|

Dahara uttarebhyah I.3.14 (77)
The small (ether,
Akasa, is Brahman) on account of the subsequent arguments
or expression).
Daharah: the small; Uttarebhyah: from subsequent
texts or expressions or arguments.
Another expression from the Chhandogya Upanishad is taken
up for discussion.
'Dahara' refers to Brahman, because the reason stated in
the later portions of the passage show this clearly.
We read in Chhandogya Upanishad VIII-1-1 "Now there is this
city of Brahman (the body), and in it the place, the small
lotus (the heart) and in it that small ether (Akasa)". Now
what exists within that small ether is to be sought, that
is to be understood.
Here the doubt arises whether the small ether within the
small lotus of the heart, which the Sruti speaks, is the
elemental ether, or the individual soul, or the Supreme
Soul.
The Purvapakshin or the opponent says: By the small ether
we have to understand the elemental ether which is the ordinary
meaning of the word. It is here called small with reference
to its small abode, the heart. Or else the 'small one' may
be taken to mean the individual soul on account of the term
the city of Brahman (Brahmapuri). The body is here called
the city of Brahman because the individual soul has his
abode in the body, and has acquired this by his deeds. The
individual soul is here called Brahman in a metaphorical
sense. The Supreme Brahman cannot be meant, because He is
not linked with the body as its Lord. The Lord of the city
i.e., the individual soul resides in one spot of the city
viz., the heart, just as a King dwells in one spot of his
Kingdom. Further the mind, the limiting adjunct of the individual
soul, abides in the heart. Only the individual soul is compared
in the Sruti in size to the point of a goad.
Here the 'small Akasa' is Brahman and does not mean elemental
ether, although there is the qualification 'small' which
may indicate that he is a limited something. Why? Because
the nature of Brahman is described later on in the text
"As large as this (external) ether is, so large is that
Akasa within the heart. Both heaven and earth are contained
within it." Chh. Up. VIII 1-3. This clearly intimates that
it is not actually small.
Akasa cannot be compared with itself. The finite individual
soul also with its limiting adjuncts cannot be compared
with the all-pervading Akasa or ether. The Sruti declares
"Both the earth and heaven are contained in it". This indicates
that this Akasa is the support of the whole world. From
this it is manifest that the ether is the Supreme Self.
We read in the Chhandogya Upanishad VIII-1-5 "The Self or
Atman is sinless, ageless, deathless, griefless, free from
old age, hunger, thirst, with true desire (Satkama), true
thought (Satsankalpa) that ever comes true". This cannot
apply to mere physical ether. These are all distinct qualities
of the Supreme Brahman. The description cannot refer to
the individual soul, because the comparison to the infinite
ether and the statement that heaven and earth are contained
in it cannot apply to the finite individual soul.
The word 'Brahma' in Brahmapuri shows the reference to Brahman
only. Even if you take the word as referring to Jiva the
teaching relates to Brahman who is realised in the heart
which is the Brahmapuri (the city of soul or Brahman). Moreover
the promise of Infinite Bliss to the knower of Dahara Akasa
intimates that the reference is only to the Supreme Brahman.
For all the reasons explained, that ether is the Highest
Self or Supreme Brahman.
Gatisabdabhyam tatha
hi drishtam lingam cha I.3.15
(78)
The small Akasa
(ether) is Brahman on account of the action of going (into
Brahman) and of the word (Brahmaloka); because thus it is
seen (i.e. the individual souls go into Brahman) is seen
elsewhere in other Sruti texts; and this daily going of
the souls into Brahman (during deep sleep) is an inferential
sign by means of which we may properly interpret the word
'Brahmaloka').
Gatisabdabhyam: on account of the going and of the
word; Tatha hi: thus, like; Drishtam: it is
seen; Lingam: mark, sign from which something
may be inferred; Cha: and.
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is given.
It has been said in the preceding Sutra that the small ether
is Brahman on account of the reasons given in the subsequent
passages. These subsequent passages are now described.
The mention of 'going' and a 'word' refers to Brahman. We
read in Chhandogya Upanishad VIII-3-2. "All these creatures
day after day go into this Brahmaloka (i.e. they are merged
in Brahman during deep sleep) and yet do not discover it"
etc. This passage shows that all Jivas or individual souls
go daily into the 'small Akasa' called here Brahmaloka.
This intimates that the 'small Akasa' is Brahman.
This going of the individual souls into Brahman which occurs
daily in the deep sleep is mentioned in the other Sruti
text: "He becomes united with the true (Sat), he is merged
in his own Self" Chh. Up. VI-8-1.
In common parlance or ordinary life also we say of a man
who is in deep sleep "He has become Brahman". "He is gone
into the state of Brahman".
The word 'Brahmaloka' is to be interpreted as Brahman Himself,
and not as the world of Brahman (Satya Loka) because there
is the indicatory sign in the passage. What is that indicatory
sign or Lingam? It is said in the text that the soul goes
to this world daily. It is certainly impossible for the
Jiva to go to the world of Brahman daily. Hence the term
'Brahmaloka' means here Brahman Himself.
Dhritescha mahimno'syasminnupalabdheh I.3.16 (79)
Moreover on account
of the supporting also (attributed to it) the small ether
must be Brahman, because this greatness is observed in this
(Brahman only according to other scriptural passages).
Dhriteh: on account of supporting (of the world by
the Akasa or ether); Cha: and, moreover, also; Asya mahimnah: this greatness; Asmin: in Brahman; Upalabdheh: on account of being observed or found.
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is continued.
Daharakasa or the small ether referred to in Sutra 14 indicates
Brahman, as the glory of supporting all the worlds can be
reasonably true only in respect of Brahman. And also on
account of the 'supporting' the small ether can be the Supreme
Brahman only. How? To begin with the text introduces the
general subject of discussion in the passage "In it is that
small ether". Then the small ether is to be compared with
the universal ether. Everything is contained in it. Then
the term Self is applied to it. Then it is stated that it
is free from sin etc. Finally it is said "That Self is a
bank, a limiting support (Vidhriti) so that these worlds
may not be confounded" (Chh. Up. VIII-4-1). In this passage
the glory of small ether by way of supporting the worlds
is seen. Just as a dam stores the water so that the boundaries
of the fields are not confounded, so also that Self serves
like a dam in order that the world and all the different
castes and Ashramas may not be confounded.
Other texts declare that this greatness of supporting belongs
to Brahman alone "By the command of that Imperishable (Akshara)
O Gargi, the sun and moon are held in their positions" Bri.
Up. III-8-9. "He is the lord of all, the king of all kings,
the protector of all things. He is a bank and a limiting
support, so that these worlds may not be confounded" Bri.
Up. IV-4-22. This also shows that to be a boundary and support
of the worlds is the distinctive attribute of Brahman only.
Therefore, on account of the 'supporting' also, the small
(ether) is nothing else but Brahman.
Prasiddhescha I.3.17 (80)
Also because of
the well-known meaning (of Akasa as Brahman the small Akasa
is Brahman).
Prasiddheh: of the well-known (meaning); Cha: also
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is continued.
Akasa has the settled meaning of Brahman. It is a well-known
fact in Sruti that Brahman is indicated by the term Akasa.
Therefore 'Daharakasa' also stands for Brahman.
We read in Chh. Up. VIII-14-1 "Akasa is the revealer of
all names and forms". "All these beings take their origin
from Akasa alone" Chh. Up. I-9-1. "For who could breathe
if that Akasa (ether) were not bliss" Tait. Up. II-7. In
all these texts 'Akasa' stands for Brahman.
Itaraparamarsat sa
iti chen nasambhavat I.3.18 (81)
If it is said that
the other one (i.e. the individual soul) is meant on account
of a reference to it (made in a complementary passage) (we
say) no, on account of the impossibility.
Itara: the other one, that is the Jiva; Paramarsat: on account of reference; Sa: he (the individual soul); Iti: thus; Chet: if; Na: not; Asambhavat: on account of impossibility.
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is continued. We read
in the Chhandogya Upanishad - "Now that serene being, the
individual soul (Jiva) indeed which having risen above this
earthly body, and having reached the highest light, appears
in its true form, that is the Self: thus he spoke."
The Purvapakshin or the opponent says: As in the complementary
passage the individual soul is referred to, the small Akasa
of Chh. Up. VIII-1-1 is also the individual soul. "The word
'serenity' (Samprasada) which denotes the state of deep
sleep conveys the idea of the individual soul only. The
'rising from the body' also can be spoken of the individual
soul only whose abode is therefore 'the small Akasa'; this
denotes in the passage under discussion only the individual
soul, on account of reference to the ether."
This cannot be. In the first place the individual soul which
is limited by the internal organ and its other adjuncts,
cannot be compared with the all-pervading ether.
In the second place, the attributes like 'freedom from evil'
and the likes of this Akasa, referred to in the passage
under discussion, cannot be true of the individual soul.
Hence Brahman is meant in that passage.
Uttaracchedavirbhutasvarupastu I.3.19 (82)
If it be said that
for subsequent texts (it appears that the individual soul
is meant, we say that what is there referred to is) rather
(the individual soul in so far) as its real nature has become
manifest (i.e. as it is non-different from Brahman).
Uttarat: from the subsequent texts of the Sruti; Chet: if; Avirbhuta-svarupat: with its true
nature made manifest; Tu: but.
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is continued.
An objection is again raised by the Purvapakshin to justify
that the 'small Akasa' (Dahara) refers to the individual
soul. Prajapati at the outset declares that the Self, which
is free from sin and the like is that which we must try
to understand Chh. Up. VIII-7-1. After that he points out
that the seer within the eye i.e. 'the individual soul is
the Self', Chh. Up. VIII-7-3. He again explains the nature
of the same individual soul in its different states. "He
who moves about happy in dreams is the Self" Chh. Up. VIII-10-1.
"When a man being asleep, reposing, and at perfect rest
sees no dreams, that is the Self" Chh. Up. VIII-1l-1. The
qualifying terms 'Immortal, fearless' used in each of these
descriptions of the self show that the individual soul is
free from sin or evil and the like. Obviously the individual
soul is meant here because Brahman is free from the three
states viz. waking, dream and deep sleep. It is also said
to be free from evil. Therefore 'small Akasa' refers to
the individual soul or Jiva and not to Brahman.
The Sutra refutes this. The Sutra uses the expression "He
whose nature has become manifest". Prajapati finally explains
the individual soul in its true nature as identical with
Brahman. The reference is to the individual soul in its
true nature as identical with Brahman or, in other words,
who has realised his oneness with Brahman and not to the
individual soul as such. "As soon as it has approached the
highest light it appears in its own form. Then It is the
Highest Purusha" Chh. Up. VIII-12-3. The individual soul
is free from evil etc., when it becomes identical with Brahman
and not when it is enveloped by limiting adjuncts and remains
as the finite Jiva or embodied soul. Agency (Kartritva),
enjoying (Bhoktritva), like and dislike (Raga-dvesha) indicate
Jivahood. If these are removed the individual soul shines
as Brahman.
As long as the individual soul does not free itself from
Avidya (ignorance) in the form of duality and does not rise
to the knowledge of the Self or Brahman, whose nature is
unchangeable and Satchidananda which expresses itself in
the form 'I am Brahman', so long it remains as an individual
soul. The ignorance of the Jiva may be compared to the mistake
of a man who in the twilight mistakes a post for a man,
a rope for a serpent.
When it gives up the identification with the body, sense
organs and mind, when it realises its identity with the
Supreme Brahman it becomes Brahman itself whose nature is
unchangeable and Satchidananda, as is declared in Mun. Up.
III-2-9. "He who knows the highest Brahman becomes even
Brahman". This is the real nature of the individual soul
by means of which it arises from the body and appears in
its own real form.
Why a reference has at all been made to Jiva in this Section
treating of Dahara, you will find an answer in the following
Sutra.
Anyarthascha paramarsah I.3.20
(83)
And the reference
(to the individual soul) is for a different purpose.
Anyarthah: for a different purpose; Cha: and; Paramarsah: reference.
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is continued.
The reference to the individual soul has a different meaning.
The reference to the individual soul is not meant to determine
the nature of the individual soul, but rather the nature
of the Supreme Brahman. The reference to the three states
of the individual soul is meant not to establish the nature
of Jiva as such, but to show finally its real nature (Svarupa)
which is not different from Brahman.
Another objection is raised. The text describes this 'Dahara'
as occupying a very small space in the heart, and because
'Dahara' is so small and Jiva is also small, therefore,
'Dahara' must be Jiva mentioned subsequently. The following
Sutra gives a suitable answer.
Alpasruteriti chet
taduktam I.3.21 (84)
If it be said that
on account of the scriptural declaration of the smallness
(of the ether) (the Brahman cannot be meant) (we say that)
that has already been explained.
Alpasruteh: because of the Sruti declaring its smallness; Iti: thus; Chet: if; Tat: that; Uktam: has already been explained.
The argument in support of Sutra 14 is concluded.
The Purvapakshin or the objector has stated that the smallness
of the ether stated by the Sruti "In it is that small ether"
does not agree with Brahman, that it may however refer to
the Jiva or the individual soul which is compared to the
point of a goad. This has already been refuted. It has already
been shown under I.2.7 that smallness may be attributed
to Brahman for the purpose of meditation (Upasana). The
same refutation is to be applied here also. That smallness
is contradicted by that Sruti text which compares the ether
within the heart with the universal ether "As large as is
this ether so large is the ether within the heart".
|