mahAvAkyaratnAvaliH- Translation No. 45.

[Guest guest]

*mahAvAkyaratnAvaliH- Translation No. 45. Miscellaneous statements.*

 

 

 

175. eshha shuddhaH pUtaH shUnyH shAnto aprANo anIshAtmA ananto akshhayaH

sthiraH shAshvataH ajaH svatantraH sve mahimni tishhThati—

 

This (brahman) is pure (free from the taint of ignorance), sacrosanct,

devoid of qualities, calm, without vital air, without any ruler; it is the

Self, infinite, undecaying, firm, eternal unborn, independent, established

in its own glory.

 

Note. The word shUnya has to be interpreted as 'devoid of qualities', since

it cannot obviously mean 'void'.

 

The impossibility of describing brahman by words has been brought out by

Shri Shankara in the last shloka of his Dashashloki, which is as below:

 

na caikam tadanyad dvitIyam kutaH syAt

 

na vA kevalatvam na ca akevalatvam/

 

na shUnyam na ca ashUnyam advaitakatvAt

 

katham sarvavedAntasiddham bravImi//10

 

 

 

Meaning:-- " It is not one; how can there be a second different from it? It

has neither absoluteness nor non-absoluteness. It is neither void nor

non-void since it is devoid of duality. How can I describe that which is

established by the entire Vedanta!

 

 

 

176. cakshhushho drashhTA shrotrasya drashhTA manaso drashhTA vAco drashhTA

tamaso drashhTA sarvasya drashhTA tataH sarvasmAd anyo vilakshhaNaH sadghano

ayam cidghana Anandaghana eva ekaraso avyavahAryaH—

 

It (brahman ) is the seer (knower) of the sense of sight, the knower of the

sense of hearing, the knower of the mind, the knower of speech, the knower

of ignorance, the knower of everything; therefore, different from everything

and of a different nature; it is pure existence, a mass of consciousness, a

mass of bliss, homogeneous, and indescribable.

 

Note. The kenopanishad describes brahman as the eye of the eye, the ear

 

of the ear, etc. The same idea has been brought out above.

 

 

 

In this context the following shloka from hastAmalakIyam, a work of twelve

verses by hastAmalaka, one of the four disciples of Shri Shankara is also

relevant.

 

manashcakshhurAderviyuktaH svayam yo

 

manashcakshhurAdermanashcakshhurAdiH/

 

manashcakshhuraderagamyasvarUpaH

 

sa nityopalabdhisvarUpo'ham AtmA//

 

The interesting feature in this shloka is that the term 'manashcakshhurAdi'

is repeated four times.

 

 

 

Meaning:-- I am that Self which is of the nature of eternal consciousness,

which is different from the mind, eye and other organs, but is itself the

mind of the mind, the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear and so on. It is

however inaccessible to the mind and sense-organs.

 

The Self is different from the mind and organs, that is to say, from the

gross and subtle bodies. The external objects are experienced by the mind

through the sense organs. The mind and the sense organs are clearly seen to

be different from the experienced objects. By the same reasoning, the Self

which illumines the mind and the organs must necessarily be different from

them.

 

It is only by the light of the Consciousness that is the Self that the

mind and organs, which are themselves insentient, perform their functions of

thinking, seeing, hearing and so on. This is why it is said in this verse

that the Self is the mind of the mind, eye of the eye and so on. This is

based on the kenopanishad which says:--

 

" He (the Self) is the ear of the ear, the mind of the mind, the speech of

speech, the vital air of the vital air and the eye of the eye " (1.2).

 

The mind and the organs of sense can experience only external objects.

They cannot know the Self. The mind has by itself no consciousness, but

appears to be conscious only because of the reflection of the consciousness

of the Self on it. The sense organs also derive their apparent sentiency

only from this reflected consciousness. This being so, it is obvious that

the mind and organs cannot know the Self.

 

This is the idea contained in kaTha up. 2.1.1.

 

S.N.Sastri