The Real and the Unreal - Part IX - Ishwara

August 3, 2004

Om Gurubhyo Namah

THE RG-VEDA HYMN OF CREATION

Existence then was not, nor its opposite,

Nor earth, nor heaven's blue vault, nor aught beyond,

The subtle elements that are the veil

Of this so insubstantial world, where then

Might they find out a place? by whom be known?

The deep abyss of waters – where was that?

Death was not yet, nor deathlessness; the day

Was night, night day, for neither day nor night

Had come to birth. Then THAT, the primal font

Of life – breathless – to its own primordial power joined -

Brooded eternally. Itself beside,

In the wide universe there nothing was,

In the beginning gloom – gloom hidden in gloom!

>From its cause undistinguished stood the world:

But lo, thereafter, from its darkling state –

Yet undistinguished from its cause – it rose,

By the pure will of THAT made manifest.

Whence came this will? From out a seed it came

Asleep within the heart of THAT – the seed

Of vanished worlds that have in order wheeled

Their silent courses of eternity:

The manifest in the unmanifest they found –

The sages, searching deep within themselves….

Ah, what are words, and what all mortal thought!

Who is there truly knows, and who can say,

Whence this unfathomed world, and from what cause?

Nay, even the gods were not! Who then can know?

The source from which this universe hath sprung,

That source, and that alone, which bears it up –

None else: THAT, THAT alone, Lord of the worlds,

In its own self contained immaculate

As are the heavens, above, THAT alone knows

The truth of what Itself hath made – none else!

ISHWARA, THE EFFICIENT CAUSE

The shruti assigns the origin of the universe to Ishwara.

"Brahman is omniscient because of Its being the source of the

scriptures". (BSB, I,I,3).

Shankara explains: "Brahman is the yoni (i.e., the material and

efficient cause) of great scriptures like the Rg-Veda etc. which are

supplemented by other scriptures that are themselves sources of

knowledge, which reveal all things like a lamp, and which are almost

omniscient. For scriptures like the Rg-Veda, possessed of all good

qualities as they are, cannot possibly emerge from any source other

than an all-knowing One. For it is a well recognised fact in the

world that the person from whom the scriptures dealing with

multifarious subjects emerge is more well informed than the

scriptures themselves; for instance grammar etc., emanating from

Panini and others, represent merely a part of the subject known to

them. It goes without saying that, that great Being has absolute

omniscience and omnipotence, since from Him emerge the Rg-Veda etc. –

divided into many branches and constituting the source of

classification into gods, animals, men, castes, stages of life, etc.,

and the source of all kinds of knowledge – and since the emergence of

these Vedas from that Being occurs as though in sport and without any

effort like the breath of a man, as is stated in the Vedic

text, 'Those that are called the Rg-Veda, are but the exhalation of

this great Being'."

Again Shankara says: "The Upanishads teach thus: Starting with the

text, 'O amiable one, before its creation, this universe was but

Existence, one without a second.' (Ch.VI,ii,1), it is stated, 'That

(Brahman) visualised, 'I shall become many, I shall be born' That

Brahman created fire' (Ch.VI,ii,3). In that text, the universe,

manifested as names and forms and referable by the word 'it', is

first ascertained to be identified with Existence 'before its

creation'; then the text shows that the creatorship of fire etc.,

that follows the visualisation of future creation, belongs to that

very entity, called Existence, which is under consideration. So also

elsewhere: 'In the beginning this universe was but the one Self

alone; there was nothing else whatsoever that winked. He

visualised, 'Let me create the worlds'. (Ai.I,I,1-2)."

ON THE MEANINGFUL USE OF WORDS

There is in science a principle called the law of entropy that states

that the world continuously tends to chaos and disorder. Evidence of

this universal tendency towards disintegration is everywhere - cars

rust, stereos break down, people become old, mountains erode, and

buildings collapse. If one were to place the parts of a clock in a

box and shake it, the probability of the pieces falling together as a

working clock is so negligible that it can be discounted. Yet, if we

open our eyes and look around us, we see that the principle of

entropy is being violated with such impunity that it is astonishing

that we don't see it. The evidence is all around us - ordered

structures of beehives come into existence, honey is gathered from

diverse flowers and accumulated, anthills come into being, seeds

germinate and grow into beautiful trees, cars get made, particles of

sand turn into microchips, aeroplanes fly and reach their intended

destinations, activities coalesce into coherent organisations, human

beings are born and grow - the list is endless. The loci of these

tendencies to order are living beings - wherever we find life there

we find that the most wondrous order of things are brought forth from

the chaotic dispersions of inanimate matter. The element that makes

this possible is life, for intelligence is the mark of life.

If one who wanted to make a clock were to sit shaking the pieces in a

box hoping that they would become a clock, we would not called such a

person intelligent. On the contrary, it would be quite fitting with

his actions to call him 'ignorant'. It is possible to create things

only by discerning the operative causes and acting accordingly. In

Shankara's words: "We have already said that an effect which is

patent in the cause serves as an obstruction to the manifestation of

the other effects. So if one tries only to destroy the previously

manifested effect such as the lump or the two halves which stand

between it and the jar, one may also have such effects as the

potsherds or tiny pieces. These too will conceal the jar and prevent

its being perceived; so a fresh attempt will be needed. Hence the

necessary operation of the factors of an action has its utility for

one who wants the manifestation of a jar or any other thing."

(Br.Up.I.2)

Discussions on efficient causality have often been obscured because

words are used in manners that violate their meanings. Thus it is

said that omniscience is to be understood as being contained in the

manifestations of avidya. It is not reasonable to speak of

omniscience as being a manifestation of avidya, for that is a mere

application of the word 'avidya' without a consideration of its

meaning. It is as if one who, on seeing a remarkably beautiful woman,

were to state that that beauty is contained in, or is a manifestation

of, ugliness. Apart from the wounded reaction that this might draw

from the charming woman in question, it would only go to show that

the person who speaks thus is not speaking meaningfully. Words must

be employed in consideration of their meanings; otherwise one may as

well call a cow a horse and a horse a door and say that flying is a

kind of walking, and the only thing that this manner of speaking

would achieve is universal confusion.

One does not attain to the desired result through avidya, for by

definition avidya is lack of knowledge. Driving a car without knowing

how to drive would most likely result in a consequence that is graver

than the intended one of reaching the destination. Attempting to cook

without knowledge of cooking may result in something not quite

palatable to the senses. But when these same tasks are undertaken

with knowledge, they lead to the intended goals even if the law of

probability does not give them much of a chance. Intelligent goal-

oriented actions are disruptive of the closed systems within which

the principle of entropy operates. Moreover, the law of probability

would completely rule out the possibility of repeatability. It may

happen by a rare chance that one clock may somehow fall into place

and get assembled, but the chances of clocks getting repeatedly

assembled with clocklike regularity would need an extraneous factor

for sure. That extraneous factor is the directedness to the result

that is provided by intelligence. Order and regularity can only be

brought about by vidya. The word vidya has all these connotations –

of intelligence, design and goal-orientation, etc. Avidya on the

other hand has neither intelligence nor directedness. Avidya is

darkness, sloth, sleep, inertia. Avidya may contribute to the rise of

chaos, but would certainly not account for the regularity that we see

in the world. Therefore, it is Intelligence rather than avidya that

is the efficient cause of the universe. And Maya is to be understood

as the power through which Brahman brings forth this universe. Maya

is not avidya. The efficient cause of the universe is the Intelligent

Brahman and Brahman only.

MAYA AND AVIDYA

The confusion between avidya and Maya arises from a misinterpretation

of the bhashya, wherein it is stated that the omniscience and

omnipotence of God are contingent upon the nescience of the jiva. How

is this statement to be interpreted? The word 'contingent' here

implies a condition upon which something else happens. Avidya is the

condition and what happens is the response of Reality to that

condition. And that response springs by its innate power given the

contingency of avidya and the accumulations of karma caused by

avidya. Just as in the Yoga Sutra it is mentioned:

"Good and bad deeds are not the direct causes in transformations, but

they act as breakers of obstacles to nature, as a farmer breaks the

obstacles to the course of water, which then runs down by its own

nature." (YS,IV,3).

Similarly avidya is not the cause, but is the contingent factor upon

which the very nature of Brahman 'acts'. And it is because Brahman

acts by His nature that Brahman is actionless in His actions, because

that action is not through the sense of agency but by His own

immovable nature, for His nature is unmoved even by the greatest of

deeds and is hence truly omnipotent. He does the greatest of deeds

with the greatest of ease – without the least affection to His being.

That is His aishwarya - His controllership. Therefore He is called

Ishwara, for Ishwara is the repository of aishwarya.

ISHWARA AND MAYA

Ishwara is not a product of Maya. Maya is Ishwara's incomprehensible

power of creation. There is no avidya in Ishwara.

The seeing of the Seer is not avidya. It is the very nature of

Brahman. It is the eternal and unbroken seeing of Brahman: "For when

it appears that it does not see, it is seeing even though it appears

it is not seeing; for there is no cessation of the seeing of the

seer, but there is no second thing apart from it that it can see."

(Br.Up. IV,III,23).

Shankara says in the bhashya (BSB,I,v,5): "For like the effulgence of

the sun, Brahman has eternal consciousness by Its very nature, so

that It has no dependence on the means of knowledge. Moreover, in the

case of the transmigrating soul, subject to ignorance, the rise of

knowledge depends on body etc., but not so in the case of God whose

knowledge is free from obstacles. And thus it is that the following

two mantras show how God is not dependent on body etc., and how His

knowledge has no covering: 'He has no body and no organ; none is seen

to be either equal or superior to Him. The Vedas speak of His diverse

supreme powers as also of His spontaneous action that is accomplished

by His vigour arising from knowledge.' (Sv.VI.8)." And the next sutra

reinforces this by stating that this eternal seeing is not spoken in

a secondary sense.

Now, the capacity by which the 'created' universe is brought forth

into the luminosity of seeing is not avidya. For avidya is nescience

which means sloth, or sleep, or inertia. Inertia cannot bring forth;

it can only mask and hide. That is the meaning of avidya. The

capacity to bring forth has to be the capacity to illuminate to the

senses – it has to be a power of projection. Its name must derive

from the etymological root that evokes the meaning of projection.

That word is vikshepa. And the power by which it brings forth is

vikshepa shakti.

What is brought forth to be illumined to the senses also hides what

is not illumined, in so far as it is not so illumined.

Particularization hides the infinitude of the universal. That showing

forth of a particular also conceals the universality, and that

concealment is a concomitant of vikshepa. It is its avarana shakti.

It is the obverse side of vikshepa.

The knowing eye – the third eye – is never befooled by avarana. It

knows the infinity even in seeing the particular. It is only the

cloud of unknowing that takes the finite for the infinite. That cloud

of unknowing is avidya. It is not a 'thing' for it is the privation

of knowing. It is the veil of indescribability that has its seat in

the jiva.

The third eye is the eye of Ishwara. Therefore Ishwara has no avidya.

Vikshepa and avarana are the capacities of His infinite power – the

awesome power of Maya. They are not two - Ishwara and His Maya – they

are Existence and the magical power of Existence. They are Shiva and

Shakti.

What Ishwara brings forth is Himself. That is His own form showing

forth. It is His Prakriti. They are not two – Ishwara and His Form –

they are Existence and the Prakara of Existence. They are Purusha and

Prakriti.

In our lucid moments, we may glimpse that the world is only in

consciousness, that it has no existence in itself, but in spite of

such a vision, one cannot, by one's will, determine the world into

being. That power of aishwarya remains with Ishwara. A fraction of

that power may come to a yogi through the eight siddhis, but the

power of creation remains with Ishwara alone.

"For the Supreme Lord alone has competence for activities concerning

the creation etc., of the universe inasmuch as the fact of creation

etc., is taught in connection with Him alone, and the word `eternal'

is attributed to Him. The Upanishads mention that others get the

divine powers of becoming atomic in size etc., as a result of search

and hankering for knowing Him." (BSB, IV,IV,vii,17).

The world springs from a deeper level than one's conceptions and

conception cannot negate the very Will from which it springs forth as

conception. The weft and weave of the cloth cannot negate the cloth.

The jives with their minds are identified with so many layers or

sheaths of Reality, and from amidst the weave of these sheaths one

cannot negate the filaments of the weave, nor see the deep springs

from whence the world has come. The weave is already woven and it is

Ishwara that has brought it forth and it is He that projects and

holds the universe in place. How then can the jiva that cannot see

the well-springs of the world deny the world? When the jiva

challenges the creation of Ishwara, it is questioning the truth of

its own inner Self, and the answer to the challenge may as well be

like the words that came out of the clouds when Job challenged God in

the Old Testament:

"Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird

up now thy loins like a man, for I will demand of thee, and answer

thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?…

Who laid the cornerstone thereof, when the morning stars sang

together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Or who shut up the

sea with doors…. And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further;

and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?…. Canst thou bind the sweet

influence of the Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?…. Knowest

thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in

the earth? Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts, or who hath given

understanding to the heart?" (Job 38:1-40:2).

None can dislodge the universe from the firmament in which Brahman

holds it aloft as the three created worlds. For is it not seen that

it is held in place?

"Under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O Gargi, the sun and moon

are held in their positions; under the mighty rule of this Immutable,

O Gargi, heaven and earth maintain their positions; under the mighty

rule of this Immutable, O Gargi, moments, Muhurtas, days and nights,

fortnights, months, seasons, and years are held in their respective

places; under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O Gargi some rivers

flow eastward from the White Mountains, other flowing westward

continue in that direction, and still others keep to their respective

courses; under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O Gargi, men praise

those that give, the gods depend on the sacrificer, and the manes on

the independent offerings."

______________

With regards,

Chittaranjan

August 4, 2004

praNAm CN prabhuji

Hare Krishna

CN PRABHUJI