The unborn Ātman

In kārikā 57 Gauḍapāda says that one can talk of the origin and end of appearance of reality and not of reality itself.

He says,

‘All this is seen to be born on account of the illusion of experience (due to avidya); therefore nothing is permanent. All, again, as one with the Ultimate Reality is unborn. And therefore there is nothing like annihilation (ucchedaḥ)’.

According to Saṅkara, the objectionist here is arguing against the view of the kārikā 56. They ask, “If there is nothing else apart from the unborn ātman, how can you take about the origin and destruction of the cause and effect idea, as well as the cycle of birth and death”.

Śaṅkara, explains the word ‘saṃvṛti’ in the kārikā as the illusory experiences of the phenomenal world which are produced by ignorance (avidyā). All this is born of that saṃvṛti (i.e. concealment giving rise to illusory empirical experience). In other words, it is this concealment of truth that gives rise to birth of all. Hence whatever is the object of ignorance (avidyā), is non-eternal. For this reason it was stated in the previous kārikā that this empirical world (saṃsāra) characterised by birth and death appears to be present. From the point of view of Ultimate Reality, all this is unborn ātman. As it is unborn, it can never have any destruction which is the result of the relation of cause and effect. What we call the empirical world is the unborn ātman. In that sense there is no such thing as death or destruction in the world.

Gauḍapāda in kārikā 58, again, reiterates the idea that though the objects are not born, in fact, they do appear as though they were born because of illusion. In this kārikā he makes use of the notion of māyā to establish the fact that the birth of jīvas is only seen but not an actual event. But the illusion (māyā) itself does not exist.

He says:

‘Those Jīvas (entities) or beings are said to be born. But that birth which is never possible from the standpoint of Reality. Their birth is like that of an illusory object. That illusion, again, is non-existent’.

Śaṅkara explains that those, again, who imagine the birth of the jivas and other entities, do so only through saṃvṛtii. e. of empirical existence due to ignorance (avidyā). They are born on account of ignorance and not in reality. As the birth of those entities is the result of ignorance, it is said to be like the birth of objects through illusion (māyopamam). Their birth should be understood like the birth of things conjured up by magic, by māyā.

According to Śaṅkara that māyā or illusion does not exist. It is not a substance i.e. is not a separate entity. Māyā is the name given to a thing which does not really exist. In other words the name (māyā) has no referential content. Even though there is perception of a thing (pratiti), it does not really exist.

Karmarkar thinks that ‘dharmas’ in this kārikā may refer to 75 divisions of Reality admitted by the Buddhists which are popularly said to be born. Gauḍapāda says they are not really born.

Continuing with negation of causation and the doctrines of permanent existence and destruction called the śāsvatavāda and the ucchedavāda. Gauḍapāda advocates the view that an illusory sprout can germinates only from an illusory seed. Whatever is thus seen to be generated does not get destroyed or does not exist permanently.

He elaborates it in kārikā 59 thus:

‘Only illusory sprouts can come out of illusory seeds. They are neither eternal nor transitory (subject to destruction). The same applies to all beings (Jīvas)’.

Śaṅkara in his commentary on this kārikā explains that how the birth of these dharmas (entities, jīvas) is comparable to illusion. He gives an illustration. As from an illusory seed of mango, for instance, an illusory mango sprout is born. That sprout is neither permanent nor subject to destruction as it does not really exist. In the same way we have to construe the births and deaths etc. of jīvas. It means that from the absolute point of view, it is not possible to speak of the birth or death of these dharmas.

Gauḍapāda says that in the doctrine of non-origination which holds that everything is unborn, the epithets eternality and non-eternality is meaningless.

The kārikā 60 is the elaborations of kārikā 57 i.e. “sadbhāvena hyajam sarvam”. He says:

‘When all entities (dharmas) are unborn, there is no question of calling them either eternal or non-eternal. Where words cannot describe them there is no scope for discriminating them (real or unreal)’.

According to Śaṅkara from the standpoint of absolute Truth, the terms ‘eternal’ or ‘non-eternal’ do not apply to the unborn ātmans (na ajaṣu dharmeṣu). And whose essence consists in eternal one homogenous pure Consciousness. Śaṅkara says that words cannot be applied to ātmans. The Sanskrit term ‘varnāḥ’ derivatively signifies that which can describe things and it means words. In the case of ātman words are incapable of describing the nature of ātman. Discrimination (viveka) consisting of ideas like “this is of this nature” “this is of that nature”, eternal or non eternal cannot articulate the nature of unborn ātmans (aja dharmas). The Śruti also says, “where the words turn back etc.” (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.4.1). In other words the highest truth cannot be described in words (yato bacho nivartante).

Karmarkar adds in this kārikā that Buddhsits speak of 72 saṃskṛta dharmas and 3 asamskṛta dharmas. The former are śāsvata and the later are aśāśvata. According to Gauḍapāda when everything is unborn (aja) this classification is meaningless.