Vivekachudamani – 15

Select verses 74 to 80

Verse 74

tattvampadabhyamabhidhiyamanayoh,

brahmatmanoh sodhitayoryadittham|

srutya tayostatvamasiti samyag,

ekatvameva pratipadyate muhuh ||241||

Verse 75

aikyaṃ tayorlaksitayorna vacyayoh,

nigadyate’nyonyaviruddhadharminoh|

khadyotabhanvoriva rajabhrtyayoh,

kupamburasyoh paramanumervoh ||242||

If Sruthi in its maxim “That Thou Art”, repeatedly establishes the absolute oneness of Brahman and the individual Self, indicated by the term “That” (Tat) and “Thou” (Tvam) respectively, then divesting these terms of their relative associations, their implied but not literal meanings are to be understood. The identity applies to their implied meanings, not to their literal meanings. The latter inculcates mutually contradictory or opposite attributes between the two; for example, between the glow-worm and the sun; or between the king and his servants; or between a well and the ocean; or between a tiny atom and Mount Meru.

        “Tat” and “Tvam” are the two words in the famous Mahavakhya “Tat Tvam Asi”, Tat referring to Brahman and Tvam referring to Athma.  The literal meaning of the Mahavakhya is, Brahman is you, the individual Jiva.  The literal meaning, vachyartha, appears incorrect as Brahman is immortal and infinite Bliss while Jiva is mortal, limited in Time and Space and bound in samsara.  But this Mahavakhya appears nine times in Chandogya Upanishad and elsewhere also scriptures reveal the identity of Jiva and Brahman.  So we resort to the implied meaning, lakshyartha, and the contradiction is resolved as Brahman is the self-evident Consciousness as even the true Self of Jiva, Athma, is. To indicate the obvious difference between Jiva and Brahman, when the vachyartha is taken, four examples are given – 1) the glow-worm and the sun; 2) the servant and the king; 3) the well and the ocean and 4) the atom and mount Meru.  In these examples the limited light of glow-worm (Jiva) and the unlimited light of the sun (Brahman); the ruled servant (Jiva) and the ruler king (Brahman); the limited space of the well (Jiva) and the vast expanse of the ocean (Brahman); the minute atom (Jiva) and the gigantic Meru (Brahman); explain their lack of identity.  These examples serve to illustrate the lack of identity between Jiva and Brahman on the basis of vachyartha and that identity is to established on the basis of lakshyartha.

Verse 76

tayorvirodho’yamupadhikalpitah,

na vastavah kascidupadhiresah |

isasya maya mahadadikaranam,

jivasya karyam srnu panchakosah ||243||

The difference between them is only created by the upadhi (adjunct) and is not real. The upadhi in the case of Iswara is Maya, the cause of Mahat etc. and the upadhi in the case of Jiva is the panchakosa, the product of ignorance.

Verse 77

etavupadhi parajivayostayoh,

samyannirase na paro na jivah |

rajyam narendrasya bhatasya khetakah,

tayorapohe na bhato na raja ||244||

These two (Maya and panchakosa) are the upadhis of Iswara and the Jiva. When their negation is done there is no Iswara, no Jiva. When the kingdom of the king and the shield of the soldier are taken away, there is neither the king nor the soldier.

        The difference between Iswara, the Lord, and Jiva, the individual, is great as brought out in earlier verses. But on examination one finds that the differences are due to the upadhis, the conditioning.  Iswara is Brahman, the Consciousness with the upadhi, Maya, and Jiva is Athma, the Consciousness with the upadhi, panchakosas that is equivalent to the three sareeras.  Maya is karana-upadhi and the panchakosas are karya-upadhi.  Upadhis do not have independent existence and they do not exist in essence.  Brahman expresses itself as Iswara through Maya and as Jiva, an individual entity, through a set of panchakosas.  When these equipments are removed through negation what remains is Brahman, the Consciousness, the one without the second.  An example is given to illustrate how the differences are set up by the upadhi and how there is oneness when the upadhis are negated.  A king has the upadhi of kingdom. A soldier has the upadhi of armour plate. When the upadhis are removed, king is revealed as a human being and the soldier is also revealed as a human being only.  Even though they are separate as individuals they are one only as human being. Similarly, though there are two entities as Iswara and Jiva, they are one only from the standpoint of Brahman. 

Verse 78

tatastu tau laksanaya sulaksyau, tayorakhandaikarasatvasiddhaye |

naalam jahatya na tathajahatya, kintubhayarthatmikayaiva bhavyam ||247II

Therefore, the two terms (Isvara and jiva), should be carefully considered through their indicative meanings in order to establish their absolute identity. Neither the method of total rejection, nor the method of complete retention will suffice. One must reason through a combined process of both.

            The method of deriving implied meaning is called lakshana in Sanskrit.  There are three types of lakshanas; jagad, ajahad and jagadajagad or bhagatyaga. In jagad-lakshana, some aspects of the direct meaning are rejected to arrive at the implied meaning.  In ajahad-laksshana something is added to the actual words spoken to arrive at the implied meaning. In the jahad-ajahad lakshana contradictory aspects are removed and non-contradictory aspects are retained to arrive at the implied meaning. It is the third type that is employed in arriving at the implied meaning in the understanding of Mahavakhya, ‘Tat Tvam Asi’.  The upadhis of both ‘Tat’ and ‘Tvam’ are removed and what remains is one and the same, Brahman.

Verse 79

sa devadatto’yamitiha chaikata,

viruddhadharmamsamapasya kathyate |

yatha tatha tattvamasiti vakye,

viruddhadharmanubhayatra hitva ||248||

Verse 80

samlaksya cinmatrataya sadatmanoh, akhandabhavah parichiyate budhaih|

evaṃ mahavakyasatena kathyate, brahmatmanoraikyamakhandabhavah ||249||

 “This is that Devadatta”—just as in this sentence the identity expressed is arrived at by eliminating respective contradictory portions, so too it is in the statement, “That Thou Art”.  The wise should give up contradictory elements on both sides and recognize the identity of the Lord and the individual Self, carefully noting that the essence of both is unlimited Consciousness. Thus, hundreds of scriptures declare the oneness and the identity of Brahman and the individual Self.  

            An example is given for jagadajagad lakshana, “sah Devadatta ayam” (“This is that Devadatta”). Devadatta is a hostel-mate of two others of whom one only is in touch with him later.  When all the three meet after forty years, the familiar one introduces Devadatta to the other who does not recognise him, with these words.  “sah Devadatta” referring to Devadatta of that time and place i.e. forty years ago and the hostel while “ayam” refers to Devadatta with them right then. The contradicting parts of “time and place” are dropped and only the common “Devadatta” is retained to recognise him.  In the sentence “Tat Tvam Asi”, the oneness is recognised in the same way by negating the contradictory parts in both “Tat” and “Tvam”.  Jiva identifies with a particular body that is created and Iswara is the cause of creation. This and other contradictory attributes listed in earlier verses when negated, reveals the oneness i.e. Brahman, the pure Consciousness, which cannot be revealed by words otherwise. This is understood as Jiva-Brahma-Ikyam by the discriminating Athma Jnani where Ikyam stands for undivided oneness.  Hundreds of declarations in the scriptures declare the oneness of Brahman and Athma as pure Consciousness, pointing out that the essential core in Jiva is the essential core in Iswara also.  In this sense of essential oneness of core, scriptures say that Athma, the Real Self in Jiva, is Brahman, the Reality behind the whole universe. 

----------------