Tag Archives: ignorance

Brahman—Neither reaching nor non-reaching

Posted on by
1

Varuna instructs Bhrigu:
“Seek to know well that from which all beings are born, that by which they live after being born, and that towards which they move and into which they merge. That is Brahman.” (Tai. 3.1)
 A well-established principle is that, upon dissolution, an effect resolves into its cause.

In his commentary (Tai. 2.6), Shankaracharya raises the following questions:
“Does an ignorant person, after departing from this world, reach the other world, or does he not? Similarly, does a person of knowledge, after departing from this world, reach the other world, or does he not?”
He explains the difficulty as follows:
“Brahman, being the cause of space and everything else, is equally the source of both the ignorant person and the person of knowledge. Therefore, one might suspect that the ignorant person, too, reaches Brahman.”
Conversely, “if the ignorant person does not reach Brahman, even though Brahman is the common source of all, one might also doubt whether the enlightened person reaches Brahman.”

This appears to present a catch-22 situation.

Resolution                                                                                                                        The difficulty arises because the questions themselves are incorrectly framed. The concepts of reaching and not reaching are meaningful when there is a distance to be traversed or there is a difference between the seeker and the goal. Neither applies to Brahman which is the true nature of the individual.

From the standpoint of Advaita Vedanta, both the ignorant person and the enlightened person are, in their true nature, Brahman. Therefore, Brahman is not something that either of them must reach in the sense of attaining a previously absent reality.                There can be no satisfactory answer to a question based on a mistaken assumption.

The distinction between the ignorant person and the enlightened person lies not in their true nature, but in their knowledge of it. The ignorant person does not know that his or her true nature is Brahman, whereas the enlightened person knows this to be the case.

Self-knowledge does not bring about a transformation into Brahman; it removes the ignorance that conceals the ever-present truth that one has always been Brahman.

Note: Translation by Swami Gambhirananda, Eight Upanishads, Advaita Ashram

Saṃsāra

Posted on by
2

Unraveling the Wheel of Transmigration

In our day-to-day lives, many of us experience an underlying, persistent restlessness—a feeling of being inherently finite, vulnerable, and caught in an unpredictable universe. We chase happiness in relationships, careers, possessions, and worldly achievements, yet every gain seems shadowed by transience and the inevitability of change. In Indian philosophy, this perpetual roller-coaster of existence, characterized by the continual cycle of birth, death, and transmigration, is known as saṃsāra.

In the non-dual tradition of Advaita Vedānta, systematized by Ādi Śaṅkara, saṃsāra is not viewed as an external physical prison created by a distant deity, nor is it an inescapable cosmic trap. Rather, saṃsāra is an empirical plight rooted entirely in a fundamental cognitive error: Self-ignorance (avidyā). As Śaṅkara notes in his introduction to the Māṇḍūkya Kārikā Bhāṣya, the scriptures and teachings are undertaken specifically to reveal Brahman, because “by knowledge (vidyā), the illusion of duality caused by ignorance is destroyed”.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part39)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 38

Chapter 19 Conversation between Atma and the Mind

19.19                                                                                                                            Owing to ignorance, people superimpose upon Atma such notions as relative existence, relative non-existence, qualified, unqualified, agent, non-agent, and so on. Yet Atma is birthless, imperishable, non-dual, and is never Itself superimposed upon anything.
The ignorant mind takes Atma and the world of duality to belong to the same order of reality. Consequently, it performs actions that produce punya and papa, which in turn become the cause of birth and death—that is, samsara. The cycle of samsara continues endlessly until the mind realizes that Atma and the world belong to different orders of reality. The mind is mithya, and all superimpositions are likewise mithya.

Continue reading →

Knowledge and Experience

Posted on by
4

Clearing the Minefield of Modern Advaita

For many modern seekers, the spiritual path feels like a journey from the ‘dry’ realm of intellectual study to the ‘wet’ realm of mystical experience. There is a pervasive belief, often propagated by Neo-Vedantic and Western satsang circles, that acquiring Self-knowledge through the scriptures is a ‘merely intellectual’ achievement—a collection of concepts that must eventually be ‘transformed’ into a direct, non-dual experience through meditation or samādhi.

However, traditional Advaita Vedānta, as systematized by Ādi Śaṅkara, offers a radical correction to this view. In this tradition, the ‘gap’ between knowledge and realization is non-existent for the prepared mind. To understand why, we must carefully define our terms and examine the relative value of knowledge and experience in the pursuit of liberation (mokṣa).

Continue reading →

Āvaraṇa and Vikṣepa

Posted on by
Reply

The Twin Powers of Illusion

Most seekers of Advaita Vedānta eventually encounter a perplexing riddle: if Brahman is the only reality—one without a second—how is it that we perceive a world of dizzying multiplicity and feel ourselves to be limited, suffering individuals? Traditional teaching addresses this paradox through a sophisticated pedagogical framework known as the two ‘powers’ of ignorance (avidyā) or illusion (māyā): Āvaraṇa and Vikṣepa. While these terms are cornerstones of modern Advaitic study, they represent a nuanced evolution in the tradition that is vital for any serious student to understand.

Defining the Terms: Concealment and Projection

In the technical vocabulary of Vedānta, ignorance is not merely a passive lack of information; it is often described as a functional force with two distinct aspects.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri ( Part 31)

Posted on by

Part 30 

Part 32

18.72–75 are omitted, as they primarily deal with the Buddhist doctrine of momentary consciousness.
Who is the Hearer? Who Says, “I am Brahman”?
The teaching of Tat Tvam Asi (TTA) can serve its purpose only if there is a hearer to whom it is addressed (18.111). Accordingly, verses 18.76–77 raise the question: Who is the hearer of the teaching?
Two possible answers are examined: the Self and the ego. The Self cannot be the hearer being actionless and beyond all empirical transactions. Nor can the ego, who is a sufferer, be the hearer in the ultimate sense and truthfully declare, “I am free.” Does it imply that scripture is not a valid means of knowledge and the teaching is purposeless? To remove this confusion, verse 18.78 introduces the concept of reflected consciousness.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 26)

Posted on by

Part 25

17.51-55                                                                                                                            A man desirous of knowing the truth should cultivate dispassion and refrain from loving the worldly objects for such a love is risky. It is mixed with pain because any worldly object is impermanent and its absence causes pain. The love causes bondage as desires are plenty and impossible to fully satisfy. He should approach a skilled teacher who has Self-knowledge, who is tranquil and established in Brahman- meaning he is anchored in Self while transacting in the world. In this sense, he is free from bondage of action. Such a teacher interprets the scriptures and impart knowledge (Ch Up 6.14.2 and BG 4.34). When a qualified student approaches a skilled teacher with humility in the prescribed manner, the teacher should accept him into his fold and impart knowledge of Brahman thereby enabling him cross Samsara which is like ocean of darkness.

Continue reading →

Parokṣa and Aparokṣa

Posted on by

Bridging the Gap from Intellectual Understanding to Immediate Realization

In the pursuit of Advaita Vedānta, a seeker often grapples with a frustrating sense of distance. We read the great declarations of the Upaniṣads, we follow the rigorous logic of Ādi Śaṅkara, and we may even become ‘intellectually convinced’ that reality is non-dual. Yet, despite this conviction, we often feel as though we are standing on the outside looking in. This gap is technically defined by the distinction between two types of knowledge: parokṣa (mediate or indirect) and aparokṣa (immediate or direct).

Unravelling these terms is not just a matter of semantics; it is a vital step in clearing the ‘minefield’ of modern spiritual confusion. As I have argued in my series Confusions in Advaita Vedānta, many seekers are led astray by the belief that scriptural knowledge is ‘merely intellectual’ and must be transformed into something else through mystical experience. By looking at the original definitions and Śaṅkara’s own commentaries, we find a much more empowering truth: for the qualified seeker, the right means of knowledge (pramāṇa) can trigger immediate realization without the need for a secondary ‘mystical’ event.

Continue reading →

Pramāṇa

Posted on by

The Gateway to Valid Knowledge in Advaita Vedānta

In the spiritual journey of Advaita Vedānta, the ultimate goal is the permanent eradication of Self-ignorance (avidyā), which is replaced by the liberating realization of our true nature. However, this realization is not a mystical occurrence or a random event; it is the specific result of Self-knowledge. For the seeker, a fundamental question arises: how do we acquire this knowledge? To answer this, we must understand the technical concept of pramāṇa, the vital intellectual framework that distinguishes between what we think we know and what is actually true.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part24)

Posted on by

Part 23

Part 25

17.17 and 17.18                                                                                                         During dream, one mind is divided into subject (knower), object (known) and instrument of knowledge. The divisions are unreal. Likewise, in the waking state, one consciousness appears differently when desires in the intellect causes action. The desires arise because the jiva thinks that it is incomplete though it is essentially complete. The desires and actions are revealed by consciousness. The waking state is a superimposition on consciousness, the substratum. The divisions in the waking state are as unreal as the divisions in the dream. The ideas of interior and exterior in the waking state are unreal like reading and writing which are interdependent. Reading depends on a written page without which nothing can be read and writing also depends on reading as we first read and then write. So, both of them are unreal as the sounds represented by written letters are all-pervasive and have no forms. Hence, they can neither be really written nor read.

Continue reading →