Advait Vedanta
(as understood through the book ‘What is Advaita’ by K.Sankarnarayan)
WHAT IS REALITY ?
‘Brahm Satya Jagat Mithya’ is an oft-repeated sentence most spiritualists would have heard. It is generally translated as ‘God is real; world is an illusion’. However, there is a confusion of sorts here.
First of all, let us look at what ‘reality’ or ‘truth’ is :
REALITY is SAT, TRUTH is SATYA.
As per Adi Sankaracharya’s definition of REALITY, REALITY (SAT) is that which remains constant in all three periods – past, present and future. As per this definition, REALITY has little to do with the existence of something. By this definition, all objects of the world fall under the category – NOT-REAL.
A word of caution here is that we do not use the words UNREAL (ASAT) over here simply because UNREAL is something which is just not possible like a square-circle or a barren woman’s son. Hence NOT-REAL is a better word. It is this which is misrepresented as ILLUSION or MITHYA. The word ‘illusion’ here has little to do with its traditional meanings like ‘conjured up’ or ‘hallucination’ or similar. It means more like really false and falsely real or SAT-ASAT.
The highly famous Vedic analogy of a man seeing a rope for a snake in dim light and getting frightened is a case in point. While it cannot be said that the SNAKE doesn’t exist in the man’s mind else how would he be frightened. However, since sooner or later he realizes that it is a rope and not a snake, the snake is not eternal. Hence it is MITHYA or SAT-ASAT.The universe is also like this snake to a deluded mind.
Let us look at the types of NON-REALITY :
An image which appears in the mirror vanishes when the object is taken off. This is one type of NON-REALITY or REALITY, also called as PRATIBHASIK reality.
Similarly, any object of the world is also not eternal just like the image, so that too is NOT-REAL. However, its reality is a shade higher than that of an image as we can feel and understand. Such REALITY is called VYAVAHARIK REALITY.
Finally, that which is always eternal (like Brahman) is called PARMARTHIK REALITY.
A potter sees not a jar or a bowl or a decorative peace in his creation. He sees not the object but the clay which is common to all objects. This clay is like BRAHMAN, the basic building block of the universe.
THE THEORY OF CAUSATION
Among the six systems of Indian philosophy, the different systems hold different views about CAUSATION.
ADVAITA VEDANTA maintains that there is no such thing as one event causing the another.NYAYA-VAISHESIKA school maintains that an effect is a new production from a cause. If the effect was to already pre-exist in the cause, what is the need for causation in the first place ? This is also called ARAMBHVADA or Asatkaryavada.
SANKHYA says that an effect already pre-exists in the cause latently. Non-manifested cause only becomes manifested later, just like pot coming out of clay. If the effect was not pre-existent in the cause , then anything can come out of anything. How can there be a determinate cause for any effect consistently ? This is called PARINAMAVADA or Satkaryavada.
The effect of these two opinions is that both nullify each other. This gives rise to VIVARTAVADA or Sat-Asatkaryavada of ADVAITA VEDANTA. VivartaVada is similar to Satkaryavada but not totally. According to VIVARTAVADA, the effect is pre-existent in the cause and it is nothing but the cause appearing differently. To this point, it matches SATKARYAVADA.
However, VIVARTA means a thing appearing differently without ceasing to be itself even during the different appearance. In case of SATKARYAVADA, there was total change as if milk becomes curd. But VIVARTA is more like the snake-for-the-rope analogy. The difference here is in VIVARTA one can go back to the cause or move back-and-forth. It is reversible unlike SATKARYAVADA which is irreversible.
This theory of causation has fantastic applications when it comes to the aspect of the creation of the world :
AsatkaryaVada argues that the world has been fashioned out of Isvara or God who is, in substance, different from the world. The problem here is as to what substance God created the world out of, if there was no substance to start with. To say it was created out of vacuum is against the laws of the phenomenal world.
SatkaryaVada maintains that the world is created by Prakruti but the problem here is that how can a non-intelligent Prakruti (which is not predominantly Satva Guna) do such an inltelligent action (which requires predominantly Satva Guna).
VIVARTA dispenses with both these problems at one go since the world (snake) is only a variant of the Brahman (rope) which goes to mean that the action-ridden world only appears as world but is essentially the actionless Brahman.
From the Advaitic standpoint, the supreme Brahman being actionless cannot be said to CREATED. The world is more like an appearance (Drishti), sustained (Stithi) and dissolution or disappearance (Laya or Pra-laya) rather than creation (Udbhava), maintenance(Vyavastha) and destruction (Vinasha) of the other schools of Vedanta.
FOUR STATES OF HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS
JAGRUTI : This is the state of wakefulness. This is when the consciousness flows out comes into contact with the world of objects and is called BAHIRPRAJNA. Five jnanendriyas, five karmendriyas, five vital airs and four aspects of self – manas (mind), citta (consciouness) , buddhi (intellect) and Antahkarana(ego) all are directed outwards.
SWAPNA : This is the state of dreaming. This is when the consciousness flows in and comes into contact with the world of events on the mind’s eye. This is called ANTAHPRAJNA.
SUSUPTI : This is the state of dreamless sleep. In this state consciousness doesn’t flow without or within to come into contact with anything but yet exists. This is so because if it weren’t for it, we wouldn’t be in a position to say ‘I am feeling so happy and relaxed’ after coming out of sleep (which was a movement into SWAPNA and SUSUPTI). If there was any break in consciousness, this couldn’t be felt or claimed.
However, in Susupti, the latent seeds of gross or subtle objects ( JAGRUTI OR ) are present. Hence it has an element of refreshing stillness but it is not plentiful. Nevertheless, it is a state of mind which is free of physical pleasures and pains and mental emotions. In this state, consciousness is compacted like how sweetness is compacted in sugar-candy.
TURIYA : This is the state of consciousness where it is in direct contact with BRAHMAN(the basic substratum of the universe). The consciousness is neither moving out nor in nor does it have any latent seeds of movement. This is the state of SAMADHI or total bliss. In Samadhi, there is no world-consciousness. Turiya state is neither externally or internally congnitive. Since for Turiya to take place, the Tri-puti of knower, known and knowledge is a must. Turiya transcends all distinctions. It is an objectless subject, a condition of being not knowing.
While the other three-states are temporary and transient, the Turiya is the ever-present abding consciousness. When once that becomes a fact of actual experience, as in Samadhi one abides in it forever except for when one chooses to step out into the Vyavaharika world.
WITNESSING CONSCIOUSNESS (SAKSHI-CHAITANYA) – SAKSHI is the common denominator in all these four states. It is owing to the SAKSHI that one gets to understand that ‘I’ was present in so-and-so state. It provides for self-identity.
Dreaming state vs Waking state
On careful analysis, it can be found that the waking state is as false as the dream state or conversely, the dream state is as real as the waking state. The so-called tangible objects in the waking stae are nothing but our sense impressions which are equally active in the dream state. This only confirms the Advaitist view that the world of experience does not have absolute and ultimate reality.However, an Advaitist does not deny the existence of the world of objects. It only says that it is not real the way Brahman is real. Considering the world an appearance does not detract an Advaitin’s dealing with it in the same way as other schools of Vedanta. But he does so with the knowledge of its status as an appearance.
BRAHMAN
BRAHMAN is the of the nature of Sat,Cit and Anand. This doesn’t mean that these three are attributes which qualify Brahman. Sat, Cit and Anand themselves are also not different, they are , as they say, all-in-one-piece. A sugarcandy is sweetness compacted all over. There is no candy apart from that. Similarly Brahman is the indivisible Sat,Cit and Anand compacted all over.
The usual means of knowledge of things is through sense-perception. Sense-perception can be had only of physical objects. Brahman is the permanent subject and trans-sensuous or Atindriya. It is therefore that one has to depend on scripture or Sad-pramana for knowledge of Brahman.
Brahman is action-less, niskriyam. For, action is intended for fulfillment of a desire. As Brahman is perfect and whole there is nothing deficient about it. It can have no desire and in the occasion of no desire, there will be no occasion for action also.
Since Brahman is nirguna, by mental categories we cannot say what Brahman is; we can only say what it is not (Neti Neti)
MAYA
Maya is the finitizing principle which provides the dynamics of the One appearing as the many. Ajnana is the agency of Vivarta, making the substratum appear differently from what it is causing either joy or sorrow.
The origin of Maya is beyond our comprehension. Even as the child cannot be present at tnas – the birth of his mother, we must transcend Maya to know its origin.Maya which is generally spoken of in the feminine, contains the three gunas – satva,rajas and tamas in her womb.
Maya is the activating agency making for the appearance of Brahman as the world. It pertains to the phenomenalizing process. It is that which makes the One unmanifested, undifferentiated, formless,nameless,attributeless,actionless Brahman into the manifested, variously differentiated universe of diverse forms and names, exhibiting qualities and engaged in action.
The electric current that is carried through the wires is electric energy, pure and simple. It does not function as such. It is nirguna and niskriya, in a manner of speaking. But when mediated by an appropriate mechanism, the current exhibits itself in various forms of activity as light, heat, power etc.
SAGUNA BRAHMAN
When the Nirguna Brahman is associated with the guna-ridden Maya, it is spoken of as Saguna. In such a case, what is formless,nameless,actionless becomes formed, named and action-filled like Ram, Krishna etc.
Advaita says that Saguna Brahman has applicability in the Vyavaharik reality but not in Paramarthik reality. Inapplicability in the Paramarthika doesn’t mean invalidity in the Vyavaharik.
v According to Advaita, creation is nothing but undifferentiated appearing differentiated. Destruction is the relapse of differentiated becoming undifferentiated again. What is spoken of as ‘destruction’ is actually a ‘relapse’.
Strictly speaking it is ‘Laya’. Srsti, Stithi & Laya are not creations etc.anew, but the appearance and disappearance of something in a form different from its native original. Thus the creationist view in its native state is not different from the Vivarta-vada of Advaita.
JIVATMAN
Unlike other schools, according to Advaita, Jivatman is essentially non-different from Paramatman.The Atman is the innermost essence of a man back of the bodily sheaths known as the Annamaya, Pranamaya, Manomaya, Vijnanamaya and Anandamaya Koshas, being respectively, the material, the vital, the mental, the cognitive and the blissful sheaths
v Atman is that by which the eye sees, the ear hears, the mind thinks, the understanding and the ego function.
Consider the case of differences of electric bulbs of varied wattage. The electric current flowing into the bulbs is the same. It is of the same voltage. But the luminosity of the current is varied due to the upadhis of the several bulbs, their internal media and these are responsible for differences in illumining effect. So too is the Atman identical in all persons, but they appear different and are spoken of as being different due to differences in the constricting upadhis.
There are three theories that explain how the individual Atman is the Brahman itself :
Avacchedavada : The space inside a pot can be called Ghat-akasa. The space outside the pot can be called the Maha-Akasa. It appears that the two are different. If the walls of the pot were to be broken, wouldn’t the so-called different again become one ?
Pratibimba-vada : Brahman is the original being reflected in the upadhis of the body. The haziness or movement in reflection is due to the dullness of the reflecting mirror or the movement of the water viz.the upadhis of the body. This is how the same sun being reflected in various vessels of water appears as various suns and theBrahman appearing in many upadhis appears as many Atman or Jivas.
Abhasavada : A crystal placed next to a red flower appears as red. Brahman placed next to the upadhis appears as a Jiva.
The Mahavakya ‘Tat-tvam Asi’ has a two-fold significance. It means that
a) Every Jiva is Brahma
b) Every Jiva is also every other Jiva however apparently different they may seem to be.
MOKSA
There is a difference between salvation and liberation. Salvation is a theistic idea. It realtes to saving the soul from damnation, to salvaging it from the slough of despond. It connotes to the act of a Saviour. It can be brought about only after the present life is over. Liberation is a metaphysical idea. It has nothing to do with after-life; it happens here and now.
Even as a lad delights in his playthings unconcerned with his hunger or afflictions of the body, so too does he delight in Brahman with no consciousness of ‘I’ or ‘mine’. A serene stillness of mind, eating what is offered, drinking out of a tank or river, moving about automonously, sleeping without fear even in forests or burning grounds with the bare ground as the couch – these are the ways a Jivanmukta sports in Brahman.
He goes about in the expanse of supreme wisdom like an unsophisticated child, like one possessed or like a mad man. To some he appears as a fool; to others as a royal personage. Some call him mad; others are drwn to him by the luster of his countenance. Sometimes he lies inert. Now he is honoured and now ridiculed or ignored.
From an Advaitic point of view, there is no bondage of the Atman, and hence there is no meaning in speaking of its release. It is all an as-if, a make-believe.
Brahm-anubhava of Advaita is as far removed from Buddhistic Nirvana. The one is a plenary bliss with a positive content while the latter for aught one knows seems to be a contentless void.
SCIENCE & ADVAITA
The view of the finality of matter has been superseded by the researches in atomic physics and by the concept of energy as both the determinant and the constituent of the material world.
The ‘independence’ of the objective world apart from the contemplating subject has been exploded as a myth. In modern physics and psychology both, more and more importance is being given to the subjective element with the result that in line with the Indian theory of Dristi-Srishti-Vada, it is beginning to be held that mind makes matter.
The difference between a modern scientist’s approach to the problem of reality and the Vedantic approach to it is that, whereas the former works up from the base to the apex, from the manifold of material phenomena to a unitary spiritual principle, the latter first intuited this spiritual truth and displayed its manifestation in the realm of phenomenal variety.
The intellect functioning as a reflection in the antahkarana points to its original as the pure cit embedded in the inmost recess of the individual as the pratyagatman. All systems of ethics and all forms of religion worth the name subordinate action and emotion to the empire of the intellect in the affairs of man.
