Part 30 - Shatsthala Parasiva Brahman and Other Deities

This fourth Adhikarana, Samanvayadhikaranam, is begun in order to clear the clouds of doubt and confusion that arise from the study of the Vedas and the Vedanta, viz., that while Shatsthala Parasiva Brahman is being declared throughout (as the Supreme Lord) whether Indra, Upendra, 284 That is, they realize Parasiva Brahman while in the form of jiva (.e., human form); jijnasa means the attainment of Sivahood while still in jiva form.

Dinendra or Chandra, or any of the several other deities should be considered as one with Parasiva or as different from Him. In order to clearly establish this point this fourth Sutra (I. 1. 4.) Tat tu samanvayat (That but by reconciliation) is laid down. The word tat should be understood to establish that Shatsthala Parasiva Brahman, who is touched upon throughout the Vedas and the Vedanta as the primaval cause of everything (Sarva karana vedanta vedya purva paramrishta shatsthala Parasiva Brahmaiva). The word tu destroys all evidence that is visible to the eye. By the word samanvaya, it is clearly taught on the principle of the Sthularundhatinyaya that Siva, who is of the Amsa of Indra, Chandra, Upendra, Dinendra, etc., is throughout the Sastras Supreme Lord. 285 And therefore the meaning of the Sutra is that on the whole, disallowing all the ocular proofs and taking all the Veda-Vedanta proofs according to the Shadvidhalingatatparya, Siva is that (i.e., the chief) Brahman (tat Brahma). Here the matter for proof is whether the Sutra points out that Sarva Veda-Vedanta should be depended upon. | Sruti texts like Sadeva saumyedam agra asit 280 | Ekam eva advitiyam Brahma, 281 Eka eva Rudro na dvitiyaya tasthe Asankhyatah sahasrani smaryate na cha drisyate 288 | Deva ha vai svargam lokam agaman Te deva rudram apruchchhan Ko bhavan iti So'bravit Aham ekah prathamam asam Vartami cha bhavishyani cha Nanyah kaschin matto vyatiriktah So'ntaradantaram pravisat 289 Ritam satyam param brahma purusham krishnapingalam | Urdhvaretam virupaksham visvarupaya vai namo namah Sarve veda yat padam amananti iti, which are of a bhedabheda | , 285 The six ways of proof for fixing an argument are :- Upakrama with Upasamhara, Abhyasa, Apurvata, Phalam, Arthavada, and Upapatti. These are, in logic, collectively known as Shadvidhalingatatparya. For the Sthularundhati nyaya, see ante, page 273, footnote No. 107. 286 Chchandogya-upanishad , VI. 2. 288 24 Atharva Upa. 287 Atharva Upa. 289 Mahopanishad, X. II.

character, denote the purport of sarva veda-vedanta expressions which speak in favour of Siva being the Parasiva Brahman for creation, etc., and for shatsthala. The great argumentative doubt is whether the word Samanvaya includes in its purview deities (like) Indra, Upendra, etc., and the different forms of God worshipped or whether Prakriti is meant, of which Siva is the Overlord. Perhaps we may argue that Parasiva is not meant to be the chief Brahman. The Purvapaksha argument is: Never at any time can Parasiva be considered to be Parabrahinan; nor do the Vedas and the Vedanta anywhere declare Him to be so. Because the Vedas are entirely devoted to the practice of attaining Brahman, the doubt arises on both sides (regarding Parasiva being Brahman). 200 Further, the Brahman that could be attained through practice (Jagad Brahmanoh) is generally sought by realization through objects and motives (karya karanatva) by several ways and means until Brahma Siddhi is attained. Therefore it is not purely on Vedanta alone that one can depend upon for realizing the Brahman. 201 Furthermore, it is also right that the Veda should describe the several kinds of worship and the several deities to be worshipped according to it. For example, in the Vedic texts :Agniragre prathamo devatanam Asavadityo Brahma 200 Sripati says that two Brahmas should be considered in two ways Pratipadita Brahma and Vidhipurvaka Brahma. That Para Brahmatva should be proved in two ways: (1) through Sastra Samanvaya, and (2) from Vidhi or Achara Samanvaya. Both must coincide. 291 Cf. Anandatirtha's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita, Chapter II, where the nature of the Veda and the Vedanta are described with reference to the ways and means of attaining the Brahman. Anandatirtha distinguishes between the Veda, which, he says, lay down the practice (Dharma) to be followed to realize. (Para Brahman) and the Vedanta, which, he says, shows the reason. why he practice (Dharma) should be adopted in order to realize Para Brahman. In other words, the Veda prescribes the course of conduct, while the Vedanta assigns the reason for the same.

Tadvishnor ekam uttamam , Narayanah Param Brahmaiti And in similar other texts such as 371 Saisha vichitra sudridha bahvamkura svayam gunabhinna ankureshvapi gunabhinna | Sarvatra Brahma Vishnu Sivarupini Ajamekam lohita sukla krishnam bahvim prajam janayantim sarupam ||ti|| etc. Brahman is denoted to be the Supreme Being, declared in all Vedanta as the prime cause and as Pradhana-Prakriti. These therefore are the different forms of Brahman as declared throughout the Vedanta and adopted in practice (for realization). Moreover, if the realization of Brahman which is the highest of all attainments, is reduced to mere dependence upon useless things and to what is seen in the everyday world-such as ayam ghatah, ayam patah (this pot, this cloth) etc., which are of a transitory (or destructive) nature, then Brahman becomes a matter of uselessness and one never deserving to be aspired for with so much effort and religious meditation. In order to obviate these two great defects, the Veda prescribes the vidhi for working out the realization (of Brahman) as stated in the Vedanta. Or, if it reduces itself to this, viz., that working through certain prescribed methods, one could realize the Brahman, then, we lay down the following as the Siddhanta :-The Vedanta generally treats of Brahman; it also shows how to realize Brahman; and it further lays down the rules of action (required for it). Thus, there is no fault regarding the statements made in the Vedanta because both these 292 are brought about by the actual vidhi prescribed by the Vedas. We have to understand the Vedas and the Vedanta in the following manner. The Vedas prescribe the method of action to realize Brahman under six heads, viz., Upakrama, etc. 293 For example, Sruti texts like Atma va're drashtavyah 292 That is Brahman and how to realize Brahman, 299 See note 285 on p. 369,

srolavyo mantavyo nididhyasitavyah | 204 iti | show the particular way that should be adopted to realize Brahman. In the Smriti text Upakramopasamharau abhyaso' purvataphalam Arthavadopapatti cha lingam tatparyanirnaye iti, 295 the several methods which || are the ways and means by which Brahman might be realized from the start to the finish are laid down in detail as declared in the Vedanta. And therefore one should start from enquiring and hearing about the method, as laid down in the text: Ajnanat prabhavam duhkham jnanam tasya nivartakam Sarvavedantavakyanam sravanam tatpravartakam Sravanam nama vakyanam vaidikanam paratpare Upakramadibhir lingaih krita tatparya nischayam | iti. Thus Ajnana is the cause of all misery and jnana is the way to get out of it. And this is realized first by initiating an inquiry into and hearing about Brahman. Those statements which bind one to hear and understand that great Brahman described in the Vedas clearly state that one should start by knowing the cause and the effect by inferences. And therefore discussion is the first step to gain knowledge of the chief cause and the final effect. The text Sadeva saumyedam agra asit | iti, 290 indicates the first starting point. Then the text Sa ya esho'nimaitadatmyamidam sarvam sa atma tat tvam asi (Svetaketo) | iti 297 denotes the final effect. Again, the text Tattvamasi is also a subject for discussion and study. Further, the text Tam tvaupanishadam purusham pruchchhami iti, provides the several proofs in the Upanishad and the Vedanta to know the Purusha (i.e., Para Brahman). Finally, texts like Yenasrutam srutam bhavati iti, and Eka vignanena sarva vijnanam phalam 298 Seyam devataikshata Hantaham 294 295 Brihadaranyaka-upanishad , II. 4. 5. This follows the usual reading. For a different one, where the words Adimadhyanta sanganam takes the place of Upakramopasamhara, see Sri Kumara's commentary on Bhojadeva's Tattvaprakasa (Tri. Skt. Series, 68). 290 Chchandogya-upanishad , VI. 2. 1. 297 Ibid., VI. 14. 3. 298 Ibid., VI. 3. 2.

imah tisro devatah anena jivena atmananupravisya namarupe vyakaravani iti, and others provide for the understanding of Srishti, sthiti and samhara, and other kinds of manifestations and disappearances. For example, the text 200 Yatha saumyaikena mritpindena sarvam mrinmayam vignatam syatiti, provides an instance by way of illustration. Similarly, we have to understand in other places. In the case of Narayana, the text Anoraniyan mahato mahiyan 1300 iti, is the beginning. The text Sarvo hyesha Rudrah provides for the final conclusion. Also, texts like Yah parah sa Mahesvarah\ Ambikapataye Umapataye Pasupataye namo namahiti, etc., provide for the study (of the whole meaning of the Vedanta). 301 Texts like Visvadhiko Rudro maharshihiti, declare that Rudra is the greatest of all and above the whole universe. Texts like Paramritat parimuchyanti sarve iti, etc., provide for the grasping of the phalam, i.c., final realization (result) of the Vedantic study. Texts like Sahasrasirsham | 302 iti, and others provide for arthavada (discussion of the Upanishads). Texts like Yasmatparam naparamasti kinchit | iti, prove for Upapatti (argument). Agreeably to this, throughout the Vedanta, the hidden characteristic of Brahman is indicated by the neutral (passive) qualities (tatastha lakshana) of things. Just as an object is clearly realized by viewing it directly with one's own eyes, similarly the Vedanta as a whole gives for realization the characteristic of Parasiva Brahman. Therefore there is no contradiction either way. The Sruti text Naisha tarkena matirapaneya | iti, 303 declares that Brahman cannot be Chchandogya-upanishad , VI. 1. 4. 301 Mahopanishad, XIII. 18. 300 Katha. Upa., II. 20. 802 The full text is:-Sahasrasirsham devam visvaksham visvasambhavam > Visvam Narayanam devam aksharam paramam padam ▪ 303 Katha. Upa., II. 9.

realized by the knowledge obtained through discussion and therefore the three forms of discussion fall to the ground. As As through inference it is not possible to realize Brahman or the truth about him, inference ought not to be relied upon. Again, texts like Visvam bhutam bhuvanam chitram bahudha jatam jayamanam cha yat Sarvo hyesha Rudrah tasmai Rudraya namo astu iti, etc., clearly point to the material cause of the world. Also, the text beginning with Umasahayam Paramesvaram prabhum iti, and ending with Sa eva Vishnuh sa pranah sa Kalognih sa Chandramah Sa eva sarvam yadbhutam yachcha bhavyam sanatanam | Dhyatva tanmrityum atyeti nanyah pantha vimuktayeiti, sufficiently proves that throughout the Vedanta Parasiva alone is Brahman and that He alone should be meditated upon in order to realize moksha. Texts like Yo Rudro'gnau | iti, etc., also declare as the purport of all the Vedas that Siva is enshrined in all (mundane) things. And therefore He is the subject treated of as the Chief Brahman and declared to be such throughout the Vedanta. This does not conflict with the worshipping of different kinds of deities, high, middle or low (or good, indifferent or bad). The Smriti text Bhedabhedatmika saktih Brahmanishtha sanatani iti, states that the chief characteristic inherent in vahni (giving light and heat) is that of Brahman. These agencies (such as fire, etc.) are powerless without their respective saktis invested in them by Brahman (as his chief agents). Therefore Brahman possesses power above all these agencies. Just as the father gladdens his heart by the joyous words he speaks to his child and obtains replies from it and feels happy over them 304 _ which we generally see and experience in the world-so Brahman imparts his own power among his respective agentsThis idea is found worked up in the Harikathamritasara, 3 rd Sandhi, in this manner: when a father dresses up his child in a becoming way and feels glad at the sight presented by it, though the child has no idea of it, so Brahman gives his blessings to those who are dependent on Him.

Fire, Sun, Moon, etc.-and points them to the world as his chief agents, who primarily would have been nothing of consequence without his special power (invested in them). This is not merely an antiquated practice but also is current (to-day) among parents who we find saying (to their children) "This is a pot," "This is a piece of cloth," in order to give them a clear knowledge of the several objects we perceive around us. Further, just as those who are learned in the Kavyas and Alamkaras teach their disciples their views in order that they might grasp the whole meaning by illustrations, all statements made in the Vedanta prove nothing but the existence of Brahman. For Moreover, the realization of Brahman being inevitable anyhow, a knowledge of the Sastras is shown to be of little use, and renders action the only desideratum. Nor does it give the fruit of freeing oneself from bondage. Then, whether bondage is separate from Brahman or one with Brahman will have to be understood. Then, whether it is eternal or illusory (has also to be understood). (It is) not the first, because in that case, Sakti will have to be separated from Parasiva which results in the abandonment of Advaita. Nor can it be the second, because human beings, who in fact are subject to the bondage of illusion (Mayapasa), will not have any chance for absolution (moksha) left for them. Maya being removed, no attempt is necessary for any one to attain Brahman. Nor even the last one. For Paramesvara being available at all times, one who wishes moksha will never put forth any attempt by his exertions towards attaining it. Then there will be no difference made between bandha (bondage) and moksha (absolution). Then if one asserts that there is no necessity whatever in trying to discuss and understand the Vedanta to know Brahman, then we say, it is not so. Paramesvara who is ever composed of the three gunas (sattva, rajas and tamas) is different from the three gunas themselves. And therefore no sooner the jiva is freed from the fetters of the said three gunas, he will be no more separate from Siva but naturally get embodied with Siva and become one with him, who is never apart from

chitsakti.305 Even though Mayapasa (the bondage of illusion) is true, yet moksha need not be despaired of, as it is inevitable. Therefore the dvaitadvaita doctrine should be accepted. There is no contradiction in accepting this doctrine. The text Brahmavid Brahmaiva bhavati iti, One who knows Brahman becomes Brahman, and the text Brahmabhavanakamo Brahmavedanam kuryat iti, He who desires to become Brahman should know Brahman well 30 and others like it sufficiently prove the above view As Avidya produces moha (delusion) and is absolutely different from chitsakti (mental power or intellectual capacity) until the jiva is free from Avidya, the practice of religious meditation (upasana) must continue in order that the fetters of Avidya may be broken and Siva reached.307 Then what is meant by release (nivrittir nama) from Maya is to end oneself by ceasing to be the cause of Maya (Chit Saktau tatkarinibhuta layah) and becoming one in the domain of knowledge. According to the maxim Nasah karanalayah (destruction is only the cause for displacement from one place to another), it may be argued that the material and the non-material world (charachara prapancha) being constantly the material cause (upadanakarana), release from Avidya (illusion) cannot possibly be had at all and therefore even for those who know Brahman, it would not be possible to get themselves freed from the shackles of the bondage of Samsara (Samsara pravritlih sambhavati). It, however, cannot be argued so. Because the Sruti 305 The jiva while not free from the three gunas is separate from Brahman (i.e., in a dual state). There is, therefore, Advaitahani, i.e., abandonment of Advaita in that state. When the jiva frees himself from the three gunas, he is no longer separate from Brahman, i.e., he loses his duality. The duality goes and he becomes one with Siva, who is ever with chitsakti (i.e., mental power). That is, Advaita state is reached when the jiva is freed from the three gunas. well. 306 In order to become Brahman, know (or understand) Brahman When Brahman is well known, you will become Brahman. 307 Until he breaks the fetters and joins Siva, he is separate from Siva. The Dvaita doctrine prevails till then. And the way to reach Advaita is through upasana or religious meditation.

text Anisaya sochati muhyamanah Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati | 808 Nacha punaravartate nacha punaravartate | iti and hundreds of other Sruti texts like it teach that he who fully recognizes Brahman by his knowledge will become Brahman Himself, being freed from bondage for ever. It must not be said that by the mere use of the word Brahman it simply means mere understanding of Brahman and not becoming one with him, as it is not expressly said so. Just as by the mere chanting of a mantra one readily becomes cognizant of the deity to whom his offering is directly due, similarly at the very time of the offering of the sacrificial object, which is to be offered simultaneously with the chanting of the mantra, in order to secure the complete realization of the fruit of the sacrifice, in the Vedanta, the prayoga vidhi 309 thus binds one's action in realizing Brahman. In this instance, the principle denoted in the declaration of the Vedanta is not in contradiction with actual practice. If the doubt is raised as to how the declarations in the Vedanta, which while they do not point to the various stages of development in karma which help to attain wisdom, could be held to render the realization of Brahman by merely applying the principles of practice, we reply, it is Sruti texts like Amritasya deva dharano bhuyasam iti declare decisively and without doubt that by the mere application of the principles of karma, such as the wearing of the Sivalinga on the body and the holding fast to one's dedication vow (diksha) will enable one to immediately perceive Brahman and realize him. not so. Also, texts like Tasyabhidhyanat yojanat tattvabhavat bhuyaschante visvamayanivrittih Gnatva devam muchyate 308 Mundaka-upanishad , III. 2. 9. 309 808 Literally, the principle or method of application. The meaning is that when an oblation is offered in the fire, the deity to whom it is offered is thought of simultaneously. Similarly in the Vedanta, through a particular karma (method of action), a particular aspect of Brahman is known and according to the text Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati, Brahman is attained simultaneously. There is no interval of time between the "knowing" of Brahman and the "attaining" of Brahman.

sarva pasaih \ iti 310 lay down that one becomes eligible for moksha by closely meditating upon Parasiva and investing oneself with the Sivalinga. According to the Ratrisattra nyaya (offering of sacrifices in the night), 311 one who is desirous of moksha should at once adorn himself with the Rudraksha (beads) and invest himself with the Sivalinga and dedicate himself with the Sambhava diksha and then get at the Shatsthala Parasiva Brahmajnana in order to realize Brahman. As Sruti texts like Atma va're drashtavya | iti,312 do not clearly prescribe any particular principle for attaining Brahmajnana, therefore it may be said that the principles laid down in the Vedanta may lead one to blind action without actually helping to the realization. of Brahman, who is nirvikara (unchangeable). Or even it may be said that because the laws of procedure (vidhi) being declared, action is inevitable and therefore one is obliged to act up according to the principles laid down, in order to realize Brahman as a compulsory measure, though Brahman is not changeable. Moreover, in order to attain Brahman, it is not right to see a substitute for meditation acting on the basis of the Saktu nyaya 313 as illustrated in the expression Saktuna juhoti | iti and other texts. In trying to realize Brahman, the never-changeable, it is not right to adopt a different method of application in meditation out of mere jealousy. Whatever be the nature of the principles adopted for attaining Brahman in the different methods according to the Vidhi, one who is earnest about realizing moksha should adopt an indisputable method free from contradiction. If it is asked then which is that particular way which is not beset with 310 Sveta. Upa., I. 8. 311 According to this maxim all the sacrifices that should have been performed during the day might be performed during the night, if one has been rendered unable to perform them during the day. Otherwise he becomes a Karmabhrashta. 812 Brihadaranyaka-upanishad , II. 4. 5. 813 Saktu is the flour of barley first fried and then ground and offered in sacrifice.

contradiction, we would answer that the following three methods deserve contradiction. According to the Vedanta, Brahman cannot be realized just as we realize a pot placed in the presence of our eyes. Generally speaking, even though one dislikes (to see it), yet he does see a pot as soon as his eyes catch hold of it and thereby he realizes the object. But in Vedanta, the realization of Brahman must be obtained through the various proofs and inferences drawn by the expressions therein in order to get at a firm knowledge regarding Brahman before actually realizing him. Brahman cannot be realized in any other way. Of course, we find in various sacrificial Vidhis, as in the text Samidho yajatiiti, that by way of offering sacrifice Brahman can be realized. Even in such instances, one must have a firm knowledge both in Vedanta and in sacrificial functions in order to realize Brahman as the result of sacrifice. But one should not say that while Vedanta offers Brahmajnana through correct knowledge, that there is not the slightest use of following the Vidhis (relating to the offering of sacrifices) on the pretext that knowledge of Vedanta alone is sufficient. While Vedanta provides for a firm knowledge in order to realize Brahman out of sight (paroksha), in order to realize visibly (aparoksha) one has to apply oneself to the ritual functions (vidheh upapattih), which alone will enable him all the more easily to realize (Brahman). It is never possible to attain Brahman by mere knowledge derived from learning the Vedanta. But the Srauta marga (the way pointed out by the Srutis or Vedas) is only to get at the grace of Sadguru, which can only be attained through upasana (meditation) and penance and thereby through the help of the knowledge imparted to him by the Sadguru, the attainment of Brahman can at once be had. And this is the only way. The Sruti texts Dhyatva munir gachchati bhutayonim samastasakshim tamasah parastat Tasyabhidhyanat yojanat tattvabhavat bhuyaschante visvamaya nivrittih

Sraddha bhakti dhyana yogat avehi | Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati 314 Dhyana nirmathanabhyasat pasam dahati panditah Gnatva devam muchyate sarva pasaih 1315 Isam gnatva amruta bhavanti | 316 Atmanyeva atmanam pasyet | 317 Sambhurakasa madhye dhyeyah | 318 Tajjalaniti santa upasita Iti prachina yogyopasva | 319 iti, declare that in order to readily obtain moksha as the result of meditation, the knowledge obtained by the worship of Paramesvara is the chief means. So say the Smritis also :. Srotavyah srutivakyebhyo mantavyaschopapattibhih Dhyatva cha satatam dhyeyam etat darsana hetavah " jnanam vastu parichchhetti dhyanam tat bhavakaranam Tasmat jivo bhavet Sambhuh krimivat kitachintanat | iti. The above texts show clearly that it is by the method of constant sravana and manana and the knowledge derived therefrom applied to nididhyasana (the process of meditation and penance) that Paramasiva, who is the Lord of shatsthala, can be realized by the jiva and become one with him. This is the chief means by which Shatsthala Parasiva sakshatkara can be obtained. And those who desire the attainment of moksha through Parasiva should abstain from all pleasures of life, steadily and faithfully act according to the strict ordinances laid down by the Nigamas and Agamas, which derive their authority directly from Siva, and faithfully follow the karma in applying them and thus clearing their minds free of all wrong thoughts and dedicate themselves by vow for obtaining Parasiva. Such persons only can be in a position to gain the knowledge required for knowing Shatsthala Parasiva and to meditate upon Him to become one with Him. The 314 III. 2. 9. 815 Sveta. Upa., I. 8. 816 Sveta. Upa., III. 7. 317 818 IV. 4. 23. Atharvasiras. 319 Chchandogya-upanishad , III. 14. 1.

Atharvana Sikha texts Tad upasva (Meditate only on Him) and Siva eko dhyeyah sivamkarah sarvamanyat parityajya iti 320 (Siva alone should be meditated upon; Siva alone is capable of giving moksha; and therefore all others must be renounced), prohibit the meditation upon any deity other than Siva. And by no other means can he be freed from the bondage of the illusory Samsara (samsara mayapasa nivrittih). Again, texts like Ksharam pradhanam amrutaksharam Harah ksharatmana visate deva ekah 1821 Tasyabhidhyanat yojanat tattvabhavat bhuyaschante visvamaya nivrittih Yada charmavadakasam veshtayishyanti manavah Tada Sivam avignaya duhkhasyanto bhavishyati iti declare that meditation on Siva, adorning of the body with Siva's symbol, and knowledge of Siva result in the fruit of moksha. 322 And therefore Siva alone is Parabrahman. Accordingly those who desire moksha must therefore adopt the following six paths as of knowledge epitomised in shadvidha lingatat parya 323-dharana, jnana, dhyana, sravana, manana and archana, 324 according to the Vedanta in order to realize Brahman. If, in following the maxim Brahma satyam jagan mithya iti, the doubt is raised that realization cannot mean anything different from the knowledge derived from 321 Sveta. Upa., I. 10. 320 Atharva Upa. 322 Sripati says Sivadhyana, Sivadharana and Sivajnana will end in Sivarupa (lit.-will lead to the moksha called Sivarupa). The kita becomes bhramara, ie., the jiva assumes the rupa of Brahman. 323 Shadvidha lingalatparya means of the six means of knowledge. (Here linga denotes hetu or karana.) 824 Cf. with the following taken from the Naradiya, wherein it is stated :-Sravanam mananam chaiva dhyanam bhaktistathaiva cha >> Sadhanam jnanasampattau pradhanam nanyadishyate || Na chaitani vina kaschit jnanamapa kutaschana. The following are the six ways of attaining absolute knowledge about Brahman:-Sravana (hearing through teaching); Manana (repeating); Dhyana (meditation); Bhakti (devotion-Sudridhasnehasamyukta yatharthajnanato bhavet | sa bhaktiriti vignaya, says the Agama); Sadhana (accomplishment); and jnana (firm knowledge). Sripati replaces Bhakti and Sadhana by Dharana and Archana.

" realizing thoroughly one's own form (svasvarupa), all the world being nothing but false, and if this is to be the result of discussion of the whole of the Vedanta, then the reply is that it is not so. Because it will lead to contradiction of the Vedanta. If it is asked whether by the term 'Jagan mithya" (The world is false), it is meant that it is ignorance (Brahmajnanabadhyatvam) that prevents the knowing of Brahman; or whether it is traikalika nishedha, i.e., prohibition relating to the three times-past, present and the future-the reply is that it is not the first. For there is no means of prohibition attaching to it as it is impossible. The knowledge of Brahman enables one to free himself from the five elements making the world. For Sruti texts such as Sarvo vai Rudrah 325 Sarvam khalvidam Brahma | iti, 320 declare firmly that the whole world consists of the body of Siva. Or is, alternatively, agreeable to Sruti texts such as Nanyat pasyati nanyat srunoti | iti 327 (He can see nothing else; he can hear nothing else-but Brahman). He may be interrupted from becoming one with Siva through knowledge by the bondage of worldly ties, which he feels and hears. Texts such as Sivo data Sivo bhokta Sivah sarvam idam jagat iti, insist on one being absolutely free from worldly ties like ghata (pot) and pata (cloth) and until he is released from that bondage, he cannot have the knowledge of becoming one with Brahman or be released from the bondage of worldly ties. Therefore the doctrine of mithyatva (the falsity of the world) is not suitable (ayuktam). So long as this doctrine is entertained, the vow embodied in the Sruti text Eka vignanena sarva vijnana pratigna sruteh 328 (If you know one thing 325 Maha-upanishad , 22-24. 326 Chchandogya-upanishad , III. 14. 1. 327 Samadhi is of two kinds :-(1) Asampragna Samadhi and (2) Sampragna Samadhi. In the former, one loses even the senses of hearing, seeing, touch, etc., but in the latter, he will be feeling the external things-seeing, hearing, etc. = 328 Chchandogya text (VI. 1. 4) :- Yatha saumyaikena mritpindena sarvam mrinmayam vignatam syata (Oh, my dear boy, if you know

thoroughly well, you will be able to know all other things), will have been washed off one's hands (dattanjali prasangah). 329 It is stated in the Srutis in the form of a vow Eka vignanena sarva vijnanamiti, in order to illustrate the world as the chief material cause (upadanakarana) for Brahman in regard to srishti (creation), etc. Therefore Sruti texts like Sarvam khalvidam Brahma Aitadatmyamidam sarvam tat satyam sa Atma tattvamasi Svetaketo 1330 Sarvo vai Rudrah 330 iti declare that the world is composed of Siva. Therefore the knowledge of Brahman with (belief) in the existence of the world is no contradiction.331 Even King Janaka and other great men, who knew and realized Brahman, seem to have acknowledged the above truth. Even they thought that realization of Brahman was compatible with belief in the existence of the world. The existence of Jivanmuktas³32 in their carnal bodies, etc., also renders impracticable (the theory of) Jagad vyavaharanupapattih (when considered) with the exposition (contained) in the Srutis. 333 Further it is stated in the Smritis generally as a great objection Akhandadvaita bhane tu sarvam Brahmaiva nanyatha jnanad vikalpabuddhistu liyate na svarupatah | what one ball of earth is constituted of, then you can understand the whole world.) 329 Literally, giving away with a handful of water, as when making a gift--as prescribed in the Hindu Law relating to gifts. 330 Chen. Upa., III. 14. 1; VI. 15. 3. 330 a Maha-upanishad , 22-24. 331 Sripati's opinion is that the doctrine of jaganmithyatva is false. In his view, the belief in the existence of the world is compatible with the realization of Brahman. 882 Those who have realized Brahman but still live in this world to lead people (the followers) to Brahmajnana. 333 Here Sripati combats the theory of Sankara that the world is real only for the purpose of Vyavahara. Sripati suggests that this view is impracticable for two reasons: -(1) that the Srutis declare against it; and (2) that the existence of Jivanmuktas makes the theory impossible of belief. The connecting link between the Jagat and Brahman is the carnal body. I am Brahman and the carnal body disappears when meditation makes me realize Brahman,

Bhinnatvam naiva yunjita Brahmopadanatah kvachit Vacharambhanamatratvat bhedah kenopajayate i Tasmat Avidyamatratva kathanam mohanaya hi || iti || In Sruti texts genarally, only censure is heard in regard to the doctrine of jaganmithyatva.334 When knowledge developes to a stage capable of realizing everything as an indivisible Whole, everything is Brahman and nothing else. When comprehension departs from true knowledge, he cannot find absorption in Brahmasvarupa. Never at all entertain division from Brahman. Though the Sruti text Vacharambhana 335 speaks of division, it is to be understood as not real, because Avidya is treated in the Smritis evidently to delude the minds of those who have a firm knowledge of Brahman. In the Gita it is said: Asatyam apratishtam te jagadahuh anisvaram ili, 836 the world is te \ not real, nor an established one; nor has it a Lord to rule over it. Nor can it be the second, for the text Amulam anadharam imah prajah prajayante Na kadachit anidrisam jagatiti, affirms that the world is eternal. Moreover, Sruti texts like Asad va idam agra asit tato vai sadajayata sadeva saumyedam agra asit 1 337 Ekameva advitiyam Brahmaiti, and hundreds of others similar to them declare that the world did not exist long before it was created (srishteh purvam prapanchasya sattvat). Then, if it is asked, "How can it be affected by the three kinds of time, present, past and future (traikalika)," the answer is "It is not so (affected) ". Because the Sruti text Asad va idam agra asit clearly states that the world did 834 Sripati protests that if the Jagat is real only for vyavahara, then how can the carnal body be real and help through karma, the realization of Brahman? So, he drives home the point, "You have to grant that the carnal body is real" and if that be so, then the Jagat is also real. Compare the Chchandogya text Vacharambhanam vikaro namadheyam mruttiketyeva satyam What is uttered undergoes vikara (change), which is the result of the final change of mrittika, the earth. 335 Chchandogya-upanishad , VI. 1. 4. 330 Bhag.-Gita, XVI. 8. 337 Taittiriya-upanishad , II, 7.

385 exist before it became manifest in Brahman in the form of an indivisible small particle (sukshma rupa) with the same name and form and therefore it is termed asatvam in the Smriti. Then the Sruti says Tato vai sadajayata, which means that after creation, it (the world) developed (from its small condition) to such an extent as to appear to be a world different from Brahman, in a divided (i.e., separate) form, assuming a big shape. Furthermore, by the use of the word "Asat", the Sruti text grants and preassumes the existence of the forms of akasa (space), gagana (sky) and aravinda (the earth). 239 It would, therefore, be as correct to ask "Why not a barren woman be possessed of a son" as to suggest that the world never existed but still gave an idea of its existence (gaganaravindavadabhavatvangikare vandhyaputradinamapi jagatkaranatvam kim na syat) by accepting bhavatva (i.e., the state of being in existence through gagana and aravinda).340 Moreover, the word Sadeva in the Sruti text, directs attention (avadharana) to the characteristic idea of the world's existence in Brahman in an attributive manner (na saviseshatva nishedhah). 3*1 And the word asatah removes the contradiction of the idea which throws delusion (bhranti) on the mind. 342 Then how can the expression Sadeva saumya iti, in the Sruti text, be taken to mean what is contradictory to actual existence? 343 Taittiriya-upanishad , II. 7. 338 339 That is, Sripati suggests that the word Asat presupposes the existence of space, sky and the lotus (the lotus representing the earth as a product of earth). - 340 A barren woman cannot possess a child. To think of her possessing a child is inconsistent. So if the world never at all existed, the bhavajnana pointed out in the Sruti is incorrect and hence the Jagat did originally exist in an infinitesimal form (sukshma rupa). 341 This is opposed to Sankara's description of Brahman as nirvisesha, without any characteristic attributes. Sripati's view is that Brahman is savisesha, i.e., has attributive characteristics. 842 It removes the delusive feeling whether the world actually existed or not. 843 This is another aspect of the criticism directed against Sankara's view. 25 F

The word agre used in the text-agre-iti-denotes the characteristic (kalaviseshah) of time. The word asit in the text is the verb which seems to declare clearly the world's existence. The word asit means existed. ***The word Ekameva (in the text) directs attention to the idea (avadharana) of the actual existence (of the world) without leaving anything to doubt. And the word advitiya (in the Sruti text) clearly shows the double characteristic of Brahman in being the two-fold cause. Sruti texts like Eka eva Rudro na dvitiyaya tasthe \ iti, 345 must be understood in the same manner. Then, the Sruti text Visvadhiko Rudro maharshih \iti, also firmly declares that there is no contradiction whatever in the three periods of time-past present and future-regarding the world's existence. This is all the secret about it (Iti rahasyam).