Lecture rendered by
Poojya Tatwavidanda Saraswati
at
Bahamas
North
Atlantic Ocean
Transcripted and edited
by
Radhakrishnan Garani
For private circulation only
Naasadiya sukta
This is the 129 th suktam in the 10th mandala of Rig Veda purported to be Rishi Parameshti who is none other than prajapati. Before we go into the text of this sukta,let us first understand what is meant by a sukta.
Sukta is generally a hymn praising a devatha. Devatha is one particular aspect of Ishwara, just like saying that it is one of the limbs of Shiva.
We have to visualise the devatha as a personification of Shiva. Devatha is an aspect of the higher power of Ishwara.
Most of the suktas, whatever are there, ultimately praise the glory of Ishwara only. When we recite a Sakta, for example,Shri sukta we presume we are praising the glory of Lakshmi, but then, the devata is an adjunct of Paramasiva only. In Agri suktam it is devatha Agni, another aspect of Ishwara. Shri (wealth) and Agni ( fire) are two different aspects of Ishwara. Similarly, many aspects of Shiva which are infinite in number exist. It is said in the Puranas that there are 33 crore devatas. But for our concern we can reduce it to 33 suktas.
Naasadiya sukta is one such sukta which does not deal with the praise of any devatha, but a very interesting thing is, the one in which the sage or the seer( one who sees the truth) visualises the truth.( यह पश्यति स पश्यति). We don’t use the word “look” here as जानाति. Jaanaati has two meanings," it could be known or it could not be". This happens when we use pashyanti not in the meaning of seeing with eyes, but with the meaning of jaanaati, then that meaning is a different jaanaati. This is not about seeing the object with eyes. Visualising is the real seeing, knowing the contents deeply.
One such Rishi, (Parameshti purported to be Prajapati also) tries to visualize the cause of the universe जगत् कारणम्। concept of Brahman. Cause is always the earlier State. We are not talking of the universe as a nimitta Karana etc. When it is advaya,( one without the second) one cannot have the nimitta Karana. … only _upaadaana karana _remains.
Nimitta Kaarana arises only when a conscious person is around. Here is the case of Brahman, awareness of the absolute,the stuff with which the universe is composed of. That is how Rishi is visualising. He is not visualising a person standing there and taking decisions and managing a few things etc. He is visualising that “Reality” from which alone appears all this universe सः तद् असृजत, he has created …how…तद् अभवत् it became. Then, तदासीत् .. existing now.
So,from a very gross point of view, we say that Brahma created this universe. तत् ब्रह् असृजत। What kind of creation? तत् अभवत्। Brahma itself manifested. That means, it has undergone transformation. The word transformation has a leniency towards परिणाम? Do we feel it as an assertion or otherwise? We feel the transformation only. We cannot stop at परिणाम since it puts us into dvaita_,_ that means, it makes the GodHead into some material object. Therefore the world अभवत् is not the end. So, the Rishi adds one more word, तादासीत् that alone is.
So instead of a transformation cause, it could be Brahman, which is the apparitional cause of this universe. If it is a transformational cause,we can know something about Brahman. But Shruti says, it is an assertion only. We can give an example of gold turning into a necklace. If we want to know about the nature of gold; we can only look at it as a product of a transformation leading into a necklace and then only we can know something about gold.
But we cannot do that with regard to Brahman, by looking at the jagat. Jagat is स्थूल or जड that is to say insentient, whereas Brahman is sentient चैतन्य, चेतन Jagat is called dukhka sthana. दुखालयं अशाश्वतं . So, if we have to talk about Brahma by looking at the Jagat,then Brahman would be असत् अचित् and दुखम् where as ( it is actually opposite of sthira स्थिरा), we talk about Brahman as सत्त् चित् and आनन्द. Then how can the Jagat become the transformation of brahman. What kind of an apparition? Sat appears as asat, chit appears as achit and ananda appears as duhkha. So, what kind of apparition could it be? An apparition rooted in bliss? There is no other way. Rishi Sees that Reality. He says that it did not come into being, but it appears to come. But for the one who knows, it does not even appear to come. But, he had to say something about Brahma. Yet he says. He says seven verses, about that reality which appears as the universe. It is called nasadiya sukta since the sukta begins with the word नासदासीत् .. नासद means not belonging to that, beginning to that, नासदिय therefore is a pratyaya.
Let us look into details of the sukta hymn by hymn.
This hymn talks about the reality before this creation. Rishi does not even use the word Brahman. He only talks about that Reality. This sukta is not popular in India mainly because of the Puranic cultured baggage people carry for generations, and believed in suktas which tend to praise the glory of devatas. Western thinkers however have heaped praise on this suktam because it is like Quantum physics talking about the quantum world. Quantum world defies logic, defies description, yet a quantum physicist talks about that. He puts all the theory in a language called uncertainty principle. The word uncertainty itself is a quantum world, whereas physics is a certainty. The language of this sukta rhymes with this.
But, in this land of ours, everyone seems to know God. If you ask a purohit, he asserts that he is the custodian of the temple in which he has placed the God and he worships and also enables others to worship the deity. Many people have their respective Gods in their own way, on a shelf in one corner of the house. A common man however is non committal, since he says that God may or may not exist.
God cannot be realised by the intellect, since the mind does not move from the known to the unknown. Suppose the mind moves and holds on to the unknown, then it is no more unknown. So, the paradox is obvious. God is something that a mind can hold on to. The God that the world holds on to, is only a conceptual God of the mind. Is this God the same as the real God? No. The concept is itself deeply coloured by the vasanaas and the samskaraas of the mind. We are all a bundle of memory or emotion. It is like the Quantum field. There is a universal quantum field in which there is a vortex here, pull there etc. Mind is only going from.one known to another known, due to its conditioned memory, evolution et al. Mind Is only the past. There is nothing like the present mind. When thoughts operate, it is only the past that is operating.
This puts us into a question whether the concept of God is worthless. What is its worth if it is not a real God?
The answer is simple. The concept is created only to train the mind and discipline it to reach the Godhead. So we should neither reject God nor validate it.
It is good to remember the sloka……न ते रूपं न च आकारः उपासकानां कार्यार्थंम् ब्राह्मणो रूप कर्मणा .. ….Reality has neither the roopa nor the shape,nor the weapons, like shankha and chakra, no kailasa or vaikunta et al, These are all Kalpanas to make worship possible.
In nasadiya sukta, there is only wonder, not worship. When one looks at the Sun, there is wonder. Worship is a process that operates in the mind of phenomenon, whereas, wonder is much above phenomenon. That is why a wonderous thing takes one to a different dimension altogether. There is no movement of mind in wonder,unlike in worship. A mind that is incapable of wondering in that silence, (which is the real God), is unable to reach it at all. One has to prepare the mind for that. Another name for silence is vairaagya. Raaga means, eyes want to see,ears want to listen,taste buds want to relish something etc. In vairaagya all functions of indriyas are set at rest. The mind also remains quiet. A virakta alone knows how to wonder at everything. If reality has to express itself, then the mind should stop receiving and dissecting things and frame opinions.
In this sukta, the Rishi by visualising the naama roopa, rises above them, only to realise the Reality, by transporting himself to that level. Then he is lost in the beauty of that Reality. Just as a raindrop which falls from above,reaches the ocean and loses itself, the Rishi, is visualising that Reality through naama roopa and then,he loses himself in it. This is not the movement of the mind from known to the unknown. In fact it is a very form of negation of the known because the known does not constitute the truth. Truth can only be observed, not known. Truth is the “Self” itself. Truth is “you” only. So, you can only be yourself,not to know “you”. From that state of realisation,it comes forth as an expression, and that expression,is the Naasafiya sukta. That is why it is an अपौरुषेयं statement. It is a shabda behind a shabda or it is अशब्द appearing as शब्द.
Let us now go in detail into the mantra.
First verse
नासदासीन् नो सदासीत् तदानीं नासीद् रजो नो व्योमापरो यत्
किमावरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन्नम्भः किमासीद् गहनं गभीरम्।।
ನಾಸದಾಸೀನ್ನೋ ಸದಾಸೀತ್ತದಾನೀಂ
ನಾಸೀದ್ರಜೋ ನೋ ವ್ಯೋಮಾ ಪರೋ ಯತ್ |
ಕಿಮಾವರೀವಃ ಕುಹ ಕಸ್ಯ ಶರ್ಮನ್ನಂ
ಭಃ ಕಿಮಾಸೀದ್ಗಹನಂ ಗಭೀರಮ್ |
(There was neither non-existence nor existence then. There was neither the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond. What stirred? Where? In whose protection? Was there water, bottom-lessly deep?)
ನಾಸದಾಸೀತ್ ನೋ ಸದಾಸೀತ್ ತದಾನೀಮ್
Tadaaneem means…“then”. It does not imply time. It does not apply even to the mind. It simply implies a state before the universe appears. What could it be? Their expression is in words and word is thought, thought is expressed as word. We should not assume that the elements of the mind are expressed in words. ( One should not think about a thing which is in the flow of time). Since language restricts a time element, definition seems to have already appeared. So tadaaneem means where there was no concept of time, say, at that time!
We use time, even while speaking about time. When we talk of the world, either there is something or something is not, a very fundamental reality. The world is a collection of opposites like, Sukha-dukha, Dharma-adharma, _punya- papa, _knowing-not knowing, all these are part of the Samsaara. To say that I do not know a flower, means that I have known about other flowers also and may not have known the one I am seeing. you have known yourself as a drashta. दृष्टा.
Whenever you say “I know’, there is an element of not knowing also. So,it is better to say “what is”. it is the opposite of “not isness”. Nothingness means the opposite of “here”. What is that nothingness? So it is relative to say that. Is this phenomenal world “is” or “is not”. Very fundamentally the existence itself is split into opposites. All creation therefore is nothing but opposite pairs. It is like magnetism dividing itself into the North and South pole or electrical force dividing itself into positive and negative, space dividing itself into up and down, time dividing itself into here and later… Gata and bhavishya ( गत and भविष्य). Space time itself is like that.
We talk of a Brahman in which there are no opposites. So, if we say sat
(सत्) is brahman, then asat
(असत्) is not that. One of these two sat or asat which make them relative. We are talking of a reality which you may call sat, but that is a part of “sat asat pratyaya”. Is it some other sat? It is not part of sat asat. So, सत् न आसीत् , असत् न आसीत्. नासीत् रजः, नो व्योमा, अपरो यत्.
There was neither non-existence nor existence then. There was neither the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond.,
Supposing we say something is there, then it is already in the mind. When we say, something is not, then also it is already in the mind, since both are in the field of the known. They do not constitute reality. How to reach that reality? One has (negate) to reach the frontiers of the known and rise above it. This can be done by meditation. You bring to your mind what all is known and reject it. Bring to the surface of the mind what is unknown and negate it. At this point, you are already in the realms of Brahman. It is described thus…. अन्यदेव तद् विदितात् अविदितात् अधि। ….You have to reach
the frontiers of knowing, because both known and unknown are inside what is called knowing. When you rise above this, then it becomes a wonder. Even the effort to categorise is dropped. That state is your true nature. That is Brahman. You are Atma. So, it is pure meditation and cannot be classified as isness or no isness.
(नासदासीन्नो तदासीत् तदानीं)
It is also compared with sushupti….then… rajaha na aaseet.. रजः न आसीत्….rajas always gives the impression of an universe, as the universe is always in flux. Rajas, being in between satva and tamas, acts as an upa lakshana. Even this was not there…नासिद्रजः.
The universe is nothing but matter.द्रव्यम्…..it is the manifestation of tamo guna. Movement or flux.. क्रिया..is rajo guna. Satwa guna is found in the intelligence of the universe. It is a cosmogenic universe, not chaotic. It is a structured intelligence,where all these are accounted for.
Now, the question arises.
Was the universe active before Brahman appeared or before creation?…one cannot say that.
Was it ordered?…one cannot say that.
Was it intelligent? ….one cannot even say that.
So,before the appearance of the world, even the intelligence or order was not there.
नो व्योमा….what about space itself ? When we are talking about Being or Reality, everything should be contained in space, or. all locus is in space!
We have to construe space also like timelessness. It cannot be grasped with the intellect, since it is rooted in the past. So, NO VYOMAN.
Then what was there? अपरः यत्….nothing else…..
किमावरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन् अम्भः किमासीद् गहनं गभीरम्…
ಕಿಮಾವರೀವಃ ಕುಹ ಕಸ್ಯ ಶರ್ಮನ್
ಅಂಭಹ ಕಿಮಾಸೀದ್ಗಹನಂ ಗಭೀರಮ್.
किं आवरिहः (aavarana means cloud hiding the reality). That Reality…what did it contain? We are bound to ask, not in the sense of containing, but something greater. What does it have? Or what is it composed of? Or was there nothingness?
The answer is.
It is composed of no parts or it concealed everything. What did it conceal? it is revealing and concealing in all duality. Is it like a seed containing everything,but not revealing until it sprouts? Is Brahman like that? NO. As we know, Brahma does not contain or conceal or cover-up anything.
कुह कस्य शर्मन्?
The Rishi wonders if there is somebody (शर्मन्) high up concealing? … (कुह.). where. (कस्यKasya)..for whose sake?
We, on this earth assume that someone by name Vishnu is sitting high up and controlling everybody and everything, good and bad. Mind wants protection because it always feels insecure .
When the mind starts to work both knowing and not knowing appears. So, brahmajnana and Brahma saakshaatkaara, are both equally unreal. (As per Gaudapada, there is no bandha, no moksha)
Rishi further wonders..
अम्भः किमासीद् गहनं गभीरम्…
Was it like a deluge so deep that it could not be visualised?
In a puraanic context, it was all water everywhere, before creation. When water encompaases everywhere, it looks more like a deluge, nothing is seen, everything looks blank and submerged, like a depth of darkness in which nothing is seen. This is what the Rishi wonders. Was it like unfathomable water?
He says…certainly not!
Second verse
न मृत्युरासीदमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या अह्न आसीत् प्रकेतः
आनीदवातं स्वधया तदेकं तस्माद्धान्यन् न परः किं च नास
ನ ಮೃತ್ಯುರಾಸೀದಮೃತಂ ನ ತರ್ಹಿ |
ನ ರಾತ್ರ್ಯಾ ಅಹ್ನ ಅಸೀತ್ಪ್ರಕೇತಃ |
ಆನೀದವಾತಂ ಸ್ವಧಯಾ ತದೇಕಂ |
ತಸ್ಮಾದ್ಧಾನ್ಯನ್ ನ ಪರಃ ಕಿಂ ಚ ನಾಸ
(There was neither death nor immortality then. There was no distinguishing sign of night nor of day. That One breathed, windless, by its own impulse. Other than that there was nothing beyond. )
If we have to summarise the essence of nasadiya suktam, in one sentence, it means that one should be left to remain alone completely. We generally hold on to some type of routine and its ideas, as if they are the truth. We can arrive at the truth only when we do not hold on to anything in life. Truth can only be experienced when we become free from the known. It is only the known that binds us. By a careful process of unlearning we can get rid of all the known. Then we remain at the door of the unknowable, which reveals the truth. It is akin to a sleep state. Holding on to dogmas does not create the space in the mind to realise that sleep state. This is the spirit of the nasadiya sukta.
Now the sloka…..Tarhi…
at that time..before creation…there was no death and no life. Life and death are the pair of opposites which come into action only after creation.
We cannot say,it was all death before creation. The word death here has to be taken as “no life” meaning, in the absence of life. No मृत्युः no अमृतं. Is it possible to describe sleep as death? It is neither life nor death.
Then, न रात्रया अह्न आसीत् प्रकेतः….. there was no appearance of either day or night… (प्रकेतः…apperance)
The reality cannot be day or night. We are bound to forget about the notion of day or night when we leave the Earth behind us. Only when we are standing on the earth relative to the Sun, the concept of day and night envelops us. There is an atmosphere around the earth which also rotates along with the earth. When you travel in an aircraft, you are still in the grip of the earth’s atmosphere. All these opposites are there when we move with the mind. Mind divides the seeing of an object into seer and the seen, as a pair of opposites. Seer is mithya, seen also is mithya. We have to rise above the opposite to see the truth. As per the Rishi, there was no concept of day and night. न असीत्।
Another point regards praketa. Was not The Sun who is a beacon of light, in appearance at that time? When light is experienced, while on earth,it is classified as day and night. So, there was nothing called daylight. There was only light.
Similarly the Atma Chaitanya,as jaagrat( waking consciousness),is the chetana while in jagrat. It is the source for all knowledge, but, it Itself is not this truth. But the origin of the waking consciousness is the truth, like all objects are seen in the sunlight. It is like seeing a hero and villain on the movie screen. Both are false. Only the Light that falls on the screen is real. Rest are projections only. Even the waking consciousness itself is औपाधिक. But the pure chaitanyam that reflects in the mind, appears as the waking consciousness, its origin is the truth.
We get doubts. In that case, is that Reality alive or dead?
It is neither alive nor dead. It cannot be described. Words fail when you start describing it. Therefore it is only silence. Is it lifeless? *no” Was it inhaling or exhaling? “no” It was neither.
So, आनीत् अवातम्।
अवातम्। Means without wind।
It breathed without wind since wind is the product of creation. How can it breathe without the absence of wind?
स्वधया…by its own power.
When we ask where the galaxies are?., we say it is in space ….where is space located? …it is in itself.. it is in its own glory. स्वे महिंने प्रतिष्ठिताः.
It means everything has its being in Ishwara. Ishwara is having its being in himself. Everything shines in the light of atma Chaitanya. So, the Paramatma, before creation, was breathing without mind, but with its own power …स्वधया….there was no other….tat ekam…तदेकम्….it cannot be described अनिर्वचनीय….
तस्मात् ह अन्यं पर किञ्च न आस.. Therefore,other than that, there was no other. That reality was called Brahman.
(Vedanta is not learning,in the conventional sense,one tries to unlearn what one had learnt. The fact is that “one” is not the doer. Truth is timeless. यत्र वेदाः अवेदो भवति।)
Third verse
तम आसीत् तमसा गूळमग्रेऽप्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वमाइदम्
तुच्येनाभ्वपिहितं यदासीत् तपसस्तन्महिनाजायतैकम्
ತಮ ಆಸೀತ್ ತಮಾಸಾ ಗೂಢಮಗ್ರೆ ಪ್ರಕೇತಮ್.ಸಲಿಲಂ ಸರ್ವಮಾ ಇದಂ.।
ತುಚ್ಚೆನಾ. ಅಪಿಹಿತಮ್ ಯದಾಸೀತ್
ತಮಾಸಸ್ ತನ್ ಮಹಿನಾ ಜಾಯತ್ತೈಕಂ ।
(Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning, with no distinguishing sign, all this was water. The life force that was covered with emptiness, that One arose through the power of heat).
Tama aaseet.
It is possible to describe anything when there is light. If one sits in a totally dark room, nothing is visible. It is not possible to describe when we say it is pitch dark. You are carried by an inner darkness when you are asleep. That too, if you sleep in a pitch dark room, then, there is darkness outside also. Whereas in the waking state, there are two knowing states. You know that there is an object in front of you, and you also know that " you" are there. It happens this way. When you wake up from sleep,first , you know that you are there and then, there is an object in front of you. Similarly when you are about to sleep,first,you know that there are objects out there, eventually you stop knowing that “you " are there. In terms of vedanta, it is called aham vritti and idam vritti. When you wake up from sleep,aham vritti is the first thought and when you are about to sleep, aham vritti is the last thought. Between the two vrittis, the entire world is there with the movement of mind,which appears as a world, due to our memory. In sleep, we stop knowing the outer which is covered by tamas, the inner also is covered by tamas but only “you” exist, since all the sense organs are restrained and World comes to an end. (सन्मात्राः करणोप समतातः)….,
Even the " I am conscious” is also withheld. Therefore, " I am" without being " I am". “I am” is the limitation of being.
Being, by itself, has no limitation. What we put in one particular way, it is the " I am". In another particular way, “being” is the world. You cannot describe सन्मात्रः
तम आसीत् तमसा गूढं। It was tamas covered by tamas. As the light of consciousness is put to an end, the process of knowing has come to an end.
Therefore it is गूढं…..resolved fully.
Darkness was in the beginning before creation hidden by darkness तमसा गूढं…. What is called “sat” is darkness hidden by darknes
Adi Shankaracharya calls sat as sanmaatra. Nothingness means all the process of knowingness. It is close to shoonya in a way. you cannot distinguish this aspect from poornam also since poornam and shoonyam are very much alike. While Buddhists call this as shoonya, vedantins call it as अशब्दम्, अरूपं, अरसं,अनित्यं et al.
Vidyaranya swami says this as अग्रे अप्रकेतम्..(pratyaksha jnaanam ashakyam…प्रत्यक्ष ज्ञानं अशक्यम्)। It is not possible to know it perfectly..
तमॊ भूतं अप्रज्ञातं… अलक्षणम्..no attributes.. cannot even imagine…. अविज्ञेयं…not something that you can know. प्रस्तुतम् इव सर्वत्र…present in every possible way….it is like a sleep state…like, you are alone, when you are in deep sleep…. totally withdrawn from everything…there is no other one to communicate…it is like a seamless like, existence having no reality….
सलिलम् सर्व मा इदं…..salilam means water that which coming into being, was all water
तुच्चेन आभू अपिहितम् .. tuccha means shoonya…. That which came into being. Aabhoohu.. is being covered with void.
Vidyaranya swami says.तमसा तन्मना जायत एकं…one with second rose or came into being with its own Glory (तन् महिम्ना) from the darkness.
Let us deliberate on this aspect,some more, since this is the difficult part of the sukta.
The world we know is no different from the knowledge of the world. Can there be a pot, without the knowledge of the pot?…cannot be…..pot is jneya.. it has to shine in the consciousness of some conscious being. Supposing nothing shines in the consciousness of the conscious being, then what type of existence is that?
Jneya always comes with jnaana. Both of them happen together. Ghata or pot is there,when ghata jnaana is there. When we say “the world” it is only a word! So knowledge is consciousness. The raw material for the object is consciousness or its movement is the question here. In the motionless movement, arises the Being. Knowing is a movement in the Being, which is the reality. When Being resolves, knowing resembles tamas, since knowing itself is a movement( चित् आवेश). If Being is possessed by knowing, then it is in between सत् and चित्। Sat chit appears as the universe. Therefore “‘Being” is the reality that resembles darkness. All that is known or knowable is absent in it. What is it that makes the movement possible, from that Being? There is no other factor. It comes out with its own glory, from which a form of knowing emerges. Knowing alone appears as Being. तमसः तन् महिना अजायत एकं….
Salilam here is used not as water but as a form of shakti.(Water possesses a strong power). We must remember here the upanishad statement…आपॊ वा इदम् सर्वं… This is a mind boggling description
Even John Milton says,. It is not light, but darkness which has taken a physical shape.
सलिलम् आप्रकेतं… indefinable …that alone covered everything…..like deluge. In deluge, there is water everywhere…all opposites are covered by deluge of darkness… as if there is deluge….
From that state arose desire कम्मस्तदग्रे समवर्तताधि।..
Fourth verse
कामस्तदग्रे समवर्तताधि मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यदासीत्
सतो बन्धुमसति निरविन्दन् हृदि प्रतीष्याकवयो मनीषा
ಕಾಮಸ್ತದಗ್ರೇ ಸಮವರ್ತಾತಾಧಿ ಮನಸೋ ರೆತಃ ಪ್ರಥಮಮ್ ಯಾದಾಸೀತ್
ಸತೋ ಬಂಧುಮಸತಿ ನಿರವಿಂದನ್ ಹೃದಿ ಪ್ರತೀಷ್ಟಾ ಕವಾಯೋ ಮನೀಷಾ.
(Desire came upon that One in the beginning, That was the first seed of mind. Poets seeking in their heart with wisdom found the bond of existence and non-existence)
From that being,which just resembles sleep…. तृच्चेन अपिहितं तमस्….covered with tamas…..that Reality tries to find a fulfillment in the apparitional becoming…
Example…when we wake up from the sleep phase, there is a shoonya-like phase for a very short span,like being in the NOW, in its own glory,… Then starts a movement.
The first stirring of Atma, is in the form of desire,. The desire to be.
It was the Being..then it was the stirring…desire to live. Most primordial desire, like the desire to LIVE. Ajnaana alone has manifested as desire. Desire is fundamental to living. Desire alone is samsaara. Brahma’s desire however appears as macrocosm. सो कामायता। बहुस्याम् प्रजायेयेति..this is the whole basis of all creation.
Mind is the movement. रेतः..the very first sprout of movement is the mind….is the desire… That desire binds the Reality in the unreal world. सतो बन्धु..sat gets into bondage. We talk about Sambandha ( स्वहन्द) ..being bonded by desire…one web being connected to another web…the worldly people are like that..
Niravindan. सतो बन्धुमसति निरविन्दन् हृदि प्रतीष्याकवयो मनीषा
…this truth is realised by a few people (kavayah) who remain motionless in wonder, or un-agitated when things happen around them, those who can realise the clear demarcation between existence and nonexistence. This is the conclusion drawn by the sages when they contemplated in their mind.
( niravindan…concluded)
So, Brahman is the basis or adhistaana for desire.
That desire happens to be the bondage of Brahman, bound in the asat. असत्..
This Brahman is called shabala or apara Brahman, inferior one, since desire is an inferior quality. Para Brahman becomes saguna Brahman resulting in fear and unhappiness. Hiranya garbha is the first jiva, has birth means, manifestation as the universe because of desire, whereas para Brahman remains as साक्षि. Witness consciousness.
Fifth verse
तिरश्चीनो विततो रश्मिरेषामधः स्विदासी दुपरिस्विदासी
रेतोधाआसन् महिमान आसन् स्वधा अवस्तात् प्रयतिः परस्तात्
ತಿರಶ್ಚಿನೋ ವಿತತೋ ರಶ್ಮಿರೇಷಾಮ್ ಅಧಃ ಸ್ವಿದಾಅಸೀತ್ ಉಪರಿಸ್ವಿದಾ ಸೀತ್ ರೇತೋಧಾ ಅಸನ್ ಮಹಿಮಾನ ಆಸನ್ ಸ್ವಾಧಾ ಅವ ಸ್ಥಾತ್ ಪ್ರಯತಿ ಪರಸ್ತಾತ್
( Their cord was extended across. Was it below? Was it above? There were seed-placers, there were powers. There was impulse beneath, there was giving forth above)
Out of the desire came entire panchabhutas, mind etc. from the womb of the universe (वितता एषाम्) came living and nonliving, all the multitudes of objects. It is like the multiple objects appearing on the movie screen. All these things have a common structure of interpenetration of horizontal and vertical threads.
This is a tough vision of the vedanta, where people fail to realise the truth…. object versus the knowledge of the object. Vitatah Rashmi hi eshaan….all creation is pure chaitanyam alone.
Let us say. Ghata. It is jneya vastu. An object that is known never occurs without jnana of the ghata. Can there be any known object in this world without jnaana in this creation? Known is a superimposition on knowledge. There is no knower. There is knowledge. ज्ञानं एव ज्ञातृत्वेन उपजीयते । Knowledge alone is construed as the knower. Thinker and thought are one and the same. Atma is the substratum. Thinker is the ego. Jnaana alone is taken as jnaata. For example, river means flow, a river does not flow.
So, jneyam can never occur as jnaana. Without the awareness of the pot there cannot be a pot. Awareness does not have an anchor. Jnaana is independent, but jneya is always dependent on jnaana. It is an appearance of the pot in the jnaana. Jnaana appears as space,time,tree,men,women, everything else one beholds.
So, jnaanam appears as the web and weft of the creation.
It is like a wave of water having a crest and trough. Water in the top, in the middle and in the bottom.
In a movie, on a screen, light alone appears as everything that is projected on it. In the case of a pot, it is light everywhere, inside and outside. Similarly it is all the light of awareness, interpenetrating the awareness of creation. It is an emphasis that jnaana alone is the origin of creation.
When we come to the aspects of cosmology, there is a Purana version and there is a Darshana version. Everything is personified in a Purana vision. It is an extrapolation of the loka drishti or loka Anubhava. Just as we live in a community and consider that devatas also live like us in a community. They also get married and have children. They also fight like how we do on earth. It is all names and forms, Male and female come together so the creation happens Devatha coming together becomes aadi dampati. Lakshmi.. Narayana, Parvati ..Ishwara, etc .
In vedanta Darshana,there are no female or male concepts. It is only .para prakriti and apara prakriti.
Lord Krishna in bhagavad gita (7-04/7-05 ) says that prakriti is of eight dimensions. Para prakriti is the one which upholds the universe.
We use the words inferior for insentient beings and superior, when we talk of sentient beings. That is why in creation there is what is termed as upper and lower.
रेतोधा आसन्। महिमानः आसन्
In the first creation there is the male principle( रेतोधा) which is para prakriti.sentient principle and female principle (महिमानः) which is apara prakriti… insentient principle.
The apara prakriti which is also called maya, shakti etc, is called swadhaa ( inferior). The para prakriti is called prayati( superior).
स्वधा अवस्थात्। प्रयति अवस्यात्
If you look at the known, say the body, it is made of panchabhutas, mind, ego and intellect.. eightfold apara prakriti.
Para prakriti is like a dance master and the dance, the master, has in his fold, all the details of the dance.
Sixth verse
को अद्धा वेद क इह प्र वोचत् कुत आजाता कुत इयंविसृष्टिः
अर्वाग् देवा अस्य विसर्जनेनाथा को वेद यतआबभूव
ಕೋ ಅದ್ಧಾ ವೇದ ಕ ಇಹ ಪ್ರವೋಚತ್ | ಕುತ ಆಜಾತಾ ಕುತ ಇಯಂ ವಿಸೃಷ್ಟಿಃ |
ಅರ್ವಾಗ್ದೇವಾ ಅಸ್ಯ ವಿಸರ್ಜನೇನಾ ಥಾ ಕೋ ವೇದ ಯತ ಆಬಭೂವ.
(Who really knows? Who will proclaim it here? Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation? The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. Who then knows whence it has arisen?)
If everything is known, and knowable,( if you think like that), then truth can be offered on a platter by somebody. Truth is not a property to be inherited. It has to be discovered. Any Guru cannot find it for you. He will not tell you what to know. If he tells, then the thing is already discovered. He will tell only how to know. An interesting thing to note here. A Sadhu, once said that he can think, he can fast,and he can wait. One has to put in an effort to arrive at that. Starting point for that is Brahma jijnasa. One has to have an enquiry mind and to do this he has to keep an empty mind.
That is the spirit of this sloka. को वेद? Who knows brahman as(अद्दा) saakshaat, directly, like knowing something. Nobody can think of knowing like that.
क इह प्रवोचत्? What was there to tell about that creation ?
Many questions like,what is the truth of this world, what is this variety of creation, life and death, Sukha and dukkha. One cannot say that this is all unreal as it is continuously changing. How to explain the creation which is full of contradictions( which is complete in itself). It is neither me nor mine. “Kuta aajaata”? Where did I come from? All the answers cannot lead one to the truth.
कार्य कारण भाव itself is illuminated by the आत्म चैतन्य।
Naasafiya sukta leads to a _drishti srishti vaada or ajaativada. _ The. Spirit of enquiry is kept alive in this sukta. Only then, one can resolve all doubts and notions. This can happen only when one becomes fearless and starts with an empty mind. When you abide as Atma, only then saakshatkara can happen.
अर्वाग् देवा अस्य विसर्जनेन. Panchabhutas have created this universe. Even Agni Indra Varuna are all of later origin…. arvaakjina… They were not there prior to Brahman. So, they will not be able to. know about Brahma. Visarjana means smruti.
Is it possible to know with our buddhi about all this? Brahman is much above Mahat tava and avyaakruta.
को वेद यतआबभूव. Who knows what is the upaadaana and nimitta of this universe?
Seventh verse
इयं विसृष्टिर्यत आबभूव यदि वा दधे यदि वा न
यो अस्याध्यक्षः परमे व्योमन् सो अङ्ग वेद यदि वा नवेद
ಇಯಂ ವಿಸೃಷ್ಟಿರ್ಯತ ಆಬಭೂವ |
ಯದಿ ವಾ ದಧೇ ಯದಿ ವಾ ನ |
ಯೋ ಅಸ್ಯಾಧ್ಯಕ್ಷಃ ಪರಮೇ ವ್ಯೋಮನ್ |
ಸೋ ಅಂಗ ವೇದ ಯದಿ ವಾ ನ ವೇದ ||
(Whence this creation has arisen– perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not –
the One who looks down on it, in the highest heaven, only He knows or perhaps He even does not know.)
Where does this sristi originate from? If we say, it originated from para Brahman .. यदि वा दधे…यदि वा न… does he or does he not hold on to the substratum?
Lord Krishna in bhagavad gita says. तस्य कर्तारम् अपि मां विद्धि… अकर्तारम् अपि मां विद्धि..
You understand that I am the doer and also not the doer.
For example, the light in the room shows all objects like chairs, table books etc. Does it bring out all these things from outside or does it not? Light only shines on them.
Similarly,when we talk of gold and the ornaments, does the gold uphold all the ornaments. The world of ornaments is only in the mind, not in the GOLD. Is the gold cause of the ornaments? Maybe or may not. All these questions arise due to our ajnaana. It is like the concept of rajju sarpa upaadaana kaarana due to ignorance. The fact is,there was never a sarpa in the rajju anytime. We only become victims of the mind and start believing the mind like building castles in the air!
That is why Lord krisna said that Ishwara is the adhyaksha of the karma but he is asanga also. He is only a witness. He is only a Being. When the Being becomes, then everything appears.
On a screen in a movie theatre, a movie cannot appear without the light. But the light does not create the movie.
So where does Brahma abide in? Does he abide in creation? Just as gold in a necklace abides in its own glory, Brahman also abides in his own glory.
There are three catogories of space.
Chittaakaasha. Internal space
Bootaakasha the space we can feel.
Chidakasha. The space of pure awareness.
Let us understand what the word अङ्ग in the sloka refers to .
It means “certainty”
Can some one say with certainty that Brahman is the origin of this creation or not? Does He know the creation? We do not know, who knows that? May be no one! Even He!
The glory of Hinduism is that truth cannot be described as a formula. Only inquiry can lead one in that direction. It is an open ended enquiry.
Vidyaranya swami quotes a sloka from the maitreyi brahmana( 2-4-14) of brihadaranyaka upanishad.
When duality appears to be there, one sees the other, one hears the other, one smells the other,one thinks of the other….
When all questions are resolved in the Atman, there is nothing called the second. THAT ALONE REMAINS. Everything else is negated holding on only to that ATMA.
केन कम् पश्येत्…it sees What?
Only jnaana prevails.
Atma does not see anything with a particular instrument.
केनापि किमपि न जिघ्रति? Atman knows all the appearance as it upholds the very appearance.
It is even better to say that it does not even know because there is no appearance at all.
So, यदि वा अङ्ग वेद यदि वा न।
The Rishi leaves the matter as an open ended statement or even as a question for anyone to ponder.
Om tat sat