More Advaita Questions (Part-5)

Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only

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

Superimposition

You have introduced the superimposition in the case of mistaking the body for the soul (Dehatmabhranti). By analysis, you have removed the illusion of misunderstanding the body for the soul. But, you are captured by another most dangerous illusion i.e., mistaking the soul for God (Brahman), which can be called as “AtmaBrahmabhranti.” Both the superimpositions are similar. Based on one common property, the illusion or superimposition is born. When you see the rope in light darkness, the physical appearance (the length, movement by air etc.), which is the common property between the rope and snake generated the illusion. Therefore, you should not decide anything based on a single aspect. You have to consider other aspects also to decide anything. When you switch on the torchlight, the difference is realized because the other properties like life, hissing on moving it etc., are realized. Similarly, the single property like wishing cannot decide Brahman as awareness. Such decision shows only the illusion under ignorance as in the above case. The different properties like creation of the universe, the original creativity etc., will differentiate Brahman from the soul. Even if you separate Jiiva from the Atman by removing all the qualities (When the subtle body, which is a bundle of qualities is destroyed, the causal body, which is pure awareness in nirguna state remains.), still the soul of such a realized person also is not proving the potentiality of creation. You cannot remove the potentiality of creation from Brahman even in its ultimate reality. You do not have such potentiality to remove the hidden potentiality of Brahman for fulfilling your ambition. It is most pitiable that you do not achieve anything by removing such potentiality from Brahman. If you remove such potentiality, Brahman cannot be the greatest and then you cannot call such Brahman as Brahman. You cannot call such Brahman as Brahman, because such Brahman loses the sense of the word ‘Brahman’. Do you want to become such incapable Brahman, which is only namesake Brahman? Why don’t you say that finally you have become yourself?

Petitioner: There is only one superimposition that is between the body and Atman. There is no second item like Brahman, which is different from Atman. Brahman is the second name of Atman. Therefore, there is no question of illusion between Brahman and Atman. In the first superimposition, there are two items, which are body and soul (Atman). Similarly, there are two items in the simile also, which are the rope and serpent. But in the second superimposition brought by You, there is only one item that is the awareness, which can be called as Atman or Brahman.

Mediator: As far as the existence of Brahman is considered, there is no debate because the scripture speaks about it and the scripture is supported by the unimaginable actions of the human incarnation. The debate is only about whether the Brahman mentioned by scriptures is Atman or not.

Respondent: The unimaginable actions of the human incarnation prove the existence of the unimaginability, which is beyond all the imaginable items of creation. If you say that all the items of the creation are unreal, the awareness, which is in the creation, is also unreal. If you say that awareness is beyond creation, then the word awareness must not carry any sense. Therefore, if you mean such unimaginable item, which is beyond all the imaginable items of creation by the words Atman or Brahman, we have no objection to say that Atman is Brahman. But, if you have understood Atman, in such case it is an item within the space and then cannot be the creator. You cannot deny the existence of unimaginable item because the concept of unimaginability is established by the human incarnation. The possessor of such unimaginability is Brahman or can be called also as Ishwara due to the hidden potentiality of unimaginable creativity in Brahman. If you have understood any item, it is not Brahman according to Lord Yama in the Veda. After all, the angels are far superior than the human beings in the potentiality of knowledge. However, if you call that unimaginable item by words like Brahman, Atman, we have no objection. But, we advise you to call it by the word Parabrahman because this word does not indicate any positive information about the nature of that item.

The word Atman means that, which pervades other things like space, energy, air etc. Such pervading property reveals the spatial nature of the item and so it is better not to use the word Atman. Of course, you can use the word Brahman because it means greatest. The unimaginable item is always the greatest among all the imaginable items of the world. Still it is better not to use this word also because this word is used to several greatest items in their categories. Only to avoid the confusion, we are opposing this word. The word Parabrahman is the best because it means that, which is beyond any greatest item or even the greatest world. The soul is called as Atman because the awareness pervades all over the body. Atman can be Brahman in the sense that Atman is the greatest item due to its critical and subtle nature. If you use the word Brahman for inert energy, the soul can be called as Brahman in the sense that the soul is essentially the all-pervading inert cosmic energy.

Petitioner: We call the soul (Atman) as jiiva in the relative reality and Brahman as Ishwara. In the ultimate reality, since the world is unreal, the potentiality of creating the world is also unreal and so Ishwara as well as Jiiva become unreal. In the ultimate reality only Brahman or Atman remains as the ultimate reality.

Respondent: If Brahman and Atman are one and the same in the ultimate reality, Ishwara and Jiiva also must be one and the same in relative reality. However, you may say that the difference between Ishwara and Jiiva is also unreal because both exist in the relative reality. In such case, Ishwara, Jiiva and the difference between Ishwara and Jiiva are the three unrealities existing in the unreal world. Then, Brahman or Atman is the only reality at any time. Then, who is experiencing this unreal world? The unreality can never be experienced like the horn on the head of Rabbit. Shankara never said that this world is unreal. He said that the world is Mithya, which is neither real nor unreal (sadasat vilakshana). It means that it is non-existent if isolated from Brahman, but it is existent as long as it is based on the Brahman. When you see the rope as serpent, the illusory serpent exists based on the existence of rope. If the rope is removed, the illusory serpent disappears and becomes non-existent. But during the existence, the serpent is existing in the form of imagination, which is made of nervous energy. Energy is more subtle than the matter. Awareness is more subtle than the energy. The imagination or feeling is more subtle than the awareness. Thus, compared to the rope (matter), the illusory serpent is very very subtle and negligible, which can be treated as almost absent. It is neither completely existing nor completely absent. Therefore, you cannot say it as completely unreal. Neither the cause (rope) nor the product (serpent) is non-existent and therefore, even Shankara did not agree with Asat karya vada. He proposed only the Sat karya vada, which means that the product is not completely non-existent but still it is neglected. This is vivarta. In such case, you cannot use the word “unreal” either to Brahman or to the world. The Veda says that the world is created for the entertainment of the Brahman. If the world is completely unreal, there cannot be entertainment because the object is absent. Relatively real means not completely unreal.

The creation is work in essence because it is energy in the basic form. Energy is dynamic and is work only. The process of construction is work. The product of this work is building, which is matter bound in certain design by binding energy. Matter is a form of energy. Binding energy is work and therefore, the process of construction, the binding energy, and the matter in the building are work only. Therefore, there are only two items. i) The worker or designer (constructor). ii) The construction (work). Only the construction is visible and not the worker or designer. Similarly, only the unimaginable Brahman and imaginable creation exist. The link between the two is unimaginable. The world may be very very negligible but still it exists as the object of entertainment for the Brahman. If you say the world is unreal, the entertainment is unreal and it indicates that Brahman is incapable. Brahman is the ultimate reality and the world is relative reality even in Paramartha dasha. Brahman has not become the relative reality, in which case, its existence becomes negligible and moreover the entertainment is not possible because the subject itself becomes the object. Therefore, Brahman always remains in the ultimate reality and creates the world, Itself existing in the same plane of ultimate reality. Brahman with such potentiality expressed is called as Ishwara. When you are not imagining anything, you are a man (Brahman). When you imagine something, you are called as poet. During the stage of imagination, the man is poet and poet is the man. Before imagination, only the man exists but the poet is hidden in the man in the form of potentiality to say the poetry or imagination. Thus, during the existence of world, both Paramartha dasha and vyavahara dasha co-exist. You cannot say that the man is real and the poet is unreal. Both the states are mutually inclusive with each other. According to your theory, unless the creation disappears totally, Brahman is not released. If you say that one state is real and the other state is unreal, only one state can exist at one time.

Mediator: You have spoken about Brahman. But, our topic is whether the soul is Brahman or not.

Respondent: Unless you understand very clearly about Brahman, you cannot understand whether Brahman is Atman or not. The answer for this lies in your hands only. You have defined Brahman as the ultimate reality, which is imaginable to us under any circumstances and the only information about Brahman is that It exists. Such existence is experienced by us practically through the unimaginable talents of the human incarnation and through the scripture, which is also fulfilled by Him only. We have called this item as Brahman or more precisely as Parabrahman. If you like to call this item as Atman, we have no serious objection because it is just an alternative name. If we can take the word Atman in the sense of essence, we can call Brahman as Atman also because Brahman is the essence of the creation. The ultimate reality is always the essence of the negligible reality. Now, if you say that you are such Brahman or Atman having the hidden potentiality of Ishwara, we have no objection to accept it provided you can show at least the vision of Ishwara in which you are creating, maintaining and dissolving the cosmos as shown by Krishna. Now, you should not escape from this saying that the world is unreal, Ishwara is unreal, creation of world is unreal and therefore, vision is unreal. Now you should not escape telling that the two states cannot co-exist. It is not a sleep-dream. It is only day-dream in which the dreamer and the dream co-exist mutually. It is not like light and darkness, which cannot co-exist together. It is like the day-dreamer and the day-dream. Ofcourse, this simile is perfect for the concept within its limitations. In the superimposition of serpent over the rope, the serpent exists elsewhere in equal status with the rope. The serpent is also a form of matter and is as good as rope. When Brahman created this relatively real world, it did not exist totally or partially elsewhere before the creation. The daydream also is made of the impressions of the items already existing in the world, which were not originally created by the soul. You have to take this simile just to understand the concept of relative reality. Thus, the creation of the world by Brahman can be understood with the help of the relative reality and the unique capability of Brahman in having the original creativity (which means that the world is created without the help of any external impression).

Petitioner: The daydreamer is also creating a special animal with eight legs, two tails, ten eyes etc. Such animal does not exist in the world. Therefore, the soul has original creativity. A person is seeing the non- existent ghost with peculiar features, when he sees a vibrating tree in a forest in the night. He has not seen such ghost elsewhere in the world. This is the superimposition where the superimposed object exists as imagination during the time of illusion only. When the illusion ends with the help of a torchlight, there is no existence of the superimposed objects elsewhere like the serpent. Since the soul is proved with such original creativity, there should be no objection to say that Brahman and the soul (myself) are one and the same. At least I can be treated as a spark of the Brahman since my imaginary world, made of nervous energy, is also not non-existent. Based on the difference in the intensities of the energies of this external world and my dream-world, I am a particle of Brahman in this relative reality. When the space disappears in the final dissolution of the world, the quantitative difference between Brahman and myself disappears and thus, I become the ultimate reality.

Respondent: We have already told that the parts of the special animal or the ghost are visible in the world separately and therefore, it cannot be the original creativity of Soul (animal with eight legs and two tails as found in the dream by a soul). The soul is only combining the parts in various probabilities to develop a new design. Such creativity is seen even in the robot, which develops new designs based on the probabilities of combinations of various bits of information, which is fed into the chip. Therefore, neither the soul nor the robot can be Brahman. The soul can be only a part of the creation and not even a part of the creator. If the soul is a part of the creator, atleast it should create an atom in the external world. If you say that the soul is a very negligible particle only so that it can create only a thought in the nervous energy since the thought is also kinetic energy, you may say that the soul has created atleast a trace of kinetic energy. Even this much is not true because, the impression from the external world, existing in the soul is just projected as the imagination. Therefore, you cannot compare the soul with Brahman in any way.

Petitioner: Ramanuja and Madhva have agreed that the soul and Brahman are awareness essentially. Even those two preachers, who are the founders of dualism, have agreed the common awareness between Brahman and the soul. What we say is that the other differentiating qualities become unreal in Paramartha Dasha and since the common awareness only remains, Brahman and soul are one and the same.

Respondent: Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva are the three incarnations of the same Lord Datta. There is no fundamental difference and they know the ultimate truth very well that Brahman is unimaginable and cannot be touched by the soul even by logic. Did they not study the Veda, in which the angel Yama told that even the angels cannot imagine Brahman, who have concluded that Brahman is unimaginable? They have said the truth in various styles according to the surrounding atmosphere. Their aim was to uplift the then spiritual aspirants. Revelation of the truth was not their main aim because the logical maturity of the people, based on the underdeveloped science, was not so much as it is today. Ramanuja and Madhva were able to establish the difference between Brahman and the soul even accepting the common awareness.

When the result is possible even by following your concept, why should they oppose your concept and get the same result? Moreover, if your concept is opposed, you may go back to become the original atheist because even such a trace of hope is lost since even that one common item is lost. You may also say that Brahman does not exist since it is unimaginable. You have not come to the high level of spiritual maturity to experience the existence of Brahman through the human incarnation. Therefore, let the false impression of experience of Brahman exist in every human being through the awareness. Finally, Madhva told that there is no similarity between Brahman and the soul. Shankara also knows the total reality. As I told already, He has created this attraction for the sake of the atheists. If you consider the will, you are concluding Brahman as awareness through that property. But, Brahman is not having only that property so that it can be concluded as awareness only. Brahman is the source of all other properties in the world so that you have to conclude Brahman as a collection of all the items (world itself) through such properties. Even the differentiating properties have to naturally lead Brahman to a group of the corresponding items; thereby Brahman becomes a part of the world.

Liberated Soul expected to Join the Service of the Lord

The self-realization leads to liberation of the soul from the worldly bonds. You must be relieved from the worldly attachments if you are determined to join the service of the Lord. If you are joining the new institution, you must be relieved from the old institution. By self-realization, you are relieved from the worldly bonds and you are expected to join the new institution i.e., the service of the Lord. Such relieving is not the retirement, so that you can stay in your house leisurely without any activity. Similarly, by self-realization, when you are relieved from the worldly bonds, it should not mean that you should continue in that state without any bond. You are relieved from the old bonds to strengthen the new divine bond with God. After leaving the old job, you are expected to do the new job with more vigor. After cutting the worldly love, you are expected to love God more vigorously. But, the Advaita philosopher is continuing in the state of no love after cutting the worldly love. Instead of achieving a better goal, the case became worse. The anesthesia is given to perform the operation so that you are relieved from the disease and live with more happiness. After the operation also, anesthesia may be given to relieve you from the pains. But the case of Advaita philosopher is unfortunate because he has gone into continuous coma after the operation. In such case it would have been better if the operation is not done so that at least, he will live with the disease. Here, the self-realization (Yoga) is the anesthesia. The process of operation is liberation (Moksha) from worldly bonds. After this liberation, the liberated soul is expected to join the service of the Lord with more vigor. Just like after the operation, the patient is expected to be more active in his life. But unfortunately, after the liberation, the Advaita philosopher continues in the same state of self-realization (coma) only. This unfortunate situation developed because the patient wants anesthesia and operation for getting continuous coma only. The goal is prefixed by the patient.

Similarly, the Advaita philosopher has fixed the goal of self-realization and liberation as the continuity of himself in the state of self-realization (self-attainment) only. His goal is Brahman, which is pure awareness without any quality or thought or feeling (Nirguna chit). Even if all the thoughts are removed as in the state of meditation, the thought of self-awareness exists. Therefore, there is no awareness without thought (guna). The awareness without any thought, which is the complete Nirguna chit, is nothing but the inert energy, which is the essential form of the awareness as obtained in the deep sleep (Sushuptyekasiddhah –Shankara). Such state is nothing but the state of a tree or a stone, in which the mind (all the thoughts) is totally destroyed (Manolaya yoga). The childish Advaitin calls such state as the state of Brahman in ultimate reality. He wants to remain as inert energy in the cosmos, which is the soul in the highest state (deep sleep) in his words! I am deeply pained at this pitiable condition of such human beings, who are misled like this. The soul of Advaitin continuing in this state of thoughtless inert energy cannot disappear from the cosmos, because the primary cosmic energy will never disappear as per the will of God. It is retained for storing the entire film of the world as a reel at the end of this world show. Let this unfortunate Advaitin become a tree or a stone so that atleast he will be useful in serving a devotee. A devotee may be fed with the fruits of such tree or the devotee can sit on such stone for praying the God. Therefore, instead of remaining as a part of the cosmic inert energy or becoming the entire cosmic energy by merging in it, such rebirth as a tree or stone is only due to the grace of God on him. The realization should lead to the liberation of the soul from the worldly bonds and not from the bond with God. If all bonds are removed, he will be neither here nor there. It is better if he remains in the worldly bonds having atleast some disturbed entertainment in the world. Atleast this is better if he is unable to get the divine bliss in the divine love with the God. It is better to have ‘Goli Soda’ if the ‘Gold Spot’ drink is not available. It is better to have worldly bonds if the bond with God is not available. Infact, after tasting the Gold Spot, the Goli Soda is spontaneously rejected. Thus, rejection of Goli Soda has only one sole aim, which is the Gold Spot.

The Advaitin has set up the goal, which is totally unreal. There is no Brahman, which is simply awareness without being Ishwara or atleast without having the potentiality of Ishwara. He has taken the worst state and named it by the unreal word. Infact, Brahman always exists as Ishwara since the ultimate and relative realities are mutually inclusive with each other like the dreamer and daydream. If these two states are real and unreal, both cannot co-exist. The rabbit and its horn cannot co-exist. When two states are absolute reality and relative reality, they can co-exist like gold and its ring. The gold in the ring is ultimate reality and the ring existing in the gold is relative reality. Thus, the word “golden ring” indicates the co-existence of both the states. The ring is not unreal because it exists based on the gold. The lazy Advaitin is aiming at such worst state of mere awareness without the potentiality of Ishwara without doing any effort. There need not be any effort to fall from the hill. The effort is only needed to climb the hill. The soul, which aims at the post of Ishwara, becomes Indra, who is the Lord of the three worlds. The word Indra itself means Ishwara or the Lord (Idi Aishwarye). His aim is only the power and luxuries. He is often insulted by the demons and the real Ishwara (Narayana) has to protect him often. This shows that the soul cannot manage itself in that post. But if you take Hanuman, He has both the aspects of the Lord and soul. From one angle, He is Lord Shiva. He is a Jiiva (soul) from the angle that He is the son of a soul, called as Vayu. The angle of God in Him shows that He can only maintain the post of Ishwara and therefore, He was made the creator. But from the point of the soul, it shows the possibility of the soul also to become God. But, this fruit is attained by Hanuman through selfless sacrifice and service without aspiring any fruit in return unlike Indra, who did hundred sacrifices for the fruit only. The Advaitin is not atleast Indra, who appeared for the examination and failed.

The Advaitin is the most lazy student, who sits in the house without even going to the school and claiming himself having that degree, which is of no use to get a job. Thus, there is every possibility for the soul to become the Brahman or Ishwara. In such state, the soul is charged by Parabrahman or God, which is the incarnation of God maintaining the individual soul as a medium. Thus, we do not deny the possibility of the soul to become Brahman in real sense. But what we say is that the soul is not already Brahman because Brahman is always Ishwara simultaneously. The world may be real (since it is not completely unreal) or may be unreal (since it is a negligible quantity), the world may be in its existence or may be before its creation or may be after the dissolution, Brahman cannot be isolated from the potentiality of Ishwara. For the fear of impossibility to become Ishwara, you have made Ishwara and the world unreal. But we are giving you the assurance that you can become Ishwara through your spiritual effort in the path of Hanuman. Why become Ishwara? You can become Ishwara (master) of Ishwara. The Lord has become the servent of Radha and thus, Radha is the Ishwara of Ishwara. Therefore, you can become Ishwara (simultaneously Brahman) and even you can become the master of Ishwara. But the path is full of real love, which is sacrifice and service. Without any effort, you can become yourself because you are already yourself. This is what Shankara told. You have not understood Him properly. By this, He means that one cannot become anything different than himself without any effort. He converted the atheist into Advaitin by this attraction. He told that the Atheist is already God so that the atheist has to accept the existence of God. Shankara was very clever because when He called the atheist as God, He has given a new definition to God, which exactly suits to the existing state of atheist. By this, He indicated that the atheist is in his original state by such attraction. According to the new definition of Shankara, God (Brahman) is just awareness, which is found even in animal. By this, He indirectly meant that the atheist in the present state is an animal. Even in the present state, the atheist is not accepting God other than himself. He is experiencing himself like an animal. The animal has no God other than itself. Therefore, Shankara cannot be blamed for the unfortunate situation of Advaitin in view of his atheistic background. There is no other way than this for Shankara to attract the atheist to climb atleast the first step.

You can understand the reality of Advaita just from two points. The angel Yama, who is the son of the Sun, did not tell that he is Brahman. He told that the angels are still searching for Brahman and finally concluded that Brahman is unimaginable. No human being is greater than Yama, whose messengers will drag out the soul of Advaitin in the end even though the soul is claiming that it is Brahman! Hanuman is the greatest soul in this world in knowledge, devotion and in having superpowers. He never told that He is Brahman. In the Gita, the Lord said that He preached the Gita to the Sun in the beginning of creation. If Advaita is the essence of the Gita, the Sun must have told his son (Yama) and must have told his disciple (Hanuman). When Lord Krishna (Human incarnation) approached Yama, Yama folded his hands and got down from his thrown. Hanuman served the human incarnation throughout His life. Even the angels want to be born on the earth as human beings because only in the human birth, any soul can do Sadhana. In the upper world, no karma can be done. The people, who worship only the energetic forms like Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva reach the corresponding worlds and exist near such energetic forms of God. Their Sadhana is incomplete because they have not accepted the human form of God due to egoism and jealousy. Above these three worlds lies Datta Loka, in which the Lord Datta (Ishwara) exists. Datta means God given to the devotee in the most convenient medium to him. Since Hanuman exists in human form, recognized and served the human form, He reached Datta Loka and got the highest fruit from Lord Datta. He is made God there. Above this, Goloka exists where the Lord in the form of Krishna resides with Radha acting as Her servant. Radha worshipped the human form of God. Thus, the complete absence of egoism and jealousy towards human form and the complete sacrifice and service to the Lord in human form without aspiring any fruit in return, have brought these highest results.

I did My best to save the Advaitin. Krishna told at the end of the Gita that one should analyze His knowledge and then only accept (Vimrusyaitadasheshena). The Lord also said that people will do according to the levels of their mentalities (samskaras) only (Prakrutim yanti) and any amount of analysis cannot control them (Nigrahah kim karishyati). The cloud rains the same water drops everywhere without any partiality. The drop fallen in the sea becomes salty, the drop fallen in Ganga becomes a pious sweet drop, the drop fallen in the mud pond becomes mud and the drop fallen in pearl shell becomes pearl. You can neither blame the cloud, which has impartially rained the same water drops nor can you blame the sea, Ganga, mud pond, or pearl shell because they have behaved according to their nature. The secret in the third incidental dimension is that all this happens without any damage to logic or justice for the time pass as the divine play of the Lord, which cannot be blamed from any angle.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★