Brahman and attributes (was Re: )

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

TU: taittirIya upanishhat.h
MU: mANDUkya upanishhat.h
GK: gauDapAda kArikA

_______________________________________________________________________________

My apologies for the rather late reply. I have been busy with work.

VP Nandakumar wrote:

>        Can someone give a clear explanation of the three attributes of the
>Brahman - satyam, jnanam and anandam.

Here is my understanding:

satyaM GYAnamanataM brahma, in the TU does not mean that the Atman has
attributes. Why is that? It is because the same TU also says (both verses occur
in the Anandavalli):

yato vAcho nivartante | aprApya manasA saha |
       From which words turn back, (which words do) not reach with the mind.

What does this mean?

1. To say that X has an attribute Y, it means that Y is a characteristic of X
which can be `comprehended' by one of the senses, mind or the intellect. It
cannot be said that there is a characteristic which exists, but cannot be
comprehended by the mind or the intellect. It goes against the very definition
of attribute.

2. So then how can one say that brahman has attributes, but still cannot be
comprehended by the mind? If brahman has an infinite number of attributes, then
it cannot be described completely (which is what some systems claim). But this
does not hold water. Why? This is because the TU clearly says "that from which
words turn back" and not "that which words cannot describe entirely". There is a
clearly difference between these two statements. _If_ Atman had an infinite
number of attributes and _hence_ not capable of being comprehended by the mind,
shruti would not say "that from which words turn back", but rather "that which
words cannot describe completely".

3. Thus we can conclude that Atman does not have any attributes. This includes
even words like satyam, GYAnam etc since they are also only mental conceptions.

But then, why does the same TU say that brahman is

satyaM GYAnamanataM brahma | brahman (is) truth, knowledge (and) infinite

In fact right after the verses "yato vAcho .." etc TU says:

AnandaM brahmaNo vidvAn.h |

These verses serve as a description of brahman, when something called avidyA or
mAyA is admitted. The best description of mAyA is in GK II. See also
mAnasollAsa  (chapter 8 I think) and pa.nchadashI. The previous verses "yato
vAcho", etc is from the stand point of ajAti. ajAti is the final truth and
conclusion of vedAnta. How it is so is described in GK. When something called
avidyA is admitted to explain the existence of the world as we see it, then
Atman is satyaM, GYAnaM and AnandaM. Why?

satyam: As expounded by the MU and GK I and II, we can clearly see that the
world is merely a superimposition. But a superimposition cannot exist on a mere
void. The son of a barren woman cannot exist in reality nor as an illusion.
Thus when one is under the influence of avidyA, but recognizes using reasoning
and shruti that the world is an illusion, Atman is the "real" entity which
serves as the substratum for the illusion.

GYAnam: "knowledge" of it serves to destroy avidyA. removal of avidyA = moxa.

Anandam: by the knowledge of Atman the cycle of births and deaths which is the
cause of all "misery", ceases. Thus it is Anandam.

Thus Atman, though beyond sat and asat, Anandam and duHkhaM, etc, is described
as satyam, GYAnam and Anandam in the TU.

shrI sha.nkara has dealt with in his bhAshhya to the TU statement "satyaM
GYAnamanantaM brahma" how brahman has no attributes and what the meaning of
this statement is.

[Nandakumar also remarked he did not want quotes from sha.nkara]

Further you were wondering why shrI sha.nkara is being quoted extensively. It's
because one has to rely on shruti and shrI sha.nkara is the most authoritative
commentator in the advaita line. You can take it that advaita tradition =
adherence to sha.nkara's views. So quotes from sha.nkara serve as a kind of
proof, that a statement is in accordance with the tradition of advaita. If not,
you can ignore all such statements. That's why Giri was also giving quotes from
shrI sha.nkara.

Ramakrishnan.