sign in sign up
<<
Home , Prajna (Hinduism), Turiya, Visayah

14

1. PRAMEYA IN ADVAITA {AMANASKA )

1

1.0. Prameya

1 i Oneness of the individual soul and , the pure corjscious- ness, is the prameya, thesubject matter of AdvaitaVedanta; f<^r there lies the purport of the Vedantas ; ■ jivabrahmaikyam suddhacaitanyam prameyam, tatra eva vedantanam tatparyat.' The existence of such pure- as the non-duat is realized with confirmation from three stand points: (1) Direct .Experi- ence, (2) Inference and (3) Support of the authority (sr^i-yukti-antfbhuti)./ H i

1.1. Direct experience {aparoksanubhuti) » I

All disturbances, sufferings, problems, tensions, tragedies and dif­ ficulties etc. are the outcome of the agitation of mind. When mind is quiet, it is in a state of all peace and tranquility. This state is caljled qui­ escent consciousness, which never takes any part in any fact of act, as said in the Pat^adaii : manojrmbhanarahitye yathia saksi nirakulah/

mayajrmbhanatah purvam sat tathaiva nirakulam/P The witnessing consciousness becomes pure, calm and unigitated, if the mind is devoid of all mentations. Similarly, the prameydk (sat) is known to be pure, calm and unruffled prior to the function of niaya (the creative impulse). The Advaitic tradition enjoins upon man to tfanscend 15

the source of duality i.e. the mind, intellect, vital energy, ego and igno­ rance etc, as the prerequisite to have a direct experience of the reality, - ~ ' ~~ f the p ra m eya . Acarya S ankara’s N irvanasatkam comjlrising "manobuddhyahamkaracittani naham”^ is an instance of the direct experienc of the reality, the pure-consciousness. which ^s based . - 0^ - i upon the Mandukyakarika’s clue, "anythagrhnato svapno..." and| ' ■ ' " ' * __ ■ — is used widely as a relaxation technique, is another means of difect ex­ perience of reality. The multiple objects of the world are known on accouni of the exercise of the mind and intellect. When a child looks several tiilies at a thing, say a toy, the idea of that thing is cognised by his mind anfi there­ after he can recognize it slowly. Had he not paid sufficient an^ount of attention to that object, he would not have apprehended it. A; person ignorant of any language, becomes ' d e a f to the phonemes of tfiat lan­ guage and is unable to listen to all the sounds of that languagcj There­ fore, the of different entities, i.e. the dual world, |lepends upon .the mind only. If the mentation is stopped, there will be not knowl­ edge of the duality : manodrsyamidam dvaitam yatkincit sacaracaram/

martasah hyamanibhave dvaitam naivopalabhyate//^° “All this that there is - together with all that moves or ^oes not move, is perceived by the mind (and therefore all this is but th0 mind); for when the mind ceases to be the mind, duality is no longer perjceived.” After discarding the mind, there will be nothing that qould be known. When there is the abandonment of the duality, what is experi­ enced is called Sat, the awareness, the non-dual reality, the prameya : taddstimitagambhiram na tejo na tamastatam/ anakhyamanabhivyaktam sat kincidava^isyate//^ ic

“What remains after dissolution is an unmoving and ungraspabld, un­ named and un-namable, unmanifest, indefinite something beyond| light and darkness and all-pervading”. This is the direct experience of thejpure- consciousness - the pranieya, known by making the pram ata |is the grameya. |

1.2. Inferential knowledge: anumana

The knowledge of the prameya, pure consciousness, is received through inference in three ways : viz, by the analysis of (I) the Three States, (II) Five Sheaths and (III) Five Elements.

1.2.1. Analysis of the three states: waking, dreaming and d^ep sleep

Waking according to the Pitambara^’', is that state when one ac­ quires knowledge through the direct contact of sense organs v^ith the objects or through the impression of such contacts. In waking s ate, the objects of knowledge differ from one another, because their < ualities differ; as the cow, the horse etc. are different. If each of the knowledge of such objects like sound etc. is separated from their different objects of knowledge, then such knowledge does not shine different f' one another. It is because knowledge is known in all as knowledge only. It is just like the sky, which is considered as one in everything even ' hough it is present differently in different objects such as in a pot or iif a hut’**. j The objects are different in themselves, from one another as welll as from those included in their own class {sajatiya, vijatiya and svagata-bheda). Whereas knowledge or consciousness of one sound neither difjfers from j that of another sound nor it differs from the knowledge of tou4h etc. 17

Similar is the case in the dream state, where the perceived cjbjects are transient. They are varying in nature as these are seen diffei'ently. But the perceiving consciousness does not differ as it is known ajs one.

This consciousness is not different from that of the waking state, i In deep sleep, where “want of knowledge” is perceived, the con- sciousness is distinct from the object (here, ignorance), but not fiom it­ self, as the knowledge of the pot is different from its object 'pot . This knowledge in deep sleep, when separated from its object, does not differ from the pure knowledge or awareness of waking state. Thus in all the three states, waking, dreaming and deep sleep, it is known frorr infer­ ence that the persistence of an unvarying, consistent and one - ype of knowledge, called consciousness continues homogeneously.

1.2.2* Analysis of the five sheaths

Human being is not merely corporeal, but he is made up of five sheaths : physical, mental, vital intellectual and blissful. In the begin- ning, ‘sound health’ was considered from the stand point of the physical

t body only. Afterwards, mental health is accepted in the sense olF sound health and then the definition broadened from ‘social’ to 'spir tual or holistic life'. The cancerous tissues are now detected in the ‘vita r body six months before they actually appear in the physical organs. The Kirlian photography which takes the picture of aura or life-force, has co ■vfirmed the more permanent and pervasive nature of different bodies not only in human beings or animals, but even in the plants also. Human beings are I made of five sheaths, declare the Upanisads. From analysis of thiese five sheaths of a being, we find that the mind is more subtle and internal than I d the physical one, and the vital sheath is more subtle and pervasive than the mind. Similarly intelligence is more pervasive than the vital sheath. So, the more subtle, internal and pervasive one is, it becomes morej real.

Consciousness being the subtlest, is the greatest reality.

1.2.3. Analysis of the flve elements

The physical realm consists of five gross elements viz., ^arth, water, fire, air and ether which are experienced from their qualities; like, smell etc., by the five sense organs, viz, nose, tongue, eye, skin anjd ear respectively. The word earth does not denote the physical earth attone, ! but it is a symbol which stands for all that is known by the quality ‘sdiell’, experienced with the sense organ “nose”. Similar are the symbol^ like water, fire etc. In analyzing these five elements, earth etc., it is dedjuced that the subtler an element is among the five, the more pervasivtj and more causal it becomes. Earth is dissolved in water which becomes its cause. Similarly, water comes from fire and is dissolved in fire. jUlti- mately, consciousness being the subtlest, becomes the most pervasive s reality. j

1.2.4. Inference and experience compared

Though the knowledge of the Pure consciousness or Ejrah- man, is known only through experience - proclaim the Upanisads,?still — ’ ' ' A -- Swami and others like Sriharsa [Sriharsa in his Khandanakhandakh~adya writes 'anumayapi tadadhigamarri] have tried to acquir an inferential knowledge of the prameya (Brahman) as stated. However, the knowledge obtained by experiencing the awareness is 4asy, strong and convincing. Truly speaking, what the great teacher of

Bhagavan Acarya Sankara, Sri Gaudapadacarya has very explicitly ex­ 19

posed of the amanibhava, is the right method of knowing the reality. Amanibhava is^ state where the mmd is without mentation i.e. mi^d is not allowed to receive objects outside and not allowed to function.! It is introverted. Then the aspirant becomes ready to receive the experience of his own awareness, the awareness of the self. Here, it is felt that l^ase- less is the common objection which blames the Advaitins that they Want to become “sugar” instead of lasting the sweetness of sugar; for, thejre is i no mind, the duality, to taste it. Besides these two means of attaining the prameya, the third m^eans I i of knowing the prameya is the “Authority”. Therefore, let the natu^^e of the prameya be discussed here as the scriptures describe it vividly j I I 1.3. Shstric description of prameya i The substance which is experienced without mind and intellect, obviously not by senses but by direct experience, (aparoks'anubhuti^, is named as bodhamtttram or Brahman, the reality. Such prameya is! de- / / ^ scribed by Advaitins in an Upanisadic, Philosophic or s^stric language as follows : i 1.3.1. Cit or bodhaniatram'. pure conciousness

i When the objects, i)ii which knowledge is acquired, are remoived from the mind, what remains is the pure consciousness, the awarenjess, the self or Brahman. This knowledge is called determination of Brah­ man. . i yasmin yasminasti lake bodhastattadupeksane/ yad bodhaniatram tad ityevam brahmaniscayah// ^ The self knows all that is knowable. There is no other one to kr|ow the self. It is different from both the known and the unknown, the kn^w- 20 able and the unknowable, because it is the embodiment of knowledge, bodha-svarupakam. sa vetti vedyam tatsarvam nanyastasyasti veditd/ viditaviditabhyam tat prthagbodhasvarupakam/P

1.3.2 SaV. existence

That which is realized or whose presence is still known after l e ­ gating all objects of the world, is called the real existence or Sat. Sat is

that which is not negated (satyatvam badharahityam):

“jagadbadhaikasaksinah badhah kim saksikah/. ”■* The world vanishes in sleep. This absence is witnessed by the |ex- fi istent consciousness as “I slept deeply. I know nothing.” Knowledgi! is Existence and Existence is knowledge, "sattaiva bodhah bodha evai ca satt'd” \ 1.3.3. Ananda: bliss \

Self is loved by all for the sake of none. Whereas all others |are loved for the sake of the self. The wife is loved not for her, but forlthe i husband's own sake. So also the child, fame etc. are loved for the sak^ of tI the self. Therefore the self is the Supreme bliss. r _ i iyamatma parahandah paraprema^spadam yatah/'^° ; It is blissful, because here is fearlessness. Fear arises from a Sec­ ond one. Here is the end of suffering and eternal peace, for all wisljj to exist for ever and never wish to cease. All these are achieved by discard­ ing the duality from the mind ; manaso nigrahSyattambhayam sarvayogiimm/

duhkhaks^yayah prabodhascapyaksayasantireva ca//‘“ "For all these , fearlessness, the removal of mislery, knowledge (of the self), and everlasting peace are dependent on the cjon- 21 trol of the mind.” It is calm, eternal light, fearless and unshakable me|di- tation .suprasantah sakrjjyotih sam^dhiracalobhayah/'/Kht \ ■‘It is supremely tranquil, eternal effulgence, divine absorption, imriiu- table and fearless.”

1.3.4 A nantant'. inTinite

The Brahman is int'niite in three respects : in space, in time and in beings. It is (I) omnipresent, for It is all pervasive, (II) eternal, for i^ is not limited by time and (III) infinite. It being the nature of all beings! It is not limited to a particular object "anantyam brahmani tridha'.’’

1.3.5. S a ksii witnes.s

The nature of the reality is that which remains after dismissing 1Te objects of knowledge and the five sheaths of the physique etc. as tjhe residue. It is called the witness as it remains to witness all dissolv ed ones. It is not without a saksi : ”na tvasdksikah.

1.3.6. Vijnata or knower

Awareness is the substratum by which everything is known. It is

in and through all that is known and unknown. How could the knower t>e

known '^? How can the contents contain the container ? Objects are he|ld as contents in consciousness which is the container of the knowledge |of those objects. To say we know the objects and do not know the con­ sciousness in and through which we know them, is a piece of self-decep­ tion. In every act of knowing the knower knows consciousness. He is that who knows. Knower cant be known. \

■N— ^ yo hi jnata sa eva sah/''* \ ^ _ _ vijnataram kena vijaniyai/'^" 22

1.3.7. Avacya: indescribable

It cannot be described as ‘this’ or ‘that’. It also cannot be said as like this’ or ‘like that’. Not the spirit, but only an objeqt is described. A perceptible one can only be called like this; and which is beyond perception is said "like that’. Self is neither the object of perQep- tion, nor beyond the ken of perception. So it cannot be described and is devoid of all thought, determinations and imaginatiosns: sarvabhilapavigatah sarvacinta samutthitah/'^

1.3.8 Svayam jyotUy. self-revealing

Though it is not an object of knowledge, yet it is known directly

i i.e., without being an object of knowledge. So, it must be self-revealing. tameva bhantamanubh'ati sarvam/

tasyabhasa sarvamidam vibhati”'^

1.3.9. Nirguna: indeterminate

The moment we try to bring Brahman within the category of irjtel- lect, or try to make this ultimate subject an object of thought, we misi Its

essential nature. Then it no more remains unconditioned consciousness’’.

Finite thought can never grasp Brahman, because it is unqualified, irtde- terminate and Absolute. All those who rely on the intellect are deluded.

All categories of mind fail to grasp It fully'*. Those who try to deternjiine It through intellect, they try to find the footprint of birds on the $ky, because, it is not mere existence, nor mere consciousness, but It is All Consciousness (vijnana-ghana). So all determinations of the intellect fail

here’’. 23

1.3.10. A^ira^Aara: not a substratum

Brahman is not a substratum of the qualities like sai, cit and dinandam. It is not also a subject of knowing or feeling these qualities-”.

1.3.11 Acodyam: unquestionable

Objections are raised and answered from the point of view of!du- ality. From the stand point of pure non-duality, neither question norjan- swer is possible. Arguments are possible through the mind and spejech which belong to the world of duality. In non-duality, silence or experi- ence is the only language.

codyam va pariharo va kriyatam dvaitabhasaya/ ' advaita-bhasaya codyam riasti napi taduttaram//-' |

1.3.12. Advaita: non-dual

The means as well as goal of Vedanta is to transcend the minii. It

results in transcending the duality. What remains after crossing the ^ual world is a non-duality. It is one without a second. “sadeva somya idamagra asit, ekamevadvitiyam "Existance was" .■ "asadeva idamagra asit"^^ “Nonexistence was also existing”, 'sat' and 'asat' both arei de­ rived from the root 'as' which signified existence. If the two are ac­ cepted as referring to two things, the idea of secondless Brahman _ _ i (advitiyam in this ) is affected. So, both refer to the samej be­ cause the three words in "ekam eva advitiyam ” reject the three diffdren- tiations. SajdtTyabheda is negated by ekam, vijatTya by advitiyam,and

svagata by eva. Therefore, there is no ptatiyogi of this prameya. Sinde its presence is felt in the absence of duality, therefore. It is non-dual. PA

1.3.13. Omkara: pranava

Consciousness is not a separate field of experience other thari vi­ bration. The ultimate reality as the Supreme consciousness is the unstifoke sound, anahatanada. It is heard in the highest states of meditation wihen the gross mind has been fully transcended. Consciousness is represerited by AUM. It is that state where the three states of consciousness iare crossed. The unity of the component parts of AUM is felt with the difjfer- ent states of consciousness. The component sounds a,u,m of Om are gradu­ ally identified with the three conscious states subjectively (viiva, taijpsa andprajna) and with cosmically (Virat, Hiranyagarbha and Isvara). The feeling of the union of Omkara with the states of consciousness should lead ultimately to the feeling of the presence of Brahman as identical with oneself: amatrascaturtho' vyavahdryah prapatwopasamah sivadvaita evamohk^ra 'atmaiva samvisatyatmanatmanam ya evam vedar^" The prameya in this aspect of sound has a great affinity with ihe Advaita of Kashmir, discussed in the section kaktopaya. Omkara as the prameya should be distinguished from the omkara as the meansiof attaining the ultimate Omkara. PranaVa as a means is like a bow to shc|ot at the goal. Brahman -■*. i I 1.3.14. Navayava: Indivisible

•s Division, parts or avayava can be conceived of after a thing fis created. Names and forms are given to differentiate a thing. A jada c>n I' have division. Consciousness which in existence has no division, be­ cause parts of existence cannot be conceived of. Like sky. Brahman |is

partless. 25 sato navayavassahkyastadamsasyanirupanat/ na tayorudbhavastasm^niramiah sadyatha viyat//^^

1.3.15. Ekarupa: homogeneity

Consciousness does not differ from one consciousness of a thing to that of another. It is one and the same. The objects of knowledge viz., sound, touch etc., which are perceived in the waking state, are different i from one another because of their peculiarities. Similar is the case in ^he dream state. In deep sleep “want of knowledge” is perceived. The cc^n- sciousness in the deep sleep is distinct from its object (here, ignorancfe), but not from itself. Thus in all the three states, consciousness being Ho­ mogeneous, is the same. ) sabdasparsddayo vedya vaicitrdjja^gare prthak/ J tato vibhaktat tat samvidaikarupyanna bhidyate/P^ Homogeneity of consciousness is inferred in three levels : (1) in the fike objects of perception, (2) in the five sheaths of body and (3) in the thilee states of man ; waking, dreaming and deep sleep, though in all thejse three levels the ingiredients differ. It is . It does not change jin time. Except it, everything changes : i masabdayugakalpesu gatdgamyesvanekadha/ nodeti nastamatyeti samvidesa svayamprabha//-^

1.3.16. Purna: perfect

Consciousness lacks nothing. Nothing is lost from it, as it is t)ie witness of absence, “vadhaika saksi”. It is phenomenal as well ^as noumenal, saguna, as well as nirguna, par^and apara, cause and effect.

In the form of visva, it is all in outside; in the form of , luminousity, it is full inside and in the state of , intelligence, it is concentrated 26 consciousness, where there is no effect but it remains as the cause. In the state, it is neither cause nor effect. It is purna, for it remains purna even after another purna coifies out of it. Like the light of a candle which remains full even after igniting another candle or like knowledge which does not lose anything aftefc- it being imparted.

1.3.17. Brahntavid brahma: knowing is becoming

The essence of the prameya is existence which is awareness. Who­ ever becomes aware of it, he also becomes awareness, lie does not be­ come a new one, but he is iternaly awareness. He merely recognizes )iis

own nature of consciousness. In that stage the individual self is S^lf- illumined. atrayam purusah svayam jyotirbhavati/- ya evam brahma Veda sa brahmaiva bhavati svayam. brahmaho nasti janmatah punarasya najayate.

1.3.18. /ij’ova: indicated like Arundhati

In the Upanisads, there are passages which declare the worlcily things as Brahman, like '‘the food verily Brahma” etc. The Vedic psis- sages which say son etc. as the self, are not wholly meaningless. As the self is too subtle for ordinary understanding, the passages gradually tra^n ! the mind to dwell on finer and finer aspects of the self. They help one ^o know the reality. It is like indicating the small star, Arundhati, by shoxi'- ing a nearby brighter star. 1.3.19. innermost awareness

The inner most self is different from the body, the sense$,

vital organs, mind, intellect etc., and it is the illuminer of the outer enti­ ties such as the sun etc. The consciousness is inner (pratyak), not oute^. 27

When one’s awareness is introverted for its knowledge and the mind is withdrawn from the surface awareness, he knows the inner one.

"atastattadbhasaikcim nityasuddhabuddha-muktasatyasvabhavdm pratyakcaitanyam evatra vastviti vedantavidvadanubhavah ' I 1.3.20. Upadana and nimitta karanax efficient and material •• cause

Consciousness when associated with ignorance and considered frojri its own stand point, it is the efficient cause, and when considered from the stand point of its upadhi or limitations, it is the material cause of the universe. Just as the spider is the efficient cause when considered from its own self, and it becomes the material cause when considered from the stand point of its body.

ajnVnopahitam caitanyam svapr^dhanataya nimittam, \

svap'adhipradhanatayop'ddmxam bhavati^^ "yathornanabhi srjate grhnate ca ”

The definition of Brahman therefore is given as “from which these crej- ations are created, in which maintained and dissolved..”

“yatova imani bhutani jay ante...... and janmadyasyayatah 1.3.21. Turiya: the noumena The prameya is called the fourth, the turiya, the transcendental which is above the three : gross, subtle and casual: or wakeful, dreaming and deep sleep, both individually (namely, visva, taijasa and prajria)

and collectively (namely Vaisvanara, Hiranyagarbha and Isvara). Turiyk ■1 is the substratum of these three states. It is the substratum of individual and aggregate, ignorance as well as of the consciousness (Isvara an4 pt^jna) associated with them. 28

"ajnanatadupahita caitanyyoradharabhutam yadanupahitam cait^ai^m lattu/^amityuccyate “santam sivamadvaitam caturthamanyate sa atfna sa vijnyih. 1.3.22. Aparinami’. unchanging The prameya knows of no change and can never be related to |the changing objects: citeh suddhavattvat aparinamacca.^'* All souls are unborn and are always in the state of enlightenment. All elements by their very nature, are calm from the beginning, unborn &nd internal in the Absolute. I'hey are so, because, they are nothing otiher than Brahman which is unborn, same and vaisaradyam.

~adisantohyanutpanriah prakrtyaiva sunirvrtah/ sarve dharmah samWyhinnah ajam samyam visdradam//^^

1.3.23. Buddha: pure The self is pure^because “after the manifestation of the world, w|iat- ever awareness is there, is mixed or (as they call it) reflected awarenejss’,

which without being qualitatively different from it, is so joylessly unlike as not to be recognized at all as that”^*. “An enlightened soul is neither

related to anything nor anything is related to his knowledge. He has ti-an- scended the duality. Purity of pure-consciousness is not in dualityj So ^ I the highest Reality is pure in tr a n s c e n d e n c e ."nitya-suddha-bud^ha- mukta... / ‘ f durdarsamatigambhiramajam santam visaradam/ buddhva padamananatvam namaskurmo yath'a balam//^'' 1.3.24. N iskriya: inactive Action requires the presence of duality. The distinctive character­

istic of is to go above action, which, as they procl&im. 29 is the cause of duality. Ascertainment of action and non-action as 'the highest goal, is the basic difference between the Ptirvamimarhsa’ bnd

Uttaramimarhsa respectively. Through action of the Vedic rights, one tijan- scends it and arrives at non-action. Ultimately, reality cannot be achieved by action. Non-duality is total peace, a complete renunciation of the |du- ality. No trace of the slightest disturbance or movement, the spandh or vibration even is traced in It. Everything is discarded at the state of n|on- duality. The Supreme consciousness is not even aware of Its own don- sciousness. Vimarsa or awareness of own awareness - the basis of K^sh- i f mir Saivism - is a determination of intellect for the Vedantins—uphjold i some scholars^*. The pranicya does not enjoy Its own bliss, as there i:; no enjoyer and enjoyed at all. But Swami Swahananda writes,” It Know'S that it knows”. 1.3.25. N eti n eti The best method of pointing out the Advaitic prameya is adopted J by negating the non-consciousness, the matter, yac/a which is called| the dvaita, the world. The means of discarding the duality makes one and easily at the non duality, such method of ‘negation’ i.e., denying! the JI world "neti, neti'’’ not this, not this (world), well describes the non ^ual and indescribable reality. “No duality, no-duality” or “no mind, no m|nd” j or transcendental mind is the prameya of Advaita Vedanta. Renunciajtion of dvaila is the means of as well as goal of Advaita. ^

1.3.26. A ^ u n y a m : nothingness does not exist Sometimes the prameya is also called “void”. Here it is not,that sunya which has no existence. “There was neither existence nor nohex- istent then. There was void”, speak the ; i na sadasTnno sadasittadanim kimtvabhuttamah/'*^ 30

Here the void, tama is “existence”. It is because Existence (asii) is attributed to tamah. The word asit refers to sat. "tamah asit tamasST gudhamagre " ‘Darkness (tama) was covered by darkness (tamasa) then (before creation)’. “The first tamus is not same as the second (tamasa).

r Attribution of existence (tamah "asit) to the first darkness is not Void } (sunya) or nonexistence. So the first tamah is Brahman and the secjond one is its power, rrfaya. Brahman is tama, void, sunya, for It is not knpw- able with mind. is tama, for it is not knowable and covers B)-ah- man. So existence to the nonexistent (world) is denied, "na asadaiit",

“Non-existence did not exist”, "tannisedhanat ” 1.3.27. P ara: above duality The existence of nonexistence (m'aya) is apparent. It is due t(j the association of existence, "sadyogat tam^ah sattvam ”. Without S^t or _ ^ I f ' Brahman, maya cannot exist. In Kashmir Saivism, without sakti, SiVa is dead (nonexistent). A power, say will power without consciousness is

S inconceivable. Whereas, a man with consciousness, but without exek’cis- ing his will, (power) is still conscious. “So consciousness, the wieidier of will (power) is the real entity; and consciousness is existence. T^iere- fore the glory of power is a borrowed glory”. T h e existence of the glorified prameya is above, urddhvam or para of this duality, sincp the duality (sakti) has a borrowed existence. It (maya) cannot cover the real- ity fully. Reality rises above such appearance. Existence is not exhausted in the wielding of power. It “raised ten fingers measured as the three- fourth’ above the world which is only one fourth.” padosya visva (sarv^ bhlitani tripadurdhvah dasangulam/^^

Creation is measured as a quarter of the reality. After covering one 31

fourth of the Reality what remains from the totality is measured as “t^n fingers” "dasangulam" which is again Full, ‘‘purnamevavasisyate is not computed like this : If the 3/4 is 10, then the Full, the total mea­ surement will be 10 X 4/3 = 13.333n. Rather it remains Full. Thus tl^e prameya is above the duality, above the sky, void which is the subtlest creation of m"aya, the duality. So it is Para. 1.3.28. A''f5ca/a/a//v<'/; as quiscent state The Advaitins describe the indescribable ultimate Goal, tHe prameya as niicalatattva, a state of unagitation or equilibrium of mind. It is , an equipoise state, like the waveless water. satsangatve nihsangatvani nihsangatve nirmohatvam/ nirmohatve ni^calatattvam.niscalatattve jivanmuktih//''^ 5 i When one contacts with sat (consciousness), he is unattached with e\ erything (nihsanga). Being unattached, he becomes free from infatui tion (nirmohatvam). Being free from infatuation he attains a state of equ librium (ni/calatattvam). By attaining the state of equilibrium, he is lil erated while living in the world. The .quiscent state of the reality is we described as tranquil, unborn, detached, birthless equipoised and ce ebrated (visZlradam). Therefore^comments the great Acarya “there is n^ such thing as peace or liberation that has to be brought about. For any­ thing done can have no meaning for one that is ever of the same nature.f’ (Mdndukya-karika^bhdsya,\\.\93, p.231. Eng. tr. by Sw. Gambhirananda]j. 1.3.29. Antanibhava'. without mentation The quiscent state is a drop of mind (amanibHava). This is th nfscalatattva, which is in vaisaradya, transcendental purity. It is not avail able to those who move in difference (bheda). Their case is indeed piti^ able : because they do not transcend the mind (amani). 32

vaisaradyam tu vai nasti bhede vicaratdrh sada/ bhedabhinnah prthagvadastasmatte krpana smrtah//''^ There can be no perfection (vai^dradya) for people who dwellUn different thoughts i.e., who have proclivity for multiplicity, they trejad for ever the path of duality, and talk of plurality. Hence they are trajii- tionally hold to be pitiable. ! For niscalatattva-, (1) both laya (in deep sleep) and viksepa |(in dream and waking states) are transcended (as happens after Yoga-ni^ra which is neither sleep nor wakefulness), (2) the mind does not fall i^to sleep nor is it distracted again, (3) it becomes unshakable and free frf^m illusion, there it becomes Brahman. It is described by the seers as kve experience it in Swami Satyananda ’s discovered method! of yoga-nidra and in the traditional process of meditation : j yada na liyate cittam na ca viksipyate punah/ aninganamanabhasam nispannam brahma tattada//*^ When the mind does not become lost nor is scattered, when it is motion­ less and does not appear in the form of objects, then it becomes Brjah- man.

1.4. Criticism ;

The opponent dvaitins comment : “The evidences put forwarded by the Advaitins in favour of the Reality are contradictory and adverse to their prameya. For example, the Advaitasiddhi, in order to prove'the unreality of the duality, bases its arguments on^visibility, materiality bnd limitability etc (drstatvat, jadatvat and avacchinnatvat etc.). "How tvill • • r the visibility be a cause for unreality ?” - comments the opponent. Such opposition is understood as groundless when the basic principle of the 33

Advaitins is remembered. They rely on the principle “whatever can be presented as an object, is ultimately unreal”. It is because grasping tt|e I reality’ through the determinations of mind and intellect is to see tHe } foot prints of a fish in water or of a bird in the sky/'' I 1.4.1. The prameya is described as " ”. In presenting the 'Atmqn I and Brahman’ section of Sankara Vedanta, Prof. C.D.Sharma in his boojc, If A Critical survey of , writes, “The , thereforje, becomes silent after saying - 'not this, not this’. If a man does not und^r- t stand that he is a man when he is told that he is not a non-man. how w|ll he be able.to understand then if he is told that he is a man?” Referring jto

the bh^sya of Aitareya Upanisad II. 1, Prof. Sharma writes, “the two 'njo-

es’ in the formula 'neti neti’ are meant for emphasizing the fact what­ ever can be presented as an object is ultimately unreal.

The question here is “Do these two 'neti neti’ words'**” denote t^^o negatives or is it one negative only repeated twice?” In the example 'riot a non-man’, there are two negatives. Therefore, it can render a posit ve

information (he is a man). If the two 'neti neti’ are interpreted as t VO

negatives, then in order to derive a positive assertion, the first 'ne t i ’ must contradict the second 'neti'. The first 'neti’ means 'this dualit>| is

not real’. The second 'neii ’ would mean; “No, what here is said that tpis

world is not real, is also wrong”. Then only the two 'neties’ can imjaly

two negatives in one sentence. I By interpreting 'neti' in this way, as two negatives, the purpos^ of the Advaita will be defeated, because, by these two negatives, the w eld, the dvaita will become . ,•; real. Therefore it would not mean as two nejga-

tives. Moreover, such play of language, i.e., forwarding two negatives in order to import one positive meaning, is not generally found in the v^rit- 34

- - J ings of the Upanisadic rather, jb. a^^imple language the Vedas de- *- JL ' 1 , - ' ff- ' ' dare “No, Brahman is n©l this worlc^Avhat you.see through your mind. Never”. The second negitid^n is just'#i ^affirmation or emphasis of the first one. * In a third way it cUflrbe interpreted that the first 'neti' is the sub­ ject matter of the Vedas^-xlcscribing Brahman. The second ‘neti’ refutes the first neti that the Vedas are also'_unreal. i.e. Brahman is indescrib­ able. 1.4.2. In describing t(^ inferential knowledge of the prarn^ a . Prof.

- - ‘ / ^ K.B. Rao folIi>ws the Pancadasi in his work Ontology of ' . y ______Advaita Vedanta with special refereffn^^ to Maya*^. He mentions that the knowledge of Brahman can be obtained^through the inference that what-

ever is more subtle, intjernal and p^va^ive among the five sheaths of

■■ i ■ ' . - L. human body, and which is iubtle among the five external elements viz., earth, water etc., is mojie^ pervasive and^real. Consequently, the self be- ■ - ‘ 'i ' ing the subtler than ether^becomes absolutely Real. Now the objection is raised:,if"the knowledge of Brahmart is achieved by measuring aftd comparin^the subtleness of the five elemejnts with that'of consciousiti;ss, then a fear Remains, that once a sixth finer

thing is discovered, theji there will .be a doubt on which one out of the two, viz., the newly discovered sixth-one and consciousness, will be the finest. Instead of compa-ing the fineness of the self, the dvaitins depend

upon the fact that the sd^uxce or substratum of all the finer and the finest

elements, whether alre^y discovered or which will be discovered in fu­ ture, is consciousness, it is because, by its presence, all the finest can I exist.

cittameva hi samsarastajt prayatnena sodhay^t/ 35

'Mind is the world. It should be effortfully purified.'

1.4.3. The four Chapters and the contents of the Brahmasutras summarise the nature of the prameya. The four chapters are : (1) Samanvay'Sdhyaya (2) AvirodhadhytTya (3) S^dhanadhyaya and (4) Phaladhyaya. The Samanvayitdhy'5ya speaks that all the scriptures up^ hold one : consciousness as the reality, which is non-dual. The es»- sence of all the scriptures is one which is the subject matter of Vedanta, This is taken from the maHavctkya belonging to Rgveda : prajnhnam brahma. The second aphorism of Brahmasutra : "janmadyasyayatah” supports it.

The Avirodhadhyaya speaks that there is no''contradiction among the scriptures. Congruity is the relation between the individual and the

subject (visaya). Brahman. It is supported by the Yajurvedic Lina •.ahatnbrahmasmi and the third shtra (lastrayonitvat) corroborates it.

The Sadhanadhyaya speaks that the essential nature of the indi­ vidual is spiritual, not material. The adhikari determined in the first ( brahasmi), supports it. It is seconded by the Samavedic mahavakya,

“tattvamasi The Phaladhyaya speaks the identity of Brahman with the indi­ vidual being. There is no difference between the individual and the cos­ mos. (pinda-brahnianda) Identity is the result (phala) of this section. The Atharvavedic Line "Ayamatma brahma ” goes with the fourth apho­

rism "tattusamanvayat ”. Thus from the stand point of four , wakefulness, dream state, deep sleep and the fourth, Xhs prameya in short is : (1) Non-duality

(2) Spirituality (3) Congruity and (4) Identity, taken from the Aitereya, Brhadaranyak, Chdyidogya and M^ndukyopanisads respectively. 36

1.4.4. P ra m e y a (Brahman) in a nut-shell : OMKARA A U M Non-duality Congruity Spirituality Identity

Upholding- No contra- You are not Unity of Micro one Reality diction to mourn &Macracosm

Samanvaya^ Avirodha- S^dhana- Phaladh- dhyaya dhyaya dhyaya ySya

Subject Disciple’s Relation Result matter eligibility

Rgveda Aitareya Chandogya Brhadaranyak^^ Mandukya

Janmadyasya Sastryonity^t Athato brahma Tattusamanvaya k yatah

Prajnanamo Aham Tattvamasi Ayamatma brhma

brahma brahmcfsmi

Jagrat Svapna Susupt; Turiya

23 37

1.5. Chapter-Conclusion

Imparting the knowledge of the self, the pram eya of Adyaita Vedanta shines as the highest contribution of India to the mankind for ever. Though drk is the prameya of Advaita Vedanta, a discussion of the world, drsya, has not altogether been left aside. The world is not a sub­ ject of teaching by the sastras (i.e. the Vedas), as it is well understood from the phenomena’^. The material world may be a subject matter of teaching for Vaisesika So the world is not a prameya, but the elimination of such physical reality, the drsya has not been a lesser en­ terprise for the Vedantins, as the prameya is understood only by elimina­ tion of the duality. So, Rshi Astavakra says : “Just now you will be happy (by knowing the prameya), peaceful and free if you rest on the conscious­ ness by eliminating the body (duality or maya)\

I f ^ yadi deham prthakkrtya citi visramya tisthasi/

adhunaiva sukhi santo bandha-mukto bhavisyasi// (1.3) “God is knowable. You can know Him just know, through medita­

tion”, paraphrases Paramahansa Yoganandji. “Eliminate the body by the axe like intellect ; dig deep into the mind and get there the gem like prameya” - as writes Vidyaranya in "dehopalamap'akrtya". “What to speak more ? Listen to the teachings of the Advaita. The citi is beyond the mind and becomes the object for the use of all mind and speech”. bahunigadya kimatra vadamyaham ^rnuta samgrahamadvayJsa^anam/

sakalavanmanasatigata~ citi sakalavanmanasavyavahSrabhGk/P^

24