Author Archives: Bimal Prasad

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 22)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 21

16.45 to 16.50                                                                                                            Earlier the author has refuted different theories of the Buddhists. Advaita and Samkhya are similar in some respects and dissimilar in other aspects. The author refutes some theories of Samkhya philosophy. According to Samkhya, both purusha (consciousness), and prakriti (material and inert) are real. Purusha is action-free and unattached. Prakriti works for purusha and the latter is the enjoyer. There are many purushas, one for every jiva. Prakriti has three constituents, sattva, rajas and tamas. Samkhya further says that prakriti alone is the cause of creation. Purusha has no role. When the constituents are in equilibrium, the creation is unmanifest. Creation unfolds due to imbalance in three constituents.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 21)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 20

16.30-33 There is a Buddhist school of thought called nihilism which holds that nothing exists, neither the subject nor the object. This theory of emptiness is questioned by the author. That which witnesses and is aware of emptiness must exist. The witness exists even before beginning of deliberation on existence or non-existence or both. According to Advaita, the world of objects is a superimposition on the Self. There can be destruction of the superimposition but not of the entity (Self) on which is the superimposition. Existence of Self is undeniable. It is indestructible. It is one without second on which diversity is a superimposition.

Continue reading →

Bhagavad Gita- 5.1 and 5.2

Posted on by
Reply

Arjuna to Krishna: You praise both renunciation of actions and again their performance Tell me for certain that one which is better between these two (5.1) Krishna: Both renunciation of actions and Karma-yoga lead to supreme good. Between the two, Karma-yoga, however, excels over renunciation of actions (5.2) [Translations by Gambhirananda] It may give a misplaced impression that yoga of karma. i.e., Karma Yoga is superior to yoga of renunciation, i.e., Jnana Yoga.

Chapter 4 has discussed both yoga of action and yoga of renunciation which are opposed to each other as they cannot be practiced by a person simultaneously. Arjuna raises a natural question (5.1), which is better? Krishna says (5.2) that both Karma Yoga and renunciation of action result in supreme good; however, Karma Yoga is superior to mere renunciation. Here, the first renunciation refers to renunciation by a knower of the Self which is distinct from renunciation by a non-knower. Shankaracharya uses the word ‘mere’ which is noteworthy. ‘Mere’ renunciation refers to renunciation by a non-knower who sits quietly and is apparently without action. It is tamasic (18.7) or rajasic renunciation (18.8). Nothing is achieved by mere renunciation (3.4). Therefore, he should first practice Karma Yoga which is stressed in 5.2. It is sattvic renunciation (18.9). By Karma Yoga, he acquires necessary qualifications for Jnana Yoga. Renunciation by a knower is on account of disidentification from non-Self and identification with action-free Self. 

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 20)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 19

Part 21

16.16 The cause pervades the effect, e.g., gold pervades the ornament. There has to be an uncaused cause for otherwise, there is infinite regress. Therefore, the theory of nihilism is not tenable. According to Advaita, the uncaused cause is the Self. It exists prior to anything, e.g., intellect. Even a total blankness, e.g. deep sleep has to be revealed by self-luminous entity, viz, Self which is of the nature of consciousness. The intellect which is dormant during sleep comes into being in the waking state. The Self exists prior to the intellect.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 19)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 18

Part 20

Chapter 16 Consisting of Earth

16.1 to 16.4 The verses establish that real I, the Self, which is of the nature of consciousness, is different from the gross body, the sense organs and the mind because they all are made of five fundamental elements, namely, earth, water, fire, air and space. They are devoid of consciousness and are inert. Take the gross body. Its solid part is made of earth, the grossest element. The title of the chapter is derived from the name ‘earth’. The liquid part is made of water. There is heat in the body which is due to the fire element. There is air inside the body, e.g., the vital forces. Lastly, the empty area inside the body is made of space.

There are five sense organs, eyes, ears, nostrils, tongue, and skin which reveal respective sense objects, namely, form and colour, sound, smell, taste, and touch. There is an illuminator-illumined relationship among each pair of sense organ and sense object. Each pair is unique. They do not mix, e.g., eyes do not hear. The sense objects are categorized according to pre-dominance of the five elements. A sense object will be revealed by a sense organ which has predominance of the same element as that of the sense object. The conclusion is that the sense organs are also made of the five fundamental elements and therefore inert. As such, the Self is different from them.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part18)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 17

15.31. On the authority of Sruti (Tai Up 2.4 and 2.9), it is said that words fail to describe the Self. It is also explained on the basis of reason. Words describe an entity if it falls in one of the five categories, namely, species (e.g., tree), property (e.g., colour), action (e.g., servant), relationship (e.g., son) and convention (proper name). The Self does not belong to any of the five categories. This is why verbal description is difficult. All descriptions are from the standpoint of other entities which involves duality. If it is said not small one will think big. The only way to understand the Self is as I am Brahman.

15.32. The nearest entity comparable to the Self is the space. Like space, It is all-pervading and It accommodates everything in the sense that It is their substratum. Yet it is not attached to them. The Self is pure and formless. According to Vedanta, Self-knowledge is the supreme goal.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 17)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 16

15.9 to 15.13, 15.15 to 15.17
The Self is the light of pure consciousness. It is non-dual. A Self-realized person knows that there is one Self in all beings including a pipal tree (BG 10.26). The Self is homogeneous, undivided, without parts and all-pervading like space. As space accommodates everything, all beings are in one Self. The self is different from gross and subtle bodies as said in Isa Up 8. It is like a witness. The ideas of ‘me’ and ‘mine’ are thoughts of the mind. They do not exist in the Self which is a witness. Therefore, the Self is free from virtue and vice, pleasure and pain and old age. As intellect is the seat of aversion and fear, the Self is free from them and their impressions. It is pure, free from worldly afflictions.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 16)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 15

Chapter 15 Impossibility of one being another

15.1 The essential nature of a jiva is not different from Brahman for otherwise the jiva will be essentially finite. Any amount spiritual practice can bring about only superficial changes and not changes in the essential nature. Finite cannot become infinite. If at all it becomes infinite, it will lose its essential nature which means destruction. In that case, liberation is ruled out. The conclusion is that jiva is essentially Brahman. A doubt may arise. If a jiva is already Brahman, what is the need of a teacher and scriptures? The answer is that they are needed to remove the ignorance about our true identity.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 15)

Posted on by
2

Part 14

14.26 During dream gross body is dormant and there is no external world. There is no external light or medium. The mind functions and sees, hears, thinks which are modifications of the mind. As the mind is inert, seeing, etc., is possible if there is an entity different from the mind and which lends sentiency to the mind. The said entity is Self which is of the nature of consciousness. In this sense, it is concluded that Self is directly known. The Self is the witness of the modifications of mind called the dream.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 14)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 13

14.11 Self alone remains after negating everything. No other effort is needed to know Self. It is self-revealing. The knowledge that Self is Brahman is enlightenment. On enlightenment, the (last) desire for liberation goes away resulting in contentment and peace.

14.12 Shankara advises that a seeker should aspire to think that he is all-pervading Self which is beyond mind and body system (MBS). MBS is the locus of miseries. I, the Self, am beyond miseries. Let the mind and body take action to remove miseries. Nothing can be added or subtracted from Self. How can Self do anything?

Continue reading →