Fwd: Attributes and Substantive

[Guest guest]

advaitin , V Subrahmanian <subrahmanian_v

wrote:

 

 

 

 

Namaste to all Advaitins:

 

 

 

Attributes and Substantive

 

 

 

A recent post on Mandukya Upanishad Notes Introduction 2 from Sri

Sadananda ji (Ref. Msg. No. 30570 dt.Mar.15, 2006) and a response to

it on the above subject by our Sri Michael ji (Ref.Msg.No.30576

dt.Mar.16.2006) form the genesis for this post of mine. This is a

weighty topic in Advaita Vedanta and I thought it would be worth

discussing the topic in some detail. The objective is to evoke

considered responses from the honourable members of this List and to

take the discussion forward and arrive at and appreciate the final

position as per our system of Vedanta.

 

 

 

Here is my understanding of the topic. Brahman is the One Substance

of everything. It would not be wrong to call It 'The Substantive'.

( Sri Sadanandaji explains this with the support of 'Sarvam

Khalvidam Brahma'.) What we call objects is the 'Nama and Rupa'

superimposed on this One Substantive. It would not be wrong to call

this Nama-Rupa combine, the attribute. All attributes that we

perceive, coming from all the sensory activity can be included in

the one nomenclature called Nama-Rupa. We have thus the scheme

where 'the world is Brahman plus nama-rupa. Paramarthic Brahman is

the world minus nama-rupa.'

 

 

 

The Mandukya Upanishad provides an excellent model to understand the

above. Brahman, the Turiya, is the Original Consciousness (O.C.).

The three paada-s constitute the Reflected Consciousness (R.C.)

thus:

 

 

 

First Pada: 1. Viraat the Cosmic Consciousness of the waking world.

2. Vishwa, the individual consciousness of the waking world.

 

Second Pada: 1. Hiranyagarbha the Cosmic Consciousness of the Dream

world and 2. Taijasa the individual Consciousness of the dream world.

 

Third Pada: 1.Ishvara, the Cosmic Consciousness of the world in its

resolved state and 2. Praajna the individual consciousness obtaining

in the deep sleep state.

 

 

 

All the Six entities mentioned above are Turiya alone reflected in

each of these entities and thus called the Six R.Cs. Each of the

Cosmic Consciousness above denotes the entire world of objects

animate and inanimate, involving all vyavahara of the play of the

seer, seeing and seen in the gross, subtle and causal states. In

the seventh mantra of the Mandukya Upanishad, the all the six

reflected consciousness(es) are shown to have no absolute reality;

the Turiya alone is the Absolute Reality.

 

 

 

The revered Swami Paramarthananda, to whose lucid exposition of the

Mandukya Upanishad (in a whopping eighty hours) to which the above

presented scheme owes its origin, elucidates the matter further by

taking the example of the Gold and the Bangle, Chain and Ring to

signify the Turiya, and the three paadas. In each of the bangle,

chain and ring, upon investigation, it is concluded that apart from

the name and shape of these ornaments, nothing else obtains in them

except the Substance, Gold. In other words, the names and shapes of

these ornaments are insubstantial in themselves. These names and

shapes, the nama-rupa combine is what we called the attribute a

little above. The Swami asks his students humourously, " Would you

all hand over to me the gold and walk away with your bangles, chains

and rings? "

 

 

 

The Panchadashi gives a beautiful verse:

 

 

 

Asti Bhati Priyam Rupam Nama chetyamsha-panchakam |

 

Aadya-trayam Brahmarupam Maya-rupam tato dvayam ||

 

 

 

In every object these five amshas, parts, as it were, are present:

1.Asti, Existence (Sat),2. Bhati, Consciousness (Chit) 3.Priyam,

Bliss (Ananda) 4. Rupam, form and 5. Nama, name. Of these, the

first three pertain to Brahman, the Substantive and the latter two,

the attributes, pertain to Maya.

 

 

 

Sri Vidyaranya in the Panchadashi gives the sadhana for realizing

the Non-dual Absolute, Brahman: He says one must constantly engage

in 'dvaita-avajnaa', that is, deliberate disregard of the objective

duality. Essentially, this means: reject the attributes and grasp

the Substance.

 

 

 

All the exercises the Upanishads prescribe are this sadhana for

example,

 

Yadaa pancha-avatishthante jnaanaani manasaa saha |

 

Buddhischa na vicheshtati taamaahuH Paramaam Gatim ||

 

Taam Yogamiti manyante sthiraam indriya-dhaaranaam |(Kathopanishad

2.3.10)

 

(The Seers call that the highest state, wherein the five senses of

knowledge rest together with the mind and the intellect too does not

function. They consider firm restraint of the senses as Yoga.)

 

and 'Paraanchi khaani vyatrnat svayambhooH, paraang pashyanti na

antaraatman. Kaschit dhiraH pratyagaatmaanam aikshat aavrtta-

chakshur-amrtatvam icchan.'(Katha. 2.1.1) (The Lord cursed the

senses to be outward-turned. They, by nature, are not turned

towards the Atman, the Indweller. A rare, mighty-willed, aspirant

restrains his senses and succeeds in beholding the Atman.)

 

 

 

In effect, from the sadhanas taught by the Scriptures, what we

conclude is that 1. The senses grasp the attributes, nama-rupa, and

become enamoured by them. 2. Atman, in its purity, is not grasped by

the senses.

 

 

 

Evidence from the Sruti, scripture, Yukti, reasoning and Anubhava,

experience of the Enlightened can be advanced in this regard:

 

Sruti:

 

There are direct Sruti vakyams to show that the Self is not grasped

by the senses, as for example, 'na tatra chakshur gacchati, na vaag

gacchati, no mano'(Kena.1.3)= the eyes do not grasp Brahman, not the

words nor even the mind..' We can take that the eyes represent the

entire range of sense organs and vaak, speech, represent the entire

range of motor organs.

 

Vijnaataaram arey, kena vijaaniiyaat? (Brihadaranyaka)

 

By whom/by what indeed can that which knows be known?

 

Yukti:

 

The Self is the subject, the vishayi. It can never become the

object, vishaya. Vishayi cannot grasp the vishayi. There are

examples like 'the knife cannot cut itself', 'even an expert acrobat

cannot stand on his own shoulders', etc.

 

The five senses, instruments, are designed to grasp sound, form(and

colour), smell, touch and taste. They can not grasp Atman/Brahman

that has none of these, sound, etc. 'Ashabdam

asparsham..'(Kathopanishad).

 

 

 

Anubhava:

 

The unsublatable experience of the Enlightened gives us the faith in

the possibility of all that is learnt through the Sruti and deduced

through reasoning. Here is presented an account of the experience

of an enlightened Sage:

 

 

Acharyal: Yes. This is what I did on that day too. I, however, had

no doubt that the divine grace rather than My effort or competence

was primarily responsible for the conviction and all the samàdhi-s.

 

A few minutes after emerging from samàdhi, I thought as follows.

With the aid of a mental vrtti (modification of the mind) in the

form of a desire to meditate or a hue, I have earlier focused on the

Supreme. I should be able to become absorbed in the Supreme even by

considering any external object. After all, the Supreme is not

merely the witness of mental states but is also the real substratum

of everything.

 

(Mahànàràyana

Upanisad XIII.5)

(Whatsoever there is in the entire world that is seen or heard of,

all that is pervaded by Nàràyana, within and without (like a

bracelet and other golden ornaments by gold, their material cause).)

 

An earthen pot has a rotund form, has the name, `pot', and is made

of mud. It is apprehended as something that exists, as " is " ; it is

the object of the notion of existence (sadbuddhi). What is

responsible for the pot's being or existence? Decidedly, its name

and form do not lend any being to it. Other than as clay, its

material cause, the pot has no existence; it has existence only as

clay.

(A modification (of clay, such as a pot or jar,) has speech as

its origin and exists only in name; as clay alone, it is real.)

 

Can clay, per se, account for the being of the pot? No, for clay

has no existence apart from the particles of which it is made; the

name and form of clay do not make it existent. Nothing that is an

effect has existence apart from its material cause; only as the

cause, does an effect exist. Thus, no intermediary member of the

causal chain headed by the pot, clay and particles can account for

the pot's being. Only the ultimate cause, if it be intrinsically

existent, can adequately do so. The scripture teaches that Brahman

is the ultimate cause, the substratum of all, and that It is of the

very nature of absolute existence.

 

Thus, in the final analysis, a pot has existence only as Brahman;

apart from Brahman, it is simply non-existent. The name and form of

the pot are but its false or illusory aspects. Similarly, every

object has existence only as Brahman; the name and form of the

object are its illusory aspects. Were such not to be the case, the

scripture would not have emphatically taught that on knowing

Brahman, everything becomes known, just as on knowing clay, all

products of clay become known.

 

In the past, whenever I have wanted to, I have been able to

readily ignore the name and form of an object, such as an earthen

pot or a golden vessel, and to apprehend the object as being just

the substance of which it is made, such as clay or gold. Now, I

should go much further. I should thoroughly discriminate the name

and form of any selected object from its being, disregard them, and

understand that the object is actually just its ultimate basis,

absolute existence.

 

Having reflected in this manner, I started My meditation, taking

the sun as the object of relevance. I gazed at the sun, which was to

set in about half an hour and was pleasant to behold. With effort, I

increasingly ignored everything about the sun, such as its shape,

size and brightness, and focused on just its being. Soon, nothing

mattered except the bare existence of the sun; indifference to the

illusory aspects became well established and effortless. I cannot

say whether thereafter My eyes were fully open, partially closed or

fully closed. Abruptly, I almost totally forgot Myself. Just

unqualified being, unrelated to space, time and objects, remained

and that too not as an inert entity but as objectless consciousness.

 

When My mind descended from this savikalpa-samàdhi, I found that

the sun had already set and that the place was illumined by the

moon. I estimated that My samàdhi would have lasted for nearly an

hour. I then left for Narasimhavana.

 

The next morning, the external object I considered to facilitate

My meditation on the Supreme was the wall in front of Me. With

hardly any effort, I was able to disregard all illusory aspects and

focus on just the being of the selected object. I attained savikalpa-

samàdhi in moments; the experience was the same as what I had had

on the previous occasion.

 

{Here, Acharyal instructed me, who was seated in front of Him, to

move to His side and face the same direction as Him. He then

said, " In the evening, use the sun as an object and focus on the

Truth, the way I did. Right now, let us both enter savikalpa-

samàdhi for some time with the wall in front serving as the object

to initiate the meditation. " Such was the power of Acharyal's

presence and grace that, even without any effort, I went into,

experienced and emerged from savikalpa-samàdhi in the same manner as

and together with Acharyal. Acharyal Himself confirmed that what I

had experienced was similar to what He Himself had experienced.

Acharyal then said that He would continue His account the next day.}

 

(Acharyal:) In the evening, I went to My usual place of

meditation. After taking My seat, I reflected, " Brahman is of the

nature of absolute existence and is the substratum on which this

illusory world of names and forms is superimposed. Even as I

perceive what is external, I could, instead of considering a

specific external object, use words to this effect to direct My

attention fixedly to the Truth. This would be equivalent to My

earlier using, when inward-turned, words of the Brahmànucintana and

the Pañcikarana to become absorbed in the Supreme. "

 

Without shutting My eyes, I mentally said to Myself:

(I am Brahman of the nature of absolute existence, the substratum

of everything.)

 

I intensified the resulting notion by disregarding names and forms

in general. As I proceeded to do so, the diversity, rooted in names

and forms, of the world seemed more and more to be superficial and

irrelevant. Everything appeared to become stripped to bare being,

without attributes. My sense of individuality faded. An upsurge in

the intensity of concentration resulted in savikalpa- samàdhi that

was akin to the preceding ones. About one and a half hours passed

before My mind descended from samàdhi.

 

I: Was Acharyal familiar at that time with the scriptural account

of the two drsyaanuviddha (associated with a perceptible object) and

two sabdaanuviddha (associated with a name) kinds of savikalpa-

samàdhi-s?

 

Acharyal: No. I read the verses concerned of the Sarasvati-Rahasya

Upanisad and the Drg-Drsya-Viveka much later. Only when I did so did

I come to know that there were these varieties of savikalpa-samàdhi

and that I had properly practised all of them.

 

(Drg-Drsya-Viveka 3cd)

Savikalpa-samàdhi is of two kinds by virtue of its association

with a perceptible object or a name

(ibid. 24)

Desire and the like, which are located in the mind, are

perceptible objects. One should thoroughly concentrate on

consciousness as their witness. This constitutes savikalpa-samàdhi

associated with a perceptible object.

(ibid. 25)

I am unattached, of the nature of absolute existence, pure

consciousness and ultimate bliss, self-luminous and free from

duality. Meditating thus constitutes savikalpa-samàdhi associated

with words(scriptural declaration).

(ibid. 27)

Savikalpa-samàdhi associated with a perceptible object can occur

with regard to any external object just as it can with regard to

what is in the mind. In this, name and form are separated from pure

being.

(ibid. 28)

There is just Brahman, the indivisible, homogeneous entity of the

nature of absolute existence, pure conscious and ultimate bliss.

Such an uninterrupted thought constitutes savikalpa-samàdhi

associated with a word – scriptural declaratioin.}

End of Quote from the book 'Yoga Enlightenment and Perfection'.

 

The above quoted experience brings out two levels involved here:

1. the substantive gold, of the attributed ornaments and 2. The

(Super) Substantive Brahman, the substratum Being of even the gold

and ultimately of the ornaments. By bypassing the (gold)-

substantive, one can arrive at the conclusion that Brahman is the

Substantive of all objects. I get the feeling that Sri Sadananda ji

actually meant this when he said that 'the senses do not grasp the

substantive'. It was these lines of his that reminded me of the

Acharya's experience that I have quoted above.

 

 

The Sruti, yukti and Vidvad-anubhava mentioned above prove that

the senses grasp the attributes and by restraining the senses and

disregarding the attributes one will be able to 'grasp' the One

Substance, Brahman. I make it clear that the Vedanta Paribhasha

prakriya for perception and inference and the Brahmasutra Bhashya

portions quoted by Sri Michael ji do not stand invalidated by what

is said by me in the foregoing. In my perception, these are valid in

the level 1 that is mentioned in the above para. I am open to be

corrected on this. The Vedanta Paribhasha offers an excellent

scheme to explain the sensory perception and the inference that we

have in our experience of the world. The defect of 'subject

knowing the subject' does not arise in the Paribhasha scheme as

Brahman is 'differentiated' by the application of upadhis and thus

the triad of the seer, seeing and seen is amply accounted for.

 

I would like to thank Sri Sadananda and Sri Michael for

providing, although unintended by them, the basic idea for this

post. Members who are interested to take this forward are welcome

to do so.