Objects of the world - Chapter 22

The essential purport of Shastras (शास्त्र) is to reveal the Truth that atman (आत्मन्) alone is satyam (सत्यं) and everything else is mithya (मिथ्य) and that atman (आत्मन्) is of the nature of satchitananda (सत्चिदानन्द). The myriad of empirical experiences of a human being though cannot be summarily dismissed with a technical word like mithya (मिथ्य) and they need to be elaborated in greater detail for the assimilation of the Truth to become easier without conflicting empirical experiences diluting the understanding. It is for this reason that Shastras (शास्त्र) talk about what the atman is not also in good detail. Multiple models are used in different Upanishads to explain objects of the world that belong in the realm of anatma (अनात्म) and these should be understood in the right context so one does not get hung up on these details and keeps the essential purport as central to ones learning & understanding of the scriptures.

We had previously defined mithya (मिथ्य) as that which does not have an independent existence or in other words that which depends on something else to exist. Consider a pot made of clay and if one were to remove the clay from the pot then the pot would not have any existence at all. Even while that being the case the pot is available for perception and that way cannot be discounted as non-existent and therefore it is accorded the status of mithya (मिथ्य) or that which has a borrowed existence. In this context, clay becomes the satyam (सत्यं) or that which lends its existence to the pot. The interesting aspect here is that satyam (सत्यं) can never be spatially apart from mithya (मिथ्य) and it is this fact that is at the root of confusing mithya (मिथ्य) to be satyam (सत्यं) and not understanding the true nature of satyam (सत्यं).

Here Adi Shankara begins elaborating on the nature of the Self by negating the gross, subtle and causal bodies as the Self and each of these bodies are elaborated upon in some detail using the models used in Upanishads. The reason for this negation beginning with the body is because it is primarily the body that is mistaken for the Self and even in the body it is the grossest aspect of it that is mistaken strongly still. The body is mistaken for the Self because being mithya (मिथ्य) it is not spatially separate from the Self from which it borrows its existence. 

Beyond the five sheaths - Chapter 21

Tattvabodha can be looked at as having 4 distinct segments. The first segment after establishing the anubandha catustayam (अनुबन्ध चातुष्टयं) or the intended recipient of the text, its subject matter, its purpose and the relation of the text to its purpose went on to elaborate on the qualifications that a seeker of the Truth needs to possess. Having concluded this segment we now enter into the second segment which elaborates in detail who an individual is and what his true nature is. The Self is first defined in negative terms in terms of what it is not and then its true nature is asserted.

The segment begins with the inquisitive student asking of the learned teacher what atman (आत्मन्) is and the teacher in the traditional manner of all Vedantic literature providing a terse response which shall then be elaborated in great detail.

आत्मा कः ?

स्थूलसूक्ष्मकारणशरीराद्व्यतिरिक्तः पञ्चकोशातीतः सन्

अवस्थात्रयसाक्षी सच्चिदानन्दस्वरूपः सन्

यस्तिष्ठति स आत्मा ।

What is the Self? That which is other than the gross, subtle and causal bodies, beyond the five sheaths, the witness of the three states of consciousness and of the nature of existence-consciousness-happiness is the Self.

We had seen previously how a colorless crystal can appear green or blue when held before a piece of green or blue cloth. The piece of cloth in this example is referred to as upadhi (उपाधि) in Vedantic phraseology and the crystal is referred to as the upahita (उपहित). The three bodies, five sheaths and the three states of consciousness are the upadhi (उपाधि) for the Self and they condition the Self based on their own attributes. We shall now expound in detail the three bodies, five sheaths and the three states of consciousness and understand their attributes so we can identify how their attributes are conditioning the Self. It is this conditioning that is the basis for mistaking the non-Self for the Self. Without the conditioning, the Self, as we had seen previously is of the nature of limitless existence, consciousness and fullness.

The colorless crystal - Chapter 20

The existence of atman (आत्मन्) is intrinsic to it or in other words is its very nature and we need to understand this aspect clearly. We generally use adjectives to qualify the attributes of an entity and therefore when the word ‘existence’ is used with atman (आत्मन्) the tendency would be to understand atman (आत्मन्) as an entity and existence as it’s attribute but that is not so. Just as a wave in the ocean does not have water in it but IS water so too atman (आत्मन्) does not exist but IS existence. Being of the nature of existence it remains the same in all the three periods of time. It is changeless, ever the same.

Atman (आत्मन्) is not a distinct entity to be sought out and understood but is the very essence of all beings just as water is the essence of all waves. The teachings of Vedanta therefore essentially are teachings about oneself or what one intimately refers to as ‘I’. When Vedanta says that everything other than one’s own Self is mithya (मिथ्या) and everything depends on one’s own Self to exist there is stiff resistance because we do not know the real nature of one’s own Self. We have taken what the Self is not to be the Self and that mix-up is the source of the resistance. It is not a physical mix-up though but a cognitive mix-up and knowledge of the Self can remove this. One needs to understand the Self so well that one can distinguish it from the non-Self. Ignorance of the Self is universal and beginningless but once removed it doesn’t come back again.

A red flower seen through a crystal would seem to be coloring the colorless crystal in red and in the same manner the non-Self seemingly superimposes its attributes onto the attribute-less Self resulting in the Self and the non-Self getting mixed-up beyond differentiation. It is for this reason that Shastras used the method of negating the superimposition to reveal the Self. When the non-Self is negated in its entirety, what remains is the pure Self, the Truth.

We shall now begin discussing the nature of the Self in this method where we shall elaborate in detail on what the Self is not before elaborating on what it is.