By
Shri Lakshminarayan Aithal
(Shri
Lakshminarayan Aithal has served for over 3 decades in Swami’s institution and
is the former Principal of the Sri Sathya Sai Loka Seva Institutions at
Muddenahalli. Inspired by Swami’s direct message to study the Upanishads, he
first learnt Sanskrit and then studied the direct works of Adi Shankaracharya
and Swami. Sincere perseverance led him to the reality of Aham Brahmasmi and He
realized and experienced Swami’s words: “I am God and so are you”. He shares
the import of the Upanishadic teachings with us in this series of articles.)
THE
SHUNNING OF THE DELUSION OF SELF-HOOD.
If we
are really of
the Form of
Auspiciousness, how does
the imagination occur
that we are
the individual a
soul ( Jeeva ) ? Why
do happiness and
sorrow that don’t
exist in the
Form of Auspiciousness appear
in us? If
happiness and sorrow
don’t exist in
reality, why do
majority of people
experience them? The
Vedantins tell: ‘ I
am not an
individual soul and
the individuality is
imagined.’ Such Vedantins also
eat and act as ignorant-people do.
What testimony is
there that the
Jnanis have got
rid of their
individuality? Such doubts may
arise amongst us. In order
to shun the
doubts the following
verse is commenced:
(Rajjvaj-jnaanaat-bhaati
Rajjau Yathaahihi Svaatmaajnaanaat-aatmano Jeeva-bhaavahI
Aptoktyaa Hi
Braanti-naashe Sa Rajjur-jeevo Naaham Deshikoktyaa Shivoham II)
An unknown rope may appear as a snake. Similarly, the unknown Self appears as an
individual self. If the
knowers tell: that
is a rope,
that becomes the
rope itself. Similarly,
by the preaching
of the true
teacher, one realizes that I am
not an individual
self, I am
the Auspicious One (
Shiva ) , Himself.
AN EXAMPLE
OF SNAKE AND ROPE.
We have
the delusion that
we are individual
selves because we
have not understood
our real Self.
As soon as we know
our real Self
this delusion is
got rid of. An example
may be given:
Do we not
have the experience
of delusion that
in the early
dawn a piece
of rope is
mistakenly considered as
a snake? That
delusion has come
because the real
form of the
rope is not
known, isn’t it?
During the delusion,
the rope appeared
as a snake;
as soon as
the experience dawns: ‘ that
is the rope, ‘ that
delusion is got
rid of. In
this illustration as
due to delusion
the snake appears,
so in the
illustrated, the individual
soul appears. This is a theorem of the Vedanta.
Let us
deliberate upon this
example in a
little more detail:
Due to delusion
a serpent is
seen in the
rope; and, where
is that deluded
serpent? Does it exist apart from
the rope? No. For,
when we examine
we have the
real experience: ‘ This is
really the rope,
not the serpent’.
None consider that
the real serpent
appears due to
delusion. For, none
will find the
whereabouts of that
snake after the
removal of delusion.
Prudent-men never tried to find out that snake. None
has heard that
certain people have
died due to
the biting of
that snake. There may be a few death cases. Suppose
a few people
stamping a rope,
imagine that they
have really stamped
a poisonous snake
and that has
bitten them; and,
thereby they may
die. In spite
of that, we
don’t think that
really the snake
has bitten them;
and that is
why, they died.
Even if we
speculate that a
mental imagination has
transformed into a
snake; and we
don’t agree with
it. For, none
of us has
the experience that
the mind has
changed as a
snake. The knowledge
of the rope
itself is enough
to know that
there is no
real snake in
the delusion. It
is a mere
ignorance to think
that during the
delusion the rope
itself has changed
into a snake.
If objects change
themselves into other
objects, then it
will be very
difficult to conduct
worldly activities. Then,
there would be
no rule that
curds would be
obtained from the
milk; and, sometimes,
water also would
become curds; and,
sometimes, milk added
with a little
sour catalyst would
become water! In
this very manner
such things would
happen, then, how
would people hope
to conduct worldly
activities? Would we
consider that the
rope had the
little part of
a snake and
during the delusion
that part appeared
as the snake?
None will agree with this. During the
time of delusion
a snake is
born and it
dies when the
delusion is removed-
these words don’t
agree with the
experience. To which place does
the snake belong? When we
find out the
rope, can we
tell that the
snake appears because
we remember it?
Then, that doesn’t
become right; there
is no reason
to see, as
if, the real
snake by simply
remembering it. Not
only that, why
should the rope
disappear by merely
remembering the snake?
In this case,
there is no
possibility of getting
an answer to
this. To have
the experience: ‘ I
have seen the
snake’ instead of ‘
I remembered the
snake’- is against to
this imagination. Anyhow,
in this illustration,
there is neither
a real snake,
nor the remembrance
of it. But,
in the delusion,
don’t we have
the experience that
we have seen,
as if, a
real snake? How do we get rid of this entanglement?
Our answer
to this is
as follows: It is
false that, in
the illustration, a
snake is born.
In the semi-darkness, those
who don’t see
clearly rope, for
them it appears,
as if, it
is a snake;
and there is
no snake at
all. In the
delusion, neither a
snake is born,
nor does it
sneak away after
dawning of the
right understanding. The
understanding: ‘ I have understood
the rope as
a snake’- is a
support to this
theorem. Therefore, we can tell
only this much: A snake is
mere delusion and
the rope itself
is real; and,
it is not
right to find
a reason to the snake
appeared due to
delusion. Similarly, we should
understand in the illustrated also. It
is a mere delusion that we are living beings.
We have this
delusion because we
have not understood
our Real Form;
and really, we
don’t have selfhood.
It is the
right understanding that
all of us
are always of
the Auspicious Form ( Shiva-svaroopa ).
Here is an
objection: It is not
right to tell
that the rope
is an object
of an understanding
and the snake appears.
It is the
rule that which
appears alone is the object.
Therefore, here it is right
to accept that
the snake alone
appears. Otherwise, by
rejecting the experience,
it would be
accepted that something
appears and some
other thing is
an object.. Then,
a man would
appear as a
river, a mountain
as a town;
and an elephant
would appear as
a little cock.
But such things are not in experience.
(Relief: -) There
is no rule
always that as
an object so
the experience. An
experiment: Dip your
one hand in
cold water and
other one in
hot water, then,
dip them in
lukewarm water. The hand
of cold water
feels heat and
that of hot
water feels cold.
The warm water
simultaneously cannot show
different temperatures; and
it should be
considered that because
of delusion the
same warmth water
is felt differently
by different hands.
Those who are rigid
in accepting that
object should be
as it appears;
and they should
imagine that the
warm water has
two temperatures. None accepts this. Not
only that, everyone
has the experience
that there are
two types of
understandings: the right one
and the wrong
one; and in
the right one
object appears as
it is and
in the wrong
one it appears
as it is
not. Such being
the case, it
is not at
all right to
imagine against the
universal experiences: ‘ this is
not correct, and
this should be
like this’. Therefore,
the only correct
conclusion is that
the rope is
considered mistakenly as
a snake.
(Objection: -) When
a snake appears,
why it is
wrong to consider
that the real
snake exists there?
If it is
wrong, what authority
we have to
tell that the
rope exists when
it appears so?
(Relief: -) We have already answered this
objection. During delusion the rope
appears as a snake. When the
right understanding dawns
we have the
clear experience that: ‘ this
is the rope only,
the snake never
exists in it;
and the experience
of seeing a
snake is a
delusion’. In the case
of the right
knowledge of the
rope, the experience
remains unchanged after
the removal of
delusion. The falsified
experience never is the real one.
(Objection:
-) Does one delusion cancel the other one?
An example: A
man, from a
distance, imagines a
crack in the
ground. As he
approaches he thinks
that should be
a crooked stick.
Finally, when he
reaches the spot,
he decides that
is a piece
of rope. In
this case, the
first imagination is
cancelled by the
second one. Finally, the decision has cancelled the
second imagination also. The falsified
understanding, in this context, is not true!
(Relief: -)
What you
have told becomes
an example: ‘ whatever is
falsified is not
true’. It is right
that there is
no rule that
the falsifying knowledge
is not true;
and, it cannot
be told that
people have never
accepted the object
that is not
falsified at all.
An example: A
deluded person sees
a snake in
the rope; still,
the rest of
people who are
not deluded see
the rope, as
it is. After examining it, the deluded person also,
sees the rope. Thus, in
the wakeful state,
the rope and
its knowledge are
never falsified; and
therefore, that knowledge
is considered as the right
one. According to this consideration, accepting
the knowledge of
the rope is
real; we have
given this example
of the rope
and the snake;
and it is
not our opinion
that the rope
is never falsified.
The Vedantins tell
that the Self
alone really is
the Truth; and
the selfhood and
the world are
imagined in Him;
and, for them,
there is no
harm in considering
the rope which
is the support
of the imagined
snake also is
falsified. According to
their opinion, the
whole world, itself,
is untrue and
naturally, the rope
of the world
is also untrue.
Still, the rope
is an empirical
reality; and the
snake appears due
to delusion is
not so. Both
of these snake
and the rope have this
difference.
……….. (to be continued in the next
edition of Venugaanam)
No comments:
Post a Comment