dattaswami

Knowledge is the most important power in spiritual path 143. Sanmaargadarshanadrudhanishchayakaram jnaanam. Translation: Knowledge shows the true path and creates strong determination. Explanation: Knowledge is the most important power in spiritual path as per Shankara. Out of several paths, you have to discuss with sharp analysis to find out the correct path to reach the goal. When all the doubts are cleared, determination to implement effort in practice results. Deep analysis of knowledge alone can clarify all the doubts. Hence, these two are the important effects of spiritual knowledge and therefore lot of importance must be given to deep analysis of spiritual knowledge.

Bond with the God is eternal in all the births and is the most important 144. Shankaramatrutyago devaarthe na paarthasya. Translation: In interpreting the correct version of God, the sacrifice of mother by Shankara was correct, whereas Arjuna was not correct. Explanation: Shankara wanted to go out for serving the divine mission of the Lord by propagating the true spiritual knowledge to convert the atheists existing in that time into theists. He was the only son and she became very old. No relative helps her since she was boycotted by village. In such situation, it is the bound duty of the son to serve her, since Veda says that mother is God (Maatrudevobhava…). But Shankara took the interpretation of this Vedic statement to mean that God is the mother. In Pravrutti, the first interpretation is correct since the mother stands first among all the souls. But in Nivrutti the second interpretation becomes correct because one is having several mothers in several births. Such relationship is the bond between souls and it varies from birth to birth. But the bond with the God is eternal in all the births and is the most important. Shankara was convinced about the second interpretation with the help of deep analysis of knowledge. No body could change His determination since He was complete in the knowledge from all sides. If the knowledge is partial, one will not leave the mother especially in such situation. Arjuna was not having the complete knowledge and hence hesitated to fight with his grandfather even though the Lord Krishna decided the war. Thus, if the knowledge is partial, one will either take a wrong decision or will be misled in to wrong decision by others. If the knowledge is complete, none of these two possibilities can happen.

Importance of Satguru in the spiritual path 145. Ubhayaphalam satgurau gurau tu pramaadah syaat. Translation: In the case of Satguru both the fruits are achieved but in the case of guru there may be the danger of slip. Explanation: Satguru is the human form of God, who shows the correct path and also clarifies all your doubts with perfect analysis. Hence, the importance of Satguru is very much in the spiritual path. In the case of Satguru, He is also the goal of your spiritual effort. If you have attained Satguru, you have already reached the goal. With the help of His knowledge and sharp analysis, you have to only identify Satguru as the goal. The case of Guru is different. Sometimes, he may err and mislead you to the wrong goal. If the guru gives correct knowledge, you can identify Satguru with the help of such sharp knowledge. Sometimes, the guru may appear as Satguru and you may be stuck-up with such guru and not reach the goal.

Complete knowledge will lead to full determination and service to God 146. Purnajnasya na jnaanam nishchayadhaaraagopyah saphalaah. Translation: If the spiritual knowledge is complete, there is no need of preaching even from Satguru as in the case of Gopikas, who could maintain the determination and succeeded. Explanation: The spiritual aspirant having complete knowledge from all sides by achieving it through sharp analysis will straightly catch Satguru and serve Him with full determination and there is no need of any spiritual knowledge even from Satguru. The spiritual knowledge helps only to detect the Satguru. If Satguru is detected by your sharp analysis of spiritual knowledge, there is no need of spiritual knowledge from Satguru also. Gopikas were divine sages, who have already detected the human form of God as Krishna. They straightly loved and served Him with full determination and Krishna did not preach them any spiritual knowledge as there was no need of it. They were only tested by the Lord in the strength of their determination that has to be maintained forever. Those sages who maintained the same strong determination could withstand the tests and succeeded to get the eternal grace of the Lord. Some of them could not maintain the same strength of determination during the tests and hence failed.

Difference between ‘Son of God’ and other human beings 147. Yantraputraaviva srashtuh paramaatmanopi. Translation: Like the machine and son of an engineer, the creation and son of God exist. Explanation: All the human beings are part of the creation of God. A liberated soul is one of the human beings and when he is blessed by God, God enters in to him to make him the human incarnation of God on the earth. Such a blessed liberated soul is mentioned as the son of God. The son of God differs from all the other human beings and the rest of creation by having God in him. The entire creation including all the other human beings is also the product of God and the son of God is also the product of God. But the difference between the son of God and the rest of creation is the presence of God in the son of God and the absence of God in the rest of creation. A machine invented by the engineer is said to be his product. Similarly, the son of the engineer is also said to be the product of the same engineer. But the difference is that the blood of engineer exists in the son, where as, the blood of engineer is absent in the machine. Thus one has to clearly understand the meaning of the son of God.

Entry of God into ‘Son of God’ 148. Shrutapravesho gito lohamishravat shaktyaamshi vishishtah. Translation: The entry is said by Veda as well as Gita like the alloy of two metals. The major component is decided by power as in Vishistaadvaita. Explanation: The entry of God in to creation is explained by the Veda (Tadevaanupraavishat…). The entry of the blessed liberated soul in to God is mentioned by the Gita (Praveshtumcha…). In both the scriptures, the word entry is common. This shows the homogeneous mixing of God and liberated soul (Son of God) to form a single phase like the two metallic components mixing together homogeneously to form a single phased alloy. Since, God is unimaginable and unseen, He becomes undetectable. The human incarnation appears as the detectable liberated soul or human being only. In the case of alloy, if one of the two metals is a trace and is undetectable to the eye, the alloy appears to be the major single metal only. In the case of gold, a small amount of copper is mixed but the alloy appears to be gold only due to the major detectable gold only. In the quantitative sense, the major amount of metal is treated as the major component. But if the trace-metal happens to be very costly, the minor component can be treated as the major component from the point of the value of the metal. Similarly, even though God is undetectable to the eye, from the point of the value, God happens to be major component and the liberated soul is only the minor component. Hence, the theory of Ramanuja treating God as major component (Amshi) and the soul as minor component (Amsha) is correct from the point of the value of power of the component.

A preacher is totally different from a scholar 149. Uddhaarakaah guravo na kevalasadvidah trayopi. Translation: The three preachers are for uplifting the disciples and they are not mere scholars to expose the truth. Explanation: Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva are equally respectable preachers, who have preached the same truth by stressing a part of the truth or some times twisting the truth to suit the context for uplifting the human beings existing in their times. A preacher can twist the concept or stress a part of the concept for the sake of uplifting the spiritual aspirants existing in that time. Such freedom is sanctioned by God to the preacher since the upliftment of the human beings is the main goal to be achieved. The projection of the complete concept without any twist may some times become useless and may even harm the people. The practical problems are more important for a preacher to uplift the disciple and mere projection of theoretical truth without any practical use is done by a scholar. Thus, a preacher is totally different from a scholar. The preacher modifies the spiritual knowledge in such a way so that the disciple climbs the higher step. A scholar is never bothered about the upliftment of the disciple and is bothered only in projecting the plain concept as the ultimate truth. The preacher is also a scholar but a scholar need not be the preacher.

Shankara preached about Human Incarantion not about any soul 150. Shaankare vishishta eva bhedaat vidyudvalliva. Translation: According to the angle of Shankara a specific soul, which is different from other souls is considered like the electrified wire. Explanation: Shankara was always speaking about the human being charged by God called as human incarnation like Himself, Krishna etc. Only in human incarnation, the discussion about the soul being God comes into picture. Such discussion of a specific soul is called as shaarirakamimaamsaa. There is no need of any discussion about any ordinary human being because, after all, he is a human being only. There is no need of any discussion about God because God is God. There is no need of discussion about current and wire independently because current is current and wire is wire. The discussion is only about the electric wire. The discussion is about the point that whether the electric wire can be treated as electricity or wire. This dilemma comes because the current is invisible and only the wire is visible. Similarly, God in human incarnation is unimaginable and only the human being is visible and imaginable. Shankara preferred to treat the human incarnation as God only and not as human being because such human incarnation defers from all the other human beings due to expression of unimaginable nature. Even though the unimaginable God is not directly projected, He is indirectly projected through the exhibited unimaginable nature, which is experienced.

Shankara preached to uplift atheists 151. Ativyaptih na niruddha tadastitvalaabhaat. Translation: The extrapolation of the concept of human incarnation to all the souls was not contradicted by Shankara, since it has use in the case of atheists, who accepted the existence of God. Explanation: The concept of Shankara was extended by all human beings to themselves and every human being concluded that he is God. The silence of Shankara about this misunderstanding was of great use in that time. Then, Shankara was surrounded by Buddhists and Purvamimamsakas, who were complete atheists. At least they agreed in the existence of God even though they have misunderstood that they were God. Atheism to theism is essential step in the beginning for anybody and hence Shankara kept silent about such misunderstanding. This shows that Shankara was not a mere scholar to expose the truth but also a preacher (Guru) to uplift the foolish atheists.

Shankara effectively preached both atheists and theists 152. Shankaro vidvaan gurushcha pruthak ubhayoh. Translation: Shankara became scholar for theists and became preacher for atheists separately in the case of clarifying the misunderstanding. Explanation: Shankara clarified the misunderstanding to the minority of theists but kept silent and allowed the misunderstanding to continue in the case of majority of atheists. If He clarifies to atheists also, instead of climbing one more step, they will descend from the climbed step! Effort for promotion will result in demotion! However, the minority of theists were clarified so that they were promoted to the higher step. The clarification should not be given to both in uniform way. That is the talented treatment of the preacher to his disciples. If he is a mere scholar, he will clarify the truth by removing the misunderstanding and will not bother about promotion or demotion of the disciples. Shankara was a scholar as well as a preacher.

Commentaries of Shankara are diplomatic aimed at atheists 153. Ubhayadhaa bhaashyaani stotraanyekadhaa daivaat. Translation: Since, Shankara was the God in human form, His commentaries simultaneously uplifted atheists and theists by diplomatic style. The prayers composed by Shankara were meant for theists only. Explanation: The commentaries of Shankara were meant for majority of atheists, which maintain the misunderstanding. Shankara composed several prayers on God referring to the component of the soul in Him for the sake of minority of theists. These theists were expected to view the commentaries as discussions about a specific soul or human incarnation. Thus, the commentaries are diplomatic, serving the purpose of atheists by creating misunderstanding that every soul is God and also serving the purpose of theists by specifying the soul of human incarnation only as God. Hence, the commentaries were carefully composed by Shankara, which uplifted atheists and simultaneously theists also according to the sense of their level. Since Shankara was the human form of God, such intellectual capacity was exhibited.

Human Incarnation alone is Got not every body 154. Viparitameke naanye sisapaanaat. Translation: The theists can take the angle of atheists from the commentary but not reverse. The mistake of theists was rectified by drinking the molten led. Explanation: When the theists also misunderstood like atheists and started thinking themselves as God, because the angle of atheists can also be taken by theists due to its attraction, Shankara had to clarify the truth. When Shankara told that He is God (Shivoham), some theists misunderstood and started telling the same. The meaning of I was taken as awareness and when Shankara told “I am God”, theists thought that since I exists in them also, they must also be God. Since king is a man, since every one is a man, hence every one must be king! This was their logic! Then Shankara swallowed the molten lead and corrected the statement by saying that He alone was God (Shivah kevaloham). From the diplomatic commentary, even though the theists can take the angle of atheists, vice-versa is impossible, because the atheists can never accept the concept of human incarnation.

Shankara preached monism for atheist, dualism for theists diplomatically 155. Ekakonamaatro bhrantah stotranidarshanaat. Translation: Shankara was misunderstood as the preacher of one angle of monism only through His commentaries. This can be disproved because the second angle of dualism was very clear through His prayers. Explanation: Shankara is misunderstood today as the author of the commentary pertaining to atheists only and is misunderstood as the preacher of monism, which states that every soul is God. The other angle of commentary that it deals only with the case of specific soul of human incarnation was forgotten. At least, this angle was made very clear in His prayers and these prayers, which show that soul is a servant of God, are now completely neglected. If the commentary had only one angle of monism, Shankara should not have composed the prayers in which the monism is completely absent and dualism is well established. Therefore, the prayers are indication of the second angle of the diplomatic commentary.

Spiritual field is the most liberalized one 156. Samaavakaashaat dvayoh samanvayah. Translation: Due to equal opportunity, both the angles are correlated. Explanation: One angle of the commentary is that every soul is God. Another angle is that a specific soul like Krishna alone is God. The first angle is for atheists, who will never accept the second angle. The only consideration to maintain the first angle is that at least they will accept the existence of the God. In both the angles the common point is that there is a chance of a selected soul to become God. There is equal opportunity to every soul to get this fortune. In every human generation God comes in human form and some times there may be more than one human incarnation in one generation itself based on the requirement. The deserving soul gets that chance and the chance is open to all the souls. Therefore, this is not like the cruel capitalism that only one is born with golden spoon to become the king. There is only one post of the king and only one can become the king. But there is equal chance for anyone to become the king by achieving the deserving qualification. Hence, this is like the justified capitalism. Even in democracy, only one is becoming the president of the nation, but every one has equal opportunity to contest for the post and to succeed. This is not the cruel capitalism, but it is a justified democracy based capitalism. Even in justified capitalism there is only one president, whereas in spiritual field there can be more than one human incarnation in one time. Some times, different souls with different compositions of the three qualities are selected for different programs in one time of human generation itself. Hence, the spiritual field is the most liberalized one.

Every soul has equal opportunity to become human incarnation 157. Atisannihitabhavishyati lat pitruvaatsalyaatishayaat. Translation: The present tense is used in the immediate future due to excess of paternal affection. Explanation: Every soul has equal opportunity to become God in the post of human incarnation. This does not mean that every soul will become the human incarnation in one generation itself. This also does not mean that every soul is already God, whether the soul deserves or not. But Shankara being God, wishes that every soul should become God as early as possible. This shows the climax of eternal love of God on the souls. The immediate future can be mentioned in the present tense, which indicates that the soul should become God as early as possible. Shankara being God, having climax of affection on the souls created by Him only, wished every soul to become God as early as possible. In this sense, Shankara told that every soul is God. This does not literally mean that every soul is already God. This means that Shankara wishes that every soul should become God as early as possible due to the climax of His paternal affection on the souls. Gita says that God is the father of the souls (Ahambijapradah pitaa…).

Three components of spiritual knowledge followed by Shankara 158. Jnaanabhaktisevaakarmaani tasyaapi Rukminyaa iva. Translation: The knowledge, theoretical devotion and practical devotion as service are the three subsequent steps followed by Shankara also as in the case of Rukmini. Explanation: The knowledge of the goal, the knowledge of the correct path to reach the goal and the knowledge of yourself that you are not already the goal is called ‘triputi’ or the three components of spiritual knowledge. This is the first step. After getting the knowledge of the goal, the interest on the goal called as devotion is developed and this is the second step. Due to devotion, one gets the association of God. Now starts the practical devotion, which is sacrifice of work and fruit of work without aspiration for fruit, to get the real grace of God. This is the third step. Rukmini heard the details of Krishna from sage Narada and this is first step. In the second step, she developed love to Krishna. Due to this love, Krishna married her. She did not aspire to become the queen, but became the servant by pressing the feet of Krishna continuously. The commentaries of Shankara refer to the first step. The prayers composed by Shankara refer to second step. Shankara left even His old mother and was intensively involved in the mission of God through out His life and this refers to the third step. Thus, Shankara represents the total spiritual path of three subsequent steps so that none can add anything after Him.

Shankara- Adishesha- Ramanuja 160. Uktabhaagapunashcharanaartham shishyasheshah shruteh. Translation: To revise a part of the preached knowledge, the disciple, Adishesha came and all this is supported by Veda. Explanation: After Shankara, slowly, almost all atheists were converted into theists, but they were under the illusion that they were already God and avoided devotion and service. In course of time, their theism was well established and the time was ripened for them to realize the truth and climb the next step. The second step followed by Shankara already in composing the prayers on God was to be stressed upon in that time. The second step was to be revised, which was already preached by Shankara long ago. A professor teaches the lesson completely and leaves the class. The students may have difficulty in some parts of the lesson. To clarify those parts, the professor will not come again to teach the class. He will send his senior research students to revise the hard parts of the lesson. Similarly, God Shankara sent His disciple, Adishesha in the form of Ramanuja to stress upon the second step. Ramanuja is said to be the human incarnation of Adishesha. You can find the stress on devotion already in the preaching of Shankara (Bhaktireva gariyasi). Hence, devotion was not invented by Ramanuja. It was already invented and introduced by Shankara. Shankara was Lord Shiva and as per Veda Shiva is Narayana (Shivashcha Narayanah). Adishesha is the servant of Lord Shiva existing as jewel in the neck. Since, Shiva is Narayana, Adishesha being the servant of the Narayana, shall be also the servant of Shiva. The followers of Ramanuja themselves agree that Ramanuja is incarnation of Adishesha. Hence, none can contradict any point of this concept.

Ramanuja never criticized Shankara 161. Param dutaabhyaam svabhaagayoreva kaalaanukulam. Translation: Afterwards, when the proper time came, He sent His messengers to stress the two relevant parts of His own spiritual concept. Explanation: Ramanuja never criticized Shankara. He criticized only the disciples of Shankara (Yaduchyate Shaankaraih…), who misunderstood the monism and were not spiritually developing. Every Tam, Dick and Harry started thinking that he was already God. Therefore, the truth was revealed to them through Ramanuja. Since, the concept of theism became firm, nobody became atheist. Those who realized the truth climbed the step of devotion accepting dualism. Those who were not convinced remained in monism only and did not become atheists. Subsequently, Shankara sent His another servant Vayu, an angel, in the form of Madhva to preach the third and final step of practical devotion. Madhva, Himself claimed as the incarnation of Vayu and Vayu is only one of the angels. Dualism is not a new invention of Ramanuja and Madhva. It was already stressed in the prayers by Shankara. Ramanuja and Madhva stressed the devotion and dualism, which are parts of the total spiritual concept of Shankara only.

God is not grasped by any human being 162. Mulamaayaiva naro bhaagaat tadatitahetorapi na graahyam. Translation: The human being is the Mula Maya only in essence and it being the part of illusion and God being beyond the entire creation, God is not grasped by any human being. Explanation: The human being is a composite of three parts: The outer most gross body being the condensed matter, the inner subtle body being the group of different works of inert energy and the inner most causal body being the very inert primordial energy, all these three are in essence the Mula Maya or the primordial energy only. Since the primordial energy is the illusion created by God, the human being becomes a part of the illusion itself. God being beyond the entire illusion cannot be grasped by the human being. These two points are the reasons for the human beings in not grasping the original nature of God.

Gita says that nobody understands God even after hearing lot about God 163. Anuhyataiva gitamaashcharyam. Translation: The surprise that is mentioned in Gita is nothing but the unimaginable nature of the God. Explanation: In Gita it is said that one sees God with surprise, one hears about God with surprise and one speaks about God with surprise. Finally Gita says that nobody understands God even after hearing lot about God (Aashcharyavat…). The surprise mentioned about all aspects of God indicates just the unimaginable nature of God. There is no surprise if the concept is understood. When any point is not understood, then only the surprise arises.

The word infinite cannot project the real nature of God 164. Simaanuhyameva anantam na madhye yathaakaashah. Translation: The word infinite denotes the unimaginable nature in the boundaries only and not in the portion between the boundaries as in the case of space. Explanation: The infinite space cannot be compared to the unimaginable God. In the case of space, only the boundaries are unimaginable, where as the form of space is well understood as vacuum or subtle inert energy. In the case of God, both the form and boundaries are unimaginable. Hence, the word infinite cannot project the real nature of God. An imaginable item like space is said to be infinite since its boundaries are unimaginable and not the portion between the boundaries. In the case of God, not only the boundaries but also the portion between the boundaries is unimaginable. The word infinite shows only partial unimaginable nature, which is limited to the boundaries only.

The knowledge of God is helpful to find out the correct address of God in the medium 165. Bhaktirmanasaa gunaanaam dhiyaa tattvasya jnaanamekam paramabhijnaane. Translation: Both knowledge and devotion are the same worship of qualities and nature of God through mind and intelligence respectively. But the knowledge of God is helpful to find out the correct address of God in the medium. Explanation: Shankara stated in His commentary that devotion is the knowledge of God. He did not differentiate knowledge and devotion of God. Knowledge is thinking the nature of God through discussions involving intelligence. Devotion is thinking the qualities of God through mind. Both are different forms of the same worship and hence the difference disappears. On knowing the details of God (Knowledge), the interest on God (devotion) develops simultaneously and hence knowledge and devotion are inseparable forms of the same worship of God. Devotion and knowledge do not have any difference, once God is correctly detected. For detection of God only knowledge helps and not the devotion.

Worship of God through work is called as seva or karmayoga 166. Sevaakarma phalajanakam tayorjaatam. Translation: The work or service is born out of knowledge and devotion, which alone is the source of fruit. Explanation: Worship of God through work is called as seva or karmayoga, which is consequence of knowledge and devotion. In fact, this consequence is very important and is the source of grace of God. The knowledge and devotion have no value if the consequence is not seen. This consequence involves the sacrifice of work and fruit of work. This consequence alone can yield the fruit through the grace of God.

Gita gives a lower position to the sacrifice of material than the place of knowledge 167. Bhraantadrushtadravyayajnaniraaso gitah shruta eva. Translation: The twisted sacrifice of material as seen today was rejected by Gita and in real sense it is in the path of Veda only. Explanation: Veda deals with this karma or work involving the sacrifice of material or fruit of work in elaborate manner. Almost all the Veda gives stress on work and sacrifice of material only (Dravyayajna). But Gita gives a lower position to the sacrifice of material than the place of knowledge (Shreyaan dravyamayaat…). Therefore, there is a contradiction between Veda and Gita. This contradiction can be removed by understanding the position of Dravyayajna in the time of Gita, which is almost the beginning of Kali age. The sacrifice of material was misunderstood by the ignorant priests as seen today. The priests sacrifice the material in to physical fire without knowing the actual meaning of the word fire. Fire means Satguru, who is the human form of the God. Due to lack of proper knowledge of the word fire, the sacrifice of material is twisted and became wastage of material. In this context of the twisted sense of Drayayajna, the Lord condemned such foolish wastage of material and advised to give importance to knowledge so that the proper sense of the sacrifice should be understood first before its practice. Therefore, there is no contradiction between Veda and Gita in the real sense of sacrifice (Yajna). In fact, Gita stressed a lot on the sacrifice of work and material (fruit of work) everywhere as karma yoga.

One cannot argue that God is imagined as unimaginable 168. Anuhyamiti nohyam yadastitvamaatrajnaapakam na svarupam. Translation: One cannot argue that God is imagined as unimaginable, because the unimaginable nature indicates only the existence of God since it is not the real inherent characteristic of God. Explanation: The unimaginable nature of God is not the inherent characteristic because it changes when God Himself becomes the observer. This means that God is unimaginable for others and is imaginable for Himself. Since the inherent characteristic cannot be altered by the change of observer, the unimaginable nature can no more be the inherent characteristic of God. This was already established in the above sutras. Hence, no inherent characteristic of God is known or experienced. Experience is not different from knowledge. The unimaginable nature acts as an inherent characteristic like the inseparable yellow thread to identify the married lady. The yellow thread is said to be inseparable but is not really inseparable. Therefore, by experiencing or knowing the unimaginable nature of God, you cannot claim that you have known or experienced God. If you claim that you have imagined God as unimaginable, and if you argue that by this way you have imagined God, then, even that becomes futile. The reason is that even if you imagined God as unimaginable, since the unimaginable nature is not the inherent characteristic of God, you have not touched God or God’s inherent characteristic through the experience of unimaginable nature. This means that you have caught only the yellow thread but not the lady. Hence, in no way can you imagine God. By this, the logical way of arguing that God is imagined as unimaginable is also totally rejected and there is no way to imagine God. The final conclusion is that the unimaginable nature gives the existence of God in that medium.