2. Mudaliar,A. Devaraja “Gems from Bhagavan” Sri Ramana Ashram, India (2000)
3. Chidambaram, Raju “Towards A Mathematical Theory of Spirituality Based on
Advaita Vedanta (Part IV)”- To be Presented at the Sixth International WAVES
Conference, Orlando, FL (June 2008)

1
In the Bhagavad Gita (VI.35), Arjuna famously notes that the fickle (“chanchala”) mind is as difficult to
control as the wind (“tasyaaham nigraham manye vaayoriva sudushkaram”.) By what means can one bring
such a mind to single pointed attention on the Self? To this question from Arjuna, the Lord answers simply
“abhyaasena tu kaunteya vairaagyena ca grihyate” (by repeated practice and detachment does one hold the
mind.) Since will power is a prerequisite to diligent practice, it can be surmised that both will power and
spiritual detachment are required for identifying with the Self.