Class 42

The Upanishad describes features of Brahman, we come across a logical problem that two features of Brahman contradict each other.  One feature is nirvikaram, not subject to modification, beyond time and space, eternal and all pervading; free from all modiifcation caused by time.  The same upanishad describe Brahman as jagat karanam – nimitha karanam or upadhana karanam – word karanam implies subject to modification. In one place it is nirvikaram and another place it says it is savikaram.   The only way to reoncile is one is sathyam and another is mithya.  Opposite words can co-exist only in different planes.  Which one is mithya savikaram or nivikaram?  Savikaram – the karanam status -alone should be taken as mithya.  Once karanam status is taken as mithya and the world created by the karanam status is also mithya.  Mithya karanam can only create mithya kariyam.  Gowdapadha gave spiritual quotation to support this conclusion in verses 24 to 26.  Gowdapadha gives logical support for the logical conclusion in verses 27 to 30.

The origination of world out of Brahman is possible only in one way – through Maya – apparently or seemingly or unreal.  Real creation is not at all possible out of Brahman.  If you assume a creation originates out of Brahman, if the world is a kariyam and then Brahman will become Karanam.  If Brahman is a real cause of the universe then Brahman is subject to modification, becoming savikaram.  If Brahman has modification, then you should accept the six fold modification. One of the modification is jenma, that is subject to birth.  That means Brahman will become kariyam, then it will require its karanam.  You will never be able to arrive at logical conclusion at all.  Brahman will become subject to birth and death and will become a samsari.

Verse 28.

From a sat vasthu ( Brahman) produces a world, it can only be only a mithya or unreal world.

From an asat vashtu (nonexistent cause) neither a real nor unreal creation can exist.  Sunya vadha philosophers say Brahman did not produce world, but it came from sunyam.  Son of a woman who is vandhya – incapable of giving birth (a baron woman), can never be born either really or apparently.  Real creation is not possible from sat or asat.

Verse 29

The world we see can only be mithya.  How can I accept this solid world as unreal?  This world appears to be very real.  The world is clearly visible, tangible, useful, gives me sugam and dhukkam and all of these are very real.  Just because the world is visible, tangible, useful, gives you problem you can’t conclude it is real because an unreal world can also be visible, tangible, useful and give your problem.  Tangibility does not prove reality.  Experience does not prove reality.  Utility does not prove reality.  The unreal dream world is also tangible when you are in dream.  Unreal dream world appear real in dream state and unreal waking world appear real in waking state.  So Jagrath prabanja and swapna prabanja are unreal.  Both are unreal when the state is reshuffled.  When you go to sushukthi both are unreal.

Let us assume another state of experience (other than swapna and waking) where you get another body, space, time etc. in that state also mind perceives dwaida basham or dwaida experience;  All dwaida experiences are mithya.  Vaikunda , kailasa, Brahma loga are all dwaida and mithya.  Advaidam alone sathyam.  If we go to nirvakalpaka samathi would advaidam Brahman stand in front of you?  No because it is also dvaidam.  Advaidam is not a matter or objectification of experience.  Don’t look into going to another state of experience to see Brahman.  If you do, there will be an experiencer and experience with duality.  All dwaidam is mithya.

Verse 30

The non-dual mind alone appears as duality in dream.  In dream, there is only one object – mind.  Mind appears as dream objects; mind seemingly convert itself into dream objects and create the seeming duality.  Mind itself makes a seeming division.  Because when you wake up, you can shake off the entire dream world.  Similarly, the non-dual Brahman alone seemingly appears as duality in waking state.  That Brahman I am.  I alone appear as the world.  Just as the waker boldly say I am the tiger, mountain etc. in dream, a gyani can say I alone appear as the world.

The four topics discussed by Gowdapatha: 

1. Yuktyya jiva shrity nishedhaga:  Logical negation of jiva shristy (Vereses 3 to 9)
2. Yukthya jagat shristy nisedhagaha:  Logical negation of jagat shrisy (Verse 10)
3. Shruthya jiva shristy nishedhaha:  Scriptural negation of jiva shristy (Verses 11 to 14)
4. Shruthya jagat shrisy nishedhaha:  Scriptural negation of jagat shristy. (Verses 15 to 30)

With this these four topics are completed.  Taken together this means there is never jiva shrishti nor jagat shrishti; there is no shrishti; there is no kariyam.  Therefore, Brahman is not a karanam.  He is kariya karana Brahma vilakshyanam or advaidam thiriyum.  The significance of the word advaidam is kariya karana vilakshanam

Verse 31

All samsara problem is caused by duality.  The dream perception of duality causes problem because it makes me forget the advaidam, the mind;  dwaida dharshanam is the cause of samsara.  Advaida dharshanam is the solution for samsra.

In jagradha avastha, you have dwaida avastha, you have kama, krodha, moha, laya etc.  In sushukthi there is no dwaidam and we experience moksha temporarily.  When dwaida dharshanam there is problem  Dwaida dharshanam is very much there when the mind is active.  In jagradh and swapna mind is active; in sushukthi mind is resolved, there is neither dwaidam or samsara.  In jagradh and swapnma the mind is active and there is samsara problem.  When the mind is active, there is problem and when the mind is not there, there is no problem.  The mind is the culprit.  In deep sleep there is world, but it does not cause samsara.  Therefore for moksha, you have to tackle your own mind.  Tackling the mind, conquering the mind (amani bava) are dealt with in verses 31 to 39.