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.
19.20 to 19.22 Duality has neither birth nor absence of birth, for either position leads to contradictions. Therefore, duality cannot be ultimately real. If duality is born from another duality, an infinite regress follows. Duality cannot be born of non-duality because non-duality is changeless and cannot undergo transformation. On the other hand, if duality is said to be unborn, it would have to be changeless. But changeless duality is itself a contradiction. Therefore, the world of duality is mithya. Though it is experienced, it is neither absolutely real nor absolutely unreal.
There is another reason for arriving at the same conclusion. Every act of creation requires instruments (or accessories) and activity. Are the instruments themselves endowed with activity? Both possible answers—’Yes’ and ‘No’—lead to absurdity. If the answer is ‘No’, there can be no activity at all, and everything would merely remain an inert instrument. If the answer is ‘Yes’, activity by itself cannot produce an entirely new entity; otherwise, anything could arise from anything.
Even name and form are not newly created, because they already exist in an unmanifest form in the cause. This is the doctrine of satkaryavada. The opposing doctrine, asatkaryavada, holds that the effect is non-existent in the cause and comes into existence as something entirely new. This is untenable. To say that a non-existent thing “comes into existence” is grammatically as well as logically incorrect. The verb “comes” requires an existing subject. A non-existent entity cannot be the subject of any action. Similarly, the argument that the pot is produced because of an intimate relationship between clay and a previously non-existent pot is untenable, since no relationship with a non-existent entity can ever be conceived. It is also maintained that the real and the unreal cannot interchange.
Bhagavad Gita 2.16 supports this conclusion. Sat cannot “downgrade” into asat, nor can asat “upgrade” into sat. Otherwise, it would become impossible to determine which is the cause and which is the effect, just as one cannot identify the higher side of a weighing balance whose two pans alternately rise and fall. Such interchangeability is unacceptable because it would imply that anything could appear from nowhere and disappear into nowhere. Therefore, the real and the unreal are fixed categories, and creation cannot be understood as the transformation of one into the other. Existence is not a destination. A non-existent entity cannot travel to existence, and an existent entity has no need to arrive at existence.
19.23 Let it be assumed, merely for the sake of argument, that things are indeed created. Atma says to the mind that such creation, brought about by actions, is of no use to Atma, which is infinite and free from all attributes. Nothing can improve Atma, either quantitatively or qualitatively. Therefore, the mind should remain quiet.
19.24 According to some schools of thought, the universe is ultimately composed of minute atoms. Creation is explained as the aggregation of these atoms. They, however, differ in their understanding of the nature of atoms. The first school maintains that atoms are eternal and can neither be created nor destroyed. The second school, on the other hand, holds that everything, including atoms, is momentary. Shankaracharya argues that, according to both the schools, the aggregation of atoms is impossible. Momentary atoms cannot combine, because they would cease to exist before any combination could occur. Since according to the first school, the atoms are fundamental and indivisible, they are not themselves composites, they must be part less, like space. But if they are truly part less, they cannot combine with one another. Moreover, eternal and changeless atoms cannot undergo the change necessary for combination, much less produce a universe whose very existence presupposes change.
19.25 During nidhidhyasana, the aspirant meditates: (i) I am Atma. I alone am. Anything appearing different from Me is mithya. There is, in truth, no creation. (ii) As consciousness, I am present in all three states of experience—waking, dream, and deep sleep. (iii) I do not become liberated, because I have always been free. I was free, I am free, and I shall ever remain free. (iv) Bondage is a false notion superimposed upon Me. Liberation is giving up the notion that I am bound. (v) I am ever self-effulgent and free from all pairs of opposites belonging to the empirical world.
19.26 A Self-realized person does not objectify Brahman, which is beyond the gunas. He does not say, “I know Brahman.” Instead, he declares, “I am Brahman.” In this connection, Kena Upanishad (2.2) says: “I do not think, ‘I know It well.’ Nor do I think, ‘I do not know It.’ I know It indeed. Whoever among us understands It as both the known and the unknown truly understands It.” One should not wait for Brahman to “arrive.” Ignorant fails to appreciate this teaching. Brahman is never an object that is experienced at a particular moment. Brahman is the ever-present Subject, immediately self-evident at all times.
19.27 Duality is the product of delusion and gives rise to likes and dislikes, anger, jealousy, and other mental disturbances. The teachings of Advaita remove this delusion and provide the remedy.
19.28 Shankaracharya concludes by glorifying the teacher–student tradition. He offers his gratitude to all the teachers who carefully preserved and faithfully transmitted these teachings from generation to generation. He bows to them with deep reverence and, in all humility, claims no credit for himself
CONCLUDED