Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-23 Katha 2.1.5 to 2.1.10 Some technical terms used by the Upanishad need explanation. Brahman is all-pervading Original Consciousness (OC). It is AtmA at the individual level. The OC manifests through matter, the Reflecting Medium (RM). It is Reflected Consciousness (RC). OC is only one, but RCs are as many as RMs. The quality of RC depends upon RM. The OC remains unaffected. The material universe is divided into three pairs: three belonging to the microcosm and three belonging to macrocosm. Consciousness reflects in any of the six mediums. There are 6 mediums RM1 to RM6 and six reflected consciousness RC1 to RC6. At the individual level, there are three mediums: RM1 (physical -gross), RM2 (mental-subtle) and RM3 -causal.
Being: the bottom line
Since I am busy writing my next book (for a change), I have been looking through the past 25 years of written essays and reviews, looking for material that is not currently available anywhere. And there does seem likely to be quite a bit. So I will be (re-)publishing some of this over the next few months. The first of these is a two-part (quite long!) review of the book by Nathan Gill (who sadly died some years ago), I wrote the review back in 2006 but it is still relevant – possibly more so.
A Review of the book “Being: the bottom line” by Nathan Gill and a critique of Neo-Advaita.
This is a courageous book in that it openly tackles some of the most difficult questions that neo-Advaita has to answer and it doesn’t shy away from those that are phrased in the most challenging ways. It is also a dangerous book, in that it appears, superficially, to be providing satisfactory answers. Nevertheless it is a valuable book, albeit not perhaps for the reasons the author intended, in that there are some very searching questions and Nathan’s attempts to answer them expose the vulnerability of the neo-Advaitin position.
Continue readingEight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 20
Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-14 Katha 1.3.11 The unmanifested (Avyakta) is higher than mahat, the Purusha is higher than the unmanifested. Purusha is the highest. He is the highest goal.
At the end of a cycle of creation called pralaya, the world resolves in Brahman and is in potential and causal state. It is the ‘unmanifested’ mentioned in the mantra above. It is the maya power of Brahman. Brahman is also called Purusha. In the next cycle of creation, cosmic subtle body is the first born and creation of names and forms unfolds in stages. The cosmic subtle body is Hiranyagarbha, also called mahat. The unmanifest causal body is superior to Hiranyagarbha. Beyond this unmanifest, there is another unmanifest called Brahman (BG 8.20) or Purusha. The universe has two states, namely, unmanifest (potential form) and manifested names and forms. To know Brahman is the highest human goal, i.e., moksha.
Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 19
Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-9 Katha 1.2.25 The mantra reads: How can one know thus as to where It (the Self) is, for which both the Brahmin and the Kshatriya become food, and for which death takes the place of a curry? Brahma Sutra 1.2.9 clarifies who is the eater. Is it fire or the individual soul, or is it the supreme Self? The doubt is because Nachiketa has asked Yama about three entities-fire, individual soul, and the supreme Self.
Adhyāropa-apavāda (Part 5)
ADHYĀROPĀPAVĀDA: REVISITING THE INTERPRETATIONS OF SVĀMI SACCIDĀNANDENDRA SARASVATĪ AND THE POST-ŚAṄKARĀDVAITINS
by Manjushree Hegde
(Read Part 4)
*** Abbreviations, Notes and References ***
Abbreviations
AS Advaitasiddhi of Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. Advaitasiddhi of Madhusudanasarasvati with the commentaries Gaudabrahmānandī, Viṭṭhaleśopādhyāyī, Siddhivyākhyā of Balabhadra and a critical summary called Chaturgranthī by M.M. Ananta Kṛiṣṇa Śāstrī. 1937. Edited by Anant Kṛiṣṇa Śāstrī. Revised by Śivrām Śāstrī Śintre. 2nd ed. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagar Press.
Continue readingAdhyāropa-apavāda (Part 4)
ADHYĀROPĀPAVĀDA: REVISITING THE INTERPRETATIONS OF SVĀMI SACCIDĀNANDENDRA SARASVATĪ AND THE POST-ŚAṄKARĀDVAITINS (concluded)
by Manjushree Hegde
(Read Part 3)
Based on Śaṅkarācārya’s statements, the PSA formulated a rigorous exposition of the continuation of prārabdha karma—and avidyā—in a jīvanmukta. Nelson (1996) documents the different arguments advanced: Vimuktātman, for example, advocates for the existence of a tangible remnant of avidyā in the jivanmukta (IS 1.9, p. 75).43 Sarvajñātman employs a range of metaphorical constructs to describe the remnant of moha (ignorance) post-gnosis: scent (gandha), shadow (cchāyā), residue, impression (saṁskāra), and so on, (SŚ 4.42).44 Citsukha delineates three forms of ignorance and argues that knowledge destroys only two forms—the third persists post-gnosis; otherwise, he argues, it would result in the immediate cessation of the body, and not admit the experience of jīvanmukti (TP, p. 394ff).45 Prakāśātman writes that the mukta “slips into dualistic awareness (dvaita-darśana)” in his participation in the world (PPV, p. 786).46 Building on Citsukha’s arguments, Madhusūdana Sarasvatī— and his commentator Brahmānanda Sarasvatī—declare videhamukti as “paramamukti,” hierarchically superior to jīvanmukti (AS, p. 892ff). We see here that the PSA’s (seemingly innocuous) endeavour to elucidate the persistence of prārabdha karma in the jīvanmukta compromises and undermines the very notion of mokṣa, here and now. This is akin to severing the very branch upon which one is perched.
Continue readingEight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 18
Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-1 Katha 1.2.12 and 1.2.13 The Self (AtmA) is not perceptible to sense organs. Neither is It available for inference. It is hidden in the intellect like a cave enveloped in darkness of ignorance causing miseries. It is a figurative expression as the elf is infinite, all-pervading and cannot be hidden. It is the witnessing consciousness of both the happy and sad states of the mind. An aspirant first hears about this Truth from an enlightened teacher. If he has any doubts, he gets it resolved by the teacher. He is now intellectually assured about the teachings. Stii, he may not be able to align the life with the teaching because of habitual tendencies. To overcome it, he reflects upon what he has learnt by constant meditation on the teachings. It is Vedantic meditation, nidhidhyAsana. He meditates on the Self withdrawing his mind from external objects. Eventually his life conforms to the teachings. He achieves the fulfilment of the highest human goal. He learns that all sense pleasures are but fragmentary reflections of that one supreme joy found in the true Self alone. Yama says that Nachiketa will realize the Truth as he has shown the highest discrimination and sincerity of purpose. The mansion of Brahman is wide open for him.
Adhyāropa-apavāda (Part 3)
ADHYĀROPĀPAVĀDA: REVISITING THE INTERPRETATIONS OF SVĀMI SACCIDĀNANDENDRA SARASVATĪ AND THE POST-ŚAṄKARĀDVAITINS (continued)
by Manjushree Hegde
(Read Part 2)
VI. Adhyāropāpavāda According to the PSA
For the PSA, “Brahman can only be shown, not described” (Murthy 1959, p. 57), albeit in a circuitous, approximate manner (“adūraviprakarṣeṇa”).27 The crux of this position lies in the contention that although brahman eludes direct descriptive elucidation (abhidhā), it retains a semblance of apprehensibility through indirect means (lakṣaṇā). Vācaspati Miśra illustrates with an example: in order to explain gold, we point to gold ornaments—earrings, bracelets, etc—and explain it as the substance that assumes these various shapes; it is that which remains when the shapes no longer do. In a similar manner, the śruti “points to” the world-appearances to “show” brahman as that which assumes these various appearances; it is also what remains when the appearances no longer do (Bhāmati 1.1.4).
Accordingly, for the PSA, adhyāropāpavāda is one method to “show” brahman.28 Consider the stock example of Bhagavadgītā 13.14–15. In the verse 13.14, brahman is said to possess karmendriyas (hands, feet, etc.) and jñānendriyas (eyes, etc.). According to the PSA, this is an adhyāropa that is useful in drawing attention to the existence of brahman as that which permeates everything—including the human body and the sensory organs— and allows movement/perception to occur: ‘immanent’ brahman (Rambachan 2017, pp. 164–165). Ānandagiri writes, “The faculties of the body are a function of the consciousness that enlivens them; through them, the presence of brahman (as consciousness) can be recognized.”29 The śruti, thus, ‘points’ to brahman with the help of the attributes in accordance with the arundhati darśana nyāya. This is adhyāropa. In the verse immediately following this, brahman is said to be “without senses” and “devoid of qualities.” This is an apavāda that contradicts the preceding adhyāropa to point to brahman’s ‘transcendent’ nature (Rambachan 2017, pp. 164–165).30
Continue readingAdhyāropa-apavāda (Part 2)
ADHYĀROPĀPAVĀDA: REVISITING THE INTERPRETATIONS OF SVĀMI SACCIDĀNANDENDRA SARASVATĪ AND THE POST-ŚAṄKARĀDVAITINS (continued)
by Manjushree Hegde
(Read Part 1)
- Levels of Deliberated Attribution in the Prasthānatraya Texts
According to SSS, deliberated attribution occurs on three distinct levels in the texts of the prasthānatraya:16 words, sentences, and methodological procedures or prakriyās employed to articulate the inquiry.17 Each of these levels can be illustrated with examples. Consider the level of words. It is notable that most words themselves can be categorized as adhyāropas. Indeed, even a term as fundamental as ‘ātman’ is itself an adhyāropa. In the CUB 7.1.3, Śaṅkarācārya writes:
The term ‘ātman’ serves as a means of identifying it in contradistinction to the corporeal vehicle it inhabits. Moreover, the term is extended to convey the referent which persists after the repudiation of the body and other non-self entities as illusory. Finally, the word is used to reveal what is inexpressible by words.18
The term “ātman” is an adhyāropa; the aim of invoking the term is not its designation per se, but rather to draw attention to its distinctiveness from the nonself entities, to discriminate it from the nonself referents (body, mind, etc.). Loundo writes, “[Understanding it as an adhyāropa] prevents the reification of ātman and, concomitantly, of its negatum, in the process of distinguishing the former from the latter (body, etc.)” (Loundo 2015, p. 72). Similarly, the term “brahman,” derived from the verbal root “bṛḥ, expansion,” is an adhyāropa that seeks to invalidate the potential limitations associated with “ātman” (BUB 2.3.6). Most words of the prasthānatraya texts—including jīva, īśvara, jagat, avidyā, māyā, bandha, mokṣa, and so on—are adhyāropas.
Continue readingAdhyāropa-apavāda
Over the next 5 – 6 weeks, I will be posting a paper on this topic by Manjushree Hegde. Martin drew my attention to this and initially contacted her. She forwarded the paper to me and, having read it, my comment was that “it is without doubt one of the most important/authoritative/well-reasoned/persuasive documents on Advaita that I have ever read”. She has kindly agreed for me to post it to the site.
Given the title, it will be no surprise that it is a support for the teaching of Swami Satchidanandendra, but to my mind it goes further than he did in explaining the traditional method for the teaching of Advaita and in criticizing post-Śaṅkara authors for their unjustified distortion of that teaching. (Or at least she brings it out much more clearly for me.) It is an academic paper but suffers much less than most as regards its readability. I would urge any serious seeker to read it if they want to understand the sometimes seemingly contradictory aspects of prasthāna traya and, occasionally, Śaṅkara himself.
ADHYĀROPĀPAVĀDA: REVISITING THE INTERPRETATIONS OF SVĀMI SACCIDĀNANDENDRA SARASVATĪ AND THE POST-ŚAṄKARĀDVAITINS
Manjushree Hegde
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences,
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras