(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.)
Now,
let us enquire
into the third
and the fourth
objections. A rope is different
from the snake. The latter object may be
imagined in the former one. But, does
the one self delude
that he is
of other form?
How do we believe that
many living beings
and inert objects
are imagined in
the Sole Auspicious
Form of the
Self? How do
we believe that,
in front of the Self,
the non-self-world is
imagined, apart from
Him? None of these two suitably
befit to the rope-snake-illustration.
This, in a
nutshell, is the
purport of the
two objections. If
the Self is
of the Form
of
Existence-Awareness-Bliss, how does
the
non-existent-inert-sorrowful-world
appear in Him?
This is also included in the doubt of the objector.
THE APPEARANCE OF THE WORLD IS LIKE
THE DREAM.
Before we answer
to the objections
a few words
should be told:
The objector is
pertinent about the
rope-snake-illustration. He imagines
that a particular
moment of time,
a person misunderstands the
rope to be
a snake; similarly,
the self imagines
in him the
world at a
particular moment of
time. Therefore, there are many
objections in his method of deliberation.
But, if we
observe really, as
in the illustration,
none imagines the
selfhood and the
world at a
particular time in
Real Form of
Auspiciousness. From a
particular view point
one feels that
he is a
self, he lives
in the world
of many living
beings like him
and many inert
objects are also
existing. According to
the other view
point another one
gets the feeling
that he is
the Sole Self
of the Form
of Existence-Awareness-Bliss which is
devoid of selfhood.
Among the two
feelings, the second
one is the
right one; for,
as soon as
we obtain the
second one, worldliness
and the world
appear to be
unreal. In order
to show this
alone, the illustration
of rope and
snake is given;
and there is
no opinion that
all parts of
the illustration are
equally befitting to
that of the
illustrated. Therefore, now,
we can have
a suitable illustration
to answer the
third and the fourth objections.
In the dullness
of sleep if
a person dreams,
he sees various
spectacles! He forgets
completely his own
form and he
sees, as if,
he has obtained
a different form;
and though he
is alone, in
front of him,
he sees a
world containing many
people, animal, trees
and plants, inert
objects like stone,
mud, etc; and
he sees himself.
Still, what is the reality? The
dream world and its forms are fully unreal.
As soon as he gets up, all the scenes disappear. Therefore, existence of the scenes depends
upon him. In this
illustration, none has
deliberately created the
dream; it appears
itself; but the
dream is not
true alone. Similarly,
there is no
obstacle to tell
that the selfhood
and the world
are imagined in
our Form of
the Self which
is of the
Form of Existence-Awareness-Bliss.
THE WORLD IS NOT REAL.
(Objection: -) A snake is
misconceived on a
rope; and in
a dream a
non-existing world may
appear; and merely
on this ground
can we justify
that the world
that appears now
and the worldly
life are imagined?
By merely giving
one or two
examples none can
prove that the
world is only
an appearance. “Look at a donkey. How harshly he brays! Similarly, he sings”. By
saying this alone
none can determine
that a musician’s
voice is equal
to that of
the donkey. If
a harsh-singing woman
is compared to
a sweet-singing nightingale,
none judges that
she sings well.
Let the snake
in the rope
be an appearance;
and the dream
also be an
appearance and can
these two illustrations
affect the real
empirical world?
(Relief: -) Just as the
objects of mere
appearance appear, similarly,
the world also
appears; and the
misconception that those
objects are real
is falsified by
the real understanding; similarly,
the misconception that
the world is
real is also
falsified by the
correct understanding. Therefore
there is no
difference whatsoever between
those objects of
mere appearance and
this empirical world.
For an instance,
look at the
world that appears
in the dream.
Just like the
waking world, the
dream world also
appears to be
real and it
appears to be
spread in front
of us; and
similar to the
waking world, in the dream-world
also many people,
animals, birds and
beasts appear to
exist and we feel that
as in the
waking world, in
the dream also
living beings take
birth, live and
die; and we
have a strong
feeling that as
in the waking
world even in
the dream we
have relation with
other beings and
inert objects. We
have the feeling
that during the
dream it appears,
as if, the
waking state in
all respects. Thus,
there is no
specific hallmark to
show that the
so called waking
state is not
a dream; then,
there is no
evidence to prove
that the world
appears in it
is true. Therefore,
the example of
the dream is
not any mere
illustration and it
is also an adequate universal
experience to tell
that the world
is not real
and it is
imagined in the
Self.
(Objection: -) This doesn’t
appear to be
proper, for the
wakeful state comes
after the dream
has gone; then
the dream becomes
unreal. But after
the coming of
which state the
wakeful state goes;
and that state
becomes unreal? Being
in the wakeful
state how do
we tell that
the state and
its world are
unreal?
(Relief: -) After coming
to the wakefulness
the one knows
that the dream
is false; and
this knowledge is not an
important one; and
we have to
rightly deliberate that
weather that knowledge
is the right
one, or not;
for, the dream
world doesn’t exist
anywhere in the
wakefulness. If the
dream world were
real we could
have guessed that
the world would
be somewhere else
now; but we
don’t have such
experience. We have
decided that the
dream world doesn’t
exist anywhere either
in the dream
or in the
wakefulness. Therefore, the dream
and its world are not real. That means
the dream is a mere appearance.
Similarly, when we
have a dream,
where does the
world of wakefulness
exist? That world doesn’t exist
anywhere. In the
dream, we don’t
have the feeling
that the world
exists somewhere else.
If we admit
the presence of
the world of
wakefulness in the
dream, we have
to accept that
we experience both
the states simultaneously. None will agree with this. Therefore,
we have to
admit the waking world
also unreal similar
to that of
the dream. In
any case we
have not decided
that the dream
is false because
we have come
to the other
state. We have
admitted the unreality
of that state
by deliberating upon
the nature of
the state. In
the same way,
we can conclude
the unreality of
the wakefulness by
deliberating upon its
nature. In order
to have the
conclusion, we need
not go to
any other state.
(Objection: -) Let us
agree that the
world of wakefulness
is unreal similar
to that of
the dream. But
what evidence is
there to prove
that this appearance
is imagined in the Self
of the Form
of
Existence-Awareness-Bliss?
Do we have
the supporting experience
that the Self
is so?
(Relief: -) For this, just
observe the experience of the deep sleep.
We see the
selfhood and the
world either in
the wakefulness or in the
dream; but we
exist alone in
deep sleep. Thus,
the Self exists
in all the
three states; and
we never imagine
the non-existence of
the Self. Therefore,
it is settled
that the Self
is of the Form of
Existence ( Satya-svaroopa ).
The Self, as
in the Witness-Form,
experiences the entire
animate and inanimate
world either in
the wakefulness or
in the dream;
and He experiences
the deep-sleep in the same
Form. Therefore, the
Self is of
the Form of Awareness
( Jnaana-svaroopa ). It appears,
as if, the
Self desires to
have something or
the other either
in the wakefulness
or in the
dream; and in
the deep-sleep, the
Self without desiring
the external objects
give the experience
of happiness by
its mere presence.
Therefore, it is
settled that the
Self is of
the Form of
Bliss ( Aananda-svaroopa ). Thus,
in the Eternal-Existence-Awareness-Bliss-Form the
world that appears
only either in
the wakefulness or
in the dream-
is imagined; and
this means that
the world doesn’t
exist independently apart
from the Self.
This is also arranged by this deliberation alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment