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.
BSB 1.3.41
Ch 8.14.1 states that space is the accomplisher of name and form, that in which they are contained is Brahman which is immortal and the Self. The doubt is whether space denotes Brahman or the material space. The opponent holds that it denotes material space according to the conventional meaning as also because space contains all worldly objects. The sutra clarifies that Brahman is denoted by the word space because It is stated in the Ch 8.14.1 as containing name and form. Furthermore, creation is manifestation of name of form of which Brahman is the revealer as per Ch 6.3.2: “Let me manifest name and form by Myself entering as individual soul”. Moreover, Ch 8.14.1 itself declares that Brahman is immortal and is the Self.
Topic: Brahman is also the material cause of the world
BSB 1.4.23 to 1.4.25 The aphorist establishes that Brahman is also the material cause of the universe. The view of the opponent is that Brahman is only efficient cause because creation is preceded by reflection and deliberation (Pr. Up 6.3). Furthermore, as universe is composite, it is a product and impure, the material cause also should be of the same nature. But Brahman is devoid of such characteristics. Opponent’s views are refuted on the strength of Ch.6.1.2, 6.1.4-6 and 6.2.3 besides other Upanishadic texts. Brahman is one by knowing which everything is known as by knowing gold, all ornaments are known and by knowing clay, all products of clay are known. It is possible if Brahman is also the material cause of the universe as the effect is non-different from the material cause and material cause is different from the efficient cause as is seen in the case of architect and architecture. That Brahman is both material and efficient causes requiring will is evident from the text, “It deliberated, l shall become many, I shall be born” (Ch Up 6.2.3). On dissolution, everything returns to its material cause. That the world resolves in Brahman at the time of dissolution (Ch 1.9.1) proves that Brahman is the material cause also.
BSB 2.1.13
The opponent argues further. In the empirical world, there is seen difference between the experiencer and the experienced. If Brahman is held as the material cause of the world, and that effect is non-different from the cause, it will contradict the difference between the experiencer and the experienced. This view is refuted by citing the case of waves and foams which are different between themselves, yet they are not different from sea water. Although all things are non-different from Brahman, the supreme cause, there can be difference between experiencer and the experienced on the analogy of sea and wave.
BSB 2.1.14 to 2.1.20
The sutras establish that effect is non-different from the cause. In support is cited Ch 6.1.4 which says that a modification has origin in speech and exists only in name. From the Absolute viewpoint, any modification has no existence separate from It. “The three colours alone are true” (Ch 6.4.1) and “All this is but the Self” (Ch 7.25.2) are further reinforcements Accordingly, in the diversified world, experience and experienced have no existence separate from Brahman.
The opponent argues that both unity and diversity are true. For the purpose of liberation, unity of Self is real and for empirical transactions, diversity is real. This view is refuted because in the case of clay and pot etc, the reality of clay only is spoken of (Ch 6.1.4) and on the strength of the text, “”All this has That as its essence; That is the Reality” (Ch. VI. viii. 7). There is also the teaching that the embodied soul is Brahman in essence in the passage, “That is the Self; That thou art, 0 Svetaketu”. The Upanishadic teaching is very clear that unity is the highest truth, and multiplicity is conjured up by false ignorance.
How can identity of Self and Brahman arise from unreal Upanishadic texts? It does not pose any fault. The dream incidents, e.g., snakebite, are unreal but the knowledge derived from such incidents is not sublated.
Sutra 15 says that cause and effect are non-different since effect is perceived only when the cause is there. For example, pot is perceived when clay is there but it is not that the pot is perceived only when potter (which is not the material cause of the pot) is there even though there is relationship of agent-ship and effect. Furthermore, it is not always that a thing is perceived when something different is present. A cow is not always perceived when there is a horse. There is counter argument that something is always perceived when something is present, e.g., smoke can exist only when there is fire. It is refuted since smoke is seen even if the fire is extinguished. The reason for holding that the (material) cause and effect are non-different is that (not only can the effect exist only when the cause exists, but also that) the idea of the effect can exist only when the idea having the impress of the cause persists. And this coexistence is absent in the case of fire and smoke.
In Sutra 16, the commentator refers to Ch 6.2.1 according to which this world was but Existence before creation. ”Hence from the fact of non-difference before origin, it is understood that the effect must be non-different different from the cause even after its birth. Just as Brahman, the cause is never without existence in all the three periods of time, so also the universe, which is the effect, never parts with Existence in all the three periods. But Existence is only one. And this is a further ground for the non-difference of the of effect from the cause.” In sutra 17, the opponent counters by referring to Ch 3.19.1 which says the in the beginning this was indeed non-existence. It is refuted on the ground that non-existence means dormant state and not literal non-existence like horn of a rabbit. Sutra 19 explains, “A piece of rolled up cloth is not recognized as to whether it is cloth or something else; but when it is spread out, its real nature becomes revealed. The cloth is unmanifest so long as it remains latent in their causes, viz yarns etc. and is known distinctly when it is manifest. On the analogy of the cloth rolled up and spread out, it is concluded that the effect is non-different from the cause.
Moreover, theory of non-existence is challenged subsequently- “How can existence come out of non-existence?” And lastly it is asserted, “0 amiable one, in the beginning all this was Existence to be sure” (Ch. 6.2. 1-2).
If everything be non-existent everywhere before creation, why should curd be produced from milk alone and not from clay; and why should a pot come out of clay and not out of milk? If the effect were non-existing existing before its origin, and inhered in the cause after the origin, then it would be different from the cause, and in that case the declaration, “That by (knowing) which the unheard becomes heard” (Ch. VI. i. 3), would be set at naught. But it can be upheld only by understanding that the effect exists before its birth and it is non-different from the cause.
Sutra 20 uses the metaphor of prana to vindicate Ch 6.1.1 “That by knowing which the unheard becomes heard, the unthought becomes thought, and the unknown becomes known”. By practice of breath control, the vital forces are made dormant. And contraction and expansion (of lungs) are stopped and mere living continues. When the same pranas are activated, contraction and expansion resume. In the two conditions, the vital forces are same. In the same manner the effect is not different from the cause. As a result, by knowing the ultimate cause, namely, Brahman, everything becomes known.
Note: The quotation(s) are from Brahma sutra Bhasya of Shnakaracharya, Translated by Swami Gambhirananda, Advaita Ashrama
Contd