TAITTIRIYA UPANISHAD

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

Monday 11, Mar 2024. 06:45.

Part-2.

BRAHMANANDA VALLI

PART 2: 9 No. Anuvakas (Chapters)

THE BLISS THAT IS BRAHMAN

Post - 51.

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

UPANISHAD SARA SANGRAH

Anuvaka 2.1

The Essence of the Upanishads:

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

“Satyam, Jnaanam, Anantam Brahman”

Bhashya A:

“On the Nature of BRAHMAN”

Coverage: Mantram - 2.1.2 (3 Padas)

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

We now begin one of the most famous passages of Shankara Bhashya, the discussion.

on “Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam Brahma”.

This is considered to be a masterpiece of Samskrit as well as Vedantic literature. It is

a piece of literary genius, and students are asked to memorise this entire piece of the

Bhashya, which extends over 14 pages, covering just three lines, 3-5!

This entire discussion is attempted here in layman’s English, as far as possible.

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

Mantram - 2.1.2: Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam

“satyam, jnaanam, anantam brahman; = “Truth, Knowledge|, and Infinity– is the nature of Brahman.

yah veda nihitam guhaayaam = He who knows It, in the cave of the heart,

parame vyoman; = as being the transcendent Akasha,

sah ashnute sarvaan kaamaan, = he realizes all his desires,

saha brahmanaa vipashchitaa” iti; = along with the Omniscient Brahman"

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

LINE 3

satyam, jnaanam, anantam brahman

“Brahman is the Truth, Knowledge, and Infinity”

We recap the question which this Line answers:

Question: What is the true nature of Brahman?

1A/ This line is intended to be a Definition of Brahman, and not a Qualification Brahman. The importance of this distinction will be seen in OBJ 2 of . The following distinguishing terms are important:

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

Lakshana: Definition Noun (Substantive) Differentiates a noun from other nouns.

Viseshana: Qualification Adjective Qualifies a noun in the same species.

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

The 3 terms, Satyam, Jnanam and Anantam, are the attributes of Brahman. They

are Viseshanas or adjectives. However, because they are being used in a defining sense, and

not in a qualifying sense, they are to be seen as defining Brahman from all other nouns, i.e.

the entire Samashti Prapancha or Manifested Universe.

[At this point OBJ 2C/arises.]

The three adjectives are unrelated among themselves, as they are meant to be

applied to something else, viz. the substantive, Brahman. Each one is related independently

to Brahman.

D/SATYAM: This is that which is true, does not change, always exists in that way,

and whose nature never changes. That which opposes Sat is Asat (the non-existent) or

Mithya (the unreal or apparently real), which is used for an object that changes, i.e.

undergoes modification (Vikara). Asat does not exist, hence we can ignore it henceforth.

Mithya objects exist only so long as the basis of their existence (Ignorance) persists.

The Shruti support statement is: “All change has mere speech as its basis, it is in

name only.” (Chand. Up 6.1.4) “That alone is true that exists.” (Chand. Up 6.2.1)

Thus the word Satyam distinguishes Brahman from all things that are mutable

E/. Being unchangeable, Satya has to be the original Cause of all others objects which

arise from it and thus become its Effects. Satya itself cannot have a cause. It has to be the

“causeless Cause”. Satyam thus removes the effectsfrom Brahman.

However, there is a difficulty with this definition: It may then appear to be akin to

gold from which all other gold ornaments are produced. As gold is an inert substance, would

Brahman also not be considered to be Inert? It is possible for an inert substance to be

unchangeable. The term Satyam is thus found to be insufficient to uniquely define Brahman.

F/JNANAM: To overcome this problem, the word Jnanam is added to define

Brahman. This term means Consciousness, or the ‘knowing principle’. This adds the

sentiency element to Brahman. An insentient object cannot “know” anything. The ‘Knowing’

Principle has three parts to it, as we know it in our ordinary experience. They are the

Knower, the Knowable and the Knowledge. Which of these three is Jnanam referring to?

The act of knowing is always associated with a knower, the one who knows. So we

start by considering whether Jnanam could be the Knower. 1 itself says, “The Knower of

Brahman…” However, we encounter a problem with this definition of Brahman.

G/If Brahman is a knower, then it becomes a changing entity, as a knower is

changing all the time as it acquires knowledge. It can no longer stand in the company of the

other two terms, Satyam and Anantam. Firstly, as a changing entity, it violates Satyam.

Secondly, infinity is violated because if Brahman is the ‘Knower’ (the subject), then it

excludes the ‘Knowable’ (the object) and Knowledge, the link between the two.

The Shruti support for this is: “The Infinite is that where one does not understand

anything else. Hence, the finite is that where one understands something else.”

[At this point OBJ 3arises.]

H/We now consider whether we can take Brahman or the Self to be the ‘Knowable’.

In 1“The knower of Brahman”, the object or ‘knowable’ term is Brahman. If it is taken to be

the Knowable’, then there will be no Knower to know it, since the Self is already taken as the

Knowable. Brahman cannot be Knower and Knowable at the same time!

[At this point OBJ 4I/arises.)

Thus we come to the only other sense of the word Jnanam that can apply in this

case, and that is in its meaning of Knowledge. ‘Jnanam Brahma’ has to mean “Brahman is

Knowledge”. In this way both the earlier problems are averted: i) the relationship as agent is

ruled out, and ii) the condition of inertness is also avoided. Jnanam thus removes inertness

from Brahman.

J/ANANTAM Now we see the need to introduce a third term to define Brahman

fully. We have already removed effects and inertness using the first two terms. In its

meaning as Knowledge, Jnanam encounters a problem of limitedness. In our normal view,

knowledge is associated with limitedness. Human knowledge is seen to be finite, not only

for each individual, but also collectively. There is never a time when we can know everything

that is to be known. Anantam or Infinity is brought in to resolve this problem. Anantam

removes the limitednessfrom Brahman.

[At this point OBJ 5arises.]

K/In mantram 2.1.3, 6, it says, “From Brahman, which is the Self…,” the Self is clearly

related to Brahman without doubt. This implies that Brahman is the same as the knowing

Self of the individual. In another line (2.8.14, 20) are the words, “He attains the Self made of

Bliss,” which again makes the same connection for the Self.

In mantram - 2.1.3, 6, it says, “From Brahman, which is the Self…,” the Self is clearly

related to Brahman without doubt. This implies that Brahman is the same as the knowing

Self of the individual. In another line (2.8.14, 20) are the words, “He attains the Self made of

Bliss,” which again makes the same connection for the Self.

In another Upanishad it says, “Having created that, He entered into that very thing.”

(Aitareya Up.) This shows that Brahman Himself entered as the individual soul. This shows

that the cognizer (the soul), in his essential nature (Self) is Brahman.

[At this point OBJ 6arises.]

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

L/CONCLUSION: Is this Really a Definition?

In this concluding passage of the in-depth analysis of 3, Sri Shankaracharyaji draws

the inevitable conclusion that the power of words is insufficient to define Brahman, and at

best can only indicate or point it out. We have seen this in his answer to Obj 6

the same applies to the other two words also.

The main reason for the shortcomings of these words is that Brahman, not being an

object, does not possess the categories (Jaati), the qualities (Guna), the functions (Kriya), or

the relationships (Sambandha) which are needed by words to make them most effective.

Without all these, words have no “bones to chew on.”

The above categories provide the “address” of objects in this world. Without them,

we cannot know the address of Brahman. Hence, the only conclusion is that Brahman has

no address; that He is everywhere; that “Brahman is indefinable.”

Satyam and Anantam together occupies 10% and 5% of the discussion approximately,

whilst 85% is dominated by Jnanam. This is to be expected. The human mind

is better able to relate itself to knowledge than to abstract concepts such as pure Existence

or causeless Cause of Satyam, and the Infinity of Anantam. The Bhashya takes up the word

Satyam and draws the same conclusion about it as Jnanam in its power to define Brahman.

Anantam is not mentioned in this respect, but we can assume it to be just as restricted in

defining Brahman.

All three words together are needed to give a fairly accurate indication of the

Swaroopa of Brahman. They form a triple axis system, by which the elusive Brahman may be

“plotted”. They act on each other, restricting and being restricted in turns by each other. In

this manner Brahman is somehow distinguished from all other objects.

About this, a line is quoted from this Upanishad itself: “Failing to reach Brahman,

words, along with the mind, turn back.” (Valli II, 4.1). In another part (Valli II, 7.1) it is said,

“…inexpressible and unsupporting Brahman.” Like Avidya, Brahman, too, is indescribable. It

cannot be imprisoned within the two ends of a sentence – It cannot be sentenced by man’s

intellect!

*****

THE OBJECTIONS (Poorvapakshi)

Continued

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

Search This Blog

Upanishads : "The cream of Vedas"