Aadi Sankara and Sringeri Peetham

SRI VIMALANANDA BHARATI SWAMIJI
Sri Siddheswari Peetham, Courtallam

It is a familiar notion among Hindus that there are four Yugaas, (epochs) and the present one is Kali Yuga. In spiritual field, Aadi Sankara is considered to be the present Yuga Purusha. If he was not there, today India would have been entirely different. Prior to Sankara, the Hindu religious system got disorganised and in a way damaged by Buddhistic and Jain creeds. The real spirit of the scripture got shrouded, and many misinterpretations assumed the form of “true religions” and “pure” forms. Unlike the Avataaras of Vishnu (incarnations of the Lord) which dealt with “law and order” problems, the Sankara Avataara had a specific purpose, i.e., re-establishment of the Vedic spiritualism. The Hindu Veda (Scripture) is accepted to be the breath of the Lord, and no mortal claims its authorship. This scripture is mostly universal in its scope and is broadly divided into ritual (Karma), devotional (Upaasana) and spiritual (Jnaana) sections. Ritualism is for beginners and devotionalism is for adepts, while spiritualism is for the advanced. The essence of the scripture, nay the whole religion, must be found in the spiritual part (Jnaana Kaanda) only. Jnaana Kaanda which is available in Upanishads (which are tentatively categorised into 108 texts) is the final resort for the seeker of the best and highest. Aadi Sankara’s contribution gives an extreme focus to the spiritual perfection as opposed to devotional or ritual. His oft quoted saying is “Emancipation is solely and truly by spiritual practice” (Jnaanadevatu Kaivalyam) and not by mere rituals or sole devotion or simple moral behaviour or the like.

This leads to a comment that Sankara’s preachings must be confined to a few among many. Sankara, while anticipating such comments, answered the same saying that Veda must be studied by all and the rituals (Yaaga, Yajna, Kratu, Ishti, etc.) mentioned therein, must be performed by all beginners (Vedo nityam adheeyataam, Taduthitam karma swanushteeyataam). One should mug up mathematical tables, if he were to proceed to a study of mathematics. Similar is Veda and rituals.

Another comment against Sankara is that his creed is mostly theoretical and less practical: being so, “it is not easy to attain.” True it is: but, in experience we see that wrong theories lead to rotten practices, while right theories may or may not produce good, but they do not at all lead to incorrect tracks. A preacher or teacher must utter the best and finest, unmindful of the following he may or may not have. All scriptures of all religions propound the best and most solemn, though a small fraction of the followers may strive for it. The true test of a prophet is the eternity of his sayings automatically carried on from generation togeneration. Sankara’s preachings, howsoever idealistic they are, have stood the test of time. Today, the entire world (the best brains among men) have come to recognise that Sankara’s doctrines are foolproof and in a way universal.

If one sums up Sankara’s mass of doctrines, it can be put succinctly as “God is reality, Cosmos is illusory and Soul is none but God.” It may also be said poetically as “God is one, Rest is none, Soul is sole, All is whole.” (Brahma Satyam, Jagat Midhya, Jeevo Brahmaiva na aparah). That “God is Reality” is almost accepted by all religions and creeds, but about “Cosmos” (Jagat) many differ. The Dualists (Dwaitins) say that Cosmos is eternal: some say the Universe is unfolding as a sprout from a seed, or as curds from milk (This doctrine is akin to the theory of evolution–Parinaama Vaada). Some say the Cosmos is a combination of atoms, and that atoms are eternal (This doctrine is known as Anu Vaada or Aarambha Vaada). Sankara says that the Cosmos is illusory as a dream-world or as the sight of snake on a rope in twilight. Men implant their own notions, and do convert a rope into a snake or a black garland or a crooked water course, etc. It is man’s description in names and forms that makes or unmakes the universe. Men have another curious habit of believing it to be true of whatever and wherever they see. A tiger in dream is considered “true” by the man in dream. He scarce thinks then that “this is a dream and the tiger is a mere dreamy object.” When awake, he realises that what he suffered during the night was by a mere dreamy tiger. Therefore, What appeared in a dream was “true and real” for the dreamer and its illusoriness becomes evident when he comes into a wakeful state. With similar logic, so long you are in a wakeful state, you see this world to be real, but once you enter into a super-state (Tureeya Avastha) you realise that the Cosmos you saw before was a mere illusion. This doctrine of universe is known as “Vivartha Vaada” or the principle of imposition. In short, Sankara says that unless you practice and reach a super state of “Samadhi”, you may not be able to realise that the universe is illusory or Midhya. Till then, you are in a better type of dream which you call as wakefulness (Jaagrat).

A question is often raised as to why the philosophers are bothered about the truth or otherwise of the Cosmos. Is it not sufficient for them (the philosophers) to explain or expound God and recommend the same to seekers? This query has some force prima facie. But on close examination, the issue appears to be relevant and must needs answered, else philosophy becomes empty. If the Cosmos is real or eternal, one must cling to it permanently, for all the pleasures are available here. “As the Cosmos is composed of five elements, a mass of energy, space, time, etc., it may be blended by science to suit ‘all’ our requirements and pleasures in particular.” Thus runs the argument of the non-believer. But, in fact, none including the greatest scientists, is giving a guarantee about the span of his own life and his ability to enjoy. At various stages, they admit that “nature” has its own laws or limitations. Moreover, so long one is amorous about the worldly pleasures, he may not be inclined to think or enter into higher realms. The “eternity” of the Cosmos and the availability of its so-called pleasures made men on this globe either wicked or idle folk. Hence all spiritualists of all climes and creeds decry, in high tones, the Cosmos and its pleasures. Sankara puts the theory on a fundamental basis that the Cosmos is a creation of erroneous brains (snake-rope theory) or of dreamy brains (Space prevents me from discussing this aspect in extenso).

If cosmos is but a dreamy picture, “Who am I?” is the next question, “I”, being a part of the Cosmos, I must also be a dreamy creature. If that is so, the entire argument leads to a mere void, “I am awake now”,  “I dreamt last night between 3 to 5 A. M.”, “I slept soundly from 10 P. M., to 2 A. M.”. Such statements are truly and validly made and are accepted as correct. The three states (awakefulness, dream and sound sleep) are observed by myself and, therefore, “I” must be a witness to all the three states. The Hindu philosophy goes a bit further and says that the soul (“I”) is a permanent witness to births and deaths that follow successfully and without a suspense. Hence, by a simple logic (leaving the Hindu dogma for the present) “I” am a witness to my whole career, and there is some sort of eternity for “I” as compared to my three states. Hence “I” the Jeeva or individual has eternity. Only the world in which he dwells can be proved to be illusory (Midhya) though not nugatory (Soonya). In illusion, we mistake one for another (rope to a snake, or oyster to silver), while in negation (Soonya) we create one on nothing as a son to a barren woman, or a flower from the sky or a horn to hare, or water in mirage. This Soonya theory is a speciality to Buddhistic creed. Sankara condemns the “Soonya Vaada” as opposed to good logic or even common sense. Anything substantial or tangible cannot emanate from nothing. The Cosmos is apparently tangible and its parent cannot be a state of nothingness.

Hence, in the sphere of philosophy the reality or unreality of Cosmos must have to be enunciated, with special reference to soul (I-ness) which must be maintained to be eternal.

If the soul is eternal, it is put forth by some that there must be as many eternals in this Cosmos as there are animate beings, including men, animals, ants, etc. The traditional view is that there is only one eternity, i.e., God. The dualists (Dwaitins) maintain that all souls are eternal, and in their view eternity can be in multiples. Sankara vehemently objects to the theory of variety or numerality to eternity. What is numerous or various; is bound to perish and so number and eternity go at variance; Secondly, what is numerous or various is capable of observation to sense organs; and observability is offensive to eternity. Thirdly, eternity makes a Jeeva (individual) perpetually bound. Hence a Jeeva cannot hope or aspire for emancipation or liberation (Moksha). So Jeeva and God are one and one only (Aham Brahma Asmi), because they are eternity.

Today in modern science or sociology, experts are making attempts to excavate common principles for reaching “oneness”; and division or variety in whatever form is being abhorred. In the view of Sankara, nay Vyasa and others, the soul is one and one, while bodies may be many and various, as the current is one, though bulbs may be many. The sun (Apollo) is one, though his reflected images in various jars of water be many. The clay isone though its products of pots and kettles, etc., may be various. Gold is one though the ornaments and jewels may be varied or numerous. Thus analogies are enunciated to propound the principle that soul is one and bodies (Sareeras) may be various.

A subtle doubt may arise as to why people are generally fond of separateness and exclusiveness, with notions of young and old, poor and rich, black and white, man and woman, etc. This arises due to lack of proper instruction of sound truths. Of course, after several devastating wars, some nations are of late veering round for propagation of “oneness in international affairs.” To speak frankly, the strife or unrest in a family, nation, or inter-nation, etc., is due to lack of philosophic education and culture. Sankara’s doctrines are far ahead of the international views of the modern world. Variety and numerality, according to him, are a mere mushroom growth on the fallacious habit of superimposition (Adhyaasa). In materialistic world, man gradually slipped into the error of dubbing or implanting his possessions on his self. He says “I am deaf or lame” thereby impounding the deafness of the ear and lameness on his self (I-ness). He would also say, “I am angry, I am wise, etc.,” thereby engrossing his psychic features upon his self. Thus all his physical and psychic merits and demerits are implanted on his self. This is technically called “Adhyaasa” which causes variety, love, hatred, etc., which are the pillars of material business. Having analysed the fallacy of Adhyaasa, Sankara reveals the remedy by saying that true philosophy which propounds oneness of eternity or soleness of soul makes a man liberated.

Then again, there are counters in defining “liberation” (Mukti). Simple logic suggests that “liberation” does not arise unless “bondage” is established. Sankara advises the mortal to stand and ponder why he is not happy. The answer is that he is bound by family ties, social ties, national ties or ties of profession and avocation, etc. Suppose one answers that there can’t be any “ties” to a monarch like Alexander or Caesar; right it may be that he has no domestic or social or national worries. There are external ties or worries. But what about the worry of his failing health or fear of death? This worry does haunt the monarch or scholar or devotee alike. Here Adhyaasa (superimposition) works on him, and he thinks that the body’s decay and perish are tantamount to the decay and perish of his self. Now, we may deduce the element of “bondage” to be a mere psychic misconception of superimposition or false attribution of bodies on the soul. The psychic error is bondage and its correct view is liberation. Error (Ajnaana) can be cured only by correct knowledge (Jnaana) and not by penance or ritual or charity or good deeds. Hence Sankara emphatically propounds the theory that only correct knowledge causes liberation from bondage.

When the individual is freed from error, he is completely free here and here alone. This opportunity is open to one and all, irrespective of sex, caste, creed or religion. Sankara’s doctrinaire is doubtlessly universal and foolproof. All his writings abound in stark and sound reasoning and there is none to beat him in exposing the correct theories.

As propaganda is the process of diffusion of knowledge, Sankara had established four Peethams or sanctuaries in the four directions of India. In South at Sringeri, in East at Puri, in North at Badari and in West at Dwaraka. Four pontiffs were set up, and they are imparting the tenets of Sankara’s dicta, of course, following the rules of Hindu scripture. These pontiffs have clearcut territorial jurisdictions, and they maintain an ideal, spiritual and spotless life. They are born bachelors with profound learning and super-worldly temperament. They are the torchlights of Adwaitic creed (non-dualism).

The present pontiff of Sringeri Peetham, Sri Sri Sri Abhinava Vidyateertha Mahaswami, is a rare piece of personality with scholarship, calmness, plenty of grace and abundant human approach. Once in a decade, he undertakes a tour in the entire land to bless the weak, guide the educated, teach the rich, check the arrogant and advise the powerful. In this vast land of 65 crores of people, he is the sole connecting link between the northern and southern regions and his messages are heard by the masses with rapt attention and devotion. Recently for two months, he was the State Guest of Andhra Pradesh Government at Hyderabad, and somehow the Andhras take him to be their own patria potestas .

Sri Swamiji has completed his sixty years of mortal age in November, 1977, and Madras has taken the honour of celebrating him in a fitting manner. For us Yaties, Sri Swamiji is all,–Aatma and eternal. May he bless us for ever.

I, of Siddheswari Peetham, Courtallam, with the grace and permission of my revered Guruji, Sri Sri Sri Trivikrama Ramananda Bharati Swamiji, can do no more obeisance to my supreme godhead Sri Sri Sri Jagadguru Abhinava Vidyateertha Mahaswami than making a whole-hearted Pranaama to Him, the All-Pervading Soul, whose grace I covet for ever.

Om Tat Sat