|
The Real and the Unreal - Part IX - Ishwara -
08-03-2004, 09:01 AM
Om Gurubhyo Namah
THE RG-VEDA HYMN OF CREATION
Existence then was not, nor its opposite,
Nor earth, nor heaven's blue vault, nor aught beyond,
The subtle elements that are the veil
Of this so insubstantial world, where then
Might they find out a place? by whom be known?
The deep abyss of waters where was that?
Death was not yet, nor deathlessness; the day
Was night, night day, for neither day nor night
Had come to birth. Then THAT, the primal font
Of life breathless to its own primordial power joined -
Brooded eternally. Itself beside,
In the wide universe there nothing was,
In the beginning gloom gloom hidden in gloom!
>From its cause undistinguished stood the world:
But lo, thereafter, from its darkling state
Yet undistinguished from its cause it rose,
By the pure will of THAT made manifest.
Whence came this will? From out a seed it came
Asleep within the heart of THAT the seed
Of vanished worlds that have in order wheeled
Their silent courses of eternity:
The manifest in the unmanifest they found
The sages, searching deep within themselves
.
Ah, what are words, and what all mortal thought!
Who is there truly knows, and who can say,
Whence this unfathomed world, and from what cause?
Nay, even the gods were not! Who then can know?
The source from which this universe hath sprung,
That source, and that alone, which bears it up
None else: THAT, THAT alone, Lord of the worlds,
In its own self contained immaculate
As are the heavens, above, THAT alone knows
The truth of what Itself hath made none else!
ISHWARA, THE EFFICIENT CAUSE
The shruti assigns the origin of the universe to Ishwara.
"Brahman is omniscient because of Its being the source of the
scriptures". (BSB, I,I,3).
Shankara explains: "Brahman is the yoni (i.e., the material and
efficient cause) of great scriptures like the Rg-Veda etc. which are
supplemented by other scriptures that are themselves sources of
knowledge, which reveal all things like a lamp, and which are almost
omniscient. For scriptures like the Rg-Veda, possessed of all good
qualities as they are, cannot possibly emerge from any source other
than an all-knowing One. For it is a well recognised fact in the
world that the person from whom the scriptures dealing with
multifarious subjects emerge is more well informed than the
scriptures themselves; for instance grammar etc., emanating from
Panini and others, represent merely a part of the subject known to
them. It goes without saying that, that great Being has absolute
omniscience and omnipotence, since from Him emerge the Rg-Veda etc.
divided into many branches and constituting the source of
classification into gods, animals, men, castes, stages of life, etc.,
and the source of all kinds of knowledge and since the emergence of
these Vedas from that Being occurs as though in sport and without any
effort like the breath of a man, as is stated in the Vedic
text, 'Those that are called the Rg-Veda, are but the exhalation of
this great Being'."
Again Shankara says: "The Upanishads teach thus: Starting with the
text, 'O amiable one, before its creation, this universe was but
Existence, one without a second.' (Ch.VI,ii,1), it is stated, 'That
(Brahman) visualised, 'I shall become many, I shall be born' That
Brahman created fire' (Ch.VI,ii,3). In that text, the universe,
manifested as names and forms and referable by the word 'it', is
first ascertained to be identified with Existence 'before its
creation'; then the text shows that the creatorship of fire etc.,
that follows the visualisation of future creation, belongs to that
very entity, called Existence, which is under consideration. So also
elsewhere: 'In the beginning this universe was but the one Self
alone; there was nothing else whatsoever that winked. He
visualised, 'Let me create the worlds'. (Ai.I,I,1-2)."
ON THE MEANINGFUL USE OF WORDS
There is in science a principle called the law of entropy that states
that the world continuously tends to chaos and disorder. Evidence of
this universal tendency towards disintegration is everywhere - cars
rust, stereos break down, people become old, mountains erode, and
buildings collapse. If one were to place the parts of a clock in a
box and shake it, the probability of the pieces falling together as a
working clock is so negligible that it can be discounted. Yet, if we
open our eyes and look around us, we see that the principle of
entropy is being violated with such impunity that it is astonishing
that we don't see it. The evidence is all around us - ordered
structures of beehives come into existence, honey is gathered from
diverse flowers and accumulated, anthills come into being, seeds
germinate and grow into beautiful trees, cars get made, particles of
sand turn into microchips, aeroplanes fly and reach their intended
destinations, activities coalesce into coherent organisations, human
beings are born and grow - the list is endless. The loci of these
tendencies to order are living beings - wherever we find life there
we find that the most wondrous order of things are brought forth from
the chaotic dispersions of inanimate matter. The element that makes
this possible is life, for intelligence is the mark of life.
If one who wanted to make a clock were to sit shaking the pieces in a
box hoping that they would become a clock, we would not called such a
person intelligent. On the contrary, it would be quite fitting with
his actions to call him 'ignorant'. It is possible to create things
only by discerning the operative causes and acting accordingly. In
Shankara's words: "We have already said that an effect which is
patent in the cause serves as an obstruction to the manifestation of
the other effects. So if one tries only to destroy the previously
manifested effect such as the lump or the two halves which stand
between it and the jar, one may also have such effects as the
potsherds or tiny pieces. These too will conceal the jar and prevent
its being perceived; so a fresh attempt will be needed. Hence the
necessary operation of the factors of an action has its utility for
one who wants the manifestation of a jar or any other thing."
(Br.Up.I.2)
Discussions on efficient causality have often been obscured because
words are used in manners that violate their meanings. Thus it is
said that omniscience is to be understood as being contained in the
manifestations of avidya. It is not reasonable to speak of
omniscience as being a manifestation of avidya, for that is a mere
application of the word 'avidya' without a consideration of its
meaning. It is as if one who, on seeing a remarkably beautiful woman,
were to state that that beauty is contained in, or is a manifestation
of, ugliness. Apart from the wounded reaction that this might draw
from the charming woman in question, it would only go to show that
the person who speaks thus is not speaking meaningfully. Words must
be employed in consideration of their meanings; otherwise one may as
well call a cow a horse and a horse a door and say that flying is a
kind of walking, and the only thing that this manner of speaking
would achieve is universal confusion.
One does not attain to the desired result through avidya, for by
definition avidya is lack of knowledge. Driving a car without knowing
how to drive would most likely result in a consequence that is graver
than the intended one of reaching the destination. Attempting to cook
without knowledge of cooking may result in something not quite
palatable to the senses. But when these same tasks are undertaken
with knowledge, they lead to the intended goals even if the law of
probability does not give them much of a chance. Intelligent goal-
oriented actions are disruptive of the closed systems within which
the principle of entropy operates. Moreover, the law of probability
would completely rule out the possibility of repeatability. It may
happen by a rare chance that one clock may somehow fall into place
and get assembled, but the chances of clocks getting repeatedly
assembled with clocklike regularity would need an extraneous factor
for sure. That extraneous factor is the directedness to the result
that is provided by intelligence. Order and regularity can only be
brought about by vidya. The word vidya has all these connotations
of intelligence, design and goal-orientation, etc. Avidya on the
other hand has neither intelligence nor directedness. Avidya is
darkness, sloth, sleep, inertia. Avidya may contribute to the rise of
chaos, but would certainly not account for the regularity that we see
in the world. Therefore, it is Intelligence rather than avidya that
is the efficient cause of the universe. And Maya is to be understood
as the power through which Brahman brings forth this universe. Maya
is not avidya. The efficient cause of the universe is the Intelligent
Brahman and Brahman only.
MAYA AND AVIDYA
The confusion between avidya and Maya arises from a misinterpretation
of the bhashya, wherein it is stated that the omniscience and
omnipotence of God are contingent upon the nescience of the jiva. How
is this statement to be interpreted? The word 'contingent' here
implies a condition upon which something else happens. Avidya is the
condition and what happens is the response of Reality to that
condition. And that response springs by its innate power given the
contingency of avidya and the accumulations of karma caused by
avidya. Just as in the Yoga Sutra it is mentioned:
"Good and bad deeds are not the direct causes in transformations, but
they act as breakers of obstacles to nature, as a farmer breaks the
obstacles to the course of water, which then runs down by its own
nature." (YS,IV,3).
Similarly avidya is not the cause, but is the contingent factor upon
which the very nature of Brahman 'acts'. And it is because Brahman
acts by His nature that Brahman is actionless in His actions, because
that action is not through the sense of agency but by His own
immovable nature, for His nature is unmoved even by the greatest of
deeds and is hence truly omnipotent. He does the greatest of deeds
with the greatest of ease without the least affection to His being.
That is His aishwarya - His controllership. Therefore He is called
Ishwara, for Ishwara is the repository of aishwarya.
ISHWARA AND MAYA
Ishwara is not a product of Maya. Maya is Ishwara's incomprehensible
power of creation. There is no avidya in Ishwara.
The seeing of the Seer is not avidya. It is the very nature of
Brahman. It is the eternal and unbroken seeing of Brahman: "For when
it appears that it does not see, it is seeing even though it appears
it is not seeing; for there is no cessation of the seeing of the
seer, but there is no second thing apart from it that it can see."
(Br.Up. IV,III,23).
Shankara says in the bhashya (BSB,I,v,5): "For like the effulgence of
the sun, Brahman has eternal consciousness by Its very nature, so
that It has no dependence on the means of knowledge. Moreover, in the
case of the transmigrating soul, subject to ignorance, the rise of
knowledge depends on body etc., but not so in the case of God whose
knowledge is free from obstacles. And thus it is that the following
two mantras show how God is not dependent on body etc., and how His
knowledge has no covering: 'He has no body and no organ; none is seen
to be either equal or superior to Him. The Vedas speak of His diverse
supreme powers as also of His spontaneous action that is accomplished
by His vigour arising from knowledge.' (Sv.VI.8)." And the next sutra
reinforces this by stating that this eternal seeing is not spoken in
a secondary sense.
Now, the capacity by which the 'created' universe is brought forth
into the luminosity of seeing is not avidya. For avidya is nescience
which means sloth, or sleep, or inertia. Inertia cannot bring forth;
it can only mask and hide. That is the meaning of avidya. The
capacity to bring forth has to be the capacity to illuminate to the
senses it has to be a power of projection. Its name must derive
from the etymological root that evokes the meaning of projection.
That word is vikshepa. And the power by which it brings forth is
vikshepa shakti.
What is brought forth to be illumined to the senses also hides what
is not illumined, in so far as it is not so illumined.
Particularization hides the infinitude of the universal. That showing
forth of a particular also conceals the universality, and that
concealment is a concomitant of vikshepa. It is its avarana shakti.
It is the obverse side of vikshepa.
The knowing eye the third eye is never befooled by avarana. It
knows the infinity even in seeing the particular. It is only the
cloud of unknowing that takes the finite for the infinite. That cloud
of unknowing is avidya. It is not a 'thing' for it is the privation
of knowing. It is the veil of indescribability that has its seat in
the jiva.
The third eye is the eye of Ishwara. Therefore Ishwara has no avidya.
Vikshepa and avarana are the capacities of His infinite power the
awesome power of Maya. They are not two - Ishwara and His Maya they
are Existence and the magical power of Existence. They are Shiva and
Shakti.
What Ishwara brings forth is Himself. That is His own form showing
forth. It is His Prakriti. They are not two Ishwara and His Form
they are Existence and the Prakara of Existence. They are Purusha and
Prakriti.
In our lucid moments, we may glimpse that the world is only in
consciousness, that it has no existence in itself, but in spite of
such a vision, one cannot, by one's will, determine the world into
being. That power of aishwarya remains with Ishwara. A fraction of
that power may come to a yogi through the eight siddhis, but the
power of creation remains with Ishwara alone.
"For the Supreme Lord alone has competence for activities concerning
the creation etc., of the universe inasmuch as the fact of creation
etc., is taught in connection with Him alone, and the word `eternal'
is attributed to Him. The Upanishads mention that others get the
divine powers of becoming atomic in size etc., as a result of search
and hankering for knowing Him." (BSB, IV,IV,vii,17).
The world springs from a deeper level than one's conceptions and
conception cannot negate the very Will from which it springs forth as
conception. The weft and weave of the cloth cannot negate the cloth.
The jives with their minds are identified with so many layers or
sheaths of Reality, and from amidst the weave of these sheaths one
cannot negate the filaments of the weave, nor see the deep springs
from whence the world has come. The weave is already woven and it is
Ishwara that has brought it forth and it is He that projects and
holds the universe in place. How then can the jiva that cannot see
the well-springs of the world deny the world? When the jiva
challenges the creation of Ishwara, it is questioning the truth of
its own inner Self, and the answer to the challenge may as well be
like the words that came out of the clouds when Job challenged God in
the Old Testament:
"Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird
up now thy loins like a man, for I will demand of thee, and answer
thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Who laid the cornerstone thereof, when the morning stars sang
together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Or who shut up the
sea with doors
. And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further;
and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
. Canst thou bind the sweet
influence of the Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
. Knowest
thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in
the earth? Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts, or who hath given
understanding to the heart?" (Job 38:1-40:2).
None can dislodge the universe from the firmament in which Brahman
holds it aloft as the three created worlds. For is it not seen that
it is held in place?
"Under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O Gargi, the sun and moon
are held in their positions; under the mighty rule of this Immutable,
O Gargi, heaven and earth maintain their positions; under the mighty
rule of this Immutable, O Gargi, moments, Muhurtas, days and nights,
fortnights, months, seasons, and years are held in their respective
places; under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O Gargi some rivers
flow eastward from the White Mountains, other flowing westward
continue in that direction, and still others keep to their respective
courses; under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O Gargi, men praise
those that give, the gods depend on the sacrificer, and the manes on
the independent offerings."
__________________________________________________ ______________
With regards,
Chittaranjan
|
Linear Mode
