Sridakshinamurtistotram (Part VII - d)

[Guest guest]

Sridakshinamurtistotram

(Part VII – d)

Tamaamsi dhvamsante pariNamati bhUyAnupashamaH

sakRRitsamvAde'pi prathata iha chAmutra cha phalaM |

atha pratyAsangaH kamapi mahimAnam vitanute

prasannAnAm vaachaH phalamaprimeyam prasuvate ||

(Ignorance is destroyed and great tranquility results.  Even a single

conversation yields fruit here and in the world attained after

death.  Close association bestows some form of greatness.  The words

of the pure ones give rise to limitless fruit.)

(Source of this verse not known)

 

We are studying the sixth verse of the Sridakshinamurtistotram where

the Existence of Atman is taught as being evidenced from Deep Sleep

experience – the Bliss obtained therein pointing to it.  The

Dashashloki of the Acharya points out that the Self-effulgent Atman

being the Witness of the state of deep sleep is not non-existent in

that state, for otherwise the pratyabhijnaa i.e, the recollection 'I

was ignorant' cannot  be accounted for.

The consideration of the deep sleep state, among the three states, in

fair detail is seen from the fact that practically everyone longs for

it and contrives to get into it as the way out of the troubles and

the turmoils experienced in the other two states.  This fact makes it

clear that peace and happiness are believed to be attained in that

state. 

 

Tired of its avocations in the waking state, the jiva seeks happiness

in such objects of enjoyment as bed etc.  This happiness is no doubt

external and extrinsic, being born of objects, and not completely

free from misery as there is still the differentiation of the

experiencer, the experience and the experienced – the triputi.  In

order to get rid of the tiresomeness, the jiva  plunges into the

Supreme Self and secures identity with the Brahman-Bliss thereof.

 

The five examples:

 

The Sruti indicates by means of five examples the Brahman-Bliss

experienced in deep sleep:  Says the Panchadashi (XI 46 to 56) in

this connection:

 

46. The scriptures give the following examples to illustrate the

bliss enjoyed in sleep: the falcon, the eagle, the infant, the great

king and the knower of Brahman.

 

47. Tied to a string, the falcon, flying hither and thither but

failing to find a resting place, returns to rest on the wrist of its

master or on the post to which it is tied.

 

48. Similarly the mind, which is the instrument of the Jiva, moves on

in the dreaming and waking states in order to obtain the fruits of

righteous and unrighteous deeds. When the experiencing of these

fruits ceases, the mind is absorbed in its cause, undifferentiated

ignorance.

 

49. The eagle rushes only to its nest hoping to find rest there.

Similarly the Jiva eager only to experience the bliss of Brahman

rushes to sleep.

 

50. A tiny tot having fed at the breast of its mother, lies smiling

in a soft bed. Free from desire and aversion it enjoys the bliss of

its nature.

 

51. A mighty king, sovereign of the world, having obtained all the

enjoyments which mark the limits of human happiness to his full

contentment, becomes the very personification of bliss.

 

52. A great Brahmana, a knower of Brahman, has extended the bliss of

knowledge to its extreme limit; he has achieved all that was to be

achieved and sits established in that state.

 

53. These examples of the ignorant, infant, the discriminative king

and the wise Brahmana are of people considered to be happy. Others

are subject to misery and are not very happy.

 

54. Like the infant and the other two, man passes into deep sleep and

enjoys only the bliss of Brahman. In that state he, like a man

embraced by his loving wife, is not conscious of anything either

internal or external.

 

55. Just as what happens outside in the street may be called external

and what is done inside the house internal, so the experiences of the

waking state may be called external and the dreams produced inside

the mind and the nervous system may be called internal.

 

56. The Shruti says: `In sleep even a father is no father'. Then in

the absence of all worldly ideas the Jivahood is lost and a state of

pure consciousness prevails.

 

What exactly is deep sleep?

 

The deep sleep state is distinguished from the other two, waking and

dream, from which the jiva tries to escape to.  What is his condition

then?  What are his experiences then and what are the means?  What is

the relation of this state to the other two and what is the outcome

of this investigation?  These questions are to be answered in the

light of the reminiscences pertaining to the deep sleep state as

voiced by the jiva in the waking state and the Srutipramana.  That

the individual reminisces this state subsequently proves that he was

not non-existent then.  The Sruti's views on these questions are

brought out in the Sutrabhashya (3.2.2.7,8 and 3.2.3.9), a portion

from which we present here:

 

.. For apart from its connexion with the limiting adjuncts it is

impossible for the soul in itself to abide anywhere, because being

non-different from Brahman it rests in its own glory. And if we say

that, in deep sleep, it abides in Brahman we do not mean thereby that

there is a difference between the abode and that which abides, but

that there is absolute identity of the two. For the text says, 'With

that which is he becomes united, he is gone to his Self;' which means

that the sleeping person has entered into his true nature.--It

cannot, moreover, be said that the soul is at any time not united

with Brahman--for its true nature can never pass away--; but

considering that in the state of waking and that of dreaming it

passes, owing to the contact with its limiting adjuncts, into

something else, as it were, it may be said that when those adjuncts

cease in deep sleep it passes back into its true nature. Hence it

would be entirely wrong to assume that, in deep sleep, it sometimes

becomes united with Brahman and sometimes not 2. Moreover, even if we

admit that there are different places for the soul in deep sleep,

still there does not result, from that difference of place, any

difference in the quality of deep sleep which is in all cases

characterised by the cessation of special cognition; it is,

therefore, more appropriate to say that the soul does (in deep sleep)

not cognize on account of its oneness, having become united with

Brahman; according to the Sruti, 'How should he know another?' (Bri.

Up. IV, 5, l5).--If, further, the sleeping soul did rest in the nâdîs

and the purîtat, it would be impossible to assign any reason for its

not cognizing, because in that case it would continue to have

diversity for its object; according to the Sruti, 'When there is, as

it were, duality, then one sees the other,' &c.--But in the case of

him also who has diversity for his object, great distance and the

like may be reasons for absence of cognition!--What you say might

indeed apply to our case if the soul were acknowledged to be limited

in itself; then its case would be analogous to that of Vishnumitra,

who, when staying in a foreign land, cannot see his home. But, apart

from its adjuncts, the soul knows no limitation.--Well, then, great

distance, &c., residing in the adjuncts may be the reason of non-

cognition!--Yes, but that leads us to the conclusion already arrived

at, viz. that the soul does not cognize when, the limiting adjuncts

having ceased, it has become one with Brahman.

 

Nor do we finally maintain that the nâdîs, the pericardium, and

Brahman are to be added to each other as being equally places of deep

sleep. For by the knowledge that the nâdîs and the pericardium are

places of sleep, nothing is gained, as scripture teaches neither that

some special fruit is connected with that knowledge nor that it is

the subordinate member of some work, &c., connected with certain

results. We, on the other hand, do want to prove that that Brahman is

the lasting abode of the soul in the state of deep sleep; that is a

knowledge which has its own uses, viz. the ascertainment of Brahman

being the Self of the soul, and the ascertainment of the soul being

essentially non-connected with the worlds that appear in the waking

and in the dreaming state. Hence the Self alone is the place of deep

sleep.

 

Hence the awaking from that (viz. Brahman).

And because the Self only is the place of deep sleep, on that account

the scriptural chapters treating of sleep invariably teach that the

awaking takes place from that Self. In the Bri. Up. when the time

comes for the answer to the question, 'Whence did he come back?' (II,

1, 16) the text says, 'As small sparks come forth from fire, thus all

prânas come forth from that Self (II, 1, 20). And Kh. Up. VI, 10, 2,

we read: 'When they have come back from the True they do not know

that they have come back from the True.' If there were optional

places to which the soul might resort in deep sleep, scripture would

teach us that it awakes sometimes from the nâdîs, sometimes from the

pericardium, sometimes from the Self.--For that reason also the Self

is the place of deep sleep.

 

The Persistence of the upadhis in  deepsleep and the jiva not being

aware of his oneness with Brahman is brought out in the following

Sutrabhashya (3.2.3.9):

 

>From all this it follows that the person rising from sleep is the

same that went to sleep.--Nor is it difficult to refute the

analogical reasoning that the soul, if once united with Brahman, can

no more emerge from it than a drop of water can again be taken out

from the mass of water into which it had been poured. We admit the

impossibility of taking out the same drop of water, because there is

no means of distinguishing it from all the other drops. In the case

of the soul, however, there are reasons of distinction, viz. the work

and the knowledge (of each individual soul). Hence the two cases are

not analogous.--Further, we point out that the flamingo, e.g. is able

to distinguish and separate milk and water when mixed, things which

we men are altogether incapable of distinguishing.--Moreover, what is

called individual soul is not really different from the highest Self,

so that it might be distinguished from the latter in the same way as

a drop of water from the mass of water; but as we have explained

repeatedly, Brahman itself is on account of its connexion with

limiting adjuncts metaphorically called individual soul. Hence the

phenomenal existence of one soul lasts as long as it continues to be

bound by one set of adjuncts, and the phenomenal existence of another

soul again lasts as long as it continues to be bound by another set

of adjuncts. Each set of adjuncts continues through the states of

sleep as well as of waking; in the former it is like a seed, in the

latter like the fully developed plant. Hence the proper inference is

that the same soul awakes from sleep. (End of quote from the Sutra

bhashya).

 

Triad of Avidyavrittis in Deep Sleep: of the form of the Sakshi,

Sukha and Avastha ajnana:

 

The Siddhantabindu (8) observes in respect of the state of Deep sleep:

On the exhaustion of the karma, the adrista, responsible for the

waking and dream states, the jiva who is tired by the experiences in

these two states, finds himself in his resting place when, with all

its impressions, the inner organ (mind) delimited by the power of

knowing (jnanashakti) is identified with the causal body (its power

of action, kriyashakti, however, not being merged) i.e. ignorance, in

which is latent the said inner organ with its impressions etc.  This

is the deep sleep state.  Deep sleep is the cognition of only this

causal ignorance as qualified by the non-cognition of the gross and

subtle body, given expression to by one and all in the form 'I did

not know anything', as is well known.

In dissolution, pralaya, Avidya is in its primal state without any

vritti whatever.  Coeval with creation is this Avidyavritti, the

first modification of Avidya termed 'ajnaanaakaaravritti' of the

form 'I know not the  basic Svarupa' which is an expression of the

universal experience of the persistence – in all the three states

namely the waking, the dream and the deep sleep - of the ignorance

pertaining to the basic Reality.

 

Mulaajnana, the Seed very much present in Deep Sleep:

 

A reference here is made to the Upadeshasahasri (XVII 26 and 27)

where the Acharya says:

What is called deep sleep, darkness or ignorance, is the seed of the

waking and the dream states.  It gets perfectly burnt by the fire of

Self-knowledge and it no more produces effects, like a fried seed

that does not germinate.

That one seed called Maya is evolved into the three states which come

one after another again and again.  The Self, the substratum of Maya,

though One only and Immutable, appears to be many like the

reflections of the Sun in waters. (unquote)

 

Now, coming back  to the Avidyarittis in deep sleep state, the

Siddhantabindu continues: As being present in the waking state as

well, this Ajnaanaakaaravritti, the expression of the basic

ignorance, is not opposed to the various items of knowledge

pertaining to the parlance of the waking or the dream which are seen

to be there along with it.  Thus, the deep sleep cannot be accounted

for merely on the basis of this basic ignorance.  Hence, it has to be

accepted, an additional vritti, a modification of Avidya

termed 'avastha ajnaanaakaara vritti' which specifically prevents the

experiences of the waking and dream parlance.

Further, to account for the recollection 'Blissfully did I sleep, I

did not know anything', two other modifications of Avidya, one of the

form of the Witness-Self and the other of the form of Bliss, must

also be accepted.  Thus, besides the Mulavidya modification i.e, the

ajnaanaakaaravritti common to all the states, in deep sleep, is to be

accepted the triad of vrittis: of the form of the Witness Self, Bliss

and the ignorance pertaining to the state of deep sleep.

(to be continued)