Tag Archives: Upadesa SAhasrI

‘Difference’ is not real

Posted on by
3

The post ‘Duality is mithyA’ (see here) is based on the verses 19.20 -22 of Upadesa Sahasri (US). Swami Parmarthananda has discussed (transcripts of his talks on Chapter 16 of US) the same topic with a different reasoning which according to him has scriptural support though he has not cited it. 
Advaita Vedanta acknowledges six means (Pramana) of knowledge of which direct perception and inference are important. I see red colour and green colour and say that the two colours are different which is my experience too. If asked whether I see the ‘difference’ as an object, my answer is in negative. That is to say, there is no direct perception of the ‘difference’. It also means that the ‘difference’ cannot be inferred, because for inference, there should be a previous direct perception. Other means of knowledge, namely, comparison, postulation, non-cognition also do not prove difference. Sabda Pramana i.e., scriptures, affirm that ‘difference’ is not real though it is experienced. QED

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 23)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 22

Chapter 17   Right Knowledge

17.01 to 17.03 The author pays obeisance to Self and the teachers. Self is non-dual as It alone exists. It is of the nature of existence, consciousness and bliss. Other things depend on Self for their existence. It is witnessing consciousness and therefore omniscient. It is not an object. It is the ultimate subject and is to be known as such. Though supporting everything It is unattched, untainted and pure.  The author bows down to Self. He bows down to all the teachers who are conversant with words, sentences of the scriptures and have transmitted the knowledge of Self since ancient time. The author bows down to his own teacher whose words have sparked knowledge in him and destroyed ignorance as sunrays destroy darkness.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 22)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 21

Part 23

16.45 to 16.50                                                                                                            Earlier the author has refuted different theories of the Buddhists. Advaita and Samkhya are similar in some respects and dissimilar in other aspects. The author refutes some theories of Samkhya philosophy. According to Samkhya, both purusha (consciousness), and prakriti (material and inert) are real. Purusha is action-free and unattached. Prakriti works for purusha and the latter is the enjoyer. There are many purushas, one for every jiva. Prakriti has three constituents, sattva, rajas and tamas. Samkhya further says that prakriti alone is the cause of creation. Purusha has no role. When the constituents are in equilibrium, the creation is unmanifest. Creation unfolds due to imbalance in three constituents.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 20)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 19

Part 21

16.16 The cause pervades the effect, e.g., gold pervades the ornament. There has to be an uncaused cause for otherwise, there is infinite regress. Therefore, the theory of nihilism is not tenable. According to Advaita, the uncaused cause is the Self. It exists prior to anything, e.g., intellect. Even a total blankness, e.g. deep sleep has to be revealed by self-luminous entity, viz, Self which is of the nature of consciousness. The intellect which is dormant during sleep comes into being in the waking state. The Self exists prior to the intellect.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part18)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 17

15.31. On the authority of Sruti (Tai Up 2.4 and 2.9), it is said that words fail to describe the Self. It is also explained on the basis of reason. Words describe an entity if it falls in one of the five categories, namely, species (e.g., tree), property (e.g., colour), action (e.g., servant), relationship (e.g., son) and convention (proper name). The Self does not belong to any of the five categories. This is why verbal description is difficult. All descriptions are from the standpoint of other entities which involves duality. If it is said not small one will think big. The only way to understand the Self is as I am Brahman.

15.32. The nearest entity comparable to the Self is the space. Like space, It is all-pervading and It accommodates everything in the sense that It is their substratum. Yet it is not attached to them. The Self is pure and formless. According to Vedanta, Self-knowledge is the supreme goal.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 17)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 16

15.9 to 15.13, 15.15 to 15.17
The Self is the light of pure consciousness. It is non-dual. A Self-realized person knows that there is one Self in all beings including a pipal tree (BG 10.26). The Self is homogeneous, undivided, without parts and all-pervading like space. As space accommodates everything, all beings are in one Self. The self is different from gross and subtle bodies as said in Isa Up 8. It is like a witness. The ideas of ‘me’ and ‘mine’ are thoughts of the mind. They do not exist in the Self which is a witness. Therefore, the Self is free from virtue and vice, pleasure and pain and old age. As intellect is the seat of aversion and fear, the Self is free from them and their impressions. It is pure, free from worldly afflictions.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 16)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 15

Chapter 15 Impossibility of one being another

15.1 The essential nature of a jiva is not different from Brahman for otherwise the jiva will be essentially finite. Any amount spiritual practice can bring about only superficial changes and not changes in the essential nature. Finite cannot become infinite. If at all it becomes infinite, it will lose its essential nature which means destruction. In that case, liberation is ruled out. The conclusion is that jiva is essentially Brahman. A doubt may arise. If a jiva is already Brahman, what is the need of a teacher and scriptures? The answer is that they are needed to remove the ignorance about our true identity.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 15)

Posted on by
2

Part 14

14.26 During dream gross body is dormant and there is no external world. There is no external light or medium. The mind functions and sees, hears, thinks which are modifications of the mind. As the mind is inert, seeing, etc., is possible if there is an entity different from the mind and which lends sentiency to the mind. The said entity is Self which is of the nature of consciousness. In this sense, it is concluded that Self is directly known. The Self is the witness of the modifications of mind called the dream.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 14)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 13

14.11 Self alone remains after negating everything. No other effort is needed to know Self. It is self-revealing. The knowledge that Self is Brahman is enlightenment. On enlightenment, the (last) desire for liberation goes away resulting in contentment and peace.

14.12 Shankara advises that a seeker should aspire to think that he is all-pervading Self which is beyond mind and body system (MBS). MBS is the locus of miseries. I, the Self, am beyond miseries. Let the mind and body take action to remove miseries. Nothing can be added or subtracted from Self. How can Self do anything?

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 12)

Posted on by

Part 11

Chapter 13 Eye-lessness
13.1 to 13.5
Yajnavalkya tells Gargi (Br Up 3.8.8): Brahman is not gross, not oily, nothing is inside outside, thereby suggesting all negations. What remains is not negated and is a positive entity, Brahman. A knower of Brahman is Brahman (Mun Up 3.2.9). An enlightened person is capable of using the word ‘I’ emperically and also at the Absolute level.
The author uses a rhetorical device of putting words in the mouth of Brahman. The verses are in the1st person. Brahman is of the nature of pure consciousness and is different from the gross and subtle bodies which are essentially inert. Therefore, Brahman speaks. Alternatively, an enlightened ego speaks:

Continue reading →