[Advaita-l] Iswara swaruupam - 3
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Sun Apr 1 09:31:10 CDT 2012
In Gita Ch. 7 slokas 4
and 5 two aspects of Iswara have been pointed out. One is aparaa prakRiti
expressing in terms of tatvas or eight-fold fundamental entities which are
primordial causes for the creation. They form together the ever changing
material cause. above them is the para prakRiti which is their substantive
supporting their very existence. The Ch. Up mantra says existence alone
was there before creation and that itself became many. Hence pure existence
without names and forms is Brahman since scripture says it is ekam eva
advitiiyam, one without a second. Thus combining these two statements we arrive that the creation consists of para
prakRiti which is of the nature of pure existence expressing after creation
existence with changing names and forms as aparaa prakRiti. Thus Iswara
swaruupam is a combination of para and apara prakRiti. The manifestation of
pluralistic apara prakRiti is facilitated by maaya at the total level and
avidya at the individual level. Maya is the force that brings out this
transformation-less transformation with the appearance of one into many. In
physics any change is attributed to a force. The accomplished change itself is
the proof of the force and there is no other proof is required. Similarly one
(para prakRiti) appearing as many is the proof for the force, maaya and the
locus for that force is also Iswara, since it inheres with Him. In the above
sloka Krishna only mentions about material
cause or upaadana kaaraNam. In the next slokas he emphasizes that there is
nothing higher than Him – mattah parataram na anyat kincit asti- indicating that he is also the nimitta
kaaraNam or intelligent cause. Thus Iswara is abhinna nimitta upaadana
kaaraNam, undifferentiated material and intelligent cuase. This is indirectly
pointed out in Sloka 5 with the statement jiivabhuutam indicating that the para
prakRiti is not only sat swaruupam but chit swaruupam also. This is in parallel
to Ch. Up statement – tat aikshataa| buhusyaam| prajaayeyeti| – it saw –
desired to become many and became many, thus indicating that Iswara is jiiva
ruupena chaitanya swaruupam, a conscious entity also and expressing as jiiva.
Q. Is there
separate Iswara different from para and aparaa prakRiti and of course separate
from jiiva who is a tiny conscious entity in relation to the total creation?
Ans. The slokas
are very clear – there is pure sat chit ananda swaruupam which manifests in
terms of panca bhuutas etc. In Tai. Up. it says- aatmanam aakaashaH sambhuutaH,
akaashaat vaayuH .. etc. Thus from the consciousness-existence alone the inert
entities are appearing. If we can write the equation, we can come up with
apara prakRiti + Brahman (sat-chit-ananda) =
Iswara from the samashTi or total or macro level
loval apara prakRiti + Brahman
(sat-chit-ananda) = Jiiva from the vyaShTi or individual or micro level.
If we discard
(or negate) the apara prakRiti as it is only mithyaa and therefore cannot be
counted, the identity of the two equations in terms of - tat tvam asi – that
thou art -follows. The process of discarding mithyaa parts is called bhaga
tyaga lakshaNa where only a part (apara part) is discarded while retaining the
rest to arrive at identity equation or mahaavakya of Vedanta. This is done
intellectually by developing the viveka – a discriminative faculty to
discriminate that which is changeless from the changing world.
Q. Why do you
say the apara prakRiti is mithyaa and not satya or real as the other
darshanikas or philosophers propound?
Ans: In Vedanta
real is defined as that which does not undergo a change. In the creation we
have apara prakRiti which is continuously changing in terms of names and forms
and para prakRiti which is changeless. The unchanging para prakRiti alone
satisfies the definition of real and that is Brahman. The apara prakRiti is not
unreal either since it is experienced. Unreal or asat cannot be experienced; a
typical example given is vandhyaa putraH or son of a barren woman. Since it is
not real and not unreal (as it is experienced) we need to coin a new word to
describe it as mithyaa. Mithyaa is defined therefore as sat asat vilakshaNam –
neither real and unreal. Since it is mithyaa, we can discard it only
intellectually and understand the underlying truth which is Brahman. It is like
ring and the gold. We can discard the name and form of the ring and recognize
the underlying gold which is changeless in the changing names and forms, since
ring can become a bracelet or some other ornament while gold remain unchanging.
Nagation of the ring to discover the underlying gold is only an intellectual
process. While looking at the ring, I need to understand that it is just gold
and nothing but gold expressing now in the form of a ring. Similarly I have to
discover the para prakRiti by intellectual process by discarding the naama
ruupa of the external objects as I perceive them and recognizing the underlying
the existence part which is brahma swaruupam.
In the slokas
that follow Krishna provides additional
information in terms of relation-less relation between para and aparaa
prakRiti. When we discuss about the cause for our creation, there are two types
of causes. 1. aapekshika kaaraNam or intermediate cause and 2. atyantika
kaaraNam and ultimate cause.
For example for
my birth my parents are intermediate cause, but they are not the ultimate cause
since they themselves are caused by their respective parents. They are only
panca bhuutas – the five gross elements - they are intermediate causes for the
creation of the universe; but they are not the ultimate cause.
says as para prakRiti I am the ultimate cause and there is nothing else beyond
Me (here me stands not for Devaki nanadana but pure sat chit ananda swaruupa
brahman- mattaH parataram na anyat kinchit asti dhananjaya. In essence, I am the
causeless cause or aatyantika kaaraNam.
We should note that these discussions are from the point of creation
when one sees or experiences or from the point of vyavahaara or transactional
reality. From the point of paaramaarthika or absolute reality there is no
creation what so ever, and what is there is pure sat chit ananda swaruupa
Brahman – hence Brahman is defined by Goudapaada as kaarya kaaraNa vilakshaNam
brahma – that is beyond any cause-effect relationships. In principle no
description is possible for paaramarthikam as the scriptures say – yato vaacho
nivartante apraapya manasaa saha – the words return back along with the mind.
In the second
line of the sloka 7 Krishna gives an example –
mayi sarvam idam protam suutra maNigaNaa iva – I am the suutram or the running
thread that support various components (beeds) of the chain. While this
particular example is rather limited since the beeds can exit independent of
the suutram, the word that used by Krishna –
protam – rings the bell and takes us to the Bri. Up. mantras to -
Gargi-Yagnavalkya discussions on akshara Brahman, as noted by Shankara. The
upanishad gives tantu-pata dRiShTanta or thread-cloth example where the cloth
is protam or pervaded by the thread. Cloth is nothing but the network of
threads. When we look at the cloth, the thread may not be noticed; even though
the very existence of the cloth (name and form) is due to thread that supports
it. This is exactly the relation between para and apara prakRiti – I am the
support for all the creation as the very essence of the creation and without my
presence the creation cannot exist. Thus we have apara prakRiti existing as
mere name and form while the support for its very existence comes from the pure
existence itself as para Brahman.
this fact using several examples in the following slokas. These examples, in principle, echoes the
sloka, Ch. 4-24, brahmaarpaNam brahma haviH.. that all the apara prakRiti if
one looks carefully with the discriminative intellect is nothing but para
prakRiti which is sat chit ananda swaruupa. I am the rasam or taste in the
water. Taste is actually an attribute or guNa for its locus, object or vishaya.
Shabda sparasha ruupa rasa gandhaas, sound, touch, form, taste, smell are the
qualities that the five senses can measure. But rasam here stands for inner
essence of water since example is provided to see the inner essence of each of
the panca bhuutas. Inner essence of each of the gross elements are nothing but
their subtle elements – sukshma bhuutani. In the previous post we have
discussed that grass elements or sthuual bhuutani are originated from subtle or
suukshma bhuutaani. Hence in the examples here rasam, shabdam, gandham, etc
stand for subtle elements of water, space, earth, etc. Even though, they are
the cause or essence for the grosser elements they became qualities or guNa for
the grosser. It is like calling golden ring where gold, which is the cause for
the ring, has become an adjective or attributive for the ring. Hence Krishna says, in essence, I am the essence of every
object in the world – both from the point of intermediate cause – avaantara
kaaraNam- as well as the ultimate cause – aatyantika kaaraNam. Hence
brahmaarpaNam sloka also follows. The ultimate essence of all this – idam
sarvam - is sat or existence only – aitadaatmya idam sarvam tat satyam, says Ch.
Interestingly Krishna says referring to earth – punyogandhaH
prithivyaam ca… I am the good smell of the earth. Shankara says punya as
surabhiH or fragrant smell. Considering the above analysis the smell, which is
guNa, is actually the subtle element of earth and the cause for the gross
element earth. Question we can raise is – what about the bad smell that we
smell. That is not from the pure earth but from the impurities due to mixing.
When the water tastes bad, we know it is due to something else mixed in the
water. In the final analysis the impurities come from karmas of the jiivas or
actions of the jiivas that has the mixture of good and bad - punya and paapa.
The cause for the karmas ultimately is anaadi avidya – beginningless ignorance.
discussions again are based on the discourses by Swami Paramarthanandaji on
Gita Bhashya – any misrepresentation is from me.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list