Let us probe into आनन्दमयकोश(ānandamayakośa – blissful sheath) which is considered to be the अन्तिमकोश भावित प्रपञ्चस्य(antimakośa bhāvita prapañcasya - final sheath of manifested world). According to Hindu
philosophical schools, amongst the पञ्चकोशाः(pañcakośāḥ - five-sheaths), it is defined that each कोश (kośa –sheath) is dominated by a particular aspect. For example, the table
summarizes the प्रायस्य आलोकन प्रवृत्तेः (prāyasya ālokana pravṛtteḥ –
predominant aspect of manifestation)specific
to each कोश (kośa –sheath)
Thus, as indicated above, in the fifth realm, predominates. In
other words, आनन्दमय कोश(ānandamaya kośa – bliss sheath) is the next higher
realm which is subtler than the विज्ञानमयकोश (vijñānamayakośa – gnostic sheath). But what
exactly is the difference between आनन्दमय प्रेम (ānandamaya
prema – blissful love) and its previous realm viz. विज्ञानमयकोश (vijñānamayakośa – gnostic sheath)? Well, the
fantastic explanation given by Sri Aurobindo helps us will help us set the
context better.
“And
what then is the necessity of a still higher step and what difference is there
between the soul in gnosis and the soul in the Bliss? There is no essential
difference, but yet a difference, because there is a transfer to another
consciousness and a certain reversal in position,—for each step of the ascent
from Matter to the highest Existence there is a reversal of
consciousness. The soul no longer looks up to something beyond it, but is in it
and from it looks down on all that it was before. On all planes indeed the
Ananda can be discovered because everywhere it exists and is the same. Even
there is a repetition of the Ananda plane on each lower world of consciousness.
But in the lower planes not only is it reached by a sort of dissolution into it
of the pure mind or the life-sense or the physical awareness, but it is, as it
were, itself diluted by the dissolved form of mind, life or matter held in the
dilution and turned into a poor thinness wonderful to the lower consciousness
but not comparable to its true intensities. The gnosis has on the contrary a
dense light of essential consciousness in which the intense fullness of
the Ananda can be. And when the form of gnosis is dissolved into the Ananda, it
is not annulled altogether, but undergoes a natural change by which the soul is
carried up into its last and absolute freedom; for it casts itself into the
absolute existence of the spirit and is enlarged into its own entirely
self-existent bliss infinitudes. The gnosis has the infinite and absolute as
the conscious source, accompaniment, condition, standard, field and atmosphere
of all its activities, it possesses it as its base, fount, constituent
material, indwelling and inspiring Presence; but in its action it seems to
stand out from it as its operation, as the rhythmical working of its activities,
as a divine Maya or Wisdom-Formation of
the Eternal. Gnosis is the divine Knowledge-Will of the divine
Consciousness-Force; it is harmonic consciousness and action of
Prakriti-Purusha—full of the delight of the divine existence. In the Ananda the
knowledge goes back from these willed harmonies into pure self-consciousness,
the will dissolves into pure transcendent force and both are taken up into the
pure delight of the Infinite. The basis of the gnostic existence is the
self-stuff and self-form of the Ananda.”
With this contextual
understanding, let us now probe into the आनन्दमयकोशस्य
लक्षणम् (ānandamayakośasya lakṣaṇam – nature of bliss sheath). To this end,
let us start with one of its earliest descriptions, as revealed in the famous श्रुति शास्त्रस्य वचन (śruti śāstrasya
vacana – declaration of revelatory scripture) viz., the ब्रह्मानन्दवल्ली(brahmānandavallī)section of theतैत्तीर्योपनिषद्(taittirīyopaniṣad)wherein it is very clearly declared thus:
Knowledge spreadeth the feast of sacrifice and knowledge spreadeth also the feast of works; all the gods offer adoration to him as to Brahman and the Elder of the Universe. For if one worship Brahman as the knowledge and if one swerve not from it neither falter, then he casteth sin from him in this body and tasteth all desire. And this Self of Knowledge is the soul in the body to the former one which was of Mind. Now there is yet a second and inner self which is other than this which is of Knowledge and it is fashioned out of Bliss. And the Self of Bliss filleth the Self of Knowledge. Now the Bliss Self is made in the image of a man; according as is the human image of the other, so is it made in the image of the man. Love is the head of Him; Joy is His right side; pleasure is His left side; Bliss is His spirit which is the self of Him; the Eternal is His lower member wherein He resteth abidingly. Whereof this is the Scripture.
Sri M.P.
Pandit, the eminent scholar and disciple of Sri Aurobindho, further explains
thus in his famous book, ‘Upanishads – Gateways of Knowledge’:
“It
is this Bliss or Anandamaya Purusha who makes possible the existence of all
other Purushas. Ananda, Bliss is the very nature of Brahman from whom all is
derived; and it is from the fountain-spring of Ananda in its supreme ebullience
that all creations issues forth, is motivated and maintained. The Self of
Ananda is not supported by any other Self by the previous selves, but is is
based, indeed arises out of Brahman of which it is the very nature.”
But what
exactly is meant by आनन्द (ānanda -
bliss)
in spiritual terms? Well, this is a very important question that we need to
understand before proceeding further. According to Sri Aurobindho,
“The
Upanishad tells us that after the knowledge-self above the mental is possessed
and all the lower selves have been drawn up into it, there is another and the
last step of all still left to us—though one might ask, is it eternally the
last or only the last practically conceivable or at all necessary for us
now?—to take up our gnostic existence into the Bliss-Self and there
complete the spiritual self-discovery of the divine Infinite. Ananda, a supreme Bliss eternal,
far other and higher in its character than the highest human joy or pleasure is
the essential and original nature of the spirit. In Ananda our spirit will find
its true self, in Ananda its essential consciousness, in Ananda the absolute
power of its existence. The embodied soul's entry into the highest
absolute, unlimited, unconditional bliss of the spirit is the infinite
liberation and the infinite perfection. It is true that something of this bliss
can be enjoyed by reflection, by a qualified descent even on the lower planes
where the Purusha plays with his modified and qualified Nature. There
can be the experience of a spiritual and boundless Ananda on the plane of
matter, on the plane of life, on the plane of mind as well as on the gnostic
truth-plane of knowledge and above it. And the Yogin who enters into these
lesser realisations, may find them so complete and compelling that he will
imagine there is nothing greater, nothing beyond it. For each of the divine
principles contains in itself the whole potentiality of all the other six notes
of our being; each plane of Nature can have its own perfection of these notes
under its own conditions. But the integral perfection can come only by a
mounting ascent of the lowest into the highest and an incessant descent of the
highest into the lowest till all becomes one at once solid block and plastic
sea-stuff of the Truth infinite and eternal.”
Again, श्री आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi
śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda),provides the
आनन्दस्य लक्षण (ānandasya
lakṣaṇa – definition of bliss)as follows:
Original
Transliteration
Translation
आनन्दः कः? सुख स्वरूपः॥
ānandaḥ kaḥ? sukha svarūpaḥ॥
What is bliss? It is the nature of absolute happiness.
With this
brief understanding on the concept of आनन्द
(ānanda - bliss), a natural
question that might arise is that why is such आनन्द
(ānanda - bliss) considered to be a कोश(kośa – sheath) i.e., why is it
considered as part of the पञ्च कोश(pañcakośa -five-fold realms)? For
example, आनन्दमय (ānandamaya) cannot be reduced to कोश(kośa – sheath) according to वृत्तिकारमतम् (vṛttikāramatam) which is a वृत्ति (vṛtti - comment) on this
topic, widely believed to have been written by श्री
बर्तृप्रपञ्च (śrī bartṛprapañca).
This is a
very important point for us to understand, and to this end, let us analyze what
kind of explanations are provided by different subject matter experts while
interpreting the श्रुतिवाक्य (śrutivākya
– revelatory statement) cited above, which I reproduce here viz.
The
interpretation of this श्रुतिवाक्य (śrutivākya
– revelatory statement)has opened
up important debates between भाष्यकाराः (bhāṣyakārāḥ
- commentators) as to whether the आनन्दमय
आत्मन् (ānandamaya ātman – blissful soul) mentioned here
corresponds to जीवात्मा या परमात्मा (jīvātmāyā paramātmā – corporeal soul orsupreme soul). Well potentially there
are the following three possible interpretations
#
Interpretation
1
आनन्दमय
आत्मन् (ānandamaya ātman – blissful soul)corresponds to जीवात्मा (jīvātmā
– corporeal soul)in his
highest state of Bliss
2
आनन्दमय
आत्मन् (ānandamaya ātman – blissful soul)corresponds to परमात्मा (jīvātmāyā paramātmā – supreme soul)in the immanent capacity of सगुण
ब्रह्मन् (saguṇa brahman – divinity with qualities)
3
आनन्दमय
आत्मन् (ānandamaya ātman – blissful soul)corresponds to परमात्मा (jīvātmāyā paramātmā – supreme soul)in the transcendent capacity of निर्गुण ब्रह्मन् (nirguṇa brahman – divinity without
qualities)
Interestingly,
the opinions are divided between the commentators between these three variants
and epistemologically speaking, the beauty of highly polymorphic multivalent
terms is Sanskrit provides the required flexibility for the such
interpretational hermeneutics. We shall
take a quick analysis of these differences and try to arrive at the underlying
synergies. To this end, let us start with, what आचार्य
श्री बाद्रायण महऋषि (ācārya śrī bādrāyaṇa mahaṛṣi) has got to declare in
the आनन्दमयाधिकरणम् (ānandamayādhikaraṇam
– section on blissfullness) which basically is his aphoristic summary on
the ब्रह्मानन्दवल्ली(brahmānandavallī)section of theतैत्तीर्योपनिषद्(taittirīyopaniṣad), as part of his ब्रह्मसूत्र (brahmasūtra):
Original
Transliteration
Translation
आनन्दमयोऽभ्यासात्॥ विकारशब्दान्नेतिचेन्न प्राच्यार्त्॥ तद्धेतुव्यपदेशाञ्च॥ मान्त्रवर्णिकमेव च जीयते॥ नेतरोअंउपपत्तेः॥ भेदव्यपदेशाञ्च॥ कामाञ्च नानुमानापेक्षा॥ अस्मिन्नस्य च तद्योगं शास्ति॥
ānandamayo'bhyāsāt॥ vikāraśabdānneticenna prācyārt॥ taddhetuvyapadeśāñca॥ māntravarṇikameva ca jīyate॥ netaroaṃupapatteḥ॥ bhedavyapadeśāñca॥ kāmāñca nānumānāpekṣā॥ asminnasya ca tadyogaṃ śāsti॥
The Blissful One is the Supreme Self on account of repetition.
If it be argued that (the Blissful One) is not Brahman, owing to the use of a word (suffix) denoting modification, we say no, for the word is used in the sense of abundance.
For the further reason that Brahman is indicated as the source of Bliss.
And the very Brahman spoken of in the mantra is declared in the Brahmana (portion explaining the mantra).
The other is not the Supreme Self, because that is illogical.
And because of the assertion of the difference (between the individual soul and the supreme Self).
There can be no reliance on inference (for ariving at Pradhana) owing to (the mention of) desire.
Moreover, the scripture teaches the absolute identity of this one with this (One).
On the face
of it, it appears that आचार्य श्री
बाद्रायण महऋषि (ācārya śrī bādrāyaṇa mahaṛṣi) advocates #3 listed
above i.e. , आत्मन् (ānandamaya
ātman – blissful soul)corresponds
to परमात्मा (jīvātmāyā paramātmā – supreme soul)in the transcendent capacity of निर्गुण
ब्रह्मन् (nirguṇa brahman – divinity without qualities). This fact
is testified by the सूत्र (sūtra
-aphorism)
#1.1.12 (quoted above). And in support of this claim, the suffix मय /मयट् (maya /mayaṭ) in the term आनन्दमय
(ānandamaya) is etymologically interpreted to mean “प्राचुर्य (prācurya - abundance)” rather than
its alternate meaning “विकार (vikāra -
modification)”, as testified in the next सूत्र
(sūtra - aphorism). The subsequent सप्त सूत्रानि (sapta sūtrāni – seven aphorisms) quoted
above, provides justification for this postulate.
However, an
earlyअनामकवृत्तिकाकार (anāmaka vṛttikākāra – anonymous
explanator) who is considered to be one of the earliest knownभाष्यकाराः ब्रह्मसूत्रस्य
(bhāṣyakārāḥbrahmasūtrasya
– commentators of brahma sutra) called “शारीरक
मीमांस वृत्ति (śārīraka mīmāṃsa vṛtti)”. Although his
whereabouts are not fully known, yet his वृत्ति
(vṛtti - explanation) as taken a significant
role, since he has been widely referred to as a पूवपक्षिन्
(pūvapakṣin – traditional opponent) in many of
the उत्तर भाष्याणि (uttara
bhāṣyāṇi – subsequent commentaries) including श्री आदिशंकराचार्य (śrī ādiśaṃkarācārya) who has
referred toवृत्तिकाकार (vṛttikākāra
- explanator)in his ownभाष्य (bhāṣya -
commentary).
Regarding
the possible identity of this वृत्तिकाकार (vṛttikākāra
– explanator), the opinions are divided between different subject matter
experts. While some identify him as आचार्य श्री
उपवर्ष (ācārya śrī upavarṣa), while others identify
him as आचार्य श्री बोधायन (ācārya
śrī bodhāyana)another equally eminent early bird भाष्यकारा ब्रह्मसूत्रस्य (bhāṣyakārābrahmasūtrasya – commentator of brahmasutra). In a
nutshell, there is yet no standard consensus regarding his identity.
With this disclaimer on identity, we
shall try to analyze the views of this वृत्तिकाकार
(vṛttikākāra – explanator)who is supposed to have, in his शारीरक मीमांस वृत्ति (śārīraka
mīmāṃsa vṛtti), favored interpretation #1 listed above. That is, according
to him आनन्दमय आत्मन् (ānandamaya
ātman – blissful soul)corresponds
to जीवात्मा (jīvātmā –
corporeal soul). Although this text is not currently available,
this point has been testified by
taittrīyake,annamayaṃ prāṇamayaṃ, manomayaṃ vijñānamayaṃ cānukramayamrāyate - 'tasmādvā etasmādvijñānamayat। anyo'ntara ātmānandamayaḥ' (tai up 2.5.1) iti। tatra saṃśayaḥ - kimihānandamayaśabdena paramevabrahmocyate yatprakṛtam 'satyaṃ jñānaṃ anantaṃ brahma' (tai up 2.1.1) iti kiṃvā'nnamayadbrahmaṇo'rthāntaramiti। kiṃ tāvatprāptaṃ brahmaṇo'rthāntaramamukhya ātmānandamayaḥ syāt। kasmāt। annamayādyamukyātmapravāhapatitvāt। athyāpi syātsarvāntartvādānandamayo mukhya evātmeti। na syāti prāydyavyvayogacchārīratvaśravaṇāñca। mukhyaścetmānandameyaḥ - syāna priyādisaṃsparśaḥ syāt। iha tu 'tasya priyameva śiraḥ' ityādi śrūyate। śārīratvaṃ ca śrūyate - tasyaiṣa eva śārra ātmā। yaḥ pūrvasya' iti। tasya pūrvasya vijñānamayasyaiṣa eva śārīra ātmā ya eṣa ānandamaya ityarthaḥ। naca saśarīrasya staḥ priyāpriyasaṃsarpśo vārayituṃ śakyaḥ।
In the Taittiriya Upanishad after having mentioned the self made of food, that made of vital airs, that made of mind and that made of knowledge, it has been said, ‘Other than this perceiving self, there is internal self constituted by bliss’ (Tai U 2.5.1). Here arises a doubt. Does the expression ‘ the internal self constituted of bliss’ denote the Supreme Brahman which has been declared earlier as, ‘ Truth, Knowledge, and Infinite’ (Tai Up 2.1.1), just as the self made of food etc. is different from it? Here the opponents hold that the self made of bliss is a secondary one, different from Brahman. Why? Because (according to them) it is just one in a succession of self's, beginning with that made of food, which are not the principle Self. Still, since it is the innermost of all, the self made of bliss should be regarded as the principle Self.
No (say the opponents) for the self made of bliss is heard of as having joy, etc. for its parts on account of which it becomes embodied. If it were one with the principle Self, joy etc. would not have touched it. But with regard to the self under discussion we hear of such description as ‘Of him happiness certainly is the head’ (Tai Up 2.5.1). And we also hear of its being embodied in words such as ‘Of that preceding (blissful) one, this one, as the embodied self’ (Tai Up 2.6) i.e. of the preceding self of cognition this blissful self is the embodied one. Nor is it possible for the embodied one to ward off contact with the joy and pain. Therefore the self made of bliss is simply the transmigrating soul.
Here, in the
above paragraphs, the भाष्यकार (bhāṣyakāra
- commentator) first explains the views of the प्रतिपक्ष
(pratipakṣa - opponent) who in this case is
widely believed to be वृत्तिकाकार (vṛttikākāra
- explanator) mentioned earlier, whose निर्वचन
(nirvacana - interpretation) obviously seems to
differ from that of the original बाद्रायण सूत्र (bādrāyaṇa
sūtra – aphorism of Badrayana).According to
the former, आनन्दमय (ānandamaya – bliss based) only corresponds to the जीवात्मन् (jīvātman – corporeal soul) as it is
qualified as ‘शरीर आत्मन् (śarīra
ātman - embodied soul)’just like and an extension of the पूर्वतन चतुर् कोशाः (pūrvatana catur kośāḥ -
previous four sheaths) viz. अन्नमय कोश(annamaya kośa – food-based sheath), प्राणमय कोश(prāṇamaya kośa – vital-based sheath), मनोमय कोश(manomaya kośa – mind-based sheath) & विज्ञानमय कोश(vijñānamaya – knowledge-based sheath).
Further, वृत्तिकाकार (vṛttikākāra - explanator)interprets
the suffix ‘मय / मयट् (maya /mayaṭ)’ in the sense
of ‘विकार (vikāra -
modification)’ unlike श्री बाद्रायण
महऋषि (śrī bādrāyaṇa mahaṛṣi),who, as already observed, interprets it instead as “प्राचुर्य (prācurya - abundance)”. This fact is
also testified in the शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka bhāṣya)
An objection is advanced by the oponent that the expression Anandamaya (made of bliss) does not represent the Supreme Self. Why? Because the word denotes a modification. This is something different from the original word (Ananda with the suffix mayat) and denotes modification, for the suffix mayat in the expression Anandamaya carries the meaning. Therefore, the word Anandamaya denothes nothing but a modification even as the word Annamaya and the rest do…
अनुसारेन उत्तरमीमांसकेवलाद्वैतवेदान्तदरशन (anusārena uttaramīmāṃsakevalādvaitavedāntadaraśana – according to posterior inquiry absolute non-dualstic final wisdom philosophy)
Let us now
look at what is the stand of श्री
आदिशंकराचार्य (śrī ādiśaṃkarācārya) in this regard. To
this end, we may have to look at his द्वभाष्ये(dvabhāṣye – two
commentaries)relating to the topic viz. ब्रह्मसूत्र / शारीरक
भाष्य (brahmasūtra / śārīraka bhāṣya), as well as his तैत्तीर्योपनिषद्शंकरभाष्य(taittīryopaniṣadśaṃkarabhāṣya). Let’s start with former text first. Here as part of his explanation of
the सूत्र (sūtra -
aphorism)
(#1.1.12) he clearly states that the term आनन्दमय (ānandamaya – bliss based) only referes to the परब्रह्मन् (parabrahman – supreme divinity) and in support of his claim,
he cites many श्रुति वाक्यानि (śruti vākyāni – revelatory
statements)
… 'ānandamayo'bhyāsāt'। para evātmānandamayo bhavitumarhati। kutaḥ। abhyāsāt। parasminneva hyātmanyāndaśabdo bahukṛtvo'bhyaste। ānandamayaṃ prastutya 'raso vai saḥ' iti tasyaiva rastvamukhatvocyate - 'rasaṃhyovāyaṃ lavadhvā॥anandī bhavati' iti 'ko hyorvānyātkaḥ praṇayāt। yadeṣa ākāśa ānando na syāt। eṣa hyovānandayāti' (tai up 2-7) 'saiphānandasya mīmāṃsā bhavati', 'etmānandamayamātmāmupasaṃtrkāmati ', 'ānandaṃ brahmaṇo vidvān na vibheti kutaścana' (tai up 2-8-1) iti। ānandobrahmeti vyajānāt' (tai up 2-8-5) iti ca। śrutyantare ca 'vijñānandam brahma' (Brih ūp - 3-9-28 (7)) iti brahmaṇyevānandaśabdo dṛṣṭaḥ। evamānandaśabdasya bahukṛtvo brahmaṇyabhyāsādānandamaya ātmā brahmeti gamyate।…
…‘The self made of bliss (is the Supreme) on account of the repitition (of the word ‘bliss’ as representing the Supreme)’. The self made of bliss cannot but be the Supreme. For what reason? On account of the repitition. For the word ‘bliss’ is applied repeatedly, to the Supreme Self. ‘That verily is the essence of existenc’, says the sruti (Tai Up. 2.7) pointing to the self made of bliss, and describe it to be of the nature of the essence of existence. We come across passages such as, ‘for having attained this essence one becomes happy. Who indeed will remain alive, and who will breathe, if this Bliss were not in the supreme space? Indeed this one causes happiness’ (Tai Up. 2.7) and also, ‘This then is an assessment of that Bliss’ (Tai. Up 2.8.1). ‘He reaches this self made of Bliss’ (Tai. Up 2.8.5). ‘After realising that bliss of Brahman the enlightened one is not afraid of anything (Tai up. 2.9) and ‘He knew Bliss as Brahman’ (Tai Up. 3.6). Again there is another sruti-passage,‘Knowledge, Bliss Brahman’ (Brih up. 3.9.28 (7)) in which the word bliss is seen applied to Brahman. Thus, in as much the word ‘Bliss’ is repeatedly used to represent Brahman; it goes to show that the self made of bliss is also Brahman…
In fact, theभाष्यकार (bhāṣyakāra - commentator), not only emphasizes this point
for the above सूत्र (sūtra - aphorism) alone, but he also provides
ample justification from the same while commenting on the following सूत्रानि (sūtrāni - aphorisms). However, at the same time, The
भाष्यकार (bhāṣyakāra - commentator) i.e.,श्री
आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda), does not fully reject the निर्वचन (nirvacana - interpretation) that the term आनन्दमय (ānandamaya – bliss based) may correspond to जीवात्मन् (jīvātman – corporeal soul) from a limited perspective of
extension of the पूर्वतन चतुर् कोशाः (pūrvatana catur kośāḥ -
previous four sheaths). For example, श्री आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi
śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda) as part of his famous भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentary) on the
above cited तैत्तीर्योपनिषद् (taittīryopaniṣad)(2.5.1) very
categorically states thus:
Of that which proceeds i.e. of the self constituted by mind, this is certainly the self existing in the mental body. Which? This perceiving self. “Other than this…” etc., has already been explained. From the usage of the suffix mayat as well as from the context, the involvement of a conditioned self is to be apprehended from the term anandamayah (made of bliss), for in this context, the conditioned self conditioned by food etc. which are elemental are discussed, and the self constituting of bliss is also included in it. Moreover, the usage of the suffix mayat here is in the sense of modification, as it is the case of anandamaya. Hence the term anandamaya is to be comprehended as a conditioned self.
Thus, as highlighted above, the भाष्यकार (bhāṣyakāra - commentator) seems to agree with वृत्तिकाकार
(vṛttikākāra - explanator) in interpreting मय
/मयट् (maya /mayaṭ)
as ‘विकार (vikāra - modification)’ when he declares “तदाधिकरपतितश्चायमानन्दमयः
मयद् चात्र विकारर्थे दृष्टो यथान्नमय इत्यत्र (tadādhikarapatitaścāyamānandamayaḥ
mayad cātra vikārarthe dṛṣṭo yathānnamaya ityatra - moreover, the usage of the suffix mayat here is
in the sense of modification, as it is the case of anandamaya).”
Moreover, in
another small yet concise treatise called तत्त्वबोधः
(tattvabodhaḥ)which is widely ascribed to श्री
आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda), the term आनन्दमय (ānandamaya) is defined considered
as“अवद्यास्थ
मलिन सत्त्वम् (avadyāstha malina sattvam - impure
realm born of ignorance)”:
श्री सुरेश्वराचार्य (śrī
sureśvarācārya)one of his अनन्तर शिष्याः (anantara śiṣyāḥ - direct disciples) and also a मुख्य आचार्या (mukhya ācārya - chief preceptor)in his famous वार्तिक(vārtika - gloss) on the
above भाष्य (bhāṣya -
commentary) further elucidates thus:
But this (ānandamaya) cannot be the Supreme Brahman, because it occurs in the context of evolved principle. Like the annamaya etc., the ānandamaya is also an effect.
As in the case of the annamaya, etc., here also the suffix mayat is used in the sense of modification. The defect of (adopting) a different explanation will arise, if it is construed in the sense of abundance.
However,
this is not the only view expressed by the भगवत्पाद
(bhagavatpāda). For instance, he very
clearly states that when it comes to आनन्दमय कोश (ānandamaya kośa – bliss-based sheath)
it is not a mere linear extension of spiritual consciousness as in the case of पूर्वतन चतुर् कोशाः (pūrvatana catur kośāḥ -
previous four sheaths), but on the other hand it is a
quantum leap expansion into परब्रह्म
(para brahma – supreme divinity).
For example, in the शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka
bhāṣya),
as part of his explanation on the same सूत्र
(sūtra - aphorism) (#1.1.12) he clarifies
thus:
The argument that the self is made of bliss is only a secondary one as it is just one in a succession of selfs beginning with that made of food, which are secondary, does not involve any defect for the self made of bliss is he innermost of all. The scripture which intends to teach all about the primary Self takes recourse to common conceptions and refers to the body made of food, which is the non-self and which those who are utterly dull-witted think of as identical with the Self. From the body it proceeds to another self which has the same form as that of the preceding one, just as the idol has the shape of the mould which has been made use for pouring the molten brass. Again, it proceeds to another one invariably representing at first the non-self as the Self, in order to make the understanding more easy. Unfortunately it teaches the primary Self which is made of bliss and which is the innermost of all. Just as one who wishes to show the star Arundhati (to another) shows at first many ordinary stars (and through them) at last the real Arundhati, so also in the instant case the Self made of Bliss, being the innermost of all is the real one.
There is nothing wrong with attribution of joy etc., as head etc., in the case of real Self, which you have pointed out as improper, for this attribution results only on account of the limiting adjunct (i.e. Vijnanamaya kosha) which immediately precedes and it is not natural with the real Self. The state of bodily existence is also attributed to the Self made of bliss, just because it has been presented through a succession of bodies beginning with the self made of food. In the true sense it has no body as in the case of a transmigrating self. Therefore the self made of bliss is but the Supreme.
Next, श्री आदिशंकराचार्य (śrī ādiśaṃkarācārya) is more in
line with श्री बाद्रायण महऋषि (śrī
bādrāyaṇa mahaṛṣi) when it comes to the निर्वचन (nirvacana - interpretation) of the
suffix ‘मय / मयट् (maya /mayaṭ)’,unlike
that of वृत्तिकाकार (vṛttikākāra
- explanator).This fact is
testified in the शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka
bhāṣya)(1.1.12) wherein श्री
आदिशंकराचार्य (śrī ādiśaṃkarācārya) negates the postulate
of वृत्तिकाकार (vṛttikākāra
- explanator)
… (Vedantin’s reply): No, for the suffix mayat is used also in the sense of abundance as evidenced by the Panini sutra, ‘tatprakṛtavacane mayaṭ’ (Pa 5.4.21). That is to say, it expresses an abundance of that which the original word denotes. Accordingly, we come across the expression, ‘The sacrifice abounds in food’ in which the suffix maya(t) points to the abundance of food. Similarly, Brahman that abounds in Ananda (bliss) is spoken of as Anandamaya. That Brahman abounds in bliss is seen from a sruti passage , in which after declaring the bliss of each category of beings, beginning with man, to be a hundred times greater than that of the category of being immediately preceding, the bliss of Brahman has been declared as unsurpassed. Therefore the suffix maya(t) has been used in the sense of abundance.
The भाष्यकार (bhāṣyakāra - commentator) refers to पाणिनेः अष्टाध्यायी (pāṇineḥ
aṣṭādhyāyī – ashtadhyayi of panini) – the famous treatise on
classical संस्कृत व्याकरण (saṃskṛta
vyākaraṇa - Sanskrit grammar) to trace the etymological meaning of ‘मय / मयट् (maya /mayaṭ)’
Original
Transliteration
Translation
तत्प्रकृतवचने मयट्
tatprakṛtavacane mayaṭ
The affix ‘mayat’ may be employed after a word denoting some substance, when we require an expression for it as abundant.
… (Vedantin’s reply): No, for the suffix mayat is used also in the sense of abundance as evidenced by the Panini sutra, ‘tatprakṛtavacane mayaṭ’ (Pa 5.4.21). That is to say, it expresses an abundance of that which the original word denotes. Accordingly, we come across the expression, ‘The sacrifice abounds in food’ in which the suffix maya(t) points to the abundamce of food. Similarly, Brahman that abounds in Ananda (bliss) is spoken of as Anandamaya. That Brahman abounds in bliss is seen from a sruti passage , in which after declaring the bliss of each category of beings, beginning with man, to be a hundred times greater than that of the category of being immediately preceding, the bliss of Brahman has been declared as unsurpassed. Therefore the suffix maya(t) has been used in the sense of abundance.
Thus, as per
the above शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka
bhāṣya), the
suffix‘मय /मयट् (maya /mayaṭ)’ is
interpreted by श्री आदिशंकराचार्य (śrī
ādiśaṃkarācārya) as “प्राचुर्य (prācurya
- abundance)” whereas he himself has interpreted the same term as ‘विकार (vikāra - modification)’ in the तैत्तीर्योपनिषद्शंकरभाष्य(taittīryopaniṣadśaṃkarabhāṣya).
#
मय /मयट् (maya / mayaṭ) interpreted as
आनन्दमयमात्मन् (ānandamayamātman – bliss-self) interpreted as
आदि शंकरस्य भाष्य (ādi śaṃkarasya bhāṣya – commentary of Adi Shankara)
तैत्तिरीयोपनिस्षद् शंकर भाष्य (taittrīyopaniṣad śaṃkara bhāṣya)
श्री आदि शंकराचार्य (śrī ādi śaṃkarācārya)
2
प्राचुर्य (prācurya - abundance)
पर आत्मन् (para ātman – supreme self)
शारीरक मध्व भाष्य (śārīraka madhva bhāṣya)
शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka bhāṣya)
श्री मध्वाचार्य (śrī madhvācārya)
श्री आदि शंकराचार्य (śrī ādi śaṃkarācārya)
On the face
of it, #1 and #2 seem to be logically contradicting with each other. Does this
mean the revered परमाचार्य (paramācārya
– chief preceptor) is inconsistent across his प्रस्थानत्रय भाश्याणि (prasthānatraya
bhāśyāṇi – commentaries of primary three)? Well, from my two
cents of understanding,the answer is an
obvious “No”. Although, superficially, these two interpretations seems to be at
longer-head with each other, yet on deeper analysis the interpretations
seamlessly synergize. Let’s see how (of course) subject to my limited
understanding.
Firstly, we
should understand that पञ्च कोशाः (pañca
kośāḥ - five sheaths)are not
water-tight compartments. They are rather a ब्रह्मचैतन्यस्य
अखेदित्व (brahmacaitanyasya akheditva – continuum of spiritual consciousness) increasing
with higher potencies of spiritual subtelity as we progress through the ज्ञानवाद वर्गानुवंश (jñānavāda vargānuvaṃśa - epistemological heirarchy), starting
from its grossest manifestation in the अन्नमय
कोश (annamaya kośa – food based sheath) and
culminating in its subtlest manifestation as the आनन्दमय कोश (ānandamaya kośa – bliss-based sheath). In mathematical terms, ब्रह्मन् (brahman - divinity) is both theHighest Common
Factor (HCF)
as well as the Least Common Multiple (LCM) underlying the पञ्च कोशाः (pañca kośāḥ - five sheaths).
The next,
important point to understand that according to the laws of correspondence
(viz. “as above, so below”), theपिण्डाण्ड पुर्णालेख(piṇḍāṇḍa
purṇālekha - micro
cosmichologram) corresponds to ब्रह्माण्ड पुर्णालेख(brahmāṇḍa
purṇālekha - macrocosmichologram). Further, as explained by Di Biase
explains in his “Quantum Information Self-Organization And
Consciousness - A Holoinformational Model Of Consciousness”, refers to a Holo-informational
Model of Transpersonal Consciousnesswherein theव्यष्टि(vyaṣṭi -
individuality), is a fractal snapshot of the समष्टि(samaṣṭi - collectiveness) spread-across
five-fold realms of Holosphere.To quote
him:
“The quantum potential guides by means of active
information the particle alongside its course. As any elementary particle is
united to the whole cosmos by means of a non-local quantum potential,
information then starts to be understood as nature’s fundamental process. This
active non-local information that organizes the whole universe shows us that
nature is informationally meaningful. In the brain, this means that
informational processes are part non-local and part local i.e.
holoinformational. To understand this holoinformational nature of consciousness
and intelligence in the universe allows us to understand matter, life and
consciousness as meaningful activities, intelligent quantum-informational
processes, order transmitted through the cosmic evolution, originated from a
generating informational field beyond our perception limits. A universe full of
quantum potential and significant informational activity is an intelligent
universe functioning like a mind, as Sir James Jeans already had observed. So,
consciousness is always present in all levels of organization of nature, and
matter, life and consciousness cannot be considered as separated entities,
capable of being analyzed under a fragmentary Cartesian-Newtonian framework -
but must be considered as an indivisible unity, with quantum informational
processes interacting by means of non-local holistic relationships, and
simultaneously by local Newtonian mechanistic relationships, generating
self-organization, complexity intelligence and evolution. Such view of a
holoinformational intelligent “continuum”, a fundamental generating order with
a quantum-holographic informational creative flow permeating the whole cosmos,
permits to understand the basic nature of the universe as an intelligent
selforganizing unbroken wholeness, i.e. a universal consciousness unfolding in
an infinite holoarchy. As a quantum-holographic system this universal
consciousness is distributed in every part of the Cosmos, and each part of this
holosphere contains the information of the whole cosmos in a holistic
indivisible way. Quantum-informational fluctuations generated from this
universal consciousness through the holomovement (a non-local holoflux)
self-organizes the universe’s basic informational levels:
oThe Cosmosphere with the Atomic-Nuclear Code
that organizes energy and matter. It is the physical level and information is
stored in atomic structures.
oThe Biosphere with the Genetic Code
that organizes life. It is the biological level and information is stored in
the DNA molecules. –
oThe Noosphere with the Neural Code
that organizes the brain and mind. It is the psycho-social level and
information is stored in neural networks
oThe Technosphere with Artificial Intelligence Codes.
It is the technology level and information is stored in internet, in hardware
and software designs
oThe Consciousphere with the Quantum-Holographic Code.
It is the consciousness level that organizes the interconnectivity between the
mind and the universe. It is the spiritual level, and information is stored in
quantum-holographic networks of the brain and the cosmos. Such informational
codes, this order that is transmitted in a meaningful and intelligent way
through all levels of complexity of the universe, is the negentropic
self-organizing nature of information-consciousness, an irreducible physical
dimension of the cosmos as energy and matter.”
According to
me, the five-fold heirarchies in holosphere referred by Di Biase can more or
less be mapped to the पञ्च कोशाः(pañca kośāḥ - five fold sheaths) which in turn can be
mapped with the पञ्च कार्य अवस्थाः(pañca kārya avasthāḥ - fivefold effectual states) along with
the corresponding पिण्डाण्ड पुरुष लक्षण(piṇḍāṇḍa puruṣa lakṣaṇa –
microcosmic scope of soul)with respect toविशेष/व्यष्टि(viśeṣa / vyaṣṭi
– particlars/individuality)and the ब्रह्माण्डपुरुष
लक्षण(brahmāṇḍa puruṣa lakṣaṇa – macrocosmic scope of
soul) with respect to सामान्य / समष्टि(sāmāniya /samaṣṭi - universals/ commonness). I will not be deep diving on this topic for now, as we shall be
discussing them in detail later. For now I just want to summarize these
mappings in the table below:
#
पूर्णपरिमण्डल(pūrṇa
parimaṇḍala -
holosphere)
कोश (kośa – sheath)
कार्य अवस्था(kārya
avasthā – effectual state)
पिण्डाण्ड पुरुष लक्षण(piṇḍāṇḍa puruṣa lakṣaṇa – microcosmic scope of
soul)w.r.t.विशेष/व्यष्टि(viśeṣa / vyaṣṭi
– particlars/individuality)
ब्रह्माण्डपुरुषलक्षण(brahmāṇḍa puruṣa lakṣaṇa – macrocosmic scope of
soul) w.r.t. सामान्य / समष्टि(sāmāniya /samaṣṭi - universals/
commonness)
1
Cosmosphere
with the Atomic-Nuclear Code
अन्नमय कोश (annamaya
kośa - physical or material sheath)
जाग्रत्
अवस्था (jāgrat
avasthā – wakeful state)
विश्व(viśva)
वैश्वनार(vaiśvanāra)
2
Biosphere
with the Genetic Code
प्राणमयकोश(prāṇamaya kośa –
breath based sheath)
स्वप्न
अवस्था(svapna avasthā - dream state)
तैजस(taijasa)
हिरण्यगर्भ(hiraṇyagarbha)
3
Noosphere
with the Neural Code
मनोमय कोश(manomaya kośa - mental or psychic sheath)
सुषुप्ति
अवस्था (suṣupti avasthā – deep sleep state)
प्राज्ञ(prājña)
ईश्वर
/ अव्याकृत अक्षर(īśvara / avyākṛta akṣara)
4
Technosphere
with Artificial Intelligence Codes
विज्ञानमय कोश(vijñānamaya kośa - buddhic or overmind sheath)
तुरिय
अवस्था(turiya avasthā - trance state)
मन्त्रेश्वर्(mantreśvar)
5
Conscious
sphere with the Quantum-Holographic Code
आनन्दमय कोश(ānandamaya kośa - spiritual or supramental sheath)
तुरियाथित
अवस्था (turiyāthita avasthā – transcendent
state)
मन्त्र
महेश्वर् (mantra
maheśvar)
As indicated
in the above table, we can infer that the Holosphere is essentially
hierarchical nesting of realms which when traversed top-down (#1-#5) represents
the involutionary sequence of realms increasing in its subtelty (from grosser
to subtler forms), while if we reverse the direction (#5 to #1) it corresponds to the evolutionary sequences.
This fact is well explained by Dr. Mark
Gemine in his famous work “The Holographic Principle Theory of Mind”
tries to explain the same,:
“Holographic surfaces can be unfolded into
sheets, one on top of another, with each sheet or surface being a higher
dimension of information. Alternatively, these sheets may be replaced in
integration of new holographic information, perhaps in the curled up dimensions
against time. New dimensions of information emerge from the lower-order
surfaces as they are unfold on to the higher order surfaces, which carry
information of their own respective areas. The higher dimensions manifest
information from the lower dimensions that was not there to start with until we
reach the highest dimension of information, the boundary of the Universe, which
is in constant and instantaneous interaction with the ‘worlds’ beneath it”.
An important
point to understand is that the amount of information explicitly available from
each of these spheres, is bound or constrained by their respective rung in the hierarchy – technically called मर्शन
ऋतु(marśana
ṛtu - explicate order). However,
this is not all, as even at each level there is information of the whole (i.e.,
information including other sphere in the heirarchy) implicitly encapsulated
within itself. This is technically called as व्यतिषजते ऋतु(vyatiṣajate ṛtu - implicate order). In other words, the
divisions between these spheres are not water-tight compartments as the पूर्ण परिमण्डल(pūrṇa parimaṇḍala - holosphere) is an undivided
whole.
This fact is very categorically established by the eminent physicst and
philosopher David Bohm who in his famous book “Wholeness and the Implicate
Order”,
very clearly explains thus:
“There is the germ of a new notion of order
here. This order is not to be understood solely in terms of a regular
arrangement of objects (e.g., in rows) or as a regular arrangement of events
(e.g. in a series). Rather, a total order is contained, in some implicit sense,
in each region of space and time. Now, the word ‘implicit’ is based on the verb
‘to implicate’. This means ‘to fold inward’ (as multiplication means ‘folding
many times’). So we may be led to explore the notion that in some sense each
region contains a total structure ‘enfolded’ within it. It will be useful in
such an exploration to consider some further examples of enfolded or implicate
order.Thus, in a television broadcast, the visual
image is translated into a time order, which is ‘carried’ by the radio wave.
Points that are near each other in the visual image are not necessarily ‘near’
in the order of the radio signal. Thus, the radio wave carries the visual image
in an implicate order. The function of the receiver is then to explicate this
order, i.e., to ‘unfold’ it in the form of a new visual image. All this calls
attention to the relevance of a new distinction between implicate and explicate
order. Generally speaking, the laws of physics have thus far referred mainly to
the explicate order. Indeed, it may be said that the principle function of
Cartesian coordinates is just to give a clear and precise description of
explicate order. Now, we are proposing that in the formulation of the laws of
physics, primary relevance is to be given to the implicate order, while the
explicate order is to have a secondary kind of significance (e.g., as happened
with Aristotle’s notion of movement, after the development of classical
physics). Thus, it may be expected that a description in terms of Cartesian
coordinates can no longer be given a primary emphasis, and that a new kind of
description will indeed have to be developed for discussing the laws of
physics…To generalize so as to emphasize undivided wholeness, we shall say that
what ‘carries’ an implicate order is the holomovement, which is an unbroken and
undivided totality. In certain cases, we can abstract particular aspects of the
holomovement (e.g., light, electrons, sound, etc.), but more generally, all
forms of the holomovement merge and are inseparable. Thus, in its totality, the
holomovement is not limited in any specifiable way at all. It is not required
to conform to any particular order, or to be bounded by any particular measure.
Thus, the holomovement is undefinable and immeasurable.”.
Again,
elsewhere David Bohm further reiterates thus:
“The implicate order is
particularly suitable for the understanding of such unbroken wholeness in
flowing movement, for in the implicate order the totality of existence is
enfolded within each region of space (and time). So, whatever part, element, or
aspect we may abstract in thought, this still enfolds the whole and is
therefore intrinsically related to the totality from which it has been
abstracted. Thus, wholeness permeates all…in the implicate order everything is
folded into everything. But it’s important to note here that the whole
universe, is in principle enfolded into each part actively through the
holomovement, as well as the parts. Now this means that the dynamic activity -
internal and external - which is fundamental for what each part is, is based on
its enfoldement of all the rest, including the whole universe. But of course,
each part may unfold others in different degrees and ways. That is, they are
not all enfolded equally in each part. But the basic principle of enfoldment in
the whole, is not thereby denied. Therefore enfoldment is not merely
superficial or passive but, I emphasize again, that each part is in a
fundamental sense internally related in its basic activities to the whole and
to all the other parts. The mechanistic idea of external relation as
fundamental, is therefore denied. Of course such relationships are still
considered to be real, but of secondary significance. That is, we can get
approximations to a mechanistic behavior out of this. That is to say, the order
of the world, as a structure of things that is basically external to each
other, comes as secondary and emerges from the deeper implicate order.
Each कोश (kośa – sheath), in other words, acts as the माया उपाधि विवर्ताविद्यायाः (māyā upādhi vivartāvidyāyāḥ – measuring adjunct of apparent ignorance) imposing
some kind of ज्ञानवाद विकार प्राचुर्य तलान
ब्रह्मरसे (jñānavāda vikāra prācurya talān brahmarase – epistomological
modification to the abundance levels in spiritual essence).
And in
theभृगुवल्ली (bhṛguvallī)section of the तैत्तिरीयोपनिषद् (taittirīyopaniṣad) it is very categorically testified that
each of the पञ्चकोशानि (pañcakośāni
– fivefold sheaths) are nothing the one and only ब्रह्मन् (brahman -
divinity). For example, the following paragraphs begin thus:
Now as
we are specifically discussing अन्नमय कोश (annamaya
kośa – food based sheath) here, let us deep dive on the same. The भृगुवल्ली (bhṛguvallī)section of the तैत्तिरीयोपनिषद् (taittirīyopaniṣad) explains it thus:
He knows Bliss as Brahman, Verily from Bliss, all these things are born, by Bliss they live after being born, and to Bliss they proceed and become absorbed (into it). This knowledge realized by Bhrigu and taught by Varuna culminates in the Supreme (Bliss) located in the cavity of the heart. He who realizes thus becomes established (in Brahman). He turns to be a possesor of food. As well as its eater. He becomes great in progeny, in cattle, and in divine glory; he becomes great through renown.
An पौरुषेयमध्यत पातनिका(pauruṣeyamadhyata
pātanikā – anthropicentric correspondence), for example, can be
drawn between the शरीराणाम्
अङ्गाः (śarīrāṇām aṅgāḥ - organs of bodies) and the आनन्दस्य तलानि (ānandasya talāni – levels of bliss), as
testified in the earlier quoted तैत्तीर्योपनिषद् (taittīryopaniṣad)(2.2.1)
#
शारीरक अङ्ग (śārīraka aṅga – body organ)
आनन्दस्य तल (ānandasya tala – level of bliss)
आत्मबोधस्य विस्तर (ātmabodhasya vistara – intensity of self-awareness)
शरीरस्य अवस्था (śarīrasya avasthā – state of body)
आत्मचैतन्यस्य अवस्था (ātmacaitanyasya avasthā - state of soul consciousness)
समष्टि अवस्था (samaṣṭi avasthā - collective state)
श्री आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi
śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda), as part of his famous भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentary) on the
above cited तैत्तीर्योपनिषद् (taittīryopaniṣad)(2.5.1) very
categorically states thus:
tasyānandamayasyātman iṣṭaputrādidarśanajaṃ priyaṃ iva śiraḥ prādhānyāt। moda iti priyalābhanimitto harṣaḥ। sa eva ca prakṛṣṭo harṣaḥ pramodaḥ। ānanda iti sukhasāmānyamātmā priyādīnāṃ sukhāvyvānām teṣvanusyūtattvāt।
Of the self constituted by bliss, the happiness resulted from seeing such pleasurable objects as a son is the head. Joy consists in the pleasure derived from the attainment of a desirable thing , and when that itself becomes excessive it is revelry. Bliss is gladness in general which is the self (trunk) of happiness etc., which form the limbs, for it (i.e. gladness in general) is uninterruptedly associated with them.
Of course,
the differences between these आनन्दस्य तलानि (ānandasya
talāni – levels of bliss)are not water-tight compartments. In other
words, प्रिय (priya – happiness) and आनन्द (ānanda - bliss)are not
fundamentally distinct entities but rather are part of the same continuum of सर्वव्यापिन् परमानन्द (sarvavyāpinparamānanda – all pervasive supreme bliss) and to
Swami Vivekananda’s thought provoking expression, the differences (between them)
is in degrees and not in kind. Again, this fact is testified by श्री आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi
śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda)
ānanda iti param brahma। taddhi śubhakarmaṇā pratyupasthāpyamāne putramitrādiviviṣayaviśeṣopādhāvantah karaṇavṛttiviśeṣe tamsā pracchādyamāne prasanne'bhyajayate। tadviṣayasukhamitī prasiddham loke। tadvṛttiviśeṣa prathupasthāpakasya karmaṇoanvasthitattvātsukhasya kṣaṇikatvam। tadyadānantaḥkaraṇaṃ tapasā tamoghanena vidyā brahmacaryeṇa śraddhayāca nirmalatvamāpadyate। yāvadyāvattāvattādvivikte prasanne'ntaḥkaraṇa ānanda viśeṣa utkṛṣyate। vipulībhavati। vakṣyati ca "rasau vai saḥ। rasaṃhyovāyaṃ labdhvānandī bhavati eṣa hyevānandayāti" (tai up 2।7।1) :etsaivānandasyānanyāni bhūtāni mātramupajīvanti" (bṛh up 4।3।32) iti ca śrutyantarāt। evaṃ ca kāmopaśamotkaṣapikṣayā śatguṇottarotarokarṣa ānandasya varkṣyate।
Bliss (in the absolute sense) is Supreme Brahman. It manifests itself as being conditioned by such particular objects as son, friend and the like that are accomplished through past good deeds, in the various moods of the mind which is clear and which is not vieled by ignorance. This is well-known in the world as the happiness derived from the objects of the senses. Since the result of past actions, through which such mental moods (as happiness) are accomplished, is impermenant, this happiness is transitory. So to that extent upto which the mind attains purity through austerity which dispels the darkness (of ignorance), and also through meditation, celibacy and faith, the particular happiness gets enhanced, i.e., becomes redoubled in the clear and pure mind. And it will be said later, “That is verily the essence (of existence), for having attained this essence, one becomes happy. This one indeed causes happiness.” (Tai Up 2.7.1) Also, there is another shruti passage to this effect, “On a minute part of this bliss alone, other beings subsist” (Bṛh Up 4.4.32). Thus, again it will be said that bliss gets enhanced a hundred times successfully in proportion to the degree of cessation of one’s desires.
Moreover,
there revered भगवत्पाद (bhagavatpāda) reiterates
the same point elsewhere also, as part of his famous भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentary) on the ब्रह्मसूत्र (brahmasūtra)(1.1.19), wherein he clearly explains that the पुच्छ (puccha - tail) in the above analogy definitely refers to अधिदैविक /ईश्वरात्मन्(adhidaivika / īśvarātman– divine intensive /divine self)
… (Doubt): But the sutras have to be explained as follows: It has to be considered whether Brahman expressed by the passage. ‘the tail tha supports’, is simply a member of the self made of food or whether it’s a chienf entity by its own right.
(Oponent):- The word ‘tail’ goes to show that it is to be regarded only as a member.
(Vedantin):- The passage ‘self made of bliss on account of repitition’, points to the fact that Brahman which is described as supporting tail in the passage, ‘the self made of bliss’ etc. is taught as the principal entity and this fact is seen as repeated (by many other shruti passages). In the memorial verse, ‘He becomes himself non-existent’, Brahman the Absolute, is reiterated. ‘On account of the word (maya(t)) denoting modification, the Self made of bliss is not Brahman’. This view is not correct, for the word Maya(t) does not mean modification but abundance. The word ‘modification’ in the sutra is intended to show the sense of member. Owing to the use of the word ‘tail’ which denotes only a member, Brahman cannot be treated as a principal entity. This objection is to be refuted. Here follows the explanation:This is not a defect, for the word maya(t), although it has a sense of abundance, can also be taken in the sense of member. The word prachurya is an expression which abounds in terms of members. When members beginning with the head and ending with the tail have been mentioned in respect of the five selfs beginning with that made of food, the head and other parts have been similarly mentioned in the case of Self made of bliss also, with the particular expression; ‘Brahman is the tail that supports’, the purpose of which was to present some terms denoting members (metaphorically) not to convey (literally) the meaning of the member, for Brahman as the principal entity has already been established on the basis of repitition of the word Ananda in many shruti-passages to designate Brahman. ‘Also because he is declared to be the cause of it’ (Sutra 14 above). This bears the evidence of Brahman being the cause of everything which is called effect, including the Self made of bliss. There is the shruti-passage - ‘He created all this – whatever there is’ (tai up 2.6). Nor is it proper that Brahman which is the cause, should be member, in the primary sense of the word, of the Self of bliss which is the Brahman’s effect. The other sutras also (connected with the self of bliss) are to be observed as referring to Brahman which has been declared by the expression ‘tail’.
Now, the
natural question is, as explained above, if आनन्द
(ānanda - bliss)corresponds to अधिदैविक /ईश्वरात्मन्(adhidaivika / īśvarātman – divine intensive / divine self), then the
logical question that would arise is that why does such आनन्दमय (ānandamaya – bliss-based/intensive) is still treated as a “कोश (kośa - sheath)”in
the sacred तैत्तीर्योपनिषद् (taittīryopaniṣad)and various other
texts?.
To this end,
the first point for us to understand is that although आनन्द (ānanda - bliss) which is
rated as the परमक आनन्दस्य तल (paramaka
ānandasya tala – highest level of bliss) in the above table and
corresponds to the अधिदैविक /ईश्वरात्मन्(adhidaivika / īśvarātman– divine intensive / divine self), yet we must
remember that it is still only treated as a शारीरक
अङ्ग (śārīraka aṅga – body part) and to that extent, its
scope is प्रसीमित
क्लेशेन नियामक उपाधेः शरीर नाम (prasīmita kleśena niyāmaka upādheḥśarīra nāma - conditioned by sheath of
limiting adjunct called body).Therefore in that
sense, the ईश्वरात्मन् (īśvarātman
–divine self) is also part
of the आनन्दमय कोश (ānandamaya kośa –
bliss-based/intensive sheath) and is similar to जीवात्मनः (jīvātmanaḥ - corporeal souls). This fact, is clarified by श्री आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi
śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda) in the following lines
Original
Transliteration
Translation
संकरममणाच्च आनन्दमयाअत्मानमुपसंक्रामतीति वक्ष्यति। कार्यात्मानां च संक्रमणमनात्मनां दृष्टम्। संकरमणकर्मत्वेन चानन्दमय आत्माश्रूयते। यथान्नमयमात्मानमुपसंक्रामतीति। न चात्मन उपसंक्रमणं संभवति। स्वतमनि भेदाभावत् आत्मभूतं च ब्रह्म सङ्क्रमितुः।
मन्त्रोदाहरणानुपपत्तेश्च। न हि प्रियशिर आद्यव्यवविशिष्टे प्रत्यक्षतोऽनुभूयमान आनन्दमय आत्मनि ब्रह्माणि नास्ति ब्रह्मेत्याशङ्काभावात् "अस्म्मेव स भवति । अस्द्रब्रह्मेति वेद चेंत्। " (तै उप् २।६।१) इति मन्त्रोदाहरणमुपपद्यते। ब्रह्म पुच्छं प्रतिष्ठेत्यपि चानुपपन्नं पृथगब्रह्मणः प्रतिष्ठातेन ग्रहणम्। तस्मात्कार्यपतित एवानन्दमयो न पर एवात्मा।
saṃkaramamaṇācca ānandamayāatmānamupasaṃkrāmatīti vakṣyati। kāryātmānāṃ ca saṃkramaṇamanātmanāṃ dṛṣṭam। saṃkaramaṇakarmatvena cānandamaya ātmāśrūyate। yathānnamayamātmānamupasaṃkrāmatīti। na cātmana upasaṃkramaṇaṃ saṃbhavati। svatamani bhedābhāvat ātmabhūtaṃ ca brahma saṅkramituḥ।
śira addhikalpanānupapateśca। na hi yatokttalakṣaṇa ākāśa adhikāraṇe'kāryapatīte । "adṛśye'nātmaye'nirukte'nilayane " (tai upa 2।7।1)। asthūlamanaṇu (bṛh up 3।8।8) । "neti netyātmā" (3।9।26) ityādhiviśeṣāpohaśrutibhyaśca।
mantrodāharaṇānupapatteśca। na hi priyaśira ādyavyavaviśiṣṭe pratyakṣato'nubhūyamāna ānandamaya ātmani brahmāṇi nāsti brahmetyāśaṅkābhāvāt "asmmeva sa bhavati । asdrabrahmeti veda ceṃt। " (tai up 2।6।1) iti mantrodāharaṇamupapadyate। brahma pucchaṃ pratiṣṭhetyapi cānupapannaṃ pṛthagabrahmaṇaḥ pratiṣṭhātena grahaṇam। tasmātkāryapatita evānandamayo na para evātmā।
For reasons of samkramana (attainment), too, this meaning holds good. It will be said later, “He reaches the self consisting of bliss” (Tai up 2.8.5). The attainment of non-selves and effects such as the annamaya (self constituted by food) etc. are seen. Again, the self constituted of bliss is heard of as being associated with the act of attainment, in the same manner as it is seen (in this Upanishad). “He reached the self constituted by food”(ibid). There is no attainment of the Self as such, in as much as a thing is opposed to the context and is also impossible. For the attainment of the Self by the Self does not take place owing to the absence of part(s) in it. And Brahman is the Self of the one who attains.
Also since the attributes of the head etc. (to the self) does not hold good (anandamaya can be regarded only as a conditioned self). As for the Self possessed of the charecteristics described above, which is the cause of space etc., and which does not come within the group of effects, it is not in fitness to imagine it having limbs in the form of head etc. This is evidenced from the shruti texts such as “Unseen, bodiless, undefinable and supportkess” (Tai Up 2.7.1), “Neither gross nor subtle” (Bri Up 3.8.8), “”The self is that which has been declared as ‘not this not this’” (Bri Up 3.9.26) etc., which go to remove all distinctions from the Self.
(If the Self is meant by the term anandamaya), the citation of the mantra (that succeeds) does not hold good. If Brahman is directly escperienced as the self made of bliss and endowed with limbs such as happiness which represent its head,etc., there cannot be any such doubt as “Brahman does not exist”, to ward off which (doubt) there occurs the succeeding mantra. “If a man knows Brahman as non-existent, he himself becomes non-existent” (Tai Up 2.6.1). (And as a matter of fact) the citation of the mantra becomes relevant. Moreover, it is unreasonable (otherwise) to make a separate reference to Brahman as the tail that supports, as could be seen from “Brahman is the tail that supports” (vide mantra above). Therefore the self made of bliss (anandamaya) comes within the group of conditioned selves alone and it is not the Supreme Self.
The next important
point to understand is that the ईश्वरात्मन् (īśvarātman
– divine self)which corresponds
to परमक आनन्दस्य तल (paramaka
ānandasya tala – highest level of bliss), is mapped to the पुच्छ (puccha - tail) among the शरीराणाम् अङ्गाः (śarīrāṇām aṅgāḥ - organs of bodies). The above
declaration from तैत्तिरीयोपनिस्षद् (taittrīyopaniṣad) very clearly declares “ब्रह्म पुच्छं प्रतिष्ठ (brahma
pucchaṃ pratiṣṭha – divinity is the tail that supports)”.
This may
sound very odd because we are mapping the पुच्छ
(puccha - tail) which for all practicall purposes is a
functionally insignificant शारीरक अङ्ग (śārīraka aṅga – body organ) and even a non
existing one for humans – the highest evolved species on planet Earth. Then why
this analogy? Let us try to understand from the experts. Once again, as always,
श्री आदि शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi
śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda) comes to our rescue. He clarifies thus:
(Opponent): Now, how is that existeant Brahman, the chief entity in its own right, designated as the tail of Anandamaya, as in the passage ‘Brahman is tail that supports’?
(Reply): There is nothing wrong for the word ‘tail’ means something of a nature of tail from which we have to comprehend that the bliss of Brahman is not a mere part but the support or the first resort, i..e., the one seat of all worldly bliss, as evidenced by another shruti-passage, ‘On a minute part of bliss itself other beings live’ (Brih Up 4.3. 32)
Let us now
look at the ‘human tail’ from a modern
anatomical science perspective. Technically it corresponds to the ‘coccyx’ which is
more commonly known as ‘tail bone’ and is the final
segment of the ‘vertebral column (spinal cord)’ not only in
homosapiens (human beings) but also in all apes. Of course, in former case, the
coccyx (tailbone) is considered as a vestigial tail (i.e. its a
vestige of a redundant organ).
Although,
the coccyx (tailbone) seems to be
functionally redundant from the prespective of स्थूलभूत
शरीर (sthūla bhūta śarīra – gross physical body), yet
according to the occult science of कुण्डलिनी योग (kuṇḍalinī
yoga),as already seen, coccyx
(tailbone)
is closely associated with the मूलाधार
चक्र (mūlādhāra cakra – main base center) at
the base of theसुषुम्णा / ब्रह्म नाडी(suṣumṇā / brahma nāḍī – curve edged / divine channel)in the सूक्षम लिङ्ग शरीर(sūkṣama liṅga śarīra – subtle astral plane).We have also seen that
because of the coccyx (tailbone)gives a special curvature at the base of the कषेरुका (kaṣerukā - vertibral column / back bone) resembling
the esoterically overloaded symbolism of the sacred ஊமைஎழுத்து(Umai ezhuththu – silent letter)viz. ‘உ (u)’ and because of which the சுழுமுனை /सुषुम्णा(suzhumunai / suṣumṇā)is also referred
as சுழிமுனை / भुग्न मूल(suzhimunai /bhugna mūla– curved edge).
As we have already dealt with this topic at length earlier itself, I will
not repeat them here. However, the important point for us now is to relate it
to better understand the esoteric significance of the श्रुति वाक्य (śruti vākya – revelatory statement)
viz. “ब्रह्म
पुच्छं प्रतिष्ठ (brahma pucchaṃ pratiṣṭha – divinity is the tail that supports)”. In simple terms the पुच्छं (pucchaṃ - tail) symbolizes the gateway to divinity viz. theसुषुम्णा / ब्रह्म नाडी(suṣumṇā / brahma nāḍī – curve edged / divine channel)
like a spiritual worm-holespeculated in modern physics.
I assume that the above explanation in terms of कुण्डलिनी योग (kuṇḍalinī yoga) will help
us better understand as to why श्री आदि
शंकराचार्य भगवत्पाद (śrī ādi śaṃkarācārya bhagavatpāda) declares “पुच्छवत्पुच्छं प्रतिष्ठा परायणमेकनीडं लैकिकस्यानन्दजातस्य ब्रह्मानन्द (pucchavatpucchaṃ
parāyaṇamekanīḍaṃ laikikasyānandajātasya brahmānanda - ‘tail’ means something of a nature of tail from which we
have to comprehend that the bliss of Brahman is not a mere part but the support
or the first resort, i..e., the one seat of all worldly bliss)”, in the above quoted
passage from शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka
bhāṣya).
The next important point to understand here is that,
according to केवलाद्वैत दर्शन(kevalādvaita
darśana – absolute nondualstic philosophy), the ब्रह्म (brahma- divinity) referred in the “ब्रह्म पुच्छं
प्रतिष्ठ (brahma pucchaṃ pratiṣṭha – divinity is the tail that supports)” corresponds to the सविशेष
/सगुण ब्रह्मन् (saviśeṣa /saguṇa brahman – divinity with qualities / specifications) which in
theological terms corresponds to the परमेश्वर तत्त्व
(parameśvara tattva – supreme divinity principle).
apica āndamayasya brahmatve priyādyavyavatvena saviśeṣaṃ brahmabhupagantvayam। nirviśeṣaṃ tu brahma vākyaśeṣe śrūyate। vāṅbhanasyoragocāratvābhidhānāt। yatho vāco nirvatante । aprāpya nanasā saha। āanandaṃ brahaṇo bidvān। na vibheti kutaścaneti' (tait up 2।9)। apica ānandagrahacura ityukte duḥkhastitvāmapi gamyate prācuryasya loke pratiyogyalapatvāpekṣatvāt। tathāca sati 'yatra nānyatpaśyati nānyacchṛṇoti nānyadvijānāti sa bhūmā' (chā up 8।24।1)। iti bhūmni brahmāṇi tvadyatiriktābhāvaśrutirūparudhyet।
Moreover, if we are to comprehend the true ‘Self of bliss’ as Brahman, then we have to assume that the Brahman distinguished by attributes is meant here, for it is said to have fondness etc. for its members. But this notion is opposed to by the passage ‘That from which speech returns along with mind, without reaching, after realizing that Bliss of Brahman the enlightened one is not afraid of anything’ (Tait Up 2.9) which shows that Brahman is not the object of mind or speech and that the (real) Brahman (free from attributes) alone is meant. Moreover, when we sat that something abounds in bliss, it implies the presence of pain also, for the very conecption of abundance presupposes the presence of a small measure of opposite of that which is abundant. Though such is the case it would be contradicted by the passage ‘That in which one neither sees anything else, nor hears anything else, nor knows anything else is the Infinite” (Cha up 7.24.1) which declares that in Brahman, the Infinite, there is nothing different from it.
In a
nutshell, आनन्दमय कोश (ānandamaya
kośa – blissmade sheath) corresponds to the कोश
(kośa – sheath) which abides as the शुद्धाशुद्ध
स्वरूप सत्त्वस्य (śuddhāśuddha
svarūpa sattvasya – pure-impure nature of existence).It is considered “शुद्ध
(śuddha -
pure)”because it
is none less than the ब्रह्मन् (brahman –
divinity), to be specific the सगुण
ब्रह्मन् (saguṇa brahman – divinity with qualities). However, at the same time, it is
considered अशुद्ध (aśuddha -
impure) in the specific sense that
even such a सगुण ब्रह्मन् (saguṇa
brahman – divinity with qualities), as already discussed, is प्रसीमित
क्लेशेन नियामक उपाधेः शरीर नाम (prasīmita kleśena niyāmaka upādheḥśarīra nāma - conditioned by sheath of limiting adjunct called
body).
Of course, in this case, the आनन्दमय
ईश्वर्स्य शरीर (ānandamaya īśvarsya
śarīra – blissful body of god) is the कारण शरीर अनादि मायायाः (kāraṇa śarīra anādi māyāyāḥ – causal
body of beginingless mystery) which is operating at the आत्मचैतन्यस्यसमष्टि
अवस्था (ātmacaitanyasya samaṣṭi avasthā -collective state of
soul consciousness).Whereas
in the case ofआध्यात्मिक
/ जीवात्मन् (ādhyātmika / jīvātman – soul intensive / living self), the आनन्दस्य तल (ānandasya tala – level of bliss) corresponding
to the प्रमोद (pramoda – delight) operates
within the capacity of आत्मचैतन्यस्य व्यष्टि
अवस्था (ātmacaitanyasya vyaṣṭi avasthā -individual state of
soul consciousness).And, in this
case it is कार्य शरीर अनादि मायायाः (kārya śarīra anādi māyāyāḥ – effectual body of beginingless
mystery).
अनुसारेन उत्तरमीमांसविशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदरशन (anusārena uttaramīmāṃsaviśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadaraśana – according to posterior inquiry qualified-non-dualstic final wisdom philosophy)
According to the विशिष्टाद्वैतदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaita darśana – qualified nondualstic philosophy), the highest scope of आध्यात्मिक / जीवात्मन् (ādhyātmika / jīvātman – soul intensive / living self) is the विज्ञानमय कोश (vijñānamaya kośa – gnostic intensive sheath). In other words, आनन्दमय कोश (ānandamaya kośa – bliss intensive sheath) belongs to the परमात्मन् (paramātman – supreme self) operating at the आत्मचैतन्यस्यसमष्टि अवस्था (ātmacaitanyasya samaṣṭi avasthā -collective state of soul consciousness) and hence cannot belong to the जीवात्मन् (jīvātman – living self) who is operating within आत्मचैतन्यस्य व्यष्टि अवस्था (ātmacaitanyasya vyaṣṭi avasthā -individual state of soul consciousness).For example, श्री रामाणुजाचार्य(śrī rāmāṇujācārya), as part of श्रीभाष्य(śrībhāṣya) which is his famous ब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्य(brahmasūtra bhāṣya - divine aphorism commentary) 1.1.12 (13) deals at length on the subject running into several pages.
iti yajñādikartṛtvaṃ vijñānasya śrūyate। buddhimātrasya hi na kartṛtvaṃ saṃbhavati। acetaneṣu hi cetanopakaraṇabhūteṣu vijñānamayātprājīneṣu, annamayādiṣu na cetanadharmabhūtaṃ kartṛtvaṃ śrūyate। ata eva cetanam acetanaṃ ca svāsādhāraṇaiḥ nilayanatvādibhiḥ dharmaviśeṣaiḥ vibhajya nirdiśyadvākyaṃ
'vijñānaṃ cāvijñānaṃ ca' (tai up 2।6)
‘Constituted of bliss on account of repitition’. The ānandamaya is the paramatman. How? On account of repitition. In this passage beginning with
‘This is the consideration of Ānanda’ (Tai Upa 2.8)
And ending with the sentence
‘from whom words turn back’ (Tait upa 2.9)
‘Ānanda’ being repeated, in the order in which the succeeding is multiplied a hundred-fold, culminating in an unsurpassed condtion, not possible to exist in the jivatman experiencing an iota of limited happiness mixed with the endless misery, proclaims as its resort the Paramatman himself, the rival of everything fit to be abandoned, continuously associated with the auspiscious (and) different from everything else. As says (the Śruti) –
‘From this here, consitituted of Vijñāna, there (is) another inmost atman constituted of bliss’ Tai Upa (2.5)
-Vijñānamaya is indeed the Jiva, not merely intelligence, on account of the apprehension of something over and above, by (the use of) suffix ‘mayaṭ’. In (the case of the expression) ‘Prāṇamaya, however, (the suffix) is taken as refering to the same sense, there being no other course (i.e. alternative). In the present case (of Vijñānamaya), however thetre being the possiblity of Jiva possesed of that (vijñāna), it is not reasonable to take that (suffix) as meaningless (i.e. having no additional meaning). We have already stated that the innermost atman, wether in bondage or released (from the bondage), is the Knower himself. Imposiblity of the sense of the ‘Mayaṭ’ (suffix) in ‘Prāṇamaya etc. would be stated immediately below.
How then does the use of merely the word ‘vijñāna’ stand to reason in the passage
‘Vijñāna performs the sacrifice’ (tai up 2.5)
in the verse refering to vijñānamaya? – (The answer is) – Even the natur eof atman although (eva) the knower, is spoken of as vijñāna owing to his self-illumining nature – and so, there is no flaw (in our statement). On account of the knower being fit to be pointed out by knowledge alone; for, the word denoting the charecteristic pointing out to the nature (of an object), propoounds also the nature of the ‘Dharmin’ thorugh the ‘Dharma’; like the word ‘Go’ and others; and the affix ‘Lyu’ is resorted to in the sense of an ‘agent’ in accordance with (the Sūtra)
‘The Kritya affix Lyu, has more than one (sense)’ (Pa 3.3.113)
Or, by taking thiss (root ‘jña’) to be included in (the group of roots) beginning with ‘Nanda’, there is the affix ‘Lyu’ in the sense of the agent in accordance with the (Sūtra)
‘(The group of roots beginning with) Nanda and (the group of roots) beginning with grah’ (Pa 3.1.134)
And, therefore, the nature of an agent for the sacrifice and others in the case of vijñāna is stated in the Śruti –
‘Vijñāna performs the sacrifice, and also performs actions’ (Tai up 2.5)
For, the nature of agent is impossible in the case of an intelligence. For, in the case of the non-sentient ‘annamaya’ etc. that are prior to the ‘vijñānamaya’ and which are the instruments (of enjoyment) for the sentient - the nature of the agent – the charecteristic of a sentient – is not mentioned in the Śrutis. Therefore, for this very reason, the passage pointig to the sentient and the non-sentient, having differentiated (them) on the basis of special attributes peculiar to themselves, such as being the abode and not being the abode, speaks speaks of the sentient having that (vijñāna) as its ‘guna’ by the word ‘vijñāna’ in
'tai ye śataṃ prajāpaterānandāḥ। sa eko brahmaṇa ānandaḥ' ' yato vāco nivartante। aprāpya manasā saha। ānandaṃ brahmaṇo vidvān। na bibheti kutaścana' iti hi vedyatvenāyamānandamayo'nvādhikātiśayo'bhyaste॥
No doubt the individual self, that possesses intelligence and that is different from the pradhāna, has the power of seeing; yet the individual self, neither in the state of bondage nor in the state of final release, can be the cause of the universe. The scriptural text beginning with “From the same self, the spatial ether came into existence' and ending with Different from this vijñānamaya, is the Inner-Self ānandamaya” (Tait. II-l-l) declares that the ānandamaya mentioned as the cause of the universe, is the all-knowing Highest Self, who is other than the individual soul. Why? Because of the repetition. Because there is repetition of the bliss in various grades which culminates in the ānandamaya and which (bliss) forms the summits of unsurpassable condition. This ānandamaya of the unsurpassable condition is repeatedly mentioned in the text, for meditation, ‘The hundredfold of the bliss of prajāpati is equal to the single bliss of the Brahman (Tait. II-8-4), ‘Wherefrom speeches together with the mind return not having reached it. He who knows the Brahman's bliss fears not from anything ' (Tait II-3-8).
Note: There is a slight difference in the numbering convention of the ब्रह्मसूत्र (brahmasūtra) between different भाष्याणि(bhāṣyāṇi - commentaries). For example, the सूत्र (sūtra - aphorism): “आनन्दमयोऽभ्यासात् (ānandamayo'bhyāsāt - The Blissful One is the Supreme Self on account of repetition)”is numbered as #1.1.12 in शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka bhāṣya), while the same is numbered #13 in the श्रीभाष्य (śrī bhāṣya).
श्री वेदान्तदेशिकाचार्य (śrī vedāntadeśikācārya) as part of his famous treatise अधिकरणसारावलि (adhikaraṇasārāvali)summarizing the श्रीभाष्य(śrī bhāṣya)further explains thus
अनुसारेन उत्तरमीमांसद्वैतवेदान्तदरशन (anusārena uttaramīmāṃsadvaitavedāntadaraśana – according to posterior inquiry dualstic final wisdom philosophy)
Even according to द्वैत दर्शन (dvaita darśana – dualistic philosophy), the term रस (rasa- essence)signifies the highest ब्रह्मस्य अधिदैविक रस (brahmasya adhidaivika rasa– spiritual essence of divinity).This fact is very clearly testified byश्री मध्वाचार्य (śrī madhvācārya) in his famous भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentary) on the following ब्रह्मसूत्र (brahmasūtra)
The word ‘rasa’ used to distinguish food, etc., (from ordinary food, etc.), shows that only the pure spiritual essence of Brahman is meant, which is present in the various things.
The important point to understand is that the ब्रह्मस्य अधिदैविक रस (brahmasya adhidaivika rasa– spiritual essence of divinity) is what that runs through and even between the पञ्चकोशानि (pañcakośāni – fivefold sheaths). Again, आचार्य श्री त्रिविक्रम पण्डित(ācārya śrī trivikrama paṇḍita)in the तत्त्वप्रदीप (tattvapradīpa) which is his famous gloss on the above भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentary), further explains thus:
Original
Transliteration
Translation
‘अयं भवः - 'अन्नरसमय' 'रसो वै सः' इत्यादावन्ते च विशेषणात् मध्य च 'प्राणरसमय' इत्याद्युपपत्तेः। रस शब्दस्य सारवाच्त्वात् प्रचुरान्नादिसारं चैतन्यमात्रदेहं ब्रह्म अन्नरसादिशब्दार्थः न भौतिकान्नदिः॥
ayaṃ bhavaḥ - 'annarasamaya' 'raso vai saḥ' ityādāvante ca viśeṣaṇāt madhya ca 'prāṇarasamaya' ityādyupapatteḥ। rasa śabdasya sāravāctvāt pracurānnādisāraṃ caitanyamātradehaṃ brahma annarasādiśabdārthaḥ na bhautikānnadiḥ॥
The use of the word ‘rasa’ at the outset and at the end (Raso vai sah) after ānandamaya suggests its being understood with reference to the others in between. Thus the five forms of the Supreme are to be understood as being designated here as annamaya, prāṇamaya etc. in the purely spiritual sense of those terms.
Then what is the difference between these realms? In other words, from a theological perspective, the अन्तर्यामि ब्रह्म रस (antaryāmi brahma rasa – indwelling divine essence) in each and every कोश (kośa – sheath), is governed by a ईश्वरस्य ब्रह्मरूप (īśvarasya brahmarūpa – divine form of lord) predominantly characterized by विशेष गुणस्य प्राचुर्याणि (viśeṣa guṇasya prācuryāṇi – abundances of special qualities).This fact is testified in the खंडार्थः (khaṃḍārthaḥ - lucid exposition)on the तैत्तिरिय उपनिषद् (taittiriya upaniṣad) written by परमाचार्य श्री राघवेन्द्र तीर्थ (paramācārya śrī rāghavendra tīrtha).
The hands and feet, legs and limbs of the immanent forms of Brahman are similarly pure spiritual essences in each case. Tho’ invisible they are referred by the demonstrative pronoun ‘this’ or ‘that’ in virtue of their inner proximity to their limbs of the physical body of man.
No comments:
Post a Comment