The System of Sankara

Caitanyachandra · September 24, 2001

The word 'Vedanta' meant originally the end of the Vedas, that is; the Upanishads. Today India applies it to that system of philosophy which sought to give logical structure and support to the essential doctrine of the Upanishads, the organ-point that sounds throughout Indian thought-that God (Brahman) and the soul (Atman) are one. The oldest known form of this widely accepted of all Hindu philosophies is the Brahma- sutra of Badarayana (c.200 B.C.)- in 555 aphorisms, of which the first announces the purpose of all: Now, then a desire to know Brahman. Almost a thousand years later, Gaudapada taught the esoteric doctrine of the system of Govinda, who taught it to Sankara, who composed the most famous of Vedanta commentaries, and made himself the greatest of Indian philosophers.

In his short life of thirty-two years Sankara achieved that union of sage and saint, of wisdom and kindliness, which characterizes the loftiest type of man produced in India. Born among the studious Nambudiri Brahmans of Malabar, he rejected the luxuries of the world, and while still a youth became a Sannyasi, worshipping unpretentiously the gods of the Hindu pantheon, and yet mystically absorbed in the vision of all-embracing Brahman. It seemed to him that the profoundest religion and the profoundest philosophy were those of the Upanishads. He could pardon the polytheism of the people, but not the atheism of Sankhya, or the agnosticism of Buddha. Arriving in the north as a delegate of the south, he won such popularity at the assemblies of Benaras that it crowned him with its highest honour, and sent him forth, with a retinue of disciples, to champion Brahmanism in all the debating halls of India. At Banaras, probably, he wrote his famous commentaries on the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita, and Brahma Sutras in which he attacked with theological ardour and scholastic subtlety all the heretics of India, and restored Brahmanism to the position of intellectual leadership from which Buddha and Kapila had deposed it.

There is much metaphysical wind in these discourses, and arid deserts of textual exposition; but they may be forgiven in a man who at the age of thirty could be at once the Aquinas and the Kant of India. Like Aquinas, Sankara accepts the full authority of his country's Scriptures as a divine revelation, and then sallies forth to find proofs in experience and reason for all scriptural teachings. Unlike Aquinas, however, he does not believe that reason can suffice for such a task. On the contrary he wonders 'Have we not exaggerated the power and role, the clarity and reliability of reason?' Jaimini was right: reason is a lawyer, and will prove anything we wish. For every argument it can find an equal and opposite argument, and its upshot is a skepticism that weakens all force of character and undermines all values of life. It is not logic that we need, says Sankara, it is insight, the faculty (akin to art) of grasping at once the essential out of the irrelevant, the eternal out of the temporal, the whole out of the part. This is the first pre-requisite to philosophy. The second is a willingness, to observe, inquire and think for understanding's sake not for the sage of invention, wealth or power; it is a withdrawal of the spirit from all the excitement, bias and fruits of action. Thirdly, the philosopher must acquire self-restraint, patience and tranquility. He must learn to live above physical temptation or material concerns. Finally, there must burn, deeper his soul, the desire for a blissful absorption in the Brahman of complete understanding and infinite unity. In a word, the student needs not the logic or reason so much as a cleansing and deepening discipline of the Soul. This, perhaps, has been the secret of all profound education.

Sankara establishes the source of his philosophy at a remote and subtle point never quite clearly visioned again until a thousand years later. Immaunel Kant wrote his Critique of Pure Reason. How, he asks, is knowledge possible? Apparently, all our knowledge comes from the senses, and reveals not the external itself, but our sensory adaptation-perhaps transformation of that reality. By sense, then, we can never quite know the "real"; we can know it only in the garb of space, time and cause which may be a web created by our organs of sense and understanding, designed or evolved to catch and hold that fluent and elusive reality whose existence we can surmise, but whose character we never objectively describe; our way of perceiving will forever be inextricable mingled with the thing perceived.

This is not the airy subjectivism of the solipsist who thinks that he can destroy the world by going to sleep. The world exists, but it is Maya-not delusion, but phenomenon, an appearance created partly by our thought. Our incapacity to perceive things except through the film of space and time, or to think of them except in terms of cause and change, is an innate limitation, an ajnana or ignorance whence we see a multiplicity of objects and a flux of change. In truth there is only one Being, and change is 'a mere name' for the superficial fluctuations of forms. Behind the Maya or Veil of change and things, to be reached not by sensation or intellect but only by the insight and intuition of the trained spirits, is the one universal reality, Brahman.

This natural obscuration of sense and intellect by the organs and forms of sensation and understanding bars us likewise from perceiving the one unchanging soul that stands beneath all individual souls and minds. Our separate selves, visible to perception and thought, are as unreal as the phantasmagoria of space and time; individual differences and distinct personalities are bound up with body and matter. They belong to the kaleidoscopic world of change; and these merely phenomenal selves will pass away with the material conditions of which they are a part. But the underlying life which we feel in ourselves when we forget space and time, cause and change, is the very essence and reality of that Atman which we share with all selves and things and which, undivided and omnipresent, is identical with Brahman, God.

But what is God? Just as there are two selves-the ego and Atman and two worlds-the phenomenal and nominal-so there are two deities; an Ishvara or Creator worshipped by the people through the patterns of space, cause, time and change, and a Brahman or Pure Being worshipped by that philosophical piety which seeks and finds, behind all spare things and selves, one universal reality, unchanging amid all changes, indivisible amid all divisions, eternal despite all vicissitudes of form, all birth and death. Polytheism, even theism, belongs to the world of Maya and Avidya; they are forms of worship that correspond to the forms of perception and thought. They are as necessary to our moral life as space, time and cause are necessary to our intellectual life, but they have no absolute validity or objective truth.

To Sankara the existence of God is no problem for he defines God as existence and identifies all real being with God. But regarding God as creator or redeemer. There may, he thinks, be some question. Such a deity, says Sankara, cannot be proved by reason; he can only be postulated as a practical necessity, offering peace to our limited intellects, and encouragement to our fragile morality.

The philosopher, though he may worship in every temple and bow to every God, will pass beyond these forgivable forms of popular faith. Feeling the illusoriness of plurality, and the monistic unity of all things, he will adore, as the Supreme Being, Being itself indescribable, limitless, spaceless, timeless, causeless, changeless Being, the source and substance of all reality. We may apply the adjectives "conscious" intelligent, even "happy" to Brahman, since Brahman includes all selves and these may have such qualities. All other adjectives would be applicable to Brahman equally, since it includes all qualities of all things' essentially though Brahman is neuter, raised above personality and gender, beyond good and evil above all moral distinctions, all deference and attributes, all desires and ends. Brahman is the cause and effect, the timeless and secret essence of the world.

The goal of philosophy is to find that secret, and to lose the seeker in the secret found. To be one with God means, for Sankara, to rise above-or to sink beneath-the separateness and brevity of the self, with all its narrow purposes and interests, to become unconscious of all parts, divisions, things, to be placidly at one, in a desireless Nirvana, with that great ocean of Being in which there are no warring purposes, no competing selves, no parts, no space, and no time. To find this blissful peace (Ananda) a man must renounce not merely the world but himself; he must look upon suffering and death as Maya, surface incidents of body and matter, time and chance, and he must not think of his own personal qualities and fate. A single moment of self-interest or pride can destroy all his liberation. Good works cannot give a man salvation, for good works have no validity or meaning except in the world of space and time. Only the knowledge of the saintly seer can bring that salvation which is the recognition of the identity of self and the universe, Atman and Brahman, soul and God, and the absorption of the part in the whole. Only when this absorption is complete does the wheel of reincarnation stop; for then it is seen that the separate self and personality, to which reincarnation comes, is an illusion. It is Ishvara, the Maya-God, that gives rebirth to the self in punishment and reward; but "when the identity" of Atman and Brahman "has become known, then," says Sankara, " the soul's existence as wanderer and Brahman's existence as creator" (i.e., as Ishvara) "have vanished away." Ishvara and Karma, like things and selves, belong to the esoteric doctrine of Vedanta as adapted to the needs of common man; in the esoteric or secret doctrine, soul and Brahman are one, never wandering, never dying, never changed.

It was thoughtful of Sankara to confine his esoteric doctrine to philosophers; for, as Voltaire believed, as only a society of philosophers could survive without laws, so only a society of supermen could live beyond good and evil. Critics have complained that if good and evil are Maya, part of the unreal world, then all moral distinctions fall away, and devils are as good as saints. But these moral distinctions, Sankara cleverly replies, are all within the world of space and time, and are binding for those who live in the world. They are not binding upon the soul that has united itself with Brahman. Such a soul, by definition, does not move in the sphere of desire and (self-considering) action. Whoever consciously injures another lives on the plane of Maya, and is subject to its distinctions, its morals and its laws. Only the philosopher is free, only wisdom is liberty.

It was a subtle and profound philosophy to be written by a man in his twenties. Sankara not only elaborated it in teaching and defended it successfully in debate, but he expressed snatches of it in some of the most sensitive religious poetry of India.

Ten religious orders were founded in his name, and many disciples accepted and developed his philosophy. One of them, some say Sankara himself, wrote for the people a popular exposition of the Vedanta-the Mohamudgara, or "Hammer against Folly"- in which the essentials of the system were summed up with clarity and force.

"Fool! Give up thy thirst for wealth, banish all desires from thy heart. Let thy mind be satisfied with what is gained by thy Karma... Do not be proud of wealth, of friends, or of youth; time takes all away in a moment. Leaving quickly all this, which is full of illusion, enter into the place of Brahman... Life is tremulous, enter into the place of Brahman... Life is tremulous, like a water-drop on a lotus-leaf... Time is plying, life is waning-yet the breath of hope never ceases. The body is wrinkled, the hair grey, the mouth has become toothless, the stick in the hand shakes, yet man leaves not the anchor of hope... Preserve equanimity always... In thee, in me and in others there dwells the Vishnu alone; it is useless to be angry with any body, or impatient. See every self in Self, and give up thought of difference."

Caitanyachandra · September 27, 2001

Description of Thought Process and Materializing of Earth

Samkhya and Vedanta

Out of six classical systems of studies of Indian thought (Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Mimamsa, and

Vedanta), Samkhya forms one of the most important philosophical currents. It is based on two distinct principles,

namely 1) Purusha, and 2) Prakriti. This dualism forms the basis of this philosophy. Secondly, Samkhya is precise,

rational, and logical, and therefore does not deem it necessary to invoke the concept of God for explaining the

manifest and non-manifest multifarious nature: the individual self and the objective universe. Samkhya nicely

propounds the theory of the possibility and the need to realize our true Self so that the bondage of ignorance is

broken and the individual self may attain liberation. Patanjali in his system of Yoga further elucidates the method

and means to unite our lower self with the true Self.

It is to the credit of sage Kapila (of ancient India, circa 3500 BCE) that saw the elaboration of this system, and

thereby he established the basis for all subsequent philosophical deliberations. Therefore, Kapila Muni is truly called

"Father of Philosophy".

Prakriti

Through the concept of Prakriti Samkhya deduced the evolution of objective universe in its infinite diversity. This

Prakriti is the all pervasive but complex primal substance, which is transformed into multifarious nature. The primal

entity is not perceived in its original form, for then it is in a state of equilibrium, and as such non-modified. This

eternal and infinite principle is insentient and consists of three interdependent and interchangeable elements

called the gunas. These are sattva, rajas, and tamas. These gunas are not the qualities but the constituent parts of

Prakriti. They give complexity to the Mula (original) Prakriti.

Under the inscrutable influence of Purusha, which is inactive and passive, but sentient (and also infinite and

eternal), Prakriti loses its equilibrium. As a consequence of this, the equilibrium is disturbed and the whole universe

of unlimited permutations and combinations comes into existence. The first modification of primordial nature is

called Mahat or Cosmic Intelligence. It further involutes into two forces, 1) Akasha, the primal matter, and 2) Prana,

the primal energy. Akasha forms the material basis and prana the energy basis of creation. Out of the interaction

of akasha and prana are formed five subtle elements, crudely translated as ether, fire, air, water, and earth. These

are the constituents of all the material existence in the universe. As can be seen, even mahat is material consisting

of three gunas, and so also the prana.

Nothing can exist without the combination of these three gunas. Mind, intellect, ego, sense organs, sense objects,

trees, plants, animal world, in short everything evolves from the various combination of these three gunas. In some

of these the sattva predominates, in others the rajas or the tamas. Depending upon the preponderance of a

particular guna in such a combination, the object acquires its peculiarities. Fir instance, while the mind and

intellect have predominance of sattva, a clod of earth is full of tamas! Sattva is helpful in illumining the true nature

of the thing, tamas in its extreme obscures the reality, rajas acts at the intermediate level, and it causes distorted

perception and gives false perception of it. Sattva is pure and shining, rajas is active and passionate, while tamas

is dull and lazy.

Purusha

Samkhya philosophy should not be construed to mean naturalistic science; and its conception of the second

principle as Purusha removes such a misconception. While Prakriti is insentient, Purusha is the sentient being. It is the

principle of awareness. Because of its close association with the Prakriti it is possible to gain experience. Organs of

perception are responsible for bringing sensory stimuli to the mind, but it s only because of proximity of Purusha to

the internal organ -antahkarana- one can gain the experience. One more important consideration according to

Samkhya is that Purusha are many.

The process in brief can be described as follows:

Spirit or Purusha is the principle for the sake of which nature evolves. Experience is explained on the basis of a

certain association of spirit with nature. Matter is merely the medium for spirit to manifest itself; matter is not the

source of consciousness. Mind intellect complex (or internal organ, the Antahkarana) is refined, subtle matter

predominantly consisting of sattva guna that acts as the main locus of union between Prakriti and Purusha

resulting in possibility of an experience, and thereby knowledge.

Every thought, desire, i.e. mental process by way of internal or external stimulus brings about modifications in chitta

- the mind-stuff. Like a stone thrown in a lake it produces ripples in the chitta. Immediately the mind reacts, it sends

the message to the Buddhi or the intellect, which determines the nature of the impulse and decides the course of

action. Thus, intellect acts as the deterministic faculty. Buddhi presents the whole series of modifications to the

Purusha, which experiences the change in the chitta, but is not affected in the least in the process. It is like a

colorless prism appearing red when a red flower is placed beside it! Thus internal organ or mind-stuff is the main

conduit for knowledge. However, the ego-function confuses the situation by identifying the Purusha with the

matter.

The Purpose

But what is the purpose of all these changes in the nature! Is there any? How and why this evolution from gross to

subtle and back, and these changes can be interpreted in relation to the goal? The question comes to mind: Is

the cosmic revolution purposeful?

Answers to these questions form the basis of various philosophical thoughts in the history of time and place. The

westerners and Charvakas of India believed that such changes are meant for the sense enjoyment, from grosser

indulgence to refined intellectual deliberations. Eat, drink, and be merry was the slogan of ancient materialist

Charvakas. But the Indians didn't object to their whims, for, true religious democratic tradition, respect for every

belief, was the main pillar of Indian culture.

Anyway, coming to our point of answering the question of purpose, aim or goal, of the changes in the nature,

Samkhya maintains that changes are for the 'benefit' of the soul. The Purusha gradually realizes that changes in

the nature do not affect it; and a day comes when it becomes free from all the bondages of identification with

the and mind. It realizes that it is eternal Free and omniscient. This freedom of soul is the aim and destiny of every

human endeavor.

The missing link in modern materialist science is the absence of any conception of primal sentient Self or

Consciousness or Purusha. (Throughout the article, the terms Self or Consciousness or Purusha are used

interchangeably.)

*

Differences with Advaita Vedanta:

The ancient Samkhya and Vedanta philosophies discuss various aspects of origin of universe and evolutionary

rationality of creation. The whole argumentative approach of various Indian belief systems, in some way or the

other, is based on these philosophies.

We have seen that Samkhya maintains two independent Realities and infinite numbers of Purusha! Moreover,

both the entities are taken to assume infinite and eternal existence. Vedanta does not accept two infinites and

multiplicity of Souls.

Vedanta maintains that Brahman is the only Immaterial Existence; and being non-material and simple, It has to be

all pervading and the only One Reality. The problem arises, then, about explaining this 'multifarious existence

including our identity!' The simple and apparently clever answer to this question is:

'When one perceives this universe as real, the explanation based on Maya theory should suit the person. A time

will come when one shall reach the state of higher consciousness when this multifarious reality will vanish, and the

person will perceive the same universe as no other than Brahman, (or Atman, or Self, or God).'

Before everything there exists Reality as Absolute Consciousness. The 'Will' to become many is the beginning of

manifest universe. The Will evolves as Illusion: the Maya. 'Absolute Consciousness, Brahman, willed to become

many', this is Maya. Maya is the cosmic illusion that creates ignorance and veils the vision of the Only Reality. Due

to the power of Maya, the Same Oneness is perceived as manifold universe.

Basically Absolute Consciousness was never modified, is not modified, and cannot be modified. This is the basis of

Advaita Vedanta. Based on their experiences the 'seers' or 'rishis' of ancient ages came to the conclusion that the

entire manifest universe is the expression of illusory qualities of One Substance -the Absolute Universal

Consciousness:

Swami Vivekananda has had honesty to praise the sage Kapila and his exposition of Samkhya philosophy as, "(If

we take into consideration Advaita Vedanta), then our argument will be that the Samkhya is not a perfect

generalization, ...and yet all glory really belongs to the Samkhya. It is very easy to give a finishing touch to a

building when it is constructed

Caitanyachandra · September 27, 2001