of indian philosophy
TRANSCRIPT
CON T E N T S .
Cnarrss I .
There i s a cyc le of id eas common to al l school sof ph i l osophy in I nd ia
Ph i losophy in Ind ia. means the regul at ion of
l ifeAl l Hindu schools agree abou t the tru th of 15
proposi tions
(1) Man is a compl e x of. consc iousness, m indand matter
Pure consciousness, Samvi t
Analysis of a ‘state of mind by Prof . James
Two meanings of the word ‘consciousness ’
ac
cord ing to S toutThe H ind u id ea of consciousness-Purusha
(2) The Atmai s of the nature of consciousnessand immutabl e
(3) M ind i s other thanAtmaand i s materialMater ial characte rist ics of mindD ifli cul ty of real iz ing the material ity of
mind
(4) Psych i c l ife obeys fix ed l awsThe i l l usion of Free w il l
(5) The sense-organs and act ion-organs are
mad e of subt le matter(6) The Lifiga-d eha
(7) P eriod ical incarnati on
(8) Laws of Matter—3 Guoas(9) P ralaya and Kalpa
552 6 7 50
(10) The Subt le e lements— tanmatra(1 1 ) Al l energy bound up w i th consciousness
(12) P rfina( 13) K arma
(14) Beginninglessness of Samet ra
(15) Moksha, the Goal of L ife
CHAP TER I I .
The ind iv id ual istic vs. the monistic tend encyThe same in the Bhagavad G
f‘
ota
The fund amental question of Metaphysics
Section I . Vedanta .
Param Brahma
The nature of the Ved d nta Sfd tras
The concept ion of B rahma accord ing to the Ve
d dnta Sfl tras
Pl otinus on the OneSpinoza on God
The ind iv id ual Sou l and the Supreme B rahma-Three d ifferent v iews of the Vedanti cteach ing
The R ish is vs. theAcharyasSankara’
s Ad vai taRamanuja
’
s V igisht‘d vai ta
Mad hva’
s D vai ta
S ecti on I I . A , Sankhya.
( i i i )
The Gunas u
The H i story of the Stfikhya
B . Yoga
Brashta and drigya
I gvara in Yoga
Secti on I I I .
The ear l y ved i c rel igi onThe l ater ved ic re l igionThe ri se of Um!
The Trimur t iMonotheisti c movements
The influence of the Agamas on I nd ianthought
TheAgamas, their natureThe three tattvas of theAgamasBhaktiChronological Notes
00.
I Sd kta.
Li teratureThe threegi kta tattvasP rak l sa and Vimar
c
ga
n Saz'
va.
Three subd ivisions
f
(1) P dsupata
Three ultimates
(2) Sz'
d d lzdnta.
Three ult imatesMalaM‘yfi
PasuThe Lingi yatas
H istory of Siva
(3) P ratyabhzj fia.
History of the schoolSpanda or ChaitanyaSaktiP ratyabhijnaand Advaita
ii i Vai sknava.
The VaishnavaAgamasBrahma and his formsThe three categories—the posi tion of Lakshmi
Later history of Lakshmi
Mod ern Vigishttd vaitaTattvatrayam
H istory of Vishnu
Secti on I V. Vaz'
seshz'
lca and Nydya.
General Nature
A . Vaiseahz'
ka
S i x pad i rthas
D ravyaAtma
TimeManas
Other Substances
AtmaE lementsIgvara
Opposition to the theory of il lusionD ifierent names and conceptions of the
d ifferent schools
Secti on V. P ztrva M imamsa.
The d ifferent strata in the Ved ic l iteratureThe compi lation of the Ved a
The complex ity of the ritualThe origin of Nyayas
The B rahmanasThe M imamThe eternity of soundArthavfid a
Apfirva
The Gurumata schoolThe doctrine of Sphota of Bhartrihari
The same according to Vijfl na Bhikshu
f
N
Secti on VI . The Bhagavad Gi td .
P robable originSupreme Real ityThe Achl ryas thereon
CHAP TER I I I .
The fund amental question
A firambha Vci d a .
The theory of Ooinherence
The l ater history of the theoryU dayana
's arguments for the ex istence
I svara
B . P arindma Véd a .
The theory of the ex istence of the efiect in the
cause
l . Sankhya .
The transmutation of matterBudd h iAhamk i ra
The eleven organsTanmt tra
The manifested universe
2 . Yoga.
The stages of evolutionThe flux es
V “
3 . Ved anta
The material of the universeSrishti , creationThe three regions
4,Sai va and S /i kta
The 36 tattvas
Anna tattvas
Vidyatattvas, S iva tattvaThe hierarchies of D evi s
5. Vai shnava
The Cosmic beings and spheresThe forms of the Supreme
0 0 0
I N D E X .
OTE. This ind ex refers to chap . I I and I I I and
d eal s only wi th technical terms that haved ifferent meanings or refer to th ings named d ifferentlyin d ifierent school s. The nos. refer to pages.
The fol l owing contractions are used in th is Ind ex .
D . D v a i t a
8 . 8 6 nk h y a ; Y . Y o ga ; Va. V a i s e s h i k ay N.
K y l y s ; S. S a i v a S i d d h i n t a ; P a. P t s u
p a t a ; P r . P r a t y a b h i j ii ‘; Sa. sak t a ; Vai .V a i s h n a v a ; M . M i man s‘.
A c h i t : unconscious, matter 93, cor . M 6 1a
p ra k r i t i (S , )
A d ri s h t a unseen unseen cause of actions (VaNJ , 258 ; karma (S) , 296 .
A h am k Ar a : I—malrer : the consciousness of
Se lf as opposed to not-sel f , (S), 269 [ treated by l aterA. as a sub-d iv isi on of a n t a h k a r ana, the innerorgan to be d istinguished from A h a Int ii , I—ness,
the Sak t i of the Agamas, who i s a god d ess, the wor l dmother and not a tattva merely] .
A l i nga w i thout d ist ingu ish ingmarks or wh ichcannot merge into another : pr imal matter 112 ;
cor. Mulaprakri t i
A nn : t iny , minute : atom, ( l ) eternal . ultimatesub-d ivision of earth
,ai r, fire and air (Va. , N ) ; Manes
( 11
al so i s Ann, 208 ; conception of, 256 ; (2)Ind iv id ual sel f, (S ) , because he imagines h imse l fto be infinitely smal l , 156 , 294,
cor,J i v i tma (A), ch i t
etc .
A s a t : non—being : proto-matter , root of matte r ,that state of matter when i t cannot be d ist ingu ishedas matte r, a ved ic te rm
,72 , 73, 282 n. t reated i n
the upanishad s sometimes as P aram B rahma, 283 ;
Cor . Mulaprakri t i (S).
Atma: original meaning unknown : ( 1) name of
the substance, Ego, (Va, 200, (2) a c lass of
tattvas (Sa ) 289 .
A v i d y a; ignorance (1) ignorance of the non
d ual i ty of the J i vfitma and P aram t tma 87 , 89 ;
(2) consciousness of fini teness (Se) , 156 .
A v y a k t a : ind ist inguishabl e ,und iv id ed ,
nud ifi erentiated 7 8 ; (1) id entical w i th Av id ya, wh ich in themanifested wor ld causes the sense of separation of the
ind iv id ual from the Supreme Sel f 89 ; (2) ind ist ingu ishabl e state of ind iv id ual sel ves and matterwhen there i s no manifestation (V.) 94.
B h fi t a : be ing; objects (of the wor l d ) (Y. ) 1 14 ;
also,
e lements, subtl e (Sil kshma), 27 1, and gross
(Maha) , 273 .
B u d d h i'
: knowl edge ; (1) the first stage of
d ifierent iated consciousness 267-269 . (2) intel l ec
t ion M .) 223, 236 .
O h i t Orig. mean. unknown conscious, ind iv idual
( 111
self (V. ) 93, (P r .) 172 . Cor , J i v atm I Purushae tc . The d er ivat iv e Chai tanya (Sa,
152- 153 , Pr .)1 70; anothe r d er ivat ive , ch it i-Sakt i , used in Y .
, 1 13 .
C h i t t a : probabl y d er ived from ch i t, but refersnot to the pure consciousness, but (1) to the innerorgan (Y ) 1 11 , 1 13-114 ,
1 15 ; (2) memory (late r£16 ; (3) d iscr iminative proced ure of know ledge150.
D h a r m a What i s establ ished : (1) qual i ty114, 27 6 (2) Ved ic ri tual 222.
D r a s h t a: Seer : the subjec t ’ 1 11 Cor .
Purusha ch i t At m 5 (Va. , N .)
D r i s i : S ight : cogni tion 1 1 1,112 ; Car .
P rakasa, or chi t ji iana Chai tanyam (P r.)D risya : Seen : object 1 11
,1 12 ; Cor
,
pmhri ti (S .)
G u p a : strand : (1) three fund amental propertiesof the ‘
object 105-107 ; (2) si x spec ial qual i t iesof the Supreme . 181-182 ; (3) any qual i ty of
any object (Va , 196 .
I (I am t a: th is-ness object ' (S 3 ) , 141 , 143,
144 ; Cor , Prakri ti d rigya (Y).
I s v a r a z ru l er : ( l ) the omniscient be ing, authorof creation, d epend ent on A v i (1y A, but d ifferent fromit (A ) , 87— 89 ; (2) an ever-free Purusha 1 15 ;
(3) P arami tm i , (Vai , esp. l ate r), 186 , 189 (4) MoralGov e rnor of the universe 208 ; (5) God , the
creator etc , (later 26 1-262,
i v ;
J i v 8 tm i se l f l iv ing (in the manifested wor ld )ind iv id ual se l f 8 6 frequently cont racted intoj i va, espec ial ly i n l ater A , and D . Cor . ch i t (V), anu
(S) , pasu (P . , S purusha d rashtd Atmt
(Va . N .)
K a l e : smal l part : (1) insent ient matter (P .) 149
150 ; (2) that which manifests chai tanya part ial ly(Sa) , 290o
K r anav a s t h i causal cond i t ion : Param
B rahma d uringpralnya (V.) 94 ; Cor . ParamAtma (A
K ar y t v a s t h i Eff ected cond i t ion : ParamBrahma d ur ingKalpa 94 ; Cor. I avara
K r i y a: action. usual sense e verywhere : Bajas
112.
K s h e t r a j i i a : knower of the fie ld : I nd iv id ual
sou l (Vai ., Bhag. Gita), 184 ; Cor. Ji vatmfi ch i tetc.
M ay a power of causing i l l usion 1 ) a power of
I svara 88 ; same as Av id ya 89 (2) t reatedas an ent i ty ( late r i f) ; (3) the womb of the
wor ld (Sa), 158 ; of two k ind s (San) 158 -16 1,
M ul a p r a k r i t i : root matte r : Nomuenon of
materi al objects (S) , 103-5 in some respects l ik eParam Brahma al so asat of the Ved anta, e ther of
science . i b Oor Al inga i d am ta(Sn) , achitav idya avyakta
N i r v i s e s h a B r a h m a : Brahma free from
specific attributes : word used by Ramanuja, 92 , and
Srikara,1 62 , in referr ing to the P aram Brahma of
A. , frequent ly cal l ed especial ly in l ater A. , Nirguna
B rahma.
P a r am B r a h m a : Supreme Being : used ch ieflyin Vedanta ; in R igved a, 72 ; in Bhag. Gi ta, 7 2, 244in Upani shads, 74 i n Ved anta Sfitras 7 7 , in
86 ; in (V .) 92-94 ; in 97-98 Cor . P raktsa
(Se) , Narl yana (Vai ) , Siva (S.)
P As a fetter (S) 155-6 , vague ly correspond sto prakri t i .
P aau : cattl e : ind iv id ual se l f 149 , (S) , 154-155;16 1-162 Con ,
J i v i tmi (A .
, ch i t (V
P a t i : Lord : Supreme Lord (P ) , 153 ; Cor.
P aram B rahma (Ved l nta), also, Igvara of various schools.
P r a k asa : light : (1) l ight of consciousness (S ),291 , also general ly used ; (2) Sattva Guns
(3) the Supreme, (St ) 141, 143, 144, Cor. P aram
Brahma.
P r a d h t na : chief : Syn. of M ul a p r a k r i t i
P rakriti : how a thing ismad e the ‘object
101 used by most schools also.
P u r u s h a orig. mean. unknown male the
subject’
101 used by most schools also.
S a k with parts ( I ) a class of ind ivid ual souls16 1 ; (2) the gross forms of Nat tyana (Vat ), 177 ,
S a t being (1) d ifferentiated consciousness, conscious
being (Vedanta), 72 ,74, 8 1 , etc ; (2) the Supreme
92 .
S i l 8 : Syn. of Guns 1 12 .
S t h i t i : rest : (1) name of Tamas 112 (2)mamtenance of the wor ld (Vai .) 183 .
S p e n d a : Vibration : Name of the Supreme1 70: Oor. Param Brahma, etc,
V i d y 5 : knowledge : (1) cognition of the id entity of
the ind iv id ual and supreme self 87 (2) method of
med itation (upanishad s) , 120; (3) Sentiency 149
(4) a class of tattvas (Sa) , 292 (5) the 30th tattva (Sm) ,29 1 .
V i k r i t i Alteration : (1) effect 103 ;
Param l tamii 178 .
V i s e s h a : d ifference : (1) species 197 ; (2)elements that prod uce bod ies 273 .
i i
e lements. I have end eavoured to separate
al l these elements and ex hibit separately
the teach ings of these ancient systems.
I n doing so,I have attempted to d iscuss
the ideas of the earl iest avai labl e ex position
of each school . I n Ind ia, thinkers, however
independent they may be, whatever new v is
tas of thought they may open up, are com
pel led by inex orab le orthod ox y to father their
opinions on the ancients. The bol d est thin.
ker this country has produced , Sankara,fel t i t necessary to seek the sanctionof ortho
do x y by deri ving his new ideas from the old
B r a h m a S ut r a s and the ol der U p an i
s h a d s. Being a phi losopher, he had to
pretend to be a schol iast. Obversel v,each
commentator on an o l der phi losophical work ,Whi le professing to ex pound his author
,im
ports some of his own id eas in the comment
and thus unconciously helps on the move
ment of thought. Thus,to take an i l lus
tration frommodern schools, when the canon
may be ex pected to be d efini tely fix ed ,
Suresvara, the premier d isciple of San
kara,sl ightly al ters the A d v a i t a of his
master. The author of B h i ma t i, Vach
r 0 0 0
aspati M isra, gives i t another twist ;
after him,Vi dyfiranya gives another and
so thought goes on ever changing, though
not always for the better. So, too, the V i s
i sh t fi d v a i t a ; of .Yamuna, Ramanuja,P i l lai ( Lokacharya ), V e d an t a D e s i k a
and M ana v a, each has introduced
some al teration in the scheme of thought .
S imi larly,the early Va i s e sh i k a S ut
r a s ignore a creator or a d istributor of re
wards and punishments : but the modern
T a r k a school i t wed ded to a thorough going
theism. Hence in d iscussing the opini ons
of each school I have rel ied on the earl iest
avai lable book and not on the commentaries
thereon.
i t I n the case of the B r a h m a
S ut r a s, I hav e made an attempt (thefirst, I bel iev e, by any one) to ind icate what
I imag ine to be the author’s position d ist in
How much evenEuropean scholars have succumbed to
the influence of the commentator i s proved by the fact thatMax Mull er, in translating certain passages of the upanishads
has put into the tex t matter found only in S ank a r aB h l ah y a D euasen
’e recent ex posi tion of the phi losophy of.
the Upani shads is v itiated by his i dentification of the posi tionof the B ishi e with that of Sankara. I s i t any wond er thatthe average Hindu, to whom the seer and the echol iast are
both prophets sees rev elation in both tex t and commentaries 2
guishable from that of the ‘three’
schoolsof interpretat i on, cal led the three creeds
(trimata) which have engulphed it.
Though theHinduvenerates theV e d a as
self-revealed and takes great pride in cal l ing
himself aV e d ant i and has recently pro
posed to himsel f to carry the l ight of V e
d a.n t a to the West, yet the l iv ing rel igion
of Indi a, what one may cal l the work ing
fai th of the Hindus of today, is based on
the Ag ama s, Sa i v a
,Sak t a, or Va i s h
n a v a ; l ess than a thousand years ago,
the Agama s were locked on as unauthori
tative and Yamuna, in found ing the mod ernV a 1 sh na v a V i s i sh t fi d v a i t a school
fel t it necessary to wri te the Agamaprdmdn
ya, the authori tativeness of the Agama s.
To-day, however freely scraps of the U p a
n i s h a d s are quoted in d iscussions,the
actual opinions and rel igious practices of theHindus are taken entirely from the Aga
m a s. For this and other reasons, the A g ama 8 hav e beenkept secret . I have attempted
to give an account of them and their funda
mental i deas, quoting from unpubl ished or
untranslated works. I hope that this wi l l
d irect the attenti on of scholars to a vast
Vi rg in soil of investigati on l ikely to yiel d
valuable resul ts.
i t
I n d iscussing the various schools my aim
has been to combine the sympathetic insight
which is possible only to one born and bredwi thin the H indu rel igious fold and the
critical and impartial judgment of one who
has shaken himsel f free from the shacklesof sectarian animosi ty and parti zan en
thusiasm. Whether and how far I havesucceeded i t is for the reader to judge .
The only other works that can be compar
ed wi th this one in scope are the Samoa
D arsana Safigm ha of Madhavacharya
and the Saree Veddnta S i d d hantasdm ,
attributed to Sankarfichfirya, but a late
work . The former though wri tten w i th a
degree of impartial i ty v ery cred itable in ‘
a
Hindu of fiv e centuries ago, has for i ts aim
not the e x position of the fundamental tenets
of the many Indian systems of thought,so
much as the gl orificat ion of the A d v a i t a
Prof . Garbo al one of European schol ars has real i zed thevalue of theAgam aa, but he does not seem to have donemuch for
thei r eluci dat ion.
as superi or to the rest. Moreover Madha
va uses each school only to d emol ish the
previ ous one and his ex posi tion of everyd a r sana (system ) is l imited by this
circumstance, those only of the fundamental
i deas being referred to wh ich help him in his
object . H is account of theA. g am a schools
is very meagre in fact he d oes not mention
the Sak t a A. g m a s at al l ; possibly becausehe himsel f, being the reputed found er of theS ri ng e r i m u t t
,was a S fik t a as so many
A d v a i t i s are and regard ed i tsmysteriestoo sacred to be desecrated by being reveal ed
to the pub l ic. Of the second work,I could
get only a part . I t is now being ed i ted byP rofessor Rangacharya of the MadrasP residency Co l lege. I ts treatment of M i
mam s a is good . The rest d oes not seemto be valuable.
I n deal ing w i th Sanskri t technical terms,
I hav e preferred not to employ Engl ishsubstitutes especial ly in the 2nd and 3rd
chapters. I f Ind ianphi losophy is at al l to beund erstood by Engl ish-speaking peoples, theymust l earn to associate wi th Sanskrit termstheir speci al connotat ions. No Sanskri t
( vu )
phi losophical term can be equated to any
Engl ish word . The word ‘m ana s’
,for
instance is usual ly translated mind but
the connotations of the two words are by no
means identical . ‘M ana s’
to a Hindu is
a material , objecti ve thing : i t is not the
brain, for the brain is ‘gross whereas
m a n a s’
i s subtle matter. But even a
crassWesternmaterial ist who regards mind
as a secretion of the brain wi l l not admi t
mind to be matter in any sense of the word
he may- deny i ts separate e x istence as an
ent i ty,but to him i t is subjecti ve and not
object i ve . Hence the translation of manas
as mind cannot but raise obstructi ve associa
t ions in the mind of the reader. The word
B u d (1h i’
,again
,i sabsolutely untransl ate
able . A h am k ar a is sel f-consciousness, the
basis of the cogni t i ons,
‘I am the d eer of
this’
,but A h am k ar a to the Hindu, is a
function of matter, the object, and not thatof Self, the subject . Another frui tful source
of confusion caused by translating technical
word s i s d ue to the fact that di fferentschoo ls of thought use the same word in
d i fferent senses : thus,‘v i v e k a
’
to the
vi i i 3
A d v a i t i is the d istinction between the
subject and the object ; to the V i s i sh ta
d v a i t i,i t is the choice of the proper food
that l eads to spi ri tual enl ightenment . The
word ‘mfi r t a’
inthe Up an i s h a d smeans
that which has form and in the V a i s e sh i k a
i t means that which moves. Obversely
d ifferent words have been used for the same
i dea in d ifferent schools and this has con
tributed to the accentuation of their d iffer
ences. I t has therefore been thought thatthe synopsis gi ven at the end of the book of
such terms woul d be more useful than an
ind ex mechanical ly constructed . Yet no
new Sanskri t technical term has been intro
duced in the tex t wi thout some sort of ex
planatory word (suiting the contex t , but not
pretend ing to be a translation) being add ed,
for the use of read ers who may not care for
the subtle shad es of d ifferencebutmay l ike to
acquaint themselves wi th the general trend of
thought of the various systems d iscussed . One
Engl ishphi losophical word al one, I have taken
the l iberty to use freely , v ia,
“consciousness
This word I have used not in i ts usual
connotation, in psychological works,
of
f
X
ring to the invaluab le help rendered me by
my friend , Mr. Gov inda D asa of B enares
both by h is cri t icism and’
suggest ions and byhis g iving and procuring loans of M ss.
,by the
encyclopoed ic scho lar, P rofessor Ganganath
Jhaof A l lahabad in the sections onM i man
s e and V a i s e s h i k a, and by M r. P . Bha
ttanatha swami of Vizagapatam , wi thout
whose help I coul d not have deciphered or
interpre ted parts of my M ss. material .
VI ZAGAPATAM,I
4th June 1909 .
P T. SR1N1VAs YENGAR
OUTLI NES OF HI ND U
PH ILOSOPHY .
CHAPTER I .
CYCLE or I DEAS COMMON TO ALL PH I LOSO
PH I CAL SCHOOLS or IND IA.
S i t was in anc ient Greece and Rome so i t isin mod e rn E urope and America various
schoo ls of Phi losophy are be ing propounded ,each chal leng ing every fund amental pr inc iple o f
the rest . Not so in I nd ia, where though the diffe rentD a r s a na 5 d isagree abou t important quest ions,the id eas common to al l these systems are so manyand so v i tal that these d eserve to be fo rmu lated bythemse lves und er the name of Hindu Phi losophy .
These id eas . are as a ru le assumed and no t
d efini te ly expound ed in the l i teratu re of the d ifi'
er~
ent schoo ls ; each school be ing natural ly anx io u sto ex plain and j ust ify by argument the spec ial
po ints o f d octrine and d isc ip l ine whi ch const itu tei ts ind iv id ual i ty, and different iate i t from i ts sister
phi losoph ies. These ph i losophical schools are
commonly enumerated as si x, cal led the S h a d
I i a il s an‘
au‘
sg~Two o f them are who l ly based on
ts and are cal led the tw o M i rnam a s
ar v~a and U t t a r a (Earl ie r and L at te ro the rw ise , K a r m a M i mam $ 5 and B r a h m a
M imamsa,invest igat ion o f D h a r m a and o f
B r a h m a. The o the r four are based on reasoningand wh i le paying homage to the supreme au tho ri tyo f the Ved a d o no t d e rive the i r substance from
Ved ic texts, v i z S ar'
i k h y a,Y o g a
, N y ay a,
and Va ise s h i k a,the d isci pl ines o f Enumera
t ion,E ffort , Reasoning and D efini t ion respec
t iv e l y . Mad hava,in h is S ur y a-d aryana-sa izgra/za
however, classifies the schoo ls o f his t ime as six teen,
v iz, C h ar v ak a,B a u d d h a
,A r h a t a , R am a
mu j a ,P fi r nap r a j fi a , N a k u l i s a-
p as u
p a t a ,S a i v a, P ra t y a bh i j fi a R a s e s
v a r a ,V a i s e s h i k a , A k s h a p é d a
, Ja i
m i n i y a, P ani n l y a S a h y a , P a t a nj a l a and S h h k a r a . 1
' He p rofesses to
e xplain the Spe cific teach ings o f each schoo l,
bu t one gets lost in th i s forest o f phi losophi calsystems and forge ts that in them the re i s v e ry
Ramanuja d efines‘mimdmsd
'
to be “a d i scussnon of sentences
of the Ved a for the purpose of special ly d etermining the nature
and mod es of (the th ings referred to in the Ved a )
1 Mad hava’
s chapter on sankara d arsana,so l ong be l ieved
by al l schol ars to be i d ent ical w i th the book cal led P afi fl ha d agi
has been d iscovered in the Tanjore L ibrary by Gov ind a Base of
Benares and incorporated i n the recently publ ished Anand tsramae d i tion of the Sar rad arsanasangmha.
m uch more community o f opinion than d ive rsi ty,whi ch alone Mad hava emphasises. We shal l d iscussin th is chapter these fundamental assumptions ofHind u thought, so as to prepare the way for the
consid erat ion o f the d iffe rent teachings of the
various schoo ls w i th regard to ind iv id ual problems
and to me thod s o f phi losophical training .
Phi losophy to al l mod ern weste rn th inkers,is
c hiefly a matter of specu lation ; to them i ts in
t erest i s mainly inte l lectual , in that i t so lves
problems that have troubled the mind bu t to the
Hind u as to the ancient Greek and Roman,
ph i losophy has besid es this theo re tical , a practi calinterest . the regu lation of l i fe . I n ancient times
,
says D r. B usse l , “ The pursu it o f w isd om was
prac ti ca l and impl ied adherence to a d efini te ru leof l ife” (P ersonal I d eal i sm, P . and so i t
is in India even tod ay . Ph i losophy has never
been in Ind ia. d issociated from l ife ; hence eachschoo l sets abou t i ts invest igat ions w i th the specificaim of d iscovering the means o f man
’
s attainment
o f a state of perfect ion cal led M o k s h a . Th is i sthe w arm: d
’etre of each schoo l . Unless i t em
bod ies a d efini te me thod o f inte l lectual, e thical and
spiri tual t raining,lead ing a man up to pe rfect ion,
i t has accord ing to H indu ideas no j ust ificat ion fore xistence .
The only modern European phi losopher thatrecognises this to be the function of phi losophy i s
f
4
the semi-oriental Sp inoza. The opening sentenceof h is D e I ntel lectus Emma
’
at ione (Transl . E lwes),says, “After e x perience had taught me that al l theusual su rround ings of soc ial l ife are vain and :
fut i le ; see ing that none o f the objects of my fears
contained in themselves anyth ing e ithe r good or
bad , except in so far as the mind is affe cted bythem, I final ly reso l ved to enqu ire whethe r theremight be some real good having power to com
municate i tse lf, which wou ld affec t the mind singly,
to the e x cl usion o f al l e lse ; whether, in fact,
there might be anything of whi ch the d iscovery
and attainment would enable me to enjoy cont inuous
,supreme , and unend ing happiness.
”
As to S pinoza, so to al l Hind us,phi losophy
begins w i th V a i ragy a ,est imat ion o f pleasures
and pains at the i r proper val ue , and end s w i th »
M o k s h a The fi rst impu lse to phi losophy is not
inte l lectual but emotional and moral . What hastthou to d o w ith r iches ? What hast thou to d o w i th.
k in? how shal l w ives bestand thee, son that shal tsurely d ie ? seek theAtman
,that wh ich l ie th hidden
in the cave . Whe re are gone thy father , and the
fathers of thy father ?’
S uch was the teach ing, st i l lmore ancient , addressed by an anc ient Ind ian.
father to an anc ient Ind ian son— addressed byVyfisa to h is son S huka— Shuka who grew to
be greater even than his great father. And suchused to be the orig in of phi losophy in old en India.
”
5
(Bhagavan D as, S ci ence of the Emaf i ous, p .
And such ought to cont inue to be always the
power that inspi re s phi losophy i f i t is to be some
thing more than arid logomachy, labou red pounding of husk , fru i tless and only too o ften lead ingt o hypocrisy , to pharisaic se l f-r ighteousness, to
pompous pro testations and poor performance . The
world has a moral val ue and phi losophy ough t toserve a nobler pu rpose thanmere ly secur ing to i ts
d e vo tee the fee l ing of inte l lectual , sat isfaction in the
acqu isit ion of an idea by the path o f specu lat ion.
Ph i losophy, therefore, to a Hindu means not
mere ly a bod y of opinions to be be l ieved,bu t a
l i fe to be l i ved,a training to be undergone for
attaining a state of re lease from bond agef I t is
the re fore unfai r to these schoo ls to j udge of themas western w ri ters invariably d o, as theories to beargued abou t
,apart from the pract ical t raining
that they prescribe.
Al l these d isc ipl ines, except the schoo l of crude
ph i losophical N ihi l ism as expound ed in the Sammd arsanam hgm /m und er the name Charvaka and
attribu ted to Brihaspat i, are agreed abou t thet ru th of the fo l low ing proposi t ions regard ing the
E ven the 9 11 r v a. M i mamsfi, though this i s not commonlyrecognized , proposes to l e i d to a state that can be prope rly cal le lM 0k sh a for, asNach iketas says—“M osewho l i ve in the Heaven
worl d reach immortal i ty. ’E zghopm ish
/Lt,i . 13 . ri de Yam t
’
s
reply, 1b. i . 17 -18 .
6
const itu t ion of the cosmos, the natu re of man, and
the goal of human evol u t ion.
( 1 ) M an i s a complex of cons ciousness, mindand body.
(2 ) TheAtma i s of the nature o f consc iousnessand is immu table .
(3) M ind (3 n t a h~ l< a r a na), though an innero rgan is material and i s o the r than the
Atma.
(4) Psychi c l ife obeys fixed laws and hence
al l mental events are d e terminable .
(5) The five sense -organs (j nan e n d r i y a s)and the five act ion-organs (k a r m e n
d r i y a s) are,hl<e the mind , mad e o f
subt le matter.
T he eleven organs inhere ina l i ng a d e h a
or subtle body , which is re lat ive ly permanent .
The 1 i h g a d e h a i speriod ical ly connectedw i th a body of flesh and blood , wh ichprov ides man w i th sense-organs and
act ion-organs of gross matter.
Mat ter (p r a k r i t i) ismu table bu t increateand obeys fixed laws.
The world h istory i s mad e up of al ternatingperiod s of activ i ty (k a l p a) and rest
(p r a l a y a)
8
recognize the ex istence of the many powers o f
Natu re , they e x c lude the conception of one Uni
versal Be ing. The earl ier Sankhya, Vaiseshika
and M imamsa works are frankly athe ist ic. The
Y o g a and the N y ay a S Ot r a s re fe r to a D ei ty ,bu t the former makes h im bu t an ancient teache r,and the latte r bu t anad j uste r o f rewards and punishments and no more . The late r expounde rs o f al lthese systems have g i ven a the istic twist to them,
because in late r d ays, the Vedanta became popu larand hencet he name N i r i s v a r a, athe ist ic , became
a term of reproach .
We shal l now d iscuss the fi fteen propositionswh ich are common to al l these schoo ls.
(1 ) M an is a comp l ex of consciousness, 77257 c
a nd body .
I n western phi losophy the concepts‘con
sciousness’
and ‘m ind '
are not mutual ly excl usive . They are somet imes used synonymously as
when states of consc iousness ’and states o f the
mind are used as the names of the successive phaseso f the fl ux of the inner l ife at o ther times con
sciousness is treated as a qual i ty or ad junc t o fmental l ife ; but in Eastern phi losophy these two
concepts ind icate two things abso l u te ly d ist inctfrom each other consciousness is S a m v i t the en
l ightener of the mind and the senses and the iroperations whereas mind
, a n t ah-k a r ana, is
j a d a , unconsc ious. I n other words, mind ismatte r
9
and consciousness is spiri t. S am v i t , pure consc iousness, is what manifests to the man h imse l f theope rat ions of his mind and of his senses. To bor
row an analogy from the senses, the eyes see the
world when opened and d irected toward s objects.
S imi larly when S am v i t, consciousness, is tu rnedonmental processes, the Spi ri t sees or knows the funct ioning o f h is mind . I t i s as i f a ray o f l ight proc eed ed from the spiri t and enl ightened the processes of pe rcept ion, reasoning, etc. These menta lfunct ions exist whe the r consc iousness accompanie sthem or not, just as the wo rld exists whe therbe ings see i t or not. S ight manifests them to the
indiv idual so the l ight of consc iousness mani feststhe functions of perception,
reasoning and conat ionto the man. Consciousness is not thought, for the
lat te r is a procession o f images,and the former the
manifestat ion o f them to the man h imse l f. E ven
Hind u wri ters somet imes confound the two,for the
word j nana i s used for thought as wel l as for consciousness ; nor is the word c h a i t a ny a devo id of
ambigu ity , because the idea o f mo t ion (which is a
funct ion of mate rial objects) i s assoc iated w i th i t .Pure consciousness has to be d ist ingu ished
from personal consciousness. This latter is
i nvest igated by Prof. James in chap . x u of his
Tex t -600k of P sy chol ogy . He subd iv ides i t intotwo parts ( I ) the se l f as known
,the Empi ri cal
Ego’
, or the me and (2 ) the se lf as the knower, the
I O
Pure Ego’
,or the I . The former he subd iv ides
i nto ( I ) the material me,
’
the body ,etc, (2 ) the
soc ial me,
the re cogni t ion one ge ts from h is
mates,and (3) the
‘Spi r i tual me’
,the ent i re co l lec
t ion o f one’
s states o f consc iousness the pureEgo
’
he d efines as the Thinke r,the Agent beh ind
the passing‘states o f consc iousness
,
’
whose e x is
tence psycho logy has nothing to d o w i th. Th isi s the best commentary on the proposi t ion thatman is a complex . But e labo rate as th is c lassi ficat ion is, i t d oes not d ist ingu ish be tween pure con
sciousness that is unchanging l ight and personalconsc iousness ’
wh i ch i s m ind as i l l um inated by thespiri t
,be tween c h i t~s a k t i , and c h i t t a-v rt t i
as the Yogi terms them. Personal consciousness’ isAham
,an id eal construction from experience ,
j ust as the world is an ideal construct ion and be
longs to the conceptual plane . Pure consciousness isAtma, a fac t und erly ing al l that is given byexperience . The pure consciousness o f the Purushai s that of wh ich the personal consciousness bound
up w i th mental or bod i ly ac t iv i t ies,w i th wh ich
alone we are normal v acquainted , is a reflect ion inmatte r. When we move the muscles o f the bod ywe are conscious o f pleasure and pain, of perception,
conat ion, or j ud gment and we are conscious o f our
se lves as separate from the objec ts outside us. Theseare states of personal consciousness
,each state be ing
a complex . From i t l et us e l iminate whatever is
( I I )
contribu ted by the bod y and by the mind . What temains is the consciousness that accompanies al l men
tal processes, fi rst d ifferent iated by P lo t inus amongweste rn phi losophe rs and cal led the accompani
ment— p a r a k 0 l o n t h e s i s— o f the mental activ it ies by the sou l . This is the l ight o f consciousnesswhich mani fe sts bo th the mental and the physicalwo r ld s. I t is the powe r of pu re inte l l igence— c h i ts a k t i—wh ich be ing unchangeab le , canno t become
the seat o f pe rception,for th is lat ter be longs to the
m ind . We have thus reached a vagu e id ea o f pu reconsc iousness as separate from mental act iv i ty
,by
a bst ract i on from the personal consciousness. Pureconsc iou sness howeve r , is no t an abstract ion bu ta real i ty
,the greatest real i ty attainab le by man.
T he r eal i zation of this l i fe of the Atma i s the aim
o f al l s choo ls of Ind ian ph i losophy .
W hat is cal led the inner l i fe of man i s termed
the stream o f consciousness’ in western ph i losophy.
Pro f. J ames notes the fo l low ing fou r characterist icsin the flow ing ‘
states of mind
( 1 ) E very ‘state ’
or thought is part o f a
personal consc iousness.
(2 ) Within each personal consc iousness statesare always changing .
(3) Each pe rsonal consciousness i s sensibly continuous.
(4) I t i s interested in scme part of i ts objec t
( 1 2 )
to the ex cl us ion of others, and we l comes or rejects—chooses from among them. Tex t-book of P sy
enol ogy , chap. xi. ) I n this descr ipt ion, the concep
t ions o f ‘state ’
, and of change be long to matte r ;those of ‘cont inu ity ’ and ‘cho ice ’ be long to the Puru
sha and personal consciousness is d ue to the u nionofthe two . Matte r presents i tse lf as a se ries o f changingstates, and spi ri t, whose l ight i s continuous, choosesa few of them and i l l uminates or manifests themt o h imse l f by seei ng them. Only we must regardal l states o f the mind— al l cogni t ions
,desi res and
act ions as states of matte r that is always in a flux,
and not as belonging to the spi ri t . whose l i fe is
cont inuous and unbroken. P rof. James explainsthat the third o f the above fou r proposi t ions “means
two things : (a) That ev enwhere there is a t ime-gap
the consc iousness afte r i t fee ls as i f i t be longedtoge ther w i th the consciousness before i t, as another
part of the same se l f ; (b) That the changes fromone moment to another in the qual i ty o f the cons
c iousness are never abso l u tely abrupt. (In) This
cont inu i ty i s expl icable only i f consciousness i s
regarded as separate from mental states, and the
relat ion between the two to be simi lar to that between a l ight and a processionof obj ects i l luminatedby the l ight. T h ere is no change in the ‘q u a l i ty ’ o fconsc iousness, bu t to strain the analogy a l i ttle ,the obj ect, in this case a state o f mind , goes to the
o u termost fringe o f the fie ld o f i l l uminat ion and
1 3
hence looks d im and no more .
G . F. S tou t (M anual of P sy clzol ogy ,p. 8 ) notes
two uses of the word consc iousness ( I ) To ind icate al l mental states whether we have cognizanceo f them or not (2 ) the awareness we have o f our
se lves and of our own experiences, as states of the
Se lf— an inne r sense— the function by which we perce i ve the mind and i ts processes, as sight pe rce ivesmaterial facts. Father Maher d ist ingu ishes threemeanings general ly attached to this word . ( I ) To
ind icate the sum total of our psychical existence
, al l cogni tive , emot ional and appet i t ivestates which are capable o f be ing apprehended .
(2 ) The mind ’
s d irect , intu i t ive , or immed iateknowl ed ge e i ther of i ts own operat ions or of
something o ther than i tse l f acting upon i t ; ino the r words, the energy o f the cogni t ive act
,and
no t the emot ional or vo l i t ional acts as cognized .
(3) The reflex operati on by which the mind at tendsto i ts states and recognizes them as i ts own.
( P sy chol ogy , pp. 2 6 The second meaning
o f consc iousness, accord ing to S tou t and Mahe rapproximates to some extent to the Hind u idea o f
i t. Perception,Emot ion and Conat ion are funct ions
o f the m ind that take place accord ing to mentallaws, whe ther they are , or are no t, i l l uminated bythe l ight of the spiri t
.
and manifested to i t. I n
o rd inary psychic e x pe rience th is consciousness o f
the spir it is inextricably and compulsori ly bound
14 )
up w i th the l ife of the mind and canbe und erstoodonly when i t can be separated from the m ind and
contemp lated apart from i ts mental co lou ring. Th is
pure consciousness be ing the immate ria l part o f
man i s cal led P u r u s h a— Man,pur ex cel l ence. I t is
a lso cal led ] if a, the knower, for he knows o r becomesconscious o f the functions o f the m ind
,the senses,
and the muscles and o f h imse lf as the Atma.
P u r u sha i s S v a y am-p ra kasa, manifest ing hi s
own be ing. He knows h imse lf to be, unl ike the m indand the body whose existence i s mani fested onlywhen cognized by some conscious be ing. Hencec onsciousness is frequent ly compared i nHind u boo ks
to l ight . The l ight o f the sun reveals i tse l f to us
d i rect ly and when i t beats against any object i tmanifests the existence of that objec t a lso . 50 the
P u r u s h a reveals his existence to h imse l f and alsoi l l uminates a mind or a bod y he is in contac t w i th
,
which o the rw ise wou ld be unconsc ious,unknown
,
unmani fested to h im. E uropean I d eal ism makes thee xistence o f matte r d epend on i ts be ing mad e manifest by the m ind . I t ho lds that whethe r there be a
noumenon beh ind what we cognize asmatter or un,i t
i s certain that sensat ions exist and that as sensat ionsare mental modificat ions, no objective existence canbe manifested in the absence o f mind . Construct iveI deal ism represented by John S tuart M i l l admi ts a
permanent possi bi l ity of sensat ion beh ind the phe
(nomena of the object ive world ; bu t the thorough
( 16 )
immaterial part of man is involved in i ts very con
cept ion. Atma is v i bh u, not l imited by spacemat ter is anu , atomic. I t is, in the wo rds of Plo t inus,Al l in al l and al l in every part .” Hence the Atma
i s ne i the r d iv isible nor ind ivisible , ne ither a com
pound nor an atom,no t suscept ible o f d iminu tion
Y
nor o f ex cess. I t i s futi le to at tempt to con
ce ive the originat ion or d est ruct ion of consciousness, for consc iousness is invo lved in that veryconcept ion. Creat ion and d estruct ion are und erstand abl e i f conce ived as the beginning or the
end ing of one of a series o f forms in wh i ch any
noumenon mani fests i tse l f in re lat ion to an obser
ver ; consc iousness be ing from i ts very natu re im
mu table can hence ne i ther begin nor end . The
Atma i s Jna, e ternal consc iousness, because i t I Sincreate . E te rnal consc iousness is the natu re o f theAtma, just as heat and l ight are o f (S an/earn:
Baas}:y a onVea’
. S i l t . 1 1. i i i . Moreover,Atmais
by d efini t ion the opposite o f Anatma, mat te r. The
essent ial natu re of mat te r is i ts mu tabil i ty,i ts
capabi l ity to evo lve into a procession o f phenome
nal forms whereas Atma is unchanging . The refore the beginning or the end ing o f consc iousness isexcluded from the very defini t ion o f Atma. He
may sh ift h is place of i l l uminat ion from bod y to
bod y or rather, a series of bod ies may be period ical ly brought near him and sh ine by his reflectedl ight, bu t he is ni tya, eternal . Some Baud dha
( 1 7 )
schoo ls alone , o f Ind ian systems, reject the not ion
of the cont inu i ty of the l ife o f the man’
s Atma,bu t
B ud d hism and Jainism are exc l uded from th isbrief su rvey o f Ind ian thought
,only the so -cal led
o rthod ox schoo ls be ing inc l ud ed , those that at leastnominal ly admit the pramanya, au thori ty
,of the
Ved a and d o not openly d enounce i t as the fo l lowersof the Bud d ha and the J ina d o .
(3) M ind,though an inne r organ is mate rial
and is o the r than the Atma.
LThe mind o f man i s an organ made of subtlematte r and is not immate rial or spi ri tual but prakri~ta
,mad e o fmatter. Sensat ion, pe rcept ion, vo l i t ion,
e tc.,are in western ph i losophy cal led subject ive
states and t reated as non-material . Hind u ph i lo50phy analyses them into two factors
,v iz : ( I ) a
menta l process internal but not subject iv e,and (2 )
consc iousness accompanying the process and refl ec ted from the Atma. The fi rst i s mate rial and the
second immaterialJ Mental processes are variouslyc lassified in the v arious schoo ls the Sankhya attri
buting to the mind al l psych ic l i fe , and the Vaisesh ika regard ing i t merely as the organ of at tent ion
,
bu t al l schools are agreed in regard ing mind as
matte r. This apparent parad ox of schoo ls of phi losophy
,essential ly ideal ist ic , but hold ing to the v iew
cal led mater ial ism in the west , name ly the v iew thatmind is matter, has proved a stumb l ing-block to
every western scholar. I n western ph i losophy , the2
1 8
clear-cu t concept ‘consciousness’ as we have form
ulated i t abov e has not been attained nor are d efi
ni te marks attached to the concept matte r.’
D es
cartes mad e extension the only characterist ic o f
matte r. Th is “confusion o f matter w i th space”
,as
C lark -Maxwe l l cal led i t, e ven Spinoza,the expound e ro f D escartes, rebe l led against . I n o rd inary thoughtthe so -cal led proper ties o f mat te r are mad e to hangloose ly from that concept, and the phrase ‘
states of
consc iousness’ i s he ld to imply e lementary factsi ncapable o f furthe r analysis. When consc iousnessi s e l im inated from the facts o f psych ic l i fe and
when i t is real ized that mental functions are bythemse lves, jad a ,
unconscious,i t ought no t to be
d iffi cu l t to und e rstand what the Hind u ph i losophe r
means when he says that antahkarana i s a fo rm o f
matter. Antahkarana l ite ral ly means,the inne r
o rgan as opposed to the ou te r organs o f sensat ion
and action. The jna, the spi ri t, uses i t as an organ,
and therfore i t must be o ther than he,
‘since the re
i s a knowe r and an organ o f knowledge.
”Nyay a
sorm [ I ] . I . This mind is obje ct ive to the
spi ri t . H e sees i t qu i te as much o u tsid e him as he
sees his bod y and the wor ld o utsid e h im, whereas
the knower canno t p lace h imse lf ou tsid e l i ke a
perce ived objec t . Obj ect iv i ty to the consc iousPurusha i s the chie f mark of matter ; matter andm ind possess th is characte rist ic . Another id eai nvo lved in the concept
‘matter’ i s i ts mu tabi l i ty,
19 )
i ts ever-present flux,i ts capabi l i ty of evo lv ing in
a ser ies o f ever-changing phenome na. Antahkarana evo lves in eve r-changing phenomenal forms
(cal led ch i ttavri tti by the Yoga schoo l ) l i ke the
waves and ripples and ed d ies on the su rfaceof a lake
,unl ike the stead y l ight of the Purusha
wh ich waxes not nor wanes.
These phenomenal manifestat ions o f matter ina nev e r end ing kale id oscopic fl ux o f forms are sub
ject to t ime and space ; and mental e vents are bothtemporal and spat ial . They succeed one ano the rin t ime and are rest ric ted in space to the brainwh ich subse rves them. Purusha i s ne i the r big nor
smal l ; he has no before and afte r. These spat iotemporal re lations of the manifestations of m indare subject to the law o f causat ion. They are
prakrit i -v ik ri t i re lated as cause and effect . But
consc iousness i s a steady l ight and where there i s
no change , there can be noth ing subject to the
re lat ion of cause and effect . Hence i f,as mod ern
Psycho logy adm i ts,mental states are gove rned
by the l aw o f causat ion,m ind i s mat ter
,not spiri t.
Atomic i ty— ind iv isibi l i ty and inv isibi l i ty i s
a mark o f certain forms of mat ter acco rding to the Vaiseshi ka ph i losophers and m ind i sanu,
atomic . [Xt i s v ibhu,pervasive , everywhere
and nowhere . Consciousness canno t be conce ivedas be ing restricted to any part of the body throughwh ich i t mani fests itse lf ; but the mental processes
( 20 )
o f cogni t ion, desire , etc., are certainly not “
al l in al l
and al l in every part,bu t clearly local ized .
Traigunya— be ing possessed of the three Gunasor fundamental propert ies, resistance , mo tion and
equ il ibrium— is the ch ief characte rist ic of matteraccord ing to the Sa hyas. Whateve r resistsforce , can be moved by it and reaches equ il ibriumunder the act ion of many fo rces— that is matte raccord ing to th is schoo l . Antahkarana d isplays
al l these characterist ics, inertia, excitabil i ty and
final ly equ il ibrium. But consciousness by i tse l f isnot amenable to the influence of external objects.
I t cannot be quenched ; nor can i t be increasedby the ir influence . Hence i t is a category qu ited ist inc t from mind .
I t is d ifli cul t to real ize mind to be matter, becauseo f the fact that i t d erives a pseud o-subject iv i ty on
account of i ts be ing an inner organ. When our
muscles act, our consc iousness accompanies the
act ion bu t we can in thought separate the consc iousness from the muscu lar action and real ize the
l atter as a phenomenon of matter that is the non
ego , and al l the more easi ly because in the caseof o the r human be ings than oursel ves we observethese muscu lar act ions w i thou t observ ing the consc iousness that accompanies them. But mentalact ion each man can stud y only in the operat ionso f his own mind , and as these are accompanied bythe l ight of his own consc iousness, the separat ionof
( 2 1 )
these two and the appreciat ion o f the d ifference oft he nature of consciousness and of mental actionbecomes a matter of difficul ty .
Plato and Aristotle use such phrases as the
see ing of sight ” , “the perce i vmg of percept ion,
”
the th ink ing of thought ” to indicate consciousness apart from mental fuhctioning. K ena Upani
slzaz‘ uses stri k ingly simi lar phrases
“what speech
does no t enl ighten, but what enl ightens speechwhat one does not think w i th the mind ,
bu t bywhom they say the mind is thought
”
,
“what one
sees not by the eye, bu t by whom see ing i s
seen“what one does no t hear by the ear
,but
by whom hearing is heard ,”
what none breathes
w i th breath,but by whom breath i s breathed
this is B rahma,not what people he re worsh i p.
(I . 4 P l o t inus,
among ancient phi losophers
fi rst c learly formu lated th is dist inc t ion.
“ I nte l l i
gence i s one th ing and the apprehension o f i h
te l l igence i s another. And we always perce ive
inte l lectual ly,bu t we d o not always apprehend that
we d o so .
”
(E nn. I V. 3 . 30, Trans. Taylo r.) Th isi s the fi rst c lear ind icat ion in E uropean phi losophyof the existence of unconscious mental act ion,and of the id ea that our so-cal led inne r l ife is a
complex of two d ifferent facto rs— consciousnessand unconscious mental mod ificat ions. The ideathat consc iousness is not a necessary concomitantof mental operat ions was fi rst clearly enunciated
2 2 )
in modern E uropean phi losophy by Le ibniz .
“ As a matter of fac t our sou l has the power of
represent ing to i tse lf .any form of natu re whenever
the occasion comes for think ing abou t i t , and Ith ink that this act iv ity o f our sou l is
,so far
as i t expresses some natu re,form or essence
,
properly the id ea of the th ing . This is in us and
is always in us, whether we are thinking of i t or
no.
”
(M etaphy si cs, Tr. by Montgome ry,R 64. )
“ Perception shou ld be carefu l ly d ist ingu ishedfrom appercept ion or consc iousness. I n th is mat terthe Cartesians have fal len into a serious e rror
,in
that they t reat as non-existent those percept ionsof wh ich we are not conscious.
”
(16 p . S ir
Will iam Hami l ton brought into prom inence the
concept ion of unconscious mental modificat ions.
D r. S chofie ld , in the opening chapter o f his Un
consci ous Therapeut i cs, attributes the phenomena
of hysteria to the power o f unconscious m ind , and
j ustly complains that the powers o f unconscious
m ind have been unduly neglected by invest igators.
But i t has not struck weste rn thinkers that mindis in i tse l f always unconscions as musc le i s alwaysunconsc ious. Ri bot
,in The D iseases of P ersonal i
ty , uses the fac t that the l ife of the mind is some
t imes unconscious, to prove that consc iousness isa simple phenomenon,
supe rad d ed to the activ ityo f the brain, as an event hav ing i ts own cond i t ionso f ex istence appearing and disappearing accord ing
24 )
in his field o f vision. Psych ic and physio logicalcond it ions are invariably bound together , bothbe ing material functions ; consc iousness i s not a
phenomenon or epi-phenomenon o f material
processes as i t exists in i ts own right, ne i the r beginning nor end ing, nev e r increasing, neve r d imini shing. Not so the complex fact
,which we have
cal led personal consciousness, mad e up of the reflec
t ion of pure consc iousness and of mental functions.
Al l mental funct ions are in themse l ves unconsc ious ;when the Purusha t urns to them he i l l um inatesthem and makes them manifest ; otherw ise theywou ld remain as unmanifest as the physical worldwou ld be in the absence of sent ient be ings. M indi s a material fac t j ust as a musc le i s a material fact .The action o f the mind or the musc le may be or
may not be accompanied by consc iousness. I n
i nvestigat ing the action o f the m ind or the muscle ,consc iousness has to be e l iminated as an al ien factor
,and mind should be real ized to be always
unconsc ious in i ts own own natu re,as muscle is.
Western ph i losophy not thus d ist ingu ish ing the
natu re o f consciousness to be characte rist ical lyd ifferent from that of mind has raised an inso l uble
problem—“what is the re lat ion o f consc iou s mind
and unconscious matte r P I s i t one o f interact ion,
or of paral lel ism P”E i ther hypothesis is unthink
able. I t i s nei ther possible nor ph i losophical ly helpful to imagine that consciousness and mod ificat ions
25 )
of matter, categories so characte ristical ly apart fromeach other, can inte ract or run paral le l to each othe r.Immutabi l ity and mutabi l i ty canno t mee t . M indi s matter and mental processes are material mod ificat ions. Consciousness may i l l uminate them,
manifest them,or know them,
bu t except th is therec an be no o the r re lat ions between them and con
sciousness. Whethe r the m ind be taken as i d enti
cal w i th the ne rv ous system,as western material ists
d o,or i t be consti tu ted of subtle mat ter as easte rn
phi losophe rs ho ld , i t i s abso l ute ly _d ifl'
erent from the
Purusha that i l l uminates i t ; though he may out of
i gno rance id ent ify h imse lf w i th i t,he i s no t real ly
id entica l w i th i t . The d isc ipl ines pre scribed bythe founders o f the D arsanas are bu t means of
t raining a man to real ize the natu re o f the Atma tobe d ifferent from that o f m ind . The bondage fromwh i ch al l the D arsanas except the P firva M imamsa
propose to re l iev e the Atma is that d ue to ad hyasa,
false id entification o f h imse l f W i th mind,the con
sequent pain d ue to ignorance , and moksha is the
actual real izat ion o f the d i fference of these two.
Til l th is d ifference be tween the Atmaand mind is
grasped i t i s impossib le to understand the phi loso
phy of the East .
4 P sy chi c L ife obey sfi x ea’
l aws and hence al l
mental events are d eterminabl e.
As the antahkarana . i s a material organ, i ts
mod ificat ions must take place under fixed laws.
( 26 )
A l l matte r obeys the law of causat ion. Henceeve ry mental event is the resu l tant of prev ious
events,
so that i f the causes were known,the
effects cou ld be cal cu lated and predicted exactlyas in any o ther sphere of matte r . As al l schoo ls of
Hindu ph i losophy thus regard mind as a form of
matter,the problem of the freedom of the w i l l was
never raised in Ind ia. The‘w i l l ’ is a me taphysi cal
enti ty, that is one of which we cannot fo rm a pictu re ,which
,in E uropean ph i losophy , is supposed to be a
facto r of the mind and to introd uce into phenomena,mental or bodi ly
, a new force wh ich can upse t al l
known causes o f those phenomena. Hind u ph i lo
Sophy analyses mental events into cogni t ions, d esi res and actions interconnected by causal re lat ions,bu t d oes not postu late a w i l l among them. The
three fo ld l i fe o f the mind goes on und er the
t riple law of Sattva,Rajas and Tamas, bu t ne i the r
the m ind i tse l f nor any th ing extraneous to i t canconst rain the mind . There i s no o the r v era causa
,
o f i ts movements than Sattva, Rajas and Tamas,
which are bu t the cond i t ions of i ts mod ificat ions.
Hence the so-cal led freedom o f the w i l l i s a myth.
That canno t be cal led free wh ich obeys fixed
laws and the cou rse o f whose modificat ions can
be calcu lated beforehand . The m ind is no more
free than the app le which fal ls when i t is re leasedfrom the tree wh ich gave i t birth. Hence al l
Indian phi losophy i s d e te rministic . I t regards
( 2 7 )
al l mental act ion as reflex ; a cu rrent of energy
(cal led P rfina, the analogue o f nervous energy in
subtle matter) from w i thou t,entering the mind and
retu rning as an act ion. I n the mind,de l i be rat ion
may intervene be tween the in-go ing and out-go ingcu rrents. D uring the d e l iberat ion
,mo tives float ing
in the m ind or buried deep w i th in i t may rise and
influence the d irect ion of the retu rn current,bu t
al l is calcu lable al l i s d e term inable . No mentalfunct ion is “ free in the sense that the we l l knownlaws of matter are transcend ed by them.
The mind i s not free,but the Atmamay at tain
fre ed om from his bond age to mind . Consciousnessi s invo lved in most mental and bod i ly processes.
We are general ly conscious o f our thoughts and
mot ions. I n the case of some o f them,we can
de l i be rate ly w i thdraw our consciousness from
them. We can tu rn our consc iousness away froma passing thought or a casual bod ily act iv i ty ; bu t
an intricate train of thought or a compl icatedco -ord inat ion of muscu lar contract ions pe rfo rce
drags the consciousness into it. Th is compu lsoryinvo lu t ion of the consciousness in mental or bod ilyl ife is bond age ; the abil i ty to w i thd raw the con
sciousness from mental or bod i ly ev ents,however
excit ing , or again,the abi l i ty to st ick to a thought
wh ich is be ing hustled out of the fie ld o f consciousness by other thoughts is the freedom which man
is to gradual ly acqu ire by self-training . Thus
2 8
freedom i s the goal of human evol u t ion ; bu t th isis not freedom o f the w i l l
,bu t the l iberation o f
consc iousness from be ing compu lso ri ly mixed u pw ith bodily and mental events. The M ukta
,
he who has reached perfect ion,i s said to be “ free.
I t i s not freedom of the w i l l that he deve lops, butthe freedom from the compulsory interlock ing of
h is conscious se lf w i th his mind and his bod y. He
may turn away from matte r and thus escape i tstyranny, bu t i f he u ses a mind ,
he can d o so onlyby recogniz ing i ts laws and by u ti l iz ing them byj ud icious obed ience to them j ust as man uses theforces o f the physical world by und erstand ing themand obeying them. I n this sense
, the greatest God ,
nay Isvara H imse l f,is said to be not above the
Law o f Karma.
The two pro foundest th inkers o fmod ern E uropeSpinoza and Le i bniz had no i l l usions on the
question o f free w i l l . “ In the mind the re i s no
abso l u te or free w i l l bu t the mind is d etermined tow ish th is or that by a cause, wh ich has also been
dete rmined by another cause, and th is last by
another cause and so on to infini ty ”. (Spinoza,
E thi cs,1 8
, 48 , Transl : E lwes.) A l l our thoughtsand percept ions are bu t the consequence , cont ingenti t i s true
,o f our precedent thoughts and percep
tions,in such a way that were I abl e to consider
d i rectly al l that happens or appears to me at the
present t ime , I shou ld be able to see al l that w i l l
( 2 9
happen to me or that w i l l eve r appear to me
(Le ibniz , M etaphysics, Transl : Montgomery . p .
The theory of free-w i l l has been re-startedin recent western Phi losophy by the argumentthat i t is a datum o f consc iousness. I n the
interest of th is theory M unsterberg has propo undedan i l logical ant i thesis be tween “ truth of l i fe
( Free Wil l ) and truth o f science ( D eterminismThe funct ion of Science is to group the facts of l ifeund e r id eal schemes
,and hence there canno t be any
anti thesis be tween the two . The new O x ford Schoo l
of Hmanism,led by D r F . C. S . S chi l ler , ho ld s the
v iew that d eterminism is a postu late,a me thod o
log ical assumption in the sphe re o f sc ience , thetru th of wh ich i s strict ly re lat ive to i ts explanatoryfunct ion. S im i larly freedom is a postu late in the
moral sphere w i th as good a right to existi f i t can be used w ith l i ke profi t . But commonsense rebe ls against the adopt ion of two opposingpostu lates to explain the same phenomena. The
real cause of the difficu l ty is this — determinism i s
a fact of the mental world and freedom, possible or
actual,be longs to the sphere of Atma. Weste rn
phi losophy treats the mind enl ightened by the
consciousness of the Atma as one single category,
whereas a so-cal led state of consciousness, i . e .
a psychical event, is a complex of two factors— one
unique, at present in bondage bu t w i th the possibi l ity of acqu iring freedom,
and the other, work ing
( 30 )
und er fixed laws. With regard to this m ixed cate
gory, cal led pe rsonal consciousness, d ispu tes have
raged . Some look ing at one sid e of the ques
t ion have maintained i t i s free and o thers have
protested against the id ea. Hind u ph i losophyescaped be ing caught in the v ortex o f th is d is
pu te , because i t started w i th a clear analysis o f a
psych ic state into i ts const ituent e lements ( I ) consc iousness and (2 ) a flux of psychi c phenomena
and saw,from i ts inception that freed om as a
d atum of consciousness,and d ete rminism o f the
psychi c series as a sc ientific concep tion are not
incompat ible , because thy re fe r to d ifferent cate
gori es. I n popu lar re l igious thought, the quest ion i s sti l l fur ther confused by the impor tat ioninto i t of al ien problems
. The problem of ev i lsupposed to be introduced into the world by a
personal d ev i l and the id ea o f the moral responsibi l i ty of man for the proper use o f powe rs he
was supposed to be gifted w ith by a personal Godhave confounded the real ph i losoph ical q uest ionat issue . The i rrepressible anthropomorphism wh ichru led early human cul tures and inspired the id ealsof so many wor ld -scriptu res e rected God into an
autocrat ic Rule r who gave l i fe and human facult ies to man and o rd ered him to use themaccord ing to certa in ord inance s on pain o f punishment for v io lation. But science has abol ished th is
God made in man’
s image and this d iv ine l aw
32
5. S ubject to the mind are the five JfiAnen
d ryas (o rgans of know ledge ) and the five Karmen
d ryas (organs o f act ion). These also are mad e of
subt l e matte r. The ne rvous system i s the physiological counterpart o f these e leven subtle o rgans
,one
inte rnal ” and ten“external .” They are al l mad e
o f Sfikshma bhfita, the five kind s o f subtle e le
mentary matte r to be d iscussed late r on. The
o rgans o f know ledge are those o f aud i t ion,touch
,
v ision,taste and sme l l . The o rgans o f act ion are
those o f speak ing, hand l ing , wal k ing , excret ionand procreat ion. These ten o rgans are conce ived
as be ing primari ly mod ificat ions o f inv isible subtlematte r, which evo l ve into those of the v isiblephysical body. The i r ten func t ions are controled by ten d ifferent subtle l ines o f force and theyare subord inate e lements o f psychi cal l ife, whi lethe functions o f the mind are i ts princ ipal e lements.Like the mental func t ions they ente r the field of
consciousness only when the l igh t of Atma fal lsupon them. At fi rst sight i t looks l i ke a vio lat ionof the law of Parsimony that the senses are conce iv
ed as exist ing both in the physi cal and super-physi
cal matter. But i t i t i s true , as al l Hindu Yogis assertthat the sense functions are exe rc ised by a mariseparated from the physi cal bod y during l ife or
after death,the subt le o rgans ought to exist
separate from the gross ones. The div ision of
muscular functions K armend riyas into five class
[ 33 ]
es i s against the modern physio logical id ea that
motor impu lses o f al l k ind s are one and the same ;
but so long as physio logy has no t yet been able to
make up i ts m ind as to what a nervous impu lse isD
i t canno t object to the Hind u id ea of there be ing
five d ifferent k inds of moto r impu lses in the subtlebod y .
(6 ) The E l even organs inhere i n a L i ng e
d e h a wh i ch i s rel at i v ely permanent .
The m ind of man and the o the r ten o rgans i hhere in a bod y of subtle matte r cal led L i n g a
d e h a ( characterist ic bod y ) also cal led a y o n i j a
(nonu terine bod y ) and subd iv id ed variously intose ve ral subt le bod ies by the d i fferent schoo ls.
I t i s the companion o f the At m a d uring h islong wand erings ( S am s ar a ) in a k a l p a ( wo rldpe riod ). I t is b h 0t asr a y a, composed o f e lemen
tary subt le substances. I t i s also K a r m asr a y athe sto re -house o f s a m s k ar a s po tent ial d e
posi ts o f man’
s thoughts,d esi res and act ions. I t
i s the v ech icl e o f h is p r an a s ne rvous energ iesof v arious kind s. The union o f P u r u s h a
w i th the L i ri g a d e h a ,d u ring the long per iod
D i ffi erent SChOU l S ment ion d i fferent subtl e bod i es,intermed i
ate between the permanent I f nga d e h a and the peri shabl e
s t h nl a d e h a i . c. c h h i y a . Y at a nad e h a, etc, perishabl e
bod i es that. the man i s prov i d ed w i th d uring hi s post-mortemperegrinat i ons but here we are concerned only wi th the general
prmcrpl es und erl y ing al l H ind u School s and not the special
teach i ngs of any part i cul ar School .
[ 34 ]
o f h is manifested l ife ( K a l p a ) i s for the
pu rpose of enab l ing h im to experience pleasu re
and pain (b h o g a) and final ly reach a p a v a r g a
( emancipat ion ). Pleasure and pain are not primary
attributes o f physi cal or psych ic l ife . The ac tiono f the o utside world on man th rough the sense
organs prod uces a reaction in the shape of a moto rimpu lse. This moto r impu lse i s a flow of p ran a
toward s muscles. Th is flow i f uninte rrupted i s
cal led pleasu re and i f interrupted i s cal led pain.
B o th in no rmal and morbid cond i t ions pleasure and
pain are frequent ly confound ed and people find
p leasure in pain and v i c e v e r s a ; thus prov ing thatthe flow or inte rruption o f p r 9 na i s the primary
fact and pleasure and pain bu t an inte rpre tat ion
the reof. Th is i s al l in harmony w i th the H ind uid eas bu t th is flow or interrupt ion o f ene rgytakes place in the L i ng a d e h a ,
whose spec ialfunction i s E h o k t r i t v a ,
capabi l i ty o f subse rv ingsensibi l i ty .
The Neo -
platonists be l iev ed in the existence o f a
L i ng a d e h a. Plot inus speaks o f“a separab le por
t ion of the sou l,
a“ common
,d ual , or composi te
natu re wh ich is the subjec t in percept ion,and wh i ch
i s an intermed iary between sou l and bod y. (Wh i ttake r ’s N eo-pl atom
'
sts, pp. 46 Th is d octrine
d ropped out of E u ropean ph i losophy in the darkness of the mid d le ages. On account o f the severanceof the Greek phi losophic tradi t ion during th is period
[ 35 ]
the obscu rat ion of E uropean inte l lectual l ifei t i s impossib le to find out what the anc ients real lymeant by the te rms p sy c h e and m e n 5
, nor can
w e t race the exac t co rrespond ence be tween Greek
and Hind u ph i losophy ; only i t i s certain that themod ern Engl ish translat ions o f Greek te rms are
as inad equate as those o f S amskri t terms and therewas more uni ty o f thought be tween the ancientGreek and the ancient Ind ian than the Eng l isht ranslat ions o f Greek and Samskri t works ind i cate .
7 . The L i figa d e h a i s per i od i cal ly connected
~w i th a body of fl esh .
Th is i s the S t h a l a - d e h a,the “ gross body by
m eans of whi ch man acts onnature outsid e h im . The
ad d i tion of th is S t h al a d e h a comple tes the man.
The personal consciousness as al read y po inted out
i s the resu l t o f the conj unct ion o f the S a m v i t of
P u r u s h a,the B h o k t r i t v a ( sensi bi l i ty ) o f the
L i fi ga d e h a and the K a r t r i t v a (capaci ty fora ction) o f the bod y of flesh and b lood . Wh i le in thisbod y the wo rld o ffe rs man pleasures to be enjoyedand pains to be av o id ed . These cal l forth his acti v i
t ies in manipu lat ing natu re . When he acts on the
world he ge ts a know led ge o f the world as objecta nd o f h imse l f as actor. The resu l t ing pleasureand pain intensi fy th is knowled ge of se l f as apartf rom the no t-se lf. D esi res and expe rience of pleasu re and pain interact on each othe r
,and he thus
e stabl ishes re lat ions between himse lf and othe r
( 36 ]
men. H e therefore period ical ly returns to incarnat ion for the fru it ion of his hankerings and the
sat isfact ion of the bonds estab l ished be tween h im*
se l f and others. When R ag a d v e s h a m (d esi reand aversion) i s transcended
,compulsory incar
nat ions cease .
S uper-human be ings also who normal ly havebu t subtle bodies some t imes take birth in human
bod ies. Th is is cal led A v a t ar a,
a crossing :
over of the boundaries that usual ly separate the
cu rrents of human and super-human l ives. Thismay be a voluntary or a compulsory incarnat ion.
K rishna in the B hagavat Gfta IV. 6 -8 says, .
“ Though I am not a be ing subjec t to birth and
death and the Lord o f born be ings,I by my wond er
work ing powe r enter into p r a k r i t i that i s m ineand am born in a body. Wheneve r there i s a d ecayo f right act ion and increase o f law lessness
,then I
make for myse l f a bod y , 0 Bharata; for the protect ion o f the we l l -doers and destru ction o f i l l -d oersand the estab l ishment o f laws I come to birth age
after age.
”The P urd nas abound in tales o f
superphysi cal be ings be ing mad e to take physi calbirths as a punishment , bu t an incarnat ion v o l untaryor invo l untary is a l imitat ion to the be ing thatunde rgoes i t, for whi le in a physi cal bod y, the laws
o f physical mat ter cannot be t ranscended even bythe highest . But the body also affords the supe rphysi cal be ing opportunit ies to hold intercourse
[ 37 ]
w i th human be ings and affec t the i r dest inies in a
much su re r fash ion than o the rwise,as i s ind icated
i n the S l o k a s quo ted above . I f superphysi calbe ings shou ld from the i r own sphe res act d i rectlyon the brains of man,
i t wou ld be at the cost o f
upse tting the nervous, and hence the mental and
moral,equ i l ibri um o f the man acted on. Inspi red
.prophe ts have always been abnormal men in whom
.patho log ical cond i t ions have been prominent and tothem pe rfec t sani ty as we und erstand i t has beenimpossible be cause the ir e vo l u t ion has been so d if
‘ferent from ours. Fo r even an I s v a r a i s not omni
potent in the sense that laws o f be ing (material or im~material) can be suspend ed by h im. The only wayHe can d i rec t ly affect human be ings is by birthamong them as a man. As An t a r y am i ( inne rcontro l ler ) he turns the whee l o f l ife he i s ou
looke r,
approver,
supporte r, enjoyer, greatestf
sovere ign and h ighest se l f in the bod y Bhag : Gi l d
X I I I . bu t laws of natu re (P r a kr i t i) are immutable and she i s the roo t of al l mu tat ions and
q ual i t ies ( 1b : 1 3- 19A v a tar a is popu larly understood as a “ descent
o f I s v a r a into mund ane regions. Th is is absu rd .
Q
I s v a ra is everywhere and hence a“ d escent ” wou ld
be to H im an impossible feat. Hindu w ri ters takec are to explain that what actual ly takes place in
A v a t ar a s is bu t the manifestat ion,general ly tem
rporary , o f a ray of H im,through the body of an
( 38 1
advanced human be ing, more than H e i s manifested in the heart of the o rd inary man. E ven Krishnasaid to be a “
fu l l A v a t ar a became an ord inaryman some t ime before h is d eath.
8 M atter is mutabl e, but i ncreate and obey s
fi x ed L aws.
M atter l ike the At m a is increate and ind estruct ible. Creat ion e x n i h i l o and d isso l u tion againinto noth ingness have been no t ions a lways obno x i
ous to Hind u thinke rs. The Samskri t root 8 r i ftmeans to pou r out
, emi t , bege t and S ri s h t i means
emission or emanat ion. I n the Vedas the se l fexistent i s alw ays spoken o f as emi t t ing or emanat a
i ngmatter as we l l as l iv ing be ings by means of
t a p a s, med itat ion. Le ibniz among E u ropean
phi losophers agrees w i th the Hindus in regard ingcreat ion as a k ind of emanat ion j ust as we prod uceour thoughts ”
(M etaphy sics, t r. M ontgomery p 2 3).
The ch ief characterist i c of matte r i s
I t i s j a d a i . e. , i ts existencebe mani fested only by the spiri t that i s the
.
seer ; i t is not s v a y a m - p r a k asa ,i e . i t canno t
o f i tse l f manifest i ts be ing. I t i s p r ak ri t i - v i k ri t i ,mutab le . I t transforms i tse l f into a series o f
phenomena d uring a cycle of mani festat ion
(k a l p a ) , each'
phenomenon be ing a mod ificat ionof a prev ious someth ing and i tse lf soon mod ifiedinto something e lse. Th is suscept ibi l i ty to
[ 40 ]
o f the existence o f material objects. I f they have
to exist at a l l they must have those g u na s,hence
they const i tu te the material i ty o f matter. Theyconst i tu te
,as i t were , three cases o f the so -cal led
Law o f se l f-prese rvat ion. I f we try to imagine a
physical worl d w i thou t one o f these three g u nas o f
inert ia,fo rce and equ i l i br ium we shal l find that our
wo r ld w i l l d isso l ve into thin ai r befo re our mentalv ision. Hence they are g u na 5 more proper ly thanLaws. Th is explanat ion o f the act ion o f the threeg u h a s in the physical wo rld make s them exac tlythe same as New ton’
s famous three Laws o f mot ion.
I t i s be ing grad ual ly recognised that N ew ton’
s
Laws are not so much Laws of mo t ion as facto rsthat make up the concept
‘matte r’. The fi rst and
th i rd Laws can scarce ly be cal led Laws of mo t ion.
The second i s as much a Law o f mot ion as o f
mat te r. They are more proper ly the fund amental
p ropert ies, g u na s,o f mat ter
,that wh ich d ifferen
t iatesmatter from what i s not matte r . They d efinemat te r and ind icate the cond it ions of i ts mani festa
t ion. M at ter mani fests i tse l f wh i le in mot ion thati s why they are also cal led Laws o f mo t ion. I n
the ear l ier days, mo tion was regard ed some t imes as
an e n s r a t i o n i s some t ime s as a th ing in i tse l f,because the Cartesian concept ion o f mate rial substance as consist ing me re ly in extension was preval
ent. But we can see“that matte r w i thou t mot ion i s
as inconce ivable asmatter w i thou t extension, so that
[ 4 X ]
D escartes’ assumpt ion that matte r was there fi rst asan inert l ump and mot ion was put into i t afterward si s i l l leget imate and i rrat ional” Po l lock
, Sp inoza
.his L ife and P hi l osophy , p. I
These three G u na 5 cond i t ion mental mod ifica
t ions also . M enta l ev ents are o f three leve ls,accord
ing as cogni t ions, d esi res and act ions pred ominatein them. I n the lowest leve l , T amas
,R aj as
and S a t t v a appear au tomat ic action, exci ted
ac t ion,and d e l i berat ive act ion. I n the leve l o f
d esi re , the three manifest themse lves as al l -compe ll ing d esi re
,the struggle o f mot i ves and V a i ragy a,
or regu lated d esi re . I n the leve l o f cogni t ion,
t he three G u na s operate as i gnorance,c lo ud ed
inte l lect and pe rfec t know l ed ge . The general toneo f the m ind
,und e r the influence o f these g u n a s
,
‘i s ind ifference, pain and pl easure . Thu s the m ind
i s as t r a i gu my a,cond i t ioned bv the three
g u na s ,as the bod y.
Thus we see that the concept ion of the three
G u na s is the w idest and most he lpfu l gene ral izat ion that has been reached by phi losophy. I tembraces w i th in i ts w id e sweep al l states of perceptible objects and al l states of mind that we know o f,
ev e ryth ing that is mu table , e very th ing that i sobject ive to the P u r u s h a
, and binds them in one
general concept, Gunas d ifferent iated into the threecond i t ions o f the manifestat ion o f the object iveCosmos. The inertia of physical objects
,the
[ 42 ]
automat ism of the m ind ,i ts subject ion to desi re
,
the fai l u re of i ts powers o f apprehension and in
sensi bi l i ty to pleasure and painare al l comprehended und er the one word
,Tamas. T amas i s l i te ral ly,
‘be ing choked ’
,hence d arkness
,and sums up in
one wo rd these charac terist ics and fo rms one o f
the cond i t ions o f the manifestat ion o f mat te r.R a j a s simi larly sums up mot ion und e r the constraint o f fo rce
, excitement , st ruggle of d esi res, w rongapprehension and pain. Raj as
,l i teral ly , the cloud y
co lou red i l l uminat ion o f the inte rmed iate spherebetween the d ark earth and the bright heaven,apt ly d enominates this cond i t ion. The common
facto r of equ i l ibrium,balance
,se l f-cont ro l , right
apprehension and pleasure i s conce ived as S a t t v a,real be ing.
These three g u na s are not qual i t ies o f any
substance,bu t the laws o f matte r
,the mod es in
wh i ch matter can mani fest i tse l f. Kar l Pearsond efines sc ient ific me thod to consist in “
the carefu land o ften labor ious classificat ion o f facts, in the
comparison o f the i r re lat ionsh ips and sequences,and final ly in the d iscov ery
,by the aid of the d isc i p
l ined imaginat ion,of a brie f statement, or f o r m u l a,
wh ich in a few wo rd s resumes a w id e range of facts.
”
S uch a f o r m u l a is a scient ific law. I n th is sense ,the G u n a s are the fund amental laws of matter.The wo rd
,law
,associated as i t i s w i th the id ea
of a Law-giver i s a rathe r unsat isfactory word un
[ 43
less we , as Lo tze says,give up the customary v i ew
accord ing to wh i ch the Laws of real i ty are regardedas a se l f-subsistent powe r cont ro l l ing the real andactual . They are no thing more than general forms
o f thought in whi ch, a spi r i t contemplat ing the
course of the world and comparing i ts d iffe rentmovements might sum up the who le system o f i t inone brief expression. What is thu s briefly e x
pressed i s the th ing real ized by and through theown natu re o f th ings themse lves, wh ich are whatthey are and act as they act o f themse l v es
,so
mak ing i t possib l e for us to comprehend the i rbehav iou r as a case o f th is or that l aw . E very th ingV
wh ich we regard as a l aw or orde r ing o f the
w o rld is j ust the wo r ld ’
s own natu re,and i t i s only
our incorrect , though hard ly avo id able w ay of
look ing at th ings wh ich represents i t as a ru l e se
parab le the refrom and hav ing al read y an autho
r i ty from some othe r sou rce to wh ich this natu remu st submi t” ( P hi l osophy of R el igi on p . 76 I n
o ther wo rd s,the act iv i ty o f matte r found the laws
and not the laws the activ i ty . The three laws,
or G unas, cond i t ion the mani festat ion o f mat te reve rywhere . What i s not mat ter— P u r u s h a
,con
sciousness— can alone neve r be affected by the
G u na s,wh i ch d o not be long to the sphere of the
immutab le A t m a.
That matte r i s also subject to Space and
Time and causal i ty fo l lows from i ts be ing atom
[ 44 ]
i c in const itut ion and T r a i gu ny a in nature .
B ut though the evo l u t ion o f mat ter i s sub
ject to t ime,matte r i tse lf is indestru c t ible . The
ind iv id ual P u r u sha may tu rn from i t and ignore i tbu t i t ceases no t to exist . And when The Lord o f
the Unive rse w i thd raws H is ene rgies from i t i tse vo l u t ion i s bu t inte rrupted ,
for during P r a l a y a,
mat te r cont inues to exist as A s a t,A v y a k t a
unmani fested as the shoo t w i th in the seedS ankara
(9 ) The w orl d -hi story i s made up of a l ternati ng
p eri od s of acti v i ty and rest.
Matter is in a constant state of fl ux . The
largest period i cal flux i s that o f p r a 1a y a and
k a l p a . P r a l a y a i s the peri od when matte ri s a v y a k t a , und ifferent iated . I t canno t thenbe cognized . The G u na s are in a state of quies
cence . P u r u s h a s are then also a v y a k t a ,un
mani fest. K a l pa is the perio d o f the mani festat iono f a wo rld
,or a system o f wo r lds. Western scho lars
are o f Opinion that the d octrine o f period ica l manifestat ions and obscurat ions of the univ erse d i d not
exist in the earl iest period o f the Ved a notw i th
stand ing the assert ion o f R igv ed a, V. 190-3, that“ B rat c reated as before .
”But weste rn scho l
ars are apt to forge t that the three Ved as are,afte r
al l . compi lat ions for purposes o f Y a j na (sacrifi ce),and were neve r intended to be re l igious treat isesfor the matte r of that, even the Upanishad s are
[ 45 ]
but manuals of U p as a na (medi tat ion ) and re l i
gious d octrines can,i f they appear at al l in them,
d o so only by way o f al l usion. Hence the pau cityor ev en the absence of re ferences to any doc t rine inthese books canno t by itse l f be treated as e v id enceto prove that the d octrine
'
had not been worked out
by the ancient th inkers. I t was j ust because the
w ho le o f the Ved a— the former and the latte r parts,the port ion o f ceremonial wo rk and that o f med i tat ion,
was mere ly a manual o f r it ual ism that m i m a
m s a s were requ ired to e l uc id ate the theo ry and
pract ice o f the ri tuals.-There fore the re i s nothing
to d isprove the trad i t ional v iew accepted in Ind iathat the d octrine o f per iodical d isso l u tion and crea
t ion be longs to the ear l iest ages of Ind ian thought.Nor i s the doctrine so d iffi cu l t or compl i cated
as to pre-suppose a long prev ious course of ph i loso
phical deve lopment . M an natu ral ly wo rks fromh is own const i tu t ion to that o f the cosmos. I n
the earl iest savage times he attribu ted h is own
thoughts and sent iments to rocks and t rees and
animals around h im. So to-d ay he extend s theconcept ions o f force and of energy wh ich he i s
conscious of i n h is own body to the objec ts abou th im and thence seeks to explain the cosmos. J ust so ,
i n o lden t imes he extend ed the d ai ly al ternat ionso f act iv i ty and sleep of h is own bod y, j ag r a t a and
s u s h u p t i to the universe and formu lated the
ideas o f B r a h m a’
s act iv i ty (K a l p a) and sleep
[ 46 ]
( p r a l a y a). There i s noth ing spec ial ly mode rnin th is concept ion that shou ld compe l the h istoriano f Hind u thought to assign to i t a later age .
Here i t must be noted that the wo rd N i t y a,
usual ly translated e ternal, means no t an i l l imi table
futu re,as is und e rstood in the West . E te rni ty i s
but t ime w i th i ts bound aries thrown to a great d i stance . just as infini te space , i s bu t l imi ted space ,bu t w i th i ts bound s thrown far apart . B o th phrases are free ly used and few rea l ize they are bu tword s w i thou t any d efini te meaning beh ind them.
On the cont rary,Hind u phi losophy invariab ly uh
d erstand s by N i t y a ,up to the end o f th is k a l p a ;
a s l o k a o f the M atsy a P a rd na,
says “ By
immo rta l i ty (am r i t a t v a) i s meant (l i fe ) unt i l thed estruct ion o f al l be ings (i—e . unt i l P r a l ay a se ts in).
Immuni ty from re incarnat ion i s l ife as long as the
three l o k a s last .” Ind eed i t i s meaningless to
extend Time,as we know i t , into the state
,cal led
P ra l ay a . Time is re lated to the change o f state sof a perce i v ing mind and hence canno t exist
,when
the m ind s themse l v es are no mo re . The Hind u phi
l OSOphy d iv id es K al a ( T ime ) into two c lasses,K h a nd a,
and A k h a nd a,d iscre te and cont inu
ous. The fo rme r alone , i s t ime as we know i t. Thelatter, du rat ion, independ ent o f change o f statesof mind , we can scarce ly understand
,since i t
t ranscends human experience . M a l
'
t . Up . v i . 15.
says: There are two forms o f Brahma, K a l a and
[ 48 ]
b roken and cemented together again (to use a
c rud e bu t effect ive image) w i thout accurate ly fi t t ingthe parts, so that there i s a resid ual strain al l
round the place (Larmor, E ther and M atter,
pp . 2 6 .
Thus haveWesternSc ient ists,w i th extraord inary
experimental and mathemat ical ski l l,framed a
p ic tu re o f Ak asa ,E the r, mod ified to se rv e as
the basis of l ight v ibrat ions. Clerk M axwe l lproved l igh t and e lectric i ty to be id ent ical
,and
hence the E thereal strain charged w i th e lectr ic i tyi s exp lained as the part icu lar structure that he lpsus to imagine what correspond s to R ap a t a n
m a t r a or rud imentary l ight . But no Western
S cient ist has as yet started the q uestion o f what are
sme l l , taste and touch. Are they also st rains in the
E the r and i f they are,what k ind s o f strains ?
M ost H ind u schoo ls say that they also are mod ifi
cat ions ofAkasa,t a nm at r a s
,roo ts o f sensat ion
,
the V a ise sh i k as only regard ing them,as we l l as
l ight , to be qual i t ies and no t mod ificat ion,of atoms.
Thus four d ifferent k ind s of strains in E ther would
be requ ired to exp lain the roots o f these fou r sensat ions.
Then the re is sound , wh i ch Hind u P h i
l osophy conce ives as a q ual i ty or mod ificat ion of
the unstrained , unmod ified , non-atomic Ak asa .
M od ern S c ience explains sound to be v i brat ions
o f ai r. The Hindu id ea i s that behind the air
v ibrat ions there is a mod ificat ion of Akasa ,not
49 )
o f the k ind that const i tutes an atom,and this is the
basis o f sound . There i s no thing inherent lyimprobab le in th is id ea that the five sensat ionsare five d iffe rent modificat ions o f E the r. Outsid ethe human bod y they exist i n a T am a s a or resisting form and consti tu te the e lements of the Uni
v e rse . I nsid e the sense-organs the same E therealmod ificat ions exist in the i r S at v i k a, equ i l ibratedfo rm and hence the man pe rce ives them as sensa
ti ons. Weste rn S cience pictu res the e x ternal
causes of the various sensat ions as mod es of v ibrati on. This has l ed to the inso l ub le prob lem,
how
can a v ibrat ion ou tsid e the body become a sensa
t ion afte r i t impinges on a nerv e . To conce ive o f
l ight or sound as v i brat ions as the physic ist does,he lps him to invest igate the i r prope rt ies, bu t fromthence to assert that the v ibrat ion is a fact
,a
noumenon, a real i ty ind epend ent of our thought,and that the sensat ion i s a phenomenal representat ion of this fact by consciousness to i tse l f is
abso l u te ly unph i losophical . For v i brat ion i s but aconcept of the m ind manu factu red from expe rienceo f the mo t ion of our bod ies and i tse l f bu t a
phenomenal representat ion. I t is equal ly unph i loso
ph ical to talk of consciousness respond ing to
v ibrat ions in the fo rms of sensat ions. Th is is (in theword s of the Yoga S d tras) a v i k a 1p a, a form of
wo rd s w i thou t any fact corresponding to them
( I . The only idea we can attach to consc ious4
50 )
ness is,as H ind u Phi lo sophy po ints out, that o f
e nl ightene r, what manifests or i l l umines thatwhose existence would o therw ise be unmani fest .To speak o f consc iousness as responding to v i brat ion is to attr ibute activ i ty to that wh ich canno tbe conce ived as acting . I t i s no t an act ive agent , a
manipu lator o f v i brat ion into a sensat ion,a d é u 5
e x m a c h i na that myste riously change s a v ibrat ion
,a harmonious d isplacement o f mo lecu les o f
matte r into a taste , a sme l l,e tc . S uch an e x pl an
a tion i s me taphysi cs in the wo rst sense o f the wo rd- the use o f language to conceal ignorance and not
to clari fy thought. Conscio usne ss can enl ighten,
rend e r consciou s, make the man know what wou ldo the rwise be unconscious sensat ion
,unknown to
h im,bu t i t is impossible to imagine how i t can
respond to,i . e . ,
change i tse lf, in the form o f
a sensat ion,when a vibrat ion fal ls on i t . The
physi cal explanation o f sensat ion that “sound
l ight , heat, e lectric ity and even the ne rvous infl ux is d ue to
“v ibratory movements
,varying only
by the i r d irect ion and the i r per iods”
i s,as B inet
l uc id ly po ints out, bu t an art ifice
,a symbo l or
a process convenient for c lassificat ion in ord erto combine the very d iffe rent qual i ties of thingsin one unifying synthesis— a process having the
same theore tical val ue as a m e m o r i a t e c h u i c a,
wh ich, by subst i tu ting letters for figures, he lps us
t o retain the latter in our minds. This does not
51 )
m ean that figures are,in fact
,lette rs
,but i t is a
conv enient subst i tu t ion whi ch has a pract ical ad
v antage (The M ind and the B rain,p . M ot ion
i s no t less of a phenomenon,more of a real i ty
than the five sensat ions,bu t is more easi ly capab le
o f measurement . Otherw ise the physi c ist can con
c e ivabl y explain al l sensat ions and mo t ions,i . e .
a l l phenomena in te rms o f form, or, as the Hind u
myst ic d oes, in terms of sound . From a phi loso
p h ical stand po int i t i s a mere accid ent tha t our
v isua l and muscu lar sensat ions seem to have acqu
i red such a Supreme impo rtance that we invent“
theories explai ni ng o the r sensat ions by imaginaryv isual and mu scu lar events. But i t is as val idt o explain a sound as a v ibrat ion
,as to explain a
mot ion as a sound . To measure the length of
a body instead o f applying to i t a yard wand ,
one might l isten to i ts so und for the p i tch of the
sound given by two co rd s a l lows us to deducethe i r d ifference o f length ,
and even the abso l u telength o f each ,
”
( 1b. p . Thus al l scient ifictheories may be reconstructed in te rms of aud i toryevents, and sound he ld to be the parent o f al l ma
terial form; and we may understand why the Hinducal ls sound ( nad a ), the fi rst manifestat ion of
t he unmanifested . Hence the id ea that v ibrat ioni s an u l timate fact and sensat ions are i ts pheno.menal forms
,though i t underl ies al l mod ern
E uropean thought, is ph i losophical ly absurd .
( 52
M oreover to say that a v ibrat ion affec ts consc iousness i s to attribute mu tabil ity to that which isimmutable . The Hind u explanat ion i s at leastinte l l ig ible . Sensation is the same o u tside the
bod y as i t i s inside the body. But inside the bod yi t is i l l uminated by the consc ious subj ect, who i s
then said to “ know and t i l l i t i s known i t i swhat we may cal l
“ unconscious sensat ion.
”
Sene
sat ion exists ou tside the body as sensat ion and
the five sensat ions by the i r combinat ion const i tu tethe objects o f the wo rld . I t i s in this sense thatthey are the five e lements o f
’ the world . H encealso is the world percept ib le by a mind . Thussound inside the aud itori um or in the unive rse
,is
but a special mod ificat ion ofAk asa. The perce i v
ing organ o f aud i t ion and the perce iv ed objec t,
sound , are o f the same natu re , both be ingAk as a or S a b d a t a nm at r a
, pu re sensat ion o f
sound only Ak asa ou tside the body i s not pure ,unmixed , l i ke the one in the o rgan o f hear ing
,bu t
compounded w i th air,etc .
, and hence the S a b d a
(the essence of sound ) in the external Ak asa before i t can reach the bearer must fi rst be manifestedas nad a or d h v a n i
, or v ibrat ions o f air. As
a commentator on Jaimini’
s .M imdrnsa S d tras, I .
1 3, says, “the st i l l atmosphere which inte rferes:
w ith the percept ion of sound,is removed by the
conj unct ions and d isj unct ions of air (undulat ions,v i c h i t a r ang a ) issu ing from the speaker ’s.
( 53 )
m ou th and thus sound becomes percept i ble . S imil arly in the case o f the o ther senses cogni t ion issrend ered possible by the fact that the same substance exists inside the sense -organ as in the out
s id e wo rld . These are the five e lements, so much
m isund erstood and hence rid icu led . This Hinduv iew o f the existence o f five t a nmat r a s or five
e lements or five mod ificat ions of E ther to ac
c ount for the five sensat ions and five s e n s i b i l i ai s not as al l opposed to reason or to mod e rn
ways of thought .1 1 . Al l energy in the Uni v erse ispersonal , i . e.
bound up w i th consciousness,though of vary i ng
d egrees of i ntensi ty .
Besid es consciousness and unconscio us mat te r,t he great gene ral izat ion mad e from the phenomena
o f the universe i s Energy. Energy i s the l inkbetween these two . The only manifestat ion of
«energy of wh i ch we have fi rst hand know led ge is
the ene rgy we expend in re act ing on the objectsaround us by changing the i r posit ion or cond i t ions.
Hence when we observe bodies al tering shape or
posi t ion,we infe r that some ene rgy has been act ing
o n them. That the manifestat ion o f energy in
the world othe r than by animals is not accompa
fnied by any d egree of consciousness i s what isc al led the mechani ca l v iew o f the world
,and th is
v iew d ominatesmodern thought . The opposi te v iew,
t hat al l manifestat ion of energy in the universe
( 54 )
proceed s from consc ious be ings,v isible or invisible
,
i s the animist i c theory of the cosmos,the a d h i d a i
v a t a explanation of i t accepted by al l Ind ianschoo ls o f ph i losophy. Of these theories the a d h id a i v a t a theory i s ce rtainly the more plausible ,for the conscious exert ion o f ene rgy by us is a
concre te real i ty o f our l ives,whe reas the id ea of
ene rgy unaccompanie d by consc iousness i s oa‘
an abstract ion from our experience . The mechani
cal theory, l i ke E ucl id’
s theory o f space , has been
a concept of much assistance in und erstand ing the
cosmos,bu t ne i the r theo ry i s a percept of the
w or ld of experience . The ex trao rd inary growthof modern sc ience inspired by the mechani calexplanat ion o f the uni ve rse has made people forge tthat i t is an abstraction and no t a real i ty of
conscious exper ience .
O f th is t rio , Consciousness, Energy and M atte r,one v iew iso lates Consciousness as Real B e ing and
regard s Matte r and Energy as be ing p r a k r i t i or
object . Th is is the v iew of the Bhagavadgi td , v i i . 4
6 -“My atomic P r a k r i t i e ightfo ld , i s Earth,
Water,Fire , Ak aga, M an a s
,B u d d h i and
A h a m k ar a. This is the lowe r ; learn now , 0
mighty armed,my P r a k r i t i , highe r than this,
that wh ich becomes l iv ing l a and by which
the Universe i s uphe ld . Know that these two are
the wombs of al l be ings.
”
Another v iew isolatesP r a k ri t i , and regards consc iousness and S a k t i ,
( 56 )
intel lec tual advancement that man can attain to .
The animistic theory prevai ls in crude forms
among the savage races o f the wo rld . Hence theWest regards i t as a theo ry fi t only fo r savages
,
bu t the t rue ph i losophe r does no t est imate the
value o f phi losophi cal theories from fee l ings O f
rac ial superiori ty. The mod ern impat ience w i thanimism i s but a phase O f the material ism that hasObsessed the Weste rn m ind ; and su re ly an id eal ist ic savage may have be tter intu i t ions than one
who is the flowe r o f mod e rn ci v i l isation bu t b l ighted by the canker o i material ism . The prej ud i ceagainst animism i s
,l ike the prejud i ce against
d e terminism d ue to a fee l ing that the conduct O f
conscious be i ngs must be capric ious i rred ucible tofixed laws.
But cond uc t of man or Of natu re , d epend ing as i td oes on mind and bod y, takes place always according to fixed laws. The informing consciousnessthat accompanies i t e i ther in the human body or
in Natu re has no power to make i t fitful or un
amenab le to the e te rnal Laws o f matte r. Hence
the unerring mechanism Of Nature ’
s operat ions is
qu ite compat ible w ith i ts be ing enl ightened by the
conc iousness of the god s.
The name animism is an unfortunate one sug
gesting as it does, to temism and simi lar assoc iat ions. But the theory that personal i ty o f v ario usk ind s or degrees underl ies al l Operat ions of Nat u re
( 57 )
i s not at al l crud e . M any of the greatest th inkers of the wor ld have accepted and expo unded i t,some ad mi t ting one Pe rsonal God ,
and o thersassuming many pe rsonal be ings, cal l ing them Gods,Ange ls, Powe rs, D e v a s
,A s u r a 5
,etc . M ater ial ism
alone opposes i t .
Le i bniz,who shared w i th Newton the honou r of
presid ing at the birth Of mod e rn scient ifi c thought ,p e rce ived the d ange r o f that though t lapsing intoa forge tfu lness o f the inte l l igence beh ind natu reand v igo rously protested against i t. I n sect ion 19
o f h is M etaphysics he acknow led ges the val id i ty o f
the mechanical explanat ion O f natu re so far as i t
goes, but ad d s that to neglec t to tal ly the inte l l igencebehind natu re wou ld be as i f
,in o rd e r to account
for the captu re o f an impo rtant p lace by a prince ,theh istorian sho u ld say i t was caused by the part ic leso f powd e r in the cannon hav ing been to uched by a
spark o f fire expand ed w i th a rapid i ty capable Of
push ing a hard,so l id body against the wa l ls o f the
p lace, wh i le the l i t tle part ic les, wh ich compose the
brass o f the cannon,were so we l l interlaced that
they d id no t separate und e r th is impact,— as i f he
shou ld account for i t in this way instead ofmak ingus see how the fo resight o f the conque ro r broughth im to choose the t ime and proper means, and howh is abi l i ty surmounted a l l Obstac les ”
(M . p.
Le ibniz uses th is argument to establ ish the inte ll igence of the one God behind natu re
,but i t does
58 )
not affect the argument i f to that one supremeinte l l igence be ad d ed many subord inate inte l l igences. Animism,
then, is no t so terribly primi t ive a
conception as i t i s said to be .
1 2 . Tlzi : energy i s P r d zz a,w /ziclz i s i nter
med iate betw een sp i r i t and matter .
Western sc ience conce ives al l fo rms o f energyas mot ion
,mo lar or mo lecular . We must remem
ber that th is picture of ene rgy o f al l forms as
mot ion i s no t a real i ty independ ent o f our mind .
I t is a concept fo rmed by us to he lp our ha l t ingthought to d eal w i th the var io us physi ca l pheno o
mena wh i ch we d esi re to bind into one no t ion,and
i s no t necessari ly true o u tsid e the wo rld o f ideas.
Hind u ph i losophy regards P r 9. na and no t mo t ion
as the fund amental ene rgy o f the cosmos. P r an a
i s conce ived as a powe r coming from o r started bythe P u r u sha and act ing onmatte r. This concept ion of P rana as powe r charged w i th consc ious
ness wh ich manifests i tse l f as ene rgy when i t ac tson matte r and thus becomes v isi ble o u tsid e the
P u r u s h a i s a necessary coro l lary o f the A d h i
d a i v a t a explanat ion o f the world .
The S ank h y a cannot ad mi t that P r anacan start from the P u r u s h a. The u tmost that th is
schoo l and the al l ied schoo l o f Y o ga wou ld al lowi s that P r éna starts into ac tiv i ty in matte r whenthere is a union o f P u r u s h a and P r a k r i t i .
I f natu re -
powers D e v a s exist behind”
59
natu re al l her energy must u l timate ly be im
material in origin. The energy exerted by an
animal or a man is primari ly nervous energy.
A l l the energy o f animals i s ne rvous energy t i l li t leav es the muscles and acts on outsid e objects.
Th is ne rvous energy i s.
cal led Prana. WesternS cience has for a hund red years unsuccessful lytried to exp lain nervous energy as a form of
mechanica l mot ion ; Eastern Ph i losophy rev e rsesthe process and d erives mechanical mo tion fromP r an a
,or energy accompanied by consciou sness.
P r fi na, corresponds to the P s y c h i k o n
p n e u m 3,animal sp i r i ts, o f Greek ph i losophy , a
catego ry wh ich i s intermed iate be tween spiri t and
matter , and brings them into re lat ion w ith eacho the r . Matte r i s ever changing
,always in a state of
flux . P u r u s h a is immu tab le . H e reflected ,
“Whati s i t by whose d eparture I shal l d epart (from the
bod y by establ ishing whom ( in i t ) I shal lremain estab l ished (in i t) ? He emi tted P r 3 na
(P ras . Up . VI . 3-
4) as hi s e m p i r i c a l represen
tat ive . M atter is atomic and unconsc ious P r é n a
is cont inuous, that i s, no t d iscrete , and charged , as
i t were , w i th the consciousness o f the P u r u s h a.
P u r u s h a be ing above space , canno t h imse l f move
or be the direct cause of mot ion inmatte r. P r anais spoken o f as V ay u or air
,for air is the best
symbo l of an immaterial someth ing wh ich is the
cause o f mot ion, but i s not at the same t ime pure
( 60 )
spiri t. The ene rgy of the Universe is but the P r anao f cosmic be ings. P r ana i s S a k t i regardedas a material fact and not as conscious somebody.
B e ing an inte rmed iate category betweenA t m aandmatter i t partakes o f the nature o f both. I t iscapab le of more or less, l ike matter, and is at thesame t ime accompanied by consc iousness. I t
connects as a brid ge A t m a and matte r whose
characte rist ics are so opposed to each o ther thatto speak o f the i r union o r the i r interact ion w i l lbe as absurd as to say that l inear magni tude 18
m ixed w i th whiteness. S tudents o f E uropean
phi losophy are fam i l iar w i th the d ifficu l t ies of thec onnection o f bod y and mind . Th is intermed iatecategory so lves al l such d ifficu l t ies.
Th is doctr ine of Universal P r ana is deve lopedin the U p ani shad and Ag ama l i teratu re and not
ful ly worked out in the o the r D a rsa n a s. I t i s notincompat ib le w i th the i r spec ial po ints o f View
,bu t
i s no t d iscussed by them because the D a t sa na s
concern themse lves w i th the d iscipl ine thatthey advocate ,
and d o no t re fe r to theories not
immed iate ly connected w i th the special mentaltraining they prescribe .
13 . The Law of causat ion K arma
supreme in the phy sical and mental wor l d s .
The Law of Karma i s the supreme law unde rwhich the mani fested Unive rse wo rks. The
bind ing nature of the re lat ion o f cause and efi’
ect
i s part of the concept ion of the P r a k gi t i. Boththe physi ca l and mental world s be ing evo lved frommatter come under this Law . A l l be ings thatpossess bod ies, even i f i t be the h ighest be ingincarnated cannot be ind epend ent o f this Law .
The free spi ri t that has reached the se l f-real izat ion,
i s alone abo ve i t , for spi ri t be ing immu table is
free ”. The fund amental id ea o f the Law o f Karma
i s this. E ve ry mental or physi cal process, everythought
,d esi re ,
or force exerted on bod ies is
fo l lowed by a consequence wh ich when no t immed iate ly v isib le
,is cal led A p fi r v a, A d r i s h t a,
whose nearest Engl ish equ ivalent i s po tent ia lenergy.
”which mani fests i tse l f when su i table cons
d i tions arise .
The experiences o f the seen (physical world)and the unseen ( subtle wo rld s have the i r rest ing
place in Karma and the i r roo t in K l esa (the atfl ic
t ions of ignorance,ego ism,
as long as the roo te xists i t fruct ifies as bi rth ( in human or non-human
bod ies), l i fe there in and expe riences ( pleasurable or painfu l They lead to joy or griefaccord ing as they or ig inate in good or ev i l ” (YogaS ift . i i. 1 2 Every experience i s a S am s k ar a,
a modificat ion of the subtle bod y, wh ich has
a tendency to reprod uce i tse l f and every man
i s “ bound by the S am s k ar a 5. They form the
atmosphere wh ich must influence the cou rse of his
thoughts, desi res, and deeds in the present. I t is not
( 6 2
every one o f the S a m s k ar a s that can opera te
every minu te o f h is l ife . For po tential ene rgy can
become kine ti c only when the proper cond i t ions
present themse lves. That portion of a man’
s pastthat is operat ive in influenc ing a man
’
s mind and
the cou rse of h is experiences d uring an incarnat ion
i s cal led p r ar a b d h a l i t begun to act ). Thosethat ye t l ie d eep w ith in the inner recesses o f his
l i ng a d e h a and have not yet begun to mani fest
themse lves d uring an incarnat ion are cal led5 am c h i t a (accumu lated ), wh i le eve ry present act ,e very present thought, every present d esire becomesstored in his subtle body as agam i ( augmentat ive which goes to enrich hi s atmOpshere of
Karma and w i l l react on h im in the futu re .
The present course o f a man’
s l ife,the c ircum
stances in whi ch he find s h imse l f,the pleasu res and
pains that w i l l reach him, the thoughts and d esiresthat w i l l rise in his mind and the act ions that hew i l l be constrained to d o , al l depend upon o ra
r a b d h a. The Law o f Karma“ re igns supreme inthe mental and physi cal worlds.
Hence al l schoo ls o f Hind u phi losophy are ri gid
An of t, quoted sl oka shows the use of K arma as one of
the names of the uni v ersal cause against wh ich use some scholars
have protested . He, whom Sa i v a s worship as S i v a, V e d an
t i s as B r a h m a, Bud d hists as B u d d h a, theN a i y ai k a s ski l l ed
in proof, as the Creator, those that d el igh t in the J a i n a scrip
tures as A r h a n, the M i mamsa k a s as K arma, may he, H a r i ,
the Lord of the three worl d s, gi ve us the frui ts of our d esires.
( 64
d id not exist at some past po int of t ime i t cou ldnot at al l have been orig inated . Hence the courseo f Karma is A nad i
,has always existed .
So too ,M {1 1a p r a k r i t i , causal matter, whe ther
i t be the non-existent Nescience o f the A d v ai t a,
or the germ o f object iv i ty o f the o the r schoo ls. The
ind iv id ual spiri ts (j i v at ma) too are A nad i,for i f
they d id not exist at any t ime no cause cou ld havearisen to bring them into be ing . The B r ah m ana s
and the U p a n i s h a d 5 v ery frequent ly speak of a
beg inning— A g r a. This A g r a always means,be
fore the present Ka l pa— world -
period— and no
more . A nad i d oes no t mean e te rnal . Hind ubooks speak of two k ind s of beginningl essness, (I )A j a ny a t v a r fi p a a nad i t v a
, beginninglessness of the k ind o f neve r hav ing been bo rn. Thisbe longs only to Abso l u te B e ing. (2 ) P r a v ah a
a nad i t v a,the beginninglessness o f a flood
,
above explained . Al l Hind u specu lat ions abou tN i t y a t v a
,enterni ty ,
ought to be und erstoodonly in the second sense ; thus the N i t y a m u k
t a s, eternal ly free be ings, o f the R am an u j iy a s are those who we re free ’
at the beginningo f th is K a l p a and the N i t y a nar ak i k a s the
e ternal ly d amned , o f the M ad h v a s are those
who w i l l remain “ bound at the end of thisK a l p a.
(15) M oksha i s the<goal of human l ife and
r esul tsf rom the training of the mind and hence
r eachingM ohsha is a mental event.
( 65 )
A l l human be ings are b a d d h a, b o u n d , by thecourse of k a r m a
,the causes they hav e set go ing,
also by the laws o f the matte r that const i tu tes the irmind s and
.
bod ies. The object of phi losophy i sto teach them to escape th is bond age and to leada l i fe uninterrupted by izompulsory incarnat ions.
When this is t ranscend ed, man i s m u k t a, emanci
pated . So long as the conscious spi r i t d oes notreal ise i ts natu re and id ent ifies i tse l f w i th i ts bod yor i ts m ind , i t is no t free. So long as the man
’
s
l ife i s bu t the l ife of the material bod y and the
mate rial mind,wh ich act accord ing to fixed laws
,
al l l ife is bond age .
What , then,i s m o k s h a
,the state o f freed om to
at tain wh ich i s the true goal of human l i fe ? The
constant unbroken recogni t ion of the d ifference between the natu re o f spi r i t and of mat te r
,the know
led ge that the operat ions of m ind are fore ign to,
ou tsid e o f,the real man
,the consequent freed om o f
the spi r i t from inv o l u t ion into psychi c l ife , and the
perfection to which man may bring h is m ind byknow ing the laws of i ts work ing. I n the physi caluniverse the mod e rn scient ific man conquers natu reby obeying and u ti l iz ing i ts laws ; the same the
m u k t a d oes in the psych ical world . The t rainingfor m o k s h a therefore is a process of know ledge , a.
process of“ d iscriminat ion of Purusha from P rak ri t i
Atma from Anatma.
”As the Samskri t aphorisrn
has i t , “
JnAnad evatu kaivalyam,
” l iberat ion is
5
c 66 :
thsoughk noml ed ge albnex IOne necessary concomi
tant Qf 'the-
areal igat ion'
o f“
mahr’
s‘ true natu re as a
spi ri tual i'be inzg i s? ft
'
d eathiessnesa -'
For when he
knows‘uh i rfise l f‘ bu t the
immutab le Atma, .
‘f the zLord ro f d eath runs away”
from ‘h irnwfor the Lo rd of .d eath , has ove r
bo d ies :a lone and me o ver). the re terna l A t m 5.
Ano ther’ conpom itant t o f the ‘d iscri r'
n inat ion o f
man’
s real be ing fro'
m' the 'unreal fphe‘
no‘
menal forms
of mat ter l ist he cessatione f tpainwd u h k ‘h a,k 1e g a
,
t ap Pleasure and 'pai nza'
nd l are ibut l l interpre ta
t ions by B l] d d :h i nf inc i d ents of the flowfof P r anain the subtle bod ies. Hence when‘
the fspiri t , afterh is long weary '
pi lgrimage ,knows=himse l f to
‘
be othe rthanth‘
e'
subt le ibod y or 'trhe mind f he feels" pleasureand
“
pain. L i fe'
issino ‘mo re a
cease less l storml of d e si res tossing the .he lp less m ind
about. the‘
ov'
er ; nomo re und er the zsway fof some thing e x te
’
mal ’ to him,
but; se l f he '
reaches supreme
peace“”
v;‘
v fl l i f l u
of‘ the conimonfipo ihtslb f’al l
’
the
H indu D augea n a syho iwever brief,’showsl that they
are prac t i call y. “agreed t inn -E
'
riegard' to menswear
quest ions u r'
é‘
garid ingf thenconsti tu'
t i on the
const itut io n!of: the ‘cosmos; and the ’ l‘ihes
'
of thef‘past
and the‘i futuiefi évo luti drr ’It ! is im
poss ible to au surprisi ng”
uri ani’
mi t§ramongi t
'he '
sects bfTanyo thet rel igidtigorthe schools
( 6 7
of phi losophy of any o ther nat ion in the world .
Hence i t is that ne i the r the extrao rd inary com
pl ex i ty o f the subd i v isions o f sects that so d istractthe inqu irer, nor the great changes of ri tual ande xte rnal manifestat ions of re l ig ion that the Hind uD h a rm a has und e rgone d u ring the many thousand s o f ye ars i t has swayed the l ives o f the Ind ian
peop les, nor again the impacts of the d ive rse fo re igncu l ts that hav e at var ious t imes assai led i t, haveat a l l impai red i ts v i tal i ty , but hav e only he lpedto show that i t rests on the bed rock of t ru th
, and
w i l l cont inue to prevai l in the d istant fu tu re when
many mod ern ph i losoph ies w i l l have been forgo tten.
CHAPTER I I .
M ETAPHYS I CS .
VER S ince man began to think abou t there lations between h imse l f and the worldabou t h im and to d ist ingu ish the hosts of
passing phenomenal forms from the possible per
manent noumenon of wh i ch these forms may be
temporary modificat ions,he has fo l lowed two
d ifferent and opposed tendencies o f thought,wh ich
may be cal led ind iv idual ist i c and monist ic .
The first tend ency is inspired by the ineffaceablesense o f cont inuous personal existence wh ich men
fee l and wh ich refuses to be abo l ished unde r any
c i rcumstances. The other is the equal ly potentintu it ion wh ich men have of the uni ty o f al l th ings
,
of the oneness of the l ife that pulsates in al l be ings.
Hence phi losophy has grown in two d irect ionstwo opposing theor ies have been ad vocated bythinkers— one in which the ind iv id ual man is d e
c lared a real permanent factor o f the cosmos,the
other in which the mani fo ld wo rld is conce ived as
aspects of one Real ity— whethe r that real ity be a
conscious B rahma,or uninte l l igent Natu re. These
l atter theories are rightly cal led monistic bu t the
( 69 )
name dual ism usual ly appl ied to the former is
scarce ly accu rate , for they recognise,no t two
,
but at least as many real Be ings as there are
human indiv id uals, besid es the real substancesbeh ind nature . Hence the name ind iv id ual ist icor p lural ist i c seems to be a more correct d esignat ion of these theor ies.
Krishna,i n the B hagaoacl Gi ta,
i i . 3, d iv id esmen
into two classes— Sa hyas and Yogi s,those fit
for Jnan a yoga and those fi t for K a r m a yoga.
To the forme r, med i tat ion on the S e lf appeals ;the latter prefe r a l ife of act ion, one o f lo v ingserv ice of the Lord o f the Universe , or o f some
monist ic abstraction,l i ke the humani ty of the
Posi t iv ists. Th is d ifference be tween these two
classes o f men seems to be d ue to the preponde rance o f the representative or the affective e le
ments o f psych i c l ife ,of
‘inte l lec t’ or of ‘w i l l ’ as
S chopenhauer cal ls them. i f the normal man i s
mad e up of two- th i rd s w i l l and one - thi rd inte l lec t,
the man of geni us consists o f two - th i rd s inte l lect andone th ird ‘
wi l l ’ (Schop.
“On the P r imacy of the Wi l l .
Quot. by R ibo t . P sy ch . of Emot .
, page , The
names Sankhyas and Yogi s given above to thesetwo classes o f men have no th ing to d o w i th the
The word s Sfinkhya yoga and K arma yoga as used by K rishna
are general ly m i sund erstood . The former not onl y meansintel l ectual d isci pl ine, but also incl ud es the Yoga of P atafi jal i
whereas the latter incl ud es what are und erstood as the rel igi onof humani ty and as theism in EurOpe .
( 70 )
S choo ls o f P hi l osophy ,so cal led , bu t only imply
that the forme r are incl ined to the d isc ip l ine o f
Contemplat ion and the latter to that o f E ffort ;abstract thought at tracts the former
,concrete
images the latter. I n Ind ia,as in o the r count ries
,
both kind s o f ph i losoph i cal theories hav e been
expound ed and v igo rously uphe ld by the i r fo llowers ; those cal led Vaisesh ika, Nyaya, Sankhyaand Yoga are ind iv id ual isti c : whereas those schoo lso f though t wh ich are der ived from the Upani shaa
’
s
and Agamas are d i rect ly or ind i rect ly monist i c .I n th is and the succeed ing chapters the d ifferentmetaphysi cal , cosmo logical and psycho logicaltheories o f these schoo ls as propound ed in the i rearl iest avai lable exposi t ions w i l l be d iscussed . I n
late r Ind ian phi losophy , the d octrines of the
sharply d ist ingu ished l ines o f thought o f the s i x
D a rsanas hav e beenm ixed up. Hence,the orig inal
S fi t ras or K ar i k as w i l l be quoted as far as possi
ble , and the commentaries w i l l be,as a ru le
,avo id ed
,
for they we re made by late r thinkers who m i xedup the ideas o f the d iffe rent schoo ls
, part ly because in the i r days, the Vedanta came to be
regarded as the final tru th,and partly because the
absence of a h istorical spi r i t mad e i t impossi blefor them to expound accu rate ly the id eas o f
schools whi ch were w i d e ly d ivergent from the i rpo int of v iew.
M etaphysics attempts to answer the question
7 2 )
S ect ion I . Vedanta.
The Vedanta teaches that there i s bu t one
Real i ty beh ind the wor ld o f matte r and of ind iv id ual
be ings and that is P a r a m B r a h m a. The earl iestattempt to d escribe the S upreme B e ing, the one
Real i ty that und er l ies what we cal l spi r i t and whatwe cal l matte r is the we l l - known Na
'
saa'
iya S flhta,'
R ig Vea’
a X . 1 2 9 .
“ Then Asat ( pro to -mat te r ) d id
not exist. S a t (manifested be ing ) d i d not exist .There was no ai r nor sky above . What enve loped
( al l ) ? Where , i n whose protect ion? Was i t wate r,
the profound d arkness ? D eath was no t,nor
immortal i ty. There was no d iffe rent iat ion o f nighto r d ay . That one breathed w i thou t breath
,se lf
supported . There was noth ing d iffe rent from or
above i t. I n the beginning d arkness existed ,
enve loped by darkness. Und ifferent iated was al l
th is. That one wh ich l ay v o id wrapped in Noth ingness was d eve loped by the powe r o f med i tat ion.
”
This is a d escript ion o f the one Real i ty d u ring theperiod o fworld - repose— P r a l a y a Now fo l lows ad escript ion o f the same d url ng the world -act iv i ty
,
K a l p a .
“ I w i l l propound to you the Jne y a m
( that wh ich i s to be known ) know ing whi ch one
tastes d eathlessness, the S upreme B r ah m a . I ti s cal led not S a t and not A s a t . I t has hand sand fee t in every d i rect ion
,eyes
,heads, and mouths
o n al l sid es,ears everywhere . I t stand s enve loping
al l things in the world . D evo id o f al l organs, i t
( 7 3 )
shines w i th the functions of al l organs. I t is unattached , yet the supporter o f al l . Without G u n a s
yet enjoye r of G u na 3 I t is w i thou t and w i th inal l be ings. I t is movable and w i thal immovab le . I tis unknowable on account o f i ts subtleness. I t i s
far and near. Ind iv isible , yet d we l l ing am id st be ingsas i f d iv id ed . I t is to be known as the supportero f al l be ings
,the i r devou re r and generator. I t i s the
Light o f Lights,i s said to be beyond D arkness.
Thi s j fi e y a m is consciousness seated in the heartsof al l , and is to be reached by consciousness
”
(Bhag'.
Gi tci , xi i i . 1 2“ Roo t above , branch be low,
Asvattha they cal l i t, ind estructible , whose leavesare hymns who knows i t i s the knower o f V e d a.
D ownward s and upwards spread forth i ts branche s, nurtu red by the G u na s
,the sense-objects i ts
tw igs. D ownward i ts roots stre tch,the bond s of
action in the world o f men. I ts form i s not here
behe ld ,nor i ts end , nor the beginning, nor i ts
found ation. This Asvattha o f we l l grown roo tsw i th the strong weapon o f d is-passion hav ing cu td own
, then the path has to be trod d en,wh ich hav
ing reached , no one re tu rns. I fo l low ind eed thatprimal P u r u s h a whence has streamed forth the
anc ient energy [ 5.X V. 1
He is not A sa t ( the roo t o f matter) for Therei s no o ther seer than H e
,there i s no o the r hearer
than H e, the re i s no o ther perce iver than He
,the re
i s no other knower than He. I n that A k s h a t a
74
(imperishable), then, 0 Gargi , the A k asa is wov en,
l i ke warp and woof”B r i h. Up. I f . v i i i - I I ) H e i s
no t S a t (manifested be ing), for “ That,v eri ly
, O
Garg i , the Brahmanas cal l A k s h a r a,not gross
,not
minu te , no t short , no t long , no t red ,not flu id ,
w i thout shad ow
,not d ark
,w i thout air
,w i thou t A k asa,
no t attached,w i thou t taste
,or sme l l , w i thou t ears
or eyes, w i thou t speech,
w i thout m a n a 5,w i thou t
seed,w i thou t P r an a
,w i thout mou th
,w i thou t mea
sure , hav ing no insid e or outsid e,i t d oes not con
sume any th ing , no thing d oes consume i t ,”
(15. [ I ] .
oz’
zz
’
. H e i s above the three l imi tatiQJJi Qt space ,t ime and causal i ty (D e s a k a l a n i m i t t a).
“Th isB rahma has no ear l ier o r late r
,no insid e or outsid e”
(16 . I ] . v .
“ Beyond good ,beyond ev i l
,beyond
what i s mad e,beyond what i s no t mad e
,beyond
what has been, beyond what shal l be” (K ath. Up. i iTh is S upreme B e ing i s creator in the sense that
be emi t ted matter and then ente red i t as i ts soul .H e w ished
,may I be many
,may I propagate . H e
med i tated . Afte r he med i tated,be emi tted al l th is
,
f whatev er there is. Hav ing emi t ted i t , He enteredi t. Hav ing entered i t he became S a t (Be ing) andT y a t Non-B e ing), d efined and undefined
, sup
ported and unsupported ,consciousness and uncon
sciousness,real i ty and unreal i ty. The Real i ty he
\c ame al l th is whatsoev er. That i s Truth, theysay
”
(Ta i t. Up. I ] .
P a r a m B r a h m a,the one Real i ty is thus the
( 76 )
tences o f the Upanishaa’s or the S fi t r a s o f
the Uttara M imcimsa embodying phi losoph i cald octrines are frequent ly quo ted hence people imagine that these are ph i losophica l works. I t i s t imet hat they are recognised not to be such
,but that the
former are manuals o f U p as a n a heterogeneousco l lect ions of various me thod s of med i tat ion,
ad vo
cated and practised in ancient Ind ia,and o f u tte r
ances embod ying myst i c experiences whi le in an
exegesis or state o f ecstasy ,and the latter, bu t a
manual o f the same . Nor are the S ut r a s com
pl ete in the sense that they contain unmistakeablyBed arayana
’
s id eas. For the wo rd S at r a means a
thread . The S 0 t r a s are se ries of single wo rd s, orphrases
,or sentences
,on wh i ch were hung the ex
planat ions and lectu res of the Rish is to the ir d isci pl es and were a so rt o f memori a techm
'
ca intend ed torem ind the d isc iples of the teach ings of the M aste r .I n many aphorisms
,ne i the r the subject treated of,
nor what i s pred icated ,is at al l refe rred to e . g.
From connection (Vea’
. S at . 1 . i v . 15 On ac
count o f the connec ted meaning o f the sentences ”
(16 . 1 . i v . I n course o f t ime the lec tures we relost , the
‘thread s alone remained,w i thou t the
pearls, lend ing themse lves to the ingenu i ty o f the
commentators to hang whatever they l iked on the
S at r a s this and the wond erful d ialect ic sk i l l o ft he Ac h ar y a s have inthe case o f the V e d an t a
S at r a 5 made it al l but impossible for an unsecta
( 77
n invest igator to find out exactly the opinions ofBad arayana onmany po ints.
Ye t there i s no ambigu i ty about the fund amental posi tion o f the V e d an t a S ut r a s .
“ Thenthe refore the enqu iry into B r a h m a Fromwh ich the o rigin,
e tc . o f th is (Cosmos ). From be ingthe source o f the S cript ur
'
e . That,again
,from i ts
close connect ion. From see ing (z. e . consci ouse
ness) be ing attr ibu ted to the cause o f the wo rld,
unconscious matter i s not ( the cause ; for i t i s )unscriptu ral (V e d . S fl t . I . i . I . The re .
al i ty beh ind the Cosmos is thus a consciousBe ing . The S ut r a s then exp lain that th isB e ing is re ferred to in the Upanishaa
'
s for
purposes of U p as a n a (med i tation) by variouspe rsonal names—An a n d a m a y a
, the B l issfu lpe rson (1h. I . i . 1 2 H i r a nm a y a P u r u s h a
,
Go ld en pe rson (in the Sun), A k s h i p u r u s h a,
person w i th in the eye ([ h. i . i . M a n o m a y a,he
who consists of m ind (1 6 . I . i i . 1 etc. ; th is B e ing isalso referred to in the Upanishaa
’s by names
o f material substances— A k as a (1h. I . i.P r é na (16 . I . i . Jy O t i 5, l ight ( 16 . I . i . 24
e tc.
Th is B r a h m a i s t he Operat ive (N i m i t t a)cause of the world “ He i s d eclared as describedto be the cause w i th regard to A k aga
, etc.
’
(16 . I . i v: Because the world is cal led (H i swork)
”
(16 . I . iv . He i s also the mater ial
( 78 )
c ause o f the world .
“The mate rial cause also . on
account of i ts no t be ing in confl ict w i th the pro ~
mi ssory statements and the i l l ustrat ive instances
(16 . I . i v . But he is fo rm less.
“ He i s w i thou t
form veri ly , that be ing the most impo rtant. (He
i s) as consist ing o f Light (wh ich mani fests fo rms)
(th is d iscript ion) be ing no t d e vo id (of meaning)(l b. I I I . i i . 14
“ For this ve ry reason (areused ) comparisons such as (images) o f the sun
,e tc.
”
(16 . I I I . i i . “ H e is a v y a k t a,und i fferent iat
e d ,so (the scriptu re) says. B ut (He i s apprehen
d ed ) by propi t iat ion,acco rd ing to p r a t y a k s h a
and a n 11 m an a (16 . I l l . i i .H e is the S upreme
,though he i s d escribed in
the Ved as by means o f phrases ind icat ive of
l imi tat ions o f place , as a bank (5 e t a bound arye tc.
“ On account o f the d esignat ion o f bank,
measu re,connect ion
,and separat ion, (in the S r u t i),
one m ight th ink there is some th ing h igher thanHe ; bu t (i t i s no t so , for He is only cal led a s e t u )On account o f some resemblance (between a bankand H im). (S uch phrase s only) subserve ‘
the
pu rposes of the m ind ; as when we speak of hisfour fee t . (The statements of connect ion and
d ifference) are d ue to d ifference of p lace , a'
sl i lr'
i‘
the
case o f l ight, e tc. as
‘sh
’
iningfl in?
particulaa' e
pl aces, . tihough al l t pervasive)”and d oni
account .{0f the possibi l i ty (o fs only .th is soft i hf
connec ti on-d between ' H im;and
)
otheri
( 80
not inte l lect, bu t someth ing more exce l lent . For
inte l lect i s a cer ta in one among the number ofbe ings, bu t that is not a certain one
,bu t prior to
everyth ing. Nor i t is be ing (S a t) ; for be ing
has, as i t were, the form of the one. B ut That is
formless and i s not even w i thou t inte l l ig ible form.
For the natu re o f t lze one be ing generat ive o f
al l things, i s not any one of them. Ne i ther, therefore
,i s i t a certain th ing, nor a qual i ty
,nor a quan
t i ty,nor inte l lect , nor sou l
,nor that wh ich i s
moved,nor again that wh i ch stand s st i l l
,nor i s
i t in place nor in t ime ; bu t i s by i tse l f uni
form,or rathe r w i thou t form ,
be ing prio r to al l
form,to mot ion and we say
that the one i s the cause of al l th ings,we d o not
predicate anything as an acc ident to i t,bu t
rather as some thing wh i ch happens to us,because
we possess someth ing from i t the one in the
meant ime subsist ing in i tse l f ( Enn. I I I . i x.
Tranl . Taylor). Spinoza, among mod ern E uropeanph i losophers approaches nearest to the V e d an t ametaphysical posi t ion. God , or substance , consisting of infinite attribu tes
,o f wh i ch each expresses
e ternal and infi ni te essent ial i ty,necessari ly exists.
Whatsoever i s, i s God ; and w i thou t God noth ingcanbe , or be conce ived . God i s the in-dwe l l ing andnot the transient cause o f al l th ings. God i s the
efficient cause not only of the existence of things, bu talso of the i r essence. Intel lect, in funct ionfinite, or in
( 8 1
funct ion infini te, must comprehend the attribu teso f God and the mod ificat ions of God ,
and no thinge lse.
”
(E t/zics, I . Props.
“ Thoughti s an attribu te o f God
,or God i s a th ink ing be ing.
E xtension i s an attri bu te o f God , or God i s an
extend ed th ing ”
(1b. I I . Props. Po l lock thust ranslates S pinoza
’
s me ta physi cal posi tion in langnage su ited to mod ern habi ts of thought. We
know the wo r ld und e r the at tribu tes or aspects of
extension and thought (A s a t and S a t), and in
each k ind the sum o f real i ty appears to be
inexhaust ible . Our world consists o f mod es o f
extension associated w i th mod es of thoughtB ut we have no r ight to assume that th is i s the
only wo rld ; for th is wou ld be to se t bound s to
infi ni te be ing” (Spinoza ,H i s s e and P lzi l oso
N W, 9 1 6 7 )
I t is cu rious that one o f the hal f-a-d ozen sen
tences l o g i a wh ich mod ern research has t racedto Jesus
,but whi ch is not found i n the Gospe ls,
i s pu re Ved anta. S uch Vedanta l o g i a werecarefu l ly e l iminated from the Christ ianGospe ls
, pos
sibly d u ring the t ime when the ear ly church partedcompany w i th my t icism in the 3rd and 4th centu rieso f the Christ ian era
,and Christ iani ty entered a
phase o f material ism from which i t has not y et
emerged .
The Vedanta S d tras also d iscuss the re la
tion between the individual souls and S upreme
6
( 82
B rahma as we l l as the re lat ion between H im a nd
matte r. But the d iffe rent Acharyas hav e madethese S at r a s yie ld d iffe rent meanings abso l u te l yopposed to each o ther. Thus
,I I I . i i. I I , l i teral ly
t ranslated wou ld run,
“ No t on account o f p lace,though o f the S upreme
,two -fo ld characte rist ics ;
S ankara read s th is as“ Note verywhere , v eri ly ’
on account o f (d i fference o f) place al so can
two fo ld characterist ics be long to the S upreme ; for
everywhe re S criptu re teaches B rahma to be
w i thou t d ifference
Ramanuja makes this out as,
“No t on account o fp lace ev en is there any imperfec tion in the Supreme
for everywhere He is d escribed as hav ing two
fo ld characte rist i cs. Acco rd ing to M ad hva,i t
i s,“E v enfrom d ifference of place , no essent ial d iffer
ence be tween the mani festat ions of the Lord shou ldbe supposed ; for S r u t i d eclares of H im the id ent ical characte r ) everywhere .
”Again
,I I I . i i . I 7 runs
thus I t i s seen ( in S r u t i ) ; and also i s remem
bered (in S m r i t i Sankara comments on th is:“That B ra hm a i s w i thou t d ifference i s provedby passages from the S r u t i . The same teach ingi s conveyed by S m r i t i .
”Ramanuja comments
on the S ut t a as fo l lows Hosts o f Vedanta
passages ( prove ) H is be ing d evo id o f fau l ts andbe ing the treasure-house o f auspicious qual i t ies ; so
too,the S m r i t i s M ad hva makes out this
5 C1 t r a to mean that S r u t i shows that perfect bl iss
( 84 )
d eriv ing new ideas from o l d texts.
The R i s h i s of the Upani skad s spoke as
U p as a k a s. Sentences l ike“t a t t v am a s i were
intend ed to give po inted expression to experiencesreached d uring the practice of V i d y a5
,me thod s
of meditat ion, wh ich abound in the Upanz’
skaa’s.
They are psycho logical fac ts,
at least to the
one engaged in the myst ic contemplat ion ; facts
to be v erified by fo l low ing the me thod s of med i tat ion prescribed , and not to be treated
,as the
Acharyas, and mo re espec ial ly the i r late r expounders have d one
,as texts to be w renched out of
the i r context and made the found at ion o f a phi lo
soph ical structu re bui l t w i th a heavy load o f argu
mentat ion. The R i s h i s spoke o f B rahma
from the intu it ions reached during the rare mo
ments o f ecstat ic communion w i th H im,arrived at
'
after stead y attempts ai keeping d own al l mentalactiv i ty and reach ing a plane above the storms o f
human passions. By the more or less contrad ic~
tory statements o f the Real be ing scatte red in the
Ved as, and especial ly in the final sections of the
Ved as cal led the Upanz'
sbaa’s,the human mind
tries to represent to i tse lf what must ever bereal ized by transcending the mind ; mind be ingbu t an organ mad e of matter
,human language ,
which i s the expression of the human mind,can
contain only expressions descript ive o f objec t ivematerial categories. To attempt to describe in
( 85 )
such language what is not mind,and fu rthe r what
i s no t conscious be ing as men know i t,must neces
sari ly lead to the use o f contrad icto ry id eas and
phrases. The R i s h i s, who spoke from intu it ion,
d id not real ise the d iffi c u l t ies that co ld logic cou ldraise against the contrad ic tory statements thatalone are possible whenwe attempt to d escribe thei ndescribable , to l imi t in forms o f speech what i sunl imi ted
,to imprison in symbols of the m ind
(p r a t i k a,that wh ich i s fo rmed by out-go ing
activ i ty of the m ind ) what for ever soars in an
atmosphere which the m ind cannot reach. The
A c h a r y a s o f a later age were anxious aboveal l to construct a se l f-consistent theory. Logicalconsistency can apply only to the systems bu i l t bythe m ind . An extension o f the laws o f mind tothe region o f the Abso l u te
,wh ich i s above m ind
as I t is above al l regions o f re lat iv i ty,must lead to
profitless logic -chopping, as i t has done in the
sectarian squabb les o f the minor subd iv isions oft he Vedanta.
The princ ipal commentators of the Vedanta
S d tras among those that have found ed sects,
name ly Sankara,Ramanuja and M ad hva
,have
imposed on them three w id e l y d ifferent , bu t se l fconsistent phi losophical and d isc ipl inary systems
cal led A d v a i t a, V i s i s h tad v a i t a and
D v a i t a . The i r fo l lowers have accentuated the
d ifferences among these three,and minimised the ir
( 86
po ints of agreement, and thus carried on the
sectarian movement ti l l the modern Ved ant ic sectsare hope lessly d iv id ed . Later
,bu t original , com
mentators hav e formed other theories out of the
same S ut r a s. We shal l briefly ind i cate the
main l ine of d iv ergence of these three orig inal sec ts
of the Vedanta.
S a xi k a r a starts from the posxt i qno fa one who
attempts to real ize the natu re of the
S e l f manifested in the heart of the ind iv idual,
of oneawho apprehend s in the . W
r ise o f know led ge (5. e. in the moment of -real iza
t ion o f the Supreme ) h is S e l f and no second ”
(D akshz’
ndmmt i When the consciousnessi s re leased from the bound ing ad j uncts of matte rand mind ,
there i s no more d ual i ty,no more
re lat iv i ty, al l is One and that One i s the Se lf.I n such a state o f exal tation the world appearsunmani fested ,
“ l ike the shoot w i thin the seed .
”
Hence Sankara al lows only phenomenal e xi stence to the ind iv idual S e l f, J i v at m a (these lf l iv ing in the world) and to matter. The
fol lowing q uotat ions from h is B h as h y a on the
B ra/m m S utras ind icate his View on thesequestions.
We meet W i th two forms ofB rahma (descr i bedin the S r u t i
,one) cond i t ioned by the d ifferent
k ind s of name and form,and (the o ther) the opposi te .
of th is,d evo id of al l cond it ions whatsoeve r. Thus
( 88 )
the very sou l o f the omniscient I sv a r a,are name
and form, prod uced by nescience , incapable o f
be ing d escribed as I ts natu re or as the natu re of
any other thanThat , wh ich const iute the germs of
the phenomenal universe . Th is i s the wond er
wo rk ing power (M ay asa k t i) o f the omniscient
I svara, P rak r i t i , as w e learn from S r u t i and
S mri t i . The omnisc ient Isvara is o ther than those
two (name and l svara i s depend ent
upon the cond i t ions o f name and form, prod ucedby nescience , j ust as space i s d epend ent upon the
c ond i t ioning objects, j ars, po ts, e tc. (be fore i t be
comes d ifferent iated as the space insid e a jar, the
space inside a pot, e tc From the stand po intof the phenomenal unive rse he i s the S ov ere ign of
those who are cal led j i v as, (ind iv id ual sou ls), V i j
fi anatmés (l i t . knowing se l ves,those capable o f
percept ion and know led ge ),who are his ve ry se l f
,
bu t who d epend on (bod ies that are) the aggregatesof organs of action, prod uced by name and fo rm
,
based on nescience,resemb l ing in this the Space in
a jar; hence l sv a ra’
s Lord sh ip, omnisc ience , and
omnipotence d epend on the l imi tat ion o f con
d it ion of the nature o f nesc ience. From the stand
po int o f the noumenon the activ i t ies (invo lved) inbe ing the Ru le r, the ru led , the omnisc ient , e tc. ,
canno t subsist in the S e l f, cleared o f al l l imi t ingad juncts by right knowled ge (V i d ya). (Com. on
Ved . S at. I I . i . “ I n the supreme B rahma,
( 89 )
there i s no d ual i ty ; this concept excl ud es no second
be ing,real or unreal . The concept Isvara neces
si tates the concept of a causal‘fore-state ’
(pragav as
t h a) of the world ,d epend ent on the I svara, bu t
w i thout wh ich I svara cannot become a creato r.This causal state o f the wor ld i s cal led A v i d y a,nescience , for i t i s destroyed by V i d y a,
know ledgeOf the At m awh ich secures for the M u k t a,
the t e
leased,once for al l
,the real ization o f the abso l u te
uni ty of al l l ife . I t is also cal led A v y a k t a, unmanifested
,for be fore creat ion i t canno t be perce iv
e d some t imes i t i s spoken o f as M ay 51 , i l l usion
(B izd slzy a on Ved . S flt . I . i v . The theory thatP r a k r i t i i s M ay a
,unreal
,the non- existent
s imu lating real i ty was started by S ankara and
d one to d eath by h is later fo l lowers. H e h imse l f is
guard ed in h is statements,as m ight be no ticed in
the above quo tat ions,and seems to insist mo re on
A v i d y a (ignorance) be ing the cause of the im
aginary d ual i ty where the re i s but uni ty ; bu t late rA d v a i t i s have , w i th the fatal
,but d angerous,
faci l ity w i th which phrases d evo id of content arehand led by me taphysi c ians, created M ay a intoa non-ent i ty that masquerad es as an ent i ty,and read th is d octrine into the Upanzl
s lzaa’s. A l l o ther schoo ls o f Hind u thought
that have any to uch w i th Vedanta—Vaishnava,S ak t a and M Ah e sv a r a Schoo ls have alwaysprotested agai nst the not ion of the world be ing an
( 90 )
unreal non-ent i ty , as i t i s based on the real B rahma.
Among E u ropean scho lars, Colebrooke fi rst not icedthat M ay a was always used in the early (andgenu ine) Upanz
'
s/zad s and B hagaoaa’
Gftd for the
wond er-work ing powe r of the Lord ,and the use
of M ay a for non-ent ity or for P r a k ri t i was
invented by the A d v a i t a S chool . I t i s curiousthat Gough and
,in ourid ay ,
D eussen,shou ld hav e so
far al lowed the i r cri t ical facu l ty to be obscured by
the i r fami l iari ty w i th the A d v a i t a Vedantaas to attempt to read the mod ern M ay 3 d octr ineinto the ancient Upanz
'
sbaa’s. To these scho lars.
as to most Indian A d v a i t i s,the word Vedanta
means a d v a i t a ; the Sankara teach ing and that ,too ,
in i ts l ater d eve lopments,id ent ical w i th that , of
the Upanz'
slzaa’s. They forge t that Sankara
though a great ph i losopher, claims to be bu t aB hash y akara, a commentato r
,and that he d i d
not ev en profess,as Ramanuja professes, to e x
pound the Sut ras in accord ance w i th trad i t ion.
I f S ankara quotes any prev ious commentator ~
i t i s bu t to crit ic ize h im ; he bold ly startsa new l ine of thought fo l low ing the logical necessit ies of h is stand pomt and brushes aside any tex
t u al d ifficu l ties that m ight obstruct h im. Al l
system-bu i ld e rs that base the i r ph i losoph ical sysstem onancient inspired texts have to tw ist them to
su i t the i r pu rposes ; but Sankara d oes this morese l f- re l iantly than the other Acharyas who support
9 2 )
«does not al low that a non-d ifferentiated substance
could be establ ished by any one’
s consc iousness,because consciousness always impl ies d i fference. (2 )H e ho ld s that the S r u t i does not also teach a
B rahma free from al l d ifference (n i r v i se s h a
B rahma). To accentuate h is opposit ion to thistheo ry he d e l ights in pi l ing ad ject ive on adjectived escribing the d iv ine attributes.
“The one causeof the evo l ut ion
,maintenance
,d issol u tion and
re lease from S am s ar a o f the universe o f sent ientand non-sentient objects
,of a natu re d iffe rent
from al l things o the r than Himse l f,on account of
be ing host i le to al l ev i l,and be ing one w i th i nfi
ni te auspic iousness, o f hosts o f love ly q ual i t ies,boundless and unsu rpassab l e , Universal A t m a,S upreme B rahma
, Supreme L ight, S upreme Es
sence , S upreme A t m a, known in al l Ved antaby various wo rd s l ike S a t
,etc. the Lord ,
N a r a
y a n a E x e l lent P u r u s h a”
( Ramanuja’
s
Vea’ar tba Smngraba, p. H e alsoho lds that the theory o f a beginning less M ay a
(Nesc ience) cannot be proved by the accepted method s o f proof. Nor can such Nescience act onsupreme real i ty so as to become the cause of creat ion,e tc. For he argues that a perfect Be ing cannot become a prey to igno rance ; hence , accord ing to h im,
c reat ionand re lat iv i ty are d ue no t to M aya,bu t to
t he Love of the S upreme D e i ty for man and o therind iv id ual souls. H e al lows the val id ity o f the
( 9 3 )
real izat ion of Unity (A d v a i t an u b h a v a) o f
Gaud apad a and Sankara,bu t e x plains that thi s
ecstat i c consciousness o f uni ty i s not the consciousness o f the S upreme B rahma
,but that of
the Se l f as apar t from the l imi tations o f mat
ter (P r a k r i t i V i y u k t At m a d a rsa n a ) . A
h igher experience than this i s the intu it ion of
P a r am B rahma by constant lov ing med i tat ionon h is d iv ine attributes (bh a k t i
,u p as a n a).
H e regard s metaphysi cal quest ions from th isstand po int and hence he teaches that B rahma
i s S a v i se s h a, characterized by attribu tes. H e
i s the S e l f of bo th the ind iv id ual sou ls (c h i t) and
matter (a c h i t] and ye t d ifferent from them. H is
v iews o f the re lat ion o f the S upreme to ind iv id ualA t m a and matter can be gathe red from the fo l
low ing ' “ I t is proved from the Antary amz
B ra/ma ma (B r i l l . Up . I I I . v i i i. 3 etc .
,that
C h i t and A c h i t (conscious and unconsc iousbe ings) in the i r gross effe cted state (d uring a
K a l p a) and in the i r subtle causal state (d uringP r a l a y a) form the bod y of P a r am B r a h m a
,
and P a r am B r a h m a is the i rword s l ikeAr am bh a na, e tc. Up. V ] .
i . 4 . i t i s known that the world i s no t o therthan the S upreme cause
,the P a r am B r a h m a.
Now this is the tru th— i t is B rahma that i s
d enoted at al l t imes by al l words because of H is
hav ing for his body C h i t and A c h i t.
( 94 )
Somet imes (d uring p r a l a y a) no twi thstand ingH is possession (o f these) as H is own bod y the
body o f C h i t and A c h i t attains a S ubt le S tate ,
in which i t i s incapab le of be ing designated apartfrom H im. Th is i s B rahma in the causal cond i tion
( K ar a nav a s t h a At o the r t imes (d uringK a l p a) the bod y o f C h i t and A c h i t attains a
gross state in whi ch i t i s capab le o f be ing treated
as some th ing apart from h im. Th is i s the effectedcond i t ion (K ar y av a s t h 3 ) (S ri B bdsby a on
Vea’. Sat . l l . i .Thus accord ing to Ramanuja,
the Real i ty i sone
,the Supreme B rahma and C h i t , the cons
c ions ind iv id ual sou ls, and A c h i t , the unconsc iousforms o f matter, are h is bod ies
,A v y a k t a, in
d ist ingu ishable from H im d uring P r a l a y a,but
d uring K a l p a in a period o f manifestat ion ; not
only V y a k t a, d istingu ishable from H im,bu t
re lated to H im in the S és h i se s h a bh av a, the
re lat ion of the D ispose r and the d isposable .
The V i s i s h t a d v a i t a has undergone a
d egenerat ion qu ite as bad as that no t iced in thecase o f the A d v a i t a. RAmanuja preachedan I svara o f unimaginably exce l lent q ual i ties,the goal o f lov ing thoughts uninterupted l i ke a
stream of o i l,o f whom al l humani ty and al l nat u re
was the bod y. H is fo l lowe rs to day hav e becomean excl usiv e sect, marked off from the rest o f
the Hindus by glar ing whi te and red marks cover
f 96
quest ions, i t must be po inted out that Sankara’
s
and Ramanuja’
s inte rpre tat ions of the ' Ve
d d nta Satras agree in most po ints, except
when in sund ry places the i r special doctrinescome into confl ict. M ad hva
’
s interpre tat ionsd iffe r w id e ly from these . Thu s accord ing to theformer two , Ved . S a t . I I . 4 2 -
45 d eal w i th the
B h ag a v a t a d octrine, bu t accord ing to Ma
d hva they d eal w i th the S a k t a doctrine . By
comparing Sankara’
s and Ramanuja’
s B hash y a s,
S (1 t r a by S ut r a, a comparat ive st ud y of the i r ;
common po ints and d ivergences can be mad e .
B ut M ad hva’
s B h as h y a strikes such orig inall ines
,that there in is v isible most plainly how the
trad i t ional inte rpre tat ions of the S C1 t r a 5 hav ingbecome lost, the B b as h y a k a r a s
,commentators
,
were untrame l led and could make out whateverthey wanted form the S ft t r a s.
M ad hva’
s v iews can be gathered from h is.
B h AS h y a on Vea’
. Satras,I I . i i i . The
j i v a, ind iv idual sou l , is ce rtainly separate from
the Lord), for K aasz'
ba S rut i argues,
‘The
supreme i s d iffe rent from the mu l ti tudes of ind iv id ual Sou ls. The S upreme is inconce ivable. He
is fu l l , the group o f ind iv id ual sou ls i s not fu l l .H e is e ternal ly free, from H im re lease from bon
d age ( i s to be obtained ). Hence he is to be
sough t : S ince the essent ial natu re (of the ind i v id ual sou l) is knowled ge and bl iss (which are also)
97
the qual i t ies of B r a h m a,the ind iv idual sou l is
spoken o f as no t d iffe rent from H im. B rahmais spoken o f as the A t m aofal l (the universe ) in thetext. A l l th is is ind eed B rahma
’
(C/zh . I I I .because al l qual i t ies be long to him Unde r Ved .
S at . I I . i i i. 7 , he quo tes the fo l low ing from B r ibat
S ambz’
td :— “The One , S upreme P u r u s h a,I n
d iv isi b le i s ca l led V ishnu . P r a k r i t i,P u r u
s h a,Time
,these three are d iv id ed (z
'
. e . l im i ted )That S upreme
,Hari
,i s immu table . B e ing
und iv id ed ,He i s o f S upreme b l iss
,e ternal , o f
e terna l attribu tes ; what is d iv id ed is of l i tt lepowe r” . The fo l low ing quotat ion from Chapte r V
o f S arzad arsana S a izgralza show how ve ry
v igorously the M ad h v a s, pro test against the
A d v a i t a d octrine wh i ch they consid e r an insu l t to
the most High — “As stated in the Tatoav i
v eka,T a t t v a (u l t imate substance) i s acknow
led ged to be two fo ld ,independ ent and depend ent ;
The Ind ependent i s V ishnu , the Lord exempt
from impe rfect ions and o f end less exce l lence .
From inference , too ,d ifference (between the Sn
preme and the ind iv id ual ) is asce rtained . The
S upreme Lo rd i s d iflerent from J i v a,as (the
former) is the objec t o f his serv ice . He who is
to be served by ano the r i s d ifferent from h im,as
a k ing from h is attendant . . On account of
make) a statement that the exce l lent attri butes o f
( 98 )
V ishnu are l i ke mi rage and th is resembles the
cu tt ing o f the tongue in the desi re to ga i n a fine
p lantain ; since i t w i l l resu l t in the i r ente ring
A n d h am t a m a s (He l l o f u tte r d arkness) on
account o f the i r o ffend ing V ishnu The
grand reve lat ion,
‘A d iffe rence be tween j i va and
I svara,and a difference between matte r and
Isvara,a d ifference o f j i v a s each from o the rs,
a d ifference be tween matte r and j i v a and a d i f
ference o f mate rial be ings each from o thers,th is
i s the fi ve fo ld d i fference in the universe .
’ This i sreal and beginning less ; i f i t had a beginning i twou ld have an end ; bu t i t has no end ; nor i s i ti l l usori ly imagined
,for i f i t we re imagined me re ly
,
i t wou ld cease ; bu t i t ne ve r ceases As the
M ahopanz’
slzad says, ‘Like a bird and the string
(t ied to i t), l i ke the j ui ces of d ifferent t rees,l i ke
the r i ve rs and the seas, l i ke fresh wate r and sal t
water, l ike the robber and the robbed,l i ke man
and the objec ts (that he sees), so are the j i v a
and the l svara d ifferent,e ternal ly d ifferent iated
from each o the rS tart ing from these three d ifferent stand points
nume rous theo ries, al l.
cal l ing themse lves V e
d ant a have been evo lved by later expound e rs. Eachsystem attempts to be a se lf-consistent who le .
d isplaying the keenest logical and exeget ical ski l l .The B /zdsby as and Vrz
‘
ttz’
s on the Vedanta
S d tras so far d iscovered amount to over 30 and
100
the monism ofVedanta, the evo l u t ion and ind iv i dn
al ism of the Sankhya and the the ism and real ism
o f Nyaya.
We can not in this book pursue the later devel opments of Vedanta i n this count ry . Theyform a vast mass of profitl ess l i teratu re in wh i chthe o ld phi losophical schools have been j umbledup in inextricable confusion. I n them argumenttakes the place o f psychological experience , bigotry takes the place of med i tat ion
,and abuse of
othe r sec ts takes the place of inspi rat ion. Amongthem they have raised the innumerable sects thatd iv id e modern Ind ia and d eprive ph i losophy o f
i ts power of consol ing man in his troubles ande lavating him to a place of peace.
10 1
Section I I . A. S ank/11 a.
The Sankhya analysesa hth
’
e itd i vbrse intotwo independent and sharp
'
fy canfiasted ajfactpésgé jP u r u s h a and P r a k r i t i , spi ri t and matte r,subject and objec t. P u r u s h a i s not the Ego ,
for Ego i ty is a func tiono f matte r and the or
d inary human consc iousness invo lved in the no t iono f ‘ I is bu t the reflect ion of the Seer on the instrum ent of cogni t ion. The pure consciousness of
t he P u r u s h a is reached only when the man
has attained K a i v a l y a, aloneness, abso l u teseparat ion from P r a k r i t i and i s d evo id of
the d ist inction o f I and not- I . This P u r u s h ai s not the noumenon und erlying al l the p u r us h a s of the universe , for each p u r u s h a,whether he be in the body o f a D e v a or o f a
man,is independent o f and d ifferent from o ther
9 u r u s h a s o f the Universe . H i s attr ibu tes are
the reve rse (v i p a r i t a) of those of P r a k r i t i ;he i s immu table
,not affected by the G u n a s
,the
conscious S ee r of object ive , phenomenal fo rms,
separate from o ther p u r u s h a s,the enjoye r
(b h o k t a) of p leasu re and pain (sea. K a‘
r . xi ).
H e i s ne ither p r a k r i t i nor v i k r i t i , ne i ther theantecedent nor the consequent state of a changi ng object (l b. i i i). The existence of the knower
i s establ ished by the fo l lowing pro ofs. ( 1 ) The
o bjects of the universe apparent ly exist no t for
( 102 )
the i r own bu t for another’s use. (2 ) The existence of
matter w ith g” u na s pre-supposes the e x i s
tense o f p'u r u wi thou t g u na s. (3) M an has
the :pqw'
er'
l it i)0
99111 10} h is bod y . (4) Man has the
power of‘enjoyment ’. (5) Man i s impel led ta»
seek k a i v a l y a— the state when he i s the pu reseer, separated from contact w i th objects (l b. xv i i ).Hence the p u r u s h a i s the sol i tary , inact ive w i tness o f the Operations o f Natu re , bystand er, spectator, passive (l b. xix ). B e ing immu table he
does no t change i nto phenomenal fo rms l i kep r a k r i t i , bu t by h is union w i th forms o f insent ient matte r, b u d d h i , etc. ,
they assume the
appearance o f sentiency and the inactive p u r u s h aappears ac t ive though i t i s the g u na 5 that are thesou rce o f al l act iv i ty (1b. xx). These p u r u s h a s
are many in numbe r, because birth, death and the
o rgans (b u d d h i , e tc.) are several ly a l lo tted to
ind iv id uals,the i r activ i t ies are simu l taneous
,and
the three gu n a s are d ifferently d istr ibu ted ind ifferent men (l b. xv i i i). As the Sankhya teachesthe existence o f many p u r u s h a 5
,each
l iv ing e ternal ly separate from the rest, i t may bestbe d escribed as a schoo l of ind i v id ual ism.
P r a k ri t i, the o the r const i tuent of the uni
verse is of two forms,one causal , and homogeneous
the o ther, effected and d iscrete (v y a k t a.) The
l atte r (v y a k t a), is an effec t (he t umat), inconstant ,unpervad ing, z
'
. e. bounded , mu table , mu l ti tud inous,
( 104 )
e xpanse. The glory of the heavens i s transi tory,but the impalpable , inv isi ble e the r inconce ivablyremains. S uch as i t is to -d ay ,
it al read y was whenthe Fiat Lux was spoken ; i ts beginning musthave been coeval w i th that of t ime . No th ing or
every th ing accord ing to the manne r i t is accounte d of, i t is evasive o f common not ice
,wh i le
obtrusive to d e l i cate sc ru t iny . I ts negat ive qual it ies are nume rous and baffl ing . I t has no e ffect inimped ing mo tion ; i t does not pe rcept ib ly arrest ,absorb, o r scatter l ight ; i t pe rvad es, ye t has
(apparently) no share in the d isplacements o f grossmatte r. Look ing, howeve r, be low the su rface o f
th ings we find th is semi-fabu lous qu intessence to
be unobtrusive ly do ing al l the wo rld ’
s work . I tembod ies the ene rg ies of mot ion i s
,perhaps
,in a
very real sense , the t rue p r i m u m m o b i l e ; thepotenc ies o f mat ter are rooted in i t ; the substanceof matte r i s latent in i t ; universal intercou rse i s
maintained by means o f the e ther ; cosm ic influences can be exerted only through i ts aid unfe l t
,
i t is the sou rce o f so l id i ty ; unseen,i t i s the veh ic le
of l igh t ; i tse l f non-phenomenal , i t i s the ind ispensable o riginato r o f phenomena . A contrad ic
t ion in te rms,i t po ints the perennial mo ral that
what e l udes the senses is l ike ly to be more perma
nent l y and intense ly actual than what strikesthem.
B esid es these negat ive attribu tes P r a d h an a
105
o r M a l a p r a k r i t i has some posi t ive attr ibu teswhi ch are common to i t and the phenomena l fo rms
e vo lv ed from i t. I t is affec ted by the three G u na s,i t is unconscious
,object ive
,common to al l
P u r u s h a s insensible to p leasu re and pain and
immutable (l b. xi ). The ex istence of this P r a
d b 3 n a , (l i t. , chief pri niziple) or M fi l a p r ak a rt
(or roo t o f matte r), th is noumenon beh ind pheno
menal material objects, i s prov ed by the fo l low ingconsid e rat ions (1 ) these objec ts be ing d iscre te
,can
only be conce ived as be ing carved out o f an in
d iscre te some th ing (2 ) certain common prope rt iesare found in al l objec ts thus ind icat ing a commons ubstratum (3) objects remain d iscre te only so
long as the ene rgy o f the i r cause ac ts in them (4)an effec t i s d ifferent from i ts cause ; (5) the who leuniv erse o f mu l t i tud inous forms is one object
(l b. x v). Th is noumenon of mat te r ope rates bymeans o f the three G u na 5 . The three G u n a s
a re no t three qual i t ies o f some substance o therthan themse lves ; bu t they “
are substances, yet
cal led G u n a s,qua l i t ies, as they are the acces
sori es o f the P u r u s h a (Bhaskararaya. Com.
La] . S abas .
They are three strand s into wh i ch primal matterd ifferent iates i tse l f when i ts homogene i ty is fi rstd istu rbed . The i r manifestat ions as the so -cal ledLaws o f mot ion in the physi cal world , as mentalc haracterist ics in the world of m ind and as fee l ing
( 106 )
tones in the moral sphe re have been described in
Chap I . They are“ th ings d r a v yan i ) and no t
Spe cific qual i ties.
”I n speak ing of qual i t ies, how~
eve r, the term G u na is not to be regard ed as an
insubstantial accid ental attribute , bu t as a substanced iscernib le by sou l through the med i um of the
facu l t ies.
”
(Wilson’
s Com. on S ah . K ei r . x i l ). The
o rigin o f the theory o f the three G u na s i s shrou d edin obscu rity. I t appears al l on a sud d en i n the
Sankhya ph i losophy. The only re ferences to i tp rev ious to the age o f Sankhya ph i losophy i s
found in At/zar va S ambz’
td . X . 0211 . 43 .
“The
knowers o f B rahma know that spi r i t (Y a k s h a)wh ich re sid es in the lotus w i th nine gates, investedw i th the three G u n a s.
” Th is v erse i s repeated inAtk . S am
,X . i i . 32 , bu t the latte r bal f is changed into
i n the sheath (K o s a) made o fgo l d ,o f three spokes,o f three supports
”
. The V e d i c age d iv id ed regionsi nto three
,P r i t h v i
,A n t a r i k s h a , and D y u
,
the earth, the intermed iate sphere and the sky .
Possibly this triplet was de ve loped into the triple t of
G u na s. Th is id ea i s rendered probable by the
fac t that R aj a s, the second o f the G u n a s i s also
the name of the mid dle region,A n t a r i k s h a. I n
P r i t h v i,the earth , there i s a prepond e rance o f
T am a s, inA n t a r i k s h a,the midd l e region there
i s a prepond e rance o f R a j a s and in the D y u, the
sky . the re i s a preponderance o f S a t t v a . I ax
late r t imes a fourth region and a fourth G una
108
i ts reward s also are susceptible o f d iminu t ion and
e xcess.
”
(16. i i). The Sankhya proves i ts con
clusions by the inte l lec tual analysis o f humanexperience and not l ike the Ved cim‘
a by ex
egesis. I n this path each man can star t onl y w i thhis own experience ; and start ing therefrom,
he
d enudes i t o f al l that i s:not h imse l f. He stripsfrom his experience sensat ion
,percept ion, egotism,
and vo l i t ion,al l that mat te r has contributed , and
final ly knows h imse l f to be the pu re I na,knower,
when there i s an end to ignorance and pain. Hencewhen he i s M u k t a he remains a separate ent i ty,in o ther words he reaches K a i v a l y a
,aloneness.
The h istory o f the rise of the Sankhyaschool o f thought is wrapped in impenetrableobscu ri ty . Most scho lars now admi t that i t wasd eve loped befo re the age of B uddha. The
K apz'
l a S d tm s as we have them,has been
proved to be a work composed not earl ier thanthe X IV century, A . D . ,
though i t probably con
tains wo rd s and phrases be longing to a v e rymuch earl ier K apz
'
l aSm‘ras,now lost. The Tattva
S amésa S d z‘ras wh ich Max Mul le r regarded as
an ancient work strikes us as be ing a rather lateindex o f some pre
-existing S ut r a work . Isvara
Krishna’
s S d r’
zlzkya K d rz'
kd composed probably inthe age immed iate ly preced ing the beginning of the
Christ ian E ra,is the earl iest exposi t ion of the
‘
Sankhya that we have. Karika,means the v ersified
( 109
form of a pre-exist ing S ut r a. P afichasikha, an
early Sankhya teache r i s quoted by Vyasa in h i scommentaries on Yoga 5mm : I I . 1 3. He is
also quoted i n the S ri izklzy aséra' by Bhava
Ganesa D ikshi t, a d isciple o f Vijfiana Bhikshu .
A l l this ear ly Sér’rkhya l i te ratu re is now lost ;bu t yet there i s no room for d oubting that thesystem was worked out in the form i t now exists
in the age that preceded the birth o f Gautama
B ud d ha and M ahav i ra. This system,so ancient in
birth and so mod ern in spi r i t , must have takensome centuries to be d eve loped . Phi losoph ical systems d o not star t straigh t from the head o f a
thinker, as the finished M inerva from the head
of j upi te r. The Sankhya,
as we know i t,
is a final prod uc t w i th no mark o f the hesi tancywh i ch characte rizes an evo lv ing system. I t ho ld s
d efini te v iews on many quest ions, the natu re o f
S a m s ar a and of K a r m a,the funct ions of
the three G u na s ,the natu re of the P u r u s h a
,
the material ity of A n t a h k a r a na ,and the
unreal i ty of bondage,most of wh ich were scarce
l y known to the thinkers o f the early Upani
slzaa’s. The sankhya is a finished metaphysics
and a finished psycho logy. How many centu riesinte rvened be tween the flu id state of thought wemeet w i th in the late r V e d i c age and the co-ord inat ion and crystal l ine po l ish of the Sankhya,
‘A M s. work loaned to me by Mr . Govinda D i s of Benaru .
n o
what has become of the intervening l i teratu rewh ich alone can show how the one evo lved out of
the o ther,who can say ? B e tween the schoo lmen
w i th the i r d octr ine of “occu l t qual i t ies ”
and
“sympathe ti c v irtues and the mod ern pe l l uc id
scient ific concept ions o f energy,e tc. , so many
centuries of qu ick-mov ing thought have e lapsed .
Whe the r anc ient thought mov ed as qu ick, what
he lped on the ancient Sankhya mov ement togain ind epend ence o f the t ramme ls o f revealedscriptu res and bold ly take i ts stand on reason
,i s
a problem wh i ch at present defies so l u t ion. O f
one thing we may be su re . The Sankhyacou l d not have been evo lved by one man
,of how
e ver command ing geni us, as Pro f. Garbe th inks
(v id e Introd uction to h is translat ion o f Anirud
dha’
s Commentary ).
Anothe r equal ly curious fac t i s the fate of the
Sankhya system afte r i ts promu lgation. The
Ved ci nta 5 221 7 3 : make a d efini te attempt to
Oppose i t (S flt . I I . i . I - 2 and I I . i i . M O). The
B ud d hists controverted some o f i ts teach ings.
The V a i s e s h i k a s from the beginning opposed
i ts fundamental principle of S a t k ay a v ad a
the axiom that e ffects pre-exist in a potent ial formin the i r causes. But very soon and espec ial ly
o u tsid e these schoo ls, the Samkhya came to be
regard ed as a reve lat ion and absorbed bod ily and
we ld ed fi rmly into later Indian thought.
1 1 2
unceasing succession o f ‘states of conc iousness (as
they are cal led i s Western ph i losophy ) is termed
C h i t t a v ri t t i in the Yoga Safras and the
P u r u s h a sees these states o f conc iousnesshence he i s the Seer. Y o ga i s the inh ibi t iono f the cease less flow o f C h i t t a v r i t t i and whi lei t ceases flow ing, the Seer abid es in h is t rue natu re
I . 2“ D r i s y a (The Seen) has the three qua
l i ties (S i l a G u na) o f i l l uminat ion,act iv i ty and
rest and is the noumenon o f objec ts and o rgans(and exists) for the enjoyment and emancipat ion (ofthe I 8 ). P r a k asa ,
K r i y a, S t h i t i
c f the Sfifra j ust quoted,stand for S a t t v a
R a j a s and T a m a s.
The noumenon o f the D r i sy a i s cal led A l inga
(l i t . , the ind ist ingu ishab le), A v y a k t a, as i t i s cal
l ed in o ther S choo ls. I t is the P t a d h an a o f the
Sankhyas.
“ The D r a s h ta, mere v ision, (con
ciousness), though pure d evo id o f any mu tat ion), immed iate ly perce ives images o f objects.
common to o thers besides h im (who has reachedK a i v a l y a .) The conj unct ion (o f the S eer and
the S een) is the cause that they attain the nat u reof the possessor and the possessed . (15 I I . 20
On account of this conj unct ion the Seer evo l vesinto the possessor and the S een i s then apprehend
ed as possessed . But when ignorance is removed ,the real inmmutabi l i ty o f the S eer i s grasped .
Thus we see that, e x cept for a complete change of
H 3
technical terms, the metaphysical theories of the
Yoga are abso l u te ly ident ical wi th those of
the Sankhya. The Yoga S d i ra designatesi tse l f S ank h y a P r a v a c h an a
,exposition
o f S ankhya. The S arvad arsana S a i tgra lza
sums up the Yoga arguments regard ing the im
mutabi ty of the Seer in’ these word s — “ C h i t i
sa k t i l i t . the powe r of know ing’
,conc iousness)
i s d evo id of mu tat ion because i t always ‘knows '
(the mental mod ificat ions). I f th is P u r u s h awe re mu table, he cou ld not always know mentalmod ificat ions
,as the mu table i s inconstant (in i ts
act ion). As the P u r u s h a who is of the natu reof consc iousness remains always the Superinten
d ent, his essent ial ly pu re natu re is always maintained . Whenever i t (his nature) i s (apparent ly)affected (l it. clouded) by (the shad ow of) any objectwhatsoever (that is perce ived by h im), i t is the
D r i sy a the objec t that always rece i ves h is l ightand is i l l uminated by i t. Hence the P u r u s h ais (real ly) unaffected (d uring a percept ion) and
i t fo l lows he is always know ing and i s alwaysabove the suspic ion o f mu tabil i ty. The C h i t t ai t is that is (real ly) affected by objects and thenthat object is perce ived . When i t is not affected (byan object), i t is not perce ived. Objects resemblemagnets and the C h i t t a resembles i ron and is
suscept ible of mu tat ion because i t i s the seat ofattract ion and repu lsion (by objects) whi ch causes
8
1 14
the i r be ing known or unknown. Now (it may be
o bjected that) as the C h i t t a and I nd r i y as (sense
organs) wh ich are o f the natu re of ego ism are al l
pervasive and hence always connected w i th al l
objec ts, therefore must be prod uced know ledge o f
al l th ings always and eve rywhere. (I t i s repl iedthat) though al l -pervasi ve , when the C h i t t a i s
mod ified in any one bod y and by certain objects
in contac t w ith that bod y, in that body alone is
know ledge (o f those objects) produced no t in
other bod ies. As this l imi tat ion is absol u te,i t i s
he ld that objects are l i ke magne ts and affec t the
C h i t t a whi ch resemb les i ron by the i r coming intocontac t w i th i t through the channe ls of the sense
o rgans. Hence modificat ions be long to the C h i t t aand not the A t m a (l o. chap. x v ).
D r i gy a (matte r) evo l ves as B h 0t a, obj ects
,
and I n d r i y a,organs, by wh ich the D r a s h ta
comes in contract w i th objects. Objec ts and organsare D h a r m l , the seat o f D h a r m a or qual i t ies.
’C h i t t a, the inner organ, be ing a mode of D r i gy a,
matter, cannot i l l uminate or manifest i tse l f »
,but
must be l ighted by P u r u s h a The who le uni
v erse is bu t the C h i t t a t inged by the Seen
( on the one hand and the Seer ( on the other)Yag. Sat . i v. The See r i l l uminates i t and theSeen colours i t amixtu re ofwhi te, red and bl ue
,the
three colours represent ing the three G unas.
As Vyasa in his comment on this S ut r a says,
( 1 16 )
an I ; v a r a ; bu t when th is phrase is translatedthe isti c S ank h y a s, as is frequently done byEngl ish S cho lars, i t becomes absurd . For the
I sv a r a here referred to is not the Lord o f the
world , bu t the Lord only of his devo tee , and He i s
his Lord only in the sense that he figures H im in
his heart as the mysti c syl lable O m ’and this
makes it easy for him to reach h is own'
inner con
sciousness. Though the I sv a r a of Y o g a is an
inact ive P u r u s h a, it accepts, l i ke the S ah
k h y a, the a d h i d a i v a t a, animist ic , explanat iono f the l ife o f natu re. But th is doctrine of the
a d h i d a i v a t a cannot make any phi losophy‘the ist ic ’
in any sense o f the word. On account
o f the great spread of V e d an t a in mod ern Ind ia,later w riters l ike M a d h u sad h ana have regarded 8 ank h y a and Y o g a as stages lead ing to
V e d an t a. Germanmyst ic ism also,whether i t ap
pears as the real ist ic monism of Haecke l , who sees
in matter the one noumenon of the universe, or themore popu lar Panthe ism of many modern phi loso
phers, discount ing as i t does the abid ing val ue of theindiv id ual , arrogates to i tse l f the t it le o f final tru thand cal ls al l ind ividual ist ic or dual ist ic theories empirical . Th is i s absurd . Both monism and dual ism
are equal ly val id explanat ions of the cosmos. I t isa quest ion of individual temperament which exp ianat ion appeals to one. The human mind whichforms general concepts to ex plain the cosmos to i ts
( H 7 )
o wn sat isfact ion i s swayed by the temperaments.The man of the rich, emot ional cast of mind whosemainspring is his love to the Lord o f the universe
,
whose greatest pleasure is service of the Lord of hisheart fo l lows the path that leads to monism for to
h im everything is his Lord , al l be ings, consc ious orunconcious
,bu t the Lord ’ s body , and he thus reaches
the concept of the one noumenon. I f he shu tsh imsel f out o f touch w i th the spi r i t ual sid e o f the
universe and thus cannot reach the concept ion of
I sv ara, he invents the id ea o f natu re or clo thes w ithflesh the abstract idea of humani ty and erects themas the object ive of h is emot ional ou tflow. On the
o ther hand , the man o f the stern inte l lectual cast ofm ind prefers the path of med itat ion, trains h imse lfin V i v e k a
,d ist inction of Se l f and Not-se l f and
reaches the d ual ist ic interpre tat ion of the cosmos.H e may ,
l i ke the A d v a i t i try to e x plain away theNot-se l f as real ly i l l usory and only empirical ly trueand thus reconc i le his theory w ith monism,
bu t hei s a d ual ist al l the same
,for his path is one of d is
c riminat ion. Normust we forge t that after al l bo ththeories are bu t concepts of the mind , and not e x
periences of the spiri t. Before the spiri t can real isei tse l f or the devo tee can real ise h is Lord ,
M a n a s
has to be transcend ed and the stage of theoriz ingh as to be passed and when there i s real izat ion
,con
c ept-mak ing is ne i ther necessary nor possible .
( 1 18 )
Section I I I . f igama .
The early Ved i c re l igion was a cu l t o f magic , asystem o fpropi t iat ion or constraint ofNatu re-
powers
(D e v a s)by meansof sacrifices (Y a j na s),offerings
of animal fat (g h i , v a p 3 , etc .) and fermented l iquor
(S o m a), poured into fire regard ed as the mou th o f
the Gods, and accompanied w i th the chant ing o f
m a n t r a 5. Some o f these m a n t r a s we re incantat ions of praise ,
and o thers combinat ions of soundhav ing no meaning, be ing somet imes inart icu latecries (
“ l i ke the be l low ing of a bul l , Theywere be l ieved to please or const rain the D e v a s
and thus to secu re the fu lfi lment of the sacrificer’
s
d esires,whether these we re the acqu isi t ion of
material objects in this l ife or the enjoyment ofpleasures in post-mortem states S v a r g a I n
the al ignment of the Y a j ff a S a l a,the sacrificial .
hal l,were embod ied the early notions of the struc«
t u re of the Macrocosm,for e ven in the ear l iest days
the idea o f the wor l d be ing a macrocosm and the
ind iv id ual man be ing a mic rocosm,a minified copy
of the cosmos was worked out . The we l l -knownP u r u s h a S u k t a whi ch though later than the
earl iest hymns i s certainly much anterior to the age
of the Upanisfzaa’
s,proves this. The moon sprang
from ( the Cosmic P u r u s h a’
s) manas from (his)eyes the sun was born ; from (h is) month I n d r a
and Agn i , from (his) p rana, v ay u was born. From
(his) nave l was the mid dle region (ant a r i k sha)
( 1 20 )
(v ak), the al tar (v e d i) ; purpose, the grass on the
altar ; desi re , the fire ; know ledge, the‘
(second) fire
the Lord of vo ice, the h o t a (priest) manas, the
U p a v a k t a(assistant priest) prana, the offering
equanimi ty , the a d h v a r y u . From these were
d eve loped the genu ine v id yas, methods o f med itat ion, wh ich are co l lected in the various
each of which contains the v i (1 y as trad it ional lytaught in the Vedic Schoo l to which i t be longs.
Meanwhi le o ther influences worked on the
Hindu mind and carr i ed re l igious thought in
othe r d irections. The mu l tifarious god s o f the
Vedas were grouped unde r three c lasses,thus
laying the foundat ion o f the later doctrine of the
T r i m ar t i . The i rrepressible inst inc t for unifying the mu l ti form cosmi c phenomena under one
grand concept also worked from very early t imesand thus was evo l ved the idea of B r a hm a , the
ind efinable real i ty beh ind the D e v a s the powerthat resides in the M a n t r a s and hence can be
ut i l ized by the M a n t r a v i t the knower o f theM a n t r a s
, the B r ahm a na , for the purposeof constraining the D e v a s the same power thatin the Macrocosm drives the Universe. Throughfear of H im the wind blows, through fear the sun
Upanishad means l i teral ly ‘si ttingnear by .
’As the si tting
posture Asa na ) is absol utely necessary for the practice of mostv i d y i s (Ved . Sat. I V. i . the word Upanishad came to meana-v i d y a or a col lect ion of v i d y‘l ,
1 2 1
goes ;through fear of H im,
A g u i and I n d r a
(d o the i r work), and D eath runs, the fi fth.
”
(Tai t .
Up. 11. v . This same B r a h m a is the powe r
w i thin the innermost Se l f of the man“Who
d we l ls in the Earth,is othe r than the earth, whom
the earth knows not, whose body the earth is, who
rules the earth from w i th in,he i s thy A t m a
the inner ru le r, the immorta l .” (B r . Up. I I I . v i i .
“Who dwe l ls in the (indiv id ual) Se l f, is other thanthe Se l f, whom the Se l f knows not
,whose body
the Se lf is, who ru les the Sel f from w i th in,he i s thy
A t ma ,the inner ru ler, the immortal ." (15. 111.
v 11. Th is ident ificat ion of B r a h m a w i th the
A t ma of the God of the Universe w ith the Godwi th in the man, l ed to the d eve lopment of the
S upreme S cience , the P a r 3 v i (1y a wh ich is the
specific V e d an t a d iscipl ine and attempts to
soar to the greatest he ights of med i tat ion man is
capable of.
But i t is very few that can seek the S upremein the si lent recesses of the heart. I n most men‘the senses run out
,not towards the Se lf ’ ; and they
seek B r a h m a in the Cosmos w i thout, in the
world of objec t and not the subject . When the
P a r a mat m a is thus thought of as the object He
appears as the powe r of Nature,for That can never
become the object, bu t is the consc iousness, to be
reached by consc iousness (in-turned), seated in thehearts of al l .
"
(8 1mg. Gl td xi i i . Search for
1 2 2
H im ou tside as Indra d id .
“He ran to That. Thatvanished from his v iew . H e behe ld in that veryspace, a woman,
ve ry bri l l iant , U m a of go ld enhue.
”
(K ena Up . i i i . I I , She is the S upreme
power “ by wh ich this Universe is Uphe ld ,”
sym
bol ized by Gaya t r i inCir/z. Up. i i i. 1 2 and E rik . Up.
v. I 4. Th is concept of S a k t i,the Power of
Nature, was d eve loped from the much e arl ier oneof A d i t i , d efined in the N i r u k t a as A d i na
d e v a m at a,the mighty mo ther of the Gods.
E ven in the earl iest hymns o f the R i g Ve a’
a
she i s an embod iment of Power and the supporter .
of the Unive rse . She i s d escribed as“the
l uminous A d i t i,the S upporte r o f the Earth,
l iv ing in Heaven ”
(R . V. f . 1 36 . Not only is
she the mother o f the God s, bu t she is “the great
mother of the d evotees (S uv ratanam), the mistressof the rites
,the strong inm ight , the ev er-young,
the w id e ly-extend ed , the protect ing, the sk il ful in !
gu id ing ”
(Vdj . S am. 2 1 . When the powe rbehind Natu re and that of M a n t r a s was e rectedinto one objective ent i ty— the world -mo the r, she
absorbed al l the funct ions of the anc ient A d i t i .
Grad ual ly this idea, that B r a h m a i f sought as
an object, and not the subject o f introspect ivev ision i s S a k t i , that the object ive fo rm o f the
One w i thou t form i s Cosmic Power,grew and
appealed to the re l ig ious imaginat ion. S a k t i ,Cosmi c Power, became the rec ipient o f worsh ip,
( 1 24 )
first hymns of ‘
eaCh M and a l a of the Rz
'
gveda
(except the ninth, devo ted to S o m a) are those in
praise of Agni , the next general ly of Vayu and the
last of Ind ra. I n the Taz'
ttz'
rfya Upanislzaa’
, Su rya
takes the place of Indra, bu t Ind ra (or Sakra)cont inued to be a chief God during the age of
Budd hism. Indeed he was worshipped in templesinSouthern India and Java
,in the early years of the
Christ ian era,when B ud dhism was the state re l i
gion, as we find from Tami l ‘
E pics of e ighteenhundred years ago. But long befo re . thi s anotherT r i mur t i had been worked out ; B rahma,V ishnu and S iva who were minor d iet ies in}theVed ic age , B rahmabe ing cal led B rahmanaspat i or
B rihaspat i,and S iva be ing cal led Rudra, su pplant
ed the earl ier Trini ty. Siva absorbed the functions
of Agni besides those of some popu lar D ravid ianphal l ic de ity and Vishnu those o f Indra and Surya.
’
Later on,Siva w i th some and V ishnu w ith o thers
became the chief person o f the Trimurt i, on whom
the heart might lean and round whose feet theemot ions of the devotee might tw ine themse lves.
B rahma, though one of the TrimOrt i , the I n
d ian Trinity of the age that succeed ed the final
I nnumerabl e Ved ic passages prove that Agni coal esced w i thgi va and I nd ra and Surya w i th Upend ra, Vishnu. K rishna
’
s d efeat
of I nd ra might refer to this l atter inci d ent . Brahms correspond sto Vtyu as he in cosmi c P r t na He is i d enti fied w i th the
region of vayu in Atkarva San . X . i i . 25.
( 1 25 )
compilat ion of the M ahabharata neve r became asupreme God l ike Vishnu or S iva. This has puzzledE uropean Scholars who cannot understand why thecreato r, the fi rst and greatest person of the Tri
ni ty in the i r re l ig ion, shou ld be considered a second
any person in the Hindu Trinity. The Hinduframed the concept of the one noumenon of the
unive rse no t as a person, bu t as a substance beh indS a t and A s a t , personal consc iousness and the
unconscious ( R. V. x . Conside red as an
obj ect of thought, the same was the act ive powerbehind the phenomenal universe, ident i cal w i th thepower of the ma n t r a s, the go lden hued B rahma,B rahmanaspat i, the Lord of Hymns (R. V. i i . 2 3, i.
40 later on concei ved as a female de i ty,Sak ti .
B rahma (male) neve r became a supreme personal
God ,for the M ana Y o gi s, men of the inte l lectualtemperament natural ly preferred the h igher conceptof B rahma (neuter), the Impersonal Real i ty beh indthe Cosmos to be reached by av r i t t a c h a ks h u h, introspect ive med itat ion, as the eternal ,immu table S ubject, the at m a and the K a r
m a y ofgi s, men of the emot ional temperament,when they did not worship V ishnu , the act iveGod o f the developing universe (the Vedic Sfirya,the nourisher of al l that i s) or Siva who mani
fests himselr when the indiv idual turns his back
on the world and becomes an ascet ic (theved ic Agni who burns the universe) , preferred
( 1 2 6 )
the concept Sakt i , universal power as a w ider general izat ion than Brahma(male), the same power ex
ercising the one function of creat ion. Anothe rreason why B rahma d id not attain to the posit ionof V ishnu or Siva i s that, be ing the creator, he is no
more an act iv e d e i ty and could scarce ly reward or
punish h is devotees. I t is the hope o f reward and
fear of punishment that i s the basis o f most of whatpasses for B h a k t i (re l igious devot ion) and B rahmacou ld not sat isfy these human emot ions. I n
later t imes B rahmawas d egrad ed to the posi t ion of
an Ind iv id ual Sou l ( j i v at ma Hence so few
t races are found of any worsh ip o f B rahmain Ind ia.
T he cu l ts of Yl3.hfl p -mfl
.3 1§
P aac h a r at r a,
angwthose m of, Siga, P asu p a t aW s m x
of Mah e sv a These cu l ts were in existencebefore the Christ ian E ra. The B b ag a v a t a s are
al l uded to in an inscript ion of the second centurybefore Christ. The M a laria/ d ram
,wh ich most cri
t ics now assign to the th i rd centuryB . C. ,refers to
the P asu p a t a and of the P an c h a rat r a sys
tems ; and the part of the M akd bkaraz‘a where theyare referred to is certainly not a later interpolat ion,bu t i s at least as ancient as the bu lk of the poem.
These monothe ist ic movements,the Vaishnava
and Saiva, inspired by the need of a single, supreme ,personal God fel t by those who could not rise to
the high levels of meditat ion on the abso l u tespread to Sou th Ind ia, where they rece ived a great
1 28
a personal God and therefore easi ly gave way
to T an t r i k a re l ig ions whi ch prov ided for th isB h a k t i , so necessary to the emot ional man.
These cu l ts u ti l ized the archi tectu ral d evelopmentsof B uddh ism and Jainism and hence arose the
Temple archi tectu re of sou thern Ind ia. This.
architecture was probably also influenced by the
Egyptian temple archi tectu re,for sou the rn Ind ia
had from early t imes a steady comme rcial intercourse with E gypt as w i th Babylonia. Temple
ri tual was e laborated on a grand scale. This
ritual was primari ly based on the ceremonies of
fet ish-worship of the D ravid ian races,many of
whi ch are st i l l observed in v i l lages and under
wayside-trees in al l the i r pr imi t ive barbar ism.
I nto the Temple-r i t ual was welded e lements
from the sacrific ial r itual deve loped by the
Aryan R i s h i s. Thus was evo lved the gorge
ous ri tual of the Temples which more effect ivelyk i l led out the Ved ic Y a j i f a s (sacrifices) than the
gentle banter o f the S d izkfiya and the Bkagavad
gftd or the more passionate denunc iat ions o f the
founders of the Jaina and the Baud d ha cu l ts. S imi
larly the ol d fire-worship of the home (E k agn i
gr i h y a ceremonies) gave way to domest i c idolatry,a minified copy of the temple worsh ip. And the
v i d y as of the Upam'
s/zads became supplanted bym ental worship of the two gods and the one goddessthat now supplanted the innumerable gods of the
( 1 29 )
v ed ic Pantheon and the countless local and tribalde i t ies worsh ipped from pre
o Aryan t imes.
The worsh ip o f Sakti,Siva and Vishgu
means o f med itat ion,and o f symbo ls and i
bo th in houses and temp les gave birth to the three
“ m M " !
Pw e . The Ag am a 5 l ike the Qpi rgi
ere the u l t imate deve lopme nts“fi—‘fl f —sQ
B rahmagzas, . theyii
w x contained o therthe fo l lowe rs of the
by i he Upari z'
shads in acco rd ance w i thw ”
the i r own tene ts. They even gave the name o f
S a m h i t a to them,
as also the name
S m r i t i , thus ind icat ing the ir c laim to be,what they
real ly were,based on and regularly e vo lv ed from
t rad it ion. Th is movement gave birth 2dg
the late r Upam’
s/zad s, wh i ch unl ike the ear l ie r ones M g
m ~o
e .
d o not denom i nate the S upreme B e ing Param A »
B rahma,bu t are expressly Vaishnava,
Sai va or
sakta in the i r tone and are probably in many casesbu t Ag a m a 5 und e r the name o f Upam
'
slzad s.
Many o f the Ag a m a s themse lves are cal ledUpani slzad s, though not incl ud ed in the recogni zed 108.
The B hagavadgi‘ta whi ch is cal led an Uparzi
c .
s lzad ,also the S m r i t i , par ex cel l ence
,and the
CV"
S v etd svatara Upamslrad are wo rks of Vedanta,
bu t show clear traces of the influence of the4
9
( 1 30 )
A g a m a s Garbe has po inted out the influenceof the B hagavata (Vaishnava) figamas on the
forme r. The latte r bears equal lyW ffi —c
the influence of the Sa1vafi gul t: Both works seem
to be d ue to an anc ient synthesiz ing movement inwhich was at tempted a h ighe r standpo int than the
monism o f the Upanz'
s/zad s, the pl u ral ism of the
S ank h y a and the V a i s e s h i k a and the threet a t t v a 5 (trip le real i ty) o f the A g a m a S choo ls,a standpo int from whi ch al l three can be reconci ledand treated as d ifferent aspects o f the h igher pointof view .
yo .
)The influence of theA g am a s or T a n t r a s
,as
they are more fami l iarly known, on Ind ian l ife has
been profound . The l iv ing H indu re l ig ion of to‘ w l " “ N M
d ay from Cape Comorin.goal i e remotest corners o f
‘ M ‘
Tibet i s essent ial ly T an t r i c . E ven the few
genume V e d 1 c rites that are preseved and are
supposed to be derived straight from the Ved as e.g.
the S a n d h y a,have beenmod ified by the add i t ion
of Tan t r i'
c prac tices. Equal ly profound has beenthe influence of the Aga m a s on the d eve lopmentof Vedanta ph i losophy. Sankara was a
‘S ak t a and his a d v a i t a exposi t ion of the
V e d an t a , though overtly independent of the
S a k t a Ag a m a s, is influenced by T an t r i c
theories and his d isc ipl ine by T ah t r i c pract i ces:Ramanuj awho, accord ing to D r. Thibau t
, expounds
a less forced form of Vedanta and more near to the
( 1 32 )
anterior to the age of Sankara.
And we must also remember that , in the caseo f these w ri t ings
,as in that o f the Rdmdyapa ,
the M ahabharata ,the P arana: and the me tr ical
po rt ions o f the substance are ve ry
anc ient,bu t the form has grown w i th t ime .
The contents o f the A g a m a s are o f unequalv al ue. Here and the re we mee t w i th snatches of
h igh ph i losophy, subtle psycho logical analysis o f
ecstatic mental states, and val uable descript ions of
cent res o f p r ana and l ines of force i n the subtlebody, bu t the bulk of the Ag a m a s is but grove l l
ingsuperst i t ion,most ly ofa revo l t ing form
,and end
less d etails of du l l ri tual . Besid es the Ag a m a 5,
th is schoo l has givenbi rth to a who le series of ph i lo
soph i cal works— o f S fi t r a s , K ar i k as,
*B h a
s h y a s,V r i t t i s and V ar t t i k a s
, besides i hd epend ent works— ah immense l iteratu re jealouslyguard ed from the prying eyes of the mod e rn inves
rA Sut r a i s ord inari ly a seri es of ex tremely bri ef prose apho
ri sms, general ly unintel hgibl e W i thout a Commentary . A K ar i k a
gives the substance of a S ut r a in verse form and is al so terse .
’A B h ssh y a i s the ex posi t ion of the supposed teach ings of a
S d t r a but real ly the teachings of the B bas h y a k 0. r a suppor .
ted by a great weal th of argument and quotation . A V r i t t i
i s a further ex pos1t i on of the same . A B h as h y a k ar 9. alwaysstri kes out an ori ginal l ine of thought and tw i sts the S 13 t r a as
he l ikes but a V r i t t i 1: s r a i s supposed to fol l ow the hues of
a B h ash y a A V ar t t i k a is general l y a V r i t t i in v erse
form,A I i p p a ni contains brief ex pl anat ions on a S at r a
( on the l ines of some B h ssh y a .
( 1 33 )
t i gator, but slow ly sacrificed to the omnivorous
p o o c h i e s .
M a 11) a s are gene ral ly d iv id ed into fourK r i y a , and
C h a r y a.
“
J i i a n a i s knowled ge o f the Lord ;that know led ge i s cal led re lease” (P d dma S am
lzz'
ta I . i i . 6 .
“ Y o g a i s the restr ict ion (b a nd h a ) o f the unagitated c h i t t a to one subject
( 15. I I . i . K r i y a ( embraces a l l acts) from
plough ing the ground for laying the fo und at ionsof the temple ) to establ ishing ( the id o l (I !) I I I .i . 6 C h a r y a is the method of wo rsh ip
”
(l b.
I V. i . I ) . The S a i v a Ag a m a s regard that thelast three parts toge the r const i t u te T a p a s to be
learnt from a human teacher and that the fi rst,
i . e ., J nan a can be taught only by S iva who comes
as the G u r u to the r ipe d isc iple at the psychological moment and gives h im an ini t iat ion (D i ks h a) into w isdom.
I n the earl ie r A g a m a s o f al l the threec u l ts the S upreme Real Be ing of the Univ erse ,correspond ing to the B r a h m a P a r am am
of the Upam'
s/zaa’s and cal led N a r ay a n a in the
V a i s h na v a t ant r a s and M a h e s v a r a or
S i v a in the o the r two t a n t r a s retreats to the
background and al l cosmi c funct ions are attr ibutedto S a k t i treated as h is wife bu t the real ly the
predominant facto r .But in the V a i s h n a v a and S a i v a schoo ls
1 34 )
the male god soon acqu i red a prominent posit ion and they also broke up into d iflerent sects.
Ye t these nume rous schoo ls have some common
characte ristics : They acknowledge three tat tv asu lt imate real ities, ( I ) A sup reme Be ing w i th the
male or female aspec t predominant. (a ,
the 913 5sof ind ividual souls the
,object ive Unive rse .
These three Real it ies (t a t t v a s) are givend ifferent
names in the d ifferent schools, bu t the i r attribu tesand mu tual re lat ions d o not vary much, though the
termino logy varies from schoo l to school . These
f i lo-015 are also al l agreed 1n opposmg the M ay a
v ad a, the d octr ine of the unreal i ty of the world ,
d eve loped from the teachings of Gaudapad a and
Sankara and red uced to absurd ity by the i r modernfo l lowers. Says the P auslzkam f lgama .
“I f
, (as
the Sankaras say ) the world i s an i l l usive appearance o f conscious be ing
,the effected wor ld w i l l be
a ho l low unreal i ty how can the world which isestabl ished to be real ly exist ing by al l methods o f
proofs be a false transmutat ion of consc iousness”
(15. i i .The A g a m a 3 d o no t regard the world as a
false show as BhAskararaya says in L al z'
td S aka i
f anama B hd sby a, und er the name M i t/zy dfagada d lzzs/zflzand No. 735, Real lyaccord ing to the be l ie fof the T an t r i k a s who ho ld (the doctrine that)the world (is) a transmu tat ion of B rahma
, the
Universe i s real because as there is abso l u te ly no
1 36
S choo ls is the i r int imate assoc iat ion w i th abnor
mal manifestat ions o f the sexual inst inc t . The
emot ional natu re o f man is the common root of
d evo t ion to a superhuman be ing as we l l as to
human be ings and the habit of se l f-abandonmentto a d i v1ue be ing which grows w i th de vo tion easilyd egenerates into se l f-aband oment of d ifferent k ind s.
Hence there exists in Ind ia to-d ay debased forms
of S a k t i -worsh ip, S i v a-worsh ip, and V i s h-nu-worsh ip much too rev o l t ing to be d escri be d .
This devo t ional movement has, as in anothe rcountries, given a great stimu l us to Art ; Templea rchi tec tu re, especial ly in Sou thern Ind ia, and
Lyric (d evot ional ) Poe try , especial ly Sanskri t ,Tami l and Hind i have reached a high order of
perfection only for want of cu l t ivat ion o f the
powers o f observat ion,this poet ry is no t noted for
any weal th of poet ic images,but i s oppressed ,as o therd epartments of l ife in Ind ia are
,by a load o f sou l
su ffocat ing convent ion. M usic , D anc1ng (N aty a)
and gest icu lat ion a b h i n a y a have also been
e vo lved und er the influence o f re l igious d evo t ionbut the last art has d egenerated into gross sensual ity as i ts modern expounde rs are the women euphe
m isti cal ly cal led‘slaves o f the Gods (d e v a d as i s)
attached to the Sou thern Temples.
The fol lowingnotes regard ingthe early references to Sivaand Vishnu temples in inscriptions so far d iscovered and
d eciphered have been d rawn up by my friend ,Mr. T. A .
I 37
GOpmatha Row,of Sri rar
'
igam and are ex tremely usefu l .References to Vishnu cu l t.
1 . Ud ayagiri cave inscription of dhala,son
of Vishnudésa, grand son of Chhagala and vesse l of the
Gupta K ing,Chand ra Gupta I I , d ated the Gupta era
-2 A . D . ) Sanskri t.d ed ication of a rock-cut
shrine to V ishnu.
2 . Bhitari stone pi l lar inscription of Skand agupta ,
und ated,record ing the intal lation of the image of the
‘God Sfirfigi and the al lotment of a v il lage to it .
3 . Junagadh inscription of Skand agupta, d atedG. E
,138 (457-8 A. D . ) Repairs to the l ake Sud argana
by the governor P arnad atta’
s agent , Chakrapal ita.
Chak rapal i ta caused to be bui l t a temple to Charabhrit .
41. Gangdht r inscri ption of V isvakarmfi . d ated 423- 4
A. D,The inscription be longs part l y to the Vai shnava
and partly to the Si kta form of rel igi on. I t record sthat a person bui lt a temple for V ishnu , the Sapta M il ts
rikas and a wel l of d rink ingwater ,
5,Eran stone pi l lar inscription of Budhagupta ,
G. E . 165018443 A . D.) Erection of a d hvajastambha to
Jani rd hana by a Mahari ji M atr iv ishnu and his youngerbrother D hanyav ishnu
6 . K h6h copper plates of Mahard j i Samkshobha.
G . E . -9 A . D [begins with the famous twel veIettered mantra (Om namobhagavate V l sud evaya) , of
the Bhagav atas] ,
7 . K bb‘i copper plate of Maharaj a Jaganatha G E
1 38
177 (49 6-7 A . D Grant of the‘
vi l lage of D havashandi
ka to anumber of Brahmanas for the purpose of a templ e of
Bhagavfin.
8 . K hoh copperplates of MaharajaSarvand thaG.E
,
192 (512-3 A D
9 . Gadhwa stone inscription of G. E . 148 (467
found in the D asfivatara temple.
References to S iva-cult.
1 . Ud ayagiri cave inscript ion of Chand ragupta I I
und ated . Record s the ex cavation of a shrine of Sambhu .
2 . B i lsad stone inscription of K umtragupta of G. E .
96 (415-6 A. D ) Record s the bui ld ing of a number of.
minor bui ld ings in the temple of Swdmi Mahl sena.
3 . B ihfir pil lar of Skandagupta.
4 . Mand asor pi l lar of Yagddharma
5. K fisam (K ausfimbi) inscription on the stone imageof the time of Bhimav arma G. E . 139 (458 -9 A.
D .)
These facts show how much these two cul ts were ad van
ced in the Fifth century A. D . and that they must havehad behind themmany centuries of d evelopment .
We shal l now d iscuss the fundamental tenetsof the Ag am a schools.
i . The S fl k t a or D e v i Aga m a
[The 77 Agamas of th is S chool are sub~
d ivid ed into three , ( I ) 5 S u b h ag a m a 5 ,also
cal led S a m a y a , which teach pract i ces lead ingto knowledge and l iberation (2 ) 64 K a u l a
( 140 )
S a h a s r a nam a b h As h y a. The opening
S at r a says, Consciousness, wh i ch i s ind epen
d ence is the cause of the prod uct ion o f the
Universe.
”Another S ut r a says when one
d oes not real ize this he ge ts confused by his own
S a k t i and ente rs S a m s ar a . The nextS 0 t r a add s, when he real izes i t
,and h i s
mind i s tu rned inward s and mounts up toward s
the knower, he reaches fpure ) consc iousness.
”
The various stages l ead ing to l iberat ion are in
d icated in the fo l low ing : “When one attainsthe bl iss o f (pu re) consciousness, (he reaches)
l a nm u k t i , whi ch is unshaken identity w i th
c h i t (pu re consc iousness‘, though he retains theconsciousness of bod y, p r an a etc . This attainment of the bl iss o f (pure) consciousness (C h i d ana n d a) i s d ue to M a d h y a v i k as a
”
,z
'
. e. ,
“ bythe d estruct ion of d oubt.” “When he attainsb a l a (power of wi l l), he makes the universe h is
J)
own. The last S at r a describes the goal o f l ifeto be “
the attainment o f the Godd ess of True Consciousness and the maste ry over the C h a k r a s
(the centres of energy)” J ud ged from these quo
tat ions the S a kt i S 0t r a s i f d iscovered , wi l l
p rove a very val uable find . Many o ther works of
this S choo l are known only by name or by stray
quotat ions by commentato rs].The three tattvas (u l t imates) of th is schoo l arew
( I ) An impersonal , inactive Be ing cal led P r a k as a
( 14 1 )
or S i v a (to be d istingu ished from the act ive S i v a
of the S a i v a g am a s), of the natu re of pure cons~c iousness l i ke the P u r u s h a o f the S ank h y aS choo l , bu t d iffering therefrom in be ing omnipresent
(a k h i l an u g a t a). ( 2 ) an active,personal Be ing
,
cal led V i m ar sa, S a k t i or Tripura of the natureo f P ur nah am bh av i ( ful l ego i ty personalconciousness, who incl udes al l ind iv idual sou ls ; shei s also cal led Ahamta, I -ness (3) The insent ientuniverse of matter, also cal led I d am ta
,this -ness.
I l l uminat ion,power and objec t thus form the
t ri une manifested univ e rse . In the S a i v a and V a i
s h n a v a ag a m a s, the fi rst Be ing o f th is trini ty
i s an act ive B e ing , and the Second , H is S a k t i
occupies a subo rd inate posi t ion and in the latestd ev e lopments of these schoo ls almost d isappearsfrom v iew . The extreme S ak t a View is embod iedin the opening 5 l o k a o f
“ S i v a when he i s uni ted w i th S a k t i,i s ab le to
create ; o therw ise , the God is unable even to move .
”
K shemarAja in h is S i v a s a t r a V i m a r si n i’,
quo tes the fo l low ing from the M r i t y u j i d b h a t
t ar a k a.
“ That P a r a$ a k t i , my c c h h a,
po tent , bo rn o f Nature (S v a b h d v a j a) i s to beknown as heat in fire ,
as of the fo rm of the
A B b as h y a by K sh emaraja. a wri te r of t he 11th Century,A D . on the S i v a S at r a s, supposed to hav e been d iscovered
or perhaps composed in the 10th Century by Vasugupta, thefound er of the 1 V a l
'a P r a t y a b h i j n asystem of Cashmere
This work has been ed i ted and transl ated by me and publ i shed
by the TheOSOph ical P ubl i shingCo .
, Ad yar, Mad ras
142
rays in the sun, that S a k t i is the cause of
al l the worlds.
”Another famous t a n t r a says
,
T r i p u r a is the Supreme S a k t i,antecedent
to j fi am and o the r S a k t i s, O d ear one . She
is d ifferent iated as gross and sant le and becomes
the mother o f the orig in o f the T r i l o k t (tripleexperience of man). Her form is that where in the
total i ty o f the (36 ) t a t t v a s i s d isso lved . Al l
evo l u t ion be ing hers, the S upreme is no t requ ired
(to be active in the world process). The S upreme
(S i v a) devo id of S a k t i , i s unable to d o anything.
He becomes omnipotent when he is uni ted to
S a k t i . 0, Supreme Lad y , w i thou t S a k t i , the
subtle (unevolved , potential ) S i v a has no name or
support. E ven though (he is) known,0 M a h ad e v i,
there is no use (l i t . no gain of name or v i r tue).
When he is med itated on, (there resu l ts) no grace ,
no steadiness of mind . When she is in the
supreme path, she i s of subt le form and thence
attains the states of the seed and the plant (the
subtle and gross unive rses)wh ich had been absorb
ed in her.
” Vdmakesvara Tantra i v . 4
A Mss copy of this work,
al so cal led Ni tydshodas i kd r
pamm (the Ocean of the 16 N i tya god d esses) and i ts commen
tary , by Bhaskararfiya, cal l ed Setuband ham (the bui l d ing of the
bri d ge) has been k ind ly pl aced at my d i sposal by D r. 0 . Schrad er
of the Adyar L ibrary. Th i swork i s d i v i d ed into two parts cal l edP firvcwhatussat i
‘and Uttamchatussat i
‘. Lakshmi dhara, a com
mentator on Saundaryal ahar i says that the Vamakesvara Tantrai s a part of the Agama cal led Bhai rava yamala. (Vi de page 17 .
Mysore Ed i tion of Saund aryalahar i . )
144
w i th the earth . These three u l t imates are the same
as P r ak asa,V i m a rsa and I d am t a. These
three concepts are v ery c lear ly explained byBhaskararaya in hi s B izd s/zy d on h is own Var i
vasy dmhasy a .
“B r a h m a cal led P r a k as a i s the pure knowledge resu l t ing from the consc iousness impl ied in thefi rst person in ‘I d esi re ’
, I know, etc. I t is associated w i th Omniscience , Lord sh ip , Omni potence ,Pleni tude , Immanence
,and o the r powers. The
v ibrat ion of a ray of P r a k asa o f the natu re o f
b l iss i s cal led P a r ah a m t a, the S upreme Ego ism,
Vimarsa,the S upreme L a l i t a
,B h a t t ar a k a
,
T r i p u r a-S u n d a r i [ names of the world
mother ] . I t is said in the Vz'
wasarfm S kana’lza
o f Vi rfipaksha P afichasika Lord sh ip is Omni
potence Powe r o f Act ion), Se l f- d ependence and
consc iousness. These are said by S am b h u tobe the names o f P a r ah a m t a. As objecti v
i ty ( I d am t a,l i te ral ly , this-ness ) i s not mani
fested w i thou t the subject ( A h am t a l i t 1
ness) on account o f the re lat iv i ty of I and
Th is (Se l f and not-se l f the object,wh ich is the
content of the not ion ‘th is’, i s caused by the power
o f Ah am t a ( the subject ) or by B r a h m a who
i s o ther than i t. That object is evolved from i t."
(Var i vasyd -m lzasya, commentary on I .P r a k asa is i l l uminat ion i t i s the pu rest d is
t i l late of experience or rather the attenuat ion o f
145
experience to purest consciousness of Be ing, the
barest consciousness w i tho ut be ing stained by theleast touch of re lat iv i ty ; the nearest approach to
Pure B e ing, to the Abso l u te that human though t orhuman language can hope to reach .
A m b a the wor ld -mother ) i s the fi rst appearance o f a v ibrat ion in the abso lu te P r a k as a the
fi rst asse rt ion o f re lat ion,o f V i m a rsa, d istinc
t ion,wh ich gives birth to al l th is universe . She
i s the power (S a k t i ) latent in P r a k as a beginning to manifest herse l f and give birth to God s
,
men,and o ther be ings. The mot ion that starts from
A h a m t a goes ove r to the o the r po le o f I d am t a,
( Th is-ne ss ) object iv i ty, matter. These three ul
t imates of the T an t r i k a s I l l uminat ion,Powe r
,
and Object may be compared to Hege l ’s three d octrines o f L ogic— Be ing , E ssence and No t ion
,and
Id ea. Be ing i s the not ion imp l ic i t only i ts
spec ial fo rms hav e the pred i cate‘ i s Pure be ing
makes the beginning because i t is on the one
hand pure thought , and on the o ther immed iacyi tse l f
,simp le and ind e terminate and the fi rst
beginning canno t be med iated by anyth ing,or be
further -for-se l f, as re fe rence to
i tse l f, is immed iacy ,and as re ference o f the nega
t ive to i tse l f,i s a se lf-subsistent
,the
terms in essence are always mere pai rs o f co rre lati ves, and not yet abso l ute ly reflected in themse lv eshence in essence the actual uni ty of the notion is not
10
146
real ized , bu t only postu lated by reflection. E ssence ,
wh ich i s Be ing coming into med iation w i th i tse l fthrough the negat iv i ty of i tse l f i s se l f-re lated ness
only in so far as i t i s in re lat ion to an o the r— th iso ther however coming into V iew at fi rst no t as some
thing which i s,but as postu lated and hypothe
t ised— Be ing has not vanished : bu t fi rstly, E ssence,
as simple se l f-re lat ion,i s Be ing
,and second ly as
regard s i ts one sid ed characte rist ic o f immed iacy,
Be ing is d eposed to a mere negat ive , to a seemingor reflected l ight— E ssence accord ingly i s B e ingthus reflec ting l ight into i tse l f The E ssencel ights up in i tse l f or i s mere reflect ion and therefore i s only se l f- re lat io n
,not as immed iate bu t as
reflected . And that reflex re lat ion is Se l f- I d enti tyi s mere I d ent i ty and reflection in i tse l f
only as i t is se l f- re lat ing negat iv ity,and in that
way se l f-repu lsion. I t contains there fo re essen
t ial ly the characterist i c of D ifference . The Not ionis the power o f the substance se l f-real ised . I t isa systemat ic who l e , in wh ich each of i ts const i
tuents functions, i s the very to tal wh ich the no tioni s The onward mo tion o f the not ion i s no
longer e i ther a t ransi t ion into,or a reflection on
someth ing e lse,bu t d eve lopment. The real isat ion
of the not ion,—a real isation in which the universal
i s th is one to tal i ty w i thd rawn back into i tse lf andwh ich has given i tse l f a character of ‘ immediateuni ty by merging the med iation : this real isat ion
( 148 )
rWith regard to the quest ion of the respect ive
a causal efficiency of S i v a and of K a r m a, the' i P a$u p a t a Schoo l maintains that S i v a is a
cause independent of the actidns (k a r m a) of
if, l ind i v id uals bu t that “the efficiency of actions
i d epends upon (an indiv id ual’
s) power o f act ion
(k r i y a sa k t i) be ing unobstructed on account
of conformi ty w ith the infinite ly po tent w i l l ofi
the Lord ”
(S arvad arsana-samgm /za cbap. v i ).“The S i d d h an t a schoo l regard s S i v a as the
Universal agent bu t not i rrespective of ind iv idual K a rm a (The fru i t ion of ) the two 6 .
good and bad ) act ions reaches (ind iv idual ) sou lsby the order of the Highest ; H is d epend ence on
the karma of the ind iv id ual d oes not d e trac t fromH is ind epend ance , j ust as a k ing ’s d epend ing on
hi s guards to protec t h is c ity does not d e tract fromthe royal power ; just as the hold e r of a magne td irects the mo tion of a needle , so the Lord d i rectsthe fru its of actions to the proper persons.
”
(cond ensed from a lengthy d iscussion in S i v a j i i a na
b h as h y am a Tami l commentary of the 1 8 cen
tuary on Meykand a D eva’
s Tami l S at r a 5 cal ledrS z
'
vafianaéoa’am
,earl ier than the I 3th centu ry). The
rP raty abh i j fi a schoo ls conce ive M a h e sv a r a to
c reate the universe, “by mere force of desire” , for heis of “unobstructed powe r, bl iss and independ ence .
”
This school , therefore, denies causal efficiency to‘
al l bu t the wi l l of M a h e sv a r a.
( 149 )
This difference of start ing po int has l ed to a
w ide d ivergence o f v iews w i th regard to the natu reand re lat ions of the three metaphysical u l t imatesvthat compose the manifested unive rse .
(1 ) THE PASUPATA SCHOOL.
The three u l timates aie cal led by the fo l lowerso f this schoo l
,the cause, the effect and the d efect.
The S arvad arsanammgraka quo ting from the com
mentary on the fi rst sutra of th is sect , Now then weshal l expound the ru les o f P asu p a t a y o ga of
P a su p a t i,
”says
,P asu means the effect , for i t
depend s on some thing u l terio r ; P a t i means the
cause, (K ar a na) the Lord , for he i s the cause of the
world,the Ruler.” “ The cause i s the au thor of crea
t ion,destruct ion and sustenance o f the world
,the
e ffect). On account o f d ifferences of qual i ty and
act ion he i s subd iv id ed into P a t i , S ad h y a
e tc. H is Lord sh ip consists in infini te know ledgeand power, e ternal supremacy
,be ing the First of
be ings, possession of powe r, not adventi t ious, etc.
”
The E ffec t ( K ar y a ) is threefo ld , V i d y a( sent iency K a l a ( the insentient P asu (thesentient) . Sentiency (V i d y a) i s the characteri st ic of P a su . I t i s two fo ld
,accord ing as i t is of
the natu re of Know led ge (bo d h a), and I gnorancea b o d h a). Know led ge i s (again) two fo ld , according as i ts procedure is discriminat ive (v i v e k a)or indiscriminat ive (a v i v e k a). D iscriminat ive
1 50
proced ure which is based on ev idence i s cal led
C h i t t a. By means of c h i t t a, al l l iv ing be ingscognize objects d iscrim inate or ind iscriminate
when they are i l l uminated by the l ight o f e x
ternal objectsfi“ I gnorance , again, is e i ther charac
teri zed or no t by the objects of the P a su The
insent ient (K a l a), wh i le d epend ing upon the sen
t ient , is unconsc ious. I t i s,also
, two-fo ld , what i s
cal led the e ffect and what is cal led the cause .
There in, what i s cal led the effec t i s ten-fo ld ,the five t a t t v a s
,P r i t h v i (ear th ) etc.
,the five
qual i t ies, colou r etc. What i s cal led the cause isthi rteen-fo ld
,the five organs of Cogni t ion,
the fiv e
organs o f act ion,the triple A n t ahk a r a na,
.
B u d d h i , A h a m k ar a and M a n a s hav ingthe funct ions of cert i tude
,se l f-cogni t ion and desi re .
Pasu is what is unde r bond age . I t i s, also, two -fo ld,
the d isplayed (S anj a n a) and the und isplayed . Of
these,the d isplayed are those that are assoc iated
w ith bodies and organs ; the und isplayed are d e
vo id of them.
” M a l a (defect) i s an ev i l cond i t ionpertaining to the sou l . I t is o f five k ind s, falseconception etc. I t i s said (by Harad atta) that ‘falseconcept ion, dev iat ion from d u ty
,attachment , in
terestedness, and fal l ing (from the path), these five
are the root of bond age , to be special ly shunned in
this system.
’
(16. Chap v i ). B esides the P aw
The read ingof these two sentences i s corrupt and the trans~l ation i s unsatisfactory .
( 152 )
the M r i ge n d r a A g am a,
’ whi ch i s the
j i f an a p ad a (section d eal ing w i th know led ge )o f the K am i k a, the fi rst o f the S a i v aAg a m a s. S i v a i s beginning less, fre e fromd efects (m a l a), the al l -d oer , the al l knowe r, removes
from the ind iv id ual sou l (here cal led , a nn,atom
,
from i ts l im i tat ion), the web o f bond s that obscu rei ts nature . (M gr ig. fig: i i . I ). The who le S a i v a
posi t ion i s thus cond ensed in th is one s at r aT”
(15 i i-z) Creat ion,su stenance and dest ruct ion
o f the Universe , obscu rat ion (T i r 0 d h an a), and
l iberation (o f the ind iv id ual sou l ), (these five)actions,§ w i th the i r agency and fru i t are to be
known as H is. The creato r o f the wo rld mu st bese l f-existent , otherw ise there wou ld be a regressa s
a d z
’
nfinz’
tum and there w i l l be no final cau se o f
M o k s h a. The essence o f consciou sness i s the
act ot see ing (c h a i t a ny am d ri k k r i y ar fi p am)and i t exists in the At m a at al l t imes and on a l l
sides, for we hear that in the l iberated .i t is per
Th i s and a few other S a i v aAga m a 8 , hav e been printed
w i th Tami l commentaries 111 Mad ras. The Mrigend ra i s being
ed i ted and transtated by M r . M Narayanaswami l yer, Mad ras,who k ind ly furni shed me wi th ad vance proofs of the first x i chapters.
i‘ I t i s curious that Sa i v a wri ters gi ve the name 8 ii t r a
to Sl o k a s. The I sm o'a. P ratyabh ij fid Sat rae are a mi x ture of
S l o k a s and 8 i i t ra s as we ord i nari ly und erstand them .
The five funct i ons are in the S a k t i Sut t a s, of course ,attributed to Her and cal l ed Ab h asa ( i l l uminat ion) , B. a k t i
(col orat ion) , V 1m a r san a ( E x amination) , B i i av as t h ana
( sowing the seed ) and V i l ap an a t a ( lamentat i on
( 1 53 )
fect . Though i t exists, i t does not manifest i tse l f
as such (in the unl iberated ), hence i t i s inferredthat i t is obscured and i t is subject to one whose
powe rs are not obscured (P a t i , the Lord ), t i l l i treaches l ibe rat ion. The web o f bond s (p asa j al am) i s on the who le of four k ind s
,the enve loping ,
the w i l l o f the Lord ,K a r m a
,and the work o f
M ay 3 . (The i r) names ind icate the i r natu re .
“
(M 1 222 Ag. i i .
The Ag am a discusses in chap i i i . P a t i 1a ks h a nam
,the characterist ics o f the Lord . As the
body and other th ings are proved to possess the
characteristics o f prod ucts, we must infer that thereexist s the i r M aker, d i fferent from them. H e i s eve rlasting because He i s not l imi ted by Time ; H e i s
r‘ot confined to one local i ty , because He i s al l -per
vad ing. H e is possessed of powers o f creat ing gra vdual ly and simu ltaneously, because creat ion is bo thgrad ual and simu l taneous. H e possesses an instru
ment (K a r a na), because no act ion is seen (accom
pl ished ) w i thou t instruments. Th is (instrument )must no t be taken to be ad vent i tious
,because the
work has been w i thou t a beginning . This instrument itis no other than S a k t i . S a k t i is not unconciousbu t a conc ious Be ing . As objects are infini te . she
,
(though) one,appears l ikew ise ( infini te) both in
cogni t ion and in activ i ty . Action (creat ion&c. d oes
no t resu l t from) the seed o f preservat ion,creat ion
e tc. (K a r m a) , or from P r a k r i t i or from the in
( 154 )
d iv id ual sou l (an u ) ; there only remains the theorythat i t i s the work of the Great Lord , the Free . He
i s S i v a.
”
(M . i i i . 1 “ Action always proceed sfrom an embod ied actor ; in the world we see
3 actions only o f persons w i th bod ies. Hence He,
too , is l i ke us. (B ut) the Lord’
s body is, unl ike ours,
one of S a k t i M a l a etc. canno t attach themse lvesto i t ; that bod y is composed of the five M a n t r a s
and subserve H i s five act ions 16 . i i i . “He i s
omnicient,because he i s the M ake r o f al l for i t i s
we l l-proved that one d oes a th ing only when one
knows the means, the consi tuent e lements and the
resu l ts. H is knowled ge i s not v e i led in any th ing,hence does not requ ire any aid to manifest i tse lf,I t i s w ithou t doubts and never at faul t .” (M . v .
1 2,
“S ank r a
’
s knowled ge is not based on
percept ion, infe rence or au thori ty . I t sh ines pure ,3,in al l th ings
,
”
(15. v .
f* The second u l t imate is the P a s u l i t . cattle,
hence what is owned by,subjec t to
,the P a t i
,
the Lord .
“ The earth and the rest are effect5 °
the Lord is the cause . They are no
Make r nor to themse lves because thec ions ; nor are they pu rpose less, forderogatory to the i r M aker. There orffy remains the
The fivemantras, Ta i t . Aw n. x . 43 . 47 , cal l ed S a d y o j at a,v am a d e v a, Agh o r a, T a t p u r u s h a, and 1 San a, respect i
v el y correspond ing to the five functions of creat i on, preservat ion,
d estruct ion, obscurati on and l iberat i on,are the forehead , the
mouth, the heart, the guh y a and the feet of S i v a .
1 56
Ana v am a l a,the defect d ue to the at m a
th ink ing that i t is bu t A nu atom the taint of
fini teness. The A t m a who is pure consciousness
and Independence imagines h imse l f to be fini te ,bound ed by h is body
,of c ircumscribed know ledge
and power. As K shemaréja explains, in his com
mentary on S i v a S 0 t r a s i . 2,
“Be ing infini te
consc iousness,he thinks, ‘I am fini te be ing Inde
pend ence, he thinks ‘I am the bod y A na t m a
Thus the An a v a m a l a is of two k ind s, ( a )
)3 1gnorance of the act that theA t m s is consciousness (b) mistak ing the body for the A t m a cal ledrespect ive ly A k h y at i and A n a y a t h ak h y
at i,non-cogni t ion and wrong cognit ion. Th is
”F TP asa is d escribed as a v e i l over the sou l known by
a varie ty of names,P a su t v a bondage
,P as u
n i h ar a ,mi st round the p a su , M r i t y u ,
d eath,M fi r c h c h h a
,swoon
,M a l a , de fect , A fi j a
n a pigment, A v ri t i , enve lope , R u j malad yG 12 11 i
,depression,
P ap a,
ev i l,M £1 1 a
,roo t,
K s h a y a,decay , e tc. I t i s one in al l be ings
,
beginningless, dense , great, possessed of numerous
powers S a k t i s ) resid ing inevery soul and perishingwhen the i r t ime i s over. (Mrz
'
g. f ig. v i i . 6 -8
“ The benign M ah e sv a r i -S a k t i,benign,
blessing al l,i s incl ud ed in the P Asa s, for they
act in confo rmi ty w i th them I t . 1 1 The
five powers of the Lord are exerc ised only w i threference to P a s u s and are hence t ransforma
( 157 )
t ions ( p a r i nam a ) of A v i d y a .
For the purpose o f br inging abou t the l iberat ion of the ind iv id ual 90111
,the Lord sets the
m a l a s evo lv ing ; so start the powers of creat ion,
sustenance , d estruc t ion and obscurat ion of knowled ge (t i r o d h an a or r o d h asa k t i ) ; then the
S a k t i evo lves into Ai
n ugr a h a, the power of.
bened ic tion,in that indiv id ual from whom the
powers of m a l a have departed and he becomes,
l iberated . The Lord supports the m a l a s d uring,
the who le course of the i r transmu tat ions for the ‘
ul t imate good of the P a su s d epend ent on H is )Grace . (16 . v i i . 1 1 The Second P asa or at.
m a l a,K a r m a
,is d escribed in chapter v i i i . I t
is the cause of the conjunct ion of conscious 1,” Q
sou l w ith the unconscious bod y . I t i s local (2. e,not omnipresent), mamfo ldj E mporary ,
associatedw ith ind iv id uals
,and cont inuous throughou t the
births. I t is an auxil iary of the fi rst 111 a l a,A v i dya.
I t is cal led k a r m a,because i t is produced by the
act iv i t ies of be ings and‘sa d r i s h t a (unseen), be
2 I l
cause i t i s subtle (between the end ing of the actionand the beginning of the p h a l a, the reaction).I t is the prod ucer and sustainer of the body
,the
object of enjoyment . I t i s threefo ld (prod ucedby the bod y , the speech and the mmd ). I t isgood and bad , d h a r m a and a d h a r m a, according as i t is based on tru th or falsehood . I t ripens
slumber, prevai ls during aK a l p a
58
and merges in may a d uring p r a l a y a,bu t is
neve r destroyed w i thou t be ing experienced (v i i i1
a The thi rd among the m a l a s 1s M ay a, alsocal led B b e d a
,d ifference. This i s the Y 0 mi (Si va
S rt‘
t. i . the womb o f the world,the g r a n t h i
p asa (M rz
'
g f ig. ix . the knot tha t imprisonsthe A t ma in 1gnorance .
“ I t is single,the cau se
of misery,the seed of the universe
,pos sessed of
many powe rs)and obstruc ts the ind iv id u al t i l l the
power of i ts aux i l iary (k a r m a) shou ld cease ; i t5 i s omnipresent and imperishable . For the same
reason a creator i s inferred from the natu re of
the universe , i t must fo l low that i t has a mate rialcause ; for there i s no cloth w i thou t thread . I t i sunconsc ious for i ts products are known to be so .
”
(15. ix , 2
The P auskkam f igama“ describes the cate
gories (p a d ar t h a) of the S a i v a S choo l as fol
lowsz— “P a t i,K u nd a l i n i , M aya, P asu, P as a,
and the causes (k ar a k a), these are briefly the
si x categories, in the S a i v a t an t r a SCD Thatcatego ry _
1s cal led P a t i whose triple func t ion is
d estruct ion, enjoyment and au thori ty , wh ich i s
in i ts nature , and possessed of powers
d a l 1 h i (o therwise cal led , S u d‘h n—n-n
d h a M ay a, Pure M ay a) is that whence P a t i
The J fi ana p a d a of th is work has been publ ished 1n Madrasw i th a Tami l commentary .
( 1 60 )
be ing,l ike S i v a and w i thou t transmu tat ion l ike
matter . (I d . i i . 2 She i s the e ternal sound,
the subtle connecting l ink be tween word s and con
cepts (I d . i i . This e ternal sound i s d iv id edinto fou r k inds, cal led V a i k h a r i
,M a d h ya m a
,
P a s y a n t i,
and S fi k s h m a. V a i k h a r i is
what becomes in the throat the sound that isheard by the ear and takes the shapes o f letters.
M a d h y a m a is the form of objects mental lyapprehend ed before they are assoc iated w i thsounds. P a sy a n t i is und ifferent iated l ike theyo lk w i th in the egg. S fi k s h m aj
' is the purean a S a k t i . I d . i i 19 These are cal led
fou r fo rms o f V ak ( l i t. Vo ice,sound ), one
objective , the o thers subject iv e,and al l prod uce
states o f consciousness of the P a su I d . i i. 2 5- 2 6
he ind iv id ual sou ls id ent ify themse lves w i th theseorms o f V ak and thus resu l t the three M a l a sd efects ) whi ch obscu re cogni t ion and action.
( I d . i i . 2 8 -2 9 K shemaraja defines the threebonds to be the three cognit ions
,l ike ‘ I am
fini te ’
,
‘I am thin or fat’
,
‘ I am the sacrificer
e tc respect ive ly i l lustrat iv e of A n a v a, M ay a
and K a r m a M a l a These fund amentalcogni t ions of l imi tat ion,
of ident ity w i th the bod y,
and o f actorsh ip exist in the m ind e i ther in the
9 As oppsed to the rud iment of sound , S a b d a t a nm fist r a
which i s a prod uct . 1' More commonly cal l ed P a ra.
I Com. S i c-Stet . i -4 .
( 16 1 )
form o f words ( V a i k h a r i or o f images
M a d h y am a or of vague states of consc i
ousness not yet d ifferent iated into clear o cut images
( P asy an t i or,again, the mere possibi l ity of
such l imi ted consciousness S ak u s h m a V akSound in i ts four forms thus marks al l the stages))o f l imi tat ion of the ind iv idual sou l . The names
o f the S a k t i 3 ( goddesses, ene rgies of S i v a )that presid e over these and the m a n t r a s 1nd icat
ing them are also combinat ions o f V ak. HenceS u d d h a may a, the mother
_
of the universe 4
is supreme V ak the e ternal spund “;-
th is'
ise _\
0
the d octrine of N ad a ,
‘vorce of the S i lence ’
,
wh ich is the
‘
basrs of the s a i v a and s ak
i
t a
d isc i pl ines.
3P asu 5 (Indiv idual sou ls) are of three classes
,
( 1 ) S a k a l a (2 ) P r a l ay ak a l a (3) V i j fi ana
k a l a. Listen to the i r characterist ics in ord ealL
S a k a l a is one whose powers of cognit ionl,
and action are obstructed by (Ana v a) m a l a, are
associated (by M ay am a l a) w i th K a l a and o therT a t t v a s
“for the evo l ut ion (of l imited , human
powers) and bound up w ith K a r m a (m a l a) forexperiencing (pleasure and pain). P r a l a y ak a l a (gi s one who, l ike the preceding
, has cogni t ive and
active energies obstructed , but is re leased fromcontact w i th Ka l a etc. as h is Ka r m a has been
The phrases‘k a l 5. etc ‘from k a l a to the earth
( K sb i t i ) mean throughout themani fested uni versez
( 16 2 )
experienced (and done w i th), though i t i s possible
for him to be again brought und e r i ts influence ”
(1d . i v . 2 The P r a l a y ak a l a is one who i s
d evoid o f K a r m a m a l a and d issociated fromK a l a etc. d uring P r a l a y a.
“ H e i s cal ledV i j i
’i a na k e v a l a in the T a n t r a
,whose cogui
t ion and action,be ing obstructed by (Ana v a)
m a l a are almost non-existent. (I d . i v . Thu sthese three c lasses are respective ly und e r the swayOf one
, two and three M a l a 5. The i r paths are cal l“ cu
cd S u d d h ad h v a, (pure M i s rad h v a
(mixed path) and A s u d d had h v a (impure path)The S fi k s h ma V a k pertains to the S u dd h ad h v a
,the grosser (P a sy a n t i and M ad h
y a m a) to the M i srad h v a,and the grossest,
(V a i k h a r i ) to the A su d d h i i. 30 )The d octrine o f V ak more properly be longs to the
S é k t a schoo l,bu t the S a i v a and S ak ( a
schoo ls coalesce w i th each o the r in most po intsand , at t imes, i t i s almost impossible to d iffe rent iate one from ano the r.
A later d evelopment of the S a i v a cu l t i s thato f the L i ng ay a t a s or j a ngam a s
,found ed by
Basava,abou t the midd le of the X l l centu ry in
the re ign o f the K alachurya k ing , B ijjala. I ts ch ief
characterist ic i s a great revo l t against the B rahman
supremacy and the abol i tion of caste. Cu riousenough Basava
,h imse lf
,was a B rahman. H is
successor, Chennabasava, was h is nephew,son of
( 164 )
out of the opinions of th is sect i s scarcely
ssary, as i t was but a social reform movementw ith a veneer of phi losophy pu t on later to gain an
orthodox stand ing .
The B rahmans have as usual sapped the v i tal ity of this movement by re introducing caste intothe sect. Thus, though the L i ng ay a t a refor
mation started l ike the B uddhist w i th a v igorousprotest against the caste system, there are now
y , L i ngay a t a B r ahm a n s, L i ng ay a t a S n
"g1 d r a s, etc. The modern L i ri gay a t a is marked :4“ by his fierce hatred of V i s hnu and hi s constant
ly wearing a l i 11 g a encased in a si lver bo x .
The h istory of the fortunes of S i v a is more
obscure than that of V i s h n11. The B i g-V e d a
f‘3 Each sect rel i es upon an unconscionable misinterprets
tion of some v ed ic tex t or other f or legi timizing some un
v ed ic practice which has grown upon i t. The L i ngay a t a squote
‘am r i t a sy a d e v a d har ano bh fi y as am
’
[Ta i t Up.
’
6\I , 4-1] ‘0 God , may I possess w isd om’
and interpret i t tomean,
‘may I wear the God’
. The S a i v a s besmear thei rbod y w ith burnt d ung and support the practice by quoting,
“
1 ‘B h fi t y a i na p r a m a d i t a v y am’
[ I 6 I . i i . ‘D o ri otneglect greatness
’and tw isting i ts meaning into, ‘D o not fora
{get to besmear yourself w i th burnt d ung’. The Vaishnavas
1quote a phrase
‘c h a r an am p a v i t r am
'
,meaning
‘holyf eet ’ and interpret i t as referring to sacramental paintingw i th
relay and to brand ing. They hav e besi d es d iscovered'
awhole\Upanishad , Gop fchandana Upanishad , to uphold their elaboratepainting of the body, simi lar to the Bhasma Jdbd la Upanishad
found’by the Sai vas.
16 5
does not evenment ionhim but speaks o f R u d r a,somet imes as one God , at o ther t imes, as many, and
of the M a
'
r u t s as R u d r a 5 sons. I n the otherVedas R u d r a gradual ly rose to fi rst rank and in
the age of the composi tion of the Ra‘
mdyagza and the
flh kd dkdm ta ,he became id ent ified w i th S i v a or
M a h ad e v a and later on, became the last
person of the T r i mur t i . The phal l ic charactero f S i v a and his unlovely surround ings indicate
t he fact that he must have been the God of the
abor igines amidst whom the invad ing Aryansettled and whose gods he had to ad opt intohis pantheon. The only possible reference to phal l i cworship in the Vedas is the scornful phrase S i sna
d e v a s,
appl ied to the enemies of the Aryans,
e i ther demons or d a s y u 5. B ut these aborigina l
races have had an ample revenge . M ahAse pha,
(a huge membrum v i ri le) i s the God of a large ma
jori ty of modern Ind ians. I t i s worshipped in
t empiesi'
,in wayside shrines and worn round the
necks of the d evotees of the ‘Great God ,’
not merelyfor l uck as in modern I taly
8 R. V. VI I 2 1. X . 99 . 3 . The word has been vari ouslyi nterpreted , but the most probable meaning is,
‘those who have
s isna for thei r God ’ , or tai led d emonsf The old est L i ngam so far known i s one d iscov ered
by my fri end , Mr. T. A. Gapinatha Row i n the North ArcotDistri ct I am ind ebted to him for a d escri pti on of thiss uperlati vely real isti c i dol which must be much older than he i sw i l l ing to al low. He has also sent me a photograph of the
1 66
L ingam,which for obv ious reasons cannot be publ ished here .
“The temple of P arssurémesvara in whi ch the strangel yreal istic P hal lus (L i ngam) i s set up, is si tuated in the
v i l lage of Gud imal lam si x mi les north of Renigunta, a stationon the Mad ras Rai lway l ine , One of the inscriptions belonging to the temple informs us that i t was completely recon
structed in the 9th year of the reign of Vi krama Cholad eva
(1196 A. The present structure isnot af ter the common
mod el of the period to whi ch i t belongs. Tho V i mAna
[ d cme ov er the i d ol ] has the soc al led G a j a p r i s h t h ei
I r i t i . A close study of the plan and sections whereof ,
hereund er gi t en,w ould warrar t the conclusion that the
'
art h itect had d ist inct ly in v i t w the shape of the L i ngaand hence the V i mans might be better styled the L i ng?»k r i t i -v i mAna.
”
Again the L i 11 ga of this temple i s, as has been alreadystated
,a most remarkable one in that i t is an ex act copy of
the pha l lus and heaths v arious portions shaped v ery accurately .I t has been mad e out of a hard igneous rock of a d ark brown
colour,samples of which are found near the Ti rumala hi l ls.
The L i nga and the image of S i v a carv ed on i ts front si d e
are v ery highly pol ished . Unl i ke the later representation, the
image cf S i v a has beenmad e w i th only a pai r of hand s,the
right carry ing a rtm by i ts hind legs and the left hold ing a
water-vessel A batt le-ax e rests on his left should er (fromwhich perhaps he d eri v es his name of Parasui
’
a‘
mésvara) and
there i s the usual matted and tw isted hai r (J a t a) on his head .
He is stand ing on the should ers of a 1 5k s h a s a,whom the
sculptor has represented w i th a pair of animal ears. The
L i nga is the only one of i ts kind in Southern I nd ia and fromi ts sculpture i t might be set d own to about the 2nd or3rd centuryA . D . Compare this image w i th the picture of a y a k s h a
gi ven on page 36 of Gsunwed el’
s“ Bud dhist A1 t in I nd ia "
as translated by Gibt son and Burgess. The face,the ears and
( 1 68 )
(3) THE P R A T Y A B H I JN A SCHOOL
The P r a t y a bh i j fi a S choo l was founded
in Kashmi r in the e ighth century A. D . by Vasugupta
,who “ d iscovered the S i va S zi tm s and
taught them to K al lata. B esides the S im S d i m s,
the ch ief works of th is S choo l are the Spand'
a
K d rz'
ka composed by Vasugupta or K al lata,
by Soménand anétha 900 A. D .
P ratyabbg'
ffid S d z‘m by U tpala, son of Ud ayAkara,
( 9 30 A. D . commentaries Vi m a r s i n i on
the prev ious by Abhinava Gupta 99 3- 10 15 A.
and commentaries on the fi rst work by K shemaraja
1030 A . D . Buhler, who has fixed the dates 1 of
these works in his “ Tour i n search of S anskr i t
M ss.
”wrong ly div ides the Keshmi r S a i v a phi lo
sophical works into two schools, I ) S p a n d a
S dsz‘m of Vasugupta (2 ) P m ty aéhzj fid -Sd sfr a of
Somanand anatha and U tpala, because the words p a n d a occu rs frequently in the names o f
For ful ler d etai ls of this work, see my introd uction to myEngl ish translation of i t.
1 The fol low ing scheme of d ates of the wri ters of the
K ashmi r school and G u r u p a r am p a r 4, ind icated by vertical l ines, i s mostly based on B ii h l e r s investigation.
Vasugupta, d iscovered S i va Sfltras, 8th cent. A. D.
K al lata, contemp. of Avanti varman, 854 A. D.
Somfidandanfitha,ci r. 900A. D.
1 . U tpala, ci r. 930A. D .
( 169 )
the earl ier works and p r a t y a b h i j na in those ofthe late r. But there isnot enough d ifference betweenthe teachings of these two sets of works to j ust ifythei r be ing regarded as be longing to two d ifi
'
erent
schools. S p a nd a i s the u l timate principle o f the
universe— that of the spoptaneous v i brat i on aecom
panied by consc iousness which underl ies al l cosmi c
processes and p r a t y a b b i j fta i s the d iscipl ine
prescribed by this school , wh ich consists in the
unbroken recogni t ion o f man’
s essential ident i tyw ith S i v a and the falsi ty of every thing e lse . The
e arl ier wri ters natu ral ly treated the d iscipl ine as
esoteric and the later ones, see ing that the trad i tion
was get t ing lost , emphasized the p r a t y a b hi j ii a
d iscipl ine and d id not treat much of S p a n d a
which the earl ier ones had amply d iscussed .
This Kashmi r schoo l regard s al l the S a i v aagam a s and the numerous books based thereonas authoritat ive and simi larly
,the w riters of the
S a i v a S i d d h an t a 'schoo l quo te al l the Kesh
2 . Narayana,Tri v i krama
LakshmanaGupta, cir. 950A. D .
Abbinava Gupta, 993-1015 A. D .
K shemarQJa 1030A. D .
(Sometimes cal led K shemend ra, to be d istinguished fromhi s contemporary , K shemend ra Vy i sad i sa, author of works onAlankara, some Tales and other works.)
IB h as k a r a . Rfim a k a n t h a .
w 170
-mir writers as au thori tat ive in fact,the analysis of
the universe into the categories and t a t t v a s o f
the prev ious section is accepted , in toto, by the
iP raty a bh i j na d a r s a n a. The ch ief d i fference
{between the two so far as me taphysics i s concerned ,
is ( I ) the greater insistence on the s p a n d a (act ive )aspect of the a t rna (2 ) the unreal i ty o f a substratum o f the universe apar t f rom S i v a.
S i v a,s p a n d a
,c h a i t a n y a,
the one basis
of the universe,is characterized by infini te conscious
ness wh ich knows no l imi tat ions o f Time and Spaceand by unrest ricted independ ence (5 v a c h c h h a n
cl a) . Comple te independ ence in connection w i thconc iousness i s c h a i t a ny a. I t exists only inthe Lord P armas iva
”
(K hernaréja’
s) S z°
oast2t raw'
mar/ 52312
”
,i . I .) Though He possesses endless
characterist ics (D harma) , l ike N i t y a t v a (eter~
nal i ty) , Omnipresence,Fo rmlessness, e tc. , yet
n i t y a t v a e tc.
,be long (also) to o ther be ings (than
He) ;' hence I nd epend ence ,
'
wh ich i s not found in
o thers, has to be d escribed prominently (as H i scharacter ist i c) (I
'
d )“From whence this object ive
universe and this group of organs (body), and
m a na s,the internal organ
,unconcious, yet simu l
at ing concious be ing , attain the functions of creat ion
,maintenance and d estruction, that t a t t v a
must sbe d i l igent ly examined,whose Ind ependence
is always unobst ructed (Spand ex K d rz’
kd ,6 -7)
“As
the J i v a (the experiencer, the ind iv idual) i s the
x 72
that alone real ly e x sists (Sp. K ei r 2
From th is po int of v iew i t fol lows that a second
Real i ty, ind epend ent of S i v a, as the basis of
the universe is unnecessary for explaining the
cosmos. The cosmos is the projection ou tside.
C ” , N
of the/ex perience of the inner organ, Am trk a
r a nm
“ The i l l uminat ion of objects as be ing presentreal ly exists insid e but is made to appear o utside
(fsvampm ty ao/zij fid S fitm r, V. i).“ The Lord ,
of the form o f C h i t, (ind iv idual ), be ing unde rthe influence of desi re , causes the total i ty o f
objects to sh ine as i f exist ing ou tside , (though)w i thou t a sub stratum,
l ike a Y o g i .” (16 . V.
The (part of the) cogni t ion (A d h y a v a s‘th is
i s a pot,’ that transcends name and form,
the
‘
S a k t i of P a r e sa, is l ike the A t m a and does
not shine by object ivity (I d am t a) “ (15. V. I 7 ).
The theory of perception that underl ies this the
metaphysical posit ion w i l l be d iscussed in the
lChapter on Psychology.
fix . The active sa k t i of the other schools i s a
k” relatively unimportant person in this schoo l . “She
is M at r i k a,the basis of knowledge ”
(S iva S d t.
i . Me t r i k a is the alphabet, treated as the
mother of the universe,who associates human
This word i damta can be compared w i th haeccei tas’
of
Duns Scotus.
( 1 73 )
expe riences w i th the words that describe them and
whose body is formed by the m a n t r a s which are
themselves made up of letters. Shej s thusg tt the
pow /W i t ra s. O f the three sa k t i s,
j nana, k r i y a, and i c h c h h a, the first two are
attached in th is schoo l d irect to the at m a, so thatthe mo ther of the universe loses her predominance.
S i va S zftms i 1 3. says “ I c h c h h a sa k t i isU ma, the gir l . As K shemaraja explains, in the
case of the Y o gi who has attained the higheststate
,his desi re is inv incib le and the power of his
d esire is the v i rgin U at a.
Thus,from more than one side , the metaphysical
posi t ion of the P r a t y a b b i j aa
pro x imates to that of an ar‘a'
f'
A'
s
-
the P r a t y abh t j fi a is pro M y
‘
bfi édh n the S é k t a and
S a i v a Ag a m a s i t raises a presumption thatSankara and his P r 3 ch ar y a
,Gaudapad am i st
have derived the i r phi losophy from the
k t a ain the l
A di
v 3 i t a M utts which are presided~
(S-
ver by thosewho claim today to be the pont ifi cal successors of
Sankara. Gaudapad a i s be l iev ed to have be en‘author of S ub/zagoa
'aya and Sankara of S aund ary a
I t is noteworthy that Gaudapad a is scarcely a propername i t i s a d escripti ve epi thet, the rev erend G a u d a.
1“ Ev en in K al i dasa
’
s time the Agam a s were so prevalentthat he complains of their mani foldness. V. Raghuvamsa. X . 26 .
i 7’
4
[ a/zrzr i , both poems in praise o f S a k t i. They praet ised the S r i v i d y é— the famous S ak t a d iscip
l ine. S o i t may we l l be that the sou rce o f the a d
v a i t a, l ike the sou rce o f al l o the r mod ern Hind usects, has to be sough t for in the S ak t a Agamas.
Til l the Agama l i te rature i s ed i ted . publ ished and
translated ,the history o f the d eve lopment of the
Hind u re l ig ion d uring the last years canno t bew r i tten. Buhle r record s a K a s h m i r i t radi tionthat S inkara was vanquished in argument byAbh inavagupta who l ived three centu ries late r .No concl usion can be based on v ague legends carr ied d own the stre am o f uncri t i cal t rad it ion.
i i i THE VAI SH NAVA AGAMA.
The V a i s h n a v a A g a m a s are said to be
108 in numbe r,
very few o f wh i ch have been
printed . They se em to be d ev e lopments o f theB h ag a v a t a
,the P Afi c h a r fi t r a and the
S a t t v a t a schoo ls which are mentioned in the
d i abrio/zém ta. The d i fferent iat ion into schoo lsseems to have o rig inal ly d epend ed on the spec ificm a n t r a, which was the shibbo le th o f eachschoo l . Thus i t appears that the BhAgav atas
ad opted the 1 2 lettered Mantra, the P anc h a
r a t r a s, the e ight- lettered one O m n am o n a
r ay anay a ) . The B h aga v a t a s are,at pre
sent, an insignificant community scattered in the
( 175 )
The word P ah e h a r at r a is explained in
P aa’ma S amlzz
'
td (I . i . 73) to be that whi ch turnsthe other five S as t r a 5 into night (r 3 t r i) theseother s as t r a s be ing the S a i v a ,
Y o g a,
SAnk h y a y o ga ,B a u d d h a and Ar h a t a.
promu lgated respective ly by S iva, B r a h m a
K a p i l a, B u d d h a and A r h a t a. This der ivat ion is, on the face o f i t
,fancifu l . The P aa
’ma
S am/ nt ri also speaks of fou r schools of P aa c h ar a t r a ( I ) M a n t r a S i d d h e n t a,
acceptingone Form (o f God ), ( E k am fi r t i ) (2 )Ag a m a
S i d d h an t a, accept ing four Forms, (3) T a n t r a
S i d d h an t a, accept ing nine Forms,
and (4)T a n t r an t a r a S i d d h an t a, accepting a
fou r-head ed p r three-headed Form. (1 6 . I . i . 80-8
Of these fou r schoo ls, the P d a’ma S amnzta‘ claims
to be long to the T a n t r a S i d d h an t a. The
fund amental doctrines of the ear l ier schools o f
the V a i s h na v a Aga m a s are explained i n thefo l low ing quotat ions.
“B r ah m a is characterized by bl iss (ana nd a);(he i s) the beginning , change less, always und ifferentiated , self-know ing
,fau l t less
, superlat ive lysubt le , se lf-determined , the ru ler, se l f- l uminous,spotless, infinite , indestruct ible, t ranqu i l , inv isi ble ,capable of evo lv ing (the world ), unchangeable,one fu l l of conciousness of bl iss (C h i d an a n d a),the essence of consc iousness (c h i d r ap a), omnipresent, supreme, devo id of past and futu re , the
( 1 77 )
Lo rd cal led V as u d e v a, the source of al l be ings,
i sv a r a, the SUpereme P u r u s h a, of a stainless
natu re , e te rnal , w i thou t wav es, w i thou t d istu rbance ,
bound less, beyond the g u na s,w i th g u ua s,
the giv e r o f al l d esi res. ( I . v . 129 1‘
“H is form has been d escribed tobe three fo l d ,gross,
subt le,and supreme . The gross is cal led S a k a l a
(d iv id ed ) ; the subt le,Sa k a l a-n i s h k a l a ; the
supreme (fo rm) o f H im is N i s h k a l a (und iv id ed ),O , lo tus-born. The thousand -head ed and o therfo rms are the s a k a l a form of the P aramet ma ;
the fo rm wh i ch has fee t etc. and i s mad e o f l ightis s a k a l a-n i s h k a l a ; the fi rst fo rm of S a c hc h i d an a n d a i i s cal led N i s h k a l a.
”
He transcend s the three guna s of matter but is the
possessor of si x gu n a s ex plained i nfra .
f Thi s passage and the succeed ing v erses not quote dhere show a stri king resembance in i d eas and phraseol ogyto the d escri ption of P a r a m B r a h m a in B hagavadgi ta
Chap. x i i i,show ing that both are d eri v ed from the same
original Aga I I ] a source .
Described in the P urusha Sfikta .
I I t i s noteworthy that the word sa c h c h i d an a n d a, so
frequent l y used in the post-Sank a r a a d v a i t a schoo l s as the
d escri ption of P a r am B r a h m 8 occurs in th is Agam a te x t and,
so far as I hav e been abl e to search,not found in the Sankara
B hdahya on Bad rayana’
s 8 ti t r a s. Th i s shows that a d v a i t a,l i ke v i s i sh t ad v a i t a d eri ved a fresh accession of d octrinesand i d eas from the Agam a s
, after i t passed from the
found er to the later teachers . Among the Upani shad s, thi se x pression first occurs in the N r iaimha p ant and Rdma
I dpant'
,whi ch are, apparently earl i er than the t ime of t yaranya
and later than that of Ramanuja.
1 2
( 178 )
30 The P a r am atm a has two natu res, P r ak ri t i and V i k r i t i . P r a k r i t i i s the synthesisof S a t t v a and o ther g u na s ; V i k r i t i i s P u
r u s h a,cal led P a r a m at m a. She (P r a k r i t i),
the woman who has the three gunas as her essence ,in whom the ind iv id ual be ings (c h e t a n a ) are
establ ished creates the whole wo rld . By H is com
mand she sustains i t al l . (15. I . vi . 4 1
I n the Laksnmz‘
tantra,L a k s h m i d escr ibes
her Lord and he rse l f in clear terms.
“ P a r amat m a is characterized by absence o f pa in
( n i r d u h k a ) and enjoyment o f boundless bl issThey cal l H im the Path
,the end of the
Path,P a r am at m a . That wh ich i s und erstood
by the word ego is cal led the A t m a. The ego
whose natu re i s unl imi ted i s cal led P a r a m a t m a
That is cal led ego ,P a r am at m a the e ternal
,by
whom al l th is,mov ing and mo t ionless
, i s embraced .
He i s V as u d e v a , the B lessed ,consid ered the
supreme K s h e t r a j fi a . He is cal led V i s h n u ,
N ar ay a n a,V i ev a (The A l l ), V i sv a r o ‘p a
(hav ing the Universe as H is form). A l l th is worldi s enve loped by H is A h a n t a (ego i ty). Tru lythat is not , wh i ch is not enve loped by A h a n t aHe i s everywhere t ranq u i l (san t a change less
( n i r v i k ar a ), e ternal , Infini te , d evo id o f l imi tat ions of space, t ime
,e tc. H e i s cal led M a h av i
b h at i (Infini te Glory), because he extend s infini tely . H e is B r a h m a the S upreme abode
,the Light
1 80
embraced by fire, becomes fiery (t a nm a y a), 50»
c h e t y a , embraced by s am v i t becomes c h i n
m a y a (fil led w ith the l ight of consciousness). The
nature of c h i t i s undifferent iated as blue or ye l low ,
pleasure or pain. I t i s d ifferent iated by changes
d ue to manifo ld 11 p ad h i s. Of i ts own power, a
huge form (the mani fested world ) is bu i l t out of (a)smal l (one). The c h i d r i t p a that i s d ifi
'
erentiated
into subject and object i s spo tless, supreme , ne itherobjective nor subjective .
”
(l b. x i v . I — I o.)
I n another passage , L a k s h m 3 clearly d escribes
the re lat ions of the three categories, P a r am
at ma,S a k t i , and J i v a .
“He i s the At m aof al l be i ngs, the i r ego , cal led H a r i I am the
A h a n t a (ego i ty) of al l be ings, the e ternal . By
whatever b h av a (form) V as u d e v a , the eternal ,i s imagined (b h a v a t a h ) , that b h av a I am
cal led . Thence , B r a h m a the eternal goal , i s of
the nature ot a v a t bh av a . B h a v a t i s the
God N ar ay a na ; I , the supreme L a k s h m i , amB h av a. Hence B r a h m a the eternal , i s cal ledL a k s h m in aray a na fi' Only when enve lopedby A h a n t a i s i t possible to cognize ego whati s cognized as I ’ is A h a n t a. Know that theconnect ion, the id enti ty of nature (t ad at m y a)
at: These l ines are a l i ttle obscure . The rel ati on between V i sh
nu and L a k shm i i s that between noumenon and phenomenon or
abstract and concrete, correspond ingto the P r ak asa. and V i
m ar s a of the S fik t a school s.
1 8 1
be tween me and my Lord i s d ue to A v i na
b h av a (unbroken associat ion) and S am a n
v a y a (immed iate connection). Withou t A h a n t aEgo becomes indescribable and uncognizable.
A h a n t a w i thou t the cogni t ion of Ego is
baseless (n i r ad h Ar a), and uncognizable. The
B h a v a t b h a v a perc'
ep tible as S am a s t h a
(synthesis) and V y a s t h a (analysis) i s conceivedin the world as p a r o k s h a and a p a r o k s h a,
that which can be (object ive ly) real ized or not.
When B r a h m a is not awake, she , A h a n t a,P a r a m e sv a r i is no t awake, and remains w ithal l the world taken into her lap. What is cal ledhis wak ing (u nm e s h a), l i ke moonrise on the
o cean, that is I , N ar ay a n i S a k t i , of the
nature o f d esi re to create (S i s r i k s h A). Whati s cal led the w ink ing ( n i m e s h a ) o f the P a r am at mA, during annihi lat ion, that am I
,N a r a
y an i‘
S a k t i known as s u s h u p t a, desi rous of
sleeping. A i sv a r y a,indestruct ible, unl imited ,
deve lops inme , the S i sr i k s h a, who rise from
God ,the Lord o f L a k s hm i . That S upreme
B r a h m a i s consciousness nan a), al l -see r,fau l tless. A h a n t a is, of the natu re of consc iousness (j i i anat m i k a), al l knower, al l -seer. The
supreme form of bo th of us,B r a hma and me,
i s of the natu re of consciousness. The rest,A i s v a r y a, V i r y a, etc., are eternal qual i ties
(d h a rm a) of J nan a. The inner form, Ego,
( 1 82 )
is cal led j nan a r up a, the form of l ight l ikeindestructible supreme A i s v a r y a
of mine when I r ise (out of N ar ay ana) is cal led-I c h c h h a (d esi re), m the various t a t t v as
sas t r a s by the learned . Be ing the P r a k r i t i(essence) of the world , (I am) cal led S a k t i . Myefl
'
ortlessness when I create i s regarded as B a l a ;
(also) my fi l l ing al l the created world is cal ledB a l a ; though I am always P r a k r i t i , my
be ing devo id of change is V i r y a. M i l k g ives upi ts natu re (of mi l k) when curd is formed out of
i t ; such change i s never (produced) in me whenI become the (manifested) universe. Henceknowers of t a t t v a (real i ty,) regard V tr y a as
absence of change. V i r y a, (al so) cal led V i kr am a i s (by some) regarded as a part of
A i s v a r y a. My independence of assistancein do ing al l works is cal led T e j a s, the sixthG u na, by the knowers of t a t t v a s. Te j a s isd efined by some as the power of defeat ing o thers.
Some t a t t v a-knowers regard this as (part of)A i sv a r y a, These five G u t) a s are regardedas flowing from ( the fi rst g u na ) j nana . The
si x g u na s , Jh an a and the rest, are my body .
"
(16. I I . 1 2“ N aray a tj a ,
the God ,is the
eternal P a r amat ma always the ocean of
j nana ,b a l a ,
a i sv a ry a , v i ry a ,s a k t i and
0 j a 5. He is beginningless, not l imi ted by space ,
t ime and form. I am his supreme Godd ess, shin
( 184 )
H is characterist ic is grasping and enjoyment al
ways destroying (what he enjoys) l i ke fire . The
j i v a always feed s l i tt le by l i t t le my brightness.
”
(l b. xi i i. 1 8
I n the later V a i s h an a v a schools, name ly theV i s i s h t ad v a i t a and the D v a i t a V e d an
t 3 , though to a large extent based on the P afic h a r at r a Ag a m a s
, L a k s h m i,the real ly
act ive fac to r of the cosmos is degraded to an
obscure posi t ion. One subsect regard s L a k s hm ias a sort of intermed iary in the matter of the
grace that lead s to M o k s h a ; in another, she i sinferior even to the A c h a r y a. The earl ierP anc h a ra t r a Ag am a s are u t i l ized much
more by the rival S a i v a school than by the
mod e rn V a i s h na v a I n another po int havethe modern V a i s h na v a schools gone away fromthe posi t ion of the Ag a m a s. The re lat ion bet
ween the ind iv id ual sou l , cal led K s h e t r a j aa (as
in the Bhagavadgé‘
ta‘ and the P ar amat m a, is
much neare r the A d v a i t a posit ion than wou ld bepalatable to the mod ern V i s i sh t ad v a i t 1 SandD v a i t i s who regard th is work as au thori tative .
“ I t is taught in the S r u t i that the At m a of the
P a r a and the K s h e t r a j fl a i s one. The l imita
tion o f the K s h e t r a j fi a is known to be d ue
Each act of concious l i fe i s a mani festat ion of my power.1” Compare the quotat ions in the Spand apm d z
‘
p i ka w i ththose in the Tattvatmyam.
I 85
to the d ifference o f bod ies, as one image i s d i f
ferentiated into many inmany mirro rs. K s h e t r e
( the bod y) is mad e o f the five,
’
( gross ) e l e
ments (bh 0 t a) etc. the j i v a i s establ ished in itthe w ise s (1 t i 5 1 (God s) by the i r eyes of wisdomknow him,
the k s h e t r aj na, to be the supreme ,which canno t be reached by B u d d h i
,untouched
,
«t ranscend ing the mani fested , beyond the supreme,
V i s h nu”
v i . 15- 18“ As the A k as a
i n a po t moves when the pot is moved , t ru ly the reis no d i fference between the P a r a and the J i v a
( 16 . I . v i . 20).
The modern V i s i s h t ad v a i t a is a schoolof ec lect ic ism
,blend ing the R am an u j i y a
V e d an t a phi losophy and Ag am a cosmogony and pract ices. R aman u j a himse lf,though the Ac h ar y a par ex cel l ence, of th is sect ,and though he pleaded for the o rthodoxy of the
P anc h a r at r a books, expounds only the V e
d an t a ph i losophy and d iscipl ine . But his foll ow
ers have neglec ted R am an u j a 5 ph i losophy and
brought into greater prominence Ag a m a d oc
trines and practices. The modern V i s i s h t a
d v a i t a is clearly e x pounded in Pil lai Lokacherye ’
s Tattvatrayam, a Tami l work of the age of
at (1) Gross elements (2) subt le el ements (3) j fi a n e n
d r i y a s (4) K a rm e n d r i y a s (5) a n t ah k a r a ua.
'l' In the V a i sh na v a trad i t ion. the sfi r i s are bei ngs who
were never bound .
( 1 86 )
S ay a na . This work is much read by the
S r i v a i sh na v a 5,who are a fairly w idespread
sect in Southern Ind ia. The Tattvaz‘my am is an
exposit ion of the three u l t imates— I s v a r a , C h i tand A c h i t . “ C h i t i s At m a. The nature of
A t m a is (be ing) other than body,sense-organ,
M a n a s,P r éna ,
B u d d h i which are eachsuperior to the one preced ing i t (At ma i snot-unconsc ious, bl issfu l , eternal , infinitely small ,impercept ible , inconce ivable, ind iv isi ble , immu table ,the seat of kndw ledge (He i s) inspired , supportedand d isposable by I s v a r a (Tat tvatrayam. i -3
H is size i s bu t atomi c (minu te) ; his character ist ic isthe union of knowledge and bl iss o f the d imensionso f a t r a s a r e nu (mote) and shining w i th mi l l ionso f rays (Vz
'
skvaksena S ambz’
z‘d quot . inManavéla
’
s
comment . on 15. i I 4). Whereas c h i t i s anu,
I s v a r a is V i b h u infinite and th is const itu tesan e ternal d ifference between the two . The ind i
v id ual Sou l resides in the heart . “He is a knowerand hence an agent and an enjoyer 16 i . 29)C h i t is the seat of knowledge. I f he were knowled ge me rely , we shou ld say
‘I am know ledge and
not ‘ I ( l b. i . 2 7 , This re lat ionbetween the Sou l and consc iousness as substratumand qual ity ( d h a rm a d h a rm i bh av a ) d i ffer
entiates V . i $ i .s h t 3 d v a i t a from S ank h y aand
,A d v a i t a and approximates i t to N y ay aand V a i 3 e s h i k a Thi s schoo l l i ke the last , also
( 1 88 )
creat ion evo lves into simi lar and dissimi lar
forms by differences of place and t ime and is cal ledP r a k r i t i , A v i d y a and M ay a. I t is cal led
P r a k r i t i because i t causes changes ( v i k ar a ) ;i t is cal led A v i d y a because i t destroys knowledge ;
‘
i r is cal led M ay a because i t has wonde rful creat ive power. (16 . i i . 9
“ S a t t v a S 0 1; y a is Time . I t is the cause of
the evol u t ion o f P r a k r i t i and material objec ts;itse l f changes as K a l a
,K as h ta (smal l peri od s
of t ime), is e ternal , the fie ld of I s v a r a’
s sport andH is bod y . The o ther two classes of A c h i t are
( 1 ) fi t to be experienced (B h o g y a) by I sv ara and
A t m a, (2 ) means and fie lds of (the ir) enjoyment.
(Those) Fit to be experienced (B h o g y a) areobjects ‘means of enjoyment ’ are organs l ike eyes&c. ,
fiel ds of enjoyment are the four places and al l
bod ies. O f these, the fi rst A c h i t (superfinematter) is bounded be low and unbounded aroundand above ; the middle A c h i t (ord inary matter)i s bounded above bu t unbounded be low and
around . Time (the last A c h i t) is the same
everywhere. Time is N i t y a (eternal) in P a r a
m a p a d a (the supreme abode of I s v a r a), and
here (in the manifested worlds) , a n i t y a (fini te).(16 . 43 E ternal Time i s cal led A k h a 11 d a,unbroken into finite period s, infini te durat ion un
d ifferentiated by the rate of flow of changings tates of consciousness. Finite Time is K h and a,
( 1 39 )
consist ing of period s d iv ided as second s, minu tesetc. These two are cal led Time and No-Time in
I sv a r a, the thi rd t a t t v a,is opposed to al l
evi l,infini te, se lf-i l l umined , bl issfu l , sh ining w i th
hosts of auspic ious qual i t ies l ike I nan a, S a k t i
etc. the cause of the creat ion, maintenance and
d estruction of al l universes, the Refuge of the
fou r k inds of men,the affl ic ted , the enqu iring
,the
so l ic i tous and the sage (B /zagw d -C i‘
té v i i . 1 6 ) the
gi ver of the four k inds of fru i ts— v i rt ue , objects,
love and release, of a sp lend id form,and the Lord
of L a k s h m i , N i l e and B h fi m i .”
( 1a i i i . i .)L a k s h m i and the o ther two are God d essesmanifesting the three S a k t i s of know led ge
,
ac tion,
and inert ia. The auspic ious qual i t iesreferred to are w isdom, power, forbearance , mercy
,
love,activ i ty
,r ighteousness. friendship,
gentleness,
and accessibi l i ty. (16. i i i . 10)
H is ‘splendid form ’
is infinite ly super ior toforms ( l ike An a n d am a y a ) and qual i ti es
,
wo rthy of H im alone, eternal , one,const i tu ted
o f S u d d h a s a t t v a ,not obstruct ive of w isd om
l i ke human bod ies, i l lmunati ve of H is D iv inenatu re wh ich the re in i s l ike the go ld p laced ina ruby cup , the treasury of H i s hosts of qual it ies l ike del icacy etc, of infini te bri l l iancy
, fi tto be meditated on by Y o g i s
, d azz l ing al l
( 190 )
be ings, generat ive of al l enjoyments and d is
passion, always de l ightfu l ly behe ld by the
e ternal ly free be ings, quenching the affl ict ions of
al l l ike a lotus tank , the root o f al l a v a t ar a sprotect ing al l , the substratum of al l , and ornamen
ted by implements and ornaments.
”
(l b. i i i .The ‘implements and o rnaments ’
are varioussymbols of the d iv ine attributes conce ived as existing in physi cal shapes in hi s D iv ine Form.
The fortunes of V i s h nu among the gods of
Ind ia, have been the most varied . I n the earl iestVedic age , he was the h ighest,
’ be ing placed in
the sky and the‘last ’
, 1‘ in the se ries of Gods
to whom a portion of the sacrificial food was to beoffered . H e was the friend o f I n d r a and the
supporter of the world . I n the age o f the B r ahm a na s he became the sacrifice the supremeP u r u s h a, whom the God s stretched on the sacrificial al tar. The N i ruk ta t ried to explain him away
as the sun. I n the early Ag am a 3 , he became the
P a r am B rahma and his cosmic d u t ies were d ischarged by his goddess L a k s h m i . Final ly
in the P u r ana s and in the popular imaginat ion o f
modern India, he is the second person of the Trini
ty , always sleeping stretched le isure ly in his couch
(ofAd i se s h a the cosmic serpent) and comforted by three w ives, S r i
,B h fl , and e a
, on the
4! R. V. l . 22. 20. Aft B rd lz. I . i . i .
1‘
f i sca l . Sr . Sri t. i v . 2.
( 1 9 2 )
B Am fi nu j a l i ved from 1055-1137 A. D . P fi rna
p r a j i i a, otherwi se M a d h v a i s sai d to have been born in
1206 A. D. The thi rd in d escent from him was N a r a h a r it i r t h a, Dewan Regent of K al inga, (Orissa) d uring the
minori ty of V i r a Nar a s i m h a D e v a. His successor,
A k s h o bh y a t i r t h a was a contemporary of V i d y ar an y a
,l i ke the two wel l-known ex pound ers of Ram anu j a,
V e d an t a D e si k a and P i l l a i L o k d c h fi r y a. A k s h 0
bh y a’
s d isciple , J a y a t i r t h a i s the greatest among the
ex pound ers of the Mad h v a cult . From A k s h o bh y a therearose a branch
,the first member of whi ch was K r i s hna
C h a i t a n y a,the prophet of Bengal . V a l l a b h a
,the
found er of the K r i s h na-B h a k t i cult,
a TeluguBrahman of the Nel lore D istrict
,was a contemporary
of K r i s h n a D avaréya of the Vi j ayanagaram dynasty( 1500- 1527 A . D ) and a contemporary of a late M 5d h v
teacher, V y d s a t i r t h a.
The S a i v a templ e~cul t spread among the Tami lsmore ex tensi vely than the correspond ing V i sh nu-cul t and
gav e bi rth to a more ex tensi v e Tami l l i terature . The Tami lS a i v a saints, S i v a n a d i y ar a
,were 63 in number.
The greatest of them was T i r u fi a n a S am b a n d h a,who
converted the powerful Pandya K ing, E un P and y a fromthe J a i na to the S a i v a cult. Sankaracharya, who l i ved inthe later half of the 8th . century refers to Sambandha as D r av i d a S i su (Saundarya lahart , sl . Hence Samband ha a
hi s v ery mi l i tant f ri end ,A p p a r, (orVagi sa r) who cond ua v igorus crusad e against the J s i na rel igion must have l i vand worked about 650A. D . Another famous Sai va teacher
, S u
d a r am fi r t i l i ved about 850 A. D . He was a protegeN a r a s i nga M u na i y a r a i y an of N a d u Nad u (in t
South Arcot The Tami l songs of these a Si va
are cal led .Te'vd ram. About 100years later l i ved M 5.v i saga r , author
( 19 3 )
by D r. G. U. P epe. N l l a k an t h a wrote a B h é s h y a of
the V e d ri n t a s fi t r a s to sui t the tenets of the S a i v a
S i d d h ri n t a, and i t is cal l ed S a i v a V i si s h ta d v a i t aB h fi sh y a. M e i k and a , ( 1236 A D . ) and U mép a t i
S i v ac h ar y a, (1313 A. D .) wrote voluminous Tami l works
ex pound ing the same.
The fol low ing note has been. f urni shed by my fri end Mr .V. Venkayya, Gov t . Epigraphist, Ootacamund .
The Nfinaghata inscri ption begins w i th invocations to I nd raSankarshana, Vasud eva, Yams , Varuna and K ubera.
The worship of Bhagavat Sankarshana and Vasud eva and
a Vaishnava temple are mentioned in a sti l l earl i er inscri ption.
I nd . Ant. Vol x vrn p. 190.
That the worship of Si va is more anci ent than the time of
the found er of Bud d hi sm i s rend ered probable by the trad ition that the S irkyas w ere worshippers of S i va. The Chinese
pi lgrim Hi ouen Tsangwas shown near the eastern gate of
K api lavastu the ol d temple of I svara, where the infant Si d dharthe was taken by hi s father, because “ the SAkya chi ld ren whohere seek d i v ine protection always obtain what they ask .
Accord ing to the legend the stone image then raised i tse lf and
saluted the prince. That thi s legend i s v ery anci ent i s prov edby the fact that the scene i s represented on the Amaravatistfipa (Ep . 1nd . V. whi ch has probably to be assigned to theMaurya P eri od .
194
S ection I V.
Tire Vaiseshi ka and t ire Ny dy a .
These schoo ls were based on the logical
processes o f D efini t ion and D ed uction. They we reuncompromisingly ant i -monist i c in the i r aim.
E ven the S ank h y a, whi le ad mit ting eachP u r u s h a to exist abso l u te ly apart from o the rconscious be ings, conce ives al l unconsc ious subs
tances from B u d d h i d ownwards to be successiv e
transfo rmat ions of one substratum— matte r, bu tthese schoo ls d o no t at tempt to derive one kind o f
substance from ano ther. They d iv ide objec ts intogene ra and species, d efine them by these marks
,
but refuse to be attracted by the e te rna l mock ingm i rage o f monism that has prod uced so much badme taphysi cs and wo rse science ev en in our d ays.
The ear l iest V a i s e s h i k a book we hav e i s the
S ti t r e s o f K a n ad a,and the earl iest N y ay a
book,the S at r a s o f Gau tama and these are no t
much late r than the age of Bud d ha,whi le
,the
V a i se s h i k a-N y ay a system,the anc ient r ival
o f the S ank h y a-Y o g a system,and also of
the V e d an t a system,must be o ld e r. P rasasta
pad s , who l ived not much late r than the l st
centu ry A. D wro te a B /zd shya on the S 0 t r a s
o f Kanad a. This B b as h y a i s not a commen
tary but a sy stematic restatement and amp l ifica
t ion o f the V a i se s h i k a system,u t i l iz ing where
( 196 )
Ar t h a to the fi rst three (Vais . S i ft . V I I I . 11. 3and P rasastapad a extend ed i t to the o thers also .
I n late r d ays a seventh category,A bh av a.
(non-existence), was ad d ed to the l ist and the to talP a d ar t h a s acknowled ged to-d ay are thusseven.
The characterist ics o f substance are that itserves as a substrate of qual i t ies and act ions and
is a co inherent cause . (l b. I . i . Qual i t iesl ike co lou r
,and actions l i ke expansion,
canno t existi n same bu t requ ire substance as the i r Ad h at a(substrate ) .
“ A substance i s no t d estroyed e i therby i ts effect or by i ts cause .
”
(l b. I . i .Thus the threads are not d estroyed when theybecome woven into clo th
,bu t co inhere in the
clo th : But“ qual i t ies ( are dest royed ) in bo th
ways. (1b. I . i . when one taste i s producedby a combinat ion of a number o f o thers each
of these latte r loses i ts ind iv id ual i ty . An
act ion i s destroyed by i ts effect ” (l b I . i . the
tension of a bow is destroyed when d isj unc t ion of
the arrow from the bow i s prod uced . The characteri stics of qual i ty are that i t inhe res in a substance
,
i t i s w ithou t qual i t ies, and is not a cause of (or)is concerned w i th conj unc tions and d isj unctions.
”
Bod as,in hi s introd ucti on to the Tarka Samgraha
p . 30-3 l has proved that Vai § . Sfit . I . i . 4. i s an interpolationmad e later than the age of Sri dhara, the author of NydyaK andal i (991 A. D ) .
( 1 97 )
(l b. I . i . 16 ) The characterist ics o f action are thati t inheres in one substance
,i t i s w i thout qual i t ies
and is the so le cause o f conj unc t ions and d isjunc
t ions (l b. I . i . 17 , Kanad a also d iscusses
saman y a (natu re o f genus) v i se s h a (natu re of
spe cies) and s a m a v 3 ya (co inhe rence), though
he d oes no t incl ud e them in the ca tegories,for they
are no t objec ts (a r t h a) o f pe rcept ion.
“General i tyand special i ty are b u d d h y a p e k s h a m concep
t ual . (l b. I . i i The S ummum Genus,“ that whi ch
is a genus (w i thou t be ing a spec i e s ) i s B h av a
(existence ) for i t i s the mo st ex tensive concept .
(l b. I . i i . S ubstant ia l i ty ( d r a v y a t v a) ,
qual i tat i veness (g u na t v a) and ac tiv i ty (k a r m a
t v a) are bo th gene ra l and specific . (And so al l
o thers) except u l timate spec ies, (the atoms e tc.)
(l b. I . i i . I n the late r V a i se s h i k a ,the
word v i se s h a (d i ffe rence ) has been restricted to
what is cal l ed here , a n t y a v i 5e s h a,u l t imate
spec ies, the d e tai led d escription of wh ich gave the
name V a i se 5 h i k a to th is schoo l .
The last p a d a r t h a, acco rd ing to Prasas
tapad a i s co inherence, S a m a v ay a. Kanad a
defines co inherence to be “ that by wh ich (we speak )o f cause and e ffect
,that the one is in the o the r
(l b. V I I . i i . P rasastapad a d iscusses S a m a
v ay a ful ly The connec tion of what are in
separably connected and are in the re lat ion of
subst rate and accessory wh ich causes the cognit ion
( 19 8 )
here is S a ma v ay a. From the cogni t ions, ‘Here ,in the thread s(i s) the cloth,
’ ‘Here , in the grass (is)the mat (woven from the grass), Here
,in D r a v y a
(are) D r a v y a, G u n a and K a r m a,
’ ‘Here in
D r a v y a, G u n a and K a r m a (is) S a t t a,
Here , in D r a v y a (substance) i s D r a v y a
t v am Here in G u na (qual i ty),is g u n a t v am ‘H ere ,
in
k a r m a (act ion) 1i s K a m a t v amHere in e te rnal (atoms) are the u l t imate species
(a n t y a v i se s h a we can und erstand thereis some connect ion be tween the members o f these
(pai rs). Th is (connection) i s not S a m y o g a
(conj unction l ike that be tween a pot and the mi lk
placed in (Vais. D ans. Bombay l i d . p. 6 6 )
Of these p a d a r t h a s,the fi rst three
,D r a v y a
,
G u na and K a r m a possess S a t t é. S a t t a is
defined thus : Whence we say o f D r a v y a,
G u h a and K a rm a that they are— that is S a t t a.
S a t t a is an a r t h a (a th ing) d ifferent from sub
stance , qual i ty and ac tion. (l b. 1. i i . “ E x is
tence i s one , for ‘to be
’
is no specific mark (o f things)nor has i t specific marks o f i ts own.
”
(l b. I . i i.Existence i s uncaused and e terna l ” (l b. I V. i .Thus the S a t t a o f the V a i se s h i k a s i s a
general concept and o ther than D r a v y a,G u n a
and K a r m a,and hence is not a noumenon,
a
real i ty behind phenomena,l ike the P r a k r i t i
of the S ank h y a s. P rasastapAd a notes that
( 200
o bjects of sense (wh ich cognizes them) . I t i s an
inval id argument (wh ich says that cogni t ion i s a
qual i ty of the bod y or the senses) , because of the
unconsciousness of the causes o f the sensation and
consc iousness of the effec ts z
'
. e. the cogni tion.
(l b. I I I , i . 1 “ The (cogni t ion in the) term‘I ’
be ing characte rist ical ly d ifferent (from eve ry o thercogni t ion) no scriptu ral testimony i s requ ired ”
to
prove the existence o f the sou l (l b. “1. i i .On the contrary
,
"the cogni t ion o f the Ego is an
immed iate intu i t ion o f an ent i ty o ther (than the
body) , because i t appl ies to the sou l that reflectson i tse l f and no thing e lse (l b. I I I i i .
Th is reject ion of scriptu ral testimony for the
existence of the At m a is in d i rec t contrad i ct ionto the V e d an t a
,wh ich admi ts scriptu re i . e .
test imony, of e i the r supe rsensuous be ings or
teachers (g u r u 5) who have gained an experiencenot attained by ord inary men as the only ev id enceof the existence o f the A t m a
,for V e d an t a
asserts the existence of a unive rsal A t m a
which i s no t given in o rd inary human consciousness. That ‘ I am ’
every one w i l l‘
admi t. That‘I am more than I am now
’
i s the fundamenta lposit ion of the V e d an t a and th is can but be a
matte r o f faith t i l l that greater I is actual ly e x
perienced . The S a1'
1 k h y a and the Va ise shi k a
which are essent ial ly rat ional ist ic cannot he lpbeing schools of ind iv idual ism.
20 1
The sou l is manifo ld,because o f the d ist inct
ness”of one man
’
s expe riences from every o ther
(man’
s) (l b I I I . i i . M oreov er “ the activ i ty and
i nactiv i ty observed in one’
s own sou l are marks (toprove the existence o f d i ffe rent sou ls) in o the rs.
”
(l b. I I I . i . As Sankara M isra, a commen
tator on the S fi t r a s s’
ays,
Act iv i ty and in
ac tiv i ty prod uced by d esi re and aversion are
(two ) spec1es o f effort . From them are born bod i lyfunctions cal led muscular act ions hav ing for the i robject the attainment o f pleasure and avo id ance o f
pain. Hence,when w e see mu scu lar ac tion in a
bod y o ther (than our own) , we infe r (the existenceof) ano the r sou l for this muscu lar action i s
born from effo rt, because i t i s a muscu lar act ionl i ke our own muscu lar action and that e ffo rt i sborn from some sou l or based on some sou l becausei t is an effo rt l i ke our own e fe t .
”
The mark s o f the (pre sence o f the sou l (in a
bo d y) are the o utgo ing and in go ing breath,the
o pening and c losing of the eyes, v i tal i ty (that bu i ldsup tissue), the mo t ion o f m a n a s
, affection of the
o the r sense-o rgans, pleasu re , pain,
desi re , ave rsionand v o l it ional effo rt . (l b I I I . i i
The play o f breath in a body i s the resul t o f aconstant effort of the sou l to keep up the l ife of
the body exerted as much d uring sleep as d uringwak ing moments. Thi s is cal led ‘
the conat ionthat is the basis of v i tal i ty ( j i v a n a y o n i p r a
( 202 )
y a t n a w ink ing and the anabo l i c processes are
also d ue to the same conat ion. The movementsof m a n a s in bringing the At m a and the organsof sense into conj unct ion to prod uce perceptiondepend upon d esi re and e ffort bo th o f which residein the At m a Pleasure and pain resid e in the
Atmawh ich is the i r subst ratum. Thus the A t m a
of the V a i se s h i k a s comes nearest toWeste rn concept ion o f the so u l . As in E u ropean
ph i lo sophy, d esi res, conat ions and preceptions
are conce ived as qual i t ies o f the sou l,and no t as
processes o f subt le forms o f matte r,the objec t
bu t the V a i se 5 h i k a schoo l clearly separates conciousness from these . wh ich i t d oes not regard as
mod ificat ions of consc iousness as i s he ld in" theWest. Consc io u sness i s separate from them and
can and d oes exist apart from them.
Time i s ano the r u l t imate substance . The marks
of i ts existence are“the no t ions o f later, simu l tane
ous,slow and qu ick . (Va is. SW. I I . i i . “ I t
cal led a cause as i t d oes not exist in e ternal th inand exists in non-e ternal th ings.
”
(l b. I I . i i . 9 ) D ispace is ano the r substance whence (rises) thet ion “ th is is (so far) from here .
”l b. I I . i i.
Time and space are substances,because they
not inhere in any o the r substance and pos
ac t ions and qual i t ies and are e te rnal . ( l b. l I . i iT ime i s one and so is Space though th
appear manifo ld,on account of acc idental qua
204
existence and none xistence of cogni t ion on the
proximity o f the sou l and sense-objects (according as M a n a 3 serves as the i r med ium o f contac tor no) . (15. I I I . i i . I ) . I t i s atomi c (ind iv isibleand inv isible ) because i t can be in contact w i thonly one sense -organ at a t ime whereas i f it wereal l -pervad ing i t cou ld be in contact w i th al l sense
organs and we cou ld have a'
number of sensat ionsat the same t ime . As we canno t imagine i t to be
const i tu ted by const i tu ted par ts i t fo l lows that i ti s e ternal . I t is an ul t imate substance because on
i t as substratum takes place the conj unct ion w i thsense—o rgans to prod uce cogni t ions.
I n the substances are Earth Water Fire
Air and Ak as a Of these the fi rst fou r areanu atomi c and the last i s v i b h u , pervasive ,
The sensat ion of sound i s a qual i ty which inheres ininA k asa . The sensat ion of touch inheres in theatoms of ‘
air.
‘F i re has two qual i t ies,co lour
and touch. Wate r has three qual i t ies,colou r
,
taste and touch .
‘Earth ’has fou r
,co lou r
,taste ,
sme l l and touch. Thus these fou r rep resent fourhypothe t ical e lementary su bstances, wh ich combineand prod uce the perishable objects o f the universe .
The latte r are k a r y a or effects whi ch derive the i rqual it ies on account of the S a m a v ay a or
co inherence in them of the i r causes— the eternalsubstances. I n the words o f the S ut r a s the
nature of the effect (is derived) from the nature of
( 205 )
the cause (l b. I V. i . These effected (objects)are also d ist ingu ished by be ing a v a y a v i com
plex , consisting of bod y, organ and object. (l b. I V
i i . I .)
K a nad a d oes not ment ion a God or S upremeCreato r among his u l timate substances. When theV a i se s h i k a ph i losophy in much later d aysch iefly under the influence of the S a i v a cu l td eve loped the no t ion of a personal creato r, the
commentators attempted to der ive the no t ion of a
Supreme God from a misinte rpretat ion of one
s O t r a . Th is 5 h t r a (I . i . 3) runs thus : T ad v a
c h a nad am n ay a s y a p r am an y a m’
; i tmeans The authori ty of the scriptu res (is d ue) to
(the i r) d escribing i t . I t ’ refers to N i h sr e y a s a
(h ighest good ) in the prev ious 3 i) t r a whereN i h sr e y a s a i s said to be der iv ed from D h a rma
and hence this 8 (1 t r a po ints out that the V e d a
i s au thori tat ive because i t po ints out the way to
the h ighest good . The later commentato rs havet ried to wrench this passage out of i ts context and
und erstand by ‘T a d’
the absol u te B r a h m a of the
V e d an t a. Th is 5 ut r a recurs again as the last
of the work (X . i i . and there , again, the reference
is not to B r a h m a bu t to the unseen effect of
v edic ceremonial . Another 5 0 t r a is also w rongly
explained to refer to God . I t i s I I . i . 1 8. and runs,S am j fi ak a rm a t v a sm a d v i s i s h t an am
l i ng a m’
. This means‘The act ion of naming
( 206 )
(a substance) by B e ings h ighe r than ou rse l ves,i s the mark o f ( the existence o f ) that subst
ance ”
,because , as the next sut r a says, “ they
name substances on account o f d i rec t v ision of
them ( l l . i . The i r v ision be ing d eve loped by
Y o g a ,they see substances inv isi ble to us
,l i ke
a i r,or a k as a and then name them. Hence the
fact o f the i r nam ing a substance is a proof o f i ts
existence . This 3 a t r a occu rs amidst the proofso f inv isib le substances beginning w i th V ay u and
has abso l u te ly no refe rence to God .
The N y ay a and the V a i se s h i k a agreei n fund amental po ints ; the V a i se s h i k a be ing a
schoo l o f M e taphysics t inged w i th Logic and the
N y ay a,be ing a schoo l o f L ogic t inged w i th M e
taphysi cs. The N y ay a,therefore
,does no t ana
lyse the universe into i ts const i tuent parts. I td iscusses M e taphysi cal quest ions only casual ly .
I t d oes no t define P a d ar t h a or D r a v y a,bu t
P r a m e y a,what is to be proved . The P r a m e y a s
are twe l ve , A t m a bod y,sense-o rgans
,sense-oh
jects, cogni t ion,manas
,activ i ty , fau l t, transmigrat ion,
fru it, pain,
and beat i tud e ( N y . 5m. I . The
five E lements, Time and Space are introducedinc id ental ly.
The existence of the A. t m a i s proved fi rst bythe considerat ion that a sense cannot be the soul ,
208
The N y ay a, l ike the V a i se s h i k a, be l ieves
in the e ternal existence of atoms.
“ As the atomshave real existence , no p r a l a y a (d estroys them).What are beyond be ing cu t are atoms. I f i t issaid that) i t i s impossible (for such a th ing to exist),because the A k asa must (pervad e ) and d iv id e
(the atom,for o therw ise) Ak asa wou ld no t be al l
pervasive , (we reply that) the word s‘w i th in ’
and
w ithou t apply to effects and d o not exist inwhat are no t effects because they re fe r to what areo ther than causes.
”
(l b. I V. 8 1 ( I f i t i sargued that the atoms) must have real parts, because al l bod ies hav ing form must hav e a co l l ec
t ion of parts and (also) al l bod ies that conjo in
(w i th o thers) , (we reply that) the atoms canno t begiven up because i t wou ld occasion a regressus
ad z
'
nfinz’
tum and because a regressas ad z’
nfinz’
tum
is not proper ” (l b. IV. 88
As the Y o g a add ed to the S ank h y athe conception of an I s v a r a, so the N y ay ato the V a i s e s h i k a. But the I s v a r a of
the N y ay a S fi t r a s i s concerned only w iththe adj ustment o f fru its o f act ion. Some ac
t ibns are fol lowed by consequences immediateand v isible ; but o thers are not. Th is i s ad
j usted by a
.
S upreme Be ing cal led I sv a r a.
I sv a r a is a cause , for we d o no t see (al l ) the
fru i ts of action. ( I f it said), this can not be , for
in the absence of (the ind iv idual ’s) act ion,fru its
209 )
cannot come forth, (we reply) acti on is not the
(who le) cause , for (i t is) caused by H im.
”
(7b. IV.
1 9 The later N y ay a d eve loped the no t ionof God
,the creator. U d a y ana
’
s K usumd fij a l ii s d evo ted to this one q uesti on. I ts main argu
ments w i l l be summarised in the next chapter.The N y ay a ranged i tse lf against id eal ism
and affi rmed the existence of the external wo rld,
independent of the cogniz ing mind ,thus Opposing
ce rtain schoo ls of B ud d h ism and ,in later d ays,
the P r a t y a b h i j na schoo l and the more d egenerate fo rms of the A d v a i t a.
“ I f it is said that
Real existence cannot be pe rce ived because thingsare known only by means o f cogni t ion
,j ust as the
existence of a cloth canno t be perce ived when thethreads are removed (z
'
. e. cogni t ion is a part of
real existence and objects canno t exist independentof cogni t ion), (we say ,
no,) for th is i s no argument on
account of the falsehood of the assert ion in the ana
logy . The thread s and the cloth are different enti ties,
(tho ugh) they are not perce ived separate ly becauseof the inherence ( of the thread in the
( l b. I V. 9 1 (The theories that] the re lat ionof cognizer and cognised i s l ike the re lat ion [o fman) to things (exper ienced ) in a d ream, or l i kej uggle ry lor the ci ty of the G a n d h a r v a s or a
mi rage canno t be proved , because of the absenceo f any proof.
”
(l b. I V. 96
I t i s noteworthy how each school of thoughtI 4
( 2 10 )
has used a d ifferent name for the man o the r than
h is bod ies, the stud y o f whose natu re i s the start
ing part o f‘
al l ph i losophy . The S é nk h y a
cal ls h im P u r u s h a, a wo rd o f unce rtain e tymo
logy , but original ly meaning ‘male,
’
a ve ry cu rious
d esignat ion o f the inactive w i tness o f the dance o f
P r a k r i t i . The D r a s h t a o f the Y o g a i s a
very appropriate term. The A g a m a schoo ls
pre fe r C h i t or C h a i t a n y a,which in late r
S am s k ri t at least, means act ive and thus denotesthe Ag a m a concept ion fai rly accu rate ly. The
V e d an t a popularized the word A t m a,whi ch
means, se l f,natu re, essence , in accord ance w i th
i ts tendency to regard the whole world as be ingrooted in one noumenon, B r a h m a, that whi chgrows into or that which fi l ls the Unive rse .
The V a i s e s h i k a and N y ay a schoo ls alsoaccepted the word
, perhaps because they fe l t i t tobe a non-commi t tal term. They attr ibu ted so many
funct ions to the sou l that they avo id ed wo rds l ikeP u r u s h a, or C h a i t a n y a which had d efini te
'
connotat ions attached to them and preferred thevague r word A t m a. I t must not be forgotten thatthese wo rd s, though in later ph i losophical d iscussions treated as synonymous
,have defini te mean
ings depend ing upon the i r derivat ion and the i rd efini t ion in each S choo l .
1 The V e d i c etymology, he who hi d es (st) in this stronghol d (put ) (Sat . B rd h. x i i i . 6 . 2 .
-l .) i s fanciful .
2 1 2
garded as ou tsid e, object ive ; hence P r a k r i t i,the changeable , in his v iew incl udes al l that is not
P u r u s h a ; and the mental funct ions of know ledge ,act ion and desi re wh ich the o rd inary man regard s
as be longing to the world o f se lf and not to the
ou tsid e wo rld,is bu t P r a k r i t i to the S an
k h y a. But the V a i se s h i k a or the N a i y a
y i k a has as his goal the abol it ion of pain
consequent on birth in physical bod ies wh ich
i s caused by d esi res for objects. He therefore
sets abou t analysing the composi t ion of objects
and when he learns to estimate them at the i rproper val ue, he ceases to banker for them,
thereby abo l ishing birth and pain. H is aim
be ing the cessat ion of the pain o f compu lso ryincarnat ion of the soul , when this po int is reachedhis analysis of the world stops. Hence he regardsthe a t ma as possessing al l the qual i t ies whi chcannot be explained by the seven substances— earthwater, fire, air, ak asa ,
t ime and space—wh i ch are
ou tside man. These qual i t ies of the at ma are
invo l untary v ital action, vo l untary act ion, desire ,
aversion, cogni t ion, and control of the organs of
sense (j ii ane n d r y a s) and the organ of attent ion (m a n a s). The real izat ion of the a t m a as
possessed of these qual it ies is as leg it imate a goalo f l ife and a re lease (m o k s h a) as that real ized byany other d isc ipl ine and hence the V a i se s h i k ae x planat ion of the cosmos i s as val id as any other.
( 2 1 3 )
I t i s not a phi loso phy subserv ient to or leading upto any o the r bu t one so l u tion o f the riddle o f the
unive rse,se lf-consistent and final and as true as
any other.The monists of Ind ia, on account of the
fanc ied superiority of the i r metaphysics to the
atomi c theories o f the Va i s e s h i k a s and the
N a i y ai k a s superci l iously turned the names
of the found ers of these schools, K anad a and
G a u t am a to rid icu le. The former name is bythem paraphrased as K a na b h u k , eater o f atomsand the latter i s as A k s h a pad a
,he who has
eyes in his fee t,to he lp him in his search of atoms.
But the atomic theory i s by no means a less val ide xplanation than any othe r .
( 2 14 )
Sect ion V . P d rvamz‘
mdn’
zsd .
The Ved i c l i teratu re consists of various strataof d ifferent ages mix ed up in almost hope lessconfusion. First of al l
,there are the v e ry anc ient
hymns be long1ng to the age when the’
ri tual was
yet simple and the R ishis ‘sang hymns in
praise o f I nd r a and V i s h nu,M i t r a’
and
V a r u na as occasion arose for them and propi t iatedthem w i th meat and soma to avert a calami tythat immed iate ly threatened them in the i r ind iv id ualor tribal l ives or to gain some u rgent desire of
the i r heartsx l' There are
, again,
o the r hymnswh ich show that the sacrificial r i tual had al read ybecome h ighly compl i cated and wh ich refe r tothe various funct ionaries there in. 3;
When the age of inspi rat ion end ed , the work
o f compi lat ion o f the hymns float ing i n the
memory o f the people began. Between the composi
t i on of the hymns (B i k s) and prose formuloe
(Y a j u s ) and the i r comp i l at i on as the V e d a s
there must have e lapsed a period long enough tocause the orig inal purposes and occasions of the
m a n t r a s to be large ly forgo tten. The who lel i teratu re was now the ho ly S r u t i and had to
be used for reci tat ion during sacrifices so that nopart of the precious rev e lat ion might be wasted .
The R i s h i s were original ly ‘rune-masters’ .
Te . g. R . V. X . 103-8-12 .
I a. g.,R . V. 1 .
2 16
therefore understand why i t was the fi rst to becompi led . The H o t a inv i ted the God s to the
sacrifice and praised them by rec i ting hymns. I n
a sense he represented the anc ient B i s h i s who
composed the hymns, for h is func t ion was to
invoke the God s by praise . H is rec i tat ions we re
long and not general ly co rre lated to d efini te ac tsas in the case of the A cl h v a r y u . Hence in the
V e d a compi led for h im was inc l ud ed many of
the o riginal hymns in the fo rm i n wh i ch they we re
composed , z’
. e. w i thou t de tach ing ind iv id ual v e rses
from the i r context. Hence i t happens that the
R ig Ved a contains so many connected composit ions— a fac t wh i ch has l ed some E u ropean
scho lars to think that i t was compiled ear l ie r thanthe Yajur -Vau
’a whi le o the rs go so far as to
regard i t as a histo ri cal ’ wo rk . The U d g a t a
was the singer of selec t hymns d uring the sacrificesand for h is benefi t the S dma Vea’a was compi led .
Thus was consti tu ted the Tray fvz'
a’
y d , wh i chcontained what may be cal led the nat ional o r
rathe r tribal re l igious ce remonial o f the ancientHind us. The domestic ce remonial , whi ch afiected
home l ife and embod ied the w ishes and asp irat ionsof the ord inary fo l k
,was in the ear l iest t imes the
office o f the A t h a r v a na, the fami ly med ic ineman
’and the hymns used by him were co l lected
in h is V e d a. E ven the B i g V e d a,
as i t is,
contains bits absol u tely l ike the A t h a r v a V e d a
( 2 17 )
as when R . V. Vl l l . 9 1 -5 refers to the desi re of a
maiden for a pecu l iar h irsute decorat ion and the
necessary ri tual to secure that growth. Late r on,when the increasing complexity of the sacrific ia lri tual requ ired a supreme d i rector of ceremoniescal led B r a h m a and a d istinct house ritual , cal ledGr i h y a, nominal ly' based on the T r a y i
(the three V e d a s) was evo l ve d,the A t h a r v a
V e d a was techni cal ly associated w i th the
B r a h m a and actual ly fe l l into comparativeo b l iv ion. From the earl iest t imes the T r a y iv i d y a, the imposing ritual o f the sacrificesloomed large in the imaginat ion of the Hind usand from the frequent re fe rences to i t and i ts
constant glorification in the early l i teratu re , hav eresu l ted two misconceptions ( I ) that the A t h a r v aV e d a i s later than the o the rs
, (2 ) that i t d ealsw i th black magic and i s somewhat d isreputab le .
The A t h a r v a V e d a contains a great numberof S fi k t a s also found in the R i gV e d a ; but
The e laborate seri es of house ri tes, from G a r bh 6 d han amto S a p i nd i k a r anam,
Wt h are the ch ief rel ics of Ved ic
ceremoni es sti l l fai rly common among the twice-born ’
form the
ao -cal l ed S m S r t a K a rm a, whi l e the Y a j na s are the
Sr a u t a, though the M a n t r a s accompaying both bel ong to
the same age . The M a n t t a 8 of the former,col l ected in groups
cal l ed M a n t r a pa th a or M a n t r a p r a s n a were floati nghymns from ancient t imes and , of course , never formed part ofthe T r a y i wh i ch was comp i led for purposes of Y a j na, and
are hence general ly regard ed as K h i l a. fraguents of a supposed
l ent canon.
( 2 18 )
this does not mean that the former bo rrowed fromthe latte r. They were compi led for d iffe rent
purposes and tapped the same original source .
Just because i t was at least as o l d and as sac redas the rest that i t was assigned to the B r a h m awhen that oflfice was invented . The magic o f the
Y a j u r-V e d a is as pr im i t iv e as that o f the
others. The A d h v a r y u regard s eve ryth ing hetouches or u ses, stones, grass, fire ,
as a fe t ish and
flatters the spi ri t behind i t so that he may not
harm him,j ust as the A t h a r v a na charms
neualgia away from a man by praising the spi ritthat causes i t. The fo l low ing extract from the
[ fpasz‘amba S rauta S d tras w i th the m a n t r a s
refe rred to the re proves the magic of the Ved icY a j na s to be as crud e as any o the r magic.
Hav ing heated the S an nay y a v esse ls on
the G a r h a p a t y a fire w i th the 1nvocat ion,
‘may
the Rakshasas be burned,may those intent on
misch ie f be burned ,
’ taken the U p a v e s h a w i th
you are bo ld,giv e me the B r a h m a
’
(Tai t .
S am l . i taken out from the no rth sid e o f the
G ar h a p a t y a fire a l ive coa l w i th ‘M ay quarre land fear be removed , may the army that comes
(against us) be removed ,’
he (the A d h v a r y u )places the pot on i t (the l ive coal ) w i th Thou art
the m i lk -ke tt le of M at a r i sv a, thou art Heaven,
thou art Earth,thou art the bearer of al l
,be firm
(in you r place on the coal ), by (you r) transcendent
( 2 20 )
w ith I take (the cal f to i ts He takes
the calf w i th ‘ I take (0 cows, your) cal ves to you
who are w i thou t d isease and are the increase of
weal th ’
(Ta i t. B rah. I I I . v i i . 4. The A d h
v a r y u commands, D o not wal k between the
cows to whom the calves have been taken and the
V i h ar a (the place o f the three sacred I f
(any one,goes be tween the (cal ves) taken (to the
cows) and the V i h ar a,he shal l say .
‘D o not
carry o ff the S an n ay y a.
’
(The m i lker) says‘si t.
’The mi l ke r si ts w i th
,
‘I admi t ca l ves to
you,who are w i thou t d isease and are the increase
of weal th. I,who l ive ,
si t near you who are l iv ing,
who are overflow ing w i th strength-giving mi lk and
ghi’
(Tai t. B ra/i . I I I v i i . 4 . A sud r a shal lnot mi l k or shal l m i lk. He mi lks into a wood en
pot. The Y a j amana accompanies the ad
mi tted ( cal f ), the mi l ked (cow), the sound of
the streaming (mil k) w i th,‘ I adm it calves to
you, who are w i thou t d isease and are the in
crease of weal th, M ay D y av ap r i t h v i mi l k
for th is y a j i i a. May D h at a, S o m a, V ay u and
v at a, may they give weal th to the Y aj arnana
(Tai t . B rah. I I I . V11. 4 . Except that the
magic ' here i s more compl icated than in the
Atharva v eda,the re i s no th ing to d ist ingu ish i t
fol lowers of the veda as‘a v i p a s c h i t a uninspi red (B IL. Gi te .
i i . Mi l k ing a. cow and pl acing a pot on fire requi red so
much ad ulati on of the God s and abject fear of them I
2 2 1
from the latte r. The four S a m h i t a s sufii x ed the
need s of a fai rly long period of t ime.
A fte r th is period there must hav e occured a
break of cu l ture , long enough to al low of the langv age of the S a m b i t a to become obscu re to a
late r gene rat ion. The language changed duringth is period to that of the B r alrm a na s
,which
i s mid way be tween Ved i c and c lassical Sams
kri t . The meanings o f the hymns hav ing be
come obscure, they began to be appl ied ind iscri
minate ly for sacrific ial purposes and inte rpre tedi n fancifu l ways. D iscussions fre quently arose inthe assembl ies of the priests abou t d etai ls of theri tuals
,app l icat ions o f mantras, e tc. To se ttle
such quest ions, what were cal led N y ay a s werefrequently ut i l ized . The N y ay a s are analogies
,
or infe rences or proverbs which make statementsprobable or acceptable and are ev en now large lyused for purposes of argumentat ion. The A h i
k u n d a l a N y ay a ( the analogy of the snakeand i ts co i ls be ing one and y et more than one).
S t h al i p u l a k a N y ay a ( j ud ging of the stateof r ice in the cook ing-pot by examining one grain)are i l l ustrat ions of the humble beginnings of Logic .S uch N y ay a 5 form the backbone of al l h b as h y a s of al l the mode rn sects. D ec isions on
considerat ions l i ke these and crud er ones too are
0 001 Jacob has publ i shed a col l ection of them und er the
m ine Lashi ka nyaydrij al i .
2 2 2
scattered thro ughou t the B r ah m a n a s «wh ichcontain besid es
,t rad i t ions
,real or imaginary
,
rbgard ing the composi t ion o f partic u lar mantras,cosmogonic specu lat ions
,etc .
I n t ime the B r ah m a n a 5, too were ad d ed to
the ho ly canon and became fixed as a part o f the
r evealed V e d a. With the extension o f the
Scripture to inc l ud e “the M a n t r a and B r ah
m ana,
the task o f the exege te became mored iffi cu l t and comp l icated . The work of explaining the various d iscrepanc ies o f the Ved a and
so lv ing the various d ifficu lt ies of the ri tual becamea profession and the scheme of N y ay a s was
deve loped into the M i m am sa S as t r a. A
co l lect ion of such i s the S zi l f as o f Jaimini . On
them Upavarsha is said to hav e commented and
Sahara w ro te hi s Bhashya. Jaimini i s referred to
and his opinions controve rted by Béd aréyana in hisB rahma M i izzdmsa Sfitras and cou ld not hav e l i
v ery much late r than the oth century B . C. w
Vedic sacrifices were so rampant as to evokeB uddhist reaction headed by Gau tama S id d hai
The object of Jaimini’
s S ittras i s to expoD h a r m a. Now
, then,the investigat ion
D h a r m a (du ty). D h a r m a has for i ts
M i mam sa, both P fi r v a and U t t a r a i s st i
N y fi y a . M t d h a v a speaks of J a i m i n i y a N y ay
and V a i y as i k a N yay am al a The N y ay a of
i s a. d evel opment of the same humbl e and popular Nbut on rati onal istic l ines.
2 24
of man’s postmortem l ife w i th that before death
and by Yama’
s remark that the Gods themse lveswere in d oubt (K atb. Up. i . 20 The quest ionwas, in Gautama B ud d ha’
s t ime,
st i l l so flu idthat he cou ld ignore i t whi le preach ing his spec iald ispl ine . S imi larly the orig inal m i m am s a l et
these questions severe ly alone and contented i tse lfw i th establ ishing the au thority of the Ved a and
the bind ing natu re o f the Ved i c r i tes. The onlypossible way o f prov ing this au thori ty w i thou tinvok ing the sanction of a personal be ing, h ighor l ow ,
was to argue that the Veda existed fromal l e terni ty. This ‘ cou ld be only i f the word s of
the Ved a were uncreate,z. e. i f the connect ion
between a word and the object that the wo rd nameswere i tse lf '
e ternal . The M i m am s a S ut r a stherefore , say
“ B ecause the connection of sound and sense
i s unborn. Hence i t conveys unerring knowledgew i th regard to matters which canno t be reached
(by percept ion and inference ). This i s the
authority accepted by B ad a r a y a na,because i t
requ ires no further proof.”
(l b. I,i . Like j ai
mini , Bad arayana has to re ly ent ire ly on the
final au thori ty of the Veda to prove the existenceof consc ious B r a h m a
,as the noumenon of the
universe, for this cannot be proved “ by perceptionand inference (Vea
’
. S ut . I . i . He thereforegeneral l y accepts the posit ion of Jaiminl that the
( 2 2 5 )
V e d a s are eternal , though the D evas and the
world are not so, because of the ident i ty of names
and forms before and after P r a l a y a (1b. i i i. 2 8
j aimini gives the fo l lowing reasons to provethe ete rni ty of sound s. ( 1) Sound i s e te rnal becausei t serv es to convey meaning . The object referredto by a name always re sts
,as i t we re
,upon the
name . (M fm. S l i t. I . i (2 ) I t i s recognised bya l l simu l taneously . H ow cou ld th is be possiblei f i t were a vanish ing th ing? (l b. I . i (3) I ti s incommensurable . One sound repeated ten
t imes i s no t ten so und s, as i t wou ld be i f so undwere a mu table substance . (l b I . i -2o) . (4) The reare no grounds for expect ing i ts d est ru ct ion.
(l b. I . i (5) ( I f sound were a mod ificat ion of
some o ther substance ,) there wou ld be no appropriate object to be pe rce iv ed by the o rgan of hearing.
Each sense -o rgan co rrespond s to an e l ementary
substance in the wo rld . Hence sound is an
e lementary substance and not a mere v i k ar a
(mod e) of ano ther. (l b. I . i (6 ) I t i s seen thatthe v e d a also proclaims the e ternity of sound
(l b. I . i .The object ions of the N a i y ay i k a s to the
theo r ies o f the e terni ty o f sound are summarised
in l b. I . i . 6 - 1 1 , as fo l lows
Sound i s a product because (1 ) We see i t prod uced . (2 ) I t d ies. (3) We use the phrase he makesa sound ’
. (4) I t is perce ived at once by d ifferent1 5
2 26
persons far and near. The refore i t cannot be one
and immu tab le . (5) I t is suscept ible o f p t a
k r i t 1-v i k r i t i . S ound s change from one to .
ano the r in s a n d h i . Thus d a d b i a t r a becomesd a d h y a t r a. (6 ) I t is augmented by the number
o f those that make i t. These objec tions are met
i n S fitras I . i. 1 2 - 17 . I t i s admi t ted by bo th
schoo ls that the percept ion o f sound is momentary.
But the non-
percept ion of sound wh ich is always
existent i s d ue to the want o f union of the bearer
and the sound , the object o f hearing . Sound
exists always but becomes manifested as n ad a,
(no ise), conj unct ions and d isj unc tions of ai r,
when u ttered by a man. These v ibrat ions of air
serve to connect the pre-exist ing sound w i th the
aud i tori um of the bearer. The phrase ‘makes
a sound ’ means the starting of these vibrat ions, which of course are transi tory . The factthat many persons hear the same sound at the
same t ime d oes no t prove that i t i s not one and
immu tab le. Here in i t resembles the sun,which
be ing one and immu table , is sti l l seen by,
men remote from one another at the same time.
I n S a n d h i one sound does not change into ah
o ther, but the second sound (in the i l l ustrat ion)i s subst i tu ted for the fi rst. Lastly when there isan increase of sound , i t is the manifest ing nad a
(air-vibrat ions) that i s increased , not the original
substance , 5a b d a.
2 28
sou l and body or more general ly between spiri tual
and material , has been i l l ustrated by the connect ion be tween the meaning of a sentence and the
wri tten or spoken word conveying that meaningThe writ ing or the speaking may be regard ed as an
incarnat ion of the meaning, a mod e of stat ing or
exhibit ing i ts essence. As d e l ivered,the sentence
must have t ime re lat ions i t has a beginning, mid d leand end it may be repeated , and the same gene ralmeaning may be expressed in o the r word s ; bu t theintr insic meaning of the sentence i tse lf need have
no t ime re lations, i t may be true always, i t may
exist as an eternal now ,
” though i t may be pe r
ce i ved and expressed by humani ty w i th vary ingc learness from t ime to t ime . (p. 1 15) Max M i i l le r
remarks on this M i m am s a k a d octr ine that the .
ph ilosophers of Ind ia understood that the studyof language was an integral part of phi losophy.
“ They had ev ident ly perce ived that languageis the only phenomenal form of thought
,and that,
as human be ings possess no means of perce iv ing
the thoughts of o thers, nay even the i r own thoughts,
except in the form o f word s,i t was the duty of a
stud ent of thought to inqu ire into the nature of
word s before he approached or analysed the natureof what we mean by thought, naked thought, nay
skinned thought, as i t has been tru ly cal led , when:
d ivested of i ts natural integuments, the word. Theyunderstood what even modern phi losophers have
2 29
fai led to understand , that there is a d ifference between Vorstel l ung (presentation or pe rcept) and
Begr if (concept), and that true thought has to d ow i th conceptual words only , nay , that the two,
word and thought, are inseparable, and perish whenseparated .
”
( S ix Sy stems of I nd i an pbi l osopby
p .
After establ ishing to his sat isfac ti on the eterni tyand consequent authori ty o f the V e d a, Jaimini pro
ceed s to consid er the inconv enient q uestions of the
rat ional ists of his age w i th regard to those nume rouspassages of the V e d a wh i ch have noth ing to d o w i tht he D h a r m a o f Y a j na bu t d eal w i th ord inaryworld ly matters. To explain th is was invented thetheory of A r t h a v ad a subsid iary
, explanatorystatement. Whateve r in the v e d a was not a com
mandment was explained away as an explanato rystatement. I n the schoo ls of the M i m am s a
,this
fru i tfu l suggestion o f separat ing the sentences of
the V e d a into var i ous classes was worked ti l l u l t imate ly was e laborated the d ivision of Ved ic sen
tences i nto five classes v iz .,V i d h i M a n t r a
N am a d h e y a, N i s h e d h a, and A r t h a v ad a.
A V i d h i is an inj unction occu ring in the V e d aand i s of fou r k ind s
, (1) U t p a t t i- v i d h i
, an
inj unc t ion that originates o thers (2 ) V i n i y o g av i d b i one in wh ich the auxil iaries of sacrificeare ment ioned (3) P r a y o g a v i d h i inj unct ionof the main sacrific ial act ion (4) A d h i k ar a
2 30
v i d h i wh ich deals w ith the posi t ion one enjoysas the resu l t o f a sacrifice . A M a n t r a i s asentence that serves to remind one o f matte rsconnected w i th sacrifices. Those M an t r a s thatd o no t serve this purpose contribute in some un
known way to the success of the sacrifice f .
N am a d h e y a incl udes specifi c names of specialk inds o f sacrifices, l ike U d b b i d C h i t t a e tc.
N i s h e d h a re fers to sentences prohibi ting certainac tions. Lastly, A r t h a v ad a passages are thosethat are subsid iary to v i d h i or n i s h e d a and
Another classificati on of V i d h i s i s ( 1 ) A pfi r v a
V i (1h i referring to what i s unknown, 0. g. One d esi rous of
heaven should sacrifice’
(2) N i y a m a V i d l i i referring towhat i s only partial ly ex plained , c. 9 .
‘he beats the pad d y,’
meaning, husks i t. (3) P a r i s am k h ya V i d h i,ex clud ing
one of two alternati v es . This classification has nothing to d ow i th the four main classes of V i d h i s mentioned i n the tex t .T I t is noteworthy how the re lat ion between M a n t r an
and B r a b am ana s became rev ersed in the time of Jaimi ni ,
thus show ing the enormous ant i qui ty of the M an t r a s.
Jaimini’
s conception of the V e d a as primari ly d eal ingw i thD h a rm a can apply only to stray sentences in the B rs. h m a
ri a s and not at al l to the m an t r a s . Hence a m a n t r a is d e
grad ed to the posi tion of a sentence which cleverly d escribesa sacrifici al action or serv es to rem ind one of i t (Mi ni . 5121.
1 l . i . 31 I nstead of the B rahm ana beingan ad junctto the M a n t r a, i t i s the rev erse ; the M an t r a s ex ist so as to
subserve the sacrifices ord ained in the B r ahm ana B. What
a contrast to the anci ent v i ew of the M a 1) t r 9. s as a forceimpel l ing the God s, mak ing the God s themsel v es grow instrength (R V. vi . 1 7 1 3 , v i .
( 2 32 )
by Sahara.
“By c h o d a nawe und erstand A p0rv a. A p ur v a, again (ex ists, for)
‘Ar am bh a’
is ord ained , as in Let one d esi rous of s v a rga,
sacrifice.
’ Otherwise , the o rd inance becomes fru i tless
,as the sacrifice ends (and i s not cont inued
t i l l the fru i t is seen). I f the sacrifice ends w i thou tprod ucing anything e lse, the fru it canno t be (prod uced ) in the absence of anyth ing. Hence i t prod uces (some th ing). I t cannot be said that i t (theY ag a) does not i tse l f d ie , because i ts fru i t i sd ec lared (for) we cannot find any form o f (the
persistence of Karma ( other than A p 0r v a).That is said to be K a r u
ia which takes i ts
substratum (from one place) to ano the r place ;i t canno t inhere in the A t m a, for A t m a ise verywhere .
A t m a 5 act ion (knowledge) be ing e verywhereis ev idence of i ts be ing everywhe re and not of
i ts go ing ( to one place ) from anothe r p lace forthe absence of motion does not contradic t ( thecausal i ty of the A t m ( Moreove r ) the
material w i th which sacrifice was assoc iated
(ghi etc.) i s also destroyed (burnt up) ; as the
material is d estroyed , i t i s infe rred , the sacrifice,too
,is destroyed . The material i s destroyed
because i ts ashes are perce ived . I f i t i s saidthat though i t is burnt
,i t sti l l exists
, (we reply)that wh i le the exist ing th ings (ashes are seen,
i t is not seen. I f i t is said that the fructification i s
233
e v idence (o f the e x istence of the material ), one muste x plain why i t i s not perce ived . I f i t is thoughtthat ( i ts not be ing perce ived ) is d ue to any one of
the causes of inv isibil i ty, subti l i ty e tc,i t becomes
specu lat ive pred icat ion. Then i t becomes a quest ion whether A p ft r v a shou ld be pred icated or
that (cause ) . I t is more reasonable to pred i cate anew substance and to
, pred icate a new property (of
the material) . I f i t i s said that the K a r m a has
no substratum,that
,too ,
can be d isprov ed simi larly . Though a new prope rty i s pred i cated of i t , i tcanno t obtain mot ion. Hence (i t is concl uded )that the sacrifice i s destroyed as i t is dest royed ,there ex ists A p ar v a .
” This A p ur v a,then,
is
the unseen substance in which inheres the fru i t ofthe many sacrifices of the V e d a.
Jaimini’
s sut r a s are,of cou rse , h ighly d is
appo inting v iewed at from the standpoint of the
phi losophe r, bu t we must remembe r that Jaiminid oes no t contemplate the analysis of the univ ersefrom any spec ial ph i losophi c standpo int. Nor wasi t possible for him to d o so, we ighted as he was
w ith an extraord inary load of ri tual to be gonethrough, teeming w i th a crop o f quest ions of
e xegesis, whose so l u t ions d id not requ ire anything
Cf . S ank h K d r. V I I . The fact that S a u k sh m y i tis placed at the head of the l ist of the causes of inv i sibi ty hereshows that Sahara does not qui te from Isvara K rishnabut froma Sankhya Sfitra now unknown.
( 234 )
more than grammar and logic. But his fo l lowersfee l ing that ’
his d a r sa na cou ld ho ld i ts own
against i ts rivals only i f i t d iscussed the currentquest ions of ph i losophy incl uded the means o f
proof ( P r am ana s ) , the p a d é r t h a s o f the
Universe and many o ther phi losophical quest ionsin the i r d iscussions of M i m am s a. They are
d ivided into two schoo ls— the G u r u m a t a of
P rabhakara and the B h at t a of Bhatta K u
mari la.
The fo l low ing reference to the v iews of the fi rstof these two schoo ls is taken from the Sama
S z'
a’a’lui nta rahasya at tributed to Sankarflcharya
"
D r a v y a,G u na, K a r m a
, s emany a,
and
P a r a t an t r a t 31‘ (d epend ence) are five catego
ries w i th S a hi t i, S ad r i sy a (simi lari ty) and
S ank h y a (number), they are e ight. V i s e s h a andA bh av a are not (categories), separate from the
earth and other objects in wh i ch they inhe re . (l b.
Chap. I X ). Am a i s o the r than B u d d h i,I n d r i
An incompl ete mss. copy of th is work w i th Sesha Gov ind a’scommentary thereon was k ind ly pl aced at my d isposal by M r.
Paravastu Banganathasvami propri etor of the Arsha Library,Vi zagapatam .
1' E x plained by Sesha Gov ind a to be the S am a v ay a of
the V a i s e s h i k a’
s.
“ I t has beginningand end ing. NO sensi »~
h is man w i l l hold that when the material i s ei ther d istroyed
or not prod uced , the relat ion can remain ind epend ent of thematerial Herein the P rabh ak a r a s d ifier from the V a i s e
b i k a s.
2 36
,sounds in the words that we speak ; one, the
c ause of sound ; the o ther i s used for ind icat ing anobjec t.” (d yapaa
’
fya The two sounds
referred to are, fi rst, what exists in the mind be fo rethe word is actual ly pronounced , and , second , the
pronounced word .
“Some of those that fol low the
anc ient path say that these two are di fferent innature. O thers say ,
we d iv ide in two by our
thought what is real ly one. j ust as the l ight
(potent ial) in the fire-st ick ( a r ani ) is the causeo f o the r l ights be ing produced , so the sound‘
( s p h o t a ) in the mind ( b u d d h i ) is the causeo f the various sounds heard nad a ). I t i s fi rstthought out by the mind , then associated w i thsome meaning and then i s grasped ( by the
bearer) as sound. N ad a i s prod uced in succession
(in t ime) bu t 8 p h o ta is not befo re or afte r ( i . 8 .
produced in succession What i s not successive ly,
prod uced appears as i t gradual ly mad e and thusappears d iv id ed . As a reflect ion seems to takeon the mot ion of the wate r in wh ich i t is seen ( l i t.exists), be ing under the influence of the act ion of
the water, that is the re lation of s p h o t a and
nad a .
”
(16. i. 45 S p h o t a is, thu s, the
potent ial word wh ich e x ists in the mind t
'
.e. the
‘mental antecedent that i s revealed by the u ttered
word,as water reveals the moon reflected in i t.
K umari la,attacks th is 5 p h o t a theory in his S l oka
Perm/m on behalf of the Purva M imamsaand
( 2 37 )
S ankara, in his B kdslzy a, ( Ved . Sat. i i i 2 9 ) on
behal f o f the U ttara M imamsa.
The theo ry of the e terni ty of sound , l i ke most
o the r theories d eve loped in India,has i ts roots in
the BigVed a, in v ar ious hymns of whi ch Vegd e v iis prai sed . She i s often the G 3 y a t r i me tre per
sonified ; She is cal led S a r a s v a t i , S av i t r i ,S a t a r u p a e tc. I n the B rAh m a rj a s she
became the so l i tary companion of the First BornB r ah m a the creator) and co-operated w i th himin the work o f evolv ing Name and Form. I n Sat .
Brd lz. X . v i . i t is said ,h is mind entered into
union w i th speech and in the same place she is
ident ified w i th A d i t i . As she represents the
powe r of the M a n t r a s she later became identi cal w i th the S a k t i o f the A g am a s . I n the
schoo ls of the S a i v a cu l t , where the god d essloses her pred om inance
,the concept ion reappears
M art . Up. v i . 2 2 . as the S a b d a B r a h m a,fi rst
ment ioned in the Bhartrihari , expound s the d oc
trine in the Véky apaa’z
’
y a from the standpo int of
the ph i losophy o f grammar.Vijflana Bhikshu (who l ived in the X VI cen
tu ry ), in hi s Yogasd ra -S afigraka claims the S ph o tatheory as be longing to the Yoga schoo l and givesa clear exposi t ion of the theory.
“Sound is of
three kind s. ( I ) the object of the organs of speech
(2 ) the object of the sense of hearing and (3) theobject o f B u d dh i alone. Of these the sound marked
2 38
o ff (as be longing to) the throat, palate and o the r
p laces is the object of the o rgans of speech,as
prod uced by them,the sound produced by the
sound in the ear and d ifferent from the organs ofspeech, is the object of the sense of hearing
,as
be ing pe rce ived by i t . ‘ Word s,l i ke ‘
po t,’
etc.,
however, are the objects of B u d d h i alone ,for
they are grasped by the B u d d h i alone,as w i l l
be explained . These word s manifest meanings,
and are hence cal led S p h o t a (mani fester). Thatwo rd i s other than the le tters wh ich are pronoun
ced one by one by the o rgan of speech,for each
letter d ies very soon (afte r i t is u ttered) and can
not unite (to form a word ) and hence one (who le)word (for the ear to deal w i th) cannot exist andthe re w i l l be no thing to d enote the meaning (i f we
except the S p h o t a). The cause o f th is S p h o t a
i s a specific effort. I f i t we re d ue to pronunc iat ion by means o f many d istinct efforts
,i t w i l l not
be possible to regard i t as one wo rd , and to refer
to one meaning. The d iscloser of this 3 p h o t a i s
the cognit ion of the last le tter preced ed by a series
o f letters. To B u d (1h i alone be longs the pe rcep
t ion of S p h o t a, for as B u d d h i alone can cognize
a: The motion of the organs of speech i s what i s herecal led the sound that i s the obje ct of the organs of speech.The sound heard in the ear i s the sound that is the object of
the sense of heari ng.
240
Sect ion V I . The B lzagavadgz’
td .
I t has been al read y pointed out that the
B izagavadgz‘
td was an early attempt to we ldtoge ther the V e d an t a , the S ank h y a and the
Ag am a po ints of view. 1 Two passages have al
read y been quoted (p . 72 -3) describing the cons
cious supreme B rahm a— the one real cosmic u l ti
mate of the V e d Ant i s. I n o ther passages Krishna
propounds the sharp d ist inct ion between P u r u s h a.
and P r a k r i t i de l ibe rate ly using the S an k h y a
techni cal terms. Know P r a k r i t i and also
P u r u s h a to be both w i thou t a beginning ; knowthat changes o f form and g u na 5 spring from
P r a k r i t i . The or igin of the mak ing of causes
and effects is P r a k r i t i ; P u r u s h a is the
experience , o f pleasure and pain. P u r u s h a es
tabl ished in P r a k r i t i experiences the qual it ies
9 This name has been translated the song ce lesti al ’, the
Lord ’
s song etc. ,though there i s absolutely no lyrical touch
in i t. This translation i s perhaps d ue to reminiscences of
the song of Solomon and the early l i fe of the boy K rishnaand hi s flute-
play ing d escribed in the B hd qavata purdgza‘
and
the Gi tagov inda . The Bhagavadgé‘td i s the d i v ine poem
or rather ‘the proclamation,in v erse
,by the Lord .
’
THence i t has lent i tself to the tortures of the B hash y ao
k s. r a s'
who hav e commented on i t each from only one pointof v i ew . Al l ex isting translati ons
,too
,hav e been d one
consciously or unconsciously only from the point of v iew of
one the threegreat mod ernsects—San k a r a ,Ramanu j i y a
and M ad h v a.
bo rn of P r a k ri t i his attachment togu h a s is ther
cause (o f his birth) in good and bad wombs.
Onlooker and permitter, lord, experiencer; the greatlord ,
and the supreme self ( p a t amat ma too,
i s he cal led , P u r u s h a who is supreme here (inthis bod y) (xi i i. 19-2 2 ) O mighty-armed , learnfrom me the five causes de clared in the S ank h y asystem (as necessary) for the accompl ishment o f
al l actions ; the bod y , the agent , the several organs,
the various k inds of several activ i t ies, and the
presid ing d e i t ies, the fi fth ; whatever act ion mand oes by h is bod y , speech and mind
,right or w rong
these five are the causes thereof. That be ing so,
he who from imperfect understand ing sees the lonese l f to be the actor, veri ly that foo l sees not
(xv i i i . 1 3The A g am a analysis o f the Unive rse into
three facto rs is also expounded . I sv a r a dwe l lsin the heart-region of al l be ings, O Arj una, causing, by h is wonder-working‘ power, al l be ings torevo lve as i f mounted on a machine (xv i i i.Ano ther,’ indeed , is the S upreme P u r u s h a
,
cal led P a r am at m a, who, hav ing entered the
three wo rlds‘ sustains (them), the changele’
ss
I s v a r a .
”
(x v .
I n the prev ious S tanza, K ri shna has been speaking of
the mortal and immortal P u r u s ha s,
“ loke,
”which word
may mean ei ther in this world,
”or as in x v . 18
,in the
t r a s not based on the Ved a, as the rational i stic Yoga or
Nyaya.
( 242 )
I n various passages Krishna claims to be thatl sv a r a. I am unborn, the change lessAt m a
,
the lord of be ings ”
(i v .
“ I am the o rigin and
the end of the who le universe. Nothing existshigher than I
, O D h a n a r'
i j a y a. A l l th is i s
strung onme as rows of gems on a thread .
”
(v i i . 6
The othe r two t a t t v a s are the two P r a k r i a
t i s of l sv a r a.
“ The d iscrete P r a k r i t i,that i sm ine
,i s e ight-fold , Earth, wate r, fire , V ay u,
Ak as a, M a na s, B u d d h i and A h ank ar a"
(v i i . The great e lements, A h ank a r a,B u d
d h i,A v y a k t a, the o rgans ten and one
,the
five ranges of the (sense) organs,d esi re
,hate,
pleasure , pain, the (bod i ly) whole , inte l l igence ,constancy, th is is the fie ld (k s h e t r a) d escribebriefly along w i th i ts mod ificat ions.
”
(xi i i . 5-6Th is i s the lowe r P r a k r i t i , correspond ing tthe I d am t a o f the S ak t a s
, A su d d h a
may a of the S a i v a s, A c h i t of the Vaishna
vas.
“ Know my o ther P r a k ri t i , h ighe r thanth is, who becomes l iv ing (Ji v a), O mighty-armed
,
(and ) by whom this Universe i s uphe ld . (v i i .“ Be ing a port iono f myse l f, i t becomes in the worldof the l iv ing an e ternal l iv ing be ing and at tracts toitse l f the sense -organs o f wh ich M a n a s is the
sixth (x v . This category i s cal led in the Aga
m a 5 T e j a s or O j e s and these word s occu r inx v . 1 2 - 14.
“What T e j a s (l ight-energy) in the sun
brightens up the world , what in the moon, and what
( 244 )
This Supreme abode which Kri shna d ifl'
eren
tiates so carefu l ly from h imse lf, the P u r u s h o tt am a, and also from a P u r u sh a
,higher than
himse l f, whom he seems to refer to by the ad ject ives
K a v i , P u r a n 3 ,etc. in vi ii-9 , and by the name
Ad i P u r u s h a in x v . 4, is frequently cal led‘P ad am
’or, Gaff, path. Veri ly there ex ists
h igher than that A v y a k t a (z'
. e. M ul a p r ak ri t i ) another A v y a k t a ( undifferent iated ,
noumenon) eternal , wh ich i s’
no t destroyed , when
al l be ings are destroyed . I t is cal led A v y a k t a
(the absol ute), A k s h a r a (the unchanging) theycal l i t the S upreme Path. Hav ing reached i t, no
one returns. That is my S upreme abod e .
”
(vi i i-zo-z i ).“ There' the sun does not shine , nor
the moon,nor fire ; having gpne there they
retu rn not ; that i s my S upreme abode .
”
(x v .
I n this “ S upreme abode ”the au thor o f the
B /zagaw a’ Gi td finds the one noumenon into
which the u l t imate t a t t v a s of the other schoolsmerge . Th is i s the foundat ion of al l that i s ; on
which are establ ished P u r u s h a s from the lowestto the h ighest , out of which rise al l the e lements
of the evolved world . I t is not conscious be ingnor is i t unconscious be ing bu t “ that beyond ,” the
knower and the known and the Supreme fi x eddwe l l ing place (x i
I n opposi tion to the world supported by the i s 7 an referred to in x v . 12 .
( 24s )
Th is S upreme Real i ty as Krishna conceivesi t is d ifferent from the N i rguna B r a hma of
Sankara. This latter is the S a g u na B r a hm a
or consci ous Universal Being sho rn of name and
form used for purposes of meditat ion when
these d istinctions are negat ived , i t is the higher.
(Ved . Sm. B /zdslz. iv. i i i . BeginninglessA v i d y a ignorance accord ing to Sankara leadsus to attri bu te name and form to that whi chis not thus l imi ted and th is, accord ing to Sankara,i s the P a r am ( higher ) B r a h m a , wh ich is S at ,and opposed to A v i d y a which i s A s a t . Th isd octrine of A v i d y a being the cause of name
and form ’is not found in the B hagavad Gz
‘
td
nor again the doctri ne of M ay a,which Sar
’
i
k ara’
s later fo l lowers have e laborated , by whi chthey conce ived that the P a r am B r a h m a the
one w i thou t attributes, who is S a t , C h i t , andA u and a becomes in some inexpl icable way en
tangled in M ay a which is ne i ther ex istent nornon-existent and thus evo lves or rather degeneratesinto the S a g u n a B r a h m a or I sv a r a and
begins to weave the universe out of nothing.
This doctrine is a travesty of the attempt of
the early th inkers to find the common noumenonof S a t and A s a t .
RamAnuja on the other hand tr ies to whi ttled own al l the passages where Krishna d es
cri bes th is supreme noumenon, whence speech
246
returns along w ith mind , be ing unable to reachthis h igh leve l thought. He interprets p a r am~
d h am a as a local i ty, a region of space whi ch
N ar ay a {l a has de l imited as his special prov ince
where he holds his court seated on his serpentthrone , the hoods of the serpent act ing as h is
royal umbre l la and to wh ich he admits his ‘e lect
as a matter of favou r !The teach ings of the B izagavad Gi l d have
suffered more than those of any o ther Ind ian bookfrom the hand s of the Commentator."t I t i s not
crypt i c in style l ike the S i‘
i t r a s ; bu t yet, fromthe great venerat ion paid to i t on accountsupposed au thorship and on account of i ts
superiority to every other scr ipture, Ind ianon-Indian, so many E h ash y a k ar a s
attempted to use i t for bu ttressing up the i rtheories and expend ed the i r tender merc ies on i t.I ts teachings and i ts locu t ions, technical or otherw ise have been v iolent ly tampered w i th by the
commentators who d id not possess what we
cal l a ‘l iterary consc ience ’
. The commentator d id not aim to d iscover what exactlyau thor thought or attempted to'
e x press, but usedtext for support ing his own spec ial theories. I fpassages were inconveniently opposedmentator’s theories, they were to be e x p
e . g i i . 16 . has been so d one to d eath theto d iscover what i ts author meant thereby .
( 248 )
te x t bu t only in .Saizkam Bkdskya. No interpreterof other people’s thoughts, espec ial ly the thoughts ofthe anc ients can escape read ing some of h is own
thoughts into , his author’s book , bu t we might atleast honestly strive to minimize this tendand streq
uously avo id reading a thi rdthoughts also there in.
Besides this one fru itfu l sou rce of confusion,‘
anothe r more potent one has also been operat ive.
These d ifferent schoo ls of V e d an t a have in
modern Ind ia al l become orthodo x revealed re l ig ion. The Vedanta be ing o rthodox , i t was fe l tthat the other schoo ls ought to be assimi lated toit and hence the commentator has fe l t i t necessaryto furnish the S ank h y a, P ur v a M i m am s a
and V a i s e s h i k a schoo ls wi th a God for whom
Kapi la, Jaimini and Kanada had no place orneed inthe i r systems to mi x up the I s v a r a of Y o g a,the P a ram é tm a of N y ay a and B r a h m a
of V e d an t a ; to confuse the non-committal wordP u r u sh a of S ank h y a w i th the J i v at m aof
the Upam'
s/zad to ident ify B r ahm a, P a r amAtma
, P u r u s h o t t a m a and I sv a r a wher
ever they occu r in the B izagavad Gi l d .
This spiri t has in recent t imes been furthercompl icated by the necessi ty for e x tol l ing the
A d v a i t a at the e x pense of the other schoo ls.Hence has been invented the e x traord inary theo ryof the temporary val id i ty of the other schools as
( 249 )
steps lead ing to the A d v a i t a, which Mad husfi
d ana Sarasvat i propounded in his P rartlzd na birch
and Vijntl na Bhi kshu in his S d i i klzyaprovachana
Bkdrlzya. (Vi d e M u i r’s Orig inal Sanskrit te x tsi i i . pp. 194 The immed iate real ity of whi chevery one can be certain is the momentary ex
periences of changing states of conc iousness, the
kale idoscopic changes of C h i t t a v r i t t i . Metaphysi cs is the attempt to classify them, pigeonho le them unde r general categories wh ich w i l lsystemat ize them,
red uce the chaos o f immed iateexper ience into an intel l igible cosmos. Thesecosmic u l t imates must necessarily be conceptsof the mind and not object ive real it ies ind ependent of the mind . The mind analyses i ts own
experiences for the purpose of gu id ing i ts own
funct ion in ordered ways, so as not to be a
he l pless waif in the bu ffet ing o f the waves o f
experiences and memories. The fact that d ifferent minds are attrac ted by d ifferent method sof metaphysi cal analysis ind icates that mind s themse lves are coloured by d ifferent temperamentsand hence each se lf-consistent metaphysical system,
i f i t explains al l the experiences of the inqu iringmind is as val id as the others. Cosmic u lt imatesare not material , objective real ities that can be
reached or acqu i red . There cannot possibly be any
meri t in devou tly bel iev ing in the ‘correctness ’
or orthodox y of any particular system. But
250
each mind has to find out what system attractsi t, what method of analysis appeals to it and
fo l low ing that method,
analyse i ts experiences,train to d ist ingu ish i ts place in the cosmos, so
that the enl ightening consc iousness bound up
w i th i t might ‘free ’ i tse l f from the mind in wh ichi t is involved and soar to i ts own levels where
from there is no return to bondage .
( 252 )
st i l l retains i ts own character as yarn. I n the
other theory the cause of the world is P a r inam a U p ad au am,
material which undergoestransmutat ion
, z'
. e.,loses i ts d ist incti ve character
when evol ving into objects, j ust asmi l k loses i ts character as mi l k when i t becomes curd , as the floweris no more the flower when i t becomes the fru i t.
This d ivergence of theory w i th regard to the
natu re of the world-process necessari ly led to a
d ifference of view with regard to the re lat ion of
cause and effect. The Nyaya-Vaiseshikas ho ld the
A s a t k Ar y a VAd a, the theory of the non
e x istence of the cause in the effect, and the o therschools hold the Opposite theory— the S a t k ar y av ad a, the id ent i ty of cause and effect, the potent ial pre-ex istence of the effect in the cause .
A. ARAMBHA VADA.
Kanada, in Vais. S i l t. V I I . i i . 7 . says, causaland effected substances are not one and id ent ical,because uni ty and id ent i ty are not cognized between them.
”Yarn is the cause of the cloth into
whi ch i t is woven bu t we cognize yarn as d i f
ferent from cloth. The connec t ion of cause andeffect is hence one of co inherence, S am a v ay a.
“That is co inherence whence (we say ) of causeand effect , this is here.
”16. V I I . i i . 2 6 . The con
junct ion of a thread and a pot on which i t l iesis accidental , but that of a mat and the grass
( 253 )
blades of wh ich i t is consti tuted is S ama v ay a
co inherence .
“ A substance is said to be a cause
on account of i ts inheri ng in i ts effects.
”15. X .
i i . I . The u lt imate substances of the universe
are the causes of al l objec ts, which are produced
by the i r conj unct ions. These const ituent sub
stances preserve each i ts own qual it ies but yetcombine to prod uce objectswi th qual i t ies previously
non-existent. “An effect is non-existent prev ious
(to its be ing prod uced ) because act ions and qua
l i ties cannot be pred icated o f i t ." l b. I X . i . I .
The same subject is referred to by Gautama
in then dy a S zi tras IV. 48 50. The fi rst of theseS tl tras explains the opponent
’
s v iew, (P fi r v a
p a k s h am) and the succeed ing two, the view of
the au thor of the Sutras (S i d d h an t a in). Theyrun as fol lows
The effec t, be fore it is prod uced , ) i s ne ithe rnon-enti ty, nor enti ty , nor again ent ity -non-ent i tybecause ent i ty and non-ent i ty are incongruous.
Ny . S fit IV. 48. On this VAtsyayana commentsthus “ Before (an effect i s ) prod uced , the effec tto be produced canno t be a n on-ent i ty
, becauseof the necessi ty of the mater ial , z
’
. e. , a part icu larmater ial is used for prod uc ing a parti cu lar object ;al l material s d o not produce al l objec ts. Hence i tcannot be he ld to be a non-ent i ty . I t is not anent i ty ; because i t is not admissible to pred i catee x istence of that which is produced , before i ts
( 2 54 )
production. I t i snot an ent i ty-non-ent i ty,because
e nt i ty and non~ent ity are incompat ible w i th eacho ther
,for enti ty i s the admission of an objec t
and non-ent i ty i s the d enial o f an objec t . Thesetwo are opposed to each o ther and not the same
”.
This argument i s refu ted by Gau tama in the
next two sutras.
“ That wh ich i s produced is
tru ly a non-ent ity before i ts prod uc tion,be cause
both i ts product ion and destruct ion are w i tnessedby us.
”
( 16 .
“
(Though the effect befo re i ts
production) i s a non-ent i ty , i t is determined by thei . e. conce ived by the mind . (l b.
Th is fund amental posi t ion of the Vaiseshika
and the Nyaya S chools was forced on them bythe i r scient ific (as opposed to me taphysi cal) temper .When we deal w ith the ac tual objects of the
universe, analyse and reconstruct them,we find
that qual it ies which d o not exist in the const i tuentsappear when an obj ec t is constitu ted out of themand that the re fore the A s a t k ar y a v ad a rests ona so l id basis of experimental fact . That in the
late r deve lopments of Ind ian phi losophy,this
theory was ecl ipsed by the r ival one o f the S a t
k ar y a v ad a was d ue to the fact that the found st ions of science laid by the V a i se s h i k a s andN a i y ay i k a s of o l d were overlaid w i th a load of
verbal gymnast ics and dul l d ialectics,j ust as in
EurOpe ,the science of anc ient Greece was choked out
of l ife by the logic of the S choo lmen. But that the
256
ani d r a v y an t a r am ar a bh a n t e i.
10) substances orig inate other substances, w i thout
themselves be ing destroyed . Probably as Rama
unja points out in his S r i B/zdslzy a,I I . i . 15, the
word ar a b h is 54-1a b h to touch, to grasp and
the Vaiseshi ka concept ion of the essential cosmic
process is that the e lementary substances embraceone anothe r to form objects and whi le such a
conj unct ion lasts, a new property is producedwhen an object i s destroyed
,the atoms are d is
j o ined , that property d isappears and the atoms are
free to form fresh conj unct ions. This concept ioni s the same as the pictu re of the behaviou r of atoms
in the atomic theory o f mod ern chemistry .
The atoms were conce ived as“ round
, ex tremely minute, inv isible , incapable of d ivision, e ternalin themselves bu t not in the i r aggregate forms
”.
( D avies,H ind u P hi losophy , p. They we re
cal led a nu (atom) or p a r a m anu (u l t imate atom).The combinat ion of two atoms const i tues a
d v y a nu k a, (two-atom), or mo lcule. Molecu les
combine into objects.
The format ion and destruc t ion of the vari
ous objects of the universe is d ue to the con
j unct ions and d isj unctions of the fou r k inds of
atoms. The fol lowing account (i f the evolu
tion of a red baked claypot out of a black
unbaked one is taken from S id d /zdnta Muktd val r’
and given as a specimen of the degenerat ion to
( 2 57 )
wh ich the val id Vaisesh i ka ideas attained for wanto f pursu ing them w i th the he lp of the e x perimen
tal me thod of modern sc ience . From conjunc
t ion w i th fire an ac tion (is produced ) in the
u l t imate atoms whi ch exist combined as d v a y a
nu k a 5, molecules, (o f the unbaked pot) thence a
d isj unction o f the u l t imate atoms from each other ;thence the destruct ion of the conj unction whichhad produced (the mo lecu le) ; thence the d estruc
t ion o f the mo lecu le ; thence the destruc t ion of the
blackness (of the u l t imate atom) ; then the orig inat ion o f red etc. (in the u l t imate atom) ; thencethe actionauxi l iary to the prod uct ion (ar am b h a)o f a (new ) object ; thence d isj unction (of the atomfrom the space it occupied temporari ly ) ; thencethe d estruct ion of the p rev ious conj unct ion (w i thspace soon after i ts red uction to the state of ul
t imate atoms) ; thence the conj unc t i on (of the
atoms) to prod uce (the red baked por) ; thencethe prod uction of mo lecu les ( d v a y anu k a s ) ;thence the o r i gin o f red e tc. ( in the
Th is maze of words constructed by unrestrictedingenu ity sat isfies the crav ings of the modernHind u Nyaya-Vaisesh i ka ph i losophe r and d oesd utyfor physics in h is stud ies. End less d isputations d is
p laying a d iabo l ical ingenu ity begu i le his ted iumand satisfy h is inst inc t for physical research !Who started this comp l icated dance of the a
toms ? I t has been po inted out in the last chapterI 7
258
that the Sfitras of Kanada d o not contemp late a su
preme creator. The quest ion thenarises, who fi rst setthe atoms inmot ion and started the world - process.
Kanada occupies an agnost ic posit ion w i th regardto this. He proves the ex istence of an ad r i sh ta ,
unseen,cause o fsome actions. These are act ions other
than that d ue to an impulse (e . g.,the act ion o f fire
on a bamboo ) , an impact (e . g.,the ac tion of an
ax e) , or a conj unct ion (e. g.
, of a harness w i th a
ho'
rse). These latter three act ions are ex pl icable ,referable to a known agency . There are actionsother than these
,caused by an unseen cause.
(Vais 5m. V . i i . l ike c ircu lation of sap in trees,(1b.
“ The upward flaming o f fire,the sideward
mot ion of w ind ,the fi rst act ion of atoms and of
m ana s are d ue to an unseen cause (l b. K a
nada thus d e l iberate ly avo ids pred icat ing a cause of
creat ion. P rasastapad a teaches the orthodox mod ernHindu theory of creat ionby B r a h maand d est ruot ion by S i v a .
“ At the end of one hund red years 0
the measu re of B r a h m a,He reaches the t ime 0
hi s re lease . Then M a h e sv a r a , the Lord of a
the world s d esires to d estroy (al l be ings) so that al iv ing be ings that are t roubled in s am sar a may
enjoy a night’s rest . Then cease the funct ionsof al l the a d r i s h t a (unseen, potent ial resul t l
of acts) of al l be ings,that causes the bodies,
sense -organs and great e lements. Then,by the
act ion o f the desi re of M ah e s v a r a and the union
260
the Supreme I s v a ra, a huge sphere i s born fromthe atoms of fire supported by the atoms of Earth.
There inHe creates B r a hm a, w i th fou r lotus-faces,
the grandfathe r of al l the unive rse as we l l as theworlds and commands H im to create al l be ings.
B e ing command ed by M a h e sv a r a , B r a h ma,
possessed of wonderfu l knowledge, d ispassion and
power knows the fru its o f the acts of al l be ings
and creates his sons— the mind -born P r a j a
p a t i s, M a nu, the D e v a s, the R i s h i s and
the P i t r i s, the fou r castes from his face , arms,
th ighs and feet , and al l o ther be ings high and
l ow,each endowed w i th knowled ge, enjoyment
and length of l ife acco rd ing to the i r Karma.
He endows them w i th virtue , knowledge , d is
passion and power , each accord ing to his d e
si re.
”
(P rasast. Bbd . Bombay E d u. p. 1 8
I t was also po inted out in the last chapte rthat the Nyaya Sutras conce ive of God as the
cause of the d istr ibu t ion of the fru its of act ion,
because such fru its are not always visible soon
after the ac t ion. A d efinite refu tat ion of‘
al l
atheist ic systems was undertaken by Udayana,
the great teacher of N y ay a, in his K uruméfi
j al z’
, probably wri t ten in the 1 2 th centu ry .
Th is book i s remarkab le in that i t is the onlySanskri t theo logical book so lely and directly dealing w i th the question of the existence of God ,
l i ke the numerous European books on the subject,
26 1
by the Schoo lmen and by Pro testant theologians.
I t i s div ided into five chapters, each chapter be ingregarded a cl uster of K n s u m a flowers. I n the
fi rst chapter Udayana establ ishes that there i s ana d r i s h t a
, an unseen cause of events of the
world . Thus far Kanaria went bu t Udayana goesone step further, by blending the Nyaya w i th the
Vaiseshi ka posi t ion and po int ing out that a dr i s b t a canno t operate as a cause , except bymeans of the concurrent energy of I sv a r a (K am
md fij al i i . 18 . He , then, d emo l ishes the athe
i sm of the M imamsa by po int ing out that as
r i ght knowledge of {he Ved a requ i res an ex ternalsource ,
since even the Ved a is destroyed d u ring
p r a l a y a and i t has to be repromu lgated at creat ion
,I sv a r a is proved to be the source of
t radit ional knowledge . (l b. i i . He then meets
the arguments that are general ly used to provet he non-existence of God from the si x method sof test imony , perception (p ra t y a k s h a), inference (a n u man a), analogy (u p am ana), tra
d i t ion (sa b d a), presumpt ion (a r t h ap a t t i ),and non-pe rception (a n u p a l a b d h i ). The
general trend of the argument here i s that as
the various methods of proof themselves dependon H im for the i r val id i ty they are paralysed bylooking into H is face and though they are
unable to prove H is ex istence, they are enoughto d isprove arguments against it. (1b.
26 2
Udayana then disproves the M imamsa argumentthat even i f God existed , he cou ld not be
a source of right knowledge , for this consistsin knowing what was not known before. He
rebu ts this by defining right knowledge to be in
tu it ive unerr ing percept ion. (1b. IV. Final lyUdayana offers e ight posi t ive arguments.
“ Fromeffects combinat ion, sustenance, trad it ional arts,trad it ional know ledge , S r u t i , tex ts and numbe runderly ing creat ion canbe proved anomniscient ,
eternal Be ing ”. ( 1b. V. Thus was the Nyaya
Vaiseshika once for al l wedded to the ism and i tcont inues to
°
affect modern In'
d ian thought chieflythrough the
'
S a i v a and V a i s hna v a sects.
B . P ARI NAMA VADA
The Sankhya, the Yoga, the Vedanta, and the
Agama schoo ls conce ive of the relation of causeand effect d ifferently. They maintain the S a t
k ar y a v ad a, the theory that the effect ex ists in.
an unmanifested form in the cause. The fo l low ingfive arguments are g iven in the S d r
'
i /ebya K d rz’
ké,
i x, to uphold the theory that the effect exists an
teced ent to i ts manifestat ion. (1 ) A non-existentthing cannot be produced . Oi l cannot be pressedout of sand . (2 ) To prod uce every effec t we takean appropriate material . Fbr mak ing curd we
take mi l k , not water. 3) Any effec t does not
i f The argument f rom d esign.
264
ent ity, in other words,the effect was concealed in
the cause . The Agama schools also accept the
S a t k ar y a v ad a general ly ; though they se ld omd iscuss this fundamental quest ion of ph i losophy .
The S a t kar y a v ad a— the concept of the “
per
sistence of the real ly existent ”, und er l ies al l phi losophy, ancient and mod ern. Whatever real lyand fund amental ly e x ists must , so far as baree x istence is conce rned , be ind epend ent o f t ime .
I t may go through many changes, and thus havea h istory ; that i s to say , must have d efini te t imerelat ions, so far as changes are concerned buf
i t can hard ly be thought o f as e i ther go ing out
o f existence , or as coming into existence , at anyg iven period , though i t may complete ly change i tsform and accidents every thing basal must havea past and a fu tu re of some k ind or other, thoughany special concatenation or arrangement may havea date of origin and of d estru ct ion .Thé
thing that zs, both was and shal l be (Lod ge. L ife
and M at ter , pp. 10 1
Both'
the S a t k fi r y a v é d a and the A s a t
k ar y a v ad a, though opposed to each othe r as
theories are not necessarily mu tual ly excl usive whenused for explaining the cosmos. Explanat ion is a
mental attempt to form a p ictu re of what is ou tsid ethe mind . An explanat ionmust be se lf consistent ,otherwise i t fai ls ; M t a sel f-consistent explanat ionshou ld not be imagined to incl ude Me w lzol e of
( 265 )
thefacts of the cosm os we try to und erstand .
I t is noteworthy that th is ol d world d ispute
between the S a t k ar y a v ad a and A s a tk ar y a v ad a rages to-d ay in an acu te formamong the biologists. Are variat ions that underl ieevol ut ion d ue to innate causes, bu t manifestat ionsof latent qual i t ies ? Or
.
d o they arise from some
thing l ike a chemical combinat ion of the germand the spe rm plasms ? D o they evolve as res
pouse to env i ronment P Or are they d ue to spon
taneous impu lsion P How far are the characteristics d ue to hered i ty ? What are the l imi ts of
educabi l i ty A l l these quest ions are be ing d iscussed on the basis o f one assumption or the other .From the S a t k a r y a d a i t fo l lows that
the world material becomes gradual ly transmutedinto various forms to prod uce the succession of
phenomena that forms the evol ut ion of the wor ld .
This theo ry is cal led the P a r i n am a v ad a, thetheory of evo l ut ion or t ransmu tat ion, for the noumenon of the objec t is P a r i nam a U p é d fi nam,
material that changes form and not A r am b h a
U p ad an a m,o riginat ing mater ial .
1 . SAnK HYA.
The material that accord ing to the Sankhya
(and the Yoga) undergoes transformat ion to producethe world is homogeneous P r a d h ana or M 0l a
p r a k r i t i . The impu lse that sets P r a d h an a
2 66 )
inmot ioncannot be a supreme Person ; “ becausean intel l igent pe rson engages in act ions e ither forhis own gain or on account of benevolence these
(motives) cannot apply to the creat ion of the worldwhich therefore cannot be d ue to an inte l l igentpe rson. God , who can have no desi res unfu lfi l led ,can desi re to gain noth ing from the creation of the
world . Nor can his engaging himsel f in creat ionbe d ue to benevolence ; for, before creation,i i v a s have no sense-organs, bod ies, objects ( andhence cannot experi ence pain) ; in the absence of
pain, how can there be a benevolent desi re to
remove i t ? I f we say that ) benevo lence r ises onobserv ing pain after creat ion, (we commit) the fau l tof argu ing in a circ le , (inferring) creat ion frombenevo lence and benevo lence from creat ion.
”
(Vachaspati M isra,Tattva K aumud z
’
,
Therefore the impu lse to creat ion is a bl ind ,unintel l igent impu lse .
“ As the unconcious mi l kflows ( of itse l f from the cow) for the nourishmentof the calf, so P r a d h ana begins to evo lve for therelease o f Purusha S d iz. K d r . l vi The me recont igu ity of the cow and the cal f is enough to set
the mi lk flowing from the cow : so the mere cont igu i ty of P u r u s h a and P r a k r i t i causes a
movement in the latter. Then there resu l ts a
union of both, l ike that of a lame man (mountedon the back of a bl ind man. Hence startscreat ion. (15. x x i .) P u r u s h a is lame, having
( 2 6 8 )
bu t impl ic it . The process as such I S i n couse
quence immediate ly infected w i th the fini tud e
of th is sphere, and spl i ts into the two-fo l d move
ment of the inst inct of reason, presented as two
d ifferent movements. On the one hand i t super
sedes the one-sidedness of the I dea’s subject iv i tyby rece iv ing the exist ing world into i tse lf, i ntosubject ive concept ion and thought , and wi th th isobj ect ivity which i s thus taken to be real and true fori ts content i t fi l ls up the abst ract cert itud e of i tsel f.On the other hand , it supersedes the onesidedness
o f the object ive world , wh ich is now ,on the contrary,
est imated as only a mere semblance,a co l lect ion of
cont ingencies and shapes at bo ttom v isionary . l t
modifies and informs that wo rld by the inward na
t ure of the subjec t ive , wh ich i s he re taken to be thegenu ine objec t ive. The former i s the inst inct after
“ tru th, cogni t ion prope rly so cal led : the theore
‘t ical ac tion of the idea. The latte r is the instinctof the Good to fu lfi l the same , the prac t ical activityof the id ea or vo l i tion.
”
(L ogi c of Hegel , Wal l ,
p. B ud d h i,thus
,is the root o f the uni verse
and cosmi c B u d d h i , B r a h m a* i s the world
creator. Krishna speak ing in the B kagavaa’
gfta
as the cosmi c P u r u s h a says To me, M a h a tB r a hma i s the Y o n i ; ther
'
e in l se t the germ ;
t Br a h m 3 and other God s are Purushas, just l ike ord inaryhumanbeings.
( 269 )
thence the birth of al l be ings, O B bar a t a. Of
the be ings of al l forms arising in al l wombs,OK a u n t e y a
,B r a h m a m a h a t i s the Y o n i ,
I the father,giver of the seed (X IV. 2
From B u d d h i is evo lved , A h am k ar a, the
organ o f sel f-consc iousness and (necessari ly) of
o ther-consc iousness. Afte r the fi rst faint gl immering o f d ifferent iated consc iousness comes the
stage when the ind iv id ual ident ifies h imse lf w iththe d efini te port ion of space occupied by hi s
bod y (gross or subtle ) and says, ‘th is is I ‘thati s not- I
’
. Now A h am k ar a is dev eloped ; there lat iv e consciousness wh ich alone al l of us are
fami l iar w i th,becomes possible. Th is Aham k a
r a i s a func tion of matter, for t i l l the Purusha id entifies h imse lf w i th a port ion o i matterand regard s o the r po rt ions of matter as ou tsideh imse l f, the cogni t ions of l and of Not- l cannotbe experienced . Th is is true as much of the cosmi cGod s as o f the ind iv id ual man and of the hosts of
animals wh i ch stand be low man in the i r evo l u t ion.
Cosmi c A h a m k ar a is R u d r a. The highestd eve lopment of se l f-consciousness in man is unionw i th R u d r a. Hence Sankaracharya makes the refrain o f most o f hi s S i v a S t o t r a s, S i v o h a m,
( I am m (I am pureS i v a),
“ P r a t y agat m a S i v o h a m (I am
Siva,the ego of introspec tive medi tat ion).From the A h am k ar a develop the e leven or
2 70 )
gans in the A d h y at m a (ind iv id ual ) and the
corresponding de it ies in the A d h i d a i v a and
also the A d h i b h a t a (object ive universe).T a i j a s a (bright) A h am k ar a deve lops
the de it ies. The S Q t t v i c or V a i k h é r i k a
A h am k ar a acted on by R a j a s prod uces
the M a n a s, the five sense-organs
,and the five
act ion organs, mak ing up the e leven organs.
The T am a s a A h am k ar a,d ark ego ism,
becomes transformed into the five t anma t r a s
( 15. xxiv , x x v Thus i s started the t riple l ine o f
evo l u t ion the whole scheme of which is given be lowin tabular form:
a d h y at m a a d h i d a i v a
(individ ual ) (cosmic)L B u d d h i B r a h ma2 . A h am k ar a R u d r a
3. M ana s C h a n d r a
4. Bar A k asa
5. Sk in V ay u6 . Eye A d i t y a
7 . Tongue V a r u n a
8 . Nose Earth
9 . Voice A g n i10. Hands Indra1 1 . Feet Vishnu1 2 . Organ of P éy u M i t r a1 3. U p a s t h a P r a j ap a t i
a d h i bh fi t a
(objectiv e ) .Cert itudeEgoismS ank a l p a
SoundTouchS ightTasteSmel lU t teranceGraspingWalk ingExcret ionAnanda.
v
2 7 2
(u lt imate ) e lement , i t takes a t am a s a,dark
,
resist ing form and when there is a contac t betweenthese two forms, the sense organ and the sense
object , sensat ion resu lts by the i l l uminat ion of the
object by the sense organ.
Th is concept that sensat ion i s not a mode, a
funct ion,of inte l lect bu t an e lement , a const i t uent
of matter, perhaps looks parad oxical bu t i s not so
d ifficu l t to conce ive as i t looks. Al l admit thatsme l l exists as infini tesimal ly smal l part ic les of
matte r sho t off from odorous substances. According to mod ern physical no t ions l ight is bu t acase of e lectric ity and al l matte r i s bu t e l ectri
c ity . Hence “atoms o f l ight are infini tesimal
ly smal l part icles o f matter. E xtend ing this to
the o ther three sensat ions i t i s not impossibleto conce ive the five sensat ions to be the five
( metaphysi cal ) e lements o f matter out of whi ch
objects and the sense -organs wh ich perce ivethem are evolved . Physics attempts to form a
pi cture o f the universe by making or conce iv ing
mechanical mod e ls of the act ion of the comple x
objects of the universe . S uch mode ls are extreme lyhe lpful in what i s cal led scientific explanat ion. So
far the format ion of scient ific hypotheses i s val id .
But when one steps beyond and says that the planof the univ erse is a copy of the many mechanical
mode ls conce ived by the scient ific man, i t is bu t
the intrusion of bad metaphysics into good sc ience.
( 2 73 )
The only val id me taphysical explanat ion of the
universe is the analysis of i t into five ele’
ment
ary sensat ions or t a nmat r a s as the Hindu cal lsthem.
These t a nm At r a s are A v i se s h a , (l i t. nu
spec ific), perceptib le only to the Gods whose bodiesand sense organs are subtle . When they becomeV i se s h a ,
specific , d ifferenti ated , they give riseto subtle bod ies, to the bod ies that spring froma father and mother and the M a h ab h ut a s
empirical e lements ( 1b. xxxv i i i The t a nm a t r a 5 fi rst evo lve into empirical e lementscal led M a h ab h fi t a s, or S t h fi l a bh fi t a s
( gross e lements ). From S a b d a t a nmat r a is
evo lved S t h al a Ak as a ; this mixed w ithV ay u t a nm at r a becomes S t h ti l a v ay u
,
and so on, each gross e lement ’ ( m a h ab h ii t a )containing the prope rt ies of al l the e lements abovei t and serv ing as the basis of the i r d ifferentiation.
Th is process of d iffe rent iat ion is cal led P a
'
n c h i o
k a r a n a— qu intupl i cat ion. These gross e lementsthus evolved consti tute on the one hand the objectsof the physi cal universe and on the other the physi
cal bodies ( w i th the physi cal sense organs whi ch
form the habitat of the incarnating P u r u s h a sThe creat ion of these bod ies is cal led 1 i ng ak h y a S a r g a evol ut ion of bodies, re lated to
B h av ak h y a S a r g a evol u t ion of characteris
t ics. 1b. l i i These bodies are of fou rteen kinds,18
( 2 74 )
of whi ch e ight are d i vme, z. a. subtle,name ly , ( I )
B rAhm a, that of B r a h m a (2 ) P r aj ap a t y a,
those of the creat ing hierarchies, of M an u s,and of
R i s h i s , (3) S a um y a , those of the l unar
be ings ; (4) A i n d r a those of Gods of t he rank
of I nd r a ; (5) G and h a r v a , those of the
attendants on I n d r a and beings of that ord er (6 )R ak s h a sa ; (7 ) Y ak s h a ; (8) P a i sac h a,those of three classes of demons. The ninth c lass ofbodies is that ofman; the other five are infra-human—domest ic animals, wi ld beasts
,birds, creeping
animals and immovables (vegetables and minerals).These three groups of bodies, d ivine, human, and
infra-humanare respect ively characterised by S a t
t v a ,R a j a s ,
and T am a s . (l b. l i i i , l iv).Hence the Gods lead a l i fe of indolent pleasureman, one of act ivity and the beings be low man are
enveloped by ignorance bu t al l be ings— h igh or
low act not out of any imaginary princ iple of freew i l l bu t al l act ion in the manifested universe is themechanical resu l t of the play of S a t t v a R a j a s
and T a m a 3 . These three k inds of bod ies are alsocal led fl r d d h v a s r o t a s, A r v ak s r o t a s and
T i r y a g s r o t a 5, z
'
. e. those whose vital energyflows upwards, downwards and horizontal ly . Vz
'
slz.
P M . V.
This completes the evolut ionary process and
provides a large variety of bod ies in which P u r ue h a 5 may reside and ex perience the pain ar ising
( 275 )
(v i s e s h a), non-specific (a v i s e s h a) the l i nga
mat r a and the a l i nga. (16 . i i. The “spe
'
c ific ( v i se s h a ) or complex comprises the oh
jects of the world . The non-specific are the
simple pure sensat ions (t a nmat r a) of wh ich
al l objects are compounded and the A h am k ar a—the foundat ion of the cognit ion of I and not-I .
The “ 13 g am a t r a,the mere character istic , the
to uch ofmatter that colou rs the pure consc iousnessof the P u r u s h a and charac terizes him as a
bound sou l , i s B u d d h i . The a l i ng a is the
characterless, homogeneous P r a d h ana.
After al l objects are evolved they cont inuein a state of constant flux , for flux is l ife. Thisflux i s of three k inds, D h a r m a, L a k s h a na
and A v a s t h a. (l o. i i i. I 3). Th is triple flux af
fects objects and the o rgans of percept ion and the
act ion by means of whi ch we contact them. (In)D h a r m a is change of charac terist ic . Thus whena pot i s made of a l ump of clay
,the (material).
clay gives up the characterist ics of a l ump andtakes on the characterist ics of a pot. Th is is theflux of D h a r m a
,affecting the D h a r m i (
terial ), clay. This flux— change of characteristconsists of two moments, ( I ) the rise of tcharacterist ic (of the pot), (2 ) the d estructi
the old characterist ic (of the l ump). D h a ri s thus the flux of form whi le the D h a r
mater ial , is permanent the various characteris
( 277 )
the ou tgoing and the incoming ones are bothe xistent , only when the former is he ld in check
(n i r o d h a ) the latter manifests i tsel f. Thuswhen the Vampiness (p i nd a. t v a) of clay is
he ld in check , i ts pot-kooa’
(g h a t a t v a) is in
manifestat ion (v y u t t h ana). D h a r m a itself,i s subject to a triple flux
,cal led L a k s h a na, the
flux of t ime. The form o f a pot i s a D h a r m a
of clay . Th is form has three states w ith referenceto t ime— fu ture, present and past. So long as the
pot is not made,bu t is only as it were immanent in
the clay , it i s prospecti ve pot-[road (a nag a t ag h a t a t v am). This qual ity of capabi l ity of
becoming a pot is he ld in check n i r o d h aand present pot- [zooa
'
(v a r t a mana gh a t a t
gam) comes into manifestat ion (v y u t t h an a)
when a po t takes shape. S imi lary a statue existsin latency in marble before the scu lptor carvesi t. Carv ing is the act o f keeping the latencyunder contro l so that the actual statue may
manifest itse lf. When, final ly , the pot i s broken, i ts
persent pot-120ml is he ld in check and i ts state as a
past (a t i t a) pot i s manifested . Thus goes on
this procession of each form of each object froma prospect ive to a present and on to a past state(L a k s h a na), each presenting two moments,N i r o d h a and V y u t t h an a, one momentmerging and another manifest ing itse lf. The
flux of an object with regard to t ime is thus
( 273 )
analysed , so that the fundamental idea of S a t
k ar y a v ad a, that nothing is created , nothingdestroyed , may be consistent ly fol lowed in ex pla
nat ion of the world-d ux . Whi le the tri ple fiux of
L a k s h ana takes place, D h a rm a is fi x ed .
The idea of L a k s h ana as a procession of tem
po ral states of a form is indicated by each state.
being cal led an A d h v a(way). Each ad h v acontains a N i r o d h a and a V y u t t h é n a ,
one
state checked and another manifested . N i r o d h aand V y u t t h an a are always act ing. I f the for
mer is strong and the latter i s weak , a certain statei s kept under contro l when the latter i s strong andthe former is weak, manifestat ion of a stateresu l ts. Thus N i r o d h a and V y u t t h ana ,
each has two phases ; in N i r o d h a , N i r od h a is strong and V y u t t h an a is weak ;in V y u t t h an a , V y u t t h an a i s strong andN i r o d h a is weak . Each of these phasesi s cal led an A v a s t h a. Thus D h a rm a is the
flux (P a t i nam a) ot a rm i , L a k s h ana- is
the flux of D h a r ma and A v a s t h a is the fluxof L a k s h ana. This intricate analysis of the
flux of objects taken from VyAsa’
s Commentaries
on Yoga S i l tms I I I . 1 3, reminds us of the barren
hai r-spl itt ing of -the Nyaya-Vaiseshika School
i ts only v i rtue, i f i t is virtue at al l , be ing a con
sistent carrying out of the doct r ine of E x m'
lzz'
l o
nikz’
l fit. C h i t t a v r i t t i , the flux of psychoses, i s
( 2 80 )
cu lty does not occu r in the S fink b y a p a r i nam a v ad a where in unconsc ious material objectsevolve out of an unconsc ious causal proto-matter.The Sankhya therefore objec ts to the Vedantaappropriat ing hi s theory on account of the
d iffe rence of that (v ia. the world, from
'
B rahma) ”
(Ved . Sat. I I . i . The Vedanta S fi tras meetthis objection terse ly, “ But i t i s seen (l b. 115i .
’
6 )l
that the world presents many instances o f things o fdifferent nature re lated as cause and effect, c. g .
’
hai rs and nai ls grow out of man,scorpions out of
cow dung, worms out of honey. T0 * th is crudeway of meet ing this difficu l ty
,the
‘A
'
&h a r y a 5ad d each a cl eversupplementary argument derivedfrom the i r
'
sectarian tea'
ch ings. Sankara arguesthat evol ut ion of the objects that const itu te the
world is i l l usory (v i v a r t a p a r i nam a) and
B i ahma is but the seeming mate rial (v i v a r t au pad ari a
“ B rahma becomes the subs
tratum of al l phenomenal changes l ike evol u t ion e
'
tc
superimposed on him' by A v i d y a
in H is real natu re he remains beyond al l phenomenal changes and untransformed (Comm. on Vea
’.
Sat. I ] . i . RamAnuja attributes to B rahmaeven in his causal state “
(K ar a i i av a s t h a), a
subtle body made up of ind iv id ual sou ls and theelements of matter that have become absorbedin H im. D uring the K ar y av a s t h a, when the
a Hence the ad v a i t a is cal led the v i v a r t a v ad a .
( 2 8 1 )
world is in mani festati on, i t i s this body of H is
that evolves, He Himself be ing the unchangeable ,
a v y a k t a
Thus al l'
schoo ls interpose between B rahma
that i s Pure Conscious Being and the evolvedworld , a state of proto-matter which is he ld to bereal or i l l usory acco rd ing as consistency w iththe i r fundamental metaphysical posi t ion requ ires .
The hiatus be tween B r a h m a and this protomatter is the weak po int of al l Vedanta theor i es.
This orig inal state of proto-matter, M ii 1a p r ak r i t i as the Sankhyas cal l i t, is cal led A sa t in the
V e d a s.
“ A s a t w as th is at fi rst, from it sprangS a t (Tai t. ,
Up. I I 7 . I ; Clzlt . Up. I I I 19 .
“ S a t
is founded upon A s a t. B eings (b h 0t a 5) are
founded upon S a t .”
(Atltar. Ved . X VI I i .“ From A s a t, M ana s was created . M a na 5
created P rajapa t i . P ra j ap a t i created be ings.
”
(Ta i t. B ret/t I I . i i. 9 . A s a t was this.at fi rst .
They say ,
‘what is this A s a t ? The R i s h i s say
that At fi rst A s a t (S at B ralt V I . i . 1 . I ,)By A s a t, therefore , is meant a state whend ist inc to bjects were not evo lved , a state of homogene i ty ,
t“ s a t d enotes the ex istence of things in the mani fold
forms of the ex ternal world , the B usoyn of Hegel , theNatura Natura ta of Spinoza and A sa t is the opposi te of
thi s,or the formless P r a k r i t i . S at corresponds in
each separate form to the ‘being-this ’
of Hegel Byv i rtue of i ts pred i cate of merely being-this, every somethingi s a. fini te and therefore i t is an ej ect, because otherwise we
( 282 )
the chaos of the Greeks. This state is also cal ledT am a s, to be d ist ingu ished from T am a 5, one
of the three gunas.
“ T am a s ex isted , enveloped byT am a s, in the beginning Riga Voo
’
a X . 1 29 .
I n the beginning T a m a 5 alone was th is.”
(M a l t. Up. V. By T am a s. darkness, was sym
bol ized a state when nothing objec tive i s manifested . Another and frequently used symbol of the
unmanifested state of matter , i s water Al l thiswas und ifferent iated water.” (Riga Vea
'a,X . 1 29 .
“ At first al l this was water, (no thing) but water.(S a t. B ra/z. X I . i . 6 . 1 . 9 , Ta i t. S am. V I I . i . 5. I
Taz'
t. B rd lt . 1. i . 3. Tai t. Am . 1. 2 3. I .)
S r i s h t i , creat ion, started w ith an agitat ionof this primeval matter. S t i s h t i is more pro
perly emission, the emission of energy into the
waters, which started the work of evol u t ion. Thisfi rst start ing of creat ive act ivity is described in
'
the earl ier wri t ings as a desi re “ D esi re (K am a)
could only concei ve i t as absolute being and therefore un
l imi ted Dr. Muir, however, refers to the commentators on the Rigved a who ex plain A s a t as meaning an nu
d eveloped state ’
,and ad ds that i f w e accept thi s statement
there w i l l be no contrad iction. A s a t d oes not mean simplyanundeveloped state
,but the state of pure or forml ess ex is
tence of the primal substance f rom which al l forms hav esprung. I t is clear
,however, that i f A sa t means an nu
d eveloped state,then S a t must mean, not the essence of
anything, but a d eveloped state Dav ies. H indu P hi l . pp.
136-8 . But Dav i es forgets that sometimes 8 a t i s used for theessence, the noumenal enti ty as in Chh. Up . VI . i i . I . 2.
( 2 84 )
h im ; the latter was the fi rst d iscrete form of the
universe ; These are the two l ines of evol u t ion.
The work of P r a j ap a t i is described variouslyin various cosmogonic hymns. Most frequently i t is described as T a p a s (med itation accom
.panied by austeri ty) . He desi red may I becomemany
,may I produce chi ld ren. He performed
t a p a s ; after he performed tapas, he emi t ted al l
this; and whatever there is. Hav ing emitted i t,he entered into it . (Tai t. Up. I I . “ Prajapat idesi red, may I produce ch i ld ren.
’
He performedt a p a s ; he became pregnant. He became ye l lowbrown. Hence a pregnant woman becomes ye llow-brown. Be ing pregnant w i th a foetus, he
became exhausted . Be ing e x hausted , hebecame
black-brown. Hence an exhausted pe rson be
comes black-brown.
”
(Tai t . B ra/z. I I . i i i . 8. I .)Prajapat i ’s work is also conce ived as a sex ualact.
“ The Atma, in the form of a Purusha, was
this at fi rst . Look ing around , he saw (there was)none but h imself. He d esi red a second . He
was as much as a man and woman locked inembrace. He made h imse lf fal l asunder in two
parts. Thus arose man and w ife . He cohabi tedw ith her. Thence men were born. (Sat. B ret/t.
X IV. i v. 2 . Creat ion is also .descri bed as d ueto u ttering mantras.
“With ‘Bhuh ,
’ Prajapat ia: I n some legend s P rajapati came out of the gold en egg,
Sat. B rett. X I . i . 6 . 2.
( 285 )
generated this ; w ith ‘Bhuvah’
, the intermed iateregi on ; w ith ‘
Svab ,’
the sky (16 . VI . i . 4.
I t is also conce ived as a sac rifice. The ri tual ofthe Ved ic sacrifice was supposed to be an earthlycopy of this sacrifice of creat ion. Vishnu is general ly referred to as the sacrificial v i ct im. Lastly ,creat ion is somet imes d egcri bed as an act of sel fsacrifice .
“ Brahma, the se lf-existant was in con
templat ion. He thought, ‘there is no infini ty inth is contemplat ion. I shal l sacrifice mysel f in
be ings and be ings in myself. ’ Then sacrific ingH imsel f in al l be ings and al l be ings in Himse l f,he acqu ired superiority, se lf-eflulgence and lord
ship.
”
(Sat . Brah. X I I I . v i i . 1 .
The Golden Egg of the universe deve loped in
the period of a year. I t burst in two. The
two hal ves became (one) golden and (the other)si lver. The si lver ( hal f ) is this earth, the go lden
(hal f ) the sky ; the chor ion,mountains
, the am
nion, cloud and mist ; the blood vesse ls, rivers and
the flu id,the ocean.
”Ci t/z. Up. I I I . 1 9 . 1
The order in which the v arious be ings werecreated also var ies in d ifferent accounts. The
Ta i tti riy a B rzi lmzana makes it out to be Asuras,
Fathers (Pitris), men,D evas (I o. I I . i i i . 8 . L ). The
e lements were created in the order in wh i ch theSankhya makes them evol ve.
“ From that Atmasprang Akasa, from Akasa air, from air fire , fromfire water, from water earth
,from earth herbs, from
( 2 86 )
sherbs food , from food retas (seed ,) from retas in en.
(Ta i t. Up. I I . By‘man ’
here we must hereunderstand his gross body, for in the prev ious serieshe appears between the Fathers and the D evas.Al l this work of evol ut ion is done by the S upremeB rahma.
“The mak ing of names and forms (belongs) to H im who renders (the e lements) tripart i te, accord ing to the teaching of the Srut i (Ved .
S ift. I I . i v . Making the elements ‘ tripart i terefers to Clz/zdna
’ogya Up . v i -2
, where t e j a s i
ap a s and a nn am (fire , water and food or
earth, as usual ly interpreted) are alone ment ioned 3,from such crude
'
specu lations, the Sankhya el
aborated i ts we l l -thought and finished analysisof the Universe. When this was done , thoughthe Vedanta was d irectly opposed té the fund
amental Sankhya teaching and the au thor of
the B rahma Sutras devoted two sect ions of the
work to refu te the Sankhya heresy, by appeal
ing both to reason and revelat ion, it accepted
the Sankhya scheme of transmu tation i ts promul
gator Kapila has become an incarnation of
V i s h nu and his ph i losophy ~ a revelat ion as
unassai lable as the self-promu lgated Veda.
The Vedanta has e laborated the Ved ic "
seheme
of three regions, the earth, the sky , and the intermediate region (an t a r i k s h a) into three cosmic
spheres, the Vedanta scheme being perhaps a rival
o f the Vaishnava scheme. The Vi l d zza'dkya
( 2 88 )
sensing the internal , not sensing the external , not
sensmg both, no mass of sent iency,not conscious
,
not-unconsc ious, unseen, unusable , untouchable ,ind efinable, inconce ivable, ind escribable, the essenceof the intu ition of the one Atma
,where the world
is not, the unchnagi ng, the bl issfu l , the one w ithou tsecond , that, wh ich is to be known, is the Atma,the fourth (M d zzd . Up . 2
Ng'z
'
simka Tépim'
Upam'
i lzaa', I I . i , is a com~
mentary on the M d nd déy a Upam'
r/zad and
presents.
a systemat i c paral le l ism between the
three states of the indiv idual consciousness and of
the cosmic consciousness as fol lows
S tates Indiv id ual CosmicWaking. V i sv e . V a i sv ana r a.
D ream. T a i j a s a. H i r a ny a ga r bb a.
S leep. P r éj fi a. i sv a r a.
The world s and bod ies correspond ing to thesethree states of consciousness are cal led S t h ul aS fi k s h m a and K ar a na, gross, subtle and
causal (the fourth, T u r i y a, be ing the Abso l u te).
The three worlds are also cal led V i r at, S v a i-at
and S am r at.
( 2 89 )
(4) SAN A AND SAK TA AGAMAS .
The Sankhya d iv id ed the object ive universe intotwenty -four t a t t v a s
,which w i th the P u r u s h a
make up the twenty-five princ iples that const itu tethe macrocosm and the microcosm. The S a i v a sanalyse the universe into thi rty-si x t a t t v a s.
B etweenh a k r i t i and B u d d h i they interpolateG u n a as a t a t t v a separate from e ither. Thusthere are twenty-five tattvas be low P u r u s h a, whoi s the twenty o si x th. Above him there are five, cal led P a n c h a k a f’1 c h u k a
, the five-fo ld enve lope ,v iz .
,N i y a t i
,K al a, R ag a. V i d y a, and K a l a.
Above K a l a, there are M ay a, S u d d h a V i d y a,l sv a r a, S a d as i v a and S i v a t a t t v a s.
These th i rty-si x t a t t v a s are d ivided intothree classes, the h ighest , S i v t a t t v a
,being a
,
class by itse l f, the next three , S a d asi v a. , i s v a r mand S u d d h a v i d y a be ing the V i d y at a t t v a ;and the th i rty-two beginning from M ay a and '
end ing w i th the earth be ing the A t m at a t t v a.l
The first of the At m at a t t v a s is M Ay a, not
9 T a t t v a, l i t , that-ness has various connotations. Some
t imes i t means real i ty , as opposed to phenomenal i ty,a real
,
ul t imate factor of the cosmos. But in the Sankhya and
Sai va S 9 s t r a s i t more oftenmomm a stage of e volut ion, a stage h avrng md ivi d uaf characteri stics of its own.
The t a t t v a t r a y am of the Vaishnavas are, again, threereal , and ultimate factors of the cosmos and not stages of
the evolution of P rakri ti .
19
$90“
the Su d d h a M ay ament ioned in p. 158. may ai s the roo t of the universe. I t is e ternal , one ,
pervad ing , of the form of objects,the subst ratum
in whi ch the potent ial resu l ts o f act ions K a r m a)inhere , impure and common to al l 3 a k a l a s. I t
is,during mani festat ion, the cause of the subtle and
gross bod ies etc . of the P ra l a y ak a l a s, whi ch
end w ith p r a l a y a. As the t runk , the leaf, thefru it, e tc.
,latent in the seed grow (therefrom,
so the
universe) from k a l a to k s h i t i (earth) (d e ve lopefrom M ay (P aw /z. Ag. i i i . 2 “ I t fi rst e vo lvesinto the subtle t a t t v a s (K a l 9. by manifesting the powe r o f sight ( d t i k sa k t i , power o f\1 p
ercept ion) in the arms then i t evo lves into the
lgross worlds and bodies. The subtle K a l 3 e tc.
bind the man (a n u ) then the gross.
”
( 1b. i i i . 6 1 -6 2 K a l A is the fi rst t a t t v a evo l vedfrom M ay a. K 3 1a o vercomes in al l ways them a l a s ( impuri t ies ) that obstruct the mani fes
tat ion o f c h a i t a n y a and thus he lps c ha i t any ato mani fest. C h a i t a 11 y a is of the fo rm of coguit ion and act iv i ty and is the auxil iary of the Atma;(when) i t is obst ruc ted
,K a lamani fests i t. K a l a
d oes not mani fest the Atma in i ts ent i rety,bu t
makes the cha i t any a sh ine part ial ly,asK a laworks
in accordance w i th Karma.
”
( 1b. v . 2 -5 V i d ya,
f f the next t a t t v a e vo l ves from K a l a w i thou t
;b\i t the A t m 3 cannot d erive experience of pleasure\and pain “ That instrument w i th which the
I1
( 29 2 )
K a r m a by i tse lf has no power to affl ict manQ
S i v a’
5 power has to intervene, in the form of
N i y a t i (16 . v . 83 8834 The P u r u s h a clothesf w ith these five enve lopes’ developed from
M ay a be ing set thereto by S i v a. The name
P u r u s h a appl ies :only, to the s a k a l a s ; theyl are enve loped by ignorance (a v
'
i d y a) which
[ comes from P r a k r i t i} the V i j fi a n ak a l a s
and P r a l a y a k e v a l a s are not cal led P urushas.
(15. vi . 2 P t a k r i t i i s also the st uff of whichthe worlds which the P u r u s h a is to experience ;
are made. I t is the fi rst of the gross deve lopmentsof may a, K a l a and the other four (p anc h ak a n c h u k a) be ing subtle ones. I t is also cal ledA v y a k t a (16 . v i . I n 1t the g u n a s are in
l equi l ibrium (16 . vi . From P r a k r i t i evo lvethe G u na s ; from the G u na s
,B u d d h i . The
rest of this part of evol u tion i s substant ial ly thesame as that taught in the Sankhya school .
I”
The V 1 d y a t a t t v a s (to be d ist ingu ished
g, from the t a t’t v a cal led V i d y a, the thirt ieth 1n
the series) are three mod ificat ions of the highestt a t t v a, that cal led S i v a. Th is S i v a t a t t v a
" 15 n i s h k a l a, undifferentiated , where S u d d h am ay a, w i th al l i ts act iv ity ended
,becomes absorb
4 ed (reaches l a y a) ; from i t rad iate the powers of
,consc iousness and act ion ; i t i s indestruct ible,omnipresent . E ternal , unchanging , omniscient (l it.with face 1n al l d irect ions). (P ausfzA}; i . 18 20)
Q
( 293 )
S a d Asi v a is the next t a t t v a, the fi rst ofthe three V i d y at a t t v a s.
“When S u d d h a-flm ay a
,the sa k t i of S i v a begins her l ife of
t
}S
act ivity, then S i v a passes to the state of B b o g aS i v a (l i t . , S i v a that expe riences, the fi rst stageof different iat ion) be is S a d Asi v a
,also cal led
S ad ak h y a,not real ly separate from S i v a.
When S u d d h am ay a is actual ly ac tive,B b o g afi
S i v a passes on to the stage o f A d h i k ar a S i v a
(l i t . , S i v a that supe rintend s or ru les) he is theni s v a r a, not real ly separate from S a d asi v y(16 . i . 2 5 The body of five m a n t r a s referredto in the prev ious chapter be longs to 38 a d as i v a,for the h ighest , und ifferent iated S i v a t a t t v a,can scarce ly be said to have a bod y , even one com
posed of m a n t r a s.
B i n d u,
o therw ise S u d d h a M ey a,
also
S i v a ga k t i , the act ive counterpart of thesethree highest t a t t v a s is not counted as a separatet a t t v a ; so that the S ak t a ag am a s give her
prominence and throw the S i v a s in the background . The 1a y a and o ther (two) differentstates of S i v a al ready described have B i n d u
as the i r substratum she is the same as K u nd a
l i n i (the She i t i s that bind s A n
a n t a and the rest to the bondage of the i r (respect ive) act iv i t ies and re leases them therefrom. M oreover at the t ime of creat ion the world beginningw ith that of m a n t r a 5 proceed from her and
( 2 94 )
become absorbed inher.
”
(15. i i . 1 Her act ivityin manifest ing t a t t v a 5 determines the four
(h ighest t a t t v a s), S i v a t a t t v a, sad ak h y at a t t v a, i s v a r a t a t t v a, and ( S u d d h a )V i d y a t a t t v a.
”
(15. i i . 32 S u d d h aV i d y a is the cause o f true knowledge (16. i i .
Besides this l ine of evol u t ion of the variousprinciples of the Universe, the S 3 i v aA g am a 5
also d escribe the evol u t ion of hosts of be ings, suc
ceed ing the r ise o f M ay 3 .
“ Then at fi rst hec reates e ight qual ified K e v a l a sou ls (anu ac
companied by V ama and other S a k t i s and
surrounded by the 7 crores of ma n t r a s. (M y ig.
Ag. i i i. I ). They are here cal led k e v a l a becausethey be long to the c lass al read y descr i bed as
V i j fi an a k e v a l a, those that have Ana v a
m a l a sticking on to them bu t are rid of K a r m a
and M ay a. They are A n a n t a, S Ok h s h m a,
S i v o t t a m a,E k a n e t r a, E k a ru d r a, and
S i k h a n d i , lo rds of lords ( R Aj a raj a s ).
Then the Lord be ing manifested A n a n t a and
the rest, creates from M ay a t a t t v a (the knot),the I 18 ( i sv a r a 5 ) whose bod ies begin fromK a l a. (15. i i i. These evident ly, are subjectto two m a l a s.
Afterwards the Lord ente rs into those ru lers of
the worlds (b h u v an e s v a r a 5) who are tainted(with the three m a l a s) from whom al l th1s
( 296 )
ings w ith regard to the start ing of the process of
creat ion, quaint and interest ing.
“ Th is i s the
order of creation. A man, desi rous of begett ing
offspring, on account of the a d r i s h ta (k a r m a)
of the son to be born,contemplates h is own powers
and himse l f enters, in the form of S u k l a, thew ife that i s the hal f of h is bod y ; then thew ife in the form of so ni t a enters wi th in the
su k l a ; thence the b i n d u swe l ls out, l ike the
seed of the banyan and the u d u m b a r a thenin the o rde r in wh ich the sprou t etc. generate , in
process of t ime , chi ld ren etc. are generated ; whenthe sun’
s rays enter a mi rror Opposi te the sun, the
sun’
s rays and rays from the mi rror become mixedand start as a b i nd u of l ight and fal l on a wal l .S imilarly, on account of the A d r i s h t a (karma)of (al l ) be ings, B r a h m a who is P r a k as 3
,
becomes desi rous of creat ing the world which had
been absorbed in himself, tu rns to see his S a k t i,
enters her in the form of a b i n d u of l ight andbecomes a b i nd u of su k l a. Thence S a k t i ,becomes 8 o ni t a and enters into i t. The b i n d uthat resu lts from the i r commingl ing swe l ls out .
Then is produced a spec ial substance cal led H ar
d a k a 19. (heart-ray). That has to be learnt fromthe l ips of a G u r u and cannot be wri tten inbooks. (16 . i i. 15. Com.)Lal z
’
td S aharm ndma bird s/ry e: quotes from a
S ak t a work the fol lowing e laborate descript ion
( 297 )
of the stages of creat ion. F i rst is (1 ) the g h a n ibh t a stage, when k a r m a absorbed in p r al a y a is not ripe for manifestation and matter is ahomogeneous mass. Whenthe ripening is beginningi t,is (2 ) v i c h i k i r s h a. M ay a becomes charged
w ith r ipened k a r m a and B r a h m a becomesend owed w ith M ay a and i s ready to create th isis (3) A v y a k t a or K ar a na B i nd u (thecausal seed). From i t starts (4) the K ar y aB i nd u (effected seed), who i s P a r aV ak , C h i t .
‘
Thence issues (5) N ad a, S 0k s h m a V ak ,c h i d a c h i t ; thence ,
B i j a. (gross) seed , s t h 13
l a, A c h i t . S tages 3, 4, 5, 6 form the A v y a k t a
l sv a r a, H i rany aga r ba and V a i s v a n a r a
of the Vedanta (explained in section as alsothe i r Sak t a analogues. v iz S an t a, V ama,Jy e s t h a, and R a u d r i , otherw1se, A m b i k a,I c h c h h a
,J nan a
,and K r i y a.
5) VAI SHNAVA AGAMAS.
The P d dma S am/ um describes the cosmi cbe ings and spheres in the fo l lowing terms Therei s the eternal , incomparable, Light, eternal lysatisfied ,
spotless, the al l -form,the formless
,
beyond Tamas,w i thout destruct ion. On account of
(creat ive activ i ty ) comes out from th is eternalBe ing, V as u d e v a
,two-handed
,single-clothed ,
l ike pure crystal , wi th the bri l l iance of thousand so f lacs of crores of moons, fi res and suns, seated in a
( 2 93 )
sphere of rays, w ith c h a k r a (discus) and other im
plements as his marks, w ith S r i v a t sa (a curl ofhai r) and K a u s t u b h a (a jewel) on his breast ,shining w i th a garland ornamented with a crown,a neck lace, armlets, bangles, etc wearing a ye l lowcloth, gracefu l , the fi rst spotless King. He i s
known as V asu d e v a from H is ) four-facedBe ing al l created things (came). He is to be
med itated on by Yogi s always in the centre of the
lotus of the heart . The w ise (5 £1 r i 5) see him as
the supreme goal of V i s h n 11 . From V as u d ev a was born another V as u d e v a,
single-faced ,fou r-armed , endowed w i th the d iscus and otherimplements. He keeps) the d iscus for the proteot ion (of the world ); the al l -lov ing, again, has the
lotus for the purpose of creat ion the (conch cal led)p ai f c h a.j an y a for re lease (m u k t i), also the
mace for destruction w ith the s r i v a t s a and
k a u s t u b h a on his breast , ornamented w i th a
garland ; black l ike the peacock’
s neck w i th a
yel low cloth, born w i th him. Th is Lord V as ud e v a i s the au thor of creat ion, protection, d estruc
t ion, and re lease. For some cause or other be d i videdh imse lf into two of these one was V as u d e v a,l ike a pu re crystal
, the second was N ar a y ana,of the colou r of a blue cloud . From V as u d e v a
(came) S am k a r s h ana,from him (the latter)
was born P r a d y u m n a . From P r a d y u mna.
was born A n i r u d d h a. A l l these are fou r
( 300 )
pai r,golden wombed , lotus-eyed , beau t ifu l , lotus
seated , i s from a part of P r a d y u m n a. (Of
this pai r), the male is B r a h ma (cal led also)D hat a, V i d h i , V i r i fi c h a ; the woman
is cal led S r i , P a d ma, K a m l a, L a k s h m i .
From a part of S a m k a r s h ana, was mental ly~
produced by M a h am ay a, a pai r, three-eyed ,
beau tifu l in al l l imbs ; the male was R u d r a,
S ank a r a, S t h anu,
K a p a r d i , three -eyed ,and (the woman) T r a y i . i s v a ra
,B h as h a,
V i d y a, A k s h a ra
,K am a d h e n u , the (hea
venly ) Cow , S a r a s v a t l . From a part o f
A n i r u d d h a was mental ly prod uced by M a h a
v i d y a, a pai r ; the male thereof was K e g a v a,
V i s h n u,K r i s h n a
,H r i s h i k e sa, v as u
d e v a, Janar d a na, the woman be ing M a h a
g a u r i, S a t i . C h a n d r a, S u b h a ga ; by my
command T r a y i became B r a h m a’
s w i fe ,G a u r i
,R u d r a ’
s w ife, and the (lo tus-born)L a k shm i
, of V fi su d e v a”
(l b v. 2 B r a hm a then created the cosmic egg ; i t was brokeni n two by R u d r a and V i s h nu protects al l thati s w ithin the egg.
The supreme mani fests himse l f in three forms,cal led P a r a, V y fi h a and V i b h a v a ; of these ,
the P a r a (supreme) form is the one d escribed at
the beginning of this sect ion. The V y 0h a com
p rises the fou r forms of V as u d e v a, S am k a r
s h a n a, P r a d y um na and A n i r u d d h a,
301
whose shapes, ornaments etc. are described in d etai l in chapter ten of th is work . They manifestthemse lves in each of the four states of Jag r a t a,S v a p n a, S u s h u p t i and T u r i y a (wak ing,d reaming and sleep and trance.
The v i b h a v a constitu tes the various forms inwhich V i s h n u manifests h imse lf to man
, e. g. ,
P a d m nab h a,A n a n t a, K a p i l a, the horse
faced H a y a gr i v'
a,the various a v a t ar a s,
the torto ise, etc.,D at t at r e y a and so on. 1
From the compl icated pantheon of the A g am a s ,
the Ved ic d ei t ies, I n d r a and A g n i , M i t
r a and V a r u na, V ay u and S fi r y a and the
ancient D y av ap r i t h v i , the love ly U s h a s and
the intoxicat ing King S o m a have been entire lye x
clud ed yet the mod ern Hind u devoutly be l ievesi t The Mdpdfikya up ani rkad w i th i ts classificati on of
spheres into four i s so thoroughgoingly a d v a i t a in spi ri tthat i t presents a stand ing d i ffi culty to V i s i s h tad v a i t acommentators. Bangs Rami nuja i d entifies V i s v a
,T a i j a
sa,1 s v a r a and At m a referred to there wi th the four
V y fi h a s of the V a i s h n a v a Agam a s, but the
representation of these v y fi h a s as beingpresent in each
state of the mind (wak ing, in the Lakshmé‘tantra ,
knocks the bottom out of Bangs Bamanuja’
s argument.
TBesi d es P a r a,V y fi h a and V i bh a v a f orms
,
other V a i s hna v a works ad d two other forms,a n t a r y a
‘
,
m i,the al l pervasi ve form (taken from the a n t a r y 9. m i
b r a hm an s, Er i k and the ar 0 h a, the forms of
temple i d ols.
( 302 )
h is re l ig ion to be Ved i c and passionate ly maintains
i t to be the S a na t a n a D h a r m a, thee ternal ,
never-changing re l igion because the Vedas are
worshipped bu t not read by h im. Whence theseAgama d e i t ies arose , when the compl icated schemeof A g a m a d i v ini t ies was e laborated
,what d e te r
mined.
the character o f the i r evo l ut ion is wrappedi n that scarce ly penetrable ve i l of obscu rity whichshrouds most Ind ian History .