vedanta
The Importance of Nididhyasana (Meditation) | Advaita Vedanta teachings
The ACTUAL meaning of Real & Unreal in Advaita Vedanta | The World & Liberation | Sri Ramana Paravidyopanishad | Sri Ramana Maharshi
Gaudapada’s commentary on Mandukya Upanishad with further comments by Tom Das – Chapter 1
Tom: Here are most of the verses from Chapter 1 of Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad, as translated by Swami Nikhilananda. I have made comments on some of these verses in italicised red. See here for the full text of Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad.
See here for my translation of Shankara’s Introduction to this great work.
Translation by Swami Nikhilananda
The Mandukya Upanishad is 12 verses on AUM Mantra. It is often cited as the most important of the Upanishads. Gaudapada’s Karika is a commentary relating to those 12 verses and is one of the most important and authoritative texts in the Advaita Vedanta tradition.
Chapter I [of Gaudapada’s Karika] – Agama Prakarana (The Chapter based on Vedic Testimony)
Mandukya Upanishad – Verses I-VI:
I: Harih Aum! AUM, the word, is all this, the whole universe. A clear explanation of it is as follows: All that is past, present and future is, indeed, AUM. And whatever else there is, beyond the threefold division of time—that also is truly AUM.
Tom: all there is is AUM
II: All this is, indeed, Brahman. This Atman is Brahman. This same Atman has four quarters.
Tom: AUM is Brahman, they are one and the same. Brahman is Atman. It has 4 parts – we will see later that 3 of these 4 parts do not actually exist at all
III: The first quarter is called Vaisvanara (Tom: the waker), whose sphere of activity is the waking state, who is conscious of external objects, who has seven limbs and nineteen mouths and who is the experiencer of gross objects.
IV: The second quarter is Taijasa (Tom: the dreamer), whose sphere of activity is the dream state, who is conscious of internal objects, who is endowed with seven limbs and nineteen mouths and who is the experiencer of subtle objects.
V: That is the state of deep sleep wherein one asleep neither desires any object nor sees any dream. The third quarter is Prajna (Tom: the sleeper), whose sphere is deep sleep, in whom all experiences become unified, who is, verily, a mass of consciousness, who is full of bliss and experiences bliss and who is the door leading to the knowledge of dreaming and waking.
VI: He is the Lord of all. He is the knower of all. He is the inner controller. He is the source of all; for from him all beings originate and in him they finally disappear.
Tom: note that Prajna, or the sleeper or deep sleep, here is characterised as being the source of all maya, the seed of ignorance from which arises all manifestation/duality – ‘He is the source of all; for from him all beings originate and in him they finally disappear.’
Gaudapada’s Karika
1 Visva is all—pervading, the experiencer of external objects. Taijasa is the cognizer of internal objects. Prajna is a mass of consciousness. It is one alone that is thus known in the three states.
Tom: Vivsa is the waker – that which experiences the waking state, taijasa is the dreamer – that which experiences the dream state, and prajna is the sleeper – that which experiences the deep sleep state
2 Visva is the cognizer through the right eye; Taijasa is the cognizer through the mind within; Prajna is the akasa in the heart. Therefore the one Atman is perceived threefold in the same body.
3—4 Visva experiences the gross; Taijasa, the subtle; and Prajna, the blissful. Know these to be the threefold experience. The gross object satisfies Visva; the subtle, Taijasa; and the blissful, Prajna. Know these to be the threefold satisfaction.
5 The experiencer and the objects of experience associated with the three states have been described. He who knows these both does not become attached to objects though enjoying them.
6 Surely a coming into existence must be predicated of all positive entities that exist. Prana manifests all inanimate objects. The Purusha manifests the conscious beings in their manifold forms.
7 Some of those who contemplate the process of creation regard it as the manifestation of God’s powers; others imagine creation to be like dreams and illusions.
8 Those who are convinced about the reality of manifested objects ascribe the manifestation solely to God’s will, while those who speculate about time regard time as the creator of things.
9 Some say that the manifestation is or the purpose of God’s enjoyment, while others attribute it to His division. But it is the very nature of the effulgent Being. What desire is possible for Him who is the fulfillment of all desires?
Mandukya Upanishad Verse VII:
VII: Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three states, It is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized.
Tom: Turiya is here being equated with the Self, Atman, and it is this Turiya that is to be realised: ‘This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized’. This Atman is not conscious of the waking, dream or deep sleep state, nor is it mere ordinary consciousness – it is indescribable and it contains no phenomena within it, so states the Upanishad: ‘Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both…It is not simple consciousness…It is the cessation of all phenomena‘
Gaudapada’s Karika continued
10 Turiya, the changeless Ruler, is capable of destroying all miseries. All other entities being unreal, the non—dual Turiya alone is known as effulgent and all—pervading.
Tom: Turiya ends all suffering, everything other than turiya is unreal
11 Visva and Taijasa are conditioned by cause and effect. Prajna is conditioned by cause alone. Neither cause nor effect exists in Turiya.
Tom: there is no cause or effect in Turiya
12 Prajna does not know anything of self or non—self, of truth or untruth. But Turiya is ever existent and all—seeing.
13 Non—cognition of duality is common to both Prajna and Turiya. But Prajna is associated with sleep in the form of cause and this sleep does not exist in Turiya.
Tom: In both deep sleep and Turiya there is no cognition of duality or cognition of objects – we can see that Gaudapada equates perception of objects with perception of duality. However in deep sleep the Self is not known as there is a cause or seed of ignorance present (the Sanskrit word ‘bija’ used in this verse means both cause or seed). In Turiya this sleep-seed of ignorance is not present.
14 The first two, Visva and Taijasa, are associated with dreaming and sleep respectively; Prajna, with Sleep bereft of dreams. Knowers of Brahman see neither sleep nor dreams in Turiya.
Tom: in Turiya (or for the knower of Brahman or the one who is Self-realised), there is no perception or arising of waking, dream or deep sleep
15 Dreaming is the wrong cognition and sleep the non—cognition, of Reality. When the erroneous knowledge in these two is destroyed, Turiya is realized.
16 When the jiva, asleep under the influence of beginningless maya, is awakened, it then realizes birthless, sleepless and dreamless Non—duality.
Tom: the reality (ie. Self or Turiya) is without birth (objects arising), without sleep, and without dream. ie. the waking, dream and deep sleep states are not present, nor do they arise in reality. So, do they disappear in self-realisation? Let us see…
17 If the phenomenal universe were real, then certainly it would disappear. The universe of duality which is cognized is mere illusion (maya); Non—duality alone is the Supreme Reality.
Tom: this verse is often quoted by itself without the preceding verses, and so misinterpreted. We can see in context that it is saying the following: if the phenomenal universe ever appeared, then it would certainly disappear. However, since the universe is maya, it (paradoxically to the mind) never actually appeared at all. There was only the non-dual Turiya or Self, nothing else. See here for more on this teaching.
18 If anyone imagines illusory ideas such as the teacher, the taught and the scriptures, then they will disappear. These ideas are for the purpose of instruction. Duality ceases to exist when Reality is known.
Tom: The same point is being made again – ie. in truth duality or maya or appearances never actually ever came about. Note that Gaudapada here, like elsewhere, equates appearances with duality.
Mandukya Upanishad – Verses VIII-XI:
VIII: The same Atman explained before as being endowed with four quarters is now described from the standpoint of the syllable AUM. AUM, too, divided into parts, is viewed from the standpoint of letters. The quarters of Atman are the same as the letters of AUM and the letters are the same as the quarters. The letters are A, U and M.
IX: Vaisvanara Atman, whose sphere of activity is the waking state, is A, the first letter of AUM, on account of his all— pervasiveness or on account of his being the first. He who knows this obtains all desires and becomes first among the great.
X: Taijasa Atman, whose sphere of activity is the dream state, is U, the second letter of AUM, on account of his superiority or intermediateness. He who knows this attains a superior knowledge, receives equal treatment from all and finds in his family no one ignorant of Brahman.
XI: Prajna Atman, whose sphere is deep sleep, is M, the third letter of AUM, because both are the measure and also because in them all become one. He who knows this is able to measure all and also comprehends all within himself.
Gaudapada’s Karika continued
19 When it is desired to describe the identity of Visva and the letter A, the chief ground given is the fact that each is the first in its respective sphere. Another reason for this identity is the all—pervasiveness of each.
20 The clear ground for realizing Taijasa as of the same nature as the letter U is the common feature of superiority. Another plain reason for such identity is their being in the middle.
21 The indisputable reason given for the identity of Prajna and M is the common feature that both are the measure. The other reason for such identity is another common feature, namely, that both represent the state of mergence.
22 He who knows for certain the similarity of the three states and the three letters of AUM, based upon their common features, is worshipped and adored by all beings and also is a great sage.
23 Through meditation on A the seeker attains Visva; through meditation on U, Taijasa; and through meditation on M, Prajna. Meditation on the “soundless” brings no attainment.
Mandukya Upanishad – Verse XII:
XII: The Fourth (Turiya) is without parts and without relationship; It is the cessation of phenomena; It is all good and non—dual. This AUM is verily Atman. He who knows this merges his self in Atman—yea, he who knows this.
Tom: like in verse 7, Turiya is again equated with Atman and AUM – it is without any parts, meaning there are no objects that can arise in it, again emphasised by stating it is without relationship – meaning there is no relative ‘truth’ present and it has no relation to objects or phenomena. This is further emphasised when it states ‘It is the cessation of phenomena’, as per verse 7 which states the same. It is all good, meaning it is pure positivity without any negativity whatsoever, without any opposite. It is non-dual, meaning without any time, space, people or objects. It is what you are. Aum Tat Sat. This will be further explained and elaborated upon in the following verses. See here for more on this teaching.
See here for the full text of Gaudapada’s commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad.
Ramana Maharshi on Devotion or Bhakti | Guru Vachaka Kovai
Here are some verses from Guru Vachaka Kovai (Garland of Guru’s Sayings, a collection of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s teachings) on Bhakti:
314. Treading the path, one finds the world
Composed of ‘I’ and ‘this’
Transformed into the Guru Himself.
This steadiness of vision, this
Awareness of his presence bright
Everywhere is the true pupil’s
Worship of the Master.
512. Rare indeed is the non-dual jnana.
Yet fixing firmly one’s true love
On Siva’s Feet will easily lead
One to the Grace divine, the light
Which destroys illusion dark
And reveals the Real.
513. Through love firm fixing the Lord’s Feet
Ever in the heart, one can destroy
All false desires. And then the heart,
Now blossoming wide, beholds the true
Light of supreme awareness.
649. Do not wander endlessly
Searching in vain for certitude
Through strenuous study, listening, learning.
In love surrender to the Love
Supreme, the Lord, and reach
And hold the state supreme of Real
Being.
651. Those poor fools who have not savoured
The taste ineffable of Love
May go on talking of seven savours.
But we who have enjoyed Love’s sweetness,
We assert that this alone,
Love, is the sole true savour.
652. To disentangle life’s hard knots
One needs must understand the Self
As Love itself. Only when one knows
This Love supreme is moksha gained.
Of every creed this is the heart,
The real teaching.
720. Those with mind matured by bhakti,
Relishing, drinking in, its sweetness,
Deem bhakti supreme, the ever fresh
Nectar, as its own reward
And yearn for more and more of it.
792. If all you wish for is fulfilled,
Think not that it is due to your
Tapas. Know it is but God’s
Good grace, and cling with more and more
Love to His Feet.
(Tom: note, this is how the Law of Attraction can lead one to liberation – it eventually encourages love of God more than love of Things, and this in turn takes one eventually to Self as described above)
965. If towards the Lord you take
One single step, then with much more
Than a mother’s love He takes
Nine steps towards you to accept you.
Such is the Guru’s Grace.
974. Unbroken Self-awareness is
The true, bright path of devotion or love.
Knowledge of our inherent nature
As indivisible Bliss supreme
Wells up as Love.
1205. The mark of bhakti true, total
Self-surrender at Siva’s Feet,
Is perfect peace without a thought
Or word of prayer or plaint.
1206. In the heart which grace divine
Has filled with radiant bliss, can there
Be room for any trivial care,
The symptom of the ignorance which
Is knowledge for the body-bound ego?
1209. When, the dense darkness of ignorance gone,
The heart’s wide open firmament
Is filled with peace serene, clear, bright,
An inner fount of love up springs
Which is devotion true, the pure
Auspiciousness of Siva Himself.
1210. The fortunate ones who in the Self
Abide forever, they alone,
Have realised the Truth. From others
Far indeed is that eternal
Home of grace supreme.
1211. True devotees are they who are
Forever to the Self alone
Devoted. Only they enjoy
Eternally the bliss supreme
Of all-transcendent, highest heaven.
Can I have the world and liberation? Why must I let go of the world for Liberation? Ramana Maharshi on Shiva and Shakti | Tantra and Vedanta | 1st August 2024
This video was excerpted from the Satsang dated 1st August 2024:
‘It is wrong to call Self the Witness’ – Sri Ramana Maharshi
The following is an excerpt from this post: Is the Self a witness? Or is it everything? Or both?
Sri Ramana Maharshi has taught us in Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 98 (Guru Vachaka Kovai is the most authoritative record of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s verbal teachings according to Sri Ramana Ashram):
98. Unless the body is taken to be ‘I’, otherness – the world of moving and unmoving objects – cannot be seen. Hence, because otherness – the creatures and their Creator – does not exist, it is wrong to call Self the Witness.
Sri Sadhu Om, a direct devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi, writes in his commentary on this verse:
Descriptions of self as the ‘witness of the individual soul’ (jiva sakshi) or the ‘witness of everything’ (sarva sakshi), which can be found in some sacred texts, are not true but are only figurative (upacara), because only when other things are known would the one who knows them be a ‘witness’ of them. Since self does not know anything in the state of absolute oneness, which is devoid of any other thing, to what can it be a witness? Therefore describing self as a ‘witness’ is incorrect.
What both Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri Sadhu Om are saying is that objects only appear when the ego/ignorance is present. In Self-realisation, there are no objects, only the Self, so in truth the Self cannot be said to be a witness.
In verse 869 of Guru Vachaka Kovai Sri Ramana teaches us:
869. ’Tis a foolish fancy to ascribe the role of ‘witness’ to the Self, the luminous Sun, the mighty sky of Pure Awareness. In the Self Immutable there is no room for maya’s darkness void. The Self is one sole whole without a second.
Here is an alternative translation of the same verse, with Sri Sadhu Om’s commentary, which essentially states in truth, ie. in realisation, there is no Maya in the Self. It is only for ajnani’s, ie. the ignorant, that consider the Self to be a witness of phenomena/maya:
869. The role [dharma] of seeing is ascribed to Self – the space of consciousness, the sun – only in the imagination of ajnanis, [because] maya, the empty ignorance [of seeing otherness], never exists in Self, the support [sthanu], [and also because] Self is without a second.
Sri Sadhu Om’s comments: Since Self is in truth that which transcends all roles and all qualities, and since It exists as one without a second, to glorify It as the ‘witness of all’ [sarva-sakshi] or as the ‘knower of all’ [sarvajna] is merely the folly of ignorant people.
Q. Do Neo-advaita teachings point to the same realisation as traditional Advaita Vedanta and Ramana Maharshi?
Q. Tom, do you believe that the neo advaita teachings do point to the same realisation as Sri Ramana’s teachings? Because from what I have read of the neo advaita teachings, they do not even point to the Absolute Self in a clear way and are not even talking about the same realisation. They don’t speak of the Absolute Self but “the absolute appearing as the relative” in their words, so I think that following those teachings do not lead to the same realisation.
Tom: I agree, the neo-advaita teachings do not lead to the same genuine realisation in my view. They do not lead to genuine absolute love, non-duality and cessation of suffering. Please see the introductory articles on the tomdas.com homepage and my recommended reading list for more on this.
Q. YOU SAY NEO-ADVAITA CAN SOMETIMES BE HARMFUL. PLEASE CAN YOU EXPLAIN?
Tom: it varies. Here in the UK there are quite a lot of neo-advaita teachers and being UK based myself, over the years I have dealt with many people who have been very traumatised by these teachings and I have guided them through the process of undoing many of the false concepts and beliefs present in neo-advaita teachings.
The neo-advaita ‘non-teachings’ can be very abrupt and triggering and not leave (apparent) people with any sense of agency or empowerment to deal with the consequences.
I have seen near psychotic breakdowns, severe anxiety and panic disorder, depersonalisation and derealisation, relationships fall apart, people losing their jobs, lots of confusion and disorientation, depression…
In my experience Neo-advaita tends to be a feel-good teaching in the moment for those it helps, and mainly is for the intellect.
It feels good in the moment but the sense of duality and confusion keeps on returning, and it doesn’t lead to a genuine realisation of truth or love. When one engages with genuine self-enquiry we come to see just how superficial the neo-advaita teachings are
Neo-Advaita is actually far away from the true teachings even though some of the words sound similar. In some ways neo-advaita is more intellectually coherent than true Advaita teachings, but that doesn’t make it true or effective.
In my experience the true teachings, such as the teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi, guide us directly and unfailingly to realisation, the shortest route so to speak, with the minimal amount of suffering along the way.
Q. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NEO-ADVAITA AND ADVAITA?
Tom: Neo Advaita says all is already one, there is already no ego-self, and no need for any practice. In fact, any practice just perpetuates and strengthens the illusory notion of an ego-self. Suffering and worldly happenings are just things that occur to ‘nobody’.
Advaita says all is already one, there is already no ego-self, but due to ignorance there appears to be a world consisting of many people and things, of which you are one. Through self-enquiry, in which one places ones attention onto ones own self, the Subject, and ignores/turns away from objective phenomena, one can destroy this ignorance and realise that the apparent mutiplicity is an unreal illusion and there is only the formless self which is devoid of suffering. It is then seen that ignorance never actually occurred and there were never any actual people or things at all.
My own experience is that neo-advaita, whilst sounding intellectually coherent, does not lead to liberation at all and suffering, duality and egotism all actually continue, whereas Advaita, whilst appearing to be dualistic in some ways, is totally liberating and ends suffering and duality completely. They are actually quite distinct teachings that both claim to be ‘non-duality’.
Note that in my experience many prominent Advaita and Advaita Vedanta teachers actually teach distorted teachings, and that the genuine teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi are the best teachings I have come across to point the way to liberation.
