mahAvAkyaratnAvaliH- Translation No.42

[Guest guest]

*Translation of mahAvAkyas- No.42- Miscellaneous statements.*

 

 

 

164. praNavo hyaparam brahma, praNavaSca paraH smRitaH—

 

The praNava , Om, is the conditioned brahman. Om is also known to be

the supreme (brahman).

 

In kaTha up, 1.2.16, it is said:-- This letter (Om) is the inferior

(conditioned) brahman. This Om itself is also the supreme (unconditioned)

brahman. Om is the symbol for both the conditioned and the unconditioned

brahman.

 

165. na nirodho na cotpattiH,na baddho na ca sAdhakaH, na mumukshuH na vai

muktaH, ityeshA paramArthatA—It is well known that this is in the mANDUkya

kArikA (II.32). This appears also in one of the minor upanishads.

 

Meaning: There is no dissolution, no origination; there is none in bondage,

and no sAdhaka. There is no aspirant for liberation, nor is there any one

liberated. This is the absolute truth.

 

This is spoken from the point of view of the jnAni.

 

166. dehatrayavihInatvAt kAlatrayavivarjanAt, jIvatrayaguNAbhAvAt,

tApatrayavivarjanAt, lokatrayavihInatvAt, sarvam Atmeti SasanAt—

 

Because of being devoid of the three bodies, absence of the three periods of

time, absence of the three gunas of the jIva, absence of the three kinds of

suffering, absence of the three worlds, everything is declared to be the

AtmA.

 

167. cittAbhAvAt cintanIyam dehabhAvAt jarA na ca, pAdAbhAvAt gatirnAsti,

hastAbhAvAt kriya na ca. mRityurnAsti jananAbhAvAt, buddhyabhAvAt

sukhAdikam—

 

Since (for the AtmA) there is no cogitating mind, there is nothing to be

thought of. Because there is no body, there is no decay. Since there are no

feet, there is no walking. Since there are no hands, there is no action.

There is no death because there is no birth. Since there is no judging

intellect, there is no joy, etc.

 

The joy that appears to arise from external objects is really one's own

natural bliss reflected in the mind. Such joys arise when some thing

considered pleasant happens. The ideas of something being pleasant and some

thing else being unpleasant are all mere creations of the judging intellect.

When such notions do not exist, one does not have to depend on external

objects or circumstances for attaining happiness.

 

S.N.Sastri

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

In kaTha up, 1.2.16, it is said:-- This letter (Om) is the inferior

(conditioned) brahman. This Om itself is also the supreme (unconditioned)

brahman. Om is the symbol for both the conditioned and the unconditioned

brahman.

 

Humble praNAms Sri Sastri prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

I think similar maNtra can be found in prashnOpanishad (5-2) also is it not

prabhuji?? where in it is said the OmkAra is both the higher (para) & the

lower (apara) brahman. prabhuji, would it be possible to give me the

original Sanskrit text for the above kaTha maNtra?? Thanks in advance.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Sastri-ji and Shri Bhaskarji,

 

I have a doubt. Grateful if you please clarify.

 

MW Dictionary lists the following meaning for apara:

 

1 mfn. having nothing beyond or after, having no rival or superior.

 

Why do we then interpret the word as lower, conditioned etc. when the

above meaning is absolutely advaitic and befits the one-without-a-

second Brahman?

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

________________

 

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

 

> 164. praNavo hyaparam brahma, praNavaSca paraH smRitaH—

>

> The praNava , Om, is the conditioned brahman. Om is also known

to be

> the supreme (brahman).

>

> In kaTha up, 1.2.16, it is said:-- This letter (Om) is the inferior

> (conditioned) brahman. This Om itself is also the supreme

(unconditioned)

> brahman. Om is the symbol for both the conditioned and the

unconditioned

> brahman.

[Guest guest]

MW Dictionary lists the following meaning for apara:

 

1 mfn. having nothing beyond or after, having no rival or superior.

 

Why do we then interpret the word as lower, conditioned etc. when the

above meaning is absolutely advaitic and befits the one-without-a-

second Brahman?

 

 

 

 

 

praNAms Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

 

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

prabhuji, it is shankara himself who says that that which is bhArUpa,

prANasharIra, manOrUpa is lower or apara brahman & that which has been

taught in shruti as asthUlaM, anaNu etc..etc. by negating any specific

feature (name & forms) is para brahman or supreme brahman....And shankara

elsewhere in sUtra bhAshya also says that parabrahman alone has been

attributed some qualities & called apara for the sake of meditation

(upAsana). Since in shankara advaita apara brahman's attributes is due to

conditioning adjunct (upAdhi-s) of name and form created by avidyA, the

apara brahman has been treated as lower (or given secondary

importance)...Shankara also calls apara as kArya brahma & para as kArana

brahman.

 

 

I hope Sri Sastri prabhuji would throw more light on this issue.

 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

 

 

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nairji:

 

Though you have addressed to Sastriji, let me provide you with my

understanding. In Sanskit, it does make a difference how pronounce

the word - apara: Accordingly,

 

aparâ — inferior - Opposite to parâ

 

apâra — limitless - Opposite to pâra

 

Sanskrit in ancient time was not a written language and there was

less confusion (probably less understanding and analysis). Strict

transliteration can bring the true distinction how the word is

pronounced. This is one of the reasons why Mantras need to be

practiced with the help of a Pandit because when the word is

prnounced incorrectly, it can become suspicious (inauspicious).

 

Usage of a language does determine the appropriateness of the meaning

in specific contexts (true for almost all languages). One of our

friends (not familiar with Tamil) was trying to impress everyone in a

party with her Tamil skills. She complemented the host for excellent

food by saying - " Samayal Kolaipannnitele! " She actually wanted to

say that " Samayal Konnutele! " The first quote means that cooking

was 'terrible!' She actually wanted to say that her cooking

was 'terrific. "

 

Thanks for bringing to the attention of why we need to be careful in

using the language. We are very fortunate to have Scholars such as

Sastriji and Sunderji in the list who are helping us to understand

Sanskrit with a sound foot.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

Note: I am hoping that Sastriji will bring some insights to your

quesiton.

 

 

 

 

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

>

> Dear Shri Sastri-ji and Shri Bhaskarji,

>

> I have a doubt. Grateful if you please clarify.

>

> MW Dictionary lists the following meaning for apara:

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

>

> aparâ — inferior - Opposite to parâ

>

> apâra — limitless - Opposite to pâra

>

 

> advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

> <madathilnair@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > MW Dictionary lists the following meaning for apara:

 

Namaste,

 

M-W seems to have missed out on aparA (aparâ), an antonym of

parA:

 

It gives the following meanings:

 

http://webapps.uni-koeln.de/tamil/

 

Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: Search Results

 

1 apara 1 mfn. having nothing beyond or after , having no rival or

superior.

 

2 apara 2 mf(%{A})n. (fr. %{a4pa}) , posterior , later , latter

(opposed to %{pU4rva} ; often in comp.) ; following ; western ;

inferior , lower (opposed to %{pa4ra}) ; other , another (opposed to %

{sva4}) ; different (with abl.) ; being in the west of ; distant ,

opposite. Sometimes %{apara} is used as a conjunction to connect

words or sentences e.g. %{aparaM-ca} , moreover ; m. the hind foot of

an elephant S3is3. ; (%{A}) f. the west L. ; the hind quarter of an

elephant L. ; the womb L. ; (%{I4}) f. (used in the pl.) or (%{a4m})

[RV. vi , 33 , 5] n. the future RV. S3Br. ; (%{a4param} [AV.] or %

{apara4m} [RV.]) ind. in future , for the future ; (%{aparam}) ind.

again , moreover Pa1rGr2. Pan5cat. ; in the west of (abl.)

Ka1tyS3r. ; (%{eNa}) ind. (with acc.) behind , west , to the west of

Ka1tyS3r. [cf. Goth. and Old Germ. {afar} , and the Mod. Germ.

{aber} , in such words as {Aber-mal} , {Aber-witz}].

 

3 apAra mfn. not having an opposite shore TS. ; not having a shore ,

unbounded , boundless (applied to the earth , or to heaven and

earth , [%{ro4dasI}] , & c.) RV. & c. ; m. ` " not the opposite

bank " ' , the bank on this side (of a river) MBh. viii , 2381 ; (%

{am}) n. (in Sa1n3khya phil.) ` " a bad shore " ' , ` " the reverse of %

{pAra} " ' , a kind of mental indifference or acquiescence ; the

reverse of mental acquiescence L. ; the boundless sea.

 

 

Gita 7:5 clearly uses the word as an antonym of parA. In many

other places it has used parA as the ultimate (parAM shantim, parAM

gatim, niShThA j~nAnasya yA parA, madbhaktiM labhate paraM etc., or

Kathopanishad kAShThA sA parA gatiH).

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> In kaTha up, 1.2.16, it is said:-- This letter (Om) is the inferior

> (conditioned) brahman. This Om itself is also the supreme

(unconditioned)

> brahman. Om is the symbol for both the conditioned and the

unconditioned

> brahman.

 

>

> I think similar maNtra can be found in prashnOpanishad (5-2) also

is it not

> prabhuji?? where in it is said the OmkAra is both the higher

(para) & the

> lower (apara) brahman. prabhuji, would it be possible to give me

the

> original Sanskrit text for the above kaTha maNtra??

 

Namaste,

 

The references are as follows:

 

etad.hdhyevaaksharaM brahma etad.hdhyevaaksharaM param.h .

etad.hdhyevaaksharaM GYaatvaa yo yadichchhati tasya tat.h .. 16..

Katha 1:2:16

1-II-16. This syllable (Om) indeed is the (lower) Brahman; this

syllable indeed is the higher Brahman; whosoever knows this syllable,

indeed, attains whatsoever he desires.

 

 

 

etadvai satyakaama paraM chaaparaM cha brahma yadoN^kaaraH |

tasmaadvidvaanetenaivaayatanenaikataramanveti || 2

Prashna 5:2

V-2: O Satyakama, this very Brahman, that is (known as) the inferior

and superior, is but this Om. Therefore the illumined soul attains

either of the two through this one means alone.

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Nair,

The upanishads speak of the supreme non-dual absolute Reality as

param brahman. The same brahman when associated with or conditioned

by maya is referred to as apara brahman. Sri Sankara refers to apara

brahman as mAyAshabalita brahman or brahman conditioned by mAyA.

brahman conditioned by mAyA has only empirical (vyAvahArika) reality

which is a lower order of reality than pAramArthika, and so it is

referred to as apara brahman or inferior brahman. Here apara means

lower or inferior. In Samskrit almost every word has many meanings,

some of them mutually contradictory. The word apara is a compound

word which can be split up in two different words, giving two

different, contradictory meanings. These are:

1. na para – apara—not superior. In gItA, 7.5, Sri Sankara has given

the meaning of the word apara as—na para, nikRishTA, ashuddhA—not

superior, low, impure. This is the sense in which brahman is

described as apara when it is associated with mAyA, because it has

then the impurity of mAyA attached to it. Monier Williams has

probably not given this meaning. The most authoritative and

comprehensive Samskrit Dictionary is not MW' s, but Apte's. It gives

the meaning `inferior' also.

2. The second way of splitting up the word apara is—yasmAt param na

vidyate, tat aparam. The meaning now is—That, higher than which

there is nothing, is apara. That means, it is the highest. This is

the meaning given in MW Dictionary. When there are thus two

contradictory meanings for the same word, we have to take the

meaning relevant to the context. I have already explained above how

the word apara has to be taken as meaning inferior or lower in the

term apara brahman. Moreover, there is already the term para brahman

to denote the supreme Reality. Obviously the term apara brahman

cannot also denote the same supreme Reality.

The terms `conditioned brahman' and `unconditioned brahman' are used

to translate `apara brahman' and `para brahman' respectively by all

translators. I have merely followed them and do not claim any

originality.

I hope I have managed to make the meaning clear and not confused it

further.

Regards,

S.N.Sastri

 

 

In advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

>

> Dear Shri Sastri-ji and Shri Bhaskarji,

>

> I have a doubt. Grateful if you please clarify.

>

> MW Dictionary lists the following meaning for apara:

>

> 1 mfn. having nothing beyond or after, having no rival or superior.

>

> Why do we then interpret the word as lower, conditioned etc. when

the

> above meaning is absolutely advaitic and befits the one-without-a-

> second Brahman?

>

> Best regards.

>

> Madathil Nair

 

 

 

 

 

> ________________

>

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Immense thanks to Sastriji and Bhaskarji for their kind clarifications

on the word " apara " . My doubt is at rest now.

 

Dhyanasaraswati-ji has been extremely kind to send me off-List

relevant scriputural references and am immensely grateful to her too.

 

Regards to all.

 

M.R. Nair

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Sorry. In my message 40141, I left out the names of Sunderji and

Ramji. Immense thanks to them too for their clarifications.

 

Regards.

 

Nair

________

 

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

>

> Namaste.

>

> Immense thanks to Sastriji and Bhaskarji for their kind

clarifications

> on the word " apara " . My doubt is at rest now.

>

> Dhyanasaraswati-ji has been extremely kind to send me off-List

> relevant scriputural references and am immensely grateful to her

too.

>

> Regards to all.

>

> M.R. Nair

>

[Guest guest]

Katha 1:2:16

 

 

etad.hdhyevaaksharaM brahma etad.hdhyevaaksharaM param.h .

 

 

1-II-16. This syllable (Om) indeed is the (lower) Brahman; this

syllable indeed is the higher Brahman; whosoever knows this syllable,

indeed, attains whatsoever he desires.

 

 

praNAms

 

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

Thank you very much Sri Sunder prabhuji for providing the Sanskrit

originals...I have a small doubt here...if we see the kaTha shruti here,

it is not clear (unlike in prashna, where the mention of para & apara

brahman is quite clear) whether first brahma refers to lower (apara)

brahman...It can be interpreted here in such a way that shruti talking

here ONLY about para brahman & saying that this aksharaM is brahman that

is paraM...Inspite of that shankara says in his bhAshya on this maNtra that

first akshara refers to lower type of brahman!!! Any valid reason for

this??? I request the clarification from prabhuji-s...

 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

 

 

bhaskar

 

 

Prashna 5:2

 

 

paraM chaaparaM cha brahma yadoN^kaaraH

V-2: O Satyakama, this very Brahman, that is (known as) the inferior

and superior, is but this Om.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> Katha 1:2:16

>

>

> etad.hdhyevaaksharaM brahma etad.hdhyevaaksharaM param.h .

>

>

> 1-II-16. This syllable (Om) indeed is the (lower) Brahman; this

> syllable indeed is the higher Brahman; whosoever knows this

syllable,

> indeed, attains whatsoever he desires.

 

>...I have a small doubt here...if we see the kaTha shruti here,

> it is not clear (unlike in prashna, where the mention of para &

apara

> brahman is quite clear) whether first brahma refers to lower (apara)

> brahman...It can be interpreted here in such a way that shruti

talking

> here ONLY about para brahman & saying that this aksharaM is

brahman that

> is paraM...Inspite of that shankara says in his bhAshya on this

maNtra that

> first akshara refers to lower type of brahman!!! Any valid reason

for

> this??? I request the clarification from prabhuji-s...

>

 

Namaste,

 

The meaning may be more clear if read along with the bhashya on

the mantra preceding (#15) and succeeding (#17) it.

 

[ It is at : http://www.sankara.iitk.ac.in/upnishad.php3?toption=4 ]

 

In Sw. Gambhirananda's translation, there is a long foot-note

which ends thus: " ....The best minds can think of Brahman without

OM. The middle ones can meditate on Brahman with the help of OM, And

the inferior ones can worship Brahman on the symbol OM. "

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

--- Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> Thank you very much Sri Sunder prabhuji for providing the Sanskrit

> originals...I have a small doubt here...if we see the kaTha shruti

> here,

> it is not clear (unlike in prashna, where the mention of para &

> apara

> brahman is quite clear) whether first brahma refers to lower (apara)

> brahman...It can be interpreted here in such a way that shruti

> talking

> here ONLY about para brahman & saying that this aksharaM is brahman

> that

> is paraM...Inspite of that shankara says in his bhAshya on this

> maNtra that

> first akshara refers to lower type of brahman!!! Any valid reason for

> this??? I request the clarification from prabhuji-s...

 

Shree Bhaskarji - PraNAms.

 

First, I think as long as one understands the total perspective the

purpose of the shruti's statement is served.

 

I can think of an explanation after the fact. Of course I will or can

come up with different explanation for prasna too.

 

It is my feeling that Shankara feels that we are going from

vyaavahaarika to paarmaarthika - hence aksharam is negation of the

vyavahaara as not ksharam - not indestructible -looking from the

negative definition - negation of the duality or impermanence. It is

apara.

 

The second part is a positive definition - para as supreme - mattaH

parataram naasti. There is nothing beyond ME and the buck stops there.

It is my feeling that you are going to ask any more questions that

supreme is also from vyavahaara. We understand the truth is one and

looking from different perspectives. As long as this essence is

understood, scripture has done its job. Further hair-splitting logic

would only splits the hair only and does not help in the realization -

That of course is my feeling!

 

just some interesting experience:

 

When we first started a study group in Washington D.C. some 30 yrs ago,

one young man used to attend the sessions. We were doing Geeta Ch. 3

on karma yoga. He used to bring half a dozen books and for each sloka

he used to present how Shankara interpreted this sloka, how

Madusuudhana interpreted and how Raamaanuja did etc, and how a

particular word comes in this upanishad where explanation is this but

the same word is explained in differently in another upanishad, etc.

He used to throughly confuse us by the end of his presentation. At

last I had to tell him that he may be better of doing some karma yoga

than confuse himself and others by reading so many cross references to

arrive at the simple truths expounded directly by Krishna. Of course He

stopped attending the study group, realizing that we are not mature

enough to understand the indepth of the vedanta teaching or depth of

his analysis.

 

We need to keep the clear vision in mind in the pursuit of vedantic

study too. Ultimately it is not what Shankara said or Ramanuja said,

etc but do I have a clear vision of the truth for me to proceed - That

I feel should be the bottom line. Otherwise, as Shankara says in

Vivekachudamani that we can get lost in the forest of the scriptures.

It is aksharam and it is paramam - that is the truth.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

We understand the truth is one and

looking from different perspectives. As long as this essence is

understood, scripture has done its job. Further hair-splitting logic

would only splits the hair only and does not help in the realization -

That of course is my feeling!

 

 

praNAms Sri Sunder prabhuji & Sri Sadananda prabhuji

 

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

Suder prabhuji, thanks for the reference, I shall look into the shankara

bhAshya on those ( 15 & 17) maNtra-s...

 

 

Sadananda prabhuji, thank you for the clarification & advice....IMO, though

we academically know the essence of the shAstra, till that intuitive

realization, we have to have shrutyanugrahIta tarka ( you may call it hair

splitting) like above as a part of sAdhana / manana...it helps us to get

more clarity on vEdAnta & AchAryOpadEsha..is it not?? .Otherwise, what is

the need for us to indulge in long winding discussion on the concept of

perception/cognition based on some logic based texts like vEdAnta

paribhAsha etc. ?? dont you think these discussions are being carried out

just for the sake of quenching the thirst of our inquisitive mind??

 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

 

 

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

--- Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

.Otherwise,

> what is

> the need for us to indulge in long winding discussion on the concept

> of

> perception/cognition based on some logic based texts like vEdAnta

> paribhAsha etc. ??

 

Bhaskarji - PraNams.

 

You may have a point. But from my point -see the post 4 on the

series.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda