Author Archives: Ramesam

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 33 (aita 4)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 32 (aita 3)]

The aitareya Upanishad reveals a radical and liberating truth: we are not bound by an endless cycle of rebirth and death. By examining the nature of birth, the essence of the seer, and the illusory nature of creation, the text guides the seeker to the realization that all existence is nothing other than pure Consciousness (prajñAnam).

The aitareya Upanishad clarifies that the “three births” associated with human existence occur entirely within a single lifetime:

  1. We begin as seed within the father’s body. The first birth occurs when he impregnates the mother, depositing the seed.
  2. We exist as a fetus within the mother, nourished as an integral part of her body. When fully developed, she delivers us into the world. This is our second birth.
  3. As we grow, mature, and assume adult responsibilities, the father’s body eventually decays and passes away. By taking over his role and fathering the next generation, the father is reborn through us. This continuation marks the third birth. 

Continue reading →

IkSaNa and pravesha shrutis in Advaita

Posted on by
1

A Q&A on terminology, textual frequency and the problem of Sanskrit word-search

Here is a record of a short dialogue with ChatGPT on Ikṣaṇa-śruti and Praveśa-śruti, subsequently expanded to examine an interesting question: How far can we trace the use and development of these terms in Advaita literature?

*****

Question: What are Ikṣaṇa-śrutis and Praveśa-śrutis?

ChatGPT: In Advaita Vedānta, Ikṣaṇa-śruti and Praveśa-śruti are useful classifications of Upaniṣadic passages dealing with creation and the relationship between Brahman and the created universe.

1. Ikṣaṇa-śrutis — “seeing/willing” passages

Ikṣaṇa is derived from the root √īkṣ, “to see, behold, consider.” In the context of creation, it conveys the idea of seeing, intending, willing, or resolving that creation should manifest.

A classic example is:

स ईक्षत लोकान्नु सृजा इति ।
sa īkṣata lokān nu sṛjā iti
“He thought: ‘Let me create the worlds.’”
— Aitareya Upaniṣad 1.1.1 

Another famous example is:

Continue reading →

Importance of Humility in learning Advaita

Posted on by
2

Advaita Siddhānta (doctrine) is about the Knowledge of the Self—the one and only “substance” that is eternally present, immutable, infinite, and complete, lacking nothing. It is no exaggeration to say that the most fundamental prerequisite for correctly understanding this millennia-old pinnacle of human thought known as Advaita Vedānta is humility.

Śaṅkara Bhagavatpāda beautifully summarizes the means to grasp Advaita Siddhānta in a single sentence in his commentary on Bhagavad Gītā 18.50. He adds that this is the very message conveyed by Śrī Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad Gītā 2.69 and at several other places. He writes:

“It is only a cessation of the perception of the differentiated forms of the external world that can lead to a firm grasp of the real nature of the Self.”

Śaṅkara is equally careful to point out that Self-knowledge remains unattainable for those: Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 32 (aita 3)

Posted on by
5

[Part – 31 (aita 2)]

The aitareya Upanishad next presents a teaching story to unfold a profound philosophical truth.

It first describes the creation of the celestial deities, the presiding powers that govern the universe. Having brought forth the worlds, the Creator projected these deities, who then approached Him and said, in effect, “The world is our food, and we are its enjoyers. Where shall we abide to experience it?” The gods here represent the powers that function through the organs of perception and action.

ताभ्यो गामानयत्ता अब्रुवन्न वै नोऽयमलमिति । — mantra 1.2.2, aitareya upa.

[Meaning: For them He (i.e. the Creator God) brought a cow. They said, “This one is not certainly adequate for us.” ]

The Creator first produced the body of a cow and then that of a horse. The gods found neither suitable.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 31 (aita 2)

Posted on by
3

[Part – 30 (aita 1)]

From the two facts that 

(i)   no percept (a perceivable object) can be known unless it is illumined by Knowingness; and, 

(ii)  all percepts are contained within Knowingness;

it follows that the known depends on Knowing and not the other way round. The seen depends upon the seer. The witnessing seer alone is the evidence for the existence of any object. Without a perceiver, there would be no experienced world. This is the meaning behind the Vedāntic statement that the world is mAyA or mithyA. Its appearance is called AbhAsa—a fallacious appearance.

The individual (jIva) too is of the same essential nature as Knowingness. The difference is only that the individual appears limited, whereas Knowingness is unlimited. The knower and the known, the individual and the world, are both appearances within the one Infinite Knowingness.

Why then do we fear the world?

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 30 (aita 1)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 29 (taitti 4)]

8.  aitareya Upanishad:

The taittirIya Upanishad concludes with the ecstatic Vedic chant (sung by realized Sages) that “I am food; I am the eater of the food.” Here, “food” is not merely what is eaten from a plate. Whatever is consumed is food. The four elements—earth, water, fire, and air—are served to us on the vast platter of space. We consume them directly or in the countless forms they assume.

Our consumption is not merely through the mouth. The mind also feeds continuously. From birth until death it devours impressions, memories, relationships, possessions, emotions, hopes, fears, and ideas about this world and even other worlds. All these constitute food for the mind.

Thus, “food” in the mantra stands for the entire field of experience. The eater is the individual (jīva); the eaten is the world. In Vedāntic language, the eater is the knower and the food is the known. Everything cognized belongs to the world of names and forms.

The Upaniṣhad therefore ends by bringing together the knower and the known and declaring that both are included in “I.” Hence the sage proclaims, “I am the world and I am the individual.”

When both the individual and the world dissolve into “I,” no boundary remains between them. This naturally raises the crucial question: Who or what is this “I”?

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 29 (taitti 4)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 28 (taitti 3)]

Fear occurs when there is an “other”—a second object. Oneness, by contrast, is fearlessness. When the world is taken to be real and external, it appears as a constant source of threat and insecurity. This fear born of the world is sustained only as long as we attribute independent reality to it (saṃsāra). Once its dependent and insubstantial nature is understood, fear naturally subsides.

This is illustrated by the familiar analogy of the rope and the snake. In dim light, a rope is mistaken for a snake, and fear instantly arises. However, when the rope is recognized for what it truly is, the imagined snake vanishes, and with it goes the fear. Under the spell of ignorance, reality appears divided, and this apparent division gives rise to fear. When ignorance is removed through knowledge, the division is recognized as merely apparent, just as darkness vanishes in the presence of light.

The Upanishad concludes this vision with the declaration:  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 28 (taitti 3)

Posted on by
3

[Part – 27 (taitti 2)]

Unlike all other living creatures, we as human beings are uniquely blessed with the ‘Knowing principle’ within us. It is this consciousness that distinguishes us from the rest of the natural world. Our ultimate human purpose is to discover this ‘unembodied Knower’ within ourselves (1.2.22, kaTha Upanishad).

In order to help us in this process, the Upanishad starts with a description of how the Self is spoken of as though It has “descended,” step by step, into the condition of the food-body. Having apparently identified with the food-body, It comes to be mistaken for the body itself. Shaṅkara illustrates this through the analogy:

मूषानिषिक्तद्रुतताम्रप्रतिमावत् । — Shaṅkara in his commentary on mantra 2.1.1, taitti. Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 27 (taitti 2)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 26 (taitti 1)]

The Supreme Self is all-pervading. Yet, because of our mistaken belief that “I am the body,” we identify the all-pervading Self with the body and take ourselves to be the individual (jIva). Thus, we create for ourselves a fallacious ‘self.’

Next, we create an inferior ‘self’ by claiming ownership over whatever we perceive—my spouse, my family, my house, and so on. As a result, we confine ourselves to a single form (the fallacious ‘self,’ mithyAtmA), reduce everything else into multiple finite forms (the inferior ‘self,’ gauNAtmA), and contract the Supreme Self into the form of God (Ishwara). Consequently, our attention remains absorbed in forms, while the formless Reality goes unnoticed.

The taittirIya Upanishad teaches us to recognize the Supreme Self as universal Beingness, ever-present Knowingness, and unbounded Infiniteness—Its intrinsic nature.

यो वेद निहितं गुहायां परमे व्योमन् । सोऽश्नुते सर्वान् कामान् सह । ब्रह्मणा विपश्चितेति । — mantra 2.1.1, taittirIya Upa.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 26 (taitti 1)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 25 (mANDU 4)]

taittirIya Upanishad

The aim of every seeker (the individual ‘self’ or the sense of ‘me’) is to experientially realize the Supreme Self (paramAtmA).

But who is the seeker that has to realize the Self?

The seeker is located neither at the ‘self’ nor at the Self! The surprising truth is that the one who realizes and the one to be realized are not two. Both the seeker and the sought are none other than the Supreme Self (brahman) Itself.

If both the seeker and the sought are brahman, there can be no real need for one to capture or attain the other. It would then appear meaningless to go in search of brahman.

Yet the scriptures instruct us that one’s ‘self’ (AtmA) should realize the Self (AtmA) with the self (AtmA) in the Self (AtmA). It is as though the scriptures speak of four different “self-s.” The Bhagavad-Gita expresses the same idea:  Continue reading →