na-asat-Iya sUktam -- My Commentary.

[Guest guest]

praNAmaH to everyone!

 

Recently I have been into a debate with AryasamAjists on the issues of

the definition of paramAtma and validity of the concepts of avidyA and

apparent creation. When asked for a vEdic authority for the same, I

had to quote from nAsadIya sUkta - The Hymn of Creation in support of

advaita. I have commented upon this sUktam for the same purpose. I am

posting my commentary here and I request the respected erudite members

of this list to correct my mistakes, if any.

 

!! iyam nA asat Iya sUktam !!

 

(1.) nAsadAsIn nO sadAsIt tadAnIm nAsIt rajO nO vyOmAparO yat !

kimAvarIvaH kuha kasya sharmannambhaH kimAsIt gahanaM gabhIram !!

 

* Then was not non-existent nor existent:

 

COMMENTS: When there is perfect non-duality(a-dvaita) of nirguNa

brahman, it can neither be said to be existent or non-existent.

Reason: The word existent is used only when there is something as

non-existence a part from it at the same time just like evil is a term

used only in opposition to good.

Similarly, non-existence is said only when there is something like

existence existing separate from it.

Now, brahman being non-dual, it can neither be said to be existent nor

non-existent before creation.

 

 

* There was no realm of air, no sky beyond it. What covered in, and

where? and what gave shelter? Was water there, unfathomed depth of water?

 

COMMENTS: It shows that nothing like Matter existed before creation

and neither was there anything as Space then. But the question as,

" Avari iva kim kuha? " -- What was wrapping and where? shows that

brahman alone existed, yet there is *something else* which is wrapping

brahman as it were, but which is inexpressible(kim, kuha).

 

(2.) na mRityurAsIdamRitam na tarhi na rAtryA ahna AsItpraketaH !

AnIdavAta, svadhayA tadEkam tasmAddhAnyan na paraH kim chanAsa !!

 

* There was no death then, nor yet deathlessness;

 

COMMENTS: When there is perfect advaita, neither can something be

spoken of death nor of amRitatva, for death and deathlessness are only

relative terms co-existing always which do not exist in non-duality!

 

* of night or day there was not any sign.

The One breathed without breath by its own impulse

Other than that was nothing at all.

 

COMMENTS: Though brahman is AnIda = Without breath, he breathed!

This apparent contradiction is what advaita speaks of always. brahman

is unchangeable but still he becomes this world during creation. How

is this explained? -- It can be explained only by saying he breathed

without breath!

Now for example if we say, " He moved without Movement " , it only means

that he *appeared* to move while in reality he never moved!

 

vEdA tells us the samething by saying, he breathed without breath. It

means that the Creation process started without really any change in

brahman. So the Creation was only apparent as brahman being non-dual

can never undergo any change!

To establish the unreality of creation, it was again said, " Other than

that was nothing at all !

 

(3.) tama AsIt tamasA gUDamagrE aprakEtam salilam sarvamAidam !

tuchyEnAbhvapihitam yadAsIt tapasastanmahinAjAyataikam !!

 

* Darkness was there, all wrapped around by darkness,

 

COMMENTS: The word tamas used here explicitly by vEdA is what was

elaborated later in Upanishads as mAyA and in gIta as avidyA and that

which formed the basis of advaitavEdAnta of Adi SankarAchArya.

 

Clearly does the vEdA tell us that tamas was covered in tamas. Where

is this darkness(avidyA) residing when brahman was self-luminous?

This will be explained in 7th verse later.

 

*and all was Water indiscriminate, Then

that which was hidden by Void, that One, emerging,

A glory did put forth by Tapah!

 

COMMENTS: Here the words,

aprakEtam = Undistinguished.

AbhuH = Encompassing everything in itself.

apihitam tuchyEna = Hidden by Void(shunya).

are very important, for they denote the " inexpressibility " of what was

there covering brahman and how creation appears to have occurred while

brahman in reality has not undergone any change whatsoever! This

inexpressibility of tamas(avidyA) which covers brahman but covers NOT,

and makes brahman vibrate(breath - Verb) without vibration(breath -

Noun) is called as " anirvachanIya " by Adi SankarAchArya.

 

One more important thing is that the tamas is referred to as

shunya(Void) showing its unreality. So a question as where it resided

and how it covered brahman would be meaningless, for vEdA says that

the Creation occurred only APPARENTLY !!

 

(4.) kAmastadagrE samavartatAdhi manasO rEtaH prathamam yadAsIt !

satO bandhumasati niravindan hRidi pratISyAkavayO manISA !!

 

* First desire rose, the primal seed of mind,

The sages have seen all this in their hearts

The Seers, searching in their hearts with wisdom,

discovered the connection of the real with the unreal.

 

COMMENTS: This is the most wonderful verse speaking of the discovery

of the sages of the *connection* between the real and the unreal. Now,

it leads us to a clear inquiry as how something as unreal has come so

suddenly when vEdA was only speaking of non-duality all the while.

This *asat* that makes its first appearance in this verse denotes the

same tamas(avidyA) which creates the unvierse out of brahman

APPARENTLY, for it is itself UNREAL!

 

 

(5.) tirashcInO vitatO rashmirESAmadhaH svidAsIAat !

retOdhAAsan mahimAna Asan svadhA avastAt prayatiH parastAt !!

* Its rays above, below and sideways spread.

Creative then became the glory,

With self-sustaining principle below.

And Creative Energy above.

 

COMMENTS: This explains about the process of creation of Energy,

Matter etc.

 

(6.) kO addhA vEda ka iha pra vOchat kuta AjAtA kuta iyamvisRiSTiH !

arvAg dEvA asya visarjanEnAthA kO vEda yataAbabhUva !!

* Who really knows? Who can presume to tell it?

Whence was it born? Whence issued this creation?

Even the Gods came after its emergence.

Then who can tell from whence it came to be?

 

COMMENTS: This again speaks about the *cause* for creation. Although

brahman as we know is both the nimitta(efficient) and

upAdAna(material) kAraNa(cause) of this world, still that cannot be

non-dual brahman, for vEdA says it breathed WITHOUT BREATH!, So what

really got changed into this world is only brahman enveloped in tamas.

Just like a Cinema screen itself being unchanging shows the changing

clips on it, similarly brahman being unchanging and unchangeable,

projects this world out of tamas which is avidyA and is anirvachanIya.

 

Here it is also spoken of dEvAs, Gods, the ruling elements of prakRiti

who are said to be born much after Creation. They cannot tell us about

the cause of Universe being born much after Creation.

 

(7.) iyam visRiSTiryata AbabhUva yadi vA dadhe yadi vA na !

yO asyAdhyakSaH paramE vyOman so aNga vEda yadi vA naveda !!

* That out of which creation has arisen,

whether it held it firm or it did not,

He the ruler in the supreme sky, of this,

He surely knows - or maybe He does not!

 

COMMENTS: The subject discussed in this verse is, whether that thing

which gave rise to this world held this world firmly or not.

Why should such a question arise if God himself was declared to have

become this world? It only makes clear that World is something

superimposed on the unchanging God by means of tamas. And that which

held the world is this tamas!

 

One has to carefully examine a point here. If God himself has *really*

become the world and if he is the only holder of this world, vEdA

would not have said that the Supreme ruler MAY or MAY NOT know out of

which creation has arisen and whether it held it firm or not. This

only brings in another entity which is the actual cause of the

apparent creation and which is the only holder of this world. That

entity is of the nature of veiling and hence described as tamas. tamas

being its very quality, it is expressed in every jIva in the form of

ignorance of the real nature. This ignorance is avidyA, the primal

cause of Universe!

 

Further, from what has been said about the supreme ruler that He MAY

or MAY NOT know whether the tamas held the world firmly, the

*uncertainty* and *indeterminability* about the existence and

behaviour of avidyA is established which became the concept of

anirvachanIya of Adi SankarAchArya!

 

!! AchArya SrI Adi SankarArpaNamastu !!

 

Yours,

~SAMPATH~

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

<paramahamsavivekananda wrote:

>

> praNAmaH to everyone!

>

> Recently I have been into a debate with AryasamAjists on the issues

of

> the definition of paramAtma and validity of the concepts of avidyA

and

> apparent creation. When asked for a vEdic authority for the same, I

> had to quote from nAsadIya sUkta - The Hymn of Creation in support

of

> advaita. I have commented upon this sUktam for the same purpose. I

am

> posting my commentary here and I request the respected erudite

members

> of this list to correct my mistakes, if any.

>

 

Sri Sampathji, the comments are pretty nice, so far as the casual

Advaitin is concerned. You should test it out with hard-core

Dvaitin/Visishtadvaitins to get deeper criticisms. I just point a

couple of things which may get scrutinized.

 

In the first line, why is " Then " used? It suggests that " before

manifestation " there was pure advaita. It suggests that this apparent

creation-process had an origin in " time " . But then, does not " time "

belongs within maya?

 

The line " The One breathed without breath " suddenly posits existence

(and we are still in " then " ) when just before " not non-existent nor

existent " was asserted. You say that implies the apparent

creation/duality, which means that even " then " just as now, the

apparentness can be affirmed: " darkness/tama was there... " . So here

the original non-dual state referred to, say in pralaya, is more

emphatically an assertion of the always-nirguna status of Brahman,

than to the negation of saguna appearance. The latter negation is a

relative standpoint, for vyavahaarika cannot be discussed without

time and vyavahaarika means saguna Brahman. But " then " , the

appearance most closely resembles what we can imagine of nirguna, for

we cannot affirm any saguna aspect, with maya appearing inoperative.

 

Dvaitins may consider such attempts as too construed. But I like your

general argument.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

 

 

> !! iyam nA asat Iya sUktam !!

>

> (1.) nAsadAsIn nO sadAsIt tadAnIm nAsIt rajO nO vyOmAparO yat !

> kimAvarIvaH kuha kasya sharmannambhaH kimAsIt gahanaM gabhIram !!

>

> * Then was not non-existent nor existent:

>

> COMMENTS: When there is perfect non-duality(a-dvaita) of nirguNa

> brahman, it can neither be said to be existent or non-existent.

> Reason: The word existent is used only when there is something as

> non-existence a part from it at the same time just like evil is a

term

> used only in opposition to good.

> Similarly, non-existence is said only when there is something like

> existence existing separate from it.

> Now, brahman being non-dual, it can neither be said to be existent

nor

> non-existent before creation.

>

> * of night or day there was not any sign.

> The One breathed without breath by its own impulse

> Other than that was nothing at all.

>

> COMMENTS: Though brahman is AnIda = Without breath, he breathed!

> This apparent contradiction is what advaita speaks of always.

brahman

> is unchangeable but still he becomes this world during creation. How

> is this explained? -- It can be explained only by saying he breathed

> without breath!

> Now for example if we say, " He moved without Movement " , it only

means

> that he *appeared* to move while in reality he never moved!

>

> vEdA tells us the samething by saying, he breathed without breath.

It

> means that the Creation process started without really any change in

> brahman. So the Creation was only apparent as brahman being non-dual

> can never undergo any change!

> To establish the unreality of creation, it was again said, " Other

than

> that was nothing at all !

>

> (3.) tama AsIt tamasA gUDamagrE aprakEtam salilam sarvamAidam !

> tuchyEnAbhvapihitam yadAsIt tapasastanmahinAjAyataikam !!

>

> * Darkness was there, all wrapped around by darkness,

>