Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 22 (mANDU 1)

[Part – 21 (muNDaka 4)]

mANDUkya Upanishad 

(Gaudapada kArikA not included)

The muNDaka Upanishad, towards its conclusion, refers to the fifteen constituents of the human body, each of which resolves into its respective source at the time of liberation:

गताः कलाः पञ्चदश प्रतिष्ठा देवाश्च सर्वे प्रतिदेवतासु
कर्माणि विज्ञानमयश्च आत्मा परेऽव्यये सर्व एकीभवन्ति — 3.2.7, muNDaka Upanishad.

Meaning: To their sources repair the fifteen constituents (of the body) and to their respective Gods, go all the gods (of the senses). And the karmas, and the self that simulates the intellect, all become unified with the Supreme Undecaying. [Translation: Swami Gambhirananda.]

However, the prashna Upanishad, which precedes the muNDaka, speaks in its final question of sixteen parts constituting the individual. There thus appears to be a discrepancy between the two Upanishads regarding the total number of constituents. Shankara too does not explicitly explain the reason for this difference.

Continue reading

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 21 (muNDaka 4)

[Part – 20 (muNDaka 3)]

If thoughts were entirely absent during deep sleep, they could not reappear without a source. Therefore, we must admit that thoughts persist in a latent form during deep sleep. These are called tendencies (vAsanA-s), which manifest as mental modifications (vRtti-s) in the waking and dream states.

Thus, thoughts are present across all three states of consciousness. The “I,” as the seer, is itself associated with these internal components. Naturally, such a seer perceives a world that also appears to consist of multiple components. After all, the nature of the seen tends to reflect the nature of the seer. Since the seer appears composite, the seen too appears manifold. Consequently, our entire life becomes a relationship between a divisible seer and a divisible world—a situation that is inherently fraught with conflict, from which we seek release.

The way out of this turmoil, as suggested by the prashna Upanishad, is to cultivate a “spherical vision.” In such an all-encompassing vision, the multiplicity within both the seer and the seen dissolves. As a result, the notions “I am an individual” and “there is a world out there” come to an end. They resolve into that from which they have arisen—the Atman or brahman, which is indivisible and is Pure Knowledge itself. Just as space—and Consciousness as space-like—has no parts, Knowledge too is without parts.  Continue reading

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 20 (muNDaka 3)

[Part – 19 (muNDaka 2)]

Shankara writes:

ज्ञानप्रसादेन आत्मावबोधनसमर्थमपि स्वभावेन सर्वप्राणिनां ज्ञानं बाह्यविषयरागादिदोषकलुषितमप्रसन्नमशुद्धं सन्नावबोधयति नित्यसंनिहितमप्यात्मतत्त्वं मलावनद्धमिवादर्शम् ,  विलुलितमिव सलिलम्। 

तद्यदेन्द्रिय विषयसंसर्गजनितरागादिमलकालुष्यापनयनादादर्शसलिलादिवत्प्रसादितं स्वच्छं शान्तमवतिष्ठते, तदा ज्ञानस्य प्रसादः स्यात् । 

तेन ज्ञानप्रसादेन विशुद्धसत्त्वः विशुद्धान्तःकरणः योग्यो ब्रह्म द्रष्टुं यस्मात् , ततः तस्मात्तु तमात्मानं पश्यते पश्यति उपलभते निष्कलं सर्वावयवभेदवर्जितं ध्यायमानः सत्यादिसाधनवानुपसंहृतकरण एकाग्रेण मनसा ध्यायमानः चिन्तयन् ॥

[Meaning: The Grace of the Knowledge, though the intellect in all men is by nature competent to know brahman, still being polluted by such faults as love for external objects etc., thereby becoming unclear and impure, it does not, like a stained mirror and muddy water, grasp the entity of the Atman though always present nearby.

But when, through the removal of polluting taints such as desire—arising from contact with sense-objects—the intellect is made clear and calm like a mirror or still water, it becomes lucid. By this clarity of the intellect, the mind is purified, and the person becomes fit to realize brahman. Therefore, one sees brahman, which is partless, through contemplative meditation—having taken recourse to aids such as truth, having controlled the senses, and with a focused mind. (Translation adapted from S. Sitarama Sastri, 1905.)  Continue reading

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 19 (muNDaka 2)

[Part – 18 (muNDaka 1)]

We can infer from 1.1.1 of the muNDaka Upaniṣad that Knowledge of the Self is not restricted to renunciates alone — it is imparted to householders as well. After all, Śaunaka himself was a householder, not a monk. What really matters is not one’s external status, but an inner readiness: the student must be free from preoccupation with worldly concerns and firmly resolved to realize the Self, without distraction.

शौनको वै महाशालोऽङ्गिरसं विधिवदुपसन्नः पप्रच्छ कस्मिन्नु भगवो विज्ञाते सर्वमिदं विज्ञातं भवतीति    —   1.1.3, muNDaka upa.

[Meaning: Saunaka, well known as a great householder, having approached Angiras duly, asked, ‘O Adorable Sir, (which is that thing) which having been known, all this becomes known?’ (Translation: Swami Gambhirananda).]

Śaunaka is asking for that Knowledge, knowing which everything else becomes known. This is not just any question — it is the most fundamental inquiry possible. In fact, the Upaniṣads — especially those that follow the muNDaka — can be seen as extended responses to this very question. The teacher appreciates the depth of the inquiry but also makes it clear that the student must have the steadiness to abide in what is taught. Continue reading

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 18 (muNDaka 1)

[Part – 17 (prashna 4)]

muNDaka Upanishad 

The Self is of the nature of pure sentience. Hence, it can be known only through that which is likewise sentient—namely, an entity belonging to the same genre. By way of illustration, a magnet attracts iron filings but not a piece of wood; for attraction is possible only between entities that share a common nature.

The body, the senses, and even the vital force (prANa), being insentient, are incapable of apprehending the Self. The mind (antaḥkaraNa) alone, being endowed with reflected consciousness and possessing the capacity for cognition, serves as the appropriate instrument for the knowledge of the Self. Therefore, the mind alone is competent to grasp It.

Further, the Self that is sought to be realized is utterly indivisible and without any internal distinctions. It is free from all forms of differentiation — whether internal, external, or relational.

A tree, though seemingly a single entity, is divisible into multiple constituent parts such as roots, trunk, branches, leaves, flowers, fruits, and seeds. It is thus a “divisible whole.” Space, on the other hand, is not subject to such division and may be regarded as an “indivisible whole.” The Self is akin to the latter.  

Continue reading

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 17 (prashna 4)

[Part – 16 (prashna 3)]

“Limb” (in Sanskrit kala) means a part, a ray.

For example, the moon has 16 limbs from the New Moon phase to the Full Moon. Just as the Full Moon is complete with all the 16 parts on the Full Moon day, PuruSa is also complete when the 16 limbs are present. The 16 limbs are:

स प्राणमसृजत प्राणाच्छ्रद्धा खं वायुर्ज्योतिरापः पृथिवीन्द्रियं मनः । अन्नमन्नाद्वीर्यं तपो मन्त्राः कर्म लोका लोकेषु च नाम च॥    —        6.4, prashna.

[Meaning: He created prANa; from prANa (He created) faith, space, air, fire, water, earth, organs, mind, food; from food (He created) vigor, self-control, mantras, rites, worlds and name in the worlds.]

The life-principle, faith, space, air, fire, earth, the senses, mind, matter, vigor, austerity, mantras, action, fields (areas of experience), and name (identity) — these sixteen arise from the partless Puruṣa. Though in reality without parts, the Puruṣa appears as though endowed with parts when manifested.

Among these sixteen, the life-principle (prāṇa) and the mind (manas) are especially significant. It may be said that the indivisible Self appears as if fragmented into many. Just as a sheet of glass shatters into pieces upon impact, so too the Self seems to break into multiplicity when “movement” arises. This apparent fragmentation is referred to as the “fall” (cyuti). Continue reading

Advaita in the Vedas – meaning of samudra

We don’t have to dive deep into Advaita to come across the imagery of a drop of water and the ocean or many rivers flowing back to the sea. Whilst it is more prominent now, we find the same idea in classic literature,

Just as flowing rivers go down into the sea,
Leaving name and form behind,
The one who knows, freed from name and form,
Reaches the highest Supreme Self.
— Mundaka Upanishad [1]

The meaning is clear — the rivers are likened to name and form and the sea to the Supreme Self. When Advaita is realised, there is the vanishing of name and form, which is the rivers flowing back to the sea. This is very common imagery for illustrating the truth. What we may not know is that it also features in the Vedas. Continue reading

Advaita in the Vedas – Rig Veda 1.164.20

See the source image

In exploring Advaita, we may have heard of the metaphor of the two birds,

Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit, the other looks on without eating. [1]

The two birds are the jiva (the one which eats) and paramatman (the one which looks on without eating). The jiva is bound, attached to karma and its fruits, whereas the paramatman is free from karma. Identified as the jiva, the ‘enjoyer’, we ‘taste’ the fruits of action (pleasure and pain). Identified with the paramatman, we do not experience the duality of pleasure and pain as there is no attachment to them.

The two birds highlight the contrasting ways of conducting action – with or without attachment. In the jiva, we act to attain certain fruits (desirable outcomes) of our actions. Whereas, in the paramatman, we act without any desire or discrimination between success and failure or pleasure and pain. The paramatman is the Advaitin witness, whilst the jiva is still caught up in the dualistic experience of self (subject) and ‘other’ (object).

What we may not know is that the ‘two birds’ metaphor originates from Rig Veda (1.164.20). Continue reading

Q.525 Consciousness is prior to the universe

Q: What is the scriptural basis for Advaita consciousness being an awareness preceding the universe? [(sic) From Quora]

A (Martin): That’s an ‘easy’ one. 1) Consciousness and awareness are the same for Advaita Vedanta. 2) Atman-brahman, or Consciousness, is the sole reality – the universe is in essence not other than Atman (Consciousness or ‘Spirit’). 3) Consequently, there is no creation – no causation, including space and time which, as everything else, are phenomena, appearances.

Mundaka Upanishad 2.1.10: ‘the world is brahman alone’.

Gaudapada kArikA 3.18: In this karika Gaudapada demonstrates that creation is only apparent, because reality cannot undergo change (and it is taught that the effect is not other than the cause).

Katha Up. 2.1.10: ‘Whoever sees difference between what is here (individual Atman/’soul’) and what is there (brahman) goes from death to death’.

Brihadaranyaka Up. 2.5.19: ‘The supreme being is perceived as manifold on account of mAyA’ (magic).

Taittiriya Up. 2.6: ‘Brahman, which is the absolute reality, became reality (satya) and unreality/appearance (asatya)’. That is, the cause itself appears as various effects due to superimposition, which is itself the core, or definition, of ignorance (avidyA). c.f. Tait. Up. 2.6, Chandogya Up. 2.8.4, and Bhavagad Gita 4.13 and 13.2.

Consciousness and the world

What is the scriptural basis for Advaita consciousness being an awareness preceding the universe?

That’s an ‘easy’ one. 1)  Consciousness and awareness are the same for Advaita Vedanta. 2) Atman-brahman, or Consciousness, is the sole reality – the universe is, in essence, not other than Atman (Consciousness or ‘Spirit’). 3) Consequently, there is no creation – no causation, including space and time, which, like everything else, are phenomena, appearances.

Mundaka Upanishad 2.1.10: ‘the world is brahman alone’. 

K 3.18. In this karika Gaudapada demonstrates that creation is only apparent because reality is unchangeable (and it is taught that the effect is not other than the cause).

Katha Up. 2.1.10: ‘Whoever sees difference between what is here (individual Atman/’soul’) and what is there (brahman) goes from death to death’.

Brihadaranyaka Up. 2.5.19: ‘The supreme being is perceived as manifold on account of Maya’ (magic).

Taittiriya Up. 2.6: ‘Brahman, which is the absolute reality, became reality (satya) and unreality/appearance (asatya)’. That is, the cause itself appears as various effects due to superimposition, which is itself the core, or definition, of ignorance (avidya). Cf. Tai. 2.6, Chandogya Up. 2.8.4, and Bhavagad Gita 4.13 and 13.2.