ISAVASYA UPANISHAD : - 12. Swami Tejomayananda.

 ========================================================================

=========================================================================

Thursday, September 22, 2022. 07:00
B. SAMBHOOTI & ASAMBHOOTI
POST 12.

=========================================================================

Post-11 :
Mantram -12: Worship of Unmanifest & Manifest
Mantram-13: The Fruits of Unmanifest & Manifest
Mantram-14: Combining Unmanifest & Manifest
Post 11. explained three mantras and translations,

=========================================================================

Now Commentary is below :

* In Option E below, Sri Shankaracharyaji swops Unmanifest with Manifest.

In this second set of three verses, in 12 the fruits Sambhooti and Asambhooti, when 

worshipped alone, are given; in 13 their fruits are compared to each other (again, note that 

they not opposed to each other), and in 14 is given the fruit of combining both of them. 

The problem before us is to find the right interpretation of Sambhooti and 

Asambhooti so that it fits all three verses without contradiction. 

The dictionary meanings of these two terms are “manifest” and “unmanifest”.

The two options examined are:

D. Combining Destruction of Life Undivine & Construction of Life Divine :

Asambhooti = Destroying undivine tendencies in the unmanifested (causal) plane. 

Sambhooti = Seeing the Divine in all manifested life at the subtle and gross planes.

E. Combining Meditation on Impersonal God & Personal God:

Asambhooti = Meditation on the unmanifest, Impersonal Nirguna Brahman.

Sambhooti = Meditation on the manifest, Personal Saguna Brahman

F. Combining Jnana & Bhakti:

Asambhooti = Knowledge of the unmanifest, Impersonal Nirguna Brahman.

Sambhooti = Devotion and surrender to the manifest, Personal Saguna Brahman

Let us take up each of these and see how they fit all the three mantras:

D. Combining Destruction of Life Undivine & Construction of Life Divine:

This interpretation was given to Pujya Swami Chinmayanandaji by his Guru, Swami 

Tapovanji. It has the advantages of being based purely on Vedantic principles, seeing that 

we are dealing with a Vedantic text; and being free from the controversy we shall see in 

option E.

Asambhooti: The “unmanifest” here refers to latent desires called Vasanas, and 

reside at the causal level of existence. The old life is governed by subconscious Vasanas or 

tendencies that all souls are born with. At the root of these tendencies lies Cosmic Delusion 

or Ignorance, named AVIDYA in the previous set of verses. Living in Avidya leads to 

“blindening darkness”. 

A new life is ushered in when, through Vairagya the Sadhaka eliminates his Vasanas 

bit by bit, until they are fully destroyed. The fruit of such a Sadhana is the end of death. The 

absence of Vasanas means no future birth ever again. He is liberated from transmigration.

Sambhooti: At the “manifest” level of life, the Vasanas of the causal level wreak 

havoc at the subtle and gross levels. They create all sorts of complications in our lifestyle –

our habits, our actions, our thoughts, etc – and life flows into the channel of sorrow and 

grief. When Vasanas are not checked, it is impossible to arrest the build-up of sorrow in life. 

This is described as “even greater darkness”. 

A new life begins when, by Viveka or discrimination between the Self and the notSelf, life is divinised by the conscious cultivation of virtue and removal of vice. 

This divinisation brings the fruit of immortality. One becomes a ‘God’ on earth, gaining immortal 

fame among men; he also gains spiritual immortality by becoming One with Reality.

Vairagya and Viveka are products of VIDYA or Knowledge. Asambhooti represents 

Vairagya, while Sambhooti represents Viveka. Combining them is the meaning of mantram 14. 

Death is averted by the Vairagya or detachment of Asambhooti, while immortality is gained 

by the Viveka or aspiration of Sambhooti in the intellect.

This interpretation has a great simplicity, beauty and attractive charm in it for the 

practical seeker of liberation. It is a unique contribution coming from the Himalayan Sage 

Tapovanji, a man of Vairagya and Viveka. Its pure Vedantic approach steers it clear of all 

controversy. It is therefore the one that Swami Chinmayanandaji prefers.

However, Sri Shankaracharyaji, for an equally valid reason, opts for the next two 

interpretations, which are closely related.

E. Combining Meditation on Impersonal God & Personal God:

This option, which also meets with the requirements of all three verses, is supported

by none other than Sri Shankaracharyaji himself. The view taken is not restricted to 

Vedanta, but takes into account the social and philosophical upheavals of his time. There 

was much debate at that time, circa 8th century C.E., which persists even to this day, as to

which was the true God to be worshipped. Was it the Impersonal God of the Vedas, or was it 

the Personal Gods of the Puranas? Seen in this context, Sri Shankaracharyaji’s approach is 

quite justified, even though it may inevitably encourage some controversy.

Our discussion follows the same pattern as under point D:

Asambhooti: here “unmanifest” refers to the Causal State of the universe. Nothing is 

yet created but creation has been conceived as a ‘Master Plan’ about to be put into action

through the power of Maya (Prakriti). We place ourselves in the shoes of the omnipotent 

and omniscient Lord, the supreme Creator of the worlds, namely, Ishwara. Whom does He 

worship? The Impersonal, Formless, Attributeless, unconditioned Lord, the Nirguna 

Brahman, the Reality Itself. To start off with this meditation or Upasana, one is bound to 

face “blindening Darkness”. It is like a primary school child sitting in the PhD class!

If one succeeds in it, the fruit of this meditation is the overcoming of Maya, the 

destruction of Delusion or Ignorance, the root cause of worldly existence. When Delusion is 

conquered, one recognises Reality as his own Being, and attains Immortality (note below).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sambhooti: Here “manifest” refers to the whole of creation, both subtle (mental) 

and gross (physical). The Womb of Creation is Hiranyagarbha, who appoints Divine beings 

called Deities to govern it. Meditation on these Deities is meditation on the conditioned 

Lord, the Saguna Brahman with form and attributes. This meditation is within the reach of 

most worshippers who have advanced sufficiently to realise that the world is governed in an 

organised manner. However, this meditation is fraught with “even greater darkness” as one 

pins his faith on Deities who themselves are part of Creation. One faces the danger of being 

‘trapped’ in creation with a Personal God. A safety feature in this meditation is to regard the 

Deity as Ishwara Himself. 

The fruits of this worship come in the form of intellectual, mental and physical 

excellence, but there is no removal of Ignorance until he obtains knowledge of the Self. The 

excellence attained by meditating on the Saguna Brahman frees one from the fear of ‘death’ 

(see note below).

The combination of these two would lead to the fruits of both, namely, conquest 

over death and immortality. This is equivalent to Liberation while living.

Note: Sri Shankaracharya has had to swop Unmanifest and Manifest in lines 3 and 4

of verse 14. Freedom from fear of death is the maximum fruit obtained from Saguna 

meditation. Immortality is obtained only through Nirguna meditation. Hence the need for 

the re-arrangement of the fruits. Sri Shankaracharyaji takes recourse to a fine grammatical 

rule in Samskrit to justify this change. This is dealt with after point F, for those interested.

F. Combining Jnana & Bhakti:

This follows a similar pattern to option E. Asambhooti refers to Jnana or Knowledge 

of the Self or Unmanifest Supreme Reality, the Impersonal God; Sambhooti refers to Bhakti

or Devotion to the Deities ruling the Manifest Unreality, i.e. the Personal Gods.

Jnana without Bhakti leads to “blindening darkness”; Bhakti without Jnana leads to 

“even greater darkness”. It is said, “Knowledge without devotion is lame, while devotion 

without knowledge is blind.” Another proverb says, “Knowledge and devotion are like one’s 

two legs; without either one, one cannot walk.” Through sayings like these, the Bhakta is 

encouraged to obtain knowledge, and the Jnani is encouraged to develop love for God.

The sensible and correct approach is to always combine Jnana and Bhakti. By this 

combined method, the fruits of both are obtained, namely, freedom from fear of death 

through Bhakti, and Immortality through Jnana.

Thus the age-old controversy between Bhakti and Jnana is put to bed by the Rishi.

THE CONTROVERSIAL ASPECT :

Where does the controversy come in? In this option, there needs to be a correction 

made to the first line of verse 14. As it stands, Sambhooti and a completely new term, 

Vinasha, are named, which compel one to take Vinasha to mean Asambhooti. However, 

Vinasha, which means destruction, can only take place on the manifested (subtle and gross) 

world, not the unmanifested (causal) world. It therefore can only apply to Sambhooti, which 

would now appear twice.

The duplication is avoided by Sri Shankaracharya by suggesting that the word

Sambhooti is really supposed to be Asambhooti. There is a grammar rule where the ‘A’ is 

dropped when a word is preceded by another word ending in ‘A’. In this case the previous 

word is in the previous verse! – it is ‘Chakshirah’ which has changed to ‘Chakshire’.

The controversy hinges on this fine grammatical point, but Sri Shankaracharya, a 

master of Samskrit grammar, is pretty sure of his stance. For suggesting this change based 

on a grammar rule, Sri Shankaracharya has initiated a controversy that still rages among 

scholastic Vedantins. To genuine seekers, there is no problem. Any interpretation which 

helps them to evolve is acceptable – that is the approach of a true seeker. Intellectual 

controversies mean nothing to the genuine seeker.

What do we learn from such passages in the scriptures that are interpreted more in 

the light of Samskrit grammar than on Vedanta principles? Guruji gave us three reasons why 

this is considered permissible:

i) It broadens our outlook, albeit only for academic interest.

ii) It gives people who have such desires as to attain these other worlds a chance to 

fulfill their wishes legitimately.

iii) Those who seek liberation need to know these things to develop their Vairagya. 

The seeker is sure to reflect thus: “I can attain these worlds with all this huge effort, but at 

the end I will not be liberated. I gain nothing substantial. Is it worth it?”

The Brahma Jnani replies, “Enough is enough. Now stick to Brahma Jnana.”

Guruji made another interesting comment: “Vedanta is like keeping accounts. Every 

cent has to be accounted for. If the two sides do not balance we should hunt out the error. 

Even if the error is in our favour, we should not permit it – it means there is a problem 

somewhere! Vedantic enquiry demands such strict intellectual honesty in order to succeed.”

The whole matter brings out Sri Shankaracharya’s intellectual honesty to stick to the 

Truth without any compromise. If compromise is to be made, let it rather be in grammar 

than in Vedanta!

*****

Next-

ISHAVASYA UPANISHAD

Wave 4: Mantras 15-17 (3 No.)

“The VISION of TRUTH”

To be continued ....

========================================================================