a) There is a question - how long does it take for the soul to become Ishvara? The answer is - the same time taken by a Hindu to become a human. A Hindu is a human alone. If the arrogation of Hindu-ness remains, a human remains Hindu. Similarly, the soul is Ishvara alone, the arrogation of soul-ness has not gone. Arrogation of the body (deha abhimaana) alone is soul-ness. All one has to do is to conduct discrimination on the lines of five sheaths, five elements, three bodies, tristate etc. and experience the aware soul as the pure witness, distinct from the adjuncts of body-senses-min. Also, over there, he has to experience Ishvara as distinct from the cause of the adjuncts, maayaa. In experience, the pure witness and Ishvara are not two. The non-adjuncted entity is one alone. All diversity is in the adjunct.
b) Here is a well known point. The seen is distinct from the seer, but is this distinction real? No. The seer sees the seen, and also sees the absence of the seen. The absence of the seen cannot be distinct from its substratum. Therefore, the seer himself is the substratum of the seen. That is why, the seer is distinct from the seen, but the seen is not distinct from the seer. The seen is appearing there where there is an absence of the seen. Therefore, by appearing in the container (adhikarana) of its absence, the seen is illusory.
Is there some limit between the seer and the seen that says - upto here is the seer and upto here is the seen? What is in the middle of the seer and the seen? It will neither be a seer nor be a seen since this alone is the question. Maybe it is vision itself! But that is the nature of the seer. It may be an instrument of vision, but that also will become the seen. In reality, in between the seer and the seen, there is only the ignorance of the non-disconnectedness of the seer. Where the limit between the seer and the seen alone is ignorance, there the distinction between the seer and the seen also has ignorance at its root.
c) Where is the difference between the seer and the seen? When the topic of the seer equipped with the adjunct of the intellect comes up, that seer becomes disconnected. Then his name becomes knower or "pramaataa". There are differences between one knower and another, since the difference lies in the adjunct of the intellect. But, that pure seer who leaves the adjunct of the intellect cannot have any distinctions in him. This means that the seer in different internal organs is not different, he is the same.
If we accept distinctions in the seer based on distinctions in the adjunct, then there are different adjuncts in different spaces. Therefore, the question will be, are the adjuncts related to space, or is space an adjunct? In other words, in space, are there distinct adjuncts, or is space seen differently in one adjunct?
In the first case, even when there is removal of the adjunct, there will not be removal of space, then there will be no liberation. The second case is not correct, since different spaces cannot be the refuge of the adjunct. Therefore, that adjunct which makes the entire creation appear is one, which is ignorance or avidyaa. Therefore, even the seer is one. Everything else is an appearance of the soul or "jeevaabhaasa".
d)What is in between the soul and Ishvara? What is between one soul and another? What is between the soul and world? One world and another? World and Ishvara? All of these have one answer - ignorance, the ignorance of the oneness of the substratum and illuminator, the ignorance of the oneness between the refuge and object of ignorance. All differences are due to ignorance, ignorance is removed through knowledge, the result of knowledge is annihilation of all distinctions.
People who accept distinctions between the soul, Ishvara, the world as being caused by action or desire, they accept injunction and worship as liberation. But their liberation cannot be eternal. Vedanta accepts only ignorance as the cause of distinctions, therefore they accept knowledge as liberation and this liberation is eternal.
e) If the soul and Ishvara are different, how are they different? Are they two in reality, or in space, or in time? If they are two in time, then there is Ishvara in one time and the soul in another, both are perishable, and then space becomes the essence (tatta)! If they are two in space, then both become disconnected, then who will differentiate the two spaces? In reality both cannot be different since existence consciousness is one. If we say that Ishvara is of the nature of bliss, and the soul is the enjoyer of that bliss, then Ishvara happens for the soul, the soul becomes great instead of Ishvara! If there is a difference in the actions of both, then it is due to adjunct, not in reality. Ishvara's adjunct is the cause-oriented maayaa, and that of the soul is effect-oriented internal organ. This proves that all differences of the soul and Ishvara are caused by the arrogation by the soul of its adjunct. In reality, the same awareness is called soul due to arrogation with body, and called Ishvara without arrogation.
f) In scripture, distinction and non-distinction between the soul and Ishvara, both are described, and both are required. In distinction, there is an ritual of worship. By it, desires (vaasanaas) are destroyed and propensity of knowledge dawns in the internal organ. The non-distinct truth is only indicated, that is the completion of the knowledge of the essence.
No comments:
Post a Comment