Mandukya Upanishdad, Class 53


Advaidam is beyond all disputes.  In vereses 3, 4 and 5 Gowdapadha shows how advaidam doesn’t have any disputes with other systems of philosophies.  The difference of opinions is primarily was the creation.  No system of philosophy is able to agree with other system and they form rival groups.

The two theories of creation discussed later are:

  1. Sath kariya vadhaha:  This is sankya philosopher founded by Kapila Muni.
  2. Asath kariya vadhaha:  Founded by gyaya philospher or vaisheshka philosper.

They argue whether there is an existent world originated or nonexistent world originated.  Advaidin can’t join either one as he will be attacked by the other.  Advaidin do not join any particular theory of creation.  We don’t hold any theory of creation at all.  What is the advadic theory of creation?  In advaidam, there is no theory of creation because there is no creation at all.  If I accept creation, I have to explain the method of creation.  What is in front of us is not a world, but Brahman.  What was there was Brahman; and what will be there is Brahman.  Therefore, there is no creation, no theory of creation.

Sankya philosophers say an existent product originated.  Gyaya philosophers say that an existent product need not originate at all, therefore a non-existent product originates.

Verse 4

Vaisheshka philosopher refutes sankya philosopher by saying an existent product can never originate because it is already existent.  Sankya philosophers refute vaisheshaka philosophers by saying a nonexistent pot can not originate and existent pot need not originate.  Matter can never be created.  A nonexistent pot originates, is grammatically wrong.  Action can never exist by itself.  A grammatical sentence requires a verb and subject.  In this sentence the verb is originates.  What is the subject of this verb?  According vaisheshika, the subject is nonexistent pot, which means there is no subject.  By refuting each other, they indirectly refuting the origination of the world.  One group refutes the origination of existent pot another group refutes the origination of nonexistent pot; with the result there is no question of arrival of pot.  This is biggest confusion of human intellect.  Pot has not arrived at all because there is no substance called pot.  The substance is only clay.  Pot is not a substance; it is a word.  World is not a substance; it is only a word.  There is no origination of anything other than a new name called world.  Any product is not a substance, it is a new word initiated by your tongue.  When jivatma are not born, where is the question of rebirth?  The biggest samsara is the desire for moksha.  I was the paramatma, I am the pramatma and I ever will be paramatma.  There is no coming and joining of jivatma.  It is all confusion and it is Maya.

Verse 5

The non origination of the world is indirectly supported by both the sankya and gyaya philosphers by refuting each other.  The refuting of creation is the teaching of vedantic philosophy.  We acknowledge their contribution to advaidam.  We never argue with them.  The glory of advaida is it is argument free teaching.

Verse 6

The word avivadhah means the advadic teaching is beyond dispute.  This was explained in the verses 3, 4 and 5.  From verse 6 to 10, Gowdapadha gives the essence of advaidic perspective.  Advaidin has freed himself from the basic mistake all the philosophers commit.  Freedom from this basic mistake is moksha.  Verses 6, 7 and 8 are repetition of the third chapter verses 20, 21 and 22.

The mistake people commit that there is a paramatma which is the cause of this universe.  Paramatma is the karanam and the universe is kariyam.  The world has come from god and we jivas have also come from god.  This jivatma is caught up in the world of samsara which is full of suffering until the jivatma goes back and merges into paramatma.  Most of the seekers pray only for that “I have come away from god, at the time of moksha I go back to him”.  The fundamental concept is I have to join god.  The day I merge into that Lord, I will be eternally free or muktha.  All these views are entertained without taking into account, the nature of paramatma.  “Eternal paramatma is the cause of the world” is a logical contradiction.  Cause means modification, eternal means modification free.  If the god is the cause, he can’t be eternal.  If God is eternal, he can’t be cause.  This is the fundamental mistake.  Jivatma is not a product of paramatma, but jivatma is none other than paramatma.  Making paramatma a cause is not a glorification of god; it is an insult to god because how can the changeless paramata ever become the changing cause of the universe.