Chandogya Upanishad and Brahma Sutra Bhasya Part – 3

Posted on by
Reply

Part 2

BSB 1.3.40                                                                                                                    The light mentioned in Ch 8.12.3 refers to Brahman and not the ordinary light because of the context in which it is used. The subject-matter is Brahman that is free from sin (Ch 8.7.1). It should be sought by an aspirant of liberation. It is also alluded to in, “I shall explain this very one to you over again” (Ch Up 8.9.3). And this Self is declared by way of attainment of this Light for becoming unembodied as mentioned in the statement, namely, happiness and sorrow do not touch one who is unembodied (Ch Up 8.9.1). Supreme Light is used in Ch Up 8.3.4 and transcendental being in Ch Up 8.12.3.

Continue reading →

Manifestation/Appearance – A view

Posted on by
2

In Advaita Vedanta, it is said that the world is a manifestation/appearance of Brahman like ornament (world) and gold (Brahman) in gold-ornament metaphor. A hearer is puzzled as to how can the material world be envisaged as a manifestation/appearance of Brahman which is of the nature of pure existence (Existence) and is non-material. Existence is not perceived, world is perceived, whereas both gold and ornament are perceived. In this sense, the hearer argues that there is a disconnect of the gold-ornament from Brahman-world.
The counter argument from a co-hearer is that a metaphor is never similar to the thing illustrated for otherwise it ceases to be a metaphor. The principle is that in a metaphor, similarity is the focus and dis-similarity is ignored. In the instant case, dis-similarity due to material and non-material is ignored. What is the similarity then? Here comes the concept of mithya, i.e., neither nor unreal. Brahman is of the nature of Existence. It lends existence to the world which has no independent existence as it continuously changes. Brahman is real and world is mithya (ब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्या). In the gold-ornament metaphor, ornament has no existence separate from that of the gold. Gold is real and ornament is mithya. Thus, there is a similarity (of mithyatatva)  between the illustration and the illustrated.
Agreement: In the gold-ornament metaphor to explain that the world is a manifestation/appearance of Brahman, the focus is on mithyatatva.

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 8)

Posted on by
Reply

In Part 7, it is said that the chapter 10 focuses on nidhidhyasana, i.e., meditation on vedantic teachings for their assimilation and to deal with contrary feeling. The following verses do it by of ‘glorification’ of I (Self) and is in the first person.  Brahmjnanavalimala is very similar to chapter 10.  It should not be mistaken as ego-boosting because every human being is entitled to it.

10.1 to 10.3                                                                                                                         I am the supreme Brahman which is changeless and is of the nature of pure consciousness. I am unborn, imperishable. I am deathless, unchanging, devoid of old age. I am not attached with mind and body though I as consciousness pervade them. As consciousness, I am within the body, but I am not confined to the body. I have no edge and no boundary. Like space, I am in all directions and all -pervading. Worldly ups and downs belong to mind and body and do not affect Me. I am ever free. I am the ultimate subject. I am beyond objects but illumine them. I am self-effulgent. I am beyond cause and effect. Cause and effect are in the realm of duality. I am non-dual. The understanding is that though duality is experienced it is mithya. Duality is subject to change. I am non-dual and not subject to change. I alone am real.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 5 (Isha)

Posted on by
6

[Part – 4 (Isha)]

Ritual actions prescribed by the scriptures will carry a seeker from one birth to another, perhaps under more favorable conditions. However, they cannot free one from saṃsāra, the endless cycles of birth and death. 

A seeker devoted solely to ritual worship does not attain “immortality”; at best, such practices will confer “longevity.” A combination (samuccaya) of action (karma) and worship (upAsanA) can enable the seeker to dwell in the divine realms of the gods s/he worships for a very long time.  Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part 16)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 15

Chapter 4
Section 4 Sariraka Brahaman
4.4.1 to 4.4.6                                                                                                                     YJV talks about transmigration. At the time of death, the physical body becomes weak (the weakness is figuratively attributed to Self) and the sense organs withdraw from their physical locations. The presiding deities of the sense organs leave and go to their respective abodes. The sense organs do not function and the perceptions of colour, sound etc cease. They are as good as dead in the current body and Self is figuratively said to senseless.

Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

*** Read Part 1 ***

I decided that, by only making short posts (up to 1500 words) at the rate of one per week, readers might lose the thread (or lose interest) so I will now post longer ones that cover complete questions and answers. So this one is quite long, at over 1800 words.

The Bomb under the Bed

Here is the statement from Śaṅkara (translated by Alston in his book ‘Śaṅkara on the Creation’) that might raise doubts:

“The proposition to be proved is, ‘This whole duality seen by the imagined mind is itself nothing but mind’. The reason advanced is that when the mind is present, duality is also present (agreement, anvaya), and when the mind is not present, duality is not present (difference, vyatireka).” (Gauḍapāda kārikā 3.28-31)

Q: Using the Nyāya logic of anvaya-vyatireka to prove that the waking world is unreal because it disappears in deep-sleep does not seem remotely convincing. Yet Śaṅkara seems to go along with this, despite apparently being a master logician and philosopher. Are you able to explain this? If so, can you break down the argument into simple steps to show how it is possible to justify?

Continue reading →

Chandogya Upanishad and Brahma Sutra Bhasya- Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

 Part 1 is included in Chandogya Upanishad (chapters 6 to 8) Part14

Part 3

BSB 1.3.14 to 1.3.21                                                                                                        Ch 8.1.1 reads: “Om. Now, in this city of Brahman, there is a mansion in the shape of a small Lotus; in it is a small inner Ākāśa. What is within that, that should be sought; that, indeed, one should desire to understand.”                                                                     [Swami Swahananda. Chandogya Upanisad (p. 366). RK Math, Mylapore, Chennai. Kindle Edition.]                                                                                                           There is a doubt whether term ‘Akasa’ (space) refers to material space or Brahman. Another doubt is about the owner of the ‘city’, Brahman or the individual soul. The opponent holds that space denotes material space because the text, “the space inside the heart is of the same magnitude as the space outside” (Ch 8.1.3) is meaningful only for material space. The individual soul is the owner of the city because the body is earned on account of action of the individual soul. The aphorist rejects the views of the opponent on the strength of Ch 8.1.2 and Ch 8.1.3.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 7)

Posted on by
8

Part 6

Part 8

Chapter 9 Subtleness and Pervasiveness
9.1 to 9.3                                                                                                                         The author presents knowledge of Brahman with the help of cosmology. Brahman is the material cause of creation (Br Up 1.4.23). The creation unfolds in stages from subtle to gross. If creation is traversed back, the subtlest entity is reached. An entity can be described in terms of imperceptibility (gross/subtle) and pervasiveness. The Vedantic theory is that body is constituted of five fundamental elements, namely, earth, water, fire, air, and space. It may not fully conform to the scientific view. However, it seems reasonable and serves the intended objective. Earth is the least imperceptible and the least pervasive. Imperceptibility and pervasiveness increase on traversing back from earth, water, fire, air, and space in succession. The space is the most imperceptible and pervasive worldly entity. Brahman transcends it and is the most imperceptible (subtlest) and all-pervading. Like the body, the external objects are also made of the five elements.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 4 (Isha)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 3 (Isha)]

The first step is to notice “the Universal” present in the diversity of the objects. Name, form and action are the particulars of Beingness-Knowingness. Noticing the Beingness-Knowingness is like seeing the all-pervading gold in the ornaments. By this process, we will know the substratum.

The second step is to realize that AtmA modulates Itself in the form of all the objects. That means one sees the diversity as the manifested forms of AtmA. In the first step, the intrinsic nature of all the objects is grasped. In the second step, different objects are perceived to be different appearances of the AtmA. This is akin to realizing that it is Gold itself which appears in different forms as ornaments. 

Such a process helps us understand the play of AtmA in this world. We recognize the world as AtmA. We realize that all that is seen is AtmA and it is AtmA which appears as all the things. The experiential understanding will be that everything in the world is “My form” and all forms are “Me.”   Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 1

Posted on by
6

Explanation of key terms in Advaita – No. 4

I was not intending to generate a ‘definition’ of the term, since I thought it would be too short. However, a supposed translation from A. J. Alston’s excellent ‘Śaṅkara on Creation’ caused me to question ChatGPT on the subject and the response was very enlightening. Further clarification, and a correction of ChatGPT’s continuing tendency to fabrication, provided some valuable insights into our perennial discussions on the supposed disappearance of the world on enlightenment and on the supposed Brahman-equivalence of the deep-sleep state. Any readers who still try to maintain those beliefs should perhaps skip these posts. (The thought that the topic would be too short has been proved wrong – there will now be up to 6 parts to the discussion! But I promise that it is an interesting one!)

Continue reading →