Mandukya Upanishad and Karika (Part1)

Part 2

Introduction

The Mandukya  Upanishad belongs to Atharva Veda. Though it has only twelve mantras, its teachings are profound. Gauḍapadacharya wrote the Karika on it. A Karika differs from a commentary. In a commentary, the commentator analyses each mantra and comments on it in detail. A Karika, on the other hand, presents the essential philosophical teachings.

The Karika consists of four chapters comprising a total of 215 verses (Karikas). Chapter I is called Agama Prakaraṇa. It is so called because it is based on the twelve mantras of the Upanishad. This chapter contains 29 Karikas. Chapters II, III, and IV are respectively Vaitathya Prakaraṇa (On the Unreality of the World), comprising 38 Karikas; Advaita Prakaraṇa (On Non-duality), comprising 48 Karikas; and Alatasanti Prakaraṇa (On the Quenching of the Firebrand), comprising 100 Karikas.
The Upaniṣhad and Karika are traditionally studied together along with the commentary of Shankaracharya.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 37 (chAn 4)

[Part – 36 (chAn 3)]

We may currently enjoy the most prosperous circumstances, but a time inevitably arrives when we lose everything and are thrown into a desperate state beyond all human succor: death. As death approaches, our physical and mental faculties fail. Friends and family cannot save us, our limbs grow motionless, and we are left uncertain of what awaits our departure.

To prepare, we must seek a competent teacher before such an eventuality arises. A true preceptor imparts direct Knowledge, guiding us in the practice of aligning our thoughts with the nature of Pure Beingness-Consciousness. We habitually anchor our minds to finite names and forms, chasing transient worldly objects and scattered thoughts. These are mere particulars.

Spiritual practice requires us to recognize the Universal, learning to see It hidden within the particulars. By bringing this underlying Reality to the foreground, the world of forms recedes into the background. As the mind rests on the Universal, our finite sense of individual identity dissolves into formlessness; the individual soul (*jīva*) turns into the Inner Self, and the external world resolves into Space. We remain as Pure Consciousness—with the cosmos as Its manifestation. This auspicious realization of Beingness-Consciousness is the path to Immortality.  Continue reading →

lakṣaṇa

The Language of Implication and the Definition of Brahman

A central challenge in Advaita Vedānta is a linguistic and conceptual paradox: how can we speak of a reality that is explicitly declared to be beyond the reach of words and thoughts? Scriptures like the Kena, Muṇḍaka, and Kaṭha Upaniṣads remind us that neither eyes, speech, nor the mind can directly reach Brahman. If we attempt to use ordinary language, we find it completely inadequate. In everyday life, words can only reveal objects through four distinct categories: species or genus (jāti), qualities (guṇa), actions or functions (kriyā), and relationships (sambandha).

Because Brahman belongs to no species, possesses no attributes, performs no actions, and has no relationship with anything else, it cannot be revealed directly by any word in our parlance. This is why Ādi Śaṅkara and the scriptural tradition must proceed stepwise, utilizing a sophisticated pedagogical method called adhyāropa-apavāda (provisional attribution followed by subsequent negation) and, crucially, the linguistic device of lakṣaṇa—indirect implication.

Continue reading →

“Knowingness … or Not” — A Response *

Dear Dennis,

Thank you for the 3-part article, “Knowingness … or Not.”

I must say, I was disappointed.

Knowing the thoroughness with which you normally approach a subject, and the attention to detail you bring to a task once you undertake it, I had hoped to see a scholarly critique of “Knowingness”—particularly one supported by shAstric evidence showing where the term falls short, together with possible suggestions for improvement or alternative vocabulary for consideration.

Instead, much of the investigation seems to have gone into tracing the frequency of its occurrence, rather than examining the more fundamental question: whether “Knowingness” is an appropriate rendering of jñAnam in the particular context in which I have used it. Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 36 (chAn 3)

[Part – 35 (chAn 2)]

An actor plays many roles in suitable costumes. Yet none of those define who he or she truly is. The actor remains unchanged when the play ends. Likewise, the world is a cosmic drama staged by Consciousness-Beingness (Cognizance). The objective forms within this world are transient and unreal; only Consciousness-Beingness is Real, serving as the intrinsic nature (AtmA) of all things.

This, in essence, is the instruction imparted by Sage Uddālaka to his son, Śvetaketu. Śvetaketu’s true reality is not his physical body. His father reveals to him: “You are That Consciousness-Beingness Itself (tat tvam asi); you are not what is merely perceived.” What we perceive are simply the functional forms through which Cognizance manifests.

  • The tvam (“you”) refers to the realm of name and form (nAma-rUpa).
  • The tat (“That”) refers to pure Consciousness-Beingness.

Thus, the core teaching is to recognize ourselves as the primary cognizance of “I am” and to view the world simply as the cognizance of “It is.” Any shift from this grounding—such as misidentifying with assigned names and forms—inevitably yields misery.

When the Upanishad discloses this supreme Truth through the mahAvAkya (“You are That”), every student of Advaita stands in Śvetaketu’s shoes. The name Śvetaketu signifies pure, luminous knowledge (śvetā-ketu). This capacity for understanding the Supreme Self is already present within us, yet it often becomes clouded.   Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 37)

Part 36

Part 38

Chapter 19 Conversation between Atma and the Mind

Introduction                                                                                                                        It is a ‘dialogue’ between Atma and the mind. Since Atma is free from all action, the dialogue is figurative. Where the text makes such statements, what is meant is that the MIND REALIZES THIS and ceases (for the moment) to identify with ahaṃkara. Nevertheless, this chapter presents a unique method of nidhidhyasana, the third stage of jnana-yoga, following sravana and manana. At this stage, the aspirant has gained clear knowledge of Atma but must assimilate it until it becomes living knowledge.
The aspirant knows that his essential nature is consciousness, which is distinct from the mind. Yet the locus of knowledge is the mind. Thus, a peculiar situation arises in which the mind instructs itself that the aspirant’s true nature is consciousness, which is different from the mind. The mind must further remind itself that consciousness is changeless and eternal, whereas the mind is mithya.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 35 (chAn 2)

[Part – 34 (chAn 1)] 

The chAndogya Upanishad expresses the conclusion (at the end of the previous part) in an elegantly generalized form as follows:

वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम् ॥   — mantra 6.1.4, chAndogya Upanishad.

[Meaning:  All products being just words, a mere name; the clay alone is real.]

In other words, ‘form’ lacks independent reality. While the substance is only one, the forms in which it presents itself could be many.

The world we perceive is an ensemble of forms. Earth is one form, water another; the same applies to fire, air, and space. Together, these constitute the five fundamental elements. Every object—animate creatures, inanimate items, rocks, mountains, and rivers—is a derived form of these primary elements.

For earthenware such as pots, pans, cups, and jars, the underlying root substance is clay. Similarly, gold is the root substance for ornaments like rings, bangles, bracelets, and necklaces; water is the root substance for waves, foam, spume, and spray. Each set of objects appears to have its own distinct material foundation. 
Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 34 (chAn 1)

[Part – 33 (aita 4)]

9.  chAndogya Upanishad

The prefix “pari” contributes significantly to enhancing the dimensionality of a word in the Sanskrit language. For example, prashna means question. By adding the prefix pari to prashna to make it pariprashna (used in Bhagavad-Gita, verse 34, Ch 4), it means questioning from all sides. Other examples are draShTu (view) and paridraShTu (a 360 degree view) as used in prashna Upanishad; pasyanti (look) and paripasyanti (all-round look) as used in muNDaka Upanishad; pUrNam (perfect) and paripUrNam (perfect from all angles); samApti (complete) and parisamApti (complete in all respects). 

How the prefix ‘pari’ modifies a noun is like what the qualifier “spherical” does when we say “spherical symmetry” instead of simply saying ‘symmetry.’ The teaching of Advaita in a sense comes to a parisamApti in the chAndogya Upanishad.

Two of the four famous Great Statements (mahA vAkya-s), namely, “This Self (Atman) is brahman” (from mANDUkya Upanishad) and “bahman is The Absolute Knowingness” (from aitareya Upanishad) have already been introduced. Expanding on those statements, chAndogya comes up with the third Great Statement.  From a doctrinal perspective, the third statement completes the instruction on Non-dual Oneness. The Upanishad aims at showing the path to attain the experiential understanding of brahman through the third Great Statement. It is up to the seeker to ingest the message and achieve Self-realization.

The Great Statement being told here is what the Sage Uddalaka taught to Svetaketu. Maharshi Sanatkumara revealed the same to the Sage Narada. Creator Prajapati imparted the same teaching to the Lord of gods (Indra).  Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 35)

Part 34

Part 36

18.170–184
In a series of verses, Shankaracharya explains how Tat Tvam Asi (TTA) should be taught and understood. As in the case of any sentence, in order to understand the meaning of TTA, one must understand the meanings of the words Tat, Tvam, and Asi.
The direct or literal meaning of Tat is Isvara, the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of the universe. Tvam means you, the individual (jiva), and Asi signifies that Tat and Tvam are identical, that is, Isvara = Jiva.
An equation is meaningful only when its two sides are apparently different but essentially the same. If the two sides are apparently identical, the equation serves no purpose. Thus, 5 + 4 = 10 – 1 is meaningful, whereas 9 = 9 is not. For one who understands addition and subtraction, both 5 + 4 and 10 – 1 resolve into 9, thereby validating the equation.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 33 (aita 4)

[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 →