Ramanisblog

Tag: Atma Shatakam

  • Nothing Is Sacred,Sinful Adi Sankaracharya

    Right or Wrong is relative.

    It is purely Subjective.

    When a vast majority follow a certain practice and decides it  to be Right, it becomes Right.

    These value judgement are, at the Social level,tools of Social Control.

    They do not mean anything more.

    However, as one has to exist in a Society , one has to follow these norms in this world.

    Knowledge or Awareness is of two kinds.

    One, knowledge of this world of objects , of Names and Forms, and the other,

    The knowledge about oneself,Reality,which is personal and can be felt

    Therefore the Vedas classify Knowledge into two Kinds..

    One, The Absolute Knowledge, Para Vidya and

    Transient Knowledge, Apara Vidya.

    Transient Knowledge is transitory, subject to change, depends on our perceptions and real only in the relative sense.

    To illustrate, let us take the case of  one sitting in a Room and there is a Table in the other Room which he can not see.

    Here, for the one he sits in a room, the table does not exist as it is not visible or seen by him.

    If one were to prove its existence from one’s memory that it was there and it used to be there , this argument s fallacious as it does not depend on one’s direct experience.

    But, the fact that the table exists can not denied because one has not seen it, is wrong as well

    Therefore an Object exists or ‘Is’, from the standpoint of its being there, seen by some body or as an idea in one’s mind.(‘Is’-‘Asti’)

    It does not exist-‘Nasti’, from the stand point of the one who is sitting in the other room.

    There is yet another class of people who see the Table for the first time.

    As they have not seen it before they can not describe it, that is the table can not be described as to what it is.

    This is called ‘Avaktavyam'(Indescribable).

    Now look at the three stages of the Object.

    It is  ‘Asti’ ‘Does  Exist’, from the stand point of people who see  it.

    It is ‘Nasti’,’Does not Exist’, from the stand point of one who does not see it.

    It is ‘Avaktavyam’, ‘indescribable’, from the standpoint of those who se t for the first time.

    So an Object is ‘Is,Is Not,and Indescribable ‘ at the same time, Asti,Nasti , Avaktavyam.

    For the technologically inclined,

    In Cricket match Live telecasts , we have many cameras covering the event.

    The event looks different from each camera.

    Which is the correct one representing the Object,Event?

    If you have two televisions at Home in two different rooms,you will notice one frame or picture and audio comes later (or earlier than the other.

    Which represents the correct Time frame?

    Science will explain why it is so by talking about the velocity of light and Sound.( does sound have velocity or speed?)

    But it does not explain the phenomena but describes the process for such an event.

    Therefore an Object is presented to us in many ways.

    This depends on our Senses, Anthakaranas,Gunas,Mind and Chitha.

    This, apart from the attributes of the object

    Hence in the transient World, an Object ,

    Is ,Asti,

    Is Not, Nasti,

    Indescribable,Avaktavyam

    to different people.

    Again the Object may be all of these at the same time,

    That is, Is , Is Not, and Indescribable(Asti, Nasti and Avaktavyam)

    An object can be predicated in Seven different ways.

    Is,Asti,

    Is Not,Nasti,

    Avaktavyam, Indescribable.

    An Object,

    1.Is,(Asti)

    2.Is Not,( Nasti)

    3.Indescribable(Avaktavyam)

    4.Is and Is Not(Asti  Nasti) , depends on the location of the Object and the Observer.

    5.Is and Indescribable(Asti Avaktavyam)

    6.Is Not and Indescribable (Nasti Avaktavyam)

    7.Is,Is Not and Indescribable(Asti,Nasti,Avaktavyam)

    This predication of Object forms the Logic of Nyaya System of Indian Philosophy, The Sapthabangi Naya

    This is the most advanced system of Logic, better than Logical positivism of Bertrand Russell.

    Does an Object, such being the case exist at all?

    Nihilists say No.

    Empiricists say Yes.

    John Locke says, I Know Not’

    Adi Sankaracharya says ‘It exits and at the same time does not exist”

    How?

    Assume you step on some creepers in the night in a forest in and you jump out in fear, assuming it to be a snake.

    When you use a Torch, you find that it to be a creeper,

    Your Fear is gone.

    Your fear was real,

    The Creeper was real,

    And that it is not a creeper is also Real

    Therefore Shankaracharya says all the three statements are true,

    The difference is that while experiencing Fear your Awareness,Knowledge was incorrect, because of Ignorance, not knowing all the facts.

    Once you come to know all the facts you get the Knowledge,

    Removal of Ignorance or Avidya, id Knowledge, Sankara  avers.

    This being the case of individual Objects, how can one assume the Reality of Objects and events in this world and pass moral judgement?

    Any such assertion is contrary to knowledge,

    Therefore Right or Wrong is only Relative and has no place in advance knowledge.

    Look at this point.

    In Egypt, during Cleopatra’s times’ it was the custom to marry one’s sister, brother.

    Cleopatra married Ptolemy, her brother first.

    Let us see how God would judge two different cases on this issue,

    One who does marry one’s brother from another Moral system where marrying sister/brother is incest and morally wrong, and another Cleopatra, after their Deaths.

    Would he punish Cleopatra for having married her brother(which was considered Moral by Egyptians at that time) , for incest?

    Or would God punish the one , who is not an Egyptian, and who has married her brother for incest?

    He can Not. for He Is God, there can be no double standards.

    So at the Absolute  level thee is nothing as sin or sacred.

    Note;This is an advanced concept.

    Let not people quote Shankaracharya and indulge in incest.

    I would like to quote Rajaji,a Great Statesman and Philosopher of India.

    (Rajaji was a lawyer.

    Once a murderer approached Rajaji and asked him to represent him in Court.

    As a matter of principle C.Rajagopalachari (Rajaji )would never appear for one whom he thought was guilty and so he refused.

    The murderer told Rajaji,

    ‘You believe  in Hinduism, Every thing  is done by God, So my murder is not committed by me but by God, you should represent me’

    Rajaji replied,

    ‘You are correct.

    The same God asked me not to represent you.

    The same god will also ask the Judge to hang you”)

    In this sense there is no Sin, says Adi Sankara in Nirvana Shatakam.

    न पुण्यं न पापं न सौख्यं न दुःखं
    न मन्त्रो न तीर्थो न वेदो न यज्ञ ।
    अहं भोजनं नैव भोज्यं न भोक्ता
    चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहम् शिवोऽहम् ॥४॥
    Na Punnyam Na Paapam Na Saukhyam Na Duhkham
    Na Mantro Na Tiirtho Na Vedo Na Yajnya |
    Aham Bhojanam Naiva Bhojyam Na Bhoktaa
    Cid-Aananda-Ruupah Shivo[a-A]ham Shivo[a-A]ham ||4||

    Meaning:
    4.1: Neither am I bound by Merits nor Sins, neither by Worldly Joys nor by Sorrows,
    4.2: Neither am I bound by Sacred Hymns nor by Sacred Places, neither by Sacred Scriptures nor by Sacrifies,
    4.3: I am Neither Enjoyment (Experience), nor an object to be Enjoyed (Experienced), nor the Enjoyer (Experiencer),
    4.4: I am the Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness; I am Shiva, I am Shiva,
    The Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness.

    http://ramanisblog.in/2013/05/08/not-qualitiesliberation-niravana-shatakam-3/

  • Not Qualities,Liberation” Nirvana Shatakam 3

    Having described the Elements both at the individual and macro level,Sankaracharya, now goes on to describe the qualities/attributes.

    Ramana Maharishi reclining,Thiruvannamalai.
    Ramana Maharishi

    One can not separate the qualities or attributes of an object  from the Object.

    If for example, we strip of all the qualities of a Rose by which we identify a Rose, we are left with nothing to conceive of a Rose!

    In Advaita, qualities are inherent in the objects and in Reality they are not separate from them .

    And we are the Reality.

    The Reality is reflected in us because of our ignorance,called Avidya, Nescience.

    Once this ignorance is removed our original State dawns.

    न मे द्वेषरागौ न मे लोभमोहौ
    मदो नैव मे नैव मात्सर्यभावः ।
    न धर्मो न चार्थो न कामो न मोक्षः
    चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहम् शिवोऽहम् ॥३॥
    Na Me Dvessa-Raagau Na Me Lobha-Mohau
    Mado Naiva Me Naiva Maatsarya-Bhaavah |
    Na Dharmo Na Ca-Artho Na Kaamo Na Mokssah
    Cid-Aananda-Ruupah Shivo[a-A]ham Shivo[a-A]ham ||3||

    Meaning:
    3.1: Neither do I have Hatred, nor Attachment, Neither Greed nor Infatuation,
    3.2: Neither do I have Passion, nor Feelings of Envy and Jealousy,
    3.3 I am Not within the bounds of Dharma (Righteousness), Artha (Wealth), Kama (Desire) and Moksha (Liberation) (the four Purusarthas of life),
    3.4: I am the Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness; I am Shiva, I am Shiva,
    The Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness.

    http://ramanisblog.in/2013/05/02/adi-shatakam-descartes-advaita/

    Related articles

  • Adi Shatakam Descartes Advaita

    The essential difference between the philosophers of The East and The West lies in fact that while those in the East relie on Direct Experience more, while those of the West go through Reason(Rationalists)

    True there are also philosophers called Empiricists, who rely on Empirical experience,starting from John Locke.

    But their experience is limited to Experience as a Tool and not anything more.

    In India the experience which the Philosophers speak of is the actual feeling of Oneness with the Reality.

    In the sixteenth century there was a reassessment of Scientific thoughts and Philosophy.

    Though most of the earlier thoughts of Socrates, Aristotle and Plato were accepted, the Philosophers wanted to reason them out.

    Also there was the Church Dogma.

    Adi Sankaracharya
    Adi Sankaracharya

    In came Rene Descartes,a Great Mathematicians(Nearly all great Philosophers were great Mathematicians too,Descartes, Locke, Leibniz,Spinoza, Pythagoras,Bertrand Russel).

    He wanted to find the Truth of the origin of the World.

    He started by questioning his beliefs, for , to him, they were planted in his Mind by others.

    Rene Descartes Quote.
    I Think , Therefore, I am -Rene Descartes.

    He tested the senses , found that they do not give out the facts exactly(ex.You dip your hands in cold water, then in hot water;the warm water takes more time to be felt as warm, similarly with Cold water:another instance he quotes is that of a Man with jaundice, for him the World is Yellow-which it is not).

    Therefore he discounted the senses as well.

    In the same vein he discounted and rejected all the sources of Knowledge.

    Then he observes,

    Cogito ergo sum (French: “Je pense donc je suis“; English: “I think, therefore I am”)

    “Ac proinde hæc cognitio, ego cogito, ergo sum, est omnium prima & certissima, quæ cuilibet ordine philosophanti occurrat.”

    English: “This proposition, I think, therefore I am, is the first and the most certain which presents itself to whoever conducts his thoughts in order.”-Principles of Philosophy ,Rene Descartes.

    that is you can doubt everything but never the fact that You Doubt.

    Doubting implies a Doubter,

    Thinker implies a Thinker,

    So, ‘I Think, Therefore I am’

    This has become the bedrock of Western Thought.

    Now Sankaracharya,though a strict Vedantin , Gnana Yogi and Bhakthi Yogi takes the route of Skepticism to prove the existence of the Reality quite effortlessly.

    Look at these lines.

    ”

    Mano-Buddhy-Ahangkaara Cittaani Naaham
    Na Ca Shrotra-Jihve Na Ca Ghraanna-Netre |
    Na Ca Vyoma Bhuumir-Na Tejo Na Vaayuh
    Cid-Aananda-Ruupah Shivo[a-A]ham Shivo[a-A]ham ||1||

    Meaning:
    1.1: Neither am I the Mind nor Intelligence or Ego,
    1.2: Neither am I the organs of Hearing (Ears), nor that of Tasting (Tongue), Smelling (Nose) or Seeing (Eyes),
    1.3: Neither am I the Sky, nor the Earth, Neither the Fire nor the Air,
    1.4: I am the Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness; I am Shiva, I am Shiva,

    Atma Shatakam or Nirvana Shatakam Sloka 1

    Exactly what Descartes speaks of.

    But the destination of Descartes was different.

    But the method for the existence of the Self is the same.

    Descartes assigns Two Realities Mind and Matter and brings in God in his Philosophy,Idealism

    .

    http://ramanisblog.in/2013/04/29/eighteen-principles-one-verse-nirvana-shatakam-adi-sankara/

    http://ramanisblog.in/2013/04/29/who-owns-the-world-isa-upanishad-1/

    Related articles

  • The World Is Us Sankya, Nirvana Satakam

    We have seen that Adi Shankaracharya explaining the various elements in us for understanding Objects  and how we perceive them, the ‘Observer‘

    न च प्राणसंज्ञो न वै पञ्चवायुः
    न वा सप्तधातुः न वा पञ्चकोशः ।
    न वाक्पाणिपादं न चोपस्थपायु
    चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहम् शिवोऽहम् ॥२॥
    Na Ca Praanna-Samjnyo Na Vai Pan.ca-Vaayuh
    Na Vaa Sapta-Dhaatuh Na Vaa Pan.ca-Koshah |
    Na Vaak-Paanni-Paadam Na Copastha-Paayu
    Cid-Aananda-Ruupah Shivo[a-A]ham Shivo[a-A]ham ||2||

    Meaning:
    2.1: Neither am I the Vital Breath, nor the Five Vital Air,
    2.2: Neither am I the Seven Ingredients (of the Body), nor the Five Sheaths (of the Body),
    2.3: Neither am I the organ of Speech, nor the organs for Holding ( Hand ), Movement ( Feet ) or Excretion,
    2.4: I am the Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness; I am Shiva, I am Shiva,
    The Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness.

    The outside world, to be made known to us has,

    Katopanishad
    Katopanishad

    The Prakriti,(The Potential Energy to be known,),of  three constituent  Dispositions of the Prakriti) called the Gunas.

    Purusha, Kinetic Energy that Flows,

    Mahat, The Intellect, to translate these,

    Ahankara,The Feeling of ‘I, Mine” to be conscious,

    Mind,(For the Observer)

    Five sensory organs,(For the Observer)

    Five Motor organs,(For the Observer)

    Five Subtle Elements(For The Observed, The World)

    Five Gross Elements(For the Observed)

    Total 25.

    Let us look at each in brief.

    What is to be known, has ‘To Be’

    That implies presence.

    That presence has to be immanent and be inert, to be activated when to it is to be known or aware of.

    This presence is Prakriti or the Principle that is permanent, immanent and inert, awaiting to be known.

    This is provided by Purusha, the Kinetic principle that interacts with the Prakriti to generate Intellect,(at the macro level)

    Now Prakriti is constituted by the Three Gunas or Dispositions(for details see post Gunas under Indian Philosophy)

    This Intellect at the Macro level is Mahat.

    Once the Intellect is formed, it is ready to be known, both at the Macro-level and at the individual level.

    To be  understood, at the Macro-level, the external World has the Following.

    Five elements,Earth, Water, Fire, Air and Ether.

    These five elements have five  subtle elements called Tanmatras.

    The Five elements of the external world are gross in nature.

    Their qualities are a part of them ,  like Heat and Light are the qualities of Fire.

    We can not experience them as they are.

    The qualities embedded in them make us aware of them, like the heat is known by our bodies, light by our eyes.

    To sum up, the external world, the’Observed’ has elements that complement the internal organs of the Individual(Observer).

    When these connect Awareness or Knowledge dawns.

    Put it in another way , the Observed becomes Observer when connected, when the Individual Ego is identified with it.

    Therefore to know the Observer(self), is identical with knowing the Observed(External world), for the elements that constitute both are the same.

    The Observed becomes known when the elements of both the Observer and the Observed become  One, when the ‘Ahankara’ or  the ‘I, Mine ‘ is eradicated.

    This , in essence, is Advaita of Shankaracharya.

    It would be interesting to note that the principles elaborated above are from the Sankhya system of Indian Philosophy , which is called a Nastika, Heterodox, as it does not believe in the authority of The Vedas and for Shankaracharya , the Vedas are his source.

    Truth has many facets.

    Paths are many, destination is One.

    For readers,

    I have tried to simplify the concept.

    I find a lot of readers keenly following the post on Yoga Sutra, Isa Upanishad and Nirvana Shatakam.

    For any doubts, please post your comments as a discussion would benefit everyone.

    Also please do not hesitate to point out inaccuracies.

    Here I may mention that while I write objectively, where a topic on Advaita or Shankaracharya is concerned I tend to  become an Advaitin in interpretation for I am an Advaitin by Faith(which includes Reason)

    Those who have different stand points,may have their view and interpret the way it suits their disposition.

    But the meaning of the Sanskrit words are completely neutral as also the translation honest; I might differ in interpretation.

    This applies only to Nirvana Sathakam and not any thing else where I will be posting objectively.

    Explanation of the sloka in the next post.

    Related articles