Essence of Advaita -- A Question- Answer Session - Part
2/3
(Excerpted from Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana, Book - II, Sarga 190)
[Part 1/3 Part 3/3]
(Excerpted from Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana, Book - II, Sarga 190)
[Part 1/3 Part 3/3]
Sage Vasishta: What you say will amount to equating Knowledge
and the world. How can the world be then
subjected to creation and dissolution?
After all, Pure Knowledge cannot be subjected to creation and
dissolution!
Rama: Let us be clear on one thing. The creation was not there to start
with. It came about later on. You say that illusion is the reason for
it. What is the reason for the illusion?
Sage Vasishta: The question is based on an unsupported
assumption on your part! You presume
that the cause-effect relationship is valid and real. But causal relationships have no reality. Why do they lack reality? Because never is there a real cause or a real
effect.
What is perceived (chetya),
who perceives (chit) and perception (chaitanya) are different forms of your
Consciousness-Self.
Rama: If what you propose is correct, this purely
inert and mechanical gross body becomes the knower (chit). If so, Ishvar, the
source for all Knowledge will be inert.
It is like saying that the log ignites the fire and the fire is being
burnt down by the wood!
Sage Vasishta: No, that’s not what I said! ‘The seer’ can never be ‘the seen.’ The subject can never become the object. But the most subtle and salient point is that
there is no object, ‘the seen’ at all.
The seer who is Pure Consciousness appears as though It takes the form
of the triad – the knower, the known and the knowledge.
Rama: There got to be at the very beginning of the
creation someone or other who was the very first knower of the creation. There cannot be something ‘known’ in the
absence of a ‘knower.’
What existed prior to creation was Pure Consciousness
alone. Hence we are forced to admit that
It was the first Knower of the first created things. How was that first ‘known’ substance
generated?
Sage Vasishta: Rama!
If at all we said that there was a ‘seen’ or ‘known’ substance produced
at the beginning of creation, you may legitimately question us about its
origin. But that has never been our
argument. We are consistent in our
assertion that there has been no legitimate cause behind anything ‘seen’ at the
beginning of creation or even later on at anytime. Hence there is no thing ‘seen.’ Because there has been no thing seen, Consciousness
is forever without bondage. Consciousness
cannot be captured in words.
Rama:
That being so, how was the ‘thought wave’, “I”, born? How did the knowledge, “I see the world”
originate? How does one have the
feeling, “I am alive”?
Sage Vasishta: You see, there was no cause for the creation
even at the very start. So nothing ever
is really born. The entire creation is
only an illusion. Therefore, what you
see is merely an illusion.
Rama: According to you then, what exists is the
Supreme Brahman only. It cannot be
expressed in words. It does not contain Knowledge. It has no thing ‘known.’ It is eternal, self-effulgent and unblemished. To whom does this illusion happen then? Of what nature is the illusion?
Sage Vasishta: There is no reason behind the illusion! Hence there is no illusion at all! ‘You, me and everything’ are all the superbly
serene Supreme Brahman only!
Rama: Revered Teacher! I am awfully confused! I am unable to even formulate my questions. Obviously I am not fully enlightened. What misgivings can I place before you?
Sage Vasishta: Rama!
You are still going by an attempt to establish a sequence of cause-effect
relationships. There has to be a
touchstone which can establish the correctness or otherwise of the sequence of causes
and effects. If we examine based on that
yardstick, the causes will evaporate.
For example, a doubt is the cause for a question. The cause for the doubt is ignorance. If we can get rid of the ignorance, there is
no scope for a doubt and the later questions.
So go on, shoot your questions. When all the questions are resolved, you will
automatically land in and be at ease as the Supreme Consciousness.
Rama: Revered Teacher! As per your teaching, there is no cause for
creation and hence there is no creation.
I could understand that. To whom did the imaginary division of a
knower and the known occur? How did it
occur?
Sage Vasishta: Rama, you have an intellectual understanding
of the matter. But the understanding is
not fully rooted in you for lack of practice.
That is the reason a non-existing illusion has ensnared you.
Rama: Sir, rephrasing myself then, why is there an
absence of practice? How does the
practice take place? Further the so
called practice is also an illusion.
Wherefrom has it come?
Sage Vasishta: You asked the question under the assumption
that you were ignorant and that state of ignorance was ‘real.’
Let us say that your assumption is correct. But simply because you thought that you were
ignorant, the Infiniteness of the Supreme Brahman will not be compromised. Therefore, even your thoughts on practice are
a form of that Supreme Consciousness.
Hence your question does not have any validity.
Rama: The illusion of the world is eliminated for
Jivanmuktas like you. Even then you
think of instructing people like us. You
use words for that purpose. You also
admit something has to be instructed and there is someone to be
instructed. How do all such things
happen?
Sage Vasishta: The whole process of instructing etc. is
also Brahman. The disciple, teacher and
instruction are all Brahman. There is
neither bondage nor liberation in the eyes of an enlightened man.
Rama: You are establishing that illusion of a world
is an impossibility taking recourse to logic. Granting that, wherefrom the
ignoramus in the world acquire the knowledge of differentiating space, time,
action, matter etc. etc.? How could
these different things gain a reality?
Sage Vasishta: It was because of ignorance only. There is no other reality than ignorance
before obtaining enlightenment (Jivanmukti).
Rama: There is no duality or Oneness in the
Jivanmukti that you refer to. In other
words, the idea of someone being taught or someone teaching does not
arise. Does the instruction (teaching),
taught by a teacher who lacks the ‘quality of teaching’ in him, contain any ‘value
as a teaching’? Can such an instruction
lacking the ‘value as a teaching’ within it lead to Nirvana?
Sage Vasishta: A separate individual (jiva) is the Supreme Brahman not aware of Himself. The individual realizes that he is Brahman on
the Awareness of being Brahman. So it is
Brahman, who is under ignorance. It is
He who receives the instruction in this process. Because the instruction is being received by
Him, it is a teaching. Thus the
instruction becomes one with what is taught and through that it becomes one
with the Supreme Brahman. Hence you
cannot state that the instruction lacks the ‘value as a teaching’ in it. This whole scenario is applicable only in the
case of ignorant people. In the case of
enlightened people like us, as you said, an instruction cannot have the ‘value as
a teaching.’
Rama: You used the expression, “enlightened people
like us.” It does show that words like
“I”, “we” have significance for them also.
Implicitly it means that they too have the “I”-thought within them. The only difference is that one cannot say
that this “I”-thought is generated in them out of ignorance because they are
completely free of ignorance. In that
case we have to agree that the Knowledge in them has become the
“I”-thought. Then we have to admit that
the teaching is different from the “I”-thought.
But “I”-thought and the individual (jiva)
are the same. How could such a jiva
enter you who are totally Consciousness-Self?
Sage Vasishta: Wind is movement. Movement is wind. In the same way, in the case of Jivanmuktas, the
Knowledge Itself is “I”-thought. This
“I”-thought and the “I”-thought under ignorance are different. The “I”-thought of the ignorant people is
based on the attachment to the body, senses etc.
Rama: So the world of a Jivanmukta is Consciousness
as shown by the maxim, ‘the turbulent wave is also the placid ocean.’ It means that the person to be taught, the
Guru who teaches and the teaching and other similar triads are all
Consciousness.
Sage Vasishta: You asked me a little earlier a question
about the presence of the ‘value as a teaching’ in the instruction of a Jivanmukta. You contended that a Jivanmukta lacks within
him both the sense of duality and oneness and hence you said that he would not
have the sense of separation of a teacher being here and a disciple over there. Hence you doubted whether the ‘value as a teaching’
will be present in his instruction.
From what you say now, that question loses its locus. Do not visualize an ocean and a wave to be
two separate things. What is, is One
only! It is Infinite, Serene, Perfect
and the most Supreme! That is Pure
Non-duality. Get a hold on It.
Rama: You said
that Pure Knowledge and “I”-thought were like wind and movement in the case of
Jivanmuktas like you. If Pure
Non-duality is firmed up, who is it that thinks differently – sometimes as Pure
Knowledge and at other times as “I”-thought?
Who is one that experiences this “I”-thought? There has obviously to be someone to do these
things. If such thoughts of
differentiation are unavoidable to Jivanmuktas, what can we speak of the
ordinary folk? Therefore, it looks that
an illusion of distinction is inevitable for anyone. It follows that the illusion of a world is
also inescapable. It would mean that we
are necessarily trapped in the cycle of bondage and liberation.
What then is the advantage of Pure Non-duality?
Sage Vasishta: Bondage comes only if one takes what is
perceived to be true. Knowers of Truth
will not do that. From their stance, it
is Pure Knowledge appearing in different forms.
Hence they are unconcerned with bondage and liberation.
Rama: A black object
appears black and a white object appears white in the light of a lamp. But the lamp itself does not become the black
or white object. Likewise, if various
substances are seen because of Pure Knowledge, we have to say that those
substances are really there and hence are seen.
So the reality of the objects is established by the instrument of
Knowledge. This is our common
experience. But you postulate that all
things get annihilated along with their cause by Knowledge. How do you justify it?
Sage Vasishta: We had already demonstrated adopting
different approaches that the objects of the world lacked beingness. We said that there was no cause behind them
and hence they did not have beingness.
If such non-existent things are seen, that appearance has to be like the
silver in nacre. Such an appearance will
last as long as the illusion lasts. It
cannot survive beyond that. Knowers of
Truth do not suffer from the illusion.
Hence they do not see anything to be external to them.
Rama: Let us for the present leave the issue
whether the silver in nacre or the dream world etc. are real or unreal. Misery
does come out of them. Even the illusory world brings suffering.
What is the way to avoid the sorrow?
[Dialog to be continued in Part 3/3.]
[Dialog to be continued in Part 3/3.]
2 comments:
I have been trying to correlate this text- Yoga Vasishta, vi,2,190, with the version I have, trans. by Swami Venkatesananda, 1993, State U. of New York, but am unable to accomplish it. Is this one a different version, or by a different translator? Both seem to me cogent and understandable but, if different, is one of them preferable to the other? Thank you.
Sir,
The material presented here is taken from: Yogavaasishta - Part V: Nirvana, Book II, notes/comments by K.V. Krishna Murthy with English rendering by Vemuri Ramesam to be published by Avadhoota Datta Peetham, Mysore, India. We have faithfully stuck to the original unabridged Sanskrit text and the explanation (in Sanskrit script) as per "Sri Vaasishta Maharamayana Tatparya Prakasa of Sri Ananda Bhodendra Saraswathi Swamy, Nirmaya Sagar Press, 1937, Bombay (now Mumbai).
I would like to leave it to you re: preferences.
regards,
Post a Comment