For the recognition of Brahman there are two main aspects
A. Place where Brahman is recognized
B. Nature of the recognition
The place where Brahman is known or recognized is the same as is for other objects such as cloud, sky, tree , apple and so on. It is in the mind.
Just like there is a vrtti or thought form that reveals an apple, there is such a vrtti known as brahmAkara vrtti , which is what makes one recognize Brahman.
The nature of recognition is however not the same as recognising an apple. An apple is a limited object , whereas Brahman is limitless and also has to include the knower to be limitless .
If a vastu has to include the knower and also be revealed to the knower by a vrtti the operation of means of knowledge has to be different .
The advantage shAstra has is that Brahman for starters happens to be self evident vastu , as it is the reality of the knower . The knower is a status given to the reality of the self or atma , and this atma is Brahman is the message of the shAstra .
What is meant by self evident?
See any knowledge involves a knower a known and a thought . In case of apple , apple is seen by apple thought using the eyes and the knower knows the apple.
Whereas in the case of the knower , the knower does not need to be known like an apple. The knower is a pre requisite to the operation of knowing itself and the knower alone determines a thing as existent. This knower I is hence self evident doesn't need to become known by an act of knowing , in deep sleep also , while one doesn't talk in deep sleep , there is rememberance that I slept well , and this I is awareness that need not be known , is self evident in the sense doesn't need to be known, being the very knower. So all shAstra does is turn ones attention to the knower and does not suddenly makes an unknown knower known, that's absurd as the knower was always present but not noticed or talked about .
shAstra talks about the knower. It talks about the knower as a self evident and self existent vastu. Self evident as it need not be known and self existent as it does not have ones existence depending on something other than oneself.
Now when shAstra says this atma is Brahman it has to define what is Brahman. So the nature of knowledge here is by removing confusion around the nature of atma.
When shAstra says atma is Brahman , it cannot be qualifying atma since Brahman is attributeless there are no qualifications.
So a self evident vastu , if nothing is or can be qualified about by shAstra , then nature of knowledge can only be about removing a pre existing ignorance which leads to misconceptions .
The nature of the preexisting ignorance is peculiar. It cannot be an ignorance of a specific attribute or aspect as Brahman neither has attributes and is also part less.
So the nature of ignorance is essentially a specific form of ignorance which we can only say is Brahman ignorance . Or self ignorance . Or mula Avidya.
This Avidya is not available for comparison. We cannot compare. Brahman ignorance isnt like any other ignorance ,like ignorance of avocado. Because an avocado is completely unknown till one sees the fruit , while atman is self evident and need not be known at all.
Yet it is not known atman is Brahman , that 'not knowing atman is brahman' exists and is what we call as brahman ignorance or mula Avidya. So the vast need not be known, however the vastu lends itself to a particular ignorance , which can be tackled.
What does brahman mean, brahman means satyam jnanam anantham. What is satyam is jnanam, and this satyam jnanam is anantam, like gold it pervades all ornaments, and is independent, while ornaments depend on gold, gold is independent.
Same way brahman is independent, atman is independent, while anything that IS, gains its existence from brahman, and belongs to a lower order of reality. This is what we say is brahma vidya.
Brahma vidya is a peculiar vidya, since it doesn't reveal a vastu , rather an pre existing ignorance with regard to the reality of the vastu, is corrected . The pre existing ignorance with regard to reality of atma , leads to a misconception, where atma is mistaken to 'have' and be as good as a lower order of reality. The cause here is a positive state of ignorance wherein one doesn't know that Brahman is satyamjnanam anantam and atman is Brahman. This ignorance is destroyed by shabda pramana.
The ignorance of rope causes snake to be seen. The reality of the snake is itself the reality of the rope.
Here we are talking about realities. Therefore what is eliminated is the confusion over the reality of the self, the order of reality to which it belongs, and not truly an complete ignorance of brahman. Or atman which is self evident. Vastu is self evident covered by ignorance.
There is no ignorance that atman exists, but ignorance is with the fact that atman belongs to a higher order of reality, which makes it independent and non dual., Namely satyamjnanam anantam anantam.
This ignorance is removed. By means of a prakriya.
A prakriya that first posits atman as a cause, and the jagad as an effect.
Next sublates the cause effect paradigm to a lower order of reality, and attributeless self evident atman to be the svarupa and belonging to a higher order of reality.
Be careful here, that brahman is recognized in the mind alone, as the 'I am'.
So while we recognize brahman in the mind alone, the mind does belong to a lower order of reality.
What shastra does is with the mind upadhi, the self IS, and this self it carefully spells out the essential unchanging nature of the self, amidst the changing thought forms. Amidst the changing thought forms, of each cognition, the unchanging svarupa of the self is ever shining.
Just like in the changing forms of gold ornaments, the unchanging shine of gold is ever evident, in the case of the self the shining, or self evident nature is ever available and available for knowledge.
Same way the ever existent unchanging nature also entails a certain independence.
Inspite of the fact that brahman is recognized in each cognition with the mind alone as "chit" or consciousness that is self evident , self existent and unchanging, the self is also equated to brahman, by "shabda pramana" , when it says anantham brahman, and atma is brahman.
The word anantam implies atman/brahman is not space ,time or attribute wise limited in terms of its "svarupa", hence the "time space" and "attributes" of each thought wherein brahman shines, and even in between two thoughts , where there is "no particular thought" , "thought absence" is also where brahman shines as the reality of the "thought absence", between two thoughts, so the essential nature of brahman is not limited to any particular thought, and nor limited by any particular thought. A thought by design happens in a specific mind, in time and space, whereas, brahman is not shining "dependent" on time and space,rather brahman "lights up" or makes time and space "evident' and hence is in reality independent of time and space.
Further when shAstra goes on to say brahman with maya shakti is the cause of time and space, then time and space themselves become mithya realities which gain "existence" from atman or brahman.
So here shAstra promotes brahman 'as though' to the status of being a cause, and "sublates" the entire jagad and cause of the jagad unto brahman as the unchanging material cause.
This mahavakya, leaves the independence, limitlessness, non duality, consciousness of brahman unchallenged as there isnt a second.
Brahman is able to accomodate anything, being a cause, being an effect, undergoing changes, anything can be accomodated as a lower order of reality.
So with the mind upadhi , Brahman is, that much is seen. In every cognition Brahman is.
Also in every thought Brahman is reality of the thought .
In every object Brahman is truth if the object.
This Brahman alone is atman.
A. Place where Brahman is recognized
B. Nature of the recognition
The place where Brahman is known or recognized is the same as is for other objects such as cloud, sky, tree , apple and so on. It is in the mind.
Just like there is a vrtti or thought form that reveals an apple, there is such a vrtti known as brahmAkara vrtti , which is what makes one recognize Brahman.
The nature of recognition is however not the same as recognising an apple. An apple is a limited object , whereas Brahman is limitless and also has to include the knower to be limitless .
If a vastu has to include the knower and also be revealed to the knower by a vrtti the operation of means of knowledge has to be different .
The advantage shAstra has is that Brahman for starters happens to be self evident vastu , as it is the reality of the knower . The knower is a status given to the reality of the self or atma , and this atma is Brahman is the message of the shAstra .
What is meant by self evident?
See any knowledge involves a knower a known and a thought . In case of apple , apple is seen by apple thought using the eyes and the knower knows the apple.
Whereas in the case of the knower , the knower does not need to be known like an apple. The knower is a pre requisite to the operation of knowing itself and the knower alone determines a thing as existent. This knower I is hence self evident doesn't need to become known by an act of knowing , in deep sleep also , while one doesn't talk in deep sleep , there is rememberance that I slept well , and this I is awareness that need not be known , is self evident in the sense doesn't need to be known, being the very knower. So all shAstra does is turn ones attention to the knower and does not suddenly makes an unknown knower known, that's absurd as the knower was always present but not noticed or talked about .
shAstra talks about the knower. It talks about the knower as a self evident and self existent vastu. Self evident as it need not be known and self existent as it does not have ones existence depending on something other than oneself.
Now when shAstra says this atma is Brahman it has to define what is Brahman. So the nature of knowledge here is by removing confusion around the nature of atma.
When shAstra says atma is Brahman , it cannot be qualifying atma since Brahman is attributeless there are no qualifications.
So a self evident vastu , if nothing is or can be qualified about by shAstra , then nature of knowledge can only be about removing a pre existing ignorance which leads to misconceptions .
The nature of the preexisting ignorance is peculiar. It cannot be an ignorance of a specific attribute or aspect as Brahman neither has attributes and is also part less.
So the nature of ignorance is essentially a specific form of ignorance which we can only say is Brahman ignorance . Or self ignorance . Or mula Avidya.
This Avidya is not available for comparison. We cannot compare. Brahman ignorance isnt like any other ignorance ,like ignorance of avocado. Because an avocado is completely unknown till one sees the fruit , while atman is self evident and need not be known at all.
Yet it is not known atman is Brahman , that 'not knowing atman is brahman' exists and is what we call as brahman ignorance or mula Avidya. So the vast need not be known, however the vastu lends itself to a particular ignorance , which can be tackled.
What does brahman mean, brahman means satyam jnanam anantham. What is satyam is jnanam, and this satyam jnanam is anantam, like gold it pervades all ornaments, and is independent, while ornaments depend on gold, gold is independent.
Same way brahman is independent, atman is independent, while anything that IS, gains its existence from brahman, and belongs to a lower order of reality. This is what we say is brahma vidya.
Brahma vidya is a peculiar vidya, since it doesn't reveal a vastu , rather an pre existing ignorance with regard to the reality of the vastu, is corrected . The pre existing ignorance with regard to reality of atma , leads to a misconception, where atma is mistaken to 'have' and be as good as a lower order of reality. The cause here is a positive state of ignorance wherein one doesn't know that Brahman is satyamjnanam anantam and atman is Brahman. This ignorance is destroyed by shabda pramana.
The ignorance of rope causes snake to be seen. The reality of the snake is itself the reality of the rope.
Here we are talking about realities. Therefore what is eliminated is the confusion over the reality of the self, the order of reality to which it belongs, and not truly an complete ignorance of brahman. Or atman which is self evident. Vastu is self evident covered by ignorance.
There is no ignorance that atman exists, but ignorance is with the fact that atman belongs to a higher order of reality, which makes it independent and non dual., Namely satyamjnanam anantam anantam.
This ignorance is removed. By means of a prakriya.
A prakriya that first posits atman as a cause, and the jagad as an effect.
Next sublates the cause effect paradigm to a lower order of reality, and attributeless self evident atman to be the svarupa and belonging to a higher order of reality.
Be careful here, that brahman is recognized in the mind alone, as the 'I am'.
So while we recognize brahman in the mind alone, the mind does belong to a lower order of reality.
What shastra does is with the mind upadhi, the self IS, and this self it carefully spells out the essential unchanging nature of the self, amidst the changing thought forms. Amidst the changing thought forms, of each cognition, the unchanging svarupa of the self is ever shining.
Just like in the changing forms of gold ornaments, the unchanging shine of gold is ever evident, in the case of the self the shining, or self evident nature is ever available and available for knowledge.
Same way the ever existent unchanging nature also entails a certain independence.
Inspite of the fact that brahman is recognized in each cognition with the mind alone as "chit" or consciousness that is self evident , self existent and unchanging, the self is also equated to brahman, by "shabda pramana" , when it says anantham brahman, and atma is brahman.
The word anantam implies atman/brahman is not space ,time or attribute wise limited in terms of its "svarupa", hence the "time space" and "attributes" of each thought wherein brahman shines, and even in between two thoughts , where there is "no particular thought" , "thought absence" is also where brahman shines as the reality of the "thought absence", between two thoughts, so the essential nature of brahman is not limited to any particular thought, and nor limited by any particular thought. A thought by design happens in a specific mind, in time and space, whereas, brahman is not shining "dependent" on time and space,rather brahman "lights up" or makes time and space "evident' and hence is in reality independent of time and space.
Further when shAstra goes on to say brahman with maya shakti is the cause of time and space, then time and space themselves become mithya realities which gain "existence" from atman or brahman.
So here shAstra promotes brahman 'as though' to the status of being a cause, and "sublates" the entire jagad and cause of the jagad unto brahman as the unchanging material cause.
This mahavakya, leaves the independence, limitlessness, non duality, consciousness of brahman unchallenged as there isnt a second.
Brahman is able to accomodate anything, being a cause, being an effect, undergoing changes, anything can be accomodated as a lower order of reality.
So with the mind upadhi , Brahman is, that much is seen. In every cognition Brahman is.
Also in every thought Brahman is reality of the thought .
In every object Brahman is truth if the object.
This Brahman alone is atman.
No comments:
Post a Comment