Sridakshinamurtistotram Part II

[Guest guest]

Sridakshinamurtistotram

 

Part II

 

Verse 1:

 

Vishwam Darpana-drshyamaana-nagarii-tulyam nijaantargatam

Pashyan aatmani maayayaa bahiriva udbhuutam yathaa nidrayaa |

Ya: saakshaat kurute prabodha-samaye svaatmaanameva advayam

Tasmai Srigurumurtaye nama idam Sridakshinamurtaye ||

 

Obeisance to Him, who on realising that it is by Maya that the universe which

has no being of its own appears to exist like a city in a mirror, and that

outside of oneself in the manner of the dream-world, awakens to and shines as

that non-dual Self, the resplendent Dakshinamurti, incarnate in the glorious

figure of one's own Guru.

 

The Analogies:

 

With the avowed object of showing that the universe is non-different from the

Self, the hymn presents the vishwam, the universe, as that which is 'seen in the

mirror'. Supposing a typical Indian market-place is reflected in a mirror

placed in a suitable place. One can see a man frying pakoras and jilebis on an

oven. There are men and women vending vegetables, someone selling birds in a

cage, a boy bathing under a public tap, an autorickshaw driving past the main

road, people moving about, etc. Now, in the mirror, when one touches the fiery

oven or the water or any other object, all one feels is the surface of the

mirror. The mirror is not affected by the 'heat' of the oven or is wet by the

'water' of the tap. The Acharya says in His Adhyasa Bhashya: Tatraivam sati

yatra yadadhyasaH tatkrtena doshena gunena va anumaatrenaapi sa na

sambadhyate..That is, since superimposition is a product of nescience, whenever

there is a superimposition of one thing on another, the locus is

not affected in any way either by the merits or demerits of the thing

superimposed. In effect, the mirror-city does not have an existence of its own

apart from the mirror. The space and time experienced are all nothing other than

the mirror.

 

That which is not there in the mirror, appears to be there. Adhyasa is

defined as 'atasmin tad buddhiH'= perceiving something in a locus where it is

actually not there. So too, the vishwam does not exist apart from the Atman in

which it is seen to exist. This is accomplished by the first analogy. This

analogy suggests the vivarta-upadanatva of the Self.

 

There is another analogy in the verse: that of the dream. Although the dream

experience is a private one, yet at the time of the experience one sees the

world as being 'out there'. The experiencer, the pramata, the instruments of

experiencing, the pramana and the objects of experience, the prameya, are all

there in the dream world, giving one the feeling of their reality. This

showing forth something as being outside is due to the nidra-shakti. The dream

does not occur by itself; there is this nidra-shakti that causes it. When a

person is wide awake no dream occurs. Only when he is overtaken by drowziness,

sleep, does dream occur. Thus, a power, a shakti, has to be admitted for

something to be projected. By the dream analogy and the mention of the

underlying Shakti, the Acharya brings in the concept of Maya as the

parinami-upadana.

 

In the light of the dream illustration, the import of the hymn which declares

that all the parlance of the world even in the waking state is due to Maya, can

be comprehended.

 

The Panchadasi says:

Iidrsho mahimaa drshto nidraa-shakter-yadaa tadaa |

Maaya-shakter-achintyo'yam mahimeti kimadbhutam ||

 

Shayaane purushe nidraa svapnam bahuvidham srjet |

Brahmanyevam nirvikaare vikaaraan kalpayatyasau ||

 

Nidraashaktir-yathaa jiive durghata-svapnakaarinii |

Brahmanyeshaa sthitaa maayaa srshti-sthit-yanta-kaarinii || (XIII 89, 90, 86)

 

The meaning: If such greatness is seen (even) in the power of sleep, what is

there to wonder at if this greatness of the power of Maaya is inconceivable?

When the man is lying down, sleep creates dreams variously. Likewise this

(Maaya) creates in the changeless Brahman (several) changeful things.

Just as the power of sleep creates in the jiva impossible dreams, this Maaya

seated in Brahman, brings about creation, sustenance and dissolution (of the

universe).

 

It is therefore that the Maanasollaasa, a metrical commentary by Sri

Sureshwaracharya on the Stotram says:

 

Svapne svaantargatam vishvam yathaa prthagavekshate |

Tathaiva jaagrat kaale'pi prapancho'yam vivichyataam ||

 

Nidrayaa darshitaan arthaan na pashyati yathotthitaH |

Samyagjnaanodayaad-urdhvam tathaa vishvam na pashyati || (I – 9, 12)

 

The meaning: Just as in the dream state the universe existing in one's own

Self is seen as if it were external, so be it known that even in the waking

state this universe exists within and yet appears to be external.

 

Just as, when awake, a man sees not the things which were presented to his

view during sleep, so subsequent to the dawn of right knowledge, he sees not the

universe.

 

The 'waking up' to the Truth:

 

The Stotram says: 'prabodha samaye' meaning 'at the time of awakening'. This

signifies that the 'awakening' to the Truth of one's own Self is a momentous

event. The Akhandaakaara-vritti, the mental mode which has Brahman

Consciousness for its 'object', arises abruptly in the pre-eminent aspirant and

instantly destroys the avidya. This is an event that is quite unique and

unmistakable to the one who gets the experience. He is left with no doubt about

it and therefore is not in need of any confirmation whatsoever. He wakes up to

his non-dual Self, advayam. The Mandukya kaarika I – 16 says:

 

Anaadi-maayayaa supto yadaa jivaH prabudhyate |

Ajam-anidram-asvapnam-advaitam budhyate tadaa ||

 

When the jiva sleeping (i.e, not knowing the Reality) under the influence of

the beginningless Maya is awakened, then does he realise (in himself) the

Unborn, the Sleepless, the Dreamless, the One without a second.

 

By the word Sleepless, the Prajna is negated and by Dreamless, the taijasa and

vishwa are negated. In effect, the paadatrayam, representing the kaarya-kaarana

prapancha, that is the universe consisting of cause and effect, is negated,

leaving the Advaita Turiya as the True Self.

 

Incidentally, it may be pointed out that the vyakhyana on this kaarika draws

attention to the fact that the Advaitasakshatkara, the direct realisation of the

Non-dual Self, is a rare event. The expression 'anaadi maayayaa' indicates that

the jiva by himself will not be able

to secure knowledge as a matter of course. Even the awakening by another is a

rare eventuality as is pointed out by the phrase 'yadaa prabudhyate'.

 

The Maya is to be regarded as a power which has two phases – the avaranashakti

which conceals the non-dual nature of Atman and the vikshepashakti which

projects the unreal universe in its diverse aspect. This Maya is beginningless,

but ceases to be on the dawn of realization.

 

The experience of the Knower is depicted by this Kaivalya Upanishad mantra:

 

Mayyeva sakalam jaatam mayi sarvam pratishthitam |

Mayi sarvam layam yaati tadbrahma-advayam-asmyaham || (19)

 

In Me alone is everything born, in Me does everything rest, and in Me is

everything dissolved. I am that Brahman, the secondless.

 

The Advaita-makaranda verse 3 may be recalled:

Maiyevodeti chidvyomni jagad-gandharva-pattanam |

Ato'ham na katham Brahma sarvajnam sarvakaaranam ||

(In me alone, the Space of Consciousness, this phantom-city called the world

arises. Therefore, I am Brahman indeed, the All-knowing and the Cause of all)

 

In this connection, the Panchadasi (VI – 236) says:

MaayaakhyaayaaH kaamadhenoH vatsau jiveshwaraavubhau |

Yatheccham pibataam dvaitam tattvam tvadvaitameva hi ||

 

Jiva and Iswara, the two calves of the celestial cow called Maaya, may enjoy

the duality as they like. But the non-dual alone is the Reality.

 

The Sarvaatmabhaava experienced by the Jnani is expressed by the Manasollasa

thus:

 

Anoraniiyaan mahato mahiiyaan iti vedavaak |

Rudropanishadapyevam stauti sarvaatmakam shivam || (I – 29)

 

The Vedas speak of Him as subtler than even the subtlest and greater than even

the greatest; and the Rudropanishad, too extols Siva as Sarvaatman, the Self of

all.

 

In conclusion,

Yasya prasaadaat ahameva VishnuH mayyeva sarvam parikalpitam cha |

Ittham vijaanaami sadaatma-rupam tasyanghripadmam pranatosmi nityam ||

 

The Guru's benevolent Grace has blessed me with the realisation that I am

verily Vishnu, the all pervading One. In me alone all this world is

superimposed. Thus I know myself to be the Eternal Atman. I offer prostrations

at the Lotus Feet of my Guru at all times.

 

Let me close this exposition of the First verse with an incident which is

specific to this first verse. This is excerpted from the book: Exalting

Elucidations. The incident is contributed by Sri Venkatasubba Rao:

 

I felt an urge to have some traditional lessons from Acharyal. I went to

Sringeri and made known my desire. Right away, His Holiness agreed and said

that He would begin the lesson at three o'clock in the afternoon. Some

samnyasins andnPandits also came for the classes. The text taken for exposition

was the Sridakshinamurtistotram of Bhagavatpada. Having given a lucid

exposition of the first verse, Acharyal decided to explain the second verse the

next day. Actually He was having a sore throat. Still He chose to teach me

saying, "I have a sore throat. But you have come all the way from Bangalore for

this. Hence I will teach."

 

In the course of the lessons, an aged samnyasin posed some questions to

Acharyal which were based on Tarka. Acharyal said, "These lessons are meant for

Venkatasubba Rao. Hence, I am giving only those details that will benefit him.

Tarka is not important for him. If you seek to understand the text from the

standpoint of Tarka then I am willing to explain that one point itself for 14

years giving a different interpretation on each day."

 

On the third day, Acharyal said, "This is enough. In fact what I taught you

on the first day was itself sufficient for you. I took up the second verse on

the subsequent day to ward off any possible feeling you may get that the absence

of continuation of the second day is inauspicious".

End of the incident.

Sri Venkatasubba Rao became a Self-realised person. He was a householder and

lived in Chickmagalur and Sringeri. The Jagadguru, Sri Abhinava Vidyatheertha

Swamigal, a Jnani Himself, had divined that this Sri Rao was to be the disciple

to another Jnani by name Para Brahma who came to Sringeri at a certain time. It

was by the Grace of this Jnani that Sri Rao became enlightened. When time and

occasion permits me in the future, I shall post some details of this

Guru-shishya duo.

End of Verse One. End of Part II.

(to be continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Relax. Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Subbuji.

 

This is not written in the spirit of tarka but with the sole

objective of generating new thoughts.

 

A city reflected in a mirror needs a relatively real city outside.

A reflection has no independent existence without the actual object

outside. The analogy, if understood the way you have explained, thus

has the flaw of granting more reality to the outside world, which is

reflected. For this reason, isn't it safer to assume that the verse

only means that the entire universe is within the seer like the image

in a mirror. Here the mirror is Consciousness.

 

Secondly, why do we attach the meaning of swapna (dream) to nidrA?

Hasn't Acharya devoted Verse 8 to deal with the question of dream

and waking? Nidra is sleep. Can't it therefore mean that we are in

a state of sleep, i.e. not awake to Reality. Don't we often

say `Wake up to the truth'? Nidra can, therefore, be ignorance – the

sleep of ignorance – due to which (yathA nidrayA) the Universe which

is really within the Self is projected as existing separately outside

in a state of diversity.

 

Long back, I likened Consciousness here to a self-iridescent screen.

The iridescence glows the world of duality creating a seer-seen

division. We call it the error of adhyAsa. When the truth of the

one-without-a-second screen is realized as all that there is, the

division, including the iridescence, sublates into the Oneness of

Consciousness. We realize that the screen couldn't have self-

iridescence as a property. Isn't this all that the verse means? The

mirror is all that remains. The world seen in it is actually the

mirror.

 

The real intent of the verse is to show that the `inside' becomes

an `outside' due to ignorance, i.e. what is actually in the mirror is

misunderstood as existing outside. Am I right?

 

Needless to say, your attempt is brilliant and you have gathered a

lot of insightful references. I am, therefore, eagerly looking

forward to reading your further inputs on this great hymn which

encapsulates the whole of advaita.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

_________________

 

I have broken the rule of two posts per day. May I be forgiven on

the ground that I have been relatively silent in the past several

days.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Subbuji.

 

I forgot to write this in my previous message.

 

My view is that nidrA and mAyA should be read together, i.e. yathA

nidrayA mAyayA.

 

It would be helpful if you can endeavour to provide Sanskrit anwaya for

each verse as you post them so that the meaning you intend to elaborate

will be clear. I know that this quite a tall order. However, kindly

try your best.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair