OM
Ajnanatimirintasyajnananjanasalakaya
Cakshurunmilitam
yena tasmai
srigurave
namah
ADVAITA
VEDANTA
D
Krishna Ayyar
Part III
SECTIONS 1- 9
PHILOSOPHY OF ADVAITA VEDANTA
AS EXPOUNDED IN THE UPANISHADS
Section
1 – Preparatory spiritual practices
1.
The Karma kanda practices (saadhana)
as a prelude to the pursuit of jnana kanda, the human tendency to the to
seek happiness in material acquisitions and achievements and the dawning
of the wisdom that one must find happiness within oneself by recognising
one’s true nature as the infinite Brahman are brought out in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, Mundaka Upanishad and Katopanishad. Brahadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.22 – “ The
Brahmanas (i.e those who have been ceremonially initiated, seeking to
know It (Brahman) ( purify their minds) through the chanting of Vedas,
(and, later), performance of
sacrifices and duties (of the chosen avocartion),
and charity (leading) an austere and dispassionate life and thereby
developing a desire to know Brahman, become sages and (thereafter,)
renouncing wordly life altogether, become monks ( to engage in enquiry
into the Self – atma vicaara).” Mundaka Upanishad I.ii.12
– “ Having understood by experience and inference
the troubles and impermanence of wordly life and impermanence of the effects of all karma and thus developing
dispassion towards the wordly life, desiring to know the eternal Reality,
to pursue enquiry into matma (Brahman),
a Brahmana should take to renunciation and go with sacrificial
faggot in hand ( symbolic of respect , faith and devotion) to a traditional
teacher who is well versed
in the Vedas and is abiding in Brahman (“srotriya brahmanishta”) .”
Kathopanishad Mantra II.i.1 & 2 - “The self-evident One (Brahman)
has endowed the mind and the sense organs with outward-going capacity.
Therefore they tend to perceive only external objects and not
the atma within. But a rare wise man, seeking immortality (i.e., liberation
from the cycle of births and deaths), and turning the vision inwards
sees (i.e. after study, recognises) the pratyagaatma
( the Brahma caitanyam available in the individual)..” “The
foolish ones wallow in external objects and are caught in the bondage
of mortality (i.e., the cycle or birth and death and suffering and sorrow).
Whereas the wise ones ,with discrimination , having learnt that the
goal is immortality (i.e. liberation from the cycle of births and deaths)
give up the desire for the impermanent objects of the world.” This does
not mean that one should give up one’s occupation or earning. On the
other hand, except in respect of persons who have renounced the worldly
life, family and possessions and have formally adopted a life style
devoted exclusively to Jnana Yoga, called, “vividisha sanyasa”,
Sastra enjoins on all, the duty of fulfilling the obligations pertaining
to one’s station in life – obligations not only to one’s own family,
but to society, ancestors, teachers, mankind as a whole, and environment
(plant and animal kingdom and the insentient objects of the world)
so as to contribute to ecological and cosmic harmony as well as
the obligation to oneself to provide facilities for one’s own
spiritual progress. But there should be no deviation from righteousness
and if there is excessive wealth, it should be devoted to the
welfare of the needy. Kathopanishad I.ii.24 emphasises that , unless
one desists from bad conduct and keeps his senses under control and
mind concentrated and free from anxiety, he cannot gain jananam ( identification
with Brahman).
2.
The qualification to be acquired for studying Jnana kanda is called
“sadhana catushtayam” – which consists of (a) discrimination
between the eternal and the ephemeral (atma anatma viveka), (b)
non-attachment to enjoyment of objects both here and hereafter (vairagya)
(c) six –fold discipline ( shadka sampatti) consisting of (i)
restraint of sense organs (dama), restraint of mind (sama),
(iii) adherence to one’s duties (uparati), tolerance of discomfort
(titiksha), (iv) faith in sastra and guru (teacher) (sraddha),
and concentration of mind (samadhana) and ( d) aspiration
for liberation (mumukshutvam)
. The means for acquiring the sampatti consists of nishkama karma and
upasana.
Section 2 – Enquiry into one’s real nature
The core
of the teaching in Advaita Vedanta is the identity of Jivatma and Paramatma.
For knowledge of Paramatma, we have to rely entirely on Sastra. But
the real nature of Jivatma, that is, our own real nature, can be known
by inward enquiry. Technically, it is called tvampada
vicaara. There are variations of tvampada vicara. These are drgdrsyaviveka, pancakosaviveka, avasthaatrayavivieka
and analysis of stages of life. When the unenlightened man refers
to himself as “I”, he is referring to a mixture of the consciousness
aspect (cwtana amsai) and
inert matter aspect (jada amsai). Brahman is pure consciousnness. The identification
with Brahman which Sastra shows as the only means of liberation from
samsara is not possible unless we separate the cetana amsa and the jada
amsa of “I” and recognize our own real nature as pure consciousness.
We have no preconceived notion about Brahman; so, we readily accept
what Sastra says about Brahman. But about ourselves, in successive janmas,
we have been regarding ourselves as the limited personalities based
on the body mind complex and so, when Sastra tells us that we are the
pure consciousness identical with the infinite Brahman, we do not readily
accept it. That is why tvampada vicara is important.
SUB-SECTION
(1) - DRGDRSYAVIVEKA
3. There
are various Upanishadic passages pertaining to the consciousness behind
the mind. Brhadaranyaka Upanishad III.8.xi -(Also III.vii.23) – “Verily,
this Absolute, O Gargi, is never seen, but It is the Seer; It
is never heard but It is the Hearer; It is never thought but It is the
Thinker; It is never known but It is the Knower. There is no other seer
than It, there is no other hearer than It, there is no other thinker
than It, there is no other knower than It.” (Sankaracarya’s commentary
– “Being the consciousness Itself, It is not an object of the intellect.”)
Brhadaranyaka Upanishad III.4.ii - ‘Tell
me precisely about that Brahman only which is immediate and direct –
the Atma that is within all’ ‘ This is your Atma that is within all.’
‘Which is that within all, Yagnavalkya?’ ‘You cannot see the Seer
of the seer (the witness of the vision), you cannot hear the Hearer
of the hearer, you cannot think the Thinker of the thinker,
you cannot know the Knower of the knower. This is your self that
is within all. Everything besides this is unreal (mithya)”
Kenopanishad II.2.- “ I don’t say that I know Brahman nor do I say that
I don’t know Brahman. I know and do not know as well. He among us who
understands that utterance ‘not that I do not know, I know and I do
not know’, knows that Brahman. Kenopanishad II.3 - “ He who says
that he does not know ( Brahman) knows; he who claims that he knows
( Brahman) does not know……It is unknown to those who know and known
to those who do not know ( The meaning of these intriguing
Mantras is that that the atma, the original consciousness, cannot become
the object of the pramata. The example is that fire cannot be consumed
by that which it burns. Pramata is antahkarana cum reflected consciousness.
How can reflected consciousness illumine its source? It being the original
consciousness Itself, there cannot be dependent on another consciousness,
just as light does not depend on another light. But as it is said
in Kenopanishad II..4, Brahman (atma, the original consciousness) is
“pratibhotaviditam” – Brahman or Atma is the consciousness recognized
as the witness of all cognitions. It is witness in the sense that ,
whereas the knower consciousness, the knower I, is a changing I, the
atma is invoked as the unchanging , constant I. In this connection
we can also refer to the discussion in Sankaracarya’s introduction to
his commentary on Brahmasutra, where he refutes an opponent who says
that study of Sastra is futile. The opponent’s argument is ‘if Brahman
is known, there is no need to study Sastra and if Brahman is unknown,
no definition or description of an unknown thing is possible. Sankaracarya’s
answer is that Brahman is neither totally unknown nor totally known.
No one denies that he exists and that he is a conscious being. Thus,
the consciousness that is the real I is known , but we are under the
spell of the ignorance that we are limited individuals. It is necessary
to study Sastra to understand that we are Brahman, the infinite Existence-Consciousness-Infinite.
sub-Section 2 – PANCAKOSAVIVIEKA
This is discussed in Taittiriya
Upanishad Brahmanandavalli. . It talks of “aannamaya
kosa” corresponding to the sthoola sarira, “praanamayakosa”
corresponding to that part of the sukshma sarira which consists of the
five vital airs – prana, apana, vyana, udana, and samana and the five organs of action (karmendriyas),
“manomaya kosa” corresponding to that part of the sukshma sarira
which consists of the mind, i.e.,. the cognizing faculty, which is also
the generator of emotions and shares the five organs of perception (jananendriyas),.
“vijanamaya kosa” corresponding to that part of the sukshma
sarira which consists of the intellect,, i.e., the deciding faculty,
which shares the jnaanendriyas and which includes the ego (the ahamkaara)
and “anandamaya kosa” corresponding to the karana sarira
of the seep sleep state in which a person experiences ignorance and
bliss. The kosas are introduced one after the other as atma. First,
the Upanishad describes the annamaya kosa and says it is atma. Then,
saying that there is something interior and subtler than that, namely
pranamaya kosa, negates the annamaya kosa (that is, dismisses it, saying
that it is not atma – it is anatma) and so on, until it negates
even anandamaya, describing its parts as “priya”, moda” and “promoda”
which are grades of experiential happiness and, ultimately, reveals
the ultimate conscious principle and avers that that is atma,
Brahman.
SUB-SECTION
(3) –AVASTHATRAYAVIVIEKA
(a).
Another way of analysis is to examine the three states of waking, dream
and deep sleep called, respectively, “Jagrat awastha”, “swapna
awastha” and “sushupti avastha”. This is discussed in Mandukya
Upanishad which has to be studied with Mandukya Karika which is supposed
to be a commentary on the Upanishads but is, in itself, an elaborate
Prakarana grantha. However, from the Upanishad, itself, we can derive
the existence of a changeless consciousness, apart from the changing
mind. In Mantra 2, the Upanishad declares the identity of atma and Brahman
in the following terms. :- “Ayam atma Brahma”. Thereafter it describes
the experiencer of the waking state (jagrat avastha), called Vaisvaanara, the experiencer of the dream state (swapna avastha),
called taiasa and the experiencer
of the deep sleep state (sushupti avastha),
called praajna. In the crucial
mantra 7, it says that atma
is not conscious of the internal world or of the external world nor
is it a mass of consciousness (
na antah prajnam, na bahih prajnam, na prajnaanaghanam). Thus it
rules out atma being the ahamkaara operating in the jagrat avastha and
the swapna avastha and lying dormant in the sushupti avastha. It reiterates
that atma is not knower-consciousness (na
prajnam). And it hastens to add that atma is not unconsciousness
(na aprajnam). Thereafter it describes atma as being beyond empirical
dealings (avyavahaaryam).
This word clearly distinguishes atma from any consciousness which functions
as the knower (pramaata) or doer (karta) or enjoyer (bhokta); thus this
word serves to differentiate the changing ahamkaara from the changeless
atma. Three other words also differentiate the changeless pure, superior
consciousness that is atma from the changing ahamkara which is involved
in worldly transactions as the pramaata, karta and bhokta.
These are prancopasmamam
( in which all phenomena cease), saantam
(unchanging), sivam (auspicious) and advayam (non-dual). That the changeless consciousness
continues as the constant entity in and through the changes of the experiencer
is indicted by the words “eka-atmapratyaya-saaram”.
Sankaracarya gives the meaning “to be spotted by the unchanging belief
that It is the same atma that subsists in the states of waking and so
on”. In his commentary, Sankaracarya also says. “Since, like the imaginary
diversities – such as snake, a streak of water etc., superimposed on the rope
-the waking, dream and deep sleep states rule out each other,
though they are in essence one with the witnessing Consciousness, and
since the witnessing Consciousness in Its essence is unchanging in all
the states, it follows that the witness is true”.
(b).
In jagrat avastha, my body, my sense organs and
my mind are all fully active and I am perceiving external objects and
transacting with an external world (persons and things outside me) with the aid of reflected consciousness borrowed
from the atma (cidabhasa). In swapna avastha, my body and my sense organs
are dormant and my mind, aided by cidabhasa, projects a dream world.
During sushupti, both the body and mind along with cidabhasa are dormant.
The ahamkara operating in the jagrat avastha, called vaisvanara (or
visva), is not there when the ahamkara operating in the swapna avastha,
called taijasa, has come; neither the visva
nor the taijasa is there when the ahamkara is dormant, as prajna,
in the sushupti avastha.. Neither the taijasa nor the prajna is there
when the visva has come again. But still, I regard myself as the same
conscious being. In doing so, I am invoking a constant conscious
entity that was there when the visva was transacting with the world,
that was there when the taijasa was dreaming, that was there when the
prajna was sleeping and that is there when the visva has come again.
This constant consciousness is the atma, the real I.
(c).
In this connection we can refer to the following passage in “Upadesa
Sahasri” of Sankaracarya: - The disciple is asking “But at no time Your
Holiness, have I ever seen pure consciousness or anything else”. The
teacher answers , “ Then you are seeing in the state of deep sleep;
for you deny only the seen object, not the seeing. I said that your
seeing is pure consciousness. That [ eternally] existing one by which
you deny [ the existence of the seen object] when you say that nothing
has been seen, [ that precisely] is the seeing, that is pure consciousness.
Thus as [It] does not depart [from you] [Its] transcendental changelessness
and eternity are established solely by Itself without depending upon
any means of knowledge.” The pupil said, “….And there is no apprehender
different from this apprehender to apprehend it.”
(d)
That consciousness continues even during the deep sleep state when all
instruments of knowledge including the mind are dormant is expressed
poetically in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iii.23 to 30 – “ That It does
not see, smell, taste, speak, hear, think. touch, or know is because
although seeing, smelling, tasting, speaking, hearing, thinking, touching
and knowing then (the reference is to the continued presence of the
original consciousness as witness of the non-functioning mind) it does
not see, smell, taste, speak, hear, think, touch or know (the reference
is to the fact that since ahamkara is dormant, there is no experience
of an external world of objects or an internal dream world. It is only
when the sense organs and mind are functioning that one perceives an
external world of objects and it is only when the mind is active, even
though the sense organs are dormant, that one sees a dream world)
; for the vision of the witness can never be lost, because it is imperishable(
- the reference is to the fact that the original consciousness is eternal
– there is no interruption in the presence of the original consciousness
behind the mind, whether the mind is active or dormant. )”.
Section 3 –Orders of reality
1.
Advaita Vedanta does not deny the experiential or empirical reality
(‘vyavaharika satyatvam’) of the world. The seeming contradictions
in Upanishad statements can only be reconciled on the basis of the Advaita
Vedanta doctrine of different orders of reality. The concept of different
orders of reality is available in Chandogya Upanishad
- vide II.vi.1– “That (Brahman) created all that exists. That
(Brahman), having created that entered into that very thing. And, having
entered there, It became the true and the untrue, Truth became all this.
(“satyam ca anrutam ca; satyam abhavat”). Sankaracarya explains,
“ It follows from the context that satyam is truth falling within
the range of the empirical, and not absolute truth. For the absolute
truth is only one, which is Brahman. But here the relative truth, as
found in the empirical world,, is referred to; as for instance, water
is said to be true in comparison with the water in a mirage which is
false. Untruth is the opposite of that. Again, what is that became
all this? That which is the absolute truth. What is that, again? It
is Brahman; for it is Brahman that has been introduced as the topic
of discussion by the sentence ‘Brahman is truth, knowledge, infinite.'.
Thus, the word, “true” “t” in small case has been interpreted as vyaavahaarika
satyam, the word “untrue” as pratibhaasika satyam and the word “True”
with capital “T” as paaramaartika satyam. This is the authority (“pramaana”)
for three orders of reality, in the descending order - absolute reality
(paaramaartika satyam), empirical reality (vyaavahaarika satyam)
and subjective reality (pratibhasika satyam)... Vyaavahaarika
reality and praatibhaasika reality are also called "mithya”.
(For convenience, we shall, in many places, be using the term, “real”
for the paaramartika and the term “unreal” for the vyaavahaarika and
the praatibhaasika.). Brahman alone is paramarthika satyam. When Brahman
is said to be non-dual as in Chandogya, Brhadaranyaka, Mandukya etc.
(cited above) or said to be infinite as in Taittiriya and Svesvatara
(cited above), there cannot be a second entity like the world, but since
world is a thing that is experienced , it has to be accorded a lower
order of reality. We cannot dismiss the world as totally unreal because
all of us do experience a world. But if we accord the same order of
reality to the world as we do to Brahman,
statements of various Upanishads defining Brahman as non-dual
and infinite (advayam, anantam and ekam) will become
meaningless. The world is vyavaharika satyam. When we talk of the world
as vyavaharika satyam, it includes the bodies and minds of living beings.and
the world which includes bodies and minds belongs to a lower of reality.
The absolute reality of Brahman and the mithya status of the world is
expressed in the Sanskrit phrase “Brahmasatyam
jaganmithya
Things like snake seen on the rope, silver seen on the shell, the dream
world etc, are pratibhasika satyam
Section
4 –Description of Brahman, the absolute reality
(1).
Commenting on the Taittiriya Upanishad Mantra defining Brahman as Satyam,
Jnanam, Anantam, Sankaracharya first clarifies that the sentence, “Satyam,
Jnanam, Anantam Brahma” is not one that denotes the attributes (“guna”)
of Brahman but it is a definition of the nature of Brahman ( a ”swaroopa
lakshana vakyam”). The question is asked, “why should there be three
words?” Sankaracarya explains that while the word, “ Satyam” indicates
that the entity is an eternally existing entity, the word, ”jnanam”
is juxtaposed to show that the entity is not inert but that it is a
conscious entity. But even such an entity can be a limited entity, with
a limited location, existing along with other entities, i.e., one among
many. So, the word, ‘anantam’ is juxtaposed to show that it is infinite
, space-wise, time-wise and entity-wise, i.e., all pervading (“sarvagatam”),
eternal (“nityam”) and nondual (“advayam”), i.e.,
besides It there is no other entity ( of the same order of reality.
Since it is all pervading, it is formless (“nirakara”), divisionless
(“nirvikalpa”), devoid of movement (“acala”) and devoid
of parts (“niravayava”). Since it is eternal, it is changeless (“nirvikara”).
Since it is nondual, it is relationless (“asanga”).
(2).
Other passages in the Upanishads revealing the swaroopam of Brahman
( i. e the nature of Brahman) are cited below (“Brahman” and “Atma”
are interchangeable words. That Brahman is non-dual (advayam, advaitami, advidtiiyam) is stated in Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.1 and 6.2.2, in Kaivalya Upanishad 19 and 23, Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.22, Mandukya
Upanishad 7, Nrsimhaottaratapaniya Upanishad 8 and 9, Ramopoorvatapaniya
Upanishad 5, and Muktopanishad 2.73. That Brahman is infinite (anantam),
we can see in Taittiriya Upanishad 2.1., - “Satyam, janma, anantam Brahma”
and in Svesvatara Upanishad 1.9 – “Anantah ca atma visvaroopah…” In
Mandukya Upanishad mantra 7, it is said- “It is not the inward awareness.
It is not the outward awareness. It is not the intermediate awareness.
It is not the undifferentiated mass of awareness. It is not the knowing
awareness. It is not non-awareness. It is unperceivable. It is not accessible
to transaction. It cannot be grasped. It is attributeless. It
is not accessible to thought. It is not amenable to communication. It
is the substratum of the I thought. It is the remainder of the
negation (annulment) of the universe. It is changeless. It is auspiciousness.
It is the nondual reality. ……That is atma..(na antah-prajnam, na bahih- prajnam, na ubhyatah-prajnam,
na prajaana-ghanam na prajnam na aprajnam; adrshtam avyavahaaryam agraahyam
alakshanam acintyam avyapadesyam ekatma-pratyaya-saaram prapancopasamam
saantam sivam advaitams......sa atma…”. Kathopanishad I.ii.20 and
I.ii..21 - “Subtler than the than the subtlest, greater than the
greatest”. “Nearer than the nearest, farther than the farthest ……..unmoving
moving everywhere.” Isavasya Upanishad 4 – “It is unmoving ,
one, faster than the mind” ( Sankaracarya’s commentary – “ ‘One’ indicates
that It is in all beings. It is spoken of as ‘unmoving’ in respect of
Its own unconditioned aspect. And, by reason of Its following the limiting
adjunct, the mind, the internal organ characterized by volition and
doubt, It appears to be subject to modification. When the speedy mind
travels fast to the world of Hiranyagarbha etc., the reflection of the
atma that is consciousness is perceived to have reached there, as it
were, even earlier; and hence It is said to be faster than the mind.”)
Isavasya Upanishad 8 – “He is all pervasive, pure, bodiless, without
wound, without sinews, taintless, untouched by sin, omniscient, ruler
of mind, transcendent, and self-existent.” Kaivalya
Upanishad 17 – “ I am that Brahman which illumines the world of waking,
dream, and sleep” Kaivalya Upanishad 21 - I see without
eyes, hear without ears. Assuming various forms, I know everything.
There is no one who is the knower of Me. I am ever the pure consciousness.
“ (“ .... Cit sada aham.”). Kaivalya Upanishad 18
“I am distinct from all those which are the subject, the object
and the instrument. In all the three states - jagrat, swapna and
sushupti – I am the witness who is the pure consciousness (cinmatra)
and who is ever auspicious.”) Kaivalya Upanishad 23 – “ ........the
nature of Paramatma which is manifest in the mind, partless, nondual,
the witness of all, distinct from cause and effect and pure...” Taittiriya
Upanishad II.iv.1 - “ Words and sense organs, along with the mind
return, unable to reach That” Mundakopanishad I..i.6 - “That
which cannot be seen or grasped, that which has no source, that which
has no features, that which has no eyes, ears, etc, that which has no
hands, feet etc. that which is eternal, that which is infinite,
that which is all pervading, that which is the subtlest of the subtlest,
that which is undiminishing and that which is the source of all
creation…” Mundakopanishad
III.i.8- “ “That which cannot be apprehended
by sight or by words or by other ‘indriyas’ ( i.e. sense organs
and the mind), that which cannot be attained by penance or rituals….The
divisionless…..” Mundakopanishad III.i.7 – “
That ( i.e., Brahman) is infinite, effulgent, not accessible to
thought, formless, subtler than the subtlest; farther than the farthest.
It is, at the same time, near at hand in this body. It is available
to be recognised in one’s very heart, (i.e., as the consciousness behind
the ahamkara)”. Kathopanishad I.iii.15 - “That which
is soundless, touchless, formless, undecying, tasteless,
internal, smellless, imperishable, immortal, beginningless, endless,
(infinite), greater than the greatest, distinct from intelligence,
(i.e., the eternal consciousness) and changelessly constant…..”
Isavasya Upanishad 5 - “ It moves; it does not move. It is far. It is
near. It is inside all this. It is outside all this. ”Kaivalya
Upanishad 20 – “I (Brahman) am smaller than the smallest and, in the
same way, I am bigger than the biggest; I alone am this manifold universe;
I am the ancient one; I am the ruler of all; I am the effulgent one
; I am the very auspiciousness.” Kaivalya Upanishad 6 -
“Brahman which is the source of all, pure, free from sorrow, beyond
thoughts, unmanifest, many-formed (in association with thoughts), auspicious,
tranquil, immortal, free from beginning middle and end, non-dual, all
pervasive, formless and wonderful and which is consciousness and ananda.”
Kaivalya Upanishad 7 – “Brahman which is the cause of all
beings, the witness of all and beyond Maya.” Kaivalya Upanishad 16 –
“You alone are that infinite, eternal, supreme Brahman which is the
self of all, which is the abode of all and which is subtler than the
subtlest - that Brahman alone are you.” Kaivalya Upanishad 17
– “ I am that Brahman which illumines the world of waking dream,
sleep, etc.....” Mundakopanishad II.i.2 - “Effulgent, formless, all
pervading, pervading the inside and outside of the universe, unborn,
without prana and mind, pure, superior to the (other) superior (i.e.
Maya)” Svetasvatara Upanishad VI.19 - “ Divisionless,
actionless, beyond fluctuations, free from all defects, untainted,
the means of crossing the sea of samsara and attaining moksha)”
Kenopanishad I.3 - “Eyes do not reach That nor do words and not even
the mind. We do not know ‘That Brahman is of this kind’. How to make
Brahman known we do not know”
Kenopanishad I. 4.-
“ (Because) It is different from the known and It is beyond the
unknown – This is what we have heard from our teachers who have taught
us about That Brahman.” Kathopanishad II.iii.12 - “Not by
words nor by sight and not even by the mind can It be reached. But he
who says that It does not exist can never attain It.” Brhadaranyaka
Upanishad III.ix.26, IV.ii.4, IV,iv,22, and IV.v.15 - “This
Atma is That which has been described as ‘Not this, not this’. It is
imperceptible, for It is never perceived; undecaying, for It never decays;
unattached, for It is never attached; unfettered, It never feels pain
and never suffers injury. r…..” Brhadaranyaka Upanishad
IV.iv.20 - “ It is to be realized (in accordance with the
instructions of a teacher) as non dual (for) It is unknowable,
eternal. The Atma is taintless, is superior to unmanifested space (i.e.
Maya), is unborn, infinite and constant” Brahadaranyaka Upanishad
4.4.20 – “It should be realized in one form only. It is unknowable and
eternal. It, the atma, is taintless, beyond akasa, birthless, infinite
and constant”.Chandogya Upanishad VI.ii.1 “ O, good looking one, in
the beginning this was Existence alone, One only and without a
second.” Chandogya Upanishad Viii.i.v – “This (Brahman) does not
grow old when the body grows old or die when the body dies (or killed
when the body is killed)……….. This is the Atma which is beyond
sin, beyond decrepitude, beyond death, beyond sorrow, beyond hunger
and thirst….” Kenopanishad I.6 – “That which man does not comprehend
with the mind. That by which…..mind is pervaded.” Kenopanishad
I.5 – “ That which is not uttered by speech, That by which speech is
revealed, know That alone to be Brahman, and not what people worship
as an object.” Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iii.15 – “This
infinite is relationless.” Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.25 –
“That great birthless Atma is undecaying, immortal, undying, fearless,
and infinite.” Mundaka Upanishad III.i.7 – “ It is great because of
its all-pervasiveness and It is self-effulgent. Its features cannot
be thought of. It is subtler than the subtlest…..Among sentient beings
It is perceived as seated in this very body, inn the cavity of the heart
– (“heart” is the term used for the mind.) Brhadaranyaka Upanishad III.viii.8
- …..”This Immutable Brahman is neither gross nor minute, neither short
nor long, neither red colour nor oiliness, neither shadow nor darkness,
neither air nor ether, unattached, neither taste nor smell, without
eyes or ears, without the vocal organ or mind, non-luminous (when it
is said to be effulgent, it does not refer to effulgence like the fire
etc. but to consciousness),without the vital force , not a measure,
and without interior or exterior”. Kahopanishad I.iii.15 – That which is soundless, touchless, colourless, undiminsishing,,
and also tasteless, eternal, odourless, without beginnining, and without
end, distinct from Mahat, and ever constant.”. Brhadaranyaka 3.8.8 – “It
does not eat anything nor is It eaten by anybody”. (‘Eating’ refers to experience. So, It is neither the experiencer
nor the experienced.) Chandogya Upanishad VI.ii.1 – “One only, nondual”.
Brahadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.16 – “That to which time is below (i.e.
That which is beyond time.”) On the same lines, Brhadaranyaka IV.iv.15
– “…. The Lord of all that has been and will be…”And in Brhadaranyaka
III.ix.26, IV.ii.4, IV,iv.22 and IV,v.15 – “….. It is “asitah”
( i.e., not fettered by space, time or entity). Brhadaranyaka Upanishad
II.iii.6 – “Now therefore the description of (Brahman): ‘not this, not
this’. Because there is no other and more appropriate description than
this ‘not this’.” Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.19 “There is no plurality
whatsoever in It. He who regards the apparent plurality as real goes
from death to death.” Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.20
– “It should be realized in one form only.” – Sankaracarya’s commentary
– “as the homogenous pure caitanyam”. Chandogya Upanishad VII.24.i –
'The Infinite is that where one does not see anything else, does not
hear anything else and does not know anything else. Hence the finite
is that where one sees something else, hears something else and
knows something else. That which indeed is the Infinite is immortal.”
(“Does not see anything else” etc, mean that at the Paramarthika level,
there is no division of knower, known and knowing instrument – pramata
pramana and prameyam – no triputi; Paramarthika Brahman is
non-dual. Where is the question of one seeing and another being
seen or one knowing and another being known? At paramarthika order of
reality, Brahman is devoid of empirical dealings (“avyavaharyam”).
Kathopanishad I.ii.14 – “…that thing which you see as different from
dharma , different from adharma, different from cause and
effect and different from the past and the future.” Kathopanishad I.ii.18
– “The intelligent Self is neither born nor does it die. It did not
originate from anything, nor did anything originate from It. It is birthless,
eternal, undecaying and ancient. It is not injured even when the body
is killed. That Brahman is akarta is stated in Svesvatara Upanishad
1.9. Kathopanishad I.ii.19 – “…It does not kill nor is it killed.”.
Kaivalya Upanishad 1,21 – “ It is without hands or feet,
Section
5 – Unreality of the world
(1) There
are various passages in the Upanishads from which we can derive the
doctrine of the unreality or the lower order of reality of the world.
When Brahman is said to be non-dual, or one without a second (advayam, advaitam, advidiiyam, ekam)
as in Brahadaranyaka, Kaivalya, Chandogya, Mandukya
and in Svesvatara or Brahman is said to be infinite, as in Tattitiriya
and Svesvatara, it means that the world is of lower order of reality.
There
are numerous other statements indicating the unreality
of the world. Brhadaranyaka 4.4.19 and Katha 2.1.11
- “There is no diversity whatsoever
in It”. (This is negation of dwaitam, the ignorant
notion that the world is real.) Brhadaranyaka 4.3.31, 2..4.14 and 4.5.15
– “When there is something other than Brahman, as it were, one can see
something else…….know something else.” The words, “as it were” (or “as
though” – “iva" in Sanskrit) indicate that everything except
Brahman is unreal. Similarly, in Brhadaranyaka mantra IV.iv.19
and Katopanishad II.i.11, the word “iva” is used in the passage
“He who sees diversity, as it were, in It goes from death to death”
following the passage declaring that “there is no diversity whatsoever
in It. “(“neha nana asti kinca na, mrtyoh sa mrtyum apnoti
ya iha nana iva pasyati”) The word “iva” referring to the perception
of plurality indicates that plurality is unreal. In Brhadaranyaka 2.3.6,
3.9.26, 4.2 4, 4.4.22 and 4.5.15, Brahman is described as “not this,
not this” (“neti neti”) indicating that it is of a higher order
of reality than the world. In 3.4.2, 3,5.1,and 3.7.23,, talking of Brahman
that is immediate and direct, the atma within all, the Upanishad says
that except That (i.e., Brahman), everything is aarttam. Sankaracarya
explains in 3.5.1 that “aarttam” means that everything else is
perishable, beset with troubles and unsubstantial like dream, illusion
or mirage.. In Brahadaranyaka 2.3.6, the Upanishad says “
Brahman is the Truth of truth, The vital force (“praana”) is
truth, and It is the Truth of that. “Praana”
stands for the universe. Also, read with 2.3.1 to 2.3.5, we can see
that the word “truth” with “t” in small case refers to the gross and
subtle parts of the world and our bodies and Brahman is said to be the
Truth of these. This is also meant to show that the world including
our bodies and minds is of a lower of reality than Brahman. .Chandogya
6.8.7 says that It (Brahman) is the subtle essence and the Reality -
which implies that the world, the superimposition is unreal. . Chandogya 7.24.1 says, “That in which one
sees anything else……knows nothing else, that is the infinite. Hence
the finite is that where one sees something else………..knows something
else. The infinite alone is immortal and that which
is finite is mortal.” In Prasna 3.3., it is said that from Brahman is
born this prana (prana stands for the universe), just as there can be
a shadow when a man is there.. In Yajurveda it is said of Brahman said that though, It
is not one that can be born, it is born as manifold objects—which is
a rhetorical assertion of the unreality of creation. In Swetasvatara
3.10, the Upanishad talks of an entity that is superior to that which
is superior and says that one who knows that entity which is attributeless
and beyond the threefold afflictions as oneself becomes immortal. In
the commentary, it is said that ‘that which is superior' refers to the
universe and the entity superior to that refers to Brahman. In the sixth
chapter of Chandogya Upanishad, which deals with Brahman as the eternal
unchanging Existence, in 6.1.4, 6.1.5 and 6.1.6, the Upanishad gives
the examples of a lump of clay, an ingot of gold and a lump of iron
and their formation as a pot, ornament and nail-cutter, respectively,
to show that Brahman as the essence, as the Existence, alone is real
and the names and forms superimposed on Brahman are
unreal.” Kaivalya 23 Upanishad says, “There is neither
earth nor water nor fire nor air nor space.” Aitereya 3.1.3 says that
it is Consciousness (i.e., Brahman) that lends reality (existence) to
Hiranyagarbha …. the five elements and all creatures..
(2) There is also logic in saying that the world is unreal.
If the world is real, it cannot be negated by knowledge. Only if
advaitam is accepted, can we talk of moksha through the knowledge
of the mithyaatvam of the dwaitam and the satyatvam
of advaita (jaganmithya brahmasatyam). Another logical
argument which Sankaracary gives is that space and time are part of
our universe, that you cannot talk of a space and time located in which
this creation took place¸ because that would lead to infinite regress
and that therefore, creation has to be unreal. Suresvaracarya talks
of an ‘outward view ‘ and an ‘inward' view. Phenomenality and non-existence
of the world are not opposed. We cannot deny the practical reality of
the world. From the relative standpoint of avidya, the world exists
and is real and meaningful. It is not a mirage. This is the ‘outward
view. But, from the standpoint of Brahman, there is neither avidya nor
the world. This is what Suresvaracarya callls ‘ the inward view’
SECTION 6. PRAMANAM (AUTHORITY OF THE UPANISHAD) FOR
BRAHMAN NOT BEING THE ACTUAL CREATOR.
. Upanishads indicate specifically that Brahman is not
the cause of the world. Brhadaranyaka 2.5.19 – “ Brahman is without
prior or posterior”. Kathopanishad 1.2.14 “different from cause and
effect”; Kathopanishad 1.2.18 - It did not originate from anything nor
did anything originate from it”). A real cause has to undergo change
to become effect and once a real cause becomes effect, it ceases to
exist in that form.. Therefore passages in the Upanishads indicating
changelessness and eternity also mean that Brahman cannot be the cause
of the world. Muktikopanisshad -“It is changeless. Kathopanishad
1.2.18 – “It is neither born nor does it die”; Katha 1,3.15, Swetasvatara
5.13, Kaivalya 6. - -.Katha 1.2.18, 1.3.15, 2.2.13,, Mundaka 1.1.6 Kaivalya
6, 16; Brhdaranyaka 3.8.8.,, Mundaka 1.1.5.,1.1.7, 1.2.13, 2.1.1.,
2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.7, 2.2.11, Prasna 4.9, 4.10, Chandogya 8.3.4,, 8.7.4,
8.1..1, 8.12.1., Brhadaranyaka 2.5.1 to 2.5.14, 4.4.16, 4.4.17, 4.4.25,,
Katha 2,2.8,, Swetasvatara 1.7, 1.10, 4.8, 4.18, 5.6, 6.6, 6.17, 6.13,
6.19. – “It is immutable” “It is transcendental” “It is without beginning
(anaadi)”, “It is birthless
(ahjah)”,“It is without end (anantamI)”
“It is eternal (nityam)”, “It is indestructible (aksharam)”, “It is immortal (amrtam)”.
Creation involves visualisation
and action; so, Upanishads indicating actinlessness and absence of mind
also indicate that Brahman cannot be the creator, Svwetasvatara 1.9,
6.19 – “It is actionless” ”; Swetasvatra 6.8 – “ It has
neither body nor instruments” ”; Katha 1.2.19 -“It does not kill nor
is It killed” Brhadaranyaka 3.8.8 – “That immortal does not have vocal
organ or a mind”. Mundaka 2.1.2 – ‘It does not have vital force or a
mind “ ” In Kaivalya 22, Brahman, speaking in the first person says,,
“ I have neither birth nor body, nor sense organs nor the mind-intellect
equipment. (na janma dehendriya buddhih asti)
But Upanishad say in other places
that Brahman visualised, wished, thought, deliberated on creation vide
Chandogya 6.2.2 , Taittiriya 2.6.1, Aitereya 1.1.3, 1.1.4, 1.3.1.,1.3.2,
1.3.11 and created the universe - Chandogya 6.2.3, Taittiriya 2.1.1
”,,2,7.1, 3.1.1, Aiterya 1.1.2, The explanation is twofold. (a) The
universe is not a real product of Brahman. Brahman is not a modifying
material cause (“not “parinami upadhana kaaranam”.) It is not
like milk becoming curd. It is only vivarta upaadaana karanam.
“Vivarta” is a technical term. Brahman does not undergo any modification.
In its nature as Existence, it is the substratum (adhishthanam).
The actual material cause (parinami upaadaana kaaranam) is Maya
which superimposes, on the sub-stratum, the differentiated names and
forms (nama roopas) on account of which we perceive a world of
objects. Similarly, the entity that visualises and designs the names
and forms to be superimposed and impels Maya to unfold and superimpose
the names and forms is Iswara. Iswara is Maya in which the Consciousness
aspect of Brahman is reflected. (We shall be referring to the consciousness
aspect of Brahman as “Brahma caitanyam”) (In Taittioriya Upanishad Bhashya
vaartikam, Sureswaracarya gives three reasons to show why Brahman caannot
be actrual creator. (I) Brahmannis all-pervasive. So, there cannot be
anything that can be Its effexct. (ii) Brahman is one And non-dual.
So, there cannot be a second entity to be related with It in terms of
cause-effect relation. (iii) Brahmann is immutable. So, Brahman cannot
be the cause of the world.)
Direct description of an entity other than nirguna
Brahman being the creator we find in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Chapter
I, section 2 and Prasnopanishad Chapter I, section 4 where Hiranyagaarbha
is said to be the actual creator.
SECTION
7. Brahman as Existence, the sub-stratum of the universe of names and
forms
(1) In various Upanishads we see that Brahman is said
to be the sub-stratum (“adhishtaanam”) of the universe. Words such as
“sub-stratum” “root” “support” “That in which things are fixed “ occur
in Katha 1.2.11, 2.2.8. 2.3.1, Brhadaranyaka 2.5.15, Mundaka 2.2.2 Chandogya
8.14.1, Taittiriya 3.10.3, Nrsimhaottaratapani 2 and Ramottaratapani.. Swetasvatara
1.8 talks of Brahman as the support
of the unmanifest and the manifest universe. Chandogya VI.viii.4, starting
from food and passing through water and fire, says, “ O, good-looking
one, through fire as the sprout understand Existence as the root and
concludes “All these things have Existence as their root. Existence
is their abode. Existence is their place of merger”. In the fifth
section of the second chapter of Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, using honey
as metaphor, the Upanishad talks of the interdependence of the elements.
The directions, lightning, dharma,
satyam and all beings and
in mantra 11, adds the cosmic
body and declares that the shining
immortal being (Brahman, atma) is in the cosmic body.
In 2.5.1 to 14, Yajnavalkya talks of the effulgent immortal
being (Brahman, atma) as the earth, water, fire, air, space,
sun, moon, the human species, the cosmic body etc.., as associated with
them, as being the underlying unity and as Brahman and as the Self. Brhadaranyaka III,iv.1and 2 talk of Brahman
as the inner essence of all (sarvantarah). In the
eighth section of the third chapter of Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, Iswara
‘s pervasion of the universe is metaphorically said to be the warp and
woof of earth, water, fire etc. , Iswara is referred to as the unmanifested
space and in the eighth mantra, the Immutable Brahman is said to be
That that pervades Iswara. In
Chandogya Upanishad mantras
VI.3.ii .and VIII. 14. i. the words, “namaroope vyakaravani” and
“ namaroopayoh nirvahitaa” occur. The first says “I (referring
to Brahman) shall clearly manifest name and form (- we have to add ‘through
Iswara’}. The second (based on Sankaracarya’s commentary) says ”That which is indeed called space
( i.e. Brahman) is the manifester of name and form. (Again, we have
to add ‘through Iswara’) (‘Space’ is a word often used in Upanishads
to refer to Brahman.) Sankaracarya’s commentary - “Because like space,
It is bodiless and subtle.” Sankaracarya gives the example of water
manifesting foam. Sankaracarya goes on to say “That which exists
in the names and forms (i.e., that which is the support , the
substratum of namaroopas) is Brahman. That is not touched by name and
form, is different from name and form (and) yet it is their manifester.
That is immortal. That is the Atma.” Chandogya 6.3.2 – speaking of Existence-Brahman,
“That Deity….deliberated, ‘Well, by entering into these
three gods (fire, water and earth, in the form of each individual
jiva, let me manifest name and form’”. Brhadaranyaka
Upanishad I.vi.1 –“The universe verily is made up of three things –
name ,form, function.” Brhadaranyaka Upanishad I.iv.7 – “The universe was then undifferentiated. It
differentiated itself only as name and form. So even now the universe
is only manifested as name and form – it gets such and such name and
such and such form.”
And in Brahadaranyaka 1.4.7, the Upanishad says that Brahman entered
the universe. Explaining the word, “entered”, Sankaracarya says that,
like the reflection of the sun etc. in water, the entrance of Brahman
means only Its being perceived like a reflection in the differentiated
universe. Before the manifestation of the differentiated universe, Brahman
is not perceived, but after the differentiated universe is manifested,
Brahman is perceived within the intellect. like the reflection of the
sun, etc. in water and the like. What this amounts to is that Brahman has to be recognised
as the sub-stratum of Existence, in general and, in particular, as the
consciousness behind the minds and as the source of the reflected consciousness
in the minds. In his commentary on Taittiriya 2.1.1, Sankaracarya has
said that a thing is said to be true when it does not changes its nature
ascertained to be its own and a thing is said to be unreal when it changes
its nature ascertained to be its own. In his commentary on Chandogya
6.2.1, explaining the word “sat” he has said that the word “sat” means
mere existence. (“sat iti astitaamatram vastu”). In 6.2.1, he
describes that “sat” as being subtle, attributeless, all pervading,
non-dual, and pure, without parts, and of the nature of consciousness.
And says that it appears as the transacting, changing universe consisting
of nama roopas. In his commentary on Chandogya,
6, 8,7, he says “The Self (Atma, Brahman) through which all this universe
becomes possessed of its self (Existence) That itself is the source
called Existence, the Truth, the Supreme Reality. Hence that indeed
is the self of the world, its inmost, its quintessence, its very reality”
In his commentary on Taittiriya 2.6.1, explaining
the word, “praajaayaayeti” Sankaracarya explains, “Multiplication,
here, does not refer to something becoming extraneous as one
does by begetting a son. How then? Through the manifestation of name
and form ………Then that evolution of name and form is (what is called)
the appearance of Brahman as the many.
In no other way is it possible for the partless Brahman to become
either multiple or finite, as for instance the finitude and plurality
of space are surely the creations of extraneous factors. …..Therefore
it is only because of Brahman that name and form have their being under
all circumstances, but Brahman does not consist of them. They are said
to be essentially Brahman since they cease to exist when Brahman is
eliminated.. Again, in the commentary on Taittiriya
2.6.1, Sankaracarya says, “ ….there being no existence for any of these
modifications of name and form apart from the Brahman”.
From these also, it is clear that Brahman in Its aspect as the eternal
unchanging Existence provides the sub-stratum, that the sub-stratum
is alone real and the changing nama roopas superimposed on It are unreal.. (In all passages which talk of manifestation of nama roopas,
by Brahman, we have to understand that the manifestation is the
unfolding of the Maya part of Iswara and not any transformation of Brahman.
Brahman’s role is only the eternal
presence as Existence, the substratum for the alternation of unevolved
and evolved nama roopas. As a lower of reality Maya rests in
Brahman like the illusory
snake resting on rope. Hence the expraession ‘Brahman manifests as nama
roopas’).
. (“Nama roopa” is a technical term. It refers not only
to shape but to all attributes and properties. Nama roopas superimposed
on the sub-stratum comprise not only what manifest as inanimate objects
but the bodies and minds of living beings. So, attributes comprise not
only the attributes of outside objects that we perceive, such as shape,
mass, weight, shape, chemical composition etc. but the attributes of
our bodies and minds, such as weight, shape, biological functions, the
faculties of cognition, emotions, doubts, thoughts, decisions, memory,
recollection etc.)
(2)
When we say that Brahman is non-dual or Brahman alone is real, we are
referring the paramarthika satyam. When we say that Brahman is everything.,
we are including vyavaharika satyam and referring to the substratum,
the paramarthika satyam and the names and forms, the vyavaharika satyam,
superimposed on It, together, without prejudice to the latter being
of a lower order of reality ( Brahma satyam jaganmithya). When
we say that the world is unreal or mithya, we are referring to the names
and forms only, the vyavaharika satyam.
Section
8 – creator is iswara together with
Maya
We have already seen that the non-dual, changeless Brahman
cannot be creator of the world. To recapitulate, Brahman is nirguna,
akarta and amanah . i.e., It is devoid of attributes and devoid of instruments
of knowledge and action. We
have to look for an entity or entities other than Brahman, as the intelligent
and material cause (parinaaami upaadana kaaranam and nimitta kaaranam) of the universe. (Since Brahman is non-dual, that
entity or entities have, necessarily, to be of a lower order of reality.)
So, wherever we meet with passages which talk of omniscience and omnipotence,
or of visualisation or the act of creation or, specifically of the manifestation
of nama roopas, we have to take them to refer to a creator other than
Brahman, even though the word, “Brahman” and “ Iswara” occur even in
such passages without a clear distinction. What are the Upanishad passages from which we can derive such an entity
is the question? There are references to Maya
as the material cause of the universe (of nama roopas) and references to an omniscient and omnipotent visualising
creation. There is a passage referring to Maheswara as the controller
of Maya, called mayii and another passage talking of mayii as the creator. From all this, we have to conclude that
Iswara visualises creation, guides Maya and Maya unfolds nama roopas
and superim;poss them on the substratum, the Existence, Brahman. Let
us see what are the relevant passages...
Mundaka Upanishad I.i.9 - “That omniscient One ….from His envisioning
( ‘ jnanamaya tapah’) does Hiranyagarbha and this universe
of nama roopa originate.” Chandogya Upanishad
VI.ii.3 talks of Brahman visualising the universe to be
created. It says, “That (Existence) visualized (tat aikshata)
‘I shall become many. I shall be born.” Taittiriya
Upanishad II.vi.1 – “He (the Self) wished (sa akamayata) ‘Let
be many. Let me be born……….He undertook a deliberation (sa tapah
atapyata). Having deliberated, he created all that exists.”-
Also in Aitereya Upanishad I.1.i it is said “……..He thought (sa
aikshata)‘ let me create the worlds’” Prasna Upanishad
VI.3 says - “ He pondered , ‘ In the universe to be created what
principle shall I put, which if it is not there I myself will not be
there and which if it is there I will be there?” In 1.9, Swetasvatara Upanishad talks of three
unborn entitles – the Isa who is jna (the omniscient)
(this has been interpreted as referring to Iswara), the anisa
who is ajna (the ignorant) (-this has been interpreted
to refer to jivatma) and the one which is bhoktrubhogarthyukta
(the one who is in the form of the agents of experience and the
experienced) (this has been interpreted to refer to Maya) and says that
when one (i.e. the jivatma) knows that all these are Brahman,
he becomes the infinite, the all pervading and the akarta (which
means that he becomes Brahman). The significance of this passage
is that Iswara and Maya are distinguished
from the infinite, all-pervading and actionless Brahman. In Swetaswatara
Upanishad 1.12 says that, having enquired into bhokta ( i.e. jivas ), bhogyam
(jagat, the universe) and preritaaram,
it has been said that all these three are Brahman.. Preritaram means
impeller. Impeller would mean the controller of Maya and the creator,
Iswara. . 1.7 also talks of Brahman as the adhishtaanam of three entities;
if we take two of them to be bhokta (jiva ) and bhogyam (the universe
which will include its material cause, Maya), the third will
be the controller and creator, Iswara.
. 4.10 says “:Know Maya to be Prakriti ( which is another name for Maya)
and maayii ( which means the one who is master
of or is the controller of Maya) to be Maheswara. 4..9 says “'Maayi'
creates Veda, yajna, kratu, the past, the future, the entire universe
and living beings through Maya and talks of jivas
being bound ( i.e., getting caught up in samsara). 4.12 talks
of the creator as omniscient (sarvajna). Swetasvatara
1.10 talks of a Lord who controls the pradhaana
and jivas and to the overcoming of Maya (called visvamaaya) by the knowledge of Brahman. The word, “Pradhana”
refers to Maya; it is the term used in Sankhya system. 6.16 talks of the uncreated Lord as the creator,
as the omniscient, as the impeller of time, and as the master of pradhana
and the jivas. In 1.8, Lord is referred to as “visvamiisah” (Lord of the universe) and is said to preside over the avyakta (i.e., the unmanifest, i.e., Maya)
and the vyakta ( the manifest
universe) and it is said that the jivas (referred to as aniisa) get bound on account of the sense of enjoyership (bhoktrubhava). 4.1
talks of That which was the only One before creation assuming many forms
through his Power ( which must refer to Maya). .
Chulika Upanishad talks of Maya as the cause of modification.
Gopichand Upanishad talks of “mayaasahita
Brahman” Swetasvatara refers to Brahman as jaalavan (which means Maya sahita).Certain other Upanishads also talk of Maya as the power of Brahman
or of Brahman with Maya (Mayasahita Brahman) in connection with
creation. In Brhadaranyaka Upanishad first chapter, section 2 and 3,
we see Hiranyagarbha creating the five elements, and living being including
gods and asuras and animals. Hiranygarbha is the cosmic subtle
body (“samashti sukshma sarira”). Hiranyagarbha creating can
be taken to be Iswara creating the microcosm (vyashti)
through the macrocosm (samashtii).. We also find in Kaivalya 6 that
Upanishad talks of Brahman as “brahmayonim”; in this, Hiranyagarbha
is distinguished from Brahman. (Prakriti as
the modifying material cause and the instrument used by the Lord for
creation is mentioned in Bhagawadgita 7.6,, 9.7, 9.8,, 9.10, 13.19 and
13.20.) . When Brahman is said to be consciousness and also non-dual,
there can be no other real conscious entity in it own right. So we have
to take Maya to be inert matter only . So Maya which is the material
cause of the universe inasmuch as it unfolds the nama roopas cannot
be the intelligent cause of the universe. Therefore, we bring in the
reflection of Brahma caitanyam in Maya. Maya with the reflected Brahma
caitanyam constitutes Iswara. Thus, we have Iswara as the intelligent
cause (nimitta kaaranam) of the universe and Maya as the transforming
material cause (parinaami upaadaana kaaranam)i unfolding nama
roopas and superimposing them on Brahman, the sub-stratum. (We shall
be referring to the consciousness aspect of Brahman as Brahma caitanyam).
Thus, we substitute Iswara for Brahman in the creation statements
and we say that Iswara, in the consciousness aspect visualises and designs
creation and impels Maya to unfold nama roopa on the substratum, the
Brahman-existence. As regards the material part, relegating nama roopas
to the unreal category, we retain the eternal, real existence-Brahman
as the substratum and say that the unreal nama roopas are superimposed
on this sub-stratum. The world that we perceive consists of Brahman
in Its aspect of Existence, as the sub-stratum and the nama roopas superimposed
on It. Pure existence is not perceptible. It is not involved in transactions
(It is “avyavahaaryam”.) It is the nama roopas superimposed on
It that transact with each other. Brahman, the sub-stratum is not only
Existence. It is also Consciousness. Some of the nama roopas, viz.,
our minds are so constituted that they can reflect the Consciousness
aspect of Brahman, the sub-stratum. Thus, the minds of living beings
become conscious entities and they, in turn lend sentiency to the sense
organs and bodies. Though Iswara, instead of Brahman, is postulated
as the intelligent and material cause of the universe.(“abhinna nimitta
upaadaana kaaranam”) and Maya becomes the changing cause of the
universe (“parinaami upaadaana kaaranam”) we call Brahman as
the vivarta upaadaana kaaranam” of the universe, because Brahman
is the real sub-stratum of the unreal universe. But for the existence
of the sub-stratum, the unreal universe cannot appear. Like the snake
appearing on the rope. What exists is rope; the false snake that is
perceived on the rope encountered in semi-darkness cannot appear but
for the existence of the rope. Brahman is also, indirectly the nimitta
kaaranam, because, but for the presence of Brahma caitanyam, Iswara
will not have the reflected consciousness, which enables him to function
as the intelligent cause of the universe. Another name for vivarta
upaadaana kaaranam is tatastha upaadaana kaaranam, as distinguished
from swaroopa upaadaana karanam. Standing apart, without any
change and not being part of it, the tatastha kaaranam enables
another entity to function. The banks are not part of the river but
they enable the water to flow as a running stream. Brahman remains as
sub-stratum and enables Maya to superimpose nama roopas. Or we can cite
the example of the role of catalyst in chemical modification; the catalyst
does not take part in the modification, but, but for its presence, the
modification cannot take place. Or, we can cite the example of the crow
perching on the roof of a house, by pointing to which I enable a traveller
to go to the house he is searching – the crow is not part of the house,
but it is that which enables the traveller to find the house. This is
distinguished from the house being pointed out as one with a gabled
roof. ( Gabled roof is a part of the house) As examples of the same
entity being both the intelligent cause and the material cause of the
universe, Upanishad gives the example of the spider producing the web
out of its own body guided by its own instinct (vide Mundaka 1.1.7 -
“Just as the spider spins out the web out of it own body and withdraws
it unto itself, so out of the Immutable does the universe emerge here
(in this phenomenal creation.)”. Another example is the person perceiving his own vasanas as a dream world. He is not only the creator
of the dream inasmuch as it is he who is creating a dream world but
the raw material for the dream world is also his own vasanas.
Section
9 – Status of Maya.
(1).
The avarana sakti of Mayi is indicated in certain Upanishads.-
Swetasvatara Upanishad 1.3 and 1.4. talk of Brahman being veiled by
Maya ( called Brahman’s sakti in 1.3 and the three-fold – the one with
the three gunas, satva, rajas and tamas - in 1.4).
1,6 says that jivas, regarding themselves to be different from Brahman., get caught up
in samsara and are liberated when they gain knowledge of the identity
with Brahman . 1.8 says that jivas are bound on account of the sense
of enjoyership (bhoktrubhava). Kaivalya
Upanishad 12 and Krishna Upanishad 12 talk of jivas being deluded by
Maya. Kaivalya
12 says “ The jivatma deluded by Maya, identifies with the body, does
all and actions”. Krishna Upanishad talks of the world being deluded
by Maya. ((Delusion caused by Maya and the power of Maya which veils
our Bramatvam is mentioned in Bhagawadgita 7.5,7.13,7.15 and
7.25.) Katopanishadm I.iii.12 says, “He is hidden in all beings,
and hence He does not appear as the atma (of all)” .Sankaracara’s commentary
– “This one, this Purusha in all creatures – from Brahmaa to a clump
of grass, is hidden - though
He has such activities as hearing, seeing etc., yet He is covered by
avidya, i.e., Maya. Thus, since He is the atma (of all), (He) does not
appear as the atma of anyone. (eka purushah sarveshu brahmaadi-stamba-paryanteshu
bhooteshu goodhah savrtah darsanasravanaaadikarma avidya mayyaat cchatarh
ata eva atma na prakaasata aatmatvena kasyacit)”.
(2).
That Maya does not enjoy the same order of reality as Brahman we can
infer from certain Upanishad mantras. Kathopanishad I.3.xi – “The
first principle in the order of the evolution of the differentiated
universe is called ‘mahat’. Superior to mahat is ‘avyaktam’,
Superior
to avyaktam is ‘Purusha’ (i.e., the infinite, Brahman). There
is nothing superior to Purusha . He is the ultimate and He is
the supreme goal.” (‘Avyaktam’ is another term for Maya.)”
Mundaka Upanishad III.ii.8 – “ The illumined soul, having become freed
form name and form, reaches the self-fulgent Purusha (i.e. Brahman)
that is superior to the superior.” Here, the second “superior”
refers to Maya. Mundaka Upanishad II.i.2 “Purusha (i.e.,
the infinite, Brahman) is transcendental. He is formless. He is coextensive
with all that is external and internal. He is birthless, He is without
Prana and without mind. He is pure and superior to the (other) superior
imperishable,” (Here also, the second “superior” refers to Maya and
Brahman is said to be superior even to Maya. Maya is said to be
superior in the sense that it is the unevolved nama roopas, which is
cause vis a vis the evolved nama roopas which are effects. Maya is said
to be imperishable, in the sense that it never disappears altogether; it only alternates
between undifferentiated and differentiated conditions and though
it is of a lesser order of reality, it is also beginningless and
endless.) Kaivalya Upanishad 2 – “ ....... the wise man .......attains
that Infinite (Brahman) which is beyond Maya.” (The wording is “paraatparam
purusha”. ““Purusha “ means the Infinite, that is, Brahman. The
first “para” refers to Maya and the Infinite is said to be “paratparam”,
that is, superior to that Maya.
(3).
In Svetasvatara Upanishad V.1, avidya is said to be perishable
(ksharam). The idea is that,
though as a vyavarika entity , avidya continues to exist always, in
so far as a any particular jiva is concerned, avidya and its effect,
the adhyaasa ( i.e, the ignorance
of one’s true nature, notion of the world being real and the wrong identification with the unreal body-mind
complex) is overcome when the knowledge of identity with Brahman is
gained.
(
On the macrocosmic scale, superimposed on the Existence-Consciousness-Infinity
and endowed with the reflected consciousness the universal causal body
is called “ Iswara”, the universal subtle body is called “Hiranyagarbha”,
and the universal gross body is called “ Virat”. On the microcosmic
scale, similarly superimposed on the Existence-Consciousness-Infinity
and endowed with the reflected consciousness, the individual causal
body is called “praajna” and it experiences the deep sleep state,
the individual subtle body is called “taijasa” and experiences
the dream state and the individual gross body is called “visva” and it experiences the waking state.)
|