788 Liberation
Radhakrishnan, S., The Principal Upanisads, London, 1953.
Reichenbach, B., The Law of Karma: A Philosophical Study,
London, 1990.
Sanderson, A, aivism and the Tantric Traditions, in:
S. Sutherland et al., eds., The World Religions, London,
1988, 660704.
Stevenson, I., Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation,
2
1974.
Liberation. In Brills Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Vol. 2: Texts, Rituals, Arts, Concepts,
ed. Knut Axel Jacobsen, 788-792. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2010.
Liberation
In the Hindu tradition, the ultimate aim of reli-
gious striving and indeed of human life in
general is most commonly termed moksa, mean-
ing freedom or liberation. Although corre-
spondences are of course far from exact, the idea
occupies the place in Hindu thought that parallels
concepts of perfection, salvation, redemption,
freedom, and the like in other religious traditions.
While it is the most widely accepted term for the
final spiritual goal in Hinduism, it is not the only
term so used. Others, which will be mentioned in
passing, include apavarga (cessation), nirvna
(extinction), duh khnta (the end of suffering),
kaivalya (isolation), and siddhi (perfection).
From the Sanskrit root muc-, to release, to set
free, moksa and its feminine cognate and syn-
onym mukti convey the idea of liberation from the
rounds of birth and rebirth (punarbhava) in the
mundane world ( sam sra), along with the suf-
fering (duh kha) associated therewith. The indi-
vidual who has attained this state of freedom is
referred to using the past participle form mukta,
the one who is liberated. All Hindus accept this
basic definition in terms of liberation from as a
starting point, but through history and across
the spectrum of the various Hindu schools of
thought there is a wide divergence as to the pos-
itive content of the moksa experience. The bulk of
this article will be devoted to outlining these
divergences, as represented in the ancient and
classical traditions of scripture and theology.
While most schools of thought regard moksa as
the common destiny of all souls, a few, as we shall
see, teach that some are not fit for this goal. Finally,
while the general view is that moksa, once attained,
is permanent and eternal, at least one Hindu
teacher, the 19th-century reformer Dayananda
Sarasvati, understood moksa as a temporary state,
Sutherland, S., L. Houlden, P. Clarke & F. Hardy, The
Worlds Religions, London, 1988.
Weiss, M. G., Caraka Sam hit on the Doctrine of Karma,
in: W. Doniger OFlaherty, ed., Karma and Rebirth in
Classical Indian Traditions, 1980, 90115.
Zaehner, R.C., Mysticism Sacred and Profane, Oxford, 1961.
Julius Lipner
from which return to earthly life was inevitable.
The important question of whether liberation is
possible prior to the death of the body is dealt with
separately in the article on jvanmukti (living lib-
eration; jvanmukta).
Moksa and the Brahmanical
Tradition
The concept of moksa as a release from bondage to
ordinary existence first made its appearance in the
Upanisads, in what may be termed the late Vedic
period. It did not find expression in the earlier
Vedic corpus ( Vedas), where the outlook was
generally more life affirming. The highest values
of Vedic Brahmanism, as later distilled in the con-
cept of the purusrthas or goals of human life
( purusa), centered in ritual; responsibility to
family, ancestors, and society; and general earthly
well-being. The postmortem goal was not moksa
but svarga, a heavenly existence that was more or
less an extension of earthly life, but without its
defects.
The idea of the radical transcendence of mun-
dane existence that is represented by moksa arose
in part as an answer to concerns internal to Vedic
religion, especially anxiety about the possibility of
re-death ( punarmrtyu) after a postmortem
period in the world of the ancestors. It is likely that
there was also significant influence from the non-
Brahmanical shamanic and ascetic cultures
termed ramana (lit. striver), which eventually
crystallized in the Jain, Buddhist, and Yoga tradi-
tions. The development of the discourse about
moksa paralleled the rise to religious conscious-
ness of the related concepts of karman and
sam sra. These ideas were combined with a less
 Liberation
than optimistic evaluation of ordinary human
existence in terms of the suffering (duh kha) seen
to be endemic to sam sra, forming a complex that
became the common heritage of all Indic religions.
Like the idea of moksa, the doctrines of karman
and sam sra also found their earliest literary
expression in the Upanisads (BU. 4.4.37; KathU.
3.78; vetU. 6.16; MaiU. 1.4).
Beyond the Upanisads, the doctrine of moksa
moved gradually toward wide acceptance in the
Hindu tradition, but never achieved a complete
ascendency in relation to other religious goals. The
moksa ideal vied continually and most especially
with dharma ones duty toward ritual mainte-
nance of the world for status as the primary aim
of human life. Although the Dharmastras and
the Arthastra are aware of moksa as an ultimate
horizon, they limit the purusrthas formally to the
trivarga (triad) of dharma, artha, and kma.
Likewise, the Rmyana and the Mahbhrata among the upanishadic teachers that this final
speak of the trivarga of human goals only, although
the latter contains significant portions for exam-
ple, the Moksadharma in which the world-deny-
ing moksa ethos eclipses the this-worldly triad of
purusrthas. The addition of moksa to the list of
purusrthas, forming the classical caturvarga
(quartet) of human goals, is a later development.
Among the ultra-orthodox Mmm sa theorists
of ritual, intent as they were on the pursuit of
dharma and the associated goal of svarga, the idea
of moksa was not fully accepted until the time of
Kumrila and Prabhkara (7th cent. CE). Never-
theless, by this time the moksa ideal had gained
ground in other areas of Brahmanical culture to
the extent that the schools of Vednta were
speaking of it as the paramapurusrtha, the
supreme goal of human life, as does ankara
(7th8th cents. CE) in his commentary on
Brahmastra 2.1.3.
The Idea of Liberation in the
Upanisads
In the early and middle Upanishads (c. 900
500 BCE), we begin to see forms of the verb muc-
(BU. 4.2.1; ChU. 6.14.2; KathU. 6.8), other noun
formations such as vimoksa (BU. 4.13.1416),
and, rarely, the feminine noun mukti (BU. 3.1.6)
used in senses evoking the later, formalized con-
ception of moksa. By the later Upanisads, the word
itself has attained the status of a technical term, for
example, in the vetvataropanisad: He is the
789
cause of sam sra and moksa (vetU. 6.16; see also
MaiU. 6.20, 30, 34). In addition, there are numer-
ous passages in which the idea of liberation from
sam sra is suggested by other, more metaphorical
expressions, for instance, not returning (BU.
6.2.15; ChU. 4.15.56); gaining victory over
repeated death (punarmrtyu; BU. 1.2.7); passing
beyond sorrow, sin, and death (BU. 3.5.1; MuU.
3.2.9); untying the knots of the heart (MuU. 2.2.9);
being released from good and evil (BU. 4.4.23;
MuU. 3.1.3); and reaching the further shore
(ChU. 7.26.2).
More positively, we read of going to brahman
(BU. 4.4.6; KathU. 6.14), reaching the supreme
light (param jyotih ; ChU. 8.12.3), becoming
immortal (amrta; BU. 4.4.7; KathU. 6.8), reach-
ing the world of Brahm (brahmaloka; ChU.
8.4.1; 8.15.1), and so on. As these varied meta-
phors suggest, while there is general agreement
release is a state of blissful freedom from earthly
limitations, positive conceptions of the content of
the experience vary. We find accounts that suggest
personal immortality (ChU. 8.12.3), having ones
desires spontaneously fulfilled (ChU. 8.2.110;
8.7.13; TaiU. 2.1, 3.10.5), reaching a state of com-
plete desirelessness (BU. 4.4.7; MuU. 3.2.2; MaiU.
6.30), attaining likeness to the supreme (MuU.
3.1.3), enjoying a heavenly paradise (ChU. 8.12.3;
KausU. 1.35), attaining oneness with the divine
person (purusam divyam; MuU. 3.2.8), merging
in brahman (ln brahmani; vetU. 1.7), or even
finding complete isolation from pleasure and pain
(kevalatva; MaiU. 6.21). In some cases, the souls
retention of individual form, or even some kind of
spiritual embodiment, is suggested (ChU. 7.26.2;
8.12.3), while in others complete loss of individu-
ality is clearly indicated (BU. 2.4.1214; 4.3.30;
4.4.6; ChU. 6.10.1; MuU. 3.2.89; PrU. 6.5).
Liberation in the Brahmastra
The Upanisads, being visionary in content rather
than systematic, make no attempt to harmonize
the various perspectives presented. The first record
we have of any such endeavor is the Brahmastra,
attributed to Bdaryana (3rd2nd cents. BCE).
The third and fourth chapters of this work discuss
a number of upanishadic passages dealing with
the postmortem state of brahman knowers and
reveal that, even at this relatively early stage in the
development of the Vednta, there were teachers
worthy of mention by name who had divergent views
790 Liberation
on the topic of moksa, to the extent that Bdaryana
felt it necessary to seek a reconciliation.
The Brahmastra addresses several key ques-
tions concerning the state of the liberated soul
(mukta), the first and most obvious being the rela-
tion between the liberated soul and brahman.
There seems to have been general agreement that
the mukta abided in a state without distinction
(avibhga) from the ultimate (BrS. 4.4.4), though
the word avibhga was vague enough to give later
commentators much latitude. There was disagree-
ment, however, regarding the nature of the liber-
ated soul itself. Is the soul in liberation to be
defined as pure consciousness (citi) only, or does
it posses other qualities? The author of the
Brahmastra wants to allow other brahman-
like attributes in addition to pure consciousness
(BrS. 4.4.57). Does the mukta, for example, enjoy
supernatural powers? Bdaryana suggests that
this is the case, but that these powers do not
encroach upon the functions of cosmic creation,
sustenance, and so on, which are exclusive to brah-
man (BrS. 4.4.1721). How should we read scrip-
tural passages that suggest that the desires
of the liberated are realized simply by willing (BrS.
4.4.89)? We must accept them. Are the liberated
somehow embodied? If so, may they enjoy more
than one body? Bdaryana seems to believe that
some kind of embodiment, and even multiple
embodiments, is possible but not necessary (BrS.
4.4.1016). An additional question is the issue of
whether certain liberated souls under certain con-
ditions attain only the lower or effected (krya)
brahman the world of Brahm (brahmaloka) or
Hiranyagarbha instead of the supreme (para)
brahman (BrS. 4.3.716). At least in ankaras
reading, the author of the Brahmastra allows for
this, which opens the door for a central debate
among later commentators: do the scriptural pas-
sages referring to the mukta as embodied and pos-
sessed of desire, powers, and other celestial
attributes and experiences pertain only to those
who have attained the lower brahman, or do they
teach that the highest state might include such
experiences? The distinction between the supreme
and the lower brahman as goals for liberated souls
also opens the door for the conceptualization of
what ankara calls kramamukti, stepwise or grad-
ual liberation. The Brahmastra (4.3.1011) refer-
ring perhaps to Mundakopanisad 3.2.6 suggests
that those who have attained the world of Brahm
attain full liberation along with Brahm when, at
the end of cosmic cycle, the world is dissolved.
While there is general agreement that, once lib-
eration is attained, there is no return (anvrtti) to
the mundane world (BrS. 4.4.22), Bdaryana
does suggest one interesting exception. Those
muktas who have been appointed to certain
cosmic missions may retain their bodies, or take
up new bodies, as long as their appointed missions
last (BrS. 3.3.32). Commentators take this idea
to refer to certain sages ( rsi s) such as
Apntaratamas, Vasisth a, and others who are
known in tradition for having assumed new bod-
ies at the behest of the Lord to carry out certain
divinely appointed tasks.
Liberation in the Bhagavadgt
Along with the Upanisads and the Brahmastra,
the Bhagavadgt is one of the three primary
texts (prasthnatray) of the Vednta. Like the
Upanishads, the Bhagavadgt is not a systematic
treatise. Indeed, it is something of a syncretic doc-
ument. While it clearly represents a stage in Hindu
thought at which the idea of sam sra is approach-
ing their full classical articulation, there is no sin-
gle, definitively expressed view of liberation in the
text. Rather, as in the earlier texts, there is ample
scope for both a nondualist and a theistic reading,
though it is easily arguable that the Bhagavadgt
tends more strongly toward a theistic conception.
The word moksa is used five times (BhG. 5.28;
7.29; 13.34; 17.25; 18.30) in the text, with the ver-
bal forms (mukta etc.) appearing considerably
more frequently. The text speaks of liberation
from the body (BhG. 5.23), from old age and
death (BhG. 7.29), from subjection to rebirth
(BhG. 2.51), from evil (BhG. 4.16, 9.1), and espe-
cially from the bondage of karman (BhG. 9.28).
The liberated soul crosses beyond my (BhG.
7.14), ever again to be reborn (BhG. 4.9; 5.17;
8.1516) and attains positively immortality
(amrtatva; BhG. 2.15; 13.12; 14.20), peace (nti;
BhG. 2.71), the highest perfection (sam siddhim
paramm; BhG. 8.15), the supreme bliss (atyantam
sukham; BhG. 6.28), and the eternal, immutable
state (vatam avyayam padam; BhG. 18.56).
The Bhagavadgt describes the sage as fit for
becoming brahman (BhG. 18.53), as established in
brahman (5.1920), or even as having become
brahman (brahmabhta; BhG. 5.24; 6.27; 18.54).
Krsn a promises that, at death, the sage will attain
brahman or the nirvna that is brahman (BhG.
4.3031; 5.6; 5.2426; 8.24; 13.30). Brahman is
 Liberation 791
defined, as in the Upanisads, as the imperishable ness (cit) in moksa, since it is for them part of the
(aksara; BhG. 8.3). souls inalienable nature; for the Nyya-Vaiseika
While these passages have given comfort to and the Mmm s, consciousness also is denied in
commentators who sought a nondualist, transthe- liberation, being an adventitious attribute of the
istic reading of the text, there are verses that have jva.
just as readily provided support for a final theistic The various schools of Vednta base their vision
import. Krsn a himself is identified with the on the Upanisads and thus do offer, in various
supreme brahman (param brahma; BhG. 10.12) modalities, participation in a reality beyond and
and the unexcelled goal (anuttamam gatim; BhG. higher than the individual self. All emphasize,
7.18). The liberated sage attains the supreme moreover, that moksa is not merely the end of suf-
divine person (param purusam divyam; BhG. 8.7 fering but also a positive experience of the highest
10). Indeed, over and over again, Krsn a proclaims bliss (paramnanda). Among these, the Advaita
that the liberated soul will come to, attain, or enter Vednta offers a transtheistic, nondualist concep-
into him (BhG. 4.9; 7.23; 8.7, 1516; 9.25, 28, 34; tion of liberation. It is transtheistic in the sense
10.10; 11.5455; 12.8; 18.55, 65, 68), his being that the moksa experience in Advaita entails iden-
(madbhvam; BhG. 4.10; 8.5; 13.18), or his supreme tity with the attributeless ( nirguna) brahman,
abode (dhma paramam mama; BhG. 15.6). conceived of as a reality that transcends, yet does
not negate, the attribute-full (saguna), or theistic,
aspect of the ultimate. The conception, if not com-
Moksa in the Various Schools monsensical, is fairly simple. In ankaras words,
moksa is brahman (brahmabhva ca moksah ;
As Hindu religious literature developed in the BrSBh. 1.1.4). It is not a question of an individual
classical period, a rich variety of conceptualiza- tman becoming, or as is often said merging
tions of moksa arose, corresponding to various into brahman. Moksa occurs with the realization
theological/philosophical traditions, which each that the single self (tman), which is present uni-
in its own way interpreted the suggestive ambi- formly in all beings as their inmost consciousness,
guity of scripture. Space does not permit a detailed is and has always been nothing other than brah-
analysis, but one may roughly divide these visions man. Although the reward of this nondualist real-
into (a) nontheistic or pluralist/isolationist, ization is supreme bliss (paramnanda), the cost
(b) transtheistic nondualist, and (c) theistic. is dear: the postmortem state termed videha-
The nontheistic, pluralist conceptions of moksa mukti, or disembodied liberation is one in
can be found among the Hindu daranas (philo- which, with rare exceptions (as at BrS. 3.3.32, dis-
sophical schools) Nyya, Vaiseika, Mmm s, cussed above), all traces of the muktas former
and Sm khya-Yoga ( Sm khya; Ptajala Yoga). individuality is dissolved.
All of these recognize an infinite multiplicity of Theistic expressions of the Vednta tradition are
spiritual selves ( tman, purusa, jva). At the primarily Vaisna va in orientation. These include
same time, none allows in moksa any participa- the theologies of Rmnuja (11th12th cents.),
tion in a higher reality beyond the self. Rather, the Madhva (13th cent.), Vallabha (15th16th cents.),
vision involves a cessation or removal (apavarga) and Rpa Gosvmin and Jva Gosvmin (16th
of connection with the suffering of the world and cent.). Speaking generally, they accept a multiplic-
an isolation (kaivalya) in the individual self s ity of spiritual selves (tman, jva), which may in
essential nature. Among these traditions, only the moksa attain a state of eternal, blissful commu-
later Nyya and the Yoga of Patajali offer a con- nion (but not identity) with the deity. This occurs
ception of god. The conception is minimalist, in a heavenly realm (Vaikunth a, Goloka) that
however, and moksa as perfect isolation in transcends sam sra, images of which are drawn
the self tman does not for them involve from the Upanisads (e.g. KausU. 1.35) and, espe-
any sort of communion or identity with god. The cially, the Purnas (e.g. BhgP. 3.15). It is signifi-
primary appeal of the moksa ideal in these tradi- cant that in these traditions moksa is not entirely a
tions is a negative one: the guarantee of the per- disembodied state. The mukta enjoys a spiritual
manent and complete cessation of suffering body (aprkrtadeha, siddhadeha, vaikunth amrti,
(duh khnta, tyantikaduh kanivrtti). There is no and so on) composed of pure being (uddhasattva).
positive experience of bliss, since in none of these A number of the Vaisna va preceptors accept the
systems is bliss accepted as part of the souls essen- idea of differing degrees of relationship with the
tial nature. In Sm khya-Yoga there is conscious- deity in moksa: residence in the same realm
792 Liberation
(slokya), partaking in divine attributes (srsti ),
proximity to god (smpya), enjoying a divine
form (srpya), and union (syujya or ekatva;
BhgP. 3.29.13). As this scheme suggests, it is not
necessarily the case that all liberated souls enjoy
the same degree of felicity. For Madhva, souls are
qualitatively distinct (svarpabheda), and there is
a gradation of bliss (nandatratamya) in moksa,
according to their worthiness. Madhva also is
notable for his teaching that some souls (the
nityasam srin sor nityabaddhas) are destined to
remain in the rounds of birth and rebirth forever,
never to attain moksa, while others (tamoyogya,
those fit for darkness) will slide toward an even-
tual eternity in hell. While not expressed so starkly,
similar ideas may be found in the Nimbrka and
Vallabha traditions. Finally, it should be noted that
Krsn a traditions, following the Bhgavatapurna after the saints physical passing, a concept of wide
(7.8.42; 11.14.4), deemphasize the value of moksa
in preference to bhakti, which they designate as
the fifth goal of life (pacamapurusrtha). They
see bhakti as a supremely blissful end in itself, not
merely a means to liberation.
The aiva and kta traditions have much in
common theologically, so they may be considered
here as a group. The aiva Siddhnta accepts a
plurality of souls and aims in moksa for a blissful
union with the deity that is consuming enough to
be described as the attainment of iva-hood
(ivatva), while yet being a state in which differ-
ence is retained. The varieties of moksa recognized
by Vaisna vas (slokya, smpya, etc.) are also
accepted in the aiva gamas, with the differ-
ence that syujya (union with the deity) is valo-
rized instead of being devalued. The realization in
moksa of ivatva is taken more radically in
the nondualist aivism of Kashmir ( Kashmir
aivism), represented preeminently in the work of
Abhinavagupta (10th-11th cents.). In this theis-
tic nondualism, the individualized consciousness
is said to expand into a thoroughgoing identity
with iva, actualizing to the full the mantric
exclamation, ivo ham, I am iva. The kta tra-
ditions are similarly nondualist in orientation.
The goal here is not leaving the world behind, but
rather transforming the yogins vision of the world
to the point that it is seen as iva (or the Goddess
[see Mahdev ]) sees it, that is, as divine. aivas
and ktas alike express this idea hyperbolically
by proclaiming that they seek the union of bhukti
and mukti (worldly enjoyment and liberation).
Hence, the emphasis is on jvanmukti, liberation
while living, after which the casting off of physical
embodiment becomes incidental. There is thus in
the aiva and kta schools as in the Vaisna va
bhakti traditions, though for somewhat different
reasons a tendency to devalue moksa. In this
case, it is in favor of siddhi, a complete perfection
of consciousness in which the world is not aban-
doned but rather transfigured. The conception of
reality is dynamic and capable of sustaining para-
dox to the extent that the siddha, the perfected
or accomplished saint, despite a close or even
complete identification with the deity, retains a
functional individuality. The siddha, indeed, is
often understood to have achieved a state of per-
sonal immortality that holds beyond the death of
the earthly body. This immortality involves a yogi-
cally engendered spiritual body (divyadeha,
jnadeha), an idea already mentioned in connec-
tion with Vaisna vism. It allows for the siddhas
continued, felt presence and power in the world
currency among the followers of any number of
guru-centered traditions within Hinduism.
Bibliography
Brown, C.M., Muktimrga and Mukti, in: idem, God as
Mother: A Feminine Theology in India, Hartford, 1974,
99112.
Dhavamony, M., Salvation, in: idem, Classical Hinduism,
Rome, 1982, 411465.
Flood, G., The Meaning and Context of the Purusrthas,
in: J. Lipner, ed., The Fruits of Our Desiring: An Enquiry
into the Ethics of the Bhagavadgt for Our Times,
Calgary, 1997, 1127.
Fort, A.O., & P. Mumme, eds., Living Liberation in Hindu
Thought, Albany, 1996.
Haberman, D.L., Acting as a Way of Salvation: A Study of
Rgnug Bhakti Sdhana, New York, 1988.
Jordens, J.T.F., Daynanda Sarasvat, His Life and Ideas,
Delhi, 1978.
Klostermaier, K.K., Mythologies and Philosophies of Salva-
tion in the Theistic Traditions of India, Waterloo, 1984.
Olivelle, P., Upanisads, New York, 1998.
Rambachan, A., The Advaita Worldview: God, World, and
Humanity, Albany, 2006.
Sarma, D., An Introduction to Mdhva Vednta, Burlington,
2003.
Sutton, N., Religious Doctrines in the Mahabharata, Delhi,
2000.
Thompson, G., The Bhagavad Gita: A New Translation,
New York, 2008.
White, D.G., The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in
Medieval India, Chicago, 1996
White, D.G., Why Gurus Are Heavy, Numen 31/1, 1984,
4073.
Witzel, M., Vedas and Upanisads, in: G. Flood, ed., The
Blackwell Companion to Hinduism, Oxford, 2003, 6898.
Lance E. Nelson