Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-11 Tattiriya Upanishad Siksha Valli
6-11-1 Anuvaka 10 Trisanku on Knowledge and Wisdom
The Upanishad quotes Trisanku who after attaining jnAna declares that the glories of Brahman are his glories. Instead of saying Brahman is Satyam-JnAnan-Anantam, he claims- ‘I am Satyam-JnAnam-Anantam’. Instead of claiming that Brahman is Jagat-Karana he declares: I am Jagat-Karana. To an ignorant person, the claim of I am Brahman may seem preposterous. For a jnani, it is a rehearsal mantra. By rehearsing (Nidhidhyasana), he is established in Brahman. It is jnAna-nishtha.
Vedanta makes a distinction between Brahman and Isvara. Brahman is nirguna, Isvara is saguna. Maya is the total causal body. It is unmanifest and rests in Brahman. Brahman with its mAyA power is Isvara. Isvara is also unmanifest. Manifest Isvara is the universe. Sometimes Brahman and Isvara are used interchangeably. However, the context should make clear whether the term refers to nirguna or saguna.
Chapter 7 Brahm Sutra Bhasya
7-1 Introduction
Acharya Vyas (also known as Badarayana) is the author of Brahma Sutra (BS). It is one of the three Prasthanas, other two being Sruti (Upanishads) and Smriti (Bhagavad Gita). It is Nyaya Prasthana and provides logical foundation to Upanishadic teaching by removing possible confusions. It is not possible to independently understand the meanings of sutras which are pithy. Shankaracharya has written commentary, Brahma Sutra Bhasya (BSB) to help humanity in general and teachers and students in particular understand the sutras. Brahma Sutra has four chapters dealing with four broad topics. The four topics are Samanvaya, Avirodha, Sadhana, and fruits of Brahma-knowledge. Each chapter has four sections called Padas. Each pada has many sutras. There are total of 592 sutras spread over four chapters of sixteen sections. Samanvaya chapter establishes that Knowledge of Brahman is the main teaching of Upanishads. Avirodha establishes that there is consistency across Upanishads and there is no contradiction in different Upanishads. Sadhana chapter deals with various spiritual disciplines for gaining Brahma- knowledge. The last chapter deals the benefits arising out of Brahma-knowledge.
An important feature of Brahma Sutra Bhasya is that before establishing final view called Siddhanta, there is discussion to refute possible opposite view called Purva Paksha. The idea is that by this method there is conviction in understanding of Upanishadic teaching.
In previous chapters, especially chapter 6, some sutras have been referred in context of some mantras of the eight Upanishads to bring out more clarity. Additionally, in the chapter 7, it is proposed to discuss some topics of Brahma Sutra which are of interest.
7-2 BSB 3.3.34 Mundaka 3.1.1 and Katha 1.3.1 constitute one vidya because the same thing is described.
Mundaka 3.1.1 Two birds that are ever associated and have similar names, cling to the same tree. Of these, one eats the fruit of divergent tastes, and the other looks on without eating.
Katha 1.3.1 The knowers of Brahman and those who invoke the five fires and who invoke the Nachiketa-fire thrice say that jivAtamA and ParamAtmA are like shade and light. They have entered the intellect which is the the supreme abode of ParamAtmA. The two experience the result of the works.
The objection raised by purva paksha (PP) is that in Mundaka, one bird is experiencer and the other is non-experiencer. But in Kathopanisad both the entities are experiencers. Therefore, the two mantras do not reveal the same knowledge. ShankarAchArya says that this point has been discussed in BSB 1.2.11 and 1.2.12 [ see 6-5-10] and it has been shown that in Kathopanisad mantra, ParamAtmA and jivAtmA are referred to. ParamAtmA seems to be experiencer due to proximity with intellect. Therefore, fact of same knowledge revealed by the two mantras is established.
7-3 BSB 3.2.12 to 3.2.21 Nature of Brahman There are two types of Upanishadic texts. In one type, Brahman is spoken as with attributes, e.g., “He is the doer of all (good) acts, possessed of all (good) desires, all (good) smell, all (good) tastes” (Ch Up 3.14.2). In other type, Brahman is spoken as attribute less, e.g., (i) Mundaka Upanishad (1.1.6) says “By the higher knowledge the wise realize everywhere that which cannot be perceived and grasped, which is without out source, features, eyes, and ears, which has neither hands nor feet, which is eternal, all-pervasive, extremely subtle, and undiminishing, and which is the source of all.
(ii) 1.3 of the Kenopanisad says “The eye does not go there, nor speech, nor mind. We do not know (Brahman to be such and such); hence we are not aware of any process of instructing about It. (iii) 1.3.15 of Kathopanisad says it is without sound, without touch without form and without decay. (iv) Br up (3.8.8): It is neither gross nor minute, neither short nor long, neither red colour nor oiliness, neither shadow nor darkness, without eyes or ears, without interior or exterior. It does not eat anything, nor is It eaten by anybody.
BSB 3.2.14 confirms that Brahman is formless because He is the main purport of all texts. It has been established in Samanvaya chapter (1.1.4) of Brahma Sutra that attribute-free Brahman is the teaching of Upanishads. One reason is that the Upanishad need not teach saguna Brahman because it is proved by other means of knowledge, e.g., perception.
The question is about the status of texts referring to Brahman with attributes. BSB 3.2.15 clarifies that as light assumes forms of objects due to contact, similarly, Brahman seems to assume the forms of different objects. There is no contradiction to use the attributes for meditations on Brahman and the texts of Brahman as having attributes remain meaningful.
There can be contradiction when both belong to the same order of reality. Nirguna is of higher order of reality and saguna is of lower order of reality. The metaphor of sun and its reflection in water is also used. It may be countered that comparison with the reflection of the sun in water is not valid in the case of supreme Self because there is nothing like that in respect of Brahman. Water is separate and remote from the sun which has attributes. There it is proper that an image of the sun should be formed. But Brahman is without form, all-pervasive. Hence, the metaphor is inapt. In response, it is said that the metaphor is quite apt in so far as it highlights the pertinent point of similarity. If there is total similarity between the illustration and the thing illustrated, the very relation between the illustration and the thing illustrated will not stand.
In BSB 3.2.16, it is said that Upanishad reveals that Brahman is pure consciousness without any distinguishing feature. As a lump of salt is without interior or exterior and purely saline in taste, Brahman which is Self is without interior or exterior and It is pure Intelligence (Br Up 4.5.13). Consciousness takes the form of adjuncts. That a jiva is sentient means that it has consciousness. There are Upanishadic text about entry of Brahman in jiva. Consciousness seems to move or act according to the movement or action of adjunct.
Vedas reveal through the method of negation that Brahman has no distinguishing feature as in Br 2.3.6 “Now therefore the description (of Brahman): `Not this, not this”; “That (Brahman) is surely different from the known; and is above the unknown” (Ke Up 1.4), “failing to reach which, words turn back along with the mind” (Tai Up 2.9.1) and so on.
Where the idea is to teach formless Brahman to an aspirant, the attributes are sublated later. For example, “For to Him are yoked ten organs, nay hundreds of them. He is the organs; He is ten, and thousands-many, and infinite” (Br Up 2.5.19). It is so because the conclusion is “That Brahman is without prior or posterior, without interior or exterior”. There are manifestations, e.g., “Identified with the mind, having prAna as his body, and effulgence itself by nature” (Ch Up 3.14.2) meant for meditation and not for sublation. As Brahman is nirguna, sruti makes use of indirect method of revealing It. The indirect method is negating every attribute. The definition using the method of negation (neti neti) in Br Up 2.3.6.
Contd Part 38