Preamble:
In the 7th verse, Śankarācārya pointed out that aham or “I am” alone is inherent in and through all the states of experience and therefore that I am or sat chit ātma alone must be taken as the real I. And since all the other states are subject to arrival and departure, he should be taken as my real nature; I am Satcidātma. And relevant to every particular state, I take the attribute to myself; like the youthful-I, youth-I; old-I, waker-I, etc.; even those attributes should not be taken as an integral part of I; because even the attributes are subject to arrival and departure, which means the attributeless-I alone is the ātma and this attributeless-I alone is called Sakshi. On the other hand, if I take the incidental attributes also as my intrinsic nature, then I mistake myself as an attributed-I, which is called ahaṃkāra. So, because of ignorance when I add attributes to myself it is called ahaṃkāra; through wisdom when I see the attribute as distinct from me, then I am called Sakshi. So, the difference between ahaṃkāra and साक्षि sākṣi is caused by ignorance and wisdom; in ignorance attributes are added; I am ahaṃkāra. In wisdom attributes are not added; I am sākṣi. This was the content of the teaching of the 7th verse
Maya – ஒப்பனை – An overview
Now in the 8th verse; Adi Śankarācārya says unfortunately most people are in a state of ignorance; and therefore they do not own up the sākṣi-I, and therefore they remain the empirical ahaṃkāra-I.
Two questions arises immediately –
- 1. “How come? Why are most of us ignorant?”.
- 2. The moment I become empirical ahaṃkāra, what happens?
For this we should try and understand the concept of Maya (Illusion). The subject of “Maya” is Vedantic Student’s delight. So much literature is available on the subject. However for our study, we will take the verses given in Sureshwaracharya’s Mānasollāsa (text and translated by Alladi Mahadeva Sastry first in 1899).
The excerpts reproduced here are from Mānasollāsa.
Puranas say that Rahu and Ketu** are, respectively, the head and the trunk of one Rakshasa’s body severed into two; so that, when one speaks of the head of Rahu, we cannot suppose that the head exists distinct from Rahu. The two are, in fact, one. Similarly when Paramesvara is spoken of as the cause of the universe, we should not understand that the universe is distinct from Paramesvara. There is only one existence, namely, Paramesvara. That Isvara amuses Himself assuming, of His own accord, the forms of worshipper and the worshipped, of teacher and disciple, of master and servant, and so on. He who is a son with reference to his father is himself the father with reference to his son; one alone, indeed, is imagined in various ways according to mere words. Therefore, on investigating supreme truth, we find that the Light alone exists. False (mithyâ) indeed is all notion of difference in Ātman, caused as it is by Mâyâ. All our mundane experience is a display of Mâyâ. Like unto suṣupti, Mâyâ is nullified by knowledge of Ātman. The name ‘mâya’ is given to an appearance which cannot be accounted for. It is not non-existent, because it appears; neither is it existent, because it is nullified. It is not distinct from the Light, as the dark shadow is distinct from the sun. Neither is it identical with the Light because it is insentient. Nor can it be both distinct from and identical with the Light, because it is a contradiction in terms. Or, Maya may be compared to the shadow which conceals the sun from the view of those who are blind by day. Here the sun’s light itself appears to be a shadow; and the shadow, therefore, has no distinct existence from the light. It is not said to be made up of parts, because no parts caused it. Neither is it devoid of parts, since in the effects it is made up of parts. This harlot of a Mâyâ, appearing only so long as not scrutinised, does deceive the Ātman by her false affectations of coquetry.
Mānasollāsa Chapter 8 Slokas 5-16
(** – Ref: Introduction to Sloka 6 for the story about Rahu & Ketu from the Puranas).
கண்ணன், மம மாயா என்றும் தைவீ மாயா என்றும் இந்த மாயையைப் பற்றிக் குறிப்பிடுகிறான். மம என்றால் என்னுடைய என்றும் தைவீ என்றால் தெய்வீகமான என்றும் பொருள்படும்.
ஏஷா என்றும் மாயைக்கு ஒரு அடைமொழி கொடுக்கிறான். அதாவது புலன்களால் உணரக் கூடியது. கண்களால் காணவும், செவிகளால் கேட்கவும், சருமத்தால் உணரவும், மனதால் புரிந்துகொள்ளக் கூடியதுமான மாயை. ஆக, மாயையின் வடிவில் உனக்கு எந்நேரமும் நான் காட்சியளித்துக் கொண்டுதான் இருக்கிறேன் என்று கண்ணன் நமக்கு உறுதி கூறுவதாக இதைப் புரிந்துகொள்ள வேண்டும்.என்னை வெளிப்படுத்திக்கொள்ளாத பிரம்மமாக இருக்கையில், நானே மாயையாக இருக்கிறேன் என்றும் கண்ணன் கீதையில் தெளிவாகவே குறிப்பிடுகிறான். அவனே மாயையாய் நம்மை மருள வைக்கிறான்.
இருள்நீங்கி இன்பம் பயக்கும் மருள்நீங்கி
மாசுஅறு காட்சி யவர்க்கு
என்று திருக்குறளில், மெய் உணர்தல் அதிகாரத்தில், திருவள்ளுவர் கூறியது என் நினைவிற்கு வருகிறது.
So the answer to the first question is clear. We are ignorant thanks to Maya. Now the second question.
Relations and Transactions – உறவுகளும் பரிமாற்றங்களும்
The moment I become empirical ahaṃkāra, I cannot avoid relationships with the relevant world. So the “relationless” Atma becomes “related” or “relationed”. It is a never ending story of relationships.
நானாக நானில்லை, ஏனெனில்
மாயையவள் தரும் ஒப்பனையிட்டு
நானெனும் உள்ளொளி மறைந்து
நானெனும் உறவுகள் மலர்ந்தன – பின்
நானெனும் பொய்யை நானே
நடத்தினேன் உறவுகளுடனே !
அந்த உறவுகள் ஒரு தொடர் கதை; அந்த ஒப்பனை கலந்த உறவுகள் எத்துனை எத்துனை ! இவ்வுறவெனும் உலகத்தில் வரவொன்றும் இல்லாததால் வறுமையின் வாரிசாகி வாசலோடு துரத்தபடுகிறோம். ஒப்பனையைக் கலைத்து உள்ளிருக்கும் மெய்ப்பொருளை உணர்ந்தால் நிலையான வீடுபேறு. இதுவே இப்பண்ணின் சாரம்.
இப் பண்ணில் எடுத்துக் காட்டாக ஓரிரு உறவுகளை ஆதி சங்கரர் விவரிக்கிறார். அவைதனை அடுத்த பதிவில் காண்போம்.
What all relationships? Plenty.
A few examples are discussed in the Sloka which we will see subsequently. What essentially happens is that this “jivatma” which was “relation less” and who is otherwise a witness “Saakshi” becomes related and the misery starts with transactions and continues till we know our true self through “atma gnanam”.
With this understanding let us get into the Sloka in the next blog.
Prabhu's Ponder 