Creation in the upanishads

[Guest guest]

Dear Dennis,

You are right. Even the word 'cause' is used only from the vyaavahaarika

standpoint. Actually brahman is not a cause at all. We have to use these

words to make ourselves understood.

brahman is described as nimittopAdAna kAraNa even by Sankara when speaking

from the empirical standpoint, though he says that it is neither a cause nor

an effect.

Perhaps I used the word 'cause' in a loose way. Thank you for pointing out.

S.N.Sastri.

 

Just one point I would like to make to be pedantic. You say that: " The

description of creation, etc, in the upanishads is only to bring out the

truth that brahman, the cause, alone is real. " Does not Gaudapada in the

kArikA take pains to point out that brahman is kArya kAraNa vilakShaNa (free

from any cause-effect relationship)?

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> *The real object of the description of creation in the upanishads.*

>

> * * Different upanishads describe the creation, sustenance and

> dissolution of the universe differently. The taitt. up. describes the

> creation of five elements. The chandogya up. speaks only of three

elements.

> The aitareya up. describes creation in an entirely different manner.

These

> contradictions are not considered to be of any importance because the

> description of creation is not the intention of the upanishads.

 

Namaste Sri Shastri-ji,

 

In the text vEdAntasAra the author says that " The authoritiveness of

this method of compounding should not be questioned for the triple

combination1 described in the shruti indirectly2 refers to this. "

 

The translator Swami Nikhilananda has give the following notes:

 

" 1. Triple combination- The process of trivikaraNa is mentioned in the

shruti- " Let me make each of these three tripartie " (Ch. Up. 6.3.3).

According to this passage the Lord first created fire, water and earth

and combined them according to the process of trivikaraNa. This

process is also similer to that of pachIkaraNa. Each of the gross

elements fire, water and earth contains half of its own kind andone

fourth of each of the other two.

 

2. Indirectly- Though in the scriptural passage regarding trivitkaraNa

there is no mention of ether and air, yet other passages speak of

them. Cp. AtmanaH AkAshH sambhUtaH- " Ether came out of the self. " The

creation of the five elements is supported by the shruti and smriti.

Ether and air have been apparently left out in the tivikaraNa process.

This apparent contradiction has been reconciled in the vEdAnata

sutrAs. vidvattamAchArya, a great vedAntic teacher, remarks that as

ether is all-pervading and without it nothing can exist, and as force,

symbolised by air, is also at the root of all movement, and nothing

can exist apart from it, therefore ether and air are to be taken for

granted along with fire, water and earth, and shruti speaks of

trivikaNa only as a more convenient mode of expression. Therefore the

shruti passages about trivikaraNa indirectly refer to panchIkaraNa "

 

I don't know how the process is explained in aitareya up. Within the

framework of vyavahara there should be consistency in the explanation

of the shruti, isn't it?

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka.