The Silence of Buddha and his Contemplation of the Truth
Gautama Buddha "Buddha was born in or around 563 B.C. into a religious milieu which had in its tradition two distinct approaches to the pursuit and personal discovery of the Truth. The first approach was that of sharpening one's intellect through active engagement in philosophical inquiries. Truth was sought through metaphysical debates and discussions. This approach placed strong emphasis on the power of rational knowledge. The second way was to enter into seclusion and solitude and to search for the Truth in personal silence. Here the emphasis was placed on renunciation, detachment, and an ascetical way of life. Eschewing the first approach, Buddha deliberately and decisively chose the second. Mauna, rendered in English as "silence," was the chief characteristic trait of this path." - A. J. V. Chandrakanthan
SPIRITUALITY TODAY
Summer 1988, Vol.40 No. 2, pp. 145-156.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fr. Chandrakanthan earned his doctorate in theology at St. Paul
University, Ottawa, where he also teaches Eastern Religions. This
article is based on a talk he gave in July, 1986, at the Christian
Meditation Centre, London.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A. J. V. Chandrakanthan:
The Silence of Buddha and his Contemplation of the Truth
In the life and teaching of the Buddha, true Silence leads to Truth
by avoiding both wordiness and wordlessness because such Silence is
Truth.
A philosopher once visited Buddha and asked him: "Without words,
without the wordless, will you tell me the truth?"
Buddha kept silence.
After a while the philosopher rose up gently, made a solemn bow and
thanked Buddha saying: "With your loving kindness, I have cleared
away all my delusions and entered the true path."
When the philosopher had left, Ananda, a senior disciple of Buddha,
enquired: "O, Blessed one, what hath this philosopher attained?"
Buddha replied: "A good horse runs even at the shadow of the
whip!"(1)
This little anecdote eloquently illustrates the manner and method by
which Gautama Buddha sought to experience and express the truth.
Buddha's entire life could be briefly summed up as a relentless
search, a revolutionary discovery, and a revealing experience of
Truth. Stories and anecdotes attributed to him in popular Buddhist
legends, like the art, architecture, and sculpture that endeavor to
capture and contain the radical mystique of the person of Buddha,
often, if not always, present him as a serene, sober, and silent sage.
His first disciples and followers also perceived these qualities of
serenity, sobriety, and silence as indistinguishable traits of his
enlightened personality.
A brief exploration of our little anecdote will unfold to us the
importance and the necessity of Silence as an indispensable means
towards an interior experience of the Truth. Because as we shall
illustrate later, silence at the interior and exterior levels is a
sine qua non condition for both meditation and contemplation. In fact,
despite the doctrinal differences that separate the various schools
of Buddhism,(2) a remarkable unity exists among them in recognizing
the indispensability of silence as a powerful catalyst for dhyan or
meditation.
BUDDHA: THE SILENT SAGE
Buddha was born in or around 563 B.C. into a religious milieu which
had in its tradition two distinct approaches to the pursuit and
personal discovery of the Truth. The first approach was that of
sharpening one's intellect through active engagement in philosophical
inquiries. Truth was sought through metaphysical debates and
discussions.(3) This approach placed strong emphasis on the power of
rational knowledge. The second way was to enter into seclusion and
solitude and to search for the Truth in personal silence.(4) Here the
emphasis was placed on renunciation, detachment, and an ascetical way
of life. Eschewing the first approach, Buddha deliberately and
decisively chose the second. Mauna, rendered in English as "silence,"
was the chief characteristic trait of this path.
The word mauna is one of the few terms used commonly by all language
and religious groups in India. In religious treatises and traditions,
this word has a history of its own. Mauna, from which the noun muni,
meaning "sage" or "hermit" is derived, has a meaning exorbitantly
wealthier than its English counterpart "silence." Mauna means
blissful calmness, joyous recollection, tranquil quietude, and
peaceful stillness.
In many of the legends and stories ascribed to Gautama Buddha,(5) he
is referred to as Sakyamuni. Literally this means, "the silent one of
the Sakya clan." But the popular use of this name for the Buddha also
contains a dual significance. For besides referring to Buddha's clan,
in certain Indian languages the word sakya also refers to something
"graceful" or "pleasing." Thus Sakyamuni can also mean "one who is
gracefully silent."
Buddha began his search for the Truth as a muni walking on this
graceful path of mauna, whereas the philosopher referred to in the
above story symbolizes one who has chosen the first path, that of
rational inquiries and metaphysical investigations. A philosopher
paying a visit to Buddha to learn about the Truth was thus an
exceptionally uncommon event. And because the path opted for by
Buddha and the way chosen by the philosopher are two parallel lines
that never meet, one can only jump from one to the other. It was
indeed a rare event.
The decision of the philosopher to swerve from his path is indicative
of his tacit acknowledgement of the limitations and even failures of
reason and logic. It points to the philosopher's gross disappointment
with metaphysical discussions and debates. He had resolved to eschew
both, words (discourses and debates) and the wordless (signs and
gestures), and humbly requests Buddha to tell him of the Truth,
without using either words or the wordless.
Thus, in the penetrating eyes of the Lord Buddha, the philosopher had
become a receptacle ideally prepared to receive the treasure of the
Truth. In his humble request, Buddha astutely recognized the sense of
defeat and despair.
A great mystic like Buddha could easily sense the interior
preparedness of the philosopher, who had unreservedly surrendered
himself, with profound trust, docile humility, and audacious hope.
The very decision of the philosopher to come to him asking for an
experience of the Truth was already a revolutionary step of personal
conversion. Thus Buddha did not need any external force to teach him
or lead him to the Truth. Neither was there any need to prescribe
techniques and exercises or lessons on meditation. For Buddha, the
philosopher's sheer openness, the sublime emptiness that could now be
filled to the brim, was enough. He therefore compares this
philosopher to a good horse that is so watchfully alert and aware
that it begins to run if it merely sees the shadow of the whip. The
master has only to touch the whip and the horse nearly flies. Buddha
has only to look into the eyes of the philosopher and all the
teaching that can ever be imparted is readily received.
TRUTH AND SILENCE
In the stories and discourses attributed to Buddha, one can clearly
see a close link between Truth and Silence. Wherever Truth is
mentioned in reference to Buddha it is always said in relation to
Silence. In fact, popular Buddhist religious tradition attests that
whenever someone asked Buddha to explain the Truth, he invariably
answered by Silence. Thus he gave a new and deep significance to both
Truth and Silence. His silence was not a mere absence of speech or
words. Buddha's silence was eloquent! It was so blissful and ecstatic
that it always provided the perfect answer to those akin to the
philosopher in the above anecdote who sincerely sought for the Truth.
For Buddha, Silence as the inevitable path that leads to the Truth is
not distinct from the Truth itself. That is, as the way to the Truth,
Silence already contains the reality of the Truth. They are two
aspects of the same reality.(6) It is no wonder that even in Christian
tradition silence is spoken of as the language of God.(7) In Christian
terms, we may say that for Buddha, Silence is the sacrament of the
Truth.
Satya, the word translated "truth" in English, is one of the oldest
words in the Indian religious heritage. It too has a wealth of
meanings. Derived from the root sat, meaning "being," "existence,"
"pure," "holy," "perfect;"(8) etc., satya signifies the Truth in all
its unlimited perfection and plenitude. As the ground of all
existence, satya can only be experienced through the medium of
Silence. It cannot be expressed. The moment one tries to express it,
one runs the danger of falsifying it, of rendering it asatya,
"untruth." The fountain of Silence is the sole medium that is capable
of delivering the Truth.
Buddha did not communicate any knowledge with his Silence, but he
nevertheless communed with seekers of the Truth. He did not offer
them a part of his knowledge, but imparted to them an aspect of his
being. He used neither words nor the wordless (signs and gestures).
Rather, the language he used was Silence in the sense of an effulgent
mauna. That is why even a philosopher who counted rational power as
the sole source of true knowledge could accept the failure of logic
and reason and surrender to Buddha, asking him for the Truth in a
medium that does not involve words and the wordless. Perhaps the
experience disclosed to the philosopher both the poverty of words and
concepts and the paucity of wordlessness, thereby motivating him to
choose a medium that transcends them.
Buddha's Silence was not wordlessness or noiselessness. It had a
transforming power, permeating and filling the atmosphere around him
with such intensity that people seated at his presence experienced
"the ineffable and the inexplicable." His Silence had no movement,
yet people around him moved closer to the Truth just by being in his
presence, permeated and filled by the effulgence of his joyous
stillness. His Silence was contagious. It was like the unseen powers
of a magnetic field or the invisible sound waves that travel in the
atmosphere.
The close affinity that is said to enjoin Truth with Silence is not
uncommon in the mystical traditions of other religions including
Christianity. Whether it be in the Sufism of Islam or in the Hasidim
of Judaism, silence is always referred to as the prerequisite for an
interior experience of the divine. Silence is often eulogized as the
language of the heart. Buddha's Silence reveals to us the nature and
significance of an ideal form of silence. This becomes more evident
when we contrast the mauna with our ordinary experience of silence.
UNQUIET SILENCE
The silence which most of us have experienced or know of is an
exterior absence of words or a stillness from noise. During such an
experience we may not use words audibly and externally but the mind
is unquiet, filled with words and noise, ideas, questions, desires,
doubts, and conflicts. All this clouds and confuses the mind; silence
is only on the surface. Quietude is only on the periphery. It is only
a mirage or a deceptive appearance of Silence, because there is
calamity inside and a pretense of calm outside. Such silence can
easily be tilted by the least external noise. Instead of resulting in
peace this forced stillness will explode into annoyance and
irritation.
SPEECHLESS SILENCE
Persons under sudden shock or deeply excited by fear also experience
a brief spell of silence. This silence may be wordless or it may
render someone momentarily speechless. But there is no lasting peace
or quietude. It only causes confusion and chaos, besides accelerating
anxiety and tension. It is a silence thrust onto a person from
outside and therefore has no natural flow or spontaneity.
TRANQUIL SILENCE
Buddha's Silence is of a third category. His Silence is not forced by
any internal or external factors. It is natural and spontaneous,
active and sublime. It wells up from the depths of his personality
and overflows with a certain rhythm. It is mauna in the fullest sense
of the term. It radiates energy and emanates vitality. Peace and joy
are inseparably interwoven in its very essence. This Silence is not
negative; there is no "absence" of something. It is wholly positive,
pervading the entire atmosphere around him, so that he can just sit
without uttering anything and the people around him can receive
wisdom. It is this pattern of Silence that the early Buddhist
sculptors and artists endeavored to convey in their images and
replicas of the Buddha.
Buddha's Silence was the result of a profound harmony within himself
and with the world outside. It pointed to a deep concord between the
center and periphery of his self and his states of awareness or
consciousness. Buddhism refers to seven layers of such consciousness.
A joyous quietude is attained when these seven layers throb
harmoniously, pulsating in sublime awareness. Buddha is silent
because he knows the narrow boundaries of rational knowledge and the
blind alleys of metaphysical queries. He knows the frailty and
feebleness of words and concepts. His discovery of the language of
Silence helped him dispel the inner darkness and void created by a
rational thirst for knowledge.(9)
SILENCE AND CONTEMPLATION
As we mentioned earlier, in the Indian languages a contemplative is a
muni. Literally, this means "the silent one." Muni refers to one who
is so totally and intensely silent, calm, serene, and recollected
that his very presence becomes a pool of energy, radiating an
ineffable spirit of stillness. Buddha was a muni par excellence. The
strength of his contemplation was rooted in his power of Silence,
which led him to enlightenment.
In the Eastern contemplative tradition, the act of doing something is
already the thing done. The goal of life for Buddha was the act of
living it. Thus Silence as the way to the Truth is itself the Truth.
In fact, in Buddha's teaching the four-fold salvific truth(10)
incorporates "the path" as one of its constituents, while "the
eightfold path"(11) leads to the realization of the Truth.
Buddha persistently refused to define or describe the Truth. It can
only be experienced and assimilated. It was part of his very being.
It cannot be communicated by words, but can only be shared with
someone who possesses the right prerequisites for receiving it into
his or her being.
People who came to Buddha with adequate inner preparation received at
least some experience of the Truth through their trustful silence.
Otherwise it is hard to give any proper interpretation to the "cult
of meditation" that is integral to Buddhism and eventually blossomed
into Zen. Paintings and sculpture over two thousand years old portray
Buddha as a serene and silent sage, a phenomenon found in almost all
countries where Buddhism claims adherents.(12) It further confirms that
this elegant and eloquent trait of Buddha's personality had a
universal attraction and appeal for over the millennia.
In the Christian mystical and contemplative tradition, silence is
strongly recommended as an ingredient of the religio-spiritual quest.
The Desert Fathers and the later monastic tradition stress the role
of silence for interior spiritual growth. St. Benedict advises his
followers, "Monks ought to be zealous for silence at all
times ..."(13) Silence creates an atmosphere and an attitude for
listening and receptivity, for response and recollection. Only thus
can the Truth, that is, the Divine Reality, be able to permeate our
entire being.
EMPTINESS
A major question arises: how is this ideal form of Silence to be
embraced? Can anyone experience it? Buddha himself provides the
answer. It lies in the Buddhist understanding of the richness of
emptiness.(14) As long as a person is willing to become empty(15) of
all forms of desires and attachments, both within and without, and
learns to avoid using any self-suppressive force, the path of silence
is very accessible. It should be undertaken in an attitude of total
self-surrender, humility, and trust. Otherwise it is very hard to
quiet the mind, which is always clouded with thoughts and concerned
with the deceptive power of the ego. This is possible only by
incessant practice induced by the desire to reach into the very core
of one's "inner-self."
A story of one of the Buddha's disciples can help us to discern how
the process of achieving emptiness is an ideal means of attaining the
Truth:
Subhuti was one of Buddha's disciples. He was able to understand the
potency of emptiness: the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its
relationship of subjectivity and objectivity.(16)
One day, when Subhuti was sitting under a tree in a mood of sublime
emptiness, flowers began to fall around him.
"We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness;' the gods
whispered to him.
'But I have not spoken of emptiness;' said Subhuti.
"You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness,"
responded the gods. "This is true emptiness."
And the blossoms showered upon Subhuti like rain.(l7)
This is the only story that exists about Subhuti. There is nothing
remarkable about him simply because he was one of Buddha's numerous
disciples. Tradition affirms that already during his lifetime, Buddha
had some outstanding persons, kings and scholars, as his disciples.
But the gods did not choose them. They chose the unknown Subhuti.
Herein lies the key to the Buddhist notion of emptiness, which can be
understood and cherished only by being empty.
Like tranquil silence, emptiness cannot be expressed. The moment an
effort is made to express it, it loses its value. It is no longer
emptiness. Because in "true emptiness" even the experience
disappears. This is the significance of the Buddhist notion of
sunyata, the attitude that Buddha had when he left the palace and
chose to become a sage. It is not a negative emptiness, but a sublime
emptiness that becomes the firm foundation on which the edifice of
silence can stand.
For a few elusive moments, all of us have had glimpses of emptiness
and experiences of silence. But as long as the mind is there, or the
ego is there, such moments pass like a dream. The closer we move
towards silent emptiness, the more elusive it becomes. To grasp this
moment one has to be securely rooted in openness and humility. Only
then can we who are temples of the Holy Spirit can become the
sanctuary of the Truth.
JESUS AS THE WAY AND THE TRUTH
The striking affinity that binds truth with silence is not uncommon
in Christian tradition. We come to experience Jesus the Truth by
following Jesus the Way.(18) The challenge is to travel with Jesus in
our own historical context. Through this same process we can also
come to experience Jesus as the Truth.
In the Gospel of John, Jesus reveals the subtle dimensions of the
Truth when he says, "The Truth shall set you free" and "you shall
worship in Spirit and Truth." This gospel also presents an incident
not very dissimilar to that of the story at the beginning of this
article. On the very eve of Jesus' death, a knowledgeable Roman
governor asked him, "What is Truth?" (John 18:38). Little did Pilate
realize that Truth in its plenitude was standing before him. Jesus'
answer to Pilate was very similar to that of Buddha to the
philosopher—communing or conveying the Truth in Silence. But
unlike the philosopher, Pilate lost the greatest opportunity he was
ever afforded.
SILENCE TODAY
More than ever before, people today feel the need for silence,
meditation, and contemplation. The growing number of Christian
mediation groups in Europe and North America, like the mushrooming of
ashrams and hermitages in South Asia, very clearly indicates their
deep spiritual longing for an interior experience of the Truth
through a process of silence and stillness.
Mahatma Gandhi entitled his autobiography Satya Sodhana, "an
experiment with Truth." Regularly observing one day of the week as a
day of mauna viradha, "fasting by silence," Gandhi described it as
one which filled him with the vitality and strength necessary for him
to generate Truth to others. For him, satyagraha, "insistence on
truth," was an inseparable part of life. Gandhi is also reported to
have said that on this day of silent fast, he was more in contact
with his inner self and feelings than with the reality of God. It was
thus not so much a day of prayer as one of personal reconciliation
with his inner conflicts. When these conflicts are resolved, prayer
blossoms as its joyous result. Such prayer gives peace and solace,
comfort and consolation. Prayer and meditation are not just ways of
learning to relax with God.
Today's world is a world of the outer. It has sought and bought the
outer at the cost and expense of the inner. Hence the need to return
to the source and the center of ourselves in Silence and solitude to
discover the treasure of the Truth buried within. As a priceless
statement attributed to Buddha has it, "As long as I had no knowledge
of the treasures within me, all outside things seemed valuable. Now
since I have found the diamond within, all earthly diamonds have
paled into insignificance."
A. J. V. Chandrakanthan:
The Silence of Buddha and his Contemplation of the Truth
NOTES
1) Paul Reps, (ed.), Zen Flesh, Zen Bones (London: Penguin Books,
reprinted 1982), pp. 119-120.
2) The major schools of Buddhism are known as Mahayana (practiced in
China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam), Theravada or Hinayana (practiced
in Burma, Ceylon, India, Laos, and Campuchea), Ch'an or Zen (China
and Japan) and Tibetan Buddhism.
3) R.E. Hume, (ed.) The Thirteen Principal Upanishads (London: Oxford
University Press, revised and reprinted, 1934), p. 30. See also
Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad, 5.1 to 6.5 and Mundaka Upanishad, 3.1.1 to
3.2.11.
4) For some pertinent religious texts see R.M. Panikkar, (ed.),
Matranmanjari: The Vedic Experience, (University of California Press,
1977), pp. 250, 264, 412, 629-630.
5) Gautama was the family name of Buddha. Siddhartha was the name
given to him by his parents. "Buddha," in fact, is a title rather
than a name, meaning "the blessed" or "enlightened one." The name
Sakyamuni is used in later legends and literature.
6) See Joel Giallanza, "Silence as a Second Language" in Review for
Religious, 46 (1986: 453-457.
7) Ibid.
8) R. M. Panikkar, op. cit., pp. 60-66, 110-111, 123-124, 716-720, and
740-742.
9) Ninian Smart, The Religious Experience of Mankind (London: Collins,
1986), pp. 109-117.
10) Buddhist traditions maintain that "The Four Noble Truths" were
pronounced by Buddha when he delivered his first sermon. Briefly the
Four Noble or Great Truths are: 1) Sorrow is associated with all
stages of life (i.e. birth, aging, death etc.). 2) Selfish desire is
the cause of all sorrow. 3) Emancipation from sorrow is possible only
by abandoning all selfish desires. 4) The Eightfold Path is the means
by which human beings can overcome all selfish cravings or desires. I
have translated the word duhkka as "sorrow" but it also
means "misery," "pain," and "anguish." For more on this see P.L.
Narasu, The Essence of Buddhism (Delhi: Bharatya Publishing House,
1979), pp. 128-133.
11) The Eightfold Path is said to contain the scheme of spiritual
self-development leading to enlightenment. It consists of 1) right
understanding, 2) right aspiration, 3) right speech, 4) right action,
5) right pursuits (including means of livelihood), 6) right effort,
7) right attitudes, and 8) right concentration or contemplation.
12) The paintings and sculptures of Buddha found in Burma, India, Sri
Lanka, Japan, Thailand, Korea, and Vietnam are illustrations of this
phenomena.
13) Rule of St. Benedict, Chap. 42.
14) The word sunyata is used in Buddhism to refer to the notion of
emptiness. The religious significance of this term is very much
similar to that of the Greek word kenosis, used by St. Paul, (esp.
Phil. 2:6). Sunyata means emptiness as openness, freedom and
fullness. See A.J.V. Chandrakanthan, "The Richness of Emptiness in
Religious Life," a talk given on the occasion of the Silver jubilee
celebrations of Sr. Anne Leonard, R.S.C.J., Canadian Provincial of
the Religious of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, (mimeographed), Ottawa,
1987, pp. 2-9.
15) For more on the Buddhist understanding of emptiness, see F.J.
Streng, Emptiness: A Study in Religious Meaning (Nashville, TN:
Abingdon Press, 1967), pp. 43-81.
16) In Buddhism and Zen, the distinction between subjectivity and
objectivity means that reality is to be understood in terms of its
impermanent relationships, e.g. a middle-class rich man compared to a
millionaire is a poor man.
17) Paul Reps, op. cit., p. 43.
18) Jon Sobrino, The True Church and the Poor (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis
Books, 1984), p. 24.
"Chopra: Deep stuff or New Age fluff?
ST. PETERSBURG
Motivational guru Deepak Chopra believes he provides answers for a new age, teaching his international body of followers that the key to solving problems is to seek God within. Chopra's philosophy, zealously marketed through books, seminars and tapes, has won him legions of fans...
“There is no guilt in his system. There is no need for remorse or anything like that. It is not like you have to stop sinning (or) you have to clean up your act. There are no commandments,” John Morreall, professor of religious studies at USF, said of Chopra's teachings. “People want easy, digestible stuff that doesn't require them to change their life, and any way you can package that will be successful,” Morreall added.
In fact, a sell-out crowd is expected Monday when Chopra makes an appearance at the Mahaffey Theater, said the Rev. Joan Pinkston, minister at the Center for Positive Living, which is sponsoring his visit.
She said this is the third time her church, at 5200 29th Ave. N, has brought Chopra to Tampa Bay.
“He is so popular and he does bring a universal message of truth for those who are ready to hear it,” Pinkston said. “He brings it to the masses who are unchurched and who may never capture that message other than through the secular community.”
In a telephone interview, Chopra, who was born in India, said he prefers to be thought of as spiritual rather than religious. “The founders of religion were universal beings,” he said. “But at some point it developed dogma and ideology and unfortunately we have had more anguish and more war and more hatred and more bigotry and more suffering in the name of religion than in every other name. . . . I like to think of myself as seeking spirituality, which is the basis of religion. God gave humans the truth, and the devil came and he said, 'Let's give it a name and call it religion.' ”
Chopra, whose teachings are based in part on the Vedantas, the sacred writings that are the root of Hinduism, added that it often is said that God created man in his own image. “I think it is the other way. Man created God in his own image,” he said. “The image of God is usually a dead white man in the sky. That is just an image. It is not satisfactory. Why can't God be black or a woman? . . . All the conflict in the world is because we have different images of God. God is beyond image. As soon as you create an image about God, you limit God.” But, he said, that is what defines most religion.
Spirituality is different, giving one the ability to love and have compassion, added Chopra, author of 22 books, including best-sellers Ageless Body, Timeless Mind, The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success and The Pathway to Love. “It is the capacity to experience joy and spread it to others,” he said. “It is the security of knowing that your life has meaning and purpose. It is a sense of connection to the creative power of the universe. This creative power of the universe is by various religions called God. “In my experience, it is infinite. It is unbounded. It's immanent and transcendent. It is timeless. It expresses itself in the infinite organization of the universe and in the infinite intelligence of the universe.”
And to find God, those caught up in the search must get in touch with what Chopra refers to as “the essence” of their own being. That essence, he explained, is God. And it is within every person, said Chopra, quoting Jesus in the book of John...
And it seems to sell particularly well among intellectuals, Morreall said. For those trying to cope with stressful conditions, Chopra's message finds a ready welcome.
“What Chopra offers is the promise that you will be able to quiet down the noise and you will be able to control your world. And that is immensely appealing,” Morreall said.
To members of the Center for Positive Living, part of the Spokane, Wash.-based Religious Science organization, Chopra reaffirms a familiar philosophy.
“With what we teach, we believe in one power and it doesn't matter what you call it, whether it is God, spirit, nature, life,” Pinkston said. “It is the ultimate one power. What we believe is true about God is also true about us. The one thing that may separate us from other mainline, traditional religions is that we truly believe that this power that created us is within us and is not something that is outside and separate from us and that it is, yes, greater than we are and that we can use it and we are using it every moment.” Chopra's popularity, she said, is based on his universal message.
“Here is a medical doctor who has taught at Tufts University, and he is very well-read. I believe that people are really hungry for the message . . . that the soul responds to — that we are divine beings,” added Pinkston, a former Baptist who began searching for a new path about 30 years ago.
“We teach the metaphysical, the inner message of Jesus the Christ,” Pinkston said. “(Chopra) is teaching the same message. The way he is teaching is that love can renew, heal. Love can make us safe. Love can inspire us and bring us closer to God and that is what we are all searching for, the union of the self and the spirit.”...
What morsels of wisdom will he leave with his audience Monday?
“I only want to achieve one thing in that when they leave they will say to themselves there is a lot to think about,” he said. “And in some of them it will start a new journey which will radically affect the way they live their life.” "
Kitty Bennett, Times researcher, UMI Company 1998
PARAA VIDHYAA
THE NOUMENAL STATE OF MAN
In the last chapter, we looked into the phenomenal state of man, as considered by Shankara. This chapter attempts to study the noumenal state of man. According to Shankara, man's ultimate destiny does not consist in being caught up in the phenomenal existence; rather, man is called to live at a depth at which he must experience the source of the universe within himself. The task of man is not to search for his ultimate destiny outside, but to move into himself and discovering the ultimate in the cave of his heart. It is not a new knowledge, but a realization of what one really is. Paraa vidhyaa, therefore, is nothing else but a self-realization in which one experiences Brahman (Brahmaanubhava) as one's own indwelling spirit (Aatman). This chapter deals with the goal, nature and characteristics of para vidhya.
2.1.1. THE GOAL OF PARAA VIDHYAA
The goal of para vidhya is Brahman, the ultimate universal spirit behind the universe and Aatman, the ultimate principle in the individual. Only when one has true knowledge about both Brahman and Aatman, can one begin to experience the oneness between these two. In this section, we will clarify these two notions, in preparation for the analysis of the nature of para vidhya.
2.1.1. BRAHMAN
The word `Brahman'[1] is derived from the Sanskrit root `brih' which literally means `to gush forth', `to grow', `to be great', and `to increase'. The suffix `man' added to the root `brih' signifies the absence of limitation. Thus, the term `Brahman' etymologically means that which is absolutely the greatest.[2] So `Brahman' denotes "that first … reality from which the entire universe of our experience has sprung up."[3] In the words of the Vedaanta-Suutras, "Brahman is that omniscient, omnipotent cause from which proceeds the origin of the world."[4] Thus, the term `Brahman' signifies the absolute and ultimate reality which is the substratum and the foundation of the world we know, and on which everything depends for its existence. Brahman is self-sufficient and does not depend on anything else for its existence. Hence it must be spiritual entity, since matter is not self-sufficient, limited and subject to change. George Thibault, in his introduction to the Vedaanta-Suutraas, says that whatever exists is in reality one, and this one universal being is called Brahman. This being is absolutely homogeneous in nature; it is pure Being, Intelligence and Thought. Intelligence or thought is not predicated of Brahman as its attribute, but constitutes its substance. Brahman is not a thinking being, but thought itself. It is absolutely destitute of qualities and whatever qualities or attributes are conceivable can only be denied of it.[5] Thus, Brahman is without qualities (nirguna), beyond the order of our empirical and worldly experience. We cannot grasp Brahman with our empirical experiences, since the being of Brahman is necessary for anything to exist, and even for the possibility of empirical experience. In other words, Brahman is a priori and cannot be grasped by a posteriori or limited experience.
Because of our inability to grasp the true nature of Brahman, whatever positive description is developed about Brahman will remain in the level of phenomenal experience, and Brahman is beyond all phenomena. That is why we find contrary characteristics attributed to Brahman. In Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, we read that Brahman is "light and not light, desire and absence of desire, anger and absence of anger, righteousness and absence of righteousness."[6] Kaatha Upanishad speaks of Brahman as "smaller than the small, greater than the great, sitting yet moving, lying and yet going everywhere."[7] Brahman is light and not light, in the sense that it is only because there is Brahman that there is light and darkness. Again there exist small and the greater only because Brahman exists.
At the same time the word `existence' cannot be attributed to Brahman and to the empirical world in the same way, for Brahman's existence is different in nature. The existence of Brahman is opposed to all empirical existence, so that in comparison with this it can just as well be considered as non-existence. Brahman is the being of all beings.[8] The nature of Brahman is so transcendent, that it cannot be compared with anything in the world we know. At the same time, Brahman is present in all its manifestations, for without the Being of Brahman nothing can exist. Yet the empirical experience of Brahman is not possible. Thus, Brahman is that unalterable and absolute Being which remains identical with itself in all its manifestations. It is the basis and ground of all experience, and is different from the space-time-cause world. Brahman has nothing similar to it, nothing different from it, and no internal differentiation, for all these are empirical distinctions. It is non-empirical, non-objective, wholly other, but it is not non-being.[9]
Shankara repeatedly speaks of, and strongly defends, the absolute, unchangeable, attributeless nature of Brahman, alluding to many texts in the scripture which points to the nirgunaa Brahman.[10] Commenting on the Upanishadic text, "as a lump of salt is without interior or exterior, entire and purely saline taste, even so is the self (Brahman) without exterior or interior, entire and pure intelligence only,[11] Shankara points to the oneness of Brahman. In the lump of salt there is nothing other than salt, so too Brahman is nothing other than itself. It is the absolute being without a second.[12] Shankara also uses the example of the sun reflecting in water and appearing as many, in order to bring home the same truth. He says that just as the reflection of the sun in water increases with the increase of water, and decreases with its reduction, it moves when the water moves, and it differs as the water differs, so is the self. The sun seem to conform to the characteristics of water, but in reality the sun never has these increasing or decreasing qualities. So also Brahman, which from the highest point of view always retains its sameness, seems to conform to such characteristics as increase and decrease of the limiting adjunct owing to its entry into such an adjunct as a body.[13]
For Shankara, therefore, Brahman is a principle of utter simplicity. There is no duality in Brahman, for no qualities are found in his concept of Brahman. It is also simple in the sense that it is not subject to inner contradictions, which would make it changeable and transitory. Though Shankara uses logic and arguments to understand the nature of Brahman and to speak of Brahman, still for him in its reality Brahman is not a metaphysical postulate that can be proved logically, but must be experienced in silence.[14] Thus, Brahman is one: It is not a `He', a personal being; nor is it an `It', an impersonal concept. It is that state which comes about when all subject-object distinctions are obliterated. Ultimately, Brahman is a name for the experience of the timeless plenitude of Being.[15]
2.1.2. AATMAN
The term `Aatman' comes from the Sanskrit root `an' which etymologically means `to breathe'. It is often rendered as `soul' or `self', and signifies the most fundamental being of the individual. There is no one who can deny the existence of the self for it is the basis of all individual actions. Everyone is conscious of the existence of his self and never thinks that he is not.[16] To doubt the existence of the self would be a contradiction in terms because then one would doubt the existence of the very doubter who engages in the doubt. The doubter of the self is often compared by Advaitins to a person who searches for the necklace while wearing it; or to a person who wears the spectacles on his face and at the same time looks for them elsewhere. Without the existence of the self, it is impossible for us to entertain the idea even of its being capable of refutation. For the knowledge of the self is not established through the so-called means of right knowledge, but it is self-established.[17] Thus, the very existence of understanding and its functions presuppose an intelligence known as the self which is different from them, which is self-established and which they subserve. [18] The very possibility of knowledge and the means of knowledge (pramaanas) have relevance if there exists the self which is the source of all knowledge. Therefore, Aatman is beyond all doubt, "for it is the essential nature of him who denies it." [19] Therefore, Shankara believed that it was the nature of the self and not its reality, which is to be proved. "The self must seek itself in order to find what it is, not that it is." [20]
Having established the existence of the self, we can turn now to the discussion of the nature of the Aatman. Aatman is the deathless, birthless, eternal and real substance in every individual soul. It is the unchanging reality behind the changing body, sense organs, mind and ego. It is the spirit, which is pure consciousness and in unaffected by time, space and causality. It is limitless and without a second. [21] Vedantins speak of three states of consciousness, namely the waking state (vishwa), the dream state (taijasa), and the state of dreamless sleep (pragna). The basic underlying principle which witnesses all these three states of one's existence is the pure consciousness (chaitanyam), the self. It is because of the presence of this ultimate substratum, that the body, the senses, the mind and the intellect function properly. At the same time it is not identified with these, nor affected by the changes that take place in the body, in the other sense or intellectual functions. Thus, Aatman.is the "unrelated witness of the experiences of the three stages, which include a man's diverse activities." [22]
Shankara gives a number of illustrations to clarify the nature of the self, especially in its role of being a witness (saakshin) to all activities of body, mind, senses, and intellect. Firstly, Shankara gives the analogy of a king's court. In the court, the king sits in his high throne as the observer of the activities of his ministers, councilors and all the others present. But because of his majesty as the king, he is unique and different from all. So too the self which is pure consciousness dwells in the body as a witness to the functions of the body, mind and other faculties, while at the same time it is different from them by its natural light. Thus, the witness is the absolute consciousness, the unchanging intelligence that underlies the finer and grosser bodies. It is neither Iishvara nor jiva, but it is Aatman which is untouched by the distinction of Iishvara and jiva. [23]
To those who come with the objection that the self is not only a mere observer or witness, but also participates in the activities of the body, Shankara replies using the analogy of the moon and the clouds. The movement of the clouds on a moonlight night suggests that the moon is moving, whereas in fact it is the clouds that move. Likewise, the activities of the mind and senses create the illusion that the self is active. [24] To the one who would say that activity belongs to the senses or other faculties and considers them the self, Shankara gives the following illustrations. Just as the iron filings become active at the presence of the magnet, so also it is the presence of the self that makes the body, the senses and all the other faculties active. It is fire which makes the iron ball red-hot. So also neither can the mind, the intellect or the body combined make the self. It is the self which is the source of all their activities. Just as a man who works with the help of the light that in inherent in the sun does so without ever affecting the sun, so too the mind, the body, the intellect, and the senses, engage in their respective activities with the help of the self, but without exerting any influence on the self. [25] All these illustrations point to the basic and absolute nature of the Aatman. The following Upanishadic statement bear witness to this reality. "That the imperishable is the unseen seer, the unheard hearer, the unthought thinker, the ununderstood understander. Other than It, there is naught that hears, other than It, there is naught that thinks; other than It, there is naught that understands. [26]
The terms `Brahman' and `Aatman', both basically denote one and the same underlying principle: the former stands for the underlying and unchanging principle of the universe; while the latter refers to the unchanging reality in the individuals. Both of these terms are used in the Upanishads and by the interpreters as synonyms they do interchange these two terms in the same sentence. Commenting on the Upanishadic statement: "Who is an Aatman? What is Brahman?", [27] Shankara remarks: "By Brahman, the limitations implied in the Aatman are removed, and by the Aatman the conception of Brahman as a divinity to be worshipped is condemned."[28] These two terms fundamentally refer to one and the same reality, which is the ground of everything. In other words, these two terms stand for two different descriptions of the same ultimate reality, from the point of view of the universe and the individual. The ultimate reality represented by these two terms is the goal of paraa vidhya or Brahmaanubhava.
2.2. NATURE OF PARAA VIDHYAA
We have analyzed the goal of paraa vidhya, in the preceding section. Here, we must attempt to clarify the nature of paraa vidhya, in which the Brahman-realization is attained by the seeker. We elaborate the nature of paraa vidhya, by looking into its meaning and clarifying the identity between Brahman and Aatman.
2.2.1. MEANING
Paraa Vidhya or Brahmaanubhava is the ultimate and monumental state of man. The term `Bramaanubhava' is a compound word, which consists of two Sanskrit words, viz. `Brahman' (absolute reality) and `anubhava' (intuitive experience or knowledge). The term `anubhava' means not a mere theoretical or intellectual knowledge, but the knowledge obtained through an integral experience. Anubhava is not the immediacy of an uninterrupted sensation, where the existence and the content of what is apprehended are separated. It is related to artistic insight rather than to animal instinct; it is an immediate knowledge.[29] Thus, literally the term `Brahmaanubhava' means the integral and intuitive experience of the absolute reality. When we speak of the intuitive experience of Brahman, from the Advaitic point of view there arise many basic questions as to the nature of Brahmaanubhava. How is it possible to have an experience if there is no subject to experience and no object to be experienced? Besides, if there is no duality in an experience, can it be described? If Brahmaanubhava is an experience, and if it has no duality in itself as an experience, then what is the nature of the experience involved in Brahmaanubhava? These questions stem from the fact that the Advaita philosophy of Shankara does not permit the possibility of duality in this fundamental experience.
Possession of intellectual knowledge about the nature of Brahman and that of Brahmaanubhava is the first step towards the attainment of Brahmaanubhava. Obtaining intellectual knowledge by the study of the Scriptures, especially by understanding the meaning and the import of the Vedantic statements like `That art Thou', is necessary for Brahmaanubhava. In knowing the nature of Brahman intellectually, one can work towards the attainment of Brahmaanubhava. When we speak of the attainment of Brahmaanubhava, we use the term attainment' (labdha) in a figurative sense (upacara). [30] In an empirical experience we attain some new knowledge, i.e., knowledge which had not been previously existed as far as we were concerned. In Brahmaanubhava, however, we do not attain anything new, but only realize what we are, i.e., our true nature, the identity with Brahman. According to Shankara, we are Brahman, and Brahmaanubhava is that experience by which we recognize our own real nature.
Many texts in Shankara's works point to the fact that the attainment of Brahmaanubhava consists in the recognition and the realization that one's real and true nature is Brahman. "The state of being Brahman is the same as the realization of the self." [31] "Perfect knowledge … is the realization of the Aatman as one with Brahman."[32] "When a man knows the Aatman, and sees it inwardly and outwardly as the ground of all things animate and inanimate he has indeed reached liberation." [33] "No man who knows Brahman to be different from himself is a knower of truth." [34] "My self is pure consciousness, free from all distinctions and sufferings." [35] Thus, Brahmaanubhava which is the experience of identity with Brahman, is an attainment only from the point of view of the aspirant or the seeker of truth. From the absolute of paramaartha point of view there is no attainment of Brahman.
2.2.2. IDENTITY OF BRAHMAN AND AATMAN
From what has been said about the nature of Brahmaanubhava, so far, there arises the question, how, at all, can we know or have any kind of knowledge about this experience called Brahmaanubhava? No empirical means of knowledge (pramaana) can help us in this regard, except scriptural knowledge. Though scriptural knowledge is limited to the level of duality, still it provides knowledge about the reality of Brahman and enables us to have an intellectual understanding of Brahman.
Shankara holds the authority of the scriptural testimony in our intellectual understanding of Brahman. Nothing else on earth, except the scriptures, can reveal to us the nature of Brahman and of Brahmaanubhava. In this regard Shankara is very clear; he does not substitute any pramaana than the scriptural testimony, for the attainment of the intellectual knowledge about Brahman. He does make use of other pramaanas, but only to elucidate, clarify and demonstrate what he accepts on the basis of scriptural authority about Brahman and Brahmaanubhava. He says, "The fact of everything having its self in Brahman cannot be grasped [intellectually], without the aid of scriptural passage "That art Thou'.[36]
The word `upanishad' (scripture) derives its meaning from its capacity to lead to the truth those who, having been thoroughly dissatisfied with the things seen and unseen, seek liberation from ignorance, which is the source of bondage and suffering. The Upanishads are capable of accomplishing all these, for in them the highest end of life is embodied.[37]
Authentic human destiny: the paths of Shankara and Heidegger
Vensus A. George, Council for Research in Values & (August 1998), pp. 47-54
NOTES [1] The word `Brahman' appears for the first time in the Rig Veda as related various sacred utterances, which were believed to have magical powers. So, initially it meant `spell' or `prayer', which can be used for the attainment of one's wishes and desires. In the Brahmanas, it began to signify that which stands behind God as their ground and basis. Finally, in the Upanishads, this terms came to stand for the unitary principle of all beings, the knowledge of which frees one from finitude. Cf. Eliot Deutsch, p. 9.
[2] Cf. BSB, I, i, 1, pp. 11-12.
[3] Ramkant A Sinari, p. 67.
[4] Swami Virswarananda (trans.), Brahma-Suutra (Mayavata, Almor, Himalayas: Advaita Ashrama, (1948), I, i, 2, p. 26 (hereafter: BSB, Virsawarananda).
[5] George Thibaut (trans.), Brahma-Sutras, vol. XXIV, Introduction, pp. xxiv-xxv (hereafter: BSB, Thibaut).
[6] S. Radhakrishnan (ed.), The Principal Upanishads (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1953), p. 272.
[7] Ibid., p. 617.
[8] Cf. Paul Deussen, The System of Vedanta, trans. Charles Johnson (Chicago: Open Court Publishing Co., 1912), pp. 211-212. Cf. also BUB, II, i, 20.
[9] S. Radhakrishnan and C. A. Moore (eds.), A Source Book in Indian Philosophy, 5th printing (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1973), p. 507. [10] In interpreting the Upanishadic text, Shankara is of the opinion that one must accept only those texts which speak of Brahman without qualities and forms. "But other texts speaking of Brahman with form", he says, "have the injunctions about meditation as their main objectives. So long as they do not lead to some contradictions, their apparent meaning should be accepted. But, when they involve contradictions, the principle to be followed for deciding one or the other is that those that have the formless Brahman as their main purport are more authoritative than the others which have not that as their main purpose. It is according to this that one is driven to the conclusion that Brahman is formless and not its opposite". Cf. BSB, III, ii, 14, p. 612.
[11] "Brihadaaranayaka Upanishad", IV, v, 13, R. E. Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upanishads, 2nd revised ed. (New York: Princeton University Press, 1973), p. 147 (hereafter: BU., Hume).
[12] Cf. BSB, III, ii, 16, pp. 615-617.
[13] CF. ibid., III, ii, 18-20, pp. 615-617.
[14] Baskali asked Bhava three times about the nature of Brahman. The latter remained silent all three times, but finally he replied, "I have already spoken, but you cannot comprehend that the self is silence". ibid., III, ii, 17, p. 614.
[15] Cf. Eliot Detsch, p. 9.
[16] Cf. BSB, I, i, 1, p. 12.
[17] Cf. ibid., II, iii, 7, p. 455.
[18] Cf. ibid., p. 456.
[19] Ibid., p. 457.
[20] Organ Troy Wilson, The Self in Indian Philosophy (London: Mounton & Co., 1964), p. 104.
[21] Cf. AB, p. 118.
[22] Ibid., p. 133.
[23] Cf. ibid., p. 136, Cf. Mahendranath Sircar, The System of Vedaantic Thought and Culture, pp. 156-157.
[24] Cf. ibid., pp. 136-137.
[25] Cf. ibid., pp. 137-138.
[26] BU., III, viii, 1, Hume, p. 118.
[27] "Chaanduukhya Upanishad", V, ix, 1, Hume, p. 234 (hereafter: Ch. U., Hume).
[28] Paul Deussen, The Philosophy of the Upanishads (New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1996), pp. 86-87.
[29] Radhakrishnan S., Indian Philosophy, vol. II, p. 513.
[30] BUB, VI, v, 6, pp. 500-501.
[31] Shankara, Gaudapaadakaarika Bhaasya and Maanduukya Upanishad Bhaasya, trans. Swami Nihilananda (Mysore: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama, 1955), IV, 85 (hereafter: GKB).
[32] VC, p. 65.
[33] Ibid., p. 89.
[34] Shankara, Upadeshasaahasrii, trans. Swami Jagadaananda, 6th ed. (Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1979), II, xvi, 70, p. 189 (hereafter: UI).
[35] BSB, IV, i, 2, p. 815.
[36] Ibid., I, i, 2, p. 815.
[37] Cf. A. Ramamuarthi, p. 116.
"Self-realization involves an identity-experience, wherein one realizes his oneness with the ultimate Brahman"
"4.1.2. Incommunicability of Self-realization
The self-realization involves an identity-experience, wherein one realizes his oneness with the ultimate Brahman. Therefore, self- realization is of the nature of Brahman, i.e., without subject-object duality, eternal and uncaused, immediate and direct, besides being incomprehensible, indescribable and trans-empirical. Brahmaanubhava is not available to the empirical experience, as the scope of the former goes far beyond that of the latter. The words and languages we use refer to the phenomenal world and relative realities. As Brahman is beyond the phenomenal, Brhamaamubhava cannot be described in ordinary language. Therefore, one can speak of self-realization only by way of negation, by denying the qualities of the empirical experience superimposed on it. For instance, the qualities that are attributed to Brahman, such as reality (satyam), knowledge (jnaanam) and infinitude (aanandam) are not positive descriptions of Brahman, but are mere negations of qualities superimposed on Brahman, such as unreality, ignorance and finitude. Thus, all statements we make about Brahman, Brahmaamubhava and Brahmajnaani are mere approximations in the light of the phenomenal knowledge. Such a philosophical position makes self-realization, for all practical purposes, incommunicable. Since, Brahmaanbhava is unknowable and indescribable, it cannot be communicated by the Brahmajnaani to any one in the realm of phenomenal existence. Since Brahman-experience cannot be passed on to the other in any form of communication, it would always remain the subjective experience of the Brahmajnaani. Any attempt to communicate it, using phenomenal language, would be nothing else but a mere phenomenal approximation of the transcendental experience. Such approximations would never take one to the core of self-realization, as it is incommunicable.
4.1.3. Insignificance of the Other's Role in Brahmaajijnaasa
Shankarite path to self-realization, viz., the movement from ignorance to knowledge, is a way that is basically walked by the aspirant alone. The only involvement of the other, on the aspirant's effort to attain the goal of Brahmaanubhava, is the Guru. He is a detached guide, who helps the student to understand the true import of the Vedaantic statements, especially at the hearing (sravana) state of Brahmaajijnaasa. The relationship that exists between the aspirant and the Guru is that of a teacher and a student. In this relationship, the aspirant is totally obedient to the Guru, does personal service to him, looks after the daily chores in the ashram and listens to the teachings of the Guru by sitting at his feet. It is not a one to one, I ƒ² Thou relationship, in which one enters into the life of the other as an equal partner. Other than the teacher, the aspirant does not have any significant relationship with any other person. This is clear from what the aspirant does in the three stages of Brahmaajijnaasa, viz., sravana, manaana and nididhyaasana. In these three stages of Brahmaajijnaasa the aspirant firstly, hears the instructions of the teacher personally. Secondly he reflects on the content of the Guru's teachings in solitude, so as to remove the apparent contradictions and to be intellectually convinced of the true import of the scriptural aphorisms. Thirdly, he meditates in silence on the truths he achieved through hearing and reflection. The various stages of Brahmaajijnaasa in the jnaana path are so centered on the individual seeker and his personal effort the presence of the other in the process is seen as an interference that would distract him from the goal of self-realization. So the seeker is basically all alone through out the process of Brahmaajijnaasa. Even after the seeker has attained self-realization, he does not need to have any relationship with the other or to a community of others, because all such relationships would be irrelevant and unreal to the Brahmajnaani. Thus, Shankara's path to self-realization does not give any significance to the I-Thou relationship that is genuine and inter- subjective communion of hearts between human persons...
From what has been said, it is clear that Shankara by his doctrine of Brahmaanubhava and the self's absolute oneness with Brahman, does not speak of a dissolution of the world. At the attainment of Brahmaanubhava, the external world is not destroyed or annihilated. But, the Brahmajnaani views the world no longer from the phenomenal point of view. He sees everything in terms of oneness, which is characteristic of Brahmaanubhava. Thus, from the point of view of the liberated man the phenomenal world is real in the relative sense, because the state he is in, i.e., his absolute identity with Brahman is that which is really real. As long as one tries to understand Shankara's Advaita philosophy purely from the phenomenal point of view, he will always meet with contradictions, for what is absolutely true is the transcendental and trans-empirical.
4.2.2. Advaita Vedaanta as Pantheism
Many consider Advaita Vedaanta to be pantheistic, because self- realization consists in the identity of the self and Brahman. Those who hold this view cite the mahaavaakya `That art Thou' in their support.9 In interpreting the above mentioned Vedaantic aphorism, we say that it cannot be interpreted in the direct meaning of `That' and `Thou', viz., Iishvara and jiiva, since such a union between the supreme Lord and the limited soul is not possible. It its implied meaning `That' refers to Brahman and `Thou' refers to Aatman. Brahman is the absolute and eternal reality in the universe and Aatman is the pure consciousness, the eternal reality behind the individual self. Brahman and Aatman are eternally identical. In Brahmaanubhava, as we know, there is not experiencer and the experienced. What really happens in Brahmaanubhava is that the self, removed of all ignorance and its effects, realizes its eternal identity with Brahman. Thus, Brahmaanubhava cannot be considered as involving an identity between supreme Lord and the soul. Besides, the terms, `union' and `identity', are used figuratively because there is not new identity reached in Brahmaanubhava, but only the existing eternal identity between Brahman and Aatman is realized. Again there is no notion of God (as a theist would understand) in Shankara's thought. He does not consider Brahman as a deity to be worshipped or to be devoted to, but as the absolute ontological reality behind all the phenomena, which is identical with the self, the pure consciousness. So, for Shankara Brahman is not to be worshipped, but to be realized. If Brahman is viewed as a deity to be worshipped, and such a deity is seen as being identical with everything in the universe, then we have a pantheistic world-view. Since Shankara does not consider Brahman as deity who is identical with the universe, it seems clear that in Shankara's Advaita there is no trace of pantheism. Advaita goes beyond the distinction of theism, atheism and pantheism, as the question of God is not at all an issue in Advaita Vedaanta. Therefore, Shankarite thought does not involve any form of `isms' that views the absolute reality in terms of Godhead. But rather it is a mystical philosophy that aims at making everyone aware of his true ontological nature, i.e., Brahman and move towards attaining it."
Vensus A. George, Self-realization (Brahmaanubhava)
Council for Research in Values & (January 2001), pp. 23-31
Shri Sadashiva said:
So long as a man has not real knowledge, he does not attain final liberation, even though he be in the constant practice of religious acts and a hundred austerities (111).
The knowledge of the wise from whom the darkness of ignorance is removed, and whose souls are pure, arises from the performance of duty without expectation of fruit or reward, and by constant meditation on the Brahman (112).
He who knows that all which is in this universe from Brahma to a blade of grass is but the result of Maya, and that the Brahman is the one and supreme Truth, has this (113).
That man is released from the bonds of action who, renouncing name and form, has attained to complete knowledge of the essence of the eternal and immutable Brahman (114).
Liberation does not come from japa, homa, or a hundred fasts; man becomes liberated by the knowledge that he himself is Brahman (115).
Final liberation is attained by the knowledge that the Atma (Soul) is the witness, is the Truth, is omnipresent, is one, free from all illuding distractions of self and not-self, the supreme, and, though abiding in the body, is not in the body (116).
All imagination of name-form and the like are but the play of a child. He who put away all this sets himself in firm attachment to the Brahman, is, without doubt, liberated (117).
If the image imagined by the (human) mind were to lead to liberation, then undoubtedly men would be Kings by virtue of such kingdoms as they gain in their dreams (118).
Those who believe that Ishvara is in images made of clay, or stone, or metal, or wood, merely trouble themselves by their tapas. They can never attain liberation without knowledge (119).
Can men attain final liberation by restriction in food, be they ever so thin thereby, or by uncontrolled indulgence, be they ever so gross therefrom, unless they possess the knowledge of Brahman? (120).
If by observance of Vrata to live on air, leaves of trees, bits of grain, or water, final liberation may be attained, then snakes, cattle, birds, and aquatic animals should all be able to attain final liberation (121).
Brahma-sad-bhava is the highest state of mind; dhyana-bhava is middling; stuti and japa is the last; and external worship is the lowest of all (122).
Yoga is the union of the embodied soul and the Supreme Soul, Puja is the union of the worshipper and the worshipped; but he who realizes that all things are Brahman for him there is neither Yoga nor Puja (123).
For him who possesses the knowledge of Brahman, the supreme knowledge, of what use are japa, yajna, tapas, niyama, and vrata? (124).
He who sees the Brahman, Who is Truth, Knowledge, Bliss, and the One, is by his very nature one with the Brahman. Of what use to him are puja, dhyana, and dharana? (125).
For him who knows that all is Brahman there is neither sin nor virtue, neither heaven nor future birth. There is none to meditate upon, nor one who meditates (126).
The soul which is detached from all things is ever liberated; what can bind it? From what do fools desire to be liberated? (127).
He abides in this Universe, the creation of His powers of illusion, which even the Devas cannot pierce. He is seemingly in the Universe, but not in it (128).
The Spirit, the eternal witness, is in its own nature like the void which exists both outside and inside all things, and which has neither birth nor childhood, nor youth nor old age, but is the eternal intelligence which is ever the same, knowing no change or decay (129-130).
It is the body which is born, matures, and decays. Men enthralled by illusion, seeing this, understand it not (131).
As the Sun (though one and the same) when reflected in different platters of water appears to be many, so by illusion the one soul appears to be many in the different bodies in which it abides (132).
As when water is disturbed the Moon which is reflected in it appears to be disturbed, so when the intelligence is disturbed ignorant men think that it is the soul which is disturbed (133).
As the void inside a jar remains the same ever after the jar is broken, so the Soul remains the same after the body is destroyed (134).
The knowledge of the Spirit, O Devi! is the one means of attaining final liberation; and he who possesses it is verily, yea, verily, liberated in this world, even yet whilst living, there is no doubt of that (135).
Neither by acts, nor by begetting offspring, nor by wealth is man liberated; it is by the knowledge of the Spirit, by the Spirit that man is liberated (136).
It is the Spirit that is dear to all; there is nothing dearer than the Spirit; O Shive! it is by the unity of Spirit that men become dear to one another (137).
Knowledge, Object of knowledge, the knower appear by illusion to be three different things; but if careful discrimination is made, Spirit is found to be the sole residuum (138).
Knowledge is Spirit in the form of intelligence, the object of knowledge is Spirit whose substance is intelligence, the Knower is the Spirit Itself. He who knows this knows the Spirit (139).
I have now spoken of knowledge which is the true cause of final liberation. This is the most precious possession of the four classes of Avadhutas (140).
Arthur Avalon, Mahanirvana Tantra of the Great Liberation
Kessinger Publishing (June 30, 2004)
When we come to Sahaja Yoga the Tantra is damaged and impure and the heart 'catches.' There is nothing to be upset in that. One should settle down silently and work to undo the 'catches,' gradually and slowly. The whole Library of Divine Knowledge is at one's hand and if the heart's desire to evolve the being and achieve the Absolute is pure, the solution to every problem will occur automatically, effortlessly and spontaneously — Sahaj.
The ultimate act against the Spirit is to worship that which has no Spirit — gross matter or raksasas. Shri Muhammad inveighed against both.... The Atma and its expression is the sole Reality in the Universe. Identification with anything else causes the heart to 'catch.' "
The Paraclete Shri Mataji
Related Articles:
“Jesus presented ... salvation .. based upon knowledge of self"
Who am I - Deepak Chopra
The Silence of Buddha and his Contemplation of the Truth
On being liberated from the dualities of pleasure and pain
Yoga Methods in Christian Mysticism
Each religion springs from a profound experience of the Spirit
This new mode of being and consciousness is the ...
For the mystics, Jesus was a living embodiment of union with God
Gnosis essentially is act of distinguishing soul from deepest self
People who have never even glimpsed the realm of the sacred
Eckhart Tolle's Teachings and Self-realization are in perfect harmony
Eckhart Tolle's Stillness Speaks and T. A. are in perfect harmony
The Third Jesus: The Christ We Cannot Ignore - Deepak Chopra
Jesus rebukes those who seek access to God elsewhere
Self-Atma: The Teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi Part One & Two
Silence on Self (read it regularly till in Silence you realize your Self)
Guru Nanak taught that the way to connect with the Supreme is ...
The Resurrection of Christ Within You
The Second Birth of Man—In Spirit
Idolatry to take pride in belonging to a particular religious tradition
Muhammad (Prophet For Our Time) Conclusion: Salam (Peace)
We are all Hindus now # 1
We are all Hindus now # 2
We are all Hindus now # 3
We are all Hindus now # 4
We are all Hindus now # 5
We are all Hindus now # 6
In the twenty-first century ... “India will conquer her conqueror"
Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti—"that which exists is One
Jesus: "God is spirit, and those who worship him ..."
Self as Spirit: “Jesus answered them ..."
"In order to rise above darkness, people must follow ..."
Theosis is a state akin to 'enlightenment'
Look deep within
God (Brahman) exists in every living being
Aim of being reborn known to almost every religion
All Holy Scriptures uphold the Self as Spirit, for Self is God
Allâh is "closer to him (the human) than [his] jugular vein."
Has Yoga strayed from its core?
Yoga is an art of living and not a religious practice
A Christian practicing sahaja yoga meditation
Shri Mataji: "Achieve your Self, become your Self."
Shri Mataji: "But this Judgment is so beautiful."
Shri Mataji: "What Christ said ... is nothing but Advaita."
For if you walk on this road, it is impossible to go astray
Mystic’s discovery of the higher Self is only a step on a greater journey
Shri Mataji: "The ultimate act against the Spirit ..."
Shri Mataji: "Self-Realization will ... lead to the creation of a new race"
A heavenly realm where a great invisible Spirit dwells
What and where is Self/Brahman/God/Being ...?
Silence Is God's First Language
NOTE: If this page was accessed during a web search you may wish to browse the sites listed below where this topic or related issues are discussed in detail to promote global peace, religious harmony, and spiritual development of humanity:
www.adishakti.org/www.al-qiyamah.org/
www.adi-shakti.org/ — Divine Feminine (Hinduism)
www.holyspirit-shekinah.org/ — Divine Feminine (Christianity)
www.ruach-elohim.org/ — Divine Feminine (Judaism)
www.ruh-allah.org/ — Divine Feminine (Islam)
www.tao-mother.org/ — Divine Feminine (Taoism)
www.prajnaaparamita.org/ — Divine Feminine (Buddhism)
www.aykaa-mayee.org/ — Divine Feminine (Sikhism)
www.great-spirit-mother.org/ — Divine Feminine (Native Traditions)
