28 Oct 2017
[This is the third part called as Tatva Bhaaga or philosophy of God, which consists of five chapters: Parabrahma (unimaginable God), Avataara (incarnation), Vibhuti (miracles), Samanvaya (co-relation of religions) and Samaadhaana (clarification of all doubts). This first chapter deals about Parabrahma, the unimaginable God.]
[Brahma means the greatest by itself (svaartha or in its own sense) and makes other than itself (created soul) as greatest by total merge (in preranaartha or in the promoter sense). Brahma is the greatest in a category. If the category is this creation, God being the greatest becomes Brahma. But, God as the original unimaginable God, who is beyond this creation is not in the creation and hence this word gets the problem. The greatest item should exist in the category. Brahma means the Veda also, which is the greatest among all scriptural books existing as a book in the category. When the unimaginable God is mediated and exists in the creation, such mediated God can be called as the greatest in the creation. But, to call the unimaginable God, who is beyond this creation as Brahma becomes inconvenient. In the case of unimaginable God, you have to enter the prefix ‘Para’, which means beyond this creation. Moreover, there are several categories in the creation and the greatest in each category can be called as Brahma. In this way, the Veda, penance, food, mind, intelligence, bliss etc., are called as Brahma independently. To distinguish the unimaginable God from all these greatest items among their categories, the word ‘Parabrahma’ is useful.]
[This word was used by Shankara as God expressed through silence because such absolute God is beyond imagination and hence no word can be expressed to indicate Him (maunavyaakhyaapara Parabrahmatattvam…). The Gita also used this word as the ultimate cause without beginning (Anaadimat Param Brahma). The Gita also said that the unimaginable God can’t be said either existent or non-existent (Nasat tat naasaduchyate). This means that since the unimaginable God actually exists, you can’t say that He is non-existent. Even though He exists, since He is unimaginable, you can’t say that He is existent because you always say an item existing only when you understand it. The existence of unimaginable God is absolute plane (Paramaarthasattaa) and the non-existence of unimaginable God means the non-existence of imaginable item of relative plane (Vyavahaara sattaa).]
[The Veda says in several statements that God is unimaginable: words and mind return (yatovaacho…), not attainable by intelligence (na medhayaa…), beyond logic (atarkyah…), know that He is unknowable (avijnaatam…) etc.]
[The Gita also says that nobody can know God (maamntuveda na kashchana). In the Brahma Sutras also, the first sutra says that God shall be enquired. Then, the second sutra says that creator of this world is God. This information is about associated characteristic (tatastha lakshnam) of God like saying that the enquired cow is on the bank of the river. This doesn’t speak about any inherent characteristic of nature (svarupa lakshnam) like saying that the cow is red in color. The reason for such saying is that the nature of God is totally unimaginable. The three authoritative scriptures in spiritual knowledge are the Veda, the Gita and the Brahma Sutras called as sacred triad (Prasthaana Traya).]
[The unimaginable nature of God is experienced through the unimaginable events called as miracles as exhibited by the human incarnations of God and His climax devotees. These unimaginable events exhibited to the naked eyes satisfy the basic authority of perception (pratyaksha pramaanam), which is the unbeatable authority to any human being starting from uneducated to the greatest scholar in this world. Of course, experience of two moons in the sky by a person having defect in eyes need not stand here as obstruction since all the public is visualizing the miracle. The miracle can be differentiated from the magic, which can be shown on a specific stage only with certain pre-arrangements behind the screen. Miracle is seen anywhere by anybody. Hence, the experience of miracle is an authority. These unimaginable miracles indicate their unimaginable source called as unimaginable God.]
[Anuhyam means unimaginable and atarkyam means beyond logic or imagination since uha (imagination) is an alternative word of tarka (logic) as told in the dictionary (Tarka Uhah). This means that unimaginable God is beyond scientific analysis since science means true imagination or conclusion arrived through logic. This is very important authority that decides the ultimate truth in any debatable subject. This separates truth from false and is called as the analysis differentiating truth from false when both are mixed like milk and water. There are four authorities: Shruti or the Veda, Smruti or the Gita and other secondary scriptures, Yukti or analysis of truth to separate it from false (sadasat viveka) and experience or Anubhava. Among these four, the third is very important, which alone is taken as the pre-requisite for spiritual knowledge or Brahma Vidyaa by Shankara along with other three pre-requisites, which are: 1) patience etc., (six good qualities called as saadhana shatguna sampatti), 2) no aspiration for fruit here and there and 3) desire for salvation.]
[Science of these days is nothing but the logic of earlier days. Science or logic is the subject in which all of the items of the creation are analyzed carefully to be rejected to be called as unimaginable God (Neti neti – Veda). Tarka also means the subject that analyzes all the components of this creation (Tarkyante padaarthaah asmin iti). Science is more developed than theoretical logic due to constant association with experimental proof. The old logic felt that God is awareness. But, the present science proves that awareness is only a specific work form of functioning nervous system in which the inert energy is converted into specific work called as awareness. This helps us to reject awareness as the unimaginable God. A philosopher (Vedaanti) in the earlier days was always a scholar in logic (Tarka Shastra) as we observe the commentaries of all preachers. This sharp logic or scientific analysis only brings value to the spiritual knowledge since it exposes the basic truth without any hesitation or partiality.]
[Science of atheists may blindly reject miracles as magic without impartial analysis. But, the unimaginable boundary of the universe is acceptable discussion of science. This universe constitutes components, which are limited or finite. The joint sum of finite components must have a finite boundary only since the boundary also consists of sides of finite components only. The components may be in very large number so that the boundary of the total sum (world) can’t be reached even by the imagination of human beings. This analysis helps us to understand the concept of infinity as the sum of very large number of finite components only so that infinity means unimaginable (in the sense of unreachable and not in the sense of beyond imagination) finite boundary of finite universe only. Infinity straightly means unreachable boundary of very large sum of finite quantities only. The unreachable nature of the boundary of the sum of finite components makes the sum to appear as infinite, though it is not actually the infinite.]
[Science proposed the concept of constant expansion of universe, which only means that the diameter of universe is very large that can’t be touched even by your imagination. This means that you can never touch the unimaginable domain standing as the other side of boundary of imaginable creation like the soil standing as the other side of boundary of the ocean. The boundary of ocean can’t be again water only, which means that water is never ending entity. Hence, the boundary of the water can’t be the water itself, which should be different from water i.e., the soil of earth. Similarly, the domain after the boundary of imaginable creation can’t be the same imaginable entity and it can be only a totally different entity called as unimaginable domain or absolute God. The concept of infinity ends in the conclusion that the imaginable domain is very large so that its end, which is the beginning of unimaginable domain can never be touched (imagined). The infinity comes not because of the real endless universe, but, it results because of the unreachable (unimaginable) domain existing beyond the boundary of the imaginable universe! This logic alone gives the meaningful solution for infinity instead of saying that the imaginable universe is actually endless. A sum of finite components can never be endless since it must have both beginning and end. When Krishna said that His creation is endless, it only means that one cannot reach the end of the imaginable universe since unimaginable or unreachable God exists beyond such universe (nantosti mama… Gita).]
[It is said by the Veda that space is generated from the unimaginable God (Aatmana aakaashah). The space can’t exist before its generation in the unimaginable God. If it exists in God even before its generation, it means that God didn’t generate the space, which already existed in Him. If space is absent in God, it means that God is beyond space by not having spatial dimensions and hence side, area and volume of God do not exist. Such entity having no space can never be imagined by any intelligence at any time even after concentrated imagination for millions and millions of years! Our intelligence and imagination cannot go beyond space and hence, God is always beyond our imagination. God is beyond the three dimensional model of space and time. Einstein explained anything of creation by the four dimensional space and time. God, the creator is beyond His creation.]
[Space doesn’t mean absence of everything. It means very subtle energy. The Veda says in one place that the first creation of God is space (Atmana aakaashah) and the same Veda says in another place that the first creation of God is inert energy (Tat tejo asrujata). This means that space is something (which doesn’t mean nothing), which is subtle energy only. Hence, space is a part of creation only and creation means something but not nothing. The bending of space around the boundary of the object is spoken in science. Something only can bend and nothing can bend. Hence, the first creation (space or subtle energy) went on modifying itself in to different forms like awareness and matter etc. There is no fundamental difference between space and universe, which constitutes different forms of subtle inert energy only. If we say that space is generated from God, we can say that this universe is generated from God. When a stream of smoke is generated from fire and if you follow the track of smoke, you will have to meet its generator, the fire, in the end boundary of the smoke. Similarly, if you follow the diameter of the universe, you will have to reach unimaginable God, who is the generator of this universe after its boundary. If you say that the diameter of universe is exactly 200 billion light years, naturally a question comes:- what is existing beyond such diameter? Will there be a compound wall on which it is written that space ends here? In such case, what exists beyond that compound wall? The answer for this is that unimaginable domain (God) exists beyond that compound wall. The edge of the universe is also made of the same components as the core of the universe is made of. Hence, the edge or boundary of the universe is imaginable and finite, but, beyond that edge, unimaginable God exists, who can’t be touched by your imagination. All this concept is simply told as the constant expansion of universe as you travel along its diameter to reach its boundary!]
[The uncertainty principle of Heisenberg says that when a value is indeterminable due to the incapability of calculating instrument, it does not mean that the value does not exist in reality. When the electron is revolving in its orbit, its position and simultaneous momentum co-exist in reality even though both values can’t be simultaneously calculated by the incapability or crudeness of electron microscope. Similarly, if the diameter of universe is so large that it is beyond the scope of calculating brain or instrument, it doesn’t mean that the diameter is really infinite meaning that it is really endless. In reality, the value of the diameter exists as given as 200 billion light years. This is practically undeterminable based on perception, but, the value exists in reality. Existence in reality is independent of the incapability of understanding (calculation). The unreachable end of the universe is expressed by the constant expansion of universe, which is not in real sense since the universe (sum of very large number of finites) has certainly its end. Similarly, we may not understand exactly the nature of God, but, in reality God exists with His real nature that is unimaginable (undeterminable) to us.]
[There is no difference between space and full-fledged universe, like no difference between gold and its jewellery. Space is the first basic component (prathama bhutam) of this universe, which is made of five elements (space, air, fire, water and solid earth). When we say that this universe is created, maintained and finally dissolved, these three points apply naturally to space also. Hence, space must have beginning, centre and end. Infinite space means only very large space, which does not mean really the endless space. Space is created, maintained and dissolved by God and this needs the necessity of beginning, centre and end of space. The scripture says that this universe is perceived, but, appears to be infinite due to very large extent (pratyakshopyaparicchedyo, mahyaadirmahimaa tava).]
[Einstein says that space and time are conventional, which mean that they are not absolute reality but, relatively myth (mithyaa). Relative means that which exists with reference to the existence of something else and doesn’t exist by itself independently. The pot exists with reference to the existence of the mud in it. If mud is absent, pot is also absent. Mud is the absolute reality and pot is relative reality. The bond energies between mud particles maintaining the shape of pot (Ramanuja says that the shape exists since we can bring water with pot and not with lump of mud!) are to be included in the mud only for the sake of convenience since unimaginable God (compared to mud with bond energies) is only one and there is no second unimaginable item in the creation for exact comparison. Einstein says that space relatively exists with reference to matter. When the two walls of a room are destroyed, the space between these two walls also disappeared. You are not experiencing the disappearance of this space because other space between the two external compound walls exists. This means that if all the matter disappears, space also disappears proving that the existence of space is not absolute reality, but, only relative reality. Disappearance of space is totally unimaginable leading to the concept of unimaginable God as cause of space. When the effect (pot or space) disappears, its cause (mud or unimaginable God) appears. Shankara exactly told this concept in His theory of relative reality (Mithyaavaada or Mayaavaadaa). By this, the conclusion comes that universe is also a relative reality being the modification of space or subtle energy. The quantisation of space also supports that space is something and not nothing that exits and disappears in the plane of relative reality like any other component of this plane. In ancient logic, space is considered as an element (bhutam) among the five elements composed of very small quantities of space called as spatial atoms (aakaasha parammanu).]
[This relative reality or space or creation is neither really existent nor really non-existent! You should not immediately mistake that self-contradiction is resulting by this. If the reference to both these concepts are one and the same, certainly, the self-contradiction of the same concept is to be accepted. But, the reference for the existence of creation is the soul whereas the reference for non-existence of the creation is different, which is the absolute reality or unimaginable God. Since there are two different references (one for each concept), the two concepts are not contradicting each other. If you say that world is non-existent, it is with reference to the absolute unimaginable God in absolute plane, which alone is attributed to Shankara (Shankara mentioned both absolute and relative planes). If you say that world is existent, it is with reference to the soul (or mediated God taken as medium only) in relative plane. Ramanuja and Madhva confined to relative plane only (fixing God as mediated God only) since preaching of spiritual knowledge is always with reference to souls only and not absolute God.]
[Ramanuja and Madhva feel that if unimaginable God in absolute plane is introduced to a soul, the soul, unable to understand the unimaginable nature of God may take a negative direction to say that God does not exist. This unimaginable nature of God was introduced by the Veda (Ysyaamatam…) to a disciple called as Nachiketa and in doing so the Veda also feared about the resulting atheism (Naayamastiitichaike). The existence of unimaginable domain beyond the boundary of universe and the existence of genuine miracles prove that unimaginable God exists in reality (Astityevopalabdhavyah- Veda).]
[Science says that the inert root subtle cosmic energy is the ultimate cause of this universe and same theory was told by atheistic (Nirishvara) philosophy of Saamkhya in which the root cause is the inert cosmic energy called as pradhaana. They said that the root inert cause is an equilibrium stage between the three qualities of awareness (Sattvam, Rajas and Tamas), which means that even awareness is generated from inert energy only in the process of evolution (Annat purushah) and hence, the ultimate cause is only inert energy. Sage Charvaka also says that awareness is an activity generated from inert energy only, which (inert energy) is generated by digestion of food. Science also says that awareness is a specific work form of inert energy in functioning nervous system. Hence, there is a perfect co-relation between atheistic Charvaka, atheistic Kapila (founder of atheistic Saamkhyaa) and atheistic science in the main point that inert energy, (which is the cause of awareness also) is the root cause of this entire creation and not God. This is the explanation of the theory of the opponent (Purvapaksha) attacking that God is not the cause of this creation. In such concept, they have gone up to space or subtle energy only from which all this universe emerged out. These people are doing endless travel along the diameter of space unable to reach its cause, called as unimaginable God and hence, conclude that the space itself is the ultimate cause of creation.]
[The Veda says that the root cause of this creation wished to create this universe for its entertainment (Tadaikshata). In such case, the root cause is not inert because the Veda says that the root cause wished to create this world. If the root cause is inert, how it can wish as said in the Veda? This is the meaning of the Brahma Sutra (ikshaternaashabdam) opposing such theory of atheistic science. This Sutra is used as the answer split in the following way: ikshateh= since the root cause is said to have a wish to create world, na = the root cause can’t be inert space or subtle energy, ashabdam= such inert cause is not told in the Veda since the root cause is awareness wished to create. All the three divine preachers have interpreted in the above manner so that the inert subtle energy (Pradhaana) is refused to be the root cause of this world.]
[This is good as far as the context of refusing the inert entity to be the cause of this creation. The basis for such rejection is the Veda saying that the root cause wished to create. Hence, the conclusion was that the root cause must be awareness and not inert energy. Negation of inert energy is alright. But, it is not fully correct to say that the root cause is awareness (since it wished) because the root cause is beyond both awareness and inert energy and is called as unimaginable God. If the root cause is awareness, the awareness is also modification of inert energy only as a specific wok in the functioning nervous system. To establish this totally correct concept, Datta Swami likes to interpret this sutra in the following manner: ikshateh = if you say that the root cause is awareness because of its wish mentioned in the Veda, na = such version is not correct because, ashabdam= the root cause is unimaginable and can’t be expressed by a word (shabdam) like awareness also since every word indicates imaginable item only.]
[The unimaginable God can do anything by His unimaginable power. Hence, He wished and He need not be the awareness due to wish. The worldly logic is that anything can wish provided that is awareness. But, the unimaginable God is beyond worldly logic and wishes even though He is not awareness. The unimaginable God can burn anything and due to this He need not be fire. He can burn anything by His unimaginable power without Himself being the fire or energy. The second statement (burning anything) itself proves that He is beyond inert and you need not specifically say that He is awareness and hence, not inert. The statement saying that He is beyond inert and awareness also clearly means that He is not inert. If you say that this is a man, neither lion nor bird, it means that this is not a bird. In order to say that this is not a bird, you need not say this is lion!]
[If you say that awareness is root cause and hence the same awareness entered this effect (creation) as souls, the above opponents will say that the inert materials of this creation are also due to the entry of inert root cause since cause enters its product like mud entering the pot. They will also say that they are finding the causal space in its product, the universe, and hence the inert space is the root cause! You may ask that if unimaginable God is the cause of the universe, but, you are not finding anything as unimaginable in this imaginable creation based on the necessity of entry of cause in to effect. We can answer this by saying that unimaginable miracles of incarnations are also found in this creation, which satisfy the necessity of entry of cause into effect. You may say that the unimaginable God is also bound by the worldly logic of entry of cause in to its effect. But, we differ in this basic point, which is that the unimaginable God enters this creation as per His free will only and not bound by the worldly logic that cause shall appear in its effect. We can support our point by saying that this entry of cause in to effect is worldly logic and need not bind the unimaginable God, who is beyond the worldly logic. The Vedic statement of entry of unimaginable God in to world as incarnation (Tadevaanu praavishat) associated with another Vedic statement that He is beyond worldly logic (Naishaa tarkena) explains this concept of entry into world by His free will and not by the force of the rule of cause-effect logic.]
(To be continued...)
★ ★ ★ ★ ★