So far, ācārya has talked about meditation on ātmā as limitless reality. Now, he is going to talk about meditation upon ātmā as the basis for the mithyā world, using the method of resolution.
ātmanyevākhilam dṛśyam pravilāpya dhiyā sudhīḥ |
bhāvayedekamātmānam nirmalākāsavatsadā || 39 ||
Having resolved the entire knowable world in oneself through understanding, the intellectual person should contemplate on non-dual self all the time, just like pure space.
pravilāpya - having resolved very well akhilam - the entire dṛśyam - knowable world ātmani - in one self. dhiyā - through wisdom / understanding sudhīḥ - one who has good intellect, who is capable of meditating upon one’s non-dual nature because of having sufficient śravanam, mananam and vairagyam bhāvayed - he should contemplate ekamātmānam - upon non-dual self sadā - all the time. nirmalākāsavat - just like pure space, free from any division. Even though we are seeing many segregated spaces and enjoying their utilities, but we all know in reality there is only one space which can’t be divided. We can’t rule out the empirical reality of those spaces which can be utilised, but any space doesn’t have its own reality apart from that one space.
Similarly by seeing the whole world as effect and brahman is the cause, where effect can’t exist apart from the cause, I understand that the world can’t exist apart from brahman, and that brahman is me. This is called the method of resolution of the world into ātmā, means seeing the world doesn’t have its own really apart from me, I ātmā alone is the reality of all. Just like resolving pots in to clay, where there is no substance called pot, what is there is only clay. As long as reality is attributed to the world, strong reactions can’t be avoided. Reaction is directly proportional to one’s view of reality. We don’t require many names and forms to create sorrow, even if only one thing we take it as real, that will make me sorrowful. On the other hand if the whole world is understood as names and forms superimposed on me, the acceptance will be easy. The whole creation resolved in me, the world does not exist apart from me, I am alone is the reality of all. This understanding is called resolution. Therefore this is a contemplation ekamātmānam - on non-dual self.
Next, verses 40-45 talk about results of śravana-manana-nididhyāsanam (jñāna-yoga). Knowledge which is free from samsaya - doubt, viparyaya - habitual error, and asparthata - vagueness (where unclear even not sure about what is not clear), such knowledge is called jñāna-nistha - abidance in knowlege.
rūpavarṇādikam sarvam vihāya paramārthavit |
paripūrṇacidānandasvarūpeṇāvatiṣṭhate || 40 ||
Having given up all attributes such as form, status etc., one who knows the absolute reality abides as the self of the nature of limitless consciousness.
paramārthavit - one who knows the absolute reality. Absolute means for which there is no opposite, unlike all the object of the world. Inert is not opposite to consciousness. I am not opposed to anything in the world. This knower of brahman vihāya - given up, sarvam - all attributes such as rūpavarṇādikam - form, status etc. Really speaking if one has abidance in brahman, nothing can be given up, since everything exists in brahman only. Therefore knower of brahman gives up the sense of reality in all attributes.
avatiṣṭhate - he abides paripūrṇacidānandasvarūpeṇa - as the self of the nature of limitless consciousness. When one is abiding in brahman, he doesn’t need to keep remembering “I am brahman”, since being limitless is in the back of his head.
Next verse is to dismiss the misconception of the word paramārthavit - the knower of brahman. Since everything here in this transactional world is having a triad of knower-known-knowing, it also means duality is there. If this triad is not there for him, how can knowledge of brahman take place?
jñānajñātṛjñeyabhedaḥ pare nātmani vidyate |
cidānandaikarūpatvāddīpyate svayameva tat || 41||
Division of knowledge, knower, and known doesn’t exist in absolute self. Because it is of the nature of limitless consciousness alone. That brahman is shined by itself alone.
jñānajñātṛjñeyabhedaḥ - division of knowledge, knower, known triad na vidyate - does not exist in pare ātmani - absolute self
cidānandaikarūpatvād - because it is of the nature of limitless consciousness alone. Tat - that brahman dīpyate - is shined svayameva - by itself alone.
Really speaking there is no knowledge of ātmā, just the misconception of oneself is knocked out. The knower of brahman will not claim that he knows brahman, since he knows he is brahman alone. For him there is no triad, since everything is himself. There is no one will claim that he knows himself.
The knowing here is not in the conventional sense. In Kenopanisad 2.22:
nāham manyate suvedeti no na vedeti veda ca l
I don’t think I know that brahman very well. It is not that I don’t know.
I don’t think I know brahman well as an object of experience, since every knowable is name and form which is incidental. In the same time it is not that I don’t know, because that brahman is me alone who is self evident consciousness which knowing is the nature, where I don’t need another light to make me known.
If triad is not there, how can knowledge take place? Self-knowledge is not an event, the word “knowledge” is used just to say that ignorance is not there.
Comments