More Advaita Questions-IV

Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only

Realized Soul: If you can learn from God regarding His state of continuous entertainment from the creation containing both pleasant and tragic scenes, you have become God in this very important aspect. God’s super power and producership of the world etc are not at all required. The spectatorship and entertainment is the only essence of this creation (Ekaki na ramate—Veda). The spectator of the ‘movie’ can enjoy equally with God even though the spectator has not produced the movie [creation]. The producership of the movie has no relevance to the enjoyment. In this aspect, the soul and Brahman become one and the same (Advaita). When the sole purpose of the creation is entertainment and that is fulfilled, even without the producership of the world, you are unnecessarily canceling the producership of God by making the world unreal. You have done this because you cannot be God if God’s producership is real; since you cannot produce the world. Now since the very essence of the production of the world is attained by you through the equal status of complete entertainment with God, you need not do this unnecessary crime.

Petitioner (purva pakshi): You said that the entertainment becomes continuous if you realize the unreality of the world. As You said, there are three levels of unreality of the world. At the first level, forms and feelings are unreal and this level is called as Maya. The second higher level is Maha Maya, in which matter, awareness, light, heat etc are unreal. The third highest level of unreality is called as Mula Maya, in which the primary energy is unreal. For the soul only the lowest level called as Maya is unreal. The second and third levels are equal and higher levels respectively and therefore cannot be unreal for the soul. For God all the three levels are unreal. The world may be unreal for God because it is totally unreal at the three levels. For the soul, only the one lower level is unreal where as the other two levels of the world are real. Therefore for the soul the world cannot be totally unreal. Thus, God can have continuous entertainment due to the total unreality of the world for Him. For soul the world is partially unreal (one third) and therefore the soul cannot be continuously and deeply entertained like God. Therefore to keep equality in the entertainment of God and the realized soul, you have to at least say that the realized soul is Brahman (God). Otherwise you are making God selfish. In our theory Brahman is not selfish, because as soon as realization comes, the soul becomes Brahman and the world becomes unreal in all the three levels.

Mediator (madhyamika): For entertainment the aspect of producer-ship of God is already proved to be unnecessary. Therefore this aspect does not strengthen the problem of the petitioner to any extent. Even though it is agreed that the producership does not disturb the continuous entertainment, the degree of the reality of the world cannot be overlooked as raised by the petitioner. When the basis of continuous entertainment is the unreality of the world and if there is a difference between God and soul with regard to the basis itself, how can the continuous entertainment, which is the result of this basis, be same for both God and the soul? If the result is to be equal, the basis also should be equal. Therefore the petitioner’s objection cannot be overruled.

Respondent (siddhanti): The entertainment is always limited only to the third level. When you are watching or acting in a drama, the entertainment of the spectator is completely based on the unreal forms, which are the unreal roles, unreal dialogues and unreal actions, which are only unreal feelings. The second and third levels (Maha Maya and Mula Maya) are not at all related to the entertainment. In the drama the low level of Maya is related to the story, dialogues, actions and the emotions that are expressed in the drama. All these items come under the category of feelings, which are only forms of awareness. The roles like king, queen, servant etc are also unreal like the unreal forms of matter. When the drama is stopped, all these items disappear. The dresses used for the roles, the actors, the stage etc remain for some time, and can be removed from that place. This is the second level of Maha Maya where matter, awareness etc exist as real items up to the final dissolution of the world. The ground, on which the stage is built up exists permanently, which is the level of Mula Maya. When you see only the higher [Maha Maya] and highest levels [Mula Maya], the entertainment does not start at all. If you see the ground, the stage, the dresses and the actual actors, who are going to play the roles, the entertainment has not started at all in your mind. Therefore the higher and highest levels are irrelevant to the entertainment like the producership. The whole entertainment is limited only to the third, lowest level (Maya), which is a common unreality for both God and the soul. The realization of the unreality of the third, lowest level can be attained equally by both God and the soul and therefore entertainment can be equal for both God and the soul. The unreality of the world preached by Shankara is thus limited only to this third level, which constitutes the various unreal forms of matter. Feelings, which are forms of awareness, arise only based on the unreal difference between these unreal forms. For example: One girl is good looking and another girl is not good looking. Beauty and ugliness are the names of these two unreal forms. Based on these unreal forms of matter, the feelings of love and dislike are generated. The basis of these feelings is only the form of the body of the girl, which is just matter. If both die at the same time and the bodies disintegrate, the matter, which is the reality in both is one and the same. Now the feelings are not different when the matter in both the bodies is realized to be the same. Entertainment is essentially a feeling. Similarly, suppose one girl is red in colour and other girl is black. The light, which is the common energy in both the colours, is one and the same. Just because of the difference in the wavelengths of energy, the different colours are seen. After death the common light energy mixes with the cosmic energy and the colours are unreal. Thus in the second level, matter and light exist as realities for the soul, which do not cause any feeling. When matter, light, awareness etc become the primary energy, then the awareness itself disappears and even the basis for feelings does not exist. There is no need of even dreaming to get entertainment at that highest level. Thus you have assigned names to the different unreal forms, which give rise to feelings. Thus the unreal names and unreal forms constitute the essence of the whole entertainment. Shankara says that the world of these unreal names and unreal forms is unreal. The world in this basic level of Maya causes various feelings and thoughts like love for your family members, neutrality to others etc. If this Maya can be crossed, then knowledge and love for God can be achieved. Since anything related to God is real, both divine knowledge and devotion are real. The form of God is also real, based on the same reason. All these apply to devotees also because the devotees are related to God. Therefore the love for the form of God and His devotees is completely real since the base (God) with which they are related, is real. Therefore the God in human form and the devotee related to God, become the items of reality and significance. Thus in this sense too, the God in human form and devotees attain the equal status of reality. Since both God and devotees cross Maya, the entertainment is equal to them.

Petitioner: The soul (awareness) creates an imaginary world in a daydream. That world is a bundle of imaginations, which are produced directly from the soul. The soul has generates that world, controls any item of that world with full independence and finally dissolves the whole world into itself. The soul also generates an imaginary space [within itself]. All the same aspects are seen in the case of God too. Creation is the imaginary world of God, which is a bundle of imaginations of God. God generates, independently controls and finally dissolves the world into Himself. The space in the world is also generated by God. Since we don’t find any difference between the effects, the cause in both the cases must be one and the same. Therefore the soul or awareness is directly Brahman.

Mediator: Regarding the effects, there should be no opposition because the Veda admits all these aspects. The respondent has only limited scope for the analysis of the cause in both the cases to decide whether the cause of the two is the same or not.

Respondent: We do not object to the effects, since all the Vedic statements stand as authority for all these points. However, we raise one point that if the soul and God are one and the same, all the effects must also be one and the same. In that case, the soul should act like God in the external world too. The soul should have the same control on the items of the external creation as the God has. The Veda says that God controls the sun but the soul is controlled by the sun. Another fundamental objection is that the awareness (soul) is the product of combined efforts of the digestive, respiratory and nervous systems. The food in the digestive system is oxidized by the oxygen supplied from the respiratory system. Inert energy is released, which enters the brain and nervous system. The awareness is generated by the combined effort of all the three systems. If this awareness and God are one and the same, God must also be the product of those systems in His background. When God is the effect of some other systems, He cannot be the root cause of everything. Therefore you have to show these three systems in the macro level, which generate the awareness or God from whom the universe can come out as an imaginary world. In that case the soul must control this external world, which is his own imagination since he has become Brahman by realization. We do not have any objection if you take the soul as a simile to understand the effect that is generated from God. However, since God and the link through which the world is generated are unimaginable, we can only understand the state of the effect with reference to God. From this simile you can understand that the world is unreal with reference to God just like the imaginary world with reference to the soul. In the case of the soul, we can analyze the effect (imaginary world) as energy. The link, which is the process of production as work can be also realized as energy. The soul can also be realized to be a special form of work, which is also energy. However, in the case of God, except the effect (external world), neither the link nor God Himself can be analyzed. This is the limitation of the simile. The simile always is valid only in certain aspects and cannot be extended in all the points. Therefore the soul can stand as a simile in certain aspects. The differences prove that both the compared items are not one and the same. Here you have taken the awareness as a direct cause of the imaginary world. But on scientific analysis, it can be proved that awareness is essentially the inert energy and here the creator, process of creation and created energy are all essentially inert energy. The same inert energy, in association with some special technology [nervous system] is converted into awareness. Therefore the awareness is responsible for the will [to create] and design of the imaginary world. The robot also imagines and plans with the help of various combinations of information that is fed to it. Regarding the soul too, the imagination is not original as that of God. The imagination of the soul is also based on the various probable combinations of parts of information collected from the world. Thus the basis of planning is also ruled out in inferring that God is awareness. The planning of God is unique and based on genuine creativity since no information of any part is available to Him before creation. Science has brought the robot as [an entity] exactly equal to the human being in the extent of creativity. But both the human being and the robot cannot stand before God due to the genuine and original creativity of God, which is unimaginable. The essence of awareness, which is inert energy, is responsible for the generation, maintenance and dissolution of the imaginary world. Therefore the word ‘awareness’ stands for the inert energy in its essential form and in a special form [of that energy], is called as awareness. Thus the soul is the material cause (Upadanam) and the design cause (Nimmitam) simultaneously. Similarly God is the root material cause as well as the root design cause of this world. However, here God is not directly the material cause, which may be misunderstood in the sense that God is modified [to form the creation] and is affected by all the changes of the world. Similarly if you say God is directly the design cause, God will be responsible for all good and bad deeds. In the case of the soul, the soul experiences all the happiness and misery because its material (awareness) is the material of the imaginary world. Since the soul is the designer of all the feelings, the soul becomes responsible for all good and bad intentions. However, in the case of God, God is neither affected by such experiences and nor is He responsible for the good and bad feelings in the world. Therefore the material, which is the inert energy that is produced from God, is modified into the world. The will (awareness in essential form) that is produced from God has designed this world. Neither can you say that God is inert energy, nor can you say that God is awareness because the link between the cause and effect is again unimaginable in this case. In the case of the soul, the imaginary world and the soul are both imaginable items. The link between them is also imaginable, and therefore analysis can prove that the soul has to be responsible for every action and for the experience of every fruit. God is unimaginable and the world is imaginable. The link between an unimaginable and an imaginable item must be unimaginable. Therefore you cannot assign the responsibility of any work or the experience of any fruit in the world to God. Due to the unimaginable link, God has no responsibility for the work and the fruit. Yet, the world is created by God alone (Kartaramapi Sarvasya Viddhyakartaram avyayam—Gita). Even if you say that the imaginary world cannot affect the soul, it is not so. The good and bad feelings are said to have fruits to be enjoyed by the soul in the upper world. The reason for this is that the soul is awareness and the feelings are also made of awareness. Therefore the imaginations have equal status with the awareness. A golden ring and a lump of gold that is extracted from that ring, have equal weights. However, in the case of God, we know that the effect is a golden ring but the cause is not gold; it is unimaginable. Therefore the material of the world even in the deepest level (inert energy) is not the material of God. In that case, the concept of relativity too cannot be confirmed. The concept of relativity needs the knowledge of the material and its form. For example, gold is the absolute reality and the ring is the relative reality. Thus the concept of relativity gives the knowledge of the process of generation. Here, since the knowledge of the material of the cause is not known, we cannot logically arrive at the conclusion of the concept of relativity. Since the world cannot control itself by itself, the cause is inferred. The scriptures have mentioned the existence of the Cause and thus form the basis of [enquiry about] God.

Petitioner: The scriptures can be imaginations of some poets. You can call the world itself as God, for which no other cause is needed. This is the philosophy of science too, for which you are giving so much value. If we observe the world, there is no need of any cause for it because it is a self-sufficient system. The theory of probability can be an alternative for the necessity of the designer and this theory is again in science alone. You said that science can be used to explain the world. Therefore using science, you can prove that the world is designed by probability and is controlled by the same theory of probability. Similarly the destruction can be explained by probability. Of course we can accept inert energy as the material cause and the material that maintains the world and the force that destroys the world. Without awareness, we can arrive at answers by associating the items of the world with the probability of collisions and energetic considerations of reactions as explained in science. Even the ancient Indian logic says that atoms guided by probability (Adrishtam) create this world and the designs are attributed only to probability without the need of a designer. Therefore both inference and scripture have gone into the dustbin. The theory of evolution as proposed by Darwin can completely explain the production and development of awareness into mind and intelligence in course of time, based on the requirements of nature. The robot with simultaneously working microprocessors proves the production of awareness and thoughts. The information in the chip is always from external world. Even if you believe in previous births, the bundle of information (Samskaras) was also fed from the external world alone. Therefore the external feeding of the information into the chip is common. Thus all the aspects are answered by science. I [Advaitin] was actually an atheist (Buddhist or Purvamimansaka) and was a believer of this concept. I was converted to an Advaita philosopher by this Shankara through some intellectual trick. Shankara convinced me that I am God. Since I exist, I accepted that God also exists. However I still remain an atheist. Even as an Advaita philosopher, there is no God other than me. As per science, I am a part of the creation, called as God. Therefore, Advaita and science are one and the same. I have not crossed the limits of the world. I have only changed my name as God.

Respondent: Your whole argument is un-debatable because it is concentrated only within the limits of the world. Probability can certainly replace the designer. The cosmic inert energy associated with the theory of probability can explain every aspect of the world without the necessity of God. Therefore inference can be easily thrown out. We cannot contradict you if you say that the Veda is an imagination of the sages, who were poets. We cannot give any special validity to the Veda saying that it was told by God and therefore it has special validity. Now since God Himself has disappeared, the Veda cannot be a special authority. If the story had been only this much, certainly there could be no answer from our side. However, before answering this objection, I would like to remind you that science is completely based on experimental evidence. Experimental evidence is only derived from perceived objects and perceived phenomena. Therefore before hearing My answer, I should reconfirm that both of you are standing on science which is based on perception. Unless you both reassure Me on this aspect, we will not give our answer.

Petitioner and Mediator: If the phenomena are perceivable and the objects have the same status as that of objects existing in this world, we will accept your answer.

Respondent: My answer is certainly based on perceivable phenomena and perceivable objects, which have exactly equal status with the phenomena and objects existing in this world. There are several people who exhibit supernatural powers as miracles. The production of the material [spontaneous materialization] is perfectly perceived and the material produced is as real as any object in this world. The existence of the materialized object is equal to the existence of any other object in this world. Therefore the unimaginable power, which is beyond science, is established. You have to accept the existence of unimaginability (Maya) and thereby the possessor of the unimaginable power (God) has to be accepted. Certainly, you have to recognize the existence of some item (either power or power and its possessor) beyond the spatial dimensions of this world. Thus the exhibition of miracles establishes the existence of something beyond this world and thus the scripture is not poetry and gains validity. The human incarnation establishes the validity of the scripture through such miracles. Jesus said that He has come down to fulfill whatever was told in the scripture. For the existence of this unimaginable power, the human incarnation Himself is not required. Even devotees exhibit such power. Once the existence of something above science is realized and once the scripture becomes proved to be valid, there will be quest for further discussion on the subject of the scriptures. To create such fundamental quest, the human incarnation is not necessary. It is at the very fundamental level and this basic concept is meant for every normal human being. Therefore God has given such super powers to devotees at all levels so that the fundamental faith and quest on the subject is ignited in every human being. The human incarnation is very rare and cannot cater to all human beings at such fundamental levels. He comes down mainly to give the final solutions to the discussions done on the subject, based on this quest. This is the reason why God is gives super powers to several people whether they are good or bad. The propagation of this fundamental concept is to be done at a very broad level. The Gita says that wherever miracles are found, they denote the existence of the super power, from which such sparks have come (Yadyat Vibhutimat Sattvam…). The superpower denotes the possessor of the power (Mayinamtu—Gita, Indro Mayabhih—Veda).

Mediator: Do you mean to say that every cheap fellow exhibiting such powers (Kshudra Upasaka) is God?

Respondent: The verse in the Gita says that the potentiality or power (Sattvam) that is showing the miracle (Vibhuti) is a spark of the infinite super power of God. The possessor of that spark is neither God nor a spark of God. A merchant has a hundred diamonds. Somebody argued with him that there is no diamond. The merchant ordered his servent to bring a diamond from the box and show it to that fellow. The servant did the same. This does not mean that the servent is the owner of the diamond. It also does not mean that the servent who brought one diamond has 1/100^th share of the wealth of the merchant. The possessor of that power may be a devotee or may even be a demon. The point is limited only to the exhibition of existence of the diamond. The subject regarding the ownership of the diamond is a subsequent topic, which constitutes spiritual knowledge. Therefore the exhibition of miracles is also an aspect of the spiritual knowledge. A mere scholar cannot show the miracle. A demon [who can do miracles] cannot deliver knowledge. Suppose Ravana is both a scholar and possessor of miracles. He does not have divine love. He tortured devotees of the entire world. He did not have bliss, which is continuous happiness. He was without happiness and worried on several occasions. The possessor of bliss and love must also transfer the same to others. However, he transferred fear and misery to several people. Therefore all these aspects eliminate the non-God items and reveal the real God. However, remember, all these are only characteristics of the medium and not God directly because God is unimaginable. They direct you to the address of the Lord with collective effort. Thus special knowledge (Prajnanam Brahma), miracles (Satyakamah), love (Rasovaisah) and bliss (Anando Brahma) are the signs revealed in the Veda. They indicate the address of the Lord.

Mediator: A devotee may also be mistaken as God due to his superpowers, divine knowledge, love and bliss. In that case, God is missed by a narrow margin because any higher level in these four levels can be taken as the highest level and thus the devotee may be mistaken as God [a devotee having fairly high levels of superpowers to do miracles, divine knowledge, love and bliss may be mistaken to be God, who possesses these four to the highest extent].

Respondent: If you mistake a devotee as God, there is no harm. After the human incarnation, the next address of God is only the devotee. God will fulfill all your requirements even through the devotee. God is more pleased with the fame of His devotee than His own fame. The above signs are mainly intended to isolate the demons and the scholars who twist the knowledge. Of course there is one miracle, which cannot be transferred to the devotee and is limited only to God. That is the creation, maintenance and dissolution of the universe. However, unfortunately, God cannot exhibit this miracle to any soul because to exhibit this miracle, first the entire universe including the primary cosmic energy should be dissolved by God. If that is done, the individual does not exist any more and hence cannot be a witness to the dissolution. When the universe is created again, the individual who does not exist before creation cannot witness the process of creation. Arjuna asked Krishna for this single miracle i.e. the real proof of God. However, God only gave Arjuna a vision of this (Vishwarupam) as there is no other way than this. Thus Arjuna confirmed that Krishna was God by this miracle. Otherwise, Arjuna was thinking that Krishna being a genius, was delivering the special knowledge based on His scholarship of the Vedas and Shastras.

Petitioner: If the respondent has established God, I have no objection to accept God if I am that God.

Mediator: To call yourself as God, the respondent has already given the objection that in that case, God would need the existence of biological systems to be the awareness [which is the essential nature of the individual]. Therefore the petitioner cannot continue his claim.

Petitioner: Awareness can also exist without the background of these biological systems. At the time of death, the soul leaves the body and still has awareness. Therefore awareness exists without the association of these biological systems. Awareness is an independently existing item. When the same soul re-enters another body, the same awareness continues. Thus awareness is eternal and does not require the systems. The awareness in the body may disappear after death but the awareness in the soul should not disappear if it has to experience the punishments given by the messengers of Yama [in hell] after the soul leaves the body [death].

Respondent: As soon as the soul comes out of this gross body, a new body covers the soul. The new body contains all the systems in a very subtle level. The Veda says that the soul coming out of the body does have another body, which contains a nervous system and respiratory system (Manomayah Prana Shariraneta). Therefore the awareness of the soul [after death; in hell] is from the new body called as the Yatana Shariram. The soul experiences the punishments through this body alone. The respiratory system needs a digestive system and thus very subtle matter is oxidized to release inert energy.

Mediator: A soul going to heaven is said not to have hunger and thirst (Ubhetirtva…Swargaloke—Veda). Therefore the digestive system is not necessary to supply the energy. Then, the nervous system cannot function. Still they should have awareness to enjoy the pleasures of the heaven. Therefore the awareness exists in the body going to heaven (Bhoga Shariram), which does not have these systems. Thus awareness is an independent item

Respondent: It is said that when souls go into the upper worlds, they take the solar rays as food (Suryoshma payenah). That means that energy is taken from solar energy. If the awareness were independent, there would be no need for supply of energy from outside. This means that the nervous system (Manomaya Kosha) must exist, into which energy enters directly and awareness is produced from it.

Petitioner: The angels have energetic forms (Divya Shariram), which do not contain any system, but still awareness is present. The angels do not ‘drink’ solar energy as you stated.

Respondent: Even in angels, the nervous system (Manomaya Kosa) exists and since their bodies are energetic reservoirs, there is no need of taking energy from outside. Let us assume that independent awareness exists in angels without the need of any system in the body. If that were so, the eternal awareness in the body of the angel must be God according to you. Then, why did Yama, one of the angels say that God is unknowable? He also said that even he cannot know God (Yasyamatam, kathametat vijaneyam—Veda). If you do not give value to this Vedic statement, then very angels you are talking about are gone because their existence is referred to only by the Veda.

Human Incarnation

The Advaita scholar comes fast if he finds the item, awareness. He will make other items unreal and the realty of the object becomes only awareness. He will limit himself to the same awareness, which is present in his human body. Since all the items except awareness are unreal, he will also remain as the awareness, which is the ultimate reality. Now he will say that the object and himself are one and the same. He is the owner of one lakh rupees [hundred thousand]. The other person is the owner of one crore rupees [ten million]. Now the Advaita scholar will say that the other person too, really has only one lakh and the other lakhs that he posseses are unreal. Now he [Advaitin] says that he and the other person are one and the same. He will never try to rise to the level of one crore. Hanuman, a monkey, who was the owner of just a hundred rupees [hundred rupees, is compared to the body of a monkey which is inferior to a human body], rose to that level [He became God, since the Lord made him the creator for the next cycle of creation]. This is a positive effort. The effort of Advaita philosopher is completely negative. He tries to bring down any richer man to his level saying that the extra riches of anyone are unreal. Even if everyone becomes equal to him, he is not worried because his sole aim is to see that no one is richer than him. He is not interested in his own rise, but there should be no person greater than him. He may not get any benefit but nobody should be benefited more than him. This is the basic psychology of human beings.

When any philosophy appears convenient to one’s psychology, such philosophy is accepted immediately. Nobody will want to leave that philosophy. Similarly, the Advaita philosopher has reduced Brahman to mere awareness, removing His post of Ishwara. The Advaita philosopher proposed that Brahman is the ultimate reality and Ishwara is only the relative reality and hence is unreal. Since everything except awareness becomes unreal, he is also reduced to awareness only in reality. Therefore he and Brahman become one in the ultimate reality. The Advaita philosopher should know that Brahman never retires from the post of Ishwara. Nobody can become Ishwara except Brahman. When the officer comes back to his house from the office, it does not mean that he has retired or resigned. Though the officer’s behaviour is not expressed by wearing the uniform or sitting in the office, the officer in the house is still an officer for all practical purposes. Similarly, when he is in the office as an officer, you cannot say that he is not the father of his child. Therefore the ultimate reality (Brahman) is Ishwara and the relative reality (Ishwara) is Brahman. The lump of the gold (ultimate reality) has the potentiality to become the gold ring. During the existence of ring, the same lump of gold is present. Thus in Ishwara, Brahman exists in totality. In Brahman, the potentiality to become always Ishwara exists. You say that the same Brahman becomes both Ishwara and the Jeeva just like the same gold becomes a ring and a crown. The gold present in the crown weighs one kilogram. The gold present in the ring weighs one gram. You say that the same gold (Brahman) is present in the ring (Jeeva) and the crown (Ishwara) and the difference between the crown and the ring is only in the design, which when separated from the gold is unreal. Therefore, the difference between Ishwara and Jeeva is unreal. In reality, only gold exists, which is the Brahman. However, in this simile, all the concepts are not clear. Since the design is a relative reality, the difference between the crown and ring can be unreal. Since it is totally unreal, the quantitative difference is also unreal. However, what about the difference in the quantities of the gold present in the ring and crown? Gold is the ultimate reality. Now the difference is in the ultimate reality.

Petitioner: Since space (relative reality) is unreal, the quantitative difference in the gold is unreal. Only qualitative similarity holds good. You have to treat the gold [in this similie] to be beyond space. Such example is not available in the relatively real world. Therefore awareness is above spatial dimensions and cannot have a quantitative difference.

Respondent: Any item, which is above spatial dimensions, cannot have even qualitative identification. If you say that the existence of Brahman alone is experienced as told by the Veda and then if you say that the similarity between the Jeeva and Ishwara is only the existence of some unknowable item, then you can only say that both Ishwara and Jeeva have ‘existence’ in common. This means that the common item of existence in both is Brahman. In that case how can you say that Brahman is awareness (Chit)? If you confine the Brahman only to the existence (Sat) of some common unknowable item, we have no objection. Since the item is unknown, even the existence of such unknown item has no meaning and cannot become called as a similarity. If the aspect of the similarity is unknown, it becomes meaningless to say that some unknown similarity exists. Moreover, the awareness is not mere existence of some unknowable item. It is an item that can be realized and thus we use the word self-realization (Atma Jnanam). Therefore apart from existence, the nature of the item is also known. We also differentiate awareness from inert items and thus awareness has defined boundaries that come under spatial dimensions. Then how can you say that awareness is above space? Therefore it is very clearly proved that awareness is an item that can be defined by spatial dimensions.

If you are very fond of the word Brahman, let the soul have that word as its name. We have no objection, because any greatest item in a category can be called as Brahman based on the root meaning. In fact, we too are very happy to call the soul as Brahman because the soul, even though it has several negative points that prevent its greatness, is the greatest in one point. In that point it can be said to be similar to Brahman. This similarity is that awareness is absent when isolated but still gives its experience. Brahman is unimaginable but gives the experience of its existence. The unimaginability and absence can be viewed as similar even though fundamentally, there is a vast difference. Absence means non-existence. Unimaginability means existence, which cannot be understood. In this point, the soul stands as an example to understand the Brahman. Therefore if you call the soul as Brahman, we will be happy to sacrifice that term, and we will call the Brahman [God] as Parabrahman from now onwards. It is just like the owner of one-lakh rupees being called as the owner of a crore. We will call the actual owner of a crore as a billionaire from now onwards. In fact, even this may be painful to you because in that case, you may want to be called as a billionaire. Therefore our new name for the owner of one crore is “The person beyond one crore.” Therefore the word Parabrahman [that which is beyond Brahman] does not have any positive meaning, to which you may again be attracted. It only has a negative meaning that it is something beyond yourself (Brahman). However, unfortunately, you do not agree to this proposal and want to stick only to the word Brahman.

You are saying that Ishwara means the Creator, Maintainer and Destroyer. You have limited Ishwara to this concept and pushed Him to the relative reality making Him unreal. You have clearly understood the reason, which is that you cannot become Ishwara by any path. This concept is built up by you so please stand on it. You say that Brahman is the word introduced in the Brahma Sutras as the ultimate reality. The characteristic of the Brahman is immediately revealed in the second Sutra as the creation, maintenance and dissolution of the world. If awareness is the real meaning of Brahman, then the second Sutra should have been immediately “That [Brahman] which is awareness.” If you say that this characteristic is only Tatastham [associated characteristic; not inherent characteristic], we have already answered this by saying that the Tatastham, which is constantly associated and not found in any other item can act as Swarupam [inherent characteristic]. If you say that the Swarupam or the inherent characteristic of Brahman is told in the fifth Sutra (as awareness), [then we say that] the context of the fifth Sutra is not to state the inherent characteristic of Brahman but the actual context is only denying inert items being mistaken as Brahman. Therefore giving importance to awareness and removing the importance of the potentiality of creation etc. is against theme of the Brahma Sutras. The theme of the Brahma Sutras is twisted by you because you possess mere awareness and you can never achieve the potentiality of creation in your lifetime. This twist is done by you only to call yourself as Brahman.

Petitioner: In the fifth Brahma Sutra, even though it is out of context, the conclusion is that Brahman is not an inert item but is awareness.

Respondent: In the fifth Sutra, awareness (Chit) is not mentioned. Only the will (Ikshateh) is mentioned. It means that Brahman has a will but it is not said that Brahman is awareness. Due to the presence of the will, inert items are rejected. However, it does not mean that awareness is selected [to be God]. If you say to one student that he has failed in the examination, it does not mean that the other student has passed. The indirect sense need not always be the direct meaning. In fact, this Sutra gives a broad step of the address of Brahman that enters the world as an incarnation. This means that Brahman enters into a living body and not an inert body because the program of the incarnation is to preach the knowledge. Even in the context of Brahman, It wished to create, as per the Veda. However, that does not mean that It is awareness. In the case of worldly items, such logical analysis will certainly prove the item to be awareness [that which wishes must be awareness]. But Brahman being above spatial dimensions, such worldly logic fails. Since Brahman is the source of every item (dravya), property (guna), form (rupa), action (karma), there is no objection to say Brahman did this or that. Brahman can do everything and therefore It wished to create.

Mediator: You have related the fifth Sutra to the incarnation of Brahman. Do you mean that the theme of all the Brahma Sutras relate with the incarnation of Brahman?

Respondent: Certainly all the Sutras can be related to the human incarnation [Krishna], which was present during the time of Vyasa. There is no difference between Brahman, Ishwara and the human incarnation (Krishna). Ishwara is in the relative reality and it is proved that He is simultaneously Brahman. Since both the human incarnation and Ishwara are in the same plane of reality, there is no objection to give homogeneous [identical] status to both. Thus the human incarnation is simultaneously Brahman and Ishwara. The human incarnation is before your eyes and the medium in which He is present is a human body and not the entire cosmos as in the case of Ishwara. The complication and repulsion is greater in case of the human incarnation. Therefore the enquiry is more necessary in this case. The second Sutra refers to the vision of Vishwarupam, in which Krishna showed the creation of the universe, its maintenance and its dissolution in the vision. This itself proves the common characteristic of both Brahman and Ishwara. The third Sutra says that the main aim of the human incarnation, which is to preach the spiritual knowledge (Shastram). The fourth Sutra says that the medium can be treated as Brahman due to the unity of the medium and Brahman without isolation (Samanvyat) like the electric current and the wire. The fifth Sutra says that the incarnation does not happen through an inert medium because awareness of the medium is required for preaching the spiritual knowledge. There is no need of any tension [or objection] in this interpretation because Vyasa himself [author of the Brahma Sutras] stressed that Lord Krishna is Brahman and Ishwara as seen in His Bhagavatam.

The human being cannot touch Brahman in the ultimate reality even on entering into more subtle bodies of energetic forms after death because even angels in that state have declared that they cannot understand Brahman. As far as the existence and experience of the unimaginable nature of Brahman is concerned, there is no objection. In fact such experience of the existence of the unimaginable nature of Brahman is given by the human incarnation only for the sake of humanity through unimaginable actions (miracles), unimaginable knowledge etc. Otherwise the very existence of the Brahman based on the scriptures would be thrown out by the atheists as mere poetry. You cannot touch Brahman even in poetry because it is beyond the imagination of any soul since it is above space. When the same thing is uttered by angels like Lord Yama, how foolish does it sound when it is heard from the mouth of a petty human being? Do you mean to say that even angels could not understand that Brahman is awareness? Do you mean to say that Hanuman, after studying all the Vedas from the Sun-god could not understand this small point that awareness is Brahman and therefore He is Brahman? If you say that awareness (soul) is not Brahman but Brahman is awareness, in that case how can you utter the statement that you are Brahman? Krishna said that He is the creator, maintainer and destroyer of the world (Prabhavah pralayah…, mai sarvamidam, mamabhutamaheshwaram—Gita). From the point of the awareness, you can also state the same and say that there is no difference between Krishna and yourself. However, Krishna proved what He said by giving the cosmic vision, which you cannot give. You may say that it is only a vision and that an actual proof is impossible because the soul will not exist to grasp the concept in such proof. Accepting this impossibility, which is due to the incapability of the soul alone, you too can give at least the same cosmic vision as given by Krishna. Now you say that all miracles are untrue. You say that the world is unreal and therefore Ishwara is unreal. Now, even Krishna is reduced to mere awareness so that yourself, Krishna and Ishwara are reduced to Brahman, which is limited only to pure awareness. Therefore you are always in the circular motion of egoism and jealousy and you can be never dragged out from this circle. Due to this you are going in the opposite direction and will finally reach the place of demons. Your aspired goal can be achieved by you if you come out of this circle and worship the human incarnation like Hanuman, who became Brahman and simultaneously Ishwara at the end of His spiritual effort. You are the ‘most laziest’ man on this earth because you want to be Brahman without any effort; just like getting your lost ancestral property through a sudden judgment from the court. All the sacrifice and service of Hanuman is the climax of foolishness since He only attained what you got in a fraction of second by simply hearing the Mahavakyam!

Petitioner: If you say that Krishna is Brahman, He Himself has told in the Gita that He is the awareness (soul), which knows everything (Kshetrajnamchapi mam). He said that there are two items; one is the soul and the other is the body. He also said that He is the soul present in every body (Sarvakshetreshu…). He said that He has entered the human body (Manusheem Tanum…) and therefore, He must be the soul since there are only two items (Prakritim purushamchaiva). Therefore, you are encircled from all the angles and you have no other way than to accept that Brahman is the soul in every body.

Mediator: The word Purushottama also means that he is the best among the souls since the word Purusha has to stand for the soul alone. Krishna says that He is beyond the Prakriti (Kshara or Kshetra). However, He says that He is the best among the souls (Akshara). In this verse, the word Atita means ‘beyond’. The word Uttama means the best among the category of souls. Since a realized soul is Brahman, he is the best among all the souls. Since the soul is beyond the body in view of its eternality, the word Atita is used in this context. Therefore, this makes clear that there are only two categories, the first is Purusha (soul), and the second is Prakriti (body or inert world).

Respondent: When you say that there are only two categories i.e. soul and body only, how can you include the soul in Prakriti under the subdivision Para Prakriti? In that case, the soul and body are Prakriti and God is Purusha. Thus, there are only two categories (Purusha and Prakriti), because both the soul and the body are in the same category.

Petitioner: It is said that the Para Prakriti is Jeeva or the subtle body in the Gita (Jeeva Bhutam) and not the Atman (causal body). Therefore Para Prakriti is the subtle body and not the soul.

Mediator: If the subtle body is Para Prakriti, it is said that the Para Prakriti maintains the entire world (Yayedim Dharyte Jagat) in the same verse. However, the subtle body is definitely not maintaining the world. Since the inert energy is maintaining the world, the soul here must refer to its basic essential form, which is inert energy. Therefore here the soul in the state of a bundle of qualities (subtle body) is not to be taken; it should be taken in its basic form of inert energy as attained in the state of deep sleep. Here the word Jeeva cannot refer to the subtle body and the causal body either. It must refer only to the soul in deep sleep, which is inert energy. The word causal body means the standstill awareness of a realized soul. This verse does not refer to the soul in the state of vibrations (subtle body) as found in the states of waking and dream.

Respondent: As the mediator explained, it is proved that the soul in all the states (waking, dream, meditation and deep sleep) can come under only the category of Prakriti. However, we can show the reference in the Gita about the mention of the soul as standstill awareness also under the category of Prakriti. ‘Chetana’, which is just the pure awareness (Suddha chit), is mentioned in the category of Kshetram, which represents the body or Prakriti.

Petitioner: The word Purusha means the awareness that is lying in the body. Therefore you cannot keep the awareness in the category of Prakriti or body.

Respondent: In the Veda, the word Purusha frequently refers to the Lord alone. It is said that this world is the body of the Lord in the Veda (Prithvi Shariram, Vishwaatmanam etc.). If you are so particular about a limited living body, you can take the human body of the human incarnation, in which God exists. When the Lord said, “Idam Shariram [This body],” it indicates the pious [holy] body of the Lord or the pious body of a great devotee like Arjuna, who is participating in the divine mission. It is not referring to every human body. When the Lord said “This body”, there is no need of introducing an alternative word ‘Kshetram’ here. If He wanted to mention alternative words for ‘body’, other alternative words must have also been mentioned. Therefore the word Kshetram means the pious gross body, which is like the holy city of Varanasi.

The word Kshetram is explained as the collection of five elements, various qualities and pure awareness (Chetana). The gross body consisting of the five elements is like the pious city. The bundle of qualities (subtle body) is like the pious temple [Devalaya]. The pure awareness is like the innermost room (Garbhalaya). God is like the pious lingam in it. The lingam is beyond the Garbhalaya, temple (Devalaya) and the city. Similarly God is beyond the gross, subtle and innermost causal bodies. Such God denoted by silence, is beyond Vishwa (gross), Tejasa (subtle) and Prajna (causal) bodies as explained in the Veda. Now here the causal body (Or even the subtle body, which is made of the causal body) has the property of awareness and so is Kshetrajna [knower of the Kshetra]. Now God inside the causal body is also Kshetrajna, which means God also has the property of awareness and can also wish. Here, the two words, ‘cha’ and ‘api’ are very important. These two words mean that even though God is unimaginable and is not any item of creation and therefore is not awareness; yet the Lord has the property of awareness. The reason is that the Lord being omnipotent can have any property because He is the chief source of everything.

The soul is like the personal room of the Lord in the house (gross body). The owner is not restricted only to that room and can move anywhere in the house. Similarly God can pervade all the three bodies in the human incarnation if necessary. Here, God can be Purusha and all the three bodies would be Prakriti. If you take the soul as Purusha, God is the third item called as Purushottama who is beyond both Kshara [body] and Akshara [soul], which are the two imaginable items. The word ‘Atita’ can refer to both Kshara and Akshara according to grammar. The word Uttama (superlative degree) means the best because Akshara is better than Kshara and God is better than Akshara. If your version were correct, the word ‘uttara’ (comparative degree) would have been used there. If you take the case of a devotee, you can take the gross body as a city, the subtle body is the temple and the causal body is in the position of God. In this case, the Garbhalaya is included in the temple. If the city is not referred here, the gross and the subtle body can be the temple and the causal body is like God (Deho Devalayah). In the human incarnation, all the three bodies constitute the temple and God is the shrine. If the concepts are clear, there is no confusion in the classification because sometimes the subdivision is also considered as the main division. The number of classified items varies because of the variation in the nature of the classification.

Mediator: If the soul is made of awareness, which is the root cause of the whole creation, there is no objection because the word Prakriti need not be taken only in the sense of ‘effect’. This word can be also taken in the sense of ‘cause’. The Sanskrit dictionary says that Prakriti means the root cause (prakritirmulakarane). The word Prakriti can also be said to be the cause that is responsible for the best work (prakrishtam kriyate anaya iti). In that case the soul can be called as Para Prakriti and at the same time can stand as the root cause of the creation. Such soul or awareness can also be Purusha as per its definition.

Respondent: If you call the soul as the root cause based on the dictionary, I cannot object to you in that way, but the objection comes because the other items mentioned in the Apara Prakriti are products [effects]. The Para and Apara are the two sub divisions of Prakriti. You cannot say that one subdivision is of products and the other subdivision is of the cause.

Petitioner: We can take the word Prakriti in the sense of ‘inherent nature’. This word is mentioned in that sense also in the Gita (Prakritim yanti...). The Para Prakriti means the best nature of the Brahman, which means the real nature. That means Para Prakriti itself is Brahman. Thus the soul becomes Brahman.

Respondent: In that case the Apara Prakriti must also be the other nature of Brahman. Nature being common, there cannot be distinction between Para and Apara. In that case, the entire created world (products) also becomes the nature of Brahman. This means that the world itself is Brahman. There is no distinction between cause and effect. This is the concept of science and atheism.

Petitioner: The Brahma Sutra says that the soul is not a modification of the food. It is independent awareness (vikarat netichet na prachuryat). Since it is not a product, it can be taken as the cause of the world.

Respondent: If something is not the product of another specific item, it does not mean that it is the root cause of the world. That Brahma Sutra is referring to the Vedic statement “Purushah annarasa mayah”. If you take the Vedic statement “Annat Purushah”, it means that the soul is a product of the food. If you go to the beginning of this statement, it starts describing that space came from Atman (inert energy), air came from space, fire came from air etc. When you say that the pot is produced from mud, it does not mean that the mud by itself can produce the pot. The pot maker, wheel, fire, water etc. are responsible for the production of the pot. Therefore you cannot say that the pot is a direct modification (vikara) of mud. Thus in all these productions [items of creation], the will of the God is necessary, without which the production cannot take place. The sand particles in course of time form an aggregate called as stone and here the pot maker etc. are not required. Such modification of sand into stone is a direct [spontaneous] modification (vikara). Even though food is the cause of the soul, the will of God must also be associated for the production of the soul from food. It is not a direct modification.

The same sense is referred to by the statement “Annarasamaya”. The word maya (mayat) refers to the direct modification. Such direct modification is opposed by the Brahma Sutra and the same sense also exists in “Annat Purushah”. Here the Vedic statement is referring to the soul, which is made of inert energy that is produced from the food by the will of God. The soul is associated with inert energy (annarasa) that is supplied to the soul. The soul is like the ice-block that is formed from water. Suppose the ice block is in a beaker of water. Since water is the same even in the condensed ice, we can say that the ice is associated with mostly water. The quantity of water in the ice is very less because the ice block is very small. Thus the ‘mayat’ is used in the sense of majority (prachuryam or predominance). Even though the ice consisting of the same water, is less in quantity, its individuality is maintained. The surrounding water is perfectly homogenous with the ice. But it is in the liquid phase, which is different from the solid ice. Actually the soul creates a dream with help of this inert energy supplied from food.

When the soul (jeeva) leaves the body, the condensed inert energy as a solid containing the strong feelings from several births (samskaras), leaves the body. Thus the central chip [information chip; analogous to computers] is now missing from the body. Therefore even if you introduce inert energy into the dead body, the original chip, which is responsible for individual behaviour does not appear. But the chip (jeeva) that comes out of the body is surrounded by another energetic body (Yatana Shariram). Thus the jeeva, who escaped in the new body, will have the same behaviour of the dead person.

Here Brahman and the soul differ because Brahman is unimaginable and creates the universe with its associated inert energy (Mula Maya). The soul also creates the dream with its associated inert energy but the soul is made of the same inert energy as a bundle of specified individual qualities (samskaras) collected from previous births. Another difference is that Brahman is the cause for the inert energy associated with it. In the case of the soul, the inert energy supplied from the food associates with the Jeeva. Due to such differences Brahman cannot be the soul.

(To be continued...)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★