Tag Archives: taittiriya

Mundaka Upanishad (3.2.9)

Posted on by
Reply

The Mundaka Upanishad (3.2.9) makes a bold statement, “Anyone who knows that supreme Brahman becomes Brahman indeed.”  This statement gives rise to two potential doubts:
The Issue of Action: The verb “becomes” implies a transformation or action. However, according to Advaita Vedanta, knowledge alone—not action—is the direct means to liberation.
The Issue of Essential Identity: The mantra might suggest that an ignorant person is not Brahman, whereas the fundamental premise of Advaita is the intrinsic identity of the Jiva and Brahman.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 43 (brih 5)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 42 (brih 4)]

The sages often compare death to sleep: just as we wake up and dive back into the world, we are said to be reborn (with some or no gap) after death. But this does not mean we are helplessly caught in an endless cycle of birth and rebirth, because the story of individual bondage tying us down to this cycle is ultimately provisional.

The explanation of the three states of consciousness and latent impressions (vAsanA-s) is a pedagogical tool. It helps us make sense of our apparent individuality, yet none of these states possesses an independent reality outside of Consciousness itself.

What, then, is the substratum in which these states, impressions, and actions appear?

It is Consciousness itself—our essential nature—appearing as its own reflection. Birth and death, merit and demerit, joy and sorrow are merely images in a mirror. On their own, these reflections are insentient; they borrow their existence entirely from the Original. Recognize clearly that whatever appears is none other than your true Self.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 42 (brih 4)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 41 (brih 3)]

Shaṅkara uses the term saṁsthAnam to point to the configuration or arrangement through which a form becomes recognizable. From the standpoint of Advaita, the diverse configurations we encounter in the world constitute the structural display of the one underlying Reality. Names and forms distinguish one appearance from another, but they do not possess an independent existence apart from that Reality.

This is the essential shift in vision that the teaching seeks to bring about: from seeing a world of separate things to recognizing the one Reality appearing as all things. The forms may differ, but their apparent multiplicity does not overturn the non-dual truth.

Sage Yajñavalkya tells us that our bodies are like salt crystals—condensed forms of the essence of the Ocean of Consciousness. When salt is dissolved in water, its finite, solid form disappears, and it becomes indistinguishable from the water. Likewise, the teaching invites us to dissolve the apparently solid boundaries of the body and other objects, understood as condensations of Consciousness, back into Consciousness itself. The scripture urges us to bring about this dissolution through understanding before death puts an end to the body.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 41 (brih 3)

Posted on by
Reply
The shruti does not mince her words:

अथ योऽन्यां देवतामुपास्तेऽन्योऽसावन्योऽहमस्मीति न स वेद यथा पशुरेवं स देवानाम् । यथा ह वै बहवः पशवो मनुष्यं भुञ्ज्युरेवमेकैकः पुरुषो देवान्भुनक्त्येकस्मिन्नेव पशावादीयमानेऽप्रियं भवति किमु बहुषु तस्मादेषां तन्न प्रियं यदेतन्मनुष्या विद्युः ॥ — 1.4.10, brihadAraNyaka Upaniṣad.

Translation: “He who worships another deity thinking, ‘He is one, and I am another,’ does not know the Truth. He is like a beast to the gods. Just as many animals serve a man, so does such a worshiper serve the gods. Even if a single animal is lost, it causes distress; what then if many are lost? Therefore, it is not pleasing to the gods that human beings should know this Truth.”

Just as a livestock owner seeks to retain his cattle, the subtle deities are not portrayed as welcoming the transcendence of the dualistic realm by human beings. Those who worship the gods as entities separate from themselves sustain the cosmic order through ritual offerings and devotion. The gods, in turn, offer worldly benefits and heavenly rewards that keep such worshippers dependent upon them, distracting them from the pursuit of ultimate liberation.

Continue reading →

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

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 40 (brih 2)

Posted on by
Reply

[(Part – 39 (brih 1)]

The brihadAraNyaka Upanishad tells us,

ब्रह्म वा इदमग्र आसीत्तदात्मानमेवावेत् । अहं ब्रह्मास्मीति । — 1.4.10, brihadAraNyaka Upanishad

Meaning: “This (self) indeed was brahman in the beginning. It knew only Itself as ‘I am brahman.’”

What appears before us in the world is not an independent material reality, but a reflection (AbhAsa) of brahman. brahman alone is the ultimate reality (vastu), and the universe is Its manifest appearance. Therefore, that which perceives is brahman, and that which is perceived is also brahman.

In daily life, the mind acts as the seer and the external world appears as the seen. The mind assigns labels and categories—spouse, family, rivers, trees—generating mental concepts (nAma) that are projected outward as solid objects (rUpa).  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 39 (brih 1)

Posted on by
Reply

[(Part – 38 (chAn 5)]

10.  brihadAraNyaka Upanishad 

The Upanishadic teachings are like a medicine administered to a sick patient. They help him/her to bounce back to her normal health. The Sanskrit word for “health” is “swasthata” (स्वस्थत). “swasthata” is derived from “stha” to be and “swa” in one’s normal state. Our normal healthy position gets affected, if and when we are invaded by foreign elements including alien “thoughts.” Thus far nine experts (Upanishads) have already treated us to rid us of the illness called “ignorance.” Now comes the final Specialist, brihadAraNyaka inquiring if we have come back to our normal health.  

We take it for granted that we are limited to or confined within our body-mind. That itself is our illness. It is called “ignorance.” We are not actually confined or limited to any finite form. Time and space are within me. In other words, there is no moment when we are not and there is no place where we are not present because our true nature is “Knowing.”  Our intrinsic nature is pure Knowingness (the Knowing ability) that has no form. As ‘Knowingness,’ we are formless, unbounded and all-pervasive. We are birthless and deathless. We are never “the known.” We are ever the Knower. We are eternal, immutable and indivisible.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 38 (chAn 5)

Quote

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 37 (chAn 4)]

The instruction to Narada reveals that mantras function strictly at the mental level. Realization requires us to transcend the mind entirely. From our empirical identity down to the vital force (prANa), the scriptures enumerate fifteen transient components of the individual. None of these are absolute. Even the vital force is a continuous motion–an activity rather than an unchanging reality. To awaken to Truth, we must transcend the triad of name, form, and action (nAma, rUpa, and karma). Beyond them lies the unconditioned Infinite brahman, known as bhUma:

यो वै भूमा तत्सुखं नाल्पे सुखमस्ति भूमैव सुखं भूमा त्वेव विजिज्ञासितव्य इति भूमानं भगवो विजिज्ञास इति ॥ — 7.23.1, chAndogya upa.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 37 (chAn 4)

Posted on by
Reply

[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

Posted on by
Reply

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 →