[Advaita-l] Sleep, tamas and brahman
Kalyan
kalyan_kg at yahoo.com
Mon Apr 30 14:53:51 EDT 2018
Thanks for pointing out the dichotomies between the BU and ChU bhashyas. I reiterate - in deep sleep Shankara does not admit any ignorance in BU 4.3, as anyone is free to verify.
// It has been said that in the state of profound
sleep there is not, as in the waking and dream states, that
second thing differentiated from the self which it can. know
; hence it knows no particulars in profound sleep. Here
it is objected: If this is its nature, why does it give up
that nature and have particular knowledge? //
The question is a just different way of asking - why does jIva wake up from deep sleep and have particular knowledge?
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 4/30/18, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Sleep, tamas and brahman
To: "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Monday, April 30, 2018, 6:28 PM
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018
at 11:17 PM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
wrote:
// That is not the
impression that anyone,
any translator or commentator has got from
the Upanishad. In case you have arrived at such a
conclusion, well, that is not substantiated in the least
by the Upanishad. There is everything in the mantras in
that section to clearly show that it is an analogy.//
Alright. We will then have to disagree here and leave
it at that. I would only say one thing. Members are free to
read BU 4.3 and commentary and then they can draw their own
conclusions. In fact, as Sri Bhaskarji pointed out, the
statement atra veda avedah is made with respect to deep
sleep. On a different (note) Shankara does not interpret
this to mean that the Vedas are sublated.
Here one has to read the introduction to the
third Brahmana of the 4th chapter by Shankara. The above
statement about veda being not-veda in deep sleep is part of
the prakriyaa to teach the true state of the jiva. In this
prakriyaa, methodology, the three states are talked of and
the totally-free-of-all-upadhis state of the jiva is
demonstrated in a graded manner - from jaagrat to svapna to
sushupti to the one beyond sushupti. By showing that all
the identities of the jiva with caste, relations, gods, veda
(as he is enjoined to perform karma), aashrama, etc. are not
really his, as they cease to be experienced, though
temporarily, in the deep sleep, the true nature of the jiva,
the liberated state, is pointed out. So, the sublation of
veda, etc. is implicit in this whole teaching.
//Could you show the exact passage? //
BU 4.3.31.
Here is the Swami Madhavananda
translation:
It has been said that in the state of profound
sleep there is not, as in the waking and dream states, that
second thing differentiated from the self which it can. know
; hence it knows no particulars in profound sleep. Here
it is objected: If this is its nature, why does it give up
that nature and have particular knowledge? If, on the
other hand, it is its nature to have this kind of knowledge,
why does it not know particulars in the state of profound
sleep? The answer is this: When, in the waking or dream
state, there is something else besides the self, as it were,
presented by ignorance, then one, thinking of oneself as
different from that something-although there is nothing
different from the self, no! is there any self different
from it can see something. This has been shown by a
reference to one's experience in the dream state in the
passage, 'As if he were being killed, or
overpowered' (IV. iii. 20). Similarly one can smell,
taste, speak ..hear, think, touch and know
something.
Coming to the discussion: //If the latter, he
says, the jiva will not emerge from sleep as that will be
liberation: //
Shankara in fact asks a similar question but bypasses it in
the brihadaranyaka.
If the question you mean is: //
Here
it is objected: If this is its nature, why does it give up
that nature and have particular
knowledge?//
then, the answer is provided therein by
Shankara: that in the waking/dream states there is duality
of the seer and seen and hence perception of duality is
inevitable.
But then, the question is not the one I pointed
out earlier:
//If
the latter, he says, the jiva will not
emerge from sleep as that will be liberation: // This
is about attaining only saguna brahman in deep sleep and if
it is held that the jiva attains to the Nirguna Brahman in
deep sleep, he would not emerge therefrom, according to
Shankara, based on the scripture. He says this in the
Mandukya Upanishad bhashya for the kaarika
1.2:
कथं
प्राणशब्दत्वमव्याकृतस्य
? ‘प्राणबन्धनं हि
सोम्य मनः’ (छा. उ. ६ । ८ ।
२) इति
श्रुतेः । ननु,
तत्र ‘सदेव
सोम्य’ (छा. उ. ६ । २ ।
१) इति
प्रकृतं सद्ब्रह्म
प्राणशब्दवाच्यम् ; नैष
दोषः,
बीजात्मकत्वाभ्युपगमात्सतः ।
यद्यपि सद्ब्रह्म
प्राणशब्दवाच्यं तत्र,
तथापि
जीवप्रसवबीजात्मकत्वमपरित्यज्यै
व प्राणशब्दत्वं सतः
सच्छब्दवाच्यता च ।
यदि हि निर्बीजरूपं
विवक्षितं
ब्रह्माभविष्यत्
, ‘नेति
नेति’ (बृ. उ. ४ । ५ ।
३) ‘यतो
वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ.
२ । ९ । १) ‘अन्यदेव
तद्विदितादथो
अविदितादधि’ (के. उ. १ ।
४)इत्यवक्ष्यत्
; ‘न
सत्तन्नासदुच्यते’ (भ.
गी. १३ । १२) इति
स्मृतेः । निर्बीजतयैव
चेत् , सति प्रलीनानां
सम्पन्नानां
सुषुप्तिप्रलययोः
पुनरुत्थानानुपपत्तिः
स्यात् ; मुक्तानां च
पुनरुत्पत्तिप्रसङ्गः,
बीजाभावाविशेषात् ,
ज्ञानदाह्यबीजाभावे च
ज्ञानानर्थक्यप्रसङ्गः
;
तस्मात्सबीजत्वाभ्युपगमेनैव
सतः प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः,
सर्वश्रुतिषु च
कारणत्वव्यपदेशः । अत
एव ‘अक्षरात्परतः
परः’ (मु. उ. २ । १ ।
२)‘सबाह्याभ्यन्तरो
ह्यजः’ (मु. उ. २ । १ ।
२) ‘यतो
वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ.
२ । ९ । १) ‘नेति
नेति’ (बृ. उ. २ । ३ ।
६) इत्यादिना
बीजत्वापनयनेन
व्यपदेशः ।
तामबीजावस्थां तस्यैव
प्राज्ञशब्दवाच्यस्य
तुरीयत्वेन
देहादिसम्बन्धजाग्रदादिरहितां
पारमार्थिकीं
पृथग्वक्ष्यति ।
बीजावस्थापि ‘न
किञ्चिदवेदिषम्’
इत्युत्थितस्य
प्रत्ययदर्शनाद्देहेऽनुभूयत
एवेति त्रिधा देहे
व्यवस्थित इत्युच्यते
॥
The translation for this may be
seen in Swami Gambhirananda's book: p.189-190 of Advaita Ashrama
edition, for the crucial portion: ///Hence Existence is referred to as
prANa (in the Ch.Up.), and in all the Upanishads. It is
spoken of as the cause in all the Upanishads by *assuming*
It (for the time being) to be the seed of others (the whole
creation). And it is because of this that It
is referred to - *by refuting Its causal state* - in such
Vedic texts as, 'Superior to the akshara (mAyA) (Mund.
2.1.2), 'from which speech turns back (Tai.2.2), etc.
That Supremely Real State, *free from causality, relation
with body, etc. and modes of waking etc.* of that very
entity that is called prAjna, will be spoken separately in
Its aspect as the Turiya. If Brahman in Its seedless
(non-causal) state be meant there, then the individuals that
merge in It in deep sleep and dissolution cannot reasonably
re-emerge. If anybody can re-emerge from sleep or
dissolution, conceived of as nothing but identity with the
pure Brahman, then there will be the possibility of the
freed souls returning to take birth again, for in either
case, the absence of cause is a common factor."// By
saying the above, Shankara has indicated that ‘in all the
Shruti passages, wherever it is said that during deep sleep
the jiva merges in Brahman’ the ‘Brahman’ there is not
the Absolute, Non-dual, Vedāntic Brahman, but the tinged,
seeded, Brahman, that is the cause of creation.
According
to Shankara in all places where Brahman is referred to in
the context of deep sleep/creation it is the tinged Brahman
that is meant and not the Nirguna chaitanyam. The
reasoning is what is stated by Shankara above.
------------------------------ --------------
On Mon, 4/30/18, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Sleep, tamas and brahman
To: "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita
Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedan
ta.org>
Date: Monday, April 30, 2018, 5:25 PM
On Mon,
Apr 30, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
wrote:
// The Upanishad only
gives deep sleep
as an analogy to the liberated state //
I would disagree here. The upanishad literally equates
deep
sleep to the highest state. It is not a mere analogy.
That is not the impression that
anyone, any translator or commentator has got from the
Upanishad. In case you have arrived at such a
conclusion,
well, that is not substantiated in the least by the
Upanishad. There is everything in the mantras in that
section to clearly show that it is an analogy.
//If the latter were meant by
the shruti, everyone
will, with zero effort, become
liberated by just going to sleep.//
This is exactly what the upanishad suggests. Everyone
gets
liberated in deep sleep, without any effort.
This is again an offshoot of the
earlier misunderstanding of the
Upanishad.
//This is because in sleep there is no
room for sattva
(knowledge/deliberation/ sadhana) and
activity, karma, rajas. //
Ok. But I feel that there is a contradiction in equating
deep sleep to tamas and highest state respectively.
Again, a lot of things have been
missed. Nowhere does the Upanishad 'equate'
sleep
with the liberated state. If such were the case, then
sleep would have been taught as a substitute for
liberation. Nowhere such a teaching is given out.
//Shankara has pointed out that
in sleep the jiva
'merges' in saguna brahman and not
the nirguna brahman.//
At least in the brihadaranyaka, it is mentioned that the
individual is embraced by the supreme Self (becomes one
with
supreme Self), aka nirguNa brahman, in deep sleep.
This misconception arises because of
not reading / understanding the mantras /
bhashya.
//If the latter, he says, the jiva will
not emerge from sleep as that will be liberation: //
Shankara infact asks a similar question but bypasses it
in
the brihadaranyaka.
Could you show the exact
passage?
On a related note, the brihadaranyaka and mandukya seem
to
be giving different teachings. For the former, deep sleep
is
as good as nirguNa brahman. For the latter, there is a
fourth state turiya above deep sleep, which is nirguNa
brahman.
In fact Shankara makes a statement
showing the similarity between the two Upanishads: In
his
introduction to the third brahmana of the fourth chapter
he
says:
अत्र
च
जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्ततुरीयाण्
युपन्यस्तानि
अन्यप्रसङ्गेन —
इन्धः,
प्रविविक्ताहारतरः,
सर्वे प्राणाः, स एष
नेति नेतीति ।
Swami
Madhavananda: ·Here, in a different connection,(1) the
states of wakefulness, dream, profound sleep and
transcendence have been introduced in the words,
'Indha,' 'Has finer food,' 'The
different vital forces,' and 'This self is That
which has been described as "Not this, not
this,"
'
He adds a
footnote: 1. To show the order of gradual
emancipation.
Thus,
the two Upanishads teach the highest through the same
methodology; only that the Brihadaranyaka gives explicit
examples like a fish traversing from bank to bank, a
couple
in love, a bird returning to its abode, etc. which are
not
there in the Mandukya. In both the Upanishads the
'gradual' emanicipation is shown through the
three
states to the transcendental.
regards
----------------------------- - --------------
On Mon, 4/30/18, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Sleep, tamas and brahman
To: "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>,
"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta"
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-
vedanta.org>
Date: Monday, April 30, 2018, 1:57 AM
On Sat,
Apr 28, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Kalyan via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-
vedanta.org>
wrote:
Namaste
The brihadaranyaka upanishad equates deep sleep with
the
highest state of brahman.
The Upanishad
only gives deep sleep
as an analogy to the liberated state because there is
no
experienceable duality, no identities of jivas as so
and
so,
no misery, there is explicit peace and hence the state
is
called samprasaada. The comparison is only
instructional,
to enable the aspirant to get an idea of the liberated
state. Vidyaranya says in the Panchadashi, on a
different
context, the negation/sublation of jagat means only the
firm
conviction that it is mithya and not its disappearance
from
one's vision/experience. If the latter were meant
by
the shruti, everyone will, with zero effort, become
liberated by just going to sleep.
Why is sleep then, associated with tamas in the
bhagavad
gita?
This is because
in sleep there is no
room for sattva (knowledge/deliberation/
sadhana) and
activity, karma, rajas. In fact the 6th chapter of
the
Gita prescribes moderate sleep and moderate waking for
the
Yogi. This is because, without the required quantum
of
sleep, even as modern physicians, etc. agree, one
cannot
pursue sadhana properly. The body needs a certain
amount
of
sleep. The cosmic correspondence with individual
sleep
is
pralaya. This is a must since what has been created has
to
come to a resolution, dissolution, so as to enable the
next
cyclical creation. That is why pralaya is also a
tamasic
function of Brahman.
Second question -
vide the brihadaranyaka, can we say that
sleeping is a sAdhana in itself?
No. Sleep is not
a sadhana in
itself. As shown above, sleep, in moderate amount, is
required for conscious sadhana; therefore sadhana is a
conscious, wakeful activity. Shankara has pointed out
that
in sleep the jiva 'merges' in saguna brahman
and
not
the nirguna brahman. If the latter, he says, the jiva
will
not emerge from sleep as that will be liberation: yad
gatvaa
na nivartante ...of the 15th chapter of the Gita. So
too,
in
pralaya the jivas/bhutas merge in the saguna brahman,
only
to emerge later in srishti.
regardssubbu
Regards
Kalyan
____________________________ __ _________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.
org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.
culture.religion.advaita
To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://lists.advaita-
vedanta.
org/cgi-bin/listinfo/ advaita-l
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.o
rg
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list