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.
Tag Archives: samsara
Ahaṃkāra: The Making of the “I”
In our daily existence, the word “I” is the most frequently uttered and least understood term in our vocabulary. We use it to signify our successes, our failures, our bodies, and our deepest emotions. Yet, traditional Advaita Vedānta, as systematized by Ādi Śaṅkara, suggests that this “I” to which we habitually refer is not our true nature, but a mental construct known as ahaṃkāra. Understanding the nuances of this term is not merely a linguistic exercise; it is a fundamental requirement for the seeker who wishes to dismantle the illusion of a separate self and realize their identity as the non-dual Brahman.
Etymology and Basic Definition
The word ahaṃkāra is a compound derived from two Sanskrit roots: aham, meaning “I,” and kāra, meaning “making” or “uttering”. Literally, it translates as “the making of the I”. In common parlance, it is often equated with the Western concept of the “ego,” but its Vedantic definition is more precise: it refers specifically to the identification or attachment of the true Self (Ātman) with something else, typically the body, mind, or a social role.
Continue readingEnlightenment and Liberation (Part 2)
*** Read Part 1 ***
Note that there has been some discussion on Part 1 and there may be some overlap with this new (concluding) part.
Reasoning
The reasoning behind the differentiation (between enlightenment and liberation) is straightforward:
- The scriptures tell us that we are already Brahman.
- Since Brahman is eternally free, so must we be.
- Initially, the jīva does not know this.
- Consequently, the teaching of a qualified guru is needed.
- If it were something that is ‘produced’ (i.e. not existing before), it could not be permanent.
- Mokṣa is ‘nitya siddha’, ever accomplished. It is automatically ‘acknowledged’ when the knowledge triggers akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti.
- It is not ‘produced’ by the teaching, since mokṣa is already the case and something that is permanent cannot be produced. ‘Liberation’ is a figurative concept in the sense that there is never any real bondage.
- The notion that we are bound is a mistaken superimposition (adhyāsa) that is sublated (bādha) by the teaching.
There is extensive support for these definitions, from both scriptures and Śaṅkara bhāṣya-s, emphasizing that the realization of our already existing reality as Brahman (liberation) comes only from knowledge. It is the efficacious attainment of that knowledge that is called ‘enlightenment’ as explained by the metaphor of the ‘tenth man’.
Continue readingEnlightenment and Liberation (Part 1)
This ‘terms and definitions’ post is in two parts (there are, after all, two terms!). The style is quite different from earlier posts. The earlier ones were derived from my books and earlier writing; I wrote this following a recent discussion. It contains many quotations from Śaṅkara in support, together with carefully constructed reasoning.
Mokṣa is not produced by any action (as argued in depth by Sureśvara in his Naiṣkarmya Siddhi chapter 1); it is nitya-siddha – already accomplished – and the knowledge gained from scriptures and teacher reveals this fact.
There is much confusion amongst seekers regarding these terms, which are often used interchangeably, or even in the wrong manner. This is because the same confusion exists amongst many writers and teachers. I want to clarify the correct usage of them with support from Śaṅkara’s own writing.
Continue readingAdhyāsa
Explanation of key terms in Advaita – No. 2
If adhyāropa-apavāda is the most important term regarding the teaching method of Advata, adhyāsa is the most important term describing the essence of the teaching.
Adhyāsa: The Fundamental Error of Mistaken Identity
In the study of Advaita Vedānta, the term adhyāsa is arguably the most critical concept to grasp if one is to understand the human condition and the path to liberation. Often translated as “superimposition,” adhyāsa refers to the fundamental mistake of apprehending one thing as something else. It is the cognitive error of mixing up what is real (sat) with what is only apparently real (mithyā), thereby creating a sense of confusion that defines our everyday experience. This concept is so pivotal that Ādi Śaṅkara devoted the entire introduction of his commentary on the Brahmasūtras—known as the Adhyāsa Bhāṣya—to explaining its mechanics and implications.
Continue readingUpdesa SAhasrI-Part 1
Chapter 1 Upodghatprakaranam
Upadesa SAhasrI means A thousand Teachings. Its authorship is attributed to Adi ShankarAchArya. It has two parts- prose and verse with many paragraphs and verses which is a figurative justification of the title. Prose part has 116 paragraphs. Verse part which has 19 chapters is the focus here. Some of the chapters are small and chapter 18 titled Tat Tvam Asi is the biggest with 233 verses. There are totally 675 verses across all 19 chapters. Upodghat means introduction and prakaranam means chapter. Verse 1 is a prayer and much more. A prayer is generally for successful completion of the objective. Here it contains teachings also. The seeker prays (bows down) to Nirguna Brahman which is of the nature of pure consciousness. It is the Self (essential nature) of a jIva. It resides in the cave (intellect) of everyone and is like a witness of the intellect. It is within and without. It is all-pervading like rope pervading the mithyA snake in rope-snake metaphor. It is omniscient. It is beyond all perceptions and all objects of knowledge.
Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 21
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.
Eight 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.
Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 14
Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-1 Introduction In verse 20 of Brahm-JnAna-valli-mAlA, Shankaracharya says that Brahman is reality, jagat is mithyA and jiva is not different from Brahman. It means the identity of Brahman and jiva. Brahman is vast; jiva is finite and small. How can they be the same? To establish their identity, Advaita delves into the essential nature of the two. There is an inquiry about the real nature of a human being, a jiva. Body-Mind System (BMS) is made of matter, is inert, and is different from consciousness. However, BMS is found to be sentient. Therefore, it is inferred that the consciousness enters BMS, like a reflection of the sun entering the water, and makes the BMS sentient. The sentient BMS is a Jiva. Sun is like the Original Consciousness (OC) and there is a Reflected Consciousness (RC) in BMS making BMS sentient.
Advaita Gurus and Critics – part 2
by Prof. Phillip Charles Lucas
<Read Part 1>
Modern Advaitins are the successors of a long line of Vedanta-inspired teachers and movements in North America that reaches back to 1830s New England Transcendentalists, the Theosophical Society (founded 1875), New Thought (originating in the late nineteenth century), Vedanta Societies (founded in the 1890s), Paramahansa Yogananda’s Self-Realization Fellowship (founded 1920), Transcendental Meditation (founded 1959 in Los Angeles as the Spiritual Regeneration Movement), the Integral Yoga Institute (founded 1966), Sivananda Yoga Vedanta Centers (founded 1959), and many other teachers and movements. [For a recent and comprehensive view of these teachers and movements see Philip Goldberg, American Veda: From Emerson and the Beatles to Yoga and Meditation (New York: Random House, 2010).]
TMA proponents have witnessed the profusion of NTMA (sometimes pejoratively called “Neo-Advaita”) satsangs and teachers in the past twenty-five years with a growing concern that the forms Advaita spirituality is taking in Western cultures may no longer be providing spiritual seekers with an effective methodology to achieve moksha, the ultimate liberation from the ocean of human suffering and rebirth (samsara). This article takes no position on the efficacy issue but seeks to examine various dimensions of tension between these two factions that might shed light on the larger phenomenon of orthodoxy versus innovation in transnational spiritual movements.
Continue reading