mahAvAkyaratnAvaliH- Translation No. 18

[Guest guest]

*Translation of mahAvAkyas- No.18- Sentences declaring the world as mithyA.*

 

45. prapanco yadi vidyeta nivarteta na samSayaH.

 

mAyAmAtram idam dvaitam advaitam paramArthataH-

 

It is well known that this is in mANDUkya kArikA (I.17), but it appears also

in one of the 'minor upanishads'. (I have not been able to trace which).

 

The world would cease to exist only if it did exist. There is no doubt

about this. This duality is nothing but mAyA; in reality there is only

non-duality.

 

The world is superimposed on brahman like a snake on a rope. We can say

that the snake " will cease to exist " when the rope is known only if it

existed earlier, when it was seen. The snake never existed and so the

question of its 'ceasing to exist' cannot arise at all. Similarly, since the

world does not exist even now, we cannot say that it will cease to exist

when brahman is known. Even now, when we experience the world, what actually

exists is only brahman. This is what is brought out by this Sloka. The

reality is only the non-dual brahman. The purport is that there is no world

which appears and later disappears.

 

46. vikalpo vinivarteta kalpito yadi kenacit.

 

upadeSAd ayam vAdo jnAte dvaitam na vidyate- mANDUkya kArikA, I.18.

Diversity would disappear if it had been imagined by anyone. This talk is

for the sake of instruction. Duality ceases to exist on realization.

 

Sri Sankara says in his bhAshya:--

 

How can such fancies as instruction, instructor, and the instructed

disappear? To this the answer is: Just as this phenomenal world is analogous

to magic or a snake superimposed on a rope, so also such fancies as the

differences of the instructed, etc., are only for the sake of teaching

(vedAnta). When the result of the teaching is accomplished, on the

realization of the supreme Reality, all duality ceases to exist.

 

47. dvitIyakAraNAbhAvAd anutpannamidam jagat- (It would have been helpful if

the name of the upanishad in which the sentence appears had been given by

the person who made this collection. Statements from the main ten upanishads

and SvetASvatara upanishad can be recognized straightaway from memory, but

statements from the remaining 97upanishads (out of the total of 108

mentioned in muktikopanishad) cannot be easily traced. Moreover, in some

instances only a part of the whole Sloka is given, adding to the difficulty

in understanding the meaning).

 

Because of the absence of another cause, this world must be considered as

not having originated. I am not able to explain this further without knowing

the context in which it appears. If any one is able to locate the upanishad

in which this appears, kindly let me know.

 

S.N.Sastri

 

(To be contd)