Avidyaa and the States of Consciousness (Part-5)

Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only

Part-1   Part-2   Part-3   Part-4   Part-5

FIFTH PART

Conclusions

A producer-director of a cinema came to see the cinema along with his servant. The producer-director saw the cinema from the beginning to end without sleeping. The servant saw the cinema up to the interval and slept after the interval. The cinema continued to run till end since the producer-director is seeing it. In fact, the cinema is put on the screen only for his sake and not for the sake of his servant. Till the interval, both are the enjoyers of cinema. The servant is thinking that he alone is the enjoyer without minding the presence of his master, for whom only the show is displayed. After the interval, only one spectator as enjoyer exists. The servant and master are not one and the same enjoyer. Similarly, God is the producer-director of this world-cinema. The world is continuously displayed for the enjoyment of God only. The awaken and dream states indicate the interval of the cinema. The soul-servant enters into deep sleep after these two states of interval. The enjoyer is now only God in deep sleep. This is true even in ordinary human being since God is externally connected as the first energetic incarnation supporting the entire world. In the case of human incarnation, God exists in all the three states (deep sleep, dream and awaken).

In the ordinary human being, soul is the enjoyer in awaken and dream states. In human incarnation, both God and soul are the enjoyers in awaken and dream state whereas God alone is the enjoyer in deep sleep as in the case of ordinary human being. There is a sudden shift from the servant-soul to the master-God. This shift is clearly indicated by the Veda, by putting some special adjectives to the enjoyer in the state of deep sleep like ‘the enjoyer is the cause of the total world’, ‘the enjoyer is omniscient’ etc. Such adjectives were not put to the enjoyer in the awaken and dream states because the adjectives may be wrongly applied to the servant-soul enjoyer. Hence, the enjoyer in these two earlier states (awaken and dream) without any adjective is only the ordinary soul. Even though God-enjoyer exists in these two earlier states (awaken and dream) also, God is not referred in these two states because God is unimaginable.

Even if you take the mediated God as the first energetic incarnation, He is invisible and hence, not referred in these two states. Even if you take the human incarnation of God, such God is not at all identified by the co-human beings due to ego and jealousy. Due to these reasons, God is neglected from identification and only the clear visible soul with its gross body is referred as the enjoyer in these two states. Now, in the deep sleep the enjoyer is inferred as the God clearly by the new adjectives since there is no other alternative because God alone is the single enjoyer and He alone must be referred. Due to the above said problems in identification of God, in this deep sleep state also, the soul (which is also invisible) is taken as the enjoyer of deep sleep because connecting this tiny body to the Almighty looks odd since such concept gives the impression that God is in the tiny body. This wrong expectation is used by Shankara for the uplift of atheists by saying that God is in the tiny body and hence, God is in every body. This is impossible because the soul–servant exists like a stone in deep sleep, but, is not aware of even his little cinema and not to speak of the world-cinema. Hence, the soul is not at all the enjoyer, but, another enjoyer (God) exists, who is more important spectator then the soul. Hence, we say that the soul exists as inert energy in deep sleep but not as awareness. By this, we are not denying the existence of soul (inert energy) and we are denying the existence of individual soul (thoughts including ‘I’ thoughts).

To satisfy you more, we say that even the individual soul exists as inert impulses in the brain. The inert gross body is maintained by the will of God even in the absence of soul-enjoyer because God is enjoying the whole world and this tiny body along with or without individual soul is a tiny part of the world. Even if some individual souls are absent in the tiny body in deep sleep on one side of the earth, some other souls with tiny bodies in awaken state exist on the other side of the earth so that enjoyment of God with human souls in all states is never stopped. In the other upper worlds, the energetic beings (souls with tiny energetic bodies) exist always in awaken state since there is no dream and deep sleep in the case of energetic beings. The enjoyment with human beings in dream state is also possible in the case of sleeping human beings since some of them are in dream state also before deep sleep. In this way God is enjoying with the inert items and with the souls in all the three states (awaken, dream and deep sleep) in all the times continuously like a plate of meals served with all varieties of dishes continuously. The Veda says that the creation is created by God for entertainment only (Ekaakii na ramate).

Opponent:- God is not enjoying anything since the Veda says that He is in the enlightened state only even without enjoying any fruit (Anashnan anyah…). Enjoyment of the fruit comes only when the work is done and God says that He is untouched by any work (Na maam karmaani limpanti— Gita). He also says that He has no aspiration for any fruit (Na me karmaphale spruhaa… Gita) and hence, no fruit touches Him to give enjoyment. Only souls are doing works, aspiring the fruits and finally enjoying the fruits (Pippalam svaadu atti— Veda).

Swami:- This is a good question indeed. The rule of deeds and fruits is inevitable for anybody including God. If God breaks this rule by His omnipotence, He will lose His moral eligibility to implement it in the case of the souls. Even a normal human ruler follows the rule so that he can implement it for others. You can’t expect the madness of omnipotence in the case of omniscient God even though it is possible in an ignorant and egoistic ruler. Hence, if God has done the work, He will certainly enjoy its fruit and if He has not done any work He will not enjoy the fruit like a soul. Tell Me whether God created this world or not? The Veda says that He has created this world (Sa idam sarvam asrujata). You can’t say that He has created this world without any aim (Samkalpa) and hence, He will not enjoy this world, which is the fruit of His work or creation. Only a mad person does some work without any aim and God is not mad since He is omniscient and omnipotent always. We can’t say that God has become mad due to mental stress in dealing with these souls continuously since He is always omniscient and omnipotent. Moreover, the Veda says that He created this world with the aim of His entertainment and hence, such possibility has no place at all because the fruit is inevitable if work is done with aspiraton for its aimed fruit.

Hence, as per His aim and its corresponding work done by Him, He is enjoying the fruit, which is the entertainment. You have to state more carefully in the case of the God. You must say that He is entertained with the fruit, which is not direct enjoyment of the fruit. Entertainment is without attributes and enjoyment is with attributes. I will make this more clear with an example. You climbed the mango tree (work done) and attained a mango fruit. You are eating it and enjoying the sweetness of the fruit. This is enjoyment with attribute (sweetness). This is direct enjoyment involving work and fruit. You are seeing a cinema in which somebody is eating the mango fruit, which is the enjoyment of the fruit without attribute (enjoying the sweetness). This indirect enjoyment is called entertainment (Vinoda or Ramana), which is not direct enjoyment of fruit (Phala Bhoga). God is not the direct enjoyer (Bhoktaa). He is the direct enjoyer of the entertainment only and in this angle, He is also told that He is bhoktaa (kartaa bhoktaa Maheshwvarah— Gita). Since God did the creation (karma) with the aim to enjoy the entertainment (samkalpa), He becomes kartaa (doer) and bhoktaa (enjoyer of the fruit of work done with the aim). The word ‘Anashnan’ means not enjoying the fruit with attribute, which is not direct enjoyment of the fruit. He is not for any direct enjoyment of the fruit in this world and hence, He is not aspiring for any fruit in this world as said by Him in the Gita. He is for the overall indirect enjoyment (vinoda or ramana) of the entire creation. A spectator seeing the cinema is having overall indirect enjoyment and did not go to the cinema for a specific enjoyment of the person eating the mango fruit. In the case of God, enjoyment (overall and indirect) exists in one angle and enjoyment (specific fruit) doesn’t exist in another angle. Entertainment is also enjoyment of fruit but entertainment is overall and general whereas enjoyment is involved with a specific fruit. He is doer and enjoyer in the angle of entertainment and not doer and not enjoyer in the angle of enjoyment of any specific fruit.

You can’t also force enjoyment of fruit on God because He is basic force or energy for every work done in this world. Here, even though work is done by God, God will not enjoy the fruit of such work because there is no aim and desire for fruit of such work in the God. The Gita says the same concept that if one does a work under the direction of somebody else and does not have the interest in its fruit, such doer has burnt his work (doership) also and will not be bound to the fruit (Yasya sarve samaarambhaah, kaamasamkalpavarjitaah…). A horse is taking you to your goal under your direction and hence, the horse is neither bound to the work or to its fruit (Abadhnan purusham pashum—Veda). Of course, this concept should not be wrongly applied to a rowdy killing somebody arguing that a rowdy is not interested in killing any body and worked only under the direction of some body. The rowdy did this work of killing somebody for the sake of some money from that somebody and hence, the killer is bound to the fruit and its corresponding action to become sinner.

Opponent:- In the case of human incarnation, God merges with the selected human devotee and becomes one with the medium. In that case, the human being is doing work with the aim of some fruit. For example, the human incarnation eats food to pacify the hunger of the medium. This work is done with specific aim of pacifying hunger and the hunger is pacified as the fruit of eating work. In such case, the human being-component is bound by the work and fruit and simultaneously God fully merged totally with the human being is also bound by the work and fruit. If you want to avoid this defect of binding God, you have to accept dualism between God-component and human being-component, which means that God is not fully merged with the human being-component. In such case, God can’t satisfy His devotees, who desired to see and talk with God directly.

Swami:- The basic concept of human incarnation is the full merge of God (as Eshvara) with the selected human being. You need not worry about the enjoyment of fruit by doing corresponding work in the case of God because God is already following the rule of deeds and is enjoying the entertainment-fruit by doing its corresponding creation-work. This fresh objection raised by you is not a new objection since He is already following this rule of deeds and fruits. He is eating the food to maintain His medium for the sake of divine work to be done by Him for the welfare of the souls in the world. Hence, eating food is not to maintain the body for worldly enjoyments as in the case of ordinary souls. The human incarnation like God Krishna has already declared that His birth and work are divine for the welfare of the souls (Janma karma cha…, na kuryaam karma chedaham…, matkarmaparamo bhava… Gita). You can’t find any difference between the human-component and God-component in human incarnation and hence, all the works done by the human incarnation are related to God-component or human being-component since both components have become really one and the same.

Such oneness is attained by the unimaginable power of God. Hence, the desire of the devotees to come into contact with God directly is satisfied by God. In an alloy of two metals, which is a worldly example, such oneness may not be really attained because the two components exist separately in their atomic levels even though both metals are homogeneously mixed with each other. The alloy is given as the simile for the human incarnation because of almost oneness attained in the alloy. No simile is exactly equal to the item compared. Moreover, you can’t get the same equal item in all aspects from the imaginable domain for the unimaginable God. The works done by the human incarnation must be very carefully and very patiently analyzed so that one will realize that all the works are without any selfishness only since nothing is to be attained by God (Naanavaaptamavaaptavyam… Gita). If you say that the human incarnation can survive even without food, yes, it can survive, but, it can’t mix freely with the human beings to clarify their doubts. No excitement shall be developed in human beings by exhibiting unimaginable powers, in which case, human beings will not mix freely with the human incarnation.

The human incarnations are of five types:-

1) Ray (Kalaa):- God is by the side of the devotee and a little unimaginable power of God is expressed by the medium, which is the selected human being. This is example of basic dualism in which God has not entered the human being. Ex:- Sage Vyaasa

2) Part (Amsha):- God is by the side of devotee in the state of dualism only, but, God is very close to the devotee so that the devotee is treated as the inseparable limb of the God and this comes as special monism due to love of God to make feel part-medium of the whole-God. Father says to his child “You are my eye. You are my both hands”. Here, the child is very much loved by the father to feel that the child is inseparable part of himself. Ex.:- Sage Kapila.

3) Merge (Aavesha):- God enters the devotee and merges temporarily with the medium till the work is done. This is special monism with basic dualism in which both God and medium merge almost perfectly with each other to become almost one item only as in the case of two metals forming an alloy. Ex.:- Parushurama was possessed by God to kill all the evil kings and God left him after the work is over.

4) Complete (Puurna):- God enters and merges with the medium throughout the life. This is perfect monism of Shankara in which God is perfectly merging with the medium throughout the entire life of the medium Ex.:- Rama remained as God throughout His life.

5) Complete with Full Expression (Paripurna):- God enters and merges with the medium throughout the life coming under perfect monism as in the previous case of the medium and also expresses that He is the ultimate God. Ex.:- Krishna, who showed cosmic vision to prove that He is creating, maintaining and dissolving the world. Cosmos was created from His body, maintained by His body for some time and was withdrawn by His body after sometime.

The first type of incarnation belongs to dualism. The second and third types belong to special monism based on dualism in the fundamental level and monism due to non-isolation of the two items. The fourth and fifth incarnations belong to perfect monism in which there is no trace of dualism due to the unimaginable power of God. In dualism, the medium is in God (light). In special monism, the God (light) is in the medium. In monism the medium is God (light).

However, God is the possessor of the total unimaginable power in all these incarnations even though He expressed the total unimaginable power in the last type of human incarnation only. Hence, all types of human incarnations are equal since the same God is involved. The difference is only in expression as needed by the context. It is important to note that the human incarnation is possible even in dualism of Madhva as in the case of first type (Kalaa) incarnation. In dualism, sometimes, there is a possibility of higher type of incarnation compared to the incarnation attained by monism. Lord Krishna is the human incarnation of the final type, but, is a servant of Radha and Radha is incarnation of God based on dualism. The Veda refers to this human incarnation based on dualism (dvaa suparnaa…). The first two types of incarnations belong to dualism whereas the latter three types belong to monism.

The second type of incarnation (Amsha) is also special monism of Ramaanuja in the aspect of medium being treated as a part of God. The third type of incarnation (Aavesha) is also special monism in the aspect of inseparable medium from God even though basic dualism exists. Sometimes, the dualism-incarnation surpasses the monism-incarnation and this concept is shown in the case of Hanuman winning over Rama in a fight between them! Therefore, one shall not aspire to become monism-incarnation and can become greater than monism-incarnation while remaining as a devotee in dualism. As long as one aspires to become God, such soul will never become God. It is the will of God that decides to become the monism-incarnation for the requirement in a divine program. Even in devotional cinema, an actor is needed in the role of God apart from other actors needed in the story of the divine picture.

Vidyaa means knowledge and avidyaa means ignorance. Absence of knowledge itself is ignorance. Absence of knowledge of the true rope is the appearing false serpent. The true absolute item is the unimaginable God whereas the appearing false item is this world. This example is an incident taking place in the world for a soul and the soul is part of the world. This example shall not be applied to God. The rope is not under the illusion to think that itself is a serpent! A human being is under the illusion to think that the rope is serpent and serpent seen elsewhere was not an illusion. The human being influenced by the illusion is a part of the false serpent (world) and not a part of the true rope (God).

The true serpent that was seen elsewhere was not illusion and hence, world is not an illusion for the soul. The serpent confined to a particular incident of illusion was only false and this does not mean that the entire true world (in the view of soul) is not false. The human being has already seen the already existing serpent, which was an equally true item like rope in the world. If you say that God is that human being, such illusion is not possible for God since God is not seeing the world before the appearance of the world! God has created this world for the first time without seeing it earlier. Hence, avidyaa can’t touch God and therefore, neither the illusion (avidyaa as concept) nor the world (avidyaa as the product) can’t touch God. From the view point of God, world and illusion are non-existent and hence, avidyaa is non-existent for God. Vidyaa is the knowledge of truth or truth itself (because we have taken God as unimaginable awareness) and hence, is God. Avidyaa can cover God in the case of incarnation (since unimaginable God is in the medium) from the view point of the soul since the soul (avidya is real for the soul only) can never cross the boundary of avidyaa to see the absolute truth or God. If we assume that the true rope as awareness but, is not seeing serpent generated by illusion, but, is seeing the serpent generated by the power of rope, the example suits well provided you also realize that the person affected by the illusion is a tiny part of the false serpent itself and not a tiny part of the true rope.

This true power of the true rope is rope itself and there is no dualism within the rope or God to say that this is true God and this is the true power of God since both are unimaginable. A substratum like Sun and its power like Sunlight are different in the imaginable domain. Therefore, both God and His power are one and the same. The Brahmavaada School speaks about the substratum and the Shaktivaada School speaks about its power separately based on the knowledge of the imaginable domain, which doesn’t apply to unimaginable God. Both the schools are speaking about one true item only. Since both God and His power are unimaginable and wonderful, both can be called as Maayaa, which means wonderful or unimaginable. For a better understanding of human beings based on the knowledge of imaginable domain, both are separately mentioned to say that the power is Maayaa and the possessor of the power is Maayii as said in the Gita. Even in the case of incarnation, the medium is non-existent avidyaa (but appears to exist really due to power of God) from the view point of God and the same medium is true from the view point of the soul.

For God, the medium is really non-existent though it appears to be really existent by His power. For soul, the medium is really existent since both the soul and medium are having equal status of reality. The medium of God is only for the sake of souls. The word maayaa has four meanings:- 1) Unimaginable God (cause). 2) Unimaginable power of God (inherent characteristic of God). 3) Existing wonderful world (effect or product) as viewed by soul and soul is a part of the world unable to cross world. 4) Non-existing world before God, but, viewed by God as existing due to His unimaginable power. The difference between 1 and 2 is based on the knowledge of imaginable domain. Similarly, the word prakruti has two meanings:- 1) Best product created by God, which is this wonderful world (Prakrushtaa krutih) and 2) The root cause of this world, which is God (Prakrushtam kriyate anayaa).

The discourse on Avidyaa and the States of Consciousness is completed.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★