Science of the Absolute did 1

Details: Written by Patrick Misson; Parent Category: Content; Published: 20 October 2008; Created: 20 October 2008; Last Updated: 02 July 2015; Hits: 22249

DARSANA-MALA

A GARLAND OF VISIONS OF THE ABSOLUTE

FOREWORD

What follows here is a transliteration and translation from the original Sanskrit of Narayana Guru's Darsana Mala. It is followed by a short commentary by his disciple Swami Vidyananda who took instruction each day from Narayana Guru so that he could strictly adhere to his own commentary. Each day the Guru had the commentary read back to him for correction and approval. Those phrases which happened to be extraneous were rejected while the rest of the commentary received his approval.

The present writer has been an eye-witness to this cooperative effort between Narayana Guru and his disciple. The feature of teacher-disciple collaboration undoubtedly enhances the value of the commentary, however brief it might seem to anyone trying to understand the Darsana Mala. Narayana Guru also tacitly indicates the double-sidedness of the responsibility for his work by a verse he wrote as envoi for the commentary which reads:

"Let this commentary called didhiti (gloss)
Coming from my disciple Vidyananda
Be looked upon graciously by the wise
As belonging to one of tender years."

The Guru's own hand is clearly visible in just those phrases where subtle epistemological or methodological aspects have to initially glossed over, at least tentatively, in view of further clarifications such as what we are attempting in this book. The rest of the commentary has only an incidental value for us, and is not so important. We have taken some liberty with it, taking care however, to put whatever additions we make within brackets. On the other hand, when we suspected Narayana Guru's own handiwork, we have tried to keep as close to the original as possible, so as not to spoil the perennial value of the interpretations and intentions coming directly from him.

I hereby recognize my deepest gratitude to Narayana Guru also my indebtedness to my fellow disciple, the late Swami Vidyananda, whose permission for following the broad lines of this commentary can now only be sought by way of courtesy. Wherever further clarifications have been felt to be necessary, the present writer has taken care to throw some light on them, either in the prologue of each chapter or in the epilogue.

In the present commentary translated by us, we have tried to adhere as strictly as possible to Narayana Guru's own words expressed through Swami Vidyananda. Swami Vidyananda, as he openly states in the preface to the Malayalam edition, claims no credit for himself in the matter of being responsible for this commentary and attributes almost the whole of it, even the naming of the title, didhiti (meaning "throwing light"), to Narayana Guru. He especially states that the Guru made the comments and these, when put on paper, were then corrected more than once by him. In the light of these circumstances, it would be safe to assume that the purport of these comments, though not the presented form, belongs to Narayana Guru himself.

I. ADHYAROPA-DARSANAM (VISION BY SUPPOSITION)

1. asidagre' sadevedam bhuvanam svapnavat punah sasarja sarvam sankalpamatrena paramesvarah

In the beginning, there was
Non-existence indeed!
Dream-wise then again, by mere willing
Everything existent created He, the Lord supreme.

AGRE, in the beginning (before creation),
IDAM BHUVANAM, this world
ASAD EVA, even as nothingness (as non-existence, indeed)
ASID, existed,
PUNAH, thereafter (at the time of creation),
PARAMESVARAH, the supreme Lord,
SARVAM, everything
SANKALPAMATRENA, by mere willing,
SVAPNAVAT, like a dream,
SA-SARJA, (he) created

228

In the beginning (i.e. at its upper limit which has to be distinguished together with other similar limits), there was non-existence. Posteriorly to this (in pure time), the Supreme Lord (Paramesvara) when creation was to begin, by His mere willing created all this (i.e. gave it a conceptual status different from what was merely nominal), just as in the case of a dream (having its own virtuality within consciousness).

The stuff that dreams are made of is admittedly unreal to the extent that they belong to the world of ideas. In the same manner the world can be said to be unreal to the extent that its stuff is of the same order as His will. Whatever reality there was at this limiting point can be attributed to The Supreme Lord, rather than to his creation. The Taittiriya Upanishad supports this twofold point of view. The world as objectively manifested apart from the Lord was there equated to nothing, tentatively accepting the principle of contradiction between existence and non-existence.

In Vedantic parlance the upper limit set by the term agre (before creation or in the beginning) corresponds to the paramarthika or ultimate reality (i.e. the vertical), while puna (thereafter) refers to the vyavaharika or workaday practical reality (i.e. the horizontal).

It should be noted that according to Sanskrit convention a work of this kind has to indicate the subject-matter, and also imply something by way of adoring the most high value of the Absolute. This requirement is only tacitly fulfilled by virtue of his beginning the very first verse with the letter "a", which, according to the Bhagavad Gita (X.33), is equated with the Absolute: "Among syllabic letters l (i.e. the Absolute) am the A..."

The first word of the verse moreover, refers to something existing, because the word asid suggests something existent (in the ontological sense of sat). Because of referring to sat, this word, occupying the very first position in the verse, can also be considered as fulfilling the requirements of an auspicious beginning required by the same convention referred to above. Moreover, the verse later on equates existence with the Supreme Lord, and further confirms and complies with this same requirement.

229

2. vasanamayamevada vasididamatha prabhuh asrjanmayaya svasya mayavivakhilam jagat

In the beginning, in the form of incipient memory factors,
(All) this remained. Then the Lord,
By his own power of false presentiment, like a magician,
Created all this world (of change).

ADAU, in the beginning (at inception, before creation),
IDAM, this (visible world),
VASANAMAYAM EVA, in the form of incipient memory factors, (i.e. as samskaras, deep apperceptive masses in consciousness),
ASID, (remained) existent,
ATHA, thereafter (at the time of creation),
PRABHUH, the Lord,
SVASYA, (by) his own
MAYAYA, by (his power of) false presentiment,
MAYAVIVA, like a magician,
AKHILAM JAGAT, the whole world,
ASRIJAT,created.

At inception this visible world was in the form of vasanas (incipient memory factors). Thereafter, the Great Lord, by His power, which was of a non-existent (or merely conceptual order), after the manner of a magician, created all this phenomenal universe. Before creation this world had merely the status of pure samskaras (deep apperceptive masses in consciousness). The sankalpa (willing) mentioned in the previous verse is only an active version of the same vasana. At the time of creation the Lord created all this by his illusory power. This is like the magician, who while remaining all alone is able to make us believe there are multitudes of other things around him. There is in reality nothing apart from the magician, who is capable of manifesting visible things. Actual entities are not there, but only entities having the status of memory factors are not to be considered real. In the same way, there is nothing in the universe which is other than the Lord. What is in the Lord is only a certain power of specification or qualification called maya (the principle of false presentiment), having no (real) existence of its own. By the example of the magician, it has been shown that the phenomenal world is false.

230

3. pragutpatteridam svasmin vilinamatha vai svatah bijadankuravat svaysa saktireva'srjatsvayam

This (world) before creation was
Latent within Himself,
Thereafter, like a sprout from seed,
From Himself, by His power, by itself it was created.

IDAM, this (world),
PRAKUTPATTEH, before creation,
SVASMIN, in Himself (in the self, in the Lord),
VILINAM, was latent,
ATHA VAI, thereafter,
BIJAD ANKURAVAT, like sprout from seed,
SVATAH, from himself (from the Lord),
SVASYA SAKTIH, his power,
SVATAH EVA, by itself,
ASRJAT, created.

Before creation this world was only potentially present in the Lord. Thereafter, at the time of creation, His power, which was in Him by its own self-potence, created all this manifested world like a sprout from a seed. This power is capable of shrinking into nothingness, as well as expanding into elaborate sets of manifested entities. It is only the potent virtual entity which is present within the seed and is capable of manifesting itself as sprout, stem, branch, leaf, flower or fruit. Likewise, it is a potent power within the Lord who created this world. But the Lord is not subject to any process of becoming. It is that power alone, which is dependent on Him, that can be transformed (vikara) and is capable of creating this world.

4. saktistu dvividha jneya taijasi tamasiti ca sahavaso'nayornasti tejastimirayoriva

The power, however, as of two kinds
Is to be known, as the bright and the dark;
There is no co-existence between these two,
As with light and darkness.

231

SAKTIS TU, this power, however,
TAIJASI TAMAS ITI CA, and thus made of light and darkness,
DVIVIDHA, two kinds,
JNEYA, is to be known,
ANAYOH, as between these,
TEJASTI MIRAYOR IVA, so with light and darkness,
SAHAVASAH STI, there is no co-existence.

The aforesaid power of the Lord, however, is to be understood in two distinct ways: (first) as taijasi, or belonging to the light (i.e. heliotropic); and (secondly), as tamasi, as belonging to darkness (i.e. geotropic). We can divide the (specificatory) power of the Lord into two (ambivalent) divisions referring respectively to light (tejas) and darkness (tamas). Light and darkness cannot co-exist. It is the same with these two (ambivalent and specificatory) factors or powers of the Lord.

5. manomatramidam citramivagre sarvamidrsam prapayamasa vaicitryam bhagavan citrakaravat

In the beginning, this world,
Which was in the form of mind stuff, like a picture
Achieved with all this picturesque variety,
Like an artist, the Lord.

AGRE, in the beginning (before creation),
MANO MATRAM, in the form of mind-stuff (as made of mere mind-stuff),
IDAM, this (world),
CITRAM IVA, like a picture,
SARVAM IDRISAM, all this as such here,
VAICITRIYAM, (with its picturesque variety),
PRAPAYAMASA, achieved,
CITRAKARAVAT, like an artist,
BHAGAVAN, the lord.

The terms sankalpa (willing), vasana (incipient memory factor), and sakti (potent power), have been employed so as to be considered equivalent (vertically), each in itself, to the mind (manas), which occupies the central position in this verse. This world was merely of a mental status before creation. Just as an artist creates in respect of his painting, so the Lord also accomplished all this artistic variety (seen in the world). Before creation this world remained in the form of virtual mind-stuff. If it should be asked how; we say, it remained like a picture in the mind of an artist, before the picture was accomplished. In the same way it was in the mind (manas) or the willing (sankalpa) of the Lord that all this potentially resided. It is possible for an artist to produce works of art with many and varied elaborations or varieties. In short, the entire manifested world is only an (artistic) expression of the mind of the Lord.

232

6. asit prakrtirevedam yatha'dau yogavaibhavah vyatanodatha yogivasiddhijalam jagatpatih

Potentially, what even as Nature remained
Like the psychic powers of Yoga
Like a Yogi did He, the Lord of the world, work out
His varied psychic powers thereafter.

ADAU, in the beginning,
YATHA YOGAVAI BHAVAHA, as (in the case of) psychic powers,
IDAM, this (world),
PRAKRTIR EVA, as nature (itself),
ASIT, remained,
ATHA, thereafter,
YOGI SIDDHI JALAMIVA, as a yogi with his varied psychic powers,
JAGAT PATIH, the Lord of the world,
IDAM, this (world),
VYATANOD, worked out.

In the beginning the world was prakriti (nature), having the same status as the psychic powers of a Yogi (mystic of unitive inner experience). Thereafter, at the time of creation, the Lord made manifest his own nature in the same way as a yogi makes manifest his powers. The psychic powers of a yogi are in reality only incipient memory factors within himself. What we meant here by prakriti only refers to tendencies capable of functioning as contraction or expansion, which could be merely mental in status; or, otherwise stated, it is mind itself which is referred to as none other than prakriti, as we should here understand. All the manifold manifested powers of a yogi are only innate tendencies in his mind, belonging to his own nature, and later on to be expanded and elaborately manifested. In the same way it is prakriti that is virtually present in terms of mind-stuff that becomes transformed into this expanded universe as presented to our vision. What has been discussed so far under the terms of sankalpa (willing); vasana, (incipient memory factor), sakti (potent specifying power), manas (mind) and prakriti (nature) have one and the same meaning. The term avidya (nescience), to be used in the next verse, also falls into the same (verticalized) series. It is possible to refer to this same factor in many other ways. In view of simplicity and for the student's (apodictic) clarity and understanding, we have merely followed a graded series of terms with different designations.

233

7. yada'tmavidyasamkocastada'vidya bhayankaram namarupatmana'tyartham vibhatiha pisacavat

When Self-knowledge shrinks,
Then prevails nescience fearful;
Ghost-like, taking name and form,
In most terrible fashion looms here.

YADA, when,
ATMA VIDYA SAMKOCAH (BHAVATI), knowledge about the self shrinks,
TADA, then,
AVIDYA, nescience,
NAMA RUPA ATMANA, taking name and form,
PISACAVAT, ghost-like,
ATYARTHAM BHAYANKARAM, in most terrible fashion,
IHA, here,
VIBHATI, looms

234

In this verse it is pointed out how, because of the absence of right knowledge (avidya) about the Self, all beings find creation to have a terrifying aspect. When such knowledge is absent then nescience (lends support) to the appearance of name and form (nama-rupa). (This plurality of) name and form (entities) seem ghost-like in a most terrifying fashion, presenting themselves as appearances.

It is only because there is lack of Self-knowledge (atma-vidya) that the whole of the universe seems to be the seat of all fear and suffering. When the correct knowledge about the Self prevails, all apparent sufferings and their sources (in the world) disappear. There will not be any cessation of suffering until one realizes the true knowledge resulting from the realization of one's own self. Self-knowledge is the most superior of all means for release. In the same way as in cooking the only means is fire (or heat), so there is no salvation without Self-knowledge. This is what Sankaracharya has taught.

By this verse the man who is desirous of getting release from suffering, resulting from lack of Self-knowledge, is to be considered an adhikari (a person fit to study this science), and that the subject-matter of this present work is atma-vidya (the Science of the Self). Furthermore, between atma-vidya and this work there is the relation of subject-matter and object-matter. The final release from suffering due to nescience and the attainment of the goal of full Self-knowledge, is the aim and utility of this work as required by Sanskrit convention.

Suffering and ignorance apply not only to people in this world but to all created beings, whether seen or unseen, wherever they be in the universe. In principle this applies to all of them. (It is to be remembered that) even the creation undertaken by the Lord involves the same wonderful and terrifying elements of this very kind.

235

8. bhayankaramidam sunyam vetalanagaram yatha tathaiva visvamakhilam vyakarodadbhutam vibhuh

Terrible and empty of content
Like a city infernal,
Even as such a marvel
Did the Lord make the whole universe.

IDAM, this (visible world),
VETALA NAGARAM YATHA, like an infernal city,
BHAYANKAR IDAM SUNYAM (CA BHAVATI), terrible and empty of content both (remain),
VIBHUH, the Lord,
AKHILAMVISVAM, the whole universe,
TATHA IVA, even as such,
ADBHUTAM, a marvel,
VYAKAROD, made

This visible world is just like an infernal city, empty of content (sunya) and terrible (bhayankaram) in this most wonderful manner, with visible and invisible aspects referring to all possible worlds created by the Lord. Because the Lord is all-powerful and capable of accomplishing anything He was able to create something which had no basis in reality, but still could be seen as a wonderful appearance, because it is at once empty of content and terrible, though describable as a marvel (adhbuta).

The term vibhuh employed in the verses refers to the omnipresence, omnipotence, and everlasting eternity of the Lord. (vi, before; and bhuh, what exists: because it existed before, it is called vibhuh).

9. arkadyathakramam visvam tatha naivedamatmanah supteriva pradurasidyugapatsvasya viksaya

If from a sun in graded succession
This world came, such was not the case at all.
Presented as if out of slumber,
At one stroke, all came to be.

236

IDAM VISVAM, this world,
ARKAD, from the sun,
YATHA KRAMAM, as in a gradual manner,
PRADURASID (ITI CET), it is unmanifested (if it should be said),
TATHA NA IVA, thus not at all,
IDAM, this (world),
ATMANAH, from the self,
SVASYA, (by) its own,
VIKSHAYA, regard (i.e. will),
SUPTEH IVA, as if from sleep,
YUGAPAD, at one stroke,
PRADURASID, all came to be

If it be said that this world came to be in gradual steps out of a primordial sun, we say it is not so at all. From the Self, as if from sleep, all come into being at one stroke.

There is a traditional belief that there was an original sun and from that sun, by successive steps the universe was produced; the sky was produced, and from the sky the atmosphere, from the atmosphere the fire, from the fire the water, and from the water the earth.

This view is not correct. This world with all its features that we experience in practical life came by the willing of the Self out of the Self, coming out together all at once. Before creation, the Self had the character of being itself or alone (kevalam). When one wakes from deep sleep (sushupti), the whole world becomes presented all together. In the same way at the time of creation, by dint of the will of the Self all is manifested together, and projected from out of the Self. There is also the Upanishadic dictum which says, "The one Self thought "Let me be many!"." By this verse the theory of gradual creation (kramasrishti) is repudiated and that of instantaneous creation (yugapad-srishti) is upheld. What is implied herein is that the power of the Lord is so great that it could create all this world at one stroke.

237

10. dhanadiva vato yasmat pradurasididam jagat sa brahma sa sivo visnuh sa parah sarva eva sah

He from whom, like a fig tree as from seed
Came out this world manifested -
He is Brahma, He is Siva and Vishnu,
He is the Ultimate, everything is He indeed.

DHANAT, from a seed,
VATAH IVA, like a fig tree,
YASMAT, from whom,
IDAM JAGAT, this world,
PRADURASID, manifested,
SAH BRAHMA, he is Brahma,
SAH VISNU, he is Vishnu,
SAH SIVA, he is Siva,
SAH PARAH, he is the ultimate,
SAH EVA SARVAH, everything is he indeed

Just as from a (minute) seed a (large) fig tree arises (so too), that Lord from whom this whole wonderful universe became manifested. He is Brahma, He is Vishnu, He is Siva, He is the Supreme Self (paramatma), and He is everything indeed. By this Brahma, the creator (in the Vedic context) of the (Vedic gods) Indra and Varuna and others, as well as Vishnu who is the Lord of the Vaishnavas and Siva who is the Lord of the Saivites, and the Supreme Self of the Vedantins, are all treated as one and the same. Because of this reference to the threefold gods (trimurti), it is indicated that this world originates from the same Lord having this threefold character, and that it originates in Him, endures in Him and dissolves into Him once again. Further, by the statement that He is everything, it is affirmed that there is no world outside of the Lord. It further states that by the words, "sa parah" i.e. "He is the Ultimate," it is indicated that the Lord is not subject to any kind of transformation (vikara), and that he is without any kind of specific attributes, being Himself the Supreme Self. The world is only seemingly present in the Lord and it is indicated that the instrumental and material causes (nimitta-karana and upadana-karana are none other than the Lord.

238

In fact, the attribution (wrongly thought of) by the mind of the phenomenal aspect to that which is non-phenomenal is what is referred to as "superimposition" or "supposed position" characterizing this chapter called Adhyaropa. All gurus (spiritual teachers) and sastras (texts) are known traditionally to indicate and take an initial supposed position in respect of their subject-matter, before giving instruction about the attributeless Absolute (nirguna-brahman). Following the same tradition, the section on Adhyaropa has now been terminated. In the next vision of truth (darsana), the apavada (i.e. neutralizing this supposition) is to be dealt with.

238

II. APAVADA-DARSANAM (VISION BY NON-SUPPOSITION)

1. caitanyadagatam sthulasuksmatmakamidam jagat asti cedsadghanam sarvam nasti cedasti cidghanam

This world, which is both subtle and gross,
And which has come to be from living consciousness,
If existent, then everything is existent;
If non-existent, then it exists as consciousness.

CAITANYAT, from living consciousness (i.e. the Lord),
AGATAM, what has come to be,
STHULA SUKSHMATMAKAMIDAM, which is both subtle and gross,
IDAM JAGAT, this world,
ASTI CET, if existent,
SARVAM SADGHANAM ASTI, everything is existent,
NASTI CET, if non- existent,
CIDGHANAM ASTI, it exists as consciousness

This world, while seen as having both a subtle and a gross form, has come out of the Lord who is of the form of consciousness. In other words, it is the Lord who appears as the world. (But) the world does not really exist. The world which is none other than the Lord, if we should say it is real it consists of existence (sat). If we should say, on the contrary, that it does not exist because it still remains in the form of knowledge, it consists of the stuff of consciousness. Because it is both existent and made of consciousness it is none other than what the Lord is. Therefore, whether we say the world is existent or non-existent we have to admit that it is not different from the Lord; this is because the world is merely superimposed (adhyasa) on the Lord who is existence-subsistence-value (sat-cit-ananda). It has no real existence and that which really exists is the foundation which is the Lord alone.

370

2. anyanna karanatkaryam asadedadato'khilam asatah kathamutpattiranutpannasya ko layah

Other than the cause, the effect cannot be,
Therefore, all this is non-existent.
Of what is non-existent, how can there be an origin?
And of something unoriginated, how (can there be) reabsorption?

KARANAT, from the cause,
ANYAT, other,
KARYAM NA, there is no effect,
ATAH, before,
ETAT AKHILAM, all this (universe),
ASAT (BHAVATI), becomes non-existent,
ASATAH,of what is non-existent,
UTPATTIH KATHAM, how can there be origin,
ANUTPANNASYA, of something unoriginated,
LAYAH, reabsorbtion,
KAH, how can there be?

There is no effect independent of the cause. That is, when we examine it more closely all effects are unreal. Their causes alone are real. Therefore, the visible and invisible universe is unreal because of being an effect. That which is existent is what is real. It is what constitutes the one cause for everything, which is the Lord, or in other words, the Absolute (brahman). How can a non-existent world have an origin? In other words, it never originated at all. How can anything which does not originate have re-absorption? That is, there is no re-absorption. For something which has neither origin nor re-absorption there is no state of being. That is, in the Absolute this universe has no being at any time (either) in the past, present or future.

3. yasyotpattirlayo nasti tat param brahma ne'tarat utpattisca layo'stiti brahmatyatmani mayaya

To that which origin and dissolution is not,
That is none other than the ultimate Absolute.
(That there) is origin and re-absorption,
By Maya´s confusion in the Self (is supposed).

371

YASYA, to that which,
UTPATTIH LAYA CA, origin and reabsorption,
NASTI, is not,
TAT, that,
PARAM BRAHMA, (than) the ultimate Absolute,
ITARAT NA, is none other,
UTPATTIH LAYA CA, origin and reabsorption,
ATMANI, in the self,
ASTI ITI, as present,
MAYAYA, by Maya,
BHRAMATI, by confusion (one thinks)

Because origin and reabsorption have been mentioned, being (existence) is also to be understood as included. That one reality which has neither origin, being, nor reabsorption is none other than that supreme and ultimate Absolute. In that Absolute which is in the form of the Self the origin, being and re-absorption of the world is taken to be present because of confusion. This confusion is caused by the conditioning (upadhi) imposed by Maya. In the fourth darsana Maya will be further elaborated.

4. karanavyatiriktatvat karyasya kathamastita bhavatyataha karanasya kathamasti ca nastita

Because of non-difference from cause,
The effect, how could it have being?
How could there be, for the same reason,
For the cause also, any non-being?

KARANA VYATIRIKA TVAT, because of non-difference (of effect) from cause,
KARYASYA, for the effect,
KATHAM, how could there be,
ASTITA, (state of) being,
BHAVATI, come to be,
ATAH, for the same reason,
KARANASYA, for the cause,
NASTITA CA, non-being also,
KATHAMASTI, how could there be?

Because an effect is non-different from its cause the effect has no independent status in being. By the same reason, for the cause there is no non-existence either. That is to say, the world as an effect is given to the vision, but on further examination it is seen to be unreal. If there is an effect it should necessarily have a cause. That effect should not be different from its cause in principle. This is to say, when we examine it (still) further there remains only the cause and not the effect, because the non-existence of the effect as given to view is the unsublated reality of the cause itself. By virtue of such a reasoning the Absolute as the cause alone is real. The world as an effect is thus established as unreal without further argumentation.

372

5. karyatvadasato'syasti karanam nahyato jagat brahmaiva tarhi sadasaditi muhyati mandadhih

Being an effect, and thus non-existent,
An existent cause there is; the world is thus not indeed.
On the other hand, it is the Absolute alone that is existent,
That dull minds mistake as non-existing.

KARYATVAT, because of being an effect,
ASATAH, what is non-existent,
ASYA, for this (visible world),
KARANAM, an (existent) cause,
ASTI, there is,
ATAH, therefore (because there is a cause),
JAGAT, he world (which is an effect),
NA HI, is not (real) indeed,
TARHI, on the contrary,
SAT, existent (as a cause),
BRAHMA EVA, the Absolute it is indeed,
MANADHIH, dull minds,
ASAD ITI, as unreal,
MUHYATI, mistake

All things which constitute an effect are unreal. This is well known. Therefore the whole world is unreal and because of being unreal it must have a cause which is real. Because the cause alone has a status in reality, it naturally follows that the effect is unreal. That unique cause which represents real existence is the Absolute. Dull minds not capable of discrimination due to a confusion between existence and non-existence treat real existence as unreal. In other words, they mistake the Absolute for the world and thus suffer.

6. ekasyaivasti satta cedanyasya'sau kva vidyate satyastyamatmasrayo yadyapyasati syad asambhavaha

If one alone has reality,
Another in it how could there be?
If existence is posited in existence, tautology,
And if non-existence is so asserted, contradiction (comes).

EKASYA EVA, for one only (i.e. for the absolute alone which is the cause)
SATTA, existence,
ASTI, there is,
ANYASYA, for another (i.e. for the world which is an effect),
ASAU, in this existence,
KYA VIDYATE, where could it be,
SATI, within what exists,
SATTA, existence,
ASTI CET, if we say there is (existence is),
ATMASRAYAH, there is petitio principii, (i.e. tautology),
ASATI, within non-existence,
(SATTA ASTI, existence is),
YADI, if we should say,
ASAMBHAVAH, impossibility (i.e. contradiction),
API, also,
SYAD, would come to be.

373

If we press further along the foregoing reasoning concerning the relation between the effect and cause, we come to know there is only one thing that is real and that another can have no reality beside it. That is to say, only the Absolute which is the cause has reality and thence it follows that the world is an effect having no reality. In a certain reality, if the reality of another is predicated that is a tautology. Again in the Absolute, which is alone real, there is the existence of a non-existent thing; this is impossible and a contradiction. When one's own existence is posited in oneself, there is the defect of begging the question (petitio principii) which is, in principle, a tautology.

As an alternative, if one should state that in the world that is non-existent there is existence; this results in the logical error called contradiction. Familiar examples of such contradictions in the Vedantic context are gandharva nagaram, the city of quasi-celestial beings, the son of a sterile woman, the rabbit's horn, etc. Their (inherent) impossibilities could be referred to as contradictions.

7. vibhajya'vayavam sarvamekaikam tatra drsyate cinmatramakhilam nanyaditi mayaviduragam

Dividing all parts one by one,
Everything then is seen there
As mind stuff alone, and as no other,
As thus banishing Maya (relativity) far away.

AVAYAVAM, parts, limbs,
EKAIKAM, one by one,
SARVAM, all,
VIBHAJYA, having divided,
TATRA, then,
AKHILAM, everything, (i.e. the whole world),
MAYAVIDURAGAM, banishing Maya far away (i.e. without any taint of Maya),
CINMATRA, mind stuff alone (of the stuff of absolute consciousness),
ANYAT NA, no other thing,
ITI, thus,
DRSYATE, is seen

To understand this let us examine the reality of a cloth. In the first place we can divide the cloth into its threads. When the threads have been taken out there is no cloth to be seen. Thus we know that it is the threads that take the form of cloth, and the cloth (itself) has no reality. The reality of the cloth merely resides in the thread. If we proceed once again in the same manner to examine the thread we see that it gives place to cotton. Now we understand that it is cotton that appears like thread, and the reality of thread is not in the thread but in the cotton. If we further examine this cotton we find it consists of atoms composed of the five elements. Now the reality is not even in the cotton and (instead) it is in the atoms where reality resides. If we further examine these atoms by means of instruments, or even by the instrumentality of the mind, we find these atoms without being, given as objects for the instruments or even the mind which is subtler than the subtlest instrument, all perception hiding in a sort of darkness or ignorance, which is nescience. That is to say nobody is able to know how all this originated. Now by this kind of enquiry, cloth, thread, cotton, elemental atoms and ignorance we know that for all these there is only one reality and from cloth to atom everything is the effect of nescience. But even this nescience is capable of being abolished by knowledge or science. It is this aspect of knowledge that is attributed to the Lord. The absence of knowledge is what constitutes the stuff of ignorance. When knowledge operates nescience becomes abolished and with the help of such knowledge one is able to see the causal status in reality of each one of the items ranging from cloth to atom. Such awareness is a kind of ever-present and lasting witness, having an ultimate status of its own. Awareness itself is without further cause and is self-evident. All others have dependent causes, one behind the other. Therefore it is knowledge alone that is supreme and eternal. All other things are unreal.

375

8. cideva nanyadhabati citah paramato nahi yacca nabhati tadasadyadasattanna bhati ca

Thus, it is pure mind-stuff alone that shines,
There is nothing, therefore, beyond pure mind-stuff at all.
What does not shine is not real either,
And what is not real does not shine indeed.

CIT EVA, it is even pure mind-stuff,
ABHATI, shines;
ANYAD NA, not anything else;
ATAH, therefore;
CITAH PARAM, beyond pure mind-stuff (i.e. other than knowledge);
NAHI, nothing indeed;
YAT CA, that which also;
NA ABHATI, does not shine;
TAT, that;
ASAT, is non-real;
YAT, that which;
ASAT, is non-real;
TAT, that;
NA BHATI CA, also does not shine indeed.

All that enters consciousness is nothing other than what is real. That which is not real cannot enter consciousness. It is knowledge alone that remains real. That which is both real and consciousness is the Absolute which is none other than the Lord as consciousness. Therefore, what appears as this world is nothing other than the Absolute. Existence and subsistence are both the form of the Absolute. Existence-subsistence-value all have the characteristics of the form of the Absolute. What is both existence and subsistence is a High Value at the same time.

9. ananda evasti bhati nanyah kascidato'khilam anandaghanamanyanna vina'nandena vidyate

High Value (Biss) alone exists and shines,
Therefore nothing else at all,
Thus, everything is of the stuff of the High Value,
And besides this High Value, nothing else exists.

ANANDA EVA ASTI, high value (Bliss) alone exists,
(ANANDA EVA) BHATI, (it is high value alone that) shines,
ANYAH KASCID NA, not anything else,
ATAH, therefore,
AKHILAM, everything (i.e. the whole world),
ANANDA GHANAM, is of the stuff of this high value,
ANYAT NA VIDYATE, nothing else exists

This verse merely underlines the High Value content called Bliss or ananda as comprising the totality of the Absolute.

10. sarvam hi saccidanandam neha nana'sti kincana yah pasyatiha naneva mrtyormrtyam sa gacchati

All is indeed existence-subsistence-value,
Herein there is not even a little plurality.
He who sees (this) as pluralistic,
From death to death he goes.

SARVAM SACCIDANANDAM HI, all this is indeed existence-subsistence-value,
IHA, herein,
KINCANA, not even a little,
NANA, plurality,
NA ASTI, there is not,
IHA, in this (absolute),
YAH, he,
NANA IVA, as if pluralistic,
PASYATI, sees,
SAH, he,
MRITYOR, from death,
MRITYAM, to death,
GACCHATI, he goes

The meaning of the verse is sufficiently clear. The note on which it ends is reminiscent of an Upanishadic dictum as found in the Katha Upanishad. The Absolute is here reduced as comprised with the categories of Existence-subsistence-value.

II. APAVADA-DARSANAM (VISION BY NON-SUPPOSITION)

1. caitanyadagatam sthulasuksmatmakamidam jagat asti cedsadghanam sarvam nasti cedasti cidghanam

This world, which is both subtle and gross,
And which has come to be from living consciousness,
If existent, then everything is existent;
If non-existent, then it exists as consciousness.

370

2. anyanna karanatkaryam asadedadato'khilam asatah kathamutpattiranutpannasya ko layah

Other than the cause, the effect cannot be,
Therefore, all this is non-existent.
Of what is non-existent, how can there be an origin?
And of something unoriginated, how (can there be) reabsorption?

3. yasyotpattirlayo nasti tat param brahma ne'tarat utpattisca layo'stiti brahmatyatmani mayaya

To that which origin and dissolution is not,
That is none other than the ultimate Absolute.
(That there) is origin and re-absorption,
By Maya´s confusion in the Self (is supposed).

371

4. karanavyatiriktatvat karyasya kathamastita bhavatyataha karanasya kathamasti ca nastita

Because of non-difference from cause,
The effect, how could it have being?
How could there be, for the same reason,
For the cause also, any non-being?

372

5. karyatvadasato'syasti karanam nahyato jagat brahmaiva tarhi sadasaditi muhyati mandadhih

6. ekasyaivasti satta cedanyasya'sau kva vidyate satyastyamatmasrayo yadyapyasati syad asambhavaha

If one alone has reality,
Another in it how could there be?
If existence is posited in existence, tautology,
And if non-existence is so asserted, contradiction (comes).

373

7. vibhajya'vayavam sarvamekaikam tatra drsyate cinmatramakhilam nanyaditi mayaviduragam

Dividing all parts one by one,
Everything then is seen there
As mind stuff alone, and as no other,
As thus banishing Maya (relativity) far away.

375

8. cideva nanyadhabati citah paramato nahi yacca nabhati tadasadyadasattanna bhati ca

Thus, it is pure mind-stuff alone that shines,
There is nothing, therefore, beyond pure mind-stuff at all.
What does not shine is not real either,
And what is not real does not shine indeed.

9. ananda evasti bhati nanyah kascidato'khilam anandaghanamanyanna vina'nandena vidyate

High Value (Biss) alone exists and shines,
Therefore nothing else at all,
Thus, everything is of the stuff of the High Value,
And besides this High Value, nothing else exists.

This verse merely underlines the High Value content called Bliss or ananda as comprising the totality of the Absolute.

10. sarvam hi saccidanandam neha nana'sti kincana yah pasyatiha naneva mrtyormrtyam sa gacchati

All is indeed existence-subsistence-value,
Herein there is not even a little plurality.
He who sees (this) as pluralistic,
From death to death he goes.

III. ASATYA-DARSANAM (VISION OF NON-EXISTENCE)

1. manomayamidam sarvam na manah kvapi vidyate ato vyomniva niladi drsyate jagadatmani

All this (world) is of mind-stuff,
The mind, however, is not anywhere.
Therefore, like the blue and so on in the sky,
The world is seen in the Self.

IDAM SARVAM, all this (world),
MANOMAYAM, is of mind-stuff,
MANAH, the mind,
KVAPI, anywhere,
NA VIDYATE, is not,
ATAH, therefore,
VYOMNIVA, in the sky,
NILADI VA, like the blue and so on,
ATMANI, in the Self,
JAGAT, the world,
DRISYATE, is seen.

In the sky there are no colours such as blue, etc. In spite of this, however we know this verity as we actually perceive the blue colour in the sky. In reality only the sky is real, and blueness, etc. are fully unreal. In the same manner in the pure unqualified Self this world is perceived which is a presentiment of the will. It is the Self alone that is real, and the world consisting of mind-stuff is unreal.

2. manaso'nanyaya sarvam kalpyate'vidyaya jagat vidyaya'sau layam yati tadalekhyamiva'khilam

By nescience, which is no other than the mind,
All this world is a presentiment of the will.
This (nescience) by knowledge gets reabsorbed,
Then the whole world (becomes) a mere configuration.

MANASAH, from the mind,
ANANYAYA, which is no other,
AVIDYAYA, by nescience,
SARVAM JAGAT, all this world,
KALPYATE, is a presentiment of the will,
ASAU, this (nescience)
VIDYAYA, by knowledge (i.e. true knowledge of the Self),
LAYAM ITI, gets reabsorbed (ignorance is abolished and Self-knowledge prevails),
AKHILAM, the whole (world),
ALEKHYAMIVA (BHAVATI), then it (becomes)a mere configuration (drawing)

It is the mind that is to be considered the same as nescience It is because of this ignorance that the world seems to be real. For destroying this ignorance, which is nescience, there is no other way than through knowledge, that is, true knowledge of the Self. When nescience is abolished Self-knowledge prevails, and when nescience is abolished and science prevails, the whole world resembles a configuration (drawing) presented by the mind. In the same way by the power of nescience which is the form of mind, the whole world is willed. Therefore this world is non-existent. When Self-knowledge prevails the fact that the world is unreal becomes experienced.

3. vijrmbhate yattamaso bhiroriha pisacavat tadidam jagrati svapnalokavad drsyate budhaih

Here, what a coward finds through darkness
To be like a looming ghost,
The same is seen to be by the wise
Like a dream-world of a waking state.

IHA, here (i.e. from a workaday standpoint),
BHIROH, to a coward,
TAMASAH, through darkness,
PISACAVAT, like a ghost,

YAT, what,
VIJRIMBHATE, looms,
TAT IDAM, that same (i.e. what is visible),
BUDHAIH, by the wise,
JAGRATI, of the wakeful state,
SVAPNALOKAVAD, like a dream-world,
DRSYATE, is seen.

For a coward darkness is like a ghost, and this is a common experience. The ghost and its cause which is darkness are both non-existent. To the coward, however, because of his fear and lack of light it is darkness that is seen as a ghost. When a lamp is brought and one looks at it there is neither darkness nor a ghost. In the same way for those who are not aware of the principle of nescience, this world which is of the form of nescience (which is the same as ignorance), i.e. for a man who does not know this principle, it seems real. Just as in the same way as darkness becomes for a coward a ghost, through that ignorance which is of the nature of darkness, what looms in the form of this world is seen to be true only to those who have not attained to Self-knowledge. But to those who have Self-knowledge and who are wise, this world is like a daydream and seen to be unreal.

4. sankalpakalpitam drsyam sankalpo yatra vidyate drsyam tatra ca nanyatra kutracidrajjusarpavat.

This visible world results from a willing presentiment.
Where willing is present alone
Is this visible world seen, not anywhere else,
As a snake, too, when alone a rope is found.

DRISYAM, this visible world is seen (results),
SANKALPA KALPITAM, (as) a presentiment of the will,
YATRA, where,
SANKALPAH VIDYATE, willing is present,
TATRA CA, there alone,
DRISYAM VIDYATE, this visible (world) (exists),
ANYATRA KUTRACID NA, not anywhere else,
RAJJUSARPAVAT, as a snake too where alone a rope (is found)

All visible things are the product of willing. Only where there is willing is there any object. If there is no willing there is nothing at all. The snake imagined on the basis of a rope is merely a product of willing. For a man who has the presentiment of a snake, a piece of rope lying in a place badly lit seems like a snake. When a lamp is brought and the object is examined there is no snake in the rope. If we now inquire where the snake was, we can see that it has its being only in the will. This snake has neither a workaday reality (vyavaharika) nor an absolute reality (paramarthika). It has only a reflected eidetic (pratibhasika) status. In the same way as with this eidetic snake, if we consider any other of the many objects presented to us we conclude that they are only products of the will. Here we find the justification for what was said in the first chapter about the creation of the world by the mere will of the Highest Lord. In the same way as this eidetic snake came from the vitalistic will (of the individual), (so too) this workaday world is the product of the Highest Lord. All things as presentiment of the will are unreal. When knowledge comes they are destroyed. But the difference we should note here is that the snake-rope is of the nature of a vital presentiment of the will, when the right knowledge which belongs to the living being is operative they (i.e. snake and rope) get abolished. But in the case of this workaday world having its origin in the will of the Highest Lord, even after we come to know of it as unreal we cannot abolish it completely because the Lord's willing is stronger than individual vital willing and because all beings are caught and helplessly spun around by the will of the Lord. It is only the will of the Lord that can abolish altogether this collective presentiment (called) the visible world. In spite of this, however, those great souls who have attained to the experience of reality through Self-knowledge, know the unreality of the world in respect of the three aspects of time; whether past, present or future. Because it arises from the will and is also dissolved by the will the world is non-existent in the same way as the snake supposed in the basis of the rope. By bringing in the analogy of the rope and snake we have to understand that the world was not before or after but only present in the intermediate period when nescience prevailed and knowledge had not asserted itself. What is not present in the past and in the future can certainly be said to be non-existent in the present.

5. sankalpamanasoh kascinnahi bhedo'sti yanmanah tadavidyatmahprahkyam indrajalam ivadbhutam

Between the will and the mind,
There is no difference at all,
That which is mind and called nescience and darkness,
Like the magic of Indra, is a marvel.

SANKALPA MANASAH, as between the will and the mind,
KASCIT BHEDAH, any difference,
NA HI ASTI,there is none at all,
AVIYA TAMAH RAKHYAM, what is called nescience and darkness,
YAT MANAH, which is mind,
TAT, that,
INDRAJALAM IVA, like the magic of Indra,
ADBHUTAM, is marvel

What is given as the world, which is false in respect of the three aspects of time, is an appearance preserved with all the varied picturesqueness belonging to it, seems itself as created by that specific power which is the mind endowed with will. It is therefore described as a marvel (adbhutam) like the magic of Indra. Because this power remains in the form of darkness and nescience it is difficult to clearly determine the intrinsic nature of this factor which is itself unreal. Although all persons know that the objects produced by a magician are unreal yet they are taken to be real. Because it is difficult to find the truth about this unreality, it is said to be a marvel. In the same way, because it is not possible to understand the nature of the mind it is also said to be a marvel.

6. maricikavatprajnasya jagadatmani bhasate balasya satyamiti ca pratibimbamiva bhramat

Like a mirage, to a wise man,
The world looms in the Self,
Just as to an infant, by confusion,
A reflected image might real seem too.

PRAJNASYA, to a wise man, (who can discriminate between what is real and what is unreal),
JAGAT, the world,
MARICIKAVAT, like a mirage,
ATMANI, in the Self,
BHASATE, shines, looms,
BALASYA, to an infant(without discrimination),
BHRAMAT, by confusion,
PRATIBIMBAM IVA, like a reflected image,
SATYAM ITI CA, as if real too,
(BHASATE), might seem

For a child having no discrimination, when it sees a reflection in a mirror it thinks that there is another child in the mirror. The child treats the reflection as if it were a real child. This is due to confusion in the child's mind. By confusion we mean the erroneous comprehension of one thing for another. But a person who has attained to discrimination understands the reflection in the mirror to be non-existent. In the same way people of non-discrimination understand the world as real, but those with discrimination take it to be non-existent. The mirage that is seen in the desert in the form of water seems only real to animals while those who have knowledge and experience understand it to have no real existence. In the same way, the wise man who discriminates between the transient and eternal values in life arrives at certitude in knowledge. He treats this world like a mirage, or in other words, as having no real existence. It is only to people of non-discrimination that the world seems real. The world is a mere superimposition or epiphenomenon, of the Self. Therefore it is absolutely non-existent.

7. atma na ksiravadyati rupantaramato'khilam vivartamindrajalena vidyate nirmitam yatha

This Self, like milk (that turns),
Does not attain to another form.
Therefore, the whole (universe), as if created
By Indra's magic,
exists as (an eidetic) presentiment.

ATMA, the self,
KSHIRAVAT, like milk,
RUPA ANTARAM, to another form,
NA YATHA INDRAJALENA NIRMITAM, as if created by Indra's magic,
VIVARTAM VIDYATE, exists as (an eidetic) presentiment, (i.e. being non-existent, it appears as existent)

The Self is something that remains changeless and is without the states of birth, being, growth, transformation, decrease or destruction. Like milk that goes sour and changes over into curds or buttermilk, the Self does not change, taking the form of the world, because it is not possible for even an atom to be outside the Self. If one asks how this marvelous visible world originated and how it came about and on what basis it is established, the reply is that it exists in the Self in the form of an eidetic presentiment (vivarta). The things produced by the magician do not really exist. In the same way this world is really non-existent (i.e. it is false).

8. mayaiva jagatamadikaranam nirmitam taya sarvam hi mayino nanyadasatyam siddhijalavat

Maya itself is the prime (material) cause
Of the world, by that which is no other
Than the Maya-maker (Self) is all this
Created, as various magical effects.

MAYA IVA, Maya itself is,
JAGATAM, of the world,(with varied forms),
ADI KARANAM, the prime material cause,
MAYINAH NA ANYAT, what is no other than the Maya-maker, (i.e. the self),
SIDDHIJALAVAT ASATYAM, as various unreal magical effects,
SARVAM, everything,(i.e. the whole world),
TAYA HI, indeed by herself(i.e. by Maya),
NIRMITAM, created, made

Maya is what does not exist at all. When. we say that the non-existent Maya is the prime material cause of the world it goes without saying that the world is not real. Maya is not other than the Self and the resulting world which in its effect is not different from the Maya-maker which is the Self. The various unreal magical effects are none other than their author. Even thus they are unreal. In the same way the world is none other than the Lord, although it is non-existent.

9. vibhati visvam vrddhasya viyadvanamivatmani asatyam putrika rupam balasyeva viparyayam

To the mature mind, this universe
Looms like a sky-forest in the Self
Even as an unreal puppet-form
To a child (would seem) contrariwise.

VISVAM, the universe,
VRIDDHASYA, to the mature mind,
VIYADVANAM IVA, like a sky-forest,
ATMANI, in the Self,
VIBHATI, seems,
ASATYAM, unreal,
PUTRIKA RUPAM, puppet form,
BALASYA, to a child,
VIPARYAYAM IVA, as contrariwise (would seem)

Wise people look upon this world like a sky-forest imagined in the Self. In other words, they see everything in the form of the Self and they treat the world as unreal, because it is supposed in the Self. They understand that the Self alone is real. It is only unwise people who think the world is real. Children who lack understanding treat lifeless and inert puppets as equally real as themselves and play with them, carrying on a conversation. Only those of maturer years know that such things are inert and lifeless.

10. ekam satyam na dvitiyam hyasatyam bhati satyavat silaiva sivalingam na dvitiyam silpina krtam

One (alone) is real, not a second,
What is unreal, indeed, seems as being real.
The Siva Lingam is stone itself,
Not a second made by the mason.

EKAM SATYAM, one (alone) is real,
DVITIYAM NA, not a second,
ASATYAM HI, what is unreal indeed,
SATYAVAT BHATI, seems as being real,
SILA IVA SIVA LINGAM, the Siva Lingam is stone itself,
SILPINA KRITAM DVITIYAM NA, not a second made by a mason

It is the Self that alone is real. Anything other than the Self is not at all real. The unreal world merely has a semblance of the real. That which seems like the Siva-Lingam (i.e. the phallic emblem of Siva) is really the stone itself. As for the Siva-Lingam it merely seems as if it is a reality independent of the stone. What is real is the stone and the Siva-lingam is what is supposed on the basis of what really exists. The Siva-lingam, is not one that the mason made independently of the stone. It is the stone itself. The stone is real and the Siva-Lingam is unreal. In the same manner the Absolute is real and the world is unreal. The unreal world (only) seems real.

463

IV. MAYA-DARSANAM (VISION BY NEGATION)

1. na'vidyate ya sa maya vidya'vidya para'para tamah pradhanam prakrtirbahudha saiva bhasate

What is not real, that is Negation,
Which by itself, as by science-nescience,
Transcendence-immanence, darkness and prime potency
Of nature, in many forms looms.

YA NAVIDYATE, what is not real,
SA MAYA, that is negation,
SA EVA, itself,
VIDYA, science,
AVIDYA, nescience,
PARA, transcendance,
APARA, immanence,
TAMAH, darkness,
PRADHANAM, prime potency,
PRAKRITIH, nature,
(ITI) BAHUDHA, (thus) in many forms,
BHASATE, looms

The term Maya refers to what is not real. What really does not exist but seems to exist in practical life is what is to be understood here. It is this same Maya which is not real but in practical life seems to be the basis of science, etc.

2. pragutpatteryatha'bhavo mrdeva brahmanah prthak na vidyate brahma hi ya sa maya'mevaibhava

Just as for the origin of the pot the clay itself is
In its non-being,(so too before the origin of the world), as other than the world,
What had no being as the Absolute itself,
Such is Maya, the negative principle of indeterminate possibility.

YATHA, just as,
(GHATASYA) UTPATTEH PRAG, before the origin (of the pot), ABHAVAH, the non-existence,
MRID-EVA, is the clay itself,
(TATHA JAGAT UTPATTEH PRAK), (in the same way before the origin of the world),
YA BRAMANAH PRTHAK NA VIDYATE, what as other than the Absolute is not there,
YA BRAHMA HI, what is the Absolute indeed,
SA MAYA AMEYAVAIBHAVA, such is the negative principle of indeterminate possibility

Although the term abhava as used in ordinary language means nothingness according to the Nyaya (Logic) school of philosophy, it is counted as a padartha (i.e. a category of existence). Even according to the Advaita philosophy, abhava is non-different from its counterpart bhava (being). Before the pot originated, its non-existence is to be attributed to the clay. In other words, it is the clay that remains as the prior non-existence of the pot. Therefore the non-existence prior to the origination of the pot has its anterior existence which is stated to be the clay. To state this another way, the non-existence of the pot and the existence of the clay are the same. But in reality even after the origin of the pot what is the being of the pot is a supposition, and the being of the clay is real. The non-existence of a certain object always resides in the existence of another thing. As the clay constitutes the anterior non-existence of the pot, it remains as another entity. Similarly, before the origin of the world its non-existence remains something which is none other than the Absolute. In other words, it is the Absolute alone. But from the Absolute which is without change of form, how this world with all its different forms came about is a matter that cannot be decided on the basis of inferential reasoning (anumana), etc. Therefore, that non-existence which was the cause of the origination of the world and is non-different from the Absolute is described here as the principle of indeterminate possibility. In other words, Maya - is the non-existent - is the Absolute. That which does not really exist is Maya, as has already been stated in the previous verse. Within the scope of the term Maya it is not wrong to include also manas (mind), sankalpa (willing), and other faculties.

3. anatma na sadatma saditi vidyotate yaya sa vidyeyam yatha rajjusarpatattvadharanam

"The non-Self is unreal, the Self is real".
Thus what looms is vidya (knowledge),
As the reality of the snake (appearance)
(Superimposed) one the rope-reality is understood.

ATMA SAT, the Self is real,
ANATMA NA SAT, the non-Self is unreal
ITI YAYA VIDYOTATE, thus what looms,
SA IYAM VIDYA, that what is here is knowledge,
YATHA-RAJJU-SARPA-TATTVA-AVADHARANAM, as the reality of the snake superimposed) on the reality of the rope is understood.

That knowledge which sees things as they really are is knowledge or science. That knowledge which makes us aware that the Self alone exists and all else outside it does not exist is (also) knowledge or science. Maya has a bright-intelligent side and a dark ignorant side. Of these, the bright-intelligent side is here referred to as vidya or science, which is the way to salvation.

4. atma na sad anatma saditi vidyotate yaya saiva'vidya yatha rajjusarpayoryatharthadrk

"The Self is unreal, the non-Self is real."
Thus what looms is avidya (nescience) indeed,
As the erroneous cognition
As between rope and snake.

ATMA NA SAT, the Self is unreal,
ANATMA SAT, the non-Self is real,
ITI YAYA VIDYOTATE, that what looms (in awareness),
SA EVA AVIDYA, that indeed is nescience,
YATHA RAJJU-SARPAYOR-AYATHARTHA-DRIK, as the erroneous cognition as between rope and snake.

What has the form of knowledge is vidya (science), and what has the form of ignorance is avidya (nescience). That is to say, nescience is contrary to science. Patanjali has said (in the "Yoga Sutras", II.5):

"What is transient (anitya), unclean (asuci), having a seat of suffering (duhkham), and belonging to the side of the non-Self (anatma) are respectively to be taken to be (as the opposite, such as) lasting (nitya), clean (suci), happy (sukham), and consisting of the Self (atma). Such perverted awareness is produced by nescience (avidya)."

Wrong value-judgments are thus included under nescience.

5. indriyani manobuddhipancapranadayo yaya visrjyante saiva para suksmangani cidatmanah

The senses, the mind, intelligence and the five
Vital tendencies, what creates -
That is the transcendent (para) indeed, even (they being)
The subtle limbs of the reasoning Self.

CIDATMANAH, of the reasoning Self (which is the vital principle), SUKSHMA-ANGANI, the subtle limbs,
INDRIYANI, the senses,
MANO-BUDDHI-PANCAPRANADAYAH, mind, intelligence, the five vital tendencies, etc.,
YAYA, that by which,
VISRJYANTE, is created,
SA-EVA PARA, that indeed is the transcendent aspect (of Maya)

JNANENDRIYAS:

The five organs of knowledge;
hearing (SROTRA),
sight (CAKSUS),
touch (TVAK),
taste (RASANA)
smell (GHRAND)

KARMENDRIYAS:

The five organs of action;
speech (VAK),
grasping (PANI),
legs (PADA),
excretory organs (PAYO)
sex organs (UPASTHA)

PANCA PRANAS:

The five vital tendencies;
the upward vital tendency, (PRANA),
the downward (APANA),
the equalizing (SAMANA),
the outgoing, (UDANA)
the evenly spread (VYANA)

All these are the subtle limbs of the reasoning Self (which is the same as the vital-principle). Both the vital principle and the Absolute together form the thinking Self.

When the limbless Absolute comes to have these subtle limbs, it is called jiva or vital principle. So, in this manner, the Absolute without limbs is that factor which created limbs causing the erroneous consciousness of a living being; that limbless aspect of Maya is called para or the transcendent.

6. aganyetanyavastabhya sukhi dukhiva muhyati cidatma mayaya svasya tattvato'sti na kincana

Adopting as its own these limbs, the reasoning Self,
By its own negative base of error, imagines
(Itself) as if happy or suffering,
In truth, there is nothing at all.

CIDATMA, the reasoning self (which is the vital principle),
SVASYA MAYAYA, by its own negative base of error,
ANGANI-ETANI-AVASHTHABYA, adopting as its own these limbs, SUKHI IVA, as if happy,
DUKHI-IVA, as if suffering,
MUHYATI, imagines,
TATTVATAH, in truth,
KINCANA NA ASTI, there is nothing at all.

When the vital principle (jiva) has happiness or suffering of a sensuous character, it considers them to belong to itself and that there is an agent behind such happiness and suffering. (It also) erroneously considers itself to be happy or suffering. But in reality this happiness and suffering are only presentiments and therefore unreal. The vital principle which is the reasoning Self is ever free from happiness and suffering. It is Maya which is the transcendental (para) that is at the basis of this wrong assumption.

7. indriyanam hi visayah prapanco'yam visrjyate yayasaiva para'dhyatmasthulasankalpanamayi

The objective data of the senses, which is the world,
What emanates forth - that indeed,
In the context of the Self, is the immanent (apara),
The basis of all gross presentiments of the will.

INDRIYANAM HI, of the senses indeed,
VISHAYAH, the objective data,
AYAM PRAPANCAH, which is the world,
YAYA, by what (Maya factors),
VISRIJYANTE, emanates forth,
SA-EVA, that indeed,
ADHYATMA-STHULA-SANKALPANAMAYI APARA, which in the context of the Self is the basis therein of all gross presentiments of the will, is the immanent

This visible world of the five elements has been already stated to be a product of the will. What remains in the Self in the form of gross presentiment and creates this world as presented to the senses is that aspect of Maya called the immanent (apara). What is called para or transcendent is subtle and what is called apara or immanent is gross.

8. suktikayam yatha'jnanam rajatasya yadatmani kalpitasya nidanam tattama ityavagamyate

As the ignorance about the mother-of-pearl
Is the basis of the silver-presentiment,
So too what in the Self is the basis (of the world),
That is known as darkness (tamas).

YATHA, as,
SUKTIKAYAM, in the mother-of-pearl,
KALPITASYA, what is a presentiment,
RAJATASYA, of silver,
AJNANAM, lack of knowledge
NIDANAM, the basis,
BHAVATI, is,
ATHA, so,
ATMANI, in the Self,
YAD, that which,
KALPITASYA, of what is imagined,
JAGATAH, as the world,
NIDANAM, the basis,
AJNANAM, lack of knowledge,
TAT-TAMAH-ITI-AVAGAMYATE, this is known as darkness

Some people see the mother-of-pearl and mistake it for silver. The reason for this error is ignorance. In the same way, ignorance, which is the cause of the presentiment of the world, is darkness. When the Self is properly understood we come to know that it alone is real and the world is only a presentiment in the Self and is unreal. Just as darkness is the cause of error in perceiving silver in the mother-of-pearl, so the cause of the supposition of the world in the Self is that aspect of Maya called darkness.

9. dhiyate'smin prakarsena bije vrksa ivakhilam atah pradhanyato va'sya pradhana miti kathyate

Because of being that aspect (of Maya) which is a marvel,
By containing all this (universe) like a tree in a seed,
Or by virtue of its importance (above others),
This here is known as the prime potent power (pradhana).

BIJE-VRIKSHA-IVA-AKHILAM, as the tree in the seed, everything,
ASMIN, in this (i.e in this aspect of Maya),
PRAKARSHENA DHIYATE, contains as a marvel,
ITI ATAH VA, or else it,
ASYA, of this,
PRADHANYATAH (VA), (or) its importance,

IDAM, this pradhana

MITI KATHYATE, is known as the prime potent power.

In the same way as a large banyan tree is contained in a small seed, the whole of this universe is contained within Maya. Because in a marvelous way it contains the whole universe in itself, it is called prime potent power. There is the further justification for calling it pradhana, the prime potent power, because it is a more comprehensive factor than science (vidya) and other factors already enumerated.

10. karotiti prakarsena prakrtyaiva gunan prthak nigadyate'sau prakrtiritihatrigunatmika

By its very nature, because in a marvelous way
It diversifies the three nature modalities,
This aspect (of Maya) consisting of the three
Modalities is well known as Nature (prakrti).

PRAKRTYA-EVA, by its very nature,
GUNAN, the nature modalities,
PRAKARSHENA in a marvellous way,
PRTHAK KAROTI-ITI, in that it diversifies,
ASAU, (this aspect of Maya),
TRIGUNATMIKA, as consisting of the three modalities,
PRAKRTIH-ITI-HA NIGADYATE, it is well-known as nature (PRAKRTI)

The three Nature modalities remain potentially united within Maya before creation. At the time of creation Nature separates them out in a surprising manner. Because it was separated out in a surprising way it is called Nature. The varieties observed in Nature are all due to the three nature modalities. Nature is no other than what is the basis of the variety seen in the world. In this darsana, the same Maya has been described under the eight items (including Maya) which are: vidya (science), avidya (nescience), para (the transcendent), apara, (the immanent), tamas (darkness), pradhana (prime potent power), and prakriti (nature). This is not the ultimate Reality, but instead it is called Maya; because it is the basis of the discrimination of the Self from the non-Self it is called vidya ; because it is the basis of contrary knowledge it is called avidya ; because it remains in the form of potentiality and creates the subtle limbs of the vital principle, such as the indriyas, it is called para ; because it remains in a gross form and creates-the sense data called the world it is called apara ; because it remains in the form of darkness forming the basis of wrong suppositions it is called tamas ; because it bears within itself the whole universe in a surprising manner it is called pradhana ; (and) because it remains in the form of the three nature modalities, and by its own nature it is able to separate them, it is called prakriti. These are only the main divisions, but if necessary we could elaborate them into further subdivisions.

556

V. BHANA-DARSANAM (VISION OF CONSCIOUSNESS)

1. antarbahirvadasinam sada bhramaracancalam bhanam dvidhaiva samanyam visesa iti bhidyate

Present equally within (and) without,
In constant bee-agitation,
Consciousness is of two kinds -
The generic and the specific.

BAHIRVAD ANTAH ASINAM, present as within (and) without,
SADA BRAHMARA-CANCALAM-BHANAM, in constant bee-agitation, consciousness,
SAMANYAM VISESAH ITI, as the generic and the specific,
DVIDHA-EVA BHIDYATE, is of two kinds

That which is called consciousness is what constitutes the basis of all events and is of the form of a mental activity. This consciousness remains both outside and inside. In other words, it seems to be both outside as well as inside. (Yet) on closer examination it is neither inside nor outside. Because it has no stable state of existence it is called most changeful. Conventionally it is capable of being referred to as having generic or specific aspects. This will be explained later.

For both consciousness and its basic counterpart, four grades of differences (are) known as the concrete (sthulam), subtle (sukshmam), causal (karanam), and absolute (turiyam). Because it is difficult to grasp what constitutes the generic and specific aspects without first knowing the factors of consciousness and its basis, we have first to consider these and afterwards explain how the generic and specific aspects enter into them.

2. sthulam suksmam karanam ca turyam ceti caturvidham bhanasrayam hi tannama bhanasyapyupyacaryate

As the concrete, the subtle, the causal and the Absolute,
Basic consciousness (is) of four kinds,
So these names even (of basic consciousness)
Are also applicable to consciousness.

STHULAM, (as the) concrete,
SUKSHMAM, the subtle,
KARANAM, the causal,
TURYAM CA ITI, and the Absolute,
CATURVIDHAM, (there are) four kinds,
BHANASRAYAM (BHAVATI), of basic consciousness,
TAT NAMA HI, these names too,
BHANASYA API, for consciousness also,
UPACARYATE CA, are applicable also

For consciousness, as well as for its basic counterpart, there are four divisions.

They are:
concrete basic consciousness,
subtle basic consciousness,
causal basic consciousness
and Absolute basic consciousness.

In the same way there are (four divisions for consciousness) and they are also concrete, subtle, causal and Absolute, respectively.

The difference of generic and specific belongs to all of the components of consciousness. They are broadly divided into two, giving four generic and four specific sets e.g., generic-concrete consciousness has its counterparts in specific-concrete consciousness as also, two such as generic-concrete basic consciousness and specific-concrete basic consciousness. As with the concrete, we have to extend such divisions as applicable to the subtle, the causal, and the Absolute.

3. drsyatmiha kayo'ham ghato'yamiti drsyate sthulamasritya yadbhanam sthulam taditi manyate

Lo, here, "I am the body, this is the pot,"
Depending on the concrete,
What looms in consciousness,
That is known as the concrete.

IHA, here (in a visible manner),
DRSYATAM, lo,
AHAM KAYAH, I am the body,
AYAM GHATAH ITI, this is the pot,
STHULAM-ASRITYA, depending on the concrete,
YAT BHANAM DRSYATE, what looms as consciousness,
TAT STHULAM ITI MANYATE, that is known as the concrete

That which is called concrete consciousness is in the form of "I am the body; this is the pot", because both derive their reality from visible concrete objects. In other words, that which looms in the form of concrete objects is concrete consciousness. This concrete consciousness is experienced by everyone in the wakeful state.

4. atra kayo ghata iti bhanam yattadvisisyate tatha'hamayamiti yat samanyamiti ca smrtam

Here, what is the consciousness of the body
And the pot, that is the specific,
Likewise too what is (the consciousness of) "I" or "this"
Is known as the generic.

ATAR, here (in what has been said above),
KAYAH, (of) the body,
GHATAH, the pot,
ITI BHANAM YAT, what is the consciousness,
TAT VASISHYATE, that is the specific,
TATHA, likewise,
AHAM, (of) "I",
AYAM, "this",
(BHANAM) YAT, what is (the consciousness),
(TAT) SAMANYAM-ITI CA SMRTAM, (this) as the generic is known

Because the body, pot, cloth, house, etc. each have a discrete specific status qualified by specificity in reference to each other, such items of consciousness are called specific.The body is specified by the differences implied in such ideas as pot, cloth, house, etc. The cloth is specified by the difference implied in such ideas as body, pot, house, etc. Thus each object has a discrete status of its own. Therefore, the consciousness of such is called specific. Such items as "I", "this", "that", etc. are called generic because they do not specifically distinguish such items as, body, pot, cloth, house, etc.; so they do not refer to their discrete individuality. For each of the four such as gross, subtle, etc. there are the generic and specific aspects to be considered.

5. indriyani manobuddhivisayah panca vayavah bhasyante yena tatsuksmam asya suksmasrayatvatah

The senses, mind, intellect, interest items
And the five vital tendencies,
By what are made conscious - that is (know as) the subtle.
Because of dependence on the subtle.

INDRIYANI, the senses (such as hearing),
MANO-BUDDHI, mind (and) intellect,
VISHAYAH, interest items, (like sound and form),
PANCAVAYAVAHA, the five vital tendencies,
YENA BHASYANTE, by what is made conscious,
ASYA SUKSHMASRAYATVATAH, because of dependence on the subtle,

TAT SUKSHMAM (ITI MANYATE), this (is known) as the subtle.

The subtle consciousness is what emerges from the subtle basic consciousness. Each of the senses has a specific capacity; such as the ear having the power to appreciate sound; the eye to appreciate form; the skin to appreciate touch; the tongue to appreciate taste and the nose to appreciate smell. It is by this subtle specific capacity that we are able to appreciate a sound originating from a distance. It is by the same subtle specific capacity that other senses such as the eyes come to appreciate objects of interest, as well as the mind being capable of thinking; the intellect of discriminating the recognizing for itself the functioning of the (five) vital tendencies. It is by the specific power that we are even able to feel the presence of these senses. But their real form is so subtle that it becomes difficult to fix it. It is on the basis of something very subtle that the senses, mind, intellect and five vital tendencies are brought within the scope of consciousness. Therefore, because this kind of consciousness has its origin in the subtle basic consciousness, it is called subtle consciousness. It is during the dreaming state of consciousness that we clearly experience this kind of subtle consciousness. Even when the organs are not in direct relation with the objects in the dream state we have the experience that these organs are capable of appraising those objects. This is a common experience of all people in the dream state. In other words, in the dream state all people experience this subtle consciousness.

6. ajno'hamiti yadbhanam tatkaranamudhartam atra'hamiti samanyam viseso'jna iti sphurat

"I am ignorant". Such a consciousness
Is said to be the causal.
Here, that aspect which stands for "I" is the generic,
And the specific what stands for "am ignorant".

AJNOHAM, "I am ignorant",
ITI BHANAM YAT, such a (specific) consciousness,
TAT KARANAM ITI UDAHRITAM is said to be causal,
ATRA, here,
AHAM-ITI YAT TAT SMANYAM, what stands for "I" is the generic,

AJNANAH ITI SPHURAT (YAT TAT) VISESHAH (CA BHAVATI), (and that which) makes for the consciousness "am ignorant" is the specific.

In this verse we go one step beyond what we were concerned with in the previous verse. Beyond the senses, mind, and intellect, veiling all knowledge in a certain way, there is an ignorance or nescience which has the function of revealing to consciousness what is implied in a sentence such as "I am ignorant." It is this nescience that is the causal basis for both the gross and subtle consciousness, as also their basis. It is because of this causal ignorance that we have the consciousness of what is implied in the sentence "I am ignorant." Therefore this consciousness is called causal consciousness. It is in the state of deep sleep that all men experience this kind of consciousness. "I slept well and knew nothing." This form of experience is well known to all persons who have experienced deep sleep. Here the "I'', because it is common to all people, is generic and unitive in character. The more definite awareness "am ignorant" applying as it does to the individual aspect of each person, while remaining infinite still, is called specific.

7. aham brahmeti yadbhanam tatturyamiti samsyate samanyamahamitiyamso brahmetyatra visisyate

"I am the Absolute." Thus what consciousness attains
Is praised as (the consciousness of) the Absolute.
Here, the element "I" is the generic,
And "Absolute" is its specific attribute.

AHAM BRAHMA-ITI BHANAM YAT, "I am the Absolute"- thus what consciousness makes,
TAT-TURYAM-ITI SAMSYATE, is praised as that absolute consciousness,
ATRA, here,
AHAM-ITI-AMSAH SAMANYAM, the element "I" is the generic,
BRAHMA-ITI (AMSAH) VISISHYATE, (the element that refers to the Absolute is the specific

In the case of contemplative yogis or mystics in their state of perfect samadhi (contemplative calmness) which is still conditioned by mental activity; what is experienced in the form of identity with the Absolute as a further state beyond the state of causal ignorance is what is here referred to as absolute consciousness. Although the Absolute cannot actively enter our conditioned consciousness, still in the case of those yogis who constantly engage themselves in the meditation of the Absolute, when they attain to a state of identification with the Absolute they experience a consciousness in the form of "I am the Absolute." The absolute consciousness comes into evidence only when the natural dispositions (vasanas) of the senses and the consciousness of "I am ignorant" belonging to the state of deep sleep have become weakened. The 'praise' alluded to here is used in connection with this state in order to extol its value as a desirable or significant spiritual goal. All varieties of consciousness are to be understood as comprised within the scope of the four states of consciousness, beginning from the simple ones like that of the pot which is in the common experience of any one person, and finally ending with the supreme experience given to the yogi in the form of consciousness of "I am the Absolute". There is not anything higher than this last state even for the most advanced man of spirituality. In this last stage we have also to distinguish that the "I" is common to all individuals while the specific attribute of the Absolute is of an individual character pertaining only to specially qualified yogis.

8. yatra bhanam tatra bhasyam bhanam yatra na samanyamahamitiyamso brahmetyatra visisyate

Where consciousness (exists), there the
Object of consciousness (exists), where
Consciousness exists not, its object neither.
Thus, both by agreement and difference, certitude comes.

YATRA BHANAM (VARTATE), where consciousness (exists),
TATRA BHASYAM VARTATE, there (exists) the object of consciousness,

YATRA BHANAM NA (VARTATE), where consciousness (exists) not,

TARA BHASYAM NA VARTATE, the object of consciousness (exists) not,
ITI-ANVAYENA VYATIRIKENA API BODHYATE, so by agreement and difference certitude comes

Agreement is when we appraise the fact that wherever there is consciousness there is also the object of consciousness. Agreement (anvayena) is defined as the inseparable association of ends and means. Here the ends are the object of consciousness while the means are consciousness (itself). By this method of agreement and difference we should understand that only where there is consciousness there is the object of consciousness and conversely wherever there is an object of consciousness there is also an accompanying consciousness that goes with it. Difference (vyatirekena) is defined as non-existence; that is the lack of a concomitant associative link as between ends and means. Where there is no object of consciousness there is no consciousness either. This is called difference or absence of agreement. Here the absence of ends is the absence of the object of consciousness, while the absence of means corresponds to the absence of consciousness (itself). By this method of difference we come to know that where there is no consciousness there is also no object of consciousness, and vice-versa, (thereby attaining to unitive certitude).

9. yatha drgdrsamatmanam svayamatma na pasyati ato na bhasyate hyatma yam pasyati sa bhasyate

As with the eye which cannot see itself,
(So) the Self does not see itself,
Therefore indeed, the Self is not the object of consciousness.
That which the Self sees is the object of consciousness.

YATHA DRIG-DRISAM SVAYAM NA PASYATI, as with the eye that cannot see itself,
(TATHA) ATMA ATMANAM (SVAYAM) NA PASYATI, (so) the Self does not see itself,
ATA ATMA NA BHASYATE HI, therefore indeed the Self is not the object of consciousness,
ATMA-YAM PASYATI SA BHASYATE, that which the Self sees is the object of consciousness

It is the Self that ever remains without becoming the object of consciousness, as the one ever-remaining reality, although by the mere presence of the Self all things enter into consciousness. Although by the very presence the Self remains alone in its loneliness as a witness devoid of all conditionings, it is without any limitations either. In the form of existence-substance-value it is beyond all states, without change or activity, and not graspable by the mind. There is no consciousness of the self in the Self. To explain this we take the example of the eye with the help of which we can see everything but (the eye) does not help us to see itself.

10. yadbhasyate tadadhyastam anadhyastam na bhasyate yadadhyastam tadasadapyanadhyastam sadeva tat

What is the object of consciousness, that is conditioned,
What is unconditioned, that is not the object of consciousness.
What is conditioned is non-existent,
But what is unconditioned, itself THE EXISTENT IS THAT.

YAD BHASYATE, what is the object of consciousness,
TAD ADHYASTAM (BHAVATI), that is conditioned,

YADANADHYASTAM, what is unconditioned,
TAT NA BHASYATE, that is not the object of consciousness,
YAD ADHYASTAM, what is conditioned,
TAT ASAD, that is non-existent,
API YAT ANADHYASTAM, and what is unconditioned (i.e. the Self),

TAT SAD-EVA, itself THE EXISTENT IS THAT

By this darsana the conclusion arrived at is that all things that are objects given to the senses, etc. and which enter consciousness are to be considered non-existent, and the only reality is that which is not the object of mental activity and is not the object of consciousness which is not conditioned but is the basis for all effects of consciousness, while itself remaining without any basis except in the Self.

657