Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 40

Posted on by

Part 39

Chapter 7 Brahm Sutra Bhasya
7.7 BSB 3.3.53 and 3.3.54 The Self distinct from the body                                          Please see the post Vedanta and Hard Problem of Consciousness

7-8 BSB 3.4.1 to 3.4.17 Knowledge of Brahman is independent of rites                The aphorist establishes that karmAs do not produce knowledge of Brahman. In sutras 1 to 7, the opposite views (Purva Paksha) are presented which are refuted in sutras from 8 to 17 (Siddhanta).

7-8-1                                                                                                                             BSB 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 (Purva Paksha)                                                                     Knowledge itself cannot produce any result. Action is paramount. Knowledge is an aid to action. There is no result of knowledge in its own right. If there are any Vedic texts to the contrary, they are only figurative to glorify the knowledge. Knowledge of self is also an aid to action. The knowledge that self is different from body is an aid to action. Because the performer of rite believes that on fall of body at death, the self goes to higher loka due to punya earned on account of successful completion of rites.

Continue reading →

Locus of Primal Ignorance (Mool-avidyA)

Posted on by

In Up Sah 18.44, the opponent (Purva Paksha-PP) asks a question. Who experiences the transmigratory existence? It cannot be the changeless Self. It cannot be the inert intellect, nor can it be the reflection (of the Self in the intellect) which is mithya. ShankarAchAryA gives a short reply. The transmigratory existence is a delusion because of non-discrimination between Self and non-Self. It has an apparent existence (and experienced) because of real existence of the changeless Self and appears to be belonging to It (Self). 

Continue reading →

Q.559 – Atman and intellect

Posted on by

Q: Does Atman make use of intellect? Or does intellect function automatically with Atman just being the witness?

This is because, identification with body mind is possible only when we think. Liberation is possible when we overcome this wrong idea. Either way, it appears that Atman makes use of the intellect to get bound or liberated. 

It is said that Atman is ever free and illusion and bondage are concepts only. But this concept can appear to Atman only when intellect is used.

A: First of all, you must clearly differentiate between the ‘absolute reality’ and the ‘empirical’ (worldly) appearance.

 In reality, there is only non-dual Brahman. The world, including ‘you, the person’, is not real in itself. It is ‘name and form of’ Brahman, just as ring and necklace are not real in themselves, being name and form of gold.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 39

Posted on by

Part 38

Chapter 7 Brahm Sutra Bhasya

7.5 BSB 3.2.31 to 3.2.37: Brahman is one without a second

There is a view that there is something different from Brahman on account of the terms, embankment [Setu- Ch 8.4.1], measure, connection and difference. Isvara is the protector of dharma etc. jivAtmA is the protected. It suggests that jivAtmA and ParamAtmA are different, one is the Setu, the protector and other things are protected (Ch Up 6.8.1). Lokas rest on Bhagavan (Katha 2.3.1). From “having crossed over the embankment”” (Ch Up 8.4.2), it is gathered that just as in life somebody crosses a stream over the embankment to reach solid ground, which is other than the embankment, so also one crosses over this embankment, that is the Self, to reach something that is not the embankment of the Self. 

Continue reading →

Tat Tvam Asi (Part 5)

Posted on by

Part 4

Sravan is sufficient
In Sravan, the student listens to the teacher about the teaching, namely, TTA. On understanding the full import of TTA, the student has Self-knowledge, i.e., I am Brahman and there is liberation. Self-knowledge and liberation are simultaneous. There is no time-gap. In chapter 18 titled ‘Tat Tvam Asi’ of Upedesha Sahasri (Up Sah), ShankarAchArya introduces a Purva Paksha (PP) in 18.09 who holds that mere Sravan is not sufficient for liberation. It should be followed by repetition of ‘I am Brahman’. PP argues as below.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 38

Posted on by

Part 37

Chapter 7 Brahma Sutra Bhasya
7-4 BSB 3.2.22 to 3.2.30    Unconditioned Brahman and soul                                        Neti neti means negation of two things and question is which are the two things negated. Purva Paksi argues that they are Brahman the substance and the attributes. According to Siddhanta negation of both leads to nihilism. Neti neti does not negate Brahman. It is negation of the attributes and not Brahman. Denial of Brahman is not reasonable, for that would contradict the introduction made with, “I will tell you of Brahman” (Br. 3.1.1), as also the condemnation contained in such texts as, “If anyone knows Brahman as non-existent, he himself becomes non-existent” (Tai. 2.6.1), and the affirmation, “The Self is to be realised as existing” (Ka. 2.3.13), “The knower of Brahman attains the highest”, “Brahman is Truth, Knowledge, Infinity” (Tai. 2.1.1). The text “Failing to reach which, words turn back with the mind” (Tai. 2.9.1) points to Brahman.

Continue reading →

Tat Tvam Asi (Part 4)

Posted on by

Part 3

Meaning of words, Direct meaning of a sentence, Bhag Tyag Lakshna, Suggestive meaning of a sentence

In chapter 3 of Naiskarmya Siddhi, SuresvarAchArya explains the method to interpret and operationalize Tat Tvam Asi. Like any sentence, TTA is made of words and to ascertain the meaning of a sentence, meaning of words is to be ascertained followed by their inter-se relationships. In Vakya Vritti (VV) 1.9 and 1.10, the teacher affirms the student’s concern that if he does not know the meanings of the words, how can he comprehend the mahAvAkya.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 37

Posted on by

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.

Continue reading →

The Limitations of Metaphor

Posted on by

Advaita teaching frequently makes use of metaphor in its explanations of the various topics. These are indisputably invaluable, although there is also the danger of taking them beyond the realm of their applicability and either drawing erroneous conclusions or simply failing to see the point that is being made. This also highlights the necessity of using the metaphor that is most appropriate for conveying the message. Take the example of sarvam khalvidam brahma – all this (world) is really Brahman.

We might start with the ubiquitous rope-snake metaphor. We think we see a snake but the light is poor. (We think we see a world of separate objects, but we haven’t yet gained the Self-knowledge of Advaita – our perception is covered by ignorance.) When we bring torchlight to shine into the darkness, we see that it is really a rope. (Having been taught Advaita, we realize that the world is really name and form of Brahman.)

Continue reading →

Tat Tvam Asi (Part 3)

Posted on by


Part 2

Part 4

Vedantic teaching, i.e., TTA is completed in section 8 of chapter 6 of Ch Up. It is sravan (listening) to the teacher. Since Svetaketu has doubts, sections 9 to 16 are manan (removal of doubts) so that the student has conviction about the teaching. Svetaketu has doubts because he is unable to figure out why human beings do not claim identity with the Deity though they merge in It every day in deep sleep. In deep sleep, the jiva loses his individuality as he merges with the Deity. That means that the mind, the instrument of knowing is resolved and is dormant. Knower-hood is suspended temporarily. This is why, on waking up, a jiva does not claim identity with the Deity. The teacher explains with illustrations.

Continue reading →