Posted on: 22 Sep 2015
Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only
[Back Ground: Dr. Nikhil’s Questions] Shri Anil asked: You said that there are three types of wishes: 1) Zero wish in which the mechanism and material are unimaginable, 2) First wish in which mechanism is unimaginable but the material is imaginable and 3) Subsequent wish in which the material and content are imaginable. Is third type of wish, the wish of God?
Shri Swami Replied: You have asked very sharp question. Your intellectual potential is very high because you hail from the native place of Adi Shankara in Kerala state!
I have classified these wishes based on the structure of wish (mechanism and content material) only and not based on the source of wish. The source of zero wish and first wish is certainly God because the unimaginable domain is totally or partially involved in these two wishes. The subsequent wishes of God after the first wish also exist, which are not at all different from the first wish. The subsequent wishes of God in the process of creation have unimaginable mechanism since they are generated in God without nervous system and have imaginable content material (specific work of inert energy) as in the case of first wish. Such subsequent wish of God will be regarding the plan of creation of human being only. The first wish or the subsequent wish of God involved in the process of creation is always related with respect to the existence of creation in reference. If there is no reference of creation process, the zero wish also can continue in God in the situations like God is pleased. Here, the pleasure of God is within the domain of God only (unimaginable) and has no reference to create something different. The above mentioned third type of wish has imaginable mechanism (nervous system) and imaginable content material (specific work form of inert energy) and this type of wish is born in the human being only and not in the God. The reason is that God has no nervous system and hence imaginable mechanism is not possible in His case. The human being has nervous system and hence, imaginable mechanism only is possible in his case. The word ‘subsequent wish’ can be used in both the cases (God and human being) since the wish after the first wish of God is also called as subsequent wish. The wish generated in the human being is also called as subsequent wish because the human beings are generated only after the first wish in the sequential chain of creation. Hence, the confusion is quite normal and this clarification is needed in this context. You cannot link God to the wishes of the human beings since God gave freedom to the human beings to analyze well by intelligence and then only to do anything. But, you can link God to all the subsequent wishes in the sequential chain of planning various types of creation like air from space, fire, water, soil, plants, birds, animals and human beings. All these wishes are from God and based on God and hence, the unimaginable mechanism in the background becomes inevitable. In the living beings also, wishes are generated and their background mechanism is imaginable without which the wish cannot be generated. In a stone, the background mechanism (nervous system) is absent and hence, the wish cannot be generated. But, in the case of unimaginable God, the background mechanism (nervous system) is absent (as in the case of stone), yet, the wish is generated.
The presence of required background to generate its related result (living being) and the absence of required background not to generate its related result (non-living stone) come under the imaginable domain. The absence of the background generating the result as if the background exists is the unimaginable domain for which the example is God generating the wish without nervous system. Here, the result is imaginable since the wish is form of inert energy, the surprise is generated. If the wish is unimaginable without inert energy, there is no surprise to us because we cannot detect even the wish. In the first wish as well as subsequent wishes of God, in the process of creation, the result is wish, which is imaginable since it exists as a specific work form of inert energy only. This resulting wish is simultaneously the creation since the resulting wish contains the inert energy, which is the building material as in the case of the imaginary world of the human being. In these first and subsequent wishes, there is no difference as far as the unimaginable source, the unimaginable mechanism and imaginable result (wish) are concerned. The zero wish of God differs from the first and subsequent wishes of creation since the zero wish has the unimaginable source, unimaginable mechanism and unimaginable result (wish) since the zero wish is before creation of even the first wish. The zero wish is not unimaginable due to the absence of inert energy but due to its limitation to the domain of God. Hence, the zero wish confined to the domain of God only can take place even after the creation. The unimaginable result or wish means that the wish exists even without its content material (inert energy). Such zero wish can be of any type like boring, happiness, anger etc. If our astonishment is 50% for the first and subsequent wishes of creation, our astonishment for the zero wish is 100%. You have to simply note that God is bored and your worldly logical analysis utterly fails in God before the creation or even after the creation since the zero wish is always confined to God only irrespective of the existence or non-existence of the inert energy. You must also note that you are doing such analysis in zero wish existed before creation while you stand after the creation only to do such analysis. In that time and in that place, God alone existed and everything was imaginable to Him, which became unimaginable to you now. As the imaginable item exists now in the perspective of imaginable human being, the zero wish existed before creation as imaginable item in the perspective of imaginable God since God is imaginable to Himself. In that time and in that place, the zero wish existed with reference to God, the single observer. Therefore, you need not doubt about the existence of zero wish in that time in God because it was not unimaginable to God. That existed zero wish is not understood by you now and its past existence does not suffer in the present time. For example: your grand grand father existed sometime in the past seen by himself and others also existing in that time. Since you do not see him now, you cannot say that he did not exist. The concept of seeing in support of the existence existed in the past and the lack of concept of seeing in the present cannot disturb the past existence. If the zero wish was also not understood by God in that time as by you in the present time, you can say that its existence was impossible in the past and is impossible in the present. In such case only, the total non-existence results, finally ending in the conclusion that it never existed in the past nor exists in the present and hence, cannot exist in the future also. Such existence attacked by the three tenses of time is only non-existent in reality (trikaala baadhya sattaa). Once existed exists always and hence, these states of feeling exist in God now and in the future also. Therefore, such zero wishes exist always in God. God is pleased, God is furious etc., are possible in all the times. Such wishes in all the times remain as zero wishes only since such wish is confined to God (unimaginable domain) only. When God comes in the human form, such feelings exist in the medium as imaginable by mechanism and by material also. The homogeneity between the unimaginable God and imaginable human form indicates that such feelings of the medium are related to the unimaginable God also since God derives those feelings of the medium like the iron rod in close touch with hot iron rod. Such feelings of the medium may also be confined to the medium only without involving the inner unimaginable God. It depends on the situation and context and God is fully free to act in anyway not bound by the worldly logic.
You need not worry that the feeling of medium should touch God always since the iron rod in close touch with hot iron rod remains always hot. This is the problem with the human being, who applies the worldly logic existing between two imaginable items, which cannot be applied to the unimaginable God and imaginable medium. You may doubt the concept by questioning that how darkness can stay in the Sunlight. The heat may stay in the Sunlight as supporting item. But, darkness being the opposite item cannot be associated with the Sunlight. All this logic involves only imaginable items like Sunlight, darkness and heat. But, in the case of God (Sunlight), there cannot be any other item, which can support or oppose God. God is beyond support and opposition. Anything is possible in His case due to omnipotence resulting from His unimaginable nature. We must always remember this basic point whenever we discuss about God. If we miss this basic point, that leads to lot of confusion and tension.
If you analyze the first wish (or subsequent wishes) of God, the total picture is obtained. The unimaginable background indicates the unimaginable God (Parabrahman) as the basic substratum (Puchcham Pratishthaa— Veda, Brahmanopi Pratishthaaham— Gita). The imaginable content material indicates both the inert construction material (Upadana) and the designing cause (Nimitta) and this can be taken as the power of the school of power (Shakteya). Hence, the Gita says that the unimaginable God (indicated by Aham or I there by indicating the unimaginable God present in Krishna) is the substratum of Brahma (the power). The creation of the world from Brahma is Satkarayavada (product coming out that which already existed in the cause since the creation containing matter, energy and awareness exist in the first wish or Brahma). This first wish is called as Brahma, which is called as Karya Brahma or the first product that happens to be the single cause of the creation. The substratum is a called as Karana Brahma or the ultimate cause since it is the source or substratum of the first wish. Everywhere, in the process of creation, the first wish is said to be cause that can be easily understood, which is knowable and known to scholars since the content material of the first wish is made of wish (awareness) and inert energy. The wish (chit) is the designer cause and inert energy is material cause (achit). Hence, the first wish is said to be single cause, which is both designer and material (Abhinna Nimitta Upadanam). The building material, inert energy, is of two components, which are matter (inertia or inert of the word inert energy) and energy resulting from inert energy. The whole creation constitutes the three components: 1) Wish or awareness as the specific form of inert energy or Jnana (Saraswati), 2) Inertia or static nature or matter or gravity or bala (Lakshmi) and 3) energy or dynamism or Kriya (Parvati) as said in the Veda (Jnana Bala Kriyacha). The first Brahma Sutra says that the effort to know Brahman (first wish) is made by which both unimaginable background of the first wish (Parabrahma or Karana Brahma) and the imaginable content material made of three components (Brahma or Karya Brahma) are analyzed. The word Brahma (in the sense of God) used to indicate God, always suggests the unimaginable God. Of course, the word Brahma is used in other senses also to indicate any greatest item in a category. By this analysis, both unimaginable and imaginable aspects of the cause are understood. Understanding the unimaginable aspect means that it is understood as unimaginable.
All the three divine preachers have taken awareness as the starting point or cause of the creation, which as wish (specific form of inert energy) is the designer and as the inert energy is the material cause. They have mentioned the first wish (Brahman) as the total imaginable cause because if there is no imagination, the effort to know becomes waste. But, the unimaginable background of the first wish known as unimaginable God is also knowledge only. Hence, whenever the first wish is mentioned, its unimaginable background (Parabrahma) and the imaginable content (Brahma) are always touched. The Second Brahma Sutra says that God can be understood only from the inference of the cause of the creation (which is the aspect of scholars of logic without referring to the scripture). The third Brahma Sutra says that the knowledge of cause is from the scripture (the aspect of Purvamimaamsa of Jaimini). The fourth Brahma Sutra says that correlation must be done, which is in two contexts: 1) To understand the Parabrahma as the background whenever the first cause (first wish) called as Brahma is touched and 2) To understand both designer cause (wish) and material cause (inert energy) simultaneously whenever the cause of the creation (Brahma) is analyzed. The fifth Brahma Sutra says that it (Parabrahma) should not be imaginable due to imaginable awareness (one component, wish, of Brahma) since it is unimaginable and indicated by silence only. The unimaginable awareness of Parabrahma need not be the awareness existing in the world because such awareness can exist in God without worldly awareness. This sutra means that the designer cause of the first wish (awareness) should not be taken as the ultimate substratum, which is unimaginable and has no word to be indicated (any word should indicate some imaginable knowledge of the item as its meaning). This awareness of the first wish is not the ultimate cause since it is only the first created item (the zero wish might have existed earlier, but its content material is not inert energy and hence, cannot be treated as imaginable). The first wish means the first type of wish appeared as specific form of the inert energy and should not be taken as the first very wish itself since zero wish existed in God already as the state of boring. This first appearance of first wish of creation, made of three components, is said to be the second item after the first item or unimaginable God as said in the Veda (sa dvitiyamaichchat). For the entertainment, to get rid of the boring, the unimaginable God wished for the second item. Here, there are no two steps (wish for the second item and creation of the second item). It is a single step only because this first wish (specific work form of inert energy as awareness) to get second item (the awareness and inert energy put together happens to be the designing and material cause of the creation and itself is the second item as well as the first wish) itself is the second item. This first wish is not different from subsequent wishes of God. As soon as the wish appeared, the item of the wish simultaneously appears because the wish itself is that item and this is possible only when the wish contains inert energy, which is the building material of that wish. This proves that the entire creation is simply the wish of the unimaginable God only.
The first wish is not different at all from the subsequent wishes of God and this can be compared to the subsequent wish of human being in creating its imaginary world. As soon as the wish is created to create the imaginary world, the building material of the imaginary world (inert energy) and the designer (awareness) exist side by side in the first wish that appeared in the human being. Thus, the subsequent wish of the human being helps us to understand the first or subsequent wish of God with reference to the creation. When God is pleased, such happiness of God is not creating any external item and hence, it should be treated as zero wish since it does not contain inert energy that is necessary for the creation. But, if God wished to create a hill, such wish itself becomes the hill having the material cause as inert energy (inertia is the matter of the hill and energy is the binding force of the particles of the hill) and designing cause as wish or awareness (deciding the shape of the hill). You should clearly distinguish the zero wish and first wish (subsequent wishes, which are similar to first wish) of God from the subsequent wishes of human being. This difference brings the difference between concept (process of creation of God) and comparison (the creation of imaginary world by the human being).