An Introduction to Advaita Vedanta -3

An Introduction to advaita vEdAnta

So far we have understood that Brahman is the material and intelligent causes of jagat. We reviewed causes of jagat as posited by other philosophies and countered them. We established that Brahman is the one and only (undifferentiated) material and intelligent cause of the jagat. In the last unit, we understood what mAYA is.
In this Unit, we will review some of the statements of scriptures regarding the creation of jagat.
MAnDUkya upanishat (3-20, 24).
Some argue that the jagat was born by Brahman, who is of the nature of unborn and undying. A jagat born out of an undying entity (Brahman) indicates that the Brahman has to be of the nature of dying (when the jagat ends). How can Brahman of undying nature be dying? Should an undying Brahman transform into a dying jagat, then the initial statement of undying Brahman is violated. Brahman is the only unborn and undying entity. Therefore the creation of jagat is to be understood as the manifestation of Brahman (appearance of creation) caused by the power of mAyA. Otherwise it leads to the absurdity of an entity to be dying and undying. How can fire be of the nature of hot and cold?
MAnDUkya upanishat (4-3, 5).
Among the philosophies that believe in the actual creation, there are two groups; one group says the existent jagat is created, while the other group claims that the non-existent jagat is created. In the philosophical plane, an existent entity is always existent - past, present and future and a non-existent entity is always non-existent - past, present and future. The vEdAntic Reality is, an existing entity is never non-existing and a non-existing entity is never existing.
"nAsatO vidyatE bhAvO nAbhAvO vidyatE satah
ubhayOrapi drishTo antah tvanayOh tatva darshibhih "
- The unreal has no existence and the real has no non-existence. The final truth of these two, have been experienced by the knower of the truth (gIta 2-16).
Therefore the jagat must be of the nature of existence or non-existence. If it is of the nature of existence, then there can not be a state of non-existence; if it is of the nature of non-existence, it can not have a state of existence. That is, it cannot be created. So how should we understand this jagat coming into being? One group of philosophers claim creation of an existing jagat. This is contradictory in the fact that how can an existing jagat be created? On the other hand, another group claims a non-existent jagat has been created. This is objected to by the former group, saying it is like horn on a rabbit; the non-existent cannot be created. The advaitins differs from these two groups in postulating that the creation is a manifestation of Brahman, facilitated by the power of mAyA.
Krishna says in gIta (9-10)
" maya adhyakshENa prakritih sUyatE sacharAcharam
hEtuna anEna kauntEya jagat viparivartate"
- O Arjuna! With me as the supervisor or presiding officer, this prakriti (nature) brings forth moving and unmoving (entities or objects - jagat); by this cause (by my supervision), the jagat revolves.
This verse is key to understanding mAyA, in that it highlights the non-doership (akartru) of Brahman. prakriti is jada or insentient. paramAtma is of the nature of consciousness. By the presence (or supervision of Iswara or Brahman), prakriti (prakriti is synonymous with mAyA) causes this jagat. The word "adhyakshENa" indicates the non-attachment or indifference (udAsIna) of Brahman. Just as iron particles move and arrange into a pattern in the presence of a magnet, in the presence of the Lord, the prakriti (mAyA) brings forth jagat. The magnet itself has no role, but its presence causes the movement of the iron particles. The Lord is always present, adhyakshENa indicates a volition in the creation (an assembly comes to life only when the Speaker or President takes the chair); likewise prakriti is animated by the volition of the Lord, which then brings forth the jagat.
The prakriti, a power composed of the three guNas - satva, rajas and tamas is nothing other than the mAyA. mAyA is also referred to as bIja (seed). mAyA is jaDa and by itself cannot be the creating power of the jagat. However, it can do wonders through the support of the Brahman that is always existent. Our experiences in the jagat are a reflection of the witness of Brahman in our intellect. Similarly the witness of Brahman in mAyA enables the creation of jagat. Elsewhere in gIta (13-26), Krishna says -
"yAvat sanjAyatE kinchit satvam stAvara jangamam
kshEtra kshEtrajnya samyOgAt tat viddhi bharatarshabha"
- O Arjuna, in this world, whatever being - moving or unmoving - is born, know that to be created from the union of kshEtra (field) and kshEtrajnya(knower of the field).
At the individual level (vyashTi), kshEtra is the body and the kshEtrajnya is the jIvAtma; At the aggregate level (samashTi), kshEtra is the prakriti and kshEtrajnya is the purusha or Brahman. The characteristics of kshEtra and kshEtrajnya are different. The kshEtra is visible and inert; the kshEtrajnya is invisible and of the nature of consciousness. What does the union of two distinctly different objects mean? It is not like the union of a pot with a rope, for the Atman(kshEtrajyna) is without limbs or organs. Is it like the union of a cloth and yarn? It can't be so! the cloth is made out of the yarn; so there is a natural union between the two. But the body and the knower of the body have no such natural union. Bhagavan Shankara pronounces in the gIta bhAshya that this union is the wrong identification of the jIva (kshEtrajnya) that it is the body(kshEtra). Are then the jIvas responsible for the jagat? If the jIva is the kAraNa for the creation of the jagat (since the jagat exists for the experience of the jIvas), how can such a jagat be existent, caused by the ignorance of the jIvas? Therefore it stands to reason that the jagat is not created at all and it is a manifestation of Brahman.
MAnDUkya kArika
If an object is created, it is necessary to understand what preceded it. An object that is born, cannot be born by itself; it is also absurd to think it is created by another inert object - a pot is not created by itself; one cannot be born by another inert body as cloth is not born out of cloth. In the empirical experience, it is said that the pot is born of clay or a son is born of father. However, when examined carefully, the pot, son are only a form. So it is very clear that nothing is born in the jagat. So where is the question of jagat itself being born.
If jagat were to be born, how, why, where and when are obvious follow-up questions. How can these questions be answered of a really unborn entity? MAyA is the power that helps explain these questions. We need to understand how the mAyA causes Brahman to appear as jagat.
There are two powers associated with mAyA - AvaraNa shakti and vikshEpa shakti. That power which covers the nature of paramAtman- Real, consciousness and blissful -is the AvaraNa shakti; that power which projects or superimposes the jagat over the Atman is vikshEpa shakti ( 'vikshipati' is to throw ). These two powers are the two faces of ajnyAna.
AvaraNa shakti: As an example, a small or finite patch of cloud appears to cover the entire Sun from the sight of the seer. Similarly the ajnyAna, though limited, has the power to cover the infinite Atman by covering the intellect of the seer. AjnyAna is limited, inert and tamas. Atman is infinite, consciousness and full. How can such an ajnyAna cover the conscious Atman? The answer is in the example of the cloud above. The cloud does not have any effect on the Sun itself; the sun continues to shine. The cloud does not cover the sun, but the sight of the seer. Similarly, though the Atman is ever consciousness, the AvaraNa caused by ajnyAna, by covering the intellect prevents the jIva from the experience of the Atman. It is an apparent cover, impacting the seer and not the Atman. The jIva thus experiences doership, enjoyement, pain and pleasure etc.
vikshEpa shakti: In the example of the rope and snake, the rope itself is the kArya of ajnyAna (rope itself is a superimposition due to ajnyAna). So in reality, the ajnyAna cannot cover the rope. What it is covering is the jnyAna of the seer. In the darkness, it not only covers the svarUpa of the rope (Brahman), but also superimposes a snake in the rope. This is the vikshEpa shakti. vikshEpa is that power by which the ajnyAna not only covers Brahman, the Reality, but also superimposes the jagat.
In the next unit, we will continue with further discussion of mAya.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

So far we have understood that Brahman is the material and intelligent causes of jagat.
We reviewed causes of jagat as posited by other philosophies and countered them. We established that Brahman is the one and only (undifferentiated) material and intelligent cause of the jagat. We understood what mAYA is and its two powers - the power of covering the reality and the vikShEpa shakti - the power of superimposition. In the last unit, we reviewed some of the statements of scriptures regarding the creation of jagat.
We will continue with mAyA and conclude the section on jagat in this unit.
The Process of Creation.
brahmA (chaturmukha or four headed) is the designated vehicle (deity having the pre-requisites) for overseeing the creation. brahmA is an appointed position in each creation. He represents the most evolved jIva of the previous creation and is the aggregate intellect of all the jIvas. Of course he does not have a body and organs as humans have. Brahman with the upAdi of mAyA is brahmA (covering Brahman - AvaraNa shakti) . The five subtle elements - space, wind, fire, water and earth - form the body of brahmA; in other words, these five elements are the superimposition on Brahman due to mAyA. The TaittirIya Upanishat describes the process -
Atmana AkAshah sambhUtah, AkashAt vAyuh, vAyOragnih, agnErapah, adbyah prithivI..
- The vikshEpa shakti, predominantly tamas, superimposes the five elements - space, wind, fire, water and earth. These elements are predominantly tamas, though they have small amounts of satva and rajas. Among them space exhibits the highest satva and lowest tamas while the earth exhibits the lowest satva and highest tamas. The five elements in subtle form combine to become gross elements through the process of panchIkaraNa (five fold composition). During the time of dissolution, the process is reversed, in exactly the opposite order.
The Atman is akartru and asanga - non-doer and detached. The upAdhi of ajnyAna (mAyA) not only covers the Atman, but also superimposes a jagat by the powers of AvaraNa and vikshEpa.
The consciousness (Brahman) having the upAdhi of ajnyana composed of the two powers - AvaraNa and vikshEpa - becomes the nimitta kAraNa (of jagat) when considered the principal; when the upAdhi is considered the principal, becomes the upAdAna kAraNa (of jagat).
jagat is of the gross form. mAyA is of the seed form and is the power of Brahman. The jagat is an outward expression of names and forms, emotions of happiness and sorrow and attachment - all resulting from mAyA. mAyA is triguNAtmika - triad of three guNas ( satva, rajas and tamas). Krishna describes this mAyA as two kinds - parA prakriti and aparA prakriti (gIta 7-4,5). aparA is of the lower form and parA is of the higher form; aparA prakriti is kAraNa for the jagat and parA prakriti is the kAraNa for the jIvas. Brahman is therefore the kAraNa for the creation, sustenance and dissolution of jagat. Brahman associated with the upAdi of mAyA is called by several names like Iswara, aparabrahma and hiraNyagarbha.
With the upAdi of bhaga, Brahman is also called bhagavAn. bhaga is a combination fo six qualities, which are jnyAna (Omniscience), bala (omnipotence), aishvarya (lordship), shakti (creative power), vIrya (immutability) and tEjas (splendour). Iswara, bhagavAn are synonymous terms - bhaga as an upAdhi is not generally used in the advaita context (it is folded in mAyA).
So mAyA is a supporting kAraNa for jagat, in addition to Brahman; however, their roles are different. Brahman is like father and mAyA is like mother. Brahman provides the seed (hiraNyagarbha) and places in mAyA (not a physical placing, but a sankalpa ) - gIta 14-3. This verse explains the union of kshEtra and kshEtrajnya (gIta 13- 26 or 27).
The origin of mAyA cannot be determined. It is as old as Brahman. The jagat is the playground for the jIvas to enjoy the fruits of action. So every kalpa is created for the fulfillment of karma of the jivas of the previous kalpa. The previous kalpa was created for the fulfillment of karma of the jIvas during the kalpa previous to it. Similarly the next kalpa will be created for the fulfillment of the karma of jIvas in this kalpa. Even though if one or a few jIvas are liberated from the cycle of birth and death in a kalpa, there are other jIvas whose karma need to be fulfilled. So the jagat creation and dissolution is a continuous process with no beginning (anAdi) and no end (ananta). Accordingly mAyA is ever present to facilitate creation and is undying. The mAyA presents itself as jagat during creation and becomes unmanifested during dissolution. So mAyA is pariNAmi nitya (ever present in a resultant form), where as Brahman is kUTasta nitya (ever present and changeless). Though the mAyA is timeless, it is certainly possible to transcend it at the individual level (It is here; there is no value in trying to find its origin. What is of value is to understand how to transcend it). While the jIvas are under the influence of mAyA, mAyA is under the control of Brahman.
mAyA is anirvachanIya - It cannot be precisely defined. We said earlier that mAyA is the power of Brahman and also it is the upAdi which presents the nirguNa Brahman as Iswara; that is, mAyA is the marker that helps jIvas identify Brahman, without producing any change in It. This begs a question - Does mAyA belong to Brahman or is it outside Brahman ? The madhya maNi nyAya (logic of the middle bead) is applicable here; the middle bead can be associated with either side of the necklace. Similarly mAyA can be associated either with the kAraNa (Brahman) or kArya (jagat). As an example, consider a glass plate, on one side of which is applied a mercury paste resulting in a mirror. The glass is kAraNa, mirror is the kArya and the mercury paste is the relating compound. Does the paste belong to the glass or to the mirror? The answer is either way. By belonging to glass, it facilitates a mirror. As a part of mirror, it makes the mirror a mirror. Still, the paste is an upAdhi for glass. The paste helps identify the glass (as a form). The paste in no way adds or takes away the value in the glass. Now let us come to the context on hand. The glass is Brahman, the mirror is jagat and the paste is mAyA. When mAyA is associated with jagat, it is unreal, has organs, limited and inert. When mAyA is associated with Brahman, it is Real, has no organs, of the nature of consciousness, unlimited etc. Therefore mAyA is anirvachanIya. BhagavAn Shankara very poetically describes mAYA in vivEka chUdAmaNi as follows;
"sannApyasannApyubhayAtmikAnO
bhinnApyabhinnApyubhayAtmikAnO
sAngApya nangApyubhayAtmikAno
mahAdbhutA! anirvachanIya rUpam ( Verse 109)
- (This mAyA) sat na = not real (If mAyA is real, then jnyAna cannot destroy it) api=and asat na =not unreal (if it is unreal, then it cannot produce any kArya) api = and ubhayAtmikA nO = neither of these two (same entity cannot have opposing characteristics); bhinna api abhinna api ubhayAtmikAnO = not different from Brahman, not same as Brahman, neither of these two (if it is different from Brahman, it violates non-duality, it is not same as Brahman, because for example, fire and its burning power cannot be the same); sAngA api anangA api ubhayAtmikAnO = Not with limbs, not without limbs, neither of these two (anything that has limbs should have a birth; not without limbs, because it is triguNAtmika - is of the nature of three guNas); mahAdbhutA = very wonderful, anirvachanIya rUpA = unable to determine its svarUpa (It is indeterminate, because any of its characteristics or lakShaNa can be defined)].
We will conclude the study of jagat with a verse (85) from DVG's manku timmana kagga:
"nabhada bayaloLa-nanta manada guheyoLa-natha
vubhayadA naDuve sAdyanta jIva kathe
vibhuvobbanI gALi-buDDegaLanUduvanu
habe guLLeyO sriShTi - manku timma "
----- translated as
The sky's vacuity is infinite, mind's cavern is endless
Between the two is the whole gamut of life affair
Only the Lord fills these balloons with His breath
A vaporous bubble is this creation.
There is no limit to the outer space as well as the depth of the mind. The jIva's life is experienced between the two (jaga). This creation is like a steam balloon; its existence is true while the balloon lasts and is at the whim of the Lord.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

Brahman
" sri vishNu vishvAdi mUla mAyAlOla
dEva sarvEsha parabommanendu janam
Avudanu kANadoDa-maLtiyim nambihudO
A vichitrake namisO - Manku Timma "
Sri VishNu, the source of the Universe
Who revels in mAyA and is the Lord of all things
Whom men though they know Him not, believe and revere
Salute that Mystery - Oh Manku Timma (manku Timmana kagga - 1).
This mystery that we think is - Brahman, is the subject of our study.
In the discussion of jagat, we understood that its svarUpa is Brahman, though its appearance in names and forms is the empirical experience. In order to understand Brahman, we will follow the Jagat to its kAraNa, when we expect to understand Brahman in its real form. If there is a doubt to the existence of Brahman, chAndOgya upanisaht narrates a story. The guru, understanding that his disciple is doubtful of Brahman, asks him to fetch a pot of water. He asks the disciple to add a fistful of salt to the water. Next morning, the guru asks the disciple to fetch the same pot of water that he had added salt the previous evening. The guru asks him to take out the salt, which obviously he could not do. The salt has dissolved in the water. The guru said, never mind! there is another way to understand the presence of salt in the water. He asks the student to take a spoon of water from different sections of the pot and drink each of those spoonful of water, which the student followed; On enquiry, he then replied that each spoon of water was salty, which confirmed the presence of salt in the water. The salt had transformed from the gross form to the subtle form in the medium of water. However, what could not be seen by the eye (gross form) was perceived by the tongue (subtle form). The guru tells the student, likewise Brahman, which is subtle can be experienced in the gross jagat through enquiry. This enquiry is facilitated by ignoring the names and forms of the kArya (effect) and focus on the substratum, which is Brahman.
It is easy said than done to ignore the names and forms, because (1) the sense organs directed outwards ( parAnchi KAni vyatruNat svayamBUh tasmAt parAng pashyati -kaTa upanishad 2.1.1) explores names and forms. So we are surrounded by Brahman in the form of names and forms and we will have to identify this Brahman amidst us. The shAstrAs help us with two contrivances - vishEShaNa and lakshaNa - to help us understand Brahman.
vishEShaNa is that characteristic by which an object can be separated (or marked out) from other objects that belong to the same class. Examples are the color of a flower that distinguishes it from other flowers, like yellow color separating a yellow flower from red flower. Yellow or red color is the vishEShaNa among the class of flowers. Similarly the thick soft skin in the neck of a cow is the vishEshaNa that distinguishes the cow from other four leg animals.
lakshaNa is a marker (or a quality) that separates an object from all objects that does not belong to its class.
For example, space allows all objects to be contained in it, yet none of the objects have this quality of space. So the lakshaNa of space is to contain all objects. Similarly receptivity is the quality or marker of an ocean which receives water from all rivers and streams. No other object has this characteristic. Therefore, receptivity is a lakshaNa of ocean.
In the following sections, we will apply the markers of vishEShaNa and lakShaNa to separate Brahman from the multitude of nAma and rUpa.
There are two classes of vishEShaNas - bhAva rUpa (of the type of "is") and abhAvarUpa (of the type of "is not") - we will use to sort out Brahman from the names and forms.
Among the class of humans, it is evident we have knowledge (we engage in actions, because of knowledge). Brahman, being the creator, also has knowledge. So Brahman and humans belong to the same class. Infinity is the bhAvarUpa vishEShaNa that separates Brahman from humans; humans have limited creativity, whereas Brahman has infinite creativity; humans have limited knowledge, while Brahman is omniscient (infinite knowledge); humans accomplish partial desires, Brahman's accomplishments are total and infinite. bhaga is a group of six characteristics, the possessor of which is bhagavAn. They are jnyAna (Omniscience), bala (Omnipotence), aishvarya (lordship or sovereignity), shakti (creative power), vIrya (immutability) and tEjas (splendour). Brahman with the upAdhi of mAyA is bhagavAn, who has all these qualities infinitely. This infinite wealth is what separates Brahman from names and forms of humans. Thus infinity is the bhAvarUpa vishEShaNa of Brahman that separates Him from the humans.
Now let us look at the abhAva rUpa vishEShaNa of Brahman. Brahman is described as
apahatapApma vijarO vimrutyu vishOkO vijiGhatsO apipAsaha
- (IshAvAsya upanishad - 8);
brahman is not affected by dharma and adharma, he is not subject to old age, he is not subject to death, he does not have sorrow, hunger and thirst. A human is affected by dharma/adharma, is subject to oldage and death, has sorrow, hunger and thirst. For all these human qualities of "is", Brahman exhibits "is not". So "is not" is the abhAvarUpa vishEShaNa that separates Brahman from humans (of names and forms).
We have understood from the above that the vishEShaNas "infinite and "is not" separate Brahman from the humans, the most evolved of the names and forms of Brahman.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace)

In Unit 15, we started with the understanding of Brahman; we reviewed the vishEShaNa , vishEShya relationship.
In Unit 16, we reviewed the lakShaNas that help us understand Brahman.
In this Unit, We will look at some of the scriptural statements describing Brahman.
Scriptural Statements on Brahman.
As much as we are unable to comprehend and understand Brahman, challenging Him is a challenge to our own existence. It is the statements of shruti that, though Brahman can not be marked, He is the substratum that supports all activities in this jagat. Knowing Him is the basis of existence. The shruti points at some of the markers that help us understand Brahman. We will review some of those markers in this Unit.
kaTha Upanishat - 3.12
" Esha sarvEShu bhUtEShu gUDhO AtmA na prakAshatE
drishyatE tvagryayA buddhyAsUkShmayA sUkShma-darshibhih"
- "The Atman, though present in all living beings, is hidden and does not shine forth. However, He reveals His presence to the subtle intellect of the discerning person." The Atman, though present in all living beings supporting the sense organs, is invisible through the power of mAyA to the ignorant jIvas. He is visible only to the jIvas with the subtlety of discernment. We may recall here Krishna's statement in gIta 7.25 - enveloped by My yOgamAyA (cosmic illusion), I am not manifest to all; this world, deluded, knows Me not, the unborn and imperishable.
kaTha Upanishat - 3.10
"indriyEbhyah parA hi arthA arthEbhyascha param manah
manasastu parA buddhih buddhEh AtmA mahAn parah"
- The outer sense organs are gross. The sense objects of sound, touch, form, taste and smell are subtler than the sense organs. The mind that processes these sense objects is subtler than the sense objects. The intellect is subtler than the mind. The Atman, referred here as mahAn (Great Atman) is subtler than the intellect. In Verse 3.11, this chain of thought is expounded further as follows - The Unmanifest is beyond (subtler than) the Great Atman, the PuruSha is beyond the Unmanifest. PuruSha is the supreme goal and there is nothing beyond Him.
kEna upanishat - 1.1 and 1.2
"kEnEShitam patati prEShitam manah
kEna prANah praTHamah pryiti yuktah
kEnEShitAm vAchamimAm vadanti
chakShuh shrOtram ka u dEvO yunakti
- The disciple asks of the teacher - by whose will does the mind proceed to its object? At whose command does the prANa, the foremost do its duty? At whose will do men utter speech? Who is the god that directs the eyes and the ears?"
"shrOtrasya shrOtram manasO manO yad
vAchO ha vAcham sa u prANasya prANah
chakSuShah cha chakShuratim uchya dhIrAh
prEtyAsmAh lOkAt amrita bhavanti"
- the teacher replies - it is the Ear of the ear, the Mind of the mind, the Speech of the speech, the Life of the life and the Eye of the eye. Having detached the Self (from the sense organs) and on discarding of the body (renounced the world), the wise attain to immortality.
mAndUkya upanishat - 2.11
" ubhayOrapi vaitaThyam bhEdAnAm sThAnayOh yadi
ka EtAn buDhyatE bhEdAnkO vai tEShAm vikalpakah"
- if the objects cognized in both the conditions of dream and of waking be illusory, who cognizes all these illusory objects and who again imagines them? The answer is in the next verse that the self-luminous Atman alone is the knower of the objects created through the powers of its own delusion (mAyA).
MunDaka Upanishat - 2.2.7
" yah sarvajnyah sarvavid yassyaiSha mahimA bhuvi
divyE brahmapurE hi ESha vyOmanyAtmA pratiShThitah"
- He who knows all (omniscient) and understands everything, and to whom belongs all the glory in the world, He, Atman, is placed in the space in the effulgent abode of Brahman." (He assumes the forms of the mind and leads the body and the senses. He dwells in the body, inside the heart. By the knowledge of That which shines as the blissful and immortal Atman, the wise behold Him fully in all things).
Bhagavad gIta - 13.16
" avibhaktam cha bhUtEShu vibhaktamiva cha sThitam
bhUtaBhartru cha tat jnyEyam grasiShNu prabhaviShNu cha"
- That which is to be known (jnyEyam) is undivided, yet exists in beings as divided; It is the supporter of all beings, it is destroying and also generating - creator and destroyer. (Verses 13-13 to 13.17 describe the characteristics of That to be known).
kaTha Upanishat - 5.15
"na Tatra SUryo BhAti Na Chandra tArakam
nEmA vidyuto BhAnthi Kutoyamagnihi
tamEva BhAntam anuBhAti sarvam
tasya BhAsA sarvam idam viBhAti"
- The nature of Brahman is such that the Sun, the Moon and the Stars do not have the ability to illuminate Him; so what to talk about the lightening and fire ? He alone makes others shine and His Shine helps everything else to be seen. This Pure Consciousness is described as Brahman, which is the nature of every living being."
For example if there is an object in a room, it by itself has no intrinsic ability to show itself. It needs the help of a light source like the sun light through the windows or a lamp or light bulb to be seen. Likewise, the above mantra says that even the Sun by itself has no intrinsic ability to show itself. It depends on the effulgence of the Pure Consciousness to be seen. The upanishads affirm that, that entity, which does not need the support of any other agent to be seen is Brahman.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

In Unit 15, we started with the understanding of Brahman; we reviewed the vishEShaNa , vishEShya relationship.
In Unit 16, we reviewed the lakShaNas that help us understand Brahman.
In Unit 17, We looked at some of the scriptural statements describing Brahman.
In this Unit, we will understand that Brahman is nirguNa and why so.
Brahman is nirguNa.
We identified Brahman by the markers of vishEShaNa and lakShaNa. jIva's first encounter with Brahman is through vishEShaNa in the form of worship. The next step is the identification of Brahman with lakShaNas. This is more difficult, since Brahman has to be separated from everything else. This takes the jIva one step closer to understanding the identity of Brahman. At this closer distance, the jIva identifies Brahman through dhyAna or meditation. dhyAna is more difficult compared to worship. So the shAstra says that one has to begin with worship and graduate to dhyAna over a period of time. However, identifying Brahman by the markers of lakShaNa will not help us understand the svarUpa or inherent characteristic of Brahman. What the lakShaNa tells us is that it is different from jIva, but does not really tell what it is (knowing so and so is one's father does not let us know who he is). So we need to understand Brahman directly without reference to any entity. This is an impossible task even for the scriptures ( "yatO vAchO nivartantE aprApya manasA saha" - the speech returns empty handed without an understanding of Brahman and so does the mind). However the scriptures try in many ways to convey Brahman through speech only. Though Brahman is described by lakShaNas - satya, jnyAna and ananta -, one should not try to understand Brahman by these lakShaNas only. To show the small arundhatI star, attention is drawn to a bigger star in the vicinity and to look for the arundhatI star beyond that (sthUlArundhatI nyAya). Likewise one has to go beyond the lakShaNas in understanding Brahman. Brahman is not an entity to be understood by debate or mental logic. The shruti offers many tactics to help remove this misnomer.
Shruti describes Brahman with distinctive characteristics (savishESha) as well as without distinctive characteristics (nirvishESha). For example, "asthUlam anaNvam ahrasvam adIrgham" - It is not big, it is not atomic, it is not short, it is not long; "ashabdam asparsham arUpam avyayam tathArasam nityam agandhavacca" - It is soundless, untouchable, formless, immutable or imperishable, tasteless, always existing, and without smell; "apUrvam anaparam anantaram abAhyam" - Not having existed before, not to exist in the future, not inside and not outside etc.
If shruti describes Brahman both with and without distinctive markers, what should be followed and why?
It depends on the spiritual progress of the seeker. A beginner must follow the savishESha Brahman through worship and karma. An advanced seeker will then be able to give up karma and focus on the nirvishESha (or nirguNa) Brahman through meditation.
Is Brahman saguNa (with guNa or characteristics) or nirguNa (without guNas)? Brahman in its svarUpa is nirguNa. It is saguNa in association with upAdhi.
Brahman is only describable by "nEti, neti" - not this, not this. Any description of Brahman is in association of an upAdhi. Then is it shUnya (nihil)? Definitely not. All that we see and feel, is emanating from Brahman. So how can it be nihil? Brahman exists, but it is so nirguNa that it can not be described.
To highlight that Brahman is nirguNa, the shruti describes Brahman by a pair of opposites. For example,
"anEjadEkam manasO javIyO tat dhAvatah anyAn atyEti tiShTati"
- It does not quiver, it is only one, faster than mind, it overtakes others running while standing in a location (IsAvAsya -4);
"tadEhjati tannaijati taddUrE tadvantikE "
- It quivers, it does not quiver, it is far away, it is very near (IsAvAsya -5);
" dUrAtsudUrE tat ihAntikE cha"
- It is farther than the farthest and is right here (MunDaka 3.1.7);
"apANipAdO javanO grahItA pashyati achakShuh sa shruNOti akarNah"
- He walks very fast without hands and legs, will see without eyes and will hear without ears (svEtAsvatara 3.19);
"Brahma tEjOmayO atEjamayah kAmamayO akAmamayah krOdhamayO akrOdhamayah dharmamayO adharmamayah"
- Brahman is splendid and is not splendid, He is desirous, He is not desirous, He is wrathful, He is not wrathful, He follows dharma, He does not follow dharma (BrihadAraNya -4.4.5).
These descriptions of Brahman should drive home the point that Brahman is NirguNa, for the same glass cannot be red or blue, unless associated with a red or blue upAdhi; the glass itself is colorless. Brahman without upAdhi is one and only one - does not quiver, is there and is here(if it is one and only one occupying the entire space, where is the question of movement?-there is no space for movement!). As a kArya with upAdhi, moves fast or slow, is far away (for the ignorant), is close by (for the jnyAni). Is angry with an angry upAdhi and is peaceful with a peaceful upAdhi etc. We may wonder how can Brahman be so nirguNa? This is the characteristic of all kAraNas. For example, in the world we see solid, liquid and gaseous entities; at the molecule level we don't see solid, liquid gas etc. Though we see the guNas of the entity at the molecule level, at the atom level, even this disappears. The same phenomena is with Brahman. The jagat, being a composition of all guNas, is a kArya of Brahman. If all guNas have to come from the kAraNa, the kAraNa must be nirguNa (light being colorless, has all colors in it; clay being formless, creates all forms etc.). Similarly, Brahman being distinction-less stems from the fact that attributes arise out of association with and dependent on upAdhi - Brahman is omnipotent etc. Jagat is different from Brahman at the kArya level, but the same as Brahman at the kAraNa level. So everything is Brahman at the svarUpa. So if everything is Brahman, where is the scope for upAdhi? At the kAraNa level, even the upAdhi is of the svarUpa of Brahman and so at the svarUpa level, it cannot even sustain as an upAdhi ( imagine a crystal beside another crystal; the second crystal has no impact on the first crystal - so at the kAraNa level, everything is nirguNa). There is only Brahman. So if there is no upAdhi, there are no attributes; So Brahman is distinction-less. As much as it is distinction-less, it is Real, because we have known that Brahman is the kAraNa for jagat.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

Om Tat Sat

(Continued...)

_{(My humble salutations Sreeman Brahmasri Ramakrishna- Advaita Vedanta dot org for the collection)}

Read more...

An Introduction to Advaita Vedanta -2

An Introduction to advaita vEdAnta

The Three guNas
What is guNa?
During the course of hundreds of lives, the actions of the jIva will accumulate certain tendencies or impulses that make the jIva in the current life to react in a friendly or unfriendly attitude towards any object or entity (including living beings). Such a power or characteristic of the jIva expressing as a propensity in the prakriti (nature) is described as guNa. guNa is therefore, the inborn impulse or propensity of a jIva that guides its behavior. This inborn propensity is an expression of the past samskAras (samskAra is the training/experience in life management) of the jIva. Therefore the propensity fulfilled in this life, forms the seed for the guNa in the next life. The guNa is dynamic and not static. The discrimination that an individual exhibits may arrest the negative propensities and promote positive propensities. Even during a life time, gunA can be managed through knowledge of the shAstras and following the instructions there in.
gIta says
"satvam rajah-tama iti guNAh prakriti sambhavAh
nibhadnanti mahAbAho dEhE dEhinam avyayAm" - (14.5)
Three guNas - satva, rajas and tamas- born in prakriti, bind the jiVa to the body (we will see the mechanics of binding shortly). The three guNas are described in gIta (14-6,8).
Satva is of the nature of pure, divine, shining (or clear) and knowledge. Pure indicates absence of defects or blemishes. Contemplation, analytical and logical are the expressions of satva. This expression towards Brahman is divinity. The consequence of such expressions is knowledge or jnyAna (however, the jIva is yet to experience the Brahman). The knowledge (worldly or spiritual) creates a sense of happiness in jIva. The jIva exults in such happiness and knowledge. Such identification with happiness arrests spiritual progress in the realization of Brahman. The jIva comes back in another body to continue the spiritual quest - the jIva binding to the body due to satva.
Rajas is of the nature of action driven by passion and attachment. The rajas expresses as activity to fulfill the desires created by passion and
attachment. The actions lead to fruits of action, which need to be experienced. If all fruits are not experienced in the current life, jIva comes back in another body to experience the remaining fruits - jIva binding to the body due to rajas.
Tamas is of the nature of delusion, ignorance, negligence, carelessness and lethargy. The tamas expresses as inefficiency, excessive sleep, neglect of duty, shirking of work and idleness. gIta (14-8) says tamas expresses as pramAda - wasteful engagement in activities prohibited by shAstra and ignorance of the consequences of undesirable fruits of such engagement. Tamas also binds the jIva to body, either because the jIva has not experienced the fruits of the current life (prArabda) or to experience the fruits of wasteful engagement.
Inert objects like rock etc. are predominantly tamas with traces of rajas. Plants though are also mostly tamas, exhibit higher levels of rajas compared to inert objects. Animals exhibit a mixture of tamas and rajas. Only humans are endowed with satva guNa. All humans exhibit a combination of satva, rajas and tamas in varying proportions from person to person; the proportions will also vary in an individual from time to time, based on the discrimination exercised in behavior over time.
An infant sleeps for most of the day, indicating predominantly tamas during the infancy. As the baby grows, it starts to show rajas in increasing proportions. As the child grows, rajas and satva increase per previous samskAras and activities of current life.
The three guNas cannot exist in pure form in any entity. Life is not possible in the pure form of satva, rajas or tamas ( like gold cannot be shaped in pure form; add impurities like copper to give it a form). Every individual has a certain mixture of satva, rajas and tamas in different proportions and this proportion varies from time to time (may be above and below a mean). When tamas predominates, the individual sleeps, when rajas dominates, he works and when satva predominates, the individual is calm and happy.
The three guNas do not exist in equal proportions either - Satva dominates to overpower rajas and tamas; rajas dominates to overpower satva and tamas; and tamas dominates to overpower satva and rajas (gIta 14-10). As an example, if a thought occurs in us to do a work, which may not be legal or ethical or in accordance with dharma, we may set out to do the work, in accordance with rajas. But there comes a doubt, whether it is the right thing to do (satva domination?); we ponder over it for some time, then unable to decide, we may put away the thought for a while; procrastination sets in (tamas predominates). The thought may come back again, when we may rationalize to do the work (rajas dominates). Finally we may or may not do the work, depending on which of the guNas has a dominant sway on us. Whatever action we undertake and how we undertake, the action will add to the data points that will influence our future propensity. In this way, an individual accumulates thousands (may be even hundreds of thousands) of data points in each life. These current data points along with the infinite data points of past lives make a composite of the guNa for the next life. If we assume a guNa continuum from zero (0) to 100, the approximate breakdown may be described as follows (an arbitrary division to illustrate the guNa continuity);

Below 30 - predominantly tamas
30-50 - predominat tamas and rajas, with traces of satva
50-70 - predominantly rajas and sattva, with minor of tamas
Above 70 - increasing satva with lesser rajas and traces of tamas

The goal in each life should be to raise the guNa composite towards satva to make progress in the spiritual journey. Predominantly endowed with satva at the time of death, the jIva goes to higher worlds (heaven - comes back to the human birth after experience of the heaven), while predominantly rajas, the jIva comes back to be born as a human; predominantly tamas takes the jIva to animal and plant births (again coming back to human birth after the animal/plant life). Satva, rajas and tamas are all binding as discussed above. Therefore, in the quest for realization of the Self, the jIva must go beyond the guNas - guNAtIta (as described in gIta, 14-22,26). guNAtIta is the term that describes the state in which the jIVa is not under the influence of satva, rajas and tamas.
We will begin with the study of jagat in the next unit.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

Study of jagat
One of Isaac Newton's assistants was an atheist. One day, when he walked into the lab, he noticed a working model of the solar system. He asked Newton, who made it. Newton replied; "It happened by itself". The assistant asked again; "Really, who made it Issac? It can't happen by itself". Newton replied; "If the solar system can happen by itself, why can't a model of it happen by itself?
The above conversation presents a nice drop back for the study of jagat and its creation. We will try to understand through some examples from our daily life.
One day a man was passing by through a village. He noticed a huge mass of wet clay in front of a house. When, he returned through the same path in the evening, the clay was not to be seen. There were a bunch of pots, plates, etc set for drying. He asked a boy there, what happened to the clay? Where did all these pots and plates come from? The boy said, they were made from the clay. The man asked who made it. The boy pointed to a middle aged person and said he made it. Next day, when the man passed through the same path again, he noticed that most of the pots and plates were dried and set aside, but a few pots and plates were broken and were tossed into a corner. We understand a few facts about this situation. A material cause and an intelligent cause is required in the creation of any object. In this case, Clay is the material cause of the pots and plates. The Pot Maker is the intelligent cause of the pots and plates. The pots and plates are the effect or product. The same clay is present in the pots or plates. The clay retains its attribute as clay in the product, be it pot, plates or the broken pieces of the pots or plates.
This quality or characteristic of an object, which retains its unchanging attribute even as it appears differently, is called the svarUpa of the object. Similarly gold retains its attribute as it is made in to bangles, chain or ear ring etc, allowing us to understand the svarUpa of gold.
Now let us take another example. A spider builds a web around itself. What does it build the web from? It uses its own saliva to build the web. So, in this case, the spider is the material cause as well as the intelligent cause of the web.
In the advaita philosophy, the material cause is called the upAdAna kAraNa and the intelligent cause (this is also referred to as Efficient cause) is called the nimitta kAraNa. The effect (product) is called kArya (Effect). Both the upAdAna kAraNa and the nimitta kAraNa are required in the creation of a kArya or Effect. The upAdAna kAraNa, like clay, is generally insentient, but the nimitta kAraNa is always sentient, like the pot maker or the goldsmith. The nimitta kAraNa is the chEtas or chEtana (consciousness) in the pot maker or the goldsmith. Therefore it can be concluded that only a sentient entity can be a nimitta kAraNa for any kArya. So it is very clear that the Intelligent Cause for the creation of jagat is in the chEtana or Pure Consciousness.
Now let us look at the jagat. What is Jagat?
Before we attempt to determine the material and intellectual cause of the jagat, let us try to understand what jagat is. Krishna describes two aspects of jagat in gIta - the aparA prakriti (inferior or lower aspect) and parA prakriti (higher aspect). The verses are 7-4 and 7-5;
" bhUmirApO analO vAyuh kham manO buddhih Eva cha
ahankAra itIyam mE bhinnA prakritih ashTadhA "
- Earth, water, fire, air, ether(space), mind, intellect and ego - This eightfold unit is one aspect of my nature-(7-4)
" aparEyam itah tu anyAm prakritim viddhi mE parAm
jIvabhUtam mahAbAhO yayEdam dhAryatE jagat "
- Oh Arjuna! this (described in the previous verse) is my lower or inferior nature. Know my other nature, the higher (parA prakriti) is the life element by which the universe is supported-(7-5).
So everything we see (and don't see) around us, including us, is jagat.
The mind is also classified under insentient, because it is made of the five insentient elements - Earth, water, fire, air ether. The elements are insentient, so the modifications of them are also insentient. It is interesting to note from the spiritual point that since mind is insentient, it can be controlled like any other insentient object and it can never have power over the sentient. Knowing the difference between jada (insentient), and the chit (sentient), we can clearly understand that that the mind can be trained to what we want it to be.
In the next unit, we will look at the kAraNa for Jagat.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

In the last unit, we studied the concepts of material and intelligent causes; in this unit, we will review the causes of jagat.
Brahman is the nimitta kAraNa for jagat.
BhagavAn Shankara comments in the sUtra bhAshya (1.1.10) -
" samAnam Eva hi sarvEshu vEdAntEshu chEtana kAraNavagatih "
- All upanishats declare with a single voice that chaitanya (Brahman or Pure Consciousness) is the kAraNa for the creation of the jagat.
Let us review some of these statements from the upanishats.
MunDaka upanishat - 1.1.8 and 9
" tapasA chIyatE brahma tatO annam abhijAyatE
annAt prANO manah satyam lOkAh karmasu cha amritam "
- Brahman expands by tapas, which creates food, consumption of which causes prANa and creation of mind; Then follows the five great elements (satyam); the seven lOkas (universe). The living beings, karma and the fruits of karma follow in succession.
" yah sarvajnyah sarva vidyasya jnyAnamayam tapah
tasmAt Etad brahma nAmarUpam, annam cha jAyatE "
- One who is omniscient and of the nature of knowledge, by Him, this brahma, names, forms and food chain is created.
AitarEya upanishat - 1.1.1
" Om AtmA vA idamEka EvAgra AsIt nAnyat kinchana miShat | sa IkShata lOkAnnu srijA iti "
- Om - this was only Atma in the beginning (without any name and form); there was nothing else; It contemplated to create the jagat (an entity consisting of names and forms).
TaittirIya upanishat - 2-6
"sO-kAmayata | bahu syAm prajAyEyEti | sa tapO atpyata "
- He desired to become many; to be born. (I will show myself in many forms, I will be born in many forms); So He did tapas.
The above statements of shruti declare that this chEtana is the nimitta kAraNa for the jagat. This chEtana must be there prior (between the kalpas) to the creation. Therefore Brahman is the nimitta kAraNa of this jagat. Here a question may arise as to why Brahman even wanted to create the jagat of names and forms associated with all pains and sorrows. We will study later that the jagat is created for the benefit of jIvas-for them to enjoy the fruits of their karma.
Brahman is the upAdAna kAraNa of jagat
We concluded above that Brahman is the nimitta kAraNa of this jagat. But this does not help us understand the svarUpa of jagat. We saw in the examples in the last unit that we will understand the svarUpa of pot or ornament, only when we know the clay or gold; that is when we know the upAdAna kArana of the pot or ornament. Likewise we will understand the svarUpa of jagat only when we understand the upAdAna kAraNa of jagat- that is when we understand the material out of which the jagat is made. Once again we turn to shruti for an understanding of the upAdAna kArANa.
" shounakO ha vai mahAshAlO angirasam vidhivadupasannah papriccha kasminnu bhagavO vijnyAtE sarvamidam vijnyAtam bhavatIti "
- Shounaka, in a tone of humility, asks angIras; Oh! bhagavan, knowing which, all this (jagat) is understood? - munDaka upanishat (1-1-3)
angIras replies;
"yathOrNanAbhih srijatE grihNatE cha yathA prithivyAm Oshadhayah sambhavanti yathA satah purushAt kEshalOmAni tatha akSharAt sambhavtIha viswam "
- Just as the spider creates and retracts the web, just as the trees and plants grow in the world, just as man grows small and large hair, so does all this comes out of akShara - that which does not die - a synonym for Brahman. - munDaka upanishat 1-1-7.
In ChAndOgya upanishat (6-1-3), AruNi asks his son shvEtakEtu (this conversation is reported to have taken place when the son had returned from gurukula; the father asks him what he learnt there. The son discussed all the transactional knowledge he had learnt, which was all he had learnt);
"tam AdEsham aprAkshyO yEna shrutagam shrutam bhavatyamatam matam avijnyAtam vijnyAta-miti katam nu bhagavah sa AdEshO bhavatIti"
- That which is understood, which was not understood before, that which was not discussed becomes discussed, that which was unknown becomes known, do you know "That" ?
AruNi continues to answer the question himself (6-1-4);
" yathA sOmyaikEna mritpinDENa sarvam mrinmayam vijnyAtam syAd-vAchArambhaNam vikArO nAmadhEyam mrittikEtyEva satyam, "
- Oh! sOmya, just as by knowing a lump of clay, all products made out of clay are known; the various products are name sake only (vAchArambhaNa) and the clay is the Real thing,
" sadEva sOmyEdamagra AsIdEkamEvAdvitIyam "
- this (jagat) was earlier the 'One and the Real' Brahman (6.2.1).
In the above illustrations, the objective is to describe Brahman; but what is described is jagat. This can only be possible if the Brahman is the upAdAna kAraNa (material cause) of jagat. Because by knowing the material cause (gold) all its effects (ornaments) are known.
So Brahman is the abhinna-nimitta-upAdAna kAraNa (undifferentiated or one and only material and intelligent cause) of this jagat.
The Relation between kArya (effect) and kAraNa (cause).
If gold(cause) can be removed from the ornament(effect), there is no cause (gold) any more. However, if the ornament (effect) is melted away, the gold(cause) is unaffected. Therefore it can be concluded that the kArya (effect) is not different from kAraNa (cause), but kAraNa is different from kArya. Similarly, jagat is not different from Brahman, but Brahman is different from jagat - Statement 1.
We will review the views of other philosophies regarding the existence of jagat and its kArana and vEdAnta's interpretation of those views. Most of these interpretations are offered by no other than bhagavAn Shankara in His commentaries on brahmasUta. Shankara's commentaries have been summarized in some of the vEdAnta texts; the following is a brief version of those summaries.
The Buddhist View.
There are two groups in Buddhism - shUnyavAda and vijnyAnavAda. We will not discuss the shUnyavAda here. The vijnyAnavAda argues that there is no jagat outside of our experiences, just like we experience an outside world in dream though there is no world outside of the dream. They therefore argue that there is no need to find a kAraNa for this jagat. There is an inconsistency in the Buddhist statement itself. The affirmation of an appearance of an outside world in the dream amounts to accepting an outside world in the waking state (the logic here seems to be that, if there is no outside world in the waking state, where is the need to even talk about it in the dream context? so by talking about it in the dream state, they are implicitly accepting the existence of an outside jagat). In addition, the existence of an outside world is accepted by everyone, since they transact business with the outside world. For example, humans and animals alike search for food outside in order to quench the hunger inside. No one goes after food, where it does not exist. Denying the existence in the waking state by comparing to a dream state is inconsistent logic. After all, the dream is a reflection of experiences in the waking state.
Following the dream, in the waking state, the difference (between dream and waking) is obvious - for example, seeing a friend or relative in the dream does not negate the existence of that friend or relative in the waking state, though that friend or relative does not exist outside of the dream during the dream. vEdAnta, therefore rejects the Buddhist view that the jagat does not exist.
The mImAmsa view.
A mImAmsaka is a follower of vEda. He believes only in the karma kAnda - sections of vEda dealing with karma only - and do not believe in jnyAna kAnda. A mImAmsaka argues that the jagat is not created; it has existed (in steady state) like this for ever from beginning-less time and so there is no need to go after a kAraNa for the creation of jagat. Since they are believers in vEda, shruti pramANa is invoked to counter the inconsistency in their logic and reject their view. For example, the shruti clearly says there is an unseen kAraNa for the jagat in the following shruti statements;
"sadEva sOmya idam agra Asit Ekam Eva advitIyam"
- In the beginning, this (jagat) was the non-dual Reality (chAndOgya upanishat,6.2.1)
" AtmA vA idam Eka Eva agra AsIt "
- In the beginning, This (jagat) was only Atman - ( ItarEya upanishat, 1.1.1).
Other shruti statements even describe that this jagat is subject to creation, sustenance and dissolution, as describe below.
" anEna jIvEnAtma nAnu pravishya nAma rUpE vyAkaravANi"
- I enter as this jIVa form of Atma and classify the names and forms (of this jagat) (chAndOgya 6-3-2). Here, in saying "this jIva", the jIva must be existent even before the name and form. If jIva exists, then a jagat must exist to support jIva.
" yatO vA imAni bhUtAni jAyantE yEna jATAni jIvanti yat prayant-yabhi-sam-vishanti "
- These living entities (bhUta), by which they are born, by which they are sustained and into which they merge, describe Brahman (taittirIya 3.1.3).
"sUryA-chandra-masou dhAtA yathA-pUrvamakalpayat divam cha prithivIm cha-antariksham-athO suvah "
- Ishwara created the Sun and the Moon, dyulOka, earth, space and heaven as usual (rigvEda samhita 10-190-3). Here "as usual" points to the cycle of creation and dissolution.
These shruti statements negate the mImAmsa view; the jagat has an intelligent and material kAraNa for its existence.
We will continue with the remaining views in the next unit.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

In the last unit, we determined that Brahman is the material and intelligent causes of jagat.
We also reviewed a couple of other views of the causes of jagat. We will continue with the review of what other philosophies say about the causes of jagat.
The VaishEShika view.
A vaishEShika is an ancient scientist. He posits that the gross universe we see is made of four elements - gross earth characterized by smell, taste, form and touch; subtle water characterized by taste, form and touch; subtle fire characterized by subtle form and touch; and subtle air characterized by touch only. During the time of dissolution, they divide and disintegrate continuously until they are like atoms, beyond which no further division is possible. At the time of the next creation, these atoms integrate to become the four elements described above. So the vaishEShikas say that these atoms are the kAraNa for the jagat; by which they also mean that the atoms are the svarUpa of the jagat. vEdAnta addresses these statements as follows;
(i) The atoms being inert, cannot integrate without the support of intelligence during the time of creation. The vaishEShika believes in an Atma who is the doer and enjoyer and is the nimitta kAraNa for the integration of the atoms. However, the advaitin claims that this Atma needs tools and medium of a body to do so. However, this body has to come out of the integration of the atoms. So there cannot be a medium of a body before creation. Therefore the effort required for the integration cannot be provided by this Atma.
(ii) If one concedes that somehow the Atma has obtained a body, the dissolution has to be initiated by this Atma, who is also the enjoyer according to the vaishEShikas. The jagat is created for his enjoyment only. Then why would he dissolve this universe, forsaking the enjoyment?
(iii) The union of atoms - Two kinds of union is possible (a) Complete integration and (b) partial / localized union - Complete union of two atoms results in the fusion of two atoms and remain the size of an atom. So how can they come together and keep increasing the size to become the gross jagat? partial/ localized union posits that the atoms have parts, which is contrary to the vaishEShika theory.
(iv) The characteristics of the atoms - Touch etc. and the Reality (nitya) of them contradict each other. Our experience suggests that all objects
exhibiting touch etc. are effect (kArya) and not cause (kAraNa). For example, the cloth is the kArya of fiber; the fiber is the kArya of cotton etc. The fiber is more real than the cloth (if the cloth is destroyed, fiber still remains); cotton is more real than the fiber (if fiber is destroyed, cotton still remains). Likewise the atoms exhibiting the characteristic of touch can only be a kArya and cannot be a kAraNa. Being a kArya, they cannot be real.
A point to be noted here is that Shankara has not rejected atoms. What He has discarded is the theory that the atoms are the kAraNa of the jagat and the characteristics of atoms as described by vaishEShikas.
The naiyAyika view.
The followers of the Science of Logic are naiyAyikas. They believe in a God defined by logic and not in the vEdic view of God. They define three entities - purusha (jIva), Iswara (God) and prakriti (nature). According to them all the three are mutually independent and infinite. In addition, the prakriti is inert and Iswara is omniscient. The naiyyAyikas posit that the prakriti is the material cause (upAdAna kAraNa) and Iswara is the intelligent cause (nimitta kAraNa). The purusha is the enjoyer. Though they invoke vEdas in arguments, they will not accept vEda as an independent pramANa. vEdAnta explains the following inconsistencies in the NaiyaAyika view;
( i ) prakriti being inert, cannot by itself be the material cause of the jagat. This can only be possible if Iswara is tasked for the creation of the jagat; If so, Iswara's role violates the independency of prakriti.
( ii) Iswara is omniscient, prakriti, purusha and Iswara are independent.This violates the omnisciency of Iswara, since he has no control over the form of prakriti and puruSha. However, even if it is conceded that Iswara has control over prakriti and puruSha, (a) then the infiniteness of prakriti and puruSha is violated, and (b) If the infiniteness of purusha is violated(ie. the number of puruShas), then a finite number of purushas, when they all get liberated from the cycle of birth and death, where is the need for creation of jagat? Then Iswara looses his role of creation! This violates that Iswara is omniscient. Therefore the naiyAyika view is contradictory (Sutra 2.2.39-41). In here, the logic of naiyAyika is used to show the inconsistency of his view. This is called uShtra laguDa nyAya (Logic of camel and the club) - using the firewood load on the camel as a club to control the straying of the camel.
The sAnkhya view.
The sAnkhyAs also use logic as their basis; that is, they use anumAna pramANa, though they invoke vEda in arguing with vEdAntins. There is no Ishwara in this view. They posit that there are two entities - jaDa (inert) and chEtana (consciousness). They claim they don't see jaDa being the cause of chEtana or chEtana being the cause of jaDa. They therefore conclude that the material cause of jagat should be jaDA. The jagat appears to be a composite of satva, rajas and tamas ( We will take up the review of guNas later in the study. At this point, we can understand that satva is divine quality, rajas is characterized by activity and tamas is laziness or lethargic). Therefore the material cause of jagat should also be composite of satva, rajas and tamas. They call this composite of guNas (triguNAtmika or triad) as pradhAna or prakriti. The other is the consciousness or puruSha, (a proxy for jIva). They posit that in each living being, there is a separate puruSha. This puruSha is only a witness, non-engaging, remains detached and does not have any attributes. The pradhAna, by itself automatically transforms to jagat for the enjoyment of puruSha. The three guNas of pradhAna, when they are out of balance, creation happens; when they are in balance, it is dissolution. There are three objections to this theory;
(i) How does pradhAna, being jaDa, transform by itself to jagat? They respond that it is like water flowing by itself? Water can flow on a downward slope, which must have been created by an intelligent force. Or need external agency like a pump to make it flow. So the flow of water is the result of intelligence behind it!
(ii) The purusha, being inactive, cannot be the cause behind the transformation of pradhAna to jagat, like the potter transforming the clay to a pot.
(iii) pradhAna, being jada, obviously has no benefit in transforming itself to jagat. Even if so, the puruSha also has no benefit, since he is unattached and has no enjoyment; since he is unattached, even the benefit of self realization over time is absurd (the purusha, being detached, no desire to live or even attain self realization, what is the purpose of his existence?).
These arguments make the sAnkhya view flawed and unsustainable.
Contemporary Scientific View.
The contemporary scientific view, like the sAnkhya view, believes that the cause of this jagat is jada. They cite the example that the atoms in a gas are continually in a state of motion and are responsible for the enjoyment of puruSha! Or the atoms explode by themselves. If this were true, then the atoms must always be moving in a uniform path or speed. However, it has been a scientific observation that the temperature changes cause the atoms to move faster or slower. In fact it is thus controlling the movement of the atoms that the puruSha uses it for his enjoyment. So the movement is controlled by heat and heat is controlled by an external agency or chEtana; so chEtana should be the cause of the movement of atoms.
Again, the movement of the atoms cannot be stopped at all, even by controlling temperature, for at some low temperature, the movement of atoms attains a certain state, beyond which any further decrease of temperature does not change the movement of atoms. The scientist counters then, that this is its natural behavior (jaDa undergoing no change even with application of heat - external force or chEtana). The vEdAntin argues that the chEtana of the scientist is overpowered by a higher chEtana in subduing further change in movement. Similar logic applies to the explosion of atoms also.
The scientist is contradicting himself when he says that an inert body needs an external force to change its state of rest or of uniform motion and at the same time saying that the inert atoms move by its own.
In summarizing these views, the following observations can be made. As much as the jagat is visible, the cause of the jagat is invisible. Therefore none of the visible pramANas can be applied to determine the cause of the jagat. Inference and arthApatti (Inference by removing inconsistency) are also helpless, since there are no telltale signs for the jagat; since jagat being unique, even a simile fails to describe jagat. Therefore its cause has to be determined by shruti statements only, as has been proposed by advaita vEdAnta, that we studied earlier.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

So far we have understood that Brahman is the material and intelligent causes of jagat.
We reviewed causes of jagat as posited by other philosophies and countered them. In this unit, we will continue to revisit the advaita view of cause of jagat to firmly establish the validity of the advaita view.
Further Review of Brahman as the kAraNa for jagat.
Objection 6 - Brahman is Partial and Cruel
There is wide range of differences in the creation of jagat. There are some who are very happy. Some of the animals undergo immense hardship and distress. Some others would have a mix of happiness and sorrow. So is Brahman partial? In addition, at the time of dissolution, all jIvas experience extreme distress. So is Brahman very cruel? If so, Brahman cannot be the kAraNa for jagat!
vEdAntin: The jagat creation with differences in the happiness among jIvas is organized according to their karma. The variations, in the level of happiness among jIvas, is a result of their own making. Brahman is not responsible for this (In business life also, every one is rewarded according to their contributions!). The cause of dissolution is the aggregate karma of jIvas. So this objection of Brahman's partiality or cruelty is not accurate.
Objection 7 - awkwardness (Contamination) of Brahman
(i) When the kArya (jagat) is dissolved, it merges in its upAdAna (Brahman). So at the time of dissolution, all the contamination of the jagat, merges into Brahman. This destroys the svarUpa of Brahman. So Brahman cannot be the kAraNa for Jagat.
vEdAntin: When the ornament dissolves into gold, the gold is not contaminated in any way; Likewise, no kArya will contaminate its upAdAna (kAranA). In addition, even in sustenance, the upAdAna is not affected. Little jewel, big jewel, loose jewel, tight jewel will not likewise translate to gold(little gold or big gold has no meaning). This is the nature of upAdAna. So Brahman is not contaminated during dissolution.
(ii) Brahman being of the nature of consciousness, though its intelligent cause (nimitta kAraNa) for the jagat is acceptable, its material cause cannot be accepted for the jagat which is jada (opposite characteristic from that of Brahman). The kArya cannot be different in characteristics from kAraNa. The kAraNa should carry its characteristics into kArya. But the jagat does not exhibit the characteristics of Brahman. Therefore Brahman cannot be the cause of jagat. There are possibly three aspects of this objection; the vEdAntin addresses the three aspects as follows;
vEdAntin: (a) All characteristics of Brahman should be found in the jagat - If all characteristics of a kAraNa are to be found in a kArya, then there is no difference between kArya and kArNa and kArya has no opportunity to show itself. The expectation of all characteristics of kAraNa to be found in kArya is untenable. If all the characteristics of Brahman follow into jagat, there is no difference between Brahman and jagat. Then there is no creation. So this aspect of objection is invalid.
vEdAntin:(b) At least one characteristic of Brahman should be found in the jagat; none of the characteristics of Brahman is found in jagat - The vEdAntin accepts this is a fair objection. If even a single characteristic of the kAraNa is not found in the kArya, the kAraNa is invalid. An example would help. Sweet drink is the kArya, water and sugar are the upAdAna kAraNa (material). The sweet drink is watery; so water is the material cause is obvious. However, the crystal touch and the white form of sugar are not obvious in the drink. However, tasting the drink will confirm the sugar as its material cause. Likewise it is necessary that at least one characteristic of Brahman follow into the jagat. Which of the characteristics of Brahman follows into jagat is determined as follows - Brahman 'is' changeless, jagat 'is' changing; Brahman 'is' consciousness, jagat 'is' inert. The characteristic 'is' of Brahman is found in the jagat as 'is' [ brahmaNo api sattA lakshaNah svabhAvah AkAshAdishu anuvartamAnO drishyate - sattA(is) of Brahman is followed into sky etc, sUtra 2.1.6]. So the objection that even a single characteristic of Brahman is not found in jagat is not valid.
vEdAntin:( © Brahman's consciousness must be found in jagat to accept Brahman is the kAraNa for jagat; jagat is jada, so Brahman is not kAraNa for jagat- What is the basis for this requirement? does the crystalline touch of sugar follow in to the sweet drink? still the sugar is upAdAna of the drink is obvious. So this objection is rejected.
Objection 8 - Insentient from Consciousness ?
How can Brahman of the svarUpa of consciousness be the upAdAna of the jagat which is inert? This question may arise to any one. This is being answered using a familiar example from contemporary science. According to science, the material cause of water is the two gases, oxygen and hydrogen. The hydrogen is a highly combustible gas and oxygen is a supporter of combustion. The effect (kArya) of these - water - does not have either one of these characteristics. A flame is put off if dipped in water. In this example, the liquidity (of water) is not in the cause, but is present in the effect. The combustibility of cause is not in the effect. So it is no surprise if characteristics of kArya and kAraNa are different. So the shruti statement that the consciousness Brahman is the material cause of the inert jagat is not troublesome.
Objection 9 - Conflict of Limbs / Organs
The chAndOgya upanishat says of the jagat -
" tAvAnasya mahimA atO jyAyAmscha pUruShah pAdO asya sarvA bhUtAni tripAdasyAmritam divi ":
all the living beings are his one fraction (quarter), the remaining three quarters are in the outer world (3.12.6). Brahman is thus described as having limbs or parts in this shruti. There are other shrutis which say Brahman is niravaya - limbless or organless. These are conflicting statements and therefore it cannot be accepted that Brahman is the cause of jagat.
vEdAntin: Again this objection is resolved through an example. Say gold has taken the form of a ring. Gold is gold weather it is in the form of ring or not in the form of ring. Either way gold itself, is not impacted. So it is obvious that "gold is in the ring and is beyond it (gold transcends ornament)". Similarly what the chAndOgya shruti is saying is Brahman is also jagat and transcends jagat. It should not be interpreted as Brahman having parts. He is niravaya.
Objection 10 - Which is the authority?
The doctrine of vEdAnta is conflicting with sAnkhya, yOga and other smritis. These smritis are works of great people. So it is difficult to accept Brahman as the cause of jagat.
vEdAntin: Manu, Apastamba, vyAsa etc. all have reiterated that Brahman is the cause of jagat. Wherever there is a conflict between smriti and shruti, shruti is authoritative. Everyone has to also accept those sections of smritis which are not in conflict with shruti.
In countering the above objections, the thrust of the argument is that "the kArya is not different from kAraNa, but kAraNa is different from kArya". The difficulty in understanding this concept is alleviated through the use of a term "upAdhi".
upAdhi
Let us consider the ring again. It is a form to identify the gold. The ring is a name for Gold in that form (vAchArambhaNa). Even though gold is identified in the form of ring, the form itself will not affect gold; the gold is completely independent of ring. The knowledge of gold, thus obtained is not influenced by the ring. That knowledge is one and the same, whether the knowledge is derived from ring, bracelet or necklace. The ring, - which is not a part of gold, but used to identify gold - is called the upAdhi of gold.
Now let us take another example, say a crystal. The crystal is not likely visible in isolation. However, if a red flower is placed behind the flower, the crystal becomes clearly visible in red color. In association with the red flower, the crystal appears red, though it is not actually red. In this case the red flower is the upAdhi for the crystal. In this case the red flower is not attached to the crystal, like the ring was attached to gold. If a different color flower, say blue, replaces the red flower, the crystal now appears blue. So by the crystal appearing as different color, in association with different colored flowers, we conclude that the crystal is transparent. Whereas the crystal was not visible by itself, the upAdhi helps us see the crystal (a safety decal placed on clear glass doors, helps people avoid bumping into the glass door - the sticker - which helps to see the glass as a glass door - is the upAdhi for the glass; birds many times bump into clear glass panes and die). This is the benefit of upAdhi. The following statement can be made regarding upAdhi;
upAdhi, though attached to object, is not attached; upAdhi though appears to be in object, is not in object. - Statement 3.
Likewise, the names and forms of jagat are upAdhis for Brahman. Brahman is able to be identified only through the upAdhi of names and forms. If Brahman had not created the jagat, we would not have known its svarUpa (we would not have been here to debate this!). Yet, Brahman is not affected by the awkwardness of jagat, just as gold is not affected by the ring or the crystal is not affected by an association with a colored object near it.
Brahman is jagat and is beyond jagat is equivalent to saying that jagat is the upAdhi for Brahman. We may recall here the declaration of Krishna in gIta
"mat sthAni sarva bhUtAni na cha aham tEshu avasthitah"
- all beings are in Me and I am not placed in them (9-4) [Brahman is jagat and is beyond jagat]. Clay is in all pots; yet, if the pot is broken, clay is not impacted; clay is still clay (the name and form is lost, yet the substratum is not affected). So, the pot is not in clay. The pot is an upAdhi of clay. Similarly the jagat is an upAdhi of Brahman. A heap of clay is also a form; one should not consider this as different from a pot or a pan; It is form resulting from the intelligence that it occupies the smallest floor area vs. a bed of clay for example.
If the heap is disturbed the clay remains as clay. Similarly a nugget of gold is also a form, like an ornament, cast into the form of a nugget using a mold (think of intelligence in preparing the mold and casting into it!).
We may review another example to understand upAdhi. I am a son, a father, a husband, an employee etc. But father, son, husband etc. are not in me. These are roles only. These roles are the upAdhis that make me appear as a father, husband etc.
We have now understood, that Brahman is the "abhinna nimitta upAdAna kAraNa" (undifferentiated material and intelligent cause) of the jagat. We need to next look at the mechanics of the jagat coming into being. This is a difficult task. We need to understand a power of Brahman, called mAyA in order to understand the jagat coming into being.
Om shAntih, shAntih, shAntih ( Om peace, peace, peace).

Om Tat Sat

(Continued...)

_{(My humble salutations Sreeman Brahmasri Ramakrishna- Advaita Vedanta dot org for the collection)}

Read more...

Hindu Vedic Philosophy (Advaita)

VISITORS

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me

Followers

map

visitors

visitors

An Introduction to Advaita Vedanta -3

An Introduction to advaita vEdAnta

An Introduction to Advaita Vedanta -2

An Introduction to advaita vEdAnta