Bādha

Posted on by
Reply

The Process of Bādha: The Engine of Realization in Advaita Vedānta

In the rigorous intellectual and spiritual framework of Advaita Vedānta, the journey toward enlightenment is not marked by the acquisition of new objects of experience, but by a fundamental shift in understanding. At the heart of this shift lies a crucial technical process known as bādha. Frequently translated into English as sublation, subration, cancellation, or negation, bādha is the cognitive mechanism by which a previously accepted point of view or understanding is superseded by a totally different, more accurate one upon the receipt of new information. It is effectively the apavāda stage of the adhyāropa-apavāda process.

For the seeker, understanding bādha is essential because it defines the very nature of Truth and Reality. In Advaita, the “Real” is defined specifically as that which cannot be sublated—that which remains uncontradicted in all three periods of time (past, present, and future).

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 12)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 11

Chapter 13 Eye-lessness
13.1 to 13.5
Yajnavalkya tells Gargi (Br Up 3.8.8): Brahman is not gross, not oily, nothing is inside outside, thereby suggesting all negations. What remains is not negated and is a positive entity, Brahman. A knower of Brahman is Brahman (Mun Up 3.2.9). An enlightened person is capable of using the word ‘I’ emperically and also at the Absolute level.
The author uses a rhetorical device of putting words in the mouth of Brahman. The verses are in the1st person. Brahman is of the nature of pure consciousness and is different from the gross and subtle bodies which are essentially inert. Therefore, Brahman speaks. Alternatively, an enlightened ego speaks:

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 10 (kaTha 1)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 9 (kena 4)]

kaTha Upanishad

अतिमुच्य धीराः प्रेत्यास्माल्लोकादमृता भवन्ति ॥    —  1.2, kena Upanishad.

[Meaning: The wise, having relinquished all false identifications, become immortal upon departing from this world.] 

The kena Upanishad tells us that “A dead man becomes immortal after death.” 

At first glance, what the kena says appears to be a paradox: it suggests that one must “depart” to become immortal. If we take this literally, it sounds as though a dead man becomes immortal — yet a dead man is no longer there to experience immortality. This apparent contradiction is the gateway to a deeper Vedantic truth.

kena Upanishad is actually pointing to a “solution” for the one thing we all struggle with: Freedom from the constant, grinding cycle of birth, death, and the misery in between — what the shAstra-s (texts) call samsAra.

Continue reading →

Ātman and Brahman

Posted on by
Reply

The Pillars of Non-Dual Reality

In the vast and rigorous tradition of Advaita Vedānta, two terms stand as the absolute foundation of all spiritual inquiry: Brahman and Ātman. While these words can initially seem like abstract philosophical markers, they are, in fact, pointers to the most intimate and undeniable truths of our existence. Traditional Advaita, as systematized by the great sage Ādi Śaṅkara in the 8th century, is fundamentally a methodology designed to reveal that these two apparently different entities are, in reality, one and the same.

The core message of this teaching is famously summarized by the dictum: brahma satyam, jaganmithyā, jīvo brahmaiva nāparaḥ—”Brahman is the reality; the world is not in itself real; the individual self is none other than Brahman”. To understand this “Great Equation,” we must first clarify what is meant by these two essential terms through the lens of scriptural testimony (śabda pramāṇa) and Śaṅkara’s commentaries.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 11)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 10

Part 12

12.6, 12.7 and 12.10                                                                                       Consciousness is independent of experience, but experience needs consciousness. There are two factors in experience. Consciousness and the mind. Consciousness is limitless.  But it is limited or conditioned by the mind. The conditioned consciousness is like a reflection in the mind. When the mind comes in contact with an object through sense organs, there are modifications in the mind called vrittis. The vrittis are illumined or revealed by the (reflected) consciousness. Illumined vrittis is experience.

A wise person knows that locus of ignorance is the mind and not the Self, his true nature, and further that the mind commits the mistake of false identification. Such a wise person is indeed the best of yogis and not anyone else. Heat of the sun on the body is an object of knowledge. Likewise, pain and pleasure and the mind where they reside are the objects of knowledge. It is wrong to superimpose them on Self. Self is neither sad nor happy. The bottom line is that the condition of the mind belongs to mind and not to Self. Sadness is natural.

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 9 (kena 4)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 8 (kena 3)]

The Upanishad continues:

यत्प्राणेन न प्राणिति येन प्राणः प्रणीयते । 
तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि नेदं यदिदमुपासते ॥                   — mantra 1.9, kena.

[Meaning:  What none can breathe with the breath, but by which the breath is directed, know that alone as brahman, and not this they worship here. (Here the word ’prANa’ may also mean smell. In that case, the translation would be: What one smells not by the organ of smell, but by which the smell is directed towards its objects, know that alone as brahman.)]

The above mantra tells us that brahman is that very Sentience behind everything that “Is” and that “Goes on” in this world and not any idol that we worship. Practices such as worship, mantra repetition, and yoga are efforts to understand brahman without relinquishing name and form. But true Knowing lies in knowing without name and form. Only the formless and featureless can be omnipresent.  Continue reading →

Chandogya Upanishad and Brahma Sutra Bhasya Part 6

Posted on by
Reply

Part 5

BSB 4.1.4 and 4.1.5
Doubt: There are texts, “One should meditate about space as Brahman” and “The sun is Brahman”. The doubt is, whether self-identification should be resorted. The opponent says that one should identify oneself with those symbols as well (thinking thus: “I am the symbol which is Brahman”). Because Brahman is familiar as the Self and the symbols also are forms of Brahman. The aphorist clarifies that meditator should not identify himself with a symbol, for he cannot consider himself to be so. Brahman is taught to be identical with the individual Self after eliminating empirical characteristics like agent ship etc. from the latter, whereas meditation is prescribed without eliminating these. As the meditator and the symbols are both limited entities, self-identity with symbols is ruled out. There are supporting texts. “He who having known thus meditates about the sun as Brahman” (Ch 3.19.4). “He who meditates organ of speech as Brahman” (Ch 7.2.2). “He who meditates about resolve as Brahman” (Ch 7.4.3).

Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 8 (kena 3)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 7 (kena 2)]

The utilities that reach our homes offer a useful way to think about Consciousness (AtmA). Water and electricity come through their supply lines, and we access them using specific outlets — a tap for water, a socket for electricity. But these utilities are not produced by our house, nor can we keep them exclusively to ourselves. They are shared resources, available to all houses.

AtmA — Beingness-Consciousness — can be understood in much the same way. It is not generated by the body or the mind. It is already present: unmanifest, universal, and available everywhere. The body is like a house, while the mind and senses — the eyes, ears, nose, and so on — function like outlet points.

When Consciousness breathes, it appears as the life-principle (prANa). When it sees, it appears as the eye; when it hears, as the ear. In short, the same single power of Consciousness manifests as seeing in the eye, hearing in the ear, breathing in the life-principle, and thinking in the mind.  Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 5

Posted on by
Reply

(This is the final part)
*** Read Part 1 *** *** Read Part 4 ***

Q: Your kārikā 3.31 bhāṣya still does not correspond with the one I have in front of me. For the passage in question from Śaṅkara, I have:

tena hi manasā vikalpyamānena dr̥śyaṃ manōdr̥śyaṃ idaṃ dvaitaṃ sarvaṃ mana iti pratijñā, tadbhāve bhāvāt tadabhāve cābhāvāt |

manasau hi amanībhāve niruddhe vivekadarśanābhyāsavairāgyābhyāṃ rajjvāmiva sarpe layaṃ gate vā suṣupte dvaitaṁ naivaupalabhyata iti abhāvātsiddhaṃ dvaitasyāsattvamityarthaḥ ||

तेन हि मनसा विकल्प्यमानेन द्र्̥श्यं मन्ōद्र्̥श्यं इदं द्वैतं सर्वं मन इति प्रतिज्ञा, तद्भावे भावात् तदभावे चाभावात् ।

मनसौ हि अमनीभावे निरुद्धे विवेकदर्शनाभ्यासवैराग्याभ्यां रज्ज्वामिव सर्पे लयं गते वा सुषुप्ते द्वैतं नैवौपलभ्यत इति अभावात्सिद्धं द्वैतस्यासत्त्वमित्यर्थः ॥

Continue reading →

Chandogya Upanishad and Brahm Sutra Bhasya Part 5

Posted on by
Reply

Part 4

Part 6

BSB 2.3.9
There is no possibility of origin of Brahman which is of the nature of Existence. It cannot originate from Existence for otherwise it leads to infinite regress. Moreover, there should be some distinguishing features for a causal relationship. Brahman cannot originate from non-existence (Ch 6.2.2). For creation, a primary origin-free material cause is to be admitted, and Brahman is the primary material cause.

Continue reading →